URTeC: 3188

Increasing Frac operations performance using real-time monitoring of frac

fluid chemistry, and treatment data Key Performance Indicators
Juan Hurtado​*,​ ​Michael Mayer,​ Scott
​
Rutherfor​d, (​ReStream Solutions)

Copyright 2020, Unconventional Resources Technology Conference (URTeC) DOI 10.15530/urtec-2020-3188

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference held in Austin, Texas, USA,
20-22 July 2020.
The URTeC Technical Program Committee accepted this presentation on the basis of information contained in an abstract
submitted by the author(s). The contents of this paper have not been reviewed by URTeC and URTeC does not warrant the
accuracy, reliability, or timeliness of any information herein. All information is the responsibility of, and, is subject to corrections by
the author(s). Any person or entity that relies on any information obtained from this paper does so at their own risk. The information
herein does not necessarily reflect any position of URTeC. Any reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper by
anyone other than the author without the written consent of URTeC is prohibited.

Abstract
Abundant operational and fluid system related issues can be found during hydraulic fracturing
operations that can be attributed to dynamically changing source water or chemistry addition. The lack of
real-time measurements of fluid parameters along with minimal integration with process parameters limits
the insight into how these dynamics are impacting the process.. The scope of this study is to show a
comprehensive data collection and analytics system that includes real time measurements of fluid system
chemistry and combines process data to generate important KPI metrics that can be carefully monitored
based on changes from different stimuli.

The real-time analytical solution combines an independent hardware system that can collect fluid
chemistry parameters from the clean and slurry side of the frac blender and it integrates it with existing
SCADA, 3rd party sources, or publicly available datasets for in-depth comparative analysis. This solution
manages to break the persistent information silos by creating consistent and validated data sets and
enhances the value of common frac data by coupling it with fluid chemistry information, and other data
sources. Once the data is stored in a database, the software part of the solution creates important pad/well
metrics, crew summary and comparison, contrast stages for optimal designs, track actual quantities of
materials employed and compare it with designed, and rapidly identify outliers and summarize KPIs in
automated reports. Data can be viewed at the pad, operator or geographic region level, providing an
engineering and business tool that provides dashboards and enhanced visualization for On-Site and
remote monitoring of KPIs. The system provides pad filtering tools to identify fluid systems dynamics
and discriminate different fluids occurring in one stage and flag potential events.

This tool has achieved detection of operational issues like high corrosion events due to acid leaks
by tracking continuously sudden changes in PH and conductivity. Detected overpumping of ClO2 by
constantly monitoring ORP and PH. Without taking note of any of these events, issues with friction
reduction and surface pressure would have happened adding and increasing operational NPT. Additional
KPI’s were calculated including the evaluation of fracture propagation quality by implementing a
URTeC 3188 2

diagnostic tool that works to detect potential screen outs. Pressure decay Shut-in analysis was used to
automatize the identification of ISIP and a method was developed to detect wellhead opening pressure.
Determination of crew NPT by stage classification along with crew performance.

The tools added value lies in the determination of frac metrics, KPIs and dashboards that are
monitored in real time so immediate action can be taken by operational decision makers.This system
provides asset and logistics metrics through fluid, chemical and sand supply chain to water and
completion managers. By identifying and defragmenting these high-value datasets and visualizations
these data sets will become the basis for predictive analysis and machine learning to automatically
identify events.

Introduction

Fracturing fluids are a critical component in hydraulic fracturing operations. The ideal fracturing fluid
should have the following characteristics ​(Economides, M. J., & Nolte, K. G. , 2000)​:

1. Be able to open the fracture and transport propping agent along the length of it.
2. Exhibit the proper viscosity in the fracture during and after the treatment (break and clean up
rapidly).
3. Exhibit low friction pressure during pumping.
4. Be compatible with the formation rock and fluid.
5. Provide good fluid-loss control
6. Be cost-effective.

The most used fracturing fluids are water-based fluids due to their low cost, superior performance and
flexibility which account for the majority of all fracturing jobs. Even though fluid systems are designed
for specific source water types (fresh, brine, blended, ect), in practice those source waters are not
consistently delivered. Persisting logistical issues associated with produced water disposal and water
stressed operating areas will contribute to the increased utilization of different water sources. This
increase leads to the need for real-time monitoring and analysis of source water chemistry and fluid
system rheology. ​Insight into these elements will be key in order to properly characterize fluid systems at
the point of use for quality assurance purposes and maintain fracturing fluid performance according to the
designed specifications.

Fluid Rheology and Water Chemistry Real-time Monitoring analysis

To design a successful hydraulic fracturing treatment, accurate measurements of the chemistry and
rheological properties of fracturing fluids are needed. Even though there are complex and sophisticated
tools that can measure these parameters in the laboratory, the need to measure the fluid properties at a
field level has prompted the development of more portable measuring devices. These instruments must be
durable and simple enough to be used by persons with a wide range of technical skills​. It has been
established that an intense control of certain variables will improve the execution of a hydraulic fracturing
job and the success of a stimulation. For example, monitoring and measuring the sensitivity of frack fluids
to additives at different conditions ​(Fink, J. K. 2015)

Field conditions can be challenging. As such, current field methodologies can fall short on achieving the
goal of adequately characterizing the composition of fracturing fluids. Measurements are taken manually
URTeC 3188 3

and technicians have to work through methodologies and perform calculations on their own. This process
is time consuming, labor intensive and prone to error. ​The range at which these data points are collected
between every hour to one measurement per day depending on the measurement. This has the potential to
miss the changes within the fluid system that highlights the root cause of an arising issue.​ With the
inherent dynamics of the water transfer logistics it could be challenging to pinpoint the product that is
being used as source water for fracturing fluid.

Source water trends and chemistry

The current market conditions are making operators keep an austerity mentality, as they focus now on
maintaining a healthy cash flow and maximizing profits. They achieve that by optimizing resource use,
improving efficiency and reducing non productive time (NPT) as much as possible. This is applicable to
the oilfield water management market as well. ​To minimize costs associated with treating produced water
and to minimize the environmental impact of using massive amounts of freshwater, the use of produced
water in hydraulic fracturing treatments has been reported ​(​Fink, J. K. 2015)​. Using produced and
flowback water as part of fracturing fluid will help decrease costs associated with running and
transporting this water to saltwater disposal wells. It will reduce the current need of obtaining and
disposing fresh water and at the same time reducing its dependence which would be a more cost-effective
and sustainable long-term solution. It is hard to argue that the current (2020) downturn would not disrupt
the market, however produced water production will continue to increase along with demand for frac
water as Figure 1. shows. This event will pose incredible opportunities for using produced water in
fracturing fluids as companies will try to find ways to reduce lease operating expense (LOE) that
produced water convey.​ (Perez, P. 2020)

Figure 1- Produced Water Production and Frac Water Demand (Source: IHS)

Current water transfer logistics that feed hydraulic fracturing operations will handle multiple water
sources that would include fresh and brackish water, water blends (Combination between fresh and
produced water) or the use of 100% produced or flow back water. In consequence, the source water
components would potentially have an effect on the fracturing fluid chemistry and rheology due to its ​salt,
metal and sand residual content​. This dynamic could be completely different from basin to basin. Figure
2. exemplifies how varied the chemistry of produced water (TDS ,Total Dissolved Solids) measured in
particles per million (ppm) along the United States is:
URTeC 3188 4

Figure 2-Chemistry of Produced Waters in the United States (Source USGS)

The current study will bring together the two ideas of real-time monitoring and analysis of water
chemistry and rheology and the increasing utilization of produced water systems by presenting a real-time
analytics workflow. This workflow will be able to gather real-time measurements of chemical and
rheological properties of fracturing fluid. It will incorporate it with treatment data parameters where the
data will be streamed, normalized and aggregated and become KPI’s that will provide insight and help
improve frac operations through the use of different examples.

Theory and Methods

Figure 3. shows the workflow 2 main subsystems: a Real-time Monitoring System designed to collect
water chemistry data, integrate it with treatment data and visualize it on the fly and the Cloud-Based
application will make the information to be remotely available for analysis.

Figure 3- Real-Time analytics Workflow

URTeC 3188 5

Field Real-time Monitoring System

Figure 4-Part A: Real-Time Monitoring System

Figure 4. gives context on what type of variables are being integrated in the operation and the data flow
from the sensors to the field UI and the cloud-infrastructure. The system’s sensor suite is hydraulically
connected before and after the blender using clean and slurry slipstream sample lines. The system is
designed to measure the following key parameters defining each tool (sensor) use to measure them:

Key parameters

● Dissolved oxygen​ - The presence of dissolved oxygen in an alkaline media can be a major
contributor to the corrosion of working iron. The system employs the use of optical dissolved
oxygen sensors to evaluate the in-situ dissolved oxygen in the source water and also the
operationally introduced dissolved oxygen from the process.

● pH​ - pH is the measurement of the concentration of hydrogen ions in a solution through the use
of a SHE (Standard Hydrogen Electrode). Many common fluid systems utilized in completions
operations have optimal pH ranges for maximum performance. The buffering of pH has also
been shown to be an effective mitigation measure in controlling rates of corrosion.

● ORP​ - Oxidative Reductive Potential is a direct measurement of the activity of the oxidizing and
reducing agents in a fluid. Common bacteria has been shown to be unable to survive at ORP
levels above 665 mV for more than 30 sec (Trevor V, 2004). Excessively high ORP levels can
contribute to polymer degradation and corrosion of working iron.

● Conductivity​ - The conductivity measurement from the toroidal conductivity probes is a

measurement of the fluids ability to conduct electricity. Through the utilization of empirical data
to create models, conductivity can be used to accurately estimate the concentrations of the ions
contributing to the electrochemical conductance, such as the TDS (total dissolved solids) or
chloride concentration. As a result conductivity is highly indicative of the ratio of produced to
fresh water.
URTeC 3188 6

● Corrosion​ - Corrosion is a costly reality throughout the oil and gas industry. Not only do
companies incur the cost associated with replacing corroded equipment, the HSE impact as well
as the corresponding NPT must be considered as well. Through the use of the aforementioned
sensors in addition to LPR (linear polarization) corrosion probes, the rates and causes of corrosion
are monitored in real time, giving insight into possible mitigation measures.

● Viscosity​ - The fluid's resistance to deformation, or viscosity, is measured through the use of a
coriolis meter. Many fracturing fluids such as Crosslinked and linear gels and more recently
HVFRs depend on the fluid viscosity to create fracture width or increase the proppant carrying
capacity of the fluid.

● Density​ - The fluid’s density, as measured by means of a mass flow meter, is used to monitor
proppant addition as well as fluctuations in changing source water total dissolved solids.

Measurement Methodology

The sensor suite’s mechanical configuration is managed by a group of programs that will be in charge of
controlling how the sample is taken and allows the definition of several measurement points that will
achieve specific goals (effect of time in the fluid). Fracturing fluid (slurry side) and source water (clean
side) go through the system, passing through their respectives main spools as measurements are taken
every second. Both sides also contain secondary spools that hold a sample for a set period of time to
monitor the time effect on the fluid. In order to assess data integrity and quality, the system is in constant
communication with the sensors to verify measurement parameters and conditions. This process allows
the determination of when the sensors need to be maintained and evaluate their calibration status.

The local data feed obtained from the data van acquisition software will contain treatment data of
properly mapped channels. These channels consist of parameters such as Surface Pressure, Slurry rate,
Clean Rate, Proppant Concentration, Bottomhole Pressure, Chemical dose/rate among others. This
information is tied together through timestamps into payloads that will be processed and sent to the field
User Interface (UI).

Figure 5-Customizable Dashboard Field (User interface) UI

URTeC 3188 7

Figure 5. presents a version of the local User Interface, each one of the gauges show a combination of raw
measurements and calculated values derived from algorithms. As these dashboards are customizable,
preset configurations are deployed based on fluid system type to present the most meaningful data for a
specific use case.

Remote Operations/Office

Figure 6-Part B: Cloud-based Infrastructure

Simultaneously, data is sent to the cloud infrastructure that consists of two main components: Data Store
API and the Web Application. The structured and organized Time-series data, once sent to the cloud, will
be stored in databases. Then, there will be two ways to make the data remotely accessible.

Datastore API

The datastore API gives the capability to access the data real-time through the user’s own infrastructure.
This data management platform outputs a validated, standardized data set that will be accessible at any
point in time.

Data Integration and Analysis

Having a centralized system that can handle several hierarchical types of data adds robustness to the frac
operation dataset. The system incorporates data mining tools that enrich these data sets as they are
transformed into additional KPIs. The system divides these workflows into computed values that are
applied directly to raw measurements and algorithms which are automated workflows that include more
than one variable, additional instrumentation and includes additional pattern recognition processes and the
application of signal processing.
URTeC 3188 8

Computed Values

- Total Dissolved Solids

Produced water blends are typically characterized by their concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS).
TDS is commonly determined throughout industry by measuring the conductivity of fluid and applying a
conversion factor based on empirical data. Since the conductivity measurement is affected by the
increase or decrease in temperature above or below 25℃ a temperature correction must be applied.
Research shows conductivity will change about ± 2% per 1 degree Celsius. (Wood, 1976). The corrected
conductivity relationship will be defined as:

K
K 25℃ = 1 + α(T −25℃) …………………(1)
Where:
● K 25℃ = raw conductivity (mS/cm)
● T = Temperature ( ℃ )
● ɑ = linear compensation coefficient

Several widely accepted conductivity/TDS standards exist based on the concentration of the specific ion
species dissolved in the fluid. These include TDS​442​, TDS​NaCl​, ect. Alternatively, conductivity/TDS
relationships can be developed for specific regions based on the fluid type.

Algorithms:

These algorithms can be deployed either on the field or cloud level based on the intended use of the data.
As it was mentioned before these workflows rely on a different combination of parameters. There are two
different types of algorithms: in-house and integrated. The in-house algorithms are workflows developed
entirely to ​calculate​ water chemistry KPIs which include running several physical configurations to obtain
new variables and the use of data mining techniques to maintain the integrity of the data. The integrated
components of the algorithms include external sources’ techniques oriented towards improving treatment
data integrity and obtaining new KPIs from these data sets.

In-house

● Friction Reduction
The friction reduction algorithm involves a direct measurement of pressure drop inside of a coil in
conjunction with an algorithm calculating the predicted pressure drop caused by the addition of sand. The
system utilizes both the clean and slurry streams for density measurements to maintain an accurate sand
concentration reading when source water density changes due to TDS and temperature. Controlled testing
took place to generate the friction pressure gradient across the coil for water and several non-viscosifying
friction reducers. Testing was then completed by adding varying sand concentrations and types into the
system and recording the pressure drop across the coil to generate a correlation of the additional pressure
drop due to proppant for each type of proppant. The algorithm was then field tested on data collected on
over 2000 stages utilizing 100 mesh, 40/70 and 30/50 proppant at concentrations up to a 4.0 ppa.
URTeC 3188 9

● Apparent Viscosity
Typical completions fluid systems exhibit non-Newtonian, shear thinning behavior. Meaning as the shear
rate applied to fluid increases the viscosity of the fluid will decrease. As a result, viscosity measurements
can vary greatly depending on the measuring technique. It is common to measure fluid viscosities both in
the field and in the laboratory with a Fann 35 viscometer set to a shear rate of 511s​-1​. The system
measures viscosity at a much higher shear rate, which yields a much lower viscosity that is difficult to
compare to values typically seen in the lab or field . To overcome this, an apparent viscosity algorithm
was developed based on the Ostwald-de Waele relationship for pseudoplastic fluids .
n−1
μef f = K ( )
∂u
∂y
…………………(2)

Where:
● μef f = Apparent viscosity (cP)
● K = flow consistency index (Pa s​n​)
● ∂u -1​
∂y = shear rate (s​ )
● n = flow behavior index (dimensionless)

The algorithm utilizes this relationship along with the empirically derived rheological model for each
fluid system to calculate the viscosity of the fluid at the shear rate they are accustomed to seeing.

Integrated

- MRP (Moving Reference Point Method)

The Moving reference point is a technique that was developed by ​Pirayesh et al (2013)​. This technique
analyzes and interprets pressure-time data during fracturing and acts as an enhanced version of
Nolte-Smith. It describes fracture propagation not as continuous but instead sporadic meaning that
fracture growth would transition between periods of growth and periods of dilating (not propagating).
Being able to identify this kind of behavior in real-time will help identify operational issues to be rapidly
diagnosed and avoid potential screen-outs. On the other side, there is no need to know prior knowledge of
formation in-situ stresses as it only relies on bottomhole pressure. This workflow assigns a dynamic slope
(e) value to each propagation mode so it becomes an easily traceable KPI.

- ISIP (Instantaneous Shut-In Pressure)

The instantaneous shut in pressure (ISIP) is defined as the difference between the final injection pressure
and the pressure drop due to friction. It is important because fracture net pressure can be calculated which
is an essential parameter for any fracture model. ​(Menouar, N., Liu, G., & Ehlig-Economides, C. 2018)​.
One current method to calculate ISIP is by-hand determination. Another method includes subtracting the
friction component from the bottomhole pressure if they are available. However these methods are prone
to estimation errors. ​Menouar et al (2018)​ implemented a method that ​used the main treatment pressure
falloff to estimate ISIP. This technique also includes Wellbore storage effect and friction dissipation.
Being able to automate the determination of ISIP can help optimize the completion design.
URTeC 3188 10

Web Application

Besides the DataStore API, all the data is presented using interactive dashboards to check and control data
integrity over time from remote locations. It unlocks the ability to find patterns by searching at bivariate
or multivariate relationships. Figure 7. shows the different tools provided in the web application. It serves
with a live view functionality to track in real time stage progress along with water metric KPIs. An
analysis section allows the elaboration of custom charts to perform multivariate analysis, flag events and
analyze historical data. The stats portion will aggregate this information and provide daily stage statistics
in terms of water, sand, and chemical usage. A direct comparison between design with actuals will be
made. Finally, a stage comparison tool is provided to evaluate metrics across different stages

Figure 7-Web application Dashboards

Results

Breaking information Silos

The workflow previously described has the intention of performing multivariate analysis across different
datasets as the interpretation of single variables would not provide enough context about the different
physical effects occurring during the frac operation. By merging these water chemistry profiles and
treatment datasets, it is possible to determine and evaluate the variables that are improving or decreasing
frac operation performance. Breaking information silos ​means having​ a centralized tool to visualize this
URTeC 3188 11

information using a descriptive analytical workflow to ​identify hidden patterns and trends​ in the
operation. The real-time component of the tool provides the opportunity to establish variables that are key
performance indicators and their ranges of values. These KPIs are transformed, normalized and
aggregated in such a way it could offer strategies for well completions methods and optimize hydraulic
fracturing designs.

The following examples are real field cases in which these parameters analyzed in real time were able to
highlight treatment responses due to fluid system issues using water and treatment KPI’s:

Example 1. Water system identification

Figure 8. Treatment data of three stages containing a shift from fresh water to a produced blend system.

Figure 9- Fluid Chemistry data showing changing water systems reflected in corrosion and conductivity increases

Water conductivity provides a good measure to identify the introduction of produced water as source
water for fracturing fluid. Figures 8 and 9 show three stages along with one second measurements of ph
and water conductivity. The first stage presents an average conductivity of 4.53 mS/cm (10,406 ppm)
corresponding to fresh water typical values. As produced water is introduced in the following stage,
conductivity levels increase to an average of 30 mS/cm (29,880 ppm which is typical for water blends)
with a sudden change in corrosion of about 50% with significant reduction in pH levels. This trend
continues in the third stage as produced water continues to be blended in the system. Sudden spikes in
corrosion and reduction in pH needs to be continuously monitored. Identifying water quality is vital for
ensuring chemical compatibility throughout the frac operation. Aside from increased corrosion, changes
in source water or blends can impact friction reducer performance when using an anionic friction reducer,
require adjustments to the biocide dosing or selection and limit the ability to use certain fluid systems
such as borate crosslinked gel. Proper monitoring and making adjustments as needed when the water
quality changes is the only way to minimize the occurrence of these issues.

Example 2. Chemical Dosage Real-Time Tracking

Accurate chemical tracking can be challenging. Current methods rely on the operators and manual
methods are prone to errors as quantities of chemicals can easily be under or over pumped. Under
URTeC 3188 12

Pumping chemicals will ​decrease the effectiveness of the fluid compared to design while overpumping
can negatively impact the fracturing fluid performance or result in increased stage cost with no benefit to
the fluid system.​ The algorithm developed to calculate real-time friction reduction will give some insight
in two cases where there were flaws while pumping chemicals with two different outcomes:

Figure 10- Fluid friction resulting in significantly lower rate observed for the first two hours of the stage.

Figure 11-Issue with friction reducer dosing observed with the low value of friction reduction prior to remediation.

This first stage presented in figures 10 and 11 presents lower values of friction reduction for the first two
hours of the stage treatment which coincide with pumping conditions of an average slurry rate of 55 bpm
(30 bpm lower than the designed rate) to reach max pressure. Even though the target dose was 0.35 gpt,
the pump was not delivering the desired amount of friction reducer and thus the poor performance. Once
the problem was solved and the dose was restored, the target rate was achieved and it could be reflected in
a 25% friction reduction increase. A similar issue happened at the end of the stage where a friction
reduction decrease is followed by loss in rate. The treatment went for two hours under these conditions
and added 46 more minutes in stage time and 93 FR gallons that weren’t used (even though they were
counted initially as being pumped).

Figure 12-Treatment data of stage with rapid remediation of issue causing high friction pressures.
URTeC 3188 13

Figure 13-Friction reduction changes indicate the higher pressures are a result of fluid friction.
Figures 12 and 13 present a similar issue with friction reduction. The problem was detected at the
beginning of the treatment (10 min after injection started). The Chemical ISO tank was replaced and then
pumped a higher dose to evaluate the friction reduction response. Once an acceptable level friction
reduction level was achieved the treatment continued at a design flow rate of 85 BPM. Taking early
action on the stage allowed the loss of only 22 gallons of chemical due to a bad chemical used in the first
10 minutes of the stage.

Example 3. Overpumping Chlorine Dioxide​ (​CLO2)

Chlorine Dioxide (ClO​2​) is used as a biocide that helps in controlling bacteria. However, overpumping
ClO​2​ while being sent to location as a stage is occurring could negatively impact fluid system
performance(e.g guar gel polymer chains). ClO​2​ is mixed prior to arrival on the frac site and is manually
measured by titration.

Figure 14-Treatment data of stage being pumped with high levels of ​ClO​2

Fig 15-Example 3. ClO​2​ Overpumping reflected in high levels of ORP and low pH levels

Figures 14 and 15 indicate Initial ORP conditions at the clean and slurry line start at 730 mV and pH
level of 4 which indicates a strong ClO​2​ presence. Usually, -200 to 200 mV will indicate the presence of
only water, 200-450 mV will indicate the presence of oxidized breaker or a biocide while 450 to 700 mV
indicate the presence of ClO​2​. Initial conditions indicated that Oxidized levels were enough to kill bacteria
URTeC 3188 14

however the upward trend to a max value of 810 mV along with a pH 3.5 could indicate a potential for
fluid system incompatibility. The excessive oxidative potential of the fluid can degrade the polymer
chain.

Example 4. Acid leak

Acid leaks are a serious operational concern. It’s mainly due to equipment failure, most commonly
isolating valves the acid tank. This low pH fluid could hinder the ability of friction reducer to be effective
and the introduction of a highly corrosive low pH fluid into the frac iron could lead to significant
corrosion and fluid system issues during pumping.

Figure 14-Treatment data of stage with acid leak. Fluid pH started declining at 16:47 and the well was opened at 16:55.

Figure 15-Acid leak shown by lowered fluid pH and corrosion increase.

Figures 14 and 15 are indicating lowered pH on the slurry slipstream and a highly corrosive fluid
indicates a potential introduction of a low pH fluid into the system during the recirculation period prior to
starting the stage.​ This behavior is expected at the beginning of the treatment as acid is injected initially to
clean the near wellbore area and perforations. The pH within the system for this example drops to a 1.5 as
soon as the pumps start priming up to prepare for the next stage prior to opening the well. This low fluid
pH was measured during the entire duration of the prime up and pressure testing periods. During the
prime-up period, fluid flows through the missile and back into the tub through a recirculation line at the
end of the missile rather than into the well. Because the low pH fluid was seen when prime up occurred, it
was not only flowing through the iron during recirculation, but also pressurized within the missile during
the pressure test. This can pose a safety hazard to the on-site personnel and can lead to crevice and pitting
corrosion, which can lead to more frequent iron failures.
URTeC 3188 15

Example 5. Viscosity
Viscosity is a vital measurement of frac fluid performance that is typically taken at specific intervals
throughout the stage in order to maintain quality control on-site. Testing methods typically involve
sampling fluid from the hydration tank or a sample port on the low-pressure side of the missile. This
sample is then brought to a viscometer where the test can be completed. There is a potential for significant
variation in this measurement based on the time between sample time and viscosity measurement.
Continuously monitoring the fluid viscosity allows for a more reliable measurement without
inconsistencies due to varying the time between sample collection and measurement.

Viscosity is measured by the system at a higher shear rate than a typical field test using a viscometer at
511s​-1​. The apparent viscosity algorithm, labeled as slurry apparent viscosity in Figure 17 utilizes the
empirical model for guar based gel systems to calculate the apparent viscosity at 511s​-1​. This allows the
real-time data to be compared to the data collected in lab and manual field tests.

Figure 16-Treatment data leading to a screenout.

Figure 17-Raw and apparent viscosity both show a large viscosity decrease prior to pressure increase.

Shown in Figure 16 and 17, several shifts of viscosity can be seen throughout the stage despite running at
a 6.25 gpt (25#) for the entire duration of the stage. Designed viscosity was targeted at a 21 cP for the
duration of the stage. Viscosity fluctuated between 16 cP and 21 cP for the duration of the stage until a
spike in viscosity at 14:55. After this spike, a chemical pump spike occurred, temporarily increasing the
viscosity to 26 cP before initially decreasing to a 8.69 cP and further decreasing to 5.87 cP where the
apparent viscosity remained for the remainder of the stage. Four minutes after the surface measurement of
viscosity dropped to an 8.69 cP, pressure started gradually increasing, eventually resulting in a screenout
for this stage. The difference between the raw measured viscosity and the viscosity algorithm can be seen
as the difference between the slurry inlet viscosity and slurry apparent viscosity in Figure 17.
URTeC 3188 16

Example 6. MRP

As it was mentioned before, the advantage of the Moving Reference Point Technique is that it doesn’t
require closure pressure and uses the Bottomhole pressure. Two examples are provided in which this
technique is used to perform fracture diagnostics. In figure 18, the stage recorded a stable pressure
throughout the whole treatment. Figure 19 shows The slope-e (green line) obtained by the technique
indicates normal fracture propagation for approximately 15 min after the injection began, afterwards
several fluid loss events accompanied by normal propagation for about 35 min. These events could be
attributed to near-wellbore tortuosity and formation complexity. Normal propagation with periods of
fluid loss continues for 20 minutes until the end of the treatment.

Figure 18-Example 6. Treatment data of stage with stable pressure.

Figure 19-Moving reference point method results for a stage with stable pressure.

In Figure 20, the stage presents more unstable treatment pressure conditions which makes fracture
diagnosis more challenging. In Figure 21, fracture propagation is continuously changing between dilation
and leak-off during the first 30 min of injection. Some pressure ranges present some normal propagation
behavior. (the largest for approximately 5 min). 70 min after the treatment started, a long dilation period
was observed of 8 min followed by a reduction of rate and unstable treatment pressure conditions. The
last 45 min of the treatment present was more stable as the rate was also brought up.

Figure 20-Treatment data of a stage with several rate changes and unstable pressure.
URTeC 3188 17

Figure 21-Moving reference point method analysis on the stage with unstable pressure.

Example 7. Automation of ISIP Calculation

Using the falloff pressure and using the method presented previously, a ISIP per stage is calculated. To
automate the process, an algorithm automatically detects falloff pressure limits after the stage is finished.
The algorithm includes using low-pass filters to process and eliminate the water-hammer effect after
shutting off the pumps. Based on the method procedures, the algorithm estimates friction losses, and
wellbore storage effects (WBS), identifying them directly from the diagnostic log-log plot and estimates
the final ISIP values.

Figure 22-ISIP Estimation and Log-log diagnostic Plot

These values are included in the web application. By achieving a consistent method to automatically
calculate ISIP based on this method, it is possible to identify trends in friction behavior across stages and
assists in identifying stress shadowing effects​. Figure 17 shows the ISIP calculation for 11 stages and the
diagnostic plot with the identification of friction pressure loss and the wellbore storage effect.

Example 8. Automatic Stage Identification

Key parameter identification for data aggregation across a stage or group of stages is required for
classification of stage events and stage statistics.​ In this case determining stage start and end would reduce
manual labor on picking these events and would serve as the foundation to automize stage reporting.
Figure. 18 shows how four stages are being classified as it can be shown by the variable site active server
exemplifies. The algorithm manages to consistently identify stage starts and when the stages end times
while discarding any outliers.
URTeC 3188 18

Figure 23-Stage start and Stage end identification

Results Discussion

Hydraulic Fracturing is a complex operation that involves a lot of moving parts, people and processes.
There is room for many operational issues to occur and even greater amounts of variables to be analyzed
in order to find the root cause of these issues. Examples 1 through 4 evidentiate how integrating frac fluid
KPIs (friction reduction percentage, corrosion rate, water conductivity, total dissolved solids and
Viscosity), measured in real-time, provided insights into the variations and hidden patterns that would not
be able to be as easily identifiable just with the treatment data. Having a central system that can easily
display this information helps to understand the physical processes occurring as the information is
remotely accessible for visualization and manipulation. Examples 6 through 8 exhibit how regular
treatment data can be enhanced by applying different data techniques (MRP and ISIP) and transformed
into KPIs that capture behaviors like fracture propagation or falloff pressure. Accurate frac stage statistics
can be analyzed through the use of a consistent stage identification method.

Conclusions
● A comprehensive workflow was established to gather real time frac fluid chemistry and was
manipulated to generate KPI’s. These datasets were merged with treatment data to be shared and
visualized real time.
● Real-time water chemistry data has proven to help identify several operational issues related to
fluid chemistry and compatibility. These variables allowed rapid identification of the root cause
of an issue and highlighted potential remediations steps.
● Additional KPIs were calculated using treatment data along with accurate automated reports and
dashboards displaying reliable frac efficiency metrics.
URTeC 3188 19

References

1. Economides, M. J., & Nolte, K. G. (2000). ​Reservoir stimulation​ (3rd ed.). Chichester: Wiley.
2. Fink, J. K. (2015). ​Petroleum Engineer's Guide to Oil Field Chemicals and Fluids (2nd ed.).
Waltham, MA: Gulf Professional Publishing. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-383844-5.00027-1
3. Holdaway, K. R. (2014). ​Harness oil and gas big data with analytics: optimize exploration and
production with data-driven models.​ Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
4. Wood, Warren W. “Guidelines for Collection and Field Analysis of Ground-Water Samples for
Selected Unstable Constituents.” ​Open-File Report​, 1976, ​https://doi.org/0.3133/ofr76241
5. Menouar, N., Liu, G., & Ehlig-Economides, C. (2018, October 16). A Quick Look Approach for
Determining Instantaneous Shut-in Pressure ISIP and Friction Losses from Hydraulic Fracture
Treatment Falloff Data. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
https://doi.org/10.2118/191465-18IHFT-MS
6. Pirayesh, E., Soliman, M. Y., & Rafiee, M. (2013, September 30). Make Decision on the Fly: A
New Method to Interpret Pressure-Time Data During Fracturing - Application to Frac Pack.
Society of Petroleum Engineers. ​https://doi.org/10.2118/166132-MS
7. Cherednichenko, N. (2020, May 1). Keys to Better Water Management: Seeking Sustainability
Amid the Chaos. Retrieved May 18, 2020, from
https://pubs.spe.org/en/jpt/jpt-article-detail/?art=4835
8. Perez, P. (2020, March 30). "Water is not the exception" – Historical drop in oil prices negatively
affect the oilfield water management market. Retrieved May 12, 2020, from
https://ihsmarkit.com/research-analysis/water-is-not-the-exception-historical-drop-in-oil-prices.ht
ml?utm_campaign=pc10236&utm_medium=organic-social&utm_source=linkedin
9. Otton, James K., and Tracey Mercier. “Produced Water Brine and Stream Salinity .” ​Produced
Water Brine and Stream Salinity ​, USGS,. ​https://water.usgs.gov/orh/nrwww/Otten.pdf
10. Suslow, Trevor V. “Oxidation-Reduction Potential (ORP) for Water Disinfection ...”
Oxidation-Reduction Potential (ORP) for Water Disinfection Monitoring, Control, and
Documentation​, UC Davis, 2004, ​https://ucce.ucdavis.edu/files/datastore/234-406.pdf