See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/241787724

Horizontal Well Completion and Stimulation Techniques--A Review With

Emphasis on Low-Permeability Carbonates

Article · April 2007

DOI: 10.2118/108075-MS

CITATIONS READS

14 3,874

5 authors, including:

Valdo Rodrigues Luis Fernando Neumann

Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense Independent Consultant
31 PUBLICATIONS 161 CITATIONS 31 PUBLICATIONS 206 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Valdo Rodrigues on 04 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SPE 108075

Horizontal Well Completion and Stimulation Techniques—A Review With Emphasis on

Low-Permeability Carbonates
Valdo Ferreira Rodrigues, SPE, and Luis Fernando Neumann, SPE, Petroleo Brasileiro S.A.; Daniel Torres, SPE,
Halliburton Energy Services; Cesar Guimarães, SPE, Schlumberger; and Ricardo Sadovski Torres, BJ Services

Copyright 2007, Society of Petroleum Engineers

nonconventional reservoirs, such as tight gas, it is related to
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2007 SPE Latin American and Caribbean them as stimulated horizontal completions have been used on
Petroleum Engineering Conference held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 15t18 April 2007.
their development. This paper focuses fracturing stimulations,
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
also making a few references to matrix stimulation. It also
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to assumes that a horizontal well has already been justified and
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 what is being discussed is its completion and stimulation. The
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
paper starts by reviewing the lessons learned in some chalk
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is fields in the North Sea (Dan, Halfdan, South Arne, Valhall and
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 Eldfisk) and in a few pilot projects offshore Brazil (Congro
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, Texas 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
and Enchova). Then it devises some thought on the
methodology used to select completion and stimulation
Abstract techniques for horizontal wells. It address cased and cemented
This paper presents a brief review of the available techniques horizontal wells, in addition to open hole and
in the oil and gas industry to complete and stimulate horizontal perforated/slotted liners completions. The key parameters for
wells, with emphasis on low permeability carbonates. These designing, applying and evaluating horizontal completion and
techniques can also be applied in non-conventional reservoirs, stimulation are presented, underlining the most common
particularly in tight formations. The paper starts by reviewing failures and the controversial aspects.
the lessons learned in some chalk fields in the North Sea (Dan,
Halfdan, South Arne, Valhall and Eldfisk) and in a few pilot Completion and Stimulation of North Sea Low-
projects offshore Brazil (Congro and Enchova). Based on Permeability Carbonates
these lessons learned and in the broad literature, the paper
The North Sea low permeability chalks are taken here as a
devises some considerations on the methodology to select
reference due to the outstanding technological evolution
completion and stimulation techniques for horizontal wells.
verified there in the last decades. Amongst more than ten
Cased and cemented horizontal wells, in addition to open hole
fields producing from these reservoirs in the North Sea this
and perforated/slotted liners wells are addressed. The macro
paper focuses on the Dan, Halfdan, South Arne, Valhall and
aspects of field/area management are stressed as the
Eldfisk fields. The main characteristics of these fields are:
completion and stimulation drivers. The key parameters for
shallow waters (43 to 69 m), dry completion, high volumes of
designing, implementing and evaluating horizontal completion
OOIP (1.6 to 2.9 billions barrel), low permeability carbonates
and stimulation are presented, emphasizing the most common
(0.2 md to 10 md) with microfractures in the central areas (10
failures and the controversial aspects. The paper presents a
md to 120 md), high porosities (up to 48%), soft to very soft
summary of mature field and new scenarios that are candidate
chalks, small to medium net pays (15 m to 65 m), high oil
to horizontal completion and stimulation in Brazil and other
saturation (up to 97%), and light oils ( about 36o API).
Latin America countries. Then it makes a few comments on
the resources available in Latin America to face the mentioned What most distinguishes these fields is their over-pressured
opportunities and related challenges. It is supposed that this soft chalks which are subjected to a high degree of compaction
brief review will be useful for the low permeability scenarios under pore pressure depletion, resulting in loss of drilling
in Latin America and worldwide. fluids, rapid production decline, well failures and seafloor
subsidence. On the other hand the positive effects of rock
Introduction compaction as a reservoir drive energy, outweigh by far the
negative ones. The recovery factor under primary recovery can
This paper presents a brief review of the available techniques
be as high as 30%. In general the North Sea chalks
in the industry to complete and stimulate horizontal wells,
experienced an evolution from vertical/directional wells
with emphasis on low permeability carbonates. The emphasis
stimulated with acid treatments to multiple fractured
on low permeability carbonates in this work is justified by the
horizontal wells.
renewed importance of this scenario in Brazil and other Latin
America countries. Although it does not focus on
2 SPE 108075
The Dan and Halfdan Complex1-11
This complex is located in the Danish part of the North Sea
Central Graben and is comprised by Dan (2.9 billions barrel
OOIP, 12 production platforms, and 108 wells) and Halfdan
(1.615 billions barrel OOIP, 4 production platforms, and 62
wells).
The Dan field was discovered in 1971 and started production
in 1972, making it the oldest producing oil field in the North
Sea. It consists of a high porosity (18% to 40%), low
permeability (1 md in average) chalk. It was initially
developed with fractured vertical/deviated wells. To improve
productivity the operator adopted horizontal cemented wells in
1987 associated with acid fracturing stimulation. The
stimulation treatment was soon changed to hydraulic
(propped) fracturing looking for medium and long term
productivity. Amongst the many lessons learned in the Dan
field development one can mention:
1. Water injection is fundamental to increase the recovery
factor in the low permeability carbonates;
2. To achieve high water rates in nonfractured chalks it is
necessary to inject above the fracture propagation pressure,
and true stimulation is not necessary4,5;
3. Water injection management can be achieved by using
sliding sleeve (SS) configuration (opened or closed),
downhole fixed chokes, and surface injection pressure
control 4,5;
4. Horizontal cemented wells associated with multiple
hydraulic fractures, were successfully introduced in 1987;
5. A stimulation and lower completion system that allowed
perforating, stimulating, and isolating the treated interval,
in one trip, was introduced in 19891;
6. The controlled acid jetting liner (CAJ), introduced in
19986, allowed the extension of the horizontal section
beyond coiled tubing reach (used to operate the SSs of the
previous system) while permitting efficient acid treatment
along the liner;
7. Whenever possible the wellbore orientation must be in the
preferred fracture direction in order to avoid or minimize
tortuosity in the fracture initiation/propagation process.
8. The perforation interval must be short to avoid the
initiation of several fractures, and with high density and
large entrance holes to ease the placement of high proppant
concentration;
9. The use of injection tests prior to the main treatment can
estimate the magnitude of tortuosity;
10. Sand injection tests were successfully used to remove or
reduce tortuosity; increasing the treatment rate and/or the
fracturing fluid viscosity also helped overcoming
tortuosity;
11. It is possible to overcome poor cement isolation filling the
channels with sand before pumping the fracturing fluids.
The Halfdan field was discovered in December 1998 by a
9022 m long horizontal well (horizontal section of 6324 m)
drilled from a production platform in the Dan field. It went on
stream in the same year through a pilot production system.
The reservoir is laterally extensive and consist of a
homogeneous and isotropic chalk of Maastrichtian and Danian
age, with high porosity (25% to 35%), low permeability (0.5
md to 2.0 md), low thickness (5 m to 15 m) and without
structural closure8,9. The Halfdan development plan was
conceived at the very beginning by making use of the lessons
learned in Dan. The water injection secondary recovery was
the main determinant in the Halfdan development. Among the
several lessons learned in Halfdan one can emphasize the
injection fracturing in a densely spaced line drive water flood
technology, including the fracture aligned sweep technology
(FAST) concept9-11.
South Arne 12,13
The South Arne field is located in the northern part of the
Danish sector of the North Sea in water depth of 60 m. The
installations comprise a combined wellhead, processing, and
accommodation platform. The reservoir is an elongated
structure, 93 km² in area, 2,800 m deep (deepest chalk in
Denmark), and is comprised of high porosity/low permeability
chalks from the Maastrichtian and Danian ages. The wells
horizontal sections (around 1800 m) navigate through the
upper portion of the Tor formation (0.2 md to 4 md). The
fractures along the lateral were supposed to cover the Tor
formation and at least 75% of the Ekofisk formation (0.0 md
to 0.7 md) above to ensure adequate drainage. South Arne is
an example of initial total failure that was overcame by proper
analysis and actions. This case study12,13 revealed many
important conclusions such as:
1. Using proper fracture initiation, the wellbore orientation
did not make difference in South Arne;
2. Pressure depletion can significantly affect fracture
geometry;
3. The combination of G-function and log-log pressure
decline analyses provided more reliable and consistent
interpretation of fracture closure pressure;
4. The use of G-function superposition analysis of mini-frac
data can assist in the recognition of pressure dependent
leakoff due to fissure opening;
5. The fracture initiation should use cross-linked gel,
proppant slugs to reduce complexity and sand slugs to plug
open natural fractures/fissures. zones with high natural
fracture density should be avoided;
6. 100-mesh sand slugs at concentrations of 3 ppg to 4 ppg
may control excessive fluid loss due to the activation or
dilation of natural fractures;
7. Porosity (25% to 45% in South Arne) is an important
determinant in the fracturing design affecting very much
the Young’s modulus (less than 500,000 psi to over
2,000,000 psi);
8. Most fracture treatment problems arose in zones with
porosity less than 30%;
9. In a case of longitudinal fractures in a poorly cemented
liner there were no evidences of additional problems.
Valhall 14-18
The Valhall field, located in the Norwegian sector of the North
Sea, was discovered in 1975 and started production in October
1982. The Valhall complex consists of five separate steel
platforms for quarters, drilling, wellheads, production, and
water injection. In addition the field has two unmanned flank
platforms, one in the south and one in the north, both around 6
SPE 108075
kilometers from the field centre. The reservoir is comprised of
an over-pressured, under-saturated Upper Cretaceous chalk
reservoir, which main characteristics are: depth from 2,400 m
to 2,600 m, high porosity (35% to 50%), low matrix
permeability (1 md to 10 md), total permeability from 1md to
300 md, high oil saturation (92% to 97%), 36 o API oil gravity,
average thickness of 25 m with large lateral variation, GOR of
800 scf/STB to 1,400 scf/STB, and two oil bearing formations,
Hod and Tor. The Tor formation is the primary reservoir
having higher porosity and permeability and providing the
greatest reservoir volume. The OOIP is 2.6 billion barrels with
an original reserve of 250 million barrels. A major differential
in Valhall is the high degree of compaction suffered by its
weak chalk under pore pressure depletion. Valhall had about
2,900 psi original over-pressure related to an original 6,550 psi
pore pressure @ 2,450 m. It means an effective stress on the
chalk matrix of 650 psi equivalent to a burial depth of only
700 m to 800 m17. This explains drilling fluid loss, rapid
production decline, well failures and seafloor subsidence. Well
failures have been the greatest challenge throughout Valhall’s
history. Failure due rock influx is the uncontrolled chalk
production, caused by pressure cycling and high drawdown.
Production is restored by an expensive coiled tubing
cleanout17. Terminal failure is the lack of wellbore access
caused by a collapsed casing or liner. The observed subsidence
has been around 25 cm/year. The total subsidence was 4.91 m
as of March 200317. On the other hand the positive effects
(rock compaction contributes more than 50% of the reservoir
drive energy) outweigh by far the negative ones20. It is
important to note that pressure depletion was not a matter of
negligence or lack of resources. Water injection was
repeatedly studied for the Valhall field since 1989, always
showing no economical gain. In 1996 a multidisciplinary
study was created to evaluate waterflooding the Tor
formation18. A waterflood project was installed at late 2004.
The Valhall completion and stimulation history14-17, started in
1982, is summarized in the figure 1.
Figure 1 Completion phases in the Valhall field
All the Valhall completion/stimulation changes were based on
comprehensive studies. The implementation of the cemented
and cased horizontal well was based on a reservoir study
3
carried out in 1991 to 1992. The association between
cemented and cased horizontal well and multiple propped
fractures came from a completion study accomplished in 1994
to 1995. In 1996 a study for hydraulic fracturing optimization
using an implicit reservoir simulator defined multiple fractures
geometry (60 m long, 0.55 in. wide), conductivity (5 lbm/sqft
to 6 lbm/sqft) and spacing (110 m to 160 m). After that the
focus was to optimize operations times and fracture Tip
Screen-out. An update in the beginning of 2003 revealed the
execution of over 150 proppant fractures in Valhall. In face of
a new development in the North and South flank areas, a study
was carried out comparing acid versus proppant fracturing15.
This study, justified by the expected differences in the
reservoir in the flank areas, where the chalk was supposed to
be thinner and less soft, was based on:
• Comparison of the production history of propped and acid
fractured wells;
• Modeling using an in-house analytical reservoir simulator
especially built for proppant fracture wells;
• Numerical modeling using a commercial simulator15.
This study provided a Valhall stimulation strategy and a
fracturing decision tree.
As of 2003 reserves had increased from 250,000 STB to 1
billion STB due to:
• Better reservoir description;
• Drilling, completion and stimulation evolution;
• Complementary development of the flank areas;
• Waterflood in the crestal section.
The imminent risk of well failures and other challenges led to
a great emphasis on well management. This evolved to a
dedicated offshore control room monitoring the wells
continuously17. A group of onshore petroleum engineers
monitors well performance and provides guidelines to the
offshore staff. The well opening guidelines are very tight. The
usual strategy is to draw the wells down quite fast during
clean-up, then slow down gradually, and finally open the well
slowly. A horizontal multiple propped fracture in Tor
formation, for instance, may take a year to reach full opening
at separator pressure17
A Valhall redevelopment is on the way to optimize recovery
and deal with subsidence. It includes a new production and
hotel platform, planned to be in operation during 2009. Valhall
is already considered a field of the future, in addition to
employing 4D seismic as a key reservoir management tool. It
was also the first Norwegian field to feature a seismic receiver
array permanently installed on the seabed.
Eldfisk19
The Eldfisk field is located in the southern part of the
Norwegian North Sea. It was discovered in 1970 and came on
production in 1978. The original development consisted of
three facilities. In 1999, a new water injection facility was
installed, based on horizontal injection wells. Eldfisk has an
OOIP of 2.8 billion barrel of oil (37o API) and 4,600 billion
scf gas. The reservoir drive is comprised by 30% from rock-
compaction, 30% from gas influx, 20% from oil expansion
and 20% from water influx. Eldfisk suffered similar problems
4 SPE 108075
as it neighbors Valhall and Ekofisk: rapid production decline,
casing deformation and solids flow. The Tor chalk in Eldfisk
is a very soft one with Brinell hardness number (BHN) less
than 5 kg/mm². The Upper Ekofisk BHN is generally less than
10 kg/mm².
The Eldfisk wells were stimulated with massive, high-rate
acidizing, multistage, limited-entry treatments on clustered
perforations (2 m to 3 m intervals) separated by 10 m to 12 m.
The initial rates varied from 3,000 bbl/d to 4,000 bbl/d,
declining to 1,200 bbl/d to 1,500 bbl/d in one year. Production
was usually restored by acid restimulations. The production
decline was attributed to the closure of natural fractures and to
offset-well interference.
It was possible to manage solids production by periodic
inexpensive acid-wash and separator cleanout operations.
However in many wells solids production caused casing
deformation resulting in leaks, collapses and erosion, as well
as scale deposition. An update in 2001 verified that 75% of
Eldfisk wells suffered some degree of casing deformation. In
late 1997 four propped fractures were successfully created in a
1,524 m section in the Tor formation of a horizontal well in
Eldfisk. It is important to say that despite two previous
unsuccessful trials this third attempt was made based on the
success of other operators in the North Sea chalk field
community. The initial trials were probably unsuccessful due
to mechanical problems and low proppant concentrations.
The goals defined for placing four propped-fractures in this
Eldifisk pilot well were achieved. The well has produced at
sustained oil rates significantly greater than all the offset wells
in the field. Thus, multiple propped fractures in an Eldfisk
horizontal well achieved similar results as other neighboring
fields in the North Sea.
Campos Basin Low-Permeability Carbonates
Completion and Stimulation
The Campos Basin was discovered in 1974 and started
production by an early production system in August 1977. The
history of low permeability carbonates completion and
stimulation in Campos Basin, offshore Brazil, is similar the
North Sea counterparts. In the eighties the completions were
vertical or directional wells stimulated with massive acid
fracturing or matrix acidizing. Rapid production decline was
the main problem in this period. In 1989 a huge hydraulic
fracturing treatment was performed in a subsea directional
well, based on a comprehensive study. Unfortunately a
previously unidentified fault very close to the well took most
of the pumped proppant invalidating this important pilot
operation. From 1990 to 1995 a second stimulation period was
characterized by low volume matrix treatments (up to 75 gal/ft
of 15% HCl) with similar results. A third period started in
1995 with the drilling and completion (with preperforated
liner) of the first horizontal well in the Quissamã formation. A
standard stimulation treatment included alternating stages of
nonviscous acid, viscous acid up to 30 gal/ft of 15% HCl and
acid with diversion feature pumped below fracture rates,
spotted by the use of dedicated stimulating string or coiled
tubing inside the horizontal liner.
In August 2001, after realizing that matrix treatments in
noncemented horizontal wells were not presenting sufficient
results, the operator launched a research project searching for
alternatives. Following the North Sea operator’s experience,
the project team realized that the creation of a limited number
of discrete fractures, with proper length and conductivity,
widely separated and well distributed, could stimulate and
provide sustained productivity in horizontal wells. As part of
the research project an onshore horizontal cemented well was
multifractured in October 2002 as a pilot application. In
November 2002 and April 2004 two offshore platform
noncemented horizontal wells were multifractured by sand
jetting fracturing technology. Propped fractures were created
in these three wells. Concluding the research project a subsea
noncemented horizontal well was acid multifractured in
August 2004 and a subsea cased, cemented and perforated
horizontal well was hydraulically multi fractured in November
2005, both in Campos Basin. This paper summarizes these two
applications.
Acid Multiple Fracturing in a Subsea Horizontal
Noncemented Well 20-22
The Macaé/Quissamã is a carbonate formation present in
various fields (Bonito, Cherne, Congro, Enchova) in Campos
basin offshore Brazil. The Congro field was discovered in
1977, in water depths from 190 m to 600 m, and started
production in 1985. The Quissamã carbonate in Congro
produces by a unique noncemented horizontal well, 1-RJS-
512HA, drilled in 1996. Oil production had declined from the
original 201 m3/d (1,264 bpd) to around 100 m3/d to 138
m3/d (629 bpd to 868 bpd). A reservoir management plan
elaborated in 2002 raised the opportunity for a stimulation of
the 1-RJS-512HA well. The main challenge was how to
create multiple fractures in a noncemented subsea well. An
extensive study including geology and stratigraphy analysis,
well logs interpretation, well testing, nodal analysis,
production forecast and economic evaluation achieved the
following conclusions20:
• Fractures propagation would follow a perpendicular
direction in relation to the wellbore;
• A sand jetting fracturing process was the best technique for
this noncemented well;
• Production forecast, from a reservoir simulator with
capacity to model multiple fractured horizontal well, and
subsequent economic evaluation showed that 5 acid
fractures should be placed in this well at 3,915 m, 3,792 m,
3,689 m, 3,580 m, e 3,435 m MD depths (Fig. 2).
Table 1 shows the parameters used in the stimulation study.
Focusing only on the fracturing method used, this well
offered additional difficulties such as:
• The presence of two abandoned lateral that could cause
high additional leak off reducing fracture growth;
• Keeping the jetting tool in position during each fracturing
stage was a first in wells connected to floating rigs;
• Fluid loss control during fracturing while pulling the
fracturing string out of the hole and when tripping the
production tail string in hole was also a concern;
SPE 108075 5

• Pumping stimulation fluids under high pressure expansion combined with some water influx of a weak aquifer.
simultaneously down the tubing and the annulus from the The under saturated oil had an initial pressure and temperature
stimulation vessel and the floating rig required of about 3550 psia and 190°F, respectively and a viscosity of
modification of the onshore procedures. 11 cP. As previously stated the previous completion and
stimulation methods applied in the Quissamã carbonate of
Well name 1-RJS-512HA (subsea)) Enchova field did not provide sustained production. So, it was
Water depth 331 m decided to drill and complete a horizontal, cased and cemented
Offshore Rig SS-45 (moored floating rig) well and place a number of discrete fractures, with proper
Location Congro, Campos Basin length and conductivity, along its horizontal section.
Formation Macaé/Quissamã 20
Lithology Carbonate To design properly this well a project team studied the
Production slotted liner 7” 26# P-110 @ 2,926 m
following aspects:
Production casing 9 5/8 in 47# P-110 @ 2,972 m
Pore pressure 3,569 psi @ 3,050 m TVD
1. In situ stresses and the choice of the creation of transversal
Bottom hole temperature 210 °F or longitudinal fractures;
Fluid type / API Oil / 28 API 2. Selection of the fracturing treatment, that is, propped
Fluid viscosity 1.007 @ 3,000 psi (PVT) fracture, acid fracture or a combination of both;
Formation thickness 99 m gross / 28 m net 3. Cementation of the 7 in liner in the horizontal section;
Avg Permeability 1 md radial – 0,5 md vertical 4. Method to isolate each fracture;
Avg Porosity 19% to 29% 5. Perforation of the well and related issues regarding the
Avg Water saturation 0.1%
orientation of the well;
Sand jetting. tool 4.5 in OD w/8 jets ¼ in
Table 1 – Quissamã reservoir parameters 6. Best spacing of the fractures and fracture length, height
and width and characteristics of the tip screen out (TSO);
The solutions to overcome these difficulties and other 7. Best use of calibration tests to optimize the pad and
operational details were presented in previous papers21,23. The propped laden fluid volumes;
only exception to the predicted operational parameters was the 8. Methods to control proppant flow back;
abnormal annular flow rate rose from 4.5 bbl/min in the first 9. Techniques to evaluate each fracture without flowing each
fracture to 17.0 bbl/min in the fourth fracture instead of the one individually.
expected 9.0 bbl/min. As a matter of fact this behavior was The project and the execution details were presented
hypothesized in the planning phase and was explained by the elsewhere23. The wellbore orientation was determined by
created fractures intercepting one abandoned lateral 12 m reservoir drainage aspects, being aligned with the maximum
distant21,23. The great importance of this operation in a subsea far field horizontal stress, resulting in longitudinal fractures.
well was to make the used technology available for all the The number of fractures, established as seven, was obtained
operator’s scenarios using an in-house semi-analytical model. The well design
comprised a 1500 m (4900 ft) horizontal section, 30 m (65 ft)
bellow of the top of the Quissamã formation (≈ 2,380 m or
7,810 ft TVD) and 70 m to 90 m (230 ft to 295 ft) above
oil/water contact. The fracturing type selection was based on
laboratory tests on cores plugs which revealed:
• Porosity and oil permeability of 16% to 22% and 0.2 md to
0.7 md, respectively, which were bellow the expectations;
• Young's modulus between 2.34×106 psi to 3.34×106 psi;
• BHN from 9 to 39;
• Results from oedometer cell tests suggested embedment of
Figure 2 Five acid fractures in the 1-RJS-512HA well
1% to 3%;
• Acid etch testing showed low conductivity values.
The production results were above the expectations as the oil
rate as of January 2006, 29 months after the treatment, was Cement evaluation through sonic, and ultrasonic logs was not
twice the rate before the stimulation. straightforward due to the eccentricity of the tools. However
they indicated a mud channel in the lower part of the well.
The First Multiple Fractured Subsea Horizontal Cased An in-house semi-analytical model predicted the need to
and Cemented Well23 obtain fractures conductivities between 3,000 and 4,000 md-ft.
The Enchova field was discovered in 1976, came on Assuming a fracture half-length (xf) of 165 ft (50 m) and 1 md
production in 1983 and is on primary recovery until today. Its formation permeability a commercial hydraulic fracture
main reservoir is the Quissamã Member of Macaé Formation, simulator showed that 1 lb/ft2 to 2 lb/ft2 of high quality
which is a Lower Cretaceous, Albian age carbonate reservoir. proppant, that is, 20/40 or 16/20 mesh ceramic or bauxite,
The Enchova field is elongated southwest to northeast and lays could provide the required conductivity.
in water depth from 106 m to 130 m. The Quissamã carbonate Proppant flowback was controlled either by the use of a liquid
is characterized by low to medium porosity (15% to 25%) and resin coated system, or by the use of deformable particles
low permeability (1 md to 10 md), exhibiting a typical mixed into the proppant.
thickness of 40 m to 70 m. The drive mechanism is gas
6 SPE 108075
The SSs of the lower completion deployed could be used to
flow each fracture selectively during cleanup. However, this is
a cost prohibitive approach from a floating drilling rig. So it
was decided to tag all individual stages of each of the seven
fractures with oil and water-soluble tracers. Both types of
tracers are relatively inert, stable at reservoir conditions, and
can be analyzed to very low parts per billion levels.
After trouble with screen-out in fractures 1 and 3, changes and
improvements, such as higher rate, larger pad sizes, circulating
crosslinked gel and 100-mesh sand to the perforations prior to
the main treatment, in addition to proppant slugs and smaller-
sized proppant, made the following fractures treatments
successful. The well was completed and declared ready for
production with six propped fractures and one acid fracture
(Fig. 3). All fractures were mechanically isolated with packers
and SSs.
Figure 3 Horizontal well EN-52H wellbore schematic with
seven fracture stages (35% welbore coverage)
The well came on stream in November 2005 with 4 intervals
opened and 3 closed to avoid cross flows due to significant
reservoir pressure differences caused by depletion from offset
wells. In April 2006 the 3 SSs still closed were opened with
difficulty due to the presence of proppant in the horizontal
section. After one year on stream the oil rate stabilized in 150
m3/d. In a recent post job study, production history match was
only achieved assuming a vertical permeability in the order of
micro Darcy. This surprisingly small vertical permeability had
to be set to match the quite low water rate and to avoid coning
of water from the transition and water zones below. Thus,
ignoring proppant flowback harms, the poorer than expected
reservoir quality is the cause of the lower than anticipated
production24.
Methodology to Select Completion and Stimulation
Techniques for Horizontal Wells
We focus here what most differ the process of selecting
completion and stimulation techniques for horizontal wells of
the same process for vertical wells. Though unstimulated
horizontal wells have been very successful in naturally
fractured reservoirs and in reservoirs with gas or water coning
problems25 there were many cases of underachieving
horizontal wells. The poor performance of a horizontal well
may be attributed to one or the combination of the following:
1. Reservoir rock quality poorer than anticipated;
2. Unpredicted shale stringers or poor vertical permeability;
3. Poor positioning of the wellbore in the pay zone - large
standoff from the center and/or missed producing zones in
some parts of the lateral;
4. Severe drilling/completion formation damage25,26.
Additionally, the production into a horizontal well is rarely
uniform across the whole interval
The process of selecting completion and stimulation
techniques for horizontal wells is much more complex than in
vertical wells. The main reasons for that are:
1. Each stimulated horizontal well causes a great impact in
the reservoir drainage;
2. The completion and stimulation design, execution and
evaluation are much more complex and time consuming.
3. The completion and stimulation costs are much higher,
increasing the capital investment risk.
4. Failures can have great impact in terms of deferred
production and remedial costs.
5. Often the process is not to select a good candidate, but to
find a solution for an underachieving horizontal well.
6. Often the completion was not designed for stimulation
purpose increasing the challenges to design and execute an
effective treatment.
The first reason represents perhaps the main differential
between completing and stimulating vertical and horizontal
wells. A stimulated horizontal well can be seen as many
vertical wells, significantly affecting the reservoir drainage.
Thus the macro aspects of field/area management and the
multidisciplinary approach are much more important. To
select the optimum completion/stimulation option the
engineer, in close cooperation with geologists, reservoir and
production engineers, must consider the macro aspects of the
reservoir drainage and the particular aspects of each well. The
Halfdan field development, for instance, is a very illustrative
case where the waterflood technology adopted, a macro
aspect, determined that fracturing must be avoided11.
Because the history of horizontal wells, the asset teams
now face a scenario of selecting completion and stimulation
techniques for new wells or searching for alternatives to
stimulate horizontal wells already completed, often with an
inappropriate wellbore configuration. This process is based on
the balance between investment, risks and possible rewards.
The expected rewards are production anticipation and reserve
increase.
With regard to the type of treatment the usual stimulation
options comprise matrix treatments, acid fracturing, hydraulic
fracturing and mixed fracturing. The matrix treatments,
usually acid based, are pumped at rates below fracture closure
stress and are efficient only in near wellbore region
(penetration of inches to feet). These are damage removal
treatments and not true stimulation. In acid fracturing, acid is
pumped at pressures above fracture closure stress, creating
penetrating fractures. This is true stimulation, potentially
increasing production and effective drainage area. The main
concerns about acid fracturing are the effective fracture
conductivity length and the stability of the etched width (Will
the fracture lose conductivity during production?). In propped
hydraulic fracturing proppant laden fluid is pumped at
pressures above fracture closure stress and at sufficient rates to
create the required geometry. The fluid leaks off and the
fracture closes on proppant, creating a highly conductive flow
path. Although there are many issues that have to be properly
considered in hydraulic fracturing design and execution, this
technique is more controllable than acid fracturing. Mixed
SPE 108075
fracturing is the association between propped and acid
fracturing. The selection of fracturing type (acid, propped or
mixed) is based on specific laboratory analysis, used to
estimate fracture geometry and conductivity along the
production time. In the absence of these and other reservoir
information it is necessary to assume certain parameters
values, increasing the process uncertainty.
Concerning fracturing design, following the usual approach in
the last decades the stimulation engineer, using a fracturing
simulator, verify the technical viability, risks and costs of
placing one or more fractures in a vertical well and represents
the benefits in terms of productivity index. The engineer can
then estimate post-fracture production via analytical methods
such as nodal analysis software. General optimization
methodology steps are:
• Predict well performance for the base case (unfractured)
and for different fracture lengths, conductivities and
drainage areas;
• Estimate treatment costs required to create the assumed
fractures;
• Perform the economical evaluation based in indicators
such as net present value (NPV), rate of return (ROR) or
net present value to investment ratio (NPV/IR);
• Based on optimal economical indicators and practical
considerations make the final decision.
The beauty of this process is simplicity and speed and it works
for vertical well in homogeneous reservoir. However,
analytical modeling provides poor production forecasting for
wells with complex trajectories and/or in heterogeneous
reservoirs. This happens because in general the analytical
models do not take into account important parameters and
effects such as reservoir layering and geometry, non-Darcy
effects along the fracture, fracture conductivity variation along
the time, multiphase flow, condensate banking and flow
convergence25,27,28. The problem is worse in horizontal wells
where modeling the vertical communication provided by the
fractures is crucial28, and it is necessary to model several
discrete fractures in one well. An accurate modeling of a
horizontal well with hydraulic fractures can be achieved with
numerical simulation, that permit detailed reservoir properties,
layering, pressure-volume-temperature (PVT) properties, field
geometry and well geometry to be built-in into the model. It is
then possible to model the fluid flow from the matrix to the
fractures and along the fractures more realistically. However
until recently it was very complex to build the model using the
numerical simulators available even without numerical
diversion. To solve these problems, new numerical fracture
modeling software or templates were recently developed27,28.
Using these user-friendly interfaces between fracturing and
reservoir simulators, multiple fractured horizontal wells can be
modeled faster. It is also easy to change parameters and
regenerate the model permitting sensitivity analysis.
A good example of stimulation study where there were neither
cores nor special logs available is the study for the 1-RJS-
512HA well in the Congro Field in Campos Basin20.
A reference study on field scale, where all the phases and steps
were carefully fulfilled, is the one carried out in 2003 for the
Valhall field15.
7
Summarizing, the methodology to select completion and
stimulation techniques for horizontal wells comprise:
1. Adopt a macro view considering the field/area drainage;
2. Teamwork is a must;
3. Although a short period may be used in the techniques
selection phase, the final design must consider the well life
cycle;
4. Use a template interface between fracturing and reservoir
simulators to perform multiple fractured horizontal wells
numerical modeling;
5. The well trajectory design must consider many reservoir
aspects and the balance between longitudinal and
transverse fractures;
6. Provide specific laboratory analysis to support the
selection of the stimulation type;
7. For each area/field develop an strategy for
completion/stimulation and a decision analysis tree for
stimulation selection;
8. Post job evaluation, including production history match, is
very important for future treatments.
It should be mentioned that the suggested approach still has to
overcome many controversial points. Real teamwork is still a
challenge due to the different background and cultural aspects
of well engineering and reservoir engineering people. The
template interface between fracturing and reservoir simulators
is a recent tool. The general simulation process still require
premises or provide results that seems to contradict the real
world.
Completion/Stimulation Alternatives for Multiple
Fractures in Horizontal Wells
The type of completion determines the sort of treatments that
can be made and the productivity that can be realized. When
designing a new well or, which is better, several wells in a
project, there is a chance of selecting both the completions and
the stimulations that are optimum to that area or field. When
dealing with an existing well or group of wells the task of
selecting the optimum stimulation for the existing completion
may be a huge challenge. The stimulation selection is very
dependent on the lower completion or formation completion,
that can be comprised of cemented liner, noncemented liner
with annulus barrier tools, slotted or preperforated liner
without annulus barrier tool or simply openhole (barefoot).
Thus, completion design is a fundamental step. The premise
that horizontal wells would not be stimulated supported the
adoption of openhole or uncemented liner (pre or post
perforated) as a structural reinforcement. Horizontal wells in
high permeability unconsolidated sandstone have been
completed with open hole gravel pack (OHGP). More than
200 OHGP have been deployed in Campos Basin horizontal
wells as of October 2006, as well as some stand alone and
expandable applications. In Brazilian carbonates reservoirs
slotted or perforated liner have been used like in many other
areas in the world.
The available stimulation techniques will be presented by the
lower completion type in the next sections.
8 SPE 108075
New Completion in Cased and Cemented Well
Cased and cemented wells provide the maximum freedom to
define and control stimulation (where the fractures will be
placed and how large each fracture should be) and oil and
water management. On the other hand this completion
presents high costs, is very time consuming, and may also
limit the production due to the long blank sections and the
possibility of cementing natural fractures and fissures29. In
addition, later restimulations are not easy due to internal
diameter restrictions. In this kind of completion the
stimulation, in particular multiple fractures, can be staged,
simultaneously created or placed with alternative techniques.
Staged multiple fractures are those placed in a wellbore in
separate stages, or selectively. Since each treatment only
creates a single fracture, the fracture models and pressure
analysis techniques are applicable, allowing on-site redesign.
This enhances the chances of achieving the design objectives
and reducing job failures. The first fracture treatment is carried
out at the toe of the lateral, and the following treatments are
placed sequentially in the heel direction. There are various
methods to carry on staged multiple fractures depending on
the devices (bridge plug, composite plug, sand plug, chemical
packer) used to isolate each created fracture from the next one
and the type of intervention unit used (drilling rig, snubbing
unit, coiled tubing unit). Some information about these
methods was presented previously in this paper.
The more complete methods for staged fracturing are those
that provide selectivity both during treatments and production
such as the one introduced in the Dan field in 19891. This
system is comprised of two basic assemblies run into the well
all together. The permanent one is a downhole assembly,
consisted of sealing assembly, SSs and spacing tubing, for
isolating each interval after stimulation treatment (Fig. 4).
Figure 4 Wellbore schematics with selective system –
removing proppant excess
After removing the proppant excess, the sealing assembly
is stabbed into a bridge plug (first fracture) or into the
previous packer (second fracture onwards) and then the packer
is set. The service assembly is retrieved from the permanent
assembly (lower completion) after setting the packer and then
moved to the next perforating interval. After perforating it is
pulled out of the hole with the fired gun carrier1.
Figure 5 Wellbore schematics with selective system - seven fractures
ready to open the sliding sleeves.
Following upper completion installation a coiled tubing
conveyed tool is run in to open the SS of each stimulated
interval.
A new system was developed specially for application on
multiple fractured subsea horizontal cased and cemented wells
as well as multi-zone frac pack wells. Benefits of this system
are as follows:
• Utilizes proven sleeve/shifting tool technology for
isolation;
• Utilizes screen designed for optimum production and
proppant flowback control;
• All positions are mechanically identified and
hydraulically verified;
• Design provides large and unrestricted ID normally equal
to production tubing string.
This system was first field tested for a multi-national
operator in Louisiana-USA in 2005, and it has been selected to
be used for two multi-national operators in Indonesia. This is
an alternative that provides the ability to multi-frac a
horizontal cased well or frac pack multi-zone wells in a single
trip, with complete zone isolation both before and after
treatment and the ability to provide selective or commingled
production.
Figure 6 Comparison example chart showing operation hours required
for a conventional multi frac operation and the single trip system
The maximum functionality may be achieved with
remotely controlled valves (intelligent or smart completion),
that need to be developed for fracturing operations conditions.
Sand jetting fracturing, although developed for
noncemented liners (see section on existing wells in
noncemented liner) can be applied in cemented liners for
staged fracturing.
An alternative method, Casing Conveyed Perforating
Technology, that fits the casing string with integral isolation
devices (such as flapper valves), perforating guns external to
the casing, and methods (such as external hydraulic control
lines) to actuate the equipment remotely, was introduced in
1999. Recently this technology has been successfully deployed
in horizontal completions in tight gas formation. As many as
thirteen discreet interval have been stimulated in a single
horizontal intervals, nearly 4,000 ft (1,219 m) long30.
However, there are geometric limitations and operational
issues to address for offshore horizontal well applications.
SPE 108075
When the staged multiple fractures are not justified, an
alternative is the simultaneous creation of the multiple
fractures, what saves significant amount of completion cost.
The main drawback in this method is that the proppant may be
placed in a few dominant fractures (due to variations in in-situ
stress and permeability), leaving the rest of intervals not
fractured or with much smaller fractures. Simultaneous
creation of multiple fractures can be achieve with limited entry
technique or bullheading.
The limited entry technique, developed for vertical wells,
has also been used in horizontal wells for many years31.
Several cases of success have been presented in the literature.
Zonal isolation (good cement) and perforation methods are
key for limited-entry fracturing success31. Acid soluble cement
also improved fracture effectiveness by reducing near-
wellbore effects32. Biodegradable ball sealers carried in acid
spearhead may be used to breakdown the perforations. After
ball sealers dissolution a step down test from the main
treatment rate can allow the estimation of the number of
opened perforations33. However, this technique presents many
drawbacks that are exacerbated in horizontal wells, such as
high fluid friction along the horizontal section; high
perforation erosion; and large variation of stress and near-
wellbore effects along the horizontal section. Thus, there is a
significant chance that the majority of the proppant-laden
slurry may go into the perforation intervals near the heel,
while only a little amount reaches the toe section. In this case,
besides having poor or no fractures close to the toe, the
fractures close to the heel can be much bigger than designed,
wasting time and money and eventually hitting water or gas
zones.
A bullhead treatment is a very simple technique that can be
applied down production tubing or operational string. It is
difficult to predict where and how many fractures will be
created. The pad volume can be adjusted on site by usual
minifrac pressure decline analysis which estimates the
nominal fluid efficiency. But this analysis is more difficult and
less reliable. Bullhead fracturing long horizontal perforated
intervals in Prudhoe Bay field, Alaska34 showed, both by
pressure response and radioactive tracers, that only a few
fractures were propagated. However, these remedial fracture
treatments resulted in significant production increase, since the
wells contained formation damage or missed pay. Bullheading
can be assisted with diversion techniques such as sand slugs,
rock salt and fibers. Unfortunately these diversion methods
can bridge the annulus and cause premature screenout.
New Completion in Openhole or Noncemented Liner
Openhole or barefoot completion may be an option for some
scenarios. Some important parameters for selecting this kind
of completion are wellbore stability, geological properties, and
reservoir fluids control, as defined by hydraulic units and
permeability magnitudes and anisotropy35.
Noncemented liners, whether preperforated or slotted, provide
some structural reinforcement, while maintaining the
advantage of large well exposure. In general these completions
designs offer limited flexibility in stimulation, remediation and
production control. Stimulations for either completion can be
9
done by sand jetting, limited entry, coiled tubing washing or
bullheading.
In 2002, an openhole completion with cased hole
functionalities for horizontal wells was introduced to the
industry. The completion system enables multiple fractures of
an uncemented completion in one pumping treatment.
Openhole packers are run on conventional casing to segment
the reservoir and maximize reservoir drainage (Fig. 7).
Between each set of openhole packers are hydraulically
activated SSs. During pumping, balls are dropped from surface
to shift each SS open and isolate previously fractured SSs.
Following the pumping treatment, the well can be immediately
cleaned up to minimize any damage from the fracturing fluid.
During cleanup of the well, the balls which shift the sleeves
are collected at surface for disposal. A final feature is that the
sleeves can be shifted throughout the life of the well to aide in
reservoir management. Since 2002, this completion system has
been run in over 400 wells, both in land and offshore wells, in
a wide range of formations including sandstone, carbonate,
shale, coal and chalk. The packers have been run to withstand
8,000 psi differential pressure, been run in a well with BHST
of 380 oF and in a variety of wellbore fluids including oil, gas,
condensate, H2S and CO2 29.
Figure 7 Noncemented liner with packers and fracports
In the future it may be possible to create several effective
(optimum geometry and conductivity) transversal fractures in
noncemented completions. Then, as explained by
Surjaatmadja et al. the flow of fluids will be as follows36 (Fig.
8).
Figure 8 Flow pattern in a preperforated liner completion
(Surjaatmadja, et.al., SPE 103774)
The formation fluids near the wellbore between two
contiguous fractures will flow straight into the wellbore (a).
Far from the wellbore, the fluids flow is parallel with the face
of the fracture (b). The flow follows a radial pattern through
the fracture, and as the radial fluid velocity (c) becomes high,
the pressure drop between position (d) and the wellbore also
10
becomes high, which may cause fluids to reenter the formation
(e) and from there, directly enter the perforated liner36. Thus
this type of completion would add the advantages of openhole
completion with multitransversal fractures.
Sand jetting. fracturing could be used to create the
transversal fractures, adding vertical jetted holes to eliminate
or to reduce flow constriction in the wellbore connection.
Jetted cavity length can exceed 1.52 m (5 ft), providing an
effective well diameter over 3.04 m (10 ft). This is
significantly greater than effective wellbore diameters
achievable with regular perforations (about 8 in length,
generating 16 in effective wellbore diameter)36.
An even better improvement could be the use of dual
fractures as proposed by the same authors36 (Fig. 9).
Figure 9 Flow in a dual frac completion (Surjaatmadja, et.al., SPE 103774)
This completion would have a more simple flow pattern
due to the second fracture. The possibility of fracture
redirection allowing the creation of a longitudinal fracture
after the transversal fracture, has long been recognized37.
Some questions have to be answered such as how much time
is allowed between the creation of the two fractures before the
relaxation of the rock eliminates the redirection effect.
Existing Completion in Cased and Cemented Well
Some wells that were cased and cemented and completed
without considering the necessity of stimulation can, soon or
later, require stimulation due to poor well performance. The
difficulty in creating multiple fractures in these wells is
aggravated in cases of long perforated intervals not adequately
separated from each other. The following techniques can be
used: bullhead treatment, sand jetting stimulation, multiple
alternating treatment stages. Bullheading was presented in a
previous section. Sand jetting fracturing although developed
for noncemented wells can be used for cased and cemented
wells (see next section).
Existing completion in openhole or noncemented liner
These are perhaps the most difficult completions for fracture
stimulation treatments, since any weak planes such as natural
fractures, faults and joints can be fracture initiation sites.
Furthermore, a slotted or preperforated liner prevents
mechanical isolation through packers and bridge plugs. To
stimulate this type of completion one can use a bullhead
treatment or a sand jetting. stimulation. To facilitate fracture
initiation one can use perforating, breakdown with straddle
packers, propellant fracturing and notching with a sand jet.
SPE 108075
Bullhead treatments have failed in most hydraulic fracturing in
this type of completion. The main cause of failures is
excessive leak-off leading to insufficient fracture width and
consequent screen-out. Another cause of failure may be slurry
dehydration in the slotted liner.
Sand jetting fracturing is a effective method to stimulate
noncemented liner in various scenarios20-22, 38,39. This method
is a combination of three distinct processes: i) cutting a slot
and initiating a fracture with sand jetting, ii) fracturing (down
the tubing), and iii) co-injection down the annulus. Rather than
using mechanical sealing or chemical blocks, this method uses
the fluids own dynamic to divert the majority of the fluid flow
into a specific point in the horizontal section. This method
allows the placement of several discrete fractures,
sequentially, from the toe to the heel of the horizontal section.
As many texts38,39 described the sand jetting fracturing process,
this paper will not discuss it in detail. It should be mentioned
that the method has limitations such as erosion of the jet
nozzles and tool body due to back splash, fracturing string
sticking and excessive loss of fracturing fluid when there is
high pressure differential between fractured intervals.
Key Aspects for Designing and Implementing
Horizontal Completion and Stimulation
Amongst the many crucial aspects for design, deployment and
evaluation of horizontal completion and stimulation are:
1. In situ stresses, well placement and the choice of the
creation of transversal or longitudinal fractures;
2. Determination of fracture orientation;
3. Treatment type selection;
4. Horizontal section cement execution and evaluation;
5. Definition of the number of fractures and their
characteristics;
6. Perforating design;
7. Proppant flow back control;
8. Calibration tests to optimize the pad and propped laden
fluid volumes;
9. Procedures to opening up the well;
10. Fracturing monitoring;
11. Evaluation of each fracture.
The in situ stresses and the well placement define whether
the fractures will be transversal or longitudinal (Fig. 10).
Transverse fractures are created when the wellbore is
oriented perpendicular to the fracture plane (±15º).
Longitudinal fractures result when the wellbore is parallel to
the fracture plane (±15º)25. When the horizontal section axis is
not aligned with the fracture propagation plane the fracture
will experience a reorientation from the wellbore to this plane,
what can raise near-wellbore issues25,40. Thus, it is essential to
know the in situ stresses and the direction of fracture
propagation and to make the best effort to align the horizontal
section with one of the principal horizontal stresses. It is not
always possible because the macro aspects of reservoir
drainage come first, when defining well placement orientation.
While an undamaged horizontal well provides a nearly
infinitely conductive path in the reservoir along the wellbore
direction, the transverse fracture enhances the flow in the other
direction. Thus, transverse fractures drain a larger section of
SPE 108075
the reservoir and have the potential for attaining even higher
productivity than longitudinal fractures. Many cases histories
have shown the good results of transverse fractures20-22,38,39.
On the other hand transverse fractures may present more
difficult for proppant placement, and as they only connect the
wellbore at one point, flow convergence may raise some
issues. These issues are more relevant in high rate wells,
formations that produce both liquid and gas, what can cause
non-Darcy and convergence effects, and in formations where
creating transverse fractures can be difficult due to near-
wellbore tortuosity.
A study indicated that a high-conductivity proppant could be
placed in the fracture to help overcome the additional pressure
drop caused by fluid convergence at the borehole. Also, to
really make a difference, the fracture must have an
adimensional conductivity (Cfd) of at least 525
A longitudinal fracture across a horizontal wellbore behaves
similarly to its vertical well counterpart, with one great
difference: the horizontal well is usually long and the fracture
height is usually short. Thus, a longitudinal fracture is
generally not effective for increasing the drainage area, but to
anticipate the production. It does provide a conductive path to
the wellbore in the vertical direction, which is mostly useful in
a laminated formation with very low vertical permeability.
Thus, in general the transverse fractures are preferred
whenever possible, considering the fractures creation process
and the productivity and reserve increase benefits.
σv σhma
longitudinal
transversal
σhmi
Figure 10 Transverse and longitudinal fractures
Fracture orientation can be identified by regional fault
analysis, using logs (sonic, resistivity images), oriented cores
associated with other measurements (microfrac, anelastic
strain recovery, Kaiser effect), downhole extensometer and
nearby wells observation (tiltmeters or microseism
instruments)41. In deepwater subsea wells offshore Brazil all
these methods, except tiltmeters and microseismic, have been
used 20,23,42
The detection of the fracture orientation from cores
samples is sometimes difficult. The type of the rock, retrieval
problems, and the fact that the associated measurements
(microfrac, anelastic strain recovery) is done in a vertical
section of the wellbore that is offset from the proposed
horizontal section, can lead to uncertainties in determining the
true directions of the horizontal stresses. Logs methods require
lab and field calibration for adequate accuracy.
11
There were some special cases where hydraulic fractures
previously created were intercepted by new wells or by
hydraulic fracturing a nearby well. These are rare
opportunities to check the methods used for fracture direction
prediction and to estimate fracture geometry. In the Dan field ,
in March 1990 a massive propped hydraulic fracture
restimulation performed in a well intercepted a nearby well.
Thus it was possible to determine exactly the direction of this
particular fracture: 5ºNNW3. In 1996 a new producer
intercepted the fracture created by an injector well which was
injecting above fracture propagation pressure for 6 months6. In
Halfdan a design well was used to confirm the propagation
direction of a previously created fracture in a nearby well11.
Images from infill horizontal wells can also identify hydraulic
fractures previously created in offset wells43.
For offshore wells most of the methods are very expensive
and time consuming. This aspect associated with the
verification that pressure depletion and other artifacts affect
the fracture orientation along a horizontal section, make this
subject a controversial one. Should one rely on broad
geological analysis? Is it worth to invest in direct check with a
design well, for instance? Can resistivity image logs while
drilling the horizontal provide all the necessary information?
Selection of the treatment type focusing on true stimulation
includes acid fracturing, hydraulic (propped) fracturing and
mixed fracturing (acid plus proppant). As mentioned before
the selection of the optimum treatment is based on specific
laboratory analysis used to estimate fracture geometry and
conductivity along the production time. Experience in the area
and practical aspects are also important.
Horizontal section cementation – for a cemented horizontal
well that will be stimulated a good quality cement sheath is very
important. Higher stress levels at perforations, and multiple high
pressures cycles during fracturing impose tremendous stresses
on cement sheaths. The fracturing fluid during early stages may
cleanup cement channels, allowing proppant placement along
these channels. There was a case where proppant traveled
around 100 feet behind the casing, re-entering the casing, and
damaging the work string9. Low quality cement may add
tortuosity, which can increase the treatment pressures and can
cause premature screen-out. It can also compromise zonal
isolation, and, in more adverse situations, damage the fracturing
string. Acid treatments can percolate through even small
channels. Some keys aspects to cementing horizontal wells are:
good mud rheology and drilling practices; good mud removal,
dependent upon circulation, centralization, liner movement and
effective spacers and washers; good liner centralization and
consistent cement properties, in particular no sedimentation, no
free water, minimal fluid loss and low gel strength. Field
experience has shown that it has been very difficult to achieve
cement isolation in horizontal sections. A promising solution is
the acid soluble system (ASC), which can provide conditions
similar to openhole in the perforating interval region by using an
acid pre-flushing. A recent case study revealed improved
fracture initiation conditions, while maintaining zonal isolation
when applying this new solution44.
It has also been difficult to evaluate the cement isolation even
using a full set of sonic and ultrasonic tools. It is an area of
insufficient knowledge and/or communication.
12
The number of created fractures and their characteristics
should be defined, as mentioned before, using a fracture
simulator, a template interface and a reservoir simulator, that
allow an accurate and fast modeling of the effects of multiple
fractures on a horizontal well productivity and long term
production27,28. Fracturing simulators are used to define
fracture length, height, width and agressivity of net pressure
gain. The known relationship CfD=kfw/kx denotes that, to
increase the dimensionless fracture conductivity CfD, it is
required to increase the kfw product41. To achieve high kfw in
medium to soft formations one should adopt the TSO (Tip
Screen Out) technique. It should be mentioned that in
fracturing deviated or horizontal wells, the width at the
borehole entrance might not enlarge after initiation40.
The template interface into the fracture simulator exports a
refined grid with the selected parameter to represent fracture
productivity gain to the reservoir simulator. This is used to
calculate the predicted the long term production for each
number of fractures and their characteristics.
Perforating for fracturing design presents different
requirements than perforating for production. This is
particularly important in horizontal/deviated wells, in which
the connection between perforations and fracture may be
limited. Several parameters such as wellbore inclination,
wellbore orientation relative to the fracture propagation plane,
formation hardness, proppant size and loading are very
important. The design should use computer simulation with
parameters input at downhole conditions and performance data
based on API RP 19B. Improper perforations may cause high
pressures in the treatment, premature screenouts and/or
hamper production due to choke effect in the wellbore-fracture
interface. In horizontal/deviated wells there is a tendency to
initiate an axial fracture that soon switches to following the far
field stresses. El-Rabaa studied this problem and concluded
that to prevent the creation of axial fractures, the perforated
interval should not exceed four times the diameter of the
wellbore40. For an 8.50 in. wellbore it means 34 in. (0.86 m).
To avoid multiple fractures it is better not to exceed two times
this diameter. While in some low permeability carbonates this
criterion has been relaxed a little (perforated lengths from 1 m
to 2 m) 40, a recent study on tight formation confirmed the
importance of not exceeding the four times wellbore diameter
criterion 44.
The perforation density should be high, which for oriented
perforating may require reperforating about the same interval
with a small depth difference . An experimental study showed
that at least for low permeability rock and high injection rate,
the maximum perforation spacing in a row (180º phasing)
should not exceed 4 times the perforation diameter. This way
fractures initiated at the perforations link up, regardless of
wellbore inclination45. The perforation diameter should be 8 to
10 times (minimum of 6) the mean proppant diameter.
For transverse fractures, phasing should cover the full
360º of the wellbore circumference.
For longitudinal fractures it is recommended to perforate
only the high and low sides of the wellbore (oriented 180º
phasing), with high density46. It is based on many experiments
that showed that fracture initiated at the high and low sides of
the wellbore, wherever overburden stress was greater than the
other stresses (> 99% of wells). After the stimulation, an extra
SPE 108075
perforation with 360º coverage may be considered for
production reasons46. Some engineers prefer 60º phasing when
they don’t know the fracture propagation direction. The
perforated interval may be longer (a few meters). It is
recommended to design for several separate longitudinal
fractures because it is not practical to obtain an entire
horizontal perforated well exactly in the direction of the
maximum horizontal stress. The perforation cluster distance or
fracture spacing has a minimum to avoid the stress shadow
phenomenon. Roughly this minimum is the previous fracture
height.
Sand jetting may be an alternative for perforating. It has
the potential for deep penetration and to cut a hole the full
360º of the wellbore circumference, which may be necessary
to surpass the stress concentration area around the wellbore.
Proppant flow back can be a major problem over the life
of a fractured horizontal well. Any proppant production
becomes a problem because there is no rat hole in which it can
fall. There are many methods of proppant flow-back control
such as: proppant consolidation, proppant tacking agents,
deformable proppants, micro-fibers, heat-sensitive plastic film,
forced fracture closure47. What has been most used in low
permeability carbonates is: resin-coated proppant (stress
bonding or bonding to stress type), forced fracture closure and
very careful bean-ups. According to the production platform
engineers proppant flow is still common, so the proppant flow
back control methods are still being optimized.
Calibration tests to optimize the pad and propped
laden fluid volumes, the combination of G-function and
square root time pressure decline analyses of both injectivity
test, and minifrac, have resulted in a much more reliable and
consistent interpretation of fracture closure pressure. The
application of G-function and G dP/dG derivative analysis of
minifrac data can aid in the identification of pressure
dependent leakoff, thus providing an indication of potential
fracture treatment problems. It should be mentioned that G-
Function analysis is based on 2D models, which according to
some engineers is an important drawback. The application of
step down test analysis is very useful in identifying near
wellbore tortuosity, and in defining the deployment of
proppant slugs5,12,14.
Procedures to production management of a fractured
horizontal well must be written and rigorously followed since
the cleanup of fracturing fluids through all its producing life.
The cleanup process in offshore wells is often carried out
some time after the conclusion of the stimulation/completion.
It may take months in some cases. So, the first well unloading
is an important moment in the project life where the
multidisciplinary approach may be broken. Bean up
procedures, including samples collection, must be rigorously
applied. This is very important to manage stimulation
evaluation, proppant flow back, fines migration and other
issues, mainly in well with transverse fractures. As previously
mentioned, Valhall wells were drawn down quickly initially,
then slowed down and then finally opened slowly to peak
production17. Frequent shutdowns are a problem in offshore
wells demanding frequent restarts. These restarts are more
problematic in deep water wells due to the conflict between
slow rate bean up, to minimize shocks on the completion, and
SPE 108075
the risk of hydrate formation or organic scale deposition. It
also should be mentioned that the operator’s production
sections should maintain the internal stimulation experts and
the external partners informed of the well production history.
This would be very important for the evaluation of the
methods applied and their evolution. It can be said that,
unfortunately, it is still a controversial point.
Fracture monitoring has experienced a significant
evolution. Real time monitoring through live feed satellite
communication allows the consultation of experts real-time.
Besides monitoring parameters such as rates, volumes,
pressures, proppant loading and chemical concentrations some
of them both on the surface and downhole, engineers now
have resources such as tiltmeters, microseismic and various
wirelines tools48-51.
The evaluation of each fracture should ideally be done
selectively. There are several methods to achieve that.
However, in the offshore environment, particularly in
deepwater, it is a cost prohibitive approach. One given
solution is to tag all individual stages of each fracture with oil
and/or water-soluble tracers. Both types of tracers are
relatively inert, stable at reservoir conditions, and can be
analyzed to very low parts per billion levels. Once the well is
on production, collected water and oil samples can be
analyzed for presence of both tracers.
Scenarios for horizontal completion and stimulation
in Brazil and other Latin America countries
Information obtained in the industry events allows one
perceive that there are a lot of opportunities for horizontal well
completion and stimulation in several countries in Latin
America. In Brazil one can say that there is a new phase of
renewed interest in low permeability carbonates and other
scenarios for horizontal completion and stimulation. This
includes a broad program of carbonate revitalization in the
mature areas of Campos Basin. A pilot project in the Bonito
field was in the drilling phase on February 2007. Two projects
were on technical and economical evaluation in the Congro
and Cherne fields. New finds in Santos and Campos Basin
opened opportunities for horizontal completion and
stimulation in oil and gas reservoirs.
Regarding the resources required to face the challenges
raised by the new opportunities in Latin America, it can be
said that the operators and their partners are ready to provide
them. It should be mentioned that there is a personnel shortage
and the delivery times are long for materials and equipments.
Thus, project coordinators must be aware of these difficulties
and take actions to overcome them.
Conclusions and recommendations.
1. Many discoveries and technological innovations in
completion and stimulation of North Sea low-permeability
carbonates were presented;
2. The first applications of horizontal stimulation methods in
subsea wells of Campos basin were presented.
3. The paper presented some considerations on the
methodology to select completion and stimulation techniques
for horizontal wells;
4. Completion and stimulation methods for cemented liner,
noncemented liner with annulus barrier tools, slotted or
13
preperforated liner without annulus barrier tool and openhole
were reviewed;
5. The paper also summarized the key aspects for designing,
implementing, and evaluating horizontal completion and
stimulation;
6. Some controversial or unsatisfactorily solved issues were
raised, which optimization can result in signifcant gains;
7. It was verified that there are many promising scenarios for
horizontal completion and stimulation in Brazil and other
Latin America countries;
8. It was also verified that personnel shortages and long
delivery times for equipments are important issues in
implementing horizontal completion and stimulation in Latin
America
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Petróleo Brasileiro S/A, Halliburton
Energy Services, Schlumberger and BJ Services for their
support and permission to publish this paper. Special thanks
go to Marcos Antonio Rosolen and Paulo Dore Fernandes
from Petróleo Brasileiro S/A, Anthony Neil Martin and
Frederico Carvalho from BJ Service and Steve Deyo from
Schlumberger for manuscript revision.
Nomenclature
API = American Petroleum Institute
API RP = API recommended practice
BHN = Brinell hardness number
BHST = bottom hole static temperature
GOR = gas oil rate
MD = measured depth
OOIP = original oil in place
SS = sliding sleeve
STB = stock tank barrel
TVT = total vertical depth
4D = four dimensions
References
1. A.P Damgaard, D.S. Bangert, D.J. Murray, R.P. Rubbo e G.W.
Stout, A Unique Method for Completing Horizontal Wells, SPE
19282, February 1992.
2. Owens, K.A. et al.: “Practical Considerations of Horizontal Well
Fracturing in the ‘Danish Chalk’,” SPE 25058, SPE European
Petroleum Conference, Cannes, France, 16–18 November, 1992.
3. Weijers, L., De Pater, C.J., Owens, K.A., Kogsbøll, H.H.:
“Geometry of Hydraulic Fractures Induced from Horizontal
Wellbores,” paper SPE 25049, SPE Production & Facilities, May
1994
4. Larsen F.P., Cowie, D.R., Ovens, J.V.: ”Using 4000 ft Long
Induced Fractures to Water Flood the Dan Field,”paper SPE
38558, presented at the 1997 Offshore Europe Conference, held
in Aberdeen, Scotland, 9-12 September.
5. Ovens, J.E.V., Larsen, F.P., Cowie, D.R.: “Making Sense of
Water Injection Fractures in the Dan Field,” papers SPE 52669
presented at the 1997 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, held in San Antonio, Texas, 5-8 October.
6. Hansen, J.H., Nederveen, N.: “Controlled Acid Jet (CAJ)
Technique for Effective Single Operation Stimulation of 14,000+
ft Long Reservoir Sections”, paper SPE 78318, presented at the
SPE European Petroleum Conference, Aberdeen, Scotland, 29–31
October, 2002.
14
7. Kogsboll, H.H., Pitts, M.J., and Owens, K.A., “Effects of
Tortuosity inf Fracture Stimulation of Horizontal Wells – A Case
Study of the Dan Field”, SPE 26796, Offshore Europe, Aberdeen,
Scotland, 7-10 September, 1993.
8. Jacobsen, N.L., Engstrøm, F., Uldall, A., Petersen, N.W.:
“Delineation of Hydrodynamic/Geodynamic Trapped Oil in Low
Permeabiliy Chalk,” paper SPE 56514 presented at ,1999.
9. Albrechtsen, T.; Andersen, S.J.; Dons, T.; Engstron, F.;
Jorgensen, O. and Sorensen, F.W.: “Halfdan: Developing Non-
Structurally Trapped Oil in North Sea Chalk”, paper SPE 71322
presented at 2001 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans, Lousiana, 30 September-3 October
2001.
10. Jorgensen Ole: “Using Flow Induced Stresses for Steering of
Injection Fractures”, paper SPE/ISRM 78220, presented at the
SPE/ISRM Rock Mechanics Conference, Irving, Texas, 20-23
October 2002.
11. Rod, M.H. and Jorgensen O.: “Injection Fracturing in a Densely
Spaced Line Drive Waterflood – The Halfdan Example”, paper
SPE 94049 presented at the SPE Europe/EAGE Annual
Conference, Madrid, Spain, 13-16 June 2005.
12. Cipolla, C.L., Berntsen, B.A., Moos, H., Ginty, W.R., Jensen, L.:
“Case Study of Hydraulic Fracture Completions in Horizontal
Wells, South Arne Field Danish North Sea,” paper SPE 64383
presented at the 2000 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference
and Exhibition held in Brisbane, Australia, 16-18 October 2000.
13. Cipolla, C.L., Hansen, K. K. and Ginty, W.R.,”Fracture
Treatment Design and Execution in Low Porosity Chalk
Reservoirs”, SPE 86485, 2004 SPE International Symposium
and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, L.A.,
USA, 18-20 February 2004.
14. Norris, M.R., Bermtsen, B.A., Myhre, P., Winters, W.J.: Multiple
Proppant Fracturing of a Horizontal Wellbore: an integration of
two technologies”, paper SPE 36899 presented at the 1996 SPE
European Petroleum Conference, Milan, Italy, 22-24 October,
1996.
15. Karen E. Olson, Eivind Olsen, Sami Haida, Alexandre Boulatsel,
and Kristian Brekke: “Valhall Field: Horizontal Well
Stimulations “Acid vs. Proppant” and Best Practices for Fracture
Optimization, paper SPE 84392 presented at SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, U.S.A.,
5-8 October, 2003
16. Norris, M.R., Bernsten, B.A., Skartveit, L., and Teesdale, C.,
“Multiple Proppant Fracturing of Horizontal Wellbores in a
Chalk Formation: Evolving the Process in the Valhall Field,” SPE
50608, SPE European Petroleum Conference, The Hague, Oct.
1998.
17. Olav Barkved, Pete Heavey, Roar Kjelstadli, SPE, Tore Kleppan,
and Tron Golder Kristiansen, Valhall Field – Still on Plateau after
20 Years of Production, SPE, BP, paper SPE 83957 presented at
the Offshore Europe 2003, Aberdeen, UL, 2-5 September 2003.
18. Martinsen, R., Kjelstadli, R.M., Ross, C., Rostad, H.: ”The
Valhall Waterflood Evaluation: A Decision Analysisi Case
Study,”, paper SPE 38926 presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition held in San Antonio, Texas, 5-8
October 1997.
19. Cook, C.C., Brekke, K.: “Productivity Preservation Through
Hydraulic Propped Fractures in the Eldfisk North Sea Chalk
Field”, paper SPE 73725 presented at the 2002 SPE International
Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage, Lafayette,
Louisiana, 20-21 February 2002. Reedited as SPE 88031.
20. Surjaatmadja, J.B., Gonzales, C.M., Rodrigues, V.F., Neumann,
L.F., Rosolen, M.A., Fernandes, P.D., Lima, C., Costa, M.G.F.,
Silveira, M.A.: “Sucessful Pin-Point Placement of Multiple
Fractures in Highly Deviated Wells in Deep Water Offshore
Brazil Fields”, paper SPE 95443, presented at 2005 SPE Annual
SPE 108075
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9-
12 October 2005.
21. Surjaatmadja, J.B. et al: “Selective Placement of Fractures in
Horizontal Wells in Offshore Brazil Demonstrates Effectiveness
of Hydrajet Stimulation Process,” paper SPE 90056 presented at
the 2004 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 26-29 September 2004.
22. Rodrigues, V.F., Neumann, L.F., Rosolen, M.A., Fernandes,
P.D., Lima, C., Surjaatmadja, J.B., Gonzalez, C.M., Carneiro, F.:
“First Implementation of Hydrajet Fracture Acidizing in
Deepwater Offshore Brazil Fields,” paper SPE 94706 presented
at the SPE European Formation Damage Conference held in
Scheveningen, The Netherlands, 25-27 May 2005.
23. Neumann, L.F., Fernandes, P.D., Rosolen, M.A., Rodrigues,
V.F., Silva Neto, J.A., Pedroso, C.A., Mendez, A., Torres, S.A.,
“Case Study of Multiple Hydraulic Fracture Completion in a
Subsea Well, Campos Basin, paper SPE 98277, apresentado no
2005 SPE International Symposium ande Exhibition on
Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, LA, 15-17 February 2006.
24. Pinnacle Technologies Inc.: “Post Job Evaluation of the 7-EN-
52H-RJS Enchova Field, Offshore Brazil, report prepared for
Petroleo Brasileiro SA, January, 2006.
25. Soliman, M.Y., Boonen, P.,: “Review of Fractured Horizontal
Wells Technology”, paper SPE 36289 presented at the SPE Asia
Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Kuala lumpur,
Malaysia, April 14-16, 1997
26. Soliman, M.Y., Hunt, J.L., Azari, J.: “Fracturing Horizontal
Wells in Gas Reservoirs,” paper SPE 59096, SPE Prod. &
Facilities 14 (4), November 1990.
27. Sadrpanah, H., Charles, T., and Fulton, J.: “Explicit Simulation of
Multiple Fractures in Horizontal Wells, paper SPE 99575,
presented at the SPE Europe/EAGE Annual Conference and
Exhibition, Vienna, Austria, 12-15 June 2006.
28. Shaoul, J.R., Behr, A., Mtshedlishvili, G.: “Developing a Tool for
3D Reservoir Simulation of Hydraulically Fractured Wells”,
paper SPE IPTC 10182, presented at the International Petroleum
Technology Conference, Doha, Qatar, 21-23 November 2005.
29. Lohoefer, D., Athans, J.: “New Barnett Shale Horizontal
Completion Lowers Cost and Improves Efficiency”, paper SPE
103046 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, U.S.A., 24-27 September 2006.
30. Rodgerson, J.L., Ruegamer, M.L., Snider, P.M.: “External Casing
Perforating Provides Optimal Treatment Coverage in Horizontal
Pay,” paper SPE 97175 presented at the 2005 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, 9-12 October, Dallas,
Texas.
31. McDaniel, B.W., Willet, R.M., Underwood, P.J.: “Limited-Entry
Frac Applications on Long Intervals of Highly or Horizontal
Wells,” paper SPE 56780 presented at the 1999 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, Oct. 3-6.
32. Roudakov, V., Rohwer, C.: “Successful Hydraulic Fracturing
Techniques in Horzontal Wells for Sandstone Formations in the
Permian Basin,” paper SPE 102370 presented at the 2006 SPE
Russian Oil and Gas Technical Conference and Exhibition held in
Moscow, Russia, 3-6 October 2006
33. Jennings Jr., A.R., Westerman, C.W., Taklock, D.E., Anderson,
M.: “ A Systematic Approach to Improved Success With
Hydraulic Fracturing Applications,” paper SPE 101837 presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in
San Antonio, Texas, U.S.A., 24-27 September 2006.
34. Sanders, G.S., Weng, X., Ferguson, K.R.: “Horizontal Well
Fracture Stimulation Experience in Prudhoe Bay, “ paper SPE
38607 presented at the Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, San Antonio, October 1997.
35. Erwin, M.D., Ogbe, D.O.: “Predicting Openhole Horizontal
Completion Success on the North Slope of Alaska,” paper SPE
SPE 108075
97121 presented at the 2005 SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9-12 October.
36. J.B. Surjaatmadja, B.W. McDaniel, L.E. East, and J. Pyecroft,
Halliburton, Considerations for Future Stimulation Options Is
Vital in Deciding Horizontal Well Drilling and Completion
Schemes for Production Optimization, paper SPE 103774
presented at First International Oil Conference and Exhibition in
Cancun, Mexico, 31 August-2 September 2006.
37. Warpinski, N.R., Branagan, P.T.: ”Altered Stress Fracturing,
”JPT, September, 1988, pp 990-997.
38. McDaniel, B.W., East, L., and Hazzard, V.: “Overview of
Stimulation Technology for Horizontal Completions without
Cemented Casing in the Lateral,” paper SPE 77825 presented at
the 2002 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and
Exhibition, Melbourne, Australia, 8-10 October.
39. Surjaatmadja, J.B. et al: “Effective Stimulation of Multilateral
Completions in the James Lime Formation Achieved by
Controlled Individual Placement of Numerous Hydraulic
Fractures,” paper SPE 82212 presented at the 2003 European
Formation Damage Conference, The Hague, The Netherlands,
13-14 May.
40. El Rabaa, W.,: “Experimental Study of Hydraulic Fracture
Geometry Initiated From Horizontal Wells, “SPE 19720, SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, TX,
Oct. 8-11, 1989.
41. Economides, M.J. and Nolte, K.G.: Reservoir Stimulation, Third
Edition, London, UK, John Wiley & Sons (2000).
42. De Lima, B.B., Viana, R.: “Application of Multiple Techniques
to Determine In-Situ Directions in Marlim and Albacora Fields,”,
paper SPE 28711 presented at the 1994 SPE Petroleum
Conference and Exhibition of Mexico, held in Veracruz, October
10-13.
43. Water, G., Heinze, J., Jackson, R., Ketter, A., Daniels, J.,
Bentley, D.: “Use of Horizontal Well Image Tools to Optimize
Barnett Shale Reservoir Exploitation”, SPE 103202 presented at
the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San
Antonio, Texas, U.S.A., 24-27 September 2006.
44. Ketter, A.A., Daniels, J.L., Heinze, J.R., Waters, G.: “A Field
Study Optimizing Completion Strategies for Fracture Initiation in
Barnett Shale,” paper SPE 103232 presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas,
U.S.A., 24-27 September 2006.
View publication stats
15
45. Van de Ketterij, R.G., de Paater, C.J.: “Impact of Perforations on
Hydraulic Fracture Tortuosity,” paper SPE 56193, SPE
Production & Facilities, 14 (2), May 1999.
46. Kim, C.M., Abass, H.H.: “Hydraulic Fracture Initiation from
Horizontal Wellbores: Laboratory Experiments,”, paper presented
at the 32nd Symposium on Rock Mechanics, The University of
Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, July 10-12, 1991.
47. Daneshy, A.: “Proppant Distribution and Flowback in Off-
Balance Hydraulic Fracture,” paper SPE 89889 presented at the
2004 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, 26-29 September
48. Mayerhofer, M.J., Bolander, J.L., Williams, L.I., Pavy, A.,
Wolhart, S.L.: “Integration of Microseismic Fracture Mapping,
Fracture and Production Analysis With Well Interference data to
Optimize Fracture Treatments in the Overton Field, East Texas”,
paper SPE 95508 presented at the 2005 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9-12 October
2005.
49. Olson, K.E., O’Keefe, M., Nicholyasen, A., Cameron, D.:
“Vahall Field: Microfracture Acquisition Using Wireline-
Formation-Tester Tools To Validate Fracture Confinement”,
paper SPE 96773, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, U.S.A., 9-12 October
2005.
50. Rod, M.H., Zyweck, M., Dom-Lopez, D.W., Frederiksen, C.H.,
Gaucher, E.: “Permanent Microseismic Monitoring System in a
Long Horizontal Well”, paper SPE 97075 presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas,
U.S.A., 9-12 October 2005.
51. Minner, W.A., Du, J., Ganong, B.L., Lackey, C.B., Demetrius,
S.L., Wright, C.A.: “Rose Field: Surface tilt Mapping Shows
Complex Fracture Growth in 2500’ Laterals Completed with
Uncemented Liners”, paper SPE 83503 presented at the SPE
Western Regional/AAPG Pacific Sector Joint Meeting, Long
Beach, California, U.S.A., 19-24 May 2003.