International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 2979-2985
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
A New Correlating Parameter to Quantify Productivity of Extended
Hydraulic Fractured Wells
T. Marhaendrajana*
Associate Professor, Petroleum Engineering, Institute Technology Bandung (ITB)
Bandung dan Sekitarnya, Jawa Barat, Indonesia.
S. Parsaulian
Senior Reservoir Engineer, PT PERTAMINA EP, Indonesia.
Abstract
A modified model of extended height fractured well is
presented to account for a more realistic case that allows fluid
flow from fracture to the wellbore only through the reservoir
thickness interval (commonly perforated). One of the results,
this work proposes a new correlating parameter of effective
fracture conductivity for extended height fractured well. This
correlating parameter enable ones to determine pseudo-skin
factor which then can be used to compute well productivity.
Two other important results are presented, they are:
(i) Extending fracture height beyond the reservoir thickness
at constant fracture length increases fracture
conductivity until it reaches a maximum value at an
optimum fracture height.
(ii) The increase of fracture conductivity by extending
fracture height greater than reservoir thickness is also
true for the case of constant fracture volume provided
that fracture height is less than 1/0.727 times fracture
half-length (xf).
These are different perspectives from Bennett’s proposal
stating that at constant fracture length, increasing fracture
height always increases effective fracture conductivity, and at
constant fracture volume, extending fracture height beyond
reservoir thickness lower effective fracture conductivity.
Keywords: Well Productivity, Extended Fracture Height,
Hydraulic Fracture, Pseudo-skin Factor, Fracture
Conductivity.
Introduction
Hydraulic fracturing is a mean to improve flow connectivity
between well and reservoir by injecting pressurized fluid into
the reservoir to create cracks in the targeted reservoir. It is
then expected to increase well productivity [1], or to increase
effective wellbore radius [2, 3], or to lower pseudo-skin factor
[4, 5]. These productivity, effective wellbore radius and
pseudo-skin factor are related each other and they correlate
with fracture conductivity. The available published results
correlating fracture conductivity with either of those three
parameters are developed for case of fracture height equal to
reservoir thickness.
Fracture propagates both at lateral and vertical directions. Its
lateral and vertical dimensions are inter-dependent affected by
2979
contrast of stress profile in the formation, fracturing fluid
properties, and rock properties. It is then almost impossible to
maintain its size in one and change the other. Therefore, it is
not uncommon if fracture height extend beyond reservoir
thickness to achieve certain and desired fracture length.
Fracture grow perpendicular to the direction of least principal
stress, or in the direction of maximum stress. The deeper the
wells, it is more likely that principal fracture orientation is
expected to be vertical. Fisher [6] presented vertical growth of
hydraulic fractures from micro-seismic and tilt-meter data,
and the fracture could grow 1, 500 ft vertically at the depth
greater than 2, 000 ft.
The analytical solution [5, 7], and numerical solution [8] were
already presented in the literatures for the case of fracture
height equal to reservoir thickness. Bennett [9] proposed a
numerical model to take into account the fracture height
greater than reservoir thickness. In that model, fluid flow from
fracture toward the well through the entire interval of fracture
height.
This work, on the other hand, considered fluid flow from
fracture into the wellbore is limited through the reservoir
interval. The new correlating parameter for effective fracture
conductivity was developed and it can be used to compute
pseudo-skin factor for well productivity calculation.
Data and Methods
A Computational model was developed and was solved using
numerical reservoir simulator (Figure 1). A well is located at
the center of a square drainage area. However, the boundary
effect is not considered and it is not presented in this study.
The reservoir is isotropic and uniform with constant thickness.
The fracture height, hf, was constant along the fracture length,
xf, and was allowed to be equal to or greater than pay
(reservoir) thickness, h, penetrating the impermeable zones
above and below. The fracture is assumed to be filled in with
proppant with uniform permeability. Both fracture wings are
symmetrical. The perforation interval was set for the whole
pay thickness. It assumes that perforation density is high
enough so that pressure loss is negligible. At this condition,
there will be converging flow from fracture to well when
fracture height extends beyond the reservoir thickness. This
differs from model presented by Bennett [9], in which the
entire fracture height is open to the well.
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 2979-2985
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

The grid size is smaller near the well and near the fracture tip Dimensionless fracture conductivity,
as these regions subject to higher flux density [5]. To avoid k f wf
false wellbore storage response, the effective well-block FcD  (5)
radius was computed using Peaceman formula [10]; Equation kx f
1 for isotropic and Equation 2 for no isotropic. The Dimensionless fracture height, and
discretization of the reservoir model is shown in Figure 2.
hf
Reservoir and fracture are assumed to be filled with slightly H fD  (6)
compressible and single-phase fluid of constant viscosity. xf
Gravity effect is neglected and wellbore pressure is
independent of depth. Thickness ratio,
hf

ro  0.14 x 2  y 2  (1) h fD 
h
(7)

ro  0.28
k y / kx1 / 2 x 2  k x / k y 1 / 2 y 
2 1/ 2
(2)
Where pi is initial pressure (psi), pwf is wellbore bottom hole
k y / k x 1 / 4  k x / k y 1 / 4 pressure (psi), q is surface flowrate (stb/d), B is fluid
formation volume factor (v/v),  is fluid viscosity (cp), ct is
Grid was constructed in symmetrical manner, and a well in the total compressibility (1/psi), k is reservoir (mD),  is porosity
center of reservoir. The dimension of grids were calculated by (fraction), h is reservoir thickness, kf is fracture permeability
using equations below. (mD), wf is fracture width, xf is half fracture length, hf is
At location that is away from the well at y-direction: fracture height, and t is producing time.
1 /( N 1)
yi  1  y 
 a; where a   e 
yi  y w  Vertical
well
In the formula, ye is reservoir dimension at y-direction; yw is
well grid block size at y-direction; and N is number of grid
blocks.
At x-direction and away from well (direction of fracture), grid ye
blocks were computed similarly with exception that it was
divided into several sections; (i) well-to-center of fracture, (ii)
center of fracture-to-fracture tip, (iii) fracture tip-to-reservoir Fracture
limit (xe/2). tip
wf/2
y xe
x
reservoir
z
Figure 2: Model of Grid Block Size and Geometry
h

Produc-
Data used to generate numerical solution for extended fracture
Fracture vertical fracture height is listed in Table 1.
height, h f tion
interval
Table 1. Rock, Fluid and Fracture Data

Parameters Unit Value

Reservoir Permeability, k mD 5
xf Reservoir Thickness, h ft 100
Porosity,  fraction 0.2
Figure 1: Reservoir Model with Extended Vertical Fracture Rock Compressibility, cr 1/psi 3x10-6
Initial Reservoir Pressure, psia 5000
Well pressure response as function of time was generated at pi
specified constant rate for various fracture conductivity, Fluid Formation Volume v/v 1.2
thickness ratio, fracture length and fracture height. Wellbore Factor, B
storage is not included in this model. The solutions are Fluid Viscosity,  cp 0.8
presented in the dimensionless form, in which the Fluid Compressibility, co 1/psi 6x10-6
dimensionless variables are defined as below. Dimensionless Fracture Dimension- 0.01; 0.05; 0.1; 0.5
Height, HfD=hf/xf less
Dimensionless well pressure drop,

kh p i  p wf  Thickness Ratio, hfD=hf/h Dimension-
less
1; 2; 5; 10
p wD  (3)
141.2qB Dimensionless Fracture Dimension- 0.1; 0.25; 0.5; 0.75; 1; 2.5;
Conductivity, FcD less 5; 7.5; 10; 25; 50; 75; 100;
Dimensionless time, 1000
0.0002637kt (4) Surface Flow Rate, q Stb/day 100
tD 
ct x 2f Wellbore Diameter in 6

2980
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 2979-2985
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

To validate the model setup (i.e. grid size and orientation), a

special case condition of fracture height equal to reservoir
thickness was selected. The wellbore pressure from numerical
solution was compared with the analytical solution that was
computed using formula proposed by Cinco et.al. [5] for
constant flowrate case (Equations 8 to 9).

Flux rate along the fracture face (for-1<xD<1, and tD>0) is

calculated by:

t D  
 


1
 2 cos nx D 
 1  exp 
 n fD n 
2 2
t D 



 n 
1
 1
 
 1  
C fDf  2  tD 1 2

 

 (8)
  n fD n 1  q x' ,    cos n ( x  x' )  dx' d 
   D  D
 


 0 1
  
 n 1 exp  n fD n 2  2 (t D   )  

  x  x ' 2  Figure 3: Comparison between Numerical and Analytical
exp   D 
tD 1  4t D     Solutions for Fracture Height Equal To Reservoir Thickness
 
   q D x' ,  
1
dx' d
4 0 1 t D 

As the contact area between well and fracture is only limited

Where: at the producing zone, the well pressure drop of the proposed
model is higher than Bennett’s model (Figure 4). At this case
x y 2q  x ' ,  
; q D x' ,   
the extended fracture height is half of fracture half-length. The
xD  ; yD  xf ; differences are so significant that it cannot be ignored
xf xf qw
especially for low dimensionless fracture conductivity,
k f c t w f  f c tf FcD=0.1. For a fair dimensionless fracture conductivity, FcD =
n fD  ; C fDf  1, the difference between two models become smaller during
k f c tf x f c t
radial flow (tD>1).

Wellbore pressure is then computed by: When fracture height is much less than fracture half-length
(hf/xf = 0.01), the limited entry has little effect on the pressure
 x' 2  drop as seen in Figure 5, at both FcD = 0.1 and FcD = 1.
exp 
tD 1  4t     Furthermore, the extended fracture height solutions coincide
 
p wD t D   q D x' ,  
1 D

4 0 1  t D 
dx' d (9) with the Cinco solution (hf=h) at FcD, app = hfD.FcD. For
example, the solution of extended fracture height at hfD=5 and
FcD=0.1 coincides with Cinco solution at FcD=0.5. Likewise,
When the two solutions (numeric and analytic) are in good the solution of extended fracture height at hfD=5 and FcD=1
match, an analogous numerical model setup is used to coincides with Cinco solution at FcD=5.
generate constant flowrate solution for fracture height
extending beyond the reservoir thickness.

Results and Discussion

The results are plotted in forms of dimensionless variables
defined in Equations 3 to 7. It can be seen from Figure 3 that
the numerical solution mimic the analytical solution [5] very
well for various fracture conductivity of 0.2, , 2, 10, and
100 . The results were satisfactory enough so as foundation
to use similar numerical model setup to generate constant
flowrate solution for fracture height extending beyond the
reservoir thickness. For this case, Bennett [9] published
numerical model, but the entire fracture height is open to the
wellbore. On the other hand, this paper limits the flow
connection of fracture and wellbore only at reservoir thickness
interval. It is more appropriate for general practice since, Figure 4: Dimensionless Wellbore Pressure of Extended
when stimulated by hydraulic fracturing, wells are commonly Height Fractured Well, Case h f /x f = 0.5 and h f /h = 5
cased and are perforated at pay zone.

2981
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 2979-2985
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

It can be said that extending fracture height beyond the curve approach to a constant value at about FcD > 10 and this
producing zone interval improves the well performance by value is equal to 0.7.
reducing well pressure drop. Another thing can be drawn from
Figure 5 is that Cinco solution can still be used for extended
fracture height provided FcD, app = hfD.FcD is used as correlating
parameter. This correlating parameter were first introduced by
Bennett. However, results from this paper indicate that it only
applies if hf <<xf.
For radial and horizontal flow of a fully penetrated vertical
well, productivity index (PI) is computed from Darcy’s
equation and it is written as:
q kh
PI   (10)
p  re 
141.2 B ln 
 rw 
For extended fractured well, the expression of productivity
index can use effective/apparent wellbore radius concept
(Prats, 1961) or pseudo-skin factor concept (Cinco, 1978) for
vertically fractured well. Figure 5: Dimensionless Wellbore Pressure of Extended
kh Height Fractured Well, Case hf/xf = 0.01 and hf/h = 5
PI f  or
 re 
141.2 B ln 

 rwa 
kh
PI f  (11)
  re  
141.2 B ln   s f 
  rw  
Where rwa is effective wellbore radius; and sf is pseudo-skin
factor. The productivity increase of extended fractured well is
then measured by productivity ratio.
r  r 
ln e  ln e 
PI f r
 w  rw 
  (12)
PI  re   re 
ln  ln   s f
 r 
 rwa   w
Equation 12 will always be positive because rw and rwa cannot
be greater than re. Hence [ln(re/rw) + sf] will always be
positive. The pseudo-skin factor is determined by subtracting Figure 6: Pseudo-Skin Factor of Extended Height Fractured
the extended fracture height solution by fully penetrated Well, Case hf/xf = 0.01 and hf/h = 5
vertical well solution (Equation 13). Pseudo-skin factor for
case of HfD=0.01 and hfD=5 is shown in Figure 6.
kh
sf  p s  p Dw, f  p Dw,v (13)
141.2qB
In Figure 6, pseudo-skin factor of extended fracture is always
negative, and it decreases with time for all dimensionless
fracture conductivity, FcD. The value becomes stable
(approaching a constant value) during pseudo-radial flow
period (for this case the time is approximately greater than
100 days). This constant value, sf, is used in the productivity
index (Equation 12). Value of sf depends on dimensionless
fracture conductivity, FcD, and it decreases (becomes more
negative) as FcD increases. For fracture height is equal to
reservoir thickness, hf/h=1, Reference [5] proved that group of
parameter sf+ln(xf/rw), called pseudo-skin function, correlates
with FcD in a single curve. To validate our pseudo-skin factor
computation, the numerical solution of extended fracture for
hf/h =1 are plotted and are compared with data from Figure 7: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at hfD=1 for various
Reference [5]. Figure 7 shows that all data of pseudo-skin value of HfD
function for various HfD lie on a single curve. It is seen the

2982
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 2979-2985
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

For hf/h > 1, the curves of pseudo-skin function deviate from

hf/h=1 case and the pseudo-skin factor decreases as hf/h
increases (Figures 8 to 11), indicating improvement of well
productivity. Correlating parameter FcD, app = hfD.FcD was
attempted to plot pseudo-skin function as they are depicted by
Figures 12 and 13. All data for hfD>=1 lies on the same curve
(Figure 12) for hf/xf = 0.01 (hf << xf). Furthermore when hf/xf
>0.01 as is shown in Figures 13 to 15, some of data for hfD>1
deviate from those of hfD=1. Nevertheles, at FcD, app > 10 all
data remain following a single curve and converge to a value
of 0.7.
By observing those figures, HfD plays a role in spreading those
curves for FcD, app < 10. Because of that, a new correlating
parameter was developed to include variable HfD. Two simple
form of equations may be used, they are polynomial and
power functions.
Figure 9: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at HfD=0.05 for
various value of hfD
Polynomial form:

FcD,app  FcD h fD (1  H fD ) (14)

Power form:

FcD,app  FcD h fD (1H fD ) (15)

Those two formulation satisfies condition that as HfD is very

small then FcD, app = FcDhfD has been exercised and been
observed. The second criterion is that FcD, app must be positive,
and Equation 15 satisfies this condition. Regresion method
was used to obtained coeficient  in Equation 15. It was found
that  = 0.727 with R2 = 0.988. Hence the correlating
parameter FcD, app is written by Equation 16. Figure 16 implies
that the original curve proposed by Cinco et al. for pseudo-
skin function can still be used provided FcD, app = FcDhfD^(1-
0.727 HfD) is used replacing FcD for extended height fractured Figure 10: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at HfD=0.1 for
well. various value of hfD
(10.727H fD )
FcD,app  FcD h fD (16)

Figure 8: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at HfD=0.01 for Figure 11: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at HfD=0.5 for
various value of hfD various value of hfD

2983
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 2979-2985
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

4 4 4 4

hfD=1 Hf D=0.5 hf D=1

HfD=0.01
hf D=2
hfD=2
hf D=5
hfD=5 3 3
3 3 hf D=10
hfD=10 Cinco Data
Cinco Data

Sf +ln(xf /rw)
2 2
Sf +ln(xf /rw)

2 2

1 1

1 1

0 0
0.1 1 10 100 1000
FcD,app=FcD*hf D
0 0
0.1 1 10 100 1000
FcD,app=FcD*hfD Figure 15: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at HfD=0.5 for
various value of hfD using correlating parameter FcD, app =
Figure 12: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at HfD=0.5 for FcD*hfD
various value of hfD

4 4
Hf D=0.05 hfD=1
hfD=2
hfD=5
3 hfD=10 3
Cinco Data
Sf +ln(xf /rw)

2 2

1 1

0 0
0.1 1 10 100 1000
FcD,app=FcD*hfD

Figure 13: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at HfD=0.05 for Figure 16: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function using a new
various value of hfD using correlating parameter FcD, app = correlating parameter FcD, app= FcD*hfD^(1-0.727 HfD) for
FcD*hfD various hfD and HfD

Equation 16 can be examined further to determine the

4 4 influence of increasing fracture height on the effective
hfD=1
HfD=0.1 (apparent) fracture conductivity, that is increasing
hfD=2
hfD=5 productivity by lowering skin factor. At a given reservoir
3 hfD=10 3 thickness and keeping the fracture length constant, effective
Cinco Data fracture conductivity is increased by increasing fracture
height. It is until reaching a maximum point at which the
Sf +ln(xf /rw)

2 2 fracture height is at optimum (Figure 17). After this point,

further increasing fracture height lower effective fracture
conductivity and eventually it becomes disadvantageous as
1 1 FcD, app/FcD below 1. This result is considered important and it
was not observed by previous literatures.
This work also produce results with different finding when
0 0 fracture height is greater than reservoir thickness at constant
0.1 1 10 100 1000 fracture volume. Unlike Bennett’s conclusion stated that the
FcD,app=FcD*hfD optimum condition for this case is at hf = h, this work shows
that effective fracture conductivity can increase at hf > h until
Figure 14: Plot of Pseudo-skin Function at HfD=0.1 for it reaches a maximum provided that hf < xf/0.727. When hf >
various value of hfD using correlating parameter FcD, app = xf/0.727, increasing fracture height becomes detrimental since
FcD*hfD effecttive fracture conductivity is less than case of hf=h.

2984
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 2979-2985
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

100 References

[1] W.J. McGuire, and V.J. Sikora, “The Effect of

Vertical Fractures on Well Productivity, ” Journal of
Petroleum Technology, pp. 72-74, October 1960.
h/x f =0.01 http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2118/1618-G.
[2] M. Prats, P. Hazebroek, and W.R. Strickler, “Effect
FcD,app /FcD

10 of Vertical Fractures on Reservoir Behavior--

h/x f =0.025
Compressible-Fluid Case, ” Society of Petroleum
h/x f =0.1
Engineers Journal, pp. 87-94, June 1962.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/98-PA
h/x f =0.05 [3] M. Prats, “Effect of Vertical Fractures on Reservoir
h/x f =0.5 h/x f =0.1 Behavior--Incompressible Fluid Case, ” Society of
h/x f =0.25 Petroleum Engineers Journal, pp. 103-118, June
1
0 10 20 30 40
1961. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/1575-G.
h fD [4] A.C. Gringarten, H.J. Ramey, Jr., and R. Raghavan,
“Applied Pressure Analysis for Fractured Wells, ”
Figure 17: Effect of fracture height on effective fracture Journal of Petroleum Technology, pp. 887-892. July
conductivity at various value of h/xf. 1975. http://dx.doi. org/10.2118/5496-PA.
[5] L.H. Cinco, V.F. Samaniego, and A.N. Dominguez,
3.5
“Transient Pressure Behavior for a Well with a
Finite-Conductivity Vertical Fracture, ” Society of
3.0 Af = 5000 sq-ft
Petroleum Engineers Journal, pp. 253-264, August
2.5 Af = 10000 sq-ft
1978. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/6014-PA.
FcD,app/FcD

hf = xf Af = 50000 sq-ft
2.0
Af = 100000 sq-ft
[6] K. Fisher, and N. Warpinski, “Hydraulic Fracture
1.5
Af = 200000 sq-ft
Height Growth: Real Data, ” Journal SPE Production
hf = xf/0.727
1.0 Af = 200000 sq-ft
& Operations, pp. 8-19, February 2012.
0.5
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/60184-JPT
[7] H. Cinco-Ley, and F. Samaniego-V., “Transient
0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Pressure Analysis for Fractured Wells, ” Journal of
Petroleum Technology, pp. 1749-1766, September
hfD = hf/h
1981. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/7490-PA.
[8] R.G. Agarwal, R.D. Carter, and C.B. Pollock,
“Evaluation and Performance Prediction of Low-
Figure 18: Effect of fracture height on effective fracture
Permeability Gas Wells Stimulated by Massive
conductivity with fracture volume is constant
Hydraulic Fracturing, ” Journal of Petroleum
Technology, pp. 362-372, March 1979. http://
dx.doi.org/10.2118/6838-PA.
Conclusion [9] C.O. Bennett, A.C. Reynolds, R. Raghavan, and J.L.
This work presents a modified model for extended height Elbel, “Performance of Finite-Conductivity,
fractured well, where fluid entering to the well from fracture Vertically Fractured Wells in Single Layer
on through the reservoir thickness interval. This model is Reservoirs, ” Journal SPE Formation Evaluation, pp.
considered to be more realistic compared to the latest model 399-412, August 1986. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118
by Bennett. This work proposes a new correlating parameter /11029-PA.
of effective fracture conductivity for extended height fractured [10] D.W. Peaceman, “Interpretation of Well-Block
well. This correlating parameter, FcD, app = FcDhfD^(1- Pressures in Numerical Reservoir Simulation with
0.727HfD), enable ones to determine pseudo-skin factor using Non-square Grid Blocks and Anisotropic
the relationship between pseudo-skin function versus FcD Permeability, ” Society of Petroleum Engineers
previously published by Cinco et al. which then can be used to Journal, pp. 531-543, June 1983.
compute well productivity. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/10528-PA.
Two important findings are offered in this work: (i) extending
fracture height beyond the reservoir thickness at constant
fracture length increases fracture conductivity until it reaches
a maximum at optimum fracture height. Extending fracture
height further lower the fracture conductivity and it becomes
disadvantageous when FcD, app/FcD < 1, (ii) The increase of
fracture conductivity by extending fracture height greater than
reservoir thickness is also true for the case of constant fracture
volume provided that hf < xf/0.727. When hf > xf/0.727,
effective fracture conductivity is not better than case of hf=h.

2985