Polymer Flooding in Unconsolidated-Sand Formations: Fracturing and Geomechanical Considerations
- Mohamad F. Khodaverdian (Shell) | Tibi Sorop (Shell) | Sophie J. Postif (Shell) | Paul J. Van den Hoek (Shell)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Production & Operations
- Publication Date
- May 2010
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 211 - 222
- 2010. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 5.3.4 Integration of geomechanics in models, 2.5.1 Fracture design and containment, 5.5 Reservoir Simulation, 5.6.4 Drillstem/Well Testing, 5.6.9 Production Forecasting, 1.8 Formation Damage, 5.2.1 Phase Behavior and PVT Measurements, 6.5.2 Water use, produced water discharge and disposal, 2.4.6 Frac and Pack, 4.2.3 Materials and Corrosion, 3.2.3 Hydraulic Fracturing Design, Implementation and Optimisation, 5.4.7 Chemical Flooding Methods (e.g., Polymer, Solvent, Nitrogen, Immiscible CO2, Surfactant, Vapex), 3 Production and Well Operations, 5.3.1 Flow in Porous Media, 1.2.1 Wellbore integrity, 2.2.2 Perforating, 1.2.2 Geomechanics, 2.4.3 Sand/Solids Control, 5.2 Reservoir Fluid Dynamics, 4.3.4 Scale, 5.4.1 Waterflooding
- 10 in the last 30 days
- 1,585 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 5.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
A study was carried out to determine the geomechanical effects of polymer flooding in an unconsolidated-sand reservoir. The work involved laboratory-scale polymer injections in unconsolidated-sand blocks to identify the injectivity mechanisms, numerical analyses for fracture prediction, and geomechanical modeling of the formation to examine the potential of shear failure and containment loss during flooding.
Laboratory tests under polyaxial conditions indicate that near-wellbore fracturing and permeability increase in unconsolidated sands occur at net injection pressures limited to 2.0 MPa. These findings were applied to fracture modeling. Geomechanical modeling suggests large-scale shear failure in the sand and in the bounding shale during polymer flooding. These are expected to affect both the fracture containment and the vertical-hole integrity. Finally, fracture predictions underscore the importance of the geomechanical considerations on determining the fracture dimensions and containment. Sensitivity analyses also point to the significance of binding several key parameters for fracture prediction. These include sand shale stress contrast, fluid quality and total-suspended-solids (TSS) content, fluid rheology and effective viscosity in the formation, and the filter-cake properties in the presence of polymer.
This paper provides a geomechanical perspective on the generally complex problem of polymer flooding in unconsolidated formations containing viscous oil. The work also offers some insights into the critical issues that must be examined in such situations to avoid catastrophic failures. It highlights the existing technological gaps in the current predictive capabilities.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||12|
Chang, H. 2004. Hydraulic Fracture in Particulate Material. PhD thesis,School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology,Atlanta, Georgia (November 2004).
Costier, L., van den Hoek, P.J., Davidson, C., Mei Ding, vanden Berg,J.T.M., and Hofland, R.A. 2009. Establishing Water InjectionDynamics by Leading-Edge Coreflood Testing. Paper SPE 121786 presented atthe EUROPEC/EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, 8-11 June. doi:10.2118/121786-MS.
de Pater, C.J. and Dong, Y. 2007. Experimental Study of HydraulicFracturing in Sand as a Function of Stress and Fluid Rheology. Paper SPE105620 presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, CollegeStation, Texas, USA, 29-31 January. doi: 10.2118/105620-MS.
Dong, Y. and de Pater, C.J. 2008. Observation and modeling of the hydraulicfracture tip in sand. Paper ARMA 08-377 presented at the 42nd US Rock MechanicsSymposium and 2nd US-Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium, San Francisco,California, USA, 29 June-2 July.
Earlougher, R.C. Jr. 1977. Advances in Well Test Analysis. MonographSeries, SPE, Richardson, Texas 5.
FLAC™ Version 5.0 user manual. 2007. Minneapolis, Minnesota: ItascaConsulting Group (ICG).
Hustedt, B. and Snippe, J.R. 2008. Integrated Data Analysis and DynamicFracture Modelling Key to Understand Complex Waterflood: Case Study of thePierce Field North Sea. Paper IPTC 12533 presented at the InternationalPetroleum Technology Conference (IPTC), Kuala Lumpur, 3-5 December. doi:10.2523/12533-MS.
Khodaverdian, M. and McElfresh, P. 2000. Hydraulic Fracturing Stimulation inPoorly Consolidated Sand: Mechanisms and Consequences. Paper SPE 63233presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 1-4October. doi: 10.2118/63233-MS.
Paige, R.W. and Murray, L.R. 1996. Produced Water Re-Injection JointVenture--Final Report. Final Report RWK-21862, BP Exploration TechnologyProvision, Sunbury-on-Thames, Middlesex, UK (January 1996).
Seright, R.S., Seheult, M., Kelco, C.P., and Talashek, T. 2009. Injectivity Characteristics of EORPolymers. SPE Res Eval & Eng 12 (5): 783-792.SPE-115142-PA. doi: 10.2118/115142-PA.
Wu, R. 2006. Some Fundamental Mechanisms of Hydraulic Fracturing. PhDthesis, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute ofTechnology, Atlanta, Georgia (September 2006).
Zhai, Z. and Sharma, M.M. 2005. A New Approach to Modeling HydraulicFractures in Unconsolidated Sands. Paper SPE 96246 presented at the SPEAnnual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 9-12 October. doi:10.2118/96246-MS.