Hydraulic Fracturing

Pekerjaan fracturing eksperimental pertama dilakukan pada

tahun 1947 oleh Stanolind Oil di lapangan gas Hugoton di
baratdaya Kansas menggunakan 1000 galon asam naftena
dan bensin yang dicampur minyak sawit (napalm) dan pasir
dari Arkansas River (Montgomery dan Smith, 2010)

Fracturing Overview
Hydraulic fracturing involves the
injection of fluids into the formation
at a rate and pressure above the
fracture pressure of the reservoir in
order to create a fracture within the
rock itself. We then pack this space
with proppant which:
Improves productivity
Interconnects formation permeability
Improves EUR (Estimated Ultimate Recovery)
3

Rekahan me-bypass
damage

Veatch Jr, 1983

5

Tekanan dalam sumur merekahkan batuan

formasi

Rekahan menjalar

Memasukkan proppant ke dalam

rekahan

Flushing lubang sumur

Penampang aliran dihasilkan dari rekahan

10

Source: Economides and Nolte: Reservoir Stimulation 3rd

Ed.

11

Propped Frac & Acid Frac

open fracture
1/2"
during job
(frac width = wf)

sand used to
prop the
frac open

fracture tends to close

once the pressure has been
released

acid etched frac

walls

Hydraulic Fracturing

Increase well productivity by creating a highly conductive

path compared to the reservoir permeability.
Formation perm. = ke
Damage

Frac perm. = kf
lxf = Fracture half length

}
lxf

wf

The fracture will extend through the damaged near

wellbore area.
The fracture size is limited to two criteria :
Drainage Radius
Cost

Four Principal Parameters

Hydraulic fracturing does not change the permeability of the

given formation, but rather creates a permeable channel for
reservoir fluids to contact the wellbore.
The primary purpose of hydraulic fracturing is to increase
the effective wellbore area by creating a fracture of given
geometry, whose conductivity is greater than the formation
Dimensionless Conductivity

kf wf
Fcd
k elxf

Where;
kf = fracture permeability

Fracture conductivity
wf = fracture width
------------------------------ke = formation permeability
Formation conductivity
lxf = fracture half length

Fcd of 10-30 considered optimal

14

Effective Wellbore Radius

(rw)

By relating dimensionless fracture conductivity (F CD) to

effective wellbore radius (rw) and fracture length (lxf, or
xf) a correlation can be distinguished.
As shown here, the
Cinco-Ley Relation for r w,
as the ratio of r w/xf
increases,
so does the dimensionless
fracture conductivity.

rw = 0.5*lxf

In other words, the bit would

be as wide as the half length
of the fracture (effectively)!
Fcd 10-30

15

Effective Wellbore Radius

(rw)

The expression (rw) is to equate the in-flow areas of

wellbore and propped fracture as illustrated. This relation
shows for an infinite fracture, the effective wellbore radius
(rw) is approximately fracture penetration or length
(lxf).

rw = 0.5*xf
rw = 0.5*800 ft
rw = 400 ft
width = 800 ft!!!
For a half length of 800 feet,

800 ft.

it would equate to a 800 foot

wide drill bit!
16

Hydraulic Fracturing
Materials
Base Fluid Systems
Chemical Additives
Proppants

17

Base Fluid Systems

Slickwater Applications
Low Friction
Low Viscosity (<5cp)
Low Residue, less damaging
Low Proppant Transport
capabilities
Linear Gel Applications
Mild Friction Pressures
Adjustable Viscosity (10<x<60cp)
High Residue, more damaging
Crosslinked Applications
High Friction
High Viscosity (>100cp)
Excellent Proppant Transport
capabilities
High Residue, more damaging
Expensive
Complex Chemical Systems
pH and Temperature
dependent

Energized Fluid Applications

Carbon Dioxide
Nitrogen
Water Sensitive Formations
Depleted Under pressured wells
Low Permeable Gas Formations
High Proppant Transport
capabilities
Gelled Oil Fluids
Acidizing Services

18

Chemical Additives

Gelling Agents
Friction Reducers
Crosslinker Control
pH Adjusting Agents
Clay Control
Breakers
Scale Inhibitors
Corrosion Inhibitors
Bactericide

Oxygen Scavengers
Surfactants
Recovery Agents
Foaming Agents
Acids
Anti-Sludge Agents
Emulsifiers
Fluid Loss Agents
Resin
Activator
Multiple varieties of all additives
differing
in
concentrations, ionic charges, limitations, and
compatibilities
19

Proppant Permeability

20

Proppants

Frac Sand (<6,000psi)

Jordan
Ottawa
Brady
Resin-Coated Frac Sand (<8,000psi)
Super LC (Santrol)
Cureable
AcFrac Black (Borden)
Precured
Intermediate Strength Ceramics (<10,000psi)
Econoprop (Carbo Ceramics)
Nap-Lite (Norton-Alcoa)
High Strength Ceramics (<15,000psi)
Carboprop (Carbo Ceramics)
Sinterball (Sintex)

21

Principle of least resistance

Least Principal Stress

Horizontal fracture

Least Principal Stress

Vertical fracture
23

Vertical Fracture - Vertical

well
Bypass damage

Original skin disappears

Change streamlines
Radial flow disappears
Wellbore radius is not a
factor any more

Increased PI can be
utilized
p or q

q J post p
24

Fracture Morphology

source: Economides at al.: Petroleum Well Construction

25

Fracture Growth is Complex!

Poor fluid
diversion
?

Upwar
d
fractur
e
growth

Horizont
al
fractures
?

?
?

Out-ofzone
growth

?
Twisting
fractures

Pay

Pay

?
Perfect
fracture

Multiple fractures
dipping from vertical

T-shaped
fractures

Pinnacle Tech. Ltd.

Fracture models cannot predict highly complex behavior

Main questions
Which wellbore-fracture orientation is
favorable?
Which can be done?
How large should the treatment be?
What part of the proppant will reach the pay?
Width and length (optimum dimensions)?
How can it be realized?

27

Pseudo-steady state Productivity

Index
q Jp
Production rate is proportional to drawdown, defined as average
pressure in the reservoir minus wellbore flowing pressure

Circular:

2kh
J D p
q
B

JD

1
re 3
s
ln
rw 4

Drawdown

Dimensionless
Productivity Index

28

Hawkins formula
k

rs

s
1 ln
rw
ks

ks
Damage
penetration
distance

rw

rs

29

Exercise 1
Calculate the skin factor due to radial damage if

rs

Wellbore radius

0.328 ft

Permeability impairment

k
5 folds
ks
0.5 ft

Damage penetration

Solution of Exercise 1

rs
s
1 ln
rw
ks

rs 0.828 ft
0.828
s 5 1 ln[
] 3.7
0.328

Note that any "consistent" system of units is OK.

30

Exercise 2
Assume pseudo-steady state and drainage radius r e = 2980 ft in
Exercise 1. What portion of the pressure drawdown is lost in the
skin zone? What is the damage ratio? What is the flow efficiency?
Solution 2
The fraction of pressure drawdown in the skin zone is given by (Since we
deal only with ratios, we do not have to convert units.):

3.7
2980
ln[
] 0.75 3.7
0.328

0.31

Therefore 31 % of the pressure drawdown is not utilized because of the near

wellbore damage.
The damage ratio is DR = 31 %
The flow efficiency is FE = 69 %.
31

Exercise 3
Assume that the well of Exercise 2 has been matrix acidized and the
original permeability has been restored in the skin zone.
What will be the folds of increase in the Productivity Index?
(What will be the folds of increase in production rate assuming the
pressure drawdown is the same before and after the treatment?)
Solution 3
We can assume that the skin after the acidizing
treatment becomes zero. Then the folds of
increase is:
Folds of Increase :

r
ln[ e ] 0.75 s
rw
FOI
r
ln[ e ] 0.75
rw

2980
3.7

0.328
1.44
2980
0.75 ln
0.328

0.75 ln

The Productivity Index increase is 44 % ,

therefore the production increase is 44 % .

32

Exercise 4
Assume that the well of Exercise 2 has been fracture treated and a negative pseudo
skin factor has been created: sf = -5. What will be the folds of increase in the
Productivity Index with respect to the damaged well?

Solution 4
The ratio of Productivity Indices after and before the treatment is

2980
] 0.75 3.7
FOI 0.328
3.6
2980
ln[
] 0.75 5
0.328
ln[

The Productivity Index will increase 260 % .

33

Fully penetrating vertical fracture:

Relating Performance to Dimensions
wp

2Vfp

2xf
34

Dimensionless fracture
conductivity
2 xf

Dimensionless fracture
conductivity

C fD

kf w
kx f

fracture conductivity
no name

35

Accounting for PI: sf and f and

rw

q Jp

sf is pseudo skin factor used after the

treatment to describe the productivity

2kh
2kh
1

J D
J

B ln[ re ] 0.75 s
B
f
rw
JD is a function of what?
half-length,
dimensionless fracture
conductivity
Drainage radius, re sf is a function of what?
half-length,
dimensionless fracture
conductivity
wellbore radius, rw

36

Pseudo-skin, equivalent radius, ffactor

J

2kh

re
B ln 0.472 s f
rw

or

2kh

re
B ln 0.472
r 'w

Prats

f (C fD )
2kh

J
B

xf
0.472re
ln
s f ln
xf
rw

2kh

0.472re
ln
f
xf

Cinco-Ley
37

Notation
rw

wellbore radius, m (or ft)

r'w

Prats equivalent wellbore radius due to fracture,

m (or ft)

f s f ln

xf
rw

Cinco-Ley-Samanieggo factor, dimensionless

sf

the pseudo skin factor due to fracture,

dimensionless

rw
xf

Prats' dimensionless (equivalent) wellbore

radius
But JD is the best
38

Dimensionless Productivity
Index, sf and f and rw
JD

1
re
ln 0.472 s f
rw

or

JD

1
re
ln 0.472
r 'w

Prats

f (C fD )

1
1
JD

0.472re
xf
0.472re
ln
f

ln
s f ln
xf
xf
rw

Cinco-Ley

39

Penetration Ratio
Dimensionless Fracture Conductivity
Proppant Number
Ix

2x f

C fD

N prop

xe

y e = xe

kf w

2 xf

kx f

4k f V f,prop,1 wing
kVres

xe

2k f V f,prop,2 wing
kVres

(I x )2C fD
40

The following models, graphs and

correlations are valid for low to
moderate Proppant Number, Nprop
OK, so what IS the Proppant Number?
The weighted ratio of propped fracture volume
to reservoir volume. The weight is 2k f/k .
A more rigorous definition will be given later.
The following models are valid for N prop <=0.1 !
(The case when the boundaries do not distort
the streamline structure (with respect to lower
proppant numbers.)

41

Prats' Dimensionless Wellbore

Radius
1.0

rw'
0.5
xf

'
w

r
xf

0.1

rw'
0.25 C fD
xf
0.01
0.1

1.0

C fD

kf w
kx f

10

100

42

Cinco-Ley and Samaniego graph

f (CfD)= sf + ln(xf/rw)
4

1.65-0.328u+0.116u 2
f (C fD )
1+0.18u+0.064u 2+0.005u 3
where u ln C fD

1
use f = ln(2) for CfD > 1000
0
0.1

10
CfD

100

1000
43

Infinite or finite conductivity

fracture
Note that after CfD > 100 (or 30), nothing
happens with f.
Infinite conductivity fracture.
Definition: finite conductivity fracture is a not
infinite conductivity fracture (CfD < 100 or 30)
(Other concept: uniform flux fracture, we will
learn later.)

44

Proppant Number Various ways to look at i

N prop I C fD
2
x

Nprop= const means

fixed proppant volume

N prop

4k f x f w
2
e

kx

4k f V1 wing , propped
2
e

kx h
2k f V2 wing , propped
kVreservoir
45

Fig 1: JD vs CfD (moderate Nprop)

46

Fig 2: JD vs CfD (large Nprop)

47

Optimal length and

width

Struggle for propped volume: w and xf

2Vfp = 2h wp
2Vfp = 2h wp
xf
xf

V fp hw p x f

C fD

k f wp
kx f

V fp k f

1/ 2

C fDV fp k

1/ 2

xf

C hk
fD

wp

hk f

48

The Key Parameter is the

Proppant Number

0.5

Dimensionless Productivity Index, JD

X e=Y e

Ye
0.4

Ix =1

2Xf

Medium perm

0.1

Xe

0.06

0.03

0.3
0.01
0.006

High perm
Frac&Pack

0.003
0.001

0.2

0.0006
0.0003
N prop=0.0001

-4

10

-3

10

-2

-1

10
10
10
Dimensionless Fracture Conductivity, CfD

10

10

49

The Key Parameter is the

Proppant Number
2.0

Dimensionless Productivity Index, JD

X e=Y e

Ye

Ix =1
100

2Xf

1.5

60

Xe

30

10

Low perm
Massive HF

1.0
3

1
0.6
0.3

0.5

Medium perm

N prop =0.1

0.1

10

100

1000

Dimensionless Fracture Conductivity, CfD

50

Let us read the optimum from the JD

Figures!
dimensionless fracture conductivity
(for smaller Nprop)
penetration ratio
(for larger Nprop)
51

Optimum for low and moderate

Proppant Number
0.5
X e=Y e

Dimensionless Productivity Index, J

Ix=1

Ye
0.4

2Xf

0.1

Xe

0.06

0.03

0.3
0.01
0.006
0.003
0.001

0.2

0.0006
0.0003
N prop =0.0001

-4

10

-3

10

-2

-1

10
10
10
Dimensionless Fracture Conductivity, CfD

10

10

CfDopt=1.6
52

Optimum for large Proppant

Number
100

Dimensionless Productivity Index, J

1.8
1.6

30

X e=Y e

Ye

10

2Xf

Xe

1.4
1.2
1.0
1

0.8

0.6

0.6
0.3

0.4

0.01

N prop =0.1

0.1

Penetration Rate, IX

53

Tight Gas and Frac&Pack:

the extremes
Tight gas k << 1 md (hard rock)

xf

V fp k f

1/ 2

C fDoptV fp k

wp

hk
fDopt

1/ 2

hk f

High permeability k >> 1 md (soft formation)

V fp k f

x f
1.6hk

1/ 2

wp

1.6V fp k

1/ 2

hk f

54

Economic optimization
Production forecast
Transient regime
Stabilized
Economics: Converting additional production
into value
Time value of money
Discounted revenue

NPV

55

Costs and Benefits

The more proppant (larger proppant
number) the higher Productivity
Index, if the given proppant volume
is placed according to the optimal
dimensionless fracture conductivity
The more proppant, the larger costs
How large should be the treatment?
NPV optimization
56

Treatment Sizing
N

Rev n
- Cost
n
n 1 (1 i)

NPV

57

Design Input Data

Petroleum Engineering Data
Hydrocarbon in Place, Drainage area, Thickness,
Permeability

Rock Properties
Youngs modulus, Poisson ratio,
Fracture toughness, poroelastic const

Stress State
Leakoff
Proppant and Other Fluid properties
Operational constraints

58

Rock Properties
Linear Elasticity
Poroelasticity
Fracture Mechanics

59

Young's modulus and Poisson ratio

Uniaxial test
F
A

xx l
l
yy D
D

xx
E
xx

l
D

xx F
A

yy

xx
D/2

Linear stress-strain relations

60

Other elasticity constants

E,

G,

E ,G

Shear modulus, G

E
21

Young's modulus, E

2G 1

Poisson ratio,

E 2G
2G

Plane strain modulus, E'

E
1 2

2G
1

4G 2
4G E

Required

Known

61

Formation Classification

Two types
Consolidated and tight
E = 106 + psi
Unconsolidated and soft E = 105 - psi

62

Poroelasticity and Biots

constant

p
Total Stress = Effective Stress + [Pore Pressure]

63

Who Carries the Load?

Total Stress = Effective Stress + [Pore Pressure]
Grains

Force

Biots constant

Pore Fluid

64

Stress State in Formations

Far Field and Induced Stresses, Fracture
Initiation and Orientation
Stress versus Depth
Minimum Horizontal Stress
Magnitude and Direction

65

Total (absolute) horizontal

stress
The simplest model:
g dz
D

v v p

v p
h
1
'

v p p
h
1
1) Poisson ratio changes from layer to layer
2) Pore pressure changes in time
66

0
Ground Surface
Critical Depth
977 m

-1000
m
mu

-1500

Tr
u

Ho
riz

-2000

on
tal
s
es
St r

-2500
-3000
0

20x106

O
rig
i

Ve
rt
ic
al

-500
-1000

na

lV
er
tic

St
re
ss

-1500
al

40x106
60x106
Stress, Pa

St

re
ss

Current Depth , m

-500

ni
Mi

Depth from original ground surface, m

Crossover of Minimum Stress

-2000

-2500
80x106
67

Stress Gradients
Overburden gradient gradient
Slope of the Vertical Stress line

1.1 psi/ft

Frac gradient

Basically the slope of the

minimum horizontal stress line
0.4 - 0.9 psi/ft
Extreme value: 1.1 psi/ft or
more
68

Linear Elasticity + Fractures

The force opening the fracture comes from net pressure
Net pressure = fluid pressure - minimum principal stress
pn
=
p
min
The net pressure distribution determines the width profile
Plane strain modulus and characteristic half length

69

Ideal Crack Shapes (Plane

strain)
Plane strain: Infinite
repetition of the same picture (2D)
Plane - strain modulus:

E
1 2

Half length c

pn(x)
Deformation (distribution)
net pressure (distribution)

70

Shape of a pressurized crack,

pn=cons

Width

4 pn
w( x)
c2 x2
E'

Max Width
4c
w0
pn
E'

pn : net pressure
c : half length
characteristic dimension
c
w

linearity preserved

71

Height and Width in Layered

Formation
Far-field Stress

Questions:
Upper tip

Pinch point

Lower tip

Contained?
Breakthrough?
Run-away?
Up or Down?
Width?
Hydrostatic
pressure?
Height
control?
What can be
measured?

72

Pentingnya tinggi rekahan

73

Stress Intensity Factor

stress distribution
at tip
weighted pressure at tip
Pa m1/2

K I 2c

pn ( x )
c x
2

dx

1
cx

psi - in.1/2
Weighting function: the nearer
to tip, the more important the
pressure value

x
c
KI : proportionality const

74

Stability of Crack,
Propagation
Critical value of stress intensity
factor:
Fracture Toughness KIC
Propagation: when stress
intensity factor is larger than
fracture toughness

75

Application:
Fracture Height Prediction
Height containment: why is it critical?

Fracturing to water or gas

Wasting proppant and fluid

Can it be controlled?
Passive: safety limit on injection
pressure
Active: proppant (light and heavy)

76

Calculation Based on Equilibrium

Fracture Height Theory
far field stress

fluid pressure

p
r
o
f
i
l
e

77

Injection rate

Bottomhole pressure

Step rate test

Time
78

Bottomhole pressure

Step rate test

Propagation pressure

Two straight lines

Injection rate
79

3 ISIP

Fall-off (minifrac)
4 Closure

5 Reopening
6 Forced closure

7 Pseudo steady state

8 Rebound
3

2nD injection
cycle

Injection rate

Injection rate

1st
injection
cycle

Bottomhole pressure

shut-in

flow-back

Time

80

Proppant Placement
Concepts

From dynamic width (hydraulic)

to propped width (after frac
closes on proppant)
Areal proppant concentration
Added proppant concentration
Max added proppant conc
Proppant (placement) efficiency

81

Proppant Transport: Settling

Settling causes problems
proppant efficiency decreases
(proppant leaves pay layer)
screenout danger

No settling in perfect
transport fluid
Viscosity (rheology) and density
difference
(Foams: visc good, dens: bad)
82

Key concept: Width

Equation
Fluid flow creates friction
Friction pressure is balanced by injection
pressure
Net pressure is positive
Fracture width is determined by net
pressure and characteristic dimension (half
length or half height)
The combination of fluid mechanics and
solid mechanics
83

Two approximations:
Perkins-Kern-(Nordgren)
Vertical plane strain
characteristic half-length ( c ) is half
height, h/2
elliptic cross section

Kristianovich-Zheltov (Gertsmaa-deKlerk)
Horizontal plane strain
characteristic half length ( c ) is xf
rectangular cross section
84

Width Equations (consistent units)

width: w, wo,
wwell,o
viscosity:
inj. rate (1 wing):
qi
half-length: xf
plain-strain
modulus: E'
height: hf

Vf = w(h f x f )

Perkins-Kern-Nordgren PKN

ww,0 = 3.27

qi x f
E'

1/ 4

w 0.628ww, 0
Kristianovich-Zheltov
Geertsma-De-Klerk KGD

qi x
ww = 3.22
E' h
f

w 0.785ww

1/ 4

2
f

85

PKN Power-Law Width

Equation

With equivalent viscosity at

average shear rate
the maximum width at the
wellbore is
ww, 0 = 9.15

1
2n 2

ww, 0

3.98

n
2n2

1 2.14n

n
2n2

1
2n2

qi h1f n x f

1
2n 2

E'

Power Law fluid

K: Consistency (lbf/ft2)sn
n: Flow behavior index

86

Material balance +Width Equation

Vf = w(h f x f )
Vf = w A

2qi
V i = qi t e

xf
Vfe = Vi - Vlost

Average
w(xf)

hf

qi
A
Lost: spurt +leakoff

87

Pumping time, fluid volume, proppant

schedule: Design of frac treatments
Pumping time and fluid volume:
Injected = contained in frac + lost
length reached, width created
Proppant schedule:
End-of-pumping concentration is uniform,
mass is the required

Given:
Mass of proppant, target length, frac height, inj
rate, rheology, elasticity modulus, leakoff coeff,
max-possible-proppant-added-conc
88

Gross and Net Height

2qi
V i = qi t e
Vfe = Vi - Vlost
2D design: hf is given

hf

hp

Lost: spurt +leakoff

rp= hp /hf
89

Design Outcome
Constraints allow optimum placement
of the given amount of proppant
Some improvement is necessary
Consider higher quality proppant
Better fluid loss control
Better rheology
Larger allowable proppant concentration

Optimum placement is not possible

with traditional method: consider tip
screenout design

90

Tip Screenout vs. Near-well

Screenout
Screenout in the near-wellbore
region: Proppant cannot enter to
the main body of the fracture
(oftentimes in Austin chalk)
Screenout at tip: Length control
Two concepts:
Enough width for a single proppant
Enough width for the actual number
of proppant grains
91

Width to accept
proppant
At the end of pad stage the
created width has to be at least
2-3 times the proppant diameter
At the end of pumping the
proppant reaches only that part
which has a width at least 2-3
times the proppant diameter
Propped length less than
hydraulic length
92

Width ratio
criterion
Considering material coordinate,
Accounting for fluid loss
Calculate ratio of (Dry width) to
(Dynamic width)
Criterion: cannot exceed critical
value (about 0.5)

93

Net Pressure Prediction

(PKN)
Net pressure is proportional to width
Width from width equation (PKN)
Convert it to pn
E'
pn
ww, 0
2h f
Basic uses:
Feedback to height containment
Hydraulic horsepower calculation

94

Hydraulic Horsepower
Energy: (Power) (Time)
Power = (Pumping Pressure) (Injection
rate)
(Pumping Pressure) =
Minimum Stress + Net Pressure +
Friction Losses - Hydrostatic Pressure
Friction Losses : in tubulars, through
perforations and possibly in near
wellbore tortuous flow path
95

Main Tasks During

Execution

Zonal Isolation, Cement Integrity

Perforation strategy
Pumping through tubing, casing, both
Safety considerations: wellhead, casing,
tubing
Formation breakdown and Step rate test
Calibration test (Minifrac)
Pad and Proppant schedule tuning
Pumping
Monitoring: Tip screenout - near-well/well
screenout
Flush
Forced closure
Cleanup
96

Perforation and Execution

Strategy

For thin layer: Perforate the whole

interval
For thick or multilayer formation
Danger: non uniform coverage
Solution: Ball sealers, Limited entry
or Staged

Limited entry
Few perforations in small groups
High perforation friction loss
Uniform coverage

97

Monitoring
Calculate proppant concentration at
bottom (shift)
Calculate bottomhole injection
pressure, net pressure
Calculate proppant in formation,
proppant in well
Later: Add and synchronize gauge
pressure
98

Nolte-Smith plot
Log net
pressur
e

Normal
frac
propagatio
n

Tip
screenout

Wellbore
screenout

Unconfined
height
growth
Log injection
time
99

Design Improvement in a Field

Program

Sizing
Pad volume for generic design
More aggressive or defensive proppant
schedule
Proppant change (resin coated, high
strength etc.)
Fluid system modification (crosslinked,
foam)
Proppant carrying capacity
Leakoff

Perforation strategy changes

Forced closure, Resin coating, Fiber
reinforcement, Deformable particle

100

Goals and Reality

Or
1200 ft

Or
500 ft

450 ft
Pay
zone

What we want

What we get

Design Implement Monitor Analyze Learn

Optimasi fracture treatment

102