Sie sind auf Seite 1von 13

PROPPANT HYDRAULLIC FRACTURING IN LOW

PERMEABILITY AND LOW ACID-SOLUBLE CARBONATE


RESERVOIR : A CASE HISTORY

TESIS
Karya tulis sebagai salah satu syarat
untuk memperoleh gelar Magister dari
Institut Teknologi Bandung

Oleh:

ELISA WIJAYANTI
NIM : 22210067
(Program Studi Teknik Perminyakan)

INSTITUT TEKNOLOGI BANDUNG


2013

i
ABSTRACT

PROPPANT HYDRAULLIC FRACTURING IN LOW PERMEABILITY AND


LOW ACID-SOLUBLE CARBONATE RESERVOIR : A CASE HISTORY
By
ELISA WIJAYANTI
NIM : 22210067
(Program Studi Teknik Perminyakan)

Proppant hydraulic fracturing has been a successful stimulation method used to


enhance production in sandstone reservoirs. But for fracturing carbonate formations,
the possibility of the existence of natural fractures and the hardness of the rock can be
challenging. This paper will elaborate on a carbonate-fracturing pilot project in
Zhafira field, which is the leading carbonate proppant hydraulic fracturing project in
Indonesia.
Platform carbonate limestone from the Baturaja formation is the major
component of Zhafira field reservoir. The platform consists of limestone with
infiltrate mudstone/packstone and chalky limestone with poor porosity. The
limestone mudstone/packstone lithology is dominatedby mud, clay, and fine silt
carbonates which results in the limestone becoming dirty and causes the low acid-
solubility value of limestone in the field.
Stimulation jobs were performed in two wells in Zhafira field. From log analysis,
the carbonate formation in both wells showsa high shale content (20%) and low
permeability (6 md). Acid-solubility tests performed on both well cores showed low
acid solubility. Matrix acidizing was performed in both wells, but they still showed
low influx. Zhafira-1 well, after being perforated and matrix-acidized, only produced
40 BFPD, with a 30% water cut anda high TGLR 19,061 scf/STB. Zhafira-2 well,
after being perforated and matrix-acidized twice, had very low influx from reservoir
to wellbore.
Proppant hydraulic-fracturing stimulation was performed in both wells using
hydocarbon-based frac fluid and 12/18-mesh ceramic proppant. After being

i
hydraulically fractured, Zhafira-1 well produced 165 BFPD at 18/64 inch choke, with
60% water cut and a TGLR of 700 scf/STB, while Zhafira-2 well produced 173
BFPD at 25/64 inch choke, with a 0% water cut and a low gas rate. Production from
both of these wells is maintained at the reservoir critical rate for each well.
This paper provides a summary of the background and development history of the
reservoir, and also focuses on the successes that have pointed to how low-
permeability and low acid-soluble carbonate reservoirs can be developed.

ii
SARI

PEREKAHAN HIDROLIK DENGAN PROPAN PADA RESERVOIR


KARBONAT DENGAN PERMEABILITY DAN KELARUTAN ASAM YANG
RENDAH : STUDI KASUS
Oleh
ELISA WIJAYANTI
NIM : 22210067
(Program StudiTeknikPerminyakan)

Perekahan hidrolik dengan propan adalah metode stimulasi yang sudah


terbukti berhasil dalam meningkatkan produksi dari reservoir sandstone. Namun
Perekahan hidrolik pada reservoir limestone memiliki tantangan yang berupa
kemungkinan keberadaan rekahan alami dan kekuatan batuan yang lebih besar
dibandingkan pada reservoir sandstone. Tesis ini akan membahas tentang project
perintis perekahan hidrolik pada reservoir limestone di Lapangan Zhafira, yang juga
merupakan salah satu project perintis di Indonesia.
Limestone karbonat platform dari formasi Baturaja adalah komponen utama
dari reservoir Lapangan Zhafira. Platform ini mengandung pengotor
mudstone/packstone dan karbonat dengan porosity rendah. Litologi limestone
mudstone/packstone didominasi oleh kandungan lumpur, lempung, dan pasir
karbonat yang menyebabkan limestone menjadi kotor dan memiliki kelarutan yang
rendah dalam asam.
Stimulasi telah dilakukan terhadap dua sumur di Lapangan Zhafira.
Berdasarkan log analysis, formasi karbonat pada kedua sumur tersebut memiliki
kandungan shale yang tinggi (20%) dan permeability yang rendah (6 mD). Uji
kelarutan asam yang dilakukan pada sampel core dari kedua sumur menunjukkan
hasil kelarutan yang rendah (25-48%). Pengasaman matriks sumur yang dilakukan
terhadap kedua sumur tersebut kurang berhasil karena laju alir sumur masih tetap
rendah. Sumur Zhafira-1, setelah diperforasi dan dilakuan pengasaman matriks,
hanya berproduksi 40 BFPD, kadar air 30% dan TGLR 19,061 scf/STB. Sumur

iii
Zhafira-2, setelah diperforasi dan dilakuan pengasaman matriks sebanyak dua kali,
masih menghasilkan laju alir sumur yang sangat rendah.
Perekahan hidrolik dengan propan di aplikasikan pada kedua sumur tersebut
dengan menggunakan fluida berbahan dasar oil dan 12/18-mesh propan keramik.
Setelah dilakukan perekahan hidrolik, kedua sumur dapat berproduksi sebesar 165
BFPD pada 18/64 inch choke, kadar air 60% dan TGLR 700 scf/STB, untuk sumur
Zhafira-1. Sementara sumur Zhafira-2 berproduksi sebesar 173 BFPD pada 25/64
inch choke, kadar air 0% dan produksi gas rendah. Produksi dari kedua sumur ini
dijaga agar masih dibawah laju alir kritikal reservoir.
Tesis ini membahas tentang latar belakang dan sejarah pengembangan
reservoir, juga focus pada kesuksesan perekahan hidrolik yang dapat diterapkan pada
seberapa rendah permeability dan kelarutan asam dari reservoir karbonat tersebut.

iv
LEMBAR PENGESAHAN

PROPPANT HYDRAULLIC FRACTURING IN LOW


PERMEABILITY AND LOW ACID-SOLUBLE CARBONATE
RESERVOIR : A CASE HISTORY

Oleh:

ELISA WIJAYANTI
NIM : 22210067
(Program Studi Teknik Perminyakan)

Menyetujui
Tanggal: 20 Maret 2013

Pembimbing

Dr. Ir. SudjatiRachmat, DEA


NIP : 130812292

v
DISCLAIMER

The unpublished of S2 thesis is registered and available in InstitutTeknologi Bandung


library, and disclosed for public with certainty the copyright belongs to the author
under the HaKI regulation holds in InstitutTeknologi Bandung. Literature reference is
allowed to be noted, but copying or resuming can only be done under author
permission and must be followed by scientific custom to mention the source.
Reproducing or publishing any part of this thesis must be under permission Director
of Pascasarjana Program, InstitutTeknologi Bandung.

vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my special gratitude and appreciation to Dr. Ir. Rachmat,
DEA.for his guidance and supervision as research advisor and the chairman of the
examination committee. The understanding, patience, helps, and friendly approach
has helped me to go through my times during studies.
I also thank to PT Medco E&P Indonesia for giving the opportunity to process all
engineering data & my gratitude to the study team and staff of Petroleum Engineering
and Exploration Division for their support and cooperation during this project.
Finally, I would grateful to My Lovely family for all their encouragement, patience,
care, support and love throughout this master program.

vii
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. i
SARI ............................................................................................................................iii
LEMBAR PENGESAHAN ........................................................................................ v
DISCLAIMER ............................................................................................................ vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................ vii
CONTENTS ..............................................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... x
LIST OF SYMBOLS & ABREVIATIONS ............................................................. xi
Chapter I Introduction ........................................................................................ I-1
I.1 Background ................................................................................................. I-1
I.2 Hypothesis ................................................................................................... I-1
I.3 The Objectives of the Study ........................................................................ I-2
I.4 Scope of the Study ....................................................................................... I-2
I.5 Systematic of The Writing .......................................................................... I-2
Chapter II Literature Review ......................................................................... II-1
II.1 Basic of hydraulic fracturing .......................................................................... II-1
II.2 Rock Mechanical Parameters ......................................................................... II-2
II.3 Fracturing fluid ............................................................................................... II-4
II.4 Fracturing proppant ........................................................................................ II-5
II.5 Rock and fluid mechanics .............................................................................. II-7
II.6 Rheology ...................................................................................................... II-11
Chapter III Methodology................................................................................. III-1
III.1Preparation ....................................................................................................III-1
III.1.1 Geological and reservoir review ...........................................................III-1
III.1.2Well Candidates .....................................................................................III-5
III.1.3 Laboratory Analysis ............................................................................III-10
III.2Hydraulic Fraturing Design ....................................................................III-11
III.2.1Material Selection ................................................................................III-11
III.2.2 Hydraulic Fracturing Design ...............................................................III-12
III.2.3 Perform sensitivity on fracturing model .............................................III-17
III.2.4 Production performance prediction .....................................................III-20
III.3 Execution ...............................................................................................III-21
Chapter IV Result and Analysis ..................................................................... IV-1
IV.1 Hydraulic fracturing operation result ..................................................... IV-1
IV.1.1Zhafira-1 well result.............................................................................. IV-1
IV.1.2Zhafira-2 well result.............................................................................. IV-4
IV.1.3.Production performance after hydraulic fracturing.............................. IV-7
IV.2 Analysis ................................................................................................. IV-8
Chapter V Conclusion and Recommendation ....................................................... 1
IV.1. Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 1
IV.2. Recommendations ............................................................................................ 1
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 2
APENDIX A. Base case output simulator ................................................................. 3

viii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure II-1 Effect of Young’s Modulus ............................................................................ II-2


Figure II-2 Effect of Poisson’s Ratio ................................................................................ II-2
Figure II-3 Rock mechanic illustration ............................................................................. II-4
Figure II-4 Relativity of Permeability vs Closure Stress of fracturing fluid .................... II-6
Figure II-5 Typical of fracturing proppant ...................................................................... II-7
Figure II-6 Effect of hf and CL on L ................................................................................ II-8
Figure II-7 Three regions of fluid loss............................................................................ II-10
Figure II-8 Correlation between Shear rate vs Shear Stress of fracturing fluids ........... II-12
Figure III-1 Stratigraphic of Musi Platform .................................................................... III-3
Figure III-2 Depth structure map of Zhafira field ........................................................... III-5
Figure III-3 Well Diagram of Zhafira-1 .......................................................................... III-6
Figure III-4 Open Hole Logof Zhafira-1 ......................................................................... III-7
Figure III-5 Well Diagramof Zhafira-2 ........................................................................... III-8
Figure III-6 Open Hole Log of Zhafira-2 ........................................................................ III-9
Figure III-7 Fracture Geometry Prediction of Zhafira-1 Well ..................................... III-14
Figure III-8 Fracture Geometry Prediction of Zhafira-2 Well ...................................... III-16
Figure III-9 Fracture Geometry Prediction from model ............................................... III-18
Figure III-10 Production sensitivity on Young’s Modulus .......................................... III-20
Figure III-11 Production sensitivity on Poison ratio ..................................................... III-21
Figure IV-1 Breakdown – Horner chartof Zhafira-1 well .............................................. IV-1
Figure IV-2 Minifrac chart – G function of Zhafira-1 well ............................................ IV-2
Figure IV-3 Fracture Geometry prediction Zhafira-1 well ............................................. IV-4
Figure IV-4 Minifrac chart – G function Zhafira-2 well ................................................ IV-5
Figure IV-5 Fracture Geometry prediction Zhafira-2 well ............................................. IV-6
Figure IV-6 Production performance of Zhafira-1 well ................................................. IV-7
Figure IV-7 Production performance of Zhafira-2 well ................................................. IV-8

ix
LIST OF TABLES

Table III-1 Cutting of Zhafira-1 Well ...............................................................................III-7


Table III-2 Drilling Cutting of Zhafira-2 Well ..............................................................III-10
Table III-3 Acid Solubility of Zhafira-1 Well Core Sample ...........................................III-10
Table III-4 Acid Solubility of Zhafira-2 Well Core Sample ...........................................III-11
Table III-5 Layer Parameter input of Zhafira-1 Well ....................................................III-13
Table III-6 Hydraulic Fracturing Design Schedule of Zhafira-1 Well ..........................III-14
Table III-7 Layer Parameter input of Zhafira-2 Well ....................................................III-15
Table III-8 Hydraulic Fracturing Design Schedule of Zhafira-2 Well ...........................III-16
Table III-9 Mainfrac pumping schedule .........................................................................III-18
Table III-10 Rock Properties range in Zhafira Limestone ..............................................III-19
Table III-11 Rock Properties sensitivity in Zhafira Limestone ......................................III-19
Table IV-1 Zhafira-2 well Rock Properties based on minifrac net pressure match ........ IV-3
Table IV-2 Summary of proppant volume and size ........................................................ IV-3
Table IV-3 Zhafira-1 well Rock Properties based on minifrac net pressure match ........ IV-6
Table IV-4 Tubing Friction Analysis of Zhafira-1 and Zhafira-2 Well .......................... IV-9

x
LIST OF SYMBOLS & ABREVIATIONS

A Area
C tot Total leak off coefficient
CI Leak off viscosity controlled
C II Leak off compressibility controlled
C III = C w Leak off wall building mechanism
ct Total formation compressibility
C vc Leak off viscosity - compressibility controlled
D Depth
d pf Perforation diameter
E Young’s Modulus
E' Plane strain modulus
F Force
F Horizontal stress ratio
F CD Fracture Conductivity Dimensionless
gf Fracture gradient
hf Fracture height
k Permeability
kf Fracture Permeability
kfw Fracture conductivity
m gradient
n Number of periods
n' Exponentinpower law fluid
P Present worth
p bd Breakdown pressure
pc Closure pressure
pe Reservoir pressure
pf Fracture pressure
pp Porosity fracture
p surf Surface pumping pressure
p wf Wellbore flowing pressure
Q Production rate
qi Injection rate
re Drainage radius
rw Wellbore radius
r' w Effective wellbore radius
s Skin factor
sf Skin after fracturing

xi
t Time
ts Spurt time
t set Proppant settling time
v Poisson’s ratio
VL Leak off volume
VS Spurt volume
w Fracture width
Xf Fracture half-length
z depth
Δp Pressure differential
γ Shear rate
ε Strain
η Efficiency
μ Viscosity
ρ Material density
ρs Slurry density
σ In-situ stress
σ min Minimum stress
σv Vertical stress
σv' Effective vertical stress
τ Shear stress
φ Porosity

xii