Currently hydraulic fracturing is an integral part of measures aimed at intensifying the influx. At the stages of the hydraulic fracturing program implementation, given the uncertainties in the evaluation of the reservoir's energy and productive capacity, well testing is recommended. Moreover, the goal of the well testing may be to refine and validate the fracture parameters obtained as a result of the fracturing activities: fracture half-length and its conductivity. Besides, testing in producing wells can lead to significant downtime and losses in production, therefore, planning and carrying out well testing for this category of wells is essential. The task of optimizing the time spent on research, as well as the search for methods of processing information obtained during the hydraulic fracturing, is particularly relevant. An example of such an efficient and economical method for solving similar problems can be the interpretation of mini-fracturing data in order to obtain information on reservoir pressure and transmissibility of the formation. Mini-fracturing is a short pressure test, which must be performed before the main hydraulic fracturing to obtain the parameters necessary to correct the geomechanical models and make corrections to the main hydraulic fracturing program.
Today the interpretation of these mini-fracturing data is actively used to determine reservoir pressure and hydraulic conductivity of the formation both in foreign and domestic practices.
This paper explores the experience of processing mini-fracturing data. It also describes the processing results, gives the results analysis, and considers the main problems in interpreting the data of mini-fracturing in order to determine formation pressure and transmissibility of the formation. The economic feasibility of using these mini-fracturing is analyzed in comparison with the data of standard well testing.
References
1. Castillo J.L., Modified fracture pressure decline analysis including pressure-dependent leakoff, SPE 16417-MS, 1987, DOI:10.2118/16417-MS.
2. Nolte K.G., Maniere J.L., Owens K.A., After-closure analysis of fracture calibration tests, SPE 38676-MS, 1997, DOI:10.2118/38676-MS.
3. Usmanova A., Smith P., Rylance M., After closure analysis as an appraisal approach (In Russ.), SPE 181968-RU, 2015, DOI:10.2118/181968-RU.
4. Barree R.D., Miskimins J., Gilbert J., Diagnostic fracture injection tests: common mistakes, misfires, and misdiagnoses, SPE 169539-PA, 2015, DOI:10.2118/169539-PA.
5. Barree R.D., Barree V.L., Craig D., Holistic fracture diagnostics: Consistent interpretation of prefrac injection tests using multiple analysis methods, SPE 107877-PA, 2009, DOI:10.2118/107877-PA.
