Multiple Fracture Propagation Model

for a Three-Dimensional Hydraulic Fracturing Simulator

Koji Yamamoto1; Tatsuo Shimamoto2; and Shunichi Sukemura3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: Multiple nonplanar hydraulically induced fractures are often observed or assumed to exist in well stimulation sites of
petroleum and geothermal reservoirs. Although such multiple and nonplanar features of the fractures affect the fracture extension and well
stimulation efficiency, or even cause failure of the fracturing treatments, most of the available numerical simulators for hydraulic
fracturing place restrictions on the fracture geometry such as a single, planar, and symmetrical fractures. To develop design tools and
investigate the nature of fracture formation in consideration of the interaction between each fracture, the authors developed a true
three-dimensional simulator of the fracturing process. The stress field around a fracture induced by the entire fracture system is computed
and used to determine fracture aperture and its advance. The displacement discontinuity method is used to model arbitrary shapes of
fractures with a fully coupled solution of fracture deformation and injected fluid pressure under the condition of mass conservation. In this
paper, the theoretical basis and numerical method are presented with some examples of the simulated results for multiple fractures.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲1532-3641共2004兲4:1共46兲
CE Database subject headings: Fractures; Boundary element methods; Finite element method; Coupling; Petroleum; Well construc-
tion; Reservoir design; Hydraulic models.

Introduction three-dimensional fracture geometry with fracture aperture

Due to its complex nature involving the mechanical behavior of
solid material and fluid flow under the high-stress and high-
pressure conditions of rock mass systems deep underground, hy-
draulic fracturing is a subject of much debate among engineers
and scientists. Various numerical models of the phenomenon have
been developed by different approaches, and their application to
the petroleum and geothermal industries has become an important
issue in the field of geomechanics. We have improved our under-
standing of the mechanics of rock failure through the develop-
ment and verification of the numerical models, since the fractur-
ing operation can be regarded as an in situ rock mass destruction
test of the greatest scale under partially controlled conditions.
The development of hydraulic fracturing models has pursued
freer fracture geometry models, with no restrictions. Studies on
the behavior of cracks under several stress and pressure condi-
tions started with analytical solutions for static simple circular
共so-called ‘‘penny shape’’兲 fracture with internal pressure 共Sned-
don 1946兲. More realistic analytical models for hydraulically in-
duced fracture were developed for two-dimensional or quasi-
1
Research Engineer, Technology Research Center, Japan National
Oil Corporation, 1-2-2 Hamada, Mihama-ku, Chiba 261-0025, Japan.
E-mail: yamamt-k@jnoc.go.jp
2
Reservoir Engineer, Technical Planning Dept., Teikoku Oil Corpora-
tion, Hatagaya 1-31-10, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 151-8565, Japan. E-mail:
t – shimamoto@teikokuoil.co.jp
3
Senior Research Officer, Simulation Products Division, Fuji Re-
search Institute, 2-3 Kanda-Nishiki-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8443,
Japan. E-mail: sukumura@star.fuji-ric.co.jp
Note. Discussion open until August 1, 2004. Separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos-
sible publication on June 7, 2001; approved on July 15, 2002. This paper
is part of the International Journal of Geomechanics, Vol. 4, No. 1,
March 1, 2004. ©ASCE, ISSN 1532-3641/2004/1-46 –57/$18.00.
solutions such as the Khristianovic–Geertsma–de Klerk 共KGD兲
model 共Geertsma and de Klerk 1969兲 and the Perkins–Kern–
Nordgren 共PKN兲 model 共Perkins and Kern 1961; Nordgren 1972兲.
In such models, the fracture shape should be basically rectangular
and develop under the condition of constant height or constant
length. To determine the fracture aperture, the plane strain condi-
tion is applied to horizontal or vertical cross sections of the frac-
ture, respectively. Fluid pressure is modeled as one-dimensional
flow along the fracture length. Such simple fracture geometry is
believed to be reasonable, because in many cases the fracture
would be confined in a reservoir formation that generally has a
lower Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio, and consequently,
lower horizontal stresses. A three-dimensional model of the hy-
draulically induced fractures is necessary for more general situa-
tions, since the scale of fracturing operation increases as higher
injection rates and treatment pressures are used to improve recov-
ery and productivity. The assumption of confined fracture is not
suitable for such massive fracturing operations, and so numerical
methods like the finite difference, finite element, and boundary
element methods have been introduced for planar fractures of free
shape by Wiles and Curran 共1982兲, Vandamme and Curran
共1989兲, Clifton and Abou-Sayed 共1979兲, Clifton and Abou-Sayed
共1981兲, Gu and Yew 共1988兲, and others. A model comparison
study 共Warpinski et al. 1993兲 was carried out and many other
models were introduced. In such simulators, the fracture surface
is discretized with nodes and elements, and the coupled solution
of the fracture aperture and fluid pressure is derived by the nu-
merical methods.
In case of a fracture from a deviated well, the fracture initiates
along with the borehole because of the stress concentration in-
duced by internal pressure, but departs from the original surface
to minimize the strain energy around the fracture tip. Such curved
and/or twisted fracture should be modeled for recent complex
well geometries. A completely free and three-dimensional fracture
model was developed with boundary element methods by a group

46 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004

Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.

 Fig. 1. Model of multiple fractures from horizontal wells: 共A兲
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
transverse fractures and 共B兲 axial fractures are formed along the bore-
hole normal to the minimum horizontal stress direction
from Cornell University 共Lutz 1991; Morales et al. 1993兲, which
used volumetric elements to discretize the space around the frac-
ture. The present authors developed another true three-
dimensional model for single, nonplanar fractures 共Yamamoto
et al. 1999兲. With the numerical simulator in which only the frac-
ture surface needs to be discretized with elements, free fracture
formation for an arbitrary injection schedule of the stimulation
can be modeled with reasonable computation time.
Multiple fracture formation is believed to be a common occur-
rence around boreholes, and complicates the fracturing treatments
such as severe tortuosity and early screen-out 共high-pressure drop
at the fracture tip due to concentration of solid particles兲, because
the fracture aperture is limited due to the fracture interaction.
Such multiple fracture formation is observed with conditions such
as extended reach wells and deviated boreholes as shown in Figs.
1 and 2, respectively. On the contrary, artificially generated mul-
tiple fractures might be useful for storing drilling waste for rein-
jection of drill cuttings. According to the disposal domain concept
proposed by Moschovidis et al. 共1994兲, the capacity of the dis-
posal site should be secured by multiple radial fractures from the
single interval of the borehole shown in Fig. 3. In such cases, the
fracture extent is also the key to the environmental friendliness of
the disposal operation, because the fractures must not reach the
seabed or usable fresh aquifers. Another example of multiple frac-
tures is the heat dry rock 共HDR兲 geothermal reservoir creation,
Fig. 2. Model of multiple fractures from a deviated well; fractures
are initiated along the borehole but expected to depart from the origi-
nal plane
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004 / 47
Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.
Fig. 3. Schematic of the disposal domain concept for drilling waste
reinjection 共After Moshchovidis et al. 1994兲; multiple fractures of
different orientation are created in a small region around the well
during periodic injections due to equalize the horizontal stress by the
deposition of cuttings
for which two fractures are created from both injection and pro-
duction wells, as shown in Fig. 4.
As mentioned above, the geometry and extent of multiple frac-
tures are likely to affect the efficiency of hydrocarbon production,
capacity of drilling waste disposal, and reliability of environmen-
tal safety. To consider such multiple fracture cases, the system of
the fractures should be three-dimensional and heterogeneous, and
interaction between the fractures should be taken into account.
Following the previous work on a single nonplanar fracture
model, the authors extend the application of the simulator to such
multiple fracture cases.
Overview of the Systems Modeled in the Simulator
Similar to most other three-dimensional simulators, the simulator
is based on models of the following four major physical phenom-
ena 共Yamamoto et al. 1999兲.
1. Fracture aperture due to internal pressure:
• Elastic deformation of the formation around the fracture
Fig. 4. Model of fractures from injection and production wells of a
HDR reservoir; two fractures are designed to merge at a certain point
to create a channel of the water and steam
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. Simulated and measured pressure history in typical well stimulation treatment; single planar fracture case with various leak-off rates
共Yamamoto et al. 2000兲; 共four cycles of periodic injection with slurry pump rate 3.15 m3 /min)

by the displacement discontinuity method; Displacement Discontinuity Formulation

• Stress concentration around the fracture tip with the linear
fracture mechanics model.
2. High-viscosity non-Newtonian fluid flow inside of the frac-
ture and leak-off into the formation:
• Incompressible power-law fluid flow between parallel sur-
faces;
• Fluid leak-off rate according to one-dimensional Carter’s
flow model.
3. Proppant 共solid particles as elastic support material to sustain
the fracture aperture after injection termination兲 transport in-
side of the fracture
• Particle motion due to fluid flow;
• Slip velocity between fluid and solid induced by settlement
of the particles by gravity;
• Viscosity variation of the fluid according to the concentra-
tion of the solids.
4. Fracture propagation:
• Stress intensity factor determined by aperture at the frac-
ture tip with the linear fracture mechanics model;
• Fracture tip advance determined by fracture toughness of
the formation and mode I stress intensity factor.
In this model, we assume uniform elastic moduli of the entire
space. However, different values of in situ stress, fracture tough-
ness, and leak-off coefficient are given for each parallel stratum.
Stratum boundaries are not obliged to be horizontal. The injection
schedule, which gives the pump rate of the fracturing fluid and
proppant concentration at the wellbore, is arbitrary, so the post-
shut-in process, flow back, and periodic injections can be mod-
eled without any assumption other than mass conservation. In
case of multiple fractures, the schedule can be defined indepen-
dently for each borehole or fracture wing. Fig. 5 shows a typical
pressure history simulated with the model for single fracture cases
of various leak-off coefficients 共Yamamoto et al. 2000兲.
For the multiple fracture cases, any number of boreholes with
free geometries 共azimuth and deviation angle兲 can be modeled.
One or multiple perforation interval共s兲 are defined for each bore-
hole. Initial fractures are planar ellipsoids, and have free azimuth.
The displacement discontinuity 共DD兲 formulation is based on
Green’s functions, which represent the relationship between dis-
placement discontinuity and stress tensor. On the fracture plane,
displacement discontinuity is defined by aperture and two kinds
of ride 共relative shear displacements between fracture surfaces兲,
shown in Fig. 6. Assuming arbitrary Cartesian coordinates, the
crack opening and rides are modeled as the distribution of the
concentrated displacement discontinuities ⌽共␰兲, which is defined
by Eq. 共1兲 at a point ␰ as follows:
⌽ kn 共 ␰ 兲 ⫽ lim u k 共 ␰ 兲 ⫺ lim u k 共 ␰ 兲 ⫽␦ 共 ␰ 兲 •␾ *
kn (1)
␰ n →⫺0 ␰ n →⫹0
where u k ⫽kth component of displacement; n⫽normal compo-
nent of the fracture surface; ␦(x)⫽Dirac’s delta function; and
␾*kn ⫽intensity tensor of the displacement discontinuity. Fracture
itself is modeled as a continuously distributed displacement dis-
continuity on a curved or flat plane without thickness.
The concept of the DD method was presented by Crouch
共1976兲 as a means of discretizing crack opening with finite length
segments which have uniform displacement discontinuity
throughout each segment. Wiles and Curran 共1982兲 and Van-
damme and Curran 共1989兲 derived the three-dimensional formu-
lation and Green’s functions in uniform, infinite, and elastic
media for a point source, in order to apply it to the fracture of an
arbitrary shape in three-dimensional space. Some applications to
Fig. 6. Definition of the three modes of displacement discontinuity

48 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004

Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.

 multiple fracture problems are introduced 共Vandamme et al.
1988兲. Also, Kuriyama and Mizuta 共1993兲 adopt the method to
the hydraulic fracture cases and applied to three-dimensional hy-
draulic fractures case and two-dimensional multiple fracture cases
for HDR plant design 共Mizuta et al. 2000兲.
Stress tensor ␴ i j and displacement vector u i at a point x in-
duced by the point source at ␰ are obtained by multiplying
Green’s functions by the intensity tensor of the displacement dis-
continuities as follows:
␴ i j 共 x 兲 ⫽T *
i jkn 共 x,␰ 兲 ⌽ kn 共 ␰ 兲 (2)
Fig. 7. Configuration of the fracture front elements
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

u i ⫽G *jkn 共 x,␰ 兲 ⌽ kn 共 ␰ 兲 (3)

where T * ,G * ⫽tensor representation of Green’s functions as and for type II elements defined in Fig. 7 as

i jkn ⫽
T*
G
4␲ 共 1⫺␯ 兲
1
r 冋
⫻ 3 兵 共 1⫺2␯ 兲共 ␦ ik ␦ jn ⫹␦ jk ␦ in 兲
⌽⫽N 1 ⌽ 1
N 1 ⫽ 冑d/d 0
(9)

3 where d⫽distance from the fracture tip; d 0 ⫽width of the front

⫺ 共 1⫺4␯ 兲 ␦ i j ␦ kn 其 ⫹ 兵 ␯ 共 ␦ ik y j y n ⫹␦ jk y i y n ⫹␦ in y j y k elements; and ␶⫽parameter to represent the circumferential posi-
r5
tion defined as ␶⫽t/t 0 in Fig. 7. Since only the fracture surfaces
⫹␦ jn y i y k 兲 ⫹ 共 1⫺2␯ 兲共 ␦ kn y i y j ⫹␦ i j y k y n 兲 其 ⫺
15
yy y y
r7 i j k n 册 need to be discretized, such boundary integral methods are suit-
able for analyzing the fracture propagation problem in which the
analysis mesh should be regenerated for each time step.
(4) The pressure of the fluid should balance the normal component

* ⫽⫺
G ikn
1
8␲ 共 1⫺␯ 兲
⫻
1⫺2␯
r3 再
共 y i ␦ kn ⫺y n ␦ ki ⫺y k ␦ in 兲
of stresses against the fracture faces and shear stress on the sur-
faces must be eliminated, hence,
p 共 x 兲 n i 共 x 兲 ⫽␴ i j 共 x 兲 n j 共 x 兲
冎
冋 冕 再兺 冎 册
3y i y k y n
⫺ (5) E N(e)
r5
where, G⫽shear modulus of the formation rock; y i ⫽(x i ⫺␰ i ),
⫽ 兺
e⫽1
i jkn 共 x,␰ 兲
T*
⌫e p⫽1
␾* (p) (p)
kn N 共 ␰ 兲 d⌫ e n j 共 x 兲

and r 2 ⫽y i y i .
(10)
The stresses induced by the finite extension of a fracture, such
as the continuous displacement discontinuity, are obtained by in- where p(x)⫽fluid pressure at x; and n i ⫽normal vector of the
tegrating the right-hand side of Eq. 共2兲 over the total fracture surface of fractures.
surface ⌫, written as By applying numerical integration and coordinate transfer, Eq.
共10兲 is rewritten as a vector–matrix equation:
␴ i j共 x 兲⫽ 冕 i jkn 共 x,␰ 兲 ⌽ kn 共 ␰ 兲 d␰
T* (6) E N (e)
⌫
p m n im ⫽ 兺兺 T mn(p)
ij ␾ n(p)
j (11)
In case of multiple fractures, ⌫ should include the whole of the e⫽1 p⫽1

fracture system. where m⫽node number of the observation points; n⫽node num-
The discrete form of Eq. 共6兲 is derived by discretizing the i j ⫽influence matrix between node m
ber of the source points; T mn
surface with triangle elements and appropriate shape functions and node n derived from integrating the tensor T * ; and ␾ i
N i (x): ⫽displacement discontinuity vector defined as ␾ i ⫽␾ * ijn j .

冋 冕 再兺 冎册
E N(e) For the integration of Eq. 共10兲, a Gaussian point integral is
␴ i j共 x 兲⫽ 兺
e⫽1
i jkn 共 x,␰ 兲
T*
⌫e p⫽1
␾* (p) (p)
kn N 共 ␰ 兲 d␰ (7) used when r is sufficiently large. The number of integration
points varies with the distance between the element centers to the
source points r 共if r is larger, fewer integration points are used;
where e⫽element number; E⫽total element number; p⫽node the minimum is 1 and the maximum is 7. If r is less than a certain
number in element e; N (e) ⫽number of the nodes which form value, the elements are divided into sub-elements for the integra-
element e 共in this paper, N (e) ⫽3); and ⌫ e ⫽area of the element e. tion.
In this model, we choose a linear shape function for the elements Since a hypersingular integral is necessary to obtain the diag-
inside the fracture and square-root shape functions for the dis- onal elements of the matrix T i j , we define a small polygonal area
tance from the fracture front for front elements in order to repre- for each node, of which the boundary is defined by a function
sent the fracture opening characteristics predicted as the infinite a(␪) as shown in Fig. 8. The displacement discontinuity is as-
crack tip stresses by linear fracture mechanics. The aperture of
sumed to be uniform in the area as ␾ (0)j . The diagonal element of
type I elements defined in Fig. 7 is written as
the influence matrix T mm is derived from the integration of the
⌽⫽N 1 ⌽ 1 ⫹N 2 ⌽ 2 Green’s function T of the infinite area on the plane outside of the
polygon as
N 1 ⫽ 共 1⫺␶ 兲 冑d/d 0
冕 冕
(8) ⬁ ␪2

N 2 ⫽␶ 冑d/d 0 i j ⫽⫺
T mm T i j 共 r,␪ 兲 ␾ (0)
j rd␪dr (12)
a(␪) ␪1

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004 / 49

Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.

 where n⫽(n ⬘ ⫺1)/2 and m⫽(2n⫹2)/(2n⫹1).
Because Eqs. 共13兲 and 共14兲 are nonlinear equations that should
be satisfied simultaneously, the equations are rewritten as a form
of Euler’s differential equations, and the solution is derived as the
extremal value of a functional with the calculus of variation 共Clif-
ton and Abou-Sayed 1981兲. We introduce a function L as

L 共 p,p ,␰ ,p ,␨ 兲 ⫽ 冉 冊
w2 w2
m n⬘
1/n ⬘
兵 共 p ,␰ ⫺␳g ␰ 兲 2 ⫹ 共 p ,␨ ⫺␳g y 兲 2 其 m/2

冉 冊
⫹p q L ⫹
dw
(16)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

dt
Fig. 8. Domain of the singular integration for diagonals of the
matrix; uniform aperture is assumed in the small region around the where p ,␰ ⫽⳵p/⳵␰, p ,␨ ⫽⳵p/⳵␨.
node, and analytical solution of the area outside of the singular area is Eqs. 共13兲 and 共14兲 are rewritten as

冉 冊 冉 冊
obtained
⳵L ⳵ ⳵L ⳵ ⳵L
⫺ ⫺ ⫽0 (17)
⳵p ⳵␰ ⳵p ,␰ ⳵␨ ⳵p ,␨
where the integral is derived from analytical solutions.
⳵L
⫽⫺q ␰
Coupled Model of Fluid Pressure and Aperture ⳵p ,␰
(18)
Distribution ⳵L
⫽⫺q ␨
⳵p ,␨
Non-Newtonian Fluid Flow
respectively. The boundary condition of injection fluid injection is
In this model, the fracturing fluid flow of each fracture wing is written as
solved independently. However, along the borehole, the pressure
of each fracture wing should be the same value at the same point. ⳵L ⳵␰ ⳵L ⳵␨
⫺ ⫽q 0 on ⳵⌫ (19)
The fracturing fluid viscosity is assumed to obey the power law, ⳵p ,␰ ⳵n ⳵p ,␨ ⳵n
in which the viscosity is a function of the shear rate, and the
velocity distribution along the axis normal to the surface is not where q 0 ⫽injection volume per unit time and unit boundary
parabolic but higher or lower order function forms. The model length, and ⳵⌫⫽injection domain which is a model of perforated
assumes that the fluid runs through the parallel planes between intervals on the borehole.
fracture surfaces as a laminar flow. The numerical method for A functional J(p,p ,␰ ,p ,␨ ) is introduced as

冕 冕
analyzing the fluid pressure distribution of the injected fluid is
based on the two-dimensional finite element formulation with the J 共 p,p ,␰ ,p ,␨ 兲 ⫽ L 共 p,p ,␰ ,p ,␨ 兲 d␰d␨⫺ q 0 ds (20)
model presented by Clifton and Abou-Sayed 共1979兲. Friction loss ⌫ ⳵⌫

caused by fracture tortuosity is not considered, although the effect

where ⌫⫽entire fracture plane. Using Gauss’s integral theorem,
cannot be neglected around the borehole.
the solution of Eqs. 共13兲 and 共14兲 under the boundary condition-
The governing equations of the two-dimensional power-law
defined by Eq. 共19兲 is derived as the extremal values of the func-
fluid flow in the ␰–␨ plane between fracture surfaces are written
tional J(p,p ,␰ ,p ,␨ ).
as follows:
The fracture surface is discretized by triangle elements, and
• The equation of continua:
Galerkin’s procedure with appropriate shape function N i are used
⳵q ␰ ⳵q ␨ ⳵w to give pressure p and pressure gradient p ,␰ and p ,␨ in each ele-
⫹ ⫽⫺q L ⫺ (13)
⳵␰ ⳵␨ ⳵t ment as follows
• Pressure gradient along ␰ and ␨ directions by friction losses ⳵N i ⳵N i
and body forces p 共 ␰,␨ 兲 ⫽N i 共 ␰,␨ 兲 p i , p ,␰ ⫽ p , p ,␨ ⫽ p (21)
⳵␰ i ⳵␨ i
⳵p
⳵␰
兩q兩
⫹␩ ⬘ 2
w 冉 冊 n ⬘ ⫺1
q␰
w3
⫽␳g ␰ where i⫽number of adjacent nodes of the element. Using the
relations of Eq. 共21兲, the functional J(p,p ,␰ ,p ,␨ ) is rewritten as a

冉 冊
(14)
⳵p 兩 q 兩 n ⬘ ⫺1 q ␨ functional of a single variable J(p), and the extremal value of the
⫹␩ ⬘ 2 ⫽␳g ␨ functional J(p) can be derive by the relation
⳵␨ w w3
where w⫽fracture aperture; q ␰ and q ␨ ⫽fluid flux in the ␰ and ␨ ⳵J 共 p 兲
directions; ␳⫽fluid density; and g ␰ and g ␨ ⫽gravity accelerations ⫽0, i⫽1,N (22)
⳵p i
in the ␰ and ␨ directions. Values q ␰ and q ␨ are obtained from the
integration of fluid velocity profile between fracture surfaces. q where N⫽number of nodes.
⫽total flow rate defined as 兩 q 兩 ⫽(q 2␰ ⫹q 2␨ ) 1/2; and q L is the leak- Eq. 共22兲 can be rewritten as a nonlinear vector-matrix equation
off rate. The viscosity parameter ␩ ⬘ is given with the empirical for the element e as
power-law exponent n ⬘ and consistency law index k ⬘ as
K ei j 共 p 兲 p j ⫽F ie 共 p 兲 (23)
k⬘
␩ ⬘ ⫽␩ 0 2 共共
n
m⫹1 兲 2 m 兲 1/共 m⫺1 兲 , ␩ 0⫽ n (15)
2 where

50 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004

Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.

 Fig. 9. Schematics of the coupled solution of fluid pressure and fracture aperture through an iteration loop of liner displacement discontinuity
equations and nonlinear finite element equations
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

K ei j 共 p 兲 ⫽ 冕 冉 冊
⌫e
w 2
w
␩⬘
1/n ⬘
兵 共 p ,␰ ⫺␳g ␰ 兲 ⫹ 共 p ,␨ ⫺␳g y 兲 其
2 2 m/2 ⫺1
cake formation. t e0 is the time taken for the area of the fracture
element e to be generated. The leak-off rate of any specific point
on the fracture is assumed to decrease in inverse proportion to the

⫻ 冉 ⳵N j ⳵N i ⳵N j ⳵N i
⳵␰ ⳵␰
⫹
⳵␨ ⳵␨
d␰d␨ 冊 (24)
square root of time after the fracture formation as described by
Eq. 共27兲. This assumption, which is based on the pore-pressure
change due to one-dimensional Darcy’s flow near the fracture

冕 冕 冕 冉 ⬘冊 1/n ⬘
w surfaces, is known to be valid only for the single planar fracture
F ie 共 p 兲 ⫽⫺ N i d␰d␨⫹ q 0 N i ds⫹ w2 case under the condition of sufficiently fast fracture propagation
⌫ e
⳵⌫ e
⌫ e ␩
compared to the seepage flow inside the formation. In the case of
⫻ 兵 共 p ,␰ ⫺␳g ␰ 兲 2 ⫹ 共 p ,␨ ⫺␳g ␨ 兲 2 其 m/2 ⫺1 closed multiple fractures, fluid flow from the multiple fractures
and pore-pressure accumulation should be taken into account.

冉
⫻ ␳g ␰
⳵N i
⳵␰
⫹␳g ␨
⳵N i
⳵␨
d␰d␨ 冊 This issue will be discussed later.
The second term is the injected fluid volume from the bore-
hole共s兲. The third term is the fracture volume of the time step

⫽⫺
ae
3
q L⫹ 冉
⳵w
⳵t
⫹ 冊 冕 ⳵⌫ e
q 0 N i ds⫹ 冕 冉 ⬘冊
⌫ e
w2
w
␩
1/n ⬘ (n⫺1) as the sum of the products of each element area and
aperture.
In the single fracture case, the fracture aperture at each time is
⫻ 兵 共 p ,␰ ⫺␳g ␰ 兲 2 ⫹ 共 p ,␨ ⫺␳g ␨ 兲 2 其 m/2 ⫺1 obtained to satisfy the fracture volume W as

冉
⫻ ␳g ␰
⳵N i
⳵␰
⫹␳g ␨
⳵N i
⳵␨
d␰d␨ 冊 (25) 冋 T
a
⫺1 ␾
0 P册再 冎 再 冎
p
⫽ W (28)

where a e ⫽area of element and subscript i⫽adjacent node num- where T⫽global coordinate form of the influence matrix
ber. The solution for the entire system is given by integrating Eq. defined in Eq. 共11兲; ⫺1⫽(0,0,⫺1,...,0,0,⫺1) T ; a⫽
共23兲 on entire fracture surface ⌫⫽⌺ e ⌫ e , and the nodal values of projection of the area representing the node (n)
the pressure p are derived by the iteration scheme for p. and a⫽a (n) n (n) ⫽(a (1) n (1) x , a
(1) (1)
n y , a (1) n z(1) , a (2) n (2)
x , a
(2) (2)
ny ,
a n z ,..., a n x , a n y , a n z ) ; ␾⫽displacement dis-
(2) (2) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) (N) T

continuity vector written in global coordinate; and ␾⫽(␾ (1) x ,

Coupled Solution ␾ (1) , ␾ (1)
, ␾ (2)
, ␾ (2)
, ␾ (2)
,..., ␾ (N)
, ␾ (N)
, ␾ (N) T
) ; p⫽p (n) (n)
n
y z x y z x y z
The coupled solution is given by the condition of fluid volume ⫽(p (1) n (1)x , p
(1) (1)
n y , p (1) n z(1) , p (2) n (2)
x , p
(2) (2)
n y ; p (2) n z(2) ,...,
conservation. The fracture volume W at time t of step n is given p (N) n (N)
x , p
(N) (N)
n y , p (N) n z(N) ) T ; and n (n) is a normal vector to the
by fracture surface at the nodal point n. P⫽integral constant; and the
pressure at the node n⫽sum of p (n) and P.
W⫽ 兺e a e(n) w e(n) ⫽⫺⌬t 兺e a e(n) q Le(n) ⫹⌬t 兺e r e q e(n)
0
The coupled solution of fracture aperture and fluid pressure
balance is obtained from the convergence loop shown in Fig. 9.
The pressure distribution is given by the fluid flow solution of the
⫹ 兺e a (n⫺1)
e w e(n⫺1) (26) finite element method, and the displacement discontinuity distri-
bution is given by the DD solution.
In the case that fluid is injected into the entire system simul-
where a e ⫽area; w e ⫽fracture aperture; r e ⫽length of the perfo-
taneously, e.g., unintended multiple fractures from a single sec-
rated segment included in the elements; q L ⫽leak-off rate; and
tion, the fracture aperture at each time is obtained so as to satisfy
q 0 ⫽flux of in-flow through the perforation. The superscript e
the total fracture volume W 共total fracture volume⫽total injected
means element number, (n) means a number of time step, and ⌬t

冋 册再 冎 再 冎
fluid volume⫽total leak-off volume兲. This condition is written as
is an interval of time step.
The first term of the right-hand side represents the volume of T 11 T 12 ¯ ⫺1 ␾1 p1
fluid leak-off into the formation. The leak-off rate of the element
T 21 T 22 ¯ ⫺1 ␾2 p2
q L at each time and is derived as 共Geertsma 1989兲 ⫽ (29)
] ]  ] ] ]
2c L P W
q Le ⫽ (27) a1 a2 ¯ 0
冑t⫺t e0 where the subscript is the number of fractures. T mn means the
where, c L is the leak-off coefficient defined in each layer which is influence matrix between fracture m and n.
related to the fluid viscosity, formation permeability and filtrate On the other hand, the injection schedule can be defined inde-

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004 / 51

Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.

 pendently for each fracture, e.g., fractures from independent
wells, and multistage or periodic injection. In such cases, fluid
mass balance should be satisfied at each fracture, so the equation
of fracture aperture–fluid pressure relationship and conservation
of fluid volume is written as

冤 冥
T B (1) 1B (1) 1 T B (1) 1B (1) 2 ⫺1 T B (1) 1B (2) 1 T B (1) 1B (2) 2 0
T B (1) 2B (1) 1  ] T B (1) 2B (2) 1  ]
aB (1) 1 ¯ 0 0 ¯ 0
T B (2) 1B (1) 1 T B (2) 1B (1) 2 0 T B (2) 1B (2) 1 T B (2) 1B (2) 2 ⫺1
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

T B (2) 2B (1) 1  ] T B (2) 2B (2) 1  ]

0 ¯ 0 aB (2) 1 ¯ 0
Fig. 10. Fracture propagation direction determined by the maximum
␾ B (1) 1 circumferential tensile stress criteria

冦 冧冦 冧
pB (1) 1
] ]
P B (1) W B (1)
⫻ ␾ B (2) 2 ⫽ p2 (30) Stress intensity factor K I is derived from the aperture distribu-
tion at the fracture tip as follows:
] ]
P B (2) W B (2)
where W B (k) ⫽total fracture volume injected from the borehole k;
K I⫽
Ew e
2 共 1⫹␯ 兲
冑
2␲
d0
(34)

B ⫽integral constants for fractures connected to the bore-

and P (k) where w e ⫽fracture aperture at the second layer of the nodes; and
hole k. d 0 ⫽width of the front elements; E⫽Young’s modulus; and ␯
⫽Poisson’s ratio.
When the multiplier C front is appropriate, the maximum value
Fracture Growth Path of K I of new geometry (K I*max) satisfies the following relationship
with the same fracture volume (W (n) ) as
The fracture mechanics approach is adopted in the simulator to
K I*max on ⳵S (n⫹1) ⫽K IC (35)
determine the growth and path of the fracture.
Fracture growth length ⌬d for a given time step ⌬t (given) is where ⳵S (n⫹1) ⫽new fracture front after the propagation. In this
determined by comparing the mode I stress intensity factors K I at simulator, the fracture front advance is basically determined by
the fracture front and fracture toughness of the rock mass K IC the relation of Eqs. 共31兲, 共32兲, and 共33兲 and checked and corrected
共Mastrojannis et al. 1980兲, which is defined at each stratum by the relation of Eq. 共35兲.

冉 冊 ␣ In the present model, only the opening mode of the stress

K I ⫺K IC
⌬d⫽⌬t (given)
兩 K I max⫺K IC 兩
where ⌬d⫽fracture advance at the point; K I max⫽maximum
value of stress intensity at the fracture front; and ␣⫽constants
which is usually set to be 1.
A multiplier C front is related to material properties of the for-
mation and stress conditions, and is determined to satisfy the
equilibrium of fluid volume change and fracture volume change at
certain time steps during the simulation. When fracture advance is
given by the maximum advance length ⌬d (given) at the time step,
the equilibrium equation is given as
C front (31) intensity factor (K I ) is concerned with the fracture growth. How-
ever, the contribution of sliding 共mode II兲 and tearing 共mode III兲
should be considered especially for curved fractures. Fracture
propagation direction is determined by the criterion of maximum
tensile stress in the circumferential direction. The stress field
around the fracture front is a combination of in situ stresses and
stresses induced by fracture opening and rides, which can be ob-
tained from Eq. 共7兲. In this simulator, we generate the computa-
tion points of the stress around the fracture tip and compare the
principal stresses of each point. New nodes are generated on the
plane normal to the original fracture front with the angle deter-

冉 冊
mined by the maximum tensile stress as shown in Fig. 10.
1
⫺ 兺e a e q Le ⫺ ⌬t 兺
e⬘
a e(n) w e(n) ⫺ 兺 a e(n⫺1) w e(n⫺1)
e
Mesh Configuration for Stable Computation
⫹ 兺e r e q e0 ⫽0 (32) The analysis mesh system is critical for the stability and accuracy
of the nonlinear solution of coupling analysis. The remeshing
where the second term of the left-hand side⫽fracture volume scheme for the simulator should accommodate a variety of frac-
change during a unit time between time step (n⫺1) and n. The ture geometries in three-dimensional space and deformation of
time step ⌬t for the fixed advance length ⌬d (given) is derived by the fracture through the simulation steps.
solving Eq. 共32兲. Then, C front is found by Since the methods for two-dimensional fracture are not appli-

C front⫽⌬d (given) 冒 冋冉 K I ⫺K IC
兩 K I max⫺K IC 兩 冊 册
␣
⌬t (33)
cable for the present three-dimensional system, the authors have
developed an adaptive remeshing scheme for a fracture on a
curved surface 共Yamamoto et al. 1999兲. A new mesh is obtained
Once C front is determined by Eq. 共33兲, the value is used to from the solution of the previous step, and the surface is divided
determine the fracture front advance for subsequent time steps into regions, each of which is the band having the same physical
with Eq. 共31兲 for a fixed time step. property divided by the contour lines. We chose the fracture ap-

52 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004

Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.

 Fig. 11. Rule of remeshing and generation of new nodes on the conserved fracture surface
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

erture as the property, because fluid transmissibility is propor-
tional to the cube of aperture for a Newtonian fluid.
To avoid the phenomenon that the fracture surface departs
from its original one through interpolation, we first define the
fracture surface with quadratic functions using so-called T-9N
共Bazeley et al. 1965兲. The T9-N element is a nonconforming tri-
angle element, and its inner distribution of variables is determined
by three nodal values and six derivatives at three nodes. The
distance between the original curvilinear surface and the plane
formed by the three nodes v is defined as follows:
the constant value p 0 on the fracture surface in this case. Here,
the stress near the fracture surface seems to be distorted due to
numerical interpolation error.兲
The cases of fractures whose centers are off to one side from
the cases presented in the previous paragraph are discussed next.
Such cases can be regarded as representing multiple fractures
from an inclined wellbore, where the fractures are formed from
different points on the fractures in the plane normal to the mini-
mum principal stress.
In Fig. 15, the distribution of fracture aperture on the horizon-

再 冏 冏 冎
3 tal (z⫽0) plane is shown for the case of fracture numbers 3, 4,
⳵v ⳵ v (3)
v⫽ 兺
i⫽1
v i N i(1) ⫹ N (2) ⫹
⳵x i i
N
⳵y i i
(36)
and 5, and fracture interval d⫽R, 2/3R and 1/2R, respectively.
The center of each fracture is located on the oblique line which
has an angle of ␲/4 to the direction normal to the planes in which
where the fractures exist. Here, the fracture volume becomes smaller in
N i(1) ⫽L i ⫹L i L j 共 L i ⫺L j 兲 ⫹L i L k 共 L i ⫺L k 兲 each fracture similar to the cases in the previous subsection. Fur-
thermore, the distribution of fracture aperture in each fracture is
N i(2) ⫽c *
k 共 L i L j ⫹ 2 L 1 L 2 L 3 兲 ⫺c *
2 1
j 共 L i L k⫹ 2 L 1L 2L 3 兲
2 1
(37) asymmetric due to the fracture interaction, which would lead to
asymmetric fracture growth.
N i(3) ⫽b *j 共 L i2 L k ⫹ 21 L 1 L 2 L 3 兲 ⫺b *
k 共 L i L j⫹ 2 L 1L 2L 3 兲
2 1

and Multiple Fracture Propagation

b i* ⫽y j ⫺y k , c i* ⫽x k ⫺x j
The distribution of the variable is obtained by using area coordi-
nates (L 1 ,L 2 ,L 3 ) as shown in Fig. 11. 共␰,␨兲 is the position of
nodes on Cartesian coordinate defined on the element. i, j, k take
the values 1, 2, and 3 in cycle. Since the curvilinear surface
formed by the shape functions intersects the plane formed by
three nodal points as shown in Fig. 11, v 1 , v 2 , and v 3 must be 0
at the nodal points, and derivatives ⳵ v /⳵x i 兩 1 , ⳵ v /⳵x i 兩 2 , and
⳵ v /⳵x i 兩 3 are obtained from the normal vectors of the fracture
plane at each node.
Multiple Fracture Growth from a Single Borehole
Here, examples of multiple fracture growth from a single section
of a borehole are presented. We consider two fractures, a larger
initial fracture 共height, 15 m; width, 15 m兲 and smaller initial
fracture 共height, 15 m; width, 6 m兲, formed perpendicular to each
other. The fracturing fluid is injected into the borehole at a con-
stant rate, and the injected volume is kept to be the sum of the two
fractures to simulate the fracture growth from the same open hole
or perforated section. In this condition, fracture apertures are gov-

Static Fracture Models

Here, we present examples of the fracture interaction briefly for

static fracture displacement under constant load and geometry
共Yamamoto 2001兲, considering single or multiple penny shape
fracture共s兲 of radius R⫽1 under constant internal pressure p 0 .
The ratio of Young’s modulus to pressure E/p 0 is 500 and Pois-
son’s ratio ␯ is 0.3. The model configuration is shown in Fig. 12.
Fig. 13 shows a case of single fracture aperture distribution along
the diameter with cases 3, 4, and 5 for parallel fractures with the
interval d⫽R, 2/3R, and 1/2R. The single fracture solution agree
well with the analytical solution given by Sneddon 共1946兲 shown
by the solid line. The distribution of stress normal to the fracture
Fig. 12. Model configuration of multiple fracture under constant
distribution on the horizontal (z⫽0) plane is shown in Fig. 14.
pressure case
共Note: the stress should be equal to the fluid pressure and takes

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004 / 53

Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 13. The fracture aperture of a penny shape crack under constant internal pressure; dotted line: calculated; solid line: analytical solution 共1兲
(E/p 0 ⫽500, ␯⫽0.3, R⫽1)
erned by Eq. 共29兲 in the iteration loop. The fracture planes are
confined in the original surface; turning of the fracture is not
considered here. To avoid the singularity caused by the integra-
tion of hyper singular functions, fracture wings are separated
from each other with a certain distance. In the cases presented
here, the fractures have a distance of 10% of the initial fracture
Fig. 14. Distribution of the stress normal to the fracture plane (␴ n )
(E/p 0 ⫽500, ␯⫽0.3, R⫽1)
54 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004
Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.
height from the center axis. Hence, complex fracture interactions
such as fracture tortuosity around the borehole are not considered.
Three different initial stress cases are shown in Fig. 16 to show
the effect of the stress condition on the fracture growth: the uni-
form horizontal stress (S H ⫽S h ) case, slight deviated stress case
(S H ⫽S h ⫹0.7 MPa) and higher deviated stress case (S H ⫽S h
⫹1.4 MPa). Generally, the smaller fracture tends to grow in the
vertical direction and to form a spindle shape fracture, while the
larger one tends to grow uniformly in all directions and to form an
almost circular fracture. The reason for this inhomogeneous frac-
ture growth is that the compressive stress induced from the larger
fracture prevents the lateral advance of the smaller fracture. Here,
Poisson’s ratio ␯ is 0.3, Young’s modulus E is 70 GPa, and injec-
tion rate q 0 is 3.15 m3 /min. If Poisson’s ratio is 0, no interaction
between two perpendicular fractures occurs and two circular frac-
tures are formed independently.
In Fig. 17, the time series advance of two fracture systems
from different sections of a single borehole is shown.
Multiple Fractures from Different Wells
Turning of the fracture due to the influence of the other fracture is
simulated here. Two fractures from different boreholes are mod-
eled as shown in Fig. 18. Each initial fracture has the same area
and shape 共ellipsoid兲, but exists in a different plane. One is in the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 15. Fracture aperture of penny shape cracks offset on one side
关 E/p 0 ⫽500 共constant pressure兲, ␯⫽0.3]
plane normal to the minimum principal stress, and the other one is
in the plane which has an angle of 1/6␲ to the other one. The
maximum horizontal stress S H ⫽S H ⫹0.7 (MPa), Poisson’s ratio
is 0.3, Young’s modulus is 70 GPa, and injection rate is
6.3 m3 /min. The position of the center of the second fracture to
the first one is (⫺2.5R,⫺2.5R) where R⫽6 m is the minor axis
of the initial fractures.
Fig. 16. Fracture geometries of dual perpendicular fracture systems
(␯⫽0.3)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004 / 55
Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.
Fig. 17. Time series advance of two crossed fracture systems from
different sections of a single borehole
Fig. 19 shows the fracture geometries that have complex shape
under the interaction between two fractures, and minimum prin-
cipal stress distribution around the fractures which directly gov-
erns the fracture growth path. If there is only the front fracture or
no influence from the other fracture behind, the first fracture
should tend to turn into the plane normal to the minimum princi-
pal stress. In fact, the left wing of the fracture turns parallel to the
x – z plane. On the other hand, the right wing turns toward the
other fractures because the formation around the second fracture
is compressed by the opening of the second fracture, and high
compressive stress is induced. We can see which way the fracture
front is going to advance from the stress distribution around the
tip as shown.
In the case that two initial fractures have progressed further
than the former model, the effect of the fracture interaction is less
significant, and the front fracture grows along the plane normal to
the minimum principal stress like a single fracture case as shown
in Fig. 20, where the position of the second fracture center to the
first one is (⫺2.5R,⫺4.0R) and R⫽15 m. The geometry of each
fracture is asymmetrical relative to the borehole, but is symmetri-
cal again at the intermediate line of the two boreholes.
Discussion
We have presented the concept of a multiple fracture interaction
model. Although the model satisfies the balance between stress
and fracture aperture in the multiple fracture system, we should
consider the following issues.
Fig. 18. Model configuration of dual fracture system cases 共two
fractures are formed from different boreholes兲
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 19. Propagation path of a dual fracture system 共the close
fracture case; the contour lines show minimum principal stress
distribution on the horizontal plane兲
Fracture Propagation Model
In the model, fracture propagation velocity and direction are gov-
erned solely by the tensile stress normal to the fracture surface.
As a result, the model gives a final fracture geometry in which
mode I stress concentration is predominant. The shear stress on
the fracture surface is completely released in the model, although
some portion of the stress might remain interlocked due to frac-
ture roughness.
56 / INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004
Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.
Fig. 20. Asymmetric geometry of a dual fracture system 共the distant
fracture case兲
In real situations, we often observe fracture growth by modes
II and III shear displacements. It is anticipated that such shear
fracture modes are important in complicated stress states in mul-
tiple fracture systems. Also, such shear displacements would con-
tribute to fracture permeability through the fracture dilation
mechanism 共Barton et al. 1985兲. We can derive the shear dis-
placement and stress intensity factors at the fracture front from
this numerical model, and if reliable fracture propagation criteria
are established, the factors can be applied to the model.
Fracture propagation velocity is also a complicated issue. Al-
though there is much literature about the dynamic behavior of
brittle failure for steel and other metals, the problem of a rock
mass is more difficult because of its composite nature and non-
linear behavior. Many micro-mechanics factors such as accumu-
lation of micro cracks and cavities, creation of a plastic zone and
others affect the behavior of the fracture tip.
Another factor affecting the fracture propagation velocity is
the fluid velocity and pressure at the fracture front. Desroches
et al. 共1994兲 and Desroches et al. 共1998兲 pointed out the impor-
tance of the pressure distribution of the fracture tip, and regarded
the fluid velocity as the key to advance of the fracture front. It is
difficult to derive an accurate value of the fluid pressure distribu-
tion of the fracture fronts in this model due to the rough assump-
tion of fracture opening behavior and static fluid flow model for a
fixed boundary, in which transient flow due to the change of frac-
ture shape and injection rate is not considered. A more accurate
stress and displacement distribution model than the classical
square-root model around the fracture front is required, and the
simulator should treat the fluid flow around the fracture tip in
more detail.
Leak-Off Characteristics of Multiple Fractures
The leak-off model in the simulator does not consider the accu-
mulation of pore pressure from neighboring wells.
A system of two closed parallel fractures is expected to behave
like a single fracture, since the pore pressure between two frac-
tures is quickly saturated. However, the result from the simulator
gives the leak-off characteristic of two independent fractures, and
might give almost double the leak-off volume compared to the
 model in which pore pressure accumulation is considered, thus
leading to smaller fractures for the same injected volume.
To solve the problem, the authors plan to conduct a numerical
study of pore pressure change around advancing multiple frac-
tures in order to establish the relationship between fracture dispo-
sition and leak-off rate changes, and include the criteria into the
numerical model.
Conclusion
The multiple fracture propagation model presented here can give
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF STELLENBOSCH-PERIOD on 05/14/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
the final geometry of a multiple fracture system of hydraulic frac-
turing treatments which satisfies the equilibrium of stresses and
internal pressures on the entire surface of multiple fractures. The
solutions of the fracture aperture and relative shear displacement
are derived from the pressure distribution and stress state around
the fractures.
The simulator is used to analyze the interaction between frac-
tures, which might influence the fracture growth path in real situ-
ations. Such modeling studies are useful to understand the mecha-
nism of fracture formulation and some operation troubles, since
multiple fractures are often believed to lead to an undesirable
pressure increase, early screen-out, and poor productivity im-
provement. To improve the understanding of such unpredicted
events, the simulator should be used as a platform for investigat-
ing various physical models.
The key tasks to improve the accuracy and mechanical consis-
tency are to develop a reasonable fracture propagation model and
fluid leak-off model with pore pressure increase from closed
wells. The authors will continue to investigate the mechanics of
hydraulic fracturing using theoretical approaches, experiments
and field experience to improve the numerical model and its ap-
plication.
Acknowledgments
This work has been carried out as a part of a collaborative R & D
program: ‘‘Improvement of Productivity for Carbonate Rock Res-
ervoirs’’ and other research projects of the Technology Research
Center/Japan National Oil Corporation 共TRC/JNOC兲. The writers
thank all members of the research program for their contributions.
References
Barton, N., Bandis, S., and Bakhtar, K. 共1985兲. ‘‘Strength, deformation,
and conductivity coupling of rock joints.’’ Int. J. Rock Mech. Min.
Sci., 22共3兲, 121–140.
Bazeley, G. P., Cheung, Y. K., Irons, B. M., and Zienkiewicz, O. C.
共1965兲. ‘‘Triangle elements in bending–conforming and nonconform-
ing solutions.’’ Proc., Conf. on the Matrix Method in Structural Me-
chanics, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, 397– 443.
Clifton, R. J., and Abou-Sayed, A. S. 共1979兲. ‘‘On the computation of the
three-dimensional geometry of hydraulic fractures.’’ SPE 7943, Proc.,
1979 SPE of AIME Low Permeability Gas Reservoirs, Society of Pe-
troleum Engineers, Denver, 433– 451.
Clifton, R. J., and Abou-Sayed, A. S. 共1981兲. ‘‘A variational approach to
the prediction of the three-dimensional geometry of hydraulic frac-
tures.’’ SPE 9879, Proc., 1981 SPE/DOE Low Permeability Gas Res-
ervoirs Symp., Society of Petroleum Engineers, Denver, 457– 465.
Crouch, S. L. 共1976兲. ‘‘Solution of plane elasticity problems by the dis-
placement discontinuity method, I. Infinite body solution.’’ Int. J.
Numer. Methods Eng., 10共2兲, 301–343.
Desroches, J., Detournay, E., Lenoach, B., Papanastasiou, P., Pearson, J.
R. A., Thiercelin, M., and Cheng, A. 共1994兲. ‘‘The crack tip region in
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS © ASCE / MARCH 2004 / 57
Int. J. Geomech. 2004.4:46-57.
hydraulic fracturing.’’ Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 447, 39– 48.
Desroches, J., Lenoach, B., Papanastasiou, P., and Thiercelin, M. 共1998兲.
‘‘On the modeling of near tip process in hydraulic fractures.’’ Int. J.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech. Abstr., 30共7兲, 1127–1134.
Geertsma, J. 共1989兲. ‘‘Two-dimensional fracture–propagation models.’’
Recent advances in hydraulic fracturing, SPE monograph 12, J. L.
Gidley, S. A. Holditch, D. E. Nierode, and R. W. Veatch Jr., eds.,
Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, Tex., 4, 81–94.
Geertsma, J., and de Klerk, F. 共1969兲. ‘‘A rapid method of predicting
width and extent of hydraulically induced fractures.’’ J. Pet. Technol.,
21, 1571–1581.
Gu, H. R., and Yew, C. H. 共1988兲. ‘‘Finite element solution of a boundary
integral equation for mode I embedded three-dimensional fractures.’’
Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 26共7兲, 1525–1540.
Kuriyama, K., and Mizuta, Y. 共1993兲. ‘‘Three-dimensional elastic analysis
by the displacement discontinuity method with boundary division into
triangular leaf elements.’’ Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. Geomech.
Abstr., 30共2兲, 111–123.
Lutz, E. D. 共1991兲. ‘‘Numerical methods for hypersingular and near-
singular boundary integrals in fracture mechanics.’’ PhD dissertation,
Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y.
Mastrojannis, E. N., Keer, L. M., and Mura, T. 共1980兲. ‘‘Growth of planar
cracks induced by hydraulic fracturing.’’ Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng.,
15共1兲, 41–54.
Mizuta, Y., Kuriyama, K., Li, C. H., and Kayupov, M. A. 共2000兲. ‘‘Stud-
ies in order to build a fully 3D boundary element based model to
contribution to HDR plant design.’’ Proc., Workshop on Three-
Dimensional and Advanced Hydraulic Fracture Modeling, 4th North
American Rock Mechanics Symp., American Rock Mechanics Asso-
ciation, Seattle.
Morales, R. H., Brady, B. H., and Ingraffea, A. R. 共1993兲. ‘‘Three-
dimensional analysis and visualization of the wellbores and the frac-
turing process in inclined well.’’ SPE 25889, Proc., SPE Rocky Moun-
tain Regional Low Permeability Reservoir, Symp., Society of
Petroleum Engineers, Denver, 461– 457.
Moschovidis, Z. A., Gardner, D. C., and Veatch, R. W. 共1994兲. ‘‘Disposal
of oily cuttings by downhole periodic fracturing injection in Valhall-
North Sea: A case study and modeling concept.’’ SPE Drill. Comple-
tion, 9共4兲, 256 –262.
Nordgren, R. P. 共1972兲. ‘‘Propagation of a vertical hydraulic fracture.’’
SPE J., 12共8兲, 306 –314.
Perkins, T. K., and Kern, L. R. 共1961兲. ‘‘Widths of hydraulic fractures.’’ J.
Pet. Technol., 13共9兲, 937–949.
Sneddon, I. N. 共1946兲. ‘‘The distribution of stress in the neighborhood of
a crack in an elastic solid.’’ Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 187, 229–
260.
Vandamme, L., and Curran, J. H. 共1989兲. ‘‘A Three-dimensional hydrau-
lic fracturing simulator.’’ Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 28, 909–927.
Vandamme, L., Jeffrey, R. G., and Curran, J. H. 共1988兲. ‘‘Pressure distri-
bution in three-dimensional hydraulic fractures.’’ SPE Prod. Eng.,
3共2兲, 181–186.
Warpinski N. R., Abou-Sayed, I. S., Moschividis, Z., and Parker, C.
共1993兲. ‘‘Hydraulic fracture model comparison study: Complete re-
sults.’’ GRI93/0109, SAND93-7042, Gas Res. Inst. Sandia National
Laboratories, Albuquerque, N.M.
Wiles, T. D., and Curran, J. H. 共1982兲. ‘‘A general 3D displacement
discontinuity method.’’ Proc., 4th Int. Conf. for Numerical Methods in
Geomechanics, Zurich, Switzerland, 1, 103–111.
Yamamoto, K. 共2001兲. ‘‘Fracture interaction analysis using the three-
dimensional displacement discontinuity method.’’ JSCE J. Appl.
Mech., 3, 153–162 共in Japanese兲.
Yamamoto, K., Gutierrez, M., Shimamoto, T., and Maezumi, M. 共2000兲.
‘‘Verification of a 3D hydraulic fracturing model against a field case.’’
SPE 59373, Proc., SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Conf., Society
of Petroleum Engineers, Tulsa, Okla.
Yamamoto, K., Shimamoto, T., and Maezumi, M. 共1999兲. ‘‘Development
of a true 3D hydraulic fracturing simulator.’’ SPE 54265, Proc., Asia
Pacific Oil and Gas Exhibition and Conf., Society of Petroleum En-
gineers, Jakarta, Indonesia.