Application of the PseudoIinear-FIow

Model to the Pressure-lWansient

Analysis of Fractured Wells
H. Cinco-Ley,

SPE,

and

F. Samaniego-V.,

SPE,

U. of Mexnm/Pemex,

and F. Rodriguez,

SPE,

U. of Mexrco/IMP

sP~

130S9

Summary.
The themetical basis for the pseudolimar-flow mcdel is established. It is demonstrated by use of an analytical model that
the lin--flow graph (p vs. W) cm be extended to the analysis of pressure data of fractured wells intersected by an intermediate- or
high-conductivity fractme (CP >57r). It appears that the fracture-conductivity effect during the pseudolinem-flow pecicd can be handled
as pseudoskin pressure drop that adds to the pressure drop cawed by tluid-Ioss damage. The combination of the pseudolineac-flow anafysis with other interpretation techniques is illustrated through examples of field cases.
Itrtroduetlon
During the last 2 decades, many analy$is methcnlsl-30 to iaterpret
pressure data to estimate both formation and hydraulic fracture pamneters have been prop.med. In adtiltion to type-awe analysis,
three of the most widely used graphical metbcds of interpretation
are the- linear-flow graph (p vs. J), the bilinear-flow graph (p
vs. t*), and the pseudoradial-flow gmph (p vs. log r). ft cannot
be overemphasized that each technique appIies to a specific flow
regime. Unfm-htmtely, the general pressure behavior of a fractured
well includes not only these flow periods but also several intermediate transition flow periods, as shown in Fig. 1. The only current
graphical analysis methcd avaitable to interpret pressure data falling in the transition periods is the typwrve-matching
technique.
The linear-flow mudel has km applied in the past to early
time/pressure data of iniiite-conducdvity fratires (for practical
purposes, a finite-conductivity fracture can be considered as an
Mtite-conductivity-fmcture case whmever the pressure dmp along
the fracture is negligible-i.e., C kr)a 31J2).This model assumes
uniform flux in the formation an i nezllmble
---~~ stom~e ca!mcitv
.
. within the fmctare.
The application of the li&r-tlow graph was extended empiricaffv to cases where the fracture has low or intermediate values
of c_onductivity.29 This r&@res either knowledge of the formation
permeability frum prefracture testing or a ti-ial-and-errur prueedure.
f.fa&y and Bandyop2dbyay30 used a uniform-flux Z@ticti
mudel to show that the pressure behavior of a ftite:cunductivity
vefiical fracture at intermediate values of tine can be described
by the pressure behavior of the War-flow mcdel plus an extra pressure drop that is a function of the fracture conductivity. They slso
a.wumed tit the fracture penetrates the formation completely in
the horizontal direction (X,lX$=1).
The purpose of this work is tu show through tie analysis of an
irnafydcd solution for tinite-conductivity fractures that the )ine2rflow mcdel maybe extended to cuses of h@ fracture conductivity
without assuming a uniform flux along the fracture. Furthermore,
analysis of field cases illustrates the application of the pseudolinearflow mcdel and its combmtiun with other interpretation techniques
tu obtaii reliible estimates for fructure and reservoir parametem

PseudrrIhrear.Flow

Model

This study considers the model presented in previous

works 15J$2~; i.e., an inftite homogeneous reservoir is prcduced
tbruugh a well intersected by a symmetrical ftite-conductivity vertical fracture of constant properties, as indicated in Fig. 2.
Several autbors16.17.21have demonstrated that me pressure behavior of a fractured wefl can b+ expressed in terms of three panwneters: ditnensionle3s pressure drop, *WD, dimemionless time,
!.fD: ~d ~ensio~=s
m Fig. 1. So

ApWD=f(@,,CD).

Cq@ght

438

fiacmre ~nducti~v,

%.

2S ~s~~

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(1)

!989Sccl@ly
ofPelroleurn
Eng!nws

For the pericd including the btiear flow, Transition Zupe 1, and
the hear flow, Q. 1 can be expressed in the bpkce space as2731
d3(pwD)=m cOril{@s/(cfl)2]

* }Acvzsl(cp)zl

x,

(2)

where d3 (pwD) is the Laplace transform of the dimensionless wellbore pressure and s is the Laplace space parameter.
The hyperbolic cotangent fiction may be mitten as an infinite
serie3.32
cool(x)

=(1/x) + (x/3) (x3/45) + .

+[2&B&-1/(2n)!]

+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(3)

Hence,

s(pwD)=T/sc@ti[s/(cp)21
+(~/3)[s/(cD)2]u

x (1/ti[s/(c*)Zl

1/45{@/(C@)2]

}3 + . .).

(4)

At large values of time, s-O and the series in RI. 4 can be approximated by use of two terms:
dXpwD)=m/2sK+m/3c@ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(5)
faplace inversion of this equation yields
pwD=~~(~/3C~).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(6)
The fist term on the right side cmresponds to the classic linearflow expression discussed extensively in the literature. The second term is a result of the fnite conductivity of the ti-acture. HauIey and Bandyopadbyay30 presented a similar equation; the only
difference is that their numerical constant in the secund term is unity
instead of the u/3 constant. It is obwousthat this equation also incfude.sthe infite-conductivity case for which the second term on
the right side goes to zeru.
By multiplying Eq. 6 by CP, we obtain
PwD(Cj)=d%fD(%)2
fbis equation

indicates

+(d~j.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)

graph ofp.D(Cp) VS. W

line with an intemeot
. emml
.

that a

must give a sinde straieht

to 7r13for
differ&t vzlue;of Cp~
Fig. 3 shows this type of graph for the pressure behavior of a
fmite<ondctitity vertical fracture. 16 It is evident that a portion
of the curves for C@> 5X falls on the straight Iine defined by RI.
7. Hence, an interesting conclusion is evident the pressure behavior
of a well intersected by a fracture of conductivity > ST is identical
to the behavior of an infinite-conductivity fracture with a skin
that depends on the fracture conductivity. This condition is valid
fOr a @ti
the ~ge, t.rjD(C@)2 >1.
Agarwal et af. 21 found this type of behavior and provided a
graph for the relationship between fracture conductivity and the intercept in the linw-flow grapk however, no analytical prouf was
presented. In addition, Lee and Holditchzg emended the use of tie
linear-flow graph to Iinite-cunducdtity fracture.ca.sev they presented
empirical correlations of both slope and intercept as a function of
fracture conductivity.
It has been demomtmted that the flux distribution afong the fracture is uniform during the lin~-flow periud for an infmite-

SPE Formation Evahatic,n. Septem&T 1989

,:W
~:
100 L,,e

1 ..
-.

,.

BUN;AR-

,rJ-z,..,

Fig.

]~-z

,~o

15

,@
I,.(cr.],

104

,.6

10

Q
o

TRANS!-W~
FLOWPEQ!ODS

100T

~08

IPressure behavior of a vertically fractured well.

5J=Y

i
Ig. 3Linear-flow

graph for a f[nite-conductivity

fracture.

I
cm , 5T

qf~
twD

lg. 2-Finite.conductlvify

vertical

fracture

[n an infinite

mewolr.

i.:

conductivity fracture. Tfds is not so for ftite-conducdvity fractures, as shown in Figs. 4 and 5. These graphs present the flux
distibwion for CP equal to 5X and 10T and for values of time
when E+ 7 applws. The flux distribution tends to be mom uniform as flowing time increases. his information was obtained by
use of Cinco-Ley et als 16mcdeI. .4kbougb the pressure behavior
under these conditions is similar to the linear-flow behavior. it is
not the same because of the dtierence in flux distributions, Consequently we propose that the pressure behavior exhibited by fjdte.
conductivity fractures be called pseudolinear flow.
Fig. 6 shows a heavy line representing the pseudolinear-tlow behavior. The beginniig of thisflow period occurs at a value of
t.r/D(C@2 = Ii.e., one log cycle of time after the end of the
bdineir flow and two log cycles before the start of the apparent
one-half-slope straight line, The pseudolinm-flow wricd includes
part of the transition mne between the one-qmwter-slope straight
line and the on&Mf-sloIE straight linq therefore, a theoretical basis
exists (Eqs. 2 through 7) for the extension of the linear-flow graph
to cases of intennedtie and high fractore conductivities for pressure data falfing within the transition zone, which can be analyzed
only by type-curve matching with currentfy avadable metbcds.

0
0

?g. 4Flux

0.2

0.4

distribution

A+=mL&+bLf,

during

the

0.8
XD
pseudoilnear

1.0
flow;

for gas wells. On the other hand, b=f is defined by

b~f=ALfo(q@/h)(x]cf)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(11)

for oil wells and by

bLf=,4Lfg(qT/h)(xf/Cf)

, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(12)

for gas wefls. FLfO, FLti AL@ and ALfi are unit conversion
factors.
Eq. 8 indicates that a graph of pressure data vs. the square root
of time during the pseudoliiea.r flow should exhibit a straight line
of slope mLf and intercept b=f, as shown in Fig. 7.
According to Eqs. 9 and 11 for oil wefls and Eqs. 10 aod 12 for
gas wells, the slope is inversely proportional to fmctuze area hrf
and the intercept is inversely proportional to C)/.xf; hence,
*

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(13)

Analysis

Acc.zr&g to Eq. 6, the wellbore pressure behavior under

pseudolinezr-flow conditions is given in terms of real variables by
Apor

0.6

:,D =5T.

krf= (FLfo@/nI~f)(@@cJ
Pseudollnear-Flow

.. _.~

. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(8)

where mLf is given by

mLf=(FLf&?B/hf) @/k4@ % . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(9)
for oil wells and by
. .
mLf(FLfg9T/~f)(l/ kI@@ % . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(10)
SPE FormaCionEvaluation.Sc!nernber 1989

and Cf/xf=ALfOqBjJhbL f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(14)

for oil wells, and

hxf= (FLfiqT/m~f)(l/k@cJ
and Cflxf=AL&qT/hbL

~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(15)

f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(16)

for gas wells.

The pseudolinear flow starts at about txfD(Cfl)2 = li.e., irl
tWUJSof red variables.
~fipLf=(~@#c#f/~)(~f/Cf)2

...............

. . . . . . (17)

439

::
:4

C,D= ]0 T

lfD

-.

FLOW

10+

10+

,.-2

,.O

,)2
t.,.(m),

,,)6

104

,~

I
o

Fig. 6-PseudolInear-flow

0.2

0,4

0.6

0.8

pressure

behavior.

1.C

XD
lg. 6-Flux

distribution

during

the

pseudolinear

flow

:m - 10W.
siooless form
~rtbpLf=(9/m)(bL,ImLf)

Z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(M)

l?qs. 17 and 18am both vafid for.oif and g= ms. M. 18 w=

obtained by considetig f3qs. 9 through 12 and can be used to check
whotber the prqer pseudolinearflow straight line has been chosen.
Extension

and Limitations

Unfortunately, the pressure behavior given by Eq. 8 is exhibited

not only by a finite-conductivity fracturq an inftite-xmductivity
fracture with fluid-loss damage yields an identical behavior. The
Mtor has been considered to k the case when the linear-flow-graph
straight line does not intercept the origin (Ap]~.. > O). Therefore,
a uniqueness problem regarding the ~
of system does exist.
One way to discriminate between these cases is based on the existence of the bifinewflow perid, i.e., a finite-conductivity fracmm may exhibit bilinear flow and an infinite-canducfivity damaged
fracture does not. Another possibility is tie use of Eq. 18 to check
the start of the pseudolinear-flow peric@ a highly conductive
damaged fracture becomes e~ident in the event that a straight line
in the squar.acot+f-dme graph begins earlier than indicated by
Eq. 18.
The intorpre.tation of data is more complex when both ftiteconductivity and fracture fluid-loss damage are taken into account.
It apprs, as demonstrated in the AppendK, that both effects are

PwD=q+%+(7/3cp).

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(19)

E+ 8 is sdfJ vafid for this case with prqermcdiIication

nition of the intercept bLfr as defined by
qBp Xf
k
T aOqBp b,
bLf,=AL@+-
1
()
hCf2kkxfk,

of ffie defi-

. . . . . . . . .. (20)

for oil wells and

r%qTbs
bLfi=ALfigy+
hCf2khxfks

L_l

............

(21)

()

for gas wells.

Again, to obtain reliable estimates for both conductivity and
fracture-damage effects, it is essential to have pressure data on the
bilinear-flow p-aid T%iscan be achieved by use of the techniques
dscussed by Wong et aL33 An interesdng point is that a fluid-loss
damaged fracture. of l%dte conductivity does not exhibit a w@ldefmed bifimwflow stmight fine.
To perform a complete analysis of both flow-rate and pressure
data, the value of formation permeability must be avaifable from
prefmctwe-test interprotadon or from analysis of pressure data fMing in or tier the Transition Flow Pericd 2 shown in Fig. 1.
EXMIIDI~S
of Am!lcatlon
. .
The application of&e pseudofinew-flow mcdel is ilfmhatedthrough
tie anafysis of tests psrformed on massivo-hydmufic- fkwtumf
(MHF) gas wells. One of these cases was presented by Bosdc et
al. N and the other by Cmix-Ley and Sammdego-V .27

bu a++

I
c

Fig. 7Linear-fiow
havior.

440

graph for pseudolinear-flow

pressure bs-

.wEFormationEvdualion.Swemb=r

~~9

3
mLf=i.otiXlo4pSi2

Cp-l MSCF~-l~fA

b,, =2X105p$i2Cp- MSC~-

2
mw
1

..

I
. .

.-

/,
0

} b~f

50

100

150

200

fi,hours
Fig. 9-Billnear-Now

graph for Bostic et al.sw

TABLE 1TEST

example.

INFORMATION

Fig. 10Linear-flow

AND RESULTS

OF ANALYSIS

graph for Bostic et al.sw

example.

FOR CASE 1U

Reservoir Data
5,100
1,275
0.0027
56
0.085
725
0.0254

p{, psia
:tim~:a
h: ft

*OR
pd. Cp
Cg,, psi1
Results
C,lxt, md-fflft

1.465 XI0-4

Type
Curve

Analysis

0.103
131.2
13.5

x,~k, ft-md *
C,W

rnd x-n

Pseudolinear flow
0.0965
140.5

13.0s

13.6

>107T
50.00328

%
k, md
C,, md-ff

2236
>2,291

xl. ff

TASLE 2TEST

Siiinear Flow

INFORMATION

AND RESULTS

OF ANALYSIS

FOR CASE 2=

Res6tvoir Data

q, Mscf/D

7,350

tp,hours

2,640
118
0.1
0.023
690
0.0252

h, ft
fp
~ OR
Pg. OP
ct. psi-f
PM, pda
Analysis Results
C,, md-ft
x,wk ft.md k
C,/x,, md-tift
cm

Type Curve

14/3
58.9
0.3978
15.9

Case 1. This correspmds to the fmld case presented by Bosfic ef

to
=[, 34 BofJ ~m~~um.btitip test dam and rate were pr~s~
e3timate the iotl~ce
function for the presznre behzvior of the fmctnmd well; i.e., they applied the supfxposition principle to the information tn obtain the pseudopressure behavior corresponding tn
the unit of flow 22tc. Thi2 technique allows the analysis of m,exfended pecicd of dine. Flow-rnta information for a @od of 3 years
waa reported in nddition tn 134 hours of pressure-buildup measurements.

SPE Formation Evaluation. 3eutember 1989

0.129 x10-3

1,320
Bilinear Flow

154
0.4;85
16.74

Pseudolinear Flow
137
54.6
0.427
17

Fig. 8 shows the type-mme matching for this case. Although

an exceUent match is obfaincd, the duration of the flow-rate @ml
w23 not long enough to zllow the estimmion of the dimensinnfess
fracture conductivity, C@; however, a minimum value for this pamete i Cp 2107.
The match points in Fig.8 zre (Af)M= 1 honr [t. D(Cf)2]M=
106(psi2/cp)/@f3cf/D) [I .6(x 109NaZ/,
I.2 x 10-3, ~Fa)M=
Pa.s)/(std m3/d)], and f.pWD.C@)M=5.6.
441

)02

HLil\lIIIl;l
107 t.0_lo5
,.-2

1_10:2___l

,.-1

Fig. 1I-lype-cttrve

LO-l_

I
matching

L_

=(1,491.2x

=0. 103md-ftht [0.103md .tim],

=9.65 x10-2

lxf){fi(t)M1+Pci[tx fD(cD)21M}

,%

2.637x 10-4 X 1
( 0.35 X0.0264 X1.465 XIO-4X1.2X10-3

=131.2 ft-mdfi [39.99 m.md%],

and C#i=xfl(Cf/Xf)

=131.2 xO. 103

=13.5 md% [4.1 md~. m].

From these results and from the minimum value of CfD, we obtain

1x725)/(56x2x

105)

md-ftfft [9.65 x10-2

md,-timl.

ftiLf=(9/T)KZ x I@)/( 1.025 x 104)12= I SOPOhOurs,

which is, for practical purposes, the case in Fig. IO.
Information of hDtb the bilinear- and linear-flow graphs can be
combined to estimate Cflxf as follows:
Cf/xf=(~bfi/FLjg) [qTmw/fi(mbf)2]
(444.75)2X1 x725x 1.025x 104
40.925 x56x(8.3

s 0.tM328 md,

X104)2

=0.0931 md-fWI [0.0931 md+mlm].

cf2 c*/dtlhzi

Table 1 pre+ents the results obtied by use of different techniques.

The agreement of values for parameters is excellent and the maximum difference is about 10%.

>236 md-ft ~1.9 md.m],

and Xf>Xfl/_
ft [698 m].

graph for this example. The hiieactlow straight line includes ~ints up to ==40 hours; it Iras a slope
m =8.3x104 psi2/cp-Mscf-D-hr A [139.3 X 1012 kpazfpa. s-std
mY.d.h] and goes through the origin. Application of the bilinearflow-anatysis equation yields
Fig. 9 shows the bti-tlow

Cfl=[Fb~qT/mbf

Eq. 18 can be used to check whether the proper straight line has
been drawn. The stwt of the pseudolinear-tlow period occurs at

kS(Cf/xf)(lllOr)

22,291

_.

At [ho. rsl

On the other hand,

=(1 ,424x725x5.6){(56X 106)

=0.103

pl

102

Cf/xJ=ALkqT/hbLf

@hDcjD)Mlh(PFdM

fi=(cf

(+#c,) kh]z
2

444.75 X 1 x725

[ 8.3 X 104 x(O.035X0.0264

X 1.465 X 10-4)*

x56

= 13.Og md~-fl [3.99 md~.m].

Fig. 10 shows the Iinear-flow graph as applied to this case. The
straigh-line portion has a slope mzf= 1.025x 104 psi2/cp-MscfD-hr% [17.2X1012 kFa2/Fa.s.std m3 .d.h*J and an intercept
fJLf=2X105 psi2/cpMwf-D [335.76x 1012k%2iPa.s.2td m3 d].
The pseudofintwwflow analysis yields
x+

]01

Clttce-Ley and Samwtlego-V.sm example.

for

By applying Eqs. 38 through 40 in Ref. 27 and considering the

information of Table 1, we can estimate
Cf /xf =

_I__l_

t.tD(cfD)2

=FLtiqT/mLf h(@cJ

Case 2. This example represwm Wefl A in Ref. 27. A pressurebuifdup test was run in an MI-IFgas well for 120houm after a flow~g @d
of 2,1W ho~. The information for this testis presented in Table 2.
Fig. 11 shows the application of the type-curve-matching technique. As can be seem, both bilinear and pseudoliiear-flow pericds are present in the test. 71e w curve md bilkwflow
graphs
are shown here; the analysis and a canplek discussion are presented
in Ref. 27.
Fig. 12 indicates a welldefied bibw-flow
straight line that
goes through the origin of the graph. Fig. 13 presents the linearflow graph and shows that pressure data exhibit a straight-line portion where slope mLf =5.65x107. psi2/cp-ti% [26.86X 109
kpa2~a.S.h!4J md intercept bLf= 15 x 107 psizkp 171.3x 109
kpa2/Fa.s]. Application of the pseudolinear-flow @YS~ Yield3

40.925x7,350x690
x+=
5.65x107X 118 x(O.1 xO.02.32X 1.29 X 10-4)X

=54.6 md%-ft [16.6 mdfi .m]

40.925x1x725
1.025 X 104 x56 x(0,035 XO.0264X l.465x
=140.5

AA7

md%t

[42.8 md% m].

10-4)*

and Cf/xf=(l ,491.2X 7,350X6s0)/(118 X 15x 107)

=0.427 md-tllfl [0.427 md m/m].
SH5 Formation Evd..ticm,

SeWernber 1909

,0
t

.,~~
;

40

mL,=563xf07psi2c7
F

!L
02468

m,

lg. 12BObtear-llow
1.s==7example.

graph for Cbtco-Ley

and Samaniegl

Combining these resufts gives

C#=21.6

md~-fi [6.6 mdfi.m].

Table 2 summarizes tbe resuffs obtained by different techniques.

The agreement ap~s
to be excelfent and the differences are
< 10% bt alf cases.
Conciuslons

1. The tbearetiwd basis for the use of the linear-flow graph to

analyze pressure data of finite-conductivity fractures has been established.
2. The effect of fmckre conductivity on the Iin--flow graph
ato be Similar to the effect of a skin damage aromd the
fiacmre.
3. Tim effect of interrrdiate and high fracture conductivities is
additive to the effect of a skin-fracture damage during the
pseudofinear-flow pericd. Both effects can be evaluated if pressure
data in the bti~-flow
period am available.
4. The pseudolinear-flow analysis provides estimates for C#,
C/Xf, and Z+ and can be used to compare resdts from other
methods of interpretation.
5. Neither the bilinear- nor tbe pseudolinear-flow graph can be
u3d @esbtM@ fo~tim
p$-~ty.
Hence, ffds -~~
mu~
be obtained from prefracture tests or ftom long-time pressure data
falling in or beyond the transition between the pseudolinear-flow
perkd and the Pseudoradial-flow pericd.
Nomenclature

A = unit conversion factor

ALh = unit conversion factor for linear flow of gas,

1,491.2 [418.361
.4Lfi = unit c0nver3i0n factor for linear flow of oil,
147.86 [1928.9]
b = intercept
bf = fracture width
bpL = intercept on Cartesian pseudolinear graph of

fransient-test pre.wtre data.

B = FVF, RB/STB [res m3/stock-tank m3]
B& = Bemoufli numbers

compressibility, psi-1 ptPa-l]

fracture conductivity
dimensionless fracture conductivity
function uti in Fq 1
unit conversion factor
unit conversion ftior for bilii
flow of gas,
444.75 .[24.57]

c! = 3YS@ItI total

Cf =

C@ =
f=
F =

Ftig =

WE Fwmmkm Evduatkm, .%ptunber 1989

Fig. 13Linear-flow
V.SZ7

graph

10

how,

for Cinco-Ley

and %maniegc

example.

FM.
.,. = unit conversion factor for btiear flow of oil,
44.1 [34.971
FLfi = unit conversion factor for linear ffow of gas,
40.925 [11 .498]
FLfO = unit conversion factor for Iinear flow of oil, 4.064
[53.01]
h = formation thickness. ft M
k = permeabfity, md
$(p.D) = Laplace transform of dimensionless weflbore
pressure
m = slope
IIZPL= S1OF of stight liie for pseudoliiez flow,
psizkp pcPa2/Pa.s]
p = pressure, psi m]
Ap = pressure change, psi P@
APWD = dimensionless pressure drop
~ = ~eff floW rate, STI+V [stock-tank m31dJor
MscflD [Std m3/d]
~ = sti fa~or or fapkice space variable
t = time, hours
tX,D = dimensionless time
T = reservoir temperature, R KI
x = variable used in Eq. 3
XD = dimensionless variable
j+ = ~xte~
mdls
f = fia*@ fdf-length in the z dii~fion
a = pressure (or pseudopressure) unit convemion
f3.ctOr
% = Pr~~
(OI pseudopressure) unit conversion
factor, 1,424 [399.5]
~. = p~s~~ (or psedopressme) nit mnvetsion
factor, 141.2 [1S42]
i3 = time unit conversion factor, 2.637 x10-4
g = fluid viscosity, cp pa.s]
.$ = p6r0sity, fraction
+ = real gas potential, psizlcp Ma2/Pa.s]
A* = real gas potential change, Psizkp &Paz/Pa.s]
Subscripts
b = bilinear
bf = biliiear flow
D = dmensiordess

e = external
f = fracture, flowing
g=ga3
h = hydrocarbon
443

~ = ~ti~

Perm&2bility Reservoirs,. paper presented at tie 1979 Congxso

Pammericam & Jngeniwfa de Pekfk, Mexica City, March 19-23.
23. Namdnbam,T.N. and Pabm, W. A.: A Purely NumericaJ Approach
for .4naJyzingFluid Flow to a WeU Jntmcepdng a Vextical Frwture,
paw SPE 7983 pzesented at tbe 1979 SFE California RegionaJ Meeting, Vmtura, April 18-20.
24. Guppy, K.H. et af.: NoII-Darcy Flow in We!3s WMI FiniteCond.cdvity VerdcaJ Frmturm, SPEJ (Oct. 19S2) 681-98.
25. Economies, M.J. er al.: Pressure Buifdup Amdysis of Gmthemxd
Seam WeUsWith a PamlleJepi@ McdeLJPT(April 1982)925-29.
26. Bennen, C.O. et al.: %flne.ce of Fracture Heterogeneity and W%
La@ on fbe Respemc of Verdcally Fmtured WeJJs, SPEI (APIO

L= linear
Lf = Jinear flow
M = match
~=oiJ
p = production, prcducing
PL = pseudoJinear

s = dmage
w . wellxxe.

,.

Snpmaipt
= average

1983) 219-30.
H. and Samaniegc-V., F.: Transient pressure Analysis
27. Cinmley,

Referwrcss
1. S@t, J,O.: The Effect of Vertical Frmiwres cm Transient Pre%ure
B&vim of Wells,,s JPT @cc. 1%3) 1365-69; Trans., AR@ 22S.
2. Russell, D.G. and Tmitt, N.E.: Transient Pressure Behavior in Vertically FraduredP.&xvoim,JFT(&I. 1954) 1159-70; Trans.,AIME,

231.
3. Lee, W.J. Jr.: AmJysis of HydmuJicaflyFracturedWellswithFrwsure BuildupTess,>, pqer SPE 1820 presented at the 1967 SPE Annual Meeting, Housmn, Oct. 1-4.
4. Clark, K.K.: eTransient Pressure Testing of Fmtwed Water Jnjt%tion Wetls,v JPT (June 1968) 639-43; Trans., AJME. 243.
5. Milfheim. K.K. and Cichwuicz, L.: iTesdng and Analyzing LowPermeabilitv Fractured Gas Wells, JPTITeb. 196S) 193-9ti Trans..
AfME, 243-.
6. Watfwdmrger,R.A. andRamey, H.J. Jr.: Welf Test Jmerpretation
of Vertically Fractured Gas WeIfs,, .JPT (T&Y1969) 625-3Z Tram.,
AJME, 246.
7. van EverdinSen, A.F. and Meyer, L.J.: %dysis of Buildup Curves
Obtained After Well Treabnent, JPT(April 1971)513-24 Trans.,
AIME. 251.
8. Raghavan, R., Cady, G.C., and Ramey, H-J. Jr.: kWeUTest Analysis for VeniwJJy Fractured WeJls, JPT(Aw. 1972) 1014-21JTrans.,
AJME, 253.
9. Gringanen, A.C., RameY,H.J. Jr., amAffaghavM, R.: UnsteadyState Pressure Distributions Created by a Well With a Single JrdiniteConducdvily VerdcaI Fracture, SPEJ (Aug. 1974) 347-Q Trans.,
AJME, 257.
10. Gringarten, A.C,, Sanmy, H.J. S,., amdR@avan, R., ,A@ied PreswreAnalysis for Frac.turedW.US,,,JPT(IUIY 1975) 887-92; Trm.,
AJME, 259.
11. P.amey, H.J. Jr. and Gringarten, A. C.: &EHect of 3tigb-Volume Ver-

tical Fractures on Geotiermd Steam WelJ lkbavior, Proc., Second

United Nations Synqmium on the Use and Development of GeoOIermal E.ergy, 8an Framisco(May 20-29, 1975).
12. Ragbavan, R.: W.me PI@caJ Considerations in tbe AmlY?.isof Pressure Da!a,s, JPT(Oct. 1!?76)1256-6% Trans., AJME,2J3L
13, Holdkh,S, A.andMome,R. A.:
TbeEffectso fNon-DarcyFlow
onthe Bebavior of HydraticaJJy Fractured WeUs,''JPT(Oct. 1976)
1169-78.
14. Ramey, H.J. Jr. et al.: pressure Transient Tesfing of Hydraulically
Frachued Wells, paper presented at the 1977 American Nuclear .%x.
Meedg, Golde, CO, ApriJ 12-14.
15. CincQLey, H. and Samaniegc.V., F.: CWfeciof WeJlt.xe Storage and
Damage on tbe Transient Pressure Behavior of Vertically %mtured
Welk,,, paper SPE 6752 presented at the 1977SPE Annwd Technical
Conference and Exbibition,Denver ., n.+ 0-f?
16. Cin.o-laY, H., Samaniego-V., F., and Dominguez. N.: Transient
pressure Behavior for a WeJJrnti a Fiite-Conducdvity VerdcaJ Fmcture,,SPEf(Aug.
197S)253-54.
17. Barker. B.md Ramey, H.J. Jr.: TmnsientFiowm FiniteCondmfivity Vertical Fractures, paper SPE 7489 presented at the 1978 SPE
&nti Tmhtiti Conferememd~tition,
Houston, Oct. 1-3.
1S. Scott, J.O.: LANew Methcd for Determining Flow CJIaractmisticsof
Fractured Wells in Tight Formations: pap?x 75-T-2 presented at fbe
lW8AGATmstission
Cotieren=, MOrdreal, T-179-186,
19. Ragbavan, R., Uraiet, A., and Thomas. G.W.: Vertical FraUure
Height Effe.2on TransiemtFJowSehavicn: SPEJ(Aug. 1978)263-77.
20. R&!bavan, R. and Hadinoto,.N.: AIwJysis of Pressu= Data for Fracmred Wellx Tht Constant-Pressure OuteJ Boundary,,y SPEJ (ApriJ
197s) 139-5@ J-m., AlME, 265.
21. Aganwl, R.G., Carter, R.D., and PoJJcck,C.B.: rEvahmtionand Performance Pm&don of fmw-PermeabililvGas Wells SdmuJ@d b!Massive HydraulicFmcruring,,7JPT WI.& 1979)362-T2 Tram., iDvfE,
267.
22. Bandyopadhyay, P. and H8nleY,E.J.: An Jmpmved Fmsure Tmnsient Metbcd for Evaluating Hydraulic Fmcmre Effectiveness in Law
-..

444

for Fractured WeUs; JPT (Sept. 1981) 1749-66.

2S. Cincc-L+J, H. and Sameniego-V., F.: Tmnsi.@ pressure Analysis:
Finite Cmducdvity FracimmCase vs. Damaged Fracture Case, pw
SPE 10179 presented at tbe 19S1 SPE Annual TednicaJ Conference
and Exhibition, &n Antonio, Oct. 5-7.
29. Lee, W.J. and Holditch, S.A.: Frdchuc Evah2iti0nwith FIwsure Transient Testing in J.ow-PermeabiJify * Reservoir s,,,JPT (Sept. 19S1)
1776-92.
30. Hsnley, E.J. and Bandyopadbyay, P.: Pressure Transient Behavior
of the Utionn Fbu F& capacity Fmcmre,-, _
SPE 8278 presented at the 1979 SPE Am@ Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las
Vegas, Sqt. 23-26.
31. L%, S. and Bmckenbrougb, J.: A New Soludm for Finite Conductivity VetdcaJFraclures with Red Time and Laplace Space parameter
Esdmadon, SPEFE (Feb. 19S6) 75-8S.
32. AbmmowiU, M. and Stegun, I.A.: Hand600k of ,?%fhematicd Functions, Nait. Bureau of Standards, Washington, DC (1964).
33. WOW, D. W., Barrington, A. G., and Cimday, H.: Applimdon of
the FressueDetivative Function in tbe Fmssnre-Tramient Testing of
Fractured WdJS,S,SPEFE (Oct. 1986) 470-S0.
34. Bosdc, J. N., Agarw8J, R. G,, and Carter, R.D.: Combined Analysis
of Postfmct@ng Performance and pressure Buildup Data for Evacuating an MHF Gas WeU,> JPT (Ott. 1980) 1711-19.
App.sndIx-Pseudollffear.Flow
Behavior
Conslderhrg Fracture Dsmage

Consider the fmnducdvity

ffacture described earlier to & surrounded by a zone of width b, snd permcabtity k, less tbsn the
formation permeability, k. l%is intmxfucss an extra pressure drop
on tie fluids ffowing from the iimnadan to the tiactum, as describd
by Cmcc-f-ey &d Samaniego-V. 15 For tbw t30w conditions, F.q,.
2 can be written
fK.pwD)=

T coth{(I/cfD)[2/(

lA@ +C2hr)(sfi)ll ~ ,

scp(l/cfi)[2/(uw)

. (A-l)

+(zhr)(sfi)] *

where Sfi is the fracture skin ,factor, deIined as

Sfi=(Z/2)(f@[(HkS)-11.

. . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . (A-2)

Theseriesexpansion for the hyperbolic cotangent ~ven by Eq. 3

cm be used as in E.q. 4, therefore, for Jarge vafues of time, the

folJowirig approximation is obtained
d3(pWD)=(r/2sX) +(s@)+(tr/3C@).

. . (A-3)

Lsplace inversion of this equation yields J?q. 19.

.S1 Metric Conversion Factors
bbl X 1.5S9 873
E01
Cp x 1.0*
E-03
E01
ft x 3.04S*
t13 X 2.S31 6S5
J3-02
rod X 9.S69233
E04
psi x 6.S94 757
psi-l
X 1.450377
psiz x 4.7538
R X 519

=m3
= Pa.s
= m
= m3

= pmz
E+(Y3 == J&a
E-01
= kPa-l

E+OI

= kPa2

E+WI = K

.Cunvwabnwor 1sexact.

SPEFE

Ofigl.ti2FEnmnutipt r=61vdIorrewuvi
Sept.16,1934.Paperacceptedforp.bllca

mmi?64NcM.11, t9e8.Paw (SPE

tlonW 12,19$3.Revlsd nmnus+rk.t
rmsentedatme raw SPE Annum Tech.k%l Oo.fermce andExhlbluon held
6WL

12059) flint
In Hou8M.,

W-19.

SPE Formation Ev?.luatkn, Sqtembex 19S9