Fracture Conductivity Work Flow Models Well Spacing, Completions Design

Abstract

_ This article, written by JPT Technology Editor Chris Carpenter, contains highlights of paper URTeC 2023-3864710, “A Comprehensive Simulation Study of Hydraulic Fracturing Test Site 2 (HFTS-2): Part I—Modeling Pressure-Dependent and Time-Dependent Fracture Conductivity in Fully Calibrated Fracture and Reservoir Models,” by Han Li, Jichao Han, SPE, and Jiasen Tan, SPE, Occidental Petroleum, et al. The paper has not been peer reviewed. _ Combining fracture and reservoir diagnostic analysis with integrated geomechanics and reservoir simulation is an efficient and cost-effective approach to generate realistic fracture geometry, understand fluid flow behavior, and define fracture-conductivity distribution in unconventional reservoirs. The complete paper presents a case study of integrated geomechanical and reservoir simulation with a developed fracture-conductivity-calculation work flow that was validated with diagnostic results to evaluate well spacing and completions design. Introduction This study extends that of previous authors by matching field fracture diagnostics and reservoir simulation using variable fracture conductivity. In the example used by the authors from the Hydraulic Fracturing Test Site 2 (HFTS-2) development, multiple fracture diagnostic methods were used to calibrate hydraulic fracture models. Once the model was calibrated, a new proppant-conductivity algorithm assigned conductivity values along the hydraulic fractures based on a physics-based model calculation of proppant concentration. Multiple mechanisms, such as stress- and pressure-dependent effects, time-dependent conductivity degradation, unpropped fractures, and proppant embedment, can all be considered in the novel fracture-conductivity-calculation methodology. Fracture-Conductivity-Calculation Work Flow The conductivity work flow developed by the authors uses simulated proppant concentration from a fracture model and experimental conductivity measurements of propped and unpropped fractures to define variable conductivity along hydraulic fractures. Conductivity measurements included sets of long-term (50-hour) experimental fracture-conductivity tests with various mesh sizes, proppant types, and closure stresses. The conductivity-calculation work flow developed by the authors was applied to the integrated simulation project of multifractured horizontal wells in the HFTS-2 project. Fig. 1 shows a flow chart of the work flow from fracture propagation modeling through integrated reservoir simulations. In general, the work flow consists of developing a 3D geological model, creating and calibrating parent wells’ hydraulic fracture models, calculating the fracture conductivity based on proppant concentration, history-matching the parent wells’ production and constraints with reservoir simulation, performing fracture-propagation modeling for child wells, and history matching and predicting the estimated ultimate recovery (EUR) for the entire pad. HFTS-2 Project Overview The HFTS-2 is in the Delaware Basin and is a cost-shared, field-based project designed to study hydraulic fracturing processes and production using state-of-the-art diagnostics, including fiber optic (FO) distributed temperature sensing and distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) pressure monitoring, image logs, cores through the fractures, and microseismic monitoring. Many studies have detailed the project overview of the HFTS-2, and this paper’s authors only include the overview of completions in the HFTS-2 project.