Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The disclosure relates generally to hydraulic fracturing. In particular, a data acquisition program using core, image log, microseismic, Distributed Temperature Sensing (DTS), Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS), and pressure data is used to monitor stimulation operations.
Unconventional reservoirs include reservoirs such as tight-gas sands, gas and oil shales, coalbed methane, heavy oil and tar sands, and gas-hydrate deposits. These reservoirs have little to no porosity, thus the hydrocarbons may be trapped within fractures and pore spaces of the formation. Additionally, the hydrocarbons may be adsorbed onto organic material of a e.g. shale formation. Therefore, such reservoirs require special recovery operations outside the conventional operating practices in order to mobilize and produce the oil.
The rapid development of extracting hydrocarbons from these unconventional reservoirs can be tied to the combination of horizontal drilling and induced fracturing (call “hydraulic fracturing” or simply “fracking”) of the formations. Horizontal drilling has allowed for drilling along and within hydrocarbon reservoirs of a formation to better capture the hydrocarbons trapped within the reservoirs. Additionally, increasing the number of fractures in the formation and/or increasing the size of existing fractures through fracking increases hydrocarbon recovery.
In a typical hydraulic fracturing treatment, fracturing treatment fluid is pumped downhole into the formation at a pressure sufficiently high enough to cause new fractures or to enlarge existing fractures in the reservoir. Next, frack fluid plus a proppant, such as sand, is pumped downhole. The proppant material remains in the fracture after the treatment is completed, where it serves to hold the fracture open, thereby enhancing the ability of fluids to migrate from the formation to the well bore through the fracture. The spacing between fractures as well as the ability to stimulate fractures naturally present in the rock may be major factors in the success of horizontal completions in unconventional hydrocarbon reservoirs.
While there are a great many fracking techniques, one useful technique is “plug-and-perf” fracking. Plug-and-perf completions are extremely flexible multistage well completion techniques for cased hole wells. Each stage can be perforated and treated optimally because the fracture plan options can be modified in each stage. The engineer can apply knowledge from each previous stage to optimize treatment of the current frack stage.
The process consists of pumping a plug-and-perforating gun to a given depth. The plug is set, the zone perforated, and the tools removed from the well. A ball is pumped downhole to isolate the zones below the plug and the fracture stimulation treatment is then pumped in, although washing, etching, and other treatments may occur first depending on downhole conditions. The ball-activated plug diverts fracture fluids through the perforations into the formation. After the fracture stage is completed, the next plug and set of perforations are initiated, and the process is repeated moving further up the well.
Improvements in recovery using fracking depend on fracture trajectories, net pressures, and spacing. Thus, the ability to monitor the geometry of the induced fractures to obtain optimal placement and stimulation is paramount. An induced fracture may be divided into three different regions (hydraulic, propped, and effective), but out of the three fracture dimensions, only the last one is relevant to a reservoir model, and may be used to forecast future production.
Many techniques have been developed to map hydraulic fractures, including microseimic monitoring (Fisher et al. 2004), electromagnetic imaging (Haustveit et al. 2017), seismic time lapse (Atkinson and Davis 2011), pressure monitoring in offset wells (Dawson and Kampfer 2016), fluid and proppant tracers, and others. All these methods have their own strengths and limitations.
Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) is an emerging fiber optic based technology that has become available for the oil industry only in recent years. The method requires an optical fiber attached to the wellbore to guide the laser energy into the reservoir. Each piece of the fiber naturally scatters a small portion of the laser energy back to the surface sensing unit. The sensing unit then uses interferometry techniques to measure the strain change along the fiber. The DAS data are usually sampled at a very high rate (5000-10000 Hz) with a spatial resolution between 1-10 m. This high position accuracy provides critical spatial data for detecting near well bore changes both in the well undergoing stimulation and in an offset monitor well.
The raw DAS data are usually delivered in the form of optical phase, which ranges from −π to +π. The optical phase is defined by the interference pattern of the laser energy back-scattered at two fiber locations separated by a certain length. The separation length is usually referred as gauge length. The phase varies linearly with small length change between two locations, which can be approximated as the axial strain change of the fiber between the locations. Depending on the sensing unit provider, the data deliverable is sometimes a time differential of the measured optical phase. In this case, the DAS data can be treated as a linear-scaled strain rate.
DAS data have been used to monitor hydraulic fracturing operations in many studies. The applications include injection fluid allocation (Boone et al. 2015), hydraulic fracture detection (Webster, Cox, and Molenaar 2013), microseismic monitoring (Webster et al. 2013), and others. However, most of these applications focus on the high frequency bands (>1 Hz) of the DAS data, and some applications only use the “intensity” of the signal, which is obtained through amplitude averaging processing. In this study, we demonstrate that DAS data in the low-frequency band (<0.05 Hz) contain information that can provide critical constrains on hydraulic fracture geometry.
Thus, what is needed in the art are improved methods of evaluating the hydraulic fracturing for every well being hydraulically stimulated. Optimizing completions parameters are critical to improving hydraulic fracturing efficiency and unconventional production performance. Monitoring and diagnosing any potential completion issues during the stimulation operation is important to find the factors that affect well production. Therefore, understanding the geometry of hydraulic fractures is critical for designing unconventional reservoir completions. The length and height of fractures influence the optimization of well spacing and job size (e.g., injection volume), the width is important parameter for proppant transportation and fracture permeability, and the density can be used to optimize cluster spacing. All these completion parameters contribute towards reduced cost-of-supply and improved efficiency for unconventional reservoir development.
Although hydraulic fracturing is quite successful, even incremental improvements in technology can mean the difference between cost effective production and reserves that are uneconomical to produce.
A new method that utilizes the fiber optic sensing technology to detect and characterize hydraulic fractures is described.
A method of determining strain response in a hydrocarbon-containing reservoir where an operation well and a monitor well with a distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) fiber are used to monitor a DAS signal while fracturing the operation well in a fracture stimulation to form a set of fractures; determining the far-field fracture length, height, width and density of said fractures.
A method of recovering hydrocarbons from a hydrocarbon-containing reservoir comprising: drilling at least one operation well; drilling at least one monitor well; installing a distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) fiber in said monitor well; obtaining DAS data from said monitor while fracturing at least one operation well to form a set of fractures; characterizing the far-field fracture length, height, width and density of said fractures; updating said pre-determined fracturing parameters based on said characterizing step; and, performing a second fracturing stimulation stage; and, producing hydrocarbons.
A computer-implemented method for modeling the stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) of a hydrocarbon-containing reservoir, the method comprising: drilling at least one operation well into an area of said reservoir to be stimulated; drilling at least one monitoring well in said reservoir; installing at least one distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) fiber in at least one monitoring well; obtaining DAS data while fracturing at least one operation well in a first fracture stimulation stage according to pre-determine fracturing parameters to form a set of fractures; identifying said set of fractures formed in said fracturing step; and, characterizing the complexity, length, branching, or density of said fractures.
The monitor well may be a horizontal well or a vertical well. The monitor well can collect data from one or more adjacent operation wells. The data can be used to characterize and model the stress shadow, displacement, fracture propagation velocity, or a combination features. This process may be used to modify the fracturing for subsequent stages and may be repeated for multiple fractures in the hydrocarbon reservoir.
DAS is the measure of Rayleigh scatter distributed along the fiber optic cable. In use, a coherent laser pulse from an interrogator is sent along the optic fiber and scattering sites within the fiber itself causes the fiber to act as a distributed interferometer with a pre-set gauge length. Thus, interactions between the light and material of the fiber can cause a small amount of light to backscatter and return to the input end, where it is detected and analyzed. Acoustic waves, when interacting with the materials that comprise the optical fiber, create small changes in the refractive index of the fiber optic cable. These changes affect the backscatter characteristics, thus becoming detectable events. Using time-domain techniques, event location is precisely determined, providing fully distributed sensing with resolution of 1 meter or less.
Applicant has previously used DAS in a variety of fracturing monitoring methods described in detail in U.S. Ser. Nos. 15/453,650, 15/453,216, 15/453,584, 15/453,434, 15/453,730, 15/453,044, all of which are incorporated herein for all purposes.
The programs and methods described utilize non-transitory machine-readable storage medium, which when executed by at least one processor of a computer, performs the steps of the method(s) described herein.
Due to the nature of the data pre- and post-transform, parallel computing and data storage infrastructure created for data intensive projects, like seismic data processing, are used because they can easily handle the complete dataset. Hardware for implementing the inventive methods may preferably include massively parallel and distributed Linux clusters, which utilize both CPU and GPU architectures. Alternatively, the hardware may use a LINUX OS, XML universal interface run with supercomputing facilities provided by Linux Networx, including the next-generation Clusterworx Advanced cluster management system. Another system is the Microsoft Windows 7 Enterprise or Ultimate Edition (64-bit, SP1) with Dual quad-core or hex-core processor, 64 GB RAM memory with Fast rotational speed hard disk (10,000-15,000 rpm) or solid state drive (300 GB) with NVIDIA Quadro K5000 graphics card and multiple high resolution monitors. Alternatively, many-cores can be used in the computing. A Linux based multi-core cluster has been used to process the data in the examples described herein.
The disclosed methods include any one or more of the below embodiments in any combination(s) thereof:
Any method described herein, including the further step of printing, displaying or saving the initial, intermediate or final (or both) datasets of the method to a non-transitory computer readable memory.
Any method described herein, further including the step of using the final datasets in a reservoir modeling program to predict reservoir performance characteristics, such as fracturing, production rates, total production levels, rock failures, faults, wellbore failure, and the like.
Any method described herein, further including the step of using said final datasets to design, implement, or update a hydraulic fracturing program in a similar reservoir, in a similar producer well, or in subsequent fracturing stages of said reservoir.
Any method described herein, further including the step of producing hydrocarbon by said reservoir.
This summary is provided to introduce a selection of concepts that are further described below in the detailed description. This summary is not intended to identify key or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor is it intended to be used as an aid in limiting the scope of the claimed subject matter.
“Fracking”, as used herein, may refer to any human process used to initiate and propagate a fracture in a rock formation, but excludes natural processes that fracture formation, such as natural seismic events. The fracture may be an existing fracture in the formation, or may be initiated using a variety of techniques known in the art. “Hydraulic Fracking” means that pressure was applied via a fluid.
As used herein, “fracture parameters” refers to characteristics of fractures made using hydraulic fracking and includes fracture growth, fracture height, fracture geometry, isolation conditions between stages, stress shadows and relaxation, fracture spacing, perforation cluster spacing, number of perforation clusters/stage, well spacing, job size, pumping pressure, heel pressure, proppant concentration, fluid and proppant distribution between perforation clusters, pumping volume, pumping rate and the like.
As used herein, a “fracture model” refers to a software program that inputs well, rock and fracturing parameters and simulates fracturing results in a model reservoir. Several such packages are available in the art, including SCHLUMBERGERS® PETREL® E&P, FRACCADE® or MANGROVE® software, STIMPLAN™, tNAVIGATOR™, SEEMYFRAC™, TERRAFRAC™, ENERFRAC®, PROP®, FRACPRO™, and the like. Add GOHFER® (Barree & Associates LLC) For shale reservoirs, FRACMAN™ and MSHALE™ may be preferred. These models can be used with appropriate plugins or modifications needed to practice the claimed methods.
By “fracture pattern”, we refer to the order in which the frack zones are fractured.
The term “fracture complexity” refers to the degree of entanglement (or lack thereof) in the induced fractures. Fractures can range from simple planar fractures to complex planar fractures and network fracture behavior. Further, the fracture complexity can change from near-well, mid-field, and far-field regions.
As used herein, the “Gaussian Kernel” or “radial basis function kernel” aka “RBF kernel” is a popular kernel function used in various kernelized learning algorithms. In particular, it is commonly used in support vector machine classification.
As used herein, a “monitoring” well is a well nearby a producer that is used to monitor a producer. It produces samples and data for control purposes.
The term “many-core” as used herein denotes a computer architectural design whose cores include CPUs and GPUs. Generally, the term “cores” has been applied to measure how many CPUs are on a giving computer chip. However, graphic cores are now being used to offset the work of CPUs. Essentially, many-core processors use both computer and graphic processing units as cores.
The use of the word “a” or “an” when used in conjunction with the term “comprising” in the claims or the specification means one or more than one, unless the context dictates otherwise.
The term “about” means the stated value plus or minus the margin of error of measurement or plus or minus 10% if no method of measurement is indicated.
The use of the term “or” in the claims is used to mean “and/or” unless explicitly indicated to refer to alternatives only or if the alternatives are mutually exclusive.
The terms “comprise”, “have”, “include” and “contain” (and their variants) are open-ended linking verbs and allow the addition of other elements when used in a claim.
The phrase “consisting of” is closed, and excludes all additional elements.
The phrase “consisting essentially of” excludes additional material elements, but allows the inclusions of non-material elements that do not substantially change the nature of the invention.
The following abbreviations are used herein:
The invention provides a novel data acquisition program or method for monitoring hydraulic fracturing and sampling stimulation rock volume (SRV).
Data Acquisition
Because DAS is a strain rate sensor and the fiber is mechanically coupled with the formation, strain from the process of hydraulic fracturing can be detected. The DAS data of two example stages shown in this study are recorded at an offset monitor well during stimulation of an adjacent well. The fiber-optic cables are installed outside the casing and cemented in place. The raw data are sampled at 10 kHz continuously at more than 6000 locations along the wellbore, with 1 m spatial sampling and 5 m gauge length. The recorded optical phase is differentiated in time, hence the DAS data are linearly correlated with the strain rate along the fiber.
Data Processing
The raw DAS data are down-sampled to 1 s after a low-pass anti-aliasing filter (0-0.5 Hz) is applied. The data are then median filtered to remove any spiky noise. Another low-pass filter with a corner frequency of 0.05 Hz is then applied. A DC drift with an amplitude around 0.1 rad/s is removed from the data as well. The DC drift was channel invariant and does not vary significantly with time. The drift noise is most likely associated with interrogator noise. We estimate the DC drift by calculating the median value of the channels that are out of the zone of interest at each time interval. Compared to the industry standard waterfall visualizations, the low-frequency processing not only increases the signal-to-noise ratio of the signal, but also preserves the strain rate polarity (
Horizontal Well Measurement
The propagation of hydraulic fractures is associated with strain perturbation in the surrounding formation. For a simple planar fracture model, the stress component in the direction perpendicular to the fracture plane can be characterized by two zones: the extensional zone in front of fracture tip, and the compressional stress shadow on both sides of the fracture (Grechka 2005).
Cementation of the fiber in place outside the casing in a horizontal offset well makes it well-suited for measurement of the strain induced by fracture propagation since the fiber is mechanically coupled with the surrounding formation. The monitor well is also usually parallel to the operation well, which is typically at a high angle to the fracture plane, thereby maximizing the strain response along the fiber.
After locating the fracture hits on the monitor well for all stages, a fracture connection map was created to illustrate the fracture network between the two wells (
After the injection stopped (shown by the pump curve in
The stress shadow can be clearly identified as the growing compressing (blue) zones on both sides of the fracture zone during the injection in
Another way to utilize the stress shadow signal is to integrate the DAS strain rate measurement to produce strain.
The strain measurement can be further integrated in space to get displacement, as shown in
The extension strain measured by the fiber in the fracture zone should be much smaller than the actual strain happened inside and near the fractures. The hypothesis for that argument is that the mechanical decoupling is likely to happen between the formation rock and the cement in a form of slipping movement. Another cautionary note for using the strain and displacement estimation from DAS quantitatively is the mechanical coupling condition within the fiber cable. For better protection, optical fiber installed in borehole condition is usually surrounded by a layer of viscous gel, which decouple the fiber with outside casing mechanically. Although we still can observe the clear formation strain variation in the data, the signal magnitude may be significantly dampened due to the gel layer. Further laboratory investigation is required to calibrate this effect.
It is also important to mention that the DAS monitor well strain measurement in horizontal well should be acquired before the monitor well is hydraulically fractured. Once the well is completed and the borehole is opened to the formation, strain perturbation from other well's operation can produce cross flows between the perforation clusters of the monitor well, which generates large temperature variations and contaminates the strain signal required for fracture mapping.
Fiber can also be installed in a vertical monitor well to observe the vertical extent of hydraulic fracture hits from the stimulation well.
The low-frequency DAS response together with pressure and temperature gauge data are plotted in
Two separate fracture hit events can be clearly identified in the data, which are associated with fiber extending, and increased temperature and pressure differential. The DAS response is highly correlated with the temperature gauge response. The hyperbolic arrival-time curves that relate to the fracture propagation can also be observed in the DAS data due to the high spatial resolution and large coverage. The shape of the fracture signal arrival curves can be used to estimate the fracture propagation velocity near the monitor well, while the delay time from the ball seat event to the fracture hit arrival can be used to estimate the average fracture propagation velocity between the wells. The first DAS responses are consistent with the first recorded local microseisms in time and depth. However, the DAS data indicate a deeper fracture growth compared to the microseismic observations. It is also ambiguous to interpret the two fracture hits as two sections of one fracture plane, or two individual fractures, as the dipping angle of the fractures is not well constrained in this case.
Because the fiber in the vertical well is almost parallel to the fracture plane, it cannot detect the extension strain created by the fracture opening. Due to the high correlation with the co-located temperature gauge data, we believe that the DAS response in this example is caused by the thermal expansion of the fiber due to temperature change. Although the injected fluid is much cooler than the reservoir temperature, temperature increases are observed at all gauges. We interpret this warming event as the adiabatic compression heating of formation fluid. As shown in
DAS signal in the low-frequency band (<0.05 Hz) can be used to measure small and gradual strain variation along the fiber. The strain variation can be caused mechanically and/or thermally. Fibers in the horizontal well can be used to monitor the strain perturbation due to fracture propagation during hydraulic stimulation. Fracture intersections with the monitor well can be precisely located, and magnitude of stress shadow can be quantitatively measured. The low-frequency DAS data in this case can be used to constrain the fracture length, density, and width. If the fiber is installed in the vertical well that is parallel to the fracture plane, it can be used to detect the small temperature perturbation due to the increased pressure in the fractures, which can be used to constrain the fracture vertical height. The low-frequency band of DAS data contain valuable information and should be carefully preserved in data processing and hardware development. Hydraulic fracture geometry characterizations using this method can be used to evaluate completions and well spacing design, and constrain reservoir models.
The following references are incorporated by reference in their entirety for all purposes.
This application is a non-provisional application which claims benefit under 35 USC § 119(e) to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 62/573,486 filed Oct. 17, 2017, entitled “LOW FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTED ACOUSTIC SENSING HYDRAULIC FRACTURE GEOMETRY,” which is incorporated herein in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3981187 | Howell | Sep 1976 | A |
4676664 | Anderson et al. | Jun 1987 | A |
6026913 | Mandal et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6176323 | Weirich et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6268911 | Tubel et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6778720 | Cekroich et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
7055604 | Jee et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7668411 | Davies et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
8505625 | Ravi et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8630816 | Park et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8646968 | MacDougall et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8930143 | Sierra et al. | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8950482 | Hill et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
9116119 | Le Floch | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9273548 | LeBlanc et al. | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9347310 | Unalmis et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9416644 | McEwen-King et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9464512 | Kalia et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
10095828 | Swan et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
20020180728 | Neff et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030205375 | Wright et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20060272809 | Tubel et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20080277568 | Crickmore et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090114386 | Hartog et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090194333 | MacDonald | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090326826 | Hull et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100076738 | Dean et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100200743 | Forster et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100200744 | Pearce et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100284250 | Cornish et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110019178 | Vlatas | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110088462 | Samson | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110188347 | Thiercelin et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110288843 | Weng et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120017687 | Davis et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120057432 | Hill et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120067118 | Hartog et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120092960 | Gaston et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120111560 | Hill et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120133367 | Bittar et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20120147924 | Hall | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130023353 | Wright | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130032338 | Kalia et al. | Feb 2013 | A1 |
20130211726 | Mestayer et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130233537 | McEwen-King et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130298635 | Godfrey | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130298665 | Minchau | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140036628 | Hill | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140100274 | Bobotas et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140110124 | Goldner et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140126325 | Farhadiroushan et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140163889 | Finfer et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140180592 | Ravi et al. | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140202240 | Skinner et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140216151 | Godfrey | Aug 2014 | A1 |
20140246191 | Zolezzi-Garreton | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140260588 | Jaaskelainen et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140290936 | Wills et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140358444 | Friehauf et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20140365130 | Woods | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150000932 | O'Brien | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150014521 | Barfoot | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150057934 | Ma et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150083405 | Dobroskok et al. | Mar 2015 | A1 |
20150135819 | Petrella et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150146759 | Johnston | May 2015 | A1 |
20150159478 | Georgi et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150331971 | Scollard et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20160003032 | Grubb et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160108705 | Maxwell et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160138389 | Stokely | May 2016 | A1 |
20160146962 | Hayward | May 2016 | A1 |
20160265345 | In 'T Panhuis et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160266276 | Stokely et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160319661 | Mayerhofer | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160356125 | Bello et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170045410 | Crickmore et al. | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170075005 | Ranjan et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170075006 | Dusterhoft | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170191363 | Dickenson | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170205260 | Jaaskelainen et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170260839 | Beardmore et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170260842 | Jin et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170260846 | Jin et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170260849 | Jin et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170260854 | Jin et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170328181 | Kristjansson et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20170342814 | Krueger et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20180016890 | Friehauf | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180217285 | Walters et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180230049 | Wysocki et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180348389 | Jaaskelainen et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2492802 | Jan 2013 | GB |
2001048353 | Jul 2001 | WO |
2013092906 | Jun 2013 | WO |
2015067931 | Nov 2014 | WO |
2014201316 | Dec 2014 | WO |
2015065869 | May 2015 | WO |
2015076976 | May 2015 | WO |
2015094180 | Jun 2015 | WO |
2015107332 | Jul 2015 | WO |
2015170113 | Nov 2015 | WO |
2015187140 | Dec 2015 | WO |
2015187149 | Dec 2015 | WO |
2016007161 | Jan 2016 | WO |
2016069322 | May 2016 | WO |
2017027340 | Feb 2017 | WO |
2017039605 | Mar 2017 | WO |
2017156331 | Sep 2017 | WO |
2017156339 | Sep 2017 | WO |
2018204920 | Nov 2018 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Li, Z., & Zhan, Z. (2018). Pushing the limit of earthquake detection with distributed acoustic sensing and template matching: A case study at the Brady geothermal field. Geophysical Journal International, 215(3), 1583-1593. (Year: 2018). |
Bakku*, S. K., Fehler, M., Wills, P., Mestayer, J., Mateeva, A., & Lopez, J. (2014). Vertical seismic profiling using distributed acoustic sensing in a hydrofrac treatment well. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2014 (pp. 5024-5028). Society of Exploration Geophysicists. (Year: 2014). |
Zeng, X., Lancelle, C., Thurber, C., Fratta, D., Wang, H., Lord, N., . . . & Clarke, A. (2017). Properties of noise cross-correlation functions obtained from a distributed acoustic sensing array at Garner Valley, California. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 107(2), 603-610. (Year: 2017). |
Wilks, M., Wuestefeld, A., Oye, V., Thomas, P., & Kolltveit, E. (2017). Tailoring distributed acoustic sensing techniques for the microseismic monitoring of future CCS sites: Results from the field. In SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2017 (pp. 2762-2766). Society of Exploration Geophysicists. (Year: 2017). |
Sellwood S.M., et al., “An in-well heat-tracer-test method for evaluating borehole flow conditions,” Hydrogeology Journal, Springer, vol. 23, No. 8, pp. 1817-1830 (Aug. 29, 2015). |
Webster, P., et al. “Micro-Seismic detection using distributed acoustic sensing,” society of Exploration Geophysicists, pp. 5 (Aug. 19, 2013). |
Webster, P., et al., “Developments in Diagnostic Tools for Hydraulic Fracture Geometry Analysis,” Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, pp. 7 (Aug. 12-14, 2013). |
Wheaton, B., et al. “A case study of completion effectiveness in the eagle ford shale using DAS/DTS observations and hydraulic fracture modeling,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp. 11 (2016). |
Wu, K., et al. “Mechanism analysis of well interference in unconventional reservoirs: Insights from fracture-geometry simulation between two horizontal wells,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 9 (Feb. 2018). |
Awada, A., et al. “Is that interference? A work flow for identifying and analyzing communication through hydraulic fractures in a multiwell pad,” SPE Journal, vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 13 (Oct. 2016). |
Becker, M.B., et al., “Measuring Hydralic Connection in Fractured Bedrock with Periodic Hydraulic Tests and Distributed Acoustic Sensing,” Juounal of Hydrology, pp. 1-11 (Feb. 22-24, 2016). |
Boman, K., “DAS technology expands fiber optic applications for oil, gas industry,” Rigzone, (May 4, 2015) issue : http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/138405/DAS_Technology_Expands_Fiber_Optic_Applications_for_Oil_Gas_Industry, pp. 4. |
Booone, K., et al., “Monitoring Hydraulic Fracturing Operations Using Fiber-Optic Distributed Acoustic Sensing,” Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, pp. 8 (2015). |
European Search Report for European Application No. EP 17764137.0 dated Mar. 6, 2019. |
European Search Report for European Application No. EP 17764143.8 dated Mar. 4, 2019. |
European Search Report for European Application No. EP 17764150.3 dated Mar. 4, 2019. |
European Search Report for European Application No. EP 17764151.1 dated Mar. 4, 2019. |
European Search Report for European Application No. EP17764146.1 dated Mar. 14, 2019. |
Grayson, S., et al., “Monitoring acid stimulation treatments in naturally fractured reservoirs with slickline distributed temperature sensing,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp. 17, (Jan. 2015). |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2017/021659 dated Jun. 1, 2017, pp. 7. |
International Search Report with written opinion dated Jun. 1, 2017 for International Application No. PCT/US2017/021667, pp. 8. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2017/021674 dated May 25, 2017, pp. 10. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2017/021678 dated Jun. 1, 2017, pp. 7. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2017/021679 dated May 25, 2017, pp. 7. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2017/021681 dated May 22, 2017, pp. 10. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2017/21670 dated May 25, 2017, pp. 6. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2018/031404 dated Jul. 13, 2018, pp. 15. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2018/056327 dated Dec. 21, 2018, pp. 12. |
International Search Report with Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2019/030408 dated Jul. 22, 2019, pp. 9. |
Jin, G., and Roy, B., “Hydraulic-fracture geometry characterization using low-frequency DAS signal,” The Leading Edge, vol. 36, No. 12, pp. 962-1044 (Dec. 2017). |
Johannessen, K., et al. “Distributed Acoustic Sensing—a new way of listening to your well/reservoir,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp. 1-9 (Mar. 27-29, 2012). |
Le Calvez, J. H., et al. “Real-time microseismic monitoring of hydraulic fracture treatment: a tool to improve completion and reservoir management,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp. 7 (Jan. 2007). |
Lord, D.L., “Study of Performation Friction Pressure Employing a Loarge-Scale Fracturing Flow Simulator,” SPE Annual technical Conference and Exhibition, pp. 10 (Sep. 25, 1994). |
McKinley, R.M., et al., “Specialized Applications of Noise Logging,” Journal of Petroleum Technology, vol. 31, Issue 11, pp. 1387-1395 (Nov. 1979). |
McKinley, R.M., et al., “The Structure and Interpretation of Noise From Flow Behind Cemented Casing,” Journal of Petroleum Technology, vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 329-338 (Mar. 1973). |
Molenaar, M., et al, “First Downhole Application of Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) for Hydraulic Fracturing Monitoring and Diagnostics,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 32-38 (Mar. 2012). |
Molenaar, M.M., et al., “Real-Time Downhole Monitoring of Hydraulic Fracturing Treatments Using Fibre Optic Distributed Temperature and Acoustic Sensing,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp. 13 (2012). |
European Search Report for European Application No. EP18794756.9 dated Apr. 14, 2020. |
Bukhamsin, A., et al., Cointerpretation of distributed acoustic and temperature sensing for improved smart well inflowprofilling. In SPE 180465-MS, Western Regional Meeting. Society of Petroleum Engineers (2016). |
Byrd, R. H., et al., A limited memory algorithm for bound constrained optimization. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 16 (5), 1190-1208 (1995). |
Curtis, M., et al. (1973). Use of the temperature log for determining flow rates in producing wells. In Fall Meeting of theSociety of Petroleum Engineers of AIME. Society of Petroleum Engineers 4637 (1973). |
Dakin, J., Distributed optical fibre Raman temperature sensor using a semiconductor light source and detector. Electronics letters, 21 (13), 569-570 (1985). |
Ouyang, L.-B., Flow profiling by distributed temperature sensor (DTS) system-expectation and reality. SPE Production& Operations, 21 (02), 269-281 (2006). |
Ramey Jr, H., et al., Wellbore heat transmission. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 14 (04), 427-435 (1962). |
Van der Horst, et al., Fiber optic sensing for improved wellbore production surveillance. In IPTC 2014: International Petroleum Technology Conference (2014). |
Vu-Hoang, D., et al., A novel approach to production logging in multiphase horizontal wells. In SPE 89848, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers (2004). |
Rector, J.W., et al—“The Use of an Active Drill Bit for Inverse VSP Measurements”, 2018, Exploration Geophysics, vol. 20, Issue 1-2, Abstract only, 5 pgs. |
URTEC-2670034-MS (2017) Raterman K.Y., et al., Sampling a Stimulated Rock Volume: An Eagle Ford Example. |
SPE-168610-MS (2014)—Holley, E.H., et al. “Using Distributed Optical Sensing to Constrain Fracture Models and Confirm Reservoir Coverage in Permian Basin.” SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, Texas, U.S.A., Feb. 4-6. |
SPE-153131-PA(2013)—Holley, E.H., et al., “Interpreting Uncemented Multistage Hydraulic-Fracturing Completion Effectiveness by Use of Fiber-Optic DTS Injection Data.” SPE Drilling & Completion, 28(3): 243-253. |
SPE-107775-PA (2009)—Glasbergen G., et al. “Real-Time Fluid Distribution Determination in Matrix Treatments Using DTS”, Society of Petroleum Engineers. |
SPE-116182-MS (2008}—Sierra J.R., et al., “DTS Monitoring of Hydraulic Fracturing: Experiences and Lessonsearned”, Society of Petroleum Engineers. |
SPE-107854-MS (2007}—Tardy, et al., “An Experimentally Validated Wormhole Model for Self-Diverting and: onventional Acids in Carbonate Rocks Under Radial Flow Conditions”, Society of Petroleum Engineers. |
Ribeiro et al., Detecting Fracture Growth Out of Zone Using Temperature Analysis, Oct. 27-29, 2014, SPE-1707 46-MS, SPEAnnual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 24 pp. (Year: 2014). |
Hesthammer, J et al. “From seismic data to core data: an integrated approach to enhance reservoir characterization”; 2003; Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 209, pp. 39-54. |
Optasense, “Pipeline Integrity Management: Leak Detection,” accessed at https://ace-control.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Pipeline-Integrity-Management-Leak-Detection.pdf, accessed on Jun. 10, 2019, pp. 5. |
Ouyang, L-B., et al. “Flow profiling via distributed temperature sensor (DTS) system-expectation and reality,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp. 14 (2004). |
Paleja, R, et al., “Velocity Tracking for Flow Monitoring and Production Profiling Using Distributed Acoustic Sensing,” Society of Petroleum Engineers, pp. 16 (Sep. 28-30, 2015). |
Portis, D. H., et al., “Searching for the optimal well spacing in the eagle ford shale: A practical tool-kit,” Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, pp. 8 (Aug. 12-14, 2013). |
Dawson, Matthew, et al.—Breakthrough in Hydraulic Fracture & Proppant Mapping: Achieving Increased Precision with Lower Cost, 2016, Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, URTeC: 2432330; 21 pgs. |
Grechka, V.—“Penny-Shaped Fractures Revisited”, 2005, Stud. Geophys. Geod. 49, pp. 365-381; 17 pgs. |
Haustveit, K., et al—“New Age Fracture Mapping Diagnostic Tools—A STACK Case Study”, 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE-184862-MS;14 pgs. |
Fisher, M.K., et al.—“Optimizing Horizontal Completion Techniques in the Barnett Shale Using Microseismic Fracture Mapping”, 2004, SPE 90051, SPE International; 11 Pgs. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190120047 A1 | Apr 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62573486 | Oct 2017 | US |