2/24/2014

WELL STIMULATION TECHNIQUES

CHAPTER 4 HYDRAULIC FRACTURING 1

LESSON OUTCOME

At the end of this section, the students will be able to :

Understand different fracturing fluids.
Design hydraulic fracturing treatment.
Identify selection criteria for fracturing.

2/24/2014

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
Naturally occuring underground stresses resist wellbore
fracturing.
The general stress condition underground can be defined
in terms of the effective stresses, z, along the vertical Z
axis and x and y along the horizontal X and Y axes.
In the absence of external forces, the stress at any point is
due to the weight of the overburden.
Using an average density rock to be 144 lbm per cu ft, the
vertical stress at any point is expressed by the equation
3

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
(4.1)

Where D is the depth in feet.

Under the influence of this vertical stress, the rock tends
to expand laterally but is prevented from doing so by the
surrounding rock.
In the elastic zones of the earths crust, since no horizontal
movement has occured.
According to Hookes law, the horizontal strain is expressed
(4.2)
4

2/24/2014

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
Where E is Youngs modulus.
For rock in compression, x is essentially zero and since the
lateral stress x equals the lateral stress y,
(4.3)

Where his the horizontal stress in general.

Since Poissons ratio for consolidated sedimentary rocks
ranges from 0.18 to 0.27, the horizontal compressive stress
is between 0.22 and 0.37 psi per ft of depth.
In the absence of external forces the horizontal stress is
5
always less than the vertical stress.

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
If fluid pressure is applied within rocks and increased until
parting of the rocks occurs that plane along which fracture
or parting may first occur is the one perpendicular to the
least principal stress (Fig 4.1).
When a well is drilled the preexisting stress field in the
rock is distorted.
An approximate calculation of this distortion has been
made by assuming the rock to be elastic, the borehole
smooth and cylindrical, and the borehole axis vertical.
6

2/24/2014

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING

Fig. 4.1 Stress

element and
preferred plane
of fracture

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
The pressure that will fracture the borehole vertically is
the sum of that required in order to reduce the
compressive stresses on the wall of the hole to zero plus
the tensile strength of the rock, or
(4.4)

where pf is the internal pressure in pounds per square

inch.
St is the tensile strength of the rock.
8

2/24/2014

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
Using 0 to 500 psi as the range of tensile strenghts for
competent sandstones and limestones, the pressure
necessary to induce vertical fracturing should lie between

and

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
Once a fracture has been started, the pressure is applied
to the walls of the fracture.
According to Hubbert and Willis, the minimum down-thehole injection pressure requried to hold open and extend a
fracture is slightly in excess of the original stress normal to
the plane of the fracture.
Loss of fluid slightly decreases the pressure required to
produce vertical fractures.

10

2/24/2014

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
In the case of horizontal fractures, the confining stress
holding the fracture planes together is equal to the
effective overburden at the depth of the fracture.
In the case of vertical fractures, the confining stress
holding the planes together is some function of the
effective overburden.
In the lower limiting case, horizontal fracturing can take
place when
(4.5)
11

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING
The approximate maximum depth at which horizontal
fracturing should occur, can be determined from Eqn (4.4)
and (4.5) by assuming
(4.6)

Using a vertical stress (overburden) gradient of 1.0 psi per

ft, a Poissons ratio of 0.25, and a tensile strength of 1000
psi, the maximum depth for horizontal fracture is found to
be 3000 ft.
12

2/24/2014

PRODUCTION INCREASE FROM FRACTURING

Reasons for production increases from fracturing are:

1. new zones exposed,
2. reduced permeability zone is bypassed, and
3. flow pattern in reservoir changed from radial to
linear.

13

New Zones Exposed

In a carbonate formation where productivity depends on
porosity or
in a fractured zone where primary flow capacity is related
to the fracture system or
in a deltaic sand formation where permeability is related
to regional depositional geometry,
the possibility of increasing well productivity by fracturing
into a new zone may be significant.
In some situation, however, the new zone might be
water or gas.
14

2/24/2014

By-passed Damage
Production increase from bypassing reduced permeability
zone is a function of the depth of the damaged zone and
the ratio of damaged to undamaged permeability.
Production increase can be estimated more effectively
from transient pressure tests.
Only a short fracture is needed to bypass most damage
zones, but it is very important to prop the fracture in the
area near the well-bore to provide a highly conductive
15
path through the damaged zone.

Radial Flow pattern changed to Linear Pattern

Production increase from changing the flow pattern results

from creation of a high conductivity fracture (relative to
the formation), extending a long distance from the wellbore.
For vertical fractures the productivity increase depends
primarily upon the formation permeability.

16

2/24/2014

PRODUCTIVITY RATIO
Productivity ratio is the ratio of the productivity index of
the well after fracturing to that of the well before
fracturing, Jf /J.
For the case of a horizontal fracture (fracture gradient
1.0 psi per ft), an equation for the productivity ratio can be
obtained provided it is assumed that there is zero vertical
permeability in the fracture zone.
It has been shown that
(4.7)
17

PRODUCTIVITY RATIO

where
kavg is the average permeability of the fractured formation
k is the permeability of the unfractured formation
From Fig. (1.5) that the average permeability of the
fracture zone is equal to the average permeability
predicted for radial flow in parallel beds.

18

2/24/2014

PRODUCTIVITY RATIO

Fig.1.5
19

PRODUCTIVITY RATIO

(4.8)

Where
kfz is the average permeability of the fracture zone
kf is the permeability of the fracture
W is the thickness of the fracture
k is the formation permeability
20

10

2/24/2014

PRODUCTIVITY RATIO
The average permeability of the fractured formation, kavg,
is equal to the average permeability predicted for series
beds in radial flow:
(4.9)

Where
re is the drainage radius of the well
rw is the wellbore radius
rf is the radius of the fracture
21

PRODUCTIVITY RATIO
Substituting Eq (4.8) to Eq (4.9), and into Eq (4.7), and
multiplying numerator and denominator by h,

Factoring,

(4.10)
22

11

2/24/2014

PRODUCTIVITY RATIO
To facilitate rapid calculation of the productivity ratio of
horizontal fractures, Fig (4.6) was constructed with the use
of Eqn (4.10).
The correlation between Fig. (4.6) and Eq (4.10) is shown
in Example (4.1).
Fig (4.7) shows the permeability of commonly used
fracture sands.
23

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING

Fig. 4.6
Estimated
productivity
ratio after
fracturing
(horizontal
fractures)

24

12

2/24/2014

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING

Fig. Estimated
productivity
ratio after
fracturing
(vertical
fracture)

25

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING

Fig. 4.7 Effect of

pressure on
frac-sand
permeability

26

13

2/24/2014

Example (4.1)
Calculate the productivity ratio for a horizontal fracture,
given:

Fracture width = 0.1 in

Net pay thickness = 50 ft
Permeability of propping agent (10 20 mesh) = 32500 md
Horizontal permeability of formation = 0.54 md
re / rw = 2000
Fracture penetration rf / re = 0.40
27

Example (4.1)
Solution
The value of kf W / k h is
The term ln (re / rw) in Eq (4.10) can be expressed as

Then substituting in Eq (4.10),

28

14

2/24/2014

Example (4.1)
In Fig (4.6), the PR is 5.0
It is also desirable to estimate the productivity ratio for the
vertical fractures (fracture gradient 0.7 psi per ft).
The Mobile Oil Company correlated productivity ratios for
various fracture penetrations with the factor C = kf W / k,
as shown in Fig (4.8), where W is the fracture width in feet
and kf and k are the effective fracture and horizontal
formation permeability in milli-darcies respectively.
29

PROPPING THE FRACTURE

The object of propping is to maintain desired fracture
conductivity economically.
Fracture conductivity depends upon a number of
interrelated factors: type, size, and uniformity of the
proppant; degree of embedment, crushing, and/or
deformation; and amount of proppant and the manner of
placement.
Commonly used proppant types and size ranges are:

30

15

2/24/2014

PROPPING THE FRACTURE

Commonly used proppant types and size ranges are:

Placement of propping agent in a fracture (either vertical or

horizontal) in any pattern other than a packed condition is
difficult to achieve with low viscosity fluids.
31

PROPPANT HAS TO
Not to crush at formation closure stress
and temperature
Keep desired conductivity over time
Be smaller than perforations
Not to flow back from the fracture

32

16

2/24/2014

PROPPANT SELECTION
1. Calculate optimal fracture half-length
and conductivity
2. Determine applicable proppant mesh sizes
3. Review Proppant Database finding proppants matching
required mesh sizes, formation closure stress and temperature
4. Select proppants with required conductivity
5. Sort selected proppants by price;
Select proppant flowback control additives
33

PROPPING THE FRACTURE

1. First portions of sand entering fracture drop out to the
bottom of the fracture near the wellbore. Jetting action
through perforation tends to wash sand back several feet
from borehole.
2. As more sand enters the fracture, height of the pack
increases to some equilibrium point dependent on the
velocity of flow in the fracture, the viscosity of the frac
fluid, the difference in density between proppant and
fluid, and the drag characteristics of the proppant.
34

17

2/24/2014

PROPPING THE FRACTURE

3. Additional sand is then carried over the pack and

deposited further out in the fracture.
4. Final height of packed fracture after closure may be a
relatively small percentage of the dynamic fracture
height created during injection.

35

PROPPING THE FRACTURE

High viscosity fluids which suspend large proppant permit:

1. Use of much larger concentrations of proppant.

2. Placement of multilayers of large proppant throughout a
high percentage of the fracture height, particularly in the
critical area near the wellbore.
3. Placement of proppant much further away from the
wellbore.
36

18

2/24/2014

FRACTURE AREA

During the fracturing process, the fracture fluid is injected

at the well head at a constant rate qi.
In the fracture this injection, rate is split up into two
components as shown in Fig (4.8).
Part of the liquid, ql, enters the formation as a result of
the differential pressure (pi - pe) between the fracture and
the external boundary, and the remainder, qf, increases
the fracture area, i.e., it increase the volume of the
fracture.
An expression for the fracture area at any time may be
derived by using this basic concept and the following
37
assumptions:

FRACTURE AREA

An expression for the fracture area at any time may be

derived by using this basic concept and the following
assumptions:
1. The fracture is of uniform width.
2. The flow of fracture fluid into the formation is linear
and the direction of flow is perpendicular to the
fracture face Fig (4.8).
3. The velocity of flow into the formation at any point on
the fracture face is a function of the time of exposure
of the point to flow.
38

19

2/24/2014

MECHANICS OF FRACTURING

Fig. 4.8

39

FRACTURE AREA

4. The velocity function v = f(t) is the same for every

point in the formation, but the zero time for any point
is defined as the instant that the fracturing fluid first
reaches it.

40

20

2/24/2014

FRACTURE AREA

Fracture area can be expressed as follow:

(4.11)

41

Thank You
42

21

2/24/2014

Error Function of X

Thank You
43

FRACTURING FLUIDS

Oil or water fluids are used to create, extend, and place

proppant in the fracture.
Two-thirds of fracture treatments use water base fluids
and one-third oil base fluids.
Recent innovations include gelled alcohol, LPG-CO2, or
aerated foam fluids.

44

22

2/24/2014

FRACTURING FLUIDS

Generally these comparative statements can be made:

1. Oil fluids are cheap and have inherent viscosity which
makes them advantageous for relatively low injection
rate, shallow to medium depth fracturing. Pressure loss
down the casing and safety consideration are often
limiting factors.
2. Gelled water fluids have special advantages due to
their higher density and lower friction loss in deeper
wells, and where higher injection rates are needed.
Where high temperatures are involved reasonable
viscosity can be maintained above 250oF.
45

FRACTURING FLUIDS
3. Ultra-high viscosity fluids are costly and temperature
sensitive, but can provide wide, highly-conductive
fractures needed to stimulate higher permeability
zones or sand carrying capacity needed to prop long
fractures in low permeability zones.
4. Emulsion fluids provide moderate viscosity, and good
fluid loss and carrying capacity at a reasonable cost.
5. Alcohol, LPG-CO2 and Aerated fluids have limited
application due to cost, safety and/or complexity.
Usefulness is primarily in gas or low permeability zones
where cleanup is paramount.
46

23

2/24/2014

FRACTURING FLUIDS

The constant C in Eq (4.11) is the fracturing fluid

coefficient, and for any given type of flow system it
depends upon the characteristics of the fracturing fluid,
the reservoir fluids, and the rock.
The fracturing fluid coefficient is the only term which
reflects the properties of the fracturing fluid and is
therefore a measure of their relative effectiveness.
A low fracturing fluid coefficient means low fluid-loss
properties and thus a larger fracture area for a given fluid
volume and injection rate.
47

FRACTURING FLUIDS

Fracturing fluids fall into three distinct categories:

1. Viscosity-controlled fluids
2. Reservoir-controlled fluids
3. Wall-building fluids.

48

24

2/24/2014

Viscosity-controlled Fluids

The viscosity of the fracture fluid controls the amount of

fluid loss to the formation.
The coefficient for this type of fracturing fluid is expressed
by
(4.12)

49

Viscosity-controlled Fluids

Eq (4.12) simply states that for a viscosity-controlled fluid,

the rate of leak-off will depend on the permeability, the
porosity, the treating pressure differential, and the
fracture fluid viscosity.

50

25

2/24/2014

Example (4.2)

Calculate the fracturing fluid coefficient of an oil, given:

Fracture gradient = 0.7 psi per foot

Depth = 4000 ft
Bottom-hole pressure = 1800 psi
Bottom-hole temperature = 100oF
Porosity = 20 per cent
Permeability perpendicular to fracture face = 10 md
Fracturing fluid viscosity at 100oF = 500 cp
51

Example (4.2)
Solution
The differential pressure is

52

26

2/24/2014

Reservoir-controlled Fluids

This group includes those fracturing fluids that have low

viscosity and high fluid-loss characteristics, i.e., physical
properties identical or nearly identical with those of the
reservoir fluid.

Fracturing fluids which fall into this classification are lease

crude and water, which do not contain additives to reduce
fluid loss.

53

Reservoir-controlled Fluids

The equation for the fluid-loss coefficient is

(4.13)

Noted that quantities and cf in the above equation are

properties of the reservoir fluid and not of the fracturing
54
fluid.

27

2/24/2014

Wall-building Fluids

The use of modern additives to limit fluid loss (asphaltictype materials, synthetic gums, and insoluble solids added
to oil or water) creates a third class of fracturing fluids.
These fluids build a temporary filter cake or wall on the
face of the fracture as it is exposed.
While a small amount of fluid leaks through to form the
wall, once formed, the wall presents quite an effective
barrier to further leak-off due to its low permeability.

55

Wall-building Fluids

The volume of fluid which has leaked off through the filter
cake at any times is proportional to the volume of the
filter cake at that time, or
(4.14)
where
V = volume of fluid
Af= cross sectional area of filter cake
L = thickness of filter cake
C = proportional constant
If a standard fluid loss test is run on a fracturing fluid, and
If V is plo ed against t, the slope of the curve is m, and it is
expressed as cu cm/min.
56

28

2/24/2014

Wall-building Fluids

(4.15)

If a spurt loss is included in the equation above, V

becomes

57

Wall-building Fluids

Consider a fracture of area Af with a spurt loss of Vsp.

The volume of the fracture is Af W where W is the true
fracture width.
If we define a quantity W' such that the product Af W' is
equal to the volume of the fracture without a spurt loss,
then

58

29

2/24/2014

Wall-building Fluids

If W and W' are expressed in inches, with Af in square

centimeters and Vsp in cubic centimeters, then

(4.17)

59

Example (4.3)

Calculate the fluid-loss coefficient of a wall-building fluid,

Cw, given:

60

30

2/24/2014

Example (4.3)
Solution

The spurt loss is used in correcting the fracture width by Eq

(4.17). If the fracture width is 0.2 in. The corrected fracture
width(W) is
61

Example (4.3)
Any fracturing fluid is somewhat viscous, and so Cv
mechanism helps retard leak-off.
Also, the reservoir contains a compressible fluid, and thus
the Cc mechanism will be operative.
Finally, many oils without additives will have a wall-building
effect, and so the Cw mechanism usually comes into play.
Combined coefficient could be calculated similarly to the
combined conductance of a series of conductors,

62

31

2/24/2014

FRACTURE EFFICIENCY
Once fracturing fluid coefficient is calculated, fracture area
can be determined from the basic equation

(4.11)

Solution of this equation is tedious. So, in another form

will be mentioned to facilitate the calculation.

63

FRACTURE EFFICIENCY
If we define the efficiency of a fracture job as the volume
of the fracture divided by the volume of fluid pumped,
then
(4.18)

By substituting Eqn. 4.18 into 4.11,

(4.19)

Now, Efficiency becomes a function of x alone. Then

efficiency vs x can be plotted as shown in Fig. (4.11)
64

32

2/24/2014

FRACTURE EFFICIENCY

Fig. 4.11. Plot of

fracturing
efficiency
against its
function

65

Example (4.4)

Calculate the fracture efficiency, given:

Solution
The fracture time is

66

33

2/24/2014

Example (4.4)
and

From Table (4.1), erfc (2.67) = 0.00016, so that the

efficiency is
Eff = 0.140 (1248 x 0.00016 + 3,01 1) = 31 per cent
67

Example (4.4)
The use of Fig. 4.11 and Eq. (4.19) provide a simplified
method of calculating the area of the fracture at any time,
A (t).
For example, if the injection volume is 20,000 gal of fluid
with a coefficient of 2.22 x 10-3 ft/ min, the fracture width
is 0.2 in., and the pumping time is 20 min, then

68

34

2/24/2014

Example (4.4)
From Table (4.1), the efficiency is 37%. Then from Eqn.
(4.18), the fracture area is

69

Q&A
70

35

2/24/2014

Thank You
71

36