Three-dimensional finite element simulation and parametric study for horizontal well hydraulic fracture

Abstract Estimation or determination of fracture geometry has been one of the most difficult technical challenges in hydraulic fracturing treatment. A three-dimensional non-linear fluid–solid coupling finite element model was established based on the finite element software ABAQUS. The staged fracturing process of a horizontal well in Daqing Oilfield, China was simulated with the model, in which perforation, wellbore, cement casing, one pay zone, two barriers, micro-annulus fracture and transverse fracture are included. The field data of Daqing Oilfield were used in numerical computation. Micro-annulus fracture and transverse fracture generate simultaneously and a typical T-shaped fracture occurs at the early stage of treatment history, then the micro-annulus disappears and only the transverse fracture remains and propagates. The pore pressure distribution in the formation and the fracture configuration during the treatment history are obtained. The evolution of bottomhole pressure as the direct output of simulation is well coincident with the corresponding data from the field measurements. The validation of the model is approved. The effects of several parameters on fracture characteristic are studied with the model. The parameters include in-situ stress contrast, modulus contrast, tensile strength contrast and viscosity of fracturing fluid.

[1]  P. Camanho,et al.  Mixed-Mode Decohesion Finite Elements for the Simulation of Delamination in Composite Materials , 2002 .

[2]  Jose Adachi,et al.  Computer simulation of hydraulic fractures , 2007 .

[3]  M. R. Gross,et al.  Finite-element analysis of the stress distribution around a pressurized crack in a layered elastic medium: implications for the spacing of fluid-driven joints in bedded sedimentary rock , 1995 .

[4]  H.A.M. van Eekelen,et al.  Hydraulic Fracture Geometry: Fracture Containment in Layered Formations , 1982 .

[5]  R. Jeffrey,et al.  The Influence of Fracture Toughness on the Geometry of Hydraulic Fractures , 1987 .

[6]  R. Jeffrey,et al.  Influence of Fracture Toughness on the Geometry of Hydraulic Fractures , 1989 .

[7]  Norman R. Warpinski,et al.  In-Situ Stresses: The Predominant Influence on Hydraulic Fracture Containment , 1982 .

[8]  G. Couples,et al.  Geomechanical simulation to predict open subsurface fractures , 2009 .

[9]  A. Daneshy.  Factors Controlling the Vertical Growth of Hydraulic Fractures , 2009 .

[10]  P. T. Branagan,et al.  An Interpretation of M-Site Hydraulic Fracture Diagnostic Results , 1998 .

[11]  Jennifer L. Miskimins,et al.  Modeling of Hydraulic Fracture Height Containment in Laminated Sand and Shale Sequences , 2003 .

[12]  M. W. Conway,et al.  Experimental and numerical modeling of convective proppant transport , 1994 .

[13]  Jin Zhang,et al.  A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Model of Hydraulic Progressive Damage , 2006 .

[14]  Y. Podladchikov,et al.  Transformation-induced jointing as a gauge for interfacial slip and rock strength , 2009 .

[15]  Lawrence W. Teufel,et al.  Hydraulic-fracture propagation in layered rock: experimental studies of fracture containment , 1984 .

[16]  Pedro P. Camanho,et al.  A damage model for the simulation of delamination in advanced composites under variable-mode loading , 2006 .

[17]  B. Hustedt,et al.  Induced Fracturing in Reservoir Simulations: Application of a New Coupled Simulator to a Waterflooding Field Example , 2008 .

[18]  E. Siebrits,et al.  Layered Modulus Effects on Fracture Propagation, Proppant Placement, and Fracture Modeling , 2001 .

[19]  H. Gu,et al.  Hydraulic Fracture Modeling With Bedding Plane Interfacial Slip , 2008 .

[20]  Paul van den Hoek,et al.  Induced Fracturing in Reservoir Simulations: Application of a New Coupled Simulator to Waterflooding Field Examples , 2006 .