WO2012178026A2 - Procédé de détermination d'espacement de fractures hydrauliques dans une formation rocheuse - Google Patents

Procédé de détermination d'espacement de fractures hydrauliques dans une formation rocheuse Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2012178026A2
WO2012178026A2 PCT/US2012/043773 US2012043773W WO2012178026A2 WO 2012178026 A2 WO2012178026 A2 WO 2012178026A2 US 2012043773 W US2012043773 W US 2012043773W WO 2012178026 A2 WO2012178026 A2 WO 2012178026A2
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
fracture
fractures
spacing
determining
stress
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/US2012/043773
Other languages
English (en)
Other versions
WO2012178026A3 (fr
Inventor
Nicolas P. ROUSSEL
Mukul M. Sharma
Original Assignee
Board Of Regents, The University Of Texas System
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Board Of Regents, The University Of Texas System filed Critical Board Of Regents, The University Of Texas System
Priority to CN201280037328.XA priority Critical patent/CN103733091A/zh
Priority to CA2852881A priority patent/CA2852881A1/fr
Publication of WO2012178026A2 publication Critical patent/WO2012178026A2/fr
Publication of WO2012178026A3 publication Critical patent/WO2012178026A3/fr

Links

Classifications

    • E—FIXED CONSTRUCTIONS
    • E21—EARTH OR ROCK DRILLING; MINING
    • E21B—EARTH OR ROCK DRILLING; OBTAINING OIL, GAS, WATER, SOLUBLE OR MELTABLE MATERIALS OR A SLURRY OF MINERALS FROM WELLS
    • E21B49/00—Testing the nature of borehole walls; Formation testing; Methods or apparatus for obtaining samples of soil or well fluids, specially adapted to earth drilling or wells
    • E—FIXED CONSTRUCTIONS
    • E21—EARTH OR ROCK DRILLING; MINING
    • E21B—EARTH OR ROCK DRILLING; OBTAINING OIL, GAS, WATER, SOLUBLE OR MELTABLE MATERIALS OR A SLURRY OF MINERALS FROM WELLS
    • E21B43/00—Methods or apparatus for obtaining oil, gas, water, soluble or meltable materials or a slurry of minerals from wells
    • E21B43/25—Methods for stimulating production
    • E21B43/26—Methods for stimulating production by forming crevices or fractures
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01V—GEOPHYSICS; GRAVITATIONAL MEASUREMENTS; DETECTING MASSES OR OBJECTS; TAGS
    • G01V1/00—Seismology; Seismic or acoustic prospecting or detecting
    • G01V1/28—Processing seismic data, e.g. for interpretation or for event detection
    • G01V1/30—Analysis
    • G01V1/306—Analysis for determining physical properties of the subsurface, e.g. impedance, porosity or attenuation profiles
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01V—GEOPHYSICS; GRAVITATIONAL MEASUREMENTS; DETECTING MASSES OR OBJECTS; TAGS
    • G01V2210/00—Details of seismic processing or analysis
    • G01V2210/60—Analysis
    • G01V2210/62—Physical property of subsurface
    • G01V2210/624—Reservoir parameters

Definitions

  • the present disclosure relates in general to well drilling and, more particularly, to a method for determining spacing of hydraulic fractures in a rock formation.
  • Hydrocarbon (e.g., oil, natural gas, etc.) reservoirs may be found in geologic formations that have little to no porosity (e.g., shale, sandstone etc.).
  • the hydrocarbons may be trapped within fractures and pore spaces of the formation. Additionally, the hydrocarbons may be adsorbed onto organic material of the shale formation.
  • the rapid development of extracting hydrocarbons from these unconventional reservoirs can be tied to the combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing ("fracing") of the formations. Horizontal drilling has allowed for drilling along and within hydrocarbon reservoirs of a formation to better capture the hydrocarbons trapped within the reservoirs.
  • hydrocarbons may be captured by increasing the number of fractures in the formation and/or increasing the size of already present fractures through fracing.
  • the spacing between fractures as well as the ability to stimulate the fractures naturally present in the rock may be major factors in the success of horizontal completions in unconventional hydrocarbon reservoirs.
  • a method comprising determining an expected trajectory of induced fractures, analyzing net pressure associated with the induced fractures, and determining at least one of spacing of induced fractures and a property of the induced fractures based on the net pressure.
  • Computer-readable medium containing the same are also disclosed.
  • a method of optimizing fracture spacing includes propagating an initial fracture, measuring pressure associated with propagating the initial fracture, determining a minimum spacing required to prevent a second fracture from intersecting the initial fracture, and propagating the second fracture at least the minimum spacing distance away from the initial fracture.
  • a method of optimizing fracture spacing includes analyzing stresses associated with a first set of at least one fractures associated with a first well, analyzing stresses associated with a second set of at least one fractures associated with a second well, and determining spacing of a fracture associated with a third well such that the fracture associated with the third well does not intersect with the first set and the second set of fractures, the third well running between the first and second wells.
  • a method of determining maximum horizontal pressure includes measuring an actual pressure during each stage of fracturing of a rock formation, determining a theoretical expected pressure during each stage of fracturing of the rock formation, and determining a maximum horizontal pressure of the rock formation based at least on a comparison of the theoretical expected pressure and the measured actual pressure.
  • FIGURE 1 illustrates an example schematic of a gas well configured to extract natural gas from a gas rich shale formation, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURES 2a and 2b illustrate examples of the reorientation of stresses in a rock formation due to the placement of a fracture orthogonal to a horizontal well according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 3 illustrates the geometry of a single transverse fracture of a shale formation that includes a pay zone that may include hydrocarbons (e.g., natural gas) and bounding layers that may bound the pay zone, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure;
  • hydrocarbons e.g., natural gas
  • FIGURE 4 illustrates a three dimensional model of multiple transverse fractures in a layered rock formation according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 5 illustrates the calculated propagation of a subsequent fracture (n+1) based on the mechanical stress interference of a previous fracture (n), according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 6 illustrates the results of calculating fracture propagation with each fracture spaced approximately 400 feet apart, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 7 illustrates the results of calculating fracture propagation with each fracture spaced approximately 300 feet apart, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 8 illustrates the stress distribution of a rock formation with the stress distribution being influenced by the propagation of a fracture produced during a fourth stage of a fracture treatment, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 9 illustrates fracture propagation with the fracture spacing reduced to 250 ft, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 10 illustrates the stress distribution of a rock formation caused by fractures of FIGURE 9, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 11 illustrates fracture propagation with the fracture spacing reduced to 200 ft, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 12 illustrates fracture propagation with the fracture spacing reduced to 150 ft, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 13 illustrates the impact of fracture spacing on the angle of deviation of the fractures from the orthogonal path, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 14 illustrates the impact of fracture spacing on the evolution of the net closure stress, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURES 15a and 15b illustrate the horizontal stress of a rock formation with a stress reversal region associated with a fracture, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURES 16a and 16b illustrate the differences between performing consecutive fracturing and alternate fracturing, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURES 17a and 17b illustrate the stress orientation of a rock formation with stress reversal regions associated with a first fracture and a second fracture, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 18 shows a spacing of fractures for which the stress contrast may be lowest, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 19 illustrates that the deviatoric stress may approach zero in a near wellbore region in the case of optimum spacing in an alternate fracturing sequence, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 20 illustrates an example of fracture spacing that may be done with multiple horizontal lateral wells, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURES 21a and 21b illustrate the stress distribution between two pairs of fractures propagated from outside lateral wells, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure
  • FIGURE 22 illustrates the relationship between the length of a "middle fracture" propagating from a center lateral well for different values of the fracture length with respect to the inter-well spacing, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIGURE 23 illustrates the local stress contrast that may be recorded along the assumed propagation direction of a middle fracture, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • FIGURE 1 illustrates an example schematic of a gas well 100 configured to extract natural gas from a gas rich shale formation 102.
  • Well 100 may be drilled using horizontal drilling methods to create a wellbore 104 that runs within and along shale formation 102.
  • wellbore 104 may be drilled such that wellbore 104 runs perpendicular to the maximum horizontal in-situ stresses of shale formation 102 to obtain better production of well 100.
  • Shale formation 102 may produce natural gas that is trapped in fractures and pore spaces of shale formation 102.
  • the natural gas may also be adsorbed in organic material included in the shale of shale formation 102.
  • well bore 104 runs through shale formation 102
  • well bore 104 may also run through fractures (not expressly shown) of shale formation 102.
  • the gas in the fractures may enter well bore 104 and may accordingly be retrieved at a drilling rig 106 of well 100.
  • the gas adsorbed on the organic material may be released into the fractures such that the adsorbed gas may also be retrieved.
  • the number and/or size of fractures in shale formation 102 may be increased using hydraulic fracturing ("fracing").
  • Fracing may refer to any process used to initiate and propagate a fracture in a rock formation. Additionally fracing may be used to increase existing fractures in a rock formation. Fracing may include forcing a hydraulic fluid in a fracture of a rock formation to increase the size of the fracture and introducing proppant (e.g., sand) in the newly induced fracture to keep the fracture open.
  • proppant e.g., sand
  • the fracture may be an existing fracture in the formation, or may be initiated using a variety of techniques known in the art.
  • the amount of pressure needed to extend and propagate the fracture may be referred to as the "fracturing pressure.”
  • producing fractures during fracing may change the stress properties of a rock formation. Accordingly, subsequent transverse fractures initiated from a horizontal well may deviate toward or away from the previous fracture depending on the stress reorientation caused by the tracing.
  • the stress reorientation may be a function of mechanical properties of the reservoir rock, fracture spacing, and the orientation of the previous fracture. As described in further detail below, in some instances spacing frac treatments too close together may result in a subsequent fracture intersecting with a previous fracture. Therefore, in such instances, the contribution of the subsequent fracture in hydrocarbon production may be reduced or minimized.
  • the spacing of performing fracturing operations for a hydrocarbon well may be determined using net pressure measurements to determine a minimum frac spacing that also reduces the likelihood of subsequent fractures intersecting and interfering with previous fractures.
  • net pressure may be determined by surface pressures or down-hole pressures during fracturing. Therefore, the selection of fracture spacing may be such that the number of fractures initiated from a horizontal wellbore may be increased while also reducing the likelihood that the fractures may interfere and/or intersect with each other to allow for better production rates and depletion of hydrocarbons with each induced fracture. Therefore, the economic efficiency of fracturing may be improved and the cost of retrieving hydrocarbons from tight rock formations (e.g., shale formation 102) may be reduced.
  • FIGURE 1 is described as performing fracing with respect to a shale gas formation, the present disclosure may be used to improve frac spacing for any suitable formation (e.g., a tight sand formation, coalbed methane, sandstone, limestone, oil shale).
  • suitable formation e.g., a tight sand formation, coalbed methane, sandstone, limestone, oil shale.
  • well 100 is described as being used to extract natural gas, it is understood that the principles described herein may be used to extract any other suitable hydrocarbon.
  • FIGURES 2a and 2b illustrate examples of the reorientation of stresses in a rock formation due to the placement of a fracture orthogonal (or transverse) to a horizontal well according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • the opening of a propped transverse fracture in horizontal wells through hydraulic fracturing may cause a reorientation of stresses in the rock formation surrounding the fracture.
  • FIGURE 2a may represent the stress of the rock formation in a horizontal plane (e.g., a plane substantially parallel to the ground. Accordingly, the vertical axis of FIGURE 2a may represent the distance in the x direction from the center of a substantially horizontal wellbore 204.
  • the horizontal axis of FIGURE 2a may represent the distance in the y direction from the center of a fracture 202 opened using a fracturing technique. Fracture 202 in FIGURE 2a may follow the vertical axis in FIGURE 2a, such that fracture 202 may be substantially transverse to horizontal wellbore 204. In the present example, fracture 202 may extend approximately 500 feet from the center of wellbore 204.
  • FIGURE 2a illustrates that the direction of stress on the rock formation in the area surrounding the fracture is substantially orthogonal to the fracture and also orthogonal to the in-situ direction of maximum horizontal stress of the rock formation. The reversal of stress orientation in the area surrounding the fracture may be due to the pressures exerted on the formation from fracturing. This area where the stress orientation is reversed may be referred to as a stress reversal region as shown by stress reversal region 206 of FIGURE 2.
  • the degree of reorientation of the stress with respect to the in-situ direction of the maximum horizontal stress may be expressed as an angle from the in-situ direction of stress.
  • FIGURE 2b illustrates the stress reorientation with respect to the maximum horizontal stress as caused by creating fracture 202 of FIGURE 2a.
  • the orientation of the stress may be substantially orthogonal to the orientation of the in-situ stress such that stress reversal region 206 may be referred to as having a 90° stress reorientation.
  • the point where the stress reversal region ends may be referred to as an isotropic point, which may be seen at approximately 140 feet from the center of the fracture along the horizontal axis as shown in FIGURES 2a and 2b.
  • the distance between fracture 202 and the isotropic point is depicted as S90 0 in FIGURE 2b.
  • the stresses may still be at an orientation that is not parallel with the maximum horizontal stress of the rock formation.
  • the direction of maximum horizontal stress in FIGURE 2a just outside of stress reversal region 206 progressively moves from being parallel with the horizontal axis to being parallel with the vertical axis.
  • the orientation angle of the stress adjacent to fracture 204 progressively moves from 90° to 0°.
  • the rock formation may have a stress reorientation of 10° as shown by s 10° .
  • the stress reorientation of rock formation 200 may be 5° at approximately 450 feet from fracture 202 in the positive x-direction and at approximately 400 feet from wellbore 204 in the positive y-direction as shown by s 5° .
  • the reorientation of stresses may in turn affect the direction of propagation of subsequent fractures.
  • performing fracturing within the stress reversal region of fracture 202 of FIGURES 2a and 2b may result in the subsequent fracture propagating parallel to wellbore 204 (longitudinal fracture). In such instances, this phenomenon, often referred to as stress shadowing, may negatively impact the efficiency of the frac stage.
  • performing fracturing around Sio° may cause the subsequent fracture to deviate from a path substantially orthogonal to wellbore 204 by approximately 10°. Therefore, as described in further detail below, by mapping the angle of stress reorientation and the horizontal stress in multiple fractured horizontal wells, the trajectory of each fracture may be estimated. By mapping the trajectory of each induced fracture, the induced fracture spacing may be determined such that it may be minimized without compromising the efficiency of each frac stage.
  • FIGURE 3 illustrates the geometry of a single transverse fracture 302 of a shale formation 300 that includes a pay zone 304 that may include hydrocarbons (e.g., natural gas) and bounding layers 306a and 306b that may bound pay zone 304, according to some embodiments of the present disclosure.
  • Fracture 300 may be modeled based on a variety of properties that may be expressed mathematically. The modeling may be performed by various computer programs, models or combination thereof, configured to simulate and design fracturing operations. The programs and models may include instructions stored on a computer readable medium that are operable to perform, when executed, one or more of the steps described below.
  • the computer readable media may include any system, apparatus or device configured to store and retrieve programs or instructions such as a hard disk drive, a compact disc, flash memory or any other suitable device.
  • the programs and models may be configured to direct a processor or other suitable unit to retrieve and execute the instructions from the computer readable media.
  • the following nomenclature may be used for modeling fracture 302 to describe various properties of fracture 302:
  • Vb Poisson's ratio in the bounding layers
  • hmax maximum horizontal in-situ stress, Pa (psi)
  • the bounding layers 306a and 306b may have mechanical properties (E b , Vb) differing from the mechanical properties of pay zone 304 (E p , v p ).
  • fracture 302 may be modeled using a numerical model and may have a length in the direction of the x-axis that is equal to 2L f , may have a height in the z- direction that is equal to 2h f and may also have width in the y-direction that is not shown.
  • the mechanical behavior of the continuous three-dimensional medium of shale formation 300 may be described mathematically by the equations of equilibrium Eq. (1), the definition of strain Eq. (2) and the constitutive equations Eq. (3).
  • the algebraic system of 15 equations for 15 unknowns (6 components of stress ⁇ and strain ⁇ , plus the 3 components of the velocity vector v) may be solved at each node using an explicit, finite difference numerical scheme.
  • the Einstein summation convention may apply to indices i, j and k, which take the values 1, 2, 3:
  • Pay zone 304 may be homogeneous, isotropic, and purely elastic. Hooke's law relates the components of the strain and stress tensors (constitutive equation):
  • poroelastic effects on the stress reorientation around a producing transverse fracture may be ignored in the present example because of the very low permeability of shale and the small amount of fluid leak-off during fracturing.
  • the poroelastic effects may be determined and included.
  • Shale formation 300 and fracture 302 may also be modeled using a variety of boundary conditions. Displacement along the faces of fracture 302 may be allowed where a constant stress, equal to the net pressure, p net , plus the minimum in-situ horizontal stress C min, is imposed on the faces of fracture 302 to create fracture 302, or in the present example, to simulate and model the creation of fracture 302. Therefore, the size (e.g., width, length, height) of fracture 302 may partially be a function of p net .
  • fracture 302 may close down on proppant (e.g., sand), which keeps fracture 302 open.
  • proppant e.g., sand
  • the width of the propped-open fracture may depend on the fractured length and the amount of proppant pumped during the fracturing process.
  • the uniform stress boundary condition applied on the fracture face is approximately equal to the pressure required for the proppant to maintain an opening of maximum width w 0 . This pressure value may be smaller than the pressure required to propagate a hydraulic fracture in the same rock.
  • the far-field boundaries may be placed at a distance from the fracture equal to at least three times the fracture half- length L f .
  • a constant stress boundary condition normal to the "block" faces is applied at outside boundaries. In-situ stresses are initialized prior to the opening of the fracture:
  • FIGURE 4 illustrates a three dimensional model of multiple transverse fractures in a layered rock formation (e.g., shale formation 300 with pay zone 304 and boundary zones 306 of FIGURE 3).
  • the net pressure required to achieve a specified fracture width may increase with each additional fracture.
  • An iterative process may be programmed in order to determine for each fracture, the net pressure corresponding to a given maximum fracture width w 0 .
  • the evolution of the net closure stress in the sequential fracturing of a horizontal well is described further below.
  • Traditional fracture modeling methods may model fractures perfectly orthogonal to the horizontal wells. However, in order to better quantify the evolution of the direction of propagation of consecutive transverse fractures, it may be advantageous to model subsequent fractures as deviating from the orthogonal path due to the stress reorientation that may be caused by previous fractures.
  • Model simplifications may be made in order to tackle this problem.
  • multiple inclined fractures are challenging to model on a single numerical mesh.
  • the geometry of all fractures may be set from the beginning, which may be very difficult, as the angle of propagation of the subsequent transverse fracture may depend on the mechanical stress perturbation generated by the previous fractures. This may require a complex and time consuming re-meshing after every single fracture stage.
  • the net closure stress and the propagation direction may be calculated based on the mechanical stress interference of only the previous fracture.
  • FIGURE 5 illustrates the calculated propagation of a subsequent fracture (n+1) based on the mechanical stress interference of a previous fracture (n).
  • the stress created by the previous propped fracture e.g., fracture (n)
  • the net closure stress in the subsequent fracture is equal to the net closure stress of a single transverse fracture (without stress shadow) plus the stresses generated by the previous fracture as shown by Eq. (5) below:
  • the trajectory of the subsequent fracture may be approximated by assuming that it will follow the direction of maximum horizontal stress. This may be done by determining the direction of the maximum horizontal stress at one point and having the fracture propagate in that direction. Then, the direction of the maximum horizontal stress may be calculated at another point along the trajectory of the propagation from the previous point and so on to approximate a trajectory for the subsequent fracture as shown for fracture (n+1) of FIGURE 5.
  • a determined average angle of deviation may be seen in fracture (n) of FIGURE 5.
  • the average angle of deviation may be calculated for fracture (n+1) (e.g., 0 f (S f )) from the coordinates of the final position of fracture (n+1). It may be used to model fracture (n+1) in order to calculate the net pressure and trajectory of the subsequent fracture (n+2).
  • the propagation direction of subsequent fractures may be a function of the location of the subsequent fracture with respect to areas of the rock formation that have experienced stress reorientation caused by propagating previous fractures. Accordingly, the spacing between a previous fracture and a subsequent fracture may influence the propagation direction of the subsequent fracture.
  • FIGURES 6, 7, 9, 11 and 12 described further below illustrate examples of the trajectory of multiple fractures according to various spacing distances between the fractures. The fractures in FIGURES 6, 7, 9, 11 and 12 may be determined using the process described above with respect to FIGURES 3 through 5 and may be done by any suitable computer program. In FIGURES 6, 7, 9, 11 and 12, the fractures depicted may be induced in separate consecutive stages.
  • fracture 1 of FIGURES 6, 1, 9, 11 and 12 may be induced first
  • fracture 2 may be induced second
  • the results of the different simulations with respect to different spacing distances between fractures may be used to determine optimum fracture spacing for a particular well and/or formation.
  • TABLE 1 below illustrates the parameters of the rock formation used in the examples of FIGURES 6-23 as taken from a shale gas well in the Barnett shale in Texas.
  • FIGURE 6 illustrates the results of calculating fracture propagation with each fracture spaced approximately 400 feet apart.
  • transverse fractures may propagate away from the previous fracture with a small angle of deviation from the orthogonal path (less than 2°), as expected from the angle of stress reorientation profile shown in FIGURE 1 (simulated using the same parameters).
  • FIGURE 8 illustrates the stress distribution of a rock formation 800 with the stress distribution being influenced by the propagation of fracture 4 of FIGURE 7. From the stress redistribution caused by fracture 4 it may be possible to draw a stress reversal zone 804, a zone where the subsequent fracture (e.g., a fracture 5 of FIGURE 7) may be attracted by the previous fracture (e.g.
  • attraction zone 806 an attraction zone 806
  • another zone where the subsequent fracture may propagate away from the previous fracture e.g., a repulsion zone 808,.
  • subsequent transverse fractures may propagate in both zones as shown by fracture 5.
  • the size of attraction zone 806 may be function of the net pressure, the in-situ stress contrast and the average angle of deviation from the orthogonal path of fracture 4.
  • the initiation point of fracture 5 may be located within attraction zone 806 caused by the propagation of fracture 4, thus fracture 5 may initially propagate back toward fracture 4 until it leaves attraction zone 806.
  • FIGURE 9 illustrates fracture propagation with the fracture spacing reduced to 250 ft in accordance with the present example. Because of the closer spacing, the amount of fracture deviation is larger. For instance, fractures 2, 5 and 8 may propagate away from the previous fracture at an angle 9 f > 5°. But what mostly stands out is the fact that under a critical value of the fracture spacing, the attraction zone associated with fractures 2, 5 and 8 may cause fractures 3, 6, and 9, respectively, to intersect fractures 2, 5 and 8 respectively. The practical consequence of such intersections may be much less efficient drainage of the reservoir, even if the fractures are initiated closer to each other.
  • a two-fracture system may be simulated to calculate the stress distribution of the rock formation.
  • the stress distribution that may affect the fracture 4 may be modeled based on both the fractures 2 and 3.
  • the stress distribution around the fracture system with respect to the fractures 2 and 3 is shown in FIGURE 10.
  • FIGURES 11 and 12 also illustrate fracture propagation as calculated for a 200-ft and a 150-ft spacing respectively of the present example simulation.
  • the "unsuccessful" fractures e.g., fractures 3, 5, 7 and 10 of FIGURE 11 and fractures 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 of FIGURE 12
  • the unsuccessful fractures may be caused by initiating the fractures within the stress reversal region of the previous fracture, which is located inside the attraction zone associated with the previous fracture (e.g., attraction zone 806 of FIGURE 8).
  • attraction zone 806 of FIGURE 8 In the present example (150-ft spacing), only every other fracturing stage effectively stimulates the shale, thus possibly leaving significant portions of the reservoir inadequately drained.
  • FIGURE 13 illustrates the impact of fracture spacing on the angle of deviation of the fractures from the orthogonal path.
  • the efficiency of fracturing stages may be negatively affected as shown by the large variations in deviation angles with respect to spacings 250, 200 and 150 feet apart. Accordingly, the gain in reservoir drainage at these spacings may be marginal compared to the additional cost represented by an increased number of fracture stages. This result suggests that because of mechanical stress interference, spacing transverse fractures ever closer to each other may not be a desirable completion strategy.
  • FIGURE 14 illustrates the impact of fracture spacing on the evolution of the net closure stress. As shown in FIGURE 14, for fracture spacings of 400 ft and 300 ft, the net closure stress only increases with each new stage until reaching a plateau. However for the 250, 200 and 150 foot fracture spacings, the net pressure may have an up and down trend.
  • Counting the number of times the net fracturing pressure decreases from one stage to another may indicate the number of unsuccessful fracture stages identified in FIGURES 10, 12 and 13.
  • the decrease in the fracture closure stress may be a consequence of the smaller mechanical stress interference (stress shadow) generated by the previous fracture when propagating into stimulated regions of the reservoir instead of orthogonal to the well.
  • the effective spacing may only equal to 300 ft, as every other fracture may be longitudinal with respect to the wellbore. Accordingly, doubling the number of stages for 150 ft spacing compared to the 300 ft spacing may grant very little improvement in well production.
  • modeling deviation from the orthogonal path for fractures may reveal a new up-and-down trend in the evolution of the net closure stress. This up and down trend may indicate that the spacing between fractures may be too close to generate any improvement in well production. Therefore, the net closure stress at various spacings may be analyzed to determine the closest spacing that may not yield an up and down net pressure such that optimal spacing of fractures may be determined. Additionally, to determine the proper net closure stress, the propagation direction of each fracture may be estimated instead of assuming that the propagation direction is orthogonal to the well as is traditionally done.
  • Fracture spacing may also be determined by analyzing the stress reversal region associated with a previous fracture and by initiating the subsequent fracture outside of the stress reversal region.
  • FIGURES 15a and 15b illustrate the horizontal stress of a rock formation 1500 with a stress reversal region 1502 associated with a fracture (n+1). Fracture (n+1) may run along the vertical axis of FIGURES 15a and 15b and a wellbore 1504 may run along the horizontal axis. As shown in FIGURES 15a and 15b, stress reversal region 1502 may extend approximately 230 ft. from fracture 1502 along wellbore 1504 as shown by isotropic point S o°.
  • a subsequent fracture (e.g., a fracture (n+2)) may not be initiated closer than 230 ft from fracture (n+1) because, as mentioned above, the subsequent fracture may propagate parallel with wellbore 1504 and may not increase hydrocarbon production from wellbore 1504.
  • FIGURE 15b illustrates that in the present example at point s 10° , (e.g. approximately 430 ft. from fracture (n+1)) the stress reorientation of rock formation 1500 may be 10° and at point s 5° (e.g., 600 ft. from fracture (n+1)) the stress reorientation of rock formation 1500 may be 5°.
  • the stress reorientations of 10° and 5° may be such that a subsequent fracture (e.g., a fracture (n+2)) initiated between points Sio° and s 5° may not intersect fracture (n+1) although the subsequent fracture may deviate somewhat from an orthogonal path due to the stress reorientation.
  • FIGURES 16a and 16b illustrate the differences between performing consecutive fracturing and alternate fracturing. In FIGURE 16a it can be seen that each fracture starting with fracture "1" may be initiated one after another in a consecutive order.
  • FIGURE 16b it can be seen that two fractures may be initiated consecutively (e.g., fractures "1" and “2" of FIGURE 16b), however the two previous fractures may be sufficiently far apart that a third fracture (e.g., fracture "3" of FIGURE 16b) may be initiated between the two previous fractures, such that the fractures alternate.
  • a third fracture e.g., fracture "3" of FIGURE 16b
  • FIGURES 17a and 17b illustrate the stress orientation of a rock formation
  • FIGURE 17b illustrates that the distance between stress reversal regions 1701 and 1702 may be approximately 20 ft in the present example. Therefore, by initiating fracture “3" in the middle of fractures "1” and “2," both stress reversal regions 1701 and 1702 may be avoided by a narrow margin of 20 ft. In some instances, such a small margin may be deemed too small and accordingly the spacing between fractures "1" and "2" may be increased.
  • FIGURES 17a and 17b illustrate that the spacing of fractures "1" and “2" may be determined such that stress reversal regions 1701 and 1702 may not intersect, but also such that they are sufficiently far apart to allow for the initiation of a third fracture between them. Accordingly, by analyzing the size of the stress reversal regions of the two "end" fractures (e.g., fractures "1" and “2") in alternate fracturing, the spacing between the two may be more efficiently determined for placement of the "middle" fracture (e.g., fracture "3").
  • the "middle" fracture e.g., fracture "3"
  • High values of the relative net pressure R n may favor fracture path complexity.
  • a hydraulic fracture propagating in a region of low stress contrast may create larger networks of interconnected fractures.
  • the propensity of the alternate fracturing sequence to generate fracture complexity may be quantified and compared to the more conventional fracturing approach.
  • the average value of the stress contrast seen by a propagating middle fracture in the alternate fracturing sequence may be measured for different values of the spacing between the outside fractures (2s f ).
  • FIGURE 18 shows that the spacing for which the stress contrast is lowest may be equal to the minimum fracture spacing previously calculated (325 ft).
  • the minimum fracture spacing in the alternate fracturing sequence may also be the optimum case for creating fracture complexity.
  • FIGURE 19 illustrates that the deviatoric stress may approach zero in the near wellbore region in the case of the optimum spacing in the alternate fracturing sequence (325 ft).
  • the stress contrast may remain lower than 10 psi, which may be equal to 10% of the in-situ stress contrast. It is only in the second half of the fracture propagation that the local stress contrast increases significantly.
  • choosing the alternate fracturing sequence may result in high fracture complexity in the near- wellbore region as a result of the propagation of the "middle fracture".
  • FIGURE 20 illustrates an example of fracture spacing that may be done with multiple horizontal lateral wells.
  • FIGURE 20 illustrates three horizontal wells (HWi, HW 2 and HW 3 ) that may run substantially parallel to each other through a hydrocarbon reservoir in a horizontal plane that may be substantially parallel with the ground.
  • the wells of FIGURE 20 may be described by variables representing fracture dimensions (L f , h f ), fracture spacing (s f ) and the inter-well spacing (s w ).
  • the middle well (HW 2 ) may be used to propagate a fracture (e.g. fracture "3") in between two pairs of fractures previously initiated from the outside wells (e.g., fractures "1" and “2" of well HWi and fractures "1 "' and "2"' of well HW 3 ).
  • the same strategy may be adopted in any horizontal completions having an uneven number of laterals (and of course more than just one lateral).
  • Such strategy may allow for benefiting from the propagation of a "middle fracture", like in alternate fracturing completions, without the need for special downhole tools. Indeed, in each lateral well (e.g., HWi, HW 2 and HW3) the fractures may be initiated in a conventional consecutive sequence .
  • the spacing between fractures in such multi-lateral sequences may be determined by analyzing the stress distribution (e.g., stress reversal regions) associated with the fractures. For example, the stress distribution between two pairs of fractures (e.g., fractures "1" and “2" of well HWi and fractures "1 "' and “2"' of well HW 3 of FIGURE 20) propagated from the outside laterals HWi and HW 3 is shown in FIGURES 21a and 21b.
  • stress distribution e.g., stress reversal regions
  • a fracture spacing Sf associated with the fractures of each well e.g., spacing between fractures “1", “2", “4", “6”, “8” etc. of well HWi, fractures “3", “5", “7”, “9” etc. of well HW 2 and fractures "1 "', "2”', “4"', “6”', “8”' etc. of well HW 3
  • a well spacing (s w ) between wells HWi, HW 2 and HW 3 may be approximately equal to 500 ft.
  • the above spacing may be determined by analyzing the direction of maximum horizontal stress associated with the fractures. For example, the direction of maximum horizontal stress may be reversed everywhere along the outside laterals as shown in FIGURES 21a and 21b. Thus, the outside fractures "1" and “2" are too closely spaced to allow propagation of a transverse fracture from the outside laterals HWi and HW 3 , similarly to the alternate fracturing sequence.
  • the direction of maximum horizontal stress may still allow propagation of a transverse fracture.
  • the distance of transverse propagation, Ltr ansV erse, of fracture "3" of HW 2 may be at a maximum at mid-distance from the previous fractures and may be function of not only the spacing between the outside fractures but also the inter- well spacing (s w ).
  • the zone of transverse fracture propagation can also be identified when plotting the angle of stress reorientation as shown in FIGURE 21b.
  • FIGURE 23 illustrates the local stress contrast that may be recorded along the assumed propagation direction of a middle fracture (e.g., fracture "3" of FIGURE 20).
  • it may be advantageous to position the horizontal laterals close to each other, but not closer than a distance equal to the fracture half-height. Otherwise, the benefit of propagating long transverse fractures may be lost. Indeed, that may result in fracturing zones of the reservoir that are already stimulated.
  • the distance of transverse fracture propagation may be sensitive to the fracture spacing when the inter-well spacing is small.
  • Transverse propagation length may be decreased by over 50% as the fracture spacing decreases from 650 ft to 600 ft, which is only a 50-ft spacing differential. Therefore, in the present example and similarly to the case of the alternate fracturing sequence in a single well, the spacing between the outside fractures may be at least be equal to
  • the middle fracture may be initiated from the middle well (and not from the outside well), where the refracturing interval is wide enough to allow fracture initiation from multiple perforation clusters.
  • the spacing of the fractures may be determined to improve production from wells, while also improving the efficiency of each fracturing operation.
  • Such stress reorientation analysis may be used for consecutive fracturing, for alternate fracturing and/or for multiple horizontal fracturing operations.
  • the in-situ stress contrast which is the difference between the maximum horizontal stress and the minimum horizontal stress, may influence the stress interference created by multiple consecutive fractures, including fracture intersection.
  • the evolution of the fracturing pressures during multi-stage fracturing of horizontal wells may be impacted by the in-situ stress contrast, just like it is impacted by the fracture spacing (e.g., as shown in FIGURE 14).
  • the minimum horizontal stress may be easily obtained from a mini- frac test, the maximum horizontal stress may be more difficult to evaluate in the field. Knowing the value of the maximum horizontal stress may prove useful in modeling multiple engineering problems in the oil and gas industry, including hydraulic fracturing and wellbore stability and sand production issues.
  • the proposed method may be used to calculate the evolution of the net closure stress in a given well for different values of the maximum horizontal stress. By comparing the calculated pressure profiles to the field-measured fracturing pressures, the value of the maximum horizontal stress may be determined for the well in question.
  • the stress redistribution of a rock formation caused by propagating a fracture may also be a function of the induced fracture length, fracture width, fluid rheology and the injection rates associated with propagating the fracture.
  • the propagation of subsequent fractures may be a function of the stress redistribution caused by previous fractures. Therefore, the analysis described above may also be used to determine one or more of the above mentioned properties to better improve fracturing efficiency. For example, in some instances for a particular fracture size, the determined optimal spacing may be too far apart. Accordingly, the spacing may be set at a fixed value and another factor that may affect stress reorientation (e.g., fracture width) may be modified. The stress reorientation, and the propagation and net closure stress of consecutive fractures may be calculated for different values of the fracture width such that an optimum width of the fractures may be determined.

Landscapes

  • Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Geology (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Mining & Mineral Resources (AREA)
  • Environmental & Geological Engineering (AREA)
  • General Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
  • Remote Sensing (AREA)
  • Fluid Mechanics (AREA)
  • Geochemistry & Mineralogy (AREA)
  • Acoustics & Sound (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Geophysics (AREA)
  • Investigating Strength Of Materials By Application Of Mechanical Stress (AREA)
  • Investigation Of Foundation Soil And Reinforcement Of Foundation Soil By Compacting Or Drainage (AREA)

Abstract

Des procédés selon la présente invention consistent à déterminer une trajectoire attendue de fractures induites dans une formation rocheuse, à analyser une pression nette associée aux fractures induites et à déterminer un espacement des fractures induites et/ou une propriété des fractures induites sur la base de la pression nette. La présente invention concerne en outre un support lisible par ordinateur contenant le procédé. La présente invention concerne également d'autres procédés apparentés.
PCT/US2012/043773 2011-06-24 2012-06-22 Procédé de détermination d'espacement de fractures hydrauliques dans une formation rocheuse WO2012178026A2 (fr)

Priority Applications (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
CN201280037328.XA CN103733091A (zh) 2011-06-24 2012-06-22 用于确定岩层中的水力裂缝的间距的方法
CA2852881A CA2852881A1 (fr) 2011-06-24 2012-06-22 Procede de determination d'espacement de fractures hydrauliques dans une formation rocheuse

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US201161501003P 2011-06-24 2011-06-24
US61/501,003 2011-06-24

Publications (2)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2012178026A2 true WO2012178026A2 (fr) 2012-12-27
WO2012178026A3 WO2012178026A3 (fr) 2013-05-02

Family

ID=47360733

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US2012/043773 WO2012178026A2 (fr) 2011-06-24 2012-06-22 Procédé de détermination d'espacement de fractures hydrauliques dans une formation rocheuse

Country Status (4)

Country Link
US (1) US20120325462A1 (fr)
CN (1) CN103733091A (fr)
CA (1) CA2852881A1 (fr)
WO (1) WO2012178026A2 (fr)

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN103926620A (zh) * 2014-05-09 2014-07-16 南京大学 基于阵列反褶积处理的水力压裂监测方法
CN105452599A (zh) * 2013-07-08 2016-03-30 普拉德研究及开发股份有限公司 确定地质力学完井质量

Families Citing this family (24)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CA2915625C (fr) 2011-03-11 2021-08-03 Schlumberger Canada Limited Procede d'etalonnage de geometrie de fracture a des evenements microsismiques
US8967262B2 (en) * 2011-09-14 2015-03-03 Baker Hughes Incorporated Method for determining fracture spacing and well fracturing using the method
RU2575947C2 (ru) 2011-11-04 2016-02-27 Шлюмбергер Текнолоджи Б.В. Моделирование взаимодействия трещин гидравлического разрыва в системах сложных трещин
US20160265331A1 (en) * 2011-11-04 2016-09-15 Schlumberger Technology Corporation Modeling of interaction of hydraulic fractures in complex fracture networks
US10422208B2 (en) 2011-11-04 2019-09-24 Schlumberger Technology Corporation Stacked height growth fracture modeling
EP2895887B1 (fr) * 2012-09-12 2019-11-06 BP Exploration Operating Company Limited Système et procédé de détermination de fluide hydrocarboné retenu
US9297250B2 (en) 2013-03-14 2016-03-29 Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. Controlling net treating pressure in a subterranean region
US9217318B2 (en) * 2013-03-14 2015-12-22 Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. Determining a target net treating pressure for a subterranean region
WO2014140752A1 (fr) * 2013-03-15 2014-09-18 Ormat Technologies Inc. Procédé de sélection de l'emplacement d'un puits de stimulation géothermique
GB2532145B (en) * 2013-08-09 2020-04-01 Landmark Graphics Corp Computer-implemented methods, systems and non-transitory computer readable media for improving well production
US20150075784A1 (en) * 2013-09-19 2015-03-19 Shell Oil Company Phased stimulation methods
US9988895B2 (en) 2013-12-18 2018-06-05 Conocophillips Company Method for determining hydraulic fracture orientation and dimension
US9869170B2 (en) * 2015-03-17 2018-01-16 Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. Methods of controlling water production in horizontal wells with multistage fractures
CN105178952B (zh) * 2015-09-09 2018-04-06 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 确定水平井人工裂缝间距的方法及装置
CN105422070B (zh) * 2015-12-07 2018-11-23 西南石油大学 优化特低渗透非均质气藏压裂水平井裂缝位置的方法
US10364672B2 (en) 2016-03-28 2019-07-30 Baker Hughes, A Ge Company, Llc Completion optimization process based on acoustic logging data in the lateral section in a horizontal well
WO2018102274A1 (fr) 2016-11-29 2018-06-07 Conocophillips Company État de contrainte modifié avec des complétions multi-puits
WO2018102271A1 (fr) * 2016-11-29 2018-06-07 Conocophillips Company Procédés d'analyse d'escalade de pression de fermeture de puits
US11028679B1 (en) 2017-01-24 2021-06-08 Devon Energy Corporation Systems and methods for controlling fracturing operations using monitor well pressure
US11365617B1 (en) 2017-01-24 2022-06-21 Devon Energy Corporation Systems and methods for controlling fracturing operations using monitor well pressure
US11209558B2 (en) 2018-05-09 2021-12-28 Conocophillips Company Measurement of poroelastic pressure response
US11674376B2 (en) * 2019-11-04 2023-06-13 Chevron U.S.A. Inc. Wellbore to fracture connectivity
CN113530499B (zh) * 2020-04-21 2023-07-25 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 小井距页岩油气水平井的射孔方法及射孔装置
US11859490B2 (en) 2021-08-19 2024-01-02 Devon Energy Corporation Systems and methods for monitoring fracturing operations using monitor well flow

Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5482116A (en) * 1993-12-10 1996-01-09 Mobil Oil Corporation Wellbore guided hydraulic fracturing
US5540093A (en) * 1994-11-15 1996-07-30 Western Atlas International Method for optimizing the alignment of a horizontal borehole relative to the strike of rock-layer stress planes
US7377318B2 (en) * 2002-02-01 2008-05-27 Emmanuel Detournay Interpretation and design of hydraulic fracturing treatments
US20100307755A1 (en) * 2009-06-05 2010-12-09 Schlumberger Technology Corporation Method and apparatus for efficient real-time characterization of hydraulic fractures and fracturing optimization based thereon
US20100314104A1 (en) * 2007-09-13 2010-12-16 M-I L.L.C. Method of using pressure signatures to predict injection well anomalies

Family Cites Families (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN1991127A (zh) * 2005-12-30 2007-07-04 许靖华 在有两个人工裂缝面的水平井之间通过三维注水提高原油采收率的方法
CN101952544B (zh) * 2008-01-31 2013-09-11 普拉德研究及开发股份有限公司 对水平井进行水力压裂从而增产的方法

Patent Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5482116A (en) * 1993-12-10 1996-01-09 Mobil Oil Corporation Wellbore guided hydraulic fracturing
US5540093A (en) * 1994-11-15 1996-07-30 Western Atlas International Method for optimizing the alignment of a horizontal borehole relative to the strike of rock-layer stress planes
US7377318B2 (en) * 2002-02-01 2008-05-27 Emmanuel Detournay Interpretation and design of hydraulic fracturing treatments
US20100314104A1 (en) * 2007-09-13 2010-12-16 M-I L.L.C. Method of using pressure signatures to predict injection well anomalies
US20100307755A1 (en) * 2009-06-05 2010-12-09 Schlumberger Technology Corporation Method and apparatus for efficient real-time characterization of hydraulic fractures and fracturing optimization based thereon

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
CN105452599A (zh) * 2013-07-08 2016-03-30 普拉德研究及开发股份有限公司 确定地质力学完井质量
CN103926620A (zh) * 2014-05-09 2014-07-16 南京大学 基于阵列反褶积处理的水力压裂监测方法

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
CA2852881A1 (fr) 2012-12-27
US20120325462A1 (en) 2012-12-27
WO2012178026A3 (fr) 2013-05-02
CN103733091A (zh) 2014-04-16

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US20120325462A1 (en) Method for Determining Spacing of Hydraulic Fractures in a Rock Formation
CA3045297C (fr) Etat de contrainte modifie avec des completions multi-puits
Roussel et al. Strategies to minimize frac spacing and stimulate natural fractures in horizontal completions
US20160003020A1 (en) Methods for time-delayed fracturing in hydrocarbon formations
CN104040110B (zh) 复杂压裂网络中水力压裂相互作用建模
Alekseenko et al. 3D modeling of fracture initiation from perforated noncemented wellbore
Malpani et al. Improving hydrocarbon recovery of horizontal shale wells through refracturing
Roussel et al. Optimizing fracture spacing and sequencing in horizontal-well fracturing
Saberhosseini et al. Optimization of the horizontal-well multiple hydraulic fracturing operation in a low-permeability carbonate reservoir using fully coupled XFEM model
Manchanda et al. Impact of completion design on fracture complexity in horizontal shale wells
US10267131B2 (en) Competition between transverse and axial hydraulic fractures in horizontal well
Yang et al. Optimal pumping schedule design to achieve a uniform proppant concentration level in hydraulic fracturing
AU2019200654A1 (en) Modeling of interaction of hydraulic fractures in complex fracture networks
EP3271547A1 (fr) Modélisation de fractures empilées à croissance ascendante
CA2915625A1 (fr) Procede d'etalonnage de geometrie de fracture a des evenements microsismiques
Zheng et al. Modeling fracture closure with proppant settling and embedment during shut-in and production
Manchanda et al. Factors influencing fracture trajectories and fracturing pressure data in a horizontal completion
CN112392472A (zh) 确定页岩与邻近油层一体化开发方式的方法及装置
Manchanda et al. Time-delayed fracturing: a new strategy in multi-stage, multi-well pad fracturing
WO2019014090A2 (fr) Procédés et systèmes pour fractures hydrauliques à ballonnet et inondation de bout en bout complexe
Algarhy et al. Increasing hydrocarbon recovery from shale reservoirs through ballooned hydraulic fracturing
Manchanda et al. Simulating the life of hydraulically fractured wells using a fully-coupled poroelastic fracture-reservoir simulator
Ghassemi Application of rock failure simulation in design optimization of the hydraulic fracturing
CA3052941A1 (fr) Methode de refracturation dans un puits horizontal comprenant la determination de differentes zones d'effort dans la formation
Doctor et al. Use of Channel Fracturing Technology Increases Production and Reduces Risks in Horizontal Wellbore Completions-First Experience in Russia, South-Priobskoe Oil Field

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 12802817

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A2

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: DE

ENP Entry into the national phase

Ref document number: 2852881

Country of ref document: CA

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase

Ref document number: 12802817

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A2