Flowback dynamics justification for the well after hydraulic fracturing to maintain long-term fracture conductivity

Background. Flowback period to achieve well productivity succeeds to the hydraulic fracturing operation and the period of braking of the cross-linked fluid. The well control during flowback is often not regulated or determined by external factors. At the same time, in the process of fracture cleaning, a number of hydromechanical and geomechanical effects build-up, which can reduce the long-term fracture conductivity and thereby reduce the final well productivity. Increasing the efficiency of the flowback process is associated with an increase in oil recovery of low-permeability oil reservoirs and is topical for the oil industry.
Aim of this work is to assess the contribution of the geomechanical and hydromechanical group of effects to the degradation of fracture conductivity and based on their balance propose a method for calculating the optimal flowback scenario where production is maximized.
Materials and methods. To assess the contribution for each group of effects, a comprehensive method for numerical simulations of the well clean-up process was developed using a suspension filtration model taking into account non-Newtonian rheology, particle transfer, reservoir inflow and geomechanical factors.
Results. An integrated approach for finding the optimal well dynamics during clean-up period based on the balance of competing groups of effects was implemented using the well with a hydraulic fracture model history-matched to the field experiment data. The well drawdown optimum was obtained, minimizing the effect of fracture degradation on production. Conclusions. The obtained results confirm that the developed approach to assessing the contribution for each group of effects is a reliable basis for optimizing the flowback process. As a result of the proposed method application, a recommendation for target bottomhole pressure corresponding to the optimal scenario is issued for the flowback period.

flowback, hydraulic fracturing, well clean-up, hydraulic fracturing technology optimization, rheology of hydraulic fracturing fluids, geomechanical factors, hydromechanical factors, dynamic characteristics of a well with hydraulic fracturing, low-permeable sandstone reservoir

1. Robinson B.M., Holditch S.A., Whitehead W.S. Minimizing damage to a proСed fracture by controlled flowback procedures. Journal of petroleum technology, 1988, no. 6, pp. 753–759. https://doi.org/10.2118/15250-PA.

2. Howard P.R., King M.T., Morris M., Feraud J.P., Slusher G., Lipari S. Fiber/proСant mixtures control proСant flowback in South Texas. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. OnePetro. 1995. https://doi.org/10.2118/30495-MS

3. Vreeburg R.J., Roodhart L.P., Davies D.R., Penny G.S. ProСant backproduction during hydraulic fracturing-a new failure mechanism for resin-coated proСants. Journal of petroleum technology, 1994, no. 10, pp. 884–889. https://doi.org/10.2118/27382-PA

4. Potapenko D. I., Williams R.D., Desroches J., Enkababian P., Theuveny B., Willberg D.M., Conort G. Securing long-term well productivity of horizontal wells through optimization of postfracturing operations. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. OnePetro. 2017. https://doi.org/10.2118/187104-MS

5. Karantinos E., Sharma M.M. Choke Management Under Wellbore, Completion and Reservoir Constraints. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. OnePetro. 2017. https://doi.org/10.2118/187462-MS

6. Cai Y., Dahi Taleghani A. Pursuing improved flowback recovery after hydraulic fracturing. SPE Eastern Regional Meeting. OnePetro. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2118/196585-MS

7. Jacobs T. Improving shale production through flowback analysis. Journal of Petroleum Technology. 2015, no. 12, pp. 37–42. https://doi.org/10.2118/1215-0037-JPT

8. Jia P., Cheng L., Huang S., Xue Y., Clarkson C.R., Williams-Kovacs J.D., Wang D., Jia P. et al. Dynamic coupling of analytical linear flow solution and numerical fracture model for simulating early-time flowback of fractured tight oil wells (planar fracture and complex fracture network). Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2019, no. 177, pp. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.01.086

9. Potapenko D., Theuveny B., Williams R., Moncada K., Campos M., Spesivtsev P., Willberg D. State of the Art of Flow Management for Frac Plug Drillout and Flowback. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2118/196084-ms

10. Campos M., Potapenko D., Moncada K., Krishnamurthy J. Advanced Flowback in the Powder River Basin: Securing Stimulation Investments. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. OnePetro. 2019. https://doi.org/10.15530/urtec-2019-285

11. Karantinos E., Sharma M.M., Ayoub J.A., Parlar M., Chanpura R.A. Choke Management Strategies for Hydraulically Fractured Wells and Frac–Pack Completions in Vertical Wells. SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control. Society of Petroleum Engineers. 2016. https://doi.org/10.2118/178973-MS

12. Blyton C.A., Deepen P.G., Mukul M.S. A comprehensive study of proСant transport in a hydraulic fracture. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. OnePetro. 2015. https://doi.org/10.2118/174973-MS

13. Rojas, Daniela, and Alejandro Lerza. Horizontal well productivity enhancement through drawdown management approach in Vaca Muerta shale. SPE Canada Unconventional Resources Conference. OnePetro. 2018. https://doi.org/10.2118/189822-MS

14. Wang, Junlei, Wanjing Luo, Zhiming Chen. An integrated approach to optimize bottomhole-pressure-drawdown management for a hydraulically fractured well using a transient inflow performance relationship. SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering. 2020, pp. 95–111. https://doi.org/10.2118/195688-PA

15. Tompkins D., Sieker R., Koseluk D., Cartaya H. Managed Pressure Flowback in Unconventional Reservoirs: A Permian Basin Case Study. Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, San Antonio. Society of Exploration Geophysicists. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Society of Petroleum Engineers. 2016, pp. 2687–2696. DOI:10.15530/URTEC-2016-2461207

16. Wilson, Kurt, Ibraheem Ahmed, Kirk MacIvor. Geomechanical modeling of flowback scenarios to establish best practices in the Midland Basin horizontal program. SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference. OnePetro. 2016. DOI: 10.15530/urtec-2016-2448089

17. Hamdi, Hamidreza, Hamid Behmanesh, Christopher R. Clarkson. A Semianalytical approach for Analysis of Wells Exhibiting Multiphase Transient Linear Flow: Application to Field Data. SPE Journal. 2020, pp. 3265–3279.

18. Crespo, Pablo Agustin, Sergio Cuervo. Drawdown Management Optimization from Time-Lapse Numerical Simulation. SPE Argentina Exploration and Production of Unconventional Resources Symposium. OnePetro. 2018. https://doi.org/10.2118/191828-MS

19. Fu Y., Dehghanpour H., Motealleh S., Lopez C. M., Hawkes R. Evaluating fracture volume loss during flowback and its relationship to choke size: fastback vs. slowback. SPE Production & Operations. 2019, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 615–624. https://doi.org/10.2118/195595-PA

20. Kanin E. A., Osiptsov A.A., Vainshtein A.L., Burnaev E.V. A predictive model for steady-state multiphase pipe flow: Machine learning on lab data. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2019, no. 180, pp. 727–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.05.055

21. Vainshtein, A., Osiptsov, A., Boronin, S., Faizullin, I., Paderin, G., Shurunov, A., Chebykin, N. Towards Field Testing of the Flowback Technology for Multistage-Fractured Horizontal Wells: Modeling-Based Design and Practical Implications. In SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference. OnePetro. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2118/196979-MS

22. Vainshtein, A., Fisher, G., Boronin, S., Osiptsov, A., Faysullin, I., Paderin, G., Chebykin, N. Field Testing of the Flowback Technology for Multistage-Fractured Horizontal Wells: Test Results and Primary Interpretation of the Results. SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference. OnePetro 2020. https://doi.org/10.2118/202056-MS

23. Vainshtein A., Fisher G., Boronin S., Osiptsov A., Faysullin I., Paderin G., Chebykin N. Field Testing of the Flowback Technology for Multistage-Fractured Horizontal Wells: Generalization to Find an Optimum Balance Between Aggressive and Smooth Scenarios. SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference. OnePetro. 2021. https://doi.org/10.2118/206635-MS

24. Boronin S.A., Osiptsov A.A., & Tolmacheva K.I. Multi-fluid model of suspension filtration in a porous medium. Fluid Dynamics. 2015, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 759–768. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0015462815060058

25. Tolmacheva K.I., Boronin S.A., Osiptsov A.A. Formation damage and cleanup in the vicinity of flooding wells: Multi-fluid suspension flow model and calibration on lab data. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2019, vol. 178, pp. 408–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.03.035

26. Osiptsov A.A. Hydraulic fracture conductivity: effects of rod-shaped proСant from lattice-Boltzmann simulations and lab tests. Advances in water resources. 2017, vol. 104, pp. 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2017.04.003.

27. Osiptsov A.A., Garagash I.A., Boronin S.A., Tolmacheva K.I., Lezhnev K.E., Paderin G.V. Impact of flowback dynamics on fracture conductivity. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 2020, no. 188, pp. 106-822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2019.106822.

28. Boronin S.A., Tolmacheva K.I., Garagash I.A., Abdrakhmanov I.R., Fisher G.Yu., Vainshtein A.L. et al. Integrated Modeling of Fracturing-Flowback-Production Dynamics and Calibration on Field Data: Optimum Well Startup Scenarios. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. (submitted).