Introduction

The most important material used in hydraulic fracturing is the one that remains in the well
after the invoice has been paid: the propping agent, or proppant. And the most important
part of the fracturing operation is the placement of this proppant. All aspects of treatment
design should be considered from this viewpoint.
To optimize a treatments impact on the reservoirs long-term productivity, it is essential to
attain both deep fracture penetration and adequate fracture conductivity. It is also essential
to achieve a proper balance between these two parameters in order to maximize their
respective benefits. In reservoirs of very low permeability, we must create very long
fractures; at the same time, we must provide sufficient conductivity to effectively utilize
most of the created fracture length. In higher permeability reservoirs, it is equally important
to adequately prop the short fracture in order to realize the maximum benefit from the
created fracture width.
Many different propping agents are available. Each has an application or range of
applications for which it is best suited. It is the design engineers responsibility to determine
which of these materials will most economically provide the required conductivity for a
specific situation.
The factors that determine the extent of productivity improvement resulting from fracture
stimulation are
the extent of the fracture area contacting the pay layer
the dimensioned fracture conductivity (the product of the fracture width and the
proppant permeability)
Proppant Pack Permeability and Fracture Conductivity
The purpose of the propping agent is to prop open the fracture after it has been created.
The proppant must be capable of holding the fracture faces apart so that formation fluids
can flow through the fracture with a minimal loss of energy, and it must be long lasting.
From a practical standpoint, it should be capable of being placed using pumping equipment
and a fluid system that are currently available. It should also be readily available, safe to
handle, and relatively inexpensive. The most important property of the created proppant
pack is dimensioned fracture conductivity.
Dimensioned fracture conductivity is the product of the packed fractures in-situ
permeability and its effective propped width. Both permeability and width may vary along
the fracture. If there are less than three layers of the propping agent, the permeability of
the proppant "pack" increases. At one time, there were high hopes in the fracturing
community over the fact that in laboratory or in computer programs the permeability of a
partially filled monolayer might be an order of magnitude higher than that of the densely
packed pack. Now we understand that the attractiveness of the monolayer concept is limited
to laboratory and to computer programs. In the formation there is no way to realize a
partial monolayer which keeps the fracture faces apart uniformly.

Proppant permeability is determined in the laboratory by measuring the flow rate through a
proppant-filled test cell of finite dimensions at several flowing pressure differentials until
steady state flow is achieved. The test cell is configured such that elevated temperature and
uniaxial loading to simulate closure stress may be applied. The cross-sectional area of the
test cell is then used in Darcy's linear flow equation to determine the proppant permeability.
The permeability is generally plotted versus the applied stress loadings. Standardized test
specifications have been accepted by the industry, see API RP 56 "Recommended Practices
for Testing Sand Used in Hydraulic Fracturing Operations."
Fluid residue and proppant crushing can adversely affect in-situ proppant pack permeability.
Proppant crushing (mechanical damage) deteriorates permeability and to a certain extent it
may cause the delayed decrease of the effective width. For a given type of proppant, in-situ
stress will govern the level of permeability reduction due to mechanical damage. Gas wells
may exhibit an additional negative effect: the reduction of apparent permeability due to
non-Darcy flow.
The mechanical damage of proppant at the in situ closure stress is the key determinant in
proppant selection. However, the fact that sand loses part of its permeability at higher
closure stresses should not automatically mean that above a certain closure stress, we must
select a more expensive proppant. We may instead consider using larger widths (i.e., larger
areal proppant concentration) to compensate for the loss in dimensioned conductivity. The
correct decision should involve a detailed cost analysis of the available options.

Properties Affecting Proppant Performance

Mechanical and Geometric Properties
The propping agent qualities that have consistently proven effective in achieving proppant
packs of high permeability and good integrity are:
small, rounded particles
uniform size (narrow mesh distribution)
high degree of sphericity
high compressive strength
high degree of roundness
consistent density
insolubility in reservoir fluids
stability at reservoir temperature

The API has established specifications and test procedures to ensure that essential proppant properties
are met.
Roundness and Sphericity
Particle roundness essentially refers to lack of angularity. In fracturing proppants, it is
determined visually and reported as a Krumbein Roundness factor on a scale of 0.1 to 1.0. A
value of 0.1 indicates the presence of acute angles, as compared to 0.9 roundness
indicating irregular but smooth grain curvature.
Sphericity is measured and reported on a similar basis, with 0.01 sphericity indicating the
presence of either or both highly convex and concave surface variances, and 1.0 sphericity
indicating an almost perfect sphere.
A perfectly smooth sphere would have roundness of 1.0 and a sphericity of 1.0. No naturally
occurring proppant has this idealized characteristic. A manufactured proppant having this
characteristic is glass beads formed by dropping molten glass through a cool atmosphere.
A well-formed proppant such as Northern White Sand, typically referred to as "Ottawa"
(which has a Krumbein roundness of 0.8 and sphericity of 0.7), has a permeability versus
closure stress profile as shown in Figure 1 (Sand permeability vs.

Figure 1

closure stress of Northern White Sand. Courtesy Dowell-Schlumberger). Texas Brown Sand,
although also generally considered to be well rounded (with a Krumbein roundness of 0.6
and sphericity of 0.7) is less rounded than Northern White Sand. Its permeability
performance curve is shown in Figure 2 (Sand permeability vs.

Figure 2

closure stress of Texas Brown Sand. Courtesy Dowell-Schlumberger). The less rounded sand
has a slightly superior performance under conditions of low stress because the irregular
particles do not fit together quite as closely as the rounded particles. However, as the stress
is increased, the loss in permeability is more rapid in the less rounded material because of a
higher incidence of particle failure caused by the angularity. After the amount of residue
present in the fracture (from the crushed proppant) reaches a critical level, the permeability
drops off very quickly.
This particle failure by crushing is believed to be caused mainly by small imperfections in
the particle sphericity and the resultant random but highly concentrated point-to-point
loading that increases as the stress load is increased. These surrounded points may be
easily broken off or may actually "chisel" into adjacent particles, scratching the surface. Like
window glass, silica proppants, especially man-made glass bead proppants, tend to fail at
the point where the surface has been scratched. Opportunities abound for the proppants to
be scratched during the handling and pumping operation. But the most likely time for this to

happen is during the final moments of fracture closure when the proppant pack is squeezed
into a minimum volume and forced to conform to any irregularities in the face of the
fracture.
Size and Size Distribution
Proppant size is specified as a mesh range, such as 20/40 or 12/20. The diameters of the
largest and smallest particles in API standard mesh ranges are shown in Table 1.

API mesh size

Particle diameter

(in.)

Largest

Smallest

6/12 0.0661

8/16 0.0469

12/20
0.0331

0.1320

0.0937

0.0661

16/30 0.0469
0.0232

20/40 0.0331
0.0165

30/50
0.0232
0.0117

40/70 0.0165
0.0083

70/140 0.0083
0.0041

Table 1: Standard Mesh Sizes

The larger the proppant diameter, the greater the permeability will be up to a certain
point. Compare the permeabilities for 20/40 and larger sands, as shown in Figure
1 and Figure 2 . Even though large particles provide high flow capacities at low closure
stress, they are more sensitive to increases in closure stress, and the permeability of
various sizes of proppants at high closure stresses is essentially the same. However, this is
not true for premium man-made proppants, which typically have higher compressive
strengths. They show similar proportionate losses in permeability regardless of size.
Another important consideration in selecting the correct proppant size is the fracture width
required for proppant placement. A hydraulic width approximately equal to 3 times the
nominal diameter of the proppant is considered the minimum width that will allow free
movement of the proppant through the fracture. For the 20/40 mesh, a minimum fracture
width of 0.08 in. is required. The larger 12/20-mesh proppant requires a minimum fracture
width that is twice that required for the 20/40 mesh. Larger proppants are not only more
difficult to inject but are more likely to be damaged mechanically. More than 85% of all
proppants used today are 20/40 mesh or smaller.
Grain-size distribution is an important property. Using a narrow range of particle sizes
maximizes proppant permeability. By controlling the variance in particle size within a mesh
range, the particles within the pack are separated by a maximum distance, thus providing
the highest possible permeability. Proppant suppliers control mesh distribution by passing
proppant materials through stacks of vibrating sieves and blending proportionate amounts
of each cut.Table 2 lists the typical mesh range distribution for a sample of 20/40 Ottawa

Sand.

Sieve No

Percent by Weight
Retained

16

0.1

20

1.4

30

37

35

34.3

40

21.7

50

5.3

pan

0.2

Table 2: Typical Sieve Analysis Result of Ottawa Sand

Manufactured proppants are typically sorted to more closely adhere to individual meshdistribution specification standards, with the discarded off-size material frequently recycled
through the manufacturing process.
Proppant Strength
Since resistance to mechanical damage under closure stress is known to have a major
impact on proppant performance, the effective compressive strength is one of the prime
determinants used in selecting the proppant to use. Figure 3 (Permeability of sintered
bauxite proppants. Courtesy Dowell-Schlumberger) shows the effect of closure stress on the
permeability of the proppant pack for sand and sintered bauxite.

Figure 3

Chemical/Temperature Stability
Extended exposure to high temperatures has been found to adversely affect the
performance of most proppants, including man-made materials.
The API standards include a quality control test to measure the solubility of a proppant in
hydrofluoric acid. This ensures that sands used as fracturing proppants have minimal
impurities, especially feldspars (alumina silicates). Feldspars not only reduce the proppants
compressive strength, but also are sensitive to some formation waters, which causes
additional strength degradation after prolonged exposure to high temperatures. The
maximum amount of feldspars allowed is two percent.
Brine has been found to be detrimental to the performance of proppants (including
manufactured materials) especially at extremely high temperatures. Long-term flow studies
using high-temperature reservoir fluids are currently underway in an attempt to quantify the
effects of temperature and time on proppant properties. Figure 4 (Effect of feldspars
content on conductivity of sands at the same areal concentration.

Figure 4

Courtesy of Dowell-Schlumberger) shows the effects of feldspars on short-term fracture

conductivity.
Density
Knowledge of the proppant density is essential for predicting the most probable depositional
pattern of the proppant. Manufactured proppants have higher densities than sand and
therefore settle faster. This is not a serious concern unless proppants of different densities
are mixed together, in which case they would tend to segregate by density. High-density
proppants should be used with crosslinked fluids (i.e., those having good proppant transport
capabilities) to ensure proper placement of the proppant.
Formation Properties Affecting Proppant Performance
While closure stress is by far the most important formation property affecting proppant
performance, other factors are also important. Hard rock will not allow the penetration of
proppant grains into the formation. In soft formations, however, a considerable part of the
width might be lost due to proppant embedment ( Figure 5 , Proppant embedment.)

Figure 5

The compatibility of the proppant material with formation fluids is usually not a great
concern. In the case of resin coated sands, some caution might be necessary due to
possible long-term degradation of the resin coating.
Types of Proppants
The two major categories of propping agents are naturally occurring sand and manufactured
proppants. Manufactured proppants include sintered bauxite and fused ceramic materials.
Both naturally occurring sands and manufactured proppants can be further coated with a
plastic layer to improve mechanical and chemical properties. Several names are used for
large groups of propping agents.
White Sand
A special type of naturally occurring white sand, commonly referred to as "Ottawa" sand, is
an economically and mechanically attractive propping material. Ottawa sand exceeds the
minimum standards established by the API. Compared to other sands, white sand has a
higher apparent compressive strength, exceptional sphericity and roundness properties, and
high degree of purity.

Sintered Bauxite
Sintered bauxite has exceptionally high compressive strength ( Figure 1, Permeability of
sintered bauxite proppants.

Figure 1

Courtesy of Dowell-Schlumberger), good sphericity and roundness properties, and relatively

low density. Unfortunately, it is an order of magnitude more expensive than white sand.
Sintered bauxites are used in situations where the closure stress is very high and the
potential deterioration of the proppant pack permeability would be difficult to compensate
for with larger fracture width.
Intermediate Strength Proppants
This category includes all intermediate strength fused ceramic materials (often referred to
as ISP), which use a different manufacturing process as well as a lower specific gravity raw
material. ISP products, which cost less than sintered bauxite, were developed primarily for
use in the intermediate range of closure stress between 6,000 and 12,000 psi. The high
degree of sphericity and the availability of narrow mesh ranges of these manufactured
proppants have broadened the application of these materials to include some unique shallow

applications in which exceptionally high performance products are required

( Figure 2,Permeability of ISP proppants. Courtesy of Dowell-Schlumberger).

Figure 2

Resin Coated Proppants

Resin-coated proppants are conventional proppants (commonly high-quality frac sand) that
have been coated with a thin film of plastic. The plastic film essentially encapsulates many
of the fines generated when crushing-type failure occurs. This prevents the fines from
moving about in the fracture and further reducing its flow capacity. The film also reduces the
proppants tendency to be scratched, and it reduces the effect of concentrated point-topoint loading. Since this effectively increases the closure stress limit at which the material
may be used without causing significant losses in conductivity, these products are frequently
substituted for ISP materials.
A secondary effect of the plastic coating is higher friction between the individual proppant
particles while preventing several particles from being bonded together. Therefore, resin
coated materials are less subject to proppant flowback during the flowback of the fracturing

fluid after the treatment, and/or proppant production during the first hours of hydrocarbon
production from a treated well.
Another type of plastic-coated proppant uses partially cured plastic that continues to harden
after exposure to high bottom-hole temperatures.
Figure 3 shows a typical proppant selection guide (i.e., applicability ranges).

Figure 3

Table 1 gives selected permeability values for a given closure stress.

Proppant

Proppant permeability
(md)

20/40 Ottawa Sand

150,000

12/20 Texas Brown

Sand

200,000

20/40 ISP, Ceramic

310,000

20/40 HS, Bauxite

370,000

Table 1: Laboratory-Determined Permeability of Selected Proppants at 6000 psi

Exercise 1
What kind of proppant would you consider for a formation with a closure stress of 8,000 psi?
You could use either ceramic ISP or resin-coated sand. If you select the resin coated sand,
you should use a larger amount, because the pack permeability will be less; but since it is
less expensive, it might still be the right economic choice.
Exercise 2
What correction factor should be applied to proppant pack permeability values measured in
the laboratory? Why?
Laboratory permeabilities (measured at the appropriate closure stress) should be reduced by a third to a
half of their reported values to account for the effect of extraordinary damage to the proppant pack after it
is in place. This impairment may be the result of
damage from the insoluble material in the fracturing fluid,
damage caused by formation fines,
long-term degradation of the proppant due to exposure to the formation fluids,
primarily brine.
For high-rate gas wells, non-Darcy effects might cause an additional reduction in the apparent
permeability.