CN112228033B - Method and system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured fractures - Google Patents
Method and system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured fractures Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CN112228033B CN112228033B CN201910634533.8A CN201910634533A CN112228033B CN 112228033 B CN112228033 B CN 112228033B CN 201910634533 A CN201910634533 A CN 201910634533A CN 112228033 B CN112228033 B CN 112228033B
- Authority
- CN
- China
- Prior art keywords
- layer number
- laying layer
- proppant
- particle size
- theoretical laying
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Active
Links
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 29
- 239000002245 particle Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 117
- 238000010276 construction Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 20
- 206010017076 Fracture Diseases 0.000 claims description 146
- 208000010392 Bone Fractures Diseases 0.000 claims description 119
- 238000005086 pumping Methods 0.000 claims description 115
- 238000002347 injection Methods 0.000 claims description 24
- 239000007924 injection Substances 0.000 claims description 24
- 238000004364 calculation method Methods 0.000 claims description 21
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 claims description 20
- 239000004576 sand Substances 0.000 claims description 19
- 239000003795 chemical substances by application Substances 0.000 claims description 18
- 238000012163 sequencing technique Methods 0.000 claims description 6
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 claims description 3
- 208000006670 Multiple fractures Diseases 0.000 claims description 2
- 238000005457 optimization Methods 0.000 abstract description 9
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 abstract description 7
- 230000009286 beneficial effect Effects 0.000 abstract description 4
- 238000003745 diagnosis Methods 0.000 abstract description 3
- 238000004445 quantitative analysis Methods 0.000 abstract description 3
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 abstract description 2
- 230000009466 transformation Effects 0.000 abstract description 2
- 239000007789 gas Substances 0.000 description 10
- 238000011158 quantitative evaluation Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 description 2
- VNWKTOKETHGBQD-UHFFFAOYSA-N methane Chemical compound C VNWKTOKETHGBQD-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 230000007547 defect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000006073 displacement reaction Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005553 drilling Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000012530 fluid Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000012986 modification Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000004048 modification Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000003345 natural gas Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000000843 powder Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000001737 promoting effect Effects 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- E—FIXED CONSTRUCTIONS
- E21—EARTH OR ROCK DRILLING; MINING
- E21B—EARTH OR ROCK DRILLING; OBTAINING OIL, GAS, WATER, SOLUBLE OR MELTABLE MATERIALS OR A SLURRY OF MINERALS FROM WELLS
- E21B43/00—Methods or apparatus for obtaining oil, gas, water, soluble or meltable materials or a slurry of minerals from wells
- E21B43/25—Methods for stimulating production
- E21B43/26—Methods for stimulating production by forming crevices or fractures
- E21B43/267—Methods for stimulating production by forming crevices or fractures reinforcing fractures by propping
Landscapes
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Geology (AREA)
- Mining & Mineral Resources (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Environmental & Geological Engineering (AREA)
- Fluid Mechanics (AREA)
- General Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Geochemistry & Mineralogy (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
The invention provides a method and a system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured cracks, and belongs to the field of fractured crack diagnosis. The method for quantitatively analyzing the effectiveness of the fractured fractures utilizes the theoretical number of layers of the paved layer of the propping agent and the optimal fracture width ratio to quantitatively analyze the effectiveness of the fractures; the theoretical laying number of the propping agents is the theoretical laying number of the propping agents in the cracks obtained according to the minimum value of the width of the cracks, and comprises the maximum theoretical laying number and the minimum theoretical laying number; the optimal fracture width ratio refers to a proportional relation between the fracture width obtained according to the maximum value of the fracture width and the particle size of the proppant. The invention realizes the quantitative analysis of the effectiveness of the fractured fractures, improves the knowledge of the effectiveness of the fractured fractures, and is beneficial to guiding the fracturing design optimization, the fracturing construction optimization and improving the transformation effect.
Description
Technical Field
The invention belongs to the field of diagnosis of post-fracturing fractures, and particularly relates to a method and a system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of post-fracturing fractures.
Background
The conventional shale air pressure post-fracture diagnosis technology lacks a fracture effectiveness quantitative evaluation technology based on actual construction data, and some existing post-fracture effectiveness evaluation methods are only limited to indoor experimental evaluation. At present, documents and patents for effectiveness of fractures after shale gas well fracturing are few, and some existing effectiveness evaluation methods for fractures after fracturing are limited to indoor experimental evaluation, for example, the Chinese document ' effectiveness evaluation of fractures supported by shale gas reservoir fracturing ' (' natural gas industry, 09 year 2012) discloses an effectiveness evaluation method for fractures supported by shale gas reservoir fracturing, wherein the experimental evaluation is to preset fractures and supporting conditions and then evaluate the fractures and the supporting conditions, but the evaluation method does not provide a method for acquiring the fractures and the supporting conditions according to actual construction data, and does not form specific evaluation indexes, so that the evaluation method is incomplete and cannot directly and effectively guide fracturing design optimization and construction optimization. In summary, it is necessary to establish a quantitative evaluation method for crack effectiveness to solve the above problems.
Disclosure of Invention
The invention aims to solve the problems in the prior art and provides a method and a system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured fractures, which quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of the fractured fractures and establish evaluation indexes through calculation of the number of layers laid on a proppant theory and calculation of the optimal fracture width ratio so as to systematically and quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of the fractured fractures, and are beneficial to improving the knowledge of the effectiveness of the fractured fractures, thereby guiding the optimization of fracturing design and construction and promoting the efficient development of shale gas wells.
The invention is realized by the following technical scheme:
a method for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured fractures is characterized in that the effectiveness of the fractures is quantitatively analyzed by utilizing the theoretical number of layers of the paved propping agent and the optimal fracture width ratio;
the theoretical laying number of the propping agents is the theoretical laying number of the propping agents in the cracks obtained according to the minimum value of the width of the cracks, and comprises the maximum theoretical laying number and the minimum theoretical laying number;
the optimal fracture width ratio refers to a proportional relation between the fracture width obtained according to the maximum value of the fracture width and the particle size of the proppant.
The method comprises the following steps:
s1, reversing the fracture width of each fracturing section of each pumping stage by using second point data of fracturing construction;
s2, acquiring the maximum value W of the fracture width of each fracturing section in each pump injection stage max And minimum value W min ；
S3, utilizing minimum value W of crack width min And the particle size of the propping agent obtains the maximum theoretical laying layer number and the minimum theoretical laying layer number;
s4 maximum value W of crack width max And the particle size of the proppant to obtain the optimal fracture width ratio;
and S5, obtaining the effectiveness grade of the crack according to the maximum theoretical laying layer number, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the optimal crack width ratio.
The operation of step S2 includes:
and (3) performing the following treatment on each fracturing section of each pumping stage:
sequencing the multiple fracture width values obtained by inverting the fracturing section obtained in the step S1 in a pumping stage from large to small to obtain a fracture width sequence of the fracturing section in the pumping stage;
the maximum value and the minimum value of the fracture width found from the fracture width sequence are the maximum value and the minimum value of the fracture width of the fracturing section at the pump injection stageMaximum value W of crack width of segment max And minimum value of crack width W min 。
The operation of step S3 includes:
if the reference propping agent of the pumping stage is adopted in the pumping stage of the fracturing section, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number of the fracturing section in the pumping stage are obtained by the following formula:
wherein D is min To refer to the minimum particle size of the proppant, D max Reference is made to the maximum particle size of the proppant.
If the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
Comparing the average particle size of the proppant used in the pumping stage of the fracturing stage with the average particle size of the reference proppant of the pumping stage, D ars The smaller of the two, D arb The larger of the two;
the average particle size of the proppant is the sum of the maximum particle size of the proppant and the minimum particle size of the proppant divided by 2, i.e., the average of the particle sizes of the proppant is taken.
The operation of step S4 includes:
if the reference proppant of the pump injection stage is adopted by the fracturing section in the pump injection stage, the optimal fracture width ratio of the fracturing section in the pump injection stage is obtained by the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture aspect ratio by using the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture width ratio by using the following formula:
the operation of step S5 includes:
in the silt stage, if the optimal ratio of the seam width is more than or equal to 100%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 12, the crack is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal seam width ratio is less than 90%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 11, judging that the cracks are three-equal effective; and judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions.
In the medium sand stage, if the optimal seam width ratio is more than 40%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 3, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, the crack is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal seam width ratio is less than 30%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 2, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, the crack is judged to be three-equal effective; and judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions.
The invention also provides a system for quantitatively analyzing the effectiveness of the fractured crack, which comprises the following components:
an inversion unit: the fracturing construction second point data is used for reversing the crack width of each fracturing section of each pumping stage;
a crack width acquisition unit: connected with the inversion unit and used for acquiring the maximum value W of the fracture width of each fracturing section in each pumping stage max And minimum value W min ；
A number of laid layers calculation unit: connected with the crack width acquisition unit for utilizing the minimum value W of the crack width min And the particle size of the propping agent obtains the maximum theoretical laying layer number and the minimum theoretical laying layer number;
an optimal crack width ratio calculation unit: connected with the crack width acquisition unit for utilizing the maximum value W of the crack width max And the particle size of the proppant to obtain the optimal fracture width ratio;
crack effectiveness evaluation unit: and the crack effectiveness grade acquisition unit is respectively connected with the laying layer number calculation unit and the optimal crack width ratio calculation unit and is used for acquiring the crack effectiveness grade according to the maximum theoretical laying layer number, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the optimal crack width ratio.
The fracture width acquisition unit 200 performs the following processing on each fracture section of each pumping stage: sequencing the values of the fracture widths obtained by inverting the fracturing section sent by the inversion unit in a pumping stage from large to small to obtain a fracture width sequence of the fracturing section in the pumping stage; the maximum value and the minimum value of the fracture width found from the fracture width sequence are the maximum value W of the fracture width of the fracturing section in the pumping stage max And minimum value of crack width W min ；
The number of laid layers calculation unit is configured to: if the reference propping agent of the pumping stage is adopted in the pumping stage of the fracturing section, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number of the fracturing section in the pumping stage are obtained by the following formula:
wherein D is min For reference to the minimum particle size of the proppant, D max Is the maximum particle size of the reference proppant.
If the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
the optimal crack width ratio calculation unit is used for: if the reference proppant of the pump injection stage is adopted by the fracturing section in the pump injection stage, the optimal fracture width ratio of the fracturing section in the pump injection stage is obtained by the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture aspect ratio by using the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture width ratio by using the following formula:
the crack effectiveness evaluation unit is used for:
in the silt stage, if the optimal ratio of the seam width is more than or equal to 100%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 12, the crack is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal seam width ratio is less than 90%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 11, judging that the cracks are three-equal effective; judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions; in the medium sand stage, if the optimal seam width ratio is more than 40%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 3, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, the crack is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal seam width ratio is less than 30%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 2, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, the crack is judged to be three-equal effective; and judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions.
The present invention also provides a computer readable storage medium storing at least one program executable by a computer, the at least one program, when executed by the computer, causing the computer to perform the steps in the method of quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of a post-fracture of the present invention.
Compared with the prior art, the invention has the beneficial effects that: the invention realizes the quantitative analysis of the effectiveness of the fractured fractures, improves the knowledge of the effectiveness of the fractured fractures, and is beneficial to guiding the fracturing design optimization, the fracturing construction optimization and improving the transformation effect.
Drawings
FIG. 1 is a block diagram of the steps of the method of the present invention;
FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of the system of the present invention.
Detailed Description
The invention is described in further detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings:
the method of the invention is shown in figure 1 and comprises the following steps:
s1, reversing the fracture width of each fracturing section of each pumping stage by using second point data of fracturing construction: and (2) performing the fracture width of each fracturing section in each pumping stage by using Meyer fracturing design software (or other software and methods capable of inverting the fracture width) based on fracturing construction second point data (the construction data comprises pumping time, wellhead pressure, sand concentration and pumping displacement (the data is generally derived by an instrument vehicle during fracturing operation) and an actual well body structure, a perforation section and layer, perforation parameters, fracturing fluid performance parameters, a stress profile and a lithology profile (the data is obtained by drilling reports, fracturing design and fracturing construction design)). Specifically, the shale gas well staged fracturing is generally divided into dozens of fracturing stages, each fracturing stage comprises two pump injection stages, namely a silt stage and a medium sand stage, and the inversion of the data at the second point of the fracturing construction is to obtain a plurality of fracture widths of each fracturing stage in the silt stage and a plurality of fracture widths of each fracturing stage in the medium sand stage, for example, 11 fracturing stages are provided in the following embodiment, so that the inversion obtains a plurality of fracture widths of each fracturing stage in the silt stage and a plurality of fracture widths of each fracturing stage in the 11 fracturing stages in the medium sand stage.
S2, acquiring the maximum value W of the fracture width of each fracturing section in each pump injection stage max And minimum value W min : and (3) performing the following treatment on each fracturing section of each pumping stage: sequencing the values of the plurality of fracture widths obtained by inverting the fracturing section obtained in the step S1 in a pump injection stage from large to small to obtain a fracture width sequence of the fracturing section in the pump injection stage; the maximum value and the minimum value of the fracture width found from the fracture width sequence are the maximum value W of the fracture width of the fracturing section in the pumping stage max And minimum value of crack width W min 。
Because each fracturing section comprises two pumping stages, namely a silt stage and a medium sand stage, each fracturing section needs to be treated twice, namely the medium sand stage and the silt stage, and the maximum value W of the fracture width of the silt stage needs to be calculated for each fracturing section respectively max And minimum value W min Maximum value W of fracture width at medium sand stage max And minimum value W min And then, the corresponding standards of the powder sand stage and the medium sand stage in the table 1 are respectively used for judgment.
S3, utilizing the minimum value W of the crack width min And the particle size of the proppant to obtain the maximum theoretical laying layer number and the minimum theoretical laying layer number:
if the reference propping agent of the pumping stage is adopted in the pumping stage of the fracturing section, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number of the fracturing section in the pumping stage are obtained by the following formula:
wherein D is min For reference to the minimum particle size of the proppant, D max Reference is made to the maximum particle size of the proppant.
If the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
Comparing the average particle size of the proppant used in the pumping stage of the fracturing stage with the average particle size of the reference proppant of the pumping stage, D ars The smaller of the two, D arb The larger of the two;
the average particle size of the proppant is the sum of the maximum particle size of the proppant and the minimum particle size of the proppant divided by 2, i.e., the average of the particle sizes of the proppant is taken.
Specifically, if the average particle size of the proppant used is greater than the average particle size of the reference proppant, then D ars Is the average particle diameter, D, of the reference proppant arb For the average particle size of the proppant used, D if the average particle size of the proppant used is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant ars Is the average particle size, D, of the proppant employed arb Reference is made to the average particle size of the proppant. For example, let the reference proppant in the silt stage be the first reference proppant and the reference proppant in the medium sand stage be the second reference proppant, and in the silt stage, the average particle size of the proppant used is compared with the average particle size of the first reference proppant, and if the average particle size of the proppant used is greater than the average particle size of the first reference proppant, then D ars Is the average particle size, D, of the first reference proppant arb For the average particle size of the proppant used, D if the average particle size of the proppant used is smaller than the average particle size of the first reference proppant ars To be adopted byAverage particle diameter of proppant (D) arb Is the average particle size of the first support agent. For another example, if the first reference proppant in the silt stage is 70/140 mesh proppant, the average particle size of the proppant used in the silt stage is compared with the average particle size of 70/140 mesh proppant, and if the second reference proppant in the middling stage is 40/70 mesh proppant, the average particle size of the proppant used in the middling stage is compared with the average particle size of 40/70 mesh proppant.
S4 maximum value W of crack width max And the particle size of the proppant to obtain the optimal crack width ratio
If the reference proppant of the pumping stage is adopted in the pumping stage of the fracturing section, the optimal fracture width ratio of the fracturing section in the pumping stage is obtained by the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture aspect ratio by using the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture width ratio by using the following formula:
if n is greater than 100%, the optimal slot width ratio is considered to be 100%.
S5, obtaining a fracture effectiveness grade according to the maximum theoretical laying layer number, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the optimal fracture width ratio:
the theoretical laying layer number and the optimal seam width ratio of the multi-hole shale gas well in different pumping stages are calculated according to the steps, and a quantitative evaluation index of the effectiveness of the fracture is established, and is shown in table 1:
TABLE 1
In table 1, as long as one of the three conditions, i.e., the optimal slot width ratio, the minimum theoretical number of laying layers, and the maximum theoretical number of laying layers, satisfies the current level, and is determined as the current level even if the other conditions satisfy the previous level, that is, as long as any one of the three conditions does not satisfy the current level, the next level is determined, since one-level validity is the highest level, the three conditions in one-level validity must be satisfied at the same time to be determined as one-level validity, and since three-level validity is the lowest level, the three-level validity is determined as the three-level validity as long as any one of the three conditions in three-level validity is satisfied. The method comprises the following specific steps:
in the silt stage, if the optimal seam width ratio is more than or equal to 100%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 12, judging that the seam is first-class effective; if the optimal seam width ratio is less than 90%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 11, judging that the cracks are three-equal effective; and judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions.
In the medium sand stage, if the optimal seam width ratio is more than 40%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 3, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, the fracture is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal seam width ratio is less than 30%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 2, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, the crack is judged to be three-equal effective; and judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions.
As shown in fig. 2, the present invention also provides a system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of a fracture after fracturing, comprising:
the inversion unit 100: the fracturing construction method comprises the steps of performing a fracturing construction second point data inversion to obtain the fracture width of each fracturing section of each pumping stage;
crack width acquisition unit 200: connected with the inversion unit 100 and used for obtaining the maximum value W of the fracture width of each fracturing section in each pumping stage max And minimum value W min ；
The number of laid layers calculation unit 300: connected to the crack width acquisition unit 200 for utilizing the minimum value W of the crack width min And the particle size of the propping agent obtains the maximum theoretical laying layer number and the minimum theoretical laying layer number;
optimal crack width ratio calculation unit 400: connected with the crack width acquisition unit 200 for utilizing the maximum value W of the crack width max And the grain size of the propping agent to obtain the optimal fracture width ratio;
crack effectiveness evaluation unit 500: and the calculation units are respectively connected with the calculation unit 300 of the number of the laid layers and the calculation unit 400 of the optimal fracture width ratio, and are used for obtaining the effectiveness grade of the fracture according to the maximum theoretical laid layer number, the minimum theoretical laid layer number and the optimal fracture width ratio.
The fracture width acquisition unit 200 performs the following processing on each fracture section of each pumping stage: sequencing the values of the fracture widths obtained by inverting the fracturing section sent by the inversion unit in a pumping stage from large to small to obtain a fracture width sequence of the fracturing section in the pumping stage; the maximum value and the minimum value of the fracture width found from the fracture width sequence are the maximum value W of the fracture width of the fracturing section in the pumping stage max And minimum value of crack width W min ；
The number of layup layers calculation unit 300 is configured to: if the reference propping agent of the pumping stage is adopted in the pumping stage of the fracturing section, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number of the fracturing section in the pumping stage are obtained by the following formula:
wherein D is min For reference to the minimum particle size of the proppant, D max Reference is made to the maximum particle size of the proppant.
If the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
the optimal fracture aspect ratio calculation unit 400 is configured to: if the reference proppant of the pump injection stage is adopted by the fracturing section in the pump injection stage, the optimal fracture width ratio of the fracturing section in the pump injection stage is obtained by the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture aspect ratio by using the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture width ratio by using the following formula:
the fracture effectiveness evaluation unit 500 is configured to: in the silt stage, if the optimal ratio of the seam width is more than or equal to 100%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 12, the crack is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal seam width ratio is less than 90%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 11, the crack is judged to be three-equal effective; judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions; in the medium sand stage, if the optimal seam width ratio is more than 40%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 3, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, the crack is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal seam width ratio is less than 30%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 2, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, the crack is judged to be three-equal effective; and judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions.
The invention is applied to evaluation of the pressure of a certain shale gas well in the south China, and the specific embodiment is as follows:
the first reference proppant of the silt stage is 70/140 mesh proppant and the second reference proppant of the medium sand stage is 40/70 mesh proppant. Shale gas fracturing mainly uses 70/140 mesh and 40/70 mesh proppants, so the particle size corresponding to the two proppants is used as the theoretical number of layers of the proppants in the fracture for calculation in the embodiment. According to the specification of the particle size of the proppant, the particle size range of the 70/140-mesh proppant is 0.106-0.212 mm, and the particle size range of the 40/70-mesh proppant is 0.212-0.425 mm.
The method comprises the following specific steps:
1. the second point data of the fracturing construction is arranged, and the Meyer fracturing design software is utilized to reversely show the fracture widths of the 70/140-mesh proppant pumping stage (namely, silt stage) and the 40/70-mesh proppant pumping stage (namely, medium sand stage);
2. respectively obtaining the maximum value W of the fracture width of each fracturing section at the medium sand stage and the silt stage max And minimum value W min ；
3. Respectively calculating the maximum and minimum theoretical laying layers of each fracturing section in each pumping stage: by W min Divide by 0.212 (maximum particle size) and round the quotient (direct cut integer part, truncate fractional part) to give the minimum number of theoretical layers laid down, W min Divide by 0.106 (minimum of particle size) and round the quotient to get the maximum number of theoretical layers laid. In the same way, the maximum and minimum theoretical laying layer number of the 40/70-mesh proppant pumping stage can be calculated; in this embodiment, the proppants used in the two pumping stages are both reference proppants for each pumping stage.
4. Calculating the optimal fracture aspect ratio using the following formula:
n＝(W max /6-0.106)/(0.212-0.106)×100％
the optimal slot width ratio of the 40/70 mesh proppant pumping stage can be calculated by the same method.
5. The effectiveness of the fracture of each fracture section is judged according to the calculation result and the fracture effectiveness evaluation index (namely, table 1), and the result is shown in table 2:
TABLE 2
In table 2, there are 11 fracturing stages, each having a silt stage and a middling stage, and 11 effectiveness grades of 11 fractures of the 11 fracturing stages at the silt stage and 11 fractures at the middling stage are obtained by the method of the present invention.
The invention analyzes the defects of the existing shale gas pressure post-fracture effectiveness evaluation aspect and provides a fracture effectiveness quantitative analysis method. The method can quantitatively analyze the effectiveness of the fractured fractures and greatly help the system to know the fractured fracture conditions, so that the fracturing design optimization and construction optimization are guided, and the efficient development of shale gas wells is promoted.
The above-described embodiments are intended to be illustrative only, and various modifications and variations such as those described in the above-described embodiments of the invention may be readily made by those skilled in the art based upon the teachings and teachings of the present invention without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
Claims (8)
1. A method for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured cracks is characterized by comprising the following steps: the method utilizes the theoretical number of layers of the proppants and the optimal fracture width ratio to quantitatively analyze the effectiveness of the fractures;
the theoretical laying number of the propping agents is the theoretical laying number of the propping agents in the cracks obtained according to the minimum value of the width of the cracks, and comprises the maximum theoretical laying number and the minimum theoretical laying number;
the optimal fracture width ratio is a proportional relation between the fracture width and the particle size of the proppant obtained according to the maximum value of the fracture width;
the operation of quantitatively analyzing the effectiveness of the fracture comprises: in the silt stage, if the optimal width ratio of the crack is more than or equal to 100%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 12, the crack is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal crack width ratio is less than 90%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 11, judging that the crack is three-equal effective; judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions;
in the medium sand stage, if the optimal fracture width ratio is more than 40%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 3, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, the fracture is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal crack width ratio is less than 30%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 2, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, the crack is judged to be three-equal effective; and judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions.
2. The method of quantitatively analyzing the effectiveness of post-fracture fractures according to claim 1, characterized in that: the method comprises the following steps:
s1, reversing the fracture width of each fracturing section of each pumping stage by using second point data of fracturing construction;
s2, acquiring the maximum value W of the fracture width of each fracturing section in each pump injection stage max And minimum value W min ；
S3, utilizing minimum value W of crack width min And the particle size of the propping agent obtains the maximum theoretical laying layer number and the minimum theoretical laying layer number;
s4 maximum value W of crack width max And the particle size of the proppant to obtain the optimal fracture width ratio;
and S5, obtaining the effectiveness grade of the crack according to the maximum theoretical laying layer number, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the optimal crack width ratio.
3. The method of quantitatively analyzing the effectiveness of post-fracture fractures according to claim 2, characterized in that: the operation of step S2 includes:
and (3) performing the following treatment on each fracturing section of each pumping stage:
sequencing the multiple fracture width values obtained by inverting the fracturing section obtained in the step S1 in a pumping stage from large to small to obtain a fracture width sequence of the fracturing section in the pumping stage;
the maximum value and the minimum value of the fracture width found from the fracture width sequence are the maximum value W of the fracture width of the fracturing section in the pumping stage max And minimum value of crack width W min 。
4. The method of quantitatively analyzing the effectiveness of post-fracture fractures according to claim 3, wherein: the operation of step S3 includes:
if the reference propping agent of the pumping stage is adopted in the pumping stage of the fracturing section, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number of the fracturing section in the pumping stage are obtained by the following formula:
wherein D is min For reference to the minimum particle size of the proppant, D max Is the maximum particle size of the reference proppant;
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
comparing the average particle size of the proppant used in the pumping stage of the fracturing stage with the average particle size of the reference proppant of the pumping stage, D ars The smaller of the two, D arb The larger of the two;
the average particle size of the proppant is the sum of the maximum particle size of the proppant and the minimum particle size of the proppant divided by 2.
5. The method of quantitatively analyzing the effectiveness of post-fracture fractures according to claim 4, characterized in that: the operation of step S4 includes:
if the reference proppant of the pump injection stage is adopted by the fracturing section in the pump injection stage, the optimal fracture width ratio of the fracturing section in the pump injection stage is obtained by the following formula:
if the average grain size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average grain size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture aspect ratio by using the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture width ratio by using the following formula:
6. a system for implementing the method for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of post-fracture according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein: the system comprises:
an inversion unit: the fracturing construction method comprises the steps of performing a fracturing construction second point data inversion to obtain the fracture width of each fracturing section of each pumping stage;
a crack width acquisition unit: connected with the inversion unit and used for acquiring the maximum value W of the fracture width of each fracturing section at each pumping stage max And minimum value W min ；
A number of layings calculation unit: connected with the crack width acquisition unit for utilizing the minimum value W of the crack width min And the particle size of the propping agent obtains the maximum theoretical laying layer number and the minimum theoretical laying layer number;
an optimal crack width ratio calculation unit: connected with the crack width acquisition unit for utilizing the maximum value W of the crack width max And the particle size of the proppant to obtain the optimal fracture width ratio;
crack effectiveness evaluation unit: and the maximum theoretical laying layer number, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the optimal crack width ratio are used for obtaining the crack effectiveness grade.
7. The system of claim 6, wherein: the fracture width acquisition unit performs the following processing on each fracturing section of each pumping stage: sequencing the values of the widths of a plurality of fractures obtained by inverting the fracturing section sent by the inversion unit in a pump injection stage from large to small to obtain a fracture width sequence of the fracturing section in the pump injection stage; the maximum value and the minimum value of the fracture width found from the fracture width sequence are the maximum value W of the fracture width of the fracturing section in the pumping stage max And minimum value of crack width W min ；
The number of laid layers calculation unit is configured to: if the reference propping agent of the pumping stage is adopted in the pumping stage of the fracturing section, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number of the fracturing section in the pumping stage are obtained by the following formula:
wherein D is min To refer to the minimum particle size of the proppant, D max Is the maximum particle size of the reference proppant;
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, the minimum theoretical laying layer number and the maximum theoretical laying layer number are obtained by the following formulas:
the optimal crack width ratio calculation unit is used for: if the reference proppant of the pump injection stage is adopted by the fracturing section in the pump injection stage, the optimal fracture width ratio of the fracturing section in the pump injection stage is obtained by the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is smaller than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture aspect ratio by using the following formula:
if the average particle size of the proppant adopted by the fracturing section in the pumping stage is larger than the average particle size of the reference proppant in the pumping stage, obtaining the optimal fracture width ratio by using the following formula:
the fracture effectiveness evaluation unit is used for: in the silt stage, if the optimal width ratio of the crack is more than or equal to 100%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 12, the crack is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal crack width ratio is less than 90%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 11, the crack is judged to be three-equal effective; judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions; in the medium sand stage, if the optimal fracture width ratio is more than 40%, the minimum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 3, and the maximum theoretical laying layer number is more than or equal to 6, the fracture is judged to be first-class effective; if the optimal crack width ratio is less than 30%, or the minimum theoretical laying layer number is less than 2, or the maximum theoretical laying layer number is less than 5, the crack is judged to be three-equal effective; and judging that the cracks are second-class effective under other conditions.
8. A computer-readable storage medium characterized by: the computer readable storage medium stores at least one program executable by a computer, the at least one program when executed by the computer causing the computer to perform the steps in the method of quantitatively analyzing the effectiveness of a post-fracture as set forth in any one of claims 1 to 5.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201910634533.8A CN112228033B (en) | 2019-07-15 | 2019-07-15 | Method and system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured fractures |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201910634533.8A CN112228033B (en) | 2019-07-15 | 2019-07-15 | Method and system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured fractures |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CN112228033A CN112228033A (en) | 2021-01-15 |
| CN112228033B true CN112228033B (en) | 2022-09-27 |
Family
ID=74111633
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CN201910634533.8A Active CN112228033B (en) | 2019-07-15 | 2019-07-15 | Method and system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured fractures |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CN (1) | CN112228033B (en) |
Citations (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA2795417A1 (en) * | 2003-03-18 | 2004-09-30 | Baker Hughes Incorporated | Method of treating subterranean formations using mixed density proppants or sequential proppant stages |
| WO2012085646A1 (en) * | 2010-12-23 | 2012-06-28 | Claude Vercaemer | Process of hydraulic fracturing to create a layered proppant pack structure alongside the faces of the fracture to prevent formation fines to damage fracture conductivity |
| CN104358554A (en) * | 2014-12-09 | 2015-02-18 | 中国石油集团川庆钻探工程有限公司 | Shale gas combined sand fracturing fracture conductivity evaluation method |
| CN107701164A (en) * | 2017-11-16 | 2018-02-16 | 中国石油集团川庆钻探工程有限公司 | Proppant migration simulation device in shale bedding and evaluation method |
| CN108152184A (en) * | 2016-12-02 | 2018-06-12 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Proppant flow conductivity test method based on in-seam flow law |
| CN109359410A (en) * | 2018-11-01 | 2019-02-19 | 中国石油集团长城钻探工程有限公司 | Proppant incomplete filling crack remnants slit width evaluation method and device |
Family Cites Families (2)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US7451812B2 (en) * | 2006-12-20 | 2008-11-18 | Schlumberger Technology Corporation | Real-time automated heterogeneous proppant placement |
| US9194222B2 (en) * | 2011-04-19 | 2015-11-24 | Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | System and method for improved propped fracture geometry for high permeability reservoirs |
-
2019
- 2019-07-15 CN CN201910634533.8A patent/CN112228033B/en active Active
Patent Citations (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA2795417A1 (en) * | 2003-03-18 | 2004-09-30 | Baker Hughes Incorporated | Method of treating subterranean formations using mixed density proppants or sequential proppant stages |
| WO2012085646A1 (en) * | 2010-12-23 | 2012-06-28 | Claude Vercaemer | Process of hydraulic fracturing to create a layered proppant pack structure alongside the faces of the fracture to prevent formation fines to damage fracture conductivity |
| CN104358554A (en) * | 2014-12-09 | 2015-02-18 | 中国石油集团川庆钻探工程有限公司 | Shale gas combined sand fracturing fracture conductivity evaluation method |
| CN108152184A (en) * | 2016-12-02 | 2018-06-12 | 中国石油天然气股份有限公司 | Proppant flow conductivity test method based on in-seam flow law |
| CN107701164A (en) * | 2017-11-16 | 2018-02-16 | 中国石油集团川庆钻探工程有限公司 | Proppant migration simulation device in shale bedding and evaluation method |
| CN109359410A (en) * | 2018-11-01 | 2019-02-19 | 中国石油集团长城钻探工程有限公司 | Proppant incomplete filling crack remnants slit width evaluation method and device |
Non-Patent Citations (3)
| Title |
|---|
| 基于灰色关联的粒径组合支撑剂导流能力实验;曲占庆等;《大庆石油地质与开发》;20140430(第02期);全文 * |
| 煤层气井水力压裂裂缝导流能力实验评价;王春鹏等;《中国煤层气》;20060331(第01期);全文 * |
| 页岩气藏压裂支撑裂缝的有效性评价;邹雨时等;《天然气工业》;20120930(第09期);全文 * |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| CN112228033A (en) | 2021-01-15 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CN110374572B (en) | Method for determining characteristic parameters of each reconstruction section of unconventional oil and gas reservoir multi-section fractured horizontal well | |
| Cheng | Mechanical interaction of multiple fractures—exploring impacts of the selection of the spacing/number of perforation clusters on horizontal shale-gas wells | |
| Cheng | Boundary element analysis of the stress distribution around multiple fractures: implications for the spacing of perforation clusters of hydraulically fractured horizontal wells | |
| CN113283197B (en) | Sand feeding parameter design method based on complex fracture width distribution | |
| Rhein et al. | Channel fracturing in horizontal wellbores: the new edge of stimulation techniques in the eagle ford formation | |
| CN108593514A (en) | Oil-water relative permeability based on reservoir properties characterizes processing method | |
| CN104989357A (en) | Method for selecting tight oil and gas reservoir repeated fracturing target well | |
| CN108960546B (en) | CO2 huff and puff well selection method and device | |
| CN105178952B (en) | Method and device for determining spacing of artificial fractures of horizontal well | |
| CN114429231A (en) | Shale gas well yield prediction method and system, storage medium and electronic equipment | |
| CN110552691B (en) | A method and system for identifying dominant channels in reservoir fractures | |
| CN103853922A (en) | Visualized quantitative evaluation method of oil and gas field similarity | |
| CN112228033B (en) | Method and system for quantitatively analyzing effectiveness of fractured fractures | |
| CN109190218B (en) | A Dynamic Identification Method of Effective Fracture Network in Tight Reservoir | |
| CN114186440A (en) | Geological-engineering double-track shale compressibility comprehensive evaluation method | |
| CN112282750B (en) | A comprehensive identification method for shale gas reservoir geology-engineering double sweet spots | |
| CN112084467B (en) | Fractal quantification method for complex rock fracture network | |
| Odunowo et al. | Evaluation of Well Performance for the Slot-Drill Completion in Low and Ultra-Low Permeability Oil and Gas Reservoirs | |
| Palisch et al. | Initial observations from a bakken microproppant field trial | |
| CN116502553B (en) | Inversion method of fracture plugging skin coefficient and fracture parameters in unconventional oil and gas reservoirs | |
| CN111894545B (en) | Method for determining proppant pumping scheme | |
| CN108590571A (en) | Method for determining dosage of profile control agent of low-permeability fractured water-breakthrough reservoir for water injection well | |
| CN114136845B (en) | Proppant determining method, device, electronic equipment and storage medium | |
| CN114320260A (en) | Method, device and equipment for acquiring proppant injection time and storage medium | |
| CN107133880B (en) | Method for estimating oil drainage area of development well |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| PB01 | Publication | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| SE01 | Entry into force of request for substantive examination | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant | ||
| GR01 | Patent grant |