SPE-191654-MS

Engineered Fracture Spacing Staging and Perforation Cluster Spacing

Optimization for Multistage Fracturing Horizontal Wells

Mohamed Salah, Khalda Petroleum; Mazher Ibrahim, Apache Corporation

Copyright 2018, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2018 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Dallas, Texas, 24-26 September 2018.

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
Horizontal drilling and multistage hydraulic fracturing applied in tight reservoirs in North America
over the past decade and economic productivity attained by creating large fracture surface area to
contact the reservoir and create the conductive pathway for the flow of hydrocarbon into the wellbore.
Perforation cluster spacing and fracture stagging are keys to successful hydraulic fracturing treatment for
horizontal wells. The early focus of the industry was on the operational efficiency. A geometric spacing
of perforation clusters adopted as the preferred completion method. Cipolla (2011) presented a case study
on the interpretation of production logs from hundreds of horizontal wells. The results indicated that
60% of perforation clusters contribute to production when completed geometrically. Recently, numerous
studies have been undertaken to understand this phenomenon. Increasing the stimulation effectiveness
and maximizing the number of perforation clusters contributing to productivity was an obvious area
for improvement to engineering the completion design. An area with a limited number of horizontally
multistage fractured appraisal wells in the Western Desert of Egypt is targeted for this study. The developed
workflow comprises integration of petrophysical, geomechanical and production data analysis to evaluate
reservoir and completion qualities and quantify the heterogeneity and selectively place perforation clusters
in "like-rock" thus promoting the chance of initiating all perforation clusters within a stage and ensuring
uniform placement and distribution of the induced fractures and that every cluster in each zone is fracture
stimulated and can contribute to the well's full potential. The hydraulic fracture attributes from the fracture
simulator were exported to the reservoir simulator. The surface production measurement together with the
production profile was used to calibrate the reservoir model.
The scope of this study is to present an integrated workflow to identify reservoir properties variation
along the lateral section of horizontal to engineer completion design, improve stimulation effectiveness, and
improve cluster efficiency. The methodology adopted in this study resulted in optimized fracture design that
helped reduce-cost and increased well EUR. Optimal cluster spacing was determined based on long-term
production performance. The final calibrated hydraulic fracture and reservoir models were used to optimize
the cluster spacing and other completion parameters.
2 SPE-191654-MS

Introduction
The early focus of the multistage hydraulic fracturing operation of horizontal wells was on the operational
efficiency to get as many fracturing stages as possible in the shortest time. During this period, geometric
spacing of perforation clusters adopted as the preferred completion method; however, seemingly identical
wells show production variability along the length of horizontal wellbores. Cipolla et al. (2011), Miller et
al. (2011) and Slocombe et al. (2013) presented a case study on the interpretation of production logs from
hundreds of horizontal wells. The results indicated that only about 40-60% of perforation clusters contribute
to production when completed geometrically. In recent years, numerous studies have been undertaken to
understand this phenomenon. Waters et al (2006, 2011), Baihly et al. (2010), Wutherich et al. (2012),
and Xu et al. (2015) leveraged a newly acquired high-definition measurements (image logs, full-wave
sonic logs and microseismic data) along the horizontal wellbore to distinguish and quantify the reservoir
properties heterogeneity. They observed that a significant reservoir properties variation is present along the
lateral section of horizontal wells that could potentially affect the hydraulic fractures initiation, propagation
and overall productivity of the well. Increasing the stimulation effectiveness, maximizing the number of
perforation clusters contributing to production and optimizing spacing between the fracture stages were an
obvious area for improvement to maximize the well's productivity at the least possible cost.
There are different approaches to selectively place perforation clusters, by which fracturing and
completion designs can be optimized, the first one is the production perspective, and the other is
geomechanics perspective. The production perspective uses reservoir simulation models, production
data analysis. After performing history match, the model was run with different clusters and fracture
stages, and production forecasts were developed. On the other hand, many researchers mentioned that
accurate geomechanical information about the rock and its variation is also important since stresses
predominantly control fracture initiation and development (Abousleiman, 2007; Barree, 2009; Britt, 2009).
From geomechanics perspective, in-situ stress anisotropy, stress shadow analysis, near wellbore stress and
stress intensity factor are used to selectively place perforation clusters in "like-rock" thus promoting the
chance of initiating all perforation clusters within a stage, ensuring uniform placement and distribution
of the induced fractures and ensure straight fractures with no deviation or collapse, and with the highest
propagation potential in the target zone and that every cluster in each zone is fracture stimulated and
can contribute to the well's full potential, thus maximizing well productivity and improving completion
efficiency.
This paper presents an integrated engineered workflow that can be used to optimize cluster spacing and
fracture staging by integrating reservoir simulation runs, production rates and geomechanics considerations
to maximize well productivity and enhances well economics, and improve ultimate recovery.

Cluster Selection and Frac Staging Workflow

An integrated and detailed workflow was developed and followed to achieve the targets set for evaluating
and characterizing the targeted reservoir. The hydraulic fracturing design was optimized by integrating
analysis of laboratory, core testing, petrophysical, and rock mechanical properties. In this paper, we present
an engineered completion design compared to the standard geometric method. The engineered design
approach minimizes the effect of rock properties heterogeneity along the lateral on fracture initiation
by leveraging lateral measurements acquired along the horizontal wellbore that allows the estimation of
the magnitude of formation breakdown pressure along the horizontal wellbore. The predicted breakdown
pressure help in perforation clusters placing in rock with similar mechanical properties thus improving the
probability of uniform placement and distribution of the induced fractures and that every cluster in each
zone is fracture stimulated. Shadow stress effect and fracture interference are analyzed, which is a disturbed
zone around any hydraulic fracture in which the magnitude of principal stresses anisotropy is changed, so
any other fracture in this region or fractures with overlapping stress shadow zones will result from deviation
SPE-191654-MS 3

or collapse (Fisher et al., 2004). Hence, reducing the stress shadow effect around induced fractures enables
the opportunity of having optimized spacing between fractures with no deviation or collapse.
Production data and fluid chemical tracers were analyzed to examine flow regimes, completion size,
and cluster efficiency, and estimate fracture characteristics (half-length, matrix permeability, fracture
conductivity…etc). Using these data, the reservoir simulation model was calibrated with the observed
bottom ole pressure and actual daily production rates. After achieving a successful history match, the model
was varied to include varying cluster spacing, and production forecasts were developed.
By integrating earth science (petrophysics and geomechanics) with engineering (well completion,
hydraulic fracturing modeling) it will be possible to understand reservoir behavior. The objective of the
combined effort is to use a reliable mathematical model that includes physical and mechanical properties
of the rock and fluid that can match actual good performance. Once this process is in place, operators can
develop reliable estimates of production based on early test results from few horizontal or vertical wells and
this method offers an improved means to optimize performance (Vassilellis et al, 2011). Figure 1 shows the
integrated shale gas engineering workflow and hydraulic fracture modeling optimization.

Figure 1—Integrated modeling workflow that integrates data from multi-

domain to optimize cluster spacing and fracture stagging designs

Engineered Completion Design

The engineered completion workflow begins with the creation of the reservoir and completion quality
indices. Reservoir Quality (RQ) is a measure of productivity and it is a function of parameters including gas-
in-place or oil-in-place, total and effective porosity, hydrocarbon saturation, irreducible water saturation,
permeability, hydrocarbon viscosity, hydrocarbon maturity, clay content and pore pressure. RQ is a ‘given’
reservoir property – good RQ can be found, but cannot be modified given current technologies. Completion
Quality (CQ) relates to the ability to generate the required hydraulic fracture surface area and sustained
fracture conductivity that will permit hydrocarbon flow from the formation to the wellbore at economic
rates. CQ is defined primarily by the in-situ state of stress (including ordering, orientation, and amount
4 SPE-191654-MS

of anisotropy) in both the near-wellbore and far-field regions relative to the wellbore. The stress state is
dependent on elastic properties (e.g. Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio), pore pressure, tectonic strain, and
faults, and affected by heterogeneity in rock properties. Near wellbore stresses (the stress field that altered
by drilling) affect perforation efficiency, formation breakdown, fracture width, near-wellbore tortuosity, and
potential for fines production. Far-field stresses affect hydraulic fracture containment, orientation, width,
conductivity, and complexity.
They are quantified as a weighted combination of multiple property measurements and classified using
specific cutoff criteria. Petrophysical properties derived from data (cuttings, logs, core, etc.) acquired on
candidate well are used to derive the reservoir quality, while the output from 1D Mechanical Earth Model
(MEM) is the basis for determining the completion quality. The output of this exercise is a binary log
describing the good and bad quality intervals for both indices. RQ and CQ are calibrated with performance
information such as fracture placement results, surface production rates, and production logging. Once these
two indices have been quantified, they are then combined to form a composite quality index. The composite
quality index forms the basis for both the staging design and perforation strategy. Cipolla et al. (2011)
describe the semi-automated processes to identify the optimum multistage perforation strategy, called the
completion advisor that can be used to optimize cluster spacing and fracture stagging to target good RQ and
good CQ. Optimizing the completion design based on both RQ and CQ has resulted in more than 80% of
the perforation clusters contributing and a significant increase in production performance (Babatunde et al.
2013; Ejofodomi et al. 2014; Wigger et al. 2014). A summary of the composite quality index integrating
RQ and CQ logs using a reservoir-centric stimulation design tool is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2—Fracture stage depths selection integrating reservoir and completion quality index of the lateral section.
SPE-191654-MS 5

1D Mechanical Earth Model (1D MEM) Construction

Mechanical Earth Model (MEM) development is a mandatory part of the geomechanical evaluation
workflow. The MEM is the description of the state of in-situ stresses and rock mechanical properties for a
specific stratigraphic column or region. MEM construction is important for hydraulic fracturing programs
that provide direct input to fracturing design. The MEM consists of depth profiles of rock elastic properties,
earth stresses, break down pressure and pore pressure. The 1D MEM of vertical reference well is constructed
to investigate the fracture height coverage utilizing:

• A complete suite of wireline logs (full wave sonic log, image log, Triple Combo …. etc.).

• Rock mechanics core laboratory testing.

• Diagnostic Fracture Injection Tests (DFIT).

• Drilling-induced borehole failures and the leak-off test.

Calculation Of Vertical Stress

The vertical stress (σV) was computed by integrating the formation bulk density (ρb) log from surface to
total depth using the following Equation (1):
(1)

Horizontal stresses Magnitude

It was determined by use of a combination of measurements and modeling. In a passive basin, if a rock is
semi-infinite isotropic subjected to gravitational loading (i.e. overburden stress) and no horizontal strain,
the magnitude of the two horizontal stresses are equal. They can be estimated using the uniaxial strain
poroelastic Equation (2):

(2)

If tectonically active basin from geological events such as fault, fold, and other movements are creating
tectonic stresses and strains arise in the minimum horizontal stress direction εh and maximum horizontal
stress direction εH from these tectonic changes. The poroelastic model can be extended to include the tectonic
strains into consideration (Bratton, 1999) and, therefore, accommodates the anisotropic horizontal stresses,
Equations (3 and 4).

(3)

(4)

Where Pp is pore pressure, σv is overburden stress, α is Biot's coefficient and ν is static Poisson's ratio.
This poroelastic model was used as the basis for modeling in-situ stresses field from the studied well in this
paper. The results of 1D MEM for vertical reference well including the in-situ stresses, breakdown pressure,
and pore pressure are presented in Figure 3.
6 SPE-191654-MS

Figure 3—The Calibrated 1D Mechanical Earth Model for Vertical (reference) Well

Combining Vertical and Lateral Petrophysical and Mechanical Models

Initially, the vertical stress profile of reference well was extrapolated horizontally integrating the field
static model. Due to the lack of sonic logs in the horizontal well, neural networks were used to synthesize
pseudo sonic logs. These pseudo sonic logs were used along with the triple combo logs to evaluate the
geomechanical properties along the lateral of the horizontal well. The lateral logs were utilized to create
stress models across the horizontal section. Figures 4 and 5 present the lateral properties of the horizontal
well from the lateral MWD and LWD logs during the drilling. This part of the study helps optimize
perforation clusters depths selection and fracture staging placement.

Figure 4—Structural model and horizontal well location

SPE-191654-MS 7

Figure 5—Horizontal well lateral petrophysical, mechanical properties and Lateral breakdown pressure

Cluster Spacing and Fracture Staging Depths Selection

The fracture stages spacing optimization of the lateral section in the horizontal wells is to ensure that the
maximum reservoir contact is achieved and uniformly covered. Fracture staging has moved from geometric
spacing to a tailored approach in which similar reservoir properties are targeted (Walker et al. 2012). The
engineered completion design begins with the creation of the reservoir and completion quality indices. Once
the RQ and CQ indices have been quantified, they are then combined to form a composite quality index. The
composite quality index is used to optimize the fracture staging design and perforation placement in "like-
rock" to optimize perforation cluster efficiency. The zones to be stimulated were identified at the best rock
quality index that targets both good RQ and good CQ intervals along the lateral section of a horizontal well.
Figure 6 depicts the resulting grouping of like-rock with similar in-situ stresses and breakdown pressure
(Lili et al. 2015). This completion design minimized the formation breakdown pressure and stress contrast
between perforations clusters to promote initiation and propagation from all clusters in a stage and, therefore
improved reservoir contact.

Figure 6—Fracture stage depths selection along the lateral section.

8 SPE-191654-MS

Fracture Simulation and Modeling

Hydraulic fracturing simulation software models the propagation of hydraulic fractures based on the
reservoir rock and fluid properties, the stress profile, Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio, reservoir
permeability, reservoir pressure, and porosity. A fracture simulator was run with different scenarios of
perforation clusters and stress anisotropy to model multiple horizontal fracture stages propagation (assuming
one fracture per perforation cluster). The effect of the number of perforation clusters per stage and the
resultant changes in stress anisotropy were simulated. Figures 7 shows the simulated case run of three
and four perforation clusters per stage, respectively. The fracture simulation run outputs for eight fracture
stages show that the increase in the number of perforation clusters from three to four clusters for the same
fracture stage length of 200 ft caused an increase in the stress shadowing and interference from the outer
fractures, which led to reduced inner fracture half-lengths and enabled longitudinal fracture propagation
rather than transverse fractures and reduced stimulated reservoir volumes. Table 1 summarizes the fracture
model outputs comparison of fracture geometries between the three and four clusters.

Figure 7—(Left) fracture treatment simulation run result of a three-perforation cluster and stress contrast of 200
psi. Figure 7 (Right) fracture treatment simulation run result of a four-perforation cluster and stress contrast of 200.

Table 1—Comparison of fracture geometries between three and four perforation clusters.

Three Clusters Four Clusters

Transverse Transverse Transverse Transverse Transverse Transverse Transverse

Geometries
1 2 3 1 2 3 4

Gross fracture 725 200 625 375 275 50 375

length (ft)

Proppant cutoff 700 175 675 375 275 50 375

length (ft)

Fracture 25 10 25 25 15 15 10
height (ft)

Avg. fracture 0.253 0.091 0.255 0.035 0.045 0.012 0.084

width (in.)

Max. fracture 0.605 0.253 0.599 0.225 0.338 0.072 0.293

width (in.)

Avg. proppant 1.926 0.703 1.957 0.347 0.395 0.401 0.679

conc. (lb/ft2)
SPE-191654-MS 9

It is evident from the fracture simulation results that three perforation clusters per stage are optimal for
reducing the stress shadow effect, enabling transverse fractures propagation, and improving the stimulated
reservoir volume at an in-situ stress contrast of 200 psi and approximately 600,000 lbs of proppant per stage.

Cluster Efficiency
In this section, we will present the workflow for study the effect of cluster spacing on completion
performance. Cluster efficiency means how much each cluster delivers flow to the total well flow rate or
another way to rank the completion by calculating each cluster production versus the cost of each cluster.
Figure 8 whos the scorbian plot for well a tracer data vs. the cost of each stage. As you see in Figure 8 most
the flow rate come from stage 4, 8 and 5 and the rest of 8 stages does not contribute much especially stage
1, 2 and 6 only make 10% from the gas rate. The ideal completion case which has all stage produce the
same amount of flow as you can see in Figure 9. The cluster efficiency in the case is equal to 100% but the
actual case showed the cluster efficiency around 40%.

Figure 8—Cumulative completion cost vs. Gas rate during tracer time plot for Well A.
10 SPE-191654-MS

Figure 9—Comparison of 100% cluster efficiency and the actual case.

The cluster spacing is the most important parameter in hydraulic fracture treatment due to the two reasons:
1) cost of completion as more clusters will lead to more cost and 2) more clusters means more cluster
interference. Cluster spacing in the start of developing the new area to avoid the cookies cutter design.
The first well drilled and completed in the new area will be used to study the cluster spacing in the future
development well. The workflow will be used to study the cluster spacing is the integration of the following
analysis:

• Rate transient analysis for the production.

• Pressure transient analysis for the buildup data if it exists.

• Chemical tracer data analysis

• Microseismic data analysis

• Production log analysis

The integration of previous data analysis will help build simulation model will be used in studying the
cluster spacing. Figure 10 shows the superposition square time plot for Well A. The calculation of fracture
half-length is shown in Table 2 with different fracture number.
SPE-191654-MS 11

Figure 10—The superposition square time plot

Table 2—Fracture half-length calculation for Well A

Fracture Half
Case No. Number of Fractures Km, mD
Length, ft

1 1 0.1 2139
2 8 0.1 267
3 12 0.1 178
4 16 0.1 119
5 24 0.1 90

Reservoir simulation model for the second case with eight fractures was built to match the actual
production and run production forecast. The simulation model was built with a different type of fracture, 1)
equal fracture half-length and 2) actual fracture length based on the tracer data as shown in Figure 11 for the
equal fracture-half length and Figure 12 for actual fracture length based on tracer data. The methodology
for calculating the actual fracture-half length is:
1. Calculate the fracture half-length from a vertical well model.
2. Use the percentage tracer for each stage to calculate the fracture half-length
12 SPE-191654-MS

Figure 11—Shows reservoir model with equal fracture half-length

Figure 12—Shows reservoir model with actual fracture length based on chemical tracer data

The simulation model for both cases under constant bottom hole flowing pressure shows no much
difference in cumulative production as shown in Figures 13 and 14 because in both cases withhold stimulated
surface area constant but the shape of fracture is not held constant. Figure 12 shows the most representative
fracture distribution even at the time we collect the tracer. This fracture distribution gives an idea about the
performance of fracture job and how much cluster efficiency as spent money in each stage but the reality,
not all stage produced. The cluster efficiency could be used to set the well spacing and open chance for
refrac these stages again to extract the remaining oil.
SPE-191654-MS 13

Figure 13—Shows gas rate vs. time for symmetric and actual fracture distribution

Figure 14—shows the cumulative gas vs. time for both symmetric and actual
14 SPE-191654-MS

Cluster Spacing
The simulation model for Well A was built to study the effect of cluster or frac stage spacing by assuming
the following:

• Constant fracture half-length

• All stages have the same frac fluid volume

• All stages have the same proppant volume

The only variable will be different from case to case is the cluster spacing. Figure 15 shows the gas rate
vs. time for all simulation cases. The only difference in all cases is the gas rate in early time but there is no
much difference in late time. Table 3 shows the summary of all cases with the cost for each case. Figure 16
shows the comparison between each case at 90 days cumulative gas and final EUR. There are differences
in early time in cumulative gas but the cost of each completion is higher than the gain in production which
makes no sense to increase the cluster number for the small amount of production.

Figure 15—Show gas rate vs. time for different cluster spacing cases
SPE-191654-MS 15

Figure 16—Shows EUR and Cumulative gas at 90 days for different simulation cases

Table 3—the summary of the simulation cases result

Cum Gas @
Case No. Stage Number Stage Spacing, ft Cost, M$ EUR, Bcf
90 Days, Bcf

1 8 320.6 800 1.03 3.14

2 12 213.8 1200 1.20 3.15
3 16 160.3 1600 1.28 3.15
4 24 106.9 2400 1.34 3.15

The results of this study have immediate application for unconventional gas reservoir development as
the number of fracture stage will control the cost for each well. Cumulative gas production increases with
the number of hydraulic fractures but to a certain number. Therefore, the success of field development plan
highly depends on the optimization of the design parameters with minimum cost, especially with current
varying oil price.

Conclusion
In this paper, we examine an integrated workflow to optimize the perforation cluster spacing for the
multistage hydraulic fracturing horizontal wells. An advanced and engineered completion design compared
to the standard geometric method for optimizing completion and fracturing efficiencies was implemented
by incorporating advanced workflows, lateral heterogeneity analysis, and limited entry technique into the
engineered design workflow. The engineered design approach minimizes the effect of rock properties
16 SPE-191654-MS

heterogeneity along the lateral on fracture initiation by employing lateral measurements along the horizontal
wellbore that allows the estimation of the magnitude of formation breakdown and fracture initiation pressure
along the horizontal wellbore. The predicted breakdown pressure help in perforation clusters placing in rock
with similar mechanical properties thus improving the probability of uniform placement and distribution
of the induced fractures and that every cluster in each zone is fracture stimulated. The hydraulic fracture
attributes from the fracture simulator were exported to the reservoir simulator. The surface production
measurement together with the production profile utilizing chemical tracer samples was used to diagnose
hydraulic fracturing, understanding of individual stage flow patterns, calibrate the reservoir model. Various
RTA techniques are carried out utilizing pressure and production data to provide an understanding of flow
regimes, completion size, perforation cluster efficiency and fracture characteristics.

Reference
Cipolla, C. L., Lewis, R. E., Maxwell, S. C., & Mack, M. G. 2011. Appraising Unconventional Resource Plays:
Separating Reservoir Quality from Completion Effectiveness. International Petroleum Technology Conference, 1
January. IPCT-14677-MS.
Miller, C. K., Waters, G. A., & Rylander, E. I. 2011. Evaluation of Production Log Data from Horizontal Wells Drilled in
Organic Shales. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1 January. SPE-144326-MS.
Slocombe, R., Acock, A., Chadwick, C., Wigger, E., Viswanathan, A., Fisher, K., & Reischman, R. 2013. Eagle Ford
Completion Optimization Strategies Using Horizontal Logging Data. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 12 August.
Taylor, T., Waters, G. A., Sturm, S., Singh, M., Hamilton, D., Le Calvez, J. H., & Miller, C. K. 2013. Evaluating the
Impact of Mineralogy, Natural Fractures and In Situ Stresses on Hydraulically Induced Fracture System Geometry in
Horizontal Shale Wells. Society of Petroleum Engineers. SPE-163878-MS.
Waters, G., Heinze, J., Jackson, R., Ketter, A., Daniels, J., and Bentley, D. 2006. Use of Horizontal well image tools to
optimize Barnett shale reservoir exploitation. SPE ATCE, San Antonio, TX, 24-27 September. SPE-103202-MS.
Qian, B., Yin, C., Li, Y., Xu, B., & Qin, G. 2015. Diagnostics of Casing Deformation in Multi-Stage Hydraulic Fracturing
Stimulation in Lower Silurian Marine Shale Play in Southwestern China. 4 August. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
SPE-178711-MS.
Baihly, J. D., Altman, R. M., Aviles, I., Seale, R., & Snyder, D. 2011. Well Evolution in the James Lime: How Technology
has Driven Well Productivity Improvements. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1 January. SPE-147614.
Y.N. Abousleiman, M.H. Tran, S. Hoang, C.P. Bobko, A. Ortega, F.-J. UlmGeomechanics field and laboratory
characterization of the Woodford shale: the next gas play. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Society
of Petroleum Engineers, Anaheim, California, USA (2007).
Babatunde, A., Aso, I.I., Terry, I.J., Walker, K., Wutherich, K., Caplan, J., Gerdom, D.W., Clark, B.D., Ganguly, U., Li, X.,
Xu, Y., Yang, H., Liu, H., Luo, Y., & Waters, G. Stimulation Design for Unconventional Resources. Oilfield Review,
34-46, Summer 2013.
Babatunde, A., Aso, I.I., Terry, I.J., Walker, K., Wutherich, K., Caplan, J., Gerdom, D.W., Clark, B.D., Ganguly, U., Li, X.,
Xu, Y., Yang, H., Liu, H., Luo, Y., & Waters, G. Stimulation Design for Unconventional Resources. Oilfield Review,
34-46, Summer 2013.
Ejofodomi, E., Baihly, J. D., Malpani, R., Altman, R. M., Huchton, T. J., Welch, D., & Zieche, J. 2011. Integrating
All Available Data To Improve Production in the Marcellus Shale. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1 January.
SPE-144321-MS.
Ejofodomi, E. A., Varela, R. A., Cavazzoli, G., Velez, E. I., & Peano, J. 2014. Development of an Optimized Completion
Strategy in the Vaca Muerta Shale with an Anisotropic Geomechanical Model. Society of Petroleum Engineers, 25
February. SPE-167806-MS.
Wigger, E., Viswanathan, A., Fisher, K., Slocombe, R. W., Kaufman, P., & Chadwick, C. 2014. Logging Solutions
for Completion Optimization in Unconventional Resource Plays. Society of Petroleum Engineers. 25 February.
SPE-167726-MS.
Walker, K., Wutherich, K., Terry. J., et al. 2012. Improving Production in the Marcellus Shale Using an Engineered
Completion Design: A Case Study. Paper SPE 159666 Presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Xu Lili, Malcolm Yates, Olatunbosun Anifowoshe, Natalie Uschner-Arroyo, Yu Yang, Keith MacPhail. Comparing
Strategies for Optimizing Horizontal Shale Completions by Projecting Pilot Well Measurements across Laterals. Paper
SPE-177297-MS. SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, 13-15 October, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
SPE-191654-MS 17

M.K. Fisher, C.D. Harris, B.M. Davidson, C.A. Wright, K.P. Dunn (2004). Optimizing Horizontal Completion Techniques
in the Barnett Shale Using Microseismic Fracture Mapping. Paper SPE-90051-MS. SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, 26-29 September, Houston, Texas.
Vassilellis G.Li C., Seager, R., and Moos, D. 2010, "Investigating the Expected Long-Term Production Performance of
Shale Reservoirs", CSUG/SPE 138134.
Abousleiman Y., Tran M., Hoang S., Bobko C., Ortega A., Ulm G.J. 2007. Geomechanics field and laboratory
characterization of Woodford shale: The next gas play. Paper SPE 110120, presented at SPE annual technical
conference and exhibition, CA, USA. 11-14 November.
Barree R.D., Gilbert JV., Conway M.W. 2009. "Stress and rock property profiling for unconventional reservoir stimulation.
SPE 118703, presented at SPE hydraulic fracturing technology conference, The Woodlands, TX, USA, 19-21 January.
Britt L.K., Schoeffler J. 2009. "The geomechanics of a shale play: what makes a shale prospective?" Paper SPE 125525,
presented at SPE Eastern regional meeting, Charleston, WVA, USA, 23-25 September.