Influence of weave geometry and layering on the progression of sand retention and permeability in standalone screens using resolved CFD-DEM

• Simulated resolved CFD-DEM of custom woven and multilayer 3D sand-screen geometries. • Classified performance via seven metrics with reproducible, quantitative thresholds. • Visualised bridging, filtrate retention, and streamline-based pore-scale coherence. • Isolated weave effects by fixing aperture size, wire thickness, and layering choices. • Showed long-term performance depends on stability and fines-retention selectivity. Premium-type standalone sand screens are increasingly used in oil and gas well completions for their cost-effectiveness and operational simplicity. Their filtration performance involves two coupled phases: initial bridging of sand particles at the screen surface and the subsequent deposited filter-bed formation, which governs long-term retention and flow. The influence of screen geometry on this progression remains under-characterised, with past studies often separating these phases or applying inconsistent methods. This study evaluates how weave pattern and layering shape the transition from bridging to filter-bed control using a spatially resolved CFD-DEM framework. Four configurations were analysed: plain weave (PW), twill weave (TW), and their multilayer forms (ML-PW, ML-TW). Parameters such as aperture size, wire diameter, and interlayer registration were held constant to isolate geometric effects. Multilayer screens outperformed single layers, with ML-PW showing the lowest sand production, smoothest decline in production rate, and most stable filtrate size range. PW achieved the highest retained permeability (%), but this reflected its lower inherent screen-only permeability rather than the stability of flow coherence. ML-PW demonstrated the strongest overall performance by combining high retention with coherent flow paths and stable bridging, whereas TW and ML-TW showed weaker alignment, greater heterogeneity, and lower retained permeability. The findings establish layering as a stronger driver of filtration behaviour than weave alone. PW performs better than TW at equivalent aperture, while ML-PW provides the most balanced combination of fines control and hydraulic capacity. Filtration should therefore be assessed as a time-dependent progression governed jointly by screen geometry and filter-bed development.