6 views

Uploaded by David Montoya

paper

- Tunel Hs2013 Lazaro 2
- Geert Sma 1969
- Set 1
- SPE-17110-PA - Modelling of Acid Fracturing
- [G._Lakshmi_Narasaiah]_Finite_Element_Analysis.pdf
- DSA.petrel2019.1.UserManual
- 00007693
- Failure Analysis of Sheared Shaft of a Brine Recycle Pump...
- Fracture Role-Presentation
- 201051792337561
- Haim Son Vertical Horizontal
- 08CHAPTER_1
- Geo-Construct1.ppt
- Calculating Excavator Structural Stress
- Maximum Short Circuit Force Calculation of 3-ϕ Induction Motor Using FEM Analysis
- Komponen Sistem Panasbumi
- A Theoretical and Experimental Analysis of Fillet Weld
- Question Bank-CAD.docx
- Joints
- 9 - Back to Elements - Tetrahedra vs Hexahedra

You are on page 1of 15

Hydraulic Fracture Propagation from Oriented Perforations

Jay Sepehri, PinnacleA Halliburton Service; Mohamed Y. Soliman and Stephen M. Morse, Texas Tech

University

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference held in The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 35 February 2015.

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 have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect

any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written

consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may

not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract

Understanding fracture initiation and propagation from perforated wellbores is essential to designing a

perforation scheme to achieve an efficient hydraulic fracture stimulation treatment. The effect of

perforation design on hydraulic fracture propagation has been extensively studied using experimental and

analytical methods. Because the experimental investigation of hydraulic fracture is complicated, expensive, and often returns limited results, numerical methods can be applied as an efficient way to simulate

fracture propagation from perforations. An Extended Finite Element Method (XFEM) was used to develop

a model to investigate the effects of various parameters on fracture propagation from a set of perforations.

These parameters included perforation orientation, perforation length, stress anisotropy, and elastic

properties of the formation. Fracture propagation patterns from the XFEM model were first matched

against published experimental studies and exhibited good agreement. The model was then used to

broaden the study of perforation effects. Results of the modeling proved the effects of perforation

orientation and length on hydraulic fracture propagation pattern. Horizontal stress anisotropy and rock

mechanical properties were observed to strongly influence fracture propagation. It was also observed that,

when two or more perforations are positioned at different orientation angles at the same depth, a fracture

tends to propagate from the less deviated perforation. In these cases, the more deviated perforation can

develop a short fracture, following a propagating pattern that could be caused by stress shadowing/

interference. Stress interference between two perforations positioned closely together results in either

perforation breakdown or fracture propagating away from one another. The simulation results from this

study offer methods to enhance perforation design for hydraulic fracture treatment, particularly in the case

of high stress anisotropy and high uncertainty in a preferred fracture plane. Analyzing competing

perforations suggests that a technique based on this concept can be applied when high uncertainty exists

regarding the direction of the principal horizontal stresses through increasing perforation density.

Introduction

Because of common well stability issues, isolating wells from unwanted zones, and several other

operational considerations, wellbores are usually cased and then perforated; therefore, the majority of

hydraulic fracturing treatments are performed through perforations. Perforating provides the channel of

SPE-173342-MS

communication between the wellbore and the reservoir. In hydraulic fracture treatments, perforations can

serve as an initial fracture to help fracture initiation and control propagation direction. Perforations play

an important role in complex fracture geometries surrounding the wellbore. Initiation of a single wide

fracture and avoiding multiple T-shaped and reoriented fractures from a wellbore is one of the primary

objectives of using perforation techniques.

The objective in terms of the perforating design for fracturing should be choosing perforating

parameters that minimize near-wellbore (NWB) pressure drops during both fracturing operations and

production. Some of these NWB effects are perforation friction, microannulus pinch points from gun

phasing misalignment, multiple competing fractures, and fracture tortuosity caused by a curved fracture

path (Romero et al. 1995). An optimal perforation for fracture propagation would have a minimum

injection pressure, initiate only a single fracture, and generate a fracture with minimum tortuosity at an

achievable fracture initiation pressure (Behrmann and Nolte 1999).

Several studies have investigated the effect of perforations on hydraulic fracture initiation and

propagation. The first work on the effect of perforation on hydraulic fracturing was presented by Daneshy

(1973), who showed that the direction of induced hydraulic fracture is not dictated by perforation

orientation. This work showed that, in many cases, fluid can travel from the perforation through the area

between the casing and formation to initiate a fracture in the direction of maximum horizontal stress.

In an experimental work, El Rabaa (1989) examined effect of different parameters on perforation

design and showed that multiple fractures could be created when the perforated interval was longer than

four times wellbore diameters. Soliman (1990) showed that fracture reorientation can affect the analysis

of microfrac and minifrac tests in horizontal wells. Hallam and Last (1991) recommended that, without

knowledge of the stress directions, a low phasing angle should be used. In another series of laboratory

experiments (Abass et al. 1994 and 1996), the effects of oriented perforations in vertical and horizontal

wells on hydraulic fracturing treatments and sand control were studied. Results of such experiments

showed the relation between the breakdown pressure and hydraulic fracture width and perforation

orientation.

Experimental investigation of hydraulic fracture is a complicated and expensive process and has

limited results; therefore, numerical methods can be applied as an efficient way to simulate such

phenomena. Numerical simulation of the hydraulic fracturing process is essential to understanding the

complex mechanics of hydraulic fracturing. However, because of the strong nonlinearity in coupling of

the fluid flow inside the fracture and fracture propagation, numerical simulation of hydraulic fracturing

is a very complex problem. This problem gets even more complex considering the existence of natural

fractures, fluid leak off to the formation, and multilayers with varying physical and mechanical properties.

Great effort has been devoted to the numerical simulation of hydraulic fracturing with the first threedimensional (3D) modeling efforts beginning in the late 1970s. Significant progress has been made

developing two-dimensional (2D), pseudo3D, and 3D numerical hydraulic fracture models during the last

several years.

The finite element method (FEM) has been used to model hydraulic fracture propagation in heterogeneous rocks, which can include nonlinear mechanical properties and can be subjected to complex

boundary conditions. However, the FEM requires remeshing after each time step for the mesh to conform

exactly to the fracture geometry as the fracture propagates. This can result in higher computation time and

sometimes convergence problems.

By adding special enriched shape functions and additional degrees of freedom to the standard finite

element approximation, the XFEM overcomes the drawbacks associated with the use of the conventional

FEM and enables the fracture to be represented without meshing fracture surfaces. Therefore, the fracture

geometry is completely independent of the mesh configuration. As a result, remeshing is not necessary,

which results in faster simulation of the fracture propagation. Since the introduction of this method, many

new formulations and applications have appeared in the literature. The XFEM has been used to investigate

SPE-173342-MS

hydraulic fracture problems by many authors (Lecampion 2009; Dahi-Taleghani and Olson 2011; Weber

et al. 2013; Chen 2013).

This study focuses on the implementation of XFEM to simulate propagation of hydraulic fractures from

a perforated cased hole. Finite element software with XFEM capability was implemented to investigate

the effects of perforation orientations and the NWB stress regime on induced hydraulic fractures. This

study demonstrates the capabilities of XFEM for solving the complex problems of hydraulic fracture

propagation and observing the effects of perforation orientation on induced fractures. The results from this

study verified with some experimental observations in the literature help provide a better understanding

of the problem and the contributing parameters to help improve hydraulic fracturing treatments.

XFEM was developed in 1999 (Mos et al. 1999) as a technique to enhance the capabilities of the

conventional FEM. XFEM is particularly convenient when modeling discontinuities. Compared to FEM,

XFEM provides many improvements for the numerical modeling of fracture propagation. In the traditional

formulation of the FEM, a fracture has to follow element edges. In contrast, the fracture geometry in the

XFEM does not need to be aligned with the element edges, which provides great flexibility. The XFEM

is based on the enrichment of the FEM by adding extra degrees of freedom to the nodes of the elements

cut by the fracture. In this way, the fracture is included in the numerical model without the need to modify

the domain discretization because the mesh is generated completely independent of the fracture. Therefore, only a single mesh is necessary for any fracture length and orientation. In addition, nodes

surrounding the fracture tip are enriched with functions that reproduce the asymptotic fracture tip

behavior. This enables the modeling of the fracture within the fracture-tip elements and increases the

accuracy in terms of the computation of the stress intensity factors.

When a fracture is added to the finite element domain, two different sets of elements affected by the

fracture can be identified: Elements that are completely cut by the fracture and elements that are partially

cut and contain fracture tips. Nodes at these elements are said to be enriched by extra degrees of freedom

(DOF). Those elements, which are completely cut by fractures, are enriched by multiplying their shape

function into Heaviside function H(x), which has unit value and changes the sign as it crosses the crack

and conveys discontinuity across fracture faces.

(1)

For those elements that are not completely fractured and contain fracture tips, the Heaviside function

cannot be used to approximate the displacement field in the entire element. For the fracture tip elements,

the enrichment functions are applied. These functions were originally introduced by Fleming et al. (1997)

for use in the element free Galerkin method and adapted by Belytschko and Black (1999) for use in XFEM

formulation. These four functions describe the fracture tip displacement field. The first function is

discontinuous at the fracture tip.

(2)

In this equation r, are polar coordinates at the fracture tip. The above functions can reproduce the

asymptotic Mode I and II displacement fields and represent the near-tip singular behavior. By using the

enrichment functions in Eq. 2, four different additional degrees of freedom in each direction for each node

SPE-173342-MS

are added to those related to the finite element formulation. Fig. 1 shows graphically the two types of

enriched nodes in the XFEM domain.

Based on what has been discussed about the enrichment functions, the following expression for the

XFEM displacement approximation can be formulated

(3)

(4)

Where, J is the set of nodes whose elements is completely cut by the fracture and therefore enriched

with the Heaviside function H(x), K1 and K2 are the sets of nodes containing fracture tips 1 and 2, and

and

. ui are the standard degrees of freedom, and

fracture tip enrichment functions are

are the vectors of additional nodal degrees of freedom for modeling fracture faces and the two

fracture tips, respectively. Without any enrichment, Eq. 4 reduces to the classical finite element approximation:

(5)

Model Setup

The model to study the effect of perforation orientation is based on some experimental studies (Abass et

al. 1994 and 1996). Their laboratory experiments were designed to investigate the effect of perforation

orientation in vertical and horizontal wells on the hydraulic fracturing treatment. Dimensions and

parameters in this study are selected to be similar to the ones in those experiments to be able to cross

reference some of the results.

Rock samples used in those experiments were rectangular blocks of hydrostone (gypsum cement) with

dimensions of 6 6 10 in. These blocks were created from mixing water and hydrostone with a weight

ratio of 32/100, respectively. A wellbore was drilled in the center of the block in the direction of the 10-in.

side. The wellbore was cased and perforated. A series of perforation orientations was considered: 0,

SPE-173342-MS

Table 1List of parameters used in the simulation model.

Dimension

6 6 10 in.

fracture plane (PFP). All samples were confined in

Wellbore radius

0.25 in.

a triaxial loading vessel and the principal stresses of

Perforation length

0.25 in.

3,000 psi vertical, 2,500 psi maximum horizontal,

Youngs modulus

2.07 106 psi

Poissons

ratio

0.21

and 1,400 psi minimum horizontal stresses were

Min.

horizontal

stress

1400 psi

applied. No pore fluid was present within the samMax. horizontal stress

2500 psi

ple blocks (Abass et al. 1996).

Applied vertical stress

3000 psi

Fig. 2 illustrates a schematic of core sample and

Sample permeability

39 md

Table 1 lists the physical and mechanical properties.

Porosity

26.5%

Uniaxial compressive strength

8032 psi

Because the samples used for those experiments

Tensile strength (Brazilian)

807.6 psi

are cut to observe the fracture propagation pattern, it

is a good idea to consider only a 2D model, as

shown in Fig. 2 (right). The 2D model used can save

simulation time and the results can be compared to available photographs taken from the sample after

being cut.

Perforations are created to serve as communication channels between wellbore and formation and to

help decrease breakdown pressure and ease fracture propagation. There are several methods to create a

perforation in a well drilled and cased in the laboratory. For example, Bunger et al. (2004) created a starter

fracture by inserting a rod into the injection tube and striking it firmly with a hammer. Another method

could be by rotating a bent, sharpened rod inside the drill hole to scratch out the material. Unfortunately,

no information is provided on how the wells were perforated in the experiment targeted in the study by

Abass et al. (1994, 1996). In the model used throughout this study, perforations are modeled as initial

fractures extended from wellbore in opposite direction (180 phasing). Two wings are considered to have

the same length and zero initial width and positioned at angle measured from maximum horizontal stress

direction and increasing counterclockwise. No casing or cement is considered in this model; therefore,

fractures are initiated and propagated from the perforation tip. Depending on the perforation length and

orientation, it will take a distance of few wellbore radiuses for the propagating fracture to exit the NWB

region and reorient in the direction of the PFP.

Numerical Results

After the model described was constructed, sensitivity analyses were performed to obtain a better

understanding of hydraulic fracture propagation from perforations and to examine different parameters

SPE-173342-MS

Figure 3Fracture reorientation at 45 and 60 compared to the experimental model (photos from Abass et al. 1994).

and design configurations without the need to go through experimental design. In this study, the effects

of perforation angle, perforation length, rock mechanical properties, stress anisotropy, and nearby

discontinuities on fracture propagation from cased hole are investigated and analyzed.

Perforation Angle

Generally, fractures tend to initiate when the applied pressure overcomes the tensile stress at the wellbore

and propagate in the direction of the PFP. When the wellbore is cased and perforated, perforation can help

the initiation of fracture by serving as initial fractures, but the created fracture will not necessarily follow

the orientation provided by the perforation. Once the NWB region is passed, the initiated fracture will

follow the path of least resistance, which is perpendicular to direction of minimum horizontal stress. To

investigate this effect, models with perforation at different angles are built and run. The orientation angle

is measured from the direction of the PFP (which is parallel to the direction of maximum horizontal stress)

in a positive x direction. In all cases, perforations are of the same length, equal to one wellbore radius,

and other properties are kept the same. The results are presented in (Figs. 3 and 4). The result from

orientation angles 45, 60 and 75 and 90 are compared to some photographs from experimental studies

available.

As illustrated in Figs. 3 and 4, there is a very good match between the results from the numerical model

in this study and the experimental models in terms of fracture reorientation pattern. This demonstrates

confidence in the model to perform further simulation. It should be remembered that the experimental

study includes a cement layer behind the casing and, in some cases, including 75 and 90, injected fluid

SPE-173342-MS

Figure 4 Fracture reorientation at 75 and 90 compared to the experimental model (photos from Abass et al. 1994).

Orientation Angle ()

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

0

1.2

1.8

4

5

5.5

7.5

the cement to find a shorter path toward the PFP.

Because the numerical model is an ideal model

without defect and the effect of loose cement and

casing are not included, that phenomena will not

occur and fractures initiate only from perforations.

Reorientation Radius

As fracture propagates away from wellbore, the NWB effects are diminished and fracture reorients to

propagate in the preferred direction. The reorientation pattern is affected by stress distribution around the

SPE-173342-MS

wellbore. It is estimated that drilling a well will alter initial stress around wellbore over a distance of

approximately two to three times the wellbore radius. Therefore, it takes some distance for fracture to exit

the shadow of this stress change. The distance from wellbore to the point where fracture is completely

aligned with PFP or perpendicular to minimum horizontal stress is called reorientation radius. This

distance varies with orientation angle and is larger for more deviated perforations. Table 2 and Fig. 5

summarize the results of a set of simulations where the reorientation has been measured for different

orientation angles.

The reorientation radius has been estimated graphically; but, as expected, demonstrates an increasing

trend when the orientation angle increases. This is attributed to the effect of stress distribution around the

wellbore. As Figs. 6 through 8 demonstrate, tangential stress around the wellbore is increasing with

increasing . This is also the case at any radius around wellbore. Therefore, it is expected that the NWB

SPE-173342-MS

effects will extend farther as deviates from the Table 3Results of breakdown pressure for different reorientation

radius.

direction of maximum horizontal stress, which imOrientation Angle ()

Reorientation Radius (x rw)

plies that, in higher angles, it takes longer for the

0

3.2

fracture to exit the NWB stress regime.

15

4.2

Breakdown Pressure

30

4.8

The previous simulation set was run several times to

45

5.4

obtain the breakdown pressure. Different pressures

60

6.8

75

6.6

were applied to the model to find the smallest pres90

7.2

sure at which the fracture starts to propagate. The

results are presented in Table 3 and plotted in (Fig.

9). As the results of this sensitivity analysis show,

the breakdown pressure increases as the perforation angle increases. This is because higher pressure is

required to overcome the tangential stress at the wellbore in higher angles. Fig. 7 shows plotted tangential

stress for a wellbore of a radius rw 0.00635 m under the maximum and minimum horizontal stress of

2,500 and 1,400 psi. At the tip of perforation (R 2rw), this stress increases, as plotted in Figs. 6 and 7.

Initial Perforation Length

Perforation length is one is the primary parameters to be considered when designing hydraulic fracturing

from cased holes. Typical perforating guns have penetrations of 1 to 30 in. The length of the actual

perforation downhole is a function of the standoff of the perforating gun from the casing. Less standoff

means a longer perforation tunnel, while more standoff results in a shorter perforation length. For this

study, because it deals with a small scale model, perforation length is limited to be in the range of one

quarter to twice wellbore radius. Fig. 10 compares results of simulation for different perforation lengths.

Perforations are all 45 and other parameters are kept constant, except the perforation length changing

from 0.25rw to 2rw.

The initial perforation path affects the direction of fracture growth. As can be observed from Fig. 10,

the longer the perforation length, the longer it takes for the fracture to reorient. This argument is true for

the cases where fractures are only allowed to initiate from the tip of perforations. If casing with cement

with low bounding property were considered in the model and fracture could propagate through

microfractures in the cement, the result would have been different. In that case, the fracture might choose

to propagate through those microfractures because of the friction loss and pressure drop in long

perforations.

10

SPE-173342-MS

Fig. 11 compares the tangential stress for different perforation lengths. As perforation length increases (larger L/rw), the perforation tip is located

within areas with lower tangential stress, which

means stress to overcome at the tip of perforation is

lower, and this results in the fracture propagating

easier.

Mechanical Properties

Youngs modulus is one of the mechanical properties examined in this model to observe its effect on

fracture propagation. Youngs modulus has little

effect on initial stress distribution, but has significant effect on fracture propagation pattern. Increasing Youngs modulus increases the reorientation

Figure 11Variation of tangential stress with perforation length.

SPE-173342-MS

11

radius. By increasing the Youngs modulus from 0.2106 to 6106 psi, the reorientation radius has

increased 1.5 fold. Fig. 12 presents the effect of Youngs modulus.

Stress Anisotropy

Stress anisotropy, the difference between maximum and minimum horizontal stress, plays an important

role in fracture propagation pattern. Simulations were performed for different horizontal stresses at a fixed

orientation angle of 45 and Fig. 13 displays the results. As stress anisotropy decreases (increasing Sh),

there is an increasing trend in reorientation radius. The results from this simulation suggest that, in

formations with higher stress anisotropy, the role of perforation orientation becomes more significant.

Higher anisotropy results in rapid changes in fracture direction, and this means increasing tortuosity and

limiting fracture width. Therefore, in higher anisotropy, there is a smaller tolerance on perforation

deviation angle. This should be considered when perforating for hydraulic fracture treatments.

Varying Rock Properties

In this scenario, rock mechanical properties of some sections of the rock sample were considered to be

different and simulations were run again. Fig. 14 presents results. Fracturing from perforations in stiffer

12

SPE-173342-MS

rock propagates and reorients before the perforation on the opposite side even initiates a fracture. The

result in Fig. 14 suggests that, if the perforation is positioned at a more fracturable part of the rock, it

creates a higher chance of initiating and propagating a fracture and formations with varying properties can

develop asymmetric one wing fractures.

Competing Perforations

All previous simulations were performed with two perforations positioned at 180 phasing configuration.

Other configurations, such as 120 and 60 are also applied in the field. They are of course on a spiral or

helix configuration. In this model, all of the perforations are applied on a horizontal 2D model.Fig. 15

presents the results for two perforations with smaller phasing.

When two or more perforations are on a plane (assuming perforation at the same depth instead of on

a helix configuration), there is competition between the fractures to propagate. As Fig. 15 demonstrates,

when two perforations exist (15/45, 30/60, or 45/90), a fracture will propagate from the perforation

positioned at a smaller angle from the PFP. This could be because fracture initiation and propagation is

SPE-173342-MS

13

easier from less deviated perforations. In reality, fracture initiated from perforations at close angle may

link up and form one fracture, which would be in the direction of the less deviated perforation.

Also, as can be observed in the case of 30/60 perforations, the initiated fractures propagate away from

one another because of stress interference, which probably results in early screenout of the perforation

with higher deviation angle. The same discussion can be made for three competing fracture in 120

phasing, as Fig. 16 depicts.

The results obtained from simulating competing perforations can have many applications when

designing perforation for hydraulic fracturing. In cases where perforation are not aligned with the PFP

because of a lack of information regarding PFP orientation or because of operational limitations, using the

concept of two or more competing perforations can help increase the chance of developing fractures in the

PFP direction and decreasing tortuosity. Also, by decreasing perforation phasing, there are more chances

for more fractures in an orientation close to the PFP. Although there are always concerns regarding casing

stability in lower phasing angles or higher shot densities, the idea of competing perforation can still be

used by increasing operational efficiency.

It should be noted that perforations cannot be placed too closely to one another. For example,

positioning two perforations at 30 and 45 can result in perforation breakdown, as the results in Fig. 17

suggest. In this case, the stress interference from two perforations will force fracture propagating away

from each other, which would not be a favorable phenomenon. Even if one of these perforations could

result in a fracture propagating, as shown in Fig. 17 on the right, the resulted tortuosity can be very severe

around the wellbore, which could eventually reduce wellbore production performance.

Conclusions

A numerical model was developed using XFEM to investigate hydraulic fracture propagation from

oriented perforations. The primary goal in this study was to highlight and verify the effect of parameters

considered to affect this process as well as emphasize promising capabilities of XFEM for solving

14

SPE-173342-MS

hydraulic fracturing simulation problems. The results for fracture propagation patterns were confirmed to

match the results from published experimental studies and showed good agreement. Then, the verified

model was used to study the effects of different parameters involved in fracture propagation through a

perforated wellbore. Perforation angle from the PFP, perforation length, rock mechanical properties, and

horizontal stress anisotropy were observed to affect the fracture propagation pattern. It was observed that

fractures propagated from more deviated perforations require higher breakdown pressure and tend to

reorient to the PFP direction over larger distances. Changing formation Youngs modulus has little effect

on initial stress distribution around wellbore, but directly affects fracture reorientation radius. In formations with higher stress anisotropy, fractures propagated from perforations reorient over a shorter distance.

This effect is stronger for more deviated perforations. Perforations positioned at the part of formation with

larger Youngs modulus had a greater chance of initiating and propagating a fracture. Therefore, rocks

with varying properties might develop asymmetric one-wing fractures, even if perforated at 180 phasing.

Competition exists between perforations with different orientation angles to develop hydraulic fractures. In these cases, fractures tend to propagate from less deviated perforations and those more deviated

can develop short fractures, propagating away from one another because of stress interference and/or can

cease to propagate over a short distance, which could result in perforation screenout. However, stress

interference between two perforations positioned closely to each other can result in either perforation

breakdown or fractures propagating away from one another.

The findings of this study suggest that, because horizontal stress anisotropy plays an important role in

fracture reorientation radius and consequently tortuosity, in formations with high stress anisotropy, care

must be taken to identify the PFP and avoid perforation in orientations highly deviated from this plane.

Results from competing perforations analysis suggest that this technique can be applied when high

uncertainty exists regarding the direction of maximum and minimum horizontal stress. This technique can

be applied by increasing shot density or a new design of perforation gun to apply multiple perforations

at the same depth.

Nomenclature

h, Sh

H, SH

r,

a,b

DOF

E

F

H(x)

L

Ni

PFP

rw

uFEM

uENR

XFEM

Maximum horizontal stress

Polar coordinate

Vectors for added degrees of freedom

Degree of freedom

Youngs modulus

Crack tip enrichment function

Crack face enrichment function

Perforation length

Shape functions

Preferred fracture plane

Wellbore radius

Finite element part of displacement approximation

Enriched part of displacement function

Extended Finite Element Method

References

Abass, H.H., Brumley, J.L., and Venditto, J. 1994. Oriented Perforations - A Rock Mechanics View.

Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana,

2528 September. SPE-28555-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/28555-MS.

SPE-173342-MS

15

Abass, H.H., Hedayati, S., and Meadows, D.L. 1996. Nonplanar Fracture Propagation From a

Horizontal Wellbore: Experimental Study. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 11 (3). SPE-24823PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/24823-PA.

Behrmann, L.A., and Nolte, K.G. 1999. Perforating Requirements for Fracture Stimulations. SPE Drill

& Compl 14 (4). SPE-59480-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/59480-PA.

Belytschko, T., and Black, T. 1999. Elastic Crack Growth in Finite Elements With Minimal Remeshing. International Journal Of Numerical Methods In Engineering 45 (5): 601620.

Bunger, A.P., Jeffrey R.G., and Detournay, E. 2004. Toughness-Dominated Near-Surface Hydraulic

Fracture Experiments. Presented at the Gulf Rocks 2004, the 6th North America Rock Mechanics

Symposium (NARMS), Houston, Texas, 59 June. ARMA-04-468.

Chen, Z. 2013. An ABAQUS Implementation of the XFEM for Hydraulic Fracture Problems.

Presented at the ISRM International Conference for Effective and Sustainable Hydraulic Fracturing, Brisbane, Australia, 20 22 May. ISRM-ICHF-2013-007.

Dahi-Taleghani, A., and Olson, J.E. 2011. Numerical Modeling of Multistranded-Hydraulic-Fracture

Propagation: Accounting for the Interaction Between Induced and Natural Fractures. SPE J. 16

(3): 575581. SPE-124884-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/124884-PA.

Daneshy, A.A. 1973. Experimental Investigation of Hydraulic Fracturing Through Perforations. J Pet

Technol 25 (10): 1,2011,206. SPE-4333-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/4333-PA.

El Rabaa, W. 1989. Experimental Study of Hydraulic Fracture Geometry Initiated From Horizontal

Wells. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas,

8 11 October. SPE-19720-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/19720-MS.

Fleming, M., Chu Y.A., Moran, B. et alet al. 1997. Enriched Element-Free Galerkin Methods for

Crack Tip Fields. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 40 (8): 14831504.

Giner, E., Sukumar, N., Taranc, J.E. et alet al. 2009. An ABAQUS Implementation of the Extended

Finite Element Method. Engineering Fracture Mechanics 76 (3): 347368.

Hallam, S.D., and Last, N.C. 1991. Geometry of Hydraulic Fractures From Modestly Deviated

Wellbores. J Pet Technol 43 (06) 742748. SPE-20656-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/20656-PA.

Lecampion, B. 2009. An Extended Finite Element Method for Hydraulic Fracture Problems. Communications in Numerical Methods in Engineering 25 (2): 121133.

Mos, N., Dolbow, J., and Belytschko, T. 1999. A Finite Element Method for Crack Growth without

Remeshing. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 46 (1): 131150.

Romero, J., Mack, M.G., and Elbel, J.L. 1995. Theoretical Model and Numerical Investigation of

Near-Wellbore Effects in Hydraulic Fracturing. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, 2225 October. SPE-30506-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/

30506-MS.

Soliman, M Y. 1990. Interpretation of Pressure Behavior of Fractured, Deviated, and Horizontal

Wells. Presented at the SPE Latin America Petroleum Engineering Conference, Rio de Janeiro,

Brazil, 14 19 October. SPE-21062-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/21062-MS.

Weber, N., Siebert P., Willbrand, K.W. et alet al. 2013. The XFEM With An Explicit-Implicit Crack

Description For Hydraulic Fracture Problems. Presented at the ISRM International Conference for

Effective and Sustainable Hydraulic Fracturing, Brisbane, Australia, 20 22 May. ISRM-ICHF2013-048.

- Tunel Hs2013 Lazaro 2Uploaded byjcasafranca
- Geert Sma 1969Uploaded byDeyvid Debastiani
- Set 1Uploaded byPrem Sharma
- SPE-17110-PA - Modelling of Acid FracturingUploaded byswaala4real
- [G._Lakshmi_Narasaiah]_Finite_Element_Analysis.pdfUploaded bymoljaime1326
- DSA.petrel2019.1.UserManualUploaded byAdi Danu Saputra
- 00007693Uploaded byShaju Sachin
- Failure Analysis of Sheared Shaft of a Brine Recycle Pump...Uploaded byPd Rar
- Fracture Role-PresentationUploaded byyyamid
- 201051792337561Uploaded byErhan Savaş
- Haim Son Vertical HorizontalUploaded byMario Enrique Vadillo Sáenz
- 08CHAPTER_1Uploaded byEka Suprianto
- Geo-Construct1.pptUploaded bySusamto R
- Calculating Excavator Structural StressUploaded byrbachalli
- Maximum Short Circuit Force Calculation of 3-ϕ Induction Motor Using FEM AnalysisUploaded byDivyang Soni
- Komponen Sistem PanasbumiUploaded byMona Natalia Siahaan
- A Theoretical and Experimental Analysis of Fillet WeldUploaded byIJSTE
- Question Bank-CAD.docxUploaded bysudeep thota
- JointsUploaded byPaulo
- 9 - Back to Elements - Tetrahedra vs HexahedraUploaded byalealealek
- NASA 2001 Ices ScfUploaded byRamprasad Srinivasan
- JointsUploaded byivan1924
- 366976131 Bases Bola de Bowling ACI PDFUploaded byHuaman Chavez Jesus Angel
- A Model to Determine the Effect of Pore Pressure and Fracture Gradient on Stuck Pipe ManagementUploaded bydedete
- TensorUploaded byNihar Jyoti
- A Displacement-Potential Scheme to Stress Analysis of a Cracked Stiffened Panel under Axial LoadingUploaded byinventionjournals
- SPE71692.pdfUploaded bykahutzed666
- Paper Biris Opatija 2016Uploaded bybiris.sorinstefan9079
- ME CIVIL Struct Engg Syllabus 2015 16Uploaded byindian royal
- 0 AbstractUploaded byJustin West

- Parte 1_Capitulo 6.pdfUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Cabarcas PVT DataUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Parte 2_Capitulo 19Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- SPE-1208-0026-JPTUploaded byDavid Montoya
- ASPECTOS ECONOMICOSUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Parte 2_Capitulo 15Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- Well Production Practical Handbook ed. by Henri Cholet.pdfUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Parte 2_Capitulo 18Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- Parte 1_Capitulo 10Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- Parte 1_Capitulo 14Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- Parte 1_Capitulo 3Uploaded byAjendra Singh
- Parte 2_Capitulo 20Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- Parte 1_Capitulo 4.pdfUploaded byDavid Montoya
- _estadística Libro Héctor Pabón 2Uploaded byJuan Pablo Bautista
- Parte 2_Capitulo 17Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- Carlos Eduardo Andrade Gomes BarretoUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Johanferney Delgado analisis de presiones.docxUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Johanferney Delgado analisis de presiones.docxUploaded byDavid Montoya
- 62326_07Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- Parcial Práctico de Simulación de YacimientosUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Fecha Perforacion FrioUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Analisis y cuantificacion de las incertidumbres geologicas: Campo RubialesUploaded byJhon David Giraldo Rodriguez
- Parte 1_Capitulo 6.pdfUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Geoestadística G1 Tabla DatosUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Mate.Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- tesisfinalECUploaded byTestto Aragón
- Trabajo de Simlacion 123Uploaded byDavid Montoya
- SPE-13510.pdfUploaded bywsanchez_sotelo
- sintesishysisUploaded byDavid Montoya
- Dia Positi VasUploaded byDavid Montoya

- NITK UG Curriculum 2014-1Uploaded byVedang Pavanje
- Solution Manual for Finite Element Analysis MoaveniUploaded byLuciana Maia
- Spiral Casing simulation articleUploaded byduducastro
- A Finite Element Method Primer for Mechanical Desing - Charles E. KnightUploaded byRolffoTello
- EDEM is an advanced DEM (Discrete Element Method) software package for simulation and analysis of particulate solids handling and processing operationsUploaded byhugo luna
- Finite Element Analysis and Optimization of Weld Distortion in Automobile ChassisUploaded byIRJET Journal
- FEA vs TestingUploaded bycen1510353
- CFD BooksUploaded byKamalpreet Saini
- Learn COSMOSMUploaded byIulian Mărăcineanu
- Report on Bottle Packing MachineUploaded bysandeep27122
- Staad Pro-Solid Elements-cantilever BeamUploaded byV.m. Rajan
- ATENA-Engineering-2D Tutorial Construction ProcessUploaded byJustazz Justinas
- [9] an optimazation using LS-POT - nielen standerUploaded byFelis Catus
- MechFrancisTurbineBestPracticeUploaded bySyamhudar Mabruri
- Pipeline ModelingUploaded bysacharya2011
- ETH Struct OptUploaded byPratik D Upadhyay
- Validation and Updating Ansys Model Using Expt Modal DataUploaded byKiran Kolluru
- D58801Uploaded bygrats_singco
- Modal Assurance Criterion - Álvaro RiveroUploaded byrif87
- Effective Width in Shear of Reinforced Concrete Solid Slab Bridges Under Wheel LoadsUploaded bySudathipTangwongchai
- Final Report on Disc BrakesUploaded bySai Kishore
- COHEN - Mixed Finite Elements With Mass-lumping for the Transient Wave EquationUploaded byAndrés Mercado
- 1.0 Basic Interaction With SoilWorksUploaded byothman
- Live load distribution in skewed prestressed concrete i-beam and.pdfUploaded bymateus456
- msg00524Uploaded byRahul Park
- pcourseiitdUploaded byShanmugam Subramanyan
- Numerical Analysis and Simulation of PlasticityUploaded bysrikanthrajaram18
- FEM analysis of pavement linear and non linear.pdfUploaded byHanamant Hunashikatti
- ice_class_gn_e-feb14.pdfUploaded byolivo farrera jr
- fea pptUploaded bybaski_me78