3 Inflow limitations

3.1 Changing the flow conditions around the well.

During the drilling is rock is crushed and fluid filtrate seeps into the reservoir around the well.
During the completion is well exposed to various measures, such as: perforating, setting of sand
screen, or injection of acid. An overview of changes in formation around the well, formation
damage, because of the intrusion of various fluids, physic-chemical reactions formation minerals
and mechanical blocks are provided by Krueger/1986 /. During the production, the pressure
decreases and flow erosion can happen. Since all produced fluid must flow through the area around
the well, the changes here have a great effect on productivity.
Changes around the well can often be rectified, for example, by re-perforating, affecting with acid,
or hydraulic fracturing. This can yield major productivity gains. Therefore, it is important to be
able to identify any changes around the well, or preferably avoid such in the first place.
A classic way to quantify the effect of change in the flow conditions is by the flow effectiveness:
the relationship between actual production and non-profit rate, as it would have been without the
changes around the well
o o
J
J
q
q
E
(3-1)
E: the flow efficiency (-)
q : actual production
q
o
: production in the same well pressure, without the flow changes
Figure 3-1 illustrates a hypothetical case in which the filtrate from the drilling fluid has
entered the formation and reduced permeability in a zone closest to the well. As a result,
when the well pressure at a given production will be: p
w
, while it without any loss of
permeability would have been: p
o
w
. If the drift of the affects zone follows Darcy's law,
and we know the intrusion radius: r
d
, and permeability: k
d
, we can expect out into the
currents strong. But this is not possible to measure this in real life wells.

Figure 3.1 Inflow with reduced permeability of the well
Van Everding / 1953 / found a way to determine the pressure loss due to changes around the well,
according to analysis of the transient pressure response. He introduced the concept of skin
pressure: p
s
, and represented by a dimensionless skin factor
S
h k 2
B q
p
o o o
s

(3-2)
S : dimensionless skin factor
p
s
: skin pressure loss (extra pressure because of the flow changes)
3.2 Estimating skin factor
Skin factor may be estimated by comparing the transient response under the pressure and
flow of eviction.
Figure 3.2 shows the flow toward the well, after start-up as we see the full influx rate
quickly established around the well and gradually for plants across the reservoir. Reduced
permeability just around the well will therefore almost immediately provide an additional
pressure; skin pressure loss.
Figure 3.2 Transient, radial flow to the well
When the well is closed, the influx almost immediately be zero just around the well. Skin pressure
loss due to reduced permeability just around the well will then also disappear. Farther out in the
reservoir will flow to continue any longer, and cause the pressure building. Skin pressure loss in
other words, does the production, but not at the press building. We can thus find skin pressure loss
by comparing the transient pressure response in manufacturing and building.
The total press response by transient production is expressed by (2-20), by adding the skin pressure
as a constant part
( )
s
w o
o o o
i w
p
r c
t k
h k
B q
p t p +

,
_

+
2
4
ln
4

(3-3)
If we produce through a period of time: t, and then close the well, we can express response to
pressure by add (superpose) pressure response to production: q
o
in the period: t
p
+ t h; and press
response for injection: - q
o
, during the period : t
( ) ( )
t
t t
h k
B q
p t t p t p
p
o o o
i p w w

+
+ + ln
4

(3-4)
t
p
: time from production to eviction
t : time of eviction
The pressure response before the eviction (3-3), and of eviction (3-4) is outlined in Figure
3.3. By comparing these, we can estimate the skin pressure loss
Figure 3.3 Pressure structure with and without skin
3.3 Productivity index for vertical wells with skin
Skin pressure loss amounts to an addition to the calculated pressure for the assumed
homogeneous reservoir
s
w
e o o o
R w
p
4
3
r
r
ln
h k 2
B q
p p

,
_

+
(3-5)
By combining (3-2) and (3-5), we can express the pseudo steady productivity index for
vertical wells with skin

,
_

S
4
3
r
r
ln B
h k 2
p p
q
J
w
e
o o
o
w R
o
ps

(3-6)
the flow just around the well is the same for steady and pseudo-steady wells. The steady
productivity index is therefore

,
_

S
r
r
B
h k
J
w
e
o o
o
st
2
1
ln
2

(3-7)
We see that the productivity index with skin (3-6), (3-7), which remain constant, so that
in flow characteristics, we continue to be linear. This means that the measurements of
stabilized well pressure at different rates can not distinguish between the skin and the
general low permeability. The distinction is important, because a skin often can be
removed. There is less we can do if the permeability is low in the reservoir.
3.4 Factors that determine the skin factor and the flow
efficiency
If we know how the flow conditions around the well is, we will be able to calculate skin
factor and the flow efficiency. Such calculation gives an idea about how the changes of
various parameters affecting the well productivity.
If we are based on a homogeneous permeability reduction as illustrated in Figure 3-1, we
can set up the following relations for the pressure loss between the intrusion radius, r
d
,
and the well:
- expressed by the actual permeability of the invaded zone

( )
w
d
d
o o o
w d
r
r
ln
h k 2
B q
p p

- expressed by the unaffected permeability, plus skin factor
( ) S
h k 2
B q
r
r
ln
h k 2
B q
p p p
o o o
w
d o o o
s
o
w d

+ +
Since the expressions above describes the same pressure drop, we can put them equal. It
provides the following link between skin factor and the permeability of the invaded zone
w
d
d
r
r
k
k
S ln 1

,
_

(3-8)
The result above is of little use to the prediction. But it indicates how the skin factor
depends on the permeability and invasion. in other words Skin factor quantify, changes
around the well; affected by: production rate, fluid properties , approximately height and
outer boundary conditions.
For radial geometry and pseudo steady conditions, we can express your ideas with and
without skin factor by equation (3-6). The connection between the flow efficiency (3-1)
and skin factor will then be
S
r
r
r
r
E
w
e
w
e
+

4
3
ln
4
3
ln
(3-9)
In other words, flow efficiency depends on both the skin factor and distance to the outer
boundary: re
Equation (3-9) indicates that there is no linear relationship between skin factor and the
flow efficiency.
3.5 Geometric skin
Perforation, sands cores and other completion choices can change the flow conditions in
the well, even if they do not change the flow properties in rock. This is often called
geometric skin.
3.5.1 Perforation skin
Perforation means that a shoot holes through the feeding cemented pipe, into the rock.
The flow would then be radial, until it is approaching the trengings the depth of the
perforation, and then flow against each perforation channel as outlined in Figure 3.4
below
Figure 3.4 To the flow of perforated, and to open well
The classic way to study the effect of perforation channels is from the electrical analog
models.
Typically, a salt mixture (such as copper sulfate) represents the reservoir, a plastic pipe
represent wall of the well, and the copper strings out from the plastic pipe, to represent
perforation channels. The electric power will then represent the fluid power, tension
represent the pressure, and conductivity of electrolytes and copper strings
represents permeability in rock and perforation channels. Figure 3.5 shows a graphic
illustration of perforation skin, based on such measurements
Figure 3.5, graphical representation of skin from the perforation
3.5.2 Skin due to the partial completion
With the partial completion, we understand that the well is only completed over parts of
the productive reservoir, as shown in Figure 3.6. This may have occurred because of
errors. Or it may be intentional, for example, to avoid consolidated party.
Figure 3.6 Flow convergence of partial completion
Muskat / 1937 / showed that the steady production capacity, with the partial completion
could approach that

( ) ( )
( ) ( )
1
1
]
1

'

e w
o o
w e
o
r
h 4
ln
h
~
125 . 0 1 h
~
875 . 0 1
h
~
125 . 0 h
~
875 . 0
ln
r
h 4
ln 2
h
~
2
1
B
kh 2
p p
q

(3-10)
there:
h
h
h
p

~
and ( ) is gamma function:

0
1
) ( dx e x n
x n
Skin factor can be expressed from the solutions (3-10) above
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) h h
h h
h
r
h
h
h
S
w
~
125 . 0 1
~
875 . 0 1
~
125 . 0
~
875 . 0
ln
~
2
1 4
ln
~
~
1

,
_

(3-11)
At the approach of the gamma function, (3-11) becomes

( ) ( )
( ) ( ) h h
h h
h
r
h
h
h
S
w
~
125 . 0
~
875 . 0
~
125 . 0 1
~
875 . 0 1
ln
~
2
1 4
ln
~
~
1

,
_

(3-12)
By the variety area:
{ } 99 . 0 05 . 0
~
h h h
p , which corresponds to skin factor:
{ } 0 70 S
, are estimates from(3-11), and simplification (3-12) almost coincide
3.5.3 Skin because of gravel packing
Many wells are equipped with different types of gravel packages, to support the formation and
prevent the flow of sand particles in the well. Gravel size is selected so that the packing
accompany to drop the very small particles through but keep bigger back. If all the particles were
stopped, gravel packing company would soon be close.
Gravel packages generally have very high permeability, but when the gravel stops particles from
the formation, the flow channels gradually become closer. the currents move through the pack are
also often so great that it gives extra 2.-order pressure loss.
One consequence of that gravel pack filled with the formation of particles, is that the flow
properties through the packing (permeability and turbulence factor) match better with the flow
characteristics in formation, than with the original flow properties of gravel pack. Unneland /
2001 / provides an overview of the principles, experience and correlation to predict the flow
resistance because of gravel packages. The work is primarily related to internal gravel seals on the
Gullfaks field.

3.5.4 Skin because of the wellbore inclination
Reservoir layer is often not horizontal. Wells that are drilled vertically will often be angled in
relation to the reservoir. A lot of wells are also in output punk drilled with a certain inclination. At
the moderate slant will do influx be radial to a certain distance from the well, and then depart as
indicated in Figure 3.7. It may therefore be reasonable to quantify pressure discrepancy as a
geometric skin.
Figur 3.7 Flow towards an inclined well
Cinco-Ley & al / 1975 / calculated productivity of inclined wells (by source-sink
method). From the numerical results, they produced the following skin factor correlation
w
C
r
h
S
100
log
56 41
10
865 . 1 06 . 2

,
_

,
_

.. for : < 75
o
(3-13)
: inclination angle (degrees)
h : height of the reservoir( m )
r
w
: well radius ( m )
This geometric skin factor is used to correct the productivity formulas for vertical wells,
for the slant in relation to the reservoir. Figure 3.8 illustrates (3-13).
Figure 3.8 Skin factor for the slant, according to Cinco-Ley's correlation
We see that the skin is a negative factor: slant enhances productivity by providing longer-
perforated interval. At the large slant, the negative skin pressure loss will dominate the
productivity index. This means that the productivity index that differs very much from
the radial, as assumed in the point of output.
Estimation methods dominated by empirical correlation veil the relationships between the
parameters, decision-making and productivity. It may therefore be sensible to limit the
use of Cinco-Ley's correlation to less than 45
o
, so that the skin is not the negative factor is
far too large. Productivity index of greater inclination should rather be based on the
formula horizontal wells, as shown in Chapter 5.

3.7 Deviation from linear Inflow performance
At sufficiently high flow rates, the inflow characteristics
are not linear. The pressure loss will almost always be
greater than predicted from a constant productivity index.
Below, we quantify flow mechanisms that provide such a
discrepancy.
3.7.1 Second order pressure loss
Darcys equation implies proportionality between flow
velocity and pressure gradient. Similar relations are used
for other engineering applications, such as: Ohm's law of
electric resistance, Hooks elasticity law, Fourier's heat
flow law. However such relations are often not applicable at
high rate, or large load..
Forchheimer (1901) proposed a relationship that can be seen
as Darcys equation with a 2.order adjustment
v v v
k dr
dp
o

+ (6-1)
: Second-order constant, "turbulence factor" (m
-1
)
From Forchheimer equation (6-1), we can predict the
relationship between pressure loss and rate. By assuming
radial and steady-state influx, we get the following
solution
( ) ( )
o o
e
2 2
2
o o
o
e o o
e
q q
r
1
r
1
h 4
B
q
r
r
ln
kh 2
B
r p r p

,
_

+
,
_

(6-2)
The first part of (6-2) corresponds to Darcys law. The
second part is independent of viscosity and increases with
the square of flow rate, corresponding to turbulent flow
resistance in pipes. Truly turbulent flow does not occur in
porous media under normal circumstances; the pore channels
are too narrow and flow speed too low. But the flow changes
velocity and direction through the pores. For complicated
pore geometry we can expect relatively large -factor. For
relatively straight and smooth flow channels, we can expect
little -factor.
Figure 3.9 illustrates 2.order pressure profile with low
viscosity and high production. The figure shows significant
pressure loss near the well. Further out the flow speed is
so small that 2.order pressure loss is negligible.
Figure 3.9 Pressure profile according to Forchheimer
equation.
Figure 3.9 shows that the deviation from Darcys equation
occurs close to the well. Flow will hear be very close to
steady-state. there (near the wellbore). This will hold even
if the conditions further out is pseudo-steady-state, or
even transient. Thus, the well pressure can be expressed as
2
1
o o R w
Fq q
J
p p
(6-3)
By matching the (6-2) and (6-3), we get the following
relation for 2.order pressure loss parameter
w
o o
r h
B
F
1
4
2 2
2

(6-4)
Figure 3.10 illustrates 2.order inflow characteristics,
estimated from (6-3), for the same parameters which formed
the basis for Figure 6-1: [J=1.01
.
10
-8
Sm
3
/s/Pa, F=1.14
.
10
9
Pa/(Sm
3
/s)
2
] .
Figure 3.10 Second order inflow characteristics
Estimate of 2.order inflow performance from measured data.
We can estimate 2.order inflow performance from measured
well pressure and production rates. For graphical estimation
it is practical to express (6-3) as
o
o
w R
Fq
J q
p p
y +

1
(6-5)
Figure 3.11 shows pressures and production rates plotted
according to (6-5). If a straight line can be drawn through
the data points, the slope is equal to: F and the
intersection with the y-axis corresponds to: 1 / J
Figure 3.11 Graphical estimate of 2.order flow parameters
The points shown in Figure 6.3 are "simulated measurements"
and the straight line is adapted visually. The intersection
with the y-axis provides the estimate: 1 / J = 0.0115,
productivity index: J = 87 Sm3/d/bar (Estimation of "F " is
left to the reader)
Turbulence factor correlated to the rock parameters
The -factor is often correlated to porosity and
permeability. The correlation by Tek & al (1962), Katz &
Coats (1968) is illustrated in Figure 3.12

( )
75 . 0 25 . 1
9
k
10 3048 . 0 / 5 . 5

(6-6)
k : permeability (mD)
: porosity ( - )
: turbulence factor (m
-1
)
Figure 3.12 Correlation of --factor in natural rock
Second-order pressure losses in gravel packs
By gravel packing, we understand that the granular material
is placed between the rock and well to prevent flow of
reservoir fines into the well. The flow rate through such
gravel packs is often so high that it may give significantly
pressure loss.
Experience shows that -factor for gravel pack corresponds
better to the permeability of the reservoir rock than the
permeability of the gravel. This is explained by that the
production will transport fines from the formation into the
sand pack. Unneland (2001) provides an overview of different
correlations and -factor for gravel pack and comparison
with data for North Sea fields.
3.7.2 Flow below saturation pressure.
Physical mechanisms
When the pressure falls below the saturation, gas is
released. This leads to a number of changes in fluid
behavior and flow conditions:
- The total flow volume gets larger
- Viscosity of oil becomes larger because of less dissolved
gas
- gas and oil fill pores and will therefore have different
permeabilities
- Density difference may make gas will filter upwards
Such changes affect the pressure loss, as illustrated in fig
3.13
Figure 3.13 Inflow below saturation pressure
Vogels inflow performance
Vogel (1968) performed numerical simulations with pressures
below saturation. By systematizing numerical results he
found that the inflow performance could be expressed by the
following non-dimensional relationship
2
s
w
s
w
max
o
p
p
8 . 0
p
p
2 . 0 1
q
q

,
_

,
_

,
_

(6-8)
q
max
: Extrapolated production capacity at zero pressure well
p
s
: Reservoir pressure at saturation
Vogels characteristics curve (6-8) shows that the
productivity index decreases with decreasing well pressure.
The comparable dimensionless inflow performance for constant
productivity index reads
s
w
*
o
p
p
1
q
q

(6-9)
From (6-9) follows that the comparable production capacity
at zero well pressure: q
*
=Jp
R
Marshall B. Standing observed that at saturation pressure
(6-8) and (6-9) should provide the same productivity index.
Thus, the gradients of (6-8) and (6-9) should be equal at
saturation pressure, as illustrated in Figure 3.14. This
gives the following relationship

max
*
q 8 . 1 q
(6-10)
Figure 3.14 Comparison of inflow performance relations
Combining (6-9) and (6-10), the Vogel parameter may be
related to productivity index estimated above the saturation
pressure
8 . 1
p J
q
s
max

(6-11)
Reference
1937 Muskat, M.: The flow of Homogenous Fluids through Porous Media
McGraw-Hill, Ann Arbor, Michigan 1937
1953 van Everdingen, A.F.:
The skin effect and its influence on the production capacity of a well
Petr. Trans. of AIME, vol 198. 1953, p 172
1975 Cinco-Ley, H., Ramey, H.J.Jr., Miller, F.G.: Pseudo-skin Factor for Partially-Penetrating
Directionally Drilled Wells
SPE 5589, Annual meeting, Dallas, Texas, Sept. 28- Oct.1, 1975,
JPT, Nov. 1975, p. 1392
1986 Krueger, R. F.: An Overview of Formation Damage and Well Productivity in Oilfield
Operations
Journal of Petr. Tech. February 1986, p131
2001 Unneland, T.: Performance of high-rate, gravel-packed oil wells.
Doctor tech. , IPT 2001