1. Historically "Internally and Industry Wide" Wire Wrap "WW" Stand Alone Screens "SAS" are selected over Premium SAS for water injection wells
2. Rushmore database shows that the overwhelming majority of subsea water injection wells are completed with WW SAS (SAS lengths varied from 100m to ~2200m see attachment below)
3. Some operators has seen no benefits from the higher area open to flow offered by the P SAS, combined with a lower cost of WW SAS the decision to use WW was made with ease.
4. Certain literatures claims the WW screens are self-cleaning (Delattre et al., 2004) which is counter intuitive giving the fact that they offer a lower area open to flow.
5. Some operators claims that Premium SAS provides a tortures path compared to WW screens which makes them more susceptible to plugging
We are planning several water injection wells where WW SAS are carried as the reference case based on offset data (points 1 and 2)
Recent cost compression showed WW would cost more !
Sand Retention Test will be carried on both screen types for compression
I am curious to know others views, experience, theories, behind the overwarming usage of WW SAS for water injection wells
Abdullah Eshtewi, Completion Engineer
Woodside Energy Ltd.