Resin-Coated Proppant Cure Time Determination
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for determining the cure time of curable resin-coated proppants (CRCP) under field conditions are inadequate, leading to incomplete curing and subsequent proppant flowback during hydrocarbon production, as they do not account for varying temperatures and stresses encountered in reservoir fracturing treatments.
Innovation Solution
A laboratory test method involving a pressure vessel with velocity transducers and controlled temperature increase to measure acoustic velocity, correlating this with temperature recovery data to determine the minimum shut-in time for complete curing and maximum strength development of CRCP under simulated field conditions.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If the well is put on production immediately after fracturing, then productivity and cost efficiency are improved, but CRCP flowback occurs due to incomplete curing
Solution Approach 1:
The invention determines the required shut-in time for CRCP curing before production begins. By calculating and enforcing a minimum shut-in period based on resin cure kinetics and temperature profiles, the proppant pack achieves sufficient strength and stability before hydrocarbon flow is initiated, preventing flowback while enabling timely production start
Solution Approach 2:
The invention uses real-time temperature monitoring and cure kinetics modeling to dynamically determine when CRCP has achieved adequate strength. Temperature sensors track the thermal history of the fracturing fluid and formation, feeding this data into cure rate models that predict proppant pack strength development, allowing optimization of the shut-in period based on actual curing progress rather than fixed time intervals
2Strength
If the shut-in time is extended to ensure complete CRCP curing, then proppant pack strength is improved, but production time and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The invention performs preliminary determination of the minimum shut-in time required for CRCP to achieve target strength in the specific well conditions. By using cure kinetics models and temperature profiles before production starts, the optimal shut-in duration is calculated in advance, ensuring adequate strength development without unnecessarily extending the idle period
Solution Approach 2:
The invention changes the approach from using fixed or conservative shut-in time estimates to dynamically calculating the required time based on actual temperature profiles, resin cure kinetics, and desired strength targets. This parameter-based optimization allows adjustment of shut-in time to match specific well conditions, minimizing idle time while ensuring sufficient curing
3Measurement precision
If conventional API cell testing is used to evaluate CRCP, then standardized testing is achieved, but actual field curing conditions are not represented
Solution Approach 1:
The invention transitions from uniform laboratory testing conditions to location-specific field condition simulation. By incorporating actual downhole temperature profiles, confining stresses, and resin formulations specific to each well into the cure kinetics models, the determination of shut-in time is tailored to local conditions, providing accurate predictions for each specific application rather than generic laboratory results
Solution Approach 2:
The invention introduces cure kinetics models and temperature profile analysis as intermediaries between conventional laboratory testing and field performance. These models translate standardized lab data into field-specific predictions by accounting for the complex thermal and mechanical environment in the wellbore, bridging the gap between controlled testing and real-world conditions
Applied Scientific Principles
This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.
Function Achieved in This Case
This method allows for the determination of optimal shut-in time and compressive strength development of CRCP, preventing proppant flowback and optimizing fracturing treatments by simulating in-situ stress and temperature conditions, thereby reducing costs and ensuring well production efficiency.
Implementation Method 1
activating the velocity transducers at predetermined time intervals to transmit waves of a predetermined fixed frequency as the temperature of the CRCP sample increases; measuring the acoustic velocity of the waves passing through the CRCP sample
Implementation Method 2
increasing the temperature of the CRCP sample in the vessel at a predetermined rate, to thereby effect the gradual curing of the resin
Implementation Method 3
sealing the pressure vessel and applying an external hydrostatic force of predetermined value to the CRCP sample
Implementation Method 4
the curing resin form a pack that maintains its structural integrity when hydrocarbon production is commenced
Data Source
AI summary
A laboratory test method employs maximum acoustic wave velocity to determine cure time of a sample of curable resin-coated proppant (CRCP) that are packed in a pressurized chamber to simulate conditions in a reservoir rock formation during fracturing in which the CRCP will be used. The pressurized CRCP is subjected to a varying temperature profile that replicates the reservoir temperature recovery during shut-in of the fractured zone in order to develop maximum proppant pack strength and minimize proppant flow back following completion of the fracturing operation and to determine shut-in time to complete curing of the resin.