Optimization and Evaluation of Multiple Hydraulically Fractured Parameters in Random Naturally Fractured Model Blocks: An Experimental Investigation
- 42 Downloads
Researchers have recently realized that the non-tectonic natural fractures are developed in shale formations and significant for the exploitation of shale gas. Studies have shown that the tectonic fractures in naturally fractured reservoirs have influences on the maximization of stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) during hydraulic fracturing. However, the effect of the non-tectonic randomly natural fractures on the fracturing network propagation is not well understood. Laboratory experiments are proposed to study the evolution of fracturing network in naturally fractured formations with specimens that contain non-tectonic random fractures. The influences of the dominating factors were studied and analyzed, with an emphasis on natural fracture density, stress ratio, and injection rate. The response surface methodology was employed to perform the multiple-factor analysis and optimization in the maximization of the SRV. A sensitivity study reveals a number of interesting observations resulting from these parameters on the fracturing network evaluation. It is suggested from the geometry morphology of fracturing network that high natural fracture density and injection rate tend to maximize the fracturing network. The influence of stress contrast on fracturing network is nonlinear; an optimal value exists resulting in the best hydraulic fracturing effectiveness.
KeywordsHydraulic fracturing network Non-tectonic micro-fracture Simulation experiment Response surface methodology
The authors would like to thank the editors and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants nos. 41502294, 51574014), Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2302017FRF-TP-17-027A1), National key technologies Research & Development program (2017YFC0804609).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
- Adachi JI (2011) Fluid-driven fracture in impermeable and permeable rock. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of MinnesotaGoogle Scholar
- Casas LA, Miskimins JL, Black A, Green A (2006) Laboratory hydraulic fracturing test on a rock with artificial discontinuities: SPE paper No. 103617-MS. In: SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, 24–27 September, San Antonio, Texas, USAGoogle Scholar
- Cipolla CL, Lolon E, Mayerhofer MJ (2009) Reservoir modeling and production evaluation in shale-gas reservoirs. In: International petroleum technology conference. https://doi.org/10.2523/iptc-13185-ms
- Curtis JB (2002) Fractured shale-gas systems. AAPG Bull 86(11):1921–1938Google Scholar
- Dahi TA (2009) Analysis of hydraulic fracture propagation in fractured reservoirs: an improved model for the interaction between induced and natural fractures. Ph.D. dissertation. Texas, United States: The University of Texas at AustinGoogle Scholar
- De Pater CJ, Beugelsdijk LJL (2005) Experiments and numerical simulation of hydraulic fracturing in naturally fractured rock. In: Alaska Rocks 2005, The 40th US symposium on rock mechanics (USRMS). Anchorage: American Rock Mechanics AssociationGoogle Scholar
- Ding WL, Xu CC, Jiu K (2011) The research process of shale fracture. Adv Earth Sci 2:135–145Google Scholar
- Gale JFW, Holder J (2008) Natural fractures in the Barnett shale: constraint s on spatial organization and tensile strength with implications for hydraulic fracture treatment in shale-gas reservoirs. In: The 42nd U. S. rock mechanics symposium (USRMS), San Francisco, CA, June 29–July 2Google Scholar
- King GE (2010) Thirty years of gas shale fracturing: what have we learned? In: Paper SPE 133456 presented at the SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, Florence, Italy, pp. 19–22Google Scholar
- Mayerhofer MJ, Lolon EP, Warpinski NR, Cipolla CL, Walser D, Rightmire CM (2008) What is stimulated rock volume (SRV)? In: SPE 119890, presented at the 2008 SPE shale gas production conference, Fort Worth, Texas, pp. 16–18Google Scholar
- Myers RH, Montgomery DC (2002) Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
- Naghi DA, Goshtasbi K, Ahangari K, Jin Y (2015) The effect of natural fracture dip and strike on hydraulic fracture propagation. Int J Rock Mech Min Sci 75:210–215Google Scholar
- Wang Y, Li X, Zhang YX, Wu YS, Zheng B (2016c) Gas shale hydraulic fracturing: a numerical investigation of the fracturing network evolution in the Silurian Longmaxi formation in the southeast of Sichuan Basin, China, using a coupled FSD approach. Environ Earth Sci 75(14)):1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Zhu DW (2013) Developmental characteristics, major regulating factors and distribution prediction of fractures in shale of Upper Triassic Yangchang formation in Yangchang Oil–Gas Field. China University of Geosciences for Master Degree, pp. 45–53Google Scholar