Quo Vadis, Extreme Overbalance?

Perforating and surging techniques using very high wellbore pressures promise dramatic, cost-effective

improvement in initial well productivity—under the right conditions. But what are those conditions, and how

do the procedures work? Leading investigators look at the basics of these new completion methods, and

examine lessons learned to date from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska and the North American midcontinent.

Larry Behrmann In the vast majority of wells today, the
Klaus Huber moment of truth—do we have a producer,
Bryan McDonald or a hole in the ground?—is revealed
Rosharon, Texas, USA through underbalance perforating. When
perforating guns fire, pressure in the well-
Benoît Couët bore is below that of the reservoir, creating a
Ridgefield, Connecticut, USA pressure differential that helps clean the per-
foration tunnels. Formation fluids rush into
John Dees the tunnels and flush out metallic charge
Consultant debris, surrounding crushed rock, and sands
Dallas, Texas or clays that were driven into the tunnels. If
the drawdown is large enough, inflow can
Ron Folse sweep away enough debris to open the most
Marathon Oil Company conductive natural path between the forma-
Lafayette, Louisiana, USA tion and wellbore.
Two-way communication along this path
Pat Handren is essential for optimal well completion and
Oryx Energy productivity. When a well goes straight into
Dallas, Texas production, clogged perforations will limit
inflow of hydrocarbons. If intervention is
Joe Schmidt planned, perforations need to be clear to
ARCO Alaska, Inc. accept treatment fluids carrying proppant
Anchorage, Alaska, USA for fracturing, gravel for sand control, or
acid. Hydraulic fracturing and prepacking
Phil Snider perforations ahead of gravel packing benefit
Marathon Oil Company from removal of crushed sand that can
Houston, Texas reduce injectivity and elevate fracture initia-
tion pressures or lead to early screenout of
proppant during fracture stimulations.1
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Bob
Cooper, Dowell, Houston, Texas, USA; Ray Dickes,
Underbalance perforating works across a
Glen Edwards, Joe Hromas, Bjorn Langseth, Al Salsman broad range of rock properties and reservoir
and Mike Selewach, Schlumberger Perforating & Testing conditions. Its applicability decreases, how-
Center, Rosharon, Texas; Roger Card, Jack Elbel, Mark
Mack and Ken Nolte, Dowell, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA; ever, with a decline in reservoir pressure,
Roger Keese, Dowell, Anchorage, Alaska, USA; George permeability or rock strength. The trick is to
King, Amoco Exploration and Production Technology
Group, Tulsa, Oklahoma; and Terry Green, Dowell,
Sugar Land, Texas.
NODAL and X-Tools are marks of Schlumberger.
achieve enough underbalance to generate
sufficient flow rate for cleaning, but not too
much to collapse the perforations and drive
sand into the well. Theoretical and applied
studies have focused on defining the opti-
mal underbalance for ranges of reservoir
pressure, permeability and rock strength.2
With a good theoretical foundation and a
record of favorable results, underbalance
perforating reigned as the unchallenged
champion until a few years ago, when a
handful of investigators turned underbal-
ance on its head (next page ). Building on
experimental work by the US Department of
Energy and others, Oryx Energy and ARCO
independently developed new completion
techniques utilizing extreme overbal-
ance—perforating with wellbore pressure
significantly above the level required to frac-
ture the formation. The patented Oryx and
ARCO methods differ in their approach, but
each involves a process that may generically
be called extreme overbalance perforating
(EOP) and a related method of forcing an
extreme overbalance pressure into existing
perforations, called extreme overbalance
surging (EOB surging).3
Perforating underbalance or with extreme
overbalance are in many ways opposites,
but they are not mirror images of each other.
In underbalance perforating, the goal is to
create a channel and clean the channel with

18 Oilfield Review
 1865 1910 1948 1975 1980 1993

10 to 30 ft

Arrows illustrate pressure differentials

nThe first 130 years of perforating. 1865: Tin torpedoes filled with gunpowder, and later with nitroglycerin, are lowered to the depth of
interest and detonated. 1910: The single-knife casing “ripper” involves a mechanical blade that rotates to puncture a hole in the casing.
1948: The first shaped charges, developed by Welex Jet Perforating Company, are applied to oil wells, generally with a slight overbal-
ance for well control. 1970s: Underbalance, under investigation for 20 years, is tied with perforating by Roy Vann. Continued work by
others through the 1980s accelerates its popularity. 1980s: Propellant fracturing produced fractures from the burst of pressure developed
by rapid burning of propellant. Although still under investigation, the method encounters problems operationally and in reproducibility.
1993: Extreme overbalance perforating, pioneered by Oryx Energy Company, succeeds in commercial wells.

flow from the formation, then stimulate or
gravel pack later as necessary. In extreme
overbalance methods, the idea is to simulta-
neously create and stimulate the channel,
which develops into a small biwing fracture
that obviates the need for cleaning the per-
foration tunnel. Some operators have also
proposed extreme overbalance methods that
simultaneously place resin for sand control
or acid for etching fracture faces.4
Since extreme overbalance methods
became commercial in 1990, their applica-
tion has taken a roller coaster ride. Follow-
ing an initial wave of interest, only a small
but devout core of proponents continues to
carry the torch—last year about half the
extreme overbalance jobs in North America
were performed by only five operating
companies. Nevertheless, limited but per-
sistent curiosity from the industry refuses to
die. In 1994, seventeen operating and ser-
vice companies jointly sponsored experi-
ments on large blocks of sandstone to
investigate EOP fracture mechanics and
ways to optimize pressure requirements
and perforation design.
Field experience has also broadened, with
about 900 EOP jobs performed to date,
mostly in North America. Marathon per-
formed extreme overbalance procedures in
20% of its wells in 1995 and expects that
number to reach 35% in 1997. As more
data accumulate, the case for extreme over-
balance resurfaces, each time with a bit
more ammunition. The technique has
clearly established a niche, yet its applica-
bility remains incompletely defined. Where
are extreme overbalance methods today,
and what promise do they hold?

1. Screenout is the point at which no more proppant can
be pumped into a hydraulic fracture system without
an increase in pump pressure. Early, or premature,
screenout is caused by an impermeable bridging of
material across the fluid pathway that prevents further
extension and propping of the fracture.
2. King GE, Anderson A and Bingham M: “A Field Study
of Underbalance Pressures Necessary to Obtain Clean
Perforations Using Tubing-Conveyed Perforating,”
paper SPE 14321, presented at the 60th SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas,
Nevada, USA, September 22-25, 1985.
Tariq SM: “New, Generalized Criteria for Determining
the Level of Underbalance for Obtaining Clean Perfo-
rations,” paper SPE 20636, presented at the 65th SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September 23-26, 1990.
Behrmann LA: “Underbalance Criteria for Minimum
Perforation Damage,” paper SPE 30081, presented at
the SPE European Formation Damage Control Confer-
ence, The Hague, The Netherlands, May 15-16, 1995.
3. Three early works:
Bundy TE and Elmer MJ: “Perforating a High-Pressure
Gas Well Overbalanced in Mud: Is It Really That
Bad?” paper SPE 16894, presented at the 62nd SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
Texas, USA, September 27-30, 1987.
Cipolla CL, Branagan PT and Lee SJ: “Fracture Design
Considerations in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs,”
paper SPE 17607, presented at the 1988 SPE Interna-
tional Meeting on Petroleum Engineering, Tianjin,
China, November 1-4, 1988.
Northrup DA and Frohne K-H: “The Multiwell Experi-
ment—A Field Laboratory in Tight Gas Sandstone
Reservoirs,” Journal of Petroleum Technology 42,
no. 6 (June 1990): 772-779.
The Oryx method:
Handren PJ, Jupp TB and Dees JM: “Overbalance Per-
forating and Stimulation Methods for Wells,” paper
SPE 26515, presented at the 68th SPE Annual Techni-
cal Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, USA,
October 3-6, 1993.
The ARCO method:
Petitjean L, Couët B, Abel JC, Schmidt JH and Fergu-
son KR: “Well Productivity Improvement Using
Extreme Overbalance Perforating and Surging—Case
History,” paper SPE 30527, presented at the 70th SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
Texas, USA, October 22-25, 1995.
For a more recent version of the same work:
Couët B, Petitjean L, Abel JC, Schmidt JH and Fergu-
son KR: “Well-Productivity Improvement by Use of
Rapid Overbalance Perforation Extension: Case His-
tory,” Journal of Petroleum Technology 48, no. 2
(February 1996): 154-159.
4. Handren PJ and Dees JM: “A New Method of Over-
balance Perforating and Surging of Resin for Sand
Control,” paper SPE 26545, presented at the 68th SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Hous-
ton, Texas, USA, October 3-6, 1993.

Autumn 1996 19
a
The EOP Why and How
Wellhead pressure, psi

John Dees and Pat Handren, extreme over-

balance pioneers at the Sun Company (now
Oryx Energy), began investigating overbal-
ance methods in the late 1980s when
underbalance failed to give good results in
West Texas fields. The Oryx team found
what others had also observed for some
time: Correctly applied underbalance perfo-
rating can be compromised by fairly com-
mon reservoir and operational conditions. If
reservoir pressure is low or depleted, the
pressure differential may be insufficient to
clean perforations. Likewise, if permeability
is low—probably less than 10 millidarcies
(md), but the value depends on reservoir
pressure and oil viscosity—formation fluid
may not flow vigorously enough for clean-
ing. And if rock strength is low, underbal-
ance pressure differential large enough for
effective cleaning may collapse the forma-
tion and necessitate further intervention to
save the well.
Underbalance perforating can also be hin-
dered by more complex problems. Improper
killing of a well, for example, can replug
perforations with filter cake that may not be
dislodged during production.5 Sometimes,
despite good reservoir pressure and perme-
ability, the damaged zone reaches deep
enough to limit the effectiveness of under-
balance. Also, when permeability varies
dramatically—such as a thin, 1-darcy layer
sandwiched between two thick 10-md lay-
ers—the thicker sections will dominate the
flow properties and can reduce the effec-
tiveness of underbalance.6
Extreme overbalance perforating can
sidestep these problems. In EOP comple-
tions, tubing pressure is increased before the
guns are fired and then released into the
wellbore with gun detonation. At this point,

20
6500

6000

5500

5000

4500

4000

3500

3000
-40
Actual
Modeled

-20 0
Time, sec

Most procedures
follow a variant of
this basic
approach.
20
Well A

Well B

nThe 30-second moment of truth. Modeled

Pay
40

(solid line) and actual data (circles) for pres-

sure drop in two ARCO wells (above). The
slower decay in Well A is due to greater
friction produced by a large volume of
fluid (right). The goal is to minimize friction
losses, increasing propagation speed, min-
imizing leakoff into the formation and
maximizing fracture length. (From Coüet
et al, reference 3.)

nExtreme overbal-
ance perforating.

4000 to 8000 psi

(0.8 to 1.4 psi /ft)

zone
N2

Casing

Hydrostatic or
atmospheric

Packer 30 to
90 ft above valve

Isolation valve:
either retrievable
SXPV or permanent
SXAR equipment

Invaded
zone
a
Well A

2600 ft gas

6753 ft liquid

Surge disk
Well B

Pump

Pressurized N2

Cement

Fracturing fluid
8000 to 12,000 psi

50 to 100 ft,
4984 ft liquid

5472 ft gas

less often to 300 ft

Oilfield Review
because wellbore pressure exceeds rock
yield strength, perforating initiates one or
more small fractures. These fractures do not
develop the length or height of conventional
hydraulic fractures, but the event lasts long
enough to push the fractures beyond the
zone damaged by invasion and past the tip
of the perforation ( previous page, top ).
While EOP fractures are shorter in length
and height, they may develop greater width
and so possibly have a higher conductivity
per foot than hydraulic fractures.
Most EOP jobs follow the same basic pro-
cedure (previous page, bottom ). Perforating
guns are lowered to the depth of interest,
then spotted to the top of the guns is a small
amount of liquid selected for the well con-
ditions—brine, lease crude, fracturing fluid,
acid or liquid with proppant. All or most of
the wellbore above the liquid is filled with
compressible gas, usually nitrogen, less
often carbon dioxide or air. The gas col-
umn is then pressured up, like a tightly
squeezed coil spring. Sometimes liquid is
also spotted above the gas to further com-
Time 1
4000 to 8000 psi
(0.8 to 1.4 psi /ft)
N2 Pump
Pressurized N2
Rupture disk
Fracturing fluid
Pay zone
Invaded zone
nExtreme overbalance surging. Surging is performed on wells with existing perforations.
It may follow immediately after perforating or a few hours to a few days later. In general,
the sooner after perforating, the more effective the surge. Comparison of time 1 (left) and
time 2 (right) shows the penetration of fluid into the rock and propagation of the fracture
over time.
Autumn 1996
press it. Rarely does the liquid fall through
the gas because compressed gas, typically
at about 4000 psi [27,500 kPa], develops a
density of 1 to 3 lbm/gal [0.12 to 0.36
g/cm3] and a high surface tension. This cre-
ates an interface which, in the small diame-
ter of tubing, prevents liquid from displacing
gas. Because the surface pressure of gas can
reach 10,000 psi [69 MPa] or more, tubing-
conveyed perforating (TCP) guns are usually
preferred over wireline-conveyed guns
because they are operationally easier to
handle at high pressures.
With detonation of the guns, the liquid is
driven at very high flow rates by the rapidly
expanding gas and rushes into the perfora-
tions. Because the liquid is nearly incom-
pressible, it acts as a wedge that initiates
fractures, extending the effective wellbore
radius. Erosion from the liquid and any
entrained proppant flowing at more than
100 bbl/min [16 m3/min] may scour the for-
mation, creating stable flow channels. In
many EOP jobs, the event is timed to stop
just when the gas reaches the perforations,
Time 2
N2 Pump
Tip of
fracture
since the gas would quickly leak off into the
formation. Some operators, who have wells
with large tubular volumes, continue apply-
ing pressure as the gas enters the perfora-
tions. The gas also acts as an abrasive that
scours the perforation. In either case—stop-
ping as the gas hits the perforations or con-
tinuing—the higher the pressure and larger
the gas volume (a larger “spring”), the
greater the fracturing power.
Pressure generated at the perforations dur-
ing EOP or EOB surging must be high
enough to overcome two obstacles: it must
exceed the minimum in-situ rock stress,
and it must fracture through any imperme-
able debris barrier remaining in the perfora-
tion. The debris barrier often defeats the
conventional process of perforation break-
down and cleanup.7 Modeling shows that
to overwhelm the barrier, the extreme over-
balance pressure gradient usually needs to
reach at least 1.4 psi per foot [31.6 kPa/m]
of well depth.8 This gradient produces a
fracture radius that is on the order of 10 to
20 ft [3 to 6 m] although it may extend up
to 30 ft [9 m].
In the high-energy context of extreme
overbalance, flow restriction due to perfora-
tion damage has such a minor effect on per-
foration conductivity as to become almost
irrelevant. Charge debris has no time to
harden and is thought to be pulverized and
blown far back into the created cracks, like
a mashed up cork pushed into a wine bot-
tle. The low permeability of the shattered
zone is more than compensated for by the
high permeability of the fractures. In addi-
tion, gas jetting into the tunnel at nearly the
speed of sound may erode and scour walls
of the tunnels and fractures.
An extension of this method involves
pumping additional fluid at a high rate
immediately following EOP or EOB surging,
with or without proppant, to drive the frac-
tures farther (left ). Pump rates have to be
5. Mason JN, Behrmann LA, Dees JM and Kessler N:
“Block Tests Model of the Near-Wellbore in a Perfo-
rated Sandstone,” paper SPE 28554, presented at the
69th SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibi-
tion, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September 25-28,
1994.
6. Hsai T-Y and Behrmann LA: “Perforating Skin as a
Function of Rock Permeability and Underbalance,”
paper SPE 22810, presented at the 66th SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas,
USA, October 3-6, 1991.
7. Behrmann LA and McDonald B: “Underbalance or
Extreme Overbalance,” paper SPE 31083, presented at
the SPE International Symposium on Formation
Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, February
14-15, 1996.
8. Prudhoe Bay seems to be the exception. ARCO
reports good results there with only 1.1 psi/ft
[24.2 kPa/m].
21
high enough to keep the fluid above the for-
mation fracture pressure. The injection rate
needed for success depends on formation
characteristics and in some cases, up to
15,000 ft3/min [420 m3/min] has been used.
ARCO also developed a gas-surging tech-
nique that enhances hydraulic fracturing in
wells previously perforated. (see “Elements
of EOP Design: Operations,” page 31.)9
What can be expected from an extreme
overbalance operation? Recoverable
reserves may be increased, and under favor-
able conditions production rates can
increase dramatically, due to reduction in
near-wellbore pressure loss and in reservoir
skin—70% of EOP wells show a negative
skin (see “EOP for Skin Reduction,”
below ).10 In one Oryx field, where conven-
tionally completed wells—fracture treated
with 20,000 gallons [3180 m3] of gelled
diesel and 20,000 lbm [9070 kg] of 20/40
sand—produced 500 Mcf/D, EOP wells pro-
EOP for Skin Reduction
In 1994, Marathon stood at a completion cross-
roads in an eastern New Mexico gas field. In the
30-year-old field, Marathon and other operators
produced from 35 wells, each making 4 to 6
MMcf/D. In a typical completion, skin averaged
around 50 but reached as high as 150. The reser-
voir, an upper Pennsylvanian carbonate, averaged
39 md with a reservoir pressure of about 1000 psi
[6890 kPa]. Could skin be reduced?
Studying the success of nearby operators who
use extreme overbalance methods, Marathon
decided to try extreme overbalance surging to
reduce skin. The first candidate well was in the
North Indian basin section, with a perforated
interval of 171 ft [52 m].
A fairly conventional completion design was
used for extreme overbalance surging with acid.
A 60° shot phasing was chosen to evenly distribute
20% HCl acid and encourage development of a
22
duced initially at twice that rate and
depleted in 3 years instead of 7 to 10 years.
EOP also facilitates lower treating pressure
due to creation of a more conductive flow
path. In addition, EOP and EOB surging
allow for placement of a higher percentage
of proppant when followed by a conven-
tional frac job. ARCO, for example, reports
placement of 95% of sand in extended-
reach wells, probably due to higher conduc-
tivity of flow paths into the formation.11 It
formerly placed only 35% of sand.
The economics of extreme overbalance is
not clear-cut, and has contributed to skepti-
cism. One-to-one comparison with conven-
tional completions is sometimes difficult.
Should EOP be compared to underbalance
perforating alone, or to perforating and
hydraulic fracturing? While the latter may
seem logical, in practice EOP does not fully
replace hydraulic fracturing. Marathon, for
example, will later frac more than a third of
biwing fracture. Previous jobs were at two shots
per foot (spf), but this low shot density was
thought to contribute to high skin. Inflow perfor-
mance and NODAL analysis indicated that 4 spf
would probably result in more effective acid place-
ment. Deep penetrators were used to reduce flow
restriction thought to be associated with big-hole
charges. And the pressure gradient was designed
to be 1.4 psi/ft—low by today’s standards, in
which some jobs are designed at 2 psi/ft
[45 kPa/ft].
About 500 ft [152 m] of fluid was spotted at the
bottom of the string, and the tubing was charged
with N2. Fluid pumped after the gas achieved a
flow rate of 200 bbl/min [31.8 m3/min] after the
guns had fired. When the well came in, skin was
computed at 5, a dramatic 10-fold reduction.
Well production was higher than expected—over 5
MMcf/D, compared to 4 MMcf/D for conventionally
completed wells. Although completion costs were
about 8% higher, the initial rate gain quickly paid
back the higher cost. Today, the well continues
producing at a higher rate than conventionally
completed wells of similar age.
Since this job in 1994, Marathon has moved
toward a new completion strategy. During the two
years of production, decline in reservoir pressure
its EOP wells, and about 80% of wells that
were surged after EOP. Marathon finds that
EOP operations average one day longer, but
produce first oil one to three days earlier.
Some operators use EOP as a cost-effective
way to identify hydraulic fracturing candi-
dates, as a means to minimize near-well-
bore tortuosity and thereby reduce hydraulic
fracturing costs (less fluid pumped and
lower surface pressures), or as a low-cost
means to establish a high flow rate early.
The biggest benefit of EOP, however, is the
ability to place more sand and prevent a
near-wellbore screenout during a subse-
quent frac job.
Costs for EOP can vary widely, and depend
mostly on availability of compressed nitro-
gen. With easily accessible nitrogen, tubu-
lars fit for EOP pressures, and a completion
that would normally include TCP guns, EOP
costs slightly more than a small hydraulic
fracture. If nitrogen is not readily available,
from 1000 to 800 psi [5512 kPa] means that skin
plays an increasingly significant role in well pro-
ductivity. Because every well intervention risks
an increase in skin, Marathon is attempting the
least intrusive completion strategy: air drilling in
slight underbalance and completing open hole
(barefoot), without perforations. The carbonate is
fractured enough to produce without perforations,
yet competent enough to withstand production.
Other operators in the region report wells produc-
ing over 5 MMcf/D with this approach.
If reservoir pressures were 2000 to 3000 psi
[13.8 MPa to 21 MPa], according to Ron Folse,
a Marathon engineer who works in the field,
then extreme overbalance might be the method of
choice. But with the lower reservoir pressures,
Marathon is able to drill underbalance with air,
and with the barefoot completion achieve the ben-
efit of minimizing completion skin. Proof of this
new method is pending pressure transient analy-
sis, which is expected to indicate a lower skin and
less fluid invasion than with EOP.
Oilfield Review
EOP can cost more than twice that of a con-
ventional completion. While EOP wells pay
out faster, with higher initial production, it

ss l
streizonta
hor imum
Preferred
remains unclear under what conditions the fracture plane
long-term payout from EOP is comparable to

Min
that of hydraulic fracturing.
Economic uncertainty aside, the lack of Maximum Maximum
early enthusiasm for these methods also horizontal stress horizontal stress
resulted from unclear explanations for their
success and benefits, and inconsistent Created
fracture
results probably related to misapplication.
Today, with the analysis of more data, the
proper role of EOP is coming into focus.
Central to this understanding is an apprecia-
tion of EOP mechanics.

Are EOP Fractures Different?

The most effective fracture, regardless of the
generating mechanism, paves an autobahn
between the reservoir and wellbore: a sin-
gle, straight parting of significant width with
few smaller, competing fractures. This ideal
nThe ideal relationship between perforations and the in-situ stress field.
Fractures aligned with the direction of maximum horizontal stress will open
in the plane of least resistance, against the minimum horizontal stress.
The closer the fracture and maximum stress planes align, the less tortuosity
fractures develop, resulting in less pressure drop. Fractures generally initiate
at the sandface, the base of the perforation where it meets the formation.

nTiming of down-
hole events. A Perforation
Detonation
Whereas hydraulic
Overbalance Created
fracturing can last
Propellant fracture
tens of minutes to
Hydraulic hours, extreme
Pressure

overbalance perfo-
rating is finished in
20 or 30 seconds.

1000 1000 1000

µsec msec
Logarithmic time
would be achieved with perforations 180°
apart and aligned with the maximum in-situ
stress (top ). But this direction, called the
preferred fracture plane (PFP), is often
unknown, and many operators cannot yet
routinely control gun orientation. Still, it is
possible to approach this ideal with both
hydraulic fracturing and EOP. They work by
different mechanisms, however, and pro-
duce fractures with different characteristics.
In hydraulic fracturing, pressure at the rock
face rises gradually from a slight overbal-
ance to the point of failure, after which the
9. Petitjean et al, reference 3.
10. Skin is a dimensionless value that refers to the pres-
sure drop near the wellbore during production or
intervention. The pressure drop indicates a resis-
tance to flow attributable to reduction in permeabil-
ity near the wellbore occurring during drilling, com-
pletion or operations. A positive skin value denotes
formation damage; a negative skin indicates an
increased ease with which fluid can flow between
the wellbore and formation.
sec
fracture propagates as long as the treatment
continues—and it doesn’t screen out or
dehydrate. This gradual buildup of pressure
is equivalent to opening a door by pushing
it slowly (above ). Two events probably take
place. First, multiple fractures may develop
from the perforation base or tip, depending
on proximity of perforations to the PFP and
on shot phasing.12 If perforations are more
than 30° from the PFP, fractures may take
circuitous routes around the cement-forma-
tion interface before turning to align in the
PFP (right ).
11. Couët et al, reference 3.
12. Phasing is the angle between shots. Phasing of 180°
means two shots in opposite directions, whereas a
120° phasing distributes three shots around the well-
bore circumference, one every 120° degrees.
30°
Preferred fracture
plane
nA long way to Tipperary. Hydraulic frac-
tures may have to march around the bore-
hole circumference before extending into
the formation, depending on the distance
between the perforation and the preferred
fracture plane (PFP). Here are two scenar-
ios for a 120° phased gun with conven-
tional hydraulic fracturing. If the perfora-
tion lies in the PFP (A), one wing of the
fracture will initiate from the perforation,
and the other winds around the borehole
from the perforation base until it turns into
the PFP. If the perforation is 30° or more
from the PFP (B), multiple parallel fractures
may develop from the perforation.
(Adapted from Behrmann and McDonald,
reference 7.)

Autumn 1996 23

A A
B extreme overbalance pressure overwhelms
30°
nThe long and short of EOP. If a perforation
is more than 45° from the PFP, EOP frac-
tures tend to propagate immediately from
a point on the wellbore wall aligned with
the PFP, rather than wind around the well-
bore from another initiation point (A).
The channel shown between the perfora-
tion and fracture develops after the frac-
ture initiates and is eroded during the EOP
process. Where perforations are within 45°
of the PFP (B), fractures initiate from the
perforation. Only small fractures initiate
from perforations more than 45° from the
PFP. These fractures do not grow. Note that
fractures initially ignore the in-situ stress
field and probably extend straight from
the wellbore. Within a few wellbore diame-
ters they turn into the PFP. The absence
of multiple parallel fractures is thought to
be related to the sudden pressure load
on the cement-by-formation microannulus,
sealing off a path for the development of
secondary fractures.
The second event is development of a sin-
gle, dominant biwing fracture initiating at
the borehole wall. Within about two well-
bore diameters, this major fracture curves
until it aligns with the PFP, and becomes
responsible for most communication
between the wellbore and formation. Com-
peting with it, however, may be the many
small, curving fractures near the wellbore.
These fractures act as chokes that increase
the near-wellbore pressure drop.
24
By contrast, an EOP fracture is produced
Created
by a sudden burst of pressure. This high-rate Perforation fracture
pressurization of the rock results in a rate-
dependent fracture mechanism that
<15°
approaches the ideal fracture system more
Preferred fracture plane
closely than hydraulic fracturing. Instead of
opening the door by pushing gradually, an
EOP operation is analogous to breaking the
door down with a sledgehammer. Because B
the fracture breakdown pressure, EOP frac- 15 to 30°
tures initially overwhelm the in-situ stress
field and probably extend straight from the
wellbore, like spokes from the hub of a
wheel, then turn gradually into the PFP
(left ). Fractures may form at all perforations,
but extend only from those nearest the PFP, C
creating a biwing fracture.
Multiple parallel fractures are not seen in 30 to 60°
EOP studies, possibly because the sudden
pressure load closes the microannulus
between the cement and formation, shutting
off a path for secondary fractures. Another
possible explanation for the absence of mul-
tiple fractures is that rate-dependent fracture
initiation favors only weakest portions of the > 60°
D
rock. This observation is borne out in con-
ventional fracturing, where high-rate injec-
tion is known to minimize creation of multi-
ple fractures. EOP also allows a larger angle
between the PFP and perforations before
fractures ignore the perforations and initiate
at a site on the wellbore aligned with the
PFP (right ).13 nRate of reorientation of an extreme over-
balance fracture into the PFP. Angles of
EOP Candidates less than 15° (A) result in rapid reorienta-
tion. From 15 to 30° (B), reorientation is
Widely accepted candidate criteria for EOP more gradual. At 30 to 60° (C), the fracture
are low permeability (below about 10 md), initiates at the base of the perforation and
reservoir pressure insufficient to achieve runs parallel to the tunnel before turning.
cleaning with underbalance, a highly Beyond 60° (D), the fracture ignores the
perforation and initiates at the sandface.
mobile clay content, and the need to estab-
[From Salsman A, Behrmann L and Brown-
lish a fracture in multiple layers, even those ing G: “Extreme Overbalance Perforating,”
with different mechanical or flow properties. The Perforating and Testing Review 8,
Other reasons to use EOP are reduction in no. 1 (May 1995): 1-8.]
near-wellbore damage and pressure drop
associated with poor linkage of fractures fol- Dees lists two leading reasons for EOP:
lowing underbalance perforating, to avoid immediate indication of well producibility
several days of swabbing before the results (which can be delayed with underbalance
of underbalance perforating are known, and perforating) and skin reduction. Behrmann
to eliminate near-wellbore tortuosity during and McDonald also list as applications
hydraulic fracture stimulation of extended- diversion of acid in carbonates and intersec-
reach wells.14 tion of natural fractures.15 Other authors
Oilfield Review
 50
0.1 md

40
1.0 md
Fracture extension, m

30

10 md
20

10
100 md

1 darcy
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time, sec

nTheoretical modeling of fracture extension versus time for various permeabilities.

The zone of fracture extension corresponds to the sloping section of the curves. Where the
curves flatten indicates the time after which only fracture erosion takes place. At 100 md,
fracture extension reaches its maximum of about 10 m in 15 seconds. The remaining time
probably represents only erosion in the fracture. Fracture extension in a 0.1-md setting
continues for about 30 seconds and reaches 45 m [148 ft]. (From Couët et al, reference 3.)

present several scenarios for application of
EOP in high-permeability settings, often for
placement of acid or proppant. Marathon
engineers, on the other hand, use EOP in
the Rocky Mountains of the USA mainly in
hard rocks, where they assume perforations
penetrate only 10 in. [25 cm] and so remain
in the damaged zone. In hard rocks, EOP
drives the effective wellbore radius well
beyond the damaged zone.
The majority of extreme overbalance pro-
ponents view it as complementary to con-
ventional underbalance perforating and as a
precursor to conventional hydraulic fractur-
ing. Bryan McDonald, who studies extreme
overbalance methods for Schlumberger, has
ranked variables that influence the choice
between EOP and underbalance perforating.
In order of importance, the leading variables
are as follows:
Well depth—The limiting influence with
depth is friction between the fluid and tubu-
lars, which reduces ability to deliver suffi-
cient pressure at the perforations. The mini-
mum pressure gradient was originally
placed at 1.2 psi/ft [27 kPa/m], but this has
inched up as insufficient pressure was
thought responsible for early failures. Some
operators today use gradients as high as 4
psi/ft [90 kPa/m]. In general, deeper wells
require a lower pressure gradient because
the energy available to propagate a fracture
is proportional to:
(pressure gradient × depth) – in-situ stress
in which the in-situ stress is given by the
fracture gradient × depth, so the expression
becomes:
(pressure gradient – fracture gradient) ×
depth.
The fracture gradient may vary from 0.4 to
1 psi/ft [9 to 22 kPa/m], with a typical value
of 0.7 psi/ft [15.8 kPa/m], so that with
increasing depth, the gradient difference
can be reduced. Even with the lower pres-
sure gradients required in deep wells, depth
can become a limiting factor at 10,000 to
15,000 ft [3000 to 4500 m].
Technique, however, sometimes compen-
sates for physical limitations. Oryx has suc-
cessfully treated an interval at 19,000 ft
[5790 m] by placing calcium bromide water
above nitrogen to deliver 24,000 psi [165
MPa] at the perforations. “We always place
less than 1000 ft [300 m] of fluid on bot-
tom,” said Pat Handren of Oryx. “This way,
energy goes into fracturing, not into over-
coming fluid friction.” Still, most operators
are more comfortable performing EOP
above 10,000 ft true vertical depth.
Permeability—There may be no more con-
and leakoff result in significantly shorter frac-
tures (above ).
Work by Petitjean and Couët indicates that
at 100 md, up to 80% of fluid can leak off in
less than 10 seconds, limiting an already
short fracturing event. 16 Some operators
place the cutoff at 100 md, although others
have claimed success at 1 darcy. John Dees,
who has a patent on continuous pumping
immediately after the extreme overbalance
event, maintains that EOP followed by surg-
ing with resin can succeed even with perme-
ability in the 1-darcy range.
Pat Handren considers permeability-length
a more useful parameter than permeability
alone. This takes into consideration vertically
variable permeability, which can affect flow
properties. Handren’s breakpoint is about 20
md-ft. If permeability hits this value, Han-
dren would choose underbalance perforat-
ing—unless reservoir pore pressure is below
0.35 psi/ft [8 kPa/m] in which case he prefers
EOP to be sure perforations are cleaned. At
permeability around 1 darcy, some forma-
tions may be friable enough to require EOP
with injection of resin to prevent sand from
13. Behrmann and McDonald, reference 7.
14. Petitjean et al, reference 3, ARCO method.
15. Behrmann and McDonald, reference 7.
16. Petitjean et al, reference 3.

troversial an EOP topic than how permeable

is too permeable. The concern is that leakoff
will outpace the flow rate needed to main-
tain a pressure that exceeds rock strength
and extends the fractures. High rates of spurt

Autumn 1996 25
flowing out the tunnel or to prevent the tun-
nel from collapsing.
Tubular and wellhead ratings— Tubing
diameter and pressure ratings limit gas pres-
sure and volume, which determine horse-
power deliverable at the perforations. Bigger
is always better, and biggest and strongest is
best. At a minimum, tubing needs to endure
1.4 psi/ft. ARCO uses up to 7-in. tubing on
the North Slope in Alaska, USA, and
Marathon has moved from 31/2-in. to 41/2-in.
tubing wherever possible.
Likewise, wellhead pressure control
equipment must at least match tubular rat-
ing. The objective is to have tubulars that
can safely withstand the pressures neces-
sary to deliver a fracturing pressure at the
perforations. ARCO’s rapid overpressured
perforation extension, or ROPE, method
owes much of its development to the
opportunity at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, of
working on closely spaced wells with large
tubing (more than 2 7/8 in.).
Perforated interval length—Dissipation of
pressure over distance limits the interval
length that can be effectively treated with
extreme overbalance. Treatments on inter-
vals of up to 1000 ft have been performed
in a few wells, but most operators are confi-
dent that uniform, effective treatments can
be carried out over only 70 to 100 ft [21 to
30 m]. Shot density and permeability also
influence treatable interval length. As a
rule, Oryx finds that 1 shot every 2 ft [60
cm] will maintain sufficient pressure over
several hundred feet. Marathon prefers to
limit intervals to about 50 ft [15 m].
Elements of EOP Design: Hardware Before After
To one degree or another, the first genera-
tion of EOP jobs was constrained by precon-
ditions of the well completions. Now, oper-
ators recognize that success of the
procedure often relies on planning comple-
tions to optimize EOP jobs. The main con-
straints are surface-control equipment and
tubular ratings. ARCO makes routine use of
a wellhead isolation tool, or tree saver. This
device fits on top of the wellhead and has a
mandrel that extends through the wellhead,
sealing in the tubular. Downhole, Oryx will
use casing with a higher pressure rating, and Shock
run cement bond logs to determine whether absorber
the interval to be perforated is fully
cemented. When cement bond cannot be
confirmed, Oryx prefers to keep pressure
only on the tubing, using an isolation valve Shear
to avoid exceeding the casing burst rating.17 pins
In addition, Oryx uses the largest possible
tubing diameter to deliver the largest possi-
ble volume of gas, and always pressure tests
tubing to be sure it meets its rating.
After the completion configuration, the Air
next most important variable is wellbore chamber
fluid composition. All operators agree that
Operating
whatever type and quantity of fluid are piston
used, friction reduction polymers are a
must. In many operations, they are already a
given. A review of fluid design criteria and
their application has been prepared by John Pressure
Dees (below ). ports
EOP calls for new thinking about down- Firing pin
hole equipment, from the firing head to the
guns. A new kind of firing head, for exam-
ple, has been designed to better accommo-

Reservoir Conditions Fluid Type

Sandstone (some carbonates)
Sandstone with water retention
Carbonate
Sandstone with severe
water sensitivity
Carbonate and sandstone
Shaly low-pressure gas,
or <1000 psi
Heavy oil, paraffin present or well
drilled with oil-base mud
Gas sandstone <1000 psi
2% KCl water
2% KCl water with alcohol
15 to 20% HCl
Less crude
10% acetic acid
10% acetic acid or 1.5% HF nEOF firing head before and after firing.
The firing head nests inside either a pro-
duction valve or a gun release system,
Xylene and is designed for no-delay firing.
Diesel

nRules of thumb in fluid selection.

26 Oilfield Review
date the special needs of EOP jobs. Conven- SXAR Equipment Detonating Cord Initiated, Guns Dropped,
as Assembled Guns Shot Pressure Applied
tional TCP firing heads are activated by posi-
tive pressure, but have a hydraulic time-
delay mechanism that stalls firing for up to
15 minutes until activating pressure is bled
off to achieve underbalance. This delay is
Release
unnecessary with EOP—good safety practice housing
minimizes exposure of surface and down-
hole equipment to high pressure. For this
purpose, Schlumberger introduced the EOF-
BA extreme overbalance firing head, which
has no time delay (previous page, right ). The
firing head starts the train of events leading
to gun detonation when pressure exceeds
Release
the predetermined strength of shear pins. pin
This pressure drives an operating piston
upward to release a firing pin. Because the
piston must move against gravity, the firing
head is unaffected by vertical drops.
The EOF firing head nests inside either a
gun-release or an isolation valve system,
depending on completion type. The Explo-
sively Initiated Automatic Release (SXAR) Release
system is used for permanent completions, piston
in which the guns are fired and immediately
dropped into the rathole, allowing the well Break
to come on line immediately after perforat- plugs
ing (right ). The Explosively Initiated Produc-
tion Valve (SXPV) is used for “shoot-and-
pull” operations, in which the well is often
killed and the guns removed to provide an
unobstructed flow path, to run the comple-
tion string or to perform other work such as
a frac job.
In both completion types, safety and well
performance depend on quick and precisely
timed release of pressure. The valve and
gun-release system must assure that release
Pressure
of pressure from the tubing is synchronized
with detonation of the guns, thereby keep- Applied Hydrostatic Atmospheric
ing excess pressure off the casing. If unper-
forated casing is subjected to extreme over-
balance pressure, it can damage mechanical nSXAR system for extreme overbalance operations. A member of the X-Tool equipment
components in the well, cause a packer family for permanent completions, in which guns are dropped into the wellbore rathole
leak, blow packers uphole (packers are after firing, this completion tool makes use of a break-plug mechanism for rapid release
of guns and allows production immediately after perforating. Applied pressure (red),
often the weakest link), burst casing or col- before and after activation, is typically 10,000 psi.
lapse perforating guns.
For this reason, Schlumberger developed a
unique mechanism that assures rapid

17. For a safety checklist prepared by Oryx, see the

appendix in Handren et al, reference 3.

Autumn 1996 27
 nHeart of the X-Tool release of pressure only when perforation is
system, before and
after detonation. certain. The heart of this device is a stack of
Whole break plugs break plugs that have high compressive
(beside the golf ball) strength, but low lateral strength (left ). The
support the trip plugs can support the compressive force of
mechanism, but
the pressure applied to the valve, but not
shatter when the
detonating cord, high lateral stress. The detonating cord
passing through passes through the plugs and if it undergoes
their center, under- a high-order detonation—which virtually
goes a high-order assures firing of the guns—the lateral shock
detonation. This vir-
tually assures that of the cord detonation shatters the plugs and
guns release or the trips the mechanism. Because the SXPV and
production valve SXAR are activated by the detonation train
opens at the that fires the shaped charges, there is little
moment the guns
chance of loading the casing prematurely.
fire, safely keeping
high pressure off The SXPV and SXAR belong to a family of
casing, packers and five new completion tools, the X-Tools, that
surface equipment. make use of this gun-activation method.
The SXPV design enhances EOP perfor-
SXPV Equipment Detonating Cord mance by opening the flow ports faster than
as Assembled Initiated, Guns Shot Pressure Applied
any other valve (below left ). Rapid transfer
of pressure to the perforations is essential,
Flow ports since a typical EOP event lasts 15 seconds
Flow ports open at most, and must take advantage of each
closed
second to maximize the amount of work
applied to the formation. Loss of time con-
veying fluid from the tubing to the perfora-
tion translates into reduction in fracture
length and possibly in fracture width.
The SXPV valve begins opening 8 to 20
Firing head
milliseconds (msec) after gun detonation,
and is fully open after another 4 msec (next
page, top ). This high-speed operation means
the valve opens fully before fluid pressure
starts transferring from the tubing to the per-
Detonating
cord tube foration tunnels. With a conventional,
adapter hydraulically activated valve, detonation to
full opening of the valve can take a full sec-
ond, or 10% of a typical 10-second EOB
Operating event. This time delay means that less energy
piston goes into creation of fractures, resulting in
less fracture length (next page, bottom ). In
addition, the SXPV flow ports provide a flow
area 11/2 times that of the tubing diameter,
which minimizes friction and maximizes
transfer of pressure from the tubing.
In permanent completions, where guns are
Release pins dropped into the rathole after detonation,
Support the release system must overcome two engi-
sleeve
neering challenges: It must assure isolation
Break plug of completion hardware from gun shock,
support
which can unseat packers, and it must over-
Break plugs come friction in deviated wells that prevents
the guns from falling. Unassisted, guns usu-
ally will not drop until well deviation
reaches 40 to 45°. Excessive sanding and
debris can also prevent gun release.

nSXPV equipment for EOP. This X-Tool is used when wells are killed to remove guns—
shoot-and-pull—for unobstructed flow, running completions or to perform other work.
Break plugs ensure rapid opening of the production valve. Red is applied pressure, blue
shows hydrostatic and green is atmospheric pressure.
28 Oilfield Review
 nA simplified view
7000 Pulse lasts 15 to 20 seconds of the first millisec-
Gun shock after this point
onds of perforating.
6000 The SXPV valve
begins opening as

Extreme overbalance pulse

5000 early as 8 msec
after gun detona-
4000 tion, and is fully
Pressure, psi

open after another

3000 4 msec. Rapid
opening means the
2000
valve opens fully
X-valve before fluid pres-
opens sure starts transfer-
1000 Gun
firing ring from tubing to
Hydrostatic the perforation tun-
0 nels, maximizing
energy that goes
-1000 into creation of
fractures.
-2000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time, msec

wellbore fluid inflow

Jet interaction with

Maximum annulus
Jet tail formed

Slug exits gun

pressure from
wellbore fluid

Gun open to
penetration
gun swell

End of

0 1000
Time, µsec

20

16
C
E
Fracture radius, m

12
D

8
B

A
4

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time, sec

nHow valve speed makes a difference. The more energy that goes into creating
fractures, the greater potential to extend fracture length. In these five ARCO wells,
examples A, B, D and E had enough nitrogen to cause significant erosion, whereas
example C ran out of gas, literally, before the curve plateaued and fractures
reached full extension. (From Petitjean et al, reference 3.)

Autumn 1996 29
 Accelerometer Hydrophone
Guns fired
and dropped
3.07 sec (66.68 ft)
Guns hit
bridge plug
nFastest gun this side of the Pecos. The shot detection
system, which records accelerometer and acoustic
(hydrophone) signals during gun firing, documents
the rapid gun release of the SXAR system. In this well,
a 150-ft gun deviated 76° dropped in 3.07 seconds into
a 66-ft [20-m] rathole.
The SXAR addresses both shock and fric- The guns themselves provide the final link
tion problems by timing the firing of guns in the perforating chain. Charge type can
shortly after disintegration of the last break significantly influence results. Failure of
plug. At the instant the guns fire, they have some early EOP jobs was traced to a kind of
already been released, so the shock wave is screenout caused by plugging of perfora-
expended overcoming friction rather than tions with debris. Evidence for this was sur-
traveling up the completion string. Tests and face pressure that did not decline after the
field trials show the system works in a range guns went off. Investigators discovered that
of settings. In vertical wells, guns drop at 20 perforator debris behaves differently under
ft/sec [6 m/sec] and reach terminal speed a different settings. It can be permeable under
few milliseconds after release.18 The detona- the slowly rising pressures of hydraulic frac-
tion shock also effectively moves guns in turing, which can pump through some
highly deviated wells. In one well, the SXAR debris. But to the high-speed extreme over-
system successfully released a 150-ft [46-m] balance pressure pulse, debris can act as an
gun that was deviated 76° at the top and impermeable barrier. Behrmann and col-
86° at bottom (above ). leagues demonstrated that in EOP jobs,
accumulation of this debris, and subsequent
increase in pressure required to blast
through it, is minimized by use of deep pen-
etrators instead of big-hole charges.
30
Shot phasing also plays a role. In vertical
wells, a minimum of 120° phasing will typi-
cally result in two thirds of the perforations
lying within 45° of the PFP, the maximum
distance before EOP fractures start forming
away from perforations. Phasing choice is
also affected by procedures following EOP.
If EOP is a precursor to hydraulic fracturing,
a single biwing fracture is most desirable. In
this case, 60, 90 or 120° phasing is optimal.
However, if matrix acidizing is to follow,
then a higher, 45° phasing will help dis-
tribute acid around the wellbore.
While most operators use 60 to 120°
phasing, ARCO prefers 180°. Based on
large near-wellbore pressure losses in Prud-
hoe Bay wells deviated 30 to 50°, ARCO
determined that multiple fractures were
developing from 60° phase shots. By
changing shot phasing to 180°, the pressure
drop fell from 2000 psi [13.8 MPa] to under
500 psi [3445 kPa], which contributed to
placement of a larger amount of proppant.
“We think this suggests a single, biwing frac-
ture,” said Joe Schmidt, the ARCO engineer
who helped develop the ROPE program. In
gun systems with phasing other than 60°,
maximum benefit is obtained by keeping the
same alignment for all gun segments.
Shot density—the number of shots per ver-
tical foot—becomes increasingly important
in longer perforation intervals. Too high a
density can result in excessive leakoff. Too
low a density can result in longer exposure
of tubulars to high pressure and increased
risk of unseating a packer. In general,
because extreme overbalance procedures
produce instantaneous flow at 100 to 200
barrels per minute, a rule of thumb is a shot
density two to four times normal. ARCO,
for example, typically shoots EOP jobs at 4
shots per foot using 120° phasing over a
20-ft interval.
Oilfield Review
Elements of EOP Design: Operations Comparison of Extreme Overbalance Methodologies
Today’s extreme overbalance operations fol- ARCO Marathon Oryx
low one of two basic routes: perforating as a
Reservoir Properties
stand-alone event followed by pumping, or
perforating and surging at the same time Interval, ft 20 to 60 20 to 120 4 to 1501
(right ). In the Oryx method, EOP is followed Depth, ft 8000 to 15,000 4000 to 9000 4000 to 15,000
by high-rate pumping. In wells that are Bottomhole pressure, psi 10,000 to 11,000 500 to 4000 500 to 11,000
already perforated, Oryx finds that continued
Permeability, md 10 to 300 10 to 150 <100 or 100 to 300 if
pumping after overbalance surge can reduce pressure insufficient
skin, as long as the pumping precedes flow for underbalance
from the reservoir.19 The surge method, using perforating
a frangible disk or expendable plug, has Job Design
proved to reduce pressure requirements of
Gradient,2 psi 1.2 to 1.6 1.8 to 2.1 1.4 to 3.0
subsequent hydraulic fracturing.
ARCO, working on the Alaskan North Fluid/gas <300 ft fluid; N2 at <1000 ft fluid; N2 at <1000 ft fluid; N2 at
>50,000 scf, with >50,000 scf, with 50,000 to 100,000
Slope, reports similar results with its ROPE slick water on top slick water on top scf, with slick water
method and, since 1994, a high-energy ver- and 15% acid on top
sion nicknamed HE ROPE. The main differ- Guns TCP guns; wireline TCP guns, usually TCP guns, 60° or
ence between the Oryx and ARCO methods guns with big-hole 60° phasing, 120° phasing, 4 or
is that ARCO uses nearby wells as holding charges for new 4 to 6 spf more spf
tanks for high-pressure nitrogen. Instead of completions;
pumping, ARCO pressures up nitrogen in 180° phasing
nearby wells, connected by hard line to the Other Surge disk for previ- Proppant carrier over Resin gel typical for
treated well. A plug is set in the tubing tail of ously perfed wells TCP carrier sand control
the storage well, and both the target well Large-diameter tubu- Surge disk for previ- Clean fluids
lars to reduce friction ously perfed wells essential to success
and storage well are simultaneously pres- loss and increase N2
sured. At the appropriate time, the surge disk Pump after all jobs,
volume same day or
ruptures with firing of the perforating guns, High-Energy ROPE next day
releasing all the gas into the target well. method, in which N2
The HE ROPE method uses nearly 100% in a nearby well is
nitrogen, with a small amount—10 to 20 bbl pressured and piped
to the well being
[1.6 to 3.2 m3]—of liquid over the guns. Bot- treated
tomhole pressure exceeds 10,000 psi, with
Results
an overbalance of about 6500 psi [45 MPa].
The high pressure and high volume of nitro- 40% of wells with Increased production Negative skin on 88%
production increase rates and oil cuts of wells
gen lead to injection rates close to 270 bar-
of 10 to 20% in highly saturated No increase in
rels per minute [40 m3/min]. This rate results intervals
80% of wells requiring recoverable reserves,
in greater fracture width, erosion of the for- low frac pressure Completion time just in recovery rate
mation by gas and reduced near-wellbore when frac job follows reduced 30% Fractures likely to
pressure losses.20 The high-energy version Additional 15 to 20% Completion cost stay in zone due to
doubles fracture radius over conventional of frac sand placed reduced 11% low volume and short
ROPE, and because fractures tend to propa- 35% of TCP jobs period of fluid/gas
gate in a straight line, also allows for better fraced later inflow
Higher percentage of EOP as screening for
18. Huber K and Egey J: “SDET-B Confirms SXAR Fast frac sand placed other treatments: if
Release and High Speed of Dropping Guns,” The no response to EOP,
Perforating and Testing Review 6, no. 3 (October no further intervention
1993): 19. planned
19. Dees JM and Handren PJ: “Extreme Overbalance 1 With significant wellbore storage effect, the interval maximum rises to 500 ft.
Perforating Improves Well Performance,” World Oil
2 Achieved gradients sometimes fall slightly below the designed value, mainly because crews may feel more comfortable with lower
215, no. 1 (January 1994): 96-98. pressures. At the 1.4-psi gradient, however, the pressure on tubulars is usually no greater than that encountered during screenout
20. Couët et al, reference 3. of a conventional frac job, although EOP pressure may be applied for a longer period.

Autumn 1996 31
 Extreme Overbalance Perforating Underbalance Hydraulic Fracturing

M
a
ho xim
riz um Time 1 Time 1
nThe many become on
ta
one. Extreme over- ls
tre
balance perforating ss
in a horizontal well
causes a single frac-
ture to develop from
multiple perfora-
tions, since the
applied pressure
exceeds in-situ m ss
imu stre
stress. By time 2 Min ontal
r i z
(bottom left), separate ho
fractures from sepa-
rate perforations Time 2 Time 2
have merged and
rotated into the
plane of maximum
horiztonal stress.
With hydraulic frac-
turing in the same
stress scenario (right),
separate fractures
develop.

height control during fracturing of thin inter- nHot proppant.

vals (above ). A gamma ray
Several operators have looked into sus- tracer log in a
Marathon well
pending proppant in extreme overbalance shows a concentra-
fluids, in hopes of blowing it into the perfo- tion of tagged
rations and propping the fractures. Most proppant in perfo-
efforts have failed because of the high shear rations (yellow)
rate of fluid-proppant mixtures. At pump More proppant
appears to have
rates used in treatments, the fluid becomes been injected into
a “plug” and will not flow. Another prob- the upper two inter-
lem is suspending the proppant uniformly vals than into the
in the fluid while it is being pumped down bottom interval.
Subsequent produc-
the tubing. tion testing con-
Nevertheless, progress has been made. firmed that there
Marathon, for example, along with Owen was no communi-
Oil Tools has developed a proppant deliv- cation behind pipe.
ery system positioned just above the guns (From Snider et al,
reference 21.)
that minimizes difficulties of mixing prop-
pant with completion fluids (such as uncer-
tain suspension time and increased viscos-
ity). Marathon has run tests with 200 to 400
lbm [90 to 180 kg] of radioactively tagged
proppant. Gamma ray scanning logs run Work is just starting on EOP in horizontal overbalance methods in this setting may
afterward indicate no proppant in the wells, which present a new range of chal- require a higher pressure gradient, well
rathole and high radioactivity at perforation lenges related to gravity. An underbalance above 1.4 psi/ft, to pulverize and move
entrances (right ).21 “We know it’s going into perforating experiment at TerraTek shows debris that tends to fall to the low side of the
the holes,” said Phil Snider of Marathon. that detonation products could not be hole. Mobil and Halliburton have used EOP
“But we still don’t know if we’re running flushed from down-side perforations in a successfully in a horizontal well at 15,693 ft
enough proppant volume, or for enough wellbore deviated 29°, even with a 400-psi [4783 m] true vertical depth to tap a tight
time, to get effective propping.” [2756 kPa] underbalance differential. Based gas reservoir. Perforating guns were con-
on this result, some operators are using ori- veyed on drillpipe.22
ented guns and perforating horizontal drains
on the top and sides only. Applying extreme

32 Oilfield Review
Unanswered Questions
“Most of the time, we know when extreme
overbalance will work,” said Phil Snider of
Marathon. “But the few jobs that go wrong
are the ones driving our research.”
This sentiment informs much of today’s
investigations into extreme overbalance
methods. But as knowledge increases, so do
the apparent number of unknowns. Most
workers in EOP have a wish list of what
would make their lives easier and more pro-
ductive. Highlights of this list include the
following questions:
What is the pressure-rise time? Knowing
the shape and exact length of the pressure-
time curve from the moment of gun dis-
charge will allow calculation of the number
of fractures and fracture width. In addition,
watching what happens in the first few sec-
onds can shed light on friction levels to opti-
mize job design. To achieve this, Snider is
using a downhole high-speed pressure gauge
that measures 20,000 data points per sec-
ond. Early results indicate that perforation
and fluid influx may behave more as a single
event than as two distinct ones. In addition,
results indicate that optimization requires
limiting flow restrictions in tubing and
reducing the height of liquid in tubulars.23
How does gun system design affect frac-
tures—big hole or deep penetrators? 24
Marathon’s experience indicates that big-
hole charges may lay down filter cake that
prevents injection of the surge. Except for
gravel packing, deep penetrators are gener-
ally the charge of choice.
How conductive are EOP fractures, and
how long do they work? Experience shows
that short, unpropped fracs have a useful life
of 6 to 12 months. As Marathon has
observed, proppant may pack EOP perfora-
tion tunnels, but may function more as an
abrasive than a proppant. And the abrasive
action decreases near the fracture tip, as
flow velocity decreases. In support of this
claim, large gains in well productivity with
the addition of a small volume of prop-
pant—100 to 200 lbm [45 to 90 kg]—sug-
gest scouring as the mode of action. Bauxite
has proved to provide better scouring than
conventional frac sand.
Over what distance do EOP fractures turn?
Experiments in large blocks of rock indicate
turning is complete in two or three wellbore
diameters, but there is evidence that in situ,
turning may take 5 to 10 ft [0.6 to 3 m].
Autumn 1996
Does EOP mean that subsequent frac
jobs require more or less horsepower?
Again, experience is ambiguous. Some
operators report always needing less horse-
power, while others say sometimes less,
sometimes more. Oryx finds that regardless
of horsepower required, EOP jobs always
result in placement of a higher proppant
concentration during subsequent frac jobs.
The treatment screens out, for example, at
8 lbm/gal [958 kg/m3] instead of 4 lbm/gal
[479 kg/m3].
Where Are You Going, EOP?
There are parallels between the develop-
ment of extreme overbalance perforating
and tubing-conveyed perforating. In the
1970s, TCP burst on the scene with Roy
Vann’s innovative designs for downhole
equipment. Hailed by proponents as a per-
forating panacea, and by others as an aber-
ration that would soon disappear, it was ini-
tially adopted by a few operators. Trial and
error smoothed out the rough edges, con-
vincing the industry at large of its technical
and economic benefits. Eventually, TCP set-
tled in as a niche service, which today
accounts for more than 25% of the perforat-
ing business.
EOP emerged in a slightly different con-
text. After 1986, low and stable oil prices
instigated a flurry of engineering creativity,
moving completion designs toward further
specialization and producing a change in
perspective. The idea of “completion equals
plumbing”—seals, tubulars, valves and
packers—began to give way to the view that
“completion equals well optimization.” By
the beginning of the 1990s, the completions
world was no longer neatly divided into
wireline, slickline, tubing and coiled tubing
techniques. Now the approach is to find the
best mix of solutions to optimize recovery.
Extreme overbalance is one such develop-
ment that blurs old boundaries. Usually per-
formed on tubing, EOP can be achieved
with wireline; it also marries perforating and
pumping, and inches toward stimulating,
but stops short at near-wellbore enhance-
ment. In the continuum of well treatments,
it more closely resembles matrix acidizing
than hydraulic fracturing, although its tech-
niques borrow more from the latter.
Whether EOP will join the mainstream in
the style of TCP or remain a small niche ser-
vice depends mainly on proof of its eco-
nomic viability. This proof requires further
technical refinements so that results can be
clearly related to technique.
One trend that may prove fruitful is the
recent move away from the pressure gradi-
ent rule and toward the tubular limit
rule—selecting the highest pressure safely
allowed by the tubular rating. ARCO, for
example, keeps pressure to within 80% of
tubular burst rating. However, it is still
unclear whether more pressure is always
better. By contrast, there is a move toward
larger diameter tubing, which typically has a
lower pressure rating but allows a higher
volume of gas. Also under investigation is
the use of proppant carriers, which have
been tried in only a few dozen wells.
ARCO has been looking to test the ROPE
method, with its precise control of fracture
height, on coal degasification projects,
where water intrusion often limits develop-
ment. Another possible use of this method is
in remote wells, where highly mobile nitro-
gen generation equipment could be readily
moved on site.
“We think of EOP not as a replacement for
the hydraulic frac,” said Joe Schmidt of
ARCO, “but as a pretreatment for fast return.
If we have trouble with a conventional frac
because of earth stresses or well deviation,
this works.”
Schmidt’s view represents that of many
workers trying to define the limits of the
EOP frontier. True, it is known to work in
some settings, and yes, the mechanics may
not be clear, but that is simply a problem
that will wash away with more study.
“We know just about all we can about
underbalance perforating,” said Phil Snider
of Marathon Oil Company. “Extreme over-
balance still presents the possibility of dis-
covering new benefits.” —JMK
21. Oriold F and Snider PM: “TCP Proppant Carrier Sys-
tems for Extreme Overbalance Perforating: Experi-
ence to Date,”paper CIM 96-82, presented at the
47th Annual Technical Meeting of the Petroleum
Society, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, June 10-12, 1996.
Snider PM, Hall FR and Whisonant RJ: “Experiences
with High Energy Stimulations for Enhancing Near-
Wellbore Conductivity,” paper SPE 35321, presented
at the International Petroleum Conference and Exhi-
bition, Villahermosa, Mexico, March 5-7, 1996.
22. Chambers MR, Mueller MW and Grossmann A:
“Well Completion Design and Operations for a
Deep Horizontal Well with Multiple Fractures,”
paper SPE 30417, presented at SPE Offshore Europe
1995, Aberdeen, Scotland, September 5-8, 1995.
23. Snider et al, reference 21.
24. A big-hole charge increases hole diameter at the
expense of penetration depth. Hole diameter in cas-
ing is two to three times greater than with a deep
penetrator, but penetration is substantially reduced.
33