Which completion strategy is better-Plug-n-Perf or Frac Valves? The authors of this paper will evaluate multiple completion strategies in two offset horizontal wells drilled in the oil section of the Eagle Ford shale. The first well was completed using a combination of single entry point, ball-activated frac valves (first two-thirds of the lateral) and plug-n-perf (also designated as P-n-P) with multiple entry points (the remainder of the lateral). The second wellbore was completed using only P-n-P with multiple entry points. Both wells were completed using comparable completion designs (hybrid fracture design, number of fracture stages, pounds of proppant, etc.) and were cemented for annular isolation.To determine the completion and production efficiency, microseismic mapping and oil-soluble tracer technologies were used to evaluate the differences between the completion strategies. Fracture mapping was used to compare stage "complexity," while a hydrophobic oil tracer, which generated a pseudo-production log of each individual stage, was used to determine the completion efficiency.The integration of these diagnostic engineering technologies allows for interesting conclusions with respect to the fracture complexity generation from the different completion strategies, as well as the resulting production from the comparative wells. This data can provide important information regarding the difference between the two completion methods.

Summary Which completion strategy is better: plug-and-perforation or fracture-valve? The authors of this paper will evaluate multiple completion strategies in two offset horizontal wells drilled in the oil section of the Eagle Ford shale. The first well was completed using a combination of single entry point, ball-activated fracture valves (first two-thirds of the lateral) and plug-and-perforation (P-n-P) with multiple entry points (the remainder of the lateral). The second wellbore was completed using only P-n-P with multiple entry points. Both wells were completed using comparable completion designs (hybrid fracture design, number of fracture stages, and pounds of proppant) and were cemented for annular isolation. To determine the completion and production efficiency, microseismic mapping and oil-soluble tracer technologies were used to evaluate the differences between the completion strategies. Fracture mapping was used to compare stage “complexity,” while a hydrophobic oil tracer, which generated a pseudoproduction log of each individual stage, was used to determine the completion efficiency. The integration of these diagnostic engineering technologies allows for interesting conclusions with respect to the fracture complexity generation from the different completion strategies, as well as the resulting production from the comparative wells. This data can provide important information regarding the difference between the two completion methods.

No abstract