Release:2020. Vol. 6. № 2 (22)
About the authors:Guzel T. Bulgakova, Dr. Sci. (Phys.-Math.), Professor, Department of Mathematics, Ufa State Aviation Technical University; firstname.lastname@example.org; ORCID: 0000-0001-8030-1791
When designing hydraulic fracturing for high-temperature formations, it is important to know the temperature change in the fracture during the injection of fracturing fluid. The temperature profile in the hydraulic fracture is necessary to calculate the optimal composition of the fracturing fluid, which necessarily includes a crosslinker (crosslinker) and a breaker (breaker), the concentration of which is calculated by the temperature at the end of the crack. Currently, this concentration is calculated based on the maximum temperature of the formation, which can lead to a decrease in the efficiency of hydraulic fracturing, since a breaker will not completely destroy the crosslinked gel. Therefore, when a well is brought into operation after the stimulation, proppant removal may occur, reducing the effectiveness of stimulation to zero. In this regard, the optimization of the decision-making process in the design of hydraulic fracturing in terrigenous and carbonate reservoirs by calculating the optimal parameters of process fluids based on predicting heat and mass transfer processes occurring during processing is a very urgent task. A tool has been developed to improve the design efficiency of hydraulic fracturing based on mathematical modeling of temperature fields in a hydraulic fracture during its development and during the period of technological sludge.
A mathematical model that describes the temperature dynamics in a hydraulic fracture taking into account fluid leakage into the formation represents the evolutionary equation of convective heat transfer with a source, which is defined as the density of the heat flux from the formation. To check the adequacy of the model of temperature dynamics in a hydraulic fracture, a model of temperature recovery in a fracture is presented with the subsequent adaptation of simulation results to actual data. Developed mathematical models can be used in hydraulic fracturing simulators.
Esipov D. V., Kuranakov D. S., Lapin V. N., Cherny S. G. 2014. “Mathematical models of hydraulic fracturing”. Computational technology, vol. 19, no 2. pp. 33-61. [In Russian]
Ivanov V. K., Vasin V. V., Tanana V. P. 2002. Theory of Linear Ill-Posed Problems and Its Applications. Boston: Brill Academic Pub. [In Russian]
Lojczyanskij L. G. Laminar Boundary Layer. 1962. Moscow: Fizmatlit. [In Russian]
Panteleev A. V., Letova T. A. 2008. Optimization methods in examples and tasks: textbook. 3rd edition. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola. [In Russian]
Petuxov B. S. 1993. Heat transfer in a moving single-phase medium. Laminar Boundary Layer. Moscow: MEI. [In Russian]
Ramazanov A. Sh., Sharipov A. M. 2016. “Assessment of the influence of the heat capacity of a hydraulic fracture on measurements of unsteady temperature in a well”. Karotazhnik, no. 5 (263), pp. 81-86. [In Russian]
Samarskij A. A., Gulin A. V. 1989. Numerical methods. Moscow: Nauka. 429 pp. [In Russian]
Sedov L. I. Similarity and Dimension Methods in Mechanics. 1981. 9th edition. Moscow: Nauka, 448 pp. [In Russian]
Sharafutdinov R. F., Sadretdinov A. A., Sharipov A. M. 2017. “Numerical investigation of the temperature field in a reservoir with a hydraulic fracture”. Journal of Applied Mechanics and Technical Physics, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 702-709. [In Russian]
Amini K., Soliman M. Y., House W. V. 2015. “A three-dimensional thermal model for hydraulic fracturing”. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition (28-30 September, Houston, Texas, USA). Paper SPE-174858-MS. DOI: 10.2118/174858-MS
Bai B., He Y., Li X., Hu S., Huang X., Li J., Zhu J. 2016. “Local heat transfer characteristics of water flowing through a single fracture within a cylindrical granite specimen”. Environmental Earth Sciences, vol. 75, no. 22, art. 1460. DOI: 10.1007/s12665-016-6249-2
Carter R. D. 1957. Appendix I: Derivation of the General Equation for Estimating the Extent of the Fractured Area. In: G. C. Howard, C. R. Fast (eds.). Drilling and Production Practice, pp. 267-268. New York: American Petroleum Institute.
Hagoort J. 2004. “Ramey’s wellbore heat transmission revisited”. SPE Journal, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 465-474. Paper SPE-87305-PA. DOI: 10.2118/87305-PA
Kamphuis H., Davies D. R., Roodhart L. P. 1993. “A New Simulator for the Calculation of the in Situ Temperature Profile During Well Stimulation Fracturing Treatments”. Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 38-47.
Li X., Zhu D. 2016. “Temperature behavior during multistage fracture treatments in horizontal wells”. SPE Asia Pacific Hydraulic Fracturing Conference (24-26 August, Beijing, China). Paper SPE-181876-MS. DOI: 10.2118/181876-MS
Meyer B. R. 1989. “Heat Transfer in Hydraulic Fracturing”. SPE Production Engineering, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 423-429. Paper SPE-17041-PA. DOI: 10.2118/17041-PA
Nordgren R. P. 1972. “Propagation of a vertical hydraulic fracture”. SPE Journal, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 306-314. Paper SPE-3009-PA. DOI: 10.2118/3009-PA
Ramey H. J. 1962. “Wellbore heat transmission”. Journal of Petroleum Technology, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 427-435. Paper SPE-96-PA. DOI: 10.2118/96-PA
Schechter R. S. 1992. Oil Well Stimulation. 1st edition. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Seth G., Reynolds A. C. Mahadevan J. 2010. “Numerical model for interpretation of distributed-temperature-sensor data during hydraulic fracturing”. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition (19-22 September, Florence, Italy). Paper SPE-135603-MS. DOI: 10.2118/135603-MS