Applied Pressure Analysis for Fractured Wells
A. C. Gringarten,* SPEAIME, U. of California
H. J. Ramey, Jr., SPEAIME, Stanford U.
R. Raghavan,** SPEAIME, Stanford U.
Introduction
The pressure beha;ior of fractured wells is of considerable interest because of the large number of wells that
intersect fractures. AS a result of a number of studies, an
increased understanding of fracturedwell behavior has
been obtained. Although the shape of actual fractures is
undoubtedly complicated, most studies assume that real
fractures may be ideally visualized as planes intersecting
the wellbore. It is generally believed that hydraulic fracturing normally results in one verticai fracture, the plane
of which includes the wellbore; however, it is also agreed
that, if formations are shallow, horizontal fractures can
result, The specific orientation of the fracture plane with
respect to the wellbore may be subject to debate if the
well intersects a natural fracture,
Two recent studiesl2 provide new information
whereby loglog typccurve3 matching procedures may
be applied to pressure data obtained from fractured (vertical or horizontal) wells. These studies also showed that,
under conditions that would appear normal, it is likely
that horizontal and vertical fractures would affect well
behavior sufficiently such that the orientation, vertical vs
horizontal, could be determined. The purpose of this
paper is to illustrate the applicability of the results obtained in Refs. 1 and 2.
Vertically Fractured Wells
with the Bureau Recherches
w[th Amoco Pmductlon
Co.
Geo16gques
et Munieres
Tulsa. Wa.
The InfiniteConductivity Vertical Fracture in
A Square Drainage Region
Gringarten et al. have presented drawdown data for an
infiniteconductivity
vertical fracture located at the
center of a closedsquare drainage region and producing a
slightly compressible constantviscosity fluid at a constant rate, The solution for the producing pressure at time
t is
?%
D(?D,
As mentioned in Ref. 1, new solutions for the transient
pressure behavior of a vertically fractured well were
needed because earlier studies were not intended for
typecurve analysis. This study examined two boundary
*Now
**NOW
conditions on the fracture plane. The first solution, like
earlier studies,45 assumed that the fracture plane is of
infinite conductivity. This implies that there is no pressure drop along the fracture plane at any instant in time.
The second solution. called the uniformflux solution,
gives the appearance of a high, but not infinite, conductivity fracture, (This boundary condition implies that the
pressure along the fracture plane varies, ) Application of
these solutions to field data indicates that the uniformflux solution usually matches pressure behavior of wells
intersecting natural fractures better than does the
infiniteconductivity solution. On the other hand. the
infiniteconductivity solution often matches the behavior
of hydraulicallyy fractured, propped fractured wells better
than does the uniformflux solution.
( BRGM).
Orleans,
dxr) =
kh
(pfpld),
141,2qBp
. . . ...(1)
where
ID = 0.000264 kt
S#JpXxfz
(2)
. . . . .. . .. ...
France
Here, pU,D(rD,xp/xf) represents the dimensionless well
A number of recent studies have resulted in an increased understanding ofjlacturedwell
behavior, Two of these studies provide new information on applying loglog typecurve
matching procedures to pressure data obtained from fractured wells. Thk paper compares
the applicability of typecurve and conventional semilog me~hods.
JULY, 1975
887
TABLE 1VERTICAL FRACTURE(INFINITE CONDUCTIVITY) BUILDUP
EXAMPLE RESERVOIR, WEU, AND FLUID PROPERTY DATA
3,770
1,600
Initialreservoirpressure,P), psi
Drainagearea, A,acres
(Not fully developed,the wellis in the
center of the reservoir as is best known)
Wellbore radius, rut ft
Porosity, & fraction of bulk volume
Thickness, h, ft
System compressibility, c, Pst]
Viscosity, p, cp
Formation volume factor, B, RB/STB
Flow rate, q, STB/D
Producing time, t, hours
At(hours)
Pm, (psi)
(psi)
hh
3,420
3,431
3,435
3,438
3,444,5
3,449
3,452
3,463
3,471
3,477
3,482
3,486
3,490
3,495
3,498
3,500
3,506
3,528
3,544
3,555
3,563
3,570
3,582
3,590
3,600
3,610
3,620
1!
15
0.083;
0.167
0.25
;.5
29
32
43
51
::;5
;
3
4
:;
66
70
75
:
7
8
9
10
12
24
K
1::
124
135
143
::;
x
60
;2
120
144
192
240
0.28
0.12
82
21 X1O9
0.65
1.26
419
7,800
t+At
At
170
180
19U
200
9.36x
4.67x
3.12x
1.56x
1.04X
104
10
104
104
10
7.80x 103
3.90X lo~
2.60x 103
1.95 x 103
1.56x 10
1.30X 103
1.12X 103
9.76x 102
8.68x 102
7.81 X 102
6.51X102
3.26x 10
2.18x 102
1.64x 102
1.31 x 102
1.09X 102
8.23 X 10
6.60X 10
5.52x 10
4.16x 10
3.35X 10
&
Llf4EAFt
FLOW
PERIOOf x~xf .>1
I
I
101
1
END W
101
103
12
I
1C2
11
10
K?
De
Fig. Ipmo
l@r,
,..,
vs to for an infiniteconductivity
I
] I
vertical fract ure.
/
. z
MUCHPOINi
dxf ~
I [
2/
bore pressure dmp for a particular penetration ratio, x~/xf,
and ?Dis the dimensionless time. The distance from the
center of the well to the external boundary is Xe, and the
endtoend fracture length is 2xf, Eqs. 1 and 2 are expressed in engineering units. All other symbols have their
usual meaning.
Fig. 1 presents a loglog graph of the dimensionless
pressure drop, PIuL2,vs dimensionless time, fD, for the
system described above. The fracture solutions possess
an initial period controlled by linear flow to or from the
vertical fracture surface. During this period, pressure is a
function of the square root of time. On a loglog coordinate, this period is characterized by a straight line with a
slope of 0.5. Following the linear flow period, a pseudoradial flow period (slope = 1.15 I/log cycle on semilog
graph) exists only for fracture penetration ratios, xe/xf,
greater than 5. The pseudoradial flow period begins at
tD  3. Finally, all solutions reach pseudosteady state
because fluid is produced at a constant rate from a
closed system. Some of the advantages of identifying
the various flow regimes are discussed in the following
example.
The verticalfracture example considered in this paper
is a buildup test. As described in Ref. 3, a loglog typecurve graph of the pressure difference, PWS  pwf, vs
shutin time, At, should have the same character as a
logiog graph of PZODvs tLI. The typecurve match is
shown in Fig. 2, and the pefiinent reservoir and well data
are given in Table 1, As shown in Fig. 2, an excellent
match of the field &ta and the type curve was obtained
over the entire 240hour period not just the illdefined
data on a semilog straight line.
One obvious result without benefit of any calculation is
*hat no drainage limit was observed during the 240hour
test. A drainage limit would appear as points begin to rise
and follow some xe/xf line. The distance to the drainage
limit, Xe, maybe determined using the computed value of
xf. Virtually all fieldtest data have followed an infinite
reservoir curve, Xe/Xf = CO,for the proper fracture type.
As indicated in Figs. 1 and 2, data to the right of the
proper arrows should graph as straight lines on semilog
graphs. The Gringtien et al.1 criterion corresponds to
tD == 3. Another criterion, given by Wattenbarger and
Ramey,4 with to = 1, is also shown on Fig, 2. At
pment, it is sufficient to observe that the start of the
semilog straight line occurs at a tDbetween 1 and 3, or at a
At from 15 to 50 hours. The data to the right of the arrows
may be used in a conventional way. We now proceed
with a quantitative analysis of data before the semilog
straight line by typecurve matching. Following the procedure suggested in Ref. 3, permeability is obtained tlom
a pressure match (PD = 1.22, Ap = 100 psi) as follows:
TABLE 2SUMMARY OF BUILDUP RESULTS
lNFINITECONOUCTIVITY VERTtCAL FRACTURE
Semilog
Solution

,.2
Fig. 2Typecurve
8?38
11
10
matching ex&ple for a vertical fracture
(infinite conductivity).
102
Effect ive permeability, k, md
Dimensionless producing time
at shutin, to~
Halffracture length, x,, ft
Skin factor
Skin pressure drop, @.k2nf psi
Flow efficiency
Average pressure, ~, psi
LogLog
Solution
7.16
7.21
0.129
137
5.5
455
2.32
3,706
0.13
131
5.46
448
2.30
3,703
JOURNALOF PETROLEUM
TECHNOLOOY
p~ = 1.22
=
(k)(? ft)( 100 psi)
141.2(419 STB/i~)( 1.26 RB/STB)(0,65 cp)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)
That is,
k=7.21md.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
The halffracture length, Xf, may be calculated frcm the
time match (tD = 0.68, At = 10 hours) as follows:
tD = 0.68
(0.000264)(7.21 md)( IO hours)
=
..,.,
(5)
(O.12)(0.65 cp)(21 X 10 pS~)(Xf)2
That is,
x1=131 ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(6)
The skin effect,s, and effective wellbore radius, r~, can
be computed from the data given in Fig. 14, Ref. 1, For
large ratios of xe/xf, we have
r;. = ZL=ru, es.,.,..,.,.,,.,..
2
. . . . . . ...(7)
Substituting appropriate values gives
.s=5,46
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(8)
Data beyond 15 hours maybe used in the conventional
way. Fig. 3 is a semilog Homefl graph of the pressure
data shown in Fig. 2, The loglog graph indicated that the
semilog straight line should start in the time range of 15 to
50 hours. As shown in Fig. 3, a semilog straight line is
obtained for shutin times greater than 50 hours. Results
of both conventional and loglog analyses are given in
Table 2. Comparison of the results of the two methods
indicates reasonable agreement.
Several points regarding the above analysis deserve
emphasis. As shown in Fig, 3, data on the early portion of
the buildup curve fall on a straight line, with a slope
exactly onehalf the s!ope of the second straight line. It is
well known thzt doubling of the slope is also indicative of
a sealing fault. Thus, an erroneous conclusion might have
resulted if the loglog graph had not been used. Fig. 2
served an important purpose in that it indicated the start of
the correct semilog straight line. Furthermore, if the well
had not been shut in for more than 15 hours, it would have
been absolutely necessary to use the typecurve matching
procedure to avoid selecting an incorrect semilog straight
line. Although loglog typecurve matching can be used
when a test is not run long enough to find a semilog line,
the test should be run long enough that both loglog
typecurve and semilog analytical methods maybe used
to provide opportunities for checking results.
The UniformFlux Vertical Fracture in
A Closed Square
Application of the typecurve matching technique to
wells intersecting natural fractures is similar to that discussed above and will not be considered in detail here.
Fig. 4 of Ref. 1 should be used for matching purposes.
Ref. 7 presents a field example of a well intersecting a
natural fracture.
Though the shapes of the infiniteconductivity and
uniformflux solutions are similar, some of the differences are worth mentioning.
Comparing the two solutions indicates that the
JULY, 1975
pseudoradial flow period begins somewhat earlier (r~ =
2) for the uniformflux case. Furthermore, if x,/xf # 1,
the linear flow period for a uniformflux fracture exists
for a much longer period than the infiniteconductivity
case (r~ = 0.16 for the uniformflux case, t~ = 0.016 for
the infiniteconductivity case). Examination of the data
in Flg. 14 of Ref, 1 indicates that the effective wellbore
radius would be smaller for the uniformflux case, and
is equal to xf /e, where e = 2.71828. In conclusion, it
should be noted that distinction between the two cases
vanishes if x=lxf = 1.
Horizontally Fractured Well in an Infinite
Medium
The orientation of hydraulic fractures is dependent on the
stress distribution. The orientation oft he fracture plane
should be normal to the direct ion of the maximum principal stress. Since most producing formations are deep,
the maximum principal stress is proportional to the overburden load. Thus, vertical fractures are more common
than horizontal fractures. Even though horizontal fractures are uncommon, this discussion of the typecurve
matching procedure is presented for the sake of completeness and to demonstrate the interesting possibility
of determining vertical permeability from a single
opening into the weilbore.
It has been shown that the wellbore pressure behavior
of a vertically fractured well is essentially different from
that of an unfractured well: a Pu.D vs tD loglog graph
produces an initial halfslope straight line that corresponds to the initial horizontal linearjow period. This
has no counterpart in pure sadial flow, In the same way, it
has been shown in Ref. 2 that a horizontally fractured
well might exhibit early pressure behavior distinctly different from that of either a vertical fracture or pure radial
flow.
An analytical solution for a well with a single horizontal, unijormj?ux* fracture located at the center of the
%eneratfon
of an in fmitemnductlwty.
by methods described
frac%re case, detailed
horizontalfracture
analytic
m Ref. 1. In view of the hinted
results will not be given here.
soltmon
application
IS possible
of the horizontal
M = 95 PS1/CYCLE
START
OFST. LINEFROM
REF.1, to =3
START
OFST. LINEFROM
REF.4, to=l
\
/f! \
M=47.5 PS1/CYCLE
%<
~~
pwf34zo
33%
lhr
~1
I
10
Fig. 3Horner
ld
103
,,,,,
lIY
111
1$
HORt&R
Tlhf RATIO,{t +AU/At
graph for a vertical fracture (infinite conductivity).
889
fotmation with impermeable upper and lower boundaries
in an infinite reservoir was presented in Ref. 2. The
results obtained in Ref. 2 were used to prepare the curves
shown in Fig, 4, where the wellbore dimensionless pressure drop per unit reservoir dimensionless thickness is
plotted as a function of dimensionless time. The dimensionless reservoir thickness is the pammeter. For purposes of this discussion, the dimensionlesstir.le and
dimensionlessthickness
groups are defined, respectively, as follows:
0.000264 k, 2
tD=
(lo)
@crf2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , (11)
rf{kz/
In Eqs. 10 and 11, rf is the fmcture radius, k, is the
horizontal
permeability,
and k. is the vertical
permeabilityy.
Fig. 5 is a semilog graph of the same data presented in
Fig. 4 in terIIIS Of pu.D vs r~. Fig. 4 iS easy to use fOr
typecurve matching purposes because all curves have in
common an initial halfslope straight line corresponding
to earlytime vertical linearj70w (instead of horizontal
linear flow, as in the vertical fracture case). Also, a single
curve is obtained for hD > 100, which represents the case
of a singleplane horizontal fracture in a reservoir of
infinite extent in all directions. *
The curves corresponding to hD >3 in Fig. 5, and to hD
< 1 in Fig. 4, have shapes different from those of the
vertical fracture cases (see Fig. J and Fig. 4 of Ref. 1).
Thus, it may be possible to distinguish between the two
types of fractures in a well test. If 1 < hD <3, however,
there is a possibility that horizontal and vertical fracture
behavior will be confused. The line for a uniformflux
fracture in an infinite medium was found to match
reasonably well the horizontalfracture case of hD = 2.4
in Flg. 4. However, the dimensionless pressure scales are
basically different in nature and in magnitude, and it is
Large+mle
(11 x 17 in. t copies with a gnd suitable
obtained from the authors on rwfuest to R Raghavan.
Tulsa, Okla. 74102.
102L
for typecuwe
matchmg
may be
Amoco Production
Co., Box 591.
1 r
likely that results would appear questionable should the
wrong fracture type be selected.
The following expressions useful in welltest analysis
are summarized from Ref. 2, The initial vertical linear
flow period (halfslope on loglog coordinates) is represented by
p!@.2
hD
()Z!#,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12)
which may be rearranged to the dimensional form
W2
rilpi w)
141,2qB~
(0%:)2
(]3)
At long times, the flow is the same as that created by a
linesource well, plus a pseudo skin effect. A long time
approximateion for hD < 1 can be written as
Pi Pwf =
70.6qBp
krh
+1.80907+
*n 0.000264 krt
~pcrf
2k
6rf2 kZ )
.,, .,. .(14)
The proper time limits for the application of either Eq. 13
or Eq. 14 depend on hD.
To calculate kr, k,, and rf, three independent relations
are required. The first can be obtained by using any single
point of pressure difference and time from the halfslope
straight line on a loglog graph to compute the product
(k,1 rf) using Eq. 13, The products (wk~
rf) and
(kJrf) can be obtained from the pressure match and the
time match, Icspectively. However, these yield only two
independent relationships. Another relationship could be
found if it were possible to determine hD as a parameter
from the typecurve matching with Fig. 4, Conventional
semilog analysis may also be used; Eq, 14 indicates that a
semilog graph will produce a straight line whose slope
may be analyzed to obtain kr, This information is sufficient to obtain kr, kZ, and tffrom the typecurve matching
results. If hD was kwge, this might not be possible, A
pressure match would then yield only an average value
(~)
for the reservoir permeability. We now consider
an example calculation.
The example considered below is a computergenerated case for a single horizontal fracture located at the
Y
,0.
0.CU1264krf
~~crfz
Fig. &pwD
890
vs t~ for a horizontal fracture at center of interval
(uniform flux).
Fig. !%pmD vs t~ fora plane horizontal fracture (uniform flux) at
center of formation.
JOURNALOF PETROLEUM
TECHNOLOGY
center of the production interval in a reservoir of infinite radial extent. The only set of field data available for
a notchfractured well (presumably a horizontal fracture)
did not contain sufficient earlytime d~ta to permit a
certain anal ysis. This example is nevertheless interesting
because applying typecurve matching in this case leads
to determination of k,, kz, and the fracture radius, As the
horizontalfracture case is essentially similar to those of a
well with limited entry or partial penetration,2 the possi
bility of detecting vertical permeabilityy with a single well
test without special equipment appears particularly
interesting.
This example concerns a drawdown test. The reservoir, well, and drawdown &ta are given in Table 3. Fig.
6 presents the typecurve match for this case. As can be
seen, a reasonable match is found for h~ = 1.5. The
matchpoint parameters are indicated in Fig. 6. The results may be analyzed as follows. From the pressure
match (puD/hD = 0,185 and Ap = 100 psi),
~
TABLE 3HORIZONTAL FRACTURE(UNIFORM FLUX) DRAWDOWN
EXAMPLE RESERVOIR, WELL, ANO FLUIO PROPERTY DATA
Porosity, ~, fraction PV
Thickness, h, ft
System compressibility, c, psi
Viscosity, P, cp
Formation volume factor, B, RB/STB
Flow rate, q, STB/D
Drawdown Data
t (minutes)
10
15
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (16)
t~ = 0.36
0.000264 (k.)( 100/60 hours)
(17)
= (O.3)(0.23 cp)(30 X 10 psi)(rf)2
That is,
ti/rf
=0.041
(m:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (18)
Eqs. 16 and 18 provide two relationships for three unknowns. The third relation is provided by the parameter
h~ read from the match:
hD=l
f=
rf
L5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(l9)
240
285
480
720
460
480
560
630
::
40
45
50
60
From the time match (lD = 0.36 and& = 100 minutes),
we have
1;;
150
161
181
195
211
222
235
241
260
295
355
390
20
25
That is,
@rf=29.2mdft
3:
82
114
140
(15)
Cp)
P,  puj (psi)
=0.185=
VKj@j(rf)(
100 psi)
14 1.2(275 STB/1))( 1.76 RB/ST13)(0.23
0.3
12
30X 106
0,65
1.76
275
drawdown, buildup, and falloff tests in fractured wells.
The methods presented here have been used for 4 years.
The typecurve approach has been applied successfully to
many wells that intersect natural or hydraulic vertical
fractures. The data shown in Fig. 2 are typical of many
tests analyzed in the study. All data obtained from a few
minutes to more than 100 hours have matched the appropriate typecurve solution,
There are many instances, particularly in tight gas
wells, in which the linear flow period lasts for several
hundred hours. Under these conditions, neither the typecurve nor the conventional approach is uniquely applicable. However, the last point on the halfslope line maybe
used to estimate an upper limit of the permeabilitythickness product. Using this value of permeability, a
That is,
1~
rf
=o.125fr
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(2o)
kZ
From Eqs, 16 and 20, we obtain
kr=3.66md
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (21)
From Eqs. 18 and 21, the fracture radius is given by
rf=46,7
ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (22)
From Eqs. 16, 21, and 22, the vertical permeability is
kZ=O.ll
re
d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (23)
Although not illustrated here, semilog analysis can
lead to separate determination of kr. But if hD is large,
very long flowing or shutin times would be required to
reach the start of the proper straight Iine.2
hWTCH
t s 100 MIN,
lo~
I , t ,,1,,
102
102
103
I
to 0.36
AP DIW PSl,#D 0.123
h. . 1.5 pow
1
m, MIN~~2,~(
10 ,, ,81
101
,,,,
10
1C2
Discussion
The main purpose of this paper has been to present
example applications of the typecurve approach to
JULY, 1975
o B
Fig. 6TypecurI..
matchin example for a horizontal fracture
(um form flux).
891
corresponding fracture length may also be calculated.
The appropriate expressions to be used are
kh AP
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (24)
=pw~ <0.215,
141.2q13#
California and by Stanford U.
Nomenclature
B = formation voiume
~dctorj
RB/STB
c = total system isothermal
compressibilityy, psi
h = formation thickness, ft
hD = dimensionless reservoir thickness
and
0.000264 kt = tD <0.016,
@.K x,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (25)
where Ap and r are, respectively, the pressure change and
time corresponding to the last available point on the
halfslope line. Eqs. 24 and 25 are applicable forpenetration ratios x,/xf >>1. E@. 24 and 25 also maybe used if
data beyond the halfslope line are available but are not
sufficiently long to perform a typecurve match or to use
the semilog graph. If natural fractures are to be analyzed
in this fashion, then the righthand sides of E@. 24 and 25
should be replaced by 0.76 and O.16, respectively.
It should also be clear that a limiting statement can
be made concerning the drainage volume for a fractured
well that does not indicate a drainage boundary. The
verticalfracture example fcdlows the infinitesystem
curve. Inspection of Fig. 2 shows that the smallest value
that x,/xf may take is 10. Because x, is known, it is
possible to specify a lower limit forx,. For the example
problem, x, > (10)(131 ft) = 1,310 ft. Thus the drainage
area A must be at least 6,864,400 ft2 or= 158 acres.
Although the purposes of this paper have been accomplished, there ate cettain problems associated with fractured wells that shot.dd be mentioned. We have seen a
number of cases wherein the computed fmcture length
seems far too short. For example, for a large fracture job,
a fracture length of about 10 ft might be calculated. This
leads us to thiilk that other solutions will be necessary to
analyze fracture behavior completely. We suspect that in
some instances the hydraulicfracture conductivity may
be rather low. Sometimes after a fracture treatment, a
unitslope line (rather than a halfslope line) similar to the
storage and skint ype curves3*results. This behavior has
been common in naturally fractured formations that were
generally broken but not separated planar fractures. We
believe this to be a resttlt of propping open an existing
fracture zone rather than propping a single planar fracture
of the type normal] y visualized.
The typecurve solutions presented in Refs. 1,2, and 8
are useful and appear to represent a large portion of field
data. A combination of older semilog analytical methods
with the log log type curve permits a secondgeneration
welltest analysis with extraordinary confidence levels
concerning the results. It is almost always possible to
state that (.1) the subject well test behaves exactly as a
particular ideal analytical solution over the test time
range, or (2) the test is unlike any ideal solution
catalogue~ to date. Tests of Category 2 provide excellent
candidate problems for research on new welltest
methods.
Acknowledgments
We wish to acknowledge the financial assistance of the
Miller Institute for Basic Research in Science, U. of
California. We are also thankful to Texaco Inc. and
the Mobil Foundation for financial aid. Computer time
was contributed by the Computer Center of the U. of
892
(horizontal fracture) = h ~ 2
i)
k,k,,k. = effective formation perrnea;litie~, md
p = pressure
pWD= dimensionless wellbore pressure
pf = initial pressure, psi
pgf = pressure at time of shut in, psi
p = average reservoir pressure, psi
q = total withdrawal rate from
fracture, STB/D
r = distance to fracture axis, ft
rf = horizontal fracture radius, ft
rW= wellbore radius, ft
r = flowing time, hours
t~ = dimensionless time based on a
horizontal fracture radius, rf, or on a
vertical fracture halflength, Xf
x ,y,Z = space coordinates, ft
Xf= fracture length from center to tip,
ft (half the tiptotip length)
x~ ,y~ = dimensionless coordinates based
on vertical fracture halflength
Xe,Ye= rectangular reservoir dimensions, ft
xW,yW= fracture axis coordinates, ft
At = shutin time, hours
P = fluid viscosity, cp
~ = fo~oa~~eporosity, fraction bulk
References
1. Gringarfen,
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
A. C., Ramey, H, J., Jr,, and Raghavan, R.:
Unsteady.State Pressure Distributions Created by a Well With ?
Single InfiniteConductivity Vertical Fracture, Sot. Per. Eng. J.
(Aug. 1974) 347360; Trans.. AIME, 257.
Gringesten, A. C. and Ramey, H. J., Jr.: UnsteadyState Pressure
Disrnbutions Created by a Well With a Single Horizonral Fracture,
Partial Penetration, or Restricted Entry, Sot. Per. Eng, J. (Aug.
1974) 413426; Trans., AIME,2S7.
Ramey, H. J., Jr.: ShortTime Well Test Data Interpretation in the
Presence of Skin Effect and Wellbore Storage, J. Pet. Teds. (Jan.
1970) 97 104; Trans., AIME, 249.
Wattenbarger, R. A. and Ramey, H. J., Jr.: WellTest lnterpteration of Ve~icalIy Fractured Gas Wells, J. Pef. Teds. (May 1969)
625632; Trans., AIME, 251.
Russell. D. G. and Truitf, N. E.: Transjent Pressure Behavior in
Vertically Fractured Reservoirs, J. Per. Tech. (Get.1964)
11S9I l~O; Trans., AIME, 231.
Homer. D. R.: Pressure Builduo in Wells. Proc,, Third World
Pet. Cong., E. J. Brill, Leiden (1%1) II, 503.
Gringarfen, A. C., Ramcy, H. J., Jr., and Raghavan, R.: Pressure
Analysis for Fractured Wells. paper (preprint) SPE 405 I presented
at the SPE.AIME 47th Annual Fall Meeting, San Antonjo, Tex.,
Oct. 37, 1972.
AEarwal, R., AtHussainy, R., and Ramey, H. J., Jr.: An Inves.
ti~ation of Wellb&e Sto~ge and Skin E~fect in Unsteady Liquid
Flow: 1. Analytical Treatment, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (Sept. 1970)
27929Q Trans., AIME. 249.
ml!
Manuscript
tSPE
1975.
@Copyrighl
Engineers,
Inc.
Tha
5496)
maived
1975 American
paper will he included
m Society of Petroleum
Engineers
Insttute
of Mining,
Metallurgical,
in the 1975
Transactions
office May 13,
and Petroleum
volume.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY