Skip to content
Brent$117.6Gas TTF$1,192USD453.87 ₸
MunaiHub

Equations: Formation damage and stimulation

The equations of the “Formation damage and stimulation” lessons in “Oil and gas production”, with their conditions and units, and what each symbol means in them.

Skin of a zone of reduced permeability (Hawkins formula)
Sd=(kkd−1)ln⁡rdrwS_d = \left(\frac{k}{k_d} - 1\right)\ln\frac{r_d}{r_w}

any consistent units: only the ratios k/kdk/k_d and rd/rwr_d/r_w enter the formula; the logarithm is natural (base e)

Holds when: The damaged zone is a cylinder of uniform permeability, small compared with the drainage area (the part of the reservoir that feeds the well). The flow is radial over the whole thickness: open hole, or perforations that do not reach beyond the zone (then the actual skin is even larger, because the flow converges on the tunnels). Single-phase flow that follows Darcy's law (the rate is proportional to the pressure gradient).

Formation damage and damage skin →
Damage skin for several concentric zones
Sd=∑i=1n(kki−1)ln⁡riri−1,r0=rwS_d = \sum_{i=1}^{n} \left(\frac{k}{k_i} - 1\right)\ln\frac{r_i}{r_{i-1}},\qquad r_0 = r_w

any consistent units

Holds when: The same as for one zone. Inside each ring the permeability is uniform.

Formation damage and damage skin →
Damage skin for a continuous permeability profile
Sd=∫rwrd(kk(r)−1) drrS_d = \int_{r_w}^{r_d} \left(\frac{k}{k(r)} - 1\right)\frac{\dd r}{r}

any consistent units

Holds when: Radial steady-state flow in the near-wellbore zone, and single-phase flow that follows Darcy's law.

Formation damage and damage skin →
Inertial addition to the pressure drop in the near-wellbore zone
Δpinert=β ρ q24π2h2(1rw−1r)\Delta p_{\text{inert}} = \frac{\beta\,\rho\,q^2}{4\pi^2 h^2}\left(\frac{1}{r_w} - \frac{1}{r}\right)

SI

Holds when: A zone with a uniform β\beta and radial flow over the whole thickness. In the damaged zone, we use its own coefficient βd\beta_d instead of β\beta.

Formation damage and damage skin →
Return permeability of a sample made of several sections
LR=∑iLiRi,Ri=kiafterkibefore\frac{L}{R} = \sum_i \frac{L_i}{R_i},\qquad R_i = \frac{k_i^{\text{after}}}{k_i^{\text{before}}}

any consistent units: lengths in the same units

Holds when: The flow is one-dimensional and the sections work in series. The initial permeability is the same along the whole sample. Otherwise the sections are weighted not by the length LiL_i but by Li/kibeforeL_i/k_i^{\text{before}}. The permeability before and after is measured with the same fluid at the same saturation.

Sources of formation damage →
Critical water rate per metre of interval
qcr=ucr Ain,Ain=2πrw  or  n π dt ltq_{\text{cr}} = u_{\text{cr}}\,A_{\text{in}},\qquad A_{\text{in}} = 2\pi r_w\ \ \text{or}\ \ n\,\pi\,d_{\text{t}}\,l_{\text{t}}

SI; for a rate in m³/d, multiply by 86,400

Holds when: The inflow is spread evenly over the area. In reality it is stronger towards the ends of the tunnels and towards the few tunnels that are open, and the local velocity is higher. The criterion is the velocity of water in the test, where brine flows alone. When oil and water flow together, the water takes up only part of the pores and moves faster in them. So the allowable water rate is smaller, and the estimate is optimistic. The ends of the tunnels and tunnels that do not work are not counted.

Sources of formation damage →
Saturation index (for barium sulfate as an example)
SI=lg⁡γBa [Ba2+]  γSO4 [SO42−]Ksp\mathrm{SI} = \lg\frac{\gamma_{\text{Ba}}\,[\mathrm{Ba^{2+}}]\;\gamma_{\text{SO}_4}\,[\mathrm{SO_4^{2-}}]}{K_{sp}}

concentrations in mol/L; the logarithm is decimal (base 10)

Holds when: SI > 0 means the water is supersaturated and salt can come out. SI < 0 means it is undersaturated. SI = 0 means equilibrium. In brines the activity coefficients are much smaller than one. They, and KspK_{sp} at reservoir temperature and pressure, are calculated with brine models in special software. The index is thermodynamic: it tells whether the salt can come out, but not how fast.

Sources of formation damage →
How much barium sulfate can come out of a mixture
x=(a+b)−(a−b)2+4Ksp′2x = \frac{(a + b) - \sqrt{(a - b)^2 + 4K'_{sp}}}{2}

mol/L; the mass of the precipitate is xx multiplied by the molar mass of barium sulfate (233.4 g/mol)

Holds when: The mixture has reached equilibrium. Other ions and precipitates are not counted. The activity coefficients do not change as the salt comes out.

Sources of formation damage →
Hall plot
∑j(pw,j−pˉ)Δtj=μB(ln⁡rerw+S)2πkh W\sum_j \left(p_{w,j} - \bar p\right)\Delta t_j = \frac{\mu B\left(\ln\dfrac{r_e}{r_w} + S\right)}{2\pi k h}\,W

SI. In metric oilfield units, 2π2\pi is replaced by 0.536, and the slope comes out in MPa·d/m³ with kk in mD, hh in m and μ\mu in mPa·s

Holds when: Injection is close to steady state: the pressure at the distance rer_e equals the reservoir pressure pˉ\bar p and hardly changes. The mobilities of the water and of the oil it displaces (how easily each fluid moves) are close. The wellhead pressure is often used instead of the bottomhole pressure. At a constant rate, hydrostatic pressure and friction give a constant correction. The slope also changes for other reasons: a rise of the reservoir pressure, or water saturation of the zone around the well. The most accurate measurement of the skin is a falloff test (a test that records how the pressure falls after injection stops).

Sources of formation damage →
How many times the rate grows when the skin is reduced
q2q1=X+S1X+S2,X=ln⁡rerw−34\frac{q_2}{q_1} = \frac{X + S_1}{X + S_2},\qquad X = \ln\frac{r_e}{r_w} - \frac34

dimensionless; the logarithm is natural

Holds when: The average reservoir pressure and the drawdown are the same before and after the treatment: the lift system holds the same bottomhole pressure at the higher rate. Pseudo-steady-state, single-phase flow in a circular drainage area with the well at the centre. The treatment changes only the skin. The permeability and thickness of the reservoir are the same.

Acid treatments: principle, economics and candidate selection →
Absolute gain in rate after the skin is reduced
Δq=2πkh ΔpμB(1X+S2−1X+S1)\Delta q = \frac{2\pi kh\,\Delta p}{\mu B}\left(\frac{1}{X + S_2} - \frac{1}{X + S_1}\right)

SI (any consistent system of units)

Holds when: The same as for the formula for the ratio.

Acid treatments: principle, economics and candidate selection →
Payback time when the gain declines exponentially
tpb=−1aln⁡(1−aCΔq0 v)t_{\text{pb}} = -\frac{1}{a}\ln\left(1 - \frac{aC}{\Delta q_0\,v}\right)

any consistent units: here days, m³/d and dollars

Holds when: The gain declines exponentially at a constant rate aa, and the net income per cubic metre is constant. Discounting is not applied. For payback times of up to a year it changes the answer little. A solution exists only if aC<Δq0vaC < \Delta q_0 v. Otherwise all the future income from the gain, Δq0v/a\Delta q_0 v/a, is smaller than the costs, and the treatment will never pay back.

Acid treatments: principle, economics and candidate selection →
Extra production up to the economic limit after a treatment
ΔN=qelD1(1−1F)\Delta N = \frac{q_{\text{el}}}{D_1}\left(1 - \frac{1}{F}\right)

any consistent units: the rate and the decline rate in the same units of time

Holds when: A closed drainage area, with no water influx and no injection. Single-phase inflow. A constant bottomhole pressure. The decline is exponential, and its rate is proportional to productivity. The economic limit in terms of rate is the same in both cases.

Acid treatments: principle, economics and candidate selection →
Reactions of hydrochloric acid with carbonates
2 HCl+CaCO3→CaCl2+CO2+H2O4 HCl+CaMg(CO3)2→CaCl2+MgCl2+2 CO2+2 H2O\begin{aligned} 2\,\mathrm{HCl} + \mathrm{CaCO_3} &\rightarrow \mathrm{CaCl_2} + \mathrm{CO_2} + \mathrm{H_2O}\\ 4\,\mathrm{HCl} + \mathrm{CaMg(CO_3)_2} &\rightarrow \mathrm{CaCl_2} + \mathrm{MgCl_2} + 2\,\mathrm{CO_2} + 2\,\mathrm{H_2O}\end{aligned}

the coefficients are numbers of moles

Holds when: The acid is fully spent. The reaction with calcite is very fast, and with dolomite it is slower, especially at low temperature. Siderite, FeCO3\mathrm{FeCO_3}, reacts in the same way as calcite, but it puts iron into solution.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Reactions of hydrofluoric acid
SiO2+4 HF→SiF4+2 H2O,SiF4+2 HF→H2SiF6Al4Si4O10(OH)8+32 HF→4 AlF2++4 SiF62−+18 H2O+4 H+CaCO3+2 HF→CaF2↓+CO2+H2O\begin{aligned} \mathrm{SiO_2} + 4\,\mathrm{HF} &\rightarrow \mathrm{SiF_4} + 2\,\mathrm{H_2O},\qquad \mathrm{SiF_4} + 2\,\mathrm{HF} \rightarrow \mathrm{H_2SiF_6}\\ \mathrm{Al_4Si_4O_{10}(OH)_8} + 32\,\mathrm{HF} &\rightarrow 4\,\mathrm{AlF_2^{+}} + 4\,\mathrm{SiF_6^{2-}} + 18\,\mathrm{H_2O} + 4\,\mathrm{H^{+}}\\ \mathrm{CaCO_3} + 2\,\mathrm{HF} &\rightarrow \mathrm{CaF_2}\downarrow + \mathrm{CO_2} + \mathrm{H_2O}\end{aligned}

the coefficients are numbers of moles

Holds when: The acid is in excess: silicon goes into the fluorosilicate ion and aluminium into complexes with two fluorides. If fluorine is in short supply the products are different, and less HF is used per mole of mineral. The reactions with clays and feldspars are fast, and those with quartz are slow. The speed grows with temperature. With calcium minerals HF gives insoluble calcium fluoride. This is why they are removed with hydrochloric acid before the hydrofluoric acid.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Dissolving power of an acid
β=νmaMmaνaMa,X=C β ρaρma\beta = \frac{\nu_{\text{ma}} M_{\text{ma}}}{\nu_{\text{a}} M_{\text{a}}},\qquad X = \frac{C\,\beta\,\rho_{\text{a}}}{\rho_{\text{ma}}}

ratios of masses and volumes; the units of densities and molar masses are the same in the numerator and the denominator

Holds when: The acid is fully spent, and only on this mineral. For HF the coefficient νa\nu_{\text{a}} depends on which fluorides form. Here silicon goes into the fluorosilicate ion. In tables where SiF4\mathrm{SiF_4} is taken as the product, the values are 1.3–1.5 times larger. The density of the solution is taken at the temperature at which it is prepared.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Volume of acid per metre of interval for a dissolving front at radius r
Vh=π (r2−rw2)[ϕ+(1−ϕ) xX]\frac{V}{h} = \pi\,(r^2 - r_w^2)\left[\phi + (1 - \phi)\,\frac{x}{X}\right]

SI (m, m³/m)

Holds when: The acid enters the reservoir evenly over the thickness and around the circumference. The mineral dissolves completely behind a sharp front (a fast reaction). The slow reaction of HF with quartz, mixing and the growth of porosity are not counted. The volume is underestimated, so a margin is added to the calculation. For mud acid, xx is the fraction of fast-reacting minerals that the acid can reach: clays on the pore walls, fines, and particles of drilling fluid.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Skin of a ring with a precipitate from spent acid
Spr=(kkpr−1)ln⁡r2r1=12(kkpr−1)ln⁡(1+Vπϕh r12)S_{\text{pr}} = \left(\frac{k}{k_{\text{pr}}} - 1\right)\ln\frac{r_2}{r_1} = \frac12\left(\frac{k}{k_{\text{pr}}} - 1\right)\ln\left(1 + \frac{V}{\pi\phi h\,r_1^2}\right)

any consistent units; the logarithm is natural

Holds when: The acid is displaced like a piston, without mixing. The precipitate is spread evenly over the ring and lowers the permeability by the same amount wherever the ring ends up. The flow is radial, and the damage near the wellbore has already been removed.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Limit on the rate of matrix injection
qmax⁡=2πkh (pf−Δpmar−pˉ)μ(ln⁡rerw+S)q_{\max} = \frac{2\pi k h\,(p_f - \Delta p_{\text{mar}} - \bar p)}{\mu\left(\ln\dfrac{r_e}{r_w} + S\right)}

SI; ln⁡\ln is the natural logarithm

Holds when: Steady radial flow, with the pressure at the distance rer_e equal to the reservoir pressure. Injection lasts hours, and the pressure disturbance has no time to reach rer_e. So the pressure difference is overstated, and the rate comes out with a safety margin. The viscosities of the acid and of the reservoir fluid are close. If the reservoir fluid is much more viscous, the rate calculated from the viscosity of the acid is too high. The reservoir is uniform. In a layered interval the rate is divided unevenly between the layers.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Wellhead pressure during injection
pwh=pw−ρgH+Δpfrp_{\text{wh}} = p_w - \rho g H + \Delta p_{\text{fr}}

SI; in metric units ρgH=0.00981 ρH\rho g H = 0.00981\,\rho H (MPa, with ρ\rho in g/cm³ and HH in m)

Holds when: The pipes are filled with one fluid. When fluids of different densities replace each other in the pipes, the hydrostatic pressure changes during pumping. Friction grows almost as the square of the rate. Losses in the wellhead equipment and in the perforations are small, or are counted separately.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Apparent skin during injection
Sapp=2πkh (pw−pˉ)q μ−ln⁡rerwS_{\text{app}} = \frac{2\pi k h\,(p_w - \bar p)}{q\,\mu} - \ln\frac{r_e}{r_w}

SI; in metric oilfield units 2π2\pi is replaced by 0.536 (the rate in m³/d)

Holds when: The flow is steady. Transient effects at the start of pumping and after a change of rate distort the value. The apparent skin includes the pseudo-skins, the viscous slug of acid (a batch of thickened acid), and the action of the diverter.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Acid capacity number and the volume of a stage
Nac=ϕ X(1−ϕ) x,Vh=π (r2−rw2) ϕ(1+1Nac)N_{\text{ac}} = \frac{\phi\,X}{(1 - \phi)\,x},\qquad \frac{V}{h} = \pi\,(r^2 - r_w^2)\,\phi\left(1 + \frac{1}{N_{\text{ac}}}\right)

dimensionless

Holds when: The same as for the calculation of the volume with a sharp front.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Skin of a zone of viscous diverter
Sv=(μvμ−1)ln⁡rvrwS_{\text{v}} = \left(\frac{\mu_{\text{v}}}{\mu} - 1\right)\ln\frac{r_{\text{v}}}{r_w}

any consistent units; the logarithm is natural

Holds when: The viscosity is constant. In reality gels and foams thin under shear: near the wellbore, where the velocity is high, their viscosity is lower, and deeper in it is higher. The diversion is based on this. The permeability of the zone does not change.

Acid systems and treatment design →
Damköhler number for a wormhole
Da=π d l κqwhDa = \frac{\pi\,d\,l\,\kappa}{q_{wh}}

SI (dimensionless)

Holds when: The acid is spent on the walls at a rate proportional to its concentration. This is an estimate. The diameter and the length of a wormhole are measured only approximately in a test.

Acid treatment of carbonates and special wells →
Wormhole growth velocity and the efficiency curve of the acid
vwh=vopt1/3PVbt,opt vi2/3[1−e−4vi2/vopt2]2,PVbt=vivwh=PVbt,opt (vi/vopt)1/3[1−e−4vi2/vopt2]2v_{wh} = \frac{v_{opt}^{1/3}}{PV_{bt,opt}}\,v_i^{2/3}\left[1 - e^{-4v_i^2/v_{opt}^2}\right]^2,\qquad PV_{bt} = \frac{v_i}{v_{wh}} = PV_{bt,opt}\,\frac{(v_i/v_{opt})^{1/3}}{\left[1 - e^{-4v_i^2/v_{opt}^2}\right]^2}

any consistent units of velocity

Holds when: The constants voptv_{opt} and PVbt,optPV_{bt,opt} are taken from core tests of the same rock with the same acid at reservoir temperature. The formula smooths the minimum: at vi=voptv_i = v_{opt} it gives PVbt≈1.04 PVbt,optPV_{bt} \approx 1.04\,PV_{bt,opt}. At high velocities PVbtPV_{bt} grows as vi1/3v_i^{1/3}, and at low velocities very steeply. On larger samples the optimum velocity and PVbtPV_{bt} are smaller than on standard ones. So laboratory values are transferred to the reservoir with a correction, or are calibrated against the results of treatments.

Acid treatment of carbonates and special wells →
Pore velocity at the wormhole front in radial injection
vi=q2πr h ϕ,ropt=q2πhϕ voptv_i = \frac{q}{2\pi r\,h\,\phi},\qquad r_{opt} = \frac{q}{2\pi h\phi\,v_{opt}}

SI

Holds when: The acid enters the interval evenly over the thickness and around the circumference. The wormhole front is taken as a cylinder. The wormholes themselves take a negligible share of the pore volume.

Acid treatment of carbonates and special wells →
Volume of acid per metre for wormholes out to the radius r_wh
Vh=∫rwrwh2πr ϕ PVbt(vi(r)) dr  ≈  π ϕ PVbt (rwh2−rw2)\frac{V}{h} = \int_{r_w}^{r_{wh}} 2\pi r\,\phi\,PV_{bt}\big(v_i(r)\big)\,dr \;\approx\; \pi\,\phi\,PV_{bt}\,\left(r_{wh}^2 - r_w^2\right)

SI (m, m³/m)

Holds when: The wormhole front advances at the velocity vwh(vi)v_{wh}(v_i), as in a linear test at the same pore velocity. The rate is constant. The second form is a “volumetric model” with one value of PVbtPV_{bt}. It is good if the velocity along the whole path is close to the optimum. Otherwise the integral is calculated by rings. The rock is uniform. Natural fractures and vugs take acid faster and change the picture.

Acid treatment of carbonates and special wells →
Share of the rate of a layer at injection with a common bottomhole pressure
qjq=kjhj/(ln⁡(re/rw)+Sj)∑ikihi/(ln⁡(re/rw)+Si)\frac{q_j}{q} = \frac{k_jh_j\big/\left(\ln(r_e/r_w) + S_j\right)}{\sum_i k_ih_i\big/\left(\ln(r_e/r_w) + S_i\right)}

fractions; the units of kk and hh are the same for all layers

Holds when: Steady injection, as in the formula for the limit on the rate. The reservoir pressure and the viscosity of the fluid are the same in all layers, and there is no crossflow between the layers at the wellbore. A slug of diverting agent (a batch of it pushed into the layer) adds (μv/μ−1)ln⁡(rv/rw)(\mu_{\text{v}}/\mu - 1)\ln(r_{\text{v}}/r_w) to the skin of the layer, where μv\mu_{\text{v}} and rvr_{\text{v}} are its apparent viscosity and radius (skin of a viscous diverter).

Acid treatment of carbonates and special wells →
Ideal etched width of an acid fracture
wi=X V(1−ϕ)⋅2xfhfw_i = \frac{X\,V}{(1 - \phi)\cdot 2x_f h_f}

SI

Holds when: All the acid has reacted on the walls within the fracture, with no leak-off (loss of acid into the reservoir rock) and no use near the wellbore. In reality the width is smaller. The etching is even. But the conductivity is created by unevenness, so wiw_i is a measure of the volume of work that the acid has done, not the width of the channel after closure.

Acid treatment of carbonates and special wells →
Extra production over a period against the declining baseline
ΔNT=q2(1−e−a2T)a2−q1(1−e−a1T)a1,a2=a1 X+S1X+S2\Delta N_T = \frac{q_2\left(1 - e^{-a_2T}\right)}{a_2} - \frac{q_1\left(1 - e^{-a_1T}\right)}{a_1},\qquad a_2 = a_1\,\frac{X + S_1}{X + S_2}

consistent units: the rate and the decline rate in the same units of time

Holds when: A closed drainage area with no pressure support and a constant bottomhole pressure (the drawdown falls together with the reservoir pressure). The decline is exponential, and its rate is proportional to productivity. With pressure support by injection the gain lasts longer, and the formula understates it. With water breakthrough after the treatment, it overstates it.

Acid treatment of carbonates and special wells →
Skin of a well with wormholes inside the damaged ring
S={kkdln⁡rdrwh−ln⁡rdrw,rwh<rd−ln⁡rwhrw,rwh≥rdS = \begin{cases} \dfrac{k}{k_d}\ln\dfrac{r_d}{r_{wh}} - \ln\dfrac{r_d}{r_w}, & r_{wh} < r_d\\[2mm] -\ln\dfrac{r_{wh}}{r_w}, & r_{wh} \ge r_d \end{cases}

dimensionless; the logarithm is natural

Holds when: The wormhole zone conducts infinitely well, and the pressure in it equals the bottomhole pressure. So the skin comes out as a limit, and in reality it is somewhat higher. The damage is uniform in the ring from rwr_w to rdr_d. At rwh=rwr_{wh} = r_w the formula turns into the Hawkins formula (Skin factor).

Acid treatment of carbonates and special wells →
Dimensionless fracture conductivity
FCD=kf wk xfF_{CD} = \frac{k_f\,w}{k\,x_f}

any consistent units: kfk_f and kk in the same units, and ww and xfx_f in the same units too

Holds when: A vertical fracture over the whole thickness of the reservoir, with two equal wings. The conductivity of the fracture and the permeability of the reservoir are the same along the length. Single-phase flow that follows Darcy's law. Inertial losses and multiphase flow in the fracture reduce its effective conductivity.

Hydraulic fracturing: purpose and well selection →
Equivalent skin of a fracture of high conductivity
Sf=−ln⁡rw′rw,rw′≈xf2S_f = -\ln\frac{r_w'}{r_w},\qquad r_w' \approx \frac{x_f}{2}

any units of length, the same for all the radii

Holds when: The fracture has high conductivity: FCDF_{CD} is 10 and above. At a lower conductivity the effective wellbore radius is smaller (the next section). The fracture is small compared with the drainage area (the part of the reservoir that feeds the well): the half-length is much smaller than rer_e. Pseudo-steady-state flow (the pressure falls at the same pace everywhere in the drainage area). In the first months, while the flow to the fracture is linear, productivity is higher. The fracture bypasses the damage, so the damage skin is not included in the sum.

Hydraulic fracturing: purpose and well selection →
Folds of increase (FOI) of the rate after fracturing
q2q1=X+S1X+Sf,X=ln⁡rerw−34\frac{q_2}{q_1} = \frac{X + S_1}{X + S_f},\qquad X = \ln\frac{r_e}{r_w} - \frac34

dimensionless; the logarithm is natural

Holds when: The average reservoir pressure and the drawdown are the same. The lift system and the surface equipment pass the increased rate. Pseudo-steady-state flow in a circular drainage area.

Hydraulic fracturing: purpose and well selection →
Effective wellbore radius of a fracture of finite conductivity (approximation)
ln⁡xfrw′=1.65−0.328 u+0.116 u21+0.180 u+0.064 u2+0.005 u3,u=ln⁡FCD\ln\frac{x_f}{r_w'} = \frac{1.65 - 0.328\,u + 0.116\,u^2}{1 + 0.180\,u + 0.064\,u^2 + 0.005\,u^3},\qquad u = \ln F_{CD}

dimensionless; the logarithms are natural

Holds when: A vertical fracture over the whole thickness of the reservoir, the well at the centre of the drainage area, and a fracture that is small compared with the area. The approximation fits the chart with an error of a few per cent in the practically important range, from about 0.3 to hundreds. At a lower conductivity it overstates rw′r_w' (at FCD=0.1F_{CD} = 0.1 by about 12%, in more detail in the lesson Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well). At large FCDF_{CD} the right-hand side approaches ln⁡2\ln 2, that is, rw′r_w' approaches xf/2x_f/2.

Hydraulic fracturing: purpose and well selection →
Dimensionless time based on the fracture half-length
tDxf=k tϕ μ ct xf2t_{Dxf} = \frac{k\,t}{\phi\,\mu\,c_t\,x_f^2}

SI (any consistent system of units)

Holds when: A single-phase, slightly compressible fluid. The hydraulic diffusivity k/(ϕμct)k/(\phi\mu c_t) is the same as in the diffusivity equation (Diffusivity equation).

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Equivalent skin of a fracture from the universal curve
Sf=ln⁡xfrw′∣FCD−ln⁡xfrwS_f = \ln\frac{x_f}{r_w'}\bigg|_{F_{CD}} - \ln\frac{x_f}{r_w}

dimensionless; natural logarithms

Holds when: The flow is pseudo-radial: the pressure disturbance has moved away from the fracture by several of its half-lengths. The fracture is small compared with the drainage area (the penetration ratio is below about 0.3, see the next section). The conductivity is uniform along the length. Choking at the wellbore and damage to the faces are accounted for by separate skins (last section).

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Effective wellbore radius of a fracture of low conductivity
rw′≈12γ kfwk=0.2807 kfwkr_w' \approx \frac{1}{2\gamma}\,\frac{k_f w}{k} = 0.2807\,\frac{k_f w}{k}

kfw/kk_f w/k has the dimension of length: with kfwk_f w in mD·m and kk in mD, the radius comes out in metres

Holds when: FCD≲0.1F_{CD} \lesssim 0.1. At FCDF_{CD} = 0.1 the exact curve lies 3.3% below the asymptote, and at 0.05 it lies 1.6% below. The flow is pseudo-radial. The fracture is longer than the part that really works (lengths of about kfw/kk_f w/k).

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Penetration ratio of a fracture
Ix=2xfxeI_x = \frac{2x_f}{x_e}

dimensionless

Holds when: The fracture passes through the centre of the area, parallel to its side. At IxI_x = 1 the ends of the fracture reach the boundaries.

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Dimensionless productivity index
JD=qBμ2πkh (pˉ−pwf),J=2πkhBμ JDJ_D = \frac{qB\mu}{2\pi kh\,(\bar p - p_{wf})},\qquad J = \frac{2\pi kh}{B\mu}\,J_D

SI (any consistent system of units)

Holds when: The regime is pseudo-steady-state in a closed area (Pseudo-steady-state flow and the shape factor). In the transient regime JDJ_D depends on time (section on the first rates). The inflow is single-phase. For a vertical well in a square, 1/JD1/J_D equals ln⁡(xe/rw)−1.311+S\ln(x_e/r_w) - 1.311 + S. Here −1.311-1.311 is 12ln⁡(4/(γCA))\tfrac12\ln\big(4/(\gamma C_A)\big) at CAC_A = 30.88, where CAC_A is the Dietz shape factor (a number that depends on the shape of the area and the position of the well).

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Upper limit of the dimensionless productivity index
JD≤JD,max⁡=6π⋅xeyeJ_D \le J_{D,\max} = \frac{6}{\pi}\cdot\frac{x_e}{y_e}

dimensionless

Holds when: The area is closed and rectangular, the fracture runs through the centre parallel to the side xex_e, and the regime is pseudo-steady-state. There is one vertical fracture over the whole thickness of the reservoir. The derivation is in the advanced section.

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Bilinear flow to a fracture of finite conductivity
pwD=πΓ(5/4)2 tDxf1/4FCD=2.45 tDxf1/4FCDp_{wD} = \frac{\pi}{\Gamma(5/4)\sqrt2}\,\frac{t_{Dxf}^{1/4}}{\sqrt{F_{CD}}} = 2.45\,\frac{t_{Dxf}^{1/4}}{\sqrt{F_{CD}}}

dimensionless

Holds when: These are early times. For FCD≥3F_{CD} \ge 3 the regime lasts until about tDxf≈0.1/FCD2t_{Dxf} \approx 0.1/F_{CD}^2. For FCDF_{CD} from 1.6 to 3 it lasts longer than this formula gives (at FCDF_{CD} = 1.6, up to tDxf≈0.7t_{Dxf} \approx 0.7). For FCD<1F_{CD} < 1 it lasts less: only a short stretch of the fracture near the wellbore works, and already at tDxft_{Dxf} of about FCD2/400F_{CD}^2/400 the inflow starts to turn into pseudo-radial flow, skipping the linear regime. The fracture is uniform and is not choked at the wellbore. The effect of the wellbore has ended.

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Linear flow to a fracture of high conductivity
pwD=π tDxf⟺Δp=qBμ2hxftπkϕμctp_{wD} = \sqrt{\pi\,t_{Dxf}}\quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad \Delta p = \frac{qB\mu}{2hx_f}\sqrt{\frac{t}{\pi k\phi\mu c_t}}

SI (any consistent system of units)

Holds when: FCDF_{CD} is above about 300. The regime lasts until tDxf≈0.016t_{Dxf} \approx 0.016. At lower conductivity bilinear flow takes its place. The fracture runs over the whole thickness of the reservoir. If the fracture is less tall than the reservoir, the first part of the record is distorted.

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Pseudo-radial flow to a fracture
pwD=12(ln⁡tDxf+0.809)+ln⁡xfrw′p_{wD} = \frac12\left(\ln t_{Dxf} + 0.809\right) + \ln\frac{x_f}{r_w'}

dimensionless; natural logarithms

Holds when: The derivative reaches the plateau 0.5 to within 7–8% at tDxf=3t_{Dxf} = 3 and to within 5% at tDxf=5t_{Dxf} = 5, for any FCDF_{CD} from 1 to infinity. The reservoir is infinite: the disturbance has not yet reached the boundaries of the area.

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Transient productivity index and apparent gain factor
JD(t)=1pwD(t)−2πtDA,napp(t)=JD(t)JD,preJ_D(t) = \frac{1}{p_{wD}(t) - 2\pi t_{DA}},\qquad n_{\text{app}}(t) = \frac{J_D(t)}{J_{D,\text{pre}}}

dimensionless

Holds when: The area is closed and homogeneous, and the inflow is single-phase. Before the treatment the well worked in the pseudo-steady-state regime. At constant bottomhole pressure the rate changes with time in a similar way, but not exactly the same. This formula is a measure, not a forecast of the rate day by day.

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Choke skin of a fracture
sch≈πk xs(1kf,chw−1kfw)≈πk xskf,chws_{ch} \approx \pi k\,x_s\left(\frac{1}{k_{f,ch}w} - \frac{1}{k_f w}\right) \approx \frac{\pi k\,x_s}{k_{f,ch}w}

dimensionless; permeabilities and conductivities in consistent units (mD and mD·m)

Holds when: The whole flow of a wing passes along the fracture through the choked stretch, so each wing carries half of the rate. This is an upper estimate. If kf,chwk_{f,ch}w is not much larger than k xsk\,x_s, part of the fluid bypasses the choked stretch through the reservoir, and the actual skin is smaller (in the example below, by about 40%).

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Skin of the fracture faces
sfs=πbs2xf(kks−1)s_{fs} = \frac{\pi b_s}{2x_f}\left(\frac{k}{k_s} - 1\right)

dimensionless

Holds when: The layer is thin, bs≪xfb_s \ll x_f, and the same along the whole fracture. The flow through it is perpendicular to the face. In the linear regime sfss_{fs} is added to pwDp_{wD} exactly. In the pseudo-radial regime the total skin grows by about sfss_{fs}, and never by less. The model gives 5–20% more at sfss_{fs} from 0.5 to 1, and relatively even more at small sfss_{fs}, because the inflow is redistributed along the fracture.

Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well →
Horizontal stresses of a poroelastic layer with tectonic strains
σh=ν1−ν(σv−αpp)+αpp+E1−ν2(εh+ν εH)\sigma_h = \frac{\nu}{1-\nu}\left(\sigma_v - \alpha p_p\right) + \alpha p_p + \frac{E}{1-\nu^2}\left(\varepsilon_h + \nu\,\varepsilon_H\right)

any identical units of stress and modulus (MPa or psi); the strains are dimensionless

Holds when: The layer is linearly elastic and isotropic, and wide compared with its thickness. The vertical stress is a principal stress. The strains are measured from the state in which the horizontal stresses were created only by the weight of the rocks. εh\varepsilon_h and εH\varepsilon_H are the same for all layers of the section, but the stresses they cause are different in each layer. The moduli are static: measured by slowly loading a core sample (a cylinder of rock taken from the well), or converted from dynamic moduli (found from sound speeds) with a relationship that has been checked on core (Sonic log). σH\sigma_H is found with the same formula by swapping εh\varepsilon_h and εH\varepsilon_H. At εh=εH=0\varepsilon_h = \varepsilon_H = 0 the two horizontal stresses are equal, and at α=1\alpha = 1 we get the Eaton formula.

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
Change of the horizontal stress when the pore pressure changes
Δσh=A Δpp,A=α (1−2ν)1−ν\Delta\sigma_h = A\,\Delta p_p,\qquad A = \frac{\alpha\,(1 - 2\nu)}{1 - \nu}

any identical units of pressure

Holds when: The pressure changes over the whole wide reservoir, and the reservoir deforms only vertically (uniaxial strain). The rock is elastic, and the overburden pressure does not change during development. The ratios Δσh/Δpp\Delta\sigma_h/\Delta p_p measured in fields are scattered, and they can differ noticeably from the calculated one. We check the ratio by repeated measurements of the closure pressure.

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
Stresses on the wall of a vertical well (the Kirsch solution)
σθ=σH+σh−2 (σH−σh)cos⁡2θ−pw,σr=pw\sigma_\theta = \sigma_H + \sigma_h - 2\,(\sigma_H - \sigma_h)\cos 2\theta - p_w,\qquad \sigma_r = p_w

any identical units of stress; compression is positive

Holds when: The rock is linearly elastic, homogeneous and isotropic. The well is vertical, and the vertical stress is a principal stress. The pore pressure at the wall is the same as the formation pressure. Either a filter cake (a thin layer of solids deposited on the wall) separates the wall from the well, or the pressure changes so fast that the fluid has no time to enter the rock (the effect of filtration is below). The temperature of the wall equals the formation temperature. Plane strain along the axis of the well (the rock does not stretch along it). With distance from the wall the disturbance dies out quickly, and already a few radii from the axis the stresses hardly differ from σH\sigma_H and σh\sigma_h (advanced section).

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
Breakdown pressure of the wall when fluid penetrates the rock
pb=3σh−σH+T−A pp2−A,A=α (1−2ν)1−νp_b = \frac{3\sigma_h - \sigma_H + T - A\,p_p}{2 - A},\qquad A = \frac{\alpha\,(1 - 2\nu)}{1 - \nu}

any identical units of pressure

Holds when: The same as for the Kirsch solution, but the pore pressure at the wall equals the pressure in the well, and the change of the pore pressure around the well is the same in all directions (axisymmetric). The wall splits when the effective hoop stress σθ−pw\sigma_\theta - p_w reaches −T-T. The loading is slow: at every moment the rock has time to come to equilibrium with the pressure in the pores. The real breakdown pressure lies between this value and the value without penetration. Which one it is closer to depends on the injection rate, the viscosity of the fluid, the filter cake and the permeability.

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
Bottomhole pressure during injection and after shut-in
pwf=pc+pnet+Δpperf+Δpnw,pISIP=pc+pnetp_{wf} = p_c + p_{net} + \Delta p_{\text{perf}} + \Delta p_{\text{nw}},\qquad p_{ISIP} = p_c + p_{net}

any identical units of pressure; all pressures are at the depth of the reservoir

Holds when: The wellhead pressure is converted to the bottom of the well by adding the hydrostatic head of the column of fluid and subtracting the friction losses in the pipes. At the moment of shut-in, the friction losses in the pipes, in the perforations and near the wellbore vanish, and the net pressure has not yet had time to change.

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
The G function (for a fracture whose area grew in proportion to time)
G(ΔtD)=163π[(1+ΔtD)1.5−ΔtD1.5−1],ΔtD=ΔttpG(\Delta t_D) = \frac{16}{3\pi}\left[(1 + \Delta t_D)^{1.5} - \Delta t_D^{1.5} - 1\right],\qquad \Delta t_D = \frac{\Delta t}{t_p}

dimensionless; Δt\Delta t and tpt_p in the same units

Holds when: The injection is at a constant rate. After shut-in the area of the fracture does not change. Leak-off from the fracture into the reservoir follows Carter's law: the leak-off rate is inversely proportional to the square root of the time since the given part of the wall opened. The stiffness of the fracture is constant: the net pressure is proportional to the volume of fluid in it. There is also a second limiting form of the function, for a fracture whose area grew as the square root of time. The two forms differ by no more than about 20% (the later the closure, the smaller the difference), and the choice does not affect the closure pressure that is found.

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
Maximum width of a fracture at a given net pressure
wmax⁡=2 pnet hfE′,E′=E1−ν2w_{\max} = \frac{2\,p_{net}\,h_f}{E'},\qquad E' = \frac{E}{1 - \nu^2}

consistent: pnetp_{net} and E′E' in the same units, ww in the units of hfh_f

Holds when: The fracture is much longer than its height, and its vertical section is an ellipse (plane strain). The net pressure is the same over the height. The rock is homogeneous and elastic. This is an order-of-magnitude estimate. In reality the pressure falls towards the tip of the fracture, and layers of different stiffness open differently.

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
Equilibrium height of a fracture between two barriers
hf=hcos⁡(π pnet2 Δσ),pnet<Δσh_f = \frac{h}{\cos\left(\dfrac{\pi\,p_{net}}{2\,\Delta\sigma}\right)},\qquad p_{net} < \Delta\sigma

pnetp_{net} and Δσ\Delta\sigma in the same units; hfh_f in the units of hh; the angle is in radians

Holds when: The fracture is symmetric about the middle of the reservoir. The barriers are identical and thick enough, with no layers of low stress behind them. The pressure is the same over the height of the fracture (the weight of the fluid and the friction losses are not taken into account). The fracture toughness of the rock (its resistance to the growth of a crack) is not taken into account (with it, the fracture goes into the barriers a little less). The elastic moduli of the layers are the same.

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
The Kirsch solution for a vertical well
σr=σH+σh2(1−rw2r2)+σH−σh2(1−4rw2r2+3rw4r4)cos⁡2θ+pwrw2r2σθ=σH+σh2(1+rw2r2)−σH−σh2(1+3rw4r4)cos⁡2θ−pwrw2r2τrθ=−σH−σh2(1+2rw2r2−3rw4r4)sin⁡2θ\begin{aligned} \sigma_r &= \tfrac{\sigma_H+\sigma_h}{2}\left(1-\tfrac{r_w^2}{r^2}\right) + \tfrac{\sigma_H-\sigma_h}{2}\left(1-\tfrac{4r_w^2}{r^2}+\tfrac{3r_w^4}{r^4}\right)\cos 2\theta + p_w\tfrac{r_w^2}{r^2}\\ \sigma_\theta &= \tfrac{\sigma_H+\sigma_h}{2}\left(1+\tfrac{r_w^2}{r^2}\right) - \tfrac{\sigma_H-\sigma_h}{2}\left(1+\tfrac{3r_w^4}{r^4}\right)\cos 2\theta - p_w\tfrac{r_w^2}{r^2}\\ \tau_{r\theta} &= -\tfrac{\sigma_H-\sigma_h}{2}\left(1+\tfrac{2r_w^2}{r^2}-\tfrac{3r_w^4}{r^4}\right)\sin 2\theta \end{aligned}

any identical units of stress; compression is positive

Holds when: The same as for the formula for the wall. At r=rwr = r_w we get σr=pw\sigma_r = p_w, the formula for σθ\sigma_\theta at the wall, and τrθ=0\tau_{r\theta} = 0.

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
Limiting ratio of effective stresses with friction on faults
σ1−ppσ3−pp≤(μ2+1+μ)2\frac{\sigma_1 - p_p}{\sigma_3 - p_p} \le \left(\sqrt{\mu^2 + 1} + \mu\right)^2

any identical units of pressure

Holds when: There are faults of every orientation in the rock mass, with no cohesion. The effective stress is the simple one of Terzaghi (stress minus pore pressure; the Biot coefficient for faults is taken as 1).

Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing →
Effective stress on the proppant
σeff=pc−pwf\sigma_{\text{eff}} = p_c - p_{wf}

any identical units of pressure

Holds when: Near the wellbore the pressure in the fracture equals the bottomhole pressure. Farther along the fracture it is higher, and the load is smaller. As the reservoir is depleted (its pressure falls), the closure pressure falls with it, by A ΔpˉA\,\Delta\bar p, where AA is the poroelastic coefficient (Rock mechanics for hydraulic fracturing). This is usually less than the fall of the bottomhole pressure, so we calculate the design load from the initial closure pressure and the lowest planned bottomhole pressure. This is on the safe side.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Width and conductivity of a propped fracture
wp=Cp(1−ϕp) ρp,(kfw)res=kf,lab(σeff) R (wp−2e)w_p = \frac{C_p}{(1 - \phi_p)\,\rho_p},\qquad (k_f w)_{\text{res}} = k_{f,\text{lab}}(\sigma_{\text{eff}})\,R\,(w_p - 2e)

conductivity in mD·m with kk in mD and the width in m

Holds when: The proppant lay evenly, without settling to the bottom of the fracture. The factors RR and ee are found by tests with the fracturing fluid and with samples of the reservoir rock. Without tests, we choose cautious values.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Effective permeability of a pack with inertial losses
kf,eff=kf1+23 Fow,Fow=βf kf ρ vwμ,vw=qB/2hp wpk_{f,\text{eff}} = \frac{k_f}{1 + \tfrac23\,\text{Fo}_w},\qquad \text{Fo}_w = \frac{\beta_f\,k_f\,\rho\,v_w}{\mu},\qquad v_w = \frac{qB/2}{h_p\,w_p}

SI

Holds when: The inflow into the fracture is uniform along the length, which is how a fracture of high conductivity behaves. At low conductivity the inflow is concentrated near the wellbore, and the losses are closer to the value at the wellbore, kf/(1+Fow)k_f/(1 + \text{Fo}_w). The βf\beta_f of a pack grows when grains crush, with gel residue, and when a second phase (for example water) is present.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
The proppant number
Nprop=Ix2 FCD=4xf2xe2⋅kfwk xf=2 kf Vpropk VresN_{prop} = I_x^2\,F_{CD} = \frac{4x_f^2}{x_e^2}\cdot\frac{k_f w}{k\,x_f} = \frac{2\,k_f\,V_{prop}}{k\,V_{res}}

dimensionless; kfk_f and kk in the same units

Holds when: A vertical fracture in the centre of a square drainage area, parallel to its side. Only the proppant within the reservoir goes into VpropV_{prop}. If the fracture is taller than the reservoir and the proppant is spread evenly over the height, this is the share h/hfh/h_f of all the proppant. kfk_f is the permeability of the pack in the reservoir, taking into account the load, polymer residue and embedment (previous section).

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Greatest productivity at a small proppant number
1JD,max⁡≈0.99−12ln⁡Nprop,FCD,opt≈1.6–1.7\frac{1}{J_{D,\max}} \approx 0.99 - \frac12\ln N_{prop},\qquad F_{CD,opt} \approx 1.6\text{–}1.7

dimensionless; natural logarithm

Holds when: NpropN_{prop} is up to 0.1. At 0.1 the formula overstates JD,max⁡J_{D,\max} by 0.7%, and at 0.3 already by 3%. The area is a square and the regime is pseudo-steady-state. The derivation is in the advanced section.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Fracture dimensions from the proppant number and the chosen dimensionless conductivity
xf=kf Vprop2FCD k h,w=FCD k Vprop2kf hx_f = \sqrt{\frac{k_f\,V_{prop}}{2F_{CD}\,k\,h}},\qquad w = \sqrt{\frac{F_{CD}\,k\,V_{prop}}{2k_f\,h}}

consistent; kfk_f and kk in the same units

Holds when: It follows from Vprop=2xfwhV_{prop} = 2x_f w h and FCD=kfw/(kxf)F_{CD} = k_f w/(k x_f). An equivalent form is xf=Ixxe/2x_f = I_x x_e/2 with Ix=Nprop/FCDI_x = \sqrt{N_{prop}/F_{CD}}.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Width of the fracture at the wellbore and the net pressure by the PKN model
ww≈2.75(μ qi xfE′)1/4,wˉ≈0.58 ww,pnet=E′ ww2hfw_w \approx 2.75\left(\frac{\mu\,q_i\,x_f}{E'}\right)^{1/4},\qquad \bar w \approx 0.58\,w_w,\qquad p_{net} = \frac{E'\,w_w}{2h_f}

SI (any consistent system of units)

Holds when: The fracture is much longer than its height, the height is constant, and every vertical cross-section is an ellipse. The fluid is Newtonian and the flow is laminar. The factor 2.75 and the ratio 0.58 are the midpoint between the solution without leak-off (2.82 and 0.59) and the limiting case of strong leak-off (2.68 and 0.57). The derivation is in the advanced section. For fluids whose viscosity falls as the shear rate grows, we take the apparent viscosity at the shear rate in the fracture. The factor refers to the total rate into both wings. If we use the rate into one wing instead, the factor is 21/4≈1.192^{1/4} \approx 1.19 times larger, about 3.27. The formula is often given in this form, so when comparing formulas, check which rate the factor refers to.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Volume balance during injection with leak-off
qit=Af wˉ+2Al(κ CLt+Sp),η=Af wˉqitq_i t = A_f\,\bar w + 2A_l\left(\kappa\,C_L\sqrt t + S_p\right),\qquad \eta = \frac{A_f\,\bar w}{q_i t}

SI (any consistent system of units)

Holds when: Carter's law: the leak-off rate is inversely proportional to the square root of the time since the part of the wall opened. It goes through both walls, hence the factor 2. Leak-off goes only into the permeable reservoir. The proppant is part of the pumped volume, but it does not leak off. κ\kappa comes from averaging 2t−τ2\sqrt{t-\tau} over the area, when the area grows by a power law. In the examples of the lesson κ\kappa = 1.5, and spurt loss is not counted.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Efficiency and leak-off coefficient from a calibration injection
η=3π16Gc1+3π16Gc,CL=m hf2E′ hltp\eta = \frac{\frac{3\pi}{16}G_c}{1 + \frac{3\pi}{16}G_c},\qquad C_L = \frac{m\,h_f^2}{E'\,h_l\sqrt{t_p}}

SI; CLC_L in m/s1/2^{1/2}

Holds when: The GG function has the form used in the lesson on rock mechanics: the area of the fracture grew in proportion to time during injection. With the second limiting form the efficiency comes out a few per cent less. After shut-in the area does not change, there is no spurt loss, and by the time of closure there is no fluid left in the fracture. The compliance is that of a PKN fracture. For short fractures we need the compliance of the KGD model, and the leak-off coefficient will be different.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Pad fraction and the law of growth of the proppant concentration
ε=1−η1+η,Vpad=εVi,c(t)=ce(t−tpadte−tpad)ε,ce=MηVi\varepsilon = \frac{1 - \eta}{1 + \eta},\qquad V_{pad} = \varepsilon V_i,\qquad c(t) = c_e\left(\frac{t - t_{pad}}{t_e - t_{pad}}\right)^{\varepsilon},\qquad c_e = \frac{M}{\eta V_i}

consistent

Holds when: Leak-off follows Carter's law, and the area of the fracture grows during injection. The proppant does not settle and moves together with the fluid. The concentration is the mass of proppant per unit volume of slurry. In field practice it is given per volume of clean fluid: cfl=c/(1−c/ρp)c_{\text{fl}} = c/(1 - c/\rho_p). The efficiency is taken from the calculation of the main injection, calibrated against the calibration injection. When in doubt, we make the pad a little larger: a screen-out costs more than extra fluid.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Productivity of a short fracture through the proppant number
1JD=ln⁡2−1.311−12ln⁡Nprop+[12ln⁡FCD+ln⁡xfrw′(FCD)]\frac{1}{J_D} = \ln2 - 1.311 - \frac12\ln N_{prop} + \left[\frac12\ln F_{CD} + \ln\frac{x_f}{r_w'}\left(F_{CD}\right)\right]

dimensionless; natural logarithms

Holds when: The fracture is small compared with the area (IxI_x is below about 0.3), the regime is pseudo-steady-state, and the area is a square.

Fracture design: size and conductivity →
Parameters of the power-law model from two points, and the apparent viscosity
n=ln⁡(τ2/τ1)ln⁡(γ˙2/γ˙1),K=τ1γ˙1 n,μa=Kγ˙ n−1n = \frac{\ln(\tau_2/\tau_1)}{\ln(\dot\gamma_2/\dot\gamma_1)},\qquad K = \frac{\tau_1}{\dot\gamma_1^{\,n}},\qquad \mu_a = K\dot\gamma^{\,n-1}

SI; KK in Pa·sⁿ (in oilfield units lbf·sⁿ/ft², with 1 lbf·sⁿ/ft² = 47.88 Pa·sⁿ)

Holds when: The power-law model holds in the range of the measurements. At very low shear rates the viscosity of a real fluid stops growing, and extrapolation overstates it. The points are taken at reservoir temperature, after a hold that matches the injection time.

Fracturing fluids and tip-screenout fracturing →
Shear rate at the wall of a slot and of a pipe for a power-law fluid
γ˙slot=2n+13n⋅6vw,γ˙pipe=3n+14n⋅8vd\dot\gamma_{\text{slot}} = \frac{2n+1}{3n}\cdot\frac{6v}{w},\qquad \dot\gamma_{\text{pipe}} = \frac{3n+1}{4n}\cdot\frac{8v}{d}

SI

Holds when: The flow is laminar. The slot is two parallel walls (the cross-section of a fracture is really an ellipse, and the formula gives a characteristic shear rate). At n=1n = 1 we get the Newtonian 6v/w6v/w and 8v/d8v/d (shear rate in a pipe). The factors take into account the flatter velocity profile of a thinning fluid.

Fracturing fluids and tip-screenout fracturing →
Fluid-loss test: the cake coefficient and the spurt loss
VA=Sp+2Cwt,Cw=m2A,Sp=bA\frac{V}{A} = S_p + 2C_w\sqrt t,\qquad C_w = \frac{m}{2A},\qquad S_p = \frac{b}{A}

any consistent units: CwC_w comes out in units of length per square root of the unit of time

Holds when: The leak-off rate through the cake is Cw/tC_w/\sqrt t. This gives the factor 2 on integration: ∫0tCw dt′/t′=2Cwt\int_0^t C_w\,dt'/\sqrt{t'} = 2C_w\sqrt t. The pressure drop in the test is close to that in the reservoir (otherwise the coefficient is recalculated; for polymer cakes it grows with the pressure drop more slowly than the square root of it). The sample is of the same rock and permeability.

Fracturing fluids and tip-screenout fracturing →
Leak-off coefficients limited by the filtrate and by the compression of the reservoir, and their combination
Cv=k ϕ Δp2μf,Cc=Δpk ϕ ctπ μr,CL=2CcCwCvCwCv+Cw2Cv2+4Cc2(Cw2+Cv2)C_v = \sqrt{\frac{k\,\phi\,\Delta p}{2\mu_f}},\qquad C_c = \Delta p\sqrt{\frac{k\,\phi\,c_t}{\pi\,\mu_r}},\qquad C_L = \frac{2C_cC_wC_v}{C_wC_v + \sqrt{C_w^2C_v^2 + 4C_c^2\left(C_w^2 + C_v^2\right)}}

SI (kk in m²: 1 mD = 0.987⋅10−150.987\cdot10^{-15} m²). In oilfield units the coefficients are more often given in ft/min1/2^{1/2}: 1 m/s1/2^{1/2} = 25.4 ft/min1/2^{1/2}

Holds when: The filtration into the reservoir is linear (one-dimensional) at a constant pressure drop. The filtrate displaces the reservoir fluid like a piston. The overall coefficient is an exact combination of three resistances in series at one common pressure drop, if the coefficients of the cake and of the filtrate grow as the square root of their share of the pressure drop, and the compression coefficient grows in proportion to it. The approximation 1/CL=1/Cw+1/Cv+1/Cc1/C_L = 1/C_w + 1/C_v + 1/C_c is also often used. It always gives a smaller value (in the example below, by 15%). The derivation of the formulas is in the advanced section.

Fracturing fluids and tip-screenout fracturing →
Settling velocity of a grain in a Newtonian and in a power-law fluid
vs=g Δρ d218 μ,vs=[g Δρ d n+118⋅3 n−1K]1/nv_s = \frac{g\,\Delta\rho\,d^2}{18\,\mu},\qquad v_s = \left[\frac{g\,\Delta\rho\,d^{\,n+1}}{18\cdot 3^{\,n-1}K}\right]^{1/n}

SI

Holds when: A single spherical grain at a low Reynolds number, ρfvsd/μ≪1\rho_f v_s d/\mu \ll 1. The walls of the fracture are far away, and the fluid is at rest. The second formula is Stokes' law with the apparent viscosity at the shear rate 3vs/d3v_s/d. At n=1n = 1 it coincides with the first. It is an estimate: at very low shear rates the real viscosity stops growing, and the formula understates the settling velocity. In a concentrated slurry the grains hinder each other and settle more slowly. By the empirical law of Richardson and Zaki, at low Reynolds numbers the velocity is multiplied by about (1−cv)4.65(1 - c_v)^{4.65}, where cvc_v is the volume fraction of proppant.

Fracturing fluids and tip-screenout fracturing →
Leak-off and the volume of the fracture after its growth has stopped
ΔVL=2AlCLtso[g(δ)−π2],g(δ)=δ+(1+δ)arcsin⁡11+δ,δ=t−tsotso\Delta V_L = 2A_lC_L\sqrt{t_{\text{so}}}\left[g(\delta) - \frac{\pi}{2}\right],\quad g(\delta) = \sqrt\delta + (1 + \delta)\arcsin\frac{1}{\sqrt{1 + \delta}},\quad \delta = \frac{t - t_{\text{so}}}{t_{\text{so}}}

SI

Holds when: Before the screen-out the area of the fracture grew as the square root of time (the limit of strong leak-off), and every part of the wall filters by Carter's law from the moment it opened. After the screen-out the area does not change, and the spurt loss all happened before the screen-out. The same function describes the leak-off after the pumps stop in a calibration injection: g(δ)−π/2=π4G(δ)g(\delta) - \pi/2 = \tfrac{\pi}{4}G(\delta), where GG is the second limiting form of Nolte's function, for a fracture whose area grew as the square root of time (the G function is written there for growth in proportion to time). The derivation is in the advanced section.

Fracturing fluids and tip-screenout fracturing →
Proppant concentration from the density of the slurry
cv=ρsl−ρflρp−ρfl,c=cv ρp,cfl=c1−cvc_v = \frac{\rho_{\text{sl}} - \rho_{\text{fl}}}{\rho_p - \rho_{\text{fl}}},\qquad c = c_v\,\rho_p,\qquad c_{\text{fl}} = \frac{c}{1 - c_v}

SI. The concentration per cubic metre of fluid is given in field practice in pounds per gallon: 1 lb/gal = 119.8 kg/m³

Holds when: The density of the fluid is constant. Gas in the slurry (foams, nitrogen) is taken into account separately.

Fracturing fluids and tip-screenout fracturing →

Symbols

SymbolMeaning and context
pˉ\bar p
Δq\Delta q
Δp\Delta p
ΔN\Delta N
Δt\Delta t
wˉ\bar w
pˉ, pwf\bar p,\ p_{wf}
[Ba2+], [SO42−][\mathrm{Ba^{2+}}],\ [\mathrm{SO_4^{2-}}]
Δq0\Delta q_0
0.8090.809
aa
AA
a1, a2a_1,\ a_2
AfA_f
AinA_{\text{in}}
AlA_l
a, ba,\ b
  • concentrations of Ba2+\mathrm{Ba^{2+}} and SO42−\mathrm{SO_4^{2-}} in the mixture before precipitation, mol/LSources of formation damage
Al4Si4O10(OH)8\mathrm{Al_4Si_4O_{10}(OH)_8}
AlF2+\mathrm{AlF_2^{+}}
bsb_s
CC
cec_e
CLC_L
CpC_p
ctc_t
cvc_v
Cv, Cc, CLC_v,\ C_c,\ C_L
CwC_w
c, cflc,\ c_{\text{fl}}
c(t)c(t)
CaCl2, MgCl2\mathrm{CaCl_2},\ \mathrm{MgCl_2}
CaCO3\mathrm{CaCO_3}
CaF2\mathrm{CaF_2}
CaMg(CO3)2\mathrm{CaMg(CO_3)_2}
dd
D1D_1
dt, ltd_{\text{t}},\ l_{\text{t}}
d, ld,\ l
DaDa
ee
EE
E′E'
FF
FCDF_{CD}
Fow\text{Fo}_w
Δpfr\Delta p_{\text{fr}}
gg
GG
GcG_c
g(δ)g(\delta)
hh
HH
H2SiF6, SiF62−\mathrm{H_2SiF_6},\ \mathrm{SiF_6^{2-}}
hfh_f
hf, hlh_f,\ h_l
hp, wph_p,\ w_p
h, xfh,\ x_f
h, ϕh,\ \phi
IxI_x
Δtj\Delta t_j
JJ
JDJ_D
JD,max⁡J_{D,\max}
JD,preJ_{D,\text{pre}}
JD(t)J_D(t)
kk
kdk_d
kfk_f
kfwk_f w
kf, kk_f,\ k
kf, k, hk_f,\ k,\ h
kf,effk_{f,\text{eff}}
kf,labk_{f,\text{lab}}
kf,chw, kfwk_{f,ch}w,\ k_f w
kik_i
kibefore, kiafterk_i^{\text{before}},\ k_i^{\text{after}}
kj, hjk_j,\ h_j
ksk_s
KspK_{sp}
  • solubility product: the equilibrium constant of dissolving the salt at the given temperature and pressure, (mol/L)²Sources of formation damage
k, hk,\ h
k, h, re, rw, Sk,\ h,\ r_e,\ r_w,\ S
k, h, μ, pˉ, re, rwk,\ h,\ \mu,\ \bar p,\ r_e,\ r_w
k, kdk,\ k_d
k, ϕk,\ \phi
k, ϕ, ct, tk,\ \phi,\ c_t,\ t
k, kprk,\ k_{\text{pr}}
k, rwk,\ r_w
Ksp′K'_{sp}
  • solubility product in terms of concentrations: KspK_{sp} divided by the product of the activity coefficients, (mol/L)²Sources of formation damage
k(r)k(r)
ΔVL\Delta V_L
L, LiL,\ L_i
ln⁡(xf/rw′)\ln(x_f/r_w')
ln⁡(xf/rw′)∣FCD\ln(x_f/r_w')\big|_{F_{CD}}
  • value of the universal curve at the given dimensionless conductivity: from ln⁡2≈0.693\ln 2 \approx 0.693 (infinite conductivity) to several units (low conductivity), —Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well
ln⁡(xf/rw′)(FCD)\ln(x_f/r_w')(F_{CD})
mm
MM
Mma, MaM_{\text{ma}},\ M_{\text{a}}
m, bm,\ b
Δpmar\Delta p_{\text{mar}}
nn
NacN_{\text{ac}}
  • acid capacity number: how much mineral the acid that fills the pores will dissolve, relative to the mineral in the same volume of rock, —Acid systems and treatment design
napp(t)n_{\text{app}}(t)
NpropN_{prop}
Nprop, FCDN_{prop},\ F_{CD}
n, Kn,\ K
Δpnw\Delta p_{\text{nw}}
Δpp\Delta p_p
pbp_b
pcp_c
pfp_f
pISIPp_{ISIP}
pnetp_{net}
pnet, hfp_{net},\ h_f
ppp_p
pwp_w
pw,jp_{w,j}
pwDp_{wD}
pwD, tDxfp_{wD},\ t_{Dxf}
pwD(t)p_{wD}(t)
pwfp_{wf}
pwhp_{\text{wh}}
Δpperf\Delta p_{\text{perf}}
PVbtPV_{bt}
PVbt(vi)PV_{bt}(v_i)
qq
q1, q2q_1,\ q_2
qcrq_{\text{cr}}
  • critical water rate per metre of interval (at reservoir conditions; for water it is almost the same as the rate at the surface), m³/s per mSources of formation damage
qelq_{\text{el}}
qiq_i
qi, tq_i,\ t
qj, qq_j,\ q
qmax⁡q_{\max}
qwhq_{wh}
q, B, μq,\ B,\ \mu
qBqB
rr
RR
r1, r2r_1,\ r_2
rdr_d
re, rwr_e,\ r_w
re, rw, Sr_e,\ r_w,\ S
RiR_i
ri−1, rir_{i-1},\ r_i
roptr_{opt}
rv, rwr_{\text{v}},\ r_w
rwr_w
rw, rr_w,\ r
rw′r_w'
rwh, rwr_{wh},\ r_w
S1S_1
S1, S2S_1,\ S_2
SappS_{\text{app}}
schs_{ch}
SdS_d
SfS_f
sfss_{fs}
SjS_j
SpS_p
SprS_{\text{pr}}
SvS_{\text{v}}
SI\mathrm{SI}
SiO2\mathrm{SiO_2}
tt
ΔNT\Delta N_T
TT
tDAt_{DA}
tDxft_{Dxf}
tpt_p
tpad, tet_{pad},\ t_e
tpbt_{\text{pb}}
tsot_{\text{so}}
uu
ucru_{\text{cr}}
  • critical filtration velocity from the core test: the flow rate at which the permeability began to fall, divided by the cross-sectional area of the sample, m/sSources of formation damage
vv
VV
viv_i
vopt, PVbt,optv_{opt},\ PV_{bt,opt}
Vpad, ViV_{pad},\ V_i
VpropV_{prop}
VresV_{res}
vsv_s
vwv_w
vwhv_{wh}
V/hV/h
ww
WW
wiw_i
wmax⁡w_{\max}
wpw_p
www_w
w, dw,\ d
xx
XX
xex_e
xfx_f
xf, kx_f,\ k
xf, wx_f,\ w
xf, hfx_f,\ h_f
xf, rw, rw′x_f,\ r_w,\ r_w'
xsx_s
X, S1, S2X,\ S_1,\ S_2
yey_e
α\alpha
α, ν\alpha,\ \nu
β\beta
βf\beta_f
γ\gamma
  • e0.5772=1.781\e^{0.5772} = 1.781, the exponential of Euler's constant, as in the inflow formulas; 1/(2γ)=0.28071/(2\gamma) = 0.2807, —Inflow to a hydraulically fractured well
γ˙\dot\gamma
Γ(5/4)\Gamma(5/4)
γBa, γSO4\gamma_{\text{Ba}},\ \gamma_{\text{SO}_4}
  • activity coefficients of the ions: how many times the “effective” concentration is smaller than the actual one, —Sources of formation damage
γ˙slot, γ˙pipe\dot\gamma_{\text{slot}},\ \dot\gamma_{\text{pipe}}
Δρ\Delta\rho
Δσ\Delta\sigma
Δσh\Delta\sigma_h
ε\varepsilon
εh, εH\varepsilon_h,\ \varepsilon_H
η\eta
θ\theta
κ\kappa
μ\mu
μ, B\mu,\ B
μa\mu_a
μf, μr\mu_f,\ \mu_r
μv, μ\mu_{\text{v}},\ \mu
ν\nu
νma, νa\nu_{\text{ma}},\ \nu_{\text{a}}
ρ\rho
ρ, μ\rho,\ \mu
ρa, ρma\rho_{\text{a}},\ \rho_{\text{ma}}
ρsl, ρfl, ρp\rho_{\text{sl}},\ \rho_{\text{fl}},\ \rho_p
σ1, σ3\sigma_1,\ \sigma_3
σeff\sigma_{\text{eff}}
σh\sigma_h
σh, σH\sigma_h,\ \sigma_H
σH, σh\sigma_H,\ \sigma_h
σr\sigma_r
σr, σθ, τrθ\sigma_r,\ \sigma_\theta,\ \tau_{r\theta}
σv\sigma_v
σθ\sigma_\theta
τ1, τ2\tau_1,\ \tau_2
ϕ\phi
ϕ, X, x, r, rw\phi,\ X,\ x,\ r,\ r_w
ϕ, μ, ct\phi,\ \mu,\ c_t
ϕp, ρp\phi_p,\ \rho_p