• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Primary Cementing
  • Remedial Cementing
  • Plug Cementing
  • Job Execution
  • Post-job results interpretation
  • Equipment
  • Laboratory
  • Mission
  • About
  • Contact and Questions?
  • My Cementing Challenges

Better Well Cementing for ALL

The Leading Online Support Hub for Better Oil Well Cementing.

Suicide Squeeze Cementing: risky but valid

February 19, 2017 By Lenin Diaz 8 Comments

Suicide Squeeze Cementing: risky but valid

More technically, a ‘suicide squeeze’ is an application of a circulating squeeze, used in specific circumstances. In general, the cement squeeze is a fascinating topic, and an important skill to master for any experienced cementer.

In a circulating squeeze, the cement slurry is ‘forced’ to flow through a lower open path and up behind the casing with returns being taken back into the wellbore or to the annulus. Typically, there is an isolation tool, a cement retainer or a packer placed above the lower opening.

Some examples:

a) An attempt to complete casing cementing following incomplete primary cementing. A typical example is the second stage of a failed two-stage cement job. In this case, we place a cement retainer above the stage tool ports (if open) or a perforated interval. We send fluid returns to the surface, and on some occasions, pressure permitting, cement is also returned to the surface;

b) To remediate an impeded liner cementing operation. If a liner top packer is not in place or set, a cement retainer, (the better choice), or a packer is placed somewhere above the landing collar. We keep fluid returns to the top of the liner and cement top within the overlap between casings, or directly above a zone of interest;

c) Another example, (now in remedial cementing), we place a cement retainer or a packer in between two purposely-made perforated intervals with the intention to reinstate zonal isolation in a section of interest behind the casing.

When we use a packer in the example described in (c), the possibility of some costly consequences, catastrophic in nature, are significantly increased (impact + probability = risk). The worst of these consequences being losing the well entirely or a section. More theatrically ‘wasting’ the well, but because we love what we do and constructing the well is what justify our existence, we feel like ‘we are the well’, hence the ‘suicidal’ connotation.

Consequently, this circulating squeeze application in remedial cementing is what is known as a ‘suicide squeeze.’ Why is this a high-risk operation? Or more importantly, why do it?

Now because I am a cementer, answering the first question is more appealing to me. So let’s start by explaining this.

First of all, for this method lets highlight the conventional squeeze theory. Squeeze cementing is a filtration process that occurs while placing cement slurry into a wellbore entry point (leaks in the casing/wellbore) under differential pressure. Forcing the slurry against a permeable media causes solid cement particles to filter out cement liquid phase (filtrate) on the formation face. Re-establishing isolation (node formation), does not apply because, in a circulating squeeze, the objective is not to form a cement cake or node but to fill a channel or large void behind the casing with cement slurry.

During the process of a ‘suicide squeeze’, (as an application of the circulating squeeze methodology), the cement slurry is circulated down through the bottom perforations up to the top perforations. Then, the packer placed in between, with returns back into the wellbore.

There is a strong possibility that, if the cement volume is larger than the volume of the channel or void that we intend to cover, part of the cement slurry may enter the casing/work-string annulus (behind the packer tool) during the job. Should this cement set, the DP or tubing may become stuck in the hole. This is an immediate and unwanted possibility only worsened by the amount of cement slurry above the packer setting depth, and by the proximity of the packer to the top perforations.

Taking a step back in our thoughts, let’s recognize the root of the problem: “cement volume is larger than the volume of the channel or void that we intend to cover”.

This problem presents itself not because we can’t do our math; this is a problem since we don’t know the geometry of the channel.  Old, damaged or fractured cement might be in place (from the original primary cement job). Because of this, circumferential flow is not ensured. (Cement will flow only through the most natural path).

There is another contributing element, the minimum-pumpable cement volume. The definition is the minimum cement volume we should pump to ensure ‘uncontaminated’ cement slurry fills the channel or void. (The cement slurry would typically undergo mixing and contamination with the fluids ahead while flowing down the work string – the deeper the packer, the higher the contamination). In summary, in a circulating squeeze operation of this nature, it is likely to highly-likely that cement slurry (in addition to cement-contaminated fluids) would return to the wellbore behind or on top of the packer.

What are the implications?

  • Cement slurry can impair the mechanism to unset the packer;
  • The cement slurry back in the wellbore could have unpredictable behaviour. For example, thickening time reduced and increased gel strength. This is due to its interaction with a permeable media (filtration) while flowing behind the casing from the bottom perforations;
  • The work string (DP or tubing) may accidentally become stuck in the hole.

As a summary, let’s put all in perspective. In a suicide squeeze, cement slurry in an unknown quantity with unknown thickening time might end up in the active wellbore in contact with the work string and behind the packer. (A relatively large OD tool with respect to the casing ID). In other words, a game of chance that makes the term ‘suicide squeeze’ even more clear now.

Now, let me go further back to our second question, why do it?

I bet you anticipated a long answer to this one. But, you already know the answer, correct? We consider and execute a suicide squeeze because there is no other choice! Right? So, for all purposes, I assume that if a suicide squeeze job is considered it is because all other options were explored and discarded as inapplicable.

What can be done to increase our chances of success?

First of all, we must perform a team-wide operational and technical job risk assessment to recognize all risks and identify proper preventive or remedial measures. Below some appropriate actions:

  • Consider using a cement retainer for a more straightforward process. It is easier and quicker to remove the stinger assembly than the packer and POOH with a wider effective work string-casing gap.
  • Make sure that the interval is circulated to ensure the best possible cleanup and a steady circulating pressure. Fluids like acid, water or a wash can be considered, before cementing, keeping in mind density and chemical compatibility.
  • Evaluate and take action on possible fluid incompatibilities (cement/brine or mud/spacer or wash). Some cement-contaminated fluids behaviors include, among others, reduced thickening time, increased or shortened static gel strength, solids settling and delayed compressive strength development.
  • The cement slurry should be:
    • Low viscosity with very low gel strength for an easier flow (less pressure drop in the channel = less filtration);
    • Zero free water; and
    • Less than 50 ml/30 min fluid loss.
  • We can consider an additional safety factor for thickening time. In these operations, we might see a reduction in the actual thickening time, and gel strength development considerably accelerated due to the loss of filtrate while the cement slurry flows under pressure behind the casing between the perforations.
  • Cement slurry volume estimation shall be as conservative as possible. Use the fluids contamination feature of the cement placement simulation software to predict/estimate the minimum-effective pumpable volume.

Finally, I would like to emphasize that performing a suicide squeeze is a type of squeeze cementing that has to be a team decision. Every member of the team should be involved from the start, fully understanding the risk and implications.

A drilling engineer or the cementing specialist, if available, should prepare an initial presentation describing the process, assumptions, risk management, pros and cons. In a way, like sorts of ‘suicide squeeze on paper or SSOP’ exercise so, everybody can contribute and be part of the process.

Please drop your questions or comments in the space below. I will be glad to answers your questions or receive your contribution to enriching this article.

Here are couple of other articles to learn more about the topic of the cement squeeze. Here and here.

Cheers

L. Diaz

me




 

Related posts:

  1. Workover Cementing Techniques 2: Squeeze Cementing
  2. Cement Slurry Laboratory Testing
  3. Gas migration and surface casing vent flow (SCVF) issues and prevention
  4. Is a base necessary for your Cement Plug? – Part 2

Filed Under: Remedial Cementing Tagged With: circulating squeeze, packer, remedial cementing, retainer, squeeze, suicide, suicide squeeze

Article Posted By:

Lenin Diaz is an oil industry specialist with 26 years of technical and operational expertise in fluids, cementing, water control and shut-off. A distinguished track record spanning BP, Schlumberger, and NAPESCO. Lenin lives in Tenerife, Spain and is the creator of this website. Read More…

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Faouzi says

    March 10, 2017 at 7:42 am

    Lenin,

    Thanks for the valuable infos , but what about the block squeeze what are the pre-cautions and measures you should consider and take , while planning and executing the job.

    Reply
    • Lenin Diaz says

      March 10, 2017 at 11:20 am

      Faouzi, Thanks a lot for your comment. First of all please take a look at my previous post about squeeze cementing https://better-cementing-for-all.org/squeeze-cementing-principles .Now, the technique called block squeeze, typically involves two squeeze operations into permeable zones, above and below, a production zone.

      Reply
  2. Wesam Qusai says

    March 20, 2017 at 7:47 am

    Be well Mr.Lenin, you keep enriching me with information that you squeezed in my mind.

    Reply
    • Lenin Diaz says

      March 23, 2017 at 5:38 pm

      Hi Wesam, It is nice to get your feedback. Like always, we are here to help

      Reply
  3. Avim says

    April 27, 2017 at 4:40 pm

    Dear mr. Lenin,

    I want to ask what is the paramater of using retrievable packer and cement retainer?and how many success and failure precentage with theese two methods?
    Btw its a good article thank you and keep writing 🙂

    Reply
    • Lenin Diaz says

      April 28, 2017 at 2:48 pm

      Hi Avim, in general the retrievable packer is the preferred tool for high pressure squeeze, it allows to test above and below and in normal conditions cement in the wellborn is well away from the tool, mainly because the objective is injection and to limit the amount left in the wellbore to avoid drill cement.
      However, in this context (circulation squeeze) cement is likely to flow behind and on top the packer, which represents a risk as, described in the article.
      With the retainer the tool remains in the wellbore isolating below and only DP/tubing is POOH reducing induced flow by suction.
      The selection between the one and the other is dictated by the conditions of the operations (like distance between the openings above and below the tool, depth, volume of cement, fluid in the hole, etc.) and the corresponding operational risk assessment

      Let me know if this addresses the concerns to your satisfaction

      Cheers
      L. Diaz

      Reply
  4. joe moad says

    January 2, 2023 at 6:55 am

    MR. Diaz I am Joe Bill Moad a 66 year old Oilfield hand that is trying to rekindle some old vertical wells in oklahoma that have casing problems along the fault or Dolemight @ 5-5500′. This well is 13,000′ Morrow (vertical) well. It has produced Gas for or since spud in 1983. I am wanting to locate parted casing and perform a squeeze as there are many zones above the morrow to test in this old well above the morrow perfs. what would you do or not do?

    thanks

    JBM/Oklahoma

    Reply
    • Lenin Diaz says

      January 14, 2023 at 9:44 am

      Hi Joe
      Apologies for this late reply
      I will send you an email
      Cheers

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Trango DEPM is a team of Oil&Gas professionals with broad experience in the O&G industry. Working on onshore and offshore projects around the world, including most vivid and challenging areas as Saudi Arabia, US Marcellus shale and North Sea, but also small on small projects, requiring individual approach, we are well equipped to help you plan, budget, implement and execute your drilling project successfully. We also cooperate with number of other professionals with experience in such areas as drilling, geology, geophysics, procurement or logistics. This allows us to fully run your project or just support you in desired areas of expertise, depends on you needs.

How I survived the 2016 Downturn and the current difficult times?

Find the content you need

Archives

24 Page Free Primary Cementing Guide

Click this image to take a look. It is comprehensive and easy to follow too!

In 2016, I launched Better Cementing for All. Now, I want to keep it alive.

For more than 26 years, I have worked in oil well cementing, offering my services to some of the largest oil corporations in the world and committing myself to excellence. I have mastered my role, and in doing so, I have accrued a skill set that is extremely valuable to my fellow professionals. Eager to do whatever I can to help them, I have owned and operated Better Cementing for All since 2016.
Let me tell you what Better Cementing for All does and what it means. A resource for all oil industry professionals and for cementers both established and prospective, this is a non-profit resource that I established in order to do nothing but serve and make an impact on people who are looking to build careers for themselves in cementing.
From primary cementing to remedial cementing to plug cementing to post-job results, I do it all, and I am comfortable answering in-depth questions about each and every one of these topics. I also offer tools and tips for jobseekers, general self-development advice, and guidance for equipment choices. TO put it simply, this is the go-to spot for anyone who wants to know anything about oil well cementing.
The problem, however, is that covid-19 has made the structure of the website seem untenable. I am trying to juggle the work that I do and my non-profit initiatives and finding it all unhealthy and unsustainable. I want to keep Better Cementing for All up and running, but to do that, I need your help.


My NEW introductory VIDEO

Recent Posts

Max Out Your Cement Coverage

If we consider the main variables to ensure proper mud in hole replacement with cement: stand-off, … [Read More...] about Max Out Your Cement Coverage

Cementing Flowchart

In recent weeks, I received some reader requests to include cement job processes or procedures as … [Read More...] about Cementing Flowchart

Cementing. Challenges across permeable zones

This article will provide you with some actionable suggestions for cementing across permeable zones. … [Read More...] about Cementing. Challenges across permeable zones

Forensic Cementing

Forensic is a term usually associated with crimes. Criminal forensics is the use of science to … [Read More...] about Forensic Cementing

Cement Slurry design Basics

First, here is a handy table to simplify the process of cement slurry design: Additive … [Read More...] about Cement Slurry design Basics

well cementing pre-job cement challenge question

Remedial Cementing with Coiled Tubing (animation)

Though I am far from being an animation expert, during my training courses I have always wanted to … [Read More...] about Remedial Cementing with Coiled Tubing (animation)

Need urgent help?

WhatsApp me at this number: +34 657 07 01 78

Footer

Recent activity

Visit our latest posts and help others by adding a comment.

Make your contribution and help keep Better Cementing for All alive!

Now more than ever, we are facing a loss of expertise in our industry, and Better Cementing for All is a unifying force, featuring interactions among industry professionals, knowledge sharing through posts, and other valuable pieces of content that we need to preserve.

Recent Comments

  • Merit on Cementing Equipment from Serva SJS Limited
  • Lenin Diaz on Cementing Equipment from Serva SJS Limited
  • Lenin Diaz on All you need to know about Bentonite in Cement Slurries
  • Lenin Diaz on Cementing Equipment from Serva SJS Limited
  • Lenin Diaz on Cementing Equipment from Serva SJS Limited
  • Lenin Diaz on Suicide Squeeze Cementing: risky but valid
  • Samuel Bekele Bedjiga on All you need to know about Bentonite in Cement Slurries

Recent Posts

  • Max Out Your Cement Coverage
  • Cementing Flowchart
  • Cementing. Challenges across permeable zones
  • Forensic Cementing
  • Cement Slurry design Basics
  • Remedial Cementing with Coiled Tubing (animation)
  • Plug and Abandonment Webinar (Español)
  • Webinar series (II). Quality Assurance in Cementing Operations (Spanish)
  • Webinar series (I). Log interpretation (Spanish)

Submit your email

&middot Better Well Cementing For All is owned by L. Diaz © 2023 &middot TOS & Privacy Policy &middot Web Design &middot