Cemented-Liner- vs. Openhole-Packer- Completed Tight Gas Horizontal Wells
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This article, written by Senior Technology Editor Dennis Denney, contains highlights of paper SPE 152185, ’A Direct Comparison of Hydraulic-Fracture Geometry and Well Performance Between Cemented-Liner- and Openhole-Packer-Completed Horizontal Wells in a Tight Gas Reservoir,’ by Murray Reynolds, SPE, Susan Thomson, and Faezeh Peyman, SPE, TAQA North Ltd., and Allan Hung, David Quirk, SPE, and Shaoyuan Chen, Trican Well Service, prepared for the 2012 SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, Texas, 6-8 February. The paper has not been peer reviewed. With the introduction of multiple-fractured horizontal-well(MFHW) technologies and with a much better definition of the geology, a large unconventional-resource play has developed in the Glauconitic formation in central Alberta, Canada, which could contain in excess of 5 Tcf of gas in place plus associated natural-gas liquid. Microseismic technology was used in a pilot project that was designed to test the completion effectiveness of a cased-and-cemented liner vs. an openhole-packer system in this tight gas reservoir. Introduction Several operators are developing this liquid-rich tight gas play by use of MFHW technologies. While most of the horizontal wells used openhole-packer systems with ball-and-sleeve fracture-isolation technology, the completion effectiveness of this technique was uncertain in this formation. A large vertical-well population within the area presented an opportunity to use downhole-microseismic techniques for direct measurement of the hydraulic-fracture growth from two offset horizontal wells. Two vertical microseismic-observation wells were located between two proposed horizontal wells, with a mid-point-separation distance of approximately 600 m. Each horizontal well would have approximately 1200-m horizontal exposure in the reservoir and would be completed with eight large hydraulic-fracture treatments (approximate fracture spacing of 170 m along the horizontal well). One horizontal well would be equipped with the open-hole ball-and-sleeve completion system, while the other would be equipped with a fully cemented liner in the horizontal section. The latter well would use ported collars at the points of fracture origination, and these would be shifted open by use of coiled tubing. Background Depths in the Westerose area are approximately 1840 m, increasing to 3450 m in the Deanne field. The pore-pressure gradient varies with location and depth, from slightly under-pressured in the northeast (8.5 kPa/m) to significantly overpressured in the southwest (16.1 kPa/m). Total gross zone thickness varies between 15 and 25 m, with porosities ranging from 6 to 15%. The water saturation is believed to be sub-irreducible, ranging from 25 to 30%, and no significant formation water is produced anywhere in the trend. This project has a series of regional coals that cap the Glauconitic sands. The coals vary in thickness from approximately 0.5 to 5 m, are areally extensive, and are good markers for geological mapping and correlations.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».