1887
Volume 36 Number 7
  • ISSN: 0263-5046
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2397

Abstract

Abstract

A critical input in a hydraulic fracture stimulation design is the vertical stress profile. From it, designers can determine the variation in the minimum horizontal stress as a function of depth. The depth profile of the minimum horizontal stress (i.e., the vertical stress profile) is a major factor in controlling the geometry of a hydraulic fracture or fracture network development (e.g., Econo-mides and Nolte, 2000). For example, an optimum stimulation design would define the pumping variables and schedule so as to limit height growth to the productive interval while promoting optimum horizontal growth. Height growth into non-productive layers above or below the pay interval reduces the horizontal length in the productive interval. In addition, gravity can concentrate the proppant in the fractures below the producing interval, diminishing fracture conductivity in the producing interval. Both mechanisms decrease production. Therefore, to design an optimal stimulation, an accurate vertical stress profile is required. This requires appropriate and accurate stress models.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.3997/1365-2397.n0108
2018-07-01
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Economides, M. and Nolte, K.
    [2000]. Reservoir Stimulation. Wiley
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Gowd, T. and Rummel, F.
    [1980]. Effect of confining pressure on the fracture-behavior of a porous rock. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 17(4), 225–229.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Higgins, S., Goodwin, S., Donald, A., Bratton, T. and Tracy, G.
    [2008]. SPE 115736 Anisotropic stress models improve completion design in the Baxter shale. Proceedings of SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Plumb, R.
    [1994]. Influence of composition and texture on the failure properties of clastic rocks. Rock Mechanics in Petroleum Engineering, 13–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Quezada, O. and Davis, T.
    [2017]. Monitoring hydraulic fracturing through the use of time-lapse, multicomponent seismic data, and microseismic data, Wattenberg Field, Colorado. SEG International Exposition and 87th Annual Meeting, 5880–5883.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Sayers, C.
    [2010]. Geophysics Under Stress: Geomechanical Applications of Seismic and Borehole Acoustic Waves. Society of Exploration Geophys-icists and European Association of Geoscientists and Engineers. DOI: 10.1190/1.9781560802129.
    https://doi.org/10.1190/1.9781560802129 [Google Scholar]
  7. Suarez-Rivera, R., Burghardt, S., Stanchits, S., Edelman, E. and Surdi, A.
    [2013]. IPTC 17018 Understanding the Effect of Rock Fabric on Fracture Complexity for Improving Completion Design and Well Performance. International Petroleum Technology Conference, 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Thiercelin, M. and Plumb, R.
    [1994]. Core-based prediction of lithologic stress contrasts in East Texas formations. SPE Formation Evaluation, 251–258.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Tsvankin, I.
    [1997]. Anisotropic parameters and P-wave velocity for orthor-hombic media. Geophysics, 62(4),1292–1309.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Waters, G., Lewis, R. and Bentley, D.
    [2011]. SPE 146776 The Effect of Mechanical Properties Anisotropy in the Generation of Hydraulic Fractures in Organic Shales. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 1–25.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.3997/1365-2397.n0108
Loading
/content/journals/10.3997/1365-2397.n0108
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error