MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090944341 · doi:10.2118/153486-ms

3D Analytical Modeling of Hydraulic Fracturing Stimulated Reservoir Volume

2012· article· en· W2090944341 on OpenAlexaff
Guang Yu, Roberto Aguilera

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Latin America and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroseismHydraulic fracturingGeologyPermeability (electromagnetism)AnisotropyPetroleum engineeringTight gasPoromechanicsOil shaleGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsSeismologyPorous mediumPorosityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An easy to use analytical 3D model is developed to simulate the growth of stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) with time once a hydraulic fracturing job is started in an anisotropic poroelastic medium. In the proposed method, diffusivity coefficients in three dimensions are determined first by calibrating the model with an actual 3D microseismic-event cloud. Then the geometry of SRV is predicted under different stimulation conditions. The method permits studying the geometry of hydraulic-fracturing SRVs in both vertical and horizontal wells. The analytical model is corroborated with the use of a numerical simulator. The proposed method is important because in unconventional low-permeability reservoirs, such as shale and tight gas reservoirs, productivity depends primarily on permeability of the SRV and the reservoir area contacted by the SRV. Microseismic monitoring has been shown to be a useful technology to study the characteristics of hydraulic fractures. As such, the optimum is to constrain the analytical 3D model developed in this study with the use of microseismic data. It is concluded that this easy to use, yet accurate analytical model, is a viable tool for analyzing the orientation and geometry of hydraulic-fracturing SRV and for predicting other SRVs in the same reservoir. Examples of applications which can be reproduced easily in a spread sheet are presented in detail.

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 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 score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Latin America and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering ConferenceSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207