Surface modification agents (SMAs) and their coating onto proppant have been used in thousands of wells in the past 10 years resulting in significant improvement in productivity in terms of production rates and duration. In a recent field study1 involving more than 100 well stimulations, these SMAs were found to dramatically enhance the recovery of aqueous-based fracturing fluids during well cleanup following the fracturing treatments. This paper describes how a simple modification to proppant surfaces resulted in these dramatic post-frac well cleanups and subsequent well productivity. A comparison of laboratory results along with actual case histories will help explain the significant improvement in hydrocarbon production observed in fracture stimulated wells using SMA-coated proppant.
Introduction
More than 10 years ago, the concept of coating proppant with a surface modification agent (SMA) to stabilize the proppant pack and formation/proppant pack interface was introduced. Since that time, widespread use of this technology to sustain fracture conductivity has demonstrated excellent results. Numerous papers2–5 have described the mechanism by which SMA materials function to provide sustained conductivity, and in some cases, enhanced conductivity.
Initially, the SMA material was described as a "nonhardening resin manufactured from renewable resources."3 A particularly useful SMA was made6 from "tall oil," a byproduct of the paper and pulp industry; this SMA combined surface activity with a polymeric material. The polymer is insoluble in both water and oil, but is soluble in a few highly oxygenated solvents, which makes it particularly suited for treating proppant. It is described as thermally stable, with a polar polyamide backbone with long, pendent fatty chains. The polar polyamide portion of the polymer tends to adsorb strongly on mineral surfaces while the hydrophobic fatty chains tend to extend away from the mineral surface. This leaves the mineral surface highly hydrophobic, hydrophobic and sticky to the touch.
The SMA coating on proppant changes the interaction of the proppant with its surroundings in several ways. The first is to cause the surfaces to become tacky, causing a significant decrease in the tendency of proppant to flow out of a fracture. It has been reported7 that even with fracture closure, there is a significant tendency for proppant to flow back, and that this tendency increases with closure stress. In fact, the application of SMA has been shown2 to increase the critical fluid flow rate required to initiate proppant flowback by 3 to 5 times that of uncoated proppant.
Proppant pack stability is important in many cases. High stress, coupled with stress cycling, can lead to proppant crushing, and subsequent migration of fines formed by proppant crushing and bridging off, eventually plugging the pack's permeability. The tendency for crushed proppant fines to migrate is mitigated by the application of SMA to the surface of proppant as it is used in the fracture treatment. The same application of SMA to proppant can also be utilized to prevent formation fines from migrating into the proppant pack, thereby conserving the effective fracture width. This application has found widespread use in poorly consolidated formations completed using frac-pack completions. In these applications, greater than normal fracture conductivity can be achieved by using a proppant size larger than normally recommended to prevent formation fines invasion as the SMA-coated proppant traps the formation fines at the formation/fracture pack interface.3
Application of SMA-coated proppant in coalbed methane producers was found to provide long-term coal fines control.8 Without SMA, typical fracture stimulation treatments in these applications required frequent refracturing. In the SMA treatment's ability to affect fracture sustainability, it was observed that the load recovery from the frac treatment, and the dewatering process, were both significantly accelerated.
Coating SMA onto off-spec, small-sized proppants for use in water fracture stimulation treatments has in some areas delivered acceptable conductivity, even with these poorer grades of proppant. It was further observed that significantly improved fracture fluid recovery was obtained during these treatments.
This paper presents field and lab data demonstrating that coating proppant with SMA can impact fracture fluid recovery and suggests some possible mechanisms to support these observations.