LAPSE:2023.1567
Published Article

LAPSE:2023.1567
Optimization of Water Injection Strategy before Re-Stimulation Considering Fractures Propagation
February 21, 2023
Abstract
Water injection before re-stimulation has a positive effect to mitigate the “frac hit” and increase oil production in tight reservoirs. However, the study of water injection strategy optimization has not been thoroughly investigated. Some conclusions can be found in the existing literature, but the pressure and stress distribution, fractures morphology and oil production were not considered as a whole workflow during the study. In addition, the different reservoir deficit was not considered. Although technical experience and economic benefit have been obtained in some field tests, failed cases still exist. To fill this gap, a series of numerical models are established based on a tight reservoir located in northwest China. Under the different re-stimulation timing, the pressure distribution, stress distribution, and fractures morphology after water injection of different injection/production ratios are calculated, respectively. The oil and water production are predicted. The results show that, after a short period of production with a small deficit, the degree of “frac hit” is slight. Injecting water has an obvious effect on increasing oil production for both parent and infill well. After a long period of production with a large deficit, the problem of “frac hit” is very severe. Injecting water has an obvious effect on increasing oil production only for the parent well. The production of infill well is influenced by the fractures’ interference and pressure increasing comprehensively. For the well group, measured by the final cumulative oil production, the optimal injection/production ratio is different, but the water injection volume is similar, which is about 15,000 m3.
Water injection before re-stimulation has a positive effect to mitigate the “frac hit” and increase oil production in tight reservoirs. However, the study of water injection strategy optimization has not been thoroughly investigated. Some conclusions can be found in the existing literature, but the pressure and stress distribution, fractures morphology and oil production were not considered as a whole workflow during the study. In addition, the different reservoir deficit was not considered. Although technical experience and economic benefit have been obtained in some field tests, failed cases still exist. To fill this gap, a series of numerical models are established based on a tight reservoir located in northwest China. Under the different re-stimulation timing, the pressure distribution, stress distribution, and fractures morphology after water injection of different injection/production ratios are calculated, respectively. The oil and water production are predicted. The results show that, after a short period of production with a small deficit, the degree of “frac hit” is slight. Injecting water has an obvious effect on increasing oil production for both parent and infill well. After a long period of production with a large deficit, the problem of “frac hit” is very severe. Injecting water has an obvious effect on increasing oil production only for the parent well. The production of infill well is influenced by the fractures’ interference and pressure increasing comprehensively. For the well group, measured by the final cumulative oil production, the optimal injection/production ratio is different, but the water injection volume is similar, which is about 15,000 m3.
Record ID
Keywords
frac hit, infill well, parent well, re-stimulation, water injection
Subject
Suggested Citation
Ren G, Ma X, Zhang S, Zou Y, Duan G, Xiong Q. Optimization of Water Injection Strategy before Re-Stimulation Considering Fractures Propagation. (2023). LAPSE:2023.1567
Author Affiliations
Ren G: State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resource and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
Ma X: State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resource and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
Zhang S: State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resource and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
Zou Y: State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resource and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
Duan G: Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, China National Petroleum Corporation, Beijing 100083, China
Xiong Q: Engineering Technology Research Institute, Xinjiang Oilfield Company, PetroChina, Karamay 834000, China
Ma X: State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resource and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
Zhang S: State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resource and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
Zou Y: State Key Laboratory of Petroleum Resource and Prospecting, China University of Petroleum (Beijing), Beijing 102249, China
Duan G: Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, China National Petroleum Corporation, Beijing 100083, China
Xiong Q: Engineering Technology Research Institute, Xinjiang Oilfield Company, PetroChina, Karamay 834000, China
Journal Name
Processes
Volume
10
Issue
8
First Page
1538
Year
2022
Publication Date
2022-08-05
ISSN
2227-9717
Version Comments
Original Submission
Other Meta
PII: pr10081538, Publication Type: Journal Article
Record Map
Published Article

LAPSE:2023.1567
This Record
External Link

https://doi.org/10.3390/pr10081538
Publisher Version
Download
Meta
Record Statistics
Record Views
370
Version History
[v1] (Original Submission)
Feb 21, 2023
Verified by curator on
Feb 21, 2023
This Version Number
v1
Citations
Most Recent
This Version
URL Here
http://psecommunity.org/LAPSE:2023.1567
Record Owner
Auto Uploader for LAPSE
Links to Related Works
(0.27 seconds)
