Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
By
Amit Verma
Assistant Professor-senior scale
Petroleum Engineering Dept.
UPES, Dehradun
Acknowledgement:
R Meenakshi Sundaram
ONGC (GGM – Production Rtd.)
What is hydraulic fracturing?
Applying Hydraulic Pressure to the Wellbore Causes the Rock to Fail and a Fracture to Initiate
OBJECTIVES
• To bypass near wellbore damage and return a well to its
natural productivity.
• To extend a conductive path deep into a formation and thus
increase productivity beyond the natural level.
• Elevate Production to an Economic Level
• Accelerate Recovery of Reserves
Objective of HF is to increase well productivity by creating a highly conductive path,
relative to the matrix permeability, from the wellbore to the formation
Hydraulic Fracturing
Water laced with chemicals is pumped down to fracture the shale
and releases the gas, which can be pumped up.
A sandstone formation at a depth of 11,000 ft has a Poison’s ratio of 0.25 and a poro-elastic constant
of 0.71. The average density of the overburden formation is 165 lb/ft3. The pore pressure gradient
in the sandstone is 0.38 psi/ft. Assuming a tectonic stress of 2,000 psi and a tensile strength of the
sandstone of 1,000 psi, predict the breakdown pressure for the formation.
It has been decided that a low-permeability formation, consisting of three separate producing zones, will have to
be fractured to produce at economic rates. Before perforating, reasonable injection rates for fracturing (4 m3/min)
and large pressure drops across each perforation (3.5 MPa) have been selected as being suitable. Calculate the
surface pressure and the number of perforations required in each zone such that the proportion of fracture
fluid entering each of the zones is proportional to the height of the zones
Well data:
Tortuosity: A measure of deviation from a straight line. It is the ratio of the actual distance traveled between two
points, including any curves encountered, divided by the straight line distance. Tortuosity is used by drillers to
describe wellbore trajectory, by log analysts to describe electrical current flow through rock and by geologists to
describe pore systems in rock and the meander of rivers.
Offset Well:
An existing wellbore close to a proposed well that provides information for planning the proposed well. In planning
development wells, there are usually numerous offsets, so a great deal is known about the subsurface geology and
pressure regimes. In contrast, rank wildcats have no close offsets, and planning is based on interpretations of
seismic data, distant offsets and prior experience. High-quality offset data are coveted by competent well planners
to optimize well designs. When lacking offset data, the well planner must be more conservative in designing wells
and include more contingencies.
Injection falloff test:
The measurement and analysis of pressure data taken after an injection well is shut in. These data are often the easiest
transient well-test data to obtain. Wellhead pressure rises during injection, and if the well remains full of liquid after shut-
in of an injector, the pressure can be measured at the surface, and bottomhole pressures can be calculated by adding the
pressure from the hydrostatic column to the wellhead pressure.
Injection fall-off (IFO) testing typically refers to testing done in either Water disposal wells or injector wells for pressure
maintenance or secondary/tertiary recovery methods.
They are most often employed when either a new wells is drilled and completed for this purpose or more commonly a
pre-existing production well is converted into a disposal/injection well. The IFO is the mirror image of a Pressure Build- Up
(PBU) on a producing well and analysis can derive the same types of fundamental wellbore/reservoir information on an
injector well that you can with a producing well i.e. skin, permeability and reservoir pressure.
• Tree Saver: A pressure isolation sleeve that passes through one
or more production valves and isolates the wellhead from high
fracturing pressures.
step rate test
A test performed in preparation for a hydraulic fracturing
treatment in which an injection fluid is injected for a defined
period in a series of increasing pump rates. The resulting data are
used to identify key treatment parameters of the fracturing
operation, such as the pressure and flow rates required to
successfully complete the treatment.
step up test
10)If the formation fracture pressure has definitively been exceeded, as evidenced by
at least two injection rate-pressure combinations greater than the breakdown pressure,
the injection pump can be stopped, and the line valve closed and pressure allowed to
bleed-off into the injection zone. There will occur a significant instantaneous pressure
drop (Instantaneous Shut-in Pressure or ISIP), after which the pressure values will level
out. This ISIP value must be read and recorded. The ISIP obtained in this manner may
be considered to be the minimum pressure required to hold open a fracture in this
formation at this well.
Step rate (up) test procedure
11) Once the ISIP is obtained, the SRT is concluded
12)In the event that the breakdown pressure was not obtained at the maximum
test injection pressure utilized, the test results may indicate that the formation is
accepting fluids without fracturing.
Step down test
• This type of analysis is performed prior to a main frac job. It is
used to quantify perforation and near-wellbore pressure losses
(caused by tortuosity) of frac'd wells, and as a result, provides
information pertinent to the design and execution of the main
frac treatments.
• Step-down tests can be performed during the shut-down
sequence of a fracture calibration test.
Step down test
• To perform this test, a fluid of known properties (for example,
water) is injected into the formation at a rate high enough to
initiate a small frac.
• The injection rate is then reduced in a stair-step fashion, each rate
lasting an equal time interval, before the well is finally shut-in. The
resulting pressure response caused by the rate changes is
influenced by perforation and near-wellbore friction.
• Tortuosity and perforation friction pressure losses vary differently
with rate. By analyzing the pressure losses experienced at different
rates, we can differentiate between pressure losses due to
tortuosity and due to perforation friction.
Step down test
history plot of step-
down test analysis
• The chemicals’ purpose is to gel the solution and allow proppants (sand or ceramic
spheres) to be suspended in the mix.
• The fissures created in the fracing process are held open by the proppant, which is
left behind when the fluid is released form the well
• These fissures allow what was once rock as hard tough as granite to flow
hydrocarbon.
Pump
• Horse Power
– Pumping Rate
– Pressure
– Calculation of HHP
requirement
• Manifold
– Connect Lines from all pump
to single source
• Frac Van
– Data acquisition
– Pump Control
– Overall monitoring
• For context, unconventional rocks often have permeability less
than the cement that is used to seal the well casing.
• While conventional formations could be compared to a soft
sandstone, unconventionals feel more like the granite
countertops in your kitchen – hydraulic fracturing stimulation
is absolutely necessary to unlock the source-rock riches the
industry is pursuing today.
What is the impact of hydro fracturing
1. Typical production increase is 2 to 10 fold
2. A great deal of todays oil & gas development is economic only with hydraulic fracturing
135
Foam based fluids
• CO2 water-based foams
• CO2 density close to water
• More an emulsion than a foam
• High CO2 solubility in water
• Good cleanup
• N2 based foams
• Low density and high friction
• Less efficient proppant transport
• Useful in low pressure gas reservoirs for lift
• Added flowback energy for cleanup in tight zones
• Binary foams (CO2 + N2)
• Benefits of CO2 solubility
• Disadvantages of N2 density
138
Crosslink Delay
• Crosslinking (at surface) of Frac fluid increases
Viscosity
Friction pressure/ pumping pressure
142
Xlink time
• Required Equipment
Waring Blender and a rheostat to control speed
Balance to weigh out chemicals
• Main use is to adjust crosslink time to well and
treatment conditions
Primarily fluid temperature and tubing transit
time
• Very sensitive to contaminants in the water
Altered crosslink time may or may not reduce
ultimate crosslinked fluid viscosity
143
New Fluid systems
• High temperature frac fluid
• Visco-elastic surfactant (VES) based fluid
• Reduced polymer system
• Liquid gel concentrates
144
High Temperature frac fluid
• Existing fracturing fluid not suitable for high temp. Wells
(>125C)
• Frac fluid developed at WSS, Ahmedabad for temp. upto 150C
• Fracturing in Deep/Ultradeep wells
Optimisation of crosslink delay time
• Fracturing in High Temperature wells
Enhancing stability of frac fluid
Optimisation of breaker dosing
145
Gellants (Polymer)
• Guar gum
• Made from guar beans
• High molecular weight
mannose and galactose sugars
(polysaccharides)
• High residue (6-10%)
but can be reduced
by processing
146
Gellants (Polymer)
• Hydroxypropyl Guar, HPG
• Derivative of guar
• Lower residue (2-4%) and more soluble in alcohol
• Similar formation damage to guar
• More stable at higher temperatures (>150C)
• Carboxymethyl-Hydroxypropyl Guar, CMHPG
• Popular as a high temperature base gel
• Frequently crosslinked with Zr
147
Water based Polymer
• Hydroxyethylcellulose, HEC
• Glucose backbone
• Cleaner fluid than guar or HPG
• Difficult to crosslink
• Xanthan gum
• Biopolymer, produced metabolically by microorganism Xanthomonas
• Behaves as power law fluid even at low shear rates (whereas HPG fluid
becomes Newtonian)
• At shear rates less than 10 s–1,xanthan based fluid can suspend sand better
than HPG
• More expensive than guar or cellulose derivatives
• Used less frequently
148
Significance of n’, k’
• Rheological behaviour predicts the performance of fracturing
fluid based n, k’ values
153
Rheological variation
• Variation in High shear experienced by
the fluid during pumping through
tubulars & perforation tunnels
• Once in fracture, shear significantly
reduces, but fluid temperature
increases until it eventually reaches
formation temperature
• Shear experienced by a specific fluid
volume increases with time
• Formation temp. gradient experienced
by fluid is highest at the beginning of
the treatment and decreases thereafter
154
Frac fluid Stability
• Frac fluid must be stable with
• Formation Temperature
• Viscosity (50-70%) should be maintained for 2 – 3 hrs
155
FRACTURING FLUID TRATMENT EXECUTION
How do you perform the Fluid Efficiency test?
TIME
k – formation permeability, mD
Fracture performance under pseudo radial flow
The pseudo radial flow behavior can be predicted by a simple and easy-to-use relationship
provided by Cinco-Ley and Samaniego (1981). An equivalent wellbore radius is calculated for the
fracture, assuming that the fracture is not close to any boundaries and fully covers the reservoir
interval. The equivalent wellbore radius is convertible to a fracture skin factor (Sf). The skin factor
for a given Fcd can be calculated from graph in previous slide using the line (Sf + ln(xf/rw)).
where t is the time since production started (hr.), Ct the total compressibility (1/psi),
xf is the fracture half length (ft); µ is the fluid viscosity (cP)
If the fracture volume (i.e. proppant volume) is fixed, the half-length x width will be a constant for a
fracture of given height. There is an optimum combination of half-length and width for a fixed fracture
volume that minimizes the skin (greatest productivity). This occurs at the minimum of:
Q1. Calculate skin factor after hydraulic fracturing job from Cincoley Samaniego correlation. Also calculate the
time (in days) for pseudo radial flow to develop. Following data is given for the fractured well :-
Dimensionless time from Gringarten Et Al type curve for vertically fractured well is 3
Hydraulic Fracture Growth
1 - Fracture initiation as pumping of
Time Frac length fluid is started
during 2- Fracture propagation with fluid
Frac width 3 – Proppant (usually sand) enters
fracture
treatment hydraulic fracture as it is
suspended in the fracturing fluid
4 - Proppant advances further into
the fracture as pumping continues
5 – Proppant advances further in the
fracture and may reach the tip of
the hydraulic fracture as fluid
continues to leak into the
permeable formation
6 – Pumping of the fluid/proppant
mixture is stopped and fluid
continues to leak away into the
permeable formation
7 – Formation closes on proppant
and a conductive path remains in
the reservoir
Hydraulic Fracture Growth
1- Fracture initiation as pumping
of fluid is started
2- Fracture propagation with fluid
3 – Proppant (usually sand)
enters hydraulic fracture as it is
suspended in the fracturing fluid
4 - Proppant advances further
into the fracture as pumping
continues
5– Proppant advances further in
the fracture and may reach the
tip of the hydraulic fracture as
fluid continues to leak into the
permeable formation
6– Pumping of the fluid/proppant
mixture is stopped and fluid
continues to leak away into the
permeable formation
7– Formation closes on proppant
and a conductive path remains in
Proppant Selection
Since proppants are used to hold open the fracture after the hydraulic
pressure used to generate the fracture has been relieved, their material
strength is of crucial importance.
The propping material has to be strong enough to bear the closure stress;
otherwise, the conductivity of the crushed proppant bed will be considerably
less than the design value (both the width and the permeability of the
proppant bed decrease).
Other factors considered in the selection process are size, shape, and
composition. There are two main categories of proppants: naturally occurring
sands and manmade ceramic and bauxite proppants.