Proceedings of the 6th Unconventional Resources Technology Conference 2018
DOI: 10.15530/urtec-2018-2902624
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hydraulic Fractures in Core From Stimulated Reservoirs: Core Fracture Description of HFTS Slant Core, Midland Basin, West Texas

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
39
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 99 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The upscaling method used in the present study sought to reduce the overall number of fractures to be modeled by upscaling the natural fracture widths and fracture permeabilities (strengths) for a dense natural fracture network. Original natural fracture apertures in the subsurface were assumed to be 5 mm (0.2 inches), which follows from core observations that kinematic apertures were estimated to have been more than 1 mm wide [57]. A combination of object-based and flow-based upscaling was developed for this study, with an in-depth discussion of this topic given in Appendix C. The proposed upscaling method was applied to produce field models for DRV around a single hydraulic fracture with a representative, upscaled natural fracture distribution of the HFTS.…”
Section: Field Models Using Data From the Hydraulic Fracture Test Sitmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The upscaling method used in the present study sought to reduce the overall number of fractures to be modeled by upscaling the natural fracture widths and fracture permeabilities (strengths) for a dense natural fracture network. Original natural fracture apertures in the subsurface were assumed to be 5 mm (0.2 inches), which follows from core observations that kinematic apertures were estimated to have been more than 1 mm wide [57]. A combination of object-based and flow-based upscaling was developed for this study, with an in-depth discussion of this topic given in Appendix C. The proposed upscaling method was applied to produce field models for DRV around a single hydraulic fracture with a representative, upscaled natural fracture distribution of the HFTS.…”
Section: Field Models Using Data From the Hydraulic Fracture Test Sitmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This said, the simulations should be considered recognizing that there are many complexities that play a significant role in hydraulic fracture propagation and proppant placement that are not included in the models and there are number of simplifications in these models such as homogenous permeability, absence of significant natural fracture systems and poroelastic effects which can be tested in future studies. Additionally, recent core through hydraulic fracture studies in the Eagleford and Wolfcamp formations have highlighted a number of surprising results such as the propagations of multiple hydraulic fractures in close proximity and common occurrence of branching fractures (Gale et al 2018;Raterman et al 2017). This phenomena is not currently sufficiently understood to be incorporated into the models.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…137-55), groundwater transport (Gudmundsson, 2000), magma migration (Gudmundsson, 2011, pp. 525-52) and heat transfer (Pruess, 1983;Ghassemi & Kumar, 2007;Shaik et al 2011), and engineering operations such as outcomes of hydraulic fracture treatments (Gale et al 2018) and effective waste disposal (SD Ware et al unpub. data, 1996;Figueiredo et al 2016).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%