APPROPRIATE SKIN FACTOR FOR

OPTIMAL WELL PRODUCTIVITY

By
WILLIAMS ACHESE
DE.2008/1223

INTRODUCTION
The formation can be damaged during drilling, casing and cementing,
completion, well servicing, well stimulation and production operations.
The skin due to damage can be defined as the additional pressure drop in
the near wellbore area that results from the drilling, completion and
production practices used (Van Everdingen, 1953).
Formation Damage can be defined as any near wellbore alteration that
affects permeability due to well operations (Byrne et al, 2007).

INSTRUCTIONAL OBJECTIVES
1.

List causes of damage skin

2.

Calculate skin from pressure drop

3. Calculate flow efficiency from skin

4. Calculate skin factor and wellbore radius

5. To analyze the reservoir using build-up curve, to illustrate on

the improved wellbore productivity by effect of skin before
and after reperforating

6. Conclution

Damage Caused by
Injection

Damage Caused by
Drilling Fluid

Mud filtrate
invasion

Damage Caused by
Production

p < p b p > pb

dirty
water

incompatible
water

Reservoir Model of Skin Effect

Altered
zone

Bulk
formation

ka
h
rw
ra

Reservoir Pressure Profile

Pressure, psi

2000

1500

1000

Dps

500
1

10

100

1000

Distance from center of wellbore, ft

Skin and Pressure Drop

141.2qB
Dp s
s
kh

10000

Skin and Pressure Drop

s

0.00708 k h
Dp s
qB

Skin Factor and

Properties
of the Altered Zone
k

ra

1
ln
r
k

w
a

Effective Wellbore Radius

rwa
s ln
r
w

rwa rw e s

Flow Efficiency

Jactual p p wf Dps
Ef

Jideal
p p wf
Productivity Index

q
J
p p wf

ANALYSIS OF A BUILD-UP CURVE

In a buildup test, a well which is already flowing (ideally at
constant rate) is shut in and the downhole pressure measured
as the pressure builds up. Ever since van Everdingen and Hurst
(1953) introduced the concept of a skin factor, the primary

focus of research has been on evaluation and minimization of

formation impairment.
The skin effect and its influence on the productive capacitive of
a well is illustrated more efficiently in well before and after
perforation as illustrated in the table 1

Reperforating Job
Before

After

Perforated interval

6258-70ft

6258-70ft

h, producing interval

548cm

548cm

Cumulative production

3956 B/D

5500 B/D

Production rate

96 B/D

60 B/D

Production time

41.21 days

91.67 days

t, production time

3561000 sec

7920000 sec

Shrinkage factor

0.795

0.795

q at reservoir conditions

222 cc/sec

139 cc/sec

Pressure increase per cycle

6 psi

4 psi

pr , flowing pressure

2060 psi

2502 psi

, viscosity

0.65 cp

0.65 cp

, porosity

0.219

0.219

c, fluid compressibility

0.00017/atm

0.00017/atm

rw, well raduis

6.3 cm

6.3 cm

PRESSURE BUILD-UP TEST BEFORE REPERFORATION

PRESSURE BUILD-UP TEST BEFORE REPERFORATION

TABLE 2 RESERVOIR PRESSURE GOTTEN FROM THE BUILDUP

CURVE INTERPRETATION
Before Reperforation

After Reperforation

Reservoir pressure, PR

2554 psi

2554 psi

Pressure drop, PR Pf

494 psi

52 psi

Pressure drop due to skin, ps

441 psi

16 psi

Skin, s

84.8

4.6

Permeability, k

118 md

111md

Effective well bore radius, rwa

9.35 x 10-37 cm

6.33 x 10-2 cm

Production Index

0.194B/D-psi

1.154B/D-psi

Flow Efficiency

0.107

0.692

The result show that the first perforation job was not efficient and
that the reperforation essentially removed a large resistance which
existed near the well bore

CONCLUSION
It is always possible to reduce the damage skin in the vicinity of a well by
stimulation techniques such as fracturing, so both damage and
improvement can occur. The appropriate skin factor for optimal well
productivity can be achieved and control during well testing. In the
reperforation of the well as describe in this paper. After reperforation the
resulting skin factor is lesser when compared after reperforation.

THANK YOU