1 / 10

FracPac Conductivity Logic

FracPac Conductivity Logic. Why Not Denser Proppants?. Side View of Frac. Attempt to create a frac of length L f to stimulate productivity. Net Pay. L f. Top View of Frac. Width. L f. Created width is proportional to net pressure increase.

stesha
Download Presentation

FracPac Conductivity Logic

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FracPac Conductivity Logic Why Not Denser Proppants?

  2. Side View of Frac Attempt to create a frac of length Lf to stimulate productivity. Net Pay Lf

  3. Top View of Frac Width Lf • Created width is proportional to net pressure increase. • Net pressure increase is independent of proppant selection. • The proppant is used to fill the created fracture. • Created fracture width and proppant selection determines conductivity. • • Effective fracture half-length is a function of dimensionless conductivity (eff Lf = wkf/31.4k). • Therefore stimulation effectiveness is proportional to conductivity. • Can proppant selection change stimulation effectiveness?

  4. Comparison of Conductivities CONDUCTIVITY (md-ft)

  5. Comparison of Conductivities CONDUCTIVITY (md-ft) • Proppant conductivities at consistent concentrations indicate that more dense/higher strength proppants have significantly higher conductivities only at stresses above 6,000 psi. • Actual width shown at the bottom of the chart is for 4,000 psi closure, indicating that there is substantially more width required to hold 12#/ft2 of lightweight proppant versus more dense proppant. • If we hold the created width constant and then look at conductivity achieved, we will get a true comparison of conductivity.

  6. True Comparison of Conductivities CONDUCTIVITY (md-ft)

  7. True Comparison of Conductivities CONDUCTIVITY (md-ft) • When we compare conductivities for equal widths between the proppant types, we find that at 4,000 psi closure stress, InterProp has 27% more conductivity than EconoProp and Sintered Bauxite has 37% more conductivity than EconoProp.

  8. True Comparison of Conductivities CONDUCTIVITY (md-ft) • Beta factor for each of the more dense proppants is lower, significantly reducing the effects of non-Darcy flow, by 21% for InterProp and 30% for Sintered Bauxite.

  9. Productivity Enhancement

  10. Benefits Summary • Denser proppants provide more conductivity for a created fracture width than lightweight proppants. • With higher conductivity comes greater stimulation effectiveness and increased productivity. • Beta factors are also significantly reduced using more dense proppants. • Tight annular pack due to increased settling rate. • Reduces the chance for void spaces above sump packer. • Less susceptible to grain shifting and bed fluidization. • Why not denser proppants for FracPac operations?

More Related