Please enable JavaScript for this site to function properly.
OnePetro
  • Help
  • About us
  • Contact us
Menu
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Conferences
  • Log in / Register

Log in to your subscription

and
Advanced search Show search help
  • Full text
  • Author
  • Company/Institution
  • Publisher
  • Journal
  • Conference
Boolean operators
This OR that
This AND that
This NOT that
Must include "This" and "That"
This That
Must not include "That"
This -That
"This" is optional
This +That
Exact phrase "This That"
"This That"
Grouping
(this AND that) OR (that AND other)
Specifying fields
publisher:"Publisher Name"
author:(Smith OR Jones)

Comparisons of Plane Propagation from Dilating Casing and Conventional Perforations when Stimulating the Milk River Formation

Authors
G. Hocking (GeoSierra) | T.W. Cavender (Halliburton) | T. Hunter (Halliburton) | G. Li (Halliburton)
Document ID
ARMA-2013-254
Publisher
American Rock Mechanics Association
Source
47th U.S. Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium, 23-26 June, San Francisco, California
Publication Date
2013
Document Type
Conference Paper
Language
English
ISBN
978-0-9894844-0-4
Copyright
2013. American Rock Mechanics Association
Downloads
1 in the last 30 days
73 since 2007
Show more detail
ARMA Member Price: USD 10.00
ARMA Non-Member Price: USD 20.00

Abstract: The Milk River formation, a tight-gas reservoir, is a weak mudstone within a shallow, low-energy lake environment, with thin sand lenses of upward coarsely grading sequences. Stimulation of wells in the Milk River formation are compared for a) conventional perforations in a cased hole and b) expanded dilating casings in nearby offset wells. All wells were stimulated with an energized fracturing fluid carrying 20/40-mesh sand proppant and completed at seven depth horizons. Wellhead treatment pressures for the conventionally perforated stimulations are 20 MPa at depth, rising to 27.5 MPa at the shallowest horizon. Surface tiltmeter data show fracture planes are vertical at depth and horizontal at shallower depths, with an apparent stress crossover at ~400 m depth. Wellhead treatment pressures for the split dilating casing are constant at 17.5 MPa for all depths, with all fractures vertical and no stress crossover observed. Therefore, the stress crossover is attributed as an artifact of stimulating through perforations and is not formation stress related. It is concluded that, within formations acting in the non-brittle regime, the well stimulation procedure dictates the outcome. Stimulations through perforations do not excite the least energy dissipating mechanism in non-brittle weak formations.

File Size  1 MBNumber of Pages   7

Other Resources

Looking for more? 

Some of the OnePetro partner societies have developed subject- specific wikis that may help.


 


PetroWiki was initially created from the seven volume  Petroleum Engineering Handbook (PEH) published by the  Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE).








The SEG Wiki is a useful collection of information for working geophysicists, educators, and students in the field of geophysics. The initial content has been derived from : Robert E. Sheriff's Encyclopedic Dictionary of Applied Geophysics, fourth edition.

  • Home
  • Journals
  • Conferences
  • Copyright © SPE All rights reserved
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Help
  • Terms of use
  • Publishers
  • Content Coverage
  • Privacy
  Administration log in