WELL STIMULATION TECHNIQUES

CHAPTER (2) : FORMATION DAMAGE

1
LESSON OUTCOMES

• Types of formation damage

• Pre-treatment well tests analysys
• Potential formation damage caused by matrix stimulation
fluids
• Explain when and how formation damage contributes to
poor well performance
• Identify the major source of formation damage

2
FORMATION DAMAGE CONCEPTS

• Formation damage concerns the formation of a volume of

rock with a reduced permeability in the near well-bore
zone.
• Formation damage means reduced current production.

3
FORMATION DAMAGE CONCEPTS

• Stimulation treatments are designed to increase the well

productivity, either by:

– Reducing or completely removing the formation damage by

chemical matrix treatment (e.g. acidizing) or

– Bypassing the formation damage by creation of a high

permeability channel by hydraulic fracturing treatment or deep
penetration guns

4
FORMATION DAMAGE CONCEPTS

• Basic causes of formation damage

– Contact with a foreign fluid is the basic cause.

– This foreign fluid may be
• Drilling mud
• Clean completion fluid or work-over fluid
• A stimulation fluid
• Well testing fluid
• Sometimes even the reservoir fluid itself if the original
characteristics are altered

5
 FORMATION DAMAGE CONCEPTS
• Most oil field fluids consist of two phases -liquid and solids.

• Either liquid or solid can cause significant damage through

any one of several possible mechanisms:
– Plugging by solids occurs on the formation face, in the
perforation, or in the formation.
– Solids may be weighting materials, clays, viscosity
builders, fluid loss control materials, lost circulation
materials, drilled solids, cement particles, perforating
charge debris, gravel pack or frac sand fines, precipitated
scales, paraffin or asphaltenes.

6
 FORMATION DAMAGE CONCEPTS

• Liquid may be water containing various types and

concentrations of solids and particles and surfactants.

• When liquid is circulated or forced into porous zones by

differential pressure, displacing or commingling with a portion
of a virgin reservoir fluid, it may create blockage due to one of
several mechanisms.

• And then may reduce the absolute permeability of the pore,

or restrict flow due to relative permeability or viscosity
effects.

7
FORMATION DAMAGE CONCEPTS

• Classification of Damage mechanism

– Reduced absolute permeability of formation-- results from

plugging of pore channels by particles

– Reduced relative permeability to oil– results from an increase in

water saturation or oil wetting of the rock

– Increased viscosity of reservoir fluid– results from emulsions or

high-viscosity treating fluids

8
Pre-Treatment Well Tests

• Diagnosis of Formation Damage

– It is possible to determine whether formation damage or ‘skin

effect’ exists in a particular well.
– This can be done through well tests such as infectivity or
productivity test.
– From pressure build-up or pressure draw-down tests, the
magnitude of damage or ‘skin effect’ can be determined.
– Production logging surveys may show zones which are not
contributing to the total flow stream.

9
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

• Formation Damage during special well operations

1. Damage during drilling of oil and gas zones in wildcat or

development wells

a. mud solids may block pores and natural fractures.

b. mud filtrate invasion into pay zones may cause water or
emulsion blocks.
c. pores or fractures near well-bore may be sealed by the
trowelling action of bit, drill collar, and drill pipe.

10
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

2. Damage during Casing and Cementing

a. Cement or mud solids may plug large pores and natural

fractures.
b. Chemical flushes may cause changes in clays in the producing
formation.
c. Filtrate from high fluid loss cement slurries may bring about
changes in producing formation

11
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

3. Damage during Completions

a. Damage during perforating

1. Perforations may be plugged with shaped charged
debris and
solids from perforating fluids.
2. Formation around the perforation is crushed and compacted
by perforating process.

12
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

3. Damage during Completions

b. Damage while running tubing and packer

1. If returns are lost while running tubing, solids in the well fluid
may plug any fractures
2. Perforation may be plugged if solids are forced into
perforations by the hydrostatic differential pressure into the
formation.

13
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

3. Damage during Completions

c. Damage during production initiation

1. Damage may caused by incompatible circulation fluids
2. Damage may result from deposition of scales.
3. Completion fluids may cause damage to perforations and
formation.
4. Clean-up of a well at high rates may plug the formation by
particles.

14
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

4. Damage caused by cleaning of paraffin

a. When cleaning paraffin from a well with hot oil or hot water,
formation and perforations will be plugged unless melted paraffin are
swabbed.
b. While cutting paraffin from the tubing and circulated down the
tubing and up the annulus, some particles may be pumped into
perforations and into pores

15
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

5. Damage during well servicing and work-over

a. When killing or circulating a well, perforations or pores or

fractures may be plugged.
b. Filtrate invasion by incompatible water, oil, or chemicals may
cause water blocks, emulsion blocks, or changes in formation
clays.
c. Previously propped hydraulic fracturing or acid-fracturing may
have been made formations plugged.

16
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

5. Damage during production phase

a. Corrosion inhibitors or paraffin inhibitors, if contacted to the formation

zones, may reduce permeability.
b. Precipitated scales may plug the well bore, perforations, and formation.
c. Previously propped hydraulic fracturing or acid-fracturing may have been
made formations plugged.
d. Well bore opposite the producing interval in both carbonate and sandstone
wells may become plugged with silt, shale, mud or fracturing sand.

17
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

e. Screens or gravel packs may become plugged with silts, mud, or other
debris.
b. Precipitated scales may plug the well bore, perforations, and formation.
c. Previously propped hydraulic fracturing or acid-fracturing may have
been made formations plugged.
d. Well bore opposite the producing interval in both carbonate and
sandstone wells may become plugged with silt, shale, mud or frac sand.

18
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

6. Damage during Water Injection

a. While injecting water, emulsion may occur in the

formation adjacent to the well
b. The tubing, casing, perforations, screen, gravel packs, and
formation fractures may be plugged with mud, silt, clay, paraffin,
emulsions, and corrosion inhibitors.

19
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

7. Damage during Gas Injection

a. Well bore, perforations, formation fractures, and pores may be

plugged with solids scoured by injection gas.
b. Lubrication oil from the gas compressors may cause emulsion to
form in the formation.
c. The injection of corrosion inhibitors into gas zones will reduce
well injectivity of productivity.

20
FORMATION DAMAGE CAUSED BY MATRIX
STIMULATION FLUIDS

Potential formation damage caused by matrix stimulation

fluids
a. Perforations, formation fractures, and pores may be plugged
with solids while killing or circulating a well with mud, oil, or
water..Even filtered fluids may result in plugging due to solids scoured
from tubing, open hole, or casing.
b. Filtrates from circulating fluids may cause damage.
c. Acidizing sandstone with hydrofluoric acid may leave
insoluble precipitates in formation.

21
FORMATION DAMAGE CAUSED BY MATRIX
STIMULATION FLUIDS

d. Hydraulic fracturing
1. Propped fractures may be plugged with frac fluids, solids,
or frac sand fines.
2. Inadequate breakers for high viscosity frac fluids may cause
blocking of propped fractures.
3. Fluid loss or diverting agents may cause plugging of the
perforations, formation pores, or propped fractures.

22
DIAGONOSIS OF FORMATION DAMAGE

e. Fracture acidizing of carbonates

1. Failure to employ clean compatible fluids may cause plugging
of etched-fracture flow channels and adjacent formation matrix.
2. Paraffin, asphalt, scale, silt or other solids in the tubing or
well-bore may result in plugged perforations, formation, or
etched fractures.

23
FORMATION DAMAGE

• Stimulation treatments are designed to increase the well

productivity, either by:

– Reducing or completely removing the formation damage by

chemical matrix treatment (e.g. acidizing) or
– Bypassing the formation damage by creation of a high
permeability channel by hydraulic fracturing treatment or deep
penetration guns

24
Type of Formation Damage - Skin

• The value of the Total Well skin (Stotal) measured during a

production test has many sources other than formation
damage.
• It is very important to be able to identify the formation
damage component (Sd), since this can be reduced by
better operational practices or possibly, be removed or
bypassed by stimulation treatment.

25
Type of Formation Damage - Skin

• The total well skin is a composite parameters:

– Well geometry
• The well geometry skin reflects geometrical considerations
which alter the skin value form due to the well design
(limited entry, well not at the centre, well orientation
(slanted))

26
Type of Formation Damage - Skin

– Completion skin

• Insufficient perforation (density, penetration depth, incorrect

phasing)
• Fractures – either naturally occurring or (artificially) created
propped hydraulic fractures – will lead to increase inflow and
negative skins by placing a high permeability pathway from
deep in the formation to the wellbore

27
Type of Formation Damage - Skin

– Production skins

• A rate dependent skin is often observed in high rate gas well

(and very high rate oil wells). This is due to non-Darcy or
turbulent flow.
• Its presence can be a useful indication that the well is a
potential stimulation candidate

28
Type of Formation Damage - Skin

• The formation damage skin

– Most forms of formation damage reduce the rock permeability

to a certain depth away from the well
– Figure 1 illustrates the resulting producing pressure profile and
compares it with the equivalent pressure profile for an
undamaged well.

29
Type of Formation Damage - Skin

– The resulting extra pressure drop has to be compensated for

either by a reduced pressure drop across the choke or by a
smaller production rate

Figure 1

30
Example 1 – Skin Factor Calculation

An initial well test in a reservoir gave a stabilized oil flow rate of 5780 bopd for a
stabilized flowing bottomhole pressure of 1524psi with a skin factor of zero. After 18
months of production, the flowing bottomhole pressure was 1250 psi to maintain the
same initial production rate. Consider following data:

Oil permeability, ko 120 mD

Formation thickness, h 80ft
Oil viscosity, μo 1.3 cp
External radius, re 1181 ft
Wellbore radius, rw 0.49 ft
Oil formation volume factor, Bo 1.21 res bbl/stb
Average reservoir pressure 2566 psi

Assume the flow is pseudo-steady state 31

Example 1 – Skin Factor Calculation

• Calculate the mechanical skin factor for this well after 18

months’ production.

32
Solution

33
Formation Damage Concepts - Skin

• Hawkins’ Formula
– A well-known equation relating the skin effect and the near
wellbore variables (rs- damage penetration and ks – damage
permeability) has been presented by Hawkins (1956) and its
frequently referred to as Hawkins’ formula.
– If the near-wellbore permeability is the reservoir permeability
(ie. no damage), then a steady state pressure drop between the
outer boundary pressure (ps) and the well would result in a
pwf,ideal given by

34
Formation Damage Concepts - Skin

• If, the near wellbore permeability is altered to ks, then the real
bottomhole pressure related by

• The difference berween pwf,ideal and pwf,real is exactly the

pressure drop due to the skin effect, Δps
35
Formation Damage Concepts - Skin

• Therefore, the previous can be rewritten and simplified to

become

• This is a Hawkins’ formula and useful in assessing the

relative effects of
– Permeability impairment, and
– Penetration of damage

36
Formation Damage Concepts - Skin

pe

rs

• Near wellbore zone with k

ks
rw
altered permeability h

re

Zone of altered permeability

37
Exercise 2 – Permeability Impairment Versus
Damage Penetration

Assume that a well has a radius rw of 0.328ft and a

penetration of damage 3ft beyond the well (ie, rs=3.328ft).

1. What would be the skin effect if the permeability

impairment results in k/ks equal to 5 and 10, respectively?
2. What would be the required penetration of damage to
provide the same skin effect as the second case but with k/ks
=5

38
Exercise 2 – Permeability Impairment Versus
Damage Penetration

Given, When k/ks = 10

k  rs 3.328
s    1 ln  
s  10  1 ln
 ks  rw 0.328
s  20.9
when k/ks = 5,
3.328
s   5  1 ln
0.328
s  9.3

39
Exercise 2 – Permeability Impairment Versus
Damage Penetration

If s=20.9 and k/ks = 5, then the penetration due is

rs
20.9   5  1 ln
rw
20.9
rs  rwe 4

20.9
rs  0.328e 4

rs  61 ft

40
 Exercise 2 – Permeability impairment
versus damage penetration

• It can be observed that the permeability impairment has

much larger effect on the value of the skin effect than
the penetration of damage.
• When ratio of k/ks increased from 5 to 10, the skin
effect increased from 9.3 to 20.9. However, to have the
same increment in skin, damage penetration have to
increase from 3ft to 61ft

41
Exercise 2 – Formation Damage

•The Hawkins formula may be used to calculate the skin due

to formation damage:

•A Production Engineer is contemplating whether going for

cased hole completion or open hole completion in
completing Well-1 in Gelama Merah reservoir. The reservoir
and the completions properties are as follow;
42
Exercise 2 – Formation Damage

•If cased hole completion is considered, the pay zone will be

perforated using through tubing gun with 14 inches
penetration depth.
•The available mud types for drilling are as follow;

43
Exercise 2 – Formation Damage

Which mud system do you recommend if you decided to

perform;
1. open hole completions
2. cased hole completions

44
Exercise 2 – Formation Damage

Solution
Calculate the damage skin for both mud system using
Hawkin’s formula
Mud A Mud B
Sd = 5.72 Sd = 48.18

Completion Mud System

Cased Hole B
Open Hole A
45
Formation Damage Concepts – Skin
Components

• The total skin effect for a well, s, consists of a number of

components. Generally these can be added together, and
therefore

– Sd = damage skin
– Sc+θ = partial completion and slant skin
– Sp = perforation skin
– ΣSpseudo = pseudo-skins (all phase and rate dependent effect)

46
Formation Damage Concepts – Skin
Components

• It is alerted that once a hydraulic fracture is generated,

most pretreatment skin effects (Sd, Sc+θ, Sp) are bypassed
and have no impact on the post-treatment well
performance
• Similar case in deep penetrating perforation, may bypass
the near wellbore area
• In general, it is not correct to add pretreatment skin
effects to any post-fracture skin effects

47
Skin From Partial Completion and Slant

• These two skin effects can be determined using the

method of Cinco-Ley et al. (1975) using the dimensionless
parameters hD = h/rw: zw/h; hw/h and  {degrees} where;
– hw = height of the perforation interval,
– h = height of the reservoir,
– zw = elevation of the midpoint of the perforations relative to the
formation base, and
–  = slant angle relative to the vertical axis

48
Skin From Partial Completion and Slant

49
Skin From Partial Completion and Slant

• Table 5-1 and 5-2 give the results for reservoir

dimensionless thickness, hD(=h/rw) of 100 and 1000.
• The composite skin effect, Sc+θ, and the individual parts, sc
and sθ, are listed

50
51
52
Exercise 3 – Partial Penetration and Slant Skin
Effect

A well with a radius, rw=0.328 ft is completed in a 33 ft

reservoir. In order to avoid severe water coning problems,
only 8 ft are completed and the midpoint of the
perforations is 29 ft above the base of the reservoir.
1. What would be the composite skin effect if θ=45o?

2. Calculate composite skin effect if h=330 ft, hw=80 ft

and zw=290 ft.

53
Exercise 3 – Partial Penetration and Slant Skin
Effect

Base

h = 33ft hw = 8ft
zw = 29ft

54
Exercise 3 – Partial Penetration and Slant Skin
Effect

Answer
1. hD = 100
Sc+θ = 8.6 (vertical)
Sc+θ = 6 (45o slant)

2. hD=1000
Sc+θ = 15.7 (vertical)
Sc+θ = 10.4 (45o slant)

55
Skin From Well Perforation

• Perforation creates a flow path for fluids from the

reservoir through the cement and casing to the wellbore.

56
Skin From Well Perforation

• The perforation skin (Sp) is

a function of perforation
length (l), perforation
diameter (d), spacing in
shots per foot (SPF), and
phasing angle ().
• hperf = 1/SPF

57
Skin From Well Perforation

• Karakas and Thariq (1988) have presented a

semianalytical solution for perforation skin effect
calculation.
• Components includes
– Plane flow effect, sH
– Vertical converging effects, sv
– Wellbore effect, swb

Sp = sH + sv + swb

58
Skin From Well Perforation

Calculation of plane flow effect, sH

• where r’w(θ) is the effective wellbore radius and is a

function of the phasing angle θ.

59
Skin From Well Perforation

• The constant aθ depends on the perforation phasing and

can be obtained from table by Karakas and Tariq (1988).

• However, the total contribution is usually small.

60
Skin From Well Perforation

61
Skin From Well Perforation

Calculation of vertical converging effect, sV

• To obtain sV, two dimensionless variables must be

calculated.
h perf kH
hD 
l perf kV

• Where kH and kV are the horizontal and vertical

permeabilities, respectively
62
Skin From Well Perforation

• And,

• The vertical pseudo-skin is then

with

and

63
Skin From Well Perforation

• The constant a1, a2, b1 and b2 are also functions of the

perforation phasing and can be obtained from the table.

• The vertical skin effect, sV, is potentially the largest

contributor to sp; for small perforation densities, that is,
large hperf, sV can be very large.

64
Skin From Well Perforation

65
Skin From Well Perforation

Calculation of wellbore effect, swb

• For calculation of swb, a dimensionless quantity is
calculated first

• And

• The constant c1 and c2 also can be obtained from the table

66
Skin From Well Perforation

67
Exercise 4 – Perforation Skin Effect

Assume that a well with rw = 0.328ft is perforated with 2

SPF, rperf = 0.25 in (0.028ft), lperf = 8 in (0.667ft), and θ =
180o. Calculate the perforation skin if the kH/kV = 10.

Repeat the calculation for θ = 0o and θ = 60o

68
Exercise 4 – Perforation Skin Effect

• Solution

r'w    0.5 0.328  0.667 

 0.5
0.328
sH  ln
0.5
s H  0.4

69
 Exercise 4 – Perforation Skin Effect

• Knowing that hperf = 1/SPF,

h perf kH
0.5 hD 
hD  10 l perf kV

0.667
hD  2.37

rperf  kV 
rD 
0.028

2 0.5
1  0.1  rD  1 
2h perf  kH


r D  0.037

70
Exercise 4 – Perforation Skin Effect

• From table and equations,

71
Exercise 4 – Perforation Skin Effect

0.328
rwD 
0.667  0.328
rwD  0.33


swb  2.6 10 2
e  4.532  0.33 

swb  0.1

s p  0.4  4.3  0.1

s p  0 .1
72
Exercise 4 – Perforation Skin Effect

• When θ = 0o • When θ = 60o

– sH = 0.3 – sH = -0.9
– sV = 3.6 – sV = 4.9
– swb = 0.4 – swb = 0.004

sp = 4.3 sp = 4

73
Revision

Skin Calculation

74
 Exercise 1 – Skin Factor Calculation

An initial well test in a reservoir gave a stabilized oil flow rate of 1620 bopd for
a stabilized flowing bottomhole pressure of 1700psi with a skin factor of zero.
After 18 months of production, the flowing bottomhole pressure was 1428 psi
to maintain the same initial production rate. Consider following data:

Oil permeability, ko 85 mD
Formation thickness, h 80ft
Oil viscosity, μo 1.3 cp
External radius, re 2000 ft
Wellbore radius, rw 0.49 ft
Oil formation volume factor, Bo 1.21 res bbl/stb
pr
Average reservoir pressure, 2100 psi

Assume the flow is pseudo-steady state 75

Exercise 1 – Skin Factor Calculation

• Calculate the mechanical skin factor for this well after 18

months’ production.

qo 

ko h Pr  Pwf 
 re 3 
141.2  o Bo  ln   S 
 rw 4 

76
Solution

• Re-arrange the equation gives

s

k o h Pr  Pwf   3  ln r


e
141.2qo  o Bo 4 
 rw 

s
 85 80 2100  1428 3  2000 
  ln 
141.216201.211.3 4  0.49 
s  5.14

77
Exercise 2 – Skin Factor Calculation

An initial well test in a reservoir gave a stabilized oil flow rate of 5780 bopd for a
stabilized flowing bottomhole pressure of 1524psi with a skin factor of zero.
After 18 months of production, the flowing bottomhole pressure was 1250 psi to
maintain the same initial production rate. Consider following data:

Oil permeability, ko 120 mD

Formation thickness, h 80ft
Oil viscosity, μo 1.3 cp
External radius, re 1181 ft
Wellbore radius, rw 0.49 ft
Oil formation volume factor, Bo 1.21 res bbl/stb
Reservoir pressure, pe 2566 psi

Assume the flow is steady-steady state 78

Exercise 2 – Skin Factor Calculation

• Calculate the mechanical skin factor for this well after 18

months’ production.

ko h pe  pwf 
qo 
 re 
141.2 o Bo  ln  s 
 rw 

79
Solution

• Re-arrange the steady-state equation gives

ko h pe  pwf   re 
s  ln 
141.2qo  o Bo  rw 
120  80 2566  1250   1181 
s  ln 
141.2 5780 1.211.3  0.49 
s  2.05

80
Question & Answer

Q&A
81
Thank You
82