Vol. 14 No. 2 (2016): Fuentes, el reventón energético
Articles

Modeling the proppant fines mobility on productions trends for hidraulic fractured wells

Renso Alfredo Mayorga Ballesteros
Universidad Industrial de Santander. UIS, Carrera 27calle 9, Bucaramanga, Colombia.
Bio
Fernando Enrique Calvete González
Universidad Industrial de Santander. UIS, Carrera 27calle 9, Bucaramanga, Colombia.
Bio

Published 2017-01-30

Keywords

  • Proppant fines,
  • Hydraulic Fracturing,
  • Production Trends,
  • Cyclic Stress

How to Cite

Mayorga Ballesteros, R. A., & Calvete González, F. E. (2017). Modeling the proppant fines mobility on productions trends for hidraulic fractured wells. Fuentes, El reventón energético, 14(2), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.18273/revfue.v14n2-2016004

Abstract

In general terms, hydraulic fracturing is the physical -mechanical process of creating fractures in the formation in order to provide highly conductive flow channels to accelerate the total production. To this end, the injection of a highly viscous polymer fluid accompanied by particulate material called proppant material whose main function is to keep open the fissures in the rock.

The application of efforts by the rock that comes into contact with the fracture proppant material begins a crushing process. This phenomenon gives rise to the gradual appearance of proppant fines, which have the ability to be transported and deposited spatially throughout the proppant pack, thereby generating affected areas with partial obstruction or total highly conductive channels. This process occurs throughout the productive life of the fracture and has its greatest influence during the execution of chemical stimulation treatments through the proppant pack.

This study presents a new engineering approach that enables quantification of the impact generated by the mobilization and redistribution of the proppant fines banking on altering the effective fracture conductivity and its associated production. A Single Well Model (SWM) was created using Local Grid Refinement (LGR) to represent the partial fracture conductivity reduction, this model allowed to recreate the different distribution patterns in order to obtain the production trends after a remedial chemical stimulation event. The results show percentages of detrimental production between 9 to 30% compared to the base case production. The results indicate that the effect of the various distribution patterns of form caused by the re-mobilization of proppant fines banking generates significant and sustained levels of production reduction. This negative factor should be minimized during the well intervention involving the injection of fluid along the deteriorated fracture. In addition, it was found that this type of interventions, not only must be performed at matrix injection rates, but also considering a control strategy similar to those used in wells with high production of formations fines.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE
  2. Recommended Practice 19C ISO 13503-2,
  3. ‘‘Measurement of Properties of Proppants Used in
  4. Hydraulic Fracturing and Gravel Packing Operations”.
  5. Section 11. Proppant Crush-Resistance Test.
  6. Washington D.C. U.S. May 2008. P. 23-27.
  7. AZARI M., ‘‘Performance Prediction for Finite-
  8. Conductivity Vertical Fractures” Society of Petroleum
  9. Engineers, SPE-22659. SPE Annual Technical
  10. Conference and Exhibition. Dallas, Texas, U.S. October
  11. -9, 1991. P. 2, 3, 4, 6.
  12. CINCO-LEY H., SAMANIEGO V.F., ‘‘Effect of
  13. Wellbore Storage and Damage on the Transient
  14. Behavior of Vertically Fractured Wells”. Society of
  15. Petroleum Engineers, SPE- 6752. Mexican Petroleum
  16. Institute. Denver, Colorado, U.S. 9-12 October 1977.
  17. P.2, 3, 6.
  18. CINCO-LEY H., SAMANIEGO V.F., DOMINGUEZ
  19. N., ‘‘Transient Pressure Behavior for a Well with Finite
  20. Conductivity Vertical Fracture”. Society of Petroleum
  21. Engineers, SPE-6014-PA. Mexican Petroleum Institute.
  22. Ciudad de México. México. August, 1978. P.3, 4.
  23. ECONOMIDES M., VALKÓ P. ‘‘Optimization of
  24. the Productivity Index and Fracture Geometry of a
  25. Stimulated Well with Fracture Face and Choke Skins”.
  26. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE-81908-PA.
  27. University of Houston. Houston, Texas, U.S. February
  28. P.1.
  29. GIDLEY J.L., ‘‘A Method for Correcting Dimensionless
  30. Fracture Conductivity for Non-Darcy Flow Effects”.
  31. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE-20710-PA. John
  32. L. Gidley and Associates. Inc. Houston, Texas, U.S.
  33. November 1991. P.1, 2, 5.
  34. GUPPY K.H., CINCO-LEY H., RAMEY H.J., ‘‘Non
  35. - Darcy Flow in Wells with Finite-Conductive Vertical
  36. Fractures”. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE-
  37. -PA. Standford University, Society of Petroleum
  38. Engineers Journal. Standford, California, U.S. October
  39. P.3, 5.
  40. LEHMAN L., PARKER M., BALUCH M., HAYNES
  41. R., ‘‘Proppant Conductivity – What Counts and
  42. Why”. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE-52219.
  43. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. Mid-Continent
  44. Operations Symposium. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,
  45. U.S. March 1999. P.2, 3, 4.
  46. MONKHOUSE E. J. Diccionario de términos
  47. geográficos. Barcelona: Oikos Tau-Editores. (1978). p.