MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317815139 · doi:10.2118/212368-ms

Parent Well Characterization by Comparative Analysis of Initial and Second Flowback

2023· article· en· W4317815139 on OpenAlexaff
Chong Cao, Tamer Moussa, Hassan Dehghanpour

Bibliographic record

VenueSPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference and Exhibition · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFracture (geology)Hydraulic fracturingCompactionPetroleum engineeringGeologyGeotechnical engineeringEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Infill drilling is becoming a common practice for more efficient development of tight reservoirs. However, child-well stimulation may lead to a parent-child well interference or a fracture hit. To mitigate the negative impacts of a fracture hit, the parent well is preloaded before the stimulation of child wells. Then, the injected water during the pre-loading period is later produced back to the surface. The preloading flowback (second flowback) data of parent wells may provide an opportunity for fracture charactrization. The main objective of this research is to compare the responses of initial and second flowback to capture the changes in fracture characterstics after production and preload processes. We construct rate-normalized pressure (RNP) diagnostic plots on both initial and second flowback (IFB and SFB, respectively) of six multi-fractured horizontal wells completed in Niobrara and Codell formations in DJ Basin. In general, the slope of RNP versus MBT during the SFB period is higher than that during the IFB period, except for well 1. We estimate the changes in average effective fracture volume (Vef) by analyzing the changes in the RNP slope and total compressibility during these two flowback periods. Compared to the IFB period, the Vef is generally decreased during the SFB period. The loss percentage of effective fracture volume (RVef) is estimated at 10-40%. We also compare the drive mechanisms for the two flowback periods by calculating the compaction drive index (CDI), hydrocarbon-drive index (HDI), and water-drive index (WDI). The dominant driving mechanism during both flowback periods is CDI, but its contribution is reduced by 12% in the SFB period. This drop is generally compensated by a relatively higher HDI during this period. Finally, we investigate the effects of duration of production (tp) on RVef. There is a positive correlation between tp and RVef during the two flowback periods. Therefore, the loss of effective fracture volume might be attributed to the pressure depletion in fractures caused by the long production period (more than 800 days).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference and ExhibitionSame topicHydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir AnalysisFrench-language works237,207