Productivity Modeling of Multifractured Horizontal Wells Coupled With Geomechanics - Comparison of Various Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The advances in hydraulic fracturing technology and horizontal well completions have led in recent years to rapid rise in exploitation and development of tight gas and shale plays all over the world, and particularly in North America. The popularity of new field technology has in fact raised many new questions. In particular, for forecasting the productivity and EUR of multifractured horizontal wells, it is not clear if conventional reservoir simulation concepts can be adapted for modeling or if extra physics must be included to obtain realistic solutions. This paper presents various methods to model multifractured horizontal wells in tight gas sands using a conventional reservoir simulator coupled with geomechanics. Two actual wells in the same formation but with different fracturing techniques (i.e., Xlink gelled water fracs and un-gelled water (slick water) fracs) are studied. Detailed investigation of the role of fracture conductivity, effects of initial permeability level, net pay thickness, assumed size of the stimulated reservoir volume (SRV), and pressure or stress dependent permeability of the SRV and virgin reservoir were carried out by history matching the rate and cumulative production. It was established that i) history match is not possible without use of stress or pressure dependent permeability and ii) permeability dependence of pressure inside stimulated reservoir volume must be larger than in the rest of the reservoir. It was also observed that the standard method for using the same geomechanical data both in uncoupled reservoir and coupled geomechanical model will give incorrect results in terms of cumulative production. A new method based on uniaxial deformation theory is proposed to more accurately approximate the geomechanical effects in conventional reservoir simulators without running a fully coupled geomechanical simulator. The results from uncoupled reservoir modeling using the new method for correcting the permeability data for poroelastic effects were remarkably similar to rigorously coupled geomechanical modeling. This work will be of importance to engineers in analyzing and forecasting production performance of multifractured horizontal completions using numerical models. It will allow engineers to use uncoupled (conventional) reservoir modeling as a practical approximation of more complex coupled geomechanical models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".