An Advanced Method for Predicting the Productivity Ratio of a Perforated Well
Stanley Locke, SchlumbergerDoll Research
Summary
This study extends and, in most details, corroborates the work of previous investigators in the area of relating productivity ratios to perforations. A more refined model, called the finiteelement method, permits a significant advance in the precision of the general solution. The principal findings of this study include (1) corroboration of previous conclusions that perforator penetration is substantially more important than perforation diameter, within practical ranges of values, (2) confirmation that productivity continues to increase with increasing shot density, and (3) an analysis of the effect of angular phasing of successive shots, which, for the first time, compares the phasings used in real per forating guns. This analysis confirms earlier findings that 90° phasing is the best of those tested (0, 90, 120, and 180°) but produces more meaningful quan titative comparisons than were available before.
Introduction
An advanced mathematical modeling technique brings new light to the problem of predicting the performance of perforations under actual producing conditions. The principal contributions of this study over previous work arise from the use of a model that more nearly approaches the characteristics of a real perforation. For the first time, a threedimensional flow study takes into account the crushed zone around the perforation as well as a damaged zone around the wellbOle. Moreover, this study considers the perforation a true cylinder rather than one of the mathematically simpler radial configurations used in most previous studies. As in earlier studies, the flow problem is solved for various angular phasings of adjoining perforations:
0,90, 120, and 180°.
01492136/81/00128804$00.25
Copyright 1981 SOCiety of Petroleum Engineers of AIMf:.
DECEMBER 1981
The more significant results of this analysis include strong corroboration of the previous findings that (1) within realistic ranges, the length of a perforation is considerably more critical to productivity than its diameter, (2) of the four angular phasings studied, 90° phasing is best, and (3) that under all conditions, productivity continues to increase with increasing shot density up to at least a level of eight shots per foot (26 shots per meter). In addition, a new nomograph is presented for estimating the productivity ratio* of downhole perforations. A general solution of the flowprediction problem requires knowledge of or assumption about many parameters, some of which are not determined readily. Although this study offers no new techniques for evaluating these variables, it focuses attention on areas that are in most urgent need of further in vestigation. Such studies are encouraged strongly.
The Problem
Effective planning of the perforating program has come to be recognized as a crucial factor in the full term economic success of any well. Planning for the general case always has been impeded by the limitations of existing mathematical modeling studies, which have not succeeded in providing reliable predictions of productivity ratios. Such planning, therefore, has had to fall back· on ex perience, which is often lacking or of limited ap plicability. Much work is needed to further the industry's ability to plan optimal well completions under a wide range of conditions. This study provides a new basis on which this work can be built.
Background
The
first
studies
of flow
into
perforations
used
'Productivity ratio is equal to the production flow of a perforated interval divided by the open hole production potential of the same interval.
2481
0
;:
II:
'"
>
:;;
;:
<.>
~
0
0
II:
1.2
LOCKE
0.8
90·
4
No
No
Pha'in;
Sholl I Foot
Cr.,hed
Oama;ed
Zone
Zone
0.7
o
3
6
_{9}
12
15
Fig. 1  Productivity ratio vs. perforation length.
electrolytic tanks. 1,2 This approach takes advantage of the formal identity between the equation for an electric field and those for the flow of fluid in a porous medium. The first mathematical analysis was made by Harris, ^{3} using the finite difference method to solve the potential equation. For simplicity, he used a pie shaped perforation model. Two sides lay in planes through the cylindrical axis, and the other two planes were perpendicular to the axis.
used a similar model to extend
Harris' results to 180 ^{0} phasing and to include the
effects of drilling damage around the borehole. Ninetydegree phasing was approximated by multiple
perforations in the same plane. Klotz et al.
applied the finiteelement method to this problem, enabling them to calculate the effect of a crushed zone around the perforation. They used a two dimensional model defined by parabolic coordinates, whose axes of symmetry coincided with the per foration axes. As a result, their model drains a paraboloidal section of formation. Fig. 1 compares the results of Harris, Hong, and Klotz et al. with those of this study. Note that replacing the actual spiral phasing by multiple perforations in a single plane results in a configuration more restrictive to flow as perforations get deeper. Hence, this study predicts increasingly greater flow rates than the earlier ones did. Table 1 compares the perforation models used by various investigators. Each of these earlier works suffered from simplifying assumptions necessitated by the limitations in computer techniques used. Some of the results of these earlier
first
Later,
Hong
4
5
computations were not altered seriously by these assumptions, but in other cases the limitations resulted in misleading conclusions about the relative effects of the various perforating parameters on productivity ratio.
Objectives
In overview, the purpose of this study was to improve the industry's ability to predict the productivity ratios of real wells. It was proposed to do this by eliminating certain simplifying departures from the
geometry of well perforations and by the use of a denser grid for the spatial model. Specifically, previous threedimensional studies (1) modeled pieshaped perforations that diverged as they receded from the borehole axis and (2) neglected the crushed zone around the perforation. Klotz et al. ^{5} took the crushed zone into account but confined their calculations to a rotationally symmetrical flow field. The model used for the work reported here in cludes cylindrical perforations surrounded by a crushed zone of realistically reduced permeability. Questions addressed by this study include the following. How important is depth of penetration? How important is perforation diameter? What is the effect of shot density? What is the effect of varying angular phasing between shots? What is the influence of the crushed zone surrounding the perforation? How detrimental is drilling damage?
Method
In essence, the work described here presents a more precise model of a perforated zone's geometry than has been used before. Once the model was con
structed, individual parameters were varied as needed to obtain flow data under a realistic range of con ditions. From these data, the conclusions in the text were drawn, and a nomograph was constructed to allow graphical solutions for productivity ratio (Fig. 2). Note that productivity ratios significantly greater than unity are possible on the nomograph. This is by no means contradictory; productivity ratios refer to openhole flow, which can be improved significantly under many conditions by good perforations. The relative positioning of the perforations is shown in Fig. 3. Though casing and cement are allowed to be present, their presence is ignored by this study. Borehole size, damagedzone thickness, and perforation length are measured from the in terface between cement and formati.on. The model's limiting dimension was set at 30 times the borehole radius, which is far enough out for a radial flow pattern to exist at the far boundary. Thus
TABLE 1  COMPARISON OF PERFORATION MODELS
2482
_{P}_{e}_{r}_{f}_{o}_{r}_{a}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{n}
_{D}_{a}_{m}_{a}_{g}_{e}_{d}
_{C}_{r}_{u}_{s}_{h}_{e}_{d}
Shape 
_{Z}_{o}_{n}_{e} 
_{Z}_{o}_{n}_{e} 

Harris 
pieshaped 
no 
no 
_{H}_{o}_{n}_{g} 
_{p}_{i}_{e}_{}_{s}_{h}_{a}_{p}_{e}_{d} 
_{y}_{e}_{s} 
_{n}_{o} 
Klotz 
cylinder 
yes 
yes 
et at. 

Locke 
cylinder 
_{y}_{e}_{s} 
_{y}_{e}_{s} 
Angular Phase
_{0}_{°}
yes
_{y}_{e}_{s}
_{1}_{8}_{0} ^{0}
_{9}_{0}_{°}
_{1}_{2}_{0} ^{0}
multiple perforations in same plane
multiple perforations in same plane
_{y}_{e}_{s}
parabolic drainage volume substituted for actual geometry
_{y}_{e}_{s}
_{y}_{e}_{s}
_{y}_{e}_{s}
_{y}_{e}_{s}
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
Fig. 2  Nomograph for productivity ratio.
r 0 = 30 r i' where r 0 and r i are the outer and inner boundary radii. Given the productivity ratio R for r olri = 30, the skin factor s is defined following Harris as
In (:~)
R=
I
In (:0)+s
•
All produdtivity ratios shown are referred to a 40 acre' (162 x 10 ^{3} m ^{2} _{)} well spacing. The model used in this study assumes a borehole diameter (measured across the cement/formation boundary) of 6 in. (152.4 mm). A correction for a 12in. (305mm) borehole with 160acre (648 x 10 ^{3} m ^{2} ) spacing is included on the nomograph in Fig. 2. However, the nomograph has been found to give coherent results in other borehole sizes without correction. A more detailed description of the model is found in the Appendix.
Discussion of Results
Perforation Length The result of varying perforation length is shown in Fig. 4. Whereas previous studies suggest that
DECEMBER 1981
Perforation
Spacing
(Dependent on Shot Density)
bDamaged
Zone Dlam.t.r
k=:ltopen 
Hole 
Diamet.r 
.p. Pha 
Angle 
Zone
Diameter
n~~",,=::~iperforation
Diameter
Perforation
Length
Fig. 3  Perforation geometry.
productivity ratio R reaches a maximum plateau at about 12 in. (305 mm) of perforation depth, these results show that the trend is toward continuing improvement in productivity with deeper per forations. This conclusion becomes even more significant when damagedzone and crushedzone effects are incorporated. Obviously, it is downhole (actual) perforation length, not the results of surface tests, that governs
2483
o
j:
C[
a:
~
:;;
j:
U
:::l
:5
a:
IL
I.!
1.2
1.1
1.0
0.9
O.B
,JIS::I:I=B O.7'O~!3"6~:!9"I:I=i!
Phaslnv
90·
1.1
12" Perf.
O· PhaSing
4
No Damag.d Zone 0.5 Crush.d Zon. Thickn
Length
P.rfs.lFoot
Open Hole
 
  

       ,      
_1.0
 0.4
0.2
_0.1

o 0.25
0.5
PERFORATION
LENGTH
(inch.,1
Fig. 4  Productivity ratio vs. perforation length.
PERFORATION DIAMETER
(inch
)
Fig. 5  Productivity ratio vs. perforation diameter.
the productivity ratio in a well. Ref. 6 allows estimation of the downhole performance of a given charge under varying well conditions in certain types of reservoir rocks. More work is needed to extend the applicability of this method.
Phasing The angular phasing between successive perforations is an important parameter. This study, in which all perforations are assumed to have the same length, shows 90° phasing to be best in the general case (Fig. 4). This is true under the conditions of the study, one of which stipulates that all perforations extend the same distance into the formation. Moreover, this condition often is approximated in real life, when casing guns are used in the com pletion. However, in throughtubing completions, gun diameters are routinely much smaller than the casing ID. To achieve good, uniform penetration, these guns must be positioned facing the casing wall and fired at 0° phasing. Shot phasings of 90° would result in varying perforation lengths.
Perforation Diameter Fig. 5 shows the influence of varying perforation diameter with varying crushedzone kc/ku con ditions. kc and ku are, respectively, the per meabilities of the crushed zone and the virgin for mation. This figure suggests that increases in per foration diameter above 0.25 in. (6.35 mm) can be expected to yield only marginal improvement in productivity. The plots in Fig. 5 represent Poiseuille flow. In highflow wells, the flow becomes "turbulent"; Fig. 6 gives a more representative picture. It shows that
2484
only 1 psi (6.9 kPa) is required to push 100 BID (159
/d) through a 12in. (305mm) long, %in. (9.5 mm) diameter perforation. An engineer, with a good idea of how much flow he expects, can use this figure to estimate the required perforation diameter. However, these are high flow rates. It would be an exceptional case where, among practical perforators, it became worthwhile to trade perforation length for diameter.
Shot Density Fig. 7 shows the productivity ratio for various shot densitIes. The densities shown are 1, 2, 4, and 8 shots per foot (3, 6, 13, and 26 shots per meter). As can be seen, the productivity ratio increases as some func tion of shot density. It is significant that this plot is based on a shot phasing of 0°. The increase in productivity with shot density is greater at other phasings because of interference effects at high shot densities with zero phasing. The use of very high shot densities raises the question of weakening the casing by excessive per foration. Ref. 7 provides needed guidance in this area. CrushedZone Effect Perforating produces a zone of grain damage around the perforation in which permeability may be reduced substantially below that of the virgin rock. ^{8} The concept of wellflow efficiency (WFE) has been advanced to provide a means of dealing with this phenomenon: WFE is defined as the ratio of the flow from a real perforateei completion to that from an ideal perforated completion of the same geometry. WFE could be approximated by surface testing a given perforator type, if the relationship between
m
3
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
~
10
.1
Q'IOO bbl/day
(ji.
z
a
~ .010
a:
a Q·IO bbl/day
FANNING EQUATION
I1p.( 
Q.)2 
8fPL 
.". 
d 5 
f·0.85
p FOR OIL OF SPECIFIC
L 
d'
GRAVITY
PERFORATION
LENGTH .12'
PERFORATION
DIAMETER (in)
0.85
.001
Q=I bbl/day
.0001 0
0.125
0.250
PERFORATION
0.375
0.500
DIAMETER (inch
0.625
)
Fig. 6  Fanning equation.
surface test and downhole performance were known. Computations such as are presented in Fig. 8 would permit determination of the permeability reduction factor kef k u for the crushed zone. This figure represents zero phasing, but the values are not changed greatly at other phasings.
a value of
approximately 0.2, which is to say that the crushed zone can be a very serious impediment to produc tivity. Further work definitely is needed toward evaluating this effect under downhole conditions. Fig. 9 shows just how severely the productivity ratio can be affected.
DamagedZone Effect A zone of reduced permeability around the borehole commonly is produced by drilling pressure and chemical action. The thickness and severity of this damaged zone are major determinants of producibility. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to determine what these values are. Production tests, by either wireline or drillstem tools, offer a means of estimating the flowrestricting effect of this altered zone, but better information about its thickness and makeup is needed. Perforations that penetrate this damaged zone and extend into the virgin formation will improve producibility greatly. Fig. 10 shows productivity ratio vs. damagedzone thickness for a 9in. (229 mm) perforation, with conditions as shown. The sharp break, where damagedzone thickness passes
Surface tests suggest that kef ku
has
DECEMBER 1981
o
~
<l
II::
I.
1.1
1.0
>
^{~}
:;;
i=
u
~
a
~ 0.8
0.9
0.7
0.6
0". ","
f/
~:
Shott/Foot
8
'
o· Pha.ln9 0.5' Perf Diameter No Crushed Zone
No Damaged Zone
0.50=:!3~±6~9::'12~~15:~1~8
PERFORATION
LENGTH
(inches)
Fig. 7  Productivity ratio vs. perforation length.
beyond the perforation length, shows the advantage of a perforator that can penetrate the damaged zone.
Practical Applications
This paper is directed toward designing well com pletions to produce optimum recovery under a wide range of conditions. It also provides a means to evaluate the success of the completion once the well is put into production. The findings are summarized in the nomograph (Fig. 2). The following is a guide to the use of this nomograph.
1. Enter with perforation length on the upperleft
stem. This can be found from API RP 43 (Sec. II)
test data, corrected for overburden conditions ac cording to Ref. 6 if applicable. The example case is 12 in. (305 mm).
2. Proceed horizontally to the appropriate per
foration diameter, again obtained from API RP 43
(Sec. II) and possibly modified by Ref. 6. The example is 0.5 in. (13 mm).
3. Go down to the appropriate damagezone
thickness, which is 6 in. (152 mm) in the example (Point a). Now measure along the 6in. (152mm) line from the vertical axis to the appropriate k _{d} _{f} k _{u} line (Line bc in the example is 0.4). Transfer distance bc to b' c', beginning at Point a. From Point c' , go to Step 4. (The results of the nomograph tacitly assume that the damaged zone is pierced completely). 4. Go down to the appropriate crushedzone perrrcability reduction line kef ku; crushedzone thickness is assumed constant at 0.5 in. (12.7 mm).
2485
1.0
>
u
Z
11.1 _{0}_{.}_{9}
U
LI.
LI.
11.1
_{:}_{s}
O.S
0
.J
LI.
.J
.J
11.1
:s
O.
IS" PERFORATION
0.5" Perf Diameter
O· PhasinQ
4
Perfs I Foot DamaQed
No
0.5" Crushed Zone Thiekne
Zone
1.0
0.5
0.0
CRUSHED
ZONE
PERMEABILITY
FORMATION
PERMEABILITY
(Ke
I)
Ku
Fig. 8  Well flow efficiency vs. crushed zone permeability.
kc/ku may be estimated on the basis of coreflow efficiency data from API RP 43 or similar tests. Further work is needed to define this parameter under downhole conditions.
5. Cross over to the shotdensity (perforations per
foot) line.
6. Go up to the angular phasing line. These
phasings refer to real perforators: 90° phasing means
the shot pattern follows a spiral path, each shot offset by 90° from the two adjacent shots.
7. Read right to productivity ratio (0.88 in the
example) and skin factor figures. These, used in conjunction with reservoir producibility calculations, will permit predictions of the production to be ex pected from a particular well. The nomograph is drawn for a borehole size of 6 in. (152 mm). However, the effects of varying borehole size are partially compensating, and the nomograph can be used as is with coherent results over a considerable range of borehole sizes. An additional correction for a 12in. (305mm) borehole with 160acre (648 X 10 ^{3} _m ^{2} ) spacing is shown. At Point d, one simply raises the line to the 12in. (305 mm), 90° line and then continues to the productivity ratio scale (0.87 in the example). The uses of this nomograph extend beyond the simple determination of productivity ratio in an existing situation. A graphic picture of the relative influence of the various perforating parameters is given, permitting decisions to be made that ef ficiently will improve production. If flow tests do not match the productivity ratio predictions, the nomograph provides a quick check list of possible erroneous parameters. It is well to remember that the data on which this nomograph is built refer to actual downhole con ditions, not surface tests or assumptions. To enter
2486
o
"
II:
>
:>
~
()
=>
o
o
II:
IL
:9: :O=·
PHASING
4 Perfsl Foot
1.3
1.2t
O.B
IS" Perf LenQth 0.5" Perf Diameter
No DamaQed Zone 0.5" Crushed Zone Thickness
1.0
0.5
0.0
CRUSHED ZONE
FORMATION
PERMEABILITY
PERMEABILITY
(K
IK
c
u
I
Fig. 9  Productivity ratio vs. crushed zone permeability.
the chart with a shot density of four per foot (13 per
meter), for example, it is necessary to know that the four shots per foot (13 shots per meter) that you fired
are all open and flowing.
insufficient
drawdown lead to low effective shot densities. Completing through tubing under reverse pressure conditions has been proved to be an effective technique for maximizing the number of active perforations. Perforation characteristics are read routinely from API RP 43 (Sec. II) test data. These figures are not directly representative of downhole performance for several reasons: no overburden pressure, linear rather than radial flow, limited target dimensions, etc. However, until something better is devised, the API tests are all we have. Ref. 6 addresses this problem and provides a first approach to deriving downhole perforation performance figures from ApI
data. The nature of the perforation crushed zone is little understood as yet. The coreflow efficiency (CFE) measured in the course of API RP 43 testing is
related to crushedzone effect. Surface tests
have
yielded kc/ku values of 0.2 for Berea cores, but this must be regarded as a first approximation; more work is needed.
Poor
completion
procedures
and
8
Conclusions
A new method has been applied to predicting
theoretical productivity ratios on the basis of per forator parameters. Advanced computer techniques permitted the use of a more sophisticated model than
was used previously in similar studies. An extensive body of new data relating to inter active effects of the various parameters was produced. From these data, a nomograph has been
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
DAMAGEO ZONE
THICKNESS
(inchesl
Fig. 10  Productivity ratio vs. damaged zone thickness.
constructed to permit relatively simple deter minations of productivity ratio and skin factor from known perforating conditions. In most details, this study extends and
corroborates the work of previous investigations. Its chief advantage lies in the greater precision and comprehensiveness of the model. Among the more significant findings are the following.
1. In general, productivity is improved with in
creasing shot density, up to at least the level of eight shots per foot (26 shots per meter).
2. Perforation length is more critical to
productivity than perforation diameter, providing
the diameter is more than roughly 0.25 in. (6.35 mm).
3. As anticipated, a spiral 90° shot phasing is
more effective than any of the alternatives tested (0, 120, and 180°).
4. Penetration of the damaged zone is very im
portant.
Nomenclature
d = perforation diameter friction factor
f
=
kc 
crushedzone permeability 

kd 
damagedzone permeability 

ku 
formation (undamaged) permeability 

L 
perforation length 

p 
pressure 

R 
productivity ratio 

Q 
fluid volume flow rate 

ri 
inner radius 

r 0 
outer 
radius 
s 
skin factor 

p 
fluid density 
Acknowledgment
A great deal of assistance with the organization and presentation of this material was given by L. Raymer and D. Rust. This is genuinely appreciated.
DECEMBER 1981
! 
I 
I 

, 
I 
1 
I 

1 
I 

I 
I 

1 

r 
I I 

, 
2 . 0 ., 
THERE ARE 28 CYLINDERS THEY ARE DEFINED RI.O,I.5,2.0,
6,7,8,
18.20.22•
30
Fig. 11  Cylindrical surface specification.
References
1. McDowell, J.M. and Muskat, M.: "The Effect on Well
Productivity of Formation Penetration Beyond Perforated Casing," Trans., AIME (1950) 189, 309312.
2. Howard, R.A. and Watson, M.S. Jr.: "Relative Productivity Index of GunPerforated Completions, as Affected by Depth of Penetration," World Oil (Feb. 1, 1952).
3. Harris, M.H.: "The Effect of Perforating on Well Produc tivity," J. Pet. Tech. (April 1966) 518528; Trans., AIME,
237.
4. Hong, K.C.: "Productivity of Perforated Completions in Formations With or Without Damage," J. Pet. Tech. (Aug. 1975) 10271038; Trans., AIME, 259.
5. Klotz, J.A., Krueger, R.F., and Pye, D.S.: "Effect of Per foration Damage on Well Productivity," J. Pet. Tech. (Nov. 1974) 13031314; Trans., AIME, 257.
6. Saucier, R.J. and Lands, J.F. Jr.: "A Laboratory Study of Perforations in Stressed Formation Rocks," J. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1978) 13471353; Trans., AIME, 265.
7. Godfrey, W.K. and Methven, H.E.: "Casing Damage Caused by Jet Perforating," paper SPE 3043 presented at the SPE 45th Annual Meeting, Houston, Oct. 47, 1970.
8. Bell, W.T., Brieger, E.F., and Harrigan, J. W.: "Laboratory Flow Characteristics of Gun Perforations," J. Pet. Tech. (Sept. 1972) 10951103.
9. DeSalvo, G.J. and Swanson, J.A.: "ANSYS User's Manual,"
Swanson Analysis Systems Inc., Elizabeth, PA (1972). 10. Amyx, J.W., Bass, D.M. Jr., and Whiting, R.L.: Petroleum
Reservoir Engineering, McGrawHill Book Co. Inc., New York City (1960).
APPENDIX
The fluid flow in a porous medium, called Poiseuille flow, is governed by the potential equation. The modern technique for solving this equation in complex geometries is the finiteelement method. These calculations were done with ANSYS9, and checked with NASTRAN. To apply the method, one imposes a grid on the spatial region in which the solution is sought. The nodes of the grid are connected by elements. The program next imposes a piecewise approximation to the solution, element by element. Isoparametric elements were used. The region taken, for four shots per foot (13 shots per meter), is a 3in. (76mm) thick
2487
NODE SPECIFICATION
51
30'
15 
10 
5 

14 
9 
4 

13 
8 
3 

12 
7 
2 

II 
_{6} 
I 

ISO' 
165' 
_{1}_{8}_{0} 
Fig. 12  Node specification.
Fig. 14  Coupled sets of node values for 90° phasing.
horizontal section containing one perforation and extending halfway up and down to the adjoining perforations. This slabshaped region is divided by a series of concentric cylinders, as shown in Fig. 11. At 30 times the borehole radius, the flow is assumed to be radial. Upon each cylinder, the grid shown in Fig. 12 is imposed. Nodes 66 to 72 define the crushedzone boundary. The node numbering shown is for the innermost cylinder, which defines the borehole boundary. There are no nodes numbered 62, 63, or 64. Node numbers are incremented by 100 on each succeeding cylinder (Fig. 13). New node positions are defined by radial lines extending from the borehole axis through the node positions. The exceptions are Nodes 66 through 80, which define the perforation and its crushed zone. These are defined by parallel lines distributed around the perforation axis. These
2488
NODES AT WHICH
SOLUTION
VALUES
ARE
KEPT
66=72 
36=10 

73=77 
31 
=5 = I 
61=65=35 
26=6 

60=40 
21 
=II 
55=45 
4=2 

56=30 
51 =211
46=20
41 = 15
EQUAL
Fig. 13  Element specification  0° phasing.
nodes lie on planes tangent to the associated cylin ders. The whole scheme has 2,320 nodes and 1,904 elements. Angular phasing is achieved by identifying various combinations of boundary nodes with each other. The scheme for 90° phasing is shown in Fig. 14. The program computes the flow from the outer boundary, held at a constant potential, to the inner perforation boundary, Nodes 73 to 80. The openhole flow potential is computed analytic;llly, and from
these two, the productivity ratio is determined. In the calculation, the outer boundary (Nodes 1801 to 2880) had the pressure 1,000 while the interior flow surface into the borehole, Nodes 73 to 80, had pressure O. The interior surface of the perforation
,depending on
was at Nodes 73 to 77, 173 to 177,
perforation length. Inside the perforation, the
permeability was
formation.
500,000 times that of the virgin
The literature ^{l}^{O} suggests that even
2,000,000 times that of the formation would be reasonable. The skin factor s was computed for r0 Iri = 30, and from the skin factor, the productivity ratios for 40acre (162 x 10 ^{3} _m ^{2} _{)} spacings (r0 = 2640) are determined. These are the values used throughout this paper. Since the productivity ratio is dimensionless, the units of pressure drop out of the problem. So do permeability, fluid density, and fluid viscosity.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
bbl 
x 
1.589 873 
E  
01 

ft 
x 
3.048* 
EOl 
m 

in. 
x 
2.54* 
E+Ol 
mm 

psi 
x 
6.894 757 
E+OO 
kPa 
~Conversion factor is exact.
Original manuscript received in SOCiety of Petroleum Engineers office Dec. 21, 1979. Paper accepted for publication July 1,1981. Revised manuscript received Oct. 13, 1981. Paper (SPE 8804) first presented at the SPE Fourth Symposium on Formation Damage Control held in Bakersfield, CA, Jan. 28·29, 1980.
JPT
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
Mult mai mult decât documente.
Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.
Anulați oricând.