Drilling and Production-Equipment, Methods and Materials - Relative Productivity of Perforated Casing-I.

An electrolytic model study has been made of the relative productivity of perforated casing. The results show that the relative productivity is roughly one-half to two-thirds of that predicted from point-sink calculations. This discrepancy can he satisfactorily explained on the basis of casing interference. The relative productivity was found to he insensitive to spatial arrangement of the perforations. INTRODUCTION The relative productivity of wells with perforated casing has been treated mathematically by Muskat.' In his treatment the perforations are represented by small spheres, thus enabling him to approximate the flow by that to point sinks. By neglecting interference between the flow into the various spheres representing the perforations, one may deduce the approximate formula Qu 1/rp - 1/rw • (1) I + b/2n _________ 2n In re/rw Where Q is the flow rate into spherical sinks located in the median plane of the sand laver Qo is the open hole flow rate (uncased hole of radius rw) b is the thickness of sand layer under consideration (always one foot in this paper) n is the number of spherical sinks in the sand layer rp is the radius of a spherical sink rw is the well radius re is the drainage radius of the well. Fig. 1 is a comparison of values calculated from equation (1) with Mus-kat's values. It will be observed that the approximate values are in error by less than 21/2 per cent. The disturbing effect of the casing on the flow line; is not explicitly taken into account by Muskat, but he reasons that interference between the flow pat- terns from the various point sinks will result in a negligible flow in the region within the well radius, and that no appreciable error will result from not explicitly excluding flow from this region. This line of reasoning is open to question, however, as the flow impedance, in the immediate vicinity of the well, of a hemispherical cavity in contact with an opening in the casing is twice that of a spherical sink in a continuous sand layer. There will be a difference, moveover, between the flow into a hemispherical cavity and that into a circular hole in the casing. .This latter difference can best be appreciated by comparing the flow from a semi-infinite medium into a hemispherical cavity at the edge of the medium with the flow out of a circular opening of the same radius as the hemisphere and which is also on the edge of the medium. In this case2 ------= —2, showing that the difference in flow rates into differently shaped cavities is quite appreciable. It was the purpose of the investigation reported here to determine to what extent flow into circular perforations in casing departs from the values calculated by Muskat. For this purpose an electrolytic model was used.