Protekz | Bridging The Industry Gaps

Risk Management

 

Our risk management service focuses on smoothening out the tensions between maximising production performance on the one hand versus assuring mechanical integrity and minimizing costs.

We try to manage this tension to ensure that the lifecycle value of the well is maximized. Our aim is to understand and manage the different risks as effectively as possible using our knowledge of the latest technology and a risk-based approach that looks at the entire system.

Some of the risk management services we provide to Operators are:

  • Drawdown management
  • Reliability Assessment
  • Quantitative Risk Assessment
  • Production Availability Modeling
  • Well Integrity Management

Our services in this area are geared towards maximising hydrocarbon production without jeopardising well, facility or reservoir integrity. We do this by helping the Operator systemically determine and set appropriate drawdown limits.

Obviously, the consequences of incorrectly setting these limits can be very severe – too low could lead to deferred production and too high may lead to a myriad of problems including sand failure, erosion of surface or downhole equipment or early breakthrough of unwanted fluids (water or gas).

Where the limits are applied correctly, operators often maintain high level of production availability and defer costly in-fill drilling programmes and field abandonment.

At Protekz, we have developed methodologies to properly assess the various constraints that limit drawdown from a specific well, which may include:

  • Sand failure
  • Fines migration
  • Coning or cusping
  • Downhole or surface equipment erosion
  • Fluids incompatibilities and other physical chemistry effects
  • Gravel pack fluidisation
  • Mechanical integrity
  • Regulatory body or commercial constraints
We perform detailed analysis of reservoir, completion and production data, which will often result in a clear definition of the operating envelope of the well over its entire life. By doing so, we help the Operator formulate a tailored drawdown strategy based on engineering principles and not just rules of thumb.

At the pre-sanction phase, we carry out reliability assessment to ensure that the Operator selects the most robust well system. We do this by looking at the components of well system or the entire well system as a subset of the production system. We research, collate and review available failure records from which we can establish the likelihood of failure for use in quantitative risk assessment (QRA) or a production availability model.

We have to make decisions on well equipment in many cases under a great deal of uncertainty with respect to reliability and performance especially for those components that do not have significant operational life.

For this reason we have put considerable effort in performing quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for clients to assure the safety, reliability and availability of their well completions over the lifecycle of their assets.

Our work involve the use of the classical fault tree analysis (FTA) and failure mode, effect and criticality assessment (FMECA) to demonstrate that the risks associated with a chosen design are as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP).

Once we have performed a reliability assessment and QRA, we often advise our clients to go one more step to develop a production availability model that integrates the results of those two assessments such that a detailed understanding of the overall production availability and the factors that influence it can be developed.

The Operator can use this availability model to develop an operating strategy for its wells and facility as well as guide decision on sparing philosophy to ensure that overall system availability is maximized. In developing the availability models, we follow a strict process or starting from collating and validating the assumptions regarding mean time to failures – if we have not previously performed a reliability assessment – and agreeing the operational boundaries and logic to be used to constrain the model.

Once established, our models can be used by asset managers with an essential business decision-making tool.

We start this process by helping the Operator screen its existing wells’ portfolio and new well designs for potentially unsafe conditions (e.g. high casing pressures, high GOR, failed SCSSV, sand production etc.) and compliance with the relevant statutory and regulatory guidelines and health, safety and environmental (HSE) standards.

We also benchmark our findings against industry best practice, new technology development and any relevant aspirations of the company with regards to costs and production.

The end-product is a well integrity management system (WIM) that the Operator can use to ensure compliance with regulations and well performance that is within the desired operating envelope.