| Literature DB >> 35602635 |
Hai Lin1,2, Fujian Zhou1, Yakai Tian1, Yan Wang2.
Abstract
As a key technology for tight gas stimulation, refracturing plays an important role in tight gas development. In the production process of tight gas wells, the reservoir or fracturing process may cause the hydraulic fractures to gradually fail and the production to continuously decrease. In order to restore the productivity of a single well, it is necessary to refract the well to reopen the failed fractures or fracturing. Reasonable refracturing timing and optimization of refract fracture parameters are important guarantees to ensure the benefits of refracturing in tight gas wells, and relevant research on it can provide theoretical and technical guidance for field construction design. Based on the inverse problem of the dynamic prediction model of tight gas well productivity, this paper proposes an inversion method of formation and fracture parameters before refracturing based on Bayesian inversion algorithm. Finally, based on the geology and development data of the fractured wells in the Sulige gas field, the field application of refracting well selection, determination of refracting reasonable timing, and prediction of refracting effect is carried out. The actual production data are compared, and it is shown that this method can provide theoretical guidance for high-efficiency production-increasing construction on-site.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35602635 PMCID: PMC9117071 DOI: 10.1155/2022/7593526
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1The graph of fitness changing with genetic algebra.
Figure 2The curve of the minimum target value with the number of iterations.
Comparison of parameter inversion results based on genetic algorithm and Bayesian inversion algorithm.
| Method | Skin | Fracture half-length (m) | Fracture relative conductivity | Target (m3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual parameter value | 15 | 135 | 39 | — |
| Genetic algorithm | 0.25 | 40 | 38.7 | 36 |
| Bayesian inversion algorithm | 16.75 | 151.5 | 30 | 0.0004 |
Figure 3Curve of minimum target value with iteration times.
Figure 4Predicted curve and actual curve of cumulative gas production by refracturing in Well M.