SPE

SPE 22811

An Investigation of the Damaged Zone Created by Perforating

J.K. Pucknell, BP Research, and L.A. Behrmann, Schlumberger Perforating & Testing Center
SPE Members II
Copyright 1991, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 66th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engineers held in Dallas, TX, October 6-9, 1991.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program 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 Society of Petroleum Engineers and are SUbject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society
of Petroleum Engineers. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuous acknowledgment
of Where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Publications Manager, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A. Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION

Underbalance perforation flow experiments were Most oil and gas wells are cased, cemented and
performed on reservoir and outcrop sandstones to then perforated. To be effective perforations should
investigate the perforation damaged zone. Cores from penetrate several inches into the rock around the well.
several different formations were perforated under Perforating is known to damage the fabric of the rock
reservoir conditions. After perforating, the cores were around the well, causing a reduction in permeability in a
examined using CAT scans (Computer Aided region around the perforation tunnel known as the
tomography), thin sections and mercury porosimetry. In "crushed" or the "perforation damaged zone". The
conjunction with these measurements, permeabilities in amount of permeability reduction and its extent has an
the damaged zone were measured using a mini- important impact on the productivity of the we1l 1,2. For
permeameter and radial flow permeameter or were this reason it was made the subject of a detailed
estimated from pore size distribution. investigation.

The density and porosity of the damaged zone (at This paper deals with the mechanism by which the
least for saturated rocks) is essentially the same as that rock's permeability is affected, a companion paperJ
in the undamaged rock. The damaged zone is not describes how the permeability loss can be quantified.
compacted, contrary to suggestions made in earlier
work. However, the creation of this zone involves the CAT SCANS
destruction of large pores. The volume lost from these
pores is replaced by microfractures created when rock CAT scans have been performed on 59 perforated
grains are fractured by penetration of the shaped charge cores. These include samples from 6 different
jet. This reduction in the average pore size causes a sandstones, 3 from producing fields and 3 outcrop
reduction in the permeability within the damaged zone. sandstones (Berea, Gold and Castlegate sandstone).
Although direct measurement of this permeability was Further details are given in Table 1. For each core,
made difficult by naturally occurring permeability several cross sectional scans were obtained. Cores
variations, unambiguous measurements were obtained. were first vacuum saturated with brine and then
displaced to kerosene. They were then perforated with
Based on this work an understanding of the factors 3.2,6.5 or 22g charges under realistic reservoir
which control the permeability in the perforation pressures and overburden stress (reservoir temperature
damaged zone is advanced. was also reproduced in some cases). Most perforations
were shot underbalance but some on balance tests were
included. All cores were flow tested after being shot.
The confining stress was then removed and the cores
References and illustrations at end of paper. were preserved ready for CAT scanning. Further details

511
SPE 22811
of the core preparation procedure can be found in rough estimate of permeability can be obtained,
papers by Behrmann et al3 and Hsia and Behrmann 4 . Swanson's method6 was used in this study.

CAT scans (Computer Aided Tomography) are Small (approximately one cubic centimetre) samples
obtained by an X-ray imaging device originally were used for these tests. To minimize the effect of
developed for medical applications. It can be naturally occurring permeability variations, each sample
considered to produce a map of the density distribution taken from the side of the perforation tunnel was paired
within a rock. The output is also affected by the atomic with an undamaged piece of rock from near the outside
number of the elements present, however, this had little of the core. The two samples were chosen so that they
effect as the rocks tested were relatively uniform in fell on the same bedding plane. 9 different perforated
terms if their composition. cores were tested.

Based on the CAT scans obtained the following Results are given in Table 2, additional details of
observations can be made: how these cores were perforated are given in Table 3.
The mercury porosimetry results reported in Table 2
1) The density close to the perforation is very similar to confirm the CAT scan observations. The porosity in the
the density elsewhere in the rock, see for example damaged zone around the perforation is not reduced,
Figure 1. A lighter gray close to the perforation the density is no higher than in the rest of the rock.
would indicate a higher density. This was not Indeed there is evidence in Table 2 that the porosity in
apparent in any of the CAT scans examined. Any the damaged zone is slightly higher.
increase in density close to the perforation was
under 5% and less than naturally occurring density In Figure 5 a typical pore size distribution of a
variations. The lack of density variation means that sample from adjacent to the perforation tunnel is
porosity is also unchanged and the rock is not in any compared with that for undamaged rock. It is clear that
sense "compacted" (as it is sometimes described). although the porosity is maintained, the pore size
distribution is greatly altered. Large pores have been
2) Almost all the cores tested in this series of tests destroyed and have been replaced by an increase in the
were 4" in diameter. When perforated with 22g number of smaller pores. As Table 2 shows, this results
charges these generally showed a range of different in a significant decrease in the permeability, except in
fracture types. One of the more severely fractured sandstone "A".
cores is shown in Figure 2 and 3. Figure 2 shows a
"circular" fracture, (actually conical in three Figure 6 shows the pore size distribution for rock
dimensions), at the perforation damage zone type A, in which debris remained in the perforation
boundary. Radial fractures extent beyond this tunnel. Rock A has a low permeability (about 1mD) and
boundary. Figure 3, which is a "slice" closer to the the 500psi underbalance used is clearly insufficient to
perforation entrance, shows spiral fractures around clean out the debris. Fortunately the debris was hard
the perforation tunnel, together with additional radial enough to obtain a sample for porosimetry. As Figure 6
fractures which cross the perforation damage zone. demonstrates, the debris was very porous with a
Fractures along the bedding plane were also seen in permeability much higher than that of the rock. The
some cases. pore size distribution for the damaged zone is similar to
that of the undamaged rock although the number of
4" perforated cores were occasionally fractured by pores has increased.
6.5g charges; only spiral fractures were seen when
3.2g charges were used. All of the above tests were from unfractured sections
of cores shot with 22g charges. When rocks perforated
3) Enlarged sections of tunnel at the entrance to the with 6.5g charges were tested, little change in the pore
perforation were also seen occasionally as reported size distribution could be observed, as shown in
by Saucier and Lands5 . Figure 4 shows an Figure 7.
example.
THIN SECTIONS
MERCURY POROSIMETRY
To understand the reasons for the change in the
The lack of any density increase around the pore size distribution, thin sections were made of ten
perforations was unexpected, so mercury porosimetry perforated cores. Three different sandstones were
was performed to check the results provided by the CAT included, one of which was Berea.
scans. This involves injecting mercury into an
evacuated sample of rock. From the total amount of Thin sections are 30micron slices of rock which were
mercury injected a porosity is obtained. In addition, from examined using a petrographic microscope, By using
the amount injected at different pressures a pore size large thin sections, a two-dimensional slice through the
distribution can be inferred. From this distribution a

512
rock's grain structure could be examined from the PIN TESTS IfE 22811
perforation tunnel to the edge of core.
The pin test is a simple method of establishing the
Within and at the edges of the perforation tunnels, size of the damaged zone. A map pin is stuck into the
loosely packed material was present in cores which had rock at various points. The damaged zone is weaker
not completely cleaned up. Figure 8 shows an example and easily penetrated a short distance, little penetration
of this debris which has a spiral structure (similar to the is however achieved outside a certain zone. Although
spiral fractures seen on CAT scans). This debris crude, the test is easy to conduct and surprisingly
consisted of highly crushed sand grains with a variety of reproducible.
size. Metallic material, the remains of the charge liner,
was also often present in the debris (the opaque As Figure 11 shows, the pin test does not coincide
material in Figure 8). OCcasional perforations were with the end of the all of the damage, fractured grains
completely plugged by slugs of liner material. are observed beyond the zone identified. It is thought
that the test reveals the boundary of the region in which
Outside this region of loose debris a zone of inter grain bonding is disrupted.
crushed, but intact rock was observed (Figure 9). Many
of the sand grains had fractures through them. Large Table 4 shows the thickness and diameter of the
pore throats were often missing or were filled with small crush zone; details of how the cores were perforated are
fragments (presumably dislodged from the walls of the given in Table 3. The diameter of the crush zone is
pores or broken off larger grains). This can be seen by clearly wider when rocks are perforated with larger
comparing Figure 9 with the view of undamaged rock charges. If there is enlargement of the entrance of the
shown in Figure 10. Small separations between perforation tunnel, a decrease the thickness of the crush
adjacent grains were sometimes visible suggesting that zone occurs.
the bonding between the grains had been broken close
to the perforation tunnel. It may be noted that the perforation damage zone
thicknesses obtained from "pin tests" were, on average,
The amount of damage to the rock fabric fell off about 12.7cm (0.5"), a figure commonly used in skin
rapidly away from the perforation tunnel, however calculations. Nevertheless using this figure for all
clusters of broken grains and isolated fractured grains perforations may be inappropriate as the crush zone
occurred up to a few centimetres from the perforation appears to be thicker for larger charges.
tunnel. Damaged sand grains were also observed along
the fractures which had first been observed on CAT MINIPERMEAMETER RESULTS
scans.
In an effort to establish the permeability distribution
It was very clear that the damage to the rock fabric near the perforation tunnel a "minipermeameter" was
was much greater in the cores shot with 22g charges used. This involves injecting nitrogen into a flat rock
than in those shot with 6.5g charges. This is illustrated surface using a probe approximately one centimetre in
by Figure 11 which compares the distribution of diameter. When a constant nitrogen pressure is used
fractured grains in two thin sections. the gas flowrate obtained is proportional to the
permeability immediately beneath the probe.
Where the entrance to the perforation tunnel had not
been enlarged, there also seemed to be a decrease in Figure 12 is an example of the results obtained,
the amount of damage to the rock fabric along the there is no clear evidence of any decrease in
perforation tunnel. Enlargement of the tunnel near the permeability close to the perforation tunnel. This
entrance seemed to have removed the more severely suggests that damage over a wide area has not
damaged part of the crush zone. occurred. Some of the damage may not have been
detected as:
In the low permeability rock (type A) thin sections
showed that the grains were clearly damaged. 1) Permeability measurements within a centimetre of
However, the thin sections and mercury porosimetry the perforation tunnel were not possible with the siz,
suggested that microfractures created through and of probe used;
between the grains were of a comparable size to the
pore throats in the undamaged rock. This could imply 2) Naturally occurring permeability variations could
that perforating may do limited damage to very low have obscured the damage. Figure 13 shows the
permeability rock (Le. 1mD or less), although clean up of permeability variation in an unperforated core, the
debris left in the perforation seems to be more difficult. surface tested is parallel to the bedding planes in
order to minimize permeability variations. Despite
this the minipermeameter suggests a threefold
increase in permeability within a few centimetres.

513
RADIAL FLOW PERMEAMETER TESTS large numbers of microfractures extending through and
between grains of sand. Near the perforation tip the rate
To provide a definitive measure of the crush zone at which the perforation grows slows down, sometimes
permeability a radial flow permeameter was constructed allowing the growth of larger fractures from the
in which the pressure distribution across the core could perforation tip.
be measured. This gives unambiguous permeability
measurements. The technique effectively averages out Due to the crush zone being pushed outwards to
the effect of the small scale heterogeneity seen by the make room for the perforation tunnel, it is surrounded by
minipermeameter. Details of the method and results an elastic zone in which radial forces are trying to
obtained are presented in a separate paperJ. collapse the perforation. This phenomenon is called a
stress cage, as reported by Warpinski 7 . If the
Initial results from the radial flow permeameter overburden stress is not too high there can also be
suggest that the permeability reduction in the perforation tensile forces acting tangentially in the elastic zone at
damage zone can extend beyond the crush zone the crush zone boundary (see Figure 15). These can
diameter indicated by the pin test. There is also some lead to radial fracturing (as in Figure 2). Such fractures
evidence of a thin high permeability region close to the are unlikely to form in real reservoirs however they can
perforation tunnel in some cases. This probably occur in laboratory tests if the core size is too small for
represents higher porosity debris which has not been the charge. as in Figure 2. (The use of 7" cores for large
flushed out of the perforation. charges in the new API recommended practice8 will
help avoid this problem).
During testing it was apparent that some "clean up"
of the perforation was involved. Permeabilities initially Following perforation, if the rock is weak enough the
increased and fragments of sand grains and fines were overburden stress will collapse the perforation leading to
collected on a fine filter downstream of the core. sand production problems. If the rock is stronger, it may
remain intact but parts of the crush zone can collapse,
Due to fracturing, only cores perforated with 6.5g being somewhat weaker. If the debris created by failure
charges could be tested. The construction of a larger of the crush zone is cleaned out, it results in an enlarged
device will allow testing of 7" cores perforated with larger entrance to the perforation tunnel. This is observed in
charges in the near future. Figure 4 and was reported by Saucier and Lands5 . In
some cases it is difficult to remove the debris created by
MECHANISM BY WHICH THE PERFORATION collapse of the crush zone, which leads to loss of
DAMAGE ZONE IS CREATED productivity from the perforation. The spiral fractures
seen close to the perforation tunnel in some cases are
Perforations are normally created using shaped thought to be due to the partial collapse of the
charge explosives. These create a high velocity jet of weakened walls of the perforation tunnel. Similar
metallic particles which "punch" a hole through the fractures are produced when "thick walled" rock
casing, cement and rock. The hole is created by cylinders are caused to collapse.
pushing the rock out of the way.
REASONS FOR LACK OF DENSITY VARIATION
Figure 14 shows a finite difference simulation of a
perforation being created (performed by Mark Chan of Thin sections and mercury porosimetry show that
BP Research). It shows that a shock wave is created at within the perforation damaged zone the pore structure
the perforation tip which spreads radially outwards. of the rock is disturbed. Large pores are destroyed as a
Close to the perforation tunnel the pressures created by result microfracturing or are filled by broken pieces of
this wave are more than adequate to cause the rock to grains, especially close to the perforation tunnel. No
fail. This creates the typical rock fabric associated with change in porosity or density occurs because the large
the perforation damaged zone (crushed grains etc.). As pores are replaced by the volume created as a result of
the wave propagates radially, the pressure it creates microfracturing.
declines because the wave is spread over a larger area
and due to energy losses caused by "crushing" the rock. Due to the speed at which the crush zone is formed
A point is reached at which the shock wave pressure is it is not surprising that no change in porosity occurs.
no longer sufficient to exceed the rock strength. This The crush zone is formed at a velocity greater than the
marks the end of the "crush zone". speed of sound in liquid, consequently there is simply
not time for the liquid in the pore space to be moved
Figure 15 shows that to make room for the away from the perforation tunnel. The liquid is also
perforation tunnel, rock is pushed radially outwards. relatively incompressible. Consequently the liquid in the
The speed at which the perforation is created is so fast pore space can neither be moved out of the pores nor
(around 2000m/s) that there is no time for the rock to reduced in volume. The result is that the pore volume it
deform by the creation of visible fractures. Instead, occupies must therefore be retained. A different result
movement of the rock is achieved by the creation of

514
 SPE 22811
might be obtained if the pore space contained gas, during flow testing. Although fines migration is
which is a much more compressible fluid. considered likely, after the initial clean up, no loss of
permeability occurred as the flow rate was
MECHANISMS OF PERMEABILITY REDUCTION increased. Based on a fines migration mechanism,
some loss of permeability would be expected.
From the mercury porosimetry it is clear that large
pores are destroyed by microfracturing and replaced by CONCLUSIONS
smaller ones. Table 2 shows that this will result in a
reduction in permeability. This is considered a major There is a region around perforation tunnels in
cause of the permeability reduction in the perforation which the pore structure has been damaged by
damage zone. perforating. There is no loss of porosity or increase in
density in this region (at least in liquid saturated cores).
The extent of the permeability reduction by this Larger pores are destroyed and replaced by smaller
mechanism appears to be greater for the larger charge pores created thorough microfracturing. This results in a
considered (a 22g deep penetrating charge) than the loss of permeability. Other mechanisms of permeability
smaller (a 6.5g deep penetrating charge). Field data damage, such as fines migration may also be involved.
from several producing fields does however show that
larger charges appear to result in higher productivities. The extent and severity of the damage appeared
Clearly the benefit of longer perforations outweighs any greater for a 22g deep penetrating charge than it was for
increased damage around the perforation tunnels. a 6.5g deep penetrating charge. Despite this the larger
charge is expected to produce higher productivities by
In cores perforated with 6.5g charges, little damage virtue of the longer perforations it creates.
was seen in thin section or mercury porosimetry.
Despite this, evidence of permeability damage was When 4" cores were perforated with 22g charges
evident from the radial flow permeameter and other flow they tended to fracture and the use of larger cores for
measurements. It is conceivable that the permeability this size of charge is recommended.
reductions were caused by changes in pore size, but
were too minor to be readily apparent from thin section ACKNOWLEDGEM ENTS
and pore size distribution. Delicate structures might
have been present which were destroyed when the Many people contributed to this work, however Simon
cores were dried prior to analysis. Alternatively other Bishop, Mark White, Mark Chan and the CAT scanners
mechanisms may be involved. The possibilities are: of BP Research and John Davies and Dave Neely of BP
Exploration deserve particular acknowledgement for
1) In rare cases charge debris was seen lining the their efforts.
perforation. This would certainly have reduced
permeability but does not appear a common REFERENCES
mechanism.
1) Locke, S.: "An advanced method for predicting the
2) Loose but poorly sorted debris exists on the productivity ratio of a perforated well" JPT
perforation walls which could display a lower or (December 1981) 2481-2488
higher permeability than the surrounding rock. This
would easily be lost in the process of collecting 2) Klotz, JA, Kreuger, R.F. and Pye, D.S.: "Effect of
samples for thin sections or mercury porosimetry. In perforation damage on well productivity" JPT
cases where the loose debris was preserved, (November 1974) 1303-1314
e.g. Figure 8, it is unclear where the side of the
tunnel would be after the debris has been cleaned 3) Behrmann, L.A., Pucknell, J.K., Bishop, S.R. and
up by flow or underbalance. Hsia, T.-Y.: "Measurement of the additional skin
due to the perforation damaged zone" 66th Annual
3) The effect of small reductions in the pore size would Technical Conference, 1991
have been magnified by changes in the relative
permeability (cores were flow tested with kerosene 4) Hsia, T.Y. and Behrmann, LA: "Perforating skin as
but contained brine at its irreducible saturation). a function of rock permeability" 66th Annual
Technical Conference, 1991
4) Mobile fines, either naturally occurring or disturbed
due to the perforation process, could have migrated 5) Saucier, R.J. and Lands, J.F.: "A laboratory study of
to block pore throats. As pore throats would have perforations in stressed rocks" Trans AIME (1978)
been blocked in a particular direction and the size of Vol2651347
the fines would be small, the mechanism might not
be detected in thin sections or by mercury
porosimetry. Certainly fines production occurred

515
 SPE 2281'
6) 'Swanson, a.F.: "A simple correlation between
permeabilities and mercury capillary pressures" JPT
(December 1981) 2498-2504

7) Warpinski, N.R.: "Investigation of the accuracy and

reliability of in situ stress measurements using
hydraulic fractures in perforated cased holes" paper
presented at 24th U.S. Symposium on Rock
Mechanics, June 1983

8) "Recommended practices for evaluation of well

perforators" API Recommended Practice 43 (RP43),
Fifth edition, January 1991

TABLE 1. Details of perforated cores used for CAT scans

Rock Rock Rock Berea Gold Castlegate

Type Type Type Sst Sst Sst
A B D

Number of
cores 4 3 1 34 14 3
scanned

Typical properties:

Permeability 230 220 200 100 300

(mD)

Porosity 15 19 25 19 24 27
(%)

Uniaxial
Compressive 5000 3000 6000 4000 1000
Strength
(psi)

Perforating conditions:

Charge size 22 & 22 22 6.5 3.2 3.2

(g) 6.5 &3.2

Underbalances 500 & 500 & 500 0-1500 0-3000 0-2250

(psi) 1125 1500

Effective
stress 1450 2890 2350 3000 - 3000 1500 -
(psi) 6000 3000

516
 TABLE 3. Details of perforating conditions for cores subjected to further testing

Charge Underbalance Effective Total

size stress Perforation
length.
(g) (psI) (psi) (in)
TABLE 2. Results from Mercury poroslmetry
Rock type A:
Sample and Porosity Denshy Estimate of
Permeability A1 22 500 1450 12.9
Location
% glee mD A2 22 500 1450 13.6

A1 - Perforation entrance Rock type B:

Damaged zone 20 2.11 1.9 B1 22 500 2890 10.2

Undamaged rock 19 2.14 2.4 B2 22 1500 2890 9.8
B3 22 1500 2890 11.0
A1 - 4cm from entrance
Berea:
Damaged zone 20 2.10 1.2
Undamaged rock 16 2.22 0.9 BP3 22 1500 2890 9.2
BP4 6.5 1500 2890 4.3
A2 - Near entrance BP9 6.5 500 3000 4.5
BP13 6.5 1000 6000 5.5
Debris in tunnel 38.5 1.59 >100 BP14 6.5 0 6000 4.3
Damaged zone 18 2.20 0.5 BP17 6.5 0 6000 4.0
Undamaged rock 14 2.30 0.4 BP18 6.5 500 3000 3.5

B1 - Perforation entrance
....
U1
...... Damaged zone 22.5 2.03 322 TABLE 4. Dimensions of the perforation damaged zone suggested by the pin test
Undamaged rock 19.4 2.12 789

B3 - Perforation entrance
Near entrance to perforation Near end of perforation
Damaged zone
Sample 1 28.7 1.85 106 Thickness Diameter Hole Thickness Diameter Hole
Sample 2 27.0 1.90 96 of zone of zone diameter of zone of zone diam~ter
Undamaged rock 21.6 2.06 675 (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

B3 - Middle of perforation 6.5g charges

Damaged zone 22.6 1.98 132 BP9 8 31 15 7 29 15

Undamaged rock 22.1 2.03 1059 BP13 6 30 18 5 28 18
BP14 7 32 18 5 26 16
BP3 - Entrance to tunnel BP17 6 33 21 3 21 15

Damaged zone 25.7 1.92 20 22g charges

Undamaged rock 19.5 2.09 120
BP3 16 48 16 11 36 14
A1 68 14 8 24 8
BP3 - 14 cm from entrance

Damaged zone 22.8 2.10 15

A2
B1 7
..
27.
17 69
53
35
39
5
10
20
.41
10
11
.~
",
Undamaged rock 20.4 2.16 99 B2 15 60 30 11 30 8
I\)
Enlarged holes I\)
CO
A1 and A2 are a low permeability sandstone, B1 and B2 are from a higher permeability reservo~
The "BP" cores are Berea sandstone. ....
 SPE 22811

.40

-;
N
'(i;
,
(])
(;
.30
Undamaged
rock "
I,
I,

" ,,
..s 1\
I ,
C»
.Q

~
I
I ,
0
.3-
.20
I
I
I ,,
,,
(])
E I I
:J I
"'5
>
(]) .10 I
I
,
> \
~ \
Qi \
a: \

o~::;;::;;;:;;;::::===-""::.::.::r-=--=:.::..::..::.:::':::"=~=----~~" =-=l-
-

0.1 10 100
Pore size (microns)
Fig. 5-Comparlson of pora-alze dlatrlbutlon for rock adjacent to the perforation tunnal with undamaged material
for Core B3 shot with 22-g charge.

.18
Debris in
Q) perforation

~
N
'(i;
(])
(;
..s .12
C»
.Q
<l j
Q>
0
.3- II
(])
E
n
II
:J
"'5 .06
>
(])
>
~
Q5
a:

.# #

0
.01 0.1 1 10 100
Pore size (microns)
Fig. 6-Comparlson of pora-slze distribution for undamaged rock, perforation-damaged zone, and
debris left In perforation for Core A2 shot with 22-g cherge.

.16 "T""-----------------------,
Q)
N
"(i;
(])
(; .12
..s
C»
.Q
<l
0>
0 .08
.3-
(])
E
:J
"'5
> .04
(])
>
~
Q5
a:

O+-------r--------r-------j
0.1 10 100
Pore size (microns)
Fig. 7-Comparlson of pore-size distribution for rock inside end outside of perforetlon-damaged zone for core shot
with 6.5-g charge (Berea Core BP13).

519
 SPE 22811
Material location
II Steel
IEl1 Water
rI Core
• Void

Material being simulated - The "void" is the perforation tunnel created

Pressure (M bar)

PA 3.50E-03
III 2.00E-03

=
IEl1 1.50E-03

D
1.00E-03
5.00E-04

Perforation
tip
Fig. 14-Finite-difference simulation of an experiment in which a core of rock held at a suitable
confining pressure is perforated.

The perforation is formed by 'pushing' the surrounding rock outwards:

Movement of rock Crush zone boundary

Hole formed Original position of

by jet material now forming
damaged zone

After perforation, stresses try to collapse the perforation:

Inner boundary of
elastic zone

Tensional tangential t
forces created by
"stretching" the inner
boundary of the Original position of
elastic zone material now forming
elastic zone

Spiral fractures

Fig. 15-Mechanism by which perforation-damaged zone is created.

522