MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030342295 · doi:10.2118/110845-pa

A Novel Hydraulic Fracturing Model Fully Coupled With Geomechanics and Reservoir Simulation

2009· article· en· W2030342295 on OpenAlexaff
Lujun Ji, A. Settari, R. B. Sullivan

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomechanicsHydraulic fracturingPoromechanicsGeologyPetroleum engineeringReservoir simulationFracture (geology)Geotechnical engineeringFluid dynamicsPermeability (electromagnetism)Porous mediumMechanicsFlow (mathematics)PorosityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Unconventional fracturing techniques, such as high-rate waterfracs, waterflooding, or steam stimulation, produced water and cuttings reinjection, CO2 sequestration, and coalbed methane stimulation, are difficult to model because of strong interactions among the fracturing process, geomechanical changes in the porous media, and reservoir fluid flow. The resulting strong poroelastic/thermoelastic effects, permeability and porosity changes, and possible rock failure make current conventional fracturing models inadequate in such circumstances. Therefore, it is necessary to develop new models that include all of these mechanisms and that are capable of conducting integrated data analysis. This paper presents a new fracturing model with all of these mechanisms included. The model fully couples fracture mechanics with reservoir and geomechanics simulation. This methodology allows us to model fracture initiation and propagation, post-frac multiphase cleanup in the reservoir and fracture and pre-frac and post-frac well performance in a changing stress and pressure environment, all within the same system. The model couples a 3D finite element geomechanics model with a conventional 3D finite difference reservoir flow simulator. The geomechanics module implicitly models fracture propagation via displacements on the fracture face. The flow and geomechanics/fracturing are coupled in an iterative manner that is equivalent to full coupling of geomechanical and reservoir flow modeling. The 3D (planar) fracture geometry and the pressures in it are the common dynamic boundary conditions for the flow and stress modules. The new iterative process yields smooth fracture propagation, and the model has been tested on classical fracturing problems. A field example demonstrates the validity and advantages of the approach. To illustrate the model capabilities, we model a waterfrac stimulation performed in Bossier tight-gas sands. The model results show that the model is capable of matching complex injection history and calibrating the stress-dependency of formation permeability.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations117
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE JournalSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207