PART 4 Hydraulic Fracturing 8 Dynamic Fracture Geometry Hydraulic fracturing is the process of injecting a fluid into a well to create tensile stresses in a formation exposed to the fluid pressure, causing local stresses in the formation to exceed the tensile strength of the rock. This creates a crack, or fracture, propagating into the formation from the wellbore as fluid continues to be injected at a high rate. In some formations, acids may be used as the fracture fluid to etch the face of the crack, whereas in others, a proppant such as sand may be injected with the fluid so that upon cessation of pumping and crack prop- agation, the crack remains a conductivity pathway for fluids to flow from the reservoir into the wellbore. These two processes are referred to as acid fracturing and proppant fracturing. The dynamic geometry is the same regardless of which process is selected for use. Thus, this chapter will apply to both acid and proppant fracturing. Chapter 9 also applies to both since the mechanisms of heat transport are the same for both processes. ‘The mechanism by which fracture conductivity is created, however, differs between the two processes and these are considered in separate sections within Chapter 10. There are two basic reasons for fracturing a well: to increase the rate or productivity and/or to improve the ultimate recovery. Additionally, other wells may also be fractured to aid in secondary recovery operations and to assist in the injection or disposal of waste water. Ifa well has a large skin effect (see Chap. 6), then a relatively small fracture 246may increase productivity as much as a few hundred percent. Chapter 11 is de- voted to the prediction of the increased well productivity that can result from fracturing. Fracturing is also attractive in very tight sands where the production rates may be normally too low to permit economic drainage of the formation hydrocarbon. In these cases long, conductive fractures may help to increase the ultimate recovery of hydrocarbon by extending the time before the economic limit of a well is reached. The final chapters in Part 4 deal with optimum fracture design and pressure testing fractured wells. Both of these topics are of great importance to the prac- ticing engineer. These chapters can be studied without reading the more funda- mental aspects of fracturing presented in the initial chapters of Part 4. 8.1 FRACTURE ORIENTATION Fracturing Pressure In many applications of hydraulic fracturing it is essential to ascertain, if at all possible, the orientation of the fracture. The first question to be answered regards whether or not the fracture is vertical or horizontal. Generally, horizontal frac- tures are preferred, but in deeper formations they are, as will be evident, most often vertical. One of the important measurements that can help distinguish be- tween horizontal and vertical fractures is the bottomhole pressure measured dur- ing the fracture treatment. In hydraulic fracturing, enough pressure must be applied to initially break down or fracture the formation and enough pressure must continue to be imposed to allow the fracture to continue to grow or propagate. Normally, more pressure is required to initially break down a formation than is required to propagate a fracture. Once a fracture is formed, the fluid in the fracture acts as a wedge, forcing the fracture to grow. A fracture is more easily created using a low-vis- cosity, penetrating fluid than with a high-viscosity nonpenetrating fluid. A pen- etrating fluid pressurizes a larger area, and the total force on the formation is greater than if a nonpenetrating fluid, which acts only on the area near the well- bore, is used. Pressure behavior ducing @ fracturing Weatinent is illustrated by Fig. 8.1. The fluid injection rate is constant, except that at some time injection is stopped to obtain the instantaneous shut-in pressure. The bottomhole pressure is shown versus time from the initial injection of fluid until the treatment has been com- pleted. The surface pressure is, of course, different from the bottomhole pressure because of the weight of the fluid and the friction losses in the wellbore. The critical portions of the pressure history shown in Fig. 8.1 are: © Breakdown Pressure: the pressure required to break down the formation and initiate fracture. * Propagation pressure: the pressure required to continually enlarge the frac- ture. © Instantaneous Shut-in Pressure: the pressure that is required to just hold the fracture open. Sec. 8.1 Fracture Orientation 287BREAKDOWN PRESSURE FRACTURE PROPAGATION PRESSURE INSTANTANEOUS ‘SHUT-IN PRESSURE Paisie BOTTOMHOLE PRESSURE PUMPING TIME, Figure 8.1 Idealized pressure behavior during fracturing. The instantaneous shut-in pressure measured by stopping the flow will de- pend on the width of the fracture at this point and the pore pressure surrounding the fracture. If large quantities of fluid have been injected and the fracture width at the wellbore is large, then a larger shut-in pressure will be observed [1, 2]. If it is desired to measure the intrinsic tectonic stress, the shut-in pressure should be measured after only a small amount of low-viscosity fluid has been injected to create a fracture. At this stage the fracture width will be narrow and will have little effect. Even if larger quantities of fluid are injected, the effect of fracture width is normally less than 3000 kPa [1]. After shut-in, stresses in the earth squeeze the fluid in the fracture until the fracture walls close on the proppant or on the etched walls of an acid fracture. When the walls close, and support the earth's stresses, the pressure will decrease rapidly as more fluid leaks off into the for- mation. The described pressure behavior is highly idealistic. Seldom will all the pres- sures described be observed during a fracture treatment. For example, if the reservoir had been previously fractured, there may not be any difference between breakdown pressure and fracture propagation pressure. If the reservoir pressure is very low, the well will go on vacuum when the fracture closes, and a static reservoir pressure will not be measured at the surface. If pisw is the instantaneous shut-in pressure measured at the surface, then the bottomhole shut-in pressure (psisip) is given by Pasi = Pisir + pgD (8.1) 248 Dynamic Fracture Geometry Chap. 8 ‘where D is the formation depth. This equation is precise because when flow is stopped, the friction pressure vanishes. The bottomhole pressure required to maintain a fracture divided by the res- ervoir depth (D) is defined as fracture gradient (FG). Thus FG = PeisielD 8.2) Vertical or Horizontal Fractures Figures 8.2 (a), (b), and (c) show data on fracturing pressures for both breakdown and propagation. Slightly more pressure is required to break down a formation than to propagate a fracture. In the Texas-Louisiana Gulf Coast area, breakdown pressure gradients are approximately 17.9 (0.8 psi/ft) tv 19.0 kPa/m (0.84 psi/ft) on the average, whereas fracture gradients range from 15.6 to 16.7 kPa/m (0.69 to 0.74 psi/ft). The average fracture gradient in reservoirs having a depth greater than 1800 m is approximately 15.6 kPa/m. The spread in the data is approximately 2.2 kPa/m. The overburden stress is normally 22.3-24.6 kPa/m (0.99-1.08 psi/ft). If the fracture gradient is less than this, it will be easier to part the earth than to lift it, and a vertical fracture will form. The curves for fracture gradient show that when reservoirs are deeper than about 600 m, the fracture gradient is less than 22.3 kPa/m, and vertical fractures should form. In shallow reservoirs, however, frac- ture gradients can be higher than 24.6 kPa/m and here horizontal fractures can form. There is quite a bit of scatter in the data, and these rules should not be considered to be precise. The principle apparently governing the orientation of a fracture is that the crack opens and widens in an orientation requiring the least work, as depicted by Fig. 8.3. The crack is shown to be perpendicular to o-,, the smaller of the three principal stresses. Thus, it may be postulated that fractures should occur along planes normal to the least principal stress [3, 4]. Since, as shown by Fig. 8.2 the fracture gradient for deeper formations is often much smaller than the weight of the overburden, these fractures are vertical and the horizontal stresses are, therefore, less than the vertical ones. The state of stress in the subsurface is a complex function of the depth and the tectonic activity in the region [5]. Several theories characterizing horizontal stresses have been proposed. Hubbert and Willis [4] have postulated that the rock is ina state of incipient faulting. This state of stress is independent of the elastic properties of the rock. A second hypothesis assumes that during diagenetic proc- esses the movement of the earth in horizontal directions is limited. Stresses can only be accommodated by corresponding strains in the vertical direction [3]. The equations describing an elastic body (see Chap. 2 for a detailed discussion) are o-p=2G (« + ‘) Gi=x,y, (8.3) » 1=2y where p is the formation pressure, G is the shear modulus, and v is Poisson’s Sec. 8.1 Fracture Orientation 249re Figure 8.2 U.S. Gulf Coast and Inland fracture gradients (3). ust coe Up ope seamen opt masa of ot i np onda Chap. 8 Dynamic Fracture GeometryFigure 8.3 Rock fracture shown perpendicular to the direction of least stress. ratio. If strain is restricted to the z (or axial) direction as shown in Fig. 8.4, then &=620 and e=e 64) The axial stress must equal the weight of the overburden. Therefore o: = poDe 8.5) where po is the density of the overburden, which is approximately 2290 kg/m? The overburden stress then amounts to an increasing pressure with depth of about 22.4 kPalm (1 psi/ft). Substituting Eqs. (8.4) and (8.5) into Eq. (8.3), the strain in the z-direction is given by — [eRe —e] (1-2 «= [*] (=) 89 We can now solve for either o, or ay. In the present case these two stresses are assumed equal; however, because of movements within the earth, it is usually not true that strains in both the x- and y-directions vanish nor are the two stresses necessarily equal. Thus, tectonic activity plays a very important role in deter- Sec. 8.1 Fracture Orientation 251sa Y, Gy (CONFINING STRESS) % Ox Zoz (AXIAL STRESS) Figure 8.4 The stress acting in a subsurface formation. The strain is restricted to the axial direction, mining the state of stress. Continuing with our present calculation by substituting Eq. (8.6) into Eq. (8.3) (with i set equal to x), we find the important result oe = (745) pode + 9 (1 - It is of interest to compare the magnitudes of c, or oy with that of oz, for if @. > 0, then one can expect vertical fractures. Examination of Table 2.1 will show that v generally ranges between 0.25 to 0.4. This would mean that in general , exceeds o provided, of course, the assumptions made at the onset apply. Since the fracture which opens vertically must act against the stress a, it is possible to identify 0, as peisir. This is the pressure necessary to hold the fracture open. Thus oy 8.72) Pais _ (8.8) Equation (8.8) has been used in recent years to predict the fracture gradient in a new area where information regarding the fracture gradient is not available. Equa- tion (8.8) shows that the fracture gradient decreases as the reservoir pressure declines, The equation can, therefore, be used to predict the fracture gradient for a partially depleted formation, given the fracture gradient measured at an earlier 252 Dynamic Fracture Geometry Chap. 8 BPeeeeeeee eee eee eeetime when the reservoir pressure was higher. This application is illustrated by Example 8.1. Example 8.1 Prediction of the Fracture Gradient A formation 3,000 m in depth exhibited a fracture gradient of 16 kPa/m when the formation pressure was 24,000 kPa. What is the fracture gradient when the formation pressure has declined to 10,000 kPa? Solution Equation (8.8) is useful in helping to solve this problem. The quantity vi(L — ») can be treated as an empirical constant, a, which is determined based on the conditions known to exist when the fracture gradient was measured. Thus 24,000 3,000 FG = o@2.4) +(1~ a) or 16 = (22.4) + (1 - a) Solving for a we find « = 0.56 Since a depends (in theory) on the Poisson ratio, it can be assumed to remain constant as the reservoir pressure decreases. Thus, the fracture gradient for the depleted reservoir may be estimated as follows: 10,000 FG = 0.56024) + (1 ~ 0.56) 55 or FG = 14 kPa/m Equation (8.8) ignores both the influence of temperature and creep. Prats [5] has shown that these are important contributions. His analysis shows the horizontal in-situ stresses depend on the burial history and because of the dif- ferences in these properties, the tectonic stresses will differ in layers having dif- ferent creep properties. This differential creep and tectonic activity are at least in part the origin of the stress contrasts which will be shown to limit the vertical growth of fractures into the under and over burdens. 8.2 VERTICAL FRACTURES Although the final or static fracture dimensions are really the only ones that con- corn us since these determine the increased productivity that will result from the treatment, they cannot be calculated without first knowing the dynamic ones. The geometry of a vertical fracture is characterized by a length that is a function of time; a width that can depend on the distance from the wellbore, the vertical position and the time; and a fracture height that depends on the distance from the wellbore and the time. Figure 8.5 depicts one wing of a fracture extending outward from the wellbore. Normally a fracture propagates in a configuration that is symmetric about the wellbore. There will, therefore, be two wings which are assumed to be identical. The dimensions of the fracture change with time as fluid is injected. Let us consider the variation of each. Sec. 8.2 Vertical Fractures 253FRACTURE OPENING w(x,z) FRACTURE A FRONT Figure 8.5 Geometry of a vertical hydraulic fracture. Fracture Azimuth In deep formations, fractures are generally vertical. It is important in many ap- plications to be able to predict the direction or azimuth of the vertical fracture. This is especially true if fracturing is a planned part of the initial field development [6]. It is not difficult to imagine how certain well patterns will, in such a case, be much more efficient than others depending on the direction (i.e. North, South, etc.) that vertical fractures propagate. In the previous section we have assumed the principal horizontal stresses to be equal; however, movements of the earth during geological times have caused repeated deformation, faulting, and folding of rocks; and substantial variation in all three of the principal components of stress exist in subsurface formations. This point has been emphasized by Hubbert and Willis [4] using a simple example system, a box of sand divided into two parts by a partition as depicted in Fig. 8.6 (a). ‘A movement of the partition to the right causes the sand near the partition on the left side to slump, producing a series of normal faults. This is shown by Fig. 8.6(b) where the sand in the left hand compartment dips at an angle of ap- proximately 60°. It is not difficult to imagine that in this case the horizontal com- ponent of the principal stress perpendicular to the normal faults is reduced as a result of the movement of the partition. In this case or, will be the smaller of the three principal stresses and a vertical fracture perpendicular to this stress rep- resents the least work. Thus, a vertical fracture parallel to the direction of the faults is to be expected. The Gulf Coast region is normally faulted with faults running approximately parallel to the coast line, apparently due to the movement of sediments over the continental shelf. Fractures will, therefore, tend to be parallel to the coast line. In Fig. 8.6, the movement of the barrier to the right (an uplift) produces a series of thrust faults and it seems reasonable to expect 7 to be increased as a result. Thus, the fracture, if vertical, will be parallel to o, and perpendicular to the thrust faults. This is apparently the tectonic state that dominates in the central 254 Dynamic Fracture Geometry Chap. 8 etSAND LAYERS OF DYED SAND (0) In response to movement, sand in the right compartment stumps ‘and is thrust upward in the left compartment Figure 8.6 Sandbox model showing change in horizontal stresses as a result of simulated tectonic movement. (a) Approximately equal principal stresses. (b) Unequal horizontal stresses. United States east of the Rocky Mountains. Fractures are expected to be roughly perpendicular to the thrust faults and in this region the fracture orientation tends to be N70°. West of the Rocky Mountains, complex thrust-faulting systems have de- veloped and no one feature can be said to dominate fracture orientation. Local tectonic activity is highly influential in determining the fracture azimuth and the only certain way to know the direction of propagation is to measure it. Fracture azimuths have been measured by using impression packers, caliper logs, tilt- meters, core analysis, and seismic methods. A caliper log taken in a vertical open borehole can provide an indication of the direction of the minimum horizontal stress. The borehole will be deformed by the in-situ stresses [4, 7]. Therefore, unless excessive flow of fluids into and out of the formation has eroded the wellbore walls, the caliper log will reveal an elliptical wellbore with the major axis aligned in the direction of the least principal horizontal stress. The availability of fresh oriented core samples can be used to determine the direction of the least horizontal stress. The method is based on the relaxation that core sample undergoes when it is removed from its underground position [7, 8, Sec. 8.2 Vertical Fractures 255