American Oil and Gas Reporter - December 2015 - 70

page 65-73_Layout 1 12/2/2015 4:15 PM Page 70

Oilfield Improvements®
ULTRA-FLOW®
FIELD-INSTALLED

CENTRALIZERS/
PARAFFIN SCRAPERS

FIGURE 5
Microseismic Lateral Heel-to-Toe Views of PSRV for Pads 1 and 2
15,000

More Gripping
Force on Sucker Rods

Eagle Ford
Buda

Longer Useful LIfe
from Longer Vanes
& Bearing Surfaces

Oilfield Improvements®
WHEELED ROD GUIDE®
COUPLINGS
For Deviated,
Directional and
Horizontal Wells
Used Successfully for Over
27 Years by Over 90% of
Major Oil & Gas Companies
in Over 40 Countries -
Onshore and Offshore
Wheels are
Field-replaceable

Call
800-537-9327
or Your Oilfield
Supply Store
www.rodguides.com


1902 N. Yellowood Ave.
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma 74012 U.S.A.
7/6 -(? 

70 THE AMERICAN OIL & GAS REPORTER

0

Buda

Heel View

50'

9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0

Austin Chalk
Lower Eagle Ford

60'

10,000

500'

60'

100'
500'
Buda

Buda

500 feet apart and vertical zone-to-zone
spacing of approximately 100 feet on
both three-well pads. A new completion
design was tested on the second pad to
determine completion effects on the staggered configuration.
Figure 5 shows microseismic "gun
barrel" (lateral heel to toe) views of PSRV
for both pads, indicating similar propped
volume proportions on each pad (roughly
40 percent of the total SRV volume).
However, fracture growth was interpreted
to change significantly between the two
pads. Pad 1 had a propped xf of 290 feet
and a propped height of 125 feet, compared
with 185 feet and 85 feet, respectively,
for the second pad. Despite this roughly
30 percent decrease in height and length,
both pads were able to generate nearly

50'

identical productive fracture surface areas
of approximately 11 million square feet.
From both tests, it was clear that staggered horizontal wells drastically increased
the vertical coverage (SRV and PSRV)
within the Eagle Ford section, with minimal PSRV overlap seen in wells within
the same target zone.
The initial reservoir model was fundamental in establishing the expected
geometries and limits of reservoir drainage,
implying that enhanced field recovery
was viable. However, given the limits of
the model, it did not explicitly suggest
how. Understanding the extent of reservoir
drainage involved relating geologic attributes to fracture growth/connectivity
and better quantifying overall reservoir
heterogeneity.

FIGURE 6
Cumulative Condensate Production for Pad 1 (Green),
Pad 2 (Red) and Other Wells in the Field (Grey)
75

1902 N. Yellowood Ave.
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma 74012 U.S.A.
7/6 FAX 918-250-4666

5,000
4,000

11,000

Cum Condensate Prod (Mbbls)

www.rodguides.com
®

6,000

Eagle Ford

12,000

0

CALL 1-800-LES WEAR
(800-537-9327) OR YOUR
Oilfield Supply Store

7,000

Austin Chalk

150'

Positive Wear
Indicators
Amodel with Glass Fill

9,000
8,000

13,000

2,000
1,000

Austin Chalk
Lower Eagle Ford

11,000
10,000

3,000

Heel View

More Fluid Flow-by
Volume

12,000

Propped Fracture Voume (ft3)

Full-circle Wiping
of Tubing I.D.

14,000

14,000
13,000
Propped Fracture Voume (ft3)

Austin Chalk

15,000

Pad 2

16,000

Pad 1

0

Normalized Flowing Time (days)

160
http://www.rodguides.com http://www.rodguides.com
American Oil and Gas Reporter - December 2015

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Oil and Gas Reporter - December 2015
