MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3110255114 · doi:10.2118/201734-pa

One Stage Forward or Two Stages Back: What Are We Treating? Identification of Internal Casing Erosion during Hydraulic Fracturing—A Montney Case Study Using Ultrasonic and Fiber-Optic Diagnostics

2020· article· en· W3110255114 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueSPE Drilling & Completion · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueDrilling and Well Engineering
Établissements canadiensConocoPhillips (Canada)
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCasingPerforationCompletion (oil and gas wells)Hydraulic fracturingSpark plugPetroleum engineeringGeologyStage (stratigraphy)Geotechnical engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineering

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Summary Plug-and-perforation (plug-and-perf) multistage hydraulic fracturing completions in unconventional reservoirs rely on complete hydraulic isolation from the previous stage to ensure effective treatment of the active stage. Failure to isolate stages can be a result of partially set plugs, plugs set in wellbore debris or deformed casing, unqualified pressure/temperature rating of plugs, and so on. This paper presents a case study with field examples in which unexpected casing erosion occurred at the setting depths of the dissolvable fracturing (frac) plugs during hydraulic fracturing and subsequently resulted in loss of interstage isolation. A 12-well, four-layer, cube pilot was designed with permanent fiber-optic cable to collect distributed acoustic sensing (DAS), distributed temperature sensing (DTS), and distributed strain sensing (DSS) data as well as downhole pressure gauges for development insight and future completion optimization. The cable was mapped, and oriented perforation techniques placed entry holes opposite the fiber along the wellbore, and no loss of communication was observed during perforating operations. However, fiber-optic signal was lost during hydraulic fracturing operations on one or more stages in all four instrumented horizontal wells. Real-time DAS/DTS analysis indicated the fiber breaks were consistently occurring below the lowermost perforation cluster in the stage, at or very near the frac plug setting depth. Step-down tests were also performed and showed significantly enlarged effective treating area. Based on this observation, post-frac downhole imaging tools were deployed to investigate potential casing and perforation erosion. Downhole imaging data clearly showed the casing was severely eroded at several locations. Additional interrogation of the damage with respect to plug design components indicated that damage always occurred near the plug sealing element. By integrating the analysis of DAS/DTS, step-down tests, and ultrasonic imaging, it was determined that the frac plug bypass was creating a loss of casing integrity at the plug set location. Casing integrity loss resulted in multiple fiber-optic cable breaks and lowered the ability to evenly distribute slurry into treatment clusters. Fiber-optic data analysis showed that 50% of the larger outer diameter (OD) dissolvable frac plugs had bypass compared to 100% bypass for the smaller OD high-expansion, dissolvable plugs. To establish key patterns and identify critical variables that influence stimulation effectiveness, it is important to obtain several different diagnostic data sets and perform an integrated evaluation using all available information. This study also reinforces the need for operators and manufacturers to work together to design and qualify frac plugs against realistic downhole conditions, particularly in areas with potential casing deformation issues. Industry innovation is required to enable fracturing operations to continue through deformed casing. This includes advancing equipment, tools, and techniques for plug-and-perf and other multistage completion methods.

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.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,053
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,036
Tête enseignante GPT0,265
Écart entre enseignants0,229 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle