支撑剂筛分分布--真正重要的是什么?

Robert David Barree, Robert Duenckel, Barry Hlidek
{"title":"支撑剂筛分分布--真正重要的是什么?","authors":"Robert David Barree, Robert Duenckel, Barry Hlidek","doi":"10.2118/194382-MS","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Two primary criteria describe proppants utilized in fracturing: type (e.g. - sand) and mesh size (e.g. - 30/50), where mesh size refers to the number of wires per inch in the standard U. S. sieve screens. For a proppant to meet API RP-19C (API, 2006) specifications, 90% of the material sample (by weight) must fall between the screens of the largest and smallest specified mesh size. These size specifications provide the user of proppants a method of choosing a proppant, and comparing products from different suppliers, but still allows a wide variance in particle size within each sieve distribution. Laboratory conductivity tests demonstrate that limiting sieve distribution to standard sizing per API specifications is not a requirement to obtain adequate conductivity performance, or a sufficient descriptor of proppant performance.\n The industry has for the most part, limited its choices of proppants to API sizing criteria. It should be noted however, that within each standard mesh range (40/70, 30/50, 20/40, etc.) there is allowed a doubling of size from the smallest to largest particle diameter. There can be a significant difference in size distribution and performance between two proppants, both of which meet the API specification for a given mesh distribution. The difference in distribution can be recognized by determining the median particle diameter of the proppant sample. API RP-19C defines the median diameter as the fiftieth mass percentile (d50) in the distribution.\n Thousands of conductivity tests have demonstrated a very strong correlation between median particle diameter and conductivity for each specific type of proppant. The correlation provides a methodology of predicting the conductivity of differing mesh distributions within a specific standard mesh size designation, or for mixed distributions of various particle sizes. This correlation can be successfully applied to regional, non-standard, sand samples.\n The ramification of the correlation of median particle diameter to conductivity suggests that standard mesh distributions are somewhat arbitrary and that using non-standard size distributions is not necessarily a negative. Recognizing that sieving capacity is often a bottleneck to output, choosing to provide non-standard sizing may lead to greater production for a processing facility. Given potential proppant supply constraints in the industry, such a shift in proppant supply may lead to significantly improved sand availability and cost benefits to operators.","PeriodicalId":103693,"journal":{"name":"Day 2 Wed, February 06, 2019","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Proppant Sieve Distribution - What Really Matters?\",\"authors\":\"Robert David Barree, Robert Duenckel, Barry Hlidek\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/194382-MS\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Two primary criteria describe proppants utilized in fracturing: type (e.g. - sand) and mesh size (e.g. - 30/50), where mesh size refers to the number of wires per inch in the standard U. S. sieve screens. For a proppant to meet API RP-19C (API, 2006) specifications, 90% of the material sample (by weight) must fall between the screens of the largest and smallest specified mesh size. These size specifications provide the user of proppants a method of choosing a proppant, and comparing products from different suppliers, but still allows a wide variance in particle size within each sieve distribution. Laboratory conductivity tests demonstrate that limiting sieve distribution to standard sizing per API specifications is not a requirement to obtain adequate conductivity performance, or a sufficient descriptor of proppant performance.\\n The industry has for the most part, limited its choices of proppants to API sizing criteria. It should be noted however, that within each standard mesh range (40/70, 30/50, 20/40, etc.) there is allowed a doubling of size from the smallest to largest particle diameter. There can be a significant difference in size distribution and performance between two proppants, both of which meet the API specification for a given mesh distribution. The difference in distribution can be recognized by determining the median particle diameter of the proppant sample. API RP-19C defines the median diameter as the fiftieth mass percentile (d50) in the distribution.\\n Thousands of conductivity tests have demonstrated a very strong correlation between median particle diameter and conductivity for each specific type of proppant. The correlation provides a methodology of predicting the conductivity of differing mesh distributions within a specific standard mesh size designation, or for mixed distributions of various particle sizes. This correlation can be successfully applied to regional, non-standard, sand samples.\\n The ramification of the correlation of median particle diameter to conductivity suggests that standard mesh distributions are somewhat arbitrary and that using non-standard size distributions is not necessarily a negative. Recognizing that sieving capacity is often a bottleneck to output, choosing to provide non-standard sizing may lead to greater production for a processing facility. Given potential proppant supply constraints in the industry, such a shift in proppant supply may lead to significantly improved sand availability and cost benefits to operators.\",\"PeriodicalId\":103693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Day 2 Wed, February 06, 2019\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Day 2 Wed, February 06, 2019\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/194382-MS\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 2 Wed, February 06, 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/194382-MS","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

压裂过程中使用的支撑剂有两个主要标准:类型(如砂)和网目尺寸(如 30/50),其中网目尺寸是指美国标准筛网中每英寸的筛丝数量。要使支撑剂符合 API RP-19C(API,2006 年)的规格要求,90% 的材料样品(按重量计)必须位于最大和最小的指定筛孔之间。这些粒度规格为支撑剂用户提供了选择支撑剂和比较不同供应商产品的方法,但仍允许每个筛孔分布内的粒度存在较大差异。实验室电导率测试表明,将筛孔分布限制在 API 规范规定的标准粒度范围内,并不是获得足够电导率性能的必要条件,也不是支撑剂性能的充分描述指标。在大多数情况下,该行业对支撑剂的选择都局限于 API 尺寸标准。但需要注意的是,在每个标准目数范围内(40/70、30/50、20/40 等),从最小颗粒直径到最大颗粒直径的尺寸允许增加一倍。如果两种支撑剂的粒度分布和性能都符合 API 对特定目数分布的规定,那么它们之间的粒度分布和性能可能会有很大差异。可以通过确定支撑剂样品的中值粒径来识别粒度分布的差异。API RP-19C 将中值直径定义为分布中的第 50 个质量百分位数 (d50)。数以千计的电导率测试表明,对于每种特定类型的支撑剂,颗粒直径中值与电导率之间都存在很强的相关性。这种相关性提供了一种方法,可用于预测特定标准粒径指定范围内不同网孔分布或各种粒径混合分布的电导率。这种相关性可成功应用于区域性非标准砂样本。颗粒直径中值与电导率的相关性表明,标准网目分布在某种程度上是任意的,使用非标准粒度分布并不一定是坏事。由于筛分能力往往是产量的瓶颈,因此选择提供非标准粒度可能会提高加工设施的产量。考虑到行业中潜在的支撑剂供应限制,支撑剂供应的这种转变可能会大大提高砂的可用性,并为运营商带来成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Proppant Sieve Distribution - What Really Matters?
Two primary criteria describe proppants utilized in fracturing: type (e.g. - sand) and mesh size (e.g. - 30/50), where mesh size refers to the number of wires per inch in the standard U. S. sieve screens. For a proppant to meet API RP-19C (API, 2006) specifications, 90% of the material sample (by weight) must fall between the screens of the largest and smallest specified mesh size. These size specifications provide the user of proppants a method of choosing a proppant, and comparing products from different suppliers, but still allows a wide variance in particle size within each sieve distribution. Laboratory conductivity tests demonstrate that limiting sieve distribution to standard sizing per API specifications is not a requirement to obtain adequate conductivity performance, or a sufficient descriptor of proppant performance. The industry has for the most part, limited its choices of proppants to API sizing criteria. It should be noted however, that within each standard mesh range (40/70, 30/50, 20/40, etc.) there is allowed a doubling of size from the smallest to largest particle diameter. There can be a significant difference in size distribution and performance between two proppants, both of which meet the API specification for a given mesh distribution. The difference in distribution can be recognized by determining the median particle diameter of the proppant sample. API RP-19C defines the median diameter as the fiftieth mass percentile (d50) in the distribution. Thousands of conductivity tests have demonstrated a very strong correlation between median particle diameter and conductivity for each specific type of proppant. The correlation provides a methodology of predicting the conductivity of differing mesh distributions within a specific standard mesh size designation, or for mixed distributions of various particle sizes. This correlation can be successfully applied to regional, non-standard, sand samples. The ramification of the correlation of median particle diameter to conductivity suggests that standard mesh distributions are somewhat arbitrary and that using non-standard size distributions is not necessarily a negative. Recognizing that sieving capacity is often a bottleneck to output, choosing to provide non-standard sizing may lead to greater production for a processing facility. Given potential proppant supply constraints in the industry, such a shift in proppant supply may lead to significantly improved sand availability and cost benefits to operators.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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