SPE 81462
Water Injection and Water Flooding Under Fracturing Conditions
J.C. Noirot, P.J. van den Hoek, D. Zwarts, H.P. Bjoerndal, G. Stewart, SPE, Shell International Exploration and Production
B.V. ; R. Drenth, SPE ; R. Al-Masfry, B. Wassing, J. Saeby, M. Al-Masroori, A. Zarafi, Petroleum Development Oman
Copyright 2003, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE 13th Middle East Oil Show & Conference
to be held in Bahrain 5-8 April 2003.
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
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
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
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
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
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
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
With the realization that water injection is generally taking
place under fracturing conditions, tools capable of better
modelling fractured injection and its impact are being
developed. Models integrating rock (fracture) mechanics and
traditional reservoir simulation are now applied to water
injection projects with a number of applications in the Middle
East. Fracture dimensions are a key input to those models.
Monitoring techniques to track the evolution of induced
fractures with time are also being deployed. Amongst those
techniques microseismic and specific fall-off test procedures
are used.
1. Introduction
Water injection is a well-established practice for reservoir
pressure maintenance and secondary recovery, and for
disposal of production water. Nowadays it is recognized
industry-wide that water injection almost always leads to rapid
well injectivity decline unless it is taking place under
fracturing conditions. However, fracturing during injection is
often unnoticed. In waterflood applications, the latter can
result in sweep patterns being entirely different than perceived
by the Operator. Therefore, it is essential to study fractured
injection scenarios prior to waterflood development and
collect data to limit the uncertainties.
In order to properly predict the sweep of waterfloods under
fracturing conditions, the rock (fracture) mechanics aspects
have to be properly coupled to the reservoir engineering
aspects. Due to the complexity of such modeling, validation
through cautious field monitoring is required. Particularly,
techniques for monitoring the growth of induced fractures are
being deployed.
2. Reservoir simulation of induced fracturing
With the objective to better manage an increasing number of
water injection projects, Shell is currently working on a major
effort to couple a recently developed in-house fracture
simulator1,2,3 to its widely used in-house reservoir simulator.
Improved modelling of induced fracturing
The fracture simulator consists of a single well multi-layered
model including poro and thermo-elastic backstresses and
injection fluid properties in its fracture propagation
calculations. The effects of varying rock properties are
included as stress modifiers in the present modeling program.
Although application of single well models is valuable in a
number of simple projects, in most cases the complexity of the
field development plan (multiple production and injection
wells) and the complexity of the reservoir (e.g. layering of
geomechanical facies and pre-existing faults and fractures)
need to be accounted for in an integrated model.
The developed coupling between this single well fracture
simulator and the reservoir simulator can often handle this
complexity. The strength of the proposed coupling mainly
relies on the two following facts :
- the reservoir simulator can only estimate a realistic
pressure and temperature field if induced fractures
are included in the model
- usage of a realistic pressure and temperature field
(that is translated into a stress field) is essential input
to the numerical model used to estimate
fracture dimensions.
Therefore both softwares benefit from the output of the other
one and the overall simulation is improved.
A flexible coupling tool
The coupling is designed to be easily applicable to any pre-
existing reservoir simulation model so that a minimum effort
is required to incorporate induced fractures. For instance, no
re-gridding or re-orientation of the model in the direction of
fracture propagation are required. Moreover, effect on
simulation speed of the coupled model when compared to
model without induced fractures is very limited (generally 10
to 20 % extra running time) allowing for simulation of various
scenarios when required. Because of this flexibility and of the
fact that the user requires no more than a basic knowledge of
2 SPE 81462
induced fracturing to get it implemented, the new coupling
appears to be particularly attractive when compared to
specialistic geomechanical reservoir simulators already
available. Moreover, the coupling is applied in such a way that
the final result is independent of further upgrades of the in-
house reservoir simulator.
3. Middle East Applications of the coupling
The coupling technology has already been applied to several
field cases in the Middle East. Three examples, two related to
water disposal and one in a waterflooding project are
presented below.
Application to Deep Water Disposal Field 1
Cap-rock integrity constraint
In Oman, hydrocarbon production is associated with large
volumes of produced water from high watercut wells (values
greater than 80% watercut are common). In the south of the
country, more than 200,000 m3/day of water is produced from
one production station and re-injected into five Deep Water
Disposal sites. Injection is into a sandstone aquifer at a depth
of about 1000 m. A 20 m thick shale layer seals the aquifer.
Preserving the integrity of this cap-rock is required in order to
avoid injecting high salinity water and contaminants, pressure
charging and hydrocarbon escape to overlaying formation and
aquifers. If the cap-rock were to fracture, shut-in of one of the
Deep Water Disposal well sites would result in significant oil
deferment and require investment in a new water
disposal scheme.
Fractured injection was implemented4 with the objective of
guaranteeing sustained injectivity at high rates with limited
treatement of produced water. With increasing water
production from the station, a series of upgrades and
additional injection sites were required. This raised the issue
of injection scheme optimization and cap-rock
integrity constraint.
Coupled simulation contributes to safe design
By developing a coupled reservoir model, a successful history
match of injection field recorded pressure data was achieved
(Figure 1 and Figure 2) and forecasts for different upgrade
scenarios were possible. Two potential causes of breaking of
the cap-rock were analysed in the study. The first one
corresponds to the risk that induced fractures may grow
directly upto the cap-rock and propagate upwards through it.
The second cause is the local pressure build up in the reservoir
that may well cause cap-rock failure even if the fracture
remains at a certain distance below the base of the cap-rock.
Simulation showed that the first risk could be managed by a
well completion allowing for water injection at least 300 m
below the base of the cap-rock (note that injecting lower than
300 m would increase pumping costs due to increased pressure
requirements). The second risk was demonstrated to be low
even if a future injection upgrade would be positioned much
closer to existing injection sites than initially planned. In this
application the coupling allowed relaxing of the constraints on
injection site spacing leading to significant cost reduction of
several million dollars in surface pipelines.
Application to Deep Water Disposal Field 2
Well injectivity forecast
A second application to single phase flow for water disposal
was made in another field in Oman. In this field an increase of
the capacity for Deep Water Disposal was required due to
increasing water production and the need to phase out other
disposal options. Concerns of not achieving high injectivity
wells were raised because of the inflation of reservoir
pressures due to existing injection, low permeability of the
disposal zone and the existence of faults, which could
compartmentalize the injection sites. A coupled model was
built which allowed a match with historical injection data.
Figure 3 shows the RFT data match for one existing well.
Note that the pressure profile could only be reproduced by
simulation when induced fractures were included in the model.
Furthermore, with a coupled model, matching of injection
pressures for existing fractured wells was made possible
(example in Figure 4) leading to precious information on the
reservoir characteristics. Based on this history matched model,
locations of new injectors were recommended. Although one
of the wells encountered inflated reservoir much higher than
modeled, two other wells found virgin pressures and
expansion of the disposal site from a subsurface standpoint
was a success. Evaluation of the well and modeling results
suggests that additional sealing faults need to be added to
the model.
Application to Waterflooding Field 3
Disappointing waterflood performance
An application of the coupling to a waterflood project is
currently being carried out on a South Oman field. The oil in
the field is very viscous (~100 cP) and the field suffers from
limited pressure support and relatively low reservoir
permeability (<100 mD). The expected Recovery Factor (RF)
under depletion is only 6%. An attempt to implement
waterflooding using horizontal injectors and horizontal
producers has been disappointing. Short-circuiting between
injectors and producers has been experienced resulting in early
water breakthrough and poor sweep efficiency. An injection
test performed (Figure 5) indicates that injection takes place
under fracturing conditions (most likely by opening existing
faults or fractures) and this is believed to be the major reason
for the disappointing waterflood performance. A water
injection pilot using vertical wells in an inverted 5-spot pattern
is currently planned to investigate the reservoir sweep
efficiency and to determine the optimum well pattern to
develop the field. The pilot is planned for the first half
of 2003.
Coupling technology helps waterflood design
The main input to the planning of the inverted 5-spot trial is
being provided by the newly developed reservoir simulator /
fracture simulator coupling technology. Simulations have
confirmed field observations and demonstrated that re-
activated or induced fractures are significant due to the high
viscosity (i.e. low mobility) of the reservoir crude. As shown
on Figure 6, low injection rates are required to contain the
fractures within the dimensions of the 5 spot pattern (roughly
SPE 81462
180 m x 180 m). Fracture orientation is a major uncertainty
and sensitivities to fracture orientation have been run with the
coupled model. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the expected
production profile for two of the 5 spot wells for various
fracture orientations and an injection rate of 300 m3/day. If
the fracture intersects a producer, water will bypass the oil
leading to a poor sweep efficiency and a poor production
performance, even for the producers not intersected by the
fracture. Sweep efficiency is improved towards all the
producers if the fracture plane is parallel to the sides of the
pattern as shown by the saturation plot in Figure 9 and the
forecasted production performance in Figure 7 and Figure 8.
When applied to waterflood projects, the coupling technology
allows quantification of the impact of induced fractures on
production. In future work, the existing 5 spot model will be
used to analyze data during and after the trial, an analysis that
would not be possible without proper modeling of
induced fractures.
4. Techniques for induced fractures monitoring
Given their potential critical impact on sweep, cap-rock
integrity and well injectivity, monitoring the dimensions of
induced fractures is becoming an essential part of waterflood
and water disposal monitoring plans. To that end, a large
range of technologies is being applied with different levels of
maturity and implementation costs. In the following section,
two of those techniques applied in the Middle East
are presented.
A downhole microseimic trial of fractured injection
Under certain reservoir conditions, downhole microseismic
can provide valuable data regarding fracture dimensions and
fracture orientation. A number of field trials using downhole
microseimic during traditional fracturing jobs (where a
viscous injection fluid, high pressures and possibly proppant
are used to stimulate a well) have achieved this objective5,6.
Application of this same technique to fractured water injection
has been the object of a trial conducted in Oman in one of the
Deep Water Disposal sites discussed in the previous section.
Downhole geophones were deployed in two observation wells
situated less than 500 m from two injectors. By stepping up
injection rates, the number of events recorded increased (on
Figure 10, the slope of the line representing the number of 2-
phase events increases at higher injection rates) indicating that
a correlation between fractured injection and induced
seismicity exists. Unfortunately, the number of events
recorded and the number of geophones was limited and did
not allow for satisfactory location of induced fractures. A
possible explanation is the fact that fracture propagation
generally slows with time, therefore the number of events
generated reduces. Other potential explanations could be
associated to the Kaiser effect (if the highest historical
injection pressure is not exceeded during the test, seismicity
may remain limited), wave guiding, unfavorable rock
properties, relatively low fracture propagation pressure and a
low signal/noise ratio.
A new fall-off tests interpretation methodology
A low cost option is a new fall-off test interpretation
methodology, which was recently developed and tested in a
3
large number of field cases.
When shutting off a well injecting above fracturing pressure,
water contained in the induced fracture is expelled into the
formation while the fracture progressively closes. During early
fall-off (typically the first few minutes), pressure data reacts to
this fracture closure phase. To allow a proper interpretation of
early fall-off pressures, the data need to be recorded at a high
sampling rate (typically 1 data point per second). Equations
and type curves have been derived to allow an analysis leading
to an estimate of fracture dimensions7.
Several applications of the technique in the Middle East have
been made. For instance, in Figure 11 7, fracture closure is
characterized by the early unit slope pressure profile from
which an estimated fracture half-length close to 25 m can be
derived. Full detail for derivation of this fracture length is
given in Ref 7. Recently PLT data was collected in several
disposal wells in which the fall-off test fracture closure
methodology was also applied. The PLT data indicated that
the fractures have smaller fracture height than that interpreted
from the fall-off data. These calibration techniques can be
used to refine the model and direct its application.
Conclusions
Realistic modeling and forecasting of the impact of induced
fracturing in water injection projects for water disposal,
pressure maintenance or waterflooding can be achieved by
coupling of a fracture propagation predictive software with a
reservoir simulator. The flexible coupling allows quantifying
the impact on production of propagating fractures (areal and
vertical sweep), assessing and managing cap-rock integrity
risks and/or optimizing well placement for sustained high
injectivity. Moreover, the tool finds valuable applications in
the analysis of reservoir data where injection is conducted
above fracturing pressure and is essential contributor to
monitoring plans in a number of fields in the Middle East.
Validation of models by field data being key to successful
forecasts, monitoring techniques of induced fractures
orientations and dimensions are being developed and
implemented. A cost effective fall-off test analysis
methodology has already been successfully applied to estimate
fracture dimensions. Downhole microseismic technology
applied to fractured injection requires further maturation
starting from valuable learnings of trials currently performed
in the Middle East and other locations.
References
1.Van den Hoek P.J., Matsuura T., De Kroon M., Gheissary
G., Simulation of Produced Water Reinjection Under
Fracturing Conditions, SPE 57385, 1999
2.Van den Hoek P.J., Matsuura T., De Kroon M., Gheissary
G., Simulation of Produced Water Re-Injection Under
Fracturing Conditions, SPE 36846, 1999
3.Gheissary G., Fokker P.A., Egberts P.J.P., Floris F.J.T.,
Sommerauer G., Kenter C.J., Simulation of Fractures Induced
by Produced Water Re-Injection in a Multi-Layer Reservoir,
SPE 54735, 1999
4.Van den Hoek P.J., Sommerauer G., Nnabuihe L., Munro
D., Large-Scale Produced Water Re-Injection Under
Fracturing Conditions in Oman, ADIPEC 0963, 2000
4 SPE 81462

5.Bell M., Kraaijenvanger H., Maisons C., Integrated

Downhole Monitoring of Hydraulically Fractured Production
Wells, SPE 65156, 2000
6.Lehman L.V., Weijers L., Mayerhofer M., Wright C., Fisher
K., Davis E., Fulton D., Calibrating Fracture Models with
Direct Diagnostics : A Necessary but Humbling Experience,
SPE 77904, 2002
7.Van den Hoek, P.J. Pressure Transient Analysis in Fractured
Produced Water Injection Wells, SPE 77946, 2002

Fig 3. Achieved history match of RFT pressure data for

one of the wells in Deep Water Disposal of Field 2 using
the coupling technology.

Fig 1. Achieved history match of RFT pressure data

recorded in Deep Water Disposal of Field 1 using the
coupling technology.

Fig 4. Achieved history match of well head injection

pressures for one of the wells in Deep Water Disposal of
Field 2.

Fig 2. Example of achieved history match of well head

injection pressure for three wells in Deep Water Disposal
of Field 1 using the coupling technology.
SPE 81462 5

Fig 5. Clear fracturing was observed during a short-term

injection test performed on the injector of the 5 spot in
Field 3.

Fig. 7 Forecasted production for Producer 1 in inverted 5

spot of Field 3 for different fracture orientations.

Fig. 6 Forecasted fracture half-length for the 5 spot

injector well in Field 3. All simulations assume the same
water quality (Total Suspended Solids = 50 ppm, Oil in
Water = 300 ppm). Fig. 8 Forecasted production for Producer 2 in inverted 5
spot of Field 3 for different fracture orientations.
6 SPE 81462

Fig. 11 Observed pressure change during injection fall-off

test in Middle East example. Note the early pressure
behavior corresponding to fracture closure.
Fig. 9 Example of a saturation plot given by the coupling
technology in the inverted 5 spot area of Field 3. Note the
shape of the flood front for this favorable
fracture orientation.

Fig.10 Cumulative two-phase events recorded during

downhole microseismic trial in Field 1. Note the increasing
slope showing a seismic response to the injection rate
step up.