.

OETERMINATI ONOFFRACTURE PARAMETERS FROM FRACTURING PRESSURE DECLINE

.

by Kenneth G, Nolte, Member SPE-AIME, AMOCO Production Co,

,., 4

6 CDDWI

W9 AMMCO d fAhIIIW MIIUII MIIIWIUL PWltum MM WWWI. IM

!W MMtwlt DfIMmIa JIm+WI Annual WimUl COIIIWMUC Ml KMhhlbtwn 01IM WIW 01PM#OltuM iwI.!#l (II AIMI hI14 mM VIW. !lwIOI, stpltmbtf t%28. !979 lIUmalw IIluonct 10cotfwon By In@ wlhof PIMIMM 10cow II ml fwllfi 10In Ibltmcl01ml mw HIM W WOMI, W:II! 62W N, CIMIII EIW,, OIIIU, Tt&.

1HQ6

ABSTRACT This paper preaenta analyses which permit ecxne of the parameters that quantify a fracture and the fracturing process to be eetimeted from the pressure doclin~ following fractur~ng, The prtmary aasumpcions are vertical eonaiacent with chose of currenc practice--a fraccure of essentially constant heisht, propasatins throu~h a quasi-alaaetc formation, wtth continuous displacements (i.e., no clip) at che planee boundina the top and bottom of the fracture, Th~ paramecere which can ba quanti.f$.ad from the prenaure decline are cha fluid Xoea coefficient, the fracture Xensch and width, fluid efficiency, and time for the fracture co close, INTRODUCTION Ac che present time there ia no direct and aimp~e procedure for evaluutins che baeic paramecera achieved during a fraccure treatment, such as the length, width and fluid effieiency(at che time the treatment ends, of There exiw fracture models which permit eetimetion fractura length and width based on asuumed hetghts, fluid loss coefficient, fluid viscosity, .and format~on modulus, Hownver, at the end of the treatment there is #ere corno way of know:n~ if the qesumed parameter recc, with che potsible q xception of fraccure height near Ch@wellbore, Teahniquee for defining the fractura geometry from production performance do noc satisfy this need completely becauee of the time delay nd lengr,ha qnd required for Rhe data, q the infsrred qre average valuea over widths (frbciwre conductivity) to production aec~ions which aisnificantly contribute and are ac best lower bounds on tha qctual dimensions created by the fracturing fluid, As the volume and unit coat of fluLds used for a typical fraccurc treatm~nt continue co increaum, ao does the need for better of che fractxtre Seometry created by a pardefinition ticular treatment in a particular zone,
OF SUMMARY DERIVATIONS

The basic aaaumptiona for malysea are ehac the fracture: 1. 1. 1.

i.

the applicability height, formation

of the

has aasentially propagate negligible

conecant

through a quaai.-elaatic slip of bedding planee,

with

waa created by a conatanc injeccion rate of a power-law fluid into cwo symmetric winse, propa8atee continuously during pumping and propq gation scope when pumping atope, closee freely wichouc aignificanc from proppanc. interference

5.

Since actwl hydraulic fractures will deviate by tarying deereee at varioue Cimes from theee idealized assumptions, the utility of the analyaee presented for any appllcacfon will depend on the degree of deviation and the aeneitivity to the c?evia~ion, The ulclmate utility will depend on che ability to provide realistic As diacuaeed engineering correlation and prediction. in the Diacuueion of AppM.cations sectton, the meet likely deviations from assumptions 1, 4, and 5 above, would produce eatimatee erring on Che conservative aide for the fluid lome coefficient and length, In the following, the derived relationships are to chos{ summarized with equation numbere CONWIpOt2di21g The relati.on~hipe are in lacer sections of the paper, shut-in time, expressed in terms of the dimenaionlese 6 = At/c , where At is the time since pumping eeopped (ehuc-in? and to is the,pump time prior CO shut-in, Tha rate
of

pressure

dacline

at time d ia

fracture aa Basad on the concept of a verticai nd presented by Perkins q Uern2 and as extended by Nord8ren,4 relntionshipo based on the fracturing preaaure decline are derived in thie paper. Referancea
q nd illuatracione
at q nd of

f(d) rH2Ba ~ with f(ti) defined by the bounds 2(=@ > f(d)
*

U&

4CHPE

(9)

ein-1[(1+6)-121

(3)

paper,

DETERMINATION FRACTUREARMETERSFROM OF P FRACTURING

PRSSSUREDECLINE

WE 834~
-.

for the fractura length tn tenz8 of the fluid q fficiency Ihown in Fi8. 1. The symbols in che qbove and foUownd hg q quation, are dsfined ac the qnd of the paper, @e q fluid 10RS coefficient. LOdefined in Eq. 8 and shown graphically in Fig, 29 The average fracture width, ovar tha height and Tha difference in zh~ declina preaeut% between 18n@h ac the and of pumping ii3 given by :iruea 130and 6 ie, givan by
CH

E% G(b,60) (X5) 1

(37)

iP(130;0

H2$~

md G(8,40)

ia defined

in Eq, 16 and Aown on Fig, 3,

Tha dimene$wt!.eee shut-in time for the fracturp cloaa can be found by eichar of che expression ;H 1 [y]

to

The, above equation cs+n ba used with actual decline ?tassures in a curva matching technique (Application Seceion) which definam a match preseure p* A CH E% (17) Ii%a group ou the that determines cha valua of the variabla ri8hc-hand aide for the given application, from which ona of tha variablas can be defined in tanne of che ramaining variables. It ia noted that theee equationa are ind(,endent of che fracture length. Tha volume of fluid Ioet to tha formation pumping is given in tarma of the bounde (22) Tha length
L.

8 .*-+ d.g-l

(41)

2CHP~

-1 whera $ is the inverse function Fig. 1 and defined in Zq. 13,

for 8(6) 8iven in

In the ramainAng eect:ons of the paper, the abova axpresxwions are derivad and dfecusaed, with axarnple epplf,zxiona givan in, a later section. DERIVATIONS Backgrounda: There are two fmdarnentally different concepts fOr Ch8 geomatry of a conetant-height vertical reeules. One fractura which. lead to very different eonceptl la that tlta fracture width 3s conecant ecroso This requiree che aaaumpthe height of tha fracture. tion that the formation bed being fractured ia lndependanc of the bads above and below--that te, the bed% can slip frealy of one another at thair boundaries. This aaaumption leads to tha conclusion chac che fluid decreases with preseure requirad to extend tha fracture time. Tha othar concept, ueilizad by Perkins and Kern,2 SIlip of bound= aaaurnae that thare ie no, or negligible, aries along Che horizontal planas which confine the fracture hei~ht, This assumption leads to the concLu8Lon that the fluid preesure raquirad t,o axtend tha fracture incraasaa with cima.

dWing

of che fracture

can ba deterrninad (25)

by

Qco nCHp~(l+p) with cha variable

p =G(15,60) ~- s

(27) o

in which P is cha wellbore preeaura, above closure pressure, at shut-in and dP/dt is evaluated at d. Figura 4 illustracea the preaaura Cerma in tha abova q xpreeaiona. Th~ fluid efficiency by th~ simple ratio aff
q

Since tha two concepte fundamentally differ only in the aeaumption of slip along bedding planee, ehe applica~le concapt for a,given fractura application for bedding plane slip. dapands on the potential Bedding plane slip is more likely at ehallewm daptha than at daoper depths due co the difference in overburden strese on the planea and the reaulcing fricc~on which muet he overcome for slip to occur,

during

the treatmant

-Q,.
l+P

(28)

with P deftned

above,

Combining (1) and (7) gives L. Qto(l-eff) (31) mCHn ~

Maaaurementrn3 of bottom-hola preseurea during ie givan masaive-hydraulic-fracturing in thrae different are&a of North America, at depths greater than 7900 ft indipreeaure cate that for cheae condicione tha fracturing with the increaaee with time in a raanner consistent xtended concept preaenced by Perkln# and Kern2 and ae q by Nord8ren,4 Ao a result of chase measuremancrn indicating che validi~y of the concepca presanted by Perkins and Kern, che assumptions used in chic paper will ba co.tsiatent with thie reference qnd che refinamente presented by Nordgren, Nordgren preeenea qn q xcellent review and cricique of cheae ae8umpCiona which will not be repeated in thie paper,

..SPE 83~d

K, G,

NOLTE 2O=~f(t)+~&L~ ~ (6)

17hebanic equetion used in luid Loss Coefficient: ~puper ie the continuity equation for flow down riacture, and atz presented by Nordgrenb ie

-.$Q(z,c) - A(z,t) +W (1) az hich etatee that the gradient of the flow rate ia qual to the rate fluid ie loet CO,the formet$on, per ,nit length, plue the time race of fluid storage due to ross-secttonal area change. The assumption for fluid ,oee, as critiqued in Ref. 4, that

where ELdz =+ f Om

f(t)

(7)

#Y!L
m

(2) (8)

C it! the fluid lose rill be used in the following, coefficient, II Le the het%ht ovax the fracture where !luid loss occ~re (e.g., sand saction), and r is tha ;ime the fracture wae created at point z. Also che ,seumption will be ueed that negligible slip occurs kcroes bedding planes and that the formation responds ~uasi-elastir.. These assumptions yield2 2 AI+H+P (3)

to in (6) te in (8) is the ratio of the and ts given Fig. 2* f(t) 3nverse-root (7), and (8)

the injection time prior to shut-in and P wellbore pressure, Be is defined as the average pressure to the wellbore preesure by Eq. 13 of Appendix A and shown in is che average over tti~length of the of the fractures age. Combining (6), givee (9)

rhare H is the fractured height~ w iB the maximum ?racture width at z, p is the preseure at z, above the Ln-situ closure pressure of the formation, and E is :he effactive plane-straia modulus acroaa the fracture leight, The term effective refere to a constant ~odulus which gives the came average width acroaa the teight ae for an actual caae in which the fracture may :roiss eeveral beds with different in-situ preseuree and ;laati.c prope~tiee, Combining Eqs. 1, 2, and 3 yleldu (4)

The pressure decline function, f, in (7) can be evaluated by an upper and lower bound. These bounde craation, come from Ref. 4 for the time of fracture T(z), and require the assumptions chat the height, tate and the injected fluid are conscant, and injection that the fracture propagate continouely during pumpina (i.e., no flow restriction auchas a ecreen-out). The 10W8r bound on the rate of fracture eXtQriS~OtL ie for the fluid-loaa Jominated caee and assumes that the firet termon the r%ght-hand side of (1) dominatee the second term to the extent zhac the second term, for fluid etorage, can be ne@eCted. Aa shown in Ref. 4, thie assumption yields z(t)
s

xzauming that ~tme. integrating yielde

H and E1 do not Chan8e significantly (4) over th$ length L of the fracture

with L (t/to)l2 (lo) or t(z) B to(z/L)2

-Q(L)

+Q(0)

2CH
L

dz

P O= J

p:

2 Er

dz

(5)

forwhich C, H , H, and E are assumed to be effectively constant do% the fracture. Further aseuming that the fracture is shut-in the tip afker (i.e., Q(0) = O) and free extenaionof shut-in has ceased (i.e., Q(L) _ O), and replacin8 the verage velues over the length above integrals by their q (5) can be expreeaed ae

where z ie the length at time t. The upper bound on extension is for the minimal flui$ the rate of fracture lose caee and qesumes che A term of ,(1) can be neglected. For this caeek the equivalent exponent of time ir (10) would be 4/5 for a Newtonian fluid. Howaver, an equivalent result for a power-law fluid can ba obtained Integrating (5), with respect to-tima and neglecting A, to pL; and (9) of Appandix yielde Q& to be proportional to L raiaed to the A givee pL to be proportional 1+1/(2n+2) power, with n being the power-law fluid sxponent, Combining these two proportionalities yields 2n+2 z(t)
s

L (t/to)m

(11)

Since Che qxponent h (11) ie lees than unity for upper any posttive value of n, a more conservative bound than (11) is

DETERMINATION FRACTUREARAMETERS P FROM FRACTURING PRESSURE DECLINE ----. -----. OF .

z(t) ~ L c/c.

$PE 834i

(12)

Ir
t(z) - to z/L

from field data, for kha 6 s eorreaponding to those in The field ?ig. 3, vmaue ths qctual 8hut-in time M. data $8 plotted on the mm los-log scale as Fig. 3, and shen fig, 3 S$ overlain the field data with the vartical axie of Fig, 3, for 6 = 1, aligning with t j the pump time, of the field data. Then tha val+e o? AP from tho f~old data which corre8ponde to G(I?,60)-1 of Fig. 3, ia the match preseure and i8 equal to CH E%
P*
m

s shown in Figure 5, This figure also shows that (10) nd (12) 8iv@~ rtspsct~vsly~ Lower and upper bounde for he actual valua of T(z). Thesa bounds can bc used for ehe value of the tntegral which (z) in (7) tobowd hewn that ueing (10) q nd : It can be q q finso f(t). 11), reepectfvely Co evaluate (7) gtves
fx(At/to) > f(Ac/tJ

(17) H2@e

> f2(At/to) q) (13) (14)

fl(At/to) f2(At/to)

m 2(--

= ein-3[(1-At/to)-12]

The curve-matching procedure is demormtrated in the Applicatione Section. From this curve-matchfng procedure, the determined velue of P* i.aequal to the If the variable group on the right-bend side of (17). from weU logs, E from the value of H can be inferred mechanicelpproperty teecs on cores, and 1? from postfrecture temperature logs or other meane~ this Proof the fluid-lees cedure would permit determtnetion coefficient. ,. P*H2fle (M) IipE ~

there f results from (12) and f2 from (.10). At/E ie ,hedim}nsionlesa ehuc-in time in terme of the ptm$ Ame, t , and the time sfnce ehut-in~ At. The total Srne ei~ce pumping began ie t - t + At. In the fol,owins At/t till be denotad simp?y as 6, Tha above hewn in Fi.s, 1, The bounde ere Iounde for ~ are q lurprWin81y closa qnd differ by less than 10% for the pumpin~ o Ihut-in timee 8reater than one-quarter ;ime, i.e., At/t > 0,25. Az e reeult, either of the iwo bounde can b~ used without comproaiaing tha accuacy of (9) due to the lar8er uncertainty in quantify.n8 the other parameters in (9), . The preeeure difference between two shut-in thee ;an be found by intesratins (9), ueing (13), between :he two tlmea, i.e., from do co 6. This cen be shown :0 Siva , CH Et% AP(do,d) C(d,do) (1s) H2fi@ for which

c.

xc is important to note that thie expression for deter minin8 the fluid-loss coefficient ie independent of the fracture len8th or the constent Lnjection rate while pumptns, Before leavin8 this eection, the variation of weUboce preesure wtth respect to time durin6 pumpin8 will be recorded for a power-law fluid. The relationehipe for a Newtonian fluid were g%ven in Ref. 4, COmbinin8 (11) of Appendix A with tha bounde in(10) and (11) yields the followin8 proportion,alitiea for the exponent of time,

P(t)

a tz(z~+z) J_

: hi.8h fluid

loee

(19)

P(t) ~ m At/t. AP(60,6) UP(60) G(4,60) $ [8(0 - P(d) 8(6.)] ~3/2~1 (16)

a k2n+3

low

fluid

10S!3

(20)

for the bounde on the rate of preaaure

incraase.

8(6) $[( 1+6)

312-

Fracture Lenftth and Fluid Efficisncy,I Approximations lensch and fMd efficiency can be of the fracture derived in Che previous obtatned from relationships to time over sections, Inte~rating (5) with respect the tZme of injection (i.e., O to to) and using (8) yielde c
Qto - 2CHP

z(t) dz dt m

Graphs of G(13,130)and s(6) are shown in Fi8e. 3 mid 1, respectively, Eq. (15), in terms of preeeure iifferenceo, is more readily applied to field data than (9)o In particular, (15) can be ueed in terms of curve natchLn8 to determine one of the four variables; C, ii , E, or H, if the other three can be quankif$ed from p Thie is undertaken by ploCtin8 AP(60,6) other sourceo,

JJ 00

#J

E! Bpp %

(21)

sPE8i41

K, G.

NOLTE Discussion of Applicacione), then (25) would depend only on the fluid-loe~ coefticienc, the ISIP and the rate of preseure decline at come time qfter shut-in. The preeeure dacline ratio, p in (26), can be expreesed aleo h terms of che decline pressure difference defined in (15). It can be ehown that combining (9), (15), and (26) gives
p -G(6,60)

In (21), chs tarms can b. identified ae the fluid ohme Injecced which ie equal co the sum of the fluid olume lost co the formation and the fluid volume ccupyifig the fracture. Utilizing the bounds on fracure growth rate and the correapond%ng bounds for T(Z) term in (1), which ie n (10) and (12), the integral he voluma of fluid lost, VL, cen be shown to be bounde Y (22)

&e

(27) 0

The upper bound for V in (22), which reeulcs from 10), will be used in the kollowin~ in order to provide eetimetao on the fracture length and where P ie the ISIP preemre above closure preseure and lore conservative 6P(,6 ,6) is the difference in the decline praeeure luid efficiency than would result from the lower betw~en times 15 and d, The praesure terms in (26) and ound. As a result (21) can be expreseed ae (27) are Illusc?ated in Fig, 4. Qto TCHPL

~-+$@pLp

(23)

In (23) L represents the total length of both Fingu of the fracture eince Q represent the total ,njection race into both wings, Also, the subscript, I, on @ indlca~es that the appropriate condition to valuate B is for pumping, which ie given by Eq. 13 of ,pp; A and shown on Fig. 2. So.lvin~ for L from (23) ields L. Q Co
n

The fluid efficiency, defined as ths ratio of the volume of fluid (i.e., slurry) in the fracture at shucin to the volume pumped, can beebcained in a similar manner ae (25) by the previous identification of the terme in (21), However, more direccly, noting that tha term in parentheses of tha denominator of (25) relatas to the total volume pumped and that the last term in the parenthesae is the proportion left in che fracture (denoted ae p) it follows that the efficiency is

(24) Rearranging pm= eff (28) yields (29)

...

The dependence of L on frdcturu height and formaionmodulue can be eliminated by using (9). Combining ,hie equation with the lact term in the denominator bf 24) yields
,m

and 1 l+p=l-eff COmbinin8 (25) and (30) yields L. Qto(l - eff) (31) mCHp ~ (30)

Q co 2cHf(13) m[CHp ~.-+ ~ 13a < dP/dt] B P

r Q to
,m

(25) mCHp~ (l+P)

for the fracture len8th in terms of the fluid ciency and loss coeffi.cienc.

effi-

B Plt m zf(~) +-+

(26)

;~racture Width and Cloeure Time: From che expresaione in previoue seccions, the average and maximum fracture widths, and the time for the fraccure to close c~n be found. The volume of a fracture 18 1, (32)

m which f(d) can be selecced as (14) to be conahtant valuated for some rf~h the bound used in (23), qnd is q lelected shut-in time, IS; dP/dt Zs the wellbore preeIure decline rate at 6; and P ie che inetantaneoue Ihut-tn preeeure (ISIP) qbove the formation closure lrossure. Assuming that the height ovor which fluid ,0ss will occur, Ii , can be selected from well logs net eectionpof sand) q che closure preaoure nd :e,g,, qe discueeed in the eection Ian be decerudned (e.g.,

where = is the werase width over the fracture len8ch and haight. Uain$ the definition of 6 from Appendix A as the ratio of the average preeeure over the fracture to the preeeure a~ the wellbor~ (preeeuree referenced to th~ closure prassura) ik followe that 0 also relates the ratio of average width to max$mumwidth, In q ddition, the averase width, w, over the hei~ht at e iven fracture locat%on $8 w/4 timee the maximum w~dth. !

El*

Aa.m.a**,m*

**,

.- -..*

*W

m.--*

-**W

.- ewe.

*-...**.

q .,

**W

----

.-*

M a rotult, tha q vertige w%dth, ;, is relatoti Mximumwidth at the wellbore, W, by ;=EB ;mzg 4R 4p w: w: shut-in pumpfng (33) (34)

to tha

Thi@ q xpression d-panda only on tha pressuro ratio @ven in (26) or (27).

decline

LMng q wbol%c no:at%on, in terms of the inverire functtoti of $, i.e., g 1, (39) and (40) can be rewritte[ for th~ dimensionltcs closure tfme qs Ac/t. - g-l = g G [ 2C.%] (41)

Ming the pez~od of q hut-in, ; ie q emat:ally constant md (33) and (34) relate the chanse of Wdurin8 chic lhort pesiod before to after q hue-in, From tha definifficiency :%on of flu%d q vf m (eff)Qto (35)-

At/t.

-1 ~lQ .2 1

APFLZCATZONS In this eection the expreseionm derived previously will be applied to fraqwring pressure decline data for More specific information treatment- of three welle. on the treatments is given tn Table I, Case 1: This was a calibration crewnenc of 500 bble =Muddy J sand of the Denver Basin. The calibration treatmant waa pumped without proppanc to determine information on the tendency offraccure hei$ht to increaoe with respect to volume and pressure, and on fluid-loss bet!avior of the zone. The Creatmenc consisted of polymer-emulsion fluid coneiLstLn8 of twoZhirda condensate and one-third water with 50 lbe of polymer per 1000 gals. Fi8uca 6 showe the SP log from which a fluid-loss hei8ht of 32 feet over the hei8ht of the fracture was nd temperature log from escimaced, q che post-fracture which q fractura hei8ht of 60 ft. was eet~mated. Fi8ure 7 chows a puap-inlflow-back detwmination of cloeura pressure (discussed in next section) and che The left-hand surface preeeure decline, after shut-in. eide of Fi8. 8 ehowe n pressure difference P1OC conatructed from che deciine data q compatible with nd Eq, 15 and Fig, 3, The ri8ht-hand eida of Fi8ure 8 ahowa a tune match OF the reaeter curves, Fi8t 3) with ehe field data from which a P* value of 350 psi wae.obtain~d. The maeter curvee ace ehown as dashed @f the curve match lines in Fig. 8. A discussion interpretation will be given in a lacer section. Usini tha data from Table 1 and Eq. 1$, the fluid-loaa coefficient is eacimated to be p*#g6 Gn EHp~

;omb%ning (32) snd (35), ;ivas ;flCHp ~ (l+P)

and eubatitutin8

into

(,25)

(6ff)/H

(36)

Lnd auhetituting ;* ;?ctq

(28) y,talds, p

nd ac cha q of pumping, (37)

~! cHp/~

,n which C ie the average fluid loss coefficient with !eapect to the total fraccure hci8ht, q p ta the nd Iecline preesure ratio 8iveuin (26) or (27). From (34), the maxhumwtdth nd :he q of pumping, ia ~m~ W$ P ?ith~8iven-by (37),
qt

the weSlborej

at

(38)

The time for a fracture to C1OSS after shut-in Ze (9) liven in Ajpendix B qnd is found b~ integrating !rom shut-in to the time to clocieusin8 f (AC/t ) of che fo\l:?@m8 q xprees 1on iaOdeter[13) q As a reeult, lined in Appendix B, 8(At/to) ~ 2C ~ /here the tima to close, At, is the value of 8(At/t ), quals che r%ght-hand qide o? Iefined in (16), which q [39), Thie q xpraseion aesumes that the q verage width Ind q verage fluid lees coefficient can be estimated p :hrou8h the fracture d@B%8nrocese, Another expression for closure time can be obtained fter che fracture !rom pressure decline data shortly q :reaemenk whtch would be uesful for q etimacin8 the ~dditlonal time for the fracture to close, This q xpresAon is obcalned by combinin8 (37) q (39). nd (40) l@/to) -$
q

= ,00053 ft/~

(39)

From F~g, 7, the Lnetantaneoue shut-in preesure above closure pressure and ehe pressure decline difference nd between 6=.5 q 1,0 can be obtained aa 800 and 210 pei, rdepecciviily, From Fig, 3, che value of G(,5,1,)=0,59, q nd from F%g. 2 the B /6 ratio ia stimated valuemp@fsnm*7S and obta~ned aa ,88 for q a=l,O, Usin,8 the q bove data q Eq. 27, the preasurc nd decline ratio ie ~
q

0,98

From Eq,t 28, the fluid q ff

q

q fficiency

is

0,49

SPE 8341 tom tht data above and Table X, the ftacture tip to tip) can b. qat5matcd from Eq. 25 aa L - 2700 ft lm8gh

K, G.

NOLTE can be q stimated, Forming a ratio ~for the two caeea gtves 2
of P*, Hz, and

or Eq. 25, the Znjacted

volume, Q: , must be converted of unite ~#ed abava and in o ft,3 for compatibility able I. Eq. 37 can be used to eatimete the average idth acrosa Che height and length from the above data, nd yields v= 0.0!)94 ft = 0,11 inch Eq. 34 and is

~ 2 (1/

7P 01 . 02

1 1

25 300 m =.63 ,F 250 150 H1=*80xH2.80 ~ 150 = 120 ft

he maximumwidth can be found from ~and

for thla fracture height ac the time of the pad shut-~n and indicates the fracwre hei8ht changed very little duZin8 the major portion of the treatment. Caee 3: the final exam le usee data on pressure decli-orted by Novotny> The reported data %a sumarized in Table 1. This treatment was 400 bbl of a From the decline data in thie polymer-emulsion fluid. reference, a rate of decline of dP/dc=4.5 peilmin is inferred sit a shut-in time of 40 mfnucea (i.e., 6=1 for Equation 9 will be used to a 40-minute pump eime). estimate che fluid-loss coefficient with a value of from Fis, 1 and a B value from Fig. 2 of f(6=l)=0.78 0.67 (aesuming values of a=,75 ~nd n=.75). This equation gives flH%a~dp c - 4HpEf(0 m=
.,

he dimensionless tima for the fracture hen by Eq, 41 and for P=O.98 is .6 . 8-1(1.54) q 1.6

to cloee

is

here Fig. 1 can be used to q valuate g-~. The actual looure time from Fig, 7 waa 1S0 min. This ia the only qremater of those determined q bove which can be checkd with data, Caoe 2: This traawzent consisted of 700,000 lbe f 20/40 sand and 300,000 8ala of a cross-linked, ater-baae fluid with 40 to 60 lb/1000 gals of polymer The nd q S% hydrocarbon phase to reduce leakoff, reacment wae stopped qfter 30,000 gala for about O min. The data used in the followin8 calculat$on$ The zone ,eglecta this first part of the tweatment. rested waa the asme as for Case 1, A fluid-loee ei8ht of 70 ft and fracture height of 150 ft were acheted from the appropriate 108s for the treatment, he surface preesure decline data ia ahown iu F4, 9 aa The maeter a the preaeure-difference curve match. urvea are shown aa daehed lines, Uain8 the same quaziona q8 in Caee 1, the following parameters are atimeted for this treatment. P* = 300 pai c = .00076 ftl~ ~ , 2,4 eff u 0.59 L q 4600 ft 7~ 0,43 in W= 0,86 in 4 q 5,5; At s dt At - 5,5 x 250 110138Qmin

000035

From the ref~renced decline data, an inferred value of inacantaneous 8hut-in pressure above CIOaI.We reseure p of P=7%0 pei is obtained, and from Fig. 2 a B ffi value of 0988, Uein8 the above data, the pre~sufe decilne ratio ie ~ = (8) 2B P/t. &dp/dC ,1*87

The flutd

efficiency, ,65

from Eq, 28 is

eff = ~=

and eutimetin~

che length

from Eq, 31 gives

Qto(l - eff)

L..
m 23 hrs

= 5600 ft !TCHP ~

he well was flowed back before closure and, therefore, he 23-hour closure q atimate cannoc be compared with The q verage width, ovar the heZ8ht and length, and ~ctual data for this casa, maximum width qc the wellbore, obtained from Ilqs, 37 and 38, are Aa stated above, this treatment waa stopped dur4n8 :he pad, i.e., ahut+n, qfter 30,000 gala q q pump nd An q nalyaia of the decline data dme of 25 minutes. ;= ,0043 ft = 0,052 inch ~not @/@~ berm) after the pad shut-in 8ave q PA value nd ssumins that q paremll If 150 psi,. Using Eq. 17, q q w= 0,11 inch xcept &ha pump Czme, t , q the h~tght qra tha nd ltera, q nd fter the mme for the pad shut-in q Efle shut-fn q xcatmont, the hei8hC qt the time of the pad shue-in

nETERMltiATlON FRACTUREARAMETERS EWCTURING PRESSURE DECLINE ----- --- .- FROM ----. ---------------- m .------. P -he time for the fracture q. 36 and Fis. 1 aa ~ m g-1(2.9) = 4.0 to C1OOCia obtained from

SPE 834

Th8r*fora, che avot!a8a fracture haight will moat likely at the w@llbe aqual to or leaa then that determhod ffect of proppant on fracturs closure is to bore. The q
maka

the ayatem effectively etiffer which is equivalent EZther a a$~ffer to increasing the formation modulus. fracture system than wculd actually occur without PrQppant~ or a smaller than estimated average-fractureAt - 8to - 4.0 %40 = 160 rein, hdight would increauu the preaaure decline rate and lead to estimating a lerger than actual fluid-loua coefficient, Since the effect of proppant ia to he estimated cloeura time of 160min. q fluid effi~ nd increaee the decline rate, an indication of the effect iency are in reasonable q graement with that obtained of proppant on the match curves would be for che data However, the above langth ig va~~es to deviate toward larger valuea than in6icated rom the referenced date, ignificantly greater and Che above wldch La signifiby the theoretical curvae, antly leau than those eaimeted in the cited reference. hesie values can be brought in closer agreement by The match curves in Fig. 8 alao chow that all tha educing tho modulus for the referenced data fxom 107 data curvee, except 8=.25, tail off to lower values o 6 x 106 psi, (i.e., similar co the value for ehe than the theoretical curves for times greater than 125 lrevioua caeea), For the reduced modulus, the above ,mlnutea, Thie indicatea chat the rate of fluid loss Iaranetera which would change and their resulting An Lnterafter 125 minutes la less than predicted. ~aluea are listed below pretacion of this observa?.ion is that for times greater than 125 minutee the fracture walls are closing toc - .000s5 ftlm gecher from the tip toward the wellbore, since there &- 3400 ft The closing OZ the was no proppant in this caae. w = ,087 in unpropped fracture reduces the area for fluid loss in W= !2.18 in the relatively hi~h loaa area of the tip and conaequent~y reduces the nec rate of loss and preseure ~or the reduced modulus, the above value of W ie in declina,, !eaaonable agreement to the referenced value of 0,21, Iowever, the referenced value of L-852 ft. la still fracture The match curvee for Case 2 alao indicate It ie ~igni~icancly different than the abova value. extension after 6=.25, or 63 minutee, but none after toted chat the referenced valuea of fluid pumped! 6-0,5, or 12S mfnutea. The curvee for thie caee do not )fficiency, and wellbore width are not consiatant with tail-off to the came de8ree ae for Casa 1. :he referenced value of height. For Caaee 1 and 2, a fracture closure pressure ia )ISCUSSIONOF APPLICATIONS required to determina the net fracture preeeure ebove closure, denoted by P. The closure preaeurea were The curve match for Caae 1, ehown in Fig. 8, determined for cheae caaes by a procedure prior to the lndicatea that the data curve for 6=.25 ia laraer than treatments which coneiecs of c~eatin8 a fracture with a Phe theoretical preaaure difference curve for 6=,25. relatively small amount of fluid and flowing the flu~d rhia indicatea that the average rate of preaaure back out of the fracture at a controlled rate through a iecline between 6=,25 and eubaequent times ie greater choke, The decline curve for the flow-back etage than predicted by fluid loaa to che formation alone. (e,8,, l?t8, 7) shows a recognizable do~leg of an inin explanation i~ that the fraccure ie still extendin8 creaBe rate of decline at the closure preaaure due to after time 6=.25, This explanation ie supported by a the reatriccion to flow ouc of the fracture introduced wmericel simulator for fracturea (similar to that aa the fracture cloeea at the wellbore. ilscuaaed in Ref. 4) which hae been extendad to includ e fracture closure aa well ae exteneion. The cont@ued SUMMARY APPLICATIONS OF exteneion for some time after ehut-in is contrary to 1, the aaaumpcion used to deriva the expraaaiona in thie The q xampla caees given in this paper illustrate papar, However, the aanumption of extension stoppin8 that the parameter which deecrf.be che geometry of provides coneervetive q atimetes in thee the nt shut-in a fracture can ba obtained eimpiy and directly determined fluid-lose coefficient will be greater end from the praasure decline data after a treatment. This follows because tha length leaa thanin reality, 2, continued q xteneion creatae lar8er ratee of preseure Usin8 the parameters determined from an actual or declin~ (proportional to q ethated value of C) than fo r calibration treatment (e,g,, Case U improved no q xtenston! becaueethe Increaeed len8th reduces the chieved for future treatment in a deaigna can be q average fracture width (for q fixed volume of fluid) given pay zone, Also, the q ddit~onal and thue reducas the preaaure, 3, qrea (i.e., fluid-lose extension creates new fracture In particular, thefluid-loaa coefficfsnt @hould area) pot accounted for by the analyeis which q$aumes be e%milar for q treatmenca of a 8iven zone for ll no axtansion afttr chut-in. cimiler flu~dc, Aa a result, ueing a calibrated fluid-loea coefficient and using dacline data frof Other poeeible deviations from the aaeumptiona, eubeaquent creatmenta, the fracture height or the which would laad to conservae~ve eetimatee of tha forma~ionmodulua; q the fracturt length can be nd fluid-lose coefficient q len8th, qre interference nd q ctimated for these treatmante. from proppant and variable fracture hei8ht, If tho 4, fraclNre h0L8ht ie not q eaentially constant, At will Tha decllne pressure ratio, P, obtained from tend to decreaae q way from t}lewellbore, This fol~owa decline data only, providan eetimatea of che fluid becauee the preeeure decreaeee cowerd the ttp ae a q fficiency and fractute closure time, reeule of the pressure 8radient required to matntain 5, hei8ht fluid flowl q aincn qn &ncreame in fracture nd The only direce check on the q ccuracy of the the meet likely reeulta from qn increase h praaeure, q echatee provided by this q nalycie it che ttme fracture height will tend co decrease toward the tip. for the fracture to close. In the two cases wher~ .

SyE 8~41 .cloeure time data exialmd, the predicted in good agceezmnc with tha data.

K. G time wg
*

Perkins, T, K,s q Kern, L. R,, Widcha of nd HydrfiAtc Fractures, J, Pac. Tech, (Sept., 1961), Nolee, K. G,, q Smith, M. B., %cerpre~ation nd Fracturing Preasuree, 54th Annual Tech, Conf. Exhik., Las Vegas (Sept., 1979)2 af q nd

NOMENCLATURE -- A = croae-eectional area of fracture C - fluid-loaa coefficient E? n plane strain = E/(1-v2) E = Youn8s Modulus eff =,fluid
f(d) =

modulus

of a Vertical Nard8ren~ R. P., Propagation Hydraulic Fracturtz, Sot. Pet. En&, Jour, (Au8ust, 1972) , Tranaport?ti 52nd Annual Novolxay, E, J., IIproppant Tech. Conf. and Exhib., Denver (October, 1977). Dobkins,
Hydraulic

1.

q fficiency
prewure decline funccfon, Eq. 7.
i.

d~nensionless

G(6,150) - dimensionless difference function, 8(6) = avst dacline rate H D fraccure height Hp = fluid-loss L = fracture P = fracture heisht length preeaure,

pressute Eq. 16. funccicn, Eq, 16,

T, A., ?4echods co BetFar Determine Fracture Het8hC, 54th Annual Tech. Conf, and Exhib., Len Ve8ae (Sept., 1979).

@PENDIX.A ?luid
Q1OW

in a l)~r~i~al Fracture . .-.

above cloeure Eq, 17. difference

preeaure,

ac wellbore AP(60,6) dP/dt

and at shut-in

In the followin8, the power-law flow model will be represent che flow behavior of a fracturing generally encounc!luid over che ran8e of conditicna for The parameter :rad in fracturing applications, :hia model, ae ueedn$n the following, are
l.eeumed to

P* = match preeeure,
q

pressure decline decline

Shear atreea

~ k(ehear

race)n 8radienc2 ia

m pteasure

race For chic aaaumpcion, che preseure

p = preesure at aorae point in fracture, p = avera8e praeeure over len8th of fracture, Q = pump rate, t = ctie co
s

m . (,2n+l)/n ehut-in, width at wellbore, width ac aoma point

(1)

variable, since

pump time,

At = cirae

w. maximum fracture
Wm maximum fraccure

in che fraccure. ~ = avera8e width over height and length, z s diacance vqriable down fraCtUreo

flow rate per unit hei8ht) for flowof q (volumetric between wane aeparaced by the width w. The eotal flou rate, Q, down both win8a of the fracture ia twice the race down either wln8 and ie found by rearran@n8 (1) md inte8ratin8 over the cross aectiont

-H/2 a = denotes proportAonaliCy @- ratio @p = value

of
of

averase
@

and wellbore

preaaure, x f +12

HI2
Wm

while pumpins.
s

dy

6a = value of (3 while ehut-in, shut-in ttme d q dimenaionlaea 130R rafatance differences, A s fluid T = time loaa per unit ratio, local fracture ,.
of

At/Co. preaaure

or
Q.

shut-in

time

for

(LQLn HwmuQ
2k dz) m

(2)

fraccure

lensch, where

v = Poieaon?a

ctoaciono (3)

P1 ,,

Uhrietianovic, S, A, and Zheltov, Y, P,, Formation of Vertical Fracturea by Means of Highly Viscous Liquid,t Proc, Four&h World Pee, ConU,, Rome (1955).

,,

,,

..

1
.

DETERMINATION PRACTURE PARAMETERS Ok PROM FRACTURINGRESSURE P DECLINE

qt

SPE 8341 *U

In (2) th~ Aleo from (8), the praesure ~nd W ie th~ maximum erase-scccional width, nd rnseumptions wore made that k q n qro constant qcroas ~h~ aact%on q that drddz tg q nd lSO c~flct~nt qcron$ the Rssrranging (2) section, l,e,, one-dim&elonal flow. p s P(L) a[koQ~L12n+2 yieldu the proportionality

the wellbore

(u)

s!E.
dz

~Qn

@I~,
w2n+l

(4)

tl%2n+1

Formin8 the ratio of ~, from (9), tha tmllbore, P from (11), give-

to the

preeeure (12)

at

-)n ~ = 2(4(:)

; m= (2n+l)/n
;=13P

for the preueure gradient down a conetant If the fractwre recponds q laettcally ture. preesure

h~fght

frac-

to incarnal

Without a detailed diecuaaion, it hae been found from a numerical fraccure eimulator (similar to that discueeed Ln Ref. 4) that the appropriate approximation for flow sate in (7) or (12) are 5mO; shut+.n

p-sw

(5)

where S i~ che,fracture ec&ffneee (i.e., S - E12H for a constant-height fracture in a hornogeneow, infinite, elastic medium), (4) and (5) yield
P

(M)
bml;
pumping

2n+1 dp

a kQn dz

(6)

stiffnene ie aseumed to ba for which th~ fracture For tha aawmption of q homogeneous q laetic conetantg medium, cha fracturo cross eeccion ie q llipcxca12 with xia of H. For thie cael a minor axim of W q q major q nd a numerical integration for $(n) q M defined in (3) nd q (4) ie poeeible q ia shown graphically nd nd in ~i8, 10, Aeeuming k q Q hava th~ exponential nd ahipe ! k
m

f3p=implyin8 a n~arly constanc flow rate, greater than for ehuc-in even thou8h the zero, down tho fracture 12p; flow rate ie ztro qt the wallbore and fracture varyin8 flow rate while pumping of Q. q a linearly nd q t chc wellbore to q eeentially zero qt the fracture Cip, From (7) the variation of k, or q equivalently che vtscosity, can be represented aa a = O ; coneeant viecoeity

relatLon-

ko(2~/L)a
(7)

Q q Qo(2z/L)b

q q

1 ; medtum de8radacion 2 ; etron8 de8radacion

(14)
.

q long the fraccura,

(P=CI,

and inte8ratin8 (6) from che tip x-O) to come dietance z toward the wcllbora 1

yielde

whore a reflecte the order of ma8ni&ude decrease due to temperain fluid viecoaity down the fracture ture, ehear and time degradation of fluid eyatem, The ratio of 13 for pumping, @ , to chat shut-in, Be, ts found from (13) asp
~
for

P(Z) a[koQon -l=

(8)

Tho q vera8s valueof from (8) ie fractura,

for which n wae q eaumtd

q ffactivoly co be conscant, p, q lon8 tho len8Eh L of the

For

f3,

2n+3+a 3n+3+a

n 3n+3+a the q ctual

(1s)
equality
for

th~ cake of complecanees, (11) ia

o
[koQ)]k a
L

(e+l)

(9)

(L)= 6) M{ZJ:L}
I
wh.r. J_ M!
m

III (a+bn+l)/(2n+2)

(lo)

[(2n+2)M]2n+2

SPE 8341

K, G, NOLTE LefE-hand aide of (2) %e Cho maximum width W qc che and rewriting yi~lde wellbore,2
At/t.

11

with M dafincd in (4), ~y ucing tha rcl.ationship for surprfaH in t-rms of n in Fis. 10, ic c&n ba o,ILwn, indapandcnt of in61y, that M *n (16) is tsoeneially qual CO 2,53 2 9,5% over cho ranae of n=0,4 n and im q m lie* In (16), Q is cha total flow rae~ in~o both fracture wings, L is the len8th of q fraccure wing, and S. is defined by (5), APPENDIX B
Time for

f(At/to) 0
J

&= 0

(~WQ

(3)

2C ~

c~ . co Close

c %

1~

Fracture

to closa can be found The time for a fracture from Eq, 9 of the Cext, Rewriting this equation reaulcs in

(1)
nnd incegratin8 over che shut-in preeoure to go co zero) givae clme AC (time for

The integral cen be shown co b~ q auel PO 8(At/t ) given in (16) of the text, if (13) of the text ~a C is the q verage fluid-loss coeffic~eut ueed for f, height, and using (33), Ehs Eerm in over the fracture parencheees on the right-hand aide can b~, expreaeed in cerme of che average fraccure width, w, ac shutin. Therefore, (3) can be rewriccen as (4)

where P ie che preeeure

ac ehut-in,

Noctn8 :hat

the

Table 1
Data for Example Well Analyiie
Ca8e 1
I

Caee 2
6,400

@_e 3

(Ref. 5)

Treatment Treatment Treatment Fluid Type

Vol,

(bbl)

500
5

400
10 40 Poly.-Em, 10,000

Rate (BPrn)

30
250

Time (min.)

100
Poly, -Em,

Cross-Lk, 8,000 26S *O1 150

Reservoir Depth (fC,)

Temperature Permeability,
Fracture (eF)

7,900
265 ,01 60
)

200
1,0 60 20 10 130 Ya8

(red) (ft. )
(ft.

Height Hei~ht

Fluid-Loss

32
psi)

70
6 mm
Yea

Formation Modulus (106 Time to Close

Proppant (min.)

5 150
No

, 3 q

2
q

.
.

1n

t)--LAA_kbJ

0,6 0076 1,0

1,6 2,0

3s0 4,0

6,0

+-l

1,0
g

0,6
,~

0,26

0,6 0,75 1,0 1,8 2,0

3,0 4*O 6,0

d R AUto, Olmwwlonlow Shut4n Tlmo

Fig,1 = Dimansionlass timafunction trtut v flimansioolass tires,

. - .:

--l
/$,
0,9 (Shut.ln) 0,0 O*7 0,6 0,8 0,8 0,7 0,8 O*8

RH .

I ,0

M ),8

n~l,O 0,76 0,6 4$49.

0,4 01
2

01
q

Vlwodty Cmponont,a o Pfg, 2. Varfationf 6 with viscosity WOIM, EQ,7

Appendix , A

002s
-i
: I

O*S
I I

1,0 1,62,0
v I

3.0
I

5,0

?5 92 ,5 e

3 .
q

+1

Log @@

do=

h fj ,8: g y ,6 m

~ ,4= m a i

n ,2 D wI
I 0,26
Fi$,

//// I
0,6
3 . Maota~ eurvw

1
1,0

1 1 1I I 1 1

1,62,03,0
Time,

5.0
At/t(j

Dimensionless Shut.in

~ s

for prwwra

difl?crances,

Proasuro Dwlirm Ratio, p, Eqs,26 & 27

or
dP/dt
4P

ii

1~
/
~

/ =

-------

P/to i .

I
I
.1

.-m - Fraoturo ---Cloauro Prmuro

1 I

s->
2to t, tima

*;::*
to

1,6

to

1,0
Lower bound, Eq,l O,

> s pper bound, Eq,l 2

/
/

r(z)
A

~Lokve)r ctLlal A
bound I
Fig, 5 of
Bounds for rate fraoturt craacion,
A

::1:: A

1 1,0
extension

log t/t. of fraoture

and cfma

SP=Log It Fluid LOSS Height Over Fracture / =32 Ft.

~860
*

Post-Fracture Temperature Log 1 Fractuw Height =y

g
# 7 9790

I I
I

1 1 * * o * d

1-

1800F See Roft6

of oaaa 1,

f \

+7960

Fl~, 6 = Input data for malycia

Pressure Daoline After Fracturing 1800 *8 1000

16s0 = IWp *8 g 1400 1! & 1200 8 f 1000 . w 800 AP=210 U)l

1600

@ a

eoo~

1 4
I
1 t

26

60

76

100

126

150

Time Since Shut-In, rein, Fig, 7 - Prm$uro declin~ for gata 1,,

Prsasuro Difforoncosfor Data

Matohof Data and Maator Curvaa

60

6076100

160200

Shutdn Tires, mln Fig, 8 - Ma&ah of prasmra

Shut.lnllmo, Mln, diffmwnma for cast 1,

Surfaca

Pressure hclha.

psi

M (n)

IlecIina Prassure Differences. psi

.
q  q