000			02170nab a2200217 4500
005			20260520004421.0
008			260224s2013 xxu ing
041			_aInglés
245	0	0	_aComparison of Fracture Valves vs. Plug-and-Perforation Completion in the Oil Segment of the Eagle Ford Shale _bA Case Study
260			_a _b _cmayo 2013
270			_a12/07/2013 ; 12/07/2013
300			_a8 p. ; 201-209
520			_aTranscripción del resumen del autor: Which completion strategy is better: plug-and-perforation or fracture-valve? The authors of this paper will evaluate multiple completion strategies in two offset horizontal wells drilled in the oil section of the Eagle Ford shale. The first well was completed using a combination of single entry point, ball-activated fracture valves (first two-thirds of the lateral) and plug-and-perforation (P-n-P) with multiple entry points (the remainder of the lateral). The second wellbore was completed using only P-n-P with multiple entry points. Both wells were completed using comparable completion designs (hybrid fracture design, number of fracture stages, and pounds of proppant) and were cemented for annular isolation. To determine the completion and production efficiency, microseismic mapping and oil-soluble tracer technologies were used to evaluate the differences between the completion strategies. Fracture mapping was used to compare stage "complexity," while a hydrophobic oil tracer, which generated a pseudoproduction log of each individual stage, was used to determine the completion efficiency. The integration of these diagnostic engineering technologies allows for interesting conclusions with respect to the fracture complexity generation from the different completion strategies, as well as the resulting production from the comparative wells. This data can provide important information regarding the difference between the two completion methods.
581			_a2
773	0		_tSPE Production & Operations _g28
942			_cARTICULO
100	1		_aStegent, Neil A. _953379
100	1		_aFerguson, Kip _953380
100	1		_aSpencer, Jon _953381
999			_c187803 _d187803