SPE 150263

Real-time Advanced Warning of Screenouts with the Inverse Slope Method

Leon V. Massaras, SPE, and, Dimitri V. Massaras, SPE, Pangea Energy Ltd.
Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2012 SPE International Symposium and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control held in Lafayette, Lousiana USA.15 - 17 February 2012
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed
by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Papers presented at the SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committee of Society of Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage
of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and whom the paper was presented. Write Liberian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 750833836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Unconventional plays require multiple hydraulic fracture treatments placed in vertical or horizontal wellbores in
order to be economical. These are very complex operations performed on-location in an orchestrated manner by many
contributors. A screenout puts many of the contributors on stand-by status, delays the placement of subsequent stages,
and, results in cost overruns due to stand-by charges, wellbore cleanout operations, and, lost production days. Thus,
advanced warning of screenouts is a major technical advance in hydraulic fracturing.
Advanced warning of screenouts in real-time is a great advantage due to the ability to exercise decision control for
early termination of the treatment, or extension of the treatment.
A screenout is imminent if the surface pressure slope deviates from the inverse slope (positive surface pressure
slope). This allows for early initiation of the displacement (flush) procedure, and prevents leaving in the wellbore
excess proppant. When only the designed amount of proppant is left in the wellbore high net-pressure develops, along
with adequate packing of the near-wellbore area and a much wider fracture.
A treatment can be extended if the surface pressure slope doesnt deviate from the inverse slope (positive surface
pressure slope). Thus, if extra fluid and proppant are available on location the treatment can be extended. This would
result in a much better placement of the proppant pack, as it would result in a higher net-pressure, a wider fracture, and
higher production rates.

Introduction
The inverse slope method is an empirically developed method which is used in real-time during hydraulic fracturing
operations to obtain advanced warning of an imminent screenout, thus, early termination of can be executed.
Conversely, a hydraulic fracture treatment can be extended if a screenout isnt imminent, and if enough fluid and
proppant is available on location.
The inverse slope method has much better prediction accuracy than the Net-pressure plot method (a.k.a Nolte plot)
(Nolte 1981), because, it avoids the major issues inherent in the calculating procedure of the net-pressure.
The inverse slope method has been tested on thousands of hydraulic fracture treatments, which were located in
geographically and geologically diverse settings (6 countries and 3 continents) and, in wells with depths varying from
3,280 ft (1000 m) to 17,716 ft (5400 m). The prediction accuracy exceeds 95%.

Historical Background
The Net-pressure plot method (a.k.a. Nolte plot) (Nolte 1981) is the most widely used real-time diagnostic and
decision control procedure (method) for avoiding a screenout or extending a propped hydraulic fracture treatment. See
Figure 1 for a typical Net-pressure plot.
The logic of the Net-pressure plot method is very sound, as it is based on the behavior of the net-pressure (the

SPE 150263

pressure which holds the fracture open). However, the method isnt very useful in predicting a screenout or extending a
fracture treatment in real-time, as the algorithm for the net-pressure calculation as implemented in almost all
commercially available fracture propagation simulators has major issues:
Ignores the near-wellbore friction,
Ignores fracture tip dilatancy effects,
Assumes (wrongly) that the net-pressure decreases linearly to the tip of the fracture. See blue line in Figure 2,
Assumes (wrongly) that perforation friction is constant throughout the mainfrac treatment,
Ignores proppant addition effects (which vary with proppant: mesh size, type, and density),
Cannot account for effects related to the actual width of the fracture entry (an unknown).
A fracture can be thought of as a container filled with fluid under pressurized conditions (e.g., a balloon). Usually
the pressure inside the balloon is the constant everywhere (ignoring gravitational and density difference effects). Only
at the tip of the fracture the pressure declines rapidly, due to rock dilatancy and fracture re-opening effects. This is
depicted with the red line in Figure 2. The pressure in the fracture is constant, because the fluid velocity is very low.

Figure 1: Diagram showing a typical Net-pressure plot method (a.k.a. Nolte plot). The plot doesnt provide any distinct features on
which to base decisions such as when to initiate displacement (flush) or to decide to extend the hydraulic fracture treatments.

Screenout Prediction Diagnostic Methods

The screenout prediction diagnostic methods are classified into two groups:
Post-minifrac Diagnostic Methods
Real-time Diagnostic Methods

SPE 150263

Post-minifrac Diagnostic Methods:

Many methods have been devised for predicting screenout potential of propped hydraulic fracture treatments after
the minifrac diagnostic procedure has been performed and analyzed. By far the most widely used post-minifrac
diagnostic method is conventional fracture entry friction analysis (Cleary et al 1993) which has been implemented on
nearly every commercially available fracture propagation simulator, and, has increased awareness of the detrimental
effects of near-wellbore restrictions. Lizak et al. (2006), report that the result has been improved design and placement
procedures, and, decreased occurrence of screenouts.
Many methods have been developed to quantify and analyze the tendency of hydraulic fracture treatments to
screenout, which attest to the importance of solving the problem of all to frequent screenout occurrence. The postminifrac diagnostic methods which have been proposed are listed and referenced as follows:
ISIP Gradients,
Chipperfield et al. (2000), Roberts et al. (2000),
Step-Up Rate Test (SRT) or (SUT)
Chipperfield et al. (2000),
Conventional Fracture Entry Friction Analysis
Cleary et al. (1993),
Enhanced Fracture Entry Friction Analysis
Massaras et al. (2007),
Pressure Declining Gradients (PDG)
Yang et al. (2008),
Median Ratio and Near-wellbore Friction
Massaras et al. (2011).

Real-time Diagnostic Methods:

The real-time diagnostic methods which have been proposed are listed and referenced as follows:
Net-pressure plot (a.k.a. Nolte Plot)
Nolte (1981),
Inverse Slope Method
Massaras et al. (2012) (this publication).
It is beyond the scope of this paper to discuss and elaborate on all of the above listed methods. The reader is
directed to the listed references.

Typical Surface Pressure Behavior

After the pad has been pumped, proppant addition begins, which causes the hydrostatic pressure in the wellbore to
gradually increase, and the surface pressure to gradually decrease at a fairly constant slope. Once the entire wellbore is
filled-up with slurry (which is at maximum proppant concentration) maximum hydrostatic pressure is reached, thus,
the surface pressure ceases to decline. As the treatment progresses the pressure can remain constant for a while, or it
can start increasing gradually.
Once the gradual pressure increase has commenced, it should be noted that the inverse slope (positive surface
pressure slope) increase is almost equal (but opposite) to the pressure decrease noted earlier when the wellbore was
being loaded (filled-up with proppant-laden slurry).
Deviation of the surface pressure from the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope) is a positive indication
that the treatment is screening out at the near-wellbore area. This diagnostic provides adequate advance warning of an
imminent screenout, in order to start pumping the displacement (flush) stage, and avoid a screenout.
The methodology of inverse slope was developed empirically by analyzing thousands of hydraulic fracture
treatments during the past 8 years. It has a very high predictive accuracy exceeding 95%.

SPE 150263

Negative Surface Pressure Slope

A typical mainfrac treatment starts by pumping the pad stage which consists of clean fluid (no proppant is
included), followed by proppant-laden stages of progressively increased proppant concentration, which causes
progressively increasing slurry density, and consequently progressively increasing hydrostatic pressure in the wellbore.
The progressively increasing hydrostatic pressure in the wellbore causes a progressively decreasing surface
pressure, which has negative slope. When the entire wellbore is full of slurry at maximum proppant concentration the
surface pressure begins to flatten out and has a slope of zero, a condition which may not last long if near-wellbore
friction is a very serious issue, or, it may last for a while, if near-wellbore friction isnt a very serious issue.

Inverse slope (Positive Surface Pressure Slope)

Visual inspection of surface pressure plots from thousands of hydraulic fracture treatments indicates that if the
inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope) has a magnitude which is equal to the magnitude of the negative surface
pressure slope a screenout will not occur. See Figure 3. The rate of increase of the inverse slope (positive surface
pressure slope) depends greatly on the presence, size, and concentration of proppant in the near wellbore area of the
fracture, and to a lesser extent to the presence of proppant deep (far-field) in the fracture.

Figure 2: Diagram shows two methods for calculating net-pressure: Conventional and true. The conventional method ignores nearwellbore friction, and, assumes linear pressure loss along the fracture length (see solid blue line). The true method is more
representative of pressure loss along the fracture length as it accounts for the previously mentioned components (see solid red
line). (Adopted and modified from Massaras et al., 2007).

SPE 150263

A deviation of the pressure trend from the positive surface pressure plot is a strong positive indication that a
screenout is imminent at the surface, as it is already occurring at the near-wellbore area, as such, the displacement
(flush) procedure should start immediately in order to be able to displace all the proppant from the wellbore, thus,
leaving only enough proppant in the wellbore to ensure that the near-wellbore area is propped open with the maximum
fracture width possible.
The above mentioned plot data on which the inverse slope method has been based and tested, are geographically
and geologically diverse. That is, they are from 6 countries and 3 continents, and, vary in depth from 3,280 ft (1000 m)
to 17,716 ft (5400 m).

Figure 3: Typical surface pressure behavior of a screened-out hydraulic fracture treatment, showing that the negative surface
pressure slope is equal in magnitude but opposite to the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope). It also shows that when
the surface pressure slope starts to deviate from the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope), it is the start of an advance
warning interval, at which point displacement (flush) should commence immediately.

Inverse Slope Equal but Opposite of the Negative Surface Pressure Slope
The negative surface pressure slope (see Figure 3) is equal but opposite in magnitude of the Inverse slope
(positive surface pressure slope) because higher proppant concentration results in a higher hydrostatic pressure and a
steeper negative surface pressure slope. When slurry with increased proppant concentration arrives at the perforated
interval, it encounters difficulties in passing through the tortuous near-wellbore area, which manifests itself as higher
pressure loss due to friction, and a steeper inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope).
The negative surface pressure slope and the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope) are the opposite of
each other (equal but opposite slope) for standard proppant mesh sizes and types. This may not be true for large
proppant mesh sizes.

SPE 150263

Deviation of Inverse Slope Means Imminent Screenout

When deviation of the surface pressure trend from the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope) is noted, it is a
positive indication that a screenout is imminent, as it already has initiated at the near-wellbore area, and as such,
displacement (flush) should commence immediately, in order to avoid leaving the wellbore partially full or entirely full
of proppant.
On many occasions, the inverse slope method allows for achieving a screenout while at the same time leaving in the
wellbore the designed amount of proppant, which, depending on casing size, usually varies about 500 lbs (0.5 tonnes)
- 2000 lbs (2.0 tonnes).
When cross-linked gel or a proppant slug arrives at the perforations, the negative surface pressure slope shifts to the
right, however the negative surface pressure slope returns to the pre-existing trend. See Figure 5. This proves that nearwellbore friction loss phenomena have great influence on the screenout behavior of hydraulic fracture treatments and
on the trends of both the negative and the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope).

Screenout Pressure Behavior

There are two types of screenout pressure behaviors:

Gradual Screenout Pressure Behavior,

Abrupt Screenout Pressure Behavior.

Gradual Screenout Pressure Behavior

The gradual screenout pressure behavior is caused by inability of the proppant to pass through the near wellbore
area. The pressure increases gradually and in a concave upward fashion. This is referred to as Tip Screenout (TSO).
Contrary to popular belief, there isnt such a thing as a TSO in conventional and unconventional fracturing (where
supposedly proppant reaches the tip of the fracture, becomes immobile and causes a screenout. A tip screenout can
happen only during a frac-pack treatment normally performed on high permeability unconsolidated formations.

Abrupt Screenout Pressure Behavior

The abrupt screenout pressure behavior is caused by proppant which doesnt enter the fracture, but is diverted and
falls to the bottom of the well, and slowly fills the interval below the perforations. Once the interval bellow the
perforations is filled, the perforated interval begins to fill-up slowly, and once the entire perforated interval has been
completely blocked by proppant, an abrupt pressure increase is noted. This is referred to as a wellbore screenout.

Extending a Hydraulic Fracture Treatment

The Inverse Slope method can be used in real-time to extend a hydraulic fracture treatment, that is, as long as the
surface pressure isnt deviating from the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope) the treatment can be extended
without risking a screenout. See dashed black line in Figure 4.
The maximum that a treatment can be extended can be determined by the use of the surface pressure stabilization
line, which can be extended horizontally from the stabilized pressure level reached during the pad stage (when only
clean fluid is being pumped). See solid horizontal black line in Figure 4.
Usually this is the maximum pressure that can be reached when extending a hydraulic fracture treatment. Extending
any longer most likely will use-up all or part of the hydrostatic clearance (see Figure 4), which results from the lighter
fluid usually used for displacement (flush), which causes a rapidly decreasing hydrostatic pressure and a corresponding
rapidly increasing surface pressure.
The consequence of using-up the hydrostatic clearance is that maximum allowable pressure of the well equipment
(wellhead, casing, wellhead isolation tool (tree saver), etc.) will be reached early, which, will necessitate early
termination of the hydraulic fracture treatment, and usually means that excess proppant is left in the wellbore, and
requiring wellbore cleanout operations.

SPE 150263

Screenout isnt Necessarily Bad

Even though a disruption in operations has significant costs, it may not be necessarily bad for the well, as many
screened-out wells have proven to be very good produces, probably because of development of very high net-pressure,
which usually results in a much wider fracture (especially at the near-wellbore region).

Figure 4: Extending a hydraulic fracture treatment can be undertaken if the surface pressure slope isnt deviating from the inverse
slope (positive surface pressure slope), up-to where the surface pressure intersects the pressure stabilization line.

Conclusions
1. The Inverse Slope Method is a very simple and very accurate method for obtaining real-time advance warning
of an imminent screenout of a hydraulic fracture treatment.
2. The inverse Slope Method can be used for decision control to extend a hydraulic fracture treatment.
3. The Inverse Slope method has been tested on numerous geographically and geologically diverse settings, and
at greatly varying well depths.
4. The Inverse Slope Method has proven to be very accurate when used to call a screenout. The accuracy is
greater than 95% when standard mesh size proppant is utilized in the hydraulic fracture treatment.

Recommendations
1. During real-time fracturing operations, it is recommended to make two plots of the surface pressure. One plot
should be of the entire mainfrac treatments, while the other one should be zoomed-in on the inverse slopes.
2. On the zoomed-in plot, it is recommended to add movable smart lines on both the negative surface pressure
slope and on the inverse slope. This allows for effective visual monitoring of the pressure trend.
3. The zoomed-in plot can be used to decide to terminate early a hydraulic fracture treatment immediately upon
noticing deviation of the pressure trend from the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope).
4. The zoomed-in plot can be used to decide to extend a hydraulic fracture treatment as long as the surface
pressure trend doesnt deviate (diverge) from the inverse slope (positive surface pressure slope).

SPE 150263

References
Chipperfield, S.T., Roberts, G.A., Miller II, W.K. Vandersypen, R.S.: Gel Slugs: A Near-Wellbore Pressure-Loss
Remediation Technique for Propped Fracturing, SPE Paper 59777, 2000 SPE/CERI Gas Technology
Symposium, 3-5 April, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Cleary, M. P., Johnson, D. E., Kogsboll, H. H., Perry, K. F., de Pater, C. J., Stachel, A., Schmidt, H. and Tambini, M.:
Field Implementation of Proppant Slugs to Avoid Premature Screenout of Hydraulic Fractures With Adequate
Proppant Concentration, SPE paper 25892, 1993 SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting and Low-Permeability
Reservoirs Symposium, Apr. 26-28, Denver, CO.
Lizak, K., Bartko, K., Self, F., Izquierdo, G., and Al-Mumen, M. (2006): New Analysis of Step-Rate Injection
Tests for Improved Fracture Stimulation Design, SPE paper 98098, International Symposium and Exhibition on
Formation Damage Control, 15-17 February, Lafayette, Louisiana.
Massaras, L.V., Dragomir, A., Chiriac, D. (2007): Enhanced Fracture Entry Friction Analysis of the Rate Stepdown Test, SPE paper 106058, SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, January 29-31, College
Station Texas.
Massaras L.V., Massaras, D.V., Al-Subhi, S., (2011). The Median Ratio and Near Wellbore Friction: Useful
Proppant Admittance Criteria for Design and Placement of Safe and Effective Propped Hydraulic Fracture
Treatments, SPE paper 149092, Presented at the SPE/DGS ATSE, May 15-18, Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia.
Nolte, K.G. (1981): SPE 8297, Interpretation of Fracturing Pressures, Journal of Petroleum Technology, September
1981, pages 1767-1775.
Roberts, G.A., Chipperfield, S.T., Miller II, W.K. (2000): The Evolution of a High Near-Wellbore Pressure Loss
Treatment Strategy for the Australian Cooper Basin, SPE paper 63029, SPE ATCE, 1-4 October, Dallas, Texas.
Yang, Y., Hu, G., Kremer, A. (2008): Using Prefrac Test Information to Predict and Avoid Screenout Associated
with Slickwater Frac in Tight Gas Sands at the Wattenberg Field in the Denver-Julesburg Basin, SPE paper
115214, SPE ATCE, 21-24 September, Denver, Colorado.

Figure 5: When cross-linked gel or proppant slug arrives at the perforations the negative surface pressure slope shifts to the right
but the slope remains unchanged. This proves that both the negative slope isnt only a function of hydrostatic pressure, but also a
function of near-wellbore friction.