SPE 124480

Case Study of a Novel Hydraulic Fracturing Method that Maximizes Effective

Hydraulic Fracture Length
Eric H. Tudor, Grant W. Nevison, and Sean Allen, GASFRAC Energy Services LP, and Blaine Pike,
Paramount Resources

Copyright 2009, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2009 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 47 October 2009.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Effective fracture lengths are frequently observed to be much less than antcipated fracture lengths. This is seen in
lower than expected production or evidenced in pressure transient analysis results. A precursor to the poor fracture
performance is poor recovery of the fracturing fluid; often less than 50% is recovered during clean-up. In many
reservoirs this unrecovered fracturing fluid remains immobile within the formation creating an obstruction to flow.
This significantly compromises effective frac length and results in decreased production.
During the fracturing process and subsequent closure of the fracture, the bulk of the fracturing fluid invades the
reservoir matrix along the fracture face, referred to as the invaded zone. This fluid is forced into the reservoir by
the significant pressure differential between fracturing pressure and reservoir pressure. Once in the matrix,
removal of fluid from the invaded zone can be very difficult as it is held by relative permeability, irreducible
saturation, and/or capillary pressure effects.
A novel hydraulic fracturing process using 100% liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) has demonstrated quick and
complete fracture fluid recovery, significant production improvements and dramatically longer effective fracture
lengths. The process gels the LPG for efficient fracture creation and proppant transport. With that there is no
compromise in the fracture treatment placed when compared to conventional treatments. However, once the
fracture treatment is complete and the viscosity of the gelled LPG is broken, the unique properties of LPG create an
ideal fluid for complete cleanup. Removal of this fluid from the invaded zone is easily achieved; relative
permeability effects, irreducible saturation behaviour and capillary pressure demands are eliminated. Complete
recovery of the LPG is consistently demonstrated.
Fracturing with 100% gelled LPG was first completed in January 2008. By June 2009 over 210 fracture
treatments had been completed. This new process has been applied to a wide range of formations from depths of
750 ft through to 11,500 ft. In this paper, short term technical evaluations, such as post fracture pressure transient
analysis, are used to demonstrate the rapid cleanup and effective fracture lengths that approach anticipated fracture
lengths. Long term actual production comparisons will be a focus on future papers as results become available.
Introduction
The science of hydraulic fracturing has predominately been focussed on fracture geometry and proppant placement
to maximize production rates and cumulative production. Current technology for hydraulically fracturing tight
reservoirs, including shales, often focuses on complex fracture volumes rather than bi-wing geometry to create and
maximize the formation stimulated area. This in turn results in optimized commercial production rates. Within the
conventional bi-wing hydraulic fracturing theory it is well understood that the optimized fracture length is

SPE 124480

inversely proportional to reservoir permeability. Similarly, the created fracture volume model used on shales tends
to follow the same theory that optimized created volume is inversely proportional to the reservoir permeability.
Both conventional bi-wing and the created volume fracturing theories require that the fracture matrix be a
substantial distance from the wellbore. Both theories require a conductive path from the fracture network to the
wellbore. The fracture length or volume needs to fully contribute to achieve maximum production.
In the practice of bi-wing fracturing theory it is well understood that the created fracture length does not always
fully contribute to production. Post fracture pressure transient analysis of bi-wing fracture treatments have
demonstrated and measured that the effective fracture length that is contributing to production is often a fraction
of the created fracture length. The difference between effective fracture length and the created fracture length is
missed opportunity for incremental production. Effective fracture lengths have been observed to be as low as 30%
of the created fracture length (Pridie, 2009). Figure 1 is a simplified diagram illustrating created and effective
fracture lengths. Short effective fracture length, relative to created fracture length, has been linked to fracture fluid
properties and their interaction with the formation (Bennion, 1996).

NO GAS FLOW
Fluid Block

GAS FLOW

Effective Fracture Length

Propped Fracture Length

Figure 1, Description of Effective Fracture Length

Interaction of the fracture fluid with the formation may result in a less than desired clean up, short effective
fracture length and poor production. These issues have been described as resulting from water imbibition, phase
trapping, sub-normally saturated reservoirs, and under-pressure reservoirs (Bennion, 1996). While the results of
short effective fracture lengths have been recognized in bi-wing fracture theory, non-contributing factors are still
unresolved in created fracture volume theory.
An opportunity exists to optimize production in both bi-wing and fracture volume models by best choosing the
properties of the base fracturing fluid to minimize formation interaction. Relvant fracturing fluid properties are:
density, viscosity, surface tension, and solubility with the native formation hydrocarbons. The fracturing fluid can
be selected to maximize the effective fracture length or volume. This paper illustrates the fluid properties and
performance results of 100% gelled Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) as a fracturing fluid. At the time of this paper,
100% gelled LPG have been successfully applied on 210 fracturing treatment since it first inception in January
2008.
LPG Properties and Application as a Fracturing Fluid
Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) is a mixture of petroleum gases existing in a liquid state at ambient temperature
and moderate pressure. To date HD-5 spec Propane (propane) has been the most common LPG product applied to
100% Gelled LPG hydraulic fracturing. Propane has a critical temperature of 213F (Figure 2) which limits its use
above that temperature. For applications above 213F, Commercial Butane (butane) is mixed with propane to
achieve the desired performance. Butane has a critical temperature of 350F.

SPE 124480

All LPG products are tightly fractionated resulting in a high degree of purity (+90%) with very predictable
properties and performance when used as a base fluid for hydraulic fracturing. Table 1 displays the volume
specification for commercially available propane.

Specification of
HD-5 LPG

Typical
Composition of
HD-5 LPG
1.4 %. by liquid
volume

Ethane
Propane

90 % min. by
liquid volume

96.1
%
by
liquid volume

Propylene

5 % max. by
liquid volume

0.41
%
by
liquid volume

Butane &
heavier HC

2.5 % max. by
liquid volume

1.8 % by liquid
volume

Sulfur

120 ppm max.

by weight

0 ppm max. by
weight

Table 1, Composition of HD-5 Spec LPG Propane

The supply of propane is very abundant in North America. In the United States the current supply is 450 million
barrels per year (EIA, 2009). Canada produces 66 million barrels per year with over 50% being exported (Propane
Gas Association of Canada, 2003).
The ability to viscosify LPG so that it can be used as an efficient carrier of proppant is based on the concept that
LPG is maintained in a liquid phase during all aspects of the hydraulic fracturing process, particularly at reservoir
conditions.
LPG Propane liquid and vapour phases are described in the 100% Propane Liquid-Vapor Saturation diagram
(Figure 2). Propane exists as a liquid above the saturation line; while below the saturation line propane is a vapor.
Propane is stored at ambient temperature, and in the case of ambient temperature of 70F, the minimum storage
pressure of 125 psi is required to maintain propane as a liquid.

SPE 124480

Propane Saturation Curve

Super Critical Fluid

Region

Liquid Region

Vapor Region
Tc = 206.1 F
Pc = 606.6 psi

Figure 2, Propane Liquid Vapor Saturation Curve

When applying propane as a fracturing fluid, within the surface equipment, it is stored, gelled, and proppant
blended at a constant pressure of 280 psi. It is then pressurized with high pressure pumps to the required surface
injection pressure for fracturing. Figure 3 is an example of a typical fracture treatment at 7000 ft depth and 140F.
This illustrates that propane remains in the liquid phase during storage, gellation, proppant blending and in the
fracture during treatment placement.

7,000 ft Well at Formation Temperature of 140 oF

Propane Saturation Curve
2

Liquid
Region

Low-Pressure
Surface
Handling

Vapor Region
Tc = 206.1 oF
Pc = 606.6 psi

Figure 3, Example of a 7,000 ft Well at 140 oF

1. Blender thru high Pressure pumps to the wellhead
2. Wellhead thru tubular into fracture
3. Fracture and leak-off to reservoir conditions

SPE 124480

Once the fracture treatment is complete, the propane, which initially exists as a liquid, is highly soluble with the
formation hydrocarbon. In the case of a natural gas formation, the propane and natural gas (predominately
methane) will combine to create a unique liquid vapor saturation curve for the mixture.
The vapor saturation lines for a range of propane/methane mixtures are presented as Figure 4. Some liquid will
exist when the corresponding pressure and temperature is above a vapour saturation line. Pure vapour exists at all
points below and to the right of the vapour saturation line. This graph shows that when propane mixes with
methane, the corresponding mixtures vapour saturation line moves up and to the left, away from the original 100%
propane curve. The resulting propane-methane mixture will exist at formation conditions in either a multi-phase or
a single vapour phase. It will also have cleanup properties of a lower critical temperature fluid, improved gas
density, gas viscosity, and no surface tension. The ability of propane to be liquid under moderate pressure, to be
viscosified in order to carry proppant into the formation, to mix with formation hydrocarbons, and ultimately be
recovered in a vapour phase results in an ideal fluid to obtain the optimized effective fracture length volume. Note
that a liquid volume of propane will generate approximately 1,530 standard cubic foot of propane vapour per barrel
of liquid.

For a 7,000 ft well at140 F, 50% methane results in 100% vapor

Figure 4, Propane-Methane Mixtures at Formation Conditions

Propane is the lightest of the LPG fluids that can be stored at ambient temperature and moderate pressure. The
specific gravity of propane is 0.510. Table 2 presents fracture fluid specific gravities as compared to LPG
products. A low specific gravity fluid, such as propane, allows the formation to be in an under-balance state during
cleanup. Due to its low density, there are no issues of the well loading up or dying as with conventional fracturing
fluids. Should a well load up with propane, the surface pressure can be easily drawn down below 100 psi. This
allows the propane column to vaporize resulting in self regulating cleanup condition without the requirement of
swabbing or gas lifting. Intuitively, when LPG is used as a hydraulic fracturing fluid there is no necessity for
additional energizers of nitrogen or carbon dioxide. It is important to recognize that LPG is formation compatible
and can be left indefinitely on the reservoir without the concerns of water imbibition or formation incompatibility.

SPE 124480

Fluid

Specific Gravity

Water

1.0

Methnol

0.79

Butane

0.58

Propane

0.51

Table 2, Specific Gravity of Common Fluids used in Hydraulic Fracturing

To date several operators have taken advantage of the low specific gravity and the purity of propane to recover
the LPG along with formation hydrocarbons directly down the sales line. The ability to recover the LPG down the
sales line avoids environmental issues such as flaring, fracture fluid disposal, and presents the opportunity to
recover propane as sales gas (Pike, 2009). As nitrogen or carbon dioxide gases are not used in the LPG fracturing
process, the operator is not required to flare these contaminates prior to flowing to the sales line. Conventional
fracture treatments using carbon dioxide or nitrogen typically require extensive flow before returns can be directed
to the sales line.
Viscosity of the base fluid of any fracturing fluid is important, as this is the lowest possible viscosity the fluid can
achieve once the gellation system breaks. In Figure 5, viscosities of typical base fluids are compared to propane
and butane. All fluids show a trend of thinning as temperature increases. Comparing viscosities at 104oF, water
has a viscosity of 0.657 cP while propane has a viscosity of 0.087 cP. This is an order of magnitude difference.
Laminar flow of the fluid through porous media is described by Darcys law and is mathematically expressed as:
P/L=V/k
Where,
P = pressure
L = length
V = velocity

k = permeability
= viscosity

Based on Darcys law, an order of magnitude reduction in viscosity results in an order of magnitude reduction in
the pressure required to move the same volume of fluid. Minimizing the needed differential pressure for fluid
movement into and along the fracture greatly assists post fracture fluid clean up. Further, once propane and
formation hydrocarbons mix, the viscosity of the mixture, especially if the mixture is in vapour form, will result in
a further reduction of required pressures.

SPE 124480

VISCOSITY COMPARISON

1.6

1.4

40% Methanol Water ( Gupta, 1997)

Viscosity (cP)

1.2

0.8

Water

0.6

0.4

100% Propane
50% Propane - Butane

0.2

100% Butane

0
30

80

130

180

230

280

330

380

Temperature F
Figure 5, Comparison of Viscosity

Surface tension exhibited by the fracturing fluid greatly impacts capillary pressure effects in the reservoir.
Selecting a fluid with a low surface tension will reduce the pressure needed to mobilize fracturing fluid for cleanup. Figure 6 compares the surface tension of common fracturing fluids to that of LPG products.

Figure 6, Comparison of Surface Tension

Capillary pressure exhibited by fracturing fluids in reservoirs is often overlooked when selecting the fluid. In
many applications, capillary pressure from invaded fluid will result in pores and natural fractures becoming
blocked. The blocked pores, cracks and natural fractures will obstruct the flow of hydrocarbon into the created
fractures significantly reducing productivity. Unfortunately, once in place, these trapped fluids are typically
difficult to remove.

SPE 124480

Capillary pressure behaviour is unique to each reservoir and is based upon the characteristics of both the
formation and fluid. The capillary threshold pressure, the lowest applied pressure which must be overcome before
flow occurs, defines the needed pressure differential to mobilize the fracturing fluid. Values of capillary threshold
pressure can be estimated using the Laplace-Young equation (Chalbaud, 2006).

Estimated capillary threshold pressures are displayed in Figure 7 for a range of surface tension values at various
flow path dimensions. For example, water would be comparable to 70 dynes/cm, then surface-tension-modified
water such as a methanol-water at 40 dynes/cm, and a low surface tension liquid such as a liquefied petroleum gas
at 7 dynes/cm. All contact angles are presumed at zero degrees.
100,000

Capillary Threshold Pressure (psi)

10,000

1,000

100
70 dyne/cm
10

40 dyne/cm
7 dyne/cm

0
0.001

0.01

0.1

10

Pore Radius (microns)

Figure 7, Estimated Liquid-Gas Threshold Capillary Pressures

For porous media, the flow path dimension is the effective pore radius and can be generally related to
permeability by the modified Kozeny-Carmen correlation.

Estimated magnitudes of permeability with pore dimension are presented in Table 3 (Pape, 1998).

SPE 124480

Pore Radius
(microns)

Permeability
(mD)

0.001

0.000002

0.01

0.0002

0.1

0.02

10

200

Table 3, Permeability Prediction for Sandstones from Effective Pore

Radius at 10% Porosity

Tight hydrocarbon reservoirs exhibit permeabilitys less than 0.1 mD, likely with effective pore radii less than
0.1 microns. In this range water based fracturing fluids exhibit threshold capillary pressures that readily exceed
100 psi. Alternatively a low surface tension fluid such as propane will result in threshold capillary pressures
beginning near 10 psi. Additionally, solubility of natural gas into low surface tension hydrocarbons such as
propane and butane will further reduce surface tension and capillary pressure. Comparable dimensional and
capillary pressure values apply to natural fractures and cracks in shale reservoirs.
The large differential pressures needed to exceed threshold capillary pressures, typically in excess of 100 psi,
inhibit water based fracturing fluid recovery. Applying a sustained drawdown pressure along a deeply penetrating
fracture sufficient to mobilize water is difficult. Investigations into post-fracture cleanup behaviour show the
fracturing fluid saturated region around the wellbore is removed first (Tannich, 1975). Following that, applied
pressure differential for fluid recovery deeper into the fracture competes with production from the created fracture
nearest the wellbore. Evidence of poor load fluid recoveries, and reduced effective fracture lengths attest to the
inability to effectively remove water from these applications.
Alternatively, removal of low surface tension hydrocarbons from the invaded zone is readily accomplished.
Applying differential pressures of 10 psi as needed to mobilize liquefied petroleum gases is much easier to achieve,
even when competing with production near the wellbore. Mixing liquefied petroleum gases with natural gas
further reduces the required drawdown and assists in a complete load fluid recovery. Consistent and demonstrated
full recovery of liquefied petroleum gas and superior effective fracture lengths attest to the importance of complete
fracturing fluid recovery from reserves with low flow capacity.
Description of the 100% Gelled LPG Fracturing Process and Equipment
A description of the equipment and process used for the LPG fracturing process is described in the patent
application: Liquefied Petroleum Gas Fracturing System, (Loree, 2007). This application describes the safe and
efficient process that meters proppant into gelled LPG to create the viscosified, sand landen slurry that is used to
hydraulically fracture a formation.
All equipment used within liquefied petroleum gas fracturing is built for purpose and is uniquely operated to
meet the functional and safety requirements of hydraulic fracturing. Multiple storage tanks are used to store and
feed the LPG into a specialized sand blender. As a safety feature, and to maintain the LPG within the liquid phase
during the process of hydraulic fracturing, a pressurized nitrogen blanket is applied to all the LPG storage tanks.
The novel sand blender used in this system is a pressurized system in which the proppant required for the
fracture treatment is preloaded, purged and pressurized with nitrogen. During the hydraulic fracturing operation, a
controller, in conjunction with a pressurized auger system, meters the proppant into the gelled LPG liquid stream.

10

SPE 124480

Specialized high pressure pumping units are then used to inject the gelled LPG slurry into the wellbore at surface
pressures sufficent to hydraulically fracture the formations.
Gelled LPG
LPG, at a moderate pressure of 100 psi, is a liquid hydrocarbon. During injection, LPG is a liquid and has
properties similar to conventional hydrocarbon fracturing fluids. The chemistry used to gel LPG is a step function
change from existing gellation technology. It has been synthesized to take advantage of LPGs unique features:
chain length, purity, surface tension and viscosity. A typical viscosity and break curve of gelled LPG is presented
in Figure 8. The chemical system used to gel LPG is applied during the process as a continuous mixed system and
controlled using mass flow meters. The chemistry can be adjusted to provide a variable viscosity and break times
based on the requirement of the hydraulic fracturing design. A picture of gelled propane is presented in Figure 9.

250

Viscosity -Break Test - 150 F

Viscosity (cP) at 100 s-1

500

Gellant
Activator
Breaker

@ 6 gpt
@ 6 gpt
@ 1 gpt

200

400
150
300
100
200

50

100

0
00

81

80

158

Time (min)
.
Figure 8, Typical Viscosity and Break Curve for Gelled LPG

160

Temperature (F)

600

SPE 124480

11

Figure 9, Laboratory View of Gelled Propane at Atmospheric Conditions

LPG Fracturing Flow Back

Recovery of LPG following a hydraulic fracture treatment can be beneficial in terms of operational expediency,
treatment economics, logistics and environmental care. There are two primary methods to achieve post-frac LPG
recovery; direct to pipeline, or direct to flare. Each method has specific benefits best fit for different situations and
circumstances. Direct to pipeline methods support zero flare targets.
Where LPG recovery is not desired, the well flow back stream is directed to the flare. Fortunately less overall
gas is flared due to the significant reduction in clean up time compared to conventional fracturing. However,
recovery of the LPG can eliminate flaring completely and, when applied effectively, results in improved
economics. A typical equipment flow back schematic is presented Figure 10.
Sand Catcher
(Optional)

Wellhead With ESD Valve

Choke
Manifold

Line
Heater

Gas to
Sales
Pipeline

Separator
Liquids to pressure tank

Gas to flare

Vent to flare

Pressure
Tank w/vent
Flare

Figure 10, Typical Equipment Setup for flow back of LPG fracture

12

SPE 124480

Case History Data and Results

Three case histories illustrating the application of 100% LPG hydraulic fracturing on different formations are
presented in Appendix A, B and C. Typical to many tight gas reservoirs, the treated formations have been
described as having the potential to negatively interact with traditional fracturing fluids (Bennion, 1996). The
formation and the fracturing parameters are listed in each appendix as Figures A-1, B-1 and C-1.
Early indications of successful stimulation are rapid fracture fluid recovery and suitable initial gas production
rates. Figures A-2, B-2 and C-2 illustrates the rapid recovery and the cleanup of 100% LPG after the fracture
treatment. All of these examples shows complete cleanup within 14 to 24 hours. Flow backs were completed at
controlled rates rather than maximum draw-down rates.
Following the flow back with sustainable flow rates, bottomhole pressure recorders are placed within the
wellbore. An extended flow and build-up test is then completed. The formation response is then assessed using
pressure transient analysis to quantify reservoir parameters, the effectiveness of the fracture treatment and to
predict production rates. In the right hand columns, of Figures A-1, B-1 and C-1 are the results of these tests as
reported by the respective operators.
Stimulated reservoirs are typically evaluated by formation skin and effective fracture length. Skin values are
based on radial flow and interpret damage or stimulation to the well by relating the flow capacity to an effective
wellbore radius. A damaged well will have a decreased wellbore radius and a stimulated well an increased
wellbore radius. Due to the inherent assumptions, using skin values to quantify fracture effectiveness is not
typically useful. In general terms, skin values near -4 simply indicate a stimulated well, values greater than 0 a
damaged well and values around 0 an undamaged, un-stimulated well. The analyses show skin values better than 4, indicating positive stimulation for all treatments.
Effective fracture length is used to assess the length of the propped fracture that contributes to production. For
each of the illustrated cases, effective fracture lengths were determined from the flow and build-up data through
pressure transient analysis. For comparison purposes, propped fracture lengths were estimated using a hydraulic
fracture propagation simulator calibrated by history matching pressure responses observed during each treatment.
In all three cases, effective fracture lengths and anticipated propped fracture lengths matched within 10%.
Effective fracture lengths from conventional fracturing fluids in reservoirs of this character are often reported at
less than 50% of the expected length.
To illustrate the importance of effective fracture length, cumulative production forecasts for each application
were generated as presented in Figures A-3, B-3 and C-3. These forecasts were prepared using the reservoir
model available with the hydraulic fracture propagation simulator. As demonstrated by these cumulative
production forecasts, short effective fracture lengths, as compared to the created fracture lengths, are lost
opportunity for incremental production and increased reserve recoveries. For each case study, cummulative
production was compared between 100, 50, 25 and 0 percent of effective fracture length. As anticipated, with
decreasing permeabilities, proportional reduction in effective fracture length resulted in progressively worsening
cumulative production. In case 3, the permeability was 0.07 mD. In this case, a 50% reduction in effective
fracture length resulted in a loss of approximately 20% cumulative production.
Conclusions
The information presented in this paper compares the fundamental properties of a new fracturing fluid comprised
of liquefied petroleum gases with conventional fracturing fluids. The comparison includes viscosity, density,
surface tension and solubility performance in reservoir hydrocarbons. These properties are shown to be important
in realizing an effective stimulation treatment; complete fracture fluid recovery, elimination of liquid block in the
invaded zone, long effective fracture lengths and superior production. Results from three LPG fracturing
applications are provided that span permeability ranges across two orders of magnitude (0.007 mD 3.0 mD).
Unlike conventional fracturing, analysis of the treatments completed with LPG illustrates effective fracture lengths
that closely match the predicted propped fracture lengths. Additionally, typical to LPG fracturing, complete load
fluid recovery is accomplished quickly with the opportunity to recover the LPG load fluid and associated natural
gas directly to pipeline rather than flare.

SPE 124480

13

1. Properties of liquefied petroleum gases, density, viscosity, surface tension and its ability to be soluble with
formation hydrocarbons, are desirable properties of an effective fracturing fluid. The ability to maximize
results of a hydraulic fracturing stimulation by best choosing the properties of the fracturing fluid is
illustrated.
2. The need to optimize properties of a fracturing fluid becomes more critical as reservoir permeability
decreases; long effective fracture lengths, or large contributing fracture volumes, are needed within tight
reservoirs.
3. The bulk of current hydraulic fracturing is completed using water or water based fluids. In order to
maximize production from tight conventional and unconventional reserves, a fracturing fluid exhibiting
more suitable properties is presented.
4. LPG in a liquid phase can be viscosified and applied by a safe and efficient fracturing process.

5. The clean-up, flow test, and pressure transient results following gelled LPG fracture treatments
demonstrate early maximized effective fracture lengths.
Acknowledgement
The authors wish to thank those at GASFRAC Energy Services LP who have contributed to the advancement of the
gelled LPG Fracturing Process and to the operators that have applied this technology. They also thank the
management of GASFRAC Energy Services LP for the permission to publish this paper.
Nomenclature
F = formation factor, dimensionless
k = formation permeability, mD
L = length, in
P = pressure, psi
Pc = capillary threshold pressure, psi
r = pore radius, microns
Reff = effective pore radius, microns
= viscosity, cp
Xf = effective fracture length, ft
V = velocity, in/sec
Y = surface tension, dynes/cm
= contact angle, degrees
References
Bennion, D. B., Thomas, F.B., Bietz, R.F., Low Permeability Gas Reservoirs: Problems, Opportunities and
Solutions for Drilling, Completion, Stimulation and Production, paper SPE 35577 presented at the Gas
Technology Conference held in Calgary, Alberta April 28 May 1, 1996.
Chalbaud, C., Robin, M., Egermann, P., Interfacial Tension Data and Correlations of Brines/CO2 Systems
Under Reservoir Conditions, paper SPE 102918, at SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San
Antonio, Texas, September 24-27, 2006.
EIA,Energy Information Administration Official Energy Statistics from US Government: Supply Distribution;
www.tonto.eia.doe.gov, June 2009
Gupta, D.V.S, R.G. Pierce and N.D. Litt, Non-Aqueous Alcohol Fracturing Fluid, paper SPE 37229,
presented at the SPE International Symposium on Oilfield Chemistry, Houston, Texas Feb 18-21, 1997.
Loree, D.N.; Mesher, S. T., Liquefied Petroleum Gas Fracturing System, International Patent Publication
Number WO 2007/098606 A1, World Intellectual property Organization, filed date March 2, 2007,
International Publication date September 7, 2007.
James, S., Proprietary Flow Back, Well Test and PTA Data for Case 2, Caltex Energy Inc, Suite 200, 717 7th
Avenue SW, Calgary Alberta. March 2008.

14

SPE 124480

Jensen, K., Proprietary Flow Back, Well Test and PTA Data for Case 1, Painted Pony Petroleum Ltd, 300, 602 12th Avenue SW, Calgary Alberta March 2009.
Pape, H., Clauser, C., Iffland, J., Permeability Prediction for Reservoir Sandstones and Basement Rocks Based
on Fractal Pore Space Geometry, paper of the 1998 SEG Expanded Abstracts.
Pike, Blaine, Conversations from Operators Experiences of LPG Hydraulic Fracturing, Paramount Resources,
4700, 888 - 3rd Street SW, Calgary Alberta. June 2009.
Pike, B., Proprietary Flow Back, Well Test and PTA Data for Case 3, Paramount Resources, 4700, 888 - 3rd
Street SW, Calgary Alberta. June 2009.
Pridie, David J., Conversations on PTA and Well Testing, AStech Inc, P.O. Box 5947, High River, Alberta,
Canada. Phone (403) 290-0560, June, 2009 .
Propane Gas Association of Canada Inc, Propane Flow in Canada 2003, displayed on website
www.propanegas.ca, June 2009.
Tannich, J.D., Liquid Removal From Hydraulically Fractured Gas Wells, paper SPE5113 presented at the
SPE-AIME 49 the Annual Fall Meeting, Houston Texas Oct 6-9, 1974. J.Pet. Tech (November 1975) 1309
1317.

Appendix A
CASE 1: Gas Formation with Permeability of 3.29 mD (Jensen, 2009)

Case 1
Stimulation
Formation
Mode
Propane Volume
(Load Gas)
Proppant

55,000 lb Gelled LPG

Fracture
Treatment
Blue Sky Sand (Gas)
4-1/2 Casing
612bbl
(0.94 MMscf)
55,000 lb 30/50
Ceramic

Post Stimulation
Results

Pay
Perm ( K)

Case 1

5.6 ft
2.96 mD

Depth TVD

1308 ft

Skin

-5.94

Bottom Hole
Temperature

138 o F

Xf - Effective
Fracture length

252 ft

Average Porosity

14 %

Created Fracture
Length (Modeled)

262 ft

Water Saturation

20 %

% Xf/ Created
Length

96 %

Bottom Hole
Pressure

1,300 psi

Figure A -1, Case 1, Formation, Fracture Treatment, and PTA Parameters and Results

SPE 124480

15

Case # 1 Flow Back Report

1200

4.0

Load Propane Recovered 0.94 MMscf

17 hours -Cleaned -up - Run Recorders

3.5

1000

Flow Rates MMscf/day

Casing Pressure psi

3.0
800

2.5
2.0

600

1.5

400

1.0
200

0.5

0.0
0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

Flow Back and Well Test (hrs)

Figure A-2, Case 1, Flow Back Report

Case # 1 Cumulative Production

Cum Gas Production MMscf

300

252 ft (100%) Effective Frac Length (X f )

250

50 % X f
200
150
25% X f

100

0%Xf

50
0
0

60

120

180

240

300

360

Days

Figure A-3, Case 1, Cumulative Production Forecasts

Appendix B
CASE 2: Gas Formation with Permeability of 0.10 mD (James, 2008)

Case 2
Stimulation
Formation
Mode
Propane Volume
(Load Gas)
Proppant
Depth TVD

66,000 lb Gelled LPG

Fracture
Treatment
Cardium Sand (Gas)
4-1/2 Casing
630 bbl
(1.05 MMscf)
66,000 lb 30/50 sand

Pay
Perm ( K)

Case 2

14 ft
0.10 mD

Skin

-4.66

Bottom Hole
Temperature

86 oF

Xf - Effective
Fracture length

275 ft

Average Porosity

10 %

Created Fracture
Length (Simulated )

290 ft

Water Saturation

20 %

% XF/ Created
Length

94 %

1,133 psi

K fw Fracture
Conductivity

91.44 mD*ft

Bottom Hole
Pressure

4264 ft

Post Stimulation
Results

Figure B-1, Case 2, Formation, Fracture Treatment, and PTA Parameters and Results

16

SPE 124480

Case #2 Flow Back Report

4.0

2000
1800

3.5

Load Propane Recovered 1.05 MMscf

23 hours -Cleaned -up - Run Recorders

1600

3.0

1400
is
p 1200
e
ru
ss 1000
re
P 800
g
in
sa 600
C
400

y
a
d
/f
cs
M
M
s
e
ta
R
w
o
lF

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5

200

0.0

0
0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

Flow Back and Well Test (hrs)

Figure B-2, Case 2 Flow Back Report

Case # 2 Cumulative Production

200

Cum. Gas Production MMscf

180

275 ft (100%) Effective Frac Length (X f )

160
140

50 % X f

120
100
80

25% X f

60
40

0%Xf

20
0
0

365

730

1095

1460

1825

Days

Figure B-3, Case 2, Cumulative Production Forecasts

Appendix C
CASE 3: Gas Formation with Permeability of 0.07 mD (Pike, 2009)
Case 3
Stimulation
Formation
Mode
Propane Volume
(Load Gas)
Proppant

46,000 lb Gelled
LPG Fracture
Treatment
Tight Hole Sand
(Gas)
4-1/2 Casing
664 bbl
(1.01 mmscf)
46,000 lb 40/70 RC
Sand

Post Stimulation
Results

Pay
Perm ( K)

Case 3

7.9 ft
0.07 mD

Depth TVD

8140 ft

Skin

Bottom Hole
Temperature

172 o F

Xf - Effective
Fracture length

Average Porosity

11.1 %

Created Fracture
Length
(Modeled)

357 ft

Water Saturation

20 %

% XF/ Created
Length

96 %

2,570 psi

K fw Fracture
Conductivity

221 mD*ft

Bottom Hole
Pressure

-5.73
341.1 ft

Figure C-1, Case 3, Formation, Fracture Treatment, and PTA Parameters and Results

SPE 124480

17

Case # 3 Flow Back Report

1400

Casing Pressure psi

8.0

Load Propane Recovered 1.01 mmscf

14. 5 hours -Cleaned -up - Run Recorders

7.0

1200

6.0

1000

5.0

800

4.0

600

3.0

400

2.0

200

1.0

Flow Rates MMscf/day

1600

0.0
0.0

20.0
40.0
60.0
Flow Back and Well Test (hrs)

80.0

Figure C-2, Case 3 Flow Back Report and Well Test Flow

Case # 3 Cumulative Production

Cumm. Gas Production MMscf

250

200

341.1 ft (100%) Effective Frac Length (X f )

150

50 % X f

100

25% X f

50

0%Xf

0
0

365

730

1095

1460

1825

Days

Figure C-3, Case 3, Cumulative Production Forecasts