11 December, 2014 Austin Texas United States

An AAPG/SEG/SPWLA Hedberg Research Conference

Fundamental Parameters Associated with Successful Hydraulic Fracturing: Means and Methods for a Better Understanding

7-11 December 2014
Austin, Texas, United States



There is a constant and rapid evolution of hydraulic fracturing techniques; however there are important uncertainties remaining with respect to our understanding.  A current view in the industry is that 80% of the production comes from 20% of the fracs. If that is correct, considerable money is wasted by the industry. The purpose of this conference is to bring together geologists, engineers, geophysicists, petrophysicists and other geoscientists to address these issues and determine multidisciplinary solutions for the future.


The goals of this conference are to:

  • Provide an interdisciplinary setting to discuss the issues and challenges surrounding successful completion of shale or tight sands
  • Catalog and address the numerous unanswered questions and uncertainties related to current scientific assumptions and modeling parameters
Conference Description
Some questions we hope to answer during this conference include:
What parameters should be considered to define successful hydraulic fracturing?
  • Define effectiveness of hydraulic fracturing
  • Assessment of various measures of successful hydraulic fracturing: Productivity/mechanical/statistics/economical
  • Historical cases showing successful hydraulic fracture well based or field based.
  • No screen outs
Geomechanics parameters needed for the design /implementation of hydraulic fracture?
  • What are the best parameters to estimate the ease with which a rock will frac (frac initiation or frac propagation)
  • Practical definitions, characterization , and measurements of brittleness of a rock
  • What log suite to use for a brittleness index
  • Do we need new logs to define best distribution of hydraulic fractures in multi-zone stimulation in HW?
What are current diagnostic technologies to delineate hydraulic fractures geometries?
  • What is microseismic (MS) really telling us about the success of a frac and its volume stimulated? What parameters cannot be obtained by MS techniques?
  • How accurate is a downhole or surface microseismic technique?
  • Microseismic event versus frac contribution
  • What do chemical tracer techniques provide us?
  • Is it justifiable to run PLT in HW with multiple transverse fractures?
  • Does Well Test analysis tells us fracture geometry in tight and ultra-tight hydraulically fractured formations?
  • Other diagnostics showing success on delineating HF geometry?
How can we relate log analysis to successful HF?
  • What type of log analysis is needed to provide a pre and post hydraulic fracture assessment/
  • How are logs integrated in well placement, sweet spots identification, and successful HF implementations?
  • Influence of heterogeneity and layering on frac propagation
What are the completions techniques associated with successful HF?
  • Openhole versus cased-hole
  • Perforations, isolation, clean-up, flowback methods, new techniques, etc.
What are the current components associated with successful HF: and any new trends?
  • Frac fluids, proppant, and isolations
  • Multiple zonal and multiple wells stimulation and pumping techniques
  • Frac placement versus frac success


The call for abstracts has now closed.


Daniel Moos Geomechanics International, Inc., Menlo Park, California, USA
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/moos-daniel.jpg?width=75&quality=90&encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 414
Jean-Yves Chatellier Nexen, Calgary, AB, Canada
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/chatellier-jean-yves.jpg?width=75&quality=90&encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 367
Joel Le Calvez Schlumberger, Houston, TX
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/lecalvez-joel.jpg?width=75&quality=90&encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 7581
Julia Gale Bureau of Economic Geology in the Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas at Austin
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/gale-julia.jpg?width=75&quality=90&encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3081
Christopher R. Clarkson University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/clarkson-christopher-r.jpg?width=75&quality=90&encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 10278
Peter Duncan MicroSeismic Inc., Houston, TX
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/duncan-peter.jpg?width=75&quality=90&encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 10279
Fred Aminzadeh University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/aminzadeh-fred.jpg?width=75&quality=90&encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 10280
Wadood El-Rabaa ExxonMobil, Houston, TX
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/el-rabaa-wadood.jpg?width=75&quality=90&encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 10281

Comments (0)


What Can I Do?

View Archived Abstracts
Add Item

Enter Notes:
* You must be logged in to name and customize your collection.
Recommend Recommend
Printable Version Printable Version Email to a friend Email to a friend



See Also: ACE

ACE Network with the best and brightest colleagues in the geosciences Network with the best and brightest colleagues in the geosciences Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/fs-hero-generic.jpg?width=100&h=100&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=75amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 5812
ACE A premier marketplace connecting technological innovation and geoscience professionals. A premier marketplace connecting technological innovation and geoscience professionals. Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/event-hero-generic-exhibit.jpg?width=100&h=100&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=75amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 5811

AAPG Non-endorsement Policy

The American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) does not endorse or recommend any products and services that may be cited, used or discussed in AAPG publications or in presentations at events associated with AAPG.