Table 2 Technical comparison.
Comparison parameters | Traditional methods (flow limiting method / hydraulic jetting) | Bridge plug cluster perforation combined technology | Technical advantages |
|---|---|---|---|
Zonal isolation capacity | Limited number of zones (typically < 10 zones), single perforation cluster per zone | Unlimited number of zones (up to 50 zones), multiple perforation clusters per zone (3 to 5 clusters) | Reservoir stimulation coverage increased by 200% to 300% |
Construction efficiency | Multiple trips in and out of the well (each zone takes > 8 h), high labor intensity | Continuous tubing or wireline pump delivery combined operation (each zone takes < 3 h), overall, well operation cycle shortened by 40% | Suitable for factory operation mode (simultaneous construction of well groups on large platforms) |
Reservoir stimulation effect | Short fracture extension length (< 150 m), low fracture network complexity | Complex fracture network formed (fracture length > 300 m, fracture width > 5 mm), proppant placement concentration increased by 50% | Estimated ultimate recovery (EUR) per well increased by 1.5 to 2 times |
Wellbore integrity | High risk of casing damage by hydraulic jetting, flow limiting method may clog perforation holes | No mechanical damage to casing, perforation cluster cleanliness > 95%, full wellbore diameter after pressure treatment | Reduce well maintenance costs, extend wellbore life |
