Evaluation Of Fracture Parameters Using Pump-In/Flow-Back Test

Hsiao, C.C.; Tsay, F.S.

doi:10.2118/90-03

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…5 -1 The result of these disparate interpretations is appreciated if we consider Much larger discrepancies than this are presented by Shlyapobersky et al 5 (on the order of 1000 psi). Using each of these Pc estimates we can compute the net pressures generated during injection.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Quantitative Investigation of the Fracture Pump-ln/Flowback Test

Plahn

Nolte

Miska

1995

SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-214-952-9435. AbstractFracture closure pressure is an important parameter for fracture treatment design and evaluation.The pumpin/flowback (PIFB) test is frequently used to estimate its magnitude.The test is attractive because bottomhole pressures during flowback develop a distinct and repeatable signature. This is in contrast to the pump-in/shut-in test where strong indications of fracture closure are rarely seen. Various techniques exist for extracting closure pressure from the flowback pressure response.Unfortunately, these procedures give different estimates for closure pressure and their theoretical bases are not well established.We present results that place the PIFB test on a more solid foundation. A numerical model is used to simulate the PIFB test and glean physical mechanisms contributing to the response. Based on our simulation results, we propose an interpretation procedure which gives better estimates for closure pressure than existing techniques.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Shlyapobersky et al 5 do not mention the rebound period. However, it is interesting to note that in two of their field cases, "rebound pressures" exceed their Pc estimates by more than 400 psi.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Quantitative Investigation of the Fracture Pump-ln/Flowback Test

Plahn

Nolte

Miska

1995

SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other early references include Tan et al (1988) and Hsiao and Tsay (1990). Like Shlyapobersky et al (1988), Wang and Sharma (2020) and considered the evolution of system stiffness during flowback: "The system stiffness is the response of the well pressure due to fluid content changes resulting from leak-off to the formation or flowback at the surface.…”

Section: Overview Of Flowback Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flowback Test Analyses at the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) Site

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2017 and 2019, injection testing was carried out in three zones in a vertical well in granite at the Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy site near Milford, Utah, USA. In several injection cycles, flowback was implemented rather than shut-in. The goal was to explore an alternative to prolonged shut-in periods for inferring closure stress, formation compressibility, and formation permeability (permeability thickness product). The flowback procedures involved a cyclic flowback/shut-in, while pressure decreased. The flowback data are presented, and analyses are shown. The inferred closure stress(es) from flowback analyses are lower than for equivalent injection cycles that were strictly shut-in. Relatively high formation compressibility obtained from the flowback analyses indicates an extensive, fractured system. This study also includes numerical simulation of the flowback events. The numerical model shows that the rebound pressure is not necessarily the lower bound of the minimum principal stress. The signature of stiffness change can be identified as the process when the depletion mainly transitions from hydraulic fracture to natural fractures from numerical analysis. Overall, flowback potentially has advantages over shut-in because of the reduced time to closure.

show abstract

Extending The Stress-Testing Deployment Envelope to Highly Deviated Wells

Rylance¹,

Naidu²,

Hoq³

et al. 2017

Day 1 Mon, October 16, 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open-hole in-situ stress measurements have gained increasing significance in recent years, from front end loading of major hydraulic fracturing campaigns, as well as cap-rock integrity assurance and management of Out Of Zone Injection (OOZI) for pressure maintenance or secondary recovery purposes. The latter has become particularly important in recent years, with an increasing scrutiny of injection operations and their containment assurance. In response to this requirement, wireline deployed dual-packer micro-fracturing has been the most commonplace approach taken to obtain such data. However, such Wire-line Formation Tester (WFT) measurements have their own technical limitations, particularly with respect to the wellbore deviation, hole-size and pressure differential limits that can be applied. Just such a scenario was faced where a number of planned development wells were being drilled and were radiating from a suite of fixed drill centres, resulting in extensive and large sail angle sections in the zones within and across the cap-rock of interest. The use of conventional WFT micro-fracturing operations was considered to be too challenging under this scenario; due to the wellbore inclinations, the pressure limits, the probability of failure, the timings, the costs and the operational complexity in such a difficult environment. The proposed solution was to resurrect a technique that had been used on just very few occasions some 30 years ago, prior to the availability of the WFT approach, which was the use of drill-string deployed dual-packer tools for stress measurements. Due to the lack of recent industry experience with this type of application, the tool and equipment selection, the Bottom Hole Assembly (BHA) design and operational considerations were of paramount importance and required considerable planning. This paper describes the technology selection, planning, contingency options, risk mitigation, operational aspects and the outcome of the first operation from the initial concept to its final execution. It includes how the tools were successfully selected, tested and deployed, the packers inflated and set, and injection tests made within the target formation; with a number of lessons learned on the tool behaviour, the injection and the test approaches taken. The downhole data was efficiently retrieved and a suite of recommendations have resulted from the operations in general. Accurate in-situ stress measurements have been successfully made in a cap-rock formation from an open-hole section of a well at high-angle, using a pipe-deployed dual-packer approach. While the often used WFT micro-fracturing technique can address the majority of scenarios, situations can arise where a pipe-deployed approach offers the only effective and economic means of obtaining such data. The data that can be obtained is helpful for designing wells and defining the operational envelope for increasing the reliability and efficiency of injector wells to achieve field development objectives.

show abstract

Evaluation Of Fracture Parameters Using Pump-In/Flow-Back Test

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

A Quantitative Investigation of the Fracture Pump-ln/Flowback Test

A Quantitative Investigation of the Fracture Pump-ln/Flowback Test

Flowback Test Analyses at the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) Site

Extending The Stress-Testing Deployment Envelope to Highly Deviated Wells

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About