TP. 3581 THE SKIN EFFECT AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY OF A WELL A. F. VAN EVERDINGEN, SHELL OIL CO., HOUSTON, TEXAS, MEMBER AIME ABSTRACT ‘The pressure drop in a well per unit rate of flow is eon: trolled by the resistance of the formation, the viscosity of the fluid, and the additional resistance concentrated around the well bore resulting from the drilling and completion technique employed and, perhaps, from the production practices used, ‘The pressure drop caused by this additional resistance is defined in this paper as the skin effect, denoted by the sym bol S, This skin effect considerably detracts from a well’s feapacity to produce. Methods are given to deterimine quanti- tatively (a) the value of S, (b) the final build-up. pressurs and (¢) the product of average permeability times the thick ness of the producing formation. INTRODUCTION Equations which relate the pressure in a well producing from a homogeneous formation with pressures existing at vari ous distances around the well are generally used within the industry, The relation is quite simple when the fluid flowing is assumed to be incompressible, It becomes somewhat more complicated when the flowing fluid is considered compressible fo that the duration of the flaw can be considered, In each ease the major portion of the pressure drop occurs close to the well bore. However analyses of pressure build-up curves indi- cate that the pressure drop in the vicinity of the well hore is greater then that computed from these equations using the Known, physical characteristies of the formation and the Tn order to explain these excessive drops it is necessary to assume that permeability of the formation at and near the well bore is substantially reduced as a result of drilling, com pletion and, perhaps, production practice. This possibility has hoen recognized in the iterature.””” ‘A method to compute the pressure drop due to a reduetion of the peemeabilty of the formation neae the well bore, which is designated as the skin effect, S, i given in the following paragraphs, To start, equations normally used to describe flow in the vicinity of a well are given without considering this effect. These equations then are modified to include the effect fof a skin on the pressure behavior. Finally a method is given to estimate the effect of the tkin on the pressure and produc. tion behavior of a well PRESSURE EQUATIONS id Flow If pris defined as the flowing pressure in a well of radius rex the pressure at distance 7 from the well has heen shown to be:* Incompressible FI = pin + OH In Pn = Pen + a nF ‘The total pressure drop between the drainage boundary, ry and the well hore is given by ih In (ree) os A) PG) Vo. 198, 1953 SPE 203-G PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME These equations are valid only if the flow towards the well, ‘occurs in a horizontal homogeneous medium and the fluids are incompressible. The assumptions imply that all fluid taken from the well enters the system at r,, a condition rarely en countered in practice Compressible Fluid Flow, Steady State A more realinte equation i obtained if is asumed that the compres, af th flowing Hid saa and haw constant value aver the presure range encountered. After the wells been prodicing or some fine to tha rate hat Become costnt and steady sate ix reached, the. presses throughost the desinagearew are fling by th wae emo per unt of tine, and the presare diferencesbetmeen a punt tnthe druinage’ aren and’ tho wel are constant When Sese Conditions are met, the rate of production, from a well equal Arh (dp/dh), where dp/d ete prenare drop per unit dime," Hak Sowing a dstence rom the center OF the wall qual to gree)? From the lee equation nd from Date aw ican be shows tat Plo) — pe = le (Indra) —¥4) « “The equation holds for a depltiontype reservoir of radios, Utained by awl located tn entry provided the compres Ay of the fad per wail prssre drop i small and con Sat, wd Hid mover across the boundary Compressible Fluid Flow — Nonsteady State Table IIL of reference (5) shows the relationship between the pressure at the well bore and the reduced time, T= 1et/facr'y. The pressure-drop function, py), represents the drop below the original reservoir pressure, pms cased by unit rate ‘of production (qcr, = gu/2rkh = 1) for several values of Ry the ratio of drainage boundary radius, r, to well radius, re In most reservoirs the values of ry/re approach infinity, and Under these conditions the values of pyv, shown in Table I of roference (5) can be used where pyr, then signifies the dit ference between the pressure in the well and the prevailing reservoir pressure per unit rate of flow. The total pressure drop below prevailing reservoir pressure amounts to pr Pr (gu/2rkh) por whete the factor qu/2rkh converts the chron: lative pressure drop per unit rate of production to cumulative pressure drop for actual rate, q- For values of T > 100 the iin» faetion may be written (equation VI-IS of reference 5) 2) Pon = 4% (In T + 0,809), Using the time conversion T= kt/fucr'., the diflerence in pressure between reservoir and well becomes = pt ln (heuer. 9). Pape lt Il (ht / joer) + 0809] ® If values for the physical constants of the formation and the fluids are inserted, itis found that 7 exceeds 100 after a few second of production (or elosed-in time), so that the approx mation becomes val almost at once, A simple relation between the pressure in the well and in the reservoir can also be derived by considering the well as a point source*”" instead of a unit circle source, that is, by lusing Lord Kelvn’s solution instead of the unit circle source mTP. 3581 ‘THE SKIN EFFECT AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY OF A WELL solution.’ The difference in pressure at the well bore and the provailing reservoir pressure then is 2 gi (fuer /Mlt) . . (A) dekh and this expression also approaches Equation (8) closely ‘whenever the value of (ftcr',/4kt) is smaller than 0.01 which fs stated hefore is the ease’ a few seconds after the start of production (or shutin). In all of the equations given so far it is assumed that unit rate of production is obtained immediately upon opening the ‘well and, alternatively, that upon shutting-in the well the rate of production from the formation ceases abrugtly. ‘The storage capacity of the casing and tubing prevents this ideal condi- tion from being obtained immediately in wells, Hence it is normally observed that the pressure builds up gradually co that it takes from a few minutes up to several days (depend ing on the characteristics of the formation, the contained fuid, and the storage capacity of the casing) before the observed presturesime relationship assumes the logsrithmic relation mentioned above. Pa Effeet of Storage Capacity of Casing and Tubing Two methods can he used to express the effect of the storage ‘capacity of casing and tubing on the flow equations given shove. In both eases it is assumed that a well has heen closed in sufficiently long for tho pressure to attain substantially the prevailing reservoir pressure. The well then is opened and its measured production is corrected for the fluid obtained from ceasing and tubing to obtain the cumulative production fom the formation proper. These corrections are derived from observations of casing-head, tubing-head, and bottom hole pres sures, and from a knowledge of the dimensions of casing’ and Imbing, and the weight of the oil and gas columns. Method 1: The cumulative production from the formation is plotted versus time, measured from the instant of opening the well, and, in general, a graph is obtained similar to Fig. 1, i 0, cuMULATIVE PRODUCTION FIG, 1 — DETERAINATION OF RATE OF FLUID ENTRY INTO WELL BORE 172 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME FIG, 2~Biny AND "Buy CURVES VS. LOG OF TIME. whieh shows that the rate of production from the formation can be closely approximated by a formula of the type gle), where both g and « are constants evaluated from the observations ‘The rate of production, g, in ec/sccond at reservoir condi tions equals qu/2rkh reduced rates. The dimension of the factors, appearing in the exponent, is T". Expressing the time in rediced units T= kt/fucr'. causes the value of « to change to afucr"s/k = 8, The numerical value of the product AP remains equal to at From reference (5) it is elear that if « unit rate of produe- tion (gen = ge/2rkh = 1) gives a pressure drawdown of pix) samospheres, then the rate (1—e**) during the pressure ‘drawdown will result in a pressure drop, Ber, which is given by the relation T= Sa PF ) pexand 6) where len, i the differential of the unit funetion pce) with respeot 10 time. Using 4(—Fi(—47) for the pressure drop caused by unit rate of production, it is found that Equation (5) has as its explicit solution Ing 2y + In + BiLT)] @ Fons = Bees 0451722 = Bates comant and Bi(er) = 1 (e/u)da, whove values are given in refer ) "fo analyze the complications encountered nthe pressure bulla eurvesof walls the pont sume tlaon ie wed The option of this solution tend the correct unit cee ‘Sure tauton (which more eeu to handle) i on Silved permfnble as shown by the following tbl Z Poin Ug Cie en Computed from: eit 1a Ce s=o01 T= 50 09354 19409 100 02128 421608 200 0.46799 97336 500 120015, 121837 200 219670 220112 2000 30670 3a8a4 Vol. 198, 1953A. F. VAN EVERDINGEN Method 2: Observations on wells have also shown that the amount of fuid, C, which can be withdrawn from (or stored into) casing and tubing per atmosphere pressure difference 2 constant whose value can be determined with reasonable accuracy. These values of C ate exprested in ce/atmorphere at reservoir conditions, In the system of reduced units used throughout this work C = 2rfher sC, as proviously discussed If we denote the pressuredrop —time relationship which ‘would result from the relation of rate of production and un- Toading of casing a* Bix, the rate of production in reduced Units from the formation will approach tinity according to Cain far) 2) and by the superposition theorem the drawdown in well after opening will be equal to Ben =f 2 1 CPAP pn aT . . (8) which is Equation VIII appearing in reference (5). Py ‘curves are shown graphically as Fig, 8 of the same reference, As shown on Fig. 2, both pix and’Pim) when plotted versus the log of time show Some of the lag i pressure build-up so characteristic in all pressure observations. ‘The Skin Effect Although the pressuredrop function modified for the var able rate of production prevailing immediately after closingin for opening-up of a well shows some of the characteristics of the observed pressure buildup or drawdown curves encount- fered in practice, agreement between these modifed functions sand factual data leaves much to be desired. In general, the pressure difference between prevailing reservoir pressure and flowing pressure is larger than ean he accounted for by allow- ing for the variable rate in the manners explained. above. Better agreement can he obtained if it is assumed that the permeability of the formation at and neer the well bore is, substantially reduced as a result of drilling, completion and, perhaps, production practices. Whatever may be the cause for this reduction no reason can bo found to assume that this reduction is present beyond 20 ft around the bore hole and probably not that far. The volume of the fluids contained in such a cylinder is small compared to the volume of fluids within the drainage area of a well. It may therefore be con cluded that any transient conditions set up in this eylinder are of short duration and can he neglected ia the analysis. Hence the effect of a reduction in permeability in this eylinder ean be taken into account as an additional pressure drop, proportional at all times to the rate of production from the formation. For this reason the additional pressure drop (per unit rate of flow) near the well bore is considered to be ‘caused by a skin and denoted by 5. Under these conditions Equation (5) is modified further to give Ber = S30) peadt +02 )8 hick has the explicit solution Fos = Po» + 8~ 40" tn p—2y + Ind + BL(AT) +25) Dee (10) cis easy to see that for large times when e*™ becomes zero, Equation (10) gives o Pin = Pin +S, so that the entire pressure deop equals tte Pen Se Ltn (kt /fuere) + Sigg (Pon + 8] = BE Ll (he/jner.) + 0.809 + 25) Lee ayy ‘hich is the same as Equation (3) after allowing for the pres: sure drop caused by the skin Vol. 198, 1953 Ap PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME TP. 3581 Furthermore, the presence of a skin causes Equation (8) to be modified to SEU -CUFn/AP V1 powya™ aa) With the help of LaPlace transformations ix) can be ex: rested as the infinite integral pe Gee") On © [WSF yee.) + Ge TCO] eas) Which becomes identical with Equation VIII of reference (5) when 0. It can be shown that for large times, Equation (12) also gives Fin = Pen FS: Both Equations (10) and (13) can be used to represent With reasonable accuracy the entire pressure build-up in a ‘ell, so that iti felt that all factors influencing the pressure Tike (or drop) have been taken into consideration. However, itis not posible to determine the numerical value of the vari- ous parainters entering the equations; to be precise, it ix not possible to determine {rom a pressure build-up curve, even iF Bits a theoretical curve neatly, the value of Sand of the time conversion h/ fuer. Equation (11). gives, in simpler manner, all information ‘wseful in feld operations which to date has been extracted from the more. complex’ Equations (10) ana 23). Bon = ANALYSIS OF BUILD-UP CURVES ‘The pressure build-up curve of a well is obtained by m uring the bottomhole pressure in a flowing well, px, together with the subsequent pressure increases during a period of suficient duration following the shutting‘n. Te is. assumed that the well has been producing at a constant rate, q, during a considerable time, t. The pressure inerease upon closing-in Js recorded as function of the elosed-in time, 3, and only those pressure increases are used after the effects of storage are OF PRODUCTION, @ FIG, 3.— SUPERFOSITION OF FLOW RATE FOR CLOSING IN A. WELL. 173TP, 3581 THE SKIN EFFECT AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY OF A WEIL In casing and tabing have died down. tn the formals the Closingsin of well taken nto acount by superpsing & Sepa vate yy so thatthe vate of withdeawing de om the formation becomes seo, as show om Fie 3 From Equation (11), and a shown in reference (6). the pressure drop at any tine ((4 3) caused by the production 5 found tobe lf Un (oF 9) + (h/ fers) +0809 + 25, and the pressure increase caused by the superpised negative matey In + bn (/ fers 2s] = gl Un + In (h/ Incr) + 0809 + 251 ‘The actual pressure deorease at time 8 after elosing-in is given by the sum of these two expressions (In (t+ 8) ~ Ind] = pe gt Ulm (+ 8) In} in f(e+ 8) /2) at) Equation (14) indicates that the pressure change is propor- tional toa Urfunction of (¢4-8)/8 and therefore forms a straight-line relationship when plotted on semilog paper. Using ‘Equation (14) for the determination of the prevailing reservoir presture requires that 74/re be extentially infinite. For the ‘etermination of the average permeability and the skin factor itis only necessary that the pressure build-up curves contain ‘2 straight-line portion. Some of this information has been presented in somewhat different form* and is included here to present a complete analysis of a pressure eurve, including the skin effec. Papo Determination of Prevailing Reservoir Pressure For infinite clowedin time (8= o»), In {(¢ + 8)/] and ap become zero, Therefore the pressure read at Jn [f+ 3) /3] the reservoir pressure, ps, which would prevail at that point had no fluids ever been taken from the reser: oir at that particular location. ‘The relation affords a simple means to determine reservoir pressures {rom build-up surveys where the actual measured pressures are still considerably Delow final shut-in pressures. It requires, however, that com tinuous measurements be made. So-called spot readings are Jikely to be misleading, since the errors in such measurements FIG. 4— PRESSURE BUILDUP CURVE BEFORE REPERFORATING. ws PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME Table 1— Reperforat Job Before Alter Perforated interval 62500 58:70 fe ‘producing interval 518 em Sam Garnlative production 50568) 5300 B/D Production rte 58/0 usd Production tine S121 days 9.67 days t.production time 5.561,000 sec. 7920,000 cee Shrinkage factor 0795 0705 (gat reservoir conditions 222 cofsec —13B.eee Pressure increase per ele pst aps ovsing presse 2060 psi 2502 ps assen 065 ep 219) 020 uid compressibity 00017 /atm — 0.0017 /atmn Powell ads 630m Bem (especially when made with different recorders) are apt to ‘exceed the relatively small pressure increases actually oceur- ring and thereby give an erroneous slope to the straight-line portion of the build-up curves. rmination of Average Reservoir Permeability. ‘The slope of the straightline portion of the build-up to (14) is equal to gu/4rkh, When a plot on semiloglog paper is used, the pressure increase per unit rate of flow (on = 94/2rkh = 1), per Wefold increase in (+ 8) /8 is equal to 44 fn 10 = 1.1513 atmospheres = 16.925, Th, Hence if the pressure increases 40 Ib per eycle, the well has produced at 40/1692 = qu, = 236 unit rates = qx/2ekh. ‘When q and » are known from other sources the average value ‘of kh can be found. If a reliable value of his also available fan average value of the permeability ean be obtained Determination of Skin Factor Equation (11) shows the pressure drop at the time of shut in to be = gM Ln eb In (h/ frre) + 0.09 + 2 AP gan = peg lt bln (Kf) + 0.809 - ay 1G, 5— PRESSURE AUILD.UP CURVE AFTER REPEBFORATING. Vol. 198, 1953‘A. F. VAN EVERDINGEN. 3581 pt ~ ™ \ iG, 6— PRESSURE BUILDUP CURVE BEFORE ACIDIZING, Equation (14) shows the pressuee drop at elosedin time # whe = tne 499/81. 0, = isp tn (+ 9/8) For values of 8 small compared tot, In[(¢+9)/#] tially equal to in #/4 s that Bquation (14) can be modified to Line =ln 14.) p= gitllnt Ind} (tay By subtracting Hquation (14-8) from (11) In 8 + In (k/ cre Pn ~ BPay, = Ind + In (fee) 0.809 + 25) as) Since the lefthand side of this equation is the difference be: tween flowing pressure and the pressure on the straight line for time 8, and qa/2rkh is the slope, a value of In (k/uer*,) + 0.909 + 25 (16) be found. If the radius of the well hore, the compressi- ‘of the fluid, and the porosity are inserted in the equation, value for § is obtained. To obtain the above-mentioned objectives a definite straight- line portion of the build-up curve should be availabe. further shown by consideration of Fig. 2 wh the Fie functions have a tendency to show a Tinear relation: ship with In T before actually coinciding with the prs funo- tions. Therefore the duration of the pressure survey should be considerably longer than the time required for the eflects of storage in casing and tubing to die down. FIELD APPLICATIONS Field experience shows that the productive capacity of a well can be increased considerably by reducing the value of (hin h/ters +8). Two examples are ven to Mente this statement. Reperforating ‘The effect of reperforating a well on the value of S is given in Figs. 4 and 5; production, well, and PVT data are sum- ‘marized in Table 1. ‘As a well is seldom produced at a constant rate, the time, t, before closing:n is approximated by dividing the eurmulative Vol. 198, 1953, PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME ely FAG. 7 — PRESSURE BUILD-UP CURVE AFTER ACIDIZING. production before closing-in, by the rate prevailing at that time. This approximation of ¢ hecomes more reliable the longer the well is produced at the constant rate, q. The following information ean he derived from the table and Figs. 4 and 5. Before After Reperforating _Reperforating Ps 2554 pst 2554 psi Pa~Be 494 psi 52 psi NEA [tn (h/ ers) +S] 454 psi 24 pst LAT 40 146 tm (B/ fue? 1s pi 8 psi MATH [In (h/ fue? =) Ps Ps 41 psi 16 pst ms 46 118 md 11 ma ‘The curve shown is typical for a formation having high values of 2ekli/n, a6 usually found im the Miocene sends round the Gulf Coast. Under theve conditions the pressure increases per cycle are small, which stresses the necessity of cbtaining accurate date for determining the straight-line por- tion of the buildup curve. The deteemination of S, also, is Lighly sensitive to variations in the small values of qu/2ekh. In extreme cases the steaightline portion of the build-up curve approaches a horizontal line, and the entire pressure rease after shutin of the well is then an indication of the ‘Table 2 — Acidizing Job Before After ‘iy producing interval 203m 208m Prod 250B/D —2558/D 4,908,000 see 6,096,000 see oa ae 5BBec/see 5B ce/see Tomi 183 psi 3534p sats a0» 080ep 0.038 nose (2.0001/tm 0.0001 /atm Pop well ads | 03cm 16.08 cm 1751p. 3581 THE SKIN EFFECT AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY OF A WELL presence of a considerable skin effect, whose actual value, however, cannot be determined. It fs evident that in the case discussed above the first per- foration job was not eficient and that reperforation essentially removed a large resistance which existed near the well bore, Before reperforating, the entire pressure drop was 494 psi out ‘of which 441 psi or 89 per cent was caused by the skin elect After reperforating, these figures were 52 psi, 16 psi and 31 per eent respectively. Since the rate before reperforating Was 56 B/D against 60 B/D after reperforating, the last set of pressure figures given should he multiplied by 1.6 in order to obtain a valid comparison Acidizing An example of a well before and alter acidization is given in Figs. 6 and 7; the production data are assembled in Table 2. Pertinent conclusions follow. Before After ssbtng ‘Acsdsing pe 4600 psi 4589 psi Dem pr 1066 psi 45 psi 14.7 0% (56 In (k/fucr.) +8] 519 ps =12 psi SAE (iol (b/feer-) +S} 819 psi P AAT 48 (16 In (ie/ fuer’ 138 psi 140 psi ST ae (16 In (k/ cr?) » P 1 gn 381 psi =252 psi kh ® » s 56 -a1 k 69 md 70 md ‘The presence of u negative skin may be questioned and is shown here merely to illustrate the change resulting from acidizing the well. It is probable that a negative value for $ reflects an increased effestive well radius, re. The above analysis shows that the value of S, i not the ‘most significant figure that can be obtained from this type of information, Tt seems reasonable to suppose that acidizing Increases the permeability of the formetion immediately sur- rounding the well bore to such an extent that it becomes ex- tremely large compared to its original value. This increase in permeability for some distance around the well bore can be regarded as increasing the effective radius of the well several fold (without increasing the size of the bore hole). Hence, acidization will cause not only the numerieal value of S to ecrease but also the value of 5 tp (k/ucr"e) to decrease in the seme operation, due to an increase in re. Hence the ‘effectiveness of acidization can best be judged by compering the combined values of % In (k/fucr's) +S before and after acidization, without considering which of these two factors Contributes to the improvement. From this reasoning it follows that acidization should be repested whenever a sizeable de- crease in the sum of these two factors can be expected, NOMENCLATURE Used inthis Paper Used in Ref. Production time, seconds + T Production time in reduced unite r + ‘Time well has been shutin, seconds a - dareys k K Porosity, a fraction i i Viscosity of reservoir fluid, centipoises . . 176 PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS, AIME Compressibility of the reservoir luid/ atm, ¢ © Radius of well, om. re R Drainage radius of well, em, fn RR, Rate of Buid flow (ce/see reservoir conditions) a - Formation thickness, ex, h a Rate of flow in reduced units ae 6/2eKH Prevailing reservoir pres- sure, Le., well pressure after infinite sbutein time pa - Pressure at drainage ‘boundary of flowing well Flowing bottom-hole pros- sare in tho well at, time of shutin be - Increase or decrease in bottomhole pressure at time 8 after shuttingsin Pn) - or opening-up a well ap aP Pressure decrease caused Dy unit rate of flow Pes Pos Pressure drop per unit rate ‘of flow eaused by the skin, dimensionless 8 - ‘The natural (Naperian) log of @ number In) - Nor: All terms in the equations used in this paper are in the system of units aseociated with Darcy's law, and the reader is referred to suitable conversion tables such as shown in reference (6) whenever production data are expressed in a different system ACKNOWLEDGMENT ‘The author is indebted to William Hurst who, while an employee of the Shell Oil Co., was associated with him in the evelopment of much of the work presented in this paper. Hurst, however, has no responsibility for the form and con. tent of this publication. REFERENCES 1. Johnston, N., and Sherborne, J. Fu: “Permeability as Ree lated to Productivity Index,” AP Dril. and Prod. Prac, (1948) 66:81. 2. Miller, C. C., Dyes, A.B. and Hutchinson, C. A., Jr: “The Estimation of Permeability and Reservoir Pressure from Bottom Hole Pressure Build-up Characteristics,” Trans AIME, (1950) 188, 91, 3. Johnston, N., and Van Wingen, N.: “Evaluation of Zonal Damage,” World Oil, (Dec., 1950) 156-164, 4. Muskat, Mur The Flow of Homogencous Fluids Through Porous Media, MeGraw-Hill Book Co, (1937). 5. van Everdingen, A. F., and Hurst, W.: “The Application of the LaPlace Transformation to Flow Problems in Resez- voirs.” Trans. AIME, (1949) 186, 305. 6. Homer, D. Ru: “Pressure Build-up in Wells.” Proc. Third World Petroleum Congress, Section IL, E. J. Bull, Leiden, (2951) 1. Tables of Sine, Cosine and Exponential Integrals, Fede: Works “Agencs, Works Projects Administration. for City of New York, (1940). 8 Cutslaw, H. Sand Jaeger, J. C.: Operational Methods in Applied Mathematics (Second Edition), Oxford University Press, (1947). ee Vol. 198, 1953