Professional Documents
Culture Documents
, -
.
-.-.
-.
-.
--.-.-._,
._
EFF~CT
OF ELUPTiCAL
FRAqTURESON
SWEEP EFFICIENCIES
IN WATER FLOODING
OR FLUID INJECTION
PROGRAMS
~~
,. ,.,-
By
J.
,2
\
.
ABSTRACT
A potentiometric
horizontal
elliptical
displacement
model
fractures
programs.
on the pe~forniance
The center
well
of water
the effect
floding
of
or fluid
to be fractured
with an elliptical
dete rrhined.
For
was rotated
the conditions
elliptical
fracture
had a greater
effect
, ., ,
The
spacing.
sp~cing-
.,
In
well
.,
.-
of @e major,.
of ti-e .fracture
;
..
Iicikhcy
of ,the well
separate
The lengths
,
.panc@ce fracture.
-,
of the
!.
the fracture.
35 to 60 percent
>.
,-
>
depending
on its orientation,
.>
and pioduci~
~
!?*
of from
orientation.
,,
wells.
Fxaciures
sweep. effJcienc$es;
.,J+>_=__>___
-,>....A..=..
.,,; _ .
rotated
,..
._~_.___w_
450 to -
_ .-,~-.:..i.i
:=+ .- ~. .
~,
,
:=....*.2
_..
2
.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Commercial
nearly
hydraulic
i5 years.
fracturing
and indicated
~oo&ng(l)(2)(3)
factor
to ten percent
of from
flooding
for
In the early
practice
three
studies indicated
of the. well
that fractures
per day~
that fracturing
These
-e
~ of five
of
regard$ng
fears
of oil wells
rate would,
~rmit
. . ::
faster
feasible
operations
having
Early
field
-.
a radius
the injectivity
by a
would only be
The increased
and perhaps
otie rw$se.
when water
and &ere
flooding
of
data appeared
~
>
,,.
to -co~irm
*
tie
original
theoretical
...
In the early
f ractwre
tre~tments,
the volume
,-
of fracturing
,
form
1
of
/
fluids
,;-:
.?
1
might be Usedl however~
, primary.
y
f ,./.
producing
,.
Some, of the-fields
ability,
very large treatments axe nowqsed widely.
[
,.
,.
.
having. large f sacture treatments. are nbw being water
~
.
.,
Consequently,
it was a @rpo&e
and orientation
of large
ment program.
fractures
,,
The potentiome@ic
.
neglected
ratio is one,
approximately
.,
1/211deep,
exist.
The application
The potentiometric
gravitational,
The model
effects
are
The elliptical
formed
fracture
was obtained
(4)\5)(6)Q
preciously
a model
of a fluid di sfplace A ,
11. ANALYSIS
. .
of size
proper.,
of the fracture
~~ ~~
f racture
is very
great
com~ared
,$
.,
-
III. DISCUSSION
Figure
AND RESULTS
i shows two elliptical
horizontal
fractures
(Ellipses A ,and B)
,,
create d at the center of a five Rspot pattern.
The f rac:ture orientation is
.,
:
r:
.,
shown to be 45@ with the IIytt axis.
Both major and &inor axe-s &incide with.
. . .. ...!
,,
.,
,.- ~- .-..
1
.,
; ~
i..
Solid lines show ihe shape of the swept area when water breaks through a~lthe
,.. .-.
.
..
....
..
.
.
..
.
.
....
.
.
.,.
.?------------- .-.
2:
smaller f r~cture at the center well.
-The, dashedlin~s
;how the s~pe of the
~
,,
.f .
...oilrnwater
-...
,,
. ...-....
.
.-. .-,----.--. . .
...:- ...
.. .. . . . . ... ...
..--. . . ..
. --,
,.
4,
;,.
1
at Wells
No:
efficiency
Wells
No,
1 and No.
through from
efficiency
For, elliptical
Wells
2 and No.
broke
mately
pattern
the sweep
through from
fracture
to break
B, the sweep
will be re,called
A,
For elliptical
4.
kacture
less
..
A.
It
of approxi -
72 per cent.
Figure
zontal fractures.
the well
spacing
fracture
were
for ellipses
lengths
hori-
elongated
spacing.
of
. ..
>..
fractures
, ,
the water
/
breakthrough
broke
through from
from
Wells
~ and 3 considerably
Wells
2, and 4.
The.sweep
before
ef~ciencies
.4,
..
for el~ptical
percent,
fractuties
respectively.
A@in
Figure
, the ellipti~al
the major
fractur~
axes were
*he greater
and 3 ii 7
,<
el~pse
-,
:
when
,.
$he tytf axis, < The Iength ~f
.
of the well
has .,
~)
spacing.
.,.
/
. . ..
-.
.- .
. .
.... . .
. ...
.
... . - . ......
minor axes of, the eEipses were 35.,3 imd 50.9 perceqt, of the, well ,spacing.
..
,.
,
)
For this case it wa$ found that he s;e6p efficiencies
were 58.2 percent and
+,
-.,.
. .
..-
.-
,.
>
.
!
.._ _ ~
.
.,
5
.
51.9 percent8
that a slight
Coniparing
respectively.
orientation
Figure
of the fractures
3 with Figure
increased
/,.
i it is seen
by
,=
,.
water
not occur
b reeks
on the terminal
Figure
position
percent
differ
In Figure
IIYII *S*
oriented
Figure
ellipses,
sizes
fractuses
were
re speclivelyi
are, ~z percent
oriented
..
44.3 tid
40.8
The se sweeps
more
same
than *~
were
oriented
,,
75 e from
the
fractures,
breaks
fractures
were. oriented
750-from
.-,
,.
In this. case,
we
elongated
.. .
:
>
sweep
.
efficienciess
->,
does
2.
,.
sweep efficiencies
as shown in Figure
.
5 the major
and larger
and larger
size fractures
The resulting
the ~~y~taxis.
Of the ellipses
60 from
The particular
area.
!.
.
W 0 from
the
i.
tt II &is
For
the larger
fractuxes
shown in Figure8
..
we m
.4
Percent*
. . ..
a+d 59,9 perce;t j respectively,;
:~ot~- that for t-hisori~rit~tion
..
.,:-.
,,,
ficiencies. we r-e.practical~y independent, of the ~racture gi,ze..
62.1,
...
.
,.
,.
,.
(.
Figure
of fractuxe
size and
orientation
on sweep efficienciess
of, ,elliptically
fractured
thin reservoirs
.,
spot pattern.
of the ellipse
The abscissa
divide.d.b y twice
,.
ttra~ustt of We major
axis
the well
of the el~pse=
shows the
The abscissa
spacing.
The engineer
axis
angles
are cornplirnentaryt
orientation
were
ox 900; or 15 or 75 measured
zero
. .
Figure
9 shows he
efficiency.
Notice
yery
@ght
significant
from
if the
effect
of orientation
vary from
about 48 ~o 65 percent
on the sweep
depending
then ~
.-,
on
the orientation
,.
of the elliptical
oriented
zero
either
ficiency..
,
Notice,
be obtained
,.
Fractures
with their
fracture.
.. . .
.,
.
. .
,.
that a sweep effi~iency
.,
-l
for~~xarnple,
for .elliptidal
the largest
f ractures whose
long axis
,...
sweep ef -
of 60 percent
.,
.3
could .
..
.... -
,.
-,
as other fracture iadii but if the major axed are oriented at zero
,.
. ..*.
-,
--.,
,..
be very sub st?ntially
withthe
lty~~-a~sb tie sweep q~ciencymay
1 .- ,.1.
,.
.,
or 90
,. .--
,..J
greater
.-
., . . .
,..
-f~actures
or{ented
oriented
,.,
. .
.,
.Iv.suM--ytiD;~oN~~usl~Ns
J .-_-. .-. . ...
--- ..
....+ +.:+.
-~
, j
.-:_
.. _-:,
.<--...
=.
~,.
;.,,.~.--...-..
. ...2.
. ... . .
..
.:,
.__:.;--fi.A.
of t$e, effect
~.
A.A.
~..+L__A
.-
~-
-,
. ,.
. .
-.
,
_ -,:_:
.z.._._,_.~i-~_~
;=&j:
:
.,,,----+-=--of .pancidce fracttires
oh
the
sweep:
.,
..
J..
. .
.-
..J.
,
c1
~~~ :
. ..
..-,
.,...;_.
. -:=:.... ..::a.A
. ..-
efficiency
f ractu~es.
,,
.,
..
small&
:
,.,
..
~----:a..~
,>:
.-:
,.
,,
7
.,
efficiency
of five-spot
spacing.
The pancake
patternsa
axes were
fractures
vaziedt
of the well
of the ellipses
.,.
varied
from
zero
an increase
>
to 900 ~th
reference
,,:
may be of the same size and be located
centrally,
change
Elliptical
about an injection
,.
.
or prcducing
depending
.,
orientati&
well,
on the orientation
of the fracture.
sweep efficienciess
;
35 to 60 percent
.
It is concluded
are
both very
,
Very large
significant.
of the major
,..
..,
.-
axis of an elliptical
,.
connecting
pancake
fracture
is located
line .
.
.-,,,
,+
,,.
,;
.:,
,
/
.--
in sizing .frac~ringtre?tments
to a setiondary
.,
recovery
for
program.
fields. .
. 4~ovgh
; ,
..
an,
. .
.,, .,
~ incre$~e-in
primary
recove~y
maybe
-obtained:by
,.
a lar~
stimulation
..
:;
-,
. ._,.
_ -..
.,.
.
-%
.-=- .------
REFERENCES
2,
pa~l B, ~ !8~8timate&
Performance
,,Five Articles
j
3.
,.
4.
5i
.6*
water
in Horizontally
l?racture.d Thin Re se rvoia?s~t,, Series
World ail ~ Seph ~954 through Jan- 1955
.
Crawford,
Paul B. apd Collins R. E. , ltEstimated Effect o~ Vertical
Fractures
on. Secondary Recoveryf!,
Proceedings
Sixth Oil Recove rzl
Conference,
May, .i954.,
..
**Ele&rical
Model Studies of Secondary
Horner,
W. L. and Bruce~, WC AO ~
Recovery It, h,erican
Petroleum
Institute, Secondary Recovery of Oil in
the United States, p. i95, 2nd e~tion (~950)c
l!potentiometric
Lee$ B. D,,
Reservoirst,
Model Stu&is
Trans. .
AIME
I!The Theory
Muskat, Morrist
-.
,.j~,
2i6; (1949}.
F1OW in Petroleum
,
of Potentiometric
...
Models,
Trans.
MME
.,
. .
.....
.,
of Fluid
...
,-
.>
...>,
-----
of
..
,.
. ..
.. _
,,
1.
,/
.
,. . ..-
.-.
.,
,.
.,
.-
;.
..
,-.
----
..
.--
-.
..-
:.
.,.
,. .. _..--.-...
.
..
.-
..,.-
..
-,
,.
.-
. ---
,..
.-
.:.,-,
..
,.
.,.
-----
._
.
-.4-
.,
c---
_.
. -. __..
.2-.-.-.
...-_
.
/
. .
I
;
,,
ELLIPSE
:.
,,,.
%
%
.,
..
>,
+>
:
..
,,
i
,-:.7~~
1,
[ -
.
FlqURE
,.
,..
..1.
,f..
.,
.: f
.
,.
,.
; ..- -- , ,.
,,
.-,
,.
,,
.
. .
,-
--a.._
..!.
. .
. . ... . . ...
-,....
.-.
. .
,_
Y-
. ..
..:
.,
. . . . .-
....
. ... .
.
.,.
,.
.-,
_. .. -- . - ---
~,,
.. .. ... .-..
..--.-.
4-
>
ELLIPSE
A
B.
~
75.0
85~0
;//
+w
28.8
48. I
/
A ELLIPSii/
3 ELLIPSE.
-~
Y
//~.
..
~50 .
..
.
3
$..:
. .
..,.
.. .
. . . . k/
5
.,
SklkEP
iFF
32.8 %
y.7
%
\1
. ..-..=...
,-
(--/
, ,
..-.
..
.:.3
-,
,.
,.b>
*
.,
-- --mwao~a
,,
1
,----...,- ..-. 1. . .. .
i
,
-t
pd(l
1
.!
. ..-
,,.
;*,
.t
.-:
,.
~}Glj~E
.. .. . .
.
7
&
..
.*
.
..,..
y
#/
#
/,
.,
. i-J.
.
!. / ,
- !.
,.., ..
i-...
2
t.
~ -~
,
.1
-~ ,,
.,,
,,
=
>
., .
,.
s..
.. .
:2, ; -J
..
.. .. .
.
.
t..
. ..
. .
----
.4
.-..,
,.
.,
. .. j.:
/:.
i.
%
..
._.
..
.>
~~
1.
* ~#
,.
--------
---
,e---
.,
:,
. .
.,;
4
,,
.
...$
.<
,.
.,
. . . .
,,, .
. . .
. ..
. .,
. .. .
. .-
.
,
.>
.-
- Fl&J~E3
. .
.,
-..
-,
.
.,
.,.
.. .
.!.
,.
,..
.,.
., .-.
. . . .
, ..
... .
. .
. . ..
...
,,
. -.
._ -,-
.,
/
SWiZ~P3 ii:F.
25.8
42,4
75.0
Q5.O
,;f
/ /
.. -
U2$L @pm\
~
~40*El %
\
\
.\
,,..,,
/
/ ./
i \.: ..
..... . ..
,.
,,
;.
./
/
1
.=
.-.
.,
,-.
:.-.:-
- .
. ..
.,
,.
1.
.
,., . ,,
..
$-...
..
,.
.. . .
..r
.
.-.
.
..
,,.
.
,.
. .
....
~..
..:.
,.
,
/,
,,-
,,,
.~,
i, .,.
...
..
.. . . . .
,.
--.
,.
..
..
.-.
..
>.
. ~
_.
. ._
._.
. .
--
-.
_..
..
1
:
.:.. .. >
>
.,
,,,
ELLIPSE
A
.B
Ww
32.5
y;;;
489
:F.
,,
54.1
\1:,
+LJ
A
B
-,
.+
,,
-----
,>,
.,
/.
,,
..
.-
:
.,-
<
.,.
..
\. ...
.,..,>
,1,.
.
.. .
,,
~ FIG.URE
.,
.-
..
;
1,
,--,
,,
,-.
. .. . ... . .
..
.. .
.--=.
--:
->,
.;..-
,,
,.
m.. .
,.
.3
. ..
.._T, *:
....
-
.,
,.
.,+
. . . .. -
. .
-..--
..-. ...... . .
,.
.. ..
,,,. .,
,.
.,
.
.,
{
-)
,-.,
/
.
.
~,
25.2
75.0
,,
i
.,
lkWEEP EFF.
49.8 %
-,
.,
\
.,
,
.,.5
~.
I
Ii .,
.. .,
..
...FIGURE
.
..- 6-
,.
Ii
II
:,.
,
,-
~ , ~,,
>.
t
,.
I
-J
,-
,,
f
.,....:.,
..
,.
.
,.
-..
:,
-
...._
,.1/
,)
\,\)-
1
,,,
,,
{.
.,
J.,
.,
>
,,
.-J,
,,
?,
.,
:,
.,,
1
ELLIPSE
A
~.
100
L
~
50.0
: 6!3.0
,:
-.
IOolv .
~
34,2
45.2
SWE&Pg EJFF.
.
6,0:0 %
,:
1.
~.i...~,
I
I
,..
,?
.,.
,
,+
,
-.
---.-,,
.
,
i,.
i.
.- ,;
J
.,
.<.
,,
.,
II
:!GU.RE
.7
~
?.
,.
;,
.-----
.. .. ..
---. . ,>
..
. ..
.,
---
..
,,
,,
r.
}
i
..
..
..
-.
:,
.
,.,
.,
-_..
_.,
...,
._-_ -. 1 ,.-,-&:-
8
~_,_______
..._L__
_-_
,,
,,
,.
,,
=- *1 _.__
.-----;~
1
-.
,,
.
..
,-,.
.,
,,
I
. .
PATTERN
Jq=$
,~
SW::P,
ELL(PSE
75.0
A . .
29.8
85K/1
.,
:3
f
EFF.
%
%
.,,
A
B
,
.
. .-
-,
,
1-
,,
., .,
,.
.,
.,
.,
.\
----
. .
.
.:,>X,
a
I
.+
.
.-
,:,
.. .
. . . . .. .
.+.
(
,,
,.
.,
,.,
4
.-
.,
J:,
.,-,
J:
-.3*>.-_-
..
.
_.
..,____
.. .. .. .+
J,.
..
.
. ..
,,.
/,.
,
,.
,
/
.,,
,.
,,
-!
?
1
>.
,.~
.E
s.,
. .. .
.0-)
..
.
..;