MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586329322 · doi:10.2118/185043-ms

Fracturing Fluid Distribution in Shale Gas Reservoirs Due to Fracture Closure, Proppant Distribution and Gravity Segregation

2017· article· en· W2586329322 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Unconventional Resources Conference · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)University of Alberta
FundersCMG Reservoir Simulation Foundation
KeywordsFracture (geology)GeologyFluid dynamicsHydraulic fracturingGeotechnical engineeringMechanicsOil shalePetroleum engineeringMatrix (chemical analysis)PetrophysicsPorosityMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many stimulated shale gas wells experience surprisingly low fracturing fluid recoveries. Fracture closure, gravity segregation, fracture tortuosity, proppant distribution, and shut-in (soaking) time have been widely postulated to be the contributing factors. This study examines the impacts of these factors on fracturing fluid distribution using flow and geomechanical simulations. The results are analyzed to understand the circumstances under which fluid recovery might be beneficial or detrimental to well performance. A series of 3D numerical models are constructed based on petrophysical parameters, fluid properties and operational constraints representative of Horn River shale gas reservoir. Hydraulic fracture is modeled explicitly in the computational domain. Complex partially-propped fracture geometry is computed using numerical constitutive models. The physical process of fracture closure during shut-in and production periods is modeled by adjusting the fracture volume and fracture conductivity dynamically. Non-Darcy behavior due to high gas velocity in fracture and matrix desorption are considered. The coupled effect of multi-phase flow, gravity and geomechanics is simulated to examine the mechanisms responsible for the low fracturing fluid recovery and the ensuing fluid distribution away from the wellbore. Water uptake into the matrix is influenced by forced and spontaneous imbibition due to the large pressure differential across the matrix-fracture interface and matrix capillarity. Additional water is displaced into the matrix as pressure depletes and fracture closes. Gravity segregation may lead to water accumulating near the bottom of a vertical planar fracture, but fracture tortuosity could limit the segregation and promote a more uniform fluid distribution. The influence of proppant distribution is far more complex: results of the geomechanical simulation confirm the formation of a residual opening above of the proppant pack in a partially-propped fracture. Despite gas production is often hampered by non-uniform proppant distribution, the residual opening offers a highly conductive flow path for gas, which is much more mobile than the water-based fracturing fluid; this further aggravates the phenomenon of gravity segregation. Extended shut-in time may enhance the initial gas rate, but lower late-time production is observed. Analysis of the residual opening of a partially-propped fracture and its implications on production performance is novel. The results highlight the interactions between different mechanisms on fracturing fluid distribution in 3D. A few practical insights pertinent to the optimal operation strategy are explained.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.225 · 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