Meyer User's Guide

Users Guide Ninth Edition
Meyer
Fracturing
Simulators
Meyer & Associates, Inc.
ii
Meyer & Associates, Inc. Meyer Users Guide
Information in this document is subject to change without notice. No part of this document or the
associated software may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, for any purpose, other than as permitted in the license agreement, without the expressed
written permission of Meyer & Associates, Inc. (Meyer).
Copyright 1997, 1999, 2003-2011 Meyer & Associates, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the
United States of America.
MFrac, MF2d, MAcid, MPwri, MView, MAcq, MinFrac, MProd, MNpv, MFast, MFrac-Lite,
MShale, and MWell are trademarks of Meyer & Associates, Inc.
Microsoft, MS-DOS, Windows and Word are registered trademarks of the Microsoft Corporation.
All names of companies, wells, persons or products contained in this documentation are part of ficti-
tious scenarios and are used solely to document the use of a Meyer & Associates, Inc. product.
Software License Agreement
License Grant
This License Agreement permits you to use one copy of the Meyer software program(s) included in
the package. Meyer grants to the end user, a nonexclusive, nontransferable license, with no right to
sublicense or prepare derivative works from the program(s) in connection with your computers.
Warranty
Meyer hereby warrants that it has the right to license the program(s). Meyer agrees to defend, indem-
nify and hold harmless the end user against claims or alleged claims of infringement of any patent,
copyright or other intellectual property rights.
The licensed software is provided as-is. All warranties and representations of any kind with regard
to the licensed software are hereby disclaimed, including the implied warranties of merchantability
and fitness for a particular purpose. Under no circumstances will Meyer & Associates, Inc. be liable
for any consequential, incidental, special or exemplary damages even if appraised of the likelihood of
such damages occurring.
The licensed software includes libraries which are licensed under the Common Public License (CPL).
Any provisions of this agreement which differ from the CPL are offered by Meyer alone and not by
any other party.
Vendor Databases
The databases provided with the software are based on sound engineering practices, but because of
variable well conditions and other information which must be relied upon, Meyer & Associates, Inc.
Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.
iii
and its database suppliers make, no warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy of their data or of
any calculations or opinions expressed therein or derived therefrom. You agree that Meyer & Associ-
ates, Inc. and its database suppliers shall not be liable for any loss or damage whether do to negli-
gence or otherwise arising out of or concerning such data, calculations or opinions.
Third Party Acknowledgements
ICU License - ICU 1.8.1 and later
COPYRIGHT AND PERMISSION NOTICE
Copyright 1995-2008 International Business Machines Corporation and others
All rights reserved.
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and asso-
ciated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including
without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, and/or sell copies of the
Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, provided that the above
copyright notice(s) and this permission notice appear in all copies of the Software and that both the
above copyright notice(s) and this permission notice appear in supporting documentation.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANT-
ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT OF THIRD
PARTY RIGHTS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR HOLDERS
INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, OR ANY SPECIAL INDIRECT
OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, OR ANY DAMAGES WHATSOEVER RESULTING FROM
LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, NEGLI-
GENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH
THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THIS SOFTWARE.
Except as contained in this notice, the name of a copyright holder shall not be used in advertising or
otherwise to promote the sale, use or other dealings in this Software without prior written authoriza-
tion of the copyright holder.
All trademarks and registered trademarks mentioned herein are the property of their respective own-
ers.
UNICODE, INC. LICENSE AGREEMENT - DATA FILES AND SOFTWARE
Unicode Data Files include all data files under the directories http://www.unicode.org/Public/, http://
www.unicode.org/reports/, and http://www.unicode.org/cldr/data/ . Unicode Software includes any
iv
source code published in the Unicode Standard or under the directories http://www.unicode.org/Pub-
lic/, http://www.unicode.org/reports/, and http://www.unicode.org/cldr/data/.
NOTICE TO USER: Carefully read the following legal agreement. BY DOWNLOADING,
INSTALLING, COPYING OR OTHERWISE USING UNICODE INC.'S DATA FILES ("DATA
FILES"), AND/OR SOFTWARE ("SOFTWARE"), YOU UNEQUIVOCALLY ACCEPT, AND
AGREE TO BE BOUND BY, ALL OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREE-
MENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT DOWNLOAD, INSTALL, COPY, DISTRIBUTE OR
USE THE DATA FILES OR SOFTWARE.
COPYRIGHT AND PERMISSION NOTICE
Copyright 1991-2007 Unicode, Inc. All rights reserved. Distributed under the Terms of Use in
http://www.unicode.org/copyright.html.
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of the Unicode data files
and any associated documentation (the "Data Files") or Unicode software and any associated docu-
mentation (the "Software") to deal in the Data Files or Software without restriction, including without
limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, and/or sell copies of the Data
Files or Software, and to permit persons to whom the Data Files or Software are furnished to do so,
provided that (a) the above copyright notice(s) and this permission notice appear with all copies of the
Data Files or Software, (b) both the above copyright notice(s) and this permission notice appear in
associated documentation, and (c) there is clear notice in each modified Data File or in the Software
as well as in the documentation associated with the Data File(s) or Software that the data or software
has been modified.
THE DATA FILES AND SOFTWARE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF
ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRAN-
TIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONIN-
FRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
HOLDER OR HOLDERS INCLUDED IN THIS NOTICE BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, OR
ANY SPECIAL INDIRECT OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, OR ANY DAMAGES WHAT-
SOEVER RESULTING FROM LOSS OF USE, DATA OR PROFITS, WHETHER IN AN ACTION
OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE OR OTHER TORTIOUS ACTION, ARISING OUT OF OR IN
CONNECTION WITH THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF THE DATA FILES OR SOFTWARE.
Except as contained in this notice, the name of a copyright holder shall not be used in advertising or
otherwise to promote the sale, use or other dealings in these Data Files or Software without prior writ-
ten authorization of the copyright holder.
Independent JPEG Group
The Meyer software is based in part on the work of the Independent JPEG Group.
v
Libpng
The Meyer software includes libpng, which is:
Copyright 1998-2008 Glenn Randers-Pehrson
Copyright 1996-1997 Andreas Dilger
Copyright 1995-1996 Guy Eric Schalnat, Group 42, Inc.
The Meyer software includes software developed by Greg Roelofs and contributers for the book,
PNG: The Definitive Guide, published by OReilly and Associates.
Lua License
Lua is licensed under the terms of the MIT license reproduced below. This means that Lua is free soft-
ware and can be used for both academic and commercial purposes at absolutely no cost.
For details and rationale, see http://www.lua.org/license.html .
Copyright 1994-2008 Lua.org, PUC-Rio.
without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to
the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substan-
tial portions of the Software.
ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO
EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM,
DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR
OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR
THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
PCRE LICENSE
PCRE is a library of functions to support regular expressions whose syntax and semantics are as close
as possible to those of the Perl 5 language.
vi
Release 7 of PCRE is distributed under the terms of the "BSD" licence, as specified below. The docu-
mentation for PCRE, supplied in the "doc" directory, is distributed under the same terms as the soft-
ware itself.
The basic library functions are written in C and are freestanding. Also included in the distribution is a
set of C++ wrapper functions.
THE BASIC LIBRARY FUNCTIONS
Written by: Philip Hazel
Email local part: ph10
Email domain: cam.ac.uk
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
Cambridge, England.
Copyright 1997-2009 University of Cambridge
THE C++ WRAPPER FUNCTIONS
Contributed by: Google Inc.
Copyright 2007-2008, Google Inc.
THE "BSD" LICENCE
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted pro-
vided that the following conditions are met:
Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and
the following disclaimer.
Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions
and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the dis-
tribution.
Neither the name of the University of Cambridge nor the name of Google Inc. nor the names of
their contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without
specific prior written permission.
vii
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
"AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED
TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICU-
LAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR
CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROF-
ITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIA-
BILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING
NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFT-
WARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
WTL
The Meyer software uses a modified version of the Windows Template Library (WTL). Source code
for this modified version is available on our website.
yaml-cpp License
The Meyer software uses the yaml-cpp library which is:
Copyright 2008 Jesse Beder.
without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to
the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substan-
tial portions of the Software.
ABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO
EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM,
DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR
OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR
THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
viii
A fact is a simple statement that everyone believes. It is innocent,
unless found guilty. A hypothesis is a novel suggestion that no one
wants to believe. It is guilty, until found effective.
- Edward Teller
ix Meyer & Associates, Inc.
Table of Contents
Introduction_________________________________________ xxxvii
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xxxvii
Program Descriptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxviii
MFrac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxviii
MView . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxix
MinFrac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxix
MProd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxix
MNpv . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xl
MFast. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xl
MPwri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xl
MFrac-Lite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xl
MWell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xli
MShale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xli
About this Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xli
Whats in this Guide?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlii
Technical Support Documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xliv
How to use this Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlvi
Limited Experience with Meyer Software and Fracture Design . . . . xlvi
General Knowledge of Meyer Software and Fracturing . . . . . . . . . . xlvi
Experienced with Meyer Software and Fracturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlvi
Symbols and Conventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xlvi
Chapter 1
Getting Started _________________________________________ 1
1.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
1.2 System & Hardware Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
x Table of Contents
1.3 Installing the Meyer Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Before Installing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
To Install the Meyer Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Program Maintenance - Modify, Repair or Remove . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Database Installation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 General Application Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Application Installation Directories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Application Data Folder Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Application File Name Extensions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Application File Extension Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Long File Name Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Working Files. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Read Only Files. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Last Opened Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.5 Starting the Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Connecting the Hardware Security Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.6 Quick Start . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Program Check List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.7 Customer Support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Updating Your Hardware Key - MKey Utility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.8 Windows Fundamentals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.9 Meyer Program Basics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Button Conventions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
File Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Opening a File. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Creating a New File . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Saving a File . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Selecting a Printer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Defining the System Units. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Setting the Input and Output Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Getting Help . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Accessing Help . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Error Checking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Data Entry Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Run-Time Error Checking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table of Contents xi
File Version Checking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Working with Spreadsheets and Dialogs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Spreadsheet Keyboard Commands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Spreadsheet Mouse Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Freezing Spreadsheet Panes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Spreadsheet Options Dialog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Spreadsheet Speed Buttons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Dialog and Spreadsheet Column Sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Spreadsheets With Movable Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Working with Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Arranging Plot Windows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Moving Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Zooming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Printing Plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Plot Menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Configuring Plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Plot Templates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Run Menu for Other Meyer Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Simulation Data Windows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Run Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Display the following data windows when the simulator is run . . . . . . 70
Scale plots based on the last run while calculating. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Beep after each time step . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Disable MIN MAX error checking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Show template before running simulator. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Generating Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Viewing Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Report Configuration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Exporting Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
1.10 Unicode Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Pre-Unicode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Unicode. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Text Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Known Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
xii Table of Contents
Chapter 2
MFrac___________________________________________________ 77
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Exporting to Exodus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
2.2 Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
General Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Simulation Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Reservoir Coupling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Real-Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Net Present Value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Fluid Loss Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Treatment Type. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Treatment Design Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Wellbore Hydraulics Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Fracture Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Heat Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Fracture Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Fracture Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Flowback. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Simulate to Closure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Fracture Fluid Gradient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Propagation Parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Fracture Initiation Interval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Fracture Friction Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Wall Roughness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Tip Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Proppant Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Proppant Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Proppant Ramp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Proppant Flowback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Perforation Erosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Proppant Transport Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Proppant Settling Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Wellbore-Proppant Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Fracture-Proppant Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
2.3 Data Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Table of Contents xiii
Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Wellbore Hydraulics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
General Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Deviation Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Casing/Tubing Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Restrictions Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
BHTP References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Active . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Zone Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Perforation and Fracture Intervals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Zone Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Treatment Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Auto Design - Treatment Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Input - General Treatment Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Acid Frac Treatment Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
Real-Time/Replay Treatment Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
Graphical Treatment Scheduling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Foam Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Rock Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Rock Property Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Insert from Database. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Log File Importing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
Fluid Loss Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Constant Fluid Loss Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
Harmonic and Dynamic Fluid Loss Models. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
Time Dependent Fluid Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
Fluid Type Dependent Fluid Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
Proppant Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
Minimum Number of Proppant Layers to Prevent Bridging. . . . . . . . 193
Minimum Concentration/Area for Propped Frac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
Embedment Concentration/Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
Closure Pressure on Proppant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
Non-Darcy Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
Heat Transfer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Acid Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
Conductivity Damage Factor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
Minimum Conductivity for Etched Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Acid Fracture Closure Stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Rock Embedment Strength. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
In-situ Acid Temperature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
xiv Table of Contents
Carbonate Specific Gravity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
Fraction of Non-Reactive Fines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
2.4 Run/Performing Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Calculation Menu Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Stop Menu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
Simulate Closure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
Simulation Data Windows. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
2.5 Plots - Graphical Presentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
Viewing Plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
To Create a Plot:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
Plot Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
Fracture Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
Leakoff/Rheology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
Wellbore Hydraulics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
Diagnostic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Proppant Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Acid Transport. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Heat Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Net Present Value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Input Treatment Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Multilayer Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Multilayer Selection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Multilayer Legends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Composite Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
Multi-Axes Plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
Three-Dimensional Plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
2.6 Generating Reports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
Viewing a Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
Explanation of the Report Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
2.7 Program Databases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
Fluid Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
Fluid Code and Name. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
Specific Gravity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
Shear Rate - Viscosity at . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
Rheology Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
Friction Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
Proppant Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
Proppant Database Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
Table of Contents xv
Proppant Database Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
Non-Darcy Database. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Non-Darcy Database Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
Acid Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
Description of the Acid Database Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
Casing and Tubing Databases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
Rock Properties Database. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
2.8 Tools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .243
Proppant Calculator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
Beta Correlation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
Proppant Property Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
2.9 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .248
Chapter 3
MView _________________________________________________ 251
3.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .251
Menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253
3.2 Parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .253
Creating a Parameter List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
Using Parameter List Templates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
3.3 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .256
Data Sets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
Importing Real-Time Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
Importing a Replay Data File. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
Importing data from a Text File . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
Setup. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
Importing an MFrac or Mpwri Data File. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
Setup Templates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
Editing Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
Save Data as a Text File . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
Merge Data Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
Preferences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
3.4 Real-Time Menu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .267
xvi Table of Contents
Acquisition Toolbar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
Setup. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
Making a Modem Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
Troubleshooting Modem Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
Real-Time Data Window . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
Raw Data View . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
Translated Data View . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
Digital Data View. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
Configuring the Real-Time Data Window . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
Add Log Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
Clear Real-Time Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
Recover Real-Time Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
Real-Time Status Bar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
3.5 Simulation Setup. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
Sending Data To MFrac and/or MinFrac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
3.6 Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
Building Plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
Viewing Plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
Graphically Editing Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
Graphical Edit Menu Bar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
Chapter 4
MinFrac________________________________________________ 299
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
Fracture Closure Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
Fracture Efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
Total Leakoff Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
Fracture Geometry Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
Pressure During Injection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304
Determining Closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
Basic Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
Step Rate Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Step Down Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Horner Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
Table of Contents xvii
Regression Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
Derivative Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
After Closure Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
Permeability and Reservoir Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
Diagnostic Plots and Derivatives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
Menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
4.2 Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .316
General Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318
Graphical Technique - Use data from a text file . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318
Graphical Technique - Use real-time data from MView . . . . . . . . . . 319
User Specified Closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319
Graphical Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319
User Specified Pumping Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320
Derivative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321
Fracture Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
Fracture Friction Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322
Wall Roughness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
Tip Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 324
Proppant Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326
4.3 Data Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .327
Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
Base Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328
Young's Modulus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
Fracture Toughness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330
Poissons Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331
Total Leakoff Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332
Total Fracture Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
Flow Behavior Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
Consistency Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
Spurt Loss Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
Total Vertical Depth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
Wellbore Fluid Specific Gravity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
Flowback Time (after ISIP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
Flowback Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
Leakoff Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
Average Reservoir Fluid Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
Total Reservoir Compressibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
Equivalent Reservoir Porosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
Equivalent Reservoir Viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
Frac Fluid Leakoff Viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
xviii Table of Contents
Filter Cake Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337
Closure Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337
Injection Rate (2-wings) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
Pumping Time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
Closure Time (after ISIP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
Closure Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
History Match Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
Import Data File. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
Selecting a Data File. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
Edit Imported Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342
4.4 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343
Select Ranges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344
Analysis Wizard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
Select Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
Wizard Window. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351
Step Rate Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
Select Ranges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 362
Select Points. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
Pressure Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365
Diagnostic Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367
Step Down Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368
Select Ranges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369
Select Points. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370
Pressure Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372
Diagnostic Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374
Horner Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376
Select Ranges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
Select Points. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378
Regression Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380
Select Ranges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381
Select Points. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382
History Match . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 394
After Closure Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
Select Ranges. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398
Select TC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398
Select Points. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399
4.5 Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403
Simulation Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404
Base Data Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404
History Match Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
Table of Contents xix
Manage Points. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
4.6 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .409
Chapter 5
MProd _________________________________________________ 413
5.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .413
5.2 Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .415
General Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
Simulation Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
Well Orientation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420
Reservoir. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420
Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421
Fluid Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422
Internal PVT Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423
Production Boundary Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423
Non-Darcy Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
Permeability Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426
Fractured Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 426
Fracture - Multi-Case (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427
Variable Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428
5.3 Data Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .428
Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429
Formation Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430
Reservoir Drainage Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431
Dimensionless Reservoir Aspect Ratio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431
Dimensionless Well Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 431
Total Pay Zone Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432
Initial Reservoir Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432
Total Reservoir Compressibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 432
Equivalent Reservoir Permeability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 434
Equivalent Reservoir Porosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435
Equivalent Reservoir Viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435
Gas Specific Gravity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435
Bubble Point Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435
Oil API . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435
xx Table of Contents
Reservoir Temperature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436
Fracture Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436
Fracture Characteristics Tab. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437
Stages/Cluster Tab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440
Variable Fracture Conductivity Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442
Fracture Position. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442
Fracture Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443
Dimensionless Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443
Conductivity Gradient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443
History Match Parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443
No Fracture Case - Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
Fracture Case - Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
Multi-Case (NPV) Fracture Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
Fracture Characteristics Tab. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 446
Stages/Cluster Tab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449
Gas PVT Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451
Proppant Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452
Design Optimization Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
Total Proppant Mass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
Pay Zone Proppant Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
Proppant Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
Production Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455
Measured Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457
Well Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457
No Fracture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458
Fractured Well. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461
5.5 Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462
Plot Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463
Viewing Plots. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463
Viewing a Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 464
Production Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465
5.7 Program Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465
Non-Darcy Database. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465
Non-Darcy Database Parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466
5.8 Tools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467
Table of Contents xxi
Proppant Calculator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468
5.9 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .468
Chapter 6
MNpv __________________________________________________ 469
6.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .469
6.2 Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .470
Fluid Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471
Well Orientation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472
Revenue/Unit Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472
Unit Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472
Partner Share Option. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473
MProd Output File with NPV/Multi-Case Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473
6.3 Data Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .474
Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474
Economic Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 475
Frac Fluid Unit Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476
Proppant Unit Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477
Hydraulic Power Unit Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477
Transverse Fracture Unit Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
Fixed Equipment Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
Miscellaneous Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479
Currency Escalation Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479
Unit Revenue for Produced Oil or Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479
Unit Revenue Escalation Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480
Share of Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480
Share of Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480
Variable Unit Revenue Table. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480
Variable Share% Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482
Variable Unit Cost Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 484
6.4 Run/Performing Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .485
6.5 Plots - Graphical Presentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .486
Plot Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486
Viewing Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486
xxii Table of Contents
Viewing a Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
Treatment Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488
Net Present Value Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488
6.7 Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488
Chapter 7
MFast __________________________________________________ 491
7.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492
7.2 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 492
Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493
Input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 493
Fracture Friction Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494
Wall Roughness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495
Tip Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496
Proppant Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 498
Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 498
Base Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 499
Young's Modulus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500
Fracture Toughness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501
Poissons Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 502
Total Pay Zone Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 503
Total Fracture Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
Injection Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
Flow Behavior Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
Consistency Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
Total Leakoff Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504
Spurt Loss Coefficient. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505
Input Total Volume Injected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505
Input Fracture Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505
Maximum Proppant Concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 505
7.3 Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506
Table of Contents xxiii
Run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506
Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 507
Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508
7.4 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .509
Chapter 8
MPwri__________________________________________________ 511
8.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .511
Menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 512
8.2 Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .513
General Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
Reservoir Coupling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514
Thermal and Poro-Elastic Stresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 515
Fluid Temperature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 516
Fluid Loss Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 516
8.3 Data Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .518
Treatment Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 518
General Tab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 518
Stage Tab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 519
Thermal/Poro-elastic Stresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 520
Zone Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521
Initial Stress. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521
Layer Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522
Biots Constant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522
Thermal/Water Front Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522
Injected Fluid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523
Reservoir Lithology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523
In-situ Fluid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523
Minimum Reservoir Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 523
Reservoir Half-Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524
Drainage Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524
Fluid Loss Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 524
xxiv Table of Contents
Dynamic Fluid Loss Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527
Time Dependent Fluid Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532
Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533
Cake Properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533
Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534
Internal Deposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534
External Deposition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 535
8.5 Plots - Graphical Presentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 536
Waterflooding Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 536
Particulate Transport Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 542
8.6 Program Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 546
Damage Model Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 547
Internal Damage Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 548
External Damage Parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 551
8.7 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554
Chapter 9
MFrac-Lite_____________________________________________ 555
9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555
9.2 Options and Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556
General Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 556
Proppant Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558
9.3 Data Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
Zone Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560
Rock Properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 561
Fluid Loss Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 561
Harmonic or Dynamic Fluid Loss Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562
Table of Contents xxv
Chapter 10
MWell __________________________________________________ 563
10.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .563
Menu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 564
10.2 Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .565
General Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566
Simulation Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566
Real-Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566
Treatment Type. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567
Treatment Design Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567
Wellbore Hydraulics Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567
Wellbore Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 569
Fluid Temperature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570
Proppant Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 570
Proppant Ramp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571
Wellbore-Proppant Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 571
10.3 Data Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .573
Wellbore Hydraulics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 573
Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 573
Zone Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 574
Zone Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 574
Chapter 11
MShale ________________________________________________ 579
11.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .579
11.2 Zones Dialog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .580
Active . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581
Zone Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581
Zone Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582
Perforations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583
xxvi Table of Contents
Pay Zone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586
Fracture Network Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 588
Appendix A
Hydraulic Fracturing Theory_________________________ 611
A.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611
A.2 Governing Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611
Mass Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 612
During Pumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 612
After Pumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 612
Continuity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 612
Momentum Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613
Width-Opening Pressure Elasticity Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613
Fracture Propagation Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613
A.3 Solution Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614
A.4 Parametric Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615
A.5 Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623
A.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 625
Appendix B
Multilayer Fracturing _________________________________ 627
B.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 627
B.2 Governing Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 629
B.3 Numerical Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 631
Momentum Eqns. (i=1,,n) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 631
Table of Contents xxvii
B.4 Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .634
B.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .635
Appendix C
Multiple Fractures ____________________________________ 637
C.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .637
C.2 Far Field - Multiple Fractures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .638
Governing Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 638
Interaction Factors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 638
Flow Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 638
Stiffness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639
Fluid Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639
Momentum Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639
Width-Opening Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 640
C.3 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .640
Net Pressure for Multiple Fractures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641
Viscous Dominated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641
Toughness Dominated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 642
Constant Critical Stress. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 642
Net Pressure Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 642
Viscous Dominated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643
Toughness Dominated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643
Constant Critical Stress. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643
C.4 Near Wellbore - Multiple Fractures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .644
Governing Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 645
Laminar Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 645
Turbulent Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646
Width-Opening Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646
Near Wellbore Pressure Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646
GDK Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647
PKN Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647
General Near Wellbore Dissipation Function. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647
C.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .649
Appendix D
Fluid Loss_____________________________________________ 651
D.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 651
D.2 Leakoff. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 651
C - Total Leakoff Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 652
CI - Coefficient. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 652
CII - Coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 652
CIII - Coefficient. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 653
D.3 Spurt Loss. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 654
Appendix E
Wellbore Friction Factor _____________________________ 657
E.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 657
E.2 Friction Factor Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 657
E.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 660
Appendix F
Minifrac Methodology ________________________________ 661
F.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661
F.2 Governing Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 662
Conservation of Momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 662
Width-Opening Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 663
Fracture Propagation Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664
Fluid Loss During Pumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 666
Mass Conservation After Shut-In . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 668
Minifrac Closure Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 671
Table of Contents xxix
Dimensionless Net Pressure Slope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674
Pressure Decline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 677
F.3 Minifrac Numerical Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .679
F.4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .681
F.5 Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .683
F.6 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .686
Appendix G
Production Model Theory____________________________ 689
G.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .689
G.2 Governing Equations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .690
Dimensionless Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 690
Pseudopressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 691
Trilinear Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 692
Constant Flow Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 692
Constant Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 692
Pseudosteady-State Pressure Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 693
Pseudosteady-State Resistivity Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 693
Wellbore Choked Skin Effect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 694
Pseudo-Radial Flow Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 694
Horizontal Well Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 694
Productivity Increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 696
Constant Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 697
Desuperposition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 697
Method of Images - Generate Closed Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 698
No Fracture: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700
Fracture: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700
Multiple Transverse Fractures in Horizontal Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700
Single Vertical Fracture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700
Multiply Fractures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 701
Multiple Equally Spaced Transverse Fractures - Lateral Length . . . 703
Multiple Stage/Cluster Transverse Fractures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 704
Transverse Fracture Interference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 706
G.3 Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .709
xxx Table of Contents
G.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 711
Appendix H
Net Present Value Theory____________________________ 715
H.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 715
H.2 General Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 717
Fracture Net Present Value (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 717
Discount Well Revenue (DWR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 718
Discounted Return on Investment (DROI). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 719
Appendix I
TSO & Frac-Pack Methodology______________________ 721
I.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 721
I.2 Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 722
Design Criteria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 723
Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 723
I.3 Numerical Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 726
I.4 Results and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 731
I.5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 732
Appendix J
Produced Water Reinjection Fracturing ____________ 733
J.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 733
J.2 Thermal and Water Front Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 733
Table of Contents xxxi
J.3 Thermoelastic and Poroelastic Stresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .736
Thermoelastic Stresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 736
Poroelastic Stresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 738
J.4 Governing Fluid Loss Equations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .739
Carters Solution - Linear Fluid loss. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 740
Dimensionless Pressure Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 741
The uniform fracture flux solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 742
The infinite-conductivity solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 742
Dimensionless Rate Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 743
Linear Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 743
General Dimensionless Rate Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 746
J.5 Fracture Skin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .748
External Skin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 748
Internal Skin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 750
General Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 750
Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 755
J.6 Internal and External Filter Cakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .757
Filtration Damage Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 757
Internal Filtration Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 758
Displacement Damage Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 766
Deposition Saturation and Porosity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 766
Internal Cake Saturation Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 767
Internal Cake Permeability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 768
External Cake Filtration Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 769
Filter Cake Coefficient, Thickness, and Other Relationships . . . . . . 771
Filter Cake Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 772
Filter Cake Build Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773
Filter Cake Erosion Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 774
J.7 MPwri Input Dialog Nomenclature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .776
J.1 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .776
xxxii Table of Contents
Appendix K
After-Closure Analysis _______________________________ 779
K.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 779
K.2 Superposition or Duhamels Theorem: General Solution 780
K.3 Impulse Injection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 781
K.4 Linear Solution - Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 785
Constant Velocity Boundary Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 785
Constant Pressure Boundary Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 786
Time Dependent Velocity Boundary Condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 788
Variable Injection Rate followed by a Shut-in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789
Constant Injection Rate followed by a Shut-in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791
Apparent Closure Time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 792
Linear Solution Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 793
K.5 Radial Solution - Infinite-acting time period . . . . . . . . . . . 794
Horner Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 795
Noltes After-Closure Radial Time Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 797
K.6 Summary and Implementation of After Closure Analysis 798
Impulse Injection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 798
Horner Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 799
Nolte After Closure Time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 800
Graphical Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801
General Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801
Permeability and Reservoir Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801
Diagnostic Plots and Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801
K.7 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804
Appendix L
Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity
Vertical Fractures ____________________________________ 807
L.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 807
Table of Contents xxxiii
Dimensionless Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 808
L.2 Pseudosteady Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .809
Dimensionless Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 809
Effective Wellbore Radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 810
L.3 Pseudosteady Fractured System Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .812
Resistivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 812
Reservoir Resistivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813
Fracture Resistivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813
Inverse Dimensionless Productivity Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814
No Fracture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 814
Finite Conductivity Vertical Fracture System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818
Square Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819
Rectangular Reservoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 821
L.4 Pseudosteady Fracture Solutions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .824
Slot Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825
Uniform Flux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827
Effective Wellbore Radius. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 829
L.5 Pseudosteady Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .830
Constant Finite Conductivity Fracture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830
Non-Uniform Fracture Conductivity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834
Tail-in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837
Over Flush. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838
L.6 Infinite Fracture Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .841
Vertical Fracture in an Infinite System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842
Uniform Flux Vertical Fracture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842
Vertical Fracture in a Rectangular Closed Reservoir. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844
Effective Wellbore Radius - Infinite Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852
L.7 Shape Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .854
L.8 Fracture Skin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .857
External Skin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858
Internal Skin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 858
L.9 Radial Flow Differential Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .859
Derivation of Radial Diffusivity Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860
xxxiv Table of Contents
Linearization of Radial Diffusivity Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861
Pseudo-Pressure and Pseudo-Time Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861
Improved Pseudo-Pressure and Pseudo-Time Functions . . . . . . . . 866
Pseudopressure Relationships and Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 869
L.10 Dimensionless Rate & Pressure Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . 873
Infinite or Infinitely Acting System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874
Constant Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 874
Constant Flowing Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877
Closed System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882
Constant Mass Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 882
Constant Flowing Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 883
Numerical Solution -Total Mass and Mass Rate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894
L.11 Real Gas Potential and Related Equations. . . . . . . . . . . . 901
Agarwal Pseudopressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 901
General Pseudopressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 902
L.12 Forchheimer Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903
Effective Conductivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907
L.13 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908
Appendix M
Discrete Fracture Network Methodology ___________ 911
M.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911
M.2 Momentum Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912
Laminar Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 913
Slot Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 913
Elliptical Slot Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 914
Limiting Narrow Slot Ellipsoidal Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 915
Turbulent Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 918
M.3 DFN Momentum Equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 919
Laminar Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 919
Turbulent Flow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 920
Time Dependent Cross-Sectional Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 921
Table of Contents xxxv
M.4 DFN Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .921
Fracture Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 921
Number of Discrete Fractures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 922
DFN Geometric Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923
DFN Ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925
Specific DFN Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 925
Stimulated Reservoir Volume Ratios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 926
M.5 Mass Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .926
M.6 DFN Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .927
Fluid Loss Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927
Stiffness Interaction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928
Empirical Correlation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 928
M.7 Proppant Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .929
Uniform Proppant Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930
Dominant Fracture Proppant Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 931
User Specified Proppant Distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 933
M.8 Midfield Fracture Complexity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .935
Fluid Loss- During Pumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938
Fluid Loss- After Pumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938
Midfield or Extended Wellbore Storage Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938
M.9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .940
Subject Index______________________________943
xxxvi Table of Contents
xxxvii Meyer & Associates, Inc.
Introduction
Overview
This User's Guide is designed to explain the installation and use of the suite of
hydraulic fracture design and analysis software developed by Meyer & Associates,
Inc. The suite of computer programs include MFrac, MView, MPwri, MinFrac,
MFast, MProd, MNpv, MFrac-Lite, MWell, and MShale. The Meyer software is
designed for use with the following Microsoft operating systems: Windows 7, Win-
dows Vista, Windows 2003, and Windows XP SP3.
This guide explains the available options and basic procedures used for running the
Meyer programs. A number of example files are included with the software. These
examples demonstrate the utility of many of the program features, as well as, the
manipulation of data. In addition to the examples and the explanation of program
options, supplementary technical information is contained in the appendices.
xxxviii
The figure below shows an overall simulation flowchart for the Meyer intergrated
suite of software.
Program Descriptions
A brief description of each of the programs in the Meyer suite of software is given
below. Please refer to the corresponding chapter for specific information.
MFrac
MFrac is a comprehensive design and evaluation simulator containing a variety of
options including three-dimensional fracture geometry, auto design features, and
integrated acid fracturing solutions. Fully coupled proppant transport and heat
transfer routines, together with a flexible user interface and object oriented devel-
opment approach, permit use of the program for fracture design, as well as treat-
xxxix
ment analysis. MFrac is the calculation engine for real-time and replay fracture
simulation. When operating in this manner, the program works in conjunction with
our real-time data acquisition and display program, MView.
MView
This program provides a data handling system and display module for real-time
hydraulic fracturing and minifrac analysis. MView was intended primarily for use
with the MFrac and MinFrac hydraulic fracturing design and analysis simulators;
however, its flexible structure also makes it functional as a general data handling
system. This program was created as a separate utility in order to provide a simple
system that would be reliable and operate in a straight-forward independent man-
ner.
MinFrac
The MinFrac program has been specifically designed for use as an analysis tool for
injection tests and minifrac analysis. The program provides a means of examining
rate and pressure data during and after a period of injection. This includes, pump-
in/shut-in tests for the determination of stress, step rate interpretation and conven-
tional or unconventional pressure decline analysis. MinFrac, like MFrac, can also
communicate dynamically in real-time with MView to share data. This allows data
interpretation during real-time acquisition.
The primary purpose of MinFrac is to calculate closure pressure, fracture effi-
ciency, individual fracture geometry leakoff coefficients and near wellbore effects.
MProd
MProd is a single phase analytical production simulator developed by Meyer &
Associates, Inc. primarily for hydraulic fracturing applications. The program is
used to assess the production benefit for a variety of treatment scenarios with com-
parison of unfractured wells. Mprod includes an objective methodology for deter-
mining unknown or uncertain parameters through regression analysis of simulated
and measured data by history matching. A Fracture Design Optimization option
enables the user to determine the optimum fracture design (length, width, conduc-
tivity) that will maximize production for a given amount of proppant mass.
As part of a treatment optimization methodology, MProd is integrated and fully
compatible with MFrac. Output produced by MFrac (propped fracture characteris-
tics) can be used by this program as input. Once calculations are performed using
MProd, the results are available for use by MNpv.
xl
MNpv
MNpv provides a tool for forecasting fractured well net present value (NPV) or
return on investment (ROI). Simply stated, fracture treatment optimization is a
methodology used for maximizing well profitability. This process requires a com-
parison of the cost penalties and revenue benefits associated with any proposed
treatment scenario. The program has been designed for use with MProd to automat-
ically determine and compare various NPV fracture scenarios in order to identify an
optimum design.
MFast
MFast is a two-dimensional analytical hydraulic fracturing simulator for aiding the
fracturing engineer in designing 2D fractures. The simulator illustrates the impor-
tance of various parameters and provides a fast first order solution to fracture
geometry, net pressure, fracture efficiency and treatment design. This simulator
provides the capability to compare the fracture geometries for Geerstma-deKlerk
(GDK), Perkins-Kern (PKN) and ellipsoidal type two dimensional models. Since
MFast was developed from analytical solutions it has the inherent limitations of
steady state injection, constant mechanical properties, time independent fluid rheol-
ogy and single layer properties.
MPwri
MPwri is a highly specialized simulator for predicting the pressure and geometry of
hydraulic fractures associated with waterflooding. The program was specifically
designed for evaluating the effects of injecting large fluid volumes over long peri-
ods and for fracture efficiencies approaching zero. Thermal and poro-elastic effects
are also include.
MPwri has options for conventional (diffusion controlled) and ellipsoidal (non-dif-
fusion) fluid loss. At early times, fluid loss from the fracture is generally diffusion
controlled, but at large times the fluid loss is governed by steady-state or pseudoste-
ady-state leakoff. This fluid loss option has a marked effect on fracture geometry
with larger leakoff rates at later times as compared to diffusion alone.
MFrac-Lite
MFrac-Lite is a three-dimensional hydraulic fracturing simulator similar to MFrac
but with a limited number of MFrac features and capabilities (i.e., a lite version).
This simplified three-dimensional simulator provides ease of use with less input
xli
data and fewer options to choose from for applications which do not require some
of the advanced features in MFrac.
MFrac-Lite uses the same numerical routines as MFrac but without some of the
more advanced and user specified options. MFrac-Lite has similar real-time capa-
bilities as MFrac and is designed to be compatible with like features in MFrac. This
simulator is designed for those who do not need the full functionality of MFrac.
MWell
MWell is a wellbore hydraulics simulator for calculating surface or bottomhole
pressures, gravitational head, restrictions, transport times and hydraulic power
requirements in the wellbore. Near wellbore and perforation pressure losses are
also calculated to determine the bottomhole treating pressure in the formation.
MWell was designed for real-time analysis to calculate BHTPs, from surface con-
ditions but can also be used as a design tool for determining wellbore pressure char-
acteristics prior to the treatment. MWell is essentially a subset of the MFrac
simulator without the fracture simulation. MWell however does provide the capabil-
ity to simulate a time dependent formation pressures with a user specified table that
for inputting the minimum horizontal stress and a time dependent net pressure
(pressure above or below the reference minimum stress). If the formation is not
fracture the reference pressure should be the reservoir pressure.
MShale
MShale is a Discrete Fracture Network (DFN) simulator designed for simulating
three-dimensional (x-z, y-z, and x-y planes) hydraulic fracture propagation in dis-
crete fracture networks. MShale accounts for the coupled parameters affecting frac-
ture propagation (and proppant transport) in multiple planes.
MShale is a very specialized fracturing simulator designed to simulate multiple,
cluster, and discrete type fractures in shales and coal bed methane (CBM). Discrete
fractures in naturally fractured or faulted formations can be modeled by specifying
a fracture network grid to simulate fracture propagation in multiple planes (not just
perpendicular to the minimum horizontal stress).
About this Guide
This guide assumes the user is familiar with basic Windows operations and termi-
nology. When practical, screen displays are shown to demonstrate an operation or
result. It is important to realize that depending on the options selected, the input or
xlii
output displayed in the program may vary from the examples shown. All of the
screens depicted in this manual correspond to the Windows convention established
by the Microsoft Corporation.
Whats in this Guide?
This guide begins by covering topics that are general and common to all programs.
To find information specific to an individual program, refer to the chapter for the
program in question. Each program chapter is organized to correspond to the typi-
cal steps needed to begin working with the software. Selecting options, entering
data, performing calculations and viewing the output are covered. To assist you in
finding answers to your questions quickly, an index is provided at the end of this
guide.
Chapter 1, Getting Started, covers the hardware and system requirements to run
the software, as well as, installation procedures and program initiation techniques.
Program basics, such as, opening and saving files, as well as, entering and editing
values in data fields are discussed. This chapter outlines the hardware and system
requirements for the Meyer suite of software. Specific instructions for installing
and running the software are also given.
Chapter 2, MFrac, Hydraulic Fracturing Simulator, provides detailed instruc-
tions for using the MFrac simulator. This chapter begins with a discussion of the
programs options and their influence on the modeling methodology used. Each of
the data input screens is described with logical steps for data entry. In addition, the
use and maintenance of program databases, performing calculations and viewing
program output are discussed. Application to replay and real-time simulation is also
presented.
Chapter 3, MView, Acquired Data Visualization, describes how to use MView to
setup, connect and transfer replay or real-time fracture treatment data. This includes
the procedures for acquiring data from a service company, either via a serial cable
or remotely using a modem. This chapter also outlines how to send data to MFrac
and MinFrac for use as simulation input (e.g., rate, pressure, volume, proppant con-
centration, ). The programs graphical capability for viewing and analyzing frac-
turing data is covered and directions for specifying plot data and configuring plot
preferences are given. In addition, instructions for graphical editing of data are dis-
cussed. This includes the application of shifting and statistical curve fitting func-
tions.
Chapter 4, MinFrac, Minifrac Analysis, begins by explaining the procedures
involved in importing, formatting and editing injection test data. The options asso-
ciated with the analysis of minifrac data and the techniques used in performing an
xliii
analysis are described. An Analysis Wizard is provided for the systematic method
of selecting and performing minifrac analyses. The MinFrac analyses include: Step
Rate, Step Down, Horner and Regression with history matching. Various time func-
tions and pressure derivatives are provided for analyzing rate-pressure data.
Chapter 5, MProd, Analytical Production Simulator, explains the function and
use of MProd. It describes the available options and the basic procedures needed to
run the program. This includes importing MFrac output data for forecasting frac-
tured well performance. Examples are given to demonstrate MProds role in treat-
ment optimization, as well as, its use as a standalone production forecast tool for
fractured and unfractured reservoirs.
Chapter 6, MNpv, Economic Analysis, outlines economic analysis as part of a
treatment optimization method. All of the procedures and options available in
MNpv are covered in this chapter. A description of all required input is also given.
The use of MProd output data is discussed and examples are given to demonstrate
the basic program functions.
Chapter 7, MFast, An Analytical 2D Fracturing Simulator, begins by explain-
ing the basic 2D fracture models and the associated input data. This simulator pro-
vides the capability to compare the fracture geometries for Geerstma-deKlerk
(GDK), Perkins-Kern (PKN) and ellipsoidal type two dimensional models. Since
MFast was developed from analytical solutions it has the inherent limitations of
steady state injection, constant mechanical properties, time independent fluid rheol-
ogy and single layer properties. The main advantage of this program is the ease of
use and ability to provide solutions quickly. It is also a great tool for the first time
user in that it demonstrates parametric effects how various input parameters affect
the fracture propagation process.
Chapter 8, MPwri, Produced Water Re-Injection Fracturing Simulator, explains
the function and use of our highly specialized simulator. Mpwri includes thermal-
and poro-elastic stresses for large injection volumes, low fluid efficiencies frac-
tures, and thermal and water front tracking in each layer. All of the procedures and
options available in MPwri are covered in this chapter. A description of all MPwri
required input is also given. The use of MPwri output data is discussed and exam-
ples are given to demonstrate the basic program functions.
Chapter 9, MFrac-Lite, Hydraulic Fracturing Simulator - Lite Version, provides
detailed instructions for using the MFrac-Lite simulator. This chapter begins with a
comparison of the MFrac-Lite and MFrac features. Only the options and data input
screens that are different than those in MFrac are presented in the chapter. These
include the Options, Zones, Rock Properties, and Fluid Loss Data dialogs. The
reader is referred to the MFrac chapter for a description of all other comparable dia-
logs.
xliv
Chapter 10, MWell, A Wellbore Hydraulics Simulator, begins by describing the
the utility and application of the software to calculate surface or bottomhole pres-
sures, gravitational head, restrictions, transport times and hydraulic power require-
ments in the wellbore. The Main Menu, Options and Input data are discussed in
detail. The reader is referred to the MFrac chapter for a description of all other
comparable dialogs.
Chapter 11, MShale, A Three Dimensional Discrete Fracture Network Simula-
tor, provides a detailed description of the MShale simulator and the features that
set it apart from MFrac and the other simulators. Input screens and terminology
unique to MShale are discussed in detail throughout the chapter. Refer to the MFrac
chapter for descriptions of application features and screens that are not presented
within the MShale chapter.
Technical Support Documentation
Additional technical support documentation and theory may be found in the Manu-
als directory on both the CD and the install directory. The Meyer Appendices exist
at the end of the mhelp.chm file and in pdf format within the Manuals directory.
Appendix A, Hydraulic Fracturing Theory, provides a technical reference for
the analytical and numerical methods used for fracture simulation. Appendix A is a
supplement to the technical presentations provided elsewhere in this guide. It is
provided as a source of information for users who want to develop a better under-
standing of fracture modeling concepts.
Appendix B, Multilayer Fracturing, explains the methodology used in the pro-
gram for simulating the propagation of multiple fractures from multilayer perfo-
rated intervals. The general concept and theory are discussed.
Appendix C, Multiple Fractures, documents the simulation methods used when
modeling far field and near wellbore multiple fractures in a single perforated inter-
val or layer. Multiple parallel and dendritic fractures which may or may not interact
are presented.
Appendix D, Fluid Loss, outlines the numerical procedures used to model fluid
diffusion or leakoff to the reservoir. The theory behind various fluid loss options is
given.
Appendix E, Wellbore Friction Factor, presents the correlations and methods
used to simulate frictional pressure dissipation in the wellbore. The correlations are
developed in terms of the Fanning friction factor.
xlv
Appendix F, Minifrac Methodology, describes some of the fundamental rela-
tionships associated with the interpretation of minifrac pressure records and the
basic theory implemented in the MinFrac software.
Appendix G, Production Model Theory, contains a description of the basic the-
ory behind the computational methods used in MProd.
Appendix H, Net Present Value Theory, provides a brief overview of the meth-
ods used for conducting economic analyses of fracture treatments. The concepts of
fracture Net Present Value (NPV) and Discounted Return On Investment (DROI)
are presented.
Appendix I, TSO & Frac-Pack Methodology, presents the basic methodologies
of TSO and frac-packs. A discussion of the design criteria, procedures, differences
and benefits of each are given.
Appendix J, Produced Water Reinjection Theory or Waterflood Theory pres-
ents the solution methodology and governing equations for our hydraulic fracturing
produced water reinjection simulator. A summary of the governing waterfront, ther-
mal front, thermal- and poro-elastic stresses, and ellipsoidal fluid loss equations are
presented. The theory building internal and external skins and cakes due to particu-
late matter in the injected fluid is also presented.
Appendix K, After-Closure Analysis presents the solution methodology for
determining formation permeability after hydraulic fracturing is formulated in this
report. A summary of the governing linear and radial flow equations are presented
along with the graphical method to determine permeability and reservoir pressure
from the infinite-acting time period. This appendix sets forth the methodology and
documentation of the governing equations for after-closure analysis as originally
presented by Gu et al. (1993) and Nolte (1997).
Appendix L, Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical Frac-
tures presents the solution methodology for pseudosteady behavior of a well with
a finite conductivity vertical fracture in rectangular shaped formations based on a
new reservoir/fracture domain resistivity concept. The formulation encompasses a
transformed resistivity domain that utilizes an equivalent or effective wellbore
radius. The resulting pseudosteady solution is presented in the form of the dimen-
sionless productivity index ( ).
Appendix M, Discrete Fracture Network Methodology presents the solution
methodology for our Discrete Fracture Network (DFN) simulator (MShale). The
boundary conditions necessary to create multiple fractures and major assumptions
are presented along with the governing equations.
J
D
xlvi
How to use this Guide
The Meyer software has been designed to minimize the time required to become
familiar with its use. Depending on your level of experience, we recommend one of
the following methods to familiarize yourself with the software:
Limited Experience with Meyer Software and Frac-
ture Design
If you are just learning fracture design and analysis, we recommend you read this
guide from beginning to end to familiarize yourself with the program features,
menus and options. This approach will provide a thorough understanding of the
programs and prepare a base from which more advanced applications can be
explored. We recommend starting with the simple analytical 2D fracturing simula-
tor MFast.
General Knowledge of Meyer Software and Frac-
turing
Review the contents of this guide for installation and a basic understanding of the
general operations and options. Working through each of the examples provided
with the software will demonstrate the general operation of each program. Many of
the operational details can be picked up as needed using the on-line Help feature.
Experienced with Meyer Software and Fracturing
Browse the contents of this guide, exploring those topics you are least familiar with
in more detail. To optimize your time and sample the program features quickly, we
recommend working through the demo examples provided with the software. These
example files demonstrate many of the programs primary features. Secondary
options and preferences can then be investigated as time permits.
Symbols and Conventions
Throughout this Users Guide, special fonts and/or icons are used to emphasize spe-
cific steps, instructions and procedures in the program as shown below:
ALL CAPS Represent directories, file names, and commands.
Italics Used to emphasize certain points of information.
xlvii
Keycap
Bold italics are used to indicate a specific action or command to be
taken. For example: Click OK to proceed to the next screen.
MView Program names are written as shown.
Menu|Command
To avoid repeating the phrase Click the File menu and choose the
Open command, we use the File|Open convention.
Emphasizes specific information to be entered or a point of inter-
est.
To Step-by-step instructions normally start with a bold To.
xlviii
1 Meyer & Associates, Inc.
Chapter 1
Getting Started
The Meyer Software
1.1 Introduction
The Meyer Software is a powerful suite of engineering programs for the design,
analysis and monitoring of hydraulic fractures.
This chapter outlines the hardware and system requirements for the Meyer suite of
software. Specific instructions for installing and running the software are also
given.
After reading this chapter and installing the software, you will be ready to begin
using the programs. This guide assumes you have a working knowledge of the Win-
dows terminology and procedures. If you are unfamiliar with the Windows operat-
ing system, we recommend reading the relevant sections concerning Windows,
menus and using a mouse found in your Microsoft Windows User's Guide.
1.2 System & Hardware Requirements
Table 1.1 shows the minimum system and hardware requirements for satisfactory
installation and performance of the Meyer Software. Additional resources, such as
additional RAM and a faster processor may greatly improve the performance of the
software.
Table 1.1: Minimum System Requirements.
Computer: Intel Pentium III (or equivalent) microprocessor. We recommend
Pentium 4 or better.
A Meyer & Associates, Inc. authorized software protection key.
Operating
System:
Windows 7, Windows Vista, Windows 2003, and Windows XP SP3.
2 Getting Started: The Meyer Software
1.3 Installing the Meyer Software
Although it is possible to run the Meyer applications from the installation CD, we
highly recommend that you perform a traditional installation according to the steps
detailed below. Additional installation instructions are provided in the Readme file
on the CD.
Before Installing
Before installing the software, you should first do the following:
1. Close any open applications.
2. Close any virus-detection application.
3. Make sure your computer meets the minimum system requirements listed
above in Table 1.1.
4. Determine the drive where the software will be installed.
5. Check the amount of space available on the selected drive.
Memory: Most parts of the Meyer software require a minimum of 256MB for
smooth operation. MView, however, can require MUCH more than this
amount of RAM for Real-Time data sets with a large number of parame-
ters, and/or for large Replay data sets.
Also, note that starting with Windows Vista, Microsoft operating systems
require vastly more than 256MB of RAM to function. For these configu-
rations we recommend 3GB of RAM with the /3GB boot.ini switch. (32-
bit Windows applications cannot easily take advantage of more
than 3GB of RAM.)
Disk Drive: A hard disk with at least 500 MB of free disk space is recommended. At
least 200MB must be available in the Application Data folder (according
to the %AppData% environmental variable).
Mouse: A Windows compatible pointing device (e.g. mouse, trackball) is recom-
mended.
Optional
Equipment:
Windows supported printers.
A CD or DVD drive (to install the software).
USB or Parallel port (to install the security key).
Modem (for remote real-time).
Table 1.1: Minimum System Requirements.
1.3 Installing the Meyer Software 3
6. Verify that you have the necessary access rights (administrative privileges) to
create directories, files and to install device drivers on the designated drive.
To Install the Meyer Applications
The software can be installed from a CD drive. Figure 1.1 shows the Install Soft-
ware Setup screen.
Figure 1.1: Install Software Setup Menu
The Meyer Setup application is capable of installing all of the main applications
and components. Please read the directions below, and then follow the instructions
in the Setup program to complete the installation.
1. Insert the Meyer CD into the CD-ROM drive. After inserting the CD, a menu
screen as shown in Figure 1.1 will appear. If the Meyer Install Setup screen
does not display, click the Start button on the Windows taskbar, and click Run.
Type D:\Setup (where D is the letter corresponding to the CD-ROM drive) in
the Open box.
2. Click Install Software. If you want to view the Readme HTML file, click on
the View Readme button. The Readme file contains FAQs, installation tips,
new features and other information that may be important prior to installation
or other information that was not available at press time.
3. Click the Next > button and follow the instructions.
4. Type in the Customer Information User Name and Organization. Also select
one of the Install this application for options and click the Next > button.
5. Destination Folder. Click Next > to install this folder, or click Change... to
install to a different directory. Choose a directory where the software will be
installed. It is recommended that a directory name that does not exist be speci-
fied. Setup will then create the new directory.
6. Setup Type. Choose the setup type option that best suits your needs:
Complete. All program features will be installed (requires the most disk
space).
Custom. Choose which program features you want installed and where
they will be installed. Recommended for advanced users. Click on the icon
in the list to change how the feature is installed. If you are not authorized
to use all of the Meyer application software, you may wish to exclude
these components by clicking This feature will not be available. Some
components have sub-components. To change the sub-component selec-
tions, highlight the component in the list and click the appropriate desired
feature.
7. Click the Next > button, and follow the installation instructions in the Setup
Wizard. Click the Install > button to begin the installation. When the installa-
tion is completed, click the Finish > button to return to the Install Software
Setup Menu.
Program Maintenance - Modify, Repair or Remove
After installing the Meyer software, you can Modify, Repair or Remove the soft-
ware. Simply follow the steps above for starting the Setup program. The Program
Maintenance menu will then be displayed as shown in Figure 1.2 giving you the
following options:
1. Modify. Change which program features are installed.
2. Repair. Repair installation errors in the Meyer Software.
3. Remove. Remove the Meyer Software from your computer.
4. Click the Next > button, and follow the instructions in the Wizard.
To change selections in the Setup Wizard, click the < Back button.
1.4 General Application Information 5
Figure 1.2: Install - Program Maintenance Menu
These options give you the capability to free up disk space, update components to
refresh their configurations settings and to repair or reinstall any components which
you have inadvertently deleted.
Database Installation
When the applications are ran for the first time, they will attempt to find user data-
bases from previous versions of the software. If a suitable database is found, it will
be copied (and update if necessary) to the required location so that it is usable by
the most recent version of the software. If any of your user databases are deleted,
this process will be repeated.
1.4 General Application Information
This section presents general information on the application installation directories,
file name extensions, application directories, long file name support, application
folder support and other support information.
Application Installation Directories
The applications store the user databases, plots, etc. in the user profile. Technically,
we store this information in the roaming profile per-user application data folder.
The location of this folder depends on the version of Windows and the version of
the Meyer Software you are running.
For Meyer 2010 the application data folder is Meyer 2010.
This folder may be found under the Meyer & Associates, Inc folder, which in
turn may be found under the Windows application data folder.
1. The Windows application data folder is determined by the %AppData% envi-
ronmental variable, some example locations are shown below:
For a user called Bruce on Windows XP, our folder might be C:\Docu-
ments and Settings\Bruce\Application Data\Meyer & Associates, Inc\
Meyer 2010
For a user called Bruce on Windows Vista, the application data folder
might be C:\Users\Bruce\AppData\Roaming\Meyer & Associates, Inc
\Meyer 2010
Application Data Folder Support
All working files, user databases, plot configuration files are stored in a sub-folder
of the user profiles Application Data folder. In previous versions of the software,
this was stored in the application folder. By having these files in the user profile, if
more than one person uses a computer, each user will have their own copies of
these files. Locked down environment is also supported.
Application File Name Extensions
General
Table 1.2 provides a list and description of general file extensions.
Table 1.2: General File Extensions.
Extension Description
adb Acid Database (generic)
1.4 General Application Information 7
Application File Extension Summary
Table 1.3 provides a summary of the Meyer application specific file extensions.
adt
Acquired data text file or
MACQ output data file
aie Acid Import/export file
csv Comma separated value file
dat Data file
dbs Database Files (pipe and rock)
emf Exodus export file
fdb Fluid database file (vendor)
fie Fluid import/export file
fpc Fracture plot configuration file
key MKey file
las Log data file
pdb Proppant database
pie Proppant import/export file
plt Default plot configuration file
stp MACQ setup file
txt Text file
user-db
User Database (acid, damage,
fluid, non-Darcy, and proppant)
vhd MView Import header file
vtp MView Plot template file
wrl
Virtual Reality Modeling Lan-
guage file
Table 1.3: Application File Extension Summary.
Application Main Data File Plot Template File Units File
MFrac mfrac mtp mfu
MFrac-Lite mfrac-lite mtp mfu
Table 1.2: General File Extensions.
Long File Name Support
All of the Meyer applications use long file names for input, output, database, unit
and configuration files. Following is a list of general Windows limitations for long
file names:
1. The path and file name cannot exceed 255 characters (i.e., Windows
MAX_PATH).
2. The following characters not allowed in a path or file name are < > : / \ |.
These characters are reserved for Windows.
3. The application must not use reserved words, such as aux, con, and prn, as file-
names or directory names.
4. Long file name support when displaying an opened file in the title bar, Most
Recent File list, and Window menu.
Working Files
The Meyer applications use temporary working files not only for input files, but
also for output and other configuration files associated with the input files. This
allows you to open and run read-only files because the original (including the out-
put) files are only changed when you save them. This also allows you to create and
run untitled projects without having to save to a file first.
MWell mwell mtp mfu
MPwri mpwri mtp mfu
MShale mshale mtp mfu
MView mview vtp mvu
MinFrac minfrac mwz mmu
MProd mprod ptp mpu
MNpv mnpv ntp mnu
MFast mfast atp mtu
Table 1.3: Application File Extension Summary.
1.5 Starting the Software 9
Read Only Files
Read Only input files can be opened. However, during the save operation you will
be prompted to use the file Save As command.
Last Opened Files
The Meyer applications remember the last 12 files opened. Any file that does not
exist in the Most Recent Used file (MRU) list that is selected/opened will be
deleted from the list.
1.5 Starting the Software
The Meyer programs can be started using one of several methods. A program can
be started from the Windows desktop by double-clicking the associated icon or
using the Start menu. A program can also be started by Running the main execut-
able module (e.g., MFrac.exe) from the desktop File or Start menus. It is also possi-
ble to start an executable file from the Windows File Manager or Explorer.
Connecting the Hardware Security Key
The security key must be attached to the parallel (printer) port or USB port. If you
have a USB key it must be plugged into the USB port. If you are using security
keys for other software, some experimentation with the order and compatibility
may be required.
If you are using a network security key, it is not necessary to have an individual
security key on your PC. Your network administrator should install the network
security key and configure your PC to access the network security key server.
Before starting a Meyer application, make sure the hardware security key is con-
nected to your PC. If your PC is on a network with a network security key server,
check with your network administrator to ensure that your PC is properly con-
figured.
WARNING; Do not connect the parallel security key to a serial port, as this can
damage the key and/or your PC.
1.6 Quick Start
Program Check List
To ensure trouble-free processing and access to the Meyer software, please check
the following:
1. Sufficient disk space is available. Approximately 200 MB is required for pro-
gram installation. Additional free space is needed for data, output and data-
bases files. A minimum of 500 MB free space is recommended.
2. The software protection key can be either a USB or Parallel port device. The
USB key is connected to the USB port and the parallel port key to the Parallel
printer port. Do Not connect the key to the serial port, as this can damage the
key or your PC.
3. The software protection key is firmly in place to ensure a good connection. If
the key is loose, the program may not be able to access it.
4. The PC system date is set to the current date and time (i.e., today's date).
1.7 Customer Support
If a question cannot be resolved by referring to the Users Guide or on-line help,
any user with a current maintenance contract can obtain Technical Support during
regular business hours (8:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. U.S. Eastern Standard Time) at the
following numbers;
Telephone: (724) 224-1440
FAX: (724) 224-1442
Information concerning our products, updates and upcoming events can be
accessed by visiting our home page on the Internet. To send data files or correspond
with us via email, our address is
Home Page - http://www.mfrac.com
Email - info@mfrac.com
When requesting Technical Support, please include the program and version num-
ber listed in the About Box.
1.8 Windows Fundamentals 11
Updating Your Hardware Key - MKey Utility
All Meyer software requires a hardware protection device to run. The utility pro-
gram, MKey, allows Meyer technical support to access your key remotely as neces-
sary. MKey is also used to upgrade your device to run new software versions.
1.8 Windows Fundamentals
If you are unfamiliar with the graphical environment of the Windows operating sys-
tem, we suggest reading the first few chapters of the Microsoft Windows User's
Guide. Some of the fundamental techniques can be acquired by using any of the
on-line Windows Tutorials that are available.
1.9 Meyer Program Basics
This section covers the essential features of data management for the Meyer pro-
grams. The procedures used to open, save and print files, define system units and
obtain on-line help are discussed. The options and procedures discussed in the fol-
lowing sections are found under the File, Units, and Help menus of a program.
Button Conventions
The Meyer software buttons are used to control many of the program functions.
The conventions used for these buttons are summarized in Table 1.4.
In general, you should not need to use MKey unless specifically instructed to do
so by Meyer or for software upgrades. In such cases, you will be given system-
atic instructions on how to use MKey.
Table 1.4: Button Conventions.
Name Function
Browse
The Browse button can be used to specify the path in the Directories dia-
log box.
Cancel
Selecting Cancel at any time during an editing session closes the active
dialog box without accepting any changes made during the session.
Clear All Use this button to clear all selected plot choices in a dialog box.
Config. Plot
This button is found in the plot frames. Use it to access the Plot Configu-
ration screen.
File Management
The following section describes the File menu commands available within the
Meyer programs.
Opening a File
When starting a Meyer program, the file last accessed during the previous session is
automatically opened. If you do not want to work with this file, other data files can
be opened quickly and easily using standard Windows procedures.
Copy
Use this button to send a copy of the plot to the clipboard. This provides
a way to copy the plot as a Windows bitmap.
Done This button is used to close the current screen.
Help
The Help button is used to access the corresponding help information for
the dialog box that is open. Once Help is accessed, additional context
sensitive topics may be available and will be shown in green. Clicking
one of these topics will display additional information related to a partic-
ular parameter.
Load Units Use this button to apply a template of a units configuration.
OK
The OK button is used to close and accept the contents of a screen keep-
ing all changes which have occurred during the active editing session.
Print
Found on the Plot frame, this button is used to send the active plot to the
Windows specified plotter or printer.
Printer Setup
This button, found in the Select Printer dialog box, is used to access the
Windows printer properties options.
Save Units
The Save Units button is used to save a template of the current units con-
figuration. A saved configuration may then be used as a template at a
later time.
Select All
This button can be used to choose all available plot choices in a dialog
box.
Zoom-Out
Zooming-in on a plot is accomplished by dragging a box around the area
you want to zoom with the left mouse button. For a framed plot, this but-
ton provides a way of quickly returning to the starting magnification. On
non-framed plots, (i.e., normal ones) you can zoom-out by clicking the
right mouse button to reveal a shortcut menu containing a zoom-out
command.
Table 1.4: Button Conventions.
1.9 Meyer Program Basics 13
A list of the last twelve data files accessed is always maintained at the bottom of the
File menu. You can select from this list to access one of these files. Otherwise, to
open a file, choose File|Open. The program checks to see if data has been modi-
fied since the last time the file was saved. If it has, the screen shown in Figure 1.3 is
displayed prompting you to save before the current file is closed. If no changes
have been made, the file Open dialog box, as shown in Figure 1.4, is presented.
Figure 1.3: Program File Close Message.
Figure 1.4: Program File Open Dialog Box.
The File|Open dialog box alphabetically lists the available files matching your
selection criteria. The files in the default data directory are automatically shown
first.
To Open a File, Use One of the Following Methods:
1. Type in the complete name of the file in the File Name box and press ENTER.
2. Click the Files box anywhere but on a filename, type the first letter of the file-
name and press ENTER repeatedly until the desired filename is highlighted.
3. Use the TAB key to move to the Files selection box, next use the + arrow key to
highlight the desired file and press ENTER.
4. Double-click on the filename.
If the file is not listed, it is possible that:
the file is in a different sub-directory,
the file is on a different drive, or
the file is of a different type.
To change the directory or drive, type in the correct path in the directory field or
scroll to and click on the directory you want.
Creating a New File
To create a new file choose File|New. The program clears the application screen,
title bar and re-initializes the program input/output data. When creating a new file,
it is necessary to specify a file name using the Save As command as described
below.
Saving a File
To save a file, choose either File|Save or File|Save As. The Save command stores
changes made to the current active file and overwrites the previously saved data.
By default, the Save command saves a file under its original name to the drive and
directory last selected. To save the file in a different directory or to another name,
select Save As. After selecting Save As, a screen will appear as shown in Figure
1.5.
Figure 1.5: Save As File Dialog Box.
Enter the new file name in the field provided or choose an existing file to overwrite.
The file may be stored in any existing directory by making a choice from the Direc-
tories selection box. To accept the new name and directory select OK.
Selecting a Printer
Before a report or plot can be printed, the printer hardware must be specified and
set up properly to work with Windows. First, make sure that the correct printer
driver(s) are loaded by accessing the Control Panel from the Windows Desktop.
Refer to the Windows User's Guide if you are unfamiliar with this procedure.
From the Desktop, select the Printers icon to display the list of available printers. If
your printer is not among the list displayed, follow the instructions given in the
Windows Guide to install the necessary driver. After making this verification or
installation return to the application and specify the printer for output.
To Select and Set Up a Printer:
Select Printer Setup from the File Menu. The screen shown in Figure 1.6 will then
appear.
Choose from the list of printers displayed and click OK. Only printers installed
under Windows are displayed. Make sure the port specified is correct. If it is not,
refer to your Windows User's Guide for instructions or access the Control Panel
from the Desktop and select the Connect button to change the setting.
Select the Properties button to configure your specific printer.
Figure 1.6: Selected Printer Dialog Box.
When the Properties button found in the Select Printer dialog shown in Figure 1.6
is used the dialog box displayed corresponds to the printer device selected. All
printers have varying printing capabilities; however, most printers allow you to
select the paper size and source, as well as the page orientation and number of cop-
ies. The example shown in Figure 1.7 is for a HP Laser Jet 4000 Series PCL printer.
Figure 1.7: Example Printer Specific Setup Screen.
Defining the System Units
The Units menu is used to define the units that are applied to the program dialog
boxes and output displays. All of the Meyer programs use a flexible system of units
that are user defined for each variable. This flexibility makes it possible to custom-
ize the units system to suit personal preferences or change the units to correspond
with data reports supplied by service companies.
The Meyer software also allows for mixing and matching of input and output unit
sets. To create a custom unit template, make selections from the categories avail-
able and save the modified units system under a new name by clicking the Save
button found at the bottom of the Units dialog box. To apply a saved units template,
use the Load button also found on the Units screen. English and metric default tem-
plates are provided.
The units are not associated with data files. All changes to the units are kept for all
data files and work sessions. In general, once the units are set to your preferences, it
should not be necessary to enter the units box again.
To access the Units menu, click the menu name. The dialog box shown in Figure
1.8 will be displayed. To list the parameters in alphabetical order (or reverse order)
click on the triangular sort marker in the right hand corner of the parameters col-
umn.
Figure 1.8: Meyer Units System.
The Units screen is divided into the following areas:
Measurement variables, which lists all the variables currently used in a pro-
gram,
Input and Output unit group categories to the left and right of the screen, and
Command buttons.
Setting the Input and Output Units
To select the input and output units system, you may want to start with a predefined
units template. To do this, click on the Load button and select a template.
To view the units list, move the scroll box up or down until your choice appears on
the list. The corresponding input and output unit categories will scroll simultane-
ously. To select a unit, click the unit to highlight the item. Click again on the new
unit you want. If you prefer using the keyboard, use the TAB key to scroll to a
parameter and then use the directional | or + arrows to scroll to the unit item
desired. When all the parameters are set to their desired unit click OK or press
ENTER.
Unit templates can be applied or changed at any time during an active program ses-
sion. Simply open the Units dialog box and make the desired changes. All units dis-
played or contained in any open plot will be automatically converted.
Getting Help
The Meyer Users Guide (this document) can be used as a standalone reference, or
for context sensitive help while using the Meyer applications. It is available in
CHM (Microsoft HTML Help) and PDF formats.
Accessing Help
When information is needed quickly, use one of the following methods to display
the help file:
Help through the Menu
From the menu bar, choose Help|Contents and select the desired subject from the
list of Help topics provided. Additional capabilities are also offered, including an
index, search, and favorites tab. A PDF version of the Users Guide is available by
choosing Help|More Documentation|Meyer Users Guide (PDF). A PDF viewer
is required to view the PDF version of the Meyer Users Guide.
Getting Help using Help Buttons
Command buttons found within dialog boxes can also be used to access help.
Clicking a Help button directs the help function to information about the current
For English language versions of the software, the units default to the English
oilfield units; however, for the Russian version of the software, the units default
to metric units.
dialog box and its components. Pressing the F1 key also accesses context sensitive
help depending on what dialog or window is currently opened.
Error Checking
The error checking routines contained in the Meyer programs provide an extra level
of protection when working within the Windows environment. This protection is
required because Windows, unlike other environments such as DOS, does not
require sequential display and input for the data screens. The Windows user inter-
face allows multiple entry points into the data input dialogs.
Extensive error checking procedures contained in the programs check that any
entered parameter is within defined limits; and also verifies the existence of data
relative to the options that are set. The objective is to avoid taking a step in the pro-
gram that will cause a problem during the calculations or during any subsequent
process (e.g., plotting, etc.).
Data Entry Errors
When entering data in any dialog box, the program checks the data after it is
entered to ensure that it falls within the limits set by the program. If it does not, a
message similar to the one shown in Figure 1.9 is displayed. The example shown
corresponds to a case where Young's modulus has been entered incorrectly.
Figure 1.9: Example Error Checking Message for Young's Modulus.
When the program posts an error checking message, you must respond by either
clicking the Change button to return to the data entry dialog to correct the problem
or the Ignore button to continue.
When an Error Message is Displayed During Data Entry:
1. Select either the Change or Ignore button located at the bottom of the message
screen.
2. If the Ignore button is selected, the program will attempt to use the data
entered. When the Change button is used the program returns to the data field
which caused the error and allows you to re-enter a value.
3. When re-entering a value, make sure that it is within the acceptable limits as
posted by the error message tolerance range.
The programs use general solutions that are open to very broad ranges of data input.
The ranges limited by the program are typically adequate for handling most cases.
It is important to realize that even though the programs do allow you to override the
limits, the out of range values may cause a problem with the calculations.
When a dialog box is closed by selecting the OK, Next Page or Previous Page
buttons, the program again checks to make sure that the data is within the ranges
required and that all rows containing data are complete. This process is repeated for
each dialog box that is opened. The program provides a message when an out of
bounds error occurs.
Run-Time Error Checking
The next level of error checking occurs once the data has been entered and the Run
command has been selected. Prior to performing calculations, the program once
again checks the data relative to the options selected. Whenever the program
encounters a problem, whether it is out of range or missing data, the program posts
a message and terminates the simulation (see Figure 1.10). Before continuing with
the calculations, it is necessary to correct the error indicated. After the corrections
have been made, return to the Run menu and initiate the simulation again. If
another data error is found the program will display another message requiring the
correction process to be repeated. This procedure is repeated until all errors are cor-
rected. The program will then automatically proceed with the simulation.
In order to run the calculations when the Ignore button is used, disable the min/
max checking from the Run Options dialog.
Figure 1.10: Example Run-Time Error Checking Message.
When a Run-Time Error Checking Message is Displayed:
1. Select the OK button located at the bottom of the message screen.
2. Return to the appropriate dialog box to correct or add data as required.
3. Return to the Run menu and re-initiate the calculations.
For those instances when the Ignore button has been used during data entry it is
necessary to disable the min/max error checking in order to continue with the cal-
culations. This is accomplished by selecting the appropriate check box from the
Run Options dialog (e.g., See Run Options on page 69). If this is not done the
program will continuously detect an out of bounds error and not permit the simula-
tion to continue.
Once again, the error checking has been designed to cover as much of the program
structure as possible; however, to prevent the possible loss of data, a recovery
mechanism has been implemented in the program. As a last ditch effort, if a prob-
lem occurs with one of the data sets or other Windows applications that results in a
program crash, the next time the program is started, an option to recover the data
is provided. After a crash the message shown in Figure 1.11 is displayed. Select
Yes to recover your data. If the program crashes while recovering a data file, you
should select No the next time the recover message appears.
Figure 1.11: Recover Unsaved Data File Message.
File Version Checking
There is a system in place that compares the data file version for compatibility with
data files from previous versions of the program. If a message like the one shown in
Figure 1.12 appears, choose Upgrade to upgrade the file to the current version.
Note that after doing this, the file will not be compatible with the previous version
of the program.
Figure 1.12: Program Version Checking Message.
If the file was created by an application prior to Meyer 2009, an International
Options preference will be available. The international text encoding specified
under Internation Options determines the source language when converting text to
Unicode. See Unicode Compatibility on page 73 for more information.
Working with Spreadsheets and Dialogs
Spreadsheet controls are used throughout the software to input tabular data. This
section describes the special functionality of these controls and the use of the
spreadsheet speed buttons.
Spreadsheet Keyboard Commands
Table 1.5 lists the action keys used to edit data and move the active cell within a
selection.
Table 1.6 lists the movement keys used to move the active cell within a spreadsheet
and to display different sections in the spreadsheet.
Table 1.5: Action Keys.
Key Description
ENTER
When in edit mode; accepts the current entry. The next cell is selected
according to the user preference specified in the spreadsheet options dia-
log (Tools|Options...).
SHIFT+
ENTER
When in edit mode; accepts the current entry. The next cell is selected
according to the user preference specified in the spreadsheet options dia-
log, but in the opposite direction.
TAB
When in edit mode; accepts the current entry and moves active cell hori-
zontally to next cell in selection.
SHIFT+ TAB
When in edit mode; accepts the current entry. When a range is selected,
accepts the current entry and moves active cell horizontally to previous
cell in selection.
F2 Enters edit mode.
DEL Clears current selection.
ESC Cancels current data entry or editing operation.
CTRL + A Selects all rows and columns that contain data.
CTRL + C Copies selection to the clipboard.
CTRL + - Deletes/removes the selected rows. (Speed button shortcut)
CTRL + D Fill down. (Speed button shortcut)
CTRL + + Inserts rows. (Speed button shortcut)
CTRL + O Opens/imports a file into the spreadsheet. (Speed button shortcut)
CTRL + P Prints the spreadsheet. (Speed button shortcut)
CTRL + S Saves/exports the contents of the spreadsheet. (Speed button shortcut)
CTRL + T
Opens the linear transformation dialog based on the current selection.
(Speed button shortcut)
CTRL + V Pastes from the clipboard to the current selection.
CTRL + Z When in edit mode, will undo a current active cell input.
Table 1.6: Movement Keys.
Key Description
Up Arrow Moves active cell up one row.
Down Arrow Moves active cell down one row.
Table 1.7 lists the keys used to modify the action of the movement keys.
Spreadsheet Mouse Actions
Table 1.8 lists the mouse actions used in the spreadsheet.
Left Arrow Move active cell left one column.
Right Arrow Moves active cell right one column.
Page Up Moves up one screen.
Page Down Moves down one screen.
Home Goes to first column of current row.
End Goes to last column of current row that contains data.
CTRL Home Goes to first row, first column.
CTRL End Goes to last row and last column that contains data.
Table 1.7: Modifying keys.
Key Description
SHIFT + any
movement key
Extends the current selection.
Table 1.8: Mouse Actions.
Action Description
Left Click Moves the active cell to the pointer position.
Left Click in Row
or
Column Headings
Selects entire row or column.
Left Click in Top
Left Corner
Selects entire spreadsheet.
Left Double-Click Invokes in-cell editing.
Left Click and Drag
Selects a range. The previous selected ranges are deselected. You
can also freeze spreadsheet panes by dragging the pane freezing bar
(located above the first spreadsheet row) to the desired location.
Table 1.6: Movement Keys.
Freezing Spreadsheet Panes
The rows of a spreadsheet can be frozen or locked to the top of the screen while
scrolling. This is accomplished by right clicking on a highlighted row and selecting
Freeze Panes from the right-click menu. All rows above the selected line will
become frozen, and the other lines will scroll normally (See Figure 1.13). The
other way to freeze panes is to left click and drag the pane freezing bar to the
desired location.
SHIFT + Left Click
and Drag
Extends the current selection.
Right Click Opens the right-click menu.
Table 1.8: Mouse Actions.
Figure 1.13: Freezing Spreadsheet Panes
Spreadsheet Options Dialog
The spreadsheet options dialog is opened by choosing Tools|Options... from the
main application menu and clicking the Spreadsheet Options tab. It can also be
opened by right clicking on a spreadsheet field and choosing Options... from the
right click menu. All of the options within the Spreadsheet Options dialog are
global and apply to all of the Meyer applications.
A bold face font within the Spreadsheet Options Dialog identifies a non-default
value.
Move selection after enter (direction)
This option determines what happens when the ENTER key is pressed while editing
a spreadsheet cell. The Enter key direction can be set to move the cursor Down,
Right, Up, Left, or to simply toggle a spreadsheet cell in and out of edit mode if the
checkbox is left unchecked.
Display ellipsis for truncated strings
When set to Yes (default), an ellipse will appear at the end of spreadsheet text that
does not fit entirely in a cell. If this option is set to No, the text will be truncated.
Active cell border style
This allows the user to specify the visual cue that is used to identify the current
active spreadsheet cell.
Alternate background color
When set to User Defined, the background of every other spreadsheet row will be
filled using the specified color.
Frozen rows background color
When set to User Defined the background color of frozen cells will be filled using
the specified color. This allows frozen rows to stand out better from non-frozen
rows.
Spreadsheet Speed Buttons
At the top of dialog boxes that contain spreadsheet controls is a group of small but-
tons. These are the spreadsheet speed buttons. If there is more than one spreadsheet
control in a dialog box then these buttons affect the one that was most recently
active. Table 1.9 lists the speed buttons used with spreadsheets.
Table 1.9: Spreadsheet Speed Buttons.
Button Description
Imports spreadsheet file into spreadsheet control. The file should be in Excel
BIFF 4 format with the XLS file extension. It is recommend that only files
exported from the same control are imported.
Exports spreadsheet control into a spreadsheet file. The file should have
the.XLS extension and will be in Excel BIFF 4 format.
Prints the active spreadsheet to the currently selected printer (Printer
Setup... in the File Menu).
Data Shift provides an easy way to shift numerical data. Data shift can be selected
by clicking on . To use Data Shift, highlight the numbers you want to adjust,
select the Data Shift icon and add, subtract, or multiply by a fraction. This is a con-
venient way to calibrate stress, stress gradient, or Young's modulus from actual
minifrac results.
Figure 1.14 shows the data shift (linear transformation) screen. The New Values are
calculated from the Old Values by a simple linear transformation ( ). A
table of new and old column values is displayed. Selecting OK will replace the old
values with the new values.
Cut operation removes the selection and copies it to the Clipboard. Similar to
the copy command below.
Copies current selection to the Clipboard. Copied selections can then be
pasted in another selection in this or other spreadsheet controls or in Excel.
Pastes from the Clipboard to the current selection. The Clipboard selection
can come from other spreadsheet controls or Excel.
Inserts rows at the current selection.
Deletes rows of the current selection.
Fills down the top cells of the selection to the cells below in a column.
Linear transformation provides an easy way to shift and multiply numerical
data.
Table 1.9: Spreadsheet Speed Buttons.
y mx b + =
Figure 1.14: Data Shift Screen.
Dialog and Spreadsheet Column Sizing
All dialogs can be moved and scaled. To resize a dialog, grab the gripper bar on the
lower right corner of the dialog box by holding down on the left mouse button and
dragging. The dialog size and position is preserved and will be restored the next
time you access the dialog. The default dialog and spreadsheet layout can be reset
by clicking Window|Restore Default Layout.
The column widths in a spreadsheet can be resized by 1) placing the cursor on the
column separation line in the header, 2) holding down on the left mouse button, and
3) dragging the column to a given width. To adjust the spreadsheet within the dia-
log to have equal column widths, highlight the columns to be resized (see Figure
1.15) and resize as discussed above.
Figure 1.15: Spreadsheet Column Sizing to Equal Widths.
Spreadsheets With Movable Columns
Certain spreadsheets allow the columns to be rearranged. The simulation data win-
dows in all of the applications support this feature. To move a spreadsheet column
graphically, click and drag the column header to a new location. Columns may also
be rearranged or hidden via the Spreadsheet Column Configuration dialog accessi-
ble from the context menu of spreadsheets that support the feature (Figure 1.16).
Figure 1.16: Spreadsheet Column Setup Menu.
Clicking Column Setup... will open up the Spreadsheet Column Configuration dia-
log (Figure 1.17).
Figure 1.17: Spreadsheet Column Configuration Dialog.
Columns may be hidden by unchecking the check box and made visible by check-
ing the check box associated with the column. The columns may also be rearranged
using the Move Up and Move Down buttons.
Working with Plots
All of the Meyer programs use plots as a graphical method to display information.
These plots can be moved, zoomed, printed, exported and configured as described
in the following sections.
Arranging Plot Windows
All plots are in separate windows that are located within the main program window.
There can be any number of plot windows open at any given time; however, only
one document window is active at a time. This is indicated by a highlighted title bar
and its foreground position in front of all other opened plots. When plot windows
are open, their position may be adjusted by accessing commands located under the
Windows menu as shown in Figure 1.18.
Figure 1.18: Window Command Menu.
Plot windows can be cascaded from the upper left or tiled so that each plot win-
dow is fully visible. This sub-menu also has a list of all the plot windows that are
open. Selecting from the list moves the associated window to the foreground desig-
nating it as the active window. Any opened report windows will also be listed in the
Window menu and will be affected by the Window commands.
After the desired plots are displayed, they can be positioned and arranged according
to your preferences. Plots are treated much the same as any window on the Win-
dows desktop. Plots can be moved, sized and arranged relative to each other for
comparison. Figure 1.19 illustrates the Tile arrangement for displaying plots. Fig-
ure 1.20 illustrates the Cascade form of displaying all the plots in a single window.
Moving Plots
Mouse
1. Click the title bar of the plot to move and hold the left mouse button down
while dragging the plot to its new position.
2. Release the mouse button. To cancel the move, press ESC before you release
the mouse button.
Keyboard
1. Select the plot to move.
2. Press ALT + SPACEBAR to open the Control menu.
3. From the Control menu choose Move. The pointer changes to a four-headed
arrow.
4. Use the arrow keys to move the plot to its new location.
5. Press ENTER.
To Arrange Opened Plots:
1. Access the available commands from the Window menu (ALT + W).
2. Select either Tile (ALT + T), Cascade (ALT + C), or Arrange Icons (ALT + A) to
affect the arrangement of the plots (Figure 1.19 and Figure 1.20).
To Close a Plot:
1. In Window 3.x, select the Control menu of the plot you want to close. Click the
control box or press ALT + SPACEBAR.
2. From the Control menu choose Close (C).
To Close All Opened Plots:
1. Select Close All (ALT + L) from the Window menu.
Figure 1.19: The Tile Arrangement.
Figure 1.20: The Cascade Arrangement.
Zooming
All of the Meyer plots have the ability to zoom in on a specific area. You may zoom
in on a zoomed area as many times as you like. Use the Zoom Out command to
return to the previous magnification. Use the Zoom Out 100% (Zoom 100%) to
return to the original magnification.
To Zoom in on a Plot:
1. Position the cursor cross hair at one corner of the plot area.
2. Hold the left mouse button down and drag a box around the area to be zoomed.
3. Release the mouse button when the new visible plot area has been defined.
4. To return to the previous magnification, select Zoom Out from the Plot menu
or the right mouse button menu, or simply press F5.
5. To return to the original magnification select Zoom 100% from the Plot menu
or the right mouse button menu, or simply press F6.
Printing Plots
Plot windows may be printed using any Windows compatible printer. To print, you
must first select and configure the printer hardware for operation with Windows.
This can be done with the Printer Setup command in the File menu, which allows
you to select a printer and set its properties.
To Print a Plot on a Windows Compatible Output Device:
1. Open the desired plots and configure them according to your preferences.
2. Select the Print command from the File menu. The Print Graphics dialog
appears listing the available print options (Figure 1.21). Select the plot option
and page orientation.
3. Click OK to accept the selections and complete the printing process.
4. While the Print Manager is sending the information to the printer, a message is
displayed. During this time the printing process may be aborted by clicking the
Cancel button or pressing ENTER.
Figure 1.21: Program Print Graphics Dialog Box.
When zooming in on a plot with both left and right axes, both axes will be
zoomed to display exactly what was in the selected area. To change the left and
right scales independently, use the Scales section of the Plot Configuration box.
The progress of any printing operation can be monitored and controlled with the
Windows Print Manager. Refer to the Windows User's Guide for complete instruc-
tions for using the Print Manager.
On each printout, the program adds a footer (small identifier) in the lower left cor-
ner of each plot that contains the file name and date. An option to hide the footer is
also available.
Plot Menu
All Meyer programs have a Plot menu that is used to create and manipulate plots.
The menu commands used to manipulate plots are common to all programs.
If a plot is displayed, the Plot menu can be accessed from the Main Plot menu as
shown in Figure 1.22. Figure 1.23 shows the resulting Plot Menu screen by clicking
on the right mouse button.
Figure 1.22: Plot Menu Screen from Main Menu.
Figure 1.23: Plot Menu Screen from Right Mouse Button Click.
Copying to the Clipboard
To copy a plot to the clipboard, select the Copy to Clipboard command from the
Plot menu. This will place a bitmap of the current selected plot on the clipboard.
This bitmap can be pasted into any other Windows program. For best results, try to
size the plot window to the size of the desired bitmap before copying the picture.
This will eliminate the need to scale the bitmap after it has been pasted.
Exporting Plots
Meyer plots can be exported for use in another program, such as a word processor,
by saving a enhanced metafile (*.emf), bitmap (*.bmp), JPEG (*.jpg) or Portable
Network Graphics (*.png) file. Figure 1.24 shows the Exporting Plot Menu.
Figure 1.24: Exporting Plot Menu.
It is recommended that metafiles be used whenever possible, since they produce
better quality output generally. A metafile is stored as a series of vectors, which can
be scaled to any size, but a bitmap is a fixed size and does not scale well. Portable
Network Graphics (*.png) is also scalable. Most figures in this Guide are png files.
To save a plot as a metafile, select Enhanced MetaFile (*.emf) from the Save File
as Type menu. Then enter a file name for the metafile. This will create a standard
windows metafile of the currently active plot, which can be imported into many
graphics packages and word processors. For example, to insert the metafile into
Microsoft Word, choose Picture from the Insert menu in Word. Then specify the
metafile that was saved from the Meyer program. This will insert the picture into
your document. Note that the picture can be stretched without losing quality.
Default Plot Attributes
The default plot attributes for all plots can be configured by selecting the Default
Plot Attributes under the Plot Menu from the Main Menu (see Figure 1.22). This
menu is comprised of the Colors, Fonts and Layout attributes as shown in Figure
1.25.
Figure 1.25: Default Plot Attributes Menu.
Colors
The Colors command allows you to specify which colors are used in the plots. The
background, text, frame and grid colors are user specified. By default, all plots use
the colors selected in this box; however, a plot can be configured to have a different
set of colors if desired. For more information on configuring colors, see the Plot
Configuration section below.
General Colors
The default background, text, frame and grid colors are user specified under the
General Colors Menu.
To select the default background color click on the color box. A color menu will
then be displayed as shown in Figure 1.26. Select the color you want and press the
OK button.
Figure 1.26: Default Color Menu.
Curve Attributes
To change the default curve attributes click on the Curve Attributes color box. This
will bring up the Line & Curve Attributes dialog box shown in Figure 1.27.
Figure 1.27: Default Line & Curve Attributes Selection Screen.
The attributes of a specific line or curve can be modified by clicking on the button
representing the curve. This will bring up the dialog box shown in Figure 1.27.
From here the Line Color, Marker Style, Line Style and Line Width can be
changed. Setting the Marker Style to Off turns off the markers for an individual
curve. Likewise, setting the Line Style to Off allows you to plot only the markers
without lines connecting them. Choosing a Line Width greater than one will take a
longer time to draw the plot.
Fonts
The Meyer programs support all True Type fonts installed and available in Win-
dows. Clicking on the Font tab will display the font selection screen shown in Fig-
ure 1.28. This will allow you to modify the font and its size.
Figure 1.28: Fonts Selection Screen.
To change the Main Title, X-axis Label, Y-axis Labels, Scale or Legend fonts click
on the appropriate selection cell. Figure 1.29 displays the default Plot Font Selec-
tion screen. Since font size is always scaled based on the window size, it is impossi-
ble to select an exact point size; however, you may modify the ratio of the font size
to window size with the Font Size list box.
Figure 1.29: Default Plot Font Selection Screen.
Layout
Figure 1.30 shows the Default Layout folder which allows you to specify some
basic attributes (Plot Layout, Mouse Coordinates, and Left and Right Axes) used to
draw plots. All of these attributes may be overridden in any specific plot by choos-
ing the Plot Attributes button in the configuration screen as discussed below.
Figure 1.30: Layout Selection Dialog Box.
Plot Layout
The different options for determining how the plot is drawn in the window are:
1. Standard plot layout: The plot is always drawn such that the frame has a con-
stant aspect ratio, regardless of the size of the window.
2. Maximize plot area: The plot is drawn such that no empty space is wasted. The
aspect ratio of the plot will change as the plot window is sized
3. Allow graphical arrangement: The elements of the plot can be arranged
graphically. By using the Switch Mouse to Arrange Mode command, the ele-
ments of the plot can be manipulated with the mouse. The aspect ratio of the
plot can be user defined.
Mouse Coordinates
The mouse coordinates option allows the coordinates of the current mouse position
to be continuously updated on the screen. When using the graphical plot layout
option, the coordinates may be positioned anywhere in the window. The coordi-
nates are drawn using the same font as the labels on the axes. To view mouse coor-
dinates of multi-axes plots place the mouse cursor on the existing mouse
coordinates, click the right mouse button and select the desired curve. Figure 1.31
illustrates the mouse button selection dialog box.
Figure 1.31: Mouse Coordinate Selection.
Left and Right Axes
There are four options for how the curves of an axis (left or right) are drawn on the
plot. These options are 1) default, 2) like curves share an axis, 3) all curves drawn
on one axis, and 4) each curve has its own axis. Figure 1.32 illustrates the case of
all curves drawn on one axis. Figure 1.33 shows a plot where each curve has its
own axis. When they each have their own scale, there are labels for each curve
along the axis. The order of the curves in the legend is the same order of the labels
on the axis. This option is most useful when there are different kinds of parameters
on the same axis, for example rate and concentration.
Figure 1.32: Axes Label All Curves on One Axis with Maximize Area.
Figure 1.33: Axes Label Each Curve has Its Own Axis.
Slope Lines
The Slope Lines section, as seen in Figure 1.34, contains global preferences for the
behavior of plot slope lines.
1. The Show Balloon tip checkbox determines whether or not a balloon tip will
be displayed while hovering over or moving a plot slope line.
2. The Show ghost line checkbox determines whether or not a temporary line
(a.k.a. ghost line) will be drawn while plot slope lines are being moved.
Figure 1.34: General Plot Slope Line Configuration.
Configuration
This will bring up the Plot Configuration dialog box described in detail below
under Configuring Plots.
Add Text Block
A block of text may be added to any plot by selecting Add a Text Block from the
Plot menu or the right mouse button menu as illustrated in Figure 1.35. Then click
on the plot at the desired location to create a new text block (clicking and dragging
allows you to specify the text block width). To edit an existing text block, click on it
once to select it, and again to enter edit mode. Once in edit mode, pressing ENTER
will go to the next line, and CTRL+Z will undo the last change. Press ESCAPE or
click elsewhere in the plot to exit edit mode.
Figure 1.35: Adding a Text Block to a Plot.
By double clicking on the block, or selecting configuration from the right mouse
button menu (Figure 1.35), the attributes of the text block, such as colors, frame,
and font, can be configured. Figure 1.36 shows the text block configuration dialog
box. A text block can be deleted by using the right mouse button menu, or pressing
DELETE when a text block is selected. The text blocks can also be moved and sized
with the mouse.
Figure 1.36: Text Block Configuration.
Zoom Out
This will return the currently selected plot to the previous magnification. For more
information on zooming, see the Zoom section above.
Zoom 100%
This will return the currently selected plot to the original magnification. For more
information on zooming, see the Zoom section above.
Configuring Plots
The attributes of an open plot may be re-configured by either double-clicking the
active plot in the main plot area or by selecting the Configuration command from
the Plot menu. This action displays the configuration dialog shown in Figure 1.37.
All of these commands are easily accessible at any time by clicking the right
mouse button within a plot window.
Figure 1.37: Plot Configuration Screen.
The Plot Configuration screen provides a method for modifying the text, colors and
scales as described in the sections below.
When finished editing the configuration, choose one of the buttons in Table 1.10 to
close the configuration box.
Plot Labels
To change a plot label, edit the appropriate text in the Plot Labels section at the top
of the box. To change the text on the plot legend, see the Legend section below.
Table 1.10: Buttons For Closing Plot Configuration Box.
OK Changes only the current plot in the Plot Configuration screen.
Change Default Applies the changes to this plot and all future plots of the same type
that are plotted, even in different data files.
Cancel Cancels all changes.
Markers
Turn on the Markers checkbox to see markers on the curve. Fill in the Draw mark-
ers every ith point to specify how often to draw markers. For example, a value of
two will specify to draw a marker at every other data point. To turn off markers for
all curves of the plot, turn this option off. To turn off markers for only selected
curves of the plot, turn this option on and modify the marker type for the curves on
which markers are not wanted.
General Sub Categories
The sub categories of the General section are shown in Figure 1.38. This menu is
comprised of the Colors, Fonts and Layout attributes.
Figure 1.38: Individual Plot Attributes.
General Colors
One set of colors, the default colors, is used for all plots. To change these default
colors, check the Apply to defaults check box. However, individual plots may have
their own color scheme.
To use colors other than the defaults, turn off the Use Defaults check box. Then
configure the individual colors by clicking on them, which brings up a palette.
Choose the desired color from the palette and click OK. Double-click on the colors
in the palette for quick selection. The definition of the different colors is described
in Table 1.11.
Curve Attributes
The attributes of a specific curve can be modified by un-checking the Use Defaults
box and clicking on the box representing the curve. This will bring up the dialog
screen shown in Figure 1.39. From here the Line Color, Marker Style, Line Style
and Line Width can be changed. Setting the Marker Style to Off turns off the mark-
ers for an individual curve. Likewise, setting the Line Style to Off allows you to
plot only the markers without lines connecting them. Choosing a Line Width
greater than one will slow down the plot drawing process. Clicking Line Color will
bring up the color selection dialog as shown in Figure 1.26.
To return to the curve defaults, select Use Defaults. From this box, the attributes of
any curve can be changed.
Figure 1.39: Line & Curve Attributes Selection Screen.
Table 1.11: Plot General Colors.
Area Definition
Background
Color
All the area inside and outside of the plot frame.
Text Color
All of the labels, but not the legends (the legends are drawn with the
curve colors).
Frame Color The rectangle that separates the curves from the labels.
Grid Color The grid drawn inside the frame.
Fonts
The Meyer programs support all True Type fonts installed and available in Win-
dows. Clicking on the Font tab will display the font selection screen shown in Fig-
ure 1.40. This will allow you to modify the font and its size. Since font size is
always scaled based on the window size, it is impossible to select an exact point
size; however, you may modify the ratio of the font size to window size with the
Font Size list box.
Figure 1.40: Plot Font Selection Screen.
Layout
See Layout on page 44.
Scales
On certain plots, it may be desirable to have the X and Y-axes use the same scale.
To force them to use the same scale, click on the Scales button in the Plot Control.
This will bring up the scales dialog box as shown in Figure 1.41. Then check X-Y
scales have same Aspect Ratio. To turn off this feature, leave the checkbox
unchecked. Only use this feature when the X and Y scales are in the same unit, for
example the width contour plot in MFrac. In this plot, the Y scale represents depth
and the X scale represents fracture length.
Figure 1.41: X-Y Aspect Ratio Selection Screen.
Axes
The X and Y axis may be plotted on a linear or log scale. Select Linear or Log as
desired.
The Upper, Lower and Increment may be specified for each axis. The Upper and
Lower define the range of the scale and the Increment defines how often gridlines,
tick marks and numeric labels are drawn. The Increment must be less than the
Upper minus the Lower (for positive numbers).
To have the program automatically pick the appropriate settings, check the Auto
scale box. This is the default. To manually specify the parameters, turn off the
Auto scale box. Note that the X, Y Left and Y Right, and Z axes may be configured
individually; however the Y Left and Y Right axes share Auto scale and Linear/
Log buttons.
To temporarily zoom in on a section of the plot, the Zoom feature as described
above may be easier to use than manually specifying the scale.
Legend
The plot legend is used to reference a curve that corresponds or represents a given
parameter. To modify the legends attributes, click on the Legend button in the Plot
Attributes tree view. The Legend Control dialog box for the vertical orientation is
shown in Figure 1.42.
Figure 1.42: Legend Control Dialog Box - Vertical.
To hide the Legend, make sure the Show Legend checkbox is not checked. To
eliminate showing a given curve, enter the Line & Curve Attributes and set both
Line Style and Marker Style to Off.
The legends Show Units option has three radial button choices: 1) Yes - to show
the units, 2) No - do not show units, and 3) Automatic - the code will display units
when more than one parameter with different units is present on a given axes. Three
options are available for under
The legend Orientation also has three radial button choices: 1) Vertical - the legend
will be placed in the vertical position, 2) Horizontal - the legends will be oriented
horizontally, and 3) Automatic - the legend will be place vertically for a single vari-
able on each axes and in the Horizontal position for multiple variables with the
option that each has its own axis
There are five fixed locations for the vertical legend orientation as illustrated in
Figure 1.42, the four corners of the plot and along the right side of the plot. The
Legend Control dialog box for the Horizontal Orientation is shown in Figure 1.43.
There are three locations for the Horizontal legend orientation: 1) Across the Top,
2) Position with Mouse, and 3) Across the Bottom.
To allow movement of the legend, anywhere on the screen, select Position with
Mouse. If Allow graphical arrangement is checked in the Layout dialog box, the
legend can be arranged anywhere on the plot and the Legend Control dialog box
will be dimmed. Choose the desired location with the corresponding radio button.
Figure 1.43: Legend Control Dialog Box - Horizontal.
To modify the legend font, click on the Fonts button in the tree view. This font can
be modified like the label fonts, described above.
To change the legend text, click on the corresponding button at the bottom of the
screen. The left and right buttons allow you to change the text for the curves on the
left and right scales, respectively. After clicking on either of these buttons, a dialog
box will be displayed that contains all of the legends. Modify them as desired and
click OK. To revert to the original legend text, click on the Default button.
For help with the Multilayer Legend Names section see Multilayer Legends on
page 207.
Gridlines
To draw a grid on the plot, click the Gridlines section. The grid is drawn at inter-
vals specified by the Increment section of the X and Y-axes. Figure 1.44 shows the
grid selection screen.
Figure 1.44: Grid Selection Screen.
Slope Lines
Slope lines can be added to almost any line plot where the x-axis is the independent
axis. Figure 1.45 shows the slope line configuration screen.
Figure 1.45: Slope Line Configuration Screen.
Each slope line is associated with a left or right curve specified within the Curve
Number column. Toggling the Sync slope and curve colors checkbox synchro-
nizes the plot slope line colors to the curve colors.
To manipulate plot slope lines graphically, set the plot mouse mode to Select (press
F4 to toggle between mouse modes). Once in select mode, the slope lines can be
moved by dragging and dropping the points or lines. The plot cursor will change
when hovering over a slope line to indicate which operation is available.
Color Fill
With contour plots, it is possible to show a shaded, color filled or a plain contour
plot. To change this option, click on the Contours button in the Plot Attributes tree
view. This will bring up the contour selection screen as shown in Figure 1.46. Then
choose Shaded, Color Filled Contour, or Plain Contour.
Figure 1.46: Color Fill Contour Selection Screen.
Shading Colors
The shading colors are dependent on the Color Fill Contour Selection shown in Fig-
ure 1.46. Figure 1.47 shows the Shaded Contour Color Selection Screen.
Figure 1.47: Shading Colors Selection Screen.
Figure 1.48 shows the Color Filled and Plain Contour Selection Screen. To change
a Filled Area Color, click on the color or curve you wish to change. This will bring
up a dialog box for interactively choosing the color values for Red, Green and Blue.
The values must be in the range of 0 to 255.
Figure 1.48: Filled Area Colors Selection Screen.
To return to the defaults for the Filled Area Colors, select Area Color from the
Default section. To make all the Filled Area Colors be shades of a certain color,
click on the Shading button and select a base color.
Chart Type
For chart plots, it is possible to change the chart type. Click on the Chart button in
the Plot Attributes tree view. This brings up the chart dialog as shown in Figure
1.49. Then choose the desired type of plot from the list. The number displayed in
the legend can also be configured. Select either Stage Number, Percentage (percent
of total) or Unit Values (the value for the stage).
Figure 1.49: Chart Type Selection Screen.
Real-Time
MView supports additional configuration for real-time data sets. The Real-Time
configuration screen, as seen in Figure 1.50, is available when an MView plot con-
tains at least one real-time data curve.
Figure 1.50: Real-Time Configuration Screen
The Sliding X Axis option is used to change the auto scaling behavior of the plot
such that the last X Axis Size units of time are visible within the plot area each time
the plot is rescaled. When the Sliding X Axis option is enabled, the Scale X Axis to
Real-Time option is not available.
The Scale X Axis to Real-Time and Scale Y Axes to Real-Time options modify
the auto scaling behavior of plots that contain both replay and real-time data. To
prevent auto-scaling the X axis according to the replay data on the plot, enable the
Scale X Axis to Real-Time option. To prevent auto scaling the Y axes according to
the replay data, enable the Scale Y Axes to Real-Time option.
Plot Templates
The current state of all the plots on the screen can be saved into a template file. This
template can then be recalled later to view the same plots again, even for a different
simulation. This makes it easy to recall groups of plots that are always viewed
together. Any template that is saved can be added directly on the Template menu
for easy access.
The template contains the current plot default attributes, identifies opened plots and
relative window positions, and the plot configuration for each of these open plots.
Any options associated with these plots (e.g., plotted versus time or volume) are
also saved.
To Save a Template
Once the windows are arranged properly, select Save Template from the Template
pop-up menu that is under the Plot menu as shown in Figure 1.51.
Figure 1.51: Plot Template Dialog Box.
Then specify a descriptive name for the template as illustrated in Figure 1.52. If you
do not want the template to appear in the template menu, uncheck the Add to Tem-
plate Menu check box. Click on the OK button and then specify a file name for the
template.
Figure 1.52: Save Plot Template Descriptive Name.
To Recall a Template
If the template is listed on the Template menu, just select it. Otherwise, select Load
Template from the Template menu. Then specify the template file. The plots saved
in the template will appear.
Organize Template Menu
The Organize Template Menu screen allows for user customization of the Template
menu. Any template that has been saved may be added to the Template menu for
easy access as shown in Figure 1.53. Within this screen, the templates and the order
in which they appear in the menu can be configured.
Figure 1.53: Plot Template Menu Organization Screen.
Figure 1.53 shows the current configuration of the menu, the template description
and file location.
To add a template Click on the Add button and select the desired template file. To
delete a Template select the desired template in the list. Then click on the Delete
button. To Move a Template Up in the list select the desired template and click on
the Up button as many times as needed. To Move a Template Down in the list select
the desired template and click on the Down button as many times as needed.
Click on the OK button after the menu has been configured.
Run Menu for Other Meyer Applications
Figure 1.54 shows the Run Menu for other Meyer Applications. Simply click on the
Meyer Application you wish to execute.
Figure 1.54: Run Menu for Other Meyer Applications.
Simulation Data Windows
Simulation Data Windows (Figure 1.55) are available in all of the applications that
contain a simulator. An application can be identified as having a simulator if there
is a Run item in the main application menu. The Simulation Data Windows pro-
vide a read only view of the simulation output data while the simulator is running,
and after it has finished running. The data columns within these windows can be
rearranged or hidden as desired (See Spreadsheets With Movable Columns on
page 31)

Figure 1.55: Simulation Data Windows.
Right clicking on any of the Simulation Data Window spreadsheets will display a
context menu providing additional options. To reset the Simulation Data Window
columns to their original positions and original visibility, select Restore Default
Column Layout from the spreadsheet context menu.
To open a Simulation Data Window at any time, the Show Simulation Data Win-
dows sub menu under Plots provides a full list of available windows and a user
interface for opening or closing more than one window at a time.
The Simulation Data Windows are magnetic, when a data window is moved or
sized too close to another magnetic window, the two windows will snap together.
To override this feature, hold the CTRL key while sizing or moving the Simulation
Data Windows.
When the simulation is started, various Simulation Data Windows are opened
according to the current Run Options described in the next section.
Run Options
The Run Options dialog box is shown in Figure 1.56 and is available in all applica-
tions that contain simulators. To open the Run Options dialog, choose Options...
from the Run menu. These options are used during the program execution (Run-
ning) and provide flexibility for auto scaling of plots, beeping after each iteration
and min./max. error checking.
Figure 1.56: Run Options Dialog Box.
Simulation Data Windows are magnetic; they will snap together if they get close
to one another. Holding the CTRL key overrides this feature.
Display the following data windows when the sim-
ulator is run
When the simulator is run, the selected windows are automatically opened. This
preference is ignored if the Show template before running simulation option is
checked.
Scale plots based on the last run while calculating
When running a simulation, all open plots are automatically updated each time step.
Since most output parameters are growing during the simulation, this causes the
plot scales to change. Use this option to prevent the scale from changing so often.
During a simulation, if the option is on, the plots will automatically use the scale of
the last simulation. If an output parameter goes beyond the scale of the last simula-
tion, the plots will then automatically rescale. It is advised to leave this option on.
Beep after each time step
If desired, MFrac can provide audio feedback on the progress of the calculations by
generating a system beep for each time step. This may be desirable for complicated
simulations when the calculation times are long. To use this feature click the Beep
after each time step check box.
Disable MIN MAX error checking
This will disable error checking. Error checking ensures that all input parameters
are within the minimum and maximum allowable range when starting a simulation.
Use this option if you have elected to enter a value that is out of range, by clicking
on the Ignore button. Otherwise, it is advisable to keep this option off.
Show template before running simulator
The current state of all the plots on the screen can be saved into a template file. This
template can then be recalled later to view the same plots again, even for a different
simulation.
Any template that is saved can be shown during running by selecting the Template
file using the browse button (The button containing an ellipse; see Figure 1.56).
See Plot Templates on page 64 for additional information.
Generating Reports
All of the Meyer programs can generate reports which can be viewed on the screen
or exported to a file.
Viewing Reports
To view a report, choose the View Report command from the Report menu and
select the report type. A report window will then appear. Use the arrow keys or the
scroll bars to scroll around the report. The appearance of the report can be config-
ured as described below.
Report Configuration
To configure the appearance of on-screen reports, select Report Configuration
from the Report menu. This will bring up the Report Configuration dialog box
Figure 1.57: Report Configuration Dialog Box.
To include a bitmap, such as a company logo, at the top of the report, click on the
Bitmap at top of Report checkbox. Then click on the Select File button to select
the bitmap file. The bitmap can be left, center or right justified.
There are four different levels of text in reports: the Main Title, Title, Subtitle and
Main Text. For each, the justification and font may be configured. Choose the
desired justification with the Left, Center and Right radio buttons. The Main Text
justification is not configurable. To select the font for a text level, click on the
appropriate Select Font button. From the Font dialog box, select the desired Font,
Font style and Size.
The table justification is used to configure how tables are displayed. Select Left,
Center or Right.
To make report windows automatically maximized when they come up, check the
Automatically maximize report windows check box.
Exporting Reports
There are three options for exporting a report, either as a text, HTML or RTF file. A
text file is formatted by spaces and tabs. An RTF file contains all of the formatting
that is in a report window; however, an RTF file can only be read by word proces-
sors that support RTF files.
Save Report as a Text File
To save a report as a text file, select the text File command from the Report menu.
After selecting desired kind of report, enter a file name for the text file.
Save Report as an HTML File
To save a report as an HTML file, select the HTML command from the Report
menu. After selecting desired kind of report, enter a file name for the HTML file.
Save Report as an RTF File
To save a report as an RTF file, select the Save Report as an RTF File command
from the Report menu. After selecting desired kind of report, enter a file name for
the RTF file.
1.10 Unicode Compatibility 73
1.10 Unicode Compatibility
Overview
As of Meyer 2009, all of the applications included in the Meyer software suite are
Unicode compatible. Prior to Meyer 2009, characters were interpreted according to
the Windows language for non-Unicode programs setting as seen in Figure 1.58.
Figure 1.58: Language for non-Unicode programs.
Pre-Unicode
Characters were represented by a single byte and interpreted according to the
Windows language for non-Unicode programs setting.
Only 256 distinct characters were representable at a given time.
Many common symbols could not be used in the user interface due to character
encoding limitations.
Unicode
Characters are represented by one or more bytes and interpreted according to
the Unicode standard.
Thousands of characters are representable depending on available fonts and
operating system compatibility.
The Windows language for non-Unicode programs setting no longer influ-
ences how the Meyer applications display characters.
Now that the applications are Unicode compatible, any non-Unicode text loaded
from a file is converted to Unicode when the file is opened. This applies to most of
the file formats that applications prior to Meyer 2009 were capable of saving or
exporting. A prompt for choosing an international text encoding will be displayed if
this conversion process cannot be completed automatically. An example of this
prompt is show in Figure 1.59.
Figure 1.59: International Text Encoding Prompt
If a file is opened with an incorrect international text encoding, the text may
appear to be corrupt. If this happens, reopen the file and try choosing a different
international text encoding.
1.10 Unicode Compatibility 75
Text Files
UTF-8 and UTF-16 encoded text files are supported provided that they contain a
valid BOM (byte order mark). If the byte order mark is omitted, the file will be
interpreted using the Windows language for non-Unicode programs setting.
Known Issues
Languages that read from right to left are not fully supported.
Characters outside of the Basic Multilingual Plane (BMP) are not fully sup-
ported.
Chapter 2
MFrac
A Three Dimensional Hydraulic
Fracturing Simulator
2.1 Introduction
MFrac is a three-dimensional hydraulic fracturing simulator that is designed to be
used as an everyday tool. MFrac accounts for the coupled parameters affecting frac-
ture propagation and proppant transport. MFrac is not a fully 3-D model. It is how-
ever formulated between a pseudo-3D and full 3-D type model with an applicable
half-length to half-height aspect ratio greater than about 1/3 (Meyer
15
). MFrac also
has options for 2-D type fracture models.
This chapter covers the available menu options and basic procedures required to
run MFrac. Please refer to the Meyer Appendices and listed references for specific
details regarding the governing equations, modeling techniques, methodology and
numerical procedures. Example files are provided with the software to demonstrate
MFracs features, utility and general data entry procedures.
An outline of the basic steps for using MFrac is shown in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: MFrac Basic Steps.
Step Program Area
1. Open an existing MFrac data file (*.mfrac) or create a new
data file.
File Menu
2. Specify Units (optional) Units Menu
3. Select Program Options Data Menu
4. For a real-time or replay case, start MView and import the
acquired data.
MView
5. Input Required Data Data Menu
78 MFrac: A Three Dimensional Hydraulic Fracturing Simulator
Menu
The MFrac menu bar is shown in Figure 2.1. Generally, the menus are accessed
from left to right with the exception of the Units and Database menus.
Figure 2.1: MFrac Main Menu.
A description of each menu item is described in the following chapters or sections
as given in Table 2.2:
6. Run Simulation Run Menu
7. View Plots during or after the simulation Plot Menu
8. Generate Report Report Menu
Table 2.2: Description and Location of Menu Items
Main Menu Item Description Location
File File Management Chapter 1
Options Model Options Section 2.2
Data
Description
Wellbore Hydraulics
Zones
Treatment Schedule
Foam Schedule
Rock properties
Fluid loss Data
Proppant Criteria
Acid data
Heat Transfer
Section 2.3
Run Start Simulation Section 2.4
Plots Graphical Presentation Section 2.5
Table 2.1: MFrac Basic Steps.
2.2 Options 79
Exporting to Exodus
After the simulation has completed, the propped fracture characteristics may be
exported for use with T.T. & Associates Exodus reservoir simulator. To do this,
select the Export to Exodus Reservoir Simulator command from the File menu. If
there is more than one active zone, MFrac will ask which zone to export. Make a
selection by choosing the desired zone in the list box and pressing OK. Then MFrac
will ask for the file name. Specify the desired file name and press OK. Use this file
name when importing data into Exodus.
For more information on the Exodus reservoir simulator, contact T.T. & Associates.
2.2 Options
The Options screen is the first input dialog box under the Data menu in MFrac. It is
used to establish the primary model options in the program. Each option relates to a
specific aspect of the fracture and proppant/acid modeling approach.
To access the Options screen, select Options from the Data menu by clicking the
menu name. The dialog box displayed in Figure 2.2 will then be presented.
Reports Generating Reports Section 2.6
Databases
Fluid Database
Proppant
Non-Darcy
Acid
Casing
Tubing
Coiled-Tubing
Rock Properties
Section 2.7
Table 2.2: Description and Location of Menu Items
Figure 2.2: Data Options Screen.
The Options screen determines what information is needed for a particular type of
analysis. The specific data displayed in a screen or the existence of a data screen
itself varies depending on the options selected. This smart-menu approach, mini-
mizes data input and prevents unnecessary or misleading data entry. Simply decide
the relevant options for a specific simulation and the program will only display
those menus and input fields necessary. Any time the options are changed the input
data screens will be updated to enable new input or hide data that is not needed.
This hierarchy methodology is used throughout MFrac.
The selections made in the Data Options screen set the scope for all data entered
into the MFrac program. These options establish the input data required and specify
the nature of the calculations to be performed.
To select an option, click the radio button adjacent to the option preference. A black
diamond will then appear in the center of the button selected. Continuing, select a
radio button within the next option section or use the TAB button to move sequen-
tially through the choices. Once within a section, the current selection for that
option is highlighted with a dotted rectangle. The option choice may be changed by
using either the mouse or the arrow keys.
General Options
The General Options screen allows the user to specify the type of analysis to be per-
formed. The choices available for each of the General Options are summarized as
follows:
2.2 Options 81
Simulation Method
Design Mode
This option is the traditional methodology used for hydraulic fracturing design. The
program flexibility allows for running in standard mode based on a given input
fracture length, slurry volume or treatment schedule. Depending on other options
specified, the program uses the formation and treatment data in the calculation of
associated fracture and proppant transport characteristics. Design Mode refers to
the fact that the design engineer must design (and optimize) the fracture treatment.
Replay/Real-Time
The Replay/Real-Time option is required for replaying or performing real-time
fracture analysis using the data collected during a treatment. This procedure
requires the use of MView as the real-time or replay data handler. Please refer to
Chapter 3 for instructions on the use of MView.
With respect to MFrac, there is essentially no difference in the procedures used for
performing real-time or replay simulations. The difference between these methods
only involves the source data input which is handled by MView. Either method per-
mits pressures matching, geometry prediction and proppant transport simulation.
Reservoir Coupling
The mechanisms which control fluid loss from a propagating fracture are discussed
in the Appendices. Typically, for general fracturing applications where the leakoff
distance perpendicular to the fracture face is small compared to the fracture length
Carters one-dimensional fluid loss model is adequate. However, for cases with
large fluid loss volumes (e.g., produced water reinjection and large scale frac-
packs), the fluid loss behavior is two-dimensional or ellipsoidal. The ellipsoid fluid
loss option should be used for cases when the leakoff distance becomes greater than
a small fraction of the fracture length.
Linear (Conventional)
This is the classic linear fluid loss model as proposed by Carter and assumes that
the fluid loss is one-dimensional. This option can be used for most applications and
is the most common fluid loss model used for propagating fractures.
Ellipsoidal (Koning)
This option allows for ellipsoidal (2D) fluid loss from the fracture and generally
results in lower fracture efficiencies in high permeability formations when large
volumes of fluid are injected. This option requires selection of either the Harmonic
or Dynamic Fluid Loss Model. The Ellipsoidal model should be selected for pro-
duced water reinjection and high permeability large volume frac-packs.
Real-Time
The Real-Time options are only available if the Replay/Real-Time radio button is
clicked On in the Simulation Method dialog. If MView Concentration is selected
the proppant concentration will be taken from the replay/real-time data as sent to
MFrac from MView. If the Input Concentration button is selected the proppant
concentration used by MFrac will be taken from the values specified in the Treat-
ment Schedule. Generally, the MView Concentration is desirable unless the actual
proppant concentration injected is not available.
The Synchronize Well Solution radio button is used to synchronize the numeri-
cally calculated time steps for wellbore events with the replay/real-time data.
Synchronizing the wellbore solution with the incoming real-time or replay data
enables for very refined calculations of the wellbore and near-wellbore frictional
pressure losses. Since the fracture net pressure is not as dependent on the instanta-
neous rate changes, this provides the capability to run the fracture model with a
greater time step while still simulating the effects of rate changes on frictional
losses in the wellbore and near well region.
Net Present Value
The Net Present Value option can only be activated if the Simulation Method is
Design Mode.
When the NPV option is turned On, MFrac automatically sets the Treatment
Design to Auto Design and the Treatment Type to Proppant. For this option, a
maximum fracture length is specified in the treatment schedule. MFrac then auto-
matically calculates the proppant distribution and fracture conductivity for a num-
ber of incremental fracture lengths up to the maximum value specified. The
purpose of this type of analysis is to optimize the design length and conductivity for
propped fractures. This process is accomplished by coupling our analytical produc-
tion simulator MProd to forecast productivity for each subdivision of the fracture
length. MProd, in turn, produces output used by MNpv to perform Net Present
Value economic optimization calculations.
Turning NPV Off enables the simulator to perform in standard Design, Replay/Real-
time or Auto Design mode. This is the general mode of operation unless an NPV
analysis to optimize fracture length is desired.
2.2 Options 83
Fluid Loss Model
The rate of fluid loss to the formation is governed by the total leakoff coefficient .
The three types of flow resistance mechanisms making up are: 1) - leakoff
viscosity and relative permeability effects, 2) - reservoir viscosity and com-
pressibility effects, and 3) - wall building effects.
This option determines which fluid leakoff model is used. The fluid loss model
options include specifying the total leakoff coefficient (Constant Model) or the
coefficient and the corresponding components which comprise and (Har-
monic or Dynamic Models). A detailed description of the components characteriz-
ing the Harmonic and Dynamic models is given in Appendix D of the Appendices
and in the Fluid Loss Data section of this chapter.
If Constant is selected, the total leakoff coefficient, , is entered in the Fluid Loss
Data screen. The total leakoff and spurt loss coefficients are then input as a function
of depth to characterize fluid loss in the fracture at different intervals.
When either the Harmonic or Dynamic models are chosen, the filter cake coeffi-
cient ( ) and reservoir diffusivity parameters are input in the Fluid Loss Data
screen for each layer. The and coefficients are then calculated from the
input reservoir data and fracture propagation characteristics. The total leakoff coef-
ficient is then calculated internally as a function of differential pressure.
The weighting of the individual leakoff coefficients for the Harmonic and
Dynamic models is given in Appendix D.
When the Fluid Type Dependent check box under Fluid Loss Model option is
checked, different total leakoff coefficients (C and Spurt Loss) for each fluid can be
entered for the Constant Leakoff model. When the Harmonic or Dynamic Leakoff
model is chosen the user can input different wall building coefficients ( ), fil-
trate viscosities, and spurt loss coefficient for each fluid.
This option is useful when large volumes of 2% KCl or treated fluids are in the
wellbore prior to pumping the main fracturing treatment. The option is also helpful
for modeling leakoff during acid fracturing treatments with alternating pad/acid
stages.
If the Include Fluid Loss History check box under Fluid Loss Model option is
checked, the simulator will remember the fluid loss history if the fracture closes
and then re-opens. This option should be selected to include the effect of the mini-
C
C C
I
C
II
C
III
C
III
C
I
C
II
C
C
III
C
I
C
II
C
III
frac on the main fracture treatment and when multiple open/close cycles are gener-
ated. If this option is checked, the model assumes that the filter cake, viscosity, and
compressibility effects from the previous fracture remain upon re-opening.
Treatment Type
This selection determines the type of fracture treatment. The Treatment Type can
be either a propped (Proppant) or acid (Acid) fracture. In addition, the treatment
can accommodate an optional foam schedule by checking the Foam box. When
Foam is checked, MFrac will include compressibility effects.
Treatment Design Options
The treatment design options are only available if the Simulation Method is in
Design Mode and the Treatment Type selected is Proppant with no Foam. The
default setting is Input for all other cases.
In MFrac, either the pumping schedule can be input manually or determined auto-
matically. When Auto Design is chosen, the desired design fracture length or total
slurry volume is input in the treatment schedule dialog box. Depending on the
Proppant Transport Methodology selected, specific criteria for controlling the
proppant scheduling will also be required.
When Input is chosen, the pumping parameters must be entered into the Treatment
Schedule screen. The exact data input required will depend on selections made for
other options (e.g., ramped proppant scheduling, user specified proppant settling,
acid fracturing, etc.).
Wellbore Hydraulics Model
This option determines the wellbore hydraulics model to be used in calculating fric-
tional pressure losses in the wellbore. Surface and bottomhole pressures, gravita-
tional head, restrictions, transport times and hydraulic power requirements are also
calculated. The near wellbore and perforation pressure losses are calculated sepa-
rately below the BHP reference point for each fracture and coupled to the wellbore.
The available wellbore model options are listed below:
When the Net Present Value Option is On the Treatment Schedule Option is
automatically set to Auto Design. For Replay/Real-Time this option is automat-
ically set to Input.
2.2 Options 85
None
When this option is selected, wellbore hydraulics calculations are still performed;
however, the frictional pressure loss is assumed to be zero. The wellbore hydraulics
output data is also not displayed or written to file.
Empirical
The Empirical option is an internal correlation for calculating the frictional pres-
sure loss of Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids. This option provides a combined
correlation that is applicable for a variety of fluids ranging from linear systems to
highly non-Newtonian and viscoelastic fluids that exhibit drag reduction due to slip
or shear thinning during turbulent flow. Three distinct types of behavior are possi-
ble with the combined correlation used in MFrac. These behaviors are illustrated in
Figure 2.3 and summarized in the explicit expressions for the Fanning friction fac-
tor outlined in Table 2.3
Figure 2.3: Pipe Friction Empirical Correlations.
Table 2.3: Fanning Friction Factors
Maximum Drag Reduction, P.S. Virk
1

(Predicts Minimum Friction)
1
f
----- 19 Re
s
f ( ) log 32.4 =
When a value for the Relative Pipe Roughness is entered into one of the Wellbore
Hydraulics dialog boxes, the expression for friction factor based on Prandtls Uni-
versal Law is modified. See Appendix E for additional information.
To include the effects of proppant concentration on friction, the program has a built
in correlation for slurry rheology. The relationship used, originally described by
Keck, et al., is also presented in Appendix E.
User Database
When User Database is selected, the information specified in the fluid database is
used for calculating the frictional pressure loss in the tubing, annulus, and casing.
This data can be edited and plotted by accessing the database. The information in
the database does not represent proppant-laden fluid. Consequently, if the proppant
concentration wellbore option is selected in the proppant option screen, the friction
factor will be adjusted for proppant concentration in a manner similar to the method
described in Appendix E for the Empirical option.
Fracture Solution
These options provide control and flexibility for the time dependent discretization
methodology used in the program. To enable time step size control for capturing
various time dependent events, the user can specify the number of fracture Itera-
tions and the Maximum Time Step. MFrac will also automatically adjust the time
step size as necessary to control local and global errors. For Replay/Real-Time
analysis, the data Restart Time can also be specified.
The base time step used for discretization in the numerical simulation will be the
minimum of the values calculated from either the number of Iterations or Max
Time Step input.
Iterations
The value for the number of Iterations determines the target number of time steps
to be used for the fracture propagation solution. The total or estimated simulation
time is then divided by the number of iterations to determine the time step size.
Transitional Flow, Keck, et al.
2
No Drag Reduction, Prandtl, et al.
3
(Predicts Maximum Friction)
1
f
----- A Re
s
f ( ) log B + =
1
f
-----
4 Re
s
f ( ) log 0.4 =
2.2 Options 87
For example, if the number of iterations is 100 and the pump time is 100 minutes,
the average time step would be one (1) minute. The actual time step may vary
depending on other numerical considerations. For most simulations, a value of 20
to 30 iterations is sufficient.
Generally, the number of iterations is most effectively used for design and auto
design. For Replay/Real-Time, the Max Time Step constraint may be more applica-
ble.
The number of time steps should be increased for cases with order-of-magnitude
changes in the injection rate or fluid rheology properties (e.g., pad/acid). It should
also be increased if the fracture encounters numerous layers in a given time step
(especially with diverse properties) or when the injection times are very large (e.g.,
years as in water flooding). The maximum time step can also be specified to mini-
mize the time step.
If the Alpha Plots accessed from the Fracture Characteristics Plot dialog box
appear erratic, the number of iterations specified may be too small. Generally, the
solution will not be very sensitive to the number of time steps because of the solu-
tion technique used. If the governing equations cannot be solved within a specific
tolerance, an alternate solution method is used for that time step. The number of
actual fracture solution iterations will always be slightly greater than the value
specified. The larger this value is, the longer the program will take to run.
Max Time Step
The Max Time Step can be used to control the program time step. This is especially
useful when performing real-time or replay simulations. To simulate events that
occur over a very narrow range of time (e.g., rate changes or pressure spikes) the
time step size must be small enough to capture the event. If the time step is too
large, significant rate and pressure changes may be missed. Also, the smaller the
Max Time Step the longer it will take the program to run.
The Real-Time option of synchronizing the wellbore solution to the input data
enables time refinement for wellbore and near-wellbore pressure losses. This is
very useful for history matching pressure changes due to rate. Also, as stated in the
Real-Time options section, the fracture net pressure is a weaker function of rate
than frictional pressure dissipation. This provides the capability to limit the fracture
time step while still maintaining the time refinement necessary to accurately model
wellbore friction.
Restart Time
The Restart Time is used to start or restart a simulation at a time other than the first
entry point in the data file for real-time or replay simulations. This option is nor-
mally used when earlier data is not relevant or multiple injection cycles (i.e., mini-
frac) are pumped and only the later time cycle data (i.e., main frac) is to be
analyzed. Consequently, this option provides the flexibility to restart a simulation at
the beginning or middle of any injection cycle. Enter the time in the replay/real-
time data at which the simulation should begin.
Heat Transfer
When turned On, the heat transfer solution can be used to predict the heat-up of the
fracturing fluid in the wellbore and the exchange of heat transfer in the fracture to
the reservoir during fracture propagation. The heat transfer solution accounts for
conservation of energy and results in simulating the effects of temperature on fluid
rheology. The fluid rheology properties as a function of time and temperature are
specified in the Fluid Database.
If heat transfer is turned Off, the in-situ Fluid Temperature is required. The fluid
rheological properties are then calculated from the fluid database as a function of
time based on this temperature.
Fracture Options
This group of options is accessed by clicking the Fracture tab found on the Data
Options screen. The Fracture Options provide choices for the fracture geometry
model and constitutive relationships that affect the fracture solution methodology
(see Figure 2.4). The choices are as follows:
Figure 2.4: Fracture Options.
2.2 Options 89
Fracture Geometry
This section describes the five geometry models used in MFrac. See Appendix A
for a detailed description of each model. The parametric relationships for the 2-D
type models is also discussed.
Horizontal Ellipsoidal
The Horizontal Ellipsoidal fracture is an ellipsoidal two-dimensional planar-type
fracture geometry model for propagation in the horizontal plane. It is similar to the
Vertical Ellipsoidal model but with a number of different constraints and constitu-
tive relationships unique for horizontal propagation (e.g., proppant transport, for-
mation properties, stress orientation, etc.).
This geometry model is similar to a radial or penny shaped fracture propagating in a
horizontal plane; however, rather than restricting the model to radial growth, an
Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio can be specified in the Zones dialog box. This value rep-
resents the ratio of the major to minor radii. When the Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio is
equal to unity, the geometry reduces to the radial solution illustrated in Figure 2.5.
Figure 2.5: Horizontal Ellipsoidal Fracture Geometry with an Ellipsoidal
Aspect Ratio of Unity.
Vertical Ellipsoidal
This model produces a vertical ellipsoidal shaped fracture geometry that intersects
the wellbore along the fracture height. This fracture also has an ellipsoidal width
profile in the vertical and lateral planes. The Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio is equal to
the ratio of the total length (tip to tip, 2L) to the total fracture height ( ). 2L H =
Figure 2.6 shows a vertical ellipsoidal fracture and illustrates the height, width, and
length coordinates.
Figure 2.6: Vertical Ellipsoidal Fracture Geometry.
This model is similar to the Horizontal Ellipsoidal model in appearance only. The
major differences are related to orientation, intersection effects, influence of in-situ
stresses, proppant transport and a number of other constitutive relationships.
GDK
The GDK option invokes a constant height fracture geometry model with a verti-
cally constant fracture width. That is a vertically unbounded geometry with slip at
the upper and lower extremities as shown in Figure 2.7. This model is characterized
by a decreasing net pressure with time. This option is most applicable for fractures
with length to height aspect ratios less than unity or for fractures
which display slip at the upper and lower boundaries. Slip may be an appropriate
assumption when rock interfaces are weak due to rock competence or when nor-
mal stresses may be low (e.g., at shallow depths). The GDK model typically pre-
dicts greater wellbore widths and shorter fracture lengths than the PKN model for
fractures with aspect ratios greater than unity. The major difference between the
PKN and GDK models is in the width-opening pressure relationship as shown
below:
2L H = 1 <
GDK - W
w
ApL E
PKN - W
w
ApH E
2.2 Options 91
where is the maximum wellbore width, is the half-length, is the height
and

is the fracture net pressure.
Figure 2.7: GDK Geometry.
PKN
The PKN model, like the GDK model, is also a constant height model but differs by
having an elliptically shaped width in the vertical plane (vertically bounded geome-
try). Unlike the GDK model, the PKN net pressure increases with time for a con-
stant injection rate. The PKN fracture model is most applicable when the total
fracture length is greater than the total fracture height ( ). The major
difference between the GDK and PKN model is in the width-opening pressure rela-
tionship given above. Figure 2.8 shows the PKN fracture geometry profile.
W
w
L H
Ap
2L H = 1 >
Figure 2.8: PKN Geometry.
3-Dimensional
This is a 3-dimensional planar fracture model with both lateral and vertical frac-
ture propagation. For large length to height aspect ratios, the model approaches the
PKN constant height type geometry. When no confining stress, toughness or mod-
uli contrast are entered, the model approaches a vertical radial-type geometry. This
model produces the most realistic geometries and is applicable for all length to
height aspect ratios. Figure 2.9 shows a typical 3-Dimensional fracture geometry
profile. As illustrated, the model assumes a bounded geometry at the leading edge
(perimeter).
The GDK vertically constant width and PKN elliptical width profiles do not con-
trol either models characteristic behavior. Its all in the width-opening pressure
constitutive relationship. See Meyer
4
for additional comments on model differ-
ences.
2.2 Options 93
Figure 2.9: Three-Dimensional Fracture Geometry.
To use a 3-D model effectively, the formation should be characterized sufficiently
to adequately describe the rock and fluid loss properties. To better characterize the
formation, the model currently allows up to one thousand (1000) layers for the rock
and reservoir properties.
A detailed explanation, formulation and solution methodology for our three-dimen-
sional fracturing simulator (MFrac) is presented in the appendices.
Flowback
This option provides the user with the capability to allow fluid and proppant to
flowback (negative injection rates and/or cross-flow) from the fracture. To simulate
cross-flow between multilayer fractures, this option must be On. If this option is
Off, cross-flow during closure and flowback will not be permitted.
This option must be clicked on to simulate flowback, since a negative rate must be
input into the treatment schedule.
Simulate to Closure
When Simulate to Closure is On, the program will simulate closure after pumping.
Simulate to closure assumes the spatial fracture compliance factors used during clo-
sure remain constant and equal to the values at the end of pumping. This method is
less rigorous than the alternative (i.e., when this option is Off) when closure is sim-
ulated with a treatment schedule rate of zero.
When Simulate to Closure is Off the program will not simulate fracture propagation
or lateral proppant transport during closure, unless a zero rate is input in the treat-
ment schedule. The proppant transport solution during closure can accommodate
both simulate to closure and a zero rate stage (shut-in) in the treatment schedule.
To maximize compliance precision and propagation accuracy during closure, turn
this option Off and enter a zero rate stage in the Treatment Schedule. Keep in mind
that Simulate to Closure may affect the pressure decline behavior, especially for
fractures that grow into multi-stress layers and close with multiple inflection points.
Simulate to closure may not be an appropriate choice for multilayer fractures which
exhibit cross-flow.
Fracture Fluid Gradient
This option is only used for the three-dimensional model and allows the user to
Include or Exclude the effect of the fluid gradient on fracture pressure. When
Include is checked, the pressure distribution within the fracture will include the
hydrostatic pressure changes as a function of depth (fracture height). The pressure
distribution in turn will affect the fracture propagation.
Normally this option has little effect on the fracture geometry, except for cases
when the hydrostatic head difference in the fracture is of the same order of magni-
tude or greater than the fracture net pressure. This can happen in soft formations
(low Youngs modulus) when the fracture height is large.
Propagation Parameters
The options for Propagation Parameters are Default Growth, No Growth During
Shut-in, and Positive Growth Only. This option is used to override the propagation
rate calculated by the mass conservation, continuity and momentum equations.
Fracture propagation will be set to zero during closure if no growth during shut-in
is selected. If the Positive Growth Only option is selected the fracture will not be
allowed to recede.
These options may be helpful for interference closure, proppant effects, flowback
and history matching pressure declines. Low permeability rocks fractured with high
efficiency fluids may continue to propagate even after the pumps have shut down.
To model the pressure decline the user may want to select Default Growth or Posi-
tive Growth Only.
When fracturing wells with large stress contrasts between the reservoir rock and the
bounding layers, the upper and/or lower zones may close before the reservoir rock
2.2 Options 95
closes. This will effect the fracture compliance changing the slope of the pressure
decline.
Fracture Initiation Interval
This option is used to select the manner in which the program initiates the fracture.
MFrac, like other fracture models, is a fracture propagation simulator which does
not simulate the initial formation break down process. Normally for conditions
where the final fracture geometry is much greater than the initiation geometry, this
initial boundary condition becomes insignificant in the solution. The choices for
fracture initiation are explained below.
Perforated Interval
When this option is chosen, the program uses the entire Perforated Interval as the
initial fracture height. The effective closure pressure is then calculated as the mini-
mum fracture pressure necessary to keep the fracture open over the perforated inter-
val. This initiation pressure may not be (and usually is not) equal to the minimum
horizontal stress in this interval.
Min. Stress Interval
The Min. Stress Interval option invokes a routine that uses an initial fracture height
equal to ten (10) percent of the total perforation interval. For this option, the pro-
gram examines the formation stress profile and identifies the portion of the perfo-
rated interval that contains the zone with the minimum closure pressure required to
keep the fracture open over this limited depth of the perforated interval. This may
not be the interval which contains the lowest minimum horizontal stress. This
numerically selected depth interval is then used as the location for fracture initia-
tion.
Fracture Friction Model
Normally, laminar flow exists in the fracture and this option may not be needed
(i.e., select Off). For this case, the classical solution for fluid flow in a rectangular
slot (as modified for an ellipsoidal fracture width) is used and the Darcy friction
factor takes the form
where is the Reynolds number ( and )
Deviations from laminar flow affect the frictional dissipation in the fracture and,
therefore, on the pressure predicted by a model. Turbulent flow in the fracture may
f
D
24 Re =
Re Re uw v = dp dx 1 2 f
D
u
2
w =
also occur when very low viscosity fluids (e.g., gas) at high rates are pumped. To
account for these phenomena and improve the ability to predict non-laminar fric-
tional pressure loss in a fracture, the following friction factor expression is used
when the Fracture Friction Model is turned On:
Irregularities along the fracture face (e.g., tortuosity, bifuraction and wall rough-
ness) that interrupt and disturb fluid flow can also result in greater energy dissipa-
tion. These effects can be modeled by increasing the coefficient or modifying the
wall roughness factor discussed below.
The approximations for the a and b coefficients in Table 2.4 have been developed
empirically in accordance with Prandtl's Universal Law of the Wall (see
Schlichting
3
).
Wall Roughness
When this option is turned Off, the Darcy friction factor inside the fracture is used
without modification as determined from the selections made in the Fracture Fric-
tion Model option. This selection assumes that the fracture surface is a smooth pla-
nar feature without roughness.
To include the effects of roughness (or waviness) on the frictional dissipation, turn
this option On. This will result in an increase in the frictional pressure drop and
fracture width, as well as, a decrease in fracture length. If this option is used, the
friction factor defined in the Fracture Friction Model option will be modified using
a Friction Factor Multiplier. The relationship used is defined in the expression
shown below:
Table 2.4: Typical a and b Friction Coefficients.
Laminar flow Re < 750; a=24; b=1
Transitional flow 750 < Re < 2000; a=0.5; b=0.44
Turbulent flow 2000 < Re < 30,000; a=0.13; b=0.25
Turbulent flow
30,000 < Re < 10
6
; a=0.08; b=0.20
Turbulent flow
Re > 10
6
; a=0.035; b=0.14
MFrac does not use apparent viscosity. The above formulation is based on a
power-law Reynolds number to provide the user with insight on the effect of
these energy dissipation mechanisms.
f
D
a Re
b
=
a
2.2 Options 97
where
An empirically derived correlation
5-8
for determining the Friction Factor Multi-
plier is shown in Figure 2.10.
Figure 2.10: Friction Factor Multiplier Empirical Correlation.
Tip Effects
The observed field pressures for some treatments may at times be much higher than
the simulated pressure. This discrepancy in measured pressure can be minimized in
a number of ways. Typically, the friction factor multiplier, fracture toughness, near-
wellbore effects, confining stress or rock/reservoir properties are modified to obtain
= modified Darcy friction factor
= Darcy friction factor
= friction factor multiplier
f
D
'
M
f
f
D
=
f
D
'
f
D
M
f
a match; however, if the pressure discrepancy is due to excess pressure, an over-
pressure function can be applied at the tip. In MFrac, excess pressure can be applied
using any of these three mechanisms: 1) Fracture Toughness, 2) Critical Stress, or
3) Tip Over-pressure.
Over-pressure, as it is incorporated in MFrac, accounts for the extra pressure
required at the fracture leading edge for propagation to occur. This extra resistance
at the fracture perimeter (tip) requires additional pressure (energy) to propagate the
fracture. As a result, when this option is used, higher pressure must be applied at
the inlet (surface or BHTP) to compensate for losses that occur in the fracture.
Tip effects, in general, remain an area of some controversy and considerable dis-
cussion. Plausible explanations for these effects have been proposed. The possibili-
ties include tip friction due to flow resistance, rock properties effects (e.g.,
toughness as a function of stress at the leading edge or poroelasticity), or it may be
a consequence of fracture geometry (e.g., complex geometry and/or multiple frac-
tures).
In this version of MFrac, tip effects represent a flow resistance at the tip. Regard-
less of whether you believe this flow resistance is due to viscosity effects or some
other phenomena related to the tip region (e.g., tip geometry), the general effect on
pressure is typically the same (i.e., resistance is resistance). It is important to note,
however, that this type of resistance differs from fracture toughness in its classical
application in that over-pressure varies with injection rate and time, fracture tough-
ness does not.
The range on the over-pressure factor allowed by MFrac is between 0 and 1.0. If
this option is disabled, Off, a default value of zero is used. Usually, the Tip Effect
option is never suggested unless all other reasonable measures have been taken and
the measured injection pressures are still well above the theoretical values predicted
by the simulator.
When reasonable values have been implemented for wall roughness, friction factor
multiplier, toughness and other formation properties, a value between 0.1 to 0.4
may be justifiable. The larger the over-pressure factor the greater the increase in
the net pressure. If you are having difficulty relating the over-pressure factor to
pressure, one approach is to use the MinFrac program to automatically regress on
the tip factor to determine an appropriate value. This best fit value from matching
the net pressure in a minifrac analysis is a good place to start.
Many engineers mistake near wellbore pressure loss for excess net pressure. Keep
in mind that when the injection rate changes suddenly, the near wellbore pressure
loss also changes instantly; whereas, the fracture net pressure cannot because of
2.2 Options 99
storage (i.e., if the rate drops suddenly and the BHTP follows, this is not excess
pressure but frictional dissipation in the near wellbore region).
Figure 2.11: Fracture Tip Width Reduction due to Non-Linear Elastic Effects.
Proppant Options
This group of options is accessed by clicking the Proppant tab found on the Data
Options screen. The proppant options specify the proppant transport methodology
to be employed. Figure 2.12 illustrates the proppant options available. These
options are discussed below.
The phenomena of tip over-pressure has been referred to as dilatancy by some
researchers. It is not clear whether these researchers are referring to rock dilat-
ancy or fluid dilatancy. Fluid dilatancy refers to a shear-thickening fluid. Rock
dilatancy describes volumetric expansion of a material that is rapidly approach-
ing failure and is usually associated with the micro-cracking process. There has
been no published explanation on the effects of rock dilatancy on net pressure in
a crack, and to our knowledge, no correlations exist. The desired effect (i.e., an
increase in pressure) can be achieved due to viscosity effects (i.e., fluid dilat-
ancy) or as a result of stress dependent rock properties that may or may not be
related to rock dilatancy. This is commonly referred to as nonlinear elastic
deformation. Figure 2.11 illustrates one possibility.
Figure 2.12: Proppant Options.
Proppant Solution
The Proppant Solution may be turned On or Off. If Off is chosen, no proppant
transport calculations will be performed and all other options related to the prop-
pant transport will be dimmed. If Off is selected, there will be no coupling between
the fracture propagation and proppant transport solutions. Consequently, the frac-
ture may propagate backward (negative growth) during closure depending on the
R.O.C. of energy and mass conservation. If the proppant transport solution is On
and the Proppant Transport Methodology is not on conventional, negative growth
will not be allowed (this assumes proppant interaction).
When the Proppant Solution option is turned On, proppant transport calculations
will be performed.
If Input is chosen for the Treatment Schedule Options, MFrac calculates the geom-
etry and proppant distribution based on the input treatment schedule.
When Auto Design is selected, either the desired fracture length or designed slurry
volume must be entered in the Treatment Schedule screen. The program then auto-
matically designs a treatment schedule to satisfy the design criteria. For Auto
Design, the Proppant Type, Initial Proppant Concentration, Incremental Proppant
Concentration, Final Proppant Concentration, Maximum Proppant Concentration
and Proppant Damage Factor must be entered. Depending on the Proppant Trans-
port Methodology option selected, the program will internally calculate the
required PAD and proppant schedule to prevent (or create) a screen-out and
achieve, if possible, the optimum treatment specified.
2.2 Options 101
Proppant Ramp
The ramp option controls the ability to ramp the proppant concentration between a
specified range. When this option is On, the concentration of proppant will be
ramped linearly from an initial value (From) to a final (To) value for each fluid
stage in the Treatment Schedule dialog box. This results in a linear proppant ramp
with liquid volume.
When this option is turned Off, a uniform proppant concentration is assumed for
each stage. The Treatment Schedule screen will then permit only one entry value
for concentration.
Proppant Flowback
The Proppant Flowback may be turned On or Off. This option when selected On
simulates the flow of proppant back towards the wellbore.
Perforation Erosion
This option allows for perforation erosion during the treatment. If this option is
turned On the perforation frictional pressure loss will decrease as the mass of prop-
pant through each perforation increases.
Limited entry designs require a certain differential pressure across the perforations
to ensure that each zone accepts a proportionate amount of fluid and proppant. Dur-
ing the limited entry treatment, perforations are exposed to a proppant and liquid
slurry. The effect of proppant is to increase the discharge coefficient, , and the
hydraulic diameter of the perforation. The increase in the discharge coefficient can
be described as a rounding of the perforation.
Proppant Transport Methodology
The selection determines how the proppant transport model is linked or coupled to
the fracture propagation calculations. When the Net Present Value option is On,
this option is set to Conventional automatically. The proppant transport methodol-
ogy options are: 1) Conventional, 2) Conventional (link proppant), 3) Tip
Screen-Out (TSO), and 4) Frac Pack. With the exception of Conventional, all of
the other options couple the proppant transport and fracture propagation solutions.
The TSO and Frac-Pack options are normally used with the Auto Design option.
However, they are handled the same as the Conventional (link proppant) option
when the treatment schedule is Input. The above proppant transport choices are dis-
cussed below. Please refer to Appendix I for a detailed description of TSOs and
Frac-Packs.
C
D
Conventional
This option disables the link between the proppant transport and fracture propaga-
tion solutions. When this option is selected, the proppant transport calculations will
not affect the fracture propagation behavior. Consequently, for a bridge-out or
screen-out the condition of an increasing net pressure will not occur. The proppant
calculations will be performed after each fracture iteration but the results will not
be coupled.
Conventional (Link Proppant)
This option links or couples the proppant transport solution with the fracture propa-
gation solution to simulate the effects of slurry transport on fracture pressure distri-
bution and propagation. When this option is used, the program will calculate
incrementally (i.e., at each time step) a unit of fracture propagation followed by the
corresponding proppant transport time step. If a bridge-out or screen-out condition
occurs or exists it will affect the pressure distribution in the fracture and subsequent
fracture propagation behavior. The resulting change in fracture geometry in turn
influences the overall proppant transport.
When the Auto Design option is used, the choice of Conventional (Link Prop-
pant) will cause the program to calculate an optimum proppant transport schedule
without screening-out. To simulate a TSO or Frac-Pack please refer to one of the
options described below.
Tip Screen-Out (TSO)
This is a specialized form of Meyer & Associates proprietary, linked proppant
solution methodology used in MFrac (see Appendix I). The TSO option was specif-
ically developed to automatically design a TSO and output the corresponding treat-
ment schedule. This option also couples the proppant transport solution with the
fracture solution as does the Conventional (Link Proppant) option when the Treat-
ment Schedule Option is on Input. It only differs from the Conventional (Link
Proppant) option when the Auto Design feature is used.
Therefore, the following discussion will be directed toward using the TSO option as
it pertains to the Auto Design capabilities.
For this option, based on user specified criteria (e.g., target Frac Length, Initial and
Max. Inlet Concentration, Average Concentration/Area and Max. BHP), the pro-
gram will automatically design a pumping schedule that optimizes a tip screen-out
condition (TSO). Once a screen-out occurs, the net pressure will continue rising
during the remaining part of the treatment to meet the desired design criteria. Dur-
ing this type of simulation, the linked solution methodology permits continuous
proppant transport calculations as the slurry is concentrating in the fracture due to
leakoff.
2.2 Options 103
The program always satisfies the specified length and then, if possible, the average
concentration per unit area. User specified constraints are used as absolute limits
and maintain the following priority: Maximum BHP has first priority, Max. Prop-
pant Concentration (lbm/ft
2
) in the fracture is second and Maximum Inlet Con-
centration is last. If any of the specified criteria are not met, it means that a higher
priority constraint was imposed.
The result is a proppant distribution that approaches a uniform concentration per
unit volume throughout the fracture based on the target concentration per unit area
specified.
Frac-Pack
This is a more aggressive variation of the TSO solution technique described above.
Once again, it only differs from the Conventional (Link Proppant) option when
the automatic design feature is used.
Like the TSO option, it is also based on the user specified criteria, Frac Length, Ini-
tial and Max. Inlet Concentration, Average Concentration/Area and Maximum
BHP. When this option is used, the program will automatically determine a pump-
ing schedule to first produce a tip screen-out and then pack the fracture. Unlike the
Tip Screen-out option described above, the Frac-Pack method prevents excessive
width growth (ballooning) by decreasing the injection rate after the maximum inlet
concentration is attained.
The basic premise of this methodology is to control excessive ballooning by match-
ing the injection rate to the leakoff rate once the desired geometry is achieved.
Please refer to Appendix I for a comparison of the TSO and Frac-Pack Methodolo-
gies.
Proppant Settling Options
Four correlations are available for simulating proppant transport and settling
9-12
:
Empirical - lowest settling velocity.
Convective Transport - medium settling velocity.
Cluster Settling - highest settling velocity.
User Specified - user defined settling velocity.
A description of each method is as follows:
Empirical
This single particle settling velocity correlation is based on the work of Bird, et al.
9
Extension of this work to non-Newtonian fluids for all flow regimes from Stokes
Law to Newtonian flow results in the friction factor equations listed below by
Slatery
11
. The terminology upper and lower bound refers to the coefficient used
in these equations. Wall and slurry concentration (bulk viscosity) effects are
included in this option to account for hindered settling. These effects are based on
modified density and viscosity correlations.
where
and
Convective Transport
The characteristic dimension that has the most significant influence on the particle
settling velocity for classical (Empirical) proppant transport solutions is the particle
diameter. Experimental results have demonstrated for certain fluid/proppant combi-
nations that this approach, based on modified forms of Stokes Law, significantly
underestimates vertical settling velocity when large fluid bulk gradients exist.
These conditions may occur when large pad volumes, high proppant concentra-
tions, or significant stage density contrasts exist.
To account for bulk flow effects, a convective transport correlation is included. A
simplified form of the equation is shown below:
= friction factor
= non-Newtonian Reynolds number
= 1.1
= 0.9
= 7.5
Lower Bound
12
( )
Empirical
9,11
Upper Bound
12
( )
X
f
24
Re
a
---------
24
Re
b
---------X
2
c +
\ .
| |
Re 500 < ; =
f 0.44 500 Re 2.0x10
5
< < ; =
f
Re
a
b
c
X 3
n' -1 n' 2 +
3n'
--------------
n'
=
X 1 s
X 1 =
X 1 0.8 1 n' ( )
0.7
+ =
X 1 >
2.2 Options 105
where
The vertical velocity determined from the relationship shown above is corrected for
hindered settling using a power law model substitution for apparent viscosity and
effective density approach. The single particle velocity, calculated for an individual
stage using the Empirical method described above, is superimposed over the bulk
settling solution to characterize the complete settling history of the treatment.
Cluster Settling
Like the convective transport methodology described above, Cluster Settling
includes the effects of bulk density gradients and can, therefore, be used to simulate
gravity induced flow. The formulations developed for this option are given below.
The cluster settling rates produced may be higher than convective transport because
of the differences in the rheology and density corrections used. These corrections
result in an apparent viscosity that is lower than predicted by convection and an
effective density that is higher. This has the result of reducing the drag or wall
effects that are calculated; hence higher settling velocity.
In addition, with Cluster Settling, only the bulk flow is considered. No single par-
ticle, Stokes-type settling velocity is included. Consequently, there is no internal
particle settling assumed within an individual cluster.
This correlation may be most applicable when base fluid viscosity is low and prop-
pant concentrations are relatively high (e.g., when you are pumping a banking
fluid). The cluster settling formulation is:
where
= vertical (bulk) fluid velocity
= fracture width
= apparent slurry viscosity
= potential gradient due to gravity, density, and pressure
= vertical (bulk) fluid velocity
v
s
w
2
12
a
------------
z c
c+
=
v
s
w
a
z c
c+
v
s
gAd
eq
2
18
a
------------------- =
v
s
and
A power law correlation for apparent viscosity is used for proppant settling.
User Specified Settling
This option allows the user to input the proppant settling rates manually. When
selected an additional column or data box will be displayed in the Treatment Sched-
ule screen that will allow you to enter a Proppant Settling Rate for each stage. The
value entered will be used as a constant rate of settling for that stage.
Wellbore-Proppant Effects
This option controls the methodology used to simulate the effects of proppant con-
centration on pipe friction. The options are as follows:
None
For this selection, proppant has no effect on the friction factors used in the wellbore
hydraulics calculations.
Empirical
This option includes the effects of proppant concentration on pipe friction as origi-
nally described by Keck, et al.
2
This correlation uses an expression for relative
slurry viscosity to account for the effects of proppant on increased friction. The
relationship is shown below:
= particle diameter
= equivalent or characteristic diameter
= apparent slurry viscosity
= proppant void fraction
= packed proppant void fraction
= density difference of particulates and fluid
= gravitational acceleration
= fracture width
d
d
eq
a
|
|
s
A
g
w
d
eq
| |
s
( )
o
d
w 1 | |
s
( )
o
d
| |d + =
r
1 0.75 e
1.5n'
1 ( )e
1 n' ( ) 1000
| |
1.25|
1 1.5|
------------------- +
\ .
| |
2
=
2.2 Options 107
where
For laminar flow, the friction factor multiplier, M, for proppant-laden fluids is equal
to the value of . For proppant-laden fluids in turbulent flow, the expression
shown below is used to estimate the effect of proppant on friction:
and
where
User Specified
For some slurry systems, adequate characterization of the frictional dissipation is
not possible with the empirical correlation contained in MFrac. If this occurs, the
friction factor multiplier as a function of proppant concentration can be specified in
tabular form.
Fracture-Proppant Effects
This option controls the effect of proppant concentration on frictional pressure
losses in the fracture. The options are summarized below:
= relative slurry viscosity
= power-law behavior index for base fluid
= Newtonian shear rate
= proppant void or particle volume fraction
= base density
=
relative slurry density;
= slurry density
= friction factor of base fluid
= friction factor of slurry
r
n'
r
M
f

r
0.55
r
0.45
=
f
s
M
f
f
b
=
M
f
r

r

s

b
=
r
f
b
f
s
None
For this selection, proppant has no effect on the friction factor calculated in the
fracture.
Empirical
This option includes the effects of proppant concentration on fracture friction based
on the empirical expressions shown below. The procedure involves a correction to
the base viscosity to produce a relative viscosity term. Once this is done, the fric-
tion factor is calculated based on the Fracture Friction Model selected and the
Friction Factor Multiplier (if the Wall Roughness option is activated). The gen-
eral correlation as a function of proppant void fraction is:
where
User Specified
For some slurry systems, adequate characterization may not be possible with the
empirical correlation contained in MFrac. If this occurs, the friction factor multi-
plier as a function of proppant concentration can be input in tabular form. The val-
ues entered are then used to determine the relative viscosity term based on the
solids fraction present. Like in the Wellbore Proppant Effects, the friction factor is
calculated based on the Fracture Friction Model and friction factor multiplier spec-
ified (if the Wall Roughness is enabled).
2.3 Data Input
Once the Options are selected the scope of a simulation is set. Data may then be
entered by accessing the various dialog boxes from the Data menu. As previously
stated, the option screens determine what information is needed for a particular
type of analysis. Consequently, the specific data displayed in a screen or the exis-
tence of the data screen will vary depending on the options selected. This approach
minimizes data input and prevents unnecessary or misleading data entry. Simply
decide what options are relevant to your simulation and the program will automati-
cally display only those menus and input fields necessary. Any time an option is
changed, the input screens will vary to enable new input or hide data that is not
needed. This methodology is used throughout MFrac.
= exponent coefficient
r
1 | ( )
o
r
o
|
2.3 Data Input 109
The following sections pertain to the Data menu items found within the main menu.
Each Data menu item is covered in detail along with a description of the data dia-
logs and their associated variables. When pertinent, the conditions or case sensitive
options for a data screen are noted and an example of the resulting dialog shown.
All of the different data screens available within MFrac and the variables contained
within them are presented.
Description
The Data Description screen shown in Figure 2.13 provides a location for entering
information about a simulation. Space is provided for entering the Company
Name, Well Name, Well Location and Simulation Date. In addition, a Comments,
section is included so that descriptive information can be entered. All information
contained in this dialog is optional.
Figure 2.13: Data Description Dialog Box.
To enter data, position the cursor at the desired location using the mouse or TAB
key. Any text can be selected by using the mouse or the keyboard. The scroll bar to
the right of the Comments section can be used to view all the data entered.
Wellbore Hydraulics
MFrac offers an integrated wellbore hydraulics module that couples the fracture
with the wellbore to provide additional simulation capability. An energy balance
approach is used to calculate the pressure changes due to potential energy, kinetic
energy, frictional dissipation and restrictions in the wellbore.
This general solution permits calculations of surface pressure, BHP in the wellbore,
Frac-Pack screen pressure drop, hydrostatic head, frictional loss and hydraulic
power requirements for a treatment design. The flexibility of the model provides
the capability to history match measured pressures during real-time or replay treat-
ment analysis.
The capability to model tapered deviated wellbores is also included. Treatment
stage movement in the wellbore is also simulated during pumping.
General Data
The General Wellbore Hydraulics screen is shown in Figure 2.14.
Figure 2.14: Wellbore Hydraulics - General Tab.
2.3 Data Input 111
Injection Down
Performing wellbore hydraulics calculations requires that the wellbore configura-
tion and perforations be described. Numerous configurations are possible. Injection
can be simulated down tubing, casing, annulus or both. To select the configuration,
choose one of the radio buttons found in the Injection Down section of the General
Wellbore Hydraulics screen shown in Figure 2.14.
The different Injection Down configurations are:
1. Casing - Injection is down the casing. This option assumes there is no tubing
in the wellbore. Therefore, tubing data is ignored for this option. If you only
want to pump down the casing/tubing annulus, check Annulus rather than
Casing.
2. Tubing - Fluid is pumped down the tubing string. When the fluid reaches the
end of the tubing it will flow through the casing to the perforations.
3. Coiled Tubing - Fluid is pumped down the coiled tubing. When the fluid
reaches the end of the coiled tubing it will flow through the casing to the perfo-
rations.
4. Annulus - Fluid is pumped down the annulus between the casing and tubing.
Both casing and tubing data must be entered.
5. Tubing and Annulus - For this option, flow will be simulated down both the
tubing and annulus. Both tubing and casing data are required for this option.
Horizontal Wells and Frac-Packs
Special wellbore configurations are also available for Horizontal Wells and Frac-
Packs using screen and crossover assemblies. To use one of these configurations,
enable the appropriate check box located in the General Wellbore Hydraulics
screen.
When Horizontal Well is selected, the user can input the MD at the center of the
perforations rather than TVD. This provides the capability for locating the perfora-
tions on a horizontal section of the casing.
When selecting Frac-Pack Screen, the Screen O.D. and Crossover Pressure
Loss Coefficient must be entered. This provides the added capability of simulating
flow around the screen (pressure loss) and storage volume reduction due to the
decreased flow area. Once the frac-pack screen diameter is entered it will be dis-
played on the wellbore schematic extending from the end of tubing to the end of the
casing. The Crossover Pressure Loss Coefficient is used to calculate the minor
pressure loss associated with the crossover port:
where
Typical values for the loss coefficient are between two and ten.
Surface Line Volume
The Surface Line Volume is the volume of fluid/slurry in the service line(s)
upstream of the well entrance. Normally this volume is negligible; however, this
line volume may be significant at times (e.g., on Frac Boats). If all the treatment
parameters (rate, volume and staging) are referenced at the well entrance this value
should be set to zero; however, if all treatment references (measurements and vol-
umes) are upstream of the well entrance, this line volume should be specified.
Wellbore Volume Reference Depth
The Wellbore Volume Reference Depth is the depth used for calculating the vol-
ume of the wellbore. Either the Measured Depth (MD) or True Vertical Depth
(TVD) may be entered. This reference depth must be below the bottom of the tub-
ing and above the bottom of the casing. This only applies if there is tubing in the
wellbore.
Maximum BHTP
This is the maximum allowable BHTP at the BHTP Reference Depth. If this value
is exceeded during the simulation a warning message will be displayed. This Maxi-
mum BHTP is also used as a design criteria in Auto Design mode to ensure that the
optimum design does not exceed this value.
Volume
On the top of the General tab of the Wellbore Hydraulics dialog box, a Volume is
displayed. This volume is calculated based on the wellbore configuration and
includes the surface line volume. This volume is also used as the wellbore/flush
volume in the Treatment Schedule.
= pressure loss
= loss coefficient
= slurry density
= velocity
Ap K
s
v
2
2
----------- =
Ap
K
s
v
2.3 Data Input 113
Deviation Data
The first step in describing the wellbore configuration is to enter the wellbore devi-
ation survey. To do this, click the Deviation tab found on the Wellbore Hydraulics
dialog box, as shown in Figure 2.15. A table for wellbore survey stations will then
be displayed.
Figure 2.15: Wellbore Hydraulics - Deviation Tab.
Wellbore Survey Method
The five standard methods for wellbore survey calculations are supported: Average
Angle, Balanced Tangential, Minimum Curvature, radius of Curvature, and Tan-
gential.
Average Angle Method
This method models the well path between two stations as being along a straight
line whose length is the measured depth difference between the two stations and
whose inclination and azimuth angles are the average of the stations values.
Balanced Tangential Method
This method models the well path between two stations as two line segments, each
having a length that is half the measured depth difference between the stations. The
first segment having the inclination and azimuth angles of the first station and the
second segment have those of the second station.
Minimum Curvature Method
This method is a refinement of the Balanced Tangential Method where the two line
segments are replaced by a circular arc lying in the same plane as the line segments,
but where the arc length is equal to the difference in measured depths of the sta-
tions. The implementation is based on the formulation of Sawaryn et al. (see SPE
84246)
Radius of Curvature Method
This method models the well path between two stations as a circular arc lying on a
vertical plane which is then curved along a horizontal circular arc.
Tangential Method
This method, like the Average Angle method, models the well path between two
stations as being along a straight line whose length is the measured depth difference
between the two stations, but whose inclination and azimuth are those of the second
station only.
Deviation Input
The deviation input option determines what data needs to be entered in the devia-
tion table. For 3D directional surveys, choose Inclination and Azimuth (3D) (this is
the only option available for the Minimum Curvature method). For 2D inclination
surveys you have the option of entering the inclination angle or true vertical depth
(TVD).
Deviation Table
The table allows input of the wellbore survey stations. It is composed of various
columns depending on which input option is selected. For 3D surveys, the mea-
sured depth (MD), inclination angle and azimuth angle values are entered, and the
northing, easting and TVD values are calculated based on the wellbore survey
method selected. For 2D surveys, the table has columns for MD , Inclination Angle
and TVD. The input option determines which of the two (inclination angle or TVD)
is enter and which is calculated.
2.3 Data Input 115
When using the radius of curvature method, the table includes the Angle Build
Rate feature that allows the deviation angle or angle build rate to be specified. If
the deviation angle is input, the angle build rate will be calculated. If the angle build
rate is specified the deviation angle will be calculated.
Depths Enter Elsewhere
In several other places, such as the Rock Properties, Fluid Loss, and Zones dialogs,
the user can enter depth values in either MD or TVD. This option specifies which
of the two values is keep (while the other is recalculated based on the deviation
model. This also applies to reference MDs and TVDs on the General and BHTP
Reference tabs in the Wellbore Hydraulics dialog.
When you are finished entering the deviation data, or want to view the data graphi-
cally to check its validity, click on the View Deviation Plots button. A dialog box
will open with a set of tabbed plots: The first is the cross-section that plots the devi-
ations TVD versus horizontal displacement. The second plots TVD versus MD.
The third plots the inclination angle versus MD. For 3D surveys, three addition
plots are included: TVD versus North, TVD versus. East, and North versus. East.
Casing/Tubing Data
To enter pipe data, choose either the Casing and/or Tubing tabs found on the Well-
bore Hydraulics screen, depending upon your application. The program uses the
information entered to calculate the pipe volume and/or flush volume. The value
calculated is displayed in the upper left corner of the General Wellbore Hydraulics
screen and also in the Wellbore section of the Treatment Schedule. Make sure that
the volume calculated is correct if you are planning to evaluate under- or over-dis-
placement conditions. This is especially important for real-time and replay simula-
tion.
For Casing, enter the Measured Depth and Section Length for the portion of the
casing you want to describe (Figure 2.16). Selecting Allow Casing Overlap
enables the user to input both the measured depth and section length. If no overlap
exists, do not check this box.
Figure 2.16: Wellbore Hydraulics - Casing Tab.
To specify the OD, ID and pipe Weight, scroll through the Casing Database, found
at the bottom of the Casing screen to locate the correct pipe size. When you have
found the size, click the corresponding database row and the data will automatically
be entered in the casing data table. If the data is not present in the database, it can
either be entered directly in the table or it can be added to the database.
In MFrac, the entry of Casing and Tubing data is handled in a similar manner. For
Tubing data, however, it is only necessary to enter the Measured Depth, as no
overlap in sizes is allowed (Figure 2.17). Like the Casing data, once the depths
have been specified, fill in the table with the correct pipe sizes from the Tubing
Database. As each row of data is entered, it is displayed in the wellbore configura-
tion diagram located on the left side of the Wellbore Hydraulics screen. The pipe
components and their positions are drawn with the same relative scaling.
2.3 Data Input 117
Figure 2.17: Wellbore Hydraulics - Tubing Tab.
For both the Casing and Tubing, a Relative Pipe Roughness and Friction Loss
Multiplier can be entered independently for each string of pipe. The Friction Loss
Multiplier can be used to simulate additional pressure losses, due to collars, joints,
roughness, restrictions, etc. This parameter modifies the calculated frictional pres-
sure loss. When using this feature the calculated frictional pressure loss is multi-
plied by the Friction Loss Multiplier. For example, if the simulated pressure loss is
1000 psi and the friction multiplier is 0.75 the actual pressure loss reported by the
program would be 750 psi.
The Tubing dialog changes when coiled tubing is specified. Only one set of tubing
parameters is applicable, and the option to calculate friction loss (based on the reel
core diameter) or to use a user-defined reel friction loss multiplier is available. The
length of coil on the reel is calculated by subtracting the Measured Depth from the
Total Coiled Tubing Length. An example of the coiled tubing tab is shown in Fig-
ure 2.18.
Figure 2.18: Wellbore Hydraulics - Coiled Tubing Tab.
The Total Coiled Tubing Length is the total length of tubing on the reel and in the
well. The Measured Depth is the length of tubing in the well. Length of Coil on the
Reel is difference between the Total Coiled Tubing Length and the Measure Depth.
The Reel Core Mean Diameter is required input if the User-defined Coiled-Tubing
Reel Friction-Loss Multiplier is unchecked. The friction factor multiplier for the
coil on the reel is then calculated from a modified McCanns correlation (SPE
36345) as given by

where is the fanning friction factor for the coiled-tubing, is the fanning fric-
tion factor for straight tubing, is the coil tubing inside diameter, and is the reel
core diameter (i.e., mean diameter), and the coefficients and are
f
ct
f
st
1 a d D ( )
b
+ ( ) =
f
ct
f
st
d D
a 1.5 = b 0.1 =
2.3 Data Input 119
representative values. The reel friction multiplier ( , relative to straight tubing) is
given by
If the User-defined Coiled-Tubing Reel Friction-Loss Multiplier is checked, the
user must enter the Reeled-Tubing Friction Loss Multiplier for the coil. This
parameter is applied as an additional frictional pressure loss multiplier for the tub-
ing on the reel.
In general, the frictional loss multiplier for the tubing on the reel is an additional
multiplier to the straight tubing friction factor times the straight tubing multiplier.
Pipe roughness is also included in the frictional pressure loss calculation when the
Wellbore Hydraulics Model is selected as Empirical. When a value is entered for
the Relative Pipe Roughness, the expression used for friction factor is modified in
accordance with Prandtls Universal law expression. Refer to Appendix E for
addition information regarding the effect of wall roughness on the friction factor.
Restrictions Data
The last component included in the wellbore configuration is the description of any
restrictions that may exist in the tubing. Restriction data is optional and can be
entered by clicking the Restrictions tab found on the Wellbore Hydraulics dialog
box as shown in Figure 2.19. The table that is displayed requires the measured
depth, inside diameter and optional Friction Loss Multiplier for each restriction.
This feature can be used to simulate the effects of various tool or pipe configura-
tions.
f
m
f
m
1 a d D ( )
b
+ =
Figure 2.19: Wellbore Hydraulics - Restrictions Tab.
BHTP References
Figure 2.20 shows the BHTP reference depth table. Three (3) BHTP reference
depths can be specified for reporting BHTP in the wellbore. Either the Measured
Depth (MD) or True Vertical Depth (TVD) may be entered. If the reference depth
is above the tubing and you are pumping down both tubing and casing, the BHTP in
the tubing will be reported.
2.3 Data Input 121
Figure 2.20: Wellbore Hydraulics - BHTP References Tab.
Profile
After configuring the wellbore components, click the Profile tab on the Wellbore
Hydraulics dialog box to view a graphical representation of the components and
wellbore deviation (see Figure 2.21). Clicking on the Plot button will open a dialog
box to allow reconfiguring, zooming and printing of the plot.
Figure 2.21: Wellbore Hydraulics - Profile Tab.
Zones
The Zones dialog box is used to specify the number and location of the perforated
intervals and corresponding Zone Data (Figure 2.22). A maximum of ten different
perforated intervals or limited entry type fractures can be specified. The methodol-
ogy and governing equations for multilayer or limited entry fracturing is discussed
in Appendix B.
2.3 Data Input 123
Figure 2.22: Zones Dialog Screen.
The type of data required to define an interval depends on whether the well and/or
the fracture is horizontal or vertical. A well is assumed to be a vertical well
unless the Horizontal check box in the General Wellbore Hydraulics screen is
checked.
Active
Any zone that is defined in the program can be enabled or disabled for use in simu-
lation of multilayer fractures by double-clicking the left column to display or clear
a check mark. A zone is Active when the check mark is displayed. Each Active
zone represents the possibility of creating a multilayer fracture in that zone. If only
one zone is active, the fracture will initiate in that zone.
Zone Name
To assist in keeping track of the data depth intervals, an optional Zone name can be
entered in the second column of the table. This name is only used to help organize
the input and output data.
Perforation and Fracture Intervals
For vertical wells with vertical fractures, regardless of whether the well is deviated
or not, the perforation data is entered relative to the true vertical depth (i.e., Top of
Perfs TVD, Bottom of Perfs TVD) or measured depths (i.e., Top of Perfs MD, Bot-
tom of Perfs MD).
If a horizontal well is specified in the General Wellbore Hydraulics screen, the cen-
ter of the perforated measured depth (Center of Perfs MD) is input and the true ver-
tical center of the perforated depth (Center of Perfs TVD) is calculated. The Center
of Perfs TVD is dimmed and cannot be edited. This same convention is used when
the Horizontal Ellipsoidal fracture model is specified, even if the well is vertical.
When either the Vertical Ellipsoidal or 3-D geometry options are used in combina-
tion with a horizontal well, it is also necessary to enter the TVD for the top and bot-
tom of fracture initiation.
When any of the two-dimensional fracture geometry models are chosen from the
General Options screen, additional columns of data are required. For the PKN or
GDK models, the Zones spreadsheet will contain two additional columns. In these
columns you must enter the top true vertical depth of the fracture (2-D Top of Frac
TVD) and the bottom true vertical depth of the fracture (2-D Bottom of Frac TVD).
This data is used to characterize the total gross height of the fracture. If an Ellipsoi-
dal fracture geometry model is chosen, the Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio must also be
specified. This is the ratio of the major and minor ellipse axes (i.e., the ratio of the
total length (tip to tip) to the total height of the fracture (2L/H)).
Zone Data
After entering the Zones perforated depth information, open the Zone Data screen
for each interval by clicking the Edit button found in the far right column. The
Zones Data screen shown in Figure 2.23 has tabs for Perforations, Pay Zone, Mul-
tiple Fractures and Near Wellbore. A feature to include perforation erosion is also
available. To activate the perforation erosion folder you must have Perforation
Erosion selected to User Specified in the Proppant Option Dialog (see Figure
2.12).
2.3 Data Input 125
Figure 2.23: Zones Data Dialog Tabs.
Figure 2.23 shows a dimmed perforation erosion table illustrating that Perforation
Erosion was selected to None.
Perforations
Figure 2.24 shows the perforation tab screen. Perforation erosion has been set to
User Specified. This activates the screen for inputting perforation erosion data. The
perforation data requirements are discussed below.
Figure 2.24: Zone Data - Perforation Tab.
Number and Diameter of Perforations
The Number and Diameter of perforations must also be specified for each perfo-
rated zone. These values are entered in the boxes provided at the top of the Perfora-
tions screen. This information is used to calculate the perforation friction pressure
loss.
Perforation Erosion
The perforation erosion feature is based on the work of Shah
12
, Cramer
17
, and El-
Rabaa, Shah, and Lord
18
. This option allows for perforation erosion during the
treatment.
ing the limited entry treatment, perforations are exposed to a slurry of proppant and
fluid. The effect of the proppant is to increase the discharge coefficient, , and C
D
2.3 Data Input 127
the hydraulic diameter of the perforation ( ). The increase in can be
described as a rounding of the perforation.
Figure 2.25 shows the data required to model perforation erosion. To calculate Per-
foration Erosion for limited entry fracturing treatments, select Intercept or Final
Discharge Coefficient from the Perforation Erosion dialog box. When Intercept is
selected, the intercept is calculated. Enter an Initial Discharge Coefficient, Final
Discharge Coefficient, Perforation Erosion Rate, and Critical Proppant Mass.
When Final Discharge Coefficient is chosen enter an Intercept along with the Initial
Discharge Coefficient, Perforation Erosion Rate, and Critical Proppant Mass. The
final discharge coefficient is then calculated.
Figure 2.25: Perforation Erosion Data Screen.
The discharge coefficient for a sharp-edged perforation entrance is 0.60. For a
rounded perforation entrance, the discharge coefficient is 0.83. The Final Discharge
Coefficient should be set to a larger value than the Initial Discharge Coefficient.
C
D
1 2 /
D C
D
Unless reliable data is available, set the initial value to 0.6 and the Final Discharge
Coefficient to 0.83.
Typical values for the Perforation Erosion Rate and Critical Proppant Mass are
0.004 in./1000 lbm and 6000 lbm.
To view a plot of the Perforation Erosion correlation, select the Plot icon. Figure
2.26 shows a plot of the hydraulic perforation diameter ( ) and pressure loss
ratio as a function of proppant mass through each perforation. The pressure loss
ratio is the ratio of the perforation pressure loss after proppant has gone through
compared to the base case of no perforation erosion. As the amount of proppant
mass passes through a perforation, the hydraulic diameter increases and the pres-
sure loss ratio decreases. After 6000 lbm of proppant has passed through the perfo-
ration, the pressure loss ratio has dropped to less than 60% of its original value.
Figure 2.26: Hydraulic Diameter (C
D
1/2
D) & Pressure Loss vs. Mass.
The upper and lower dashed lines are the theoretical limits for the initial and final
hydraulic perforation diameters. These limits are based on Initial and Final Dis-
charge Coefficients of 0.60 and 0.83, respectively.
Note, if perforation erosion is not selected a 0.83 discharge coefficient (i.e.,
rounded orifice entrance) is used.
C
D
1 2 /
D
2.3 Data Input 129
Pay Zone
Figure 2.27 shows the Pay Zone data screen. To determine the fracture conductiv-
ity in a pay zone, a productive interval (pay zone) and average zone permeability
must be assigned. These values are used to determine an integrated (average) con-
ductivity ( ) and a dimensionless conductivity over the pay interval.
Figure 2.27: Pay Zone Data Screen.
Pay Zone Permeability
This is the average pay zone permeability used to calculate an average dimension-
less conductivity.
The associated Dimensionless Fracture Flow Capacity, , is calculated from
k
f
w
f
F
CD
F
CD
k
f
w
f
k
r
L
--------- =
The average fracture conductivity for long term production is given by
and for short term production or reduced conductivity near the wellbore the follow-
ing relationship may be more applicable

where
A more detailed analysis of the effective conductivity for variable conductivity
fractures is given in Appendix L.
Pay Zone Depth
A pay zone is defined by entering the TVD or MD Depth From (top) and TVD or
MD Depth To (bottom) in the boxes provided. These depths do not have to conform
to the perforated interval. If the fracture is not propped in this interval, the propped
conductivity and propped fracture length will be zero.
Multiple Fractures
This section allows the user to specify the number and degree of interaction of mul-
tiple fractures in the specific multilayer zone. This is not the same as multilayer or
limited entry fracturing. Multiple fractures refer to fractures in the far field (not
near wellbore) which may or may not be interacting. These fractures may also be
parallel or dendritic (tree like). Figure 2.28 shows the multiple fractures input data
screen.
= average fracture conductivity
= proppant permeability in the fracture
= reservoir permeability
= propped fracture width
= propped fracture half-length
If the Proppant Transport Plots show a conductive fracture (propped width and
conductivity contours) and the pay zone does not appear on the screen or the
pay zone plots show zero conductivity, it indicates that the fracture is not within
the pay zone.
k
f
w
f
k
f
x ( )w
f
x ( ) x d
0
L
}
L =
k
f
w
f
L
1
k
f
x ( )w
f
x ( )
------------------------- x d
0
L
}
\ .
| |
=
k
f
w
f
k
f
x ( )
k
r
w
f
x ( )
L
2.3 Data Input 131
Figure 2.28: Multiple Fractures Data Screen.
The individual fracture interaction factors and degrees of interaction as given in
Appendix C are
Flow Rate
where
Stiffness
where
Fluid Loss
where
Q
i
+
q
Q
t
= +
q
1 N =
E
i
+
E
E
0
= +
E
N 1 ( )u
E
1 + =
V
i
V
t
N =
V
t
+
l
V
0
=
The interaction factors and degrees of interaction are given by and , respec-
tively. The degrees of interaction are the values entered into the program. The
individual fracture properties and parameters are identified by the subscript i. The
total value for N fractures is given by the subscript t.
Depending on the degree of fracture interaction, the fracture net pressure can be
lower for multiple fractures than for a single fracture.
If near wellbore multiple fractures are causing near wellbore pressure losses, the
near wellbore pressure loss table should be used.
The reader is referred to Appendix C for additional information regarding multiple
fractures and fracture interaction.
Number of Fractures
This is the number of multiple fractures (with two wings) to be modeled in a given
layer. The default is a single two wing fracture (Number of Fractures equal to
one).
Fracture Interaction
Check this box to specify the degree of stiffness and fluid loss interaction for com-
peting fractures. The default is no fracture interaction.
Stiffness Interaction
This represents the per cent of stiffness interaction between the multiple fracture
system. This parameter can range from 0 to 100%. The interaction values for no
and full interaction are zero and 100%, respectively. The closer the fractures are
together, the greater the stiffness. For multiple parallel fractures within a fraction of
their characteristic height, the stiffness increases by a factor equal to the number of
fractures (i.e., full interaction). For tree like (dendritic) fractures the stiffness inter-
action may be negligible (no interaction).
Fluid Loss Interaction
This represents the percent of fluid loss interaction between the multiple fracture
system. This parameter can have a value from 0 to 100%. The interaction values for
no and full interaction are zero and 100%, respectively. Depending on the reservoir
properties and vicinity of the fracture system, this value may not be the same as the
degree of the stiffness interaction.
+
l
1 N ( )u
l
N + =
+ u
u
2.3 Data Input 133
Near Wellbore Pressure Table
The near wellbore pressure loss table is shown in Figure 2.29. MFrac has the capa-
bility to model time and rate dependent near wellbore pressure drop for each frac-
ture. This pressure drop can represent any near wellbore effect such as tortuosity,
perforation erosion, near wellbore multiple fractures, etc. The methodology
employed is explained in Appendix C.
Figure 2.29: Near Wellbore Pressure Loss Screen.
To include the near wellbore pressure drop as a function of time, fill in the spread-
sheet located on the right side of the Zone Data screen. Up to fifty rows can be
specified to define the near wellbore pressure drop as a function of time and rate.
Import RT Button
When performing real-time or replay analysis using MView, MFrac automatically
records significant rate and pressure changes and generates a near wellbore pres-
sure loss relationship. After running the acquired data through MFrac, open the
Zone Data dialog box and choose the Import RT Button. The program will then
load the corresponding data file to fill in the Near Wellbore Pressure Table. If no
significant rate/BHTP changes were encountered or if the data was not run through
MFrac, a message like the one shown in Figure 2.30 will be displayed.
Figure 2.30: Import RT Message.
The imported near wellbore pressure table includes the total near wellbore pressure
loss. This table can be manually changed to incorporate small rate/pressure changes
not considered significant or indeterminate by MFrac.
Once a Near Wellbore Pressure Table has been created, choose how it will be
applied by clicking one of the radio buttons located below the spreadsheet. The
options are: to ignore the table completely, use the pressure drop as the total near
wellbore effects (including perforations), or to add the resulting effects to the calcu-
lated perforation pressure losses (near well effects only).
The program performs a linear interpolation between successive data points for
where .If the job duration is longer than the maximum time
entered in the table, the last (final) value will be used
Treatment Schedule
The data required for the Treatment Schedule screen varies depending upon the
selections made in the General, Fracture and Proppant Options screens. The smart-
menu system used by MFrac only requests the data needed to perform a specific
simulation.
Note for limited entry the imported table must be modified to account for the
fractional flow rate going into each fracture.
K t ( ) Ap t ( ) K t ( )q t ( )
o
=
K t ( )
2.3 Data Input 135
Auto Design - Treatment Schedule
When Auto Design is chosen for the Treatment Schedule Option, a comprehensive
Treatment Schedule screen for auto design is enabled that requires variable input
depending on the Proppant Transport Methodology (i.e., Conventional, Tip Screen-
Out (TSO) or Frac Pack) (Figure 2.31).
The treatment design will be scheduled from the Input Parameter choices of Maxi-
mum Fracture Length, Total Slurry Volume. or Total Proppant Mass. The spe-
cific data required will also depend on the selection made for the Proppant
Distribution Style Option which allows the user to auto design a treatment sched-
ule based on Maximum Proppant Concentration, a specific Concentration per
Unit Area, Dimensionless Fracture Conductivity, or Fracture Conductivity in
the pay zone at closure. An option for the proppant staging profile (staging time
for increasing the proppant concentration using a power law relationship) may also
be selected.
Frac pack designs allow for the additional options for the rate step down during
packing, and a rate step down criteria for multi-stage step downs. An option is also
available to maintain a net pressure increase during the rate step down in order to
pack the fracture.
Figure 2.31: Auto Design Treatment Schedule Screen.
During an auto design simulation, the automatically designed treatment schedule is
saved into an output file. This treatment schedule can then be imported into a tabu-
lar Treatment Schedule screen (Auto Design is Off) for additional editing and sim-
ulation using the Import from Output Data button. To use this capability, it is
necessary to run the automatic design case and then change the Treatment Sched-
ule Option to Input. This enables the tabular type Treatment Schedule that contains
the Import from Output Data button. Click the button to fill in the Treatment
Schedule table using the data automatically generated by the previous MFrac run.
2.3 Data Input 137
The following input parameters and their descriptions are specific to the Auto
Design Treatment Schedule. Those input parameters not found here are in the sec-
tion Input of Treatment Schedule below.
Input Parameter Menu
The Input Parameter choices are: Maximum Fracture Length, Total Slurry Vol-
ume. or Total Proppant Mass. These choices are available for all Proppant Trans-
port Methodology options including NPV optimization. If a NPV design is
selected, designs will be created in increments up to the maximum specified Input
Parameter value.
Maximum Fracture Length
For an auto design based on fracture length (fracture half-length), a treatment
schedule will be automatically developed to create a fracture length equal to the
Maximum Fracture Length input into the dialog.
Total Slurry Volume
The slurry volume is required input when the Auto Design option is based on the
total slurry volume pumped. The resulting fracture length is then calculated from
the slurry volume injected.
Total Proppant Mass
The proppant mass is required input when the Auto Design option is based on the
total proppant mass pumped. The resulting fracture length is then calculated from
the proppant mass injected and value for the specific Proppant Distribution Style
selected.
Proppant Distribution Style
The Proppant Distribution Style can have up to four options depending on the Prop-
pant Transport Methodology. If Conventional is selected, the user can specify the
auto design proppant scheduling methodology based on 1) The Maximum Proppant
Concentration, 2) Concentration per Unit Area, 3) Dimensionless Fracture Conduc-
tivity, or the 4) Fracture Conductivity. If the TSO or Frac Pack option is selected,
proppant design scheduling can be based on target values for the Concentration per
Unit Area, the Dimensionless Fracture Conductivity, or Fracture conductivity. (i.e.,
the Maximum Proppant Concentration option will be dimmed).
If the maximum Proppant Concentration is selected for the Proppant Distribution
Style, the code will design a treatment with the last proppant stage at the final prop-
pant concentration. The auto design will create a treatment schedule so that the
stages do not screen- or bridge-out and that the maximum proppant concentration in
the fracture will not exceed the maximum value specified in the table.
The target values for the Concentration per Unit Area, Dimensionless Fracture
Conductivity and Fracture Conductivity are limited by the maximum proppant con-
centration pumped. Following are some of the limiting scenarios and numerical
results that will prevent achieving (below or above) the target values for Concentra-
tion per Unit Area and/or Conductivity based on the Proppant Transport Methodol-
ogy selected in the options screen:
Conventional and Conventional (Link Proppant)
Simulated Concentration per unit Area
Simulated Concentration per unit Area is lower than the specified Target Value.
Possible remedies:
The fracture width is not large enough. Solutions a) Select a TSO or Frac Pack
design, b) increase the fluid viscosity, increase the fracture efficiency (decrease
fluid loss) or c) Increase the size of the treatment.
Increase the final proppant concentration.
Simulated Concentration per unit Area is higher than the specified Target Value.
Possible remedies:
Decrease the initial and incremental proppant concentrations.
Simulated Dimensionless Conductivity and Fracture Conductivity
Simulated dimensionless conductivity or conductivity is lower than the specified
Target Value. Possible remedies:
The fracture width is too small. Solutions a) Select a TSO or Frac Pack design,
b) increase the fluid viscosity, increase the fracture efficiency (decrease fluid
loss) or c) increase the size of the treatment.
Pump a higher permeability proppant.
The formation permeability may be too high. Therefore the designed fracture
length may be too large for the formation (Dimensionless Conductivity only).
Simulated Dimensionless Conductivity or Fracture Conductivity is higher than the
specified Target Value. Possible remedies:
2.3 Data Input 139
The propped fracture may be a monolayer. Therefore, design on concentration
per unit area.
Chose a proppant with a lower permeability.
If in TSO or Frac Pack mode switch to Conventional.
TSO and Frac Pack
Simulated Concentration per unit Area
Simulated Concentration per unit Area is lower than the specified Target Value.
Possible remedies:.
Increase the final proppant concentration and or/increase the maximum allow-
able BHTP.
Simulated Concentration per unit Area is higher than the specified Target Value.
Possible remedies:
If TSO is selected change the mode to Conventional. If Frac Pack is selected
change to TSO.
Simulated Dimensionless Conductivity and Fracture Conductivity
Simulated dimensionless conductivity or fracture conductivity is lower than the
Increase the final proppant concentration and or/increase the maximum allow-
able BHTP.
Pump a higher permeability proppant.
The formation permeability may be too high. Therefore, the designed fracture
length may be too large for the formation (dimensionless conductivity only).
Simulated dimensionless conductivity or fracture conductivity is higher than the
The propped fracture may be a monolayer. Therefore, design on concentration
per unit area.
Chose a proppant with a lower permeability.
If TSO is selected change the mode to Conventional. If Frac Pack is selected
change to TSO
Override Internal Concentration Staging Profile
If this option is checked the user can specify the rate of proppant ramping or the
change in proppant concentration with time. The user will also then be asked to
input a Staging Profile Power Law Coefficient. If this box is not checked MFrac
will automatically design a treatment schedule based on the minimum, maximum,
and maximum concentration at the tip.
Maintain Net Pressure Increase
This option is only available for Frac pack designs and if Multi-Stage Step Down is
selected. If this box is checked, a treatment design will be calculated to ensure that
the fracture net pressure does not decrease during the slow down stages. This is
accomplished by designing the slow down rate to always be greater than the leakoff
rate. If this option is checked, the user does not have to input the Minimum Step
Down Rate.
Fluid Type
When clicking or using the TAB key to access a Fluid Type data box, the Fluid
Database pop-up screen is presented allowing the selection of the stage fluid type.
Select the desired fluid from the list by clicking on it and the fluid code will auto-
matically be entered in the Treatment Schedule. To view the fluid properties for the
selected fluid type, click on the Fluid DB button. The specified fluid will be high-
lighted in the Fluid Database pop-up screen. Next, press the Edit button to view the
fluid properties.
Proppant Type
When a Proppant Type field is entered, either by clicking on it or using the TAB
key, the Proppant Database pop-up screen is displayed. Choose the desired prop-
pant type from the list. The proppant code will automatically be entered in the
Treatment Schedule. To view the properties that correspond to this proppant code,
click on the Proppant DB button. Next, press the Edit button to view the proppant
properties.
Fracture Length
This input field is only available if the Input Parameter selected is Maximum Frac-
ture Length. For an auto design based on fracture length (fracture half-length), the
value entered will be used to automatically develop a pumping schedule. MFrac
automatically determines the required pad and stage volumes to create the input
2.3 Data Input 141
length based on the other parameters entered in the treatment schedule screen.
Proppant scheduling is optimized based on the proppant type, concentrations and
Proppant Transport Methodology option specified.
Total Slurry Volume
This input field is only available if the selected Input Parameter is Total Slurry Vol-
ume. Enter the total slurry to be pumped for the simulation. Based on this volume
and other criteria specified in the Treatment Schedule screen, MFrac will automati-
cally design the pad volume and proppant staging.
Total proppant Mass
This input field is only available if the selected Input Parameter is Total Proppant
Mass. Enter the total proppant mass to be pumped for the simulation. Based on this
mass and other criteria specified in the Treatment Schedule screen, MFrac will
automatically design the pad volume and proppant staging.
Pump Rate
This is the slurry rate at which the treatment will be pumped. When performing an
automatic Frac-Pack design, the rate entered is the maximum value that will be
used. If the frac pack Rate Schedule option of Single Step Down is selected, MFrac
will automatically reduce the rate once the maximum proppant concentration is
reached in order to match the leakoff rate and achieve a stabilized fracture pressure.
Minimum Step Down Rate
This is the minimum slurry rate at which the treatment will be pumped at the end of
the job when performing an automatic Multi-Stage Step Down rate Frac-Pack
design. This input parameter is only required if the frac pack Rate Schedule option
of Multi-Stage Step Down Step Down is selected and Maintain net Pressure
Increase is not checked., MFrac will automatically reduce the rate once the maxi-
mum proppant concentration is reached in order to match the leakoff rate and
achieve a stabilized fracture pressure.
Initial and Incremental Prop Concentration
This is the initial concentration MFrac will begin automatic scheduling. This value
is also used by MFrac as the step increment for proppant scheduling. In other
words, if 2 lb/gal is entered, the proppant concentration will begin at 2 lb/gal for the
first stage and then proceed with subsequent 2 lb/gal stage increments (i.e., 2, 4, 6,
8.... lb/gal).
When the Proppant Ramp option is turned On, this value is used as the initial ramp
concentration and increment for staging.
Final Proppant Concentration
This value indicates the final (or last stage) proppant concentration to be pumped
by MFrac. When the Proppant Ramp option is turned On, this value is used as the
final concentration for the ramp.
Maximum Proppant Concentration (at tip)
This value is the maximum volumetric concentration allowed at the fracture tip
(e.g., lb/gal) during pumping. It is used as a limit to determine the inlet concentra-
tion schedule based on the selection made for the Proppant Transport Methodol-
ogy option (i.e., TSO).
All automatic scheduling starts with the Initial Concentration and ends with the
Final Concentration. The Max. Proppant Concentration determines how the pro-
gram schedules proppant between these two points.
Target Concentration/Unit Area
The average target concentration per unit area is required input when the Proppant
Distribution Style is selected as Concentration per Unit Area. This target parameter
may be used when performing a NPV optimization, conventional, automatic tip
screen-out or frac-pack design. Based on this value and the specified Frac Length
(or Volume), Initial and Max. Inlet Concentrations, and Max. BHTP, MFrac will
automatically determine a pumping schedule using either the tip screen-out (TSO)
or frac-pack criteria selected in the Proppant Transport Methodology option.
MFrac always designs to the specified length; and then, if possible, to the average
concentration per unit area.
The value required by the program is the average mass per unit area of fracture face
(e.g., lb/ft
2
) achieved at closure.
Target Dimensionless Conductivity
The Target Dimensionless Conductivity may be input when the Proppant Distribu-
tion Style is selected as Dimensionless Conductivity. This input parameter may be
used when performing a net present value, conventional, automatic tip screen-out
or frac-pack design. Based on this value and the specified Frac Length (or Volume),
Initial and Max. Inlet Concentrations, and Max. BHTP, MFrac will automatically
determine a pumping schedule based on the selected Proppant Transport Methodol-
ogy option. MFrac always designs to the specified length for NPV, Auto Design,
TSO and Frac Pack (or volume for conventional); and then, if possible, to the target
dimensionless fracture conductivity in the pay zone as calculated from
2.3 Data Input 143

where is the average conductivity in the pay zone, is the formation permea-
bility, and is the propped fracture length in the pay.
The value required by the program is the target value to be achieved at closure.
Target Fracture Conductivity
The Target Fracture Conductivity may be input when the Proppant Distribution
Style is selected as Fracture Conductivity. This input parameter may be used when
performing a net present value, conventional, automatic tip screen-out or frac-pack
design. Based on this value and the specified Frac Length (Volume, or Mass), Ini-
tial and Max. Inlet Concentrations, and Max. BHTP, MFrac will automatically
determine a pumping schedule based on the selected Proppant Transport Methodol-
ogy option. The target fracture conductivity in the pay zone is calculated from

where is the average conductivity in the pay zone, is the variable fracture
conductivity with position in the fracture, and is the propped fracture length in
the pay.
The value required by the program is the target value to be achieved at closure.
Staging Profile Power Law Coefficient
The staging proppant profile power law coefficient is only required input if the
Override Internal Concentration Staging Profile option box is checked. The
proppant concentration as a function of time or volume (for a constant injection
rate) will then be increased (ramped) according to the following formula:

where
= profile power law coefficient
= proppant concentration at time
C
fD
k
f
w
f
kL
p
--------- =
k
f
w
f
k
L
p
k
f
w
f
k
f
w
f
x ( ) x d
0
L
p
}
L
p
=
k
f
w
f
k
f
w
f
L
p
c t ( ) c t
0
( )
c t
p
( ) c t
0
( )
------------------------------
t t
0
t
p
t
0
--------------
\ .
| |
o
=
o
c t ( ) t
The proppant ramp will be linear for , concave upward for , and con-
cave downward for . Typical values range from 0.5 to 2.0.
Maximum BHTP
The maximum allowable bottomhole treating pressure is required as a constraint
when performing automatic tip screen-out or frac-pack designs. Based on this value
and the specified Fracture Length, Initial and Max. Inlet Concentrations, Average
Concentration/Area and target Average Concentration/unit area or target dimen-
sionless conductivity, MFrac will automatically determine a pumping schedule
using the criteria selected in the Proppant Transport Methodology options. The
maximum BHTP is used as a pressure limit to prevent excessive ballooning. If a
simulation reaches this constraint before achieving the specified fracture length or
proppant concentration, a message will be displayed indicating that the maximum
allowable pressure has been reached. Selecting the message box Cancel button will
terminate the simulation. Selecting the OK button will allow you to enter a new
pressure limit.
Input - General Treatment Schedule
If Input is selected for the Treatment Design Option, a more intuitive Treatment
Schedule is presented. Two tabs are listed under Treatment Schedule, the General
tab and the Stages tab.
General Tab
The General tab for the non-foam Treatment Schedules is shown in Figure 2.32.
=
initial proppant concentration at time
=
final proppant concentration at time
= time
= time of initial concentration or pad
= time of final concentration or end of pumping
c t
0
( ) t
0
c t
p
( ) t
p
t
t
0
t
p
o 1 = o 1 >
o 1 <
2.3 Data Input 145
Figure 2.32: Input Treatment Schedule General Tab.
The General tab contains dialog boxes for Schedule Type and Wellbore.
Schedule Type
In the Schedule Type dialog box select Surface or Bottomhole to specify whether
the data entered (e.g., volumes, rates, etc.) represent surface or bottomhole condi-
tions. If pumping from Surface, specify a Wellbore Fluid Type. If pumping from
Bottomhole, specify the Flush Fluid Type.
Select Stage Friction Multipliers to enter friction multipliers for each stage.
Select Stage Recirculation to allow the selection of stages, whose rate will be used
to recirculate the fluid that is at bottomhole out of the wellbore.
Wellbore
The wellbore dialog box is related to the initial condition of the wellbore.
Along with the Wellbore Volume displayed from the wellbore hydraulics screen,
you can specify a Recirculation Volume. You can also specify whether the well is
filled or partially filled prior to injection. To indicate a partially filled wellbore,
enter a fraction (0-1) in the Fraction of Well Filled box. A value of one (1) indi-
cates the wellbore is 100% filled. A value of 0.5 means that the well is 50% filled.
An initial portion of the pumping schedule can be recirculated by entering a slurry
volume in the Recirculation Volume box. This is useful for setting stages, such as
in Frac-Packs. All stages with a total slurry volume less than the Recirculation Vol-
ume will be recirculated. If necessary, a fraction of a stage may be recirculated.
If the stage friction multipliers box is selected the Wellbore Fluid Friction Multi-
plier can be specified.
When Input is selected for the Treatment Schedule Option, a user specified Treat-
ment Schedule screen is presented. The resulting screen allows specification of the
size and pumping parameters for each stage. This variety of treatment schedule
uses a spreadsheet table for the data input. A toolbar is provided with each spread-
sheet screen to control functions such as cut, paste, copy, insert, delete and fill
down (see Chapter 1 Working with Spreadsheets). For reference, the Wellbore Vol-
ume from the wellbore hydraulics screen is displayed.
Stage Tab
The Stage tab for the Input Proppant Treatment Schedule is shown in Figure 2.33.
This type of treatment schedule uses a spreadsheet type of interface as shown. Use
the toolbar located at the top of the screen to control functions such as cut, paste,
copy, insert, delete and fill down (see Chapter 1 Working with Spreadsheets). When
pumping from Bottomhole, it is necessary to specify the Flush Fluid Type. This is
selected in the same way as the Wellbore Fluid Type as described above. For refer-
ence, the Wellbore Fluid Type (surface) or Flush Fluid Type (bottomhole) and Well-
bore Volume are displayed.
2.3 Data Input 147
Figure 2.33: Treatment Schedule Stages Tab.
To aid in defining the Treatment Schedule, the last column of the table (the Variable
Column) displays a variety of parameters. Use the Variable Column list box to
choose the desired parameter. Depending on the options, the list will contain some
subset of Total Time, Total Liquid Volume, Total Slurry Volume, Total Mass, Stage
Mass, Stage Slurry Volume and Stage Liquid Volume. All of these parameters, with
the exception of the mass parameters, may be modified in the last column. When
modifying a total parameter (such as Total Time), changes will be made in the cur-
rent stage and the next stage, such that the total parameter for the next stage
remains constant. For example, consider the case where Stage 1 has a stage time of
10 and Stage 2 has a stage time of 20. Changing the Total Time of Stage 1 to 15 will
cause both Stage 1 and Stage 2 to have stage times of 15.
The treatment schedule table has a few variations that depend on the data options. If
the Proppant Ramp option is enabled, additional columns for specifying the ramp
increment (i.e., From, To) are included. Likewise, when the Proppant Settling
Model is User Specified, a column is added to enter the Proppant Settling Rate.
There are other features of the Input Treatment Schedule screen worthy of note.
After entering any two of the first three columns, MFrac will automatically calcu-
late the third. It is possible to either enter the rate and volume to calculate the time,
or enter the rate and time to calculate the volume. In short, MFrac will always guar-
antee that the rate, time and volume are synchronized.
The following section has a complete list of input parameters and their definitions.
Recirculate
When the Stage Recirculation option is selected on the General tab, this column
will appear in the table to allow the selection of stages, whose rate will be used to
recirculate the fluid that is at bottomhole, out of the wellbore. For bottomhole
schedules, the selected stage is the one that is recirculated out of the wellbore. For
surface schedules, it is the fluid that is bottomhole, while the selected stage is
injected at the surface, that is recirculated out of the wellbore.
Slurry Rate
This is the simulated constant rate at which the slurry will be pumped for a specific
stage or volume specified. Entering a zero rate and volume is equivalent to specify-
ing a shut-in period. For flowback, a negative rate must be specified. The flowback
option should be On to enter a negative slurry rate.
Stage Liquid Volume
This is the liquid volume of the stage. In design mode, this is the second column of
the treatment schedule table. Since proppant concentration is entered as the mass of
proppant per unit volume of liquid, the calculated pump times displayed include the
volume of the proppant, as well as the liquid (i.e., based on a given slurry rate).
Stage Slurry Volume
This is the slurry volume of the stage. In real-time/replay mode, this is the second
column of the treatment schedule table.
Stage Time
This is the time required to inject the stage slurry volume at the stage slurry rate.
When a slurry rate and stage volume are input, the time is automatically calculated.
Entering or editing the time for a stage will result in an adjustment to the stage vol-
ume.
Stage Type
Figure 2.34 shows the Stage Type in the Treatment Schedule. The stage type option
was added to clearly identify the type of stage in the treatment schedule. The fol-
lowing stage types can be entered in the Treatment Schedule: None (blank), Pre-
pad, Pad, Slug (proppant slug), Prop (proppant), Acid, Flush and Shut-in.
2.3 Data Input 149
Figure 2.34: Stage Type Identifiers.
Clicking on the Stage Type box will display a pull down box with the choices
shown in Figure 2.34. Not only are the stage types cosmetically pleasing, they are
functional. The stage type is now an identifier as to whether a given stage can
screen-out or bridge-out.
The Stage Type identifier only allows a stage type of Blank (none), Prop, Flush or
Flowback to screen- or bridge-out. The only exception is if the proppant type is
0000. Then the proppant will not screen-out, independent of the stage type.
Only Stage Types of Blank (none), Prop, Flush and Flowback are allowed to
screen- or bridge-out in the fracture. All other Stage Types (Pre-pad, Pad,
Slug, Acid, and Shut-in) will prevent the proppant from concentrating and
bridging in the fracture. The bridge-out and screen-out criteria are also disabled
for proppant type 0000. In real-time if the proppant type is set to Prop for all
stages the model could screen-out due to slight meter reading fluctuations in the
proppant concentration during the pad or when pumping a proppant slug. If the
Proppant Transport Methodology is set to Conventional, the proppant can
screen- and bridge-out but it will not stop the fracture from propagating. There-
fore, to achieve a TSO the proppant Stage Type must be of type Blank (none),
Prop, Flush or Flowback and the Proppant Transport Methodology must be set
to an option that links the fracture and proppant solutions (i.e., choose Conven-
tional (link proppant), TSO, or Frac Pack. Conventional does not link the solu-
tions).
Fluid Type
When clicking or using the TAB key to access a Fluid Type data box, the Fluid
Database pop-up screen is presented allowing the selection of the stage fluid type.
Select the desired fluid from the list by clicking on it and the fluid code will auto-
matically be entered in the Treatment Schedule. To view the fluid properties for a
given fluid type either select the corresponding spreadsheet row or wellbore fluid
type and then click on the Fluid DB button. The specified fluid will be highlighted
in the Fluid Database pop-up screen. Next, press the Edit button to view the fluid
properties.
Proppant Type
When a Proppant Type field is entered, either by clicking on it or using the TAB
key, the Proppant Database pop-up screen is displayed. Choose the desired prop-
pant for the corresponding stage from the list. The proppant code will automatically
be entered in the Treatment Schedule. To view the properties that correspond to a
proppant code in a given row, click on the Proppant DB button. The specified prop-
pant type will be highlighted in the Proppant Database pop-up screen. Next, press
the Edit button to view the proppant properties.
Prop. Concentration
When the Proppant Ramp Option is Off, the value entered is a constant for the cor-
responding stage. It represents the inlet concentration of proppant per unit volume
of liquid to be injected (mass/volume liquid i.e., lbm/gal liquid). When the Prop-
pant Ramp Option is turned On, the inlet concentration is assumed to increase or
decrease as a linear ramp in liquid volume between the From and To values. This
results in a uniform increase (or decrease) in proppant concentration with increas-
ing liquid volume.
Proppant Damage Factor
The reported final permeability of the proppant in the fracture is calculated from:
where
The bridge-out and screen-out criteria are disabled for Proppant Type 0000
independent of the Proppant Transport Methodology option.
= final (damaged) fracture permeability
= proppant permeability (undamaged from database)
= proppant damage factor
k
f
k 1 DF ( ) =
k
f
k
DF
2.3 Data Input 151
The final permeability is used to determine the fracture conductivity and dimen-
sionless fracture conductivity.
Proppant Settling Rate
When the User Specified option is chosen for the Proppant Settling Model, the
Proppant Settling Rate must be entered in the Treatment Schedule. The value
entered will be used as a constant for the settling velocity of the associated proppant
stage during the simulation.
Friction Loss Multiplier
To activate the Friction Loss Multiplier column feature, the Stage Friction Multi-
plier must be checked in the General tab of the Treatment Schedule dialog box. If
stage friction multiplier is checked, friction loss multipliers can be specified for
each stage in the Treatment Schedule. This is useful for history matching surface
treating pressures.
The following explains how the Friction Loss Multiplier is implemented. If the
calculated pipe friction for a stage is 1000 psi and a Treatment Schedule Friction
Loss Multiplier value of 0.85 is entered, the resulting pipe friction would be 850
psi. This multiplier is in addition to the Friction Loss Multiplier in the Wellbore
Hydraulics Screen. Therefore, if the base pressure loss was 1000 psi, and the Fric-
tion Loss Multiplier in the Treatment Schedule was 0.85 with a Wellbore Hydrau-
lics multiplier of 0.5, the total pressure loss would be 425 psi (1000*0.85*0.5).
Database Access
The Fluid, Proppant, and Acid Databases can be accessed from the Treatment
Schedule. Figure 2.35 shows accessing the Fluid Database. Once the Fluid Data-
base screen is activated you can add, delete, copy, edit and plot data as if you had
selected the Database menu from the Main Menu tool bar.
Figure 2.35: Database Access from the Treatment Schedule.
Acid Frac Treatment Schedule
When using the Acid Fracturing option, the treatment schedule replaces the prop-
pant scheduling parameters with the required acid fracturing parameters (Figure
2.36). The acid parameters and a brief description of each are given below. The
general treatment parameters of slurry rate, stage volume, etc. are discussed in the
Treatment Schedule Input Parameters section.
2.3 Data Input 153
Figure 2.36: Acid Treatment Schedule Screen.
Rock/Acid System
This five (5) character code identifier specifies which data to use from the Acid
Frac Database. The Rock/Acid System database list automatically appears when
the cursor is placed in this column. Click on the desired rock/acid system from the
list and it will automatically be placed in the column. Moving to any other column
closes the Rock/Acid System list box.
Acid Conc. at Inlet
This is the acid concentration to be pumped. This value has the units of mass acid/
mass liquid (i.e., lbm acid / lbm liquid, or kg acid / kg liquid).
The mass of acid in each stage is calculated and included in the output using the fol-
lowing relationship:
where
= mass of acid
= inlet acid concentration
= stage volume
M
a
C
i
V =
M
a
C
i
V
Acid Conc. at Equilibrium
This is the acid concentration below which no reaction with the formation will
occur. This value has the units of mass acid/mass liquid (i.e., lbm acid / lbm liquid,
or kg acid / kg liquid).
Diffusivity Multiplier
The diffusivity of an acid stage used in a simulation is calculated from the follow-
ing:
where
Since the characteristic acid diffusivity is rarely understood, the diffusivity multi-
plier is provided as a means of quickly exploring the sensitivity of diffusivity with-
out changing the diffusivity permanently in the Rock/Acid database.
Real-Time/Replay Treatment Schedule
When using the Replay/Real-Time option, the treatment schedule functions differ
slightly from the design table (Figure 2.37). The second column of the table is now
the Stage Slurry Volume instead of the Stage Liquid Volume. If the Real-Time
option MView Concentration is selected, the proppant concentration columns in
the treatment schedule will not be editable, since the concentration will be taken
from the real-time data. If the Input Concentration option is selected, then the con-
centration values must be entered in the table. In this case, the Liquid Volumes may
be accessed from the Variable Column.
The most important difference between design and replay/real-time is that the vol-
ume and time values are synchronized with the real-time data. This is done auto-
matically each time a value is changed. For example, when a stage slurry volume is
changed, MFrac will calculate the total slurry volume up to the end of that stage.
Then it will look through the real-time data and find the total time that corresponds
to that total volume. The stage time is then calculated from this total time.
The average slurry rates, proppant concentrations and proppant mass for each stage
are calculated from the real-time data. These columns are grayed out, since they
= fluid density
= diffusivity used in the fracture
= base diffusivity as given in the database
= diffusivity multiplier
D D
0
DM =
D
D
0
DM
2.3 Data Input 155
cannot be changed. That is for a specified slurry volume these values are fixed
based on the real-time data.
Figure 2.37: Real-Time & Replay Treatment Schedule Screen.
When a stage time is changed, MFrac uses a similar process to calculate a new
stage volume. This process insures that the time and volume values are properly
synchronized with the real-time data. If a time or volume value is entered that
causes a stage to go beyond the real-time data, then the rate column is enabled. In
this case, the rate, volume and times are synchronized as they are in design mode.
To better understand the process of synchronizing with the real-time data, explore
the Graphical Treatment Schedule as described below.
Graphical Treatment Scheduling
To see a graphical picture of the treatment schedule, click on the Graphical TS but-
ton. This will display an interactive plot (Figure 2.38) of Total Slurry Volume vs.
Total Time.
This plot allows graphical manipulation of stages. The different stages are repre-
sented along the Time and Volume axes by boxes of alternating colors. The alter-
nating colors of the Time scale extend through the plot area. Horizontal lines extend
When doing a real-time job, as more data becomes available, the time and rate
columns may change in order to maintain the proper synchronization. In gen-
eral, the slurry volume always takes precedence over time in determining stag-
ing.
from the boxes of the Volume scale to aid in visualizing the stage volumes. When
using the Replay/Real-time option, the data in the plot is the real-time data from
MView. The real-time rate is integrated to get the volume curve.
The right axis drop down selection box can now display any parameter sent from
MView (i.e., Rate, Surface Pressure, BHTP, Concentrations etc.).
Figure 2.38: Graphical Treatment Schedule Screen.
Another Graphical Treatment Schedule feature is graphical placement of the restart
time (i.e., the start of the first stage can now be moved like any of the other stages).
Graphical Treatment Menu
The graphical treatment schedule has its own menu bar at the top of the screen.
Many of the menu commands are standard Meyer menu commands described in
Chapter 1. The others are described below:
2.3 Data Input 157
The File Menu
End Editing without making changes
This will end the editing session without keeping any changes made during the edit-
ing session.
End Editing
This will end the editing session and keep all changes made.
The Edit Menu
Add Stage
This will add a new stage after the currently selected stage. If the currently selected
stage is last stage, the new stage will have exactly the same properties as the current
stage. If the current stage is not the last stage, it will cut the current stages volume
in half. The new stage will have the same properties as the current stage, except it
will have one half of the slurry volume. In this case, adding a stage is essentially
splitting the current stage into two equal stages. A dialog box will allow modifica-
tion of the new stage.
Pressing the Insert key will also activate this command.
Delete Stage
This will delete the currently selected stage. The stage numbers of all the subse-
quent stages will then decrease by one.
Pressing the Delete key will also activate this command.
Modify Stage
This will allow manual modification of the currently selected stage. A dialog box
that resembles the treatment schedule table will appear; however, it will only have
one row representing the selected stage. This box functions exactly the same as the
normal treatment schedule with a few exceptions. Changing total values in the Vari-
able Column has no effect on other stages. Any change in stage volume may be
subtracted from the previous or next stage as selected with the Previous, Next or
Neither buttons. When Neither (the default) is selected, none of the other stage vol-
umes will be affected.
Double-clicking the mouse on a stage while in Select mode will also bring up the
modify stage box.
Undo all changes
This will undo all changes made during this editing session.
The Toolbar
At the top of the plot is a toolbar. In the top left of the toolbar, the current mouse
location on the X, YL (left), and YR (right) scales is displayed. The End Edit button
can be used to end the current editing session. The mouse can be set to Select
stages or Zoom in with the Mouse list box. The Right Axis list box is used to
change which data is plotted on the right axis. The choices are Rate & Concentra-
tion, Rate, Concentration or None. The bottom portion of the toolbar displays infor-
mation about the currently selected stage.
Modifying Stages Graphically
The real power of the graphical treatment plot is the ability to manipulate the stage
volumes and times with the mouse. It is important to understand that there are two
distinct mouse modes, Select and Zoom. The mode can be toggled with the Mouse
list box or the right mouse button menu.
When in Zoom mode, the mouse functions as in any other Meyer plot, the left
mouse button can be used to define an area of the plot for zooming.
The Select mode is used for selecting and modifying the active stage. Clicking the
mouse on any stage will make it the active stage. To graphically change a stage,
click and drag on the desired boundary (either time or volume). The stage informa-
tion in the toolbar will be updated automatically while dragging the stage boundary.
Also note that a boundary cannot be moved past the boundaries on either side of it.
The stage before and after a boundary will be modified if the boundary is changed.
To keep the stage time (or volume) after the boundary constant, hold down the Con-
trol key when dragging the boundary. Then, only the stage before the modified
boundary will change.
When working with a real-time treatment schedule, the times and volumes will
automatically be synchronized to the real-time data. If a stage goes beyond the end
of the current real-time data, its box on the X axis will extend to the right edge of
the plot. All subsequent stages will not have a box on the X scale; however, all
stages will be represented on the Y axis. As more real-time data becomes available,
those stages which were previously beyond the end of the data may be in the range
of available data. In this case, the stage will get a new stage time from MFrac.
When flowback is enabled, all stages after the first stage with a negative rate stage
will not be represented on the Y axis. The volume of these stages may not be
manipulated graphically; however, the time of these stages may.
2.3 Data Input 159
Foam Schedule
The Foam Schedule is enabled when the Foam option in the General Option dialog
box is checked. This option is used in simulating foam treatments of nitrogen and/
or carbon dioxide.
Foam Tab
Figure 2.39 shows the Foam Tab. The Foam tab includes the additional input data
required for foam treatment.
Figure 2.39: Treatment Schedule - Foam Tab.
Foam Input
The foam schedule permits entering of either bottomhole foam qualities or surface
rates. Use the radio buttons in the middle of the dialog box to select which one to
input; the other will then be calculated.
Quality
The foam schedule allows for the design of Mitchell, Both External Phase, Internal
Phase (CO2), and Internal Phase (N2) foam quality treatments. These qualities are
at bottomhole conditions as defined below:
Mitchell
and
Both External Phase
and
l
Internal Phase CO2
and
l
Internal Phase N2
and
l
The foam and total volumes are defined as:
where
= foam quality (void fraction)
= carbon dioxide volume
= foam volume
= liquid volume
= nitrogen volume
= proppant volume
= total volume
o
N
2
V
N
2
V
f
= o
CO
2
V
CO
2
V
f
=
o
N
2
V
N
2
V
t
= o
CO
2
V
CO
2
V
t
=
o
N
2
V
N
2
V
t
= o
CO
2
V
CO
2
V
p
+ ( ) V
t
=
o
N
2
V
N
2
V
p
+ ( ) V
t
= o
CO
2
V
CO
2
V
t
=
V
f
V
N
2
V
CO
2
V
l
+ + =
V
t
V
f
V
p
+ =
o
V
CO
2
V
f
V
l
V
N
2
V
p
V
t
2.3 Data Input 161
Standard Conditions
Quantities such as N
2
volume & rate and CO
2
solubility are given in units at stan-
dard conditions. The user has the following options to indicate the standard condi-
tions:
1. 60 F, 1 atm: The standard conditions are 60 F, 1 atm.
2. User Specified: The user specifies the densities for CO
2
and N
2
at standard
conditions.
Density
The density option specifies how densities for CO
2
and N
2
at bottomhole and CO
2
density at the flow meter are determined. The user has the following choices:
1. Van der Waals EOS: Use the van der Waals equation of state.
2. Peng-Robinson EOS: Use the Peng-Robinson equation of state.
3. User Specified: The user specifies the densities directly.
When using an equation of state (EOS) the following information is required:
1. CO2 Pressure (Flow Meter); required if pumping CO2.
2. CO2 Temperature (Flow Meter); required if pumping CO2.
3. BHTP (Bottomhole treating pressure).
4. BHTT (Bottomhole treating temperature).
CO2 Solubility
The carbon dioxide solubility at bottomhole conditions.
Saturated Liquid Volume Ratio
For CO2 in solution, this is the ratio of fully saturated liquid volume to unsaturated
liquid volume.
Stages Tab
Figure 2.40 shows the Foam Treatment Schedule screen.
Figure 2.40: Foam Treatment Schedule - Stage Tab.
This foam schedule is very flexible. If bottomhole rates and concentrations are
input the surface values will be calculated and vise versa. All of the pertinent stage
data is now presented in one spreadsheet making it easier to manage the data.
The foam schedule can also be graphically edited as shown in Figure 2.41. This
may make it easier to manipulate and visualize the slurry volume and rates in each
of the foam stages.
The Variable Column now has menu selections to display the N2, CO2, Foam,
Slurry, Liquid, and Total stage volumes.
2.3 Data Input 163
Figure 2.41: Foam Schedule - Graphical Editing.
Rock Properties
The Rock Properties dialog box provides a table for entering the mechanical prop-
erties of the reservoir and adjacent lithologies including in-situ stresses as a func-
tion of depth (see Figure 2.42). For each layer an optional Lithology Symbol, and
Zone Name can be specified to help organize the rock properties table. The TVD
depth at the bottom of the zone (Depth at Bottom) is the next entry. By convention,
this is the true vertical depth (TVD) at the bottom of each zone or layer. The MD at
Bottom is then calculated from the TVD or if the MD is specified the TVD depth
will be calculated.
Once a zone is defined, after MD at Bottom, the representative, Stress Gradient,
Stress, Young's Modulus, Poisson's Ratio, Fracture Toughness, and Critical
Stress are entered. Either the stress gradient or stress can be entered. If you enter
one the other will be calculated. The stress gradient is defined as the stress divided
by the TVD. The Interpolate Stress Gradient column allows for an interpolated
stress gradient over the given layer (explained below).
Use the Help button located at the bottom of the Rock Properties screen to obtain a
description of these parameters or refer to the description of each property given at
the end of this section.
Options to insert rock properties from our rock properties database (Insert from
Database) and to import mechanical rock properties (Import Log) data are also
available. The file format for the Import Log can be LAS or text.
Figure 2.42: Rock Properties Dialog Box.
Depending upon the Fracture Geometry model selected and the data available, the
number of layers or entries to the Rock Properties table may vary. Typically, as a
minimum, at least three layers should be entered to describe the pay zone and the
layers above and below. Even for the two-dimensional models, the modulus in the
adjacent layers will affect the formation stiffness. However, MFrac will run with
just one layer using a constant value across the entire height. This approach is more
appropriate for the two-dimensional models. A maximum of one thousand (1000)
layers can be specified.
Rows in the table may be deleted using the Delete Rows icon and new rows
inserted using the Insert Rows icon.
Rock Property Data
A description of the Rock Property screen parameters is as follows:
Lithology Symbols
Lithology symbols can be added to each zone or layer by double clicking in the box
to the left of the zone name and selecting the appropriate symbol. This is illustrated
by the highlighted box in Figure 2.42. Figure 2.43 shows a list of the available
2.3 Data Input 165
lithology symbols. Options are also available for the foreground and background
colors.
Figure 2.43: Select Lithology Symbol Screen.
Zone
An optional zone name can be specified for each layer to help organize the rock
properties table.
TVD at Bottom
The TVD depth at the bottom of the zone (TVD at Bottom) is the next entry. This is
the true vertical depth (TVD) at the bottom of each zone or layer. If the TVD is
entered, the MD is calculated.
MD at Bottom
The MD depth at the bottom of the zone (MD at Bottom) is the next entry. This is
the measured depth (MD) at the bottom of the zone or layer. If the MD is entered,
TVD is calculated. If the value for TVD results in a MD greater than the maximum
value specified for the wellbore deviation, a dashed mark (-) will be placed in the
column.
Stress Gradient
The Stress Gradient is defined as the stress at depth divided by the TVD (Stress
Gradient = Stress/TVD). If the stress gradient is entered, the stress will be calcu-
lated. If stress is entered, the stress gradient will be calculated. The stress is
assumed to be the minimum horizontal stress for vertically oriented fractures and
the overburden stress for horizontal fractures.
Stress
It is generally accepted that one of the most important parameters affecting fracture
containment is the in-situ stress. Under ideal conditions adequate contrast will exist
between the target interval and surrounding layers. Normally, for ideal containment
to exist, the stress contrast in the adjacent rock layers must be much greater than the
fracture net pressure (see Appendix A).
Several methods are regularly used in the petroleum industry to estimate the in-situ
stresses. These include micro-hydraulic fracturing methods, pump-in flowback
tests, well logging procedures and in some cases laboratory experiments (ASR &
DSCA).
Stresses may be input to represent a constant value for a layer or a linear gradient
may be used by selecting the gradient check box in the far right column. Using this
switch results in a linear increase or decrease in stress magnitude from the bottom
of the overlying zone to the bottom of the specified zone.
For more information on the influence of stress on hydraulic fracture propagation
see SPE 15240, Design Formulae for 2-D and 3-D Vertical Hydraulic Fractures.
4
Youngs Modulus
Young`s modulus or the modulus of elasticity is the slope (or derivative) of a stress-
strain curve over the elastic portion of the curve. For linear-elastic deformation,
Youngs modulus is a constant with a unique value for a particular material and in-
situ conditions. The modulus represents the materials ability to resist deformation
under load. It is, therefore, a measure of the materials stiffness. As the stiffness (E)
of the rock increases, the fracture width will decrease and the length will increase
for a given set of input parameters. See Appendix A for more information regarding
the sensitivity of this parameter.
A range of Youngs modulus values for various rock types is given in Table 2.5.
Poissons Ratio
Poisson's ratio is defined as the ratio of the transverse strain to the axial strain
resulting from an applied stress (see Figure 2.44).
2.3 Data Input 167
Figure 2.44: Definition of Poissons Ratio.
The theoretical value for Poissons ratio is 1/4 for any isotropic body with strains
below the proportional (elastic) limit. For strains beyond the proportional limit, the
ratio increases and approaches the limiting plastic value of 1/2.
Typical Poissons ratios for rock formations are 0.25. From parametric studies,
Poisson's ratio affects the fracture propagation characteristics to a very minor
extent. Therefore, if in doubt, use 0.25.
Table 2.5: Ranges of Youngs Modulus.
Rock Type Range
(10
6
psi)
Range
(10
7
kPa )
Limestone-Reef Breccia 1 - 5 0.7 - 3.5
Limestone-Porous or Oolitic 2 - 7 1.4 - 5
Limestone-Med. to Fine Grained 4 - 11 3 - 7.5
Dolomite 6 - 13 4.2 - 9
Hard Dense Sandstone 4 - 7 2.8 - 5
Medium Hard Sandstone 2 - 4 1.4 - 3
Porous unconsolidated to poorly consoli-
dated
0.1 - 2 0.07 - 1.4
Poissons ratio
u
=
c
w
c
l
c
w
0
=
w
Aw
c =
l
Al
l
0
Poissons ratio =
Lateral strain
Longitudinal strain
l
0
w
0
Poissons ratio is also used by logging companies to infer in-situ stresses. This
method assumes the rock behaves elastically and that the tectonic stresses are
known or insignificant. The typical relationship is
where
Fracture Toughness
The definition of fracture toughness is obtained from the concept of stress intensity
factor, developed in linear elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM). Fracture toughness
is a measure of a materials resistance to fracture propagation. It is proportional to
the amount of energy that can be absorbed by the material before propagation
occurs. The basis for this relationship involves the assumption that pre-existing
defects exist which induce high stress concentrations in their vicinity. These sites
become points for crack initiation and propagation.
If represents the area of the largest defect, it can be shown that the tensile
strength, , of the rock can be approximated by
where is the fracture toughness.
In hydraulic fractures, propagation is assumed to occur once the stress intensity fac-
tor reaches a critical value. This critical value, related to the propagation resistance
(or energy balance) is assumed to be a material property and is given the name frac-
ture toughness (or critical stress intensity factor). For a crack in the vicinity of a
uniform stress field, , the stress intensity is
minimum horizontal stress
Poissons ratio
vertical stress or overburden
pore or reservoir pressure
component of stress due to tectonics
Biots constant
o
Hmin
u
1 u
------------
\ .
| |
o
v
op
0
( ) op
0
o
T
+ + =
o
Hmin
=
u =
o
v
=
p
0
=
o
T
=
o =
a
c
T
T K
IC
ta
c
=
K
IC
o
K
I
o H
=
2.3 Data Input 169
and for failure to occur we have
where is a geometric coefficient and is the characteristic fracture dimension.
See Appendix A for more information on stress intensity factors.
Table 2.6 lists some measured values of fracture toughness. The values shown were
reported by van Eekelen
13
, Thiercelin
14
reviewed the testing procedures for deter-
mining this parameter in his article, Fracture Toughness and Hydraulic Fractur-
ing.
Setting fracture toughness to zero will result in the classical hydraulic fracturing
propagation solutions dominated by viscous pressure loss. For very low viscosity
fluids, fracture toughness may be the dominant parameter controlling fracture
growth.
Critical Stress
The Critical Stress is the minimum critical stress ( ) for the fracture to propa-
gate in the vicinity of a constant stress field. This parameter may also be thought of
as the apparent tensile strength since it is the critical stress that must be over come
for the crack to propagate (in a uniform stress field).
MFrac uses the maximum of or to determine the critical stress intensity
at the fracture leading edge (see Figure 2.45). If is set equal to zero, only
fracture toughness will be considered. For illustration purposes, the above discus-
sion was simplified by using a uniform stress field. See Meyer
15
for a more general
discussion of the stress intensity factor.
Table 2.6: Fracture Toughness Ranges.
Formation Type
psi-in
1/2
kPa-m
1/2
siltstone 950-1650 1040-1810
sandstone 400-1600 440-1760
limestone 400-950 440-1040
shale 300-1200 330-1320
o
c
K
IC
H
=
H
o
c mi n
o
c
o
c mi n
o
c mi n
Figure 2.45: Critical Stress.
Incorporating this parameter allows for modeling a constant critical pressure at the
fracture tip. Using fracture toughness, the critical pressure decreases as the charac-
teristic crack size increases.
Interpolate Stress Gradient
When entering stresses, if a linear stress is desired across the zone, click the Inter-
polate Stress Gradient box located to the far right of the Rock Properties table.
This places a check mark in the box and instructs the program to use the Stress
Gradient across the zone. The stress in a layer at a true vertical depth of D is
Stress(D)=Stress(TVD)+(Stress Gradient)*(D-TVD). Therefore, the stress at the
bottom of a layer will always be greater than the stress at the top of the layer if the
interpolate stress gradient check mark is selected.
2.3 Data Input 171
If Interpolate Stress Gradient is not specified, the stress value for that zone is
assumed constant across that layer.
Insert from Database
Selecting Insert from Database will bring up the screen shown in Figure 2.46. The
Rock (Lithology) Database is comprised of a Zone Name, Stress Gradient,
Young's Modulus, Poisson's Ratio, Fracture Toughness, and Critical Stress. This
database can be modified by the user.
Figure 2.46: Insert from Lithology Database Screen.
Pressing OK will place the selected lithology properties and icon into the rock prop-
erties table.
If the Interpolate Stress Gradient option is checked, the Fracture Fluid Gradient
should also be checked to Include. This will ensure a true total liquid and stress
gradient over a given fracture interval for 3D fracture propagation. Note, that if
the fluid gradient is included in a uniform stress field (i.e. constant stress for all
layers with no stress gradient checks) and assuming all other parameters are
unchanged the fracture will tend to propagate downward due to increasing frac-
ture pressure with depth. The fracture width profile would also be more tear
shaped downward. The inclusion of fluid and stress gradients is more important
as the ratio of the resultant fluid and stress gradient to the fracture net pressure
increases. Thus inclusion of a fluid gradient is only important for low net pres-
sure cases when the hydrostatic fluid gradient in the fracture is of the order of
the fracture net pressure.
Log File Importing
The Import Log option allows the user to import rock properties from a mechanical
property log (or logs). To access this import option select the Import Log button in
the Rock Properties dialog.
Upon entering the Log File Importing dialog, there are 5 tabs that control the
import process. The tabs are designed to be edited in sequential order. The basic
steps in the sequence are described in Table 2.7 below.
The functionality of each screen, and the log file importing process in general is
described below.
Parameters
The first tab is the parameters tab, it contains a single spreadsheet with a Parame-
ters column, and a Unit Type column. It is used to determine what parameters are
available for import or mapping purposes, and associates each parameter with a
unit type. An example parameters setup is shown below (Figure 2.47).
Table 2.7: Log File Importing Basic Steps.
Step Dialog Area
1. Specify Parameters: common parameters are already
setup for you, just add any special ones that you will be
importing from a file.
Parameters tab
2. Add Data Sources: specify the log files and associate their
columns to parameters.
Data Sources tab
3. Select the source of the data for each of the rock
properties that will be imported: you can choose a data
source parameter, or to generate the data (or to calculate
data for stress or stress gradient from the other).
Import Properties tab
4. To generate some of the rock properties (or lithology
symbols and zone names) map values of these properties
to a data source parameters values. (Optional)
Property Generation tab
5. Specify Zones: this can be done manual or automatically
from the menu. Also the zone boundaries can be manually
adjusted by dragging them.
Zones tab
6. Import the properties: click the import button to close the
dialog and populate the rock properties table.
Zones tab
2.3 Data Input 173
Figure 2.47: Log File Importing - Parameters Screen.
The parameters spreadsheet is designed to be very flexible, the parameters may be
in any order, have any name, and any unit type found in the drop down combo list.
The parameter name is editable at any time, and the unit type is editable as long as
no data source has been assigned to it yet. If the Unit type is disabled, then it has
already been associated with a data source; if you wish to modify it, you must
remove the association in the Data Sources tab.
Once data is entered into the parameters spreadsheet, the next step is to assign a
data source to some or all of the parameters via the Data Sources tab.
Data Sources
This tab (Figure 2.48) is used to associate data found in one or more files with some
or all of the parameters defined on the previous tab.
Figure 2.48: Log File Importing - Data Sources Screen.
By clicking the Add... button, a file open prompt will open requesting the selection
of a data file. The default extensions of the files are *.txt, or *.las. To choose a file
with a different extension, choose All Files (*.*) from the Files of Type drop down
list. Once you open the file, Log data will appear in spreadsheet form as shown
below (Figure 2.49).
Figure 2.49: Data Sources - Setup Screen.
2.3 Data Input 175
The purpose of the data sources setup screen is to associate the appropriate data col-
umns with a parameter. For example, if column A contains depth information place
an A next to the parameter that represents measured depth. Clicking on the drop
down menu listed under Unit allows you to define what units the data is in. A sam-
ple plot may be generated by defining the sample plot axes and clicking the View
Plot... button.
Once the columns and units are defined, the sampling criteria can be setup based on
measured depth, or by row number. If the sampling parameter is set to (Row Num-
ber), then a minimum, and maximum row along with a row increment determine
which rows are read. If the sampling parameter is set to Measured Depth, a mini-
mum and maximum depth can be entered to quickly find (and use) the rows corre-
lated with those depths. Once this is done, press OK to apply the changes.
To edit existing data sources, select the data source you wish to edit, then click the
Setup... button to re-open the data sources setup screen (Figure 2.49).
To delete an existing data file, select the file you wish to delete, then click the
Delete button (Note: this does not remove the file from your computer). All of the
parameter associations for that file will be removed.
Once the data sources are setup, the next step is the Import Properties tab which is
used to specify the data sources that will be used for the current rock properties
import.
Import Properties
The Import Properties tab (Figure 2.50) contains one spreadsheet. It is where the
properties for the current import are associated with a data source.
Figure 2.50: Log File Importing - Import Properties Screen.
Each property may be associated with a previously mapped data source (from a
file), set to Calculate for Stress or Stress Gradient but not both, or set to Generate
which allows manual data entry of that particular property. Once the import proper-
ties are setup, the next step is the Property Generation tab.
Property Generation
The Property Generation tab is optional. Check the Enable Property Generation
check box in the upper left hand corner to use this tab.
Note: If the Property Generation tab is disabled, any parameter set to Generate in
the Import Properties tab will be set to zero when imported.
The Property Generation tab (shown in Figure 2.51) is used to do the following:
Specify the lithology symbols and zone names associated with each zone type
Generate the rock properties that were set to Generate in the Import Proper-
ties tab. These properties are generated by a table of zone types that maps zone
types to a range of mapping parameter values. Property values are mapped to
data from a file, such as gamma ray or Pe data.
2.3 Data Input 177
Figure 2.51: Log File Importing - Property Generation Screen.
Generating Property Values
To generate property values, do the following:
1. Choose the mapping parameter from the drop-down menu. The list contains
the parameters you selected in the Data Sources tab. The parameters values
are plotted in the display area.
2. Enter property values in the table for each zone type. Click on a row in the
table of zone types, then do the following:
a. Click on a cell in the first column to select the zones lithology symbol.
(This step is optional.)
b. In the next column, enter a zone name. (This step is optional.)
c. In the Mapping Parameter column, enter the upper range of the mapping
parameter for this zone type. Each row of the table must have a larger
value than the previous row because this value represents the range of val-
ues that are mapped to the zone type.
d. The rest of the columns in the table contain values for the generated
parameters that were selected in the Import Properties tab. Enter the
propertys value for the zone type.
Inserting zone types from the rock database
As an alternative to entering zone types by hand, you can insert them from the rock
database. This method specifies values for the lithology symbols, zone name, and
the properties that are to be generated. You still need to specify a mapping parame-
ter value.
To insert a zone type from the database:
1. Select the row in the zone type table where you want to insert the new zone
type. Alternatively, you can click on the zone type on the plot.
2. Click the Insert from Database button. The Rock Database window appears
as shown in Figure 2.42.
3. Click on the database entry that you wish to insert into the zone type table.
4. Click Insert or double-click to insert the new zone type into the property gen-
eration table.
5. Enter the mapping parameter value for the new zone type.
Adjusting the range of mapping parameter values
When you move the cursor over the range boundaries on the plot, you can graphi-
cally adjust the range of the mapping parameter values associated with the zone
types.
Adding zone types with the plot
To add a zone type by using the plot, do the following:
1. Click the left mouse button on a zone to select it.
2. Choose the Add Entry command from the Edit menu or press the Insert key.
The zone type you selected is split into two zone type and a new zone type is
added to the table.
3. Edit the zone types properties as described in Generating Property Values
on page 177.
2.3 Data Input 179
Deleting zone types with the plot
To delete a zone type by using the plot, do the following:
1. Click the left mouse button on a zone to select it.
2. Choose the Delete Entry command from the Edit menu or press the Delete
key. The zone type you selected is deleted and its row is removed from the
table.
Interpolate generated data
A check box is provided to linearly interpolate generated data between mapping
parameter values. The generated value will remain constant over a given mapping
parameter range if this box is not checked.
Zones
The zones tab contains 5 plots depicting measured depth versus Stress Gradient,
Stress, Young's Modulus, Poisson's Ration, and Fracture Toughness as shown
below. If the Property Generation tab is enabled and contains data, the zones will
be initially generated according to that data.
Figure 2.52: Log File Importing - Zones Screen.
This is where the zones used for the final import are defined. Zones may be auto-
matically selected via the Edit|Auto Select Zones menu. The choices for auto-
matic selection are described below.
Auto Select Zones
From Property Generation Tab: This option selects zones based on the map-
pings defined in the Property Generation tab.
By Threshold: This option selects zones based on a threshold of one of the
current properties (defined in the Import Properties tab). e.g. If a stress
parameter is selected, and a threshold of 100 psi is chosen, a new zone will be
defined every time the stress varies by 100 psi.
By Depth: This option selects zones based on a depth increment along with
minimum and maximum bounds.
2.3 Data Input 181
Graphically Editing Zones
Zones may also be graphically edited similarly to the process of editing the map-
ping parameters in the Property Generation tab.
Import Stress/Stress Gradient Radio Buttons
When data sources for both stress and stress gradient are available, these radio but-
ton allow you to choose which one to import (the other will be calculated).
Interpolated Stress Gradient Check Box
When checked, this enables Interpolate Stress Gradient for all zones in the rock
properties table. See Interpolate Stress Gradient on page 170.
Importing
Once you have finished editing the log data, press the Import button. This will
import the mechanical rock properties into the Rock Properties table as shown in
Figure 2.53.
Figure 2.53: Rock Properties Table - After Importing from Stress Log.
If some of the parameters are not selected in the Stress Log (as is toughness in this
case) input this data manually using the fill down speed icon. Figure 2.54 shows a
plot of imported rock properties layered to specification.
Figure 2.54: Plot of Imported Layered Data.
Fluid Loss Data
To model fluid loss from the fracture into the reservoir and surrounding layers,
additional information characterizing the formation and in-situ diffusivity parame-
ters is necessary. The format for the fluid loss data entry is flexible and allows any-
thing from a single layer reservoir to multi-layered zones with diverse properties.
The specific data required by the program depends on which fluid loss model is
selected in the General Options dialog.
It is not necessary for these depths to correspond directly to the depths specified in
the Rock Properties screen, although they may. A maximum of 1000 layers is per-
mitted in both the Rock Properties and Fluid Loss data screens.
Please refer to Appendix D for a detailed description of the individual leakoff coef-
ficients which control fluid loss.
2.3 Data Input 183
Constant Fluid Loss Model
When the Constant Fluid Loss Model is chosen, the total leakoff, , and the Spurt
Loss coefficients for each layer are entered in the Fluid Loss Data screen shown in
Figure 2.55. Normally, this is the best choice for modeling fluid loss and estimating
fracture efficiency when a minifrac has been performed using the same fluid type as
the main treatment. When this model is used, it is not necessary to calculate the
three individual linear flow resistance mechanisms , , and (see Appen-
dix D). The diffusivity parameters of permeability, porosity, compressibility and
viscosity are not required for this option because they are inherently included in the
total coefficient.
Figure 2.55: Fluid Loss Data Dialog Box - Constant Fluid Loss Model.
The specific data required by the program when using a Constant Fluid Loss Coef-
ficient Model is as follows:
Zones
An optional zone name can be specified for each layer to help organize the fluid
loss data properties table.
C
C
I
C
II
C
III
Depth at Bottom
The TVD depth at the bottom of the zone (Depth at Bottom) is the next entry. By
convention, this is the true vertical depth (TVD) at the bottom of each zone or layer.
Total Leakoff Coefficient
The total leakoff coefficient is a combination of the , , and leakoff
mechanisms. These leakoff coefficients are discussed in Appendix D. The total
leakoff coefficient is used in calculating the time dependent leakoff velocity and
overall fluid loss based on mass conservation. The general diffusional leakoff
velocity is
where is time and is the initial time of fluid leakoff. The total fluid loss volume
to the formation is
where is a fluid loss parameter and A is the total leakoff area (one face) for both
wings. This equation illustrates that the fluid loss volume is proportional to the
leakoff coefficient and leakoff area product.
Spurt Loss
Spurt loss is the instantaneous volume loss of fluid per unit area of fracture face
that occurs prior to the development of a filter cake. The volume of fluid loss due to
spurt for both wings is
where is the spurt loss coefficient and is the leakoff area the pay zone.
For multilayer leakoff, spurt loss is calculated in each layer separately. Please refer
to Appendix D for additional information.
By convention, the depth entered is the true vertical depth TVD at the bottom of
the interval. The reservoir parameters are assumed to have constant properties
over this interval.
C
I
C
II
C
III
u C t t =
t t
V
l
2 v A t d d
0
A
}
0
t
}
=
tCA tu =
u
V
sp
V
sp
2AS
p
=
S
p
A
2.3 Data Input 185
Harmonic and Dynamic Fluid Loss Models
When either the Harmonic or Dynamic fluid loss models are chosen, the filter cake
coefficient ( ) is input for each layer desired. and are calculated based on
the reservoir parameters input in the Fluid Loss dialog box shown in Figure 2.56.
The parameters required for this option are described below. These properties, like
the Rock Properties, are input as a function of the TVD depth. Also like the Rock
Properties, an optional Zone name is permitted to assist in preparing and organizing
the data.
Figure 2.56: Fluid Loss Data Dialog Box - Harmonic/Dynamic Fluid Loss
Model.
For the Harmonic and Dynamic models the total leakoff coefficient for each zone
is calculated internally by combining , , and (see Appendix D). This
value is used to simulate leakoff from the fracture to each associated interval as a
function of differential pressure.
The specific data required for the Dynamic or Harmonic Fluid Loss Models is as
follows:
Zone
properties table.
C
III
C
I
C
II
C
I
C
II
C
III
Depth at Bottom
Reservoir Pressure
The reservoir or pore pressure is used in conjunction with the minimum horizontal
stress and fracture pressure to calculate the differential pressure for leakoff. The
leakoff pressure differential is
where
The pressure difference between the minimum horizontal stress and average pore
pressure is, therefore, a critical component in calculating the and leakoff
coefficients.
For new wells, enter the initial reservoir pore pressure for the productive interval.
This value is typically obtained from either a production log or well test. Variations
in pore pressure versus depth can be inferred and entered based on gradient mea-
surements and/or the fluid saturation changes within the interval (e.g., gas caps,
aquifers, etc.).
When a well has been produced for some period of time, enter the average reservoir
pressure as interpreted from a well test. In all cases, the value entered should be less
than the minimum horizontal stress.
Total Compressibility
The total reservoir compressibility is defined as the total change in the reservoir
volume per unit volume per unit pressure difference. It is the reciprocal of the un-
drained bulk modulus and is typically expressed as follows:
= minimum horizontal stress
= pressure in the fracture
= pore or reservoir pressure
=
net fracture pressure,
= differential leakoff pressure
Ap
loss
p
f
p
0
Ap
f
o
Hmin
p
0
( ) + = =
o
Hmin
p
f
p
0
Ap
f
p
f
o
Hmin
Ap
loss
C
I
C
II
c
t
S
o
c
o
S
w
c
w
S
g
c
g
c
r
+ + + =
2.3 Data Input 187
where
The compressibility is used to relate the permeability and porosity with pressure
and time using the expression
where
Permeability
The reservoir permeability is the formation property that characterizes its ability to
transfer a fluid through the pores when subjected to a pressure gradient. From
Darcy's law
where
= gas compressibility
= oil compressibility
= bulk rock compressibility
= total formation compressibility
= water compressibility
= gas saturation
= oil saturation
= water saturation
= formation permeability
= formation porosity
= reservoir fluid viscosity
= distance
= pressure
= time
= flow rate per unit area
c
g
c
o
c
r
c
t
c
w
S
g
S
o
S
w
t c
cp k
c
t
|
-----------
\ .
| |
z
2
2
c
c p
\ .
|
| |
=
k
c
t
|
z
p
t
q
k
---
x d
dp
\ .
| |
=
q
The permeability/mobility is used to calculate the coefficient in order to model
the rate of fluid leakoff into the formation during injection. The values entered
should reflect the effective permeability to the mobile portion of the reservoir fluid.
An effective permeability to the frac fluid filtrate is used to derive . The coef-
ficient is calculated from the permeability and filtrate viscosity.
Porosity
The equivalent reservoir porosity is the fraction of a rocks bulk volume that is
filled with mobile hydrocarbons. The porosity is used to calculate the and
leakoff coefficients used to simulate fluid loss during injection.
Reservoir Viscosity
The equivalent reservoir viscosity is the total effective viscosity of a multi-phase
fluid system at reservoir conditions. This value is used in calculating the leak-
off coefficient for modeling leakoff resistance due to the viscosity and compress-
ibility effects of the in-situ fluids.
Filtrate Viscosity
The filtrate viscosity is the effective leakoff viscosity of the fracturing fluid. This is
the fracturing fluid which leaks off through the fracture face. This viscosity has
been reduced from its original state due to the deposition of polymer on the fracture
face which forms a filter cake. This parameter is used to calculate the coefficient
for modeling viscosity and relative permeability effects caused by fracturing fluid
leakoff to the formation.
The effective fluid leakoff viscosity must also account for the relative permeability
effect of the leakoff fluid to that of the reservoir fluid. This is especially important
for a gas reservoir. The effective leakoff viscosity, , in terms of the fluid leakoff
viscosity and relative permeability is
where is the true fluid leakoff viscosity and is the relative permeability of the
leakoff to the reservoir fluid.
= pressure gradient
k
dp dx
C
II
C
I
C
I
C
I
C
II
C
II
C
I
e

f
k
r
=
f
k
r
2.3 Data Input 189
Wall Building Coefficient
The wall building or filter cake coefficient is equivalent to the inverse of the frac-
turing fluid leakoff resistance. A value of zero (0) represents an infinite filter cake
resistance, whereas, a value approaching infinity (e.g., >100 ft/min
) repre-
sents no wall building. This coefficient is used in calculating the total leakoff coef-
ficient . It reduces the fluid loss rate by increasing the resistance due to leakoff at
the fracture face.
The wall building coefficient is typically acquired by performing either a static or
dynamic laboratory test to determine the relationship between volume loss and
time. The slope of this relationship is proportional to the Wall Building Coefficient
(see Figure D.2 in the Meyer Appendices).
Spurt Loss
that occurs prior to the development of a fracturing fluid filter cake. The volume of
fluid loss due to spurt for both faces of a single wing fracture is
where is the spurt loss coefficient and is the leakoff area in the pay zone.
For multilayer leakoff, spurt loss is calculated in each layer separately. Refer to
Appendix D for additional information.
Time Dependent Fluid Loss
To use time dependent fluid loss, open the Time Dependent Fluid Loss tab. This
will then display the Time Dependent Fluid Loss screen shown in Figure 2.57. If
time dependent fluid loss is to be modeled, simply check the Enable Time Depen-
dent Fluid Loss check box as shown in Figure 2.57.
C
III
C
V
sp
V
sp
2AS
p
=
S
p
A
Figure 2.57: Time Dependent Fluid Loss Data Table.
This feature allows you to increase or decrease the leakoff coefficient and spurt loss
as a function of time. This is helpful for modeling leakoff in naturally fractured res-
ervoirs. While fracturing a naturally fractured formation, the pressure in the frac-
ture may approach the critical pressure. When the critical pressure of the formation
is reached, natural fractures open and accelerated leakoff occurs. A zero slope on
the Nolte plot may characterize this period of accelerated leakoff.
To use this feature, enter time dependent multipliers for the leakoff and spurt loss
coefficients. If the simulation time is less than the minimum value in the table, the
first multiplier will be used. If the fracture time is greater than the maximum value
in the table, the last data enter will be used.
The multipliers will be interpolated as varying linearly with the time values in the
table.
Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss
To use pressure dependent fluid loss, open the Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss
tab. This will then display the Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss screen shown in Fig-
ure 2.58. If pressure dependent fluid loss is to be modeled simply check the Enable
Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss check box and enter the desired fluid loss multipli-
ers.s shown in Figure 2.58.
2.3 Data Input 191
Figure 2.58: Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss Data Table.
This feature allows you to increase or decrease the leakoff coefficient and spurt loss
as a function of pressure. This is helpful for modeling leakoff in naturally fractured
reservoirs. While fracturing a naturally fractured formation, the pressure in the frac-
ture may approach the critical pressure. When the critical pressure of the formation
is reached, natural fractures open and accelerated leakoff occurs. A zero slope on
the Nolte plot may characterize this period of accelerated leakoff.
To use this feature, enter pressure dependent multipliers for the leakoff and spurt
loss coefficients. The pressure (pressure in the fracture) is input as increasing func-
tion with row number. Normally, for pressure dependent fluid loss, the multiplier
will increase as the pressure in the fracture increases. If the fracture pressure is less
than the minimum value in the table, the first multiplier will be used. If the fracture
pressure is greater than the maximum value in the table, the last data enter will be
used.
The multipliers will be interpreted as varying linearly with the pressure values in
the table.
Fluid Type Dependent Fluid Loss
When this option is selected, different total leakoff coefficients and spurt loss for
each fluid can be entered for the Constant Leakoff model. When the Harmonic or
Dynamic Leakoff model is chosen the user can input different fluid filtrate viscosi-
ties, wall building coefficients, CIII, and spurt for each fluid.
This option is useful when large volumes of 2% KCl or treated fluids are in the
wellbore prior to pumping the main fracturing treatment. The option is also helpful
for modeling leakoff during acid fracturing treatments when alternating pad/acid
stages are pumped.
Figure 2.59 illustrates the Fluid Loss Data screen (Harmonic or Dynamic Model)
with Fluid Type Dependent Fluid Loss selected in the General Options dialog box.
Figure 2.59: Dynamic Model - Fluid Type Dependent Fluid Loss.
Fluid loss data for up to fifty different fluids can be stored in this table even if the
fluid type is deleted from the treatment schedule. Only the fluid types currently
listed in the Treatment Schedule will be displayed.
Proppant Criteria
The Proppant Criteria screen is enabled when the Proppant Solution option is
turned On (Figure 2.60). When this occurs, the program requires additional infor-
mation to characterize the proppant transport process.
2.3 Data Input 193
Figure 2.60: Proppant Criteria Dialog Box.
The following parameters are required input for the Proppant Criteria Dialog.
Minimum Number of Proppant Layers to Prevent
Bridging
This value determines the proppant bridging criteria. It is the minimum number of
proppant layers in the fracture at which bridging occurs. One layer of proppant is
defined as a thickness equal to the average proppant diameter.
The average diameter is the value input in the database record for each proppant.
This is typically determined from a sieve analysis according to API standards. In
MFrac, a bridge-out is assumed to occur if the average fracture width integrated
over the fracture height is less than the Minimum Number of Proppant Layers to
Prevent Bridging. In other words, the fracture width must be greater than the
bridging criteria in order for the proppant to pass through. Typically, a value of 1.5
to 3 is used.
Minimum Concentration/Area for Propped Frac
This is the minimum concentration per unit area in the fracture below which the
propped fracture is not included in the reported propped length. In other words,
below this concentration after embedment is included, the fracture will not be
reported as being propped. A typical minimum concentration per unit area ranges
from 0 to 0.2 lbm/ft
2
(1.0 kg/m
2
).
Embedment Concentration/Area
This is the proppant embedment concentration per unit area, , in the fracture at
closure ( ) has units of proppant mass per unit area where
is the proppant concentration of embedment and is the
embedded width. The amount of embedment depends upon the proppant and for-
mation type. The lost propped width, , due to embedment is given by
where is the proppant porosity and is the proppant
density.
Closure Pressure on Proppant
This is the effective closure pressure on the proppant during production. As the clo-
sure pressure (stress) increases, the proppant pack permeability decreases. The
effective closure pressure on the proppant is equal to the minimum horizontal stress
minus the fluid pressure (i.e., bottomhole flowing pressure) in the fracture.
Using interpolation, the Closure Pressure on the Proppant is used to determine
the proppant permeability from the Proppant Database. This value is used to inter-
polate the proppant permeability from the Proppant Database.
Non-Darcy Effects
The equation to describe non-Darcy flow is a form of the Forchheimer [1901] equa-
tion
c
e
c
e
c
s
w
e
=
c
s
1 | ( ) = w
e
w
e
w
e
1 | ( ) c
e
= |
2.3 Data Input 195
where is the permeability of the porous media with units of (i.e., md or ft
2
,
etc.) and is the non-Darcy flow factor or simply factor with units of (e.g.,
cm
-1
, ft
-1
, atm-s
2
/gm etc.). Clearly the first term in this equation accounts for vis-
cous effects and the second term for inertial or minor loss effects. If the second term
on the right hand side is omitted, the equation simplifies to Darcys law. Thus non-
Darcy flow describes the flow regime that does not obey Darcys law. Holdith
[1976] reports that the original form of the second term on the right hand side of
Eq. by Forchheimer was which was replaced by Cornell and Katz [1953] by
the product of the fluid density, , and the factor.
The generalized correlation for the beta factor in terms of the fracture permeability
and porosity is of the form
where , , and are constants. The effect of immobile water saturation, , can
be incorporated by modifying the porosity to be the effective porosity
( ). A number of correlations for the beta factor (inertial coefficient)
are provided in the data base.
The Non-Darcy Effects options are given below:
Darcy Only
Non-Darcy effects will not be considered. This is the same as assuming .
Input Beta Coefficient
The non-darcy beta coefficient is user specified and assumed constant. A value
must be entered in the dialog.
User Database, Beta Coefficient
If this option is selected, a non-darcy beta coefficient correlation is selected from
the Non-Darcy proppant Database drop down menu. The beta coefficient will then
be calculated throughout the fracture as a function of proppant permeability and
porosity.
x d
dp

k
f
----u | u
2
( ) + =
k
f
L
2
| | L
1
au
2
|
k
f
|
|
a
k
f
b
|
c
----------- =
a b c S
w
|
e
| 1 S
w
( ) =
| 0 =
Heat Transfer
An analytical heat transfer model is included in MFrac that combines thermal con-
vection in the fracture, with transient conduction and convection in the reservoir.
These calculations can be linked to an option for simulating the heat exchange
between the fluid and the wellbore in order to provide a complete thermodynamic
model for the system. When the Heat Transfer option is used, it can predict the
heat-up of the fracturing fluid within the wellbore and/or the exchange of heat
between the fluid and the reservoir during fracture propagation. The model is useful
in high temperature reservoirs when the fracture fluid rheology is temperature
dependent. It couples the heat transfer, fluid flow and fracture propagation expres-
sions to characterize the time-dependent fracture temperature profiles.
When the Heat Transfer option is turned On in the General Options screen, heat
exchange calculations can be performed in the wellbore and fracture (Fluid Inlet:
Surface), or only in the fracture (Fluid Inlet: Bottomhole). The radio buttons
labeled Surface and Bottomhole shown in Figure 2.61 can be used to make this
selection. When the Surface radio button is selected, the Fluid Inlet Temperature
must be input. This is the temperature of the fracturing fluid at the surface. The pro-
gram will use this value as the initial temperature of the fluid and then simulate the
heat-up or cool-down of the fluid within the wellbore and fracture.
Figure 2.61: Heat Transfer Dialog Box.
The surface option uses the wellbore configuration to determine the wellbore heat
transfer coefficients needed for the simulation. The wellbore data is taken from the
Wellbore Hydraulics screen.
2.3 Data Input 197
To only perform heat transfer calculations in the fracture, choose the Bottomhole
radio button located on the Heat Transfer dialog box. This selection will disable the
surface calculations in the simulation and enable a small spreadsheet on the Heat
Transfer screen. With this option, bottomhole fluid temperature versus time can be
imported from another source or entered manually.
The heat transfer coefficients and parameters used in the calculations are based on
the Heat Transfer dialog box selections. The program contains an internal database
of values for various reservoir conditions. These conditions are determined based
on the selections for Base Fluid, Reservoir Lithology, In-situ Fluid, Average Poros-
ity and Mean Formation Temperature. The properties contained in the internal data-
base are as follows:
The Base Fluid category should be input to represent the base fluid of the fractur-
ing fluid used. The choices are water, oil, foam and binary foam. The Reservoir
Lithology represents the primary rock type in the region to be fractured. In
extremely heterogeneous reservoirs or when detailed lithology is not known, select
shale, as it typically represents a good average. The database assigns dry rock val-
ues based on the lithology selection and then modifies it depending on the porosity
and in-situ fluid type entered. The Average Porosity and In-situ Fluid that occu-
pies the pores characterize the fractured zone. The Mean Formation Temperature
is the average bottomhole static temperature for the fractured interval. For most
cases, we recommend entering the static temperature at the middle of the perfora-
tions. The general idea for these selections is to characterize the bulk rock that will
be exposed to the fracturing fluid.
Acid Data
The optional acid fracturing module offered in MFrac provides a comprehensive
model for simultaneously calculating hydraulic fracture geometry, leakoff, heat
transfer and acid reaction. The modeling approach uses a numerical implementa-
tion that involves control of the acidizing process by mass transfer (i.e., diffusion
and convection), as well as, the rate of reaction. All of the other options in MFrac,
such as fracture geometry models, wellbore hydraulics and production forecasting
remain available for acid fracturing, just as they are for fractures using proppants.
At the present time, the program does not allow the acid transport to be mixed with
Frac Fluid Conductivity
Frac Fluid Density
Leakoff Fluid Density
Power Law Nusselt Number
Frac Slurry Heat Capacity
Frac Fluid Heat Capacity
Rock Conductivity
Rock Heat Capacity
Pore Fluid Conductivity
Pore Fluid Heat Capacity
proppant transport. All of the screens related to propped fracturing, therefore, are
disabled when the acid frac option is selected.
When Acid is specified for the Treatment Options selection found in the General
Options screen, the Acid Data dialog box shown in Figure 2.62 replaces the Prop-
pant Criteria screen. This enables the following data to be entered:
Figure 2.62: Acid Data Dialog Box.
Conductivity Damage Factor
This allows the conductivity of the fracture simulated by the program to be adjusted
for incomplete clean-up (e.g., the deposition of insoluble residue). This may be
important for accurately predicting the anticipated production from a design. The
final conductivity of the etched fracture is calculated from:
where
= final damaged conductivity in the fracture
= undamaged fracture conductivity
= etched width conductivity damage factor
k
f
w
f
final
k
f
w
f
1 DF ( ) =
k
f
w
f
final
k
f
w
f
DF
2.3 Data Input 199
Minimum Conductivity for Etched Length
The minimum conductivity is the cut off value below which the etched fracture is
not included in the etched fracture length. In other words, below this concentration
the fracture will not be reported as having conductivity. Typical values range from 0
to 100 md-ft (30 mdm).
Acid Fracture Closure Stress
This is the effective closure pressure on the etched width during production. As the
closure pressure (stress) increases the etched width decreases. The effective closure
stress on the proppant is equal to the minimum horizontal stress minus the fluid
pressure in the fracture.
Rock Embedment Strength
The rock embedment strength is defined as the force required to push a steel ball
bearing into a rock up to a distance equal to the radius of the ball divided by the
projected area of the bearing.
This value is used to determine the final fracture conductivity based on the theoret-
ical ideal conductivity, closure stress and embedment strength. For more informa-
tion see Nierode and Kruk
16
.
Typical measured embedment strengths on dry carbonate rocks are shown in Table
2.8.
Table 2.8: Rock Embedment Strengths.
Rock Type Rock Embedment Strength (psi)
Desert Creek B Limestone 42,000
San Andres Dolomite 50,000 to 175,000
Austin Chalk - Buda Limestone 20,000
Bloomberg Limestone 93,000
Caddo Limestone 38,000
Canyon Limestone 50,000 to 90,000
Capps Limestone 50,000 to 85,000
Cisco Limestone 40,000
Edwards Limestone 53,000
Exposure to certain fluids, particularly reactive ones, can have a softening effect on
some rock types. Many values, such as the ones reported above, may be an over
estimation of a rocks true embedment resistance.
In-situ Acid Temperature
This is the temperature of the acid in the fracture. This value is used to modify the
diffusivity coefficient. Currently it is used as a constant.
Carbonate Specific Gravity
The specific gravity of the carbonate (rock) is used to calculate the mass and vol-
ume of the etched rock dissolved. Typical values are 2.2 to 2.8 as given in Table 2.9
Indiana Limestone 45,000
Novi Limestone 106,000
Penn Limestone 48,000
Wolfcamp Limestone 63,000
Clearfork Dolomite 49,000 to 200,000
Greyburg Dolomite 75,000 to 145,000
Rodessa Hill Dolomite 170,000
San Angelo Dolomite 100,000 to 160,000
Table 2.9: Typical Rock Specific Gravities.
Carbonate
Type
Average
Compressive
Strength (psi)
Average Specific
Gravity
Average Porosity
(%)
Fine grained 11660 2.71 3.4
Med. grained 18480 2.68 4.7
Porous- vugular 19320 2.44 13.9
Chalcedonic 15580 2.60 5.4
Olitic 14420 2.67 1.6
Reef Breccia 4960 2.35 15.0
Table 2.8: Rock Embedment Strengths.
2.4 Run/Performing Calculations 201
Fraction of Non-Reactive Fines
This is the fraction of insoluble material in the carbonate rock that will not react
with the acid. It affects the equivalent etched rock porosity, which is
where
2.4 Run/Performing Calculations
Once all of the required data relevant to the options selected have been entered, it is
time to perform calculations. Up to this point, MFrac has checked the validity of the
data contained in every dialog box opened during the active session; however, since
you are not required to view every data screen sequentially prior to performing cal-
culations, it is possible that some input parameters may not have been checked. To
avoid problems, when the calculation process is initiated, MFrac checks to ensure
that the minimum data requirements are met and that the data entered is within
acceptable limits. This extra level of error checking is designed to prevent calcula-
tion errors due to missing or bad data.
To start the simulation, select the Run command from the Run menu. This will
bring up the Simulation Data window and the Calculation menu bar. During the
simulation, the Simulation Data window and all open plots will be updated to show
the current state of the simulation.
Calculation Menu Bar
Most of the Calculation Menu Bar commands are also in the main menu bar and are
described elsewhere in this guide; however, the commands specific to the Calcula-
tion Menu Bar are described below.
Reef Head 3080 1.79 36.0
Stylolitic 11530 2.73 3.9
equivalent void fraction
void fraction created by reaction
fraction of insoluble fines
Table 2.9: Typical Rock Specific Gravities.
|
e
| 1 | ( )F + =
|
e
=
| =
F =
Stop Menu
The Stop! menu item stops the current simulation. After stopping, a message box
will be displayed to save the simulation results up to the current point. Pressing
Alt+S will also invoke the Stop command.
Simulate Closure
This command is only available in the Replay/Real-time simulation mode. Select-
ing this command will allow MFrac to start simulating closure immediately, ignor-
ing all real-time data beyond the current time step. The utility of this option is to
simulate closure after one stops monitoring real-time data. This is especially true
for fractures which have large closure times (high efficiencies).
Simulation Data Windows
For general information regarding Simulation Data Windows See Simulation Data
Windows on page 67. Below is Simulation Data Window information specific to
MFrac.
The Fracture Characteristics window contains a system of symbols to indicate the
zone status during the simulation. The status legend may be toggled on and off by
right clicking on the window then clicking the Status Legend menu item. The leg-
end appears at the bottom of the window when this option is checked. Table 2.10
contains an explanation of these symbols.
Table 2.10: Simulation Data Screen Symbols.
Symbol Meaning Description
Open The fracture is open and propagating.
Screened-out
The fracture has screened-out at the tip. It can still take
fluid and proppant.
Packed
The fracture is packed all the way to the wellbore. It can-
not accept fluid or proppant.
Closed
The fracture is closed and is not propped. At one time this
fracture was open.
No Frac A fracture was never initiated in this zone.
2.5 Plots - Graphical Presentation 203
2.5 Plots - Graphical Presentation
MFrac provides a vast selection of plots that can be produced to illustrate the simu-
lation results. These plots have all the characteristics of Meyer plots as described in
Chapter 1. This section describes the plotting facilities that are specific to MFrac.
The MFrac plots are grouped into different categories as described below. Plots
from any number of categories may be viewed at the same time. During a simula-
tion, the plots will update after each time step, providing an animated view of the
fracturing process. When not simulating, the plots contain the results of the last
simulation that was saved. It is important to note that changing an input parameter
does not affect a plot until the simulation has been run again. For more information
on running a simulation, see Section 2.4.
Viewing Plots
The plots that are contained in MFrac are divided into categories that can be
accessed by different commands in the Plot menu. The specific plots that are avail-
able will be directly controlled by the options selected in the General, Fracture and
Proppant Options tab dialog boxes for the last saved simulation. For example, if
Heat Transfer is disabled by unselecting it in the General Options screen, these
plots will not be available in the Plot menu.
To Create a Plot:
1. Select Plot from the main menu. The Plot menu appears listing the available
plot groups.
2. Choose from the list of groups. The associated group selection dialog appears
(see Figure 2.63). Groups that are unavailable due to the options selected will
appear dimmed. To obtain these plots you must activate the option and then re-
run the simulation.
3. Select the desired plots by clicking the adjacent check boxes. Use the Select
All button to view all the plots for the group. To disable a plot, click off the
check box or use the Clear All button.
4. If this is a Multilayer case, click on the Multilayer tab at the top of the screen.
Then select the desired layers. More information on Multilayer plots is given
below.
5. Once the desired selections have been made, click OK to view the plots.
Figure 2.63: Plot Selection Dialog Box Example.
Plot Categories
The plots in MFrac are grouped into different categories, each of which are accessi-
ble with the Plot menu. Each category is summarized below.
Fracture Characteristics
These are plots of general fracture characteristics, such as length, height and width.
Some of the plots may be plotted versus time or volume. The volume selection but-
ton is the total slurry volume pumped.
Leakoff/Rheology
These plots display the leakoff rate and fluid rheology as a function of time.
Wellbore Hydraulics
These plots are used to display the results of the wellbore hydraulics model and
real-time pressure matching. The first section of plots are various pressures versus
time. For these plots, there are check boxes for Replay/Real-Time, BH Rate, Sur-
face Rate, BH Concentration and Surface Concentration. Clicking these boxes will
show the corresponding curves on the graph. Clicking the Replay/Real-Time box
shows the corresponding real-time pressure data, if it is available. These can be
used for real-time pressure matching. The Real Calc BHP from Surface plot is a
plot of the calculated BHP from real-time surface data using the wellbore model.
Similarly, the Real Calc Surface from BHP plot is a plot of the calculated surface
pressure from real-time bottomhole data using the wellbore model.
The last two plots correspond to the near wellbore pressures losses and BHP in the
wellbore and fracture for each multilayer.
Diagnostic
The BHP Difference Plot is used for real-time pressure matching. This is the differ-
ence between the measured and simulated BHP.
A number of net pressure plots versus time in linear and log-log coordinates are
provided to represent the familiar net pressure slope as given in the Nolte plots. The
Nolte slope for each fracture is also plotted to give a graphical representation of
height growth, etc.
The measured net pressure plots for real-time or replay analysis are (of course) not
measured values but calculated from the BHTP differences and fracture net pres-
sure:
where
and
= bottomhole treating pressure at the gauge depth
= measured bottomhole treating pressure in frac
= fracture pressure
=
net fracture pressure,
= frictional pressure loss in wellbore and near wellbore
Ap
m
BHTP
m
o =
BHTP
m
p
f
p
f
o ( ) + =
BHTP
m
p
f
Ap
f
+ =
BHTP
m
BHTP Ap
fric
Ap
grav
+ =
BHTP
BHTP
m
p
f
Ap
f
Ap
f
p
f
o =
Ap
fric
Treatment
These plots show the fracture treatment. This category is divided into two parts.
The first section pertains to the surface and bottomhole treatment. The volume,
rate, concentration and mass may be plotted versus time, bottomhole volume or sur-
face volume. Bar charts of surface treatment may also be plotted.
The second section pertains to the treatment of the bottomhole and individual frac-
ture(s). The volume, rate, concentration and mass are plotted versus time or bot-
tomhole volume. The bottomhole stage bar plots show the total bottomhole
treatment and how much went into each individual layer.
Proppant Transport
A variety of plots are available to show the placement of proppant during and at the
end of the simulation.
Acid Transport
The plots contained in this category illustrate the generation of etched fracture
length and conductivity for an acid fracturing stimulation.
Heat Transfer
These plots depict the changes in temperature as a function of time and position in
the fracture as predicted for a particular simulation.
Net Present Value
The conductivity, hydraulic power, liquid volume, slurry volume and proppant con-
centration versus fracture length can be plotted.
Input Treatment Schedule
This is the same plot as the one shown by pressing the Graphical Edit button in the
treatment schedule. It is important to note that this plot always corresponds to the
current input data. When doing a real-time case, the plot will update with each real-
time time step. To graphically edit the treatment schedule, click on the Edit button.
= gravitational head in the wellbore
= measured net fracture pressure
Ap
grav
Ap
m
o
Multilayer Plots
When simulating multiple active layers, it is possible to see the data for each active
layer using the Multilayer Selection box. The different layers will be represented on
the plot legend as configured with the Multilayer legend option.
Multilayer Selection
Any combination of the active layers can be selected for a plot. Selecting the
desired layers is accomplished using the Multilayer dialog box, which is accessible
from the Plot menu, the plot shortcut menu or by clicking on the Multilayer tab in a
plot dialog box. When using the Multilayer tab, the selections will be applied to all
plots started with that dialog box. When using the menu options, you can choose to
apply the selection to just the active plot or to all open plots.
The selection box has a list of all the available active layers. Toggle the selection of
the layers by clicking on them. At least one layer must be selected.
For plots that have a Y axis depth scale, there is another option available when the
depth scales of different layers overlap or are significantly far apart. The choices
are summarized below:
Depth scale is not continuous - When two layers are significantly far apart, a
break in the Y axis will be drawn on the plot. This allows for a more detailed view
of each layer. When two layers are overlapping, no break is drawn and the data for
one layer may be drawn on top of the other.
Each zone always has its own depth scale - Each zone will have its own depth
scale, regardless of any overlapping. This is particularly useful for a horizontal
wellbore where all fractures are around the same TVD. The first layer will always
be at the top of the plot.
Continuous Depth Scale - The depth scale will be continuous, regardless of over-
lapping layers. If the layers are far apart, the larger scale will force the fracture out-
lines to be smaller.
Multilayer Legends
For plots that do not have a depth axis, the legend contains both the name of the
variable and the name of the layer. There are various options which may be config-
For best results use Each zone always has its own depth scale for horizontal
wells and Depth scale is not continuous for vertical wells.
ured in the Legend section of the Plot Configuration box. Consider an example of
a length curve for layer number two (2) named Upper Frac. The following
options, with examples in parenthesis are available:
Layer Number, Variable Name - This is the layer number, followed by the variable
name (i.e., #2 Length).
Layer Name, variable Name - This is the name of the layer followed by the name
of the variable (i.e., Upper Frac Length).
Layer Name only - This is the name of the layer (i.e., Upper Frac). This is useful
for plots of only one variable, for example, length versus time.
Variable Name Only - This is only the variable name (i.e., Length). This is useful if
only one of the active layers is selected for plotting.
There is also an option at the top to Hide Legend when there is only one layer.
This is used to hide the legend when only one layer is plotted, but show the legend
when more than one layer is plotted.
Composite Plots
A number of composite plots are available in MFrac. Composite plots refer to the
configuration of displaying more than one figure in a given plot.
Figure 2.64 illustrates a composite width contour plot that contains the stress, width
and width contours. Figure 2.65 shows a composite plot of the rock properties
table. Similar plots are available for proppant transport display.
Figure 2.64: Composite Plot - Width Contours.
Figure 2.65: Composite Plot - Rock Properties Data.
Multi-Axes Plots
Following are a few examples of Multi-Axes Plots with various options for plot
Layout and configuration.
Figure 2.66: Multi-Axes Plot - BHTP, Rate etc.
Figure 2.67: Multi-Axes Plot - Wellbore Friction & Gravity.
Three-Dimensional Plots
To display a 3D plot select Three-Dimensional from the Plot Menu as shown in
Figure 2.68.
Figure 2.68: Three-Dimensional Plot Menu Selection.
Figure 2.69 displays the dialog menu for creating Three-Dimensional Plots. These
features are mostly related to options for a propped fracture. If acid is selected some
of these items will be dimmed. The dialog menu has options for Plot, Shading,
Show Options, and Titles. This virtual reality plot is saved in a VRML at the loca-
tion shown at the bottom of this menu. In order to view these 3D plots, a VRML
plug-in must be installed with your web browser. You can download the free Cor-
tona VRML plug-in at:
http://www.parallelgraphics.com/products/cortona/
After installing the 3D VRML plug-in you must register the 3D WRL file type gen-
erated by MFrac/MPwri with the web browser so that the browser can find the
plug-in. In the web browser (e.g., Mozilla, Internet Explorer, etc.) go to Folder
Options|File Types and Register the WRL Extension with a web browser (e.g.,
Internet Explorer). After installing the plug-in and registering the WRL file type
you may have to restart your computer.
Figure 2.69: Three-Dimensional Plot Dialog Menu.
Wellbore
Below is a list of options found under the Wellbore section of the Three-Dimen-
sional Plots screen.
Show Wellbore
By checking this option, the wellbore will be included in the 3D plot output.
Parallel to Fractures
For horizontal wells, this option will orient the wellbore parallel to the fractures.
Wellbore Scaling Factor
Since wellbore width is often extremely small compared to fracture height and frac-
ture length, a scaling factor is used when drawing the wellbore. Values to the left
result in a smaller wellbore whereas values to the right result in a larger wellbore.
Three-Dimensional Plot Examples
To illustrate the functionality of the three-dimensional plots a few examples are
presented below. Figure 2.70 shows a single fracture with the Meyer Logo. Figure
2.71 shows a multilayer 3D plot with lithology and wellbore selected. Figure 2.72
shows the 3D plot from the top view.
These 3D plots can be shared with anyone on the Internet. It is not necessary to
have MFrac to view a 3D plot any VRML plug-in (e.g., Cortona) will work.
Figure 2.70: Virtual Reality 3D Plot - Single Fracture.
Figure 2.71: Virtual Reality 3D Plot - Opening View.
Figure 2.72: Virtual Reality 3D Plot - Top View.
2.6 Generating Reports 215
2.6 Generating Reports
After the calculations have been successfully performed, various options are avail-
able for viewing the results and creating reports. Working with reports is the same
in all Meyer programs as described in Chapter 1. The Report can also be saved as
an HTML file.
Figure 2.73 displays the Report Menu for the Multilayer (limited entry) case.
Figure 2.73: Report Menu - Multilayer Case.
Viewing a Report
To see the results of a simulation select View Report from the Report menu. The
Report Generation dialog shown in Figure 2.74 will then be presented with the Full
Report option enabled as a default. The Full Report contains all of the simulation
results corresponding to the options that were selected in the Options dialog boxes.
It contains all of the input data, as well as the calculation solutions.
When it is not necessary to view all of the data, you may select a pre-formatted
Summary Report, with or without input data. These reports summarize the various
solution tables presented in the Full Report. In many cases, average values are pre-
sented together with fracture geometry and proppant transport information at the
end of the treatment simulation. The summary is useful in comparing simulations
and making an overall assessment of a particular design. To acquire specific infor-
mation about the development of a simulation, or to diagnose a potential problem in
a design refer to the Full Report or choose Selected Sections.
Figure 2.74: Report Generation Dialog Box - MFrac.
Choosing the Selected Sections item enables the previously dimmed list con-
tained in the Report Generation dialog. These sections represent the components of
the Full Report and can be selected individually or together as a group. This capa-
bility allows you to view a portion of the complete report without displaying any
undesired information. Once again, some of the sections will remain dimmed
depending on the simulation options that have been used.
If there is more than one active layer, clicking on the Multilayer tab will allow you
to choose which layers to include in the report. Select the desired layers from the
list.
Once the selection(s) are made, the report may be viewed by clicking the OK but-
ton.
Explanation of the Report Output
For reports that have input data, the input data will have the same form as the input
screens. The output data (simulation results) will be presented in a variety of tables,
depending on the options. Tables relating to the wellbore will be first. Then for each
selected layer, the layer name and output tables are given. Each of the output tables
is summarized below:
Treatment Schedule Pumped
This table will have the title Surface Treatment Schedule Pumped or Bottomhole
Treatment Schedule Pumped, depending on the option selected in the treatment
schedule. This table represents what was actually pumped in the simulation. In
most cases it will exactly match the input table.
Wellbore Hydraulics Solution
This table will show Delta P Friction, Delta P Gravity, BHP, Surface Pressure and
Hydraulic Power as a function of time.
Fracture Treatment Schedule
This table displays what was actually pumped into a layer.
Fracture Propagation Solution
This table shows various fracture characteristics as a function of time.
Fracture Wellbore Hydraulics Solution
This table has the wellbore hydraulics output parameters for a given layer as a func-
tion of time.
Proppant Transport Solution
This table shows the propped fracture characteristics as a function of length. The
stage numbers are intermixed with the rows of the table, allowing visualization of
where the stages are within the fracture.
Acid Transport Solution
This table displays the acid concentrations and etched width characteristics as a
function of position.
Acid Schedule Comments
This table shows where the different acid stages are at the end of the treatment.
Summary of Etched Characteristics
This table gives a summary of the etched characteristics.
Fluid Leakoff Output
This table shows the fluid leakoff rate and rheology as a function of time.
Heat Transfer Solution
This table shows the heat transfer solution as a function of time. The output shows
both real temperature and dimensionless temperature versus position. The mixed
mean fracture temperature as a function of time is also tabulated.
Temperature vs. Position (End of Pumping)
Various fracture temperatures versus position and time are tabulated.
Automated NPV Design
The automated NPV design table lists the calculated propped fracture characteris-
tics (e.g., width, conductivity, treatment volumes, etc.) as a function of the created
and propped fracture length.
Proppant Design Summary
This table shows the propped fracture characteristics for the selected layers at the
end of the job and at closure.
Sand Transport Summary Table
This table shows the proppant transport characteristics (properties of each stage) at
the end of the job and at closure.
2.7 Program Databases
To simplify database input, MFrac offers several program databases provided by
numerous industry suppliers. While these databases are offered as an integral part
of the program, Meyer and the database suppliers make no guarantee or expressed
warranty as to their use or accuracy.
Fluid Database
A complete fracturing fluid database and database management system is provided
with MFrac to simplify entry of fluid rheology information. The databases con-
tained in MFrac are comprised of System Databases and a User Database (see
Figure 2.75). The System Databases supplied with MFrac cannot be edited or
2.7 Program Databases 219
changed. This is to prevent users from loosing the original data provided to Meyer
by various participating service companies.
Figure 2.75: Fluid Database Dialog Box.
To use the data from the System Databases, it must first be copied into the User
Database. To do this, select the desired System Database from the list box at the top
of the screen. Next, select a fluid from the System Database list and press the Insert
button located in the center of the dialog box (or double-click on the database
fluid). This action copies the selected fluid data from the System Database to the
User Database. Once a fluid has been inserted, its position relative to the other flu-
ids in the list can be adjusted by using the Up or Down arrow buttons.
Any fluid record contained in the User Database can be edited by selecting the fluid
name and clicking the Edit button or double-clicking on the fluid. A new blank
record can be created with the Add button. Selections may be deleted from the User
Database by clicking the Delete button. To exit the fluid database dialog box, click
on the Done button.
When either the Add button or the Edit button is used to create or edit a fluid, the
screen shown in Figure 2.76 appears permitting the rheology and friction data to be
entered, viewed, modified or plotted. For a new fluid, a blank screen is presented
providing a template for the entry of data.
Figure 2.76: Fluid Database Edit Screen.
Fluid Code and Name
Each database record contains rheological information the program requires for
simulation. The Fluid Code is a unique, seven (7) character name used to identify
the fluid data. Any character may be used for this code; however, by default certain
characters are automatically used to denote specific service company data (e.g., B,
D, H). The Fluid Name is a free format field to describe the fluid composition. The
Fluid Code and Fluid Name appear in the pop-up screen presented when the Fluid
Type field is entered in the Treatment Schedule dialog.
Specific Gravity
The Specific Gravity of the fluid at bottomhole conditions must also be entered for
each fluid in the space provided. The fluid specific gravity is used in the proppant
transport solution and for 3-D fracture propagation solution (energy equation for
height growth) when the fluid gradient is clicked on.
Shear Rate - Viscosity at
The Viscosity @ Shear Rate is used to calculate the apparent viscosity of the fluid
at this shear rate. This apparent viscosity, at the specified shear rate, can be dis-
played by pressing the Viscosity Plot button. The apparent viscosity as a
function of the fluid rheology parameters and shear rate is
where is the consistency index, is the flow behavior index, and is the shear
rate. Clearly, as the shear rate increases the apparent viscosity decreases for
and in the limit as the shear rate approaches zero the apparent viscosity goes to
infinity. Apparent viscosity is not used in the Meyer software calculations. The
apparent Viscosity Plot should only be used for relative comparisons.
Rheology Data
The Rheology Data section found in the database record is used to specify the
and of the fluid system as a function of Time and Temperature. At least two (2)
entries must be made for each temperature to define the properties for a range of
time. Use the Previous << and Next >> buttons to switch between temperatures.
Typical and fluid rheology parameters as a function of time and temperature
are shown in Figure 2.77 and Figure 2.78. Figure 2.79 illustrates the apparent vis-
cosity at a given shear rate as a function of time and temperature.
app
app
k'
n' 1
=
k' n'
n' 1 <
n'
k'
n' k'
Figure 2.77: Flow Behavior Index (n) Plot.
Figure 2.78: Consistency Index (k) Plot.
Figure 2.79: Apparent Viscosity Plot.
Friction Data
In addition to the Rheology Data section, the fluid database also provides a section
containing characteristic friction data for various pipe sizes. This information has
also been provided by the respective service companies. When available, the pres-
sure loss data is entered as a function of the pumping rate and Hydraulic Diameter.
This data is only used when the Wellbore Hydraulics Model Option is selected as
User Database.
Hydraulic Diameter
The hydraulic diameter is defined as:
D
h
4A
P
------- =
where
For a circular pipe,
and
where
For an annulus,
and
where
The program assumes that the data entered is specified as a function of hydraulic
diameter. Data specifically generated for an annular configuration should be input
based on the hydraulic diameter. When simulating annular flow, MFrac calculates
the fluid velocities and uses the appropriate friction data from the database.
hydraulic diameter
cross-sectional area
wetted perimeter
pipe inside diameter
casing inside diameter
tubing outside diameter
D
h
=
A =
P =
A tD
2
4 =
P tD =
D
h
4 tD
2
4 ( )
tD
------------------------- D = =
D =
A t D
2
d
2
( ) 4 =
P tD td + =
D
h
D
2
d
2
D d +
------------------ D d = =
D =
d =
Pressure Loss Table
Up to ten friction tables with corresponding hydraulic diameters can be entered.
The frictional pressure loss as a function of rate is input into the table. The more
rate and pressure loss fields entered the better the interpolation will be. Use the Pre-
vious << and Next >> buttons to access the pressure loss values for additional
hydraulic diameters. After the data is entered, it can be plotted for verification using
the Friction Plot button which is configured in a similar manner to the rheology
plots (see Figure 2.80).
Figure 2.80: Frictional Pressure Loss Plot.
Once the data has been entered, it may be plotted for verification using the various
plot buttons. When plotted, a curve is generated through the data points using a
cubic spline fit. The spline fitting function may be disabled by clearing the check
box found at the bottom of the plot dialog.
After creating a plot, the plot attributes can be changed by selecting the Plot Con-
figuration button, located on the bottom of the screen. To generate a hard copy,
click the Print button located on the tool bar. This plot can be zoomed like other
Meyer plots; however, to zoom out you must click the Zoom out button or press
F5.
Proppant Database
To characterize the many different proppants available in the industry, various
proppant suppliers have provided us with their databases.
To enter the Proppant Database select the Proppant Database command from the
Database menu. The first screen presented is the Proppant List dialog shown in
Figure 2.81. Just like in the Fluid database, a User Database can be built by copying
proppants from the programs System Databases. The System Databases contain
data supplied by most of the major proppant manufacturers and suppliers. Once
proppants have been copied from the System Database, they can be repositioned by
using the Up and Down buttons. You can Edit a record, Delete a record, Copy a
record or Add a new record to the list by choosing the appropriate button. To exit
the proppant database dialog box, click on the Close button.
Figure 2.81: Proppant Database Dialog Box.
Proppant Database Parameters
When the Edit button is selected, the proppant data screen appears as shown in Fig-
ure 2.82. The screen displays a proppants database record. The Proppant Code is
a unique, seven (7) character identifier, used in the Treatment Schedule to indicate
which proppant data to use in the simulation. The Description of the proppant is
displayed with the Proppant Code in the report for all proppants used.
Figure 2.82: Proppant Database Edit Screen.
For each proppant entry in the database, specific information is required. A descrip-
tion of these properties is given below.
Specific Gravity
This is the ratio of the proppant density to the density of water. The specific gravity
of a proppant is based on the grain density, not the bulk density of the proppant.
Typical values are shown in Table 2.11.
Table 2.11: Specific Gravity of Proppants.
Proppant Type Specific
Gravity
Absolute
Density
(lbm/ft
3
)
Absolute
Density
(kg/m
3
)
Resin Coated Sand 2.55 159.2 2550
Sand 2.65 165.4 2650
The proppant Specific Gravity is used in the calculation of the proppant settling
velocity, as well as the pipe frictional, gravitational and perforation pressure losses.
Average Diameter
This is a weighted average value as determined from a sieve analysis according to
API standards. It is used to determine the proppant settling velocity, propped frac-
ture width, monolayer criteria and as a reference value for bridge-out determina-
tions. Bridging-out is assumed to occur if the average fracture width integrated
over the fracture height is less than the value entered for the No. of Prop Layers to
Prevent Bridging.
Concentration List
The Concentration list on the left contains concentration (per area) values. Each
concentration is associated with a proppant data table on the right. That is, for each
concentration, at least one closure pressure, and other associated values, must be
entered in the proppant data table. The concentrations must be greater than zero.
The + and - buttons under the concentration list are used to add and remove entries,
respectively.
Proppant Data Table
The proppant data table associates permeability, width, conductivity, porosity, and
(if embedment is enabled) embedment concentration with closure pressure.
The proppant data table can be sorted by column by clicking on one of the fixed
column headings.
Calculations within the proppant data table are performed according to the follow-
ing equation:
where
= porosity,
ISP-Lightweight 2.72 169.8 2720
Intermediate Strength 3.15 196.6 3150
Sintered Bauxite 3.70 231.0 3700
| 1
C
a
C
ae
w
--------------------- =
|
= concentration (per area),
= embedment concentration (per area),
= proppant particle density, and
= measured width.
This mass balance equation provides limits to the valid range of values of the vari-
ous parameters in the table. Values in the table that are not valid will be displayed in
a bold/red font. A parameter value will not be recalculated if the value used in the
calculation is not valid.
The Fracture and proppant transport models compute property values associated
with a specific closure pressure and concentration (per area), first by linearly inter-
polating table values by closure pressure, then by concentration. If a closure pres-
sure is beyond the minimum and maximum closure pressures in the table the
associated values of the minimum (or maximum) will be used.
Permeability
This is the proppant pack permeability at specified concentrations as a function of
Closure Pressure. The fracture permeability is assumed to vary with concentration
and closure pressure throughout the fracture. The proppant transport model elemen-
tally tracks the proppant displacement and calculates the effective propped width
and height as a function of position in the fracture. The variation of fracture con-
ductivity with position is then used to calculate an equivalent dimensionless frac-
ture conductivity at the start of pseudo-radial flow in the specific pay zone. For
concentrations beyond the those listed, the permeability is assumed to be con-
stant.(i.e. equal to the permeability computed for the minimum or maximum con-
centration listed)
Width
This is the propped fracture width. The fracture model linearly interpolates the
propped width based on the closure pressure and concentration (per area). For con-
centrations beyond the those listed, the width is linearly extrapolated assuming a
constant porosity and embedment concentration.
Conductivity
This is the fracture conductivity. Conductivity values in the table will be calculated
by multiplying permeability times width. Entering a value for conductivity will
cause the permeability to be recalculated.
C
a
C
ae
w
Porosity
This is defined as the void fraction between sand grains (i.e., liquid volume to
slurry ratio of the settled bank). The porosity values in the table will be calculated
based on the equation presented above. Entering porosity values will caused the
embedment concentration to be recalculated if embedment is enabled, otherwise
the width will be recalculated. Typical proppant porosity values for low closure
stresses are shown in Table 2.12.
Embedment Concentration
This is the concentration (per area) of the proppant that is embedded into the forma-
tion. If the Enable Embedment box is checked, values enter in the embedment
concentration column of the table will be used to calculate values of porosity. If the
box is not checked, then the embedment concentration will be assumed to be zero
for all of the proppant data tables.
Proppant Database Plots
The proppant database plots can be viewed by clicking the Plots button on the
proppant database editor screen, shown in Figure 2.82. The screen has three tab
pages as described below.
Closure Pressures Selection
The first page, the Closure Pressures page, (Figure 2.83) is used to specify the clo-
sure pressures at which the permeability (or conductivity) and porosity versus con-
centration plots are evaluated.
After specifying up to ten (10) closure pressures, choose the Plot versus Concen-
tration tab. The plot on this page shows how the simulator interprets the proppant
data for each closure pressure. See Closure Pressure on Proppant on page 194.
Table 2.12: Porosity of Proppants
Mesh Size Sphericity Porosity
(fraction)
6-8 angular 0.36
10-20 angular 0.36
10-20 round 0.32
20-40 round 0.35
40-60 round 0.32
Figure 2.83: Proppant Closure Pressure Selection Screen
Plot versus Concentration
This page plots curves based on the list of closure pressures on the previous page.
By default, the permeability is plotted versus concentration (per area). There are
three options: (1) plot porosity curves; (2) plot conductivity instead of permeability;
and (3) include the proppant code in the plots title. (see Figure 2.84)
Figure 2.84: Proppant Plot vs. Concentration
Plot versus Closure Pressure
This page plots curves based on the list of concentrations on the editor screen. By
default, the permeability is plotted versus closure pressure. There are three options:
(1) plot porosity curves; (2) plot conductivity instead of permeability; and (3)
include the proppant code in the plots title. (see Figure 2.85)

Figure 2.85: Proppant Plot vs. Closure Pressure
Non-Darcy Database
To enter the Non-Darcy Database select the Non-Darcy Database command from
the Database menu. The first screen presented is the Non-Darcy List dialog shown
in Figure 2.86. Just like in the Fluid database, a User Database can be built by copy-
ing non-Darcy beta correlations from the programs System Database. The System
Database contains correlations for the beta factor as used in the petroleum industry.
Once beta correlations have been copied from the System Database, they can be
repositioned by using the Up and Down buttons. You can Edit a record, Delete a
record, Copy a record or Add a new record to the list by choosing the appropriate
button. To exit the non-Darcy database dialog box, click on the Close button.
(Note: This Non-Darcy database is also used in MProd.)
Figure 2.86: Non-Darcy Database Dialog Box.
Non-Darcy Database Parameters
When the Edit button is selected, the non-Darcy proppant data screen appears as
shown in Figure 2.87. The screen displays a non-Darcy database record. The Refer-
ence Code is a unique, seven (7) character identifier, used to indicate which beta
correlation to use in the simulation. The Description of the Non-Darcy Equation is
displayed with the Reference Code in the report for correlation selected.
Figure 2.87: Non-Darcy Database Edit Screen.
where , , and are the input constants. The coefficient has units consistent
with the permeability power constant, , and the units for permeability. The power
coefficients , and are dimensionless.
Acid Database
An acid fracturing database and database management system is provided with
MFrac to simplify entry of acid information. The databases contained in MFrac are
comprised of System Databases and a User Database (see Figure 2.88). The Sys-
tem Databases supplied with MFrac cannot be edited or changed. This is to prevent
users from loosing the original data provided to Meyer by various participating ser-
vice companies.
k
f
|
|
a
k
f
b
|
c
----------- =
a b c a
b
b c
An Acid Fracturing Database is included to describe the rock/acid physical charac-
teristics and mass transfer mechanisms. The objective of the Acid Frac Database is
to simplify the manner in which specific data is entered in the program to describe
physical processes. In this particular case, it is the thermodynamic and mass diffu-
sion relationships used to characterize the reaction between acid and rock.
Figure 2.88: Acid Frac Database.
To use the data from the System Databases, it must first be copied into the User
Database. To do this, select the desired System Database from the list box at the top
of the screen. Next, select an acid/rock system from the System Database list and
press the Insert button located in the center of the dialog box (or double-click on
the database fluid). This action copies the selected acid/rock data from the System
Database to the User Database. Once an acid/rock has been inserted, its position
relative to the other acids in the list can be adjusted by using the Up or Down arrow
buttons.
Any acid record contained in the User Database can be edited by selecting the acid
name and clicking the Edit button or double-clicking on the acid. A new blank
record can be created with the Add button. Selections may be deleted from the User
Database by clicking the Delete button. To exit the acid database dialog box, click
on the Close button.
When either the Add button or the Edit button is used to create or edit an acid/rock
system, the screen shown in Figure 2.89 appears permitting the acid/rock data to be
entered, viewed or modified. For a new acid, a blank screen is presented providing
a template for the entry of data.
Figure 2.89: Acid Database Edit Screen.
Like all of the databases, the Acid Frac Database is accessible from the program
Database menu and the Treatment Schedule.
Description of the Acid Database Parameters
The Reference Code is the identifier used in the Treatment Schedule to indicate
which Rock/Acid System data to use in the simulation. This code must be a unique
string of five (5) characters or less. Each Reference Code can be associated with a
Rock/Acid System description to define the content of the record. This information
is only used for reference and for future selection. The Reference Code and the
description are displayed in the pop-up which appears whenever the cursor enters
the Rock/Acid System column in the Treatment Schedule.
Along with the information described above, each entry must have the following
Characterization Parameters:
Acid Specific Gravity
Enter the specific gravity of the base acid extrapolated to a concentration of 100%
(Note: A 100% acid concentration does not exist. This information is only used for
volumetric conservation.). For 100% HCl (hydrogen chloride) use a specific grav-
ity of 1.5. This value is used to determine the specific gravity of the dilute acid mix-
ture as demonstrated in the following expression:
where
Heat of Reaction
The heat generated from the reaction of the acid with the rock has an effect on the
temperature in the fracture and, therefore, on the acid spending rate. The heat of
reaction is the associated energy per unit mass of acid that reacts.
Acid Molecular Weight
This is the molecular weight of the base acid used. The molecular weight or atomic
weight of HCl is 36.465 (H = 1.008, Cl = 35.457).
Dissolving Power
The governing acid transport relationship used by MFrac based on the rate of cre-
ation of volume (R.O.C Volume) is as follows:
where
specific gravity of the mixture
specific gravity of acid (1.5)
specific gravity of the solvent (i.e., water)
concentration of the base acid
total volume loss per unit area per unit time
leakoff in the carbonate
leakoff in the non-carbonate
leakoff due to worm holes
change in volume due to diffusion
mixture

acid
C
acid

solvent
1 C
acid
( ) + =
mixture
=
acid
=
solvent =
C
acid
=
V
2v
yl
l
2v
yp
1
l
( )
fl
V
2V
l
2V

l
+ + + =
V
=
2v
yl
l
=
2v
yp
1
l
( )
fl
=
V
=
2V
l
=
Because the internal acid fracturing calculations are based on the rate of creation of
mass (rather than volume), it is necessary to convert the entered volumes to an
equivalent mass. The dissolving power facilitates this conversion. It is the mass of
rock dissolved divided by the mass of acid used (mass of rock/mass of acid).
Reaction Order and Reaction Rate Coefficients
When an acid comes in contact with rock, the rate of reaction can be described by
the following equation:
where
The Reaction Order represents the variation in reaction kinetics as a function of
acid concentration. The Reaction Rate Coefficient is a measure of the reactivity of
the acid/rock combination at one specific temperature. Both of these values are
determined experimentally by measuring the acid or product concentrations as a
function of time while controlling the environmental conditions of a specimen. A
log-log plot of the flux versus the concentration at the wall, , theoretically yields
a straight line with the slope equal to the reaction order, , and the intercept equal
to . It is generally accepted that the reactivity (i.e., reaction rate coefficient)
will increase exponentially with temperature according to the Arrhenius equation
shown below:
where
change in volume due to the reaction products
flux or reaction rate (g-mole/cm
2
sec)
reaction rate coefficient (units depend on n)
acid concentration at the fracture surface
reaction order (dimensionless)
adjusted reaction rate coefficient at
reaction rate coefficient at the reference temperature,
activation energy, cal/g-mole
gas law constant, 1.987 cal/g-mole
2V

l
=
V k C
s
( )
n
=
V =
K =
C
s
=
n =
C
s
n
K ( ) ln
K
T
'
K
T
o
'
E
a
R
------
1
T
o
-----
1
T
---
\ .
| |
exp =
K
T
'
= T
K
T
o
'
=
T
o
E
a
=
R =
If the reaction rate coefficient is determined for a series of temperatures, then a log-
log plot of vs. will produce a straight line with slope equal to and the
inverse log of the intercept equal to . The Activation Energy, , and the Ref-
erence Temperature, , therefore, are input in order to provide a basis for adjust-
ing the reaction rate for variation in temperature.
Standard reaction parameter units are used throughout MFrac. The required unit for
the reaction rate coefficient is (g-mole/cc)
1-n
-cm/sec. The units for the Activation
Energy and Reference Temperature are Kcal/g-mole and degrees Kelvin, respec-
tively.
Diffusivity
The ability to quantify the total mass transfer in the system is directly related to the
ability to characterize the diffusivity (diffusion coefficient). Normally in acid frac-
turing, when laminar flow exists, the diffusivity is equal to the molecular diffusion.
When turbulence is encountered diffusion typically increases. Unfortunately, diffu-
sivity, as it relates to acid fracturing, has historically been difficult to measure in the
laboratory. There are currently several organizations investigating new methods for
characterizing acid diffusion.
The mass transfer coefficient is calculated from the Sherwood number, :
where is the mass transfer coefficient, is the fracture width and is the dif-
fusivity. Notice the similarity to the Nusselt number.
Just like the reactive rate coefficient, the diffusion coefficient also varies as func-
tion of temperature according to the Arrhenius equation. The following formulation
is used:
where
diffusivity at temperature
diffusivity at the reference temperature,
K
T
'
1 T E
a
R
K
T
0
'
E
a
T
o
N
sh
N
sh
K
g
W
D
----------- =
K
g
W D
D
T
D
T
o
E
D
R
-------
1
T
o
-----
1
T
---
\ .
| |
exp =
D
T
= T
D
T
o
=
T
o
A separate Activation Energy, , and the Reference Temperature, , as they
relate to diffusion are required to characterize the effect of temperature on the diffu-
sivity. Using this relationship, the acid transport model can be coupled to the heat
transfer solution. The result is a fully coupled approach for determining mass trans-
port as a function of temperature.
The required units for the Diffusivity are cm
2
/sec. Like the Reactive Rate Coeffi-
cient, the associated Activation Energy must be input in Kcal/g-mole and the Ref-
erence Temperature entered in degrees Kelvin.
Casing and Tubing Databases
To aid in defining the wellbore configuration, Casing, Tubing and Coiled Tubing
databases are provided. These are tables with three columns: OD (outer diameter),
Weight and ID (inner diameter). The Weight is never used by MFrac; it is only pro-
vided as a reference. Many common pipe measurements have been provided. You
may add, modify or delete rows in the table as you would in any other Meyer table.
When finished editing the database, click on the OK button.
Figure 2.90 illustrates the tubing database dialog.
activation energy for diffusion, cal/g-mole
gas law constant, 1.987 cal/g-mole
E
D
=
R =
E
D
T
o
Figure 2.90: Tubing Database.
Rock Properties Database
To aid in inputting rock property data a Rock Properties Database has been pro-
vided. Figure 2.91 shows the rock properties database table. The database table
includes a lithology symbol, zone name, stress gradient, Youngs Modulus, Pois-
sons Ratio, fracture toughness, and critical stress.
You may add, modify or delete rows in the table as you would in any other Meyer
table. When finished editing the database, click on the OK button.
2.8 Tools 243
Figure 2.91: Rock Properties Database Screen.
Lithology symbols can be added by placing the mouse cursor to the left of the Zone
Name and double clicking the left mouse button. The Rock Database is accessible
from the Rock Properties dialog box by selecting Insert from Database icon.
2.8 Tools
The Tools menu provides the user with options and analytical tools for calculating
or determining scientific parameters. Currently, all applications have a Tool
Spreadsheet option that allows the user to customize the spreadsheet. MFrac and
MProd also have a Proppant Calculator for determining the proppant permeability
and beta factor based on proppant properties.
Proppant Calculator
The Proppant Calculator Dialog screen displayed in Figure 2.92 allows the user to
calculate the theoretical proppant permeability and non-Darcy beta factor.
Figure 2.92: Proppant Calculator - Data Input Screen
Beta Correlation
tion
2
,
cm
-1
, ft
-1
, atm-s
2
Darcy flow describes the flow regime that does not obey Darcys law. Holdith
[1976] reports that the original form of the second term on the right hand side of
Eq. by Forchheimer was which was replaced by Cornell and Katz [1953] by
the product of the fluid density, , and the factor.

x d
d
p ( )

k
f
----u | u
2
( ) + =
k
f
L
2
| | L
1
au
2
|
k
f
|
2.8 Tools 245
are provided in the database.
Proppant Property Data
Following is a list of the proppant property data that is required to calculate the
proppant permeability and Non-Darcy beta factor:
Proppant Porosity
slurry ratio of the settled bank). It is used to calculate the propped fracture permea-
bility. Typical values of porosity for proppants are shown in Table 2.13.
Proppant Diameter
This is a weighted average value as determined from a sieve analysis according to
API standards. It is used in calculating the theoretical proppant permeability.
Sphericity
Sphericity is a measure of how spherical (round) an object is. The sphericity, , is
defined as
(fraction)
6-8 angular 0.36
10-20 angular 0.36
10-20 round 0.32
20-40 round 0.35
40-60 round 0.32
|
a
k
f
b
|
c
----------- =
a b c S
w
|
e
| 1 S
w
( ) =
u
s
where
Typical values of Sphericity for various shapes are shown in Table 2.13.
Specific Gravity
= specific surface area of a particle
= particle volume
= particle surface area
= characteristic diameter of the particle
Table 2.14: Sphericity of Common Objects
Object
Sphericity,
tetrahedron 0.671
cube 0.806
dodecahedron 0.910
half-sphere 0.840
sphere 1.0
Gravity
Absolute
Density
(lbm/ft
3
)
Absolute
Density
(kg/m
3
)
Sand 2.65 165.4 2650
u
s
6
d
p
a
s
----------
6V
p
d
p
S
p
----------- =
a
s
V
p
S
p
d
p
u
s
2.8 Tools 247
The proppant Specific Gravity is used in the calculation of the proppant density.
Concentration/Area and Propped Width
This is the effective concentration per unit area in the fracture. The concentration
per unit area, , as a function of the proppant porosity, , proppant specific grav-
ity, , and propped fracture width, , is given by
where is the reference density of water at (i.e., or ).
The propped fracture width in terms of the concentration per unit area is
The proppant damage factor is defined as
where
The permeability in the fracture is used to determine the fracture conductivity
and dimensionless fracture conductivity as given by
Calculated Fracture Permeability
The theoretical fracture permeability, , is calculated in terms of the proppant
diameter, , porosity, , proppant sphericity, , propped fracture width, ,and
damage factor, , from the equation given below

= fracture permeability
= proppant permeability (undamaged or theoretical)
C
a
|
w
f
C
a

o
1 | ( )w
f
=
o
4 C 62.43 lbm ft
3
1g cm
3
w
f
C
a

o
1 | ( ) | | =
DF 1 k
f
k =
k
f
k
DF
k
f
k
f
k 1 DF ( ) =
k
f
d
p
| u
s
w
f
DF
k
f
|
3
d
p
u
s
( )
2
72
m
1 | ( )
2
-------------------------------- 1
d
p
u
s
3 1 | ( )w
f
-------------------------- +
\ .
| |
2
1 DF ( ) =
where for . The permeability for open slot flow (i.e., no packing
in a slot as ) is
where (see Bird [1960]).
Beta
The Beta factor is calculated from the proppant property data and selected beta cor-
relation. The generalized correlation for the beta factor in terms of the fracture per-
meability and porosity is of the form
2.9 References
1. Virk, P.S.: Drag Reduction Fundamentals, AIChE Journal, Vol. 21, No. 4,
July 1975.
2. Keck, R. et al.: A New Method for Predicting Friction Pressures and Rheol-
ogy of Proppant Laden Fracturing Fluids, SPE Production Engineering, Feb.
1992.
3. Schlichting, H., Boundary Layer Theory, McGraw-Hill, NY (1955).
4. Meyer, B.R.: Design Formulae for 2-D and 3-D Vertical Hydraulic Fractures:
Model Comparison and Parametric Studies, paper SPE 15240, May 1986.
5. Hudson, P. J. and Matson, R.: Fracturing Horizontal Wells, presented at the
54th Annual SPE Technical Conf., Midland, TX, Sept. 1992.
6. Huit, J.K.: Fluid Flow in Simulated Fractures, AIChE Journal, Vol. 2, p 259.
1956.
m
25 12 ~ | 0.5 <
| 1
k
f
w
f
2
12
------ 1 DF ( ) =
m
3 2 =
k
f
|
|
a
k
f
b
|
c
----------- =
a b c S
w
|
e
| 1 S
w
( ) =
2.9 References 249
7. Louis, C.: Etude des coulements d'eau dans les roches fissures et leurs
influence sur la stabilit des massifs rocheux, Bull. de la Direction des Etudes
et Recherches, Series A, No. 3, p. 5-132, 1968.
8. Warpinski, N.R.: Measurment of Width and Pressure in a propagating
Hydraulic Fracture, SPEJ (Feb. 1985) pp 46-84.
9. Bird, R.B, Stewart, W.E., Lightfoot, E.N., Transport Phenomena, J. Wiley &
Sons Inc., NY, 1965, page 204.
10. Meyer, B.R.: Generalized Drag Coefficients Applicable for All Flow
Regimes, OGJ, 1986.
11. Slatery, J.C., doctoral thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1959.
12. Shah, S.N.: Proppant Settling Correlation for Non-Newtonian Fluids Under
Static & Dynamic Conditions, paper SPE 9330, 1980.
13. van Eekelen, H.A.: Hydraulic Fracture Geometry: Fracture Containment in
Layered Formations, SPEJ (June 1982) pp 341-349.
14. Thiercelin, M.: Fracture Toughness and Hydraulic Fracturing, Int. J. Rock
Mech. & Geomechanics, vol 26, No3/4, pp 177-183, 1989.
15. Meyer, B.R.: Three-Dimensional Hydraulic Fracturing Simulation on Per-
sonal Computers: Theory and Comparison Studies, paper SPE 19329, Oct.,
1989.
16. Nierode, D.E. and Kruk, K.F.: An Evaluation of Acid Fluid Loss Additives,
Retarded Acids, and Acidized Fracture Conductivity, paper SPE 4549, Sept./
Oct., 1973.
17. Cramer, D.D.: The Application of Limited-Entry Techniques in Massive
Hydraulic Fracturing Treatments, presented at the SPE Production Operations
Symposium, Oklahoma City, OK, March 1987.
18. El-Rabaa, A.M., Shah, S.N., and Lord, D.L.: New Perforation Pressure Loss
Correlations for Limited Entry Fracturing Treatments, presented at the SPE
Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, Casper, WY, May 1997.
Chapter 3
MView
Acquired Data Visualization
3.1 Introduction
This chapter is a guide to the use of MView. Developed as a data handling system
and display module for real-time hydraulic fracturing; this software is intended for
use with MFrac (a hydraulic fracturing design simulator) and MinFrac (a minifrac
analysis simulator), but can also be used as a general data collection and display
program. This chapter explains the basic procedures for using MView.
MView is a data handling system and display module for the real-time and replay
analysis of hydraulic fracture treatments and minifrac analysis. MView can accom-
modate up to two hundred (200) data channels and simultaneously allows selection
of up to two hundred (200) parameters for processing. A channel can also be speci-
fied for Multi-parameters (e.g., channel C can be assigned to more than one param-
eter.).
MView can process a maximum of 1,209,600 lines of data, but can read or import
virtually an unlimited number of lines of data (limited only by memory) from a file.
If there are more than 1,209,600 lines of data in a file, it will be necessary to adjust
the Sample every box so that 1,209,600 lines or less of data are actually used for
the analyses. For example, if a data file has 1,700,000 lines of data, it would be nec-
essary to set the Sample every box to 20 or higher, or select a range of data (start
row to end row) with less than or equal to 1,209,600 rows of data. This is discussed
below in the Data Set dialog.
All data manipulation in MView is done through the use of data sets. A data set is a
group of related data that may come from a text file, an MFrac file (.mfrac), an
MPwri file (.mpwri) or real-time data from the serial port.
Each data set may have up to two hundred (200) different parameters. A maximum
of five data sets may be used at a time. All data sets share the same list of parameter
252 MView: Acquired Data Visualization
names, which includes unit types (length, rate) and units (ft, bpm). There are many
functions available for processing the data sets. Data sets may be edited or saved as
text files. In addition, any number of data sets can be merged into a single file with
a single time scale and any number of them can be plotted together.
The first step in using MView is to specify the parameter names, types and units by
accessing the Parameters dialog box from the main menu.
Once a group of parameters has been specified, go to the Data menu and select
Data Sets. To import a data file into an MView data set, specify the file name and
format of its contents. The contents are defined by associating a parameter with a
channel (or column) of data in the file.
MView provides a means of sharing the real-time or replay data set with MFrac and
MinFrac for use as simulation input. This data can include the parameters: pump
rate, bottomhole and surface pressure, proppant concentration, and nitrogen or CO
2
injection rate. Sharing a data set with MFrac and MinFrac can be done after the data
sets are setup by choosing Simulation Setup from the Simulation menu.
It is important to realize that MFrac, MinFrac and MView are always in constant
communication with one another. When these programs are open, they automati-
cally share any Real-Time or Replay data set.
After data has been imported into MView, it is possible to construct composite plots,
by choosing the Build Plot command from the Plot menu. This command will dis-
play all of the data that has been imported and allow a choice of which parameters
to include in a plot. MView allows the construction of up to six plots for simultane-
ous display.
After the plots have been built, they can be viewed by selecting the View Plot com-
mand from the Plot menu. Whenever a plot is open, all the standard configuration
and exporting functions of all Meyer plots are available. In addition, MView allows
manipulation of the data contained in the plot using statistical and editing functions.
This is described in Section 3.6 Creating Plots- Graphically Editing Data.
An outline of the basic steps for using MView is shown in Table 3.1.
It is important to realize that MFrac, MinFrac, and MView are always in con-
stant communication with one another. When these programs are open, they
automatically share any replay/real-time data set.
3.2 Parameters 253
Menu
The MView menu bar is shown in Figure 3.1. Generally, the menus are accessed
from left to right as shown in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1: MView Main Menu.
3.2 Parameters
The first step in using MView is to create a list of the parameters to include in the
analysis.
Table 3.1: MView Basic Steps
Step Program Area
1. Open an existing MView data file (*.mview) or
create a new data file
File Menu
2. Specify Parameters Parameters Menu
3. Import Data into Data Sets
4. Specify data files
5. Associate columns of the file with parameters
Data Sets command from the
Data Menu
6. Start the Acquisition Toolbar (for real-time
data)
7. Specify the Acquisition Output File
8. Setup the Communications Parameters
9. Start Data Acquisition
10. Real-Time Data Window
Real-Time|Acquisition Tool Bar
MACQ (data file)
Setup
MACQ -Start button
MView - Real-Time Menu
11. Send real-time/replay data to MFrac and/or
MinFrac
Simulation Menu
12. Build Plots Plot Menu
13. View Plots Plot Menu
14. Simulate in MFrac and/or MinFrac MFrac and/or MinFrac
Creating a Parameter List
Generating a parameter list means cataloging the different parameters to be
included in the analysis. Therefore, any parameter to be imported from either the
acquired data, simulated data or any text file, must be in the parameter list. MView
will display data using the selected units of the parameter list.
To create a list of parameters, choose Parameters from the Main menu. This will
display the screen shown in Figure 3.2.
Figure 3.2: Parameters Dialog Box.
To Specify a Parameter:
1. Enter a descriptive name in the text box under the Parameters column.
3.2 Parameters 255
2. Select a corresponding Unit Type for the parameter using the list box provided
to the right of each Parameter Name. If the desired unit type is not present in
the list, choose No Units.
3. After the Unit Type has been selected, a list of the available units correspond-
ing to the Unit Type will be in the adjacent Output Unit list box. Choose the
desired unit.
4. Repeat this process for each Parameter Name.
To Reset the Parameters:
1. Press the Reset button located at the bottom of the Parameters screen.
2. This will set all of the Parameter Names to blank, the Unit Type to No Units,
and the Output Unit list box to blank.
Using Parameter List Templates
The current set of parameters can be saved for future recall. This is useful when
working with frequently used configurations in order to avoid creating the same list
repeatedly.
To Save a Parameters Template:
1. Enter a unique name in the Unit Set Description box located at the top of the
Parameters screen.
2. Click the Save button located in the lower left corner of the Parameters screen.
This will display the Save As screen.
3. Enter a name for the file in the space provided and click OK. By default,
parameter files contain the extension mvu (e.g., default.mvu).
Once saved, a set of parameters can be recalled and applied to an MView session by
using the Load Units button.
To Apply a Parameters Template:
1. Open the Parameters screen from the main menu and click the Load button
located in the lower left corner. This will display the Open screen.
2. Browse to select the saved parameters file containing the extension mvu.
3. After selecting the template file, click the OK button.
3.3 Data
A key aspect in the analysis of fracturing data is the manner in which data files of
various types are accessed, viewed and edited. This chapter outlines the data han-
dling capabilities of MView and provides instructions for importing and manipulat-
ing data sets.
Data Sets
The Data Sets dialog box is used to import data from files for display or use in a
simulation (Figure 3.3). Up to five different data files can be imported for simulta-
neous display. The first of these data sets may be setup as a real-time or replay file
to be used as input for an MFrac and/or MinFrac simulation. This file may be either
a real-time file that is transmitted to MView or it can be an acquired data set that
was provided by a service company after the treatment was performed (i.e.,
Replay). The remaining four data sets (A, B, C, and D in Figure 3.3) may be either
text files (delimited with commas, spaces or tabs), or MFrac or MPwri output files
(with the extension mfrac or mpwri, e.g., Samplefile.mfrac).
To import a data file into a data set, choose the desired data set by clicking the cor-
responding tab in the Data Sets box (e.g., Real-Time/Replay, Data Set A). Notice
that a Reference Name can be entered for each data set (e.g., Design). The Refer-
ence Name is used as the data sets unique identifier and is displayed on each data
set tab.
Figure 3.3: Data Sets Dialog Box.
For details on importing data files, refer to the instructions below that correspond to
the data file type.
3.3 Data 257
Importing Real-Time Data
To Import Real-Time Data:
1. Connect your computer to a data acquisition system that is capable of transmit-
ting data through a serial connection (e.g., RS232). Instructions for setting-up
and controlling the flow of real-time data is covered in Section 3.4, Real-Time
Menu. The real-time data set may be set up before or after the data is flowing.
2. Open the Data Sets dialog box by selecting Data Sets from the Data menu and
click on the left-most tab. Then click on the Real-Time radio button located
near the center of the screen (Figure 3.3).
3. Enter a descriptive Reference Name in the space provided.
4. Click on the Setup button and follow the instructions below for Setting up a
Text File.
Importing a Replay Data File
To Import a Replay Data File:
1. Open the Data Sets dialog box, by selecting Data Sets from the Data menu and
click on the left-most tab. Then click on the Replay radio button located near
the center of the screen (Figure 3.3).
2. Enter a Reference Name in the space provided.
3. Be sure to click on the Data File check box which is used to enable or disable a
file setup from the active session. When the box is checked, the data set is
used. When it is cleared, the data set is omitted from all plots.
4. After checking the Data File box, click on the Ellipses (Select File button). A
file browse dialog box will then be displayed. Select the desired file and click
OK.
MView and MACQ no longer support the unconventional time format of Hours
Minutes Seconds format (HH MM SS) separated by spaces. The standard format
is Hours Minutes Seconds separated by colons (HH:MM:SS). If you have a data
file with time in the format (HH MM SS) separated by spaces you can import the
file into Excel or other spreadsheet program, separate the columns by colons,
and save the new format. If real time data is being sent in a time format sepa-
rated by spaces, in MACQ under Acquisition Setup check the Time Box to Add
the computers time to the start of each data line.
5. Click on the Setup button and follow the instructions below for Setting up a
Text File.
Importing data from a Text File
The procedure for importing data from a text file is the same as importing a replay
data file; the only difference is that data files imported from a data set tab other than
the first tab cannot be used to export simulation data to other applications. UTF-8
and UTF-16 encoded text files are supported provided they contain a byte order
mark (BOM).
Setup
Once the data source has been defined and the Setup button has been clicked,
MView will display the Data File setup screen (Figure 3.4).
The bottom-left side of the screen has the list of Parameters, the top has a spread-
sheet that contains the data from the data file. Each column of data displayed in the
spreadsheet is labeled with a column letter. The primary purpose of the Setup
screen is to associate these columns with a parameter name and unit type. The
Parameter names are those that are entered in the Parameters screen.
Note that text files and real-time data must contain data lines delimited with
either tabs, spaces, or commas. When reading a data file, MView will interpret
and display these delimiters as column breaks. If the data file contains text head-
ers, we recommend that you use single word phrases. This will keep the headers
aligned properly with the correct column of data. If you must use more than one
word, try hyphenating the words to prevent unwanted column breaks (e.g., Sur-
face-Pressure).
3.3 Data 259
Figure 3.4: Data Setup Dialog Box.
To Associate Column Data with a Parameter:
1. Enter the column letter or a formula of column letters (see the explanation
below) in the corresponding Formula field, to the right of the Parameter
name. Alternatively, click and drag the column letter from the spreadsheet to
the desired column box. If there are no Parameter names displayed, close the
dialog box and return to the Parameters screen to set up parameters.
2. Choose the appropriate input unit for the parameter from the drop-down list in
Unit field. Note that this is the unit of the data in the spreadsheet, it may not
necessarily be the same unit as specified in the Parameters screen. Thus, it is
possible to have different input and output units. If the column is a time col-
umn with the format HH:MM:SS, choose the input unit that the shift and filter
values (and formulas for other parameters) will use.
3. Data may be shifted in order to superimpose data trends during analysis or to
synchronize events. Any parameter may be shifted by selecting the Shift Value
field and entering a value for the shift. The shift value will be added to the
value in the data file. Graphical shifts can also be performed on a plot when it
is displayed.
4. To filter out unreasonable parameter values, specify Filter Min. and Filter Max.
values. To use this option move the cursor to the filter fields and type in both
the minimum and maximum filter values. The Filter Min. and Filter Max. must
be entered using the input unit selected in the Unit field. All lines of data that
contain a parameter which is out of its range will be ignored.
Formulas
Not only can a single column be associated with a parameter, but a formula of col-
umns may be used. The formula may contain arithmetic operations on column let-
ters and numbers using the following operations: + (addition), - (subtraction), *
(multiplication), / (division), and ^ (exponentiation). The operations may be
grouped using () (parantheses). For example: 1.5 * A * (B + C).
In addition to the arthematic operations, there are two special functions, delta and
sum, that operate between iterations (i.e, from row to row). The delta function cal-
culates the difference between the value of the contain expression at the current
iteration and the previous one. On the first iteration delta evaluates to 0 (zero). For
example, if column A was time then delta(A) is the change in time. The sum func-
tion calculates the cumulative value of the contained expression. Building on the
example for the delta function: if column B is the flow rate, then the following
would calculate the cumulative volume: sum (B * delta (A)).
Care must abe taken to ensure that the correct units are selected. In the example
above, if column A is in minutes and column B are in barrels per minute, then bar-
rels should be the input unit selected for the parameter associated with the forumla,
sum (B * delta (A)). If column A was in hours, then the formula would have to be
modified to the convert from hours to minutes: sum (B * delta (60.0 * A)). If col-
umn A is a clock time (e.g., HH:MM:SS or HH:MM), then it needs to be associated
with a parameter as a single column if it is to be used in other formulas. The input
unit selected for this parameter is the unit that the other formulas will interpret the
columns values to be in.
Row Sampling
For text files, the range of interpretable data is indicated by the Start and End Row
listed in the Row Selection portion of the screen (Figure 3.4). These values may be
changed as desired. Character strings, such as column headers, are ignored and can
be included in the selection of rows.
To sample the data contained in the spreadsheet, specify the sampling frequency by
entering a number in the Sample every box. For example, to use every fifth data
point, enter a 5 in this box. MView can select a maximum of 1,209,600 lines of data,
but can read or import virtually an unlimited number of lines of data (limited only
by memory) from a file. If there are more than 1,209,600 lines of data in a file, it
will be necessary to adjust the Sample every box so that 1,209,600 lines or less of
data are actually used for the analyses. For example, if a data file has 1,700,000
3.3 Data 261
lines of data, it would be necessary to set the Sample every box to 20 or higher, or
select a range of data (start row to end row) with less than or equal to 1,209,600
rows of data.
Preview Plot
When importing data it is sometimes difficult to determine which column of data
corresponds to which parameter type. To assist in this situation, MView provides a
quick method of generating X-Y plots using any of the columns of a file.
To preview the data in the Setup screen, type or drag the column labels of the
desired parameters to the boxes found in the View Plot portion of the dialog box
(Figure 3.4). One X parameter and two Y parameters may be included (e.g., rate
and proppant concentration vs. time). Once a selection has been made, click on the
View Plot button to display the plot.
Completing the Setup
When you are finished associating data columns with Parameters, click on the OK
button. Then the data will be imported into the MView data set. If any change is
made to the data from within MView, it will not be reflected in the original data file.
Importing an MFrac or Mpwri Data File
To Import an MFrac File (*.mfrac) or MPwri (*.mpwri):
1. Choose one of the tabs located at the top of the screen, see Figure 3.5 (e.g.,
Data Set A). If you choose the left most tab, make sure to choose the Replay
radio button located near the left side the screen (Figure 3.3). Enter a Refer-
ence Name in the space provided.
2. Check the Data File check box and then click the Select File button. Before
browsing to select the data file, choose MFrac Files from the List Files of
Type box. Then select the desired file and click the OK button to return to the
Data Sets screen.
3. When an MFrac output file has been chosen MView automatically adds a list
box adjacent to the Select File button (Figure 3.5). This list box contains three
choices: Wellbore Hydraulics, Fracture Characteristics or Proppant Trans-
port. Choose which type of data you want to import.
4. Click on the Setup button. This will bring up the MView Data Setup box (Fig-
ure 3.6).
5. Associate rows in the list on the right of the screen to parameters on the left
side of the screen, similar to setting up text files.
6. Click on the OK button to import the data.
Figure 3.5: Data Sets Dialog Box - MFrac File.
Figure 3.6: Data Setup Dialog Box - MFrac Output File.
3.3 Data 263
When importing an MFrac File it is possible to configure the units for previewing
plots by selecting the Units button.
After data has been imported from an MFrac output file, the data in MView is inde-
pendent of the file. Thus, if the simulation is run again, there will be no change in
the data in MView. However, to update the information in MView, select the
Refresh button in the data sets screen. This will re-import the data from the output
file, using the same setup as the last time the data was imported.
Setup Templates
If the same basic data setup is used repeatedly from job to job, it may be saved as a
template. Once saved, a template may be recalled and applied at any time.
To save a setup as a template, click the Save As... button located at the bottom of
the Setup dialog box. This will present a screen for entering a file name and loca-
tion for the template. Choose a directory and enter a name in the Save As dialog
box. Click the OK button. Setup template files are automatically given the exten-
sion VHD (e.g., demo.vhd).
Once a template is created, it can easily be applied to another data set by choosing
the Load... button and selecting a file name with the extension VHD (e.g.,
demo.vhd). The same Parameters must be defined when a template is loaded as
when the template was saved.
Editing Data
The Edit Data command in the Data menu allows some basic spreadsheet editing of
a data set. For more advanced editing, refer to the Graphically Editing Data part of
Section 3.6.
When the Edit Data command is used from the Data menu, a box listing the current
data sets is displayed. From the list, choose the desired data set and click the Edit
button. A spreadsheet containing the data will be presented. Real-time data may be
viewed, but not edited.
When importing a multilayer MFrac File, there will be more than one fracture
(and/or proppant) characteristic zone. To analyze Fracture Characteristics or
Proppant Transport, select the desired zone #. The wellbore hydraulics results
are contain in the Wellbore Hydraulics item list.
Re-running MFrac will automatically update the *.mfrac file. There is no longer
any need to save the *.mfrac file after running before selecting the Refresh but-
ton.
The edit command allows you to view the entire data set and inspect it for inconsis-
tencies or potential problems. If a problem is discovered, you may either attempt to
correct it by re-typing the data or completely removing the row. The data that is
viewed and edited is not the original text or MFrac file, but rather a copy kept in
memory by MView. The original data file is never changed by MView.
To Re-Type Data:
1. Select the desired data cell by clicking on it.
2. Type the new value. Press the ENTER key when finished.
To Delete a Row of Data:
1. Select the desired row by clicking on the row number. The entire row will be
highlighted.
2. Use the Delete Row button located at the bottom of the spreadsheet to remove
the highlighted row. If you make a mistake and remove the wrong data use the
Cancel button to avoid saving the mistake. If the cancel button is used, all
changes made during the active editing session will be lost.
The edit function allows data to be viewed either with the defined shifts applied or
disabled. This choice is made by selecting either the View Data with Shifts or View
Data Without Shifts radio buttons found at the bottom of the spreadsheet.
The shifts applied to data may also be edited by clicking on the Edit Shifts at the
bottom of the screen. This will provide a list of parameters and their shifts, which
can be edited.
Save Data as a Text File
After a data set has been imported or transmitted from the data acquisition system,
it can be exported as a text file with the parameter names and units as column head-
ers and data points as rows. The saved file will be UTF-8 encoded.
To Export a Text File:
1. Select the Save Data as Text File command from the Data menu. A list of the
active data sets will be displayed.
2. Select the desired data set and click the Save As Text button located at the bot-
tom of the screen.
3. Enter a name and location for the text file and click OK.
3.3 Data 265
4. Answer accordingly when MView asks if shifted or unshifted data should be
written to the text file.
Merge Data Sets
There may be times when the data needed for an analysis exists in two separate files
and you would like to merge them into one file with a single time scale (e.g., sur-
face pressure and bottomhole pressure). MView provides the capability to merge
any number of data sets into a single set of data.
To Merge Data Sets:
1. Select the Merge Data Sets command from the Data menu. A list of available
data sets will be displayed.
2. Select the data sets to be merged by checking the adjacent box next to each
data set name. When finished, click the OK button to display the Merge Data
Sets dialog box. If the time range for each of the files is not overlapping or if
the times are not increasing, the following message will appear There is no
parameter of time for which these files have increasing data. These files cannot
be merged. In order to merge the data you will need to return to either the
Setup or Edit Data dialog boxes to synchronize the data by applying a shift.
The shifted values, when active, are always used when merging data files. The
error message may also occur if you have used different parameters for time.
3. From this screen, select the time parameter to base the match on. Normally,
there is just one time parameter; however, it is possible to have more than one.
Consequently, any parameter that is defined as a Time Unit Type and has data
in all selected data sets will appear in the list.
4. The program scans the selected data sets and determines the Min. and Max. val-
ues for the selected match parameter and displays them in the Range section of
the screen. A Time Step will also be suggested based on the existing data. Any
of these values may be changed. Notice that by adjusting the time step value,
the function can also be used to apply filtration to data files and affect the delta
time between data points. Use the Smallest Common Range or Largest
Range buttons to automatically set the Min. and Max. values. For example, if
the range for data set A is 0-100 minutes and 50-150 minutes for Data Set B
the smallest common range is 50-100, while the largest range is 0-150. Any
data set which does not have time values within the selected range will not be
completely interpolated. There is an option to specify what is written to the
data file when interpolation is impossible in the Preferences dialog box.
5. MView lists all of the active parameters in the Possible portion of the dialog
box. Select which of these parameters to include in the composite file by high-
lighting them and clicking the Add button. Likewise, parameters may be elim-
inated from the Selected list by using the Remove button.
6. After making selections, choose the OK button to display the File Save box.
Enter or choose a location and name for the file and click OK. The selected
data is written to the file along with the parameter names and units as column
headers.
Preferences
MView allows the selection of certain preferences that provide some variation in the
program control. These preferences are described as follows:
Ignore consecutive identical Real-Time lines
Some data acquisition systems transmit and save data with duplicate data lines or
rows. This can occur when the sampling rate of the data acquisition is much faster
than the cycle time for the sensor it is connected to. When this occurs, the acquisi-
tion system records duplicate sensor values until the sensor updates. These dupli-
cate data points do not necessarily cause problems, but they consume the
computers resources and cause MView and MFrac to use redundant data. To filter
these duplicate data segments from the incoming real-time data stream, check this
box in the Preferences screen. To view and use all duplicate data, disable this
option.
Ignore consecutive identical lines in data files
This option is the same as the option described above; however, it applies only to
imported files (e.g., replay files, etc.). Use this option to eliminate duplicate data
lines for any file except real-time data.
Beep when filtering real-time data that is out of range
If this option is on, there will be a beep when the program has detected and ignored
real-time data that fell outside of the range specified in the Filter section of the data
setup screen. If this option is used and numerous beeps occur, you might want to
reconsider the filtration range defined.
Filter lines with invalid column selections
If this option is on and a data column is mapped to a parameter and that column
does not exist (i.e., column 5 is mapped to a parameter, but the current data line
only contains 4 columns), then the line of data will be rejected. By turning off this
3.4 Real-Time Menu 267
option, the line will be accepted and parameters associated with invalid columns
will receive a value of zero for those lines.
3.4 Real-Time Menu
The Real-Time menu contains commands used to control the receipt of real-time
data from a data acquisition system as illustrated in Figure 3.7. The Add Log Entry
and Recover Real-Time Data options in the menu are only enabled when real-time
data set is being received from MACQ (Meyer Data Acquisition).
Figure 3.7: Real-Time Data Menu.
MView can receive real-time data either through a serial cable (Direct Connect),
network, or remotely using a modem. MView is also capable of emulating real-time
data transfer internally without the use of a second computer or acquisition system.
The Test Mode: Send a text file instead of Real-Time data, then stop is included
to facilitate training and demonstration of MView in real-time mode.
In addition to receiving data, MView can also transmit the data that it receives. This
provides a means of sending treatment data from the field to other remote locations
(e.g., someones office). A common example of this type of data transfer would be
the capture of data from the service company acquisition system via an MView
cable link on location. A second copy of MView could then be run remotely and
linked to the location copy of MView via modem. In this manner, it is conceivable
that the process of sending data in a daisy-chain fashion could continue repeatedly
as many times as needed. When used, this type of setup permits real-time simula-
tion and analysis from virtually anywhere telephone service exists (cellular or oth-
erwise).
The procedures used for setting-up various types of real-time data links are outlined
below.
Acquisition Toolbar
To receive data from a remote data acquisition system, either through a TCP/IP,
serial, or modem connection, the Acquisition Toolbar (a.k.a. the Meyer Data
Acquisition application) must be activated by selecting the Acquisition Toolbar
command from the Real-Time menu.
The purpose of the Meyer Data Acquisition (MACQ) program is to acquire real-
time data. The data is logged (as an ADT file specified by the user) and sent to
MView for further processing. The main MACQ screen is shown in Figure 3.8.
Figure 3.8: Real-Time Acquisition Toolbar.
The data is displayed (with minimal processing) on the main screen as it is
received. The last 100 lines received are displayed in the data viewer. When the
system is paused, a message will appear to indicate that the program is in Paused
mode, and data coming in from the input port will be ignored during that time.
While paused, data is not saved to the ADT file, and is not sent to MView or the out-
put port.
To Acquire Real-Time Data:
1. Click the Setup button located on the main screen to configure the Input port
and Output port.
2. Click on the File ellipse button and specify an output file for the acquired data.
If data is appended to an existing file, MACQ will attempt to respect the current
files encoding and line endings. Otherwise, the file will be encoded as UTF-8
(with BOM). The default file extension is adt (other commonly used exten-
sions are dat and txt).
3. Click on the Start button to enable data acquisition.
4. If transmitting by modem, click on the Dial button to dial a remote computer.
The individual components of the MACQ user interface are described below:
Normally, once data acquisition has been setup, the toolbar is minimized or ends up
in the background behind other open applications (e.g., MView). To bring the tool-
bar back to the foreground, select the Acquisition Toolbar command from the
Real-Time menu in MView.
Table 3.2: Acquisition Toolbar Components
File Data that is received in real-time is always written to a file on disk. This file
can then be imported into MView for replay analysis after the job. It also
provides a backup of the raw data and is used for restarting or appending
the data file in the event the acquisition is stopped or in the case of a system
crash. The toolbar File Button is used to specify the name of the acquisition
file. When it is selected, a File Save dialog box is displayed. Enter a new
filename or choose an existing file with extension ADT (*.adt) to append or
overwrite.
Log Use this button to open the Meyer Data Acquisition log window. The log
window contains a chronological log of MACQ operations. Double click-
ing on spreadsheet cells within the log window will open the contents of the
cell in a separate window (useful for displaying error detail that may other-
wise be truncated).
Setup Use the Setup button to configure the Input and Output ports.
Start Use this button to start MView data collection. Normally, this button is
accessed before the data acquisition system begins collecting and sending
data.
Pause The Pause Button can be used to temporarily suspend data collection with-
out terminating a session. No data will be received while pause is selected.
Continue When in paused mode, clicking on the Continue Button will resume data
collection.
Help Use this button to access the help file.
Dial When using a modem to transfer data, the Dial Button causes MView to
dial an entry from the phone book and connect to a remote site using the
setup parameters specified in the current setup. If the button is disabled,
make sure to click the Start button to initialize the modem.
Setup
The Setup button allows the user to configure the communication links for the
input and output ports. The Acquisition Setup dialog box is shown in Figure 3.9.
Figure 3.9: Acquisition Setup Dialog Box.
Time - Include Computers Time
To include a column containing the computers time for each row of data, check the
box located at the top of the screen entitled Add the computers time to the start
of each data line. This data will reside in the first column of the saved data file
(*.ADT) in the form HH:MM:SS.
Input and Output Ports
Depending on whether you want to configure data Input (reception) or Output
(transmission) choose the Setup... button associated with the port you wish to con-
figure.
This action will either display the Communications Setup Input (Figure 3.10) or
Output dialog box (Figure 3.11). Keep in mind that data transmission (Output) is
only used to pass along the real-time data to another computer.
Figure 3.10: Communication Setup - Input Port Dialog Box.
Figure 3.11: Communication Setup - Output Port Dialog Box.
Configuring a Serial Link
To transfer data through a serial link from one computer to another, connect the
computer to a data acquisition system that is capable of transmitting data through a
serial connection (e.g., RS232). Use a null modem cable to connect the two com-
puters. Once the cable connection is made, the next step is to set the communication
parameters for the transfer.
To Setup a Communication as Input or Output:
1. For input ports, choose Receive text from the serial port. For an output port,
choose Send to another computer via serial port.
2. Continue with the setup by choosing the appropriate COM Port, Bits Per Sec-
ond, Stop Bits, Data Bits, Parity, and Flow Control. A definition of each of
these parameters is given in Table 3.2. These settings should match the settings
of the data acquisition software that will be sending data to MView.
3. The Ignore First Line of Data option for the Input port (Figure 3.12) may be
helpful if the first line of data is normally bad. However, for most cases, this
option should be set to False.
4. For input ports, the International Text Encoding determines how text that is
received is interpreted. For an output port, the option determines how text is
encoded before it is sent.
5. Click the OK button to complete the setup.
MView requires that each line ends in either a carriage return or a carriage
return followed by a line feed.
Table 3.3: Definition of Communication Parameters.
Parameter Definition
COM Port
The COM Port refers to the serial port used for data transfer. Nor-
mally, this is a male DB-9 pin connector found on the back of the
computer.
Bits Per Second
The Bits Per Second specifies the serial port transfer rate. For most
data, sampling rates of 9600 is more than adequate. Specifying an
extremely high baud rate may result in the creation of garbage
characters in the data.
Stop Bits
This value determines how many bits are used to mark the end of a
transmitted character. The default is one (1).
Setting-up a Modem Connection
To send data to or receive data from a remote location, MView must be configured
to use a modem. Normally, this is done to receive data from the field for real-time
display or simulation.
Depending on whether you want to setup a Modem Connection for data Input
(reception) or Output (transmission), either the Communications Setup Input (Fig-
ure 3.12) or Output dialog box (Figure 3.13) will be displayed. Keep in mind that
data transmission (Output) is only used to pass along the real-time data to another
computer.
Data Bits
This is the number of bits or size of each data package that is sent
between two computers. Normally, 8-bits are used when Parity is set
to None, while 7-bits are used with Even parity.
Parity
This value controls the parity of the currently specified COM Port.
The selections are Even, Odd, None, Mark or Space. If parity is set
to None and you see garbage on the screen try changing to Even.
Odd, Mark and Space are rarely used unless required by the transmit-
ting software. Make sure to use the correct Data Bits setting that cor-
responds to the selected parity.
Flow Control
This setting determines how MView handles buffer overflows. This
parameter controls what happens if the receiving computer's buffer
becomes too full to receive more data.
XON/XOFF (software flow control) uses a character-based tech-
nique, while hardware flow control uses an RS-232 Ready to Send
and Clear to Send methodology.
Table 3.3: Definition of Communication Parameters.
Figure 3.12: Communication Setup - Input Modem Dialog.
Figure 3.13: Communication Setup - Output Modem Dialog.
To Set-up a Modem for Transferring Data In or Out:
1. For an input port, choose Receive text from the serial port. For an output
port, choose Send text to another computer via modem.
2. The Modem Initialization String is sent to the modem when the port is started.
Check the modems documentation for a valid string, or leave the value blank
to use a default initialization string. Please refer to Troubleshooting Modem
Problems below for more information.
3. Options are available for the modem to Auto Answer and/or Redial if the con-
nection is lost. The Output port also has an option Upon connection, send
all data that was acquired during off-line time (see Figure 3.13).
4. Once an initialization string has been entered, continue with the setup by
choosing the appropriate COM Port, Bits Per Second, Stop Bits, Data Bits,
Parity and Flow Control. For a definition of each of these parameters, refer to
Table 3.2. These settings must be consistent with the system you are communi-
cating with.
5. For input ports, the International Text Encoding determines how text that is
received is interpreted. For an output port, the option determines how text is
encoded before it is sent.
6. Click the OK button to complete the setup.
Configuring a TCP/IP Connection
Unlike modem connections that can initiate from either side of the connection (i.e.
either side can dial), TCP/IP connections behave differently. The input port always
connects to a remote host, and receives data; it can be thought of as a TCP/IP client.
The output port always listens for connections, and sends data; it can be thought of
as a TCP/IP server. MACQ will only accept one TCP/IP connection at a time. If a
connection attempt is made while a client is already connected, MACQ will connect
and send a single line of data indicating that the connection is already in use, and
then disconnect.
Input Port
1. Select Receive text from a TCP/IP data source from the Input Communica-
tion Setup screen.
2. Specify a destination address in the Host Name (or IP address) field. This is
the host name that MACQ will connect to.
3. Specify the TCP port to connect to in the Port Number field.
Output Port
1. Select Send text to another computer that will connect via TCP/IP from the
Output Communication Setup screen.
2. Specify a local interface to bind to in the Host Name (or IP address) to
receive connections field. A drop-down combo control is populated with
some suggestions when the Host Name field is selected.
3. Specify a TCP port to listen on in the Port Number field (possible values are
from 1 to 65535).
Once a client is connected to the Output port, the Disconnect button becomes
available in the user interface. Selecting Disconnect will disconnect the current cli-
ent and return the port to listening mode.
MACQ TCP/IP connections are not authenticated or encrypted. It is up to the
end-user to provide their own authentication/encryption using mechanisms such
as IPsec or SSH.
Special Considerations
MACQ TCP/IP connections support IPv6 connections. However, IPv6 addresses
must be enclosed in brackets. e.g. [2001:db8::abc:123].
The following addresses also have special meaning when specifying a network
interface to bind to within the Output port configuration screen:
Firewalls
TCP/IP connections may be blocked by various software and/or hardware firewalls
between the local and remote machine (including software firewalls running on the
machines themselves). If a port is started, but connections are not getting through, a
firewall might be blocking the connection. Due to the security implications, and the
sheer number of possible firewall configurations, firewall related issues are outside
the scope of this Users Guide.
International Text Encoding
An international text encoding is required for TCP/IP, serial port, and modem con-
nections. For input ports, the international text encoding determines how text that is
received is interpreted. For output ports the international text encoding determines
how text is encoded before it is sent. Figure 3.14 shows the International Text
Encoding screen with UTF-8 selected. This feature is predominantly used to
ensure that any comments (non-data lines) in the input/output stream are preserved
when they are sent or received.
UTF-8 is the recommended setting; it should be used when both sides are running
Meyer Data Acquisition.
Table 3.4: Special Addresses (Output port)
Address Description
* (or blank)
Listen on all IPv4 and IPv6 interfaces (i.e. listen on 0.0.0.0
and [::])
0.0.0.0 Listen on all IPv4 interfaces.
[::] Listen on all IPv6 interfaces.
Figure 3.14: International Text Encoding
Simulating a Real-Time Data Transfer
Choosing the Test Mode: Send a text file instead of Real-Time data, then stop
option at the top of the Input Communications Setup disables port communications
completely. When activated, this command allows you to simulate the real-time
process by reading a text file from your computer and transmitting the data as if it
were being sent by a remote data acquisition system. Select the file to replay with
the Select File button. Specify the data sampling rate (Send a line every), and
choose the OK button. The Periodically check a text file for data option is also
available; MACQ will read all of the data in the specified file as fast as possible,
then periodically check for new data that may have been appended to the file by
another process.
Saving a Real-Time Setup
As with the Data Connection and Parameters setup within MView, once the Real-
Time setup has been completed, the configuration can be saved as a template using
the Save button found in the Acquisition Setup dialog box (Figure 3.9). The saved
template file will have the extension STP (e.g., demo.stp). To recall a saved setup at
a later date use the Load button found in this screen. It is not necessary to use the
templates; the current configuration will be kept between work sessions.
Working with the Phone Book
To Add, Modify or Delete Phone Book Entries:
1. Click on the Phone Book button located in the Acquisition Setup dialog box
(Figure 3.9). This will bring up the dialog box shown in Figure 3.15.
2. Click the + button to add an entry, click the - button to delete an entry, and
to edit an entry click in the spreadsheet cell.
Figure 3.15: Phone Book Dialog Box.
Making a Modem Connection
After properly configuring the modem, click the Start button found on the Acquisi-
tion Toolbar. This will initialize the modem. If the initialization is successful, the
toolbar Dial button will be enabled. If the initialization is not successful, an error
message will be displayed.
When the Dial button is enabled, it can be used to dial a phone book entry. To con-
nect, click the Dial button to present the Modem Dial Selection dialog box shown in
Figure 3.16. Choose the target location from the list displayed and click the Dial
Modem button found in the dialog box. The program will display message screens
to indicate that it is dialing, connected or otherwise (e.g., busy, etc.).
Figure 3.16: Modem Dial Selection Dialog Box.
If another computer dials your computers modem, MView will ask if you want to
answer the phone. Answer yes to answer the phone and establish communication.
Troubleshooting Modem Problems
If the modem will not initialize, follow these guidelines:
1. First, try initializing the modem using no Modem Initialization String.
2. If you cannot connect without a modem initialization string try typing some-
thing as simple as ATZ.
3. If after trying the steps listed above, the modem still does not connect, consult
the modems manual or contact the modems manufacturer for assistance.
In general, it is important to realize that the amount of data that is actually being
sent over the modem is quite minimal (usually only one line of text each second).
Thus, for best results, try to simplify everything as much as possible. Setting the
baud rate lower will solve many problems; 2400 Baud should be more than suffi-
cient for most cases. If this still does not work, try turning off any compression fea-
tures of the modem. Also, the modem must be in verbose mode. For most modems,
adding V1 to the initialization string will put the modem in verbose mode. If
there are still problems, consult the modems manual for the proper initialization
string.
Real-Time Data Window
When real-time data is received, the data that is passed to MView can be displayed
during the transmission by using the Real-Time Data Window (see Figure 3.17)
command from the Real-Time menu.
Figure 3.17: Real-Time Data Window Menu
Raw Data View
If the Raw Data View is selected, the raw data is displayed without column headers.
The raw data is the data exactly as it comes over the serial port, before MView
parses it. Figure 3.18 shows a typical display of raw data.
Figure 3.18: Raw Data View.
Translated Data View
When the Translated Data View is selected, the data contained in the View List is
displayed using the Parameter name as a column header as shown in Figure 3.19.
Figure 3.19: Translated Data View.
Digital Data View
Figure 3.20 shows a real-time digital data view. The appearance and configuration
of this display is determined by the settings chosen in the Configure Real-Time
Data Window dialog box.
Figure 3.20: Digital Data View.
Once the Digital Data View window is opened, its position and size can be manipu-
lated like any standard window.
Configuring the Real-Time Data Window
To configure the Real-Time Data Window, access the Configure View dialog box
by choosing the Configure Real-Time Data Window command found on the Real-
Time menu.
When the Configure View dialog box (Figure 3.21) is opened, it displays the active
real-time parameters in the Possibilities section of the screen. To view a parameter
it must be added to the View list.
Figure 3.21: Configure Real-Time View.
To Add a Parameter to the View List:
1. Select a parameter or multiple parameters from the Possibilities list and click
the Add button. Double-clicking a parameter will also add it to the View list. If
the desired parameter does not appear in the Possibilities list, return to the
Setup Data screen and add the parameter to the data set (e.g., associate the
parameter with a channel).
2. The Configure View dialog box can also be used to specify whether to view the
data with any specified shifts applied or not. To use the shifts, click on the Use
Shifts check box.
3. The Selection parameter order can also be changed by using the Move Up and
Move Down buttons on highlighted items.
4. The text color and decimal format of a highlighted Selection parameter can be
changed by clicking on the Properties button. This will bring up the dialog as
shown in Figure 3.22. The Text Color and the number of Decimal Places can
be different for each selected parameter. To use scientific notation check the
Scientific check box.
Figure 3.22: Configure Real-Time View - Properties Dialog.
The fonts, for both the caption and data, can be specified independently by choos-
ing either the Caption Font or Data Font buttons. The caption can also be Left,
Center or Right justified. The data is right justified to ensure that the decimal place
remains in the same position for easy of reading the display. To view the headers in
the text color specified by the parameters properties, check the Use colors for
titles box.
Add Log Entry
The Add Log Entry menu allows the user to add text to a log file during real-time
data acquisition. If this menu option is selected, a time stamp with the current real-
time data stream will be saved in a user specified data file.
Clear Real-Time Data
The Clear Real-Time Data... command will clear all of the currently loaded real-
time data. If real-time data is cleared inadvertently, it may be recovered using the
Recover Real-Time Data command described below.
Recover Real-Time Data
If for some reason (system crash) MView must be restarted during a real-time ses-
sion, it is possible to recover the data that has already been recorded before MView
was shut down. System crashes are rare, however, they can occur during power fail-
ures, or if you overload the system resources and create an unstable situation. Dur-
ing real-time applications, it is always recommended that you minimize extraneous
use of the system. To be safe, try not to run unnecessary applications (e.g., solitaire)
during real-time acquisition.
If MView was collecting data, but suddenly shut down and then started back up
again, it would only have the real-time data collected since the last (second) start.
To recover the data collected during the first session, use the following steps:
To Recover from a System or Program Crash:
1. If the entire system crashed as a result of a power failure, restart Windows and
MView. When MView restarts, the program will provide a message indicating
that a temporary file exists, do you want to recover it? Answer yes.
2. Next, activate the Acquisition Toolbar and open the same file that you were
working with before the crash. A message will inquire if you want to append or
overwrite the data contained in the file. Choose append to save the data already
acquired and click the start button on the toolbar as quickly as possible to pre-
vent any further loss of data. If for some reason only MView crashed, but the
Acquisition Toolbar did not, just restart MView.
3. Once the acquisition has been restarted, select the Recover Real-Time Data
command from the MViews Real-Time menu. This will display the file open
dialog box and pre-set the file extension to *.ADT.
4. Select the name that was given to the data file from the Acquisition Toolbar
(e.g., *.ADT) and choose OK.
5. This will cause the program to re-read all the data up to the point that the con-
nection was lost or the crash occurred.
6. At this point you will be back to where you were when the crash occurred,
minus the data lost during any Acquisition Toolbar down-time.
The Recover Real-Time Data command may also be used to load a real-time data
set without having to open the Acquisition Toolbar (MACQ). This is particularly
useful when a user has multiple replay files that contain the same data format (i.e.,
each file contains the same number of columns each with the same type of data).
Real-Time Status Bar
The MView real-time status bar as seen in Figure 3.23 is located at the bottom of the
MView window. It contains the number of real-time data lines received, translated,
and filtered.
Figure 3.23: MView Real-Time status bar.
3.5 Simulation Setup
The process of using MView to import replay or real-time data is described in Sec-
tions 3.3 and 3.4. After successfully connecting to a data source, the next step is to
use the data to perform replay or real-time analysis. MView can send the real-time
or replay data to MFrac and/or MinFrac for analysis.
Sending Data To MFrac and/or MinFrac
To send data to MFrac and/or MinFrac make sure that, as a minimum, you have
setup a Parameter for Time and Slurry Rate. If these parameters are not configured,
a warning message will be displayed. Bottomhole Pressure, Surface Pressure,
Concentration, N2 Rate, CO2 Rate, Concentration Total Suspended Solids
Table 3.5: Status Bar Data
Lines Received The number of lines received from MACQ or by recovering
real-time data.
Lines Translated The number of lines processed (this includes applying user-
defined filters and shifts).
Lines Filtered The number of lines that have been rejected due to filtering
or because they are otherwise invalid.
3.5 Simulation Setup 287
(TSS), and Concentration Oil-in-Water (OIW) may also be used for simulation;
however, they are optional and only used if available.
To send real-time or replay data from MView to MFrac and/or MinFrac choose Sim-
ulation Setup from the Simulation menu to display the screen shown in Figure
3.24. MView will automatically place all configured parameters with units of pres-
sure in the Bottomhole Pressure list box. Likewise, all rate parameters will be
shown in the Rate list box, etc. When there are multiple parameters with the same
unit, select the parameter to use from the list. Other than Time and Rate, a parame-
ter can be disabled by choosing Not Available from the list.
You must indicate for all rate and concentration data whether the data was mea-
sured at the Surface or Bottomhole. This information is required so that MFrac
initializes the data at the correct time. When using surface data, make sure that the
wellbore volume is adequately described within MFrac. If the wellbore volume is
incorrect, the transport time for any portion of the treatment will be wrong and the
chronology of the job will be misrepresented.
Figure 3.24: Simulation Setup Dialog Box.
Additional parameters can also be sent to MFrac for display and staging by access-
ing the Additional Parameters tab as shown in Figure 3.25. Checking the Send
box will send this parameter data to MFrac
Figure 3.25: Simulation Setup Dialog Box - Additional Parameters.
Once you have selected which parameters to pass from MView to MFrac and/or
MinFrac, the programs will be in constant communication with each other.
3.6 Plots
As soon as data is available in a data set(s), it can be used to construct plots to assist
in the analysis. Composite or multi-component plots may be useful for creating
parameter match plots (e.g., measured vs. simulated pressure), comparing plausible
scenarios (e.g., best case/worst case) or simply depicting data trends in order to
document the quality control of a treatment.
Before a plot can be displayed, you must first specify the data to be displayed in the
plot. In MView, this process is referred to as building a plot and is accomplished
by choosing the Build Plot command from the Plot menu. When selected, this
command will display all data sets and their available parameters.
Once the desired plots are built, they can be viewed by selecting the View Plot
command located on the Plot menu. Whenever a plot is opened, it can be config-
ured (colors, line styles, fonts, etc.) and graphically edited. It is also possible to
export the produced graphics to include them in a customized report.
Any changes that are made to the data in MView (e.g., graphical editing) are
automatically updated in MFrac and MinFrac.
3.6 Plots 289
Building Plots
After the data sets have been imported and setup, the Build Plot dialog shown in
Figure 3.26 can be accessed from the Plot menu. This screen is used to choose
which parameters from the different data sets are to be included on a plot. Once a
plot is selected, the Parameters spreadsheet reflects the available data channels
associated with the selected Data Set or Data Sets. In order to build a valid plot, a
parameter must be assigned to the X-Axis, and at least one parameter must be
assigned to a Y-Axis. The plot description will be displayed in a dark red and bold
faced font along with an error message if the settings are invalid.
The first time you build a plot or create a new plot, the legends, axes names and the
plot title are set to the default Parameter text for a given Data Set. If more than one
parameter is plotted on an axis, the default axis caption will be blank.If an axis
parameter is changed, the legends and affected axis name will be changed to their
default settings. The default settings are obtained from the Parameter text preceded
by the Data Set Reference Name.
Figure 3.26: Build Plot Dialog Box.
To Build a Plot:
1. Use the Build Plot command from the Plot menu to access the Build Plot
screen.
2. Select a plot by highlighting one of the plot rows located near the top of the
screen or add a new plot by clicking the Add button.
3. Enter a title for the plot within the cell in the Name column. This can be
accomplished by double clicking within the cell, or by clicking the Rename
button.
4. To add data to a plot, under Data Sets highlight the data set box from which
the desired data set parameters are to be selected.
5. From the Parameters drop down menu associate the parameters with a given
Axis. Only one X parameter may be chosen per data set; however, multiple Y
parameters may be used.
6. Once the plot parameter selections are made, the plot can be previewed by
clicking the Preview Plot button.
7. Repeat the above process to build other plots. Click the OK button to finish
building the plots.
The Delete button under the Plots menu can be used to delete a plot.
The Clear All button under the Parameters spreadsheet can be used to clear all the
parameter associations for a given data set and plot.
Viewing Plots
After the plots have been built, they may be viewed. To view the built plots, access
the View Plot selection screen as shown in Figure 3.27 by choosing View Plot from
the Plot menu. This screen will contain all of the built plots. Choose the plots to
display by clicking the adjacent check box and then click the OK button. The
selected plot(s) will be presented using all of the data that is available. If a plot con-
tains real-time data, the real-time data will appear as the data is acquired.
3.6 Plots 291
Figure 3.27: View Plot Dialog Box.
Graphically Editing Data
Whenever a plot is displayed, it is possible to edit the data using MViews Graphical
Edit feature. Graphical editing allows you to manipulate or process the data con-
tained on a plot using statistical or editing functions (moving point(s), averaging,
interpolating, or smoothing data). This capability provides a powerful tool for pro-
cessing poor quality data and permits operations such as graphical data shifts.
To graphically edit the active plot, choose Graphically Edit Data from the Plot
menu. The plot will continue to be displayed; however, it will automatically be
maximized and the Graphically Edit toolbar and menu will be added at the top of
the plot (Figure 3.28). The plot must remain maximized during the graphical edit-
When graphically editing the data sent to MFrac or MinFrac for use as simula-
tion input, the changes that occur as a result of the editing are automatically
reflected in MFrac and MinFrac.
ing session. To end the graphical editing session, select End Editing from the File
menu.
Figure 3.28: Graphical Edit Screen.
The next step in the graphical edit process is to choose the curve to be edited. Make
this selection using the list box located on the left side of the toolbar. All editing
operations are only applied to the Active Curve. This selection can be changed at
any time during the editing session by accessing the list box.
Because only a limited number of mouse buttons are available to work with, MView
allows toggling the function of the left mouse button as you work with the graphical
editing feature. This is accomplished by selecting the desired function from the sec-
ond list box on the toolbar. The possible choices are: Select Range, Zoom, Select
Single Point, Drag Single Point and Drag Single Point (Y only). The function for
each of these selections is defined below.
Select Range
The Select Range mouse function is used to choose a range of data for processing.
The editing functions under the Range menu will only be applied to the active range
The Graphical Edit mode requires that all X axes parameters be increasing or
constant (i.e., non-decreasing) sequences. For example, if there are time values
of 1.0, 2.0, 1.5 and 3.0, they may not be graphically edited. In this situation,
either choose a different parameter as an X axis, or manually edit the data using
the Edit Data command in the Data menu.
3.6 Plots 293
on the active curve. This mouse mode permits the range of the active curve to be
defined by dragging a box around it. After the range is specified, a function from
the Range menu can be selected. The arrow keys can be used to expand or contract
the range. The selected range is shown as a box on the plot and the starting and
stopping values are displayed at the top of the screen.
Zoom
This mouse function allows the normal zooming of all Meyer plots as described in
Chapter 1. Click and drag to define a zoom area on the screen. To return to the nor-
mal magnification, access the Zoom Out command in the shortcut menu (right
mouse button), choose Zoom Out from the Plot menu or press the F5 key.
Select Single Point
To work with single points rather than a range of data, choose this mouse function.
Whenever the mouse is clicked on the plot area, the program will select the closest
data point on the active data curve. If it is difficult to select a specific point, try
zooming in before selecting the point. The arrow keys can be used to change the
selected point along the curve. The X and Y coordinates of the selected point are
displayed at the top of the screen.
Drag Single Point
This mouse function is used to reposition a single point by dragging it from its cur-
rent location to a new location. Click the point to be moved and then hold the
mouse button down while dragging it to a new location. With respect to the Y coor-
dinates, there are no limitations as to where the point can be dragged. However, a
point cannot be dragged beyond adjacent points on the X axis. The arrow keys can
be used to drag the currently selected point. The X and Y coordinates of the
selected point are displayed at the top of the screen.
Drag Single Point (Y only)
This mouse function limits the point drag function to movement relative to the Y-
axis only. When data points are spaced relatively far apart, this function may pro-
vide better control of the drag function, especially for only shifting in the Y direc-
tion. This feature works well for time-based plots when you want to change the
magnitude of the parameter, but not the time for each data point. The left and right
arrow keys may be used to change the currently selected point. The up and down
arrow keys may be used to drag the point up or down. The X and Y coordinates of
the selected point are displayed at the top of the screen.
Graphical Edit Menu Bar
When in the Graphical Edit Mode the menu bar changes to include commands for
working with data as described below.
Edit Menu
Whenever a change is made to data it can be undone by selecting Undo from the
Edit menu. MView tracks the operations performed on a data set so that you can
undo (or redo) in series to trace forward or backwards through the editing steps.
Range Menu
The functions provided in the Range menu provide statistical operations that can
be applied to the active range of data on the active curve. This menu also lets you
delete a group of data points directly or filter the data points based on a specified
maximum standard deviation. The name of the active curve is in the title bar of the
dialog boxes that are displayed after selecting a Range menu item. This helps you
to determine if you are working on the proper curve. The specific operations con-
tained in the Range menu are summarized as follows.
Set to Value
Use this command to set all data point in the range to a specific constant value. The
dialog box shown in Figure 3.29 will then be displayed. Either a constant value can
be specified or it can be selected graphically using the Graphically Choose button.
Figure 3.29: Range Menu - Set Range to a Value.
Deleting points from a curve cannot be undone.
3.6 Plots 295
Set to Average
To replace a portion of data with the statistical average, use this command. To view
the value calculated and used as the average, choose the Show Statistics command
found on the Range menu.
Linear Interpolation
This will linearly interpolate each point in the range. The Linear Interpolation
Screen (Figure 3.30) allows you to specify an X1,Y1 and X2,Y2 or to define them
graphically. These coordinates are used to define a line. Then for each point in the
selected range, the Y value will be set on this line. Thus, even though X values may
be specified that are not on the borders of the range, all points in the range will be
affected. If Graphically Choose is selected, two points on the graph, point 1 and
point 2, must be selected. After selecting point one, the interpolation line will be
displayed as the mouse is moved around to select point two.
Figure 3.30: Range Menu - Linear Interpolation.
Add Shift
This command can be used to shift a range of data relative to its current Y coordi-
nates. When used, this function will allow you to enter a Shift Value or select it
graphically (Figure 3.31). This shift value will be added to the current data (new =
old + shift.) Note that this shift is completely different from the shift that can be
entered in the Data setup screen or under the Shift menu. To shift an entire curve,
relative to X and Y or only X, use the commands found in the Shift menu.
Figure 3.31: Range Menu - Add Shift.
Smooth
When data is very erratic it can be smoothed with the Smooth command. Select
this command to display the Smooth Data dialog box shown in Figure 3.32. Use
the horizontal scroll bar to adjust the level of smoothness.
Figure 3.32: Range Menu - Smooth.
Remove Points
This will delete all of the points in the selected range. Use it with caution. It will
delete all points in the selected range for all parameters in the data set, even if these
parameters are not on the current plot. This cannot be undone.
Remove Points n Standard Deviations from the Average
This command allows you to remove bad data points in the current range. Even
though it is using the Active Curve to determine if a point is bad or not, if a point is
bad, it will delete all corresponding points in all parameters of the data set. This
cannot be undone. A dialog box will ask how many standard deviations around the
average are acceptable. This box will interactively show the valid range as you
change the number of deviations. The number of deviations does not have to be an
integer. After clicking OK, each point in the selected range that lies beyond this
valid range will be deleted.
3.6 Plots 297
Show Statistics
This command displays the information in Table 3.6 about the selected range.
Show Derivative
This command will show the derivative of the active curve within the selected
range. If the active curve is on the left scale, the derivative scale is on the right and
all curves on the right scale are hidden. If the active curve is on the right scale, the
opposite happens.
Point Menu
The commands in the Point menu apply only to the currently selected point on the
active curve. To see or choose the currently selected point, set the mouse function
to Select Single Point, Drag Single Point or Drag Single Point (Y only).
Set Values
Choose set values to manually type in a new X and Y value for the selected point.
Note that the X value cannot be before the previous points X value and cannot be
after the next points X value.
Remove Point
This will remove the currently selected point from the active curve. It will also
remove all other points in the data set that correspond to this point. This cannot be
undone.
Shift Menu
The Shift menu allows a graphical means of shifting an entire parameter of a data
set. These are the same shifts that are set in the data sets setup screen.
Table 3.6: Definition of Statistics of the Active Range.
Value Definition
Range Start The starting point on the X scale of the selected range.
Range Stop The stopping point on the X scale of the selected range.
Min The minimum value of the active curve in the selected range.
Max The maximum value of the active curve in the selected range.
Average The average value of all points of the active curve in the selected range.
Standard
Deviation
The standard deviation of all points of the active curve in the selected
range.
Shift Active Curve
This allows access to the shift value of the active curve. Options are available to
turn the shift on or off, set the shift value manually, or choose the shift value graph-
ically.
Shift Active Curves X Data
This is the same as Shift Active Curve, except it applies to the parameter that is
used for the X axis.
Chapter 4
MinFrac
Minifrac Analysis
4.1 Introduction
This chapter is a users guide for the MinFrac program. All of the available options
and the basic procedures used for running the software are covered in this chapter.
Please refer to Appendix F for specific information regarding the governing equa-
tions, modeling techniques and numerical procedures used in the MinFrac Analysis
Software.
The term minifrac is commonly used to describe any type of injection test per-
formed in a reservoir to obtain characteristic information associated with the
hydraulic fracturing process. Tests such as these are usually applied, as part of the
design optimization process, to calibrate the fracture model input data and redesign
the treatment. These tests typically involve periods of intermittent injection fol-
lowed by intervals of shut-in and/or flowback. As with any well test, pressure and
rate are measured throughout a minifrac and recorded for subsequent analyses.
MinFrac for Windows was developed to aid the fracturing engineer in analyzing the
data recorded during a minifrac treatment. The principles of fracturing pressure
analysis have been discussed extensively in the literature during the past several
years
1-9
. The evolution of this technology has resulted in procedures that permit the
interpretation of injection and fall-off pressures in order to characterize the basic
fracturability of a reservoir. This process results in the ability to approach an opti-
mum treatment design.
MinFrac is a comprehensive tool that implements the latest fracture injection and
pressure decline theory. With the many types of analyses and superposition deriva-
tives available, MinFrac is considered a state of the art simulator by the petro-
leum industry.
300 MinFrac: Minifrac Analysis
An outline of the basic steps for using MinFrac is shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: MinFrac Basic Steps.
Step Program Area
1. Open an existing MinFrac data file (*.minfrac)
or a new file
File Menu
3. Data Options
a. General
b. Graphical
c. Fracture
Options Menu
4. Data Input
a. Fracture Model
Description
Base Data
Leakoff Data
Closure Data (User Specified)
b. History Match Data
c. Import Data File
d. Edit Imported Data
Data Menu
5. User Specified Closure go to step 7
4.1 Introduction 301
Methodology
Minifrac analysis provides a method of estimating fracture efficiency, closure pres-
sure, ISIP, net pressure, fracture dimensions and leakoff coefficients prior to
designing a full-scale fracture treatment. These types of analyses, as originally for-
mulated by Nolte
1-5
and modified by Castillo
6
quantify the fracturing process as
estimated from the measured pressure decline data.
Most minifrac analyses are based on Nolte's equations and do not account for the
effects of fluid rheology or the conservation of momentum. The measured pressure
6. Analysis
a. Analysis Wizard
Select Analysis
Follow Wizard Steps
b. Step Rate
Select Ranges
Select Points
Pressure Table
Diagnostic Plot
c. Step Down
Select Ranges
Select Points
Pressure Table
Diagnostic Plot
d. Horner
Select Ranges
Select Points (Horner Plot)
e. Regression
Select Ranges
Select Points (Analysis)
History Match
f. After Closure
Select Ranges
Select TC
Select Points (Analysis)
Analysis Menu
7. Output
a. Simulation (base data)
b. Simulation (history match data)
c. View Report
d. Export Report
e. Report Configuration
f. Manage Points
Output Menu
Table 4.1: MinFrac Basic Steps.
decline data is simply used in place of solving the momentum equation. Neglecting
momentum can result in unrealistic estimations of fracture characteristics and fluid
leakoff coefficients that are critical to the design of the main fracture treatment.
Up until 1987, only the width-opening pressure relationship and pressure decline
data were used to estimate minifrac characteristics. Lee
7
improved upon this by
including Biot's energy balance equation for two-dimensional type fractures geom-
etry models.
The energy balance method does eliminate some of the anomalies in minifrac anal-
ysis. However, this method does not fully account for viscous driven fractures.
Meyer and Hagel
8-9
(1988, 1992) reported a new minifrac methodology that solved
the governing conservation of mass and momentum equations for power-law type
fluids using the 2-D fracture propagation equations-of-state. The solution technique
does not assume the fracture width is proportional to the measured pressure.
Instead, the governing mass and momentum equations are coupled with the mea-
sured closure time to predict fracture propagation characteristics. From the numeri-
cally simulated fracture geometry, pressure, fluid efficiency and leakoff coefficient,
you can determine which fracture model more closely represents the measured
pressure response and formation permeability.
The main advantage of this technique is that mass and momentum are both satis-
fied. In addition, the important effects of flowback, interference closure, time
dependent leakoff and fluid rheology are simulated.
The numerical results are used in conjunction with the measured pressure decline
data to history match a number of fracture characteristics such as fracture height,
pay zone height, Young's modulus and spurt loss. Closure time can also be more
accurately estimated from these parametric studies.
The equations of mass conservation, continuity, width-opening pressure, momen-
tum and constitutive relationships for fracture propagation models are formulated
based on the methodology of Meyer
10-12
. Refer to these references and Appendix A
for a detailed description of the model assumptions and solution technique.
Definitions
The following basic concepts are critical to the use of the MinFrac Program. If you
are uncertain about the terminology, please review the following definitions. For
more information about minifrac theory, refer to Appendix F.
Fracture Closure Pressure
The fracture closure pressure ( ) has been given many names by the petroleum
industry. For example, it is often referred to as the instantaneous shut-in pressure
( ), the minimum horizontal stress ( ), the least principal stress ( ), the
frac gradient (i.e., F.G. or fracture closure pressure/depth to formation) or even the
fracture propagation pressure. Each of these parameters have their own unique def-
inition. Many of these definitions of course are used inappropriately and refer more
to the extension or propagation pressure than to the closure pressure.
The correct definition of fracture closure pressure as used throughout this guide is
the pressure in the fracture at the point of closure. This is more commonly referred
to as the minimum horizontal stress or least principal stress.
The fracture closure pressure is an important parameter that is generally obtained
from the decline pressure(s) following a minifrac or stress test. Once the fracture
closure pressure is known, it can be used as a reference to determine the fracture
closure time, which in turn is used to find fluid efficiency. Fracture closure pressure
is also necessary in defining net pressure during injection: net fracturing pres-
sure, , is the difference between the pressure in the fracture, , and the
closure pressure (i.e., ). The fracture net pressure at the
end pumping is .
Fracture Efficiency
Fracture efficiency is defined as the ratio of the fracture volume to the volume of
slurry injected. The fluid efficiency, therefore, changes as a function of volume
injected. This change depends on the rate of creation of fracture area, as well as, the
leakoff characteristics of the fracturing fluid and reservoir. The fracture efficiency
is approximately equal for all models, since it is only a function of the pressure
decline slope and closure time. For a minifrac, the fluid efficiency of interest is gen-
erally the efficiency at the end of pumping. This instantaneous value provides a ref-
erence point for determining the total leakoff coefficient relative to a given volume
of fluid injected and fracture geometry model.
The leakoff coefficient obtained from a minifrac is the total leakoff coefficient ( ).
The total leakoff coefficient that is calculated for each model, is a function of the
fluid efficiency and the fracture area
1-13
. This coefficient is generally expressed in
units of . This has become a standard way of reporting the leakoff charac-
p
c
ISIP o
H
mi n
o
min
Ap
net
p
fracture
Ap
net
p
fract ure
p
closure
=
Ap
net
ISIP p
closure
=
C
ft min
teristics of a fluid in a given reservoir. The total leakoff coefficient is actually a
combination of all the mechanisms acting to prevent fluid loss to the formation.
These mechanisms are broken down into numerical relationships that are coupled
in the MinFrac program using the Harmonic fluid loss model as defined in Appen-
dix D.
For additional information about the fluid leakoff models and minifrac leakoff refer
to Appendices D and F.
Fracture Geometry Models
Understanding the types of two-dimensional (2-D) models used in the interpreta-
tion of a minifrac treatment is critical to the data analysis process. Each 2-D model
solves the fracture geometry with inherent assumptions about how hydraulic frac-
tures propagate. The assumptions that are part of a numerical model solution are
what dictates whether a particular fracture geometry model is applicable to a given
reservoir. For more information regarding the 2-D models used in MinFrac, please
refer to Chapter 2.
Pressure During Injection
The magnitude of the injection pressure and the rate of change of pressure may be
as important as all other dependent parameters obtained from a minifrac treatment.
Rate changes and fluid property changes have predictable influences on the
expected pressure response during a minifrac as well as the propped fracture treat-
ment. Deviations from the expected pressure response can be analyzed for probable
causes. For example, if bottomhole pressure is available during a minifrac by plac-
ing a gauge close to the perforations, then the measured pressure, , can be
expressed as follows:
Each of these components has their own dependency on rate and fluid proper-
ties. A change in either one (i.e., rate or fluid properties), therefore, should bring
about a predictable change in . If actual changes in differ from expec-
tations, plausible explanations may be considered. When this occurs, the signifi-
cance of the deviation should be weighed against it's influence on the desired
outcome of the propped fracturing treatment. This process allows the engineer to
decide whether the appropriate model(s) is being used; and to decide whether the
signal (i.e., ) and model combination provide a unique understanding of the
current fracturing process.
p
gauge
p
gauge
Ap
net
Ap
perf
Ap
near wellbore
o
min
+ + + =
Ap
p
gauge
p
gauge
p
gauge
Determining Closure
The method chosen to identify fracture closure will depend on the test procedure
and on the quality of the acquired data. This guide is not meant as a primer to these
procedures; however, a list of the industry accepted methods is given below along
with a brief description of each. All of these methodologies are grouped here as
minifrac analyses. For additional information on each of these methods, refer to the
references cited.
Micro-Frac Test
This type of test is used to measure the in-situ stress in discrete intervals within a
zone. The procedure involves isolating a narrow interval using packers in order to
pump a minimum volume of fluid (usually low viscosity) to break-down and initi-
ate a hydraulic fracture. The resulting can be determined by plotting the
acquired pressure versus the square root of time. When performed properly, it is
generally accepted that the is a reasonable estimate of the minimum horizon-
tal stress and, therefore, is a form of closure pressure. The problems associated with
using this type of test, particularly in cased and perforated wellbores is discussed by
Warpinski
14,15
.
Step Rate Test
A step rate test is used to determine the fracture extension pressure that is typically
considered the upper bound for the minimum horizontal stress or closure pressure.
After break-down, fluid is pumped at increasing flow rates in a stair-step fashion.
Ideally, each flow rate is maintained until a stabilized pressure is achieved. In lieu
of achieving a stabilized pressure, it has been proposed that periods of equal time
for each flow rate be used. Regardless, the bottomhole pressure at the end of each
rate interval is then plotted versus rate to identify a change in slope. This change or
break indicates the start of fracture extension that is theoretically equal to the
magnitude of the closure pressure plus the fracture friction and propagation resis-
tance.
3
Pump-In/Decline
Unlike the discrete measurements associated with Micro-Frac Testing described
above, un-isolated injection tests performed through the entire perforated height
provide estimates of the state-of-stress over the total interval affected by the frac-
ture. These types of tests involve larger volumes of fluid than a test designed solely
for the purpose of determining in-situ stress. To obtain representative stress data, as
well as characteristic fluid loss, it is essential that the volume of fluid pumped cre-
ate a fracture of significant dimensions. For this reason, a pump-in test is usually
preceded by a step rate test to ensure that the propagation pressure is obtained and a
fracture is created.
ISIP
ISIP
The basic principle of this type of injection test is to create and propagate a fracture
in order to monitor the natural pressure decline following shut-in. Once the pres-
sure and time data is acquired, various graphical methods are used to identify the
closure event. Diagnostic plots involving numerous time and characteristic func-
tions can be produced to identify fracture behavior. For high permeability wells, a
Horner plot is sometimes used to identify pseudo-radial flow. The utility of this plot
is based on the concept that if a semi-log straight line is observed, the flow is
pseudo radial and therefore, the fracture is closed during the remaining portion of
the test. That is, data beyond the point of pseudo-radial flow is not used to evaluate
closure time.
To pick the closure time, normally, a plot of pressure versus square root of time is
a good place to start. For this time function, initially, pressure should decline along
a straight line indicating linear flow in the fracture. The point at which the fracture
closes should be marked by a distinct change in slope. Unfortunately, depending on
the relative relationship between the physical properties of the fracture and the res-
ervoir, the change in slope may be either positive, negative or so subtle that it is not
detected. Different situations require different diagnostic plots (i.e., different X-axis
functions) to interpret the closure event. When conditions result in an inability to
identify closure (e.g., low permeability resulting in long closure times), a Pump-In/
Flowback test may be required.
Pump-In/Flowback
When fluid loss is extremely low, as it is in many low permeability reservoirs, the
increased time required for a fracture to close due to natural pressure decline can
make the identification of closure extremely difficult. When this scenario is likely,
the closure identification process may be augmented by using a Pump-In/Flowback
procedure. This type of test uses constant rate flowback immediately following the
injection to increase the deflation rate of the fracture. Flowback is designed to
match the order-of-magnitude rate of leakoff. The objective is to affect the pressure
response in such a way as to develop a characteristic curvature (S-shaped) that
reverses from positive up to positive down (see Figure 4.1). This procedure usually
involves trial and error to determine the proper flowback rate. The return rate is
typically controlled using a manifold assembly containing operable valves (e.g.,
gate valves) or an adjustable choke. A low-rate flow meter is also beneficial in
monitoring the flowback rate and may allow digital acquisition of the data for sub-
sequent analysis.
Figure 4.1: Idealized Flowback Pressure.
Using flowback to close a fracture is based on an interpretation of the closure pro-
cess that produces at least three distinct stages of pressure versus time behavior.
Each stage represents a change in characteristic behavior, described as follows.
During the first stage, fracture deflation, due to leakoff and flowback, dominates
the pressure response producing a pressure trend that appears similar to natural
decline (i.e., concave up with respect to time). The second stage of the pressure
decline behavior is characterized as a transition from a fracture that is fully open to
one that is partially closed. It is this process that initiates the desired curvature
reversal.
The fracture continues to close and the communication between it and the wellbore
is choked as a result of decreasing conductivity and corresponding flowback rate.
The restriction caused by fracture closure reduces the wellbore recharge rate result-
ing in an increase in the relative wellbore deflation rate. This produces a character-
istic acceleration in the rate of pressure decline as the wellbore pressure is reduced.
Once this point of acceleration is identified, the fracture is assumed to be closed.
The identification of this point is typically made using a plot of the derivative
( ) to illustrate the change of pressure with respect to time. The maximum
point on the derivative plot represents the maximum rate-of-change in the pressure
decline and, therefore, the point at which the fracture is closed
8,16
.
Derivative Method
Analyzing the derivative, as a function of time is another method of deter-
mining closure. The resulting trend represents the rate-of-change in the pressure
p d t d
p d t d
with respect to time. Depending on the type of data (i.e., flowback or natural
decline), the derivative plot can be used to identify the closure by observing a char-
acteristic change in the shape of this relationship. Refer to Figure 4.2 for an exam-
ple of the desired trends.
Figure 4.2: Idealized Pressure and Derivative Trends for Time and Slope.
Basic Concepts
The fundamental methodology implemented in the MinFrac Program is discussed
by Nolte
1-5
, Castillio
6
, and Meyer
8
.
The basic concepts essential to using MinFrac and understanding the results are dis-
cussed below for each type of analysis:
Natural Decline Flowback
P
Time
t
c
P
dP
dt
Time
P
dP
dt
dP
dt
P
Root Time
P
dP
dt
Root Time
Step Rate Analysis
A step rate test is used to determine the fracture extension pressure. This is typi-
cally considered the upper bound for the minimum horizontal stress or closure pres-
sure.
After breakdown, fluid is pumped at increasing flow rates in a stair-step fashion.
Ideally, each flow rate is maintained until a stabilized pressure is achieved. In lieu
of achieving a stabilized pressure, it has been proposed periods of equal time for
each flow rate can be used. Regardless, the bottomhole pressure at the end of each
rate interval is then plotted versus rate to identify a change in slope. This change or
break indicates the start of fracture extension that is theoretically equal to the
magnitude of the closure pressure plus the fracture friction and propagation resis-
tance.
Step Down Analysis
The step down analysis is used to calculate perforation and near wellbore friction
losses. If the step down analysis is performed using surface treating pressure, the
pipe friction needs to be entered for analysis credibility. This analysis is used to
determine near wellbore pressure loss effects (i.e., problems with anomaly high
pressures which may cause a near wellbore screen-out).
This analysis is performed after fracture propagation has been established. Then
during shut down the rate is decreased in a stair-step fashion for a short period of
time while the pressure stabilizes. As the injection rate decreases, the pressure will
also decrease as a result of perforation and near wellbore pressure losses. The rela-
tionship between the decreasing rate and pressure results in a determination of near
wellbore pressure losses.
Horner Analysis
The Horner plot is used to determine if pseudo-radial flow developed during pres-
sure decline. If a semi-log straight line is observed and the line can be extrapolated
to a reasonable value of reservoir pressure, radial or pseudo-radial flow may be
affecting the decline behavior. This suggests that the fracture is already closed and
that data beyond the point of influence need not be considered in the evaluation of
closure.
The Horner plot provides a lower bound of the minimum horizontal stress or clo-
sure pressure.
Regression Analysis
Regression Analysis is a procedure whereby time dependent rate-pressure data dur-
ing fracture propagation and shut-in is analyzed to determine information regarding
fracture characteristics. The specific methodology used is given below:
1. Graphically identify the major events that occurred during the treatment cycle
(e.g., Initiation, , Closure etc.). Diagnostic plots can be generated using a
variety of time functions. These plots are used in the determination of closure.
In addition, a statistical procedure can be invoked to automatically determine
closure.
2. Once the events, including closure time, have been identified, parameters can
be selected and history matches performed comparing the theoretical response
to the actual measured data for each fracture model contained in the program.
A regression technique is used to minimize the difference between the model
results and the measured data. This process can be repeated as many times as
desired.
3. When satisfied with the combination of history-matched responses and param-
eter optimization for the fracture geometry models, calculation of the fracture
geometry and associated fluid loss parameters can be made.
The following information can be determined from a properly conducted Regres-
sion Analysis:
1. Instantaneous shut-in pressure, .
2. Closure pressure, .
3. Fracture net pressure, .
4. Closure time, .
5. Fracture efficiency, .
6. Fraction of PAD, and .
7. Parametric uncertainty (history match).
8. Applicable fracture model (history match and net pressure).
9. Fracture area, , based on the best-fit geometry model.
ISIP
ISIP
p
c
Ap ISIP p
c
=
t
c
q G t
c
( ) 2 G t
c
( ) + ( ) ~
f
pad
min
1 q ( )
2
~ f
pad
max
1 q ( ) 1 q + ( ) ~
A
10. Leakoff coefficient, , if the fracture area is known.
Derivative Method
The Derivative Method is one of the methodologies for determining inflection
points (i.e. fracture closure). Analyzing the derivative, as a function of time
is a method of determining closure. The resulting trend represents the rate-of-
change of pressure with respect to time. Depending on the type of data (i.e., flow-
back or natural decline), the derivative plot can be used to identify the closure by
observing a characteristic change in the shape of this relationship.
Nolte
1-5
was the first to implement this concept. In simple terms, if one can find a
time function where the rate of pressure decline with respect to a time function is a
constant during fracture closure, the closure time would be indicated by a deviation
from the measured and theoretical pressure declines. This concept is formulated
below:
or
Where is the pressure, , and is a time function.
The time function Nolte purposed was the Nolte G time (i.e., ). Table
4.2 lists a number of other time functions also used in MinFrac. During closure the
user may perform a minifrac analysis with a time function that gives the best fit
pressure decline match with an inflection point at closure. Although this time func-
tion may give the best fit, it may not be a unique solution.
Table 4.2: MinFrac Time Functions.
Log/Log Slopes*
Time Scale Definition Storage Fracture
Radial
Flow
Data Time - - -
C
p d t d
ISIP p + ( ) +
+ d
d
ISIP p ( ) +
+ d
dP
= =
p + ( ) ISIP +
+ d
dP
=
p P ISIP p = +
P GdP dG =
t
Data
After Closure Analysis
The purpose of the after closure analysis is to determine the formation permeability
and reservoir pressure from the pressure response of a fractured (or unfractured)
well during the infinite-acting time period (i.e., late time period or radial solution).
Following is a brief summary of the after closure analysis. A detailed formulation
and description of the governing equations is presented in Appendix K.
General Equation
The general form of the after closure pressure response is
(4-1)
where is slope, is a time function and is the straight line intercept at
.
Permeability and Reservoir Pressure
As discussed above, if the pressure is plotted against in Cartesian coordinates,
the late time portion of the curve should follow a straight line. The permeability
can be calculated from the slope of the straight line (i.e., ). The apparent
Time - - -
Delta Time 1 1/2 1/4
Nolte Time 1 1/2 1/4
Root Theta Time 2 1 1/2
Root Delta Time 2 1 1/2
Root Nolte Time 2 1 1/2
Nolte G Time 2 1 1/2
Data Start of Pumping Time = , Data End of Pumping Time =
Pumping Time; .
See the Meyer Appendices for additional information on these functions.
Table 4.2: MinFrac Time Functions.
t t
Data
INIT =
At t t
p
=
t
D
t t
p
1 =
O'
1 2
t t
p
( )
1 2
1 =
At
1 2
t t
p
( )
1 2
=
t
D
1 2
t t
p
1 ( )
1 2
=
G f t t
p
... , , ( ) =
INIT EP
t
p
EP INIT =
p p* m F =
m F p*
F 0 =
p F
k
m k 1 m
reservoir pressure can be found from the intercept of the extension of the
straight line with the axis.
Diagnostic Plots and Derivatives
Diagnostic plots similar to those used in the regression analysis using the Nolte G
function can be used to help identify radial flow (pressure transient). The general
relationships are given below.
Taking the derivative of Eq. (4-1) with respect to the time function, we find
(4-2)
or
(4-3)
Therefore at late time (small values of ) the measured pressure data should over-
lay Eq. (4-3) in Cartesian coordinates. Figure 4.3 illustrates the use of Eq. (4-3) by
overlaying the derivative function to help identify the intercept (reservoir pressure)
and late time slope (permeability).
p*
F 0 =
dp dF m =
p p* F
dp
dF
------- + =
F
Figure 4.3: After Closure Analysis - Surface Pressure vs. Nolte - FR Linear
Plot.
If a plot (see Figure 4.4)of net pressure vs. is generated, the pres-
sure should overlay the following equation
(4-4)
Ap p p* = F
Ap p = p* F
dp
dF
------- =
Figure 4.4: After Closure Analysis - Delta Pressure vs. Nolte - FR Linear
Plot.
Taking the natural log of Eq. (4-4) we find
(4-5)
Therefore, the net pressure curve in log space should also overlay the derivative
function for radial flow.
Another important derivative is the log slope. Taking the natural log of Eq. (4-1) we
find
(4-6)
where for the slope is equal to the net pressure (i.e., ).
Eq. (4-6) also illustrates that if is plotted versus , the log-log slope
will approach unity for large times. That is
as
Ap ( ) ln F
dp
dF
-------
\ .
| |
ln =
p p* ( ) ln m ( ) F ( ) ln + ln =
F 1 = p p* ( ) ln m ( ) ln =
Ap ( ) ln F ( ) ln
d Ap ( ) ln
d F ( ) ln
-------------------- 1 F 0
as shown in Figure 4.5.
Figure 4.5: After Closure Analysis - Delta Surface Pressure vs. Nolte- FR Log-
Log Plot
Please refer to Appendix K for a detailed formulation and description of the gov-
erning equations.
Menu
The Meyer MinFrac menu bar is shown in Figure 4.6.
Figure 4.6: MinFrac Main Menu.
4.2 Options
This section describes the various options available in MinFrac. The Menu layout
(see Figure 4.6) and Data options are as shown in Figure 4.7. A complete descrip-
tion of the options is presented in this section.
4.2 Options 317
Figure 4.7: MinFrac Data Menu.
To access the Options screen, select the Data|Options menu. The dialog box dis-
played in Figure 4.8 will then be presented. The default menu selection of the radio
button is Graphical Technique Use real-time data from MView opening a new
file.
Figure 4.8: Options Screen.
itself varies depending on the options selected. The selections made in the Data
Options screen set the scope for data used in MinFrac. These options establish the
General technique, Graphical and Fracture options.
General Options
The General Options screen allows the user to specify the type of Graphical or user
specified technique used to perform the analysis. Figure 4.9 shows the General
Options screen.
Figure 4.9: General Options.
To take full advantage of MinFracs ability to process acquired pressure and rate
data, choose one of the Graphical Technique options. Selecting the Graphical
Technique option configures the program for graphically analyzing the data from
an actual minifrac treatment. This data can be replay data from a text file or Replay/
Real-Time data sent by MView.
The third choice is to simply perform minifrac closure and geometry calculations.
To use MinFrac to perform calculations only, select the User Specified Closure
option. This option is not recommended, since the user is required to specify the
pertinent regression data of closure time, pressure, etc. This option is used to per-
form parametric studies with different scenarios for various closure times and
hence fracture efficiencies.
Graphical Technique - Use data from a text file
Select this option to import data from a text file directly into MinFrac.
4.2 Options 319
Graphical Technique - Use real-time data from
MView
Select this option to use the real-time or replay data from MView for the graphical
analysis. When using this option, all of the plots will update automatically when
real-time data is acquired. This is the recommended method.
User Specified Closure
If the complete pressure and rate data records are not available to analyze, or if clo-
sure time is to be determined by another method, select User Specified Closure.
This selection will disable all data input that corresponds to graphical analysis and
simply present data dialog boxes that require characteristic reservoir and fracture
data.
In addition to the reservoir data, specific information regarding the minifrac must
also be entered. For User Specified Closure the following information is required:
Injection rate
Volume injected or injection time
Closure time
Closure pressure
Graphical Options
The Graphical Options are only fully available if a Graphical Technique option is
selected in the General Options box. The Graphical Options provide choices for the
User Specified Pumping Data, Derivative, Mouse Button and Wizard steps. Figure
4.10 shows the Graphical Option choices.
Figure 4.10: Graphical Options.
The Graphical option allows you to decide where specific information for the anal-
ysis will be obtained. This set of options is provided for occasions when a complete
data set is not available for analysis. When this occurs, the data set can be supple-
mented by using the calculation facility contained in this dialog.
User Specified Pumping Data
Interpretation of a minifrac treatment requires that the rate and volume of fluid
injected be defined.
These may be defined graphically (recommended if rate data is available) or manu-
ally. Select the option that corresponds to how you want to enter the data. To enter
all data graphically, choose Nothing (All data taken from graph).
These variables are necessary to determine fluid efficiency and the leakoff coeffi-
cients for each fracture model. The program is capable of obtaining these from the
rate and pressure versus time graphs by using the event selections to start or end a
time interval for processing. The data contained within a time interval (e.g.,
between Initiation and End of Pumping) must contain sufficient data to identify
the injection period, as well as the period of pressure decline. For those instances,
when data is missing from the imported file, it must be entered in this dialog or cal-
culations cannot be performed. For example, when only the bottomhole pressure
and time records are available, the injection rate and volume or some complemen-
4.2 Options 321
tary combination of time and volume, or rate and time must be input in order to
continue with the analysis.
The injection time found in the calculator portion of this dialog is considered to be
At. This is important because of the link between these values and those that may be
obtained graphically (i.e., end of pumping time, ISIP time, closure time, etc.).
Derivative
This option pertains to the three-point method used to calculate the derivative in the
regression plots. However, since many data pressure values stay constant over a
few time steps, a three-point method would result in many data points having a
derivative of zero. To avoid this situation, consecutive points are not used.
Percentage of (MAX-MIN) used to find the derivative at each point
The Derivative Option allows you to enter the percentage of the data between the
MIN and the MAX values used to calculate the derivative. For example, a value of
12% indicates that for each point, the derivative is calculated using 12% of the total
range defined between the MIN and MAX selections. Therefore, when possible,
data within 6% on either side of a calculation point is used.
Use right mouse buttons to select points
The default is to select points with the left mouse button. To select points with the
right mouse button, check this box. It is recommended to leave this box unchecked.
Minimize number of wizard steps
The Wizard Analysis allows the user to step through the different analyses system-
atically. The wizard also has an option (see the Wizard screen) to have a description
of the next step visible or hidden in the regression plots. The description and proce-
dure for doing the analyses is beneficial for first time users or as a refresher. Conse-
quently, the only time this box should be unchecked is if you want the wizard to
step you through (very slowly) every detail of the procedure.
If the values entered in the Graphical Calculation Options dialog are input prior
to importing the actual data records and subsequently these values are specified
graphically, it will be necessary to return to this option screen and reset the
option to: Nothing (All data taken from graph). This will allow the actual data
values to take precedence over those input manually in this data screen. Keep in
mind that these options are global for a given interpretation. Changing them to
obtain a different set of results will change the entire analysis.
It is recommended that this box be checked. Also, if you have to click next a num-
ber of times to proceed to the next step in the regression analysis, you may have this
box unchecked.
Fracture Options
Clicking the Fracture tab found in the Options screen will access this group of
options. The Fracture Options provide choices for the fracture geometry model and
constitutive relationships that affect the fracture solution methodology. Figure 4.11
shows the Fracture Option choices.
Figure 4.11: Fracture Options Screen.
(i.e., unchecked). For this case, the classical solution for fluid flow in a rectangular
factor takes the form:
f
D
24 Re =
D
u
2
w =
4.2 Options 323
Deviations from laminar flow effect the frictional dissipation in the fracture and,
therefore, on the pressure predicted by a model. Turbulent flow in the fracture may
also occur when very low viscosity fluids (e.g., gas) are pumped at high rates. To
account for turbulent flow and improve the ability to predict non-laminar frictional
pressure loss in a fracture, the following friction factor expression is used when the
Fracture Friction Model is turned on:
tion. These effects can be modeled by increasing the a coefficient or modifying the
wall roughness factor discussed below.
Typical values for the a and b coefficients have been developed empirically in
accordance with Prandtl's Universal Law of the Wall
17
as shown in Table 4.3.
Wall Roughness
When this option is turned off (not checked), the Darcy friction factor inside the
fracture is used without modification as determined from the selections made in the
Fracture Friction Model option. This selection assumes that the fracture surface is
a smooth planar feature without roughness.
this option on. This will result in an increase in the frictional pressure drop and
shown below:
Turbulent flow
30,000 < Re < 10
6
; a=0.08; b=0.20
Turbulent flow
Re > 10
6
; a=0.035; b=0.14
f
D
a
Re
b
--------- =
where
18-21
Tip Effects
The observed field pressures for some treatments are at times much higher than the
simulated pressure. This discrepancy in measured pressure can be minimized in a
number of ways. Typically, the friction factor multiplier, fracture toughness, near
f
D
'
M
f
f
D
=
f
D
'
f
D
M
f
4.2 Options 325
a match. However, if the pressure discrepancy is due to excess pressure, an over-
pressure function can be applied at the tip. In MinFrac, excess pressure can be
applied using two mechanisms: 1) Fracture Toughness, and 2) Tip Over-pressure.
Over-pressure, as it is incorporated in MinFrac, accounts for the extra pressure
Tip effects, in general, remain an area of some controversy and considerable discus-
sion. Plausible explanations for these effects have been proposed. The possibilities
include tip friction due to flow resistance, rock properties effects (e.g., toughness as
a function of stress at the leading edge or poroelasticity), or it may be a conse-
quence of fracture geometry (e.g., complex geometry and/or multiple fractures).
In this version of MinFrac, tip effects represent a flow resistance at the tip. Regard-
less of whether you believe this flow resistance is due to viscosity effects or some
other phenomena related to the tip region (e.g., tip geometry) the general effect on
pressure is typically the same (i.e., resistance is resistance). It is important to note,
however, that this type of resistance differs from fracture toughness in its classical
application; over-pressure varies with injection rate and time, fracture toughness
does not.
The range of the over-pressure factor allowed by MinFrac is between 0 and 1.0. If
this option is disabled, a default value of zero is used. Usually, the Tip Effect option
is suggested when the measured injection pressures are well above the theoretical
values predicted by a classical model (i.e., Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics).
pressure, one approach is to use MinFrac to automatically regress on the tip factor
to determine an appropriate value. This best fit value from matching the net pres-
sure in a minifrac analysis is a good place to start.
loss also changes instantly whereas the fracture net pressure cannot because of stor-
age (i.e., if the rate drops suddenly and the BHTP follows, this is not excess pres-
sure but frictional dissipation in the near wellbore region).
Proppant Effects
Analysis of the pressure decline from a fracture containing proppant (i.e., interfer-
ence closure) requires special considerations. If the fracture is partially filled with
proppant, the fracture will close on the proppant before all of the fluid leaks off.
The propped fracture volume corresponds to the reduction in fluid required to leak-
off before the fracture closes. The limiting case occurs if the fracture is 100%
packed with proppant. This exists when the Propped Fraction entered in the Frac-
ture Model Options dialog box is set to 1 (see Figure 4.11). For this scenario, the
fracture closure time would be equal to 0 (see Appendix F).
4.3 Data Input 327
If there is no proppant in the fracture, the entire volume in the fracture at the end of
pumping must leakoff into the reservoir before the fracture actually closes (unless it
does not close totally). This case corresponds to a value of 0 for the Propped Frac-
tion. The fracture closure time and pressure can be obtained using the methodology
given in Appendix F.
4.3 Data Input
In addition to the actual treatment records imported for use by the program, other
parameters characterizing the reservoir physical and mechanical properties are
required. All analyses are performed with 2-D fracture geometry models, which
greatly reduces the required data input.
Use the Data menu commands to input data (see Figure 4.7). The Closure Data
command is only activated if the User Specified Closure option has been previ-
ously selected. Likewise, the History Matched Data command is not enabled
unless the Graphical Technique is used. This section explains the Data menu input
screens.
The input data requirements are presented below.
Description
miscellaneous information about the specific analysis being performed.
Figure 4.14: Description Dialog Box - MinFrac.
Base Data
The Base Data dialog box shown in Figure 4.15 provides the information neces-
sary to describe the rock properties, fluid rheology and fracture parameters. Each of
these data items are discussed below.
4.3 Data Input 329
Figure 4.15: Base Data Dialog Box.
Young's Modulus
under load. It is therefore a measure of the materials stiffness. As the stiffness (E)
Table 4.4: Youngs Modulus for Various Rock Types.
Rock Type Range
(10
6
psi)
Range
(10
7
kPa)
Limestone-Reef Breccia 1 - 5 0.5 - 3
Limestone-Porous or Oolitic 2 - 7 1 5
Limestone-Med. to Fine Grained 4 - 11 2.8 - 7.6
Dolomite 6 - 13 4.14 - 9
Fracture Toughness
defects exist and induce high stress concentrations in their vicinity. These sites
become points for crack initiation and propagation. See the MFrac chapter for more
information.
Hard, dense Sandstone 4 - 7 2.8 - 5.2
Medium Hard Sandstone 2 - 4 1.4 - 2.8
Porous, unconsolidated to poorly consolidated 0.1 - 2 0.35 - 1.4
a
c
T
T K
IC
ta
c
=
K
IC
o
K
I
o H
=
o
c
K
IC
H
=
H

4.3 Data Input 331
22
. Thiercelin
23
ing.
Setting the values of fracture toughness to zero will result in the classical hydraulic
fracturing propagation solutions dominated by viscous pressure loss. For very low
viscosity fluids, fracture toughness may be the dominant parameter controlling
fracture growth.
Poissons Ratio
Poissons ratio is defined as the ratio of the transverse strain to the axial strain
Typical Poisson's ratios for rock formations are 0.25. From parametric studies,
Table 4.5: Fracture Toughness Values for Various Rocks.
Formation Type
psi-in
1/2
kPa-m
1/2
Siltstone 950-1650 1040-1810
Sandstone 400-1600 440-1040
Limestone 400-950 440-1040
Shale 300-1200 330-1320
Poissons ratio is also used by logging companies to infer in-situ stresses. This
where
Total Leakoff Height
This is the total or net permeable height penetrated by the fracture for leakoff. This
may or may not be equal to the hydrocarbon pay thickness used to estimate produc-
tion. The total leakoff height is also referred to as the net pay zone thickness.
= Poissons ratio
= vertical stress or overburden
= component of stress due to tectonics
= Biots constant
Poissons ratio
u
=
c
w
c
l
c
w
0
=
w
Aw
c =
l
Al
l
0
Poissons ratio =
Lateral strain
Longitudinal strain
l
0
w
0
o
Hmin
u
1 u
------------
\ .
| |
o
v
op
0
( ) op
0
o
T
+ + =
o
Hmin
u
o
v
p
0
o
T
o
4.3 Data Input 333
Total Fracture Height
This is considered the total fracture height for the PKN and GDK fracture models.
These 2-D models have fixed fracture heights by definition (see Chapter 2). This
parameter is one of the most difficult to estimate and is one of the most important
input parameters used in the analysis of the minifrac treatment for the PKN model.
MinFrac has an option to history match on fracture height for the PKN model. The
total fracture height is not used for the ellipsoidal geometry model.
Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio
This is the ratio between the length of the major and minor ellipse axes. If this value
is equal to unity (1), the model reduces to the standard radial or penny shaped solu-
tion. Any value greater than one will produce an elliptical profile and correspond-
ing fracture area. For example, an Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio of two (2) results in a
fracture half length that equals the total height of the fracture.
Flow Behavior Index
Rheological characterization of non-Newtonian fluid is required to calculate the
frictional dissipation in the fracture. Fracturing fluids are most often characterized
by the power law model. This model is typically defined as:
where is the wall shear rate, is the wall shear stress, is the consistency
index, and is the flow behavior index (dimensionless).
Consistency Index
See the explanation of the flow behavior index above.
Spurt Loss Coefficient
spurt for both faces of a single wing fracture is
n' ( )
t
w
k'
n'
=
t
w
k'
n'
k' ( )
V
sp
V
sp
2AS
p
=
Total Vertical Depth
Enter the true vertical depth (TVD) to the center of the perforations. This parameter
is used to calculate the hydrostatic head required to adjust surface pressures to bot-
tomhole pressures.
Wellbore Fluid Specific Gravity
The specific gravity of the fluid occupying the wellbore during shut-in (i.e., pres-
sure decline) is required to calculate the hydrostatic head. This value, along with
the Total Vertical Depth described above, is needed when bottomhole pressure is
not available.
Flowback Time (after ISIP)
Because flowback data is rarely available in digital form, there is no graphical
option associated with this event. To include flowback in the calculations, the start-
ing time for flowback must be specified. Enter the shut-in time from the ISIP. For
any injection interval, this is the difference between the time flowback began and
the time of the ISIP.
Flowback Rate
The flowback rate is simply the average negative return flow rate following a
period of injection. This rate is applied in the calculations beginning at the Flow-
back Time (after ISIP) described above and continues until closure.
Leakoff Data
The Leakoff Data screen shown in Figure 4.17 is provided for the additional reser-
voir data needed to calculate the leakoff coefficients and permeability of the frac-
tured interval. Each of the data items in this screen are described below. The reader
is referred to Appendix D for additional information regarding fluid loss.
S
p
A
4.3 Data Input 335
Figure 4.17: Leakoff Data Dialog Box.
Average Reservoir Fluid Pressure
The average reservoir pressure is the fluid pressure in the pore spaces. This value
must be less than the fracture closure pressure. If it is not, a warning message will
be displayed. See Chapter 2 and Appendix D for additional information.
Total Reservoir Compressibility
where
= gas saturation
= oil saturation
= water saturation
c
t
S
o
c
o
S
w
c
w
S
g
c
g
c
r
+ + + =
c
g
c
o
c
r
c
t
c
w
S
g
S
o
S
w
where
Equivalent Reservoir Porosity
This is the fraction of a rocks bulk volume that is filled with mobile hydrocarbons.
This value is used to calculate the C
I
and C
II
leakoff coefficients. Refer to Appen-
dix D for information on the leakoff models contained in the program.
Equivalent Reservoir Viscosity
The equivalent reservoir viscosity is the total effective viscosity of a multiphase
fluid system at reservoir conditions. This value is used to calculate the C
II
leakoff
coefficient, which models the leakoff resistance due to the viscosity and compress-
ibility effects of the in-situ fluids.
Frac Fluid Leakoff Viscosity
Enter the effective viscosity of the fracturing fluid filtrate. This is the portion of the
fracturing fluid which passes through the fracture face. Its viscosity has been
reduced from its original magnitude due to the deposition of polymer on the frac-
ture face to form a filter cake, as well as, environmental consequences (i.e., stress
and temperature). This parameter is used to calculate the C
I
coefficient for model-
ing viscosity and relative permeability effects caused by the fracturing fluid.
= equivalent reservoir permeability
= pressure
= time
= distance
= equivalent reservoir viscosity
= equivalent reservoir porosity
t c
cp k
c
t
|
-----------
\ .
| |
z
2
2
c
c p
=
c
t
k
p
t
z
|
| ( )
r
( )
e
( )
4.3 Data Input 337
Filter Cake Coefficient
resistance, whereas, a C
III
value approaching infinity (e.g., >100 ) repre-
sents no wall building. This coefficient is a component in calculating the total leak-
off coefficient C. The filter cake reduces the fluid loss rate by increasing the
resistance due to leakoff at the fracture face.
Closure Data
When using MinFrac with the User Specified Closure (i.e., no imported data file),
it is necessary to enter specific information regarding injection rate, volumes and
closure time, in addition to the reservoir and leakoff data described in the preceding
sections. This data is entered in the Closure Data dialog box shown in Figure 4.18.
The items contained in this dialog box are defined below.
e

f
k
r
=
f
k
r
C
III
( )
ft min
Figure 4.18: Closure Data Dialog Box.
Injection Rate (2-wings)
The average injection rate is required when the actual rate data is not available.
Make sure the product of this value and the Pumping Time is equal to the volume
pumped. The injection rate is also used to couple the closure time to the fracture
propagation solution (see Appendix F).
Pumping Time
The total pump time is needed to calculate the volume of fluid injected during a
treatment. This value is also needed to calculate certain required time functions,
such as the dimensionless total time, (see Appendix F). The value required is the
total time of injection (i.e., the difference between the start and end of pumping).
Closure Time (after ISIP)
This is perhaps the single most important parameter required for the calculations.
From closure, an estimation of fluid efficiency is determined. The fracture propaga-
tion characteristics are also predicted by coupling the closure time with the govern-
ing mass and momentum equations. Determining a definitive closure time can be
difficult for some data sets. The recommended procedure is presented in Section
4.4. This value is the delta time after ISIP to closure.
Closure Pressure
Fracture closure pressure or the minimum horizontal stress is needed to define the
net pressure during injection. The net fracturing pressure, , is the difference
u
Ap
net
4.3 Data Input 339
between the pressure in the fracture, , and the closure pressure, ,
(i.e., ). These values can be determined by performing a
minifrac analysis as discussed below.
History Match Data
The Graphical Technique can be used to process treatment data and evaluate dif-
ferent model parametric effects when adequate information is available. This pro-
cess, referred to as History Matching, uses regression analysis to compare and
improve the theoretical pressure response with the actual measured data.
The regression parameters can be selected from the Regression Analysis window.
During the regression (i.e., History Match) the selected parameters are optimized to
minimize the error between the measured and calculated pressure decline. When
the best fit is achieved (i.e., error is minimized), the regression is complete. For
more information on History Matching, see the Regression Analysis section.
The individual fracture model data values used in the regression can be viewed and
edited by accessing the History Match Data dialog shown in Figure 4.19. This
screen is not updated until after the first regression is performed. The values dis-
played or entered in this dialog box are the values used each time a new regression
is started (i.e., the History Match is performed). These values are also reported in
the History Match section of the report. The first time you regress on a data set, this
screen contains the values entered in the Base Data dialog box. Each subsequent
regression analysis then uses the History Match Data contained in this screen. To
reset all values to the base data press Reset to Base Data. For reference, the origi-
nal Base Data values are shown on the right hand side in the dialog box.
Figure 4.19: History Match Data Dialog Box.
p
fracture
p
closure
Ap
net
p
fract ure
p
closure
=
For information on the individual parameters in this screen, refer to the appropriate
part of the Base Data section.
Import Data File
If the Graphical Technique Use data from an ASCII text file is selected, the
Import Data function can be accessed by selecting the Data|Import Data File
menu. When using this option, an ASCII file must be imported into MinFrac before
graphical analyses are performed.
There are two steps to importing a data file, selecting a file and importing the
parameters.
Selecting a Data File
To Select an ASCII Data File for Importing:
1. From the Import menu, select Import Data File. The screen shown in Figure
4.20 will be presented.
2. Browse to select the file to import.
3. Once a file is highlighted, use the OK button to finalize the selection. The dia-
log box shown in Figure 4.21 will be presented.
Figure 4.20: Import Data - File Open Dialog Box.
4.3 Data Input 341
Figure 4.21: Import Data Format Screen.
The file should be an ASCII file with columns of data separated by commas, spaces
or tabs. Text headers at the top of the file will be ignored. Any text in between rows
of data will also be ignored.
To sample the data contained in the spreadsheet, specify the sampling frequency by
entering a number in the Sample every box. For example, to use every fifth data
point, enter a 5 in this box. MinFrac can select a maximum of 86,400 lines of data
from a file. If there are more than 86,400 lines of data in a file, it will be necessary
to adjust the Sample every box so that 86,400 lines or less of data are actually
imported. The other option is to adjust the Data starts at row and Data ends at row
values to limit the number of selected rows to a maximum of 86,400.
Edit Imported Data
After a data file has been imported successfully, the data may be viewed and edited.
To Edit Imported Data:
1. From the Main menu, select the Data|Edit Imported Data menu. The dialog
box shown in Figure 4.22 will be displayed containing the current data. If this
option is dimmed, data has not yet been imported.
2. Click on a row or record to change and type the correction. Press ENTER to
accept the changes.
3. To copy a selection to the Clipboard, select the desired rows by clicking on
their row numbers. Then click on the Copy button.
4. To delete row(s) of data, select the desired rows by clicking on the row num-
bers. Then click on the Delete button.
5. When you are finished editing the file use the OK button to close the editing
window and accept all changes. Use the Cancel button to abort and discard the
changes made.
Figure 4.22: Edit Imported Data Dialog Box.
Note any changes made here will only affect the imported data, no changes will
be made to the original ASCII file.
4.4 Analysis 343
A more powerful method to edit data is to use the graphical editing features in
MView (see Chapter 3).
4.4 Analysis
The main purpose of MinFrac is to graphically analyze time dependent rate and
pressure data associated with minifrac treatments. This section summarizes the
options and features involved in performing graphical analyses.
The fracture data found in the Data menu is used for history matching and model
dependent parameter optimization. A minifrac analysis to find fracture efficiency
and closure pressure can be performed without knowledge of the specific fracture
model.
To use MinFrac as a graphical tool for processing minifrac data, choose one of the
Graphical Technique options. After importing all the data, begin an analysis using
the commands under the Analysis menu.
Figure 4.23 shows the Analysis menu in MinFrac. The different types of analyses
available displayed under the Analysis menu are Analysis Wizard, Step Rate, Step
Down, Horner, Regression, and After Closure. The Analysis Wizard is a step by
step tool for performing all types of different analyses.
Figure 4.23: Analysis Menu.
The analysis menu and methodology for performing minifrac analysis has evolved
over the years. A detailed description of all the analyses is presented below for con-
tinuity.
Since each analysis begins with the Select Ranges menu, a general Select Ranges
procedure is presented first.
Select Ranges
By default, MinFrac uses the entire range of imported time and pressure data for an
analysis. This command provides the capability to work with a limited range of
data (i.e., when multiple injection cycles have been recorded).
Figure 4.24 shows a typical Select Ranges menu item for the Step Rate Analysis.
Figure 4.24: Select Ranges Menu.
The dialog box as shown in Figure 4.25 is only displayed if both surface and bot-
tomhole pressure data are available.
Figure 4.25: Select Ranges Dialog Box for Pressure.
The radio buttons in the Select Ranges dialog box are used to indicate which pres-
sure to use in the analysis if both are available. After making your selections, click
the OK button and a plot of the data will be generated. An example is shown in Fig-
ure 4.26.
4.4 Analysis 345
Figure 4.26: Select Ranges Plot.
The plot created using the Select Ranges procedure includes all of the imported
data. The purpose of this plot is to graphically define a range of data to use for anal-
ysis. To make a selection slide the mouse to the left or right edge of the highlighted
data range. Then drag the highlighted edge horizontally to bracket a segment of
time on the plot. This is accomplished by using the left mouse button. Click and
hold the mouse button while dragging the vertical edge to the desired position.
Release the button to fix the position of the highlighted edge. Remember the color
filled region outlines the range used for the analysis.
Notice that the Start and Stop position is continuously displayed in the upper left-
hand corner of the plot dialog (or where you graphically place the box). The abso-
lute position of the selected range can be viewed and edited by choosing the Range
Menu button as shown in Figure 4.27. The Range Menu has two options: Extend
Range to the End of Data and Edit Selections. This displays a dialog box contain-
ing the coordinates of the selected range (see Figure 4.28).
Figure 4.27: Range Menu Items.
Figure 4.28: Range - Edit Selections Dialog Box.
The Range|Extend Range to End of Data menu defines the end of the range to be
the end of the data. This is useful for working with real-time data when the end time
of the data is continually increasing.
4.4 Analysis 347
Analysis Wizard
The Analysis Wizard is a systematic method for selecting and performing minifrac
analyses. The Wizard allows for all the analyses under the Analysis menu (Step
Rate, Step Down, Horner, Regression, and After Closure).
This Analysis Wizard section is a How to use the Wizard presentation. The
details on performing a specific analysis are discussed in the individual analysis
sections presented below.
Figure 4.29 shows the Analysis|Analysis Wizard menu. To utilize the many
menus and features in the Wizard, systematically follow the Wizard steps.
Figure 4.29: Analysis Wizard Menu.
The purpose of the Wizard is to organize and step the user through an analysis. This
is a great way for novice users to begin or for experienced users to set up a Wizard
template for performing analyses consistently.
The Wizards systematic menu methodology will step you through the analysis and
will not allow you to access a dependent procedure until the previous step has been
performed. Informational help screens are provided at the top of each Wizard step
to guide you in performing a particular analysis.
The Analysis|Analysis Wizard menu consists of two parts: Select Analyses and
Wizard Window.
Select Analyses
After selecting the Analysis|Analysis Wizard menu, the Select Analyses dialog
box will be displayed as shown in Figure 4.30.
Figure 4.30: Analysis Wizard - Select Analyses Dialog Box.
The Analysis Wizard|Select Analyses menu is setup very similar to the MFrac
Fluid, Proppant and Acid database dialogs. The buttons at the bottom of the screen
are used to Edit, Add, Delete or move the Selected Analyses Up or Down in the
Menu. The select analyses Save Analyses and Load Analyses buttons can be used
to save and load a file. This makes it easy to setup the MinFrac Wizard with stan-
dardized template analyses.
Select the OK button to enter the Wizard Window or Cancel to exit the Analysis
Wizard.
To add a selection to the Select Analyses menu select the Add button. Selecting the
Edit or Add buttons will bring up the menu shown in Figure 4.31.
Figure 4.31: Analysis Wizard - Edit Selections.
4.4 Analysis 349
This Edit Selection menu consists of the Analysis Type, Regression Options and
Report Options. The Regression Options are only highlighted if Analysis
Type|Regression is selected. Likewise, the Report Options will be dimmed unless
the Analysis Type|Report menu is selected.
Analysis Type
The analysis type provides a drop down selection box as shown in Figure 4.31. The
Analysis Types available are Step Rate, Step Down, Horner, Regression, After Clo-
sure, and Report. Each of these analyses is discussed below in detail. To generate a
report as one of your Wizard Window tabs select Analysis Type|Report.
If both the surface and bottomhole pressures are available for analysis, select the
Data Source drop down menu and choose either surface or bottomhole pressure.
Regression Options
If you choose Analysis Type|Regression the Regression Options will be high-
lighted (see Figure 4.32). Select the Regression Options Time Axis (e.g., Nolte G
time). The allowable choices are given in the drop down menu (see also Table 4.2).
Figure 4.32: Edit Analysis - Regression Options.
Next select the Right Axis derivative for Pressure (e.g., ISIP-GdP/dG). The
Regression Plots can display multiple Right Axis derivatives and are selected by
clicking the ... button which opens the Right Axis Derivatives dialog as shown in
Figure 4.33. Next, click the corresponding check boxes if you want to see the
Delta Pressure Log-Log and/or Linear analyses.
Figure 4.33: Edit Analysis - Select Axis.
If you want to perform a history match analysis check the History Match box.
Report Options
If you choose Analysis Type|Report the Report Options will be activated as
Figure 4.34: Edit Analyses - Report Options.
The Report Options specify which items you want to include in the report.
4.4 Analysis 351
Wizard Window
After selecting OK in the Analysis|Analysis Wizard|Select Analyses menu, the
Wizard Window will be displayed as shown in Figure 4.35. The number of folder
tabs corresponds directly to the number of analyses selected in the Analysis Wiz-
ard|Select Analyses menu.
Figure 4.35: Analysis Wizard - Wizard Window.
Please refer to the specific analysis in question when using the Select Points menu.
The Select Points menu is discussed below for each analysis.
At the top of the Wizard Window, descriptive text informs the user of any actions or
steps to be taken. Plot configuration and point selection features are also described
at the top right corner of each plot.
At the bottom of the Wizard Window is a set of selection buttons as shown in Fig-
ure 4.36.
Figure 4.36: Wizard Window - Select Buttons at Bottom.
The options at the bottom of the Wizard Window are; < Back, Next >,
Select Analyses and a check box to Hide Description.
To hide the descriptive text above the plot check Hide Description. This will
enlarge the viewable plot area as shown in Figure 4.37.
Figure 4.37: Wizard Window - Hide Description Checked.
The Select Analyses button will return you to the Analysis|Analysis Wiz-
ard|Select Analyses menu (see Figure 4.30). The < Back and Next > buttons are
used to navigate through each step of an analysis. After a step is completed you will
be allowed to proceed to the Next > step. The Back and Next buttons are addressed
4.4 Analysis 353
in the next section where a complete regression analysis in the Analysis Wizard is
presented.
Any time you are in the Wizard Window, each of the tabs will be displayed at the
step last viewed. The main menu Tool Bar will also change depending on the analy-
sis type.
Figure 4.38 shows the second Wizard Window tab for this example. Notice the drop
down Axes menu selection to change the right axis derivative function.
Figure 4.38: Wizard Window - Nolte G Time Plot with Axes Selected.
Figure 4.39 shows the next tab of Sqrt Delta time plot with the Select Points menu
selected. From the Select Points menu the user can perform all the point, line, hide,
edit etc., options in this menu. The Select Points menu for the Regression Analysis
is discussed below in the Regression Analysis section.
Figure 4.39: Wizard Window - Sqrt Delta Time with Select Points Menu.
Figure 4.40 shows the Report tab based on the Report Options selected. The full
report menu features are available in the Main Tool Bar.
4.4 Analysis 355
Figure 4.40: Wizard Window - Report.
Wizard Window Example
Following is an example session using the Wizard to perform a Regression Analy-
sis. The steps the Wizard takes you through are identical to the steps required to do
this analysis in the Analysis|Regression menu. Figure 4.41 shows the Nolte G
time Wizard Window the first time it is opened. The first step is to Select Ranges.
Descriptive text is shown above the Wizard Plot to help the user select the pump
time and pressure decline cycles.
Figure 4.41: Wizard Window - Select Ranges.
Selecting the Next > button will change the Wizard Window to the plot shown in
Figure 4.42. Here the Wizard asks the user to select the Min/Max Range Bar. This
can be done from the Select Points menu. Please refer to the Regression Analysis
section describing the Select Points menu Min/Max Range Bar.
4.4 Analysis 357
Figure 4.42: Wizard Window - Select Min/Max Range Bar.
The next step is to do the Regression Analysis to find closure by choosing the
Select Points menu. Figure 4.43 shows the Wizard Window for the Select
Points|Automatically Find Points menu. The instructions at the top of the Wiz-
ard Window describe the Select Points menu. The scroll bar can be used to show
additional comments.
Figure 4.43: Wizard Window - Select Points.
Figure 4.44 shows the next item in the Analysis Wizard| Select Analyses|Edit
Analyses menu (see Figure 4.31). This is the Nolte G time in log coordinates.
4.4 Analysis 359
Figure 4.44: Wizard Window - Delta Pressure Log Coordinates.
Figure 4.45 shows the Next > step of the Delta Pressure in linear coordinates with
the right axis derivative of GdP/dG.
Figure 4.45: Wizard Window - Delta Pressure Linear Coordinates.
The final item selected in the Analysis Wizard|Select Analyses|Edit Selections
menu is to history match the decline data (see Figure 4.31). The history match Wiz-
ard Window is shown in Figure 4.46. The pressure decline line as predicted by each
of the two-dimensional fracture models is shown on the plot. For each of the frac-
ture geometry models (GDK, PKN and Ellipsoidal) a drop down parameter selec-
tion menu is available. Choose the parameter to history match on and then press the
History Match button.
4.4 Analysis 361
Figure 4.46: Wizard Window - History Match.
The user has total control on which regression plots to place in the Wizard Window.
The Wizard allows you to create your own methodology of performing Step Rate,
Step Down, Horner, Regression, After Closure, and Report windows. The Wizard is
a tool, which will help minimize the complicated procedures by systematically per-
forming an Analysis.
Step Rate Analysis
A step rate test provides a means for determining the fracture propagation or exten-
sion pressure. Since the propagation pressure (dynamic condition) is typically on
the order of a few hundred psi (several hundred to several thousand kPa) greater
than the closure pressure (static condition), the value determined from this type of
procedure yields an upper bound for closure.
Figure 4.47 shows the Analysis|Step Rate menu. To perform a step rate analysis,
systematically follow the menu.
Figure 4.47: Step Rate Menu.
The Analysis|Step Rate menu consists of four parts: Select Ranges, Select Points,
Pressure Table and Diagnostic Plot. The first time you perform a Step Rate test with
a new data file all of the menu items will be dimmed except for the Select Ranges
as shown in Figure 4.48. The reason these menus are dimmed is that Select Points,
Pressure Table and Diagnostic Plot are all dependent on Select Ranges. Conse-
quently, this menu step-by-step methodology will not allow you to access a depen-
dent procedure until the previous step has been performed.
Figure 4.48: Step Rate Menu - Dimmed.
The menu command items for the Step Rate analysis are described in the sections
below.
Select Ranges
Using the graphical method described above in this section, select a range of data to
analyze by activating the Analysis|Step Rate|Select Ranges menu (Figure
4.48). Figure 4.49 shows a typical Select Ranges plot.
4.4 Analysis 363
Figure 4.49: Step Rate - Select Ranges Menu.
Select Points
To select the data points for the step rate analysis, click on the Step Rate|Select
Points menu item as shown in Figure 4.50.
Figure 4.50: Step Rate - Select Points Menu.
This will bring up a plot as shown in Figure 4.51. Once the Step Rate plot is dis-
played the mouse pointer changes to a vertical bar. Slide the bar horizontally to
align it with the time values to be used in the analysis. To choose a time, click the
left mouse button. Two markers will be displayed corresponding to the selection,
one on rate and the other on pressure.
Figure 4.51: Step Rate - Select Points Plot.
To edit or erase the selected points click on the Select Points menu shown in Figure
4.52. The Select Points|Edit Selections menu can be used to display and edit the
coordinates (Figure 4.53). To erase all of the data points use the Select
Points|Erase All menu. You can also erase selected points by clicking the mouse
button on an existing point.
Figure 4.52: Step Rate - Select Points Edit Menu.
4.4 Analysis 365
Figure 4.53: Step Rate - Edit Selections Dialog Box.
Pressure Table
To perform a meaningful Step Rate Analysis from the surface (or bottomhole) the
frictional pressure drop in the wellbore and across the perforations and the net frac-
ture pressure should be accounted for in the calculations.
To input the wellbore friction and perforation losses, and net fracture pressure
dependence on rate select the Analysis|Step Rate|Pressure Table menu (see Fig-
ure 4.54).
Figure 4.54: Step Rate - Pressure Table Menu.
After selecting the Pressure Table menu, the table shown in Figure 4.55 will be dis-
played.
Figure 4.55: Step Rate - Pressure Table.
Figure 4.55 shows the step rate pressure table with the selected rate and pressure
points in the first two columns, respectively.
Then the wellbore pressure loss (DP Fric) is entered. Since this case was with bot-
tomhole pressure data the DP Fric in the wellbore was set to zero. For surface pres-
sure the frictional pressure loss as function of rate should be specified.
The fracture net pressure (DP Frac) is then specified in column four. Once the frac-
ture begins to propagate the net pressure may be relevant to the analysis. In this
case a value of zero was entered for the fracture net pressure. As the net pressure
increases the calculated Extension Pressure will decrease.
Next is the ideal perforation pressure loss (DP Perf Ideal) as a function of rate. The
perforation pressure loss is calculated from the Specific Gravity of Fluid and the
Number, Discharge Coefficient, and Diameter of the perforations. Typical values
for the discharge coefficient are 0.60 for a sharp orifice entrance and 0.83 for a
rounded entrance. If no proppant has passed through the perforations select the
lower discharge coefficient value of 0.60.
The extension pressure (surface or bottomhole) is then calculated from the equa-
tion: Extension Pressure = Pressure DP Fric DP Frac DP Perf Ideal.
4.4 Analysis 367
Diagnostic Plot
When you finish editing the Pressure Table, choose the Step Rate|Diagnostic Plot
menu (see Figure 4.56). A diagnostic plot like the one shown in Figure 4.57 will be
presented.
Figure 4.56: Step Rate Diagnostic Plot Menu.
Figure 4.57: Step Rate - Diagnostic Plot.
Two lines may be placed on this plot to determine the extension pressure by locat-
ing two points per line. The active point is selected from the Select Points menu
(see Figure 4.58). To position a point on the plot click the left mouse button. The
points are labeled 1A, 1B, 2A and 2B. An alternative to manually selecting the
points and line positions is to perform the selection automatically by regression.
Figure 4.58: Step Rate - Automatically Find Points.
When the Select Points|Automatically Find Points menu is selected, as shown in
Figure 4.58, two lines are positioned by regression to a best fit of the data. This
method develops an intersection that many use as an upper bound to the extension
pressure. The intersection of the Y-axis at a rate of zero may also be taken as a min-
imum value of the extension pressure. This point may be a better representation of
the true extension pressure (minimum horizontal stress).
The intersection point of the two lines is generally considered the upper bound of
the closure pressure.
Step Down Analysis
The Step Down Analysis is used to calculate perforation and near wellbore friction
losses.
This analysis is performed after fracture initiation and propagation has been estab-
lished. During shut down the rate is decreased in a stair-step fashion for a short
period of time while the pressure stabilizes. As the injection rate decreases, the
pressure also decreases as a result of perforation and near wellbore pressure losses.
The relationship between the decreasing rate and pressure results in a mechanistic
approach for determining near wellbore losses.
If the step down analysis is performed using surface treating pressure, the pipe fric-
tion needs to be entered.
4.4 Analysis 369
Figure 4.59 shows the Analysis|Step Down menu. To perform a Step Down analy-
sis systematically, follow the menu steps.
Figure 4.59: Step Down Menu.
The Analysis|Step Down menu consists of four parts: Select Ranges, Select
Points, Pressure Table and Diagnostic Plot. The first time you perform a Step Down
analysis with a new data file all of the menu items will be dimmed except for the
Select Ranges as shown in Figure 4.60.
The reason these menu items are dimmed is that Select Points, Pressure Table and
Diagnostic Plot are all dependent on Select Ranges.
Figure 4.60: Step Down Menu - Dimmed Steps.
The menu command items for the Step Down analysis are described below.
Select Ranges
To select ranges click on the Analysis|Step Down|Select Ranges menu.
analyze by activating the Select Range Menu. Figure 4.61 shows a typical select
range plot.
Figure 4.61: Step Down Analysis - Select Ranges.
Select Points
To select the data points for the Step Down analysis, click on the Analysis|Step
Down|Select Points menu shown in Figure 4.62. As illustrated for a new data file,
the Pressure Table and Diagnostic Plot menus are dimmed since Select Points has
not been performed.
Figure 4.62: Step Down - Select Points Menu.
After accessing Select Points a plot will be displayed as shown in Figure 4.63. If
this is the first time you entered Select Points no markers will be on the curve.
4.4 Analysis 371
Figure 4.63: Step Down - Select Points Plot.
Once the Step Down plot is displayed the mouse pointer changes to a vertical bar.
Slide the bar horizontally to align it with the time values to be used in the analysis.
To choose a time, click the left mouse button. Two markers will be displayed corre-
sponding to the selection: one on rate and the other on pressure. The program will
automatically find a zero rate and associated pressure point.
To edit or erase the selected points click on the Select Points menu. The Select
Points|Edit Selections menu (Figure 4.64) can be used to display and edit the
coordinates (Figure 4.65). To erase all of the data points select Erase All. You can
also erase a set of selected points by placing the mouse pointer on the existing point
and left clicking the mouse button.
Figure 4.64: Step Down - Select Points Edit Selections Menu.
Figure 4.65: Step Down - Edit Selections Show Picks.
Pressure Table
To perform a meaningful Step Down Analysis from the surface (or bottomhole) the
wellbore losses, calculated perforation friction, and the net fracture pressure must
be accounted for in the calculations.
To input the wellbore friction and net fracture pressure dependence on rate select
the Analysis|Step Down|Pressure Table menu (see Figure 4.66).
4.4 Analysis 373
Figure 4.66: Step Down - Pressure Table Menu.
After selecting the Pressure Table menu, a table will be displayed as shown by Fig-
ure 4.67.
Figure 4.67: Step Down - Pressure Table.
Figure 4.67 shows the selected rate and pressure points in the first two columns.
The Delta Pressure is the next column which is calculated by subtracting the Pres-
sure at a given rate from the ISIP (i.e., Delta Pressure =Surface Pressure-ISIP).
The user-specified values for frictional pressure loss in the wellbore (DP Fric) and
fracture net pressure (DP Frac) go in the next two columns. The change in the
wellbore friction and net pressure from the ISIP (zero rate value) is then calculated
and placed in the Change DP Fric+ DP Frac column.
The total near wellbore loss including perforations (DP Total NW) is then calcu-
lated from the difference between Delta Pressure and Change DP Fric+ DP Frac.
The ideal perforation pressure loss (DP Perf Ideal) as a function of rate is calcu-
lated from the Specific Gravity of Fluid and the Number, Discharge Coefficient,
and Diameter of the perforations. Typical values for the discharge coefficient are
0.60 for a sharp orifice entrance and 0.83 for a rounded entrance. If no proppant
passes through the perforations select the lower discharge coefficient value of 0.60.
For surface pressure the frictional pressure loss as a function of rate should be spec-
ified. The fracture net pressure may be relevant to the analysis if it is rate/time
dependent. In this case a value of zero was entered for the fracture net pressure.
Entering a variable value for net pressure will change the calculated near wellbore
pressure loss. If the fracture net pressure is assumed to be relatively constant, it will
not effect the analysis.
The Apparent Number of Perfs is given in the last column. This is the equivalent
number of perforations that would have to be open to match the Total Near Well-
bore Pressure loss (DP Total NW).
Diagnostic Plot
When you finish editing the Pressure Table, choose the Analysis|Step
Down|Diagnostic Plot menu (see Figure 4.68). A diagnostic plot similar to the
one shown in Figure 4.69 will be presented.
Figure 4.68: Step Down Diagnostic Plot Menu.
4.4 Analysis 375
Figure 4.69: Step Down - Diagnostic Plot.
The diagnostic plot shows the Total Pressure Loss, Perforation Only and Near Well-
bore Only losses. The data points displayed by the markers are the calculated total
and near wellbore pressure losses as given in the Pressure Table (see Figure 4.67).
The near wellbore power coefficient (Alpha) for this case is shown to be 1.21018.
The total near wellbore pressure loss is calculated from the following equation:
where
= total pressure loss
= perforation (ideal) pressure loss
= near wellbore pressure loss
= perforation coefficient
= near wellbore coefficient
= injection rate
= near wellbore power coefficient
Ap
Total
Ap
Perfs
Ap
NW
+ K
Perfs
Q
2
K
NW
+ Q
o
= =
Ap
Total
Ap
Perfs
Ap
NW
K
Perfs
K
NW
Q
o
The near wellbore pressure loss and Alpha coefficient ( ) curve is calculated from
a regression analysis. If the near wellbore pressure loss is much less than the perfo-
ration or total pressure loss there probably is not a near wellbore problem (like this
example). If the alpha power coefficient is near two, it may be a condition where
not all the perforations are opened.
As discussed, the near wellbore pressure loss calculation is a combination of many
factors, pipe and perforation friction, and fracture pressure. If the flow in the well is
laminar the wellbore friction power coefficient may be near unity not 1.8 or 2.0.
Consequently, many apparent near wellbore problems with a low power coefficient
may just be the uncertainty in the laminar wellbore pressure loss. The flow rate in
the wellbore may be turbulent at the high rate values but as the rate decreases to
zero the Reynolds Number will be in the laminar region.
Horner Analysis
For some reservoirs it may be desirable to evaluate the decline data for production
effects (i.e., high permeability reservoirs) to determine the lower bound for fracture
closure. Normally, plotting pressure versus the log of Horner time will help identify
the onset of pseudo radial flow (i.e., fracture closure). This time function is typi-
cally defined as , or where is the pump time and is the
shut-in time that is equal to .
The Horner plot provides a lower bound, first estimate of closure pressure.
Figure 4.70 shows the Analysis|Horner menu. To perform a Horner analysis, fol-
low the menu steps.
The Horner menu consists of two parts: Select Ranges and Select Points. The first
time you perform a Horner analysis with a new data file Select Points will be
dimmed as shown in Figure 4.70. Again, the reason this menu is dimmed is because
Select Points is dependent on Select Ranges.
Figure 4.70: Horner Menu - Dimmed Steps.
o
t
p
t
s
+ ( ) t
s
t t t
p
( ) t
p
t
s
t t
p

4.4 Analysis 377
The menu command items for the Horner analysis are described below.
Select Ranges
To select the Horner range click on Analysis|Horner|Select Ranges menu (see
Figure 4.71).
Figure 4.71: Horner Menu - Select Ranges.
analyze. Figure 4.72 shows a typical select range plot.
Figure 4.72: Horner - Select Ranges.
For the Horner and Regression analyses two ranges must be selected. A range from
the initiation to end of pumping (Pump Time) and a range from the end of pumping
to the end of the pressure decline data (beyond closure) must be specified.
After the range cycles have been selected the Horner plot can be generated. This
analysis is only reliable if the fracture closes.
Select Points
To display the Horner Plot, click on the Analysis|Horner|Select Points menu
Figure 4.73: Horner - Select Points Menu.
After accessing the Analysis|Horner|Select Points menu a plot of the data will
be displayed as shown in Figure 4.74. If this is the first time you entered Select
Points no lines will be on the graph as illustrated. The pressure data is only plotted
from the Select Ranges data from the end of pumping to the end of the selected
range data (stop).
Figure 4.74: Horner - Raw Data Plot.
4.4 Analysis 379
Straight lines may be drawn on this Plot with the use of the Select Points menu.
Two points may be selected on the graph, 1A and 1B and a line will be drawn
between them. To select the points, choose the desired point from the Select Points
menu. Then click on the graph with the left mouse button. The coordinates of the
selected point are shown under the Select Points|Edit Selections menu.
To manually enter coordinates for the points, click on the Select Points|Edit
Selections menu. To click and drag the points that are already on the graph, click on
the Select Points|Drag Points menu. The mouse coordinates can also be shown
on the plot to pin point the start of pseudo-radial flow.
Figure 4.75 shows a typical line placement after closure. The deviation of the
straight line from the Horner data (Horner time of about 0.15 and pressure of about
5200 psi) signifies the start of pseudo radial flow and represents the lower bound
for the closure pressure.
Figure 4.75: Horner Plot - Lower Bound for Closure Pressure.
The Horner plot is used to determine if pseudo-radial flow developed during the
test. If a semi-log straight line is observed as shown in Figure 4.75 and the line can
be extrapolated to a reasonable value of reservoir pressure (4400 psi), radial or
pseudo-radial flow may be affecting the decline behavior. This conclusion suggests
that the fracture is already closed and that data beyond the point of influence need
not be considered in the evaluation of closure.
Regression Analysis
The main purpose of a minifrac analysis is to provide a method of estimating clo-
sure pressure, near wellbore effects, fracture dimensions, fluid efficiency, and leak-
off coefficients prior to designing and pumping the main treatment.
The various methods to estimate the upper and lower bounds of closure pressure are
the Step Rate and Horner analyses as addressed above. Near wellbore pressure
losses can be determined from a Step Down analysis as presented. These analyses
provide alternate ways to help identify the fundamental characteristics of wellbore
friction, perforation and near wellbore losses and closure pressure.
The following information can be determined from a properly conducted analysis:
1. Instantaneous shut-in pressure, .
2. Closure pressure, .
3. Closure time, .
4. Fracture efficiency, .
5. Fraction of PAD, and .
6. Fracture net pressure, .
7. Parametric uncertainty (history match).
8. Applicable fracture model (history match and net pressure).
9. Fracture area, , based on best-fit model.
10. Leakoff coefficient, , if the fracture area is known.
The derivative method is one of the MinFrac methodologies for determining inflec-
tion points (i.e. fracture closure). As discussed in Section 4.1, the derivative plot
can be used to identify closure by observing a characteristic change in the slope.
Figure 4.76 shows the Analysis|Regression menu. To perform a Regression Anal-
ysis, systematically follow the menu.
The Regression menu consists of three parts: Select Ranges, Select Points, and His-
tory Match. The first time you perform a Regression analysis with a new data file
ISIP
p
c
t
c
q G t
c
( ) 2 G t
c
( ) + | | ~
f
min
1 q ( )
2
~ f
max
1 q ( ) 1 q + ( ) ~
Ap ISIP p
c
=
A
C
4.4 Analysis 381
Select Points will be dimmed as shown in Figure 4.76. The reason this menu is
dimmed is because Select Points is dependent on Select Ranges.
Figure 4.76: Regression Menu - Dimmed Items.
The menu command items for the Regression analysis are described below.
Select Ranges
To select the Regression range click on Analysis|Regression|Select Ranges
menu (see Figure 4.76).
analyze. Figure 4.77 shows a typical select range plot. As illustrated this is the same
range as used for the Horner Plot (see Figure 4.72).
Figure 4.77: Regression - Select Ranges.
For the Regression analysis two ranges must be selected. A range from the initia-
tion to end of pumping (Pump Time) and a range from the end of pumping to the
end of the pressure decline data (beyond closure) must be specified.
After the ranges have been selected the regression plot can be generated.
Select Points
To display the regression analysis select points, click on the Analysis|Regres-
sion|Select Points menu shown in Figure 4.78.
Figure 4.78: Regression - Select Points.
4.4 Analysis 383
After accessing the Analysis|Regression|Select Points menu a plot of the data
will be displayed as shown in Figure 4.79. If this is the first time you entered Select
Points no lines will be drawn on the graph as illustrated. The pressure data is only
plotted from the Select Ranges data from the end of pumping to the end of the
selected data range (stop).
Figure 4.79: Regression - Data Time Plot.
Figure 4.79 shows the pump time cycle (shaded area) and the pressure decline cycle
in data time. The solid bar at the top of the plot is the Min/Max Range Bar. This
bar defines the range of data to be used for performing the regression analysis. This
bar is discussed below.
Figure 4.80 shows the Main Menu bar after selecting the Analysis|Regres-
sion|Select Points menu. This Main Menu bar allows you to use all of the Select
Points and Axes menu features. The Main Select Points menu is shown in Figure
4.81.
Figure 4.80: Select Points - Main Menu Bar.
Figure 4.81: Select Points - Regression Main Menu.
The Select Points and Axes Main Menu Bar features are discussed below.
Select Points from Main Menu Bar
The Select Points from the main menu bar is used to graphically choose specific
time events. These time events can then be dragged, hidden and edited. Lines can
also be manually or automatically placed on the plot to determine inflection points.
Shut-in/Closure/Select Line Points
This menu is used to manually specify or change the Shut-in (ISIP) and Closure
(TC) times.
Straight lines may be drawn on this Plot with the use of the Select Points menu.
Two points make up a line (i.e., 1A and 1B). To select the points, choose the desired
point from the Select Points menu. Then click on the graph with the left mouse
button. The coordinates of the selected point are shown under the Select
Points|Edit Selections menu. Points can also be chosen using the F7 and F8 func-
tion keys. The currently selected point and line slopes are reported in the Slope
Information Box.
4.4 Analysis 385
Automatically Find Points
A statistical method is available for evaluating the pressure decline plot. Using lin-
ear and nonlinear regression to fit the data, an estimate of the closure pressure can
be obtained. The technique is performed in the active plot space using the time
interval specified by the Min/Max Range Bar. MinFrac uses a statistical function
that fits two discrete curves through the data between the Select Ranges data. The
first curve has the form of a straight line (i.e., ) and is assumed to pass
through the portion of data immediately following the minimum value of the Min/
Max Range Bar. The second curve has the form of , and is
assumed to pass through the data that begins immediately after the early straight-
line portion of data and before the maximum time range selected. This nonlinear
regression methodology minimizes a difference function to fit both curves.
The intersection of the resulting curves represents the fracture closure pressure.
This statistical technique is based on the MinFrac Methodology given in Appendix
F. The basic premise is that there is some function or functions that linearizes the
pressure decline (e.g., where ). This technique thus
characterizes the deviation from a straight line on a pressure versus time plot to
help determine when an inflection point occurs.
A Regression Analysis is in the current space coordinates of the plot (i.e., uses the
same time scale and pressure scale as the plot). Thus, if the X-axis changes, the
regression results will be different. The TC that is found by the regression will
always be in the range defined by the Min/Max Range Bar.
To Use the Automatic Closure Method:
1. First define the Min/Max Range Bar by graphically arranging it on the screen.
This is done by Clicking on the left or right edge of the Min/Max Range Bar
with the left mouse button and while holding down the button drag the left or
right edge to the desired position. Keep in mind that the Min/Max Range Bar
defines the range of data that is used in the regression.
2. After the points are selected, select one of the time and pressure functions
given in the Axes menu. The Axes menu is discussed below.
3. To begin the regression, click the Select Points|Automatically Find Points
menu.
4. When the regression is complete, a message box similar to the one shown in
Figure 4.82 will be displayed. This message is provided to update the ISIP.
The theoretical or calculated ISIP is estimated from the projection of the early
time decline data back to the y-axis. Choose Yes to use the calculated ISIP.
y mx b + =
y ax bx
1 2
c + + =
P GdP dG = P ISIP p =
During and after the regression, the TC curve is displayed on the plot. To hide these
lines, choose the Select Points|Hide Lines menu.
Figure 4.82: Regression - Automatic Find Points and Update ISIP.
Figure 4.83 illustrates the Select Points|Automatic Find Points method for the
Nolte G function in linear coordinates.
Figure 4.83: Regression - Nolte G Time Linear Analysis.
Figure 4.83 shows the calculated time of closure and regression data. The regres-
sion data displayed is the Pump Time, Delta TC (closure time after pumping), ISIP
and Closure Pressure, BH (bottomhole) Closure Pressure, Efficiency (after spurt),
Residual (difference between pressure data and line fit), and Slope 1 and 2 (of line
1 and 2).
4.4 Analysis 387
Put TC at the intersection of line 1 and line 2
This will place the time of closure (TC) at the intersection of the two lines. This is
done automatically for Automatically Find Points.
Drag/Hide Points and Lines
Numerous options are available to drag or hide points and lines on the graph.
Edit Line Slopes
The edit line slopes screen allows the user to specify a slope for any of the four (4)
slope lines. The slope value is calculated based on the X-axis and the left Y-axis.
Select Slope Lines
The select slope lines screen is used to show or hide slope lines.
Edit Selections
The Select Points|Edit Sections menu allows you to edit the data points for Shut-
in, Closure and the line points (1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B, 4A and 4B). Figure 4.84
shows the Edit Selection dialog box.
Figure 4.84: Regression - Edit Selections Dialog Box.
Axes - Main Menu
The Axes menu is used to vary the X and Y-axes coordinates. Figure 4.85 shows the
Axes menu after selection of the Analysis|Regression|Select Points menu. The
X-axis is the time function (Time), the left Y-axis is the pressure coordinate (Pres-
sure), and the right Y-axis is the Derivative coordinate. The regression select
Axes|Time, Axes|Pressure and Axes|Derivative menus are discussed below.
Figure 4.85: Regression - Axes Main Menu.
Axes Time
The Axes|Time menu is shown in Figure 4.86. This is the time function to be used
on the X-axis.
Figure 4.86: Regression Axes - Time Menu.
The pressure data may be plotted versus a variety of time functions. As presented,
Table 4.2 lists the formulas used to calculate the different time scales
Axes Pressure (Left Y- Axis)
Pressure or Delta Pressure may be plotted on the left Y-axis. Delta Pressure is
defined to be . When in the Delta Pressure mode, the plot axis can be
either log-log or linear coordinates.
p t
p
( ) p t ( )
4.4 Analysis 389
Figure 4.87: Regression Axes - Pressure (left axis).
Three options are available from the Axes|Pressure menu:
Axes|Pressure|Pressure
Pressure on the left Y-axis and the X-axis time function are in linear coordinates.
Axes|Pressure|Delta Pressure (Log-Log)
Delta Pressure on the left Y-axis and the X-axis time function are in log coordi-
nates. Please refer to Appendix F regarding the Delta Pressure theory.
Axes|Pressure|Delta Pressure (Linear)
Delta Pressure on the left Y-axis and the X-axis time function are in linear coordi-
nates.
Right Axes Derivative (Right Y- Axis)
The right axis can be used to plot a number of derivative functions as illustrated in
Figure 4.88.
Figure 4.88: Regression Axes - Derivative Menu.
Select the Axes|Derivative|None menu, to turn off the right axis.
To plot a derivative(s), choose any of the following derivative options from the list
menu:
Linear [dy/dx]
[xdP/dx]
[ISIP-xdP/dx]
Semi Log [dy/d(log x)]
Semi Log [d(log y)/dx]
Log [d(log y)/d(log x)]
For Nolte G time derivatives, the nomenclature will use the G symbol (i.e., ISIP-
GdP/dG).
The derivative is calculated using the formula for the option selected, where y is the
current pressure curve (Pressure or Delta Pressure) and x is the current time func-
tion. A modified three-point method is used to calculate the derivative, as described
in the Options section. The derivative is plotted for the data defined by the Min/
Max Range Bar at the top of each plot.
When using a log scale on the Y-axis, it is impossible to plot a negative derivative.
To remedy this situation, check the Plot absolute value of derivative from the
Axes|Derivative menu. Then the absolute value of the derivative will be plotted.
Example Regression Analysis
Following are a set of regression analyses using the different Axes options.
Figure 4.89 shows a Nolte G plot in linear coordinates. The right axis displays the
ISIP-GdP/dG derivative. As illustrated, this derivative helps identify closure as
shown by the deviation from the measured data.
Note the time of closure will always be slightly after the derivative curve devi-
ates from the data (to the right of deviation).
4.4 Analysis 391
Figure 4.89: Nolte G Time Plot - Linear Coordinates.
The calculated regression data is shown within the Information Box. You can edit
which data is displayed in the information box by choosing Plot , Select Informa-
tion Lines as seen in Figure 4.90.
Figure 4.90: Select Information Lines
Figure 4.91 shows the corresponding Delta Pressure plot in log coordinates with the
GdP/dG derivative function. The same deviation pattern is also illustrated in the
graph.
Figure 4.91: Delta Pressure Nolte G Time - Log Coordinates.
Figure 4.92 shows the Delta Pressure plot in log coordinates. The slope,
, is presented. From Table 4.2 the slope in log space should be
unity for the fracture and for radial flow. Values of two represent storage.
Slopes greater than two represent other anomalous effects. As illustrated the slope
is near unity up to the time of closure (TC) and then drops to around . The early
time data derivative is not critical since some water hammer is present.
Note: for the Nolte G function the GdP/dG derivative should normally be used
with the Delta Pressure plots and the ISIP-GdP/dG derivative with the Pressure
plots. This also applies to the generic plots (i.e., Pressure use ISIP-xdP/dx, and
Delta Pressure uses xdP/dx). In log-log coordinates, the slope, ,
may also be used.
d y log ( ) d x log ( )
d y log ( ) d x log ( )
1 2
1 2
4.4 Analysis 393
Figure 4.92: Delta Pressure - Log Slope.
Figure 4.93 shows the Delta pressure (ISIP-p(t)) in linear coordinates with the GdP/
dG derivative on the right axis. As illustrated the time of closure is slightly to the
right of the derivative deviation from the Delta Pressure curve.
Figure 4.93: Delta Pressure Plot - Linear Coordinates.
History Match
To display the history match, click on the Analysis|Regression|History Match
menu shown in Figure 4.94.
Figure 4.94: Regression - History Match.
History Matching allows for specifying a dependent parameter for each fracture
geometry model. Then regression is performed by systematically varying the
dependent parameter to achieve the best match with the measured decline data.
During the regression calculations, the dependent parameter is continuously
updated and displayed along with a graphical representation of the simulation. To
4.4 Analysis 395
evaluate parameter sensitivity or other parametric variations different regressions
can be performed.
To History Match Data:
1. Make sure the Base Data and Leakoff Data have been entered, and the closure
time (TC) has been selected from the Analysis|Regression|Select Points
menu.
2. Choose the regression parameter for each model using the GDK, PKN and
Ellipsoidal list boxes found in the toolbar.
3. After choosing the models and dependent variables for regression, click the
History Match button to History Match on the selected parameters (see Figure
4.95).
4. View the History Match Data and make any desired changes. For successive
regressions another data parameter must be changed to get a different regres-
sion solution. If nothing is changed from one regression to another, MinFrac
will have already minimized the error, and therefore, cannot improve on the
match (i.e., the program will have nothing to do).
5. After performing a history match, the calculation results can be viewed by
selecting the Data|History Match menu as shown in Figure 4.96 (see also
Figure 4.19).
Figure 4.95: Regression - History Match Solution.
4.4 Analysis 397
Figure 4.96: History Match - Data Dialog Box.
After Closure Analysis
The purpose of an after closure analysis is to determine the formation permeability
The following information can be determined from a properly conducted analysis:
1. Reservoir pressure, .
2. Formation permeability, .
Since the after closure analysis plots and procedures are very similar to the discus-
sion of the Regression Analysis redundant explanations of various steps and the
Wizard will not be reiterated.
The menu command items for the After Closure Analysis are described below.
p
i
k
Select Ranges
The Analysis|After Closure|Select Ranges menu item, as seen in Figure 4.97 is
used to specify a specific data range.
Figure 4.97: After Closure - Select Ranges Menu
Select TC
The Time of Closure (TC) is specified within the Select TC dialog box (Figure
4.99), and can be opened by clicking the Analysis|After Closure|Select TC
menu item (Figure 4.98).
Figure 4.98: After Closure - Select TC Menu
4.4 Analysis 399
Figure 4.99: After Closure - Select TC Dialog Box
Select Points
To select the data points for the After Closure analysis, click on the Analysis|
After Closure|Select Points menu item as shown in Figure 4.100.
Figure 4.100: After Closure - Select Points Menu
The Select Points plot is used to graphically select data points for the after closure
analysis. Two data points are required to generate data.
Example Regression Analysis
Following are a set of after closure analyses using the different Axes options as dis-
cussed in Appendix K.
Figure 4.101 shows a Nolte After Closure plot in linear coordinates. The right axis
displays the derivative. As illustrated, this derivative helps identify
the correct slope and p* value as shown by the deviation of the derivative from the
measured data
Figure 4.101: After Closure Analysis - Surface Pressure vs. Nolte - FR Linear
Plot.
Figure 4.102 shows the Delta Pressure plot in linear coordinates with the
derivative function. The same deviation pattern is also illustrated in the graph.
p* x dp dx
xdP dx
4.4 Analysis 401
Figure 4.102: After Closure Analysis - Delta Surface Pressure vs. Nolte - FR
Linear Plot with the xdP/dx Derivative.
Log-Log Plot with xdP/dx derivative.
Figure 4.104 shows the corresponding Delta Pressure plot in log coordinates with
the log-log derivative function. As illustrated the log-log slope asymptotes to one
for pseudo-radial behavior.
4.5 Output 403
Log-Log Plot with the Log Slope Derivative.
4.5 Output
When the closure time has been determined and all of the required reservoir infor-
mation has been entered, calculations can be performed to determine fracture and
reservoir characteristics (leakoff coefficients, etc.). The methodology used to model
fracture characteristics and fluid leakoff behavior is outlined in Appendix F.
The Output menu is shown in Figure 4.105. There are two main Output section
items, simulation results and viewing the report.
Figure 4.105: Output Menu.
Simulation Calculations
There are two types of simulations that MinFrac can do, Simulation using Base
Data and Simulation using History Match Data as selected from the Output menu.
Base Data Calculations
The Base Calculations are accessible from the Output|Simulation using Base
Data menu. This will run the simulation for all the models using the Base Data.
When using the Graphical Technique, some of the input data will be taken from the
imported data, as specified in the Options|Graphical calculation menu. Then a
summary of the simulation results will be shown for the GDK, PKN and Ellipsoidal
models as shown in Figure 4.106.
4.5 Output 405
Figure 4.106: Output - Simulation Using Base Data.
Table 4.6 contains a description of the output data.
Table 4.6: Output Data.
Parameter Description
Vol. Fluid Inj. Volume of fluid injected into the fracture
Length Half length of the fracture
Height (wellbore) Height of the fracture
Max. Well Width Maximum width at the wellbore
Avg. Well Width Average width at the wellbore
Avg. Frac. Width Average width throughout the fracture
Net Pressure Fracture net pressure
Efficiency Fracture efficiency
Closure time - Delta Time from the ISIP to closure
% error % error in closure time
History Match Calculations
When using the Graphical Technique, the History Match Calculations are accessi-
ble with the Output|Simulation using History Match Data menu. This will run
the simulation like the Base Calculations, except where applicable, the data in the
History Match dialog box will be substituted for the Base Data. The same set of
simulation results will be displayed.
The parameters used for history matching are the ISIP, closure time and closure
pressure. Consequently, the history matched net pressures (ISIP- closure pressure)
will be the same for all models. The fracture efficiencies will also be approximately
equal for all models. A summary of the History Match results for the GDK, PKN
and Ellipsoidal models is shown in Figure 4.107.
Ct Total leakoff coefficient
CI Leakoff fluid viscosity effects
CII Reservoir compressibility and viscous effects
CIII Filter cake coefficient
Permeability Reservoir permeability
4.5 Output 407
Figure 4.107: Output - Simulation Using History Match Data.
The history match solution matches the calculated net pressure (ISIP-Closure Pres-
sure). Figure 4.107 shows that the net pressures are the same for all three geometry
models. This is not so for the base data output (see Figure 4.106).
From history matched parameters, the individual leakoff coefficients for each frac-
ture model can be calculated based on the leakoff area. Remember that minifrac
analysis only gives insight into the fracture efficiency. A fracture model is required
to calculate the leakoff area.
Although all fracture models will give a history-matched solution for various
dependent parameters (within reason), it is up to the design engineer to evaluate/
determine if this is a reasonable solution. The model with the most reasonable his-
tory matched parameters should be the model of choice.
Since all fracture models will have about the same fracture efficiencies or leakoff
coefficient and area product (based on mass conservation), the calculated leakoff
coefficient is strongly dependent on the fracture model. Consequently, do not use a
leakoff coefficient calculated for a GDK model in the PKN model unless the leak-
off areas are the same.
The estimated reservoir permeability is calculated from the leakoff coefficients as
discussed in Appendix F. Therefore, if CIII is dominant, the calculated permeability
uncertainty will be high.
Reports
MinFrac can generate reports similar to the other Meyer Programs. Before generat-
ing a report, MinFrac will inquire if Base Calculations and/or History Match Calcu-
lations are to be included in the report. Figure 4.108 shows the View Report dialog
box.
Simulation using History Match Data is not available when using the User Speci-
fied Closure option.
Figure 4.108: Output - View Report Dialog Box.
The order of the Time of Closure (TC) points can be changed using the Move Up
and Move Down buttons. Only the rows marked active will be displayed in the
report.
4.6 References 409
For more report options, select Configuration... from the Output menu (See
Report Configuration on page 71.)
Manage Points
The Manage Points dialog (Output|Manage Points...) can be used to delete
unwanted points or to change the order of existing points. Any changes made
within the Manage Points or View Report dialog will be reflected in the other dia-
log boxes and maintained per minfrac file.
4.6 References
1. Nolte, K.G., Smith, M.B.: Interpretation of Fracturing Pressures, SPE 8297,
Sept. 1979.
2. Nolte, K. G.: Determination of Fracture Parameters from Fracture Pressure
Decline, SPE 8341 presented at the 54th Annual Technical Conference, Las
Vegas, Sept. 1979.
3. Nolte, K.G.: Fracture Design Considerations Based on Pressure Analysis,
SPEPE, Feb. 1988, pp 22-30.
4. Nolte, K. G.: A General Analysis of Fracturing Pressure Decline With Appli-
cation to Three Models, (SPE 12941) JPT (Dec. 1986), 571-582.
5. Nolte, K. G.: Application of Fracture Design based on Pressure Analysis,
SPEPE (Feb. 1988), 31-41.
6. Castillo, J.L.: Modified Pressure Decline Analysis Including Pressure Depen-
dent Leakoff, SPE 16417, May 1987.
7. Lee, W.S.: Study of the Effects of Fluid Rheology on Minifrac Analysis, SPE
16916, Sept. 1987.
8. Meyer, B.R., Hagel, M.W., Simulated Mini-Frac Analysis, Petroleum Soci-
ety of CIM, Calgary June 1988.
9. Hagel, M. W. and Meyer, B. R.: Utilizing Mini-Frac Data to Improve Design
and Production, CIM paper 92-40 June, 1992.
10. Meyer, B. R.: Frac model in 3-D - 4 Parts, Oil and Gas Journal, June 17,
July 1, July 22 and July 29, 1985.
11. Meyer, B. R.: Design Formulae for 2-D and 3-D Vertical Hydraulic Fractures:
Model Comparison and Parametric Studies, paper SPE 15240 presented at the
SPE Unconventional Gas Technology Symposium, Louisville, KY, May. 18-
21, 1986.
12. Meyer, B. R.: Three-Dimensional Hydraulic Fracturing Simulation on Per-
sonal Computers: Theory and Comparison Studies, paper SPE 19329 pre-
sented at the SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, Morgantown, Oct. 24-27, 1989.
13. Gidley, J. L., Holditch, S. A., Nierode, D. E. and Veatch, R. W.: Recent
Advances in Hydraulic Fracturing, SPE Monograph Vol. 12, Chapter 14,
1989.
14. Warpinski, N.R.: In-Situ Stress Measurements at U.S. DOE's Multiwell
Experiment Site, Mesa Verde Group, Rifle, Colorado, JPT (March 1985) pp
527-536.
15. Warpinski, N.R.: Investigation of the Accuracy and Reliability on In-Situ
Stress Measurements Using Hydraulic Fracturing in Perforated, Cased Holes,
Proc., 24th U.S. Symposium on rock Mechanics, College Station, TX (June
1983) pp 773-786.
16. Smith, M.B.: Stimulation Design for Short, Precise Hydraulic Fractures,
SPEJ (June 1985) pp 371-379.
19. Huit, J.K.: Fluid Flow in Simulated Fractures, AIChE Journal, Vol. 2, pp
259, 1956.
21. Warpinski, N.R.: Measurement of Width and Pressure in a propagating
Hydraulic Fracture, SPEJ (Feb. 1985) pp 46-84.
4.6 References 411
Chapter 5
MProd
Analytical Production Simulator
5.1 Introduction
MProd is a single phase analytical production simulator developed by Meyer &
Associates, Inc. Although the program was designed primarily for hydraulic frac-
turing applications, it can also be used to explore the production potential of unfrac-
tured reservoirs. This chapter explains the options available and basic procedures
for running MProd. Detailed information regarding the methodology and basic the-
ory is presented in Appendix G.
MProd has options for Production Simulation, History Match Production Simula-
tion, and Fracture Design Optimization. Production Simulation, allows the user to
input typical production data to simulate well performance for fractured and unfrac-
tured wells. The capability to compare the output (numerical simulated results)
with measured data is also provided. An objective methodology for determining
unknown or uncertain parameters by regression analysis of measured data through
history matching is available. The procedure is implemented by parametric optimi-
zation to minimize the error (standard deviation) between the measured and history
matched results. The history matching process allows the user to history match on
various parameters depending on whether the well is unfractured or fractured. For
an unfractured well, the user has an option to history match on the following
parameters: 1) reservoir drainage area (closed system), 2) permeability, 3) reservoir
aspect ratio, and/or 4) wellbore skin. For the fractured well, the user has an option
to history match on one or all of the following parameters: 1) reservoir drainage
area (closed system), 2) permeability, 3) reservoir aspect ratio, 4) fracture length,
and/or dimensionless fracture conductivity. A Fracture Design Optimization feature
enables the user to determine the optimum fracture design (length, width, conduc-
tivity) that will maximize production for a given amount of proppant mass. Appen-
dix L provides a detailed explanation of the theory and optimization methodology,
414 MProd: Analytical Production Simulator
MProd is integrated and fully compatible with MFrac to provide full feature optimi-
zation. Output produced by MFrac can be used by MProd. The numerical results of
MProd, in turn, can be imported by MNpv to perform economic analysis.
An outline of the basic steps for using MProd is shown in Table 5.1
Table 5.1: MProd Basic Steps
Step Program Area
1. Open an existing MProd data file (*.mprod) or
create a new data file
File Menu
3. Select a Simulation Option
a) Production Simulation
b) History Match Production
c) Fracture Design Optimization
Data Menu
4. Input Data
a) Production Simulation
Formation Data
Variable Fracture Conductivity
NPV Fracture Data (if NPV)
Gas PVT (if gas)
Production Data
Measured Data (if option is on)
Well Data
b) History Match Production
Formation Data
History Match Parameters
Gas PVT (if gas)
Production Data
Measured Data (if option is on)
Well Data
c) Fracture Design Optimization
Formation Data
Proppant Data
Design Optimization
Well Data
Data Menu
5.2 Options 415
5.2 Options
This section outlines the flexibility of the MProd program and describes the param-
eters that define the conditions and intended use of the software. The first step in
performing a simulation is establishing the options that will be used. This is accom-
plished by accessing the Options dialog box from the main menu.
The option selections determine the scope of the MProd program. The options
establish the input to be entered and the nature of the calculations to be performed.
The parameters selected are global for the current file you are working with. They
remain with the file and are saved and recalled with the data.
The Options dialog box is typically the first input screen used in the MProd pro-
gram. Its function is to establish the primary model options that will be employed.
Each section deals with a different aspect of the modeling approach.
To access the Options screen, select Options from the main menu by clicking the
Table 5.1: MProd Basic Steps
itself varies depending on the options selected. This smart-menu approach mini-
data screens will be updated to enable new input or to hide input that is not needed.
This methodology is used throughout MProd.
An explanation of the choices available for each of the Program Options are sum-
marized in the following section.
5.2 Options 417
General Options
follows:
Simulation Options
This section describes the fundamental options available for running MProd.
Depending on the Simulation Options selected different general options and dialogs
will be displayed. Throughout this Users Guide, we will identify which sections
are applicable for the different options.
Production Simulation
This option allows the user to input typical production data to simulate well perfor-
mance for fractured and unfractured wells. The fluid and formation properties are
input and the code will simulate the projected production rate or bottomhole treat-
ing pressure based on the specified boundary condition. The production simulation
option also provides the capability to compare the output (numerical simulated
results) with measured data.
Overlay Measured Data
If Production Simulation is selected the user has an option to overlay measured data
for comparison. If the Overlay Measured Data option is checked the user will be
prompted in another dialog to either enter the measure rate or bottomhole flowing
pressure versus time. This data will then be overlaid on the numerical simulation
results.
History Match Production Simulation Data
This option should be selected if one wishes to history match actual measured data
with simulated data. The numerical procedure uses an objective methodology for
determining unknown or uncertain parameters (through regression). This procedure
is implemented by parametric optimization to minimize the error (standard devia-
tion) between the measured and history match results.
The history matching process allows the user to history match on various parame-
ters depending on whether the well is unfractured or fractured. For an unfractured
well, the user has an option to history match on the following parameters: 1) reser-
voir drainage area (closed system), 2) permeability, 3) reservoir aspect ratio, and/or
4) wellbore skin. For the fractured well, the user has an option to history match on
one or all of the following parameters: 1) reservoir drainage area (closed system),
2) reservoir permeability, 3) reservoir aspect ratio, 4) fracture length, and/or dimen-
Since the history match algorithm uses a methodology of steepest descent, a mini-
mum, estimated, maximum value for a parameter must be specified. The initial esti-
mate for a given parameter can either be Internally Estimated or User Defined. The
user must also select the Maximum Iterations allowed for the regression analysis.
The user must be aware that if the solution is not dependent on a given parameter
the code may select any value in the minimum/maximum range depending where it
initializes or estimates the starting point (e.g., a short term well test may not be able
to accurately determine the drainage area or aspect ratio).
Internal Estimate
Given a minimum and maximum range for a history match parameter, the code will
provide an estimate of the best parameter values to minimize the error between the
measured and history matched data. A report is then available that lists the best and
worst fit parameters based on the associated error.
This option is useful if you have no idea what a reasonable history match value for
the parameters may be.
User Estimate
Given a minimum and maximum range for a history match parameter, the user must
also provide an estimate of the best parameter values to minimize the error between
the measured and history matched data.
This option is useful if a reasonable history match value cannot be readily esti-
mated.
Number of Iterations
This is the maximum number of iterations the code will perform prior to exiting
with a last best fit parameter. This is necessary in case the code has not fully con-
verged within some reasonable number of iterations (i.e., the solution is non-lin-
ear). Normally, 20 to 50 iterations are sufficient for a reasonable solution. If you are
trying to get a quick estimate of the history match parameters (especially a large
number) you may want to put in fewer iterations and then refine your minimum and
maximum ranges in the history match parameters dialog.
Fracture Design Optimization
Fracture Design Optimization is not a new concept but has received great attention
in the last few years as attributed to concept of Unified Fracture Design as pre-
5.2 Options 419
sented by Econimides, Valko and others. This concept, however, was first
addressed by Prats in 1961.
The main idea of Fracture Design Optimization is to provide the user with an opti-
mum fracture design (length, width, conductivity) for a given proppant mass that
will maximize production. Appendix L provides a detailed explanation of the the-
ory and optimization methodology.
Selecting this option, a pseudosteady state analysis will be performed based on the
formation data, proppant properties, and desired proppant mass pumped to optimize
productivity. The numerical results provide the user with the optimum design char-
acteristics for fracture width, length, penetration ratio, dimensionless conductivity,
conductivity, concentration/area, productivity index and productivity ratio. These
optimum values can then be used as input into MFrac for auto scheduling the opti-
mum design.
This option also allows for the addition of Optimization Diagnostic Plots option for
McGuire and Sikora Type Curves and Optimum Fracture Performance Curves. The
additional diagnostic plots are discussed in Appendix L.
To provide a curve of optimum fracture characteristics versus proppant number or
mass, additional values of proppant number (mass) are used. The Number of Sub-
divisions between the minimum and maximum proppant masses, input into the
Design Optimization data table, is used to generate a smooth curve.
Number of Sub-divisions
The number of data points used to provide a smooth curve of fracture optimization
parameters is the Number of Sub-divisions plus one. If the number of sub-divisions
is less than the number needed between each table sequence, the code will add
additional points.
If the Optimum Fracture Performance Curves are activated, the Number of Sub-
divisions is specified within that section instead.
Optimization Diagnostic Plots
Optimization Diagnostic Plots for McGuire and Sikora Type and Optimum Fracture
Performance Curves may be selected by checking the Active check box for each. A
description of the required input is given below.
McGuire and Sikora Curves
If the McGuire and Sikora Curves are activated, the range (minimum, maximum),
and number of sub-divisions for the dimensionless conductivity are required. Nor-
mally 100 sub-divisions (101 data points) is sufficient to generate a smooth curve
as presented in Appendix L (see also SPE 95941).
Optimum Fracture Performance Curves
The Optimum Fracture Performance Curves, if activated, will provide a set of diag-
nostic plots versus dimensionless conductivity and proppant numbers as presented
in SPE 95941. The Fracture Design Optimization curves for each of the proppant
masses (and proppant numbers) entered in the Design Optimization Data table will
be presented as constant proppant numbers as a function of dimensionless conduc-
tivity and productivity index (and productivity ratio). To generate these curves the
user must input 1) Dimensionless Conductivity range (minimum, maximum), and
number of sub-divisions and 2) Proppant Number range (minimum, maximum),
and number of sub-divisions. If the proppant minimum and maximum values are
not within the minimum and maximum values in the Design Optimization Data
table, the Design Optimization Data table minimum and maximum proppant num-
bers will be used.
Well Orientation
The well orientation can be either Vertical or Horizontal. The vertical well orienta-
tion option provides production solutions for un-fractured and vertical fractures
intersecting a vertical wellbore. The horizontal option provides solutions for the
production and interference of multi-stage/multi-cluster fractures in a horizontal
well and production from an un-fractured perforated or open-hole horizontal well-
bore.
Reservoir
The Reservoir can be either a Closed System or an Infinite Reservoir.
Closed System - This case describes a square or rectangular, bounded reser-
voir. The well can be located anywhere in the closed system by describing the
Reservoir Drainage Area and Dimensionless Well Locations found in the
Formation Data dialog box. The method of images is used to generate rectan-
gular drainage shapes for closed systems. Drainage area aspect ratios can be as
large as 100.
Infinite Reservoir - This case models the performance of a well located in an
infinite (unbounded) reservoir. If production is below the bubble point, then an
infinite reservoir with a modified oil compressibility should be used.
5.2 Options 421
Solutions
The Solution options are only applicable when the Simulated Options of Production
Simulation or History Match Production Simulation Data is selected. These options
are not applicable for pseudosteady-state analyses as used with the Fracture Design
Optimization Option.
MProd provides three (3) alternatives to describe the un-fractured and fractured res-
ervoir solutions. The selections are:
No Fracture
This case models the performance of an un-fractured well or wellbore that has not
been hydraulically fractured. If the well orientation is horizontal the simulator will
model the productivity from an unfractured horizontal wellbore. Options for base
and stimulated wellbore skin factors are available in the well data dialog.
Fractured - Single Case
This solution models the performance of finite conductivity vertical fracture pene-
trating a combination of vertical, horizontal, closed and infinite reservoirs. Unfrac-
tured well skin factors can be specified and will be used in both cases.
Fractured - Multi-Case
This solution models the performance of finite conductivity vertical fracture for
multiple cases. Thus vertical fractures of various lengths and conductivities for dif-
ferent areas, skins etc. can be simulated and compared. This option allows for pro-
ductivity comparisons of numerous scenarios of fractured wells and fractured well
optimization based on NPV.
Base and Stimulated Cases
The Base and Stimulated Cases from which fractured and unfractured solutions
can be compared is dependent upon the Well Orientation and Solution selected. To
ensure that the Base and Stimulated Cases are not identical the user is prevented
from selecting the same case in both drop down menus.
No Fracture
Vertical and Horizontal Wellbore Orientation - The base case is that of an
unfractured well with a base skin (Vertical - No Frac (base skin)) and the Stim-
ulated case is for an unfractured well with a given stimulated skin (Vertical -
No Frac (stim skin)).
Fracture - Single Case
Vertical Wellbore Orientation - The Base Case is that of an unfractured well
with a base skin (Vertical - No Frac (base skin)) and the Stimulated Case is for
an unfractured well with a given stimulated skin (Vertical - No Frac (stim
skin)).
Horizontal Wellbore Orientation - The base case is selected from a drop down
menu consisting of the following options: i) Vertical - No Frac (base skin), ii)
Vertical - No Frac (stim skin), iii) Horizontal - No Frac, or iv) Vertical fracture
- Darcy. The Stimulated case has options ii-iv.
Fracture - Multi-Case
The Base Case drop down menu is dimmed for this option. Only the Stimulated
Case can be specified.
Vertical Wellbore Orientation - The Stimulated Case is that of an unfractured
well with a given stimulated skin (Vertical - No Frac (stim skin)). The produc-
tivity index is based on the stimulated wellbore skin not the base skin.
Horizontal Wellbore Orientation - The Stimulated Case is selected from a
drop down menu consisting of the following options: i) Vertical - No Frac
(stim skin), ii) Horizontal - No Frac, or iii) Vertical fracture - Darcy.
Fluid Type
The formation Fluid Type option is only applicable when the Simulated Options of
either Production Simulation or History Match Production Simulation Data is
selected. This option is not applicable for pseudosteady-state analyses as used with
the Fracture Design Optimization Option.
MProd is an analytical, single phase reservoir simulator capable of modeling the
diffusion of a homogenous liquid or gas through porous media. To predict both
pressure and rate changes through the reservoir, it is important to accurately
describe the properties of the fluid. The Fluid Type option is used to specify the pri-
mary fluid produced from the reservoir to direct the calculations through the appro-
priate algorithms. The algorithms used will vary depending upon the fluid type
selected. Either Oil and Water, or Dry Gas can be specified.
In general, for liquid production above the bubble point, the oil or water phase is
assumed to be slightly compressible. Conversely, when the fluid type is specified as
gas, the gas phase is assumed to be highly compressible. These basic differences
obviously influence model behavior.
5.2 Options 423
Regardless of Fluid Type, an additional option is available for selecting whether
internal or user-specified fluid property correlations are to be used. Refer to the
description of the Internal PVT Table option later in this section for further expla-
nation.
Internal PVT Table
For liquids, if the Internal PVT Table is turned Off, the Total Reservoir Compress-
ibility and the Equivalent Reservoir Viscosity must be entered in the Formation
Data dialog box. The values input for these parameters will be used as constants for
the simulation. If the Fluid Type is gas and the Internal PVT Table is turned Off, a
table of Gas Viscosity and Z-Factor as a function of pressure must be entered. It is
also necessary to enter a Reservoir Temperature in the Formation Data dialog.
When the Internal PVT Table is On, internal correlations are used to generate the
PVT data for the Fluid Type specified. For oil, the oil solution GOR and formation
volume factor versus pressure, are determined using the correlation originally
described by Vazquez and Beggs
1
. For these same conditions, the oil viscosity ver-
sus pressure is estimated based on the work of Beggs and Robinson
2
. For this com-
bination of options, the Gas Gravity, Oil gravity and bubble point pressure must be
entered.
When the Fluid Type is gas and the Internal PVT Table is On, the Gas Specific
Gravity and Reservoir Temperature are required in the Formation Data dialog box.
The correlation used for gas viscosity is as originally described by Lee &
Gonzalez
3
. If the Internal PVT Table is Off, and the Fluid Type is gas, a separate
Gas PVT Table must be entered. This table contains a list of the Gas Viscosity and
Z-Factor as a function of pressure.
Production Boundary Condition
The Production Boundary Condition option is only applicable when the Simulated
Options of Production Simulation or History Match Production Simulation Data is
selected. This option is not applicable for pseudosteady-state analyses as used with
the Fracture Design Optimization Option.
This option specifies whether the simulation will be based on a specified rate or
pressure production. When Rate is selected, production will be simulated at con-
stant rate or a series of variable rates depending on the data entered. Specifying
Pressure results in the simulation of a constant bottomhole flowing pressure or
series of variable bottomhole flowing pressures. Since the simulator uses superpo-
sition, mixing constant rate and pressure production is not permitted.
The convention for rate is positive for production and negative for injection. If a
negative rate is specified in the production table, the properties are assumed to be
the same as the reservoir fluid.
Fracture Options
The Fracture Options screen displayed in Figure 5.2 allows the user to specify the
type of analysis to be performed.
Figure 5.2: Data Options Screen - Fracture Tab
The choices available for each of the Fracture Options are summarized as follows:
Non-Darcy Effects
tion
5.2 Options 425
2
,
cm
-1
, ft
-1
, atm-s
2
Darcy flow describes the flow regime that does not obey Darcys law. Holditch
[1976] reports that the original form of the second term on the right hand side of the
above equation by Forchheimer was which was replaced by Cornell and Katz
[1953] by the product of the fluid density, , and the factor.
The Non-Darcy Effects options are given below:
Darcy Only
Non-Darcy effects will not be considered. This is the same as assuming .
Input Beta Coefficient
The non-darcy beta coefficient is user specified and assumed constant. A value
must be entered in the dialog.
User Database, Beta Coefficient
If this option is selected, a non-darcy beta coefficient correlation is selected from
the Non-Darcy proppant Database drop down menu. The beta coefficient will then
be calculated as a function of proppant permeability and porosity.
x d
dp

k
f
----u | u
2
( ) + =
k
f
L
2
| | L
1
au
2
|
k
f
|
|
a
k
f
b
|
c
----------- =
a b c S
w
|
e
| 1 S
w
( ) =
| 0 =
Permeability Options
The fracture Permeability Options are given below:
Input Fracture Conductivity
The fracture conductivity ( ) is user specified. This option is only available if
the Darcy Only option is selected. Since for inertial flow (non-Darcy) both the frac-
ture permeability and fracture width are required.
Calculate Fracture Permeability, Width, or Conductivity
This option provides the user with greatest flexibility in inputting and calculating
an unknown any combination of fracture permeability, width, or conductivity are
specified. This option is required for Non-Darcy flow. The theoretical proppant per-
meability may also be determined by using the Proppant Calculator under Tools
Menu.
Proppant Property Data
Following is a list of the proppant property data required to calculate the Non-
Darcy Beta factor:
Proppant Porosity
slurry ratio of the settled bank). It is used to calculate the propped fracture permea-
bility. Typical values of porosity for proppants are shown in Table 5.2.
Fractured Well
The Fractured Well check box to Include Horizontal Choked Skin is only available
if the Well Orientation is Horizontal. If the Include Horizontal Choked Skin is
checked the user will be prompted to input a Choked Skin Multiplier.
(fraction)
6-8 angular 0.36
10-20 angular 0.36
10-20 round 0.32
20-40 round 0.35
40-60 round 0.32
k
f
w
f
5.2 Options 427
Choked Skin Multiplier
The inadequate contact between a vertical transverse fracture and the horizontal
well resulted in a restriction that can be quantified by a choked skin effect as given
by
where the above equation has been placed in terms of the dimensionless fracture
conductivity.
To enable the user to modify the above equation a choked skin multiplier is
introduced
where is the modified choked skin used in the simulator.
The choked skin multiplier allows the user to modify the magnitude of the choked
skin used in the solution to simulate the fluid flow restriction from a vertical frac-
ture into a horizontal wellbore. A multiplier of zero represent the case of no choked
skin. A multiplier of unity results in a choked skin equal to the base choked skin.
Fracture - Multi-Case (NPV)
The Fracture - Multi-Case solution is only applicable when the Simulation Option
of Production Simulation is selected. This option is not applicable when the simula-
tion option is set to History Match Production Simulation Data, or Fracture Design
Optimization.
When Fracture - Multi-Case is Selected, the simulator will run in standard mode
simulating the production response of a well and reservoir with or without a frac-
ture, depending on the Stimulation Case selected. The Multi-Case Fracture solu-
tion allows the simulator to calculate a series of automated runs based on a variety
of fracture geometries. The fracture characteristics for a Vertical Well Orientation
may be identified by either specifying a MFrac file or by inputting a table of frac-
ture data directly (i.e., User Specified). Please refer to the description of the Multi-
Case (NPV) Fracture Data Source option for more information on this topic as pre-
sented below.
S
ch
kh
k
f
w
f
---------
h
2r
w
--------
\ .
| |
t
2
--- ln
h
x
f
----
1
C
fD
---------
h
2r
w
--------
\ .
| |
t
2
--- ln = =
m
S
ch
m

m
S
ch
=
S
ch
m
If Multi-Case (NPV) is Selected, a series of fracture designs (Multi-Case) with
variable propped fracture length and fracture conductivity can be input into a table.
The numerical results for the multi-case can then be compared in the report or
graphically to determine the effect of fracture length and/or conductivity on pro-
duction.
When the Multi-Case (NPV) option is used, the output produced can be read by the
MNpv program to perform economic calculations. This procedure can be used to
design the economically optimum treatment.
Multi-Case (NPV) Fracture Data Source
When the Fracture - Multi-Case (NPV) Solution Option is Selected, there are two
available methods for specifying the fracture characteristics for the production sim-
ulation. They are:
1. Select MFrac File and browse for an MFrac file that contains NPV output data.
The file must have been created in MFrac with the NPV option set to On. If the
NPV option was not used to create the fracture output file, an error message
will be displayed. Also, the MProd and MFrac versions of the software must be
compatible.
2. Choose User Specified and the Multi-Case (NPV) Fracture Data dialog will be
enabled from the Data menu. Use the import button provided in the NPV/Frac-
ture Data dialog to read the data from any MFrac .mfrac file containing NPV
data. Once the data is imported it can be modified. The User Specified option
will be selected and dimmed when the Well Orientation is Horizontal.
Variable Conductivity
This option allows the user to input a spatially varying fracture conductivity. This
option is not available if the Fracture - Multi-Case (NPV) Solution is selected. If
the option is checked, a Variable Fracture Conductivity dialog will be activated
with input for fracture height, width, permeability, conductivity, and dimensionless
conductivity as function of fracture position.
5.3 Data Input
Once the options are selected and the scope of a simulation is set, data may be
entered by accessing the various dialogs available under the Data menu. As previ-
ously stated, the options selected determine what information is needed for a partic-
ular type of analysis. Therefore, the specific data displayed in a screen or the
existence of the data screen itself will vary depending upon the options chosen.
5.3 Data Input 429
This approach minimizes data input and prevents unnecessary or misleading data
entry. Simply decide what options are relevant to the simulation and MProd will
only display those menus and input fields necessary. Any time an option is
changed, the screens will vary to enable new input, or hide data that is not needed.
This methodology is used throughout MProd.
The following sections pertain to the Data menu items found by selecting Data
from the program's Main menu. Each Data menu item is covered in detail along
with a description of the data dialogs and their associated variables. When perti-
nent, the conditions or case sensitive options for a data screen are noted and an
example of the resulting dialog is shown. All of the different data screens available
in MProd and the variables contained within them are presented.
Description
information about a simulation. Space is provided for entering the Company
Name, Well Name, Well Location and Simulation Date. In addition, a Comments
section is included so that descriptive information can be entered. All information
contained in this dialog is optional.
Figure 5.3: Data Description Dialog Box - MProd.
Formation Data
The Formation Data dialog box (see Figure 5.4) provides a location for entering
most of the reservoir properties needed to perform a simulation. As you become
familiar with this data screen, you will notice that many of the parameters will
appear or disappear as the program options are changed. For example, changing the
Fluid Type from oil to gas with the Internal PVT Table option enabled, will result
in the elimination of the variables related to the oil PVT (e.g., oil gravity, bubble
point pressure).
Figure 5.4: Formation Data Dialog Box.
Each of the items found in the Formation Data dialog screen are explained below. If
necessary, the conditions for data entry are indicated.
The Reservoir Drainage Area and the Dimensionless Reservoir Aspect Ratios
are only required if the Reservoir is a Closed System. If the Well Orientation is
selected as Horizontal and the Solution is selected as Fracture - Multi-Case the Res-
ervoir Drainage and Reservoir Aspect Ratio are input in the Multi-Case (NPV)
Fracture Characteristics Stages/Cluster tab. This allow for greater flexibility when
comparing multiple transverse fracture solutions in a horizontal wellbore for closed
systems. The Dimensionless well location for the Multi-Case (NPV) Fracture Char-
acteristics when the Well Orientation is horizontal is assumed to be at the reservoir
center (i.e., Dimensionless Well Location (x=0,y=0)).
5.3 Data Input 431
Reservoir Drainage Area
The Reservoir Drainage Area is only required in this dialog if the Reservoir is a
Closed System. This is the area of the reservoir to be produced. It usually repre-
sents, in map view, the lateral extent of the reservoir drained by a particular well.
The reservoir volume is obtained by multiplying the area times the pay zone thick-
ness (see Figure 5.5).
Figure 5.5: Definition of the Reservoir Drainage Area.
Dimensionless Reservoir Aspect Ratio
This data is only required if the Reservoir is selected as a Closed System. Con-
cerning the reservoir's spatial relationship with the wellbore and fracture, MProd
currently assumes that the drainage area, described above, can be approximated by
a rectangular shape. A rectangle is defined by entering the Dimensionless Reser-
voir Aspect Ratio ( ). This is the ratio of the reservoir half-length ( ) and
half-width ( ) illustrated in Figure 5.6. Entering a value of one (1) for this param-
eter corresponds to a square drainage area. An aspect ratio of four (4) represents a
rectangular area with a length 4 times greater than its width.
For a hydraulically fractured reservoir, the fracture azimuth is always assumed to
parallel the orientation. The aspect ratio should, therefore, be greater than or
equal to one (1) so that the fracture parallels the long axis of the block.
Dimensionless Well Location
In MProd, the wellbore can be positioned anywhere within the defined drainage
area. This is accomplished by specifying two Dimensionless Well Locations param-
eters titled Dimensionless Well Location - Direction and Dimensionless Well
Location - Direction. Entering and values of zero centers the well on the
axis. The other positions can be achieved by using the convention summarized in
Figure 5.6. The values input must range between -1.0 and 1.0. Any fraction of the
X
L
Y
H
X
L
Y
H
X
L
X
Y X Y
total reservoir dimension can be used to position the wellbore within the rectangu-
lar coordinate system used.
Figure 5.6: Wellbore Positioning within the Drainage Area.
Total Pay Zone Height
By definition, the Total Pay Zone Height or net pay thickness is the portion of the
formation that contains the mobile hydrocarbons. Together with the drainage radius
and effective porosity, it defines the effective reservoir drainage volume.
If the productive rock is discontinuous or made up of intermittent layers of perme-
able and impermeable material, this value should be entered as the sum of the indi-
vidual permeable zones. For example, if the pay zone lies between 8500 and 8600
ft., but only 50 ft. of the interval is permeable, enter 50 ft. for the Total Pay Zone
Height.
Initial Reservoir Pressure
To simulate pressure behavior in the reservoir, the initial conditions must be charac-
terized. For new wells, enter the initial reservoir pore pressure for the productive
interval. This value is typically obtained from either a production log or well test.
pressure as interpreted from a well measurement. In all instances, the value entered
for the Initial Reservoir Pressure should be less than the minimum horizontal
stress in the pay zone.
Total Reservoir Compressibility
The Total Reservoir Compressibility is defined as the total change in the reservoir
drained bulk modulus. This value is only required when the Fluid Type is oil or
water and can be estimated using the following relationship:
5.3 Data Input 433
where
When the Fluid Type is gas, the compressibility is calculated internally using the
following relationship:
where
Please refer to SPE Monograph 5, Advances in Well Test Analysis and Appendix
D for typical oil, gas, water and rock compressibilities. This information is
extremely important in order to accurately characterize the reservoir diffusivity, D,
as illustrated in the following expression:
where
= gas saturation
= oil saturation
= water saturation
= initial reservoir pressure
= gas Z-factor
= total reservoir compressibility
c
t
S
o
c
o
S
w
c
w
S
g
c
g
c
r
+ + + =
c
g
c
o
c
r
c
t
c
w
S
g
S
o
S
w
c
g
1
p
---
1
Z
---
p d
dZ
=
c
g
p
Z
D
k
|c
t
----------- =
c
t
k
|
When possible, it is always advisable to calibrate the rate of diffusion by per-
forming a well test or adjusting the parameters shown above in an attempt to history
match the flow rate for some period of time.
Equivalent Reservoir Permeability
As shown in the above equation, the permeability is an important parameter in
determining the reservoir diffusivity. The reservoir permeability is the formation
property that characterizes its ability to transfer a fluid through the pores when sub-
jected to a pressure gradient. From Darcy's law:
where
MProd is a single-phase simulator, therefore, the reservoir permeability, or Equiva-
lent Reservoir Permeability (as well as, reservoir viscosity) must match the sys-
tem mobility for a multi-phase system. The total flowing mobility is
where
= fluid mobility
= fluid velocity
= pressure gradient
= total system mobility
= relative permeability to gas
= relative permeability to oil
= relative permeability to water
= gas viscosity
= oil viscosity
= water viscosity
v
k
---
x d
dp
=
k
v
x d
dp
k
---
t
k
k
ro
o
-------
k
rg
g
-------
k
rw
w
------- + +
\ .
| |
=
k
---
t
k
k
rg
k
ro
k
rw
w
5.3 Data Input 435
Provided the distribution and relative saturations of the fluid phases remain fairly
constant throughout the reservoir by entering appropriate equivalent values, the
mobility should be reasonably accurate for a multi-phase system.
Equivalent Reservoir Porosity
The reservoir porosity is the fraction of a rocks bulk volume that is filled with
mobile hydrocarbons. For a multi-phase system, the equivalent reservoir porosity
must be used to satisfy the diffusivity relationship given in the explanation of Total
Reservoir Compressibility above. Normally, this value can be determined with rea-
sonable accuracy from well logs and/or core measurements.
Equivalent Reservoir Viscosity
The Equivalent Reservoir Viscosity is only required when the Internal PVT Table
is disabled and the Fluid Type is oil or water. The equivalent reservoir viscosity
should represent the total effective viscosity of a multi-phase fluid system. As
stated above, the equivalent permeability and reservoir viscosity must match the
system mobility for a multi-phase system.
Gas Specific Gravity
The gas specific gravity is only required when the Internal PVT Table is used.
When this occurs, correlations will be applied to characterize the fluid behavior.
For gas production, enter the specific gravity of the dry gas. When oil is selected,
enter the specific gravity of the solution gas (i.e., at stock-tank conditions).
Bubble Point Pressure
During a decrease in pressure, as is typically the case during production, the bubble
point is the pressure at which gas begins to evolve from solution. This value is only
required when oil or water is the produced fluid and the Internal PVT Table is
selected.
Oil API
The oil API gravity is required when the Internal PVT Table is used and the fluid
type is oil. The definition of API is as follows:
API
141.5
o
------------- 131.5 =
where is the specific gravity of the oil at 60F and atmospheric pressure.
Reservoir Temperature
The initial mean reservoir temperature is used to calculate the fluid properties. This
value is only required when the Internal PVT Table option is selected or the fluid
type is gas.
The Fracture Characteristic Data dialog box (see Figure 5.7) provides a location for
entering the propped fracture properties needed to perform a simulation when the
fracture option is selected. As you become familiar with this data screen, you will
notice that many of the parameters will appear or disappear depending on the
options selected. The Stages/Cluster tab will only be activated if the Well Orienta-
tion is selected as Horizontal.
Figure 5.7: Fracture Characteristics - Data Dialog Box.
Each of the items found in the Fracture Data dialog screen are explained below. If
necessary, the conditions for data entry are indicated
o
5.3 Data Input 437
Fracture Characteristics Tab
Calculate
A calculate radial option is available at the bottom of the dialog to calculate either
the fracture permeability, fracture width, or fracture conductivity. This gives the
user the flexibility to input two of the variables and have the third calculated. The
calculated value will then be dimmed. The Calculate option may not be available
depending on the Fracture options selected (i.e., if Input Conductivity or Calculate
fracture permeability is selected. The code will only display this feature if it is nec-
essary.
The Total Pay Zone Height or net pay thickness is an input parameter from the For-
mation Data dialog. It is dimmed here since it is only shown for reference
Effective Propped Pay Zone Height
As stated, this is the effective propped height of the proppant in the pay zone ( )
and is used only if the fractured well option is selected. This value maybe greater or
less than the Total Pay Height ( ). The Effective Propped Pay Zone Height, how-
ever, must be less than or equal to the Total Propped Fracture Height that is used for
the Fracture Design Optimization cases.
The effective dimensionless conductivity in the pay zone is calculated from

The reader is referred to Appendix L for additional information.
Total Propped Fracture Height
The Total Propped Fracture Height is only required if the Fracture Design Option
is selected. The Total Propped Fracture Height along with the Effective Propped
Pay Zone Height to calculate the proppant mass in the pay zone and the effective
proppant number in the pay zone. Please refer to Appendix L for additional discus-
sions.
Propped Fracture Length
When the NPV option is used and the User Specified NPV Fracture Data is dis-
abled, the propped fracture lengths are read from the MFrac output file (.mfrac).
If the NPV option is Off, it is necessary to specify the propped fracture length. Enter
h
p
'
h
p
C
fD
k
f
w
f
kL
---------
h
p
'
h
p
----- - =
a value that represents the fracture half-length which is propped or conductive. The
fracture is assumed to have two symmetrically propped wings of equal half-length.
The Average Fracture Conductivity is used over the entire length.
Fracture Permeability
This is the average value for fracture conductivity (with damage).
Fracture Width
This the average value for the propped fracture width.
Average Fracture Conductivity
The Average Fracture Conductivity is only input in this dialog box, if the NPV
option is Off.
The average fracture conductivity for slightly varying conductivities may be esti-
mated using the following relationship for long term production

where
For a variable fracture conductivity with position, the User should consider using
the Variable Conductivity option for a fractured well. This option requires the
User to input fracture conductivity as a function of fracture position. The code will
then calculate the more rigorous Average Fracture Conductivity based on pseudos-
teady-state analyses (see Appendix L).
Because MProd uses an analytical approach to reservoir simulation, the Average
Fracture Conductivity entered should be weighted towards the near wellbore con-
= propped fracture length
k
f
w
f
k
f
x ( )w
f
x ( ) x d
0
L
}
L =
k
f
w
f
L
1
k
f
x ( )w
f
x ( )
------------------------- x d
0
L
}
\ .
| |
=
k
f
w
f
k
f
x ( )
w
f
x ( )
L
5.3 Data Input 439
ductivity when modeling early time production. Effectively, this will more accu-
rately characterize a shorter, more conductive fracture. When simulating longer
production times (pseudosteady-state), the entire propped fracture length should be
used. If an analytical approach is unsatisfactory, a numerical simulator that allows
the fracture conductivity as a function of position to be specified, must be used.
Exodus, developed by T.T. & Associates, is such a simulator and is fully compati-
ble with MFrac output.
Dimensionless Conductivity

If the Average Fracture Conductivity is input, the effective Dimensionless Conduc-
tivity in the pay zone will be calculated, and if the Dimensionless Conductivity is
input, the Average Fracture Conductivity will be calculated.
Beta Factor
The field will not be displayed if the Darcy-Only option is selected in the Fracture
Options tab. The non-Darcy beta factor is required input if input Beta has been
selected. If the option to calculate beta from a database correlation is selected, a
value will be present but dimmed since it will be a calculated value from the prop-
pant porosity and permeability.
Fracture Skin Factor
Damage to the fracture face can occur as a result of the fracture fluid leaking off
and fluid loss additives, as well as mechanical damage due to fracture propagation
process. The Fracture Skin Factor can be used to model this damage by simulating
an additional pressure drop adjacent to the fracture face. As with any type of skin, a
positive value corresponds to damage, while a negative value indicates stimulation.
Stimulation effects may be inferred as a result of the chemical reactions that occur,
for example, during acid fracturing. The Fracture Skin factor, , used by MProd
can be expressed as:
where
C
fD
k
f
w
f
kL
---------
h
p
'
h
p
----- - =
S
f
S
f
t
2
---
y
s
x
f
----
\ .
| |
k
k
l
---- 1
\ .
| |
=
k
Inverse Fracture Diffusivity
Normally, the ratio of the diffusivity of the reservoir to the diffusivity of the frac-
ture approaches zero for low permeability reservoirs and reasonable fracture con-
ductivities. For these conditions, inverse fracture diffusivity is insignificant. As the
conductivity of a fracture approaches the conductivity of the reservoir, however,
this may significantly influence the early time production behavior of a well. To
include the effects of fracture diffusivity, enter the Dimensionless Inverse Frac-
ture Diffusivity, , in the space provided. The definition of this parameter is as fol-
lows:
where
For more information on inverse fracture diffusivity refer to Lee and Brocken-
brough.
Stages/Cluster Tab
The Fracture Characteristics Stages/Cluster tab is shown in Figure 5.8. This dialog
will change depending on the Fracture Stage Option selected. The Reservoir Drain-
age Area, Aspect Ratio, and Reservoir Size will be shown (dimmed) if the Reser-
voir is a closed system. The Stages/Cluster Tab will only be present if the Well
Orientation is selected as Horizontal.
= damaged zone permeability due to leakoff
= propped fracture half length
= damaged zone adjacent to the fracture
= dimensionless inverse fracture diffusivity
= equivalent fracture permeability
= total fracture compressibility
= equivalent fracture porosity
k
l
x
f
y
s
c
f
c
f
k|c
t
k
f
|
f
c
tf
--------------- =
c
f
k
k
f
c
t
c
tf
|
|
f
5.3 Data Input 441
Figure 5.8: Fracture Characteristics - Stages/Cluster Tab.
Each of the input variables are discussed below:
Number of Stages
This is the total number of fracture stages in the horizontal well.
Number of Clusters per Stage
This is the total number of fracture clusters per stages in the horizontal well. The
total number of multiple transverse fractures is simply the number of stages multi-
plied by the number of clusters per stage. Please refer to Appendix G.
Fracture Stage Option
There are three selections for the fracture stage option with each having different
data input requirements regarding the stage and cluster spacing in the horizontal
wellbore. This option is only selectable for a closed system. For an infinite reser-
voir it is assumed that the clusters do not interfere. The user is referred to Appendix
G for a complete description with illustrations of the transverse fracture placement
for each option.
Equal Spaced Over Reservoir
This option will place the total number of transverse fractures equally spaced in the
reservoir. This also referred to as the Multiply spacing option.
Equal Spaced Over Specified Wellbore Length
This option will place the total number of transverse fractures equally spaced over a
specified wellbore length. This option is also referred to as the Multiple Equally
Spaced Transverse Fractures - Lateral length. If this option is selected the Horizon-
tal Lateral Length must be input.
User Specified
This is the most general case and allows the user to input the Stage spacing and
the Cluster spacing. This selection is also referred to as Multiple Stage/Cluster
Transverse Fractures option as defined in Appendix G.
Variable Fracture Conductivity Data
If the Variable Conductivity option is selected for a fractured well a dialog
prompting the user to input Fracture Conductivity or Dimensionless Conductiv-
ity as a function of Fracture Position will be available as illustrated in Figure 5.9.
The numerical simulator will then calculate the effective fracture and dimension-
less conductivities. Only parameters unique to this Variable Conductivity option are
discussed below.
Figure 5.9: Variable Fracture Conductivity - Data Dialog Box.
Fracture Position
The Fracture Position is the location of the proppant in the fracture measured from
the wellbore (i.e., a fracture position of zero or a value equal to the well radius).
The final entry in the table is the propped fracture length from which the Dimen-
sionless Conductivity is calculated as discussed below.
5.3 Data Input 443
Fracture Conductivity
The variable Fracture Conductivity is entered into the table as a function of fracture
position. As discussed earlier in this chapter, if the Fracture Conductivity is input
the equivalent spacial Dimensionless Conductivity will be calculated.
The Dimensionless Conductivity as a function of fracture position can be input and
the Fracture Conductivity as a function of fracture position will be calculated, The
Dimensionless Conductivity as a function of position is defined as

where the final Fracture Position in the table is the Propped Fracture Length ( ).
Conductivity Gradient
An option is provided at the bottom of the dialog to select a Conductivity Gradi-
ent in the fracture. Selecting this option will model the conductivity as a linearly
varying value from fracture position to fracture position within the fracture. If Con-
ductivity Gradient is not selected the Fracture Conductivity (and Dimensionless
Conductivity) will be assumed to be piece-wise constant over a given fracture
position (see Appendix L for additional information and discussions).
History Match Parameters
If the History Match Production Simulation Data option is checked in the Options
dialog, then the History Match Parameters and Measured Data screens become
available.
The history matching process allows the user to history match on various parame-
ters depending on whether the well is unfractured or fractured. For an unfractured
well, the user has an option to history match on the following parameters: 1) reser-
voir drainage area (closed system), 2) permeability, 3) reservoir aspect ratio, and/or
4) wellbore skin. For the fractured well, the user has an option to history match on
one or all of the following parameters: 1) reservoir drainage area (closed system),
2) permeability, 3) reservoir aspect ratio, 4) fracture length, 5) beta factor and/or 6)
dimensionless fracture conductivity depending on the Fracture Options.
C
fD
x ( )
k
f
w
f
x ( )
kL
-----------------
h
p
'
h
p
----- - =
L
History matching is a methodology of finding a set of input parameters (history
match parameters) that will minimize the error between the measured data and the
history match data (simulated numerical results).
To history match on any given parameter the user must specify the minimum/maxi-
mum range and provide an estimate of a starting value. If the option Internal Esti-
mate is selected the user will not have to enter an estimate for any of the history
match parameters.
Any parameter (property) with the same minimum and maximum values will not be
a history parameter. That is, the code will keep this parameter at a constant value.
History matching by its very nature may result in a non-unique solutions. The code
may find parameter values that minimize the error in saddles but may not actually
represent the true history match values. To ensure a pleasant experience, it may be
advantages to history match on only a few parameters at a time.
Following is a partial list of history matching scenarios for which the differential
equations will provide a non-unique solution:
1. Short time well test. The simulator will not be able to history match (converge)
on the drainage area or reservoir aspect ratio unless the drainage area is
extremely small.
2. High dimensionless fracture conductivities. For fracture conductivities greater
than 100 or 1000, there is essential no difference in the solution. Consequently,
if the dimensionless conductivity range is from 0.1 to 10,000 and an estimate is
at 1000, the code may converge on an infinite conductivity fracture (i.e., the
numerical solution for is no different than if ).
3. Fracture length. If the fracture length is chosen to be a value greater than the
maximum reservoir drainage dimensions.
4. Permeability. Calculations may not be unique for short term data. Once pseu-
dosteady state occurs the probability of solution uniqueness increases.
5. Beta. Calculations may not be unique for constant production data, since there
are an infinite combination of fracture conductivity and beta that will give the
same effective dimensionless conductivity.
6. Fluid properties. The uncertainty in fluid properties affects the reservoir mobil-
ity and history matching uniqueness.
7. No fracture case. The effective estimated wellbore skin may not be very accu-
rate if the flow has not reached pseudosteady state. A negative skin value
C
fD
1000 = C
fD
10000 =
5.3 Data Input 445
should also be increases if the effective wellbore radius is greater than the
drainage area.
Although some of the above items are error checked in the code, the user must be
responsible for reasonable input values to obtain a unique solution. History match-
ing is an engineering methodology not a trial and error exercise.
No Fracture Case - Properties
Following is a list of the history match parameters for an unfractured well:
1. Reservoir Drainage Area (Closed system only).
2. Dimensionless Reservoir Aspect Ratio (Closed system only).
3. Equivalent Reservoir Permeability.
4. Skin Factor.
Fracture Case - Properties
Following is a list of the history match parameters for a fractured well:
1. Reservoir Drainage Area (Closed system only).
2. Dimensionless Reservoir Aspect Ratio (Closed system only).
3. Fracture Length.
4. Dimensionless Fracture Conductivity.
5. Beta factor.
6. Equivalent Reservoir Permeability.
Multi-Case (NPV) Fracture Characteristics
Multiple fracture treatment cases can be simulated during a single execution. To
perform treatment optimization studies using a Net Present Value approach, MProd
provides three options for gathering MFrac data. This can be found in the section
containing the description of the Multi-Case (NPV) Fracture Data Source.
When User Specified fracture data is selected for the NPV Fracture Data Source,
the NPV Fracture Data option is added to the Data menu. This sub-menu provides a
table for defining up to 25 different fracture cases for simultaneous production sim-
ulation as shown in Figure 5.10. If the Well Orientation is selected as Horizontal,
the Stages/Clusters tab will be present as shown in Figure 5.11.
Figure 5.10: Multi-Case (NPV) Fracture Characteristics Dialog.
Figure 5.11: Multi-Case - Stage/Clusters Dialog.
Fracture Characteristics Tab
The categories of data required to characterize each fracture in the Multi-Case Frac-
ture tab are as follows:
Import
Use the Import button provided in the dialog to read the proppant transport data
from any MFrac file containing a proppant transport solution. Once the data is
imported it can be modified. This capability allows for preliminary viewing of
MFrac data and offers a method for editing and adding data prior to its use by the
program. To take advantage of this capability, Click on the Import button to browse
5.3 Data Input 447
and select an MFrac file. Since data contained in the dialog box is over-written dur-
ing an import operation, caution should be used when using this facility. Normally,
prior to importing, we recommend starting with a blank data dialog, or using the
Export Spreadsheet function on the dialog tool bar to avoid loosing the original
data.
Calculate
A calculate radial option is available at the bottom of the dialog to calculate either
the fracture permeability, fracture width, or fracture conductivity. This gives the
user the flexibility to input two of the variables and have the third calculated. The
calculated value will then be dimmed. The Calculate option may not be available
depending on the Fracture options selected (i.e., if Input Conductivity or Calculate
fracture permeability is selected. The code will only display this feature if it is nec-
essary.
Propped Length
The Propped Length is the propped fracture half length for which the production
will be simulated.
Effective Propped Pay Zone Height
This is the effective propped height of the proppant in the pay zone ( ) and is used
only if the fractured well option is selected. This value maybe greater or less than
the Total Pay Height ( ).
Fracture Permeability
This is the average proppant permeability (with damage) as a function of position in
the fracture.
Fracture Width
This is the effective average propped fracture width in the fracture as a function of
position.
Average Fracture Conductivity
Like the Average Fracture Conductivity discussed earlier in this chapter, this should
be consistent with the average integrated value over the fracture length.
h
p
'
h
p

If the Average Fracture Conductivity is input, the effective Dimensionless Conduc-
tivity in the pay zone will be calculated, and if the Dimensionless Conductivity is
input, the Average Fracture Conductivity will be calculated.
Beta
The field will not be displayed if the Darcy-Only option is selected in the Fracture
Options tab. The non-Darcy beta factor is required input if input Beta has been
selected. If the option to calculate beta from a database correlation is selected, a
value will be present but dimmed since it will be a calculated value from the prop-
pant porosity and permeability.
Fracture Skin Factor
The Fracture Skin factor, , used in MProd can be expressed separately for each
case as:
where
Inverse Fracture Diffusivity
To include the effects of fracture diffusivity, enter the Dimensionless Inverse
Fracture Diffusivity, , in the space provided for each case.
Maximum Power
This is the maximum power required to create the specified (multi-cluster for a hor-
izontal well) fracture geometry. These values are entered and included as output to
be used later by MNpv in the calculation of Net Present Value.
= damaged zone permeability due to leakoff
= propped fracture half length
= damaged zone adjacent to the fracture
C
fD
k
f
w
f
kL
---------
h
p
'
h
p
----- - =
S
f
S
f
t
2
---
y
s
x
f
----
\ .
| |
k
k
l
---- 1
\ .
| |
=
k
k
l
x
f
y
s
c
f
5.3 Data Input 449
Slurry Volume
This is the total slurry volume required to create the specified (single cluster for a
horizontal well) fracture geometry. This quantity is only included to allow the
determination of Net Present Value for a design.
Liquid Volume
This is the total Liquid Volume (frac fluid) injected necessary to create the specified
(single cluster for a horizontal well) fracture geometry. This Liquid Volume is only
included to allow the determination of fracture Net Present Value based on the cost
of the fracturing fluid.
Total Proppant Mass
This is the amount of proppant used to create the specified (single cluster for a hor-
izontal well) fracture geometry. These values are also used for the determination of
Net Present Value.
To Enter User Specified NPV Fracture Data:
1. Make sure that the NPV option is turned on by opening the Options dialog box
from the Main Menu and selecting the appropriate radio button. The User
Specified option for the NPV Fracture Data Source must also be selected.
2. Next, open the NPV Fracture Data dialog from the Data menu. The dialog
boxes shown in Figure 5.10 will appear. Use the Import button provided in the
dialog to read the data from any MFrac .FD* file containing NPV data. Once
the data is imported it can be modified.
3. Complete as many rows as necessary by entering data in each of the six col-
umns. The Insert and Delete buttons can be used to edit the table as it is con-
structed.
4. When finished characterizing the fractures for evaluation, click OK or the Next
Page button to close the dialog box.
Stages/Cluster Tab
The Fracture Characteristics Stages/Cluster tab is shown in Figure 5.8. This dialog
will change depending on the Fracture Stage Option selected. The Reservoir Drain-
age Area, Aspect Ratio, and Reservoir Size will be shown (dimmed) if the Reser-
voir is a closed system. The Stages/Cluster Tab will only be present if the Well
Orientation is select as Horizontal.
The Reservoir Drainage Area and the Dimensionless Reservoir Aspect Ratios
are only required if the Reservoir is a Closed System. If the Well Orientation is
selected as Horizontal and the Solution is selected as Fracture - Multi-Case the Res-
ervoir Drainage and Reservoir Aspect Ratio are input in the Multi-Case (NPV)
Fracture Characteristics Stages/Cluster tab. This allows for greater flexibility when
comparing multiple transverse fracture solutions in a horizontal wellbore for closed
systems. The Dimensionless well location for the Multi-Case (NPV) Fracture Char-
acteristics when the Well Orientation is horizontal is assumed to be at the reservoir
center (i.e., Dimensionless Well Location (x=0,y=0)).
Each of the input variables are discussed below:
Reservoir Drainage Area
The Reservoir Drainage Area is only required in this dialog if the Reservoir is a
Closed System. This is the area of the reservoir to be produced. It usually repre-
sents, in map view, the lateral extent of the reservoir drained by a particular well.
The reservoir volume is obtained by multiplying the area times the pay zone thick-
ness (see Figure 5.5).
Dimensionless Reservoir Aspect Ratio
This data is only required if the Reservoir is selected as a Closed System. Con-
cerning the reservoir's spatial relationship with the wellbore and fracture, MProd
currently assumes that the drainage area, described above, can be approximated by
a rectangular shape. A rectangle is defined by entering the Dimensionless Reser-
voir Aspect Ratio ( ). This is the ratio of the reservoir half-length ( ) and
half-width ( ) illustrated in Figure 5.6. Entering a value of one (1) for this param-
eter corresponds to a square drainage area. An aspect ratio of four (4) represents a
rectangular area with a length 4 times greater than its width.
For a hydraulically fractured reservoir, the fracture azimuth is always assumed to
parallel the orientation. The aspect ratio should, therefore, be greater than or
equal to one (1) so that the fracture parallels the long axis of the block.
Number of Stages
This is the total number of fracture stages in the horizontal well.
Number of Clusters per Stage
This is the total number of fracture clusters per stages in the horizontal well. The
total number of multiple transverse fractures is simply the number of stages multi-
plied by the number of clusters per stage. Please refer to Appendix G.
X
L
Y
H
X
L
Y
H
X
L
5.3 Data Input 451
Fracture Stage Option
There are three selections for the fracture stage option with each having different
data input requirements regarding the stage and cluster spacing in the horizontal
wellbore. This option is only selectable for a closed system. For an infinite reser-
voir it is assumed that the clusters do not interfere. The user is referred to Appendix
G for a complete description with illustrations of the transverse fracture placement
for each option.
Equal Spaced Over Reservoir
This option will place the total number of transverse fractures equally spaced in the
reservoir. This also referred to as the Multiply spacing option.
Equal Spaced Over Specified Wellbore Length
This option will place the total number of transverse fractures equally spaced over a
specified wellbore length. This option is also referred to as the Multiple Equally
Spaced Transverse Fractures - Lateral length. If this option is selected the Horizon-
tal Lateral Length must be input.
User Specified
This is the most general case and allows the user to input the Stage spacing and
the Cluster spacing. This selection is also referred to as Multiple Stage/Cluster
Transverse Fractures option as defined in Appendix G.
Total Stage/Cluster Volumes and Proppant Masses
The total stage/cluster volumes and proppant masses are the values as calculated
from a single cluster (specified in the Fracture Characteristic Tab) multiplied by the
Total Number of Transverse Fractures.
Gas PVT Data
If Gas is specified as the Fluid Type and the Internal PVT Table is Off, a table of up
to 25 values of Viscosity and Z-factor as a function of pressure must be entered.
This table is used to calculate the pseudo-pressures used in the simulation (see Fig-
ure 5.12).
The Gas PVT table must be constructed with increasing values of pressure and
cover the expected range of pressures for the simulation. The first entry should be
at standard pressure (14.696 psi) with a Z-factor equal to 1.0. The last entry should
be equal to or greater than the initial reservoir pressure.
Figure 5.12: Gas PVT Dialog Box.
Proppant Data
Proppant Data is required when the Fracture Optimization option is selected. The
data in this screen is used in the calculation of the optimum fracture characteristics
and proppant number. The reader is referred to Appendix L for additional informa-
tion.
The required proppant input data are: 1) permeability, 2) porosity, 3) specific grav-
ity and 4) the fracture permeability damage factor. These parameters are discussed
below:
Permeability
This is the fracture proppant pack permeability which is a function of concentration
per unit area and Closure Pressure. The effective propped fracture permeability is
calculated based on a damage factor as discussed below. The user is referred to the
MFrac proppant database for typical values.
5.3 Data Input 453
Porosity
slurry ratio of the settled bank). It is used to calculate the final propped fracture
width. Typical values of porosity for proppants are shown in Table 5.3.
Specific Gravity
The proppant Specific Gravity is used in the calculation of the proppant settling
velocity, as well as the pipe frictional, gravitational and perforation pressure losses.
The reported final permeability of the proppant in the fracture is calculated from:
(fraction)
6-8 angular 0.36
10-20 angular 0.36
10-20 round 0.32
20-40 round 0.35
40-60 round 0.32
Gravity
Absolute
Density
(lbm/ft
3
)
Absolute
Density
(kg/m
3
)
Sand 2.65 165.4 2650
k
f
k
f0
1 DF ( ) =
where
The final permeability is used to determine the fracture conductivity and dimen-
Design Optimization Data
This data is only required if the Fracture Design Optimization option is selected.
The fracture optimization methodology is based on placing a given amount of prop-
pant mass in a propped hydraulic fracture in such a manor as to optimize perfor-
mance. That is for a given mass of injected proppant, the simulator will calculate
the optimum fracture characteristics and dimensionless conductivity to maximize
production (i.e., for a given volume of proppant do we need fracture length or width
to optimize productivity).
The design optimization is based on the proppant mass in the pay zone or for a
given reservoir the Proppant Number. This table allows the user to input various
values for the Total Proppant Mass. The proppant mass placed in the pay zone
(Pay Zone Proppant) and the effective Proppant Number are also calculated based
on the other proppant and formation properties. Entering the Proppant Number
will result in the calculation of the Total and Pay Zone Proppant Masses. The user
is referred to Appendix L for additional details.
Total Proppant Mass
This is the total mass of proppant pumped into the fracture.
Pay Zone Proppant Mass
This is the mass of proppant placed in the pay zone.
Proppant Number
The proppant number is defined as twice the ratio of the propped fracture volume in
the pay zone ( ) to reservoir volume ( ) multiplied by the fracture to
reservoir permeability ratio ( ).
= final (damaged) fracture permeability
= proppant permeability (undamaged from database)
k
f
k
f0
DF
V
prop frac
V
reservoir
k
f
k
5.3 Data Input 455
The proppant number for a rectangular shaped reservoir is given by
where is the fracture penetration and is the reservoir aspect ratio. See Appen-
dix L for additional information.
Production Data
The Production Data dialog box provides a table for entering the production rate or
bottomhole flowing pressure schedules as a function of time. The appearance and
required data for the dialog box presented will depend upon the selection made for
the Production Specified option. When Rate is selected for this option, a table
containing the rates, durations (time) and time step for the calculations is required.
The time step determines the number of iterations calculated for each correspond-
ing time value. The data shown in Figure 5.13 would result in pressure calculations
performed using a rate of 300 bpd for 30 days with calculations made every day.
This would be followed by a rate of 200 bpd for the next 70 days to 100 days with
calculations performed every 10 days. The last entry corresponds to 100 bpd for
900 days calculated every 100 days up to a total of 1000 days.
Figure 5.13: Production Data Dialog Table - Variable Rate.
To Enter a Series of Constant Rates or Flowing Pressures:
1. Select Rate or Pressure for the Production Specified option by opening the
Options dialog box from the Main Menu and making a selection.
N
prop
2V
prop frac
V
reservoir
-----------------------
k
f
k
---- C
fD
I
x
2
= =
I
x

2. Next, open the Production Data dialog from the Data menu. One of the dialog
boxes shown in either Figure 5.13 or Figure 5.14 will be displayed depending
on the selection in Item 1 above.
3. Fill in at least one (1), and up to five-hundred (500) rows of data making sure
to complete each row that is used. Use the Insert and Delete buttons to edit the
table as it is constructed.
4. When finished entering tabular data, click OK to close the dialog box.
Figure 5.14: Production Data Dialog Table - Variable Flowing Pressure.
When the Production Specified option is set to pressure, the data required is Bot-
tomhole Flowing Pressure, Time and Time Step. The example shown in Figure
5.14 would start with calculations using a flowing pressure of 2500 psi every day
for 30 days, followed by a flowing pressure of 1500 psi to 365 days with calcula-
tions performed every 3.65 days and finally a calculation every 36.5 days at 500 psi
to a total of 3650 days.
The principle of superposition is used to integrate the data input into a series of con-
stant rate or pressure changes. For hydraulically fractured wells, the model is appli-
cable for all flow regimes including linear, bilinear, trilinear and pseudo-radial.
Calculations are made both for real and dimensionless time and flow rate or pres-
sure. In addition, cumulative production and folds of increase (both instantaneous
and average) are calculated.
5.3 Data Input 457
Measured Data
The measured data is input in a table very similar to the Production Data table
above. The difference is that measured data is input and not the boundary condition.
An overview of the measured input data is given below.
The Measured dialog box provides a table for entering the measured production
rate or bottomhole flowing pressure data as a function of time. The appearance and
required data for the dialog box presented will depend upon the selection made for
the Production Specified option. When Rate is selected for this option, a table
containing the time and time dependent bottomhole pressures is required.
To Enter a Series of measured Rates or Flowing Pressures:
1. Select Rate or Pressure for the Production Specified option by opening the
Options dialog box from the Main Menu and making a selection.
2. Next, open the Measured Data dialog from the Data menu. A dialog box will
be displayed requiring input for pressure or rate versus time depending on the
selection in Item 1 above.
3. Fill in and up to five-hundred (500) rows of data making sure to complete each
row that is used. Use the Insert and Delete buttons to edit the table as it is con-
structed.
4. When finished entering tabular data, click OK to close the dialog box.
When the Production Specified option is set to rate, the data required is Time and
Bottomhole Flowing Pressure,. When the Production Specified option is set to
pressure, the data required is Time and Rate.
Well Data
Production forecasting typically requires a minimum of data describing certain fea-
tures of the well in order to perform a simulation. For MProd, these features
include the Wellbore Radius and the permeability damage due to skin. The well
radius defines the contact area between the well and the reservoir. This value is par-
ticularly important for unfractured wells, or when performing multi-case (NPV)
analyses. The skin damage (Well Skin) characterizes the additional pressure drop
associated with the near well regime. This parameter may have a significant effect
on calculating the folds of increase.
To include the effects of wellbore storage on the calculation of dimensionless pres-
sure and avoid errors during early time, the Dimensionless Wellbore Storage
Coefficient may be entered. This parameter is important in the early-time solutions
and are typically insignificant for long-time production. Generally, entering a value
of zero for the wellbore storage will not affect the overall results.
No Fracture
The required and/or optional well information entered in the Well Data dialog box
for an unfractured well (Solution selected as No-Fracture) is shown in Figure 5.15.
The Wellbore Data for an unfractured well is given in the Vertical Tab. If the well
orientation is Horizontal and the No Fracture Solution is selected data must also be
input in the Horizontal - No Fracture Tab.
The parameters contained in the dialog are listed and described below.
Figure 5.15: Well Data Dialog - Unfractured Oil Well.
Vertical Tab
The Wellbore Data for an unfractured well is given in the Vertical Tab dialog. If the
well orientation is Horizontal and production is from a an unfractured (No Fracture)
perforated horizontal or open hole, the general configuration of the horizontal
should be specified.
Wellbore Radius
The Wellbore Radius is the radius of the borehole. It is used as the base case for
radial flow from the reservoir to the well and in the calculation of wellbore storage
effects. When performing Multi-Case (NPV) analyses the productivity increase or
5.3 Data Input 459
folds of increase is based on the production ratio of the fractured well to an unfrac-
tured well with a known borehole radius.
Formation Volume Factor
The Formation Volume Factor is the ratio of the volume of oil plus dissolved gas
at reservoir pressure and temperature divided by the volume of the oil at stock tank
conditions. The formation volume factor is not required when the produced fluid is
gas.
Wellbore Skin Factor (base)
The dimensionless pressure drop at the wellbore face as a result of damage (posi-
tive value) or stimulation (negative value) is commonly referred to as Well Skin.
The base Wellbore Skin Factor is the skin before the well is stimulated or simply a
base skin that a stimulated well can be compared to determine a productivity
increase index.
Wellbore Skin Factor (stimulated)
The dimensionless pressure drop at the wellbore face as a result of damage (posi-
tive value) or stimulation (negative value) is commonly referred to as Well Skin.
The stimulated wellbore skin is used to calculate the well productivity. The base
wellbore skin factor for an unfractured well is used for the base productivity for
comparison with the stimulated case (i.e., the dimensionless productivity index is
the ratio of the stimulated to the base case productivity).
Dimensionless Wellbore Storage Factor
The Dimensionless Wellbore Storage Factor can be included to improve the
accuracy of early time predictions of pressure and rate when storage is present. This
parameter is defined as:
where
= dimensionless wellbore storage
= wellbore storage coefficient
= pay zone height
= wellbore radius
C
D
5.16146C
2t|c
t
hr
w
2
------------------------ =
C
D
C
c
t
h
r
w
|
Horizontal - No Fracture Tab
The Horizontal - No Fracture Tab only requires data if the Well Orientation is Hori-
zontal and if a No Fracture solution is selected for either the Solution, Base Case or
Stimulated case.
The required horizontal well information to be entered in the Horizontal - No Frac-
ture (unfractured horizontal wellbore) dialog box is shown in Figure 5.15.
The parameters contained in the Horizontal - No Fracture dialog are listed and
described below.
Figure 5.16: Well Data: Horizontal - No Fracture Tab.
Length of Perforated Lateral
The Length of Perforated Lateral is the total open hole length or the perforated
interval in a horizontal leg contributing to production from an unfractured horizon-
tal wellbore.
Permeability Ratio
The Permeability Ratio is the ratio of the horizontal to vertical permeability of the
formation. The horizontal permeability is the permeability input into the Formation
Data dialog. The smaller this ratio the greater the productivity. As the formation
Permeability Ratio goes to zero, the unfractured wellbore produces as an infinite
conductivity vertical hydraulically fractured well with a total fracture length equal
to the Length of the Perforated Lateral (i.e. fracture half-length equal to one-half
the perforated interval). The reader is referred to Appendix G for the solution meth-
odology for unfractured horizontal wells.
5.3 Data Input 461
Wellbore Skin
The dimensionless pressure drop at the horizontal wellbore face as a result of dam-
age (positive value) or stimulation (negative value) is commonly referred to as
Wellbore Skin.
Fractured Well
The well information required for a fractured well is shown in Figure 5.17.
Vertical Tab
The additional well data parameters required for a fractured well are listed and
described below.
Figure 5.17: Well Data Dialog - Fractured Gas Well.
Wellbore Skin Factor (base - prefrac)
The prefrac Wellbore Skin Factor is the wellbore skin before the well is fractured.
The prefrac skin factor is used in the calculation of the flow resistivity in the near
wellbore region. For high conductivity fractures, the flow entering the wellbore in
the near well region is normally negligible and positive prefrac skin values will
have a minor effect when the fracture length is much greater than the wellbore
radius (or effective wellbore radius). If the prefrac skin is negative, the fracture
resistivity model simulates a reduced resistance in the near wellbore region result-
ing in an increased productivity. This is especially true for short fractures with large
negative prefrac skins. (Please note that the storage of this variable in the input file
is shared with the base wellbore skin factor for an unfractured well).
Wellbore Skin Factor (stimulated)
The productivity from a well with a stimulated wellbore skin factor is also calcu-
lated which is used for comparison with the fractured well productivity. For the
fractured well with a prefrac skin, the productivity increase is the ratio of the frac-
tured well productivity to that of a well with the stimulated Wellbore Skin Factor as
given by this input value (Please note that the storage of this variable in the input
file is shared with the simulated wellbore skin factor for an unfractured well).
Once all of the required data relevant to the options selected have been entered, the
calculations can be performed. Up to this point, the program has checked the valid-
ity of the data contained in every dialog screen opened during the active session.
Since you are not forced to view every data screen sequentially prior to performing
calculations, it is possible that some input parameters may not have been checked.
To avoid problems, when the calculation process is initiated, the program checks to
ensure that the minimum data requirements are met and that the data entered is
within acceptable limits. This extra level of error checking is designed to prevent
calculation errors due to missing or bad data. Please refer to Chapter 1 for more
information about the general error checking processes.
To Perform Calculations:
1. Click Run from the main menu.
2. The Run|Options dialog can be used to specify options while the simulator is
running. See Run Options on page 69.
After clicking the Run menu item, a Simulation Data window will be displayed
and the menu bar will change to reflect that the simulation is running. To stop the
simulation, choose Stop! from the menu bar. Once the calculations are finished, the
menu bar will return to normal. Due to the nature of the MProd calculations, if the
simulator is stopped before the calculations are finished, none of the calculated data
will be saved.
5.5 Plots
MProd provides a vast selection of plots that can be produced to illustrate the simu-
Chapter 1. This section describes the plotting facilities that are specific to MProd.
The MProd plots are grouped into different categories as described below. Plots
from any number of categories may be viewed at the same time. The plots contain
5.5 Plots 463
the results of the last simulation saved. It is important to note, that changing an
input parameter does not affect a plot until the simulation has been run again.
Plot Categories
The plots in MProd are grouped into different categories, each of which are accessi-
ble with the Plot menu.
Production (Single Case): Non Multi-Case NPV plots.
Fracture Characteristics: These are plots of general characteristics of the
fracture plotted versus propped length.
Cumulative Production: These plots include the cumulative production and
the productivity ratio versus time or propped length.
Net Cumulative Production: These plots are for net cumulative production.
Flow Rate: These plots are of various flow rates versus time or propped
length.
History Match: These plots are for history matching (e.g. flow rate versus
time, and flowing BHP versus time).
Design Optimization: Various design optimizations plots.
Viewing Plots
The plots that are contained in MProd are divided into categories that can be
accessed by different commands in the Plot menu. The specific plots available will
be directly controlled by the options selected for the last saved simulation. For
example, if NPV is disabled by unselecting it in the Options screen, these plots
will not be available in the Plot menu.
To View a Plot:
plot groups.
(See Figure 5.18). Groups that are unavailable due to the options selected will
appear dimmed. To obtain these plots, you must activate the option and then
re-run the simulation.
3. Select the desired plots by clicking the adjacent check boxes. Use the Select
All button to view all the plots for the group. To disable a plot, click Off the
check box or use the Clear All button.
Figure 5.18: Example Plot Selection Dialog Box - MProd.
in all Meyer programs as described in Chapter 1.
Viewing a Report
To see the results of a simulation select View Report from the Report menu.
The input data will have the same form as the input screens. The output data (simu-
lation results) will be presented in a set of tables.
5.7 Program Database 465
Production Solution
These tables, one per case (fracture length), show the flow rate, production, pres-
sure and productivity ratio solutions indexed by time.
5.7 Program Database
To simplify database input, MProd offers a Non-darcy database for the beta factor
correlation. While this databases is offered as an integral part of the program,
Meyer and the reference sources make no guarantee or expressed warranty as to
their use or accuracy. This Non-Darcy database is also used in MFrac.
Non-Darcy Database
To enter the Non-Darcy Database select the Non-Darcy Database command from
the Database menu. The first screen presented is the Non-Darcy List dialog shown
in Figure 5.19. Just like in the Fluid database, a User Database can be built by copy-
ing non-Darcy beta correlations from the programs System Database. The System
Database contains correlations for the beta factor as used in the petroleum industry.
Once beta correlations have been copied from the System Database, they can be
repositioned by using the Up and Down buttons. You can Edit a record, Delete a
record, Copy a record or Add a new record to the list by choosing the appropriate
button. To exit the non-Darcy database dialog box, click on the Done button.
Figure 5.19: Non-Darcy Database Dialog Box.
Non-Darcy Database Parameters
When the Edit button is selected, the non-Darcy proppant data screen appears as
shown in Figure 5.20. The screen displays a non-Darcy database record. The Refer-
ence Code is a unique, seven (7) character identifier, used to indicate which beta
correlation to use in the simulation. The Description of the Non-Darcy Equation is
displayed with the Reference Code in the report for correlation selected.
5.8 Tools 467
Figure 5.20: Non-Darcy Database Edit Screen.
where , , and are the input constants. The coefficient has units consistent
with the permeability power constant, , and the units for permeability. The power
coefficients , and are dimensionless.
5.8 Tools
The Tools menu provides the user with options and analytical tools for calculating
or determining scientific parameters. Currently, all applications have a Tool
Spreadsheet option that allows the user to customize the spreadsheet. MFrac and
MProd also have a Proppant Calculator for determining the proppant permeability
and beta factor based on proppant properties.
k
f
|
|
a
k
f
b
|
c
----------- =
a b c a
b
b c
Proppant Calculator
The Proppant Calculator allows the user to calculate the theoretical proppant per-
meability and non-Darcy beta factor. Please refer to the MFrac section labeled
Proppant Calculator on page 243 for more information.
5.9 References
1. Vazquez, M. and Beggs, H.D.: Correlations for Fluid Physical Property Pre-
diction JPT (June 1980) 32, 968-970.
2. Beggs, H.D. and Robinson, J.R.: Estimating the Viscosity of Crude Oil Sys-
tems JPT (Sept. 1975) 1140-1144.
3. Lee, A.L. Gonzalez, M.H. and Eakin, B.E.: The Viscosity of Natural Gases
Trans., AIME (1966) 997-1002.
4. Lee, S.T. and Brockenbrough, J.R: A New Approximate Analytic Solution for
Finite-Conductivity Vertical Fractures, SPEFE (Feb. 1986) 75-88.
Chapter 6
MNpv
Economic Analysis
6.1 Introduction
This chapter is a users guide for MNpv, a fracturing design optimization simulator,
based on the concept of Net Present Value developed by Meyer & Associates, Inc.
MNpv is designed for use with MProd to automatically determine and compare the
NPV of various fracture scenarios in order to identify an optimal design. Using
MNpv, treatment advantages or disadvantages can be ascertained by evaluating pre-
dicted cash flow and future return on investment.
The complete process of performing an analysis is covered in this chapter. A
description of the available options and the basic procedures required for running
MNpv are given. Detailed information about the MNpv methodology and basic the-
ory is covered in Appendix H. In addition, examples are provided with the software
to demonstrate the utility of certain features and manipulation of the data.
Hydraulic fracturing optimization is a basic requirement to maximize economic
returns on investment. Although, there are many factors which influence the results
of a design, the principle objective of any stimulation application is to maximize
well profitability. Typically, this involves careful economic analysis of the costs
and potential benefits of individual well operations. For many, forecasting Net
Present Value (NPV) has become an integral part of the preferred methodology to
optimize hydraulic fracture treatments.
The integrated capability of MFrac, MProd, and MNpv provides the ability to opti-
mize the potential propped fracture length of a design based on the pumping sched-
ule, fracture geometry, treatment cost and production revenue. The NPV of various
fracture lengths can be calculated and displayed as a function of producing time.
Fracture characteristics, treatment cost, revenue and cumulative production plots as
a function of fracture length and producing time can also be created.
470 MNpv: Economic Analysis
To perform an integrated NPV analysis, the simulators are run in sequence. First,
the pumping schedules and associated fracture geometries are automatically deter-
mined using MFracs NPV option. This step may be omitted if the data is entered
directly in the MProd program. Next, MProd is used to generate production fore-
casts for each of the different fracture geometries. Finally, the output generated by
MProd is used in MNpv to perform an economic analysis.
An outline of the basic steps for using MNpv is shown in Table 6.1
6.2 Options
This section outlines the available options and describes the parameters that define
the conditions for MNpv. The first step before performing calculations is to estab-
lish the options. This is accomplished by accessing the Options dialog box from the
main menu.
The option selections determine the scope of the MNpv simulation. They establish
the kind of input to be entered and specific nature of the calculations to be per-
formed. The selected options are stored in the current file.
The Options dialog box is typically the first input screen used in the MNpv pro-
gram. Its function is to establish the primary model options that will be employed.
There are four sections to this dialog. Each section deals with a different aspect of
the modeling approach.
Table 6.1: MNpv Basic Steps
Step Program Area
Open an existing MNpv data file (*.mnpv) or cre-
ate a new data file
File Menu
Specify Units and currency symbol (optional) Units Menu
Select Program Options and an MProd output file Data Menu
Input Data:
Input Economic Data
Input Unit Revenue (if required)
Input Share% Table (if required)
Data Menu
Run Simulation Run Menu
View Plots Plot Menu
Generate Report Report Menu
6.2 Options 471
To access the Options screen select Options from the main menu by clicking the
menu name. The dialog box in Figure 6.1 will then appear.
Figure 6.1: Program Options.
diamond will appear in the center of the button when a choice is made. To move to
the next option, click on its radio button or use the TAB button to move sequentially
through the choices. Within a section the current selection for that option is high-
lighted with a dotted rectangle. The option choice may be changed by using either
the mouse or the arrow keys.
An explanation of the choices available for each of the Options are summarized in
the following section.
Fluid Type
MNpv uses the production predictions from MProd to forecast the potential future
revenue for each fracture geometry evaluated. The Fluid Type, as read in from the
MProd output file, is used internally in MNpv to specify the primary fluid produced
from the reservoir in order to direct the calculations through the appropriate algo-
rithms for the purpose of calculating incremental revenue. This informational head-
ing insures that the appropriate units are used and that the subsequent input screens
are oriented towards the correct fluid (i.e., oil or gas).
Either Oil or Gas will appear in this dialog depending on information from the
MProd output data file. The Fluid Type cannot be changed by the user.
Well Orientation
The Well Orientation, is read in from the MProd output file. MNpv plots can dis-
play transverse fractures for a horizontal well orientation.
Either Vertical or Horizontal will appear in this dialog depending on information
from the MProd output data file. The Well Orientation cannot be changed by the
user.
Revenue/Unit Volume
This option specifies the type of production revenue schedule to use. There are two
choices available.
When Fixed is selected, the Unit Revenue per volume of oil or gas produced is
specified as a constant in the Economic Data section of the Data menu. For this
selection, a Unit Revenue Escalation Rate may also be specified.
The other choice for this option is Variable. This selection enables the Unit Reve-
nue Table found under the Data Menu to be used. The program will use the revenue
versus time data entered in this table for all calculations.
Unit Costs
This option is used to modify the fluid and proppant unit cost for each case. If it is
Fixed then it will use the same fluid and proppant unit cost for each case. If it is
Variable, you can enter a separate fluid and proppant unit cost for each table entry
of conductivity and length.
When Fixed is selected, the Frac Fluid Unit Cost and Proppant Unit Cost are
specified as constants in the Economic Data section of the Data menu.
The other choice for this option is Variable. This selection enables the Unit Cost
Table found under the Data Menu to be used. The program will use the cost versus
fracture length and conductivity (i.e., row specific) data entered in a table for all
calculations.
6.2 Options 473
Partner Share Option
When ownership of a well involves more than one partner, this option may be used
to specify the percent share of revenue a partner receives for the Net Present Value
calculations.
If Variable Percentage vs. Rate is chosen, the Share% Table is enabled. This table
allows the entry of share percentage as a function of net flow rate. It can be found
under the Data menu.
Selecting Fixed Percentage requires entering the Share of Revenue percentage in
the Economic Data section of the Data menu. This value is used as a constant in
the economic calculations.
MProd Output File with NPV/Multi-Case Data
To perform NPV calculations, the output from MProds simulation must be linked
to MNpvs file. The path to the data file is specified by using the Select button
found in the Options dialog. Using this button displays the dialog box shown in
Figure 6.2 from which the desired data file may be selected. This is accomplished
by browsing directories to locate and select the file. Once the file is highlighted,
click the OK button to complete the selection process. During this procedure, the
default filename extension for MProd output is used. The file extension is POD
(Production Output Data).
Figure 6.2: MProd Output File Selection.
Attempting to select an MProd file that does not contain the necessary NPV data
will result in a message like the one shown in Figure 6.3. This indicates that the
data file was not created with the NPV option on within MProd. Either select
another data file or return to MProd and re-run the simulation with the NPV/Multi-
Case option checked as On.
Figure 6.3: MProd Output File Selection Error.
6.3 Data Input
After the options are selected and the scope of a simulation is set, data can be
entered by accessing the categories found under the Data menu. As previously
described, the options selected determine what information is needed for a particu-
lar type of analysis. The specific data requirements of a screen or the existence of
the data screen itself will vary depending upon the options chosen. This approach,
minimizes data input and prevents unnecessary or misleading data entry. Simply
decide what options are relevant to the simulation and MNpv will display only those
menus and input fields necessary. Any time an option is changed, the screens will
vary to enable new input or hide data that is not needed. This methodology is used
throughout MNpv.
The following sections pertain to the Data menu items found by selecting Data
from the main menu. Each Data menu item is explained and a description of the
associated variables given. When pertinent, the conditions or case sensitive options
for a data screen are noted and an example of the resulting dialog is shown. All of
the data screens available within MNpv and the variables contained within them are
presented.
Description
descriptive information about a simulation. Space is provided for entering the Com-
pany Name, Well Name, Well Location and Simulation Date. In addition, a Com-
ments section is included so that additional information can be entered. This
information can include items such as the specific fluids, program options or an
6.3 Data Input 475
explanation of the data used. All of the information contained in this dialog is
optional.
Figure 6.4: Data Description.
Economic Data
When the Revenue/Unit Volume and Partner Share Option are both Fixed, the
Economic Data dialog box containing all of the necessary information to perform
the calculations appears as shown in Figure 6.5. Variations of this dialog may be
presented along with additional data screens when the Variable options are modi-
fied. The units displayed, along with the variables contained in this dialog, are con-
sistent with the Fluid Type selected and the preferences selected from the Units
menu. For example, if the Fluid Type changes from oil to gas, the unit revenue
parameter will change to currency per unit volume gas (e.g., $/Mscf).
Figure 6.5: Economic Data Dialog Box.
Each of the items found in the Economic Data dialog screen are explained in the
next section. When necessary, the conditions for which the data is required are also
indicated.
Frac Fluid Unit Cost
The Frac Fluid Unit Cost is the cost per unit volume of fracturing fluid for a spe-
cific treatment design or group of designs. Normally, this includes the total cost of
the base fluid and gelling agents, as well as, miscellaneous additives such as, clay
stabilizers, fluid loss additives, nitrogen, CO
2
, surfactants, inhibitors, etc. Special
fees associated with license arrangements and material handling may be factored
into this unit cost or they may be added in the Miscellaneous Cost category found
in this dialog. The value required for the fluid unit cost can usually be obtained by
referring to the pumping service companys price book or their specific job ticket.
The number entered is used to determine the fluid cost as a function of fracture
length for the NPV calculations. The typical relationship between fracture penetra-
tion (i.e., length) and the fluid cost is illustrated in Figure 6.6.
6.3 Data Input 477
Figure 6.6: Treatment Cost vs. Propped Fracture Length.
Proppant Unit Cost
Like the fluid unit cost, the Proppant Unit Cost is used to determine the proppant
cost as a function of fracture length. This is the cost per unit mass of proppant used
for a particular treatment design. While the proppant type may have a significant
effect on the resulting fracture conductivity and productivity, the cost of the prop-
pant may also dramatically influence the economic viability of a particular treat-
ment design. A typical proppant cost versus propped length relationship is depicted
in Figure 6.6.
Hydraulic Power Unit Cost
The hydraulic power requirements for each specific pumping schedule, as deter-
mined by MFrac or entered in MProd, are passed to MNpv for calculating the asso-
ciated costs to be included in the economic analysis. The Hydraulic Power Unit
Cost is the cost per unit power required for each design. This value is used to deter-
mine the hydraulic cost. This data can be obtained from the pumping service com-
pany involved. Concerning standby power, mobilization costs, or overtime charges,
these expenses may be factored into the unit cost or included in the Fixed Equip-
ment Cost category explained below. Dont forget that service companies usually
charge based on the power ordered and not necessarily on what is actually used.
You may want to add additional costs in the Fixed Equipment Cost or Miscella-
neous Cost if extra pumping capability is ordered.
Treatment Cost vs Propped Length
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Propped Length (ft)
0
40000
80000
120000
160000
200000
240000
T
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t

C
o
s
t

(
$
)
Job cost
Fluid cost
Proppant cost
Transverse Fracture Unit Cost
The Transverse Fracture Unit Cost field is used to represent the additional cost of
each transverse fracture for horizontal wells. Per-fracture proppant mass, fluid vol-
ume, and hydraulic power costs are already factored in before the transverse frac-
ture unit cost is applied. This field is often used to represent the fixed equipment
cost and miscellaneous cost that vary linearly according to the number of transverse
fractures.
Fixed Equipment Cost
This category may be used to represent the additional cost of equipment that is not
a function of hydraulic power or number of transverse fractures. The value entered
is added to the variable power cost to determine the total equipment cost. Items that
fall in this category are listed below:
Truck Mileage and Transportation - These are charges typically incurred for
mobilizing equipment and delivering materials.
Fixed Power Costs - This includes standby power and non-pumping service time.
Blending Charges - Other than mobilization and minimum charges, these costs are
sometimes based on the average injection rate.
Pressure Multipliers (Intensifiers) - The cost of pressure intensification is nor-
mally based on the hydraulic power ordered. There are usually fixed costs also
associated with this equipment.
Proppant or Slurry Handling Equipment - These are charges associated with
any equipment related to proppant handling not included in typical blending equip-
ment charges. This includes proppant transports, conveying equipment and special
proppant concentration devices.
Liquid Additive Equipment - These costs are related to liquid delivery systems
not covered by blending charges. Examples include LFC units, as well as other
ancillary upstream pumping equipment used for delivering fluids to the blender.
Nitrogen or CO
2
Equipment - Special charges usually apply for the transport,
preparation and pumping of energized fluids. The costs associated with the equip-
ment should be included in this category.
Auxiliary Equipment - The cost of miscellaneous equipment such as, tree savers,
manifolds, flowmeters, data acquisition, transport units, treating connections, and
frac support units should also be considered in the fixed cost of equipment.
6.3 Data Input 479
Miscellaneous Cost
Miscellaneous costs should also be entered to compute the total cost associated
with a treatment. This category should be used to represent potential expenditures
not related to hydraulic power, equipment or materials already included in the cate-
gories described above. This includes site preparation, workover costs, tubular rent-
als, specialized wellbore equipment (e.g., bridge plugs, etc....) and perforating.
Tank rentals, water hauling, license fees, logging or testing services, and consulting
fees can also be included. Basically, this is a general category where any fixed cost
related to the analysis can be included.
Currency Escalation Rate
In MNpv, future economic calculations are always made relative to the present
value of currency. To make this transformation, the time value of money must be
defined. The Currency Escalation Rate is the parameter which describes this rela-
tionship. It can be thought of as the effective interest rate used for calculating pres-
ent worth from the future value of produced oil or gas. Another way of thinking
about this parameter is to equate it to the change in the average investment opportu-
nity rate. For example, the average interest rate that could have been achieved with
a similar amount of money during the same time period if it had been invested else-
where. This value is sometimes referred to as the discount rate. The present worth
of a future value is defined as:
where
Unit Revenue for Produced Oil or Gas
When the Revenue/Unit Volume option is Fixed, the current unit revenue for the
produced fluid must be entered. The unit revenue escalation rate (discussed below)
can then be specified to forecast the future revenue. The title and unit for this vari-
able automatically change depending on the Fluid Type selected in the Options
menu.
= present worth
= future worth
= currency escalation rate or interest rate
= number of periods
P
F
1 i + ( )
n
------------------ =
P
F
i
n
If Variable is selected for the Revenue/Unit Volume option, this parameter does
not appear in the Economic Data dialog. It is replaced by the Variable Revenue per
Unit Volume Table found in the Data menu.
Unit Revenue Escalation Rate
The Unit Revenue Escalation Rate is used to specify the percent change in the
unit revenue for produced oil or gas as a function of time. If this value is positive,
the future revenue of gas or oil will increase. A negative value indicates that as time
increases, the unit revenue price will decrease.
Share of Cost
When partnerships are involved, this is your percentage of the total cost of the treat-
ment for the NPV analysis. If you have no partners, your percentage or share of the
cost is 100%.
Share of Revenue
This data is only required when the Partner Share Option has been set to Fixed in
the Options dialog box. It represents your percent share of the total revenue. If you
have no partners your share of the revenue is 100%.
If Variable is selected for the Partner Share Option, this parameter is disabled and it
is replaced by the Share% Table located in the Data menu. This allows the entry of
your share percentage as a function of net flow rate.
Variable Unit Revenue Table
Given the history of oil and gas prices and their potential future variability, fore-
casting production revenue may be speculative. Nevertheless, to evaluate different
economic scenarios, as they influence the engineering decision, it is necessary to
have some flexibility in how future hydrocarbon price estimates are applied. MNpv
provides the ability to use a fixed revenue and an associated escalation rate. MNpv
also allows a table to be defined for increasing or decreasing revenue values.
This table is only available if Variable is selected in the Revenue/Unit Volume
option found in the Options dialog box. For this condition, the table is used to enter
the unit revenue of oil or gas as a function of time. The total number of entries must
When the Currency Escalation Rate for NPV calculations and the Unit Revenue
Escalation Rate are the same, the unit revenue is a constant in terms of present
value.
6.3 Data Input 481
be between two (2) and twenty-five (25). The table must be constructed with
increasing values of time to cover the total period of the simulation. The first entry
should be at zero producing time with a corresponding initial unit revenue. The last
time entry should be equal to or greater than the maximum time of the production
simulation.
To Enter the Unit Revenue as a Function of Time:
1. Select Variable for the Revenue/Unit Volume option by opening the Options
dialog box from the main menu and making a selection.
2. Next, open the Variable Revenue/Unit volume Table screen from the Data
menu. The dialog boxes shown below will be displayed.
3. Fill in at least 2 and up to 25 rows of data making sure to complete each row
that is used. Use the Insert and Delete buttons to edit the table as it is con-
structed.
4. Click OK or Next Page to close the dialog box and save the changes you made.
The unit revenue of produced oil or gas is assumed to change linearly between con-
secutive times. Consequently, midway between two times (Time 1 and Time 2) the
unit revenue is equal to the average between the two entered values.
Assuming your net unit revenue for oil is $10.00/bbl today and will increase by
$1.00 per year, the table in Figure 6.7 would be input.
Figure 6.7: Variable Revenue Table - Step in Unit Revenue.
If your net unit revenue for oil is $10/bbl today and increases linearly to $50/bbl in
twenty years, you would enter the data shown in Figure 6.8.
Figure 6.8: Variable Revenue Table - Linearly Increasing Unit Revenue.
Just as the unit revenue field in the Economic Data dialog is updated corresponding
to the Fluid Type selected, the unit and title for the variable revenue table also
change.
Variable Share% Table
Partnerships complicate any economic evaluation, especially when share percent-
ages do not remain constant. Share of cost is usually more straight forward and in
MNpv your percent share of expenditures is entered in the Economic Data dialog
(see Share of Cost). If the percent share of revenue is a constant, simply apply
your percentage to the fixed Revenue/Unit Volume. When share of revenue is
based on periodic production rates, the Share% Table can be used to specify the
change in percent share of revenue of oil or gas as a function of the net flow rate. To
access this table the Partner Share Option must be chosen as Variable Percentage
vs. Rate in the Options dialog screen. The net flow rate is defined as the flow rate
from the fractured well minus the unfractured base case (i.e., radial production).
When using the Share% Table, the total number of entries must be between 2 and
25 and the table must be constructed with increasing values of net flow rate to cover
the expected range of production. The first entry should be for a net rate of zero.
The last time entry should be equal to or greater than the maximum expected rate. If
6.3 Data Input 483
the actual net rate is lower than the first data entry value, the share percentage for
the first value will be used. If the calculated net rate is greater than the last value in
the table, the last entered share percentage will be used.
As in the Revenue/Unit Volume Table (see Figure 6.7), the percent share of revenue
of produced oil or gas is interpreted linearly between consecutive net rates. Conse-
quently, midway between two rates the share percentage is equal to the average
between the two values.
Assuming the share percentage of revenue for oil will increase linearly from 0% at
a rate of 0 bbls/day to 90% for 200 bbls/day of net flow rate increase, the data in
Figure 6.9 would be entered.
Figure 6.9: Share% versus Net Flow Rate Table.
This corresponds to a Share versus Flow Rate relationship as shown in Figure 6.10.
Figure 6.10: Share% vs. Net Rate Relationship.
The unit for the net flow rate column will automatically correspond to the Fluid
Type that is specified in the Options dialog.
Variable Unit Cost Table
When the Variable unit cost option is selected you can enter a separate fluid and
proppant unit cost for each table entry of length/conductivity and length.
When Fixed is selected, the Frac Fluid Unit Cost and Proppant Unit Cost are
specified as constants in the Economic Data section of the Data menu.
The Variable selection enables the Unit Cost Table found under the Data Menu to
be used. The program will use the cost versus fracture length and conductivity (i.e.,
row specific) data entered in this table for all calculations as shown in Figure 6.11.
6.4 Run/Performing Calculations 485
Figure 6.11: Variable Fluid and Proppant Unit Cost Table.
This table provides the user with the capability to optimize the NPV based on dif-
ferent unit costs for the fluid and proppant types. The Frac Fluid Unit Cost and
Proppant Unit Cost can vary with either job sizes or for different proppants with
various conductivities at a given fracture length.
Once all of the required data relevant to the options selected have been entered, the
calculations can be performed. Up to this point, MNpv has checked the validity of
the data contained in every dialog screen opened during the active session. Since
you are not forced to view every data screen sequentially prior to performing calcu-
lations, it is possible that some input parameters may not have been checked. To
avoid problems, once the calculation process is initiated, the program checks to
ensure that the minimum data requirements are met and, once again, that the data
entered is within acceptable limits. This extra level of error checking is designed to
prevent calculation errors due to missing or bad data.
To start the calculations, select the Run command from the Run menu. If there are
any error checking messages, correct the errors and select Run again. The
Run|Options dialog is available for specifying options for when the simulator is
running. See Run Options on page 69.
After clicking the Run menu item, a Simulation Data window will be displayed
and the menu bar will change to reflect that the simulation is running. To stop the
simulation, choose Stop! from the menu bar. Once the calculations are finished, the
menu bar will return to normal. Due to the nature of the MNpv calculations, if the
simulator is stopped before the calculations are finished, none of the calculated data
will be saved.
MNpv provides a vast selection of plots that can be produced to illustrate the simu-
Chapter 1. This section describes the plotting facilities that are specific to MNpv.
The MNpv plots are grouped into different categories as described below. Only
plots from the same categories may be viewed at the same time. The plots contain
the results of the last simulation. It is important to note that changing an input
parameter does not affect a plot until the simulation has been run again.
Plot Categories
The plots in MNpv are grouped into different categories, each of which are accessi-
ble with the Plot menu. The Fracture Characteristics, Cumulative Production, Net
Cumulative Production, and Yearly Average Flow Rate categories have plots that
use MProd output data. Each category is summarized below:
Fracture Characteristics: These are plots of general characteristics of the fracture
plotted versus propped length.
Cumulative Production: These plots include the cumulative production and the
productivity ratio versus time or propped length.
Net Cumulative Production: These plots are for net cumulative production.
Yearly Average Flow Rate: These plots are of various flow rates versus time or
propped length.
Treatment Cost & NPV: These plots include the treatment cost versus propped
length plot and NPV; and DROI plots versus time or propped length.
Partner Share Treatment Cost & NPV: These plots are similar to those above.
Viewing Plots
The plots in MNpv are divided into categories that can be accessed by different
commands in the Plot menu. The specific plots that are available will be directly
controlled by the options selected for the last run simulation.
To View a Plot:
plot groups.
(see Figure 6.12). Groups that are unavailable due to the options selected will
appear dimmed. To obtain these plots you must activate the option and then re-
run the simulation.
3. Select the desired plots by clicking the adjacent check boxes. Chose the
Select All button to view all the plots for the group. To disable a plot, click off
the check box or use the Clear All button.
Figure 6.12: Plot Selection Dialog Box - NPV/Multi-Case.
in all Meyer programs and is described in Chapter 1.
Viewing a Report
To see the results of a simulation select View Report from the Report menu.
The input data will have the same form as the input screens. The output data (simu-
lation results) will be presented in a variety of tables. Each of the output tables is
summarized below.
Treatment Cost
This table gives the proppant cost, the fluid cost, the total job cost and the share of
the job cost indexed by the propped length of the fracture.
Net Present Value Solution
These tables, one per time step, show the production, revenue and net present value
solutions indexed by the propped fracture length.
6.7 Units
The Units dialog box (Figure 6.13) works the same as the other Meyer Unit dialog
boxes as described in Chapter 1. However, there is an option to specify the currency
name and currency symbol.
6.7 Units 489
Figure 6.13: MNpv Units Dialog Box.
Chapter 7
MFast
Analytical 2D Fracture Simulator
7.1 Introduction
MFast is an analytical two-dimensional hydraulic fracturing simulator for design-
ing 2D fractures. The simulator illustrates the importance of various parameters and
provides a fast first order solution to fracture geometry, net pressure, fracture effi-
ciency and treatment design. This simulator provides the capability to compare the
fracture geometries for Geerstma-deKlerk (GDK), Perkins-Kern (PKN) and ellip-
soidal type two dimensional models. Since MFast was developed from analytical
solutions it has the inherent limitations of steady state injection, constant mechani-
cal properties, time independent fluid rheology and single layer properties.
The governing equations of mass, momentum and energy conservation used in the
development of MFast are presented in full detail by Meyer
1-4
. Numerous coeffi-
cients are implemented from analytical relationships based on the limiting solutions
of numerical results obtained from MFrac.
MFast is a great tool for beginners to understand the parametric effects of the vari-
ous input data and their importance in fracturing. MFast is also a useful tool for the
more experienced user in providing a fast first order analysis and in performing
parametric studies based on field data. Utilizing this program to perform simple net
pressure history matching will provide a first order estimate of the fracture geome-
try, correct geometry model to use, fracture efficiency and proppant mass for a
specified inlet concentration.
An outline of the basic steps for using MFast is shown in Table 7.1.
492 MFast: Analytical 2D Fracture Simulator
Menu
The MFast menu bar is shown in Figure 7.1. Generally, the menus are accessed
from left to right as shown in Figure 7.1.
Figure 7.1: MFast Main Menu.
7.2 Data
This Data menu describes the various data options and input data required for
MFast. The Data options are shown in Figure 7.2. A complete description of the
required input data is presented in this section.
Figure 7.2: MFast Data Menu.
Table 7.1: MFast Basic Steps.
Step Program Area
1. Open an existing data file or a new file File Menu
3. Input Data
a. Options
b. Description
c. Formation/Fracture Data
Options Menu
Base Data Menu
6. View Report Report Menu
7.2 Data 493
Options
To access the Options screen, select the Data|Options menu. The dialog box dis-
played in Figure 7.3 will then be presented.
Figure 7.3: Options Screen.
The Options screen allows the user flexibility on which features to include for a
particular type of fracture design analysis. The specific data displayed in the base
data screen varies depending on the options selected. The selections made in the
Options screen set the scope for data used in MFast.
The Options provide choices for the fracture geometry model and constitutive rela-
tionships that affect the fracture solution methodology (Figure 7.3).
Input
This option determines whether the simulations will be based on specifying a fluid
(slurry) volume or entering the desired fracture length. If volume is selected, the
slurry volume is input and the fracture length will be calculated. If the fracture
length radio button is selected, the volume to create a fracture of this dimension
will be calculated.
(i.e., unchecked). For this case, the classical solution for fluid flow in a rectangular
factor takes the form:
Deviations from laminar flow effect the frictional dissipation in the fracture and
therefore the fracture pressure predicted by a model. Turbulent flow in the fracture
may also occur when very low viscosity fluids (e.g., gas) at high rates are pumped.
To account for these phenomena and improve the ability to predict non-laminar
frictional pressure loss in a fracture, the following friction factor expression is used
when the Fracture Friction Model is turned On:
tion. These effects can be modeled by increasing the a coefficient or modifying the
wall roughness factor as discussed below.
Typical values for the a and b coefficients have been developed empirically in
accordance with Prandtl's Universal Law of the Wall
5
as shown in Table 7.2.
Turbulent flow
30,000 < Re < 10
6
; a=0.08; b=0.20
Turbulent flow
Re > 10
6
; a=0.035; b=0.14
f
D
24 Re =
D
u
2
w =
f
D
a
Re
b
--------- =
7.2 Data 495
Wall Roughness
When Wall Roughness is turned off (not checked), the Darcy friction factor inside
the fracture is used without modification as determined from the selections made in
the Fracture Friction Model option. This selection assumes that the fracture sur-
face is a smooth planar feature without roughness.
this option on. This will result in an increase in the frictional pressure drop and
shown below:
where
6-8
f
D
'
M
f
f
D
=
f
D
'
f
D
M
f
Tip Effects
The observed field pressures for some treatments are at times much higher than the
simulated pressure. This discrepancy in measured pressure can be minimized in a
number of ways. Typically, the friction factor multiplier, fracture toughness, near
a match. However, if the pressure discrepancy is due to excess pressure, an over-
pressure function can be applied at the tip. In MFast, excess pressure can be applied
using two mechanisms: 1) Fracture Toughness, and 2) Tip Over-pressure.
Over-pressure, as it is incorporated in MFast, accounts for the extra pressure
Tip effects, in general, remain an area of some controversy and considerable discus-
sion. Plausible explanations for these effects have been proposed. The possibilities
7.2 Data 497
include tip friction due to flow resistance, rock properties effects (e.g., toughness as
a function of stress at the leading edge or poroelasticity), or it may be a conse-
quence of fracture geometry (e.g., complex geometry and/or multiple fractures).
In MFast, tip effects represent a flow resistance at the tip. Regardless of whether
you believe this flow resistance is due to viscosity effects or some other phenomena
related to the tip region (e.g., tip geometry) the general effect on pressure is typi-
cally the same (i.e., resistance is resistance). It is important to note, however, that
this type of resistance differs from fracture toughness in its classical application;
over-pressure varies with injection rate and time, fracture toughness does not.
The range of the over-pressure factor allowed by MFast is between 0 and 1.0. If
this option is disabled, a default value of zero is used. Usually, the Tip Effect option
is suggested when the measured injection pressures are well above the theoretical
values predicted by a classical model (i.e., Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics).
pressure, one approach is to use MinFrac to automatically regress on the tip factor
to determine an appropriate value. This best fit value from matching the net pres-
sure in a minifrac analysis is a good place to start.
loss also changes instantly whereas the fracture net pressure cannot because of stor-
age (i.e., if the rate drops suddenly and the BHTP follows, this is not excess pres-
sure but frictional dissipation in the near wellbore region).
Proppant Type
A proppant type must be selected from the drop down list box. The proppant type is
used to determine the amount of proppant which can be placed in fracture without
screening-out the fracture. The physical properties of each proppant type included
in the list box are contained in an internal database.
Description
descriptive information about the specific analysis being performed.
7.2 Data 499
Figure 7.6: Data Description Dialog Box - MFast.
Base Data
The MFast Base Data dialog box shown in Figure 7.7 provides the information
necessary to describe the rock properties, fluid rheology and fracture parameters.
Each of these data items are discussed below.
Figure 7.7: Base Data Dialog Box.
Young's Modulus
under load. It is therefore a measure of the materials stiffness. As the stiffness (E)
Rock Type
Range (10
6

psi)
Range
(10
7
kPa)
Limestone-Reef Breccia 1 - 5 0.5 - 3
Limestone-Porous or Oolitic 2 - 7 1 5
Limestone-Med. to Fine Grained 4 - 11 2.8 - 7.6
7.2 Data 501
Fracture Toughness
defects exist and induce high stress concentrations in their vicinity. These sites
become points for crack initiation and propagation. See the MFrac chapter for more
information.
Dolomite 6 - 13 4.14 - 9
Hard, dense Sandstone 4 - 7 2.8 - 5.2
Medium Hard Sandstone 2 - 4 1.4 - 2.8
Porous, unconsolidated to poorly consolidated 0.1 - 2 0.35 - 1.4
a
c
T
T K
IC
ta
c
=
K
IC
o
K
I
o H
=
o
c
K
IC
H
=
H

9
. Thiercelin
10
ing.
Setting the values of fracture toughness to zero will result in the classical hydraulic
fracturing propagation solutions dominated by viscous pressure loss. For very low
viscosity fluids, fracture toughness may be the dominant parameter controlling
fracture growth.
Poissons Ratio
Poissons ratio is defined as the ratio of the transverse strain to the axial strain
Typical Poisson's ratios for rock formations are 0.25. From parametric studies,
Table 7.4: Fracture Toughness Values for Various Rocks.
Formation Type
psi-in
1/2
kPa-m
1/2
Siltstone 950-1650 1040-1810
Sandstone 400-1600 440-1040
Limestone 400-950 440-1040
Shale 300-1200 330-1320
7.2 Data 503
Poisson's ratio is also used by logging companies to infer in-situ stresses. This
where
This is the total pay zone or net permeable leakoff height penetrated by the fracture
for leakoff. This may or may not be equal to the hydrocarbon pay thickness used to
estimate production. The total leakoff height is also referred to as the net pay zone
thickness.
= Poissons ratio
= vertical stress or overburden
= component of stress due to tectonics
= Biots constant
Poissons ratio
u
=
c
w
c
l
c
w
0
=
w
Aw
c =
l
Al
l
0
Poissons ratio =
Lateral strain
Longitudinal strain
l
0
w
0
o
Hmin
u
1 u
------------
\ .
| |
o
v
op
0
( ) op
0
o
T
+ + =
o
Hmin
u
o
v
p
0
o
T
o
Total Fracture Height
This is considered the total fracture height for the PKN and GDK fracture models.
These 2-D models have fixed fracture heights by definition (see Chapter 2). This
parameter is one of the most difficult to estimate and is one of the most important
input parameters for the PKN and GDK models. MinFrac has an option to history
match on fracture height for the PKN model. The total fracture height is not used
for the ellipsoidal geometry model.
Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio
This is the ratio between the length of the major and minor ellipse axes. If this value
is equal to unity (1), the model reduces to the standard radial or penny shaped solu-
tion. Any value greater than one will produce an elliptical profile and correspond-
ing fracture area. For example, an Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio of two (2) results in a
fracture half length that equals the total height of the fracture.
Injection Rate
The injection rate is the total constant slurry injection rate for a two wing fracture.
Flow Behavior Index
Rheological characterization of non-Newtonian fluid is required to calculate the
frictional dissipation in the fracture. Fracturing fluids are most often characterized
by the power law model. This model is typically defined as:
where is the wall shear rate, is the wall shear stress, is the consistency
index, and is the flow behavior index (dimensionless).
Consistency Index
See the explanation of the flow behavior index above.
The total leak-off coefficient, C, is made up of a combination of three flow resistant
mechanisms that are encountered in fluid loss from the fracture. These mechanisms
n' ( )
t
w
k'
n'
=
t
w
k'
n'
k' ( )
7.2 Data 505
are: C
I
- fracture fluid leak-off viscosity and relative permeability effect; C
II
- reser-
voir fluid viscosity-compressibility effects; and C
III
- wall-building effects.
The total leak-off coefficient is one of the most important parameters in determin-
ing the fluid efficiency and therefore the fracture geometry. Fluid loss is only
assumed to occur over the pay zone height.
Spurt Loss Coefficient
spurt for both faces of a single wing fracture is
Input Total Volume Injected
When the Input option is selected as Input Volume, the total slurry volume must
be entered. This is the amount of slurry which will be used for the simulation. From
this total slurry volume, the program will automatically calculate the proppant mass
required based on the proppant type and maximum proppant concentration speci-
fied.
Input Fracture Length
When the Input option is selected as Input Length, the fracture half length must
be entered. The total amount of slurry is then automatically calculated to create the
desired input fracture length. From the total calculated slurry volume, the program
will then calculate the proppant mass required based on the proppant type and max-
imum proppant concentration specified.
Maximum Proppant Concentration
The maximum proppant concentration is the desired or final concentration in the
fracture. This value is normally the final or maximum inlet concentration. From this
the total amount of proppant mass pumped is calculated based on this uniform con-
centration at the end of pumping in the fracture.
V
sp
V
sp
2AS
p
=
S
p
A
7.3 Output
The Calculations menu is shown in Figure 7.9. There are two main Output section
items, simulation results and viewing the report. There is also an option to display
2D Plots of the calculations.
Run
The calculations are accessible from the Run|Show Calculations menu. This will
run the simulation for all the models using the Input Data. A summary of the simu-
lation results are displayed for the GDK, PKN and Ellipsoidal models as shown in
Figure 7.9.
Figure 7.9: Calculations for the GDK, PKN and Ellipsoidal 2D fracture
propagation models.
Table 7.5 contains a description of the output data.
7.3 Output 507
Plot
The MFast Plot dialog box is shown in Figure 7.10. It allows the user to select
which plots to display, and whether or not the plots are displayed versus time or
volume.
Parameter Description
Length
Half length of the fracture. The fracture is assumed to
have two symmetric wings.
Height (wellbore) Total height of the fracture at the wellbore.
Max. well width Maximum width at the wellbore.
Avg. well width Average width at the wellbore.
Avg. frac. width Average width throughout the fracture.
Net pressure Fracture net pressure.
Efficiency
Fracture efficiency = Fracture volume/ Total injected vol-
ume.
Pumping time
Time to inject a given volume or to create a given fracture
length.
Volume Total volume of slurry injected. (Fluid + Proppant).
Proppant mass
Total mass of proppant pumped based on the specified
maximum allowable concentration.
Percent propped
Percent of the created fracture volume that will remain
propped after closure. (this will be the same for all geom-
etry models).
Figure 7.10: Plot Options Dialog Box
Reports
MFast can generate reports similar to the other Meyer Programs. Figure 7.11 shows
a typical MFast Report which includes a summary of the input data and calculated
results.
7.4 References 509
Figure 7.11: MFast Output Report.
7.4 References
21, 1986.
7. Huit, J.K.: Fluid Flow in Simulated Fractures, AIChE Journal, Vol. 2, p 259.
1956.
Chapter 8
MPwri
Produced Water ReInjection -
Fracturing Simulator
8.1 Introduction
This chapter is a Users Guide for the three-dimensional (3-D) hydraulic fracturing
waterflood simulator MPwri. This simulator has many of the same features as
MFrac with the exception of proppant transport, acid, foam etc. Options are avail-
able for various fluid loss models, inclusion of thermal- and poro-elastic stresses
behaviors. Additional options are available for inputting internal and external frac-
ture skins and cakes. The solution methodology for our Produced Water Reinjection
(PWRI) hydraulic fracturing simulator is formulated in the Appendices. A sum-
mary of the governing water and thermal front equations, thermal- and poro-elastic
stresses and fluid loss equations are also provided.
MPwri is a highly specialized simulator for predicting the pressure and geometry of
hydraulic fractures associated with waterflooding
1,2
. The program was specifically
designed for evaluating the effects of injecting large fluid volumes over long peri-
ods and for fracture efficiencies approaching zero.
MPwri has options for conventional (1D Carter type leakoff) and ellipsoidal (2D)
fluid loss. At early times, fluid loss from the fracture is generally diffusion con-
trolled or 1D, but at large times the fluid loss is governed by ellipsoidal and pseu-
dosteady-state leakoff. The reservoir coupling with ellipsoidal fluid loss has a
marked effect on fracture geometry for high permeability large injection volumes
compared to 1D leakoff. Boundary conditions for the reservoir drainage area
include, closed system, constant pressure boundary condition and pseudo-steady
state behavior.
Options are available in MPwri to modified the vertical layer and lateral stresses to
account for thermal and poro-elastic effects.
512 MPwri: Produced Water ReInjection - Fracturing Simulator
Only features unique to MPwri will be presented in this chapter. Please refer to the
MFrac Chapter for a complete description of the fracture input data. An outline of
the basic steps for using MPwri is shown in Table 8.1.
Menu
The MPwri menu bar is shown in Figure 8.1. Generally, the menus are accessed
Figure 8.1: MPwri Main Menu.
A description of each of the menu items is described in the MFrac chapter. The
items unique to MPwri are described in the following sections:
Options - Section 8.2
Table 8.1: MPwri Basic Steps
Step Program Area
1. Open an existing MPwri data file (*.mpwri) or create a new
data file.
File menu
2. Specify units (optional) Units menu
3. Select program options Data menu
4. Input required data
Wellbore hydraulics
Zones
Treatment schedule
Rock properties
Thermal/Poro-stress
Thermal front
Fluid loss data
Cake Properties
Data menu
5. Run simulation Run menu
6. View plots during or after the simulation Plot menu
7. Generate report Report menu
8.2 Options 513
Data Input - Section 8.3
Thermal/Poro-elastic Stress Properties
Thermal/Water Front Data
Treatment Schedule
Run - Section 8.4
Plots - Section 8.5
The data sections are in the same order as in the MFrac Chapter for ease of refer-
ence.
8.2 Options
To access the Data Options screen, select Options from the Data menu by clicking
the menu name. The dialog box displayed in Figure 8.2 will then be presented.
The Data Options screen determines what information is needed for a particular
type of analysis. The specific data displayed in a screen or the existence of a data
screen itself varies depending on the options selected. The selections made in the
Data Options screen set the scope for all data entered in the MPwri program. These
options establish the input data required and specify the nature of the calculations to
be performed.
Figure 8.2 shows the data screen speed buttons at the top of the dialog box. All data
screens in MPwri now contain these speed buttons to make it easier to go from one
data screen to another without pressing OK or Cancel. Selecting a speed button has
the same effect as pressing OK when exiting a dialog.
General Options
formed. Figure 8.2 shows the MPwri General Options screen. The Filtration Law
and Thermal Stress options are features unique to MPwri.
Reservoir Coupling
This option provides control and flexibility for the fluid loss mechanisms. Conven-
tional is the standard diffusion type fluid loss model as used in MFrac. The Steady-
State option is useful for long injection times when the leakoff rate is no longer
controlled by diffusion but rather by steady-state injection and production.
Linear (Conventional)
The Linear or Conventional option is the standard type of fluid loss mechanism
where the rate of fluid loss to the formation is governed by the total leakoff coeffi-
cient C. This is referred to as diffusion type leakoff because the fluid loss mecha-
nism is diffusion controlled. See the MFrac chapter for additional information on
the conventional leakoff mechanisms.
This option should only be used if the leakoff distance perpendicular to the fracture
is much less than the fracture length
Ellipsoidal (Koning)
This option should be used for long periods of produced water reinjection or water-
flood injection. This model assumes an ellipsoidal (2D) fluid loss model based on
the work of Koning. Three reservoir boundary conditions are available for ellipsoi-
dal fluid loss: 1) Closed system - no flow boundaries, 2) Constant pressure
boundary condition (b.c.) at the initial reservoir pressure, and 3) Pseudo-Steady
State - where the average reservoir pressure is maintained at the initial reservoir
pressure. The pseudo-steady state solution is based on the assumption that the res-
ervoir is in a pseudosteady-state mode of injection and production. That is, the pro-
duction rate is equal to the injection rate resulting in a pseudo-steady state pressure
behavior of the reservoir.
Although the closed system, constant pressure b.c. and steady-state fluid loss are
not diffusion controlled at long injection periods, the leakoff velocity at early times
8.2 Options 515
is diffusion controlled or linear (i.e. the leakoff velocity is inversely proportional to
the square root of time). This option accounts for the fluid loss behavior changing
from the conventional diffusion leakoff to a steady-state fluid loss controlled mech-
anism.
At large dimensionless times, the resulting leakoff velocity for the constant pres-
sure b.c. and steady-state behavior approaches an asymptotic value. This results in
a constant leakoff velocity since as time increases the fracture length asymptotes to
a constant value.
When the Ellipsoidal law is specified, either the Harmonic or Dynamic Fluid Loss
Model must be chosen. The Constant fluid loss option will be dimmed.
The governing equations for the ellipsoidal fluid loss model are given in
Appendix J.
Thermal and Poro-Elastic Stresses
Options are available to Include or Exclude Thermal and/or Poro-elastic stresses.
If either thermal or poro-elastic stresses are included a Thermal/Poro-Elastic Prop-
erties Table must be input. This table includes the zone layer (depth), initial stress,
and coefficient of thermal expansion and layer temperature (if thermal stresses are
included) and Biots constant (only if poro-elastic effects are included). From this
information, the thermal and poro-elastic stresses can be calculated (see
Appendix J).
Normally, the fluid injected is cooler than the reservoir temperature which for large
injection times and volumes, will result in a lowering of the minimum horizontal
stresses in zones that have fluid leakoff (if only thermal stresses are included). This
results is a lower BHTP and more contained fracture. If the thermal front is ahead
of the fracture leading edge, the modified minimum horizontal stresses due to ther-
mal effects are seen by the fracture.
However, if poro-elastic stresses are included this will increase the minimum hori-
zontal stress in layers with large leakoff volumes. Consequently, when thermal
stresses are included one should also include poro-elastic effects.
If you exclude thermal and poro-elastic stresses, they can in some special cases
(under pseudo-steady conditions when the thermal front is well ahead of the frac-
ture) be modelled using modified stresses in layers where thermal and poro-elastic
stresses become time independent.
Fluid Temperature
The fracture fluid temperature is specified in this dialog box. There is no option for
heat transfer in the wellbore or fracture because of the long injection periods that
result in the fluid temperature in the wellbore and fracture being equal to the injec-
tion temperature.
The thermal and water fronts are calculated based on the rate of creation of energy
and mass. The fluid ahead of the thermal front is assumed to be at the reservoir tem-
perature and the fluid behind the thermal front is at the fluid temperature specified
in this dialog box.
The injection fluid temperature is also used to calculate the induced thermoelastic
stresses.
Fluid Loss Model
Two fluid loss models are available: 1) Constant and 2) Dynamic. If the reservoir
coupling is ellipsoidal only the dynamic fluid loss option is available.
If the Reservoir coupling is selected as linear, the rate of fluid loss to the formation
is governed by the total leakoff coefficient C. The three types of flow resistance
mechanisms making up C are: 1) C
I
- leakoff viscosity and relative permeability
effects, 2) C
II
- reservoir viscosity and compressibility effects, and 3) C
III
- wall
building effects.
This option determines which fluid leakoff model is used. The fluid loss model
options include specifying the total leakoff coefficient (Constant Model) or the C
III
coefficient and the corresponding components which comprise C
I
and C
II
(Har-
monic or Dynamic Models). A detailed description of the components characteriz-
ing the Harmonic and Dynamic models is given in Appendix D and J and in the
Fluid Loss Data section of this chapter.
Constant
If Constant is selected, the total leakoff coefficient, C, is entered in the Fluid Loss
Data screen. The total leakoff and spurt loss coefficients are then input as a function
of depth to characterize fluid loss in the fracture at different intervals.
Dynamic Model
For the Harmonic model, the three additional options available are: 1) Input Filter
Cake, 2) Input Fracture Skin, and 3) Calculate Fracture Skin.
8.2 Options 517
If Input Filter Cake is selected, the wall building coefficient must be input in the
table. If the Input Fracture Skin option is selected, the user will be asked to input an
Internal Skin and External Skin for each layer. If the Calculate Fracture skin option
is selected, the user must enter the particulate properties given in the Cake Proper-
ties dialog.
Please refer to Appendix J for additional information of the definition of internal
and external fracture skin.
Include Fluid Loss History
If the Include Fluid Loss History check box under Fluid Loss Model option is
checked, the simulator will remember the fluid loss history if the fracture closes
and then re-opens. This option should be selected to include the effect of when mul-
tiple open/close cycles are generated. If this option is checked, the model assumes
that the cake, skin, viscosity, and compressibility effects from the previous fracture
remain upon re-opening.
Fracture Options
model and constitutive relationships that affect the fracture solution methodology.
Figure 8.3 shows the Fracture Option choices.
See MFrac Fracture Options on page 88 for additional information.
8.3 Data Input
The following sections pertain to the features unique to MPwri in the Data menu.
All other MPwri data menus are covered in detail along with a description of the
data dialogs and their associated variables under MFrac. When pertinent, the condi-
tions or case sensitive options for a data screen are noted and an example of the
resulting dialog shown. The data screens applicable for MPwri are presented below.
Treatment Schedule
The input Treatment Design schedule for waterflood applications is given below.
Two tabs are listed under Treatment Schedule, the General tab and the Stages tab.
General Tab
The General tab for the Waterflood Treatment Schedule is shown in Figure 8.4.
Figure 8.4: Input Treatment Schedule General Tab.
The General tab contains dialog boxes for Schedule Type and Wellbore.
8.3 Data Input 519
Schedule Type
In the Schedule Type dialog box, select Surface or Bottomhole to specify whether
the data entered (e.g., volumes, rates, etc.) represent surface or bottomhole condi-
tions. If pumping from Surface, specify a Wellbore Fluid Type. If pumping from
Bottomhole, specify the Flush Fluid Type.
Select Stage Friction Multipliers to enter friction multipliers for each stage.
Select Stage Recirculation to allow the selection of stages, whose rate will be used
to recirculate the fluid that is at bottomhole out of the wellbore.
Select Ramp Particulates Concentration when the option to calculate fracture
skin is enabled in the General Options, to enter from/to values for the total sus-
pended solids (TSS) and oil-in-water (OIW) concentrations for each stage.
Wellbore
The wellbore dialog box is related to the initial condition of the wellbore.
Along with the Wellbore Volume displayed from the wellbore hydraulics screen,
you can specify a Recirculation Volume. You can also specify whether the well is
filled or partially filled prior to injection. To indicate a partially filled wellbore,
enter a fraction (0-1) in the Fraction of Well Filled box. A value of one (1) indi-
cates the wellbore is 100% filled. A value of 0.5 means that the well is 50% filled.
An initial portion of the pumping schedule can be recirculated by entering a slurry
volume in the Recirculation Volume box. This is useful for setting stages, such as
in Frac-Packs. All stages with a total slurry volume less than the Recirculation Vol-
ume will be recirculated. If necessary, a fraction of a stage may be recirculated.
If the Stage Friction Multiplier box is selected the Wellbore Fluid Friction Multi-
plier can be specified.
Stage Tab
The Stage tab for the Waterflood Treatment Schedule is shown in Figure 8.5. This
type of treatment schedule uses a spreadsheet type of interface as shown. Use the
toolbar located at the top of the screen to control functions such as cut, paste, copy,
insert, delete and fill down (see Working with Spreadsheets and Dialogs on
page 23). When pumping from Bottomhole, it is necessary to specify the Flush
Fluid Type. This is selected in the same way as the Wellbore Fluid Type as
described above. For reference, the Wellbore Fluid Type (surface) or Flush Fluid
Type (bottomhole) and Wellbore Volume are displayed.
Figure 8.5: Treatment Schedule Stages Tab.
To aid in defining the Treatment Schedule, the last column of the table has a Vari-
able Column list box, which displays either the Total Time or Total Volume
injected.
When the Stage Recirculation option is selected on the General tab, the Recircu-
late column will appear in the table to allow the selection of stages, whose rate will
be used to recirculate the fluid that is at bottomhole out of the wellbore. For bot-
tomhole schedules, the selected stage is the one that is recirculated out of the well-
bore. For surface schedules, it is the fluid that is bottomhole, while the selected
stage is injected at the surface, that is recirculated out of the wellbore.
When the option to calculate fracture skin is enabled in the General Options, col-
umns for particulate concentrations will appear in the table for the total suspended
solids (TSS) and oil-in-water (OIW) concentrations for each stage.
Thermal/Poro-elastic Stresses
The Thermal/Poro-elastic Stress Properties dialog box provides a table for entering
the Coefficient of Thermal Expansion, and formation Layer Temperature (only if
thermal stresses are included), and Biots constant (only if poro-elastic stresses are
included) as a function of depth. Figure 8.6 shows the dialog layout when both the
thermal and poro-elastic stress options are selected.
8.3 Data Input 521
Figure 8.6: Thermal/Poro-elastic Stress Properties Table.
Ahead of the thermal front, the stresses are equal to the initial formation stresses
plus any poro-elastic effects. Behind the thermal front (and toward the wellbore),
the modified stresses as a result of thermal and poro-elastic effects are seen by the
fracture system.
Appendix J has a complete list of the Thermal/Poro-elastic stress equations.
Therefore, if the injection temperature is less than the reservoir temperature the
thermoelastic stresses will be negative.
Zone Depth
The zone depth is the TVD at the bottom of the zone. This data is taken from the
Rock Properties dialog box. This depth can only be changed in the Rock Properties
dialog.
Initial Stress
The Initial Stress is the stress value input as a function of depth in the Rock Proper-
ties dialog. This value can only be changed in the Rock Properties dialog.
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion
The Coefficient of Thermal Expansion, , is used to calculate the thermal stresses
in the formation as a function of depth. The magnitude of the thermal stresses will
The Thermal/Poro-elastic Stress data must be input after the Rock Properties
data.
o
increase as this coefficient increases. Typical coefficients of thermal expansion for
rocks are 2x10
-6
/F to 5x10
-6
/F (i.e., 10
-6
/C to 2.5x10
-6
/C).
Layer Temperature
This is the formation layer temperature. The temperature difference for thermal
stresses is calculated from where is the injection temperature and
is the formation layer temperature.
Biots Constant
The change in the minimum horizontal stress is related to the change in the pore
pressure by Biots Constant, where . The general form of the poro-elas-
tic equation (see Appendix J) is
where the Perkins factor, , is used to account for the magnitude of the
ellipsoidal pressure extent around the fracture.
Thermal/Water Front Data
The Thermal/Water Front Data screen is shown in Figure 8.7. This data is used to
calculate the thermal front, waterfront, ellipsoidal waterflood shape, oil displace-
ment and leakoff characteristics. A description of the input data is discussed below.
AT T
i
T
f
= T
i
T
f
o 0 o 1 s s
Ao
3
p
1 2v
1 v
---------------
\ .
| |
of
k
Ap f a
1
b
1
h , , ( ) =
f a
1
b
1
h , , ( )
8.3 Data Input 523
Figure 8.7: Thermal/Water Front Data Screen.
Injected Fluid
The injected fluid represents the properties (thermal conductivity, heat capacity,
specific gravity, etc.) of the fracturing fluid. For waterflood applications, the user
should specify Water. The internal database associated with the injected fluid is
used in the calculation of the thermal front.
Reservoir Lithology
The Reservoir Lithology represents the primary rock type in the region to be frac-
tured.
In-situ Fluid
The In-situ Fluid is the formation fluid that occupies the pores. Typically, this fluid
is oil.
Minimum Reservoir Height
The Minimum Reservoir Height is used as a minimum layer thickness for calculat-
ing the thermoelastic coefficient. The minor axis to thickness ratio will be calcu-
lated based on the maximum value of the reservoir layer thickness or the minimum
reservoir height. Very thin layers can be modelled for fluid loss with the thermo-
elastic and poro-elastic effects being simulated over a greater height. This results in
a smaller thermoelastic coefficient for small fluid penetration in the minor axis. The
minimum reservoir height input prevents the thermoelastic coefficient from being
unity for small laminated reservoir intervals with a small minor axis where the
minor axis to thickness ratio is large.
Reservoir Half-Length
The Reservoir Half-Length is used in the dimensionless pressure solution for fluid
leakoff. If the reservoir is of infinite extent simply put in a very large value. The
drainage half-length/area is only used if the Reservoir Coupling option is set to
Ellipsoidal. The reservoir is assumed to be a square.
If the reservoir half-length, , is input, the drainage area, , will be calculated
from ( ).
Drainage Area
The Drainage Area, , is used in the dimensionless pressure solution for fluid leak-
off. If the reservoir is of infinite extent simply put in a very large value. The drain-
age half-length/area is only used if the Reservoir Coupling option is set to
Ellipsoidal.
The reservoir is assumed to be a square with sides of half-length
where the equivalent drainage radius is defined as
( ).
Fluid Loss Data
ters is necessary. The format for the fluid loss data entry is flexible and allows any-
thing from a single layer reservoir to multi-layered zones with diverse properties.
The specific data required by the program depends on which fluid loss model is
selected in the General Options dialog.
It is not necessary for these depths to correspond directly to the depths specified in
the Rock Properties screen, although they may. A maximum of 1000 layers is per-
mitted in both the Rock Properties and Fluid Loss data screens.
x
e
A
A 4x
e
2
=
A
x
e
1 2 A tR
e
= =
R
e
A t ( )
1 2
=
8.3 Data Input 525
Please refer to Appendix D for a detailed description of the individual leakoff coef-
ficients which control fluid loss.
This option is only available if the Reservoir Coupling is set to Linear. When the
Constant Fluid Loss Model is chosen, the total leakoff, and CTotal coefficients for
each layer are entered in the Fluid Loss Data screen shown in Figure 8.8. There is
no Spurt Loss for produced water reinjection or waterflood. When this model is
used, it is not necessary to calculate the three individual linear flow resistance
mechanisms C
I
, C
II
, and C
III
(see Appendix D). The diffusivity parameters of per-
meability, compressibility and viscosity are not required for this option because
they are inherently included in the total coefficient.
However, the reservoir porosity and fluid saturations are required to calculate the
water and thermal fronts. The mobile porosity is also displayed (non-editable) as
calculated from
where is the residual oil saturation, and is the irreducible water saturation.
ficient Model is as follows:
Zones
An optional zone name can be specified for each layer to help organize the fluid
loss data properties table.
|
m
| = 1 S
or
S
iw
( )
S
or
S
i w
Depth at Bottom
Total Porosity
The total reservoir porosity is the fraction of a rocks bulk volume that is filled with
hydrocarbons, water, and gas.
Hydrocarbon Saturation
The hydrocarbon saturation is the fraction of the total porosity initially filled with
oil or gas.
Residual Hydrocarbon Saturation
The residual hydrocarbon saturation is the fraction of the total oil or gas initially in
place that is immobile. The Oil Displacement Factor is the fraction of oil that is dis-
placed by the water. This factor is directly related to the irreducible or residual oil
saturation (i.e., Oil Displacement Factor = 1- irreducible oil saturation).
Irreducible Water Saturation
The irreducible water saturation is the fraction of the water that is immobile.
Mobile Porosity
The mobile or equivalent reservoir porosity is the fraction of a rocks bulk volume
that is filled with mobile hydrocarbons. This porosity is calculated from
and is not editable. The mobile porosity is used to calculate
the C
I
and C
II
leakoff coefficients used to simulate fluid loss during injection. This
value is also used to determine the extent of the water front (see Appendix J).
The total leakoff coefficient is a combination of the C
I
, C
II
and C
III
leakoff mecha-
nisms. These leakoff coefficients are discussed in Appendix D. The total leakoff
coefficient is used in calculating the time dependent leakoff velocity and overall
fluid loss based on mass conservation. The general diffusional leakoff velocity is
By convention, the depth entered is the true vertical depth TVD at the bottom of
the interval. The reservoir parameters are assumed to have constant properties
over this interval.
|
m
| = 1 S
or
S
iw
( )
u C t t =
8.3 Data Input 527
where is time and is the initial time of fluid leakoff. The total fluid loss volume
to the formation is
where is a fluid loss parameter and A is the total leakoff area (one face) for both
wings. This equation illustrates that the fluid loss volume is proportional to the
leakoff coefficient and leakoff area product.
For multi-layer leakoff, spurt loss is calculated in each layer separately. Please refer
to Appendix D for additional information.
Dynamic Fluid Loss Model
When the Dynamic fluid loss model is chosen three additional options are available
for modeling fluid loss. In the Options screen the user can specify either 1) Input
Filter Cake, 2) Input Fracture Skin, or 3) Calculate Fracture Skin.
If Input Filter Cake is selected, the wall building coefficient must be input in the
table. If the Input Fracture Skin option is selected, the user will be asked to input an
Internal Skin and External Skin for each layer. If the Calculate Fracture skin option
is selected, the user must enter the particulate properties given in the Cake Proper-
ties dialog.
Figure 8.9 illustrates the input parameters when the internal and external skin are
input.
The parameters required for this option are described below. These properties, like
the Rock Properties, are input as a function of the TVD depth. Also like the Rock
Properties, an optional Zone name is permitted to assist in preparing and organizing
the data.
t t
V
l
2 v A t d d
0
A
}
0
t
}
=
tCA tu =
u
Figure 8.9: Fluid Loss Data Dialog Box - Dynamic Fluid Loss Model (Input
Fracture Skin).
A detailed description of the Linear and Ellipsoidal fluid loss models are given in
Appendix J.
The specific data required for the Dynamic Fluid Loss Model for the various
options is as follows:
Zone
properties table.
Depth at Bottom
Reservoir Pressure
The reservoir or pore pressure is used in conjunction with the minimum horizontal
stress and fracture pressure to calculate the differential pressure for leakoff. The
where
= pressure in the fracture
=
net fracture pressure, ( )
= differential leakoff pressure
Ap
loss
p
f
p
0
Ap
f
o
Hmin
p
0
( ) + = =
o
Hmin
p
f
p
0
Ap
f
p
f
o
Hmin
Ap
loss
8.3 Data Input 529
The pressure difference between the minimum horizontal stress and average pore
pressure is, therefore, a critical component in calculating the C
I
and C
II
leakoff
coefficients.
For new wells, enter the initial reservoir pore pressure for the productive interval.
This value is typically obtained from either a production log or well test. Variations
in pore pressure versus depth can be inferred and entered based on gradient mea-
surements and/or the fluid saturation changes within the interval (e.g., gas caps,
aquifers, etc.).
pressure as interpreted from a well test. In all cases, the value entered should be less
than the minimum horizontal stress.
Total Compressibility
where
= gas saturation
= oil saturation
= water saturation
c
t
S
o
c
o
S
w
c
w
S
g
c
g
c
r
+ + + =
c
g
c
o
c
r
c
t
c
w
S
g
S
o
S
w
t c
cp k
c
t
|
-----------
\ .
| |
z
2
2
c
c p
\ .
|
| |
=
where
Permeability
The reservoir permeability is the formation property that characterizes its ability to
transfer a fluid through the pores when subjected to a pressure gradient. From
Darcy's law
where
The permeability/mobility is used to calculate the C
II
coefficient in order to model
the rate of fluid leakoff into the formation during injection. The values entered
should reflect the effective permeability to the mobile portion of the reservoir fluid.
An effective permeability to the frac fluid filtrate is used to derive C
I
. The C
I
coef-
ficient is calculated from the permeability and filtrate viscosity.
Total Porosity
The total reservoir porosity is the fraction of a rocks bulk volume that is filled with
hydrocarbons, water, and gas.
Hydrocarbon Saturation
The hydrocarbon saturation is the fraction of the total porosity initially filled with
oil or gas.
Residual Hydrocarbon Saturation
The residual hydrocarbon saturation is the fraction of the total oil or gas initially in
place that is immobile. The Oil Displacement Factor is the fraction of oil that is dis-
= distance
= pressure
= time
= flow rate per unit area
= pressure gradient
k
c
t
|
z
p
t
q
k
---
x d
dp
\ .
| |
=
q
k
dp dx
8.3 Data Input 531
placed by the water. This factor is directly related to the irreducible or residual oil
saturation (i.e., Oil Displacement Factor = 1- irreducible oil saturation).
Irreducible Water Saturation
The irreducible water saturation is the fraction of the water that is immobile.
Mobile Porosity
The mobile or equivalent reservoir porosity is the fraction of a rocks bulk volume
that is filled with mobile hydrocarbons. This porosity is calculated from
and is not editable. The mobile porosity is used to calculate
the C
I
and C
II
leakoff coefficients used to simulate fluid loss during injection. This
value is also used to determine the extent of the water front (see Appendix J).
Reservoir Viscosity
The equivalent reservoir viscosity is the total effective viscosity of a multi-phase
fluid system at reservoir conditions. This value is used in calculating the C
II
leakoff
coefficient for modeling leakoff resistance due to the viscosity and compressibility
effects of the in-situ fluids.
Filtrate Viscosity
The filtrate viscosity is the effective leakoff viscosity of the fracturing fluid. This is
the fracturing fluid which leaks off through the fracture face. This viscosity has
been reduced from its original state due to the deposition of polymer on the fracture
face which forms a filter cake. This parameter is used to calculate the C
I
coefficient
for modeling viscosity and relative permeability effects caused by fracturing fluid
leakoff to the formation.
Wall Building Coefficient
The wall building coefficient is only require if the Dynamic fluid loss option is
selected to Input Filter Cake.
|
m
| = 1 S
or
S
iw
( )
e

f
k
r
=
f
k
r
resistance, whereas, a C
III
value approaching infinity (e.g., >100 ft/min
) repre-
sents no wall building. This coefficient is used in calculating the total leakoff coef-
ficient C. It reduces the fluid loss rate by increasing the resistance due to leakoff at
the fracture face.
Input Fracture Skin
The internal and external fracture skins are input for each layer, if the Input Frac-
ture Skin option is selected. The input fracture skins are assumed to remain con-
stant (note: use the Calculate Fracture Skin option for time dependent fracture
skins).
The internal fracture skin for linear leakoff from Appendix J is
The effective external skin based on the filter cake thickness at the wellbore from
Appendix J is
The reader is referred to Appendix J for a detailed outline of the governing equa-
tions for ellipsoidal skin factors. the nomenclature is also presented in Appendix J.
For multi-layer leakoff, spurt loss is calculated in each layer separately. Refer to
Appendix D additional information.
Time Dependent Fluid Loss
To use time dependent fluid loss, open the Time Dependent Fluid Loss tab. This
will then display the Time Dependent Fluid Loss screen shown in Figure 8.10. If
s
f
internal
1
2 t|
o
'
-----------------
o k k
s
1 ( )
x 0 =
L t ( )
----------------------------------------- =
s
f
external
1
2 t|'
---------------
o
c
t ( )
L t ( )
------------
k
k
c

c
--------------
)
`

=
8.3 Data Input 533
time dependent fluid loss is to be modeled, simply check the Enable Time Depen-
dent Fluid Loss check box as shown in Figure 8.10.

Figure 8.10: Time Dependent Fluid Loss Data Table
This feature allows you to increase or decrease the fluid loss multiplier as a func-
tion of time. This is helpful for modeling leakoff in naturally fractured reservoirs.
While fracturing a naturally fractured formation, the pressure in the fracture may
approach the critical pressure. When the critical pressure of the formation is
reached, natural fractures open and accelerated leakoff occurs. A zero slope on the
Nolte plot may characterize this period of accelerated leakoff.
To use this feature, enter time dependent fluid multipliers.
Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss
To use pressure dependent fluid loss, open the Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss
tab. This will then display the Pressure Dependent Fluid Loss screen. If pressure
dependent fluid loss is to be modeled simply check the Enable Pressure Dependent
Fluid Loss check box and enter the desired fluid loss multipliers.
Cake Properties
The internal and external cake properties screen shown in Figure 8.11 is available
when the Fluid Loss Model is set to Calculate Fracture Skin within the Data
Options screen. The three sections of the cake properties screen are described
below.
Figure 8.11: Cake Properties - Internal and External.
Model
The parameters on the cake properties screen are associated with a damage model.
Damage models are stored within the damage model database. To edit an existing
damage model, or to create a new damage model entry, select the Damage Model
DB button. Code and Description identify the damage model associated with the
current case.
Internal Deposition
The internal deposition input data allows for specifying the fraction of mobile and
deposition particulates. The fraction of particulates that are deposited internally and
externally for the DDM may also be specified. The FDM (Filtration Damage
8.3 Data Input 535
Model) allows for non-deposition of particulates but once the external cake starts to
build the internal deposition stops as discussed in Appendix J.
Particulate Deposition
The fraction of total suspended solids (TSS) or oil/water injected into the formation
that are not included in the cake building process are defined to be Non-Deposi-
tion/Mobile.
Deposition Distribution
If the Displacement Damage Model (DDM) is selected, a deposition distribution is
required for both the internal and external cake. If the Filtration Damage Model
(FDM) is selected from the database the deposition distribution options are
dimmed.
External Deposition
The external deposition options are discussed below.
Cake Wall Friction Effects
The cake wall friction effects accounts for the additional resistance (frictional pres-
sure loss) in the fracture due to narrowing of the fracture width for fluid flow due to
a build up of the external filter cake. If On is selected the cake wall friction effects
will be included. If Off is selected friction effects will be ignored which may result
in a cake thickness greater that the fracture width. It is suggested that this option be
specified as On.
Fluid Loss Reduction at Tip
If cake is deposited at the tip of the fracture there may be a reduction in the fluid
leakoff rate as a result of the pressure loss through the cake at the tip. However, if
the fracture has positive growth/propagation the fluid loss reduction at the tip
would be minimized. If fluid Loss reduction at the tip is selected as On the user can
specify the leakoff area reduction factor from the trailing edge of the cake to the tip.
A factor of zero (0) means there is no reduction of fluid loss at the tip as a result of
cake build up. A reduction factor of unity (1) signifies that there is no fluid loss
through the fracture area at the tip that has external cake deposited. The reduction
factor ranges from zero, no deduction factor, to unity for full reduction.
Cake Deposition
The fraction of external cake deposition on the fracture face and at the fracture tip
can be specified using the options of Face, Tip, or User Specified. If Face is spec-
ified the filter cake will build on the walls. If erosion of the filter cake takes place
(which may occur depending on the damage model database selected) the eroded
cake will be deposited at the tip. If Tip is specified all the cake will only be depos-
ited at the tip and no wall building will occur. If User Specified is selected, the user
can specify the fraction of TSS and OIW that are wall building with the remaining
fraction being deposited at the tip. The fraction of external cake at the wall or tip
can range from zero to unity.
Once all of the required data relevant to the options selected have been entered, it is
time to perform calculations.
To start the simulation, select the Run command from the Run menu. All open
Simulation Data windows and plots will be updated to show the current state of the
simulation. See Run Options on page 69 for information about the available run
options.
This section describes the plots unique to MPwri.
Waterflooding Plots
Figure 8.12 illustrates the water and thermal front profiles, and the fracture length
at the end of pumping. This plot only displays the zone with the greatest fluid loss
volume The minor to major axis aspect ratio is illustrated in Figure 8.13.
Figure 8.12: Thermal/Water Front Profiles.
Figure 8.13: Thermal/Water Front Aspect Ratio as a Function of Time.
The thermal, water and fracture major fronts as a function of time are shown in Fig-
ure 8.14.
Figure 8.14: Thermal/Water and Fracture Fronts.
Figure 8.15: Thermal/Poro-Stresses and Fronts with Fracture Profile
Figure 8.16: Volume Loss versus Depth - Two Limited Entry Fractures
Figure 8.17: Injectivity Index versus Time
Particulate Transport Plots
Figure 8.18: TSS/OIW Fronts
Figure 8.19: Major Axis Fronts
Figure 8.20: Minor Axis Fronts
Figure 8.21: TSS/OIW Front Aspect Ratios
Figure 8.22: Volume Distribution TSS
Figure 8.23: Volume Distribution OIW
Figure 8.24: Particulate Volume Distribution Total
Figure 8.25: Fracture/Cake Volume
Figure 8.26: Skin Pressure Loss
Figure 8.27: TSS/OIW Front Profiles
8.6 Program Database
MPwri shares the majority of its databases with MFrac. See Program Databases
on page 218 for more information.
Damage Model Database
To enter the Damage Model Database select the Damage Model Database com-
mand from the Database menu. The first screen presented is the Damage Model
List dialog shown in Figure 8.28. Once Damage Models have been created, they
can be repositioned by using the Up and Down buttons. You can Edit a record,
Delete a record, Copy a record or Add a new record to the list by choosing the
appropriate button. To exit the Damage Model database dialog box, click on the
Close button.
Figure 8.28: Damage Model Database Dialog Box.
Any damage model record contained in the User Database can be edited by select-
ing the record and clicking the Edit button or by double-clicking on the record. A
new blank record can be created with the Add button.
When either the Add button or the Edit button is used to create or edit a damage
model, the screen shown in Figure 8.29 appears permitting the data to be entered,
viewed or modified. For a new damage model, a blank screen is presented provid-
ing a template for the entry of data.
Figure 8.29: Edit - Internal Damage
Internal Damage Parameters
The Code is a unique seven (7) character used to identify the damage model. A
description of the damage model may be specified in the Description field. The
saturation and permeability models are discussed in great detail in Appendix J.
Saturation Model
The internal cake concentration and saturation distribution in the formation is
expressed in the following form
S
D
S S
*
f z , , ( ) = =
where is the elliptical particulate position in the formation, is the
dimensionless position in the formation and is the internal damage zone
elliptical leading front (edge).
Table 8.2 lists a number of general relationships used in MPwri for the DDM and
FDM models where is a user specified constant.
Permeability Model
The internal permeability damage in the formation is expressed in the following
form

where is the internal damaged permeability ratio, is the damaged permea-
bility, is the formation permeability, is the dimensionless partic-
ulate saturation, is the volume loss of fluid per unit area, and is the
volume loss of particulates per unit area as a function of position in the formation.
Table 8.2: Internal Saturation Distribution Functions
Correlation Model
DDM or FDM
Dimensionless Saturation Average Dimensionless
Saturation
i DDM
ii FDM
iii DDM
iv DDM
v DDM
z , z z
max
=
z
max
a
S
D
S S
*
= S
D
S S
*
=
S
D
1.0 =
S
D
1.0 =
S
D
e
az
=
S
D
1 e
az
az
------------------
\ .
| |
=
S
D
e
a,
=
S
D
1 e
a
a
----------------
\ .
| |
=
S
D
1 , ( )
a
= S
D
1 1 a + ( ) =
S
D
1 ,
a
= S
D
a 1 a + ( ) =
k
D
k
s
k f S
D
V V
p
, , ( ) = =
k
D
k
s
k S
D
S S
*
=
V V
p

Table 8.3 lists a number of general relationships used in MPwri for the internal per-
meability damage for both the DDM and FDM models.
Table 8.3: Internal Permeability Damage Models
Correlation Model
Suggested Use
DDM or FDM
Dimensionless Saturation
, where are constants
I DDM or FDM
IIi DDM or FDM
III DDM or FDM
IVa DDM
IVb DDM
Va DDM
Vb DDM
k
D
k
s
k = a b c d , , ,
k
D
a =
k
D
1
1 bS
D
a
+
------------------- =
k
D
a 1 a ( ) 1 s
D
b
( ) + =
k
D
a 1 a ( ) Vb ( )
c
( ) exp + =
k
D
a 1 a ( ) V
p
b ( )
c
( ) exp + =
k
D
a b V
c ( )
d
( ) exp + =
k
D
a b V
p
c ( )
d
( ) exp + =
Figure 8.30: Edit - External Damage
External Damage Parameters
Cake Permeability
This is the permeability of the external filter cake, . The lower the cake permea-
bility the greater the resistance and fracture skin will be.
Cake Porosity
This is the external cake porosity, , of the filter cake. The greater the porosity the
faster the filter cake builds for a given concentration and fluid loss volume per unit
area.
k
c
|
c
Maximum Filter Cake Thickness
This input variable allows one to limit the maximum filter cake thickness, ,
and corresponding fracture skin. The Maximum Volume Loss per Unit Area after
transition to reach the maximum filter cake thickness is given by
The filter cake resistance at the maximum thickness is
Typically one assumes that the maximum filter cake thickness (one face) should be
less than 1/2 the fracture width. However, if filter cake embedment/compaction
occurs or if one assumes that the filter cake is outside the fracture control volume,
the filter cake thickness may be greater than the fracture half-width. The filter cake
thickness does not necessarily have to have a physical meaning with respect to the
fracture width but rather as a calculated parameter for mass conservation and a
mechanism for fluid leakoff resistance based on the user input cake properties.
Minimum Cake Erosion Thickness
This is the minimum cake thickness after erosion. If no erosion occurs this value
can be set equal to the maximum cake thickness. The minimum cake thickness
must be less than or equal to the maximum value.
The minimum filter cake resistance is then
Cake Build Coefficient
Normally the filter cake is assumed to build proportional to the volume loss per unit
area (i.e., linear build rate)
A more general form of this equation for non-linear building of the filter cake is
o
c
max
AV
max
o
c
t ( )
1 c
s
( )
c
s
------------------ 1 |
c
( ) =
R
s
max
o
c
max
k
c
--------------- =
R
s
min
o
c
min
k
c
-------------- =
Ao
c
t ( ) AV t ( )
where is the cake build coefficient. For a linear build rate, is equal to unity.
The filter cake grows at a faster rate for smaller build coefficients. If , the
filter cake will instantly grow to the maximum value and if , the filter cake
will not grow until the volume loss is near the maximum value. Theoretically the
cake build coefficient should be near unity. See Appendix J for additional informa-
tion of the build coefficient.
Cake Erosion Coefficient
The change in the filter cake thickness during the erosion process is
where is erosion rate power coefficient and the change in volume loss per unit
area after reaching the maximum filter cake thickness is

and is the volume loss per unit area when the filter cake reached its
last maximum value.
The filter cake thickness during erosion is then
or
The erosion coefficient controls the erosion rate over the time or volume to erode.
If is set to unity the filter cake erosion will be linear with the volume loss per
unit area. If , the filter cake will erode instantly and then remain at the
o
c
t ( ) AV t ( )
|
g
|
g
|
g
|
g
0
|
g
1
Ao
e
o
max
o
min
( )
oV
AV
e
----------
\ .
| |
|
e
=
|
e
oV AV t ( ) AV
t
max
( ) =
AV
t
max
( )
o
c
t ( ) o
max
Ao
e
=
o
max
o
c
t ( ) oV ( )
|
e
|
e
|
e
0
minimum value until the change in erosion volume is met. If , the filter
cake thickness will remain at nearly the maximum value until the change in erosion
volume, , is obtained.
The actual erosion to build rate, , is given below.
Erosion to Build Rate Ratio
Erosion of the filter cake can also take place during produced water reinjection.
Defining the erosion to build rate as
where the volume loss per unit area to build the filter cake form to is
and is the volume loss per unit area required to erode the filter cake from
to .
The larger the erosion rate ratio the less time it takes to erode the filter cake from
the maximum to the minimum thickness. If the time to erode the filter cake is the
same as the build ratio then should be set to unity. If the erosion process is very
fast then or
8.7 References
1. Morales, R.H., Abou-Sayed, A.S., Jones, A.H. and Al-Saffar, A.: Detection of
a Formation Fracture in a Waterflooding Experiment, Journal of Petroleum
Technology, October 1986, 1113-1121.
2. Detienne, J-L, Creusot, M., Kessler, N., Sahuquet, B., and Bergerot, J-L:
Thermally Induced Fractures: A Field Proven Analytical Model, SPE 30777,
October 1996.
3. Perkins, T.K. and Gonzalez, J.A.: The Effect of Thermoelastic Stresses on
Injection Well Fracturing, SPE Journal, February 1985, 78-88.
|
e
1
AV
e
e
e
V d
do
e
V d
do
b
AV
b
AV
e
----------- = =
o
min
o
max
AV
b
AV
max
AV
min
=
AV
e
o
max
o
min
e
e 1 > e 1
Chapter 9
MFrac-Lite
Three Dimensional Hydraulic
Fracturing Simulator - Lite Version
9.1 Introduction
MFrac-Lite is a three-dimensional hydraulic fracturing simulator similar to MFrac
but with a limited number of MFrac features and capabilities (i.e., a lite version).
This simplified three-dimensional simulator provides ease of use with less input
data and fewer options to choose from for applications which do not require some
of the advanced features in MFrac.
MFrac-Lite uses the same numerical routines as MFrac but without some of the
more advanced and user specified options. MFrac-Lite has similar real-time capa-
bilities as MFrac and is designed to be compatible with like features in MFrac.
MFrac-Lite can open *.mfrac files. Upon importing the MFrac data will be pro-
cessed to produce a compatible three-layer single layer fracture (not limited entry)
MFrac-Lite file (*.mfrac-lite). This MFrac file should be saved with the *.mfrac-lite
extension. MFrac can also open MFrac-Lite files which are fully compatible but
should be saved as a *.mfrac file. This simulator is designed for those who do not
need the full functionality of MFrac.
A summary of the major MFrac-Lite and MFrac feature comparisons are shown in
Table 9.1.
Table 9.1: MFrac-Lite and MFrac Feature Comparison.
Feature/Option MFrac MFrac-Lite
Reservoir Coupling Linear or Ellipsoidal Linear
Fluid Loss Model
Options
Fluid Type Dependent
Include History
None
None
Treatment Type Proppant, Acid, & Foam Proppant Only
556 MFrac-Lite: Three Dimensional Hydraulic Fracturing Simulator - Lite Version
Since MFrac-Lite is a subset of MFrac, the MFrac chapter should be referred to for
a specific description of a given feature or data input parameter.
A detailed list of the MFrac-Lite features and differences between MFrac-Lite and
MFrac is provided.
9.2 Options and Features
MFrac-Lite has many of the same capabilities as MFrac but with limited features.
The differences between MFrac-Lite and MFrac are presented below by category:
The major differences in MFrac-Lite and MFrac is most easily distinguished by
comparing the options and various other data input screens.
General Options
Heat Transfer On or Off option Off
Flow Back On or Off option Off
Proppant Flow Back On or Off option Off
Perforation Erosion On or Off option Off
Rock Properties 1000 layers 3 layers
Fluid Loss Data 1000 layers 3 layers
Import LAS Yes No
Limited Entry Yes, 10 multiple zones No. Single zone
Table 9.1: MFrac-Lite and MFrac Feature Comparison.
9.2 Options and Features 557
Figure 9.1: General Data Options Screen.
analysis.
The General Options not available in MFrac-Lite are:
1. Reservoir Coupling. MFrac has options for Linear and Ellipsoidal. The
default in MFrac-Lite is Linear only.
2. Fluid Loss Model. MFrac-Lite does not support Fluid Type Dependent or the
option to Include Fluid Loss History.
3. Treatment Type. MFrac-Lite only supports a treatment type of Proppant.
MFrac also supports options for Acid and Foam.
4. Heat Transfer. There is no heat transfer option in MFrac-Lite. By default heat
transfer is set to off and the user only needs to specify the fluid temperature at
which rheological properties are evaluated.
See MFrac General Options on page 80 for more information.
Fracture Options
model and constitutive relationships that affect the fracture solution methodology
(see Figure 9.2). The choices are as follows:
MFrac-Lite does not support Flowback as does MFrac.
See MFrac Fracture Options on page 88 for more information.
Proppant Options
Options screen. The proppant options specify the proppant transport methodology
to be employed. Figure 9.3 illustrates the proppant options available.
9.3 Data Input 559

As illustrated, options for Proppant Flowback and Perforation Erosion are not
supported in MFrac-Lite.
See MFrac Proppant Options on page 99 for more information.
9.3 Data Input
entered by accessing the various dialog boxes from the Data menu. The following
sections pertain to the Data menu items found within the main menu.
Only Data menus that are different than the MFrac Data menus will be covered in
this section. The reader is referred to the MFrac chapter for Data Input menus not
covered in this chapter that are common to both simulators.
Zones
intervals and corresponding Zone Data (Figure 9.4). Only one perforated interval
can be specified. Limited entry type fractures are not supported in MFrac-Lite.
See MFrac Zones on page 122 for more information.
Zone Data
Perforations
Figure 9.5 shows the Perforation tab screen. Perforation erosion is not supported in
MFrac-Lite.
See MFrac Zone Data on page 124 for more information.
9.3 Data Input 561
Rock Properties
The Rock Properties dialog box provides a table for entering the mechanical prop-
erties of the reservoir and adjacent lithologies including in-situ stresses as a func-
tion of depth (see Figure 9.6).
MFrac-Lite only supports three lithology layers.
MFrac-Lite does support an option to insert rock properties from our rock proper-
ties database (Insert from Database) but DOES NOT support an option to import
mechanical rock properties (Import Log) data as does MFrac.
Figure 9.6: Rock Properties Dialog Box.
MFrac-Lite supports up to three layers. A maximum of one thousand (1000) layers
can be specified in MFrac.
See MFrac Rock Properties on page 163 for more information.
Fluid Loss Data
ters is necessary.
MFrac-Lite only supports three fluid loss zones whereas MFrac supports up to a
maximum of one thousand (1000) layers. The specific data required by the program
depends on which fluid loss model is specified in the General Options Dialog.
MFrac-Lite only supports Constant, Harmonic or Dynamic Fluid loss.
When the Constant Fluid Loss Model is chosen, the total leakoff, , and the Spurt
Loss coefficients for each layer are entered in the Fluid Loss Data screen shown in
Figure 9.7.
ficient Model is discussed in the MFrac chapter.
Harmonic or Dynamic Fluid Loss Models
When either the Harmonic or Dynamic fluid loss models are chosen, the filter cake
coefficient ( ) is input for each layer desired. and are calculated based on
the reservoir parameters input in the Fluid Loss dialog box shown in Figure 9.8.
MFrac-Lite only supports three layers while MFrac supports up to one thousand.
Figure 9.8: Fluid Loss Data Dialog Box - Harmonic/Dynamic Fluid Loss
Model.
See MFrac Fluid Loss Data on page 182 for more information.
C
C
III
C
I
C
II
Chapter 10
MWell
A Wellbore Hydraulics Simulator
10.1 Introduction
MWell is a wellbore hydraulics simulator for calculating surface or bottomhole
pressures, gravitational head, restrictions, transport times and hydraulic power
requirements in the wellbore. Near wellbore and perforation pressure losses are
also calculated to determine the bottomhole treating pressure in the formation.
MWell was designed for real-time analysis to calculate BHTPs, from surface con-
ditions but can also be used as a design tool for determining wellbore pressure char-
acteristics prior to performing the treatment. MWell is essentially a subset of the
MFrac simulator without the fracture simulation. MWell however does provide the
capability to simulate time dependent formation pressures with a user specified
table for inputting the minimum horizontal stress and a time dependent net pressure
(pressure above or below the reference minimum stress). If the formation is not
fractured the reference pressure should be the reservoir pressure.
MWell is structured in a manor similar to MFrac and uses the same databases. The
data files *.mwell and *.mfrac or *.mfrac-lite are compatible in that the common
data is shared.
This chapter covers the available menu options and basic procedures required to
run MWell.
An outline of the basic steps for using MWell is shown in Table 10.1.
Table 10.1: MWell Basic Steps.
Step Program Area
1. Open an existing MWell data file (*.mwelll) or create a new
data file.
File Menu
564 MWell: A Wellbore Hydraulics Simulator
Menu
The MWell menu bar is shown in Figure 10.1. Generally, the menus are accessed
Figure 10.1: MWell Main Menu.
A description of each of the menu items is described in the following chapters or
sections:
File - Chapter 10
Options - Section 10.2
Data - Section 10.3
Wellbore Hydraulics
Zones
acquired data.
MView
5. Input Required Data
Wellbore Hydraulics
Zones
Treatment Schedule
Foam Schedule
Data Menu
Table 10.1: MWell Basic Steps.
10.2 Options 565
10.2 Options
The Options screen is the first input dialog box under the Data menu in MWell. It is
used to establish the primary model options in the program. Each option relates to a
specific aspect of the fracture and proppant/acid modeling approach.
Figure 10.2: Data Options
itself varies depending on the options selected. This smart-menu approach, mini-
data screens will be updated to enable new input or hide data that is not needed.
This hierarchy methodology is used throughout MWell.
The selections made in the Data Options screen set the scope for all data entered
into the MWell program. These options establish the input data required and specify
the nature of the calculations to be performed.
diamond will then appear in the center of the button selected. Continuing, select a
radio button within the next option section or use the TAB button to move sequen-
tially through the choices. Once within a section, the current selection for that
option is highlighted with a dotted rectangle. The option choice may be changed by
using either the mouse or the arrow keys.
General Options
follows:
Simulation Method
Design Mode
This option is used for determining the pressure losses, hydrostatic head, perfora-
tion friction, wellbore pressures etc. for a specific design. The program flexibility
allows for running in standard mode based on a given input treatment schedule.
Depending on other options specified, the program uses the formation and treat-
ment data to calculate surface and bottomhole pressures. Design Mode refers to the
fact that the design engineer must design (and optimize) the fracture treatment
schedule.
Replay/Real-Time
The Replay/Real-Time option is required for replaying or performing real-time
fracture analysis using the data collected during a treatment. This procedure
requires the use of MView as the real-time or replay data handler. Please refer to
Chapter 3 for instructions on the use of MView.
With respect to MWell, there is essentially no difference in the procedures used for
performing real-time or replay simulations. The difference between these methods
only involves the source data input which is handled by MView.
Real-Time
The Real-Time options are only available if the Replay/Real-Time radio button is
clicked On in the Simulation Method dialog. If MView Concentration is selected
the proppant concentration will be taken from the replay/real-time data as sent to
MFrac from MView. If the Input Concentration button is selected the proppant
concentration used by MWell will be taken from the values specified in the Treat-
ment Schedule. Generally, the MView Concentration is desirable unless the actual
proppant concentration injected is not available.
The Synchronize Well Solution radio button is used to synchronize the numeri-
cally calculated time steps for wellbore events with the replay/real-time data.
10.2 Options 567
Synchronizing the wellbore solution with the incoming real-time or replay data
enables for very refined calculations of the wellbore and near-wellbore frictional
pressure losses.
Treatment Type
This selection determines the type of fracture treatment. The Treatment Type can
be either a propped (Proppant) or acid (Acid) fracture. In addition, the treatment
can accommodate an optional foam schedule by checking the Foam box. When
Foam is checked, MWell will include compressibility effects. Since Mwell uses the
same treatment type as MFrac, the reader is referred to the MFrac chapter for more
detailed information not duplicated below
Treatment Design Options
The treatment design options are only available if the Simulation Method is in
Design Mode and the Treatment Type selected is Proppant with no Foam. The
default setting is Input for all other cases.
In MWell, either the pumping schedule can be input manually or determined auto-
matically. When Auto Design is chosen, the desired design fracture length or total
slurry volume is input in the treatment schedule dialog box. Depending on the
Proppant Transport Methodology selected, specific criteria for controlling the
proppant scheduling will also be required.
Wellbore Hydraulics Model
This option determines the wellbore hydraulics model to be used in calculating fric-
tional pressure losses in the wellbore. Surface and bottomhole pressures, gravita-
tional head, restrictions, transport times and hydraulic power requirements are also
calculated. The near wellbore and perforation pressure losses are calculated sepa-
rately below the BHP reference point for each fracture and coupled to the wellbore.
The available wellbore model options are listed below:
None
When this option is selected, wellbore hydraulics calculations are still performed;
however, the frictional pressure loss is assumed to be zero. The wellbore hydraulics
output data is also not displayed or written to file.
Empirical
The Empirical option is an internal correlation for calculating the frictional pres-
sure loss of Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids. This option provides a combined
correlation that is applicable for a variety of fluids ranging from linear systems to
highly non-Newtonian and viscoelastic fluids that exhibit drag reduction due to slip
or shear thinning during turbulent flow. Three distinct types of behavior are possi-
ble with the combined correlation used in MWell. These behaviors are illustrated in
Figure 10.3 and summarized in the explicit expressions for the Fanning friction fac-
tor outlined in Table 10.2
Figure 10.3: Pipe Friction Empirical Correlations.
When a value for the Relative Pipe Roughness is entered into one of the Wellbore
Hydraulics dialog boxes, the expression for friction factor based on Prandtls Uni-
versal Law is modified. See Appendix E for additional information.
1

2
3
1
f
------ 19 Re
s
f ( ) log 32.4 =
1
f
------ A Re
s
f ( ) log B + =
1
f
------ 4 Re
s
f ( ) log 0.4 =
10.2 Options 569
To include the effects of proppant concentration on friction, the program has a built
in correlation for slurry rheology. The relationship used, originally described by
Keck, et al., is also presented in Appendix E.
User Database
When User Database is selected, the information specified in the fluid database is
used for calculating the frictional pressure loss in the tubing, annulus, and casing.
This data can be edited and plotted by accessing the database. The information in
the database does not represent proppant-laden fluid. Consequently, if the proppant
concentration wellbore option is selected in the proppant option screen, the friction
factor will be adjusted for proppant concentration in a manner similar to the method
described in Appendix E for the Empirical option.
Wellbore Solution
These options provide control and flexibility for the time dependent discretization
methodology used in the program. To enable time step size control for capturing
various time dependent events, the user can specify the number of wellbore solu-
tion Iterations and the Maximum Time Step. For Replay/Real-Time analysis, the
data Restart Time can also be specified.
The base time step used for discretization in the numerical simulation will be the
minimum of the values calculated from either the number of Iterations or Max
Time Step input.
Iterations
The value for the number of Iterations determines the target number of time steps
to be used for the fracture propagation solution. The total or estimated simulation
time is then divided by the number of iterations to determine the time step size.
For example, if the number of iterations is 100 and the pump time is 100 minutes,
the average time step would be one (1) minute. The actual time step may vary
depending on other numerical considerations. For most simulations, a value of 20
to 30 iterations is sufficient.
Generally, the number of iterations is most effectively used in design mode. For
Replay/Real-Time, the Max Time Step constraint may be more applicable.
The number of time steps should be increased for cases with order-of-magnitude
changes in the injection rate or fluid rheology properties (e.g., pad/acid). It should
also be increased when the injection times are very large (e.g., years as in water
flooding). The maximum time step can also be specified to minimize the time step.
The larger this value is, the longer the program will take to run.
Max Time Step
The Max Time Step can be used to control the program time step. This is especially
useful when performing real-time or replay simulations. To simulate events that
occur over a very narrow range of time (e.g., rate changes or pressure spikes) the
time step size must be small enough to capture the event. If the time step is too
large, significant rate and pressure changes may be missed. Also, the smaller the
Max Time Step the longer it will take the program to run.
The Real-Time option of synchronizing the wellbore solution to the input data
enables time refinement for wellbore and near-wellbore pressure losses. This is
very useful for history matching pressure changes due to rate. This provides the
capability to accurately model wellbore friction.
Restart Time
The Restart Time is used to start or restart a simulation at a time other than the first
entry point in the data file for real-time or replay simulations. This option is nor-
mally used when earlier data is not relevant or multiple injection cycles (i.e., mini-
frac) are pumped and only the later time cycle data (i.e., main frac) is to be
analyzed. Consequently, this option provides the flexibility to restart a simulation at
the beginning or middle of any injection cycle. Enter the time in the replay/real-
time data at which the simulation should begin.
Fluid Temperature
This is the wellbore Fluid Temperature. The fluid rheological properties are then
calculated from the Fluid Database as a function of time based on this temperature.
Proppant Options
Options screen. Figure 10.4 illustrates the proppant options available. These
options are discussed below.
10.2 Options 571
Proppant Ramp
The ramp option controls the ability to ramp the proppant concentration between a
specified range. When this option is On, the concentration of proppant will be
ramped linearly from an initial value (From) to a final (To) value for each fluid
stage in the Treatment Schedule dialog box. This results in a linear proppant ramp
with liquid volume.
When this option is turned Off, a uniform proppant concentration is assumed for
each stage. The Treatment Schedule screen will then permit only one entry value
for concentration.
Wellbore-Proppant Effects
This option controls the methodology used to simulate the effects of proppant con-
centration on pipe friction. The options are as follows:
None
For this selection, proppant has no effect on the friction factors used in the wellbore
hydraulics calculations.
Empirical
This option includes the effects of proppant concentration on pipe friction as origi-
nally described by Keck, et al.
2
This correlation uses an expression for relative
slurry viscosity to account for the effects of proppant on increased friction. The
relationship is shown below:
where
For laminar flow, the friction factor multiplier, M, for proppant-laden fluids is equal
to the value of . For proppant-laden fluids in turbulent flow, the expression
shown below is used to estimate the effect of proppant on friction:
and
where
User Specified
For some slurry systems, adequate characterization of the frictional dissipation is
not possible with the empirical correlation contained in MWell. If this occurs, the
friction factor multiplier as a function of proppant concentration can be specified in
tabular form.
= base density
=
= slurry density
r
1 0.75 e
1.5n'
1 ( )e
1 n' ( ) 1000
| |
1.25|
1 1.5|
------------------- +
\ .
| |
2
=
r
n'
r
M
f

r
0.55
r
0.45
=
f
s
M
f
f
b
=
M
f
r

r

s

b
=
r
f
b
f
s
10.3 Data Input 573
10.3 Data Input
entered by accessing the various dialog boxes from the Data menu. The following
sections pertain to the Data menu items found within the main menu.
Only Data menus that are different than the MFrac Data menus will be covered in
this section. The reader is referred to the MFrac chapter for Data Input menus not
covered in this chapter that are common to both simulators.
Wellbore Hydraulics
MWell offers an integrated wellbore hydraulics module that couples the fracture or
formation with the wellbore to provide additional simulation capability. An energy
balance approach is used to calculate the pressure changes due to potential energy,
kinetic energy, frictional dissipation and restrictions in the wellbore.
This general solution permits calculations of surface pressure, BHP in the wellbore,
Frac-Pack screen pressure drop, hydrostatic head, frictional loss and hydraulic
power requirements for a treatment design. The flexibility of the model provides
the capability to history match measured pressures during real-time or replay treat-
ment analysis.
The capability to model tapered deviated wellbores is also included. Treatment
stage movement in the wellbore is also simulated during pumping.
Since the MWell and MFrac wellbore hydraulics dialogs are identical, the reader
is referred to the MFrac chapter section on Wellbore Hydraulics for a detailed
description of the required input data and features.
Zones
intervals and corresponding Zone Data (Figure 10.5). Only one perforated interval
can be specified.
checked.
Zone Name
Perfs TVD, Bottom of Perfs TVD) or measured depths (i.e., Top of Perfs MD,
Bottom of Perfs MD).
ter of the perforated measured depth (Center of Perfs MD) is input and the true
vertical center of the perforated depth (Center of Perfs TVD) is calculated. The
Center of Perfs TVD is dimmed and cannot be edited.
Zone Data
Zones Data screen shown in Figure 10.6 has tabs for Perforations, Near Wellbore,
and Fracture Pressure.
10.3 Data Input 575
Perforations
Figure 10.6 shows the perforation tab screen. The perforation data requirements are
discussed below.
loss.
The near wellbore pressure loss table is shown in Figure 10.7. MWell has the capa-
bility to model time and rate dependent near wellbore pressure drop for each frac-
ture. This pressure drop can represent any near wellbore effect such as tortuosity,
perforation erosion, near wellbore multiple fractures, etc. The methodology
Import RT Button
When performing real-time or replay analysis using MView, MWell automatically
sure loss relationship. After running the acquired data through MWell, open the
MWell, a message like the one shown in Figure 10.8 will be displayed.
10.3 Data Input 577
not considered significant or indeterminate by MWell.
(where ). If the job duration is longer than the maximum
time entered in the table, the last (final) value will be used.
Fracture Pressure Table
The fracture pressure table is shown in Figure 10.9. This table enables the user to
calculate surface pressures in Design Mode (from a given BHFP reference) and his-
tory match the net, surface, and bottomhole pressures in Replay/Real-Time Model
The time dependent bottomhole formation or fracture pressure ( ) can either
be input as function of time and the net pressure or delta pressure ( ) above the
reference minimum horizontal stress ( ) for a fractured system calculated or the
delta pressure can be calculated based on a given . The general formulation
for the bottomhole formation or fracture pressure is
K t ( ) Ap t ( ) K t ( ) Q t ( ) -
o
=
K t ( )
BHFP
Ap
o
BHFP
BHFP o Ap t ( ) + =
If the formation is not fractured the minimum stress reference is the reservoir pres-
sure and the delta pressure (negative for production and positive for injection) is the
deviant form this value.
Figure 10.9: Fracture Pressure Dialog.
Following is a detailed description of the parameters in the Fracture Pressure Dia-
log.
Minimum Stress
This is the minimum horizontal stress ( ) in the formation for a hydraulically frac-
tured system. If the formation is not fractured during injection, the minimum stress
represents the reservoir pressure.
Delta Pressure
The Delta Pressure ( ) or net pressure is the pressure above (positive) or below
(negative) the reference Minimum Stress.
BHFP
The bottomhole formation or fracture pressure ( ) is the pressure in the for-
mation or fracture. The bottomhole treating pressure is then calculated by adding
the near wellbore and perforation pressure loss to this value.
o
Ap
BHFP
Chapter 11
MShale
A Three Dimensional Discrete Fracture
Network Simulator
11.1 Introduction
MShale is a Discrete Fracture Network (DFN) simulator designed for simulating
three-dimensional (x-z, y-z, and x-y planes) hydraulic fracture propagation in dis-
crete fracture networks. MShale accounts for the coupled parameters affecting frac-
ture propagation (and proppant transport) in multiple planes. MShale is not a fully
3-D model. It is however formulated between a pseudo-3D and full 3-D type model
with an applicable half-length to half-height aspect ratio greater than about 1/3
(Meyer
15
). MShale also has options for 2-D type fracture models.
The solution methodology for our discrete fracture network hydraulic fracturing
simulator is formulated in Appendix M. The fundamental first-order mass, continu-
ity, and momentum conservation equations for DFN are provided in detail.
MShale is a very specialized fracturing simulator designed to simulate multiple,
cluster, and discrete type fractures in shales and coal bed methane (CBM). Discrete
fractures in naturally fractured or faulted formations can be modeled by specifying
a fracture network grid to simulate fracture propagation in multiple planes (not just
perpendicular to the minimum horizontal stress). The boundary condition assumes
that once the pressure exceeds the minimum stress in a plane perpendicular to the
natural fracture a hydraulic fracture will be initiated and start to propagate. This
boundary condition forces multiple fractures to be created. MShale can also be used
as a diagnostic tool to compare DFN numerical results with microseismic data.
The majority of the menu options and basic procedures required to run MShale are
discussed in the MFrac Chapter. The only input dialog unique to MShale is the
Zones Data dialog which will be presented in this chapter. Please refer to the MFrac
Chapter for a complete description of the other fracture input data.
580 MShale: A Three Dimensional Discrete Fracture Network Simulator
Please refer to the Meyer Appendices and listed references for specific details
regarding the governing equations, modeling techniques, methodology and numeri-
cal procedures. Example files are provided with the software to demonstrate some
of the MShale features, utility and general data entry procedures.
An outline of the basic steps for using MShale is shown in Table 11.1.
11.2 Zones Dialog
intervals and corresponding Zone Data (Figure 11.1). A maximum of ten different
perforated intervals or limited entry type fractures can be specified. The methodol-
ogy and governing equations for multilayer or limited entry fracturing is discussed
in Appendix B.
Table 11.1: MShale Basic Steps.
Step Program Area
1. Open an existing MShale data file (*.mshale) or create a
new data file.
File Menu
acquired data.
MView
5. Input Required Data Data Menu
11.2 Zones Dialog 581
checked.
Active
Any zone that is defined in the program can be enabled or disabled for use in simu-
lation of multilayer fractures by double-clicking the left column to display or clear
a check mark. A zone is Active when the check mark is displayed. Each Active
zone represents the possibility of creating a multilayer fracture in that zone. If only
one zone is active, the fracture will initiate in that zone.
Zone Name
Perfs TVD, Bottom of Perfs TVD) or measured depths (i.e., Top of Perfs MD, Bot-
tom of Perfs MD).
ter of the perforated measured depth (Center of Perfs MD) is input and the true ver-
tical center of the perforated depth (Center of Perfs TVD) is calculated. The Center
of Perfs TVD is dimmed and cannot be edited. This same convention is used when
the Horizontal Ellipsoidal fracture model is specified, even if the well is vertical.
When either the Vertical Ellipsoidal or 3-D geometry options are used in combina-
tion with a horizontal well, it is also necessary to enter the TVD for the top and bot-
tom of fracture initiation.
When any of the two-dimensional fracture geometry models are chosen from the
General Options screen, additional columns of data are required. For the PKN or
GDK models, the Zones spreadsheet will contain two additional columns. In these
columns you must enter the top true vertical depth of the fracture (2-D Top of Frac
TVD) and the bottom true vertical depth of the fracture (2-D Bottom of Frac TVD).
This data is used to characterize the total gross height of the fracture. If an Ellipsoi-
dal fracture geometry model is chosen, the Ellipsoidal Aspect Ratio must also be
specified. This is the ratio of the major and minor ellipse axes (i.e., the ratio of the
total length (tip to tip) to the total height of the fracture (2L/H)).
Zone Data
Zones Data screen shown in Figure 11.2 has tabs for Perforations, Pay Zone,
Fracture Network Options, and Near Wellbore. A feature to include perforation
erosion is also available. To activate the perforation erosion folder you must have
Perforation Erosion selected to User Specified in the Proppant Option Dialog
(see Figure 11.2).
Figure 11.2 shows a dimmed perforation erosion table illustrating that Perforation
Erosion was selected to None.
Perforations
Figure 11.3 shows the perforation tab screen. Perforation erosion has been set to
User Specified. This activates the screen for inputting perforation erosion data. The
perforation data requirements are discussed below.
loss.
Perforation Erosion
The perforation erosion feature is based on the work of Shah
12
, Cramer
17
, and El-
Rabaa, Shah, and Lord
18
. This option allows for perforation erosion during the
treatment.
ing the limited entry treatment, perforations are exposed to a slurry of proppant and
fluid. The effect of the proppant is to increase the discharge coefficient, , and
the hydraulic diameter of the perforation ( ). The increase in can be
described as a rounding of the perforation.
Figure 11.4 shows the data required to model perforation erosion. To calculate Per-
foration Erosion for limited entry fracturing treatments, select Intercept or Final
Discharge Coefficient from the Perforation Erosion dialog box. When Intercept is
selected, the intercept is calculated. Enter an Initial Discharge Coefficient, Final
Discharge Coefficient, Perforation Erosion Rate, and Critical Proppant Mass.
C
D
C
D
1 2 /
D C
D
When Final Discharge Coefficient is chosen enter an Intercept along with the Initial
Discharge Coefficient, Perforation Erosion Rate, and Critical Proppant Mass. The
final discharge coefficient is then calculated.
Figure 11.4: Perforation Erosion Data Screen.
The discharge coefficient for a sharp-edged perforation entrance is 0.60. For a
rounded perforation entrance, the discharge coefficient is 0.83. The Final Discharge
Coefficient should be set to a larger value than the Initial Discharge Coefficient.
Unless reliable data is available, set the initial value to 0.6 and the Final Discharge
Coefficient to 0.83.
Typical values for the Perforation Erosion Rate and Critical Proppant Mass are
0.004 in./1000 lbm and 6000 lbm.
To view a plot of the Perforation Erosion correlation, select the Plot icon. Figure
11.5 shows a plot of the hydraulic perforation diameter ( ) and pressure loss
ratio as a function of proppant mass through each perforation. The pressure loss
ratio is the ratio of the perforation pressure loss after proppant has gone through
compared to the base case of no perforation erosion. As the amount of proppant
mass passes through a perforation, the hydraulic diameter increases and the pres-
sure loss ratio decreases. After 6000 lbm of proppant has passed through the perfo-
ration, the pressure loss ratio has dropped to less than 60% of its original value.
Note, if perforation erosion is not selected a 0.83 discharge coefficient (i.e.,
rounded orifice entrance) is used.
C
D
1 2 /
D
Figure 11.5: Hydraulic Diameter (C
D
1/2
D) & Pressure Loss vs. Mass.
The upper and lower dashed lines are the theoretical limits for the initial and final
hydraulic perforation diameters. These limits are based on Initial and Final Dis-
charge Coefficients of 0.60 and 0.83, respectively.
Pay Zone
Figure 11.6 shows the Pay Zone data screen. To determine the fracture conductiv-
ity in a pay zone, a productive interval (pay zone) and average zone permeability
must be assigned. These values are used to determine an integrated (average) con-
ductivity ( ) and a dimensionless conductivity over the pay interval. k
f
w
f
Figure 11.6: Pay Zone Data Screen.
Pay Zone Permeability
This is the average pay zone permeability used to calculate an average dimension-
less conductivity.
The associated Dimensionless Fracture Flow Capacity, , is calculated from
The average fracture conductivity for long term production is given by

F
CD
F
CD
k
f
w
f
k
r
L
--------- =
k
f
w
f
k
f
x ( )w
f
x ( ) x d
0
L
}
L =
k
f
w
f
L
1
k
f
x ( )w
f
x ( )
------------------------- x d
0
L
}
\ .
| |
=
where
A more detailed analysis of the effective conductivity for variable conductivity
fractures is given in Appendix L.
Pay Zone Depth
A pay zone is defined by entering the TVD or MD Depth From (top) and TVD or
MD Depth To (bottom) in the boxes provided. These depths do not have to conform
to the perforated interval. If the fracture is not propped in this interval, the propped
conductivity and propped fracture length will be zero.
Fracture Network Options
This section allows the user to specify the Fracture Network Options, Characteris-
tics, Interaction, and Proppant Distribution. Figure 11.8 shows the Fracture Net-
work Options input data screen.
= reservoir permeability
= propped fracture half-length
If the Proppant Transport Plots show a conductive fracture (propped width and
conductivity contours) and the pay zone does not appear on the screen or the
pay zone plots show zero conductivity, it indicates that the fracture is not within
the pay zone.
k
f
w
f
k
f
x ( )
k
r
w
f
x ( )
L
Figure 11.7: Fracture Network Options Screen.
The Fracture Network Options menu allows the user to specify the type of discrete
fractures to be modeled, their extent, numerical solution methodology, characteris-
tics, interaction, and proppant distribution in the dominant or primary fracture.
Depending on the Fracture Network option chosen different Options and Character-
istic dialogs will be presented.
Fracture Options
The Fracture Options allows the user to specify the type of discrete fractures to be
modeled. The Fracture Options are discussed below:
Multiple Fractures
Multiple fractures refer to fractures in the far field (not near wellbore) which may
or may not be interacting. These fractures may also be parallel or dendritic (tree
like). Multiple fractures are fractures that have the same fracture characteristics.
That is the fracture length, height, and width are the same. Under the Characteris-
tics and Interaction drop down menus the user can specify the number of multiple
fractures, their spacing and degree of interaction in the specific multilayer zone.
This is not the same as multilayer or limited entry fracturing. Figure 11.8 shows the
Fracture Network Options screen for Multiple Fractures.
Figure 11.8: Multiple Fractures Options Screen.
As illustrated, if Multiple Fractures is selected, the Fracture Network Extent and
Fracture Network Numerical Solution options are dimmed. These options are
dimmed because the Multiple Fractures option assumes that the fractures are self-
similar with the same characteristics and extent.
Cluster Fractures
Cluster fractures, unlike Multiple fractures, allow fractures to propagate in all three
principle planes. Cluster fractures are assumed to be self similar, but can be of finite
extent. Under the Characteristics section, the user can specify the number of frac-
tures, fracture spacing, fracture aperture ratios, and aspect ratio. Figure 11.9 shows
the Fracture Network Options screen for Cluster Fractures.
Figure 11.9: Cluster or Complex Fractures Options Screen.
As illustrated, if Cluster or Complex Fractures are selected the Fracture Network
Numerical Solution option is dimmed. The characteristics data menu will require
input of the limited network extent in the primary planes if the Fracture Network
Extent is selected as finite.
Discrete Fracture Network - User Specified and Deterministic
A discrete fracture network is a set of discrete fractures in the principle planes. Dis-
crete referring to the condition that each fracture has discrete characteristics. Figure
11.10 shows the Fracture Network Options screen for Discrete Fracture Network -
User Specified option.
Figure 11.10: Discrete Fracture Network Options Screen.
As illustrated, if the Discrete Network Fracture User Specified or Deterministic
options are specified, the user has the ability to select the Fracture Network Extent
and Fracture Network Numerical Solution options. The Characteristics screen will
require input of the limited network extent in the primary planes if the Fracture Net-
work Extent is selected as Finite.
Discrete Fracture Network - User Specified
A discrete fracture network is a set of discrete fractures in the principle planes. Dis-
crete referring to the condition that each fracture has discrete characteristics. If the
User Specified option is selected the users specifies the secondary fracture charac-
teristics relative to the primary fracture under Characteristics. If Deterministic is
specified, the formation properties in the principle planes is input and the code will
calculate the discrete fracture network extent and propagation of secondary frac-
tures. If the confining stress contrast is unknown, select this option (User Specified)
and enter the fracture aperture ratios and propagation aspect ratio in the y-z and x-y
planes within the Characteristics screen. This is convenient if the engineer has an
idea of the network extent.
Discrete Fracture Network - Deterministic
The deterministic fracture network option requires the user to input the confining
stress contrast in the y-z and x-y planes. The code will then calculate the discrete
fracture network apertures extent and propagation of secondary fractures by solving
a set of mass, momentum, and fracture propagation equations in each plane. If the
confining stress difference in the y-z and x-y planes are unknown, parametric stud-
ies can be used to determine which properties give the best stimulated reservoir vol-
ume based on experience. This a more rigorous solution that requires additional
input in the Characteristics screen.
Fracture Network Extent
The fracture Network Extent option allows the user to specify the extent of the frac-
ture system in the various planes. The primary or dominant fracture in the x-z plane
is not affected by this option only the secondary, or non-primary fractures.
Infinite
If Infinite is selected, the secondary fractures are assume to have no limiting or
finite extent.
Finite
If Finite is selected, a limiting fracture extent in each plane can be specified in the
Characteristics screen. This will limit the extent of the secondary fractures in the x-
z, y-z, and x-y planes as input by the user.
Fracture Network Numerical Solution
The fracture Network Numerical Solution options are only required input for the
Discrete Fracture Network User Specified or Deterministic selections. The two
options available are Continuum and Discontinuous theory as discussed below.
Continuum Theory
Continuum Theory can best be explained by its definition Continuum (theory), is
anything that goes through a gradual transition from one condition, to a different
condition, without any abrupt changes or discontinuities. This allows for model-
ling of discrete fractures that are randomly spaced with some mean spacing. Conse-
quently if this option is selected the number of newly created discrete fractures will
not increase by an integer but rather gradually from say 2 to 3. Thus the creation of
the secondary fractures are more gradual or continuous. This is analogous to the
movement necessary to climb a stairs. Your feet move horizontal and vertical where
as your body has a more continuous motion.
Continuum theory is also based on a grid system but assumes a gradual intersection
of secondary fractures.
Discontinuous Theory
Discontinuous theory assumes that the fracture propagation process is not continu-
ous and only initiates secondary fractures when the fracture extent (propagation) in
the different planes reaches a secondary fracture at a precise grid location. Thus the
number of created fractures with time is discontinuous.
Characteristics
The fracture characteristics data input screen is dependent on the Fracture Network
Options selected. The discrete fracture characteristics are input for each principle
plane. The minimum horizontal stresses and are in the x and y directions
(axes). The vertical stress is in the z-direction (axis). The primary fracture is
assumed to propagate in the x-z plane which is perpendicular to the minimum hori-
zontal stress and parallel to . Secondary fractures can initiate (depending on
the boundary conditions and rock properties) in each of the three principle planes.
The x-z plane is perpendicular to and parallel to . The fracture aperture or
opening (width) is in the direction of or axis. The y-z plane is perpendicular
to and parallel to . The fracture aperture or opening (width) in the y-z plane
is in the or axis direction. The x-y plane is perpendicular to and in the z-
direction. The fracture aperture or opening (width) is in the direction of or
axis. Fractures in the x-z and y-z planes are vertical and fractures in the x-y plane
are horizontal.
Table 11.2 presents the nomenclature used within the application to describe the
different fractures and axes.
The Characteristic input data will be discussed for each of the Fracture Options.
Table 11.2: Nomenclature used by the Characteristics screen
Name Fracture Plane Aperture Opening Along
Major Vertical Fractures x-z
- Minor Axis
Minor Vertical Fractures y-z
- Major Axis
Horizontal Fractures x-y
- Vertical Axis
o
2
o
3
o
1
o
3
o
2
o
3
o
2
o
2
y
o
2
o
3
o
3
x o
1
o
1
z
o
3
o
2
o
1
Multiple Fractures
Figure 11.11 shows the Fracture Network Characteristics screen for Multiple Frac-
tures.
Figure 11.11: Multiple Fractures Characteristics Screen.
Multiple fractures are assumed to be in the primary or dominant fracture x-z plane.
which is perpendicular to the minimum horizontal stress, . The number of multi-
ple fractures and the fracture spacing are the only required input. The fracture spac-
ing is used in the calculation of the empirical stiffness influence factor and for
plotting.
Number of Major Vertical Fractures
This is the number of multiple fractures (two wings) to be modeled in a given zone.
The default is a single two wing fracture (Number of Major Vertical Fractures
equal to one).
Spacing along the Minor Axis
This is the distance between the multiple fractures in the x-z plane. The closer the
spacing of multiple fractures the greater the fracture interaction factors and degrees
of interaction will be as discussed in Appendix C and Appendix M.
Cluster or Complex Fractures
Figure 11.12 shows the Fracture Network Characteristics screen for Cluster or
Complex Fractures.
o
3
Figure 11.12: Cluster or Complex Fractures Characteristics Screen.
Complex fractures can be in each of the principle planes. The required input data is
the Number of Fractures, the Spacing, Aperture Ratio in each plane and the net-
work fracture Aspect Ratio. The fracture spacing is used for determining the empir-
ical stiffness influence factor and for plotting.
Number of Fractures
The Number of Fractures in the x-y, y-z, and x-z are input. If secondary fractures
can not propagate in a given plane, enter zero. At least one fracture in the x-z plane
must be specified. If only one fracture is specified it is the primary fracture.
Spacing
The spacing or distance of the cluster fractures in the x-y, y-z, and x-z planes are
input. The closer the fractures in any given plane the greater the fracture interaction
factors and degrees of interaction will be as discussed in Appendix C and
Appendix M. Only fractures in the same plane are assumed to interact. Dilatancy at
the interface is ignored.
Maximum Extent
The maximum extent of secondary fractures in the x-y, y-z, and x-z planes is only
required input data if the Fracture Network Extent option of Finite is selected. This
input data allows the user to account for a finite region of natural fractures. The pri-
mary fracture in the x-z plane is not limited by the Maximum Extent.
Aperture Ratio
The Aperture ratio is the ratio of the secondary fracture widths in the various planes
relative to the primary fracture width. The fractures in each plane are assumed to be
identical with each having the same length, height, and width. The primary fracture
extent and width profile however can be different than the secondary fractures in
the x-z plane.
Aspect Ratio
The Aspect Ratio is defined as the fracture network minor (y-z plane) to major axis
(x-z plane) fracture extensions. A fracture network with an aspect ratio of 0.5
describes a fracture network extension in the y-z plane of 1/2 that in the x-z plane.
The aspect ratio has ranges from zero to one. An aspect ratio of zero means no sec-
ondary fractures can open. An aspect ratio of unity implies the secondary and pri-
mary fractures are of equal length at the origin.
Discrete Fracture Network - User Specified
Figure 11.13 shows the Fracture Network Characteristics screen for the Discrete
fracture Network - User Specified option.
Figure 11.13: Discrete Fracture Network - User Specified Characteristics.
The Discrete Fracture Network Characteristics is specified for each of the principle
planes. The required input data is the Dimensionless Well Location, Fracture, Spac-
ing, Maximum Extent, Aperture Ratio in each plane and the network fracture
Aspect Ratio. Secondary fractures do not all propagate simultaneously as Multiple
or Cluster type fracture. Secondary fractures only initiate and begin to propagate
when a fracture propagating in a given plane reaches a fracture grid in the adjacent
plane. That is a fracture in the x-z plane can not initiate unless a fracture in the y-z
plane reaches extents to the next grid location in the x-z plane.
The location of the perforations in the well or origin grid block can be positioned in
space (x, y, z) by the dimensionless well location. The primary fracture in the x-z
plane is oriented with respect to this location. The discrete fractures are assumed to
be located symmetrically about the well grid block center (0,0,0). The location of
the primary fracture relative to the secondary fracture (grid) is specified by the
dimensionless well location with values ranging from -1.0 to 1.0 in each axis.
As an example, if the wellbore is drilled through a natural fracture in the x-z plane,
the dimensionless well location, , in the y-direction can be specified
as either or . If the fracture initiates at the intersection
of natural fractures in each plane the dimensionless well location could be specified
as (e.g., . If the primary frac-
ture is located at the center of the natural fracture system the dimensionless well
location would be . The reader is referred to Appendix M for additional
information regarding the dimensionless well location.
Spacing
The spacing or distance of the discrete fractures in the x-y, y-z, and x-z planes are
factors and degrees of interaction will be as discussed in Appendix C and Appendix
M. Only fractures in the same plane are assumed to interact. Dilatancy at the inter-
face is ignored.
Maximum Extent
x
Dw
y
Dw
z
Dw
, , ( )
x
Dw
1 z
Dw
, , ( ) x
Dw
1 z
Dw
, , ( )
x
Dw
1 or 1 = y
Dw
1 or 1 = z
Dw
1 or 1 = , , ( ) 1 1 1 , , ( )
0 0 0 , , ( )
Aperture Ratios
The Aperture ratio is the ratio of the secondary fracture widths in the each plane rel-
ative to the primary fracture width. This is the maximum plane width ratio. The
fracture aperture is assumed to decrease as an elliptical function of position from
the center of the primary fracture. See Appendix M for addition information regard-
ing aperture as a function of position.
Aspect Ratio
The Aspect Ratio is defined as the fracture network minor (y-z plane) to major axis
(x-z plane) fracture extensions. A fracture network with an aspect ratio of 0.5
describes a fracture network extension in the y-z plane of 1/2 that in the x-z plane.
The aspect ratio has ranges from zero to one. An aspect ratio of zero means no sec-
ondary fractures can open. An aspect ratio of unity implies the secondary and pri-
mary fractures are of equal length at the origin.
Discrete Fracture Network - Deterministic
Figure 11.14 shows the Fracture Network Characteristics screen for the Discrete
fracture Network - Deterministic option.
Figure 11.14: Discrete Fracture Network - Deterministic Characteristics.
The Discrete Fracture Network Characteristics are specified for each of the princi-
ple planes. The required input data is the Dimensionless Well Location, Fracture
Spacing, Maximum Extent, Stress Difference, and in-situ Aperture after initiation.
As above, the secondary fractures do not all propagate simultaneously like the Mul-
tiple or Cluster type fracture. The secondary fractures only initiate and begin to
propagate when a fracture propagating in a given plane reaches a fracture grid in
the adjacent plane. That is a fracture in the x-z plane can not initiate unless a frac-
ture in the y-z plane reaches extents to the next grid location in the x-z plane.
The location of the perforations in the well or origin grid block can be positioned in
space (x, y, z) by the dimensionless well location. The primary fracture in the x-z
plane is oriented with respect to this location. The discrete fractures are assumed to
be located symmetrically about the well grid block center (0,0,0). The location of
the primary fracture relative to the secondary fracture (grid) is specified by the
dimensionless well location with values ranging from -1.0 to 1.0 in each axis.
As an example, if the wellbore is drilled through a natural fracture in the x-z plane,
the dimensionless well location, , in the y-direction can be specified
as either or . If the fracture initiates at the intersection
of natural fractures in each plane the dimensionless well location could be specified
as (e.g., . If the primary frac-
ture is located at the center of the natural fracture system the dimensionless well
location would be . The reader is referred to Appendix M for additional
information regarding the dimensionless well location.
Spacing
The spacing or distance of the discrete fractures in the x-y, y-z, and x-z planes are
factors and degrees of interaction will be as discussed in Appendix C and Appendix
M. Only fractures in the same plane are assumed to interact. Dilatancy at the inter-
face is ignored.
Maximum Extent
Stress Difference
The stress differences in the x-y and y-z planes are defined as and
, respectively. The fracture pressure must be greater than to ini-
x
Dw
y
Dw
z
Dw
, , ( )
x
Dw
1 z
Dw
, , ( ) x
Dw
1 z
Dw
, , ( )
x
Dw
1 or 1 = y
Dw
1 or 1 = z
Dw
1 or 1 = , , ( ) 1 1 1 , , ( )
0 0 0 , , ( )
Ao
13
o
1
o
3
=
Ao
13
o
1
o
3
= o
1
tiate a horizontal fracture in the x-y plane and greater than to initiate a vertical
fracture in the y-z plane. The stress difference for secondary fractures in the x-z
plane is assumed to be zero (i.e., ). The fracture aperture is assumed to
decrease as an elliptical function of position from the center of the primary fracture
as a result of pressure dissipation in the different planes. The discrete fracture net-
work aspect ratio is then calculated from the governing mass and momentum equa-
tions controlling fracture propagation as given in Appendix M.
Aperture (in-situ)
An in-situ Aperture is a residual natural fracture width that may exist after a dis-
crete secondary fracture is initiated. The residual or in-situ apertures are natural
fractures that are open under in-situ conditions. Normally, natural fractures are
closed under in-situ conditions.
Interaction
The Interaction dialog for User Specified Fracture Interaction is shown in Figure
11.15. The stiffness and fluid loss interaction of discrete fractures is calculated
based on the input data in this dialog. Stiffness interaction is only assumed to occur
between fractures in the same plane. Fluid loss interaction can occur between
planes. Depending on the Fracture Interaction options various input data fields will
be dimmed.
Figure 11.15: Interaction Screen.
o
2
Ao
33
0 =
Depending on the degree of fracture interaction, the fracture net pressure can be
lower for multiple fractures than for a single fracture.
See Appendix C and Appendix M for additional information regarding multiple
fractures and DFN interaction.
Fracture Interaction
Fracture interaction can be None, Full, User Specified or Empirical. None repre-
sents no stiffness or fluid loss interaction between fractures and Full represents
100% interaction. If User Specified is selected, the User can input the specific lev-
els of interaction for both Stiffness and Fluid Loss. Selecting Empirical allows for
the stiffness interaction to be calculated from an internal correlation and a user
specified fluid loss interaction.
Stiffness interaction occurs when fractures are close enough to be affected by the
stress field from adjacent fractures. The stiffness factor for each plane is defined as

where is the stiffness or elastic interaction factor and is the number of paral-
lel fractures in that plane that interact. If there is no interaction and the
stiffness factor is zero , and for the fractures fully interact and the
stiffness factor is, . A maximum stiffness factor, , can also be
specified such that .
The stiffness multiplier is defined as

The effective modulus in the direction is then defined as

An empirical correlation for the 3D influence factor, , is

E
,
N
,
1 ( )u
E
=
u
E
N
,
u
E
0 =
E
,
0 = u
l
1 =
E
,
N
,
1 =
E
max
E
,

E
max
s
+
,

E
,
1 + =
,
E
,
+
,
E =
u
i j
u
ij
1 1 1
h
2d
ij
---------
\ .
| |
2
+
3 2
=
where is the fracture height and is the distance between parallel fractures
and .
The average stiffness factor for parallel fractures is

Stiffness Characteristics
If the Empirical option for Fracture Interaction is chosen, a maximum height to
spacing value ( ) can be specified when calculating the empirical stiffness fac-
tor. Typically, a value of one is reasonable since fracture spacing is approximately
equal to the zone height. Thus, if the numerical fracture height to spacing ratio is
greater than the value entered in this dialog, the value in the dialog will be used for
calculating the stiffness factor.
This represents the percentage of stiffness interaction between the multiple fracture
system. This parameter can range from 0 to 100%. The interaction values for no
interaction and full interaction are zero and 100%, respectively. The closer the frac-
tures are together, the greater the stiffness. For multiple parallel fractures within a
fraction of their characteristic height, the stiffness increases by a factor equal to the
number of fractures (i.e., full interaction). For tree like (dendritic) fractures the
stiffness interaction may be negligible (no interaction).
If User Specified or Empirical is selected, the Maximum Stiffness Factor for In-
Zone and Multi-Layer can be specified.
This represents the percent of fluid loss interaction between the multiple fracture
system. This parameter can have a value from 0 to 100%. The interaction values for
no interaction and full interaction are zero and 100%, respectively. Depending on
the reservoir properties and vicinity of the fracture system, this value may not be
the same as the degree of the stiffness interaction.
If User Specified or Empirical is selected, the Minimum Leakoff Coefficient Multi-
plier for In-Zone and Multi-Layer can be specified. Thus, if the calculated leakoff
multiplier is less than the value entered in the dialog the dialog value will be used.
For example if we have 10 multiple fractures with full interaction the leakoff multi-
h d
ij
i
j
N
,
E
,
u
ij
N
,
j 1 =
N
,
i 1 =
N
,
=
h d
ij

plier would be 0.1. However, if we specified a minimum multiplier of 0.5, the total
leakoff coefficient for each fracture would be multiplied by a factor of 0.5. If a mul-
tiplier of one is input, this would be the same as no interaction.
Proppant Distribution
The proppant distribution allocation is defined as
where is the proppant mass in the primary fracture and is the total proppant
mass injected (or mass in DFN system).
This proppant distribution solution is a methodology for determining fluid loss and
proppant loss (distribution) from the primary or dominant fracture based on fluid
efficiency. That is, even with no fluid leakoff the proppant can screen-out if the sec-
ondary fractures do not allow proppant transport.
The Proppant Distribution dialog is shown in Figure 11.16. Options are available
for Uniform, Dominant, and User Specified distribution.
Figure 11.16: Proppant Distribution Screen.
The three proppant Distribution Styles are discussed below.
Uniform Proppant Distribution
The Uniform Proppant Distribution option assumes that the proppant can be trans-
ported uniformly (i.e., concentrating only due to fluid loss not flow dispersion in
_
p
M
f
M
DFN
M
f
M
t
= =
M
f
M
t
the secondary fractures or bridging at DFN interfaces.) throughout the fracture net-
work. That is both proppant and fluid are transported into the fracture network from
the dominant fracture as a slurry.
The proppant distribution allocation for a uniform proppant distribution is
where is the proppant mass in the primary fracture and is the total prop-
pant mass injected (or mass in DFN system). Thus the mass (and volume) of prop-
pant is assumed to be distributed based on network fracture volume.
Dominant Proppant Distribution
The Dominant Fracture Proppant Distribution option assumes that all the proppant
remains in the primary fracture and no proppant enters the secondary DFN. Conse-
quently the secondary fractures act primarily as fluid loss conduits from the pri-
mary fracture.
The proppant distribution allocation for all the proppant in the primary or dominant
fracture is
User Specified Proppant Distribution
The User Specified Proppant Distribution Style allows the user to specify the Mini-
mum Dominant Fracture proppant allocation, , that remains in the primary
fracture with the remaining proppant entering the secondary DFN. Consequently,
the secondary fractures will have a maximum fraction of ( ) of the total
proppant. If the minimum proppant allocation specified is less than a uniform dis-
tribution by discrete network fracture volumes, the minimum allocation will be set
to the primary fracture to DFN volume ratio. That is
_
p
M
f
M
DFN
V
f
V
DFN
~ =
M
f
M
DFN
_
p
M
f
M
DFN
M
f
M
t
1 = = =
M
f
M
t
_
p
min
1 _
p
min
_
p
min
V
f
V
DFN
>
mass injected (or mass in DFN system). The mass in the secondary fractures, , is
The near wellbore pressure loss table is shown in Figure 11.17. MShale has the
capability to model time and rate dependent near wellbore pressure drop for each
fracture. This pressure drop can represent any near wellbore effect such as tortuos-
ity, perforation erosion, near wellbore multiple fractures, etc. The methodology
Import RT Button
When performing real-time or replay analysis using MView, MShale automatically
sure loss relationship. After running the acquired data through MShale, open the
_
p
M
f
M
DFN
M
f
M
t
= =
M
f
M
t
M
s
M
s
M
t
M
f
M
t
1 _
p
( ) = =
MShale, a message like the one shown in Figure 11.18 will be displayed.
not considered significant or indeterminate by MShale.
where . If the job duration is longer than the maximum time
entered in the table, the last (final) value will be used
Mid-Field Fracture Complexity
The mid-field fracture complexity plot and table data is shown in Figure 11.19.
MShale has the capability to model time dependent mid-field fracture pressure
decline for the fracture network. It has been observed (e.g., Weijers et al. (2002),
Weng (1993), and Jacot et al. (2010)) that complex fracture behavior may occur
when fracturing highly deviated and/or horizontal wellbores. Complex fractures in
Note: for limited entry the imported table must be modified to account for the
fractional flow rate going into each fracture.
K t ( ) Ap t ( ) K t ( )q t ( )
o
=
K t ( )
the midfield region turn and twist, then re-orient in the direction perpendicular to
the principal stress planes. This creates a high fracture pressure that does not dimin-
ish instantly as does the near-well or perforation pressure loss at shut-in. The frac-
ture gradient during pumping can be much larger than the over-burden stress
gradient without creating horizontal fractures in the far-field. The MFC methodol-
ogy is explained in Appendix M.
Figure 11.19: Mid-field Fracture Complexity Screen.
If you have pressure decline data that exhibits mid-field fracture excess pressure
loss as a function of time, fill in the spreadsheet located on the right side of the
screen. Up to fifty rows can be specified to define the near wellbore pressure drop
as a function of time and rate. The curve fit to this data can be achieved by using a
form of the Arps equation
where
p t ( ) ISIP ISIP o
,
( )f t t o , , ( ) =
f t t o , , ( ) 1 1 1 o t t
p
( ) t + ( )
1 o
=
and is a power constant (with representing an exponential decline
( ) and representing a harmonic decline). The constant is
a pressure decline time constant ( ).
The pressure decline function based on G-function analysis is
for
MFC Excess Pressure
The mid-field complex fracture excess pressure is defined by where
is a mid-field closure stress. Although the excess pressure is not known before the
fracture treatment (similar to the near wellbore pressure loss), abnormally high
treating pressures and high pressures during shut-in may indicate mid-field fracture
complexity. The excess fracture pressure is normally on the order of the difference
between the maximum and minimum principal stresses (i.e., ).
Decline Time Constant
The pressure Decline Time Constant ( ) represents the initial pres-
sure decline slope. This constant can be obtained by placing a straight line on the
initial pressure decline and extrapolating to an excess pressure of zero. This inter-
section on the time axis represents .
Decline Exponent
The Decline Exponent is a power constant in the Arps equation ( repre-
senting an exponential decline and representing a harmonic decline). This
constant can be obtained by history matching on the excess pressure decline data.
The greater the decline exponent the smaller the pressure decline will be for a given
time constant.
Build Time Constant
The Build Time Constant (i.e., ) represents the excess pressure
build rate. The greater this time constant the longer it will take for the mid-field
fracture complexity to develop. Since the excess fracture pressure normally builds
o o 0 =
f 1 e
t t
p
( ) t
= o 1 = t
t
1
Ap
-------
dp
dt
------
\ .
| |
1
=
f
f u ( )
G
ISIP o
,
-----------------------
dP
dG
------- = G G
c
s
ISIP o
,
o
,
o
1
o
3
t t
1
Ap
-------
dp
dt
------
\ .
| |
1
=
t
o o 0 =
o 1 =
t t
1
Ap
-------
dp
dt
------
\ .
| |
1
=
rather quickly, this time constant should be approximately equal to or less than the
Decline Time Constant.
Build Exponent
The Build Exponent is a power constant in the Arps equation ( represents
an exponential decline and represents a harmonic decline). This constant
can be obtained by history matching on the excess pressure build rate. The greater
the build exponent, the longer it will take to achieve the maximum mid-field frac-
ture excess pressure.
o o 0 =
o 1 =
Appendix A
Hydraulic Fracturing Theory
A.1 Introduction
This appendix describes the solution methodology for our hydraulic fracturing sim-
ulator. The coupled rock and fluid mechanics equations governing fracture propa-
gation are presented. These non-linear partial differential equations are then
transformed and solved using integral methods.
The hydraulic fracturing simulator accounts for the coupled parameters affecting
fracture propagation and pressure-decline. The major fracture, rock and fluid
mechanics phenomena included are: (1) multilayer unsymmetrical confining stress
contrast, (2) multilayer leakoff, (3) fracture toughness and dilatancy (tip effects),
(4) variable injection rate and time dependent fluid rheology, (5) vertical and lateral
rock deformation, (6) wall roughness and (7) coupled proppant transport, heat
transfer and fracture propagation.
A list of parametric relationships which affect the fracture characteristics and frac-
ture net pressure is also given.
A.2 Governing Equations
An overview of the governing equations of mass conservation, continuity, width-
opening pressure, momentum, fracture propagation criteria and constitutive rela-
tionships to model fracture propagation are presented here for completeness. A
detailed description of these equations and the solution methodology is provided by
Meyer et al.
1-6
Symbols are given in the nomenclature.
612 Hydraulic Fracturing Theory:
Mass Conservation
The governing mass conservation equation for an incompressible slurry in a frac-
ture is

where
The above mass conservation equations are solved numerically in MFrac by ele-
mentally descritizing a fracture grid and then integrating over each element.
The above equations for performing minifrac analysis can be simplified for 2-D
type models for fluid loss due to leakoff during and after pumping:
During Pumping
After Pumping
Continuity
The mass continuity equation in terms of the flow rate per unit length q = v W is
q d V t V t V t
f l sp
t
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) t t =
}
0
0
(A-1)
| |
| |

V t
C A t
t A
dAdt
V t S A t
A t A A t
l
t
sp p
A
a
( )
( , )
( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
=
=
=
} }
2
2
0 0
t
t
o
o
t

(A-2)

V t C t A t t
l a c
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) = t o o u
(A-3)
V C t A t t G
t t
l p p p a c
p
( ) ( ) ( ) ( , )
.
u o o u
u
=
=
2
2
where

(A-4)
A.2 Governing Equations 613
where and is the leakoff rate per unit leakoff
area (i.e., leakoff velocity).
Momentum Conservation
The momentum equation (equation of motion) for steady flow is
where
; laminar flow
; turbulent flow
is the Darcy friction factor, Re is the Reynolds Number and c is the relative wall
roughness.
Width-Opening Pressure Elasticity Condition
The crack-opening and opening pressure relationship is of the form:
where is a generalized influence function, is a characteristic half-height and
is the net fracture pressure .
Fracture Propagation Criteria
The criterion for fracture propagation is based on the concept of a stress intensity
factor . The fracture will propagate when the stress intensity factor equals the

V + + = q q
W
t
L
2 0
c
c

(A-5)
V q cq
L
cx c
z
cz + = c
L

V = P f q w
1
2
2 3
(A-6)
f 24 Re =
f fR e c , ( ) =
f
) , 0 , (
) 1 ( 2
) , , , ( ) , , ( t x P H
G
t z y x t z x W
W
A
I =

v

(A-7)
I
W
H
,
AP P o
K
I
fracture toughness or critical stress intensity of the rock ( or
whichever is greater).
A.3 Solution Methodology
The fracture propagation solution is obtained numerically by satisfying mass con-
servation (Eqn. (A-1)), continuity (Eqn. (A-5)), momentum (Eqn. (A-6)), elasticity
relationship (Eqn. (A-7)) and the fracture propagation criteria ( or
whichever is greater).
The governing differential equations for fracture propagation are differentiated with
respect to time and then simplified by the transformations
to form a set of equations in terms of the alpha parameters .
The length propagation parameter is of the form:
where accounts for the time dependent gamma parameters, non-steady injection
rates and fluid rheology, spurt loss, fracture toughness, etc. The fracture efficiency
is given by and . The geometric factor is equal to unity for the
PKN and 3-D type fracture models and equal to zero for the GDK model. Addi-
tional alpha parameters for 2-D type fractures are also given by Meyer
3
.
Equation (A-9) and the formulated constitutive relationships control the time
dependent length propagation solution:
K
IC
K
I
K
IC
=
o
I
o
IC
=
K
I
K
IC
=
o
I
o
IC
=
o o
o o
o o
L a
w
w
w
H
w
w
p c
t
L t
dL t
dt
t
A t
dA t
dt
t
W t
dW t
dt
t
H t
dH t
dt
t
P t
d P t
dt
t
C t
dC t
dt

( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
;
;
;
A
A

(A-8)
o
,
t ,d, dt = ( )
o
o q o
q |
|
L
ca term
H
n
n
=
+ +
+
+ + '
' +
1 1 2 1
1
1 3
1 1
( )( )
( ( )
( )( )

(A-9)
o
,
q |
H
o
H
o
L
= |

A.4 Parametric Relationships 615
A.4 Parametric Relationships
This section describes some of the functional relationships between various fracture
parameters and their effect on fracture characteristics and pressure response (see
Hagel and Meyer
6
for additional details).
Table A.1 shows the effect of various parameters on fracture length, width and net
pressure for PKN, GDK and Penny type 2-D fracture models for viscous and tough-
ness dominated fracture propagation. The viscous equations are for laminar flow
with negligible toughness and no spurt loss. The toughness equations are for negli-
gible viscous dissipation. The penny shape model is referred to as the Sneddon
model for toughness controlled propagation.
Parameters with the largest exponents have the greatest influence on the specific
fracture characteristic. Therefore, more emphasis should be put on refining these
critical parameters. A systematic approach is a good method of determining param-
eters which best match the fracture characteristics and response.
The proportionality equations in Table A.1 can be used to refine input data and to
determine parameter sensitivity for 2-D type models. The parameters which affect
net pressure the most are: Young's modulus, fracture height and viscosity for the
PKN model. To match the net pressure in a GDK model only the fluid rheology or
Young's modulus can be varied to get a match assuming negligible toughness. The
net pressures for the GDK and Penny models are shown not to be a function of frac-
ture height.
Table A.1 illustrates that the fracture net pressure decreases with volume (time) for
the GDK and Penny models for both viscous and toughness dominated fractures.
The PKN model is the only 2-D model where the net pressure increases with time
(volume). Replacing the injected volume ( ) by fracture volume ( ) demonstrates
the approximate effect on fluid efficiency.
Table A.1 shows that for fracture propagation controlled by toughness, as tough-
ness increases the net pressure and width increase, and the length decreases. The
fracture characteristics are shown to be only a function of the critical energy release
rate ( ).
) (
) ( ) (
t
n
n
L
t
t
t L t L
o
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
(A-10)
V V
f
G
cr
K
IC
1 u ( ) G =
Table A.2 summarizes the parametric equations for the total leakoff coefficient
based on satisfying the governing equations of mass and momentum. Since the clo-
sure time for a minifrac analysis is a constant and known, the fracture efficiency
and fluid loss volume ( ) are also constant for a specific model. The proportion-
ality relationships given in Table A.1 are for negligible spurt loss.
The leakoff coefficient in minifrac analysis is also shown to be strongly influenced
by the pay zone and total fracture height for the GDK and PKN type models.
Clearly, to obtain an accurate total leakoff coefficient, the pay zone and total frac-
ture heights must be known. One of the major reasons for using a 3-D hydraulic
fracturing simulator is to predict height growth as a function of time in fracture
pressure analysis. A 2-D PKN type model can also be used with reasonable results
for well contained fracture by modifying the fracture height to match at given
points in time. However, to history match the entire pressure response in formations
which display height growth, the model must account for this behavior.
Table A.2 also shows that the total leakoff coefficient is inversely proportional to
the pay zone height. Changing the fracture height and injection rate has a major
effect on the predicted leakoff coefficient. The penny shape equations assume leak-
off over the entire fracture area.
Table A.3 lists the relationships for the fracture length, width and leakoff coeffi-
cient as a function of net pressure. As illustrated, the leakoff coefficient and width
increase and the length (radius) decreases as the net pressure increases. Table A.3
also demonstrates that if the simulated net pressure is different than the measured
net pressure, a significant error in the leakoff coefficient and fracture characteristics
can occur. Compatibility in net pressure is far more important for mass conserva-
tion than the fracture model used. For the PKN, GDK and Penny shape models the
leakoff coefficient is proportional to net pressure raised to the 1, 1/2 and 2/3 pow-
ers, respectively.
Table A.3 also illustrates the problem with assuming the measured net pressure
applies to all three models. This is evident by the fact that if momentum is satisfied,
each model will predict different values for the net pressure. Therefore, the mini-
frac net pressure results should also be applied to the correct model. The fracture
efficiency is approximately equal for all models, since it is only a function of the
pressure decline slope and closure time (see Appendix F).
Table A.5 lists a qualitative representation of the effect various parameters have on
the fracture geometry for 2-D and 3-D type models. This table is useful in deter-
mining what happens if a given parameter is increased or decreased. Since these
equations do not account for coupled effects and assume no parameter interaction,
they should only be used as general guidelines. Exceptions can be found in non-
homogeneous formations and for treatments with time dependent parameters.
CA
The utility of Table A.1 through Table A.4 is in providing the engineer with a quick
and qualitative method of establishing the effect various parameters have on frac-
ture characteristics without running numerous simulations. For example, Table A.4
illustrates that increasing fracture toughness generally increases fracture width and
net pressure, and decreases height growth. Whereas, increasing dilatancy, viscosity
or wall roughness will tend to increase the fracture width, height and net pressure
(generally), and result in a shorter length.
Generally, many of the parameters listed in Table A.1 through Table A.4 are not
constant but vary with time and space. To accurately model such variations it is
necessary to use a fracture simulator which accounts for these complex interac-
tions. For well contained fractures, a 2-D model will provide acceptable results.
However, for fractures which exhibit height growth the importance of a 3-D model
is realized to correctly simulate height, net pressure and compliance (width).
To determine the effect of coupling numerous parameters in Table A.1 through
Table A.4 a numerical simulator is almost essential. A hydraulic fracturing simula-
tor can account for the following effects not normally modeled in fracture-pressure
analysis:
Time dependent fluid rheology.
Multilayer leakoff.
Height growth through multi-stress zones.
Temperature effects on fluid rheology.
Fracture tip effects. Dilatancy and fracture toughness.
Variable formation properties.
Coupled fracture propagation, heat transfer and proppant transport.
Wall roughness and waviness.
Variable injection rates.
Consistency in the fracture-pressure analysis and treatment design.
Table A.5 lists the major elements used in the numerical simulator to calculate the
fracture pressure and pressure decline. They are divided into three sub-groups; res-
ervoir, geomechanical and fracture fluid. Each element has been rated according to
its relative influence on the pressure solution. The engineer is encouraged to make
an effort to obtain the best possible values as the final accuracy of the analysis will
be affected. The items which have received a rating of minor, need only be approx-
imated within a range of 25 percent.
Table A.1: Two-Dimensional Hydraulic Fracture Parametric Equations.
Viscous Dominated
P
K
N

M
o
d
e
l
G
D
K

M
o
d
e
l
R
a
d
i
a
l

M
o
d
e
l
Toughness Dominated
P
K
N

M
o
d
e
l
G
D
K

M
o
d
e
l
R
a
d
i
a
l

M
o
d
e
l
L
EQ
n'
V
2n' 2 +
1 v
2
( )k'H
n' 2 +
----------------------------------------
1
2n' 3 +
-----------------
W
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------
k'Q
n'
V
H
n'
-----------------
1
2n' 3 +
-----------------
AP
E
2n' 2 +
k'Q
n'
V
1 v
2
( )
2n' 2 +
H
3n' 3 +
----------------------------------------------------
1
2n' 3 +
-----------------
L
EQ
n'
V
2n' 2 +
1 v
2
( )k'H
n' 2 +
----------------------------------------
1
2n' 4 +
-----------------
W
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------
k'Q
n'
V
H
n' 2 +
-----------------
1
2n' 4 +
-----------------
AP
E
n' 1 +
k'Q
n'
1 v
2
( )
n' 1 +
V
n'
--------------------------------------
1
n' 2 +
--------------
R
EQ
n'
V
2n' 2 +
1 v
2
( )k'
---------------------------------
1
3n' 6 +
-----------------
W
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------k'Q
n'
V
2 n'
2
-------------
2
3n' 6 +
-----------------
AP
E
n' 1 +
k'Q
n'
1 v
2
( )
n' 1 +
V
n'
--------------------------------------
1
n' 2 +
--------------
L
E
1 v
2
( )
-------------------
V
K
IC
H
3 2 /
---------------------
W
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------K
IC
H
1 2 /
AP
K
IC
H
1 2 /
-----------
L
E
1 v
2
( )
-------------------
V
K
IC
H
-------------
2
3
---
W
1 v
2
( )
2
E
2
---------------------
K
IC
2
V
H
-------------
1
3
---
AP
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------
K
IC
4
H
V
--------------
1
3
---
L
E
1 v
2
( )
-------------------
V
K
IC
---------
2
5
---
W
1 v
2
( )
4
E
4
---------------------K
IC
4
V
1
5
---
AP
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------
K
IC
4
V
---------
1
5
---

Table A.2: Leakoff Coefficient Parametric Equations.
Viscous Dominated C - Leakoff Coefficient
PKN Model
GDK Model
Radial Model
Toughness Dominated
PKN Model
GDK Model
Sneddon Model
C
1 q ( )
q
-----------------
Q
4n' 1 +
4n' 6 +
-----------------
V
2n' 1 +
2n' 3 +
-----------------
------------------
H
n' 3 +
2n' 3 +
-----------------
H
p
------------------
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------K'
1
2n' 3 +
-----------------
C
1 q ( )
q
-----------------
Q
n' 1 +
n' 2 +
--------------
V
n'
2n' 4 +
-----------------
----------------- -
H
1 2 /
H
p
-----------
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------K'
1
2n' 4 +
-----------------
C
1 q ( )
q
-----------------
Q
1
2
---
2n'
3n' 6 +
----------------- +
V
1
2
---
2n'
3n' 6 +
-----------------
--------------------------
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------K'
2
3n' 6 +
-----------------
C
1 q
q
------------
Q
1 2 /
V
1 2 /
-----------
H
3 2 /
H
p
-----------
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------K
IC
C
1 q
q
------------
Q
1 2 /
V
1 6 /
-----------
H
2 3 /
H
p
-----------
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------K
IC
2
3
---
C
1 q
q
------------
Q
1 2 /
V
3 10 /
-------------
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------K
IC
4
5
---

Table A.3: Leakoff Coefficient Parametric Equations
P
K
N

M
o
d
e
l
G
D
K

M
o
d
e
l
S
n
e
d
d
o
n

M
o
d
e
l
L
qV
AP
1 v
2
E
--------------H
2
-----------------------------
W AP
1 v
2
E
--------------H
C
1 q
q
------------
Q
1 2 /
V
1 2 /
-----------
H
2
H
p
------AP
1 v
2
( )
E
----------------
L
qV
AP
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------H
--------------------------------
1
2
---
W
qV
H
-------AP
1 v
2
E
--------------
1
2
---
C
1 q
q
1 2 /
------------Q
1 2 /
H
1 2 /
H
p
----------- AP
1 v
2
( )
E
----------------
1
2
---
R
qV
AP
1 v
2
( )
E
-------------------H
--------------------------------
1
3
---
W qV ( )
1
3
---
AP
1 v
2
E
--------------
2
3
---
C
1 q
q
2 3 /
------------
Q
1 2 /
V
1 6 /
-----------
H
2
H
p
------ AP
1 v
2
( )
E
----------------
2
3
---

Table A.4: Qualitative Parametric Effects on Fracture Charactersitics.
PARAMETER FRACTURE CHARACTERISTICS
Two-Dimensional Models (PKN, GDK, Penny)
q 1 q 0
Toughness, K
IC
| W| L+ W| L-
Young's Modulus, E| W+ L| W+ L-
Poisson's Ratio, v| W+ L| W+ L-
Inj. Rate, Q| W| L+ W| L|
Leakoff Coef., C| W+ L+ W+ L+
Viscosity, | W| L+ W| L-
Height, H| W- L+
W+
W|
L-
L-
GDK
PKN
Pay Height, H
p
| W- L- W+ L+
Volume, V| W| L| W| L|
Three-Dimensional Models Ao>0
Stress Contrast, Ao| W? L| H+ W? L- H+
Toughness, K
IC
| W| L+ H+ W| L- H+
Young's Modulus, E| W+ L| H| W+ L- H|?
Inj. Rate, Q| W| L+ H| W| L| H?
Leakoff Coef., C| W+ L+ H+ W+ L+ H+
Viscosity, | W| L+ H| W| L- H|
Pay Height, H
p
| W| L+ H? W| L+ H?
Temperature, T| W+ L| H+ W+ L- H+
Volume, V| W| L| H| W| L| H|
| increase
+ decrease
? not sure (may go either way)
- not a function of that parameter
W - width
L - length
H - height
q - efficiency
Table A.5: Summary of Major Elements for Proper Analysis.
RESERVOIR Sources Importance Rating
Porosity Logs, Cores Minor
Compressibility Tests, Calculations Medium
Reservoir Pressure Buildup Medium
Net Pay Logs, Cores Important
Gross Pay (Estimate of Frac
Barriers)
Logs Medium
Permeability (estimated) Cores, Tests Medium
Fluid Viscosity Lab Tests, PVT Medium
Fluid Compressibility Lab Tests, PVT Minor
GEOMECHANICAL Sources Importance Rating
Poissons's Ratio Logs, Core Tests Minor
Young's Modulus Logs, Core Tests Medium
Fracture Toughness Tests, History Match Medium
Minimum Horizontal Stress Minifrac Important
Stress Contrasts Logs, Core Tests Important
FRAC FLUID Sources Importance Rating
Rheology Lab Tests Important
Density Lab Tests Minor
Filter Cake Lab Tests Medium
Filtrate Viscosity Lab Tests Important
A.5 Nomenclature 623
A.5 Nomenclature
= Leakoff area (one face of the fracture)
= Total reservoir compressibility
= Total leakoff coefficient
= Leakoff viscosity control coefficient
= Reservoir compressibility and viscosity coefficient
= Wall building coefficient
= Young's modulus
= Fluid loss function, Eqn. (F-18)
= Fracture half-height
= Pay zone height
= Total wellbore height
= Permeability
= Consistency index
= Fracture half-length
= Flow behavior index
= Pressure
= Injection flow rate
= Spurt loss coefficient
= Time
= Dimensionless Nolte time,
= Fracture volume
= Fluid loss volume (no spurt loss)
= Volume loss by spurt
A
C
t
C
C
I
C
II
C
III
E
G u ( )
H
H
p
H
w
k
k'
L
n'
P
q
Sp
t
t
D
V
f
V
l
V
sp
Greek
= Fracture width
= Average wellbore fracture width
= Fracture width as a function of position
= Lateral coordinate along fracture length
= Coordinate perpendicular to frac face
= Vertical Coordinate
= Leakoff area parameter, Eqn. (A-8)
= Leakoff parameter during pumping, Eqn. (A-8)
= Length propagation parameter, Eqn. (A-8)
= Pressure parameter, Eqn. (A-8)
= Width propagation parameter, Eqn. (A-8)
= Friction coefficients
= Width profile coefficients
= Maximum width-opening pressure coefficient
= Net fracturing pressure
= Fracture efficiency
= Efficiency excluding spurt loss
= Dimensionless time,
= Dimensionless lateral coordinate
= Time of fracture leakoff area creation
= Fluid loss parameter, Eqn. (A-3)
= Fluid loss parameter, Eqn. (A-3)
= Minimum horizontal stress
W
W 0 t , ( )
W , t , ( )
x
y
z
o
a
o
c
o
L
o
p
o
w
f
I
f
,
w
I
w
,
w
o
I
w
o
,
AP
q
q
*
u
t
u
o
A.6 References 625
Subscripts
A.6 References
1. Meyer, B. R.: Frac model in 3-D - 4 Parts, Oil and Gas Journal, June 17, July
1, July 22 and July 29, 1985.
21, 1986.
4. Meyer, B. R., Cooper, G. D. and Nelson, S. G.: Real-Time 3-D Hydraulic
Fracturing Simulation: Theory and Field Case Studies, paper SPE 20658 pre-
sented at the SPE 65th Annual Technical Conf., New Orleans, Sept. 23-26,
1990.
5. Meyer, B.R., Hagel, M.W., Simulated Mini-frac Analysis, Petroleum Society
of CIM, Calgary June 1988.
6. Hagel, M. W. and Meyer, B. R.: Utilizing Mini-frac Data to Improve Design
c = Closure, leakoff parameter
D = Dimensionless
f = Fracture
l = Fluid loss
p = Pay zone, end of pumping
sp = Spurt loss
Appendix B
Multilayer Fracturing
B.1 Introduction
Multilayer or limited entry fracturing is a process whereby multiple zones are stim-
ulated simultaneously. The initiation and propagation of multilayer fractures is gov-
erned by conservation of mass and momentum for the system of fractures. This
process is controlled by the limited entry techniques employed which include the
number of perforations, perforation spacing, near wellbore effects, fracture pres-
sures, stresses, etc.
The methodology for limited entry fracturing was first presented by Elbel1 et al.
where an analytical PKN fracture model was linked to an analytical wellbore
model. Elbel developed his formulation based on an analogy of Kirchoff's current
and voltage laws to those of mass and momentum conservation.
Although the solution techniques presented here are similar for solving a non-linear
system of equations, the implementation is not limited by the fracture model, well-
bore restrictions or time dependent dissipation losses. Our formulation is based on
conservation of mass and momentum (formulation based on Transport
Phenomena2 ).
The methodology presented here for multilayer fracturing couples a general
hydraulic fracturing simulator with a general wellbore model. The fractures may
coalesce, interact or may remain isolated from one another. The governing equa-
tions presented are not specific to any limiting constraints. Only the constitutive
relationships and boundary conditions imposed on the fracture geometry model
govern the interaction behavior of the fracture system.
Figure B.1 shows a schematic of the multilayer fracturing technique implemented
in MFrac. As illustrated, this concept is based on conservation of mass and energy
with an analogy to electrical theory.
628 Multilayer Fracturing:
Symbols are given in the nomenclature.
Figure B.1: Schematic of Multilayer Fracturing.
B.2 Governing Equations 629
B.2 Governing Equations
Following are the governing mass and momentum conservation equations for mul-
tilayer (limited entry) fracturing.
Mass Conservation
Mass conservation is based on an overall mass balance for fluid flow into the casing
and fracture system:
Eqn. (B-1) states that the rate of mass accumulation in the casing (below the refer-
ence point) is equal to the rate of mass injected into the system minus the sum of
the rates of mass out of the control volume into the individual fracture intervals. For
positive flow is into the fracture and for negative flow (flowback) is out of
the fracture.
Assuming a constant fluid density in the control volume (i.e., same density in the
casing and at the entrance to each fracture layer) Eqn. (B-1) simplifies to
where
Eqn. (B-2) also applies to compressible and changing density slurries with time so
long as the fluid density to each fracture layer is constant for a given time step. Eqn.
(B-3) allows for wellbore storage (filling the wellbore and re-circulation).
c
c

- Q
i
i=1
n
i
V
t
Q
in
=

(B-1)
Q
i
Q
i
Q Q
t i
i=1
n
=

(B-2)
Q Q
V
t
t in
=

c
c

(B-3)
This equation is based on an overall momentum balance for fluid flow in the casing
and into the fracture layers. From the steady-state macroscopic mechanical energy
balance2:

where
For fluid flow of a constant density , Eqn. (B-4) simplifies to the extended Ber-
noulli's Equation:
where is positive in the direction of the gravity vector.
Rearranging Eqn. (B-5) and gathering like terms:
where
From Eqn. (B-6) for each of the fracture layers (i=1,,n) we have
= cross-sectional velocity
= change in potential energy
= mechanical work
= frictional loss
A A u
1
2
1
0
3
1
2
v
v
dp W E
P
P
v
+ + + + =
}

(B-4)
v ( )
Au
W
)
E v
)
P v
gz
P v
gz W E
v
2 2
2
2
1 1
2
1
2 2
+ = + +

(B-5)
z
P P P P
l h 1 2
= + A A

(B-6)
A
A
P g z z
P W E
v v
h
l v
=
= + +
|
\
|
.
|

( )
( )
2 1
2
2
1
2
2

B.3 Numerical Solution 631
where
and and

are time dependent energy dissipation coefficients calculated numer-
ically from losses in the casing. This also includes restrictions, velocity head
changes, etc. The terms and

are the dissipation coefficients calculated
for the total near wellbore effects (multiple parallel fractures, tortuosity, perforation
losses, etc.).
B.3 Numerical Solution
Eqns. (B-2) and (B-7) represent a system of n+1 non-linear equations and n+1
unknowns (i.e. and for i=1,..,n) for the n fracture layers.
Non-dimensionalizing Eqns. (B-2) and (B-7), and rewriting in the form of a zero
contour function we have:
Momentum Eqns. (i=1,,n)
P P P P P
f i NW i l j
j
i
h j
j
i
0
1 1
= + +
= =

, , , ,
A A A
(B-7)
P

f,i
= +
=
=
=
o
o
i f i
h j j j
l j j j
j i
n
j
j i
n
NW i NW i i i
P
P g z z
P c Q Q
P c Q Q
j
NW i
A
A
A
A
,
,
,
, ,
( )
,
1
1
1
c
j
o
j
c
NW, i
o
NW, i
P
0
Q
i
f P P P P P
i f i NW i l j
j
i
h j
j
i
= + +
|
\
|
.
|
= =

0 0
1 1
0
/ /
, , , ,
o o A A A

(B-8)
Mass Conservation
where and are normalizing reference values for rate and stress.
The governing equations are non-dimensionalized to ensure that fi and fn+1 are of
the same order. This is extremely beneficial and necessary for solving non-linear
sets of equations. This follows from the statement: There are no good, general
methods for solving systems of more than one non-linear equation
3
.
The general solution methodology utilizes the Newton-Raphson Method for non-
linear system of Equations
3
.
The typical problem gives functional relations to be zeroed, involving variables
, i = 1,2,...,N:
If we let denote the entire vector of values then in the neighborhood of ,
each of the functions can be expanded in Taylor Series
By neglecting terms of order

and higher, we obtain a set of linear equations for
the corrections that move each function closer to zero simultaneously, namely
where
f Q Q Q Q
n t i
i
n
+
=
= / -
1 0 0
1
/

(B-9)
Q
0
o
0
N
x
i
f x x x i N
i N
( , ,...., ) , , ,....,
1 2
0 1 2 = =

(B-10)
X x
i
X
f
i
f X X f X
f
x
x X
i i
i
j j
i
j
( ) ( ) ( )

+ = + +
=
c
c
c
c 0 c

1
2

(B-11)
cX
2
cX
o c |
ij
j
N
j i
x
=
=
1

(B-12)
B.3 Numerical Solution 633
Matrix Eqn. (B-12) can be solved by LU decomposition as described in Ref. (3).
The corrections are then added to the solution vector
where
and the process is iterated to convergence.
Although the above numerical procedure (solution of non-linear equations) is simi-
lar to that of Ref. (1), the fracture pressures

are calculated numerically for any
geometry model (not just an analytical PKN model). In general, the flow rates ,
reference pressure , frictional dissipation and gravitational head terms are
implicit. The fracture pressures are semi-implicit and utilize a shooting
method to better approximate , ( ), at the new time step and as a func-
tion of . Utilizing explicit values for can result in an unstable solution if the
near wellbore and casing frictional losses are negligible. The implementation of the
above numerical solution is stable for all fracture geometry models (including the
GDK model whose net pressure is not a function of flow rate) and for negligible
energy dissipation.
o
c
c
|
ij
i
j
i i
f
x
f

;
x x x i n
i
new
i
old
i
= + = + c , ,..., 1 1

(B-13)
x , i = 1,..., n
x
i
n+1
=
=
Q Q
P
i
/
/
0
0 0
o
P
f, i
Q
i
P
0
P
f, i
P
f, i
o
i
AP
f, i
+
Q
i
P
f, i
B.4 Nomenclature
Greek
= Viscous dissipation term
= Equations to minimize
= Gravitational acceleration
= Fracture layer number
= Interval number
= Number of layers
= Number of equations to solve (n+1)
=
Reference pressure at
= Fracture pressure in layer i
= Reference rate
= Injection rate into layer i
= Inlet injection rate
= Total injection rate (Eqn. (B-3))
= cross-sectional velocity
= mechanical work
= Variables
= Depth to center of layer i
= Reference depth
=
Matrix coefficients,
=
Matrix function,
E v
)
f
g
i
j
n
N
P
0
z
0
P
f i ,
Q
0
Q
i
Q
in
Q
t
v ( )
W
)
x
i
z
i
z
0
o
ij
cf
i
cx
j
|
i
f
i

B.5 References 635
Superscripts
Subscripts
B.5 References
1. Elbel, J. L., Piggott, A. R., and Mack, M.G.: Numerical Modeling of Multi-
layer Fracture Treatments, paper SPE 23982 presented at the 1992 SPE Perm-
= Pressure difference
= Change in potential energy
= Variable correction
= Function partial derivative
= Minimum horizontal stress in layer i
= Reference pressure/stress
= Density
new = New or current value
old = Old value
= Vector
1 = Reference point 1
2 = Reference point 2
f = Fracture
i = Fracture layer number
j = Interval number
l = Loss
h = Gravitational head
NW = Total near wellbore
perf = Perforations
AP
Au
cx
cf cx
o
i
o
0

ian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, March 18-20,
1992.
2. Bird, R. B., Stewart, W.E., and Lightfoot, E. N.: Transport Phenomena,
Wiley, New York, 1960.
3. Press, W.H. et al.: Numerical Recipes.., Cambridge University Press, New
York, 1988.
Appendix C
Multiple Fractures
C.1 Introduction
Multiple fractures refers to the condition when more than one fracture is created in
the same zone. This is not the same as multilayer or limited entry fracturing which
initiate fractures in different zones. Consequently, multiple zones can create multi-
layer fractures with each having their own system of multiple fractures. Also, mul-
tiple fractures may or may not be parallel to one another.
A definition of multiple fractures as implemented in MFrac is necessary because of
the general misconception of what they are and how they are modeled. Multiple
fractures can occur in two regions, the near wellbore and far field. Each has a
unique impact on the fracture geometry and pressure response.
Near wellbore multiple parallel fractures occur near the wellbore. They have been
referred to as tortuosity (or a result of tortuosity), multiple fractures, initiation frac-
tures non-perpendicular to the minimum horizontal stress, etc. Many times the
cause of excess Net Pressure is postulated to be multiple fractures.
Whether near wellbore pressure loss is a result of perforations, tortuosity, multiple
fractures, fracture initiation or some other form of viscous dissipation, it can be
modeled as a near wellbore pressure loss function. This near wellbore pressure loss
has been modeled by some using the Multiple Parallel Fracture approach. In
MFrac, near wellbore pressure losses are entered into a table as a function of time
and rate, since they are not known a priori.
Only the far field multiple fractures are modeled as a fracture system in MFrac.
These fractures may propagate parallel to one another or spread out in a dendritic
(tree like or radial) pattern from the wellbore. These multiple far field fractures may
or may not interact.
638 Multiple Fractures:
Although, MFrac provides a number of options for modeling multiple fractures, we
do not believe they should be used as a general methodology for increasing net
pressure. This is discussed in greater detail below. These options should be used
with care based on sound engineering judgment.
For completeness, the governing equations for far field and near wellbore multiple
fractures are presented.
C.2 Far Field - Multiple Fractures
This section presents a set of constitutive equations describing multiple fractures in
the far field (away from the near wellbore). The basic premise is that there are N
multiple (parallel or dendritic) fractures which may or may not interact. To model
this phenomena (if it exists) we assume that the multiple fracture system consists of
a set of N similar fractures.
Governing Equations
Following are a set of governing momentum, conservation and constitutive equa-
tions to model multiple fractures in the far field (and near wellbore region). These
constitutive relationships have been integrated into our general fracture simulator
MFrac.
Interaction Factors
The governing constitutive relationships for the interaction factors and degree of
interactions used in modeling multiple fractures are given below.
Multiple fractures can be modeled independently for each multilayer fracture. To
allow for interaction between multiple fractures, interaction factors are introduced
for the flow rate, stiffness (elastic) and fluid loss. The individual fracture interac-
tion factors and degrees of interaction are
Flow Rate
where
Q Q
i q T
= +

(C-1)
C.2 Far Field - Multiple Fractures 639
Stiffness
where
Fluid Loss
where
The interaction functions and degrees of interaction are given by and , respec-
tively. The degrees of interaction are the values input into the program. The indi-
vidual fracture properties and parameters are identified by the subscript . The total
value for fractures is given by the subscript .
The degrees of interaction for stiffness and fluid loss are functions of the formation
properties and relative position of the multiple fracture system. For non-interacting
fractures, the degrees of interaction for stiffness and fluid loss are zero. If the
fractures are fully interacting (competing for the same space and leakoff area), the
values are equal to unity.
The generalized momentum equation for N multiple fractures in laminar or turbu-
lent flow is
+
q
= 1/ N
E E
i E
= +
0

(C-2)
+ u
E E
N = + ( ) 1 1
V V N
i T
= /

(C-3)
V V
N N
T l
l l
=
= +
+
+ u
0
1 ( )
+ u
u
i
N T
u
u
where
is the Darcy friction factor, is the Reynolds number and is the flux per unit
length.
Width-Opening Pressure
The crack-opening and opening pressure relationship is
where
C.3 Discussion
Multiple parallel fractures have been used as a mechanism in the industry to
increase fracture net pressure. The paradox here is: why would mother nature create
multiple far field fractures at an energy level (pressure) that is higher than what a
= generalized influence function
= stiffness interaction factor
= characteristic half-height
= fracture width
=
opening pressure,

V = P f q W 1 2
3
/ /

(C-4)
f
f f
q
q Q N
k
q
W
k k
n
n
a
q q
a a
n
a
n
=
=
= =
=
|
\
|
.
|
|
=
+ |
\
|
.
|
24
1
6
2 1
3
2
1
/ Re;
(Re);
Re ; ; /
;
'
'
'
'
'
laminar flow
turbulent Flow

+ +
f Re q
W
G
H P
W
E
=

I
+
A
2 1 ( ) v

(C-5)
I
W
+
E
H
W
AP
P
f
o
C.3 Discussion 641
single fracture requires? This, of course, assumes that multiple fractures always
interact to be at a higher pressure state (which certainly is not always true).
Although multiple fractures surely exist in nature, they are not the norm for general
hydraulic fracturing treatments.
The above set of equations have been fully integrated into MFrac which account for
the coupled effects of stiffness, fluid loss and flow rate interactions.
Net Pressure for Multiple Fractures
To illustrate the effect of the degree of interaction on net pressure, a simple formu-
lation is presented for two-dimensional type models. This analysis clearly illus-
trates, in a simple format, why net pressure may increase or decrease with an
increasing number of multiple fractures depending on the degree of interaction.
The net pressure for a single fracture from conservation of mass and momentum
can be expressed in the form:
Viscous Dominated
AP E Q
E
q
o
o

(C-6)

PKN:
q o o
q o o
= =
+
+
=
+
+
= =
+
+
=
1
2 2
2 3
1
2 3
0
2 1
2 2
1
2
: ;
: ;
'
'
'
'
'
'
,
,
E q
E q
n
n
n
n
n
n

GDK & Penny:
q o o
q o o
= =
+
+
=
= =
+
+
=

+
1
1
2
0
0
2 1
2 2 2 2
: ;
: ;
'
'
'
'
'
'
,
,
E q
E q
n
n
n
n
n
n

Toughness Dominated
Constant Critical Stress
The net pressure for a N multiple parallel fractures is
where
Net Pressure Ratio
The ratio of the net pressure for N multiple fractures ( ) to a single fracture
( ) from Eqn. (C-7) is
PKN:
o o
E q
= = 0 0 , ;

GDK:
o o
E q
= = 1 3 1 3 / / ; ,

Penny:
o o
E q
= = 1 5 1 5 / / ; ,

All Models:
o o
E q
= = 0 0 , ;

A + + P E Q
N E q
E
q
( ) ( )
o
o

(C-7)
+ u
+
E E
q
N
N
= +
=
( )
/
1 1
1
AP
N
AP
o
o
p
N
E
P
P
N
N
E
q
=
+
A
A
u

( ) 1 1

(C-8)
C.3 Discussion 643
The condition for equivalent multiple and single fracture net pressures ( ) is
where
The range of beta values is
Viscous Dominated
Toughness Dominated
Constant Critical Stress
+
p
u
E p
N
N
( )
|
= =

1
1
1

(C-9)
| o o =
q E
/
PKN:
q |
q |
= =
= =
+
+
1 1 2
0
1
2 1
: / ;
: ;
'
'

n
n

GDK & Penny:
q |
q |
= =
= =
+
1 0
0
2 2
: ;
:
'
'

;
n
n

PKN:
| = = 0 0 1 , u
E

GDK:
| = = 1 1 , ; u
E

All Models:
| = = 0 1 , ; u
E

Figure C.1 shows as a function of the degree of interaction and number of frac-
tures for the PKN model ( and ). As illustrated, for interacting frac-
tures the net pressure ratio increases. However, for non-interacting fractures the net
pressure decreases. The required degree of stiffness interaction to maintain the
same net pressure as a single fracture is given by Eqn. (C-9) and represented by a
horizontal line with a value of unity.
Figure C.1: Net Pressure Ratio for Multiple Fractures (PKN Model).
The above analytical analysis can also be extended to include the degree of fluid
loss interaction. This presentation illustrates that multiple fractures do not necessar-
ily always increase fracture net pressure.
C.4 Near Wellbore - Multiple Fractures
A set of equations is presented to illustrate the concept of multiple fractures (tortu-
osity) in the near wellbore region. This formulation is non-unique and cannot quan-
tify the number or physical characteristics of multiple fractures in the near well
region. The details of this formulation are only useful in modeling phenomena
related to increased near wellbore pressure loss or dissipation.
Figure C.2 shows a schematic of the near wellbore multiple fracture network. Here
is the length, is the height, and is the width of each near wellbore fracture
+
p
q 1 = n' 0.5 =
L
T
H W
C.4 Near Wellbore - Multiple Fractures 645
Figure C.2: Schematic of Near Wellbore Multiple Fractures.
Governing Equations
A set of governing momentum conservation and constitutive equations are pre-
sented to model multiple fractures in the near wellbore region. This formulation is
based on a simplistic analysis to illustrate the general form of dissipation.
The momentum equation for N multiple fractures in the near wellbore region from
Eqn. (C-4) is
Laminar Flow
A
+
P
Q
H
W L
T
q
n
n
T
=
|
\
|
.
|
+

'
'
( ) 2 1

(C-10)
Turbulent Flow
where
The crack-opening and opening pressure relationships from Eqn. (C-6) for the
GDK and PKN type two-dimensional models are
where
Near Wellbore Pressure Loss
The near wellbore pressure loss due to multiple fractures (or tortuosity) is found by
substituting the constitutive relations for width-opening pressure into the momen-
tum equation (Eqns. (C-1) to (C-5)). To maximize the near wellbore pressure loss,
=
=
= flow rate into one-wing
= number of multiple fractures
=
A
+
P f
Q
H
W L
T
q
T
=
|
\
|
.
|

1 2
2
3
/
(C-11)
2 6
n
- k
a
I
f
+
q
1 N
Q
N
AP
T
VPL
T
GDK: W
L P
E
T
E
=
A
+
'

(C-12)
PKN: W
H P
E
E
=
A
+ 2
'

(C-13)
E
G
'
) )
=
2(1-
E
4(1- v v
2
C.4 Near Wellbore - Multiple Fractures 647
it will also be assumed that the near wellbore fractures are fully interacting (com-
peting for the same space):
GDK Model
PKN Model
General Near Wellbore Dissipation Function
The general form of the near wellbore dissipation function is
(C-18)
where is a time dependent proportionality constant and is the power
coefficient.
This formulation for near wellbore pressure loss can be used for perforation fric-
tion, tortuosity, near wellbore multiple fractures or any other near wellbore effect
that is a result of friction dissipation.
The coefficients for the near wellbore pressure loss are usually based on analyzing
the measured BHP and rate data. This technique works best if a number of substan-
tial rate and BHP changes occur during the job. MFrac has a built in automatic fea-
Laminar
Flow:
A
A
P
Q N
L H
NE
P
T
T
n n
=
|
\
|
.
|
|
\
|
.
|
+

/
' '
'
( )
2
2 1

(C-14)
Turbulent
Flow:
A
A
P f
Q N
L H
NE
P
T
T
=
|
\
|
.
|
|
\
|
.
| 1 2
2
2 3
/
/
'
(C-15)
Laminar
Flow:
A
A
P
Q N
H
NE
P
L
H
T
n
n
T
=
|
\
|
.
|
|
\
|
.
|
+

/
'
'
'
( )
3
2 1
2

(C-16)
Turbulent
Flow:
A
A
P f
Q N
H
NE
P
L
H
T
T
=
|
\
|
.
|
|
\
|
.
| 1 2
2
3
2
3
/
/
'

(C-17)
AP t ( ) K t ( )Q t ( )
o t ( )
=
K t ( ) o t ( )
ture to perform the necessary regression analysis to determine and as
piece wise continuous functions of time. Currently, the analysis regresses to find
the best fit a coefficient for the entire time cycle.
Since is a coefficient that is not readily associated with pressure loss, it is con-
venient to transform Eqn. (C-18) so that it can be easily represented in tabular data.
The pressure loss as a function of flow rate for a given time is
(C-19)
where
The near wellbore pressure loss methodology is summarized in Figure C.3 and Fig-
ure C.4
.
Figure C.3: Near Wellbore Pressure Function.
= pressure drop at time and rate,
=
table pressure drop at time and rate
= injection rate at time
= table rate at time
= simulation time
K t ( ) o t ( )
K t ( )
AP AP
i
Q
Q
i
-----
\ .
| |
o
i
=
AP t Q
AP
i
t Q
i
Q t
Q
i
t
t
C.5 Conclusions 649

Figure C.4: Near Wellbore Pressure Loss Analysis.
C.5 Conclusions
1. Far field multiple fractures can be modeled using the interaction factors given
in Eqns. (C-1) through (C-3). These fractures can be parallel or dendritic and
may or may not be interacting.
2. Far field multiple fractures may not result in a net pressure increase, depending
on their degree of interaction (see Figure C.1).
3. Near wellbore pressure loss is some function of rate and the total number of
near wellbore multiple fractures ( ). This resulting rela-
tionship clearly matches observed field measurements and intuition. The
power coefficient can range from less than unity for laminar flow to a value of
about two for turbulent flow.
4. Clearly, Eqns. (C-14) to (C-17) cannot describe near wellbore tortuosity quan-
titatively. Certainly, the number of multiple fractures or tortuous path length
cannot be inferred.
AP t ( ) K t ( )Q t ( )
o t ( )
=
o t ( )
Appendix D
Fluid Loss
D.1 Introduction
Fluid loss from the fracture to the formation is modeled by two mechanisms 1)
leakoff and 2) spurt loss. These leakoff and spurt loss coefficients are discussed
below.
D.2 Leakoff
The rate of fluid loss to the formation is governed by the total leakoff coefficient,
. The three types of flow resistance mechanisms making up are: 1)

- Leak-
off viscosity and relative permeability effects, 2) - reservoir viscosity and com-
pressibility effects and 3) - wall building effects.
The fluid loss model options include specifying the total leakoff coefficient (Con-
stant Model) or the coefficient and the components which comprise and C
II
(Harmonic or Dynamic Models). A detailed description of the components charac-
terizing the Harmonic and Dynamic models is given below.
If a Constant leakoff model is selected, the total leakoff coefficient, , is entered in
the Fluid Loss Data screen. The total leakoff and spurt loss coefficients are then
input as a function of depth to characterize fluid loss in the fracture at different
intervals.
When either the Harmonic or Dynamic models are chosen, the filter cake coeffi-
cient ( ) and reservoir diffusivity parameters must be input in the Fluid Loss
Data screen for each layer. The and coefficients are then calculated from the
C C C
I
C
II
C
III
C
III
C
I
C
C
III
C
I
C
II
652 Fluid Loss:
input reservoir data and fracture propagation characteristics. The total leakoff coef-
ficient is calculated internally from the individual components as a function of dif-
ferential pressure.
C - Total Leakoff Coefficient
The weighting of the individual leakoff coefficients for the Harmonic and Dynamic
models is shown below:
C
I
- Coefficient
The or coefficient is used to simulate the effects of the fracturing fluid fil-
trate viscosity and relative permeability. It is calculated from the following relation-
ship:
where
=
viscosity control coefficient,
= differential leakoff pressure, psi
= effective frac fluid filtrate permeability, darcy
= porosity
= effective viscosity of fracturing fluid filtrate, cp
Harmonic:
) (
) (
C
C C C
C C C C C C
I II III
I II II III I III
=
+ +

(D-1)
Dynamic:
( ) ( )
| |
C
C C C
C C C C C C C
I II III
I III I III II I III
=
+ + +
2
4
2
2 2 2

(D-2)
C
I
C
v
C C 0.0469
K p
I v
f
f
= =
A |

(D-3)
C
I ft min
Ap
K
f
|
f
D.2 Leakoff 653
C
II
- Coefficient
The reservoir fluid viscosity and compressibility effects are modeled using the
or coefficient:
where
C
III
- Coefficient
The wall building or filter cake coefficient ( ) represent the inverse of frac
fluid leakoff resistance through the filter cake. A value of zero (0.0) represents an
infinite filter cake resistance while a value of infinity (i.e., )
represents no wall building effect. The wall building mechanism is calculated from
laboratory data as follows:
where
=
compressibility control coefficient,
= differential leakoff pressure, psi
= reservoir permeability to reservoir fluid, darcy
= total formation compressibility, 1/psi
= reservoir fluid viscosity, cp
=
wall building coefficient,
=
cross-sectional area, cm
2
=
slope of volume versus square-root of time plot, ml/min
1/2
C
II
C
c
C C 0.0374 p
k c
II c
r t
r
= = A
|

(D-4)
C
II ft min
Ap
k
r
c
|
r
C
III
C
w
C
III
C
III
100 ft/min
1 2
>
C C
0.0164m
A
III w
= =
(D-5)
C
III ft min
A
m
654 Fluid Loss:
D.3 Spurt Loss
that occurs prior to the development of a filter cake. Generally, spurt loss occurs
only in the pad volume. However, if the spurt time constant is of the same order as
the pump time, modeling spurt loss as instant mechanism (i.e., linear leakoff) can
result in inadequate modeling of the total fluid loss and fluid loss during closure
(pressure decline) (See SPE Monograph Volume 12, Recent Advances in Hydraulic
Fracturing, page 158-174).
The total fluid loss due to spurt is
where
For multilayer leakoff the spurt loss is calculated separately in each layer.
The value of the spurt loss coefficient is usually determined from the same labora-
tory procedures used to measure the Wall Building Coefficient (see Figure D.1).
The spurt in units of volume per unit area is equal to the vertical intercept from the
projection of the final slope, shown in Figure D.2, divided by the cross-sectional
area of the core or filter paper used
For more information about the fluid leakoff models refer to SPE Monograph
Volume 12, Chapter 8.
= leakoff area (both wings)
= spurt loss coefficient
= leakoff volume due to spurt
V S A
sp p
= 2
(D-6)
A
S
p
V
sp
D.3 Spurt Loss 655
.
Figure D.1: Laboratory Apparatus.
Figure D.2: Laboratory Procedure for determining the Wall Building
Coefficient and Spurt Loss of a Fluid.
656 Fluid Loss:
Appendix E
Wellbore Friction Factor
E.1 Introduction
The wellbore friction factor is used to determine the energy dissipation (pressure
loss) in the wellbore when the Empirical option is specified. The Empirical option
is an internal correlation for calculating the frictional pressure loss of Newtonian
and non-Newtonian fluids. This option provides a combined correlation that is
applicable for a variety of fluids ranging from linear systems to highly non-Newto-
nian and viscoelastic fluids that exhibit drag reduction due to slip or shear thinning
during turbulent flow.
E.2 Friction Factor Model
Three distinct types of behavior are possible with the combined correlation used in
MFrac. These behaviors, summarized in the explicit expressions for the Fanning
friction factor outlined below, are given in Table E.1.
Table E.1: Fanning Friction Factors
1

2
3
1
f
----- 19 Re
s
f ( ) log 32.4 =
1
f
----- A Re
s
f ( ) log B + =
1
f
----- 4 Re
s
f ( ) log 0.4 =
658 Wellbore Friction Factor:
Through an iterative process, MFrac determines which correlation is most applica-
ble in determining the friction factor. The criteria are based on the argument that
will always be greater than the Prandtl-Karman Law (lower bound) and less
than Virk's maximum drag reduction asymptote (upper bound). Therefore, when the
transitional correlation developed by Keck, et al.
2
reaches either the upper or lower
bound, it is automatically adjusted as shown in Figure E.1 to meet the above crite-
ria.

Figure E.1: MFrac Pipe Friction Empirical Correlations.
When pipe roughness is included, by entering a value for the Relative Pipe Rough-
ness in one of the Wellbore Hydraulics dialog boxes, the expression for friction fac-
tor based on Prandtl's Universal Law is modified. An example of the modified
correlation containing this additional parameter is shown below:
(E-1)
where
=
=
= hydraulic diameter
= fanning friction factor
= flow behavior index
= Reynolds number of solvent (e.g., water)
= absolute pipe roughness
1 f
1
f
----- 4 Re
s
f ( ) 0.4 A 0.2c
e
Re
s
f 1 + ( ) log log =
A
14.9n'
1.6
d
0.13
B
53.9 n'
1.9
d
0.27
d
f
n'
Re
s
o
E.2 Friction Factor Model 659
To include the effects of proppant concentration on friction, the program also has a
built in correlation for slurry rheology. The relationship used, originally described
by Keck, et al., is
(E-2)
where
For laminar flow the Friction Factor Multiplier, , for proppant-laden fluids is
equal to the value of . For proppant-laden fluids in turbulent flow, the expression
shown below is used to estimate the effect of proppant on pipe friction:
(E-3)
and
(E-4)
where
= relative pipe roughness,
The effect of pipe wall roughness is not applicable for Virks or Kecks correla-
tions because, by definition, they assume slip at the boundary.
= base density
=
= slurry density
c
e
o d
r
1 0.75 e
1.5n'
1 ( )e
1 n' ( ) 1000
| |
1.25|
1 1.5|
------------------- +
\ .
| |
2
=
r
n'
|
M
r
M
f

r
0.55
r
0.45
=
f
s
M
f
f
b
=
M
f
r

r

s

b
=
r
f
b
f
s
660 Wellbore Friction Factor:
E.3 References
1. Virk, P.S.: Drag Reduction Fundamentals, AIChE Journal, Vol. 21, No. 4,
July 1975.
2. Keck, R. et al.: A New Method for Predicting Friction Pressures and Rheol-
ogy of Proppant Laden Fracturing Fluids, SPE Production Engineering, Feb.
1992.
Appendix F
Minifrac Methodology
F.1 Introduction
Minifrac analysis provides a method of estimating fracture efficiency, closure pres-
sure, dimensions and leakoff coefficients prior to designing a full scale fracture
treatment. These type of analyses, as originally formulated by Nolte
1-5
quantify the
fracturing process as estimated from the measured pressure decline data.
Most minifrac analyses are based on Nolte's equations and do not account for the
effects of fluid rheology or the conservation of momentum. The measured pressure
decline data is simply used in place of solving the momentum equation. Neglecting
momentum can result in unrealistic estimations of fracture characteristics and fluid
leakoff coefficients that are critical to the design of the main fracture treatment.
Up until 1987, only the width-opening pressure relationship and pressure decline
data were used to estimate minifrac characteristics. Lee
6
has recently improved
upon this by including Biot's energy balance equation for two-dimensional type
fractures geometry models.
The energy balance method does eliminate some of the anomalies in minifrac anal-
ysis. However, this method does not fully account for viscous driven fractures.
A new minifrac methodology was reported by Meyer and Hagel
7-8
which solves the
conservation of mass and momentum equations for power law type fluids. The
methodology utilizes 2-D fracture propagation equations-of-state. The solution
technique does not assume the fracture width is proportional to the measured pres-
sure. Instead, the governing mass and momentum equations are coupled with the
measured closure time to predict fracture propagation characteristics. From the
numerically simulated fracture geometry's, pressures, efficiencies and leakoff coef-
662 Minifrac Methodology:
ficients, you can determine which fracture model more closely represents the mea-
sure pressure response and formation permeability.
The main advantage of this technique is that mass and momentum are both satis-
fied. In addition, the important effects of flowback, interference closure, time
dependent leakoff and fluid rheology are simulated.
The numerical results are used in conjunction with the measured pressure decline
data to history match a number of fracture characteristics such as fracture height,
pay zone height, Young's modulus and spurt loss. Closure time can also be more
accurately estimated from these parametric studies.
F.2 Governing Equations
The equations of mass conservation, continuity, width-opening pressure, momen-
tum and constitutive relationships for fracture propagation models are formulated
based on the methodology of Meyer
9-11
. Refer to these references and Appendix A
for a detailed description of the model assumptions and solution technique. A sum-
mary of the formulated equations is presented below.
Conservation of Momentum
The momentum equations for power law fluids in 2-D and 3-D type fracture geom-
etries simplified by order-of-magnitude analysis are shown below:
x-component:
z-component:
Since the leakoff velocity perpendicular to the fracture face is an order-of-magni-
tude less than the velocity of the fracture, the y-component of the momentum equa-
tion reduces to .
c
c
P
x
K q
H
W x t
a
f x
n
=
|
\
|
.
|
' +
2 6
0
2 1
I
I
( , , )
( )

(F-1)
c
c

P
z
K
q
H
W z t
a
f z
n
=
|
\
|
.
|
'+
2
6
0
2 1
( , , )
( )
(F-2)
cP cy 0 =
F.2 Governing Equations 663
The z-component of the momentum equation is required for 3-D type fractures. For
radial or ellipsoidal fractures an equation similar to Eqn. (F-1) in radial coordinates
is used.
Equations (F-1) and (F-2) are generalized momentum equations used in the mini-
frac analysis. The minifrac solution methodology, however, is applicable with any
set of fracture propagation relationships.
The width-opening pressure and width profile for GDK, PKN and radial type frac-
tures are
GDK:
PKN:
Radial:
where and are the fracture widths at any position or
. The maximum wellbore widths are given by and .

and

W t
G
L t P t
W t W t
W
( , )
( )
( ) ( , )
( , ) ( , )( )
0
2 1
0
0 1
0
2
1
2
=

=

A

and

W x t
G
H P x t
W t W t
W
W
( , , )
( )
( , )
( , , ) ( , , )( )
0
2 1
0 0 0 1
0
=

=
I
A
I

(F-4)

and

W t
G
R t P t
W t W t
W
( , )
( )
( ) ( , )
( , ) ( , )( )
0
2 1
0
0 1
0
2
1
2
=

=

A

(F-5)
W t , ( ) W 0 t , , ( ) x L t ( ) =
r R t ( ) = W 0 t , ( ) W 0 0 t , , ( )
Fracture Propagation Solution
The momentum, mass conservation and width-opening equations are simplified by
the following transformations:
to form a set of equations in terms of the alpha parameters. The transformed equa-
tions are then solved simultaneously to determine the fracture propagation charac-
teristics.
The length, width, pressure and area propagation alpha parameters for a constant
injection rate and no spurt are
GDK:
PKN:
o o
o o
o
L w
a c
p
t
L t
dL t
dt
t
W t
dW t
dt
t
A t
dA t
dt
t
C t
dC t
dt
t
P t
d P t
dt

( )
( )
( , )
( , )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( , )
( , )
;
;

0
0
0
0
A
A

(F-6)
o
q o q
q
o o
o o o o
o o
o o
L
c
w L
p w L L
a L
L c
n
n
n
n n
=
' + +
' + +
= ' +
= = ' ' +
=
< < =
( )( ( ))
( )
( )
( )
.
1 1 2 1
2 1
1
1
1 2 2 3 0
-

where for

(F-7)
o
q o q
q
o o
o o
o o
o o
L
c
w L
p w
a L
L c
n
n
n
=
' + +
' + +
= ' +
=
=
< < =
( )( ( ))
( )
.
1 1 2 1
2 2
2 2
1 2 4 5 0

where for

(F-8)
Radial:
For radial shaped fractures, the radius propagation parameter is equal to .
Leakoff is also only assumed to occur in the pay zone.
The leakoff coefficient alpha parameter is a measure of the time dependent fluid
loss. If the total leakoff coefficient is only a function of the fluid loss, then
where is a constant which ranges from zero (0) to unity (1). If the net fracturing
pressure, , is much less than the difference between the minimum horizontal
stress and the reservoir pressure , is equal to zero. If the net pressure is much
greater than , is equal to 1/2 and 1 for dominant and resistance, respec-
tively.
Mass Conservation
The total system mass balance for an incompressible slurry requires that the total
volume of slurry injected minus the volume of slurry in the fracture and the volume
of fluid loss to the formation by leakoff and spurt loss be equal to zero:
o
q o q
q c q
o q o
o o o o
o c o
c
c
o
o o o
L
c
r
w L
p w L L
a r L
r p
r p
c
L a L p
n
n n n
n
n n
R H
R H
R H
=
' + +
' + + ' + + ' +
= ' +
= = ' ' +
= +
= <
= >>
=
< < = <
( )( ( ))
( ) ( )( )
( ) ( )
( )
( )
):
1 1 2 1
2 2 4 2 2 1
2 2 2
3 2 2
1
1 2
0 2
0
1 4 4 9 2 2
;
;
where (for
and ;
and ; 1 3 1 2 2 < < = >> o o o
L a L p
R H

(F-9)
o
R
o
L
o
c
o c o
c
=
p p
(F-10)
o
p
AP
AP
l
AP
l
C
I
C
II
q d V t V t V t
f l sp
t
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) t t =
}
0
0
(F-11)
where
and

is equal to 1/2 for square-root fluid loss. The equivalent leakoff coefficient
is given by .
Equation (F-11) is applicable throughout the fracturing process and from shut-in to
closure. Since spurt is an instantaneous loss of fluid occurring when an element of
fracture leakoff area is initially created, spurt loss will not occur during closure, as
long as the fracture stops propagating.
The total leakoff area, , (one face of the fracture only) for the 2-D and radial
shaped fractures is
2-D:
Radial:
where leakoff only occurs in the pay zone, .
Fluid Loss During Pumping
The total volume of fluid loss due to leakoff (excluding spurt loss) from Eqn. (F-
12) is
| |
| |
V t
C
t A
dAdt
V t S A t
A t A A t
l
e
A t
sp p
a
( )
( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
=
=
=
} }
2
2
0 0
1
t
t
o
o
t

(F-12)
o
t
C
e
A t ( )
A t H L t
p
( ) ( ) =
(F-13)
A t R t R t H
p
( ) ( ) ; ( ) = s
t
2
2
2

(F-14)
A t H R t R t H
p p
( ) ( ) ; ( ) = >>
2
2
(F-15)
H
p
where
and is the gamma function. For and , is equal to unity. The
leakoff scale constant is equal to one if .
The total leakoff coefficient is the instantaneous time dependent value. For a
constant leakoff coefficient independent of time and pressure, is equal to zero.
The range of values for 2-D and radial models is
GDK:
PKN:
Radial:
The above coefficients are based on a constant leakoff coefficient
( ).
( )
V t
C A d
d
C t A t t
l
e
t
a c
a
( )
( )
( ) ( ) ( , )
=
=
} }
2
1
0 1 0
1

t o o
o
o
o
t t
u

(F-16)
( )
o o
| |
| o o
o o o o |
o o u o o o o
u o o

o
t
o o
o
t
o
o
t
=
= =
=
= + +
=
= + +
=

}
1 2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2 1
2
1 0
1
c
e c p p c
p p
c c c
a c a c c
a c a c a c
a c
a
C C t t C t t
C t C t t t
d
c c
c
a
( )( ) ( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( , ) ( , )
( , ) ( , ) ( )
( , )
(
I I I
u
I

+ +
+ +
1
1
2
1
2
) ( )
( )
I
I
o
o o
c
a c

I o
a
1 2 = o
c
0 =
|
c
o
c
0 =
C t ( )
o
c
u o
a
0 , ( )
09411 u o
a
0 , ( ) 1 s <
0.9008 u o (
a
0) 1 s , <
1 u o (
a
0) 1.0713 R t ( ) ; < , s H
p
2 <
0.8760 u o
a
0 , ( ) 1 R t ( ) H
p
2 ; s s
u o
a
0 , ( )
o
c
0 =
Mass Conservation After Shut-In
After pumping, the fracture is assumed stop propagating. The fluid loss volume
after shut-in, from Eqn. (F-12) is
(F-17)
where
(F-18)
During closure, square-root fluid loss with a variable leakoff coefficient is
assumed. This assumption is generally accurate enough for engineering purposes
and flexible enough for modeling most leakoff situations during shut-in. Although
other non-square-root forms of Eqn. (F-17) may be more rigorous mathematically,
they result in incomplete beta functions and can only be evaluated for a limited
number of o
a
o
t
and o
c2
values.
The effective leakoff coefficient is the time dependent value during shut-in.
is equal to at the end of pumping where is a constant. The
leakoff alpha parameter after pumping is negative for a decreasing coefficient
with time. Typically, ranges from 0 to -1/2.
The dimensionless total time is defined as
where is the Nolte shut-in time .
AV
i
| |
2 2
2
1
2
) , , ( ) ( ) ( 2
) (
2 ) (
0 0
c c a p p p
t A
e
l
G t t A t C
dAdt
A t
C
t V
| u o o
t
=

=
} }
( )
2
2
2
2
1
2 2
) )( (
1
) , , (
1 0 1
c p p e
c c a
c
a
a
c a
t t t C C
d
d
G
|
| u o o
o
u
o
o o
o
=

=
} }

+
C
e
2
C
e
2
C t
p
( ) ( ) |
c
2
|
c
2
o
c
2
o
c
2
u
u
= +
t t
t
p
D
1

(F-19)
t
D
t
D
t t
p
1 =
Eqn. (F-18) is a function of the incomplete beta function and, therefore, is only ana-
lytically integratable for specific values of and . functions for various val-
ues of and are given below.
(F-20)
Although, is similar to Nolte's function, it is evaluated at
and rather than at fracture efficiency. The relationship between the Nolte
G
Nolte
and the Meyer function is
Since is reported for a number of different and values, other
functions can easily be interpolated by fitting a cubic spline
through the analytic formulae in Eqn. (F-20). Because is nearly
linear in , the following expression is a good approximation:
o
a
o
c
2
o
a
o
c
2
{ }
{ }
{ }
{ }
+
+ + +
= +
+ =
+ + =
+ + = +
=
+ + =
+ + + + = +
+ =
+ + =
+ =
=
+
) 2 3 2 ( ) ( ) 1 ) ( 2 2 ( 16 3
) 1 ( 8 3 1
9
8
) , , 2 (
) 1 )( 2 3 ( 1
15
16
) , 0 , 2 (
) 2 1 ( ) ( ) 1 ( 2 3 1
3
4
) , , 2 (
) 2 1 ( ) ( ) 1 ( 2 1 ) , , 1 (
) ) 1 ( 1 (
3
4
) , 0 , 1 (
) ( ) 1 ( 1 2 ) , , 1 (
( ) 1 ( 2
3
1
) , , (
2 ) 1 ( ) , 0 , (
) 1 ( 2 2 ) , , (
) 2 1 ( ) 1 ( ) , , 0 (
) , , 0 (
2 1 2 2 1 2
2 1 3
2
1
2 3 2 5
2 1 2 2 1 2
2
1
2 1 2 2 1 2
2
1
2 3 2 3
2 1 2 2 1
2
1
2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 3
2
1
2
1
2 1 2 1
2
1
2 1 2 1 2 1
2
1
2
1
2 1
2
1
2
2
2
u u u u u u
u u u
u
u u u u
u u u u u u u
u u u u u u u
u u u
u u u u u u
t u u u u u u u
t u u u u
t u u u u u
o u u o
u u
o
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
c c
e
Log
Log
G
G
Log G
Log G
G
Log G
Log Arcsin G
Arcsin G
Log Arcsin G
G
Log G
c

) , , (
2
u o o
c a
G
) (
D
t G
o
a
o
c
2
G
G G
a Nolte
( , , ) o u
t
0
4
=

(F-21)
G o
a
o
c
2
) , , (
2
u o o
c a
G
) , , (
2
u o o
c a
G
o
a

Figure F.1 shows the function for various values of with
. Generally, and bound the range of expected
values. The bounds of G are shown to differ by less than about ten
percent (see also Nolte
13
). Figure F.1 also illustrates that is approxi-
mately a linear function of for all values. This result can be used by plot-
ting pressure decline data as a function of for estimating closure time as
discussed below.
Figure F.1: Fluid Loss Function - Constant Leakoff.
Figure F.2 shows as a function of for three values of . As
illustrated for an increasing leakoff coefficient , the fluid loss rate
{ }{ } G G G
G
a c c c a
c
( , , ) ( , , ) ( , , )
( , , )
o o u o u o u o
o u
2 2 2
2
1 2 1
1
2
1
2
~
+

(F-22)
) , , (
2
u o o
c a
G
o
a
o
c
2
0 = ) , 0 , (
2
1
u G ) , 0 , 1 ( u G
) , 0 , ( u o
a
G
) , 0 , ( u o
a
G
2
1
u
a
o
2
1
u
) , , (
2
2
1
u o
c
G
u
2
c
o
) 2 1 (
2
+ =
c
o
increases; whereas, for a decreasing leakoff coefficient with time ,
the fluid loss rate decreases. Consequently, the effect of a pressure dependent leak-
off coefficient can be a major factor in modeling fluid loss during shut-in.
Figure F.2, also illustrates that the fluid loss volume function is
not a linear function of if is not zero. This non-linear effect can result in errone-
ous estimation of the closure time and minimization of an inflection point at clo-
sure.
Figure F.2: Fluid Loss function - Time Dependent Leakoff.
Minifrac Closure Equations
Mass conservation during shut-in (Eqn. (F-11)) requires that the fracture volume
during shut-in be equal to the fracture volume at the end of pumping
minus the volume of fluid loss after pumping due to leakoff and
flowback :
o
c
2
1 2 =
) , , (
2
u o o
c a
G
) , , 2 1 (
2
u o
a
G
) (t V
f
) (
p f
t V
l
V A
) (t V
fb
The flowback volume is given by
where is the flowback rate and is the time when flowback is initiated
. For a constant flowback rate:
The fracture volume at the end of pumping is
where is the fracture efficiency at the end of pumping and is the average
pumping rate.
From mass conservation the total fluid loss by leakoff (excluding spurt loss) at the
end of pumping is
The ratio of fluid loss by leakoff to the fracture volume at the end of pumping from
Eqns. (F-27) and (F-26) is
V t V t V t V t
f f p l fb
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) = A (F-23)
V t q d
fb fb
t
t
fb
( ) ( ) =
}
t t
(F-24)
fb
q
fb
t
) (
c fb p
t t t s
s
fb fb fb
fb fb
t t t t q
t t t V
> =
s =
; ) (
; 0 ) (

(F-25)
V t q t
f p o p
( ) = q (F-26)
q
o
q
V t q t V t
l p o p sp p
( ) ( ) ( ) = 1 q (F-27)
V t
V t
l p
f p
( )
( )
=

-
-
1 q
q

(F-28)
where is the fracture efficiency after spurt loss. This efficiency is defined as
The ratio of fluid loss during shut-in and fluid loss volume at the end of pumping
from Eqns. (F-17) and (F-16) is
The fracture volume ratio during shut-in as a function of time is found by substitut-
ing Eqns. (F-25), (F-26), (F-28) and (F-30) into Eqn. (F-23):
where .
The final propped fracture volume at closure is
where is the propped fracture fraction due to interference closure or proppant
in the fracture.
Substituting Eqn. (F-32) into (F-31) and rearranging results in the closure condi-
tion:
where is the dimensionless closure time.
-
q
| |
q q
-
1 V t q t
sp p o p
( )
(F-29)
AV t
V t
G
l
l p
a c
a c
c
c
( )
( )
( , , )
( , )
=
o o u
o o
t
|
|
2
2
2

(F-30)
V t
V t
q
q
G
f
f p
fb
o
fb
a c
c
( )
( )
( )
( , , )( )
=

-
-
1
1
1
2
2
q
u u
o o u q
q
t

(F-31)
p fb fb c a c c c
t t = = u o o | | and ) , (
2
V t V t
f c p f p
( ) ( ) = | (F-32)
p
|
G
q
q
a c c c p
fb
o
c fb
( , , ) ( ) o o u
t
q
q
|
q
u u
2
2 1
1
1
=

|
\
|
.
|
-
-

(F-33)
p c c
t t = u
Equation (F-33) is the governing closure equation which couples closure time to the
fracture propagation solution.
The Nolte G function at closure for no flow back or propped width from Eqn. (F-
33) and (F-21) is
where can be approximated as unity for most engineering applications, if the
leakoff coefficient is a constant and the fracture efficiency is low.
Assuming the fracture closes in a self similar manner, pressure decline during shut-
in can be calculated from Eqn. (F-31) with
If the fracture does not close in a self similar manner, the net wellbore pressure at
the end of pumping, in Eqn. (F-34), should be replaced by an average net
fracture pressure. For non-similar closure, the bottomhole pressure may initially
decrease faster than Eqn. (F-34) would predict; however, as time progresses pres-
sure decline will follow Eqn. (F-31). Therefore, minifrac analyses based on only
measured pressure decline data may not satisfy Eqn. (F-31), if Eqn. (F-34) does not
apply.
Dimensionless Net Pressure Slope
The dimensionless net pressure slope is determined from mass, momentum,
elasticity and constitutive relationships. Differentiating Eqn. (A-1) and the elastic-
ity equation (Eqn. (A-7)) with respect to time and rearranging results in the dimen-
sionless pressure slope ( ):
q
*
G
Nolte
u
c
( )
2
c
G
Nolte
u
c
( ) +
---------------------------------------- =
c
A
A
P t
P t
V t
V t
p
f
f p
( )
( )
( )
( )
=
(F-34)
) (
p
t P A
o
p
o
p
Eqn. (F-35) is a generalized net dimensionless pressure slope ( ) equation which
represents how various parameters affect the fracture pressure. The alpha parame-
ters in Eqn. (F-35) are numerically calculated in the simulator. Eqn. (F-35) can also
be used to illustrate fracture pressure responses for special cases.
A specialized case of Eqn. (F-35) is pressure decline during closure. If the fracture
is assumed to stop propagation (with alpha parameters ),
the dimensionless pressure slope for no spurt loss is
where
Assuming the fracture closes in a self similar manner, the dimensionless net pres-
sure decline is
| |
L H
c
sp
c a
p
w v
V
V
t q
t q
dt
t P d
t P
t
t
o | o | o o
o o
q
o o o q
q
o

) 2 ( ) 1 (
) (
) )( 1 (
) (
) ( 1

) (
) (
) (
2
1
2
1
+ + + +
+ + +
(
+ + + =
A
A
I I
u
u

(F-35)
o
p
0 , , , , =
I
o o o o o
c a H L
) (
) 1 (
) (
2
1
u
+
= o
q
q
o t
p
(F-36)
| |
| |
) ( ) , (
2 ) ( ) , ( ) (

) (
) (
) (

) , , ( ) , (
) ( ) (
= ) (
2
2 2
4
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
u o o
u u o o u u
u
u
u
u
o
u u o o o o
t
u
t
t t
t
G
G G
d
d
G
t t A t C
V V
c a
c a
c a c a
l l
+ u
+ u '
=
u
u
=
+ u =
A +
u
u

D
P A
where .
From Eqn. (F-37), the pressure decline is shown to be proportional to the G func-
tion:
The dimensionless square root of time net pressure decline slope is
Substituting into Eqn. (F-39) and neglecting second order effects, the rate of
pressure decline slope as a function of is
where is the fracture efficiency at the end of pumping.
Equation (F-40) illustrates that if the fracture decline pressure during closure is
plotted as a function of the square root of time or on a semi-log axis a straight line
will result with a constant slope equal to Eqn. (F-40). Equation (F-40) can also be
derived by differentiating Eqn. (F-37) with respect to where
(see Meyer
7
et al.).
)
u
= A u o o
q
q
o o
t
u , , (
) (
) ( 1
) , (
2
1 ) (
2
c a
p
p
c a
D
G
t
t
P
(F-37)
) 1 ( ) ( ) ( e = A A A u u u P P P
D
p
P P G
f f a c
( ) ( ) ( , , ) u u o o u = 1
2

(F-38)
o
u
o u
A
A
A
P
D
p D
D
d P
d
P
=
=

1
2
1
2
2

(F-39)
p
o
2
1
u
o
t
o o
q
q
A
u
P
a c
p
p
D
t
t
=

4
1
( , )
( )
( )
(F-40)
) (
p
t q
2
1
u
) 1 ( 2 ) , , (
2
1
2
= u u o o
c a
G
Pressure Decline
Pressure decline responses during closure for various parameters as a function
of and are shown in Figure F.3 and Figure F.4, respectively. The pres-
sure decline curves are reported for no spurt loss,
.
Figure F.3: Dimensionless Pressure Decline vs. Square-Root Total Time.
2
c
o
2
1
u
2
1
D
t
1 and ,
2
1
2
1
= = =
c a
o q
Figure F.4: Dimensionless Pressure Decline vs. Square-Root Shut-In Time.
Figure F.3 and Figure F.4 show that for a decreasing fluid loss coefficient during
shut-in , the pressure declines at a slower rate than for an increasing
coefficient, , as expected. This illustrates that the effect of a time
dependent fluid loss coefficient can have a significant impact on determining the
closure time based on an inflection point or deviation from square-root pressure
decline. This is generally true for a decreasing pressure decline profile, since a
unique straight line may not fit the data.
It is also observed that the pressure plotted as a function of is approximately
linear if . Consequently, plotting the decline pressure as a function of
will generally yield a more prominent inflection point at closure than if the
data is plotted versus the square-root of shut-in time ( ). This is especially true
if closure is relatively fast (i.e., ; see Figure F.4).
) (
2
1
2
=
c
o
) (
2
1
2
=
c
o
2
1
u
) 0 (
2
=
c
o
2
1
u
2
1
D
t
t
D
1 <
F.3 Minifrac Numerical Solution 679
F.3 Minifrac Numerical Solution
The governing minifrac equations of mass and momentum conservation are solved
iteratively to match the measured closure time. The numerical procedure is based
on solving the equations-of-state for a given leakoff coefficient.
The following procedure assumes the total leakoff coefficient is to be calculated
from a measured closure time. If the total leakoff coefficient is known, the proce-
dure is non-iterative and closure time is found directly from Eqns. (F-33) and (F-
18).
The purpose of the numerical solution is to minimize the object function :
where is the measured closure time and is the predicted closure time.
With this objective defined the numerical procedure is outlined below:
Step (1)
Given the equation and initial approximations to the leakoff coeffi-
cients and with .
Step (2)
Update the total leakoff coefficient using the Secant method:
A Bisection Algorithm in logarithmic C space is used for the first few iterations
with and having opposite signs.
) (C f
f C
c
m
c
p
c
m
( ) ( ) = u u u
(F-41)
m
c
u
p
c
u
0 ) ( = C f
0
C
1
C
1 0
C C =
2 = i Set
) ( ) (
) )( (
2 1
2 1 1
1

=
i i
i i i
i i
C f C f
C C C f
C C
) (
0
C f
) (
1
C f
Step (3)
Solve the governing mass and momentum equations during fracture propagation
based on to determine:
a) Fracture characteristics
b) Alpha parameters
Step (4)
Solve the minifrac closure Eqn. (F-33) with Eqn. (F-18) for to
determine the predicted closure time .
Step (5)
Calculate the error, , between the predicted and measured closure times
from Eqn. (F-41)
If is less than a specified tolerance go to Step (6). Otherwise, add one to i
and go to Step (2).
Step (6)
When the measured and predicted closure times are within the specified tolerance,
the procedure is complete. The numerical procedure outlined above usually con-
verges in less than ten iterations for initial values of and
.
After convergence, the formation permeability is calculated from the total leakoff
coefficient at the end of pumping using the following relationship:
1
C
...) , , , ( q P W L A
...) , , , (
a p w L
o o o o
) , , (
2
u o o
c a
G
) (
i
p
c
C u
) (
i
C f
m
c i
p
c
m
c i
C C f u u u )) ( ( ) ( =
) (
i
C f
8
0
10
= C
min ft 0 . 1
1
= C
F.4 Conclusions 681
In the formulation above is the leakoff pressure differential expressed in psi, k
in darcies, is the formation compressibility in 1/psi. The reservoir viscosity,
, is in centipoise. The equivalent leakoff viscosity, , is equal to zero if the
frac fluid leakoff viscosity, is equal to (if >> , = ).
Formation permeability is solved directly from Eqn. (F-41) since it is the only
unknown. A dynamic weighting of the individual leakoff coefficients, in place of
the harmonic weighting shown in Eqn. (F-41) can also be used to calculate permea-
bility.
F.4 Conclusions
Pressure analysis during and after a fracture treatment is primarily performed to
establish fracture characteristics and critical parameters governing fracture propa-
gation. Minifrac analysis is a first step in providing an estimate of fracture geome-
try, efficiency, leakoff and possibly height growth prior to designing the fracture
treatment.
Since fracture efficiency is virtually independent of the fracture model; using a
leakoff coefficient based on a measured net pressure or pressure decline can result
in a different design fracture efficiency. The reason for this is that most minifrac
analyses only determine the leakoff coefficient and area product. Satisfying
momentum and matching the fracture pressure responses provides the analyst with
a great deal more information on the fracture geometry and sensitive parameters.
Consistency in solving the governing equations is essential in any type of history
matching or simulation. If a given method is used to calculate the leakoff coeffi-
1 1 1 1
C t C C C
p I II III
( )
= + +

(F-42)
constant a
0374 . 0
0469 . 0
where
=
A =
A =
III
r t l II
e l I
C
C k P C
P k C
|
l
P A
t
C
r

cient from measured data, a consistent method must be used to design the fracture
treatment using this data. The fracture efficiency should match the minifrac and
main treatment design at the end of the minifrac.
Due to the large number of uncertainties, history matching field data may not result
in a unique solution if only part of the data is used. Often the problem with history
matching is that unverifiable and unrealistic data is used to force the solution to
match at some point in the pressure response. History matching throughout the
stimulation thereby eliminates many of the erroneous matches and conclusions
encountered by only using a few selected measured data points. Using logs to ver-
ify fracture height and fracture characteristics are very useful in establishing realis-
tic input parameters.
F.5 Nomenclature 683
F.5 Nomenclature
= Leakoff area (one face of the fracture)
= Total reservoir compressibility
= Equivalent leakoff coefficient
= Leakoff viscosity control coefficient
= Reservoir compressibility and viscosity coefficient
= Wall building coefficient
= Young's modulus
= Fluid loss function, Eqn. (F-18)
= Fracture half-height
= Pay zone height
= Total wellbore height
= Permeability
= Apparent consistency index
= Fracture half-length
= Flow behavior index
= Pressure
= Fracture closure pressure
= Reservoir fluid pressure
= Flowback rate
= Injection flow rate
= Radial coordinate
= Fracture radius
= Spurt loss coefficient
A
C
t
C
e
C
I
C
II
C
III
E
G u ( )
H
H
p
H
w
k
K
a
L
n'
P
P
c
P
r
q
fb
q
o
r
R
Sp
Greek
= Time
= Closure time,
= Dimensionless Nolte time,
= Flowback time,
= Fracture volume
= Fluid loss volume (no spurt loss)
= Volume loss by spurt
= Fracture width
= Average wellbore fracture width
= Fracture width as a function of position
= Lateral coordinate along fracture length
= Coordinate perpendicular to frac face
= Vertical Coordinate
= Leakoff area parameter, Eqn. (F-6)
= Leakoff parameter during pumping, Eqn. (F-6)
= Leakoff parameter during shut-in
= Length propagation parameter, Eqn. (F-6)
= Pressure parameter, Eqn. (6)
= Width propagation parameter, Eqn. (F-6)
= Leakoff scale factor during pumping
= Leakoff scale factor during shut-in
= Parameter defined in Eqn. (F-31)
t
t
c
t
D
t
fb
V
f
V
l
W
W 0 t , ( )
W , t , ( )
x
y
z
o
a
o
c
o
c
2
o
L
o
p
o
w
|
c
|
c
2
c
F.5 Nomenclature 685
Subscripts
= Friction coefficients
= Pressure profile coefficients
= Width profile coefficients
= Maximum width-opening pressure coefficient
= Radial coefficient , Eqn. (F-9)
= Pressure coefficient, Eqn. (F-10)
= Net fracturing pressure
= Leakoff pressure differential
= Fracture efficiency
= Efficiency excluding spurt loss
= Dimensionless time,
= Dimensionless closure time
= Dimensionless flowback time
= Integration indices
= Dimensionless lateral coordinate
= Time of fracture leakoff area creation
= Propped fracture volume fraction
= Fluid loss parameter, Eqn. (F-16)
= Fluid loss parameter, Eqn. (F-16)
= Minimum horizontal stress
2 = Shut-in
c = Closure, leakoff parameter
D = Dimensionless
f
I
f
,
p
I
p
,
w
I
w
,
w
o
I
w
o
,
c
r
c
p
AP
AP
l
q
q
*
u
u
c
u
fb
,
t
|
p
u
o
H
min
F.6 References
1. Nolte, K.G., Smith, M.B.: Interpretation of Fracturing Pressures, SPE 8297,
Sept. 1979.
2. Nolte, K. G.: Determination of Fracture Parameters from Fracture Pressure
Decline, SPE 8341 presented at the 54th Annual Technical Conf., Las Vegas,
Sept. 1979.
SPEPE, Feb. 1988, pp 22-30.
4. Nolte, K. G.: A General Analysis of Fracturing Pressure Decline With Appli-
cation to Three Models, (SPE 12941) JPT (Dec. 1986), 571-582.
5. Nolte, K. G.: Application of Fracture Design based on Pressure Analysis,
SPEPE (Feb. 1988), 31-41.
6. Lee, W.S.: Study of the Effects of Fluid Rheology on Minifrac Analysis, SPE
16916, Sept. 1987.
8. Hagel, M. W. and Meyer, B. R.: Utilizing Mini-Frac Data to Improve Design
10. Meyer, B. R.: Design Formulae for 2-D and 3-D Vertical Hydraulic Frac-
tures: Model Comparison and Parametric Studies, paper SPE 15240 presented
at the SPE Unconventional Gas Technology Symposium, Louisville, KY, May.
18-21, 1986.
f = Fracture
fb = Flowback
l = Fluid loss
p = Pay zone, end of pumping
sp = Spurt loss
F.6 References 687
Appendix G
Production Model Theory
G.1 Introduction
This appendix provides a brief overview of the computational methods used in
MProd and highlights some of the program's capabilities. The equations and
relationships employed are listed and the variables used are defined. In addition, a
list of references is furnished at the end of this Appendix with additional information
regarding the simulation methodologies used in MProd.
Three distinct analytical models are contained in MProd for performing production
simulations on different types of reservoirs. The basic reservoir production model
(i.e., No Fracture) is based on the transient behavior of a well in a closed (finite)
reservoir. The method of images is used to generate rectangular drainage shapes in
closed formations. Drainage area aspect ratios can be as large as 100.
The hydraulically fractured models employed are based on a finite conductivity
vertical fracture. The analytical method used was developed by coupling the short
time solution of Lee and Brockenbrough (1983, 1986) with the well known semi-log
asymptotic (pseudo-radial) solution that has been publish by many authors. These
models are applicable for all flow regimes from linear, bilinear, trilinear to pseudo-
radial.
All of the models used in MProd allow either a rate or pressure boundary condition
at the well. Using the principle of superposition, a series of rates or pressures may
be specified. For closed systems, the concept of desuperposition has been
incorporated to simulate the effects of wellbore and fracture skin on the production.
Available for use with either gas or liquid, the numerical solutions have been
improved over earlier versions (version 3.0 or before) for low conductivity fractures.
The transition from trilinear to pseudo-radial flow has increased accuracy for very
690 Production Model Theory:
low values of ( ). The transition is now calculated in Laplace space
eliminating the need to specify time steps that are sufficiently small at the match
point. Additional information concerning the analytical techniques used is contained
in the following sections of this appendix.
G.2 Governing Equations
This section presents the governing equations for simulating production from
fractured and unfractured wells in closed and infinite reservoirs. When appropriate
the solution methodology is also given.
Dimensionless Parameters
The following dimensionless parameters are used throughout this paper. The
dimensionless pressure ( ) for a constant production rate ( ) is defined as
(G-1)
where is the formation permeability, is the formation height, is the reservoir
viscosity, and is the differential pressure (the initial reservoir pressure
( ) minus the flowing pressure ( )).
The dimensionless times based on the drainage area, , wellbore radius, , and
fracture half-length, , are defined as
, , and (G-2)
where is the formation porosity and is the formation compressibility.
The dimensionless rate ( ) for a constant flowing pressure ( ) is defined as
(G-3)
The flow rate as a function of the dimensionless rate is
C
fD
C
fD
0.001 >
p
D
q
p
D
2tkh
q
-------------Ap =
k h
Ap p
i
p
wf
=
p
i
p
wf
A r
w
x
f
t
DA
kt
c
t
|A
--------------- = t
D
kt
c
t
|r
w
2
----------------- = t
Dx
f
kt
c
t
|x
f
2
----------------- =
| c
t
q
D
p
wf
q
D

2tkhAp
--------------------q t ( ) =
G.2 Governing Equations 691
(G-4)
where is the constant draw down pressure.
The productivity index ( ) is defined as
(G-5)
where is the flow rate, is the average reservoir pressure, and is the flowing
pressure. The dimensionless productivity index, , is defined as
(G-6)
The dimensionless and Laplace parameters used in the production model are
, , ,
, , ,
, (G-7)
,
The Laplacian operator used in the production models is given by . The fracture
skin is given by .
Pseudopressure
The real gas potential or pseudopressure is defined as
(G-8)
q t ( )
2tkhAp
-------------------- q
D
=
Ap p
i
p
wf
=
J
J
q
p p
wf
----------------
2tkh
-------------J
D
= =
q p p
wf
J
D
J
D

2tkh
------------- J

2tkh
-------------
q
p p
wf
---------------- = =
C
fD
k
f
w
f
kx
f
--------- = C
D
C
2t|c
t
hr
w
2
------------------------ = C
Df
C
2t|c
t
hx
f
2
----------------------- =
C
1
q q
f
= q k |c
t
( ) = q
f
k
f
|c
t
( )
f
=
S
f
t
2
---
y
s
x
f
----
k
k
s
---- 1
\ .
| |
=
a
2
C
fD
--------- = b
t
C
fD
--------- =
s
S
f
m p ( ) 2
p
p ( )Z p ( )
----------------------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
where is an arbitrary base pressure and is the real gas deviation factor.
The real gas pseudopressure equation can be simplified for certain pressure ranges.
At low pressures is essentially constant, while at higher pressures it is directly
proportional to pressure (Earlougher, 1977).
At low pressure (p < 2000 psi), the real gas pseudopressure based on a constant
product is
or (G-9)
where and are initial condition gas properties at .
At high pressures (p > 3000 psi), the real gas pseudopressure based on a constant
product is
or (G-10)
When the fluid type is gas and the Internal PVT correlations are not used, the model
requires that a table of and be entered as a function of pressure. The
pseudopressure function is then automatically used to calculate the dimensionless
pressure.
Trilinear Solution
The trilinear solution given by Lee and Brockenbrough (1983, 1986) for a finite-
conductivity fracture in Laplace space is
Constant Flow Rate
(G-11)
Constant Pressure
(G-12)
p
b
Z
Z
Z
m p ( )
p
2
p
b
2
( )
Z
---------------------- = m p
i
( )
p
i
2
p
wf
2
( )
i
Z
i
------------------------ =
i
Z
i
p
i
p Z ( )
m p ( )
2p p p
b
( )
Z
-------------------------- = m p
i
( )
2p
i
p
i
p
wf
( )
i
Z
i
------------------------------- =
Z
p
D
s ( )
b
s sbC
Df
tanh ( )
------------------------------------------------ =
q
D
s ( )
1
s
2
p
D
s ( )
-------------------

sb
----- tanh = =
The parameter used in the above equations is defined by:
(G-13)
This analytical solution is based on transforming the equations above from Laplace
space to real time using the Stehfest inversion algorithm

(1970).
Pseudosteady-State Pressure Solution
The pseudosteady-state dimensionless pressure solution in a closed system can be
written as (e.g., Ramey et al. (1971))
(G-14)
where the inverse productivity index is given by
(G-15)
Pseudosteady-State Resistivity Solution
The pseudosteady-state resistivity solution for a finite-conductivity fracture in a
closed system in terms of the inverse productivity index as given by Meyer and Jacot
(2005) is
(G-16)
where the pseudo-skin function, , is
(G-17)
The above set of equations are solved to generate the production solution for a single
fracture in a closed rectangular reservoir for all times (i.e., linear, bilinear, trilinear,
and pseudosteady-state). These generated fundamental solutions for constant rate
and constant pressure boundary conditions are then used to calculate the composite
a s s
1 2
+ ( )
1 2
1 s s
1 2
+ ( )
1 2
S
f
+
--------------------------------------------- C
1
s + =
p
D
2tt
DA
1 J
D
+ =
1 J
D
1 2
4A
e
C
A
r
w
'
2
--------------------
\ .
|
| |
ln =
1
J
D
------ |
x
e
x
e
x
f
----
\ .
| |
ln f + =
f
f
t
C
fD
g ( )
-------------------- ,
+
\ .
| |
ln =
multiple transverse fracture solution as discussed below.
Wellbore Choked Skin Effect
Mukherjee and Economides (1991) identified that the inadequate contact between a
vertical transverse fracture and the horizontal well resulted in a restriction that can
be quantified by a choked skin effect as given by
(G-18)
where the above equation has been placed in terms of the dimensionless fracture
conductivity.
Eq. G-18 illustrates that as the height interval to wellbore radius ratio or height to
propped length ratio decreases (i.e., radial to linear flow in the fracture) or the
dimensionless fracture conductivity increases, the skin due to convergence becomes
smaller. Soliman et al. (1988) concluded that a high conductivity tail-in could be
incorporated to reduce the additional pressure drop because of flow convergence
around the wellbore.
Pseudo-Radial Flow Solution
The non-dimensional pressure drop at the wellbore, for an unfractured well, given
by Earlougher (1977) is
(G-19)
where the exponential integral, , is defined as follows:
(G-20)
This solution is also used for the pseudo-radial solution of the fractured well by
matching the pseudo-radial and trilinear solutions.
Horizontal Well Solution
S
ch
kh
k
f
w
f
---------
h
2r
w
--------
\ .
| |
t
2
--- ln
h
x
f
----
1
C
fD
---------
h
2r
w
--------
\ .
| |
t
2
--- ln = =
p
D
1
2
---Ei
1
4t
Dw
-----------
\ .
| |
=
E
i
Ei x ( )
e

------- d
x
}
=
(G-21)
where is the constant draw down pressure. The dimensionless rate
( ) for a constant flowing pressure ( ) is
(G-22)
The apparent wellbore radius ( ) as derived from the governing steady-state
equations for the inflow performance of an unfractured horizontal well as originally
presented by Joshi (1987) and modified by Mukherjee et.al (1991) is
(G-23)
where
and (G-24)
The above set of equations will now be transformed into a general solution based on
the pseudosteady-state analysis for finite conductivity vertical fractures as presented
by Meyer and Jacot (2005). The transformed solution for the effective wellbore
radius is
(G-25)
or
(G-26)
where the following parameters have been introduced
q t ( )
2tk
h
hAp
---------------------- q
D
=
Ap p
i
p
wf
=
q
D
p
wf
q
D

2tk
h
hAp
----------------------q t ( )
1
r
e
r
w
'
( ) ln
------------------------ = =
r
w
'
r
w
'
r
e
l
h
a 1 1 l
h
2a ( ) { }
2
+ | |
h|
| 1 + ( )r
w
-----------------------
h| l
h
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- =
a
l
h
2
----
1
2
---
1
4
---
2r
e
l
h
-------
\ .
| |
4
+ + = |
k
h
k
v
----- =
r
w
'
x
f
I
x
( )
h|
| 1 + ( )r
w
-----------------------
h| 2x
f
( )
-------------------------------------------------------------- =
x
f
r
w
'
----- I
x
( )
h|
| 1 + ( )r
w
-----------------------
h| 2x
f
( )
=
, (G-27)
It can be shown that where and
.
The general effective wellbore radius for a uniform-conductivity fracture in an
infinite reservoir as given by Meyer and Jacot (2005) is
(G-28)
Thus an unfractured horizontal wellbore can be represented by a finite conductivity
vertical fracture with a dimensionless conductivity given by
(G-29)
where is the half-length of the perforated lateral (Eq. G-27) and is given
by Eq. G-26.
Productivity Increase
The productivity increase as defined by the ratio of the productivity indices for the
fractured and unfractured wells as given by Meyer (1985) are given below.
Constant Flow Rate
The instantaneous (current rate) and average (volume) productivity indices are:
I
x
( ) a
D
1 1 I
x
a
D
( )
2
+
)
`

=
x
f
l
h
2 = I
x
x
f
x
e
=
a
D
a x
e
I
x
2
2 1 I +
x
4
4 + = =
2 I
x
( ) 2.058171 < s I
x
0 = ( ) 2 =
I
x
1 = ( ) 2.058171 =
r
w
'
x
f
-----
t
C
fD
---------
r
w
x
f
----- 1 +
\ .
| |
t
C
fD
--------- 2 +
\ .
| |
=
C
fD
t 1
x
f
r
w
'
-----
r
w
x
f
-----
\ .
| |
x
f
r
w
'
2
------------------------------ =
x
f
x
f
r
w
'

Instantaneous
Average
(G-30)
Constant Pressure
The instantaneous (rate) and average (volume) productivity indices are:
Instantaneous
Average
(G-31)
where refers to the fractured well and to the unfractured case. For unfractured
reservoirs the subscript refers to the well with no skin. When considering a series
of constant rate or pressure changes, the productivity parameters outlined above are
equal to the equivalent values calculated by superposition.
Desuperposition
The concept of desuperposition has been illustrated by Gringarten, Ramey and
Raghavan (1974) for modifying known values of to dimensionless pressures
describing somewhat different systems. This method is used to calculate the effect
of skin and fractures in closed systems. For closed systems, the dimensionless
pressure, , is found from the following relationship:
(G-32)
In the above equation is the dimension pressure for a closed system and is
the dimensionless pressure for an infinite (unbounded) reservoir. The first term on
the right side of the equation is for the closed system with zero skin and zero
wellbore storage. for a single well in an infinite system with zero skin and
J J
o
t ( ) p
D
o
p
D
f
=
J J
o
V
p
} D
o
dt p
} D
f
dt =
J J
o
t ( ) q
D
f
q
D
o
=
J J
o
V
q
D
f
}
dt q
D
o
}
dt =
f o
f
p
D
p
D
p
D
C
D
S , ( ) p
D
C
D
0 = S 0 = , ( ) p
D
C
D
0 = S 0 = , ( ) p
D
C
D
S , ( ) =
p
D
p
D
p
D
wellbore storage is subtracted from this dimensionless pressure. for a single
well in an infinite system with the desired wellbore storage and skin factor is then
added.
Method of Images - Generate Closed Systems
The method of images is used to determine the pressure distribution in closed
rectangular formations. The drainage shapes considered are generated by adding a
regular infinite pattern of image wells to the actual well in an unbounded
homogenous reservoir. If each well is a producer, a closed drainage area is defined.
The dimensionless pressure drop, , at the well is given by:
(G-33)
where . Here it is assumed that the response of each well is given by the
line source solution and is the location of the i
th
image well for .
The number of image wells to approximate the infinite series simulation is based on
the analytical and numerical studies of Larsen (1985).
The summation, in terms of a single well rectangle, is carried out by adding
columns on each side in the direction and rows in the y direction, where
and (G-34)
In the equations above the reservoir aspect ratio, , is given by where
and are the reservoir half length and half width, respectively. For a fractured
reservoir, the aspect ratio should be greater than or equal to one (i.e., the fracture is
assumed to run along the long axis).
The well location at position within the closed rectangle is shown in Figure
G.1
p
D
p
D
p
D
t
DA
( )
1
2
--- Ei
x
i
2
y
i
2
+ | |
4At
DA
----------------------
\ .
| |
i 1 =
=
x
i
2
y
i
2
+ r
w
2
=
x
i
y
i
, ( ) i 2 >
n
c
x n
r
n
c
2 1 4 t
DA
F ( )
1 2
+ | | = n
r
2 1 4 Ft
DA
( )
1 2
+ | | =
F F X
L
Y
H
=
X
L
Y
H
X
1
Y
1
, ( )
Figure G.1: Well Location.
The dimensionless well coordinate given by and
is shown in Figure G.2.
Figure G.2: Dimensionless Well Coordinates.
The dimensionless coordinate and is the geometric center of the
rectangle.
For long periods of production, the closed system will reach a pseudo-steady
condition. The dimensionless pressure at times greater than the pseudo-steady state
time is given by the following:
X
D1
Y
D1
, ( ) X
D1
X
1
X
L
=
Y
D1
Y
1
Y
H
=
X
D1
0 = Y
D1
0 =
t
DASS
No Fracture:
(G-35)
Fracture:
(G-36)
where is the dimensionless time, A is the drainage area and is the shape factor
used.
It can be shown that the dimensionless rate solution is in the
form of a decaying exponential for times greater than the pseudo-steady state time
.
Multiple Transverse Fractures in Horizontal Wells
The fundamental production solution methodology for multiple transverse finite-
conductivity vertical fractures in horizontal wells is presented. The solution for a
single fractured well in a closed system is presented followed by general solutions
for Multiply Fractures, Multiple Equally Spaced Transverse Fractures, and Multiple
Stage/Cluster Transverse Fractures in horizontal wells.
Single Vertical Fracture
The system configuration for a single finite-conductivity vertical fracture in a closed
rectangular reservoir with aspect ratio ( ) is illustrated in Figure G.3.
p
D
2tt
DA
0.5
A
r
w
2
-----
\ .
| |
ln 0.5
2.2456
C
A
----------------
\ .
| |
ln + + =
p
D
2tt
DA
f A x
f
C
A
C
fD
.... , , , , ( ) + =
t
D
A
C
A
q
D
s ( ) 1 s
2
p
D
s ( ) ( ) =
t
DASS
x
e
y
e
=
Figure G.3: Schematic of a single hydraulic fracture in a closed rectangular
reservoir - top view.
The fundamental dimensionless solutions are
Constant Rate
, where (G-37)
Constant Pressure
, where (G-38)
Multiply Fractures
The system configuration for multiple vertical fractures equally spaced in a closed
rectangular reservoir with aspect ratio ( ) is shown Figure G.4.
p
D
t
D
, ( )
2tkh
q
-------------Ap t ( ) = Ap t ( )
q
2tkh
-------------p
D
t
D
, ( ) =
q
D
t
D
, ( )

2tkhAp
--------------------q t ( ) = q t ( )
2tkhAp
--------------------q
D
t
D
, ( ) =
x
e
y
e
=
Figure G.4: Schematic of multiply fractures in a closed rectangular reservoir -
top view.
The no flow boundary conditions are identified by dashed lines. The individual
fractured reservoir aspect ratio is given by or where
, , and is the number of fractures. The total flow
rate is found by multiplying the single well fracture solution with an aspect ratio of
by .
The fundamental dimensionless pressure and rate solutions for multiple fractures
are
Constant Rate
(G-39)
Constant Pressure
(G-40)
This solution is referred to as Multiply Fractures since the total rate for a constant
draw down pressure is simply the single fracture production solution multiplied by
the total number of transverse fractures (see also Guo and Evans (1993)). This is an
exact solution methodology.
c
x
e
Ay
c
=
c
N =
Ay
c
y
e
N = x
e
y
e
= N
c
N
N
p
D
p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) N =
q
D
q
D
t
D

c
, ( ) N =
Multiple Equally Spaced Transverse Fractures -
Lateral Length
The system configuration for N equally spaced transverse fractures over a given
lateral length in a closed rectangular reservoir with aspect ratio ( ) is shown in
Figure G.5.
Figure G.5: Schematic of a multiple transverse fractures in a closed
rectangular reservoir - top view.
The no flow boundary conditions are identified by dashed lines. The individual
fractured reservoir aspect ratios for the cluster and end fractures are given by
Clusters
End or Exterior
(G-41)
The cluster spacing is found from . The spacing from the exterior
fracture to the boundary is given by where .
The fundamental dimensionless pressure and rate solutions for multiple equally
spaced fractures over a given lateral length are
c
x
e
Ay
c
=
e
x
e
Ay
e
=
Ay
c
l
h
N 1 ( ) =
Ay
e
2 Ay
e
y
e
l
h
=
N
Constant Rate
(G-42)
Constant Pressure
(G-43)
These are not exact solutions but very good first-order approximations. The above
equations simplify to the Multiply Fractures solution for equally spaced fractures
(i.e., ).
Multiple Stage/Cluster Transverse Fractures
The system configuration for multiple stage/clusters with equally spaced stages
and equally spaced clusters per stage in a closed rectangular reservoir with aspect
ratio ( ) is shown in Figure G.6.
Figure G.6: Schematic of a multiple stage/cluster transverse fractures in a
closed rectangular reservoir - top view.
The no flow boundaries for each cluster set are identified by dashed lines. The
reservoir and no flow boundary aspect ratios for the clusters, interior, and exterior
transverse fractures are
Clusters
p
D
p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) p
D
t
D

e
, ( )
p
D
t
D

e
, ( ) N 1 ( ) p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) +
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- =
q
D
q
D
t
D

c
, ( ) N 1 ( ) q
D
t
D

e
, ( ) + =
e

c
=
n
s
n
c
c
x
e
Ay
c
=
Interior
(G-44)
End or Exterior
where the cluster spacing is given by , the interior spacing between cluster
stages is given by , and the spacing from the exterior fracture to the boundary is
given by . The total number of transverse fractures is .
The fundamental dimensionless pressure and rate solutions for multiple stage/cluster
transverse fractures are
Constant Rate
(G-45)
Constant Pressure
(G-46)
These are not exact solutions but very good first-order approximations for various
complicated stage/cluster configurations. For equally spaced inner and cluster
fractures (i.e., ), the above equations simplify to the Multiple Equally
Spaced Transverse Fractures solution
Constant Rate
(G-47)
Constant Pressure
(G-48)
where .
i
x
e
Ay
i
=
e
x
e
Ay
e
=
Ay
c
Ay
i
Ay
e
2 N n
c
n
s
=
p
D
p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) p
D
t
D

i
, ( ) p
D
t
D

e
, ( )
p
D
t
D

i
, ( ) p
D
t
D

e
, ( ) n
c
1 ( )n
s
p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) p
D
t
D

e
, ( ) n
s
1 ( ) p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) p
D
t
D

i
, ( ) + +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ =
q
D
q
D
t
D

c
, ( ) n
c
1 ( )n
s
q
D
t
D

i
, ( ) n
s
1 ( ) q
D
t
D

e
, ( ) + + =
i

c
=
p
D
p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) p
D
t
D

e
, ( )
p
D
t
D

e
, ( ) n
c
1 ( )n
s
p
D
t
D

e
, ( ) n
s
1 ( ) p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) + +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ =
p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) p
D
t
D

e
, ( )
p
D
t
D

e
, ( ) n
c
n
s
1 ( ) p
D
t
D

c
, ( ) +
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- =
q
D
q
D
t
D

c
, ( ) n
c
n
s
1 ( ) q
D
t
D

e
, ( ) + =
N n
c
n
s
=
For equally spaced fractures (i.e., ), the above equations simplify
to the Multiply Fractures solution as illustrated below
Constant Rate
(G-49)
Constant Pressure
(G-50)
Transverse Fracture Interference
The interference of multiple transverse fractures is evident by the no flow boundary
conditions imposed by the solution methodology as presented above.
The subject of well interference is not a new concept. Stevens and Thodos (1959)
presented one of the first papers on Prediction of Approximate Time of Interference
Between Adjacent Wells based on a point-source function. Warren and Hartsock
(1960) also published a paper entitled Well Interference. Other notable
contributors to this area of study include Vela and Mckinley (1969), Mousli et al.
(1982), Cooper and Collins (1989), Meehan et al. (1989), and Malekzadeh and Tiab
(1991).
A simple solution to understand this concept of fracture interaction or interference
was present by Lee et al. (1996, 2003). Lee entitled this behavior as the Radius of
Investigation Concept. Lee states, The radius of investigation, defined as the point
in the formation beyond which the pressure draw down is negligible, is a measure of
how far a transient has moved into the formation following any rate change in a well
and physically represents the depth to which formation properties are being
investigated at any time in a test. Lee gives the approximate radius of investigation
at any time as
(G-51)
Applying this concept to multiple transverse fractures spaced a distance apart
(i.e., ), we have
e

i

c
= =
p
D
p
D
t
D

c
, ( )
n
c
1 ( )n
s
n
s
1 ( ) 1 + +
-----------------------------------------------------------
p
D
t
D

c
, ( )
n
c
n
s
-------------------------
p
D
t
D

c
, ( )
N
------------------------- = = =
q
D
q
D
t
D

c
, ( ) n
c
1 ( )n
s
n
s
1 ( ) 1 + + | | =
q
D
t
D

c
, ( )n
c
n
s
q
D
t
D

c
, ( )N = =
r
i
kt
948|c
t
--------------------
\ .
| |
1 2
=
Ay
Ay 2r
i
=
(G-52)
where the formation diffusivity, , is given by . Average
property values should be used for gas.
Thus, the approximate time for transverse fracture interaction (i.e., time to reach the
no flow boundary) is
Figure G.7 shows the interference spacing as a function of diffusivity for various
selected times. This figure illustrates that as diffusivity increases the time for
transverse fracture interference decreases.
Figure G.7: Interference spacing versus formation diffusivity for various
times.
Figure G.8 shows the interference spacing as a function of time for selected
diffusivities. Figure G.8 illustrates that as the formation diffusivity increases, the
transverse fracture spacing increases for a given time to interference.
Ay
4kt
948|c
t
--------------------
\ .
| |
1 2
qt
237
---------
\ .
| |
1 2
= =
q q k |c
t
( ) =
t 237
Ay
2
q
--------- =
Figure G.8: Interference spacing versus time for selected diffusivity values.
G.3 Nomenclature 709
G.3 Nomenclature
=
Reservoir drainage area, ft
2
= Propped fracture width, ft
= Formation volume factor, RB/STB
=
Total reservoir compressibility, psi
-1
=
Fracture compressibility, psi
-1
= Wellbore storage coefficient, RB/psi
= Dimensionless inverse fracture diffusivity
= Dimensionless wellbore storage coefficient
= Dimensionless fracture storage coefficient
= Dimensionless fracture conductivity
= Reservoir aspect ratio
= Pay zone height, ft
= Productivity index
= Equivalent reservoir permeability, md
= Horizontal reservoir permeability, md
= Propped fracture permeability, md
= Fracture damaged zone permeability, md
= Vertical reservoir permeability, md
= Fracture conductivity, md-ft
= Length of horizontal lateral, ft
= Propped fracture half-length, ft
=
Initial real gas pseudopressure, psi
2
/cp
A
w
f
B
o
c
t
c
t
f
C
C
1
C
D
C
Df
C
fD
F
h
J
k
k
h
k
f
k
l
k
v
k
f
w
f
l
h
x
f
m p
i
( )
Superscripts
=
Flowing real gas pseudopressure, psi
2
/cp
= Initial reservoir pressure, psi
= Dimensionless wellbore pressure
= Bottomhole flowing pressure, psi
= Flow rate, bpd or Mcf/d
= Dimensionless flow rate
= Wellbore radius, ft
= Apparent wellbore radius, ft
= Dimensionless apparent wellbore radius
= Laplace space variable
= Wellbore skin factor
= Choked fracture skin
= Fracture skin factor
= Time, hours
= Dimensionless time based on drainage area
= Dimensionless time based on fracture length
= Dimensionless time based on wellbore radius
= Reservoir temperature, R
= Damaged zone adjacent to fracture, ft
= Real gas deviation factor
= Equivalent reservoir viscosity, cp
= Equivalent reservoir porosity
m p
wf
( )
p
i
p
wD
p
wf
q
q
D
r
w
r
wa
R
w
s
S
S
ch
S
f
t
t
DA
t
D
f
t
D
w
T
y
s
Z
|
G.4 References 711
Subscripts
G.4 References
1. Beggs, H.D. and Robinson, J.R.: Estimating the Viscosity of Crude Oil Sys-
tems JPT (Sept. 1975) 1140-1144.
2. Cooper, K.J. and Collins, R.E.: Applications of Transient Pressure Interfer-
ence Tests to Fractured and Nonfractured Injection Wells, SPE 19785, Octo-
ber 1989.
3. Earlougher, R.C., Jr. and Ramey, H.J., Jr.: Interference Analysis in Bounded
Systems, JCPT October-December 1973, 33-45.
4. Earlougher, R.C., Jr.: Advances in Well Test Analysis, Monograph Vol. 5, SPE,
1977.
5. Gringarten, A.C., Ramey, H.J., and Raghavan, R.: Unsteady-State Pressure
Distributions Created by a Well with a Single Infinite-Conductivity Fracture,
SPEJ, August 1974, 347-360.
6. Joshi, S.D.: A Review of Horizontal Well and Drainhole Technology, SPE
16868, September 1987.
7. Larsen, L., A Simple Approach to Pressure Distributions in Geometric
Shapes, SPEJ (Feb. 1985), Vol. 25, No. 1 pp. 113-120.
8. Lee, A.L. Gonzales, M.H. and Eakin, B.E.: The Viscosity of Natural Gases
Trans., AIME (1966) 997-1002.
- = Time averaged
D
= Dimensionless
f
= Fracture
I
= Initial conditions
o
= Unfractured
w = Wellbore
9. Lee, J. and Wattenbarger, R.A.: Gas Reservoir Engineering, SPE TextBook
Series Vol. 5, 1996.
10. Lee, J., Rollins, J.B., and Spivey, J.P.: Pressure Transient Testing, SPE Text-
Book Series Vol. 9, 2003.
11. Lee, S.T. and Brockenbrough, J.R.: A New Analytical Solution for Finite
Conductivity Vertical Fractures with Real Time and Laplace Space Parameter
Estimation, SPE 12013, October 1983.
12. Lee, S.T. and Brockenbrough, J.R.: A New Approximate Analytical Solution
for Finite-Conductivity Vertical Fractures, SPE Formation Evaluation, Febru-
ary 1986.
13. Malekzadeh, D. and Tiab, D.: Interference testing of Horizontal Wells, SPE
22733, October 1991.
14. McGuire, W.J. and Sikora, V.J.: The Effect of Vertical Fractures on Well Pro-
ductivity, SPEJ Vol. 219 401-403, 1960.
15. Meehan, D.N., Horne, R.N., and Ramey, H.J. Jr.: Interference Testing of
Finite Conductivity Hydraulically Fractured Wells, SPE 19784, October
1989.
16. Meyer, B.R., Frac Model in 3D- Parts 1-4, Oil and Gas Journal, June 17, July
1, July 22 and July 29, 1985.
17. Meyer, B.R.: Design Formulae for 2-D and 3-D Vertical Hydraulic Fractures:
Model Comparison and Parametric Studies, SPE 15240, May 1986.
18. Meyer, B.R. and Jacot, R.H.: Pseudosteady-state Analysis of Finite Conduc-
tivity Vertical Fractures, SPE 95941, October 2005.
19. Meyer, B.R., Bazan, L.W., Jacot, R.H., and Lattibeaudiere, M.G.: Optimiza-
tion of Multiple Transverse Hydraulic Fractures in Horizontal Wellbores, SPE
131732, February 2010.
20. Mousli, N.A., Raghavan, R., Cinco-Ley, H., and Samaniego-V, F.: The Influ-
ence of Vertical Fractures Intercepting Active and Observation Wells on Inter-
ference Tests, SPEJ, December 1982, 933-944.
21. Mukherjee, H. and Economides, M.J.: A Parametric Comparison of Horizon-
tal and Vertical Well Performance, SPE Formation Evaluation, June 1991.
G.4 References 713
22. Ramey, H.J. and Cobb, W.M: A General Pressure Buildup Theory for a Well
in a Close Drainage Area, JPT December, 1971, 1493-1505.
23. Soliman, M.Y., Hunt, J.L., and El Rabaa, W.: On Fracturing Horizontal
Wells, SPE 18542, November 1988.
24. Stehfest, H: Numerical Inversion of Laplace Transforms, Comm. ACM 13,
47-49, 1970.
25. Stevens, W.F. and Thodos, G.: Prediction of Approximate Time of Interfer-
ence Between Adjacent Wells, Trans. AIME, 1959, 216, 77.
26. Vazquez, M. and Beggs, H.D.: Correlations for Fluid Physical Property Pre-
diction JPT (June 1980) 32, 968-970.
27. Vela, S. and McKinley, R.M.: How Areal Heterogeneities Affect Pulse-Test
Results, SPE 2569, July 1969.
28. Warren, J.E. and Hartsock, J.H.: Well Interference, JPT, September 1960,
89-91.
Appendix H
Net Present Value Theory
H.1 Introduction
This appendix provides a brief overview of the methods used for conducting eco-
nomic analyses of fracture treatments as applied in the MFrac, MProd and MNpv
programs. The basic methodology is outlined and the pertinent economic equations
are presented. The purpose of employing these methods is to maximizing well prof-
itability by accelerating production, reducing operating costs and perhaps even
increasing ultimate recovery.
Normally, economic analysis, as it pertains to hydraulic fracture design, involves
comparing the cost of treatments with their expected revenues to maximize the
potential return on investment. This typically includes several steps. First, produc-
tion potential is evaluated as a function of fracture penetration and conductivity.
These fracture characteristics have a dramatic impact on the cash flow income of a
well. After generating the relationships between production and fracture character-
istics, the next step is to consider the costs associated with each of the fracture
geometries under evaluation. The final step is to combine the productivity data with
the cost information to determine the maximum economic return. This basic meth-
odology is consistent with the approach used in MFrac, MProd and MNpv (see Fig-
ure H.1).
Prior to performing a productivity analysis, it is necessary to have an idea of plausi-
ble fracture designs (or geometries) to explore. Since reservoir properties usually
control fracture geometry, it makes sense to use a fracturing simulator to develop a
set of characteristics for the model to evaluate. MFrac provides a convenient man-
ner to obtain this data by generating automatic designs. When the NPV option is on
in MFrac, a maximum fracture length and proppant concentration are specified.
Pumping schedules, as well as, fracture geometry and proppant transport solutions
are automatically created for ten subdivisions of this length. The information cre-
716 Net Present Value Theory:
ated from this procedure can then be imported directly into MProd to perform a
group of production simulations.

Figure H.1: Economic Optimization Concept.
Although it is convenient to use MFrac to determine the fracture characteristics and
treatment parameters for evaluation in MProd, fracture length, conductivity and
material quantity information can be directly input in MProd to perform a produc-
tion or economic analysis. Consult the MFrac and MProd chapters for more
information on their respective options.
With fracture data entered in MProd and all of the remaining reservoir parameters
described, production simulations can be performed to predict the relationship
between cumulative production, fracture contact area (e.g., frac length) and fracture
deliverability (e.g., conductivity). These results will normally show that for reason-
able conductivity, the greater the fracture length, the more substantial the produc-
tivity improvement. To determine whether or not the benefit of creating additional
reservoir contact area is worth the cost, the economic value of each treatment must
be considered.
H.2 General Equations 717
The economic value of a stimulation treatment is typically assessed by using one of
three methods. The first of these methods is predicting the time it takes for the
cumulative post-frac revenue to reach the level of the initial investment. This is the
time required to pay for the treatment with revenues from the well. This criterion is
usually referred to as payout. Particularly for low permeability wells, where
investments are large and payout time is long, this method does not take into
account the time value of money (e.g., Currency Escalation Rate or achievable
interest rate) and can, therefore, lead to false conclusions. Even if the value of
money remained constant over the producing time of a well, the payout or net reve-
nue of each treatment design under consideration would not always be an accept-
able method to determine an optimum design. For example, comparing a smaller
treatment and associated fracture penetration with a larger job may show that the
smaller treatment pays out sooner because of early time production effects. Evalu-
ating the long-term production decline of the two scenarios, however, may reveal
that the larger treatment and contact area, once it achieves stabilized flow, declines
less rapidly and, therefore, results in a higher ultimate recovery.
To include the time value of money in the economic evaluation of fracture treat-
ments, the preferred methods of either Net Present Value (NPV) or Discounted
Return On Investment (DROI) are used. The primary difference between the two
approaches is that DROI is sensitive to the rate of change in NPV and, therefore,
can be thought of as an indicator of capital efficiency. In other words, the incremen-
tal DROI decreases when the cost associated with an increase in production
increases at a greater rate than the NPV. When capital is strictly limited, DROI indi-
cates the more conservative optimization criteria. A decreasing DROI suggests that
your limited capital may receive a higher rate of return if invested in another man-
ner (i.e., one with a higher DROI).
H.2 General Equations
This section presents the equations used for conducting economic calculations in
MNpv. When appropriate the solution methodology is given.
Fracture Net Present Value (NPV)
The present value or present worth, , of a future-value, , is
(H-1)
P F
P
F
1 i + ( )
n
------------------ =
where
This simple formula is the basis for calculating the Net Present Value of an invest-
ment. Fracture Net Present Value, , is defined as the revenue from a hydrauli-
cally fractured reservoir less the production from the same reservoir without a
hydraulic fracture and the cost of the treatment in current dollars. This relationship
is expressed as follows:
(H-2)
or
where
Discount Well Revenue (DWR)
The discounted well revenue (DWR) in terms of the net incremental cash flow
(NCF)j is
(H-3)
or
= present worth
= future worth
= currency escalation rate or interest rate
= number of periods
= total fixed and variable cost of a fracture treatment
= number of periods
= fracture Net Present Value
= present value production revenue of a fractured reservoir
= future value production revenue of an unfractured reservoir
= future value production revenue of a fractured reservoir
= future value production revenue of an unfractured reservoir
P
F
i
n
NPV
NPV R
F
R
0
C
F
=
NPV
V
F
( )
j
1 i + ( )
j
-----------------
\ .
|
| |
V
0
( )
j
1 i + ( )
j
-----------------
\ .
|
| |
C
F
j 1 =
n
j 1 =
n
=
C
F
n
NPV
R
F
R
0
V
F
V
0
DWR
V
F
( )
j
1 i + ( )
j
-----------------
\ .
|
| |
V
0
( )
j
1 i + ( )
j
-----------------
\ .
|
| |
j 1 =
n
j 1 =
n
=
H.2 General Equations 719
The NPV can be expressed in terms of the DWR by:
(H-4)
From these expressions it is shown that the Fracture NPV is a function of time,
propped fracture length, conductivity, drainage area, reservoir properties, etc. This
methodology, therefore, is an excellent criteria for basing the optimization strategy.
Discounted Return on Investment (DROI)
The DROI also takes into account the time value of money invested and can be
used as a indicator of the capital investment efficiency. The DROI is simply the
ratio of the Discounted Well Revenue divided by the total cost of a treatment. For a
fracture design this is
(H-5)
The decision on which optimization criteria to use rests with your companies busi-
ness philosophy and financial position. DROI is the approach used by many opera-
tors to evaluate new prospects. Typically, this involves considering the total cost of
drilling and completing a well. When estimating the value of a hydraulic fracture
treatment you can identify a design which may result in the highest NPV; however,
this does not mean that you have identified a design which makes the most financial
sense relative to other investments. For that we recommend the use of DROI with
realistic estimates of the future hydrocarbon revenue per unit volume and cur-
rency escalation trends.
DWR
NCF ( )
j
1 i + ( )
j
------------------
j 1 =
n
=
NPV DWR C
F
=
DROI
DWR
C
F
------------- =
Appendix I
TSO & Frac-Pack Methodology
I.1 Introduction
Tip Screen-out (TSO) and Frac-Pack designs are generally performed in moderate
to high-permeability reservoirs that require greater conductivity than achieved with
conventional hydraulic fracturing. The implementation of TSO and Frac-Packs,
over the past few years, has resulted in substantially greater fracture conductivities
and improved proppant placement. As a consequence, these applications have
gained popularity in the industry, especially in high permeability wells in the Gulf
of Mexico where inadequate conductivity and formation damage have been prob-
lems. Fundamentally, these techniques are similar up to the step of fully packing the
fracture.
The TSO methodology as presented by Smith
1
et al. and applied to the Ravensurn
South gas field
2
is used to deliberately create a proppant screen-out or bridging
condition around the perimeter of the fracture to prevent further propagation and
height growth. Continued pumping results in ballooning or an increase in the
fracture aperture with continued increasing fracture pressure. The increased aper-
ture results in a greater propped width and increased fracture conductivity. Typi-
cally, only the perimeter of the fracture is packed.
Frac-Packs differ from TSO's by packing the entire fracture with proppant from the
tip to the wellbore at the settled bank concentration which greatly increases the
fracture conductivity. This technique is typically performed in higher permeability
formations that require large average conductivities to increase productivity.
The relative popularity and success of the so-called Frac-Pack technique for
hydraulic fracturing has resulted in many misconceptions regarding the objectives
and procedures used for these non-conventional treatments. The Frac-Pack method-
ology presented here (and compared to the classical TSO methodology) was origi-
722 TSO & Frac-Pack Methodology:
nally developed and implemented into MFrac-II ver. 7.1 July of 1994. An
analytical form of this methodology was presented at the 1995 SPE annual
meeting
3
.
This appendix presents in a concise manner a summary of Meyer & Associates, Inc.
1994 tech notes for design of TSO's and Frac-Packs. A clear definition of the
design objectives and a step-by-step procedure that can be used as an engineering
guide for implementation are also included. A comparison is made between the
classical TSO and Frac-Pack methodologies with a presentation of results achiev-
able with Frac-Packs. The following discussions will help reduce the confusion sur-
rounding the design of fractures in high permeability reservoirs and offer
alternatives to increase productivity.
I.2 Methodology
MFrac uses numerical, state-of-the-art, Frac-Pack and TSO methodologies to
design fully packed or TSO type proppant distributions. The modeling tech-
niques used require that the fracture propagation and proppant transport solution be
linked in such a way that each can influence the other. Normally, this means that for
each time step in the fracture propagation calculation, the proppant transport simu-
lation must be assessed and coupled. This methodology differs substantially from a
conventional fracture stimulation approach which by design tries to prevent prop-
pant screen-outs or bridging.
In order to fully pack a fracture and achieve a desired conductivity, it is necessary
to accurately model and control the rate of creation of fracture volume. If this is
accomplished, the fracture can be filled or packed with an injection concentration
far below the packed value.
For a Frac-Pack or TSO design the slurry treatment must be scheduled such that as
the earlier stages concentrate, due to slurry dehydration or leakoff, the later stages
fill the void created by a continuous and declining rate of fluid loss. The only oper-
ational alternatives to fully pack a fracture is to either decrease the injection rate or
increase the proppant concentration to offset the decreased leakoff rate during the
Frac-Pack process. Increasing the leakoff velocity (rate) during the Frac-Pack pro-
cess will also enable the fracture to be fully packed. However, accomplishing this
in a diffusion controlled environment may be unrealistic. In practice, the maximum
pumped concentration is normally limited by an upper constrained value far below
the packed concentration needed for Frac-Packs. Therefore, the only practical way
to accomplish a Frac-Pack reliably is to decrease the injection rate after a pre-spec-
ified design criteria is satisfied to offset the decline in fluid loss once screen-out
occurs and fracture growth has stopped. The advantage of decreasing the injection
rate also minimizes excess ballooning by maintaining a constant fracture pres-
I.2 Methodology 723
sure. This methodology is easily implemented in the field (by controlling pressure
and decreasing rate) and can help force a TSO or enhance the rate of Frac-Packing.
Design Criteria
The criteria for automatic TSO and Frac-Pack designs include:
Designing to a pre-specified fracture length to optimized near wellbore con-
ductivity;
Basing the design on a maximum allowable inlet concentration;
Designing to achieve a minimum concentration per unit area; and
Maintaining pumping pressures below a critical maximum.
Procedures
In terms of procedures, operations should design for a target fracture length. After a
perimeter tip screen-out is achieved, fracture extension (length and height growth)
will stop and the fracture width and pressure will begin to increase. The rate of fluid
leakoff begins to decrease.
For a TSO, the fracture pressure is allowed to continue increasing until the mini-
mum concentration per unit area is satisfied or the pressure rises to the maximum
allowable value. The TSO methodology assumes a constant injection rate during
the entire pumping schedule.
For a Frac-Pack once the fracture width (or pressure) reaches a value to satisfy the
minimum concentration per unit area at the bank concentration, the fracture pres-
sure (compliance) is held constant by decreasing the injection rate to match the
leakoff rate.
Because excess ballooning is permitted in a TSO, the inlet concentrations to
approach a fully packed fracture are not feasible.
Figure I.1 illustrates the methodologies for tip screen-out and frac-pack designs. As
shown, the behavior of the fracture length (extension) is similar for both methods
with arresting of fracture propagation after the time of tip screen-out (TSO). The
inlet proppant concentration for a TSO is shown to continually increase with time
(after the initial TSO stage) until it reaches a maximum pre-specified inlet concen-
tration.
The Frac-Pack schedule shows a similar behavior up to the time of the maximum
inlet concentration. After reaching maximum concentration, the injection rate is
decreased to match the leakoff rate while maintaining a constant inlet concentra-
tion. The leakoff rate decreases as a result of the decreased fracture propagation
rate. Since no new fracture area is being created during the packing process, the
leakoff velocity will decrease with time as a result of diffusion. If leakoff is not
controlled by diffusion or is time dependent, the leakoff rate will decline at a differ-
ent slope.
For a Frac-Pack, once the injection rate is cut to the leakoff rate, the fracture pres-
sure will remain essentially constant. This mitigates the pressure dependence effect
on fluid loss. If leakoff is a strong function of fracture pressure, the leakoff coeffi-
cient would change more drastically for a TSO than a Frac-Pack because of the
continued increasing net fracture pressure with time after a TSO.
Figure I.1 shows that the fracture net pressure and width both increase with time
after a TSO. However, the Frac-Pack net pressure and width remain constant after
the time the maximum concentration is reached. Since our 3-D model is not a
lumped model, the spatial compliance factors may change during the declining
injection rate period resulting in slight variations in the pressure and aperture. The
fracture volume will, however, remain constant during this period. Figure I.1 also
shows the final concentration at the end of the job (eoj). This clearly illustrates that
the main advantage of packing a fracture all the way back to the wellbore is to
increase the propped width and minimize excess pressure
I.2 Methodology 725
Figure I.1: Tip Screen-Out vs. Frac-Pack Methodology.
Generally, Frac-Packs are performed in formations which have higher permeability
and lower fracture efficiencies than TSO's. Therefore, to achieve an adequate
dimensionless conductivity the conductivity must be
greater for frac-packs. This is achieved by designing for short high conductivity
fractures. Frac-Packs are also most easily realized in formations conducive to low
F
CD
k
f
w
f
( ) k
r
L
p
( ) = k
f
w
f
( )
fracture efficiencies (typically less than forty percent). The lower the efficiency the
easier and quicker it is to achieve a TSO or Frac-Pack. For fracture efficiencies
greater than fifty per cent it is difficult to perform a classical fully packed frac-
ture. Other important considerations are the minimum allowable flow rate, prop-
pant settling, time/pressure dependent leakoff, spurt loss and changing fracture
compliance. The numerical procedure developed here for 3-D (and 2-D) TSO's and
Frac-Pack's automatically accounts for these effects and other time dependent
parameters generally ignored in analytical solutions.
Typically TSO's are performed in moderate permeability hard rock country
where as Frac-Packs have been successfully performed in high permeability uncon-
solidated soft rock formations. The advantage of a successful Frac-Pack is that
the fracture will be packed at the settled bank proppant concentration and at the
dynamic pumped width. The propped width for a TSO (no settling) will be equal to
the ratio of the slurry concentration in the fracture at the end of pumping divided by
the settled bank slurry concentration ( ). If 20/40 Jordan sand is
placed at a maximum proppant concentration of 12 lbm/gal (7.8 lbm/gal slurry) the
TSO propped width ratio would be 0.61 (i.e., bank concentration of 30.5 lbm/gal liq
(12.8 lbm/gal slurry), where or )). This
clearly illustrates why many TSO's are ballooned to a much greater extent than nec-
essary to achieve the same concentration per unit area as a Frac-Pack.
I.3 Numerical Simulation
The above methodology for Frac-Packs and TSO's was implemented in our 3-D
hydraulic fracturing simulator (MFrac) in early 1994. The code was beta tested and
released in late summer. This methodology is applicable for all types of 2-D and 3-
D type fracture geometry models. The methodology is simple and based on sound
engineering principles of mass and momentum conservation. Since this methodol-
ogy has been incorporated in a numerical simulator, implementation of different
boundary conditions or assumptions is possible and the effect of such changes
quantified. Although all the underlying boundary conditions outlined in this meth-
odology may not always be satisfied, these tools enable the design engineer to
investigate the simplicity of this first order analysis and how substantially it devi-
ates from conventional fracturing.
To illustrate the Frac-Pack methodology an automatic design was numerically sim-
ulated based on the following criteria:
Pre-specified fracture length of 100 feet;
Maximum allowable inlet concentration of 12 lbm/gal liquid;
w
p
w
eoj
c
s
c
s
bank
=
c
l
c
s
1 c
s
( ) = c
s
c
l
1 c
l
+ ( ) =
I.3 Numerical Simulation 727
Designed to achieve a concentration per unit area of 9 lbm/ft2; and
Maintain a pumping pressure below 10000 psi.
Figure I.2 shows the inlet slurry, liquid and resulting leakoff rate as a function of
time which satisfy the pre-specified Frac-Pack criteria. Figure I.3 illustrates the
simulated automated inlet proppant concentration schedule.
Figure I.2: Automated Injection and Leakoff Rates vs. Time.
Figure I.3: Automated Inlet Proppant Concentration vs. Time.
Once the design fracture length is achieved at about 13 minutes fracture extension
(length and height) stops as a result of the tip screen-out condition (Figure I.4). The
fracture continues to balloon from 13 to 17.5 minutes to a width of about 1.3 in.
(Figure I.5) to meet the design concentration/area of 9 lbm/ft
2
for a fully packed
fracture.
I.3 Numerical Simulation 729
Figure I.4: Fracture Extension vs. Time.
Figure I.5: Fracture Net Pressure and Width vs. Time.
Once the fracture stops propagating the pressure and width continue increasing
(Figure I.5). After the optimum design width is achieved the injection rate is cut to
the leakoff rate and the inlet concentration is maintained at the maximum value.
This stops the fracture from ballooning, resulting in an approximate constant pres-
sure throughout the remainder of the job.
Figure I.2 shows that once the fracture stops propagating the leakoff rate decreases.
Also, the liquid rate decreases with increasing inlet sand concentration. After the
slurry rate decreases to the leakoff rate at tc
max
the liquid injection rate falls below
the leakoff rate. The higher the maximum allowable inlet concentration the lower
the liquid rate will be. Consequently, during this decreasing injection period, the
rate of fracture packing is equal to where is the settled bank
porosity.
Figure I.6 shows the behavior of fracture efficiency as a function of time. After the
propagation rate diminishes at 13 minutes the efficiency rises as a result of the
decreased leakoff rate. However, once the injection rate decreases to the leakoff
rate the fracture volume remains approximately constant (i.e., the compliance fac-
tor may, however, change slightly with time) and the efficiency will continue
decreasing until the fracture is fully packed. The fracture efficiency at closure rep-
resents the fraction of propped volume to total injected slurry volume.

Figure I.6: Fracture Efficiency vs. Time.
q
s
q
l
( ) 1 | ( ) |
I.4 Results and Conclusions 731
Figure I.7 shows the final fully packed fracture concentration per unit area con-
tours. This profile is shown to match the desired final value of 9 lbm/ft
2
. The two
maximum concentration variations in the contours are a result of the two low con-
fining stresses layers in each of the pay intervals.
Figure I.7: Proppant Concentration per Unit Area Contours.
Figure I.2 through Figure I.7 illustrate the Frac-Pack methodology as implemented
in our 3-D hydraulic fracturing simulator. The advantage of using a numerical sim-
ulator is that the leakoff rate, compliance factors, spurt loss, height growth and
other typical simplifying analytical assumptions made by 2-D models are not nec-
essary to solve the governing equations.
I.4 Results and Conclusions
The methodology and procedures outlined in Figure I.1 will help the design engi-
neer better understand TSO and Frac-Pack treatments. The advantage of a Frac-
Pack, in controlling the pressure rise to minimize excess ballooning and in opti-
mizing proppant placement, was also demonstrated. The application for either the
TSO or Frac-Pack is more a function of the fracture efficiency than if it is of hard
or soft rock. Lower fracture efficiencies (high reservoir permeability) favor the
Frac-Pack while higher efficiencies (moderate permeability) favor the TSO meth-
odology. Excessive leakoff control for both the TSO and Frac-Pack may be a strong
disadvantage resulting in higher fracture efficiency jobs.
High permeability reservoirs require high conductivity fractures, hence the term
packed is applied since the fracture must be fully packed with proppant to accom-
plish an optimum conductivity. To approach a truly packed condition it is neces-
sary to control the injection rate and inlet proppant concentration once a TSO has
occurred and throughout the Frac-Pack process.
When classical TSO methods are applied to small scale treatments undesirable or
less desirable effects may occur due to the resulting proppant distribution. Nor-
mally, Frac-Packs are performed in high permeability reservoirs that require a more
aggressive approach to achieve the optimum proppant placement for full develop-
ment of short high conductivity fractures.
Achieving the optimum condition described in the methodology above requires an
understanding of the fundamental dynamic time dependent diffusion fluid loss pro-
cess for a specific application. Fracture growth equilibrium can then be inferred by
considering the material balance between injection, fluid loss and overall fracture
conservation of volume (mass).
Frac-Packs are most applicable in design of hydraulic fracturing treatments when
the target conductivity is high and more control in the spatial distribution of prop-
pant is required.
I.5 References
1. Smith, M. B., Miller, W.K. and Haga, J.: Tip Screenout Fracturing: A Tech-
nique for Soft Unstable Formations, SPEPE, May 1987, 95-103.
2. Martins, J.P. and Stewart, D.R.: Tip Screenout Fracturing Applied to the
Ravenspurn South Gas Field Development, SPE Prod. Eng., Aug. 1992, 252-
258.
3. Fan, Y. and Economides, M.J.: Fracture Dimensions in Frac&Pack Stimula-
tion, Paper SPE 30469 Presented at the 1995 Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Dallas, TX, Oct. 22-25, 1995.
Appendix J
Produced Water Reinjection Fracturing
J.1 Introduction
The solution methodology for our Produced Water Reinjection (PWRI) hydraulic
fracturing simulator is formulated in this report. A summary of the governing water
and thermal front equations, thermo- and poro-elastic stresses and fluid loss equa-
tions are presented.
J.2 Thermal and Water Front Equations
The mass and energy conservation equations are developed based on the assump-
tion that there are two zones, one at the injection temperature and another at the for-
mation temperature. The separation of these zones is identified by the thermal front.
Both zones are assumed to be at an irreducible oil saturation. The thermal zone
extends from the wellbore to the thermal front and the second zone extends from
the thermal front to the waterfront. The first zone is at the injection temperature and
the second is at the formation temperature.
Perkins and Gonzalez (1985) presented a simplified methodology for determining
the cooled region and thermal fronts. The volume of the cooled region (assuming
the injected fluid is cooler than the reservoir) is determined from energy conserva-
tion. The cooled volume in the reservoir is assumed to be the region where the res-
ervoir is at the injected fluid temperature. We also assume conduction heat transfer
is negligible in the reservoir.
The governing energy equation is
(J-1)
where
E
in
E
out
AE
system
=
734 Produced Water Reinjection Fracturing:
The governing energy equation with a reference temperature equal to the initial res-
ervoir temperature of (i.e., ), and a fluid injection temperature of
is
(J-2)
The volume of the cooled region is
(J-3)
where is the residual oil saturation.
Perkins and Gonzalez approximated the cooled region as an elliptical inclusion
confocal with a line crack of length and having a volume . The major axis
( ) is parallel to the fracture length and the minor axis ( ) is perpendicular to the
fracture plane. The resulting ellipsoidal equations are
(J-4)
and
or
. (J-5)
E
in
Energy into the System =
E
out
Energy out of the System =
AE
system
Change in System Energy =
T
r
E
out
0 =
T
f
V
i
c ( )
w
T
f
T
r
( ) V
c
c ( )
r
1 | ( ) c ( )
w
| 1 S
or
( ) c ( )
o
|S
or
+ + | | T
f
T
r
| | =
V
c
c ( )
w
V
i
c ( )
r
1 | ( ) c ( )
w
| 1 S
or
( ) c ( )
o
|S
or
+ +
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- =
S
or
L
f
V
c
a b
a
0
L
f

0
cosh L
f

0
( ) exp
0
( ) exp +
2
-------------------------------------------------
\ .
| |
= =
b
0
L
f
h
0
sin L
f

0
( ) exp
0
( ) exp
2
-------------------------------------------------
\ .
| |
= =
V
c
ta
0
b
0
h tL
f
2
h h
0
h cos
0
sin = =
V
c
tL
f
2
h
4
------------- 2
0
( ) exp 2
0
( ) exp | | =
J.2 Thermal and Water Front Equations 735
Substituting into the above equation, we find
(J-6)
The solution to is
(J-7)
where
The major and minor thermal front axes are
(J-8)
and
. (J-9)
The volume of the water flooded region from mass conservation is
(J-10)
where is the irreducible water saturation.
Approximating the water flooded region as ellipsoidal in a similar manor to the
thermal region, we have
(J-11)
where is
F
0
2
0
( ) exp =
F
0
2
4V
c
tL
f
2
h
-------------F
0
1 0 =
F
0
F
0

0

0
( )
2
4 + + ( ) 2 =
0
4V
c
tL
f
2
h
------------- =
a
0
L
f
F
0
1 F
0
+ ( ) 2 =
b
0
L
f
F
0
1 F
0
( ) 2 =
V
w
V
w
V
i
| 1 S
or
S
iw
( )
-------------------------------------- =
S
iw
F
1
2
4V
w
tL
f
2
h
-------------F
1
1 0 =
F
1
(J-12)
and
The major and minor water front axes are then given by
(J-13)
and
. (J-14)
Since , the ellipsoidal thermal front ( ) will lag the ellipsoidal
water front ( ).
J.3 Thermoelastic and Poroelastic Stresses
This section summarizes the governing equations for thermoelastic and poroelastic
stresses generated during Produced Water Reinjection (PWRI) fracturing. The
methodology is based on the work of Perkins & Gonzalez (1985) for elliptically
shaped regions of finite thickness.
Thermoelastic Stresses
The thermoelastic stresses are generated if the inject fluid is at a temperature differ-
ent than that of the formation. The region of changed rock temperature has a sharp
boundary interface which progresses outward in an ellipsoidal shape.
The thermoelastic stresses for regions of elliptical cross-section of finite height
have been developed by Perkins and Gonzalez using numerical analysis. They
reported the following equation for estimating the average thermal stress perpen-
dicular to the fracture face in the interior of an elliptical cooled region of any
height:
F
1

1

1
2
4 + + ( ) 2 =
1
4V
w
tL
f
2
h
------------- =
a
1
L
f
F
1
1 F
1
+ ( ) =
b
1
L
f
F
1
1 F
1
( ) =
V
w
V
c
> a
0
b
0
,
a
1
b
1
,
J.3 Thermoelastic and Poroelastic Stresses 737
(J-15)
or
(J-16)
where the thermoelastic coefficient is
(J-17)
Figure J.1 shows the thermoelastic coefficient for various thermal front ellipsoidal
shapes.
Figure J.1: Thermoelastic Coefficient vs. Ellipsoidal Shape
1 v ( )Ao
3
T
E|AT
-------------------------------- f a
0
b
0
h , , ( ) =
Ao
3
T
E|AT
1 v
--------------- f a
0
b
0
h , , ( ) =
f a
0
b
0
h , , ( )
b
0
a
0
1 b
0
a
0
+
------------------------ =
1
1 b
0
a
0
+
------------------------
\ .
| |
+
1 1
1
2
-- - 1.45
h
2b
0
--------
.
|
0.9
0.35
h
2b
0
--------
\ .
| |
2
+
\ .
| |
1
b
0
a
0
-----
\ .
| |
0.774
+ +
)
`

\ .
|
| |
A corresponding second principal thermal stress change is also reported by
Perkins & Gonzalez.
Poroelastic Stresses
The change in horizontal stress ( )as a result of a change in pore pressure
( ) is analogous to the thermal stresses equations. To accomplish this transfor-
mation, the following linear coefficient of pore pressure expansion is introduced
(J-18)
which is analogous to the linear coefficient of thermal expansion. The change in the
minimum horizontal stress as a result of pore pressure changes from Eq. (J-15) is
(J-19)
Introducing Biots constant
(J-20)
where is the bulk modulus of the material and is the bulk modulus of the
solid constituents. The bulk modulus of the material, , is defined as
(J-21)
Rearranging Eq. (5), the grain compressibility in terms of Biots constant and the
bulk modulus of the material is
(J-22)
Then substituting Eq. (7) and (5) into (3) and rearranging we find
Ao
2
Ao
3
p
Ap
J
1 2v
E
---------------
c
gr
3
------- =
1 v ( )Ao
3
p
EJAp
-------------------------------- f a
1
b
1
h , , ( ) =
o 1
c
gr
c
b
------- 1
k
b
k
gr
------- = =
k
b
k
gr
k
b
k
b
E
3 1 2v ( )
----------------------- =
c
gr
1 o
k
b
------------ 1 o ( )
3 1 2v ( )
E
----------------------- = =
J.4 Governing Fluid Loss Equations 739
(J-23)
Placing Eq. (4) in terms of Biots constant we have
(J-24)
or
(J-25)
where .
Perkins and Gonzales used the same approach for calculating the poro-elastic stress
as the thermal stress (i.e., they assumed the elliptical area of constant pressure vari-
ations surround the fracture). Since Koning (1985) realized that this assumption
was clearly unrealistic, he developed a different approach following the method-
ology of Muskat. Konings ellipsoidal pressure distribution around the fracture for
plane strain yields a limiting factor on the effective pressure differential. This factor
which we will call the Koning factor, , is equal to 0.5 as derived by Koning.
The resulting poro-elastic equation from Eq. 10 is
(J-26)
where the Perkins factor, , is used to account for the magnitude of the
ellipsoidal pressure extent around the fracture.
J.4 Governing Fluid Loss Equations
This section discusses the mechanisms which control fluid loss form a propagating
fracture. The classic linear (1D) fluid loss equations as proposed by Carter which
are exclusively used today are first presented. Next we present the fundamental
dimensionless pressure and rate solutions for linear and ellipsoidal. A relationship
between the dimensionless rate and pressure solutions is then discussed based on
the methodology of Koning. A discussion of internal and external skin is then pre-
sented, This is followed by the governing equations for modeling internal and
EJ 1 2v ( )
Ec
gr
3
----------- 1 2v ( )o = =
1 v
1 2v
---------------
\ .
| |
Ao
3
p
oAp
-------------- f a
1
b
1
h , , ( ) =
Ao
3
p
1 2v
1 v
---------------
\ .
| |
oAp f a
1
b
1
h , , ( ) =
Ap P
f
p
i
=
f
k
Ao
3
p
1 2v
1 v
---------------
\ .
| |
of
k
Ap f a
1
b
1
h , , ( ) =
f a
1
b
1
h , , ( )
external filter cakes based on the total suspended solids in the injected fluid which
is based on the work of Pang and Sharma (1994) concludes the fluid loss section.
Carters Solution - Linear Fluid loss
The total fluid leakoff rate as a function of time in a hydraulic fracture is normally
based on Carters one-dimensional fluid loss equation
(J-27)
where is the fluid loss rate at time , is the fracture area (one face),
is the total leakoff coefficient, is the time of fracture area creation. Carters
1D equation assumes that the fluid loss to the formation is linear and perpendicular
to the fracture face (see Howard and Fast (1970, page 33)).
Meyer and Hagel (1988) presented a general equation to replace the leakoff rate of
Eq. (J-27)
(J-28)
where
(J-29)
and
(J-30)
Meyer and Hagel also showed that for a constant leakoff area propagation parame-
ter, , Eq. (J-29) simplifies to
q t ( ) 4
C
t t A ( )
----------------------- A d
0
A t ( )
}
=
q t ( ) t A t ( ) C
t A ( )
q t ( )
4CA t ( )
t
------------------
1
1 f ( )
----------------------- d
0
1
}
=
4CA t ( )
t
------------------|' =
f ( ) t ( ) t =
|'
1
1 f ( )
----------------------- d
0
1
}
=
o
a
(J-31)
and
(J-32)
where is the gamma function and . Typical values for as a
function of are given in Table J.1.
Dimensionless Pressure Solution
The dimensionless pressure for a constant fluid loss rate is defined as
(J-33)
Gringarten (1974), as report by Earlougher (1977), presented two dimensionless
pressure solutions for a static vertical fracture in an infinite-acting system. The two
general solutions for elliptical leakoff are presented below.
Table J.1: Fluid Loss Integral versus Propagation Parameter
Propagation Parameter,
Fluid loss Integral,
0 1
1/2
1 2
2 8/3
10 5.675463855...
f ( )
t ( )
t
-----------
A t ( )
A t ( )
-----------
)
`

1 o
a
= =
1 o
a
=
|'
1
1
1 o
a
-------------------------- d
0
1
}
=
I o
a
1 + ( )I 1 2 ( )
I o
a
1 2 + ( )
------------------------------------------- =
I I 1 2 ( ) t = |'
o
a
o
a
|'
t 2
p
D
2tkh
q
-------------Ap =
The uniform fracture flux solution
This solution assumes that the fluid loss in the fracture is a uniform leakoff rate per
unit area of the fracture face so that there is a pressure drop in the fracture. The
dimensionless pressure is calculated from
(J-34)
where the dimensionless time based on the fracture half-length is defined as
(J-35)
and
(J-36)
The dimensionless pressure solution at early times (i.e., , linear or 1D
leakoff) for a static (non-propagating) uniform flux fracture in an infinite system is
given by
(J-37)
When , Eq. (J-34) becomes
(J-38)
with less than 1% error.
The infinite-conductivity solution
This solution assumes that the fracture has an infinite permeability and that the
pressure is uniform in the fracture. The approximate solution for an infinite-con-
ductivity fracture as given by Gringarten (1974) is
p
D
t
Dxf
( ) tt
Dxf
erf
1
2 t
Dxf
----------------
\ .
| |
1
2
---Ei
1
4t
Dxf
------------
\ .
| |
=
t
Dxf
t
L
2
----- =
k
c|
--------- =
t
Dxf
0.1 
p
D
1
2
--- t
Dxf
2.80907 + ln ( ) =
(J-39)
The dimensionless pressure solution at early times (i.e., ) for an infi-
nite conductivity fracture in an infinite system is given by
(J-40)
(J-41)
Dimensionless Rate Solution
Defining the fluid loss rate in terms of a dimensionless rate function, , we have
(J-42)
where is the formation permeability, is the formation height, is the reser-
voir viscosity, and is the differential pressure (fracture pressure minus the ini-
tial reservoir pressure).
Linear Solution
The differential equation for the pressure distribution in the formation
assuming one-dimensional (linear) fluid loss from a fracture is
(J-43)
p
D
t
Dxf
( )
1
2
--- tt
Dxf
erf
0.134
t
Dxf
-------------
\ .
| |
erf
0.866
t
Dxf
-------------
\ .
| |
+
)
`

=
0.067Ei
0.018
t
Dxf
----------------
\ .
| |
0.433Ei
0.750
t
Dxf
----------------
\ .
| |
t
Dxf
0.01 
p
D
1
2
--- t
Dxf
2.2000 + ln ( ) =
q
D
q t ( )
2tkhAp
--------------------q
D
t ( ) =
k h
Ap
p x t , ( )
k
c|
---------
y
2
2
c
c p
\ .
|
| |
t c
cp
=
where the reservoir viscosity ( ), permeability ( ), porosity ( ), and compress-
ibility ( ) effect the pressure transient.
The boundary and initial conditions, assuming that the reservoir is infinite and that
a constant pressure exists in the fracture between the fracture and the reservoir, are
(J-44)
The solution to Eq. (J-43) as given by Holman (1977, page 102) is
(J-45)
where
(J-46)
The velocity at any position in the formation from Darcys law is
(J-47)
Performing the partial differentiation of Eq. (J-45) gives
(J-48)
At the fracture face, the leakoff velocity is
(J-49)
where the leakoff coefficient is given by
(J-50)
and .
k |
c
p y 0 , ( ) p
i
=
p 0 t , ( ) p
f
for t 0 > =
p y t , ( ) p
f
p
i
p
f
-------------------------- erf
y
2 t
------------
\ .
| |
=
k
c|
--------- =
y
v
k
---
y c
cp
\ .
| |
=
y c
cp
p
i
p
f
tt
--------------
y
2
4t
--------
\ .
| |
exp =
v
k
---
y c
cp
\ .
| |
y 0 =
---
Ap
tt
-------------
C
II
t
------- = = =
C
II
k
---
Ap
t
----------- Ap
k|c
t
--------- = =
Ap p
f
p
i
=
This is the same linear velocity formulation as presented by Howard and Fast
(1970, page 35).
Equating Eq. (J-42) to Eq. (J-28) for 1D flow and substituting Eq. (J-50) for reser-
voir dominated fluid loss ( ), we find
or
(J-51)
where the dimensionless time is given by
(J-52)
The dimensionless rate can be calculated from the dimensionless pressure solution
based on the following well known relationship in Laplace space (see Lee and Bro-
chenbrough (1983, Appendix A)
(J-53)
Then for linear fluid loss
(J-54)
or
The dimensionless rate in Laplace space is
C C
II
q t ( )
2tkhAp
--------------------q
D
t ( ) =
4CA t ( )
t
------------------|' =
q
D
t ( )
2
t
---
|'L t ( )
tt
--------------- =
1
tt
D
------------- =
t
D
t
L
2
-----
1
2 t |'
---------------
\ .
| |
2
- =
q
D
s ( )
1
s
2
p
D
s ( )
------------------- =
p
D
tt
Dxf
t
2
---2 t
Dxf
t =
p
D
s ( )
t
2
---
1
s s
--------- =
(J-55)
Inverting Eq. (J-55), we find the dimensionless rate solution for a static fracture
with linear leakoff to the formation to be
(J-56)
Consequently, if we make the following substitution for a propagating fracture
(J-57)
then the dimensionless rate solution as a function of dimensionless pressure for lin-
ear fluid loss is
(J-58)
General Dimensionless Rate Solution
Koning (1985) first showed that the solution for fractures propagating with a con-
stant injection rate could be obtained by making the following substitution
(J-59)
Our first reaction to this substitution is that its too simple to be correct. However,
Koning goes on to explain that this assumption is based partially on the work of
Haggort et al. who observed that in an infinite reservoir the fracture length is
always proportional to the square root of time, even in the region intermediate
between (16) and (17). Koning defines these conditions as follows: Condition
(16) means that the velocity of fracture propagation is much greater than the veloc-
ity with which the pressure disturbance travels into the reservoir (i.e., )
and condition (17) is if the fracture propagates much slower than the pressure dis-
turbance (i.e., ) and Carters model is certainly not valid. Koning fur-
ther goes on to state that (his) 2-D ellipsoidal solution is compared with the graph
in Hagoorts thesis on p. 132. The agreement is everywhere within 10%.
q
D
s ( )
1
s
2
p
D
s ( )
-------------------
2 t
s
---------- = =
q
D
t ( )
2
t
--- =
1
tt
Dxf
----------------
1
tt
D
-------------
2 t|'
tt
Dxf
----------------
q
D
t
D
( )
1
p
D
t
D
( )
---------------- =
q
D
t
Dxf
( )
1
p
D
t
Dxf
( )
--------------------
t
Dxf
1
t
Dxf
1
The correctness of Konings substitution for a constant injection rate (at low frac-
ture efficiencies) becomes clear from Eq. (J-57). If the fracture propagates propor-
tional to the square root of time, , then the fluid loss integral
parameter is given by . Eq. (J-57) then can be written as
(J-60)
or
(J-61)
Therefore, Eq. (J-58) simplifies to the Koning solution (Eq. (J-59)) for a fracture
propagating proportional to the square of time for 1-D and 2-D ellipsoidal flow.
van den Hoek (2000) proceeded along the lines of Koning in order to come up
with an elliptical leak-off rate for the general fracture case. His substitution, based
on our nomenclature, was
(J-62)
where is given by
(J-63)
This equation is similar to Eq. (J-32) for a time dependent propagation rate. van den
Hoek justifies this equation by the correctness of the asymptotic behavior for 1) a
constant propagation parameter (i.e., is a constant) and 2) for linear fluid loss
(i.e. Carters Solution). Clearly, van den Hoeks substitution does not simplify to
Carters 1-D solution for a general propagating fracture (i.e., only for
does it simplify to the Carter solution).
Therefore, again following along the lines of Koning, a general ellipsoidal solution
for non-constant fracture propagation rates (from Eq. (J-57) and Eq. (J-58)) is
obtained by making the substitution,
o
a
1 2 =
|' t 2 =
1
tt
D
-------------
2 t|'
tt
Dxf
----------------
1
tt
Dxf
----------------
o
a
1 2
=
t
D
t
Dxf
1
t
D
---------
2 t
t
Dxf
-------------
|'
f
o
----
f
o
f
o
1
1
1 o
a
t ( )
------------------------------- d
0
1
}
=
o
a
o
a
1 2 =
(J-64)
This is the same as van den Hoeks Eq. (J-62) with set equal to unity.
The general dimensionless rate solution as a function of dimensionless pressure is
(J-65)
J.5 Fracture Skin
The pressure drop, , as a result of a skin effect is defined as
(J-66)
where is the fracture skin.
External Skin
The leakoff velocity through the filter cake as a function of the cake permeability
( ), cake thickness ( ), and pressure drop across the cake ( ) from Darcys
law can be written as
(J-67)
The total leakoff rate over the fracture face is
(J-68)
The pressure drop across the cake in terms of the flow rate is
1
t
D
---------
2 t|'
t
Dxf
---------------
f
o
q
D
t
D
( )
1
p
D
t
D
( )
---------------- =
Ap
s
Ap
s
q
2tkh
-------------
\ .
| |
s =
s
k
c
o
c
Ap
s
v
k
c
c
-----
Ap
s
o
c
--------- =
q 4hL ( )
k
c
c
-----
Ap
s
o
c
--------- =
J.5 Fracture Skin 749
(J-69)
The fracture skin for an external filter cake from Eq. (J-66) is
(J-70)
Eq. (J-70) is for a static (non-propagating) fracture. For a propagating fracture, the
cake thickness varies as function of exposure time ( ). From conservation of
mass (volume) and Eq. (J-67) we have
(J-71)
The cake thickness as a function of time from Eq. (J-71) is
(J-72)
Therefore, the cake thickness as a function of exposure time is easily shown to be
of the form
(J-73)
The total fluid loss rate for a propagating fracture at time is
(J-74)
where and is understood to be the filter cake thickness at the
wellbore. Please refer to Eq. (J-28) for additional details.
Ap
s
q
c
4h
---------
o
c
L
-----
1
k
c
---- =
q
2tkh
-------------
t
2
---
o
c
L
-----
k
k
c

c
--------------
\ .
| |
)
`

=
s
f
external
t
2
---
o
c
L
-----
k
k
c

c
--------------
\ .
| |
=
t t
t c
co
c
v 1 o
c

o
c
t ( ) t
o
c
t t ( ) o
c
t ( ) 1 t t =
t
q 4hL ( )
k
c
c
-----
Ap
s
o
c
t ( )
------------
1
1 f ( )
----------------------- d
0
1
}
=
4hL ( )
k
c
c
-----
Ap
s
o
c
t ( )
------------|' =
f ( ) t t = o
c
t ( )
The effective skin based on the filter cake thickness at the wellbore with
from Eq. (J-70) is
(J-75)
Internal Skin
General Formulation
The pressure drop of the leakoff fluid in the formation for linear fluid loss as result
of mobility effects (see Eq. (J-69)) can be written as
(J-76)
where the subscript refers to the leakoff fluid properties, is the extent of the
damage region into the formation normal to the fracture face, and is the
leakoff fluid mobility.
The mobility ratio, , is given as
(J-77)
The internal fracture skin from Eq. (J-66) for a static fracture is
(J-78)
The internal skin for a propagating fracture based on the same methodology for the
external skin (i.e., ) is
o
c
o
c
t ( ) |'
s
f
external
1
2 t|'
---------------
o
c
t ( )
L t ( )
------------
k
k
c

c
--------------
)
`

=
Ap
s
q
4h
------
o
s
L
----

k
---
s
k
---
\ .
| |
=
q
2tkh
-------------
t
2
---
o
s
L
----
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
)
`

=
s o
s
k
s

s
M
M
k
k
s

s
-------------- =
s
f
internal
t
2
---
o
s
L
----
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
)
`

=
o
s
o
s
t ( ) |'
(J-79)
where is the damaged distance in the reservoir at the wellbore.
Eq. (J-79) can be written as
(J-80)
where
(J-81)
and for linear fluid loss
(J-82)
It is also observed that for linear fluid loss is related to the dimensionless
pressure solution (i.e., for small ) if we make
the following substitution
(J-83)
Since the above equations were developed for linear resistance or , we
now will develop an approximate solution for an ellipsoidal internal skin
.
The skin for a radial system (see Economides and Nolte (1987, pp. 1-11, eq 1-77))
is
(J-84)
s
f
internal
1
2 t|'
---------------
o
s
t ( )
L t ( )
-----------
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
)
`

=
o
s
t ( )
s
f
internal
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
f
D
( ) - =
o
s
t ( )
L t ( )
----------- =
f
D
( )
1
2 t|'
--------------- =
f
D
( )
f
D
( ) p
D
t
D
( ) tt
D
= t
D
tt
D
1
2 t|'
---------------
o
s
L 1
o
s
L 1
s
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
o
s
r
'
w
------ ln =
where is the effective wellbore radius. The effective wellbore radius for an
infinite conductivity fracture is
(J-85)
Substituting Eq. (J-85) into Eq. (J-84) and rearranging we find
(J-86)
where
The dimensionless pressure solution for an infinite conductivity fracture when
is
(J-87)
Therefore, if we make the following substitution
(J-88)
or
(J-89)
Then for a non-propagating fracture, we have when
. Similar to the methodology above we can postulate that for a propagat-
ing fracture with ellipsoidal fluid loss that Eq. (J-89) becomes
(J-90)
r
'
w
r
'
w
L 2 =
s
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
f
D
( ) - =
f
D
( ) 2 ( ) ln =
t
D
10 >
p
D
1 2 t
D
( ) 2.2 + ln | | =
9t
D
( )
1 2
ln =
9t
D
2
tt
D
2 t
3
----------
f
D
( ) p
D
t
D
( ) =
o
s
L 1
tt
D
2 t
3
----------
1
2 t|'
---------------
\ .
| |

Since the constant is near unity, an approximate solution for
the internal fracture skin with is
(J-91)
where
(J-92)
and the multiplier can be approximated by
(J-93)
where is a constant.
An approximate solution for the internal skin function based on Gringartens (1974)
infinite-conductivity fracture solution is
(J-94)
where for .
The dimensionless internal skin solution for small penetrations (i.e.,
) with an infinite conductivity fracture in an infinite system is given by
(J-95)
2 t
3
---------- 1.181635 ~
f
D
( ) p
D
t
D
( )
s
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
f
D
( ) - =
tt
D
( )
1
2 t|'
---------------
\ .
| |
( )
( )
2 t
3
----------
2 t
3
---------- 1
\ .
| |
e
a
~
a
f
D
( )

2
--- erf
1 x
D
2
t
-------
---------------
\ .
|
|
|
| |
erf
1 x
D
+
2
t
-------
---------------
\ .
|
|
|
| |
+
)

`

=
1 x
D
( )
4
------------------- -Ei
1 x
D
( )
2
4
t
---
2
-------------------------
\ .
|
|
| |
1 x
D
+ ( )
4
--------------------Ei
1 x
D
+ ( )
2
4
t
---
2
--------------------------
\ .
|
|
| |
x
D
0.51475 = o
a
1 2 =
f
D
0.35 <
f
D

(J-96)
Figure J.2 shows the dimensionless internal skin function (Eq. (J-94)) as a function
of the extent of the ellipsoidal damage region in the formation normal to the frac-
ture face divided by the fracture length (i.e., ). The
linear ( ) and radial ( ) solutions are shown for comparison.
Figure J.2: Dimensionless Internal Skin Function vs. Damage Penetration
Closed System
The mechanical skin pressure drop due to variable spacial mobility in a closed sys-
tem for steady-state behavior from Eq. (J-66) is given by
3.5 >
f
D
2 ( ) ln =
o
s
t ( ) L t ( ) b x
f
= =
f
D
= f
D
2 ( ) ln =
(J-97)
where is the elemental volume. The spacial varying total skin is given by
(J-98)
The equivalent internal skin for a closed system is
(J-99)
Implementation
Normally the internal mechanical skin is assumed to be at or near the wellbore.
However for produced water reinjection the internal damage may extend some dis-
tance into the formation. The above equations are required for variable internal
mobility in finite reservoirs.
To illustrate the utility of the above equations for a spacial variable mobility in the
reservoir a general steady-state solution for radial flow will be presented
The governing pressure equation for steady-state radial flow is
(J-100)
The average reservoir pressure is given by
(J-101)
and since Eq. (J-101) can be represented as
(J-102)
Substituting Eq. (J-100) into Eq. (J-102) and integrating we find
Ap
s
q
2tkh
-------------
\ .
| |
s
V d
}
V d
}
=
dV s
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
f
D
d
}
=
s Ap
s
q
2tkh
-------------
\ .
| |
s
V d
}
V d
}
= =
p r ( ) p
wf
q
2tkh
------------- r r
w
( ) ln =
p p V d
}
V d
}
=
dV 2trh|dr =
p
2
r
e
2
r
w
2
----------------
\ .
| |
p r ( )r r d
r
w
r
e
}
=
(J-103)
where has been substituted.
Including the mechanical skin in the above equation, we have
(J-104)
To illustrate the use of the above equations for mechanical skin we will assume that
the entire formation is damaged with a mobility of . The damaged skin pres-
sure drop from Eq. (J-97) to Eq. (J-99) is
(J-105)
where and have been implemented. The mechanical
skin from the above equation is
(J-106)
p p
wf
2
r
e
2
r
w
2
----------------
q
2tkh
------------- r r
w
( ) ln r r d
r
w
r
e
}
=
q
2tkh
-------------
2
r
e
2
r
w
2
----------------
\ .
| |
r
e
2
2
----- r
e
r
w
( ) ln
r
e
2
r
w
2
2
---------------- =
q
2tkh
------------- r
e
r
w
( ) ln
1
2
--- =
r
e
r
w
p p
wf
q
2tkh
------------- r
e
r
w
( ) ln
1
2
--- Ap
s
+ =
q
2tkh
------------- r
e
r
w
( ) ln
1
2
--- s + =
k
s

s
Ap
s
q
2tkh
-------------
\ .
| |
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
f
D
d
}
\ .
| |
V d
}
V d
}
=
q
2tkh
-------------
\ .
| |
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
f
D
d
}
V d
}
V d
}
=
q
2tkh
-------------
\ .
| |
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
r
e
r
w
( ) ln
1
2
--- =
f
D
r r
w
( ) ln = r
e
r
w
s Ap
s
q
2tkh
-------------
\ .
| |
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
r
e
r
w
( ) ln
1
2
--- = =
J.6 Internal and External Filter Cakes 757
The resulting inflow pressure equation for a damaged reservoir with a mobility of
is found by substituting Eq. (J-106) into Eq. (J-104) and rearranging
(J-107)
This (of course) is the exact solution illustrating the utility of the above methodol-
ogy. If we did not use this integral methodology for finding the mechanical skin, the
increase in the average reservoir pressure due to the damage (i.e., the integral con-
stant of in Eq. (J-106) would have been missing).
J.6 Internal and External Filter Cakes
The internal and external filtration theories will be identified as either a Displace-
ment Damage Model (DDM) or a Filtration Displacement Model (FDM). The
DDM assumes that the internal cake develops based on a saturation distribution in
the formation and the external filter cake can develop without a transition time
based on a given distribution of internal to external filter cake distribution. The
FDM is based on the initial development of an internal skin (or cake) as a result of
particulate deposition and permeability decreasing with increasing concentration of
deposited particulates. After some period of time (transition time) an external filter
cake begins to develop.
Filtration Damage Model
Wennberg and Sharma (1987), Pang and Sharma (1994) etc., have proposed various
internal and external cake filtration theories to model the injectivity decline in
water injection wells. These models are based on the initial development of an
internal skin (or cake) as a result of particulate deposition and permeability decreas-
ing with increasing concentration of deposited particulates. After some period of
time (transition time) an external filter cake begins to develop.
Pang and Sharma (1994) best summarized their development of a model which
accounts for both internal and external filter cakes (skin) and the concept of transi-
tion time. The foundation of their model is stated as In developing filtration mod-
els, both internal and external filter cakes need to be accounted for since both are
generally present in the filtration process. We postulate that during some initial
period an internal filter cake is formed. As more particles are trapped on the surface
k
s

s
p p
wf
q
2tkh
------------- r
e
r
w
( ) ln
1
2
--- 1
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
+ =
q
s
2tk
s
h
--------------- r
e
r
w
( ) ln
1
2
--- =
1 2
of the rock a point is reached where very few particles can invade the rock and an
external filter cake begins to build. We refer to the time at which no more particles
invade the rock, i.e., the time at which the initial layer of external filter cake is com-
pletely formed, as the transition time ( ). If we can determine the conditions
under which particles will form internal and external filter cakes and the time
required to form the initial layer of external filter cake (transition time), then the
entire filtration process can be approximated by applying an internal cake filtration
model before the transition time and an external cake filtration model after the tran-
sition time. Purely external filtration can be obtained in the limit as , and
pure internal filtration can be obtained in the limit as .
Internal Filtration Equations
The governing mass conservation equations for the particles and liquid are
(J-108)
and
(J-109)
where
(J-110)
and is the volume concentration of particulates per total volume deposited
(porosity of deposited particulates), is the original porosity, and is the cur-
rent porosity.
It is common practice to simplify the above mass balance equations by substituting
the particulate mass balance equation into the liquid equation. Differentiating Eq.
(J-109) and rearranging, we can write the liquid mass balance equation in the fol-
lowing form
(J-111)
where from Eq. (J-110)
t
*
t
*
0
t
*

y c
c
vc
s
( )
t c
c
|c
s
o + ( ) + 0 =
y c
c
v 1 c
s
| | ( )
t c
c
| 1 c
s
| | ( ) + 0 =
o |
0
| =
o
|
0
|
y c
cv
y c
c
vc
s
( )
t c
c
|c
s
o + ( ) +
)
`

0 =
has been substituted.
Noting that the quantity between the brackets in Eq. (J-111) is the particulate mass
balance equation which is equal to zero, we now substitute the particulate mass bal-
ance Eq. (J-108) into Eq. (J-111) and find
(J-112)
Substituting Eq. (J-112) into Eq. (J-108) and rearranging, the particle mass conser-
vation equation is simplified to
(J-113)
or
(J-114)
This is the same basic mass conservation equation as reported by Wennberg and
Sharma (1987). However, the particle concentration here is that of the slurry and
not of the liquid. The liquid and slurry concentrations are related by
Dividing by the liquid volume , we find that
or
and (J-115)
t c
co
t c
c|
=
y c
cv
0 =
v
y c
cc
s
t c
c
|c
s
o + ( ) + 0 =
t c
c
|c
s
( ) v c
s
V -
t c
cc
s
+ + 0 =
V
l
c
l
V
s
c
s
V
l
V
p
+ ( )c
s
= =
V
l
c
l
1 V
p
V
l
+ ( )c
s
=
1 c
l
+ ( )c
s
=
c
s
c
l
1 c
l
+
------------- = c
l
c
s
1 c
s
------------- =
Consequently for dilute solutions .
The form of the deposition function as first proposed by Iwasaki is
(J-116)
where is the filtration coefficient with units of (i.e., ). For dilute solu-
tions, the filtration coefficient is assumed to be independent of .
Eq. (J-113) can be simplified by substituting Eq. (J-116) and noting that
for all practical purposes except at very early times.
(J-117)
The solution to Eq. (J-117) is
(J-118)
where is the time the suspension reaches a position in the formation.
The deposition function is found by integrating Eq. (J-116)
(J-119)
where is the volume loss per unit area as given by
(J-120)
From Eq. (J-119), we have
(J-121)
where
c
s
c
l
~
t c
co
vc
s
=
L
1
ft
1
c
s
o |c
s
y c
cc
s
c
s
=
c
s
y ( ) c
s
0 ( )e
y
for t t > =
t y
o
o y t , ( ) vc
s
y ( ) t d
t
t
}
=
V t t ( )c
s
0 ( )e
y
=
V
V t t ( ) v t d
t
t
}
=
o y t , ( ) o 0 t , ( )e
y
=
(J-122)
From Eq. (J-118), it is shown that for the suspended concentration is time
independent and only a function of position. The average distance a particle travels
into the formation, , can be found from Eq. (J-118)
or
(J-123)
Transition Volume Loss per Unit Area
The transition volume loss per unit area, , is the injected volume loss per unit
area at which time, , the transition from internal filtration to external cake build-
up takes place. When a critical porosity, , is reached, particles can no longer
enter into the formation and the external cake starts to develop.
The critical deposition porosity at which transition takes place is
(J-124)
Inserting the critical deposition porosity, , into Eq. (J-119), we find the transi-
tion volume loss per unit area to be
(J-125)
Wennberg and Sharma (1987) report that a reasonable guess for the critical poros-
ity, , at which transition occurs from a theoretical standpoint is when the pore
space is about 50% filled, or .
A reasonable value for the deposited porosity ratio is
The theoretical maximum deposited porosity ratio is
o 0 t , ( ) V t ( )c
s
0 ( ) =
t t >
o
d
c
s
o
d
( ) c
s
0 ( )e
o
d
c
s
0 ( ) 2 = =
o
d
2 ( ) ln =
V
*
t
*
|
*
o
*
|
0
|
*
=
o
*
V
*
o
*
c
s
0 ( )
---------------- =
|
*
|
*
|
0
2 =
o
*
|
0
1 2
(J-126)
where is the particulate porosity within the pore system.
Internal Cake Permeability
The internal cake permeability reduction at a given point in the formation is gener-
ally expressed in the following form (e.g., see Bachman (2003) or Pang (1994))
(J-127)
where is a constant.
A more general form of Eq. (J-127) is
(J-128)
where represent the damage factor and the power coefficient.
The pressure drop across the internal cake (assuming linear flow for now) from
Darcys law is
or
(J-129)
where is the leakoff distance in the formation and is the local dam-
aged permeability.
The average or equivalent formation permeability ratio in the internal cake from
Eq. (J-128) and Eq. (J-129) is
o
*
|
0
------
max
1 |
p
( ) =
|
p
k
s
k
----
1
1 Oo +
----------------- =
O
k
s
k
----
1
1 | o o
*
( )
o
+
---------------------------------- =
| o
dp
dy
------

k
s
y t , ( )
-----------------v =
Ap

k
s
y t , ( )
-----------------v y d
0
o t ( )
}
=
o t ( ) k
s
y t , ( )
(J-130)
where the deposited particle porosity function from Eq. (J-121) is
(J-131)
Substituting Eq. (J-131) into Eq. (J-130) and integrating, we find an expression for
the average internal cake permeability
(J-132)
The limiting formation to damage permeability ratios for small and large values of
, are
and
The characteristic leakoff distance at transition, , can be approximated
from mass conservation of the particles when a large fraction of the particles are
deposited in the internal cake
k
k
s
----
1
k
s
k
----------- y d
0
o t ( )
}
)
`

o t ( ) =
1 | o o
*
( )
o
+ y d
0
o t ( )
}
o t ( ) =
o y t , ( )
o
*
----------------
o 0 t , ( )
o
*
----------------e
y
=
k
k
s
---- 1 |
o 0 t , ( )
o
*
----------------
)
`

o
e
oy
y d
0
o t ( )
}
o t ( ) + =
1 |
o 0 t , ( )
o
*
----------------
)
`

o
1 e
oo
( )
oo t ( )
--------------------------- + =
o
k k
s
o 0
1 | +
k k
s
o
1
o t ( ) o
*

(J-133)
From Eq. (J-125) we find
or
(J-134)
The characteristic distance at transition in terms of the average distance a particle
travels from Eq. (J-123) is
(J-135)
Consequently, the characteristic distance at transition (where most of the particles
are deposited) is within an order of magnitude of the average distance a particle
travels in the formation, (e.g., if , and if ,
).
Rearranging Eq. (J-132), we have
(J-136)
Internal Cake Skin
The internal filtrate skin can be calculated from Eq. (J-136) if the variation of the
deposited particulate porosity at the fracture face as a function of exposure time
(position) is known. Similar to methodology used for the external cake thickness in
Eq. (J-75), the deposited porosity at the fracture face for linear leakoff is of the
form
(J-137)
V
*
c
s
0 ( ) o c
s
| + ( ) y d
0
o
*
}
o y o
*
e
y
y d
0
o
*
}
= d
0
o
*
}
~ =
V
*
c
s
0 ( )
o
*
------ 1 e
o
*
( )
1 e
o
*
=
o
*
1 ( ) ln
------------------------- =
o
*
o
d
1 ( ) ln
2 ln
------------------------- =
0.9 = o
*
o
d
3.322 0.99 =
o
*
o
d
4.605
o t ( )
k
k
s
---- 1
\ .
| |
|
o 0 t , ( )
o
*
----------------
)
`

o
1 e
oo
( )
o
--------------------------- =
o t t ( ) o t ( ) 1 t t ( )
The effective form of Eq. (J-136) for the entire fracture is
or
(J-138)
where
(J-139)
with the limits
The internal fracture skin for linear leakoff from Eq. (J-79) is
(J-140)
Internal Cake Build and Erosion
It is common practice to assume once the internal cake is fully developed it remains
a constant. However, once the external cake begins to developed the continued
fluid loss through the external cake may erode the deposited particulate material.
The deposited porosity in the formation from Eq. (J-119) is
1
o k k
s
1 ( )
frac
---------------------------------------
1
o k k
s
1 ( )
x 0 =
---------------------------------------- o x ( ) o 0 ( ) | |
o
x d
0
L
}
)
`

L t ( ) =
|
o
'
o k k
s
1 ( )
x 0 =
---------------------------------------- =
o k k
s
1 ( )
frac
|
o 0 ( )
o
*
-----------
)
`

o
1 e
oo
( )
o
---------------------------
1
|
o
'
------ =
o k k
s
1 ( )
x 0 =
1
|
o
'
------ =
|
o
'
1
1 f ( ) | |
o
------------------------------- d
0
1
}
=
|
o
'
|
'
: o 1 ( )
|
o
'
1 : o 0 ( )
s
f
1
2 t|
o
'
-----------------
o k k
s
1 ( )
x 0 =
L t ( )
---------------------------------------- =
(J-141)
Assuming erosion can occur immediately after transition, the form of the deposited
porosity can be written as
(J-142)
where is the erosion coefficient and
Displacement Damage Model
The Displacement Damage Model (DDM) assumes that the internal deposition
porosity reaches a maximum value in the formation and then displacing the leading
edge of the internal damage front based on some saturation (porosity) distribution
over the internal damage zone. Unlike the Filtration Damage Model, the extent of
leading edge or maximum displacement into the formation is not limited by a filtra-
tion coefficient. Since there is no transition volume for the DDM .
Deposition Saturation and Porosity
The minimum porosity, , is defined as the porosity that deposition of particles
can no longer take place in the formation. The displacement of the leading edge of
the internal front is then calculated based on a mass balance of internal particulate
distribution. The deposition porosity and saturations are given by
and (J-143)
where is the original (mobile) formation porosity and is the current mobile
porosity.
The maximum deposition porosity, , and saturation, , are given by
and (J-144)
o y t , ( ) V t t ( )c
s
0 ( )e
y
=
o
o*
------
o
o*
------
min
o
o*
------
min
1
\ .
| |
o
e
A V V* ( ) exp =
o
e
AV t t ( ) V V* for V V* > ( ) =
V
*
0 =
|
*
o |
0
| = S
o
|
0
-----
|
0
| ( )
|
0
------------------- = =
|
0
|
o
*
S
*
o
*
|
0
|
*
= S
*
o
*
|
0
------
|
0
|
*
( )
|
0
---------------------- = =
The deposition and particulate saturation relationships are
(J-145)
where is the deposition porosity, is the deposition saturation and is the
mobile porosity (where ).
The theoretical maximum deposited porosity ratio and saturation are given by
(J-146)
where is the particulate porosity within the pore system.
The particulate concentration slurry, , in the formation is defined a the particu-
late volume per unit volume of slurry as given by
(J-147)
The maximum particulate concentration in the formation, , is
(J-148)
Internal Cake Saturation Distribution
The internal cake concentration and saturation distribution in the formation will be
expressed in the following form
or (J-149)
where is the elliptical particulate position in the formation, is the
dimensionless position in the formation and is the internal damage zone
elliptical leading front (edge).
o
o
*
------
S
S
*
-----
|
0
|
|
0
|
*
----------------- = =
o S |
| |
*
>
o
*
|
0
------
max
S
*
max
1 |
p
( ) = =
|
p
c
s
c
s
|
0
| =
c
s
*
c
s
*
|
0
|
*
o
*
S
*
|
0
= = =
S
D
S S
*
f z , , ( ) = = c
s
c
s
*
f z , , ( ) =
z , z z
max
=
z
max
Table J.2 lists a number of general relationships used in MPwri for the DDM and
FDM models where is a user specified constant.
Internal Cake Permeability
The internal permeability damage in the formation will be expressed in the follow-
ing form
(J-150)
where is the internal damaged permeability ratio, is the damaged permea-
bility, is the formation permeability, is the dimensionless particu-
late saturation, is the volume loss of fluid per unit area, and is the volume
loss of particulates per unit area as a function of position in the formation.
Table J.2: Internal Saturation Distribution Functions
Correlation Model
DDM or FDM
Dimensionless Saturation Average Dimensionless
Saturation
i DDM
ii FDM
iii DDM
iv DDM
v DDM
a
S
D
S S
*
= S
D
S S
*
=
S
D
1.0 =
S
D
1.0 =
S
D
e
az
=
S
D
1 e
az
az
------------------
\ .
| |
=
S
D
e
a,
=
S
D
1 e
a
a
----------------
\ .
| |
=
S
D
1 , ( )
a
= S
D
1 1 a + ( ) =
S
D
1 ,
a
= S
D
a 1 a + ( ) =
k
D
k
s
k f S
D
V V
p
, , ( ) = =
k
D
k
s
k S
D
S S
*
=
V V
p

Table J.3 lists a number of general relationships used in MPwri for the internal per-
meability damage for both the DDM and FDM models.
External Cake Filtration Equations
The external filter cake thickness can be calculated from conservation of mass
(J-151)
where is the cake thickness, is the filter cake porosity, is the particu-
late concentration available for deposition in the cake, and is the time dependent
velocity at the leading edge of the filter cake.
From mass conservation of liquid, at the leading edge of the external cake we have
Table J.3: Internal Permeability Damage Models
Correlation Model
Suggested Use
DDM or FDM
Dimensionless Saturation
, where are constants
I DDM or FDM
IIi DDM or FDM
III DDM or FDM
IVa DDM
IVb DDM
Va DDM
Vb DDM
k
D
k
s
k = a b c d , , ,
k
D
a =
k
D
1
1 bS
D
a
+
------------------- =
k
D
a 1 a ( ) 1 s
D
b
( ) + =
k
D
a 1 a ( ) Vb ( )
c
( ) exp + =
k
D
a 1 a ( ) V
p
b ( )
c
( ) exp + =
k
D
a b V
c ( )
d
( ) exp + =
k
D
a b V
p
c ( )
d
( ) exp + =
o
c
t ( ) 1 |
c
( ) c
s
v
s
t d
0
t
}
=
o
c
t ( ) |
c
c
s
v
s
v
s
1 c
s
( ) v
l
=
where is the incident velocity at the face of the external cake and is the inci-
dent velocity of the fluid at the cake/formation interface (note: , see
also Eq. (J-113)). Therefore, the filter cake thickness as a function of the leakoff
velocity is
(J-152)
where the volume loss per unit area is
(J-153)
Since the external filter cake does not start to develop until after transition for the
FDM, , Eq. (J-152) must be written as
(J-154)
where for . The transition volume for the DDM is zero
(i.e., ).
The pressure drop across the filter cake from Darcys law and Eq. (J-154) is
(J-155)
Eq. (J-155) is identical to the pressure drop equation given by Tongchun (1994) for
a Newtonian fluid flowing through an external filter cake.
The effective external skin based on the filter cake thickness at the wellbore with
from Eq. (J-70) is
v
s
v
l
v
s
c
s
v
l
c
l
=
o
c
t ( )
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
------------- v
l
t d
0
t
}
=
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
-------------V t ( ) =
V t ( )
V t ( ) v
l
t d
0
t
}
=
V t ( ) V
*
>
o
c
t ( )
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
------------- V t ( ) V
*
| | =
o
c
0 = V t ( ) V
*
<
V
*
0 =
Ap
s

c
k
c
-----o
c
v =
c
k
c
-----
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
------------- V t ( ) V
*
| |v =
o
c
o
c
t ( ) |'
(J-156)
Filter Cake Coefficient, Thickness, and Other
Relationships
A more general form for the filter cake thickness as a function of time (see also Eq.
(J-152)) is
(J-157)
Substituting Darcys law (Eq. (J-67)) into Eq. (J-157), we find
(J-158)
Integrating Eq. (J-158) over time, the filter cake thickness as a function of time is
found to be
(J-159)
where we have assumed that the differential pressure, mobility, porosity and partic-
ulate concentration are constant.
Eq. (J-159) illustrates, that for the above simplifying assumptions, the filter cake
thickness grows proportional to the square root of time. Consequently, with the aid
of Darcys law we have
(J-160)
where is the wall building coefficient and is given by
(J-161)
s
f
external
1
2 t|'
---------------
o
c
t ( )
L t ( )
------------
k
k
c

c
--------------
)
`

=
t d
d
o
c
t ( )
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
-------------v
l
=
t d
d
o
c
2
t ( )
2
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
------------- =
k
c
c
-----Ap
c
o
c
t ( )
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
-------------
\ .
| |
2k
c
Ap
c
c
----------------- t =
v
l
k
c
c
-----
Ap
c
o
c
t ( )
------------
C
III
t
--------- = =
C
III
C
III
1 |
c
( )
1 c
s
c
s
-------------
k
c
Ap
c
2
c
-------------- =
The filter cake thickness in terms of the filter cake coefficient from Eq. (J-157) and
Eq. (J-160) is
or
(J-162)
Inversely, the filter cake coefficient as a function of the cake thickness is
(J-163)
Filter Cake Resistance
The external filter cake resistance, , is defined as
where is pressure loss across the cake, is the leakoff velocity, and is the
fluid leakoff viscosity.
The pressure loss across the filter cake from Darcys law (Eq. (J-67)) is
(J-164)
where the flow resistance term, , is shown to be a function of filter cake thick-
ness and permeability. The external cake resistance can also be written as
(J-165)
t d
d
o
c
t ( )
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
-------------
C
III
t
--------- =
o
c
t ( )
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
-------------2C
III
t =
C
III
o
c
t ( )
2 t
------------
1 c
s
c
s
-------------
\ .
| |
1 |
c
( ) =
R
s
R
s
Ap
s
v
c
---------
Ap
s
v
c
Ap
s
v
o
c
k
c
----- vR
s
= =
R
s
R
s
o
c
k
c
----- =
which is the same definition presented by Mayerhofer, Economides and Nolte
(1991).
Consequently, from Eq. (J-152) the filter cake resistance as a function of the partic-
ulate concentration and volume loss per unit area is
(J-166)
The total leakoff rate over the fracture face is
(J-167)
The pressure drop across the cake in terms of the flow rate and flow resistance is
(J-168)
The fracture skin in terms of external filter cake resistance from Eq. (J-66) and Eq.
(J-168) is
(J-169)
The external skin for a propagating fracture from Eq. (J-75) is
(J-170)
where is the flow resistance at the wellbore.
Filter Cake Build Rate
The filter cake thickness build rate from Eq. (J-154) is shown to be directly propor-
tional to the volume loss per unit area. This also is the conclusion stated by Perkins
R
s
o
c
k
c
-----
1
k
c
----
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
-------------V t ( )
)
`

= =
q 4hL ( )
Ap
s
c
---------
1
R
s
----- =
Ap
s
q
c
4h
---------
R
s
L
----- =
q
2tkh
-------------
t
2
---

c
-----
R
s
k
L
--------
\ .
| |
)
`

=
s
f
external
t
2
---

c
-----
R
s
k
L
--------
\ .
| |
=
s
f
external
1
2 t |'
---------------

c
-----
R
s
k
L
--------
\ .
| |
=
R
s
according to usual filtration theories, the resistance should be directly proportion
to the volume loss per unit area.
However, a more general form of Eq. (J-154) is
(J-171)
where is the volume loss per unit area after transi-
tion for the FDM and is the growth rate coefficient. For , the filter
cake thickness is proportional to the volume loss per unit area, .
Rewriting Eq. (J-171), we have
(J-172)
where
(J-173)
The filter cake resistance for a constant cake permeability, , is also of the form
(J-174)
In general, both the cake thickness and permeability may be non-linear functions of
the volume loss as described by Eq. (J-174).
Filter Cake Erosion Rate
Erosion of the filter cake can also take place during produced water reinjection.
Defining the erosion to build rate as
(J-175)
where the volume loss per unit area to build the filter cake form to is
o
c
t ( ) AV t ( )
|
g
AV t ( ) V t ( ) V
*
| | =
|
g
|
g
1 =
V t ( )
o
c
t ( ) o
max
AV t ( )
AV
max
-----------------
|
g
=
o
max
1
1 |
c
( )
-------------------
c
s
1 c
s
-------------AV
max
=
k
c
R
s
t ( ) R
max
AV t ( )
AV
max
-----------------
|
g
=
e
V d
do
e
V d
do
b
AV
b
AV
e
---------- = =
o
min
o
max
(J-176)
and is the volume loss per unit area required to erode the filter cake from
to . The volume loss at the minimum filter cake thickness from Eq. (J-
172) is
(J-177)
The change in the filter cake thickness during the erosion process is
(J-178)
where is erosion rate power coefficient and the change in volume loss per unit
area after reaching the maximum filter cake thickness is
(J-179)
last maximum value.
The filter cake thickness during erosion is then
(J-180)
or
The filter cake thickness during the build cycle after the first erosion cycle is
(J-181)
where
AV
b
AV
max
AV
min
=
AV
e
o
max
o
min
AV
min
AV
max
o
min
o
max
-----------
\ .
| |
1 |
g
=
Ao
e
o
max
o
min
( )
oV
AV
e
----------
\ .
| |
|
e
=
|
e
oV AV t ( ) AV
t
max
( ) =
AV
t
max
( )
o
c
t ( ) o
max
Ao
e
=
o
max
o
c
t ( ) oV ( )
|
e
o
c
t ( ) o
max
oV t ( ) AV
min
+
AV
max
--------------------------------------
|
g
=
(J-182)
last minimum value.
J.7 MPwri Input Dialog Nomenclature
Following is a list of some of the input data required for calculating the internal and
external filter cakes:
1.Deposited Concentration Ratio at Transition,
2.Permeability Damage Equation,
3.Permeability Damage Factor,
4.Permeability Damage Coefficient,
5.Cake Build Coefficient,
6.Cake Erosion Coefficient,
7.Cake Erosion to Build Rate Ratio,
J.1 References
1. Perkins, T.K. and Gonzalez, J.A.: The Effect of Thermoelastic Stresses on the
Injection Well Fracturing, SPE Journal, February 1985, 78-88.
2. Koning, E.J.L.: Fractured Water Injection Wells - Analytical Modeling of
Fracture Propagation, SPE 14684, August 1985.
3. Howard, G.C. and Fast, C.R.: Hydraulic Fracturing, Monograph Vol. 2, SPE,
1970, 33.
4. Meyer, B.R. and Hagel, M.W.: Simulated Mini-Frac Analysis, Petroleum
Society of CIM, Calgary, June 1988.
oV AV t ( ) AV
t
min
( ) =
AV
t
min
( )
o
*
|
0

k
s
k
----
1
1 | o o* ( )
o
+
----------------------------------- =
|
o
|
b
, Ao AV ( )
|
b

|
e
, o
c
t ( ) o
max
oV ( )
|
e

e, e do
e
dV ( ) do
b
dV ( ) =
J.1 References 777
SPEJ, August 1974, 347-360.
6. Earlougher, R.C.: Advances in Well Test Analysis, Monograph Vol. 5, SPE,
1977.
7. Holman, J.P.: Heat Transfer, McGraw-Hill, Inc., NY, 1977, 102.
8. Lee, S.T., and Brockenbrough, J.R.: A New Analytical Solution for Finite
Estimation, SPE 12013, 1983.
9. van den Hoek, P.J.: A Simple and Accurate Description of Non-Linear Fluid
Leak-off in High-Permeability Fracturing, SPE 63239, October 2000.
10. Economides, M.J., and Nolte, K.G.: Reservoir Simulation, Schlumberger Edu-
cational Services, 1987, 1-10.
11. Wennberg, K.E. and Sharma, M.M.: Determination of the Filtration Coeffi-
cient and the Transition Time for Water Injection Wells, SPE 38181, June
1987.
12. Pang, Shutong and Sharma, M.M.: A Model for Predicting Injectivity Decline
in Water Injection Wells,, SPE 28489, September 1994.
13. Bachman, R.C., Harding, T.G., Settari, A., and Walters, D.A.: Coupled Simu-
lation of Reservoir Flow, Geomechanics, and Formation Plugging with Appli-
cation to High-Rate Produced Water Reinjection, SPE 79695, February 2003.
14. Mayerhofer, M.J., Economides, M.J. and Nolte, K.G.: An Experimental and
Fundamental Interpretation of Fracturing Filter-Cake Fluid Loss, SPE 22873,
October, 1991.
15. Tongchun, Yi and Panden, J.M.: A Comprehensive Model of Fluid Loss in
Hydraulic Fracturing, SPE Production & Facilities Journal, November, 1994.
Appendix K
After-Closure Analysis
K.1 Introduction
The solution methodology for determining formation permeability after hydraulic
fracturing is formulated in this report. A summary of the governing linear and
radial flow equations are presented along with the graphical method to determine
permeability and reservoir pressure from the infinite-acting time period.
The purpose of this report is to set forth the methodology and documentation of the
governing equations for after-closure analysis as originally presented by Gu et al.
(1993) and Nolte (1997). The formulation is developed for linear and then radial
flow. Although, the main focus is on the asymptotic solution for large times (i.e.,
radial flow) from which the formation permeability can be determined, the linear
solution is important since it sets forth the frame work Nolte used to derive the
effective or an apparent closure time used in his radial time function.
Since Nolte (1997) provided a background formulation for his after closure analy-
sis, the only intent of this report is to supplement Noltes original work and provide
a framework of understanding (possibly only for my benefit and enjoyment) of the
underlaying formulation, boundary conditions, assumptions, etc. This is of course
in lieu of just using Noltes equations and skipping directly to the implementation
section of the after closure analysis found in Section 6.
This report contains the following sections:
1. Abstract: After Closure Analysis Overview.
2. Superposition: Duhamels superposition theorem is presented. This is the foun-
dation used to solve the response of a linear homogeneous system with time
dependent (unsteady) boundary conditions (i.e., a pump-in followed by a shut-
in).
780 After-Closure Analysis:
3. Impulse Injection: Classic impulse injection solution by Gu et. al. (1993) from
which all pressure responses (unfractured and fractured wells) must asymptote
to at infinite-acting times.
4. Linear Solution: Presents the formulation of Noltes (1997) linear fluid loss
time function and apparent closure time, .
5. Radial Solution: Presents the formulation of the pressure response for the infi-
nite acting time period. Solutions are presented for the Horner, , and
Nolte, , time functions.
6. Summary and Implementation: The methodology used for the implementation
of the after closure analysis to determine the initial reservoir pressure and per-
meability is discussed with the aid of various graphical techniques.
K.2 Superposition or Duhamels Theorem:
General Solution
Duhamels theorem is the general theory of superposition used to solve the
response of a linear homogeneous system with time dependent boundary conditions
by using the solution to a corresponding fundamental problem with steady state
boundary conditions (see Myers (1971, pg 153)).
If is the response of a linear homogeneous system (initially at zero) to a sin-
gle unit step input, the response of the system to the input (in place of the unit
step) is given by either
(K-1)
where N is the number of finite discontinuities between and , or by
(K-2)
Myers also addresses the ability of Duhamelss method to handle one non-homoge-
neous boundary condition.
F
L
t
t
c
, ( ) _t
c
F
h
t t
, ( )
F
R
t t
c
, ( )
U x u , ( )
F u ( )
u x u , ( ) U x u , t ( )F' t ( ) t d
t 0 =
u
}
U x u , t
j
( ) F
j
A
j 1 =
N
+ =
t 0 = t u =
u x u , ( ) F t ( )
u c
c
U x u , t ( ) t d
t 0 =
u
}
=
K.3 Impulse Injection 781
The general solution in terms of a dimensionless pressure , to the radial dif-
fusivity equation at the wellbore for a constant production rate, , is (Drake (1990,
pg 166))
(K-3)
where is the formation permeability, is the formation height, is the forma-
tion viscosity, is initial reservoir pressure, is the pressure at any dimensionless
position , is the well skin, is the dimensionless time given by
(K-4)
where is time, is the formation compressibility, and is the wellbore radius.
The general solution for a multi-rate draw-down using Duhamels theorem is
(K-5)
where the system input boundary condition has been substituted
and is an arbitrary constant reference flow rate.
The general form of the net draw-down pressure for multiple constant injection
rates from Eq. (K-5) is
(K-6)
The reader is also referred to Earlougher (1977) and Drake (1990) for similar repre-
sentations of the multi-rate drawdown pressure response at the wellbore.
K.3 Impulse Injection
Gu et. al. (1993) first presented the theory and analysis that the late-time pressure
behavior after fracture closure is like that of an instantaneous source solution,
p
D
t
D
( )
q
2tkh
q
------------- p
i
p
wf
( ) p
D
t
D
( ) = S +
k h
p
i
p
r
D
r r
w
= S t
D
t
D
kt
|c
t
r
w
2
----------------- =
t c
t
r
w
2tkh
q
------------- p
i
p r t , ( ) | | p
D
r
D
t ,
D
t
D
j 1
( ) S + | |
q
j
q
j 1
q
---------------------
j 1 =
N
=
AF
j
q
j
q
j 1
q
---------------------- =
q
p
i
p r t , ( )

2tkh
------------- p
D
r
D
t
D
, t
D
j 1
( ) S + | | q
j
q
j 1
( )
j 1 =
N
=
whether the formation is fractured or not during the injection. The importance of
Gus analysis is that the pressure response at late time is independent of the fracture
geometry. Consequently, any late time fracture solution must asymptote to the
instantaneous line source solution.
The pressure response in the reservoir after an instantaneous injection or production
as given by Gu is
(K-7)
where is the elapsed time since shut-in and is the injection or produced vol-
ume. In late time, when is large, the exponent in Eq. (K-7) approaches zero and
the pressure at the wellbore simplifies to
(K-8)
Eq. (K-7) can be derived using Duhamels theorem.
The boundary conditions for a well flowed or produced at a constant injection rate
for a total time and then a shut-in are
(K-9)
The pressure solution using Duhamels method of superposition from Eq. (K-6)
with the above boundary conditions is
(K-10)
where and is assumed positive for injection an negative for produc-
tion.
The dimensionless pressure solution as given by Earlougher (1977) for an infinite-
acting system is
(K-11)
Ap r At , ( )
V
0
4tkhAt
-------------------e
|cr
2
4kAt
--------------
=
At V
At
Ap At ( )
V
4tkh
-------------
1
At
----- =
q t
p
t t
p
q ;
1
s q =
t t
p
q ;
2
> 0 =
Ap r t , ( )
q
2tkh
------------- p
D
r
D
t
D
, ( ) p
D
r t , t
p
( )
D
{ } =
Ap p p
i
= q
p
D
1
2
---Ei
r
D
2
4t
D
--------
\ .
| |
1
2
---E
1
r
D
2
4t
D
--------
\ .
| |
= =
K.3 Impulse Injection 783
when . Here is the exponential integral and is the exponential
integral of the first kind.
Substituting Eq. (K-11) into Eq. (K-10) we find
(K-12)
The pressure response for an impulse injection (i.e., as or ) is found by
differentiating the numerator and denominator of the second term in Eq. (K-12)
(K-13)
The pressure response at large times is
(K-14)
Eq. (K-14) can also be derived from the late time approximation of Eq. (K-11)
given by
(K-15)
t
D
r
D
2
25 > Ei E
1
Ap r t , ( )
qt
p
2tkh
-------------
1
2
--- Ei
r
D
2
4t
D
--------
\ .
| |
1
2
---Ei
r
D
2
4 t t
p
( )
D
-----------------------
\ .
|
| |
+
)
`

t
p
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- =
V
4tkh
-------------
E
1
r
D
2
4t
D
--------
\ .
| |
E
1
r
D
2
4 t t
p
( )
D
-----------------------
\ .
|
| |
t
p
------------------------------------------------------------ =
t
p
0 t
p
t
Ap r t , ( )
V
2tkh
-------------
t
p
d
d
E
1
r
D
2
4 t t
p
( )
D
-----------------------
\ .
|
| |
)
`

dt
p
dt
p
----------------------------------------------------- =
V
4tkh
-------------
e
r
D
2
4 t t
p
( )
D

t t
p
----------------------------- =
V
4tkh
-------------
e
|cr
2
4kAt
--------------
At
---------------- =
Ap t ( )
V
4tkh
-------------
1
At
----- =
p
D
1
2
--- t
D
r
D
2
( ) ln 0.80907 + | | =
when (or within 1-percent error when ).
Substituting Eq. (K-15) into Eq. (K-10), the infinite-acting period solution becomes
(K-16)
where or is recognized as the Horner time.
For a pulse injection or in the limit as we find
(K-17)
where is the slope of vs .
Gu states that If the pressure is plotted against in Cartesian coordinates,
can be calculated from the slope of the straight line from the following expres-
sion:
(K-18)
The apparent reservoir pressure ( )can be found from the intercept
of the extension of the straight line with the axis.
Gu also states that if one takes the derivative of pressure in Eq. (K-17) with respect
to , we have
(K-19)
Consequently, a plot in Cartesian coordinates of and should coin-
cide with the pressure curve at late time. This property can be used as a diagnostic
plot to help determine and the late time slope from which the permeability can
be calculated.
t
D
r
D
2
100 > t
D
r
D
2
10 >
Ap r t , ( )
V
2tkh
-------------
1
2
--- t
D
r
D
2
( ) ln 0.80907 + | |
1
2
--- t t
p
( )
D
r
D
2
( ) ln 0.80907 + | |
)
`

t
p
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- =
V
4tkh
-------------
t t t
p
( ) | | ln
t
p
--------------------------------
V
4tkh
------------ -
1 t
p
At + | | ln
t
p
--------------------------------- = =
t t t
p
( ) | | ln 1 t
p
At + | | ln
t
p
At
Ap t ( )
V
4tkh
-------------
1
At
----- = m
1
At
----- =
m p 1 At
p 1 At
k
m
k
V
4thm
-------------- =
p* Ap p p* =
1 At 0 =
At ( ) ln
dp
d At ( ) ln
-------------------
V
4tkh
-------------
1
At
----- = m
1
At
----- =
p dp d At ( ) ln
p*
K.4 Linear Solution - Background 785
K.4 Linear Solution - Background
The differential equation for the pressure distribution in the formation
assuming one-dimensional (linear) fluid loss from a fracture is
(K-20)
where the reservoir viscosity ( ), permeability ( ), porosity ( ), and compress-
ibility ( ) effect the pressure transient.
Constant Velocity Boundary Condition
the leakoff velocity is a constant
(K-21)
The solution for this case as given by Holman (1977, page 104) is
(K-22)
where
(K-23)
At the fracture face ( ) the pressure is
(K-24)
The velocity in terms of the changing net leakoff pressure differential is
p x t , ( )
k
c|
---------
y
2
2
c
c p
\ .
|
| |
t c
cp
=
k |
c
v
0
p y 0 , ( ) p
i
=
v 0 t , ( ) v
0
k
---
y c
cp
\ .
| |
y 0 =
for t 0 > = =
p y t , ( ) p
i
2
v
0
k
-------- t t
y
2
4t
--------
\ .
| |
v
0
y
k
----------- 1 erf
y
2 t
------------
\ .
| |
exp =
k
c|
--------- =
y 0 =
p 0 t , ( ) p
i
2
t
---
v
0
k
-------- tt =
(K-25)
where and .
The total volume loss at time is
(K-26)
where the fracture area , is the fracture half-length, and is the forma-
tion height.
Placing Eq. (K-24) in terms of rate and dimensionless time ,
we find
(K-27)
Defining the net differential pressure in terms of a dimensionless
pressure function, , we have
(K-28)
The dimensionless pressure for linear fluid loss from Eq. (K-27) is found to be
(K-29)
Constant Pressure Boundary Condition
a constant pressure exists in the fracture between the fracture and the reservoir, are
v
0
t
2
---
k
---
Ap
tt
-------------
t
2
---
C
II
t
------- = =
Ap p 0 t , ( ) p
i
= C
II
k
---
Ap
t
----------- =
t
p
V
l
t
c
( ) 4Av
0
t
p
4A
t
2
---
C
II
t
p
( )
t
p
---------------- = =
2tC
II
t
p
( )A t
p
=
A Lh = L h
q V
l
t
p
= t
D
t L
2
=
p 0 t , ( ) p
i
q
2tkh
------------- tt
D
=
Ap p 0 t , ( ) p
i
=
p
D
Ap
q
2tkh
-------------p
D
t ( ) =
p
D
tt
D
=
(K-30)
The solution to Eq. (K-20) as given by Holman (1977, page 102) is
(K-31)
The velocity at any position in the formation from Darcys law is
(K-32)
Performing the partial differentiation of Eq. (K-31) gives
(K-33)
The leakoff velocity at the fracture face from Eq. (K-32) and Eq. (K-33) is
(K-34)
where the leakoff coefficient is given by
(K-35)
and .
This is the same linear velocity formulation as presented by Howard and Fast
(1970, pg 35).
The total volume loss for a static (non-propagating) fracture with a constant pres-
sure boundary condition at time is
p y 0 , ( ) p
i
=
p 0 t , ( ) p
f
for t 0 > =
p y t , ( ) p
f
p
i
p
f
-------------------------- erf
y
2 t
------------
\ .
| |
=
y
v
k
---
y c
cp
\ .
| |
=
y c
cp
p
i
p
f
tt
--------------
y
2
4t
--------
\ .
| |
exp =
v
k
---
y c
cp
\ .
| |
y 0 =
---
Ap
tt
-------------
C
II
t
------- = = =
C
II
k
---
Ap
t
----------- Ap
k|c
t
--------- = =
Ap p
f
p
i
=
t
p
(K-36)
Rearranging Eq. (K-34) in terms of flow rate, , we have
(K-37)
Defining the fluid loss rate in terms of a dimensionless rate function, , we have
(K-38)
where
(K-39)
The general dimensionless rate solution as a function of dimensionless pressure for
a non-propagating fracture is
(K-40)
Time Dependent Velocity Boundary Condition
Nolte (1997) first presented a closed form solution for the changed-boundary con-
dition and an infinite-length fracture, or equivalently for linear flow from a fixed
length fracture, the constant-pressure condition for pre-closure followed by a zero-
flux condition. Noltes solution was based on the work of Carslaw and Jaeger. The
final closed form solution is
(K-41)
where is the pressure differential carried by the reservoir and the
leakoff velocity at closure is given by .
V
l
t
c
( ) 4A v t d
0
t
p
}
4AC
II
1
t
----- t d
0
t
p
}
= =
8C
II
A t
p
=
q 4vA =
q t ( )
4kA
----------
Ap
tt
-------------
2tkh
-------------Ap
2 t
tt
D
------------- = =
q
D
q t ( )
2tkhAp
--------------------q
D
t ( ) =
q
D
2 t ( ) tt
D
=
q
D
t
D
( )
2 t
p
D
t
D
( )
---------------- =
Ap
R
v
c
t
c
t
kc|
---------
2
t
---arcsinu
1 2
)
`

=
Ap
R
p
R
p
i
=
v
c
C
T
t
c
=
The dimensionless linear time function from Eq. (K-41) is
(K-42)
Following is a more detailed formulation of Noltes linear time function and how it
can be derived using Duhamels superposition method.
Variable Injection Rate followed by a Shut-in
The homogeneous pressure response solution for a non-propagating fracture with a
constant leakoff velocity from Eq. (K-24) is
(K-43)
or
(K-44)
where is the response of a linear homogeneous system (initially at zero) to a
single unit step input and .
The boundary condition for a typical fracture from initiation to closure is one of
essentially a constant pressure in the fracture during propagation up to closure and
then a zero leakoff velocity at the fracture face during shut-in.
To obtain a constant pressure in the fracture to the time of closure , the velocity at
the fracture face from Eq. (K-34) must be of the form
or (K-45)
where is the leakoff velocity at .
The time dependent Duhamels step function for this case is
F u ( )
2
t
---arcsinu
1 2
=
v
c
p p
i
2
t
---v
c
t
kc|
t
--------- =
U u ( )
p p
i
v
c
t
c
-------------
kc|
t
---------
2
t
--- u = =
U u ( )
u t t
c
=
t
c
v
1
t
-----
v
v
c
----
t
c
t
---
1
u
------- = =
v
c
t
c
(K-46)
where .
The response of the system to the input (in place of the unit step) is given by
(K-47)
where .
Substituting the change of variable into Eq. (K-47), we find
(K-48)
Simplifying, we find
(K-49)
The unsteady pressure solution from Eq. (K-44) is
(K-50)
or
F t ( )
v
v
c
---- t
1 2
and F' t ( ) 1 2t
3 2
= t 1 s ( ) ; = =
F t ( ) 0 and F' t ( ) 0 = t 1 > ( ) ; =
t t t
c
=
F t ( )
u u ( ) U u t ( )F' t ( ) t d
t 0
+
=
1
}
U u t
j
( ) F
j
A
j 1 =
2
+ =
1
t
---
u t
t
3 2
--------------- t d
t 0
+
=
1
}
U u ( ) F 0
+
( ) U u 1 ( ) F 1 ( ) A A + =
F 1 ( ) A 1 =
2
t =
u u ( )
2
t
---
u
2
2
------------------ d
0
+
1
}
u F 0
+
( ) A u 1 +
)
`

=
2
t
--- = u
2
arcsinu
1 2
+ ( )
0
+
1
u F 0
+
( ) A u 1 +
)
`

2
t
--- u 1 u F 0
+
( ) A arcsinu
1 2
+ u F 0
+
( ) A u 1 + { } =
u u ( ) 2 t arcsinu
1 2
=
p p
i
v
c
t
c
-------------
kc|
t
--------- 2 t arcsinu
1 2
=
(K-51)
where .
Placing Eq. (K-51) in terms of the dimensionless pressure ratio at closure, we have
(K-52)
where the pressure at closure ( ) from Eq. (K-51) is
(K-53)
Eq. (K-51) is the closed-form solution initially given by Nolte (1997a, Eq. (K-5),
pg.5) for the constant-pressure condition for pre-closure and a zero-flux condition
after closure.
Constant Injection Rate followed by a Shut-in
The pressure response for a constant injection rate followed by a shut-in is given by
the boundary conditions
(K-54)
The general form of the pressure solution for multiple injection rates using the prin-
ciple of superposition from Eq. (K-6) is
(K-55)
The dimensionless pressure solution for linear fluid loss from Eq. (K-29) is
p p
i
v
c
t
c
t
kc
t
|
----------
2
t
---arcsinu
1 2
)
`

=
C
T
t
kc
t
|
----------
2
t
---arcsinu
1 2
)
`

=
v
c
C
T
t
c
=
F
p p
i
p t
c
( ) p
i
---------------------- 2 t arcsinu
1 2
= =
u 1 =
p t
c
( ) p
i
C
T
t
kc
t
|
---------- =
q
1
q t t
c
s ; =
q
2
0 t t
c
> ; =
p
f
p
i
q
2tkh
------------- p
D
t ( )
D
p
D
t t
c
( )
D
| | =
(K-56)
Substituting Eq. (K-56) into Eq. (K-55) we find
(K-57)
Placing Eq. (K-57) in terms of the dimensionless pressure ratio at closure we have
(K-58)
where the pressure at closure ( ) from Eq. (K-58) is
(K-59)
The dimensionless fluid loss time function in Eq. (K-58) can also be written in
the form
(K-60)
where is the shut-in time.
Apparent Closure Time
Nolte (1997a) devised an apparent closure time defined as where .
This apparent closure time represents an equivalent time of exposure and if used
with Eq. (K-60) will approximate the more rigorous linear time function given by
p
D
tt
D
tkt
c
t
|L
2
----------------- = =
p
f
p
i
q
2tkh
-------------
tkt
c
t
|L
2
-----------------
tk t t
c
( )
c
t
|L
2
----------------------- =
q
2thL
-------------
t
kc
t
|
---------- t t t
c
| | =
4v t
c
2t
--------------
t
kc
t
|
---------- u u 1 | | =
F
L
p p
i
p t
c
( ) p
i
---------------------- u u 1 = =
u 1 =
p t
c
( ) p
i
4v t
c
2t
--------------
t
kc
t
|
---------- =
F
L
F
L
t t
c
, ( ) 1 t t
c
( ) t
c
+ t t
c
( ) t
c
=
1 At t
c
+ At t
c
=
At t t
c
=
_t
c
_ 16 t
2
=
Eq. (K-52). Nolte also used this apparent closure time in the radial solution formu-
lation based on a constant injection rate followed by a shut-in.
Implementation of the apparent closure time in Eq. (K-60) we find
(K-61)
Simplifying Eq. (K-61) for large time ( )
or
Equating Eq. () to Eq. (K-52) for , a value of that fits the infinite-acting time
period can be found
(K-62)
Solving for we find
. (K-63)
The maximum error between Eq. (K-61) and Eq. (K-52) with is 3.5% at
. The error diminishes toward zero as increases with an error less of
than 1% for .
Linear Solution Summary
The governing pressure response equation for after closure analysis from Eq. (K-
51) is
where
_t
c
F
L
1 t t
c
( ) _t
c
+ t t
c
( ) _t
c
=
u 1
F
L
u _ _ u 1 + 1 ( ) u _ 1 _ 2u ( ) 1 + ( )
F
L
1
2
--- _ u
u 1 _
1
2
--- _ u 2 t arcsinu
1 2
2 t 1 u = =
_
_ 16 t
2
=
_ 16 t
2
=
u 1.35 = u
u 7 >
p p
i
m
L
F
L
t t
c
, ( ) =

.
The dimensionless linear function can also be set equal to since
this is the exact function from which was developed. That is
K.5 Radial Solution - Infinite-acting time period
Horner (1951) first proposed that for any pressure build up test, the bottom-hole
shut-in pressure response could be expressed using the principle of superposition
for a well producing at a rate until time , and a zero rate thereafter (see Ear-
lougher (1977), pg. 45). The pressure response after shut-in is
(K-64)
During the infinite-acting time period, if there are no fractures or storage effects,
the exponential integral for could be replace by the logarithmic approximation
for
(K-65)
where .
Substituting Eq. (K-65) into Eq. (K-64), the bottom-hole pressure response is found
to be
m
L
C
T
t
kc
t
|
---------- =
F
L
t t
c
, ( ) 1 t t
c
( ) _t
c
+ t t
c
( ) _t
c
=
_ 16 t
2
=
F
L
t t
c
, ( ) F t t
c
, ( )
_
F
L
t t
c
, ( ) F t t
c
, ( )
2
t
---arcsin t
c
t =
q t
p
p
ws
p
i

2tkh
------------- p
D
t
D
t
D
j 1
( ) S + | | q
j
q
j 1
( )
j 1 =
N
2tkh
-------------q p
D
t ( )
D
p
D
t t
p
( )
D
| | =
p
D
t
D
100 >
p
D
1
2
--- t
D
0.80907 + ln ( ) =
t
D
t r
w
2
=
K.5 Radial Solution - Infinite-acting time period 795
(K-66)
where the shut-in time is given by . Horner noted that Eq. (K-66)
describes a straight line with intercept which will be equal to the initial reser-
voir pressure for an infinite acting system and slope , where
(K-67)
The reservoir permeability can then be estimated from the slope
(K-68)
This is the proposed methodology by Horner for determining formation permeabil-
ity. Thus a plot of vs. is commonly called the Horner plot.
To distinguish between closure and pump time, the nomenclature for Horner time
will be
(K-69)
where and is either equal to or .
Clearly for , the Horner time asymptotes to and Eq. (K-66)
becomes
(K-70)
where is the total produced or injected volume. This equation is identical
to the impulse solution given by Eq. (K-14).
Following is the after closure analysis for fractured systems based on Horners time
and the methodology of Nolte.
Horner Time
The general form of dimensionless pressure solutions for a static (non-propagating)
fracture in an infinite system is
p
ws
p
i
m
t
p
At +
At
----------------
\ .
| |
ln =
At t t
p
=
p*
p
i
m
m
q
4tkh
------------- =
k
q
4tmh
-------------- =
p 1 t
p
At + | | ln
F
h
t t
, ( ) 1 t
At + | | ln =
At t t
= t
t
p
t
c
At t
F
h
t t
, ( ) t
At
Ap t ( )
q
4tkh
-------------
t
At
-----
V
4tkh
-------------
1
At
----- = m
1
At
----- = =
V qt
=
(K-71)
where is a constant (i.e., for a uniform flux and for an infinite con-
ductivity fracture ). Eq. (K-71) is with less than 1% error of the exact
solution when ( ).
The pressure response for a constant injection period followed by a shut-in from
Eq. (K-6) is
(K-72)
Substituting Eq. (K-71) into Eq. (K-72) and rearranging
(K-73)
where the injection rate and is the total volume injected.
Eq. (K-73) can also be written in terms of a Horner slope, , and time, ,
(K-74)
The Horner time based on closure is
(K-75)
where is the time after closure.
The slope in Eq. (K-74) is given by
(K-76)
For large times Eq. (K-75) becomes
p
D
1
2
--- t
Dxf
| + ln ( ) =
| | 2.80907 =
| 2.2000 =
t
Dxf
10 > t
Dxf
t L
2
=
p
f
p
i

2tkh
-------------q p
D
t ( )
D
p
D
t t
c
( )
D
| | =
p
f
p
i

4tkh
-------------
V
t
c
---
t ( )
D
t t
c
( )
D
------------------- ln =
4tkh
-------------
V
t
c
---
t
t t
c
-----------
\ .
| |
ln =
q V t
c
= V
m
h
F
h
p
f
p
i
m
h
F
h
t t
c
, ( ) =
t
c
F
h
t t
c
, ( )
t
t t
c
-----------
\ .
| |
ln 1 t
c
At + ( ) ln = =
At t t
c
=
m
h
m
h

4tkh
-------------
V
t
c
--- =
K.5 Radial Solution - Infinite-acting time period 797
(K-77)
and Eq. (K-73) simplifies to
(K-78)
Eq. (K-78) illustrates that at long times the radial solution for a fractured system
also asymptotes to the impulse solution given by Eq. (K-14).
Noltes After-Closure Radial Time Function
Noltes derived his radial time function, , by substituting the apparent clo-
sure time, , into Eq. (K-75) and noting that for large times
and
(K-79)
The Nolte pressure response from Eq. (K-73) with the aid of Eq. () is
(K-80)
Simplifying Eq. (K-79), we find
(K-81)
where the Nolte radial time function is given by
(K-82)
and the slope
F
h
t t
c
, ( ) 1 t
c
At + ( ) ln = t
c
At
p
f
p
i
V
4tkh
-------------
1
At
----- =
F
R
t t
c
, ( )
_t
c
1 t
c
At + ( ) ln t
c
At
1
_
--- 1 _t
c
At + ( ) ln t
c
At
p
f
p
i

4tkh
-------------
V
t
c
---
1
_
--- 1 _t
c
At + ( ) ln =
tkh
---------
V
t
c
---
1
_
---
1
4
--- 1 _t
c
At + ( ) ln =
p p
i
m
R
F
R
t t
c
, ( ) =
F
R
t t
c
, ( )
1
4
--- 1 _t
c
At + ( ) ln =
(K-83)
where has been substituted.
The choice for (i.e., the 1/4 constant) was based on the asymptotic behav-
ior of at large times. That is
and (K-84)
or
(K-85)
for .
The good fortune is that Eq. (K-85) is a very good approximation to at all
times.
K.6 Summary and Implementation of After Clo-
sure Analysis
The purpose of the after closure analysis is to determine the formation permeability
The use of Noltes linear time function is only used in conjunction with its
relationship to the radial time function, . The methodology to determine
fracture characteristics using will not be addressed.
The governing pressure response equations for the radial or infinite-acting time
period of Section 5.0 are presented below for the Impulse Injection, Horner
and Nolte Analyses.
Impulse Injection
The pressure response for a pulse injection, from Eq. (K-14)
m
R

tkh
---------
V
t
c
---
1
_
---
t
16kh
------------
V
t
c
--- = =
_ 16 t
2
=
F
R
t t
c
, ( )
F
L
F
L
1
2
---
_t
c
At
------- F
R
1
4
---
_t
c
At
-------
F
R
t t
c
, ( ) F
L
2
t t
c
, ( )
t t
c
F
R
t t
c
, ( )
F
L
t t
c
, ( )
F
R
t t
c
, ( )
F
L
t t
c
, ( )
t t
c

(K-86)
where is the slope of vs and .
The permeability can be calculated from the slope of the straight line from the
following expression:
(K-87)
The apparent reservoir pressure ( ) can be found from the intercept
of the extension of the straight line with the axis.
Horner Time
The pressure response from Eq. (K-73) for an injection followed by a shut-in period
in terms of a Horner slope and time is
(K-88)
The Horner time and slope based on a pump ( ) or closure time ( ) is
(K-89)
(K-90)
where
The permeability can be calculated from the slope of the straight line from
the following expression:
(K-91)
The apparent reservoir pressure can be found from the intercept of the extension
of the straight line with the axis.
p p
i
V
4tkh
-------------
1
At
----- = m
1
At
----- =
m p 1 At At t t
p
=
k m
k
V
4thm
-------------- =
p* Ap p p* =
1 At 0 =
m
h
F
h
p
f
p
i
m
h
F
h
t t
, ( ) =
t
t
p
= t
t
c
=
F
h
t t
, ( ) 1 t
At + ( ) ln =
m
h

4tkh
-------------
V
t
---- =
At t t
=
k m
h
k

4th
----------
V
t
----
1
m
h
------ =
p*
F
h
t t
, ( ) 0 =
Nolte After Closure Time
The pressure response of a fractured well for an injection followed by a shut-in
period in terms of the Nolte after closure time and slope from Eq. (K-81) is
(K-92)
The Nolte radial time function and slope are given by
(K-93)
and
(K-94)
where .
The Nolte after closure function can also be represented as a function of the follow-
ing linear time functions
(K-95)
where
(K-96)
and
(K-97)
The permeability can be calculated from the slope of the straight line from
the following expression:
(K-98)
The apparent reservoir pressure can be found from the intercept of the extension
of the straight line with the axis.
F
R
m
R
p p
i
m
R
F
R
t t
c
, ( ) =
F
R
m
R
F
R
t t
c
, ( )
1
4
--- 1 _t
c
At + ( ) ln =
m
R

tkh
---------
V
t
c
---
1
_
---
t
16kh
------------
V
t
c
--- = =
_ 16 t
2
=
F
R
t t
c
, ( ) F
L
2
t t
c
, ( ) F
2
t t
c
, ( ) ~ ~
F
L
t t
c
, ( ) 1 t t
c
( ) _t
c
+ t t
c
( ) _t
c
=
F t t
c
, ( )
2
t
---arcsin t
c
t =
k m
R
k
t
16h
---------
V
t
c
---
1
m
R
------- =
p*
F
h
t t
, ( ) 0 =
Graphical Method
General Equation
The general form of the after closure pressure response is
(K-99)
where is slope, is a time function and is the straight line intercept at
.
Permeability and Reservoir Pressure
As discussed above, if the pressure is plotted against in Cartesian coordinates,
can be calculated from the slope of the straight line (i.e., ). The apparent
reservoir pressure can be found from the intercept of the extension of the
straight line with the axis.
Diagnostic Plots and Derivatives
Diagnostic plots similar to those used in the regression analysis using the Nolte G
function can be used to help identify radial flow (pressure transient). The general
relationships are given below.
Taking the derivative of Eq. (K-99) with respect to the time function, we find
(K-100)
or
(K-101)
Therefore at late time (small values of ) the measured pressure data should over-
lay Eq. (K-101) in Cartesian coordinates. Figure K.1 illustrates the use of Eq. (K-
101) by overlaying the derivative function to help identify the intercept (reservoir
pressure) and late time slope (permeability).
p p* m F =
m F p*
F 0 =
p F
k
m k 1 m
p*
F 0 =
dp dF m =
p p* F
dp
dF
------- + =
F
Figure K.1: After Closure Analysis - Surface Pressure vs. Nolte - FR Linear
Plot.
If a plot (see Figure K.2)of net pressure vs. is generated, the pres-
sure should overlay the following equation
(K-102)
Ap p p* = F
Ap p = p* F
dp
dF
------- =
Figure K.2: After Closure Analysis - Delta Pressure vs. Nolte - FR Linear
Plot.
Taking the natural log of Eq. (K-102) we find
(K-103)
Therefore, the net pressure curve in log space should also overlay the derivative
function for radial flow.
Another important derivative is the log slope. Taking the natural log of Eq. (K-99)
we find
(K-104)
where for the slope is equal to the net pressure (i.e., ).
Eq. (K-104) also illustrates that if is plotted versus , the log-log slope
will approach unity for large times. That is
as
Ap ( ) ln F
dp
dF
-------
\ .
| |
ln =
p p* ( ) ln m ( ) F ( ) ln + ln =
F 1 = p p* ( ) ln m ( ) ln =
Ap ( ) ln F ( ) ln
d Ap ( ) ln
d F ( ) ln
-------------------- 1 F 0
as shown in Figure K.3.
Figure K.3: After Closure Analysis - Delta Surface Pressure vs. Nolte- FR
Log-Log Plot
K.7 References
1. Abousieiman, Y, Cheng, A.A-D., and Gu, H: Formation Permeability Deter-
mination from Micro or Mini-Hydraulic Fracturing. ASME, Vol. 116, pg.
104-114, June, 1994.
2. Benelkadi, S., Belhaouas, R., and Sonatrach, M.S.: Use of After Closure
Analysis to Improve Hydraulic Fracturing designs, Application on Algerias
In-Adaoi Gas Field, SPE 80936, March 2003.
3. Drake, L.P.: Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering, Elsevier Science Pub-
lishers, B.V., The Netherlands, 1990, 174.
1977.
5. Gu, Hongren, Elbel, J.L, Nolte, K.G., Cheng A.H-D., and Abousieiman, Y.:
Formation permeability Determination Using Impulse-Fracture Injection,
SPE 25425, March 1993.
K.7 References 805
6. Holman, J.P.: Heat Transfer, McGraw-Hill, Inc., NY, 1977, 102.
7. Howard, G.C. and Fast, C.R.: Hydraulic Fracturing, Monograph Vol. 2, SPE,
1970, 33.
8. Horner, D.R.: Pressure Build-Up in Wells, Proc., Third World Pet. Cong.,
The Hague (1951) Sec. II, 503-523. Also Reprint Series No. 9 - Pressure Anal-
ysis Methods, SPE AIME, Dallas (1967), 25-43.
9. Myers, G.E.: Analytical Methods in Conduction Heat Transfer, McGraw-Hill,
Inc., NY, 1971, 153-160.
10. Nolte, K.G.: Background for After-Closure Analysis of Fracture Calibration
Tests, SPE 39407, July 1997.
11. Nolte, K.G., Maniere, J.L., and Owens, K.A.: After-Closure Analysis of Frac-
ture Calibration Tests, SPE 38676, October 1997.
Appendix L
Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite
Conductivity Vertical Fractures
L.1 Introduction
The solution methodology for pseudosteady behavior of a well with a finite con-
ductivity vertical fracture is formulated based on a new reservoir/fracture domain
resistivity concept. The formulation encompasses a transformed resistivity domain
based on an equivalent or effective wellbore radius. The resulting pseudosteady
solution is presented in the form of the dimensionless productivity index ( ).
Some of the major advantages of this pseudosteady solution for finite conductivity
vertical fractures are 1) the methodology is based on fundamental principles, 2) the
solution is analytical, 3) the equations are formulated for rectangular shaped reser-
voirs, and 4) the solution and concepts are easily understood and implemented. The
methodology accounts for a piece wise continuous linearly varying fracture con-
ductivity including: proppant tail-ins, over-flushing, pinch zones, choked flow
(external skin, fracture), and internal skin mechanisms (reservoir).
A summary of the fundamental building blocks, effective wellbore radius concept,
pseudo-skin functions and fracture skin are discussed. An improvement to Gringar-
tens dimensionless productivity solution for infinite vertical conductivity fractures
in rectangular closed reservoirs is also presented.
This report begins by presenting the dimensionless parameters and definitions,
methodology, governing equations, and finally solutions to specific fundamental
finite conductivity scenarios. Gringartens infinite conductivity solution for vertical
fractures in a closed rectangular reservoir is then presented. Gringartens infinite
conductivity solution that is based on utilizing the uniform flux solution with an
equivalent dimensionless fracture position ( ) is then discussed. A modi-
fication of Gringartens infinite conductivity solution is presented that addresses the
J
D
x
D
0.732 =
808 Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical Fractures:
singularities and anomalies with the assumption of constant value for . An ana-
lytical expression for the formation shape factor ( ) is presented for rectangular
shaped reservoirs. A formulation for internal and external fracture skins is then pre-
sented.
Finally a discussion on pseudopressure and pseudotime is presented followed by
solutions to the radial diffusivity equation for undersaturated oil (liquids), real gas,
and two phase behavior. A presentation on methodology for non-Darcy flow is also
addressed.
A summary of the Pseudosteady-State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical
Fractures is presented by Meyer (2005).
The following dimensionless parameters will be used throughout this report. The
dimensionless pressure ( ) for a constant production rate ( ) is defined as
(L-1)
viscosity, and is the differential pressure (the initial reservoir pres-
sure ( ) minus the flowing pressure ( )).
The dimensionless time based on the drainage area, , is defined as
(L-2)
where is the formation porosity and is the formation compressibility.
The dimensionless rate ( ) for a constant flowing pressure ( ) is defined as
(L-3)
x
D
C
A
p
D
q
p
D
2tkh
q
-------------Ap =
k h
Ap p
i
p
wf
=
p
i
p
wf
A
t
DA
kt
c|A
------------- =
| c
q
D
p
wf
q
D

2tkhAp
--------------------q t ( ) =
q t ( )
2tkhAp
-------------------- q
D
=
L.2 Pseudosteady Equations 809
where is the constant draw down pressure (the initial reservoir pres-
sure ( ) minus the flowing pressure ( )).
(L-4)
where is the flow rate, is the average reservoir pressure, and is the flowing
pressure. The dimensionless productivity index, , is defined as
(L-5)
L.2 Pseudosteady Equations
Ramey (1971) defined pseudosteady state as the condition in a finite closed reser-
voir when producing at a constant rate that every point within the reservoir will
eventually experience a constant rate of pressure decline. Ramey also states That
this condition has been referred to as pseudosteady, quasi-steady, semi-steady, and
even steady state in the literature. Like Ramey, we will use the term pseudosteady
or pseudosteady state to describe this behavior.
Dimensionless Pressure
Ramey (1971), Earlougher and Ramey (1973), and Gringarten (1974) showed that
at sufficiently large producing times the system (unfractured or fractured) eventu-
ally reaches pseudosteady state and the dimensionless pressure may be evaluated
from
(L-6)
where is the shape factor and is the effective wellbore radius as originally
proposed by Prats (1961). Ramey (1971) showed that for pseudosteady flow
Ap p
i
p
wf
=
p
i
p
wf
J
J
q
p p
wf
----------------
2tkh
-------------J
D
= =
q p p
wf
J
D
J
D

2tkh
------------- J

2tkh
-------------
q
p p
wf
---------------- = =
p
D
t
DA
( )
2tkh
q
------------- p
i
p
wf
( ) 2tt
DA
1 2
4A
e
C
A
r
w
'
2
--------------------
\ .
|
| |
ln + = =
C
A
r
w
'
2tt
DA
2tkh
q
------------- p
i
p ( ) =
and
The dimensionless pressure solution can be written in the form (see e.g.,
Ramey(1971) and Valko (1998)):
(L-7)
where
or
(L-8)
Effective Wellbore Radius
Rearranging Eq. (L-8) in terms of effective wellbore radius
(L-9)
where the reservoir area for a rectangular reservoir has
been incorporated.
1 2
4A
e
C
A
r
w
'
------------------
\ .
|
| |
ln
2tkh
q
------------- p p
wf
( ) =
p
D
2tt
DA
1 J
D
+ =
1 J
D
1 2
4A
e
C
A
r
w
'
2
--------------------
\ .
|
| |
ln =
J
D
1 2
4A
e
C
A
r
w
'
2
--------------------
\ .
|
| |
ln
1
=
1
J
D
------
4t
e
C
A
( )
--------------------
r
e
r
w
'
----- ln
4
e
C
A
-------------------
x
e
r
w
'
-----
\ .
|
| |
ln = =
1
J
D
------
4t
e
C
A
( )
--------------------
r
e
x
f
----
x
f
r
w
'
----- ln + ln
4
e
C
A
-------------------
x
e
x
f
----
x
f
r
w
'
----- ln + ln = =
A tr
e
2
4x
e
y
e
4x
e
2
= = =
L.2 Pseudosteady Equations 811
The effective wellbore radius, , concept was first introduced by Prats (1961,
1962) as a means to define an equivalent reservoir with wellbore radius, , that
would have a production behavior similar to that of a fractured reservoir. Prats
showed that for high conductivity fractures ( ) and low fracture penetration
ratios ( ), the effective wellbore radius was given by
(L-10)
The effective wellbore radius concept is discussed in greater detail below as it per-
tains to finite and infinite conductivity vertical fractures in closed systems.
Pseudo-Skin Relationships
The dimensionless productivity index as formulated by Cinco-Ley is of the form
(L-11)
where is the pseudo-skin function with respect to the fracture half-length ( ).
The pseudo-skin function and effective wellbore radius, , are related by
Eq. (L-9) can also be written in terms of a fracture skin, ,
The relationships between the pseudo-skin function, , dimensionless reciprocal
effective wellbore radius, , and fracture skin, , are given below
r
w
'
r
w
'
C
fD

x
f
x
e
0
r
w
'
x
f
2
1
J
D
------
4t
e
C
A
------------
r
e
x
f
---- f + ln =
f x
f
r
w
'
f
x
f
r
w
'
----- ln =
S
f
1
J
D
------
4t
e
C
A
------------
r
e
r
w
----- S
f
+ ln =
f
x
f
r
w
'
S
f
f
x
f
r
w
'
----- ln S
f
r
w
x
f
----- ln S
f
x
f
r
w
----- ln + = = =
(L-12)
and
or
L.3 Pseudosteady Fractured System Model
The pseudosteady model for a fractured domain is based on Darcys law
(L-13)
where is a reference dimension. The pseudosteady flow rate from Eq. (L-13) is
(L-14)
Resistivity
Eq. (L-14) can be rearranged and placed in terms of a resistivity, , such that
(L-15)
The resistivity from Eq. (L-14) and Eq. (L-15) is
(L-16)
S
f
r
w
x
f
----- f + ln
r
w
x
f
-----
x
f
r
w
'
----- ln + ln
r
w
r
w
'
----- ln = = =
x
f
r
w
'
----- e
f
x
f
r
w
-----e
S
f
= =
r
w
'
r
w
e
S
f
x
f
e
f
= =
v
k
---
d
dp
=
q vA A
k
---
d
dp
\ .
| |
= =
( )
2tkh
q
-------------
d
dp
( )
e ( )
A
2th
----------
k ( )
k
----------
--------------------- =
L.3 Pseudosteady Fractured System Model 813
where is the permeability as a function of position and is the reference or far
field reservoir permeability. The fracture flow rate as a function of position is given
by .
Reservoir Resistivity
The reservoir resistivity, , for radial flow from Eq. (L-16) is
(L-17)
where the flow rate for pseudosteady radial flow is a constant
and the flow area given by at any position
has been substituted.
Fracture Resistivity
Substituting the fracture flow area (i.e., flow rate through area ,
where is the single wing fracture flow rate) into Eq. (L-15), we find
(L-18)
where is the permeability as a function of position in the fracture ( ) and is
the reference or far field reservoir permeability. The fracture flow rate as a function
of position is given by .
The dimensionless fracture flow rate as a function of position can be represented by
(L-19)
where for slot flow, , and for a uniform flux, . The average fracture
resistivity, , from the wellbore to any position for a constant width fracture is
found by integrating Eq. (L-19)
k ( ) k
e ( ) q ( ) q 0 ( ) =
r
( ) 1
k ( )
k
----------
\ .
| |
=
e ( ) q ( ) q 0 ( ) 1 = = A 2th =
A w
f
h = q A
q
f
( )
e ( )
w
f
2t
------
k
f
( )
k
------------
------------------- =
k
f
( ) k
e ( ) q ( ) q 0 ( ) =
e ( ) q ( ) q 0 ( ) = 1 x
f
( )
o
q
=
o
q
0 = o
q
1 =
f
, ( )
f
0 ( ) e ( ) d
0
,
}
,
1 1 , ( )
o
q
1 +
1 o
q
+ ( ),
------------------------------------- = =
where . The average fracture resistivity over the entire fracture length is
(L-20)
As illustrated, the average resistivity for slot flow is twice that of the uniform flux
solution.
The average apparent conductivity as a function of position is
(L-21)
where
and
The average apparent conductivity parameter for a uniform-flux fracture ( )
is

Inverse Dimensionless Productivity Index
The inverse dimensionless productivity index ( ) is found from Eq. (L-5) by inte-
grating the resistivity over the flow domain as given by
(L-22)
where is the constant of integration.
No Fracture
The formation resistivity for an unfractured homogeneous reservoir ( )
from Eq. (L-16) is .
, x x
f
=
f

f
0 ( )
1
1 o
q
+
--------------- =
k , ( )
k
f
w
f
, ( )
k
f
w
f
------------------
1 o
q
+ ( ),
1 1 , ( )
o
q
1 +
------------------------------------- = =
k 0 ( )
k
f
w
f
0 ( )
k
f
w
f
------------------ 1 = = k 1 ( )
k
f
w
f
1 ( )
k
f
w
f
------------------ 1 o
q
+ ( ) = =
o
q
1 =
k , ( )
2,
1 1 , ( )
2
---------------------------- =
J
D
1
J
D
------
}
( )d c + =
c
k ( ) k 1 =
r
( ) 1 =
The dimensionless productivity index ( ) for radial flow in a homogeneous reser-
voir with a wellbore radius, , and drainage radius, , from Eq. (L-22) is
(L-23)
The constant of integration is found from Eq. (L-8)
(L-24)
or
(L-25)
where .
Eq. (L-23) can also be written as
(L-26)
The equivalent drainage radius, , in terms of rectangular reservoir dimensions
for a given drainage area ( ) is
(L-27)
where the reservoir aspect ratio is given by .
Rearranging Eq. (L-8) or Eq. (L-26) in terms of the rectangular reservoir coordi-
nate, , with , we have
(L-28)
J
D
r
w
r
e
1
J
D
------
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d c +
r
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln c + = =
1
J
D
------ 1 2
4A
e
C
A
r
w
2
------------------
\ .
|
| | r
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln c + = ln =
c
4t
e
C
A
( )
-------------------- ln =
r
e
A t
1
J
D
------
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d c +
4t
e
C
A
( )
--------------------
r
e
r
w
----- ln = =
r
e
x
e
y
e
, ( ) A 4x
e
y
e
= 4x
e
2
tr
e
2
= =
x
e
r
e
----
t
4
------ =
x
e
= y
e
x
e
A 4x
e
2
=
1
J
D
------
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d c +
4t
e
C
A
( )
--------------------
r
e
r
w
----- ln
4
e
C
A
-------------------
x
e
r
w
-----
\ .
|
| |
ln = = =
The above equation can be written as
(L-29)
where
;
and
.
The constant of integration in Eq. (L-28) can also be represented by
(L-30)
Circular Reservoir
The beta integration constants for a well located at the center of a circular drainage
area are
(L-31)
where .
The pseudosteady inverse productivity solution for a well located at the center of a
closed circular homogeneous reservoir from Eq. (L-29) and Eq. (L-31) is
(L-32)
where the constant of integration can is now represented by
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
( )
r
e
r
w
----- ln |
x
e
( )
x
e
r
w
----- ln = =
|
r
e
( )
4t
e
C
A
( )
-------------------- = |
x
e
( )
4
e
C
A
------------------- =
|
x
e
( ) |
r
e
( )
4
t
------ =
c
4t
e
C
A
( )
--------------------
r
e
r
w
----- ln
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d
4
e
C
A
-------------------
x
e
r
w
-----
\ .
|
| |
ln
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d = =
1 =
|
r
e
0.47237097 =
|
x
e
0.53301379 =
C
A
1 = ( ) 31.62 =
1
J
D
------
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d c + 0.472
r
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln 0.533
x
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln = = =
(L-33)
The dimensionless productivity index for a well of radius located at the center
of a closed circular drainage area from Eq. (L-32) is
(L-34)
Square Reservoir
The beta integration constants for a well located at the center of a square are
(L-35)
where .
The pseudosteady inverse productivity solution for a well located at the center of a
closed square homogeneous reservoir from Eq. (L-29) and Eq. (L-31) is
(L-36)
where the constant of integration can is now represented by
(L-37)
The dimensionless productivity index for a well of radius in the center of a
homogeneous square formation from Eq. (L-32) is
(L-38)
c 0.472
r
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d ln =
r
w
J
D
1
0.472
r
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln
------------------------------
1
0.533
x
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln
------------------------------ = =
1 =
|
r
e
0.47797569 =
|
x
e
0.53933781 =
C
A
1 = ( ) 30.8828 =
1
J
D
------
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d c + 0.478
r
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln 0.539
x
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln = = =
c 0.478
r
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
1
---
r
w
r
e
}
d ln =
r
w
J
D
1
0.478
r
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln
------------------------------
1
0.539
x
e
r
w
-----
\ .
| |
ln
------------------------------ = =
Finite Conductivity Vertical Fracture System
The fracture for a rectangular reservoir with aspect ratio, , is mapped in a
fracture domain with dimensions or .
The total system resistivity within the fracture domain or radial fracture
domain (where is some reference (still to be determined) apparent or
effective domain radius) for the formation and fracture acting in parallel is
where
and the net fracture resistivity is

The average net inverse fracture resistivity integrated from the wellbore to some
position is
The total inverse resistivity (reservoir and fracture) within the fracture domain zone
is then
(L-39)
To illustrate this methodology we will first develop the equations for a square reser-
voir and then extend the analysis to a rectangular shaped reservoir.
x
e
y
e
=
r
w
'
r
w
'
r
w
'
r
w
'
, ( )
r
w
'
r
w
'

r
w
'
s r
w
'
1
---
1
r
-----
1
f
---- + =
r
1
k ( )
k
----------
\ .
| |
=
f
e ( )
w
f
( )
2t
-------------
k
f
( )
k
------------
k ( )
k
----------
\ .
| |
------------------------------------------------- =
f

f
0
}
d'
\ .
| |
=
1
r
w
'
s ( )
-----------------------
k ( )
k
----------
1
f
---- + =
Square Reservoir
The inverse dimensionless productivity for a two wing fracture in a square reservoir
with a fracture domain of from Eq. (L-22) is
(L-40)
Eq. (L-40) is similar to an equation originally proposed by Raymond and Binder
(1962) but with a few significant differences. Raymond integrated the above equa-
tion over the fracture half-length ( ) without transforming the fracture into a
domain coordinate system (i.e., some effective wellbore radius, domain). He
also assumed slot flow in the fracture (i.e., ). Both of these
conditions were detrimental to his results.
Eliminating the constant of integration, Eq. (L-40) can be written as
(L-41)
where the constant of integration has been implemented with the aid of Eq. (L-30).
For an infinite conductivity fracture with a uniform formation permeability Eq. (L-
41) becomes
(L-42)
As illustrated, the apparent domain radius to satisfy Eq. (L-42) must be the effec-
tive wellbore radius for an infinite conductivity fracture as given by .
To prevent confusion, the dimensionless fracture half-length ratio with respect to
the effective wellbore radius (i.e., reciprocal effective wellbore radius) for an infi-
nite conductivity fracture will be defined as
(L-43)
where is a function of the penetration ratio ( ) as discussed below.
r
w
'
r
w
'
, ( )
1
J
D
------
1
k ( )
k
----------
1
f
---- +
-------------------------
r
w
r
w
'
}
d
1
k ( )
k
----------
--------------
r
w
'
r
e
}
d c + + =
x
f
r
w
'
e ( ) q ( ) q 0 ( ) 1 = =
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----
x
f
r
w
'
-----
\ .
|
| |
ln
1
---
k
k ( )
---------- 1
\ .
| |
r
w
'
r
e
}
d + =
1
k ( )
k
----------
1
f
---- +
-------------------------
r
w
r
w
'
}
d +
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----
x
f
r
w
'
----- ln + ln |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----
x
f
r
w
'
----- ln
C
fD

+ ln = =
r
w
'
r
w
'
C
fD
=
,
x
f
r
w
'
C
fD
I
x
( ) I
x
x
f
x
e
=
Defining a dimensionless fracture domain position, , with respect to the effective
wellbore radius for an infinite conductivity fracture ( ), we have
(L-44)
where
and
.
Eq. (L-41) can now be written in terms of the dimensionless domain parameter as
(L-45)
where

The fracture dimension is related to by
(L-46)
The dimensionless position as a function of fracture position from Eq. (L-46)
is
(L-47)
Eq. (L-46) can be approximated by
,
r
w
'
C
fD
, r
w
'
C
fD
=
,
w
r
w
r
w
'
C
fD
r
w
x
f
( ),
= =
,
e
r
e
r
w
'
C
fD
r
e
x
f
( ),
= =
,
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----,
\ .
| |
ln
1
_
---
,
w
1
}
d
1
,
---
k
k , ( )
---------- 1
\ .
| |
1
,
e
}
d, + + =
_ ,
k , ( )
k
----------
1
f
----
,
x
f
------ + =
x ,
x r
w
x
f
r
w
---------------
, ,
w
1 ,
w
--------------- =
, x
, 1 ,
w
( )
x r
w
x
f
r
w
--------------- ,
w
+ =
x x
f
, ~
for most cases if and .
Eq. (L-45) can be represented in terms of a pseudo-skin function
(L-48)
where the pseudo-skin function is given by
(L-49)
The delta pseudo-skin function, , represents the skin of a finite conductivity
fracture (i.e., additional skin of a finite conductivity fracture as opposed to an infi-
nite conductivity fracture). This finite conductivity skin is given by
(L-50)
For a piece wise continuous fracture conductivity, Eq. (L-50) can be represented by
(L-51)
where is the number of fracture intervals and the integrand is represented by
and
Rectangular Reservoir
The inverse dimensionless productivity for a two wing fracture in a rectangular res-
ervoir with a fracture domain of from Eq. (L-22) is
,
w
1 x r
w
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln f
1
,
---
k
k , ( )
---------- 1
\ .
| |
1
,
e
}
d, + + =
f ,
( ) ln AS
f
+ =
AS
f
AS
f
1
_
---
,
w
1
}
d =
AS
f
1
_
---
,
w
1
}
d
1
_
i
----
,
w
,
i
}
d
1
_
i
----
,
w
,
i 1
}
d
i 1 =
N
= =
N
_
i
,
k , ( )
k
---------- C
i
k ,
i
( ) + =
C
i
w
fi
2t
-------
1
x
f
----
k
fi
k
-----
k , ( )
k
----------
\ .
| |
,
=
r
w
'
r
w
'
, ( )
(L-52)
Eq. (L-41) can now be written in terms of the dimensionless domain parameter as
(L-53)
where
(L-54)
To determine the formulation of the geometric parameter , Eq. (L-54) can be
simplified with the aid of the mean value theorem for a homogeneous reservoir and
constant fracture conductivity as
where

and represents the ratio of the reservoir to net fracture resistivity.
The geometric shape parameter is obtained from the definition of the dimen-
sionless domain conductivity where
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----
x
f
r
w
'
-----
\ .
|
| |
ln
1
k ( )
k
----------
g ( )
f
----------- +
--------------------------------
r
w
r
w
'
}
d
1
---
k
k ( )
---------- 1
\ .
| |
r
w
'
r
e
}
d + + =
,
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----,
ln
1
_
---
,
w
1
}
d
1
,
---
k
k , ( )
---------- 1
\ .
| |
1
,
e
}
d, + + =
_ ,
k , ( )
k
----------
g ( )
f
-----------
,
x
f
------ + =
g ( )
_ , C k ( ) + ~
k ( )
k
f
w
f
( )
k
f
w
f
------------------
1 o
q
+ ( )
1 1 ( )
o
q
1 +
------------------------------------- = =
C C
fD
g ( ),
2t
------------------ =
C
fD
w
f
x
f
-----
k
f
k
---- 1
\ .
| |
=
C
g ( )
C , ( )
C , ( )

C , ( )
1 =

r
1 = ( )
r
( )
------------------------ C , ( )
1 =
g ( ) = =
This geometric parameter for high and low conductivity fractures for aspect ratios
greater than or equal to unity ( ) is given by
and
respectively. The geometric parameter for aspect ratios less than one is equal to
unity (i.e., ).
There are actually two parts to the function. Part one is the transformation of
variable in Eq. (L-52) (i.e., integration from to for high conductivity frac-
tures and straight mapping to for low conductivity fractures) and a reservoir
area resistivity factor .
This follows since for low conductivity fractures the fracture domain is not a func-
tion of fracture length (i.e., the domain is not ).
As illustrated for a square reservoir is not a function of conductivity (i.e.,
). For an infinite-acting reservoir is also equal to unity, ( ).
The general form of for all conductivities and penetrations is
where
To simplify the nomenclature may be written interchangeably as or
.
1 >
g ( )
C
fD

A 1 = ( )
A ( )
----------------------
2
1 1 +
------------------- =
g ( )
C
fD
0
A 1 = ( )
A ( )
----------------------
2
1 1 +
------------------- =
g 1 < ( ) 1 =
g ( )
r
w
'
r
w
'
r
w
'
A 1 = ( ) A ( )
r
w
'
r
w
'
, ( ) r
w
'
r
w
'
, ( )
g 1 = ( )
g 1 = ( ) 1 = g g 1 =
g C
fD
I
x
, , ( )
g C
fD
I
x
, , ( ) |g ( )
C
fD
0
1 | ( )g ( )
C
fD

+ =
| e
2 C
fD
I
x
2

~
g C
fD
I
x
, , ( ) g
g ( )
L.4 Pseudosteady Fracture Solutions
General Solution for Homogeneous Reservoirs
The governing inverse productivity index equation for a piece-wide continuous and
linearly varying fracture conductivity in homogeneous reservoir ( ) from
Eq. (L-53) is
(L-55)
or

where
(L-56)
The delta pseudo-skin function (i.e., additional skin of a finite-conductivity frac-
ture) for a piece-wise continuous varying fracture conductivity in a homogeneous
reservoir as derived from the mean value theorem is
(L-57)
where
and .
k , ( ) k 1 =
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln ,
ln AS
f
+ + =
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln f + =
f ,
ln AS
f
+ =
AS
f
1
_
---
,
w
1
}
d, AS
fi
i 1 =
N
= =
AS
fi
AS
f
,
w
,
i
, ( ) AS
f
,
w
,
i 1
, ( ) =
AS
f
,
w
, , ( )
1
_
---
,
w
,
}
d
, k , ( )C +
,
w
k , ( )C +
----------------------------
\ .
| |
ln = =
k , ( )
1 o
q
+ ( ),
1 1 , ( )
o
q
1 +
------------------------------------- =
k 0 ( ) 1 =
L.4 Pseudosteady Fracture Solutions 825
The conductivity variable is given by
and is a function of the aspect ratio, the dimensionless conductivity,
and the penetration ratio.
Slot Flow
A fundamental solution to Eq. (L-57) can be obtained if we assume slot flow in the
fracture ( ). Although, slot flow is not a very realistic assumption for most
fractured systems (i.e., assuming all the flow enters at the tip of the fracture and
flows with a constant rate in fracture) it will provide a limiting solution for the max-
imum pressure in the fracture/reservoir domain. That is, slot flow results in the
maximum value for the pseudo-skin function (minimum value for ).
Assuming slot flow ( , ) in the fracture with a constant conduc-
tivity fracture, Eq. (L-57) is integrated to obtain the delta pseudo-skin as a function
of position
(L-58)
The inverse fracture productivity index for slot flow in a fracture with a constant
conductivity from Eq. (L-58) is
(L-59)
C
w
f
x
f
-----
k
f
k
---- 1
\ .
| |
g C
fD
I
x
, , ( ),
2t
------------------------------------- =
C
fD
g C
fD
I
x
, , ( ),
2t
------------------------------------- =
g C
fD
I
x
, , ( )
e , ( ) 1 =
J
D
e , ( ) 1 = k , ( ) 1 =
AS
f
, ( )
1
_
---
,
w
,
}
d,
, C +
,
w
C +
----------------
\ .
| |
ln = =
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln ,
ln
1 C +
,
w
C +
----------------
\ .
| |
ln + + =
|
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln
,
C
------ ,
+
,
w
C
------ 1 +
-------------------
\ .
|
|
|
| |
ln + =
Placing Eq. (L-59) in terms of the dimensionless fracture conductivity for a con-
stant conductivity fracture , the productivity index for slot flow can
be written as
(L-60)
Uniform Flux
The uniform flux assumption is a more realistic solution for high conductivity ver-
tical fracture systems. Since the fracture flux is a function of the fracture conductiv-
ity as illustrated by Cinco-Ley (1981), the flux (flow rate in the fracture) must be
known prior to solving Eq. (L-55).
To obtain a more realistic solution to this domain problem, we will assume a con-
stant flux into the fracture (at least for high conductivity fractures). As illustrated
above, the resistivity for a uniform fracture flux is one-half that of slot flow (i.e.,
). This makes the effective conductivity look like it is two times higher
since the full flow rate is not seen over the entire length of the fracture. Conse-
quently, one may without much more thought make the following incorrect analogy
Then for a uniform flux
The above analogy of course is false for all positions in the fracture. This is easily
illustrated by noting that at or near the wellbore, the fracture flow rate is at the max-
imum value (like slot flow) from which ( ). However, at the fracture
tip, the flow rate is less than the value at the well .
Thus, from Eq. (L-55) we would find (see below) that for a uniform flux
C C
fD
g ( ),
2t
------------------ =
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln
2t
C
fD
g ( )
-------------------- ,
+
2t
C
fD
g ( )
--------------------
,
w
,
------ 1 +
-------------------------------------
\ .
|
|
|
| |
ln + =
f
1
2
---
f
0 ( ) =
f
0 ( )
------------
1
1 o
q
+
--------------- ~
C
fD
C
fD
--------- 1 o
q
+ ( ) ~
f
0 ( )
------------
1
2
-- - ~
C
fD
C
fD
--------- 2 ~
C , 0 ( ) C ~
C , 1 ( ) C
(L-61)
However, applying this analogy to the entire fracture domain is approximately true,
as will be illustrated. Thus, integration over the entire fracture domain for a high
constant conductivity fracture, we find
(L-62)
and
(L-63)
The resulting pseudo-skin function from Eq. (L-63) is shown to be in excellent
agreement with the numerical results of Cinco-Ley as discussed in the main body of
the report.
Summary
The inverse dimensionless productivity index and related equations for a piece wise
continuous linearly varying fracture conductivity in a homogeneous reservoir is
(L-64)
where
(L-65)
and
(L-66)
The delta pseudo-skin function (i.e., skin of a finite conductivity fracture) for a
piece wise continuous varying fracture conductivity in a homogeneous reservoir for
slot and a uniform fracture flux are
AS
f
1
_
---
,
w
,
}
d,
, 2C +
,
w
2C +
-------------------
\ .
| |
ln = =
AS
f
1
_
---
,
w
1
}
d
1 2C +
,
w
2C +
-------------------
\ .
| |
ln ~ =
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln ,
1 2C +
,
w
2C +
-------------------
\ .
| |
ln + ~
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln f + =
f ,
( ) ln AS
f
+ =
AS
f
1
_
---
,
w
1
}
d,
1
_
i
----
,
i 1
,
i
}
d,
i 1 =
N
= =
General Flow Solution
A more general solution as derived from the mean value theorem that we will use is
where
(L-67)
and .
For a uniform flux fracture ( ) and we have
(L-68)
The conductivity variable is given by
(L-69)
and is a function of aspect ratio, penetration, and conductivity as given
below by the following limits
and
The general form of for all conductivities and penetrations is
AS
f
1
_
---
,
w
,
}
d
, k , ( )C +
,
w
k , ( )C +
----------------------------
\ .
| |
ln = =
k , ( )
1 o
q
+ ( ),
1 1 , ( )
o
q
1 +
------------------------------------- =
k 0 ( ) 1 =
o
q
1 =
k , ( )
2,
1 1 , ( )
2
---------------------------- =
C
w
f
x
f
-----
k
f
k
---- 1
\ .
| |
g C
fD
, ( ),
2t
------------------------------ =
C
fD
g C
fD
, ( ),
2t
------------------------------ =
g C
fD
, ( )
g C
fD
, ( )
C
fD
1
2
1 1 +
------------------- =
g C
fD
, ( )
C
fD
1
2
1 1 +
------------------- =
g
(L-70)
where
To simplify the nomenclature, will be written interchangeably as or
. It is also noted, that for aspect ratios less than unity, we have
.
Effective Wellbore Radius
The inverse dimensionless effective wellbore radius for a constant (uniform) con-
ductivity fracture in a rectangular reservoir from Eq. (L-57) is
(L-71)
or
(L-72)
Eq. (L-72) can be simplified if we assume a uniform fracture flux ( and
) and if as given by
(L-73)
Consequently, for large and small fracture conductivities with aspect ratios greater
than or equal to unity ( ), we have
(L-74)
and
g C
fD
I
x
, , ( ) |g C
fD
I
x
, , ( )
C
fD
0
1 | ( )g C
fD
I
x
, , ( )
C
fD

+ =
| e
2 C
fD
I
x
2

~
g C
fD
I
x
, , ( ) g
g ( )
g 1 < C
fD
I
x
, , ( ) 1 =
x
f
r
w
'
k 1 ( )C,
+
,
w
k 1 ( )C +
-----------------------------------
,
k 1 ( )C ,
+
,
w
k 1 ( )C 1 +
--------------------------------------- = =
x
f
r
w
'
2t k 1 ( )
C
fD
g ( )
---------------------- ,
+
\ .
| |
2t k 1 ( )
C
fD
g ( )
----------------------
,
w
,
------ 1 +
\ .
| |
=
o
q
1 =
k 1 ( ) 2 =
t
C
fD
g ( )
---------------------
,
w
,
------ 1
x
f
r
w
'
t
C
fD
g ( )
-------------------- ,
+
\ .
| |
=
1 >
x
f
r
w
'
C
fD
1
t
C
fD
2
1 1 +
-------------------
\ .
| |
---------------------------------- ,
+ =
(L-75)
where in Eq. (L-75) we have assumed that .
Eq. (L-75) illustrates that the effective wellbore radius at low fracture conductivi-
ties is not a function of the fracture length
Then from the above equation for low conductivity vertical fractures in a square
reservoir ( ), we have

The remainder of this section is devoted to finding solutions to the above set of
equations for special cases of interest.
The following analysis will primarily be based on dimensionless productivity solu-
tions for finite conductivity vertical fractures with a well at the center of a rectangu-
lar reservoir.
L.5 Pseudosteady Cases
Constant Finite Conductivity Fracture
One very important and fundamental solution for the dimensionless productivity
index, , is for the case of a finite conductivity fracture of constant width and per-
meability (conductivity) in a homogeneous square reservoir. The boundary condi-
tions for this case are:
x
f
r
w
'
C
fD
1
t
C
fD
2
1 1 +
-------------------
\ .
| |
---------------------------------- ,
+ =
t
C
fD
g ( )
---------------------
,
w
,
------ 1
r
w
'
C
fD
1
1
t
---
2
1 1 +
-------------------
\ .
| |
w
f
k
f
k
r
---------
1 =
r
w
'
C
fD
1
1
t
---
w
f
k
f
k
r
---------
J
D
L.5 Pseudosteady Cases 831
(L-76)
or
(L-77)
The fundamental productivity index solution for a uniform fracture conductivity
(and uniform flux) is found by substituting the boundary condition of Eq. (L-77)
into Eq. (L-64) and rearranging
(L-78)
where
and
Placing Eq. (L-78) in terms of the dimensionless fracture conductivity and assum-
ing a uniform flux ( ), we have
(L-79)
Eq. (L-78) can be simplified if the fracture permeability is much greater than the
formation permeability and the wellbore radius is much less than the width permea-
bility ratio, as given by
k , ( ) k ,
w
, ,
e
s s =
k
f
, ( ) k
f
,
w
, 1 s s =
w , ( ) w
f
,
w
, 1 s s =
C
fD
,
w
, 1 s s ( ) C
fD
=
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----,
ln AS
f
+ =
AS
f
1
_
---
,
w
1
}
d,
1 k 1 ( )C +
,
w
k 1 ( )C +
----------------------------
\ .
| |
ln = =
C C
fD
g ( ),
2t
------------------ =
k 1 ( ) 2 =
AS
f
t
C
fD
g ( ),
--------------------------- 1 +
t
C
fD
g ( )
--------------------
,
w
,
------ 1 +
-------------------------------------
\ .
|
|
|
| |
ln =
The resulting simplification of Eq. (L-78) with the above assumptions can be writ-
ten as
(L-80)
where the dimensionless fracture conductivity, , for is approximated
by
(L-81)
The pseudo-skin function, , from Eq. (L-65) and Eq. (L-80) is
(L-82)
The reciprocal effective wellbore radius, , from Eq. (L-12) and Eq. (L-80) for
a uniform finite conductivity fracture in a square homogeneous reservoir (
and ) is
(L-83)
Figure L.1 shows the effective dimensionless wellbore radius (Eq. (L-83)) as a
function of fracture conductivity. A comparison with the work of Cinco-Ley and
Ramey illustrates the excellent agreement.
k
f
k 1
,
w
w
f
x
f
-----
k
f
k
---- 1
\ .
| |
g ( ),
t
------------------ or r
w
w
f
k
f
k
---- 1
\ .
| |
g ( ),
t
------------------
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
---- ln
t
C
fD
g ( )
-------------------- ,
+
\ .
| |
ln + =
C
fD
k
f
k 1
C
fD
w
f
k
f
x
f
k
--------- =
f
f
t
C
fD
g ( )
-------------------- ,
+
\ .
| |
ln =
x
f
r
w
'
1 =
g ( ) 1 =
x
f
r
w
'
t
C
fD
--------- ,
+ =
Figure L.1: Dimensionless Effective Wellbore radius for Finite Conductivity
vertical fracture.
Figure L.2 shows the dimensionless pseudo-skin (Eq. (L-82)) as a function of frac-
ture conductivity. A comparison with the work of Cinco-Ley and Ramey is also
shown.
Figure L.2: Pseudo-skin function versus Dimensionless Conductivity.
Comparison with the work of Cinco-Ley and Ramey.
Non-Uniform Fracture Conductivity
Consider a fracture with uniform conductivity zones. The boundary conditions
for this general case are:
(L-84)
These boundary conditions are typical for propped fractures with a pinch zone, a
tail-in, over flushing, choked flow, etc.
The incremental pseudo-skin from Eq. (L-78) for the above boundary conditions is
where
(L-85)
and from Eq. (L-67)
The conductivity constant from Eq. (L-69) is defined as
and .
N
k , ( ) k ,
w
, ,
e
s s =
C
fD
, ( ) C
fD1
,
w
, ,
1
s s =
C
fD
, ( ) C
fD2
,
1
, ,
2
s s =
......
C
fD
, ( ) C
fDN
,
N 1
, 1 s s =
AS
f
AS
fi
i 1 =
N
=
AS
fi
,
i
k ,
i
( )C
i
+
,
w
k ,
i
( )C
i
+
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
i 1
k ,
i 1
( )C
i
+
,
w
k ,
i 1
( )C
i
+
-------------------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
k , ( )
1 o
q
+ ( ),
1 1 , ( )
o
q
1 +
------------------------------------- =
C
i
C
fD
i
g ( ),
2t
------------------ =
,
0
,
w
=
The general productivity solution for uniform fracture conductivity zones from
and Eq. (L-78) is
(L-86)
Then for three zones we have
and
where for a uniform flux distribution.
Pinched Fracture or Blockage
A pinched fracture is defined as a propped fracture that has a restricted width or
pinch zone somewhere within the fracture. A limiting restriction is when the frac-
ture and formation permeabilities are equal (i.e., no propped fracture). The resulting
boundary conditions with a uniform conductivity on either side of a pinch zone are:
(L-87)
The reciprocal productivity index from Eq. (L-86) with the boundary conditions of
Eq. (L-87) is
N
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----,
\ .
| |
ln AS
fi
i 1 =
N
+ =
AS
f
AS
fi
i 1 =
3
=
AS
f1
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
i
+
,
w
k ,
1
( )C
i
+
--------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
AS
f2
,
2
k ,
2
( )C
2
+
,
w
k ,
2
( )C
2
+
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
2
+
,
w
k ,
1
( )C
2
+
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
AS
f3
1 k 1 ( )C
3
+
,
w
k 1 ( )C
3
+
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
2
k ,
2
( )C
3
+
,
w
k ,
2
( )C
3
+
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
k 1 ( ) 2 =
C
fD1
C
fD
,
w
, ,
1
s s =
C
fD2
0 ,
1
, ,
2
s s =
C
fD3
C
fD
,
2
, 1 s s =
and
The finite conductivity skin for , is
where for a uniform flux fracture.
Placing Eq. (L-86) in terms of a pinch point or zone skin, , for a uniform flux
fracture, we have
(L-88)
where
(L-89)
and
AS
f
AS
fi
i 1 =
3
=
AS
f1
,
1
k ,
1
( )C +
,
w
k ,
1
( )C +
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
AS
f2
,
2
,
1
-----
\ .
| |
ln =
AS
f3
1 k 1 ( )C +
,
w
k 1 ( )C +
----------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
2
k ,
2
( )C +
,
w
k ,
2
( )C +
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
,
w
C
AS
f
,
1
k ,
1
( )C +
,
w
k ,
1
( )C +
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
2
,
1
-----
\ .
| |
ln
1 k 1 ( )C +
,
w
k 1 ( )C +
----------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
2
k ,
2
( )C +
,
w
k ,
2
( )C +
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln + + =
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
------------------ 1 +
\ .
| |
ln
,
2
k ,
2
( )C
------------------ 1 +
\ .
| |
ln
,
2
,
1
-----
\ .
| |
ln
1
k 1 ( )C
--------------- 1 +
\ .
| |
ln + + =
k 1 ( ) 2 =
S
pp
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----
\ .
| |
ln
t
C
fD
g ( )
-------------------- ,
+
\ .
| |
ln + + = S
pp
AS
pp
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
------------------ 1 +
\ .
| |
ln
,
2
k ,
2
( )C
------------------ 1 +
\ .
| |
ln
,
2
,
1
-----
\ .
| |
ln + =
C C
fD
g ( ),
2t
------------------ =
Then for an infinite conductivity fracture ( ), the pinch point skin is
Tail-in
The boundary conditions for a two zone conductivity fracture is
The pseudo skin function from Eq. (L-85) is
and
The total skin is
Then for and , we have
If the far field conductivity is infinite ( ), we have
C
AS
pp
,
2
,
1
-----
\ .
| |
ln =
C
fD
C
fD1
,
w
, ,
1
s s =
C
fD
C
fD2
,
1
, 1 s s =
AS
fi
,
i
k ,
i
( )C
i
+
,
w
k ,
i
( )C
i
+
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
i 1
k ,
i 1
( )C
i
+
,
w
k ,
i 1
( )C
i
+
-------------------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
AS
f1
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
1
+
,
w
k ,
1
( )C
1
+
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
AS
f2
1 k 1 ( )C
2
+
,
w
k 1 ( )C
2
+
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
2
+
,
w
k ,
1
( )C
2
+
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
AS
f
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
1
+
,
w
k ,
1
( )C
1
+
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
1 k 1 ( )C
2
+
,
w
k 1 ( )C
2
+
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
2
+
,
w
k ,
1
( )C
2
+
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln + =
,
w
C
2
,
w
C
1
AS
f
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
1
-------------------- 1 +
\ .
| |
ln
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
2
-------------------- 1 +
\ .
| |
ln
1
k 1 ( )C
2
------------------ 1 +
\ .
| |
ln + =
C
2

(L-90)
Over Flush
Over flushing or over displacing the proppant near the wellbore is a special case of
a pinched fracture where the pinch zone is at the wellbore. The boundary conditions
for this case are:
The pseudo skin function is
Then for , the total pseudo skin is
The total skin for an infinite conductivity fracture in the main body is
where
and
AS
f
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
1
-------------------- 1 +
\ .
| |
ln =
C
fD
0 ,
w
, ,
1
s s =
C
fD
C
fD
,
1
, 1 s s =
AS
f
AS
fi
i 1 =
2
=
AS
f1
,
1
,
w
------
\ .
| |
ln =
,
w
C
AS
f
,
1
,
w
------
\ .
| |
ln
1 k 1 ( )C +
,
w
k 1 ( )C +
----------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
,
1
k ,
1
( )C +
,
w
k ,
1
( )C +
-------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln + =
,
1
,
w
------
\ .
| |
ln
1 k 1 ( )C +
,
1
k ,
1
( )C +
------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln
k 1 ( )
k ,
1
( )
--------------
\ .
| |
ln + =
AS
f
,
1
,
w
------
\ .
| |
ln =
,
w
r
w
r
w
'
C
fD
r
w
x
f
( ),
= =
Choked Fracture
Cinco-Ley defined a choked fracture as an infinite conductivity fracture with a flow
restriction near the wellbore as a result of reduced fracture permeability. A choked
fracture is therefore a special case of a tail-in with an otherwise infinite conductiv-
ity fracture.
The total the pseudo-skin , (which Cinco-Ley called a choked skin ( ) and
we will later identify as ) from Eq. (L-85) with ,
and is
Then for , we have
(L-91)
where
The inverse dimensionless productivity index is
(L-92)
where is really a choked skin .
Eq. (L-92) simplifies to Eq. (L-80) as and illustrates the correct asymptotic
behavior for a finite conductivity fracture. That is checking the limits of as ,
we find
,
1
1 ,
w
( )
x
1
r
w
x
f
r
w
---------------- ,
w
+ =
AS
f
S
fs
( )
ch
S
ch
C
fD

,
1
1 ,
w
( )x
1
x
f
,
w
+ = x
1
x
f
,
w
AS
f
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
1
+
,
w
k ,
1
( )C
1
+
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
,
w
C
1
AS
f
,
1
k ,
1
( )C
1
-------------------- 1 +
\ .
| |
ln =
C
1
w
f
x
f
-----
k
f1
k
------ 1
\ .
| |
g ( ),
2t
------------------ =
1
J
D
------ |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----
\ .
| |
ln ,
( ) ln S
ch
+ + =
AS
f
S
ch
,
1
1
x
1
x
f

(L-93)
where
Placing in terms of a choked skin, , (skin compared to an infinite conductivity
fracture), we have
where we have assumed .
The choked fracture skin as defined by Cinco-Ley (SPE 10043) is
(L-94)
Placing our choked fracture skin in terms of , we find
(L-95)
Now, if the choked skin is small , Eq. (L-95) becomes
(L-96)
where for a uniform flux fracture is

1
J
D
------ = |
r
e
r
e
x
f
----
\ .
| |
t
C
fD
--------- ,
+
\ .
| |
ln + ln
C
fD
w
f
k
f1
x
f
k
------------ =
S
ch
S
ch
x
1
k
w
f
k
f1
------------
2t
g ( )k ,
1
( ),
-------------------------------- 1 +
\ .
|
| |
ln =
k
f1
k 1
S
fs
( )
ch
S
fs
( )
ch
tx
1
k
w
f
k
f1
------------ =
S
ch
S
fs
( )
ch
S
ch
S
fs
( )
ch
2
g ( )k ,
1
( ),
--------------------------------
\ .
| |
1 +
\ .
| |
ln =
S
fs
( )
ch
1
S
ch
S
fs
( )
ch
2
g ( )k ,
1
( ),
--------------------------------
\ .
| |
=
k ,
1
( )
k ,
1
( )
2,
1
1 1 ,
1
( )
2
------------------------------ =
L.6 Infinite Fracture Conductivity 841
Eq. (L-96) simplifies to the Cinco-Ley choked skin for small choked distances (i.e.,
, ) and low penetration values ( and ) in a square
reservoir with as shown below
(L-97)
Slot Solution
If one considers that for an infinite conductivity fracture with only a small near
wellbore choked region, most of the fluid enters the tip of the choked region and
flows through the choked fracture region with little flowing through the formation
for small values of (i.e., and ).
Cinco-Ley assumed that all of the fluid entered the choked fracture near the tip of
the choked region with the full flow rate going through the choked part of the frac-
ture. This pressure loss in the choked fracture region (for all flow in the choked part
of fracture) is
Thus, the choked skin for all flow through the choked fracture in the near well
region can be calculated from
This result can also be obtained form Eq. (L-25) and Eq. (L-18)
L.6 Infinite Fracture Conductivity
Solutions for infinite conductivity fractures in infinite and closed rectangular reser-
voirs are presented based on the work of Gringarten.
x
1
x
f
1 k ,
1
( ) 1 I
x
0 ,
2
g ( ) 1 =
S
ch
I
x
0
S
fs
( )
ch
x
1
x
1
x
f
1
w
f
k
f1
x
f
k
------------ 1
Ap
ch
q
A
---

k
f1
------ x
1
r
w
( )
q
2hw
f
------------

k
f1
------ x
1
r
w
( ) = =
S
ch
2tkh
q
-------------Ap
ch
tk
w
f
k
f1
------------ x
1
r
w
( ) = =
S
ch
1
w
f
t
-----
k
f1
k
------
\ .
| |
------------------
r
w
x
1
}
d S
ch
tx
1
k
w
f
k
f1
------------ 1 r
w
x
1
( ) = = =
Vertical Fracture in an Infinite System
This analysis is for a vertical fracture in an infinite-acting system. The dimension-
less pressure for a constant production rate is defined as
(L-98)
Gringarten (1974), as report by Earlougher (1977), presented two dimensionless
pressure solutions for a infinite conductivity vertical fracture in an infinite-acting
system.
Uniform Flux Vertical Fracture
This solution assumes that the fluid flux into the fracture is a uniform rate per unit
area of the fracture face with a pressure drop in the fracture (within the fracture
plane). The dimensionless pressure in the fracture is calculated from
(L-99)
where the dimensionless fracture position is given by and the dimen-
sionless time based on the fracture half-length is defined as
(L-100)
and
(L-101)
The dimensionless pressure at the well for the uniform-flux vertical frac-
ture in an infinite-acting system is
p
D
2tkh
q
-------------Ap =
p
D
t
Dxf
( )
1
2
--- tt
Dxf
erf
1 x
D
2 t
Dxf
----------------
\ .
|
| |
erf
1 x
D
+
2 t
Dxf
----------------
\ .
|
| |
+
)
`

=
1 x
D
( )
4
------------------- -Ei
1 x
D
( )
2
4t
Dxf
-------------------------
\ .
|
| |
1 x
D
+ ( )
4
--------------------Ei
1 x
D
+ ( )
2
4t
Dxf
--------------------------
\ .
|
| |
x
D
x x
f
=
t
Dxf
t
L
2
----- =
k
c|
--------- =
x
D
0 =
(L-102)
The dimensionless pressure solution at early times (i.e., , linear or 1D
flow) for a static (non-propagating) uniform flux fracture in an infinite system is
given by
(L-103)
When , Eq. (L-102) becomes
(L-104)
Infinite-Conductivity Vertical Fracture
The infinite conductivity solution assumes that the fracture has an infinite permea-
bility and that the pressure is uniform throughout the fracture (no pressure drop in
the fracture). The numerical results of Gringarten determined that the long time
pressure at the wellbore was
(L-105)
Gringarten observed that the same result could be obtained in the uniform-flux frac-
ture case by measuring the pressure drop at in the fracture. Therefore,
Gringarten concluded that This suggests that the pressure drop in the fracture for
the infinite-conductivity fracture can be obtained from that for the uniform flux
fracture, Eq. (L-102), with . The resulting approximate solution for an
infinite-conductivity fracture as given by Gringarten (1974) is
(L-106)
Gringarten noted that Eq. (L-106) yields the correct value of the wellbore pressure
for a well with an infinite-conductivity vertical fracture, at early and long times. It
p
D
t
Dxf
( ) tt
Dxf
erf
1
2 t
Dxf
----------------
\ .
| |
1
2
---Ei
1
4t
Dxf
------------
\ .
| |
=
t
Dxf
0.1 
p
D
1
2
--- t
Dxf
2.80907 + ln ( ) =
t
Dxf
10 >
p
D
1
2
--- t
Dxf
2.2000 + ln ( ) =
x
D
0.732 =
x
D
0.732 =
p
D
t
Dxf
( )
1
2
--- tt
Dxf
erf
0.134
t
Dxf
-------------
\ .
| |
erf
0.866
t
Dxf
-------------
\ .
| |
+
)
`

=
0.067Ei
0.018
t
Dxf
----------------
\ .
| |
0.433Ei
0.750
t
Dxf
----------------
\ .
| |

can be assumed that it also yields the correct pressure values during the transition
period. Gringarten also points out that a similar result ( ) has been
obtained by Muskat for a well with partial penetration at steady state.
The dimensionless pressure solution at early times (i.e., ) for an infinite
conductivity fracture in an infinite system is given by
(L-107)
and when , Eq. (L-106) becomes
(L-108)
Vertical Fracture in a Rectangular Closed Reservoir
Gringarten presented solutions for both the uniform flux and infinite conductivity
vertical fracture cases in a closed rectangular reservoir. Gringarten noted that as in
the infinite-reservoir case, it is only necessary to derive the dimensionless pressure
drop for the uniform flux fracture. The Gringarten solution for a well at the center
of a rectangular reservoir is
or
(L-109)
x
D
0.75 =
t
Dxf
0.01 
p
D
1
2
--- t
Dxf
2.2000 + ln ( ) =
p
D
x
D
t
DA
, ( ) 2t 1 2 e
n
2
t
2
t
cos
2 nt
2
------
\ .
| |
n 1 =
+
0
t
DA
}
=
1 2 e
n
2
t
2
t
nt
2
------I
x
\ .
| |
sin
nt
2
------I
x
------------------------
nt
2
------
\ .
| |
cos
nt
2
------ 1 x
D
I
x
+ ( )
\ .
| |
cos
\ .
|
|
|
| |
n 1 =
+
p
D
x
D
t
DA
, ( ) 2t 1 2 e
4n
2
t
2
t
n 1 =
+
0
t
DA
}
=
1 2 e
4n
2
t
2
t
ntI
x
( ) sin
ntI
x
------------------------ ntI
x
x
D
( ) cos
n 1 =
+
Gringarten stated that The pressure drops on the fracture for a uniform flux frac-
ture and for an infinite-conductivity fracture are obtained by evaluating Eq. (L-109)
at and , respectively. The choice of the same point as the infi-
nite case leads to reasonable results and can be justified a posteriori by the method
of desuperposition... Gringarten also states that it was found that desuperposition
of the analytical solution for a closed square yields a very good approximation of
the analytical solution for an infinite reservoir, for values of 2, 5, and 10/3.
This justifies a posteriori the choice of for representing the wellbore
pressure for an infinite-conductivity fracture in the finite reservoir case..
The dimensionless pseudosteady solution can be calculated from Eq. (L-7)
where is calculated from Eq. (L-109) once pseudosteady behavior has been
reached.
Gringarten in 1978 presented a closed form analytical expression for the pseudo-
steady state form of Eq. (L-109). The inverse dimensionless productivity index for
a well located at the center of a rectangular reservoir based on Gringartens pseudo-
steady solution is
(L-110)
where Gringarten obtained the solutions for a uniform flux and an infinite-conduc-
tivity fracture by evaluating Eq. (L-110) at and , respectively.
From Eq. (L-110) for a fully penetrating fracture , the dimensionless produc-
tivity index is .
The problem with assuming a constant value for at all values of and aspect
ratios is that will not be a monotonically increasing function of . In fact
Gringartens solution predicts a greater value for at values of then at
. At all aspect ratios Eq. (L-110) exhibits similarities and anomalies as illus-
trated in Figure L.3.
x
D
0 = x
D
0.732 =
x
e
x
f
x
D
0.732 =
1 J
D
2tt
DA
p
D
=
p
D
1 J
D
t
6
---
t
4
---I
x
1 x
D
2
+ ( )
t
4
---I
x
2
1
3
--- x
D
2
+
\ .
| |
t
6
---
1
I
x
------- + + =

1
2t
------
1
I
x
-------
e
ntI
x
1 x
D
( )
n
2
1 e
2nt
| |
------------------------------------ 1 e
2nt 1 I
x
( )
| | 1 e
2ntI
x
x
D
+ | |
n 1 =
x
D
0 = x
D
0.732 =
I
x
1 =
J
D
I
x
1 =
6
t
--- =
x
D
I
x
J
D
I
x
J
D
I
x
1 <
I
x
1 =
Figure L.3: Gringarten J
D
Solution for an Infinite Conductivity Fracture
Versus Penetration Distance and Aspect Ratios.
Since must be a monotonically increasing function of , we have
(L-111)
or
Differentiating Eq. (L-110) with respect to for large aspect ratios , we find
J
D
I
x
dJ
D
dI
x
--------- 0 >
J
D
2
d 1 J
D
( )
dI
x
--------------------- 0 <
I
x
1
(L-112)
Therefore for large aspect ratios when the fracture penetration approaches the
extent of the reservoir , the value for must be less than 0.732, i.e.,
. As the aspect ratio approaches zero , the maximum
value for is about 2/3 for . Figure L.4 shows the maximum value
for at such that as a function of aspect ratio.
Figure L.4: Maximum values to prevent Similarities and Required
values at such that ( ) Versus Aspect Ratio.
This illustrates that assuming a constant value of for the infinite con-
ductivity case to be used in the uniform flux solution is not correct.
Eq. (L-112) also illustrates that the singularity at large aspect ratios occurs
when
d 1 J
D
( )
dI
x
---------------------
1
t
4
--- 1 x
D
2
+ ( )
t
2
---I
x
1
3
--- x
D
2
+
\ .
| |
t
6
---
1
I
x
2
-------- + 0 
x
D
0.732 =
1
t
4
--- 1 x
D
2
+ ( )
t
2
---I
x
1
3
--- x
D
2
+
\ .
| |
+ 0 =
or at
Thus using , we find the singularity for large aspect ratios at .
At an aspect ratio of ten ( ), the singularity position increases to .
A low penetrations, , a value of will result in the effective
wellbore radius being equal to one-half the fracture length ( ) for an
infinite conductivity fracture.
Assuming is of the form
(L-113)
we now only have to find a value of to satisfy the condition
(L-114)
Differentiating Eq. (L-114) with respect to we find
(L-115)
Now differentiating Eq. (L-113) and substituting the results into Eq. (L-115), we
find
or
I
x
1 x
D
2
+
2
1
3
--- x
D
2
+
\ .
| |
------------------------ =
x
D
0.732 = I
x
0.8835 ~
10 = I
x
0.93 ~
I
x
0 x
D
0.740108 ~
r
w
'
x
f
1 2
x
D
x
D
I
x
, ( ) x
D
I
x
0
x
D
I
x
0
x
D
1 , ( ) | | I
x
( )
o
=
o
dx
D
I
x
dI
x
-------------- 0 >
I
x
dx
D
dI
x
---------
x
D
I
x
--------- >
o x
D
I
x
0
x
D
1 , ( ) | | I
x
( )
o 1
x
D
I
x
, ( )
I
x
--------------------- >
Then as we have
Noting that for a given aspect ratio near full penetration,
numerically we find the approximate solution for to be
where
The values for as a function of aspect ratio are illustrated in Figure L.4.
Figure L.5 shows the modified dimensionless productivity index solution for an
infinite conductivity fracture as a function of penetration and aspect ratio. As illus-
trated increases with penetration distance for all aspect ratios.
o
x
D
I
x
, ( )
I
x
( )
o
x
D
I
x
0
x
D
1 , ( ) | |
---------------------------------------------------------------- <
I
x
1
o
x
D
1 , ( )
x
D
I
x
0
x
D
1 , ( )
---------------------------------------------- <
dJ
D
dx
D
I
x 1
cons t tan ~
x
D
x
D
I
x
, ( ) x
D
I
x
0
x
D
I
x
0
x
D
1 , ( ) | | I
x
( )
o
=
o
x
D
1 , ( )
x
D
I
x
0
x
D
1 , ( )
---------------------------------------------- =
x
D
1 , ( )
J
D
J
D
Figure L.5: Modified Gringarten J
D
Solution for an Infinite Conductivity
Fracture Versus Penetration Distance and Aspect Ratios.
Figure L.6 illustrates the performance of an infinite conductivity fracture for rect-
angular shaped reservoirs versus a square reservoir. As illustrated, these results
match those presented by Valko and Economides.
Figure L.6: Performance of an infinite conductivity fracture for rectangular
shaped reservoirs versus a square reservoir
Figure L.7 shows the dimensionless pressure versus dimensionless time ( ) and
penetration ( ) for a well located at the center of a square reservoir with an
infinity conductivity fracture. Figure L.8 shows the dimensionless pressure versus
dimensionless time ( ) and penetration ( ) for a well located at the center of
a square reservoir with an infinity conductivity fracture. Figure L.9 shows the
dimensionless pressure versus dimensionless time ( ) and penetration ( )
for a well located at the center of a square reservoir for a uniform-flux fracture.
Figure L.7: Dimensionless pressure for a vertically fractured well in the center
of a closed square system, infinite conductivity.
t
DA
x
e
x
f
t
Dxf
x
e
x
f
t
Dxf
x
e
x
f

of a closed square system, infinite conductivity.
of a closed square system, uniform-flux fracture
Effective Wellbore Radius - Infinite Conductivity
The inverse dimensionless effective wellbore radius, , for an infinite conduc-
tivity vertical fracture can be calculated from Eq. (L-9)
x
f
r
w
'

(L-116)
where
In Eq. (L-116) the dimensionless productivity index is given by Eq. (L-110) and
by Eq. (L-113).
To prevent confusion, the dimensionless fracture half-length ratio with respect to
the effective wellbore radius (i.e., reciprocal effective wellbore radius) for an infi-
nite conductivity fracture will be defined as
where is a function of the penetration ratio ( ) as illustrated in Eq.
(L-116).
Figure L.10 shows the inverse dimensionless effective wellbore radius, , for
an infinite conductivity vertical fracture for various aspect ratios as a function of
penetration.
x
f
r
w
'
-----
C
fD

e
1 J
D
I
x
|
x
e
( ) =
|
x
e
( )
16
e
C
A
( )
------------------------ =
J
D
x
D
,
x
f
r
w
'
C
fD
I
x
( ) I
x
x
f
x
e
=
x
f
r
w
'

Figure L.10: Inverse Dimensionless effective wellbore radius for an infinite
conductivity vertical fracture for various aspect ratios.
L.7 Shape Factor
The reservoir shape factor can be found numerically by using the method of
images for a well in a closed reservoir. The number of image wells to approximate
the infinite series simulation is based on the analytical and numerical studies of
Larson (1985). Although Larsons method works very well it is not an explicit solu-
tion.
Observing that the inverse dimensionless effective wellbore radius, , for an
infinite conductivity vertical fracture is approximately constant for aspect ratios
less than unity, we can formulate an implicit analytical solution for .
From Eq. (L-116) the shape factor can be written as
Then for a fully penetrating fracture we have
C
A
x
f
r
w
'
C
A
C
A
( )
,
I
x
, ( )
I
x
----------------------
2
e
2 J
D
16
e
-------- =
I
x
1 =
L.7 Shape Factor 855
(L-117)
where from Eq. (L-110) has been substituted.
The shape factor ratio of a rectangular reservoir to a square reservoir from Eq. (L-
117) is
Eq. (L-117) can be simplified for aspect ratios less than unity since
. Using this result the shape factor can be approximated by
(L-118)
where is a slight correction for .
From symmetry for an unfractured reservoir with the well in the center of a rectan-
gular reservoir we can Eq. (L-118) as
The slight correction based on numerical simulations is of the form
where the coefficients are related through symmetry
C
A
( ) ,
( )
2
I
x
1 =
e
t
3
------
16
e
-------- =
J
D
I
x
1 = , ( )
6
t
--- =
C
A
( )
C
A
1 = ( )
-------------------------
,
( )
2
I
x
1 =
,
1 = ( )
2
I
x
1 =
-----------------------------------------
\ .
|
| |
e
t
3
------
e
t
3
---
----------
16
e
--------
16
e
----- -
--------
,
( )
2
I
x
1 =
,
1 = ( )
2
I
x
1 =
-----------------------------------------
\ .
|
| |
e
t
3
--- 1 1 ( )
1
---
\ .
|
| |
= =
,
1 < ( ) ,
1 = ( ) ~
C
A
1 s ( )
C
A
1 = ( )
------------------------- e
t
3
--- 1 1 ( )
1
---
\ .
|
| |
1 f
c
( ) + | | ~
f
c
( ) ,
1 < ( ) ,
1 = ( ) =
C
A
1 > ( )
C
A
1 = ( )
------------------------- e
t
3
--- 1 ( )
\ .
|
| |
1 f
c
( ) + | | ~
f ( )
f
c
( ) a 1 e
b 1 ( )
( ) =
dC
A
d
----------
1 =
0 =
Thus from symmetry, we have
where from numerical simulations using Larsons method of images the coeffi-
cients are found to be and .
The complete analytical implicit solution for the shape factor from the above equa-
tions is
(L-119)
where
To calculate the shape factor for aspect ratios less then unity we can use the symme-
try identity
Figure L.11 and Figure L.12 show comparisons of the shape factor as a function of
aspect ratio for the numerical simulation results based on the method of Larson and
the analytical solution of Eq. (L-119). Comparison with the published values of
shape factors from Earlougher are also presented.
a
t 3 1
b
------------------- =
b 2t ~ a
t 3 1
2t
------------------- 0.00751 ~ =
C
A
1 > ( )
C
A
1 = ( )
------------------------- e
t
3
--- 1 ( )
\ .
|
| |
1 f
c
( ) + | | ~
f
c
( )
t 3 1
2t
------------------- 1 e
2t 1 ( )
( ) =
C
A
( ) C
A
1 ( ) =
L.8 Fracture Skin 857
Figure L.11: Shape Factor versus Aspect Ratio (1-6) - Numerical and
Analytical Comparisons.
Figure L.12: Shape Factor versus Aspect Ratio (6-20) - Numerical and
Analytical Comparisons.
L.8 Fracture Skin
The pressure drop, , as a result of a skin effect is defined as Ap
s
(L-120)
where is the fracture skin.
External Skin
The velocity through the filter cake as a function of the cake permeability ( ),
cake thickness ( ), and pressure drop across the cake ( ) from Darcys law
can be written as
(L-121)
The total flow rate over the fracture face is
(L-122)
The pressure drop across the cake in terms of the flow rate is
(L-123)
The fracture skin for an external filter cake from Eq. (L-120) is

Internal Skin
The pressure drop of the fluid in the formation for linear flow adjacent to the frac-
ture as result of mobility effects (see Eq. (L-123)) can be written as
Ap
s
q
2tkh
-------------
\ .
| |
S =
s
k
c
o
c
Ap
s
v
k
c
c
-----
Ap
s
o
c
--------- =
q 4hL ( )
k
c
c
-----
Ap
s
o
c
--------- =
Ap
s
q
c
4h
---------
o
c
L
-----
1
k
c
---- =
q
2tkh
-------------
t
2
---
o
c
L
-----
k
k
c

c
--------------
\ .
| |
)
`

=
s
f
external
t
2
---
o
c
L
-----
k
k
c

c
--------------
\ .
| |
=
L.9 Radial Flow Differential Equations 859
(L-124)
where the subscript refers to the leakoff fluid properties, is the extent of the
damage region into the formation normal to the fracture face, and is the
leakoff fluid mobility.
The mobility ratio, , is given as
(L-125)
The internal fracture skin from Eq. (L-120) is
(L-126)
L.9 Radial Flow Differential Equations
The basic equation for the radial flow of a single phase fluid in a homogeneous
porous medium is a combination of mass conservation and Darcys law (e.,g., see
Earlougher (19977, pg4), Drake (1978, pg 131,295) etc.). The well known govern-
ing general partial differential equation in radial form is
(L-127)
This equation is non-linear and in order to obtain an analytical solution it is first
necessary to linearized (e.g., see Drake). This section will present a general linear-
ization methodology using pseudopressure and pseudo time concepts. However,
prior to linearizing the above equation we will present the derivation of the radial
partial differential equation. This is necessary for a fundamental understanding of
the basic underlying assumptions in the above diffusivity equation.
Ap
s
q
4h
------
o
s
L
----
1
k
c
----

k
---
s
k
---
\ .
| |
=
q
2tkh
-------------
t
2
---
o
s
L
----
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
)
`

=
s o
s
k
s

s
M
M
k
k
s

s
-------------- =
s
f
internal
t
2
---
o
s
L
----
k
k
s

s
-------------- 1
\ .
| |
)
`

=
1
r
---
r c
c k
------r
r c
cp
\ .
| |
|c
t c
cp
=
Derivation of Radial Diffusivity Equation
The general derivation of the diffusivity equation will be in radial form based on
mass conservation and Darcys law. This derivation is not dependent on the fluid
under consideration. The following simplifying assumptions will be made in the
derivation of the partial differential equation in radial flow (see Drake):
1. The reservoir is homogeneous and isotropic in permeability and porosity.
2. The flow is fully developed radial flow, The well is therefore produced over
the entire pay thickness.
The principle of mass conservation applied over a stationary volume element
through which fluid flows is
(L-128)
For simplicity, we will use a control volume for radial flow. The fluid velocity in
the r-direction is designated by , the density is indicated by . The rate of mass in
through the face at is and the rate out through the face at is
. The rate of mass accumulation within the volume element is
.
The continuity equation for radial flow through an imaginary volume fixed in posi-
tion or control volume is
Upon simplification for a constant formation height, we have
(L-129)
This is the continuity equation which describes the rate of change of density with
respect to time as a function of the changes in the mass velocity vector at a fixed
point.
rate of
mass
in
)

`

rate of
mass
out
)

`

rate of
mass
accumulation
)

`

=
u
r ur ( )
r
2th ( ) r Ar +
ur ( )
r Ar +
2th
t c
c
2trhAr ( ) 2trhAr|
t c
c
=
ur ( )
r
2th ( ) ur ( )
r Ar +
2th 2trhAr|
t c
c
=
1
r
---
r c
c
ur ( ) |
t c
c
=
The radial flux is now placed in terms of the pressure gradient by using Darcys law
for radial flow
(L-130)
Substituting Eq. (L-130) into Eq. (L-129), we find
(L-131)
The density in terms of the pressure from the definition of isothermal compressibil-
ity is
or (L-132)
Substituting Eq. (L-132) into Eq. (L-131) and rearranging we find
(L-133)
This is general diffusivity equation for radial flow.
Linearization of Radial Diffusivity Equation
Pseudo-Pressure and Pseudo-Time Functions
Drake states that Prior to obtaining useful solutions of this equation it must first be
linearized (or partially linearized) and the method by which this can be achieved
depends on the nature of the fluid under consideration.
Al-Hussainy (1966 see lee ref 7 pg 167) et. al. linearized the above equation in
space by replacing pressure with a pseudopressure to account for the change in vis-
cosity and density with pressure. Al-Hussainy defined real gas pseudopressure as
Following is a summary of Drakes methodology for linearization:
v
k
---
r c
cp
=
1
r
---
r c
c k
------r
r c
cp
\ .
| |
|
t c
c
=
c p ( )
1
---
p c
c
T
= c
p c
c
=
1
r
---
r c
c k
------r
r c
cp
\ .
| |
|c
t c
cp
=
m p ( ) 2
p
p ( )z p ( )
---------------------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
Undersaturated Oil
Drake (pg 138, 295) shows that for liquid flow, the above equation can be partially
linearized if 1) the viscosity is independent of pressure , 2) the fluid is
slightly compressible, and 3) the term .
Real Gas
Partial linearization using the integral transformation
Gas-Oil
Partial linearization using the integral transformation
or as Drake points out the correct form of this transformation should be
Drake illustrates that the substitution of these transformations leads to the following
re-formulation of Eq. (L-133)
(L-134)
where for an undersaturated oil, , for a real gas, , and for a gas-oil
or two-phase flow, .
Total linearization of Eq. (L-133) is only achieved if coefficient is a con-
stant (i.e., under saturated oil with the above assumptions). Since for both a real-gas
and two-phase flow the product is a function of pressure Eq. (L-133) is still not
linear.
constant ~
cp 1
r c
cp
\ .
| |
2
0 ~
m p ( ) 2
p
p ( )z p ( )
---------------------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
m' p ( )
k
ro
S
o
( )
o
p ( )B
o
p ( )
---------------------------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
m' p ( )
k
ro
S
o
( )
o
p ( )
o
p ( )
-------------------------------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
1
r
---
r c
c
r
r c
c|
\ .
| |
|c
k
---------
t c
c|
=
| p = | m p ( ) =
| m' p ( ) =
|c k
c
Agarwal(1979, SPE 8279) developed a new time function which considered varia-
tions in gas viscosity and compressibility as a function of pressure to linearize the
above equation. Agarwals pseudo-time was defined as
The adjusted time proposed by Lee (pg 115) was
The linearization methodologies are of the general form
Carter (SPE 12917) developed a set of pseudo-steady decline curves which used a
lamda parameter to represent variations in the decline curve from real gas proper-
ties. Carters correction to the dimensionless time was
where
Gardner (2000) proposed a dimensionless time of the form
based on the mass balance
t
a
1
p ( )c p ( )
---------------------- t d
0
t
}
=
t
a
c
1
p ( )c p ( )
---------------------- t d
0
t
}
=
dt
a
c
p ( )c p ( )
----------------------dt =
t
D
'
t
D
=
c ( )
i
2
------------
m p
i
( ) m p
wf
( ) | |
p
z
---
\ .
| |
i
p
z
---
\ .
| |
wf
------------------------------------------ =
t
D
'
kt
|cr
w
2
---------------- =
q t' ( )
p ( )c p ( )
---------------------- t' d
0
t
}
Q t ( )
c t ( )
------------- =
Gardner found the average viscosity compressibility product to be
(L-135)
where
This equation can be simplified based on the following simple mass balance rela-
tionship
(L-136)
where is the original gas in place.
Substituting Eq. (L-136) into Eq. (L-135) and rearranging we find
Thus lamda factor based on Gardners formulation is then
(L-137)
The dimensionless form of Eq. (L-134) can be expressed as
where and
c
c
2p
i
Q t ( )
z
i
G
i
Am p ( )
-------------------------- =
Am p ( ) 2
p
p ( )z p ( )
---------------------- p d
p
p
i
}
=
Q t ( ) G
i
z
i
p
i
----
p
i
z
i
----
p
z p ( )
----------
\ .
| |
=
G
i
c 2
p
i
z
i
----
p
z p ( )
----------
\ .
| |
Am p ( ) =
c ( )
i
2
------------
m p
i
( ) m p ( ) | |
p
z
---
\ .
| |
i
p
z
---
\ .
| |
p
------------------------------------- =
1
r
D
-----
r
D
c
c
r
D
r
D
c
c|
\ .
| |
t
D
c
c|
=
r
D
r r
w
=
The lamda factor given by Eq. (L-137) will be shown as the correct formulation
which satisfies the mass balance equations.
The general solution for a constant production rate at the wellbore ( ) as
given by Drake is
The inverse dimensionless productivity is given as
or
For the above equation, the various parameters for the specific type of flows are
given in Table L.1.
Table L.1: Parameter Definitions for Various Types of Flow
Undersaturated
Oil
Real Gas Two Phase
Gas-Oil
field units field units field units field units
t
D
kt
|cr
w
2
----------------
kt
| c ( )
i
r
w
2
---------------------- = =
r
D
1 =
a
q
---
\ .
| |
f p ( ) |
D
t
D
( ) S + =
a
q t ( )
---------
\ .
| |
f p ( )
1
J
D
------ =
J
D
1
a
---
q t ( )
f p ( )
--------- =
a
q
---
kh
141.205q
o
o
B
o
--------------------------------------
kh
1424q
sc
T
-----------------------
kh
141.205q
o
-------------------------
a
q
---
2tkh
q
o
o
B
o
------------------
2tkh
q
-------------
Z
2p
-------
tT
sc
p
sc
T
-----------
kh
q
sc
------- =
2tkh
q
o
-------------
a
2tkh
o
B
o
-------------
tT
sc
p
sc
T
-----------kh 2tkh
Improved Pseudo-Pressure and Pseudo-Time
Functions
A more general methodology of linearizing the governing partial differential equa-
tion for radial flow will be presented in this section. The general diffusivity equa-
tion for radial flow from Eq. (L-133) is
(L-138)
From Eq. (L-138) the pseudopressure integral transformation function, , that will
linearize the above equation for all fluids is
(L-139)
where the fluid density and viscosity are assumed to be functions of only pressure.
Differentiating Eq. (L-139), we find a relationship between the differential pseudo-
pressure function and pressure
(L-140)
Substituting Eq. (L-140) into Eq. (L-138), the diffusivity equation in terms of the
pseudopressure is
(L-141)
A partial dimensionless form of Eq. (L-141) can be expressed as
Table L.1: Parameter Definitions for Various Types of Flow
Undersaturated
Oil
Real Gas Two Phase
Gas-Oil
f p ( )
Ap p
i
p
wf
= Am m p
i
( ) m p
wf
( ) = Am' m' p
i
( ) m' p
wf
( ) =
f p ( )
Ap p p
wf
= Am p ( ) m p ( ) m p
wf
( ) = Am' p ( ) m' p ( ) m' p
wf
( ) =
|
D
t
D
( ) p
D
t
D
( ) m
D
t
D
( ) p
D
t
D
( ) = m'
D
t
D
( ) p
D
t
D
( ) =
1
r
---
r c
c k
------r
r c
cp
\ .
| |
|c
t c
cp
=
+
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}
=
, c
c+
---
, c
cp
=
1
r
---
r c
c
kr
r c
c+
\ .
| |
|c
t c
c+
=
(L-142)
where and the permeability is assumed constant. Modification of to
account for relative permeability effects can also be handled as described above by
Drake.
To fully linearize Eq. (L-142) we will now introduce a dimensionless pseudotime
function
(L-143)
where
The lamda factor considers variations in gas viscosity and compressibility as a
function of time. As illustrated, this is essentially the dimensionless form of Agar-
wals pseudotime transformation in terms of a lamda factor. Evaluation of lamda
will be discussed later on in this report.
The final dimensionless form of the diffusivity equation, obtained by substituting
the pseudotime transformation (i.e., Eq. (L-143) into Eq. (L-142)), is
(L-144)
A new set of dimensionless parameters will now be defined that are independent of
the fluid. The dimensionless pressure function for slightly compressible fluids was
defined as
1
r
D
-----
r
D
c
c
r
D
r
D
c
c+
\ .
| |
|cr
w
2
k
----------------
t c
c+
=
r
D
r r
w
= +
t
D
k
|cr
w
2
---------------- t' d
0
t
}
=
kt
| c ( )
i
r
w
2
----------------------
c ( )
i
c
------------ t' d
0
t
}
t
\ .
| |
=
t
D
t ( ) =
t ( )
c ( )
i
c
------------ t' d
0
t
}
t
p
i
( )c p
i
( )
c
------------------------- = =
1
r
D
-----
r
D
c
c
r
D
r
D
c
c+
\ .
| |
t
D
c
c+
=
From the definition of the pseudopressure function, we have
or
Therefore, the dimensionless pseudopressure ( ) for a constant production rate
( ) is
(L-145)
fluid density, and is the differential pseudopressure.
The dimensionless pseudotime based on the drainage area, , is defined as
(L-146)
where is the formation porosity and is the initial formation compressibil-
ity-viscosity product.
The dimensionless flow rate ( ) for a constant flowing pressure ( ) is defined
as
(L-147)
where and the mass flow rate (i.e., mass flow
rate per unit time). Therefore, Eq. (L-147) represents the dimensionless mass flow
rate
The mass flow rate as a function of the dimensionless mass rate is
p
D
t
DA
( )
2tkh
q
------------- p
i
p
wf
( ) =
d+

---dp = Ap

---A+ =
+
D
q
+
D
2tkh
q
-------------A+ =
k h
A+ + p
i
( ) + p
wf
( ) =
A
t
DA
kt
| c ( )
i
A
-------------------- t
DA
= =
| c ( )
i
q
D
p
wf
q
D
q t ( )
2tkhA+
----------------------
m
t ( )
2tkhA+
---------------------- = =
A+ + p
i
( ) + p
wf
( ) = m
t ( ) q t ( ) =
m
D
q
D
m
t ( )
2tkhA+
---------------------- = =
(L-148)
The flow rate at standard conditions is
where is the constant draw down pseudopressure (i.e.,
also constant drawdown pressure since the initial reservoir pressure ( ) minus the
flowing pressure ( ) is a constant).
The dimensionless productivity index, , is defined as
(L-149)
where .
(L-150)
where is the mass flow rate, is the flow rate at standard conditions, is the
average reservoir pressure, and is the flowing pressure.
Pseudopressure Relationships and Limits
This section presents various pseudopressure relationships and limiting solutions of
for undersaturated oil, gas and gas-oil mixtures. The general pseudopressure
function is
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) m
D
=
q
sc
t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( )
m
sc
------- =
A+ p
i
( ) + p
i
( ) + p
wf
( ) =
p
i
p
wf
J
D
J
D
1
2tkh
-------------
m
+ p ( ) + p
wf
( )
------------------------------------ =
1
2tkh
-------------
m
A+ p ( )
-----------------
1
2tkh
-------------

sc
q
sc
A+ p ( )
----------------- = =
A+ p ( ) + p ( ) + p
wf
( ) =
J
J
2tkh
i
-------------J
D
m
+ p ( ) + p
wf
( )
------------------------------------ = =
m
A+ p ( )
-----------------

sc
q
sc
( )
i
A+ p ( )
---------------------------- = =
m
q
sc
p
p
wf
+
Undersaturated Oil
If we assume the viscosity for undersaturated oil is independent of pressure
, and that the fluid is slightly compressible, Eq. (L-139) can be
represented by
The dimensionless pseudopressure for a constant flow rate from Eq. (L-145) is
(L-151)
The ratio of the stock tank rate (volume) to the reservoir rate (volume) as defined
by the formation volume factor, is
or
where is stock tank flow rate.
Placing Eq. (L-151) in terms of the stock tank flow rate, we have
(L-152)
Real Gas
The constitutive relationship for the density of a real gas is
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}
=
constant ~ cp 1
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}

o
o
----- p p
b
( ) = =
+
D
2tkh
o
q
-------------A+
2tkh
o
q
-------------
o
----- p
i
p
wf
( ) = =
2tkh
o
q
------------- p
i
p
wf
( ) =
B
o
B
o
q
q
0
----- = q q
o
B
o
=
q
o
+
D
2tkh
o
q
o
B
o
------------------ p
i
p
wf
( ) =

sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------
p
Z
--- =
Substituting the above constitutive relationship into Eq. (L-139) we have
or
(L-153)
where the real gas pseudopressure integral transformation by Drake for a real gas is
The dimensionless pseudopressure for a constant flow rate (mass rate) from Eq. (L-
145) is
or in terms of Drakes pseudopressure
The above result is identical to Drakes dimensionless pressure function as given in
Table L.1.
Gas-Oil
For a gas oil mixture the density is replaced by the relative permeability density
product (i.e., ) and the pseudopressure function is
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}

sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------
p'
p' ( )Z p' ( )
--------------------------- p' d
p
b
p
}
= =
+ p ( )

sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------
p'
Z
------- p' d
p
b
p
}
1
2
---
sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
--------------- 2
p'
Z
------- p' d
p
b
p
}
)
`

= =
1
2
---
sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------m p ( ) =
m p ( ) 2
p'
p' ( )Z p' ( )
--------------------------- p' d
p
b
p
}
=
+
D
2tkh
q
-------------A+
2tkh
s
q
s
------------- + p
i
( ) + p
wf
( ) ( ) = =
+
D
2tkh
s
q
s
-------------A+
2tkh
s
q
s
-------------
1
2
---
sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
--------------- m p
i
( ) m p
wf
( ) ( ) = =
tkh
q
s
---------
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------- m p
i
( ) m p
wf
( ) ( ) =
k
ro

(L-154)
or
where the pseudo pressure transformation given by Drake for an oil-gas mixture is
The above equations are applicable above and below the bubble point (i.e., produc-
tion above and below the bubble point pressure).
Above the bubble point (undersaturated oil), the compressibility is
The relationship between density and formation factor for undersaturated oil is
or (L-155)
or
where is the initial reservoir pressure and is any reference pressure above the
saturation pressure (bubble point).
The pseudopressure for undersaturated oil in terms of the formation factor is found
by substituting Eq. (L-155) into Eq. (L-154)
(L-156)
+ p ( )
k
ro
o
------------- p' d
p
b
p
}
=
+ p ( ) m' p ( ) =
m' p ( )
k
ro
S
o
( )
o
p' ( )
o
p' ( )
---------------------------------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
c
1
o
-----
d
o
dp
---------
1
B
o
------
dB
o
dp
--------- = =
d
o
o
---------
dB
o
B
o
--------- =

o
p ( )
o
p
i
( )
---------------
B
o
p
i
( )
B
o
p ( )
--------------- =
o
p ( )
B
o
p
i
( )
o
p
i
( )
B
o
p ( )
-------------------------------
B
o
p
r
( )
o
p
r
( )
B
o
p ( )
-------------------------------- = =
p
i
p
r
+ p ( )
k
ro
o
------------- p' d
p
b
p
}

o
p
i
( )B
o
p
i
( )
k
ro
p' ( )
o
p' ( )B
o
p' ( )
-------------------------------- p' d
p
b
p
}
= =
L.10 Dimensionless Rate & Pressure Solutions 873
The dimensionless pseudopressure for a constant flow rate (mass rate) from Eq. (L-
145) in terms of Drakes pseudopressure is
where the stock tank flow rate ( ) to reservoir rate ( ) is .
Drakes pseudopressure in terms of formation factor is given by the integral trans-
formation
L.10 Dimensionless Rate & Pressure Solutions
This section presents a summary of dimensional pressure and rate solutions for
radial or infinite acting systems and pseudosteady behavior in closed systems. The
starting point for the development of the dimensionless rate solutions will be based
on the dimensionless pressure solutions and mass conservation in closed systems.
Solutions are presented for undersaturated oil (liquid), real gas, and two phase gas-
oil flow in a homogeneous formation. The solutions are applicable for fractured and
unfractured reservoirs.
The general dimensionless pressure and rate solutions are applicable for
flow of oil, gas and two phase gas-oil flows as illustrated in Table L.1. The dimen-
sionless times will be defined in terms of a lamda parameter to account for the time
dependent behavior of viscosity and compressibility effects as illustrated below
(L-157)
and
m' p ( )
+
D
2tkh
q
-------------A+
2tkh
o
p
i
( )q p
i
( )
----------------------------
o
p
i
( )B
o
p
i
( )Am' = =
2tkh
q
o
------------- m' p
i
( ) m' p
wf
( ) ( ) =
q
o
q p
i
( ) q
o
q p
i
( ) B
o
p
i
( ) =
m' p ( )
k
ro
S
o
( )
o
p ( )B
o
p ( )
---------------------------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
p
D
q
D
t
D
k
|cr
w
2
---------------- t' d
0
t
}
kt
| c ( )
i
r
w
2
---------------------- t
D
= = =
t
Dxf
k
|cx
f
2
--------------- t' d
0
t
}
kt
| c ( )
i
x
f
2
---------------------- t
Dxf
= = =
The time average lamda factor for a real gas in a closed system will be shown to be

This lamda formulation for closed systems with pseudosteady state behavior is
based on mass conservation (i.e., evaluated at the average reservoir pressure).
The lamda factor for an undersaturated slightly compressible oil is unity, .
The lamda factor for an infinite acting system should be evaluated at some reason-
able average pressure in the flow domain. A good starting point for flow in infinite
or infinite acting systems (unbounded radial flow) is

Infinite or Infinitely Acting System
The dimensionless time for an infinite acting system can be represented by
where is evaluated at some average domain pressure as given approxi-
mately by
Constant Rate
The general dimensionless pressure solution for pseudo-radial flow in an infinite
acting system producing at a constant rate is of the form
t
DA
k
|cA
------------- t' d
0
t
}
kt
| c ( )
i
A
-------------------- t
DA
= = =
p ( )
c ( )
i
2
------------
m p
i
( ) m p ( ) | |
p
z
---
\ .
| |
i
p
z
---
\ .
| |
p
------------------------------------- =
1 =
p ( )
p
i
p
wf
+
2
------------------
\ .
| |
=
t
D
t
D
=
p ( ) =
p ( )
p
i
p
wf
+
2
------------------
\ .
| |
~
where is a dimensionless time and is a constant.
No Fracture
The dimensionless pressure solution for an infinite-acting system as given by Drake
(pg 157) is
(L-158)
where the exponential integral is given by
The exponential integral of the first kind can be approximated by (see mathematical
hand book pg 229)
( )
where is Eulers (i.e., Euler-Mascheroni) constant.
A simplification to Eq. (L-158) with less than 1% error
when is
(L-159)
where
+
D
1
2
--- t
D
C + ln ( ) =
t
D
C
+
D
1
2
--- Ei
r
D
2
4t
D
---------
\ .
| |
E
1
r
D
2
4t
D
---------
\ .
| |
= =
Ei x ( )
Ei x ( )
e
s
s
------- s d
x
}
=
E
1
z ( ) z ln
1 ( )
n
z
n
nn!
------------------
n 1 =
~ z arg t <
0.5772156649. =
t
D
10 >
+
D
1
2
---
4
e
----t
D
ln
\ .
| |
1
2
--- t
D
0.80907 + ln ( ) ~ ~
t
D
t
D
=
The constant in Eq. (L-159) is actually . However, this infi-
nite series is usually reported as . The constant is also used in the
closed system formulation rather than the equivalent numeric value (i.e.,
).
The exponential integral solution is only applicable if , or when
. The solution at very early times ( ) as given by the Everdingen-
Hurst solution is
Vertical Fracture
The dimensionless pressure solution for a vertical fracture from Eq. (L-159) and the
effective wellbore radius concept in an infinite-acting system when is
where
or
4 e
0.809078697. = ln
0.80907 4 e
ln
1
2
--- 4 e
ln 0.40453934. ~
r
D
20 > t
D
r
D
2
0.5 >
r
D
2
25 > t
D
0.01 
+
D
1
2
---
4
e
----t
D
ln S
f
+ =
1
2
-- -
4
e
----t
Dxf
ln f + =
S
f
r
w
x
f
----- f + ln
r
w
x
f
-----
x
f
r
w
'
----- ln + ln
r
w
r
w
'
----- ln = = =
where
and is a pseudo-skin parameter that is a function of fracture conductivity as origi-
nally presented by Cinco-Ley (SPE 10179) (see also spe 23630). The pseudo-skin
parameter for a uniform flux fracture is , and for an infinite conductivity frac-
ture (i.e., ). Gringarten gave the constant as
from which the dimensionless reciprocal effective wellbore
radius is found to be . Numerically Gringartens solution with
results in a value of .
The pseudo-skin parameter for a constant fracture conductivity in an infinite acting
system as illustrated below (i.e., see Eq. (L-83)) is

The apparent fracture conductivity for a uniform flux fracture in pseudosteady or
radial flow with is .
Constant Flowing Pressure
The approximate dimensionless rate solution for pseudo-radial flow in an infinite
acting system producing at a constant flowing bottomhole pressure as given by Ear-
lougher (pg. 40) is
+
D
1
2
---
4
e
----t
D
\ .
| |
r
w
r
w
'
-----
\ .
| |
2
ln =
1
2
-- -
4
e
----t
Dxf
\ .
| |
x
f
r
w
'
-----
\ .
| |
ln + ln =
1
2
---
4
e
----t
Dxf
f + ln =
1
2
--- t
Dxf
0.80907 + ln ( ) f + =
t
Dxf
t
Dxf
=
f
f 1 =
f x
f
r
w
'
ln 0.69314718 = = x
f
r
w
'
2 =
2f 0.80907 + 2.2000 =
x
f
r
w
'
2.00464 ~
x
D
0.732 = x
f
r
w
'
2.015 ~
f x
f
r
w
'
( ) ln
t
C
fD
--------- 2 +
\ .
| |
ln = =
f 1 = C
fD
uniform flux
t
e 2
----------- 4.37 ~ =
(L-160)
where is a dimensionless time and is a constant. The corresponding equation
for a slightly compressible fluid is given by . The constant for an unfrac-
tured well (with no skin) is .
Lee (pg. 105) defines a dimensionless cumulative production, (for an unfrac-
tured oil well with no skin) as
and for , can be approximated by
The dimensionless rate is
This solution is with 6% of Eq. (L-160) for at . The differ-
ence in these two solutions decreases to zero as .
The dimensionless rate solution at very early times ( ) as given by the
Everdingen-Hurst or Laplace solution ( ) is
The general dimensionless mass rate solution for pseudo-radial flow in an infinite
acting system producing at a constant flowing bottomhole pressure is
m
D
1
+
D
-------- ~
2
t
D
C + ln
---------------------- =
t
D
C
q
D
1 p
D
~
C 0.80907 =
Q
pD
Q
pD
q
D
t
D
d
0
t
D
}
=
t
D
200 > Q
pD
Q
pD
4.29881 2.02566t
D
+
t
D
ln
------------------------------------------------------- ~
q
D
dQ
pD
dt
D
-------------
Q
pD
t
D
2.02566 +
t
D
ln
------------------------------------------------ = =
C 0.80907 = t
D
200 =
t
D

t
D
0.01 <
q
D
2
t
---
1
p
D
------ =
q
D
tt
D
=
m
D
1
+
D
t
D
( ) S +
---------------------------- =
The general mass and flow rate equations in terms of the dimensionless mass rate
for an infinite acting systems are
and
The resulting mass and flow rates are summarized below for undersaturated oil,
real gas and two phase fluids.
Undersaturated Oil
If we assume that for undersaturated oil that the viscosity is independent of pressure
, and that the fluid is slightly compressible, Eq. (L-139) can be
represented by
The dimensionless pseudopressure for a constant flow rate from Eq. (L-145) is
(L-161)
The ratio of the stock tank rate (volume) to the reservoir rate (volume) as defined
by the formation volume factor, is
or
where is stock tank flow rate.
Placing Eq. (L-161) in terms of the stock tank flow rate we have
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ m
D
=
q 2tkhA+
m
------- =
constant ~ cp 1
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}

o
o
----- p p
b
( ) = =
q 2tkhA+
m
o
------- 2tkh

o
o
----- p
i
p
wf
( )
)
`

m
o
------- = =
2tkh
o
------------- p
i
p
wf
( )m
D
=
B
o
B
o
q
q
0
----- = q q
o
B
o
=
q
o
(L-162)
where and .
Real Gas
Substituting the above constitutive relationship into Eq. (L-139), we have
(L-163)
The mass and flow rates in terms of the dimensionless flow rate is
and
or in terms of Drakes dimensionless pseudopressure
or
q
o
2tkh
o
B
o
------------- p
i
p
wf
( )m
D
=
2tkhAp
o
B
o
--------------------q
D
=
q
D
m
D
Ap p
i
p
wf
=

sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------
p
Z
--- =
+ p ( )
1
2
---
sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------m p ( ) =
m
D
m t ( )
2tkh ( )A+m
D
=
q
sc
t ( ) 2tkh ( )A+
m
sc
------- =
m
2tkh ( )A+m
D
2tkh ( )
1
2
---
sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
--------------- m p
i
( ) m p
wf
( ) ( )
)
`

m
D
= =
tkh
sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
--------------- m p
i
( ) m p
wf
( ) ( )m
D
=
where and
The above result is identical to Drakes dimensionless pressure and rate function as
given in Table L.1.
Gas-Oil
The mass flow rate for gas-oil two phase flow is
(L-164)
where for a gas oil mixture, the density the pseudopressure function is
(L-165)
and is Drakes pseudopressure as a function of oil density.
The reservoir flow rate from Eq. (L-164) is
The stock tank rate is
where .
The above equations are applicable above and below the bubble point (i.e., produc-
tion above and below the bubble point pressure).
Above the bubble point (undersaturated oil), the pseudopressure in terms of the for-
mation factor from Eq. (L-165) is
q
sc
t ( )
tT
sc
p
sc
T
-----------khAm p
wf
( )q
D
=
Am p
wf
( ) m p
i
( ) m p
wf
( ) = q
D
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ m
D
2tkhAm' m
D
= =
+ p ( ) m' p ( )
k
ro
o
------------- p' d
p
b
p
}
= =
m' p ( )
q p
i
( ) 2tkhA+
m
o
p
i
( )
--------------- =
q
o
2tkhA+
m
D
B
o
p
i
( )
o
p
i
( )
------------------------------- =
q p
i
( ) q
o
B p
i
( ) =
(L-166)
where the Drake pseudotime function in terms of the formation volume factor is
The mass flow rate for a constant producing pressure in terms of the Drake pseudo-
pressure is
The stock tank rate is
or

where the stock tank flow rate ( ) to reservoir rate ( ) is .
Closed System
The analysis for closed systems producing at a constant flowing pressure must also
account for mass conservation. That is the initial mass of the hydrocarbon system
must be equal to the mass of system at any time plus the mass of hydrocarbons pro-
duced. As we shall see this the underlying basic formulation for a pseudo-time
function in variable compressible systems.
Constant Mass Rate
The general dimensionless pressure solution for pseudosteady flow in a closed sys-
tem producing at a constant rate (mass rate) is
+ p ( )
k
ro
o
------------- p' d
p
b
p
}

o
p
i
( )B
o
p
i
( )
k
ro
p' ( )
o
p' ( )B
o
p' ( )
-------------------------------- p' d
p
b
p
}
= =
o
p
i
( )B
o
p
i
( )m' B
o
p , ( ) =
m' B
o
p , ( )
k
ro
p' ( )
o
p' ( )B
o
p' ( )
-------------------------------- p' d
p
b
p
}
=
m' B
o
p , ( )
m
2tkh ( )A+m
D
2tkh ( )
o
p
i
( )B
o
p
i
( )Am' B
o
p
wf
, ( )m
D
= =
q
o
2tkhA+
m
D
B
o
p
i
( )
o
p
i
( )
------------------------------- =
q
o
2tkh ( )Am' B
o
p
wf
, ( )m
D
=
q
o
q p
i
( ) q
o
q p
i
( ) B
o
p
i
( ) =
(L-167)
where the dimensionless time is
The productivity index as formulated by Cinco-Ley is of the form
Lamda should be evaluated at the average reservoir pressure as given by
The lamda factor for a gas formation will be shown to be of the form
Lamda for a slightly compressible fluid is , as will be shown below.
The formulation of the lamda equation is based on mass conservation principles
and is presented in the constant pressure boundary condition for closed systems.
The above equations are applicable for undersaturated oil, gas, and two phase flow.
in fractured and unfractured wells.
Constant Flowing Pressure
The dimensionless rate solution for production at a constant flowing bottomhole
pressure can be obtained from the constant flow rate (mass flow rate) solution (i.e.,
) in laplace space as proposed by van Everdingen and Hurst
(see spe 26424 pg5). Their result is given as
+
D
2tt
DA
1 J
D
+ =
t
DA
t
DA
=
1
J
D
------
4t
e
C
A
------------
r
e
x
f
---- f + ln =
p ( ) c ( )
i
+ p
i
( ) + p ( )
p
i
( ) p ( )
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
=
p ( )
c ( )
i
2
------------
m p
i
( ) m p ( ) | |
p
z
---
\ .
| |
i
p
z
---
\ .
| |
p
------------------------------------- =
1 =
+
D
2tt
DA
1 J
D
+ =
(L-168)
The dimensionless pressure solution Eq. (L-167) in Laplace space is
(L-169)
The dimensionless mass flow rate solution in Laplace space from Eq. (L-168) and
Eq. (L-169) is
The inverse transformation of the dimensionless rate solution is
(L-170)
The mass and reservoir flow rate as a function of dimensionless rate are given by
(L-171)
or
and
or
where .
m
D
s ( )
1
s
2
+
D
s ( )
-------------------- =
+
D
s ( )
2t
s
2
------ s J
D
+ =
m
D
s ( )
1
s
2
+
D
s ( )
--------------------
J
D
2tJ
D
s +
--------------------- = =
m
D
t
DA
( ) J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) m
D
=
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
q t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) m
D
( ) =
q t ( )
2tkhA+ p
i
( )
-------------------------------J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
A+ + p
i
( ) + p
wf
( ) =
Pseudopressure as a Function of Time
The dimensionless pseudopressure as a function of time during draw down can be
found from Eq. (L-170), Eq. (L-171), and the definition of the inverse productivity
index Eq. (L-149)
(L-172)
where
The mass flow in terms of the inverse productivity from rate from Eq. (L-172) is
(L-173)
Equating Eq. (L-173) and Eq. (L-171) we have
The dimensionless pressure ratio as a function of dimensionless time from Eq. (L-
170) is
(L-174)
or
(L-175)
The above equation relates the change in dimensionless pressure as a function of
pseudotime. The only remaining parameter to be formalized in the above set of
equations is the dimensionless pseudotime lamda factor.
Alternate Method
The mass flow in terms of the inverse productivity from rate from Eq. (L-172) is
The total mass of fluid produced must be equal to the decrease of the fluid
mass in the formation. That is
J
D
1
2tkh
-------------
m
+ p ( ) + p
wf
( )
------------------------------------
1
2tkh
-------------
m
A+ p ( )
---------------- - = =
A+ p ( ) + p ( ) + p
wf
( ) =
m
2tkh A+ p ( )J
D
=
m
2tkh A+ p ( )J
D
2tkhA+ p
i
( ) m
D
= =
A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
------------------
m
D
J
D
------- e
2tJ
D
t
DA
= =
A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
------------------
+ p ( ) + p
wf
( )
+ p
i
( ) + p
wf
( )
-------------------------------------- e
2tJ
D
t
DA
= =
m
2tkh A+ p ( )J
D
=
AM
. (L-176)
The mass flow rate is found by differentiating Eq. (L-176) with respect to time
(L-177)
Now from the compressibility and pseudopressure equations, we find
or (L-178)
and
or (L-179)
Then from Eq. (L-177), Eq. (L-178), and Eq. (L-179), we find
(L-180)
Equating Eq. (L-173) with Eq. (L-180), we have
(L-181)
or
(L-182)
Integrating Eq. (L-182), we find an expression for pseudo pressure as a function of
the dimensionless pseudotime
AM AM
system
|hA p
i
( ) p ( ) | | = =
m
t ( )
t d
d
AM
system
( ) |hA
d p ( )
dt
-------------- = =
c p ( )
1
p ( )
-----------
d p ( )
dp
-------------- =
d p ( )
dp
-------------- c p ( ) p ( ) =
+ p ( )

--- p d
p
b
p
}
=
d+ p ( )
dp
----------------
p ( )
p ( )
----------- =
m
t ( ) |hA
d p ( )
dt
-------------- |hA
d+ p ( )
dt
----------------
d p ( )
dp
--------------
dp
d+ p ( )
---------------- = =
|hA
d+ p ( )
dt
----------------c p ( ) p ( )
p ( )
p ( )
----------- =
|hAc p ( ) p ( )
d+ p ( )
dt
---------------- =
|hAc p ( ) p ( )
d+ p ( )
dt
---------------- 2tkh A+ p ( )J
D
=
1
A+ p ( )
---------------- -d+ p ( )
p
i
p
}
2tkJ
D
| p ( )c p ( )A
------------------------------dt
0
t
}
=
or
where
and
It is worth noting that and are time averaged values. A consequent of
this is that the total mass production as a function of time can be determined, but
the mass rate can not be directly found from
(L-183)
since is defined with an average viscosity compressibility product over the
total time. That is, we need an instantaneous value for lamda.
A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
------------------ ln
2tkJ
D
| p ( )c p ( )A
------------------------------dt
0
t
}
2tJ
D
t
DA
= =
A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
------------------ e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
t
DA
k
| p ( )c p ( )A
------------------------------dt
0
t
}
kt
|c t ( )A
--------------------
c t ( )
p ( )c p ( )
----------------------dt
0
t
}
= =
kt
|c t ( )A
-------------------- =
kt
| c ( )
i
A
--------------------
c ( )
i
c t ( )
-------------
kt
| c ( )
i
A
-------------------- t ( ) = =
1
c t ( )
-------------
1
p ( )c p ( )
----------------------dt
0
t
}
\ .
| |
t =
t ( )
c ( )
i
c t ( )
------------- =
c t ( ) t ( )
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
t
DA
Mass Conservation and Lamda
The total mass of fluid produced from mass conservation is
(L-184)
Recalling that the dimensionless pseudotime from Eq. (L-143) based on drainage
area is

or
where is a constant over the time interval and will be represented as to pre-
vent confusion.
Eq. (L-184) can now be written as
(L-185)
AM m
t' d
0
t
}
=
t
DA
k
|cA
------------- t' d
0
t
}
=
kt
| c ( )
i
A
--------------------
c ( )
i
p ( )c p ( )
---------------------- t' d
0
t
}
t
\ .
| |
=
kt
| c ( )
i
A
-------------------- t ( ) =
dt
DA
k
| c ( )
i
A
--------------------dt' =
p ( )
AM m
t'
k
| c ( )
i
A
-------------------- p ( )
\ .
| |
| c ( )
i
A
k p ( )
--------------------
\ .
| |
d
0
t
}
=
m
t'
| c ( )
i
A
k p ( )
--------------------
\ .
| |
d
0
t
DA
}
=
2tkhA+ p
i
( ) m
D
t'
| c ( )
i
A
k p ( )
--------------------
\ .
| |
d
0
t
DA
}
=
A+ p
i
( )
p ( )
------------------ | c ( )
i
hA ( ) 2t m
D
t' d
0
t
DA
}
=
(L-186)
Integrating Eq. (L-186), we find
Substituting the average pseudopressure ratio from Eq. (L-175), we have
(L-187)
The total mass of fluid produced must be equal to the decrease of the fluid
mass in the formation. That is,
. (L-188)
Then substituting Eq. (L-188) into Eq. (L-187) and rearranging, we find that the
value of lamda to satisfy mass conservation is
or
(L-189)
Simplifying Eq. (L-189) for a slightly compressible fluids and a real gas is pre-
sented below.
AM
A+ p
i
( )
p ( )
------------------ | c ( )
i
hA ( ) 2tJ
D
e
2tJ
D
t'
t' d
0
t
DA
}
=
AM
A+ p
i
( )
p ( )
------------------ | c ( )
i
hA | | 1 e
2tJ
D
t
DA
| | =
AM
A+ p
i
( )
p ( )
------------------ | c ( )
i
hA | | 1
A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
------------------
\ .
| |
=
A+ p
i
( )
p ( )
------------------ | c ( )
i
hA | |
A+ p
i
( ) A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
-----------------------------------------
\ .
| |
=
1
p ( )
----------- | c ( )
i
hA | | + p
i
( ) + p ( ) | | =
AM
AM AM
system
|hA p
i
( ) p ( ) | | = =
p ( )
| c ( )
i
hA | | + p
i
( ) + p ( ) | |
|hA p
i
( ) p ( ) | |
------------------------------------------------------------------- =
p ( ) c ( )
i
+ p
i
( ) + p ( )
p
i
( ) p ( )
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
=
Undersaturated Oil or Slightly Compressible Fluid
The change in fluid density as a function of pressure can be determined from the
definition of fluid compressibility
or
(L-190)
Integrating Eq. (L-190) from the initial pressure to the average reservoir pressure
for a constant compressibility ( ), we find
or
(L-191)
Now if the fluid is slightly compressible ( ), we can rewrite Eq. (L-191)
as
or
.
The pseudopressure function for a constant viscosity and slightly compressible
fluid is
c
1
---
d
dp
------ =
d
------ cdp =
c c
i
=
d
------
}
cdp
p
i
p
}
=
i
---- ln c
i
p p
i
( ) =
c
i
p p
i
( ) 1
i
---- e
c
i
p p
i
( )
1 c
i
p p
i
( ) + ~ =
i

i
c
i
p
i
p ( ) ~
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}
=

i
i
---- p p
b
( ) ~
Consequently, lamda for a slightly compressible fluid with a constant viscosity is
or
.
The reservoir flow rate as a function of the dimensionless rate is
where is the constant draw down pressure (the initial reservoir pres-
sure ( ) minus the flowing pressure ( )). The stock tank flow rate is related to
the reservoir rate by the formation volume factor (i.e., ).
Total volume of oil produced, , as a function of producing time assuming
pseudo-steady state behavior is
(L-192)
where the maximum produced reservoir volume for an undersaturated oil (liquid)
formation is given by
(L-193)
The average reservoir pressure for a slightly compressible fluid producing at a con-
stant bottomhole flowing pressure is
p ( ) c ( )
i
+ p
i
( ) + p ( )
i

---------------------------------
\ .
|
| |
c ( )
i
i
---- p
i
p ( )
i
c
i
p
i
p ( )
---------------------------
\ .
|
|
|
| |
~ =
1 ~
q t ( )
2tkhAp
-------------------- q
D
2tkhAp
-------------------- J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA
= =
Ap p
i
p
wf
=
p
i
p
wf
|
o
q
stb
q B
o
=
Q t ( ) t
Q t ( ) q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
2tkhAp
-------------------- J
D
e
2tJ
D
kt |cA ( )
t d
0
t
}
= =
2tkhAp
--------------------
|cA
2tk
------------- 1 e
2tJ
D
t
DA
( ) =
Q
max
1 e
2tJ
D
t
DA
( ) =
Q
max
|hAcAp =
or
(L-194)
Now from Eq. (L-5) with the definition of the dimensionless productivity index
we find as a check on our solution that indeed
The above analysis follows from the assumptions that the formation fluid is slightly
compressible and has a constant compressibility.
Real Gas
The lamda factor is
Substituting the above constitutive relationship into Eq. (L-139), we have
(L-195)
p
i
p
p
i
p
wf
------------------
Q t ( )
Q
max
------------ 1 e
2tJ
D
t
DA
( ) = =
p p
wf
p
i
p
wf
------------------ e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
J
D

2tkh
-------------
q t ( )
p p
wf
---------------- =
q t ( )
2tkhAp
-------------------- J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA

sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------
p
z
-- - =
p ( ) c ( )
i
+ p
i
( ) + p ( )
p
i
( ) p ( )
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
=
+ p ( )
1
2
---
sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------m p ( ) =
The lamda factor for a real gas in terms of is
Ideal Gas
The constitutive relationship for the density of an ideal gas is
(L-196)
The compressibility for an ideal gas is found from
(L-197)
The pseudopressure for an ideal gas with a constant viscosity is
(L-198)
The lamda factor for an ideal gas is found by substituting Eq. (L-196), Eq. (L-197),
and Eq. (L-198) into Eq. (L-189)
or
(L-199)
The lamda factor for an ideal gas (with a constant viscosity) is shown to range from
1 to 1/2.
m p ( )
p ( )
c ( )
i
2
------------
m p
i
( ) m p ( )
p
i
z p
i
( )
------------
p
z p ( )
----------
--------------------------------
\ .
|
|
|
| |
=

sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------p =
c
1
---
d
dp
------
1
---
sc
T
sc
p
sc
T
---------------
1
p
--- = = =
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}
=

i
p
i
i
--------- p
2
p
b
2
( ) ~
p ( ) c ( )
i
i
p
i
i
--------- p
i
2
p
2
( )
i
1
p
p
i
----
\ .
| |
--------------------------------
\ .
|
|
|
|
| |
c
i
p
i
2
p
2
( )
p
i
p ( )
----------------------
\ .
| |
= =
p ( )
1
2
--- 1 p p
i
+ ( ) =
Numerical Solution -Total Mass and Mass Rate
Constant Lamda Solution
A very simple methodology for finding the mass rate and total mass produced is to
use a constant value for . From mass conservation, the correct average value for
is
(L-200)
The mass rate is then calculated from
where
The total mass produced as a function of time is then calculated from
where
The above mass balance equation can also be written as
(L-201)
where
p
wf
( ) c ( )
i
+ p
i
( ) + p
wf
( )
p
i
( ) p
wf
( )
--------------------------------------
\ .
| |
=
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
t
DA
t
DA
p
wf
( ) =
AM t ( ) m
t ( ) t d
0
t
}
=
2tkhA+ p
i
( ) J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
t d
0
t
DA
}
dt
DA
dt
------------
\ .
| |
=
dt
DA
dt
------------
k p
wf
( )
| c ( )
i
A
-------------------- =
AM t ( ) AM p
wf
( ) 2tJ
D
e
2tJ
D
t'
t d
0
t
DA
}
=
AM p
wf
( ) 1 e
2tJ
D
t
DA
( ) =
It is easy to illustrate that Eq. (L-200) is the correct choice for lamda. From Eqn we
have
Then as time goes to infinity , we find
or
Rearranging, we find
which is identical to Eq. (L-200).
Eq. (L-201) can also be written in terms of the total mass in place
where the total mass in place is
AM p
wf
( ) |hA p
i
( ) p
wf
( ) ( ) =
AM t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
t d
0
t
DA
}
k p
wf
( )
| c ( )
i
A
--------------------
\ .
| |
=
|hA ( )
c ( )
i
A+ p
i
( )
p
wf
( )
------------------------------- 2tJ
D
e
2tJ
D
t
t d
0
t
DA
}
=
|hA ( )
c ( )
i
A+ p
i
( )
p
wf
( )
------------------------------- 1 e
2tJ
D
t
DA
( ) =
t
DA

AM t ( ) AM p
wf
( )
|hA | |
c ( )
i
A+ p
i
( )
p
wf
( )
------------------------------- |hA | | p
i
( ) p
wf
( ) | |
p
wf
( ) c ( )
i
A+ p
i
( )
p
i
( ) p
wf
( )
-----------------------------------
\ .
| |
AM t ( ) AM
total
p
i
( ) p
wf
( )
p
i
( )
-----------------------------------
\ .
| |
1 e
2tJ
D
t
DA
( ) =
AM
total
|hA p
i
( ) =
The above equations can be solved using a non-iterative numerical procedure for a
constant lamda value and a given average reservoir pressure:
Step 1
Given:
Step 2
Find: , , , , , and
where
Step 3
Find: , , ,
The total mass of hydrocarbons produced is
The dimensionless pseudotime is then calculated from
or
p
AM
max
A+ p
i
( ) A+ p ( ) p ( ) p ( ) t
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}
=
d
------
}
cdp
p
i
p
}
=
p
wf
( ) c ( )
i
+ p
i
( ) + p
wf
( )
p
i
( ) p
wf
( )
--------------------------------------
\ .
| |
=
AM
max
|hA p
i
( ) p
wf
( ) ( ) =
AM p ( ) |hA p
i
( ) p ( ) ( ) =
AM p ( ) t
DA
t
DA
t
M p ( ) AM
system
|hA p
i
( ) p ( ) | | = =
t
DA
AM p ( ) AM p
wf
( ) 1 e
2tJ
D
t
DA
( ) =
The dimensionless time and time are then found from
and
Step 4
Find:
Time dependent Lamda Solution
As stated above, since and are time average values, the total mass pro-
duction as a function of time can be determined, but the mass rate can not be
directly found from
(L-202)
since was defined with an average viscosity compressibility product over the
total time. That is, we need an instantaneous value for lamda to evaluate the above
equation. However, all is not lost.
The numerical procedure to find the total mass and mass rate as a function of time
for a non-constant lamda is outlined below:
Step 1
Given:
Step 2
Find: , , , , and
where
t
DA
1
2tJ
D
------------- 1
AM p ( )
AM p
wf
( )
----------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
t
DA
t
DA
p
wf
( ) =
t t
DA
| c ( )
i
A
k
--------------------
\ .
| |
=
m
t ( )
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
c t ( ) t ( )
m
t ( ) 2tkhA+ p
i
( ) J
D
e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
t
DA
t ( )
p
A+ p
i
( ) A+ p ( ) p ( ) p ( ) t
Step 3
Find: , , ,
The total mass of hydrocarbons produced is
The dimensionless time and time are then found from
and
Step 4
Find:
+ p ( )

--- p' d
p
b
p
}
=
d
------
}
cdp
p
i
p
}
=
p ( ) c ( )
i
+ p
i
( ) + p ( )
p
i
( ) p ( )
---------------------------------
\ .
| |
=
AM p ( ) t
DA
t
DA
t
AM p ( ) AM
system
|hA p
i
( ) p ( ) | | = =
t
DA
A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
------------------ e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
t
DA
1
2tJ
D
-------------
A+ p
i
( )
A+ p ( )
------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
t
DA
t
DA
p ( ) =
t t
DA
| c ( )
i
A ( )
k
-------------------------
\ .
| |
=
m
t ( )
m
t ( )
AM t
n
( ) AM t
n 1
( )
t
n
t
n 1
------------------------------------------------- =
where is the current time step.
General Dimensionless Numerical Solution
The dimensionless flow rate or mass rate as a function of dimensionless time is
given by
(L-203)
where is the average reservoir pressure at dimensionless time . This equation
can also be written as
(L-204)
where
The dimensionless flow (or mass) rate as a function of average reservoir pressure
from Eq. (L-174) is
(L-205)
where .
The numerical procedure to find the total mass and mass rate as a function of
dimensionless time for a non-constant lamda is outlined below:
Step 1
Given: , , , , , , and
Step 2
Find: , , , and .
n
Q
D
p ( ) q
D
t
DA
d
0
t
DA
}
1
2t p ( )
------------------
m p
i
( ) m p ( )
m p
i
( ) m p
wf
( )
------------------------------------- = =
p t
DA
Q
D
p ( ) Q
D
p
wf
( )
p
i
z
i
p z
p
i
z
i
p
wf
z
wf

------------------------------------- =
Q
D
p
wf
( )
1
2t p
wf
( )
----------------------- =
q
D
p ( ) m
D
p ( ) J
D
A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
------------------ J
D
Am p ( )
Am p
i
( )
------------------ = = =
Am p ( ) m p ( ) m p
wf
( ) =
t ( )
p
n
p
n 1
q
D
p
n 1
( ) Q
D
p
n 1
( ) p z ( )
n 1
Am p
n 1
( ) t
DA
p
n 1
( )
q
D
p
n
( ) Q
D
p
n
( ) p z ( )
n
Am p
n
( )
Step 3
Find: ,
The average dimension flow rate from to is given by
The change in the formation dimensionless mass from to is
given by
Step 3
Find:
The dimensionless time and real time are then calculated from mass bal-
ance
and
L.11 Real Gas Potential and Related Equations
The above equations were transformed into pseudo-pressures for gas systems since
the gas viscosity and density vary significantly with pressure.
q
D
avg
AQ
D
t
DA
p
n 1
( ) t
DA
p
n
( )
q
D
avg
q
D
p
n 1
( ) q
D
p
n 1
( )
q
D
p
n 1
( ) q
D
p
n 1
( ) ( ) ln
-------------------------------------------------------------- =
t
DA
p
n 1
( ) t
DA
p
n
( )
AQ
D
Q
D
p
n
( ) Q
D
p
n 1
( ) =
t
DA
p
n
( )
t
DA
A+ p ( )
A+ p
i
( )
------------------ e
2tJ
D
t
DA
=
t
DA
1
2tJ
D
-------------
A+ p
i
( )
A+ p ( )
------------------
\ .
| |
ln =
t
DA
p
n
( )
t
DA
p
n
( ) t
DA
p
n 1
( ) AQ
D
q
D
avg
+ =
t
n
p
n
( ) t
DA
p
n
( )
| c ( )
i
A ( )
k
-------------------------
\ .
| |
=
L.11 Real Gas Potential and Related Equations 901
Agarwal Pseudopressure
To handle this non-linear behavior problem, a real gas potential (or real gas pseudo-
pressure or pseudopressure) was defined by Agarwal (1978), Al-Hussainy (1996)
(see also Earlougher (1977, pp 17) and Economides and Nolte (1987, 1-5))
(L-206)
where is an obituary base pressure. Then,
(L-207)
and
(L-208)
Earlougher [1977] reports that as a rule of thumb, at low pressures ( )
is essentially constant and at high pressures ( ) is essentially
constant.
Another useful relationship from Eq. (L-214) is
The dimensionless real gas potential is obtained from the identity . Now
from Eq. (L-1), we have
and
(L-209)
m p ( ) 2
p
p ( )z p ( )
---------------------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
p
b
m p ( ) V
p c
c
m p ( ) p V
2p
Z
------- p V = =
t c
c
m p ( )
2p
Z
-------
t c
cp
=
p 2000 psi <
Z p 3000 psi < p Z
dm p ( )
dp
---------------
2p
Z
------- =
m
D
p
D
=
dp
D
d Ap ( )
---------------
2tkh
q
------------- =
dm
D
d Am ( )
----------------
dm
D
d Ap ( )
---------------
d Ap ( )
d Am ( )
----------------
dp
D
d Ap ( )
---------------
d Ap ( )
d Am ( )
---------------- = =
2tkh
q
-------------
Z
2p
-------
tkh
q
--------- =
Z
p
--- =
The gas density from the real gas law is
(L-210)
where is the number of moles, is the molecular weight, is the gas volume
and is the non-ideal gas or Z-factor. Eq. (L-210) can be arranged as
(L-211)
or
(L-212)
or
(L-213)
General Pseudopressure
The general pseudopressure to linearize the radial diffusivity equation is
(L-214)
where is an obituary base pressure. Then,
(L-215)
and
nM
V
--------
nM
ZnRT p
---------------------
Mp
ZRT
----------- = = =
n M V
Z
M
ZRT
p
--------------

sc
RT
sc
p
sc
------------------- = =
Z
p
---

sc
p
sc
----------
T
sc
T
------- =
dm
D
d Am ( )
----------------
tkh
q
---------

sc
p
sc
----------
T
sc
T
-------
tT
sc
p
sc
-----------
kh
q
sc
T
---------- = =
m
D
tT
sc
p
sc
-----------
kh
q
sc
T
---------- Am =
+ p ( )
p ( )
p ( )
----------- p d
p
b
p
}
=
p
b
+ p ( ) V
p c
c+
p V

--- p V = =
L.12 Forchheimer Equation 903
(L-216)
Another useful relationship from Eq. (L-217) is
The dimensionless real gas potential is obtained from the identity . Now
from Eq. (L-1), we have
and
(L-217)
Rearranging Eq. (L-217), for a constant mass flux ( ), we find
(L-218)
where
L.12 Forchheimer Equation
The pressure loss in a fracture for Darcy and non-Darcy flow as given by the Forch-
heimer equation is
t c
c+
---
t c
cp
=
d+ p ( )
dp
----------------

--- =
+
D
p
D
=
dp
D
d Ap ( )
---------------
2tkh
q
------------- =
d+
D
d A+ ( )
---------------- -
d+
D
d Ap ( )
---------------
d Ap ( )
d A+ ( )
---------------- - =
dp
D
d Ap ( )
---------------
d Ap ( )
d A+ ( )
---------------- -
2tkh
q
-------------

--- = =
2tkh
q
------------- =
q
+
D
2tkh
q
------------- A+ =
A+ + p
i
( ) + p ( ) =
(L-219)
where the non-Darcy Reynolds number is defined as
where is the fracture permeability in the fracture, is the fluid density, is the
fluid velocity (i.e., is the superficial or average velocity), and is the total flow
rate (2-wings) at the wellbore.
Since gas is a compressible fluid, the gas density and velocity are functions of the
pressure in the fracture. From mass conservation, the mass flux per unit area in the
fracture is related to the gas density and velocity at standard conditions by
(L-220)
Multiplying Eq. L-219 by the gas density and placing in terms at standard condi-
tions, we have
(L-221)
or
(L-222)
where the non-Darcy gas Reynolds number which may be a function of position is
defined as
(L-223)
x d
dp

k
f
----u | u
2
( ) +

k
f
----u 1
|k
f
u
--------------- +
\ .
| |
= =
k
f
----u 1 Re
|
x ( ) + ( ) =
Re
|
x ( )
|k
f
u x ( )
-----------------------
|k
f
q
f
A
f
----------------
|k
f
q
t
2A
f
---------------- = = =
k u
u q
t
u ( )
p T ,
u ( )
p
sc
T
sc
,
=
dp
dx
------
\ .
| |

k
f
----
sc
u
sc
( ) |
sc
u
sc
( )
2
+ =
---
dp
dx
------
\ .
| |

sc
u
sc
( )
1
k
f
---- 1
|k
f
sc
u
sc
----------------------- +
)
`

=
sc
u
sc
( )
1
k
f
---- 1 Re
|
x ( ) + { } =
Re
|
x ( )
|k
f
u
---------------
|k
f
sc
u
sc
-----------------------
|k
f
sc
q
sc
2A
f
----------------------- = = =
Placing Eq. (L-221) in terms of the dimensionless pseudopressure, , we have
or
The governing equation based on Argwals pseudopressure function is
(L-224)
In the above equations, the mass flux ( ) is a function of position
and therefore, the non-Darcy Reynolds number is also a function of position (i.e.,
). Assuming a mass flux distribution of the form
where the alpha power coefficient is a function of fracture conductivity. The flux is
approximately uniform for large conductivity fractures ( ) and for low con-
ductivity fractures the flux power coefficient is much greater than unity ( ).
The total pseudopressure or pressure loss in the fracture (one wing) is
+
d+
dx
--------
sc
u
sc
( )
1
k
f
----
|
sc
u
sc
( )
2
-------------------------- + =
d+
dx
--------
sc
u
sc
( )
1
k
f
----
|
sc
u
sc
( )
2
-------------------------- + =
sc
u
sc
( )
1
k
f
---- 1
|k
f

sc
u
sc
( )
---------------------------- +
)
`

=
sc
u
sc
( )
1
k
f
---- 1 Re
|
x ( ) + { } =
dm
dx
-------

sc
u
sc
( )
--------------------
dm
dp
-------
k
f
---- 1
|k
f

sc
u
sc
( )
---------------------------- +
)
`

=
2p
sc
T
T
sc
--------------
u
sc
k
f
------- 1
|k
f

sc
u
sc
( )
---------------------------- +
)
`

=
m
v v ( )
sc
= =
Re
|
x ( )
m
x
D
( ) m
0 ( ) 1 x
D
( )
o
q
=
o
q
1
o
q
1
or
(L-225)
The beta Reynolds number is defined as
(L-226)
and
(L-227)
where the gamma coefficient for slot flow ( ) is unity ( ), for large
conductivity fractures or a uniform flux fracture ( ) the gamma coefficient is
about 2/3 ( ) and for low conductivities fractures ( ) the gamma coef-
ficient is about 1/2 ( ).
The single wing mass flux at the wellbore is . The total mass flux at the well-
bore (two-wings) is . It is important to note that the Reynolds number
as define above is based on single wing fracture mass rate. Some authors use a
Reynolds number based on the total 2 wing mass rate.
A+
x
f
m
0 ( )
-------------------
1 x
D
( )
o
q
k
f
------------------------
|m
0 ( ) 1 x
D
( )
2o
q
---------------------------------------------- + x
D
d
0
1
}
=
1
1 o
q
+
---------------
\ .
| |
1
k
f
----
1
1 2o
q
+
-------------------
\ .
| |
|m
0 ( )
------------------ - + =
1
1 o
q
+
---------------
\ .
| |
1
k
f
---- 1
1 o
q
+
1 2o
q
+
-------------------
\ .
| |
|k
f
m
0 ( )
----------------------- +
\ .
|
| |
=
A+
x
f
m
0 ( )
-------------------
1
1 o
q
+
---------------
\ .
| |
1
k
f
---- 1
1 o
q
+
1 2o
q
+
-------------------
\ .
| |
Re
|
+
\ .
| |
=
1
1 o
q
+
---------------
\ .
| |
1
k
f
---- 1
q
Re
|
+ ( ) =
Re
|
|k
f
m
0 ( )
-----------------------
|k
f
m
t

2
---------------- = =
q
1 o
q
+
1 2o
q
+
------------------ - =
q
o
q
0 =
q
1 =
o
q
1 ~
q
0.67 ~ o
q
1
q
0.5 ~
m
0 ( )
m
t
2m
0 ( ) =
Effective Conductivity
The effective permeability and dimensionless conductivity for non-Darcy flow
from Eq. (L-225) are given by
(L-228)
and
(L-229)
Rearranging Eq. (L-229), and placing the effective conductivity in terms of a Darcy
and non-Darcy dimensionless conductivities, we have
(L-230)
where the non-darcy dimensionless conductivity is
where . The dimensionless beta conductivity can be written as
Eq. (L-230) also illustrates that for an infinite conductivity fracture ( ), the
effective conductivity will be equal to non-darcy value .
k
f
e
k
f
--------
1
1
q
Re
|
+
------------------------ =
C
fD
e
C
fD
-------------
1
1
q
Re
|
+
------------------------ =
C
fD
e
1
1
C
fD
---------
1
C
fD
|
------------- +
----------------------------- =
C
fD
|
C
fD
q
Re
|
--------------
hw
2
q
|qkx
f
-----------------------
2
q
|q
t
-----------------
hw
2
kx
f
--------- = = =
u ( )
p T ,
u ( )
p
sc
T
sc
,
=
C
fD
|
2
|q
t
-----------
hw
2
kx
f
---------
2
|
sc
q
sc
( )
t
-------------------------
hw
2
kx
f
--------- = =
C
fD

C
fD
e
C
fD
|

L.13 References
SPEJ, August 1974, 347-360.
2. Gringarten, A.C.: Reservoir Limit Testing for Fractured Wells, SPE 7452,
October, 1978.
1977.
4. Lee, S.T., and Brockenbrough, J.R.: A New Analytical Solution for Finite
Estimation, SPE 12013, 1983.
5. Ramey, H.J. and Cobb, W.M: A General Pressure Buildup Theory for a Well
in a Close Drainage Area, JPT December, 1971, 1493-1505
6. Earlougher, R.C., and Ramey, H.J.: Interference Analysis in Bounded Sys-
tems, JCPT December 1973, 33-45.
7. Valko, P.P. and Economides, M.J.: Heavy Crude Production from Shallow
Formations: Long Horizontal Wells Versus Horizontal Fractures, SPE 50421,
November, 1998.
8. Prats, M.: Effect of Vertical Fractures on Reservoir Behavior - Incompressible
Fluid case, SPEJ June, 1961,105-118.
9. Prats, M Hazebroek, P., and Strickler, W.R.: Effect of Vertical Fractures on
Reservoir Behavior - Compressible Fluid case, SPEJ June, 1961,105-118.
10. Riley, M.F., Brigham, W.E., and Horne, R.N.: Analytical Solutions for Ellipti-
cal Finite-Conductivity Fractures, October 1991, SPE 22656.
11. Cinco-Ley, H. and Samaniego-V: Transient pressure Analysis: Finite Conduc-
tivity Fracture case versus Damaged Fracture Case, October 1981, SPE
10179.
12. Cinco-Ley: Evaluation of hydraulic fracturing by Transient Pressure Analysis
Methods, March 1982, SPE 10043.
13. Cinco-Ley, H., Samaniego-V and Dominguez, A.N.: Transient Pressure
Behavior for a Well with a Finite-Conductivity Vertical Fracture, SPEJ Aug.
1978.
L.13 References 909
14. McGuire, W.J. and Sikora, V.J.: The Effect of Vertical Fractures on Well Pro-
ductivity, SPEJ Vol. 219 401-403, 1960.
15. Fetkovich, M.J. et.al: Decline-Curve Analysis Using Type Curves-Case His-
tories, SPE Formation Evaluation Journal, 637-656, Dec. 1987.
16. Lee, J., and Wattenbarger, R.A.: Gas Reservoir Engineering, SPE Textbook
Series Vol. 5, SPE, 1996.
17. Drake, L.P.: Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering, Elsevier Science Publica-
tions, Amsterdam, 1990.
18. Economides, M., Oligney, R., and Valko, P.: Unified Fracture Design, Orsa
Press, Alvin, Texas, 2002.
19. Fraim, M.L. and Wattenbarger, R.A.: Gas Reservoir Decline Analysis using
Type Curves with Real gas Pseudo-Pressure and Pseudo-Time, SPE 14238,
September, 1985.
20. Gardner, D.C., Hager, C.J., and Agarwal, R.G.: Incorporating Rate-Time
Superposition into Decline type Curve Analysis, SPE 62475, March 2000.
21. Meyer, B.R. and Jacot, R.H.: Pseudosteady-State Analysis of Finite Conduc-
tivity Vertical Fracture, SPE 95941, October, 2005.
Appendix M
Discrete Fracture Network Methodology
M.1 Introduction
The solution methodology for our Discrete Fracture Network (DFN) Simulator
(MShale) is formulated in this Appendix. The fractures are assumed to be discrete
and may or may not interact.
Although most fracturing applications consist of a bi-wing fracture because it
requires less energy, there are natural systems that force the boundary condition to
create discrete fractures which indeed require less energy. This is most easily
understood by examining limited entry designs or perforating large intervals in
highly deviated wellbores. Both of these are examples of creating multiple fractures
as a result of the boundary conditions.
The fundamental first-order DFN mass and momentum conservation equations are
based on a self-similar solution methodology. The formulation utilizes a pseudo-
three-dimensional ellipsoidal approach. The major assumptions are:
1. The dominant fracture or main fracture is in the x-z plane and propagates per-
pendicular to the minimum horizontal stress, . The y-z and x-y plane frac-
tures propagate perpendicular to and , respectively.
2. The discrete fracture network may composed of secondary fractures in all three
principle planes. The spacing in the x-z, y-z, and x-y planes are , , and
, respectively.
3. The boundary conditions are such that the natural fracture system can initiate
multiple hydraulic fractures. This is similar to creating multiple fractures from
a highly deviated vertical wellbore with a large perforated interval. This forces
o
3
o
2
o
1
Ay Ax
Az
912 Discrete Fracture Network Methodology:
the condition to propagate multiple fractures in various planes in preference to
a single bi-wing dominant fracture as typical for limited type entry designs.
4. Fractures will only propagate in the y-z and x-y planes if the fracture pressure
is greater than the corresponding minimum horizontal stress in that plane.
5. Fractures in the x-z plane (other than the dominant fracture) can not open
unless a fracture network in the y-z plane is established for the fracture to prop-
agate (i.e., in the DFN the fractures must be connected.). These assumptions
are not applicable for multiple or cluster type fractures which may be dis-
jointed.
6. The numerical solution will be based on ellipsoidal self-similar type equations.
That is the fracture stimulated reservoir volume will be ellipsoidal as will the
geometric distributions. The width and height profiles are however calculated
from the governing p3D pressure-width-height relationships.
7. Fracture interaction for stiffness and fluid loss is considered.
8. The fracture height at the joints in the x-z, and y-z planes will be assumed to be
the same. This summation is true for 2-D and penny shape fractures but may
not be for well contained fractures. This assumption will not have a great effect
on the solution unless there is considerable fracture volume and/or fluid loss in
the regions of high confining stress contrast at the upper and lower fracture
height extensions.
9. Dilatancy of interacting fractures at the joints is ignored.
10. The fracture net work extension (with the except of the dominant fracture) can
be limited to a finite fracture extent in each plane.
The discrete fractures created in the x-y plane is assumed to be horizontal with the
same aspect ratio as the y-z plane fracture.
The governing mass, momentum, and energy equations and constitutive relation-
ships are presented.
M.2 Momentum Equation
The fundamental solutions for flow in a fracture (closed conduits) are presented in
this section from which the foundation for the fracture network methodology is for-
mulated. The momentum equations (pressure loss) for flow in slot for Laminar flow
(Newtonian and non-Newtonian behavior) is first presented followed by Turbulent
flow behavior. The solutions for flow in an elliptical slot are then presented.
M.2 Momentum Equation 913
Laminar Flow
Fundamental solutions for laminar flow in slots are presented below for Newtonian
and non-Newtonian (power-law) fluids. The solution for turbulent flow is then pre-
sented.
Slot Flow
Consider steady laminar flow in a channel with parallel flat straight walls. The dis-
tance between the two walls is and the channel height is
Newtonian Fluid
The pressure gradient in terms of the average stream velocity is
(M-1)
This equation corresponds to Reynolds observation that the pressure drop for lami-
nar flow is proportional to the average flow velocity.
The hydraulic diameter for a slot is
(M-2)
where is the slot height and . Rearranging Eq. M-1 in terms of the
hydraulic diameter, we obtain
(M-3)
The Reynolds number for flow of a Newtonian fluid in a slot is
(M-4)
The pressure gradient in terms of the Darcy friction factor based on the average
flow velocity is
2b 2a
x d
dp 3 u ( )
b
2
---------------- =
d
h
4A P
f

4 2a2b ( )
2 2a 2b + ( )
--------------------------- 4b ~ =
2a a b 1
x d
dp 48 u ( )
d
h
2
------------------- =
Re
u ( ) d
h
------------------ =
(M-5)
The Darcy friction factor in terms of the Reynolds number (Eq. M-4) is found by
equating Eq. M-3 to Eq. M-5 and solving for
(M-6)
Power-Law Fluid
The pressure gradient in terms of the average velocity and hydraulic diameter for a
power-law fluid is
(M-7)
The pressure loss in terns of the Darcy friction factor (Eq. M-5) is
(M-8)
where from Eq. M-6 is
(M-9)
The power law Reynolds number from the above equations is therefore defined as
(M-10)
The above power law equations simplify to the Newtonian equations for .
x d
dp f
2
---
u ( )
2
d
h
--------------- =
f
f
96
u ( ) d
h
------------------
96
Re
------ = =
x d
dp 2n' 1 +
n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' u ( )
n'
b
n' 1 +
----------------- =
4
n' 1 + 2n' 1 +
n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' u ( )
n'
d
h
n' 1 +
----------------- =
x d
dp f
2
---
u ( )
2
d
h
--------------- =
f
f
96
Re
------ =
Re
u ( )
2 n'
d
h
n'
12
n' 1 2n' 1 +
3n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k'
------------------------------------------------ =
n' 1 =
Elliptical Slot Flow
The momentum equation for steady incompressible laminar flow in an ellipsoidal
cross section with major and minor radii of and , respectively is presented
below.
Newtonian Fluid
The pressure gradient is in terms of the average stream velocity is
(M-11)
where
(M-12)
accounts for the integration of the velocity profile in the z-direction. This parameter,
, represents the ratio of the average velocity profile over the channel height to the
average velocity at the mid-section. The general form of the integral in Eq. M-12 is
given by
(M-13)
The pressure loss in terms of the flow rate ( ) is
(M-14)
Limiting Narrow Slot Ellipsoidal Solution
Newtonian Fluid
The limiting solution for a Newtonian fluid with from Eq. M-14 is
(M-15)
a b
x d
dp
4
3t 16
u
----------------
\ .
| |
u ( )
a
2
b
2
+
a
2
b
2
-----------------
\ .
|
| |
4 u ( )
a
2
b
2
+
a
2
b
2
-----------------
\ .
|
| |
= =
u 1 z
2
( )
3 2
z d
0
1
}
1
2
---
I 1 2 ( )I 5 2 ( )
I 3 ( )
-------------------------------------- = =
3t
16
------ =
u
1 z
2
( )
1
z d
0
1
}
1
2
---B 1 2 , ( )
1
2
---
I 1 2 ( )I ( )
I 1 2 + ( )
------------------------------- = =
q u ( ) tab =
x d
dp 3
4u
-------
\ .
| |
q
a
2
b
2
+
a
3
b
3
-----------------
\ .
|
| |
4
t
---q
a
2
b
2
+
a
3
b
3
-----------------
\ .
|
| |
= =
a b
x d
dp 3
4u
-------
\ .
| |
q
ab
3
--------
\ .
| |
4
t
---
q
ab
3
--------
\ .
| |
= =
The pressure drop in an ellipsoidal slot is shown to be times that of flow
between parallel plates (see Eq. M-1).
The hydraulic diameter for an ellipsoidal slot ( ) is
(M-16)
The pressure loss in terms of the Darcy friction factor is
(M-17)
(M-18)
Power-Law Fluid
The pressure gradient in terms of the average velocity at any position z for a very
narrow slit based on the order of magnitude discussion above from Eq. M-7 is
(M-19)
Since the pressure gradient at any vertical section must be constant, we find
(M-20)
The cross-sectional average velocity over the entire slot is
1 u
a b
d
h
4A P
f

4 tab ( )
2 2a ( )
------------------ ~ tb =
x d
dp f
2
---
u ( )
2
d
h
--------------- =
f
f
8t
2
Re
--------- =
x d
dp 2n' 1 +
n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' u z ( ) ( )
n'
b z ( )
n' 1 +
------------------------- =
u z ( ) ( ) u z 0 = ( ) ( )
b z ( )
b z 0 = ( )
--------------------
n' 1 +
n'
--------------
=
u z 0 = ( ) ( ) 1 z
2
( )
n' 1 +
2n'
--------------
=
(M-21)
where
(M-22)
and or .
The pressure gradient in terms of the average slot velocity is
(M-23)
The pressure gradient in terms of the flow rate, , is
(M-24)
The pressure drop in an ellipsoidal slot is shown to be times that of flow
between parallel plates (see Eq. M-7). Perkins and Kern
1
[1961] in their paper enti-
tled Width of Hydraulic Fractures assumed held the same relationship for
both Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids (i.e., that ).
u ( ) u z ( ) ( ) b z ( ) z d
0
a
}
b z ( ) z d
0
a
}
=
4
t
--- u z 0 = ( ) ( ) 1 z
2
( )
2n' 1 +
2n'
-----------------
z d
0
1
}
=
4u n' ( )
t
----------------- u z 0 = ( ) ( ) =
u n' ( ) 1 z
2
( )
1
z d
0
1
}
=
1
2
---B 1 2 , ( )
1
2
---
I 1 2 ( )I ( )
I 1 2 + ( )
------------------------------- = =
1
2n' 1 +
2n'
----------------- =
4n' 1 +
2n'
----------------- =
x d
dp 2n' 1 +
n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' u z 0 = ( ) ( )
n'
b z 0 = ( )
n' 1 +
----------------------------------- =
2n' 1 +
n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' u ( )
4u n' ( )
t
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
b
n' 1 +
--------------------------------------------- =
2n' 1 +
4n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' t u ( ) ( )
n'
u n' ( )
n'
b
n' 1 +
-------------------------------- =
q tab u ( ) =
x d
dp 2n' 1 +
4n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' q a ( )
n'
u n' ( )
n'
b
2n' 1 +
----------------------------------- =
1 u
n'
1 u
n'
1 u
n'
16 3t ~
The pressure gradient in terms of the average velocity and hydraulic diameter is
(M-25)
The pressure loss in terms of the Darcy friction factor (Eq. M-5) is
(M-26)
(M-27)
The power law Reynolds number for flow in an ellipsoidal slot from the above
equations is therefore defined as
(M-28)
The above power law equations simplify to the Newtonian equations for .
Turbulent Flow
The pressure gradient in a closed conduit as a function of the mean or average wall
shear stress is
(M-29)
where is the hydraulic diameter, .
x d
dp 2n' 1 +
4n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' tu ( )
n'
u n' ( )
n'
b
n' 1 +
-------------------------------- =
t
2n' 1 +
u n' ( )
n'
------------------
2n' 1 +
4n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' u ( )
n'
d
h
n' 1 +
----------------- =
x d
dp f
2
---
u ( )
2
d
h
--------------- =
f
f
8t
2
Re
--------- =
Re
3t
16u
----------
\ .
| |
n'
u ( )
2 n'
d
h
n'
4t ( )
n' 1 2n' 1 +
3n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k'
------------------------------------------------------ =
n' 1 =
x d
dp
4t
w
d
h
--------- =
d
h
d
h
4A P
f

M.3 DFN Momentum Equations 919
(M-30)
where the Darcy friction factor, , for a non-circular duct can be written as
(M-31)
where is a function of the Reynolds Number ( ).
M.3 DFN Momentum Equations
The fundamental DFN methodology is based on the momentum and mass conser-
vation equations.
Laminar Flow
The pressure gradient in terms of the flow rate in an elliptical slot, , is
(M-32)
Rearranging Eq. M-32 we find
(M-33)
From mass conservation the ellipsoidal slot volume in terms of the slot dimensions
is
(M-34)
where is the length of the fluid front in the elliptical slot.
The slot flow rate, , assuming a constant cross-section area ( ) is
(M-35)
x d
dp f
2
-- -
u ( )
2
d
h
--------------- =
f
f
8t
w
u ( )
2
---------------
2d
h
dp dx ( )
u ( )
2
--------------------------------- = =
f Re
q tab u ( ) =
x d
dp 2n' 1 +
4n'
-----------------
\ .
| |
n'
k' q a ( )
n'
u n' ( )
n'
b
2n' 1 +
----------------------------------- =
q
4n'
2n' 1 +
-----------------
\ .
| |
u n' ( )ab
2 1 n' +
k' ( )
1 n'
-------------------------------------
Ap
L
-------
\ .
| |
1
n'
----
=
V tabL =
L
q tab
q tab
AL
At
------- =
Substituting Eq. M-35 into Eq. M-33, we find
(M-36)
where is the change in the fluid front position over the time step .
The governing fluid front relation in terms of the slot width ( ) and pressure dif-
ferential (pressure loss) is
(M-37)
Fluid front positions for different slot widths and pressure drops from Eq. M-37 is
(M-38)
where
(M-39)
Turbulent Flow
(M-40)
where and .
The flow rate from Eq. M-40 is
(M-41)
Substituting the slot flow rate from Eq. M-35 into Eq. M-41, we find
AL
At
-------
4n'
2n' 1 +
-----------------
\ .
| |
u n' ( )b
1 1 n' +
t k' ( )
1 n'
----------------------------------
Ap
L
-------
\ .
| |
1
n'
----
=
AL At
2b
AL L
1 n'
4n'
2n' 1 +
-----------------
u n' ( )
t
--------------
\ .
| |
At
k' ( )
1 n'
------------------b
1 1 n' +
Ap ( )
1
n'
----
=
AL
2
L
2
1 n'
+ AL
1
L
1
1 n'
=
+
b
2
b
1
-----
\ .
| |
1 n' +
Ap
2
Ap
1
---------
1
n'
----
=
x d
dp f
2
---
u ( )
2
d
h
---------------
f
2
---
q
2
t
3
a
2
b
3
----------------- = =
u ( ) q tab ( ) = d
h
tb =
q
2t
3
a
2
b
3
f
---------------------
Ap
L
-------
\ .
| |
1 2
=
M.4 DFN Characteristics 921
(M-42)
Fluid front positions for different slot widths and pressure drops from Eq. M-42 is
(M-43)
where
(M-44)
Time Dependent Cross-Sectional Area
The above equations are easily modified for a time dependent ellipsoidal cross sec-
tional area. The power law behavior for pseudo-steady 2-D and 3-D fracture propa-
gation is of the form (See Meyer
2-5
)
(M-45)
where
and (M-46)
The flow rate for a time/length dependent cross sectional area is
(M-47)
Thus Eq. M-39 and Eq. (M-43) are still valid for given aperture ( ) and pressure
drop ( ) at time .
M.4 DFN Characteristics
The fundamental first-order DFN mass conservation equations will be based on a
self similar solution methodology. Fracture propagation in each plane is governed
by both momentum and mass. The governing mass conservation equations for a
DFN system are presented below.
AL L
1 2
2t
f
------bAp
\ .
| |
1 2
At =
AL
2
L
2
1 2
+ AL
1
L
1
1 2
=
+
b
2
b
1
-----
Ap
2
Ap
1
---------
\ .
| |
1
2
---
=
L t ( ) L t ( )
t
t
--
\ .
| |
o
L
= a t ( ) a t ( )
t
t
--
\ .
| |
o
a
= b t ( ) b t ( )
t
t
--
\ .
| |
o
b
=
o
a
|
a
o
L
= o
b
|
b
o
L
=
q tab
AL
At
------- 1 |
a
|
b
+ + ( ) =
2b
Ap t
Fracture Network
The number of network fractures, total network fracture length, area, fluid loss, and
fracture network volume will be presented below.
The location of the well and perforations in a given grid block is defined by the
dimensionless coordinates ( ) where
(M-48)
The well and perforation location from the center of the DFN grid are given by
. The dimensional well location values range from -1 to +1. The location
at the center of the block is (0,0,0).
The maximum stimulated fracture extent in the y-direction (y-z plane) from
momentum is given by
(M-49)
where is the stimulated reservoir volume aspect ratio, is the minor axis
in the y-direction and is the fracture extent (dominant fracture length) in the x-
direction.
Number of Discrete Fractures
The number of discrete fractures for each of the three principle stress directions is
(M-50)
where the dimensionless position, , in the positive and negative coordinate
directions, and , are given by
x
Dw
y
Dw
z
Dw
, ,
x
Dw
2x
w
Ax
--------- y
Dw
2y
w
Ay
--------- z
Dw
2z
w
Az
-------- = , = , =
x
w
y
w
z
w
, ,
b a =
f + ( ) = b
a
n
,

,
D
+
i 0 = ( )
,
D
+
i ( ) ,
D
+
max
<
=
,
D
-
i 0 = ( )
,
D
-
i ( ) ,
D
-
max
<
+
,
D
,
D
+
,
D
-
,
D
+
i 0 = ( ) 1 ,
Dw
( )A, 2, ( ) =
,
D
-
i 0 = ( ) 1 ,
Dw
+ ( )A, 2, ( ) =
and is the maximum fracture network extent (half-length) in the direction. The
dimensionless position is given by
where .
The total number of integer fractures in the x-z, y-z, and x-y planes are
(M-51)
To illustrate the use of the above equations lets consider a DFN system with a dis-
crete fracture spacing in the x-z and y-z planes of and with a x-
y plane aspect ratio of where is the dominant frac-
ture half-length. Lets also assume there are no discrete horizontal fractures in the
x-y plane. It is noted that all length units are consistent. Lets also assume that the
wellbore and perforated interval are located at the center of the network grid
( ).
Thus the number of fractures in the x-direction (x-z plane) is

or
The number of fractures in the y-direction (y-z plane) is

or
, ,
,
D
i ( ) ,
D
i 0 = ( ) A, i ( ) , + =
0 ,
D
1 s s
N
x
n
x
=
N
y
1 n
y
+ =
N
z
n
z
=
Ax 100 = Ay 50 =
b a 1 2 = = a x
f
1000 = =
x
Dw
0 = y
Dw
0 = z
Dw
0 = , ,
n
y
b Ay 2 ( )
Ay
--------------------------- 1 + =
b Ay 2 ( )
Ay
--------------------------- 1 + +
n
y
10 10 + 20 = =
N
y
1 n
y
+ 21 = =
n
x
a Ax 2 ( )
Ax
--------------------------- 1 + =
a Ax 2 ( )
Ax
--------------------------- 1 + +
n
x
10 10 + 20 = =
DFN Geometric Characteristics
The total length, area and volume of the DFN is
(M-52)
where
(M-53)
The fracture length and width distribution for each network fracture perpendicular
to the direction is given by
(M-54)
N
x
n
x
20 = =
w
DFN
V
DFN
A
DFN
=
L
DFN
L
,
j ( )
j 1 =
N
,
)

`

, x y z , , =
=
A
DFN
A
,
j ( )
j 1 =
N
,
)

`

, x y z , , =
=
V
DFN
V
,
j ( )
j 1 =
N
,
)

`

, x y z , , =
=
L
,
d
}
=
A
,
h
,
( ) d
}
=
V
,
w
,
( )h
,
( ) d
}
=
w
,
V
,
A
,
=
,
L
D
1 ,
D
2
( )
1 2
=
w
D
1 ,
D
2
( )
1 2
=
where and .
The fracture height profile in the secondary plane is assumed to be self-similar to
the main fracture as given by
(M-55)
where and for an elliptical profile .
The x-y plane fracture is horizontal with an ellipsoidal shape and width profile.
This configuration allows for a T shaped fracture geometry.
DFN Ratios
The ratios of the DFN characteristics to the dominant or primary fracture are
defined in this section. The ratios for length, area, and volume are
(M-56)
where , , and are the length, area, and volume of the dominant or primary
fracture.
Stimulated Reservoir Volume
The stimulated reservoir volume is defined as
(M-57)
where is the stimulated average fracture height and is the ellipsoidal area of
the fracture network. The major or dominant fracture half-length (x direction) is
and the network extension in the y-direction or minor axis is . The stimulated pro-
jected area is the area in the x-y plane as observed in the z-direction (note:
where is the ellipsoidal DFN aspect ratio).
L
D
L L
,
= w
D
w w
,
=
h
D
f ,
D
( ) =
h
D
h h
,
= h
D
1 ,
D
2
( )
1 2
=
L
L
DFN
L =
A
A
DFN
A =
V
V
DFN
V =
L A V
V
SR
h , ( ) , d
A
}
tabh = =
h tab
a
b
tab ta
2
=
Specific DFN Characteristics
The specific stimulated reservoir characteristics are define as the ratio of the DFN
characteristics divided by the stimulated reservoir volume as given by
(M-58)
where is total injected volume.
Stimulated Reservoir Volume Ratios
The stimulated reservoir ratios are define as the ratio of the Stimulated Reservoir
Volume divided by the DFN characteristics
(M-59)
The stimulated reservoir volume ratios are the inverse of the specific reservoir char-
acteristics.
M.5 Mass Conservation
The governing mass conservation equation for the DFN is
(M-60)
where
L
L
DFN
V
SRV
=
A
A
DFN
V
SRV
=
V
V
DFN
V
SRV
=
V
t
V
t
V
SRV
=
V
t
e
L
L
DFN
V
SRV
1
L
= =
e
A
A
DFN
V
SRV
1
A
= =
e
V
V
DFN
V
SRV
1
V
= =
e
V
t
V
t
V
SRV
1
V
t
= =
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
V
l
t ( ) V
sp
t ( ) V
f
t ( ) =
M.6 DFN Interaction 927
(M-61)
The above mass conservation equation is solved numerically by integrating over
every layer for each discrete fracture network in all planes.
The efficiency for the fracture network is
(M-62)
The fracture efficiency for a single dominant fracture with constant leakoff and
spurt loss coefficients from Eq. (M-61) and Eq. (M-62) is
(M-63)
where is the leakoff area, is the fracture area, and is the average fracture
width.
M.6 DFN Interaction
The fluid loss and stiffness interaction for a DFN system is given below.
Fluid loss interaction accounts for the reduction in leakoff for multiple fractures.
The fluid loss multiplier, , is defined as
(M-64)
V
l
t ( ) 2 v a t , ( ) a d t d
0
A
DFN
}
0
t
}
=
V
sp
t ( ) 2 S
p
a ( ) a d
0
A
DFN
}
=
V
f
t ( ) V
DFN
w ( )h ( ) d
0
L
DFN
}
= =
q
DFN
V
DFN
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
=
1
1 V
l
V
sp
+ ( ) V
f
+
------------------------------------------- =
q
1
1 tcA
l
tu 2S
p
A
l
+ ( ) wA ( ) +
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- =
A
l
A w
c
A A
DFN
1 ( )u
l
1 + =
where is the fluid loss interaction factor. If there is no interaction,
, and for the fractures fully interact, . A minimum
multiplier, , can also be specified such that .
Incorporating the fluid loss multiplier into Eq. (M-61), we have
(M-65)
This equation must be solved numerically since is in general time
dependent for a DFN if .
For a fully interacting fracture , Eq. (M-65) becomes
(M-66)
This equation represents the fluid loss from the main or dominant fracture only.
Stiffness interaction occurs when fractures are close enough to be affected by the
stress field from adjacent fractures. The stiffness factor for each plane is defined as
(M-67)
where is the stiffness or elastic interaction factor and is the number of paral-
lel fractures in that plane that interact. If there is no interaction and the
stiffness factor is zero , and for the fractures fully interact and the
stiffness factor is, . A maximum stiffness factor, , can also be
specified such that .
The stiffness multiplier is defined as
(M-68)
The effective modulus in the direction is then defined as
u
l
u
l
0 =
c
1 = u
l
1 =
c
A A
DFN
=
c
min

c

c
min
>
V
l
t ( ) 2
c
v a t , ( ) a d t d
0
A
DFN
}
0
t
}
=
c
A A
DFN
=
u
l
0 >
c
A A
DFN
=
V
l
t ( ) 2 v a t , ( ) a d t d
0
A
}
0
t
}
=
E
,
N
,
1 ( )u
E
=
u
E
N
,
u
E
0 =
E
,
0 = u
l
1 =
E
,
N
,
1 =
E
max
E
,

E
max
s
+
,

E
,
1 + =
,
M.7 Proppant Distribution 929
(M-69)
Empirical Correlation
The stiffness interaction factor is also referred to as an elastic influence factor and
is dependent on the fracture spacing and fracture height. An empirical correlation
for the 3D influence factor, , is
(M-70)
where is the fracture height and is the distance between parallel fractures
and .
The average stiffness factor for parallel fractures is
(M-71)
M.7 Proppant Distribution
The distribution of proppant in a DFN is a very complicated and inherently difficult
problem to solve. The proppant may bridge- or screen-out in one fracture or a few
secondary fractures while the others continue propagating. The flow distribution
changes with time and the proppant concentration distribution depends on individ-
ual fracture fluid loss and secondary fracture extension. To handle this problem cor-
rectly a fully 3D DFN simulator that allows individual fractures in the network to
bridge- or screen-out and stop propagating while the others remaining propagating
with the redistributed slurry flux. Also if some fractures only take fluid and no
proppant, the proppant will concentrate up at a greater rate in the remaining frac-
tures that take proppant. The dominant fracture efficiency is used to determine
proppant transport and distribution. The flux is also slightly different in the primary
fracture depending on the proppant distribution option and will therefor give slight
deviations in the numerical solution.
To simplify the theory (and calculations) while preserving the limiting solutions, a
Proppant Style Distribution for Uniform, dominant, and User Specified proppant
allocation will be presented. The limiting solutions of a uniform distribution of
proppant in the fracture network and all the proppant remains in the main or domi-
E
,
+
,
E =
u
ij
u
ij
1 1 1
h
2d
ij
---------
\ .
| |
2
+
3 2
=
h d
ij
i
j
N
,
E
,
u
ij
N
,
j 1 =
N
,
i 1 =
N
,
=
nant fracture will be discussed first followed by the User Specified proppant alloca-
tion option.
(M-72)
This proppant distribution solution is a methodology for determining fluid loss and
proppant loss (distribution) from the primary or dominant fracture based on fluid
efficiency. That is even with no fluid leakoff the proppant can screen-out if the sec-
ondary fractures do not allow proppant transport. Again the full set of equations are
solved for the DFN and this solution technique provides a solution methodology for
proppant distribution and proppant concentrating in the primary and secondary
fractures.
The mass conservation equation from Eq. (M-60) and Eq. (M-61) is
(M-73)
where
(M-74)
The Uniform Proppant Distribution option assumes that the proppant can be trans-
ported uniformly (i.e., concentrating only due to fluid loss not flow dispersion in
the secondary fractures or bridging at DFN interfaces.) throughout the fracture net-
work. That is both proppant and fluid are transported into the fracture network from
the dominant fracture as a slurry.
The proppant distribution allocation for a uniform proppant distribution is
_
p
M
f
M
DFN
M
f
M
t
= =
M
f
M
t
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
V
l
t ( ) V
sp
t ( ) V
DFN
=
V
l
t ( ) 2 v a t , ( ) a d t d
0
A
DFN
}
0
t
}
=
V
sp
t ( ) 2 S
p
a ( ) a d
0
A
DFN
}
=
V
DFN
w ( )h ( ) d
0
L
DFN
}
=
(M-75)
where is the proppant mass in the primary fracture and is the total prop-
pant mass injected (or mass in DFN system). Thus the mass (and volume) of prop-
pant is assumed to be distributed based on network fracture volume.
This option also assumes that the DFN system efficiency ( ) is a representative
value that can be used throughout the fracture network for proppant transport and
proppant concentrating in the fracture network and dominant fracture. The uniform
proppant distribution efficiency is calculated from Eq. (M-62)
(M-76)
To examine the limits of this assumption consider two fractures initiated at the
same time with each having the same leakoff and spurt coefficients and fracture
leakoff area to fracture area ratios but with different apertures (widths). The effi-
ciency relationship for fractures and from Eq. (M-63) is
(M-77)
or
(M-78)
where the width and efficiency for fractures and are ( ) and ( ),
respectively. This equation illustrates that at high efficiencies the assumption of
equivalent efficiencies ( ) is a reasonable first-order approximation. How-
ever, for low DFN efficiencies a more rigorous model is needed. Also note that in a
DFN network not all fractures are created at the same time and thus the efficiency
correlation above is not applicable. This assumption works well as long as the sec-
ondary fractures do not screen-out before the primary fracture. If the secondary
fractures do screen-out they will create a smaller stimulated reservoir volume.
Dominant Fracture Proppant Distribution
The Dominant Fracture Proppant Distribution option assumes that all the proppant
remains in the primary fracture and no proppant enters the secondary DFN. Conse-
quently the secondary fractures act primarily as fluid loss conduits from the pri-
mary fracture.
_
p
M
f
M
DFN
V
f
V
DFN
~ =
M
f
M
DFN
q
DFN
q
DFN
V
DFN
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
=
a b
q
b
q
a
q
a
1 q
a
( ) w
a
w
b
+
----------------------------------------------------- =
q
b
q
a
1 1 q
a
( ) 1 w
a
w
b
( )
---------------------------------------------------------------- =
a b w
a
q
a
, w
b
q
b
,
q
a
1
The proppant distribution allocation for all the proppant in the primary or dominant
fracture is
(M-79)
The mass conservation equation from Eq. (M-60) and Eq. (M-61) in terms of the
primary fracture is
(M-80)
where
(M-81)
The above mass conservation equation can also be written as
(M-82)
where for the primary fracture we have
(M-83)
_
p
M
f
M
DFN
M
f
M
t
1 = = =
M
f
M
t
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
V
l
t ( ) V
sp
t ( ) V
DFN
V
f
( ) V
f
=
V
l
t ( ) 2 v a t , ( ) a d t d
0
A
DFN
}
0
t
}
=
V
sp
t ( ) 2 S
p
a ( ) a d
0
A
DFN
}
=
V
DFN
w ( )h ( ) d
0
L
DFN
}
=
V
f
t ( ) w ( )h ( ) d
0
L
}
=
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
q
s
t ( ) t d
0
t
}
( ) V
l
t ( ) V
sp
t ( ) V
f
=
V
l
t ( ) 2 v a t , ( ) a d t d
0
A
}
0
t
}
=
V
sp
t ( ) 2 S
p
a ( ) a d
0
A
}
=
V
f
t ( ) w ( )h ( ) d
0
L
}
=
and is the fluid loss rate to the secondary fractures (i.e., DFN less the primary or
dominant fracture). The fluid loss volume to the secondary fractures, , is given
by
(M-84)
where is the fluid loss and is the fracture volume of the secondary
fractures (i.e., DFN less the dominant fracture).
The dominantdominant fracture efficiency, , for all proppant remaining in the pri-
mary fracture is
(M-85)
The total effective fluid loss volume, , from the primary fracture is
(M-86)
User Specified Proppant Distribution
The User Specified Proppant Distribution option allows the user to specify the min-
imum proppant allocation, , that remains in the primary fracture with the
remaining proppant entering the secondary DFN. Consequently, the secondary frac-
tures will have a maximum fraction of ( ) of the total proppant. If the min-
imum proppant allocation specified is less than a uniform distribution by discrete
network fracture volumes, the minimum allocation will be set to the primary frac-
ture to DFN volume ratio. That is
(M-87)
q
s
V
ls
V
ls
q
s
t ( ) t d
0
t
}
=
AV
l
DFN
AV
DFN
+ =
AV
l
DFN
AV
DFN
q
q V
f
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
=
q
DFN
V
f
V
DFN
=
V
loss
V
loss
t ( ) 1 q t ( ) | | q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
=
_
p
min
1 _
p
min
_
p
min
V
f
V
DFN
>
_
p
M
f
M
DFN
M
f
M
t
= =
mass injected (or mass in DFN system). The mass in the secondary fractures, , is
(M-88)
The average slurry concentration in the primary fracture and secondary network
system is
(M-89)
and
(M-90)
Eq. (M-87) can be written as
(M-91)
We now define an effective proppant allocation volume as
(M-92)
where is the total volume injected.
The mass conservation equation from Eq. (M-60) and Eq. (M-61) in terms of the
effective proppant allocation DFN volume, , is
(M-93)
or
(M-94)
where
M
f
M
t
M
s
M
s
M
t
M
f
M
t
1 _
p
( ) = =
c
f
M
f
= V
f
_
p
M
t
V
f
=
c
s
M
s
= V
s
1 _
p
( )M
t
V
DFN
V
f
( ) =
_
p
c
f
V
f
cV
DFN
----------------
c
in
V
f
q ( )
c
in
V
DFN
q
DFN
( )
------------------------------------------
q
DFN
q
-------------
V
f
V
DFN
------------- = = =
V
pD
qV
t
V
f
_
p
= =
V
t
V
DFN
q
DFN
=
V
pD
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
V
l
t ( ) V
sp
t ( ) V
DFN
V
pD
( ) V
pD
=
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
V
l
t ( ) V
sp
t ( ) V
DFN
V
pD
( ) | | _
p
V
f
=
(M-95)
and is effective discrete DFN volume containing proppant. The effective dis-
crete DFN volume is then used to determine the fluid loss and proppant allocation
in the secondary fractures. The proppant distribution fraction of is then dis-
tributed through the secondary fractures.
The above mass conservation equation can also be written as
(M-96)
where for the primary fracture we have
(M-97)
and is an equivalent distributed fluid loss rate to the secondary fractures.
The dominant fracture efficiency, , for a fraction of proppant remaining in the
primary fracture is
(M-98)
V
l
t ( ) 2 v a t , ( ) a d t d
0
A
DFN
}
0
t
}
=
V
sp
t ( ) 2 S
p
a ( ) a d
0
A
DFN
}
=
V
DFN
w ( )h ( ) d
0
L
DFN
}
=
V
pD
V
f
_
p
=
V
pD
1 _
p
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
q
s
t ( ) t d
0
t
}
( ) V
l
t ( ) V
sp
t ( ) V
pD
=
V
l
t ( ) 2 v a t , ( ) a d t d
0
A
pD
}
0
t
}
=
V
sp
t ( ) 2 S
p
a ( ) a d
0
A
pD
}
=
V
pD
V
f
_
p
=
q
s
q _
p
q V
pD
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
=
q
DFN
V
pD
V
DFN
=
V
f
_
p
V
t
( ) =
where is the equivalent slurry volume injected into the primary fracture. The
effective discrete DFN volume containing proppant can also be approximated by
(M-99)
The effective distributed secondary injected volume is approximated by
(M-100)
The numerical results for the Eq. (M-100) and Eq. (M-93) solutions are very close.
Slight differences in the uniform and dominant fracture proppant solutions may
occur because of the different fracture network flow rate distribution as the bound-
ary condition.
M.8 Midfield Fracture Complexity
Meyer et al. (2010) introduced a new extended wellbore storage (EWS) and dissi-
pation function that accounts for the complex fracture behavior and pressure
decline in the extended or midfield region of the fracture. This dissipation function
is better defined as Midfield Fracture Complexity (MFC) as discussed below.
Weijers et al. (2002) discussed three regions within the fracture: the near-well, mid-
field and far-field, with complex, tortuous and simple fracture characteristics each
having unique pressure signatures. Muthukumarappan et al. (2007, 2009) states
that screen-outs during shale and coal hydraulic fracturing treatments can be attrib-
utabled to high pressure dependent leakoff (PDL), high process zone stress (PZ), or
both.
A midfield fracture complexity formulation is presented by Meyer et al. (2010) that
explains the complex fracture behavior, high fracture pressure (ISIPs) and pressure
fall-off as a result of fracture storage in the extended or midfield region of the frac-
ture. The governing equations are presented below.
It has been observed (e.g., Weijers et al. (2002), Weng (1993), and Jacot et al.
(2010)) that complex fracture behavior may occur when fracturing highly deviated
and horizontal wellbores. Complex fractures in the midfield region turn and twist,
then re-orientate in the direction perpendicular to the principal stress planes. This
creates a high fracture pressure that does not diminish instantly when the fracture is
shut-in. The fracture gradient during pumping can be much greater than the over-
burden stress gradient without creating horizontal fractures in the far-field.
_
p
V
t
V
pD
q
DFN
t ( ) q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
q
s
t ( ) t d
0
t
}
( ) ~
q
s
t ( ) t d
0
t
}
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
V
pD
q
DFN
=
q t ( ) t d
0
t
}
1 V
pD
V
DFN
( ) =
M.8 Midfield Fracture Complexity 937
Figure M.1 and Figure M.2 illustrate the conceptual complex fracture behavior in
the midfield and the far-field discrete fracture network (DFN) as shown by Weng
(1993) and Weijers et al. (2002). Figure M.2 shows a conceptual picture of mid-
field tortuosity. Weijers et al. states that Mid-field tortuosity is recognized by a
high apparent ISIP and rapidly declining pressures during the first few minutes of
shut-in. This is caused by a pressure choke beyond the near-wellbore area in the
fracture.
Figure M.1: Extended or midfield wellbore storage schematic (Weng (1993)).
Figure M.2: Conceptual picture of midfield tortuosity (Weijers et al. (2002)).
The governing equations of mass conservation, compliance, width-opening pres-
sure and constitutive relationships governing the complex fracture behavior in the
extended wellbore region and fracture closure as given by Meyer (2010) are pre-
sented by below. The Nolte G function analysis is based on the original work of
Nolte et al. (1979, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1991, 1993), Castillo (1987), and the method-
ology of Meyer and Hagel (1989).
Fluid Loss- During Pumping
The volume of fluid loss due to leakoff (excluding spurt loss) is
(M-101)
where is formulated from incomplete gamma functions as given by Meyer and
Hagel (1989). The total leakoff coefficient is the instantaneous time depen-
dent value. For a constant leakoff coefficient independent of time and pressure,
is equal to zero. The fracture area for the extended wellbore storage or midfield
AV
l
t ( ) 2 v A d t d
0
A
}
0
t
}
=
tC t ( ) A
DFN
A
MFC
+ ( ) tu o
a
o
c
, ( ) =
u
C t ( )
o
c
M.8 Midfield Fracture Complexity 939
fracture complexity contributing to fluid loss is given by , and the fracture
leakoff area of the discrete fracture network is given by .
Fluid Loss- After Pumping
The volume of fluid loss during closure is
(M-102)
The solution for time dependent fluid loss is presented in Appendix F.
Midfield or Extended Wellbore Storage Region
The mass conservation equation during shut-in for the midfield fracture complexity
or extended wellbore fracture system and DFN are presented below. During closure
it is assumed that fluid loss from the extended wellbore storage region is governed
by fluid loss from the MFC or EWS area ( ) and flow into the DFN system.
Mass conservation during shut-in requires that the fracture volume during shut-in
be equal to the fracture volume at the end of pumping minus the fluid loss after
pumping due to leakoff and fluid flow into the DFN
(M-103)
The fracture volume ratio in the EWS or MFC region is found by substituting Eq.
(M-102) into Eq. (M-103)
or
(M-104)
where is the fracture efficiency at the end of pumping excluding spurt loss.
A
MFC
A
DFN
AV
l
t ( ) 2 v A d t d
0
A
}
t
p
t
}
=
tC t
p
( ) A
DFN
A
MFC
+ ( ) t
p
G o
a
u , ( ) 2 =
V
l
t
p
( )G 2u ( ) =
A
MFC
V
MFC
t ( ) V
MFC
t
p
( ) AV =
l
t ( )
V
MFC
t ( ) V
MFC
t
p
( ) tC t
p
( ) A
DFN
A
MFC
+ ( ) t
p
uG o
a
u , ( ) 2 =
V
MFC
t ( )
V
MFC
t
p
( )
----------------------- 1
1 q
s
( )
2
c
q
s
-------------------
V
DFN
V
MFC
+
V
MFC
---------------------------------
)
`

G u ( ) =
q
s
Assuming the fracture compliance remains constant during closure, the resulting
net pressure ratio at any time during closure of the midfield fractures is
(M-105)
Placing Eq. (M-105) in terms of the ISIP we find
(M-106)
where
(M-107)
and .
The corresponding relationship for pressure dependent fluid loss and compliance as
presented by Meyer et. al. (2010) is
(M-108)
The complex fracture geometry and pressure behavior (decline) in the MFC or
EWS region can be a very complicated phenomenon to mathematically represent
for all cases (e.g., pressure dependent compliance, pressure dependent fluid loss
and dissipation of energy in the EWS region). To mathematically model this pres-
sure behavior, we propose a very general solution using a form of the Arps equa-
tion:
(M-109)
where
(M-110)
Ap
MFC
t ( )
Ap
MFC
t
p
( )
-------------------------- 1
1 q
s
( )
2
c
q
s
-------------------
V
DFN
V
MFC
+
V
MFC
---------------------------------
)
`

G u ( ) =
ISIP p t ( ) G u ( )
dP
dG
------- =
dP
dG
------- Ap
MFC
t
p
( )
1 q
s
( )
2
c
q
s
-------------------
V
DFN
t
p
( ) V
MFC
t
p
( ) +
V
MFC
t
p
( )
----------------------------------------------------
)
`

=
P ISIP p t ( ) =
dP
dG
------- p ( )
dP
dG
-------
p t ( ) p
,
p t
p
( ) p
,
-----------------------
)
`

o
cp
=
p t ( ) ISIP ISIP o
,
( )f t t o , , ( ) =
f t t o , , ( ) 1 1 o t t
p
( ) t + ( )
1 o
=
M.9 References 941
and is a power constant ( represents an exponential decline and
represents a harmonic decline). The constant is a pressure decline time constant
(i.e., ).
The pressure decline function based on G-function analysis is
for (M-111)
M.9 References
1. Perkins, T.K. and Kern, L.R.: Widths of Hydraulic Fractures, JPT, Sept.
1961.
21, 1986.
4. Meyer, B.R. and Hagel, M.W., Simulated Mini-frac Analysis, Petroleum
Society of CIM, Calgary June 1988.
5. Hagel, M. W. and Meyer, B. R.: Utilizing Mini-frac Data to Improve Design
6. Meyer, B.R. and Bazan, L.W.: A Discrete Fracture Network Model for
Hydraulically Induced Fractures: Theory, Parametric and Case Studies, SPE
140514, February 2010.
7. Weijers, L.G., Sugiyama, H., Shimamoto, T., Takada, S., Chong, J.M., and
Wright, C.A.: The First Successful Fracture Treatment Campaign Conducted
in Japan: Stimulation Challenges in a Deep, Naturally Fractured Volcanic
Rock, SPE 77678, Oct. 2002.
8. Muthukumarappan, R., Lyons, B., Hendrickson, R.B., Barree, R.D., and
Magill, D.P.: Effects of High-Pressure-Dependent Leakoff and High-Process-
Zone Stress in Coal Stimulation Treatments, SPE 107971, April 2007.
o o 0 = o 1 =
t
t
1
Ap
-------
dp
dt
------
\ .
| |
1
=
f
f u ( )
G
ISIP o
,
-----------------------
dP
dG
------- = G G
c
s
9. Muthukumarappan, R., Barree, R.D., Broacha, E., Barett, B., Longwell, J.D.,
Kundert, D.P, and Tamayo, C.: Effects of High-Process-Zone Stress in Shale
Stimulation Treatments, SPE 123581, April 2009.
10. Weng, X.: Fracture Initiation and Propagation from Deviated Wellbores,
SPE 26597, Oct. 1993.
11. Jacot, R.H., Bazan, L.W., and Meyer, B.R.: Technology Integration A
Methodology to Enhance Production and Maximize Economics in Horizontal
Marcellus Shale Wells, SPE 135262, September 2010.
12. Nolte, K.G.: Determination of Fracture Parameters from Fracture Pressure
Decline, SPE 8341 presented at the 54
th
Annual Technical Conference, Las
Vegas, Sept., 1979.
13. Nolte, K.G.: A General Analysis of Fracturing Pressure Decline with Applica-
tion to Three Models, (SPE 12941) JPT (Dec. 1986), 571-582.
14. Nolte, K.G.: Discussion of Influence of Geologic Discontinuities on Hydrau-
lic Fracture Propagation, (SPE 17011) JPT (Aug. 1987), 998.
SPEPE (Feb. 1988), 22-30.
16. Nolte, K.G.: Application of Fracture Design Based on Pressure Analysis,
SPEPE (Feb. 1988), 31-41.
17. Nolte, K.G.: Fracture Pressure Analysis for Non-Ideal Behavior, (SPE
20704) JPT (Feb. 1991), 210-218.
18. Nolte, K.G., Mack, M.G. and Lie, W.L.: A Systematic Method of Applying
Fracture Pressure Decline: Part I, SPE 25845 presented at the SPE Rocky
Mountain Regional/Low Permeability Symposium held in Denver, CO, April
12-14, 1993.
19. Castillo, J.L.: Modified Fracture Pressure Decline Analysis Including Pres-
sure-Dependent Leakoff, SPE 16417, May 1987.
Subject Index

A
Acid
convection 197
diffusion 197
diffusivity 154, 240
molecular weight 238
specific gravity 238
treatment schedule 152
Acid concentration 153
equilibrium 154
inlet 153
Acid data 197
closure stress 199
conductivity damage factor 198
in-situ temperature 200
minimum conductivity 199
non-reactive fines factor 201
rock embedment strength 199
rock specific gravity 200
Acid database 235, 236
activation energy 240, 241
diffusivity 240
dissolving power 238
heat of reaction 238
molecular weight 238
reaction order 239
reaction rate 239
reference code 237
reference temperature 240
Acid treatment schedule 152, 192
Acquire real-time data 268
Acquisition setup 270
add computers time 270
ignore first line of data 272
Acquisition toolbar 268
Activation energy 240
Active zone 123, 581
After closure analysis xlv, 779
examples 399
graphical method 801
horner time 799
impulse injection 798
summary and implementation 798
Agarwal
pseudopressure 901
Alpha coefficient 376
Alpha parameters 87
Analysis wizard 347
analysis type 349
regression options 349
report options 350
select analyses 347
wizard window 351
Analytical production simulator 413
Angle build rate 115
Annulus 111
Aperature (in-situ) 601
API gravity 435
Apparent closure time 792
Apparent conductivity 814
944 Index
Apparent conductivity parameter 814
Apparent domain radius 819
Apparent number of perfs 374
Apparent viscosity 96
Area 247, 431, 450
drainage 815
Arrhenius equation 239, 240
Aspect ratio 815, 818
ellipsoidal 504
reservoir 431, 450
thermal and water 538
Associate a column of data with a pa-
rameter 259
Authentication 276
Auto design 82, 84, 100, 135, 567
fracture length 137, 141
proppant concentration 141
proppant mass 137, 141
slurry volume 137, 141
Auto scale plots 70
Auto select zones 180
Automatically find points 385
Automatically find points menu 357
Average angle method 113
Average fracture conductivity 438
Average reservoir pressure 335
Axes 387
delta pressure 389
derivative/rate 389, 390
pressure 388
time 388
B
Balanced tangential method 114
Ballooning 103
Base calculations 404
Base case 421
Baud rate 272
Beep after each time step 70
Best fit 339
Beta correlation 244
Beta factor 244, 248
Beta integration constants 816
square reservoir 817
BHTP
maximum 144
maximum allowable 112
reference depths (3) 120
Biots constant 168, 332, 503, 520, 522
Biots energy balance equation 661
Bits per second 272
BOM 75
Bottom of fracture 124, 582
Bottomhole data 287
Bottomhole flowing pressure 423, 456,
457
Bottomhole pressure 304
maximum 144
Breakdown 309
Bridge-out 149
criteria 149
Bridging 149
Bridging criteria 194
Bubble point 881
Bubble point pressure 435
Build a plot 290
Building plots 289
name 290
Building plots in MView 289
Bulk modulus 186, 335, 529
Button conventions 11
Byte order mark 75
Index 945
C
Cake
build coefficient 552
erosion coefficient 553
erosion to build rate ratio 554
permeability 551
porosity 551
Cake properties 533
cake deposition 535
cake wall friction effects 535
deposition distribution 535
fluid loss reduction at tip 535
particulate deposition 535
Cake thickness
maximum 552
minimum 552
Calculate fracture perm damage factor
247
Carbonate specific gravity 200
Carters solution 740
Casing 111, 115
database 116
overlap 115
Casing database 116, 241
CBM 579
Characteristic fracture dimension 169,
330, 501
Check list 10
Choked fracture 839
skin 840
Choked skin 694
Circular reservoir 816
Clear real-time data 285
Closed reservior 844
Closed square system
dimensionless pressure solution 851
Closed system 420, 882
Closure
determining 305
finding using derivative method 307
lower bound 376
upper bound 361
Closure data 337
Closure equations 671
Closure pressure 199, 303, 338, 406
Closure pressure on proppant 194
Closure stress 199
Closure time 338, 384, 406
put TC at intersection 387
Cluster
spacing 442, 451
Cluster fractures 590
CO2 solubility 161
Coal bed methane 579
Coefficient 652
filtercake 189, 531
thermal expansion 520
wall building 189, 531
Coefficient of thermal expansion 521
Coiled tubing 117
Com port 272, 275
Communication
input or output 272
setup 271
Complex fractures
aperture ratio 597
aspect ratio 597
maximum extent 596
number 596
spacing 596
Composite plots 208
Compressibility 186, 529, 808
constant 890
946 Index
fluid 890
gas 433
total reservoir 432
Concentration 247
Concentration per unit area 142
Conclusions 649, 681
Conduction 196
Conductivity 438, 447
Conductivity damage factor 198
Configure real-time view 283, 284
Configuring
real-time data window 283
Conservation of momentum 662
Consistency index 333, 504
Constant critical stress 642
Constant finite conductivity fracture 830
Constant flowing pressure 877, 883
Constant fluid loss 183
Constant injection rate 791
Constant mass rate 882
Constant rate
dimensionless pressure solution 874
Constitutive relationship
ideal gas 893
Containment 166
Continuity 612
Continuity equation 860
Continuum theory 593
Convection 196, 197
Coordinates 815
Cortona VRML plug-in 211
Cost
fixed equipment 478
fluid 476
hydraulic power 477
miscellaneous 476, 479
proppant 477
share 480, 482
Cost share 480
Coupled fracture and proppant solutions
102
Crack initiation 168
Critical stress 98, 169, 170
Critical stress intensity 168, 330, 501
Cross-flow 93, 94
Crossover port 111
Crossover pressure loss coefficient 111
Cumulative production plots 463, 486
Currency
escalation rate 479
name 488
symbol 488
Currency escalation rate 480
Customer information 4
Customer support 10
D
Damage model database 547
Darcy friction factor 494
Darcys law 187, 434, 530, 861
Data acquisition system 257
Data bits 273
Data channels
maximum number 251
Data editing 263
Data preferences 266
filtering 266
identical lines 266
Data range in MinFrac 345
Data sets 256
importing replay data file 257
maximum number of lines 251, 260,
341
Index 947
preview plot 261
reference name 256
sample frequency 260, 341
setup 258
start and end rows 260
units 260
Data setup
dialog box 262
Data sources 173
Data viewing 280
digital 282
translated 281
Database
access 151
acid 235, 242
casing 241
coiled-tubing 241
installation 5
rock 171
tubing 241
Default growth 94
Degree of interaction 131, 132, 595, 596,
598, 600
flow rate 131, 595, 596, 598, 600
fluid loss 131, 595, 596, 598, 600
stiffness 131, 595, 596, 598, 600
Delimiters 258
Delta pressure 373, 388
Delta pseudo-skin function 821, 824
Delta time 311, 388
Dendritic 132, 603, 637
Depth
bottom of zone 184, 186, 526, 528
MD 165
scale 207
TVD 165, 184, 526
Derivative method 307, 311
Derivative min-max range 321
Derivative options 321, 390
Design mode 81, 566, 577
Desuperposition 697
Determining closure 305
Deterministic 593
Deviation 113
DFN
characteristics 921
dimensional well location 922
effective volume 934
ellipsoidal aspect ratio 925
fluid foss interaction 927
fracture height profile 924
fracture length and width distribu-
tion 924
fracture network 921
geometric characteristics 923
interaction 927
major fracture half-length 925
mass conservation 921
mass conservation equation 926
maximum stimulated fracture extent
922
number of discrete fractures 922
proppant distribution 929
ratios 925
specific characteristics 925
stiffness interaction 928
system efficiency 930
Diagnostic plots 205, 310
Diagnostic plots and derivatives 313,
801
Differential equations
radial flow 859
Diffusion 197
Diffusivity 154, 433, 440, 448
948 Index
Diffusivity equation 861
general solution 865
linearization 861
Diffusivity model 860
Diffusivity multiplier 154
Digital data view 282
Dilatancy 99, 326, 497, 611
Dimensionless
parameters 690
pressure 690
rate 690, 695
time 690
Dimensionless conductivity
non-darcy 907
Dimensionless domain conductivity 822
Dimensionless domain parameter 820,
822
Dimensionless effective wellbore radius
829, 854
Dimensionless flow rate 880, 899
Dimensionless fracture conductivity
129, 587, 826
Dimensionless fracture domain position
820
Dimensionless fracture flow capacity
129, 587
Dimensionless fracture flow rate 813
Dimensionless fracture half-length ratio
819
Dimensionless fracture position 807
Dimensionless inverse fracture diffusiv-
ity 440, 448
Dimensionless net pressure slope 674
Dimensionless parameters 808
dimensionless rate 808
pressure 808
productivity index 809
radial flow 867
time 808
Dimensionless position
fracture 820
Dimensionless pressure 809, 842
Dimensionless pressure ratio 885
Dimensionless pressure solution 741,
810
constant rate 874
early times 843
infinite acting vertical fracture 876
infinite conductivity 844
infinite-acting system 875
late time 843
uniform flux 842
Dimensionless productivity index xlv,
807, 809, 811, 814
circular reservoir 817
definition 869
modified 849
summary of equations 827
Dimensionless productivity solution 807
Dimensionless pseudopressure
Drake 880
time dependent 885
Dimensionless pseudopressure solution
constant flow rate 879
Dimensionless pseudo-skin
versus conductivity 833
Dimensionless pseudosteady solution
845
Dimensionless rate 808, 878, 891
Dimensionless rate & pressure solutions
873
closed system 882
infinite or infinitely acting system
Index 949
874
Dimensionless rate solution 743, 857,
877, 883
Dimensionless reservoir aspect ratio
431, 450
Dimensionless time 808, 842, 874
Dimensionless well location 431, 598,
600
Dimensionless wellbore storage factor
459
Dimensions
reservoir 815
Direct connection 267
Discharge coefficient 101, 126, 127,
584, 585
initial and final 128, 586
typical values 128, 585
Discontinuous theory 594
Discount well revenue 718
Discounted return on investment 719
Discrete 591
Discrete fracture
aperture ratios 599
aspect ratio 599
dimensionless well location 600
maximum extent 598, 600
spacing 598, 600
Discrete fracture network
deterministic 599
introduction 911
major assumptions 911
momentum equations 919
time dependent cross-sectional area
921
user specified 597
Discrete fracture network methodology
xlv
Discrete fractures
aperture (in-situ) 601
interaction 601
number 922
stress difference 600
Discretization methodology 86, 569
Discussion 640
Dissolving power 238
Domain
apparent radius 819
conductivity 822
dimensionless parameter 820
dimensionless position 820
fracture 818, 819
radius 819
resistivity xlv, 807
Drag
lines 387
points 387
Drag reduction 85, 568
Drainage
area 815
radius 815
Drainage area 431, 432, 450, 524
Duhamels theorem 780
E
Economic data 475
Edit line slopes 387
Edit selections 387
Editing imported data 342
Effective conductivity 907
Effective dimensionless wellbore radius
versus conductivity 832
Effective modulus 602, 928
Effective wellbore radius 809, 810, 811,
950 Index
829, 852
infinite conductivity fracture 820
uniform flux 829
Efficiency 303
Elastic interaction 602, 928
Ellipsoidal aspect ratio 89, 124, 333,
504, 582
Elliptical slot flow 914
Empirical option 657
Encryption 276
EOS 161
Equation of state 161
Equivalent drainage radius 815
Equivalent reservoir
permeability 434
porosity 336
viscosity 336
Equivalent reservoir permeability 434
Equivalent reservoir porosity 435
Equivalent reservoir viscosity 435
Error checking 20, 70, 462
disable 70
entering data 20
file version 23
min./max. 70
run-time 21
Escalation rate 480
Eulers constant 875
Excess pressure 98, 325
Exodus reservoir simulator 439
export data to 79
Export to Exodus 79
Exporting data 264
Extend range to end of data in MinFrac
346
Extended wellbore storage 935
External cake filtration equations 769
External skin 748, 858
F
Far field 638
File
new 14
opening 12
save 14
save as 14
version 23
File management 12
File name extensions 6
application summary 7
general 6
Filter cake
build rate 773
coefficient 532, 771
erosion rate 774
resistance 552, 772
thickness 771
maximum 552
minimum 552
Filter cake coefficient 189, 337
Filtering real-time data 266
Filtrate viscosity 188, 531
Filtration law
conventional 514
Finite conductivity skin 821
Finite conductivity vertical fracture 807,
818
Fixed equipment cost 478
Flow area 813
Flow behavior index 333, 504
Flow control 273
Flow rate 891
dimensionless 813
Index 951
Flow resistance at fracture tip 98
Flowback 93, 158, 306, 307
Flowback rate 306, 334
Flowback time 334
Fluid and proppant unit cost table 485
Fluid code 220
Fluid database 218
Fluid filtrate viscosity 336
Fluid gradient 94
Fluid loss xliv, 81
conventional 511
data 182, 524
layers 182, 524
ellipsoidal 81, 514, 515
fluid dependent 83, 557
fluid type dependent 191, 557
history 83
interaction 132, 603
linear 81
models 83, 561
multiplier 533
pressure dependent 190, 533
time dependent 189, 532
volume 184, 527
Fluid loss during pumping 666
Fluid loss interaction 132, 603
Fluid loss models 183, 516, 525
constant 515
dynamic 515
harmonic 515
Fluid loss multiplier 927
Fluid name 220
Fluid temperature 88, 516, 570
Fluid type 140, 150, 422, 423, 475
gas 422
oil & water 422
Fluid type dependent fluid loss 83, 191,
514
Fluid type for MNpv 471, 472
Fluid unit cost 476
Flush fluid type 146, 519
Foam 84, 567
Foam quality 160
Foam treatment schedule 159
Forchheimer 244
Forchheimer equation 903
Formation
compressibility 808
porosity 808
resistivity 814
shape factor 808
volume factor 879
Formation data 430, 436
Formation volume factor 459
Frac fluid leakoff viscosity 336
Frac fluid unit cost 476
Frac-pack 103
Frac-pack screen 111
Fraction of PAD 380
Fraction of well filled 145
Fracture
spacing 595
Fracture azimuth 431, 450
Fracture characteristic plots 486
Fracture closure 309
Fracture closure pressure 303
Fracture conductivity 438, 447
infinite 841
piece-wise continuous 821
zero conductivity 130, 588
Fracture data source 428
Fracture design optimization 418
Fracture diffusivity 440, 448
Fracture dimension 820
952 Index
Fracture domain 818, 819
rectangular reservoir 821
Fracture efficiency 303, 310, 380
dominant 935
dominant fracture 927, 929
Fracture flow rate 813
Fracture fluid gradient 94, 171
Fracture friction model 95, 96, 322, 494
Fracture geometry models 89
2-D 304
3-dimensional 92, 124, 582
GDK 90, 124, 582
horizontal ellipsoidal 89, 90, 124,
582
PKN 91, 124, 582
vertical ellipsoidal 89, 124, 582
Fracture height 333, 504
Fracture initiation interval 95
min. stress interval 95
perforated interval 95
Fracture interaction 132, 602
fluid loss 603
options 602
stiffness 602
Fracture interaction factors 131, 595,
596, 598, 600
Fracture length
input 135
propped 437
Fracture length (input) 137
Fracture net pressure 380
Fracture network
characteristics 594
continuum theory 593
discontinuous theory 594
numerical solution 593, 594
Fracture network extent 593
finite 593
infinite 593
Fracture network options 588
Fracture Options 589
Fracture permeability 247
Fracture propagation criteria 613
Fracture propagation solution 664
Fracture proppant effects 107
Fracture resistivity 813
average 813
Fracture skin 691, 748, 811, 857
external 858
input 532
internal 858
Fracture skin factor 439
Fracture solution
homogeneous reservoirs 824
slot flow 825
Fracture toughness 98, 168, 169, 325,
330, 496, 501
Fracture width 247
Fractured system model 812
resistivity 812
Fractures
cluster 595
complex 595
dendritic 132, 603
multiple 595
multiple parallel 132, 603
number 595
Friction factor a and b coefficients 323
Friction factor model 657
Friction factor multiplier 96, 323, 495
empirical correlation 496
Friction factors
Darcy 95, 96, 322, 494
Index 953
Fanning 85, 568
Friction loss multiplier 117, 151
Friction tables 225
Frictional dissipation 96
Fronts
thermal 522
thermal and water (plot) 539
water 522
Future worth 479
G
Gas
constitutive relationship 892
Gas compressibility 433
Gas pseudopressure 861
Gas PVT data 451
Gas PVT table 423, 451
Gas specific gravity 435
Gas viscosity 451
Gas-oil 881
Gauge pressure 304
General dimensionless rate solution 746
General equations 717
General flow solution 828
General productivity solution
N uniform fracture conductivity
zones 835
General solution
diffusivity equation 865
Geometric parameter 822
high conductivity fracture 823
low conductivity fracture 823
Geometric shape parameter 822
Getting started 1
Governing equations 611, 629, 638, 662
production simulator 690
Governing fluid loss equations 739
Graphical edit
shift menu 297
Graphical edit menu 294
add shift 295
linear interpolation 295
range 294
remove points 296
set to average 295
set to value 294
show derivative 297
show statistics 297
smooth 296
standard deviation 296
Graphical edit screen 292
Graphical point menu 297
remove point 297
set values 297
Graphical technique 318
Graphical technique options 319
Graphical treatment schedule 155
restart time 156
Graphically editing data 291
active curve 292
drag single point 293
drag y-point 293
menu 294
select range 292
single point 293
zoom 293
Graphically editing zones 181
Gringartens solution 841, 877
anomalies 845
infinite conductivity 807
infinite conductivity-long time 843
pseudosteady state 845
954 Index
singularities 845
Growth
default 94
H
Hardware security key 9
Harmonic fluid loss 304
Heat of reaction 238
Heat transfer
bottomhole 196
coefficients 197
conduction 196
convection 196
fracture 197
inlet temperature 196
internal database 197
mean formation temperature 197
model 196
option 88
surface 196
wellbore 196
Height
fracture 504
gross fracture 124, 582
leakoff 332, 503
pay zone 432, 437
wellbore 507
Help 19
accessing 19
menu 19
History match 339, 394, 417
estimate parameters 418
History match calculations 406
History match data 339
Horizontal wells 111
Horner analysis 309, 376
Horner plot 379
select points 378
select ranges 377
Horner plot 309
Horner time 376
Hydraulic diameter 223
annulus 224
circular pipe 224
Hydraulic fracturing
optimization 469
theory xliv
Hydraulic fracturing theory 611
Hydraulic perforation diameter 128, 585
Hydraulic power unit cost 477
Hydrocarbon saturation 530
Hyphenating 258
I
Ideal gas 893
Ignore first line of data 272
Import data 340
Import data from MFrac output file 446
Import FOD button 136
Import log 172
data sources 173
import properties 175
parameters 172
zones 176, 179
Import MFrac NPV data to MProd 449
Import MFrac proppant data to MProd
446
Import properties 175
Import RT button 133, 576, 606
Import stress log 172
Imported stress log
import 181
Index 955
Importing a replay data file 257
Importing an MFrac file 261
Importing data 258
Importing data into MinFrac 318
Importing real-time data 257
Impulse injection 781
Infinite conductivity 852
Infinite conductivity fracture solution
square vs. rectangular reservoirs 850
Infinite conductivity solution 807, 843
Infinite fracture conductivity 841
effective wellbore radius 852
vertical fracture in a rectangular
closed reservoir 844
vertical fracture in an infinite system
842
Infinite reservoir 420
Infinite system
infinite fracture conductivity 842
Infinite vertical conductivity fractures
807
Infinite-acting time period 794
Infinite-conductivity fracture solution
843
Influence factor
empirical 602, 928
stiffness 602, 928
Initial reservoir pressure 432
Initial stress 521
Initiation interval 95
Injected fluid 523
Injection down 111
annulus 111
both 111
casing 111
tubing 111
Injection pressure 304
Injection rate 338, 504
Inlet temperature 196
Inperpolate generated data 179
Input
fracture length 493, 505
volume 493, 505
Input parameter menu 137
Input treatment schedule 146
Insert from database 164, 171, 561
In-situ acid temperature 200
In-situ fluid 197, 523
In-situ stresses 166
Installation 2
directories 6
Installing the Meyer Software 2
Instantaneous shut-in pressure (ISIP)
303, 406
Interaction 601
fluid loss 603
stiffness 603
Interaction factors 131, 595, 596, 598,
600, 638
flow rate 638
fluid loss 639
momentum conservation 639
stiffness 639
width-opening pressure 640
Interest rate 480
Interference 706
Internal and external filter cakes 757
Internal cake build and erosion 765
Internal cake permeability 762
Internal cake skin 764
Internal damage
permeability model 549
saturation model 548
Internal filtration equations 758
956 Index
Internal PVT table 423, 451
Internal skin 750, 858
International options 23
International text encoding 74, 277
Interpolate stress gradient 170
Inverse diffusivity 440
Inverse dimensionless effective well-
bore radius 829, 852
Inverse dimensionless productivity
solution 865
Inverse dimensionless productivity in-
dex
summary 827
Inverse fracture diffusivity 440, 448
Inverse fracture productivity index
slot flow 825
Inverse resistivity 818
IPv6 277
Irreducible water saturation 525, 531
Iterations 86, 569
K
Koning 81
L
Lamda factor 864
ideal gas 893
infinite acting system, 874
slightly compressible fluid 891
time averaged 874
Lamda parameter 873
Laminar flow 95, 645, 913
Newtonian fluid 913
power-law fluid 914
Language for non-Unicode programs 73
Laplacian operator 691
Larsons method of images 856
LAS data 164
Layer temperature 520, 522
Leakoff 651
area 184, 189, 334, 407, 527
coefficient
total 303
coefficients 183, 525
height 332, 503
pressure 186, 187, 528, 529
velocity 184, 526
viscosity 336
Leakoff area 505
Leakoff coefficient
constant 183, 525, 561
total 184, 504, 526
Leakoff models 83, 182, 514, 516, 524,
561
constant 183, 525, 561
dynamic 185, 527, 562
harmonic 185, 562
Leakoff viscosity 336
Least principal stress 303
Lee and Brockenbrough 689
Legend 57
font 58
show 57
tilde 57
turn off 57
Line
style 54, 57
turn off 54, 57
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics
(LEFM) 168
Linear fluid loss 740
Linear solution 743, 785
constant pressure boundary condi-
Index 957
tion 786
constant velocity boundary condi-
tion 785
summary 793
time dependent velocity boundary
condition 788
Linear-elastic deformation 166, 329
Lithology symbols 163, 164
Load parameters 255
Log file importing 172
Long file names 8
M
MACQ 268
Magnetic windows 68
Manage points 409
Marker
style 54, 57
turn off 54, 57
Mass accumulation 629
Mass conservation 612, 629, 632, 665,
860
after pumping 612
after shut-in 668
DFN 926
during pumping 612
Mass flow rate
gas-oil two phase flow 881
Mass transfer coefficient 240
Maximize well profitability 469
Maximum power 448
Maximum proppant concentration 505
Maximum time step 87
McGuire and Sikora curves 419
MD at bottom of zone 165
Mean formation temperature 197
Measured data 417
Measured depth (MD) 115, 165
Merging data sets 265
range 265
time step 265
time step value 265
Method of images 698, 856
fracture 700
no fracture 700
Methodology 722
design criteria 723
procedures 723
Meyer CD 3
Meyer Data Acquisition 268
Meyer software xxxviii
MFast
basic steps 491, 492
calculations 506
data 499
data menu 492
generating reports 508
introduction 491
menu bar 492
options screen 493
overview 491
plot 507
simulation results 506
MFast description xl
MFrac
basic steps 77, 172
data input 108
databases 218
description xxxviii
fracture options 88
general options 80
menu bar 78
options 79
958 Index
plot categories 204
plots 203
proppant options 99
references 248
reports 215
run/performing calculations 201
stop menu 202
MFrac NPV file 428
MFrac plots 203
acid transport 206
diagnostic 205
fracture characteristics 204
heat transfer 206
leakoff/rheology 204
multilayer 207
net present value 206
proppant transport 206
treatment 206
treatment schedule 206
viewing 203
wellbore hydraulics 204
MFrac reports
discussion 217
full report 215
selected sections 216
summary report 215
MFrac-Lite 555
data input 559
description xl
feature comparisons 555
fluid loss data 561
fracture options 557
general options 556
perforation erosion 560
proppant options 558
rock properties 561
zones 559
Micro-frac test 305
Mid-field fracture complexity 607
Midfield fracture complexity 935
Min/Max range bar 356, 385
MinFrac
analysis 343
analysis menu 343
analysis wizard 347
axes 387
delta pressure 389
derivative/rate 389
pressure 388
time 388
base data 328
basic concepts 302, 308
basic steps 300
closure data 337
data input 327
description xxxix
editing imported data 342
general options 318
generating reports 408
graphical technique 318, 343
Horner analysis 376
import data 340
introduction 299
leakoff data 334
methodology 301
options 316
output 403
overview 300
regression analysis 380
select ranges 344
simulated calculations 404
step down analysis 368
step rate analysis 361
Index 959
user specified closure 318
wizard window 351
MinFrac time functions 311, 388
data time 311, 388
delta time 311, 388
Nolte G time 311, 388
Nolte time 311, 388
root delta time 311, 388
root Nolte time 311, 388
root theta time 311, 388
time 311, 388
Minifrac methodology xlv
Minimum concentration per unit area
194
Minimum conductivity for etched width
199
Minimum critical stress 169
Minimum curvature method 114
Minimum horizontal stress 166, 303
Minimum stress interval 95
Miscellaneous cost 476, 479
MKey 11
MNpv
basic steps 470
data Input 474
description xl
economic data 475
fluid type 471, 472
introduction 469
MProd output file selection 473
options 470
overview 469
plots 486
report 487
run 485
share % table 482
unit revenue 480
units 488
variable unit costs 484
Mobility 188, 434, 530
Mobility ratio 859
Modem
auto answer 275
dial 279
initialization 280
re-dial 275
send all data 275
Modem connection 273, 279
Modem initialization string 275
Modem problems 280
Modify 4
Modifying stages graphically 158
Molecular weight 902
Momentum conservation 613, 630
Momentum equation 912
Momentum equations 631
MProd
basic steps 414
data description 429
data input 428
database 465
description xxxix
formation data 430, 436
gas PVT data 451
general options 417
introduction 413
NPV 427
NPV fracture data source 445
NPV option 428
options 415
overview 413, 414
pay zone height 432, 437
plot categories 463
960 Index
plots 462
production data 455
references 468
reports 464
reservoir models 421
solutions 421
user specified NPV fracture data 449
viewing pots 463
well data 457
MProd output file selection for NPV 473
MPwri
basic steps 512
data input 518
description xl
general options 514
introduction 511
menu 512
options 513
treatment schedule 519, 536
MShale 579
basic steps 580
description xli
Multi-Axes plots 209
Multi-Case 428
Multilayer fracturing xliv, 93, 122, 580
Multilayer plots 207
depth scale 207
legends 207
Multilayer zones 122, 580
Multi-phase system 435
Multiple fractures xliv, 130, 589, 703
degree of interaction 132
fluid loss interaction 132, 603
interaction 131, 132, 595, 596, 598,
600
number 132, 595, 596, 598, 600
stiffness interaction 132, 603
Multiple parallel fractures 132, 603
Multiple transverse fractures 442, 451,
700, 704
Multiply fractures 701
MView
basic steps 253
building plots 289
concentration 82, 566
data 256
data preferences 266
data sets 256
graphical edit screen 292
graphically editing data 291
introduction 251
menu bar 253
overview 251
parameters 253
plot name 290
plots 288
preferences 266
real-time data collection 267
status bar 286
test mode 267
viewing plots 290
MView concentration to MFrac 154
MView description xxxix
MWell
basic steps 563
data input 573
description xli
general options 566
menu bar 564
options 565
proppant options 570
Index 961
zones 573
N
Near wellbore 644
dissipation function 647
governing equations 645
losses 368
momentum conservation 645
pressure loss 98, 132, 375, 646
pressure loss table 133, 575, 606
pressure table 133, 575, 606
width-opening pressure 646
Net cumulative production plots 463,
486
Net flow rate 484
Net fracture resistivity 818
Net fracturing pressure 338
Net pay zone thickness 332, 432, 437,
503
Net present value (NPV)
MFrac option 82
MProd data source 428
MProd option 428
Net present value solution 488
Net present value theory xlv
Net pressure 303, 310, 641
excess 98
GDK 90
PKN 91
Net pressure ratio 642
constant critical stress 643
toughness dominated 643
viscous dominated 643
Network administrator 9
Nolte after closure time 800
Nolte G time 311, 388
Nolte time 311, 388
Nomenclature 623, 634, 683, 709, 776
Non-Darcy 904
Non-Darcy database 233, 465
Non-Darcy effects 424
Non-linear elastic effects 326
Nonlinear regression analysis 385
Non-uniform fracture conductivity 834
NPV fracture characteristic dialog box
446
NPV fracture data source 445
Number of major vertical fractures 595
Numerical simulation 726
Numerical solution 631, 679, 894
general 899
Nusselt number 240
O
Oil API gravity 435
Oil displacement factor 526, 530
Optimization 418
Optimum
fracture performance 420
Over flush 838
Over-pressure 325, 496
Over-pressure factor 98, 325, 497
P
PAD fraction 310
PAD volume 310
Parameter list 253, 254
load units 255
name 255
output unit 255
save units 255
specifying 254
962 Index
templates 255
unit type 255
Parameters 172, 253
load units 255
maximum number 251
save units 255
template 255
Parameters Save 255
Parametric relationships 615
Parity 273, 275
Particulate transport plots 542
Partner share option 473, 480
Partner share treatment cost & NPV
plots 486
Partnerships 482
Paused mode 268
Pay zone 129, 586
depth 130, 588
interval 129, 586
permeability 129, 587
Pay zone height 432, 437
Pay zone thickness 332, 503
Penetration ratio 819
Peng-Robinson 161
Percent propped 507
Perforated interval 95, 122, 124, 559,
573, 574, 580, 582
Perforation erosion 101, 124, 133, 575,
582, 606
critical proppant mass 127, 584, 585
discharge coefficient 127, 584, 585
hydraulic diameter 128, 585
pressure loss ratio 128, 585
rate 127, 128, 585
Perforations 126, 575, 584
apparent number 374
diameter 126, 127, 575, 584, 585
erosion 125, 126, 583, 584
number 126, 575, 584
tab 125, 575, 583
Permeability 187, 530
equivalent 434
reservoir 434
Permeability and reservoir pressure 312,
801
Permeability ratio 460
Phone book 278
Pinched fracture 835
Pipe roughness 658
Plot
slope lines 59
Plot configuration 51
area colors 61
aspect ratio 55
axes 56
chart type 62
color filled 60
contours 60
curve attributes 42, 54
font size 55
general colors 53
grid 59
labels 52
layout 44, 45
left & right axes 46
legend 57
legend font 58
line style 54
line width 54
marker style 54
markers 53
plain contour 60
scale 55
shaded 60
Index 963
use defaults 53
Plot menu 38
add text block 49
colors 41
configuration 49
curve attributes 42
default attributes 40
font size 43
fonts 43
general colors 41
layout 44
left & right axes 46
mouse coordinates 45
organize templates 66
recall templates 66
save templates 64
templates 64
zoom 100% 36, 51
zoom out 36, 51
Plot templates 70
Plots 33
3D plug-in 210
arranging 34
auto scale (run time) 70
close all 35
closing 34
composite 208
configuring 51
copying to clipboard 39
diagnostic 205
exporting 39
footer 38
menu 38
moving 34
multi-axes 209
multilayer 203, 207
printer setup 37
printing 37
save as a metafile 40
save file as type 40
three-dimensional 210
virtual reality 213
VRML 211
windows menu 33
zooming 36
Plug-in 211
Poissons ratio 166, 168, 331, 332, 502,
503
Pore pressure 186, 528, 529
Poro-elastic input parameters 521
Poroelastic stresses 520, 738
Poroelasticity 98
Porosity 188, 526, 530, 531, 808
equivalent 435
mobile 531
reservoir 435
total 530
Power law model 333, 504
Prandtls universal law 119, 323, 494,
658
Prandtl-Karman law 96, 658
Present worth 479
Pressure
bubble point 435
closure 303
excess 98, 325
gauge 304
injection 304
net 90, 98, 303
pore 186, 528
propagation 361
reservoir 432
Pressure decline 311, 677
Pressure dependent fluid loss 190, 533
964 Index
Pressure during injection 304
Preview plot 261
Primary fracture
proppant mass 605, 931
Printer
selecting 15
setup 16, 37
Produced water reinjection theory xlv
Production boundary condition 423
Production data 455
Production data dialog table 455
Production model theory xlv
Production rate 423, 455, 457
Production specified option 456, 457
Productivity increase 696
constant pressure 697
Productivity index 691, 809
definition 869
Productivity solution
infinite conductivity fracture 843
Program basics 11
Program check list 10
Program descriptions xxxviii
Program maintenance 4
modify 4
remove 4
repair 4
Propagation parameters 94
Propagation pressure 361
Property generation 176
Proppant
bridging criteria 194
concentration/area 247
conductivity damage 198
damage factor 247, 453
mass 449
porosity 230, 245, 426, 453
profile power law coefficient 143
Proppant allocation
user specified 929
Proppant bridging 193
Proppant calculator 243, 468
average diameter 245
porosity 245
Proppant code 227
Proppant concentration 150
final 142
incremental 141
initial 141
input 154
maximum 142
maximum inlet 103
MView to MFrac 154
Proppant criteria 192
closure pressure on proppant 194
minimum concentration per area 194
proppant layers to prevent bridging
193
Proppant damage factor 150
Proppant database 150, 194, 226
average diameter 228
closure pressure selection 230
code 227, 234, 466
conductivity 229
description 227, 234, 466
embedment concentration 230
plots 230
porosity 230, 426, 453
specific gravity 227, 453
width 229
Index 965
Proppant Distribution 929
Proppant distribution 604
allocation 604, 605, 929, 933
dominant fracture 605, 931
minimum allocation 605, 933
uniform 604, 930
user specified 605, 933
Proppant effects
fracture 107
wellbore 106, 571
Proppant flowback 101
Proppant mass 137, 141
input 135
primary fracture 605, 930
Proppant mass (input) 137
Proppant options 99, 558
Proppant ramp 141, 147
linear 144
non-linear 144
Proppant ramp option 101, 571
Proppant settling options 103
cluster settling 105
convective transport 104
empirical 104
user specified 106, 151
Proppant settling rate 147, 151
Proppant solution (on/off) 100
Proppant Style Distribution 929
Proppant transport methodology 84,
101, 135, 567
conventional 102
conventional (link) 102, 103
frac-pack 103
tip screen-out (TSO) 102
Proppant type 140, 150, 498
Proppant unit cost 477
table 485
Propped fracture
fraction 326
minimum concentration per area 194
percent 507
Propped fracture width 247
Propped length 437, 447
Pseudopressure 691, 901
gas 870
general relationships 902
ideal gas 893
relationships 869
undersaturated oil 870
Pseudopressure function
constant viscosity & slightly com-
pressible 890
gas-oil 871
rule of thumb 901
Pseudo-radial flow 309
Pseudo-radial solution 694
Pseudo-skin 811
Pseudo-skin function 811, 821, 827
delta 821, 824
Pseudo-skin parameter 877
constant fracture conductivity 877
Pseudo-skin relationships 811
Pseudosteady behavior xlv, 807
Pseudosteady cases 830
choked fracture 839
constant finite conductivity fracture
830
non-uniform fracture conductivity
834
over flush 838
pinched fracture 835
tail-in 837
Pseudosteady equations 809
dimensionless pressure 809
966 Index
effective wellbore radius 810
pseudo-skin relationships 811
Pseudosteady flow rate 812
Pseudosteady fracture solutions 824
homogeneous reservoirs 824
slot flow 825
Pseudosteady fractured system model
812
finite conductivity vertical fracture
818
fracture resistivity 813
inverse dimensionless productivity
index 814
reservoir resistivity 813
resistivity 812
Pseudosteady inverse productivity solu-
tion
circular reservoir 816
Pseudosteady model 812
Pseudosteady productivity solution
Pseudosteady solution xlv, 807
constant lamda 894
Pseudosteady state analysis 807
Pseudosteady state analysis of finite
conductivity vertical fractures xlv
Pseudosteady-state
pressure solution 693
resitivity solution 693
Pseudo-time 863
Pump rate 141
Pump time 338
Pump-in/decline test 305
Pump-in/flowback test 306
PVT table 423
Q
Quality
both external 160
external phase 160
internal 160
internal phase 160
Mitchell 160
R
Radial diffusivity equation
derivation 860
linearization 861
Radial flow
differential equations 859
dimensionless parameters 867
pseudo-pressure functions 866
pseudopressure relationships and
limits 869
pseudo-time functions 866
Radial solution 794
Horner time 795
Noltes after-closure function 797
Radius of curvature method 114
Ramp
linear 144
non-linear 144
Range
edit selections 345
extend to end of data 345
Raw data 280
Raw data viewing 280
Reaction order 239
Reaction rate 239
Readme file 3
Real gas
constitutive relationship 892
Index 967
pseudopressure 870
Real gas equation 870
Real gas potential and related equations
901
Real gas pseudopressure 861
Real-time 82, 256, 566
template file 278
test mode 278
Real-time data
clear 285
lines filtered 286
lines received 286
lines translated 286
recover 285
Real-time data window 280
configuring 283
show 280
Real-time status bar 286
Real-time/replay treatment schedule 154
Recirculation volume 146, 519
Recover real-time data 285
Rectangular reservoir
dimensionless productivity index
821
Rectangular reservoir coordinates 815
Reel friction loss 117
Reference code 234, 466
Reference depth
BHTP 120
volume 112
Reference temperature 240
References 625, 635, 660, 686, 711, 732,
776, 804, 908
DFN 940
Refresh button 263
Regression analysis 310, 380
deterministic information 310
examples 390
history match 394
main menu bar 383, 384
purpose 380, 397
select points 382, 383, 384
select ranges 381
Regression analysis window 339
Regression technique 310
Relative pipe roughness 86, 117, 568
Remote data acquisition 268
Remove 4
Repair 4
Replay 81, 256, 566, 577
concentration 82, 566
Replay/real-time data from MView 319
Reports 71
adding a bitmap 72
configuring 71
exporting 72
HTML file 215
saving as a text file 72
saving as an HTML file 72
saving as an RTF file 72
viewing 71
Reservoir 420
aspect ratio 431, 450, 815
circular 816
compressibility 186, 335, 432, 529
coupling 514
dimensions 815
drainage area 431, 450
half-length 524
infinite 420
layers 93
minimum height 523
mobile porosity 531
permeability 187, 408, 434, 530
968 Index
pore pressure 186, 529
porosity 188, 336, 435, 526, 530
pressure 186, 335, 432, 891
resistivity 813
square 817
temperature 423, 436
viscosity 188, 336, 435, 531
Reservoir Coupling 81
Reservoir coupling
ellipsoidal 81
linear 81
Reservoir models 421
closed system
infinite reservoir 420
fractured well/closed system 421
no fracture 421
Reservoir pressure 528
Reservoir solutions
fractured - multi-case 421
Residual hydrocarbon saturation 530
Residual oil saturation 525
Resistivity 812
average fracture 813
formation 814
fracture 813
net fracture 818
reservoir 813, 814
system 818
total 818
Resistivity solution 693
Restart time 87, 156, 570
Restore default layout 30
Results and conclusions 731
Revenue as a function of time 481
Revenue escalation rate 472
Revenue share 480
Revenue/unit volume 472, 479, 481, 484
Reynolds number 95, 322, 494
Rheology data 221
Rheology model 333, 504
Rock database 171, 242
Rock embedment strength 199
Rock layers 93
Rock properties 163
Rock specific gravity 200
Rock symbols 164
Rock/acid system 153
Root delta time 311, 388
Root Nolte time 311, 388
Root theta' time 311, 388
Row selection 260
Run options 69
S
Saturated liquid volume ratio 161
Saturation 530
irreducible 531
residual 530
Saturations 435
Save data as a text file 264
Screen-out 102, 149
criteria 149, 150
Secondary fractures 594, 932
fluid loss 935
Section length 115
Security key 9
MKey 11
updating 11
Select information lines 391
Select points
automatically find points menu 357
Select points in MinFrac 356
Index 969
Select points menu 353
Select ranges 344
Select ranges in MinFrac 344
Select slope lines 387
Semi-log asymptotic 689
Sending data to MFrac & MinFrac from
MView 286
Sending MView concentration to MFrac
154
Sending surface or bottomhole data 287
Serial cable 267, 272
Serial connection 257
Serial link 272
Setup 4
Setup templates 263
Shape factor 808, 809, 854
analytical solution 856
Share
% table 482
net flow rate table 483
of cost 480, 482
of revenue 480
Sherwood number 240
Shift data 259
Show simulation data windows 68
Show units 57
Shut-in time 384
Simulate closure 202
Simulate to closure 93
Simulation data windows 67
show 68
Simulation setup 286
Single vertical fracture 700
Skin
calculate 527, 532
choked fracture 839
external 532
finite conductivity 821
input 527
internal 532
Skin factor
fracture 439
wellbore 459, 461, 462
Slightly compressible fluid 890
Slip 90
Slot flow 825
solution 841
Slurry rate 141, 148
Slurry volume 137, 141, 449, 505
input 135
Slurry volume (input) 137
Software installation 2
check list 10
Solubility
CO2 161
Solution
general 828
time dependent lamda 897
Solution methodology 614
Solution options 421
fractured - multi-case 421
fractured - single case 421
No fracture 421
Spacing along the minor axis 595
Specific gravity
fluid 220
gas 435
Sphericity 245, 246
Spreadsheets 23
action keys 23
column configuration 31
freezing panes 26
keyboard commands 23
movable columns 31
970 Index
options 27
active cell border style 28
alternate background color 28
display ellipsis for truncated
strings 28
frozen rows background color 28
move selection after enter 28
shift data 29
speed buttons 28, 514
y=mx+b 29
Spurt loss 184, 189, 333, 505, 654
coefficient 184, 189, 333, 505
volume 189, 333, 505
Spurt loss coefficient 189, 334, 505
Spurt loss volume 505
Square reservoir 817
Stage
friction multiplier 151
liquid volume 148
modifying 158
modifying graphically 158
slurry volume 148
spacing 442, 451
time 148
type 149
Stage recirculation 145, 148
Stage slurry volume 148
Staging profile 143
Standard conditions 161
Step down analysis 309, 368
diagnostic plot 374
power coefficient 375
pressure table 372
select points 370
select points plot 371
select ranges 369
Step down test 309
Step rate analysis 309, 361
diagnostic plot 367
pressure table 365
select points 363
select range 362
Step rate test 305, 309
Stiffness
characteristics 603
interaction 603
Stiffness factor
average 603, 928
maximum 602, 928
Stiffness interaction 132, 603, 928
empirical correlation 928
Stiffness multiplier 602, 928
Stimulated case 421
Stimulated reservoir volume 925
ratios 926
Stock tank flow rate 879
Stokes law 104
Stop bits 272
Stop menu 202
Storage 459
Storage factor 459
Stress 166
bottom of layer 170
initial 521
layer 170
minimum horizontal 168, 186, 332,
503, 528
tectonic 168, 332, 503
thermal-elastic 522
top of layer 170
vertical 168, 332, 503
Stress gradient 163, 166, 170
Stress intensity 168, 330, 501
Stress intensity factor 168, 330, 501
Index 971
Stress log 172, 182
Superposition 456, 780
Surface data 287
Surface line volume 112
Symbols and conventions xlvi
Synchronization 155
System & hardware requirements 1
System crash
recover real-time data 285
System database 218, 235
System units 17
T
Tail-in 837
Tangential method 114
Tansverse fracture unit cost 478
Target conductivity 143
Target dimensionless conductivity 142
Taylor series 632
TCP/IP 276
Technical support 10
Technical support documentation xliv
Tectonic stresses 168, 332, 503
Temperature
fluid 516
layer 520, 522
mean formation 197
reservoir 436
Templates 64
organize 66
recall 66
save 64
Tensile strength 168, 330, 501
Test mode 267, 278
Text encoding 74
Text files 258
The infinite-conductivity solution 742
The uniform fracture flux solution 742
Thermal & water fronts aspect ratio plot
538
Thermal and Water Front Equations 733
Thermal and water front equations 733
Thermal front 521, 522
Thermal stress
input parameters 521
option 515
Thermoelastic and poroelastic stresses
736
Thermoelastic stresses 736
Time dependent fluid loss 189, 190, 532,
533
Time dependent revenue 481
Time scales 311, 388
Time step 86, 87, 456, 570
maximum 87, 570
synchronization 155
Tip effects 97, 324, 496
Tip over-pressure 98, 99, 325, 496
Tip screen-out (TSO) 102
Tools menu 243
Top of fracture 124, 582
Tortuosity 96, 133, 494, 575, 606, 637
Total fracture height 333, 504
Total leakoff coefficient 184, 303, 504,
526, 652
Total leakoff height 332, 503
Total pay zone height 432, 437
Total proppant mass 449
Total reservoir compressibility 335, 432
Total system resistivity 818
Toughness 330
Toughness dominated 642
Transition volume loss per unit area 761
972 Index
Translated data viewing 281
Transmit data 267
Transverse fractures
multiple 442, 451, 704
Treatment cost 488
Treatment cost & NPV plots 486
Treatment design options 84, 567
Treatment schedule 134
acid 152
auto design 135
database access 151
fluid type 150
foam 159, 162
graphical 155
input 146
liquid volume 148
proppant concentration 150
proppant damage factor 150, 453
proppant database 150
proppant settling rate 151
proppant settling rate (input) 147
proppant type 150
real-time 154
slurry rate 148
slurry volume 148
stage time 148
stage type 149
variable column 147
variable column list box 520
Treatment type 84, 567
Trilinear solution 692
constant pressure 692
True vertical depth (TVD) 165, 334
TSO & frac-pack methodology xlv
TSO option 102
Tubing 111
Tubing database 116, 241
Turbulent flow 95, 646, 918
TVD at bottom of zone 165
U
Undersaturated oil 879, 890
pseudopressure 870
Unicode 73
byte order mark 75
known issues 75
text files 75
Uniform flux 826
fracture 828
fracture case 843
solution 807
vertical fracture 842
option 930
Uniform proppant distribution
option 604
Unit revenue 479, 480
as a function of time 481
escalation rate 480
Units 17
input 19
load 17
output 19
save 17
User database 218, 235
User specified closure 318, 319
User specified pumping data 320
Users guide
how to use xlvi
overview xxxvii
program descriptions xxxviii
whats in xlii
Index 973
UTF-16 75
UTF-8 75
V
Van der Waals 161
Variable column list box 147
Variable fracture conductivity 442
Variable injection rate 789
Variable percentage vs. rate 482
Vertical fracture
finite conductivity 818
single 700
Vertical wells 123, 574, 581
Viewing plots 290
Virk's maximum drag reduction asymp-
tote 658
Viscosity 188, 531
equivalent 435
reservoir 435
Viscous dominated 641
Volume
oil produced 891
Volume factor 879
Volume injected 505
VRML 211
plug-in 211
W
Wall building coefficient 189, 337, 532
Wall roughness 96, 323, 494, 495
Water front 522
Water/thermal front plots 536
Waterflood theory xlv
Web browser 211
Well data 457
Well location 431
Well orientation 420
Wellbore
BHTP reference depth 120
deviated 110, 573
deviation data 113
fluid friction multiplier 146
fluid type 146
fraction filled 145
proppant effects 571
tapered 110, 573
volume 146
volume reference depth 112
Wellbore deviation 113
Wellbore friction factor xliv
Wellbore heat transfer 196
Wellbore hydraulics
general tab 110
Wellbore hydraulics model 84, 109, 567,
573
casing data 115
empirical 85, 567
general data 110
none 85, 567
profile 121
restrictions data 119
tubing data 115
user database 86, 569
Wellbore hydraulics screen 110
Wellbore positioning within the drain-
age area 432
Wellbore power coefficient 375
Wellbore proppant effects 106
Wellbore radius 458
Wellbore skin factor 459, 461, 462
base 459, 461
prefrac 461
974 Index
reference 462
stimulated 459
Wellbore solution
synchronize 82, 87, 566, 570
Wellbore specific gravity 334
Wellbore storage 459
Wellbore storage factor 459
Wellbore survey method 113
Wellbore volume 112, 146, 519
Width
average at well 507
average in fracture 507
maximum at well 507
Width-opening pressure 663
Width-opening pressure elasticity condi-
tion 613
Windows fundamentals 11
Y
Youngs modulus 166, 329, 500
Z
Z-factor 451, 902
Zone data 124, 574, 582
Zones 122, 179, 559, 573, 580
active 123, 581
dialog screen 123, 560, 574, 581
name 123, 574, 581
Zooming 36
zoom 100% 36
zoom out 36

Meyer User&#39;s Guide

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Meyer User&#39;s Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Users Guide Ninth Edition

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

502 MFast: Analytical 2D Fracture Simulator

550 MPwri: Produced Water ReInjection - Fracturing Simulator

604 MShale: A Three Dimensional Discrete Fracture Network Simulator

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

620 Hydraulic Fracturing Theory:

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

682 Minifrac Methodology:

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

764 Produced Water Reinjection Fracturing:

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

840 Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical Fractures:

844 Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical Fractures:

852 Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical Fractures:

Meyer Users Guide Meyer & Associates, Inc.

854 Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical Fractures:

872 Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical Fractures:

908 Pseudosteady State Analysis of Finite Conductivity Vertical Fractures:

You might also like

Meyer User's Guide

Meyer User's Guide