A New Skin-Factor Model for Perforated
Horizontal Wells
K. Furui,* D. Zhu,** and A.D. Hill,** University of Texas at Austin
Summary
Using a combination of analytical calculations and 3D finite-
element simulation, we have developed a comprehensive skin-
factor model for perforated horizontal wells. In this paper, we
present the mathematical model development and validation by
comparison with finite-element simulation results. With the new
perforation skin model, we then show how to optimize horizontal
well perforating to maximize well productivity.
A cased, perforated well may have lower productivity (as char-
acterized by a positive skin factor) relative to the equivalent open-
hole completion because of two factors: the convergence of the
flow to the perforations, and the blockage of the flow by the
wellbore itself. Because of the orientation of a horizontal well
relative to the anisotropic permeability field, perforation skin mod-
els for vertical wells that consider these effects, notably the Kara-
kas and Tariq model (1991), are not directly applicable to perfo-
rated horizontal completions. Using appropriate variable transfor-
mations, we derived a skin-factor model for a horizontal perforated
completion that is analogous to the Karakas and Tariq (1991)
vertical-well model. The empirical parameters in the model were
determined from an extensive 3D finite-element simulation study.
The results of the new model show that the azimuth of a per-
foration (the angle between the perforation tunnel and the maxi-
mum permeability direction, usually thought to be in the horizontal
direction) affects the performance of perforated completions in
anisotropic reservoirs. When perforations are normal to the maxi-
mum-permeability direction, perforations will enhance horizontal-
well flow compared with an openhole completion (a negative skin
factor). But if perforations are in the same direction as the maxi-
mum permeability, significant positive skin will result. The new
skin-factor model provides a clear guide to the shot density, per-
foration orientation, and level of perforation damage that is toler-
able to create high-productivity perforated completions in horizon-
tal wells.
Introduction
A skin factor can be used to mathematically account for any de-
viations of the flow and pressure field in the near-well vicinity
from perfectly radial flow to a wellbore of radius rw. A perforated
completion obviously has a flow and pressure field near the per-
forations that is not perfectly radial. As shown by Karakas and
Tariq (1991), the altered flow characteristics near perforations can
be conveniently divided into three parts: the flow in a plane per-
pendicular to the wellbore, the blockage of flow to the perforations
by the wellbore itself, and the fully 3D flow resulting from the
asymmetric distribution of perforations along the wellbore. These
effects on the near-well flow field and the corresponding perfora-
tion skin factor components are illustrated in Fig. 1.
Perforation skin models for vertical wells (Karakas and Tariq
1991; Harris 1966; Locke 1981; Klotz et al. 1974) have already
been presented in many papers. However, they are not directly
applicable to a horizontal well because the reservoir anisotropy in
a horizontal well creates complex plane-flow geometry normal to
the well, which alters the flow efficiency of a perforated comple-
* Now with ConocoPhillips
** Now with Texas A&M University
Copyright 2008 Society of Petroleum Engineers
Original SPE manuscript received for review 05 October 2004. Revised manuscript re-
ceived for review 17 January 2008. Paper SPE 77363 peer approved 21 January 2008.
September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion
tion. In this work, we present a new skin-factor model developed
for a cased, perforated horizontal well. From our observations, the
2D plane flow skin, s2D, the wellbore blockage skin, swb, and the
3D convergence skin, s3D, greatly depend on the magnitude of the
permeability anisotropy and the perforation angle measured from a
horizontal plane. Our model is based on the conventional perfo-
ration skin model for a vertical well presented by Karakas and
Tariq (1991).
Our perforation skin model is a semianalytical solution that is
correlated with numerical simulation results. The reliability of any
empirical correlation for perforation skin factors will depend on
the accuracy of the numerical simulations. The finite-element
method (FEM), which is suitable for complex flow geometry prob-
lems, has been widely applied by many authors (Karakas and Tariq
1991; Klotz et al. 1974). In this study, we used the FEM to nu-
merically model the performance of perforated horizontal wells.
Our model uses an automatic and adaptive mesh generation pro-
gram, GID (CIMNE 2006), to generate the finite-element grid.
One of the great advantages of introducing a skin model for a
perforated well is that it can be easily incorporated into any ex-
isting model of reservoir inflow performance or into a reservoir
simulator. The modified perforation skin model developed here
gives optimized perforation conditions and helps us to understand
complex flow geometry in a horizontal perforated well. Using an
accurate finite-element simulator, we also show a verification of
the model.
Problem Description
Fig. 2 shows the key parameters of a perforated completion pre-
sumed in this study. The horizontal well is assumed to be on the
x-axis. In formations with no significant formation damage or
perforation damage, the perforation skin will be a function of:
The number of perforations per plane, m [analogous to an-
gular phasing, , in Karakas and Tariqs (1991) model].
Perforation length, lp.
Perforation radius, rp.
Perforation shot density, ns (or spacing between perforations
along a well, h).
Wellbore radius, rw.
The principal permeabilities, kx,ky,kz.
Perforation orientation, , the angle between the perforation
direction and the maximum permeability direction.
The most important and significant difference between perfo-
ration skin models for vertical and horizontal wells is the effect of
perforation orientation, . For a horizontal well completed in
anisotropic reservoirs, the perforation skin factor is strongly influ-
enced by . In this study, we considered four types of commonly
used perforation phasing as shown in Fig. 3.
The mathematical solution of the problem requires that a num-
ber of assumptions be made concerning the porous media, the
perforations, and the fluid.
There is steady, viscous flow of a single-phase, incompress-
ible fluid.
The effect of gravity is negligible.
The well is horizontal.
Fluid is produced only through the casing perforations.
The reservoir anisotropy is uniform through the entire reservoir.
At some radius beyond the wellbore, the effect of the perfo-
rations is not felt. Beyond this radius, flow is radial (or elliptical
in anisotropic reservoirs) and can be described by the normal
logarithmic distribution. Inside this radius, streamlines are deviat-
ing from radial flow as the flow converges to individual perfora-
205

Fig. 1Perforation geometry modeling by GID.
tions. This deviation is accounted for by the skin-factor model
developed here.
The pressure drops inside the perforations are assumed to
be negligible.
The perforation skin factor, sp, indicates the relative efficiency
of a perforated well, compared with an ideal openhole completion.
FEM was used to solve the diffusivity equation in Cartesian co-
ordinates for a specific set of boundary conditions. From the simu-
lation results, we calculate the perforation skin factors by compar-
ing the productivity determined by the simulation with the ideal
openhole productivity, according to the following:
Jo
sp = 1 lnrb rw, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
Jp
Fig. 2Perforation geometry.
206
where Jp is a productivity estimated by an FEM simulator under a
particular perforation condition, and Jo is the ideal openhole
completion with the same fluid and formation properties as the
simulation. Some radius where the effect of the perforation is not
felt is rb. The simulations are executed for different perforation
conditions and generate the perforation skin database to find ap-
propriate correlations.
A New Skin-Factor Model for Perforated
Horizontal Wells
Following Karakas and Tariqs approach (1991), we divided the
perforation skin into three components: the 2D plane flow skin,
s2D; the wellbore blockage skin, swb; and the 3D convergence skin
factor, s3D. The total perforation skin factor is then given by
sp = s2D + swb + s3D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
2D Plane Flow Skin. A skin factor that accounts for flow in the
y-z plane without the existence of the wellbore is s2D. The plane
flow is considered as infinite perforation-shot densities, and under
most practical perforation lengths and well radii (lp>3 in. and
rw<10 in.), any convergence effect in the direction along the well-
bore (x-direction in this work) can be neglected. With this consid-
eration, the 2D plane flow behavior into perforations is quite simi-
lar to that of an infinite-conductivity fractured well (Fig. 4). This
skin factor can be negative or positive, depending on the perfora-
tion conditions and the reservoir anisotropy. The 2D plane flow
skin equation is derived in Appendix A.
For m1 and 2,
s2D = am ln 4
lpD
+ 1 am ln
1
1 + lpD
ky kz + 1
+ ln , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)
2cos + ky kz sin2 0.5
2
and for m3 and 4,
September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion
 Fig. 3Perforation phasing.
s2D = am ln 4
+ 1 am ln
1
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
where
lpD 1 + lpD
lpD = lp rw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
The numerical values of am given in Table 1 were generated by
FEM simulation results. In our simulations, the wellbore was re-
placed by a permeable formation, the permeability of which is the
same as the reservoir, to account for the true locations of the
perforations in the 2D plane. On the other hand, in Karakas and
Tariqs work (1991), they set a very small wellbore radius to
neglect the effect of wellbore. Therefore, the skin values estimated
by the two models are somewhat different.
Wellbore Blockage Skin. Also estimated for the 2D plane flow
geometry is swb. Because of the distortion of the flow into the
perforation (Fig. 5) by the presence of the wellbore, the perforation
skin simulated with the wellbore included, sFEM, will be compara-
tively greater than that given by Eq. 3 for m1 and 2 or Eq. 4 for
m3 and 4. The difference of skin factor between the two is swb;
that is,
swb = sFEM s2D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (6)
The wellbore blockage skin will be positive for any perforation
condition. The sum of s2D and swb is interpreted as a limit of the
perforation skin factor for infinite perforation shot density. The
wellbore-blockage skin correlation equation is derived on the basis
of FEM simulation results (Appendix B).
swb = bm lncm lpD,eff + exp cm lpD,eff, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)
Fig. 42D plane flow approximation.
September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion
for m1,
lpD,eff = lpD ky kz sin2 + cos2
ky kz cos2 + sin2
0.675
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (8)
and for m2,
lpD,eff = lpD 1
ky kz cos + sin
2 2 0.625
, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (9)
And for m3 and 4,
lpD,eff = lpD. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10)
The numerical values of bm and cm given by Table 2 are generated
by FEM simulations for 0.1<lpD. Because the definition of s2D
assumed by the Karakas and Tariq model (1991) and our model are
different, the wellbore blockage skin factors given by both models
are also different. However, the sum of the 2D plane flow skin and
the wellbore blockage skin represents the same flow geometry. As
a result, both models give almost the same numerical values.
3D Convergence Skin. For low perforation-shot densities, the
flow geometry around a perforation becomes extremely compli-
cated. Therefore, a 3D-FEM analysis is required. According to
Karakas and Tariqs work (1991), the 3D wellbore blockage effect
may be approximated by swb, defined by the 2D analysis for prac-
tical perforation conditions. A skin factor estimated by the 3D-
FEM simulation, sFEM, is used to estimate an additional flow con-
vergence effect into the perforations in the x-direction, denoted by
s3D, and s3D can be estimated by
s3D = sFEM s2D swb, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (11)
207
 Examples
Using the new skin correlation equations, Fig. 6 was generated for
a particular perforation condition: lp1.0 ft, rw0.328 ft,
rp0.0208 ft, kxky2 measured depth (md), kz0.5 md, ns4
shots per foot (spf). The permeability anisotropy creates and am-
plifies the effect of perforation orientation, . Higher Iani makes
perforation skin lower at 90 and higher at 0. Perforation
skin factors for 360- and 180-perforation phasing are greatly
improved at 90. On the other hand, skin factors for 120- and
90-perforation phasing do not change with respect to the perfo-
ration orientation. This is because of the particular perforation
geometry of multidirectional perforations. The reservoir anisotro-
py makes some of the perforations lengthen and the others shorten
This is also positive for any perforation condition. The 3D con- in an equivalent isotropic system. Therefore, the overall effects
vergence skin correlation equation taking into account the reser- cancel out.
voir anisotropy and the perforation orientation is derived in Ap- Fig. 7 was created with the same perforation conditions except
pendix C. ns0.5. The difference of the perforation skin factor between
s3D = 101hD21rpD2, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12) m2 and m4 becomes 1.459 at 90 (0.750 in Fig. 8). Low
perforation shot density will make the difference significant. Even
with with unidirectional perforation (m1), the productivity will be
1 = dm logrpD + em, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (13) better than multidirectional perforations (m>3). As long as it is
perforating from 75 to 90, the perforation skin factors do
2 = fmrpD + gm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (14) not change significantly. Hence, failure of perforating in the ver-
tical direction (the direction of minimum permeability) may not be
For m1 and 2,
a serious problem within the range of 15.
h One of the interesting topics of perforated horizontal wells is
hD = , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (15) the selection of perforation phasing, m, to obtain the highest pro-
lpkx kz sin + kx ky cos2
2
ductivity. As we discussed, perforating in the vertical direction (at

90) provides the minimum perforation skin factors in aniso-
rp kx 2 kx tropic reservoirs. Fig. 8 shows the relationship between the reser-
rpD = cos sin + cos2 +1 ,
2h ky kz voir anisotropy and the perforation skin factor perforating at
90. As shown in Fig. 8, the best perforation phasing will
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (16) strongly depend on the reservoir anisotropy. For slightly anisotro-
where pic reservoirs (Iani1), multidirectional perforations (m3 and 4)
will provide higher perforation productivity than the other two. For
= arctanky kz tan , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (17) anisotropic reservoirs (Iani>1), 180 perforation phasing (m2)
will be the best phasing method as long as perforating in the
= arctankz ky tan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (18) vertical direction (the direction of minimum permeability). For
For m3 and 4, highly anisotropic reservoirs, 360 perforation phasing (m1) will

also be a good perforating technique compared with multidirec-
0.5
h kykz tional perforations (m>3).
hD = , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (19)
lp kx Relationship to Overall Skin Factor of a

rpD =
rp
2h kx
ky kz
0.5
+ 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20)
Horizontal Well
The perforation skin factor presented here accounts for the effects
of localized flow convergence on well performance. The manner in
The numerical values of dm, em, fm, and gm given by Table 3 were which this skin factor is incorporated into an overall skin factor for
presented in Karakas and Tariqs paper (1991). These equations a horizontal well depends on the way in which the overall well
can be used to estimate the perforation skin factor for most prac- performance is modeled. For partially completed horizontal wells
tical ranges of system parameters (hD10 and rpD0.01). (i.e., selectively perforated wells that include blank pipe intervals),

Fig. 5Concept of wellbore blockage effect.

208 September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion


the definition of skin factor will be different, depending on the
inflow model used in the calculation.
For an analytical inflow model or a nonsegmented wellbore
model (with the use of a reservoir simulation program), these
models assume uniform inflow along the entire lateral, the skin
assigned to the inflow equation must include partial completion
effects. For this particular case, the perforation skin factor should
be multiplied by the ratio of reservoir length in the well direction
(L) to completed length, Lw, and added to the partial completion
skin factor, sc (Pucknell and Clifford 1991):
4. The 180 perforation phasing (m2) will be the best comple-
tion technique for horizontal perforated wells because all the
perforations can be oriented in the direction of minimum per-
meability. As a result, multidirectional perforation techniques
(m>3) applied for anisotropic reservoirs may not be efficient,
unlike for isotropic reservoirs.
Nomenclature
am correlation constant
aw vertical semiaxis of an ellipse, ft [m]
bm correlation constant

s=
L
s + s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (21)
Lw p c
bw horizontal semiaxis of an ellipse, ft [m]
cm correlation constant
dm correlation constant
When a multisegmented inflow modeling approach is used, em correlation constant
because the horizontal wellbore is segmented so one can assign fm correlation constant
flow and no-flow intervals separately, the reservoir flow conver- gm correlation constant
gence effects to the open intervals will be taken into account by the
h perforation spacing, ft [m]
reservoir grid system (or method of superposition). Thus the origi-
hD dimensionless perforation spacing, dimensionless

nal sp (without the multiplier) should be used.
Iani ky
Conclusions index of anisotropy,
kz
1. Our perforation skin equations for, s2D, swb, and s3D provide Jo ideal openhole completion
useful insight into the role played by the number of perforations Jp productivity
per plane, m, the perforation length, lp, perforation radius, rp, k permeability, md [m2]
perforation shot density, ns, the wellbore radius, rw, and per- lp perforation length, ft [m]
foration orientation, , on the productivity of perforated hori- lpD dimensionless perforation length, dimensionless
zontal completions.
L well direction
2. The major difference between perforation performances in a
horizontal well compared with a vertical well is the influence of Lw completed length
permeability anisotropy in the horizontal-well case. m the number of perforations per plane
3. The horizontal-well perforation skin model developed here ns perforation shot density, spf [shots/m]
shows that perforations should be oriented parallel to the direc- q flow rate, STB/D, [m3/s]
tion of minimum permeability to give the minimum perforation rb radius where the effect of perforation is not felt, ft [m]
skin factor (the maximum perforation productivity). For most rp perforation radius, ft [m]
horizontal wells, this means that perforations should be vertical, rpD dimensionless perforation radius, dimensionless
extending from the upper or lower sides of the wellbore. With rw wellbore radius, ft [m]
this advantage, the reservoir anisotropy will make the perfora- sc partial completion skin factor
tion skin factor decrease and result in favorable production.
sFEM skin estimated by an FEM simulator, dimensionless
sp perforation skin, dimensionless

Fig. 6Effect of perforation orientation on perforation skin fac- Fig. 7Effect of perforation orientation on perforation skin fac-
tor (ns=4). tor (ns=0.5).

September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion 209

 Harris, M.H. 1966. The Effect of Perforating on Well Productivity. JPT 18
(4) 518528; Trans., AIME, 237. SPE-1236-PA. DOI: 10.2118/1236-
PA.
Karakas, M. and Tariq, S.M. 1991. Semianalytical Productivity Models for
Perforated Completions. SPEPE 6 (1): 7382. SPE-18247-PA. DOI:
10.2118/18247-PA.
Klotz, J.A., Krueger, R.F., and Pye, D.S. 1974. Effect of Perforation Dam-
age on Well Productivity. JPT 26 (11): 13031314; Trans., AIME, 257.
SPE-4654-PA. DOI: 10.2118/4654-PA.
Kucuk, F. and Brigham, W.E. 1979. Transient Flow in Elliptical Systems.
SPEJ 19 (6): 401410; Trans., AIME, 267. SPE-7488-PA. DOI:
10.2118/7488-PA.
Locke, S. 1981. An Advanced Method for Predicting the Productivity Ratio
of a Perforated Well. JPT 33 (12): 24812488. SPE-8804-PA. DOI:
10.2118/8804-PA.
Prats, M. 1961. Effect of Vertical Fractures on Reservoir Behavior
Incompressible Fluid Case. SPEJ 1 (2): 105-17; Trans., AIME, 222.
Fig. 8Effect of reservoir anisotropy at =90. SPE-1575-G. DOI: 10.2118/1575-G.
Pucknell, J.K. and Clifford, P.J. 1991. Calculation of Total Skin Factors.
Paper SPE 23100 presented at Offshore Europe, Aberdeen, 36 Sep-
swb
wellbore blockage skin, dimensionless tember. DOI: 10.2118/23100-MS.
s2D
2D plane flow skin, dimensionless Spivey, J.P. and Lee, W.J. 1999. Estimating the Pressure-Transient Re-
s3D
3D convergence skin, dimensionless sponse for a Horizontal or a Hydraulically Fractured Well at an Arbi-

perforation orientation, degree trary Orientation in an Anisotropic Reservoir. SPEREE 2 (5): 462469.

azimuth angle measured from the y axis in the SPE-58119-PA. DOI: 10.2118/58119-PA.
equivalent isotropic system, degree
azimuth measured from the z axis to the vertical plane Appendix ADevelopment of 2D Plane Flow Skin
containing the transform of the original circular Equation in an Anisotropic Medium
perforation cross section in the equivalent isotropic The 2D plane flow behavior into perforations is quite similar to
system, degree that of an infinite-conductivity fractured well. The equipressure
lines are close to confocal ellipses, with some distortion from the
1 correlation constant
presence of the wellbore. The flux distribution at the perforation,
2 correlation constant as for a fracture, is significantly higher at the perforation tip and
perforation phasing angle, degree root. Under plane flow conditions, and assuming negligible well-
Subscripts bore effects, we can introduce the effective well radius concept
eff effective developed by Prats (1961) for vertically fractured wells. According
eq equivalent to his work, the effective well radius is given by lp/4 for a single
o openhole fracture without a pressure drop inside the fracture (Fig. A-1).
Because of the geometric similarity between a unidirectional per-
p perforated
foration (m1) and a fracture, the perforation skin factor equation
x x-coordinate can be analytically derived by
y y-coordinate
z z- coordinate s2D = ln
4rw
lp
= ln
4
lpD
, for m = 1, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-1)
Acknowledgments
where
The authors thank the sponsors of the Improved Well Performance
Research Program of the Center for Petroleum & Geosystems lpD = lp rw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-2)
Engineering at the University of Texas at Austin for providing the The dimensionless perforation length is lpD.
financial support for this study. As m approaches infinity as shown in Fig. A-1, the effective
well radius approaches to rw+lp. The skin factor is also analytically
References given by

CIMNE. 2006. GiD 8Reference Manual. Barcelona, Spain: International
Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering. http://www.gidhome. rw 1
s2D = ln = ln , for m = . . . . . . . . . . . (A-3)
com/support_team/su04.html. rw + lp 1 + lpD

Fig. A-1Effective well radius.

210 September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion

 Fig. A-22D plane flow skin factor in an isotropic medium.

For other values of m such as m2, 3, and 4, the skin factors
should range between those given by Eqs. A-1 and A-3. Fig. A-2
shows FEM simulation results for different perforation phasing
(m1, 2, 3, and 4). The following interpolation can approximately
give s2D;
to 0.56 for m2 by changing the orientation from horizontal
(0) to vertical (90). The contrast of skin factor will in-
crease for a higher anisotropic ratio.
For m1, we can analytically calculate skin factor by using a
coordinate transformation into the equivalent isotropic space. The

effective perforation length and the equivalent wellbore radius are
4 1 given by
s2D = am ln + 1 am ln , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-4)
lpD 1 + lpD
lp,eff = lpky kz sin2 + kz ky cos2 , . . . . . . . . . (A-5)
0.5

where am is a constant given in Table 1 for different values of m.

In this study, the numerical values for am were obtained through
FEM simulations for all the phasing except for m1 and . As
4

rw,eq = rwky kz + kz ky 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-6)
4

shown in Fig. A-2, Eq. A-4 matches the FEM results al- Substituting the previous equations into Eq. A-1 gives

most exactly.
The performance of perforated completions in anisotropic res- 4 ky kz + 1
ervoirs is greatly controlled by the azimuth of a perforation (the s2D = ln + ln . . . . . . (A-7)
lpD 2cos + ky kz sin2 0.5
2
angle between the perforation tunnel and the maximum perme-
ability direction, usually thought to be the horizontal direction). The second term represents the effect of the reservoir anisot-
Fig. A-3 shows the impact of perforation orientation, , on s2D. ropy and perforation orientation. For a fixed perforation orienta-
For a particular condition (lpD1.0 and ky /kz5), the perforation tion (constant ), the reservoir anisotropy makes the skin equation
skin factor was reduced from 2.48 to 0.88 for m1 and from 1.17 simply move up or down depending on the orientation. As

Fig. A-3Effect of perforation orientation, , on s2D.

September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion 211


Fig. A-4Comparison with FEM simulation database for m=2.
approaches 0 (the direction of the maximum permeability), the
perforation skin increases. On the other hand, as approaches 90
(the direction of the minimum permeability), the perforation skin
decreases.
As with to m1, the 2D plane flow skin equation for m2 in
an anisotropic medium is approximately given by
s2D = a2 ln
4
lpD
+ 1 a2 ln 1
1 + lpD
+ ln ky kz + 1
2cos + ky kz sin2 0.5
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (A-8)
As shown in Fig. A-4, Eq. A-8 shows good agreements with the
FEM simulation results.
For multidirectional perforation cases, especially m>3, the es-
timation of the effective well radius is not simple because the
coordinate transformation into an equivalent isotropic system
gives different effective perforation lengths for each direction.
According to the FEM simulation results (Fig. A-3), the influence
of the orientation for m3 and 4 is not as significant as those for
m1 and 2. Therefore, we can conclude that the effect of the
reservoir anisotropy and perforation orientation for m>3 are neg-
ligible, and Eq. A-4 is directly applied even for an anisotropic
medium. The comparisons of Eq. A-4 with FEM simulation results
are shown in Figs. A-5 and A-6.
Fig. A-6Comparison with FEM simulation database for m=4.
212
Fig. A-5Comparison with FEM simulation database for m=3.
Appendix BDevelopment of Wellbore Blockage
Skin Equation in an Anisotropic Medium
The wellbore is a complete barrier to the flow into perforations.
This wellbore blockage effect can be quite significant, especially
in the case of m1. As a result of the additional pressure drop,
well productivity would be less than that estimated only with s2D.
Thus, this effect can be quantified in terms of a wellbore pseu-
doskin, swb, which is always positive:
sp = s2D + swb. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-1)
Similarly to s2D, the wellbore blockage effect will depend on
the dimensionless perforation length, l pD ; the perforation
orientation, ; and the anisotropy ratio, ky /kz. For isotropic
reservoirs, swb is assumed to depend only on the dimensionless
perforation length. Fig. B-1 illustrates this dependency for the case
of m1, 2, 3, and 4. As shown in Fig. B-1, the wellbore skin for
a given dimensionless perforation length is significantly larger for
m1 than for other cases (m2, 3, and 4). Compared with the
FEM simulation results, the wellbore blockage skin, swb, can be
closely approximated by
swb = bm lncm lpD + expcm lpD, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-2)
where bm and cm are constants given in Table 2.
For anisotropic reservoirs (Fig. B-2), swb depends also on the
perforation orientation and on the anisotropy ratio. To derive a
wellbore blockage skin equation, taking into account the effect of
perforation orientation, a coordinate transformation into the
equivalent isotropic space is applied. The effective perforation
length is now given by Eq. A-5. As shown in Fig. 5, the wellbore
itself is characterized as a complete barrier against the flow into
the perforation. We concluded that the effective wellbore radius
(the barrier height) would be a key parameter, which can be trans-
formed as
rw,eff = rwky kz sin2 + 2 + kz ky cos2 + 2
0.5
= rwkz ky sin2 + ky kz cos2 . . . . . . . . . . (B-3)
0.5
From Eqs. A-5 and B-3, the ratio of the effective perforation length
to the effective well radius can be calculated by
lp,eff
= l , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-4)
rw,eff pD
where
= ky kz sin2 + cos2
ky kz cos2 + sin2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-5)
September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion
 Fig. B-1Wellbore blockage effect for an anisotropic reservoir.

The symbol represents the effect of the reservoir anisotropy and = ky kz cos2 + kz ky sin2 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-8)
0.5

perforation orientation. Compared with the simulation results, a

good agreement (Fig. B-3) was obtained by setting the effective
dimensionless perforation length as
lpD,eff = lpD1.35 for m = 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-6)
The wellbore blockage skin is calculated by inserting Eq. B-6 into
Eq. B-2
swb = bm lncm lpD,eff + expcm lpD,eff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-7)
Fig. B-4 shows FEM simulation results for m2. The symbol, ,
is empirically set as
and the effective dimensionless perforation length is empirically
estimated by
lpD,eff = lpD1.25 for m = 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (B-9)
As shown in Fig. B-2, the effect of perforation orientation for
m3 and m4 are comparatively small; that is, the effect of
anisotropy is not significant. Therefore, we can conclude that the
wellbore skin equation for m>3 is independent of the anisotropy
ratio and (i.e., Eq. B-2 can be directly used).

Fig. B-2Effect of perforation orientation on s2D.

September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion 213

 Fig. B-3Wellbore blockage effect in an anisotropic reservoir (m=1).

Appendix CDevelopment of 3D Convergence where

Flow Skin Equation in an Anisotropic Medium
k = kx ky kz. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-5)
According to Karakas and Tariqs (1991) correlation equation, an 3
additional 3D convergence flow skin factor is mainly estimated
by dimensionless perforation spacing and dimensionless perfora-
tion radius. An additional consideration is needed to estimate the effective
perforation radius (Spivey and Lee 1999). Fig. C-1 shows a per-
heff foration in an anisotropic reservoir. The circular perforation is
hD = , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-1)
lp,eff assumed to lie at an arbitrary azimuth in the maximum and mini-
rp,eff mum principle axes of permeability, respectively. The axis of the
rpD = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-2) perforation lies at an angle, , to the y-axis. In order to specify the
heff problem completely in the equivalent isotropic system, we must
Appropriate coordinate transformations give the effective perfora- also transform the perforation cylinder. The perforation in the
tion spacing, perforation length, and perforation radius. anisotropic system is considered as a right circular cylinder. In the

equivalent isotropic system, the cylinder becomes an elliptical cyl-
k inder, with the base no longer perpendicular to the axis. We ap-
heff = h , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-3) proximate this ellipse by a right ellipse that has the same perpen-
kx
dicular cross section, but the length of which is given by Eq. C-4.
lp,eff = lpk ky cos2 + k kz sin2 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-4) The vertical semiaxis of the elliptical cross section, aw, is given by

Fig. B-4Wellbore blockage effect in an anisotropic reservoir (m=2).

214 September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion

 Fig. C-1Details of the perforation in the equivalent isotropic reservoir.

aw = rpk kx . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-6) The numerical values of dm, em, fm, and gm are obtained from Table
3 developed by Karakas and Tariq (1991). As we discussed in 2D
If we transform the original circular cross section, the horizontal perforation skin analysis, the effect of perforation orientation and
semiaxis becomes the reservoir anisotropy for m>3 is not significant and can be
neglected. Therefore, Eqs. C-12 and C-13 can be simplified to
w = rpk ky sin2 + k kz cos2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-7)
However, this is not the horizontal semiaxis of the transformed hD =
h
lp
ky kz
kx
0.5

, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-17)

elliptical cylinder because, after the transformation, the original
rp kx 0.5
circular cross section is no longer perpendicular to the axis of the
cylinder. Thus, we must find the projection of the distance given in rpD = + 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-18)
2h ky kz
Eq. C-7 along a direction perpendicular to the axis of the trans-
formed perforation. The axis of the transformed perforation lying
at an angle to the y-axis is given by SI Metric Conversion Factors
E+00 cm
= arctanky kz tan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-8) in. 2.54*
ft 3.048* E01 m
The transformation of the original circular cross section lies at an
*Conversion factor is exact
angle to the z-axis, where is given by

= arctankz ky tan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-9) Kenji Furui is a senior completions engineer at ConocoPhillips

The desired cross section of the transformed perforation lies at an
angle to the z-axis. Thus, we must project the distance given in
Eq. C-7 through an angle -. Finally, we obtain the horizontal
semiaxis of the elliptical cross section of the transformed perfora-
tion from
bw = rpk ky sin2 + k kz cos2 cos .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-10)
Kucuk and Brigham (1979) showed that the equivalent wellbore
radius for an elliptical wellbore having semiaxis aw and bw is given
by the arithmetic mean. Similarly, the perforation radius is given by
completions technology group in Houston. email:
Kenji.Furui@conocophillips.com. He is an expert in the areas of
rock mechanics (sand production), well performance analysis,
and intelligent well completions. Furui holds a BS degree in
mineral resources and environmental engineering from
Waseda University in Japan and MS and PhD degrees in pe-
troleum engineering from the University of Texas at Austin. Ding
Zhu is assistant professor of petroleum engineering and holds
the W.D. Von Gonten Faculty Fellowship in Petroleum Engi-
neering at Texas A&M University. She worked at the University
of Texas as a research scientist for 11 years before joining
Texas A&M University. She is an expert in the areas of produc-
tion engineering, well stimulation (acidizing and fracturing),
and complex well production (horizontal, multilateral, and in-

telligent wells) and has authored more than 70 technical pa-
rp k k k pers. Zhu holds a BS degree in mechanical engineering from
rp,eff = sin2 + cos2 cos + . Beijing University of Science and Technology and MS and PhD
2 ky kz kx degrees in petroleum engineering from the University of Texas
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-11) at Austin. She served as SPE Austin Section Program Chair,
Chairperson, and Scholarship Chair in 20022004, and has
Then, Eq. C-1 and C-2 for anisotropic media are given by been a member and chairperson of numerous SPE commit-
tees. A.D. Hill is associate department head of petroleum en-
h gineering at Texas A&M University and holds the Robert L. Whit-
hD = , . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-12)
lpkx kz sin + kx ky cos2
2 ing Endowed Chair. Previously, he taught for 22 years at the
University of Texas at Austin. He is an expert in the areas of

production engineering, well completions, well stimulation,
rp kx 2 kx production logging, and complex well performance (horizon-
rpD = sin + cos2 cos + 1 . tal and multilateral wells), and has presented lectures and
2h ky kz
courses and consulted on these topics throughout the world.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-13) He is the author of the SPE monograph Production Logging:
Theoretical and Interpretive Elements, coauthor of Petroleum
From Karakas and Tariqs (1991) correlation equation, the vertical Production Systems, author of more than 110 technical papers,
pseudoskin is given by and he holds five patents. Hill also holds a BS degree from
Texas A&M University and MS and PhD degrees from the Uni-
s3D = 101hD21rpD2, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-14) versity of Texas at Austin, all in chemical engineering. He cur-
rently serves on the SPE Editorial Review Board, has been an
with SPE Distinguished Lecturer, has served on and chaired numer-
1 = dm log rpD + em, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-15) ous SPE committees, and was founding chairperson of the SPE
Austin Section. He was named a Distinguished Member of SPE
2 = fmrpD + gm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (C-16) in 1999.

September 2008 SPE Drilling & Completion 215