Formation Damage

CONTENTS PAGE
INTRODUCTION 2
TYPE OF FORMATION DAMAGE AND WHERE OCCURS 3
THE CAUSES OF FORMATION DAMAGE 4
FORMATION DAMAGE MECHANESIMS 4
DAMAGE IN VERTICAL VERSUS HORIZONTAL 11
WELLS
CONCEPT OF SKIN FACTOR 12
CONSEQUENCES OF IMPAIRMENT 13
FORMATION DAMAGE CONTROL AND 16
REMEDIATION
REFERENCE 21

Introduction
The Oil and Gas Industry drills thousands of wells worldwide each year.
From the reservoir and production engineers, a successful well is one that

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 1/21

Formation Damage
achieves its maximum production potential with no or minimal, formation
damage.
Almost every drilling operation is a potential source of damage to well
productivity.

What is formation damage?

Formation damage is defined as any process, which would cause a
reduction in the productivity. Two phenomena can change the permeability
of the rock. One is change of porosity. This phenomenon is due to swelling
of clay minerals or deposition of solids in the pore body. The other is
plugging of pore throats. The narrow passages govern the ease the fluid
flow through porous media. If they are blocked, the permeability of porous
rock will be low even through the pore space remains large.

Regardless of the reservoir size and production potential, formation damage

in the wellbore vicinity will introduce a barrier to flow.

(Impact of formation damage on well productivity)

During exploration, appraisal and throughout its productive life, formation

damage can severely impact the economics of a field development (e.g., the
scenario in next figure where drawdown cannot be sufficiently increased).

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 2/21

 Formation Damage

(Cash flow diagram illustrating effect of formation damage)

Type of Formation Damage and Where Occurs:

Table A -Type and where damage occurs
Type of damage Formation Formation Gravel Perforation
Fracture Matrix
Asphaltene √ √ √ √
precipitation
Bacteria plugging √ √ √ √

Clays swelling √ √ √ √
Emulsion blocks √ √ √ √

Scale precipitation √ √ √ √

Sludge blocks √ √ √ √

Solid plugging √ √ √ √
Water block √ √
Rock wettability change √ √

The Causes of the Formation Damage:

Table B - causes of formation damage

Acid Completion Drilling Fracture Injection Production Work- over
Treatments Operations Operations Treatment Operation
Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 3/21
 Formation Damage
Asphaltene √
precipitation
Bacteria √
plugging
Clays √ √ √ √ √ √
swelling
Emulsion √ √ √ √
blocks
Scale √ √ √
precipitation
Sludge blocks √ √

Solid √ √ √ √ √ √ √
plugging
Water block √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Rock √ √ √ √
wettability
change

Formation Damage Mechanisms:

1. Mechanically Induced Formation Damage.

2. Chemically Induced Formation Damage.
3. Biologically Induced Formation Damage.

1. Mechanically Induced Formation Damage.

1.1. Fines Migrations

The movement of the fines or silica particles from initial position in the
pore space by drag forces (function of velocity of flow) when become
greater than binding forces.
However, in some situation, fines migration can also occur in
carbonates by the migration of crystalline dolomite, limestone fines.
Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 4/21
Formation Damage
It is to be emphasized here that fines migration is also related to
Wettability. In general, fines tend to migrate fairly exclusively in the
phase, which wets the rock. For example, if the formation is water wet,
then gas or oil could be produced through the formation at relatively
high rate and there would be no significant physical propensity for fines
migrations as the fines are encapsulated in the static and immobile
connate water phase. Fines migration would only occur when the
wetting phase saturation become high enough (water breakthrough,
water conning, invasion of water base drilling, completion or
stimulation fluid into the formation and subsequent drawdown of the
formation to produce it).

Now if the formation is oil wet the propensity for fines migration exists
immediately upon perforation when the wetting oil phase begins to
flow. Also, turbulence induced by the simultaneous multiphase flow of
both the wetting and non-wetting phase can significantly increases the
severity of fines mobilization in some circumstances.
Fines migrations can cause block the pore throat and decrease the
permeability.

(Formation impairment due to fines migration)

1.2. Solids Invasion

Solids present in drilling and well completion fluids include one or
more of the following:
 Drilling solids (cutting).
 Weighting materials (barite).
 Viscosifiers (bentonite).
 Fluid loss additives (calcium carbonate).
 Loss circulation materials (of varying size and composition).
Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 5/21
Formation Damage
 Solid precipitation (salts, scales).
 Bacteria.
 Perforation debris.

Next figure shows a schematic of the invasion of a permeable formation

by drilling mud solids. Particles, whose sizes are an order of magnitude
greater than the formation pore throat opening, cannot invade the
formation and are usually removed by the action of the circulating
fluid. Very small particles may invade into the formation. Particles with
optimum sizes bridge at exposed pore throats.
After initial bridging, smaller particles then get trapped to form an
external filter cake. The permeability of the cake formed thereafter
controls the amount of filter that invades the formation.

(Invasion of a permeable formation by drilling mud solids)

The degree and depth of solids invasion is governed by:

1. Formation pore throat size and distribution.
2. Particle size distribution of mud solids.
3. Amount of pressure overbalance (increased overbalance or surge
pressures yield increased invasion).

1.3. Water Block

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 6/21
Formation Damage
Water invasion into low permeability rock will be assisted by the strong
capillary forces associated with the small pore throat dimensions. This
phenomenon is called water block. It occurs most frequently during
hydraulic fracturing of poor quality rocks and in low pressure
reservoir. Water blocking decreases the absolute permeability (K).

(Formation impairment due to water block)

2. Chemically Induced Formation Damage.

Chemically Induced Formation Damage can be split into three
major categories:

2.1 Rock – Fluid incompatibilities

a. Clay Swelling

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 7/21

Formation Damage
Clay can swell when contacted by water which filtrates from
drilling and completion fluid.
Swelling of clay can significantly reduce absolute permeability.

(Formation impairment due to clay swelling)

b) Clay deflocculation:

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.

c). 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.

d) Chemical adsorption:

Almost all drilling fluid contains a variety of chemical additives to

improve fluid performance. If the molecular size of the material is
sufficiently large, the physical adsorption of these compounds can
occlude a significant portion of the available pore space available to
flow and cause a resulting reduction in permeability.

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 8/21

Formation Damage

2.2 Fluid-Fluid incompatibilities

a. Organic scaling
Organic scaling of aspartames and waxes is caused by:
 Changes in pressure and temperature.
 Contact with certain light hydrocarbon liquid

Asphaltene will flocculate in crude oil and subsequently precipitate

if contacted with high and/or low PH (water based) drilling and
completion fluids, or (oil based) fluids containing diesel and other
light hydrocarbons.
Waxes precipitate if the temperature drops below their
crystallization point.
Scaling results in a reduction absolute permeability and
hydrocarbon mobility.

b. Inorganic scaling
Most formation waters contain bicarbonate and carbonate ions,
initially at insitu reservoir conditions (particularly for reservoir
systems rich in CO2 gas). Extraneous fluids containing Ca2+ ions
that contact bicarbonate rich water will cause calcium carbonate
scale to form.

A decrease in pressure, either during production or across

perforations, will cause a subsequent decrease in CO2 partial
pressure also leading to calcium carbonate scale formation. In
reservoirs containing saturated formation brine, pressure
differences change the solubility of inorganic salts causing
precipitation in the near wellbore region.

c. Emulsion blocks:

Emulsions are the result of adverse interactions of drilling and

completion fluid with hydrocarbons.

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 9/21

Formation Damage

.
(Formation impairment due to water-in-oil emulsion)

Emulsion block formation is governed by:

 Incompatible drilling and completion fluid filtrates.
 Entrained solids (drilling solids and fines).
 Water with high salinity and PH.
 The type and concentration of surfactant in oil based fluids.
 High shear rates across the perforated interval.

Note: that high shear rates are necessary to from emulsions.

2.3. Wettability alterations caused by invading fluids

Most drilling fluids contain a variety of chemical additives such as

surface active additives to improve mud performance and
characteristics. In some cases, these additives exhibit a high propensity
for physical adsorption on the walls of the pore throats. This adsorbed
layer reduces the effective pore throat leading to number of undesirable
phenomena such as permeability reduction and wettability alterations
due to the surfactant adsorption.

3. Biologically Induced Formation Damage

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 10/21

Formation Damage
Biologically Induced Formation Damage in an often overlooked mechanism.
In many situations, permeability reductions are of delayed onset rather than
of immediate consequence.
It can be caused by a number of different operative mechanisms caused by
the introduction, growth and propagation of a variety of bacterial agents
within the porous medium. Bacteria agents active in porous media generally
fall into two families:
 Aerobic bacteria, which require a continuous source of dissolved
oxygen to survive and propagate in the rock.
 Anaerobic bacteria, which do not require a continuous source of
dissolved oxygen.

Damage in Vertical versus Horizontal Wells

The productivity of the horizontal wells is potentially much high than of

vertical wells. Unfortunately, the impact of formation damage is more severe
in horizontal than in vertical wells.
Horizontal wells are more susceptible to damage than vertical wells for the
following reasons:

 Longer duration or drill-in-time leads to prolonged exposure of

formation to drilling fluids.
 Typically open hole completions are used, i.e., no bypassing of
damage by perforations or fractures.
 Greater risk of shale exposure affecting completions quality.
 Poorer hole cleaning leading to cutting beds restricting inflow.

Not only are horizontal wells more readily damage than conventional wells,
but clean up are more difficult and they offer limited post-drilling
stimulation opportunities.

Formation Damage and the Concept of Skin Factor

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 11/21
Formation Damage

The severity of formation damage is often expressed in terms of a parameter

called the damage skin factor, is a term used to account for the additional
pressure drop resulting from the resistance to flow caused by damage.

Next figure shows pressure profiles that correspond to damaged and

undamaged wells. They are presented as functions of radial distance from
the wellbore axis; pressure drop increase near the wellbore due to radial
flow. The additional pressure drop created by damaged zone is also
illustrated in figure.

(Pressure profile of damaged and undamaged vertical well)

Consequences of Impairment
Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 12/21
Formation Damage

1. Reduced or No Production
The impact of formation damage on the flow efficiency and production rate
is quantified in next figure, from the diagram we can see that with moderate
damage (skin factor=1), the well produces at 88 percent of the initial
undamaged capacity. For severe damage (skin=20), the well produces only
25 percent of its undamaged capacity.

(Flow efficiency (qd/q) versus skin)

2. Deferred Production (Delay on Investment Pay Out)

Depending on reservoir characteristics, formation damage can cause
production to fall off plateau rate early, resulting in reduced production in
the early years of field life. In most cases, this deferred production,
combined with the additional capital and operating expenses associated
with aging equipment, make the field economics less attractive, since
platforms and facilities are designed based on plateau rates.

Figure's A and B show the production rates and Net Present Value (NPV)
respectively for undamaged and damage wells versus time. Production,
deferred until later years, has less NPV than production achieved earlier in

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 13/21

Formation Damage
field life. Consequently, deferred production due to formation damage
decrease return on investment.

(Production rate illustrating deferred production and net present

value versus time for damaged and undamaged wells)

3. Early Installation of Secondary Recovery Methods

The fall in flowing BHP due to the extra pressure drop across the damage
zone may incur extra costs due to the need for early installation of
secondary recovery methods such as:

 Gas lift
 Beam pumps
 ESPs

4. Rapid Production Decline

All wells exhibit production decline as reservoir pressure decrease.
However, formation damage, particularly from inorganic scales and fines
can lead to accelerated production decline. For example, a well damaged
during drilling and completion would start at a lower initial rate than an
undamaged well and decline more rapidly.

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 14/21

Formation Damage
5. Remedial Stimulation and Workover Programmes
Well stimulation programmes significantly increase both capital and
operating costs. Formation damage prevention is always preferable to
damage remediation or bypass, as it is generally less expensive and more
importantly, less risky; stimulation and workover interventions are not
always successful and in some cases can result in further damage.

6. Cost of Additional Wells to Drain Equivalent Production

Low production from damage wells necessitation the drilling of additional
wells to drain the same reserves. NPV of deferred production (including the
costs of drill additional wells) is illustrated in next figure

(Net present value of deferred production (including costs to drill

additional wells) for damaged and undamaged reservoir

7. Formation Damage in Open Hole Completions

The consequences for open hole completions are the some as indicated for
conventionally completed wells, but are more severe. The difficulty in
selectively and accurately placing stimulation fluid in these wells, and in
particular horizontal wells, results in ineffective mitigation of damage, This
result in wells which produce far below their potential.

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 15/21

Formation Damage
Formation Damage Control and Remediation

Formation Damage Control Strategies:

In this section we will learn that formation damage can often be minimized
by proper well planning, following by use of optimum operation procedures
including selection of (1) non-damaging drilling and completion fluids, (2)
optimum drilling and completion practices, (3) desirable well site controls
and activities including underbalanced operations.

1. Understand the reservoir

A full understanding of the reservoir system depends on availability of
representative core samples and knowledge of reservoir geology. Based
on this knowledge drilling and completion requirements can be
established. In an exploration well the luxury of core samples is not
available; under these circumstances good practices for similar reservoir
types should be adopted.

2. Planning
Elements of the planning process for formation damage control include:

2.1 Select Optimum Cost-Effective and Non-Damaging Drilling and

Completion Fluids

Reservoir conditions core flood tests should be used to identify least
damaging drilling and completion fluids.

Fluids used in the wellbore should be compatible with the formation,
e.g. to prevent scaling.

Fluids based on divalent cations, e.g. Ca2+ have a greater potential to
form scale than fluids based on monovalent cations, e.g. K+

For open hole completion, filter cakes should be thin, resilient and
removable.

Particle size distribution (PSD) of drilling fluid solids should be
optimized to minimize solids invasion. Note that although the PSD will
change as soon as cuttings are generated and the fluid is recycled,
sufficient volume of correctly sized solids should prevent invasion.

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 16/21

Formation Damage


Fluid should be as simple as possible, containing least number of
additives. The more additives, the greater the change that one of them
will be incompatible with one of the elements of the system.

Additives should be selected with clear purpose, i.e., they should be
used for prevention of damage or be used so that remediation, e.g., by
acid digestion, is possible.

2.2Optimize Drilling Practices


Optimize overbalance. i.e., reduce the overbalance to the minimum
operationally acceptable.

Optimize hydraulics for the least aggressive annular velocities whilst
ensuring good hole cleaning. Lower annular velocities decrease the
filter cake erosion rate and hence decrease fluid loss rate.

Fluid used above the reservoir section will contain elements that may
be detrimental to the reservoir section; hence, changing the fluid prior
to entering the reservoir section is recommended-note that the cost of
changing fluid is minor compared to the potential loss of productivity
due to damage.

Nozzle Section: Nozzles should be selected to keep jet velocities at the
minimum required for chip removal.

Bit Type Selection: bit selection should be based on the compromise
between ROP and fines generation in the formation of interest.
Generally, diamond bits generate finer cuttings than Roller Cone and
PDC bits. To limit open-hole time, bits should be selected to drill the
reservoir section with the least number of bit runs. The cost of changing
the bit before entering the reservoir is minimal compared to the
potential production that could be lost.

2.3 Optimize Completion practices


Mud cake clean-up in horizontal wells

Perforation

Filtering

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 17/21

Formation Damage

3. Wellsite Controls
3.1 Quality Control Fluids

Ensure fluids meet specification; do not change from well plan.

Ensure tanks and entire circulating systems are cleaned before
changing fluids.

3.2 Good Operational Practices


Pre-hydrate bentonite and polymers for recommended time to prevent
subsequent swelling in reservoir.

Use clean drill pipe and remove scale and preservation coating from
used pipe; ensure internal coatings are intact.

4. Underbalanced Operations
Post drilling activities such as fracturing and acidizing to by-pass or
remove drilling and completion related damage, can by costly and are
not always fully effective. In addition, some wells experience long delays
before optimum production levels are achieved because fluid lost to the
formation, during operations, has to be produced back.
A means of avoiding these problems is to carry out all operations in the
reservoir underbalanced. The term underbalanced operations is used to
describe the situation when the pressure exerted by the drilling fluid is
intentionally designed to be lower than the reservoir pressure. It can be
artificially induced by introducing gas to the fluid stream, or, in
extremely depleted reservoir, by using gas or foam as the drilling
medium. The desired result is to eliminate reservoir impairment by
stopping invasion of the drilling solids

Underbalanced Drilling Benefits

 Minimized or eliminated formation damage.
 Increase rate of penetration.
 Minimized lost circulation problem.
 Reduced or eliminated stimulation costs.
 Simplified completions.
 Faster return on investment through incremental increased
hydrocarbon production.
 Increase reserve & ultimate recovery.

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 18/21

 Formation Damage

Formation Damage Remediation:

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.

Damage source Damage type Matrix treatment methods

Matrix acidizing
Damage source Wettability change

Solvent dissolution
Filtrates from drilling,
completion, workover,
and stimulation Emulsion Matrix acidizing

Mechanical removal

Inhibtors
Inorganic scales

Matrix acidizing

Water block Solvent dissolution

Matrix acidizing
Fines migration
Production
Matrix acidizing
Clay migration /swelling

Solvent dissolution
Paraffin/asphaltenes
precipitation Thermal removal

Mechanical removal
Solids from drilling,
completion, and Solids plugging
Matrix acidizing
stimulation

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 19/21

Formation Damage
(Flow chart for selecting a matrix treatment method)

Table C –fluids used in matrix treatments

Fluid type Specific fluid Damage that fluid Remarks
can remove
Scale, solid Used in carbonates
HCL plugging, water and sandstones
block
Scale, solid Same as HCL and
Acetic acid plugging, water high temperature
block
Scale, solid Same as HCL and
Acids Formic acid plugging, water high temperature
block
Sandstones (with
HF Clays, Scale, solid HCL or organic
plugging, water acids) used in
block cleanup drilling mud
damage
Clays, Scale, solid Possibly deep
In-situ generated HF plugging, water penetration.
acid block Sandstone only

Used with other

Water block, additives such as
Mutual solvent emulsion, wettability surfactant to
change improve
Solvents hydrocarbon relative
permeability
Used with a
Aromatic solvent Asphaltene, sludge suspending agent or
remove asphalt
deposit

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 20/21

Formation Damage

Reference
 MPC2004
 SPE29531
 Understanding formation damage and control strategies

Petroleum Seminar/Spring 2006 page 21/21