PETROLEUM EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Volume 47, Issue 5, October 2020

http://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/petroleum-exploration-and-development

Cite this article as: PETROL. EXPLOR. DEVELOP., 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130. RESEARCH PAPER

Numerical simulation of hydraulic fracture propagation in

laminated shale reservoirs
ZHOU Tong1, WANG Haibo1, LI Fengxia1, LI Yuanzhao2, ZOU Yushi3,*, ZHANG Chi2
1. Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development, Sinopec, Beijing 100083, China;
2. Shale Gas Exploration and Development Co., Ltd., Sinopec, Chongqing 408014, China;
3. China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China

Abstract: The main area of the Jiaoshiba anticline of the Fuling shale gas field was taken as the research object, laboratory rock me-
chanical experiments and direct shear experiments were conducted to clarify the mechanical anisotropy characteristics and parameters of
rock samples with rich beddings. Based on the experimental results, a 3D fracture propagation model of the target reservoir taking me-
chanical anisotropy, weak bedding plane and vertical stress difference into account was established by the discrete element method to
analyze distribution patterns of hydraulic fractures under different bedding densities, mechanical properties, and fracturing engineering
parameters (including perforation clusters, injection rates and fracturing fluid viscosity). The research results show that considering the
influence of the weak bedding plane and longitudinal stress difference, the interlayer stress difference 3–4 MPa in the study area can con-
trol the fracture height within the zone of stress barrier, and the fracture height is less than 40 m. If the influence of the weak bedding
plane is not considered, the simulation result of fracture height is obviously higher. Although the opening of high-density bedding frac-
tures increases the complexity of hydraulic fractures, it significantly limited the propagation of fracture height. By reducing the number of
clusters, increasing the injection rate, and increasing the volume and proportion of high-viscosity fracturing fluid in the pad stage, the re-
striction on fracture height due to the bedding plane and vertical stress difference can be reduced, and the longitudinal propagation of
fractures can be promoted. The fracture propagation model was used to simulate one stage of Well A in Fuling shale gas field, and the
simulation results were consistent with the micro-seismic monitoring results.

Key words: shale; lamina; hydraulic fracturing; fracture propagation law; longitudinal stress difference; Jiaoshiba anticline; shale gas reservoir

Introduction that can simulate propagation of multiple fractures, including

Shale reservoirs are typically characterized by low porosity
and ultra-low permeability. The key to effectively developing
shale oil and gas is to form a large-scale complex fracture
network by multi-stage and multi-cluster fracturing in hori-
zontal wells. Different from conventional reservoirs, shale, as
a type of layered sedimentary rock, has strong heterogeneity.
Meanwhile, shale reservoirs have a large number of local dis-
continuities, such as faults, bedding planes and natural frac-
tures, which result in significant structural anisotropy that
exerts a certain impact on the hydraulic fracture propagation.
The research on the expansion mechanism of complex
fracture networks in shale reservoirs has become an important
topic in the field of unconventional oil and gas development.
In recent years, a lot of theoretical research on the propagation
of hydraulic fractures in shale reservoirs has been carried
out, and a series of fracturing models have been established
the line network model[1], discrete fracture network model[2–3],
unconventional fracture model[4], and other models based on
the finite element method[5–6], boundary element method[7–10],
extended finite element method[11–12], discrete element
method[13–16] and phase-field method[17–18]. The above models
simplify the rock as an isotropic medium and primarily focus
on the fracture distribution under the influence of high-angle
natural fractures. However, these models generally fail to
consider the influences of typical characteristics of shale such
as bedding and mechanical anisotropy on the morphology of
fracture propagation. As demonstrated in the laboratory frac-
turing simulation and field fracture monitoring, bedding frac-
tures have an important impact on the vertical extension and
propagation morphology of hydraulic fractures[19–23]. When
encountering bedding surfaces, hydraulic fractures may result
in penetration, diversion, termination, or stepped extension,

Received date: 28 Nov. 2019; Revised date: 18 Aug. 2020.

* Corresponding author. E-mail: yushizou@126.com
Foundation item: Supported by the China National Science and Technology Major Project (2016ZX05060001-032).
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1876-3804(20)60122-7
Copyright © 2020, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration & Development, PetroChina. Publishing Services provided by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Com-
munications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130
which cause uncertainty of the shape of the final fracture
network. As a result, most numerical models can not reflect
the essential difference between hydraulic fracture propaga-
tion in laminated shale reservoirs and that in naturally frac-
tured reservoirs.
Field coring data shows that shale reservoirs have highly
dense bedding fractures (several to hundreds per meter)
commonly. The strong anisotropy brings great challenges to
the simulation of fracture propagation in shale reservoirs. It is
accurate to analyze the influence of the weak surface of the
natural fracture on fracture propagation using the cohesive
element of the finite element[24]. Nevertheless, when the natu-
ral fracture density is set too high, the calculation stability and
convergence are significantly poor. For the shale with abun-
dant weak bedding planes, the rock mass medium is more like
a discrete body of discontinuous media. As a numerical simu-
lation for discontinuous medium, the discrete element method
has great advantages in dealing with large deformation prob-
lems of discontinuous medium such as rock and soil fractures
(like highly complex fracture network)[25]. Zhao et al.[13] used
the two-dimensional particle discrete element method to sim-
ulate the behavior of hydraulic and natural fractures, in which
they simulated natural fractures by weakening the bond
strength between particles. Zangeneh et al.[14] used the
two-dimensional discrete element method to simulate the hy-
draulic fracture network. In their model, the stratum was di-
vided by multiple sets of joints, bounded by deformable rock
blocks. Nagel et al.[15] studied the types and influencing fac-
tors of hydraulic fractures in naturally fractured reservoirs
using the 3D discrete element method. However, they didnot
consider the influence of bedding fracture. Zou et al.[26–27]
established a three-dimensional discrete element fracture
network model to explore the influence of bedding fractures
on the propagation of hydraulic fractures in shale reservoirs at
engineering scale, but they did not take into account the in-
fluence of the longitudinal reservoir stress heterogeneity on
the hydraulic fracture propagation pattern.
Taking the Longmaxi shale reservoir in the main area of the
Jiaoshiba anticline in the Fuling shale gas field as the research
object, we carried out a series of experimental tests to inves-
tigate the mechanical anisotropy of the shale reservoir in this
study. Then, a three-dimensional complex fracture propaga-
tion model was built and solved based on the discrete element
method. Moreover, the propagation model was combined with
the indoor experimental test to investigate the law of hydrau-
lic fracture propagation in shale reservoirs under the influ-
ences of longitudinal stress difference and bedding.
1. Geological background
In this study, the main area of the Jiaoshiba anticline is
taken as the research object. The organic-rich, gas-bearing
shale intervals of the Upper Ordovician Wufeng Formation
and the Lower Silurian Longmaxi Formation are mainly con-
centrated in the bottom of Wufeng Formation-Longmaxi
 1118 
Formation, below which is a set of light-gray nodular lime-
stone of the Upper Ordovician Jiancaogou Formation. Ac-
cording to the reservoir physical properties, shale layers in the
Longmaxi and Wufeng Formations are divided into 9 sublay-
ers from bottom to top. Gray-black carbonaceous and sili-
ceous shale take dominance in Wufeng Formation-Longmaxi
Formation. The main gas-bearing layers have rich beddings,
and the numbers of beddings decrease from the bottom to the
top[28]. Among them, the sublayer ① is developed strongly in
bedding fractures, with hundreds of bedding fractures per
meter. In contrast, the sublayers ⑧ and ⑨ at the top have
fewer bedding fractures. The core observation results are
shown in Table 1. It can be seen that the high-angle natural
fractures in the reservoir are generally small in scale and not
connected with each other.
The vertical stress profile of Well Jiaoye A was interpreted
based on the corrected logging curve obtained during the
Kaiser in-situ stress test (Fig. 1). The minimum horizontal
principal stress varies in the longitudinal direction. The in-situ
stresses of sublayers ①–④ fluctuate within a small range
(only 1–2 MPa), with an average of 49 MPa; the in-situ stress
of sublayer ⑤ is significantly higher (up to 53 MPa), and
there is a stress difference of 3–4 MPa between sublayer ⑤
and sublayers ①–④; and the in-situ stress of sublayer ⑥ in-
creases further and reaching 56 MPa in maximum. In addition,
the Jiancaogou Formation that underlies the target layer is a
good stress-shielding layer, resulting in a stress difference of
more than 12 MPa.
2. Anisotropy of shale
Taking the Fuling shale gas field as the research object,
triaxial rock mechanics tests of shale samples taken from dif-
ferent sublayers and different coring directions of the same
Table 1. Development of beddings in different sublayers.
Density of bed-
Sub- Bond
Core photo ding fracture/
layer strength
(numberm1)
⑨ 10 Strong
⑧ 32 Strong
⑥–⑦ 65 Medium
Weak-
⑤ 90
medium
①–④ 165 Weak
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130

Fig. 1. Comprehensive evaluation of the target interval in Well Jiaoye A.

well were carried out with a dynamic rock triaxial test system
under high temperature and high pressure conditions, and the
results are shown in Fig. 2. It can be seen that elastic modulus
Eh measured in the direction parallel to the bedding (0°) is
generally higher than Ev measured in the direction perpen-
dicular to the bedding (90°). The Eh/Ev value decreases from
1.26 in sublayer ① with many bedding fractures to 1.06 in
sublayer ⑧ with few bedding fractures (Fig. 2a). When the
loading stress acts vertically on the bedding surface, the com-
paction effect of the external force will lead to the closure of
the bedding microfractures. A larger axial strain generally
corresponds to smaller elastic and deformation moduli. The
more developed the bedding fractures,the more obvious the
phenomenon will be. As the confining pressure increases, and
the compaction effect of the interlayer fractures enhances, the
elastic moduli measured in different directions tend to be
more similar (Fig. 2b). In addition, due to the influence of
bedding fractures, the fracturing patterns of core samples from
different bedding directions are different from each other.
Generally, longitudinal tensile fractures occur more frequently
in core samples with parallel bedding, while conjugate shear
failures with tensile and shear fractures are predominant in
core samples with vertical bedding.
To study the mechanical properties of bedding and their in-
fluences on the shear strength anisotropy of shale, the shear
strengths of standard samples parallel to and perpendicular to
the bedding direction were tested using a direct shear testing
machine. The internal friction angle and cohesion of the sam-
ples were approximately obtained by linear regression (Fig. 3).
As shown in the Mohr-Coulomb strength envelope curves
obtained by the direct shear test, the shear stress required for
shear failure of the rock mass in the case that the direction of
the shear stress is parallel to that of the bedding direction is
lower than that in the case that the shear stress direction is

 1119 
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130
Fig. 2. Mechanical test results of shale samples in different cor-
ing directions.
Fig. 3. Mohr-Coulomb strength envelope curves in different
shear directions.
perpendicular to the bedding direction, under the same normal
stress. At the same time, more developed bedding corresponds
to lower shear strength in the direction parallel to the bedding.
When sheared in the direction parallel to the bedding, the
cohesion of sublayer ① with extremely developed bedding is
5.24 MPa, while that of sublayer ⑧ with few bedding is 15.18
MPa. Besides, affected by the degree of bedding development,
the fracture surface is flat and smooth when the sample is
sheared in the direction parallel to the bedding. In contrast,
when the shearing direction is perpendicular to the bedding
direction, composite failure modes such as matrix tensile
splitting and bedding plane shear slip occur, the fracture sur-
face is unsmooth and some fragments are generated by local
 1120 
splitting and peeling.
The mechanical parameters of shale, such as elastic pa-
rameters and shear strength, are anisotropic due to the exis-
tence of weak planes or bedding. For the shale gas reservoir
with developed bedding, accurately describing the develop-
ment degree of bedding and the anisotropic characteristics
under its influence are the key to reflecting the difference of
hydraulic fracture propagation in shale reservoirs and natu-
rally fractured reservoirs.
3. The three-dimensional fracture propagation
model
The governing equation of the model is mainly composed
of the fracturing fluid flow equation, the rock mass deforma-
tion equation, and the fracture failure criterion. This govern-
ing equation is solved by combining the finite element and
discrete element methods[26–27]. According to the discrete ele-
ment method[29], the solution domain of the stratum model (f)
is discretized into several triangular-prism block elements that
are linked by virtual springs to transfer the interaction force.
The break of spring represents the rock fracture. The joint
elements between all the contact block elements constitute the
connected fracture network for fracturing fluid flow. The dis-
tribution of the fluid pressure in the contact block is calculated
using the finite element method. The pressure is taken as ex-
ternal load acting on the fracture surface (i.e. the contact sur-
face of the blocks), and the deformation of the block and the
stress state of the spring are calculated. The spring break
(fracture propagation) is determined by the maximum tensile
stress criterion and the Mohr-Coulomb criterion. At the same
time, the constitutive equation of transversely isotropic linear
elastic material is used to replace the isotropic constitutive
equation to study the influence of the mechanical anisotropy
of shale rock on the morphology of fracture propagation[26–27].
3.1. Flow equation
The fluid flow in the fracture is regarded as the plane plate
flow of incompressible Newtonian fluid, which satisfies the
continuity equation without considering the effect of grav-
ity[28]:
 w3 p
 qx  
 12 x
 (1)
q   w p
3
 y 12  y
w qx q y
   ql  0 (2)
t x y
Due to extremely low permeability of the shale matrix, the
matrix block is regarded impermeable and the filtration of the
fracturing fluid is ignored, i.e., ql=0. Then, the global mass
balance equation in the fracture network is as follows:
 f
wds  tQ (3)
When N cracks initiate simultaneously, and the total fluid
rate entering all the fractures is Q, the fluid flow into each
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130

fracture depends on the width and pressure of the fracture in action force disappears, namely:
the process of its extension. The model assumes the fractures  Fn( n )  0
are completely filled with fluid, and there is no flow at the end  (n) (9)
 Fs  0
of the hydraulic fractures.
When Fs    Fs,max  AS0  Fn  n  tan , shear failure oc-
n

3.2. Deformation equation of the rock mass curs, accompanied by shear displacement between adjacent
blocks (Δun≤0, Δus>0). At this moment, different from the
The linear elastic dynamic equilibrium equation is as fol-
tensile failure, the shear failure is associated with compressive
lows[30]:
 ij , j  bi   ai ,t   ui ,t  0 (4) stress and friction resistance between blocks:
 Fn  Fn
( n 1)
( n)
 k n Δun( n )
The boundary of the model block is fixed, and ui=0; in the  ( n) (10)
 Fs  Fs,re  Fn tan 
(n)
condition that a contact force is applied on the contact surface
of the block, the fluid pressure pi ( pi   ij  n j ) is applied on
3.3. Iterative coupling of equations
the fracture wall when the hydraulic fracture occurs. Since the
stress-strain relationship conforms to the linear elastic consti- Under the action of the fluid pressure in the fracture, after
tutive equation[30], then: the matrix block deforms, the width of the fracture changes.
 ij  Dijkl  kl (5) Meanwhile, the fluid rate in the fracture also changes with the
As a type of laminated sedimentary rock, shale can be re- width, which affects the fluid pressure in the fracture. In other
garded as a type of transversely isotropic material, namely, its words, the fluid pressure in the fracture and the fracture width
elastic characteristics are the same in the bedding planes, but affect each other. The weak coupling method is used to realize
different in the direction perpendicular to the bedding plane[31]. the iterative process of the fracturing fluid flow and solid de-
Five elastic constants, Eh, Ev, υh, υv, and Gv, are used to charac- formation in fracture, while the flow equation and rock mass
terize the linear elastic characteristics of transversely isotropic deformation equation are discretized respectively, and solved
rock. If the shale layer is horizontal, its flexibility coefficient sequentially and iteratively[26–27]. Before the tensile or shear
matrix is as follows: failure occurs in the matrix block, the permeability of the ini-
 1 h v  tial joint unit is equal to that of the matrix block. The perme-
 E   0 0 0  ability of the matrix block is equivalent to the initial width of
 h Eh Ev  the fracture, that is, w0=(12K0)1/2, and the original fracture
 h 1 v 
  0 0 0  width is designed for the initial flow of the fluid[33]. Then, in
 Eh Eh Ev  the current time step, it is necessary to select appropriate ex-
  v 1  perimental solutions pm and wm to solve the pressure pm+1 in
 v  0 0 0 
 Ev Ev Ev  the next time step, then wm+1 is calculated with equation (11).
A  (6)
2 1   h  Generally, 0< ≤0.5 is taken, and the time step is small enough
 0 0 0 0 0 
  to facilitate the iterative convergence of the equation[34].
Eh
     wm 
 0 1  pm  12  f
0 0 0 0  
  wm   tm
 Gv    (11)
   p  (1   ) p   p
 0 1   m 1 m m  12
 0 0 0 0
 Gv 
3.4. Model validation
where the shear modulus Gv is[32]:
Eh E v The propagation patterns of symmetrical vertical fracture
Gv 
Eh 1   v   Ev and horizontal radial fracture were simulated by the model,
and compared with the analytical solutions of the classical
There are normal and tangential springs between adjacent
fracturing models. The main input parameters were E=35 GPa,
blocks, and the springs can be broken by tensile or shear slip,
ν=0.2, =5 MPaꞏs, and Q=5 m3/min. The results are shown in
i.e. tensile failure or shear failure. Whether a spring is broken
Fig. 4. In the classical PKN model and the radial model, the
is judged according to the maximum tensile stress criterion
energy consumption during fracture propagation is assumed to
and the Mohr-Coulomb criterion. When −Fn(n)<Fn,max (the
(n) be mainly used for fluid flow in the fracture, and the influ-
tensile stress is negative) or Fs <Fs,max , there is no failure
ences of mechanical fracture parameters, such as fracture
between adjacent contact points. The normal stress and shear
toughness and tensile strength of the rock, are not considered.
stress in step n are solved with equations (7) and (8).
The tensile strength is set at zero in the numerical model. The
Fn( n )  Fn( n 1)  k n Δun( n ) (7)
results of the numerical model are basically consistent with
Fs( n )  Fs( n 1)  ks Δus( n ) (8) those of the PKN and radial models, with a difference of 3.6%
(n)
When Fn Fn,max=AT0, tensile failure occurs, the spring and 4.9% respectively, which verifies the reliability of the
breaks, adjacent blocks are separated (Δun>0), and the inter- numerical model.
 1121 
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130

Fig. 4. Comparison of results of the numerical model and clas-

sical models.

4. Simulation and analysis

Based on the reservoir parameters of the Jiaoshiba anticline
in the Fuling shale gas field, a layered formation model was
established. Considering that the formation is of horizontal Fig. 5. The minimum horizontal principal stress network model.
occurrence, the boundary of the triangular-prism grid element weak bedding planes with the interval of 2–10 m before frac-
is along the preset trace line of the interlayer interface (weak turing. At the same time, in order to study the influence of
bedding plane). In the early stage of simulation, it was found natural fractures on the morphology of the fracture growth,
that the fractures were not affected by the upper sublayers discrete high angle natural fractures 20 m long and 10 m high
⑦–⑨ in the simulation of sublayers ①–⑨. Out of the con- were set up in random distribution in the model. Given the
sideration of computational efficiency of the model, the in- fact that high-angle natural fractures in the reservoir are of
fluences of sublayers ⑦–⑨ are not considered in the follow- small scales and not connected with each other, their linear
ing modeling. The model was 200 m wide, 500 m long and 50 density was set at 0.05/m. In reference to results of the labo-
m thick in X, Y, and Z directions, respectively. According to ratory rock mechanics test, the mechanical parameters of the
the results of laboratory experiments and in-situ stress inter- shale matrix, natural fracture and weak bedding plane such as
pretation from well logging, the 9 sublayers were divided into tensile strengths, cohesion and internal friction angles were
3 intervals with different stresses vertically (Table 2). Among determined (Table 3).
them, the total thickness of sublayers ①–④ at the bottom was
Table 3. Main input parameters of fracturing simulation.
28 m; the thickness of sublayer ⑤ in the middle part was 10
m, and the stress difference with sublayer ⑥ was 3 MPa; the Category Parameter value
thickness of sublayer ⑥ in the upper part was 12 m. The hor- Density 2 600 kg/m3
Elastic modulus Eh=35 GPa and Ev=30 GPa
izontal well passed through the middle of sublayers ①–④,
Poisson's ratio υh=0.200 and υv=0.175
and the grid model is shown in Fig. 5. To simulate 3-cluster Shale
Permeability 0.001×103 μm2
fracturing in a single stage, it was assumed that only one hy- matrix
Tensile strength 10 MPa
draulic fracture was produced in each perforation cluster. The
Shear strength 30 MPa
basic fracturing simulation parameters were 3 clusters at the
Internal friction angle 40°
spacing of 25 m in one stage, displacement of 14 m3/min, and
Permeability 0.01×103 μm2
fracturing fluid viscosity of 2.5 MPaꞏs.
Bedding Tensile strength 110 MPa
In the study area, bedding fractures are developed in gen- fracture Shear strength 5–30 MPa
eral, especially in the sublayers ①–④ at the bottom of the Internal friction angle 5°–40°
Wufeng-Longmaxi Formations, bedding fractures reach the Permeability (0.01–10.00)×103 μm2
density of over one hundred per meter. During the simulation Natural Tensile strength 0–5 MPa
of the fracture propagation, it is necessary to use an equivalent fracture Shear strength 0–20 MPa
method to approximate the bedding fractures to "explicit" Friction angle 0°–35°
Maximum horizontal
Table 2. Parameters of the in-situ stress profile. 56 MPa
principal stress
Sublayer Z/m σH/MPa σh/MPa σv/MPa p0/MPa Stress Minimum horizontal
49–56 MPa
⑥ 38–50 56 56 58 40 state principal stress
⑤ 28–38 56 53 58 40 Vertical stress 58 MPa
①–④ 0–28 56 49 58 40 Pore pressure 40 MPa

 1122 
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130
4.1. Results of simulation not considering the effect of
bedding
To illustrate the influence of the weak bedding plane on the
distribution of artificial fractures in the heterogeneous interval,
the simulated morphology of fracture propagation in the ho-
mogeneous reservoir interval of a single stage of horizontal
well (without considering bedding and natural fractures) is
taken as a comparison (Fig. 6a). The simulation with the
above fracturing parameters showed three single-wing main
fractures 450–480 m long were formed after fracturing in the
homogeneous interval. Under the influence of the stress
shadow, the fractures in the outer clusters deflected to the
outside; the fractures in the middle clusters extended along the
fracture height direction more than the outer cluster fractures
under the compression of the outer fractures. The fracture near
the wellbore passed through the interface of sublayers ⑤ and
⑥, and was up to 50 m high. With the increase of the distance
to the wellbore, the height of the artificial fracture decreased
gradually. Restricted by the stress difference of the interlayer,
it can be seen that the fracture height at the fracture tip was
limited to the top of sublayer ④, and couldn't enter sublayer
⑤, with the height of 28 m. In the case considering the influ-
ence of natural fractures (without considering bedding), with
the opening of natural fractures, the complexity of the hydrau-
lic fractures increased, and the main fractures decreased in
length to about 330 m. Due to the existence of local
high-angle cross-layer natural fractures, the fracture height
was very large at local positions (Fig. 6b). In general, the
near-wellbore fractures passed through two stress-shielding
layers in the simulation not considering the influence of bed-
ding.
Fig. 6. Simulated morphology of fracture propagation in the single stage of horizontal well without considering the bedding effect (with
simulated injection of 15 min).
 1123 
4.2. Simulation considering the effect of bedding
4.2.1. Influence of the density of weak bedding plane
According to the physical modeling of fracturing in labora-
tory, a "fence-shaped" complex fracture network interwoven
by bedding and hydraulic fractures is generated in the shale
after fracturing[16], and the density of the weak bedding plane
would significantly affect the morphology of the propagation
of artificial fractures. Under the basic fracturing operation
parameters (NC=3, Q=14 m3/min, μ=2.5 mPaꞏs) and medium
strength (TBP=4 MPa, SBP=15 MPa, and φBP=25°) and 2 m of
spacing between weak bedding planes, the fracture propaga-
tion morphologies at different injection times are shown in Fig.
7. In the early stage of expansion (5 min into injection in the
simulation), the hydraulic fracture extended in the sublayers
①–④, accompanied with bedding opening (Fig. 7a); after 15
min of injection, due to the influence of the interlayer stress
difference, the fracture height propagation was obstructed and
stabilized at 28 m. The hydraulic fracture extend along the
direction of the fracture length and the bedding opened con-
tinuously (Fig. 7b); after injection for 45 min, the hydraulic
fractures in the middle cluster broke through sublayer ④ and
expanded to sublayer ⑤. Finally, they were cut off by bed-
ding fractures, and the fracture height was stable at 38 m
(Fig. 7c).
Fig. 8 shows the numerical simulation results of the artifi-
cial fracture propagation at different weak plane densities. As
a large-area, continuous weak plane, beddings in shale can
increase the fracture density during the hydraulic fracturing,
and thus improve the adequacy and effect of the reservoir
stimulation. The larger the bedding density, the higher the
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130

Fig. 7. Fracture propagation morphologies at different simulation time during the single stage fracturing in the horizontal well in the
case considering bedding effect (at weak plane spacing of 2 m).

Fig. 8. Simulated fracture growth morphologies at different bedding densities (45 min into injection).

hydraulic fracture density in unit volume will be. However,
the opening of too many beddings will severely restrict the
expansion of hydraulic fractures in the direction of length and
height, consequently, the stimulated reservoir volume will
greatly reduce. Under different bedding densities, the rela-
tionships between the length and height of artificial fractures
and the stimulation time are shown in Fig. 9. When dBP was 8
m (weakly developed), the fracture length and height ex-
panded rapidly, and the fracture near the well went through
the interface of sublayers ⑤ and ⑥ at 15 min. Then, the overall

 1124 
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130
Fig. 9. Fracture propagation dynamics under different bedding
densities.
artificial fracture height was stabilized at 40 m, and the final
simulated fracture length was 400 m. When dBP was 2 m, the
fracture length was less than 300 m, the hydraulic fractures
ended at the interface of sublayers ⑤ and ⑥, and the fracture
near the wellbore reached a maximum height of 37 m. In gen-
eral, the fractures near the well mostly ended at the interface
of sublayers ⑤ and ⑥, with a fracture height of about 38 m,
which is obviously smaller than that in the model without
considering the bedding effect. In contrast, the artificial frac-
tures far from the wellbore terminated at the interface of
sublayers ④ and ⑤, with a fracture height of about 28 m.
4.2.2. Influence of the strength of the weak bedding
plane
The tensile strength and shear strength (including cohesion
and internal friction angle) of beddings are used to describe
whether the bedding is easy to open or not. To study the in-
fluence of the bedding strength on the fracture propagation
morphology, four groups of experiment schemes were set up,
in which different values of TBP, SBP, and φBP were input to
simulate weak bedding planes with different strengths. The
strength grading is shown in Table 4.
The bedding spacing was 2 m. The dynamic parameters of
the fracture propagation and the fracture morphology at the
end of the simulation are shown in Figs. 10 and 11, respec-
tively. It can be seen that the artificial fractures in the shale
reservoir with low-strength weak bedding planes were cut off
by the bedding fractures near the well and only propagated
horizontally along the bedding, and were less than 5 m
Table 4. Mechanical parameters of the weak bedding plane.
Serial Grade of bedding
TBP/MPa SBP/MPa φBP/(°)
number strength
1 High ≥8 ≥25 ≥35
2 Medium-high (5, 8) (15, 25) (25, 35)
3 Medium [3, 5] [10, 15] [20, 25]
4 Low <3 <10 <20
 1125 
Fig. 10. Fracture propagation dynamics under different beddin
g strength conditions.
high (Fig. 11a). In contrast, when the mechanical strength of
the bedding is moderate to high, the fractures height expanded
smoothly. When the hydraulic fractures passed through sub-
layer ④, they stopped expanding in height for a period of time
due to the stress difference between sublayer ④ and ⑤. At
the later stage of fracturing simulation (40 min), the middle
cluster fractures penetrated through the stress shielding layer
under the condition of medium-high to high bedding strength
(Fig. 10). As the bedding strength increases, it becomes more
difficult to open the bedding, while the fracturing fluid is
more efficient in creating main fractures, thereby the fractures
increase in length (Fig. 11d). When the bedding strength is
weak, the bedding is easy to be opened by hydraulic fracture,
then the hydraulic fracture would divert along the bedding,
ending with much smaller fracture height.
4.2.3. Influences of fracturing engineering parameters
To investigate the correlation between fracturing parame-
ters and fracture propagation morphology, under constant
geological parameters, medium bedding strength (TBP=4 MPa,
SBP=15 MPa, and φBP=25°), and bedding spacing of 2 m,
simulations at different cluster numbers, displacements and
fracturing fluid viscosities were conducted, and the results are
shown in Fig. 12.
The same injection parameters, the less the clusters in one
stage, the better it is to increase the fluid pressure in the frac-
ture, thereby promote the expansion of the fracture height. In
the simulation under 2 clusters in one stage and the cluster
spacing of 25 m, two transverse fractures 400 m long were
formed; the near-well artificial fractures extended to the top of
sublayer ⑥, with a height of 48 m, while those far from the
wellbore stopped growth at the interface of sublayers ⑤ and
⑥, with a height of 38 m (Fig. 12a). As the cluster number
increases, the fracture height decreases. In the simulation un-
der 3 (Fig. 7c) and 5 clusters (Fig. 12b) per stage, the artificial
fractures near wellbore stopped growth at the interface of
sublayers ⑤ and ⑥ longitudinally, with fracture heights of
38–40 m, while those far from the wellbore terminated at the
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130

Fig. 11. Simulation of fracture propagation under different bedding strength conditions (45 min into injection).

interface of sublayers ④ and ⑤, with a height of 28 m and
length of about 300 m. Compared with the 3 clusters fractur-
ing, the 5 clusters fracturing was weaker in maintaining the
fracture height along the fracture length direction, the frac-
tures far away from the wellbore dropped in height quickly to
28 m, and all fractures reduced in height.
Injection displacement and fracturing fluid viscosity are
also important engineering parameters to be considered in
shale reservoir volume fracturing. As the displacement was
increased from 12 m3/min to 16 m3/min, the propagation trend
of artificial fractures was obvious, and the stimulation scope
of sublayer ⑤ increased (Fig. 12c, 12d). Increasing the vis-
cosity of the fracturing fluid can significantly reduce the re-
striction of the bedding and longitudinal interlayer stress dif-
ference on the fracture height propagation. When the viscosity
was 1.0 mPaꞏs, the hydraulic fracture fully opened the bed-
ding near the injection point, and the artificial fracture
vertically ended at the interface of sublayers ④ and ⑤, with a
fracture height of 28 m; meanwhile, due to the significant
diversion effect of the bedding fracture, the length of the main
 1126 
fracture was only 168 m, as a result, the fracture-controlled
reserves of the single well will drop significantly, which is
unfavorable for the long-term stable production (Fig. 12e). As
the viscosity of the fracturing fluid increased to 2.5 mPaꞏs, the
fracture height reached sublayer ⑤, and the beddings at dif-
ferent positions were opened to various degrees. As the vis-
cosity of fracturing fluid was further increased to 25 mPaꞏs,
the hydraulic fractures propagated along the direction of the
maximum principal stress (vertical fracture), and the fractures
broke through to sublayer ⑥ (Fig. 12f); however, increasing
the viscosity of the fracturing fluid greatly reduced the open-
ing degree of the bedding fractures and the complexity of the
fractures.
The aim of the hydraulic fracturing in the shale reservoir is
to improve the complexity of fractures and increase the vol-
ume of stimulated reservoir, so as to maximize the productiv-
ity. According to the simulation results, highly developed
bedding fractures would increase the complexity of hydraulic
fractures, but also restrict the extension of the fracture height
and reduce the volume of stimulated reservoir. For the interval
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130

Fig. 12. Simulation of fracture propagation at different engineering parameters (45 min into simulated injection).

with developed bedding and easy to open, it is necessary to with undeveloped bedding or deep shale gas reservoirs with
reduce the cluster number, increase the displacement, and large overlying stress), the target is to increase the fracture
increase the amount and proportion of high-viscosity fractur- complexity and enlarge the gas drainage fracture area. In
ing fluid in the prepad fluid stage, to reduce the restriction of this context, it is necessary to increase the cluster number,
the bedding on fracture height expansion; for the interval with increase the displacement, and reduce the viscosity of the
undeveloped bedding and difficult to open (upper gas layer fracturing fluid (using low-viscosity slick water).
 1127 
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130
Fig. 13. Comparison between simulation results and micro-seis-
mic monitoring results (red dots indicate micro-seismic signals).
5. Comparison with micro-seismic monitoring
results
Taking Well Jiaoye A in the Fuling shale gas field as an
example, the horizontal section of the well mainly goes
through sublayers ①–③. The well was fractured in a total of
28 sections (16 with 2 clusters and 12 with 3 clusters of per-
forations), at a cluster spacing of 17–25 m, average fluid con-
sumption of single stage of 1965 m3 and proppant consump-
tion of 50.7 m3. Micro seismic monitoring was carried out in
the 28 sections during fracturing, and the number of micro
seismic events in each stage was 5–135. The monitoring re-
sults show that the fractures are 229–483 m long, the fracture
network is 34–204 m wide, and the fractures are 16–49 m
high (52% of the fractures are 30–40 m high). The three-di-
mensional numerical model of fracture propagation was used
to simulate each stage, and the results were compared with the
results of micro-seismic monitoring (Fig. 13, the third section
of monitoring is taken as an example for display). From the
simulation, the fractures in the sections were 250–430 m long
and 25–50 m high, and fracture network was 76–167 m wide,
which are generally consistent with the results of micro-seis-
mic monitoring.
6. Conclusions
Based on the discrete element method, a fracture propaga-
tion model of shale reservoir with developed bedding which
considers the influence of the weak bedding plane and the
longitudinal stress difference is established. The actual pa-
rameters of the horizontal shale gas well in the Longmaxi
Formation of the main area of the Jiaoshiba anticline in the
Fuling shale gas field were used for numerical simulation
analysis. It is found that high-density beddings can increase
the fracture complexity of the stimulated volume, but inhibit
the fracture height and fracture length obviously. When the
low-strength bedding is opened, artificial fractures change to
expand horizontally, resulting in low bottom hole pressure and
limited fracture height expansion. When the bedding effect is
not considered, and there is a 7 MPa interlayer stress differ-
ence, some local hydraulic fractures in the middle cluster can
 1128 
pass through the stress shielding layer, reaching a height of
close to 50 m. In contrast, when the bedding effect is consid-
ered, there is a 3–4 MPa interlayer stress difference, and the
fractures are controlled in the stress shielding layer, and less
than 38 m high. The influences of weak bedding plane and
longitudinal stress difference should be considered when pre-
dicting fracture propagation in shale reservoirs, otherwise, the
predicted result of fracture height would be quite different
from the actual height. In fracturing of the interval with
abundant bedding, the cluster number should be reduced, the
displacement and the amount and proportion of high-viscosity
fracturing fluid in the prepad fluid stage should be increased
to reduce the restriction of bedding on the fracture height ex-
pansion, so as to improve the vertical extension of fractures
and increase the volume of stimulated reservoirs.
Nomenclature
ai,t—acceleration of gravity, m/s2;
A—contact area, m2;
A—flexibility coefficient, Pa−1;
bi—force per unit volume, N/m3;
dBP—weak plane spacing, m;
Dijkl—elastic tensor, Pa;
E—elastic modulus in isotropic and homogeneous reservoir, Pa;
Eh, Ev—elasticity moduli parallel to and perpendicular to the bed-
ding direction, Pa;
f—right vector, m/s;
Fn—normal force, N;
Fn, max—the normal force required for tension break of spring
between block elements, Pa;
Fs—tangential force, N;
Fs, max—tangential force required for shear break of spring between
block elements, Pa;
Fs, re—residual shear resistance after spring break, N;
Gv—shear modulus, Pa;
GR—gamma ray, API;
i, j, k, l—tensor indexes, dimensionless;
kn and ks—normal and tangential spring stiffness, N/m;
K0—matrix permeability, m2;
m, m+1—current iteration and next iteration;
n−1, n—current time step and next time step;
nj—unit vector normal to the fracture surface, dimensionless;
N—number of fractures;
Nc—number of clusters;
p—pressure, Pa;
pi—fluid pressure exerted on the fracture wall, Pa;
pm—experimental solution of pressure from the current iteration
step, Pa;
pm+1/2—experimental solution of pressure from the current iteration
step to the next iteration step, Pa;
p0—pore pressure, Pa;
ql—filtration rate, m/s;
qx, qy—velocity in x and y directions, m2/s;
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130

Q—total injection volume, m3/s; chanics, 2014, 131(2): 269–281.

RLLD—deep lateral resistivity, Ωꞏm; [6] SHIN D H. Factors controlling the simultaneous propagation
RLLS—shallow lateral resistivity, Ωꞏm; of multiple competing fractures in a horizontal well. USA:
s—fracture area, m2; Prentice Hall, 2014.
SBP—shear strength of the bedding fracture, MPa; [7] OLSON J E. Multi-fracture propagation modeling: Applica-
S0—matrix shear strength, Pa; tions to hydraulic fracturing in shales and tight gas sands.
t—time, s; ARMA 08327, 2008.
TBP—tensile strength of the bedding fracture, MPa; [8] XU Yun, CHEN Ming, WU Qi, et al. Stress interference cal-
T0—tensile strength of the matrix, Pa; culation model and its application in volume stimulation of
w—dynamic crack width, m; horizontal wells. Petroleum Exploration and Development,
w0—initial fracture width, m; 2016, 43(5): 780–786.
wm—experimental solution of fracture width of current iteration [9] ZHOU Tong, CHEN Ming, ZHANG Shicheng, et al. Simula-
step, m; tion of fracture propagation and optimization of ball-sealer
x, y—two directions of the coordinate system, m; in-stage diversion under the effect of heterogeneous stress
ui—displacement, m; field in a horizontal well. Natural Gas Industry, 2020, 40(3):
ui,t—velocity, m/s; 82–91.
3
α—damping per unit volume, (kgꞏs)/m ; [10] CHEN Ming, ZHANG Shicheng, XU Yun, et al. A numerical
β—iterative correction coefficient; method for simulating planar 3D multi-fracture propagation in
γ—experimental solution coefficient, m/(Paꞏs); multi-stage fracturing of horizontal wells. Petroleum Explora-
εkl—strain tensor, dimensionless; tion and Development, 2020, 47(1): 163–174.
μ—fluid viscosity, Paꞏs; [11] DAHI T A, OLSON J E. Numerical modeling of multi-
υ—Poisson's ratio, dimensionless; stranded hydraulic fracture propagation: Accounting for the
υh, υv—the Poisson's ratios in the directions of parallel to bedding interaction between induced and natural fractures. SPE Jour-
and vertical to bedding, dimensionless; nal, 2011, 16(3): 575–581.
3
ρ—rock density, kg/m ; [12] GORDELIY E, PEIRCE A. Implicit level set schemes for
σh—minimum horizontal principal stress, Pa; modeling hydraulic fractures using the XFEM. Computer
σH—maximum horizontal principal stress, Pa; Methods in Applied Mechanics & Engineering, 2013, 266:
σij—Cauchy tensor, Pa; 125–143.
3
σij, j—Cauchy Tensor derivative, N/m ; [13] ZHAO X, YOUNG R. Numerical simulation of seismicity
σv—vertical stress, Pa; induced by hydraulic fracturing in naturally fractured reser-
φ—internal friction angle, (°); voirs. SPE 124690, 2009.
φBP—internal friction angle of bedding fracture, (°); [14] ZANGENEH N, EBERHARDT E, BUSTIN R M. Investiga-
Ωf—solution domain; tion of the influence of natural fractures and in situ stress on
Δtm—size of an adaptive time step in Step m, s; hydraulic fracture propagation using a distinct-element ap-
Δwm—fracture width change of current iteration step, m; proach. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2015, 52(7): 926–946.
Δun, Δus—normal and tangential relative displacement between [15] NAGEL N B, SANCHEZ M A, ZHANG F, et al. Coupled
adjacent nodes, m. numerical evaluations of the geomechanical interactions be-
tween a hydraulic fracture stimulation and a natural fracture
References system in shale formations. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engi-
neering, 2013, 46(3): 581–609.
[1] XU W, THIERCELIN M, GANGULY U, et al. Wiremesh: A [16] ZOU Y, ZHANG S, MA X, et al. Numerical investigation of
novel shale fracture simulator. SPE 132218, 2010. hydraulic fracture network propagation in naturally fractured
[2] MEYER B R, BAZAN L W. A discrete fracture network shale formations. Journal of Structural Geology, 2016, 84: 1–13.
model for hydraulically-induced fractures: Theory, parametric [17] MIEHE C, HOFACKER M, SCHÄNZEL L M, et al. Phase
and case studies. SPE 140514, 2011. field modeling of fracture in multi-physics problems. Part II.
[3] NAGEL N, IVAN G, MARISELA S N, et al. Simulating hy- Coupled brittle-to-ductile failure criteria and crack propaga-
draulic fracturing in real fractured rock: Overcoming the limits tion in thermo-elastic-plastic solids. Computer Methods in
of pseudo 3D models. SPE 140480, 2011. Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2015, 294(1): 486–522.
[4] WENG X, KRESSE O, COHEN C E, et al. Modeling of hy- [18] LIU Guowei, LI Qingbin, ZUO Zheng. Implementation of a
draulic fracture network propagation in a naturally fractured staggered algorithm for a phase field model in ABAQUS.
formation. SPE 140253, 2011. Chinese Journal of Rock Mechanics and Engineering, 2016,
[5] BAO J Q, FATHI E, AMERI S. A coupled finite element 35(5): 1019–1030.
method for the numerical simulation of hydraulic fracturing [19] LIU Zhanli, ZHUANG Zhuo, WANG Tao, et al. The key me-
with a condensation technique. Engineering Fracture Me- chanical problems on hydraulic fracture in shale. Chinese

 1129 
 ZHOU Tong et al. / Petroleum Exploration and Development, 2020, 47(5): 1117–1130
Journal of Solid Mechanics, 2016, 37(1): 39–49.
[20] ZHANG Shicheng, GUO Tiankui, ZHOU Tong, et al. Fracture
propagation mechanism experiment of hydraulic fracturing in
natural shale. ActaPetroleiSinica, 2014, 35(3): 496–503.
[21] XU Dan, HU Ruilin, GAO Wei, et al. Effects of laminated
structure on hydraulic fracture propagation in shale. Petroleum
Exploration and Development, 2015, 42(4): 523–528.
[22] HENG Shuai, YANG Chunhe, ZENG Yijin, et al. Experimen-
tal study on hydraulic fracture geometry of shale. Chinese
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2014, 36(7): 1243–1251.
[23] ZOU Y, ZHANG S, ZHOU T, et al. Experimental investiga-
tion into hydraulic fracture network propagation in gas shales
using CT scanning technology. Rock Mechanics and Rock
Engineering, 2016, 49(1): 33–45.
[24] CHEN Z, JEFFREY R G, ZHANG X, et al. Finite-element
simulation of a hydraulic fracture interacting with a natural
fracture. SPE 176970, 2017.
[25] CUNDALL P A, STRACK O D L. A discrete numerical model
for granular assemblies. Geotechnique, 1979, 29(1): 47–65.
[26] ZOU Y, MA X, ZHANG S, et al. Numerical investigation into
the influence of bedding plane on hydraulic fracture network
propagation in shale formations. Rock Mechanics and Rock
Engineering, 2016, 49: 3597–3614.
 1130 
[27] ZOU Y, MA X, ZHOU T, et al. Hydraulic fracture growth in a
layered formation based on fracturing experiments and dis-
crete element modeling. Rock Mechanics and Rock Engineer-
ing, 2017, 50: 2381–2395.
[28] MA Yongsheng, CAI Xunyu, ZHAO Peirong. China’s shale gas
exploration and development: Understanding and practice. Pe-
troleum Exploration and Development, 2018, 45(4): 561–574.
[29] MUNJIZA A. The combined finite-discrete element method.
Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, 2004.
[30] JAEGER J C, COOK N G W, ZIMMERMAN R. Fundamental
of Rock Mechanics. 4th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing
Ltd., 2009.
[31] HENG S, YANG C, ZHANGB, et al. Experimental research
on anisotropic properties of shale. Rock and Soil Mechanics,
2015, 36(3): 606–616.
[32] LEKHNITSKII S G. Theory of elasticity of an anisotropic
body. Russian: Mir Publishers, 1981.
[33] ZIMMERMAN R W, BODVARSSON GS. Hydraulic conduc-
tivity of rock fractures. Transport in Porous Media, 1996,
23(1): 1–30.
[34] ADACHI J, SIEBRITS E, PEIRCE A, et al. Computer simula-
tion of hydraulic fractures. International Journal of Rock Me-
chanics & Mining Sciences, 2007, 44(5): 739–757.