Spe 199279 Ms

SPE-199279-MS
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPEFD/proceedings-pdf/20FD/2-20FD/D022S011R008/2350729/spe-199279-ms.pdf by Universidad Estatal Peninsula de Santa Elena, Juan Carlos Gabino on 06 November 2021
Formation Damage Evaluation in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs Using a
Laboratory-Calibrated Multi-Phase Flow Numerical Simulator
Kelly Díez, Nicolás Bueno, and Juan Mejía, Universidad Nacional de Colombia; Alejandro Restrepo, Gastim
Technologies; Juan Vallejo, Exergy - Modeling and Analytics
Copyright 2020, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control held in Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, 19-21
February 2020.
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
In this work a numerical simulation model is presented to evaluate the effect on productivity of the filtration,
transport and retention of particulate material, as well as geomechanical effects during drilling operations
in naturally fractured reservoirs. The model proposed consists of a Black Oil flow simulator developed
under a dual permeability approach, coupled to a stress-sensitive fracture width and a filtration models.
The phenomenological model studied allows to investigate the effect of the particulate material in the
reduction of permeability due to the combined effect of the invasion of solids, and the sensitivity to stress.
Laboratory oil displacement tests over a fractured core allowed to calibrate relative permeability curves and
fracture conductivity. The system was then subjected to a dynamic filtration experiment, which captured
filtration rates and volumes, enabling to calibrate filtration parameters. A successful match of volumes and
pressures drop was obtained, assuring the representativeness of the whole model. A well simulation was
performed to analyze the effect of fracture properties on productivity. This model complements an effort
made by industry and academia to understand the filtration mechanisms occurring in naturally fractured
reservoirs, maximize the laboratory investment by means of a unique phenomenological model that couples
multiphase transport with solids entrance and mudcake build up equations. This model, together with current
mud design technologies will help to novate the way the drilling fluids are being engineered to maximize
investment return.
Keywords:: Formation damage, Particle invasion, Numerical model, Naturally fractured reservoirs,
Stress state
Introduction
The productivity of many hydrocarbons reservoirs depends on natural fractures networks; especially in those
whit low and ultra-low matrix permeability. The high fracture permeability eases the oil and gas flow from
the reservoir to the producing wells. Thus, fractures system location and its characterization have become
in a key factor for well trajectory planning and completion strategy for producer intervals because it allows
you to optimize its benefits [1], [2]. Therefore, the oil and gas industry has been more interested in the last
2 SPE-199279-MS
decades for obtain a detailed understanding of fluids flow into fractured systems, in line with its importance
in reservoir productivity.
The development of naturally fractured reservoirs involves major challenges, including the mitigation of
induced formation damage during drilling operations. In these operations, the fracture permeability might
be diminished by the entry of solids transported by the drilling fluid. The strategies developed to reduce
this impact on fracture permeability have been focused on two main alternatives. The first of these suggests
drilling in underbalance condition, in which loss circulation and particle invasion occur less frequently and
reach smaller radii of invasion in the formation [2]. However, underbalanced drilling is not always the most
appropriate option due to the difficulty of its execution, control and its high cost [3], [4]. The second strategy
is to drill under overbalance, where well pressure exceeds the formation pressure. Overbalance drilling is
focused on the use of loss control materials, which promote an effective seal on the face of the fractures to
prevent the entry of a larger volume of solids and filtering inwards of fracture and formation [1]. However,
in overbalance drilling, the control materials can enter several feet into the fractures forming a kind of
internal cake of low permeability. Once the overbalance condition ends, the pore pressure is restored, causing
fractures to close due to the increase in effective stress. Consequently, the packaging formed by the loss
control material undergoes a strong compaction and its permeability is reduced further; this phenomenon
is known in the industry as stress-cage. Once the well is started to production, a high stress concentration
upon solids keep them in its place, plugging the fracture pathway and triggering permeability loss.
In summary, the presence of particulate material in natural fractures has important implications in
hydrocarbon's productivity. To understand thoroughly the filtration, transport and entrapment processes,
it was developed a multiphase/multicomponent dual permeability model. Phenomenological transport
equations were coupled a solids filtration and pore-plugging model. The model includes a dependency on
multiple particle diameters, mean pore diameter and a dynamic fracture width. In addition, the effective
normal stress acting over the fracture planes are calculated using the modified Kirsh model [5] and Bandis
model [6]. The model allows to study the effect of loss control materials on the reduction of permeability
due to the combined effect of the invasion of solids and the sensitivity to stress.
Simulation Model
Cake formation and filtration
During drilling stage, the cake formation is affected by shear forces from mud circulation into the well. The
shear stress acting on the cake surface promotes the particle detachment, reducing growth rate of the cake.
By a mass balance, the cake growth is estimated as follows:
(1)
(2)
where α is the fraction of particles stuck to the cake surface, and ufl is filtrate velocity through the cake.
cd is a parameter in function of solid concentration in the mud csm, and filter cake concentration csc. Y is
the erosion rate by particle detachment, and is largely function of shear stress and force acting in radial
direction. The equation for Y can be consulted in Lohne's work [7].
The mud filtrate rate is estimated by Darcy's phenomenological law. Thus, it is necessary to estimate the
mud filtrate viscosity, the pressure drop between the bottom hole and near-wellbore region, and the cake
permeability. The equation proposed by Carman-Kozeny [8] is used to calculate the cake permeability:
(3)
SPE-199279-MS 3
where ϕc is the cake porosity, τc is the tortuosity, S is the specific surface area.
Finally, the filtration rate can be estimated by equation(4). This variable joins the filtrate model and dual
permeability model.
(4)
where pwf is the bottom hole pressure, ppc is the pressure in the area behind the cake, μfl is the mud filtrate
viscosity, and Afl is the area exposed to filtration.
The filtration rate is associated to matrix and fracture domain using weighting factors in function of
phase's mobility krj,d / μj,d, and the form factor Gw by Peaceman [9].
(5)
(6)
(7)
In using those equations are considering the effects of block geometry and phases saturation. In this way,
it is possible to calculate the mud invasion in each domain and study possible mechanisms associated.
Finally, the filtrate rate associated to fracture and matrix domain, respectively, is determined as follows:
(8)
(9)
This developed model covers the multi-phase transport with a dual permeability domain approach.
Under this focus, two flow domains are considered: matrix and fracture. Each domain is associated with
petrophysical properties, pressure and saturation distribution. Classical dual permeability models do not
considers flow capacity between wells and matrix domain for injection or production. This guideline
is modified in the proposed simulation model, by the consideration of inflow through matrix domain.
Concerning the injection / production processes in this study, two kind of fluids are considered; original
reservoir phases and those foreign phases. In the reservoir, components are distributed in three phases:
aqueous, volatile and, oleic. Aqueous phase is composed by the formation brine, while volatile and oleic
phases are in turn constituted by the gas and oil components. On the other hand, the foreign fluids are drilling
muds, whether water-based or oil-based as the continuous phase. Although it does not take into account
the detailed composition of drilling fluids, properties such as viscosity and the effect of loss-control agents
used in mud formulation are considered in the model.
Phases and components transport in fractured systems

The multiphase flow in matrix and fracture domains, is governed by a mass balance for each component
i present in a phase j per each domain, as shown in equation (1). The advection is the main transport
mechanism considered in the model, and the mass transfer between phases occurs in equilibrium conditions:
(10)
where nj is the number of phases, d represents the domain (matrix or fracture), ϕ is the porosity, Sj is the
phase j saturation, ρj is the phase j density, wij is the mass fraction of component i present in a phase j, and
phase velocity estimated by Darcy's law. The fluid transfer between domains is estimated as a function
4 SPE-199279-MS
of the pressure difference between both domains and is represented by the term , which also depends
on phase mobility, and a shape factor ξ that is related to the surface area created by the fracture system:
(11)
Solids transport in flow domains as well as its plugging and attachment, is modeled by a nonequilibirum
transport equations. This approach is based on a material balance that includes the kinetics of mass transfer
of solids from fluid phases to rock phase, and vice versa. Solids are allowed to exist in a particular phase
depending on the continuous phase of the drilling mud (water and oil):
(12)
Solids entrapment kinetics

Lohne [7] proposed an entrapment model in matrix systems to calculate the mass transfer between liquid
phases and rock phase, . From that model, a similar solids entrapment function in fracture domain
was obtained:
(13)
where ρm is matrix density.

The parameter λd,f makes reference to remobilization of trapped particles. On the other hand, λa,f represents
the entrapment per unit length, and it is function of the particle diameter Ds, fracture width e, and calibration
parameters λf,τ:
(14)
A particle is trapped in a fracture if its diameter meets that Ds ≥εe, where ε is a calibration parameter that
rules the particle diameter and fracture width ratio. If the particle diameter is less that critical diameter εe,
there is not entrapment and λa,f has a value of zero.
Permeability reduction
The permeability reduction of the fracture is calculated by a harmonic average between the solids pack
permeability ksa, and the fracture permeability associated with effective stress changes kf. The parameter γs,f
is the solids volume and fracture volume ratio:
(15)
The solids pack permeability can be estimated from equation(3), using the fracture porosity corrected by
trapped solids ϕcr. The latter variable as well as fracture specific surface area, and trapped solids volume
and fracture volume ratio can be calculated from Lonhe's work [7].
The fracture permeability kf is computed by Bandis model [6], which is largely function of fracture width
e, and this in turn is a function of effective normal stress:
(16)
where eo is the initial fracture width, and vj is the joint closure a normal fracture effective stress :
(17)
SPE-199279-MS 5
where kni is the initial normal fracture stiffness and vm is the maximum fracture closure:
(18)
The fracture closure permeability kccf represents the fracture permeability at normal effective stress zero,
while the residual fracture closure permeability krcf is the stabilized fracture permeability, that is, when the
permeability is not affected by normal effective stress anymore. At the core scale, the effective normal stress
is calculated assuming the existence of a fracture plane that crosses the rock longitudinally. So that, the
effective radial stress applied to the triaxial cell during the experimental test is the effective normal stress
that acts on the fracture. At well scale, the effective normal stress is estimated in function of stresses
around the wellbore using the Kirsch model [5]:
Radial effective stress
(19)
Tangential effective stress
(20)
Vertical effective stress
(21)
The model proposed by Kirsh does not considered the flow between reservoir and wellbore. To consider
the effect of pore pressure, the equation was modified adding the product of Biot coefficient and pore
pressure, αPp. In this manner, the stresses around the wellbore are effective. Finally, it is also necessary
specified the fracture orientation (dip, azimuth) to obtain cosine directors of the normal vector to the fracture
plane and using the Cauchy's law, estimate the normal effective stress acting over the fracture plane.
Results
To validate the proposed mathematical model, a dynamic filtration test carried out over a naturally fractured
sample rock of Mirador sandstone formation, was simulated. Basically, the experimental test consists of the
measuring of effective oil permeability, followed by drilling fluid filtration under overbalance conditions.
During this stage, filtrate volume is measured at different times. At the end, the effective oil permeability
was estimated again to evaluate the induced damage associated with drilling mud invasion. Permeability
and porosity, which were estimated by means of laboratory tests, must be distributed on matrix and fracture
domain to complete the required data for the dual permeability model simulation. The obtained total porosity
was 8%. Due to matrix porosity is much higher than fracture porosity, a value of 0.01% of total porosity
was assigned to fracture porosity, according to previous characterized mediums from the Mirador formation
[10], [11]. The absolute and relative permeability were calibrated by experimental drop pressure and oil
recovery data. Final relative permeability is expressed with the Brooks and Corey's model [12]. The fracture
domain curve got a "X" shape as usual in fractured media. The rock and fluid properties are shown in Table
1, and the parameters used in the Bandis model to calculate fracture permeability are shown in Table 2.
6 SPE-199279-MS
Table 1—Rock properties and operational conditions.
Parameter Value
Length [cm] 4.74
Diameter [cm] 2.56
Matrix porosity [%] 7.92
Fracture porosity [%] 0.08
Matrix permeability [%] 0.3
Injection rate [cc/min] 0.2
Oil viscosity [cp] 0.4
Temperature [°C] 90
Pore pressure [psi] 300
Overburden pressure [psi] 1500
Table 2—Parameters of fracture permeability model.
Parameter Value
Fracture closure permeability [mD] 1.0
Residual fracture closure permeability [mD] 0.01
Initial normal fracture stiffness [psi/ft] 1.106
Initial fracture width [um] 100
Biot coefficient 0.9
The recovered oil volume before drilling invasion is depicted in Figure 1. There can be depicted the
laboratory data and its simulation with the proposed model. Experimental data reach almost 1.5 cc at the final
of the process. To assure a good match of this volume and other important variables such as pressure drop,
it was necessary to assure a fast fracture channeling. This phenomenon causes that oil recovery increases
sharply, but once fracture is swept, oil production is poor due to water is being injected in the fracture
preferably. The mean relative error for the simulation curve is 8%. The match between the model and
measured data supposes a challenge due to that matrix and fracture relative permeabilities can move over
different saturation windows. However, the oil recovery in latest times are matched successfully, assuring
that final produced oil volume is in line with observations.
Figure 1—Base oil recovery curve.

SPE-199279-MS 7
Before the filtration stage, oil injection takes place to saturate the oil at irreducible water saturation
conditions. This process supposes that imbibition and drainage pathways are equivalent. The drilling fluid
was modeled as a water-like phase. This stage is experimentally reproduced by circulating the mud along an
exposed core face with an overbalance pressure of 970 psi. Meanwhile, outlet face pressure is kept constant.
During its filtration, the pressure on the inlet port was estimated to be 750 psi, which, according to the
parameters of the fracture permeability model, causes a fracture width of approximately 46 um, at reservoir
conditions in the inlet port. This value is within the fracture width range of the Mirador formation, which
varies between 20-70 um [13]. In Table 1, the operational conditions of the filtration stage are detailed, and
in Figure 2 is shown the particle size distribution.
Figure 2—Particle size distribution.
Table 3—Filtrate test conditions.
Parameter Value
Overbalance pressure [psi] 970
Lineal velocity [ft/min] 500
Solids concentration [ppg] 2.5
Particle shape factor 1.8
Solids pack porosity 0.302
Oil recovery during drilling mud filtration is shown in Figure 3. Experimental data is quite scatter, but
follows the tendency reproduced by the model. The start of oil production suffers and offset between the
model and the experimental results. This gap can be attributed to an uncertainty in initial pore pressure
and backpressure at the outlet in the experimental set up. If the initial pore pressure is slightly lower than
backpressure, mud filtration must increase the pore pressure before observing any effluent in the core outlet.
Despite of this offset, simulation results are high agreement with the measured oil volumes. However, even
more important that final oil volume, it is the oil rate at the outlet what assures the phenomenon is being
reproduced. Experimental oil rates are calculated using a centered derivative, which gives more stability
to calculations.
8 SPE-199279-MS
Figure 3—Total cumulative volumes.
Figure 4 depicts the comparison between oil rates during all times of the process. Results are more
explanatory than recovered oil volume behavior, because oil rates explain the reduction in filtration rates
due to cake build-up. Although there is a non-representative point at the beginning of the process, all rates
tend to be higher at the start and decrease until reach a stable rate. This stabilized rate is typically found
in dynamic filtration experiments, due to forces over the cake have reach an equilibrium. Equilibrium rate
is correctly matched by the simulation curve. It is important to notice that, even when applying a stable
derivative calculation, experimental filtration rate suffers a scattering behavior. This introduces a question
about how to improve the volume measurements in this type of tests, in order to calibrate models with more
accuracy.
Figure 4—Filtrate rate.
Once the filtrate stage was completed, brine and oil were injected sequentially to measure the damage
upon oil recovery compared with base recovery of Figure 1. After filtration, experimental oil recovery
was reduced in 1.15 cc, which represents a reduction of 22.6%. However, the simulation shows a final oil
recovery of 1.44 cc, which only represents a decrease of 3.7% comparing against base case. A possible
explanation for the low decrease in oil recovery gotten by the simulator, is the fact that damage is modeled
SPE-199279-MS 9
only by the reduction of absolute permeability by solids entrapment. That is, the fluid-fluid interactions were
neglected, and flow is not being affected by the change in relative permeabilities. This reasoning means that
most of the reduction in recovery is attributable to changes in fluid-fluid interactions. To characterize how
much relative permeabilities are being affected, a new set of these curves were used to match the oil recovery
and the pressure drop after filtration. In the Figure 5 and Figure 6 are presented the original and affected
relative permeability curves, for fracture and matrix domains, respectively. Figure 5 allows to conclude that
oil mobility in fracture domain suffers a reduction at irreducible water saturation conditions. Also, a fraction
of water is being trapped, shown by the increasing of residual water saturation of 10% approximately.
Finally, residual oil saturation also is being increased in a 5%. Regarding matrix domain, Figure 6 shows a
similar behavior between the cases, excepting end-points of the curves. As was said before, oil recovery in
naturally fractured rocks is highly affected by water channeling. Thus, once water breakthrough occurs in
production outlet, is difficult to sweep the oil in the matrix. This explains that main alteration of irreducible
conditions is being observed in the fractured domain. Despite this, oil relative permeability at residual water
saturation was reduced, affecting the total hydraulic conductivity of the porous medium.
Figure 5—Fracture relative permeability.
Figure 6—Matrix relative permeability.
Using the new set of relative permeability curves, the oil recovery obtained with the integrated simulation
case is about 1.20 cc. This volume equals almost 19.3% of recovered oil during the first stage. This value,
summed to the impact of absolute permeability reduction, represents total impact upon oil recovery seen
10 SPE-199279-MS
during experimentation. The, total recovery reduction is associated with interactions between fluids, damage
in the effective permeability due to increased interfacial tension, and solids entrapment. Impact upon oil
recovery, desegregated by solids damage, fluid-fluid, and fluids-rock interactions damage, is presented in
Figure 7.
Figure 7—Damage percentage.
Finally, the whole model has allowed to reproduce the main interactions taking place during the oil
recovery in naturally fractured rocks and the phenomena taking place during dynamic mud filtration in this
type of reservoirs. Damage mechanisms were quantified, concluding that fluid-fluid interactions and fluid-
rock interactions are more critical than solids entrapment for oil recovery reduction.
To assess the geomechanical effect on productivity at well scale, a single well model simulation was
run. The case study consists in a drilling period of four days, followed by three months of production. The
reservoir is characterized by a strike-slip fault regime, besides a high stress anisotropy. Detailed information
of the simulation grid and rock properties is shown in Table 4, likewise, the parameters of the fracture
permeability model are shown in Table 5.
Table 4—Grid and rock properties
Parameter Value
Blocks in radial direction 20
Well radius [ft] 0.7
Drain radius [ft] 1000
Blocks in tangential direction 4
Formation thickness [ft] 240
Formation top [ft] 15000
Matrix porosity [%] 8
Fracture porosity [%] 0.08
Matrix permeability [mD] 0.7
Reservoir pressure [psi] 6000
Bottom hole pressure [psi] 4000

SPE-199279-MS 11
Table 5—Parameters of the fracture permeability model.
Parameter Value
Fracture closure permeability [mD] 700
Residual fracture closure permeability [mD] 3.5
Initial normal fracture stiffness [psi/ft] 4.5.106
Initial fracture width [um] 150
Biot coefficient 0.9
Poisson's ratio 0.2
Maximum horizontal stress gradient [psi/ft 1.15
Minimum horizontal stress gradient 0.7
Vertical stress gradient 1.0
Figure 8 depicts the fracture width along the radial axis at the initial time (IT) and the final time (FT),
which correspond at the injection and production stage respectively, as well as 0° and 90° degrees of
the maximum horizontal stress orientation. A notable observation is the fact that at 0° of the maximum
horizontal stress orientation, the fracture width presents the highest values in the near-wellbore region (< 3
ft), and as the radius increases further from the well, the aperture decreases. On the other hand, at 90° of the
maximum horizontal stress orientation, the fracture width has its lowest values in the near-wellbore region,
which increase and stabilize as the radius increases.
Figure 8—Variation of the fracture width along the radial axis,

regarding the distance of the maximum horizontal stress orientation.
These results are derived from the stress anisotropy that causes a high tangential stress concentration in
the perpendicular positions at the maximum horizontal stress orientation. This effect finally translates into a
closure of the fractures at 90° from maximum horizontal stress direction, and an opening of the fractures in
the opposite position just right in the nearest part of the face wellbore. The near-wellbore effective stresses at
0° and 90° degrees at maximum horizontal stress orientation are shown in the figures Figure 9 y Figure 10,
respectively. As discussed previously, a marked difference in effective tangential stress is noted according
to the fracture orientation.
12 SPE-199279-MS
Figure 9—The near-wellbore stresses at 0 grades of the maximum horizontal stress orientation.
Figure 10—The near-wellbore stresses at 90 grades of the maximum horizontal stress orientation.
The fracture and maximum horizontal stress orientations effect on the fracture width, entails
consequences on productivity. In the Figure 11, the oil rate is shown for a 0° and 90° degrees fracture
orientation from the maximum horizontal stress, at a constant fracture inclination of 70° degrees. As it was
expected, at 0° degrees the oil rate is higher than at the perpendicular location in the wellbore. This effect
is more outstanding in the first days of production, while the oil rates tend to get closer one from each other
during longer times.
SPE-199279-MS 13
Figure 11—Oil rate in the wellbore face at 0 and 90 grades of the maximum horizontal stress orientation.
Similarly, to the fracture orientation in regarding to the maximum horizontal stress orientation, the
fractures inclination also has an effect on the oil productivity, especially in the first days of production. In
the figure Figure 12, cumulative oil production is observed during the first month for fractures with different
inclinations, 15°, 45° and 70°, and a constant fracture azimuth of 0° degrees. There can be seen that fractures
tending to be more vertical (70°) have a higher production, while more horizontal-tilted fractures (15°) have
the lowest production. This results may be due to the fact that in a strike-slip fault regime, the magnitude of
the effective normal stress on horizontal fractures is mainly due to vertical stress, while vertical fractures are
mainly affected by horizontal stresses. Thus, the fracture width of the vertical fractures can suffer a closure
if they are oriented perpendicularly to the direction of the maximum horizontal stress, as well as the fracture
width can be highly benefited if the fractures are parallel to the direction of the maximum horizontal stress,
resulting in higher productivity compared to horizontal fractures.
Figure 12—Variation of cumulative oil production in regarding to fracture inclination.
Conclusions
• A mathematical model was developed to simulate the phenomena of filtration, transport and
retention of particulate material, as well as the dependence on productivity of the variation in the
stress state in naturally fractured reservoirs during drilling stages.
14 SPE-199279-MS
• The simulation results of the dynamic filtration test allow to validate the ability of the model to
assess damage by drilling fluids in YNF, by adjusting correctly the filtration rate and oil recovery
after damage. Additionally, it is possible to quantify and disaggregate the damage associated by the
solids entrapment mechanism of the total induced damage. Fracture width estimation is a critical
issue to correctly predict the maximum particle size that can be trapped in the reservoir.
• Channeling during filtration, becomes more difficult the measurement and calibration of relative
permeabilities from waterflooding data. Channeling also plays an important role during filtration
since it increases the invasion radius and can block the access to the matrix medium during
injection.
• Well scale simulations were performed in which the geomechanical effect on reservoir productivity
was evidenced, based on the sensitivity analysis of fracture properties, such as its orientation and
inclination.
References
1. D. Jiao and M. M. Sharma, "Mud-induced formation damage in fractured reservoirs," SPE Drill.
Complet., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 11–16, 1996.
2. C. A. Ehlig-Economides, M. Taha, H. D. Marin, E. Novoa, and O. Sanchez, "Drilling and
Completion Strategies in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs," Proc. SPE Int. Pet. Conf. Exhib. Mex.,
pp. 577–586, 2000.
3. D. B. Bennion, F. B. Thomas, R. F. Bietz, and D. W. Bennion, "Underbalanced drilling, praises
and perils," Soc. Pet. Eng. - Permian Basin Oil Gas Recover. Conf. OGR 1996, no. December, pp.
753–772, 1996.
4. S. Salimi and A. Ghalambor, "Experimental study of formation damage during underbalanced-
drilling in naturally fractured formations," Energies, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 1728–1747, 2011.
5. E. Fjar, R. M. Holt, A. M. Raaen, R. Risnes, and P. Horsrud, Petroleum related rock mechanics,
2nd ed., vol. 53. Elsevier, 2008.
6. S. C. Bandis, A. C. Lumsden, and N. R. Barton, "Fundamentals of Rock Joint Deformation," Int.
J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 1983.
7. A. Lohne, L. Han, C. Van Der Zwaag, H. Van Velzen, N. Aardolie, and M. Nam, "Formation-
Damage and Well-Productivity Simulation," no. September, 2010.
8. L. . Lake, Enhanced oil recovery. Prentice Hall Inc., 1989.
9. P. D. W, "Interpretation of well-block pressures in numerical reservoir simulation with nonsquare
grid blocks and anisotropic permeability.," Soc. Pet. Eng. J., pp. 531–543, 1983.
10. C. G. Herrera, "Simulation of nitrogen injection as an Enhanced Recovery Method in a tight
natural fracture sandstone reservoir with compositional fluids," Universidad Nacional de
Colombia, 2016.
11. Z. Gutiérrez, "Efecto del espaciamiento y longitud de fracturas sobre la permeabilidad de un
yacimiento naturalmente fracturado: caso Piedemonte Llanero Colombiano," Universidad
Nacional de Colombia, 2017.
12. R. H. Brooks and A. T. Corey, "Properties of porous media affecting fluid flow," J. Irrig. Drain.
Div., 1996.
13. H. Cifuentes, "Estimación de la capacidad de flujo del sistema matriz – fractura de la formación
mirador en la estructura miche del complejo pauto en pozos de piedemonte.," Universidad
Nacional de Colombia, 2016.

Spe 199279 Ms

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Spe 199279 Ms

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SPE-199279-MS

Copyright 2020, Society of Petroleum Engineers

Phases and components transport in fractured systems

Solids entrapment kinetics

where ρm is matrix density.

Tangential effective stress

Vertical effective stress

Table 1—Rock properties and operational conditions.

Length [cm] 4.74

Matrix porosity [%] 7.92

Fracture porosity [%] 0.08

Matrix permeability [%] 0.3

Injection rate [cc/min] 0.2

Oil viscosity [cp] 0.4

Pore pressure [psi] 300

Overburden pressure [psi] 1500

Table 2—Parameters of fracture permeability model.

Fracture closure permeability [mD] 1.0

Residual fracture closure permeability [mD] 0.01

Initial normal fracture stiffness [psi/ft] 1.106

Initial fracture width [um] 100

Biot coefficient 0.9

Figure 1—Base oil recovery curve.

Figure 2—Particle size distribution.

Table 3—Filtrate test conditions.

Overbalance pressure [psi] 970

Lineal velocity [ft/min] 500

Solids concentration [ppg] 2.5

Particle shape factor 1.8

Solids pack porosity 0.302

Figure 4—Filtrate rate.

Figure 5—Fracture relative permeability.

Figure 6—Matrix relative permeability.

Table 4—Grid and rock properties

Blocks in radial direction 20

Well radius [ft] 0.7

Drain radius [ft] 1000

Blocks in tangential direction 4

Formation thickness [ft] 240

Formation top [ft] 15000

Matrix porosity [%] 8

Fracture porosity [%] 0.08

Matrix permeability [mD] 0.7

Reservoir pressure [psi] 6000

Bottom hole pressure [psi] 4000

Table 5—Parameters of the fracture permeability model.

Fracture closure permeability [mD] 700

Initial normal fracture stiffness [psi/ft] 4.5.106

Initial fracture width [um] 150

Biot coefficient 0.9

Poisson's ratio 0.2

Maximum horizontal stress gradient [psi/ft 1.15

Minimum horizontal stress gradient 0.7

Vertical stress gradient 1.0

Figure 8—Variation of the fracture width along the radial axis,

Figure 12—Variation of cumulative oil production in regarding to fracture inclination.

You might also like