Case 07

Selected work/Scale procedure

A field procedure for confirming scale before treating it

A written workflow from pressure trend to field confirmation to targeted treatment to post-job review, adopted as the operator's surface scale identification procedure.

Setting

Onshore oil field, Middle East

Basis

Operator engagement

Period

2026

Outcome

Objective met4 of 4 success criteria. Read the conclusion
IThe problem

Carbonate, sulphate, iron sulphide and mixed scale were restricting chokes and flowlines across the field. A rising differential pressure was being read as proof of scale and flushes were scheduled on that alone. Some of those lines had a rate change, a temperature change or an instrument fault instead, and the flush achieved nothing. Flushing crews and chemicals were being spent on the wrong wells.

IIWhat we did

We wrote the workflow with the operator's production chemists and the well services team. Trend alerts on upstream and downstream pressure, choke setting, flowline differential pressure, rate and temperature. A location hypothesis: choke, flowline or both. Field confirmation by inspection, photographs and a sample. Chemistry assessment with the inhibitor history. A work order ranked by risk and recoverable production. Treatment by flush, choke change or chemicals. A post-job review comparing restored rate with the expectation. Before a work order is raised, the procedure requires rate change, temperature, choke position, reservoir change, emulsion, sand and instrument health to be ruled out and recorded.

IIIWhat it changed

Flush and treatment schedules were tied to confirmed cases with the recoverable production written on the work order. Wells with recurring scale got a control plan with inhibitor and a flush interval instead of a repeated reactive flush.

IVConclusion

Conclusion

The objective was to stop treating wells on a pressure trend alone. It was achieved. The work order now requires a confirmed cause, every treatment carries an expected recovery and a post-job comparison, recurring wells are on inhibitor and interval plans, and the procedure is the operator's controlling document at revision 3.

Success criterionMetHow it was achieved
iNo flush or chemical treatment raised without a confirmed cause on the work orderMetWork order template changed to require the confirmation step; alternative causes recorded on every order
iiEach treatment carries an expected rate recovery and a post-job comparisonMetPost-job review template issued and completed for each treatment
iiiRecurring wells on a control plan rather than a reactive listMetRecurring wells moved to inhibitor and interval plans
ivProcedure adopted by operations as the controlling documentMetProcedure issued as the operator's surface scale identification procedure, revision 3
VDeliverables and basis

Deliverables

  • Surface scale identification and evaluation procedure
  • Work order template with confirmation step and recoverable production
  • Post-job review template
  • Summary of scale types, reports and treatment approaches

Evidence note

Work done for the operator of an onshore field in the Middle East. Operator and wells not named. The procedure describes a workflow; the result of any one treatment is not quoted.

AssosTech · Energy · Engineering

If one of these looks like your problem


Send us the version you are dealing with. We will tell you what we would do first.

hello@assostechltd.com · 5 South Charlotte Street, Edinburgh, EH2 4AN