Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Natural Gas Industry B 4 (2017) 120e126
www.elsevier.com/locate/ngib

Research Article

A coupling model for gas diffusion and seepage in SRV section of shale gas
reservoirs*
Gao Shusheng*, Liu Huaxun, Ye Liyou, Hu Zhiming, Chang Jin, An Weiguo
Langfang Branch of PetroChina Exploration and Development Research Institute, Langfang, Hebei, 065007, China
Received 27 October 2016; accepted 25 January 2017
Available online 26 August 2017

Abstract

A prerequisite to effective shale gas development is a complicated fracture network generated by extensive and massive fracturing, which is
called SRV (stimulated reservoir volume) section. Accurate description of gas flow behaviors in such section is fundamental for productivity
evaluation and production performance prediction of shale gas wells. The SRV section is composed of bedrocks with varying sizes and fracture
networks, which exhibit different flow behaviors e gas diffusion in bedrocks and gas seepage in fractures. According to the porosity and
permeability and the adsorption, diffusion and seepage features of bedrocks and fractures in a shale gas reservoir, the material balance equations
were built for bedrocks and fractures respectively and the continuity equations of gas diffusion and seepage in the SRV section were derived. For
easy calculation, the post-frac bedrock cube was simplified to be a sphere in line with the principle of volume consistency. Under the assumption
of quasi-steady flow behavior at the cross section of the sphere, the gas channeling equation was derived based on the Fick's laws of diffusion and
the density function of gas in bedrocks and fractures. The continuity equation was coupled with the channeling equation to effectively char-
acterize the complicated gas flow behavior in the SRV section. The study results show that the gas diffusivity in bedrocks and the volume of
bedrocks formed by volume fracturing (or the scale of fracturing) jointly determines the productivity and stable production period of a shale gas
well. As per the actual calculation for the well field A in the ChangningeWeiyuan Block in the Sichuan Basin, the matrix has low gas diffusivity
e about 10
5 cm2/s and a large volume with an equivalent sphere radius of 6.2 m, hindering the gas channeling from bedrocks to fractures and
thereby reducing the productivity of the shale gas well. It is concluded that larger scale of volume fracturing and higher fracture density in the
SRV section are important guarantees for efficient development of shale gas reservoirs.
© 2017 Sichuan Petroleum Administration. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Keywords: Shale gas reservoir; SRV; Matrix; Fracture network; Continuity equation; Channeling equation; Sichuan Basin; ChangningeWeiyuan Block

Effective scale-development of shale gas pool is dependent
on the size of SRV area. The larger a SRV area is and the more
developed a fracture network is, the higher the gas yield will
be [1,2]. But how to describe complicated gas flow in a SRV
section during shale gas development is a vexed question
because of extremely low porosity and permeability, the
*
Project supported by the National Science and Technology Major Project
(No. 2011ZX05018) and National Basic Research Program of China (973
Program) (No. 2013CB228000).
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gaoshusheng69@petrochina.com.cn (Gao SS.).
Peer review under responsibility of Sichuan Petroleum Administration.
higher content of clay and organic matter, and the existence of
adsorbed gas (accounting for 20e80%) in shale reservoirs
[3,4]. Carlson et al. [5,6] adopted a dual-porosity model in
view of shale matrix with low porosity and extremely low
permeability. Shale gas flow was described to have two pro-
cesses: one is that with the production of free gas from frac-
tures, the adsorbed gas after desorption from matrix surface
flows through fractures to the wellbore due to the effect of the
differential pressure between fractures and matrix.; the other is
that the internal gas spreads to the matrix surface due to the
effect of differential concentration. Gas flow inside the matrix
follows the laws of molecular diffusion and the process from
fractures to the wellbore is subject to the Darcy law; the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ngib.2017.07.016
2352-8540/© 2017 Sichuan Petroleum Administration. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
 Gao SS. et al. / Natural Gas Industry B 4 (2017) 120e126
process of desorption is described by the Langmuir equation.
Javadpour et al. [7,8] developed an equation for nano-scale
shale gas flow which involves the Knudsen number (Kn)
based on diffusion and continuous flow. They found that the
ratio of apparent permeability to Darcy permeability increases
abruptly with the decreased porosity below 100 nm, implying
that diffusional effect is strong at low porosity. Schepers et al.
[9] presented a triple-porosity dual-permeability model, in
which fluid flow in fractures and matrix follows the Darcy law.
The matrix is the source of gas desorption; gas flow over-
whelms diffusional effect inside the matrix. Civan et al. [10]
developed the equation of gas flow in nano-scale shale pores
based on the Beskok gas flow equation and adsorption effect.
This equation is the function of Kn and applies to continuous
flow, transition flow, slip flow and free molecular flow. Swami
et al. [11,12] derived the equation of nano-scale shale gas flow
based on a quadruple-porosity model which delineates the
movement of free gas in micro-fractures and nanopores,
adsorbed gas on pore walls, and intra-kerogen dissolved gas.
As per the numerical solution, they suggested that Kn diffu-
sion, Langmuir desorption, gas slippage and dissolved gas
diffusion should be considered in the prediction and numerical
simulation of shale gas production. Alharthy et al. [13]
developed a dual-porosity and a triple-porosity model which
includes convective, diffusive, and Knudsen flow mechanisms.
In terms of numerical calculation, they thought that shale gas
flow is better modeled by using the triple-porosity model
because desorbed gas flow is less dependent on shale pores.
Duan et al. [14] built a dual-porosity mathematical model
which involves adsorbed gas, free gas and dissolved gas for
macroscopic gas flow in the fractured well and estimated
transient productivity of shale gas wells. Li et al. [15]
considered the effect of gas desorption and diffusion in
nanopores and concluded that gas permeability may be
improved due to more flowing channels generated by shale
matrix contraction and deformation as a result of gas
desorption when reservoir pressure is lower than the critical
pressure of gas desorption. They established equations for gas
flow and diffusion based on the function of two parameters;
one is the proportion a of molecular weight with molecular
free path above pore diameter (D) to total molecular weight,
the other is the proportion 1-a of molecular weight with mo-
lecular free path below D to total molecular weight. Zhao et al.
[16] stated that shale gas in the nanopores moves into natural
fractures and then flow into hydraulic fractures through
desorption, diffusion and slip flow. Gas flow is Darcy flow in
natural fractures and is non-Darcy flow in hydraulic fractures.
Guo et al. [17] thought shale gas in the matrix mainly flows
into the fractures across fracture planes because the influences
of high reservoir pressure, small Kn, and weak diffusional.
The above models focus on the microscopic flow law in
nanotubes or the macroscopic flow law in shale reservoirs; the
effects of adsorption, desorption and diffusion on shale gas
flow were also included. But an integrated study of micro-
scopic flow and macroscopic flow and the application to
productivity evaluation were seldom dealt with in published
papers. This paper addresses two issues through theoretical
121
researches and a case study. A geologicalephysical model was
built for the SRV section and then the control equations for gas
flow in the matrix and fractures were derived based on the
principles of gas diffusion and flow and material balance. The
equations include a parameter, interporosity flow coefficient,
to mathematically integrate the matrix model and fracture
model for complicated gas flow in the SRV section. Finally, a
case study was made on the production performance numeri-
cally simulated based on the control equations.
1. SRV geologicalephysical model
Effective shale gas development is closely related to the
generation of a complex fracture network by hydraulic frac-
turing, but it is extremely hard to delineate the fracture
network in a SRV section. Conventional approaches, e.g.
microseismicity, fracturing fluid volume estimation, and me-
chanical computation, do not capture the features of the
network accurately [18,19]. Here is a model established based
on geological and gas flow features in shale matrix and frac-
tures, and it is composed of the matrix split into many small
units by fractures (Fig. 1). This model can prove the same gas
flow as the actual SRV area.
In such a model, gas flow from the matrix to fractures is in
the form of diffusion and gas flow from fractures to the bottom
hole is in the form of seepage. Assume matrix porosity is 4m,
diffusion coefficient is D, fracture porosity is 4f, and the
permeability is Kf; matrix porosity and diffusion coefficient
can be obtained through lab tests.
The geologic reserves in the matrix and fractures may be
estimated by using the above model. For the fracture system,
only free gas is involved.
V4f
Gf ¼ ð1Þ
Bgi
where Gf is the gas reserves in fractures, m3; V is the apparent
volume of the SRV section, m3; Bgi is the dimensionless
volume factor of in-situ gas.
The matrix system involves free gas and adsorbed gas; the
volume of adsorbed gas is calculated with the Langmuir
equation.
V4m
Gm1 ¼ ð2Þ
Bgi
Fig. 1. A SRV model showing fracture distribution after massive hydraulic
fracturing.
122 Gao SS. et al. / Natural Gas Industry B 4 (2017) 120e126

VL p i As per the law of mass conservation, fluid mass change

Gm2 ¼ Vð1
4m Þ ð3Þ
pi þ pL within dt in the unit is equal to the sum of the net inflow mass
in three directions and the mass of gas flow from the matrix to
where Gm1 is the volume of free gas, m3; Gm2 is the volume of fractures. Thus the continuity equation for the fracture system
adsorbed gas, m3; pi is original gas reservoir pressure, MPa; is
VL is the Langmuir volume, m3/t; pL is the Langmuir pressure,
MPa. v

r4f ¼
V  ðrvÞ þ qc ð9Þ
vt
2. Gas flow continuity equations The Darcy equation is used to formulate the control equa-
tion due to gas flow in the fracture system is Darcy flow.
2.1. Continuity equation of gas flow in the fracture  
v
 K
system r4f ¼ V  r VP þ qc ð10Þ
vt m
The continuity equation of gas flow in the fracture system
was established with the differential method [20]. In the
hexahedral fracture-matrix unit shown in Fig. 2, the mass flow 2.2. Continuity equation of gas flow in the matrix system
rate at M, the center point of the unit, is rvf; three components
are rvfx, rvfy and rvfz. The continuity equation for the matrix system was also
As per Alharthy et al. [13], the net inflow gas mass within formulated using the differential method. In the hexahedral
the length of time, dt, in the x, y and z directions respectively is unit shown in Fig. 2, both gas desorption and gas flow from the
matrix to fractures are considered. Within the length of time dt
v
 from t to t þ dt, gas mass converted from adsorbed gas into

rvfx dxdydzdt ð4Þ
vx free gas is
 
v
 v VL p m

rvfy dxdydzdt ð5Þ ra ð1
4m Þdxdydzdt ð11Þ
vy vt pL þ pm

v
 where pm is the flowing pressure in the matrix system, MPa.

rvfz dxdydzdt ð6Þ Gas mass change within dt in the matrix system is
vz
where r is gas density, kg/m3. v
ðr4m Þdxdydzdt ð12Þ
The change of gas mass in the fracture system within dt is vt
As per the law of mass conservation, fluid mass change
v
 within dt in the unit is equal to the difference subtracting the
r4f dxdydzdt ð7Þ
vt mass of gas flow from the matrix to fractures from the mass of
The mass of gas flow within dt from the matrix to fractures gas desorption. Thus the continuity equation for the matrix
is system is
 
qc dxdydzdt ð8Þ vðr4m Þ v apm
¼
ð1
4m Þ ra
qc ð13Þ
vt vt pL þ pm
where qc is gas flow rate from the matrix per unit volume,
kg/(m3$s).
3. Interporosity flow equation

Gas flow from the matrix to fractures mainly occurs in the

Fig. 2. Schematic of a fracture-matrix unit.
form of diffusion. Shale pore diameter is usually the range of
1e100 nm and mainly shows 1e10 nm (Fig. 3); Kn is
generally larger than 0.1. Gas flow occurs in the form of
transition flow and free flow accompanied with molecular
collision and irregular molecular motion [21e23]. Due to the
occurrence of large open surface in the SRV section generated
by fracturing, gas diffusion from the matrix to fractures is
subject to the Fick's law of diffusion [23]. This means gas flow
in the matrix may be simplified by replacing the sum of inflow
gas mass inside the matrix with the quantity of Fick diffusion;
hence the coupling of complex gas flow in the matrix-fracture
system may be simplified and feasible.
 Gao SS. et al. / Natural Gas Industry B 4 (2017) 120e126 123

Fig. 3. Pore diameter distribution for typical core samples from Changning shale.

To facilitate the computation, the cube of the matrix after vC 2

fr ð18Þ
fracturing is simplified into a sphere by using the following vr
equation. As per the Fick's law of diffusion, the interporosity flow
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi rate at the radius r is
3 3 3
R¼ a ð14Þ
4p vC
qr ¼
4pr 2 D ð19Þ
vr
where a is the length of cube side, m; R is the equivalent radius
where D is the diffusion coefficient, m2/s; C is the gas density,
of the sphere, m.
kg/m3.
The control equation of gas diffusion in shale matrix has
Putting equation (18) into equation (19), we get the rela-
similar form to that of single-phase fluid flow in a homoge-
tionship between the interporosity flow rate at the sphere
neous sandstone oil reservoir. These equations were formu-
radius r and the rate at the margin R.
lated in the spherical coordinate system.
The control equation of gas diffusion in the spherical ma- r3
trix is qr ¼ q ð20Þ
R3
 
v 2 vC 1 vC
r ¼ ð15Þ where q is the interporosity flow rate at the outer margin of a
r vr
2 vr D vt single sphere, kg/s; qr is the interporosity flow rate at the
The control equation of single-phase fluid flow in a ho- sphere radius r, kg/s.
mogeneous sandstone oil reservoir is [24]. Putting equation (19) into equation (20), we get
  R2
r 2
v 2 vp 4mCt vp q ¼ 4pD½CðrÞ
CðRÞ ð21Þ
r ¼ ð16Þ 2R3
r vr
2 vr K vt
This means that, similar to single-phase fluid flow in a where C(R) is equivalent to the gas density at the outer margin
homogeneous sandstone oil reservoir, gas diffusion in the of the matrix which is in contact with fractures; hence the
spherical matrix also experiences the process from unstable outer margin and the fracture system have equal pressure.
diffusion to quasi-stable diffusion. In view of the small Thus the gas density at the outer margin is
diameter (of meter-scale) of the equivalent spherical matrix,
diffusion-induced pressure drop may quickly spread Mpf apf
CðRÞ ¼ 4m þ ð1
4m Þra ð22Þ
throughout the matrix before reaching the quasi-stable state. In ZRT pL þ pf
light of the principle of equal voidage at each point in the Equation (22) shows C(R), expressed as Cf hereinafter, is
homogeneous oil reservoir with quasi-stable fluid flow [24], the density of gas inside the matrix under fracture-system
the voidage should also be consistent at each point in the pressure.
matrix with quasi-stable gas diffusion. The flow rate is expressed as the function of average den-
vC sity after sphere integral of equation (21) and division by
¼ C1 ð17Þ spherical volume.
vt


where C1 is the voidage of shale gas per unit matrix volume, q ¼ 20pDR Cm
Cf ð23Þ
kg/(m3$t). It is independent of r.
Putting equation (17) into equation (15), we obtain where Cm is the average gas density of the matrix system.
124 Gao SS. et al. / Natural Gas Industry B 4 (2017) 120e126

Mpm apm The equations from (27) to (31) constitute the mathematical
Cm ¼ 4m þ ð1
4m Þra ð24Þ
ZRT pL þ pm model for gas flow in the SRV section. Gas viscosity, density
and adsorptive capacity are the non-linear functions of pres-
Equation (23) is divided by spherical volume and then the sure; hence the mathematical model is composed of a series of
interporosity flow rate per unit matrix volume is non-linear partial differential equations, which have to be
qc ¼ l½Cm
CðRÞ ð25Þ solved numerically because there are no analytic solutions.
Gas flow mainly occurs along major vertical fractures after
where l ¼ 15DR2 .
massive fracturing [25]. If major fracture height is consistent
Here l is the interporosity flow coefficient of the matrix, 1/ with reservoir height, shale gas flow could be simplified to be
s. 1D linear flow and equations (27), (29) and (30) are simplified
As per the expression, the interporosity gas flow rate after into the following equations.
fracturing is in direct proportion to matrix diffusion coefficient
 
and matrix-fracture density contrast and in reciprocal pro- v
 v K p

r4f ¼ r þ l Cm
Cf ð32Þ
portion to the square of the equivalent radius. Thus inter- vt vx m vx
porosity gas flow is closely related to the volume of matrix
after fracturing. Putting l, Cm and C(R) into equation (25), we
obtain equation (26) for the interporosity flow rate (qc). Gas 
4Lf hKf vpf 
diffusion in the matrix and gas flow in fractures are coupled in q¼N ð33Þ
the expression. mBg vx x¼0

 
15D Mpm apm Mpf
qc ¼ 4m þ ð1
4m Þra
4m vpf 
pL þ pm ¼0 ð34Þ
vx x¼a
R2 ZRT ZRT
 2
apf

ð1
4m Þra ð26Þ
pL þ pf
where N is the number of fractures; a is fracture spacing, m.
4. Coupled matrix-fracture gas flow model and numerical
solution 4.2. Numerical solution

4.1. Coupled matrix-fracture gas flow model Taking the gas state equation into equation (32), we get
   
In accordance with the above continuity equations and v Mp v Mp K p

4f ¼ þ l Cm
Cf ð35Þ
interporosity flow equation, we obtain the control equations vt ZRT vx ZRT m vx
for the matrix-fracture system.
For the fracture system,
where M is the dimensionless quasi-molecular weight of shale
 
v
 K
 gas; Z is the dimensionless volume factor of shale gas; R is the
r4f ¼ V  r Vp þ l Cm
Cf ð27Þ gas constant of 0.008314 MPa$m3/(kmol$K); T is the tem-
vt m
perature of gas reservoir, K.
For the matrix system, The spatial grid size and time grid size are consistently set to
    be Dx and Dt. Due to strong nonlinearity, the interporosity flow
v Mpm v VL p m

4 þ ð1
4m Þ r ¼
l Cm
Cf at the point (xi, tnþ1) is set to be the value at (xi, tn) in the process
vt ZRT m vt a pL þ pm
of difference discretization. This treatment was numerically
ð28Þ proved to be reliable. It may also simplify the process of dif-
The internal boundary condition is ference discretization and improve the convergence of equation.
Z The discretized equation is shown as follows.
Kf h vpf
q¼ dy ðx; y; zÞ2vU1 ð29Þ
mBg vx 
M4f pf;i
pnf;i diþ1=2 pf;iþ1
diþ1=2 þdi
1=2 pf;i þdi
1=2 pf ;i
1
vU1 nþ1 n nþ1 n n nþ1 n nþ1

The external boundary condition is ¼

ZRT Dt Dx2

vpf þl Cm;in

Cf;i
n
¼ 0 ðx; y; zÞ2vU2 ð30Þ
vn
ð36Þ
The initial condition is
where d is the mass transmission coefficient of fractures and
pm ðt ¼ 0Þ ¼ pf ðt ¼ 0Þ ¼ pi ð31Þ indicates the flow capacity of gas mass in the fracture system.
It is expressed as follows.
 Gao SS. et al. / Natural Gas Industry B 4 (2017) 120e126 125

method [26] to obtain pressure distribution in the fracture

system.
For the matrix system, the difference discrete equation is
 nþ1 
M4m pm;i pnm;i ð1
4m ÞVL ra
nþ1
þ
ZRTDt Zi Zi n
Dt
 nþ1   ð40Þ
pm;i pnm;i

¼
l Cm;i
n

Cf;i
n
pL þ pm;i pL þ pm;i
nþ1 n

Equation (36) is non-linear and pm, the pressure of the

Fig. 4. Shale gas production performance of Well A.
matrix system, is the monotone function of time t; so equation
(40) may be solved using trial calculation-interpolation method
[27]. For a known pressure at the point (xi, tn), assume a
Mp K pressure at the next time point. Calculate the difference be-
d¼ ð37Þ
ZRT m tween the left and the right in equation (40). The pressure at (xi,
tnþ1) is then determined by piecewise linear interpolation of
As per water-electricity similarity principle [25], the difference and assumed pressure. This method of calcu-
lating pm was demonstrated to be feasible by the case study.
2di di±1
di±1=2 ¼ ð38Þ Based on the pressure numerically calculated for the frac-
di þ di±1 ture and matrix systems, real-time interporosity gas flow rate
was obtained through space integral of equation (35).
Equation (23) is rewritten as
nþ1 nþ1 nþ1
5. Case study
ai;iþ1 pf;iþ1 þ ai;i pf;i þ ai;i
1 pf;i
1 ¼ bi ð39Þ
Well A is a vertical well drilled in the ChangningeWeiyuan
where, state shale gas demonstration area. The initial gas reservoir
dniþ1=2 pressure is 50 MPa; the matrix porosity is 2%; the diffusion
ai;iþ1 ¼ coefficient is 10
5 cm2/s; the Langmuir pressure is 8 MPa and
Dx2 the Langmuir volume is 3 m3/kg; the volume of the SRV
 n 
diþ1=2 þ dni
1=2 M4f section is about 1000  104 m3; the fracture porosity is 0.1%;
ai;i
1 ¼
þ
Dx2 ZRTDt the natural gas reserves in the SRV section is estimated to be
1.5  108 m3. Natural gas mainly occurs in the form of free
ddni
1=2
ai;iþ1 ¼ pnþ1 gas and adsorbed gas. Daily boosting output at the early stage
Dx2 f;i
1 reached 5  104 m3 for a short time and then quickly dropped
 n
M4f n to and stabilized at 0.2  104 m3. The production curve is
bi ¼
pf;i
l C m;i
Cf;i
n
ZRTDt shown in Fig. 4.
Fig. 5-a shows the interporosity flow coefficient curve for
As per equation (39), the control equation for the fracture different volumes of equivalent matrix and Fig. 5-b shows the
system is discretized to be a tridiagonal linear system of curves of history matching with different interporosity flow
equations, which could be solved using the upwind difference coefficients. Interporosity flow coefficient, as well as gas

Fig. 5. Fracturing scale and history matching for Well A.

126 Gao SS. et al. / Natural Gas Industry B 4 (2017) 120e126
yield and productivity at stable production, increases with the
volume of equivalent matrix. For an equivalent length of side
of 10 m and interporosity flow coefficient of 10
10/s, the
simulated curve is consistent with the actual production
performance curve. For an equivalent length of 3 m and
interporosity flow coefficient of 10
9/s, the stable produc-
tivity is 1.5  104 m3/d, which is higher than the actual data.
For an equivalent length of 30 m and interporosity flow co-
efficient of 10
11/s, the stable productivity is 0.04  104 m3/
d, which is obviously less than the actual data. Thus it is
possible to maintain a long-period stable production at
0.2  104 m3/d for an equivalent length of 10 m, or equiv-
alent sphere radius of 6.2 m, and interporosity flow coeffi-
cient of 10
10/s.
As per the case study, the coupling model could be used to
interpret and predict production performance of gas wells and
estimate rational production. The results may be used to guide
commercial development of shale gas accumulations.
6. Conclusions
1) The continuity equations for the matrix and fracture
systems are derived based on geologic and gas flow
features and the material balance equation. The equa-
tions include a parameter, interporosity flow coefficient,
to mathematically couple the matrix model with gas
diffusion and the fracture model with gas flow. This
paper also presents the numerical solution to the coupled
model.
2) Shale gas mainly accumulates in the matrix. Matrix
diffusibility and the size of matrix after massive frac-
turing dominate shale gas productivity and the period of
stable production.
3) Matrix diffusibility is about 10
5 cm2/s at Well A in the
ChangningeWeiyuan prospect. In spite of abundant gas
resources in the SRV section, overlarge volume of
equivalent matrix has a negative impact on gas flow
from the matrix to fractures due to underdeveloped
fracture networks; hence shale gas productivity may also
be low. In short, scale fracturing to improve the fracture
density in the SRV section is crucial to commercial shale
gas production.
References
[1] Wu Qi, Xu Yun, Wang Tengfei, Wang Xiaoquan. The revolution of
reservoir stimulation: an introduction of volume fracturing. Nat Gas Ind
2011;31(4):7e12.
[2] Dong Dazhong, Wang Yuman, Li Xinjing, Zou Caineng,
Guan Quanzhong, Zhang Chenchen, et al. Breakthrough and prospect of
shale gas exploration and development in China. Nat Gas Ind
2016;36(1):19e32.
[3] Su Yuliang, Sheng Guanglong, Wang Wendong, Yan Yi, Zhang Xuan. A
multi-media coupling flow model for shale gas reservoirs. Nat Gas Ind
2016;36(2):52e9.
[4] Wen Qingzhi, Gao Jinjian, Li Yang, Zhan Yongping, Li Meng. Analysis
of the factors of influencing stimulated volume of shale reservoir volume
fracturing. J Xi'an Shiyou Univ Nat Sci Ed 2014;29(6):58e64.
[5] Carlson ES, Mercer JC. Devonian shale gas production: mechanisms and
simple models. JPT 1991;43(4):476e82.
[6] Carlson ES. Characterization of Devonian shale gas reservoirs using
coordinated single well analytical models. In: SPE eastern regional
meeting, 8e10 November; 1994. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/29199-MS.
Charleston, West Virginia, USA.
[7] Javadpour F. Nanopores and apparent permeability of gas flow in
mudrocks (shales and siltstone). J Can Petrol Technol 2009;48(8):16e21.
[8] Javadpour F, Fisher D, Unsworth M. Nanoscale gas flow in shale gas
sediments. J Can Petrol Technol 2007;46(10):55e61.
[9] Schepers KC, Gonzalez RJ, Koperna GJ, Oudinot AY. Reservoir
modeling in support of shale gas exploration. In: Latin american and
caribbean petroleum engineering conference, 31 Maye3 June; 2009.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/123057-MS. Cartagena de Indias, Colombia,
Cuba.
[10] Civan F, Rai CS, Sondergeld CH. Shale-gas permeability and diffusivity
inferred by improved formulation of relevant retention and transport
mechanisms. Transp Porous Media 2011;86(3):925e44.
[11] Swami V, Settari A. A pore scale gas flow model for shale gas reservoir.
In: SPE americas unconventional resources conference, 5e7 June; 2012.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/155756-MS. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
[12] Swami V, Settari AT, Javadpour F. A numerical model for multi-
mechanism flow in shale gas reservoirs with application to laboratory
scale testing. In: EAGE annual conference & exhibition incorporating
SPE europec, 10e13 June; 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/164840-MS.
London, UK.
[13] Alharthy NS, Kobaisi MA, Kazemi H, Graves RM. Physics and modeling
of gas flow in shale reservoirs. In: Abu Dhabi international petroleum
conference and exhibition, 11e14 November; 2012. http://dx.doi.org/
10.2118/161893-MS. Abu Dhabi, UAE.
[14] Duan Yonggang, Wei Mingqiang, Li Jianqiu, Tang Yan. Shale gas
seepage mechanism and fractured wells' production evaluation. J
Chongqing Univ 2011;34(4):62e6.
[15] Li Zhiping, Li Zhifeng. Dynamic characteristics of shale gas flow in
nanoscale pores. Nat Gas Ind 2012;32(4):50e3.
[16] Zhao Jinzhou, Li Zhiqiang, Hu Yongquan, Ren Lan. Numerical simula-
tion of productivity after fracturing with consideration to micro-seepage
in shale reservoirs. Nat Gas Ind 2015;35(6):53e8.
[17] Guo Xiaozhe, Zhou Changsha. Diffusion seepage model for fractured
horizontal well in shale gas reservoir. J Southwest Petrol Univ Sci
Technol Ed 2015;37(3):38e44.
[18] Zhao Zhengguang, Qin Yueshuang, Yang Ruizhao. Hydraulic fracture
mapping for a tight sands reservoir by surface based microseismic
monitoring. Prog Geophys 2014;29(5):2136e9.
[19] Ren Shan, Ci Jianfa. Fracture closure and flowback optimization for
fractured wells considering dynamic fluid loss coefficient. J China Univ
Petrol Ed Nat Sci 2011;35(3):103e7. 114.
[20] Kong Xiangyan. Advanced mechanics of fluids in porous media. 2nd
ed. Hefei: Press of University of Science and Technology of China;
2010.
[21] Yao Jun, Zhao Jianlin, Zhang Min, Zhang Lei, Yang Yongfei,
Sun Zhixue, et al. Microscale shale gas flow simulation based on Lattice
Boltzmann method. Acta Pet Sin 2015;36(10):1280e9.
[22] Duan Yonggang, Cao Tingkuan, Yang Xiaoying, Zhang Ying,
Wu Guiping. Simulation of gas flow in nano-scale pores of shale gas
deposits. J Southwest Petrol Univ Sci Technol Ed 2015;37(3):63e8.
[23] Wu Keliu, Li Xiangfang, Chen Zhangxing. A model for gas transport through
nanopores of shale gas reservoirs. Acta Pet Sin 2015;36(7):837e48.
[24] Zhang Jianguo. The oil and gas flow through porous media. Dongying:
China University of Petroleum Press; 1998.
[25] Mi Lidong, Jiang Hanqiao, Li Junjian. Investigation of shale gas nu-
merical simulation method based on discrete fracture network model. Nat
Gas Geosci 2014;25(11):1795e803.
[26] Zhang Zhijuan, Yuan Yirang. Upwind finite difference methods and
numerical simulations for the unsaturated water flow problem. Acta Math
Appl Sin 2009;32(3):385e99.
[27] Li Qingyang, Wang Nengchao, Yi Dayi. Numerical analysis. 5th ed.
Beijing: Tsinghua University Press; 2008.