ENPE 533/622 PETROLEUM PRODUCTION ENGINEERING/SUBSURFACE

PRODUCTION OPERATIONS

ASSIGNMENT 10: SKIN FACTOR & WELL STIMULATION DUE: 5 pm F 11 Apr 2025

1) During a drawdown test a well flowed at 127 stb/d for 15.33 hours. The subsequent
pressure buildup data are given in A10.Problem1.xls. Well and reservoir
parameters are given in the table below. Determine the permeability and skin factor for
this well.
B_o 1.06 rb/stb
c_t 4.20E-06 1/psi
h 80 ft
porosity 0.25
viscosity 5 cP
r_w 0.29 ft

2) The following reservoir, well and fluid data are known:

Depth (D): 4,000 ft
Tubing inner diameter (dti): 2.259 in.
Oil gravity (API): 35 oAPI

Oil viscosity (cp): 5 cp

Production GLR (GLR): 350 scf/bbl
Gas specific gravity (gg): 0.7 air =1
Flowing tubing head pressure
(phf): 200 psia
Flowing tubing head
temperature (thf): 80 oF

Flowing temperature at tubing

shoe (twf): 130 oF

Water cut (WC): 20 %

Reservoir pressure (pe): 2300 psia
Bubble point pressure (pb): 1300 psia
Productivity above bubble point
(J*): 0.916 stb/d-psi
Permeability, k 176 mD
reservoir thickness, h 35 5
B_o 1.1 rb/stb
drainage radius, r_e 3000 5
wellbore radius, r_w 0.25 5
 Based on the HagedornBrown correlation and the Vogel model (use the appropriate
bottomholeNodal spreadsheet, the operator is expecting a flow rate of about 1190 stb/d as the
operating point below:

The actual flow rate observed is 600 stb/d.

a) A service company representaJve claims that paraffin deposiJon is common in

reservoirs like yours and that the reduced tubing cross secJon is causing the lower-
than-expected flow rate. Evaluate this claim by determining the tubing ID that would
be consistent with the actual flow rate.
• Assume that paraffin uniformly coats the enJre tubing,
• use Hagedorn Brown CorrelaJon with smaller values of tubing ID unJl you
obtain the actual flow rate.

b) A different service company representaJve claims that the produced water is

becoming supersaturated with respect to dissolved minerals as it nears the wellbore.
The precipitated minerals are damaging the near-wellbore formaJon. What skin
factor is consistent with the actual flow rate?
• Recall that in the Vogel IPR qmax is proporJonal to J* where

𝐽∗ =
c) The first service company representaJve argues that permeability reducJon from
mineral scale is typically only 10%. Assuming she is correct, esJmate the radius of
damage zone.

d) The third representaJve asserts that the kill fluid used in recent workover on this
well caused clay parJcles in the near-wellbore region to swell and severely block
pores in the formaJon matrix to a radius of 1.25 \. He says clay swelling typically
reduces permeability by 90%. Can his asserJons explain the actual flow rate?
3) A pressure buildup test indicates a large skin factor, along with the following reservoir
properJes. An acid sJmulaJon is proposed to remove damage and reduce the skin
factor.
reservoir depth 9800 ft
formation breakdown pressure 7200 psi
average reservoir pressure 4200 psia
wellbore radius, r_w 0.35 ft
formation thickness, h 100 ft
oil production drainage radius, r_e 3200 ft
oil permeability, k_o 5 mD
oil viscosity, \mu_o 2 cP
oil formation volume factor, B_o 1.4 rb/stb
skin factor, S 50
acid injection effective transient 4 ft
radius, r_e_trans
acid permeability, k_a 10 mD
acid viscosity, \mu_a 1 cP

a) In the months before the build-up test, the well operated at a bo^om hole flowing
pressure of 2000 psia. What was the flow rate, assuming single phase steady flow?

b) NeglecJng fricJon losses, what is the maximum allowable wellhead pressure to avoid
fracturing the formaJon while injecJng acid? That is, what is the wellhead pressure
when the well is full of acid and the bo^omhole flowing pressure Pwf equals the
formaJon breakdown pressure Pbd?

c) Acid injecJon begins at a pressure of 95% of the maximum wellhead pressure. Calculate
the expected acid flow rate into the formaJon. Assume zero fricJon losses in the tubing.
• Note: be sure to use the effec1ve transient radius r_e_trans in the injec1vity
formula

• this accounts for the fact that the acid injec1on flow regime is transient

d) A\er acid injecJon begins, the injecJon rate is gradually increased to maintain the
wellhead injecJon pressure at 95% of the maximum allowable value. A\er 10 minutes
 of injecJon, the injecJon rate is 0.75 stb/min. EsJmate the skin factor a\er 10 minutes,
assuming no fricJon losses.

e) Acid injecJon conJnues unJl the skin factor is reduced to a value of 1. The formaJon
has a heterogeneous permeability profile. EsJmate the total volume of mud acid
required for the sJmulaJon using the maximum pressure maximum rate design.

f) The well is returned to producJon a\er the acid sJmulaJon. EsJmate the producJon
rate if the bo^omhole flowing pressure the same as before the sJmulaJon, i.e. 2000 psia

4) Hydraulic fracturing sJmulaJon is also being considered for the well in Problem 3. The
following geomechanical properJes apply to the overburden and reservoir:
FORMATION AND OVERBURDEN
PROPERTIES
overburden density 187.2 lbm/ft^3
Biot alpha 0.7
fluid pressure 4200 psia
Poisson's ratio 0.25
tectonic stress 500 psia
tensile strength 500 psia
FRAC PROPERTIES
proppant mass concentration 4 lb/ft^2
frac half length 700 ft
k_matrix, to oil 5 md
a. EsJmate the bo^omhole pressure required to iniJate a fracture.

b. A fracture is created with a proppant coverage of 4 lbm/\2 of propped fracture

surface area and a half length of xf = 700 \. Taking the matrix permeability to be
the oil phase permeability in Problem 4, determine the dimensionless fracture
conducJvity FCD and the effecJve skin factor due to the fracture Sf.

c. What will the oil flow rate be a\er the fracturing sJmulaJon, assuming the
bo^omhole flowing pressure is 2000 psia?