Advertisement

Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering

, Volume 52, Issue 12, pp 5047–5069 | Cite as

Advanced Hydraulic Fracture Characterization Using Pulse Testing Analysis

  • Juan RamosEmail author
  • Wenli Wang
  • Julia Diessl
  • Nicky Oliver
  • Michael S. Bruno
Original Paper
  • 227 Downloads

Abstract

Effective hydraulic fracture characterization is important for successful reservoir stimulation. This represents one of the primary challenges for completion engineers in the oil and gas industry, especially for unconventional tight gas reservoirs which are important sources of gas production in the US. Multi-stage hydraulic fracturing in horizontal wells is the most popular completion method for these types of reservoirs. An advanced methodology has been developed to characterize hydraulic fractures via pulse testing analysis. This technique combines analytical solutions and numerical modeling based on the pressure pulse response recorded at offset wells before, during, and after horizontal well fracture operations to characterize fracture orientation, height, and length. Different conceptual models were tested for random well pair spacing and orientations to generate correlations and families of type curves for a single-stage vertical fracture characterization. The methodology was then expanded to be implemented in more complex cases of multi-stage fractures. For validation and calibration purposes, a case study for a single fracture characterization was presented to match the numerical results with the field data. A good agreement in fracture orientation, height, and length was obtained with this reasonably cost-effective technique.

Keywords

Hydraulic fracturing Pulse testing Fracture characterization Unconventional reservoir Multi-stage wells 

List of symbols

PD

Dimensionless pressure drop

tlD

Dimensionless time lag

tl

Time lag

Δtcyc

Cyclic period

ΔtcycD

Dimensionless cyclic period

rD

Dimensionless distance

k

Reservoir permeability

ϕ

Porosity

ct

Total rock compressibility

r

Radial distance treatment and observation well

xf

Fracture half-length

xd

Dimensionless distance

yd

Dimensionless distance

td

Dimensionless time

μ

Viscosity

h

Reservoir height

B

Volumetric oil factor

p

Final reservoir pressure

pi

Initial reservoir pressure

q

Fluid rate

x

Abscissa of a point

y

Ordinate of a point

Eminimized

Minimized error of one scenario modeled

BHPfield,i

Bottom hole pressure measured in the field

BHPmodeled,i

Bottom hole pressure modeled with simulator

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funding for this research was provided by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, under Award Number DE-SC-0015766. We would also like to acknowledge the reviewers of this paper for their valuable input.

References

  1. Brigham WE (1970) Planning and analysis of pulse-tests. SPE-2417-PA 22:618–624.  https://doi.org/10.2118/2417-pa CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cinco-Ley H, Samaniego VF (1977) Determination of the orientation of a finite conductivity vertical fracture by transient pressure analysis. Paper presented at the SPE Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 1977/1/1/Google Scholar
  3. Conti JJ (2018) Annual energy outlook 2016. US Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/archive/aeo16/mt_naturalgas.php#natgasprod_exp. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
  4. Earlougher RC (1980) Analysis and design methods for vertical well testing. SPE-2417-PA 32:505–514.  https://doi.org/10.2118/8038-pa CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ekie S, Hadinoto N, Raghavan R (1977) Pulse-testing of vertically fractured wells. Paper presented at the SPE Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 01 Jan 1977Google Scholar
  6. El-Khatib N (2013) New approach for pulse test analysis. Paper presented at the North Africa Technical Conference and Exhibition, Cairo, Egypt, 15 Apr 2013Google Scholar
  7. Gringarten AC, Ramey HJ, Raghavan R (1974) Unsteady-state pressure distributions created by a well with a single infinite-conductivity vertical fracture. SPE-4051-PA 14:347–360.  https://doi.org/10.2118/4051-pa CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heidbach O, Rajabi M, Reiter K, Ziegler M, Team WSM (2016) World stress map database release 2016. GFZ Data Serv.  https://doi.org/10.5880/WSM.2016.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnson CR, Greenkorn RA, Woods EG (1966) Pulse testing: a new method for describing reservoir flow properties between wells. J Pet Technol.  https://doi.org/10.2118/1517-PA CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kamal MM (1983) Interference and pulse testing—a review. SPE-2417-PA 35:2257–2270.  https://doi.org/10.2118/10042-pa CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kamal M, Brigham WE (1976) Design and analysis of pulse tests with unequal pulse and shut-in periods. SPE-2417-PA 28:205–212.  https://doi.org/10.2118/4889-pa CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pierce AE, Vela S, Koonce KT (1975) Determination of the compass orientation and length of hydraulic fractures by pulse testing. SPE-2417-PA 27:1433–1438.  https://doi.org/10.2118/5132-pa CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pruess K, Oldenburg C, Moridis G (1999) TOUGH2 user’s guide. Earth Sciences Division, University of California Berkeley, CA 94720.  https://doi.org/10.2172/751729
  14. Tiab DO, Abobise E (1989) Determining fracture orientation from pulse testing. Vol 4.  https://doi.org/10.2118/11027-pa
  15. Uraiet A, Raghavan R, Thomas GW (1977) Determination of the orientation of a vertical fracture by interference tests. SPE-2417-PA 29:73–80.  https://doi.org/10.2118/5845-pa CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GeoMechanics TechnologiesMonroviaUSA
  2. 2.GeoMechanics TechnologiesViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations