Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Hydrology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol

A semi-analytical model for multi-stage fractured horizontal wells

Shanshan Yao a, Fanhua Zeng a,⇑, Hong Liu b, Gang Zhao a
a
University of Regina, Petroleum Systems Engineering, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Canada
b
Chongqing University of Science and Technology, No. 1 Petroleum Road, Yuzhong District, Chongqing, China

a r t i c l e i n f o s u m m a r y

Article history: Multi-stage fractured horizontal wells are widely applied when developing tight reservoirs and shale gas
Received 3 April 2013 reservoirs. As such, testing and evaluating fractured horizontal wells’ productivity become necessary for
Received in revised form 17 October 2013 further improving the wells’ performance. Analyzing post-fracturing transient pressure data provides
Accepted 21 October 2013
estimation of some key parameters that affect the productivity, including effective fracture lengths, frac-
Available online 30 October 2013
This manuscript was handled by Peter K.
ture conductivities, fracture skin factors and average formation permeability.
Kitanidis, Editor-in-Chief, with the This paper presents a semi-analytical model based on Green’s functions and the source/sink method to
assistance of Markus Tuller, Associate Editor facilitate the transient pressure analysis for a multi-stage fractured horizontal well in a closed box-
shaped reservoir. Four kinds of fluid flow in the multi-stage fractured horizontal well system, including
Keywords: fluid from the reservoir to the fractures and from the reservoir to the horizontal wellbore, fluid inside the
Multi-stage fractured horizontal well fractures as well as fluid flow inside the horizontal wellbore, are all taken into consideration. Compared
Mathematical model with previous models, this study considers the pressure drops caused by pipe flow inside the wellbore.
Transient pressure analysis For the model’s accuracy and robustness, the fractures and the horizontal wellbore are discretized into
Well testing vertical plane segments and horizontal line segments, respectively. Correspondingly, the fluid flow from
the reservoir to the fracture as well as the fluid flow directly from the reservoir to the horizontal wellbore
at each segment are modeled by analytical solutions of vertical plane source and horizontal line source,
respectively. In addition, the fluid flow inside the fractures is modeled as 1-D linear flow. The fluid flow
inside the horizontal wellbore is described with Penmatcha and Aziz’s model (1999). Finally, interface
flux- and pressure-continuity conditions are used to couple the equations of aforementioned four kinds
of fluid flow.
The effects of fluid flow directly from the reservoir to the horizontal wellbore, fracture spacing, fracture
lengths, fracture conductivities, and fracture skin factors on the transient pressure behavior are studied
and type curves are generated. The results suggest that, in a tight or shale-gas reservoir, fracture stage,
fracture lengths, conductivities and skin factors have significant influence on the transient pressure
behavior during a testing period while the fluid flow directly from the reservoir into the horizontal well-
bore reduces the pressure drops slightly. Then, a field case is analyzed and reliable results are obtained.
This model can be further applied to optimize the fracture spacing and fracture lengths for a multi-stage
fractured horizontal well.
Ó 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction natural fractures, hydraulic fractures and horizontal wellbores

In a post-peak-oil world, oil demand will surpass crude oil pro-
duction. Fortunately, the difference between supply and demand
can be made up from an increase in unconventional oil and gas
production such as shale gas, tight gas and oil, coalbed methane
and gas hydrates. The horizontal well multi-stage fracturing tech-
nique makes unconventional reservoir production economically
viable and more efficient. However, unconventional reservoir pro-
duction assessment by conventional methodology may be prob-
lematic. For example, the complex flow interplay among matrix,
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 (306) 337 2526; fax: +1 (306) 585 4855.
E-mail address: fanhua.zeng@uregina.ca (F. Zeng).
makes pressure transient analysis by analytical models more diffi-
cult. Also, numerical simulations for unconventional reservoir are
very time-consuming and uncertain.
Many, such as Gringarten and Ramey, study and analyze frac-
tured wells’ transient pressure characteristics. In 1973, Gringarten
and Ramey used the Green’s and source functions with the New-
man product method to generate reservoir transient-flow problem
solutions. Pressure response integration to an instantaneous
source is applied to describe the pressure behavior of a continuous
plane/slab source. Later, Gringarten et al. (1974) extended the
above-mentioned solutions to predict the unsteady-state pressure
behavior of a well with a single infinite-conductivity vertical frac-
ture in both infinite and bounded reservoirs. Next, Cinco-Ley and

0022-1694/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.10.033
202 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212

Nomenclature

Symbols S strength of source, dimensionless

a reservoir length, L, m t time, t, s [h]
b reservoir width, L, m T temperature, T, K
ct total compressibility, L2/m, Pa1 u Laplace variable
cg gas compressibility, L2/m, Pa1 v velocity, L3/s, m3/s
C gas concentration at the surface of pore walls, n/L3, wf fracture width, L, m
mole/m3 xck choke length in one fracture wing, L, m
Cw wellbore storage, L5/m, m3/Pa xf fracture half-length, L, m
Cf fracture conductivity, L3, m3 z deviation factor, dimensionless
Cg fracture diffusivity, dimensionless
h net-pay thickness, L, m Greeks
J pseudo-steady state productivity index, L5/(tm), l viscosity, m/(L2t), Pas
m3/(Pas) q density, m/L3, g/cm3
k reference permeability, L2, m2 / porosity, fraction
ks fracture-face skin zone permeability, L2, m2 X segment number
NRe Reynolds number, dimensionless C segment interface
NRe,w Inflow Reynolds number, dimensionless s time variable in integration, t, s
p pressure, m/L2, Pa
pa adjusted pressure, m/L2, Pa Subscripts
q flow rate, L3/t, m3/s D dimensionless
qf flow rate normal to fracture, L2/t, m2/s f fracture
qh flow rate normal to horizontal wellbore, L2/t, m2/s
h horizontal well
RD dimensionless desorption storability ratio r reference length
sck choked-fracture-skin factor, dimensionless sc standard conditions
sff fracture-face skin factor, dimensionless

Samaniego (1981) presented a new technique based on bilinear
flow analysis to analyze the pressure transient data for vertical
fractures. They develop a mathematical model of a finite-conduc-
tivity vertical fracture in an infinite reservoir and use the Laplace
transformation to solve the partial differential equations (PDEs).
And wellbore storage effect and skin factors are more easily in-
cluded into the equation solutions in Laplace domain. Then, the
Stehfest Algorithm inversely transforms the solutions into real-
time domain. Moreover, Babu and Odeh (1988) integrated and sim-
plified point-sink functions to facilitate the transient pressure
behavior of a horizontal well in a closed reservoir under pseudo-
steady-state condition. It is assumed that the horizontal well is
parallel to the reservoir boundaries. Penmatcha and Aziz (1999)
proposed a transient reservoir/wellbore coupling model for
finite-conductivity horizontal wells to describe the wellbore flow
distribution. The horizontal wellbore is divided into several equal
segments and the pressure drops inside each wellbore segment
are calculated. In addition, Babu and Odeh’s solutions are applied
for the flow perpendicular to the wellbore. In 1994, Guo and Evans
developed the analytical solution for a horizontal well intersecting
multiple random discrete fractures. However, their work ignores
the interference effect among fractures, which is undertaken by
Horne and Temeng (1995) who used the superposition principle
on the basis of Babu and Odeh’s solutions. To sum up, Ozkan and
Raghavan (1991) derived point-source solutions in Laplace domain
and documented an extensive library of transient pressure solu-
tions for a wide variety of wellbore configurations. Later, based
on Ozkan and Raghavan’s work, Chen and Raghavan (1997) re-
wrote Horne and Temeng’s solutions by Laplace transformation.
In 2007, Valko and Amini developed the distributed volumetric
sources method to solve the transient and pseudo-steady state
flow problems of fractured horizontal wells with complex frac-
ture/well configurations. Furthermore, Ozkan et al. (2009) pre-
sented a tri-linear flow model coupling the linear flow in outer
reservoir, inner reservoir and hydraulic fractures. The inner reser-
voir is a dual-porosity reservoir that is connected to the single-
porosity outer reservoir. But the model is not applicable when
the regions beyond the well tips dominate the well response.
Mayerhofer et al. (2010) classified the stimulated reservoir volume
(SRV) in the fractured horizontal well system and suggested mod-
eling SRV is important for evaluating the stimulation performance.
This study of multi-stage fractured horizontal wells is focused
on the reservoir/fractures/wellbore coupling model based on
plan/slab source solutions in a box-shaped reservoir. Pressure
drops inside the hydraulic fractures and horizontal wellbores are
also considered. Type curves generated by the model can be used
to analyze and evaluate fractured horizontal oil and gas well
performance.
2. Methodologies
In order to derive the semi-analytical model, the following
assumptions are made:
(1) The fractured horizontal well is located in a homogeneous
box-shaped reservoir as shown in Fig. 1. All the boundaries
are closed boundaries.
(2) The model is derived for single-phase flow.
(3) The fluid flow from the reservoir directly to the horizontal
wellbore is considered.
Xf
b
h
a
Fig. 1. Schematic of a multi-stage fractured horizontal well in a box-shaped
reservoir.
 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212 203

(4) The reservoir could be isotropic or anisotropic. respectively, where kf is the fracture permeability and Ctf is the frac-
(5) The horizontal wellbore is parallel to reservoir boundaries. ture total compressibility.
(6) The fractures are vertical, symmetrical and perpendicular to
the horizontal well. Each hydraulic fracture is equally spaced 2.2. Method and algorithm
along the horizontal well.
A multi-stage fractured horizontal well in a box-shaped
If the reservoir is anisotropic, the geometric mean of permeabil- reservoir is separated into four sub-systems: formation/fracture
ities from three dimensions is chosen as the reference permeabil- sub-system, formation/horizontal well sub-system, fracture sub-
ity. Besides, the hydraulic fractures are not necessarily assumed system and horizontal wellbore sub-system. Each sub-system is
to be the same. However, creating equally spaced hydraulic frac- discretized and solved individually in Laplace domain. As such,
tures with similar properties is a common practice unless there the solutions for the above sub-systems in Laplace domain are
is significant difference among fractures in field application. Fur- coupled based on the interface pressure- and flux- continuity
thermore, it is very difficult to discern individual fracture proper- conditions. Finally, Stehfest’s (1970) Laplace inversion algorithm
ties from transient pressure data alone (Raghavan et al., 1997). is applied to determine the corresponding pressure distribution
in real-time domain.
2.1. Dimensionless variables
2.2.1. Fracture sub-system solution
At first, we will define dimensionless pressure and time as: In this fracture sub-system, each hydraulic fracture is supposed
2pkhðpi  pÞ to have a finite-conductivity. Fluid flow in the fractures is simpli-
pD ¼ ; ð1Þ fied as 1D linear flow, which is similar to fractured vertical wells.
qsc Bl
Furthermore, each hydraulic fracture is discretized into equal seg-
and ments. In each segment, fluid flows from the reservoir qrf beside
kt the inside flow qf (Fig. 2). At interfaces between adjacent segments,
tD ¼ ; ð2Þ solutions are coupled with equal flow rate and pressure.
/lC t L2r Based on the results of van Kruysdijk (1988), the dimensionless
where, pressure at xD (xDi1 6 xD 6 xDi) in Laplace domain for segment i is:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi fDi þ Bi q
fDi ðxD ; uÞ ¼ Ai q fDi1 þ C i q
rfDi ; 1  i  n;
3 p ð10Þ
k¼ kx ky kz : ð3Þ
where
In Eqs. (1)–(3), Lr means a reference length and k becomes reference ( )
 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
permeability. 1 2 cosh ðxDi  xD Þ u=C g ðxDi xD Þ u=C g
To consider variable gas compressibility cg(p) and viscosity l(p) Ai ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þe ; ð11Þ
C fD u=C g e2ðxDi xD Þ u=Cg 1
in gas wells’ transient pressure analysis, the adjusted pressure can
be used: (  pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi )
1 2 cosh ðxD  xDi1 Þ u=C g pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z p Bi ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þ eðxD xDi1 Þ u=Cg ;
lr qðpÞ C fD u=C g
pa ¼ dp; ð4Þ e2ðxD xDi1 Þ u=C g 1
qr pr lðpÞ
ð12Þ
where pr is a reference pressure and lr and qr are the viscosity and
density under the reference pressure. Usually, the standard pressure Cg
is taken as the reference pressure (Al-Hussainy et al., 1966). Ci ¼  : ð13Þ
C fD u
As Agarwal (1979) indicated, when analyzing build-up test re-
sults, it is useful to make time transformations. However, for draw- In this case, u is the Laplace variable.
down tests, there is no such need. Usually, choked fracture skin effect refers to the presence of a
The dimensionless distances in x-, y- and z-direction are defined damaged near-wellbore zone with a reduced conductivity in a
as: hydraulic fracture (Romero et al., 2003). The extra pressure drop
sffiffiffiffiffi caused by the choked skin factor sck can be expressed as,
x k  sck
xD ¼ ; ð5Þ DpD ¼ ; ð14Þ
Lr kx u
sffiffiffiffiffi and
y k  
yD ¼ ; ð6Þ pxck kf
Lr ky sck ¼ ; ð15Þ
xf kf ;ck  1
and
sffiffiffiffiffi where kf,ck is the choked fracture permeability and xck is length of
z k the choked zone.
zD ¼ : ð7Þ
Lr kz
2.2.2. Horizontal well sub-system solution
For the hydraulic fractures, dimensionless fracture conductivity and In previous papers (Babu and Odeh, 1988; Ozkan et al., 2009),
fracture diffusivity are defined as: the horizontal wellbore is always simplified as an infinite-conduc-
tivity ‘‘pipe’’. In this work, the wellbore pressure drop, which has
kf wf
C fD ¼ ; ð8Þ never been included in fractured horizontal well models before,
kLr
is discussed in detail. The pressure drop is the result of frictional,
and radial influx and accelerational effects. The wellbore is divided into
m segments as shown in Fig. 2. Center points of each segment are
kf /C t
Cg ¼ ; ð9Þ taken as the reference nodes among which the pressure drops are
/f C tf k calculated.
204 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212

Fig. 2. Half of the facture and horizontal wellbore divided into several segments.

The frictional pressure loss Dpfric can be calculated as: from the supposition of these three sources. For example, instanta-
neous point/line source functions can be integrated in infinite-space
L qv 2
Dpfric ¼ f   ; ð16Þ and time domains to generate continuous plane/slab source func-
d 2 tions in a parallelepiped bounded reservoir. We show the detailed
where f is friction factor and v is fluid velocity. The friction factor in source functions in Appendix A.
Eq. (16) is the explicit approximation of the implicit Colebrook- Compared with the whole reservoir, each hydraulic fracture
White friction factor (Swamee and Jain, 1976). segment can be treated as a finite vertical plane source—the inter-
Fluid flow directly from the reservoir and hydraulic fractures section of an infinite slab source in x-direction and an infinite plane
would cause a pressure drop in the horizontal wellbore. Ouyang source in y-direction. Also, every horizontal well segment could be
et al. (1998) proposed that the radial influx effect could be incorpo- regarded as a line source whose function is a combination of an
rated with the frictional effect by introducing a modified friction infinite slab source function and two infinite plane source
factor f ⁄. For laminar flow, we have functions.
64   Filter cake and polymer accumulation in fractures reduce the
f ¼ 1 þ 0:04304N 0:6142
Re;w ; ð17Þ permeability normal to the fracture wall, which is known as the
NRe
fracture-face skin effect. As such, a corresponding extra pressure
while for turbulent flow we have, drop should be added to each segment solution in the formation/
  fracture sub-system. To this end, Cinco-Ley and Samaniego
f  ¼ f0 1  0:0153N0:3978
Re;w ; ð18Þ (1981) described the fracture-face skin factor in terms of damage
penetration and damaged permeability:
where f0 is the friction factor without consideration of the radial in-
flux, NRe is the Reynolds number and NRe,w = qrq/pl is the inflow  
p k
Reynolds number. qr is the radial inflow rate per wellbore unit sff ¼ ws 1 ; ð21Þ
2xf ks
length. It is clear that the influx rate can increase laminar flow pres-
sure drops. Conversely, the pressure drop is reduced for turbulent
where ws is fracture-face skin zone width and ks is reduced perme-
flow.
ability. The dimensionless pressure drop caused by facture-face skin
From the horizontal well toe to heel, fluid velocity keeps
is the product of the skin factor and dimensionless flow rates from
increasing and this accelerational effect causes an extra pressure
the reservoir to the fractures.
drop. For each segment, the pressure drop caused by the accelera-
For a horizontal well, any pressure field deviation from perfect
tional effect can be expressed as a function of the change in
radial flow in the well vicinity can be accounted for by the horizon-
momentum DM:
tal well skin factor. The corresponding dimensionless pressure
DM drop is calculated as the same way as fracture skin factors.
Dpacc ¼ ¼ qðv 2out  v 2in Þ: ð19Þ
A
Here vin and vout are fluid flow velocities into and out of the well- 2.2.4. Coupling solutions
bore segment. The previous four sub-systems have been separated into seg-
The total pressure drop is the sum of the aforementioned three ments and solutions for each sub-system segment are obtained
kinds of pressure loss. Then, the total pressure loss is converted in Laplace domain. If the two segments, Xi and Xi+1, are adjacent,
into Laplace domain by dividing the Laplace variable u. the pressure- and flux- continuity conditions at interface Ci,i+1 in
real-time domain are
2.2.3. Formation/fracture and formation/horizontal well sub-system
pðtÞjXi ;Ci;iþ1 ¼ pðtÞjXiþ1 ;Ci;iþ1 ; ð22Þ
solutions
The source function method is effective in dealing with a wide
and
variety of reservoir flow problems. Instantaneous source functions
proposed by Gringarten and Ramey (1973) are applied in this pa- qðtÞjXi ;Ci;iþ1 ¼ qðtÞjXiþ1 ;Ci;iþ1 : ð23Þ
per. Furthermore, based on the Newman product method, a 3D
anisotropic problem solution can be expressed as source function The Stehfest algorithm for inverse Laplace transformation of the
products from three independent dimensions: pressure shows
Z t
ln 2 X
N
Dpðx; y; z; tÞ ¼ pi  p ¼ Dp0xðx;sÞ  Dp0yðy;sÞ  Dp0zðz;sÞ ds; ð20Þ
L
0
pðt k ÞjXi ;Ci;iþ1 ¼ ðujL Þ X ;C ;
V iL p ð24Þ
k
t iL i i;iþ1

0 0 0
where Dp x, Dp y and Dp z are the instantaneous pressure response
in three dimensions and Dp0 is the continuous pressure response where tk is the time at step k.
 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212 205

Substituting Eq. (24) into Eq. (22), the pressure continuity in 100
Laplace domain are expressed as
rw 0.05 m
ðuÞjX ;C ¼ p
p ðuÞjX ;C : ð25Þ h 50 m
i i;iþ1 iþ1 i;iþ1
ϕ 0.2
10 µ 0.001Pa.s
Similarly, the flux continuity in Laplace domain is Q 100 m3/Day
k 0.004mD
ðuÞjX ;C ¼ q
q ðuÞjX ;C : ð26Þ xf 50m

PwD, dPwD/dlntD
i i;iþ1 iþ1 i;iþ1
kf wf 610-12 m3
For the fracture and formation/fracture sub-systems, Eqs. (25) and 1
(26) are quite straightforward. But for the horizontal well and for-
mation/horizontal well sub-systems, unknown wellbore flow distri-
bution becomes necessary when coupling solutions. Therefore, a
hypothetical initial flow distribution and an iterative process are
0.1
applied in the model. The procedure of coupling all solutions to gen- This Work
erate a linear equation system is shown in Fig. 3. Finally, the Steh-
Kappa Results
fest algorithm for Laplace inverse transform converts the flux and
pressure distribution in Laplace domain into real-time domain.
0.01
1E-6 1E-4 1E-2 1E+0 1E+2
3. Model validation tD

Fig. 4. Model validation with KAPPA Ecrin.

KAPPA Ecrin, a commercial well-testing software, verified our
model. The wellbore pressure drop cannot be considered in Kappa
analytical models. Therefore, results without horizontal wellbore
pressure drops from our work were compared with those obtained
from KAPPA Ecrin. Fig. 4 shows the comparison of the two methods
for a horizontal well with four identical hydraulic fractures. The in-
put parameters also appear in this figure.
The comparison suggests the results from this work are consis-
tent with the results from the commercial software. As expected,
there are four flow regimes for the multiple-fracture system in
Fig. 4: bilinear/linear flow, early-radial flow, compound-linear flow
(CLF), and pseudo-radial flow, which is similar with the conclusion
of Chen and Raghavan (1997). Therefore, the mathematical model
and its algorithm are reliable. Moreover, it is difficult to track the
early time-pressure behavior in Kappa Ecrin. However, the model
provided here can provide very early-stage pressure behavior and
guarantee accuracy.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Effect of fluid flow from reservoir to horizontal wellbore
Fig. 5 compares the pressure behavior with and without the
contribution of the horizontal wellbore for 3, 10 and 20-stage frac-
tured horizontal wells respectively. 3, 10 and 20 are the stage num-
bers for these fractured horizontal wells. Here, wellbore pressure
drops were not taken into consideration. Fluid flow directly from
the reservoir could blur the differentiation between bilinear/linear
and early-radial flow when stage number was small. Moreover,
fluid flow directly from the reservoir reduces the pressure drop
slightly until the pseudo-steady-state (PSS) regime is reached.
Horizontal wellbore contributions are weakened greatly when
more fractures are created. Reasonable explanation can be found

Each fracture segment

solution in fracture
sub-system

Initial influx distribution

along the horizontal well

Each fracture segment Vector B: consisting of ΔphD

solution in formation/fracture between adjacent horizontal
Coefficient Matrix A
sub-system segments

Laplace
Aq D = B
Inversion
Solutions of each
segment in
formation/horizontal well
sub-system
(q D, new − q D < ebs ) No
q D = q D, new

Yes

t = t + Δt q D,initial = q D, new

Fig. 3. Flow chart of modeling and solving procedure.

206 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212
100
3 Fractures
3 fracutes, considering wellbore
10 fractures
10 fractures, considering wellbore
10 20 Fractures
20 Fractures, considering wellbore
1 sionless relative productivity indexes over time under different
PwD
0.1
0.01
0.001
1E-6 1E-4 1E-2 1E+0
tD
Fig. 5. Effect of fluid flow from reservoir to the wellbore on pressure behavior.
by comparing fracture contributions to the total production. Fig. 6
shows the production proportion of fractures and the horizontal
wellbore to the total production. The upper lines correspond to
fractures, while the lower ones are for wellbores. Contributions
from the horizontal wellbore increase over time. In fact, the ratio
increases from 0.09 to 0.33 for a 3-stage fracture horizontal well.
Although a horizontal wellbore produces more oil, fractures pro-
duce much more fluids than wellbores. This phenomenon becomes
more evident when the fracture stage number increases to 20; at
that level, the fracture production ratio remains around 0.99. Actu-
ally, the stages of some open-hole multi-stage fractured horizontal
wells can reach more than 20. Therefore, the flow directly into the
wellbore can be ignored when the stage number for a fractured
horizontal well is large enough.
4.2. Effect of horizontal wellbore pressure drop
Table 1 compares the drawdown data from a 6-stage fractured
horizontal well under different production rates and reservoir per-
meabilities (k = 400 md, 40 md and 0.4 md) at t = 0.001 day. The
pressure loss along the horizontal wellbore can increase the
early-stage pressure drops slightly but only when reservoir perme-
ability becomes large enough (k > 100 md). Certainly the conclu-
sion would be different under low-permeability condition. There
is no significant difference between pressure drops—with and with-
out considering wellbore pressure loss—when permeability is less
than 1 md. Furthermore, a higher production rate can increase the
pressure deviation if considering the wellbore pressure drop.
Similarly, when production rate is high but permeability is very
low, the drawdown ratio (Table 1) is close to unit, meaning it is the
permeability rather than production rate to be the key parameter to
amplify the horizontal wellbore pressure loss. And for tight forma-
tion and shale gas reservoirs, permeability is usually in the range of
microdarcies or below, As such, wellbore pressure loss has little
influence on the transient pressure behavior. Therefore, the effect
of pressure drops inside the horizontal wellbore of multi-stage frac-
tured horizontal wells can be ignored in tight and shale formations.
4.3. Effect of fracture stages
For multi-stage fractured horizontal wells, fracture stages have
significant influence on productivity and economic benefits. Here,
fracture stage effects were analyzed in three steps without chang-
ing the fracture width.
4.3.1. Constant xf
Fig. 7 gives us the pressure responses and their logarithmic
derivatives with different fracture stages and same fracture
half-lengths for a 600 m horizontal well. Fig. 8 presents the dimen-
fracture numbers for the fractured wells. Pseudo-steady-state
(PSS) productivity index, J, has been accepted as a criterion for
evaluating fracture performance, whose dimensionless form is
defined as:
1
JD ¼ ; ð27Þ
pwfD
where pwfD is the dimensionless flowing bottomhole pressure.
According to Figs. 7 and 8, a larger stage number makes a larger
total fracture volume, which leads to less pressure drop and higher
productivity. Such well productivity increases decrease with
1E+2
increasing fracture stages while also increasing multi-stage frac-
turing cost. Hence, optimum fracture stage numbers (fracture
spacing) must exist under constant fracture half-lengths.
In Fig. 8, the wells’ productivities are linearly related to the
fracture numbers in the early-stage production. For example, the
40-stage fractured horizontal well works as well as 40 separate
fractured vertical wells in the bilinear/linear flow regime. There-
fore, to analyze early-time pressure data of fractured horizontal
wells, a conventional analysis method for bilinear/linear flow can
be easily applied.
After the bilinear/linear flow, interference between fractures
appears. The duration of bilinear/linear flow becomes shorter and
interference appears earlier with more fractures along the well-
bore. In fact, when the number of fractures increases to 40, pres-
sure and pressure derivative curve slopes were close to units in
interference period after tD = 0.002. This apparent boundary-dom-
inated flow (BDF) is similar to the PSS flow. In fact, this phenome-
non means the appearance of Stimulated Reservoir Volume (SRV).
The key parameter controlling SRV appearance is the ratio of the
fracture spacing and fracture half-length. When the fracture
spacing is significantly smaller than the half-length, SRV appears
clearly.
1
0.9
0.8
Proportion of total prodcution
0.7
0.6 3 Fractures
10 Fractures
0.5
20 Fractures
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1E-6 1E-5 1E-4 1E-3 1E-2 1E-1 1E+0
tD
Fig. 6. Fractures’ production vs. wellbore’s production.
 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212 207

Table 1
Effect of permeability and production rate on bottom hole pressure drop.

Production rate (m3/Day) Permeability (mD) Drawdown with the pressure loss (kPa) Drawdown without the pressure loss (kPa) Drawdown ratio
100 400 2.67 2.02 1.32
100 40 1.13 1.06 1.06
100 0.4 0.36 0.36 1.00
1000 400 65.22 20.20 3.22
1000 40 16.04 10.62 1.51
1000 0.4 3.67 3.62 1.02

100
100 Xf=250,n=2
Xf=167,n=3
Xf=125,n=4
10 10 Xf=100, n=5
Xf=83,n=6
Xf=71,n=7

PwD dlnPwD/dlntD
1 1 Xf=62.5,n=8
Xf=55.5,n=9
PwD dPwD/dlntD

Xf=50,n=10
0.1
0.1

0.01 xf=250m,n=2
0.01
Xf=250m, n=4

0.001 Xf=250m, n=10

Xf=250m, n=40 0.001

1E-6 1E-4 1E-2 1E+0 1E+2
0.0001 tD
1E-6 1E-4 1E-2 1E+0 1E+2
tD Fig. 9. Effect of fracture stages with constant Vf on pressure behavior.

Fig. 7. Effect of fracture stages with constant xf on pressure behavior.

3
tD=1E-6
21
tD=1E-6 tD=1E-5
19 2.5
tD=1E-5
tD=1E-4
17 tD=1E-4
tD=1E-3
15 tD=1E-3 2
tD=1E-2
tD=1E-2
JD

13
tD=1E-1 tD=1E-1
1.5
JD

11
tD=1E0
9
tD=1E1
1
7

0.5
3
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Fracture Stages
1
0 10 20 30 40 50 Fig. 10. Effect of fracture stages on productivity when Vf is constant.
Fracture Stage

Fig. 8. Effect of fracture stages on productivity when xf is constant.

4.3.2. Constant total fracture volume Vf
Fig. 9 compares the pressure and corresponding derivative
curves under the constant total fracture volume. Fig. 10 provides
the relative productivity index as it changes over fracture stages
and time. As shown in Figs. 9 and 10, the pressure drop is reduced
with more fractures in early-stage production while productivity
growth tends to slow down. Correspondingly, more fractures will
cause a high production rate if the bottomhole pressure (BHP) is
constant.
The appearance of SRV reverses such a trend. For example, the
dimensionless pressure derivative of the well with10 fractures
tended to surpass one with less than 10 fractures after tD = 0.002.
This suggests that the pressure drop of a 10-stage fractured hori-
zontal well increases more quickly than a well with less than 10
fractures. Furthermore, the 10-stage fractured well’s productivity
is lower than that of the 4-stage fractured horizontal well
208 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212

(Fig. 10). Therefore, in the long term, creating more fractures is not 100
always better. As discussed in Section 4.3.1, there also exists an
optimum combination of fracture stage and fracture half-lengths 7 fractures
when the total fracture volume remains constant. 14 fractures
10
21 fractures
4.3.3. Different fracture properties
For many, natural fractures in shale formations are critical in
controlling shale gas well productivity (Gaskari and Mohaghegh,
1

PwD dPwD/dlntD
2006). Unpropped fractures induced by hydraulic fracturing treat-
ments can also exist alongside pre-existing open natural fractures.
In Fig. 11, we simply added small fractures beside each hydrau-
lic fracture to simulate natural and induced fractures for a 7-stage 0.1
fractured horizontal well. These seven hydraulic fractures have dif-
ferent lengths. At first, 7 small fractures were added on the right of
hydraulic fractures as natural/induced fractures. Then, another 7
larger fractures were created. Each natural/induced fracture can 0.01
have a different half-length and conductivity but, for the sake of
simplicity, 7 small and 7 larger natural/induced fractures pos-
sessed similar properties.
Fig. 12 shows the pressure responses of natural/induced frac- 0.001
1E-6 1E-4 1E-2 1E+0 1E+2
tures. It is clear that natural/induced fractures work as improving
tD
hydraulic fracture conductivities. So, the hydraulic fracture con-
ductivity can be overestimated if existing natural/induced frac- Fig. 12. Effect of natural/induced fractures on pressure behavior.
tures are ignored. However, it is difficult to estimate natural/
induced fractures with only transient pressure data shown in
Fig. 12.
100

4.4. Effect of fracture conductivity

10
Fig. 13 presents transient pressure behavior under different
fracture conductivities. The fracture conductivity mainly influ- CfD=5,10,40
ences early-stage pressure behavior, such as bilinear/linear flow.
PwD dPwD/dlntD

When the fracture conductivity becomes large enough (CfD = 40), 1

linear flow arises after bilinear flow. The larger CfD is, the smaller
pressure drop and its derivatives become. Improving the fracture
conductivity is an effective way to enhance fractured horizontal 0.1
wells’ productivity.

4.5. Effect of gas desorption in shale gas reservoirs 0.01

Gas desorption is an important phenomenon in shale gas and

coalbed reservoirs. During reservoir depletion, absorbed gas des- 0.001
orbs from the surface because of the thermodynamic equilibrium 1E-6 1E-4 1E-2 1E+0 1E+2
when pressure changes. Gas desorption is governed by van der tD
Waals’ force which makes hydrocarbon molecules detach from
Fig. 13. Effect of fracture conductivity on pressure behavior.
the solid surface of adsorbents. In shale gas reservoirs, the pore size
is almost in nanoscale. The exposed area in nanopores is much
larger than that of conventional reservoirs. Therefore, a large
amount of gas is adsorbed at the large surface area of Kerogen
materials in the reservoir far before drilling.
According to Kucuk and Sawyer (1980), the dimensionless
desorption storability ratio is defined as:
/D cg
RD ¼ ; ð28Þ
ð/C t Þt
where /Dcg is the desorbed gas storability, /D = RT(dC/d(p/z)) and C
is gas content at the surface of pore walls. RD can be easily added to
the existing mathematical model as an extra source term in the
diffusivity. Therefore, a similar PDE can be derived for gas reservoirs
with desorption:

@ 2 pa @ 2 pa l/C t ð1 þ RD Þ @pa
þ ¼ : ð29Þ
@x2 @y2 k @t
Fig. 14 illustrates the effect of gas desorption on the pressure re-
Fig. 11. Schematic of a fractured horizontal well with natural/induced fractures. sponse. The dimensionless desorption storability ratio represents
 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212 209

100 most of the fluid flows to the wellbore through fractures. There-
fore, relatively small fracture skin factors can make a more signif-
icant difference than the horizontal wellbore skin factors.
Moreover, fracture-face skin factors can mask the bilinear/linear
10
flow regime and make it difficult to catch bilinear/linear flow in
log–log plots of pressure and pressure derivatives.
Fig. 16 compares the flow distribution with different skin fac-
1 tors at tD = 106. The effect of fracture-face skin factor seems more
Pa dPa/dlntD

complex than the choked skin factor. The fracture-face skin factor
reduces the amount of fluid from the reservoir to fractures and in-
creases pressure drops. Moreover, the fracture-face skin factor tries
0.1 to reduce the influx difference to reach an even flow distribution
No desorption
along fractures.
RD=1.0 The choked skin factor increases the pressure drop inside frac-
RD=2.0 tures since the choked skin factor reduces the conductivities of
0.01
RD=3.0 fractures in the vicinity of the well. Also, the choked skin factor re-
duces the amount of fluid influx from the reservoir to fractures.
However, it has no influence on the influx distribution pattern
0.001
1E-6 1E-4 1E-2 1E+0 1E+2
tD
0.14
Fig. 14. Effect of gas desorption on pressure behavior.
No skin factor
0.12
Sff=1.0

100 Sck=1.0
0.10
No skin factor
Sh=1.0
Sff=1.0
0.08
10 Sck=1.0 Total skin factor
qrfD

Sh=1.0 tD=110-6
0.06
Total skin factor
PwD dPwD/dlntD

1
0.04

0.02
0.1

0.00
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0.01 XfD

Fig. 16. Flow distribution along the last-stage fracture.

0.001
1E-6 1E-4 1E-2 1E+0 1E+2
tD 100

Fig. 15. Effect of three kinds of skin factors on pressure behavior.

10
how much gas is absorbed when compared with free gas. As shown
in Fig. 14, the pressure drop with gas desorption is lower than with-
out desorption. As a result, gas desorption acts as an extra source in 1
the reservoir. It puts off the appearance of BDF.
PwD dPwD/dlntD

0.1
4.6. Effect of skin factors

Fig. 15 shows pressure and derivative curves with different skin CD=0.002
0.01
factors for a 3-stage fractured horizontal well. Here, we assumed
CD=0.0002
that the skin factors along fractures and the wellbore remain con-
stant. Actually, we can generate the pressure data for varying skin 0.001
CD=0.00002
factors. However, we cannot discern different skin factors along
fractures and along the wellbore in the field application. In
Fig. 15, fracture choked skin factor sck increases the pressure drop 0.0001
significantly and is followed by the fracture face-skin factor sff. 1.0E-04 1.0E-02 1.0E+00 1.0E+02 1.0E+04 1.0E+06
With the same skin factor value, the horizontal well skin factor sh tD/CD
only increases the dimensionless pressure a little. The surface area
of fractures is much bigger than in the horizontal wellbore and Fig. 17. Effect of wellbore storage on pressure behavior.
210 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212

along fractures. Obviously, the horizontal well skin factor also has
little influence on the influx along fractures.
As far as the total skin factor is concerned, its effect is not equal
to the sum of all skin factors. Ultimately, different skin factors can
interact with each other and finally strike a balance.
4.7. Effect of wellbore storage
Wellbore storage effect distorts the reservoir pressure response.
The characteristic of wellbore storage effect is a unit-slope line in
early-time pressure response and its derivative, which is flowed
by a hump in the pressure derivative that gradually disappears.
Fig. 17 shows the pressure behavior and derivatives with
CwD = 0.002, 0.0002 and 0.00002. The values of CwD are small be-
cause the reference length in CwD is the horizontal wellbore length.
The hump in a fractured horizontal well is as same as in a fractured
vertical well. In fact, the smaller the wellbore storage factor, the
shorter its influence on early-stage pressure behavior lasts.
5. Field example
Using our model, we performed a pressure transient analysis
based on field data. The well is a multi-stage fractured horizontal
well in a typical shale gas reservoir in Sichuan, China. The pressure
data came from two build-up tests after almost one-year produc-
tion. Fig. 18 shows the gas rates from Aug. 2nd 2011 to May
30th, 2012. Table 2 summarizes the basic input parameters for this
example.
5.1. No. 1 build-up test analysis
At first, we completed a qualitative type-curve analysis. Since
the duration of the 1st build-up test is short and the reservoir per-
meability is extremely low, we found no characteristic pressure re-
sponses such as half-slope trend in CLF and the unit-slope line at
late times. In addition, we cannot detect the fracture half-length
directly from the plot of Dpa  t1/2 because no linear-flow trend ap-
pears in the build-up test. However, what we can distinguish from
the log–log plot is the bilinear flow. Accordingly, we plotted Dpa vs.
t1/4 in Fig. 19. The slope of the straight line through the data is
m = 90 MPa/h1/4. Using this slope, we estimated the fracture con-
ductivity wfkf = 2.88  1015 m3.
Next, we compared the real field data with different type curves
to find the most appropriate fracture half-length and fracture con-
ductivity. Fig. 20 shows the matching results with our model. In
general, the match is satisfactory. We chosen a constant value
Cw = 9.20  106 m3/Pa (0.4 bbl/psi) to account for the wellbore
storage effect. In fact, in Fig. 20, we can see that the wellbore stor-
age factor is not strictly constant and varies from 7  106 to
1  105 m3/Pa (0.3–0.5 bbl/psi) during the build-up test. Further-
more, the fracture half-length was estimated as 137 m and the
fracture conductivity was 4  1016 m3. This is the best match for
the whole data. As such, we can also conclude that the area of
the SRV should be 67.7 acres (L  2xf = 274000 m2). In fact, the
fracture conductivity is not as good as the one shown in our type
curve. Higher fracture conductivity can make the pressure deriva-
tive bend upward with a bigger angle at the end of this test. But in
Fig. 20, the derivative is almost flat at the end. Therefore the frac-
ture conductivity should be a little lower than our expectation.

16000
5.2. No. 2 build-up test analysis
14000
After analyzing the No. 1 build-up test, we recognized that
using specific lines to evaluate fractures is limited for shale gas
12000
wells. Thus, we directly employed the type curve matching method
Productioin rate, m3/Day

to conduct quantitative analysis for the No. 2 build-up test. Fig. 21

10000 shows the matching results with our model. In this case, the well-
bore storage factor increases to 2.3  105 m3/Pa (1.0 bbl/psi),
8000 while the average fracture’s half-length was estimated as 100 m.
Moreover, its conductivity was recalculated as 6.2  1016 m3.
6000 Compared to the No. 1 analysis results, the half-length is shorter
and conductivity is higher. This is reasonable. In fact, part of

4000
600
2000

500
0
0 2000 4000 6000
Time, hr Slope=90
Adjusted pressure, MPa

400
Fig. 18. Field production rate data.

300

Table 2
Basic input parameters.
200
Initial pressure, pi (MPa) 18.62
Formation thickness, h (m) 38
Formation temperature, T (°C) 65
100
Porosity, / 0.03871
Average formation permeability, k (m2) 3.41  1020
Wellbore radius, rw (m) 0.05
Specific gravity, c 0.554 0
Horizontal well length, L (m) 1000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Number of hydraulic fractures, n 12 Fourth root of time,hr1/4
Initial Gas Saturation, Sg (%) 40.14
Fig. 19. Bilinear flow analysis.
 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212 211

1000 explore the optimum design for fractured horizontal wells accord-
ing to specific reservoir properties.
In field applications, involving shale gas wells, pressure re-
sponse may not display any characteristic flow behavior early on.
Therefore, techniques based on the slopes of characteristic lines
Adjusted pressure change, MPa

100 may not be guaranteed. Ultimately, type curve matching can help
analyze the overall pressure behavior with a complete model and
result in a better solution.

Acknowledgement
10
This research is supported by National Natural Science Founda-
Field data tion of China (Grant No. 51174245).
Semi-analytical result
Appendix A.
1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 An infinite plane source in an infinite slab reservoir with no-
Adjusted time, hr flow boundary is
8 h    i 9
Fig. 20. Type curve match for No. 1 build-up test. > npðxD x0D Þ npðxD þx0D Þ >
1< X1 cos aD
þ cos aD
=
NIPF xD ¼ 1þ  2 2  ðA-1Þ
a>
: n¼1 exp  n p ðt D sD Þ >
;
a2 D
100

or
8
 9
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi >
> exp  ðxD x0D þ2naD Þ >
2
>
X >
1 < 4ðtD sD Þ
>
=
k=kx
Adjusted pressure change, MPa

NIPF xD ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
 ðA-2Þ
2Lr pðt D  sD Þ n¼1> >
> þ exp  ðxD þxD þ2naD Þ >
0 2 >
>
10 : 4ðtD sD Þ ;

where x0D demonstrates the location of the plane source, xD is the

coordinate value of pressure node in x-direction and NIPF is dimen-
sionless pressure.
1 Field data An infinite slab source in an infinite slab reservoir with no-flow
boundary is
Semi analytical result 8     9
>
> y0Dþ yD 2nbD y0D yD 2nbD >
>
>
1 < erf p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi  erf p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi >
=
1 X 2 t D  sD 2 t D  sD
NISF yD ¼     ðA-3Þ
2 n¼1>
> 0
y þyD 2nbD >
0
>
> þerf yDþp
:
þyD 2nbD
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þ erf Dpffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ffi >
;
0.1 2 t D sD 2 t D sD
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Adjusted time, hr
or
2  2 2 3
Fig. 21. Type curve match for No. 2 build-up test.
4aD
X1
n p ðt D sD Þ
1
y0Dþ  y0D 6 1 þ pðy0Dþ y0D Þ n
exp  b2D 7
NISF yD ¼ 6 n¼1 7 ðA-4Þ
bD 4 0 0 0 0
5
npðyDþ yD Þ npðyDþ þyD Þ npyD
proppant flows back to the wellbore along with gas; therefore the sin 2bD
cos 2bD
cos bD
corresponding fracture section is almost closed without proppant
where y0Dþ and y0D demonstrate the location of the slab source, y is
support. But the remaining part of the fracture swells after extra
the coordinate value of pressure node y-direction and NISF is the
proppant squeezes in.
corresponding dimensionless pressure drop.
An infinite plane source in an infinite slab reservoir with con-
6. Conclusions stant pressure boundary is
8 h    i 9
> npðxD x0D Þ npðxD þx0D Þ >
In this paper, a semi-analytical model has been built to study 1< X1 cos aD
þ cos aD
=
CIPF xD ¼ 1þ  2 2  ðA-5Þ
the transient pressure behavior of multi-stage fractured horizontal a>
: n¼1 exp  n p ðtD sD Þ >
;
a2D
wells in a rectangular reservoir. The model and its algorithm can be
further extended to study the dual-porosity reservoir and reser- or
voirs with complex fractures. 8
 9
The fluid flow directly from reservoir to the horizontal wellbore pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi >
> ðxD x0D þ2naD Þ2 >
>
X
1 >
< exp  4ðt D sD Þ
>
=
can change the early-stage pressure and pressure derivative when k=kx
the number of stages is small (n is in the range of 2–10). Moreover, CIPF xD ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 ðA-6Þ
2Lr pðtD  sD Þ n¼1> >
> ðxD þx0 þ2naD Þ2 > >
>
in tight formation and shale gas reservoirs, pressure drops along :  exp  4ðtDD sD Þ ;
the wellbore can be ignored. Furthermore, here, pressure and pres-
sure derivative characteristics with different fracture conductivi- where x0D is the location of the plane source, xD is the coordinate va-
ties, fracture spacing (fracture half-lengths) and skins factors, are lue of pressure node in x-direction and CIPF is dimensionless pres-
examined comprehensively. Also, a method can be developed to sure drop.
212 S. Yao et al. / Journal of Hydrology 507 (2013) 201–212

An infinite slab source in an infinite slab reservoir with constant Babu, D.K., Odeh, A.S., 1988. Productivity of a Horizontal Well Appendices A and B.
Paper SPE 18334-MS was presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
pressure boundary is
Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 2-5 October. <http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/18334-
8     9 MS>.
>
> y0 yD 2nbD y0 yD 2nbD >
>
>
<X
1erf Dþpffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  erf Dpffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi >
= Chen, C.C., Raghavan, R., 1997. A multiply-fractured horizontal well in a rectangular
1 2 t D sD 2 t D  sD drainage region. SPE J. 2 (4), 455–465, http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/37072-PA.
CISF yD ¼     ðA-7Þ Cinco-Ley, H., Samaniego-V, F., 1981. Transient pressure analysis for fractured wells.
2 n¼1>
> y0 þyD 2nbD y0 þyD 2nbD > >
>
: þerf Dþpffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi þ erf Dpffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ffi >
; J. Pet. Tech. 33 (9), 1749–1766, http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/7490-PA.
2 tD sD 2 t D sD
Gaskari, R., Mohaghegh, S.D., 2006. Estimating Major and Minor Natural Fracture
Pattern in Gas Shales Using Production Data. Paper SPE 104554-MS was
or presented at the SPE Eastern Regional Meeting, Canton, Ohio, USA, 11–13
2  2 2  3 October. <http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/104554-MS>.
n p ðt D sD Þ npðy0Dþ y0D Þ
1 Gringarten, A.C., Ramey Jr., H.J., 1973. The use of source and Green’s functions in
4 6 n exp  b2D
sin 2bD 7 solving unsteady-flow problems in reservoirs. SPE J. 13 (5), 285–296, http://
CISF yD ¼ 4 5 ðA-8Þ
p sin npðy0Dþ þy0D Þ cos npyD dx.doi.org/10.2118/3818-PA.
2bD bD Gringarten, A.C., Ramey Jr., H.J., Raghavan, R., 1974. Unsteady-state pressure
distributions created by a well with a single infinite-conductivity vertical
where y0Dþ and y0D demonstrate the location of the slab source, y is fracture. SPE J. 14 (4), 347–360, http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/4051-PA.
the coordinate value of pressure node y direction and CISF is the cor- Guo, G., Evans, R.D., 1994. A Systematic Methodology for Production Modeling of
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs Intersected by Horizontal Wells. Paper SPE
responding dimensionless pressure drop. HWC-94-40 was presented at International Conference on Recent Advances in
The interaction of source functions in three directions can yield Horizontal Well Applications, Calgary, Canada, 20–23 March. <http://dx.doi.org/
a point source, finite line source and finite plane source. For exam- 10.2118/HWC-94-40>.
Horne, R.N., Temeng, K.O., 1995. Relative Productivities and Pressure Transient
ple, the product of a slab source in x-direction and two plane Modeling of Horizontal Wells with Multiple Fractures. Paper SPE 29891-MS was
source functions in y- and z- directions yields a finite line source presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, 11–14 March. <http://
in a box-shape reservoir sealed from top and bottom. The pressure dx.doi.org/10.2118/29891-MS>.
Kucuk, F., Sawyer, W.K., 1980. Transient Flow In Naturally Fractured Reservoirs and
drop expression caused by a line source (x0þ , y0 , z0 ) ? (x0 , y0 , z0 ) on Its Application to Devonian Gas Shales. The paper SPE 9397-MS was presented
the pressure node (x, y, z) is at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, 21–24
Z tD
September. <http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/9397-MS>.
Mayerhofer, M.J., Lolon, E.P., Warpinski, N.R., et al., 2010. What is stimulated
pD ðx; y; z; x0þ ; x0 ; y0 ; z0 ; tÞ ¼ Ss  NISF xD  NIPF yD reservoir volume? SPE Prod. Oper. 25 (1), : 89–98, http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/
0
119890-PA.
 NIPF zD dsD ðA-9Þ Ouyang, L.B., Arbabi, S., Aziz, K., 1998. General wellbore flow model for horizontal,
vertical, and slanted well completions. SPE J. 3 (2), 124–133, http://dx.doi.org/
where tD is the producing time. Ss is the strength of the sink: 10.2118/36608-PA..
Ozkan, E., Raghavan, R., 1991. New solutions for well-test-analysis problems: part1-
2 2
2phLr qðx; y; z; sÞ 2phLr analytical considerations. SPE Form Eval. 6 (3), 359–368, http://dx.doi.org/
Ss ¼ ¼ qD ðA-10Þ 10.2118/18615-PA.
x0þ  x0 qsc Ls Ozkan, E., Brown, M., Raghavan, R., Kazemi, H., 2009.Comparison of Fractured
Horizontal-Well Performance in Conventional and Unconventional Reservoirs.
Here q is the instantaneous production rate. Paper SPE 121290 presented at the SPE Western Regional Meeting, San Jose,
When tD is too small, the integration in Eq. (A-9) is not suffi- California, USA, 24–26 March. <http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/121290-MS>.
ciently accurate. Thus, the Laplace transformation to time needs Penmatcha, V.R., Aziz, K., 1999. comprehensive reservoir/wellbore model for
horizontal wells. SPE J. 4 (3), 224–234, http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/57194-PA..
to be applied to obtain better numerical calculation results. After Raghavan, R.S., Chen, C.C., Agarwal, B., 1997. An analysis of horizontal wells
applying the Laplace transformation, Eq. (A-9) becomes intercepted by multiple fractures. SPE J. 2 (3), 235–245, http://dx.doi.org/
Z 10.2118/27652-PA..
2 1
2phLr Romero, D.J., Valko, P.P., Economides, M.J., 2003. Optimization of the productivity
D ¼
p NISF xD  NIPF yD  NIPF zD eusD dsD ðA-11Þ index and the fracture geometry of a stimulated well with fracture face and
x0þ  x0 0 choke skins. SPE Prod. Fac. 18 (1), 57–64, http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/81908-PA.
Stehfest, H., 1970. Algorithm 368: numerical inversion of laplace transforms.
where pD is the dimensionless pressure in Laplace domain and u is Commun. ACM 13 (1), 47–49, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/361953.361969.
the Laplace variable. Swamee, P.K., Jain, A.K., 1976. Explicit equations for pipe-flow problems. J. Hydr.
Div. (ASCE) 102 (5), 657–664.
Valko, P.P., Amini, S., 2007. The Method of Distributed Volumetric Sources for
References Calculating the Transient and Pseudosteady-State Productivity of Complex
Well-Fracture Configurations. Paper SPE 106279 was presented at the SPE
Agarwal, R.G., 1979. ‘‘Real Gas Pseudo-Time’’-A New Function for Pressure Buildup Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, College Station, Texas, 29–31
Analysis of MFH Gas Wells. Paper SPE 8279 was presented at the SPE Annual January. <http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/106279-MS>.
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas Nevada, 23-26 September. van Kruysdijk, C.P.J.W., 1988. Semianalytical Modeling of Pressure Transients in
<http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/8279-MS>. Fractured Reservoirs. Paper SPE 18169 was presented at the SPE Annual
Al-Hussainy, R., Ramey Jr., H.J., Crawford, P.B., 1966. The flow of real gases through Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 2–5 October. <http://
porous media. J. Pet. Tech. 18 (5), 624–636, Trans., AIME, 237. http://dx.doi.org/ dx.doi.org/10.2118/18169-MS>.
10.2118/1243-A-PA.