Estimates of Fracture Lengths in an Injection Well by History Matching Bottomhole Pressures and Injection Profile
- Ajay Suri (The University of Texas at Austin) | Mukul Mani Sharma (The University of Texas at Austin) | Ekwere Peters (The University of Texas at Austin)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
- Publication Date
- August 2011
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 385 - 397
- 2011. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 5.5.8 History Matching, 3 Production and Well Operations, 2.4.3 Sand/Solids Control
- Injection induced fracture length, Frature lengths in injection wells, Well injectivity, History Matching, Injection profile
- 5 in the last 30 days
- 1,327 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 12.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
An injection-well model is presented and used to history match a field injector's bottomhole pressures (BHPs) and injection profile (injection rate into each layer), taking into account plugging of formation caused by suspended solids in the injection water, poro- and thermoelastic stresses, injector shut-ins/restarts, and changes in both the injection rates and the average reservoir pressure. Fracture lengths and injection profile are estimated for a field injector as a case study. The injection-well fracture model is very similar to the Perkins and Gonzalez (1985) model except that it has integrated a more comprehensive and experimentally tested internal filtration model (Rajagopalan and Tien 1976; Pang and Sharma 1997; Gadde and Sharma 2001; Suri 2000; Wennberg and Sharma 1997) for calculating permeability reduction. It has also added a pressure-transient model that makes the earlier reservoir flow models more accurate.
The solids deposition is modeled using a filtration model (Rajagopalan and Tien 1976). The fluid flow in the reservoir is modeled using three approximated composite zones with uniform saturations and average mobilities, and the pressure for the fractured wellbore is calculated with the help of Gringarten's infinite-conductivity solution. The induced-fracture lengths are calculated on the basis of the Perkins and Gonzalez fracture-propagation model (1985) that accounts for the thermal and poroelastic stresses. The model is developed into a semianalytical numerical simulator that can predict and history match an injector's daily BHP, fracture lengths, and injection profile. Future estimates of pump pressures, BHP, injectivity, skin, front locations, fracture lengths, and injection profile can be obtained from this model. Both short-term pressure transients and long-term pseudosteady pressures observed over several years of injection can be history matched to capture effects that are important at both short and long time scales.
Finally a field-case injection-well study is presented in which BHP and injectivity are history matched over a period of 3 years. We show that the model can be used to estimate the minimum horizontal stresses in the layers if they are not known, which was the case. Estimates of fracture lengths, fraction of flow, permeability reduction, and skin and front locations are also obtained. There is significant uncertainty in the results because of uncertainty in the model inputs and in the completeness of the physics of the model of fracturing itself. Both the solids deposition and the opening/closing of the injection-induced fractures had to be accounted for to obtain the history match. The layer/sand stresses and the water quality are the most important parameters that determine the well's injectivity, fracture growth, and injection profile. Microseismic surveys are needed to delineate the fractures in injection wells.
|File Size||883 KB||Number of Pages||13|
Abbaszadeh, M. and Kamal, M. 1989. Pressure-Transient Testing ofWater-Injection Wells. SPE Res Eng 4 (1): 115-124.SPE-16744-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/16744-PA.
Azarkish, A., Khaghani, E., and Rezaeidoust, A. 2006. Interpretationof water injection /fall off test (Response to M.Levitan,SPE 77532). Paper SPE101749 presented at the International Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibitionin China, Beijing, 5-7 December http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/101749-MS.
Chaban, F.R., Sharma, M.M., Suri, A. and Gibson, G.T. 2010. Method OptimizesWaterflood Projects. The American Oil & Gas Reporter (February2010): 122.
Gadde, P.B. and Sharma, M.M. 2001. Growing Injection Well Fractures andTheir Impact on Waterflood Performance. Paper SPE 71614 presented at the SPEAnnual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 30 September-3October. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/71614-MS.
Hazebroek, P., Rainbow, H., and Mathews, C.S. 1958. Pressure Fall-Offin Water Injection Wells. Trans., AIME 213: 250-260.
Hustedt, B., Zwarts, D., Bjoerndal, H.-P., Masfry, R., and van denHoek, P.J. 2008. Induced Fracturing in Reservoir Simulations: Application of aNew Coupled Simulator to a Waterflooding Field Example. SPE Res Eval &Eng 11 (3): 569-576. SPE-102467-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/102467-PA.
Kabir, C.S. and Izgec, B. 2009. Identification and Characterization ofHigh-Conductive Layers in Waterfloods. Paper SPE 123930 presented at the SPEAnnual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 4-7 October. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/123930-MS.
Larsen, L. and Bratvold, R.B. 1994. Effects of Propagating Fractures onPressure-Transient Injection and Falloff Data. SPE Form Eval 9 (2): 105-114. SPE-20580-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/20580-PA.
Levitan, M.M. 2003. Application of Water Injection/Falloff Tests forReservoir Appraisal: New Analytical Solution Method for Two-Phase Variable RateProblems. SPE J. 8 (4): 341-349. SPE-77532-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/77532-MS.
Merrill, L.S., Kazemi, H., and Gogarty, W.B. 1974. PressureFalloff Analysis in Reservoirs With Fluid Banks. J Pet Technol 26 (7): 809-818. SPE-4528-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/4528-PA.
Nordgren, R.P. 1972. Propagation of a Vertical Hydraulic Fracture. SPEJ. 12 (4): 306-314. SPE-3009-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/3009-PA.
Pang, S. and Sharma, M.M. 1995. Evaluating the Performance of Open-Hole,Perforated and Fractured Water Injection Wells. Paper SPE 30127 presented atthe SPE European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague, 15-16 May. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/30127-MS.
Pang, S. and Sharma, M.M. 1997. A Model for Predicting Injectivity Declinein Water-Injection Wells. SPE Form Eval 12 (3): 194-201.SPE-28489-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/28489-PA.
Perkins, T.K. and Gonzalez, J.A. 1985. The Effect of Thermoelastic Stresseson Injection Well Fracturing. SPE J. 25 (1): 78-88.SPE-11332-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/11332-PA.
Rajagopalan, R. and Tien, C. 1976. Trajectory analysis of deep-bedfiltration with the sphere-in-cell porous media model. AIChE J. 22 (3): 523-533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aic.690220316.
Saripalli, K.P., Bryant, S.L., and Sharma, M.M. 1999. Role of FractureFace and Formation Plugging in Injection Well Fracturing and InjectivityDecline. Paper SPE 52731 presented at the SPE/EPA Exploration and ProductionEnvironmental Conference, Austin, Texas, USA, 1-3 March. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/52731-MS.
Sharma, M.M., Pang, S., Wennberg, K.E., and Morgaenthaler, L.N. 2000.Injectivity Decline in Water-Injection Wells: An Offshore Gulf of Mexico CaseStudy. SPE Prod & Fac 15 (1): 6-13. SPE-60901-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/60901-PA.
Sosa, A., Raghavan, R., and Limon, T.J. 1981. Effect of RelativePermeability and Mobility Ratio on Pressure Falloff Behavior. J PetTechnol 33 (6): 1125-1135. SPE-9398-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/9398-PA.
Suri, A. 2000. A Model for Multi-Component Filtration. MS thesis, TheUniversity of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, USA (December 2000).
Suri, A. and Sharma, M.M. 2007. A Model for Water Injection in Frac-PackedWells. Paper SPE 110084 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference andExhibition, Anaheim, California, USA, 11-14 November. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/110084-MS.
Suri, A. and Sharma, M.M. 2009. Fracture Growth in Horizontal Injectors.Paper SPE 119379 presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing TechnologyConference, The Woodlands, Texas, USA, 19-21 January. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/119379-MS.
Suri, A., Sharma, M.M., and Moreno, J.M.M. 2010. Injectivity ofFrac-Packed Wells: A Case Study of the Guando Field. Paper SPE 125897 presentedat the SPE International Symposium and Exhibiton on Formation Damage Control,Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, 10-12 February http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/125897-MS.
van den Hoek, P.J. 2005. Dimensions and Degree of Containment ofWaterflood-Induced Fractures From Pressure-Transient. SPE Res Eval &Eng 8 (5): 377-387. SPE-84289-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/84289-PA.
Wennberg, K.E. and Sharma, M.M. 1997. Determination of the FiltrationCoefficient and the Transition Time for Water Injection. Paper SPE 38181presented at the SPE European Formation Damage Conference, The Hague, 2-3 June.http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/38181-MS.