考虑诱导应力的压裂气井出砂预测

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on the stress distribution in the zone near the well, and by the consideration of the artificial fracture induced stress, we found out the stress field around the wellbore of the fractured wells. According to the Drucker-Prage criteria, we obtained the formation stability coefficients under the different conditions. The calculation results showed that the main factors of the formation sanding are induced stress caused by the high production pressure difference instead of the gas drag. More fractures, larger induced stress and more unstable formation made the sanding easier. Meanwhile, the formation stability coefficient decreased with the increase of the permeability, and the speed of the growth overall dropped down. However, the porosity had little impact on the formation stability coefficient. As the length of the fracture increased, the stability coefficient increased as well, on the contrary, the risk of the sanding decreased. By considering the impacts of the induced stress on the stability coefficient in the process of the production, we studied the influencing factors of the sanding comprehensively, to provide the theoretical references for the sanding control design.

Key words: fracturing, sanding, induced stress, stability coefficient

CLC Number:

TE358

Zhifeng Luo,Nanlin Zhang,Liqiang Zhao. Sand prediction of fractured gas wells by consideration of induced stress[J]. Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2018, 8(1): 38-43.

Figures/Tables 9

Table 1

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Table 2

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

References 15

[1]	刘玉奎, 郭肖, 唐林 , 等. 天然裂缝对气井产能影响研究[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2014,4(6):25-28. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-1426.2014.06.006
[2]	Almedeij J H, Algharaib M K . Influence of sand production on pressure drawdown in horizontal wells: Theoretical evidence[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2005,47(3):137-145. doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2005.03.005
[3]	刘洪, 刘向君, 孙万里 , 等. 水平井眼轨迹对气井出砂趋势及工作制度的影响[J]. 天然气工业, 2006,26(12):103-105.
[4]	王小鲁, 杨万萍, 严焕德 , 等. 疏松砂岩出砂机理与出砂临界压差计算方法[J]. 天然气工业, 2009,29(7):72-75. doi: 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2009.07.022
[5]	李士斌, 官兵, 张立刚 , 等. 裂缝诱导应力场影响因素敏感性评价[J]. 油气藏评价与开发, 2017,7(2):23-30.
[6]	王彦利, 陈小凡, 邓生辉 , 等. 疏松砂岩临界出砂压差的计算方法研究及应用[J]. 西南石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2009,31(1):78-80. doi: 10.3863/j.issn.1674-5086.2009.01.019
[7]	刘先珊, 张林, 秦鹏伟 , 等. 不同物性的储层砂岩出砂力学响应分析[J]. 土木建筑与环境工程, 2014,36(2):28-34.
[8]	董长银, 王爱萍 . 出砂水平井近井塑性区出砂半径预测研究[J]. 中国矿业大学学报, 2012,41(4):663-668.
[9]	胡南, 夏宏泉 . 高陡构造异常高压深气层出砂测井预测研究[J]. 测井技术, 2014,38(5):617-621. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1338.2014.05.022
[10]	Papamichos E, Vardoulakis I, Tronvoll J , et al. Volumetric sand production model and experiment[J]. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 2010,25(8):789-808. doi: 10.1002/nag.154
[11]	Hoek P J V D, Hertogh G M M, Kooijman A P , et al. A new concept of sand production prediction: Theory and laboratory experiments[J]. Spe Drilling and Completion, 2000,15(4):261-273. doi: 10.2118/65756-PA
[12]	Wang Y, Wu B . Borehole collapse and sand production evaluation: Experimental testing, analytical solutions and field implications[J]. Bmc Infectious Diseases, 2001,12(14):584-584.
[13]	赵栋 . 考虑生产影响的气井出砂预测方法研究[D]. 中国石油大学, 2010.
[14]	雷征东, 李相方, 程时清 . 考虑拖曳力的出砂预测新模型及应用[J]. 石油钻采工艺, 2006,28(1):69-72. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-7393.2006.01.019
[15]	李士伦 . 天然气工程[M]. 北京: 石油出版社, 2000.

井号	裂缝长度/m	孔隙度,%	裂缝高度/m	泊松比	孔隙流体压力/MPa	气体相对密度	气体黏度/（mPa·s）	渗透率/10^-3μm²
KS2-2-20	100	6.6	74	0.21	103.4	0.76	0.027	70
KS2-2-10	100	6.6	210	0.21	112.84	0.76	0.027	70

井号	临界生产压差/MPa
井号	不考虑诱导应力	对称双翼缝	两对对称双翼缝
KS2-2-10	17.6	11.5	9
KS2-2-20	13.57	7.45	5.12

Sand prediction of fractured gas wells by consideration of induced stress

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 9

References 15

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	XU Ning, CHEN Zhewei, XU Wanchen, WANG Ling, CUI Xiaolei, JIANG Meizhong, ZHAN Changwu. Prediction and evaluation method for development effect of shale oil storage volume fracturing [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(5): 741-748.
[2]	LIAO Kai, ZHANG Shicheng, XIE Bobo. Simulation of reasonable shut-in time for shale oil after volume fracturing [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(5): 749-755.
[3]	WANG Weiheng, GUO Xin, ZHANG Bin, XIA Weiwei. Development and performance evaluation of fracturing-displacement agent（HDFD） for shale oil: A case study of the second member of Funing Formation, Subei Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(5): 771-778.
[4]	CHEN Xiang, WANG Guan, LIU Pingli, DU Juan, WANG Ming, CHEN Weihua, LI Jinlong, LIU Jinming, LIU Fei. Experimental and simulation study on fracture conductivity of acid-fracturing in Dengying Formation of Sichuan Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(4): 569-576.
[5]	YANG Zhaozhong, YUAN Jianfeng, ZHANG Jingqiang, LI Xiaogang, ZHU Jingyi, HE Jiangang. Research progress and understanding of fracturing fractures in horizontal wells of marine shale in Sichuan Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(4): 600-609.
[6]	LU Cong, LI Qiuyue, GUO Jianchun. Research progress of distributed optical fiber sensing technology in hydraulic fracturing [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(4): 618-628.
[7]	LI Xuebin,JIN Lixin,CHEN Chaofeng,YU Tianxi,XIANG Yingjie,YI Duo. Key technologies of horizontal well fracturing for deep coal-rock gas: A case study of Jurassic in Baijiahai area, Junggar Basin [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(4): 629-637.
[8]	ZHAO Haifeng, WANG Tengfei, LI Zhongbai, LIANG Wei, ZHANG Tao. Study on dynamic stress field for fracturing in horizontal well group of shale oil [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(3): 352-363.
[9]	KONG Xiangwei,XU Hongxing,SHI Xian,CHEN Hang. Experimental simulation of fracture initiation and morphology in tight sandstone gas reservoirs temporary plugging fracturing [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(3): 391-401.
[10]	LIU Xiao. Comparison of seam network morphology in coal reservoirs under different fracturing scales: A case of Yanchuannan CBM Gas Field [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(3): 510-518.
[11]	ZHAO Kun,LI Zeyang,LIU Juanli,HU Ke,JIANG Ranran,WANG Weixiang,LIU Xiuzhen. Parameter optimization and field practice of CO₂ pre-fracturing process in Jimsar shale oil block [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2024, 14(1): 83-90.
[12]	XIA Haibang, HAN Kening, SONG Wenhui, WANG Wei, YAO Jun. Pore scale fracturing fluid occurrence mechanisms in multi-scale matrix-fracture system of shale gas reservoir [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 627-635.
[13]	ZHANG Jiawei, LIU Xiangjun, XIONG Jian, LIANG Lixi, REN Jianfei, LIU Baiqu. Discrete element simulation study on fracture propagation law of dual well synchronous fracturing [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 657-667.
[14]	CUI Chuanzhi, LI Huailiang, WU Zhongwei, ZHANG Chuanbao, LI Hongbo, ZHANG Yinghua, ZHENG Wenkuan. Analysis of pressures in water injection wells considering fracture influence induced by pressure-drive water injection [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 686-694.
[15]	ZHANG Fengxi, NIU Congcong, ZHANG Yichi. Evaluation of multi-stage fracturing a horizontal well of low permeability reservoirs in East China Sea [J]. Petroleum Reservoir Evaluation and Development, 2023, 13(5): 695-702.