SPE 84886
Characterizing Partially Fractured Reservoirs by Tracer Injection
Fuad Qasem, SPE, Ridha B.C. Gharbi, SPE, and Muhammed I. Mir, Kuwait University
Copyright 2003, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE International Improved Oil Recovery
Conference in Asia Pacific held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 20–21 October 2003.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
There is considerable interest in the petroleum industry to
characterize partially fractured reservoirs and to develop an
increased understanding of the physics of fluid flow in these
types of reservoirs. This is because fractured reservoirs have
different behavior and there exist a large number of these
reservoirs that are not fully developed. This paper presents a
numerical simulation study that was performed to investigate
the effect of rock properties on the tracer response in partially
fractured reservoirs using a finite difference numerical
simulator. These properties include fracture intensity, fracture
porosity and matrix permeability. The functional relationships
between these parameters and the calculated effective
permeabilities are also investigated. Several images, each
with different probability of fracture intensity, were generated
randomly. Numerical simulations of single-phase tracer
transport were then performed in each of the generated
fractured models. Results show that the fracture intensity,
fracture porosity and matrix permeability have a significant
effect on the tracer response in naturally fractured reservoirs.
Depending on the reservoir properties, the results also show
that the flow in partially fractured reservoirs can be either
matrix-dominated or fracture-dominated. The characteristics
of each regime and the conditions for its occurrence
are presented.
Introduction
There is a large number of oil and gas reservoirs that are
naturally fractured. In fact, one may claim that all
hydrocarbon reservoirs are naturally fractured reservoirs
(NFR) to a certain degree. The question remains, however,
whether or not these fractures form a fracture network that
affects the fluid flow properties. The effect of fractures
becomes important only when they occur with sufficient
length of penetration, connectivity and spacing. The behavior
of these types of reservoirs is considerably different than the
conventional reservoirs (Aguilar 1980, Van Golf Racht 1982,
Saidi 1987). The difference arises from the two interacting
paths (rock matrix and fractures) for fluid flow having totally
different properties and communication with each other. Due
to the complexity of NFR systems, the literature discussing
characterization and modeling of NFR is scarce compared to
non-NFR systems.
Modeling Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. Research on
fractured reservoir simulation has a long history. Performance
prediction of naturally fractured reservoirs under uniform rock
properties has been the subject of many publications during
the last three decades. Currently, there are three different
methods being used for simulation of NFR systems: (1)
continuum approach, (2) discrete fracture approach, and (3)
integrated approach.
Conventional single continuum approach has been applied to
simulate fractured reservoirs with fractures having small
effects on the flow. Barenblatt et al (1960) first introduced the
dual continuum (dual-porosity) approach. The authors
considered naturally fractured reservoirs as two homogeneous,
isotropic, overlapping continuums: the matrix blocks and
fracture network. They assumed quasi-steady state flow from
matrix to fracture. Warren and Root (1963) later extended
this work. The authors proposed a simplified representation
of fracture networks to be used in dual-porosity simulators.
They assumed that secondary porosity is contained within an
orthogonal set of equally spaced system of fracture networks,
while the matrix blocks feed the fracture continuously. In
addition, a no-flow condition between the matrix blocks was
assumed. In order to characterize the relationship between the
two porosity regions, Warren and Root (1963) introduced two
dimensionless parameters: inter-porosity flow coefficient ( ),
and dimensionless fracture storage (ω). In his study, Kazemi
(1976) used the dual continuum approach to model NFR by a
multi-layer system (dual-permeability model). The author
assumed that fractures are thin layers of high conductivity,
alternating with thicker layers of matrix blocks consisting of
high storage capacity but low conductivity. The dual-
permeability simulators allow matrix-matrix flow (Kazemi et
al. 1976, Rossen 1977, Thomas et al. 1983).
In a later study, Pruess and Narasimhan (1985) introduced
the multiple interacting continua method (MINC), which is
applicable to numerical simulation of heat and multi-phase
fluid flow in multi-dimensional, fractured porous media. One
of the disadvantages of the dual-continuum approach is that it
assumes fractures to be distributed regularly and well
connected. Whereas, real fracture systems are very irregular
and very poorly connected (Chiles 1987, Laubach 1991,
Lorenz et al. 1991).
2 SPE 84886
Long et al. (1985) and Dershowitz (1988) presented an
approach called discrete fracture flow models. In this
approach, natural fractures are assumed as a system of
interacting fracture segments instead of viewing them as a
continuum. Because this approach considers flow only
through the fracture space, the contribution of matrix
permeability and isolated fractures is not accounted for.
Besides this limitation, the models based upon this approach
are limited in size, speed and level of sophistication required
to simulate multiphase flow when compared to models based
upon continuum approach. This approach is typically
applicable for computation of flow through a single region
containing a large number of connected fractures.
To combine the advantages of both continuum approach
and the discrete fracture network approach, integrated
methods have been introduced (Oda 1985, , Lee et al. 1997,
Lough et al. 1998, Jensen et al. 1998, Park et al. 2000,
Dershowitz 2000, Lee et al. 2000, Sutopo et al. 2001). In this
approach, a discrete fracture network model of the reservoir is
first prepared. Then, either this model directly or the
parameter distribution derived from this model is used to
provide input grid parameters for simulators based upon
continuum (single or dual) approach. The approach retains
many of the advantages of continuum approach along with the
realism offered by the discrete fracture network approach.
Characterization of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs.
Various sources for fracture data have been used: outcrop
studies, seismic, well logging, pressure transient tests, and
inter-well tracer studies. The data from all these sources is
integrated to get a reliable description of fracture system both
at field scale and at local reservoir cell scale. Reliable
characterization of fractures are now possible by developing
tools for merging seismic, borehole imaging, lithological and
outcrop data together with the help of geological and
geochemical rules. Accurate seismic data yield reliable
models of large-scale fracture networks, whereas borehole
imaging provides the actual fracture description along the
wells, which enables a reliable statistical determination of
fractures.
Well logging data represent only properties measured at
or near the well bore, so its application to characterize the
fractures system in the reservoir must be done with caution.
Pressure transient analyses have often been used to estimate
the equivalent fracture permeability, fracture volume, and
sometimes the shape factor of the fracture network around the
well. Pressure interference tests can also indicate the global
horizontal anisotropy of fracture permeability (i.e.
fracture orientation).
Radioactive and chemical tracers have been used for
many years in ground water hydrology to analyze movement
of water through porous formations. However, their use in
geothermal and petroleum reservoir engineering is relatively
recent (Jensen 1983). The literature on the flow of tracer in
porous media can be divided into two main categories: direct
and inverse methods. The direct method deals with tracer
response behavior from the knowledge of pertinent reservoir
and tracer parameters. The inverse method estimates the
reservoir and tracer parameters from the interpretation of the
tracer response.
Inter-well tracer studies provide valuable characterization
of naturally fractured reservoirs. The applications of tracers to
study naturally fractured reservoirs have been the subject of
numerous studies (Wagner 1977, Tester et al. 1982, Ramirez
1993, Shinta et al. 1993, Daltaban et al. 1994, Ramirez et al.
1994, Sato et al. 1994, Zellou et al. 1995, Maroongoog et al.
1995, Deng et al. 1995, Wattenbarger et al. 1995, Almeida et
al. 1996). Despite all these studies (only few cited here), the
response of tracers in partially fractured reservoirs is yet to be
investigated. In partially fractured reservoirs, the fracture
network does not cover the entire reservoir volume. In other
words, the fragment sizes are larger than the simulation grid
block. Therefore, the primary objective of this work is to use
numerical simulations to investigate the effect of fracture
intensities on the tracer response in partially fractured
reservoirs. A secondary objective of the work is to examine
how fracture porosity and matrix permeability affect the tracer
response in these types of reservoirs. A final objective is to
study the functional relationship between these parameters and
the calculated effective permeabilities. First, we present the
methodology that is used for this study.
Methodology
Fracture Models. The conventional methods of simulating
naturally fractured reservoirs consist of fully regular matrix
network, surrounded by interconnected fractures. This
approach is unsuitable for partially fractured reservoirs
because of their high degrees of heterogeneities. In partially
fractured reservoirs, fracture distribution is highly irregular.
In this study, a random distribution of fractures is considered.
A uniform random number generator was used to generate
random points inside a two-dimensional field of 70x71 grid
(Press et al. 1992) Several images, each with different
probability of fracture intensity, were generated using a single
realization. Fracture intensity is defined as the ratio of the
number of grid blocks having fractures to the total number of
grid blocks. The fracture models were generated to cover a
wide range of fracture intensities from 0.1 to 0.9. A fracture
intensity of 0.1 represents a nearly non-fractured medium
while a fracture intensity of 0.9 represents a highly fractured
medium (i.e. 90% of all grid blocks are fractured). Depending
on the depositional environment, partially fractured petroleum
reservoirs can have widely varied fracture intensities ranging
from high to low numbers. Figures 1 and 2 show 2-D
permeability maps with fracture intensities of 0.10 and 0.5,
respectively. The white colored blocks represent the non-
fractured ones, while the dark color blocks are fractured.
Fluid Flow Models. Numerical simulations of single-phase
tracer transport were performed in each of the generated 2-D
models. One well was placed horizontally along one side of
the reservoir, while the other was placed along the opposite
side. An advanced black oil simulator ‘IMEX’ (Users Guide,
2000), in dual permeability mode, was used for this purpose.
We have used Gilman and Kazemi ( 1983) formulation for
shape factor calculations. The 2-D areal model with x-y-z
grid of 70x71x1 was found to be relatively insensitive to
further mesh refinement. For all simulation runs, the x- and y-
permeability values were assumed equal in each grid-block.
Fracture permeability was kept constant at 1000 md.
Fracturing rarely increases the porosity more than a few
SPE 84886
percent but may dramatically increase permeabilities to values
of several darcies. The total porosity of each grid block is
assumed constant. The relationship between total porosity
(φt), fracture porosity (φf), and matrix porosity (φm) is
as follows:
φ t = φ f + (1 − φ f )φ m
The water is injected continuously and across the entire
inlet end through the 70 grid blocks. Injection was at a
constant rate of 100 bbl/day. Tracer injection schedule was 1
lbs/bbl of water injected for 10 days. Production, constrained
by constant outlet pressure, occurred through the 70 grid
blocks at the outlet end of the porous medium. Table 1 lists
the simulation input data.
A sensitivity study was carried out to investigate the
effect of fracture intensity, fracture porosity and matrix
permeability on the normalized properties of tracer produced.
These include the normalized cumulative tracer produced and
the normalized rate of tracer produced. The fracture porosity
and the matrix permeability were varied from 0.01 to 0.06,
and from 0.5 to 35 md, respectively. As mentioned earlier, the
fracture intensity varied from 0.1 to 0.9. The total amount of
tracer injected (1000 lbs) is used to normalize the cumulative
tracer produced, while the tracer mass injection of 100 lbs/day
was used to normalize the rate of tracer produced.
Results and Discussion
Figures 3a and 3b show respectively the effect of fracture
intensity ( FI ) on the normalized cumulative tracer produced
( m D ) and on the normalized rate of tracer produced ( q D ),
both of which are in dimensionless form. In these simulation
runs, the fracture porosity ( φ f ) was assumed 0.01 and matrix
permeability ( k m ) was 5 md. The figures show the effect of
FI on the tracer response is very significant. As FI
decreases below a certain value ( FI ≈ 0.6 ), the response
curves of Figure 3a gradually become elongated or more
dispersive. This corresponds to a gradual flattening of the
response curve in Figure 3b and a shift in the peak to a later
time. In these instances, the matrix increasingly dominates the
flow and the fractures play less important role as
FI decreases.
On the other hand, as FI increases to higher values
( FI ≥ 0.6 ), the shape of the response curves gradually
becomes less stretched (Figure 3a). This corresponds to
sharper and shortly delayed peaks for higher values of FI
(Figure 3b). In these cases, the fractures become more and
more dominant and the matrix play lesser role as FI
increases.
These results appear to imply that there is critical value of
FI that sort matrix-dominated flow from fractured-
dominated flow. For the case of k m = 5 md , this value of
FI is on order of 0.6. Therefore, depending on the fracture
intensity, the flow in partially fractured reservoirs can be
either matrix-dominated or fractured-dominated.
Figures 4a-b and 5a-b show the results of the tracer
response when the fracture porosity was modified to 0.01 and
0.06, respectively. All other parameters in these runs were
3
maintained constant. These figures can be compared to the
base case run of Figure 3a-b, where the fracture porosity was
0.02. It can be noticed from these figures that an increase in
fracture porosity delays the tracer break through slightly. For
reservoirs with high values of fracture intensity, this delay
becomes more significant.
Another way of looking at these data is shown in Figure
6. The figure shows the results of tracer response variation
with the fracture porosity for a given fracture intensity. As
shown, the effect of fracture porosity is more significant for
fracture intensity FI ≥ 0.6 and less significant for
FI ≤ 0.6 . At a fracture intensity of 0.6, the response shows
the formation of two peaks. In this instance, both the matrix
and the fracture play a role. The earlier peak denotes the flow
from the fracture, while the second peak is due to the flow
from the matrix. Therefore, this confirms that fracture
intensity in the order of 0.6 represents a transition from
fracture-dominated to matrix-dominated flow for the case of
k m = 5 md .
Figure 7 shows the change in the peak arrival time at the
production well with the fracture intensity, FI for fracture
porosity of 0.02 and 0.06. As shown, for low fracture
intensity (matrix-dominated flow), the peak arrival time is a
decreasing function of fracture intensity. On the other hand,
for fractured-dominated flow, the peak arrival time increases
with fracture intensity. The point where the two curves meet
indicates the transition from matrix-dominated to fractured-
dominated flow. This transition, however, is a function of
fracture porosity. As the fracture porosity increases from 0.02
to 0.06, the transition from matrix-dominated to fracture-
dominated flow occurred at higher value of fracture intensity.
In addition, the rate of change of the peak arrival time in the
fracture-dominated region was higher for higher fracture
porosity. Because of the low difference between the two
values, the variation of fracture porosity from 0.02 to 0.01 did
not make a significant effect on the peak arrival time.
Figures 8a-b, 9a-b, and 10a-b show the results of the
tracer response when the matrix permeability was modified to
0.5, 2, and 35 md, respectively, with fracture porosity
maintained at 0.02. These figures should also be compared to
Figure 3a-b, where the matrix permeability was 5 md. Except
the matrix permeability, all other parameters for these runs
were maintained constant. An increase in matrix permeability
values delays the break through time. This effect is more
pronounced in cases in which a variation in the matrix
permeability changes the nature of the flow (i.e. matrix-
dominated or fracture-dominated). In other words, the matrix
permeability plays a dominant role in deciding whether the
flow is matrix-dominated or fracture-dominated.
This point is much more clear to see in Figure 11, which
shows the effect of matrix permeability on the tracer response
for a given fracture intensity. As shown, for fracture intensity
of 0.4, the matrix dominates the flow for all studied values of
matrix permeability (0.5, 2, and 35 md). However, for
fracture intensity of 0.9, the fractures dominate the flow for all
cases. For reservoirs with fracture intensity of 0.6, the effect
of varying the matrix permeability changes the flow to
fracture-dominated for k m = 0.5 md , and to matrix-
4 SPE 84886

dominated for k m = 35 md . Therefore, higher matrix the matrix permeability ( k m ), and the fracture
permeability shifts the transition from matrix-dominated to porosity ( φ f ).
fracture-dominated flow to higher values of fracture intensity.
Figure 12 shows the change in the peak arrival time at the 4. Higher matrix permeability and higher fracture porosity
production well with the fracture intensity for matrix shift the transition from matrix-dominated to fracture-
permeabilities of 5 and 35 md. As shown, for the case of 5 dominated flow to higher value of fracture intensity and
md, the matrix dominates the flow up to a fracture intensity of vice versa.
0.6. After this point, the fractures will take over and 5. The effect of fracture porosity is more significant for
consequently; the contribution from the matrix becomes fractured-dominated reservoirs and less significant for
insignificant. For the case of 35 md, however, the matrix still matrix-dominated reservoirs.
dominates the flow for higher values of fracture intensity.
This shows that an increase in matrix permeability has shifted Acknowledgments
The authors express their appreciation to Kuwait University
the transition to higher value of FI . Further increase in the
Research Administration for financially supporting this work
matrix permeability will yield matrix-dominated flow no
through a university research grant (EP 02/01).
matter what the value of the fracture intensity is. Data also
show that a decrease in the matrix permeability below 5 md
Nomenclature
will shift the transition of matrix-dominated to fracture-
dominated flow to lower values of FI . Therefore, the
FI = Fracture Intensity
transition is a function of fracture intensity, matrix k eff = Effective permeability
permeability and fracture porosity of the reservoir.
The effect of the reservoirs properties on the effective
km = Matrix permeability

permeability ( k eff ) is also investigated. The effective mD = Normalized cumulative tracer produced
permeability values for the various models having different qD = Normalized rate of tracer produced
fracture intensity, fracture porosity, and matrix permeability NFR = Naturally fractured reservoirs
are presented in Figure 13. As shown, the effect of fracture
intensity on k eff is quite significant. With an increase in Greek Symbols
fracture intensity, the portion of high permeability medium φt = Total porosity of a grid block,
(fractures) is increased, and therefore the effective φf = Fracture porosity
permeability is increased. For matrix-dominated flow, the rate
of increase in k eff is low, whereas, for fracture-dominated φm = Matrix porosity

flow, the rate is much higher. For the same fracture intensity,
the effect of matrix permeability is to shift the effective References
permeabilities to higher values. This shift is more pronounced Aguilar, R.: Naturally Fractured reservoirs, PennWell, Tulsa,
in cases where both the matrix and the fractures play a role Oklahoma, 1980.
(i.e. at or near the transition zone). It should also be noted Almeida, A.R. and Cotta, R.M.: “Analytical Solution of the
that the change in fracture porosity plays no significant effect Tracer Equation for the Homogenous Five-Spot
on the effective permeability values. Problem,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (March) 31-38, 1996.
Barenblatt, G. I., Zheltov, I.P., and Kochina, I.N.: “Basic
Concepts in the theory of Seepage of Homogeneous
Conclusion
Liquids in Fissured Rocks,” Priklandaia Matematica I
This study was aimed at investigating the effect of rock
Mechanica Academia Nauk, S.S.S.R., 24, No.5, 852-864,
properties on the tracer response in partially fractured
1960.
reservoirs using a finite difference numerical simulator.
Barenblatt, G.I., Zheltov, I.P.: “On the Basic Equations of the
Properties included fracture intensity, fracture porosity and
Single Phase Flow of Fluids Through Fractured Porous
matrix permeability. Based on the results of reservoir
Media,” Dokladi Akademii Nauk, S.S.S.R., 132, No.3,
simulations of single-phase tracer response, we conclude
542-548, 1960.
the following:
Chiles, J.P.: “Three–Dimensional Geometric Modeling of a
1. Fracture intensity, fracture porosity and matrix
Fracture Network,” proceedings of the conference on
permeability have a significant effect on the tracer
Geostatistical, Sensitivity and Uncertainty Methods for
response in partially fractured reservoirs.
Ground–Water Flow and Radionuclide Transport
2. Depending on the reservoir properties, the flow in
Modeling, San Francisco, California, September 1987,
partially fractured reservoirs can be either matrix-
editor Bruce E. Buxton, Batelle Press, (1987) 361.
dominated or fracture-dominated. The formation of two
Deng, X. and Horn, R.N.: “Description of Heterogeneous
peaks in tracer response (one for fracture and one for
Reservoir Using Tracer and Pressure Data
matrix) indicates the transition from matrix-dominated to
Simultaneously,” paper SPE 30590 presented at the SPE
fracture -dominated flow.
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, TX,
3. The transition from matrix-dominated to fracture-
October 22-25, 1995.
dominated flow is a function of fracture intensity ( FI ),
SPE 84886
Dershowitz, B., LaPointe, P., Eiben, T., and Wei, L.:
“Integration of Discrete Feature Network Methods with
Conventional Simulator Approaches,” Soc. Pet. Eng.
Reservoir Eval. & Eng. 3 (2), April 2000.
Dershowitz, W. S., Doe, T. W.: “Practical Applications of
Discrete fracture Approaches in Hydrology, Mining and
Petroleum Extraction,” proceedings of the International
Conference on Fluid Flow in Fractured Rocks, Atlanta,
Georgia, May 1988, 381.
Gilman, J., and Kazemi, H.: “Improvements in Simulation of
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J., August
1983, pp. 695-707.
Jensen, C.L., Lee, S.H., Miliken, W.J., Kamath, J., Narr, W.,
Wu, H., and Davies, J.P.: “Field Simulation of Naturally
Fractured Reservoirs Using Permeabilities Derived From
Realistic Fracture Characterization,” paper SPE 48999,
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition held in New Orleans, LA, Sept. 27-30, 1998.
Jensen, C.L.: “Matrix Diffusion and Its Effect on the
Modeling of Tracer Returns From the Fractured
geothermal Reservoir at Wairakei New Zealand,”
Stanford Geothermal Program, SGP-TR-TR-71, Stanford,
California, 1983.
Kazemi, H., Merill, L., Porterfield, K. and Zeman, P.:
“Numerical Simulation of Water-Oil Flow in Naturally
Fractured Reservoirs,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Dec.)
317-326, 1976.
Kazemi, H.: “Pressure Transient Analysis of Naturally
Fractured Reservoirs,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (December) 415-
462, 1969.
Laubach, S.E.: “Fracture Patterns in Low Permeability
Sandstone Gas Reservoir Rocks in the rocky Mountain
region,” paper SPE 21853, presented at the Rocky
Mountain Regional Meeting and Low Permeability
Reservoirs Symposium, Denver, Colorado, April 1991.
Lee, S.H., Durlofsky, L.J., Lough, M.F., and Chen, W.H.:
“Finite Difference Simulation of Geologically Complex
Reservoirs with Tensor Permeabilities,” paper SPE
38002, presented at the SPE Reservoir Simulation
Symposium held in Dallas, TX, June 8-11, 1997.
Lee, S.H., Jenson, C.L, and Lough, M.F.: “Efficient Finite
Difference Model For Flow in a Reservoir with Multiple
length-scale Fractures,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Sept.)
268-275, 2000.
Long, J.C.S., Gilmour, P., and Witherspoon, P.A.: “A Model
For Steady Fluid Flow in Random Three-Dimensional
Networks of Disc-Shaped Fractures,” Water Resources
Research 21, 1105, 1985.
Lorenz, J.C., and Hill, R.E.: “Subsurface Fracture Spacing:
Comparison of Inferences from Slant/Horizontal Cores
and Vertical Core in Mesaverde Reservoirs,” paper SPE
21877, presented at the Rocky Mountain Regional
Meeting and Low Permeability Reservoirs Symposium,
Denver, Colorado, April 1991.
Lough, M.F., Lee, S.H., and Kamath, J.: “An Efficient
Boundary Integral Formulation for Flow Through
Fractured Porous Media,” Journal of Computational
Physics 143, 462-483, 1998.
Maroongroge, V., Saad, N., Pope, G.A., and Sepehrnoori, K.:
“Use of Inverse Modeling for Conditioning Geostatistical
Models to vertical tracer Profiles,” paper SPE 30592,
5
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, TX, October 22-25, 1995.
Oda, M.: “Permeability Tensor for Discontinuous Rock
Masses,” Geotechnique 35, 483, 1985.
Park, Y.C. and Sung, W.M.: “Development of FEM reservoir
Model Equipped With Effective Permeability Tensor and
its Application to the Naturally Fractured Reservoir,”
paper SPE 64793, presented at the SPE International Oil
and Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Beijing,
China, Nov. 7-10, 2000.
Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., and Flannery,
B.P.: Numerical Recipes in Fortran: The art of Science
Computing, 2nd Edition, Cambridge University
Press, 1992.
Pruess, K. and Narasimhan, N.T.: “A Practical Method for
Modeling Fluid and Heat Flow in Fractured Porous
Media,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (Feb) 14-26, 1985.
Qasem, F.H.: Performance and Recovery Prediction in
Heterogeneous Naturally Fractured Reservoirs Under the
Solution Gas Drive Process, PhD Dissertation, University
of Southern California, 1996.
Ramirez, J., Samaniego, F., Rivera J., and Rodriguez, F.:
“Trace Flow in Naturally Fractured Reservoirs,” paper
SPE 25900 presented at the SPE Rocky Mountain
Regional/Low Permeability Reservoirs Symposium,
Denver, Colorado, April 12-14, 1993.
Ramirez, S.J., Samaniego, V.F., Rodriguez, F., and Rivera,
R.J.: “Tracer-Test Interpretation in Naturally Fractured
Reservoirs,” paper SPE 28691, presented at the SPE
International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition of
Mexico, October 10-13, 1994.
Rossen, R.H.: “Simulation of Naturally Fractured Reservoirs
with Semi Implicity Source Terms,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J.
(June) 210-210, 1977.
Saidi, A.M.: Reservoir Engineering of Fractured Reservoirs,
General Printing, Singapore, 1987.
Sato, K. and Abbaszadeh, M.: “Tracer Flow and Pressure
Performance of Reservoirs Containing Distributed Thin
Bodies,” paper SPE 28444, presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, LA,
September 25-28, 1994.
Shinta, A.A. and Kazemi, H.: “Tracer Transport in
Characterization of Dual-Porosity Reservoirs,” paper SPE
26636, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX,
October 3-6, 1993.
Sutopo, Arihara, N., Sato, K.: “Simulation of Naturally
Fractured Reservoirs with Effective Permeability,” paper
SPE 68705, presented at SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas
Conference And Exhibition held in Jakarta, Indonesia,
17-19 April 2001.
Tester, J.W., Bivins, R.L., and Potter, R.M.: “Interwell Tracer
Analyses of a Hydraulically Fractured Granitic
Geothermal Reservoir,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (August)
537, 1982.
Thomas, L.K., Dixon, N.T. and Pierson, R.G.: ”Fractured
Reservoir Simulation,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J. (February) 42-
54, 1983.
Users Guide, IMEX, Advanced Oil/Gas Reservoir Simulator,
version 2000, Computer Modeling Group, Ltd., Calgary,
Alberta, Canada.
6 SPE 84886

Van Golf-Racht, T.D.: Fundamentals of Fractured Reservoir
Engineering, Elsevier Scientific Publishing,
Amsterdam, 1982.
Wagner, O.R.: “The Use of Tracers in Diagnosing Interwell
Reservoir Heterogeneities – Field Results,” J. Pet.
Technology (November) 1410, 1977.
Warren, J.E. and Root, P.J.: “The behavior of naturally
fractured reservoirs,” Soc. Pet. Eng. J., 3, 245-255, 1963.
Wattenbarger, R. C., Aziz, A., and Orr, F.M.: “High-
Throughput TVD-Based Simulation of Tracer Flow,”
paper SPE 29097, presented at the SPE Symposium on
Reservoir Simulation, San Antonio, TX,
February 12-15, 1995.
Yi, T., Daltaban, T.S., and Archer, J.S.: “Analysis of
Interwell Tracer Flow Behavior in Transient Two-Phase
Heterogeneous Reservoirs Using Mixed Finite Element
Methods and the Random Walk Approach,” paper SPE
28901, presented at the SPE European Petroleum
Conference, London, UK, October 25-27, 1994.
Zellou, A., Ouenes, A., and Banik, A.: “Improved Naturally
Fractured Reservoir Characterization Using Neural
Networks, Geomechanics and 3-D Seismic,” paper SPE
30722, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, TX,
October 22-25, 1995.

Table 1. Simulation Input Data

Nx 70
Ny 71
Nz 1
Injection rate 100 bbl/day
Tracer mass injection 1 lb/bbl
Total tracer amount 1000 lbs
Matrix permeability 0.5 – 35 md
Fracture porosity 0.01 – 0.06
Block porosity 0.2
Fracture permeability 1000 md
Fracture intensity 0.1 – 0.9
SPE 84886 7
8 SPE 84886

1 1

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

mD mD

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI PVI

FI: 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9 FI: 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9

Figure 3a. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer produced Figure 3b. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer rate
(φf = 0.02, Km = 5 md) (φf = 0.02, Km = 5 md)

1 0.3

0.8

0.2
0.6

mD qD

0.4
0.1

0.2

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI PVI
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9

Figure 4a. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer produced Figure 4b. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer rate
(φf = 0.01, Km = 5 md) (φf = 0.01, Km = 5 md)
SPE 84886 9

0.8

0.6

mD

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI

FI: 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9

Figure 5a. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer produced (φf = 0.06, Km = 5 md)

0.3

0.2

qD

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.9

Figure 5b. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer rate (φf = 0.06, Km = 5 md)
10 SPE 84886

a) FI = 0.4 b) FI = 0.4
1 0.3

0.8

0.2
0.6
mD qD
0.4
0.1
0.2

0
0
0 0.5 1 1.5
0 0.5 1 1.5

PVI PVI
0.01 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.06

c) FI = 0.6 d) FI = 0.6
1
0.3

0.8

0.2
0.6

mD qD
0.4
0.1
0.2

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5

PVI PVI
0.01 0.02 0.06
φf : 0.01 0.02 0.06

e) FI = 0.9 f) FI = 0.9
1 0.3

0.8

0.2
0.6

mD
qD
0.4
0.1

0.2

0
0
0 0.5 1 1.5
0 0.5 1 1.5

PVI PVI
0.01 0.02 0.06
0.01 0.02 0.06

Figure 6 Effect of φf on Tracer Response for Various Fracture Intensities

SPE 84886 11

1
Matrix Dominated
0.9
0.8

0.7

Peak Arrival Time, PVI

0.6

0.5
0.4
Fracture Dominated

0.3
0.2

0.1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Fracture Inte ns ity

0.01 0.02 0.06

Figure 7: Effect of FI on Peak Arrival Time ( Km = 5 md )

1 0.3

0.8

0.2
0.6

mD qD

0.4
0.1

0.2

0 0
0 0.5 PVI 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI

0.40 0.60 0.90 0.40 0.60 0.90

Figure 8a. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer produced Figure 8b. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer rate
(φf = 0.02, Km = 0.5 md) (φf = 0.02, Km = 0.5 md
12 SPE 84886

1 0.3

0.8

0.2
0.6

mD qD
0.4
0.1

0.2

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI PVI

0.60 0.70 0.60 0.70

Figure 9a. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer produced Figure 9b. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer rate
(φf = 0.02, Km = 2 md) (φf = 0.02, Km = 2 md)

1 0.3

0.8

0.2
0.6

mD qD
0.4
0.1

0.2

0
0
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5
0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI
PVI

0.4 0.6 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.7

Figure 10a. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer produced Figure 10b. Effect of Fracture Intensity on tracer rate
(φf = 0.02, Km = 35 md) (φf = 0.02, Km = 35 md)
SPE 84886 13

a) FI = 0.4 b) FI = 0.4
1
0.3
0.8

0.2
0.6

mD qD
0.4
0.1
0.2

0
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI P VI

0.5 5 35 0.5 5 35

c) FI = 0.6 e) FI = 0.6
1 0.3

0.8

0.2
0.6

qD
mD
0.4
0.1

0.2

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 0 0.5 PVI 1 1.5
PVI

0.5 5 35 0.5 5 35
Km :

e) FI = 0.9 f ) FI = 0.9
1 0.3

0.8
0.2
0.6
mD
qD
0.4
0.1
0.2

0
0
0 0.5 1 1.5
P VI 0 0.5 1 1.5
PVI

0.5 5 35 0.5 5 35

Figure 11. Effect of Km on Tracer Response for Various Fracture Intensities (φf = 0.02 )
14 SPE 84886

0.8

Matrix
Peak Arrival Time, PVI 0.6 Dominated

0.4
Fracture
Dominated

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Fracture Intensity

km: 5 35

Figure 12. Effect of FI on the Peak Arrival Time (φf = 0.02)

900

800

700
Effective Permeability, md

600

500

400

300 km = 35 md

200 km = 5 md

100

0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Fracture Intensity

Figure 13. Effect of FI on the Effective Permeability (φf = 0.02)