Extended Hyperbolic Decline Curve Analysis in Shale Gas Reservoirs

  • Dianfa Du
  • Yanwu ZhaoEmail author
  • Qiaoqiao Guo
  • Xuan Guan
  • Peng Hu
  • Dongyan Fan
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Series in Geomechanics and Geoengineering book series (SSGG)


To perform production forecasting in practice, lots of scholars and engineers have designed various techniques to interpolate the production both analytically and numerically, among which many decline curve analysis models have been proposed and widely used because of their simplicity and efficiency. Unfortunately, each model has their own limitations and is not applicable for all cases. For traditional reservoirs, common practice for production performance is decline curve analysis (DCA). However, when apply traditional DCA to shale wells, it is difficult to match the high initial production rate and extremely sharp decline rate in early period and the shallow decline rate at late times, simultaneously. Based on the Arps model, the extended hyperbolic production decline equation is developed, which includes four empirical parameters. Although the proposed method is not always accurate than peer models, it is likely as accurate and does not require the boundary-dominated flow start time nor to force a switch to hyperbolic decline. The validation of this new empirical DCA has been conducted by both extensive field data and simulation results for several wells. Comparisons with traditional DCA methods and numerical simulations indicate the relative advantages of this new approach.


Shale gas Production forecasting Decline curve analysis Extended hyperbolic decline 



Decline curve analysis


Extended exponential decline curve analysis


Extended hyperbolic decline curve analysis


Stretched Exponential Decline Model


Energy Information Administration


Estimated ultimate recovery


Initial gas flow rate


Nominal decline rate


A constant to account for the early period


A constant to account for the late-life period

\( n \)

An empirical exponent


103 ft3


106 ft3


×3.048e−01 = m


×2.832e−02 = m3



The authors would like to thank the support from SINOPEC Exploration and Production Research Institute sincerely. At the same time, this work was funded partially by Natural Science Foundation of China (51504277). These supports are gratefully acknowledged.


  1. 1.
    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2013) Technically recoverable shale oil and shale gas resources: an assessment of 137 shale formations in 41 countries outside the United States; EIA: Washington, DC, June 2013;
  2. 2.
    Lee WJ, Sidle R (2010) Gas-reserves estimation in resource plays. SPE Econ Manag 2(2):86–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ozkan E, Raghavan RS, Osman GA (2010) Modeling of fluid transfer from shale matrix to fracture network. In: SPE-134830-MS presented at SPE annual technical conference and exhibition, Florence, Italy, 19–22 Sept 2010Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sheng G, Su Y, Wang W et al (2015) A multiple porosity media model for multi-fractured horizontal wells in shale gas reservoirs. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 27:1562–1573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang H (2016) What factors control shale-gas production and production-decline trend in fractured systems: a comprehensive analysis and investigation, 1 Aug 2016. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
  6. 6.
    Clark AJ, Lake LW, Patzek TW (2011) Production forecasting with logistic growth models. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1 Jan 2011.
  7. 7.
    Zuo L, Yu W, Wu K (2016) A fractional decline curve analysis model for shale gas reservoirs. Int J Coal Geol 163:140–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Duong AN (2010) An unconventional rate decline approach for tight and fracture-dominated gas wells, 1 Jan 2010. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers.
  9. 9.
    Valko PP (2009) Assigning value to stimulation in the Barnett Shale: a simultaneous analysis of 7000 plus production histories and well completion records. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2009Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhang H, Rietz D, Cagle A et al (2016) Extended exponential decline curve analysis. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 36:402–413 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clarkson CR, Nobakht M, Kaviani D et al (2012) Production analysis of tight-gas and shale-gas reservoirs using the dynamic-slippage concept. SPE J 17(1):230–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sun H, Chawathe A, Hoteit H et al (2015) Understanding shale gas flow behavior using numerical simulation. SPE J 20(1):142–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhao YL, Zhang LH, Luo JX et al (2014) Performance of fractured horizontal well with stimulated reservoir volume in unconventional gas reservoir. J Hydrol 512(10):447–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ilk D, Rushing JA, Perego AD, Blasingame TA (2008) Exponential versus Hyperbolic decline in tight gas sands: understanding the origin and implications for reserve estimates using Arps’ decline curves. In: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1 Jan 2008.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dianfa Du
    • 1
  • Yanwu Zhao
    • 1
    Email author
  • Qiaoqiao Guo
    • 1
  • Xuan Guan
    • 1
  • Peng Hu
    • 1
  • Dongyan Fan
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Petroleum EngineeringChina University of Petroleum (East China)QingdaoChina

Personalised recommendations