J185180 DOI: 10.
2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1609
A Discrete, Arbitrarily Oriented 3D
Plane-Source Analytical Solution to
the Diffusivity Equation for Modeling
Reservoir Fluid Flow
Anqi Bao, Randy D. Hazlett, and D. Krishna Babu, The University of Tulsa, Potential Research Solutions
Summary
A highly accurate and efficiently computable analytical solution
to the diffusivity equation is presented for modeling fluid flow
into a 3D, arbitrarily oriented plane sink within a box-shaped, ani-
sotropic medium with Neumann boundary conditions. The plane
sink represents a gathering system for a well stimulated by means
of hydraulic fracturing. Our plane-source Neumann function
arises from analytic double integration of the point-source solu-
tion to the diffusivity equation along two vectors, forming a paral-
lelogram. A Neumann boundary condition is achieved by means
of the method of images, resulting in triple infinite summations
that are reduced with mathematical identities to a combination of
closed-form expressions and infinite sums with exponential damp-
ing. Our solution forecasts time-dependent behavior of fractured
wells, useful in interpreting field experiments for the characteriza-
tion of fracturing efficacy, reservoir size, and matrix fluid-trans-
port properties.
We demonstrate our model with two applications. One is pres-
sure-transient analysis with identified flow regimes from a pres-
sure vs. time plot. The other is pseudosteady-state (PSS) pressure
mapping, simulating inflow from multiple fractures along the
trajectory of a single horizontal well, which is achieved with
superposition theory and adjustment of flux strength of each
plane source to achieve a common pressure at each well/fracture
intersection.
Introduction
Fracturing has played a role in the oil-and-gas industry for more
than a century; however, the extent of fracturing along extended-
reach horizontal wells has attracted much attention regarding
unconventional-reservoir development. Numerous researchers
have developed fractured reservoir models, either analytically or
numerically. Discrete well models were posed for well testing and
reservoir diagnostics (Gringarten et al. 1974). Others are based on
the dual-porosity concept, which was introduced by Barenblatt
and Zheltov (1960) and widely used for modeling naturally frac-
tured formations composed of two types of media with different
permeability and porosity. One medium (fracture) has high con-
ductivity, and serves as a gathering system for fluid transport to a
well intersecting at least one such fracture; the other medium (ma-
trix) has lower conductivity, and can be viewed as a source feed-
ing fluid to the high-conductivity medium. The depiction of a
dual-porosity system as a matrix surrounded by fractures uni-
formly interspersed in the matrix has been termed “a sugar-cube
model.” Warren and Root (1963) developed an analytical solution
to the dual-porosity model. The advantage of this oversimplified
representation is that only one repeating element needs to be mod-
eled. This solution was improved further to include wellbore-stor-
age and skin effects (Mavor and Cinco-Ley 1979), transient flow
in the matrix (Kazemi 1969; Olarewaju and Lee 1989), and hori-
zontal-well orientation (De Carvalho and Rosa 1988; Du and
Copyright V
C 2017 Society of Petroleum Engineers
Original SPE manuscript received for review 29 June 2016. Revised manuscript received for
review 21 November 2016. Paper (SPE 185180) peer approved 7 November 2016.
October 2017 SPE Journal
ID: jaganm Time: 14:23 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010
Total Pages: 15
Stewart 1992). Later on, Biryukov and Kuchuk (2012) derived a
new solution on the basis of an analytical boundary-element
method for modeling reservoir systems with discrete fractures and
faults. However, those methods cannot specify the angle between
each fracture and the connecting point of crossed fractures. The
same authors presented a new semianalytical method for model-
ing a horizontal well intersecting multiple hydraulic fractures in a
naturally fractured reservoir (Biryukov and Kuchuk 2015). For
simplicity, the natural fractures are all vertical, but the intersect-
ing fractures can be specified by an angle with respect to the well.
To make the mathematics tractable, these authors replaced the cir-
cular wellbore with a square. On the basis of this result, Kuchuk
et al. (2015) and Kuchuk and Biryukov (2015) discussed pres-
sure-transient analysis and flow regimes. Other papers proposed
analytical solutions involving a horizontal well intercepted by a
series of fractures. Van Kruysdijk and Dullaert (1989) produced
their analytical fracture model on the basis of the integration of
Gringarten and Ramey’s (1973) source function in Laplace space.
Horne and Temeng (1995) incorporated further the Newman
product rule to realize a multiple-fractured system solution with
infinite-acting slab-source fractures along a major coordinate axis.
Larsen and Hegre (1994) summarized several previously devel-
oped solutions of vertical finite-conductivity transverse fractures,
and properly applied them to different flow regimes for fractures
system, although strictly 1D flow in fractures was assumed to sim-
plify the math. Raghavan et al. (1997) developed a mathematical
model with convolution to consider the production performance
of a horizontal well with both perforations and multiple strictly
transverse or longitudinal fractures. Al-Kobaisi et al. (2006)
implemented a novel method that combined a numerical fracture-
flow model and semianalytical reservoir flow model to evaluate
the system of vertical fractures intersected by a single horizontal
well in an infinite slab reservoir.
Many prior analytical models had strict wellbore and fracture
orientation or penetration limitations. Also, most of these works
used Laplace transforms, and numerically invert back to the real
domain predominantly by the Stehfest algorithm (Stehfest 1970).
Our newly developed fracture model accommodates arbitrarily
oriented wellbore and fractures, and is both computationally effi-
cient and highly accurate. The solution presented here is derived
with exact analytical integration in both time and space.
Detailed Development of Plane-Source Solution
In 2001, McCann et al. developed a fast-computing method to ap-
proximate Green and Neumann functions on rectangular domains
(McCann et al. 2001), that was extended to symmetric triangular
domains by Hazlett and Babu (2009), on the basis of the solution
given by Duff and Naylor (1966). In the petroleum industry,
point- and line-source solutions are widely used to evaluate pro-
duction- or injection-well performance. Recently, by making
appropriate assumptions on the geometry of the rectangular do-
main and integrating the point-source solution, Hazlett and Babu
(2014) obtained a simpler line-source solution or Neumann func-
tion. This arbitrarily oriented, partially penetrating, line-source
solution provides the foundation for our plane-source solution
presented herein.
1609
 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1610 Total Pages: 15

10 2 and
82 3 9
1.8
> p 2 l 2 kx t     >

Dimensionless Pressure (PiD – PwD)

>
> X1
plx plx0 7 > >
Dimensionless Pressure (PiD – PwD)

6 
>
> 4 1 þ 2 e a2 cos cos 5 >
>
1.6 >
> >
>
1 >
> a a >
>
>
>
l¼1 >
>
1.4 >
> 2 3 >
>
>
^tðD > 2 2 >
>
1.2
>
< X1 p m k y t     >
=
6 
2 pmy pmy 0 7
PDC ¼ 41 þ 2 e b cos cos 5 dt;
0.1 1 >
> b b >
>
0> > m¼1 >
>
>
> 2 3 >
>
0.8 >
> 2 2 >
>
>
> p n kz t     >
>
>
> 6 X1  pnz pnz 0 7 >
>
0.6 >
> 41 þ 2 e 2
h cos cos 5 >
>
0.01 >
> h h >
>
: n¼1 ;
0.4
Early time
Late time 0.2                    ð3Þ
0.001 0 where PDC and ^t D are point-source pressure and time in dimen-
1.E–08 1.E–07 1.E–06 1.E–05 1.E–04 1.E–03 1.E–02 1.E–01 1.E+00 1.E+01
sionless units, given as
Dimensionless Time (tD)
Pi  Pðx; y; z; :::; tÞ t
PDC ¼ ; ^t D ¼ ; . . . . . . . . . . ð4Þ
Fig. 1—Dimensionless pressure-transient analysis for both the qBl=ðabhÞ /l Ct
early- and late-time solutions to the diffusivity equation for a
line source centered along the diagonal of a cubic drainage with B representing the formation volume factor that relates vol-
system with 50% penetration in all directions and the Neumann umes at reservoir and standard conditions. We furthermore make
external boundary conditions on both log-log and semilog the connection with the more-common representation of dimen-
scales to show the extended range of radial flow. sionless time by introducing another scaling group involving a ra-
tio of two characteristic length scales,
tD ¼ ^t D  ðkx =a2 Þ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð5Þ
We start from the 3D point-source diffusivity equation (Eq. 1)
in Cartesian coordinates, with a point source at (x0,y0,z0), in which we choose the directional permeability and reservoir
expressed by product of Dirac delta functions. Transport of length taken to represent the dominant dimension. Deviation from
slightly compressible fluids through porous media can be studied traditional dimensional scaling for infinite systems is necessary to
with the two Fickian laws. The first Fickian law states that the accommodate bounded systems. The first solution form has advan-
flux is proportional to the spatial gradient of pressure. This is also tages in computation of the early-time solution, and converges
known as Darcy’s law, which is experimentally established in the more slowly as time increases because of the burden in estimating
petroleum industry. The second Fickian law is the law of continu- spatial singularity effects without the aid of exponential damping.
ity of fluid flow, which is conservation of mass or mass balance in The second solution has computational advantages in long-time
the petroleum industry. Combining these two Fickian laws results behavior after applying a number of trigonometric and series-sum-
in Eq. 1. The left-hand side represents the net flow rate into the mation identities, but loses this advantage when pressed to dupli-
system, the first term on the right-hand side represents the deple- cate near-initial conditions. Both solutions are rooted in the
tion of mass in the system, and the Dirac delta function represents method of images, which explains the presence of infinite summa-
the sink or source term in the system. We are primarily interested tions representing one well in real space and an infinite number of
in the Neumann boundary condition—to be more-specific, a finite, reflections required to mathematically “seal’’ the boundaries. One
sealed, anisotropic reservoir modeled as a rectangular parallelepi- skilled in the art will realize that solutions in the raw form of Eqs.
ped geometry of volume abh: 2 and 3 are challenging to evaluate efficiently. Great effort is taken
herein to reduce these triple infinite summations.
@2P @2P @2P @P Integration of the point-source solution in space results in a
kx 2
þ ky 2 þ kz 2 ¼ /lCt þ qldðx  x0 Þ line-source solution (Eq. 6), which, in the present application, can
@x @y @z @t
represent a well completed along this segment. Analytical integra-
 dðy  y0 Þ  dðz  z0 Þ: . . . . ð1Þ tion of the point source is facilitated by setting the point-source
location in parametric form in s:
Here, q represents flow rate, l is viscosity, / is porosity, Ct is ðL
total compressibility, and kx , ky , and kz are directionally depend- 1
PD ¼  PDC  ds; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð6Þ
ent permeabilities. Assuming a continuously emitting point source L
(flux is constant through time), Carslaw and Jaeger (1959) gave 0
two equally valid solutions to the 1D diffusivity equation.
Newman (1936) proved that the 3D solution to the diffusivity where L is the length of the line source. Fig. 1 demonstrates seam-
equation is a product of three 1D solutions. Carslaw and Jaeger less transfer of solutions from the early-time to late-time problem
(1959) outlined conditions for product rule used in solving multi- formulation for a partially penetrating diagonal line source and an
dimensional problems. Gringarten and Ramey (1973) made exten- observation point at a radius rw/a from the midpoint. The cross-
sive use of this product rule in solving pressure-transient over is typically around tD ¼ 104 on the basis of computational
problems in porous media. Thus, we can obtain two solutions to efficiency. In this work, we perform the development with the
the 3D diffusivity equations: late-time formulation on the basis of our ability to cover the entire
range of dimensionless time with a single model. The early-time
^tðD " # formulation begins to deviate at long-time because expressions
X 1 ð2la6x6x0 Þ2
abh dt  are asked to reproduce semisteady-state results without the benefit
PDC ¼ p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi  3=2  e 4k x t
of special techniques for spatial singularity handling that are
8 p3 kx ky kz t l¼0
0 available with the late-time formulation.
2 2
3 " # The work in this paper deals only with the flow and pressure
X1  ð2mb6y6y0 Þ X 1 ð2nh6z6z0 Þ2
 details of the fluid in the formation. External devices connected to
 4 e 4k y t 5  e 4kz t . . . . . ð2Þ
m¼0 n¼0
the formation such as wellbore and associated flow details (e.g.,
friction losses, pipe flow effects, detailed hydrodynamics, and

1610 October 2017 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 14:23 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1611 Total Pages: 15

(a) z (b)
z

(α ´, β ´, γ ´)

L
D C (x4, y4, z4) (x3, y3, z3)

H h γ0
(α, β, γ )
(x1, y1, z1)
A B α 0 (x2, y2, z2)

x x
b β0

y a y

Fig. 2—3D schematic plot of a plane source in a sealed cube. cos(a0,b0,c0) 5 (a,b,c), which are the directional cosines of AB and CD.
Similarly, c is a directional cosine of AD and BC.

transport of the produced fluids) are not addressed in this work.
Hence, the unit-slope characteristics associated with wellbore-
storage effects are not present here.
The complete line-source solution and its reduction to a com-
putable form were given by Hazlett and Babu (2014). The reader
is directed to that original work for mathematical detail, but certain
aspects have been introduced in Appendix A for reference. Note
that, as introduced by Muskat (1937), a line source can also be sub-
divided into an ensemble of uniform flux segments by use of
superposition with which the individual segment fluxes can be
manipulated to yield equal pressure at selected control points (e.g.,
segment midpoints). This gives an approximate uniform pressure
inner-boundary condition, often termed “an infinite conductivity
assumption”. Hazlett and Babu (2014) not only reproduced the
foundational uniform flux solutions of Gringarten et al. (1974), but
they also applied the segmented uniform-pressure inner-boundary
condition to the temporal productivity analysis of complex fracture
systems interpreted from microseismic. They furthermore give
computational times, demonstrating the rapid nature of evaluations
in the reduction of infinite-series summations.
In this work, we take one additional step by performing a sec-
ond integration in space to obtain an arbitrarily oriented plane-
source solution that can represent a generalized fracture model. We
note that the logarithmic singularity that exists in the line-source
solution is effectively smoothed out with the second integration.
With the previous equations, we proceed with a second
integration in space for Eq. 6 to form a parallelogram-shaped
plane-source solution with which we choose to separate the time-
independent or PSS component, PD;PSS , and the time-dependent
contribution, PD;trans :
ðH ðL ðH
1 0 1
PD;plane ¼  PDC  dsds ¼ PD ds0
LH H
0 0 0 ðH
ðH
1 H
¼ ðPD;PSS þ PD;trans Þds0 : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð7Þ
H
0 ðH
Fig. 2 illustrates the geometry: The plane source is bounded by
four sides ðx2  x1 ; y2  y1 ; z2  z1 Þ, ðx4  x1 ; y4  y1 ; z4  z1 Þ,
show the final result at the end. First, the line source is made to
slide parallel to itself in the ða0 ; b0 ; c0 Þ direction, thus generating a
plane-parallelogram fracture. The corners of the parallelogram are
given by ðx1 ; y1 ; z1 Þ, ðx2 ; y2 ; z2 Þ, ðx3 ; y3 ; z3 Þ, and ðx4 ; y4 ; z4 Þ. Notic-
ing that the original line-source endpoints, ðx1 ; y1 ; z1 Þ and
ðx2 ; y2 ; z2 Þ, actually become functions of the new integration vari-
able, s0 , now represented as (x1 þ a0 s0 , y1 þ b0 s0 , z1 þ c0 s0 ) and
ðx2 þ a0 s0 ; y2 þ b0 s0 ; z2 þ c0 s0 Þ, we can actually begin with the
Hazlett and Babu (2014) simplified line-source solution. The
mathematical identities given in Eq. 8 will once again allow
exact, analytic integration:
ð
eat ½acosðbtÞ þ bsinðbtÞ
eat  cosðbtÞdt ¼ ;
ð a2 þ b2 : . . . . . . . . . ð8Þ
at
e ½asinðbtÞ  bcosðbtÞ
eat  sinðbtÞdt ¼
a2 þ b2
Integration of absolute value and Heaviside function terms
requires attention to the various changes of sign possible with dif-
ferent ranges in x.
We note that Al-Rbeawi and Djebbar (2012) studied fractures
as a function of tilt angle for unbounded reservoirs, and found lit-
tle impact. Their model, however, lacks the physical input needed
for generalization of their results to bounded systems, because tilt
angle is defined with respect to such boundaries, and is affected
by interaction of the pressure pulse with such boundaries.
Integration of PSS Term. Following the solution structure of
the line source, our primary concern is the integration of I1 , I2 , I3
and I4 , where the indices, 1–4, are associated with the four princi-
pal modes of reflection in the method of images. The integrations
are separated because of different levels of complexity in integra-
tion arising from the terms containing absolute value:
1
PD;PSS;plane ¼ PD;PSS ds0
0
1
¼ tD þ ½ðIXYZ þ IYZ Þ þ ðIXZ þ IZ Þ þ ðIXY þ IY Þ þ IX ds0
H
0

ðx3  x4 ; y3  y4 ; z3  z4 Þ, and ðx3  x2 ; y3  y2 ; z3  z2 Þ, with re-
spective magnitudes L and H. Let the direction cosines of one vector
be (a,b, c), so that (La, Lb, Lc) ¼ [(x2  x1),(y2  y1),(z2  z1)]. Let
the direction cosines of the second vector be (a0 , b0 , c0 ), so that (Ha0 ,
Hb0 , Hc0 ) ¼ [(x4  x1),(y4  y1),(z4  z1)]. Points on this plane source
ðx0 ; y0 ; z0 Þ are represented parametrically, ðx0 ; y0 ; z0 Þ ¼ ½ðx1 þ asþ
a0 s0 Þ; ðy1 þ bs þ b0 s0 Þ; ðz1 þ cs þ c0 s0 Þ, 0  s  L, 0  s0  H.
The detailed process of integration is a bit long, but direct;
thus, we will give a brief description of essential techniques and
¼ tD þ ½ðIXYZ þ IYZ Þplane þ ðIXZ þ IZ Þplane
þ ðIXY þ IY Þplane þ ðIX Þplane ;                 ð9Þ
where the PD;PSS term is subdivided into actual triple, double, and
single infinite series contributions with surviving variables given by
the subscripts (i.e., XYZ, YZ, XZ, XY, X, Y, and Z) (see Appendix A).
A physical interpretation of this subdivision is the consideration of a
3D correction on the projections of the source onto the various 2D
planes and then again onto each of the principal axes:

October 2017 SPE Journal 1611

ID: jaganm Time: 14:23 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1612 Total Pages: 15

ðIXYZ þ IYZ Þplane where sign takes on the value 61 depending upon the sign of the
argument, and
 ðH X
1 pmy pnz
a
 cos cos ðI1 þ I2 þ I3 þ I4 Þds0 : s0 ¼H
ð
p2 LHkx b h
0
m;n¼1 Iheavi ¼ Hðx  x01 Þ  Hðx02  xÞ
                   ð10Þ s0 ¼0
8   9
>
> m 0 b >
Integration of I1 and I2 are shown in Eq. A-6 and Eq. A-7 in < y1 þ ð x  x10 Þ > =
Appendix A by use of Eq. 8.  2acosp b a ds0
> h
n 0 c i >
ðH >
: 6 z 1 þ ð x  x1 0 Þ ; >
1 h a
I1 ds0 ¼ 8 2
 3
p  DEN  DEN 0 >
> 0 x  x1 
0 >
> 6sinp Y1 Z1 þ bmn 7
0 1 >
> a0
epðx2 þxÞnk fAsinp½ðY2 Z2 Þ  Bcosp½ðY2 Z2 Þg >
> 2a64  
7
5
>
> x  x
B epðx3 þxÞnk fAsinp½ðY Z Þ  Bcosp½ðY Z Þg C >
>  sinp Y1 Z1 þ bmn
1
B 3 3 3 3 C >
> a
 B pðx þxÞn C >
>      x1  x  x4
@ e k fAsinp½ðY Z Þ  Bcosp½ðY Z Þg A >
>
1
1 1 1 1 > p m b0  b a0 6 n c0  c a0
>
>
> b a h a
þepðx4 þxÞnk fAsinp½ðY4 Z4 Þ  Bcosp½ðY4 Z4 Þg >
>
> 2
> 3
>
>  x  x4 
                   ð11Þ >
>
ðH >
> 6 sinp Y Z
4 4 þ b mn 7
0 1 >
> 2a6 a 7
I2 ds ¼ >
> 4  5
p  DEN  DEN 0 >
> x  x 1
0
<  sinp Y1 Z1 þ bmn
0 1 ¼    a  x 4  x  x2
epðx3 þx2aÞnk fAsinp½ðY3 Z3 Þ þ Bcosp½ðY3 Z3 Þg > m b n  c 0
>
> p b 0
 a 0
6 c 0
 a
B epðx2 þx2aÞnk fAsinp½ðY Z Þ þ Bcosp½ðY Z Þg C >
> b a h a
B 2 2 2 2 C >
>
 B pðx þx2aÞn C; >
> 2  x  x4  3
@ e 4 k fAsinp½ðY Z Þ þ Bcosp½ðY Z Þg A >
>
4 4 4 4 >
> 6sinp Y4 Z4 þ bmn a
>
> 0 17
þepðx1 þx2aÞnk fAsinp½ðY1 Z1 Þ þ Bcosp½ðY1 Z1 Þg >
> 6 7
>
> 6 0 x  x2 7
> 6 Y Z þ b
> a A7
B 1 1 C
                   ð12Þ 2a
> 6 sinp@
>
mn 0
7
>
> 6 x 2  x 1 7
where, for easier calculation, we introduce short-hand notations >
> 4 þ b 5
>
> mn
a
(for m, n ¼ 1, 2, 3, …), >
>
>
>
aa0 n2k  b0mn bmn >
>     x2  x  x3 :
A ¼ a0 bmn þ ab0mn ; B ¼ ;
>
>
> m 0 b 0 n  0 c 0
nk : p b  a 6 c  a
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi b a h a
k y m2 k z n 2                    ð18Þ
nk ¼ þ ;
kx b2 kx h2                       ð13Þ
Integration of the I4 term has analogous structure:
b0 m c0 n bm cn
b0mn ¼ 6 ; bmn ¼ 6 ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð14Þ ðH
b h b h 1
my nz1  my nz2  I4 ds0 ¼
1 2
Y1 Z1 ¼ 6 ; Y2 Z2 ¼ 6 ; p  DEN  DEN 0
myb h
nz3  b
my4 nz4
h 0
8 2 3 9
3
Y3 Z3 ¼ 6 ; Y4 Z4 ¼ 6 ;        ð15Þ >
> e2pank  Hðx  x1 ÞHðx4  xÞ >
>
b h b h >
> 4  5 >
>
>
>  2A x  x >
>
>
>  sinp Y Z þ b 0 1 >
>
as well as common denominators DEN and DEN0 , >
> 1 1 mn
a 0 >
>
>
> " #>>
>
> >
DEN ¼ a2 n2k þ b2mn and DEN 0 ¼ a0 n2k þ b02
2
mn : . . . . . . . ð16Þ
>
>  signðx  x1 ÞA  sinpðY1 Z1 Þ > >
>
>
>  e pð2ajxx1 jÞnk
 >
>
>
> >
>
The second integration for I3 is a bit more involved. For >
> þ B  cospðY Z
1 1 Þ >
>
>
> " # >
>
detailed derivation, please refer to Appendix B. Here we present >
> >
>
>
>  signðx  x 4 ÞA  sinpðY4 Z4 Þ >
>
the final form of I3 integration: >
> þ e pð2ajxx4 jÞnk
 >
>
>
< þ BcospðY4 Z4 Þ >
=
ðH  2 3 :
1 >
> e 2pan k  Hðx  x ÞHðx  xÞ >
>
I3 ds0 ¼ >
>  2A4 2 3 >
>
p  DEN  DEN 0 >
>  5 >
>
>
> 0 x  x2 >
>
0 >
>  sinp Y 2 Z2 þ b mn >
>
8  x  x1  9 >
> a 0 >
>
> " #>>
>
>
>  2A  Hðx  x1 ÞHðx4  xÞ  sinp Y1 Z1 þ b0mn >
> >
>  signðx  x2 ÞA  sinpðY2 Z2 Þ > >
> 0 > > >
>
>
>   a >
>
>
>
>
>  e pð2ajxx2 jÞnk
 >
>
>
>
>  signðx  x 1 ÞA  sinp ðY 1 Z1 Þ >
> >
> þ B  cospðY Z Þ >
>
>
> e pjxx1 jnk
 >
> >
>
2 2 >
>
>
> þ B  cosp ðY Z Þ >
> >
> " # >
>
>
> 1 1 >
> >
>  signðx  x ÞA  sinpðY Z Þ >
>
>
>   >
> >
>þe pð2ajxx jÞn 3 3 3 >
>
>
>  signðx  x 4 ÞA  sinp ðY Z
4 4 Þ >
> >
:
3 k 
>
;
>
> þ e pjxx4 jnk
 >
> þ BcospðY3 Z3 Þ
< þ BcospðY4 Z4 Þ =
  x  x                     ð19Þ
>
> 0 2 >
>
>  2A  Hðx  x2 ÞHðx3  xÞ  sinp Y2 Z2 þ bmn a0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   >
> While the I4 term contains Heaviside terms, it is routinely
>
>  signðx  x ÞA  sinp ðY Z Þ >
>
>
>  e pjxx2 jnk

2 2 2 >
> quite-small in magnitude, and computes more readily because of
>
> >
>
>
> þ B  cosp ðY 2 2Z Þ >
> the exponential spatial damping factor, e2pank .
>
>   >
>
>
>  signðx  x ÞA  sinp ðY Z Þ >
> Integration of 2D terms in Eq. 9 can be obtained as special
>
:þe pjxx jn

3 3 3 >
;
3 k
cases of prior derivation. For example, taking n ¼ 0 to eliminate z
þ BcospðY3 Z3 Þ
series, we get ðIXY þ IY Þplane . This means that with Eq. 10 and
Iheavi n ¼ 0, we can get equation for the 2D term, ðIXY þ IY Þplane ; with
þ ;
DEN                              ð17Þ m ¼ 0, we can get equation for the 2D term, ðIXZ þ IZ Þplane .

1612 October 2017 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 14:23 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1613 Total Pages: 15

10.00

Dimensionless-Pressure Derivative
12
Z PD of analytical solution
PD of numerical simulator

Dimensionless Pressure
10
PD' of analytical solution
1.00
8 PD' of numerical simulator

6 0.10

4
Well 0.01
2

Y 0 0.00
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Dimensionless Time
X
Fig. 4—Data comparison in terms of dimensionless pressure
Fig. 3—Schematic plot of the validation case. PD vs. dimensionless time tD in semilog scale and dimension-
dPD
less-pressure derivative vs. dimensionless time tD in log-
dlntD
Integration of the 1D single-series solution is as follows: log scale.

IX; plane with

8 9
>
>     >
> Dx ¼ x2  x1 ; Dy ¼ y2  y1 ; Dz ¼ z2  z1 ;
>
> plðx4 6xÞ plðx2 6xÞ >
>
<cos þ cos = Dx0 ¼ x4  x1 ; Dy0 ¼ y4  y1 ; Dz0 ¼ z4  z1 ;
a a
>
>    > xm ¼ ðx3 þ x1 Þ=2; y0m ¼ ðy3 þ y1 Þ=2; and z0m ¼ ðz3 þ z1 Þ=2:
0
>
>
: plðx3 6xÞ plðx1 6xÞ >
>
>
;
  X
1  cos  cos                    ð24Þ
a4 a a
¼
p4 aHLkx l¼1 l4 The solutions presented here involve the introduction of mathe-
8 9 matical identities and highly accurate approximations to damped
>
>     > >
>
>F ðx 4 6xÞ ðx 2 6xÞ >
> infinite sums and, in fact, can be computed to error specification.
< 4 þ F4 =
a a
>
>    > Validation of the Analytical Solution
>
>
: ðx3 6xÞ ðx1 6xÞ > >
>
;
  X
1  F 4  F 4 We validate our analytical solution with a discrete-fracture nu-
a4 a a
¼ ; merical simulator developed at the University of Tulsa (Jiang and
p4 aHLkx l¼1 l4 Younis 2015). The simulator explicitly evaluates each of the frac-
                   ð20Þ tures in the system by generating an unstructured grid around the
fracture. To maintain the same level of accuracy in such a
where scheme, larger dimensions or complex fracture systems take addi-
  
tional time to generate the mesh and to calculate results. The com-
X
1
cosðnpzÞ p4 1 z2 jzj parison is based on a simple case of a cubic reservoir with
F4 ðzÞ ¼ ¼  1  jzj 1  ;
l¼1
l4 6 15 2 4 dimensionless permeability kx ¼ ky ¼ kz ¼ 1 and dimensionless
length a ¼ b ¼ h ¼ 1. A single vertical fracture with uniform flux
0  jzj  2:                      ð21Þ is in the center of the reservoir with 30% penetration in z-direction
and 60% penetration in x-direction. For this simple case, the mi-
Integration of Transient Flow Term. The form of the integrated metic finite-difference method with 0.01 day-time steps and a tet-
solutions follows line-source development with the emphasis on rahedral mesh number of 48340 takes 90 minutes to simulate 15
compactness and reliance on exponential time damping for reduc- days of performance, whereas our solution takes only 21 seconds
tion in computational burden: to generate six-orders-of-magnitude behavior in dimensionless
1 X 1 time. The structure of the system is shown in Fig. 3.
PD;trans;plane ¼ After recasting the numerical result in terms of dimensionless
p3 l;m;n6¼0 pressure and dimensionless time, we obtained the following plot
  
plx pmy pnz including a semilog plot of dimensionless pressure vs. dimension-
Clmn expðp2 D2lmn ^t D Þ  cos cos cos less time and a log-log plot of dimensionless-pressure derivative
a b h
  2   k0 ; vs. dimensionless time. This shows that the two results from dif-
kx l k y m2 k z n 2 ferent methods yield a good match in the real challenge, the tran-
þ 2 þ 2
a2 b h sition from linear flow (Slope [1/2]) to PSS (Slope 1), and
                   ð22Þ confirms the accuracy of our solution with significant computa-
tional advantage (Fig. 4).
0
where k represents the sum of four different terms over 6 signs, We demonstrate further the validity of our solution with a gen-
eral, partially penetrating parallelogram example. We compare
k0 ¼ this result with the approximation of the plane source using 20
     0 
p lDx mDy nDz p lDx mDy0 nDz0 line sources spanning the plane and the arbitrary line-source solu-
sin 6 6 sin 6 6 tion of Hazlett and Babu (2014). Fig. 5 gives the pressure and
2 a b h 2 a b h
  0 0 0
  pressure-derivative behavior for the plane-source solution,
lx my nz whereas Fig. 6 shows a direct comparison of the pressure behav-
X
4  cos p m 6 m 6 m
a b h ior in comparable slices through the data for tD ¼ 1. Because we
  0 0
 ;
6
lDx mDy nDz lDx mDy nDz0 have a fast analytic solution for the pressure everywhere, such
6 6 6 6 dense-pressure mapping is readily available. The pressure at
a b h a b h
8,000 observation points was performed in 152 seconds for an av-
                   ð23Þ erage of 0.019 seconds per evaluation.

October 2017 SPE Journal 1613

ID: jaganm Time: 14:23 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1614 Total Pages: 15

10 1000 that is coupled through a shared horizontal well-drainage system.

Dimensionless Pressure

Dimensionless-Pressure
We exercise superposition to handle composite solutions to a lin-
1 100 ear system. Both fractures are square and have width, a/2, equiva-
Pseudosteady-
0.1 10
lent to half the reservoir length in the x-direction. Because

Derivative
state flow
symmetry is not guaranteed in fracturing operations, we allow the
0.01 Transient flow 1 first fracture to be skewed toward the x ¼ 0 boundary, starting
from x ¼ 0:1a, while the second fracture remains centered. In the
0.001 0.1
z-direction, both are 30% penetrating and centralized. The 3D ren-
0.0001 0.01 dering is shown in Fig. 9a.
We introduce coupling by insisting that the fractures share the
0.00001 0.001 same value of pressure where transected by the horizontal well.
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 As uniform flux fractures, pressure varies across each fracture
Dimensionless Time face, but we will force equal pressure at the motherbore through
the adjustment of the magnitude of flux. While pressure is propor-
Fig. 5—Dimensionless pressure, PD, vs. dimensionless time, tD, tional to flux, the pressure at every point in the system is influ-
dPD
in log-log scale and dimensionless-pressure derivative vs. enced by the presence of both fractures, including our control
dlntD
dimensionless time tD in log-log scale for the parallelogram
points. Our application of superposition allows us to evaluate the
plane source defined by the points: (x1, y1, z1) 5 (0.2a, 0.1b, 0.3h), influence of unit-flux sources on the pressure with the addition of
(x2, y2, z2) 5 (0.6a, 0.5b, 0.7h), and (x3, y3, z3) 5 (0.8a, 0.8b, 0.9h). actual flux as a multiplier. For example, we can write an expres-
sion for pressure at one control-point location ðx1 ; y1 ; z1 Þ in terms
of our two unit-strength Neumann functions, N1 and N2 , as
Application q2
Here, we present two applications for fractured reservoir systems P1 ¼ N11 ðx1 ; y1 ; z1 ; t; F1 Þ þ  N21 ðx1 ; y1 ; z1 ; t; F2 Þ;
q1
to illustrate the usefulness of our model.
                   ð25Þ
Pressure-Transient Analysis. We retain solutions in the form of
dimensionless variables to maintain the generality of the results, where we represent F1 and F2 as the plane sources. Here, the
knowing that any dimensionless solution can be transformed to Neumann function, N, as we know earlier, is the solution of our
correspond to a dimensioned one for comparison with real cases. previously derived 3D single plane-source solution in a sealed
What must be preserved is the scaled geometrical relationship box-shaped reservoir, which is PD;plane with flux (q) equal to unity.
between the reservoir and discrete features within the reservoir. In Thus, N11 would represent the influence of unit-strength Fracture
the initial case study, we have a cubic cell with a single, parallelo- 1 (F1 ) on the pressure at observation point ðx1 ; y1 ; z1 Þ, and N21
gram-shaped, vertical fracture in the middle of the cell. This could would represent the influence of unit-strength Fracture 2 (F2 ) on
either represent a partially penetrating fracture emanating from a the pressure at the same point. All the unit-strength Neumann
horizontal well or a stimulated vertical well. Because the point- functions (N) are functions of both space and time.
source strength was held constant throughout spatial integration, Similarly, for the other point of intersection on Fracture 2,
this represents a uniform flux fracture. Fig. 7 shows the central
x–z-planar slice containing the fracture and the orthogonal central q2
P2 ¼ N12 ðx2 ; y2 ; z2 ; t; F1 Þ þ  N22 ðx2 ; y2 ; z2 ; t; F2 Þ:
y–z-slice depicting the dimensionless pressure as a function of q1
dimensionless time. The pressure evolution illustrates the spread-                    ð26Þ
ing-pressure pulse toward the edge of the reservoir until it finally
touches the boundary. Note that, for this case, the boundaries at q2
By setting P1 ¼ P2 , we could immediately get ¼
x ¼ 0 and x ¼ 1 are the last to impose their influence on the pres- N12  N11 q1
sure behavior of the fracture. The flow regime changes corre- .
spondingly from early linear flow (early transient) to an N21  N22
Finally, with superposition theory, the solution for pressure for
intermediate state (late-transient) to PSS. In field data, the flow
this two-fracture system, with properly determined q2 =q1 , for any
regimes, especially for the intermediate state, can be quite-com-
observation point ðx; y; zÞ, is
plicated to identify because of different possible fracture geome-
try and fractured formation properties (Kuchuk and Biryukov q2
2013). However, with planar-fracture geometry, linear flow is Pðx; y; z; tÞ ¼ N1 ðx; y; z; t; F1 Þ þ  N2 ðx; y; z; t; F2 Þ:
readily detected during early transient time (Du and Stewart 1992; q1
Kuchuk and Biryukoy 2013; Xie et al. 2015), characterized by a                    ð27Þ
0.5 slope in the pressure-time derivative plot. For appropriate
boundary condition (Du and Stewart 1992) and fracture geometri- 70:6Blq1
A factor of can be supplied to transfer the solution
cal characterization (Kuchuk and Biryukoy 2013), pseudoradial abh
flow is possible during the intermediate state. In Fig. 8, the verti- for dimensionless pressure to carry actual dimensions (psi).
cal square-shaped fracture with 60% penetration in both x- and The pressure mapping for this example is shown in Figs. 9b and
z-directions exhibits a flow-regime change with a change in slope, 9c. As seen in Fig. 9b, the first fracture must produce more to keep
although an extended period of constant slope is not present in the pressure identical at the two well/fracture intersection points.
the intermediate state. Some would identify the flat slope in the Following the same procedure, for an n-fracture system, we have
L/a ¼ 0.6 case as an indication of a radial flow regime, but it is
2 3
rather a continuous transition period with multiple flow-regime 2 3 1 2 3
contributions. A –0.5 slope can be seen in the case L/a ¼ 0.01, N11 N21    Nn1 6 q2 7 P1
indicating a major contribution from spherical flow considering 6 7
6 N12 N22    Nn2 76 q1 7 6 P2 7
6 76 7 6 7
the small size of the plane source. 6 .. .. .. .. 76 . 7 ¼ 6 .. 7: . . . . . . . . . ð28Þ
4 . . . . 56 .. 7 4 . 5
4 qn 5
N1n N2n    Nnn Pn
Pressure Mapping for Multistage Fracture (Multiple Plane q1
Sources). In this demonstration, the reservoir-drainage volume is
an isotropic cube, as in the first example, but we choose to illus- With the condition that P1 ¼ P2 ¼    Pn , we obtain the matrix
trate the case of production from multiple fractures with behavior equation

1614 October 2017 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 14:23 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1615 Total Pages: 15

0.6 0.6

1 0.5 1 0.5
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8 0.4
0.4 0.7
0.7
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.3 0.5 0.3

Z
Z
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3 0.2
0.2
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0.1 0 0.1
0
1 1
0.8 2 0.8 2 0
0.6 1.5 0 0.6 1.5
0.4 1 0.4 1
Y 0.2 0.5 Y 0.2 0.5 –0.1
0 –0.1 0 X
0 –0.5 X 0 –0.5

0.6 0.6

1 0.5 1 0.5
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8
0.7 0.4 0.4
0.7
0.6 0.6
0.5 0.3 0.5 0.3
Z

Z
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0.1 0 0.1
1.5 1.5
1 1 1 1 0
0.5 0.8 0 0.5 0.8
0 0.6 0 0.6
Y –0.5 0.4 Y –0.5 0.4
0.2 X –0.1 0.2 X –0.1
–1 0 –1 0

0.6
0.6

2 0.5
2 0.5
1.5 0.4
1.5
0.4
1
1 0.3
0.3
Z

0.5 0.5
0.2
0.2 0
0
0.1
–0.5 0.1 –0.5
1 1
0.8 1 0.8 1 0
0.6 0.8 0 0.6 0.8
0.4 0.6 0.4 0.6
Y 0.4 Y 0.4
0.2 0.2 X –0.1 0.2 0.2 X –0.1
0 0 0 0

(a) (b)

Fig. 6—Comparison of pressure distribution at tD 5 1 for a central slice: (a) for the parallelogram plane source defined by the points
(x1, y1, z1) 5 (0.2a, 0.1b, 0.3h), (x2, y2, z2) 5 (0.6a, 0.5b, 0.7h), and (x3, y3, z3) 5 (0.8a, 0.8b, 0.9h) and (b) for superposition of 20 line
sources spanning the same plane.

2q 3
2 which we must solve to get the unknown constants
 
2 36 q1 7 q2 q3 qn T
N21  N22 N31  N32    Nn1  Nn2 6 7
6 q3 7  :
6 N21  N23 q1 q1 q1
6 N31  N33    Nn1  Nn3 76 7
76 q1 7
6 .. .. .. 76 7 The final solution for an n-fracture system is obtained by
4 . . . ... 56 . 7
6 .. 7 q2 qn
N21  N2n N31  N3n    Nn1  Nnn 6 7
4 qn 5 P ¼ N1 ðx; y; z; t; F1 Þ þ  N2 ðx; y; z; t; F2 Þ þ    þ
q1 q1
q1
2 3  Nn ðx; y; z; t; Fn Þ: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð30Þ
N12  N11
6 N13  N11 7 If the fractures intersected instead, the solution procedure
6 7
¼6 .. 7; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ð29Þ would be no different although the fractures share a line of com-
4 . 5
mon pressure. However, it should be noted that we are asking that
N1n  N11 pressures at selected points be an equal but unspecified value as

October 2017 SPE Journal 1615

ID: jaganm Time: 14:23 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1616 Total Pages: 15

tD = 0.001

1 1 0.02

0.8 0.8
0.015
0.6 0.6
Z

Z
0.4 0.4
0.01
0.2 0.2

0 0
1 0.005
1
1 1
0.5 0.5
0.5 0.5 0

Y 0 0 Y 0 0
X X
(a) (b)

tD = 0.005

1 0.25
1

0.8 0.8 0.2

0.6 0.6
0.15

Z
Z

0.4 0.4
0.1
0.2 0.2
0.05
0 0
1 1 1 1
0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
0
0 0 0 0
Y X Y X

(c) (d)

tD = 0.1
0.7

1 0.6
1 0.8
0.8 0.5
0.6
z

0.6
0.4 0.4
z

0.4
0.2
0.2 0.3
0
0 1
1 1
1 0.2
0.5 0.5 0.5
0.5
0 0 y 0 0 x
y x
(e) (f)

Fig. 7—Dimensionless-pressure mapping for various time for a centralized parallelogram-shaped fracture. All left-side figures [(a),
(c), (e)] are X–Z slice in the middle Y-plane, whereas all the right-side figures [(b), (d), (f)] are Y–Z slice in the middle X-plane. (a–b),
(c–d), (e–f) are for tD 5 0.001, 0.005, and 0.1, respectively.

we adjust the flux, because one cannot specify both pressure and
flux on a known stationary boundary. Still, as noted previously,
the uniform-flux solution serves as the basis for developing other
inner-boundary condition results. By segmenting the fracture into
uniform-flux patches, the flux on each patch can be adjusted to
match pressure at selected points along the line of intersection.
Thus, a segmented uniform-flux problem can yield a uniform-
pressure problem. The relationship between the uniform flux and
uniform pressure inner-boundary condition is even more-succinct.
Early work in 2D with centered-line sources representing fully
penetrating vertical fractures showed that a specially selected ob-
servation point on a uniform-flux fracture corresponded to the
equivalent pressure as determined in the uniform-pressure case.
This particular location, however, is only valid for symmetric
problems. Uniform-flux, uniform-pressure, averaged-pressure,
and equivalent-pressure solutions for horizontal wells and fully
penetrating fractures were compared by several authors (Chen
et al. 2005; Hagoort 2009).
Fig. 10 illustrates our findings in every case tested that the av-
erage pressure on the planar source in the uniform-flux inner-
boundary-condition case corresponds to the same pressure as
found in the uniform-pressure inner-boundary-condition problem.
Although the process physics in uniform flux and uniform pres-
sure is different, the insistence on constant production rate

1616 October 2017 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 14:24 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17
Z fluids from the horizontal well, because there is no direct contact
H=L h=a
Well
L
X superposition but is beyond the present scope.
b=a
Y a
(a)
10
Dimensionless Pressure
1 100
0.1 Pseudosteady-
state flow
0.01 Transient
0.001
0.0001
0.00001
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1
Dimensionless Time
(b)
Fig. 8—Plot of dimensionless pressure of the well in the center of
square-shaped fractures with different sizes. (a) Schematic plot of
the fractured system, fracture dimension is L2 and box dimension
is a3; (b) solid line: plot of dimensionless pressure PD vs. dimen-
sionless time tD in log-log scale. Dash line: plot of derivative of
dPD
dimensionless pressure in terms of natural log of dimension-
dlntD
less time tD vs. dimensionless time in log-log scale.
requires that both the quantity of fluid extracted and the cumula-
tive withdrawn at any time must be equivalent in both inner-
boundary-condition cases. Because the average pressure carries
material-balance information under the slightly compressible fluid
assumption, the pressure averaged over the source, in this case a
planar fracture, in the uniform-flux case must yield the same aver-
age pressure as that produced by the uniform-pressure inner-
boundary condition. The uniform-flux-case pressure will not
match the uniform-pressure case at any arbitrarily selected obser-
vation point (Gringarten et al. 1974; Hagoort 2009), but Fig. 5
shows that the surface-averaged pressures do agree as required.
We would also like to address the difference between a
horizontal well and a multistage fractured horizontal well. Con-
ventional reservoirs characteristically can possess quite-large per-
meabilities (more than 100 md). Hence, the associated horizontal
or deviated wells generally can have lengths in hundreds or thou-
sands of feet. These wells typically produce across most of their
lengths (uncased, openhole construction) directly in communica-
tion with the surrounding oil-bearing formation. In contrast, the
unconventional tight reservoirs exhibit very-low permeabilities
(orders of nano Darcy), and are fractured to start production. The
production rates decline very rapidly, and unlike the long, con-
stant, plateau rates of production from conventional reservoirs,
these fracked wells exhibit only decline tail of production rates.
The well in unconventional reservoir is just a transport device,
with zero contribution in production. In addition, experience has
shown greater control over fracturing operations in unconventional
reservoirs from cased-hole completions, that is, cemented in-place
steel pipe, with selected locations for perforations (holes blasted
through the pipe) through which fracturing fluids are pumped into
the reservoir. Thus, in what has become the standard in unconven-
tional reservoir development, there is no contribution to produced
October 2017 SPE Journal
ID: jaganm Time: 14:24 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010
Stage: Page: 1617 Total Pages: 15
with the formation. The long horizontal well is a conduit for with-
drawing fluids from the induced fracture system and does not com-
pete with fractures or augment production. In conventional
reservoirs, major portions of the horizontal well could be in direct
contact with the formation. This situation can be modeled with
Extensions
Although not aimed specifically for naturally fractured reser-
voirs, we can model multiple fractures, each with arbitrary rela-
tive orientation and spacing. Intersecting fractures present no
1,000 inherent difficulties. Thus, a discrete natural-fracture systems
Dimensionless-Pressure Derivative
model is possible with the developed framework, though frac-
tures not connected to a well require a net-zero flux specification
(i.e., fracture networks not connected to a well must be seg-
10 mented with an imposed material balance on the composite frac-
ture). Alternatively, one could formulate a Green’s function
1 instead of the Neumann function to simulate the depletion history
L/a = 0.01 of a block surrounded by infinite-conductivity fractures. The net-
L/a = 0.2
L/a = 0.4
0.1 zero flux-fracture formulation can be used to evaluate the impact
L/a = 0.6
L/a = 0.8
L/a = 0.99
of internal fractures in scale up or in capturing analytic below
L/a = 0.01
L/a = 0.2 0.01
grid-resolution information to improve numerical reservoir-simu-
L/a = 0.4
L/a = 0.6
lation schemes.
L/a = 0.8
L/a = 0.99
Wellbore storage and skin are not part of this development but
0.001
1 10 could be added. In the case of multiple fractures penetrated by a
wellbore, we have targeted casedhole completion as typical in
unconventional reservoirs, making wellbore skin a nonissue.
Wellbore storage becomes important after entertaining flow in fi-
nite-conductivity fractures to a specified drainage point. Analytic
coupling of flow into fractures and flow in fractures is possible
with segmented fractures to allow pressure matching at the bound-
ary at selected control points.
Conclusion
Our time-dependent, highly accurate analytical solution to the 3D
diffusivity equation for an arbitrarily oriented plane source pro-
vides a new approach to pressure-transient analysis and fractured-
reservoir modeling. The analytical solution involves only pure,
analytic expressions and exponentially damped, infinite-summa-
tion terms that can be computed on any standard-computer plat-
form. The solution allows direct computation of pressure at an
arbitrary observation point at any time, without the need for time
marching. The use of superposition theory provides a way to
model multiple plane-source systems, and makes possible alterna-
tive analysis under uniform-pressure conditions (infinite-conduc-
tivity fractures) through plane segmentation into patches with flux
adjustment, in a manner similar to the contained two-control-point
example. We could also extend our solution to deal with well-
bore-storage effects and nonplanar fractures. Other fracture
shapes, such as an ellipse, could be considered by adjustment of
the parametrization of the point-source integration with respect to
variables s and s0 . In addition, the Neumann boundary condition
can be relaxed to accommodate open systems through the applica-
tion of Green’s theorem.
Nomenclature
a ¼ dimensionless cell length
b ¼ dimensionless cell length
ct ¼ compressibility, P1
Clmn ¼ constant
h ¼ dimensionless cell length
H ¼ second-integration path length
k ¼ reference permeability
kx,y,z ¼ dimensionless directional permeability
l,m,n ¼ dimensionless indices
L ¼ well or first-integration path length
P ¼ pressure, P
PD,line ¼ dimensionless pressure of line source
PD,plane ¼ dimensionless pressure of plane source
1617
 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1618 Total Pages: 15

Well
X

Y
(a)

2.6

2.5

2.4

2.3

2.2

2.1

(b) (c)

Fig. 9—Dimensionless-pressure (PD) mapping for a multiple-fracture system at tD 5 1. (a) A schematic plot of the multifracture sys-
tem, (b) pressure distribution across the X–Y slice at Z 5 0.5, (c) pressure distribution for the Y–Z slice at X 5 0.5.

PDC ¼ continuous point-source pressure function, q well flow rate, L3/t

¼
dimensionless s ¼
distance parameter, L
PD,PPS,plane ¼ pseudosteady-state part of dimensionless pressure s0 ¼
distance parameter, L
of plane source t ¼
time, t
PD,PPS ¼ pseudosteady-state part of dimensionless pressure ^t D ¼
dimensionless time
of line source tD ¼
dimensionless time with length-scaling group
V volume, L3
¼
x,y,z ¼
coordinates, L
Dimensionless-Pressure Derivative

10 H/a = 0.3, L/a = 0.6 100 x0,y0,z0 ¼

source coordinates, L
x1,y1,z1 ¼
line-source endpoint coordinates, L
Dimensionless Pressure

1 10 x2,y2,z2 ¼
line-source endpoint coordinates, L
x3,y3,z3 ¼
plane-source endpoint coordinates, L
0.1 1
a ¼
angle of vector x2-x1 with x-axis
a0 ¼
angle of vector x4-x1 with x-axis
b ¼
angle of vector y2-y1 with y-axis
0.01 0.1 b0 ¼
angle of vector y4-y1 with y-axis
d Dirac delta, L1
¼
0.001
PD: Average uniform flux solution
PD: Uniform pressure solution
0.01 / porosity, L3/L3
¼
PD: Average uniform flux solution c ¼
angle of vector z2-z1 with z-axis
PD: Uniform pressure solution c0 ¼
angle of vector z4-z1 with z-axis
0.0001 0.001
0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 k ¼
dimensionless sum of four trigonometric functions
Dimensionless Time in line-source solution
k0 ¼ dimensionless sum of four trigonometric functions
dPD in plane-source solution
Fig. 10—Plot of PD and vs. tD for a centered vertical and
dlntD l ¼ viscosity, P t
rectangular plane source, showing that, as material balance
requires, the pressure averaged over the fracture plane for the
uniform flux, variable-pressure case coincides with the approxi-
Acknowledgments
mated uniform-pressure result that allows variable flux on
patchwise uniform-flux planar elements with specified pres- We would like to thank the University of Tulsa for funding this
sure-control points. If dimensionless average pressures must research effort. We also thank Jamin Jiang and Rami Younis for
match for all time, so must the temporal derivatives. providing the numerical-simulation result for model validation.

1618 October 2017 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 14:24 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17
References
Al-Kobaisi, M., Ozkan, E., and Kazemi, H. 2006. A Hybrid Numerical/
Analytical Model of a Finite-Conductivity Vertical Fracture Inter-
cepted by a Horizontal Well. SPE Res Eval & Eng 9 (4): 345–355.
SPE-92040-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/92040-PA.
Al Rbeawi, S. J. H. and Djebbar, T. 2012. Transient Pressure Analysis of a
Horizontal Well With Multiple Inclined Hydraulic Fractures Using
Type-Curve Matching. Presented at the SPE International Symposium
and Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette, Louisiana,
15–17 February. SPE-149902-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/149902-
MS.
Barenblast, G. I. and Zheltov, Y. P. 1960. Fundamental Equations of Fil-
tration of Homogeneous Liquids in Fissured Rocks. In Soviet Physics
Doklady, Vol. 5, p. 522. The Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data
System (NASA Grant NNX09AB39G): Smithsonian Astrophysical
Observatory.
Biryukov, D. and Kuchuk, F. J. 2012. Transient Pressure Behavior of Res-
ervoirs With Discrete Conductive Faults and Fractures. Transport in
Porous Media 95 (1): 239–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-012-
0041-x.
Biryukov, D. and Kuchuk, F. J. 2015. Pressure Transient Behavior of Hor-
izontal Wells Intersecting Multiple Hydraulic Fractures in Naturally
Fractured Reservoirs. Transport in Porous Media 110 (3): 369–408.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-015-0554-1.
Bromwich, T. J. I’A. 1942. An Introduction to the Theory of Infinite Se-
ries. Macmillan and Company, Ltd.
Carslaw, H. S. and Jaeger, J. C. 1959. Conduction of Heat in Solids, sec-
ond edition. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Chen, H. Y., Liu, Y., and Asaad, N. M. 2005. Horizontal-Well Productiv-
ity Equations With Both Uniform-Flux and Uniform-Pressure Well-
bore Modes. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, 9–12 October. SPE-97190-MS. https://doi.org/
10.2118/97190-MS.
De Carvalho, R. S. and Rosa, A. J. 1988. Transient Pressure Behavior for
Horizontal Wells in Naturally Fractured Reservoir. Presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 2–5 Oc-
tober. SPE-18302-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/18302-MS.
Du, K. F. and Stewart, G. 1992. Transient-Pressure Response of Horizon-
tal Wells in Layered and Naturally Fractured Reservoirs With Dual-
Porosity Behavior. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Washington, DC, 4–7 October. SPE-24682-MS.
https://doi.org/10.2118/24682-MS.
Duff, G. D. F. and Naylor, D. 1966. Differential Equations of Applied
Mathematics. Wiley, 267, 281.
Gradshteyn, I. S. and Ryzhik, I. M. 1980. Table of Series Integrals
and Products, corrected and enlarged edition. New York: Academic
Press.
Gringarten, A. C. and Ramey Jr., H. J. 1973. The Use of Source and
Green’s Functions in Solving Unsteady-Flow Problems in Reservoirs.
SPE J. 13 (5): 285–296. SPE-3818-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/3818-
PA.
Gringarten, A. C., Ramey Jr., H. J., and Raghavan, R. 1974. Unsteady-
State Pressure Distributions Created by a Well With a Single Infinite-
Conductivity Vertical Fracture. SPE J. 14 (4): 347–360. SPE-4051-
PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/4051-PA.
Hagoort, J. 2009. The Productivity of a Well With a Vertical Infinite-
Conductivity Fracture in a Rectangular Closed Reservoir. SPE J.
14 (4): 715–720. SPE-112975-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/112975-
PA.
Hazlett, R. and Babu, D. 2009. Readily Computable Green’s and Neu-
mann Functions for Symmetry-Preserving Triangles. Quarterly of
Applied Mathematics 67 (3): 579–592. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0033-
569X-09-01157-X.
Hazlett, R. D. and Babu, D. K. 2014. Discrete Wellbore and Fracture Pro-
ductivity Modeling for Unconventional Wells and Unconventional
Reservoirs. SPE J. 19 (1): 19–33. SPE-159379-PA. https://doi.org/
10.2118/159379-PA.
Horne, R. and Temeng, K. O. 1995. Relative Productivities and Pressure
Transient Modeling of Horizontal Wells With Multiple Fractures. Pre-
sented at the Middle East Oil Show, Bahrain, 11–14 March. SPE-
29891-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/29891-MS.
October 2017 SPE Journal
ID: jaganm Time: 14:24 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010
Stage: Page: 1619 Total Pages: 15
Jiang, J. and Younis, R. M. 2015. Numerical Study of Complex Fracture
Geometries for Unconventional Gas Reservoirs Using a Discrete Frac-
ture-Matrix Model. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 26: 1174–1186. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2015.08.013.
Kazemi, H. 1969. Pressure Transient Analysis of Naturally Fractured Res-
ervoirs With Uniform Fracture Distribution. SPE J. 9 (4): 451–462.
SPE-2156-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/2156-PA.
Kuchuk, F. J. and Biryukov, D. 2013. Pressure Transient Tests and Flow
Regimes in Fractured Reservoirs. Presented at the SPE Annual Techni-
cal Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 30 September–2 Octo-
ber. SPE-166296-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/166296-MS.
Kuchuk, F., Biryukov, D., Fitzpatrick, T. et al. 2015. Pressure Transient
Behavior of Horizontal Wells Intersecting Multiple Hydraulic and Nat-
ural Fractures in Conventional and Unconventional Unfractured and
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs. Presented at the SPE Annual Techni-
cal Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 28–30 September. SPE-
175037-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/175037-MS.
Kuchuk, F. and Biryukov, D. 2015. Pressure-Transient Tests and
Flow Regimes in Fractured Reservoirs. SPE Res Eval & Eng
18 (2): 187–204. SPE-166296-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/166296-
PA.
Larsen, L. and Hegre, T. M. 1994. Pressure Transient Analysis of Multi-
fractured Horizontal Wells. Presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, 25–28 September. SPE-
28389-MS. https://doi.org/10.2118/28389-MS.
Mavor, M. J. and Cinco-Ley, H. 1979. Transient Pressure Behavior of Nat-
urally Fractured Reservoirs. Presented at the SPE California Regional
Meeting, Ventura, California, 18–20 April. SPE-7977-MS. https://
doi.org/10.2118/7977-MS.
McCann, R. C., Hazlett, R. D., and Babu, D. K. 2001. Highly Accurate
Approximations of Green’s and Neumann Functions on Rectangular
Domains. In Proc., the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical,
Physical and Engineering Sciences, Vol. 457, No. 2008, pp. 767–772.
The Royal Society.
Muskat, M. 1937. Flow of Homogeneous Fluids Through Porous Media.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Newman, A. B. 1936. Heating and Cooling Rectangular and Cylindrical
Solids. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry 28 (5): 545–548. https://
doi.org/10.1021/ie50317a010.
Olarewaju, J. S. and Lee, W. J. 1989. New Pressure-Transient Analysis
Model for Dual-Porosity Reservoirs. SPE Form Eval 4 (3): 384–390.
SPE-15634-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/15634-PA.
Raghavan, R. S., Chen, C. C., and Agarwal, B. 1997. An Analysis of Hori-
zontal Wells Intercepted by Multiple Fractures. SPE J. 2 (3): 235–245.
SPE-27652-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/27652-PA.
Stehfest, H. 1970. Algorithm 368: Numerical Inversion of Laplace Trans-
forms [D5]. Communications of the ACM 13 (1): 47–49. https://
doi.org/10.1145/361953.361969.
Van Kruysdijk, C. P. J. W. and Dullaert, G. M. 1989. A Boundary Element
Solution to the Transient Pressure Response of Multiply Fractured
Horizontal Wells. Presented at the ECMOR I—1st European Confer-
ence on the Mathematics of Oil Recovery. https://doi.org/10.3997/
2214-4609.201411306.
Warren, J. E. and Root, P. J. 1963. The Behavior of Naturally Fractured
Reservoirs. SPE J. 3 (3): 245–255. SPE-426-PA. https://doi.org/
10.2118/426-PA.
Xie, J., Yang, C., Gupta, N. et al. 2015. Depth of Investigation and Deple-
tion in Unconventional Reservoirs With Fast-Marching Methods. SPE
J. 20 (4): 831–841. SPE-154532-PA. https://doi.org/10.2118/154532-
PA.
Appendix A: Line-Source Solution
We obtain PD for a line-source solution by spatial integration of
point-source PDC along the well direction:
ðL
1
PD ¼  PDC  ds: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ðA-1Þ
L
0
Combining Eqs. A-1 and A-3, after expansion and integration
in terms of time, we obtain
1619
 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1620 Total Pages: 15

PD ðx; y; z; x1 ; y1 ; z1 ; a; b; c; L; tÞ Then, the triple series can be reduced to double series with the
a b h
ðL X1 ðL X1 use of Eq. A-3 and the assumption pffiffiffiffi  pffiffiffiffi  pffiffiffiffi. The final
1 Clmn ðtrigÞ 1 Clmn E  ðtrigÞ kx ky kz
¼ tD þ  2 D2
ds   ds;
L l;m;n6¼0
p lmn L l;m;n6¼0
p2 D2lmn results given by Hazlett and Babu (2014) are summarized next,
0 0 showing the various components of PSS:
                   ðA-2Þ
 
t
PD;PSS ¼ þ ðIXYZ þ IYZ Þ þ ðIXZ þ IZ Þ
where /lCt

   2  þ ðIXY þ IY Þ þ IX ;                ðA-4Þ
p2 D2lmn t 2 kx l k y m2 k z n 2
E ¼ exp ; Dlmn ¼ þ 2 þ 2
/lCt a2 b h where

and ðIXYZ þ IYZ Þ

      X pmy pnz
pmy pnz
1
plx plxo a
trig ¼ cos cos cos cos  2
cos cos ðI1 þ I2 þ I3 þ I4 Þ;
a b h a p Lkx m;n¼1 b h
pmy  pnz 
o o
 cos cos :                    ðA-5Þ
b h

The constant Clmn ¼ 2, 4, or 8, depending on the dimension of the 1

I1 ¼
infinite series. a ¼ cosa0 , b ¼ cosb0 , and c ¼ cosc0 are the direc- DEN
8 2   my 3 9
tion cosines of the line-source trajectory. The compact notation in >
> 1 mb nc 2 nz2  >
>
Eq. A-2 is interpreted as a triple infinite summation on l, m, and n >
> 6
6 sinp 6 >
>
>
> pðx2 þxÞnk 6 nk b h b h 7 7 >
>
such that not all three indices start at zero simultaneously. If any >
> e 4 5 > >
>
> my nz  >
>
one starts at zero, a double infinite-series summation results in the >
> 2 2 >
>
>
<  acosp 6 >
=
other two indices. If any two are simultaneously zero, a single in- b h
finite series results in the remaining index. Thus, in considering  2   3 ;
>
> 1 mb nc my nz1  > >
the various combinations of starting index value, Eq. A-2 yields >
> 6 sinp
1
6 >
>
>
> 6 7 >
>
one triple infinite-series summation, three double infinite-series >
> pðx1 þxÞnk 6 n k b h b h 7 >
>
>
> e 4 5 >
>
summations, and three single infinite-series summations. We >
> my nz  >
>
>
:  acosp
1
6
1 >
;
find it convenient to break the integration into the various summa-
b h
tions, because the lower dimensional-series summations are ame-
nable to analytic reduction or cancellation within higher                    ðA-6Þ
dimensional summations. 1
On the right-hand side of Eq. A-2, the first two terms represent I2 ¼
8 DEN 2  3 9
the PSS solution, because the pressure derivative with respect to  my
time is a constant. Furthermore, in PSS, the pressure spatial deriv- >
> 1 mb nc 2 nz2  >
>
>
> 6n 6 sinp 6 7 > >
>
> b h b h 7 > >
atives no longer are functions of time. Pressure will decline uni- > p½2aðx2 þxÞnk 6 k >
>
> e 6 7 >
formly everywhere. The third term captures transient flow, >
> 4 my nz  5 > >
>
>
> þ acosp
2
6
2 >
>
because the pressure field evolves toward that of a fully bounded >
< >
=
system. With exponential time damping, this term vanishes in b h
 2   3 ;
long-time behavior; except for very-small values of time tD , the >
> 1 mb nc my nz1  > >
>
> 1 >
>
transient terms compute very rapidly. >
> 6n 6 sinp 6 7> >
>
> 6 k b h b h 7 >
>
> e
> p½2aðx 1 þxÞn k
6 7> >
>
> 4   5 >
>
PSS Solution. The PSS term needs more simplification and >
> my 1 nz 1 >
>
: þ acosp 6 ;
reduction along the process of integration and evaluation, because b h
the raw form of the equation does not have the benefit of exponen-                    ðA-7Þ
tial damping in either time or space. The triple-infinite sums can
be reduced to double-infinite sums with the identity given by
Gradshteyn and Ryzhik (1980), 1
I3 ¼
DEN 8   91
0
X
1
p cosh½pbð1  jx=ajÞ >
> m b >
cosðplx=aÞ
¼  2
1
B >
< y1 þ ðx  x1 Þ > >
=C
B Hðx  x Þ  Hðx  xÞ  2acosp b a C
l¼1 l2 þ b2 2b sinhðpbÞ 2b B 1 2 C
B >
> n h c i>
> C
0 x  x  1 B >
: 6 z þ ðx  x Þ >
; C
    B 1 1 C
pb  pb 2  B h a C
p B e a þe a C
C 1
B 2   3 C
¼ B @ 2pb A 2b2
B
B 1 mb nc m n  C
C
2b 1e B 6n 6 sinp y2 6 z2 7 C
B 6 k b h b h 7 C
B
B þ epjxx jn
2 k
6 7 C;
C
0 x  x  1 B 4 m n  5 C
    B þ a  sinð x  x Þcosp y 6 z C
p @ pb  pb 2  1 B 2
b
2
h
2 C
¼ e a þe a A 2; B
B
C
C
2b 2b B 2     3 C
B 1 mb nc m n C
B 6n 6 sinp y1 6 z1 7 C
B pjxx jn 6 k b h b h 7 C
for 0  jxj  2a and b  1:      ðA-3Þ Be 1 k
6 7 C
@ 4 m n  5 A
þ a  sinð x  x1 Þcosp y1 6 z1
b h
We have dropped the term e2pb because it is less than
                   ðA-8Þ
0.00187 for b  1:

1620 October 2017 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 14:24 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1621 Total Pages: 15

1 Appendix B: Heaviside Terms

I4 ¼
DEN We pay special attention to the Heaviside term in I3 of Eq. A-8
0 1
Hðx  x1 Þ  Hðx2  xÞ because this term tends to dominate and does not have the exponen-
8   9
B >m b > C tial damping term for fast computing. We present here a reduced
B >
> > C
B < b y1 þ a ðx  x1 Þ > = C form of the Heaviside term given by Hazlett and Babu (2014):
B 2pank C
B  2a  e  cosp
h i C 1   
B
B
> n
>
> c >
>
>
C
C a X mb nc 2
B : 6 z1 þ ðx  x1 Þ ; C I3H ¼ 2 1 6 þ a2 nk 2
B h a C p Lkx m;n¼1 b h
B 2   3 C
B   C pmy pnz
B 1 mb nc m n C
B 6n 6 sinp y 2 6 z 2 7 C  2acos cos
B
Be pð2ajxx jÞn 6 k b h b h 7 C;
C b h
B
2 k
6 7   i

B 4 m n 5 C C m b nh c
B þ a  signðx2  xÞcosp y2 6 z2 C  cosp y1 þ ðx  x1 Þ 6 z1 þ ðx  x1 Þ :
B b h C b a h a
B C
B 2   3 C
B 1 mb nc  m n  C                    ðB-1Þ
B 6 sinp y 6 z C
B 6 1 1 7 C
B pð2ajxx1 jÞnk 6 nk b h b h 7 C
B e 6 7 C It is convenient to introduce a new set of parameters:
@ 4 m  5 A
n !
þ a  signðx1  xÞcosp y1 6 z1 a b h
b h ^ ^
a ; b; hÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffi ; pffiffiffiffi ; pffiffiffiffi
ð^
                   ðA-9Þ kx ky kz

with b c Y1 6y
Y1 ¼ y1 þ ðx  x1 Þ; Z1 ¼ z1 þ ðx  x1 Þ; Y 0 ¼ ;
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi " # a a b

ky m2 kz n2 mb nc 2 2 2 Z0 ¼
Z1 6z
nk ¼ þ ; DEN ¼ 6 þ a nk ; h
kx b2 kx h2 b h
!
^ x2  x1 y2  y1 z2  z1
where ðx1 ; y1 ; z1 Þ and ðx2 ; y2 ; z2 Þ are the endpoints of the line ð^a ; b; ^c Þ ¼ pffiffiffiffi ; pffiffiffiffi ; pffiffiffiffi
kx ky kz
source. HðxÞ is the Heaviside function.
Finally, the 1D term IX , is given by ^ 2 2 ^a 2 þ ^c 2 ^c
2 ^a 2 þ b 2 b^
    A^ ¼ 2
; B^ ¼ 2
; C^ ¼ :
pl pl b^ h^ b^h^
 3 X 1 sin ðx2 6xÞ  sin ðx1 6xÞ
a a a
IX ¼ 3 3 Thus, Eq. B-1 becomes
p aLkx l¼1 l
 3 X 1
a F3 ðx2 6xÞ  F3 ðx1 6xÞ a^a^ X1
cosðpmY 0 ÞcosðpnZ0 Þ sinðpmY 0 ÞsinðpnZ 0 Þ
¼ ;      ðA-10Þ I3H ¼ :
p3 aLkx l¼1 l3 2
2p m;n¼1 2 2 2
A^ m2 þ B^ n2 62C^ mn
X
1                       ðB-2Þ
sinðnpzÞ 1 jzj jzj
where F3 ðzÞ ¼ ¼ p3  z   1 ;
0  jzj  2: l¼1
l3 6 4 3
With the shorthand notation,
Note that 2D terms ðIXZ þ IZ Þ and ðIXY þ IY Þ are obtained by 2 2 4 2
eliminating 1D from the 3D term by setting either m ¼ 0 to make 2 A^ B^  C^ 0 C^ Y 0
D^ ¼ 4
; G 1 ¼ Z  2
;
y absent or n ¼ 0 to make z absent. A^ ! A^
2
C^
Transient Solution. We recast the transient form as G2 ¼ G1 þ signðY 0 Þ  2 2
A^
1 X 1
PD;trans ¼ 3 and the use of two mathematical identities Eq. B-3 given by
2p l;m;n6¼0
Bromwich (1942) (Page 370, Eq. 5–11),
  
2 2 ^ plx pmy pnz
Clmn expðp Dlmn t D Þ  cos cos cos X1
cosðpmhÞ pcos½pxð1  hÞ
a b h ¼ and
  2  k;
kx l ky m 2
kz n 2
m¼1
m  x sinðpxÞ
6 6
a2 b2 h2 X1
sinðpmhÞ psin½pxð1  hÞ
                   ðA-11Þ ¼ ;
m¼1
m  x sinðpxÞ

where k represents the sum of four different terms over 6 signs x: complex; ð0 < h < 2Þ;                    ðB-3Þ
     
p lDx mDy nDz lxm mym nzm
X4 sin 6 6 cos p 6 6 we can obtain the simplified Heaviside term,
2 a b h a b h
k¼  
6
lDx mDy nDz a^a^
6 6 I3H ¼ 2
a b h 4pD^ A^
with  lnf½1  2cosðpG1 Þ  E1 þ E21   ½1  2cosðpG2 Þ  E2 þ E22 g
Dx ¼ x2  x1 ; Dy ¼ y2  y1 ; Dz ¼ z2  z1 ; a^^a X1
1 pnz pnZ0 
 cos cos            ðB-4Þ
xm ¼ ðx2 þ x1 Þ=2; ym ¼ ðy2 þ y1 Þ=2; and zm ¼ ðz2 þ z1 Þ=2: 2
p2 B^ n¼1 n
2 h h

October 2017 SPE Journal 1621

ID: jaganm Time: 14:24 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17 Stage: Page: 1622 Total Pages: 15

with Similarly, the integration of T2 becomes

^ 0 ^ 0 s0 ¼H
ð
E1 ¼ epDjY j ; E2 ¼ epDð2jY jÞ : 1
T2 ds0 ¼
DEN 0
s0 ¼0
This is a remarkable result, explicitly capturing the logarithmic 82 3 9
singularity of well pressure > >
  as we approach the well axis >
>
> 6 2AHðx  x 2 ÞHðx 3  xÞ 7
>
>
>
x  x1 y  y1 z  z1 >
> 4  5 >
>
¼ ¼ : (Y0 ! 0; Z0 ! 0; G1 ! 0; E1 ! 1) >
>  sinp Y2 Z2 þ b 0 x  x 2 >
>
a b c >
> >
>
>
<
mn
a0 >
=
in that, although the Heaviside term is often the dominant contrib-  
 signðx  x 2 ÞA  sinpðY2 Z2 Þ :
uting term, it is the slowest term to compute because of the lack > pjxx2 jnk >
of any exponential damping. The result in Eq. B-4, however, is >e
>
>

þ B  cospðY Z Þ
>
>
>
>
> 2 2 >
very simple to compute. Still, this simplified solution is not ideal >
>  >>
>
>
> signðx  x 3 ÞA  sinpðY3 Z3 Þ >
>
for the second integration. Thus, we return to the original I3 term, >
: þ e pjxx3 jnk
 >
;
which is Eq. A-8, for integration purposes. Then, the integration þ BcospðY3 Z3 Þ
of I3 term yields                    ðB-7Þ

ðH Integration of the Heaviside term in Eq. B-5 needs to consider

0 1 three situations: x4 < x < x2 , x1 < x < x4 , and x2 < x < x3 . Inte-
I3 ds ¼
DEN gration is simpler for the first situation. However, if integration is
0 performed for the second case, it is nonzero only when
0 1 x  x1
s0 ¼H
ð 0 < s0 < , because of the Heaviside function. Likewise, for
B Hðx  x01 Þ  Hðx02  xÞ C a0
B C the third condition, we only need to integrate when
B C
B 0
s ¼0 C x  x2 x3  x2
B 8   9 C < s0 < . This yields
B > m b > C a 0 a0
B >
< y1 þ ðx  x1 Þ = C
0 0 >
B b a 0C
BB  2acosp> n h i >ds C
C;
s0 ¼H
ð
> c
B
B : 6 z01 þ ðx  x01 Þ > ; C C Iheavi ¼ Hðx  x01 ÞHðx02  xÞ
B h a C
B 0 0 C s0 ¼0 8   9
B ð
s ¼H ð
s ¼H C > m 0 b >
B 0 0 C >
< y1 þ ðx  x01 Þ > =
@ þ T2 ds  T1 ds A b a
 2acosp h i ds0
>
> n c >
s0 ¼0 s0 ¼0
: 6 z01 þ ðx  x01 Þ > ;
                   ðB-5Þ 8 h a
2   3
> 0 x  x1
>
> sinp Y1 Z1 þ b mn
>
> 6 a0 7
where >
> 2a6  7
>
> 4 x  x 1 5
>
>  sinp Y1 Z1 þ bmn
 2  m 3 >
> a
1 mb nc 0 n 0 >
>
>    x1  x  x4
6n 6 sinp y 6 z 7 >
> m 0 b 0 n 0 c 0
0 b h b 1 h 1 >
> b  a Þ6 ðc  a
T1 ¼ epjxx1 jnk 6
4
k
m 5
7 >
>
p
b a h a
 n >
>
0
þ a  sign x  x1 cosp y1 6 z10 0 >
> 
b h >
>
>
2 x  x4  3
>
> sinp Y4 Z4 þ bmn
2   m 3 >
> 6 a 7
1 mb nc 0 n 0 >
>
> 2a6 4  x  x 7
5
6n 6 sinp y 6 z 7 >
>  sinp Y1 Z1 þ bmn
1
0 b h b 2 h 2 <
T2 ¼ epjxx2 jnk 6
4
k
m 
7 a
 n 0 5 ¼     x4  x  x2
0
þ a  sign x  x2 cosp y2 6 z20 >
>
> m 0 b 0 n  0 c 0
b h >
> p b  a 6 c  a
>
> b a h a
>
>
>
> 2   3
As seen in Eq. B-5, we divided the integration into three parts, >
> x  x4
>
>
the Heaviside term, T1 , and T2 . For T1 , integration is simpler if >
>
> 6sinp Y4 Z4 þ bmn a 7
>
> 6 0 17
x < x1 or x > x4 ; however, within the interval, theintegral must >
> 6 x  x 2 7
 xx   > 2a6 Y1 Z1 þ b0mn 7
x  x1 H >
> 6 B a 0 C 7
be split into two parts, 0;
1
and ; 0 , to correctly >
> 4  sinp @ A 5
a0 a0 a >
> x2  x1
>
> þ b
represent absolute values: >
>
mn
a
> m 
>
> b 0

n  0 c 0
 x2  x  x3 :
>
> 0
: p b  a 6 c  a
s0 ¼H
ð b a h a
1
T1 ds0 ¼                    ðB-8Þ
DEN 0
s0 ¼0
8  9 Anqi Bao is currently a PhD degree candidate at Texas A&M
> x  x1  > University. Her previous research interest was analytical solu-
>
> 2AHðx  x1 ÞHðx4  x1 Þ  sinp Y1 Z1 þ b0mn >
>
>
> a0 >
> tion to flow in multifractured media, and she now focuses on
>
> >
> the snapshot-based mode-decomposition method for multi-
>
> " # >
>
>
> signðx  x1 ÞA  sinpðY1 Z1 Þ >
> phase flow in porous media. Bao holds a BS degree and an
>
< epjxx1 jnk  >
= MS degree from the University of Tulsa.
 þB  cospðY1 Z1 Þ :
>
> >
> Randy Hazlett is an associate professor at the University of Tul-
>
> >
>
>
> " # >
> sa’s McDougall School of Petroleum Engineering. Previously,
>
> signðx  x4 ÞA  sinpðY4 Z4 Þ >
> he worked in the research-and-development (R&D) center of
>
> pjxx jn >
>
>
> þe 4 k  >
> Mobil for 15 years, and spent another decade conducting
: ;
þBcospðY4 Z4 Þ research as the president of Potential Research Solutions.
Hazlett’s areas of expertise are in well testing and inflow per-
                   ðB-6Þ formance of complex wells, enhanced oil recovery,

1622 October 2017 SPE Journal

ID: jaganm Time: 14:24 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010

 J185180 DOI: 10.2118/185180-PA Date: 20-September-17
geomechanical properties, emulsions, and the fundamentals
of multiphase flow in porous media. He holds a PhD degree in
chemical engineering from the University of Texas at Austin.
D. Krishna Babu has more than 40 years of experience in the
oil-and-gas industry. During his employment at the City Col-
lege of the City University of New York (early 1970s), Babu’s
work involved the application of singular perturbation techni-
ques in solving nonlinear problems associated with unsatu-
rated groundwater flows. Later, while at Princeton University
(mid-1970s to mid-1980s), his work was directed toward deriv-
ing and coding finite-element-modeling equations associated
with the transport of chemical contaminants in groundwater
October 2017 SPE Journal
ID: jaganm Time: 14:24 I Path: //chenas03/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SA/SPE/J###/Vol00000/170010/Comp/APPFile/SA-J###170010
Stage: Page: 1623 Total Pages: 15
flows. Finally, while working in the Mobil Oil R&D Division, and
continuing into retirement beyond the year 2000, Babu experi-
enced work involved in deriving several analytical solutions to
the horizontal and arbitrarily slanted (deviated) well equations
for pressure evolution and well/fracture interaction effects.
The resulting equations and the associated analytical formulas
and algorithms were required to yield a high degree of accu-
racy and very-fast computational efficiency. Babu mainly has
been interested in deriving analytical, semianalytical, and an-
alytical/numerical solutions to problems of fluid flow in porous
media. He holds an MS degree in applied mathematics from
Osmania University, India, and a PhD degree in applied analy-
sis from New York State University at Stony Brook.
1623