The Important Second Fracture and its Optimal Placement for MaximizingProduction (2007)

The Important Second Fracture and its Optimal Placement for Maximizing Production Jim Basuki Surjaatmadja Jim Basuki Surjaatmadja Halliburton Energy Services Group Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Scholar Paper presented at the Production and Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, U.S.A., March 2007. Paper Number: SPE-107059-MS https://doi.org/10.2118/107059-MS Published: March 31 2007 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Get Permissions Search Site Citation Surjaatmadja, Jim Basuki. "The Important Second Fracture and its Optimal Placement for Maximizing Production." Paper presented at the Production and Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, U.S.A., March 2007. doi: https://doi.org/10.2118/107059-MS Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll ProceedingsSociety of Petroleum Engineers (SPE)SPE Oklahoma City Oil and Gas Symposium / Production and Operations Symposium Search Advanced Search AbstractPlacement of a fracture in a formation has become a well-understood process in the industry. Recently, this practice was improved by the introduction of a method to properly initiate the fracture into a specific direction using super-high-energy jetting. A drawback of this jetting method though is not knowing exactly where the far-field fracture has gone. Although we know that the fracture will extend in the local minimum-stress direction, it is not known where that direction might be. In all probability, the fracture has gone into a less-than-desired area in the formation, and will result in only an "acceptable" improvement of production.It was once thought that refracturing merely reopened existing fractures. Recently, however, it has been shown that refracturing can actually create new fractures. In addition, when refracturing causes older fractures to reopen, the results generally show that some new area has been reached by the fracture. It is the opinion of this paper that these new areas are not substantially different from the one reached by the first fracture because local depletion enhances the effects of the original stress regime.This paper discusses a process whereby fractures are generated in a formation using at least two different fracturing techniques to reach formations in a manner not reached by conventional fracturing alone. In this process, the first fracture may achieve "acceptable" production goals, although the cost may be high. A second fracture is then quickly created to take advantage of the stress modification resulting from the first fracture. This rapid followup fracture is thus able to reach more productive rock not accessible to the initial fracture. Field data supporting the feasibility of this concept will be presented. Various situations where this approach could reap substantial benefits are also described.IntroductionFracture stimulation has been practiced by fracturing engineers worldwide for quite some time; yet, formations still present scientists with surprises and new challenges. Two questions that have persisted are:Where exactly does the fracture go during a fracturing treatment?What is the precise shape and measurement of the fracture?Theories have been offered to address these questions, but the best understanding has come about through the continuous development of new technologies that have expanded our knowledge about the reservoir geomechanics. In the realm of fracture direction, many people (including this author) have attempted to determine the true direction through the use of measurement devices, experience, and geological data.1–4Ultimately, the industry is interested in these questions for one basic reason: to find ways to maximize production. Therefore, it is the intention of this paper to use the understanding of formation rock behavior to create second fractures that can maximize fracture production.The Continuously Incongruent FormationMost formations are not homogeneous, meaning that most of the fractures created in them will not provide the same amount of production. This paper will discuss non-homogeneous formations. The formation of interest would likely have:High permeable deposits.Normal faults.Strike-slip faults with loose silt that eventually compacted.Groups of numerous, tiny, interconnected fractures forming many high-permeability streaks.5If a hydraulic-fracture stimulation resulted in a fracture that intersected one of these irregularities, production improvement from the treatment could be substantial. Attempting to intersect such a feature would not be easy; in fact, as will be discussed, it may be nearly impossible.Localized highly permeable deposits could have been developed by small dips or "rivers" in a formation layer (Fig. 1). Further tectonic movements may have contributed in the capture of these high-permeability features. Should the features contain hydrocarbons, wells that interconnect them could be very productive. Keywords: Reservoir Characterization, hydraulic fracturing, permeable area, stimulation, optimal placement, fracture characterization, natural fracture, normal fault, placement, wellbore Subjects: Hydraulic Fracturing, Reservoir Characterization, Faults and fracture characterization This content is only available via PDF. 2007. Society of Petroleum Engineers You can access this article if you purchase or spend a download.