INTEGRATED EVALUATION

Analysis of both reservoir quality and completion quality is important for successfully
developing an unconventional reservoir.

Pressure tests and well production analysis should also be integrated with logs, seismic
data, and reservoir descriptions. Integration of petrophysical log data, completions, and
seismic data is valuable for selection of drilling locations and production optimization
(Chong et al., 2010; Du et al., 2011; Glaser et al., 2013; Hryb et al., 2014).
The relationship between two variables may be affected by other interfering variables,
which may lead to a spurious correlation or other forms of Simpson’s paradox related to
a third variable’s effect (Ma et al., 2014).

As an example, the resistivity and maturity of organic matter in shales are generally
correlated positively, but in some Niobrara formations, the relationship between maturity
and resistivity can be reversed to be negatively correlated because of the wettability
change in conjunction with development of petroleum-expulsion fractures or other
mechanism in transition from wet gas to dry gas (Al Duhailan and Cumella, 2014; Newsham et al.,
2002).
It is useful to distinguish completion quality from reservoir
quality in general, but it is also very important to analyze their
correlation as they may or may not be highly correlated.

Sometimes, geomechanical parameters are indicative of not

only completion quality, but also reservoir quality. Britt and
Schoeffler (2009) showed an example of separating
prospective shales from nonprospective shales using static and
dynamic Young’s modulus correlation, yet Young’s modulus is
often used as a criterion for completion quality.

In other cases, reservoir and completion qualities are not

significantly or even inversely correlated, how to couple them is
highly important for completion optimization.
A commonly used cutoff of TOC for a source rock is 2% in weight.
Effective porosity should be more than 4% for shale gas reservoirs.
Obviously, the higher the better; but it is uncommon for gas shales
to have effective porosity more than 10%.

Water saturation (Sw) should be less than 45%, and the lower the
better. Higher Sw may be related to more water-wet pores within the
inorganic minerals pores that may not contain producible
hydrocarbon.

Table 1 lists some of the most important parameters in evaluating

shale reservoirs.
Table 1 Important Parameters in Evaluating Shale Reservoirs

Expanded and synthesized from a of shale reservoir studies (Boyer et al., 2006; Sondergeld et al., 2010).
In practice, only a small number of these parameters may be evaluated
because of limited data.

It is possible to assign a favorability score for each of the reservoir and

completion–quality parameters and then compare the reservoir to
analog reservoirs. These reservoir and completion–quality parameters
cannot be linearly combined; it is not straightforward to derive a
composite score of quality.

For example, a reservoir with 10% porosity and 1% weight TOC may
not be as good as a reservoir with 5% porosity and 2% weight TOC.
Radar plots provide a useful way to visually analyze qualities and
compare them with analog reservoirs.
 Figure 1 shows an example of ranking reservoir and completion
qualities based on the availability of data using radar plots. As more
quality parameters become available, the ranking becomes more
complex, but analysis of more parameters should be helpful to make a
more informed decision.

Figure 1: Radar plots for ranking reservoir and completion qualities of shale reservoirs with 6-level scores
(0–5 from low to high, decimals can be used as well). (a) 5-parameter ranking; (b) 6-parameter ranking;
The comparison with a well-known analog reservoir using a radar plot can
also be useful to identify strengths and weaknesses, and subsequently helps
the completion design (Fig. 1.8(d)).

FIGURE 1
Radar plots for ranking reservoir and completion qualities of shale reservoirs with 6-level scores (0–5 from low to
high, decimals can be used as well). (c) 7-parameter ranking; (d) 7-parameter ranking; and analog comparison.
COMPLETION AND STIMULATION

Tight reservoirs commonly require the combination of horizontal well

and HFT, often the key for commercial production. HFT is a process
of creating or restoring fractures in a geological formation using
fluids and proppants to stimulate production from oil and gas wells.

The completion of hydraulically fractured wells involves many

processes and variables, including completion type (cased and
cemented or open hole), stage design, lateral landing, hydraulic
fracture geometry, fracturing fluid, proppant type/size/ schedule,
hydraulic fracture monitoring, optimizing the hydraulic fracture
treatment, stimulation of reservoir volume, and production analysis
(Mayerhofer et al., 2008; Chong et al., 2010; King, 2010, 2014; Gao and Du, 2012; Agrawal et al., 2012; Manchanda
and Sharma, 2014)
Advantages of Horizontal Well
 Greater exposure to reservoir rock
 Able to intersect natural fractures
 Linear flow in reservoir, instead of radial flow, reducing water or gas coning
 Multiple hydraulic fractures along lateral
 Potential to contain fracture height growth but still stimulate the rock
 More SCF or BBL/Unit Cost
 Higher productivity
 Completions & Stimulation Aspects\ Perforating Horizontal Wells for Hydraulic Fracturing

Consequences of Poor Perforating

 High Fracture Treating Pressures

 Inability to Place Proppant

 Ineffective Stimulation

 Underperforming Well
Perforating Strategy

Perforation Cluster Length

Fractures Initiate Longitudinally
Rotate to Preferred Fracture Plane
Potential for Multiple Rotations

Recommendations
Cluster Length < 4 x Wellbore Diameter
~ 3 feet
Perforations per Cluster

Function of Required Perf Friction

 Perf Clusters/Frac Stage
 Stress Variation between Clusters

Recommendations
 Identify Stress Variation along Lateral
 <300 ft of Lateral Length/Frac Stage
 >1,000 psi Perf Friction
 >0.4” Diameter Holes (High Modulus)
 ~0.25” Diameter Hole (Low Modulus)
 > 1.5 bpm/perforation
 Assume not all Holes are Open
 Normal Fault

Perforating Strategy
Perforation Orientation
Fractures Initiate at Top & Bottom of Hole
Extensional Environment
Potential for Multiple Rotations

Top

Side

Bottom

Side

Top
Perforating Strategy
Thrust Fault
Perforation Orientation
–Fractures Initiate at Side of Hole

Compressional Environments
–Potential for Very Complex Fractures

Recommendations
– 180 Oriented to Hydraulic Frac Orientation
o o
0
– Must Know Geologic Setting
o
60 Phasing
– Holes likely close to Fracture Plane
– Limited Entry Creates Complexity Risk
Strike Slip
Perforating Strategy
Recommendations

 High Modulus Rock

Perf Diameter >0.4 inches
 Low Modulus Rock
8 to 10 times prop diameters (~0.25 in)
 Modeled Penetration > 12 inches
 Sacrifice Penetration for Diameter
 Maintain Pressure on the Well
Role of Geomechanics in
Hydraulic Fracturing
Mechanical Properties that Control Fracture Geometry
Principle Stresses
In-Situ Stress: The collective forces acting on the rock while the rock is in place
below the earth’s surface.

Minimum Horizontal Stress (sh): Stress at which

a hydraulic fracture mechanically closes

Three unequal mutually perpendicular stresses:

vertical (overburden) stress, sv

maximum horizontal stress, sH

minimum horizontal stress, sh

Young’s Modulus
Poisson’s Ratio
Why Different Stresses Exist Downhole?

Example:
Assume
Depth = 5,000 ft
Pore Pressure = 0.4 psi/ft x 5,000 = 2,000 psi
Overburden = 1.12 x 5000 = 5,600 psi
α = 1.0

Shale: sh = 3,938 psi

Sandstone: sh = 2,900 psi
Rock Fabric and Mechanical Properties
Impact of Anisotropy on Far Field Stress
Isotropic Closure Stress Estimate

Anisotropic Closure Stress Estimate

Impact of Anisotropy on Mechanical Properties and Stress
Variable Impact of Anistropy
Anisotropic Rock Stress

Isotropic = fracture height containment

Anisotropic = no height containment
 Pore Pressure

Conventional Techniques for Unconventional Reservoirs

– Pressure Build-Up

─ Hydraulic Fractures Required

Perm Too Low for Matrix Flow

─ Hydraulic Fractures mean Extended Buildup

Required Shut In Time > Biologic Time
Pore Pressure Impact on Closure Stress

Activation of Kerogen filled expulsion fractures

occurs horizontally as localized pore pressure
exceeds overburden
Geologic Impact on Stress
What about tectonics?

Can reverse stress profile

Must be calibrated with in-situ data
Tectonics Impact on Closure Stress
Brittleness
Isotropic Stress

Anisotropic Stress

Brittleness Index
Brittleness: It’s Strengths & Weaknesses
 Stress Gradients
Comparison of Isotropic and GR Mineralogy Stress Gradients Iso Aniso BI

Anisotropic Models
Fracturing Horizontal Wells
Why Fractured Horizontal Wells?

– Increase productivity

– Overcome poor kv
– Connect laminated pay

– Connect missed pay

– By-pass drilling damage

– Lower drawdown

– Reduce surface footprint

– Accelerate recovery

– More hydrocarbons/unit cost

A good completion should include generating, maintaining, and
monitoring of fracture networks, and optimally placing the
perforation clusters.

This requires understanding the geological and Geomechanical

properties, and natural fractures of the formation, heterogeneity
in the reservoir, and optimized stimulation.

An accurate mechanical earth model (MEM) is important for

developing shale reservoirs.
Fracture Orientation
Applications
Longitudinal Fracture Horizontal Well Productivity
Post Fracture Profile:
 Horizontal Formation Liner Flow to Fracture
 Vertical Fracture Liner Flow to Wellbore
Transverse Fracture Horizontal Well Productivity

Post Fracture Profile:

 Formation Liner Flow to Fracture
 Fracture Liner Flow to Wellbore
 Fracture Radial Flow Convergence at Wellbore
The MEM include the distribution of mechanical properties and
stress field of the subsurface formations (targeted reservoir and the
layers above and below)

The stresses of the adjacent bounding formations impact the

fracture height and length.

A good MEM enables the understanding of the distribution and

possible reactivation of natural fractures during the hydraulic
stimulation, and a reasonable prediction of hydraulic fracture
geometry (orientation, length, height growth, and aperture).
Longitudinal Fractures
 Wellbore in Direction of sH
 Productivity equivalent to a very long fracture
 Easier fracture placement
 No converging flow effect during production
Transverse Fractures
 Wellbore in Direction of sh
 Can achieve greater contact with reservoir and higher productivity
 Higher risk of screenout due to fracture tortuosity
 Converging flow adversely affect productivity
Which Way Do We Go?
The completion design in developing unconventional reservoirs
should be based on a combination of geomechanical and reservoir
properties.

Completion quality describes the properties of the rocks that

make completion straightforward or complicated,

Completion effort describes the various completion methods and

tools used in the completion.

The combination of completion quality and completion effort is the

completion efficiency.
Completion effectiveness is improved when hydraulic fracturing and
perforating operations take into account the anisotropies in stress
and other reservoir parameters.

Evenly fracturing all the clusters in a heterogeneous zone may not

be optimal as the lateral penetrates a heterogeneous reservoir.
Sequenced fracturing in combination with an effective fluid can
increase the effective fracture length (Kraemer et al., 2014).

Typically, without knowledge of heterogeneity of the formation, a

uniform design for perforation clusters is used, but detailed
knowledge of the lateral heterogeneity can help place the perforation
clusters in optimal locations, and enhances the hydrocarbon
production of perforated clusters (d’Huteau et al., 2011).
Other important variables in completion design include fracture
spacing, cased and cemented versus open hole, tubular selection,
selection of fracturing point, simultaneous versus sequential
fracturing, fracture initiation points, proppants, fracturing fluids,
additives, hydraulic fracture interaction with natural fractures, and
perforation strategies (King, 2010, 2014).

These variables impact the fracture complexity, SRV, and

effectiveness of a fracturing treatment.

Table 2 lists important considerations in well completion of a tight

formation. Three topics are discussed below.
Table 2 Important Considerations in Drilling and Completion of Tight Reservoirs
Table 2 Important Considerations in Drilling and Completion of Tight Reservoirs, cont’d
COMPLETION AND STIMULATION
A. FRACTURE GEOMETRY AND COMPLEXITY

Some important considerations in fracture design include:

(1) the fracture azimuth and orientation are mainly determined by
the state of in situ stress.
(2) rocks with lower Young’s modulus tend to have greater
hydraulic fracture widths.
(3) stress contrast is critical for fracture containment and length.
(4) planar hydraulic fractures occur more likely without presence
of natural fractures.
(5) transverse hydraulic fractures will likely occur if a horizontal
well is drilled in the direction of minimum horizontal stress.
(6) effective fracture length is limited by the ability of the
fracturing fluid to transport the proppant over long distances.
(7) high injection rates generally improve proppant transport and
fracture length.
Rock properties impact vertical height and horizontal shape of
fractures, including width, length, and fracture complexity index
(Daniels et al., 2007; Cipolla et al., 2008).

Hydraulic fracture height is governed mainly by the in situ stresses

(Han et al., 2014), and can be also affected by the fracturingfluid
viscosity and injection rate.

Once a propagating fracture reaches a horizon where the stress

contrast is greater than the net pressure in the fracture, it will stop.
FIGURE 2
(a) Illustration of a hydraulic fracture geometry. (b) Illustration of different levels of fracture
complexity. Some of them can be natural fractures or reactivated natural fractures. Synthesized
from several publications, Fisher et al., 2002; Cipolla et al., 2008).
There is a strong relationship between net pressure and fracture
width, as high injection rate increase fracture width. Fracture width is
important as narrow fracture width can result in early screenouts.

A gradual increasing net pressure after the initial growth period often
indicates a vertical fracture extending in length. Effective fracture
length is often limited by the ability of the fracturing fluid to transport
proppant over long distances.

Fracture-height growth and fracture width affect propped-fracture half-

length for a given treatment size. Generally high injection rate
improves proppant transport and increasing the effective fracture
length.
Fractures can be simple or complex (Fig. 2b), and the stress anisotropy
and the nature of a natural fracture system are the key drivers to
hydraulic fracture complexity (Sayers and Le Calvez, 2010; Weng et al., 2015). The
interaction between the hydraulic fractures and the preexisting natural
fractures is an important consideration in hydraulic fracture design.

Moreover, when the horizontal maximum and minimum stresses have

similar magnitude, fractures tend to grow in various directions and
fracture network may be complex.

Fracture complexity has a strong impact on the production (Warpinski et al.,

2008, 2013; Waters et al., 2011; Mata et al., 2014), but notice that although fracture
complexity increases the reservoir contact, it may pose challenge in
creating a durable proppant pack with sufficient hydraulic continuity
(Vincent, 2013).
COMPLETION AND STIMULATION
B. FRACTURING FLUID AND PROPPANT

Fracturing fluids are additives or chemicals that are used to treat the
subsurface formation in order to stimulate the flow of oil or gas.

The commonly used types of fracturing fluids include:

Water-based fluids (including slickwater, linear gels and cross-linked
fluids),
Oil-based fluids,
Foamed fluids and
Viscoelastic surfactants (polymer-free fluids).
Fracturing fluid should have stable viscosity during pumping,
and needs to be broken at the end of fracturing job.

They should have a certain level of viscosity for proppant

transport and controlling the fracture net pressure. The
viscosity of the fracturing fluid also impacts the fracture
geometry.

Moreover, mineralogy impacts the hydraulic fracturing fluid

selection. For example, the formations have more than 50%
clay are difficult for completion and the fluid selection is
more delicate.
The use of proppants in HFT is to support the opening of
the fractures so that the reservoir and the wellbore are
connected for hydrocarbon flow.

Naturally, the type and amount of proppant impact the flow

capacity of the fractures and production (Gao and Du, 2012;
McKenna, 2014; Greff et al., 2014).

The proppant used in most shale reservoirs are sands with

various specifications, including similarity in grain size,
roundness in shape, and crush resistance.

Small mesh bauxite and ceramic are also used.

The main principle of using and selecting proppant for
hydraulic fracturing is to prop the fractures while not blocking
the flow between the reservoir and the wellbore.

Important considerations in selecting proppants should

include:

Closure stress,
Conductivity, and
The bottom-hole flowing pressure.
Proppant distribution in the fracture network is highly important for
the effectiveness of hydraulic fractures (Cipolla, 2009).

When the proppant is concentrated in a primary planar fracture, the

effective fracture length is limited even when the hydraulic fracture
may be large.

When fracture growth is complex, the average proppant

concentration tends to be low and the proppant may not materially
impact well performance.
COMPLETION AND STIMULATION
C. FRACTURING STAGES

Longer laterals and more stages have

generally increased the production in shale
plays (Fig. 3 a), which is why the stage
count has gone up for many shale plays.

For example, in Marcellus and Eagle Ford,

the average fracturing stage count was less
than 10 in 2008, and was increased to more
than 16 in 2012; in Bakken, it was around
14 in 2008, and was increased to more than
27 in 2012 (RigData, 2014). Fig. 3 (a) Illustration of the impact of lateral
length and stage count on production.
However, because the complexity
and cost of completion increase
as the stage count increases, a
large stage count does not
always increase the economic
value (Fig. 3 b).

In some plays, such as the

Barnett, Fayetteville, and
Haynesville, the optimal stage
count has been well studied.

In other plays, operators are still

Fig. 3 (b) Illustration of the impact of lateral
trying to test longer laterals and length and stage count on NPV while
increased stage count. incorporating the completion cost.
PRODUCTION