DC194495 DOI: 10.

2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 1 Total Pages: 14

A Mathematical Model for Predicting

Long-Term Productivity of Modern
Multifractured Shale-Gas/Oil Wells
Gao Li, Southwest Petroleum University, China; Boyun Guo, University of Louisiana, Lafayette;
Jun Li, China University of Petroleum, Beijing; and Ming Wang, University of Louisiana, Lafayette

Summary
Modern multifractured shale-gas/oil wells are horizontal wells completed with simultaneous-fracturing, zipper-fracturing, and (in par-
ticular) modified-zipper-fracturing techniques. An analytical model was developed in this study for predicting the long-term productiv-
ity of these wells under conditions of pseudosteady-state (PSSS) flow, considering the cross-bilinear flow in the rock matrix and
hydraulic fractures. Performance of the model was verified with the well-productivity data obtained from a shale-gas well and a shale-
oil well. Sensitivity analyses were performed to identify key parameters of hydraulic fracturing affecting well productivity. The con-
ducted field case studies show that the analytical model overpredicts shale-gas-well productivity by 2.3% and underpredicts shale-oil
productivity by 7.4%. A sensitivity analysis with the model indicates that well productivity increases with reduced fracture spacing,
increased fracture length, and increased fracture width, but not proportionally. Whenever operational restrictions permit, more fractures
with high density should be created in the hydraulic-fracturing process to maximize well productivity. The benefit of increasing fracture
width should diminish as the fracture width becomes large. Increasing fracture length by pumping more fracturing fluid can increase
well-production rate nearly proportionally. Therefore, it is desirable to create long fractures by pumping high volumes of fracturing
fluid in the hydraulic-fracturing process.

Introduction
Extractions of unconventional gas and oil from shale plays have revived the US petroleum industry, boosting regional economies and
providing an increasing share of US-produced oil and gas. Improving well productivity and hydrocarbon-recovery rate are still great
challenges for petroleum engineers because of the low-permeability nature of shale formations. Modern shale-oil wells are completed
with simultaneous fracturing (where symmetrical stages in two wells are fractured simultaneously), zipper fracturing (where symmetri-
cal stages in two wells are fractured alternatively), and (in particular) modified zipper fracturing (where nonsymmetrical stages in two
wells are fractured alternatively, for better well performance) (Rafiee et al. 2012). All these fracturing techniques create symmetrical
transverse fractures that are ideally the same length, suggesting that flow regimes around the fractures change simultaneously. An effi-
cient tool is required and possibly developed to optimize hydraulic-fracturing design for maximizing well productivity and economics.
Production performance of shale-gas/oil wells is characterized by a fast rate-decline period followed by a slow rate-decline period.
The former is attributed to the quick depletion of hydrocarbons in the natural-fracture network, whereas the latter occurs because of the
slow flow of fluids in the ultralow-permeability rock matrix (Jenkins and Boyer 2008; Tran et al. 2011; Wang and Liu 2011). Li et al.
(2012) reported the important role of reservoir heterogeneity/natural fractures in gas production during the first period. Well productiv-
ity during the second period controls the long-term economics of oilfield and gasfield development.
A reliable method is required for predicting the long-term productivity of modern shale-gas/oil wells for optimizing hydraulic-
fracturing parameters. The current available methods for predicting shale-well productivity fall into three categories: analytical transient
flow models, empirical production-decline models, and numerical computer models. Analytical transient flow models include those pre-
sented by Wan and Aziz (2002), Zerzar and Bettam (2003), Tran et al. (2011), Stewart (2014), Yang et al. (2015), and Bajwa and
Blunt (2016). These models are mostly used in pressure-transient-test analysis rather than in optimizing well-completion design. Guo
et al. (2009) published an analytical model for predicting the productivity of multifractured horizontal wells. Although this model is
applicable to shale-gas/oil wells that are multifractured wells in low-permeability reservoirs, its solution is valid only for predicting the
initial, not the long-term, productivity.
Empirical production-decline models include those published by Yuan et al. (2013), Gong et al. (2013), and Makinde and Lee
(2016). These models are essentially used for assessing field-development projects according to production history. Numerical com-
puter models include those developed by Vicente and Ertekin (2006), Cheng (2011), Chaudhary et al. (2011), Sun et al. (2016), and
Yu et al. (2017). Although they are flexible in handling systems with nonsymmetrical fractures and multiphase flow, applications of
these models are limited because of the low efficiency of their numerical nature, especially the numerical treatment of local grid refine-
ment near the fractures (Orangi et al. 2011).
It is desirable to have a simple and accurate mathematical model for predicting the productivity of multifractured shale-gas/oil
wells. This study meets that need. An analytical model was developed in this study for predicting the long-term productivity of multi-
fractured shale-gas/oil wells under PSSS-flow conditions. Performance of the model was verified with the well-productivity data
obtained from two wells, one for shale gas and the other for shale oil. Results show that the model overpredicts well productivity by
less than 5% for shale-gas wells and underpredicts well productivity by less than 10% for shale-oil wells.

Mathematical Model
It is generally accepted that gas wells are wells producing with a gas/oil ratio (GOR) greater than 100,000 scf/STB; condensate wells
are those producing with GOR less than 100,000 scf/STB but greater than 5,000 scf/STB; and wells producing with GOR less than

Copyright V
C 2019 Society of Petroleum Engineers

Original SPE manuscript received for review 22 April 2017. Revised manuscript received for review 24 October 2018. Paper (SPE 194495) peer approved 30 October 2018.

2019 SPE Drilling & Completion 1

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 2 Total Pages: 14

5,000 scf/STB are classified as oil wells (Guo et al. 2007). The mathematical models presented in this work are for gas wells (GOR
greater than 100,000 scf/STB) and oil wells (GOR less than 5,000 scf/STB).
An analytical model was derived in this study for predicting the productivity of multifractured shale-gas/oil wells assuming bilinear
flow, as shown in Fig. 1. Further assumptions include the following:
1. The gas-bearing formation is isotropic.
2. PSSS-flow conditions are reached within the well-drainage area.
3. Linear flow prevails from rock matrix to the fractures.
4. Darcy’s law dominates the fluid flow in the matrix and fractures.
5. Fracture skin factor is negligible.
6. Hydraulic fractures are identical and uniformly distributed in the drainage area.
7. There is single-gas-phase flow in dry-gas reservoirs or singe-oil-phase flow in undersaturated oil reservoirs.

Drainage
boundary

p Horizontal
f
p e wellbore
S
2

kH
m

w
kf
h pw

Fracture wing
xf

Fig. 1—3D schematic of bilinear flow from a quadrant of matrix volume through a fracture wing to a horizontal wellbore.

The first assumption, isotropic formation, is necessary for deriving analytical solutions, although it is not always valid. The second
assumption, PSSS flow, becomes realistic after transient flow and the interference of pressure propagation caused by the fluid produc-
tion through fractures. The duration of transient flow mainly depends on formation permeability. The mathematical method to deter-
mine the required time it takes to reach PSSS flow is used in the Field Case Studies section and is discussed in the Discussion section.
The third assumption, linear flow, is valid before the pressure wave propagates to beyond the stimulated reservoir volume. This condi-
tion is more likely to exist in massive multifractured formations when simultaneous-fracturing, zipper-fracturing, and (in particular)
modified-zipper-fracturing (Rafiee et al. 2012) techniques are used. The fourth assumption, Darcy flow, might not always be valid
because it has been argued that gas flow in nanopores deviates from the traditional flow models (i.e., Fick’s law or Darcy’s equation)
because of molecular diffusion in different scales (Javadpour et al. 2007). However, for simplicity, it is reasonable to assume that
Darcy flow dominates in the macro-scale of shale volume. The fifth assumption, negligible fracture skin factor, is believed to be valid
as long as the fracturing fluid is chemically compatible with the formation water, not causing damage to the formation by physical/
chemical reactions. The sixth assumption, uniformly distributed identical hydraulic fractures, is not always valid but is one of the
objectives of fracturing-design optimization. The seventh assumption, single-phase-gas or single-phase-oil flow, is not always valid but
it is acceptable for optimizing fracturing design where a quantitative analysis is not critical.
Derivation of the analytical model is given in Appendix A. The resultant equations are provided in this section. The equation for
shale-gas-well-production rate is

5:87  105 nf km hðp 2  p2w Þ

Qg ¼   ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð1Þ
pffiffiffi 1 1
lTSf c pffiffi  p ffiffi
ffi
ð1  e cxf Þ ð3xf cÞ

where c is expressed in US field units as

96km
c¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð2Þ
kf wSf

where Qg is gas-production rate (in Mscf/D), nf is the number of fractures, km is matrix permeability (in md), h is pay-zone thickness
(in ft), p is the average formation pressure (in psia), pw is wellbore pressure (in psia), l is fluid viscosity (in cp), T is formation tempera-
ture (in  R), Sf is fracture spacing (in ft), e is the exponential function, xf is fracture half-length (in ft), kf is fracture permeability
(in md), and w is the average fracture width (in in.).
The equation for shale-oil-well-production rate is

5:91  103 nf km hðp  pw Þ

Qo ¼   ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð3Þ
pffiffiffi 1 1
Bo lSf c pffiffi  p ffiffi
ffi
ð1  e cxf Þ ð3xf cÞ

where Qo is oil-production rate (in STB/D) and Bo is oil formation volume factor (FVF).

2 2019 SPE Drilling & Completion

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 3 Total Pages: 14

Field Case Studies

Shale-Gas Well. Using case studies for a Fayetteville shale-gas well, Zhang and Wang (2017) showed that the difference between the
production rates given by Eq. 1 and field data is less than 10%. The accuracy of Eq. 1 was verified in this study using data obtained
from another North American shale-gas field. Stewart (2014) presented an integrated analysis of production data for a horizontal shale-
gas well completed with multifracturing. The formation thickness (h), porosity (/), and horizontal-well length (L) are 166 ft, 0.065, and
3,000 ft, respectively. In total, 40 vertical fractures were created over the horizontal wellbore, giving a fracture spacing (Sf) of 75 ft.
The well was brought into production at a rate of 5.3 MMscf/D and declined to 1.1 MMscf/D over a 2-year period. The initial reservoir
pressure is 4,858 psia and reservoir temperature is 150 F. The final flowing bottomhole pressure (FBHP) is 322 psia. Pressure-transient
data analysis exhibited a linear-flow period and a PSSS-flow period. Material-balance analysis indicated PSSS depletion.
The linear flow ended at 109 days (2,621 hours). The FBHP at the end of linear flow (telf) was estimated from flowing wellhead pres-
sure to be approximately 750 psia. Therefore, the average pressure along the flow path inside the formation is approximately
(4,858 þ 750)/2 ¼ 2,804 psia. The Guo et al. (2017) spreadsheet program, Carr-Kobayashi-Burrows-GasViscosity.xls (Guo and
Ghalambor 2012), gives a gas viscosity of 0.0198 cp at 2,804 psia and 150 F. The 1/p rule gives a gas compressibility of
1/2,804 ¼ 0.000357 psi1. The formation permeability is estimated using the distance-of-investigation concept (Lee 1982),

/lcg ðSf =2Þ2

km ¼ 1; 252 ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð4Þ
telf

which gives

ð0:065Þð0:00198Þð0:00357Þð75=2Þ2
km ¼ 1; 252 ¼ 3:08104 md: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð5Þ
2; 621
Using the Stewart (2014) material-balance calculations, the initial gas in place in the SRV is 16.9 Bcf and the cumulative gas pro-
duction at the end of the 2-year production period is 1.48 Bcf. This allows an estimate of the average reservoir-pressure level at the end
of 2 years of production by
 
p=z
G p ¼ Gi 1  ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð6Þ
pi =zi
which gives
p=z ¼ ð1  Gp =Gi Þðpi =zi Þ
¼ ð1  1:48=16:9Þð4; 858=0:95Þ
¼ 4; 666 psia;
where zi ¼ 0.95 was estimated using the spreadsheet with the Hall-Yarborough correction (Guo et al. 2017). For p=z ¼ 4,666 psia, the
trial-and-error procedure with the Hall-Yarborough correction gives p¼4,168 psia.
The Stewart (2014) linear-flow analysis gives a fracture half-length of xf ¼ 558 ft. Stewart (2014) also estimated the fracture-
network-permeability reduction to be 20 md because of closure stress. Assuming an initial fracture permeability of 100,000 md, the
fracture permeability might drop to 100,000/20 ¼ 5,000 md because of the closure pressure. The propped-fracture width was taken as
0.05 in., which is the upper bound of a range derived from Stewart (2014). All recorded and derived data are summarized in Table 1.
Substituting these data into Eq. 1 yields a model-predicted gas-production rate of 1.207 MMscf/D. This result is 2.3% higher than the
observed gas-production rate of 1.18 MMscf/D at the end of the 2-year production.

Parameter Value
Pay-zone thickness 166 ft
Matrix permeability 3.08×10–4 md
Formation pressure 4,168 psia
Formation temperature 610°R
Fluid viscosity 0.0198 cp
Number of fractures 40
Fracture spacing 75 ft
Fracture half-length 558 ft
Fracture width 0.05 in.
Fracture permeability 5,000 md
FBHP 322 psia

Table 1—Data for a North American shale-gas well (Stewart 2014).

It is worth mentioning that the 2.3% overprediction of the gas-production rate depends on the assumed fracture permeability
(5,000 md) and fracture width (0.05 in.). Fig. 2 shows the sensitivity of the model accuracy to the uncertainties of fracture-width/
permeability values. Fig. 2 indicates that the model predicts a gas-production rate with a relative error of less than 15% when the
fracture width is approximately 0.025 in.. Fig. 2 also implies that the model should overpredict a well-production rate in the realistic
ranges of fracture width (0.002 to 0.05 in.), according to Stewart (2014), and fracture permeability (5,000 to 12,500 md), according to
Orangi et al. (2011).
Model overprediction of well productivity is attributed to two factors. First, the assumption of Darcy flow in the rock matrix and in
the fractures might not be valid. The inertial effect, which is not described by Darcy’s law, should cause an additional pressure drop,

2019 SPE Drilling & Completion 3

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 4 Total Pages: 14

reducing flow efficiency. On the other hand, the mass transfer by molecular diffusion, which is not considered in the model derivation,
might promote flow efficiency. Second, the flow convergence near the horizontal wellbore (see Fig. 1) is not considered in the model.
This flow convergence with the non-Darcy effect might create a choking to the flowing fluid, resulting in lower well productivity. If
this is found true in the future, the Furui et al. (2002) equation can be incorporated to modify the model.

60

50

40

Error in Production Rate (%)

30

20

10
Fracture width (in.)
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
–10
kf = 5,000 md
–20 kf = 7,500 md
kf = 10,000 md
–30
kf = 12,500 md
–40

Fig. 2—Relative error of predicted gas-production rate from 40 fractures.

Shale-Oil Well. The accuracy of Eq. 3 was verified in this study using data obtained from Well H-6 of the Eagle Ford Shale. Most data
required for well-productivity verification were presented by Al-Otaibi et al. (2015). Although the well-production-rate data were
reported for nearly 1 year, reservoir linear flow ended at approximately 40 days, as indicated by the half-slope of pressure-transient data
analysis. Bubblepoint was reached soon after the 40 days of production, as indicated by the production GOR. The oil-production rate of
103 STB/D from one fracture at 40 days of production was used in this study to compare with model-prediction results. This point was
chosen because the new model is only valid for single-phase-oil flow under PSSS-flow conditions. Data reported by Al-Otaibi et al.
(2015) are summarized in Table 2 except the FBHP, which is corrected from 2,000 psia [the assumption of Al-Otaibi et al. (2015)], to
2,800 psia using the rate-normalized pressure data. The fracture permeability of 30,000 md was estimated using the effect of fracture-
closure stress on resin-coated-sand permeability (Economides and Nolte 2000).
Substituting the data in Table 2 into Eq. 3 yields a model-predicted oil-production rate of 1,110 STB/D at 40 days of production
from 12 fractures. This result is 7.5% lower than the observed oil-production rate of approximately 1,200 STB/D at the same production
time. It is interesting to note that the Al-Otaibi et al. (2015) numerical simulation gave a well-production rate of 85 STB/D for a single
fracture, or 1,020 STB/D from 12 fractures, at 40 days of production, which is 15% lower than the actual production rate of 1,200 STB/D
tested from 12 fractures.

Parameter Value
Pay-zone thickness 70 ft
Matrix permeability 0.080 md
Formation pressure 8,000 psia
Oil FVF 1.40 RB/STB
Fluid viscosity 0.40 cp
Number of fractures 12
Fracture spacing 402 ft
Fracture half-length 172 ft
Fracture width 0.012 in.
Fracture permeability 30,000 md
FBHP 2,800 psia

Table 2—Data from Well H-6 of the Eagle Ford Shale (Al-Otaibi
et al. 2015).

Sensitivity Analysis
Shale-Gas Well. Eq. 1 implies that well productivity is not a linear function of fracture spacing Sf and the scale of fracturing described
by fracture half-length xf and fracture width w. It is worth investigating the optimal values of these parameters for maximizing well pro-
ductivity or well economics. Using the base data set summarized in Table 1, well productivity was sensitized to these three parameters.
Fig. 3 presents a sensitivity analysis of well productivity to fracture spacing. It indicates that reducing fracture spacing can increase the
well-production rate more than proportionally. Therefore, whenever possible by operational limits, more fractures with high density
should be created in the hydraulic-fracturing process to maximize well productivity.

4 2019 SPE Drilling & Completion

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 5 Total Pages: 14

Gas-Production Rate (MMscf/D)

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Fracture Spacing (ft)

Fig. 3—Effect of fracture spacing on predicted gas-production rate from 40 fractures.

Fig. 4 shows a sensitivity analysis of well productivity to fracture width. It implies that increasing fracture width by pumping frac-
turing fluid more rapidly can increase the well-production rate, but not proportionally. The benefit of increasing fracture width should
diminish as the fracture width becomes larger. Therefore, there is no need to pursue fractures wider than 0.1 in. in the investigated case
conditions. However, the aspects of potential polymer damage and fracturing-fluid cleanout are not considered. These issues might alter
the conclusion from the analysis.

1.6
Gas-Production Rate (MMscf/D)

1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Fracture Width (in.)

Fig. 4—Effect of fracture width on predicted gas-production rate from 40 fractures.

Fig. 5 illustrates a sensitivity analysis of well productivity to fracture half-length. It shows that increasing fracture length by pump-
ing more fracturing fluid can increase the well-production rate nearly proportionally. Therefore, it is desirable to create long fractures
by pumping a high volume of fracturing fluid in the hydraulic-fracturing process.

1.5
Gas-Production Rate (MMscf/D)

1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0 200 400 600 800
Fracture Half-Length (ft)

Fig. 5—Effect of fracture half-length on predicted gas-production rate from 40 fractures.

Shale-Oil Well. It is understood that the 7.5% underprediction of oil-production rate in the preceding example case was related to the
data in Table 2, where some parameter values were estimated with uncertainties. For instance, if the actual fracture permeability is not
30,000 md but varies from 10,000 to 50,000 md, Fig. 6 shows the possible range of the oil-production rate. Fig. 6 indicates that the
model-predicted oil-production rate is not very sensitive to the fracture permeability.
Fracture width is another parameter with uncertainty. Fig. 7 presents a sensitivity analysis of well productivity to fracture width. It
indicates that the effect of fracture width on the oil-production rate slowly diminishes as the fracture width increases. This means that it
does not improve well productivity proportionally through creating wide fractures by pumping viscous fluid more rapidly and placing a
large amount of proppant to support the created fractures.

2019 SPE Drilling & Completion 5

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 6 Total Pages: 14

1,400

Production Rate (STB/D)

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000
Fracture Permeability (md)

Fig. 6—Effect of fracture permeability on predicted oil-production rate from 12 fractures.

1,800
1,600
Production Rate (STB/D)

1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
Fracture Width (in.)

Fig. 7—Effect of fracture width on predicted oil-production rate from 12 fractures.

The ranges of fracture width shown in Figs. 2, 4, and 7 do not suggest that fractures in shale-gas formations are wider than in shale-
oil formations in general. It was coincidence that the sensitivity ranges for these two special cases are as they are for the available
data sets.
Fig. 8 shows a sensitivity analysis of well productivity to fracture length. It implies that increasing fracture length can improve well-
production rate but less than proportionally. Therefore, there is no need to pursue long fractures by injecting large amounts of fracturing
fluid and proppant in the hydraulic-fracturing processes, considering the economic effect.

1,400
Production Rate (STB/D)

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0
50 100 150 200 250
Fracture Half-Length (ft)

Fig. 8—Effect of fracture half-length on predicted oil-production rate from 12 fractures.

Fig. 9 illustrates a sensitivity analysis of well productivity to fracture spacing. It shows that reducing fracture spacing can increase
well-production rate more than proportionally. Therefore, whenever field operation permits, more fractures with high density should be
created in the hydraulic-fracturing process to maximize well productivity.
The matrix permeability 0.08 md might be slightly on the high side, but the use of this value by Al-Otaibi et al. (2015) matched res-
ervoir performance. Therefore, this value is considered to be realistic but optimistic. Fig. 10 presents a sensitivity analysis of well pro-
ductivity to matrix permeability. It shows that well production increases nonlinearly with matrix permeability. The slope tends to level
off at the high-permeability end. If the true matrix permeability is lower than 0.08 md, the model would underestimate the true produc-
tivity of oil wells if other parameter values, such as fracture width, are correct. Although Fig. 2 is generated for a gas well, it should
also be valid for oil wells in estimating relative error because fracture width plays the same role in Eqs. 1 and 3 because they incorpo-
rate the same constant c defined in Eq. 2. Fig. 2 implies that well productivity is sensitive to fracture width. If the true matrix permeabil-
ity is less than 0.08 md, then using a higher value of the fracture width can match field well productivity.

6 2019 SPE Drilling & Completion

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 7 Total Pages: 14

3,000

Production Rate (STB/D)

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Fracture Spacing (ft)

Fig. 9—Effect of fracture spacing on predicted oil-production rate from 12 fractures.

1,200
Production Rate (STB/D)

1,000

800

600

400

200

0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Matrix Permeability (md)

Fig. 10—Effect of matrix permeability on predicted oil-production rate from 12 fractures.

Discussion
It is understood that the newly developed analytical model is expected to be accurate only when the assumptions made during the
model’s derivation are valid. The major limitation of the model is the requirement of PSSS flow of a single-phase fluid. For gas reser-
voirs, it requires the production time to be long enough for interference between fractures to develop. For oil reservoirs, it requires the
interference between fractures to have developed and that bubblepoint pressure has not been reached. This requirement is not always
met, but it is acceptable for optimizing fracturing design where a quantitative analysis is not critical. For both gas and oil reservoirs, the
time at the end of the reservoir transient linear flow can be estimated using the radius-of-investigation concept. In radial-flow systems,
the radius of investigation is given by (Dake 1978) as
 1=2
km t
rinv ¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð7Þ
1; 252/lct
where / is matrix porosity and ct is the total reservoir compressibility (in psia1) for oil reservoirs, and is approximately equal to gas
compressibility for gas reservoirs.
With the same principle, the front of the linear propagation of a pressure wave between fractures can be expressed as
 1=2
km t
linv ¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð8Þ
1; 252/lct
Accordingly, the time for the front of the linear propagation of a pressure wave to reach the midline (no-flow boundary) is obtained
by setting linv ¼ Sf =2,

1; 252/lct ðSf =2Þ2

telf ¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð9Þ
km
where telf is the time at the end of linear flow in hours.
Another major assumption made in the model derivation is that the flow convergence near the horizontal wellbore in the fracture is
negligible. This flow convergence might be significant in high-productivity wells. The flow convergence with possible non-Darcy effect
might create choking to the flowing fluid, resulting in low well productivity. If this is found to be true in future investigations, the Furui
et al. (2002) equation can be incorporated to modify the derived analytical model.
In addition to the previously discussed model limitations, it is understood that the capacity of the proposed approach to predicting
the productivity of multifractured shale-gas/oil wells highly depends on the accuracy of fracture- and reservoir-property values. If these
values are not definitively known, quantitative well-productivity analysis will provide an erroneous result.

Conclusions
An analytical model was developed in this study for predicting the productivity of multifractured shale-gas/oil wells under PSSS condi-
tions, considering cross-bilinear flow in the rock matrix and fractures. Performance of the model was verified with the well-productivity
data obtained from a shale-gas well and a shale-oil well. Sensitivity analyses were performed to identify the key parameters of hydraulic
fracturing that affect well productivity. The following conclusions are drawn.

2019 SPE Drilling & Completion 7

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 8 Total Pages: 14

1. The conducted field case study shows that the analytical model overpredicts shale-gas-well productivity with an error of 2.3%. This
verified the accuracy of the analytical model for shale-gas wells. However, this error was estimated with uncertainties in fracture
width and permeability.
2. In the case study with field data from Well H-6 of the Eagle Ford Shale, the analytical model gave an oil-production rate of
1,110 STB/D after 40 days of production. This result was 7.4% lower than the observed oil-production rate of approximately
1,200 STB/D after the same production time. This verified the acceptable accuracy of the analytical model for shale-oil wells.
3. A sensitivity analysis with the model for both shale-gas wells and shale-oil wells indicates that well productivity increases with
reduced fracture spacing, increased fracture length, and increased fracture width, but not proportionally. Under the conditions of the
studied cases, shale-gas/oil-well productivity is not very sensitive to the fracture permeability. Thus, there is no need to pursue high-
conductivity fractures using expensive proppant in the hydraulic-fracturing process. The effect of fracture width on the oil-
production rate slowly diminishes as the fracture width increases. This means that pumping viscous fluid more rapidly and placing a
large amount of proppant to support the created fractures do not improve well productivity proportionally. Increasing fracture length
can improve well-production rate but less than proportionally. Therefore, there is no need to pursue long fractures by injecting large
amounts of fracturing fluid and proppant in the hydraulic-fracturing process. Reducing fracture spacing can enhance well production
more than proportionally. Therefore, whenever field operation permits, more fractures of high density should be created in the
hydraulic-fracturing process to maximize well productivity.
4. It is understood that the accuracy of the presented models was verified using limited field data with uncertainties. Clean and more-
complete data sets with better estimates of fracture width and permeability are desirable for further assessment of the models.

Nomenclature
Bo ¼ oil FVF
c ¼ parameter defined by Eq. 2
cg ¼ gas compressibility, psi1
ct ¼ total reservoir compressibility, psia1
c1 ¼ integration constant at the no-flow boundary condition
c2 ¼ integration constant at the fracture face
c3 ¼ integration constant defined by Eq. A-33
c4 ¼ integration constant defined by Eq. A-37
C ¼ fluid compressibility, psia1
e ¼ exponential function
Gi ¼ initial gas in place in the stimulated reservoir volume, Bcf
Gp ¼ cumulative gas production at the end of the data period, Bcf
h ¼ pay-zone thickness, ft
kf ¼ fracture permeability, md
km ¼ matrix permeability, md
linv ¼ front of the linear propagation of a pressure wave, ft
L ¼ horizontal-wellbore length, ft
nf ¼ number of fractures
p ¼ pressure, psi
pd ¼ pressure drawdown in fracture, psi
pd* ¼ pressure drawdown in wellbore, psi
pe ¼ pressure at drainage boundary, psia
pf ¼ pressure in fracture, psi
pi ¼ initial reservoir pressure, psia
psc ¼ pressure at standard condition, psi
pw ¼ wellbore pressure, psia
p ¼ average formation pressure, psia
Pd ¼ pressure drawdown at point x in the fracture, psia
q ¼ volumetric flow rate, ft3/sec
Q ¼ productivity rate for a well with nf identical fractures, scf/D
QF ¼ production rate from one fracture, scf/D
Qg ¼ gas-production rate, Mscf/D
Qo ¼ oil-production rate, STB/D
Qsc ¼ gas-flow rate at standard conditions, Mscf/D
rinv ¼ radius of investigation, ft
Sf ¼ fracture spacing, ft
t ¼ time, hours
telf ¼ time of end of linear flow, hours
T ¼ formation temperature,  R
Tsc ¼ temperature at standard condition, R
v ¼ flow velocity, ft/sec
vf ¼ fluid velocity in fracture, ft/sec
V ¼ volume element, ft3
w ¼ average fracture width, in.
xf ¼ fracture half-length, ft
y ¼ distance from fracture face, ft
z ¼ z-factor at reservoir pressure p
zi ¼ z-factor at the initial reservoir pressure pi
zsc ¼ z-factor at standard condition, dimensionless
l ¼ fluid viscosity, cp
/ ¼ matrix porosity

8 2019 SPE Drilling & Completion

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 9 Total Pages: 14

Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the China National Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 51674217). The authors are grateful to the
China Thousand Talents Program at Southwest Petroleum University, China.

References
Al-Otaibi, B., Schechter, D., and Wattenbarger, R. A. 2015. Production Forecast, Analysis and Simulation of Eagle Ford Shale Oil Wells. Presented at
the SPE Middle East Unconventional Resources Conference and Exhibition, Muscat, Oman, 26–28 January. SPE-172929-MS. https://doi.org/
10.2118/172929-MS.
Bajwa, A. I. and Blunt, M. J. 2016. Early-Time 1D Analysis of Shale-Oil and -Gas Flow. SPE J. 21 (4): 1254–1262. SPE-179742-PA. https://doi.org/
10.2118/179742-PA.
Chaudhary, A. S., Ehlig-Economides, C., and Wattenbarger, R. 2011. Shale Oil Production Performance From a Stimulated Reservoir Volume. Presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, 30 October–2 November. SPE-147596-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/147596-MS.
Cheng, Y. 2011. Pressure Transient Characteristics of Hydraulically Fractured Horizontal Shale Gas Wells. Presented at the SPE Eastern Regional Meet-
ing, Columbus, Ohio, 17–19 August. SPE-149311-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/149311-MS.
Dake, L. P. 1978. Fundamentals of Reservoir Engineering, first edition. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Economides, M. J. and Nolte, K. G. 2000. Reservoir Stimulation, third edition. New York City: John Wiley & Sons.
Furui, K., Zhu, D., and Hill, A. D. 2002. A Rigorous Formation Damage Skin Factor and Reservoir Inflow Model for a Horizontal Well. SPE Prod &
Fac 18 (3): 151–157. SPE-84964-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/84964-PA.
Gong, X., Tian, Y., McVay, D. A. et al. 2013. Assessment of Eagle Ford Shale Oil and Gas Resources. Presented at the SPE Unconventional Resources
Conference Canada, Calgary, 5–7 November. SPE-167241-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/167241-MS.
Guo, B. and Ghalambor, A. 2012. Natural Gas Engineering Handbook, second edition. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.
Guo, B., Liu, X., and Tan, X. 2017. Petroleum Production Engineering, second edition. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Guo, B., Lyons, W. C., and Ghalambor, A. 2007. Petroleum Production Engineering. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Guo, B., Yu, X., and Khoshgahdam, M. 2009. A Simple Analytical Model for Predicting Productivity of Multifractured Horizontal Wells. SPE Res Eval
& Eng 12 (6): 879–885. SPE 114452-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/114452-PA.
Javadpour, F., Fisher, D., and Unsworth, M. 2007. Nanoscale Gas Flow in Shale Gas Sediments. J Can Pet Technol 46 (10): 55–61. PETSOC-07-10-06.
https://doi.org/10.2118/07-10-06.
Jenkins, C. D. and Boyer, C. M. II. 2008. Coalbed- and Shale-Gas Reservoirs. J Pet Technol 60 (2): 92–99. SPE-103514-JPT. https://doi.org/10.2118/
103514-JPT.
Lee, J. 1982. Well Testing, first edition, Vol. 1. Richardson, Texas: Textbook Series, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Li, J., Guo, B., and Ling, K. 2012. Case Studies Suggest Heterogeneity is a Favorable Characteristic of Shale Gas Reservoirs. Presented at the SPE Cana-
dian Unconventional Resources Conference, Calgary, 30 October–1 November. SPE-162702-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/162702-MS.
Makinde, I. and Lee, J. 2016. Forecasting Production of Shale Volatile Oil Reservoirs Using Simple Models. Presented at the SPE/IAEE Hydrocarbon
Economics and Evaluation Symposium, Houston, 17–18 May. SPE-179964-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/179964-MS.
Orangi, A., Nagarajan, N. R., Honarpour, M. M. et al. 2011. Unconventional Shale Oil and Gas-Condensate Reservoir Production, Impact of Rock,
Fluid, and Hydraulic Fractures. Presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference, The Woodlands, Texas, 24–26 January. SPE-
140536-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/140536-MS.
Rafiee, M., Soliman, M. Y., and Pirayesh, E. 2012. Hydraulic Fracturing Design and Optimization: A Modification to Zipper Frac. Presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 8–10 October. SPE-159786-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/159786-MS.
Stewart, G. 2014. Integrated Analysis of Shale Gas Well Production Data. Presented at the SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition,
Adelaide, Australia, 14–16 October. SPE-171420-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/171420-MS.
Sun, H., Zhou, D., Chawathé, A. et al. 2016. Quantifying Shale Oil Production Mechanisms by Integrating a Delaware Basin Well Data From Fracturing
to Production. Presented at the SPE/AAPG/SEG Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 1–3 August. URTEC-
2425721-MS. https://doi.org/10.15530/URTEC-2016-2425721.
Tran, T., Sinurat, P. D., and Wattenbarger, B. A. 2011. Production Characteristics of the Bakken Shale Oil. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Con-
ference and Exhibition, Denver, 30 October–2 November. SPE-145684-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/145684-MS.
Vicente, R. and Ertekin, T. 2006. Modeling of Coupled Reservoir and Multifractured Horizontal Well Flow Dynamics. Presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 24–27 September. SPE-101929-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/101929-MS.
Wan, J. and Aziz, K. 2002. Semi-Analytical Well Model of Horizontal Wells With Multiple Hydraulic Fractures. SPE J. 7 (4): 437–445. SPE-81190-PA.
https://doi.org/10.2118/81190-PA.
Wang, J. and Liu, Y. 2011. Well Performance Modeling of Eagle Ford Shale Oil Reservoirs. Presented at the North American Unconventional Gas Con-
ference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, Texas, 14–16 June. SPE-144427-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/144427-MS.
Yang, C., Sharma, V. K., Datta-Gupta, A. et al. 2015. A Novel Approach for Production Transient Analysis of Shale Gas/Oil Reservoirs. Presented at the
Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, San Antonio, Texas, 20–22 July. URTEC-2176280-MS. https://doi.org/10.15530/URTEC-2015-
2176280.
Yu, W., Xu, Y., Weijermars, R. et al. 2017. Impact of Well Interference on Shale Oil Production Performance: A Numerical Model for Analyzing Pres-
sure Response of Fracture Hits With Complex Geometries. Presented at the SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference and Exhibition, The
Woodlands, Texas, 24–26 January. SPE-184825-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/184825-MS.
Yuan, H., Soar, L., Packer, R. et al. 2013. A Case Study to Evaluate Shale Oil Production Performance Models With Actual Well Production Data. Presented at
the Unconventional Resources Technology Conference, Denver, 12–14 August. URTEC-1582234-MS. https://doi.org/10.15530/URTEC-1582234-MS
Zerzar, A. and Bettam, Y. 2003. Interpretation of Multiple Hydraulically Fractured Horizontal Wells in Closed Systems. Presented at the SPE Interna-
tional Improved Oil Recovery Conference in Asia Pacific, Kuala Lumpur, 20–21 October. SPE-84888-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/84888-MS.
Zhang, Z. and Wang, B. 2017. A Simple Analytical Model for Estimating Long-Term Productivity of Multi-Fractured Shale Gas Wells. Int. J. Eng. Res.
Appl. 7 (7): 615. https://doi.org/10.9790/9622-0707040615.

Appendix A—Derivation of a Mathematical Model for Predicting Long-Term Productivity

of Modern Multifractured Shale Gas/Oil Wells
We here provide a derivation of an analytical model for predicting long-term productivity of modern multifractured shale-gas/oil wells.
Gas and oil wells are distinguished in the model by using different compressibility factors and the real-gas law.

2019 SPE Drilling & Completion 9

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 10 Total Pages: 14

Assumptions. The following assumptions are made in this model formulation. They are explained after being listed.
1. The oil- and gas-bearing formations are isotropic.
2. PSSS-flow condition is reached within the well-drainage area.
3. Linear flow prevails from rock matrix to the fractures.
4. Darcy’s law dominates the fluid flow in the matrix and fractures.
5. Fracture skin is negligible.
6. Hydraulic fractures are identical and uniformly distributed in the drainage area.
7. There is single-oil-phase flow in undersaturated oil reservoirs and single-gas-phase flow in dry-gas reservoirs.

Governing Equations. Consider a fluid flowing from matrix to one of the fractures, as shown in Fig. A-1. Productivity of one fracture
can be formulated using linear flow from the shaded quadrant of the fracture-drainage area to the fracture.

y
x

dx V
xf

Wellbore
Fracture

Sf
w

Fig. A-1—Planar schematic of fluid flow from a quadrant of matrix volume V to a fracture.

Under PSSS-flow conditions, compressible fluids move because of expansion in the depressurization process. Consider the fluid in a
volume element V, expressed as
1
V ¼ /hSf Dx: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-1Þ
2
Using the definition of the compression coefficient,
 
1 @V
C¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-2Þ
V @p

differentiation of Eq. A-1 with respect to time gives an expression of the flow rate from the volume V,

@p @V
CV ¼ ¼ qðxÞ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-3Þ
@t @t
@p
Using Eq. A-1, the pressure-decline rate in Eq. A-3 is then expressed as
@t
@p qðxÞ 2qðxÞ
¼ ¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-4Þ
@t CV C/hSf Dx

Eq. A-5 governs linear flow in porous media (Dake 1978),

@ 2 p /lC @p
¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-5Þ
@y2 km @t

Substituting Eq. A-4 into Eq. A-5 yields

@2p 2lqðxÞ
¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-6Þ
@y2 km hSf Dx

Integrating Eq. A-6 one time yields

@p 2lqðxÞ
¼ y þ c1 ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-7Þ
@y km hSf Dx

where c1 is an integration constant and can be determined using the no-flow boundary condition,

10 2019 SPE Drilling & Completion

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 11 Total Pages: 14

 
@p
¼ 0: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-8Þ
@y y¼Sf =2

Applying Eq. A-8 to Eq. A-7 gives

lqðxÞ
c1 ¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-9Þ
km hDx

Substituting Eq. A-9 into Eq. A-7 yields

 
@p lqðxÞ 2y
¼ 1 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-10Þ
@y km hDx Sf

Separating variables, Eq. A-10 is changed to

ð ð  
lqðxÞ 2y
dp ¼ 1 dy þ c2 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-11Þ
km hDx Sf

Integration of Eq. A-11 results in

 
lqðxÞ y2
p¼ y þ c2 ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-12Þ
km hDx Sf

where the integration constant c2 can be determined using the boundary condition at the fracture face,

pjy¼0 ¼ pf ðxÞ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-13Þ

where pf ðxÞ is the pressure in the fracture at point x. Applying Eq. A-13 to Eq. A-12 gives

c2 ¼ pf ðxÞ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-14Þ

Substituting Eq. A-14 into Eq. A-12 results in

 
lqðxÞ y2
p ¼ pf ðxÞ þ y : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-15Þ
km hDx Sf
Sf
Along the no-flow boundary y ¼ , where the pressure is pe, Eq. A-15 requires that
2
4km hDx
qðxÞ ¼ ½pe  pf ðxÞ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-16Þ
lSf

The Darcy velocity in the matrix in the y-direction at the fracture face at point x can thus be expressed as
qðxÞ 4km
vðxÞ ¼ ¼ ½pe  pf ðxÞ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-17Þ
hDx lSf

The cumulative flow rate of fluid collected in a fracture interval between the fracture tip and point x can be determined using vðxÞ as
ðx ðx
8km h
QðxÞ ¼ 2 vðxÞhdx ¼ ½pe  pf ðxÞdx: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-18Þ
lSf
0 0

If the average width of the fracture is w, Darcy velocity vf ðxÞ in the fracture can be derived by dividing Eq. A-18 by the cross-
sectional area of the fracture,
QðxÞ
vf ðxÞ ¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-19Þ
wh
Applying Darcy’s law to the flow along the fracture gives
kf dpf ðxÞ
vf ðxÞ ¼  : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-20Þ
l dx
Combining Eqs. A-19 and A-20 yields
QðxÞ kf dpf ðxÞ
¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-21Þ
wh l dx
Substituting Eq. A-18 into Eq. A-21 and rearranging the latter give
ðx
dpf ðxÞ 8km
¼ ½pe  pf ðxÞdx: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-22Þ
dx kf wSf
0

2019 SPE Drilling & Completion 11

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 12 Total Pages: 14

Differentiating Eq. A-22 with respect to x yields

d2 pf ðxÞ 8km
¼ ½pe  pf ðxÞ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-23Þ
dx2 kf wSf

We define pd as the pressure drawdown at point x in the fracture,

pd ¼ pe  pf ðxÞ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-24Þ

and c is expressed in Darcy units as

8km
c¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-25Þ
kf wSf

Substituting Eqs. A-24 and A-25 into Eq. A-23 gives

d2 pd ðxÞ
¼ cpd : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-26Þ
dx2

Boundary Conditions. The first boundary condition is expressed as

pd jx¼xf ¼ pd ¼ pe  pw : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-27Þ

The second boundary condition can be expressed as

 
dpd
¼ 0: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-28Þ
dx pd ¼0

Solution. Let

dpd
p0d ¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-29Þ
dx

and then

d2 pd dp0d dp0d dpd dp0

2
¼ ¼ ¼ p0d d : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-30Þ
dx dx dpd dx dpd

Substituting Eq. A-30 into Eq. A-26 yields

dp0d
p0d ¼ cpd : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-31Þ
dpd

By separation of variables, a solution to Eq. A-31 yields

1 02 1 2
p ¼ cpd þ c3 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-32Þ
2 d 2

Using the boundary condition expressed by Eq. A-28, c3 can be obtained as

c3 ¼ 0: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-33Þ

Substituting Eq. A-33 into Eq. A-32 yields

pffiffiffi
p0d ¼ cpd : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-34Þ

Substituting Eq. A-29 into Eq. A-34 gives

dpd pffiffiffi
¼ cpd : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-35Þ
.
dx
Integrating Eq. A-35 yields
pffiffiffi
lnpd ¼ cx þ c4 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-36Þ

Using the boundary condition of Eq. A-27, c4 can be obtained as

pffiffiffi
c4 ¼ lnpd  cxf : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-37Þ

12 2019 SPE Drilling & Completion

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 13 Total Pages: 14

Substituting Eq. A-37 into Eq. A-36 yields

 
pd pffiffiffi
ln  ¼ cðx  xf Þ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-38Þ
pd

or,
pffiffi
pd ¼ pd e cðxxf Þ
: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-39Þ

Substitution of Eqs. A-24 and A-27 into Eq. A-39 results in an equation for pressure-drawdown distribution in the fracture,
pffiffi
pe  pf ðxÞ ¼ ðpe  pw Þe cðxxf Þ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-40Þ

The equation for pressure distribution in the fracture is then found to be

pffiffi
pf ðxÞ ¼ pe  ðpe  pw Þe cðxxf Þ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-41Þ

To obtain an influx function of closed form, substituting Eq. A-40 into Eq. A-18 yields
ðx pffiffi
8km h
QðxÞ ¼ ðpe  pw Þ e cðxxf Þ dx; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-42Þ
lSf
0

which can be integrated and results in the following inflow-performance relationship

8km h pffiffi
Qðxf Þ ¼ pffiffiffi ðpe  pw Þð1  e cxf Þ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-43Þ
lSf c
The production rate from one fracture is then expressed as
16km h pffiffi
QF ¼ 2Qðxf Þ ¼ pffiffiffi ðpe  pw Þð1  e cxf Þ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-44Þ
lSf c
To obtain an expression for pressure distribution in the matrix, substituting Eqs. A-16 and A-41 into Eq. A-15 gives
pffiffi pffiffi
 
4 y2
p ¼ pe  ðpe  pw Þ e cðxxf Þ þ ðpe  pw Þ e cðxxf Þ y  : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-45Þ
Sf Sf
The average reservoir pressure p can be taken as the average pressure in the matrix because of the small volume of fractures,
ðxf Sfð=2
ð
/h
pdydx
pdV
0 0
p¼ ð ¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-46Þ
/hxf ðSf =2Þ
dv

Substituting Eq. A-45 into Eq. A-46 and integrating the latter yield
pe  pw pffiffi
p ¼ pe  pffiffiffi ð1  e cxf Þ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-47Þ
3xf c
which gives
p  pw
pe  pw ¼ pffiffi : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-48Þ
1  e cxf
1 pffiffiffi
3xf c

Substituting Eq. A-48 into Eq. A-44 results in

16km hðp  pw Þ
QF ¼  : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-49Þ
pffiffiffi 1 1
lSf c pffiffi  pffiffi
ffi
ð1  e cxf Þ ð3xf cÞ
The productivity rate for a well with nf identical fractures is expressed as
16n k hðp  pw Þ
Q¼  f m  : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-50Þ
pffiffiffi 1 1
lSf c pffiffi  pffiffi
ffi
ð1  e cxf Þ ð3xf cÞ

Unit Conversion. Eq. A-50 is a general inflow equation in Darcy units for wells with any single-phase-fluid flow inside its reservoirs.
For oil wells, Eq. A-50 converted to US field units is expressed as
5:91103 nf km hðp  pw Þ
Qo ¼   ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-51Þ
pffiffiffi 1 1
Bo lSf c pffiffi  pffiffiffi
ð1  e cxf Þ ð3xf cÞ

2019 SPE Drilling & Completion 13

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036

 DC194495 DOI: 10.2118/194495-PA Date: 28-February-19 Stage: Page: 14 Total Pages: 14

where c is expressed in US field units as

96km
c¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-52Þ
kf wSf

For gas wells, the flow rate in Eq. A-51 is converted to surface conditions using the real-gas law
 
ðp þ pw Þ Q psc Qsc
¼ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-53Þ
2 zT zsc Tsc
Substituting psc ¼ 14.696 psia, zsc ¼ 1.0, Tsc ¼ 520 R, and Qsc in Mscf/D into Eq. A-53 gives
0:01769ðp þ pw ÞQ
Qsc : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-54Þ
zT
Substituting Eq. A-50 into Eq. A-54 and rearranging the latter in US field units give an inflow equation for gas wells as

5:87  105 nf km hðp 2  p2w Þ

Qg ¼   ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-55Þ
pffiffiffi 1 1
lTSf c pffiffi  p ffiffi
ffi
ð1  e cxf Þ ð3xf cÞ
where c is still given by Eq. A-52.

Gao Li is a professor in petroleum engineering at Southwest Petroleum University, China. His research interests include geome-
chanics, gas underbalanced drilling in shale gas, and oilfield development. Li has authored or coauthored more than 60 techni-
cal papers and 20 patents. He holds a PhD degree in petroleum engineering from Southwest Petroleum University.
Boyun Guo is a Chevron Endowed Professor in Petroleum Engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette. He previously
worked for Edinburgh Petroleum Services as a senior petroleum engineer. Guo’s current research interests include optimization
of well drilling, completion, and production systems. He has authored or coauthored more than 150 technical papers and
10 books. Guo holds a bachelor’s degree from Daqing Petroleum Institute, China; a master’s degree from Montana Tech; and a
PhD degree from New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, all in petroleum engineering.
Jun Li is a professor at China University of Petroleum, Beijing. His research interests include underbalanced drilling, managed-
pressure drilling, wellbore integrity, rock mechanics, and shale-gas development. Li has authored or coauthored more than
100 technical papers and 20 patents. He holds a PhD degree in petroleum engineering from China University of Petroleum, Beijing.
Ming Wang is a PhD-degree candidate in systems engineering with a concentration in petroleum engineering at the University
of Louisiana, Lafayette. She holds a bachelor’s degree in petroleum engineering from Missouri University of Science and Technol-
ogy and a master’s degree in petroleum engineering from the University of Louisiana, Lafayette.

14 2019 SPE Drilling & Completion

ID: jaganm Time: 16:40 I Path: S:/DC##/Vol00000/180036/Comp/APPFile/SA-DC##180036