乐观主义者,悲观主义者或工程师-导电性基于需求而不是时尚

M. Rylance
{"title":"乐观主义者,悲观主义者或工程师-导电性基于需求而不是时尚","authors":"M. Rylance","doi":"10.2118/205286-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n An optimist says the glass is half-full, a pessimist half-empty, whereas a good engineer says that the glass is twice as big as it needs to be. There has been much debate over the years about the relative functionality, application and even necessity of proppant in delivering effective hydraulic fractures. Often these debates have been directly linked to major changes in core frac applications, more recently in the dominant North American onshore unconventional market. However, the debates have all too often used broad or unclear brush strokes to describe shifting fracture requirements. Meanwhile, the developing oilfield in the rest of the world resides in more permeable areas of the resource triangle, great care must be taken to ensure that conventional lessons hard learned are not lost, but also that unconventional understanding develops.\n Over recent years there have been many debates and publications on the relative value of the use of proppant (and associated conductivity), although the true question was about appropriate fracture design in different rock/matrix qualities and environments. Certainly, the vast majority of fracturing engineers appreciate the difference between continuous proppant-pack conductivity and other techniques, such as infinite conductivity, pillar fracturing or duning designs. However, there is increasing evidence that conventional fracturing is suffering from populist attitudes, leading to ineffective fracturing. Additionally, and just as impactful, that unconventional fracturing continues to rely on the lessons learned and physics derived directly from our conventional experience but applying this in an entirely different environment.\n Primarily, the main concern is with the transfer of recent lessons learned and techniques utilised in one rock quality and environment, to an entirely different scenario, resulting in the misapplication, reduced IP30, poorer NPV or reduced long term EUR and IRR. Examples will be referenced where appropriate proppant selection and frac design can be the difference between success and failure. Fundamentally, we have not sufficiently developed our understanding of the role of proppant and conductivity, for application in unconventionals and thereby rely far too much on our previous conventional thinking. While at the same time we are exporting often inappropriate unconventional populist practice into very conventional environments, thereby potentially achieving the abhorrence of the worst of both worlds.\n This paper will describe and address scenarios where appropriate engineering selection, rather than popularity-based decision making, has resulted in a successful outcome. It will also attempt to ensure that we show the importance of studying your rock, in anticipation of engineering design, and that this should be a key consideration. The paper will also suggest that as an industry we urgently need to address our approach to consideration of conductivity, placement and importance and ensure that unconventional knowledge and learning progresses with a beneficial outcome for all.","PeriodicalId":11171,"journal":{"name":"Day 3 Thu, January 13, 2022","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimist, Pessimist or Engineer - Conductivity Based on Need Not Fashion\",\"authors\":\"M. Rylance\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/205286-ms\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n An optimist says the glass is half-full, a pessimist half-empty, whereas a good engineer says that the glass is twice as big as it needs to be. There has been much debate over the years about the relative functionality, application and even necessity of proppant in delivering effective hydraulic fractures. Often these debates have been directly linked to major changes in core frac applications, more recently in the dominant North American onshore unconventional market. However, the debates have all too often used broad or unclear brush strokes to describe shifting fracture requirements. Meanwhile, the developing oilfield in the rest of the world resides in more permeable areas of the resource triangle, great care must be taken to ensure that conventional lessons hard learned are not lost, but also that unconventional understanding develops.\\n Over recent years there have been many debates and publications on the relative value of the use of proppant (and associated conductivity), although the true question was about appropriate fracture design in different rock/matrix qualities and environments. Certainly, the vast majority of fracturing engineers appreciate the difference between continuous proppant-pack conductivity and other techniques, such as infinite conductivity, pillar fracturing or duning designs. However, there is increasing evidence that conventional fracturing is suffering from populist attitudes, leading to ineffective fracturing. Additionally, and just as impactful, that unconventional fracturing continues to rely on the lessons learned and physics derived directly from our conventional experience but applying this in an entirely different environment.\\n Primarily, the main concern is with the transfer of recent lessons learned and techniques utilised in one rock quality and environment, to an entirely different scenario, resulting in the misapplication, reduced IP30, poorer NPV or reduced long term EUR and IRR. Examples will be referenced where appropriate proppant selection and frac design can be the difference between success and failure. Fundamentally, we have not sufficiently developed our understanding of the role of proppant and conductivity, for application in unconventionals and thereby rely far too much on our previous conventional thinking. While at the same time we are exporting often inappropriate unconventional populist practice into very conventional environments, thereby potentially achieving the abhorrence of the worst of both worlds.\\n This paper will describe and address scenarios where appropriate engineering selection, rather than popularity-based decision making, has resulted in a successful outcome. It will also attempt to ensure that we show the importance of studying your rock, in anticipation of engineering design, and that this should be a key consideration. The paper will also suggest that as an industry we urgently need to address our approach to consideration of conductivity, placement and importance and ensure that unconventional knowledge and learning progresses with a beneficial outcome for all.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11171,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Day 3 Thu, January 13, 2022\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Day 3 Thu, January 13, 2022\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/205286-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 3 Thu, January 13, 2022","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/205286-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

乐观主义者说杯子是半满的,悲观主义者说杯子是半空的,而一个好的工程师说杯子是它需要的两倍大。多年来,关于支撑剂在水力压裂中的相对功能、应用乃至必要性,一直存在很多争论。这些争论通常与核心压裂应用的重大变化直接相关,最近在北美占主导地位的陆上非常规市场。然而,争论往往使用宽泛或不明确的笔触来描述不断变化的断裂要求。与此同时,世界上其他地区的开发油田位于资源三角中渗透性更强的地区,因此必须非常小心,以确保传统的经验教训不会丢失,同时也要确保非常规的认识得到发展。近年来,尽管真正的问题是在不同岩石/基质质量和环境下进行适当的裂缝设计,但关于支撑剂使用的相对价值(以及相关的导流能力)存在许多争论和出版物。当然,绝大多数压裂工程师都认识到连续支撑剂充填导流能力与其他技术(如无限导流能力、柱压裂或砾岩设计)之间的区别。然而,越来越多的证据表明,传统压裂正受到民粹主义态度的影响,导致压裂效果不佳。此外,同样重要的是,非常规压裂继续依赖于直接从常规经验中获得的经验教训和物理原理,但将其应用于完全不同的环境。首先,主要关注的是将最近在一种岩石质量和环境中使用的经验教训和技术转移到完全不同的情况,从而导致误用,降低IP30,降低NPV或降低长期EUR和IRR。本文将参考实例,说明支撑剂的选择和压裂设计是成败的关键。从根本上说,我们对支撑剂和导流能力的作用还没有充分的了解,因此我们过于依赖以前的传统思维。与此同时,我们正在向非常传统的环境输出往往不合适的非常规民粹主义做法,从而可能达到两个世界最坏情况的憎恶。这篇论文将描述和解决一些场景,在这些场景中,适当的工程选择,而不是基于流行的决策制定,已经导致了成功的结果。它还将试图确保我们展示研究你的岩石的重要性,在工程设计的预期中,这应该是一个关键的考虑因素。该论文还建议,作为一个行业,我们迫切需要解决我们的方法,以考虑导电性、放置和重要性,并确保非常规知识和学习的进展,为所有人带来有益的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Optimist, Pessimist or Engineer - Conductivity Based on Need Not Fashion
An optimist says the glass is half-full, a pessimist half-empty, whereas a good engineer says that the glass is twice as big as it needs to be. There has been much debate over the years about the relative functionality, application and even necessity of proppant in delivering effective hydraulic fractures. Often these debates have been directly linked to major changes in core frac applications, more recently in the dominant North American onshore unconventional market. However, the debates have all too often used broad or unclear brush strokes to describe shifting fracture requirements. Meanwhile, the developing oilfield in the rest of the world resides in more permeable areas of the resource triangle, great care must be taken to ensure that conventional lessons hard learned are not lost, but also that unconventional understanding develops. Over recent years there have been many debates and publications on the relative value of the use of proppant (and associated conductivity), although the true question was about appropriate fracture design in different rock/matrix qualities and environments. Certainly, the vast majority of fracturing engineers appreciate the difference between continuous proppant-pack conductivity and other techniques, such as infinite conductivity, pillar fracturing or duning designs. However, there is increasing evidence that conventional fracturing is suffering from populist attitudes, leading to ineffective fracturing. Additionally, and just as impactful, that unconventional fracturing continues to rely on the lessons learned and physics derived directly from our conventional experience but applying this in an entirely different environment. Primarily, the main concern is with the transfer of recent lessons learned and techniques utilised in one rock quality and environment, to an entirely different scenario, resulting in the misapplication, reduced IP30, poorer NPV or reduced long term EUR and IRR. Examples will be referenced where appropriate proppant selection and frac design can be the difference between success and failure. Fundamentally, we have not sufficiently developed our understanding of the role of proppant and conductivity, for application in unconventionals and thereby rely far too much on our previous conventional thinking. While at the same time we are exporting often inappropriate unconventional populist practice into very conventional environments, thereby potentially achieving the abhorrence of the worst of both worlds. This paper will describe and address scenarios where appropriate engineering selection, rather than popularity-based decision making, has resulted in a successful outcome. It will also attempt to ensure that we show the importance of studying your rock, in anticipation of engineering design, and that this should be a key consideration. The paper will also suggest that as an industry we urgently need to address our approach to consideration of conductivity, placement and importance and ensure that unconventional knowledge and learning progresses with a beneficial outcome for all.
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