Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Entry to Flow
A. S. O D E H
MEMBER AlME
I MOBlL RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CORP.
DALLAS, TEX.
M A R C H , 1968
solution for steady - s t a t e flow of a slightly
compressible fluid. The resulting equation allows
calculation of l o s s of productivity a s a function of
location and length of the open interval, the
thickness of productive sand, the value of rd and
the ratio of rd/rw. Solution of the equation in
graphical form is presented for the c a s e of rd. =
660 ft and rw = 1/4 ft, and for a range of sand
thicknesses from 20 to 200 ft. A comparison
between a few results for values of rd and rw
different from the above is given in tabular form.
Also, the paper shows how the n e t decrease in
productivity due to the combined effect of limited
entry and perforations is calculated.
THEORETICAL ANALYSIS
It is assumed that a well of radius rw penetrates
an isotropic medium of thickness ht. ,The interval
open to flow a t the wellbore is h, where h ht. <
The formation is bounded externally by a circle
of rd radius. The well is centrally located. Top
and bottom boundaries of the formation are
impermeable to flow. The well i s producing a t a where r d =~ (rd/ht), T w = ~ (rw/ht), Z D = (Z/ht),
constant rate q. The fluid is slightly compressible, hD = (h/ht), lo and I1 are modified Bessel functions
and the reservoir i s in semisteady-state. of the first kind of zero and first order, and KO
Mathematically, this problem could be stated a s and K are modified B e s s e l functions of the second
that of finding a solution to the equation kind of zero and first order.
If the entire productive interval is open to flow,
then
zk . . . . . . . . . . (2)
a through perforated casing with flow resistances
=0 ,
equivalent to those of an undamaged open-hole
= 0 and 4 interval. This means that the number of perforations
per foot a r e large enough s o a s not to cause
where D = - [q/(nrd 2ht& and @ is the velocity appreciable impediment to flow. If this c a s e does
potential given by @ = (k/~*)(p - P ~ Z ) . not obtain, then a correction factor must be applied
In the foregoing equations, p is pressure, p i s to the results. Modifying results to account for
fluid depsity, Z is the vertical coordinate positive the increase in resistance due to perforations i s
downward, k is formation permeability to the fluid, discussed under "Perforated Wells".
p is fluid viscosity, r is radius from the wellbore
and g is the gravitational constant. NUMERICAL COMPUTATIONS
Applying the finite cosine transform to Eqs.
1 and 2, solving the resulting differential equation Eq. 3 gives the potential drop A@ for a constant
and inverting ( s e e Appendix), the following rate of production q. Superposition must be used
solution is obtained. to obtain an exact q for a constant A@ using Eq.
3.
Muskat6 solved the problem of a partially
penetrating well under steady - s t a t e and in-
compressible flow. His solution was developed
q t i s recognized that the exact boundary condition should
for a constant potential drop. He pointed out that
to calculate the average production rate per unit
= q. However, Muskat6 showed that the ermr introduced in assuming the simpler
boundary condition i s negligible. of time using the constant potential drop c a s e
.232
--
rw=aft
,212
rw=fft
.242
,320 .301 .352 .263 .246 .280
,325 ,309 ,364 ,269 ,252 .288
.332 ,312 .368 .271 .254 ,292
.333 .313 .370 .272 ,255 .293
.332 ,312 .368 .271 .254 .292
M A R C H , 1968
error d e c r e a s e s rapidly a s the open interval open interval and for various sand thicknesses.
i n c r e a s e s and a s the total formation thickness The ratio q/q, i s the ratio of the rate of flow
increases. T h u s , from a practical viewpoint, the obtained with the specific open interval to the
figures could be u s e d for the majority of rd/rw rate of flow when the total productive interval i s
values encountered in field operations. open to flow; Z p l i s the fraction of the formation
above the open mterval.
EXPLANATION O F
FIGS. 1 THROUGH 8 The following example illustrates the u s e of the
figures. A well h a s 12 ft out of 40 ft open to flow.
Each figure g i v e s q/q, v s Z D 1 for a specific The interval s t a r t s 4 ft from the top, rd/rw = 2,640
ft and r , = ft. Determine the fractional l o s s in
productivity caused by the restricted entry to flow.
The fractional l o s s in productivity f i s defined
a s the l o s s in productivity divided by the unimpaired
productivity. Thus, f = ( q , - q)/(q,) = 1 - (q/q,).
The open interval expressed in fraction i s 12/40
= 0.3; ZD1 = 4/40 = 0.1. From Fig. 3, q / q , for a
sand thickness of 40 ft and ZD1 = 0.1 i s 0.49.
Therefore, f = 1 - 0.49 = 0.51.
E F F E C T O F ANISOTROPY
'DI
from which
ZDI
FIG. 4 - PERFORATED INTERVAL 0.4 OF
THICKNESS.
ZDI ZDI
MARCH, 1968 47
EXAMPLE
Data
A production t e s t w a s N n on a n oil well. T h e
r a t e of flow w a s 103 reservoir B/D. T h e w e l l w a s
c l o s e d after s t e a d y - s t a t e flow obtained, a n d
buildup d a t a shown in T a b l e 1 were collected.
T h e w e l l is perforated 1 0 ft out of a total of
50 ft a n d the perforations s t a r t 20 ft from t h e
top. Determine t h e true skin of the formation,
assuming t h e r e s i s t a n c e to flow c a u s e d by t h e
perforations to b e negligible; q5 = 0.20, c (fluid
compressibility) = 1 5 x vol/vol/psi, p = 0.5
cp, r w = 1/4 ft and rd = 6 6 0 ft.
Solution
Fig. 9 g i v e s t h e normal pressure buildup plot.
Slope m is (-50) psi/cycle. Therefore,
DI
FIG. 8 - PERFORATED INTERVAL 0.8 OF
THICKNESS.
167
k = 7= 3.34 md.
From pressure buildup, one c a l c u l a t e s the s k i n
by
Eq. 6 a l l o w s calculation of apparent s k i n due to
r e s t r i c t e d entry. Therefore, for any s k i n c a l c u l a t i o n s [pwsl - Pwf
s = 1.151
in w e l l s with r e s t r i c t e d entry, s, must b e c a l c u l a t e d
in addition t o obtaining s from flow t e s t data.
T h e true condition of t h e formation will b e described
by st = s - s,, where st is t h e true s k i n of the
formation around the open wellbore, and s i s t h e
s k i n a s c a l c u l a t e d from flow t e s t a n a l y s i s . T h e where pwsl a n d p w j a r e , respectively, the p r e s s u r e s
following example i l l u s t r a t e s t h e point. after 1 hour of s h u t in and t h e flowing bottom-hole
p r e s s u r e prior to s h u t in.
FIG. 9 - P R E S S U R E BUILDUP.
SOCIETY O F PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JOURNAL
Thus, where 3R is t h e average s t a t i c pressure of t h e
reservoir, a n d t h e other symbols a r e in md-ft, p s i ,
and cp. T h e a c t u a l flow rate, q, is i n reservoir
barrels per day.
T h e v a l u e of D, may b e l e s s , e q u a l to o r g r e a t e r
than one. T h i s means the flow c a p a c i t y of t h e
formation around t h e wellbore could h a v e been
improved, unchanged or reduced. T h i s is a common
By u s i n g Eq. 6 and Fig. 2, o n e c a l c u l a t e s s, a s procedure u s e d t o e v a l u a t e t h e formation condition
and t h e n e c e s s i t y for remedial work.
Eq. 7 a s s u m e s complete radial symmetry which
m e a n s t h a t t h e whole productive interval a t t h e
wellbore i s open to flow. However, in w e l l s
with limited entry, q, i s obtained through only a
T h u s , st = 10.7 - 11.7 = - 1. fraction of t h e productive interval. Therefore, to
T h i s example i n d i c a t e s clearly t h e importance arrive a t a true value of D,, one m u s t correct for
of correcting for t h e e f f e c t of r e s t r i c t e d entry t o the effect of restricted entry. T h i s is done by
flow. If t h e a n a l y s t d o e s n o t correct for t h e effect multiplying q, of Eq. 7 by the appropriate ratio of
i n t h i s example, h e will c a l c u l a t e a skin factor of (919',) obtained from F i g s . 1 through 8 prior to
10.7, indicating a badly damaged formation calculating Dr. Thus, the correct D, is given by
around t h e wellbore. However, a f t e r correcting
for t h e effect, t h e s k i n factor of t h e formation
becomes (-1). T h i s i n d i c a t e s that the open interval
a c t u a l l y is slightly improved.
Eq. 6 is presented graphically in Fig. 1 0 to
h e l p the a n a l y s t in h i s work. T h i s a n a l y s i s i s
b a s e d on a v a l u e of 2,640 ft for 9 / r w and 1/4 f t
for r,. It i s l e f t to t h e a n a l y s t to d e c i d e whether T h e previous example is u s e d to i l l u s t r a t e
t h e s e d a t a will b e satisfactory if the v a l u e of the importance of correcting q, of Eq. 7 for t h e
rd/rw of i n t e r e s t is different from 2,640. e f f e c t of limited entry. In t h e example, k h = 167
md-ft, rd/rw = 2,640, ,u = 0.5, q, = 1 0 3 reservoir
CALCULATING DAMAGE R A T I O B/D, p, i s 1,190 and F R i s 1,980. T h u s ,
O F T H E FORMATION
M A R C H , 1968
term of Eq. 3. Refs. 3, 5 and 8 a l s o show that the ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
perforations cause an additional potential drop,
which could be written a s qC2/2nht. If both effects The author wishes to thank Tom Nash for
programming the calculations, and the management
are present, and since the partial differential
of Mobil Research & Development Corp. for
equation that describes the flow is linear, one may
permission to publish this paper.
write that the total potential drop when the rate of
flow is q is
REFERENCES
1. van Everdingen. A. F.: "The Skin Effect and I t s
Influence on tire P r d u c t i v e Capac'ity of a Well",
Trans.. AIME (1953) Vol. 198, 171-176.
2. Hwst, W.: "Establishment of the Skin Effect and
I t s Impediment t o Fluid Flow into a Well Bore",
Pet. Eng. (1953) Vol. 25, No. 11. B6-B16.
3. Muskat, M.: Physical Principles o f Oil Production.
McGtaw-Hill Book Co., New York (1949).
If the well is completed open hole, then 4. Brons, F. and Marting, V. E.: "The Effect of
Restricted Fluid Entry on Well Productivity",
J. Pet. Tech. (Feb., 1961) 172-174.
5. Nisle, R. G.: "The Effect of Partial Penetration on
Pressure Build-Up in Oil Wells", Trans.. AIME
(1958) Vol. 213, 85-90.
6. Muskat, M.: The Flow of Homogeneous Fluids
Thus through Porous Media, J . W. Edwards, Inc.,
Ann Arbor. Mich. (1946) 273.
7. McDowell. J. M. and Muskat, M.: LLTheEffect on
Well Productivity of Formation Penetration Beyond
Perforated Casing". Trans., AIME (1950) Vol. 189,
309-312.
From Refs. 7 and 8 and Eq. 3, or Figs. 1 through 8. Harris, M. H.: "The Effect of Perforating on Well
8 for rd/rW = 2,640, one can estimate h e magnitude Productivity ", J. Pet. Tech. (April, 1966) 518-528.
of C1 and C2, respectively, relative to the
magnitude of (In rd/rw - 1/2). From these, a
corrected ( q / q r ) can be calculated that accounts
for the effects of restricted entry to flow and for DERIVATION O F EQ. 3
perforations. Thus, if q / q r read from Figs. 1 The equation that describes the semisteady-
through 8 is X1 and the q/q,read from Ref. 7 or 8 state flow of slightly compressible fluid in an
is x2, then q/qr that accounts for both effects is isotropic medium into a well in which part of
given by the productive interval is blocked off is
0.4 = q = constant
= 0.36. W
corr 1 + 0.4
(l
From Fig. 10, sa = 12.5, a s compared to s, of
10.05 if one does not correct for the effect of
perforations . where h is the interval open to flow at the wellbore.
d25
- -
a2 @ =
1 dzJ D
- sin ( a ht) . (A-4)
z=+rdT a
$1. = .
d = 0, gives
- m
-
~'Jn=o 2
A@ = 0,-Ow=-
ht
+-
ht ,=I
I:~5c o s (a z).
A ll ( a r,) - B Kl(a rJ =
Q [sin ( a Z2)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-8)
and
where A@I n=O
was evaluated using L2Hospital's
~ l e 1, ? (T,/Q)~ = 1, = 9 /ht, 1 , ~ = 1
, /hi,
M A R C H , 1968