Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 14, 2026

Combining Microfluidics and Microrheology to Determine Rheological Properties of Soft Matter during Repeated Phase Transitions
Published on: April 19, 2018
Method for determining the flowback rate of fracturing fluid considering gel degradation during hydraulic fracturing
Chengming Ma1, Zhaobing Hao1, Fan Yang1
1China United Coalbed Methane Co., Ltd, Beijing, 100083, China.
Abstract:
Fracturing flowback plays a vital role in coalbed methane (CBM) reservoir development, but field flowback rates are still commonly selected based on operational experience and are therefore difficult to generalize across wells. To move beyond a field-application description, this study develops a mechanics-based and parameterized framework for estimating the allowable flowback-rate window after hydraulic fracturing. The model incorporates the post-break viscosity of the fracturing fluid and formulates the critical particle-mobilization condition from the force balance acting on coal fines and proppant before and after fracture closure. Instead of calibrating an empirical correlation for a single block, the method uses measurable or literature-constrained inputs, including particle size and density, fluid density and viscosity, fracture pressure differential, wetting-phase saturation, and contact-mechanics coefficients. Field parameters from two CBM wells are used as demonstrative cases to implement the workflow and to examine whether the calculated operating window is consistent with realistic field flowback-rate magnitudes. The calculated critical proppant flowback velocity ranges from 3.6 to 498 m³/day before fracture closure and 36-890 m³/day after closure, while the minimum velocity required to mobilize coal fines increases with particle size. Sensitivity analysis identifies particle radius, post-closure pressure differential, particle density, fluid viscosity, and wetting-phase saturation as the dominant controlling factors. Larger and denser particles increase the required flowback velocity, whereas higher fluid viscosity reduces it by enhancing drag. Capillary forces promote particle mobilization, while friction becomes the primary resisting force after fracture closure. Because no new laboratory flowback experiment is conducted in this work, the model is not claimed to be fully experimentally validated; instead, its reliability is supported by transparent parameterization, literature-constrained coefficients, order-of-magnitude comparison with reported flowback rates, and systematic sensitivity analysis. The proposed workflow provides a transferable screening tool for selecting flowback rates that balance early cleanup efficiency and long-term fracture conductivity in CBM and other propped-fracture operations.
More Related Videos
10:06Microfluidic Fabrication Techniques for High-Pressure Testing of Microscale Supercritical CO2 Foam Transport in Fractured Unconventional Reservoirs
Published on: July 2, 2020
12:18Pore-scale Imaging and Characterization of Hydrocarbon Reservoir Rock Wettability at Subsurface Conditions Using X-ray Microtomography
Published on: October 21, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Major Losses in Pipes
Fluid flow can be classified as laminar or turbulent, primarily based on the Reynolds number. This dimensionless number reflects the relative influence of inertial to viscous...
Flow Table Test
Concrete is placed within a truncated cone mold that is 8 inches high with an 8-inch base diameter and a 5-inch top diameter. The...
Pipe Flowrate Measurement: Problem Solving
Gradually Varying Flow