@

The Skin Effect in Producing Wells

William Hurst, SPE-A1ME, Petroleutu Consultant J. Donald Clark, SPE-AIME, Union Oil Co. of California
~, Bernard Brauer, SPE-AIME, Union OiI Co. of California

Introduction
Because of drilling, completion, and workover practices, the permeability around a wellbore generally is diflercnt from the permeability of the formation. The zone with the altered permeability is called skin and its effect on the pressure or flow behavior of the well is called skin effect. Hawkins has shown that the radius and the permeability of this zone are related to the skin by: 10 If the permeability in the skin zone is less than that of the formation, the skin is positive; if it is more than that of the formation, the skin is negative. If the two permeabilities are equal, s is zero; that is, there is no skin. Van Everdingen and Hurst have given mathematical solutions to the case of a zone of reduced permeability around the wellbore. This skin effect i:;illustrated in Fig. 1. They treat the positive skin as a zone of reduced permeability of infinitesimal thickness around the wellbore. When applied to a well with negative skin, however, their solutions l~ad to the calculated flowing well pressure, which is smaller than the formation pressure, i.e., an injection situation. This is a physical contradiction. In this paper, it is shown that this mathematical difficulty can be overcome by assuming an effective wellbore radius larger than the actual wellbore. Existing solutionss- are modified to include the effect of an enlarged wellbore

s ==

radius, and thus enable the cnginccr to deal with negative as well as positive skins.

Theoretical Development
place

Van Everdingen and Hurst, through the usc of Latransformation, obtained the following expcssion for transient fluid influx into a wellbore:
1

(2 )
~--lln-j~

(1)

Q(t) = 2zc}cIw,, f b

<(~p) ~,,,- Q(f,, - 7,,)(/7,,,

where /,,, the dimensionless time, is given by:

r,, =
c/:lcr,c-

kt --:......

(3)

By use of the superposition technique, Eq, 2 can be expressed as

+ Ap, Q(r;, t,,,) + . . .] t

(4)

The values for Q,,,, reported extensively by van Everdingen and Hurst,. arc obtained from the following integral:
Q(r) =

(//) :- , U[.f,; + Yo(;/)] 0

.

4, q /

(1 e ?/) c-iL4

(5)

..

In calculating negative skin, treatii~g the skin as a zone of infinitesimal thickness leads to mathematical di#iculties. These can be overcome by assuming an enlarged wellbore radius and using the same equations that apply for positive skin.

NOVEMBER, 1969 1483

For a well with positive skin producing at a constant rate, the pressure drop is modified by the inclusion of the sldn:
A@) = ;$~ (S+ APO) , . . .

Eq, 2 can be rewritten as the product of q and t. Also, substituting t from Eq. 3, Eq. 2 becomes:
ID (D =

(6)

I (s;,PD)
q

Q(tD

,D)
, .

d, . .

and the cumulative fluid influx :nto the well is now gwen as: m

(9) Taking the Laplace transform of Eq. 9 and solving for the cumulative production yields: (lo)

...

(1

tlfq (j~
([J) + ~~~1

Ii {[J. (u) + Usll

(u)] + [YO
. . . .

(u)]} . . (7)

In Eq. 10, A;(S) k given by

A;(s) K, =

(~~)

Eq. 7 is for the case of positive skin and has been obtained assuming the skin to be a zone of negligible thickness located around the wellbore, The equation does not apply to the case of negative skin, In the present work, the mathematical development has been extended to include the cases of negative skin. Our derivations follow. The Laplace transform, with respect to pressure, of the influx of fluid into a weU having a skin, has been given by van Everdingen and Hurst (their Eq. IV-32),
s

SK, (\/~)

(11)

Substituting Eq. 11 in Eq. 10, one obtains:

(12)

1 =

S*&(S) *~/,,(S).

(8)

Eq. 12 is tedious to handle on a computer. A more convenient form for D(S) is obtained as follows. Van Everdingen and Hurst have shown that for large dimensionless time, S is small. For small values of S, Eq. 11 can be approximated by

where Ap is the cumulative pressure drop at the sand face per unit rate of production, and Q,. is the dimensionless cumulative production for a fixed terminal pressure. The S is the variable of integration in the Laplace transformation and should not be confused with lower-case s, the skin. The overbar denotes the Laplace transform. For a well producing at constant rate, and having a skin, the cumulatkre pressure drop was given in Eq. 6. This can be substituted into the right-hand side of Eq. 2. Since the rate is consta~t, the left-hand side of

$(s)

.: [

~+(ln

2--y)

1
.

(13)

in which y is Eulers constant. Eq. 13 is now substituted into Eq. 10 to obtain:

Q(s) = -S+!* [ .

-i-(ln2 -Y) ]

(14)

Using the well known Mellin inversion formula (see, for example, Ref. 5), we can express the cumulative fluid influx as: al
Q,,, = (1 ~.f%) ~~ --_. ..

WELL

BORE

r{ b U3 [s1nz4+(ln2 . . . . .

~)]2 + ;
. . .

} (15)

/
SKIN EFFE,$T .. . P.,
-,4

P,.

Two comments are in order. Fhst, Eq. 15 was obtained assuming large values of dimensionless time. This assumption is not a bad one, because even a few seconds after the production has commenced, dimensionless times are generally very large, as can be seen from Eq. 3 when we substitute reservoir characteristics. S;condly, Eq. 15 includes a positive skin and is more general than the van Everdingen-HurslY solution for wells with no skin (their Eq. 7), Observe that in either Eq. 4 or Eq. 15, the effect of a positive skin is to decrease the cumulative influx into the wellbore. If u = O, the integrand in Eq. 15 becomes infinite; i.e., the integration cannot be carried out at the origin. Since e= 1 + x for very small values of x, then
1 @tD ~

#tD ,

(17)

JOURNAL OF PJ3TROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

Substituting Eq. 17 in Eq. 15 and integrating from O to very smaI1values of u, denoted as 8, gives*
is

The derivatives of the Bessel functions can be replaced by Bessel functions using well known relationships to obtain

QtD(8)=

t~ du o
[

u .,.

[s1nu+(ln2
. . . . .

~)]2 + $ }
. . (18)

Making the transformation u = e-, Eq. 18 becomes

l

Eq, 26 maybe put in a dillerent form. Upon dividing both the numerator and the denominator by Kl(~7) and then substituting Eq, 24, we obtain
Q,D =

-!!

!2,(8)=

.=@ [s+- v+@2-y)]:+$ ... . . . . . . .

tl) dv

v(v~z 1) +c,

2@JtD

.,,

.,(27)

(19)

where C is a constant and is evaluated from the initial condition of QiD = O when tD= 0, Eq. 27 becomes

The limits of the integration can be interchanged to eliminate the minus sign of the integrand and, using the following transformation, m=~[s+v+(ln2 Eq, 19 becomes
dm Q,,,(8) = -2 t,, ~J77 . 7 f ,je:-(S+ln~+ln*-,) z

Results and Discussion

The currmlative dimensionless influx for positive skin values of O, 2.5, 5, 10, 15, 25, and 50, are given in Table 1 and plotted in Fig, 3 for dimensionless time ranging from 100 to 10,000,000. These results were calculated using Eqs. 22 or 15. As expected, for any value of dimensionless time, the cumulative dimensionless influx is smaller for increasing values of positive skin. Thevalidity of Eqs. 22 and 15 was verified by comparing our solution fors = O with the solution of van Everdingen and Hurst given in their Table I, Columns 4 and 5. Other numerical checks, not reported here, were used also to verify some of the entries in Table 1. Eq. 15, which is a moditied form of Eq. 7, can bc used for wells with positive skin only. This is because in obtaining Eq. 15 the Mellins inversion was carried out by taking the integral around the negative real axis from O to infinity. This integration ignores any poles that may exist along the positive real axis and, hence, cannot treat the case of negative skin,

-y)]

(20)

(21)

The integrand is the derivative of tan- and, therefore, Q/o(S) = ~ t,, -~ tan- ~
[

s+lnj+ln2y

)1
,

(22)

Eq. 22 is more readily adapted for computer calculations than either Eq. 7 or Eq, 12, It applies only for positive skin, however, since in taking the Mellins inversion of Eq. 12, only the poles on the negative real axis were considered. The integration was then carried out from zero to infinity along the negative real axis on the cut shown in Fig. 2. When the skin is negative, we start out with the same Eq, 12 as for positive skin, but substitute ( s) for (s) before taking the Mellins inversion.

The denominator becomes zero for

s = v=

Ko(~ij
V~Kl(Q;) . . . , .

(24)

The Mellins inversion of Eq. 23 yields

.
Experience q es: u=q/~, . showe that

(25)

it is sufficient

to let

u be only

es smell

..{l6)

Fig.2--Graphical illustrationof
inversion form

ula.

cut

in Mellins 1485

NOVEMBER,1969

J=JL=-JZ1 - ]-----, I
I ~

-:

/4%

For wells with negative skin, the cumulative influx is calculated from Eq. 28. From the asymptotic expansion of Eq. 24, it can be shown that VS2 less than is 1, except whens is infinity, Therefore, the denominator in Eq, 28 is always positive. On the other hand, ... . eo IS equal to or greater than 1, which makes the numerator negative, As a result, the cumulative fluid inffux into th~ well is negative. Fig, 4 shows cumulative fluid influx for skin of 2.5, 5, 10, 15, 25, and 50, The negative production physically implies an injection well, which, of course, is a contradiction, The calculated pressure at such a well will be higher than the initial pressure as illustrated in Fig. 5. To resolve this contradiction we start with the basic equation relating pressure drop to skin: (29) The Laplace transformation of this equation, obtained in a manner similar to that described by van Everdingen and Hurst,i gives

,, .
10;02

(30)

.--,.,

l-l

lo~ DIMENSIONLESS

1,
TIME, ID

,,
[06 10

Eq. 30 can be inverted to obtain

Fig, 3Cumulative

fluid influx for positive skin effect.

6
I I

!
m

(1

cq{[Yo(r\/i)] [ Y.(u) suy,(u)l}

[.Tu(lf) du/

SUJ1(U)]

l,(r~i)
60

U*{ [Jo(u)

WJ1(U)]Q + Y.(u) SuY,(U)]*}

tic
0

.20 -40 .80 .80 - !00-,20 -,40

-160 I +$0 I I \ \\\

~ .

* n

$. 5

+., ~s

O..

\\

,\\

I \
II I I I

w r=-

.200
-220 .240 -260 -em .JOo102

I II II

103 10* DIMENSIONLESS 10 TIME, [06 trI ?3

,Cx
Fig. 5Fluid injection superimposed initial pressure. above the

Fig.

4-Cumulative

fluid influx for negative skin effect.

1486

JOURNAL

OF PETROLEUM

TECHNOLOGY

The pressure distribution given in Eq, 31 can be plotted, and looks as indicated in Fig. 6. At some distance r,oa the pressure equals the flowing wellbore pressure plo~.An especially useful way of treating rw. is to use it as if it were the actual wellbore radius of a well with no skin, i.e. s = O. Thus, the apparent wellbore radius is that radius at which the calculated pressure drop in an ideal reservoir would equal that in an actual reservoir with skin. Therefore, In ~
or

(obserwe that since r,. is less than or equal to r,,., the skin is negative). The pressure drop is given by

=*[n(*)+oolo 34)
The cumulative fluid influx into a well with negative skin can be calculated from the following equation: r,.: Qt~ = rlti~z ~~ , . . Q where f is given in Eq. 3 and
fl)

(35)

=ln~+s,

(32)

._.!t.
+Icr,r,, . . . . . .

(36)

s=ln~~);

(33)

The dimensionless cumulative influx Q,,, may be found in Table 1 of van Everdingen and Hurst. This permits calculation of Q~~,given in Table 2 for s

TABLE

1FLUID 2.5

EFFLUX, Q(t),) FOR POSITIVE SKIN .5 .. 13.85 20.21 26.44 32.57 38.63 50.57 62.34 73.97 85.48 96.91 108.25 119.5s 175.06 229.57 283.35 336.55 441.63 545.34 647.98 749.76 850.80 951.21 1,051,06 1,543.78 2,028.42 2,507.22 2,981.47 3,919.40 4,846.39 5,764.85 6,676.32 7,581,91 8,482.41 9,378.44 13,805.72 18,167.60 22,482.10 26,759.58 35,228.32 43,607.72 51,917.26 68,373.57 84,661.12 396,348.54 771,533.85 10 .___ ._ 53.19 12,09 15.93 19.74 23.52 31.01 38.43 45.80 53.12 60.40 67.65 74.88 110,64 145,97 180.99 215,77 284.75 353.13 421.05 488.59 555.80 622,73 689.41 1,019.88 1,346,68 1,670.81 1,992.85 2,632.01 3,266.06 3,896.10 4,522.84 5,146,78 5,768.30 6,387,68 9,459.16 12,498.96 15,515.62 18,514.11 24,468.50 30,378.50 36,253.61 47,922.05 59,505.26 283,942.46 556,933.43

EFFECT 25 3.68 5.48 7.26 9.04 10.81 14.34 17.86 21.36 24.85 28.34 31.81 35.28 52.55 69.71 86,80 103.83 137.76 171.54 205,20 238.77 272.27 305.69 339.04 505.10 670.22 834.65 998.55 1,325.05 1,650.22 1,974.33 2,297.56 2,620.04 2,941.87 3,263.13 4,862.54 6,453.31 8,037.72 9,617.09 12,763.95 15,898.36 19,022.92 25,248.79 31,450.29 153,371.44 303,517.51

t,)
100

0
42.21 58.93 74.80

_ 15
5.81 8.62 11.40 14.16 16.90 22.36 27.77 33.16 38.52 43.~6 49.19 54.50 80.85 106.97 132.92 158.74 210.06 261.04 311.77 362.28 412.61 462.78 512.81 761.31 1,007.73 1,252.62 1,496.32 1,980.89 2,462.52 2,941.82 3,419.21 3,894.98 4,369.33 4,842.43 7,193.09 9,525.12 11,843.52 14,151.15 18,741.12 23,304.66 27,847.35 36,883.72 45,858.86 221,185.19 435,694.66

150
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1>000 2,000 2,500 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 5,000,000 10,000,000 NOVEMBER,

90.10 104,97 133.75 161.56 188,66 215<17 241,22 266.86 292.15 414.65 532,42 646.843 758.84 977.09 1,189.65 1,397.86 1,602.58 1,804.42 2,003.80 2,201.03 3,162.46 4,094.03 5,004.56 5,898.99 7,651.11 9,365.89 11,052.02 12,715.04 14,358.76 15,985,98 17,598,80 25,495.21 33,187.72 40,735,32 48,171.28 62,786,78 77,140,16 91,291.25 119,128.17 146,488,71 655,512.76 1,254;253.45 1969

-21,11 30.38 39.37 4E.16 56.81 73.75 90.35 106.67 122.78 138.71 154.48 170.12 246.73 321.41 394.73 467.00 609.10 748.72 886.43 1,022.58 1,157.43 1,291.16 1,423.91 2,076.20 2,714.46 3,342.66 3,963.09 5,185.97 6,390.38 7,580.46 8,758.89 9,927.52 11,087.72 12,240.53 17,917,67 23,487.99 28,981.45 34,415.18 45,144.25 55,730.63 66,206.00 86,899.33 107,327.02 494,071.46 955,495.44

50 1.92 2.86 3.81 4.75 5.69 7.56 9.44 11.30 13.17 15,03 16,89 18.75 28,02 37.26 46.47 55.68 74.04 92.35 110.64 128.90 147.13 165.34 183.54 274.28 364.75 455.01 545.11 724.92 904.32 1,083,40 1,262.21
1,440.80 1,619.18 1,797.39 2,686.29 3,572.53 4,456.78 5,339.46 7,101!11 8,858.84 10,613.48 14,115.40 17,609.59 86,818.12 172,597.96 1487

values of 2.5 and 5. These are plotted, together with the cumulative fluid influx for positive skin, in Fig. 7.

Summary
The cumulative fluid influx into a well was calculated for positi~~e and negative skin values of O, 2.5,5, 10, 15, 25, and 50, for dimensionless time ranging from 100 to 10,000,000, As expected, with positive skin the fluid influx into a well is decreased. For wells with negative skin, the same equations

apply; however, to avoid mathematical difficulties, we must assume the wellbore radius to be larger than the actual wellbore radius. The larger the absolute value of a negative skin, the greater the apparent wellbore radius and the cumulative tlluid influx into the well at any given time.

Acknowledgment
Appreciation is extended to the management of Union Oil Co. of California for permission to publish this paper.

TABLE 2-Q(tn), WITH NEGATIVE SKIN EFFECT AND INCREASED WELLBORE RADIUS

s=

tD,,. r

-2.5 Q(t~, rJ

s= 5.0 Q(t., r~) 1,674.65 2,051.01 2,368.28 2,770.49 3,047,58 3,548,24 3,988.83 4,393.61 4,770.27 5,124.01 5,458.81 5,777.97 7,192.51 8,441.63 9,653.75 10,814.54 12,727.76 14,373.57 15,895.16 17,274.23 18,691.63 20,026.88 21,293.18 27,105.95 32,542.96 37,441.86 42,063.45 50,599.79 58,567.41 66,241.42 73,451.12 80,375.35 87,097.38 93,617.86 124,177.12 152,099.81 179,007,53 204,494.10 252,437,50 297,587,73 342,794.13 427,268.15 507,135.13 1,855,421.76 3,~98,291.45

100
150 200 250 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000
100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000

400,000 500,000 600,000 800,000

1,000,000

5,000,000
10,000,000 1488

182.22 234,56 281.49 324.93 365,02 398,70 514.70 582.60 647.52 709.23 769,78 828.84 1,117.11 1,367.18 1,610.07 1,838.37 2,290.38 2,719.34 3,124.32 3,519.85 3,904.44 4,280.12 4,649.11 6,437.71 8,127,06 9,767.23 11,335.03 14,394.40 17,314.46 20,185.85 22,962.52 25,701.76 28,409.01 30,723.51 43,886.62 56,036.66 67,885.29 79,621.83 102,525.03 124,588.99 146,169.99 188,363.44 229,423.68 970,360.46 1,819,135.77

II
Fig. 6-Effective wellbore radius for negative skin,

,.Ll#YsONLEss~
102 10*
Fig. 7Cumulative fluid influx for positive skin and increased effective wellbora radius.

JOURNAL OF PETROLEUMTECHNOLOGY

Nomenclature
c = fluid compressibility h = reservoir tldckness normal to flow JO,j,, Y,, Y, = Bessel functions k = permeability of the formation k, = permeabdity in the skin zone K,, K, = moditled Bessel functions p = pressure Pr = reservoir pressure Pi = initial reservoir pressure P1OI = flowing bottom-hole pressure q = production rate Q(f) = cumulative flow into a weU Q,. = dimensionless fluid in!lux r. = radius of the skm zone r,o = wellbore radius
r,oa = apparent
s = wellbore radh.ts

= T= TD= +=
P

viscosity variable time of integration dimensionless 7 porosity, dimensionless

References
1. Hawkins, M. F., Jr.: A Note on the Skin Effect, Trans.,

AIME (1956) 207,356-357.

S=
t&l =

u = y=
Ap = 3P,, =

skin effect, dimensiordess variable of integration in the Laplace transformation dimensionless time. a transformed variable (see van Everdingen and Hurst) Eulers constant, 0.57722 cumulative pressure drop dimensionless pressure drop for unit rate of production

A. F.: The Skin Effect and its lnffuence on the Productive Capacity of a Well, Trans., AIME f1953) 198.171-176. ,.. ... .-, 3. Hurst, William: Establishment of the Skin Effect and Its Impediment to Fluid Flow mto a Well Bore, Per. Eng. (Oct., 1953 ), 4. van Everdingerr, A. F. and Hurst, W.: The Application of the Laplace Transformation to Flow Problems in Reservoirs, Trans., AIME (1949) 186, 305-324. 5. Sneddon, L N.: Fouriw Transforms, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York (1951). 6. Watson, G. W.: A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Fanctions, Cambridge U. Press, New York (1944) 79. 7. Matthews, C. S. and Russell, D. G.: pressure Buildup and Flow Ted.r in Wells, Monograph Series, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Dallas, Tex, [ 1967) 1. JPT 2. van Everdingen,
Original manuscript raceived [n Society of Petroleum Engineers office July 6, 1967. Revised manuscript received July 6, 1969. Paper (SPE IS54) waa presented at SPE 42nd Annual Fa!l Meeting held in Houston, Tex., Oct. 1.4, 1967. @ Copyright 1969 American Ina:ituta of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, Inc. This paper will will cover 1969. be printed in

Transactions

volume

246,

which

NOVEMBER,

1969

1489