Beta Fulltext view is in preview — article structure may vary. Browse all articles
Contents
Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal Research Article 13 min read

Hydraulic Fracturing Process Systems and Fluids: An Overview

Yehia F*, Shazly T, Noah AZ, Abou Heleik MM and Kabel KI
* Corresponding author
ISSN: 2578-4846  10.23880/ppej-16000306  Received: August 02, 2022  Published: August 22, 2022
 — views
 43 references
 2 figures
 2 tables
PDF
Keywords
Fracking Hydraulic fracturing Frac fluid Hydrocarbon Oil reservoirs
Abstract

Hydraulic fracturing has become a critical component of global petroleum and natural gas development, with most the countries around the globe, for example, Canada, India, England, and China actively pursuing the implementation of this technology to increase oil production after declination as well as tap into this new source of energy. Hydraulic fracturing has created jobs and increased revenue in several states across the country. However, as with any advanced technology, there are concerns about its long-term environmental impact. Thus, many researchers and technicians continuously conduct advanced studies to inform industries about any new or upcoming regulations. In this study, a mini-review of the fracking process is considered an important section of the petroleum and natural gas industries. Moreover, researchers demonstrated knowledge about the frac systems and different hydraulic fracturing fluids that are utilized for a fracking job which were different from one fracking system to another in addition to the nature of the reservoir formation. It is a significant factor that production engineers take into consideration when applying hydraulic fracturing to enhance oil or gas production and treat the formation damage, as well. Since the formation damage considers the most critical issue affecting oil and gas production due to fine migration.

Introduction

Fracking is a common method for increasing hydrocarbon production that involves laying down a network of highly conductive fractures around a wellbore [1, 2, 3, 4]. Figure 1 illustrates the fracking job in which 3-5 million gallons of injected water in addition to proppant and chemical additives by applying thigh-pressure process in the presence of several huge tracks to frac the reservoir and connect between formation pores to enhance the permeability again [5, 6]. Fracturing has the interest of many researchers. Bin Chen, et al. [7], conducted compressive state of art on hydraulic fracturing simulation and numerical modes are discussed. Nevertheless, Barati, et al. [8] reviewed the traditional high viscous frac fluids for conventional fracking operations in addition to the modern group of fluids that have been developed for both kinds of reservoirs (conventional and unconventional).

The fracture network not only serves to improve the reservoir formation conductivity but also creates new prospects, which contribute to the production of hydrocarbon. It can be used in verticals as well as wells. The massive increase in hydrocarbon production efficiency caused by the process’s large network of fractures has made it economically viable for the petroleum and gas industry to plug into previously untapped hydrocarbon reserves in previously undeveloped tight unconventional reservoirs.

Modern high-volume fracking is a method used to extract natural gas or hydrocarbon from shale and other tight formations, to put it another way, impermeable formations trap hydrocarbon and gas and complicate the production of fossil fuel [9, 10, 11, 12, 13]. Large quantities of water, chemicals, and (proppant) sand are hurled into these formations at pressures high enough to fracture the stone, allowing earlier trapped hydrocarbons to flow to the ground [14, 15, 16, 17].

Hydraulic fracturing job consumes huge quantities of water and causes many environmental issues. In addition, numerous issues such as water-based fluid which liquid tend to trap in the formation, decreasing the relative permeability of the oil/gas phase, and clay minerals formations swelling [18]. Recently, Carbon dioxide (CO2) is regarded as a promising innovative working fluid because it does not pose a risk of formation damage and can stimulate more extensive and complex crack networks. Applying a CO2 fracking job has many positive benefits such as (a) it has lower breakdown pressure which is beneficial for fractures propagation; (b) compared to CO2 fracturing, water fracturing produces large tensile fractures, facilitation of proppant transport and placement; (c) Even under high-stress anisotropy conditions, CO2 fracturing can dramatically increase the complexity of artificial networks of fracture; (d) thickened CO2 tends to create comparatively simple fracture networks than carbon Dioxide, but still, more complex than fresh water; and (e) an appropriate fracking scheme followed by thickened-CO2 fracturing) can easily create complex networks of fractures and transport proppant to keep hydraulic fractures open [19, 20].

Overall, Water-based fracturing outperforms CO2 fracturing; however, for naturally fractured reservoirs, CO2 fracturing can be an effective method for stimulating tight/ shale oil/gas reserves and hence enhance oil/gas production [21].

Figure 1: Process of Hydraulic Fracturing [6].
Click to enlarge
Figure 1: Process of Hydraulic Fracturing [6].

Hydraulic Fracturing Systems

Hydraulic fracking fluid systems have been designed to implement treatment in accordance with the design in order to improve productivity and enhance the Operator’s return on the investment. The following critical factors are used to create designs [22, 23, 24, 25, 26]: type of the frac Fluid, requirements of viscosity, rheology of frac fluid, the economics of fluid, know- how of formations found locally, laboratory data upon the formation, availability of fracking fluid materials, proppant selection fluid systems optimized to these parameters can result in the minimized formation and fracture face damage for maximized results. The systems of fracking fluid are contained the following types (friction-reduced water, linear gels, crosslinked gels, or foam) moreover, Table 1 illustrated the various fracking systems including the polymer type utilized for fracking in addition to the crosslinker and maximum applied temperature in Fahrenheit degrees. the fracking fluid methods are listed below: Water Fracking System: It is mainly composed water, a control agent of clay, and a friction reducer. In some cases, the (WRA) recovery agent of water is added in an attempt to reduce any diffusion coefficient or effects of the water block. The primary benefit of utilizing the Water Frac method is its low cost, ease of mixing, and the possibility of recovering and reusing water. While the disadvantage of this system is its low viscosity, creating a narrow width fracture, as a result [27, 28, 29].

Linear Gel Fracking System: It is mainly composed water, a control agent of clay, and the agent of gelling such as Guar, (HPG) hydroxypropyl guar, or (HEC) hydroxyethyl cellulose. These agents are susceptible to bacterial growth and are often used as biostat or bactericides. Chemical breakers were added as well to minimise the damage to the sand (proppant) pack. In addition to being cheaper, a liner gel is also more effective at controlling fluid loss due to its low viscosity. This is because a filter cake is built on the fracture face to prevent the fluid from moving to the formation. The linear gel is the same as the water frac system is low viscous, moreover, the residual water contains a breaker which makes water not reusable [5, 27, 30].

Crosslinked Gel fracking system: It has the same components as the linear gel in addition to a crosslinker, which increases its viscosity. This type of gel can be used for various applications, such as reducing fluid loss and improving the transport of proppant. Its higher viscosity can also help improve the efficiency of the fluid. This cross- linking improves the elastic properties of the liquid and the mobility of the proppant. The filter cake that accumulates on the fracture surface as the fluid loses fluid to the formation controls the loss of fluid. The accompanying paper for disrupting fluid components contains a detailed description of the cross-linking agents used, as well as the chemistry and mechanism of cross-linking [30, 31, 32].

Oil-Based Fluid system: It is used in water-sensitive formations that can be seriously damaged by contact with water-based fluids. The first fracking fluid used to crush the widely used gasoline is a base fluid, palm oil as a gelling agent, and naphthenic acid as a cross-linking agent. napalm. Liquid loss is generally believed to be controlled by viscosity, although some crude oils contain particles that can form filter cakes. C-II. There are some drawbacks to using gel oils. Gelling problems can occur when using high viscosity crudes or crudes containing many naturally occurring surfactants [28, 29, 33].

Foam/Polyemulsion fracking system: It is fluids composed of water-immiscible materials. This can be nitrogen, carbon dioxide, or hydrocarbons such as propane, diesel, or condensate. These liquids are very clean, have very well controlled liquid loss, provide excellent proppant transport, and break easily by gravity separation. Polyemulsions are formed by emulsifying a hydrocarbon such as a condensate or diesel with water so that the hydrocarbon is the outer phase. Viscosity is controlled by varying the hydrocarbon/ water ratio [34, 35, 36, 37].

Fluid SystemPolymerCrosslinkerMaximum Temp [F]
CleanStimNon-GuarAl225
PermStimNon-GuarZr, Al275
EZ-StimGuarB160
SiroccoCMHPGZr400
DeepQuestHPG
CMHPG		B, Zr325
HyborGuar, HPGB320
SeaQuestHPB/Ti300
Pur-Gel IIICMHPGZr275
pHaserFracCMHPGZr275
Delta FracGuar, HPGB200
Silver Stim LTGuarB100

Table 1: Frac Fluid Systems.

Hydraulic Fracturing Fluids

The hydraulic fracturing process contains water, sand (proppant), and additives that mix together and pump into the well at high pressures to fracture the surrounding formations and create passways and allow hydrocarbon and gas production to increase throughout flowing from created fracture to the production well. The main percentage of the fracking fluid is 99% of water, 0.51% of sand, and 0.49% chemical additives [29, 34, 38].

The chemical additives utilized in the hydraulic fracking process are involved which are agents of gelling, crosslinkers, reducers of friction, inhibitors of corrosion, scale inhibitors, and biocides are illustrated in Figure 2. furthermore, Table 2 shows those types of additives and main chemical compounds applied for a specific role in the fracking process in addition to the purpose of using each additive [35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43].

Additive TypeMain Compound(s)Purpose
Diluted Acid (1.5%)Hydrochloric acid or muriatic acidHelp dissolve minerals and initiate cracks in the rock.
BiocideGlutaraldehydeEliminate bacteria in the water that produces corrosive
byproducts.
BreakerAmmonium persulfateAllows a delayed breakdown of the gel polymer chains.
Corrosion InhibitorN,n-dimethyl formamidePrevents the corrosion of the pipe.
CrosslinkerBorate saltsMaintains fluid viscosity as temperature increases
Friction ReducerPolyacrylamide, Mineral OilMinimizes friction between the fluid and the pipe.
GelGuar gum or hydroxyethyl celluloseThickens the water in order to suspend the sand.
Iron ControlCitric acidPrevents the precipitation of metal oxides.
KCLPotassium ChlorideCreates a brine carriers fluid.
Oxygen ScavengerAmmonium BisulfiteRemoves oxygen from the water to protect the pipe from
corrosion.
PH Adjusting AgentSodium, potassium carbonateMaintains the effectiveness of other components such as
crosslinkers.
ProppantSilica, quartz sandAllows the fractures to remain open so the gas can escape.
Scale InhibitorEthylene glycolPrevents scale deposits in the pipe
SurfactantIsopropanolUsed to increase the viscosity of the fracture fluid.

Table 2: Fracturing Fluid Additives [35-37,39-43].

Figure 2: Fracking fluid chemical additives [37].
Click to enlarge
Figure 2: Fracking fluid chemical additives [37].

Conclusion

This is a mini-overview of the hydraulic fracturing process the most important process for induction fracture to enhance the reservoir permeability as well as the production of the well. The frac fluid systems as discussed were water- based, linear and cross-linked gals, oil-based, and foam fluids. Besides, the frac fluid contained water and sand with 99.51% and additives with0.49% which have a vital role in the fracking process. Moreover, for the future prospective of fracking, applying solutions such as the simulation and design of the frac job by mathematical programs and utilizing the AI technology for requirements of fracking optimization and minimizing the cost of fracking. To fill the gap in hydraulic fracturing and reduce the environmental impacts such as air emissions another type which is CO2 fracturing could be employed.

References

  1. Barati R, Neyshabouri SAAS, Ahmadi G (2014) Development of empirical models with high accuracy for estimation of drag coefficient of flow around a smooth sphere: An evolutionary approach. Powder Technology 257: 11-19.
  2. Economides MJ, Nolte KG, Ahmed U (1989) Reservoir stimulation. 2nd(Edn.), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
  3. Zhang F, Damjanac B, Maxwell S (2019) Investigating hydraulic fracturing complexity in naturally fractured rock masses using fully coupled multiscale numerical modeling. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineering 52(12): 5137-5160.
  4. LI Y, Long M, Tang J, Chen M, Fu X (2020) A hydraulic fracture height mathematical model considering the influence of plastic region at fracture tip. Petroleum Exploration and Development 47(1): 184-195.
  5. Yehia F, Shazly T, Noah AZ, Heleika MMA, Kabel KL (2019) Effect of Gelled Fracturing Fluid for Low-Permeability Reservoir. The 14th International Conference on Chemistry and its Role in Development (ICCRD’14).
  6. Sutter L, Weston N, Goldsmith S (2015) Hydraulic Fracturing: Potential Impacts to Wetlands. Wetland Science and Practice 32: 7-16.
  7. Chen B, Barboza BR, Sun Y, Bai J, Thomas HR, et al. (2021) A review of hydraulic fracturing simulation. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering 29: 1-58.
  8. Barati R, Liang JT (2014) A review of fracturing fluid systems used for hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 131(16).
  9. Norris JQ, Turcotte DL, Moores EM, Brodsky EE, Rundle JB (2016) Fracking in tight shales: What is it, what does it accomplish, and what are its consequences. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 44(1): 321-351.
  10. Wolske K, Hoffman A (2013) Public Perceptions of High-Volume Hydraulic Fracking and Deep Shale Gas Development. Graham Sustainability Institute.
  11. Krzaczek M, Nitka M, Kozicki J, Tejchman J (2020) Simulations of hydro-fracking in rock mass at meso- scale using fully coupled DEM/CFD approach. Acta Geotechnica 15(2): 297-324.
  12. Luginbuhl M, Rundle JB, Turcotte DL (2018) Natural time and nowcasting induced seismicity at the Groningen gas field in the Netherlands. Geophysical Journal International 215(2): 753-759.
  13. Shen W, Yang F, Zhao YP (2020) Unstable crack growth in hydraulic fracturing: The combined effects of pressure and shear stress for a power-law fluid. Engineering Fracture Mechanics 225: 106245.
  14. Pfunt H, Houben G, Himmelsbach T (2016) Numerical modeling of fracking fluid migration through fault zones and fractures in the North German Basin. Hydrogeology Journal 24(6): 1343-1358.
  15. Bažant ZP, Salviato M, Chau VT, Viswanathan H, Zubelewicz A (2014) Why fracking works. J Appl Mech 81(10): 101010.
  16. Earnden L, Laredo T, Marangoni AG, Ghazani SM, Pensini E (2021) Modulation of the viscosity of guar-based fracking fluids using salts. Energy & Fuels 35(19): 16007-16019.
  17. Wijaya N, Sheng JJ (2020) Surfactant selection criteria with flowback efficiency and oil recovery considered. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 192: 107305.
  18. Sanbai L, Zhang D (2018) How Effective Is Carbon Dioxide as an Alternative Fracturing Fluid? SPE Journal 24(2): 857-876.
  19. Middleton R, Viswanathan H, Currier R, Gupta R (2014) CO2 as a Fracturing Fluid: Potential for Commercial-Scale Shale Gas Production and CO2 Sequestration. Energy Procedia 63: 7780-7784.
  20. Feng C, Ma X, Jing F (2022) Dynamic Proppant-Carrying Performance of VES-CO2 Foam Fracturing Fluid in the Pipeline and the Fracture. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 210: 110034.
  21. Allah B, Zhang L, Wei H, Shaikh A, Khan N, et al. (2022) Development of CO2-Sensitive Viscoelastic Fracturing Fluid for Low Permeability Reservoirs: A Review. Processes 10(5): 885.
  22. Hussien OS, Elraies KA, Almansour A, Husin H, Belhaj A, et al. (2019) Experimental study on the use of surfactant as a fracking fluid additive for improving shale gas productivity. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 183: 106426.
  23. Belhaj AF, Elraies KA, Alnarabiji MS, Kareem FAA, Shuhli JA, et al. (2021) Experimental investigation, binary modelling and artificial neural network prediction of surfactant adsorption for enhanced oil recovery application. Chemical Engineering Journal 406: 127081.
  24. Miller C, Bageri BS, Zeng T, Patil S, Mohanty KK (2020) Modified Two‐Phase Titration Methods to Quantify Surfactant Concentrations in Chemical‐Enhanced Oil Recovery Applications. Journal of Surfactants and Detergents 23(6): 1159-1167.
  25. Wijaya N, Sheng JJ (2020) Surfactant selection criteria with flowback efficiency and oil recovery considered. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 192: 107305.
  26. Laben AB, Kayiem Al HH, Alameen MA, Khan JA, Belhaj AF (2022) Experimental study on the performance of emulsions produced during ASP flooding. Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology 12(7): 1797-1809.
  27. Shaikh A, Dai C, Sun Y, Foutou V, Zhao M, et al. (2021) Formation and rheology of CO2-responsive anionic wormlike micelles based clear fracturing fluid system. Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology 1-14.
  28. Bhattacharya S, Nikolaou M (2013) Analysis of production history for unconventional gas reservoirs with statistical methods. SPE Journal 18(5): 878-896.
  29. Hussien OS, Elraies KA, Almansour A, Husin H, Belhaj A, et al. (2019) Experimental study on the use of surfactant as a fracking fluid additive for improving shale gas productivity. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 183: 106426.
  30. Kang W, Mushi SJ, Yang H, Wang P, Hou X (2020) Development of smart viscoelastic surfactants and its applications in fracturing fluid: A review. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 190: 107107.
  31. Samuel M, Polson D, Graham D, Kordziel W, Waite T, et al. (2000) Viscoelastic surfactant fracturing fluids: applications in low permeability reservoirs. SPE Rocky Mountain Regional/Low-Permeability Reservoirs Symposium and Exhibition.
  32. Gurluk MR, Nasr-El-Din HA, Crews JB (2013) Enhancing the performance of viscoelastic surfactant fluids using nanoparticles. EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition Incorporating SPE Europec, London.
  33. Ilk D, Rushing JA, Sullivan RB, Blasingame TA (2007) Evaluating the Impact of Waterfrac Technologies on Gas Recovery Efficiency: Case Studies Using Elliptical Flow Production Data Analysis. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, USA.
  34. Maule AL, Makey CM, Benson EB, Burrows IJ, Scammell MK (2013) Disclosure of hydraulic fracturing fluid chemical additives: analysis of regulations. New Solut 23(1): 167-187.
  35. Soeder DJ (2021) Fracking and the Environment, Fracking and Water. Springer, pp: 93-120.
  36. Gallegos TJ, Varela BA (2015) Trends in hydraulic fracturing distributions and treatment fluids, additives, proppants, and water volumes applied to wells drilled in the United States from 1947 through 2010: Data analysis and comparison to the literature. US Geological Survey Reston, VA, pp: 15.
  37. Al-Hameedi AT, Alkinani HH, Dunn-Norman S, Trevino HA, Al-Alwani MA (2020) Conventional and eco- friendly hydraulic fracturing fluid additives: A review. SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference and Exhibition, USA.
  38. Ferrer I, Thurman EM (2015) Analysis of hydraulic fracturing additives by LC/Q-TOF-MS. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 407(21): 6417-6428.
  39. Earnden L, Laredo T, Marangoni AG, Mirzaee Ghazani S, Pensini E (2021) Modulation of the viscosity of guar- based fracking fluids using salts. Energy & Fuels 35(19): 16007-16019.
  40. Liang T, Li Q, Liang X, Yao E, Wang Y, et al. (2018) Evaluation of liquid nanofluid as fracturing fluid additive on enhanced oil recovery from low-permeability reservoirs. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 168: 390-399.
  41. Al-Hameedi AT, Alkinani HH, Dunn-Norman S, Trevino HA, Al-Alwani MA (2020) Conventional and eco- friendly hydraulic fracturing fluid additives: A review. SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference and Exhibition, USA.
  42. Liang X, Zhou F, Liang T, Wang R, Su H, et al. (2021) Mechanism of using liquid nanofluid to enhance oil recovery in tight oil reservoirs. Journal of Molecular Liquids 324: 114682.
  43. Zhang Y, Mao J, Mao J, Chen A, Yang X, et al. (2022) Towards sustainable oil/gas fracking by reusing its process water: A review on fundamentals, challenges, and opportunities. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 213: 110422.
More from this journal

Cite this article

BibTeX
APA
RIS
@article{yehia2022,
  title   = {Hydraulic Fracturing Process Systems and Fluids: An Overview},
  author  = {Yehia F, Shazly T, Noah AZ, Abou Heleik MM and Kabel KI},
  journal = {Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal},
  year    = {2022},
  volume  = {6},
  number  = {3},
  doi     = {10.23880/ppej-16000306}
}
Yehia F, Shazly T, Noah AZ, Abou Heleik MM and Kabel KI (2022). Hydraulic Fracturing Process Systems and Fluids: An Overview. Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.23880/ppej-16000306
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Hydraulic Fracturing Process Systems and Fluids: An Overview
AU  - Yehia F, Shazly T, Noah AZ, Abou Heleik MM and Kabel KI
JO  - Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal
PY  - 2022
VL  - 6
IS  - 3
DO  - 10.23880/ppej-16000306
ER  -