American Oil and Gas Reporter - February 2019 - 49

SpecialReport: Unconventional Resource Science
FIGURE 6B

FIGURE 6A
Burkett 1H Log with Gas Tracer Return Percentages
And Proppant Tracers

sand volumes. Diverter was likely sealing
some of the newly shot perforations in
addition to clusters from the previous
stage, making treatment more difficult.
Overall, the treatment rates, pressures
and sand/fluid stage volumes for the
plugless completions compared very
similarly to offset wells on the pad, all
of which had utilized plug-and-perf completions. The Marcellus 1H had aboveaverage production versus the offsets,
all of which already had been on production for about three years. The Marcellus 1H had lower initial production
in the first three months, but then proceeded to outperform the rest of the pad
wells. This may have been related to the
time necessary for the PLA diverter to
degrade and clean up in a low-temperature
application. The Marcellus 1H still performed above average after the early
portion of the well's production, despite
the likely depletion and the interior location on the pad.

for the stage two interval. Despite the
lack of proppant signature over most of
the interval, high gas tracer returns were
still observed. It is important to remember
that the gas tracer is pumped along with
the treatment fluids. The log and rendering display the returns of the gas
tracer in the planned perforation depths
for a given stage only. It is likely that
the gas tracers surrounding stages 6-10
were not entering the wellbore from
the planned perforation locations. Additionally, the clusters surrounding stage
two contain high counts of every proppant tracer.

It is likely that the majority of the
treatment for the diversionless and plugless
stages was concentrated into the area
surrounding stage two. This interval's
different gamma signature can be seen
on the gamma track (brown and tan
background) of the log in Figure 6A.
The difference in the mechanical properties
from this likely lower-stress zone were
enough to prevent the breakdown of the
new perforations.
Figure 6B is the log for some of the
divert-then-perf stages. Stage 11 was the
first stage to utilize diversion material,
and stage 12 was the first proppant-traced

FIGURE 7
Marcellus 1H and Burkett 1H Completion Data
Green - Marcellus 1H

120

Green - Burkett 1H
10K

110

100

7K
6K

Pressure

Burkett 1H Results
After the success of the Marcellus
1H, the first half of the new-drill Burkett
1H well was completed with the plugless
and diversionless technique and the second half of the lateral was completed
with the divert-then-perf technique (the
perf-then-divert method was not attempted based on the learnings from the Marcellus 1H). The toe half of the Burkett
1H well was placed lower in the target
zone, which had a consistently higher
and different gamma signature than the
rest of the well. This slight difference in
target became more of a factor than initially expected.
The proppant tracer log of the Burkett
1H showed a long length of wellbore,
coinciding with the plugless and diversionless technique. It contained no significant proppant tracer signature except

Plugless and Diversionless

Average Treating Rate

Divert-then-Perf

Burkett 1H Proppant Signature
(Divert-then-Perf Stages)

Measure Names

Average Treating Pressure
40

ISIP

Breakdown Pressure

Max Treating Pressure
0

20
25
Stage #

40 0

10
Stage #

FEBRUARY 2019 49

American Oil and Gas Reporter - February 2019

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Oil and Gas Reporter - February 2019