Multiple Precision Hydraulic Fractures of Low-Permeability Horizontal Openhole Sandstone Wells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many horizontal wells with openhole completions have been drilled in low-permeability sandstone formations. The Cardium formation in west-central Alberta, Canada is one such case. Many of these wells perform below predicted rates with uneconomical gas production. Until recently, no method existed to effectively fracture stimulate this type of wellbore to optimize production. Possible reasons for low production rates in these wells include vertical heterogeneity of the sandstone, low horizontal permeability, and much lower vertical permeability. The heterogeneities in the sandstone can act as barriers to vertical flow. Near wellbore damage is another possible reason for low production. One way to neutralize the effect of these barriers or damage is to hydraulically fracture the formation, effectively connecting the full porous height of the formation to the wellbore through a propped vertical fracture. Nevertheless, if only one hydraulic fracture is placed, the horizontal wellbore may not produce more than a vertical well. A new hydrajet-fracturing technique, however, now exists whereby many propped hydraulic fractures can be placed individually at strategically selected locations along an openhole wellbore. The resulting horizontal wellbore with multiple propped fractures can potentially produce gas at rates higher than those of a vertical well. This paper briefly describes the hydrajet-fracturing process and documents two case histories from the Cardium formation in which this system was applied. Both wells were hydraulically proppant fractured at multiple locations precisely placed along their openhole horizontal wellbores.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".