MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002621921 · doi:10.2523/iptc-17853-ms

Fracture and Wellbore Spacing Optimization in Multistage Fractured Horizontal Wellbores: Learnings from Our Experience on Canadian Unconventional Resources

2014· article· en· W2002621921 on OpenAlex
Ali S. Ziarani, Cheney Chen, Albert Cui, D. Quirk, Dana Roney

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Petroleum Technology Conference · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroseismPetroleum engineeringGeologyFracture (geology)PetrophysicsHydraulic fracturingReservoir modelingReservoir simulationTight gasPermeability (electromagnetism)Geotechnical engineeringSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Horizontal wellbore drilling and completion technology with multi-stage fracturing has revolutionized the exploitation of unconventional resources in North America in recent years. Many unconventional oil and gas reservoirs with ultra-low permeability have become economical as a result. Yet, the development and completion costs of these resources can be further improved by optimizing the number of fracture stages placed on each wellbore and the number of wellbores drilled per section of land. This study highlights our operational and analytical experience on an integrated workflow for optimization of fracture and wellbore spacing to develop the unconventional resource in Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin. The study is based on fracturing design and optimization, microseismic fracture mapping, reservoir modeling and production analysis for over 30 case studies on different formations in Canada including Montney, Cardium, Doig, Beaverhill Lake, Viking, and Sprit River formations. The typical workflow for fracture and well spacing optimization studies includes multiple and iterative steps: minifrac tests, fracture modeling and calibration, fracture job execution, microseismic monitoring, reservoir simulation and production data analysis. In this integrated process, hydraulic fracture models were built based on fracture job data, rock mechanics and log data, and then calibrated with minifrac data and microseismic fracture mapping results. Three dimensional reservoir simulation models were constructed using laboratory core data, petrophysical and geological data, and reservoir fluid PVT properties. The calibrated fracture models were integrated into reservoir simulation models. The reservoir models were fine-tuned by history matching the production data. The fine-tuned models were then used to run multiple scenarios by varying the number of fracturing stages per wellbore and wellbores per section. Fracturing treatments with different pump rate, proppant size, pumping schedule and proppant tonnage were further investigated to optimize fracture geometry and conductivity for production enhancement. Optimal fracture and wellbore spacing scenarios were recommended for future drilling and completion planning in the field. Such optimization studies have helped to minimize operation cost and improve the economics of resource development. Our workflow and experience in West Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin can be a useful guideline to improve economic success of unconventional resources in other basins around the world.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it