‫ اجخرة‬- ‫كلية الطاقة‬

‫قسم الهندسة النفطية‬

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 1

Well testing analysis

Well test analysis is the main method of on-site field-evaluation of well

completion quality in oil and gas wells. The causes and degrees of
formation damage can be evaluated. Well log analysis can also be
used. Well test analysis can directly determine the degree of damage,
using the value of skin factor S and various other formation damage
parameters. This chapter describes these methods of evaluating
formation damage of various types of oil and gas reservoirs and
illustrates them with 10 field cases. Field and laboratory evaluation
methods are compared. Modern well test analysis methods consist of
taking pressure data using a high-accuracy downhole pressure
gauge, analyzing data using the type curve analysis method, and
using advanced well test interpretation software. Data requirements
for such methods are discussed. Graphic analysis is emphasized and
logarithmic and semi logarithmic type curve match methods are
discussed.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 2

BUILD UP PRESSURE TEST ANALYSIS

The use of pressure buildup data has provided the reservoir

engineer with one more useful tool in the determination of
reservoir behavior. Pressure buildup analysis describes the
buildup in wellbore pressure with time after a well has been shut
in. One of the principal objectives of this analysis is to determine
the static reservoir pressure without waiting weeks or months for
the pressure in the entire reservoir to stabilize. Because the
buildup in wellbore pressure will generally follow some definite
trend, it has been possible to extend the pressure buildup
analysis to determine:
 the effective reservoir permeability;
 The extent of permeability damage around the wellbore.
 The presence of faults and to some degree the distance to
the faults;
 Any interference between producing wells.
 The limits of the reservoir where there is not a strong water
drive or where the aquifer in no longer than the hydrocarbon
reservoir.
Certainly all of this information will probably not be available from
any given analysis, and the degree of usefulness of any of this

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 3

information will depend on the experience in the area and the
amount of other information available for correlation purposes.

The general formulas used in analyzing pressure buildup data

come from a solution of the diffusivity equation. In pressure
buildup and drawdown analyses, the following assumptions, as
regards the reservoir, fluid, and flow behavior is usually made:
 Reservoir: homogeneous; isotropic; horizontal of uniform
thickness.
 Fluid: single phase, slightly compressible, constant U0 and
Bo.
 Flow: laminar flow, no gravity effects.
Pressure buildup testing requires shutting in a producing well and
recording the resulting increase in the wellbore pressure as a
function of shut-in time. The most common and simplest analysis

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 4

techniques require that the well produce at a constant rate for a
flowing time of Tp, either from startup or long enough to establish
a stabilized pressure distribution, before shut in. The pressure is
measured immediately before shut in and is recorded as a
function of time during the shut-in period. The resulting pressure
buildup curve is then analyzed to determine reservoir properties
and the wellbore condition.

Stabilizing the well at a constant rate before testing is an

important part of a pressure buildup test. If stabilization is
overlooked or is impossible, standard data analysis techniques
may provide erroneous information about the formation. Two
widely used methods are discussed below; these are:

 The Horner Plot.

 The Miller_Dyes_Hutchinson method.
Pressure buildup tests are conducted by:
Producing an oil or gas well at a constant rate for sufficient
time to establish a stabilized pressure distribution,
Ceasing production by shutting in the well.
Recording the resulting increase in pressure. In most cases,
the well is shut in at the surface and the pressure is recorded
downhole.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 5

DRAWDOWN PRESSURE TEST ANALYSIS
Pressure drawdown tests can be defined as a series of bottom-hole
pressure measurements completed during a period of flow at a
constant producing rate. Many traditional analysis techniques are
derived using the drawdown test as a basis. Generally, the well is
closed in earlier to the flow test period of time because it is necessary
to allow the pressure to become equal throughout the formation.
the well is shut-in until it reaches a constant reservoir pressure before
testing. In a drawdown test, a well, now static, stable, and shut-in, is
open to flow. It is completed by producing the well at a constant flow
rate while continuously recording bottom-hole pressure. When a
constant flow rate is attained, the pressure measuring equipment is
lowered into the well.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 6

It may take a few hours to several days, depending on the objectives
of the test. Drawdown tests are normally recommended for new wells.
If a well has been closed for some reason, a drawdown test may also
be done. It is also recommended for a well where there are
uncertainties in the pressure build-up interpretations. The main
advantage of drawdown testing is the possibility for estimating
reservoir volume.
Pressure drawdown tests are conducted by:
(1) Having an oil or gas well shut in for sufficient time to
establish a stabilized pressure distribution.
(2) Putting the well on production at a constant rate.
(3) recording the resulting decrease in bottom hole pressure

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 7

An ideal time to run a drawdown test is when the well is initially put on
production because in addition to obtaining information on wellbore
conditions and formation permeability, estimates of reservoir volume
can be made also. A long, constant flow rate is required.

Production Logging Tool (PLT)

A Production Logging Tool is any instrument that is used in the

preparation of production logs. These tools are run through wells
that are complete and ready to operate. These tools help in
analyzing the dynamic well performance and also determine the
contribution of each zone (in case of co-mingled stacked sands or
multiple zones) in the total production or injection. They also help
in allocating production of hydrocarbons on zone by zone basis.
Any faults such as leaks or cross flows in the oil or gas producing
wells can be diagnosed by looking at the production logs.

Explains Production Logging Tool (PLT)

Production logging tools are run down the wellbore and record the
behavior and nature of fluids inside the well during production or
injection. Once the logs are prepared, dynamic analysis of well
performance is done at different production zones. The logs are
also used to monitor the results when well stimulation is

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 8

performed. Production Logs are produced for all types of wells
(vertical, deviated or horizontal). The production logging tools
used are modular and can be combined with array of sensors that
logs the production data. These tools provide real-time production
data and generate logs at continuous intervals during the
production. Some of the tools used include:

 Full bore flow meters

 Inline flow meters
 Basket flow meters
 Continuous flow meters

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 9

One of the chief aims of production logging tools is to analyze and
investigate the borehole performances like dynamic or static
situation of a production well, measure the amount of productivity
and injectivity index of zones or layers of a field, monitor the
borehole inefficiencies by interpreting obtained logs, diagnose the
effectiveness of stimulation or completion processes, and
measure the physical condition of a well.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 10

Production logging tools are one of the leading operating services
especially for cased-hole drilling, which entails monitoring the
cement displacement, pipeline corrosion, and contacts. Moreover,
it has been utilized in the setting of the packers, plug equipment,
and perforation procedures. The most exceptional appeal of using
production logging tools is to diagnose the problems which are
caused by production operations such as leakage and occurring
cross flow through the wellbore.

There are many ways and techniques to obtain the measurement

of the formation's fluid viscosity; however, it could be estimated by
spinner flow meter (a rotational blade which will turn when the
reservoir fluid moves through the edges and past it). In ideal
conditions, the rotational speed of the blade in revolutions per
second (RPS) is proportional to the fluid velocity.

Schematic basis of two new production logging tools

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 11

 Various types of production logging tools are listed below:
 Temperature logging
 Radioactive tracer logging
 Noise logging
 Focused gamma ray density logging
 Unfocused gamma ray density logging
 Fluid capacitance logging
 Fluid identification logging in high-angle wells
 Continuous and full-bore spinner flow meters
 Diverting spinner flow meter

Some of the main applications of production logging tools are

determination of well mechanical problems, analysis of the
efficiency of completion processes, observation and monitoring
of the profiles of production and injection scenarios, obtainment
of the reservoir characteristics, and detection of cemented
channels.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 12

Standard Production Logging
Production Logging Tools
During production or injection profiling, a wide range of production
logging tools are used for all type of downhole environments
in vertical, deviated, and horizontal wells. Standard Production
Logging tools are completely modular and combinable with Array

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 13

Production Logging sensors to provide accurate measurements of
flow velocity, gas hold up, fluid velocity and other auxiliary
measurements. These tools are conveyance independent and
can be run in real time with E-line or in Memory Production
Logging (MPL) mode with similar data quality

Flow Velocity Measurements

Continuous flow meters, basket flow meters, full-bore flow meters
and Inline Flow meters

Fluid Identification / Flow Composition Measurements

Gas holdup, capacitance water holdup, radioactive fluid density,
differential pressure density, capacitance array

Flow Condition / Well Diagnostic Tools

Pressure, temperature, X-Y caliper, inclinometer correlation tools
– gamma ray, casing collar locator

Objectives of Production Logging

There are objectives associated with production logging of
which one primary function is to evaluate the flow of fluid both in
the wellbore and outside the pipe. As in most logging applications,
we measure certain physical properties and then use
interpretation techniques to determine reservoir characteristics
and extent of mechanical problems.
Objectives of production logs can be grouped into three broad
classifications:

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 14

– To monitor reservoir performance efficiency throughout the life
of a well.
– To define completion problems which are detrimental to
maximum well Performance?
– To gauge treatment effectiveness by injection/production
profiles.

Applications of Production Logging

There are many applications in both open hole and cased hole
environments. Openhole applications can include locating loss of
circulation zones and underground blowouts. Besides flow
profiling in cased holes, other uses include locating top of cement,
evaluating gravel pack quality, location of perforations,
effectiveness of well treatments, and numerous others.

Formation Damage studies includes:

 Fluid compatibility and critical velocity flood testing
 Fracturing and gravel packing fluid formation damage testing
 Mud damage and removal evaluations
 Matrix acidizing of sandstones and carbonate formations
 Capability to flow brine, oils and methane gas
 Capability to evaluate very low permeability down to 1 micro
Darcy

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 15

  Custom designed equipment and test procedures to meet
customer exact needs

Supporting Formation Damage Services:

 Routine core analysis to establish baseline data
 X-ray diffraction analysis to verify mineralogy
 Scanning electron microscopy
 Thin section analysis and photography
 Acid solubility and ion analysis
Common causes & types of formation damage
The following are some common causes of formation damage;
 Drilling mud solids invasion into the formation.
 Drilling mud filtrate invasion into the formation.
 Cement filtrate invasion into the formation.
 Solids in completion or workover fluids invading into the
formation or plugging perforations.
 Invasion of completion or workover fluids into the formation.
 Plugging of the formation pores with native clays.
 Asphalting or paraffin precipitation in the formation.
 Scale precipitation in the formation.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 16

FORMATION DAMAGE

Definition of damage:

Formation damage can be defined as the reduction of the

original or natural permeability of the reservoir rock near the
wellbore. It can also be defined as any type of a process which
leads to a reduction of the productivity of an oil, water or gas
bearing formation. Formation damage is an undesirable
operational and economic problem that can occur during the
various phases of oil and gas recovery from subsurface reservoirs
including production, drilling, hydraulic fracturing and workover
operations. It has long been recognized as a source of serious
productivity reductions in many oil and gas reservoirs and as a
cause of water injectivity problems in many water flood projects.
Formation damage causes substantial reductions in oil and gas
productivity in many reservoirs. Damage can be caused by
mechanical effects, chemical effects and the action of bacteria or
extreme temperatures associated with thermal recovery
processes (Ezenweichu and Laditan, 2015). Formation damage
reduces the well production or injection capacity and the removal
of damage is one of the major goals of petroleum engineers as
shown in the figure (2.1).

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 17

Figure (2.1): Impact of formation damage on well productivity
(Idrimba, 2006).

Stimulation procedures required to remove formation damage in

oil wells are costly and are often unsuccessful or marginally
successful.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 18

Formation damage can occur at any time during a well’s history
from the initial drilling and completion of a wellbore through
depletion of a reservoir by production. Operations such as drilling,
completion, workovers and stimulations, which expose the
formation to a foreign fluid, may result in formation damage due to
adverse wellbore fluid/formation fluid or wellbore fluid/formation
reactions (Ezenweichu and Laditan, 2015).

2.2. Location formation damage and where occurs:

Damage is described by two important parameters:
composition and location. Composition is important because, to
some extent, it determines the fluid used for dissolution. Location
is important because the treating fluid contacts several other
substrates as shown in the figure (2.2). Rust from tubular goods
or carbonate cementing material from the formation, before it
reaches the damage. Unspent fluids must reach the damaged
rock for the treatment to be effective.
These production impairments can occur anywhere in the
production system, from the wellbore to perforations and into the
formation.
Damage can be anything that obstructs the normal flow of fluids
to the surface, it may be in the formation, perforations, lift system,
tubulars or restrictions along the flow path (Bernard, et.al. n.d.).

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 19

 Figure (2.2): Location of various types of damage (Bernard,
et.al. n.d.).

2.3. Formation damage mechanisms:

There are four categories of formation damage mechanisms:
mechanical, chemical, biological and thermal can be divided into
smaller categories.
2.3.1. Mechanical damage mechanisms:
Caused by a direct, non-chemical, interaction between the
equipment or fluid used and the formation. This result in a
reduction in the permeability of the formation and changes in the
properties of the reservoir fluids during production operations.
2.3.1.1. Fines migration:

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 20

 Formation damage can occur as result of particle migration
in the produced fluid. The particles can bridge across the pore
throats in the near-wellbore region and reduce the well

productivity. When the damaging particles come from the

reservoir rock, they are usually referred to as fines as shown in
the figure (2.3) (Idrimba, 2006).
Figure (2.3): Formation impairment due to fines migration
(Idrimba, 2006).

2.3.1.2. Solids invasion:

When particles from introduced fluids enter and plug a
formation pore as shown in the figure (2.4). Which is accrued by:
a. Invasion and precipitation of mud weighting materials
(barite).

b. Invasion and precipitation of mud viscosities materials

(pentonite).

c. Solids precipitation of (salts, scales).

d. Loss circulation materials (Idrimba, 2006).

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 21

 Figure
(2.4):

Invasion of a permeable formation by drilling mud solid

(Idrimba, 2006).

2.3.1.3. Water blocks:

water blocks occur when connate water or invaded fresh
water are trapped within the pores of low permeability formation-in
excess of 200 md and also in low pressure reservoirs, water
blocks increase the water saturation due to water's high capillary
pressure subsequently the relative permeability of the oil
decreases as shown in the figure (2.5) (Idrimba, 2006).

Figure
(2.5):
Formation impairment due to water block (Idrimba, 2006).

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 22

2.3.1.4. Perforation damage:
When explosions caused by perforation gun charges fracture
rock grains into finer grains as shown in the figure (2.6)
(Faergestad, 2016).

2.3.2. Chemical formation damage:

Chemically induced formation damage can be split into two
major categories:
2.3.2.1. Rock – fluid interaction:
2.3.2.1.1. Clays swelling:
A common chemical damage mechanism is clay swelling,
are hydrated and expand when interacting with fresh or low-
salinity water. This swelling can severely reduce permeability
when clay lines the pore throats of a formation. In formations
where this potential exists, engineers use high-salinity drilling
fluids or add glycols and other chemical inhibitors to keep reactive

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 23

clays from becoming hydrated as shown in the figure (2.7)
(Faergestad, 2016).

2.3.2.1.2. Clay deflocculating:

A clay mineral is a flocculated condition when the particles of
the clay tend to come together to from flocks or lumps, and is in a
deflocculated condition when these flocks or lumps are broken up
or separated. Dispersed particles may plug the pore throats
resulting in the permeability reduction (Faergestad, 2016).
2.3.2.1.3. Formation dissolution:
In situation, water base drilling fluid can result in potential
problems associated with formation de-solution. Potentially
reactive zones would include unstable hydratable shale, clay-rich
zones, halite zones and anhydrite zones. Physical dissolution can
result in problems such as physical wellbore collapse
(Faergestad, 2016).

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 24

2.3.2.2. Fluid-fluid interaction:
Incompatibilities between introduced fluids and native fluids
can lead to the creation of emulsions and sludges that plug
formation pores and impair permeability.
2.3.2.2.1. Inorganic deposits such as scale:
Scale deposits are among the most common and most
troublesome damage problems. Scales are water-soluble
chemicals that precipitate out of solution from either a
temperature or a pressure change or from mixing incompatible
waters. The most common oilfield scales are calcium carbonate
(CaCO3), calcium sulfate (CaSO4) and barium sulfate (BaSO4).
They can be present in the tubing, the perforations or the
formation and can occur in both production and injection wells, as
long as water is present. Scale forms when the solution
equilibrium of the water is upset. Scale deposition is influenced by
anything that upsets the solution equilibrium: pressure drop,
temperature, dissolved gases, flow viscosity, nucleation sites and
metal type. As the fluids move from the reservoir to the surface,
temperature changes can upset the equilibrium. In-situ water,
which is stable under reservoir conditions, may become
supersaturated with an iron when the pressure decreases, which
allows carbon dioxide (CO2) outgassing. The supersaturated
solutions react by precipitating a compound from solution
(Schlumberger, n.d).

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 25

2.3.3. Biological formation damage:
Biological formation damage can occur when bacteria and
nutrients are introduced into the formation. Bacterial
contamination is most associated with water injection operations,
such as fracture stimulations, but may also occur when drilling
with water base fluids. Biological damage mechanisms can be
divided into three main categories: plugging, corrosion and
toxicity. Polymers secreted by bacteria may adsorb to the surface
of pores in the formation and eventually plug them. Some bacteria
induce hydrogen- reduction reactions that can cause corrosion,
pitting and stress cracking of downhole and surface equipment.
Sulfate-reducing bacteria reduce sulfates in formation or injection
water and create hydrogen sulfide [H2S] gas. Biocides or oxygen
scavengers may be added to drilling and hydraulic fracture fluids
to prevent bacterial damage (Faergestad, 2016).
2.3.4. Thermal formation damage:
Thermal damage mechanisms occur in high temperature
operations, such as steam injection and in-situ combustion.
Thermal degradation of oil and rock compounds that contain
sulfate, at temperatures above 390°F, may produce undesired by
products, such as H2S and carbon dioxide CO2. This problem is
more common at temperatures above 480°F (Faergestad, 2016).

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 26

2.4. Sources formation damage during well operations:
2.4.1 Drilling:
The drilling and completion process of a well often influences
the near wellbore area in an unpredictable and unfavorable
manner. Most of the wells, for instance, are drilled overbalanced
which means higher pressure of the drilling mud in the borehole
than in the formation and hence the forming of an internal and
external mud filter cake on the borehole wall. Thus, for instance,
natural fractures which initially could have been highly permeable
can now be plugged due to the fluid losses.
Drilling fluids which migrated into the near wellbore area and
caused reduction of the permeability can be removed
(Schlumberger, n.d.).
2.4.2 Completion and workover:
The various type of damage from completion and workover
fluids are similar to the damage created by drilling fluids. The
fluids that will be formed during the original completion process
and the subsequent process must be carefully selected to make
sure they are compatible, it do not interact with the formation and
these are some of the reasons that reduce the permeability
(Bernard, et.al. n.d.).
1) Incompatibility between the rolling liquid and forming with the
resulting pore connection.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 27

2) Invasion of perforated fluid solids and explosive debris in
formation with the resulting pore conduction.
3) Pressure and pressure to form a hole well near the explosives
during the hole.
When completion or workover operations are conducted on a well
(perforating, gravel packing, etc.), the fluid present in the wellbore
must minimize the impact on the near-wellbore permeability
(Petrowiki, 2015).
2.4.3 Well stimulation:
Well stimulation is probably the most frequent operation
when fluids are pumped into a well. The only applicable to the
pumping of high reactivity fluids such as acid. However, the
remaining effects can be encountered with any fluid that is
pumped into the well, unless proper thought is given to its
selection. The relative permeability to the hydrocarbon phases will
be reduced by this high water saturation. Long “clean up times"
the time required reducing the water saturation the pre-
stimulation value, of months or even longer have been observed
for low permeability formation. The key to avoiding all these
problems is proper selection of the acid (or other fluid) it should
be formulated so they do not occur (Tristar, n.d.).
2.4.4. Perforating:
The process of perforating is critical to well productivity
because the perforation is the only channel of communication

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 28

between the wellbore and the formation. During underbalanced
perforating, the surge flow of fluid into the wellbore should clean
the perforation tunnel of all disaggregated rock and liner debris.
Any remaining debris in the tunnel could plug gravel packs during
production. As the jet penetrates the formation, the material in its
path is thrust to the side, creating a zone of lowered permeability.
The amount of permeability loss depends on the structure,
porosity, and fluid of the formation and the size and design of the
charge (Petrowiki, 2015).
There are three critical requirements to achieving a highly
conductive flow path:
1. Select the optimum perforating equipment (including, but not
limited to, charges) for the completion type.
2. Select the fluids and charge for the best formation interaction
(minimize damage).
3. Use the application method (underbalance and overbalance.)
that provides the best cleanup and flow capacity in the
perforations.
2.4.5. Production:
Production formation damage phenomena that lead to such
reductions in well productivity are (Tristar, n.d.).
1) Initiation of fines movement during initial DST by using
excessive drawdown pressures.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 29

2) Inorganic/organic scaling through abrupt shift in
thermodynamic condition (Ezenweichu and Laditan, 2015).

2.6. Types of damage:

Formation damage is typically categorized as either natural
or induced. Natural damages occur primarily as a result of
producing the reservoir fluid. Induced damages result from an
external operation on the well, such as drilling, well completion,
stimulation treatment or injection operation. In addition, some
induced damages, completion operations or design problems can
also trigger natural damage mechanisms. Natural damages
include fines migration, swelling clays, water-formed scales,

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 30

organic deposits, like paraffins or asphaltenes, and mixed organic
and inorganic deposits. Induced damages include plugging,
caused by entrained particles such as solids or polymers in
injected fluids, wettability changes, caused by injected fluids or
oil-base drilling fluid, emulsions, precipitates or sludges, caused
by acid reactions, bacteria and water blocks as shown in the
figure (2.8) (Schlumberger, n.d.).
Figure (2.8): Flow chart shows the type of damage (Haward,
2017).

2.7. Indicators and effects of formation damage:

If a well is producing at lower rates than expected, the
source of the reduction must be determined before corrective
measures can be attempted. If production engineers determine
that formation damage is responsible for reduced productivity,
several techniques can be used to verify the cause of the
problem. Permeability impairment, skin damage and decrease of
well performance are all indicators of formation damage. Skin
damage a measureable reduction in permeability in the vicinity of
the wellbore can occur for a variety of reasons, for example,
incompatibility of the workover fluid with the native formation
fluids. The incompatibility leads to chemical reactions and scale
deposits precipitate, depending on fluid compositions and
wellbore pressure. Scale precipitation, skin and reduces
permeability near the wellbore and creates what is referred to as

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 31

skin effect. If the skin is not removed by remedial measures, such
as acid stimulation and carbonate stimulation, it will reduce well
productivity (Faergestad, 2016).
2.8. Control and remediation formation damage:
2.8.1. Control formation damage:
1. Ensure adequate formation evaluation.
2. Use of specially design drill- in- fluids or workover and
completion fluids thereby minimizing formation damage.
3. Use of formation heat treatment in the near wellbore region.
4. Use of improved perforation techniques (underbalanced
perforation, removal of crushed zones and other perforating
debris).
5. Optimization flow rate (Slideshare, n.d).
2.8.2. Remediation formation damage:
The ability to produce fluids from a reservoir is strongly
affected by near- wellbore permeability, hence formation damage
may severely reduce productivity. Operators have studied
damage mechanisms and developed methods to control or
prevent them. By doing so, operators can plan and execute
drilling, completion and production operations with optimal
efficiency and economic viability. Methods and technologies to
measure and quantify formation damage will continue to evolve,
the ultimate operator objectives are minimized damage and
maximized productivity.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 32

From what we have seen, it is clear that the damage may
penetrate a significant distance into the formation beyond the
reach of conventional perforation or near well-bore stimulation
treatment (Faergestad, 2016).
Stimulation treatments are designed to increase the well
productivity as shown in the figure (2.9) by:
(i) Reducing or completely removing the formation damage by
a matrix treatment.

(ii) Bypassing the formation damage by creation of a high

permeability channel by a hydraulic fracturing treatment.

WELL TESTING ANALYSIS IBRAHIM YAQUOB MAY 2021 33