Introduction to

Formation Damage

Section 4

Printed: 9/1/2006

Introduction to
Formation Damage
● Introduction
● Damage Mechanisms
● Reservoir Assessment
● Production Assessment
● Removal
● Prevention

1
 Introduction
● Formation damage is a well known phrase in the
oil and gas industry
● Main reason many oil, gas, and water injection
wells have low productivity or injectivity
● Damage is often expressed as ‘skin’ or ‘zonal’
damage which results when the original
permeability of the producing formation is altered
● Net result of such damage is a decrease in the
flow capacity of the well
● Formation damage is caused by many factors
and may occur from the moment the formation is
penetrated by drilling to any time during the life
of a well.

Damage Mechanisms
● Well Life Cycle & Formation Damage
● General Damage Classifications
● Examples
Fines Migration
Scale Deposition

2
 Well Life Cycle &
Formation Damage
● Formation Damage can occur in any well
operations including:
Drilling (including fluids used)
Cementing (including cement bond logs)
Completions & Perforating (including fluids
used)
Production
Workover
Stimulation

Common Types of
Formation Damage
New Well Old Well Injection Well
● Invasion of ● Deposits ● Deposits
fluids and/or Inorganic Inorganic
solids Scales Scales
Whole mud Paraffin & Clay Swelling &
Mud Solids Asphaltene Migration
Mud Filtrate Corrosion Oil Carryover
Cement Filtrate Fines Migration Unfiltered
Fluid Problems Solids
Cement Solids ●
Bacterial Slime
Wettability Emulsions
Plugged Perfs Water
Perf Production
Compaction Clay Swelling

3
 Drilling History
● Review of the drilling history (drilling
report) can reveal damage caused early in
the life of a well
● To understand fluids used and their
properties (oil-based, water-based, pH,
solids used etc.)
● Two primary drilling damage mechanisms
to consider
Drilling mud filtrate loss to the formation
Drilling solids invasion

Drilling Mud Filtrate Loss

● Caused formation damage, permeability reducing
effects
Invasion of unbroken viscosified gel fluid filter cake
On the formation face or within natural fractures or vugs
Alteration of wettability from water-wet to oil-wet state
Caused by surfactants or oil-based fluids
Reaction of fluid filtrate with formation minerals
Causing clay swelling and dispersion or
Migration of fines through clay effects or mineral
dissolution

4
 Drill Solids Invasion
● Damage caused by drill solids invasion
Weighting materials, bentonite clay or barite
Drill cuttings and cuttings fines
Loss circulation material (LCM)
Pipe dope
Other miscellaneous solid materials used

● Whole Mud Loss To Formation

In naturally fractured formations

Cementing Program
● The following possibilities for formation
damage
High losses of high-pH cement filtrate, disturb
clays and fines migration
Invasion and plugging by cement solids
Loss of whole cement to the formation
Either into natural fractures
Or due to inadvertent fracturing during cementing

5
 Completions
● Completion practices and the fluids used
Perforating in dirty fluids
Unfiltered solids in perforation fluid
Completion fluid not always compatible

Perforating
● Perforating in oil-based
drilling fluid
Cause undesirable
wettability
Reducing relative
permeability to oil or
gas
● Compaction or crushing of
formation
Dramatically reduce the
inflow of fluid into the
perforation
● Method
Over/Under Balanced
● Density
Shots per foot

6
 Workover History
● Damage created during workover
operation
Use of dirty fluid, cause plugging
The fluid not compatible with formation brine,
results in formation of variety of scales,
carbonates, and sulfates
Paraffin deposition resulting from near-
wellbore fluid temperature reduction
Water-blocking (retention of water in formation
pore spaces)

Stimulation History
● Review of stimulation history is utmost
importance
● Contact those who involved in past
treatment design
● The damage can occur during ACIDIZING
and FRACTURING
In both sandstones and carbonates

7
 Acidizing Damage Mechanisms
● Inadvertent injection of solids
● Use of incompatible additives or improper mixing
procedures
● Reprecipitation of acid reaction products
● Loss of near-wellbore formation compressive
strength
● Formation of emulsions
● Water blocking
● Wettability alteration
● Unbroken gel plugging
● Post treatment fines migration

Hydraulic Fracturing Damage

Mechanism
● Fines migration and plugging in the
proppant pack
● Problems associated with incompatible
fluids (water-block, wettability, emulsions)
● Unbroken polymer gel in the propped
fracture

8
 Classifications
● Shallow Damage
Usually associated with solids invasion during
drilling and workover operations
Mud solids create a tough impermeable filter cake
on the borehole wall
Some particles may penetrate up to a few inches
into the formation, creating a cylinder of reduced
permeability around the wellbore which reduces the
flow rate of fluid and/or gas into the bore hole

Classifications (cont.)
● Examples of Shallow Damage:
Lost circulation materials
Used with mud systems
Used in cement slurries

9
 Classifications (cont.)
● Moderate / Deep Damage
Usually associated with invasion of the
formation by fluids which are incompatible
with either the formation fluids or the
formation itself
Can also be caused during production of the
well

Classifications (cont.)
● Examples of Moderate/Deep Damage:
Clay Swelling & Dispersion
Wettability Changes
Chemical Precipitation
Emulsion Blocks
Water Blocks
Bacterial growth
Organic & Scale Deposition

10
 Examples
● Fines Migration
● Inorganic Deposition
● Organic Deposition
● Clay Damage

Fines Migration
● Occurs in sandstones
During abrupt increases in production
During natural production
If production rates exceed “critical velocities”
● Induced in sandstones by acidizing
HF treatments are notorious for generating
new fines
Or releasing existing, and undissolved fines

11
 Particle Invasion
● A primary causes of formation damage is
the invasion of solid particles that plug
interconnected pore throats
● As a result, reduce the natural
permeability of the formation

Particle Mixing Theory

● Derry Sparlin’s SPE paper 4772, “Sand
and Gravel - A Study of Their
Permeabilities”, states:
In the actual case of a mixture (of particles),
the smaller particles tend to fill the void
spaces between the larger particles so that the
permeability of the mixture is almost always
less than the permeability of the smaller
particulate matter.

12
 Particle Mixing Theory (cont.)

Large Particles Small Particles Mixed Particles

Particle Invasion -
Geometrically
● Particles with diameters smaller than 1/13
the diameter of the average formation
sand grain will invade the pore space and
possibly become trapped within the
formation matrix itself
STABLE BRIDGE

d'

d'= diameter of bridging particle

d = diameter of pore throat

If d ≤ 2d' STABLE BRIDGES WILL FORM

13
 Particle Invasion - Research
● A. Abrams’ SPE paper 5713, “Mud Design
to Minimize Rock Impairment Due to
Particle Invasion”, was presented at the
51st Annual Fall Technical Conference in
New Orleans during October, 1976. Basic
conclusions of this work are:
Particles with diameter size ranges between
1/3 and 1/7 the size of the pore throat will plug
pore channels.
Particles smaller in size than 1/7 the size of the
pore throat will migrate freely through the
formation matrix.

Particle Invasion - Research

(cont.)
● Since core samples are not always
available to determine pore space sizes, a
method of estimating pore space sizes
can be helpful
Harris and Odom’s article, “Effective Filtration
in Completion and Other Wellbore Operations
Can Be Good Investment”, provides the
following rule of thumb for estimating pore
space size in the Gulf Coast:
The pore size in microns approximately equals the
square root of the permeability in millidarcies

14
 Particle Invasion - Research
(cont.)
Critical Plugging
Permeability Pore Size Range
(md) (microns) (microns)
100 10.0 3.3 to 1.4
250 15.8 5.2 to 2.2
500 22.4 7.4 to 3.2
750 27.4 9.1 to 3.9
1,000 31.6 10.5 to 4.5
1,500 38.7 12.9 to 5.5
2,000 44.7 14.9 to 6.3

Inorganic Scale Deposition

● Occur during well production
Depending on well conditions
Produced water characteristics
Different scale types may form
● Common scales
Calcium carbonate, iron carbonate
Calcium sulfate, barium sulfate, strontium
sulfate, iron sulfate
Sodium chloride
Combinations may also form

15
Carbonate Deposition

Calcium Carbonate

16
 Layered Calcium
Sulfate Deposit

Calcium Sulfate deposit

in a 4” pipe

17
 Organic Deposition
● Very common problem in oil wells
● If not properly diagnosed
It can be missed
Or mistaken for other forms of damage
● Two general types
Paraffin (wax)
Asphaltenes

Paraffin Deposition
● A function of reservoir or wellbore
temperature
Temperature above the cloud point
Deposition will not take place
Below the cloud point can cause the paraffin
to crystallize
Deposit in perforation or wellbore
● Such temperature change may occur
during any well operation
When the fluid is introduced from the surface
to the wellbore or formation

18
 Rod Coupling With Wax Build-up
After Hot Water Program

Asphaltene Deposition
● Asphaltenes are high carbon number,
primarily cyclic hydrocarbons
Present in crude oil in colloidal suspension
● Asphaltenes deposition is not sensitive to
temperature, but to pressure drop
As crude oil flows from the formation into the
wellbore, and production tubing
● Upset to the fluid equilibria can also cause
asphaltenes deposition

19
 Clay Damage
● Three things we want to know about
clays…
Type
Occurrence
Abundance

Introduction to Permeability
Impairment by Indigenous Clays
● Water sensitive formations are
characterizes by their reduced
permeability when contacted by fluids
foreign to the formation. This reduced
absolute permeability results from
plugging of pore channels by invading or
inherent particles. Clay swelling and / or
migration is an example.

20
 Introduction to Permeability
Impairment by Indigenous Clays (cont.)

● Sandstones
Most sandstone formations typically contain a
certain percentage of indigenous clays in their
mineral composition. These clays can be part
of a matrix, as coating on pore walls, or lying
in the pores.
A sandstone containing between 1.0% and
5.0% clay would be considered ‘clean’. A
‘dirty’ sandstone would contain 5.0% to 20.0%

Introduction to Permeability
Impairment by Indigenous Clays (cont.)

● Carbonate Formations
Carbonate formations are seldom clay-bearing
and, when clays are present, they are
incorporated in the matrix.

21
 Montmorillonite
(Smectite, Bentonite)
● Has a structure and cation composition
that gives it the ability to soak up large
quantities of water, which spreads its
sheet-like layers apart (causes it to swell).
● This tendency is the main reason
montmorillonite can be so damaging to
formation permeability when it is exposed
to aqueous filtrates.
* Montmorillonite is a swelling clay.

Montmorillonite Group
● Diagenetic or detrital
● Detrital
Shales & shale clasts
Laminations in Sst
● Diagenetic
Grain-coating
Pore-bridging

22
 Illite
● Appears as hairlike structures lining pore walls
● Permeability reduction caused by dispersed illite
is primarily due to the resultant increase in
tortuosity (pore friction).
● When conditions prevail, due to outside
influences, that potassium ions are leached out
from the crystal structure, illite can change to a
clay that will expand on contact with water
● Illite is often associated with water blocks due to
microporosity.
* Illite is primarily a migrating clay

Illite (cont.)
● May be detrital or
diagenetic
Detrital occurs in
shales, shale clasts, &
shale laminations
Diagenetic occurs as
pore-bridging & grain-
coating clay

23
 Kaolinite
● Typically present in both young and old
rocks in small amounts
● Main permeability damage caused by
kaolinite found in sandstone is due to its
tendency to bridge off in pore throats
once it has been dispersed and
deflocculated

* Kaolinite is a migrating clay

Kaolinite (cont.)
● Aluminum-rich
● No interlayer cations
● Loosely attached
● Migrating fines
potential

24
 Chlorite
● Dissolution of chlorite, being an iron-
bearing mineral, could create the potential
for the formation of pore plugging iron
hydroxide precipitates.
● An iron sequestrant should be used in any
treatment.

Chlorite (cont.)
● Usually diagenetic
● Blades & rosettes
● Grain-coating &
grain-replacing
● iron-bearing &
acid-sensitive

25
 Pore Lining - Chlorite

SAND
GRAINS

Mixed Layer Clays

(MLIS = Mixed Layer Illite/Smectite)
● Composed of layers of different clays
● Irregular mixed clays usually contain
montmorillonite and illite and thus show
marked swelling tendencies
● Some tests show that permeability
reduction is the greatest when
montmorillonite and mixed-layer clays are
present
● Reduction is less with illite, and least with
kaolinite and chlorite.

26
 Mixed Layer Clays
● Most commonly MLIS
● Combines migration and
swelling potential
● Properties depend on
relative amount of
smectite and on
interlayer cation type

Clay Migration

Oil Flow through Sandstones

Water-Wet
Oil Sand Particle
Flow

Water-Wet Clay Particles Water-Wet

Clay Particle

Water-Wet
Water Sand Particle
Envelope

27
 Pore Blocking by
Oil-Wet Clay Particles
Water-Wet

Sand Particle
Oil-Wet

Clay Particles

Oil

Flow

Clay Bridging
● Pore Bridging - Illite ● Discrete Particles -
Kaolinite

SAND
GRAINS SAND
GRAINS

28
 Flocculated and
Unexpanded Clays

Feldspar

Formation Quartz
Water Grains

Clay Minerals

Deflocculated and
Expanded Clays

Feldspar

Fresh Quartz
Water Grains

Expanded and Deflocculated

Clay Minerals

29
 Reservoir Assessment
● Geology & Mineralogy
Laboratory Tests Performed on Formation
Samples
● Fluids
● Production
● Porosity
● Permeability

Reservoir Geology and

Mineralogy
● Information on reservoir geology
Rock type, sandstone or carbonate
Permeability and porosity
Nature of porosity, matrix vs naturally
fractured
Permeability distribution across the producing
or injection interval

30
 Reservoir Geology and
Mineralogy (cont.)
● Information on mineralogy characteristics
Bulk mineralogy, define the mineral types
present
Location of mineral phases in and around the
rock pore spaces
Natural fracture network

● Most important, the Lab Tests

● Consult with geologists

Laboratory Tests Performed

on Formation Samples
● The following tests should be run on core
samples to gain insight on potential problems
that may be generated or prevented by the choice
of fluids:
Thin Section Petrography - Determines the mineralogy,
texture, pore throat size, type and distribution.

Scanning Electron Microscope - Large scale view of

mineralogy and pore structure.

X-Ray Diffraction - Analysis of bulk components

showing minerals and clays present.

31
 Additional Tests Performed
on Formation Samples
● Standard Core Flood Test
● Clay Damage Test
● Particle Invasion Test
● Additional Preliminary Core Tests

Mineralogical Analysis
(XRD)

32
 Reservoir Fluids
● Fluid types (oil or gas)
● Fluid properties
H2S or CO2 content in gas
Oil gravity
Paraffin and asphaltene content
Produced water volume
Ionic composition and scaling tendency
● Lab testing and Lab analysis review

Production History
● In an older well,
A sudden and sharp decline in production
Indicative of migration of mobile formation fines in
near wellbore region
● In a new well with good drill stem test
(DST), but poor performance after
completion
Indicate damage in the completion process
● Other possible production damage
mechanisms

33
 Production History (cont.)
● Other possible production damage
mechanisms contributors
Fines migration
Inorganic scale deposition
Organic solids deposition
Paraffin
Asphaltenes

Offset Well Production

● Offset well and or nearby well comparison
● The first-step to understand the interest
well
Is the well underperforming
Is the well suffering from any form of damage

34
 Porosity
● Porosity is the amount, volumetrically, of a
porous media (rock) which is not occupied by
solid material, expressed as a percentage.
● In other words, if a one cubic foot sample of a
particular formation contained 0.75 ft3 of solid
material and 0.25 ft3 of void space, the porosity
would be :

0.25 ft3 / 1 ft3 = 0.25 = 25 %

Porosity (cont.)
● Volume of acid to radially fill a zone d

● Volume = Height x π (D2-d2) x Porosity

4
In oilfield units: D

Volume, gals = 0.0408 gal/ft x Height x (D2-d2) x ø

Where: Height, ft Let’s

Porosity, fraction Try an
Example
D, invaded zone, inches Problem!
d, wellbore diameter, inches

35
 Permeability
● Permeability is a measure of the ease with
which a fluid or gas can flow through a
porous media, expressed in millidarcies
(mD) or, less often darcies (D).

Production Assessment
● Effects of Formation Damage
Darcy’s Law
● Permeability Damage
● Skin Factor

36
 Let’s

Effects of Formation Damage Try an

Example
Problem!

Darcy’s Law for radial flow (incompressible fluid)

7.082( pe − pw )kh
Q= FLO
UID
r FL
W
µ ln e
rw
where: Q = rate (bpd)
K = permeability (D)
pe = reservoir pressure (psi)
pw = wellbore pressure (psi)
H = height (ft) re
µ = fluid viscosity (cp) rw r1
re = reservoir radius (ft) pe pw
rw = wellbore radius (ft)

Permeability Damage
● Permeability Damage Ratio

The next graph gives an estimated production

decrease associated with a given amount of
permeability damage in the near wellbore
region.

37
 Let’s

Permeability Damage Ratio Try an

Example
Problem!

1.00
7” wellbore
PI (damaged) / PI (undamaged)
0.90

0.80
Kd/Ku = 0.50
0.70

0.60

0.50
Kd/Ku = 0.25
0.40 Damaged Zone, Kd
0.30
Kd/Ku = 0.10 660’ drainage radius
0.20
40 acre spacing
0.10
Kd/Ku = 0.05
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

DEPTH OF DAMAGE (feet)

Average Permeability

● Given:
Original permeability, k
Reservoir radius, re
Damaged or reduced permeability, kd
Damaged or reduced permeability radius, rd

The well will act as as it has an average permeability, kavg

where:

ln (re / rw) = ln (re / rd) + ln (rd / rw)

kavg k kd

38
 Skin Factor

7 . 082 kh ( p e − p wf )
q=
β o µ ln re r + S
w
Where:
S = Skin value re,= reservoir radius, ft
q = production rate, b/d rw = wellbore radius, ft
k = permeability, D h = formation height, ft
pe = reservoir pressure, psi
pwf = flowing wellbore pressure, psi
βo = formation volume factor, reservoir vol/prod.vol
µ = formation fluid viscosity, cp

Skin Factor (cont.)

k rs
S = − 1 x ln
ks rw
Where:
k = formation permeability
ks= permeability of altered (damaged) zone
re,= reservoir radius
rw = wellbore radius

39
 Total Skin

(S t = S c +φ + S p + S d + Σ pskins )
Where:

St = Total Skin
Sc+Ø = Skin due to partial completion
Sp = Skin due to incomplete perforations
Sd = Skin due to damage
pskins = pseudo-skin factor
(phase- and rate-dependent effects)

Formation Damage Removal

● “Cures” for formation damage:
Matrix acid jobs
Acid fracturing jobs
Propped fracturing jobs
Various surfactant injections, etc.
● Selecting the right treatment is often not a
simple matter

40
 Formation Damage Removal
(cont.)
● When considering a well treatment, the following
information (is required):
Type of formation and mineral composition
Type of damage and its extent
Contact time interval available for chemical treatment
Physical limitations of well equipment
Bottom hole pressure and temperature
Possible contaminants
water, mud, bacteria, cement, etc.
Treating fluid compatibility with contaminants
Formation properties: acid solubility, permeability,
porosity

Formation Damage Removal

(cont.)
● Small Volume Chemical Treatments
Removing skin damage at the wellbore
generally requires small treatment volumes,
using low injection rates at pressures below
the formation fracturing pressure.
Using Darcy’s radial flow model and some
basic formation information, we can calculate
treatment rates and expected production
increase.
It is important to remember that a matrix acid
job will not give an appreciable production
increase on an undamaged reservoir.

41
 Mechanical Removal
of Scales
● For perforated casing, reperforating is the
most effective method of bypassing
perforations sealed with scale
● Other methods such as string shot, sonic
tools, drilling or reaming have been used
to remove both soluble and insoluble
scales from tubing, casing or open hole
● Scale may be removed from surface lines
with ‘pigs’ or by reaming out

Chemical Removal
of Scales
● Water-Soluble Scale
The most common water-soluble scale is
sodium chloride which is readily dissolved
using fresh water. Acid should not be used to
remove NaCl.
If gypsum scale is newly formed and porous, it
may be dissolved by circulating water
containing about 55,000 mg/liter NaCl past the
scale. At 100 °F, this solution will dissolve
three times as much gypsum scale as would
fresh water.

42
 Chemical Removal
of Scales (cont.)
● Acid-Soluble Scale
The most common scale compound, calcium
carbonate (CaCO3), is acid soluble and can
easily be removed using HCl or acetic acid.
Acid-soluble scales also include iron
carbonate (FeCO3), iron sulphide (FeS), and
iron oxides (Fe2O3). HCl plus a sequestering
agent is normally used to remove iron scale.

Chemical Removal
of Scales (cont.)
Acid Required for CaCO3 and Iron Scales
Type of Acid Gallons of 15% HCL
Soluble Scale per ft3 of Scale

CaCO3 95
Fe2O3 318
FeS 180

43
 Chemical Removal
of Scales (cont.)
● Chemically Inert Scales
The most common chemically inert scales are
barium sulphate (BaSO4) and strontium
sulphate (SrSO4). Until recently these scales
could only be removed by mechanical
methods, or bypassing them by reperforating.
New products have been developed within the
last couple of years that are able to convert
these scales to a moderately soluble state.
However, in the case of these scale deposits,
the best approach is still prevention.

Formation Damage Prevention

● Prevention is the best cure for formation damage
● Damage that occurs while drilling is difficult to
prevent, especially when heavy weight muds are
required
● Many times, good completion techniques will
overcome the majority of damage done while
drilling
If not, a stimulation treatment may be required
● Understanding the reservoir is imperative
Fluids
Lithology
● Must understand its compatibilities

44
 Section Summary
● Introduction to Formation Damage
Introduction
Damage Mechanisms
Reservoir Assessment
Production Assessment
Removal
Prevention

45