Recent Advancements in Far-Field Proppant Detection
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The combination of multistage hydraulic fracture treatments with horizontal drilling technology has been the primary driver to the successful development of resource plays. More than 85% of wells drilled in North America today employ these methods. However, while these technologies have been wildly successful, only recently has the industry begun to address in earnest, the efficiency of current practices. These completion and development optimization efforts require an understanding of which portions of the reservoir have not been adequately contacted/stimulated and are thereby failing to contribute to production, and ultimate hydrocarbon recovery. Understanding where the proppant is located, both near- and far-field, is the starting point for these evaluations, and is the basis for this paper. Traditional fracture mapping technologies provide indirect estimates of fluid distribution within the fracture network. However, there is little direct correlation between fluid distribution and proppant location, and since most unpropped portions of fractures rapidly collapse, identification of the proppant location better represents the region which contributes to ultimate recovery. Near-wellbore detection of proppant can provide insight into whether all perf clusters (in the case of plug and perf) have received proppant as well as the impacts of proppant overflush. Conversely, accurate determination of far-field proppant placement will affect everything from well and stage spacing, to stage design and refrac candidate selection, and allow significant optimization of diversion techniques. While knowledge of both near- and far-field proppant location is necessary for the industry to overcome the single-digit recovery factors that are now projected in many unconventional plays, far-field proppant detection techniques have been largely absent to date. This paper briefly reviews the current "state of the industry" regarding near-wellbore proppant detection technology. It then presents a novel far-field proppant detection technique which utilizes electro-magnetic differencing and a specialty detectable proppant. This includes a description of the technology as well as the methodology of the technique. In addition, the paper reviews the design and results from a recent (first-ever) field deployment of this technology in a horizontal Permian Basin well. Visualization of the proppant in the far-field is also shown. This paper should be beneficial to all engineers and technologists currently interested in evaluating completion efficiencies as well as fracture stimulation effectiveness. Understanding proppant location in both the near- and far-field regions has significant impact on well spacing, stage and perf cluster spacing, and ultimate recovery from stimulated horizontal wells.
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 | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
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 ».