16.01.2015 Views

Notional Field Development Final Report - EBN

Notional Field Development Final Report - EBN

Notional Field Development Final Report - EBN

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>EBN</strong> <strong>Notional</strong> <strong>Field</strong> <strong>Development</strong> Plan<br />

3.2.4 Hydraulic Fracture Summary and Recommendations<br />

Results presented here are the average of two transverse, conductive and producing fractures per stage<br />

in either the DFN or Planar modeling scenario. Although the created DFN lengths are shorter than the<br />

Planar model, the sum of propped dominate primary fractures created by the Discrete Fracture Network<br />

is similar to the propped single fracture created in the Planar models solution. Fracture width and fluid<br />

efficiency in the DFN model is less those solutions in the planar model because the same fluid volume is<br />

being used to create complex fracturing geometry. Comparison of Posidonia and Aalburg fracture<br />

geometries can be found in the<br />

Table 3-8, Comparison Results for DFN and Planar Fracture Geometry (20/40-mesh RC proppant),<br />

Posidonia Shale and Table 3-9, Comparison Results for DFN and Planar Fracture Geometry (20/40-mesh<br />

RC proppant), Aalburg Shale below.<br />

Table 3-8, Comparison Results for DFN and Planar Fracture Geometry (20/40-mesh RC proppant), Posidonia Shale<br />

Planar σ2>> σ3<br />

(average for two fractures)<br />

• Efficiency, h = 90%<br />

• DPnet = 47.5 bar (688 psi)<br />

• hf = 41 m (134 ft)<br />

• xf create = 257.2 m (844 ft)<br />

• xf prop = 172 m (563 ft)<br />

• wf prop = 0.7 cm (0.276 in)<br />

• kfwf = 121.8 mD-m (399.6 mD-ft)<br />

• CfD = 7902<br />

DFN σ2> σ3<br />

(average for two networks)<br />

• Efficiency, h = 75%<br />

• DPnet = 45.3 bar (657 psi)<br />

• hf = 39 m (128 ft)<br />

• xf create = 205.2 m (673 ft)<br />

• xf prop = 152 m (500 ft)<br />

• wf prop = 0.32 cm (0.12 in)<br />

• kfwf = 56.3 mD-m (184.7 mD-ft)<br />

• CfD = 7390<br />

• Network Width: ~35 m (~115 ft)<br />

Table 3-9, Comparison Results for DFN and Planar Fracture Geometry (20/40-mesh RC proppant), Aalburg Shale<br />

Planar σ2>> σ3<br />

(average for two fractures)<br />

• Efficiency, h = 88%<br />

• DPnet = 88 bar (1278 psi)<br />

• hf = 30.8 m (101 ft)<br />

• xf create = 357.1 m (1172 ft)<br />

• xf prop = 228.4 m (749 ft)<br />

• wf prop = 0.16 cm (0.06 in)<br />

• kfwf = 25.97 mD-m (85.2 mD-ft)<br />

• CfD = 1137<br />

DFN σ2> σ3<br />

(average for two networks)<br />

• Efficiency, h = 69%<br />

• DPnet = 95.2 bar (1380 psi)<br />

• hf = 23.4 m (77 ft)<br />

• xf create = 257 m (843 ft)<br />

• xf prop = 176.4 m (579 ft)<br />

• wf prop = 0.06 cm (0.03 in)<br />

• kfwf = 10.7 mD-m (35 mD-ft)<br />

• CfD = 1208<br />

• Network Width: 40 m (131 ft)<br />

© 2011 Halliburton All Rights Reserved<br />

38

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!