J166132 DOI: 10.
2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15 Stage: Page: 508 Total Pages: 10
A New Method To Interpret Fracturing
Pressure—Application to Frac Pack
Elias Pirayesh, Mohamed Y. Soliman, Mehdi Rafiee, and Ali Jamali, Texas Tech University
Summary
Real-time analysis of fracturing data is an invaluable tool for
determining whether a fracturing job is progressing as planned.
Since early days, understanding of fracturing pressure was em-
phasized and practiced by the industry. The most well-known
fracturing-pressure-analysis tool is the Nolte-Smith technique. To
predict the geometry of a hydraulically induced fracture, the
Nolte-Smith technique analyzes the pressure response of a forma-
tion during pumping. Extensive application of this technique has
proved reliable to interpret fracturing events. However, the com-
pression of data imposed by logarithmic scale may make the
detection of some events difficult. In addition, the Nolte-Smith
technique necessitates prior accurate knowledge of formation-clo-
sure pressure.
In this paper, we present a real-time fracturing diagnostic. This
method, which is based on a modification of the Nolte-Smith tech-
nique, has proved reliable in the interpretation of fracturing
behavior while a fracturing job is being carried out. In addition, it
eliminates the shortcomings of the original technique, meaning
that while making the interpretation of fracturing pressure faster,
the new technique does not require prior knowledge of formation
in-situ stresses. This technique was reached by a new innovative
moving-reference-point concept assembled with the power-law
fracture-propagation theory. Application of the new technique in
the analysis of a variety of field cases, including several frac-pack
and regular fracturing treatments, proved successful.
Introduction
With the fracture-propagation model developed by Perkins and
Kern (1961) and refined by Nordgren (1972), one may write the
fracturing pressure at the wellbore as a power function of time as
Pnet / te ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð1Þ
where 18  e  15. A large exponent is an indication of low leakoff
rate. In other words, more fluid is maintained inside the fracture
and contributes to fracture propagation. The bounds given in Eq.
1 are based on a Newtonian fluid, which was generalized by Nolte
(1979) in the following form in Eq. 2:
1 1
e ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð2Þ
4n þ 4 2n þ 3
where n is the flow-behavior index of a power-law fluid.
Nolte-Smith Technique. With dimensional analysis, Nolte and
Smith (1981) reached the conclusion that there are four modes of
fracture propagation. Beginning with the start of the fracturing
treatment, each of those modes is defined by a specific slope on a
plot of log of Pnet vs. log of time. The two basic modes are (1) a
mode in which a small positive slope on the log-log plot is
observed, indicating that the fracture is propagating normally, and
(2) a mode in which a unit slope on the log-log plot is observed,
implying that a significant flow restriction has formed in the frac-
Copyright V
C 2015 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 166132) was accepted for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 30 September–2 October 2013, and revised for
publication. Original manuscript received for review 15 October 2013. Revised manuscript
received for review 3 March 2014. Paper peer approved 11 August 2014.
508
ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069
ture (e.g., proppant screenout) (see Fig. 1). The other two modes
are (3) a mode when pressure drops rapidly, which is usually the
sign of uncontained fracture-height growth, and (4) an elongated
flat pressure (i.e., critical pressure) for which there is no definitive
explanation. On the basis of the succeeding pressure trend, several
interpretations are possible for the latter mode, which include
rapid height growth, increasing fracture compliance, and opening
of fissures.
In addition to the basic assumptions noted by Nolte and Smith
(1981), this technique has two additional implied assumptions. The
first assumption is that the injection rate is constant. The second
assumption is that the fracture propagation is continuous (smooth
function of time). Furthermore, to ensure a correct interpretation of
fracturing events, the Nolte-Smith technique necessitates precise
knowledge of formation-closure pressure. This requires conducting
prefracturing tests, such as minifrac tests, that are not routinely per-
formed in every fracturing job. This issue is furthered with the
increasing application of multistage multicluster-fracturing
schemes in which the subsequent fracturing stages experience
higher instantaneous shut-in pressures and thus higher closure
stresses (Soliman et al. 2008; Mayerhofer et al. 2011).
Pressure Derivative. Ayoub et al. (1992) introduced the pressure
derivative in fracturing-pressure analysis. The pressure derivative
introduced in well testing is known to enhance pattern-recognition
capabilities in well testing (Ayoub et al. 1988). Application of it
to fracturing treatments produces similar results.
Taking the derivative of the power-law fracture-propagation
theory (see Eq. 1) yields
dP
¼ e c t e1 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð3Þ
dt
Multiplying by t gives
dP
t ¼ e c te : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ð4Þ
dt
A log-log plot of t(dP/dt) vs. time will yield the same slope e as in
the net-pressure plot (see Fig. 1); however, it does not require
knowledge of formation-closure stress. In addition, because of its
enhanced sensitivity, the pressure-derivative technique magnifies
and detects fracturing events earlier in time.
The pressure-derivative technique retains the assumptions of
the Nolte-Smith technique; however, as is discussed later, some
of these assumptions, such as continuous fracture propagation, do
not always hold. In addition, this technique is prone to the effect
of starting-time error (Ayoub et al. 1992).
New Approach: The Moving-Reference-Point
Technique
The approach that we have developed builds on the work of Nolte
and Smith by coupling the fracture-propagation theory with basic
testing technology. The Nolte-Smith analysis assumes that the
fracture continuously and smoothly propagates with time. Some
of the recent field observations through microseismic monitoring,
especially in fractured shale formations, imply that a fracture may
grow intermittently. This sporadic fracture growth implies that a
fracture might go through periods of ballooning followed by peri-
ods of growth. Identifying the periods of ballooning and growth
will help in diagnosing problems and identifying potential sandout
June 2015 SPE Journal
 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15 Stage: Page: 509 Total Pages: 10

2000

Net Pressure
(psi)

200
0.1 1 10 100
Time (min)

Fig. 1—The Nolte-Smith analysis of a frac-pack treatment.

very early. In the new approach, the reference time is not the time
of the start of injection but rather changes. This change in refer-
ence points makes the identification of potential error quicker.
The Nolte-Smith technique depends on the power-law equa-
tion for propagation of a hydraulic fracture, given as Eq. 5:
Principle. Assuming that the reference time is ti , we note that
Eq. 6 is the general power-law equation of fracture growth. In the
Nolte-Smith technique, the reference point is ðti ; Pi Þ ¼ ð0;
Pclosure Þ. In this analysis, this reference time is the start of a
growth period. As shown next, one can derive Eq. 7 from Eq. 6:

logðP  Pclosure Þ / e logðtÞ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð5Þ P  Pi ¼ cðt  ti Þe ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ð6Þ

dP
¼ e c ðt  ti Þe1 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð7Þ
The Nolte-Smith technique assumes that the fracture passes dt
through various phases and each phase is continuous. Thus, it
assumes that the log-log plot of net pressure vs. time should yield Combining Eqs. 6 and 7 yields
a straight line with slopee. The value of the slope e depends on dP
the fracturing-fluid flow-behavior index n. ðt  ti Þ ¼ eðP  Pi Þ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð8Þ
dt
It was observed that the assumption of continuous propagation,
although helpful, may not always be accurate. As noted previ- If the fracture is propagating, then the exponent e will generally
ously, fracture propagation may consist of periods of ballooning have a value in the range determined by Eq. 2. If the fracture is
followed by periods of intermittent growth. These periods of bal- ballooning, the exponent will be unity, similar to what one would
looning and growth may alternate through the injection period. observe in any storage situation. In the case of fracture balloon-
Identification of periods of intermittent growth may be very ing, Eq. 8 becomes
helpful and is described in the following analysis. Jeffrey et al. dP
(2009) present a 2D numerical simulator that is built around this ðt  ti Þ ¼ ðP  Pi Þ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð9Þ
dt
idea in which a fracture may balloon when it intersects a natural
fracture. Fig. 2 shows a mined fracture that was created in a Also, Eqs. 6 and 7 will take the forms
coalbed-methane formation. The figure shows that a fracture fol-
lowed a plane of weakness (cleat) that, in turn, intersected the cre- P  Pi ¼ cðt  ti Þ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð10Þ
ated hydraulic fracture. In such a shallow formation, however, the
stress level is very low, and the stress anisotropy between the two and
horizontal stresses may be very low or nonexistent and may yield dP
behavior inconsistent with deep-formation fracturing. ¼ c: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð11Þ
dt

a b
96 mm diameter
borehole

Fig. 2—Offsets in hydraulic fracture exposed by mining; propped fracture trace is shown in roof rock above mined coal seam
[Jeffrey et al. (2009)].

June 2015 SPE Journal 509

ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069

 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15 Stage: Page: 510 Total Pages: 10

Start

Pick the current point as reference point

(tref , Pref)

Pick the next point

(t, P ) No

Yes
δP

Find e(t) = δt
P – Pref ε < threshold?
t – tref
P – Pref
And c(t) =
(t – tref)e(t)

t
1
– =
Find e(t)
t – tref
∫ e(t) dt – –
tref ε (t) = P – c(t)(t–t ref)
e(t)
t
1
∫ c(t) dt
– =
And c(t)
t – tref tref

Fig. 3—Data-analysis flow chart.

Numerical Procedure. Analysis of fracturing pressure with the and

moving-reference-point technique is performed according to the
data-analysis flow chart presented in Fig. 3.
To begin the analysis, an initial reference point, such as
ðtref ; Pref Þinitial , which meets the following criteria, is picked:
I. For intact formations, the first reference point must be
picked after the formation breakdown has occurred.
II. For formations with existing flaws, such as small cracks
resulting from minifrac tests, the first reference point can be
picked at any time after the existing crack has been reopened. The
sandstone formation of Example 1, which was previously subject
to minifrac and step-rate tests, falls into this category.
To obtain meaningful results, it is recommended that the first
few points of fracturing-pressure data be omitted from analysis
because such data usually contain severe fluctuations and are usu-
ally affected by formation breakdown/fracture reopening. After
the initial reference point is picked, analysis continues by select-
ing ðt; PÞ pairs and then by calculating eðtÞ with Eq. 8. Values of
eðtÞ are then plotted vs. time and used to interpret fracture behav-
ior. In every timestep, eðtÞ and cðtÞ are averaged over ½tref ; t with
Eqs. 12 and 13, respectively; eðtÞ and cðtÞ are subsequently used
to find estimated bottomhole pressureðBHPest: Þ (see Eq. 14):
ðt
1 reaches the region of heterogeneity, it may start ballooning, caus-
eðtÞ ¼ eðtÞ dt; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð12Þ
t  tref
tref
ðt
1 effect is similar to the tip-screenout effect discussed by Nolte and
cðtÞ ¼ cðtÞ dt; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð13Þ
t  tref
tref
BHPest ¼ cðtÞ ðt  tref ÞeðtÞ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð14Þ
If the difference between the BHPest: and the observed BHP [i.e.,
P(t)] exceeds a predetermined threshold, then the next point in
time is chosen as the new reference point.
Application to Homogeneous Formations. If the formation is
homogeneous and isotropic, it is expected that the fracture growth
would be continuous and the slope of the net pressure with time
would follow the theory developed by Nolte and Smith (1981).
This may be the case in hard sandstone rocks; however, this is not
expected to happen in many reservoirs and definitely not in heter-
ogeneous and shale formations. Application of the moving-refer-
ence-point technique in the fracturing-pressure analysis of two
frac-pack examples is provided in subsequent sections.
Application to Heterogeneous Formations. If the formation
contains various heterogeneities, natural fractures, and planes of
weakness, the fracture growth is likely to consist of periods of
propagation and ballooning. In the described formations, the frac-
ture usually propagates following the established theory until the
fracture tip hits a region of heterogeneity. After the fracture
ing an increase in pressure. During this ballooning period, it is
expected that the fracture volume increases and includes the
increase in the volume of the natural fracture. The ballooning
Smith. One can calculate the volume of the fracture and natural
fracture with Eq. 15:

510 June 2015 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069

 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15 Stage: Page: 511 Total Pages: 10

Simulator 1 Simulator 2 Simulator 1 Simulator 2

Simulator 3 Observed Simulator 3 Observed

900 6000
Net Pressure (psi)

Net Pressure (psi)

600 4000

300 2000

0 0
–10 10 30 50 0 20 40 60

Time (min) Time (min)

Fig. 4—In this example, commercial fracturing simulators over- Fig. 5—In this example, two out of three fracturing simulators
estimated fracturing pressure. failed to anticipate a major event.

dP 0:041665
¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð15Þ dP 2qi E0
dt Cff Vff ¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð17Þ
dt p h2 L
Eq. 15 is easily derived from the basic well-testing equation for
the storage period. One may also use the equation developed by As Nolte and Smith (1981) have suggested, one may use
Nolte and Smith, which is based on the compliance of the fracture: Eq. 17 to estimate the distance to a restriction and conse-
quently to determine whether the restriction is caused by tip
dP 2ðqi  ql ÞE0 screenout or near-wellbore restriction. One may use Eq. 16 in
¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð16Þ the same fashion to determine the distance to an obstruction.
dt p h2 L
Calculating the volume of the fracture with Eq. 15 at different
where E0 ¼ 1vE
2 is plane-strain Young’s modulus. If the leakoff rate is times during fracturing may be taken as a measure of fracture
negligible compared with the injection rate, one can simplify Eq. 16 as complexity.
Shale

4800 6400 0.0 2.4 0.000 0.060 3920 4120 0.10 0.30

Closure pressure Young’s modulus Fluid-loss coefficient Reservoir pressure Porosity

ft
(psi) (106psi) ( ) (psi) (fraction)
min

Fig. 6—Example 1: Geology.

June 2015 SPE Journal 511

ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069

 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15 Stage: Page: 512 Total Pages: 10

1000 n' K'

Viscosity (cp) at 170 1/sec

0.75 0.2
750

0.5
500
n' 0.1 K'
0.25
250

0 0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Time (hours) Time (hours)
at formation temperature (200°F) at formation temperature (200°F)

Fig. 7—At a constant shear rate, the viscosity of the fracturing Fig. 8—Variations of power-law-fluid parameters k and ń as a
fluid declines with time. function of time.

Examples
Application of the moving-reference-point technique is illustrated
through two frac-pack examples. Frac packs are normally high-
rate treatments designed to create infinite-conductivty fractures to
bypass the skin damage in high-permeability formations. Because
of high rates of injection, fracture packing can start and can lead
to pressures much beyond the allowable levels in a matter of
minutes or sometimes even in a fraction of a minute. Therefore,
quick identification of the onset of fracture packing is of utmost
importance to prevent both intolerable pressure levels and over-
flush of proppants.
Currently, fracturing-diagnostic techniques include numerical
simulation and the Nolte-Smith technique; however, fracturing
simulators are not fully capable of replicating fracturing behavior
in real time. Figs. 4 and 5 compare the net pressures of two frac-
turing treatments with those predicted by three commercial frac-
turing simulators. In the first case (Fig. 4), all the simulators
overestimated the average net pressure, but this is not nearly as
serious as failure to predict screenouts. Fig. 5 shows the net pres-
sure observed during a frac pack that reached extremely high val-
ues, whereas two out of three fracturing simulators did not foresee
a screenout. One may note that the nature of the log-log plot of
the original technique by Nolte and Smith tends to compress data.
The technique presented in this paper corrects this problem.
The frac-pack examples illustrate how one can use the mov-
ing-reference-point technique in different geologies to obtain a
more-detailed understanding of fracture behavior, as well as to
accelerate identification of fracturing problems. The two frac
packs are vastly different from each other. With an injected
volume of 37,000 gal of slurry, the first treatment is almost twice
the size of the second one, which injected 21,000 gal of slurry. In
addition, the first treatment was performed in a relatively thin
sandstone, which was only 40 ft in height, whereas the second one
was pumped into 215 ft of perforated interval spanning through
several layers of high-permeability sandstone, shale, and silty
sand. Results of fracture-analysis studies with a 3D fracturing
simulator indicate that the first and second treatments create
fractures with length/height ratios of approximately 4.65 and
0.75, respectively.
Each example presents analysis results in the form of an eðtÞ
vs. time plot. One can use the four fracturing modes introduced
by Nolte and Smith (1981) with this plot to monitor fracture
behavior during pumping. As was discussed previously, values of
1 1
eðtÞ in the range of 4nþ4  e  2nþ3 indicate that the created frac-
ture is propagating under the assumptions of Perkins and Kern
(1981), which are confined height, constant fracture compliance,
and unrestricted extension. The eðtÞ  1 usually means that frac-
ture propagation has decreased significantly, and, instead, fluid
storage is taking place in the form of increasing Pnet and increasing
average fracture width. In addition, a rapid pressure drop [i.e.,
eðtÞ << 1] is the sign of rapid height growth. No certain explana-
tion exists for a constant-fracturing-pressure trend [i.e., eðtÞ  0],
and on the basis of the succeeding pressure behavior, several inter-
pretations are possible, including rapid height growth, increasing
fracture compliance, and opening of fissures. Because of the uncer-
tainties associated with this period and the potential undesirable
consequences, Nolte and Smith (1981) named this constant pressure
“critical pressure” and provided guidelines for treating it.

Bottomhole Pressure Slurry Rate Proppant Concentration

7000 50

40

6000 Slurry Rate

30
(bbl/min)
BHP
(psi)
20 Proppant Concentration
5000 (lb/gal)

10

4000 0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (min)

Fig. 9—Example 1: Treatment schedule.

512 June 2015 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069

 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15
2,000
Net Pressure
(psi)
200
0.1 1 10
Time (min)
Fig. 10—Example 1: Analysis with the Nolte-Smith technique.
Example 1: High-Permeability Oilwell Frac Pack. A frac pack
performed in a high-permeability sandstone formation (see Fig. 6)
pumped 37,000 gal of a 25 lbm/1,000 gal seawater-based fracturing
fluid (see Figs. 7 and 8) and 54,000 lbm of a 12/18 lightweight
synthetic proppant. Even though a constant slurry-injection rate of
25 bbl/min was maintained throughout the treatment, proppant
injection started at t ¼ 18:4 minutes and continued until the end
of the treatment when the fracture could be packed no more (see
Fig. 9).
Mini-frac test results show that the sandstone formation, which
is highlighted in yellow in Fig. 6, has an average closure stress of
5,022 psi, 200 to 250 psi lower than the surrounding shale barrier.
This, along with a modulous of elasticity (i.e., E) on the order of
the moduli of the surrounding shale and a relatively small fracture
toughness (i.e., KIC ), is expected to lead to confined fracture-
height growth. As seen in Fig. 6, the fracturing fluid has a flow-
behavior index (n) of 0.5, for which the slope of the fracture-prop-
agation mode (i.e., Nolte-Smith Mode I) ranges from 1=5 to 1=6.
Analysis With the Nolte-Smith Technique. The log-log plot
of Pnet vs. time is shown in Fig. 10 compared with Case 2 of
Fig. 5 of Nolte and Smith (1981) (see Fig. 11) and is composed of
two distinct periods:
Pressure above closure (psi)
4000
2000
1000
1 1
Slope:
8 4
Mode:
* - Start Proppant
20
Fig. 11—Examples with different characteristic slopes in Nolte and Smith (1981).
June 2015 SPE Journal
ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069
Stage: Page: 513 Total Pages: 10
Period I: ( 0 < t < 20 minutes) The slope of this period fits in
with Mode I, which indicates that fracture propagation is likely to
be the predominant event in this period.
Period II: ( t  20 minutes) With a slope greater than unity,
this period fits the definition of Nolte-Smith Mode III, a potential
explanation for which is the creation of a substantial flow barrier
in the fracture.
In summary, fracturing Modes I and III were identified on the
Nolte-Smith plot of Example 1 that helped determine the onset of
fracture-packing at about t ¼ 25 minutes.
Analysis With Moving-Reference-Point Technique. The plot
of eðtÞ vs. time is shown in Fig. 12. According to this figure,
the moving-reference-point technique confirms the conclusions
achieved by means of the Nolte-Smith technique, meaning that a
100
period of overall fracture propagation (i.e., Mode I) (on the e-vs.-
time plots, this range is highlighted in green) is followed by a
period during which fracturing pressure increases as a linear func-
tion of time (i.e., Mode III) (on the e-vs.-time plots, this range is
highlighted in red). Fig. 12 also shows that, from t ¼ 0 minutes to
t ¼ 20 minutes, the induced fracture goes through periods of bal-
looning and growth. Marked by signs, periods of balloon-
ing may be recognized by the two peaks that almost reach into the
red zone. This is in accord with microseismic observations that
show that rather than growing continuously, fractures actually
tend to grow intermittently.
As previously discussed, quick detection of the beginning of
fracture packing and screenout is very important in fracturing
treatments, especially in frac packs. For the example in hand, the
response to fluid storage starts by as early as t ¼ 21 minutes
(marked by an orange circle on Fig. 12), where the curvature of
the plot changes from positive to negative. By t ¼ 23 minutes, the
plot falls well within the red zone, which is a better indicator of
fluid storage (marked by a red circle on Fig. 12).
Real-time application of the Nolte-Smith technique is such
that, after observing a unit-slope line on the Nolte-Smith chart, a
fracturing engineer needs to wait at least one-quarter of a log
cycle of time to confirm fracturing Mode III. In case of Example
1, this necessary precaution will delay recognition of fracture
packing until t ¼ 35.6 minutes. Table 1, which compares the time
taken by the Nolte-Smith and the moving-reference-point techni-
ques to detect fracture packing, shows that the latter technique
takes approximately one-fourth of the time taken by the former
technique to detect the onset of fluid storage.
Lock up →
Case 1
II
I I
* Case 2
II
I Case 3
*
*
I II I
to 0 1.0 Negative
I II III IV
40 60 100 200 400
Time (min)
513
 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15 Stage: Page: 514 Total Pages: 10

1.5

1.25

e 0.75

0.5

0.25

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Time (min)

Fig. 12—Example 1: Analysis with the moving-reference-point technique.

Since the Beginning of Injection Since the Start of Proppant

The Nolte-Smith The Nolte-Smith Moving-Reference-Point
Moving-Reference-Point Technique
Technique Technique Technique
35.6 minutes 23 minutes 172 minutes 4.6 minutes

Table 1—Fracture-packing identification times.

Example 2: High-Permeability Gas-Well Frac Pack. A frac-
pack treatment performed in a high-permeability sandstone for-
mation (see Fig. 13) consumed 21,000 gal of a 25 lbm/1,000 gal
seawater-based fracturing fluid (same as Example 1 fracturing
fluid; see Figs. 7 and 8) and 90,600 lbm of a 12/18 lightweight
synthetic proppant. A constant injection rate of 18 bbl/min was
maintained throughout the treatment, and the proppant was
injected in a ramped manner, as described in Fig. 14. Bound by
two thick shale layers, the pay zone consists of two high-leakoff
sandstone layers separated from each other by several layers of
shale and silty sand. From Fig. 13 and as confirmed by a minifrac
Shale
sandstone
Shale
test, the closure stress of the pay zone is approximately 6,500 psi,
which is substantially lower than the closure stresses of the
bounding shale.
Analysis With the Nolte-Smith Technique. On the log-log
plot of Pnet vs. time of this example (see Fig. 15), one can identify
three distinct periods:
Period I: ( t < 1 minute) Pressure grows with a small slope of
0.1, so the major fracturing event of this short period is Perkins-
Kern-Nordgren-type fracture propagation.
Period II: [(1 minute < t < 3 minutes) and (3 minutes < t < 9
minutes)] With a slope of approximately –0.35 and –0.1,

6400 7800 0.0 1.0 0.000 0.020

ft
Closure pressure (psi) Young’s Modulus (106 psi) Fluid-loss coefficient ( )
min

Fig. 13—Example 2: Geology.

514 June 2015 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069

 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15 Stage: Page: 515 Total Pages: 10

Bottomhole Pressure Slurry Rate Proppant Concentration

9000 40

8000 30
Slurry Rate
(bbl/min)
BHP 7000 20
(psi) Proppant
Concentration
6000 10 (PPG)

5000 0
0 10 20 30
Time (min)

Fig. 14—Example 2: Treatment schedule.

Net Pressure
(psi) 1000

100
0.1 1 10 100
Time (min)

Fig. 15—Example 2: Analysis with the Nolte-Smith technique.

1.5

0.5

e 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
–0.5

–1

–1.5
Time (min)

Fig. 16—Example 2: Analysis with the moving-reference-point technique.

respectively, these periods meet the conditions of Mode IV (i.e.,
fracture-height growth), as described in Fig. 11.
Period III: (t > 10 minutes) During this period, pressure
increases with a slope larger than unity, indicating blockage of
fluid-flow paths by the injected proppant.
Analysis With the Moving-Reference-Point Technique. The
moving-reference-point technique (see Fig. 16) confirms the find-
ings of the Nolte-Smith technique. This implies that an elongated
period with an average e(t) of approximately –0.70 prevails
through the first 10 minutes of the treatment. This period is fol-
lowed by a prolonged period of fluid storage with an e(t) of
approximately 1.0 that lasts until the end of injection.
These interpretations are in accord with the results of our frac-
turing-simulation study, which was able to replicate the observed
net pressure acceptably. As shown in Fig. 17, the created fracture
has a length/height ratio ratio of approximately 0.75, proving the
predominance of height growth during the first 9 minutes. Fig. 17
also shows that the fracture profile remains almost constant from
t  9 minutes until the end of the frac pack. It also shows that the
major event during this period is fluid storage marked by rapid
increase in pressure and fracture width.
To obtain a more-detailed understanding of the behavior of
the induced fracture, we adjusted the parameters of the numerical
procedure outlined in the data-analysis flow chart. The results

June 2015 SPE Journal 515

ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069

 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15 Stage: Page: 516 Total Pages: 10

Shale 0.000 0.000

0.050 0.301
0.101 0.603

Width - Total in

Width - Total in
0.151 0.904
0.202 1.206
0.252 1.507
0.302 1.809
0.353 2.110
0.403 2.412
0.454 2.713
0.504 3.015
Shale

1.513 m/sec 1.513 m/sec

6475 7025 19 38 56 19 38 56
Stress (psi) Fracture Penetration (ft) Fracture Penetration (ft)

t = 9 minutes t = 27.89 minutes

Fig. 17—Example 2: The results of our simulation study confirm that fracture propagation is negligible after t 5 9 minutes.

1.5

0.5

e 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
–0.5

–1

–1.5
Time (min)

Fig. 18—Example 2: A higher resolution with the moving-reference-point technique.

Since the Beginning of Injection Since the Start of Proppant

The Nolte-Smith Moving-Reference-Point The Nolte-Smith Moving-Reference-Point
Technique Technique Technique Technique
17.8 minutes 8 minutes 11. 11.55 minutes 1.75 minutes
Table 2—Fracture-packing-identification times.

obtained are shown in Fig. 18. As seen in this figure, fracturing
behavior is more complex than previously thought. For example,
there is a short period of constant pressure that took place in the
middle of the initial pressure-decline period; this point is marked
by a sign on Fig. 18. The physical meaning of this constant
pressure is not exactly known to us yet, but it could mark propa-
gation through the two close shale layers that separate the top and
bottom sandstone formations. In addition, according to the Nolte-
Smith technique, the major event during t > 8 minutes is pure
fluid storage, whereas this period actually includes some short
periods of possible fracture propagation. These short periods are
marked by signs on Fig. 18.
More importantly, Fig. 18 permits accurate determination of
the onset of fracture packing/screenout. With the moving-refer-
ence-point technique, inception of fracture packing is identified at
t ¼ 8 minutes in which the plot falls completely in the red zone
(on Fig. 18, this point is marked with a sign). With the Nolte-
Smith technique, the fracturing engineer would have had to wait
at least until t ¼ 17.8 minutes to confirm fracture packing. In other
words, the moving-reference-point technique took less than on-
sixth of the time taken by the Nolte-Smith technique to detect the
inception of the new fracturing event (see Table 2).
Conclusions
The Nolte-Smith technique relies on assumptions, such as continu-
ous fracture propagation and fixed injection rate, which do not nec-
essarily hold true in all fracturing operations. In addition, the Nolte-
Smith technique requires prior accurate knowledge of formation-
closure stress. Compression of data, imposed by the log-log plot of
this technique, makes interpretation of fracture behavior rather slow
and quite insensitive to minor fracturing events.
By taking the derivative of the power-law fracture-propagation
equation, we were able to develop the moving-reference-point
technique in this study. This new technique eliminates the major
limitations of the Nolte-Smith technique, as noted previously.
Application of the new technique in the analysis of two frac-pack
cases proved successful, which implies that, in addition to provid-
ing a fairly detailed understanding of fracture behavior, this tech-
nique helped to accelerate identification of fracturing problems.

516 June 2015 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069

 J166132 DOI: 10.2118/166132-PA Date: 4-June-15
The new technique uses a numerical procedure to analyze fractur-
ing pressure that needs to be implemented with computer pro-
gramming. The final outcome of this procedure is a Cartesian plot
of e(t) vs. time by studying the changes in fracture behavior that
one can identify quite easily and quickly.
It is strongly recommended that a downhole gauge with sur-
face readout be used to monitor pressure changes. This type of
pressure monitoring gives accurate representations of the periods
of growth and ballooning. Surface-pressure gauges may be less
expensive to implement; however, they do not present an accurate
measure of the fine changes in pressures.
Nomenclature
BHPest: ¼ estimated bottomhole pressure (psi)
C ¼ power-law fracture-propagation-equation constant, di-
mensionless
1
Cff ¼ fracturing-fluid compressibility, psi
e ¼ the exponent of the power-law fracture-propagation
equation, dimensionless
E ¼ Young’s modulus
E0 ¼ plane-strain Young’s modulus
pffiffiffiffiffiffi
KIC ¼ fracture toughness, psi in:
Lf ¼ fracture length (tip to tip), ft
n ¼ flow-behavior index of a power-law fluid
Pnet ¼ net pressure, psi
Pclosure ¼ closure stress, psi
qi ¼ injection rate into one wing of the fracture, ft3/min
q1 ¼ leakoff rate of one wing of the fracture, ft3/min
t ¼ time, minutes
ti ¼ time of start of a new period, minutes
Vf ¼ fracture volume, ft3
 ¼ Poisson’s ratio
References
Ayoub, J.A., Bourdet, D.P., and Chauvel, Y.L. 1988. Impulse Testing.
SPE Form Eval 3 (3): 534–546. SPE-15911-PA. http://dx.doi.org/
10.2118/15911-PA.
Ayoub, J.A., Brown, J.E., Barree, R.D. et al. 1992. Diagnosis and Evalua-
tion of Fracturing Treatments. SPE Res Eng 7 (1): 39–46. SPE-20581-
PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/20581-PA.
Jeffrey, R.G., Zhang, X., and Thiercelin, M.J. 2009. Hydraulic Fracture
Offsetting in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs: Quantifying a Long-Rec-
ognized Process. Paper presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing
Technology Conference, The Woodlands, Texas, 19–21 January. SPE-
119351-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/119351-MS.
Mayerhofer, M.J., Stegent, N.A., Barth, J.O. et al. 2011. Integrating Frac-
ture Diagnostics and Engineering Data in the Marcellus Shale. Paper
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Denver, Colorado, 30 October–2 November. SPE-145463-MS. http://
dx.doi.org/10.2118/145463-MS.
June 2015 SPE Journal
ID: jaganm Time: 15:51 I Path: S:/3B2/J###/Vol00000/140069/APPFile/SA-J###140069
Stage: Page: 517 Total Pages: 10
Nolte, K.G. 1979. Determination of Fracture Parameters From Fracturing
Pressure Decline. Paper presented at the SPE Annual Technical Con-
ference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Nevada, 23–26 September. SPE-
8341-MS. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/8341-MS.
Nolte, K.G. and Smith, M.B. 1981. Interpretation of Fracturing Pressures.
J Pet Technol 33 (9): 1767–1775. SPE-8297-PA. http://dx.doi.org/
10.2118/8297-PA.
Nordgren, R.P. 1972. Propagation of a Vertical Hydraulic Fracture. SPE J.
12 (4): 306–314. SPE-3009-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/3009-PA.
Perkins, T.K. and Kern, L.R. 1961. Widths of Hydraulic Fractures. J
Pet Technol 13 (9): 937–949. SPE-89-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/89-
PA.
Soliman, M.Y., East, L., and Adams, D. 2008. Geomechanics Aspects of
Multiple Fracturing of Horizontal and Vertical Wells. SPE Drill &
Compl 23 (3): 217–228. SPE-86992-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/
86992-PA.
Elias Pirayesh is a doctoral-degree student at Texas Tech
University. His research focuses on the development of consti-
tutive material models for hydrocarbon-bearing weak forma-
tions. Pirayesh has authored or coauthored five technical
articles. He also holds one US patent. Pirayesh earned an MS
degree from Texas Tech University and a BS degree from Sharif
University of Technology, Iran, both in petroleum engineering.
M.Y. Soliman is the George P. Livermore Professor of Petro-
leum Engineering at Texas Tech University. Before joining
Texas Tech University, he worked for Halliburton Energy for
more than 30 years in several technical and managerial posi-
tions. Soliman is an SPE Distinguished Member and a licensed
professional engineer in the State of Texas. He has authored
or coauthored more than 200 technical papers. Soliman also
holds 26 US patents. He earned a BS degree in petroleum en-
gineering with top honors from Cairo University in 1971. Soli-
man earned MS and PhD degrees from Stanford University in
1975 and 1978, respectively. His areas of interest include frac-
turing, well-test analysis, diagnostic testing, and numerical
simulation.
Mehdi Rafiee currently works as a Senior Researcher—Com-
pletions in the Research, Development, and Innovation
department at Statoil. His research focuses on developing
new technologies to acquire more data and knowledge from
fracturing operations. Rafiee is also involved in fracture model-
ing and data interpretation of stimulated unconventional
wells in Statoil US onshore assets. He holds a PhD degree and
an MS degree, both in petroleum engineering, from Texas
Tech University.
Ali Jamali is a doctoral-degree student at Texas Tech Univer-
sity, where he works on development of capacitance/resistive
models and their application to enhanced-oil-recovery proc-
esses. He has coauthored four technical papers. Jamali holds
an MS degree from Texas Tech University and a BS degree
from Sharif University of Technology, Iran, both in petroleum
engineering.
517