
我們知道,如果不采取適當的水力壓裂增產措施,致密氣藏就無法進行有效的開采。因此,致密氣藏鉆完井過程的關鍵就是保證后期能夠設計和實施最優的壓裂增產措施。
致密氣藏鉆井時,最重要的就是鉆取一個規則的井眼,因此,一般來說,致密氣藏鉆井需要采用平衡鉆井或者過平衡鉆井方式。其實,某些情況下,只要井眼保持規則,空氣鉆井或者欠平衡鉆井效果會最佳。
如果井眼比較規則,那我們就可以進行裸眼測井,獲得準確的測井數據,從而對地層進行合理的評價,進行最適完井設計。如果井眼被沖蝕或者是不規則的,測井就會變得非常困難或是難以獲得精確的數據,并且難以識別干氣儲層。
如果井眼較為規則,那么生產套管的固井質量就會比被沖蝕井眼的固井質量好的多。并且,對于致密氣藏這種必須進行壓裂增產的多產層油藏來說,固井質量是尤為重要的。
致密氣藏欠平衡鉆井
有些鉆井專家建議致密氣藏采用欠平衡鉆井的方式鉆進,主要是因為:
1.欠平衡鉆井的鉆進速度更快;石油圈原創www.h29736.cn
2.地層被鉆井液污染的程度最??;石油圈原創www.h29736.cn
3.由于地層滲透率非常低,因此,井噴的可能性非常小。
然而,如果能夠保持井眼規則,就可以采用欠平衡鉆井。但是,如果井眼被沖蝕,無法進行正常的儲層評估,或者無法保證固井質量,此時,鉆進速度就沒有那么重要了。在致密氣藏中,儲層損害并不是一個需要著重考慮的因素。因此,鉆井過程中是否對近井地帶儲層造成損害并不重要。在進行致密氣開發時,我們一般都會使用多個泵車和泵組來進行壓裂,水力壓裂不會對近井地帶儲層造成傷害。石油圈原創www.h29736.cn
致密氣藏完井方案
致密氣井理想的完井方案是用最低的成本獲得最大的產氣量,其中完井成本包括了最初的完井成本和后期的作業成本。也就是說,經驗豐富的完井工程師們會嘗試提出一種全能的完井方案,且對作業者來說也是成本最低的方案。
完井設計過程中,我們通常會考慮產層的數量,這些產層被垂向的隔層分開。不同產層能否視為同一油藏一起進行增產處理,取決于壓裂裂縫能否將這么多的產層連通起來。如果一個產層與其他產層之間被細粉砂巖或者頁巖層分開,就需要用模型模擬來判斷裂縫能否連通所有的產層。
如果一條裂縫可實現多產層增產合采,并且多層合采時不會造成儲層傷害,那么就可以把多產層當做一個儲層來進行完井。一般情況下,在干氣藏中,多層合采不會損害儲層。事實上,多層合采時的產氣量會更大,因為多層合采會比分層開采時的枯竭壓力更低。
如果一層較厚(大于等于50英尺)的頁巖層能夠隔開兩個或者多個產層,并且其有足夠的地應力來抵抗垂直裂縫的擴展作用,那么工程師們在完井設計和實施增產措施時就應該考慮如何才能制造出更多的裂縫。在這種情況下,若要對所有儲層進行增產,就需要采用壓裂轉向技術。
致密氣藏油管設計
當產氣速率下降時,油管設計的兩個關鍵點就是管具能夠配合完成最佳壓裂方案和具備處理井筒積液的能力。我們必須解決這兩個難題,才能達到最佳完井設計。前面提過,如果水力壓裂不成功,那么致密氣井的鉆完井和開發生產都不能獲得理想的經濟效益??偟膩碚f,產量越高,壓裂就越成功,因此為了注入大量的壓裂液,我們傾向于使用大直徑油管。
當壓裂完成,井投產以后,產氣量就開始降低。所有的井,甚至干氣井,都會產生凝析液或水。無論產液量是多或少,最終都會形成井筒積液,產氣量也會隨之下降。由于井筒積液量會影響產氣速率,因此為了解決井筒積液的問題,我們需要使用小直徑油管。
因此,矛盾就產生了,即我們需要較粗的油管來滿足壓裂的需要,同時,我們又需要較細的油管來解決井筒積液的問題。由于不同油田的特點不同,因此他們的選擇也各不相同。
Gidley曾經提出,解決這個矛盾需要考慮許多因素,計算方法也有很多。在某些情況下,當油藏壓力等于或低于正常壓力時,我們可以進行套管壓裂,壓裂后下入小油管進行完井。但是,如果油藏壓力高于正常壓力,我們可能就需要在低于最優排量的排量下進行油管壓裂。
由于套管和油管設計以及優化油管設計這兩方面的內容非常復雜,很難在這里詳細完整的闡述清楚。但是,完井工程師們應盡量在氣井開鉆之前,就對其壓裂和完井進行設計。
如果完井工程師認為需要使用某種尺寸的套管或者油管來實施最優的完井方案,那么完井工程師就應該將這個信息反映給鉆井工程師。然后鉆井工程師再設計使用合適尺寸的鉆頭和套管,以滿足完井工程師的需求。如果井已經開鉆,生產套管已經下入并固定,如果此時再要求采用更粗的套管以實現更高質量的完井作業,那么為時已晚。
同樣的道理,在井開鉆之前也應該完成壓裂設計方案,合理估計造縫壓力需要考慮以下幾個因素:
1.套管尺寸;石油圈原創www.h29736.cn
2.壓裂排量;石油圈原創www.h29736.cn
3.壓裂液摩阻和密度。石油圈原創www.h29736.cn
各種完井情況下,壓裂作業的最大施工壓力都是一個非常重要的數據。鉆井工程師可以根據這一信息來選擇合理尺寸、重量級和鋼級的套管。如果由于套管無法承受施工壓力,而改變壓裂液的泵入量或粘度,那么此次壓裂作業通常是以失敗而告終。因此,在開鉆之前,就應該把這些問題考慮清楚,對套管進行合理設計,防止這些問題的發生,使作業者順利實施高質量的壓裂作業。
致密氣藏射孔需考慮因素
完井和壓裂作業中最難的一個步驟就是選擇怎樣的射孔方式??梢哉f,射孔作業沒有簡單的解決方案,最佳的射孔方案會因油藏性質的不同而存在差異。其中,有兩點是比較重要的,第一就是確定產層的數量和壓裂的級數,第二就是確定地應力的各向異性以及是否存在天然裂縫。
最近在石油行業的文獻資料中,有一個壓裂相關的話題頻繁提及,那就是“近井扭曲效應”,即:當在井筒附近產生多條裂縫時,就會產生近井裂縫的扭曲。通常,產生多條裂縫的原因是有天然裂縫存在,或是因為長射孔段上有方向各異、數量較多的孔眼。
當近井地帶產生多條裂縫時,這些裂縫的縫寬都會比單一裂縫的縫寬窄,當向這些較窄的裂縫中泵入支撐劑時就會出現問題。有很多這樣的案例,當發生近井扭曲時,近井地帶就會隨之出現砂堵現象。
有許多方法可減弱近井扭曲效應。最佳的方法可能就是減小射孔段的長度,并且將射孔相位角設為180度,與裂縫擴展方向保持一致(對于垂直裂縫來說,裂縫擴展方向垂直于最小水平主應力方向)。
對致密氣井進行射孔時,最關鍵的一點就是:射孔作業要有利于實施最佳的壓裂方案。因此,完井工程師必須選擇正確的層位,并在這些層位進行射孔,從而能夠在多級壓裂中使用轉向壓裂技術。
在有關射孔的很多文章中,對“每英尺應射多少孔才能保證生產指數不會因為射孔數量太少而減小”這一問題進行了分析討論。實際上,在需要壓裂的致密氣井中,不需要過多的考慮每英尺的射孔數,更重要的是,射孔數一定要與壓裂液的泵入速度相匹配。石油圈原創www.h29736.cn
經驗告訴我們,合理的射孔數量應滿足每個孔眼處的排量為0.25~0.5桶/分鐘。舉個例子,如果壓裂液的泵入量為20桶/分鐘,那么就應該考慮在射孔層位(也就是裂縫起裂的位置)下入40~80個孔眼的射孔槍。
總之,射孔越緊密越好,并且射孔相位角應該為180度,且應沿著地層的最大水平主應力,這對于水力壓裂來說是最好的方案。而最壞的方案就是在很長的距離內每英尺射4孔或者6孔。當很長的距離內有比較多的孔眼時,工程師們就會很難控制裂縫的起裂位置,也會增加生成多條裂縫的可能性。
譯者/王凱? 編輯/魏亞蒙
The definitio
n of a tight gas reservoir is that the reservoir does not produce at commercial gas flow rates, or recover commercial volumes of natural gas, unless a hydraulic-fracture treatment is properly designed and pumped. As such, the entire drilling and completion procedures should focus on making sure the optimum fracture treatment can be designed and pumped in the field.
When drilling a tight gas well, the most important aspect of the drilling operation is to drill a gauge hole. Many times this means the well should be drilled at a balanced mud weight or slightly overbalanced. In other cases, air drilling or underbalanced drilling works best, as long as the hole remains in gauge. If a gauge hole is drilled, we can run openhole logs and obtain valid data that are required to properly evaluate the formation and to design the completion. If the hole is washed out and rugose, the logs are difficult or impossible to accurately evaluate, and the net gas pay is difficult to identify. Also, if the borehole is in gauge, the chances of obtaining a satisfactory primary cement job on the production casing increase when compared to trying to cement casing in a washed-out borehole. Obtaining a good primary cement job is extremely important when completing a well in a multilayered reservoir that must be fracture treated.
Underbalanced drilling
Some drilling personnel want to drill underbalanced in tight gas reservoirs because:
The penetration rate is faster
Formation invasion of mud filtrate is minimized
There is little chance of a gas kick because of the low permeability nature of the formations
However, underbalanced drilling is only acceptable if a gauge hole can be maintained. Speed to reach total depth is not important if the borehole is washed out and we cannot properly evaluate the reservoir layers or obtain an adequate primary cement job. Also, formation damage is not an important consideration in tight gas reservoirs. It does not matter whether or not the near-wellbore formation has been damaged during drilling. In every case, we still use multiple pump trucks and pump rather large fracture treatments. The hydraulic fracture breaks through any near-wellbore damage.
Completion strategy
The ideal completion is the one that produces the most gas for the lowest cost—considering both the initial completion cost and the subsequent operating costs. This definition implies that a prudent engineer will attempt to provide a functional completion for many years to come at the lowest possible cost to the operator.
Of concern in the design of the completion is always the number of producing zones that are separated in the reservoir by vertical flow barrier layers. To determine whether different producing intervals should actually be treated as a single reservoir, one must first determine if these various intervals are all connected by a single hydraulic fracture. If a particular zone is separated from another pay zone by a thin silt or shale layer with little in-situ stress contrast among the layers, one can use a model to determine if all the zones can be connected by a single hydraulic fracture. If a single fracture treatment is used to stimulate multiple layers, and no reservoir damage occurs by commingling the different zones, the well should be completed as if all the layers are actually a single reservoir. Normally, in dry gas reservoirs, no reservoir damage occurs by commingling zones. In fact, it is likely that more gas will be recovered by producing all the layers commingled because the abandonment pressure is lower at any given economic limit when the zones are commingled vs. producing the zones one at a time.
If two or more productive intervals are separated by a thick, clean shale (say, 50 ft or more) and this shale has enough in-situ stress contrast to be a barrier to vertical fracture growth, the design engineer might need to design the completion and stimulation treatments to consider the fact that multiple hydraulic fractures will be created. In such cases, fracture treatment diverting techniques must be used to properly stimulate all producing intervals. More information concerning completion design in multilayered reservoirs is available in the technical literature.
Tubular concerns
The two main concerns with tubular design are pumping the optimum fracture treatment and liquid loading as the gas flow rate declines. These two concerns must be balanced to achieve the optimum well completion. As previously stated, a tight gas well is uneconomic to drill, complete, and produce unless a successful fracture treatment is designed and pumped. In general, fracture treatments are more successful when pumped at higher injection rates. Therefore, to pump a treatment at a high injection rate, we normally like to use large tubulars.
Once the treatment is pumped and the well is put on production, the gas flow rate begins to decline. All wells, even dry gas wells, produce liquids in the form of condensate or water. Regardless of how little liquid is produced, the well eventually loads up with liquids as the flow rate declines. Liquid loading is a function of gas velocity. Therefore, to minimize liquid-loading problems, we must use small tubing.
Thus, the dilemma: we need large tubulars to pump the fracture treatment and small tubulars to minimize liquid loading. The solutions to this dilemma can be as varied as the number of fields in which we work. Many considerations and computational techniques needed to solve these problems are presented in Gidley.[1] In some cases, when the reservoir pressure is at or below normal pressure, we can fracture treat the formation down casing, then run small tubing after the treatment to produce the well. If the reservoir is geopressured, we might have to fracture treat the well down tubing at injection rates less than optimum.
The topic of how to design casing and tubing and how to design the optimum tubular configuration in a tight gas well is too large to deal with completely in this chapter. The completion engineer should, however, try to design the fracture treatment and the completion prior to spudding the well. If, during the design, the engineer determines that a certain size casing or a certain size tubing is required to implement an optimal design, the completion engineer should provide that feedback to the drilling engineer. The drilling engineer can then design the bit program and casing program to accommodate the needs of the completion engineer. Once the hole is drilled and the production casing is set and cemented, it is too late to redesign the completion if you discover you needed larger casing to implement the optimum completion.
In the same manner, the fracture treatment should be designed prior to spudding the well, so a reasonable estimate of fracture treatment pressures, from bottomhole to the surface, can be estimated as a function of:
The casing size
The injection rate
The fracture fluid friction and density properties
It is very important to know the maximum injection pressure during the fracture treatment for a variety of completion scenarios. The drilling engineer can use that information to select the correct size, weight, and grade of casing. A fracture treatment is usually not successful if the injection rate or fluid viscosity is compromised when the casing cannot withstand the desired injection pressure. Again, working the problem prior to spudding and designing the casing correctly can prevent problems and allow the service company to actually pump the optimum fracture treatment.
Perforating concerns
Perhaps the least understood part of well completions and hydraulic fracturing revolves around how to perforate a well. Again, there is no simple solution, and the best perforating scheme varies depending on the specific reservoir situation. Two factors seem to be very important. First, the number of layers and the number of fracture treatment stages affect how we perforate the well. Second, the in-situ stress anisotropy plus the presence or lack of natural fractures have a strong bearing on how we perforate the well.
A problem associated with hydraulic fracture treatment problems has been recently identified in the petroleum literature as “near-wellbore tortuosity.”[3] Near-wellbore tortuosity occurs when multiple hydraulic fractures are created near the wellbore. These multiple hydraulic fractures are usually caused by the presence of natural fractures or the fact that too many perforations are shot in multiple directions over a long, perforated interval. When multiple fractures occur near the wellbore, each fracture is narrower than a single fracture, and problems occur when trying to pump the propping agent down the narrow fractures. In many cases, a near-wellbore screenout occurs when near-wellbore tortuosity problems occur.
There are several ways to minimize near-wellbore tortuosity problems. The best solution might be to minimize the length of the perforated interval and to orient the perforations 180° in the same direction that the fracture propagates (which is perpendicular to the minimum principle horizontal stress, for a vertical fracture).
Again, the main concern when perforating a tight gas well is to perforate in such a way that the optimum fracture treatment(s) can be successfully pumped. The completion engineer must be concerned with choosing the correct zones and perforating those zones to accommodate any diversion techniques that will be used in multistaged fracture treatments.
In the perforating literature, there are many papers discussing how many holes are needed per foot of casing so that the productivity index is not reduced because of too few holes. In a tight gas well that is fracture treated, the number of holes per foot of casing is really not much of a consideration. More importantly, the number of holes with respect to the fracture treatment injection rate should control the perforation operation. A good rule of thumb is that the number of holes should be such that the injection rate per hole is between 0.25 and 0.5 barrels per minute per perforation. For example, if you plan to pump the fracture treatment at 20 barrels per minute, then you should consider putting between 40 and 80 holes in the pipe in the zone where you want the fracture to initiate. In general, the more compact the perforated interval the better, and perforations oriented 180° in the direction of maximum horizontal stress provide the best situation for hydraulic fracturing. The worst situation is to shoot 4 or 6 shots per foot over a long interval. When too many holes are shot over too long an interval, the engineer loses control of where the fracture initiates, and the chances of creating multiple fractures at the wellbore increases substantially.
未經允許,不得轉載本站任何文章:
-
- 檸檬
-
石油圈認證作者
- 畢業于中國石油大學(華東),油氣井工程碩士,長期聚焦國內外石油行業前沿技術裝備信息,具有數十萬字技術文獻翻譯經驗。如需獲取更多技術資料,請聯系我們。