You must log in to edit PetroWiki. Help with editing
Content of PetroWiki is intended for personal use only and to supplement, not replace, engineering judgment. SPE disclaims any and all liability for your use of such content. More information
Message: PetroWiki content is moving to OnePetro! Please note that all projects need to be complete by November 1, 2024, to ensure a smooth transition. Online editing will be turned off on this date.
Recognizing naturally fractured reservoirs
Fractures are the most abundant visible structural features in the Earth’s upper crust. They are apparent at most rock ridges, and it is likely that most reservoirs contain some natural fractures. Naturally fractured reservoirs are elusive systems to characterize and difficult to engineer and predict. It is important to establish some basic criteria for recognizing when fractures are an important element in reservoir performance and to recognize the nature and performance characteristics of a naturally fractured reservoir.
How naturally fractured reservoirs are formed
Unlike induced fractures, natural fractures are caused by stress in the formation usually from tectonic forces such as folds and faults. Natural fractures are more common in carbonate rocks. Fractures occur in preferential directions, determined by the direction of regional stress. This is usually parallel to the direction of nearby faults or folds, but in the case of faults, they may be perpendicular to the fault or there may be two orthogonal directions.[1]
Open and healed fractures
A fracture is often a high permeability path in a low permeability rock, or it may be filled with a cementing material, such as calcite, leaving the fracture with no permeability. It is important to distinguish between open and healed fractures. The total volume of fractures is often small compared to the total pore volume of the reservoir.
Size
Naturally fractured reservoirs are observed across a vast range of scale from microcracks to mile long features. The vertical extent of fractures is often controlled by thin layers of plastic material, such as shale beds or laminations, or by weak layers of rock, such as stylolites in carbonate sequences. The width of these beds may be too small to be seen on logs, so fractures may seem to start and stop.[1]
Types
Naturally fractured reservoirs can be open, permeable pathways, or they can be permeability baffles resulting from the presences if secondary mineralization or other fine-grained material filling the gaps. Most natural fractures are more or less vertical. Horizontal fracture may exist for a short distance, propped open by bridging of the irregular surfaces. Most horizontal fractures, however, are sealed by overburden pressure. Both horizontal and semi-vertical fractures can be detected by various logging tools.
Classification
Naturally fractured reservoirs have been classified according to the relative contribution of the matrix and fractures to the total fluid production. The following table is modified form Nelson (2001).[2]
Classification of naturally fractured reservoirs (NFR), modified from Nelson (2001) | ||
Types of fracture reservoirs | ||
NFR type | Definition | Examples |
Type 1 | Fractures provide essential porosity and permeability. |
Amal, Libya Edison, California |
Type 2 | Fractures provide essential permeability |
Agha Jari, Iran Haft Kel, Iran Sooner trend, Oklahoma Spraberry trend area, Texas |
Type 3 | Fractures provide a permeability assistance |
Kirkuk, Iraq Dukhan, Qatar Cottonwood Creek, Wyoming Lacq, France |
Productivity heterogeneity
Well production heterogeneity is a characteristic of most naturally fractured reservoirs. Although various geologic processes other than fractures can lead to field wide heterogeneity, such as thin, discontinuous high-permeability strata or variable development of interconnected vugs. Heterogeneity can be used to help recognize the importance of fractures in a reservoir and production statistic for wells can provide a quick-look method to recognize heterogeneity.
Indications of fractures in a reservoir
Indications of fractures in a reservoir [2] | |||
Production/flow-related evidence | |||
Observation |
Possible explanation |
Precision | |
Isolated intervals of high productivity on PLT that do not correspond with good reservoir rock |
Fractures enhance permeability |
Specific depth in well | |
PI of well exceeds expectations |
Fractures enhance permeability |
Reservoir | |
khwell/khcore >>1 |
Fractures enhance permeability (core analyses should exclude samples with fractures) |
Well or reservoir | |
Low porosity, low resistivity |
Low fracture porosity, but good conductivity due to fractures filled by drilling fluid |
Specific depth in well | |
Significant unexpected gas show or "kick," especially in low permeability rock |
Light hydrocarbons in fracture |
Specific depth in well | |
Dual-ø behavior in well test |
Fracture drainage, followed by matrix drainage; the absence of this effect is not evidence against the presence of fractures |
Reservoir | |
Highly productive well shows rapid decline in productivity |
Fractures intersected by well are of limited extent, and drain quickly, so system reduces to drainage from matrix |
Reservoir | |
Rapid rise in gas/oil ratio to water/oil ratio (GOR/WOR), then stabilization at a level >> solution GOR |
Dual system behavior; fractures drain first, then gas and water enter, then matrix feeds fractures, and a new steady state is achieved |
Reservoir | |
Water or gas coning |
High vertical conductivity of fr ctures allows fluids to be rapidly drawn across stratigraphic layers to low-pressure area near producing well | Reservoir, specific depth | |
High well-to-well productivity variability |
Fracture intersections can result in great variation in well performance |
Reservoir | |
Well-to-well! hydraulic communication |
Movement of fluids between wells along aligned fractures |
Reservoir | |
Rapid breakthrough of injected fluids along a consistent trend |
Movement of fluids between wells along aligned fractures |
Reservoir | |
High vertical connectivity |
Fractures cross-cut low-k layers |
Reservoir | |
Strong anisotropy in multiwell pulse test |
Rapid hydraulic conductivity along oriented fracture set |
Reservoir | |
Drilling evidence | |||
Observation | Possible Explanation | Precision | |
Drilling breaks |
Rapid drilling progress along fractures, especially through intervals where rapid drilling is unexpected |
Specific depth in well | |
Bit drop |
Open fracture, usually enhanced by solution enlargement to create a large open cavity |
Specific depth in well | |
Bit chatter |
Bit-fracture interaction |
Specific depth in well | |
Abrupt loss of circulating fluids |
Mud drained into extensive open fracture system. Losses can damage reservoir |
Specific depth in well | |
Geological evidence | |||
Observation |
Possible Explanation |
Precision | |
Open natural fractures evident in core or image logs |
Fractures in the reservoir are open |
Specific depth in well | |
Spikes in Stoneley wave reflectivity log |
Fractures are open in the reservoir |
Specific depth in well | |
Hard rock in the reservoir |
Brittle rock has a tendency to respond to strain by creation of open fractures |
Reservoir | |
Same reservoir productive from fractures elsewhere |
Subsurface fractures are a characteristic of this formation |
Reservoir | |
Geophysical indications of fractures | |||
Observation |
Possible Explanation |
Precision | |
Shear wave polarization in seismic, vertical seismic profile (VSP), full-wave sonic |
Birefringence due to open fractures. Effect may also be caused by stress-induced birefringence (fractures not necessary) |
Portion of reservoir | |
Shear and P-wave velocity anisotropy in VSP or surface seismic |
Seismic wave velocity varies as a function of raypath orientation relative to fracture set orientation |
Portion of reservoir | |
Anisotropic seismic attenuation |
Seismic attenuation vades as a function of raypath orientation relative to fracture set orientation |
Portion of reservoir |
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 E. R. (Ross) Crain, P.Eng. 2015. Crain's petrophysical handbook. https://www.spec2000.net/22-fracloc1.htm.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Narr, Wayne, David S. Schechter, and Laird B. Thompson. 2006. Naturally fractured reservoir characterization. Richardson, TX: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Noteworthy papers in OnePetro
Aguilera, R. 1983. Exploring For Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. Society of Petrophysicists and Well-Log Analysts. https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/SPWLA-1983-C.
Tiab, D., Restrepo, D. P., & Igbokoyi, A. O. 2006. Fracture Porosity of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/104056-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/104056-MS
Trask, P. D., & Patnode, H. W. 1936. Means of Recognizing Source Beds. American Petroleum Institute. https://www.onepetro.org/conference-paper/API-36-368.
External links
Xiong, Hongjie. 2017. "Optimizing Cluster or Fracture Spacing: An Overview." The Way Ahead. Society of Petroleum Engineers. https://www.spe.org/en/twa/twa-article-detail/?art=3007
Nelson, R.A. 2001. Geologic Analysis of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. Gulf Publishing. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/45755956.
See also
Fluid_flow_in_naturally_fractured_reservoirs
Fracture_diagnostic_techniques