Modeling Field Injectivity Tests and Implications for In Situ Stress Determination
Publication: International Journal of Geomechanics
Volume 18, Issue 9
Abstract
Knowledge of underground stresses (e.g., minimum horizontal stress) is vital for many aspects of oil and gas development, such as wellbore stability evaluation, lost-circulation prediction, casing design, hydraulic-fracturing design, sand-production prediction, and reservoir-compaction evaluation. Field injectivity tests performed during drilling a well, such as the extended leak-off test (XLOT) and pump-in and flowback (PIFB) test, are the primary method for obtaining that information. In this study, a fully coupled fluid-flow and geomechanics model was developed for numerical simulation of field injectivity tests. The model takes into account key elements of the tests, including fluid flow into the well, hydraulic fracture propagation, fluid flow in the fracture, pore-fluid flow, and deformation of formation rock. The model is validated against an existing analytical model and a field test reported in the literature. Finally, numerical examples are shown for injectivity tests with pump-in, shut-in, and flowback stages in formations with high permeability and low permeability, respectively. The development of fracture geometry and injection pressure was quantified during the tests. The results show that the essential features of injectivity tests observed from field practices can be captured by the model. It is demonstrated that fluid leak-off on fracture surfaces can significantly influence pressure response and fracture behavior. The results also illustrate that the traditional method for interpretation of the test based on time development of injection pressure has difficulty in properly determining the minimum principal in situ stress in formations with low permeability because of limited leak-off. The model presented in this article provides a useful tool for optimizing the design of injectivity tests, ensuring sufficient and high-quality data, and aiding interpretation of the tests.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the Wider Windows Industrial Affiliate Program, University of Texas at Austin, for financial and logistical support of this work. Program support from BHP Billiton, British Petroleum, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, Marathon, National Oilwell Varco, Occidental Oil and Gas, and Shell is gratefully acknowledged.
References
Adachi, J. I. 2001. Fluid-driven fracture in permeable rock. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota.
Barree, R. D., V. L. Barree, and D. Craig. 2009. “Holistic fracture diagnostics: Consistent interpretation of prefrac injection tests using multiple analysis methods.” SPE Prod. Oper. 24 (3): 396–406. https://doi.org/10.2118/107877-PA.
Chan, A. W., S. Ekbote, M. P. Hows, and G. K. Wong. 2015. “In situ stress measurements during well abandonment.” In Proc., 49th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symp. Alexandria, VA: American Rock Mechanics Association.
Chen, Z. 2012. “Finite element modelling of viscosity-dominated hydraulic fractures.” J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 88–89, 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2011.12.021.
Cheng, A. H.-D. 2016. Poroelasticity. New York: Springer.
Churchill, S. W. 1977. “Friction factor equation spans all fluid-flow regimes.” Chem. Eng. 84 (24): 91–92.
Detournay, E. 2004. “Propagation regimes of fluid-driven fractures in impermeable rocks.” Int. J. Geomech. 4 (1): 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2004)4:1(35).
Feng, Y., C. Arlanoglu, E. Podnos, E. Becker, and K. E. Gray. 2015. “Finite-element studies of hoop-stress enhancement for wellbore strengthening.” SPE Drill. Complet. 30 (1): 38–51. https://doi.org/10.2118/168001-PA.
Feng, Y., and K. E. Gray. 2016a. “A fracture-mechanics-based model for wellbore strengthening applications.” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 29, 392–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.01.028.
Feng, Y., and K. E. Gray. 2016b. “A parametric study for wellbore strengthening.” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 30, 350–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.02.045.
Gederaas, T. B., and A. M. Raaen. 2009. “Precise minimum horizontal stress determination from pump-in/flowback tests with drilling mud.” In Proc., 43rd US Rock Mechanics Symp. and 4th U.S.–Canada Rock Mechanics Symp. Alexandria, VA: American Rock Mechanics Association.
Guo, F., N. R. Morgenstern, and J. D. Scott. 1993. “Interpretation of hydraulic fracturing pressure: A comparison of eight methods used to identify shut-in pressure.” Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr. 30 (6): 627–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-9062(93)91222-5.
Jaeger, J. C., N. G. Cook, and R. Zimmerman. 2009. Fundamentals of rock mechanics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Kunze, K. R., and R. P. Steiger. 1992. “Accurate in-situ stress measurements during drilling operations.” In Proc., SPE Annual Technical Conf. and Exhibition. Richardson, TX: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Lavrov, A., I. Larsen, and A. Bauer. 2015. “Numerical modelling of extended leak-off test with a pre-existing fracture.” Rock Mech. Rock Eng. 49 (4): 1359–1368.
Okland, D., G. K. Gabrielsen, J. Gjerde, S. Koen, and E. L. Williams. 2002. “The importance of extended leak-off test data for combatting lost circulation.” In Proc., SPE/ISRM Rock Mechanics Conf. Richardson, TX: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Plahn, S. V., K. G. Nolte, and S. Miska. 1997. “A quantitative investigation of the fracture pump-in/flowback test.” SPE Prod. Facil. 12 (1): 20–27. https://doi.org/10.2118/30504-PA.
Raaen, A. M., and M. Brudy. 2001. “Pump-in/flowback tests reduce the estimate of horizontal in-situ stress significantly.” In Proc., SPE Annual Technical Conf. and Exhibition. Richardson, TX: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Raaen, A. M., P. Horsrud, H. Kjørholt, and D. Økland. 2006. “Improved routine estimation of the minimum horizontal stress component from extended leak-off tests.” Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 43 (1): 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2005.04.005.
Raaen, A. M., E. Skomedal, H. Kjørholt, P. Markestad, and D. Økland. 2001. “Stress determination from hydraulic fracturing tests: The system stiffness approach.” Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 38 (4): 529–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1365-1609(01)00020-X.
SIMULIA. 2016. Abaqus user’s guide. Providence, RI: SIMULIA.
van Oort, E., and R. F. Vargo. 2008. “Improving formation-strength tests and their interpretation.” SPE Drill. Complet. 23 (3): 284–294. https://doi.org/10.2118/105193-PA.
Ye, Z., and A. Ghassemi. 2018. “Experimental study on injection-induced fracture propagation and coalescence for EGS stimulation.” In Proc., 43rd Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ.
Zhang, X., B. Wu, R. G. Jeffrey, L. D. Connell, and G. Zhang. 2017. “A pseudo-3D model for hydraulic fracture growth in a layered rock.” Int. J. Solids Struct. 115–116, 208–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.03.022.
Zhou, Z. L., G. Q. Zhang, H. R. Dong, Z. B. Liu, and Y. X. Nie. 2017. “Creating a network of hydraulic fractures by cyclic pumping.” Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. 97, 52–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmms.2017.06.009.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
International Journal of Geomechanics
Volume 18 • Issue 9 • September 2018
Copyright
© 2018 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Aug 23, 2017
Accepted: Mar 2, 2018
Published online: Jun 22, 2018
Published in print: Sep 1, 2018
Discussion open until: Nov 22, 2018
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.