SPE 6014

TransientPressureBehaviorfora WellWitha Finite-Conductivity

VerticalFracture
HEBER ClN(X) L.
F. SAMANIE(30,V. INSTITUTO MEX\CANO DEL P&ROLEO
N. DWINQUEZ A. MEXICO CITY, MEXICO
MEMBERS WE-AIME

ABSTRACT uniform flux solution for horizontal fractures.

Although the assumption of an infinite fracture
A mathematical model was developed to study tbe conductivity is adequate for some cases, we must
transient behavior o/a well with a finite-conductivity consider a finite conductivity for large or very low
vertical /racture in an iniinite slab reservoir. For flow capacity fractures. Sawyer and Locke15 studied
values 0/ dimensionless time 0/ interest, tD 210-3, the transient pressure behavior of finite-conductivity
the dimensionless wellbore pressure, PwlD~ can be vertical fractures in gas wells. Their solutions
correlated by the dimensionless group, wkl/xf k , cannot be used to analyze transient pressure data
where w, kf, and x are tbe width, permeability, and because only specific cases were presented.
half length o/ t i e /racture, respectively, and k In this study, we wanted to prepare general
represents the {ormation perrneabi!ity. solutions for the transient pressure behavior of a
Results when plotted as a [unction of pwfD us well intersected by a /inite.conductivity vertical
10g tD give, for !urge t~, a 1. 151+iope straight fracture. The solutions sought should be useful for
line; hence, semilogaritbmic pressure analysis short-time or type-curve analysis. We also wanted
methods can be app!ied. When p[ottcd in terms of to show whether conventional methods could be
log pwjD vs log tD, a family o/ Curves 0/ cbaraCter. applied to analyze transient pressure data for these
istic shape result, A type-curve matching procedure conditions. A combination of both methods, as
can be used to analyze early time transient presszdre pointed out by Gringarten et aft, 14 should permit an
data to obtain the formation and jracture extraordinary y confidence level concerning the
characteristics. analysis of field data.

INTRODUCTION STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND

Hydraulic fracturing is an effective technique for DEVELOPMENT OF FLOW MODELS
increasing the productivity of damaged wells or The transient pressure behavior for a fractured
wells producing from low permeability fortnations. well can be studied by nnalyzing the solution of the
Much research has been conducted to determine the di~ferential equations that describe this phenomenon
effect of hydraulic fractures on well performance with proper initial and boundary conditions. To
and transient pressure behavior. The results have simplify the derivation of flow models, the following
been used to improve the design of hydraulic assumptions are made.
fractures. Many methods 1-14 have been proposed to 1. An isotropic, homogeneous, horizontal, infinite,
determine formation properties and fracture charac- slab reservoir is bounded by an upper and a lower
teristics from transient pressure and flow rate data. impermeable strata. The reservoir has uniform
These methods have been based on either analytical thickness, h, permeability, k, and porosity, +,
or numerical solutions of the transient flow of fluids which are independent of pressure.
toward fractured wells. Recently, Gringarten et al.14 2. The reservoir contttins a slightly compressible
made an important contribution to the ‘analysis of fluid of compressibility, c, and viscosity, p, and
transient pressure data of fractured wells, They both properties are constant.
presented a type-curve analysis and tttree basic 3. Fluid i~ produced through a vertically fractured
solutions: the infinite-fracture conductivity solution well intersected by a /ully penetrating, /initer
(zero pressure drop along a verticai fracture), the conductivity /racture of half length, Xp width, W?
uniform flux solutiori for vertical fractures, and the permeability, kf, and porosity, @ . These fracture
characteristics are constant. F {uid entering the
Original manu;!cript received AnSociety of Petro:eum Ertglneem
office Aug. 15, 1976. Paper mcepted for publication Feb. 17, 197?.
wellbore comes only through the fracmre.
Revised nranuscrlpt received April 28, 1978. paper (SpE 6014) A system with these assumptions is shown in
first preaentcd at the SPE-AIME 5 Itt Annual Fmll Technical
Conference and Exhibition, held in New Orleans, Oct. 3-6, 1976.
Fig. 1. In addition, we assume that gravity effects
are negligible and also that laminar flow occurs in
0037-9999/78/0008-60 14$00.2S
@ 197s Society of Petroleum Englneerc of AIME the system, Under these conditions, the flow

AUGUST,1~ 2s3
 ;> { ,,;: 4
+4

phenomenon may be described by the diffusivity Boundary conditions,

equation in two dimensions. 16 TO facilitate the
solution of this equation, two flow regions will be aPf q#
considered — (1) the reservoir and (2) the fracture.
zE- ~o”-ziqi
FRACTURE FLOW MODEL
and
‘l”he fracture is considered as a homogeneous,
finite, slab, prous medium of height, h, half length, mf
E- . X=X -O”*”””””’
xl, and width, w. Fluid enters the fracture at a rate ““” ● (2)
q (x, t) per unit of fracture length, and flow across
the edge of this porous medium is ne~ligible f
because the fracture width is very mall compared In Eq. 1, q x, t) is a source term that represents the
with the fracture length. lhe Iaat assumption allows fluid flow / from the reservoir to the fracture.
us to consider a linear flow in the fracture and The solution of Eq. 1 with initial and boundary
permits simulation of well production by a uniform
conditions Siven by Eq. 2 is expressed in dimen=
flux plane source of b and w, located at the wellbore
sionless form by this equation:
axis (Fig. 2).
Unsteady-state flow in the fracture may be
described by the equation,

a2Pf ~ qffx.t) ~f~cft apf

——
‘+kf ~= kf at
ax2

O<%<%=........(l)
&

subject to the, following conditions.

Initial conditia, 2n+l

pf(x, t=o) = Ppo~x~xf” qfD(x’8T)

-/
2n-1

WELLBORE (xD-x’ )2
- [ 4(kf@ct/k$fc

I
f ~) 1
e dx’ d~ * ● ●(3)
z-
i
~ ~ I where
[
[ I I FRACTURI Wpf(w)]
[ I I“
lAtPERM\ABLE I pf#~9 ‘D) =
I i 141.2 qwB~
BOUND~RIES I
[ I
I
t I &
I
I I
‘D =
‘f
--
0.000264 kt
t.
. D
$W pf2

and
FIG. 1 — FINITE-CONDUCTIVITY VERTICAL 2qf(x’ ,T)
FRACTURE IN AN INFINITE SLAB RESERVOIR.
qfD(x’90 = * ●
(4)
% ‘f””
Eq. 3 gives the dimensionless pressure &op in
the fracture at location XD and dimensionless time
tD. ‘his equation was obtained by applying Green
and source functions and the Newman product method
FIG. 2- FRACTURE FLOW MODEL, extensively discussed by Grin8arten and Ramey.22
W SOCIETY OF PSTaOLWM CNG1NES8S JOURNAL
 ●

RESERVOIR FLOW MODEL and

The transient pressure behavior in the reservoir
may be studied by considering the fracture as a qfD(x#~) - qD(~, tD) ● o . . . .(8)
plane source of height, b, length, 2X1, and flux
density q@ t) (Fi8. 3). The dimensionless pressure for
&op at any point in the reservoir may be obtained
from the following equation:

A combination of Eqs. 3, 5, 7, and 8 and use of

Poisson’s summation formula yields
o -1

● qD(%’,T) e
-[ —
(Iyx’

4 (tD-T)

(tD-T)
-
)*+yD2

1
dx’ d’c . w (5)
—
1

cfDf
I
● l-e
tD+—
2 *1
1 ~
7r2rlfD n=l n

-q ~ Dn2w2tD
cos (n7rxJ

where I I
Wpi-p(x,y,t)]
.
P#~9Y~9tJ = 141.2 ~BIJ

qD(x’ ,T) = 29.@L.Q~f o -1

n. 1

qw
and
-nf Dn2T2 (tD-~)
L. . . . . . . ., . (6) -x’) e dx t d~
‘D = X=

Eq. 5 also was derived using Green and source

functions.
To solve Eqs. 3 and 5 simultaneously, continuity
between the two flow regions must be established,
The dimensionless pressure drop pff) (x~, t~) and
flux density qlD (XD, tD) in the fracture model must
eqUd the dimensionless pressure drop pD (xf)J yD$
tD) and flux density qD (xD, tD) on the plane
., ..., . . . . . . .,, ,,. ,. (9)
source of the reservoir model, respectively. That ●

is,
where ~ ‘k’ ft
pfDtxD$tD) = pD(xD}YD=O, tJ)) 0 . 0 ● (7) fDf = Txf @ct

and
k#c ~
—.. . . . . . . . . (lo)
%D = Wfc f t

Eq. 10 is a Fredholm integral equation where the

Mknown is qfj (%D ~f$. CfDf is the dimensionless
PLANE SOURCE(FRACTURE) fractw: storage capacity, and qfD is the dimension-
%(x,t) less hy&aulic diffusivity of the fracture.

METHOD OF SOLUTION
Eq. 9 can be solved by discretization in time and
space so thar the fracture is divided into 2N equal
segments (Fig. 4) and time is divided into K different
intervals. It is assumed that fr !cture flux has a
stepwise distribution in time r.:~d space. In other
FIG. 3 - RESERVOIR FLOW MODEL. words, the flux density qD ~,e of a fracture interval

A1’GUW’. 1978
w
 ●

is constant for a given segment i and time inteival 1. - 1-1/2

For a fracture segment j, Eq. 9 becomes ‘Di N

‘%,2-I = ‘DL - ‘D&l

+ erf

and

112Ti2
~f DAtK,
-e
- k-l

1
- ~i,j%

-$
- 6i,jEi

The arguments
[ 9 II ●

of the erf and Ei functions are

defined a;
= j-i+l/2
~i,j 2N

~ j -j-i-l/2
B
9 2N

where
= j+;y2
Y ‘id

/.
# , , , 1 , , I
I
12 H SEGMENTS
I
1 1 1 1 1 1
“1 ,-
)
and

6~j=H#!L
9

By writing Eq. 11 for all fracture segments, a

123 . system of equations is obtained where the unknowns
are the g~i,t ‘s. Solution of such a system for each
time interval produces values for the fracture flux
distribution. The dimensionless pressure drop at
any point of the system can be calculated by using
the discretized forms of Eqs. 3 and 5. Although the
FIG. 4- FRACTURE DIVIDED INTO N EQUAL theory presented here does not consider formation
SEGMENTS. damage near the fracture caused by fracturing fluid

z% SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JOURNAL

loss, the equations may be modified to include a capacity, ” which may be expressed as
variable iikin damage along the fracture.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS a ‘T&’

A computer program was writtsn to determine the The use of the term “capacity” is a misnomer. The
flux distribution and dimensionless pressure drop correct term is “conductivity.” In the following,
along the fracture. A sensitivity analyais was the dimensionless fracture conductivity will be
conducted to obtain accurate results. We found considered as (k ~ . tu(D). Although there was a
that soluticma do not change appreciably when more constant n in t { e original correlating parameter
than 20 segments are taken per fracture half length, (see Eq, 12), and (tr/2) in Prats’ expression, wc
x . Results also indicated that the solutions were &oppcd the constants for the sake of simplicity.
/
accurate enough for practical purposes if at least The solutions obtained in this study were
10 intervals were considered in each log cycle of compared, where applicable, with solutions published
logarithm of dimensionless time. Therefore, in all in the literature. Results for a highly conductive
cases studied, the fracture half len@h was divided fracture (CfDf = 10 ‘3, q ID = 107, and kfp wjD =
into 20 equal segments and 10 time intervals wete I@/m) ~;how excellent a8rcemcnt with the infinite-
taken in each log cycle of dimensionless time. conductivity solution of Gringarten et al.lg
Cases were simulated for values of CfDf ranging Differcnccs between rhc two solutions arc less than
from 2 x 104 to 10-3 and values of q p from 10 1% for small values of dimensionless time, and
to 108. ‘Iheae ranges were based on published less than 0.025% for other times of interest.
fracture characteristics data. Analysis of the Fig. 5 shows the dimensionless flux along the
results showed that as soon as most of the fluid fracture at different values of !D. For small values
produced at the wellbore comes from the formntion of [D, the fhtx density is uniform along the fracture.
(i.e., the expansion of the fracture system is Also, for small times, the flow rate from the
negligible), solutions can be correlated by one formaticm into the fracture, is less than the total
parameter that depends on CfDi and ql~ constants. WCII f14Dw rate. This results from the storage
Fortunately, this holds for times of interest. This capacity of the fracture. For intermediate and
correlating parameter was found to be large vtdues of t~, the well flow rate is generated
by the expansion of rhc system outside the fracture;
kf W under these conditions, the total area under each
. . ...* (12) flux density curve in Fig. 5 is equal to unity. And
cfDf ‘fD = ~kxf” “,”
finally, for large values of tD, the flux density
becomes stabilized as discussed by Gringarten
An important feature of this variabie is that it does et al. for an infinite-conductivity fracture. Fig. 5
not depend on the porosity and total compressibility
of the formation and fracture. It is essentially the
dimensionless fracture flow conductivity,
With regard to the symbol for this correlating
parameter, Ramey 23 suggested using a product of

.
two dimensionless variables, such as
‘ 7fD’+.= lo’
It
‘f @kf .,04

3iJ
‘fD = ~ rack

and
t~>s
tB=2 -1

t*rl~lo-4
The first is the relative fracture permeability and
the second represents the dimensionless fracture Ialo’+
width. Large values for the product (kfD tu~D) rep-
resent highly conductive fractures; conversely,
small values represent fracturea of low conductivity.
Small values of the product may be caused either by — Ttlls STUDY .
low fracture permeability or large /racture length. ● 6RlM6ARTEN,~.
For much of the following discussion, we refer to (Iatlnll. contucllsltp solution)
the condition of “low fracture conductivity” —
1 1 I I
remember that we mean a dimensionless conductivity.
EitAer low fracture permeability or long fracture
.2 ,4 .s .8
XD?*
lcn@h, or both, may be the physical phe ‘mena
involved.
FIIG. 5 - FLUX DISTRIBUTION AT VARIOUS
Solutions for the atcady-stato flow case were TIMES ALQNG A HIGHLY CONDUCTIVE
co~related by Pratsls using the “relative fracture VERTICAL FRACTURE.

AllOUST, 1970 m
 .

also shows the stabilized flux distribution presented found,

by Gringartcn et al. Good a8reement was found The wellbore pressure drop reduction caused by
between both solutions. a fracture is usually handled as a pseudo-skin
It is of interest to know the effect of fracture factor, St, which is defined as the difference
conductivity on rite stabilized flux density along between the dimensionless pressure drop for a
the fracture, Fig. 6 shows that for a highly fractured well and that for an unfractured well.
conductive ftacture (i ●., kfD w fD 2 300), the flux Although s is a function of tD, it becomes a
density is high at the portions of the fracture away function o { the geometry of the system only for
horn the wellbore. As fracture conductivity ]ar8e values of tD.
decreases, the flux density changes so that flow l%e pseudo-skin factor for a fractured well in an
entering the. portion of the fracture close to the infinite reservoir may be applied to fractured wells
wellbore becomes steadily more important. For in a finite, circular reservoir whenever the radius
instance, in a low conductivity fracture (kp I#fl) = of influence, ~f, of the fracture is smaller tnan the
0.63), about 70% of the flow comes from the nearest external radius of the reservoir. The radius of
half of the fracture. However, approximately two- influence of a fracture is defined as the radius
thirds of the total flow comes from the farthest half beyond which the pressure distribution created by
in a highly conductive fracture (k@ w\D 2 300). the fracture is similar, for practical purposes, to
‘Ibis emphasizes the importance of creating high that for radial flow. The radius of influence for an
conductivity fractures to overcome the flow infinite-conductivity fracture is about 4 x!. This
restrictions created by the wellbore damage zone. means that values of s obtained for an infinite
/
These findings agree with results presented by van system may be used for a finite reservoir when
Poollen.zO re/x ~ 4, These results also are valid for a finite-
Fig. 7 shows a graph of stabilized dimensionless con d uctivity fracture because rfi for this case is
pressure &op vs dimensionless distance along the less than r~i for an infinite-conductivity fracture.
fracture fOr W/cd values of k/D wffj. Thk pres sure Fig. 8 presents SI as a ~nction of dimensionless
&op is the difference between the pressure at any frac~re conductivity, ~/D k D, for a system where
point on the fracture and the pressure at the tip of re/rw = 2,000 and ~e/x, = f O. A particular case is
the fracture. The curves on this figure show that, presented in this figure to compare solutions from
for highly conductive fractures, the pressure drop this study with those published in the literature.
along the fracture ‘,is small and sometimes Fig. 8 shows, that s is negative, indicating an
negligible. As the fracture conductivity decreases, increaae in well pro i uctivity. It also shows that
the pressure &op becomes increasingly greater, there is a strong variation of s for small values of
and as the fracture permeability approaches the w@ klD, and as the value of / racture conductivity
formation permeability, the pressure drop distribution increases, Sf approaches a stabilized value. Data
(not shown here) corresponds to that for radial flow. published by McGuire and Sikora21 and Pratsls
Fig. 7 also presents the results published by Prats18 appear tc agree well with the results of this study.
for steady-state flow. Excellent agreement was A general correlation for the fracture skin factor,
St, may be obtained if S1 is expressed as a function

-
I — THIS STUDY

z
-“
0
k ● PRATS (Stoo4y-Stoto)

“-

-“ s
z - I
e
W

k
=(

o
t I 1 1

.2 .4 .* ,0
Xos + ,
FIG. 7 - DIMENSIONLESS PRESSURE DROP
FIG. 6 — STABILIZED FLUX DISTRIBUTION FOR DISTRIBUTION ALONG A FINITE-CONDUCTIVITY
DIFFERENT FRACTURE CONJXICTIVITIES. FRACTURE (tD > 5).

zm SOCIEIWOF ●ETROLEUM ENGINEERS

JOURNAL
.

Of WjD kiD
●
n$ x//’w’ l%is can be shown by
cmnbining the line source solution and the definition
straight line for different values of w DkfD. This
time varies between tD equal to 2.5 {or very low
for fracture skin factor. Fig. 9 shows that a graph fracture conductivities, and tD equal to S for high
of (s/ + k %//rw) V$ (w/L#@) ttiil give a $ingle fracture conductivities. This is in agreement with
curve chat may be used to estimate Sf if values for the findings of Gringarten et al, for infinite-

‘“ The
‘w’ .dlmcnsion
and ‘~Dk{Dess ace
wellbore
‘govided’pressure drop vs the
TABLE 1 — DIMENSIDNLES8 PRESSURE FOR A WELL WITH
logarithm .of dimensionless time for ,various values A FULLY PENETRATING, FINITE=C43NDUCTIVITY
of k D wff) is shown in Fi8. 9 and presented in VERTICAL FRACTURE
Tab {e 1. Analysis of these results shows that for
~~(/+ - Pwf)
times of itjterest$ tD ~ l@3, solutions can be Pwm = “— t~ = 0.W0254 M
1412 Qt3/A +/Actx,z
correlated using only one parameter. If practical
values of q D and CID1 are considered, a unique Pwfr)
solution wi {‘ be obtained for a constant value of kf wl kxf = kfDwfD
‘fD ‘/D’ Fig. 9 indicates that, as the fracture
tf) o.211 Iolr loon
conductivity increases, the dimensionless wellbore —. . lr . 2f7 2olr
1x 10”3 0.5449 0.2443 0.1733 6m6 Em E65ii6
pressure drop for a fixed time decreases, and for 2 0.6330 0,2681 0.2056 O.llfxl 0.0346 0.W14
wfDkFd greater than 300, the solution is essentially 3 0,7024 0.31s0 0.2280 0.1277 0.1120 0.0SS6
equal to the infinite-conductivity solution of 4 0.7520 0.3432 0.2475 0.1424 0.1265 0.1130
Gringarten et al. All the curves on this figure do 6 0,7926 0.3633 0.2632 0.1553 0.1392 0.1258
6 0,6273 0.28W 0.2770 0.1666 O,lom 0,1360
follow, for large times, a straight line of slope 7 0.6576 0,2ss3
0,3s!3 0.1773 0.1610 0.1472
1.151, characteristic of the semilo8arithmic methods 8 0A846 o.4cm o.3m 0,1871 0.1708 Oclm
of pressure analysis. Also indicated by a dashed 9 0.2090 0.4224 0.3110 0. 1W2 0.1796 0.1658
line is the approximate start of the semilogarithmic 1 x 10-2 0,W13 0.4341 0.3207 0,2047 0.1s81 0.1742
2 1.0s37 0.6181 0.3630 0.2720 0.2540 0.2407
3 1.1661 0.5788 0.4460 0.3221 0.3047 o.2scr3
4 1.2838 0,6272 0.4=0 0,3833 0,34% 0.3310
I A
I 6
6
1.326e
1,2602
0.6682
0,7040
0.5297
0.8030
0.3W8
0.4304
0.3502
0.4122
0.3662
0,3074

-3
I — THIS SIUOY
A MCGUIRC@ndSIKORA 4
7
8
Q
1 x 10-1
1.4266
1.4676
1.504Q
1.5357
0.7361
0.7653
0,7s21
0,8170
0,5229
o.62tB
0.6456
0.6s91
0,456s
0.4640
o.5mo
0,5316
0.4408
0.4665
0,4905
0.5129
0.4255
0.4514
0.4753
0.4s75
2 1 .772s 1.W1O 0.s453 0,7015 0.6620 0.5651
3 1.9263 1.1269 0.!M65 0.82CB o.8cm8 0.7545
4 2.0414 12282 1.ms 0.9143 0;6S40 0.6774
5 2.1340 1.3CW2 1.1442 0.SS18 0.0712 0.9544
6 2.211s 1.37s4 1.2121 1.0562 1.0374 1.=05
7 2.2164 1.4iot 1.2715 1.1163 1.0355 1.0754
8 2.3372 1.41m 1.3243 1.1682 1.1472 1.1300
Q 2.3607 1,5424 1.3719 1.21m 1.1s30 1.1768
1 2.4371 1.5865 1.4153 1.2577 1.236s 1,21=
2 2.757$ 1.6m 1.7156 1.5546 1.5320 1.5152
kfwl kxf
tfj O,a? 17 2fl lolr 207r 1oo17
-— —,
3 GO =3 1.S016 1.73s4 1.7175 1.8W8
4 3.0914 2.2144 2.0371 1,8730 1.85$~ 1.6~0
FIG. 8 — PSEUDO=SKIN FACTOR FOR A FINITE- 1.07ss
5 3.2W? 2.3212 2.1435 1.9577 1.9308
CONDUCTIVITY VERTICAL FRACTURE. 6 3.28SS 2.40s2 2.2311 2.0671 2.0450 2.0270
7 3.3684 2.463!3 2.3056 2.1414 2.1193 2.1013
8 3.4312 2.54s0 2.3705 2.2ml 2.1830 2.1659
9 3.48s3 2.W5 2.4270 2.2684 2.2412 22231
1 x 101 3.5414 2.6561 2.47S4 2.3147 2.232q 2.2745
2 3.6883 2.s205 2$620s 2.6553 2.6331 2.6150
3 4.0670 3.2~ 3.0214 2.8561 2.6338 2.6157
4 4.2304 3.3430 3.1643 2.swB 2.0768 2.9=5
6 4.3417 3.4540 32753 3.lfns 3.0576 3.0805
6 4.4327 3.8458 3@3s81 3.2007 3.17s4 3.1602
7 4.5m7 3.6228 3.4430 3.2775 3.2551 3.2370
8 4.5763 3.68s2 3.50s5 3.3440 3.3217 3.3035
0 4.6351 3.74s0 3.8683 3.4a27 3.ss04 3.3623
1 x 102 4.8578 3m05 3.6208 3.4553 3.4330 3.4148
2 5sm41 4.1486 3#668 3.6013 3.776!3 3.76m
3 6.2387 4,34s2 4.16% 4.0038 3.s815 3.s633
4 5.3505 4.4s2s 4.3131 4.1475 4.1252 4.1070
5 S.4220 4.6045 4,4247 42ss0 4.2367 4.2166
6 5.5532 4.8056 4.5156 4.3502 4.3278 4.30s7
7 mm 4.7736 4.5s28 4.4272 4.4049 4.3657
8 5.7270 4.68S4 4.65W 4.4s39 4.4716 4,4535
FIG. 9- PSEUDCkSKIN FACTOR FOR A WELL WITX-1A 5.768S 4.6SS3 4.7185 4.5528 4.83m 4.5123
FINITE-CONDUCTIVITY VERTICAL FRACTURE, Ix!@ 5.s353 4.Q5m 4.7711 4.6055 4.5631 4.5650

Alxdm. 1970 2s
 ,
.

81 1 1/ A
I 1 I
‘fD ‘ID “ This feature of the solutions can be used
to analyze field data by a type-curve matching
technique. From this kind of analysis we can
determine the formation permeability, k, the half-
fracturc length, x,, and the fracture cr?nductivity,
k,w. We assume that estimates for formation
porosity, +, fluid viscosity, p, and total
compressibility, Ct, are available.
Log-1og type-curve matching is a technique
p=-unlfonll nux WLullon commonly used in well test analysis. As pointed
● IllFllllTC
WilOSCTIVITV
$OLUTION out by Gringarten et al,, a combination of this
r CnlnoABTcn,u
technique with conventional semi log analytical
o 1 1 I
,0-$ 108 IOs methods permits a hi8hly confident analysis of
,, ,+y ‘o field data.
Solutions presented here do not include wellbore
FIG, 10 — km Vs tD FOR A WELL WITH A FINITE-
CONDUCTIVITY VERTICAL FRACTURE.
storage effects. However, the /racture storage
capacity in a highly conductive fracture creates an
conductivity fractures. Thent provided that sufficient effect on the transient wellbore pressure behavior
data on the straight-line portion of the pressure similar to that caused by wellbore storage capacity.
curve are available before boundary effects influence Recently, Ramey and Gringarten12 presented finite-
a test, the formation flow capacity may be obtained difference solutions for the transient behavior of a
in the usual way by conventional semilog analytical well crossed by a high-volume, infinite conductivity
methods. Also plotted in Fig. 9 is the uniform flux vertical fracture. They defined a dimensionless
solution for vertical fractures presented by storage coefficient that appears equal to C D~ Fig.
Gringarten et al. This solution follows the infinite- 12 presents the dimensionless pressure so [ution for
conductivity solution at small values of times. For ~,D/ = 0.1, and also shows data presented by, Ramey
intermediate times, this solution behaves as a and Gringarten for the same case. A good agreement
variable conductivity fracture solution, eventually exists between the two solutions; differences are
following a finite-conductivity fracture solution of less than 2.5%.

.-,.
about equal to 4.4. Although results for the transient pressure

-
‘jD~fD
Fig. 11 shows the results of Fig. 10 plotted as a behavior of a fractured well in a finite drainage
function of the logarithm of pWD vs the logarithm of system are not presented in this study, they may
ID. At small values of dimensionless time, the be generated by means of a desuperposition
curves have a distinct form for different values of technique.19 AIso, wellbore storage effects can be
. . . . . .

m
II***, ,, ,8 *..,*
lo,~! , ,., ,,, a II 9919.’
.. .
;.:1”:;
●
., ““”-’-T.
. ,“
9
.,, ,
●
. .. ...i. r I,i,:
8 ---!
--+--
:.. --:- .- { . 4 ..
*
..-
;_, +; .; :.:,
.,

,
●

☛
tm’FR

I 1 , 1 1 , , ,
..:, j I+tlll t I ~ --l ‘
1.-L.LL!L 1..1ill! ..1..:.1---- L.-.1
..:
F SEMILO~~ ~ ,;
,1 ,I .--....-.,
.-,
.. r-l- J---- .-. . .
I I I [ [1 r d.
,.. I i 11 11 ill I I 1 .
1 1
,
1 ,,
:-I —.

—.—
I
I I t! 1 I ,,, 1 t I 1 , , , k .,, ,,, .
t
.. ———
io-s ‘ ‘ “ ‘* ’*i’&i ‘ ‘ “ *“”7 ● ‘“’”40 ~ “ * ●’.. IO* lo~
t,8— :.00; 264kt
+PQ*
FIG. 11 — f%fD Vs ~D FOR A FINITE-CONDUCTIVITY VERTICAL FRACTURE.

m SOCIETY OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JOlkNAL

 ●

incorporated into the solution by using the principle TAf3LE 2- PRES8URE DRAWDOWNDATA FOR A WELL
of superposition. We expect that in certain field CRC%8EDBY A FINITE=CONDLJCTIVITY FRACTURE
(EXAMPLE 1)
cases, the pressure behavior for a fractured well
+ = 0.3 h=30ft
may not follow the solutions presented here, These Ct = 20 x 10+ pal-* p = 0.85 Cp
deviations may be related to several causes, such B = 1.6s bbl/STB % = 260 STf3/f)
as a high dependence of fracture conductivity on
rw = 0.26 ft
pressure, wellbore storage, and partial penetration,
DrawdownDsta
to mention some. Sometimes, the nature of the
Pi - Plvf
deviation can be inferred from a careful examination Jh&/ JE!9!L
of field data, For instance, a weH crossed by a 0,25 57
fracture with a conductivity highly dependent on 0.00 68
pressure will exhibit a different behavior in both 1. 79
bui Idup and drawdown tesrs, in a drawdown test, 2.s 108
s. 134
the fracture conductivity will decrease continuously, 10 188
while in a buildup test, fracture conductivity will 20 210
exhibit an increase. In Mb cases, pressure data 30 238
will cut across the curves presented in Fig, 11. 40 201
00 200
80 228
EXAMPLES OF APPLICATION 70 311
80 321
The examples presented here are synthetic 90 334
pressure drawdown tests for a well crossed by a lW 343
finite-conductivity fracture. The pressure data were 160 384
analyzed using a type-curve matching procerdun.,
This technique consists of plotting the presw re dimensionless pressure drop, pu D, and the
&op, Ap, on the ordinate vs flowing time, t, on the dimension less time, tD, respectively. h e definitions
abscissa of a log-log paper of the sane size as of pw~ and @ are given by Eq. 4. Once these two
Fig. 11. Normally, a tracing paper is placed over parameters are known, the fracture conductivity,
the type. curve, and the major grid lines are traced klw, can be estimated from kfD wtD data match. The
for reference. The grid of Fig. 11 is used to plot definition of kf~w@ is given by Eq. 13.
actual data on the tracing paper. Next, the data EXAMPLE 1
plot is moved vertically and horizontally over Fig.
11, keeping the grids of the type-curve and those This represents the results of a pressure drawdown
of the data plot parallel to each other until the test on an oil well. Pertinent drawdown and
best match is obtained with a curve of Fig. 11. reservoir properry data are given in Table 2. Fig.
From this figure, the ‘value of klD !UfD corresponding 13 shows the application of the type-curve matching
to the curve that fits the pressure data fs read. A technique for this case. A good and unique match
convenient match point is pieced and the values of is obtained for kfD wfD = 2rr and it appsars that the
(Ap)M and (At)M are read from the data plot. The test was not run long enough to reach the semilog
corresponding values lying directly under this point straight line. Thus, type-curve matching is the
on Fig. 11 are (pW@M ~d (~D)M. best method to analyze the data of this test.
The formation permeability, h, and the half-fracture The formation permeability may be estimated from
length, xi, may be obtained by substitution of the the pressure match, Ap = 100 psi, pw~D = 0.47, and
match point data into the expressions for data from Table 2, as follows:
= 0.47 =
10
‘pwfD)M
1 I I

c,of~ *:1 0.1 (k md) (30 ft) (100 psi)

141. 2(250, STB/D) (0.85 ,Cp) (1.65 ,bbl/STB]

I
I0’
I MATCH POIHT
Niloo Dll, t#o.4?
10L Allloohr$ ,lC$I.C
I0$
I
t :s1J
1
101
●

,.~ Id
1 1
10+ 10”1 10-1 I 10 t Io? IOJ
t, ●
✍☛ 10
,0.1 I 10
&tlhr81
,08 ,~$

FIG. 12 — #WtD VS tD FOR A HIGH-VGLi.JME, INE INITE- FIG, 13 — APPLICATION OF THE TYPE-CURVE
CONDUCTIVITY FRACTURE. MATCHING TECHNIQUE (EXAMPLE 1).
AUGISr. 197s
261
This yields tion of the type-curve and the semilogarithmic
techniques, rcapertively. Fig. 14 indicates that a
k- 7.76m~.
good data match is obtained with the curve for ,
k ~9@~D = 10 rr. Furthermore, some data points of
The half-fracture length then is calculated from t 1 is test fall in the semilog straight line.
the time match, t= 100hours and tD = 1.6; that is, The pressure match may be taken as I$p = 100
(tD)M = 1.6 = PSi 2UK! /)w/D = 0.4. Similarly, the tirric match may
be chosen as At = 100 hours and tn = 3.3. These
match points, in conjunction with- the additional
0.000264(7.76 md)(100 hrs)
data given in Table 3 yield
0. 3(0.85 Cp) (20x10-6 P& (xf2 ft2)
k _ 5.05 md
Hence,

= 158.4 ft. Xf = 83,23 ft

‘f
%
An estimation of the fracture conductivity, &jw,
wkf = 13.2 X 10= md-ft
may be obtained from the kfD #jD match and the
valuesofk andxf already computed; thus:
and
(kfw red-f t)
= -5.06 ●
‘fDwfD = 2 = (158.4 ft)(7.76 rnd) ‘f
From Fig. 15, the slope of the semi logarithmic
and straight line is m = -285 psi/cyck and P 1 h~~r =
kfw = 7.72 x 103 md-f~. 2,732 psia; then,

k=. 162.6~ qB1.i ~ - 162. 6x195x1. 4x1.8

Now, the pseudo-skin factor is calculated from -285x55
Fig. 9 by using kfDwjD and %f/ru, values. Since
kpwp = 2rrandxflrw =633.60,
k= 5.1 md
= -5.65”
‘f
Although the dimensionless fracture conductivity
has an intermediate value, the fracture is large *
enough to yield a good improvement in well g
productivity. 1

EXAMPLE 2 1
MATCH POIMT II
Table 3 presents the data fora drawdown test in ;—
4 AP~loo?Di,~,o*o!4?
a fractured well. Figs. 14 and 15 show the applica- J I I1 ~t,look~, ..1.. .9.3 II
,
1d’
I

10
;02
10-2 10-’ lt
TABLE 3- PRESSURE DRAWDCWNTEST DATA FORA o I
lG’
FRACTURED WELL (EXAMPLE 2) 1 10 At (h~)ld 103
4 = 0.18 h=55ft
C, = 18x10-13w1 p = l,8cp FIG. 14 — APPLICATION OF THE TYPE-CURVE
B = 1.4 bbl/STB MATCHING TECHNIQUE (EXAMPLE 2).
%. = 195sTB/D
t ~ =o,25ft .
Drawlown Dsta
—. o
00
/+ - Pwf Pi - Pwf
I&) -i!@!- (houm)
J__ _@Q- 2400 - 00”%%
1 81 24 2s3
o
2 103 30 307 Pwf
3 128 40 333 m=-aC~C#&
( psia) \
4 144 50 358 .
.5 157 60 378
6 17C 70 3m
7 182 80 411
8 192 90 424 2000 -
9 201 100 439
10 207 120 45s L
,m~
12 223 150 4s4 10-’ 1 10 102 103
14 2s 200 522
r ( hm)
16 247 250 54s
20 267 3W 571 FIG. 15 — SEMILOG GRAPH FOR EXAMPLE 2.

262 SWIETY OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JOURNAL

 2. For practical values of time, solutions can be
correlated as a function of one parameter,
‘1 hour-pi $L) W/D = kfw/kx/. This parameter.is the dimension-
= 1.1513 less fracture conductivity. A decrease in the
‘f rn
dimensionless fracture conductivity may be caused
I by a decrease in fracture permeability, an increase

-W3 [oM;r:]
+3.22751
~
in fracture length, or botb. This appears to be an
important reason why type-curve matching with the
original fracture type curves sometimes resulted in
small apparent fracture lengths for large fracture
jobs.

I
3,. For’ k~D wfD values equal to or greater than
2732-2600
= 1*1513 300, the finite-ccmductivity solutions are for all
‘f -285 practical purposes identical to the infinite-
conductivity vertical fracture solution of Gringarten
et al.

5.1 40 The uniform-flux, vertical fracture solution of

- Log Gringarten et al. behaves like the infinite-
[ .18X1.8X18X10-1X (.25)2 1 conductivity solution at small values of time; at
intermediate times, it follows a variable fracture

I
conductivity solution, For large values of time, it
+ 3.2275 follows a finite fracture conductivity solution of

“? .‘~e=u;~~” when plotted as a function of

dimensionless wellbore pressure drop vs the
= -5.04” logarithm of dimensionless time do follow (for
‘f
large values of time) straight lines of slope equal
Results from both procedures are in excellent to 1.151. Thus, commonly used semilogarithmic
agreement; however, additional data concerning the methods of analysis can be used.
fracture geometry may be ~ound from the rype-cutve 6. The approximate start of the .w:milogarithrnic
analysis. Comparison of Fig. 14 with Fig. 15 is straight line is a function of k~D w~D. The dimension-
interesting. Only four data points lie to the right of less time for this point ranges from 2.5 to 5 for
the dashed line in Fig. 14, while 10 or 11 points practical values of fracture conductivity, but this
seem ro lie on the semilog straight line in Fig, 15. range may be stretched to lower times when
This would include all points to the right of the necessary.
arrow in Fig. 14. This results because the analytic 7. Results when plotted as a fimction of log
solutions approach the semilog straight line ~w~D vs log tf)show, at small values of t~, a set
asymptotically. This practical application of the of curves of distinct shapes for the different values
criteria for the start of the semilo~ straight line Of kjD wjD . Hence, a type-curve matching procedure
indicates the rules may be stretched with acceptable can be used to obtain both the formation and
results. fracture characteristics.
If pressure data are not available for early times, 8. Pressure data for a well with a low or an
a uniqueness problem arises when type-curve intermediate conductivity fracture (k~D WjD < 300)
matching is applied. This means that data will does not exhibit a one-half slope, straight line in a
match any of the curves in Fig. 11 because they log-log graph.
are similar for large values of time. As a
consequence, fracture geometry parameters cannot NOMENCLATURE
be estimated, and the only applicable technique
will be the semilogarithmic method. 6’= relative capacity parameter defined by
Prats,ls dimensionless
CONCLUSIONS f3= formation volume factor, bbl/STB
The main purpose of this study was to provide a c= compressibility, psi-l
solution that could be applied to analyze transient c, = fracture storage capacity, ft3/psi
pressure data for wells with a finite-conductivity k = formation thickness, ft
vertical fracture. From the results of this k= permeability
investigation, the following conclusions can be
p= pressure
reached.
1. Solutions for the transient pressure behavior 9/ = fracture flux density, STB/D - ft
for a well with ‘ a finite-conductivity vertical 9W = well flow rate, STB/D
fracture can be correlated by two dirnensiotdess t= time, hours
parameters, CIDf= w~fc~l /nxf et, and ~/D = kf+ct/ w. fracture. width, ft
%+cjt “ x,y = space coordinates, ft

Almlsr, 197s
‘w
 .
●

Fractured Oil Wells,” paper SPE 334S presented et

T = hydraulic diffusivity, md-psi/cp
the SPE.AIME Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting,
P = viscosity, cp Billings, MT, June 2-4, 1971.
@ = porosity, fraction 10. Rsgtmvsn, R., Cady, G. V,, and Ramey, EL J., jr.:
~~Well Test Analysis for Vertically Fractured
SUBSCRIPTS Wells, t? ,J, Pet, Tech. (Aug. 1972) 1014-1020;
D = dimensionless Trams,, AIME, Vol. 253,
/ = fracture 11. Schrider, L. A. ●nd Locke, C. D.: ‘$Effectiveness of
Different Hydraulic Fracturing Trcatmenta in “ ow
i = initial Permeability Reservoirs,” pt!per SPE 453u presented
t = total ●t the SPE-AIME 4Sth Annual Fail Meeting, Las
Vegas, Sept. 30-Ott. 3, 1973.
w= wellbore
12.,. Ramey, H. J., Jr., ●nd Gringsrten, A. C.: ‘iEffect of
SPECIAL FUNCTIONS High Volume Vertical Fractures on Geothermal
Steam Well Behavior,)$ Proc., Second United Nationa
Symposium on the Use ●nd Development of (3eothermai
Enc?gy, San Francisco, May 20=29, 1975.
13. Locke, C. D. and Sawyer, W. K.: ‘gConstant Preasuro
Injection Test in II Fractured Reservoir-History
Match Using Numerical Simulation ●nd Type Curve
Analyais,C~ paper SPE S594 presented ●t the SPE=
d% r- AIME 50th Annual Fall Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, Sept. 2S=Oct. 1, 1975.
14. Gringmten, A. C., Ramey, H. J., Jr., and f?aghavan,
references R.: ~6Applied Pressure Analysis for Fractured Wells,$’
J. Pet. Tech. (July 197S) 887-S92.
1. Prats, M., Hazebroek, P.,and Strickler, W. R.:
‘Jl%ffectof Vertical Fractureaon Reservoir Behavior 15. Sswyer, W. K., Locke, C. D., ●nd Overbey, W. K., Jr.:
- CompreaaiMe.Fluid Case,” Sot. Pet. 8mg. J. tcsimulation of ● Finite@apacity Vertical Fracture
(June 1962) 87-94; Trams., ASME, Vol. 225. in a Gas Reservoir,’$ paper SPE 4593 Presented at
2. Scott, J. o.: ~c~e Effect of Vertical Fracturea on
the SPE-AIME 4Sth Annual Fall Meeting, Las Vegas,
Tranai~nt Pressure Behavior of Wells, ” J. Pet. Tech. Sept. 3&Oct. 3, 19730
(Dec. 1963) 1365-1369; Trans., AIME, Vol. 22S. 16. Matthews, C. S. and Russell, D, G.: Ptessurs BMift&
3. Ruascll, D. G. ●nd Truitt, N. E.: !’Transient Pres- and Flow Teats im Wells, ?donwrrwahseries, society
sure Behavior in Vertically Fractured Reservoirs,’” of Petroleum Engineers, Dallaa (1967).
J. Pet. Tech. (Oct. 1%4) 11s9.1 170; Truss., AIME, 17. Csrslfiw, H. S. and Jaeger, J. C.: Conduction of
Vol. 231. Heat in Solids, 2nd cd., Oxford at the Clarendon
Lee, W. J., Jr.: “Analysis of Hydraulically Fractured Press (1959) 275.
4.
Wells With Pressure Buildup Teats,” paper SPE 1s. Prats, M,: ##Effect of ve~ica~ Fractures on Rese~oir
1820 presented at the SPE-AIME 42nd Annual Fall Behavior - Incompressible Case,” Sot. Pet. Eng. ~.
Meeting, Houston, Oct. 1-4, 1967. (June 1961) 105-1 1S; Tnrtisd, AIME, VO1. 222.
5. Millheim, K. Kt and Cichowicz, L.: “Testing and 19. Gringarten, A. C., Ramey, H. J., Jr., and Raghavan,
Analyzing Low-Permeability Fractured Gaa Wells,” R.: t$Unateady-statePreaswe Distributions Created
J. Pet. Tech (Feb. 1968) 193-19S; Trans., AIME, by a Well With a Single infinite.Conductivity Vertical
Fra~ture,~~ Sot. Pef, Eng. J* (Aug. 1974) 347-360~
Vol. 243.
Tram,, AIME, Vol. 257.
6. Clark, K. K.: ‘~ Transient Pressure Testing of Frac-
tured Water Snjection Wells,” J. Pet. Tech (June 20. van Poollen, H. K,: c~ProductivWy vs Permeability
1%S) 639-643; Trans., AIME, Vol. 243. Damage in Hydraulically Produced Fracture,”
Drill. and Prod. Prac., API (1957) 103.
7. Wsttenbarger, R. A. and Remey, H. J., Jr.: “well
Test Interpretation of Vertically Fractured Gas 21. McGuire, W. J. and Sikora, V. J.: “The Effect of
Wella, t$ ), Pet, ?’ecb. (May 1969) 625-632; Trans.. Vertical Fracturea on Well Productivity,$’ Tram,,
AIME, Vol. 246. AIME (1960) Vol. 219, 401-403.
8. van Everdingen, .% F. and Meyer, L. J.: ‘~Analyais 22. Gringarten, A. C. and Ramey, H. J., Jr.: “The I.@
of Buildup Curves Obtained After Well Treatment,” of Source and Green’s Functions in Solving Unsteudy
/. Pet. Tech (April 1971) S13-S24; Tram., AIME, Flow Problems in Reservoirs, ‘~ Sot. Pet. Eng. J.
vol. 2s1. @ct. 1973) 285.296; Ttams., AIME, Vol. 2S5.
9. Evans, J. G.: ~~~e Use of pressure Buildup Infor- 23. Ramey, H. J., Jr.: Personal communication, Stanford
mation to Analyze Non-Respondent Vertically U., Stanford, CA (1977).
***

au SOCIETY OF P8TROLEUM CNGINZ8M8 JOU8NAL