1 WELL COMPLETION TECHNIQUES

1-29

1.WELL DESIGN
1.1 Types of Completions:
This is the act of bringing a well to productive status. The decision whether
or not to bring a well to productive status can be quite difficult if the
reservoir analyses data indicate only a marginal prospect or if reservoir and
geological data are incomplete, unclear or contradictory. Wells found not
to be commercial petroleum or natural gas producers are abandoned,
usually by pumping cement into selected intervals of the wellbore and
sealing the casing at the surface. On the other hand, it a well is thought to
be commercially productive, completion procedures begin.
The method of well completion employed by the operator is dependent
upon the individual characteristics of the producing formation or
formations. These techniques may be classified as (1) open hole
completions, (2) conventional perforated completions, (3) sand exclusion
completions, (4) tubingless completions, (5) multiple completions and (6)
liner completion. The success or failure of any given completion program
depends greatly on the operators' understanding of the reservoir rock and
fluid properties, fluid flow regimes and/or dynamics and pressure force
fields, all of which control the productive capacity of a well. Understanding
of these properties, including geological reservoir quality will greatly
facilitate completion decisions.
1.2 Open Hole Completions:
Open hole completion is made by setting casing just above the zone of interest
and drilling or coring into the productive zone as far as may be necessary to
obtain a satisfactory well. Open hole completions are now seldom made except
for special cases in limestone reservoirs. Open hole completions are not
recommended if sloughing shales are interbeded in the productive horizon. In
this case, a perforated or slotted liner may be placed in the open hole section
without cementing.
Figure 1.1 shows the general appearance of an open hole completion.
Maximum wellbore diameter, easily deepening of well, easily enlarging of
wellbore by under reamed for gravel pack and full production capacity are
some of the advantages of the open hole completions. Where frequent
cleanouts, unregulating of fluid flow into the wellbore, and difficulty of
acidising or fracturing wellbore formations selectively are some of the
disadvantages of open hole completions.

1-30

Figure 1-1: Open hole completion.

Advantages
1. Because casing is set at the top of the pay, open hole completion allows
for special drilling techniques which minimize formation damage.
2. Full-hole diameter available to flow.
2. No perforating generally required--open hole perforating is used in
cases of severe well damage.
4. If zone is not to be perforated--log depth interpretation is not critical.
5. Hole is easily deepened or converted to a liner completion.
Disadvantages
1. No way of regulating fluid flow into wellbore.
2. Cannot control gas or water production effectively.
3. Casing is set in the dark. Formation top is generally picked from
drilling cuttings.
4. Difficult to selectively treat producing intervals, however, open-hole
packers are
available.
5. Wellbore may require periodic cleanout.

1-31

1.3 Perforated Casing Completions:

In the cased and perforated completion, casing is set into or through the
producing formation and cemented. The casing is then perforated to
provide communication between the wellbore and the formation. The
configuration is illustrated in figure 1.2. Some of the advantages of the
perforated casing completions are:
Advantages
1. Ease of selective completion and workover operations in the producing
ntervals.
2. Permit multiple completions and zones isolation.
3. Can stimulate selectively.
3. Effectively control gas and water production by selective perforation and
packer isolation.
4. Effectively control and monitor zonal fluid production with packers.
Disadvantages
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Requires accurate log analysis

Need of good depth control
Perforating expenses
Possible reduction in effective wellbore diameter and productivity
Requires good cement job through production intervals

1.4 Liner and Screen Completions:

The perforated liner completion is first used in wells that were originally
completed open hole. A perforated liner completion is shown in figure 1.3.
The perforated liner completion is also used when production casing is set
without reaching total depth. This is sometimes done if unexpected down
hole problems are encountered, such as lost circulation zones,
overpressured zones, or sloughing shales. The perforated liner permits
selective control of production from different intervals in the open hole
completion.
No two well completions are identical. The variation in well completion
format from well to well and field to field is dependent on many factors.
These factors will be discussed in detail in other sections. There are four
basic well completion formats:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Open hole completion

Conventional perforated completions
Sand exclusion completions
Permanent completions

1-32

Figure 1-2: Perforated casing completion

1-33

The general description and procedures of the above completions are

modified to satisfy the individual requirements of a particular well.
1.5 Effect of Turbulent Flow in open hole oil wells
All of the mathematical formulations presented so far are based on assumption
that laminar flow conditions are observed during flow. During radial flow, the
flow velocity increases as the wellbore is approached. This increase in the
velocity might cause the development of a turbulent flow around the wellbore.
If turbulent flow does exist, it is most likely to occur with gases and causes an
additional pressure drop similar to that caused by the skin effect. The term
non-Darcy Flow has been adopted by the industry to describe the additional
pressure drop due to the turbulent (non-Darcy) flow.
Referring to the additional real gas pseudopressure drop due to non-Darcy flow
as P non-Darcy, the total (actual) drop is given by:
(P) actual = (P) ideal + (P) skin + (P) non -Darcy

1-1

It may be argued that the basic assumption made by Fetkovich namely that
k ro / o B o is, approximately, a linear function of p, the straight line passing
close to the origin, is indeed a compromise assumption relating to wells
producing with a high production rate in which turbulent-flow pressure in
the formation are of the same order of magnitude (at least) as the Darcy
flow losses.
Jones, Blount and Glaze showed that Darcy Law can be written in the
following form in order to account for the turbulent flow effect in the wellbore
caused by the inflow of reservoir fluid into the wellbore and to show whether
near wellbore restrictions exist..
qo =

7.08x10 3 k o h ( Pr Pwf )

r
o Bo Ln e 0.75 + S + a q
rw

1-2

Where
Pr
Pwf s

=
=
=
=

qo
re
rw

=
=
=

ko
h

effective permeability to oil (md)

effective feet of oil pay (ft)
average reservoir pressure (psia)
wellbore sandface flowing pressure at center of
perforations (psia)
oil flow rate (stb.d)
radius of drainage (ft)
radius of wellbore (ft)

1-34

Figure 1-3: Uncemented slotted liner completion.

1-35

S"
a'q

=
=

o
Bo

=
=

total skin
turbulent flow term (the a'q term is normally not
significant for low-permeability wells and low flow
rates).
viscosity (cp) at average pressure of (Pr + Pwf )/2
formation volume factor at average pressure
s

Where possible, and even though tests may have been conducted on a well, the
above equation should be used to determine whether a well is producing
properly; that is, the above equation may show that a well is capable of much
higher production rates as compared to tests on the well.
The term aq is genearly negligible at low flow rates and for low permeability
wells. It may become significant at higher flow rates. A good policy is to check
the value of aq at eh maximum flow rate (pwf = 0). If the value is low, it can be
neglected. Jones, blount and glaze showed that the above equation can be
written in the following form in order to account for turbulent flow.
Pr Pwf = aq 2 + bq
s

Where
a=

2.30 x10 14 Bo 2
h p 2 rw

1-3

1-4

B [Ln(0.472(re / rw ) + S]
b= o o
7.08 x 103 kh
2.33x1010
=
k1.201

1-5
1-6

The above equation can be rewritten to include the value of a and b to become:

14 B

2.30 x10
o q 2 + o Bo [ln (0.472(re / rw ) + S] q
Pr Pwfs =

h p 2rw
7.08 x 103 kh

Where

q
Pr
Pwf s

Bo

=
=
=
=
=

turbulence coeeficient, ft-1

flow rate, b/d
average reservoir pressure (shut-in BHP), psi
flowing BHP at sandface, psi
formation volume factor, rb/stb
1-36

1-7


hp
o
re
rw
S
ko
a
b

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

fluid density, lb/ft3

perforated interval, ft
viscosity, cp
drainage radius, ft
wellbore radius, ft
skin factor (dimensionless)
oil permeability, md
turbulence term
Darcy flow term

If sufficient data is available a and b can be calculated from the above a and b
equations, and their values are substituted into the radial flow equation.
The Jones, Blount and Glaze equation is used to determine the amount of total
pressure drop in the reservoir due to drawdown and skin and turbulence in the
wellbore. The use of the equation for well performance is as follows:
Calculate a and b using the above equations.
Substitute the values of a and b into the following equation
Pr Pwf = aq 2 + bq

Using the calculated values of a and b construct the following table:

Assumed
qo

Pwf

Plot the following relationship

The difference between the two IPR curves (ideal IRR and IPR using
Jones equation) indicates the amount of pressure drop resulted in the
wellbore due to turbulence effect. The effect of turbulent flow caused
by the movement of reservoir fluids into the wellbore, on the
productivity of the well is determined from the above pressure drop
Jones equation.

1-37

TPC

Pw

IPRIDEAL
Pturb

IPRACTUAL

qo

Jones also suggests to calculate the values of a and b from production test by
representing the above radial flow equation for both oil and gas in the flowing
form in order to be able to calculate the constants a and b from the data of a
production test from the well after plotting it on a regular graph paper.
Pr Pwf
= aq + b
q

1-8

Where b is the standard laminar (or Darcy) flow coefficient and a is a

turbulence coefficient. The above equation indicates that the reciprocal of the
measured PI, when plotted against production rate q, might be expected to give
a straight line. The slope of such a line would be a measure of the degree of
turbulence. If this proves not to be small, consideration should be given to
remedial work, such as additional perforations over the completed interval or
an extension in the length of that interval.
If a three-or four-point flow rate test is available, b and a can be obtained from
the plot by using the following procedure:

1-38

1. From the data, calculate:

Calculated
Production Test Data
q

Pr Pwf
q

Pwf

2.
Prepare a plot of (Pr-Pwf)/q on the vertical axis and q on the horizontal as
illustrated in the following graph.

3.

Determine the value of b from the intercept, and the value of a from the
slope of the line. From the plot, choose two arbitrary values of flow rate
(q o and q o ) and determine the corresponding values of (Pr-Pwf)/qo. The
slope, a, can be calculated as follows:
1

a=

(P / q o )1 (P / q o ) 2
q o1 q o 2

1-9

Be sure to use two points on the line, not two data points.
A plot of the Jones, Blount and Glaze equation using a three- or four-point flow
rate test can be used to distinguish pressure losses caused by non-Darcy flow

1-39

(q) from pressure losses caused by skin (S). This is an important factor in
selecting the appropriate stimulation or remedial workover to improve
productivity. The following guidelines can be drawn from the plot and they are
recommended by Jones regarding remedial jobs and working over the well.
1.
2.
3.

The measured value of b (obtained from the plot), which indicates

damaged or undamaged conditions of the formation.
The measured value of a, which indicates the degree of turbulence in the
well formation system
The ratio of b' to b- that is, b'/b- which is also a good indicator to
determine pressure losses caused by non-Darcy flow
The value of b' is determined by using the following equation:
b = b + aq max

1-10

b' can also be determined from the plot as the ordinate value of a P/q vs
q plot at maximum flow rate (that is, at (Pr-O)/qo). The value of b is
determined from the plot.
Figure ( ) illustrates some possible conclusions that can be obtained from a
plot of the Jones, Blount and Glaze equation. Some conclusions can be drawn
based on the plots by using indicators that were previously discussed as
follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

If the value of b is low-less than 0.05 no formation damage occurs in

the well. The degree of damage will increase with the increasing values
if b.
If the value of b'/b is low-less than 2.0-little or no turbulence is occurring
in the well formation system.
If the value of b and b'/b are low, the well has a good completion.
If the value of b is low and b'/b is high, stimulation is not recommended.
The low productivity in the well is caused by an insufficient openperforated area. Additional perforations would be recommended.
If the value of b is high and b'/b is low, stimulation is recommended.

There are three basic ways to complete a well (1) open hole (2) cased
through and perforated and (3) Liner completion.
1.6 Water and Gas Coning:
Water and gas cones into the producing formation because of the creation
of flowing pressure gradient from the gas cap or the aquifer into the
producing formation. This flowing pressure gradient is formed because of
either the high flow rate or the location of the perforated interval. Water or
gas enters into the producing formation in a vertical motion perpendicular

1-40

to the bedding plane of the producing formation. Critical rate Qoc is defined
as the maximum allowable oil flow rate that can be imposed on the well to
avoid a cone breakthrough. The critical rate would correspond to the
development of a stable cone to an elevation just below the bottom of the
perforated interval in an oil-water system or to an elevation just above the
top of the perforated interval in a gas-oil system. There are several
empirical correlations that are commonly used to predict the oil critical
rate, including the correlations of:
Meyer and Garder (1954) suggest that coning development is a result of the
radial flow of the oil and associated pressure sink around the wellbore. In
their derivations, Meyer and Garder assume a homogeneous system with a
uniform permeability throughout the reservoir, i.e, kh = kv. It should be
pointed out that the ratio kh/kv is the most critical term in evaluating and
solving the coning problem. They developed three separate correlations for
determining the critical oil flow rate:
Gas coning
Water coning
Combined gas and water coning
Meyer, Gardner and Pirson presented the following method for the
prediction of water or gas coning.
a - Gas Coning:
Figure 1.4 represents the shape of gas coning when gas breaks through into
the perforation zone. It is assumed that gas coning in the oil-gas contact is
due to the high oil flow rate and the resulted pressure difference. The
following equation describes the process of gas coning into oil producing
well after neglecting capillary pressure effects. Meyer and Garder propose
the following expression for determining the critical oil rate in a gas oil
system. The proposed relationship has the following form:
p o p g k o 2
h (h D t ) 2
Q oc = 0.246 x 10 4

ln(re / rw o Bo

1-11

Where
Qoc
P g, P o
ko
re, rw
h

= critical oil rate. STB/day

= density of gas and oil, respectively, lb/ft3
= effective oil permeability, md
= drainage and wellbore radius respectively, ft
= oil column thickness, ft

1-41

Dt
o
Bo

= distance from the gas-oil contact to the top of the

perforations, ft
= oil viscosity, cp
= oil formation factor, rb/stb

b - Water Coning:
Figure 1.5 represents the shape of water coning when water breakthrough
into the perforation zone. It is assumed that the oil water contact rises
because of the water coning which results due to the high oil flow rate and
the resulted pressure drop. The flowing equation describes the process of
water coning into oil producing well after neglecting capillary pressure
effects. Meyer and Garder propose a similar expression for determining
the critical oil rate in the water coning system. The proposed relationship
has the following form:
p po k o 2
(h h 2p )
Q oc = 0.246 x 10 4 w

ln(re / rw o Bo

1-12

Where
w = water density, gm/cc
hp = perforated interval, ft
c-Water and Gas Coning Simultaneously:
Figure 1.6 represents the shape of gas coning and water coning
simultaneously into the perforation zone. It is important to select or
determine the thickness of the perforated interval, h, which permits
maximum oil production rate without water and/or gas coning into the
producing formation. The maximum flow rate can be achieved after the
equilibrium between the perforated interval and the oil-penetrated depth
into the producing formation is achieved. Maximum oil production rate
without gas and water coning simultaneously can be expressed as follows:
2
2
2
2
o g

o g
ko h hp
+ ( o g )1

Q oc = 0.246 x 10
x ( w o )

w
g
w
g
o B o ln(re / rw )

1-13
The above equation can be used to calculate the maximum oil production
rate without having gas and water coning.

1-42

Figure 1-4: Illustrating gas coning

Figure 1-5: Water coning.

Figure 1-6: Simultaneous water and gas coning.

1-43

1.7 PERFORATING OIL AND GAS WELLS:

The objective of perforating a well is to provide effective flow
communication between wellbore and reservoir. Perforating involves
shooting a hole through casing and cement and providing a perforation into
the formation.
1.8 Selection of Perforated Intervals:
Perforated zones in the producing formation are selected according to the
following:
1. Location of water-oil and gas-oil contents, which are known from
electrical and radioactive logs.
2. Results of the analysis of the producing formation during drilling
operations.
3. Special core sample analysis.
4. Geological information.
5. Producing schedule requirements
6. Permeability variations within a zone or between several zones.
7. Perforating density and multi--completion cost aspects.
8. Gas-oil, water-oil, and gas-water contacts.
9. Reservoir drive mechanisms--perforation location.
10. Workover operations--need for selective zone treatments require space
to set packers.
When selected perforated intervals the following should be considered:
1. The distance between the lower limit of the perforated interval and the
water-oil contact. This should be known in order to avoid water coning
into the producing formation.
2. The distance between the upper limit of the perforated interval and the
gas-oil contact. This should be known in order to avoid gas coning into
the producing formation.
3. Perforations should be located in zones of high porosity and
permeability and avoiding tight zones such as shales and anhydride
formations.
1.9 Determination of the Thickness of the Perforated Interval:
It is necessary to know how much thickness of the producing formation
should be perforated in order to optimize the oil production flow rate from
the well, and to satisfy the following conditions:

1-44

1) To maintain dynamic equilibrium of fluids movement in the reservoir

and not to have gas or water coning problems in the drainage area of the
well.
2) To maintain uniform fluid flow movement in the vicinity of the well,
which will prevent rock grains erosion, which cause formation damage
around the wellbore.
3) To maintain equal relative movement of reservoir fluids in order to
prevent wettability reversal around the well bore or in the reservoir near
the wellbore.
1.10 Perforating Techniques:
The following table presents the various perforating techniques that have
been used in oil and gas wells. The jet perforating technique is the most
effective method. The jet perforator relies on a shaped charge to generate a
high-pressure jet (5x 10 psi) traveling at 20,000 fps, which punches a hole
through the pipe, cement and formation. The typical shaped charge is a
simple device in terms of construction, but it is highly complex in
operation, as shown in figures 1.7 and 1.8.
The inside of the perforation tunnel will contain a crushed zone and gun
debris surrounding the open hole which will obviously quickly fill up with
perforating fluid. The objective is to select a perforating technique and
fluid that will minimize the amount of effective damage around the
perforation tunnel. Hopefully the perforation will also fully penetrate the
damaged zone from drilling operations and provide direct communication
with the native formation.
In order to perform the perforation technique successfully, the well must be
kept under the control of the completion fluids during the perforation and
tubing installation (over- balance conditions). Overbalance perforating can
cause formation damage and plugging perforations. Drilling mud can be
used as a perforating fluid but it increases the chances of poor clean-up and
productivity. In order to overcome the previous problems, specially
formulated perforating fluids should be selected based on the results of
compatibility tests with water, reservoir fluid and the formation prepared
perforating fluid should be filtered through 2 micron cartridges to remove
entrained solids. After perforation job is completed, there are three
techniques that should be used in order to remove the damage caused by
the perforation process.
1. Perforating in acid or using an acid wash in carbonate formations.
2. Backflushing the perforation in sandstones.
.
3. Perforation washing.

1-45

In carbonate formations hydrochloric acid is effective in cleaning damage

resulting from the perforation process. In sandstone formations acid is
much less effective and therefore mechanized cleaning of the perforation is
preferred. This is achieved by running DST equipment and exposing the
sand face suddenly to a high drawdown for a limited period (back surging).
A backsurge volume of at least one-gallon per perforation is required.
Underbalanced perforating is preferred in order to prevent completion fluid
from entering into sensitive formations. Underbalance perforating is also
desired for the faster and more effective clean up of perforations.
Underbalanced perforating can be achieved by:
- Through tubing perforating
- Tubing conveyed perforating
Tubing conveyed perforating requires mechanical initiation with drop bar
system or pressure initiation by either tubing pressure or differential
pressure between annulus and the hole. The following perforating
procedure should be followed with the through tubing method:
1. Run perforating gun and position opposite interval to be fired.
2. Flow well to obtain THP, which is 500 psi below the highest CITHP
recorded to date.
3. Close in well.
4. Allow THP to build up to 400 psi below CITHP and detonate gun.
5. Wait for two minutes to allow debris to fall.
6. Retrieve gun and open up well.
This can be repeated a number of times until all zones have been
perforated.
Gun Selection:
Short density and perforation penetration is the most important parameters
effecting gun performance. To minimise impairment, perforations should
extend at least 2" beyond the drilling damage. The minimum shot density
should be 2 spf and preferably 4 spf.
Gun Clearance:
Gun clearance is the distance from gun to casing along the axis of the jet.
The best perforations (largest perforation and large entrance hole) are
obtained with clearance less than one inch. With large distances from gun
to casing, the perforation characteristics are generally reduced. The
clearance problems normally occur only with tubing guns. Through tubing

1-46

Figure 1-7: Components of a shaped charge.

Figure 1-8: The jet gun perforator

1-47

gun each shot is rotated 90o from the preceding shot. This results in a spiral
pattern, which repeats every four shots.
The perforating gun always lies to the low side of the hole because of hole
deviation which occurs in many wells. This situation results in an effective
shot pattern of two shots instead of four. In other words, one-half of your
shots are wasted. If all of the charges were pointed in the same direction (0
phasing) then you might have all of the shots effective or none depending
upon which way the gun is pointing. This problem has been solved by
using 0 phasing and then mechanically or magnetically decentralizing the
gun so all of the shots are directed toward the casing and the gun is
positioned where each charge is directly against the casing.
Effect of completion Fluids on Perforating:
Drilling mud is considered to be the worst type of completion fluids
because of its plugging effect to formation pores and perforated holes
during perforating operation. Since the hydrostatic pressure of the mud
column is greater than the formation pressure, mud particles are forced into
the newly created perforations causing their plugging. This problem can be
solved by using a clean fluid such as filtered salt water (Kcl) as a
perforating fluid. In perforating limestone reservoirs, acetic or Hcl acid can
be used as perforating fluids.
Effect of Pressure Differential on Perforating:
Pressure differential is the difference between the pressure on the hold and
the pressure in the formation. Overbalanced perforating means that the
hydrostatic pressure at the bottom of the perforating fluid column is higher
than the formation pressure. Underbalanced perforating means that the
pressure at the bottom of the perforating fluid column is lower than the
formation pressure.
Underbalanced perforating is always desired because when perforating, the
formation fluids tend to flow into the well through the perforations
assisting in the clean up of the perforation debris. It is obvious then that the
best perforating efficiency will result when the pressure differential is from
the formation to the wellbore. Oil wells are routinely perforated with 200 to
500 psi differential pressures into the wellbore. Some low permeability gas
wells have been perforated with differential pressures as high as 2000 3000 psi into the wellbore.
1.11 Penetration Depth:
The importance of penetration depth of the perforation on the productivity
ratio of petroleum will be illustrated in figure 1.9. In the figure, one can

1-48

note that the curves flatten out after you get about six inches of penetration
and deeper penetration than six inches does not further increase the
productivity ratio appreciably.
1.12 Perforation Density:
Perforation density is defined as the number of shots placed in the casing
per foot. Another thing to observe in Figure 1.9 is that shot density is more
important than penetration. Figure 1.10 shows the effect of perforation
penetration on the productivity ratio at various shot densities. Common
perforation densities used in perforating petroleum wells are 1, 2, 4, 6, 8
and 12 shots per foot. The shots per foot density is determined according to
the hardness and the permeability of the formation to be perforated. In hard
tight formations where deep penetration is difficult to obtain, at least 4 and
possibly more shots per foot are recommended. The use of high shot
densities is attractive to produce larger productivity ratios; however, the
choice of shot density should also take into account difficulties that can
arise because of casing damage.
1.13 Phasing:
Phasing is defined as the orientation of the charges from each other. The
angular phase between successive perforations is an important parameter.
If all shots line up in one side of the casing or there is only one shot in that
position, the orientation is called zero (00) phasing. If there are only two
shots in opposite sides of the casing or half of the shots face one direction
and the other half face in the opposite direction, the orientation is called
1800 phasing. The orientation is called 900 phasing if each shot is
positioned 900 from the preceding shot.
The 900 phasing used to perforate for production has the perforations in a
spiral pattern, 900 apart. In most perforations cases 900 phasing is expected
to be the optimum perforation pattern used in perforating petroleum wells.
For underbalanced perforating where smaller through-tubing jet guns are
used, it necessary to position the guns facing and against the casing to
achieve adequate penetration.
Perforations studies give the following conclusions:
1. Perforation density and penetration are the most important factors
affecting the productivity ratio.
2. Stagged patterns are more productive than simple patterns.
3. A perforation density of four shots per foot and 6 inch or greater
penetration give productivities approximately equal to the equivalent open
hole completion.

1-49

Figure 1-9: Productivity ratio versus penetration

depth for various shot densities.

Figure 1-10: Productivity ratio versus penetration

depth for various phasing angles.

1-50

1.14 Determination of Pressure Drop Across Perforations:

Jones, Glaze and Blount suggested that the following Darcys radial flow
equation for both oil and gas could be written in order to include the problem
of turbulent flow losses in the reservoir.
Pr Pwf = aq 2 + bq = P

1-14

The radial flow equation for oil is most commonly written in the following
form in order to include the effect of turbulent flow effect in the wellbore as:

7.08 103 kh Pr Pwf

qo =
o Bo Ln re/rw 3 / 4 + S + aq

1-15

Mcleod has proposed the following practical approach for the determination of
pressure drop across perforations in oil and gas wells.
1. The permeability of the crushed or compacted zone is:
a) 10 % of formation permeability if perforated overbalanced.
b) 40% of formation permeability if perforated underbalanced
2. The thickness of the perforated zone is in.
3. The small wellbore can be treated as an infinite reservoir.
4. The equation presented by Jones, Glaze and Blount can be used to evaluate
the pressure losses across perforations.
Figure 1.11 shows a typical perforated tunnel and the nomenclature used in the
analysis where figure 1.12 shows perforation configuration dimensions.
Mcleod has modified the Jones Glaze and Blount equations, to represent the
pressure loss for oil flow across perforations, as follows:
Pwfs Pwf = aq 2 + bq = P

1-16

Rewriting the above equation to in terms of perforation parameters to become:

2.30 1014 B2
o o

P =

Lp2

1 1

B Ln r

rp rc
c/rp
q 2 + o o

7.08 10-3 L P k p

1-51

1-17

Figure 1-11: typical perforated tunnel.

Figure 1-12: Perforation configuration dimensions.

1-52

1 1
2.30 10 14 B 2 o o
r r
c
p
a=
2
Lp

o Bo Ln rc/rp

1-18

b=

3
7.08 10 LP k p

1-19

2.33 1010
k p1.201

1-20

rc = r p +

0.5
12

1-21

Where
q

Bo
o

LP
kP
rP
rc

= flow rate/perforation (q/perforation), b/d

=turbulence factor, ft-1
= formation volume factor, rb/stb
= oil density, Lb./ft3
= perforation tunnel length, ft
= oil viscosity, cp
= permeability of compacted zone, and
= 0.1 k formation if shot overbalanced
= 0.4 k formation if shot underbalanced
= radius of perforation tunnel, ft
= radius of compacted zone, ft

Figure 1.13 shows perforation parameters and Table 1.1 shows the perforation
tunnel length for different gun sizes and types.
The Jones, Glaze and Blount equation can be written to include the effect
turbulence across perforation in gas wells to become:
P 2 wfs P 2 wf = aq 2 + bq = P

1-22

3.16 1012 B2 TZ 1 1
3

rp rc 2 1.424 10 g TZ Ln rc/rp

2
2
q +
P wfs P wf =
q
2
LPk p

Lp

1-23

1-53

Figure 1-13: Perforation parameters.

Table 1.2: Perforation gun data.

1-54

Where
1
1
3.16 1012 g TZ

r p rc

a=
2
Lp
1.424 103 g TZ Ln rc/rp

b=
LP k p

1-24

1-25

q = flow rate/perforation (q/perforation), Mcfd

=turbulence factor, ft-1
=

g
T
Z
rc

2.33 1010
k P1.201

= gas specific gravity, dimensionless

= temperature, Ro (Fo+460)
= supercomperessibilty factor, dimensionless
= radius of compacted zone, ft
rc = r p +

rP
LP
g
kP

1-26

0.5
12

1-27

= radius of perforation tunnel, ft

= perforation tunnel length, ft
= gas viscosity, cp
= permeability of compacted zone, and
= 0.1 k formation if shot overbalanced
= 0.4 k formation if shot underbalanced

1.15 Wellbore Skin Factors:

The total skin factor (ST) can be expressed by:
ST = Sd + Sc + Sp

1-28

Where
St = Total or test skin factor
Sd = skin factor due to damage
Sp = perforation skin factor
Sc = partial completion skin factor

1-55

Perforation Skin Factor (SP)

Mathematical models have been developed to describe the threedimensional flow for perforated completions. The models were solved by
computers, and the results are presented in the form of nomograms. The
nomograms are used to determine the perforation skin factor, SP. The five
parameters are shown in figure 1.14.
1. Well diameter Csg OD + twice cement thickness, dw
2. Depth of perforation penetration (measured from cement sheath), ap
3. Ratio of vertical to horizontal permeability, kv /kh
4. The perforation phasing,
5. The interval of the perforation pattern repetition, h.
The parameters and h describe the different perforation patterns and are
shown in the following table 1.2. These data along with the values
determined for dw , ap and kv /kh are used in figure 1.15, for simple
patterns, or figure 1.16 for staggered patterns to determine Sp. Figures 1.15
and 1.16 were determined for 1/2-inch perforations. These perforation skin
factors can be corrected for other size perforations by using Figure 1.17.
1.16 Skin Factor Calculation Nomogram
Perforation skin factors are determined as follows:
1. Determine dw , kv /kh and ap. ap is the total core penetration, or TCP,
reported by the service company. The TCP is measured in Berea
sandstone, which has a compressive strength of 6,500 psi. If the
formation compressive strength is known, the ap should be corrected
using one of the formulas below.
2. Obtain h and from the previous table for desired perforating pattern.
3. Use figure 1.15 for simple patterns or figure 1.16 for staggered patterns
to get Sp. Begin at the left side of the nomogram and construct a
sequence of alternating horizontal and vertical lines for the parameters
determined in Steps 1 and 2 to determine Sp.
4. Correct Sp from Step 3 for different perforation diameters using figure
1.17.

skin =

141 qB
kh

oS

1-56

1-29

Figure 1-14: Well perforation tunnel parameters

1-57

Table 2.1: hand for various perforation patterns.

1-58

Figure 1-15: Nomogram for determining perforation skin factors for

simple pattern, in. perforations.

1-59

Figure 1-16: Nomogram for determining perforation skin factors for

staggered pattern, perforations.

Figure 1-17: Perforation skin factor Sp, for perforation

diameters of in and 1in.

1-60

To adjust perforation penetration for formations other than Berea

sandstone, use one of the following formulas:
1.17 Perforations Penetration:
Bullet Perforations:
1.15
GB
pf = p B

Cf

1-30

Jet Perforations:

Pf = PB exp 8.6 10-5 (CB CF )

1-31

Where
Pf
PB
CB
Cf

= penetration in formation, in
= penetration (TCP) in Brea sandstone, in.
= compressive strength of Brea sandstone, 6500 psi
= compressive strength in the formation, psi

In 1981 Locke has constructed a nomograph, shown as figure 1.18, to

allow the graphical solution of the perforation skin factor for different
perforation geometrics and arrangements taking into consideration the
perforation productivity ratio should be maintained equal to or above the
original ratio.
Wellbore Damage Skin Factor (Sd)
Wellbore damage skin factor can be calculated from well test transient pressure
analysis (pressure build up or draw down test).
Partial Completion Skin Factor (Sc)
Partial completions are commonly used to avoid water or gas coning. Figure
2.28 shows the two possible cases of a partial completion. In figures b and c the
flow must converge to flow into wellbore and the flow of the reservoir fluids
has three-dimensional effects similar to that of a perforation. Skin effects for
different partial completion schemes are presented in figure 1.19.
1. When the well does not completely penetrate the productive interval.
2. When the well is perforated only in a portion of the producing interval.

1-61

Figure 1-18: Nomograph for design of perforation system.

1-62

In these cases a positive skin factor is calculated even for an undamaged

well. In addition, the perforations themselves - their size, spacing, and
depth of penetration also can affect the skin factor. For a limited entry or
incompletely perforated interval wells, the total skin factor, ST, determined
from a pressure transient test is related to true skin factor, Sd, caused by
formation damage and apparent skin factor, Sc, caused by an incompletely
perforated producing interval (limited fluid entry). The relationship
between these factors is
h
ST = t S d + S c
hp

1-32

Where
hT = total producing interval thickness, ft
hP = perforated interval thickness, ft.
The apparent skin factor, Sc, can be calculated from the following equation:

ht
ht

1 ln
Sc =
hp r

kv

kh

1-33

Where
kh = horizontal formation permeability, md
kv = vertical formation permeability, md
1.18 Completion Efficiency:
The completion efficiency (CE) or the productivity ratio (PR) is used to
compare the productivity of a given completion to its equivalent open-hole
completion. In the open hole case the back pressure on the well is due to
the frictional pressure losses inside tubing and flow lines and wellhead
connections and in the oil separator, Pwf is the bottom hole flowing
pressure needed to overcome all the frictional pressure losses from the
bottom of the well to the separator.
The optimum Pwf and qo that can be produced from the well are calculated
from the well inflow performance curve and the tubing multiphase flow
curve as described in the previous section.

1-63

Figure 1-19: Partial completion and partial penetration.

1-64

Figure 1-20: Completion skin factors resulting from flow

convergence to the completion interval.

1-65

In the cased hole case the bottom hole flowing pressure, Pwf, is smaller
than Pwf, in the open hole case because of this resulted back pressure from
the perforations in the casing. The frictional pressure is not the same as in
the open hole case. Therefore, q in the cased hole should always be lower
than q from the open hole case. The following equation is Darcys law for
the open hole case:
qo =

7.08 k o h (Pe Pwf )

o B o ln

re

1-34

rw

Figure 1.20 illustrates the radial horizontal flow resulted from open hole
completion or from complete perforating across the producing interval.
For perforated completion, flow geometry has three-dimensional effects,
convergence of flow into perforations tunnel, as shown in figure 1.21.
Because most of the area to flow is blanked off by casing the produced oil
has to converge and flow through a smaller area to get into the wellbore. If
the flow rate is to be the same as that of an equivalent open hole
completion, additional pressure drop is required to force the oil to converge
into the perforations. Hence perforations have an effect similar to that of a
choke. In a reservoir, the amount of pressure drop available is fixed. As a
result, the productivity of perforated completions is generally less than that
of an open hole completion.
To account for the effect of the perforations, the Darcy's equation for the
open hole case should be modified to include the additional pressure drop
resulting from the limited fluid entry due to perforations, the new equation
becomes:

7.08 k o h Pe Pwf P
perf

qp =

re
o B o In

r wf

1-35

The pressure drop across perforations, pperf , which is the difference

between the sand face pressure, Pwfs, and the wellbore pressure, Pwf (figure
1.22) is represented by the following equation:

1-66

Figure 1-21: Radial oil flow pattern.

1-67

Pperf = Pwfs Pwf

1-36

The above Darcys equation can be rewritten to include the skin factor
instead of the pressure drop across perforations to become:
qp =

7.08 k o h (p e p wf )

o B o In

+ ST
r wf

re

1-37

The completion efficiency (CE) or the productivity ratio (PR) is defined as

the productivity of a perforated completion to that of the equivalent open
hole completion and it is defined as:
CE = PR =

q completion
q open hole

1-38

or
r
ln e
rw
CE =
r
ln e + ST
rw

Where
qo
Ko
h
Po
Pwf
Bo

re
rw
St

= oil flow rate, stb/day

= effective permeability to oil, Darcy
= thickness of the producing interval, ft
= reservoir pressure at drainage boundary, psi
= wellbore flowing pressure, psi
= oil formation volume factor, rb/stb
= oil viscosity, cp
= drainage radius, ft
= wellbore radius, ft
= total skin factor

1-68

1-39

Figure 1-22: Flow pattern for perforated well..

Figure 1-23: Illustrates pressure drop across perforations.

1-69

1.19 Planning a Completion:

1.20 Completion Program Optimization:
The function of a well is to provide a conduit from the subsurface reservoir to
the surface through which fluids can be produced or injected. Well costs make
up the major expenditure when developing a reservoir. Effectiveness of
communication between the producing formation and the well influences field
production characteristics, reservoir drainage and economics.
Selecting the best well completion involves the environment, resources,
and constraints when deciding:
-

Completion interval or intervals

Completion method
Number of completions in the well
Tubing and casing size
Tubing and casing configuration

A basic completion program involves the following procedures:

1. Long casing string (production casing) design
2. Primary cement job on the long casing string
3. Perforating, screen or liner installation
4. Testing, initial formation evaluation
5. Squeeze cementing
6. Acidizing
7. Fracturing
8. Sand control
9. Isolation of productive intervals via packers
10. Tubing string design and installation
11. Artificial lift installation
12. Wellhead design and installation
A conventional perforated completion program might run as follows:
1. Well is cased through the productive interval and casing is cemented
(primary) at least through the productive interval.
2.

The cemented casing string provides the following functions:

a. Furnishes a permanent wellbore of precisely known diameter
through which subsequent completion, producing, recompletion,
and workover operations may be carried out
b. Isolation of formations behind the pipe
c. A means of attaching surface valves and connections to control
and handle the produced fluids.

1-70

3. Zones which are potentially productive are perforated, tested, and treated
individually.
4. The lowest zone is tested first. As a general rule, formations should be
tested and completed starting from the lowest formation and working
upwards. When the zone is perforated the wellbore should be full of fluid.
Should the wellbore not be full of fluid, the shock wave of the perforation
explosion will reflect from the bottom of the hole and drive the perforating
gun up the hole. The electric cable supporting the gun is coiled randomly in
the hole and can become kinked. As the gun drops back, the line is snapped
at one of the kinks. The gun must then be retrieved by a potentially
expensive fishing job.
5. After perforating, tubing is "run in" the well with a production packer which
is set above the perforated zone. The packer isolates the productive interval
from the tubing-casing annulus and thereby allows the tubing to be swabbed
without the necessity of removing all fluid from the annulus to test the zone.
Other components of the tubing string are:
a. Hold-down tool--used as additional support to hold the packer in
place.
b. Safety joint--has coarse threads at a high pitch angle; a shear pin
prevents accidental unscrewing during completion operations. It
allows convenient disengagement of the packer should the packer
not release.
c. Seating nipple--has a smaller ID than the tubing, thus preventing
passage of the swab. It is also used as seat for down-hole (through
tubing) tools.
d. Pin collar--contains a steel pin which prevents passage of the swab.
e. Tubing sub--spacing below seating nipple or pin collar. These can be
"run in" either open-ended or with a perforated nipple and bull plug.
f. Swab--a series of rubber cups, which face upward and collapse, to
allow fluid passage, when the swab is lowered into the tubing. When
the swab is pulled upward the cups expand and the fluid, above the
point at which lift of the swab started, is removed from the tubing by
pulling the swab to the surface. The swab is raised and lowered in
the tubing on wire line.
6. After perforating, the well either flows naturally or is swab tested. The
swabbing removes the load fluid (mud, oil, water, etc.) and possibly
the well begins to flow naturally. A well test is carried out and a
decision as to the productivity of the producing zone is made.
7. If the well has potential but requires stimulation, the well is then
acidized, fractured, and/or chemically treated. After treatment, the well
is usually tested again.

1-71

8. If the zone is non-productive, the perforated interval is squeeze

cemented. The completion string is "pulled" and squeeze cementing
equipment is "run in" the hole. Excess cement in the casing is drilled
out. The squeeze job is tested. Should communications still exist, the
perforations are resqueezed.
9. If the zone is productive, a retrievable bridge plus is set above the zone
to isolate the zone from "up-hole" work. A bridge plus is a complete
seal.
10. The procedure is continued until the last zone is completed and tested.
The well is then killed with a "kill fluid" (i.e., saltwater, calcium
chloride water, mud) and the bridge plus(s) is retrieved.
11. Production packers and tubing strings are set in the casing at the
desired locations. Artificial lift equipment, if required, is "run in" the
hole. A wellhead is installed. If artificial lift is not required, the well
is swabbed on".
1.21 Considerations in Completion Design:
The best estimate of producing characteristics of the well over its
anticipated life is necessary for the best well completion. It is apparent that
there are many circumstances that can and will be encountered when
drilling and completing a well.
Economic Considerations:
Prior to the selection of a well completion design, an economic evaluation
should be made regarding 1) anticipated operating procedures, 2) reservoir
behaviour, 3) hole conditions, and 4) individual well performance.
The following parameters should be considered:
1. Primary and secondary reserve estimates
2. Drive mechanism
3. Stimulation requirements
4. Artificial lift requirements
5. Production schedule
6. Sand control problem
7. Corrosion problems
8. Gas and water coning
9. Environment; i.e. arctic, urban, offshore
10. Secondary and tertiary recovery scheme
11. Remedial and workover operations
12. Subsea possibilities

1-72

13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

Platform limitations
State or regulatory agency statutes
Safety equipment
Budget limitations
Political implications-- future forecasts

Mechanical Considerations:
The environment of the well bore has a great influence on the selection of
well-bore tools and tubular goods. The following should be considered
prior to completion specifications:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Casing--size, weight, grade, thread

Tubing--size, weight, grade, thread
Down-hole equipment specifications
Temperature ratings
Pressure ratings
Tubing movement
Protection against liner top leaks
Resistance against abrasion and corrosion

Production Casing Design Considerations:

The casing, together with the cement, performs six important functions:
1. Prevent caving of the hole
2. Prevent contamination of fresh water
3. Exclude water from the producing formation
4. Confine production to the wellbore
5. Provide a means of controlling pressure
6. Facilitate installation of subsurface equipment should artificial lift
methods become necessary.
1.22 Casing Classification:
Casing is classified according to five properties:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Outside diameter
Wall thickness
Grade of steel
Type of joint
Length range.

1-73

Casing selections are based on the following:

1. Drilling cost--hole size
2. Methods of production
3. Production rates--friction losses
4. Possibilities of multi-zone completion
5. Number of intermediate strings--telescope effect
6. Nature of fluid produced
7. Rig limitations
8. Workovers--equipment size requirements (packer O.D.).
9 Availability of casing
10. Experience in the area
11. Type of well--exploratory or development

1-74

Problem: Determination of Static

Distribution Using Well Log Data

Reservoir

Fluid

Vertical

Given the attached well logs obtained from an oil well completed in an oil
producing formation in an oil field in western Sirt Basin, Libya, calculate:
a.
b.
c.
d.

The top and the bottom of the oil-bearing zone

The depth oil water contact
The average porosity of the producing formation
The water saturation values versus depth for the producing formation

1-75

Formation Factor and Resistivity Index Data

Resistivity of saturating brine, ohm-meters: 0.057 at 24C
Permeability
Sample No.
(md)

Porosity
(%)

Formation
Factor

5.15

17.99

26.2

16

39.81

18.76

20.4

22

26.89

17.85

16.3

32

90.17

23.88

13.4

41

338.00

25.37

9.7

75

18.10

30.32

14.7

76

Brine
Saturation
% Pore
Space
100.0
96.8
95.0
90.3
70.0
45.1
43.5
100.0
97.5
96.7
89.6
39.3
20.1
18.6
100.0
97.2
96.7
95.1
63.9
32.6
28.8
100.0
97.9
94.4
64.8
22.3
13.2
8.6
100.0
97.0
88.8
72.6
32.4
17.6
15.9
100.0
97.3
96.1
85.6
53.3
32.9

Resistivity
1.00
1.12
0.19
1.25
1.89
3.82
4.35
1.00
1.03
1.15
0.25
4.75
14.20
16.70
1.00
1.04
1.00
1.20
2.60
9.50
13.38
1.00
1.10
1.15
1.85
8.20
21.39
34.00
1.00
1.27
1.35
1.90
7.50
23.95
29.00
1.00
1.00
1.20
1.40
3.60
9.47

81

0.61

20.77

47.0

103

11.92

15.97

22.0

77

31.1
100.0
96.0
94.0
88.0
77.7
66.4
63.2
100.0
95.1
87.2
73.6
56.5
43.4
39.6

9.85
1.00
1.20
1.34
1.60
2.39
4.46
4.55
1.00
1.24
1.76
2.85
5.05
13.00
16.50

Table ( ) Continued Logging Data of Water Zone

Depth, ft
6179.5
6180
6180.5
6181
6181.5
6182
6182.5
6183
6183.5
6184
6184.5
6185
6185.5
6186
6186.5
6187
6187.5
6188
6188.5
6189
6189.5
6190
6190.5
6191
6191.5
6192
6192.5
6193
6193.5
6194
6194.5
6195
6195.5
6196
6196.5
6197
6197.5
6198

Ro, m
1.047174
1.040211
1.040216
1.040212
1.051138
1.073019
1.097866
1.117832
1.139708
1.150646
1.162594
1.180488
1.201369
1.219242
1.241109
1.267937
1.291777
1.317618
1.34942
1.390159
1.436827
1.489408
1.537001
1.584569
1.614314
1.641066
1.655937
1.667833
1.677753
1.696571
1.728301
1.767994
1.826476
1.882963
1.934493
1.906922
2.046271
2.125417

0.268733
0.2761271
0.283953
0.2920851
0.293803
0.2924699
0.2872224
0.282813
0.2832186
0.28605
0.2865371
0.2860273
0.2861888
0.2855184
0.2825641
0.2793686
0.2737885
0.2621307
0.2563007
0.2515708
0.2565126
0.2594927
0.255525
0.2497627
0.2399306
0.2349941
0.2341678
0.233828
0.2320496
0.2306919
0.2295992
0.2278823
0.2222538
0.220281
0.2189157
0.2160165
0.2092906
0.2004027

78

F=Ro/Rw
22.76465217
22.61328261
22.6133913
22.61330435
22.85082609
23.3265
23.86665217
24.30069565
24.77626087
25.04404348
25.27378261
25.68278261
26.11671739
26.50526087
26.98063043
27.56384783
28.0821087
28.64386957
29.33521739
30.22084783
31.23536957
32.37843478
33.41386522
34.44715217
35.09378261
35.67534783
35.99863043
36.25723913
36.4728913
36.88197826
37.57176087
38.43965217
39.706
40.93397826
42.05419565
43.19395652
44.48415217
46.20471739

6198.5
6199
6201
6201.5
6209.5
6210
6210.5
6211

2.182778
2.271728
2.550223
2.624264
2.824798
3.032769
3.369325
3.917288

0.2079139
0.2131461
0.2105424
0.1986026
0.1856291
0.1760859
0.1622319
0.1390729

79

47.45169565
49.3853913
55.43963943
57.04921739
61.40865217
65.92976087
73.24619565
85.15043478

Table ( ) Well Log Data for Determination of SW versus depth

Interval
5272-74
5274-76
5276-78
5278-80
5280-82
5282-84
5284-86
5286-88
5288-90
5290-92
5292-94
5294-96
5296-98
5298- 5300
5300-5302
5302-5304
5304-5306
5306-5308
5308-5310
5310-5312
5312-14
5314-16
5316-18
5318-20
5320-22
5322-24
5324-26
5326-28
5328-30
5330-32
5332-34
5334-36
5336-38
5338-5340
5340-42
5342-44
5344-46
5346-48

DEN
2.30
2.19
2.20
2.22
2.24
2.27
2.30
2.25
2.30
2.26
2.27
2.25
2.25
2.26
2.40
2.35
2.33
2.30
2.27
2.30
2.27
2.25
2.22
2.18
2.22
2.24
2.28
2.32
2.34
2.35
2.34
2.37
2.36
2.33
2.47
2.42
2.33
2.39

m
NEU
0.30
0.32
0.315
0.30
0.27
0.315
0.28
0.34
0.33
0.35
0.35
0.33
0.35
0.33
0.28
0.29
0.30
0.315
0.32
0.31
0.35
0.34
0.33
0.33
0.32
0.32
0.30
0.27
0.30
0.28
0.25
0.27
0.29
0.34
0.25
0.30
0.32
0.27

SON

GR

RT

1/2

SW

83
90
90
90
87
85
82
70
78
83
84
81
82
78
71
75
72
72
75
78
82
82
83
83
82
81
80
79
79
79
78
77
75
74
67
73
76
72

15
11.5
13.5
10
9.5
12.5
9.5
17.5
18
16
15.5
15
14
13.5
15
15
15.5
15
14.5
16
17
15.5
15.5
15
15.5
15
15.5
15
16
18
17.5
17.5
19
18
15
16.5
21
25

13
10
9
8.5
8
10
16
30
18
20
27
40
80
50
27
20
30
58
65
40
20
10
9
10
7
6
5.3
4.6
4.5
4.2
3.5
3.1
3
4
10
12
6
3.5

14.13
11.65
11.89
13
14.90
13.03
15.38
11.49
12.57
11.11
11.26
11.89
11.04
12.06
17.5
15.87
14.68
13.42
12.66
13.62
11.26
11.49
11.49
11.03
11.89
12.22
13.82
16.66
14.91
16.52
18.90
17.65
16
12.57
22.68
16.39
13.62
18.26

26.6
29.3
29
27.7
25.9
27.7
25.5
29.5
28.2
30
29.8
29.0
30.1
28.8
23.9
25.1
26.1
27.3
28.1
27.1
29.8
29.5
29.5
30.1
29
28.6
26.9
24.5
25.9
24.6
23
23.8
25
28.2
21.0
24.7
27.1
23.4

0.19
0.20
0.21
0.23
0.25
0.21
0.18
0.01
0.02
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.07
0.09
0.15
0.16
0.13
0.09
0.08
0.11
0.14
0.20
0.21
0.19
0.24
0.26
0.30
0.35
0.34
0.37
0.43
0.44
0.43
0.33
0.28
0.22
0.28
0.42

80

5348-50
5350-52
5352-54
5354-56
5356-58
5358-60

2.45
2.57
2.57
2.61
2.55
2.45

0.28
0.17
0.155
0.125
0.15
0.18

Avg
Avg SW
out off
SW out off
RW

70
65
66
63
65
71

30
40
33
37
41
60

26%
28%
18%
55%
0.057 ohmm

81

2.6
2.2
2.4
3
3.2
2.5

18.90
44.44
48.90
70.62
51.02
33.03

23
15
14.3
11.9
14
17.4

0.50
0.83
0.83
0.89
0.73
0.67

Calculate
Using the well log data
aR
S w = m w
Rt
F=

Ro
Rw

F=

a
m

The constant a and m are calculated from plotting the following equation:
Log F = log a m log
RI =

l
Sw

RI =

Rt
Ro

The value n, the saturation exponent, is determined from the plot of log RI vs. log
Sw/
From the plots, the following values are obtained:
a=1
n = 1.99

m = 1.89
Rw = 0.039 m

82

Well Design Problem

The following data was obtained from a naturally flowing oil well completed in a
homogeneous dolomite formation having a reservoir pressure above the bubble
point pressure and it is underlaid by strong water drive aquifer. In order to obtain
an optimum allowable rate from this newly well without causing damage to the
productive formation, the completion engineer was asked to prepare a well
completion design program for the optimization of perforation density and section
of the perforated interval thickness.
Depth (selected perforation interval)
Thickness of the perforated interval
Oil viscosity
Oil density
Reservoir average permeability
Wellbore radius
Drainage radius
Separator pressure
Wellhead flowing pressure
Gas liquid ratio
Bubble point pressure
Formation volume factor
Reservoir initial pressure
Flowline strength
Reservoir Temperature
Dynamic fluid level
Water cut
Average reservoir porosity
Gun size (retrievable casing gun)
Perforation diameter
Perforation tunnel length
Separator temperature
Wellhead temperature

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

(5274-5312) ft
38 ft
2.32 cp
37 API (sp.gr. 0.84)
150 md
3.5 in
1500 ft
50 psi
200 psi
670 scf/bbl
200 psi
1.1 rb/stb
2062 psi
5660 meter
175 F
1307 psi
2%
26.0%
4 in
0.51
10.6 in
90F
100F

Also given, the flowing production test from the well:

Pressure (psi)
1000
1488

Oil Flow Rate (BOPD)

2167
1252

83

Calculate:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

The thickness of the perforated interval using well log data and core
analysis data.
Construct the inflow performance curve and the tubing intake curve for the
well.
The maximum possible oil flow rate from the well and the corresponding
bottom hole flowing pressure and the required wellhead pressure for the
open hole completion.
The bottom hole flowing pressure and the corresponding bottom hole
flowing pressure and the tubing wellhead pressure for a cased hole
completion with 1, 2, 4, 8, 12 and 16 shots/ft
The pressure drop for perforation patterns in part 4.
The completion efficiency for the perforation densities in part 4.
The perforation skin factor for the perforation patterns in part 4.
Plot the perforation completion efficiency and the pressure drop across
perforations versus the perforation patterns.

Construct the inflow performance relationship (IPR):

PI =

q
1252
=
= 2.04 B / D / psi
Pe Pwf (2062 1448)

q = PI(Pe Pwf )

q (bbl/D)
0
2167
3187

q = 2.04(2062 Pwf )

Pwf (psi)
2062
1000
500

Construct the flowline curve (Pth) and the tubing intake curve for various flowline
and tubing sizes:

84

4" Flowline
2" Tubing
THP BHFP
(psi) (psi)
55
1813
65
1360
81
1447
99
1522
118 1593
138 1662

3" Tubing
THP BHFP
(psi) (psi)
55
1825
65
1348
81
1432
99
1505
118 1573
138 1637

3.5" Tubing
THP BHFP
(psi) (psi)
55
1851
65
1827
81
1387
99
1453
118 1513
138 1568

6" Flowline
2" Tubing
2.5" Tubing 2" Tubing
Assumed THP BHFP THP BHFP THP BHFP
q (bbl/D) (psi) (psi)
(psi) (psi)
(psi) (psi)
500
51
1358 51
1283 51
1806
1000
52
1492 52
1383 52
1338
1500
55
1616 55
1460 55
1400
2000
58
1745 58
1531 58
1453
2500
61
1895 61
1600 61
1500
3000
66
2071 66
1672 66
1547

3" Tubing
THP BHFP
(psi) (psi)
51
1813
52
1327
55
1389
58
1443
61
1492
66
1541

3.5" Tubing
THP BHFP
(psi) (psi)
51
1839
52
1801
55
1345
58
1390
61
1429
66
1466

2" Tubing
Assumed THP BHFP
q (bbl/D) (psi) (psi)
500
55
1366
1000
65
1514
1500
81
1660
2000
99
1815
2500
118 1985
3000
138 2175

2.5" Tubing
THP BHFP
(psi) (psi)
55
1291
65
1406
81
1504
99
1593
118 1681
138 1771

Construct the inflow performance curve for perforated cased hole:

qo =

aq

7.08x10 3 koh ( Pr Pwf )

o B o (ln re / rw 3 + S + aq
4

is introduced into Darcy equation in order to account for the turbulent flow
due to perforations.

Jones and Glaze showed that Darcys equation can be rewritten in the following
form in order to account for turbulent flow are the wellbore inside formation.
Pr Pwfs = aq 2 + bq

Writing the above equations across perforations

Pwfs Pwf = aq 2 + bq = Pperf

85

Pperf

1 1
2.30x10 14 B o2 Po q 2

rp re
=
2
Lp

2 o B o (ln re / rp)
q
q +
3

7
.
08
x
10
Lp
Kp

Where

qo

1 1
2.30x10 14 Bo2 Po q 2
rp re
2
Lp
o Bo (ln re / rp)
7.08 x 10 3 Lp Kp

flow rate/perforation (q/perforations)

bbl/D/perf
turbulence factor, ft-1
=

Bo
Po
Lp
o
kp
rp
rc

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

2.33 x 1010
k 1.201

formation volume, rb/STB

oil density, lbm/ft3
perforation tunnel length, ft
oil viscosity, cp
permeability of compacted zone, md
0.1 x k, if shot overbalanced
0.4 x k, if shot underbalanced
radius of perforation tunnel, ft
radius of compacted zone, ft
1

rc = rp + 2 , ft
12

kp

rp

rc

Lp

0.1 x 150 = 15 md
0.51
= 0.021 ft
2x12
1
0.021 + 2 = 0.063
12
10.6
= 0.833 ft
12

86

2.33x1010
= 0.09 x 1010
1
.
201
15

1
1
2.3x10 14 x 0.09x1010 x (1.1) 2 x 0.84x 62.4x

0.021 0.063
= 0.054
a=
0.883 2
b=

2.32x1.1xln (0.063 / 0.021)

= 29.90
7.08x10 3 x 0.883x15

Pperf = 0.054 q 2 + 29.9 q

1 SPF
N=1 x 38
Assumed
q(B/D)
500
1000
1500

qperf

Pperf qperf

13.2 404
26.3 824
39.5 1265

Perforation
Pattern
Open hole
2
4
8
12
16

2 SPF
N=2 x 38

4 SPF
N=4 x 38

8 SPF
N=8 x 38

12 SPF
N=12 x 38

16 SPF
N=16 x 38

Pperf qperf Pperf qperf Pperf qperf Pperf qperf Pperf

6.6 200
13.2 404
19.7 610

Perforation P
wf
Interval
1380
38
1300
38
1320
38
1340
38
1355
38
1360
perf

3.3
6.6
9.9

99
200
301

1.7
3.3
4.9

qperf

Pwfs

1400
860
1050
1220
1270
1280

1380
1640
1555
1464
1443
1440

87

51
99
148

1.1
2.2
3.3
qp

q oH

1.0
0.61
0.75
0.87
0.91
0.91

33
66
99

0.8
1.7
2.5

24
51
75

sp

CE

0
14.61
8.04
3.84
2.55
2.25

1.0
0.37
0.52
0.69
0.77
0.79

Determination of Static Reservoir

Fluid Vertical Distribution

Well Completion
Problem

The following core analysis and laboratory water air capillary pressure data was
obtained from an oil well completed in a productive sandstone formation consists
of different permeability zones.
Water oil contact
100% water saturation
Density of reservoir oil
Density of reservoir water =
Water oil interfacial tension at
reservoir conditions
=
Water oil interfacial tension at
laboratory conditions
Wetting angle

=
5360 ft
=
52.4 lb/cu ft
65.3 lb/cu ft
50 dynes/cm
=
=

72 dynes/cm
0 degree

Calculate:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

The zonation of the reservoir

The reservoir capillary pressure for each zone.
The depth of the free water level
The height above the free water level of selected depth in the reservoir and
compute the capillary pressures at these depths
Using the capillary pressures computed in step [4] read the water saturations
for the selected depths from appropriate capillary pressure curves and plot
the water saturation versus depth for the reservoir.

Reservoir zonation can be determined using permeability and porosity data

obtained from routine core analysis and also it can be determined using well log
interpretation.

88

Zonation of the Reservoir

Subsea

Depth
Kh
depth
(md) fraction
(ft)
(ft)
5274 4574
40
0.293
5279 4579
47
0.290
5284 4584
38
0.277
5289 4589
25
0.259
5294 4564
36
0.277
5299 4599
27
0.255
5299 4599
118 0.295
5304 4604
68
0.282
5304 4604
68
0.282
5309 4609
38
0.300
5314 4614
38
0.298
5319 4619
53
0.290
5324 4624
27
0.301
5329 4629
26
0.288
5334 4634
17
0.239
5334 4634
7
0.251
5339 4639
115 0.261
5344 4644
166 0.273
5349 4649
56
0.281
5354 4654
156 0.271
5364 4664
150 0.250

Kv(md)
25
37
25
25
14
20
112
62
42
32
36
40
23
27
14
10
99
134
50
124
118

Depth
Zone
h
Int.
hgross net k
(ft) (md)
No.
(ft)

IV

4574
To
4584

III

24

Pc
Curve
(frac) No.

35.5

0.275

45865
4588

93

0.289

II

4588
To
4602

30

38.1

0.285

4602
To
4615

27

108.3 0.265

Converting laboratory capillary pressure data to field conditions

Pc lab (psi)

Pc res (psi)

1
2
4
8
16

0.69
1.39
2.78
5.55
10.41

Core 1
k = 39.81 md
= 18.76%
Sw
95.5
96.7
89.6
39.3
20.1

89

Core 2
k = 90.17 md
= 21.88%
Sw
97.9
94.4
64.8
22.3
17.2

Core 3
k = 118 md
= 25.37%
Sw
97
88.8
72.6
32.4
17.6

Averaging capillary data using J-Leverett function

J=

Pc res
( cos ) res

1 atm = 1.013 x 106 dynes/cm2

1 darcy = 10-8 cm2

atmx1.013x106 dynes/ cm2 atm

Pcres psi

k(d)x108 cm2
14.7 psi
J=
d
( cos) res dyne/ cm

J=

6.8912 x Pc res (psi)

( cos ) res dyne / cm

J1 =

6.8912 x Pc res (psi)

50

k (d )
(frac)
39.81
1000 x 0.2188

J 1 = 0.06349 x Pc res (psi)

J2 =

6.8912 x Pc res (psi)

50

90.17
1000 x 0.2188

J 2 = 0.08848 x Pc res (psi)

J3 =

6.8912 x Pc res (psi)

50

118
1000 x 0.2537

J 3 = 0.0940 x Pc res (psi)

90

Pc lab (psi)

Pc lab x10 6 dyne / cm 2

0.69
1.39
2.78
5.55
10.41
24.29

0.046
0.093
0.239
0.373
0.698
1.631

Core 1
k = 39.81 md
= 18.76%
J1
Sw
0.044 97.5
0.088 96.7
0.177 89.6
0.352 39.3
0.661 20.1
1.542 18.6

Core 2
k = 90.17 md
= 21.88%
J2
Sw
0.061 97.9
0.123 94.4
0.246 64.8
0.491 22.3
0.921 17.2
2.149 8.6

Core 3
k = 118 md
= 25.37%
J3
Sw
0.065 97
0.131 88.8
0.261 72.6
0.522 32.6
0.979 17.6
2.283 15.9

Calculating average reservoir capillary pressure curve

Average reservoir permeability and porosity are determined from the following
equations:
=

0.275x 24 + 0.289x5 + 0.285x30 + 0.265x 27

= 0.277
24 + 5 + 30 + 27

k=

1 h 1 + 2 h 2 + 3 h 3 + 4 h 4
h1 + h 2 + h 3 + h 4

k 1h1 + k 2 h 2 + k 3 h 3 + k 4 h 4
h1 + h 2 + h 3 + h 4

35.5x 24 + 93x 5 + 38.1x 30 + 101.76 x 27

= 60.56 md
24 + 5 + 30 + 27

Sw %

Pc res (psi)

15
20
30
40
50

1.00
0.69
0.44
0.34
0.29

15.52
10.09
6.83
5.28
4.50

h
(ft)
224
144
99
76
65

D
(Ft)

Sw %

Pc res (psi)

60
70
80
90
100

0.27
0.24
0.22
0.18
0.04

4.19
3.73
3.41
2.79
0.62

h
(ft)
60
54
49
40
9

D
(Ft)

To find the free water level, read the threshold pressure for the bottom zone, znone
no. I as 0.69 psi. This corresponds to the 100% saturation point in the reservoir.

91

Pc = 0.433 8h

65.3 52.4
0.69 = 0.433x
h
62.4
h=

0.69 x 62.4
= 7.7 ft
0.433 x 12.9

Free water level = 5360 + 7.7 = 5368 ft.

Find Pc equivalent to 1 ft
res

(P )

c res 1 ft

0.69
= 0.09 psi / ft
7.7

5
Height above
free
water
level, h (ft)
5274
94
5280
88
5286
82
5292
76
5298
70
5304
64
5310
58
5315
53
5320
48
5325
43
5330
38
5340
28
5350
18
5360
8
2. h= 5368 depth
3. equivalent Pc =h x 0.09
4. is read from Pc curve

Depth

Equivalent
Pc (psi)

Zone
IV

8.46
7.92
7.38
6.84
6.30
5.76
5.22
4.77
4.32
3.87
3.42
2.52
1.62
0.72

92

Sw
(%)
22
24
27
29
33
36
40
44
50
60
80
90
96
100