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
Technical Themes

The call for abstracts has now closed.

Monday, 8 December

Session I – Hydraulic Fracturing Characterization Part 1


Considering the Vertical Variation in Rock Mechanical Properties of a Lithologic Zone Using Laboratory Derived Data - Is it Time for Geomechanical Stratigraphy?

D.E. Wyatt, J. Hampton, D. Hu, C. Chen, V. Martysevich (Halliburton)

Geomechanical Controls on Matrix/Fracture Permeability of Tight Oil and Liquid-Rich Gas Reservoirs: Implications for Hydraulic Fracturing

A. Ghanizadeh, S. Aquino, C.R. Clarkson (University of Calgary), O. Haeri-Ardakani, H. Sanei (Geological Survey of Canada)

Mechanical Properties of Organic Matter in Shales Mapped at the Nanometer Scale

S. Emmanuel, M. Eliyahu (The Hebrew Univ. of Jerusalem), R.J. Day-Stirrat, C.I. Macaulay (Shell)

Novel Spatial Data Approach to Imrpove Production and Reduce Risks of Impacts Associated with Unconventional Resource Development – Using Geospatial & Geostatistical Analyses to Improve Science-Based Decision Making

K. Rose, J. Bauer, D. Glosser (US DOE/NETL)

Bringing Seismic Ideas to Acoustic Logging

P. Biswas, S. B. Ley (GeoBiz Technology, Inc.)

Session II – Hydraulic Fracturing Characterization Part 2

Fracture Modes in the Silurian Qusaiba Shale Play, Northwest Saudi Arabia and Their Geomechanical Implications

M.S. Ameen (Saudi Aramco)

Fracture Potential of Challenging Rocks: From Initiation to Productive Stimulated Rock Volume

U. Mutlu, J. Huang, R. Safari, M.P. Shahri (Weatherford)

Processing Well Log Data Using Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD) and Diffusion Equation

S.D. Kim, S.J. Kwon, K.M. Jeon (Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering)

Bedding-parallel Natural Fractures: Their Occurrence in Shale Plays and Possible Effects on Hydraulic Fracture Treatments

J.F.W. Gale (BEG, Univ. of Texas)

Multidisciplinary and Integrated Approach to Better Assess Open Fracture Systems and Their Impact on Hydraulic Fracturing

J-Y. Chatellier (Nexen), T. Chow, J. Wong (Talisman Energy)

Tuesday, 9 December

Session III – Hydraulic Fracturing Field and Case Studies

3-D View of Frac and Reservoir Pressures in Shale Leading to New Approach and More Reliable Predictions

J-Y. Chatellier, C. Petr, H. Vinall, D. Scarpino (Nexen), I. Anderson (Talisman Energy)

Marcellus Field Study: Application of Viscoelastic Surfactant Stimulation System for Shale

C. Pechiney, J. Akin, K. Wutherich, M. Yates, C. Boyer, D. Delozier (Schlumberger)

Mechanical Characterization in Unconventional Reservoirs:  A Facies Based Methodology

Dave Amendt (ConocoPhillips)

Modeling Study of Variation of Hydraulic Fracture Initiation and Location on Production Results Before and After Re-Fracturing

F. Vera, R. LaFollette (Baker Hughes)

“Hot Off the Press” Field and case studies from audience

Session IV – Hydraulic Fracturing Modeling

The Importance of 3-D in Stimulation Modeling of Unconventional Reservoirs

D. Moos (Baker Hughes)

Integrating Fracture Diagnostics for Complex Hydraulic Fracture Development Model

K. Wu, J. Olson (Univ. of Texas)

An Extended Finite Element Method Based Modeling of Hydraulic Fracturing

A. Khodabakhshnejad, F. Aminzadeh (Univ. of Southern California)

In-situ Estimation of Unpropped Fracture Conductivity in Shale and Assessing its Role During Stimulation and Production

M. McClure, S. Tandon, M. Yang (Univ. of Texas), S. Senthilnathan (Yale Univ.)

A Geomechanical Approach for Microseismic Fracture Mapping

S.M. Hosseini, F. Aminzadeh (Univ. of Southern California)

Wednesday, 10 December

Session V – Hydraulic Fracturing – an Operations View Point

Horizontal Well Fracturing: Technology Challenges

A. Daneshy (Daneshy Consultants Int’l.); presented by H. Brannon* (Baker Hughes)

Shale Formation Re-Fracturing: What is Needed?

I.S. Abou-Sayed, A. Abdelgawad (i-Stimulation Solutions)

Combining Mapped Microseismic Activity and Fracture Modeling to Estimate the Propped Dimensions of Hydraulic Fractures

R. Downie, J. Le Calvez, M. Williams (Schlumberger)

Forecasting Productivity of a Hydraulically Fractured Well Using a Detailed Mapping of its Proppant Conductivity Distribution

W. El-Rabaa, N. Siddiqui (Blade Energy Partners)

The Utility of Production Logging in High Angle Hydraulically Fractured Wells

D. Fitz, W. El-Rabaa (ExxonMobil)

Session VI – Microseismic Part 1

Bridging the Gap Between Microseismic and Hydraulic Fracturing Using the Horizontal Slip Mechanism

Y. Tan, T. Engelder (Penn State Univ.), N. Smith (Hess Corp.), J. Han (Baker Hughes)

Mapping Fracture Flow and Reservoir Stress Compartments with Passive Seismic Imaging

A. Lacazette, C. Sicking, J. Vermilye, R. Tibi (Global Geophysical Services

Integrating Acoustic Emission Cloud Characteristics with Individual Event Source Parameters: What Can We Learn from Observed AE Throughout a Hydraulic Fracturing Process?

J. Hampton, L. Matzar (Halliburton

Engineering Applications of Microseismic Data

C.W. Neuhaus (MicroSeismic)

 “Hot Off the Press” presentations from audience, followed by short discussions

Thursday, 11 December

Session VII – Microseismic Part 2

What Can Microseismic Tell Us About Hydraulic Fracturing?

S. Maxwell (IMaGE)

Using Microseismic Observations in Unconventional Plays to Influence Well Spacing and Stage Spacing Decisions

T. Dohmen, J.P. Blangy, J.J. Zhang (Hess Corporation)

The Signature of Shearing Driven by Hydraulic Opening

J. Rutledge, X. Yu, S. Leaney (Schlumberger)

Seismic-Based Production Forecasting for Shale Plays

A. Guest (Magnitude), S. Voisey (Apache), G. Castillo (CGG)

Group Discussion: What to do next?

Moderators:  Dan Moos and Shawn Maxwell

Summary Wrap-up

Conference Conveners

Lakeway Resort
101 Lakeway Drive
Austin Texas 78734
United States
Lakeway Resort Lakeway Resort
Questionnaire for Contributors
Names of other potential contributors who should be invited to participate:

Comments (0)


What Can I Do?

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 Program Paper

ACE Program Paper Exhibition Hall Thermochronological and Geochronological Constraints on the Origin and Evolution of the Cretaceous Ceduna Sub-Basin, Great Australian Bight Thermochronological and Geochronological Constraints on the Origin and Evolution of the Cretaceous Ceduna Sub-Basin, Great Australian Bight Desktop /Portals/0/images/ace/2015/luncheon heros/ace2015-tp5-structures.jpg?width=100&h=100&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=75amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 15457
ACE Program Paper Four Seasons Ballroom 2 & 3 Evaporite Paleokarst on a Tectonically-Enhanced Unconformity, Mississippian Madison Formation, Wyoming, USA Evaporite Paleokarst on a Tectonically-Enhanced Unconformity, Mississippian Madison Formation, Wyoming, USA Desktop /Portals/0/images/ace/2015/luncheon heros/ace2015-tp3-evaporites.jpg?width=100&h=100&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=75amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 15105

See Also: CD DVD

CD-DVD M65 CD - Salt Tectonics: A Global Perspective M65 CD - Salt Tectonics: A Global Perspective Desktop /remote/store-assets.aapg.org/img/products/M65CD_lg.jpg?width=50&height=50&mode=pad&bgcolor=white&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true&scale=both 4119

See Also: Explorer Emphasis

Explorer Emphasis Article Ireland Development Sporadic, But Promising Ireland Development Sporadic, But Promising Desktop /portals/0/images/explorer/2014/09sep/ireland-development-sporadic-but-promising-hero.jpg?width=100&h=100&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=75amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 11796

See Also: Forum Program Paper

Forum Program Paper Integrated Workflow for Understanding Fracture Interference and its Impact on Gas Production of the Woodford Shale Integrated Workflow for Understanding Fracture Interference and its Impact on Gas Production of the Woodford Shale Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/woodford-shale-forum-hero.jpg?width=100&h=100&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=75amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 19894

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.