IPTC 13815

Novel Perforation Job Design Leads To Successful TCP Shoot In A 3000

Foot Horizontal Carbonate Producer
Ahmed M. Shindy, Osama H. Khedr, SPE, ZADCO, A. Salsman SPE, G. Bennett, Schlumberger

Copyright 2009, International Petroleum Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Doha, Qatar, 7–9 December 2009.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IPTC Programme 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 International Petroleum Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily
reflect any position of the International Petroleum Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Papers presented at IPTC are subject to publication review by Sponsor Society Committees
of IPTC. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the International Petroleum Technology Conference 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, IPTC, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax +1-972-952-9435.

Abstract

A recent horizontal producer well was drilled as part of a multilateral openhole completion pair in the Arabian Gulf area.
The casing of the main wellbore could not get to bottom which necessitated the bottom lateral be cased and cemented for
isolation purposes and then perforated. The decision to perforate the 3000’ horizontal section was unexpected so supplies were
insufficient to perforate this long section using the traditional perforating method.
Rather than delaying the well completion and deferring production from this well, an effort was put into looking for
alternatives. With the help of a perforation modeling tool it was shown that the horizontal section could be shot using a
dynamic underbalance job design at greatly reduced shot densities and still achieve an injectivity, required for acid matrix
stimulation, and subsequent productivity greater than if the well were to be shot conventionally at 6 spf. This technique of
dynamic underbalance had been successfully used locally on wireline perforating jobs in short intervals but never on such a
long well section nor at such low shot densities.
Another potential complication with the conventional perforating technique is the presence of a 2nd open hole lateral which
was in communication with the well to be perforated. This meant that the zone would be shot in an overbalanced condition
which can lead to post perforation damage and poor injectivity.
This paper will describe the process used to establish the dynamic underbalance perforation job design suitable for this well,
the final job design, the execution of the job and the obtained results of this successful application. The results indicated better
than expected injectivity prior to acid matrix stimulation and better than expected well productivity post stimulation. The
improved well productivity is based on modeled and also nearby well production results.
A successful job design methodology and execution has been tried for the first time in this region and has potential
applications to many other wells.
Background

The horizontal well that forms the basis for this case study was drilled offshore in the Arabian Gulf in 2007. The well was
intended to be completed as an openhole producing well and the case under consideration here was one of 2 lateral drains
(Figure 1). During the well construction process the 7” casing was set at higher than planned depth leaving a part of upper
reservoir in communication with lower reservoir below the 7” casing shoe. This reservoir section would interfere with the
production from the lower 6” hole so it was decided to run a 4 ½” liner and extent it up into the 7” casing to provide isolation
between the two laterals. With a cemented liner in place this necessitated the requirement to perforate the liner section in order
to produce the well.
2 IPTC 13815

The horizontal section to be perforated is approximately 2500 feet long and cuts through a carbonate oil reservoir. The
perforating program was designed to shoot several sections along the horizontal well length (Table 1). Based on past
experience in perforating 4 ½” liner, a 2 7/8” 60 degree phased gun with a shot density of 6 shots per foot with deep
penetrating charges would be required. Also in previous horizontal wells in this reservoir it was observed that production
would typically come mainly from the section of the well closest to the heel. This condition was also considered as part of the
perforating program. The well will also be matrix stimulated with acid using coiled tubing as the primary means of diversion.

The requirement to run the 4 ½” liner was not considered as part of the original completion program, hence and due to limited
time, the perforating job was a challenge in terms of design, preparation, mobilization and execution. The equipment
availability with the service providers in the country was evaluated and it was found that only ~7500 of the required ~12,000
conventional perforating charges can be provided. In order to obtain additional supplies, the time required could delay the well
completion and subsequent oil production by ~2 months or more.
IPTC 13815 3

Job Planning

Based on the available information there were several options to be considered to get the well on production.
• The net interval length could be reduced but this would have a negative impact on well production and reservoir
drainage.
• The shot density could be reduced but with the well being shot overbalance resulting in significant perforation
damage again well productivity would be impaired.
• The completion could be delayed to allow adequate supplies to be brought into the country.
While these options were being considered, a novel solution to this problem was studied. Based on previous experience
elsewhere in the world and the use of a perforation modeling design tool, a gun system was proposed using the same carriers
but with a much reduced shot density of 2 to 2.6 shots per foot. The modeling results indicated that with the use of a dynamic
underbalance design the well could be perforated in an overbalance condition, the perforation damaged can be removed and
then the well can potentially produce at an even better rate that that expected with the conventional gun design. Figure 2 shows
the difference in model estimated productivity between different techniques.

Underbalance Perforating

The perforating process creates damage in the perforation tunnel wall, commonly referred to as the crushed zone which is
permeability impaired1. Several different techniques are used to mitigate this damage problem including perforating in an
underbalanced condition (wellbore pressure < reservoir pressure at the time of shooting), skin frac, acid wash and dynamic
underbalance methods. Perforating in underbalance conditions started as an accepted field technique with the introduction of
capsule style guns and wireline pressure control equipment in the 1960’s. It further evolved with the general acceptance of
Tubing Conveyed Perforating (TCP) in the 1970’s.
The technique further matured with several studies in the ‘80’s and 90’s2,3,4 which helped to establish guidelines as to the level
of underbalance required to clean perforation tunnels. As these techniques have further evolved the traditional underbalance
practices have come to be referred to as “static underbalance perforating” with the recent introduction of the dynamic
underbalance perforating method5. If the conditions in the wellbore are such that the wellbore pressure is > the reservoir
pressure at the time of shooting this is referred to as static overbalance perforating.
Dynamic underbalance perforating is a process where by a brief underbalance transient is created in the wellbore across from
the perforations at the time of shooting. This underbalance transient is created by the inflow of well fluids into the gun and
associated chambers immediately after the perforation charges make holes in the gun carriers. This inflow of well fluids is
enhanced with the addition of shots designed to makes holes in the gun carrier only. The configuration of these additional
shots is determined as part of the job design. This dramatic underbalance transient removes the perforation damage around the
4 IPTC 13815

tunnel by first breaking it up with the underbalance shock and creating a brief flow removing loose crushed rock material from
the tunnel. The dynamic underbalance perforation clean-up method has proven to be very effective and can be achieved in
both static underbalance and static overbalance conditions.
There is a growing understanding that many static underbalance perforating jobs have not delivered the expected well
performance results. This can be due to flaws in the basic perforation job design. With the introduction of high data rate
memory recorders that are now being run on many perforating jobs we can now see the pressure fluctuation in the well bore
and the time of perforating and immediately afterward. Figure 3 shows the wellbore pressure transient comparison of 3 TCP
jobs performed using 3 different design methodologies; static underbalance, static overbalance and dynamic underbalance.
Note the high transient overbalance in both the static underbalance and overbalance case. This overbalance transient is the
result of the gun detonation process where gun gases are being forced out of the gun carriers into the wellbore, increasing the
wellbore pressure. Also note that, in the static underbalance case the well pressure after shooting went back to the initial
underbalance for a few milliseconds only negating the expected after perf flow surge to clean the perforation.

In the dynamic underbalance case the job design and some specific hardware has eliminated this dynamic overbalance effect
and produced a prolonged underbalance in the wellbore immediately after perforation. The magnitude and duration of this
underbalance event is a function of the well pressure, gun characteristics and the job design. The rate at which the dynamic
underbalance is achieved creates a shock in the wellbore and perforation tunnels which breaks up the damage zone and then
the magnitude and duration of the underbalance event cleans out the perforation damage material in the tunnels6,7.
The use of dynamic underbalance perforating in carbonates has been shown to improve acid matrix stimulation treatments.
Lab tests have shown that clean perforation tunnels produced by a properly planned and executed dynamic underbalance
operation provide very good access to the reservoir with the acid and the wormholes created tend to extend from the end of the
tunnel in a dominate direction away from the well bore8.
Dynamic underbalance perforating had been used in this region before9 but not locally in these conditions with TCP in a long
horizontal section. However this technique has been used in horizontal wells in other parts of the world10, 11.
Job Design And Execution

The perforation modeling indicated that shooting with a dynamic underbalance gun system and job design to clean up the
perforation tunnels would deliver well productivity better that that predicted with the conventional 2 7/8” gun shot in
overbalance conditions. To meet the design criteria for the job, the shot density was reduced to a mix of 2, 2.6 spf. The higher
shot density was loaded into the bottom half of the lateral drain to encourage matrix stimulation and thus better productivity
IPTC 13815 5

from the bottom of the horizontal well length. The well was displaced to “clean” brine. The pressure in the wellbore at the time
of shooting was about 700 psi overbalance. This could not be altered as the upper lateral was open and connected to this
wellbore. The upper lateral would be isolated from the perforated zone once a dual completion was run after perforating.
Tradition job design would suggest that this 700 psi static overbalance could cause problems by inducing additional damage in
the perforation tunnels. Lab tests12 plus local experience with the dynamic underbalance method in carbonate reservoirs
indicates that dynamic underbalance clean-up does occur in static overbalance conditions and the subsequent damage from the
overbalance is minimal and can, if required, be removed as part of the acid stimulation process.
The 2 7/8” 6 shot per foot (spf), 60 degree carrier guns were loaded at the reduced shot density with deep penetration
perforation charges as per the program. Also loaded into the guns were additional charges which have a low gram load of
explosive material and are used to create relatively large holes in the carrier only. These charges are specific to the dynamic
underbalance perforating system and increase the area open to flow into the gun carriers and chamber section. This additional
flow area improves the rate and magnitude of the dynamic underbalance transient.
These additional charges were loaded into the guns at 0.5 spf and also into the spacer or chamber section for 30 ft above and
30ft below each perforated interval. These low gram load charges are designed to make a hole in the gun carrier only and
neither damage the casing nor penetrate into the reservoir.
The TCP firing head used was a pressure activated delay time version. No packer was used so the open hole lateral was
connected to the perforated zone via the annulus. The tubing string was run closed with a pressure actuated production located
~450 feet above the guns (Figure 4).
6 IPTC 13815

A high speed memory data recorder was attached to the bottom of the gun string to record pressure events at 1 second reading
intervals during the entire job and also at a “burst” of 28,000 data points per second for 9 seconds at the time of perforating.
This burst data is used to evaluate the pressure transients in the wellbore at the time of perforating and immediately after.
Results

The TCP perforating guns were run into position and fired. The data from the memory pressure recorder run with the guns
is seen in figures 5 and 6. Figure 5 is the one second data and shows the time of the guns firing and other events in the process.
Figure 6 shows the detailed data at the time the guns fire. This data set contains 250,000 data points recorded over 9 seconds at
the time of detonation. The data shows how the dynamic underbalance was achieved immediately after shooting to a level of
2000 psi gradually coming back to balance over the following 6 seconds or so.
IPTC 13815 7

The performance and reservoir parameters for the subject well (WX) were examined in comparison with nearby wells
indicating similar potential and productivity (Table 2). It is to be noted that other nearby wells were completed as open hole
lateral producers.

Reservoir
Potential PI
Well Permeability Pressure
STBO/D BPD/psi
psia
W1 2350 14 5.0 3200
W2 2160 12 4.0 3200
WX 1800 13 4.5 3150
W3 4200 19 6.0 3500
W4 2800 15 4.0 3200
Table 2 - Reservoir/flowing parameters of subject well and nearby wells

Conclusions

Although a perforating job was initially unplanned for this well, the low shot density solution provided by the dynamic
underbalance perforating job design delivered a well that exceeded performance expectations. Proper planning taking into
account unexpected operational failures, reservoir heterogeneities, the application of new technologies and a multidisciplinary
team work approach is essential for delivering better quality wells.
Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Zakum Development Company (ZADCO), Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC)
and Schlumberger for permission to publish this paper.
References

1. Hanaey Ibrahim, Ali Harrasi, Petroleum Development Oman; Alan Salsman, Alvaro Javier Nunez, Haposan Situmorang,
Schlumberger: “Overcoming Near Wellbore Damage Induced Flow Impairment with Improved Perforation Job Design and
Execution Methods” SPE121964 presented at the 2009 SPE European Formation Damage Conference held in Scheveningen, The
Netherlands, 27–29 May 2009
2. G.E. King, A.R. Anderson, M.D. Bingham – Amoco Production Company: “A Field Study Of Underbalance Pressures
Necessary To Obtain Clean Perforations Using tubing Conveyed Perforating” SPE 14321 – Presented at the 1985 SPE
Annual convention and Exhibition in Las Vegas, Sept. 22-25.
3. S.M. Tariq, Schlumberger – “New, Generalized Criteria for Determining the Level of Underbalance for Obtaining Clean
Perforations” SPE 20636, presented at the 65th Annual Technical SPE Conference and Exhibition in New Orleans ,
September 23-26, 1990.
4. Behrmann, L.: “Underbalance Criteria for Minimum Perforation Damage,” paper SPE 30081, presented at the 1995 SPE
European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands, May 15-16; also in the SPE Drilling & Completion
(September 1996): 173-177.
5. Walton, I.C., Johnson, A.B., Behrmann, L.A., and Atwood, D.C.: “Laboratory Experiments Provide New Insights into
Underbalanced Perforating,” paper SPE 71642, presented at the 2001 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
New Orleans, 30 September – 2 October.
6. P. Bolchover, I.C. Walton – Schlumberger, “Perforation Damage Removal by Underbalance Surge Flow”, SPE 98220 –
Presented at the SPE International Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA, 15-17 Feb.
2006.
7. Juliane Heiland, Brendan Grove, Jeremy Harvey, Ian Walton, Andrew Martin – Schlumberger, “New Fundamental Insights
into Perforation-Induced Formation Damage, SPE 122845 presented at SPE European Formation Damage Conference in
Scheveningen, The Netherlands, 27-29 May 2009
8. Kirk M. Bartko, Saudi Aramco, and Frank F. Chang, Larry A. Behrmann, Ian C. Walton, Schlumberger; “Effective Matrix
Acidizing in Carbonate Reservoirs – Does Perforating Matter? SPE-105022, Presented at the 15th SPE Middle East Oil &
Gas Show and conference, Bahrain, 11 – 14 March, 2007.
9. Al-Marri Faisal, Hassan Ibrahim Khalil, ADMA OPCO Alan Salsman, Majed Shaaban Abu Lawi, Schlumberger: Paper SPE
101278 “New Perforating Technique Improves Well Productivity and Operational Efficiency”, presented at the 2006 Abu Dhabi
International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference held in Abu Dhabi, U.A.E., 5–8 November 2006
8 IPTC 13815

10. Stenhaug, M., Erichsen, L., Doornbosch, F., and Parrott, R.A.: “A Step Change in Perforating Technology Improves Productivity
of Horizontal Wells in the North Sea,” paper SPE 84910, presented at the 2003 SPE International Improved Oil Recovery
Conference in Asia Pacific, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 20-21.
11. L.A. Behrmann, Schlumberger Oilfield Services; K. Hughes, ChevronTexaco Exploration & Production Company; A.B. Johnson
and I.C. Walton, Schlumberger Oilfield Services: “New Underbalanced Perforating Technique Increases Completion Efficiency
and Eliminates Costly Acid Clean-up” SPE 77364 presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in
San Antonio, Texas, 29 September–2 October 2002.
12. F.F. Chang, Schlumberger, N.M. Kageson-Loe, Norske Hydro, I.C. Walton, Schlumberger, A.M. Mathisen, Norske Hydro, G.S.
Svanes, MI Swaco: “Perforating in Overbalance – Is it Really Sinful?” SPE 82203: Presented at the SPE Formation Damage
Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands 13-14 May 2003