Copyright 2000, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
The choice of how to perforate an interval is considered by
many engineers as a straightforward exercise. Typically, an
engineer takes API gun performance data from RP-43, uses
some nodal analysis program and determines the "optimum"
shots per foot, phasing and shaped charge that provides the
maximum inflow performance for the completion. This
information in combination with operational constraints is
then used to design the perforation operation.
As more and more is understood about the perforation process,
some operators are becoming aware of the value of
approaching the perforation operation as a system instead of a
simple engineering exercise. However, one aspect that has not
received very much attention is the make-up of the reservoir in
the near wellbore area, and how this affects the overall
performance of the perforated interval after the perforation
event.
This paper presents the results of a program to optimize the
perforation strategy for a major gas field in the North Sea. An
emphasis is placed on understanding the effect of the
perforation operation on the deliverability of the reservoir near
the perforation. The discussion in this paper includes
petrographic analyses of the near perforation rock before and
after the perforation event. In addition, CT (Computer
Tomography) scans and core flow tests were done in order to
understand observations from whole core tests. Production
data from several wells is presented that documents the
success of the system approach to developing the perforation
strategy for the field.
Introduction
A study was commissioned by Chevron and Conoco to
determine the optimum underbalance and potential for sand
production for a major North Sea gas field. The optimum
underbalance was initially calculated using theoretical models
based on log derived formation properties. Experiments were
then conducted to confirm the theoretical models. The initial
results indicated a positive skin after perforating up to 3000
psi underbalance (1). The objective of this study was to
determine the cause of the positive skin.
It is well established that perforating process causes a change
in the matrix rock immediately surrounding the perforation
tunnel that results in a decrease in the matrix permeability in
this region (2-4). The magnitude of this permeability change is
a function of many parameters such as rock properties, matrix
and perforating fluids, and hydrostatic pressure in the wellbore
(5). The general practice to minimize the detrimental effect of
the damaged zone around the perforation tunnel is to perforate
underbalanced. Several studies have been done to try to
quantify and model the optimum amount of underbalance
needed to minimize the effect of this damaged zone (6-12).
It has been postulated that the combination of underbalance
and fines in the matrix can also contribute to magnitude of
damage around the perforation tunnel (13). If there are pore
lining fines in the formation and the velocity of the surge
toward the perforation tunnel caused by the underbalance is
greater than the critical velocity for fines movement, it is
possible that the migration of these fines into the 'crushed
zone' around the perforation tunnel can cause a further
decrease in the permeability.
Perforation Tests
A series of whole core perforation tests were done in order to
optimize the perforation strategy for a major gas field in the
North Sea. One part of the optimization process involved
evaluation of the effect of underbalance on the potential
production from the perforation. Details of the procedure are
presented in previous work (1). In general, the test was
accomplished by shooting a shaped charge into a sample of
cored formation material at reservoir condition of net
SPE 64425
Considering The Reservoir in Determining a Perforation Strategy
D.R. Underdown, SPE, Chevron, P. Mariotti, Chevron, A. Venkitaraman, SPE, Schlumberger Reservoir Completions
2 D.R. UNDERDOWN, P. MARIOTTI, A. VENKITARAMAN SPE 64425
overburden conditions in the fixture shown in Figure 1. The
perforation test consisted of initially measuring the
permeability to a synthetic formation brine in the production
direction, perforating the core up to 3000 psi underbalanced
and re-measuring the brine permeability in the production
direction. A positive perforation skin was calculated from
regain permeability flow tests of the reservoir sample tests.
In an effort to understand the cause of the positive skin,
several tests were done on the formation core after the initial
perforation test. These included a CT scan of the perforated
core to determine the shape, penetration and amount of debris
in the perforation tunnel. Additional tests were done to
determine if fluid compatibility or fines movement was the
cause of the positive skin.
Computer Tomography Evaluation
The CT scan process is a non-destructive x-ray imaging
method that provides 3D imaging of the subject whole core.
This evaluation was done within hours of the completion of
the perforation test at the Schlumberger facility. Figure 2
shows that the perforation does contain a large amount of
debris. The "solid" mounds in the center of the CT scan is the
debris left in the perforation tunnel. This debris is
predominantly made up of perforation generated rock grains
lying loosely in the perforation tunnel. The very dark spots in
the debris are part of liner material from the shaped charge.
Figure 3 is a photograph of the core impregnated with epoxy
and split to allow physical inspection of the perforation tunnel.
Even though this evaluation shows a short perforation tunnel
partially filled with debris, a negative skin was expected.
Therefore, further investigation was necessary to understand
the explanation for the positive skin.
Fluid Sensitivity Tests
One of the first explanations considered for the positive skin
was the possibility of an adverse fluid/rock interaction
between the brine and the core material. It was thought that an
adverse interaction of the interstitial brine may have caused
pore lining fines to become mobile and cause the observed
decrease in permeability after the underbalance perforation
test. There are two reasons to discount this possibility. The
first is that the synthetic brine was formulated to have a Cl
-
content similar to the interstitial brine of the formation. Even
though the Cl
-
ions do not provide a stabilization effect, the
associated cations do stabilize clays. The compatibility of the
synthetic brine with the rock used in the perforation test is
demonstrated by the stable brine permeability using 3.1%
NaCl before the test.
In support of this observation, an independent fluid sensitivity
test was done by an independent outside lab using the
Capillary Suction Time (CST) technique (14). The basic
concept is that the longer the Capillary Suction Time, the
greater the interaction of the fluid with the subject rock. The
test measured the change in CST time as a function of
concentration of NaCl in the brine. Inspection of Figure 4
shows that the interval tested is only moderately sensitive to
fresh water. A very sensitive formation will have as much as a
1000% change in CST time; therefore, the low percent change
in CST time for the 3% NaCl indicated that this brine
minimizes the interaction of the brine and the rock. Based on
this information, it was concluded that the concentration of the
brine used in the perforating tests did not cause any
destabilization of pore lining material.
Fines Migration Tests
Another possibility for creation of formation damage is fines
migration caused by the surge of formation fluids into the
perforation tunnel due to the underbalance. A sample of the
producing interval was examined with the Scanning Electron
Microscope(SEM) and petrographically in thin section. The
SEM in Figure 5 shows abundant grain-coating illite/smectite,
fibrous illite and pore-filling kaolinite booklets. The kaolinite
is coarse enough to be seen in thin section as shown in the
Figure 6 photomicrograph. All of these clay types can become
mobile.
In addition, the SEM and thin section both show abundant
quartz overgrowths. Quartz overgrowths are known to cause a
significant reduction in pore-throat diameter which would
possibily increase the likelihood of plugging from migrating
fines over a comparable rock without quartz overgrowths.
The next step in the investigation to determine the potential
for fines movement involved Critical Rate tests by an
independent lab. The Critical Rate tests are designed to
determine if fines will move within a core plug by flowing a
fluid through a core plug at increasing rates. The details of the
test procedure are given in reference (15). There are two
aspects of the potential for fines movement which were
investigated: 1) the effect of the mobile phase used in the
perforation test, and 2) the effect of gas production rate on the
potential for fines movement. Two core plugs from the
formation core used in the perforation test were used in the
Critical Rate tests.
One of the major concerns with the initial perforation tests
was the effect of the mobile phase. The mobile phase used in
the perforation tests was 3.1% NaCl. This was a concern since
the actual mobile phase in the reservoir was gas. It was
speculated that since the mobile phase in the perforation test
was also the wetting phase, there was a tendency for fines
mobilization during the perforating process similar to the
increase in the potential for sand production once a well starts
to make water.
To test this hypothesis, two Critical Rate tests were done. The
first test examined if high rate gas production in this formation
would cause fine movement. The test consisted of gradually
increasing the interstitial gas flow rate through a core plug
SPE 64425 CONSIDERING THE RESERVOIR IN DETERMINING A PERFORATION STRATEGY 3
from the formation at residual brine saturation and measuring
the retained permeability until the gas flow rate through the
core plug was equivalent to about 60,000,000 SCFPD. The
results of this test shown in Figure 7 indicate an initial
increase in normalized permeability which is attributed to a
decrease in residual brine saturation. However, at the higher
rates there is no decrease in normalized permeability that
indicates that up to about an equivalent of 60,000,000 SCFPD
there is no movement of fines.
The second test consisted of taking this same core and flowing
3.1% NaCl at increasing rates. The rates at which the samples
were tested were higher than the initial core permeability tests
carried out prior to perforation. In addition the smaller size of
the samples used gives a much higher flow velocity. Figure 8
shows that almost immediately upon the onset of flow of the
NaCl, there is a decrease in permeability. The flow rates of the
NaCl in this test are low compared to the high flow rate
experienced during the 3000 psi underbalance surge.
However, these results do indicate that one of the major causes
of the formation damage observed in the perforation test is
probably the result of the fines moving toward the perforation
tunnel during the underbalance surge.
Analysis and Implementation
There are several aspects of this study that point out how
important it is to know the characteristics of the reservoir, the
interaction of various fluids with the reservoir rock, and
operational parameters associated with the perforating
operation to maximize the production from completion. The
information gained in this evaluation provided data specific to
the North Sea reservoir, and pointed out how important it is
not to generalize when it comes to deciding on completion
procedures.
The SEM analysis and thin section analysis did show that
there were pore lining fines that could potentially become
mobile. However, just the presence of the pore lining and
cementing fines does not tell if these fines will ever become
mobile. The fluid sensitivity tests also did not show that the
formation was particularly reactive with the brine used as the
test fluid. The fines migration tests showed that interstitial
flow of the wetting phase caused the fines in the formation to
become mobile. This indicates that it was very important to
keep aqueous based fluids off the formation during the drilling
and completion operation. These findings support other work
that indicated that is was necessary to drill the wells with oil
based muds to minimize the potential damage from water
based muds (16). However, operational restrictions required
perforating with brine as the wellbore fluid. Therefore, the
wells were flowed to surface for an extended time
immediately after perforating to minimize the potential for
formation damage from brine based perforating fluids.
The initial theoretical calculations indicated that as much as
4000 psi underbalance would not cause any sanding.
However, an underbalance of 1100 to 1400 psi was chosen for
the completions based on the core test results and operational
constraints. The perforation strategy was optimized using log
derived permeability data and numerous simulations to choose
the guns, charges, and shot density. One of the major
strategies was to perforate different shot densities and charges
in different sections of the formation based on the different
layer properties. At least 20 wells have been completed using
the strategy resulting from this study. The results of well
performance tests on 12 wells are shown in Table I. With the
exception of three wells, all the wells show a negative skin
and are producing better than expected.
Discussion
In order to understand the relevance of this study it is
necessary to take a step back and look at the overall objective;
how to design a good perforating job. Nodal analysis
programs can provide a relative performance comparison of
different perforator choices to assist us in the design.
However, it is important to realize we that there are several
parameters in the analysis that are routinely assumed or
estimated. One important such parameter is the perforation
damage. Over the last several years underbalance perforating
has evolved as a method to minimize this damage and several
correlations are available to estimate the optimum
underbalance (for zero perforation skin). Each successive
effort adds a component that was overlooked by the previous
one or assumed as having a lesser importance. This study
brings out two such overlooked factors: nature of the fluid in
the wellbore and pore spaces (gas, oil, or water), and the
percentage of clays and mobile fines. These concerns were
addressed for this specific North Sea application through
experiments conducted at as near reservoir conditions as
practical. Even in the context of these experiments the study
shows that it is important to mimic the actual perforation
process when conducting perforation optimization tests. It is
also important to keep in mind that "stepping out the box", and
not accepting the norm can help.
Conclusions
The following conclusions are based on the information
discussed in this paper:
The mineralogy and pore geometry of the formation can
have major impact on the effectiveness of the perforation
operation. And, because of the significant variation
common to sandstones with regard to both mineralogy
and pore geometry, testing an actual sample of the zone of
interest is highly desirable.
Typical fluid sensitivity tests do not always indicate the
magnitude of the potential impact of fluid/rock
interactions on the skin around the perforation tunnel.
It is important to mimic field conditions of fluid type,
formation mineralogy and pressure differentials as much
4 D.R. UNDERDOWN, P. MARIOTTI, A. VENKITARAMAN SPE 64425
as possible when conducting perforation core flow tests.
The result of core flow tests supports fines migration
resulting from movement of the interstitial wetting phase
as a cause of the apparent damage observed in the initial
perforating test for the North Sea field.
Acknowledgement
The authors thank Chevron Production Technology Company
and Schlumberger Reservoir Completions organizations for
permission to publish the paper.
References
1. Underdown, D.R., Jenkins, W.H., Pitts, A., Venkitaraman, A., &
Li, H.,"Optimizing Perforating Strategy in Well Completions to
Maximize Productivity", SPE 58772, Presented at the SPE
International Symposium on Formation Damage, Lafayette, LA,
Feb. 23-24, 2000.
2. Behrmann, L.A., Pucknell, J.K., Bishop, S.R., & Hsia,
T.Y.,"Measurement of Addition Skin Resulting from Perforation
Damage", SPE 22809, Presented at the 66
th
Annual Technical
Conference, Dallas, TX, Oct. 6-9, 1991.
3. Hsia, T.Y., & Behrmann, L.A.,"Perforation Skin as a Function
of Rock Permeability and Underbalance", SPE 22810, Presented
at the 66
th
Annual Technical Conference, Dallas, TX, Oct. 6-9,
1991.
4. Pucknell, J.K., & Behrmann, L.A.,"An Investigation of the
Damaged Zone Created by Perforating", SPE 22811, Presented
at the 66
th
Annual Technical Conference, Dallas, TX, Oct 6-9,
1991.
5. Bird, K. & Block, R.H.J.,"Perforating in Tight Sandstones:
Effect of Pore Fluid and Underbalance", SPE 36860, Presented
at the SPE European Petroleum Conference, Milan, Italy, Oct.
22-24, 1996.
6. Crawford, H.R.,"Underbalanced Perforating Design", SPE
19749, Presented at the 64
th
Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, Oct. 8-11, 1989.
7. King, G.E., Anderson, A., & Bingham, M.,"A Field Study of
Underbalance Pressures Necessary to Obtain Clean Perforations
Using Tubing Conveyed Peforating", JPT 38(7), June 1986, pp
662-664.
8. Behrmann, L.A.,"Underbalance Criteria for Minimum
Perforation Damage", SPE 30081, Presented at the SPE
European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague, The
Netherlands, May 15-16, 1995.
9. Behrmann, L.A., Pucknell, J.K., and Bishop, S.R.,"Effects of
Underbalance and Effective Stress on Perforation Damage in
Weak Sandstone: Initial Results", SPE 24770, Presented at the
67
th
Annual Conference, Washington, DC, Oct. 4-7, 1992.
10. Tariq, S.M.,"New, Generalized Criteria for Determining the
Level of Underbalance for Obtaining Clean Perforations", SPE
20636, Presented at the 65
th
Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, Sept. 23-26, 1990.
11. Colle, E.,"Increase Production with Underbalance Perforating",
Pet. Engr. Intl., July, 1988. Pp 39 - 42.
12. Bartusiak, R., Behrmann, L.A., & Halleck, P.M., "Experimental
Investigation of Surge Flow Velocity and Volume Needed to
Obtain Perforation Cleanup", J. Pet. Sc. & Engg., 17 (1997), pp
19 - 28.
13. Devinder, S.A., & Sharma, M.M., "The Nature of the
Compacted Zone Around Perforation Tunnels", SPE 58720,
Presented at the SPE International Symposium on Formation
Damage, Lafayette, LA, Feb. 23-24, 2000.
14. Underdown, D.R., & Conway, M.,"Minimze Formation Damage
Potential with Rapid/Inexpensive Method of Completion and
Stimulation Fluid Selection", SPE 19432, Presented at the SPE
Formation Damage Symposium, Lafayette, LA, Feb. 22-23,
1990.
15. Miranda, R., & Underdown, D.R.,"Laboratory
Measurement of Critical Rate; A Novel Approach for
Quantifying Fines Migration Problems", SPE 25432,
Presented at the Production Operations Symposium,
Oklahoma City, OK, March 21-23, 1993.
16. Internal Chevron Report
P
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
6
Figure 1 Perforating Test Fixture
SPE 64425 CONSIDERING THE RESERVOIR IN DETERMINING A PERFORATION STRATEGY 5
1. Confining chamber with confining fluid (Kerosene) 2. Simulated wellbore with wellbore fluid 3. Core sample with pore pressure
and pore fluid 4. Pore fluid in accumulators 5. Gun with the shaped charge 6. Shooting leads 7. Five gallon accumulator 8. Micrometer
valve 9. PCB fast gauges 10. Shooting Plate
Figure 2. CT Scan of Perforated Core
Figure 3. Epoxy Impregnated Core
6 D.R. UNDERDOWN, P. MARIOTTI, A. VENKITARAMAN SPE 64425
Figure 4. Fluid Sensitivity Tests
Figure 5. SEM of North Sea Formation Material
Figure 6. Thin Section of North Sea Formation Material
SPE 64425 CONSIDERING THE RESERVOIR IN DETERMINING A PERFORATION STRATEGY 7
Figure 7. Critical Rate to Gas, Non-Pulsed
Figure 8. Critical Rate to Brine
8 D.R. UNDERDOWN, P. MARIOTTI, A. VENKITARAMAN SPE 64425
Well # Interval
Perforated
(ft)
Underbalance
(psi)
Skin
1 204 1100 -2.48
2 174 1230 -0.15
3 139 1200 -1.61
4 237 1260 +1.48
5 237 1080 -1.58
6 210 1235 -1.59
7 147 1235 -3.80*
8 201 1537 -1.60
9 178 1537 +0.50
10 325 1488 +1.60
11 237 1516 -0.46
12 254 2137 -3.50*
* These particularly low skin values may be enhanced as a
result of phase behavior effect associated with gas condensate
reservoirs
Table 1. Well Test Results