You are on page 1of 16

Oriented Fracturing – A Practical Technique for

Production Optimization

F. Fragachan
Schlumberger Oilfield Services

Why Oriented Fracturing? • • • Address near-wellbore complexities  Friction pressure losses: Tortuosity. Screenless) “Pin-Point” Completions SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans PFP g n alo c ty. Multiple. e ra i s F 1– tuo ultipl r o # t es and m Tip z i as im ent e n i r d a lem M aignm e s s l b tre a pro mis tures s c ally nt is c fra i on eme t c c e T re pla whe . Pinch Points. Misalignment. Competing Fractures  High frac gradients  Tectonically stressed areas where placement is a problem  Premature screen-outs Sand Control (FracPACK.

LG.Oriented Fracturing .Hydraulic Fracturing Optimization Treatment Optimization: • Increase the number of holes directly open to the fracture • Reduce near-wellbore complexities (tortuosity) • Fluids: shear. hybrids.Improves ability to fracture with less damaging fluids (water. viscosity . VES) • Increase sand concentrations and volumes • And/or larger proppant sizes • Minimize risk of premature screen-out Reduce fracture treating pressures • SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans .

Completion Optimization GeoMechanical Model The PFP orientation must be determined – Input for fracture stimulation Added Value • • Impact on Completion Impact on Well Production and Economics SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans Depth – Perforating strategy and fracture placement Zone of Interest • a b c Stress d .

σc. Sw. q g . Xf. k fw f. P wf . FCD •Non-Darcy Flow.GeoMechanical Model Input Data Optimum Completion Strategy Economic Evaluation Optimum Design Maximum Productivity Engineering Feasibility Performance Prediction Alternative Completions “What If Scenarios” SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans GeoMechanical Model Interpretation & Integration k. pc. f Reservoir Characterization •Multilayered/Multizone Description •Rock Mechanics – Stress Contrast •Preferred Fracture Plane Orientation •Reservoir Mechanisms •Development Strategy •Completion Modeling & Design Production Analysis •Drainage Area. Sg. Reserves •Decline Analysis •q w . φ. ν. Multiphase effects •Production Modeling •Systems Analysis: Performance & Lifting •Completion Efficiency . E. k effective . h. pr.

Lower Treatment Pressures Conventional Fracturing re u s s Pre nd – a s 2 y # ment sit o p i u T uire rt tion o t q c s res i u e r Re s z f es imi bore r n p i nt M -well e m r at ents e ks r nea s t m i e r R r owe requi out L n e  HP cre H S & ed c u ed R Oriented Fracturing SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans .

5 .0+ ppa • Wells treated 1000-1500 psi lower than conventional fracs • TSO Design for better conductivity at wellbore SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans Oriented Fracs .4.2.5 .0 ppa to 3.Pressure Requirements Morrow Sand – New Mexico • • Placed 50% more proppant than was previously thought possible based on experience in the area Conventional Fracs Higher proppant concentrations – from 0.

Lower Near Wellbore Friction Pressures Diatomite • GeoMechanical Model – PFP – Rock Mechanics data – Minifracs for calibration • Comparison with direct offset wells – Friction pressures reduced by as much as 87% (50% on average) – Treatment pressures reduced by as much as 31% (15% average) SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans .

5 .Placement and Design 11950 < 0.1.0.6 lb/ft2 1.1.3 .8 lb/ft2 12000 0.PFP • Cleaner Fluid .3 .in • Real-time analysis and remote transmission • Minimal near-wellbore pressure losses • Increased sand concentration .0.0.8 lb/ft2 1.3 lb/ft2 0.1 0 Granite Wash • GeoMechanical Model .5 lb/ft2 0.0 lb/ft2 0.0 .1.2 -0.2.ft ACL Width at Wellbore .1 lb/ft2 Well Depth .8 .6 .3 lb/ft2 1.2 0 250 500 750 Fracture Half-Length .ft 12050 12100 > 2.0 .psi 8500 -0.1 0.VES SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans 0.8 .1 lb/ft2 Z one of Interest 12150 12200 12250 6500 7500 Stress .0 lb/ft2 1.1.

4.Modified fluids for pressure dependent leakoff – Cleanup problems • History to date – Can’t pump design – Screen out on pad 0. 300.000 lbs .fracs .5 ppa – Sand slugs never worked • Success Ratio 1/20 !!!! SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans GeoMechanical Model • • • • Job Size.000 lbs (60% job) – Stress profile and Minifracs for Calibration – Nat frac sweet spot – Nat.000 bls Concentration 3 ppa – tailing with 4 ppa Good proppant pack at wellbore .Completion Optimization Antelope Shale & Monterrey Formation Oriented Fracturing Traditional Completion • • 1 job – PFP .Oriented Perforations – 75.25-0.

20/40 CarboLITE 4800 3800 0.55 .32"/Underbalanced Vol ume – IncWF240 70Q FOAM r ea s s d o / 0.32" to 0.000 lbs. Point Source/LE Oriented Perforating/Fracturing 2 well.Completion Results Well Type # .Morrow Formation Completion Proppant Pmax Details Volumes psi psi/ft 4 to 6 spf / 45o to 60o/ 0.Oriented Perforating/Fracturing S s t i i D vity z e YF835HT w/10# J353 s irec to w prGas Well # 10 .7 0. 20/40 Jordan 1000 .32" XL 30# 35# 4spf / 180o / 0. 20/40 Jordan 9900+/Screenout 0.5"  4 to 6 spf / 60o toe90 H 10+ Wells.95 282.000+ lbs.0.4" Low Guar -25# ~25. 3 Stages Well # 2 .22" to 0. Limited Entry Completion p ant4spf / 180or/ a0.60K lbs.5000 0.85 300.0.20/40 Econop 4000 .0. 20/40 CarboLITE 50K .0.000 .Mckee Sand.Limited c Entry tivi lation e o ty N to/ 180 / 0. Stages (3+). Traditional Completion .000+ lbs (20%). 20/40 SHS 8163 0.1500 0.32"  r o Con 4pto 6 spf / 45o ton90 10+ Wells.000+ .75 .20/40 sand 8000+ / Screenout 50.645 High tortuosity eliminated 15. 20/40 Jordan 2499 .300K+lbs.0.4" 3 wells . t re ellb o oduReservoirs 4 spfo/ r 60 / 0. 20/40 Econoprop 96.62 .Completion Option Well # 1 . Blanket/Selective ighe Pro ppa 4spf / 180o / 0.3000 0. 20/40 Ottawa ~ 5500 0.LE Oriented Perforating/Fracturing 2 Stages Well # 5 .4" tion n e c 1 Stage .7 to 1.22" to 0.000 lbs.000 lbs.60 / 0.0.75 .Lobo Fm / South Texas e t o/ 0.32" Traditional Completion .65 o 4spf / 45 .Tight Oil Sand / California SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans f 0 lbs.68 .32" Tip # 36spf / 180o / 0.60 25K .75 .66 .32"/Clustered Perfs 4spf Oriented Perforating/Fracturing kf w 65Q FOAM o YF340LPH obs propp f an d erv a n t fl ed owb ack 10+ Wells.2 300.73 120K lbs . 20/40 Ottawa Screenout 0.65 .40K lbs.0.Oriented Perforating/Fracturing r San L nt dC arg onc er P Well # 7 .Brown Shale / Diatomite 10+ Wells.

Gas duReservoirs ctio Traditional Completion . Traditional Completion .0.9 675 1126 Oriented Perforating/Fracturing r a ed Plac c Geom C lean eme etr Well # 4 .7 516 773 qgas ~ 1.0 285 impEntry rgy ion rov F 0.Completion Option Xf k fw f Oriented Fracturing psi/ft ft md-ft Production Results 0.68 .0 MMSCFD to qgas =3.Mckee Sand.Morrow Formation 10+ Wells.0 MMSCFD to qgas =1.Oriented Perforating/Fracturing # 4 0.75 ion SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans qgas ~ 3.Rockies/Tight Gas Sands e” – The “Op 400 Traditional Completion .5 MMSCFD to qgas =4.62 .5+ MMSCFD stabilized production From qoil=150 BOPD To: qoil=3000+ BOPD.0.5mmcf/d @ 500 psi f Well # 2 . 3-5% WC qgas = 500 MCFD (FTP 700#) qgas = 2.5+ MMSCFD From qgas ~ 1.Production Results Propped Fracture Well Type # .LE Tip 414 2 Stages .Limited >1.0+ mmcf/d @ 1200 psi From qgas ~ 0.0+ MMSCFD From qgas ~ 2.0 730 Entry tim Ene izat 1579 Traditional Completion .66 Oriented Perforating/Fracturing zat.Limited >1.0 MMCFD (FTP 1300#) .65 271 Gam Well # 3 . FTP = 3000+ psi.Limited Entryn Opt imi0.0.87 200 800 u Oriented Perforating/Fracturing i ond ds uct ivit Pr y o Well # 10 .North Sea er F y& n t C l 0.

5° of the designed placement – Not a single Screenout SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans .Oriented Fracturing Summary • Job Results – Reduced excess near-wellbore pressures – Lower treatment pressures & HHP requirements – Increased percentage of open perforations (calculated) – Alignment along PFP – Reduced costs compared to oriented TCP – Performance (Conductivity) – Able to pump larger proppant sizes – Allows use of cleaner fluids (VES) – Historical Performance – Minimum wellbore deviation of 0.13° – Perforations within +/.

000 $0 ($500.000 $500.Economics • • Can well costs be further reduced? How much 5-10%? $3.000 Optimization Scenarios $2.000 – Financial upside • How about the Production upside? NPV .000.000) 0 90 180 270 360 450 ($1.500.500.500.000 $3.500.000.$$ – Costs and performance $1.000.000 ∆ p ro d u ctio n $1.000 $2.000) Production Time SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans 540 630 720 .000.000) ($1.

000 0 – Accelerated Payout – Improved ROI Tip # 5 – Will it work for my well? Cost increase – Incremental Cash Flow Not significant 2.04% Certainty is 50.000 Trials Frequency Chart 1 Outlier .00% from 53.000 Incremental NPV @ Year 1 13.5 .015 73 .48% Do your homework Not for every well the data Not without Incremental Economics @ Year 1 Conventional Scenario 1 Check Scenario Scenario 3 – potential the 2reservoir deliverability $110.6 5.25 .54% 85.33% % 160.365 170 165 152 PayOut Time Days SPE 71652 10– -New 12Orleans 5.007 36.70% 42.4 5.000 900.200.92% 103.07% 89.62% to 102.011 54.000 750.Financial Perspective • • • Probability of success Productivity Increase Improved Total Well System Economics 5.84% ROI @ Year 1 is king!!! ROI 310 .75 .59% 121.14% 81.0 PayOut Time Months 2001 ATCE .004 18.000 $1.

– Maximum ROI. the energy is focused on optimal placement and creating the fracture geometry rather than fighting near-wellbore effects GeoMechanical model allows for integration of reservoir and rock mechanics into optimum fracture treatment design (OF and conventional) SPE 71652 2001 ATCE – New Orleans • OF allows for higher concentrations for improved conductivity and production response • Completion scenarios are investigated to determine the perforating/fracturing strategies for – Optimum fracture placement – Increased production and. ROA .Conclusions • • Having all perforations aligned along the PFP and directly open to the fracture.