Optimization of Fracture Layout of Muti-fractured Horizontal Well in Xinchang Gas Field

doi:10.19657/j.geoscience.1000-8527.2019.03.19

Abstract

Abstract:

The Xinchang gas field is a multi-layer tight sandstone gas reservoir with abnormally high pressure and poor reservoir properties. The gas well producing reserves are low. To significantly improve the well production rate, the gas reservoir was mostly developed by fractured-horizontal wells. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the influence of fracture parameters and their combinations on the multi-stage fractured-horizontal wells, and to provide a theoretical basis for the scientific and efficient development of gas reservoirs in the next stage. This work used the Xinchang gas field as an example. By using the numerical simulation method, the effects of fracture parameters on gas well productivity have been studied, including the non-uniform fracture length and its spacing, the scale of fracturing and the number of fractures, the correlations of fracture length and spacing, and the match of fracture angle and spacing. The results show that the U-mode fracture length layout is optimal for multi-fractured horizontal wells. The uniform fracture spacing is better than the non-uniform one. Less fractures but longer fracture lengths have higher economic benefits. When the fracture spacing is 0.67-1 times of fracture length, it’s beneficial to improve the productivity of fracturing horizontal wells. Besides, an orthogonal fracture layout perpendicular to the wellbore can also improve the gas wells productivity.

Key words: tight gas reservoir, horizontal well, hydraulic fracturing, numerical simulation, fracture layout optimization

CLC Number:

TE34

BU Tao. Optimization of Fracture Layout of Muti-fractured Horizontal Well in Xinchang Gas Field[J]. Geoscience, 2019, 33(03): 672-679.

Figures/Tables 13

Table 1 The different simulation cases and their related parameters

对比方案组	裂缝条数/条	裂缝长度/m	裂缝间距/m	裂缝与井的夹角/(°)
第1组	5	175/50/50/50/175	100	—
		100/100/100/100/100		—
		50/100/200/100/50		—
第2组	5	100	50/150/150/50	—
			100/100/100/100	—
			150/50/50/150	—
第3组	6	66.67	50	—
第3组	4	100	75	—
第4组	6	150	50	—
			100	—
			150	—
			200	—
			250	—
第5组	6	150	100	10/20/30/40/50/60/70/90
			150	10/20/30/40/50/60/70/90
			200	10/20/30/40/50/60/70/90

Fig.1 Layouts of the three types of fracture length

Fig.2 Cumulative production comparison of non-uniform fracture length layout

Fig.3 Layouts of the three types of fracture spacing

Fig.4 Cumulative production comparison of non-uniform fracture spacing layout

Fig.5 Cumulative production comparison between long and short fracture model

Fig. 6 Pressure distribution of different fracture spacing

Fig.7 Production rate of different fracture spacing

Table 2 Different fracture spacing, fracture length and horizontal-well length designs

裂缝间距/m	水平段 /m	总长(总缝长+水平段) /m	累积产量 /万方	累积产量 /总长/ (万方/m)	间距/ 缝长
50	350	1 250	793	0.63	0.33
100	600	1 500	1 113	0.74	0.67
150	850	1 750	1 306	0.75	1.00
200	110	2 000	1 409	0.70	1.33
250	1 350	2 250	1 459	0.65	1.67

Fig.8 Relation between cumulative gas production, length ratio and fracture spacing

Fig.9 Schematic diagram of fracture angle and distance

Fig.10 Effect of fracture angle on cumulative gas production

Fig.11 Comparison of cumulative production reducing rate of non-orthogonal fractures

References 11

[1]	张士诚, 张劲. 压裂开发理论与应用[M]. 北京: 石油工业出版社, 2003: 1-37.
[2]	HOLDITCH S A, JENNINGS J W, NEUSE S H, et al. The optimization of well spacing and fracture length in low permeability gas reservoirs[M] //SPE.SPE Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition. Houston,Texas:Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1978: 123-127.
[3]	HEGRE T M, LARSEN L. Productivity of multifractured horizontal wells[M] //SPE.European Petroleum Conference. Houston,Texas:Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1994: 211-214.
[4]	HEGRE T M. Hydraulically fractured horizontal well simulation[M] //SPE.European 3-D Reservoir Modelling Conference. Houston,Texas:Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1996: 9-11.
[5]	姜晶, 李春兰, 杨敏. 低渗透油藏压裂水平井裂缝优化研究[J]. 石油钻采工艺, 2008,30(4):50-52.
[6]	陈汾君, 汤勇, 刘世铎, 等. 低渗致密气藏水平井分段压裂优化研究[J]. 特种油气藏, 2012,19(6):85-87.
[7]	刘畅. 压裂水平对致密气藏开采的影响及优化研究[J]. 当代化工, 2015(8):1862-1864.
[8]	徐模, 郭肖. 压裂水平井布缝方式及裂缝参数优化新方法[J]. 大庆石油地质与开发, 2016,35(6):93-98.
[9]	曾凡辉, 郭建春, 何颂根, 等. 致密砂岩气藏压裂水平井裂缝参数的优化[J]. 天然气工业, 2012,32(11):54-58.
[10]	陈辉, 孙秀芝, 吕广忠. 压裂水平井裂缝布局研究[J]. 石油天然气学报, 2013,35(1):141-144.
[11]	谷丽冰, 李治平, 侯秀林, 等. 低渗透油藏压裂参数优化研究[J]. 现代地质, 2007,21(1):161-164.

[1]	PENG Hongming, WANG Zhanwei, LUO Yinfei, YUAN Youjin, WANG Wanping. Evaluation of Exploitable Groundwater Resources in the Buha River Basin Based on Groundwater Numerical Simulation [J]. Geoscience, 2023, 37(04): 943-953.
[2]	NIE Qiong, NIE Zhibao, CHEN Jian, DING Shijun, WU Saier, LI Duo, GE Runze, CHEN Ruichen. Development Characteristics and Risk Assessment of the Damogou Debris Flow in Mentougou District, Beijing [J]. Geoscience, 2023, 37(04): 1013-1022.
[3]	LIU Chen, LI Jianghai, WANG Zhichen. Dynamic Model Analysis of Formation and Evolution of the South China Sea [J]. Geoscience, 2023, 37(02): 259-269.
[4]	NAN Tian, CAO Wengeng, WANG Zhuoran, ZHANG Juanjuan, ZHANG Dong. Optimized Groundwater Numerical Simulation Model with Trending Parameter Field [J]. Geoscience, 2022, 36(02): 591-601.
[5]	HU Jinghong, CHEN Qi, YU Guoyi, LÜ Yang. Hydraulic Parameter Optimization of Dual Horizontal Well in Tight Oil Reservoirs [J]. Geoscience, 2021, 35(06): 1880-1890.
[6]	WU Yongbin, LÜ Bolin, DU Xuan, LU Yingbo, JIANG Youwei, XING Xiangrong. Experimental Study on Horizontal CSS Performance Improvement Mechanism by Wellbore Electric Heating [J]. Geoscience, 2021, 35(04): 1136-1146.
[7]	QUAN Xuerui, HUANG Yehuan, LIU Chun, GUO Changbao. Numerical Simulation Study on Seismic Magnification Effect of V-shaped Deep-cut Valley on Sichuan-Tibet Railway Line [J]. Geoscience, 2021, 35(01): 38-46.
[8]	XU Zhengxuan, MENG Wen, GUO Changbao, ZHANG Peng, ZHANG Guangze, SUN Mingqian, CHEN Qunce, CHEN Yu. In-situ Stress Measurement and Its Application of a Deep-buried Tunnel in Zheduo Mountain, West Sichuan [J]. Geoscience, 2021, 35(01): 114-125.
[9]	SUN Weifeng, GUO Changbao, ZHANG Guangze, ZHANG Yongshuang, XU Zhengxuan, TAN Chengxuan, LI Dan, WANG Xianli. In-situ Stress Measurement of Guodashan Tunnel Horizontal Borehole in West Sichuan and the Engineering Significance [J]. Geoscience, 2021, 35(01): 126-136.
[10]	ZHANG Chao, ZHANG Yufei, SUN Yingjie, YAO Yahui. Mechanism and Numerical Simulation of Liucun Coal Mining Subsidence of Yangquan Mining Area in Shanxi [J]. Geoscience, 2020, 34(02): 289-296.
[11]	ZHAN Meiqiang, GE Yonggang, JIA Lirong, YAN Hua. Study on Physical and Mechanical Characteristics and Stability Analysis of Ancient Landslide Deposit in East Tibet [J]. Geoscience, 2019, 33(05): 1118-1127.
[12]	LÜ Zhikai, TANG Haifa, LIU Qunming, LI Xiaofeng, WANG Zelong. Reservoir Distribution in the Sulige Large Tight Sandstone Gas Field and Methods for Enhancing Recovery Efficiency of Horizontal Wells [J]. Geoscience, 2018, 32(04): 832-841.
[13]	ZHONG Sumei, LIN Changhong, XIE Yuchun. Three-dimensional Modeling of Controlled Source Audio Magnetotelluric Data with Topography [J]. Geoscience, 2018, 32(02): 398-405.
[14]	CUI Chuanzhi, CHEN Honglin, GUO Yingchun, WANG Qian, ZHANG Shufan. Reasonable Water-injecting Development Methods of Multiple-fracturing Horizontal Well in Ultra-Low Permeability Glutenite Reservoir [J]. Geoscience, 2018, 32(01): 198-204.
[15]	REN Sanshao, GUO Changbao, ZHANG Yongshuang, ZHOU Nengjuan, DU Guoliang. Development Characteristics and Formation Mechanism of Chashushan Landslide in Batang, Western Sichuan [J]. Geoscience, 2017, 31(05): 978-989.