The Complicated World of

Proppant Selection…

John Kullman
October 2011
 Outline
• Proppant Selection
• Modern Proppants
- Sand
- Resin Coated
- Ceramic

• Niche Proppants / Future Developments

• Q&A
 Getting a well to production…
We drill it… We frac it…
with efficient using high-tech
bits, fluids, equipment and
rigs, etc. fluids, elaborate
designs, state-
of-the art
monitoring, etc.
We complete it…
with long lasting
tubulars &
jewelry, high tech
perf techniques,
etc.
 And when we are done…

All of this equipment is

gone and all that is left
is theBut
well….
how many of us
really understand
our fracs and
proppants?

….and the frac

 Proppant Selection Techniques
1) “It’s easy, just pump the least expensive
proppant you can find.”
2) “It’s not too hard, just look at the
_______ and see which proppant is the
best
Soathow
my conditions.”
should one select
- depth, stress, crush, MPD, price, published
proppant?
conductivity, sales engineer, etc
3) “It’s so complex, there’s all these
parameters and I certainly don’t have
time to run a model so I just use what
everyone else is using (or what we used
last time).”
4) “Pump whatever is available”
 Modern Proppant Choices
List not complete. Some names are registered trademarks, some historical
Lightweight Intermediate High Density
Sand Ceramic Density Ceramic
Other Ceramic
CARBOTag
CARBONRT

ScaleProp

LiteProp 105,
Ottawa HYDROPROP CARBOPROP CARBOHSP
125, 175
Jordan ECONOPROP ISP, InterProp Sintered Bauxite
Hickory CARBOLITE
Badger SinterLite SinterBall
Brady
ValueProp VersaProp UltraProp
Colorado Silica (broad sieve) (broad sieve)
Arizona NapLite
White/Brown BoroProp
ForoProp
--- Numerous Chinese Suppliers ---
With Resins: AcFrac CR, PR, Black CARBOBond CARBOBond CARBOBond
PR typically Tempered/Super TF Ceramax E/I Ceramax V Ceramax P
denotes pre- OptiProp MagnaProp
cured, HyperProp
CR=curable Super HS (usually sand) EconoFlex
LC = low cost XRTGold DynaProp
DC = dual coat Numerous resins on any substrate (Norcote, Tempered LC, DC, HS, XRT resins)
Does Proppant Selection Matter?
>200 field studies, written by >150 companies

Oil wells, gas wells, lean and rich condensate

Carbonate, Sandstone and Coal

Well Rates Well Depths

1 to 25,000 bopd 100 to 20,000 feet
0.25-100 MMSCFD

SPE 119143 tabulates over 200 field studies

 Production Benefit
• Excellent production gains using:
– Higher proppant concentrations
– More aggressive ramps, smaller pads
– Larger diameter & stronger proppants
– Higher quality, more uniformly sized proppant

***CONDUCTIVITY MATTERS***

• Frac conductivity appears to be much more

important than we model, possibly due to:
– Complex flow regime (low realistic conductivity)
– Imperfectly planar fracs

Further detail in SPE 119143

 Select the optimal proppant and design
using a frac model.
Jordan Sand
6000
5720 Lightweight Ceramic

5000
Effective Conductivity (md-ft)

Effective conductivities can be less

4310
4000
than 1% of API/ISO test values

0.029
98%D-m
3000 reduction

1540 1410 99%

2000 0.0001 D-m
reduction

685 547
1000
225 85 7 120
25 167

0
ISO 13503-5 Test "Inertial Flow" Multiphase Lower Achieved Gel Damage Fines Migration
with Non-Darcy Flow Width (1 lb/sq ft) (30# XLGW) / Cyclic Stress
Effects
Conditions: YM=5e6 psi, 50% gel damage, 250 F, 1 lb/ft2, 6000 psi, 500 mcfd, 1000 psi bhfp, 50 ft H, 2 blpd
References: PredictK & SPE 106301
 Fracture 3000
Perforations
Complexity 2500

2000 Observation Well 1

Shale Fracs tend to be 1500

South-North (ft)
very complex 1000

(either intentionally or 500

unintentionally) 0

Observation Well 2
-500

-1000
-1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
West-East (ft)

SPE 95568
Does this conclusion apply to all
well configurations?

11
Intersection of Wellbore and Fracture

Vertical Well:
Typically conductivity-limited

Horizontal Well with Longitudinal Frac: Uncemented liner

Conductivity requirements typically trivial

Horizontal Well with Longitudinal Frac: Cemented liner

Conductivity requirements may be important
 Intersection of Wellbore and Fracture
What if the fracs are NOT longitudinal?

In a small fat frac (160 ft Xf, 100 ft h, .4” w), the surface
area of the frac is 1 million times greater than the
intersection with an 8” wellbore. Velocity can be 1,000,000
times greater in the frac than in the formation! [SPE 101821]

Horizontal Well with Transversely Intersecting Frac:

(Orthogonal, perpendicular, transverse, imperfectly aligned)
Oil/gas must travel hundreds/thousands of feet within fracture, and converge around a
very small wellbore – high velocity within frac!
Horrible Connection; Enormous fluid velocity and near-wellbore proppant
characteristics are key!
 More Stages?
In some reservoirs, operators have pumped 30 stages, with 3 perf clusters per stage.
90 entry points!
Question: Are we convinced we “touch more rock” with more stages, or are we simply
redistributing our investment, placing it nearer the wellbore with more entry points?
If you increase intersection by 90-fold, you decrease velocity by 90-fold and reduce pressure
losses by 902 or >8000 fold compared to a single transverse frac.
However, operators are understandably conservative on toe stages!

More Horizontal Well details in SPE 128612 Courtesy Karen Olson, BP

“Ideal” Proppant Characteristics?

Lighter than water,

Stronger than diamonds,

Cheaper than dirt!

Readily available!!!!!
 Know your proppants!!…
Characteristics of Premium Proppants
• Tight Sieve Distribution
• High Strength (low crush)
• High Sphericity

Characteristics of Inferior Proppants

• Broad Sieve Distribution
• Lower Strength (higher crush)
• Low Sphericity (angular)
 The Proppant Conductivity Pyramid
Highest Production, EUR, IRR (And highest investment) Highest Conductivity

High strength (minimizes crush)

Uniform size and shape
(maximizes frac porosity and permeability)
Tier 1 - High Conductivity
Thermal resistant (durable, minimizes degradation)
Ceramic
Engineered, Manufactured Product

Medium strength Tier 2 - Medium Conductivity

Irregular size and shape Resin Coated Sand

Low strength
Irregular size and shape Tier 3 - Low Conductivity
Sand
Naturally Occurring Product

Economic Conductivity is the Conductivity that

maximizes the Economics of the well.
 Proppant Conductivity

cf = kf * wf
wf
Factors that affect…
kf
Width (Wf): Proppant density,
proppant loading, embedment, gel
filter cake
Permeability (kf): Proppant size,
strength, sphericity, fines, gel damage,
Does Density affect Performance?

If a fracture can be filled with 100,000 lbs of

Sand/RCS/Lightweight Ceramic

It will require purchase of ~120,000 lbs of

Intermediate Density Ceramic
 Natural Frac Sands

• General Information
– Sands are mined from quarries
– In periods of high demand, supply is tight and product sieve
distribution may vary (SPE 84304)

• White Sand
– Ottawa, Jordan, Ironton, Galesville sandstones, Illinois,
Minnesota, Wisconsin
– Monocrystalline, stronger than brown sands

• Brown Sand
– Hickory sandstone near Brady, Texas
– Polycrystalline, composed of multiple crystals bonded together
 Natural Frac Sands

• White Sand • Brown Sand

Note polycrystalline nature and

increased angularity.

Optical photomicrographs – courtesy of CARBO Ceramics

 What happens to
uncoated sand under stress?

….it shatters
As Sand and fines are
crushes… released.
 Resin Coated Sands
• General Information
– Quality of sand coated has large impact on quality of RCS
• Any substrate can be coated (sand, ceramic, walnut hulls, etc)
– Various types and grades of resins

• Curable Resins
– Consolidate the pack and reduce proppant flowback
– Encapsulate proppant fines

• Precured Resins
– Encapsulate proppant fines
– Improve distribution of stresses
 Resin Coated Sands
• Standard RCS

• Premium RCS
What is the advantage of
resin coating a sand?

As RC Sand is ….the resin

crushed… encapsulates
the fines
 Ceramic Proppants
Lightweight Intermediate High Density
Ceramic Density Ceramic Ceramic
(Economy and Premium
distributions available)

CARBOLITE CARBOPROP CARBOHSP

CARBOECONOPROP Interprop Sintered Bauxite
CARBOHYDROPROP Sinterlite Sinterball
Versaprop (non-API) Ultraprop (non-API)

Increasing Aluminum Content, Strength & Cost

 How proppants fail

12/20 Hickory/Brady Sand

at 6000 psi (400 atm).
Courtesy Stim-Lab, Inc. Proppant Consortium

Resin Coated
Sand at 8000 psi
(544 atm).

Courtesy Stim-Lab, Inc. Proppant

Consortium

Intermediate Strength
Ceramic at 8000 psi
(544 (atm).
Courtesy Stim-Lab, Inc. Proppant Consortium
 “Other” Proppants
• Underfired Ceramic Proppant
– Yields proppant with internal/external porosity
• Is weaker than its fully fired counterpart
– Can be impregnated with chemical, such as scale inhibitor
• Delivers the chemical throughout the fracture
• “Tagged” Proppant
– Ceramic proppant “tagged” with chemical marker
– Used to determine source of proppant flowback (e.g. screen failure in
gravel or frac-pack completion)
• “Traced” Proppants (non-Radioactive)
– Ceramic proppant “tagged” with chemical marker
– Used to determine location of proppant (frac height and proppant
placement)
 Proppant Selection Summary
• Proppant selection should NOT be made
solely on the basis of well depth, stress or
what the last engineer did.
• Instead, fracture conductivity should be
designed to accommodate expected
production rates, and then the appropriate
proppant chosen based on economic
analysis.

Run conductivity flow tests!!!

 Recommendations
• This is the first generation of engineers that must
select from 100 proppant sources
• Resist generic “commoditizing” proppant identifiers
– “20/40 white sand” or “20/40 IDC” can mean almost anything
– Similar sounding materials easily vary 5-fold in performance
• Demand realistic flow tests (conductivity & beta)
– Extrapolating from crush & sieve is unacceptable
• Be vigilant; secure & verify proppant quality
– Periodically test FIELD samples

***Proppant selection does impact production.

There is a big difference in proppants. The
more you know about proppants, the better
your selection will be.***
Questions?
Additional Slides
 Game Changing Technologies
• The Challenges of Tight / Unconventional Plays
Extremely low permeability formations
Abnormal pressure and/or temperature (deep shales)
Adsorbed gas (Coal-Bed Methane)

• Key technologies driving UC developments

Drilling and Completion advancements in HZ wells
HZ Operations - Perfs, plugs, completion designs
Advancements in hydraulic fracturing
Fracture Mapping
Do we understand our fractures as well as we
understand our completions?
Additional Challenges for Waterfracs
• Lower density for improved transport? End of
Pumping

• Reduced particle size

During

– Reduce settling velocity Production

Arch

– Entry into narrower fractures Dune

• Unusual proppant arrangements

– Settled bank with void above?
– Partial monolayer?
– Irregular proppant pillars?

All irregular distributions cause

more stress on particles than we
typically test

SPE 115769, 114173, 115766, 90698

 Proppant “arrangement” / purpose

End of
Pumping

During
Production

Arch

Dune

SPE 90698
 Oilfield and Hydraulic
Fracturing 101 “Type” Slides
 Definitions
&
Comparisons
A Typical Proppant Brochure
A Typical Proppant Brochure
 Definitions
• Shape – Sphericity & Roundness
– We describe proppants in terms of roundness and sphericity

0.9

0.7
Sphericity

0.5

0.3

0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9

Roundness
Proppant Comparisons - Shape

0.9
Premium
ceramics
Some
0.7 ceramics
Sphericity

Premium
0.5 sands
Many
sands
0.3

0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9

Roundness

API RP60, From Stratigraphy and Sedimentaion, Krumbein and Sloss

 Sieve Opening

Definitions U.S. Mesh

5
(in)
0.1570
(mm)
4.0000
6 0.1320 3.3600
• Size (Mesh) 7 0.1110 2.8300
8 0.0937 2.3800
– ASTM Sieve Series 10 0.0787 2.0000
12 0.0661 1.6800
• Based on fourth root of 2 14 0.0555 1.4100

• Every fourth screen 16 0.0469 1.1900

18 0.0394 1.0000
represents doubling of 20 0.0331 0.8400

particle diameter 25 0.0280 0.7100

30 0.0232 0.5890
20/40 35 0.0197 0.5000
– What is “in spec”? 40 0.0165 0.4200

• 90% of proppant falls

45 0.0138 0.3510
50 0.0117 0.2970
through top screen and is 60 0.0098 0.2500

caught on bottom screen 70 0.0083 0.2100

80 0.0070 0.1770
• No more than 1% on the 2nd 100 0.0059 0.1490
120 0.0049 0.1240
screen below bottom 140 0.0041 0.1040

• i.e. 20/40, 30/50, etc 170 0.0035 0.0880

200 0.0029 0.0740
 Particle Size (Sieve)
Distribution
70
20/40 White Sand
20/40 Economy LWC
60
20/40 Premium LWC

50
Weight Percent

40

30

20

10

Mesh Size => 60 50 40 35 30 25 20 18 16

20/40 Mesh
 Density

• ASG (g/cc)
– Apparent Specific Gravity
• Density of the pellet
• Important for densitometer calibration

• BD (g/cc or lb/ft3)
– Bulk Density
• Density of loose pack (how many lbs to fill a cc or ft3)
• Important for final frac geometry

• Absolute Volume (gal/lb)

– Volume taken up by 1 lb of proppant
• Straight conversion from ASG (using 8.33 lb/gal water)
• Used for densitometer calibration
 TYPICAL PROPPANT DENSITIES

ASG Bulk Density

Proppant Type (g/cc) (g/cc)

Sand 2.65 1.60

Resin Coated Sand

Light Weight Ceramic 2.72 1.62

Intermediate Density Ceramic 3.27 1.84

High Density Ceramic 3.56 2.00

 The Importance of Density
• The industry purchases proppant by mass;
however, the value is derived from the
volume/conductivity.
• Users rarely choose to purchase 20%
greater mass of proppant when they use an
IDC over an LWC.
• Instead, the same treatment design is
pumped (total job size and concentration)
regardless of proppant density.
 Crush

• Crush tests procedures dictated by ISO

standards.
• Originally developed for use in quickly
qualifying new sand mines
• Extreme caution must be exercised when
using for proppant selection purposes
• SPE 119242 – Crush Testing Myths
 ISO 13503-2 Crush Test Procedure
(More details in SPE 119242)
• Proppant is pre-sieved to
remove particles outside of
stated mesh range.
• Dry proppant placed in steel
cell at ~4 lb/sq ft (sand
equivalent)
• Room temperature
• Proppant evenly distributed
with level surface
• Load applied at uniform rate
• Constant stress maintained for
two minutes
• Proppant is sieved. The weight percent which falls
below the primary screen is reported.
– For 16/20 proppant all material < 20 mesh is reported as “fines”
– For 30/50 proppant all material < 50 mesh is reported as “fines”
 Definitions
• Proppant permeability
– A measure of fluid friction within the proppant pack.

• Fracture width P/L = v / kf

– Distance between formation faces. Width
loss with proppant crush, compaction, and
embedment into formation
wf
• Fracture conductivity
– Proppant permeability multiplied by fracture
width. A measure of fluid carrying capacity
under low velocity flow c f = k f * wf
• Beta factor, inertial flow coefficient β
– A measure of the tortuosity within the pack. This describes the
fluid acceleration necessary within the fracture, and is a
dominant factor during realistic high velocity flow.

P/L = v/k + v2
 How is Conductivity Measured?
ISO 13503-5 Conductivity Test
• Ohio Sandstone
• 2 lb/ft2 Proppant Loading
• Stress maintained for 50
hours
• 150 or 250 F
• Extremely low water
(2% KCl) velocity (2
ml/min)
Typically referred to as a
“Long Term” Conductivity Test
Reference: ISO 13503-5
All Proppants Do not Crush the Same
Remember that 5% crush on a 20/40 proppant could be a
5g of 50 mesh particles or 5g of 200 mesh particles.
75
59
Weight Percent of total

Sieve distribution of fines

crushed material

generated at 6k psi for two

50 44
proppants

25 21 22
13
10 12
6 4 5 4
0
0
-40/+50 -50/+70 -70/+100 -100/+200 -200/+325 Pan

Source: SPE 119242

 Thin section of 1.0 lb/sqft 12/20 Hickory/Brady Sand after 6000 psi
and 150F. Blue areas are epoxy resin filling the porosity the top
and bottom edge if shown is Ohio sandstone.
Taken from the 1993 Stim-Lab, Inc. Proppant Consortium

Photo above left

C) Fines and grain shards trapped in terminal pore throats (flow was from right to left)

Photo above right

D) Close-up showing two large grains with fractures and debris in angle of pore throat. Flow is from right to left.
Does coating with resin increase the strength of an individual
proppant pellet? NO.
160

140
crush one grain

12/18
120

20/40 CarboLite
100
Hickory
Interprop
Pounds of force toCPF

80
CoSilica
Jordan
60
ResinPR

40
Note that application of
20 resin does not improve
grain strength, but rather
0 improves distribution of
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
stress between grains
Proppant Size, inches
and encapsulates fines.
When cured, it can
Source: Stim-Lab Consortium, July 2001 1.8-16 increased the strength
of the proppant pack.
 The History of Proppants
• 1940’s
– Experimental fracture treatments without proppant
– Unpropped fractures quickly healed with little sustained benefit
• 1950’s
– Sand dredged from Arkansas River used in early treatments
– “White” sand from Saint Peter formation in Ottawa, Illinois
– “Brown” sand from Hickory sandstone near Brady, Texas - 1958
• 1960’s
– Glass beads, plastic beads, walnut hulls
– Attempted monolayer designs - failed due to settling, embedment, stress concentration
– Soluble proppant spacers
• 1970’s
– Curable resin coated sand - 1975
– First commercial bauxite ceramic - 1979
• 1980’s
– Precured resin coated sand – 1982
– Lightweight ceramic - 1985
• Recent
– Porous proppant
– Improved strength / tighter sieve distributions
– Ultra Lightweights
– Tagged / traceable proppants
Intersection of Wellbore and Fracture

Vertical Wells: Typically benefit greatly from improved conductivity

200 field studies - SPE 119143
Images not to scale!!!

Horizontal Well with Longitudinal Frac:

Uncemented or fully perforated liner
Good connection, fluid only needs to travel ½ the pay height within the frac.
proppant conductivity requirements are trivial – almost anything will be fine
Intersection of Wellbore and Fracture
Cemented Liner

Horizontal Well
Cemented liner with limited perforations
Fluid travels shorter distances within the frac, but there is significant flow
convergence around perfs.
Proppant conductivity requirements are a consideration
Lyco selected RCS for this completion style (SPE 90697)
 Proppant Selection

• Is proppant selection important?

• Specific challenges
– Vertical
– Horizontal
– Slickwater
• Proppant selection drivers in shale plays
 “Other” Proppants
• “Ultra-Lightweight”
– Developed primarily for Slickwater Fracturing
– Goal is to exploit “partial mono-layer” theory
– Typically 1.75 ASG to nearly buoyant
– Various substrates
• Stress and temperature limitations
 Challenges Of New Proppants
• Cost
– Despite commodity prices, we live in a low cost
environment
– Shale plays required larger investments in
proppant (larger volumes).
– Proppants are a large part of AFE

• Primarily talking about „niche‟ products now

– “Game-changers” will need to address cost
 Proppant Selection Drivers in Shale Plays

• Proppant Availability

• Slickwater/light gel fluid systems

• Our understanding of the hydraulic fracture in these

ultra-tight formations

• Cost vs Benefit
– Economic Conductivity
 Proppants of the Future
• Lighter Weight Proppants
– Transport in low viscosity fluid systems

• Proppants to withstand “harsh” environments

– Wells getting deeper
– Steamflooding, etc.

• “Smart” Proppants
– Microseismic/tiltmeter mapping tells us generally
where the fluids go, but not the proppant
 Worldwide Proppant Utilization
74%
18,000 8%
Sand
18%
RC Sand
15,000 Ceramic

12,000
Lbs in millions

78%
9,000 10%
12%
6,000

3,000

0
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Source: CARBO Internal estimates and PropTesters, Inc. 2006 Proppant Market Study
#2 Determine what the well needs

How much conductivity does this well need?

- Reservoir deliverability

What’s the cheapest way to get it?

Am I economically optimized?
=> Economic Conductivity®
 Resin Coated Ceramic Proppants

Optical photomicrograph of curable CARBOBond Lite –

courtesy of CARBO Ceramics

• Resin coatings can be applied to any classification of ceramic proppant

• Curable products are available for flowback control
 Proppant Types - Summary
• Sand
– Low cost – Brown vs White Sands
– Potential use in shallow, extremely low rate wells, with low formation
permeability
• Resin Coated Proppants
– Costs more than their substrates alone
– Precured - distribute stress and reduce fines migration
– Curable - reduce proppant flowback
• Ceramic
– More expensive than Sand/RCS
– Should improve production in all wells
• Mandatory in:
– Prolific Wells & High Stress or High Temperature conditions
– Not all ceramic proppants have the same quality