Comparison of Fracture Valves vs. Plug-and-Perforation Completion in the Oil Segment of the Eagle Ford Shale: A Case Study
- Neil A. Stegent (Pinnacle--A Halliburton Service) | Kip Ferguson (Magnum Hunter Resources Corporation) | Jon Spencer (Tracerco)
- Document ID
- Society of Petroleum Engineers
- SPE Production & Operations
- Publication Date
- April 2013
- Document Type
- Journal Paper
- 201 - 209
- 2013. Society of Petroleum Engineers
- 5.8.4 Shale Oil, 2.2.2 Perforating, 1.6 Drilling Operations, 1.14 Casing and Cementing, 2.5.1 Fracture design and containment, 3 Production and Well Operations, 5.6.5 Tracers, 2.5.2 Fracturing Materials (Fluids, Proppant)
- 4 in the last 30 days
- 1,054 since 2007
- Show more detail
- View rights & permissions
|SPE Member Price:||USD 5.00|
|SPE Non-Member Price:||USD 35.00|
Which completion strategy is better: plug-and-perforation or fracture-valve? The authors of this paper will evaluate multiple completion strategies in two offset horizontal wells drilled in the oil section of the Eagle Ford shale. The first well was completed using a combination of single entry point, ball-activated fracture valves (first two-thirds of the lateral) and plug-and-perforation (P-n-P) with multiple entry points (the remainder of the lateral). The second wellbore was completed using only P-n-P with multiple entry points. Both wells were completed using comparable completion designs (hybrid fracture design, number of fracture stages, and pounds of proppant) and were cemented for annular isolation.
To determine the completion and production efficiency, microseismic mapping and oil-soluble tracer technologies were used to evaluate the differences between the completion strategies. Fracture mapping was used to compare stage "complexity," while a hydrophobic oil tracer, which generated a pseudoproduction log of each individual stage, was used to determine the completion efficiency.
The integration of these diagnostic engineering technologies allows for interesting conclusions with respect to the fracture complexity generation from the different completion strategies, as well as the resulting production from the comparative wells. This data can provide important information regarding the difference between the two completion methods.
|File Size||1 MB||Number of Pages||9|
Britt, L.K. and Smith, M.B. 2009. Horizontal Well Completion,Stimulation Optimization, and Risk Mitigation. Presented at the SPE EasternRegional Meeting, Charleston, West Virginia, USA, 23-25 September.SPE-125526-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/125526-MS.
Mayerhofer, M.J., Lolon, E.P., Warpinski, N.R. et al. 2010.What Is Stimulated Reservoir Volume? SPE Prod & Oper 25(1): 89-98. SPE-119890-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/119890-PA.
Stegent, N.A. and Howell, M. 2009. Continuous MultistageFracture-Stimulation Completion Process in a Cemented Wellbore. Presented atthe SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, Charleston, West Virginia, USA, 23-25September. SPE-125365-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/125365-MS.
Stegent, N.A., Leotaud, L.M., Prospere, W. et al. 2010. CementTechnology Improves Fracture Initiation and Leads to Successful Treatments inthe Eagle Ford Shale. Presented at the Tight Gas Completions Conference, SanAntonio, Texas, USA, 2-3 November. SPE-137441-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/137441-MS.
Warpinski, N.R. 1983. Investigation of the Accuracy andReliability of In-Situ Stress Measurements Using Hydraulic Fracturing inPerforated Cased Holes. Proc., 24th U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics,College Station, Texas, USA, 20-23 June, Paper No. ARMA 83-0773, 773-786.
Willett, R.M., Borgen, K.L., McDaniel, B.W. et al. 2002.Effective Well Planning and Stimulation Improves Economics of Horizontal Wellsin a Low-Permeability West Texas Carbonate. Presented at the SPE Asia PacificOil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Melbourne, Australia, 8-10 October.SPE-77932-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/77932-MS.