6
Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal ISSN: 2578-4846 Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs Figure A1: The Fracture Length 600 ft and Width from 0.05 to 0.55 in Width Contours. The fracture length and width contours as shown in Figure A1. with different colours as they appear in the upper right corner represent the width ratio for each segment of the width. Each colour represents a segment ratio of the whole width. Figure A2ERROR! NO TEXT OF SPECIFIED STYLE IN DOCUMENT.: The Fracture Efficiency versus Time. Figure A2 was produced using MFrac, and it represents the efficiency of fracturing against time. The efficiency decreases with time.

Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    3

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs

Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal ISSN: 2578-4846

Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs

Figure A1: The Fracture Length 600 ft and Width from 0.05 to 0.55 in Width Contours.

The fracture length and width contours as shown in Figure A1. with different colours as they appear in the

upper right corner represent the width ratio for each segment of the width. Each colour represents a segment

ratio of the whole width.

Figure A2ERROR! NO TEXT OF SPECIFIED STYLE IN DOCUMENT.: The Fracture Efficiency versus Time.

Figure A2 was produced using MFrac, and it represents the efficiency of fracturing against time. The efficiency

decreases with time.

Page 2: Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs

Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal ISSN: 2578-4846

Figure A3: The Fracture Length 600 ft and Width from 0.05 to 0.55 in.

Figure A3 was produced using MFrac, and it represents the true vertical depth against length.

Figure A4: Stress Gradient, Stress, Young’s Modulus, Poisson’s Ratio and Toughness.

Figure A4 was produced using MFrac, and it represents the true vertical depth against Stress Gradient, Stress,

Young’s Modulus, Poisson’s Ratio and Toughness.

Page 3: Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs

Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal ISSN: 2578-4846

Figure A5: The Summary Report Shows MFrac Simulation Parameters Values.

Figure A5 was created using MFrac, and it represents the final summary report of MFrac simulation

parameters values.

Appendix B: CT scan porosity for Eagle Ford, Mancos and Marcellus

Figure B1: Eagle Ford PD Porosity using CT scan.

The porosity is taken as the voids percentage appears in the bottom right corner of the Figure, which is

5.76%.

Page 4: Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs

Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal ISSN: 2578-4846

Figure B2: Eagle Ford PL Porosity using CT scan.

The porosity is taken as the voids percentage appears in the bottom right corner of the Figure, which is

5.08%.

Figure B3: Mancos PD Porosity using CT scan.

The porosity is taken as the voids percentage appears in the bottom right corner of the Figure, which is

5.05%.

Page 5: Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs

Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal ISSN: 2578-4846

Figure B4: Mancos PL Porosity using CT scan.

The porosity is taken as the voids percentage appears in the bottom right corner of the Figure, which is

4.45%.

Figure B5: Marcellus PD Porosity using CT scan.

The porosity is taken as the voids percentage appears in the bottom right corner of the Figure, which is

5.25%.

Page 6: Appendix A: MFrac Simulation Graphs

Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal ISSN: 2578-4846

Figure B6: Marcellus PL Porosity using CT scan.

The porosity is taken as the voids percentage appears in the bottom right corner of the Figure, which is

5.76%.