Post-Frac Analysis Based on Flowback Results Using Chemical Frac-Tracers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Chemical frac tracing is used to evaluate flowback and cleanup efficiencies. The technique utilizes a family of unique, environmentally-friendly, fracturing fluid compatible chemical tracers to quantify segment-by-segment recovery for individual fracturing treatments and stage-by-stage recovery for multi-stage fracturing treatments. These chemical tracers with their unique chemical characteristics are mixed at a known concentration into frac fluid stages as the frac fluid is pumped downhole. Upon flowback, samples are collected and analyzed for tracer concentration. With the use of the mass balance method the flowback efficiency for each stage is calculated. These precise flowback calculations yield a more accurate assessment of cleanup efficiency. This paper presents several case histories in which the technique was implemented. Results and fracture flowback prognoses are presented. The results are also used to assess post-frac performance as a function of flowback efficiency. Introduction Chemical Frac Tracers Chemical frac tracers, CFT's, are used to precisely calculate flowback and hence flowback efficiency and to evaluate fracture cleanup. Various chemical tracers with unique chemical characteristics are mixed at a known concentration and injected according to a pre-determined design throughout the frac fluid stages, such as the pad and the propping laden fluid stages. The characteristics of these tracers are unique. They do not react with each other, the formation or the tubular. They do not degrade with temperature or time, do not self-concentrate, and do not react with frac fluids. These tracers are detectable at low concentrations of 50 ppt (parts per trillion). They are also environmentally safe to handle, pump downhole and dispose. They are soluble in water, and unlike polymers, do not concentrate upon leakoff. Upon flowback, samples are collected and analyzed for tracer concentration. With the use of the mass balance method, flowback of each frac fluid stage is calculated, and hence flowback efficiency for each stage of frac fluid injected. The precise flowback calculation for each frac fluid stage yields the fracture cleanup efficiency. Chemical frac tracing can also be used as a means to understand vertical communication between zones. Under this scenario, one chemical tracer is injected into each zone. Each zone is flowed back individually after a period of shut-in allowing the flow of fluid within the formation. Samples are collected and analyzed for tracer concentrations. If zones are communicating vertically under static conditions, the tracer from one zone can flow into other zones and hence will be detected accordingly.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".