SPE-171569-MS

Viscoelastic Creep of Eagle Ford Shale: Investigating Fluid-Shale

Interaction
Mouin M. Almasoodi, Younane N. Abousleiman, and Son K. Hoang, The University of Oklahoma

Copyright 2014, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/CSUR Unconventional Resources Conference - Canada held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 30 September
2 October 2014.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Although organic-rich shale formations are being extensively produced in many places in the United
States, the unexpected early production decline is still not fully understood. This phenomenon could have
many physical or operational reasons. One of the physical attributes is the time-dependent characteristics
of the shale mineral assemblage when interacting with the fracturing fluid. Creep deformation is one of
those time-dependent characteristics through which rocks exhibit continuous deformation under constant
load that affects reservoir completion and hydraulic fracture stimulation. In this study, shale creep
deformation was characterized and rheological models were developed. Triaxial creep experiments were
conducted on rock samples from the Eagle Ford shale from southern Texas. Samples were tested with
water, decane, or without any circulating fluid to assess fluid-shale interaction. Eagle Ford shale mineral
compositions were also investigated using X-Ray Diffraction analyses in an attempt to correlate minerals
fluid sensitivity. Problems such as loss of fracture width and length due to shale viscoelastic behavior
while embedding the proppant can be better understood if the magnitude of shale creep is well
characterized. The experimentally calibrated viscoelastic model not only addressed the instantaneous,
transient, and long term sample deformations, but also enabled the estimation of proppant embedment
depth during production. The creep deformation was most pronounced when the shale was impregnated
with water. Decane-impregnated samples produced less creep deformation and the least creep was
measured on the dry ones. The theory of linear viscoelasticity was used to model the samples time-
dependent deformation when subjected to their respective constant loads.

Introduction
The inherent complexity of shale reservoirs is due to the varying geological and mechanical properties at
all scales from macro to nano (Abousleiman et al., 2007). The recent boom in shale plays has paved the
way to the development of new techniques in characterizing unconventional resources. For instance, the
merger of geomechanics with sequence stratigraphy has helped to understand the relation between shale
mechanical properties and their depositional and diagenetic processes (Slatt and Abousleiman, 2011).
Hydraulic fracturing is one of the most used engineering techniques in reservoir production. From the
early start of hydraulic fracturing from vertical wells to multi stage hydraulic fracturing in horizontal
2 SPE-171569-MS

Table 1Creep test sample conditions

Sample ID Diameter (cm) Length (cm) Density (g/cc)

Dry Sample 2.55 5.28 2.42

Decane Impregnated 2.54 5.28 2.42
Water Impregnated 2.54 5.30 2.43

wells, this technique remains poorly understood. Hydraulic fracturing in conventional reservoirs has
generally worked in many cases according to engineering hydraulic fracture simulations and field
stimulations. However, this has not been the case in unconventional reservoirs due to several geome-
chanical problems such as inaccurate estimation of fracture volume (Lecampion et al., 2004), shale creep
(Hoang and Abousleiman, 2009, Hoang et al., 2012) and loss of hydraulic conductivity due to proppant
embedment (Alramahi et al., 2012).

Geologic Settings of Eagle Ford Shale (Calcareous Mudstone)

Even though Eagle Ford shale is one of the most prolific shale formations in the United States, and
perhaps in the world, factors controlling the success of Eagle Ford shale oil and gas production are still
vague. Eagle Ford shale produces oil, dry gas, and gas condensate. The formation is about 50 miles wide
forming a crescent shape in the Western Gulf Basin in South Texas. It extends across Texas for 400 miles
from Maverick County at the Mexican borders to Brazos County to the northeast; time will tell if it
extends further in the northeast direction. The Eagle Ford succession is late Cenomanian to Turonian
(Donovan and Staerker, 2010).

Samples Geologic Description

Color: light gray
Grain size: fine grains
Bedding or stratification: thinly laminated
Sorting: well sorted
No visual pores
Well cemented grains

Rocks Viscoelastic Property

Viscoelasticity is a property of any material that displays both viscous and elastic responses when
subjected to load. The viscoelastic property of shale rocks was quantitatively investigated by many
researchers over the past decades, such as the work of Schatz et al., 1981, Remvik, 1995, Chang et al.,
2009, and 2010. Viscoelasticity can be visualized via two distinct phenomena which are creep deforma-
tion and stress relaxation. The latter is out of the scope of this study; it describes the stress relief when
a rock sample is subjected to a constant strain. However, creep deformation means rocks exhibit
continuous increase in strain with time when subjected to constant load. In general, the creep curve has
three distinct regions which are primary, secondary and tertiary. The primary region indicates that the
deformation rate is decreasing while the secondary region shows the deformation rate is decreasing slowly
or steady. The final region is the tertiary region in which creep deformation accelerates to failure.
Eagle Ford Shale Creep Test
Only samples with no visible fractures, weak planes, or calcite inclusions were selected for creep test. A
summary of sample conditions is presented in Table 1
SPE-171569-MS 3

Figure 1Creep deformation of water-impregnated EFS sample during pressure steps.

To study the influence of shale-fluid interaction on the creep behavior, the first sample was impreg-
nated with water, the second one was impregnated with a nonreactive fluid (decane), and the third one was
kept dry. The decane and water impregnated samples were soaked in a beaker under vacuuming pressure.
Vacuuming removed the air inside the pores, and the fluid was delivered through an injection port. The
sample weight was monitored until no more weight increase was detected. This process took a few days
due to the low permeability of shale.
Triaxial loading frame was used to apply the axial load during creep experiments. Syringe pumps were
used to supply confining pressure. The displacement was measured using two linear variable displacement
transformers (LVDT). The pressure and stress were increased at incremental steps as shown in following
program:
Confining pressure to 500 psi, hold pressure for approximately 2 days
Confining pressure to 1000 psi, hold pressure for approximately 2 days
Confining pressure to 1500 psi, hold pressure for approximately 2 days
Confining pressure to 2000 psi, hold pressure for approximately 3 days
Deviatoric stress to 2000 psi, hold stress for more than 1 day
Deviatoric stress to 4000 psi, hold stress for more than 1 day
Deviatoric stress to 6000 psi, hold stress for 1-3 days
During these steps, the confining pressure was kept constant to within 10 psi, while the force was kept
constant to within 10-15 lbs.
4 SPE-171569-MS

Figure 2Creep deformation of decane-impregnated EFS sample during pressure steps.

Table 2Ratio of creep strain to elastic strain in pressure steps

Results and Discussions
C/E
The Eagle Ford shale creep deformation during the
stress and pressure steps was found to fit well with (1000 psi) (1500 psi) (2000 psi)
Water Impregnated 63.9% 78.8% 96.5%
a modified Zener model (a Zener model in a series Decane Impregnated 66.0% 73.9% 90.5%
with a Kelvin-Voigt model), as shown in equations Dry Sample 0% 0% 0%
1 and 2 below:
(1)

(2)

Where Stress (psi) K Bulk modulus (psi) Viscosity (psi.sec)

t time (sec) E Youngs modulus (psi) P Confining pressure (psi)
Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 present the experimental data, and the model for the water and decane impregnated
samples during pressure steps. It is worth mentioning that creep deformation was not detected for the dry
sample during pressure steps.
The ratio of creep strain (C) to elastic strain (E) was calculated to assess the amount of creep
deformation at every pressure step as presented in Table 2
Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5 present the experimental data, and the model for the dry, water, and decane
impregnated samples during stress steps.
The ratio of creep strain (C) to elastic strain (E) was calculated to assess the amount of creep
deformation at every stress step as presented in Table 3:
Creep deformation was detected in all tested samples, water, decane, and dry. It was observed that the
creep magnitude depended on the magnitude of the applied stress and pressure. In other words, higher
SPE-171569-MS 5

Figure 3Creep deformation of dry EFS sample during stress steps.

Figure 4 Creep deformation of water-impregnated EFS sample during stress steps.

6 SPE-171569-MS

Figure 5Creep deformation of decane-impregnated EFS sample during stress steps.

Table 3Ratio of creep strain to elastic strain in stress steps

stress and pressure resulted in higher creep strain. C/E
Furthermore, the influence of shale-fluid interaction
(4000 psi) (6000 psi)
on the creep behavior was significant. Results reveal
Water Impregnated 650% 799%
that the water impregnated sample had the highest Decane Impregnated 453% 588%
creep strain followed by decane, and dry samples Dry Sample 346% 521%
respectively. Practically, different fracturing fluids
will induce different shale creep rates, and hence
proppant embedment rates, based on the chemical
composition of the in-situ shale. Therefore the influence of shale-fluid interaction must be accounted for
during hydraulic fracturing design.

Application to the Proppant Embedment Problem

Using the correspondence principle (Hoang and Abousleiman, 2012), the rhelogical models obtained in
this study can be employed to estimate the depth of embedment. As an illustration, Fig. 6 shows the
normalized strain versus time relationship for the water-impregnated Eagle Ford shale sample at a
deviatoric stress level of 6000 psi and a confining pressure of 2000 psi. It can be seen clearly that the creep
strain was much larger than the elastic strain. Fig. 7 illustrates the difference between elastic and
viscoelastic embedment. It can be seen clearly that the creep strain is much larger than the elastic strain.
SPE-171569-MS 7

Figure 6 Strain versus time relationship using the modified Zeners model for the water impregnated EFS sample.

Figure 7Illustration to show the magnitude of elastic embedment versus viscoelastic embedment.

Conclusions
The main inferences can be summirzed as follow:
1. Creep deformation was observed in the tested Eagle Ford shale samples.
2. Water impregnated sample has the highest creep strain followed by decane, and dry samples
respectively.
3. The modified Zeners model fits well the three tested samples during pressure and stress steps.
4. The study sheds light on the potential effects on the fracturing fluids for Eagle Ford shale. The
various fluids induce very different creep rates, reflecting the interaction between shale mineralogy
and fluid chemistry.
5. Creep deformation could be several times greater than the elastic deformation within a year of
production. Thus, using an elastic model will severely underestimate the problem of embedment.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Mr. John Burmley and Mr. Sezar Sevinc for their assistance in the
experminetal work.
8 SPE-171569-MS

References
Abousleiman, Y.N., Tran, M.H., Hoang, S.K., Bobko, C., Ortega, A., Ulm, F.J. (2007). Geomechanics
Field and Laboratory Characterization of Woodford Shale: the Next Gas Play. SPE Annual Technical
Conference. SPE 110120. Anaheim, CA: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Alramahi, B., Sundberg, M.I. (2012). Proppant Embedment and Conductivity of Hydraulic Fractures
in Shales: The 46th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium. ARMA 12-291. Chicago, Illinois:
American Rock Mechanics Association.
Chang, C., Zoback, M. D. (2009). Viscous Creep in Room-Dried Unconsolidated Gulf of Mexico
Shale (I): Experimental Results. Journal Petroleum Science and Engineering, 69, 239 246.
Chang, C., Zoback, M. D. (2010). Viscous Creep in Room-Dried Unconsolidated Gulf of Mexico
Shale (II): Experimental Results. Journal Petroleum Science and Engineering, 72, 50 55.
Donovan, A. D., and Staerker T. S. (2010). Sequence stratigraphy of the Eagle Ford (Boquillas)
Formation in the subsurface of South Texas and outcrops of West Texas. Gulf Coast Association of
Geological Societies Transactions, 60, 861899.
Hoang, S.K., Abousleiman, Y.N. (2009). Critical Poroviscoelastic Anisotropic Evaluation of Anelastic
Strain Recovery Test. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. SPE 124330. New Orleans,
Louisiana: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Hoang, S.K., Abousleiman, Y.N. (2012). Correspondence principle between anisotropic porovis-
coelasticity and poroelasticity using micromechanics and application to compression of orthotropic
rectangular strips. Journal of Applied Physics v112, 044907.
Hoang, S.K., Abousleiman, Y.N, Hemphill. T. (2012). Poroviscoelastic Modeling of Time-Dependent
Wellbore Closure When Drilling Anisotropic Gas Shale and Oil Shale Reservoirs Applications in the
Haynesville Shale and the Colony Pilot Mine Shale. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition.
SPE 159942. San Antonio, TX: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Haakon, F., (2011). Strcural Geology. Figure 6.12. The standard loading configuration in triaxial rigs.
Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-514-8
Lecampion, B., Jeffrey, R., Detournay, E. (2004). Real-Time Estimation of Fracture Volume and
Hydraulic Fracturing Treatment Efficiency: The 6th North America Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics
Symposium. ARMA 04-519. Houston, Texas: American Rock Mechanics Association.
Remvik, F. (1995). Shale-Fluid Interaction and Its Effect on Creep: 8th ISRM Congress, Tokyo,
Japan. IS-1989-045: International Society of Rock Mechanics.
Schatz, F. J., Sinha, K. P. (1981). Creep Deformation of Oil Shale at Elevated Temperatures: ISRM
International Symposium, Tokyo, Japan. IS-1981-021: International Society of Rock Mechanics.
Slatt, R. M., Abousleiman, Y.N. (2011). Merging Sequence Stratigraphy and Geomechanics for
Unconventional Gas Shales. The Leading Edge.v30, 274-282.