Establishing Key Reservoir Parameters with Diagnostic Fracture Injection Testing
- Bahareh Nojabaei (Pennsylvania State University) | Shah Kabir (Hess Corporation)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- October 2012
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 563 - 570
- 2012. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 1.2.2 Geomechanics, 1.2.3 Rock properties, 3 Production and Well Operations
- 2 in the last 30 days
- 1,309 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
Diagnostic fracture injection testing (DFIT) is an invaluable tool for evaluating reservoir properties in unconventional formations. The test comprises injection of water over a very short time period, initiating a fracture at the end of a well's horizontal section, followed by a long shut-in period. Analysis of the falloff data with the G-function plot reveals the fracture closure pressure, and the fracture pseudolinear-flow period leads to the initial reservoir pressure.
In most tests, wellhead pressure (WHP) measurements are used because of cost considerations. A wellbore heat transfer model is used to allow conversion of WHP to bottomhole pressure (BHP) by accounting for changing fluid density and compressibility along the wellbore. This model, in turn, allowed us to assess the quality of solutions generated with the WHP data. For DFIT analysis, we adapted the modified-Hall plot for the injection period, whereas both the pressure-derivative and G-function plots were used for the analysis of falloff data. The derivative signature of the modified-Hall plot allows unambiguous estimation of the fracture breakdown pressure (pfb) during the injection period. As expected, the pfb always turns out to be higher than the fracture closure pressure (pfc), estimated with the two methods during pressure falloff, thereby instilling confidence in the solutions obtained.
A statistical design of experiments with coupled geomechanical/fluid-flow simulation capabilities showed that the formation permeability is by far the most important variable controlling the fracture closure time. Mechanical rock properties, such as Young's modulus of elasticity and the Poisson's ratio, play minor roles. In microdarcy formations, a longitudinal fracture takes much longer to close than its transverse counterpart.
|File Size||623 KB||Number of Pages||8|
Abass, H.H., Hedayeti, S., and Meadows, D.L. 1992. Nonplanar FracturePropagation From a Horizontal Wellbore: Experimental Study. SPE Prod &Fac 11 (3): 133-137. SPE-24823-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/24823-PA.
Abousleiman, Y., Chang, A.H.D., and Gu, H. 1994. Formation PermeabilityDetermination by Micro or Mini-Hydraulic Fracturing. J. Energy Res.Tech. 116 (2): 104-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.2906014.
Barree, R.D. and Mukherjee, H. 1996. Determination of Pressure DependentLeakoff and Its Effects on Fracture Geometry. Paper SPE 36424 presented at theSPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 6-9 October.http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/36424-MS.
Barree, R.D., Barree, V.L., and Craig, D.P. 2009. Holistic FractureDiagnostics: Consistent Interpretation of Prefrac Injection Tests UsingMultiple Analysis Methods. SPE Prod & Oper 24 (3):396-406. SPE-107877-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/107877-PA.
Craig, D.P., Eberhard, M.J., Ramurthy, M., et al. 2005. Permeability, PorePressure, and Leakoff-Type Distributions in Rocky Mountain Basins. SPE Prod& Fac 20 (1): 48-59. SPE-75717-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/75717-PA.
Craig, D.P. and Blasingame, T.A. 2006. Application of a NewFracture-Injection/Falloff Model Accounting for Propagating, Dilated, andClosing Hydraulic Fractures. Paper SPE 100578 presented at the SPE GasTechnology Symposium, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 15-17 May. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/100578-MS.
Hasan, A.R., and Kabir, C.S. 2002. Fluid Flow and Heat Transfer inWellbores. Richardson, Texas: Textbook Series, SPE.
Hasan, A.R., Kabir, C.S., and Lin, D. 2005. Analytic Wellbore-TemperatureModel for Transient Gas-Well Testing. SPE Res Eval & Eng 8 (3): 240-247. SPE-84288-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/84288-PA.
Hasan, A.R., Kabir, C.S., andWang, X. 2009. A Robust Steady-State Model forFlowing-Fluid Temperature in Complex Wells. SPE Prod & Oper 24 (2): 269-276. SPE-109765-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/109765-PA.
Horne, R.N. 1990. Modern Well Test Analysis: A Computer-AidedApproach, 151. Palo Alto, California: Petroway.
Izgec, B. and Kabir, C.S. 2009. Real-Time Performance Analysis ofWater-Injection Wells. SPE Res Eval & Eng 12 (1):116-123. SPE-109876-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/109876-PA.
Izgec, B. and Kabir, C.S. 2011. Identification and Characterization ofHigh-Conductive Layers in Waterfloods. SPE Res Eval & Eng 14 (1): 113-119. SPE-123930-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/123930-PA.
Mayerhofer, M.J., Ehlig-Economides, C.A., and Economides, M.J. 1995.Pressure-Transient Analysis of Fracture-Calibration Tests. J Pet Technol 47 (3): 229-234. SPE-26527-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/26527-PA.
Nolte, K.G. 1979. Determination of Fracture Parameters From FracturingPressure Decline. Paper SPE 8341 presented at the SPE Annual TechnicalConference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Nevada, 23-26 September. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/8341-MS.
Reveal Simulator. 2010. Edinburgh, Scotland: Petroleum Experts. Time. SPEForm Eval 1 (4): 363-371. SPE-11083-PA.http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/11083-PA.
Soliman, M.Y. 1986b. Technique for Considering Fluid Compressibility andTemperature Changes in Mini-Frac Analysis. Paper SPE 15370 presented at the SPEAnnual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, 5-8October. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/15370-MS.
Soliman, M. Y., Craig D., and Bartko K., et al. 2005. New Method forDetermination of Formation Permeability, Reservoir Pressure, and FractureProperties from a Minifrac Test. Paper 05-658 presented at the 40th Symposiumon Rock Mechanics, Anchorage, Alaska, USA, 25-29 June.
Soliman, M.Y., Miranda, C., and Wang, H.M. 2010. Application ofAfter-Closure Analysis to a Dual-Porosity Formation, to CBM, and to a FracturedHorizontal Well. SPE Prod & Oper 25 (4): 472-483.SPE-124135-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/124135-PA.
Soliman, M.Y., Miranda, C., Wang, H.M., et al. 2011. Investigation of Effectof Fracturing Fluid on After-Closure Analysis in Gas Reservoirs. SPE Prod& Oper 26 (2): 185-194. SPE-128016-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/128016-PA.
Soliman, M.Y. and Kabir, C.S. 2012. Testing Unconventional Formations. J.Pet. Sci. Eng. (92-93): 102-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2012.04.027.