Petroleum Engineering 401

Lab 5: Multi-Stage Fractured Horizontal Well History Match and Forecast

As an engineer for an unconventional operator, you have been given the task of designing
completion strategies for the remaining wells in an unconventional ultra-low permeability gas play.
You have been given data on a single horizontal well that you must first history match, and then
compare the current forecast to two additional forecasts: 1) A case where you double the number
of frac stages, and 2) a case where you quadruple the number of frac stages, over and above the
original number of frac stages in the well.

To design future completion strategies, you must understand how the observed production
performance (historical gas rates and bottomhole pressures) relates to the completion parameters
of the existing well. The existing well is a 4,000-ft lateral with 500-ft spacing between fracs.
Although completion engineers have estimates of the fracture length and conductivity from rock
mechanics models, you are tasked with using historical reservoir performance and CMG CMOST
software to history match the well performance using three parameters:
 The half-length of the fracture
 The conductivity of the fracture
 The permeability of the matrix

PART 1 History Match: To history match your existing well, you will be using CMOST to
perform a history match calibration with historical data provided in the following file:
 LAB04_Case_XXXX.FHF: contains the cumulative gas and bottomhole pressure (BHP)
history of the well, which you will using in CMOST as part of your object function you
will minimize.
XXXX is your assigned file number from Lab4 Student Assignment Values.pdf.

When you build your history match model, you will be taking full advantage of symmetry to
reduce the size of the model. The usual assumptions about symmetry apply.

PART 2 Optimization: Once the characteristics of the history match well have been determined,
you will test the hypothesis that increasing the number of fracs (or, reducing the frac spacing) will
be economically viable.

For these future well forecasts, you will use the same operating constraints as were used in the
history matching phase. Principally, that is a minimum flowing BHP of 500 psi. All other
characteristics of the “future well” will be the same as the history match well. You will use NPV
and IRR to determine if spending the capital on additional stages is sensible.

Part 2 can be done with a set of three cases:

1) Base Case: this is just your History Match case, forecasted forward to a maximum of 20
years from the beginning of history.
2) Case 2: double the number of fracs in the well above what is in the Base Case, running a
full 20-year forecast starting at initial conditions
3) Case 3: double the number of fracs in the well above what is in Case 2

Table A summarizes important reservoir and economic parameters. Additional reservoir

parameters are included in the data file LAB4_TEMPLATE.DAT.

Page 1 of 3
 Petroleum Engineering 401

Lab 5: Multi-Stage Fractured Horizontal Well History Match and Forecast

Table A – Reservoir and Economic Parameters

Depth of reservoir top 7,600 ft SS
Gas Gravity (air=1.0) 0.6
Reservoir temperature 180 deg F
Reference pressure for cpore 3,800 psia
Pore volume compressibility (cpore) 3x10-7 psia-1
Maximum well life 20 years
Drilling cost (before completion) $2,000,000
Treatment cost per stage $150,000
Gas price $3.00/Mcf
Operating cost $0.30/Mcf
Discount rate 10%

Use monthly cash flows and end-of-period discounting.

PART 1 –DELIVERABLES
Your submission should include the following two files.

1. A Word document containing:

 An Executive Summary (2 to 3 paragraphs max of text) with your history matching
objective, outcomes and main conclusion. Also provide a brief assessment of the quality
of your history match.
 Table 1 summarizing your calibrated reservoir description, including the three parameters
varied in the history match (matrix perm, fracture conductivity, and fracture half-length).
Be sure to convert the Xf_Index parameter into a frac half-length. Do not show the
Xf_Index in the table. It has no meaning.

Table 1: Lab 4 History Match Summary

Parameter Optimum Value
Matrix perm, md
Frac Half Length, ft
Frac Conductivity, md-ft

 From the history match CMOST study:

o A plot comparing observed and simulated cumulative gas production vs. time for
your final, optimum history match case from your CMOST study. Use symbols for
observed data and lines for simulated data.
o A plot of global error vs experiment number for your CMOST history match study.
2. The input data (.DAT) file for the best history match case (your optimum CMOST History
Match experiment), which should have embedded in it, your optimum parameter values for
PERMI (matrix perm), fracture conductivity and fracture half-length, properly named
LAB4_OPTIMUM_HM.DAT so it is easy to identify.

Page 2 of 3
 Petroleum Engineering 401

Lab 5: Multi-Stage Fractured Horizontal Well History Match and Forecast

PART 2 –DELIVERABLES
Your submission should include the following four files.

1. A Word document containing:

 An Executive Summary (2 to 3 paragraphs max of text) with your recommendations for
subsequent well completion designs based on the history match well (Part 1)
characteristics and your reduced fracture spacing cases. Include an explanation of reservoir
performance, with responses to the following questions.
o What are the effects of different numbers of fracture stages on well performance?
o Is there any difference between optimal reservoir performance and optimal
economic performance?

 Table 2 like the one shown below summarizing the results of the three forecast cases.
Table 2: Lab 4 Case Forecast Summary
Lateral Stages OGIP 20-year EUR RF NPV IRR
Case ft MMcf MMcf % OGIP M$ %
Base Case
Case 2
Case 3

 A plot of gas rate (in Mcf/d) vs. time for the three forecast cases (Base Case, Case 2, Case
3). Put the three curves on one graph. Be sure to apply the proper scale factor, either in
Results or in Excel, before you make the plot.
 A plot of cumulative gas production (in MMcf) vs. time for the three forecast cases (Base
Case, Case 2, Case 3). Put the three curves on one graph. Be sure to apply the proper scale
factor, either in Results or in Excel, before you make the plot.
2. The input data (.DAT) file for the Case 2 prediction case, properly named LAB4_CASE2.DAT
so it is easy to identify.
3. The input data (.DAT) file for the Case 3 prediction case, properly named LAB4_CASE3.DAT
so it is easy to identify.
4. Excel spreadsheet with your worked out economics and the required tables.

eCampus Submission Instructions:

Place all your deliverable documents in eCampus in the proper submission link (Part 1 or Part 2).

Page 3 of 3