This paper describes the laboratory and field development of thermoplastic film materials used to reduce proppant flowback that can occur after fracturing treatments. The paper provides a summary of flowback mechanism theories and laboratory tests comparing flowback tendency for various types of treating procedures and materials. Some of these materials include angular proppant, proppant/fiber mixtures, and proppant with film strips tested over a wide range of temperature, closure stress, and flow-rate conditions. Field treatment procedures are discussed, and several case histories are presented. All of the methods evaluated were effective in reducing proppant flowback under certain conditions. Heat-shrink film cut into thin slivers proved to provide flowback reduction over broad temperature and closure stress ranges and was found to cause little impairment to fracture conductivity with some dependency on use concentration, temperature, and closure stress. The film materials were more resistant to damage caused by blending and pumping than all other materials evaluated. In addition, proppant packs, including consolidated packs, were significantly more tolerant of large, repeated stress changes. Field results indicate that the use of the heat-shrink film material as a flowback control agent permits more aggressive bean-up procedures following conventional fracturing treatments. Conventional dry-additive metering systems were used to add the film material to the fracturing fluid proppant slurry. Introduction Proppant flowback from propped hydraulic fractures causes tubing erosion, safety-valve erosion, disposal problems, and increased costs. Extra equipment and operators are needed for wells that produce proppant. In fact, the development of fields that for economic reasons require unmanned platforms or subsea completions has been inhibited because of the potential of proppant flowback. In most instances, proppant is produced during the cleanup after a fracturing treatment and equipment and operators are then available to handle the material that is produced to surface. Proppant back-production during the production life is generally the cause all of the above mentioned problems. Substantial work has been conducted in the industry to explain, predict, and reduce proppant back-production. In fracturing operations, proppant is carried into fractures created when hydraulic pressure is applied to subterranean rock formations with such force that fractures are developed. Proppant suspended in a viscosified fracturing fluid is carried outwardly away from the wellbore within the fractures as they are created and extended with continued pumping. Upon release of pumping pressure, the proppant remains in the fractures holding the separated rock faces in an open position forming a conduit for flow of hydrocarbon, or formation fluids, back to the wellbore. Unfortunately, variations in the formation's in-situ stress and its mechanical properties can lead to nonuniform fracture closure. One possibility is the formation of open channels around proppant bridges. Fluid velocity in these channels may be very high and may increase the tendency of proppant detachment and flowback in this region. An incompletely closed fracture allows proppant to move freely (in suspension) if not trapped between the well and fracture wall. As a result, when the fluid flows back, this free-moving proppant can be brought back to the wellbore. This paper gives a brief overview of possible causes of proppant flowback, along with the methods that have been applied to curtail the problem and their shortfalls. The mechanical properties and proppant flowback control characteristics of thermoplastic film strip (TFS) material are presented. P. 119
No abstract
Summary A new well-testing method that provides high-resolution bottomhole pressure (BHP) measurement has been developed for use with rod-pumping oilwell completions. This new well-testing technique is conducted by running a high-resolution downhole pressure gauge in a specially designed carrier assembly with the downhole pump. The gauge assembly is run on the rod string without pulling the completion packers or tubulars. With the new method, a downhole pressure system is in place while the well is flowing during the entire well test. High-resolution downhole pressure data can then be recorded during all flow and shut-in periods of the well test, providing more accurate pressure data and enhanced capability for reservoir analysis. Traditional techniques use wireline-conveyed pressure gauges, tubing-conveyed pressure-recording devices, and surface pressure-monitoring systems with an advanced fluid-level measurement to record data from pumping well completions. These methods are limited in their ability to provide accurate test results when low-pressure conditions prevail. The new method allows operators of low-pressure oilwell completions to use advanced well-test-analysis software to analyze actual pressure data to obtain reservoir properties and quantify skin damage. Data can be acquired from many types of rod-pump completions, including wells with downhole gas separators. Excellent pressure resolution has been obtained from this new testing technique with either of two downhole assembly designs depending upon the completion configuration. The results and the ensuing well-test analyses in several pilot pumping wells will illustrate that the new process permits more flexibility in well testing and allows for greater accuracy and better interpretation of data in low-pressure rod-pumping oil wells. Introduction Traditionally, low-pressure rod-pumping oil wells have been difficult to test. This is true because previously used methods have not allowed downhole pressure data to be captured from both flow and shut-in periods. To obtain a test of a completed rod-pumping well, most operators would flow the well and then pull the rods before running downhole pressure gauges on wireline or tubing. With traditional methods, the rods had to be pulled out of the well before the gauges could be run. Unfortunately, unseating the pump would dump a tubing volume of fluid on the formation. Also, by the time the pressure gauges were on bottom, the flowing pressure had changed, and the possibility of an accurate measurement of flowing downhole pressure was lost. These occurrences would compromise the performance of the pressure transient analysis. Soliman presented the use of superposition in pumping well-test analysis.1 Kabir introduced the use of deconvolution 2 and a segmental analysis approach with automatic convolved type-curve methods3 to improve the analytical capabilities of existing welltest analysis techniques. Many of the new rod-pump testing methods focus on analytical changes and do not address the method's capability to capture high-resolution flowing and shut-in BHP data during a pumping well test. It can be shown that the radius of investigation for a pressure transient test can be increased with higher-gauge resolution. This increase provides still another reason for using high-resolution downhole sensors in testing procedures. Methods developed in the late 1980s tried to combine fluid level measurement with surface pressure data to estimate the BHP.4,5 The combined fluid-level/surface-pressure methods had some difficulty accounting for different fluid gradients in the wellbore. These methods could not account for gas solution into oil as wellbore pressure increases during buildup. The presence of foams and the typically high storage volume associated with pumping wells makes distinguishing the exact shut-in time from the reconstructed pressure data more difficult with this technique. Also, the combined fluid-level/surface-pressure methods do not have the high-resolution capabilities necessary for rigorous derivative-type curve matching with modern well-test-analysis software. Many authors have addressed various analytical methods of dealing with slug-test or closed-chamber data.6–9 Although most of these analytical procedures were developed for drillstem testing, several papers have been presented showing early applications of this method in rod-pumping wells. Once a well is completed for production, it will be difficult and costly to perform a slug-type test on rod-pumping wells with established slug-testing procedures. Most slug-testing methods require a downhole valve and a pressure gauge to obtain shut-in data because fluid does not reach the surface during the test. Also, matching anomalous pressure-derivative changes in early- and late-time regions is difficult if actual downhole data are not available with a high-resolution gauge during both flowing and shut-in periods. This paper addresses the mechanical issues required to obtain high-resolution downhole pressure data. This new method allows the operator to run pressure gauges with the pump assembly by simply pulling and running the pump with the rod string. Two alternative methods were developed. The operator may run the gauge assembly below the pump seat if there is no downhole gas separator. Otherwise, the gauge assembly can be set in between the rod pump and the pump seat. Both methods allow a pressure gauge assembly to be run in place during flow and shut-in periods without requiring that the tubing string be pulled out or that the recording of the flowing downhole pressure be sacrificed. This allows accurate BHP measurement during the entire testing sequence without the need to estimate the flowing downhole pressure or fluid type, amount, or density. Two rod-pumping horizontal-oilwell cases are presented here to show the advantages of this new testing technique. Previous Downhole-Gauge Testing Methods Previous attempts to use downhole gauges on rod-pumping wells have been costly and difficult. Methods used included drillstem tests run during the drilling or initial completion, slug and closed-chamber tests incorporating various analysis techniques, and wireline- and tubing-conveyed tests. Earlier attempts to run gauges on the rod string below the pump have not been effective because a gauge had not been developed that was sufficiently rugged to withstand pump vibration. Also, previous instrument dimensions have required large carrier assemblies. In tubing-conveyed methods, the operator must pull rods and then pull and run tubing. This can be costly because the operator must acquire a workover rig to perform the testing operation.
TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435. AbstractA new well testing method that provides high-resolution bottomhole pressure measurement has been developed for use with rod pumping oil well completions. This new well testing technique is conducted by running a high-resolution downhole pressure gauge in a specially designed carrier assembly with the downhole pump. The gauge assembly is run on the rod string without pulling completion packers or tubulars. Using the new method, a downhole pressure system is in place while the well is flowing during the entire well test. High-resolution downhole pressure data can then be recorded during all flow and shut-in periods of the well test, which provides more accurate pressure data and enhanced capability for reservoir analysis.Traditional techniques use wireline-conveyed pressure gauges, tubing-conveyed pressure recording devices, and surface pressure monitoring systems with advanced fluid-level measurement to record data from pumping well completions. These methods are limited in their capability to provide accurate test results when low-pressure conditions prevail. The new method allows operators of low-pressure oil well completions to use advanced well-test analysis software to analyze actual pressure data to obtain reservoir properties and quantify skin damage. Data can be acquired from many types of rod-pump completions, including wells with downhole gas separators. Excellent pressure resolution has been obtained with this new testing technique using either of two downhole assembly designs, depending upon the completion configuration.The results and the ensuing well test analyses in several pilot pumping wells will illustrate that the new process permits more flexibility in well testing and allows for greater accuracy and better interpretation of data in low-pressure rod-pumping oilwells.
The production history of a one thousand well field extension drilled in the early 1980's showed that additional wells could not be drilled at current oil prices and oil recovery. Step out drilling and production history showed that an additional one hundred infill and development wells could be drilled if the recovery could be increased. Multiple production logs indicated the upper half of the zone was not open at the well bore. Thus, if the upper zone could be more effectively completed, the well recovery had the potential to be increased to a level where future development would be feasible. The low reservoir pressure and high permeability contrast requirements demanded that a much higher viscosity fluid system needed to be used that also had the ability to clean up easily. The nitrogen foam frac yielded these desired characteristics. Five infill wells were drilled in 1991 and 1993 utilizing a nitrogen foam frac system. Production from the wells has shown a projected ultimate recovery from the wells of approximately twice the original wells. Fracturing as a well stimulation method is a simple process; however, the design, equipment and materials used to create the high permeability channel can become quite complex. Design considerations must be given to each of the drilling and completion phases and how it relates to the ultimate fracture design. Each of the major fracturing stages of prepad, pad, proppant stages, and flush have many design decisions to be made. P. 55
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.