..
SPE7977
PRESSURE
TRANSIENT BEHAVIOR
OF NATURALLY
FRACTURED
RESERVOIRS
by M.J. Mavor, Chevron Oil Field Research Co.;
and H. Clnco Ley, Stanford Univ.
yrighflW9,Amrbarr lnatMoefMlning,Metallurgbal,
andPatroIwmEn@reWs, ins.
%p~wa~e-tdatti1979 C@lWiaRqti~M*lMaf tieWie~ofPeWmmEnglnmof
carreotbnbytheuttmr.
Panniaabn10copylaraatrbtadtoanabstract
iBSTRACT
~ racture system is filled with a ma~erial of lower
l?henaturally fractured reservoir model presented by
darren and Root was extended co Lmprove analysis of
field data and to account for practical wellbore and
reservoir conditions. These conditions include ihisstudy concentrates on the first two categories,
~ellbore storage and damage, and constant producing ~ fractured and purely fracturedmedia. Both treat the
~ressure in infinite systems. Finite reservoirswere
ulvestigated to define pseudo-steady state and long
time reservoirbehavior.
[NTRODUCTION
[n recent years, numerous models have been proposed
LO explain transient pressure behavior of naturally
fractured reservoirs. The cerrnnaturally fractured
can be misleading. In reality, these models consider
s reservoir composed of two porous media regions,
?rimary and secondary porosity. Primary porosity is
synonymouswith the matrix rock whose properties are
:ontrolled by sedimentation,cementation, and lithi-
Eication of the original deposits. Secondary poros-
Lty, i.e., the fracture network, ia considered to
tave been developed subsequent to the primary system
3s a result of mechanical deformation, solution, or
iolimitizationof :he originalmatrix.
3treltsova13presented a thorough discussion of fluid
flow in fractured reservoirsand included the cLJssi-
fication system illustrated in Figure 1. Four media
categories are utilized as follows. The first, a
fractured medium, consists of a formation whose
primary porosity contains the majority of the fluid
storage volume while the secondary porosity contri-
outes the transmissivityof the zone, This is the
situation most frequentlymodeled to describe natur-
ally fractured reservoirpressure behavior. A purely
fractured medium was envisioned as a system whose
matrix permeabilityand porosity were negligible. In
this case, the storativity and transmisaivityof the
reservoir would be due entirely to the fracture
network. This classificationis one limit:ng fonrtof
the first category behavior. The third group is a
double porosity medium in which the storage volumes
of the primary and secondary regions ;re of the same
order of magnitude while the transmissivity is a
result of the fracture system..The final classifica-
References and illustrations at end of
. .
SFW
af=mmfmmksn Mr@uxmtWAIME
AIMEhddinVenWra, CaltiornlaA@i18-20,1979.TIWmatenalbsuWsct
ofnotmm thanW words.Wife. W3XN. CentralExPwy.,Dallas,Texas75206
tion is a heterogeneous medium. In this csse, che
~,ermeability
than the matrix.
reservoir as a continuum. The smallest incremental
volume which is visualized mathematically is of an
extent large enough to include both primary and
secondary porosity. The degree of fracturing is such
that the fractures appear to be homogeneouslydistri-
buted throughoutthe matrix.
Warren and Roots16 versionof a naturally fractured
reservoir model was chosefizscne basis for this work
for several reasons. The primary reason was that
many publications3467i3 have been presented which
support the analytic results of Warren and Root even
with varying idealizationa, The model has been
applied to interpretationof field data with apparent
success,27 indicating the models practicality,
From an engineering standpoint, these conditions are
a necessity.
The study isdiscussed in four section; Mathematical
Development and Idealizations, Limiting Forms of
Reservoir Behavior, Infinite Reservoirs, and Closed
Reservoirs. Conclusions from these sections are
presentedat the end of the paper,
MathematicalDevelopment
andIdealizations
In order to develop equations which describe fluid
flow in naturally fractured reservoirs,idealizations
are necessary to obtain :.model in a mathematically
tractable form. This section discusses these ideali-
zations and the ~iethodof solution of the governing
equations.
This study considers a horizontal radial reservoir
initially at uniform pressure with impermeableupper
and lower boundaries. The system was treated as a
continuum with the fracture network superimposed on
the primary porosity. This idealization resulted in
two pressures, matrix and fracture, at each location
in space. The primary porosity contained the major-
ity of the fluid stored in the reservoir while all
paper. flow through the reservoir to a fully penetrating
2 TRANSIENT PRESSURB BEHAVIOR 01
well was confined to the secondary system. The
fracture permeability was assumed to be constant and
to exceed the conscant matrix permeability by at
least one order of magnitude. The rock compressibi-
lityof each system was constant and independent of
the pressure in the opposite system. All flow was
single phase and waa described by Partys law.
Viscosity and compressibility of the fluid were
independent of pressure. Pressure gradients and
fluid compressibility were slight so that the
resulting equations could be presented in terms of
pressure. The d:nsity of the fluid in the matrix and
fract~reswas asmned equal at any locationin space.
By performing a masa balance and assuming Darcy flow,
the following equation describing tranaient flow was
pgeeentedby Warren and Root:
e ~PDf 8PDf aPDf
. %0
a~+;DarD (1-)~+~
O&ga, w, is the dimensionless fracture storage
parameter.
Lu=
$fcf
$mcm+Qfcf
The matrix-fracture interaction was described by an
instantaneoussteady-statepressure relation.
aDm
(1-u) ~ = A(PDf-Pgm)
Lambda, A, is the dimensionless mat:ix fracture
permeabilityratio.
k2
A = a &rw
c K+]
L
Equation (3) is one point at which the various models
differ. Kazemi4 presented a finite differencesimula-
tion which considered a transient pressure relation
between the matrix and fractures. Even with the
ens, the results of both publica-
$::%:?8 agreed within minor differences. These
ass~Pti
differences will be pointed out in the infinite
reservoir section. S.treltsovaL2haa shown that if
the matrix is distributed in slabs, equation (3) is
the limiting form of Kazemis tranaient relation as
time increases. Muskats haa shown that the use of a
continuous succession of steady states results in an
acceptable approximationfor traqaient flow. In view
of these agruments, equation (3) was considered a
reasonableidealization.
Equations (1) and (3) were solved with the Laplace
transformationmethod outlined by Van Everdirigenand
Hurst.ls The Laplace transformationis defined as
By applying this transformation,the general solution
was obtained in Laplace space.
IA-LY FRACTURED RESERVOIRS SPE 737;
= IU(l-w)s + A
f (7)
(1-Lo)s + A
[f w=L, then f=l, and equationa (1) and (6) reduce to
;he homogeneous form, The canstants Cl and C2 were
?valuated according to the boundary conditions.
Soundary conditions and the resulting Laplace space
solutions are listed in the appendix for all condi-
tionspresented in this study.
rhe real space solution for the reservoir pressure
>ehavioras a function of time was obtained by evalu-
~ting the inverse transformationto the Laplace apace
jolution. This was accomplished with a numerical
inversion schame presented by Stehfest.11 The
routine obtains an approximation to the real space
(1) Solutiotiby taking a weighted average of values of
the Laplace space result. The scheme is based upon
equation.
the follot;:ng
N
(2) PD(t.&& ~viq+si) .(8)
i=1
dhere
in Z+,i
5.= (9)
1
D
rhe value of N determines the accuracy of the approx-
(3)
imation. The V.s are conatanta dependent upon N in
the followingmafiner:
max(~,i)
.-8
y+l
= -+iE
N
K (2K)! (lo)
(-1)2
i
(4) (~-K)!(K!)2(i-K)!(2K-i)!
The optimum value-of N and the accuracy of the inver-
sion scheme waa deterri~ed by comparing the results
to known funtiona. For N=16, in double precision
arithmetic, inversion scheme solutions are presented
in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1 is the comparison with
the analytic solution for an inii~ite naturally
fract=red reservoir presented by Warren and Root.lG
The difference between the two computationmethods ia
small at all times but decreaaes as time increases.
The inverter result was considered more accurate aa,
in order to be evaluated, the analytic equation
required the limiting forms of the Bessel functions
in Laplace apace. Table 2 comprnree ths inverter
results win. the solutions presented by Agarwal
et all for a line source well with storage and skin.
The agreementis good.
Limiting Forma of
Reservoir Behavior
The mathematical model presented in the previous
section predicts twc limiting forms of tranaient
pressure behavior, the first at short times, the
(5) second at long times. Criteria for short and long
times are listed in the section on infinite reser-
voirs. The following discussion attempts to clarify
the reasons for the limitingbehaviors.
In a reservoir with a known unit storativity
(porosity-compressibilityproduct, @ct), the first
 .. ,,? Kb. * .
.
Limiting form occurs when the effective permeability
. of the matrix is zero,correspondingto A=O. In this
case, the matrix volume is not in communicationwith
4 the wellbore and the pressure response to production
will be due to the fracture volume. The dimension-
less fracture pressure , is a function of the
Df
dimensionlessfracturestorage time, tD/w, given by:
2.637(10-4)kfc
~= (11)
u radiua to be finite.
QfcfPrw2
Equation (11) is a dimensionless time based upon the
fracture storativity, $fc . Since w ia less than 1,
ac the ssme resl time, !fheeffective dimensionless
time is greater than a dimensionless time based on
the total reservoir storstivity ($fc +$ c ).
results in a greater pressure response%% lract%
- reservoirwith a noncommunicating matrix system than
in a homogeneous reservoir with quivalent transmis-
sivity. The fracture system behaves as though honlo-
geneous when the pressure resp~nse is considered to
be a functionof tD/u.
The second limiting form occurs when the effective
storativity in communication with the wellbore is
equal to the. total reservoir storativity. Physi-
tally, this situation can be pictured two ways. If
the matrix permeability is equal to the fracture
permeability, both systems would be in communication
with the wellbore. This would result in homogeneous
behavior. If the matrix porosity was.zero, the total
reservoir storativity would be equal to the fracture
storativity resulting in us=l. The reservoir will
again behave aa though homogeneous.
As an illustration,suppose the total storativityof
the reservoir is known from field and laboratory
measurements. This storativity will be distributed
in some manner between the two porositiee. Consider
that tiiematrix contains 99.9% of the reservoir fluid
storage but that its permeability is zero. The
pressure behavior of this situation with W=10-3 is
pictured in Figure 2. If the matrix porosity is zero
such that all fluid is stored in the fracture system.
This situation results in the second curve for w1,O.
The dimensionless pressure, with tu=10-3 and
%nd >~~~sc2: Er
2% ?reeqiii%c: ?fexcept
or 1that the
the W10-3 case is shifted by a factor of l/w leks
than the w=l.O c&$e. Plotting PDf versus ~Ju would
result in a single curve. This shift occurs since
both cases Are homogeneous reservoir solutions but
the effect~.ve~torativity for the @10-3 case is 1000
times 1s.s than the UJ=L.O case. This causes the
observed pressure change to occur a factor of l/LU
sooner thrm if the total reservoir storativitywas in
communicationat the wellbore.
In a fractured reservoir with a matrix permeability
greater than zero but an order of magnitude less tha?
the fracture permeability, the fluid produced at
early times will originate entirely in the fracture
system. The pressure response will be identical to
the cage of A=O. At long times, the major portion of
fiuid will originate in the matrix system. The
effective storativity will have increased from the be found by comparing the accuracy of equation
fracture atorativi?y to the total reservoir stora- Iwith equation (12). For 2% agreement in computed
tivity. The presa~re rmponse will be identical to
the case ofw=l.
,-MLV ..
Infinite Reservoirs
In a finite reservoir with a producing well not
located on a boundary, early t~me pressure response
will behave as though the reservoir s infinite.
This section investigatesinfinite reservoirbehavior
for three cases: a well producing with a constant
formation flow rate and damage, a well producing with
a constant surface rate with wellbore storage and
damage, and a well producing with a constant wellbore
pressure and damage. All cases consider the wellbore
Constant Formation Flow Rate
The solution for the pressure behavior at the well-
bore for a constant flow rate well producing from an
infinite naturally fracturedreservoir was originally
presented by Warren and Root. This section explains
methods for field data which have been
nalysis presented plus some techniques developed
previously
as a result of this study. Time criterionsare given
for the limiting for~s presented in the previous
section. A brief discussion of damage precedes the
analysismethods.
Formation damage causes an increase in the resistance
to fluid flow near the wellbore. This resistance can
be caused by a variety of factors such as plugging
and partial completion in the formation. This
phenomena h&s been treated mathematically as a
steady-statepressure drop acrosa an infinitesimally
th:~ Mskinttwhich considers the increaaed resistance
to be concentrated on the wellbore sandface. The
apparent skin can be negative if the well has been
stimulated by acidizationor fracturing. Mathematic-
ally, a negative skin can be interpreted as an
increasedwellbore diameter producing from an unatim-
ulated zone.
The pressure at the wellbore as a function of time
was presented in dimensionlessforme as:
-atD -atD
=$ [lntD+0.80908+Ei (=) -Ei(~+2S]
Df
(12)
For values of UJ=10-3, A=LO-7, and S=10, the above
equation is illustrated in Figure 3. Although this
semilog graph is in dimensionless form, a field data
plot of pressure veraus log time would have similar
appearance. Two parallel straight line sections
appear in the gxaph as a result of the limiting forms
discussed in the previous section.
Time criterions for the times of application c the
limiting forma canbe developed with reference to the
previous section. Early time pressure behavior acta
as though the reservoir is homogeneous and is a
function of /w. This behavior is describedby the
R ioa.
following rela
CD (13)
~f=~[ln (=) +0,80908 +2s]0
rhe end of the initial straight line iriFigure 3 can
(13)
values, equation (13) can be substituted for
aaustion (121 for tines less than
\,
.
.
TRANSIENT PRESSURE BEHAVIOR OF NATURALLY FRACTURED RESERVOIRS SPE 7977
W(l-w)
estimate will likely only be qualitatively correct
D= 3.6A (14) within a factor of 2. Matrix-fracture interaction
not described by the instantaneous steady-state
source assumption tends to lengthen the transition
able3 presents time criterions for a desired agree- region. This causes the early time straight line to
Ientwithin 2, 1, and 0.5%. The long time form is a
end at shorter times nud the final straight line to
~omogeneoussolution and is a function of begin at ionger times aa shown by Kazemi.4 The
% he
!ollowingrelationapplies.
accuracy of the estimate willalso depend upon the
pressure gauge sensitivity. Other referencea1416
=+ [ln~+O.80908+2S] present methods of estimating, as well.
Df (15)
Skin can be estimated by extrapolatingthe late time
straight line to At=l hour and using the relation:
;omparing this result to equation (12), within 2%,
:quation(15) canbe utilizedwhen
P~P1hr
f z + 3.2275]
s =1.151 [~- log
(16) (Qfcf+$mcm)prw

(21)
~able3 gives a range of accuracies for long time
~ehavioras well. The two parallel slope behaviors may not be evident
under certain combinations of reservoir properties
)mega can be estimated from field datd with two and production time. If A is large, on the order of
~ethods. Due to the shift in effective storativity, 10-4 or greater, the initial semilog straight line
jmegacan be estimated from the horizontal time ratio will end sfter very short production time and could
~f the long time straight line poxat to the early not be observed under practical conditions. If
:imeline point. production time is sufficient to reach the final
straight line, !a reliable estimate of the fracture
transmissivity could still be obtained. If A is
small, 10-7 or leas, ao that the early time semilog
straight line is apparent and production ceases in
teal times would be ratioed when analyzing field the transition period, only one line will develop.
iata. The vertical pressure difference gives the Fracture tranamissivity could still be estimated in
Eollowingestimate oftu. this case as well.
.
The pressure behavior of a shut in well following
constant flc J rate production is also of ,practical
(18)
interest. Buildup behavior can be described by
Jince field data is plotted pressure versus common superimposingthe drawdown equation.2
log time:

APV -AA$ -AAtD

JJ= exp [-2.303 (19) = * [ln ~At + Ei (=) - Ei (~)
71 Df

I (22)

n = 162.6 & (20) A(tD+AtD)) ~i ~-A(tD+AtD)

+ i( (1-L!J) - W(l-w)
)1

Using the straight line slope, m, of either the early If producing times are long such that the final two
or late time region, in conjunctionwith the horizon- exponential integrals are negligible, then buildup
tal and vertical separations, the dimensionless data would have similar appearance as Figure 3 with
fracture storage snd ths fracture trsnsmissivitycan t+At/At substituted for ~ on the horizontal,
be obtained from field data with a single well test. logarithmicaxis. The analyais methods presented for
The matrix storativitycan be estimated from core and productiondata apply in this caaeaa well.
fluid laboratorydata resulting in an est~.mateof the
fracturestorativity. If A is small, and production times are short, such
that the last two exponential integra?.sare not
One questionable point is tb~ availability of the negligible, LUand A can be estimated frrfithe l.ori-
fracture total compressibility,cf. Warren and Root zontal time ratio and the vertical pressure separa-
suggested using the fracture fluid compressibility tion using the followingrelations:
for cf. This would be an adequate approximationfor
use m estimating the total reservoir storativity
since ~= zili normally be much less than ~ . It
would n& be possible to get an accurate estim~te of
@f from Q~cf due to theinaccuracyof the compressi- (23)
bxlityest mate. ..
,.
Lambda can be estimated from the end of the early
time straight line and the start of the late time
I
straight line using equations (14) and (16) or (24)

,
 ... . . ..
cm #zt#
It would be necessary.to solve these equations itera-
tively forw, and A.
Figure 4 illustrates the effects of varying flow
times upon buildup behavior in naturally fractured
reservoirs. For CD=108, the effective storativity in
Communicationwith the well at the time of shut in is
equal to that of the total reservoir. In this case,
the two parallel line behavior results. For produc-
tion times in which the effective storativityis less
than the total reservoir storativity, the two slope
behavior is not evident, and the verticsl pressure
and horizontal time separations decrease. For pro-
duction times less than that required for the early
limiting form behavior to end, the test would affect
cnly the fracture system. If the initial reservoir
pressure ia known, a line parallel to the semilog
straightregion could be used to obtain the horizon-
tal ratio and vertical separation.
Wellbore Storage and Dama8e
This section investigates the effects of wellbore
stora8e and damage upon the pressure behavior of a
constant surface flow rate well in an infinite
naturally fractured reservo%r. A brief discussion
of storagepreceeds the presentationof the results.
Under practical operating conditions, the initial
production from a shut in well originates from the
volume of fluid stored in the wellbore. As pro-
duction continues at a constant surface rate, the
wellbore approaches a steady state condition and the
fraction of flow originating in the formation
increases. At long flow times, the surface and
Bandface flow rates become equal. The increaae in
the sandface flow rate from zero to the surface rate
causes the early time formation pressure reaponae to
be less than the response had the sandface flow rate
been constant and equal to the surface rate. After
storage effects have ended, the pressure response is
equal to that of. a well with no wellbore storase from
time zero,
rhe knowledge of wellbore conditions is necessary to
properly interpretwell test field data fcr reservoir
properties such as transmissivity and storativity,
In hOm08efl.SOusreservoirs, early time pressure data
dominated by wellbore stora8e has no relation to the
reservoir properties but can be incorrectlyanalyzed
aa if this were not the case. Ramey8 has presented
results from thesolution to the diffusivity equation
considering storage and skin. These results may be
used to estimste the duration of storage effects and
to determine the portion of field data related to the
reservoir properties. In fractured reservoirs,early
time pressure data is necessary in order to estimate
the parameter UI and A. It is necessary to under-
staridthe effects of wellbore conditions upon these
estimates.
Due to the pressure-time relationship bein8 control-
led by the four parameters ~, S, w, snd A, the
number of grapha and/or tables necessary to clearly
portray all results ia prohibitive. As a conse-
quence~ Figure 5 is presented-only for A=10-9. The
end of the storage effects occurs when the curves
originating in the lower left hand corner of the
figure merge with the C =0 curves. For LU=l, the
results are identical to \ hose presented by Agarwal
et al. for homogeneous reservoira. The time to the
end ofthe storage period, within 2 percent, is given
by the relation:
. . . -- . . ------ --,
~ = CD(60+3.5S) (25)
This equation has been presented by Rameyg for homo-
geneous systems.
To verify the accuracy of the above equation in
naturally fractured reservoirs, Figure 6 is present-
ed. This figure illustrates the.percent difference
between the storage dominalwd results and the zero
storage curve. The deviation is affected by the
value of omegs for a constant lambda. If a pressure
difference of two percent or leas between the C =0
and CD=10 curves constituteswellbore stora8e effet ts
being negligible, then the result presented by Ramey
holds for all values of omega. .esevalues of the
parameters are a severe test of ae applicabilityof
the relation. At the presented time range, the
pressure behavior is a function of tDlw for A=lO-O.
Regardless of this fact, the end of the storage
period depends only upon ~ and S aa in homogeneous
systems.
Figure 7 presents the appearance of drawdown behavior
in a specific reservoir with UJ=10-3and A=10-7. At
early times, the storage coefficient hss a signifi-
cant effect upon the pressure beh~vior. All reser-
voir behavior before the end of the stora8e period ia
obscured. The early time straight line is necessary
for es~iniationof w and A from field data. Based
upon this illustration, in the presence of wellbore
storage in a reservoirwith these properties,w and A
could not be estimated with pressure data at the
producingwell.
In general, the larger the matrix to fracture permea-
bility ratio (greater A), the less likely the possi-
bility of data analysis for fracture parameters in
the presence of wellbore stora8e and damage.
In order to determine the significafice of storage
effects in field data, it would be possible to com-
pare naturally fractured reservoir data to the log
pressure-log time type curve presented Ramey.le This
comparison ia possible due to the similarities be-
tween the results for homogeneous and fractured
formations. In general, in order to estimate frac-
ture parameters from field data, the followins
criterion must be met for one log cycle of the early
time behavior to be present
UJ(l-lu)
cD~36A(60+3.5S) (26)
Care must be taken when test times are short such
that the final straight line has not been reached and
wellbore storage obscures the initial straight line.
The horizontal line in the transition zone in
Figure 7 could be interpreted as bein8 a result of
the formation transziissivity.This would produce an
estimate of transmissivity many times greater than
actuallypresent.
Constant Wsllbcre Producing Pressure
Constant p;esaure production occurs frequently in
field operations usually caused by a fixed surface
tubing pressure. In a constant pressure well test,
surface flow rates are measutiedand interpreted for
formation tranwaissivity in a manne~ analogous to
constant flow rate pressure data. This section
discusses constant pressure production behavior for
damaged wells in homogeneous and naturally fractured
 Uuwu A&&l&rmxaaumh Jmruxv Avfi V4
?or a homogeneous reservoir, Figure 8 is a dimen-
sionless log-log type curve of a constant pressure
Jell in an infinite system with varying degrees of
iamage or stimulation. It is apparent from this
Eigure that type curve matching damaged well data to
~stimate reservoir properties will not yield ?.ccuzate
results due to the flatness of the curves. As the
iegree of damage increases, the variation in flow
rate decreaae~.An increase in the damage causes the
~bservedflow rates to decrzase as expected.
Semilog techniquesare more successfulfor estimating
formation transmissivityand skin. Within 2% accur-
icy
2 When the matrix system is not in communicationwith
aD= ln\+O.80908+2S
for
PloCting field data as l/q versus log flowing time
till result in a straight line of slope m. The
iegreeof damage canbe estimated from
+ 3.2274]
s = 1.151 [* - log -
epcr~
Xote that semilog straight lines occur earlier in
time for damaged wells (SO) than for stimulated
wells (S<0). For stimulated wells it may be neces-
5ary to extrapolate the semilog straight line to one
hour in order to obtain the desired valueof I/q.
Saturallyfractured reservoirsbehave similarly under
constant wellbore pressure and flow rate solutions.
At early times, the flow rate is influenced by the
fracture atorativity and at long times by the total
reservoir storativity. Figure 9 is a aemilog graph
for a naturally fractured nondamaged well, I/q
versus log ~. Time criterions for the effects o!
the fracture system on wellbore behaviorwere develop-
ed in the same manner as for constant flow rate
production. The criterions are presentsd in Table 3.
Figure 9 could be interpreted in the same manner as
the flow rate case for the fractured parameters using
the horizontal and vertical se~aratious between the
early and late time semilog straight lines. The
dimensionless skin can be estimated in the same
mannec as the homogeneouscase if the second semilog
straight line ia extrapolated to I/q at one hour.
The akin would have no effect on the duration of
fracture effects. One advantage to constant pressure
testing would be the elimination of wellbore storage
effects upon the data when single phase flow exists
through the tubing to the surface.
Closed Reservoira
While infinite reservoir theory is normally utilized
to estimate formationproperties, finite systems must
be considered to predict long time flow characteris-
tic of the resenoir. The effect of a circular, no
flow, outer boundary upon the pressure behavior of a
producing well located at the center of a circle is
investigatedin this section.
A closed reservoir undergoing constant flow rate
productionwill ultimately reach pseudo-steadyState.
This condition occurs when all points within the
reservoir experience a constant rate of pressure
decline. In the absence of foanation damage, pseudo-
steady state pressure behavior in a homogeneous
reservoiria describedby:io
-=
2.2458A
~ln (~) (30)
D=2ntDA+2
cArW
C is a shape factor dependent upon the geometry of
de system. For a well in the center of a closed
circle, C, s 31.62. Pseudo-steady state occurs for
Aa previously discussed, naturally fracturedpressure
behavior has two limiting forma. If boundary effects
are significantbefore the end of the initial semilog
straight line reached, then pseudo-steady state
is
behavior is similar to that illustratedin Figure 10.
(27)
the wellbore, boundary effects become significantfor
/w=O.l. When
5fi@l and or %w(l-w)/llA
w
?&l in2%, che follow ng relationapplies.
(28)
(31)
The end of this behavior for vaLAous time criterions
I
is presented in Table 3. Figure 11 illustrates the
(29)
behavior subsequent to the end of the first limiting
form when boundarv effects are si!anificant.Atransi-
tion period occur; in which the e>fective atorativity
increases to the total reservoir storativity. Within
2%, equation (30) applies for tD~44.4 (l-w)/A. Error
criterions for this limiting form are also presented
in l%bl.e 3. These criterions apply only when
boundary effects are significant prior to the start
of the second limiting form. If the toeal reservoir
storativity is in communicationwith tha well before
the oneet of boundary effects, pseudo-steady state
>0.1.
will be described by equation (30) for
Comparison of infinite and closed reservo ?$ ; iu
Table 3 shows that the transition period length
between early and late time limiting forms is
increased by the presence of boundary effects. For
2% accuracy, the first limiting form ends at about
1/3 the time when boundary effects are present than
during the infini%e behavior. The second limiting
form occurs roughly 60 times later than in the
infinitecase.
The above observation can be used to predict long
time flow behavior of a natural]{ fractured reservoir
knowing the reservoir parameters and stimating the
well spacing.
In general, for outer boundary effects to affect the
first limiting form flow period, A will have to meet
the followingrequirement.
~;JMiL (32)
- 1.13 reD2
For small value:sof k, the effect of bound&ries may
occur depending upon the size of the drainage
. radius.
When only the fracture storativity is in couununica-
tion with the wellbore, boundary effects become a
significant factor l/w earlier than would have occur-
red if the matrix hsd contributed to the flow. If
the resulting field data in this case was analyzed
for reservoir boundaries, the size of the reservoir
wouldbe greatly underestimated. Reservoir
.: ---- MT
K,. . M...*-
s.-. .,4
-w W
u. P4mmn
--..- T.aw
-.. = 9
8
m 7Y77

?acametera, u and A could not be etstimted from the Dimenrnionleaa pseudo-steady state 8hape
CA
iata since the two slope behavior would not be evi- factor.
ient.
c
Dimensionlesswellbore storage,
~he above oLaervationa would only have practical
CD 2n@cthr2w
rnpplicationin developed reeervoira. In a recently .
discovered reservoir with relatively few wells,
Constants.
boundary effecte may not be evident in shore term C1C2
testing. During this initial testing of the reser- -1
C,ct Total isothermal compressibility,psi or
voir, the two parallel slope behavior may not be
tvident for a variety of reaaons. These include kPa-l,
short flow t$mes before buildups, wellbore storage
and damage, and an unfortunate combination of flow Ei(x) Exponentialintegral.
times and reservoir properties. The reservoir would
u 1-w)s+A
appear to behave as though homogeneous and estimates f
~f deliverability would be obtained on this basis. k
Hhen the field ia fully developed, boundary effects h
Formation thickneaa,ftorm.
nay prove to significantly affect the deliverability
of the reservoir, decreasing the economic value of
Modified Beesel function~, first kind,
the field. 10
zeroth order.
~ese observation point out that if the reservoir is
Modified Bessel function, first kind, first
suspected of being naturally fractured, thorough 11
order.
planning will be necessary to estimste the extent of
ttoefracturesystem.
k Permeability,mdorpm2.
CONCLUSIONS
Modified Bessel function, second kind,
o
zeroth order.
1. The storativity of both the matrix and fracture
syatema can be estimated from a teat performed
Modified Bessel function, second kind,
ona single well. 1
first order.
2. Buildup and drawdown testa can be analyzed by
Absolute value of semilog slope, flow rate
similar techniques fo::formation parameter when m
case,
the flow rate ia constant and the total reser-
voir storativity is in communication at the
162.6 ~or2121 ~ .
wellbore at the time of shut in.
f f
3. When short flow perioda precede a buildup, data
analysis for fracture parameter is more diffi- Absolute value of semilog slope, pressure
case,
cult but can be achieved by iterativemethods.
v UB
4. Short flow periods before buildups tend to 1626 kfh(~i-Pw) r 2121 kfh(pi-Pw)
eliminate the two slope behavior of naturally
fracturedreeervo!.rs.
Dimensionlesspressure,
D
5. Wellbbre storage effect~ become negligible after
kh(Pi-P) kh(Pi-P)
~=CD(60+3.5S). Analysis of field data for frac-
ture parameter will be impossible if fracture -Or-
effecta end before this time.
Transformeddimensionlesspressure.
D
6. Constant preaaure teata in naturally fractured ~
Vertical semilog pressure difference.
reservoirs are analogous to constant flow rate v
testa.
Dimensionlessvertical semilogpresaure
DV
difference.
7. When the matrix contributionto flow is minimal,
boundary effects can occur a factor of l/w p
Wellbore flowingpressure,psi or kPa.
sooner than would be expected from the size of Wf
the system, eliminatingthe two slope behavior.
q Volumetric flow rate, bbl/dayorm3/day.

NOMENC~TIJTtE q~ Dimenaionleaa flow rate

A Drainage area, ft2 orm2. -or-

Al ,A2 Limiting form constants

r radius, ft or m.
B Formationvolume factor,
Dimensionleaaradius r/rw.
reservoirvolume D
surface volume Dimensionless outer boundary radiua r,~lrw.
eD
3
c- r Wellbore radius, ft orm.
Wellbore storage coefficient,b~orm~ w
s van ~
 .s.-. .-,. 6 .-,- --,-. .- s

s Laplsce sp~:e variable. 7. Odeh, A. S.: Unsteady-State Behavior of

Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, ~. Pet. ~.

t time,hr or s. ~. (Mar. 1965) pp. 60-64.

Dimensionlesstime 8. Ramey, H. J. Jr.: I!Short-TimeWell Test Data

D
Interpretation in the Presence of Skin Effect
2.637(10-4)kft 10-gkft
and Wellbore Storage,n _
JpT (Jan. 1970)jP. 97

(Qmcm+$fcf)vr:r ($mcm+$fcf)pr~
9. Ramey, H. J., Jr.: Practical Use of Modern
Well Test Analysis, SPE Paper 5878, Presented
at :: 51st Technical Conference of the SPE,
DA ~rw2/A, dimensionless.
New Orleans, LA, Oct. 3-16, 1976.
Horizontaltime ratio, dimensionless.
tDH 10. Ramey, H. J., Jr., and Cobb, W. M.: A General
Pressure Buildup Theory for a Well in a Closed
Laplace inversionscheme coefficient.
i Drainage Area,~(Dec. 1971), p. 1493.
-2
a InterPorosity flow shape factor, ft or
11, Stehfest, H.: Algorithm 368, Numerical
M-2. Inversion of Laplace Transform, D-5
A Dimensionless matrix fracture permeability Communications ~ the ACM (Jan. 1970), 13,
ratio. No. l,pp. 47-49.

P Viscosity,cp or Pa*s. 12. Streltsova, T. D.: Hydrodynamics of Ground-

water Flow in a Fractured Formation, Water
@ Porosity, void volumejreservoir bulk Resources Research Vol. 12, No. 13 (June 1976),
volume. p. 405. .

u Dimensionlessfracturestorage. 13. Streltsova-Adams, T. C.: t!well Hydraulics in

Heterogeneous Aquifer Formations, Advances
~
Subscripts Hydroscience Vol. ~, New York: Academic Press,
Inc. (1978).
f Fracture.
14. Uldrich, David O., md Ershaghi, I.: A Method
al Matrix. for Estimating the InterPorosity Flow Parameter
in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, SPE Paper
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 7142, Presented at the 1978 California Regional
Meeting of the SPE-AIME, San Francisco, CA,
My sincere thafiksto Dr. H. Cinco Ley and Dr. H. J. April 12-14, 19?8.
Ramey, Jr., of Stanford University for their guidance
during thie study. 15. Van Everdingen, A. F., and Hurst, W;,: The
Applicationof the Laplace Transform to flow
Problems in Reswvoirs, Tracs., AIME (1949)
REFERENCES
~, 305-324B.
1. Agarwal, R, G., A1-Hussainy, R., and Ramey,
16. Warren, J. E., and Root, P. J.: The Behavior
H. J., Jr.: An Investigation of Wellbore
of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, Sot. Pet.
Storage and Skin Effect in Unsteady &iquid
FIow:-I. Analytical Treatment, ~. Pet. ~, W. Z. (Sept. 1963), PP. 245-255.

~. (Sept.1970), p. 279.
17. Warren; J. E., and Root, P. J.L : Discussion
on Unsteady-State Behavior of Naturally Frac-
2. Crawford, G. E., Hagedorn, A. R., and Pierce,
tured Reservoirs, ~. &. ~. ~. (Mar.
A. E.: Analysis of Pressure Buildup Tests in a
1965).
Naturally Fractured Reservoir, ;.- ~. Tech.
(Nov. 1976), pp. 1295-1300.
APPENDIX
3. de Swam, O. A.: Analytic Solutione for
Determining Naturallv Fractured Rewervoir
Properties-by Well Te;ting, ~. ~. ~~. ~. BOUNMRYCONDITIONS AND
I@?LACE SPACE SOLIYTIONS
(June 1976), pp. 117-122.
A list of the boundary conditions and the resulting
4. Xazemi, H.: Pressure Transient Analysia of
Laplace space solutions utilized in this study fol-
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs with Uniform
lows. The real apace results can be generated using
Fracture- Distributions, Trans. AIME (L969),
~, pp. 451-642. the Laplace transform inversion scheme previously
discussed.
5. HuskSt, H.: ~~The .
F1OW of Homogeneous Fluids
Through Poroue7edia, J. W. Edwards, Inc.,
Ann Arbor~. (~621. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

6. Najurieta, H. L.: A Theory for the I?reesure Infinite outer boundary

Transient Analysis in Naturally Fractured
Reservoirs, SPE Paper 6017, Presented at the limPD =0 (Al)
Slst Techaical Conference of the SPE, New r-
Orleans, LA, oct 3-6,1976. D
 IPR 7977 M.J. Mswr and H. Cinco Lay a
.
Closed outer boundary Radial Coordinates
.

8PD CONSTANTFLOWRATElNNER BOUNDARY

(FINITE RADIUS)
=o (M =INFINITEOUTER BOUNDARY
q
I D=reD

. Ko(@ rD)
(A7)
Constant flow rate inner boundary D =
em Kl(@)

aPD
ix;I ,r
.l = -1 (A3) f
= w(l-lu)s+A
(1-10s+A (A8)
r.)

Constant surface producing rate STORAGEANDSKIN INNERBOUNDARY CONDITION,CONSTANT

Wellbore storage innew boundary SURFACEPRODUCINGRATE, INFINITE OUTERBOUNDARY

Transformed pressure at the wellbore

8PDw apD
cD-
a~ hD I =1
(A4)
rD=l

Wellbore damage inner boundary (A9)

P CONSTANTFLOWRATEINNER BOUNDARY
CLOSEDOUT
W=[PD -S%] (As)
rD=l BOUNDARY
(NO FLOW)

INITIALCONDITION
.,
(A6)
(A1O)

LAPLACE SPAC,ESOLUTIONS
FOR VARIOUS BOUNDARY CONDITIONS CONSTANTPRESSUREINNEiiBOUNDARY
WITHDAMAGE,
INFINITE CUTER BOUNDARY
 ,.
TABLE 1
.

COMPARISON OF THE NUMERICAL INVERSION WITH THE ANALYTIC RESULT

FOR NATUMLLY FRACTURED RESERVOIRS

-.
Analyttc Invert er Percent
tD A D D Difference
(1)

102 5 (10-% 0.001 6.16075 6.16079 6.5 (10-4)

~03 5(10-3) ~.1 3.85872 3.86134 6.8(10-2)

~03 5 (10-% 0.1 4.98509 4.98592 6.6(10-3)

~~3 5 (10% 0.01 5.93962 5.93974 2.0(10-3)

105 1.00 0.01 6.16100. 6.16104 6.5(10-4)

105 5 (10J) 0.001 9.39301 9.39301 o $6.

~06 5(lo-6j 0.1 7. 3126Q 7.31260 0

107 5(10-3) 0.l 8.46359 8.46359 0

TABLE 2

COMPARISON OF THE TRANSFORM INVERSION RESULTS WITH

AGARWAL RESULTS FOR A STORAGE AND SKIN LINE SOURCE WELL

Agarwal Inverter Percent

tD
CD > D D Difference

100 0 100 0.79378 0.79289 -0.112

1,000 0 100 0.097575 0.097564 -0.011

100 0 1,000 3.2640 3.26297 -0.031

100 5 130 0.93188 0.93178 o. 011

100 5 1,000 5.7984 5.79825 -0.003

100,000 5 10,000 0.95361 0.953595 -0.002

100 20 50,000 25.758 25.756 -0.007

100,000 20 ..50,000 0.49526 0.49507 -0.004

. .
 TABLE 3

EARLY AND LATE TIME ERROR CRITERIONS

Resewoir Approximate First Second

Condition Percent Form Fo :rn
Error
. constant
-. Constant

1
A2

. Infinite 2 3.6 0.77

Reservoir
1 6.6 1.2
0.5 12.7 1.8
-------- -------- -.------ ------- -------- -------- -------- ----

Constant 2 2 0.77
Pressure
Wellbore, 1 3.5 1.2
Infinite
Reservoir 0.5 5 1.8
-----.-- --.----- -------- -------- -------- ------- -------- ----

Closed 2 11 44
Reservoir
1 18 89
0.5 29 210
---.-------------------------.-----------------.----.-------

At End of First Limiting Form :

D=&P
At Start of Second Limiting Form:
tD = AZ (1-u)
A
 ,..,r .. .,.-,..
v
.
e 7 .;, , .~,. . ~ .. a
?;;.y,IxnT::-

El R
..
.:, . 0;.;:.
...u,., <0::.-.:; ;
,.

.2 B M
.;. o,
.4

;: .,:*,, .:, : ., .7
::,,........... ,. .:G7 ,, 0 ,e, ::. e, =. : , . ,,;>:,, . .

1 ][1
,,\ .:.... .... . :::,,::.,
,.##
..::.: ,. . .
. 0..0.: :!: . .* a ;;
,
.,. ,,, ,. :,. ,,.,
.,:
*:. ,,.. , :.. ,. * IA 9.
,, ... .. -1,
.=.. .1
.,,.
::: ,.: . ..*,:. . , ,:
. .. .
.&: ;:*Q ., .:. . ; ...0.
w .: ,*, .,:.. , : .>a ... ,.8 .

;. #.,
.@. = ,?. :;:
.:.,,
.,.;:,; ,.,.. . : ..! ;., -...
..+
..:.-

.,.
.:.
.. . .
.,.
....~
:..
,...:,....,..,,,,,,,;.... ...
.0
/ .,,, .;
...
;..9::
n
.
a<g
.. Ow
,. . ,:,,,
.

..
,:.. :...-. .;::,.,,. *:,,.
...
,q;.? :,::. ....,

L1
.& .
.,. .
I,... 7
.,;,,,,:.
~:::.;: ..8
> .,!.j:...> 0.: .;
... ...*
...c
$0.
* o,
.0, .0.
.:. .* ~.
. . .
. ,

, ...:U*.-. .:,,O
.0

.~.
j~..
)!!nii
:,: ;.. .. .....*
,,.&.
. . ~*:~::,.
. .,, . . .
:8*..:
. . ..
-a.
. .. ...
. .
. .

Fia. 1 - Schematic representation of a fractured

medium, a purelly fractured
me~ium, a double-porositymedium, and a heterogeneousmedium.
,,

1=

I I 111111 I I I 1 111111 I I 1 111111 I 1.1 111111 1 I I 11111

,02 ,03 104 105 ,06 ,07

OimensionlessTime, to

Fig. 2- Limiting forms of naturally fractured reservoir pressure behavior.

o
25
n
E
2
23
4
21

19

17

15
k~
102 104 106 108 1010
t+&
DimensionlessTime, to ,Dimensionless
At
Fig. 3 - Dimensionlesspressure vs dimensionless
Fig. 4 -Infinite naturally fractured reservoir
tfme W=l-3, A=lo-7 S=lo.
builous behavior w=10-3 ~=lo-s.
 = 10-3 S=20
.Lo----- -
u-l
----- -

C?Q

101 102 103 104 105 lo6 7(J7 1@ 1(J9 1010

Dimensionless
Time,to

Fig. 5 - Effects of wellbore storage and skin infinite naturally fractured reservot~,
A=lo-g.

1()1
GJ = 0,001

Estimated
Endof

&

DimensionlessTime,
tD

Fig. 6 - Deviat+on from the constant flow

rate solution CD=1O, S=0, A=10-9.
00
I

Dimensionless Wellbore pressure, pDf i

o
N
o- Nca Aulm -4ao aaGzz

v
o
3
m

E
2
m
m
J-l off al
start

1 I I I N l%
Accmw
u

.
3
m o
In to
(D
3

s
.
.
 . .

11
,
9

a
+.

1 (
102 1(X 106 108 1010
i)imensionless
producing
Time,tD

Fig. 9 - Reciprocal dimensionless flow rate vs

time naturally fractured reservoir with constant
producing pressure no formatfon damage.

103

I02

101

101 102 1(N Id 105 106 I07 lc@ 1()9 1010

DimensionlessTime,
to
.,

Fig. 10 - Closed naturally fractured reservoir behavior A=10-9.

 .--

. .

...

I 1 I 1 I
I I 1
101 102 1(33 I(34 1OS 106 107 108 109
Dimensionless
Time,tD

Fig. 11 - Closed naturally fractured reservoir behavior A=l(J-7.

-
.