勘探与生产世界观:距离实时水力压裂设计又近了一步

随着密封井筒压力监测系统的商业化,更多的石油和天然气运营商能够提高其裂缝簇的效率。

哈特能源员工

[编者注:本文最初发表于 《E&P Plus》十月号在此订阅数字出版物 。] 

优化完井的终极目标是能够实时设计水力压裂作业。“泵和祈祷”的日子正在慢慢消失,部分取而代之的是收集和分析数百万数据点所取得的技术飞跃。有了这些数据点,现在可以重新创建地下,以更好地可视化流体的运动、裂缝的长度等。

随着密封井眼压力监测 (SWPM) 的商业化,完井工程师可以通过跟踪未射孔井眼中的压力响应来监测裂缝扩展和处理井之间的流体体积。当裂缝接近密封井眼时,就会产生压力响应。工程师能够利用安装在表面的压力计利用响应来快速确定流体体积。

SWPM 顶部骨折图

SWPM 顶部骨折图
该图显示了一个涉及一个密封井眼和两个处理井的项目。处理孔上的每个彩色点代表一个阶段和第一次响应的相应体积。左侧的处理井绘制了裂缝长度,该长度是根据从密封井筒上的仪表接收到的数据计算出来的,并插入专有算法中。(来源:Well Data Labs)

想象它的一种方法是想象一只气球动物。

“将气球卷曲 90 度,使其看起来像水平井眼,”德文能源公司的高级完井工程师凯尔·豪斯特维特 (Kyle Haustveit) 解释道。“当你挤压气球的底部时,你会看到上半部分膨胀。因此,如果气球末端有压力表,您会看到压力增加。该挤压力与来自偏移井眼的裂缝在与井眼相交时施加到密封井眼的力相同。当挤压气球时,我们看到的压力响应与当我们有来自偏移井眼或多个偏移井眼的裂缝相交时我们的传感器在井口看到的压力响应相同。

在某种程度上,密封井眼充当天线,将压力响应传输到地面。

“套管柱可能不到几厘米的小挤压会产生压力信号,”豪斯特维特说。“我们通过让密封井眼充满流体来放大压力信号,通常是钻探留下的任何东西,某种类型的淡水或盐水。”

E&P Plus 最近与 Haustveit 以及 Devon Energy 技术副总裁 Trey Lowe 和 Well Data Labs 服务总监 Ryan Guest 就 SWPM 的开发及其在井场的使用进行了交谈。

E&P Plus:解释油井数据实验室系统的工作原理。

嘉宾:我们的角色确实涵盖了希望使用该技术的操作员的整个过程。我们将与他们及其相关服务公司会面,审查最佳 SWPM 设置所需的所有细节,以及如何根据他们的处理井进行相关操作,考虑到他们想要了解的内容,无论是他们试图了解如何最好地设计他们的阶段间距和井间距,这取决于他们正在考虑什么样的假设。

之后,我们将摄取所有数据并使用我们的专有算法和机器学习来提供有关簇效率和裂缝几何形状的一些详细的可视化和分析。我们将让我们的内部完井专家提供解释,以便帮助指导他们的操作员如何处理地层内剩余的垫层。最后,我们将在 Well Data Labs 应用程序以及 Spotfire 中将所有这些信息提供给操作员,以便他们可以根据需要进行操作和分析。

E&P Plus:这个想法从何而来?

凯尔·豪斯特威特
“当我们开始交叉绘制和叠加不同的监测技术时,我们将井下压力计的密封井筒压力叠加在应变数据中。那真是一个“啊哈”时刻。”——Kyle Haustveit,德文能源公司

Haustveit:密封井筒的诞生花了一段时间,它发生在 2008 年。我们在 STACK 中有一个大型集成诊断系统。诊断包括井下压力表和永久安装的光纤电缆。我们在中部脚趾外侧的三个位置安装了六个向下压力计,而不是脚后跟。在每个位置,我们都有一个测量仪连接到套管内部,另一个测量仪连接到外部,测量储层一侧。在大多数情况下,我们最后完成了光纤负载,以便我们可以使用光纤来监测井间应变。当井眼未完井且未射孔时,井间应变更加清晰。我们观察了外部压力表,也观察了应变,但我们没有看到压力何时对外部压力表做出反应与压力何时到达之间存在紧密的关系。

大约在我们完成该项目一个月后,Wolfgang Deeg [完井工程顾问] 首次识别并记录了管道内压力表的这些压力响应。值得注意的是,脚趾套没有打开;没有穿孔。当井眼被密封时,他通过永久井下压力表记录这些压力。它们小于 10 psi,通常在 1 到 2 psi 之间响应。

该团队将其视为一个有趣的观察结果,我们当时确实不知道它意味着什么。又过了一两个月,我们才回到紧张状态。这是我们第一次在其中一个井上收集跨井应变。当我们开始交叉绘制和叠加不同的监测技术时,我们在应变数据中叠加了来自井下压力计的密封井眼压力。那真是“啊哈”的时刻。

E&P Plus:此选项与其他可用选项有何不同?

特雷·洛
“现在我们谈论的是测量断裂几何形状,不是用百万美元的数字,但现在我们的价格是数万美元——所以,便宜了几个数量级。”——Trey Lowe,德文能源公司

Lowe:我们第一次开始滚动时,我们真的很认真地尝试了解裂缝的几何形状。我当时实际上是一名工程师,那已经是差不多八年前的事了。我们花费了近一年时间和超过 200 万美元安装光纤来聆听骨折的声音。从那时起,我们继续尝试改进这一点,并且我们使用了应变测量。我们已将成本从 200 万美元降至现在接近 100 万美元,团队通过所有这些流程发现并基本上发明了密封井筒。现在我们谈论的是测量断裂几何形状,不是用百万美元的数字,但现在我们的价格是数万美元——所以,便宜了几个数量级。

E&P Plus:如何使用数据和压力读数?

嘉宾:数据和压力读数通过我们的机器学习平台和算法运行,这提供了对裂缝几何形状和响应体积的理解。然后,它用于获取信息并测试地层垫层上的假设,并且可以帮助确定最佳井距,确定级数较少的井是否会与级数较多的井一样高效。它可以预测裂缝将保持开放状态多长时间,并有助于减轻损耗问题。

E&P Plus:在分析之前您是否需要清理数据点或进行质量控制检查?

嘉宾:我们采集的数据有一个彻底的审查和质量控制流程。如果发现任何问题,我们将提前与运营商合作,确保解决这些问题。最关键的步骤之一是确保我们对各种仪表进行准确的时间同步,因为您将有一些仪表在监测井上,以及监测处理井本身的仪表。我们希望确保这是同步的,我们希望确保压裂参数清晰并设置,并且我们选择适当的平滑方法。

E&P Plus:与以前相比,是什么让这项技术现在成为可能?

Lowe:德文郡在加快分析速度的工具和流程上投入了大量资金。当你将投资与工具、工程人才和发现结合起来时,它们的出现速度似乎比我们以前看到的要快得多。具体来说,几年前,我们决定作为一家公司,从我们的井场收集所有压裂数据并将其传输到我们自己的专有系统中。这迫使我们构建工具和流程,以获得可以进行分析的高质量数据。

E&P Plus:监测井和生产井之间有推荐的比例吗?

Haustveit:一台监测仪可以监测多口偏置井,但就数量而言,我们能监测到的越多越好。但这实际上是基于项目的目标。如果要聚焦于贫乏区域,并且您想了解不对称性,则可能只需要一台显示器。如果您想了解垂直交错和多供应商开发的影响,最好在一个或多个工作台上安装一台监视器,以了解从处理井向上或向下到不同工作台的高度。所以很难用一个单一的比率来衡量。

E&P Plus:计划或正在进行哪些进一步的改进或改进?

Haustveit:操作上的下一个重大进步是使用拉链操作,使用两个井,并在我们拉链通过时在每个井中创建一个密封井眼,或者设置不同类型的塞子或球就位,我们通常这样做来设置塞子, [并且]我们的压裂球位于塞子顶部。我们可以对其加压,然后在该塞子上方创建一个密封井眼。这将是向前迈出的一大步,因为它将为更多的监控打开大门。

原文链接/hartenergy

E&P World View: Another Step Closer to Real-time Hydraulic Fracture Design

With the commercialization of a sealed wellbore pressure monitoring system, more oil and gas operators have access to improving the efficiency of their fracture clusters.

Hart Energy Staff

[Editor's note: This article originally appeared in the October issue of E&P Plus. Subscribe to the digital publication here.] 

The holy grail of optimizing well completions is the ability to design in real time a hydraulic fracturing operation. Slowly fading are the days of “pump and pray,” replaced in part by the technological leaps made in the collection and analysis of millions of datapoints. With these datapoints, it is now possible to recreate the subsurface to better visual­ize the movement of fluid, the length of fractures and more.

With the commercialization of sealed wellbore pressure monitoring (SWPM), completions engineers can monitor fracture growth and the fluid volumes between treated wells by tracking the pressure response in a nonperforated wellbore. As fractures approach the sealed well­bore, a pressure response is generated. Engineers are able to use the response to determine fluid volumes quickly using pressure gauges mounted at the surface.

SWPM Overhead Fracture Plot

SWPM Overhead Fracture Plot
The image shows a project involving one sealed wellbore and two treatment wells. Each of the colored dots on the treatment wells represents a stage and the corresponding volume to first response. The treatment well on the left has fracture lengths plotted, which were calculated based on data received from the gauges on the sealed wellbore and plugged into proprietary algorithms. (Source: Well Data Labs)

One way to visualize it is to think of a balloon animal.

“Take the balloon and curl it 90 degrees, so it looks like a hor­izontal wellbore,” explained Kyle Haustveit, a senior completions engineer with Devon Energy. “When you squeeze the base of that balloon, you see the upper half expand. So if you had a pressure gauge at the end of that balloon, you’d see a pressure increase. The squeezing is the same force that a fracture from an offset wellbore applies to the sealed wellbore when it intersects the wellbore. That pressure response we see, when squeezing the balloon, is the same that our transducer sees on the wellhead when we have a fracture intersection from an offset or more than one offset wellbore.”

The sealed wellbore, in a way, is working as an antenna to transmit the pressure response to the surface.

“The small squeeze of probably less than a few centimeters of the casing string creates the pressure signal,” Haustveit said. “We amplify the pressure signal by having the sealed wellbore full of fluid, normally whatever drilling leaves in the hole, some type of freshwater or brine.”

E&P Plus recently talked with Haustveit as well as Trey Lowe, vice president of technology with Devon Energy, and Ryan Guest, director of services with Well Data Labs about the development of the SWPM and its uses at the well site.

E&P Plus: Explain how the Well Data Labs system works.

Guest: Our role really spans the whole process for operators that are looking to use this technique. We’ll meet with them and their associ­ated service companies to review all the details that are required for an optimal SWPM set up, and how to do that in relation to their treatment wells, given what they’re looking to learn, whether they’re trying to understand how best to do their stage spacing and their well spacing, depending on what kind of hypothesis they’re looking at.

After that, we’ll ingest all the data and use our proprietary algorithms and machine learning to provide some detailed visual­izations and analysis with regard to cluster efficiency and fracture geometry. And we’ll have our in-house completions experts provide interpretation so that it will help to guide their operators with that information on what to do with the rest of that pad within a for­mation. And lastly, we’ll provide all of that information back to the operators in the Well Data Labs app, as well as in Spotfire, so they can manipulate and analyze as they see fit.

E&P Plus: Where did this idea come from?

Kyle Haustveit
“When we began cross-plotting and overlaying different monitoring techniques, we overlaid the sealed wellbore pressures from the downhole gauges within the strain data. That was really the ‘aha’ moment.”—Kyle Haustveit, Devon Energy

Haustveit: The birth of the sealed wellbore took a while, and it occurred in 2008. We had a large integrated diagnostic in the STACK. The diagnostics included downhole pressure gauges and permanently installed fiber-optic cable. We had six down-pressure gauges at three locations along the lateral to toe at the midsection, not the heel. At each location, we had one gauge that was ported to the inside of the casing and one ported to the outside measuring the reservoir side. We completed our fiber-optic loads last in most cases so that we can use the fiber to monitor cross-well strain. Cross-well strain is much clearer when the wellbore is uncompleted and not perforated. We watched the external gauges and we watched the strain, and we didn’t see a strong relationship between when pressure would respond on the external gauges and when strain would arrive.

It was probably a month after we completed the project that Wolf­gang Deeg [completion engineering adviser] first recognized and documented these pressure responses from the gauge inside the pipe. And it’s important to note that the toe sleeve wasn’t open; there were no perforations. He was recording these pressures from the permanent downhole gauges while the wellbore was sealed. They were less than 10 psi, normally between 1 and 2 psi responses.

The team chalked it up as an interesting observation that we really didn’t know what it meant at the time. And it took another month or two before we came back to the strain. It was the first time that we had collected cross-well strain on one of our wells. When we began cross-plotting and overlaying different monitoring techniques, we over­laid the sealed wellbore pressures from the downhole gauges within the strain data. That was really the ‘aha’ moment.

E&P Plus: How is this option different from other options that are available?

Trey Lowe
“Now we’re talking about measuring fractured geometry, not with million-dollar numbers, but now we’re in the tens of thousands of dollars—so, orders of magnitude cheaper.”—Trey Lowe, Devon Energy

Lowe: The first time that we started rolling, we really got serious about trying to understand the geometry of the fractures. I was actu­ally an engineer at the time, and it was almost eight years ago. We spent almost a year and over $2 million installing fiber optics to listen acoustically to fractures. And since that time, we’ve continued to try to improve upon that, and we’ve used strain measurements. We’ve driven the cost down from $2 million now approaching $1 million, and what the team has discovered and basically invented through all of those processes is sealed wellbores. Now we’re talking about measuring fractured geometry, not with million-dollar numbers, but now we’re in the tens of thousands of dollars—so, orders of magni­tude cheaper.

E&P Plus: How are the data and pressure readings used?

Guest: The data and pressure readings are run through our machine learning platform and algorithms, and that provides an understanding of fracture geometry and response volumes. It’s then used to gain information and test hypotheses on a pad in a formation, and it can help to inform optimal well spacing, whether wells with fewer stages will perform as efficiently as those with more. And it can predict how long fractures will remain open and help to mitigate depletion issues.

E&P Plus: Do you need the datapoints to be cleaned or quality control-checked before your analysis?

Guest: There is a thorough review and quality control process for the data we ingest. If any issues are identified, we’ll work with the operator up front to make sure that we fix those. Among the most critical steps is ensuring that we have accurate time synchronization of the various gauges, because you’ll have some that are on the monitor well, as well as gauges that are monitoring the treatment wells themselves. We want to make sure that that’s synched up, and we want to make sure that the frac parameters are clear and set and that we’re selecting the appropriate smoothing method.

E&P Plus: What made this technology possible now versus before?

Lowe: Devon has invested heavily in the tools and the processes that speed up the analysis described. When you marry that investment with tools, the engineering talent and the discoveries, they seem to be com­ing much faster than we’ve seen before. Specifically, several years ago we decided as a company that we were going to collect and stream all of our frac data from our well sites into our own proprietary systems. That forced us to build out the tools and the processes to have good quality data that we could do analysis around.

E&P Plus: Is there a recommended ratio between monitor wells and producing wells?

Haustveit: One monitor can monitor multiple offset wells, but to the number, the more we can get, the better. But it’s really based on the goal of the project. If it’s to be focused on a depleted area, and you’re trying to understand the asymmetry, you may only need one monitor well. If you’re trying to understand the impacts of vertical staggering and multi-vendor developments, it’s best to have a monitor in one or more benches to understand height from a treatment well up or down into a different bench. So it’s tough to put a single ratio on it.

E&P Plus: What further improvements or refinements are planned or in process?

Haustveit: The next big advancement operationally is using a zipper operation, using two wells and creating a sealed wellbore in each well as we zipper by, either setting a different type of plug or ball in place, which we normally do to set a plug, [and] we have our frac ball on top of the plug. We can pressure up on it and then create a sealed wellbore above that plug. That’s going to be a big step forward because it’s going to open the door for a lot more monitoring.