SPE 39895

Improved Selection of Candidates for Stimulation Treatment in the Wilcox Play in the
South Texas/Mexico Border Area
P. Boonen, SPE, A.C. Byrd, SPE, G. Frisch, SPE, C. Kessler, SPE, Halliburton Energy Services
G. Kubelka, SPE, KCS Resources Inc., and Mark Nixon, SPE, Consultant

Copyright 1998, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.

fractured to increase gas production from 550 MMCF/D to
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1998 SPE International Petroleum 1,300 MMCF/D.
Conference and Exhibition of Mexico held in Villahermosa, Mexico, 3–5 March 1998.

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, as
Introduction
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to The productive trend of the Wilcox group stretches from
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at the Burgos basin in Mexico through Texas into Louisiana.
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
Two major depocenters are recognized as main areas of
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is sediment input: the Rio Grande Embayment and the Houston
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 Embayment. A field in the former area provides the examples
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
used in this paper. The Wilcox in this area consists of sand
and shale progradational and transgressive sequences. The
trapping mechanism for the hydrocarbon accumulations is
Abstract
faulting. Depletion drive with a limited water influx is the
A particular South Texas gas field has suffered severe
predominate recovery mechanism in the area studied. Virgin
production decline in the last two years. The wells were
reservoir pressure gradients are as high as 0.9 psi/ft. The
completed in the Wilcox formation, which extends from the
permeability ranges between 0.01 md to 0.5 md and hydraulic
Burgos Basin in Mexico through Texas into Louisiana. The
stimulation is required to obtain commercial production rates.
object was to identify and treat potential producing zones in
Fracture gradient is approximately 0.95 psi/ft and reservoir
all existing wells to increase production. Hydraulic fracturing
temperatures are approximately 3000F at 10,000 ft (2.0 to
is the preferred stimulation technique in these formations.
2.10F/100ft). High temperature fracturing fluids (CMHPG)
Typically multiple zones are fractured in each of the wells.
and breakers are used throughout the stimulation treatments.
The stimulation treatments are designed with the aid of 3D
Oil based mud systems are used to minimize formation
hydraulic fracture models. Wireline logs provide the most
damage while drilling.
comprehensive and continuous input parameters in such
Production had declined severely in this field in the last
modeling for borehole stress profile, permeability index,
few years. The object was to identify and treat potential
elastic moduli, lithology, porosity and fluid saturation’s.
producing zones in all the existing wells. An integrated
Existing open-hole wireline logging data were reprocessed
approach was taken to select the candidate wells and
using a new technique which provides all the available
candidate sands for hydraulic fracturing.
logging data in a format suitable for direct input in 3D
hydraulic fracture models. An automatic zoning technique
Integrated Approach to Hydraulic Fracturing
divides the data into consistent intervals based on stress
The benefits of an integrated approach to hydraulic fracturing
contrast. The representative design parameters are then
have been described extensively in the petroleum industry
computed for each zone. The outputs are a blocked stress
literature.1,2,3 Emphasis has been put on the use of an accurate
profile and a set of zoned fracture design parameters.
stress profile in a 3D hydraulic fracture simulator. Calibrated
This new technique was used to evaluate all the
wireline log processing can provide such a continuous stress
stimulation candidates in the field. One well was bypassed for
profile, unlike micro-frac testing or core analysis, which are
treatment altogether, saving $500,000 to $700,000 on a
point measurements that are not necessarily representative for
stimulation that would have had a marginal result at best. In
the entire interval to be treated. It is well documented that
another well, the log was used in combination with a Fluid
rock mechanical log analysis based on acoustic and density
Efficiency Test (FET) and a Step Rate Test to show
logs provide ‘dynamic’ moduli, which are not equal to the
essentially no leak-off, and hence very low permeability in
required ‘static’ data.4,5 Normalization of log derived data
one zone. This lower sand was skipped, and upper zones were
2 BOONEN, BYRD, FRISCH, KESSLER, KUBELKA, NIXON
needs to be performed using core/rock mechanics analysis
data, microfrac tests or published relationships.
Rock Mechanical Analysis Using Log Data
Rock mechanical analysis using wireline log or LWD data is
based on the computation of the rock’s elastic moduli from
compressional and shear slowness and bulk density. Hence
acoustic logs are the backbone of the required logging suite.
Log derived rock properties are considered ‘dynamic’
properties as opposed to ‘static’ properties when measured in
a core laboratory. These two measurements are not necessarily
the same. Dynamic parameters are traditionally ‘normalized’
to static measurements using core data and/or microfrac tests.
A number of correlations have been proposed in the
literature, but no definite agreement has been published.
Acoustic Logging
The acoustic tools need to be able to measure the shear wave
travel time (∆Ts,) in addition to the compressional wave travel
time (∆Tp ), in order to compute the log derived elastic
moduli. Such full waveform recording tools have become
readily available since the early 1980’s. This type of tool
typically consists of one or two monopole acoustic
transmitters and an array of receivers (4, 6, or 8), offset at
about 10 ft from the transmitter, with 0.5 ft or 1 ft spacing
between receivers.6,7 The monopole tools are limited in
recording acoustic travel times up to the travel time of the
borehole fluid (typically 189 microseconds per foot in water,
to over 200 microseconds per foot in oil-based mud). Shear
waves propagate through the formation at a slower rate than
compressional waves (higher travel time, lower velocity). In
liquid-filled non-fractured clastic formations, the ratio of the
shear wave travel time to compressional wave travel time is
approximately 1.65 (i.e. the shear wave travel time is
approximately 165% of the compressional wave travel time).
This ratio changes with elasticity, cementation, shale volume,
pore geometry, and compressive fluids within the pore
structure. In shales, the shear wave travel time can be
approximately 200% greater than the travel time of the
compressional wave. Monopole type acoustic tools are
therefore limited to formations with compressional wave
travel times of approximately 100 to 110 micro-seconds per
foot in order to extract the shear wave signal from the sonic
waveform data prior to the fluid arrivals. In formations with
high travel times, the shear wave data is masked by the travel
time of the borehole fluid. Consequently, in formations with
high travel time (slow velocity), dipole acoustic tool should be
utilized to be able to obtain the slower traveling shear
waves.8,9 Dipole tools have become readily available to the
oil industry during the 1990’s. These tools typically have one
or two dipole transmitters in addition to the monopole
transmitters of the standard tools. It is important to note that
dipole tools record a flexural wave traveling at the borehole
wall and not the real shear wave. Such a flexural wave travels
at velocities similar to the shear wave at low frequencies. It is
SPE 39895
therefor important to select dipole tools operating at the lowest
frequencies possible, about 1 kHz.
Stress Profile
Typical rock mechanical log analysis programs apply a linear-
elastic, homogeneous, isotropic stress model and a certain
failure criterion to evaluate the stress field around the
borehole in terms of axial, radial and tangential (or hoop)
stress. Pore pressure is a very important input parameter.
Wireline formation tester tool can help in providing a pore
pressure profile in permeable formations. In non-permeable
formations, such as shales, anhydrites, or salts beds, the pore
pressure cannot be obtained by fluid flow measurements. The
equivalent pore pressure of the shales can be estimated from
the original mud weight required to drill the formation at
virgin pressure, or can be back calculated from a formation
integrity, or shoe test, and Poisson’s ratio.
The output of this type of analysis is typically a minimum
and a maximum pressure (or mud weights) for mechanically
stable borehole conditions.10 The minimum value may be used
to predict sanding potential of the formation and to decide on
sand control measures before completing the well. The
maximum pressure is typically the fracture closure pressure. It
is this parameter that constitutes the stress profile to be used in
the hydraulic fracturing simulation. The borehole stress data
can be presented as either stress values (psi), or as gradients
(psi/ft) by dividing the stresses by the true vertical depth.
 µ   µ 
σ min = Po  + αPp1 −  (1)
1− µ  1− µ
where :
σ min = the minimum principal stress
Po = the overburden pressure
Pp = the pore pressure
µ = Poisson’s Ratio
α = Biot’s Constant
Cma
α = 1− (2)
Cb
Cma = the matrix compressibility
Cb = the Bulk compressibility
A stress profile generated from wireline logs has the
advantage that it provides a stress contrast profile over the
entire logged section, as compared to point measurements
obtained from microfrac tests or core data.
In certain formations, there may be minimal stress
contrasts between the permeable formations and the bounding
shales or siltstones. The stimulation design in such conditions
would indicate uncontrollable out-of-zone fracture growth.
This generally occurs in formations with large shale content,
or in some geopressured reservoirs. If there is sufficient
reservoir permeability for a natural completion, a pre-
stimulation production period may be used to reduce the
SPE 39895 IMPROVED SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR STIMULATION TREATMENT IN THE WILCOX PLAY
reservoir pressure thereby creating the necessary stress
contrast to control out-of-zone fracture growth for a later
hydraulic fracture treatment.
The fracture parameter log
Because of the differences in format and data density, log data
are not always optimally used in 3D hydraulic fracture
modeling. A fracture parameter log is an integrated
presentation of the log data that are used both in the selection
of intervals to be completed, and design of a hydraulic
fracturing treatment. Traditionally, all the necessary data had
to be gathered from many different sources; a time
consuming, meticulous task. A fracture parameter log now
provides these data to the stimulation design engineer in a
concise log presentation and as a zoned data set, that can be
imported in various 3D fracture simulation models. The
program provides automatic zoning based on stress contrasts,
and it averages the design parameters for each zone. The
entire section is divided into zones of similar stress conditions.
In other words, the stress profile is blocked to fit the data
format requirements of the 3D simulator.
A standard log would show the rock mechanical analysis
results (stress profile, Young’s modulus and Poisson’s Ratio)
next to a lithology column, fluid saturation data (Sw),
permeability estimations any other data that may be available
(Fig. 1, tracks 1 to 9). The curves presented in this figure are
listed in Table 1. The zonal averaged data which are available
in ASCII format to the stimulation design engineer are listed
in Table 2.
A fracture parameter log can become a living document.
It’s usefulness can be extended to the post-frac evaluation.
Inflow analysis from production logs can be added to the log
presentation to indicate fluid types and flow rates from each
perforated interval. In Fig. 1 we have added the post-frac
radioactive tracer log to the original pre-frac log data (Track
10). A Scandium tracer was pumped with the pad, and an
Iridium tracer was used to tag the proppant on this stimulation
treatment. The tracer log shows the vertical distribution of
these two radioactive isotopes around the borehole. The
hydraulic fracture grew downward to about X158 ft, exactly
where the fracture parameter routine predicted a major change
in the stress profile. It is important to note that the frac
parameter zonation routine does not predict the vertical
extension of hydraulic fractures. This is done in the 3D
fracture simulation models.
A fracture extension prediction based solely on a stress
profile from wireline data (fracture height logs, or 2D models)
is much too simplistic. With previously used 2D fracture
height logs, the fracture extension and height varied based on
the fracture initiation zone, which was the perforated interval.
To alter the perforation scenario, multiple runs of the 2D
fracture height log were necessary. With this new approach of
zoning the log data based on stress changes, and exporting the
logging data directly to the 3D fracture simulators, the effects
of, fluid rheology, pad volumes, pump rates, leak-off,
proppant concentrations, gel loading, among other parameters
3
are utilized to predict the hydraulic fracture extension: length,
height, width and conductivity.
Case Study
Data from a South Texas field completed in the Wilcox group
will be used to illustrate the importance of integrating data
from all sources for the stimulation candidate selection
process.
Well 1
Several zones within this well were identified for possible
recompletion. 3D fracture modeling predicted minimal out of
zonal fracture height growth. However, due to the proximity
of faults, achieving the optimal fracture half length for
commercial production would not be possible. This well was
by-passed for treatment altogether, saving $500,000 to
$700,000 on a stimulation treatment that would have had
yielded marginal production.
Well 2
This is a near vertical well with less than 30 deviation, that
had been completed in lower sands and which were produced
to depletion, and was scheduled for re-completion. The
logging data for the L-13 and L-12 sands are displayed in
Figs. 2 and 4, and the numerical values for the zonal averaged
data are listed in Table 3. The data presentation and curve
descriptions are listed in Table 1.
The L-13 sand has a possibly productive interval of
approximately 11 ft in thickness as identified by the pay flag.
The average effective porosity is 11.3%, water saturation is
58%, and the log derived permeability index is 0.018 md. This
interval is productive in other wells within the field. This
interval is identified as zone number 33 (Fig. 2). The logging
data indicate an increase in shale volume in the lower 25 ft of
the L-13 sand, with several shale laminations. The zoning of
the logging data, based on stress contrasts, separates the upper
portion of the sand from the lower portion (zone number 34).
Correcting the logging data for the laminated and dispersed
shale effects reduces the effective porosity and log calculated
permeability index to non-productive values. The difference in
the calculated fracture closure pressures between the two
zones is approximately 270 psi. The fracture closure pressure
in the shale overlaying the L-13 is such that minimal upward
fracture growth would be predicted.
This data was input into a 3D fracture modeling program,
which indicated that in order to obtain the required hydraulic
fracture length for commercial production rates at a log
derived permeability of 0.018 md, downward fracture growth
into zone number 34 would occur. This would result in a small
net pay-to-gross sand thickness ratio. This sand was
perforated from 9660 to 9670 ft, and a fluid efficiency test
(FET) was performed on zone 33 to confirm the log derived
data.
A Fluid Efficiency Test (FET) is an injection test
performed prior to a stimulation treatment to obtain additional
wellbore and formation data used to optimize the treatment.
4 BOONEN, BYRD, FRISCH, KESSLER, KUBELKA, NIXON
The FET consists of a pump-in period with a duration of
approximately 5-to-10 minutes at the designed rate, followed
by a multiple step down. Fig. 3 is the linear X-Y plot of
pressure versus time for the FET on the L-13 sand. On this
particular FET, the step down portion of the test consisted of
four different rates, then shut down. The combination of
injection, step-down rates and shut-in periods during the FET
is a diagnostics tool that provides valuable data for stimulation
optimization. The step down test is analyzed first to determine
the friction pressures associated with the injection, and thus to
determine effective fluid entry into the fracture. The following
equations are used to determine the minimum number of
perforations open and the minimum amount of near wellbore
friction.
Ftotal = Fpipe + Fperf + F nwb (3)
Ftotal = WHTP - ISIP (4)
Fperf = 0.237 * ρ * R/(Cd * Noperf * Dia perf2) (5)
Fnwb = C * ( R ) 1/2 (6)
where:
Ftotal = total friction
Fpipe = pipe friction
Fperf = perforation friction
Fnwb = near wellbore friction
Cd = coefficient of discharge
C = constant
No perfs = number of perforations
ρ = fluid density
R = Rate
Dia perf = perforation diameter
WHTP = well head treating pressure
ISIP = instantaneous shut-in pressure
The total friction is obtained from the well head treating
pressure minus the instantaneous shut-in pressure. The pipe
friction is obtained from the downhole tubulars that are
present and from the fluid rheology. The two remaining
unknowns are the number of perforations open and the value
of the near wellbore friction. By iterating the above equations
with various number of perforations and solving for a near
well bore friction pressure curve that approximates the rate to
the ½ power (i.e. square root of rate) is a consistent method to
determine the minimum number of perforations open and the
minimum near wellbore friction. This has proven to be a very
good and reliable method to identify problems that might
prevent proppant from being successfully placed in the
formation. 11,12,13,14,15 The pump-in/shut-in data on the L-13
sand showed that the fluid entry was excellent and that there
was almost zero near wellbore friction. This indicates that the
perforation method was optimal for stimulation.
SPE 39895
The log data for the L-13 sand indicates an 11 ft
permeable interval within the 85 ft sand shale sequence (net to
gross ratio 11/85). This sand had been successfully stimulated
in other wells in the field, but these wells had better net-to-
gross sand thickness ratios. The decision was made to evaluate
the pump-in / shut-in data to ascertain the formation’s ability
to accept fluid. The decision would be made on location to
determine if a hydraulic stimulation treatment would be
economical.
The square root of time presentation of the shut-in
pressure decline data is monitored in real time, until formation
closure occurs. This gives a fracture closure time that can be
used to determine the amount of fluid that was in the fracture
when the injection was stopped. The percentage of fluid
remaining in the fracture at the end of the injection period
divided by the total fluid pumped is termed fluid efficiency.
This fluid efficiency number can then be used to determine the
volume of pad fluid needed for the treatment.
From the pressure versus square root time data shown in
Fig. 6, the FET was terminated after observing the pressure
decline for 70 minutes. The pressure decline response
becomes linear after 50 minutes on the square root of time
plot. This large time delay before the linear decline response
begins is believed to be the result of a large fluid storage
volume of the fracture in the 85 ft gross height that has to
leak-off through the small 11 ft net permeable interval. The
fluid efficiency was determine to be greater than 80%, which
is indicative of a formation with a low net pay-to-gross pay
ratio.
The stimulation treatment would have to prop a large
volume of non-productive formation thus reducing the
economic value of treating this interval. After this pump-in
test, it was decided not to stimulate this interval based on the
lack of leak off, and to move up the hole to the L-12 sand.
The L-12 sand (Fig. 4) has approximately 50 ft of log
derived permeable section out of the 123 ft of sand shale
sequence (zones 30 and 31). This is a more favorable net-to-
gross ratio than the previous L-13 sand. The L-12 FET square
root of time data in Fig. 7 has different characteristic than the
previous example.
The pressure decline response becomes linear on the
square root of time plot after 2-3 minutes. This indicates that
more of the fracture face is within a permeable interval, and is
allowing fluid to leak-off compared to the L-13 FET. The
pressure decline has a second slope change and deviates from
the straight line at approximately 8.16 minutes into the shut-
in period. Fracture closure is picked at this second change in
slope, resulting in a fluid efficiency of 46.8%. This is in the
normal range of 30-50% fluid efficiency experienced in
successful stimulation treatments in the Lower Wilcox
formation.
This zone was successfully stimulated with 330,000
pounds of high strength proppant, pumped at concentrations
from 1 to 6 ppg. The 3D fracture model results illustrated in
Fig. 5, indicate an expected fracture half length of
approximately 700 ft, and a sand concentration of
SPE 39895 IMPROVED SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR STIMULATION TREATMENT IN THE WILCOX PLAY 5

approximately 2 to 3 pounds per square foot in the near publish this paper. Special thanks to Jim Fogal for the fracture
wellbore region. parameter log processing and Mike Gusler for supplying the
FET test data.

Conclusions References
1. The availability of a stress profile based on rock 1. Kessler, C., Venditto, J., McMechan, D., and Edwards, P.: “A
mechanical analysis from wireline logs and other data Synergistic Approach to Optimizing Hydraulic Fracturing”,
specifically designed for use in 3D hydraulic fracture paper SPE 28802 presented at the 1994 regional SPE
simulators (a fracture parameter log) has facilitated the use of Conference, Australia.
2. Voneiff, G.W., and Holditch, S.A.: “Economic Assessment of
these data in the selection of candidates for stimulation Applying Advances in Fracturing Technology”, JPT (Jan. 1994)
treatment. Post-frac radioactive tracer logging has shown that 51.
the automatic zone selection routine can identify natural 3. Cipolla C.L., Diabin Liu, and Kyte, D.G.: “Practical
barriers to hydraulic fracture extension. Application of In-Situ Stress Profiles”, paper SPE 28607
2. An integrated approach to the stimulation process, using presented at the 1994 Annual Technical Conference and
available geologic, petrophysical, and reservoir data, along Exhibition, New Orleans, LA, Sep. 25-28.
with diagnostic pump in tests has resulted in avoiding 4. Whitehead, W.S., : “In-Situ Stresses: A Comparison Between
uneconomical stimulation treatments in a South Texas gas Log-Derived Values and Actual Field-Measured Values in the
field. Travis Peak Formation of East Texas”, paper SPE 15209
presented at the 1986 SPE Unconventional Gas Technology
3. Formations with low net-pay-thickness to gross-sand-
Symposium, Louisville, May.
thickness ratios can be identified in the injection diagnostic 5. Katahara, K.W.: “Estimation of In-Situ Stress Profiles from
process as in the Wilcox L-13 sand. Formations with these Well Logs”, paper I presented at the 1996 SPWLA Annual
characteristics in many cases may be uneconomical Logging Symposium, New Orleans, LA, Jun.16-19.
stimulation candidates. The lack of leak-off during the FET 6. Minear, J.W, and Fletcher, C.R.: “Full Wave Acoustic
resulted in not stimulating several zones during this Logging”, paper EE presented at the 1983 Annual CWLA-
stimulation project. SPWLA Symposium, Calgary, Jun
7. Minear, J.W.: “Full Wave Sonic Logging: A Brief Perspective”,
paper AAA presented at the 1986 SPWLA Annual Symposium,
Houston, TX, Jun 9-13.
Nomenclature
8. Boonen, P.: “The Low Frequency Dipole Tool”, paper presented
σ min = the minimum principal stress at the SEG/SPWLA Symposium on Dipole Logging, Tulsa, OK,
Po = the overburden pressure Apr 11, 1996.
Pp = the pore pressure 9. Kozak, M.Z. and Hooks, A.J.: “The XACT Acoustic Tool and
µ = Poisson’s Ratio The Implications of Separate Receiver Recordings in Dipole
α = Biot’s Constant Data Acquisition and Interpretation”’ paper presented at the
Cma = the matrix compressibility SEG/SPWLA Symposium on Dipole Logging, Tulsa, OK, Apr
Cb = the Bulk compressibility 11, 1996.
10. Blanton, T.L. , and Olsen, J.E. : “Stress Magnitudes From
Ftotal = total friction
Logs: Effects of Tectonic Strains and Temperature”, paper
Fpipe = pipe friction SPE 38719 presented at the 1997 Annual Technical
Fperf = perforation friction Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, Oct. 5-8.
Fnwb = near wellbore friction 11. Weijers, L., Cipolla, C.L., Wright, C.A., Byrd, A.C., Kunzi,
Cd = dimensionless constant R.: “Implementation of Real-Data Fracture analysis
C = constant Methodology Improves Treatment Success”, Article GRI Gas
No perfs = number of perforations TIPS Publication, Spring 1997, pg 45-50.
ρ = fluid density 12. Byrd, A.C., Fritcher, E., Stegent, N. : “Optimization Frac Pad
and Gel Improves Well Production,” Oil and Gas Journal, May
R = Rate
1995, pg 90-94.
Dia perf = perforation diameter 13. Wright, C.A.: “On-site, Stepdown Test Analysis Diagnoses
WHTP = well head treating pressure Problems and Improves fracture Treatment Success,”
ISIP = instantaneous shut-in pressure Petroleum Engineer International, January 1997, pg 51-63.
14. Nolte, K.G.: “A General Analysis of Fracturing Pressure
Decline With Application to Three D Models”, SPEFE
Acknowledgments December 1986.
The authors wish to thank the management of KCS Resources, 15. Nolte, K.G.: “Determination of Proppant and Fluid Schedules
Inc. and Halliburton Energy Services for their permission to From Fracturing -Pressure Decline,” SPEPE, July 1986.
6 BOONEN, BYRD, FRISCH, KESSLER, KUBELKA, NIXON SPE 39895

TABLE 1 - CURVE DESCRIPTION FOR FIGURE 1

Track Mnemonic Symbol Curves
1 - Number Depth
- Number Zone Identification Number
- Flag Pay Zone Flag
2 GR Natural Gamma Ray
CALI Caliper
3 LIME Volume of Limestone
PHI Blank Porosity
SAND Volume of Sandstone
SHALE Volume of Shale
4 SW Blank Water Saturation
5 EPOR Effective Porosity
PORW Black Hydrocarbon Volume
- Blank Bulk Volume of Water
6 PERM Gray Permeability
7 POIS Dynamic Poisson’s Ratio
ESP Estimated Static Poisson’s Ratio
8 YD Dynamic Young’s Modulus
ESY Estimated Static Young’s Modulus
9 FCPS Fracture Closure Pressure
FCPG Fracture Closure Pressure Gradient
10 - Black Scandium inside the borehole
- Black Scandium in the formation
- Gray Iridium inside the borehole
- Gray Iridium in the formation

TABLE 2 - AVERAGED ZONE OUTPUT PARAMETERS - Figure 1

ZONE TOP FCPS POIS ESP YD ESY PPGC FCPG EPOR SW PERM PAY
DEPTH
61 9090.5 6725 0.33 0.36 3.88 1.94 0.65 0.74 0.001 1.00 0.000 0.00
62 9102.0 4962 0.20 0.22 7.65 3.83 0.49 0.54 0.085 0.47 0.090 23.0
63 9157.5 6238 0.28 .030 4.15 2.07 0.6 0.68 0.101 0.57 0.389 0.5
64 9175.0 6938 0.34 0.37 3.5 1.75 0.65 0.76 0.003 1.00 0.000 0.00
65 9185.5 5228 0.22 0.24 7.46 3.73 0.50 0.57 0.095 0.55 0.296 39.5

Table 3 - AVERAGED ZONED OUTPUT VALUES FOR WELL 2, L-12 and L-13 SANDS
ZONE TOP FCPS POIS ESP YD ESY PPGC FCPG EPOR SW PERM PAY
DEPTH
28 9223.5 7666.7 0.27 0.30 6.94 3.47 0.73 0.82 .031 .99 -
29 9383.0 8172.2 0.34 0.37 7.03 3.52 0.73 0.87 0.00 1.00 -
30 9461.5 7676.9 0.24 0.26 6.38 3.19 0.73 0.81 .158 0.49 0.035 30.0
31 9548.5 7950.9 0.29 0.32 8.96 4.48 0.73 0.83 0.00 1.00 -
32 9584.5 8291.5 0.33 0.37 7.77 3.89 0.73 0.86 0.00 1.00 -
33 9656.0 7778.5 0.23 0.25 5.75 2.88 0.73 0.80 .16 0.51 0.018 11.0
34 9682.5 8045.4 0.28 0.31 7.91 3.95 0.73 0.83 0.00 1.00 -
35 9741.0 8462.8 0.33 0.37 7.61 3.80 0.73 0.86 0.00 1.00 -
SPE 39895 IMPROVED SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR STIMULATION TREATMENT IN THE WILCOX PLAY 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LIME CASING
PHI PERFORATION
SAND WATER IRIDIUM

PAY SHALE SW H.C. PERM SCANDIUM

Bottom of
Hydraulic
Fracture

Fig. 1 —Fracture Parameter Log with Post Stimulation Tracer Data

8 BOONEN, BYRD, FRISCH, KESSLER, KUBELKA, NIXON SPE 39895

Fluid Efficiency Test with Step Down

for Diagnostics on L-13 Sand
5,500 30.0

5,250 25.0

5,000 20.0

Pressure, psi

Rate, bpm
4,750 15.0

4,500 10.0

4,250 5.0

4,000 0.0
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
Time, min.

Treating Pressure Injection Rate

Fig. 3— FET Test L-13 Sand

Fig. 2— Well 2, L-13 Sand

Fig. 4— Well 2, L-12 Sand

Fig. 5— 3D Fracture Simulation of L-12 Sand
SPE 39895 IMPROVED SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR STIMULATION TREATMENT IN THE WILCOX PLAY 9

Fig. 6 — FET Square Root of Time Plot L-13 Sand

Fig. 7— FET Square Root of Time Plot L-12 Sand