Characterising and Defining Stimulation Zones in Tight Formations for Appraisal Wells Onshore U.A.E with the Aid of Integrated Standard and Novel Stress Determination Methods

Neil Doucette, M. Ziller, T. Addis
{"title":"Characterising and Defining Stimulation Zones in Tight Formations for Appraisal Wells Onshore U.A.E with the Aid of Integrated Standard and Novel Stress Determination Methods","authors":"Neil Doucette, M. Ziller, T. Addis","doi":"10.2118/193032-MS","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Several onshore concessions, currently under exploration by ADNOC, consist of tight laterally variable reservoirs that pose a significant challenge during the evaluation phase of exploration.\n Most tight hydrocarbon-bearing formations require fracture stimulation. As such, the evaluation phase of these resources comprises not only the characterisation of reservoir rock properties using petrophysical analysis but, crucially, the construction of 1-D Mechanical Earth Models which underpin the identification of stimulation intervals for both vertical and horizontal well completions. The 1-D MEMs discussed here were provided by different vendors and have been calibrated against interval pressure tests, that included standard \"wet\" straddle packer microfractures and novel \"dry\" Sleeve-Fracture tests. The microfracture test data used to calibrate the MEMs were obtained from different depth intervals in onshore Abu Dhabi E&A wells and exhibit non-ideal pressure decline \"shut-in\" behavior. This required re-analysis using different interpretation methods to identify the lower bound fracture closure pressures and minimum stress magnitudes.\n The identification of stimulation intervals from the 1-D MEMs highlighted the uncertainty in the minimum stress magnitude estimations from both the log-based models, and the microfrac interpretations. The uncertainty in the log-based minimum horizontal stresses can exceed 0.15 psi/ft (>17%), even after calibration with the microfracture tests. The uncertainty in the fracture closure pressure obtained from the microfracture test can also be as large as 1,600 psi (0.22 psi/ft and 30%).\n The identification of the sources of the uncertainty, their quantification and the re-evaluation of microfracture tests fed directly into updated 1-D MEMs, which led to improved recommendations for optimised injectivity tests and acid fracturing treatments. This, in turn, has translated into a successful fluid sampling and production appraisal programme.","PeriodicalId":11079,"journal":{"name":"Day 4 Thu, November 15, 2018","volume":"152 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 4 Thu, November 15, 2018","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/193032-MS","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Several onshore concessions, currently under exploration by ADNOC, consist of tight laterally variable reservoirs that pose a significant challenge during the evaluation phase of exploration. Most tight hydrocarbon-bearing formations require fracture stimulation. As such, the evaluation phase of these resources comprises not only the characterisation of reservoir rock properties using petrophysical analysis but, crucially, the construction of 1-D Mechanical Earth Models which underpin the identification of stimulation intervals for both vertical and horizontal well completions. The 1-D MEMs discussed here were provided by different vendors and have been calibrated against interval pressure tests, that included standard "wet" straddle packer microfractures and novel "dry" Sleeve-Fracture tests. The microfracture test data used to calibrate the MEMs were obtained from different depth intervals in onshore Abu Dhabi E&A wells and exhibit non-ideal pressure decline "shut-in" behavior. This required re-analysis using different interpretation methods to identify the lower bound fracture closure pressures and minimum stress magnitudes. The identification of stimulation intervals from the 1-D MEMs highlighted the uncertainty in the minimum stress magnitude estimations from both the log-based models, and the microfrac interpretations. The uncertainty in the log-based minimum horizontal stresses can exceed 0.15 psi/ft (>17%), even after calibration with the microfracture tests. The uncertainty in the fracture closure pressure obtained from the microfracture test can also be as large as 1,600 psi (0.22 psi/ft and 30%). The identification of the sources of the uncertainty, their quantification and the re-evaluation of microfracture tests fed directly into updated 1-D MEMs, which led to improved recommendations for optimised injectivity tests and acid fracturing treatments. This, in turn, has translated into a successful fluid sampling and production appraisal programme.
借助综合标准和新型应力测定方法,为阿联酋陆上评价井描述和确定致密地层的增产层
ADNOC目前正在勘探的几个陆上特许权由致密的横向可变储层组成,这在勘探评估阶段构成了重大挑战。大多数致密含油气地层都需要压裂改造。因此,这些资源的评估阶段不仅包括使用岩石物理分析来表征储层岩石性质,而且至关重要的是,建立一维力学地球模型,这是确定垂直和水平完井增产间隔的基础。本文讨论的1-D MEMs由不同的供应商提供,并针对井段压力测试进行了校准,包括标准的“湿式”跨式封隔器微裂缝和新型的“干式”滑套裂缝测试。用于校准MEMs的微裂缝测试数据来自阿布扎比陆上E&A井的不同深度段,显示出非理想的压降“关井”行为。这需要使用不同的解释方法进行重新分析,以确定裂缝闭合压力的下限和最小应力值。从一维MEMs中确定的增产段突出了基于测井模型和微裂缝解释的最小应力值估计的不确定性。测井最小水平应力的不确定性可以超过0.15 psi/ft(>17%),即使在微裂缝测试校准后也是如此。从微裂缝测试中获得的裂缝闭合压力的不确定性也可能高达1600 psi (0.22 psi/ft, 30%)。对不确定性来源的识别、量化以及对微裂缝测试的重新评估直接反馈到更新的1-D MEMs中,从而改进了优化注入测试和酸压裂处理的建议。这反过来又转化为成功的流体取样和生产评价方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信