Modeling Method for Multiple-Fractured Horizontal Well in Tight Oil Reservoirs

  • Shuai LiEmail author
  • Yunhong Ding
  • Bo Cai
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Series in Geomechanics and Geoengineering book series (SSGG)


Because of the ultra-low permeability of tight oil reservoirs and the limited seepages from matrix to fracture, multiple-fractured horizontal well (MFHW) is becoming the main prevalent way to exploit tight oil reservoirs. Fracture description after massive fracturing is a puzzle because of the unclear understanding of artificial fractures and natural fractures. Fracture modeling software always requires a large number of FMI data, while so many wells did not have. To effectively describe the multistage fractured well without so many detailed data, a dual-permeability model with different refined grids in SRV is used to simulate hydraulic fractures, natural fractures, and matrix, respectively. Firstly, estimated parameter was obtained by well testing analysis. The buildup curve indicates the reservoir after massive fracture is dual-permeability media, and parameters such as porosity (matrix/fracture), permeability (matrix/fracture), and pressure are obtained. Then, sensitivity analysis is performed to find the parameter’s impact sequence on oil production and water production. Finally, the accurate parameters of hydraulic fracture, natural fracture, and matrix are obtained via history matching on the basis of the parameters estimated. The production forecast coincides with the real data of this well, which proves the feasibility of this modeling method for massive fractured well in tight oil reservoir.


Tight oil Massive fracturing Horizontal well Numerical simulation Dual permeability 



This work is supported by the National Science and Technology Major Project (No. 2016ZX05023). The authors would express their appreciation to the project for contribution of the research fund.


  1. 1.
    Cipolla C (2009) Modeling production and evaluating fracture performance in unconventional gas reservoirs. J Petrol Technol 61(9):84–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mayerhofer M, Lolon E, Warpinski N et al (2010) What is stimulated reservoir volume? Prod Op 25(1):89–98Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Novlesky A, Kumar A (2011) Shale gas modeling workflow: from microseismic to simulation–A Horn river case study. In: Unconventional resources conferenceGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cipolla C, Lolon E, Erdle J et al (2010) Reservoir modeling in shale-gas reservoirs. Reserv Eval Eng 13(4):638–653Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cipolla CL, Lolon EP, Erdle JC et al (2009) Modeling well performance in shale-gas reservoirs. In: Reservoir characterization and simulation conference Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zimmer U (2011) Calculating stimulated reservoir volume (SRV) with consideration of uncertainties in microseismic event locations. In: Canadian unconventional resources conferenceGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang X, Du C (2009) Sensitivity studies of horizontal wells with hydraulic fractures in shale gas reservoirs. In: International petroleum technology conferenceGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Du C (2010) Estimation of hydraulic fracturing induced fracture network in shale gas reservoir. In: International oil and gas conferenceGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Warpinski NR, Teufel LW (1987) Influence of geologic discontinuities on hydraulic fracture propagation. J Petrol Technol 39(02):209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    King GE, Haile L, Shuss J et al (2008) Increasing fracture path complexity and controlling downward fracture growth in the Barnett shale. In: SPE shale gas production conference. Society of petroleum engineersGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and DevelopmentBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations