A Theoretical and Numerical Investigationof the Pseudoskin Factor
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Partial Completion of wells to inhibit gas and/or water coning in producing wells has been a common practice in the petroleum industry for many years. This procedure however causes an additional pressure drop or pseudoskin that reduces the well productivity. In formations that are producing with partial completion the precise quantification of this additional pressure drop is of paramount importance for completely identify the existence of formation damage. Many authors have proposed mathematical solutions that can be used to estimate the pseudoskin factor caused by restricted entry. In this work a comprehensive investigation of the available models listed in the literature used for the estimative of pseudoskin due to restricted entry was performed. Selected models were implemented in a methodology and computer program. Then, a sensitivity analysis focusing on producing wells was carried out. The effect of the height of the producing interval, height from the middle portion of the producing interval to the bottom of the reservoir, reservoir thickness, horizontal and vertical permeabilities and wellbore radius were investigated. Furthermore, the extension of the methodology for the determination of mechanical skin in injectivity and falloff tests executed in injector wells is described. At the end, an example highlights the range of applicability and potential benefits of the proposed methodology. Introduction It is very frequent that wells are completed over only afraction of their productive zone in order to delay water and/or gas coning. A well completed in this manner is referred to as a partially penetrating or restricted-entry well. Two questions of practical importance in this scenario are (a) what is the productivity loss caused by the partial penetration and (b) should the well be stimulated. The answer to these questions requires the estimative of the pseudo-skin factor caused by the partial penetration and the mechanical (real) skin caused by formation damage or stimulation. In this work a comprehensive investigation of the available models listed in the literature used for the estimative of pseudoskin due to restricted entry was performed. A methodology and computer code was established that given the relative position of the perforated interval with respect to the producing zone and the values of vertical and horizontal permeability, the pseudoskin (dimensionless pressure drop) due to the restricted entry is computed. Five selected formulas: Streltsova(1), Kuchuk-Kirwan(2), Papatzacos(3), Yeh-Reynolds(4) and Odeh(5) were studied. The assumptions, simplifications and range of validity associated with each formula are presented. All the pseudoskin formulas used in this work assume the single phase of a fluid with small compressibility and constant viscosity. The reservoir is considered homogeneous and isotropic, with constant thickness and infinite extension. The reservoir top and base are considered impermeable. The gravitational effects are considered negligible. Considering all these assumptions, the total skin obtained from a well test interpretation is given by (Equation 1.) (Available in full paper) where St, Sp and S represents, respectively, the total skin obtained from the interpretation, the pseudoskin due to the partial completion and the mechanical skin due to formation damage.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».