Petroleum 5 (2019) 295e302

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Petroleum
journal homepage: www.keaipublishing.com/en/journals/petlm

A new numerical well testing approach: Application to

characterization of complex fault structures
Behzad Pouladi, Mohammad Sharifi*, Mohammad Reza Akbari, S.M. Hosseini-Nasab
Department of Petroleum Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Fluid flow in hydrocarbon reservoirs and consequently optimum scenario for hydrocarbon production, is
Received 10 October 2017 heavily influenced by reservoir heterogeneities. Faults are one of the most common types of heteroge-
Received in revised form neity found in reservoirs. Leaky faults, baffles (limited extent faults) and complex multiple fault geom-
4 May 2018
etries are among the most complicated and important types of faults that are difficult to characterize.
Accepted 2 July 2018
Leaky faults, unlike the sealing faults, are in partial communication with other portions of the reservoir.
Because of faults' effect on reservoir connectivity and possible infill drilling plan for accessing all parts of
Keywords:
the reservoirs, possible communication across the fault must be precisely modeled.
Fast marching method
Leaky faults
In order to detect the effect of a fault on communication within the reservoir, we need to analyze
Numerical well testing dynamic data. There are a few analytical methods for modelling partially communicating faults, however,
Complex fault structures these methods may not be accurate enough and may be limited in application, especially in complex
Flow diagnostic situations. Numerical methods (i.e. finite difference or finite element) are also not computationally
economical when a large number of grid blocks are simulated. In the current work, the Fast Marching
Method (FMM) is applied to effectively mimic fluid flow in the heterogeneous areas, such as complex
faults. It is shown that FMM can capture the effect of different fault configurations on the bottom hole
pressure and is also able to capture different linear, radial and spherical flows.
© 2019 Southwest Petroleum University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi
Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction tool for future management decisions. Application of well testing in

Reservoir characterization is an important step in area of oilfield
development and management. Reservoir characterization is the
process of describing reservoir properties using different sources of
information and creating a model which can be further used to
enhance the understanding of the reservoir behavior under
different production scenario. Future prediction is available
through running flow simulation of reservoir model already
created. Flow simulation is important for understanding reservoir
behavior, optimizing the production scenario and an assessment
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: m_sharifi@aut.ac.ir (M. Sharifi).
Peer review under responsibility of Southwest Petroleum University.
Production and Hosting by Elsevier on behalf of KeAi
forward modelling, reservoir model calibration, etc. has been
extensively discussed by Zhang [1].
One of the most important questions during reservoir charac-
terization is related to existence, transmissibility and extent of the
faults. Fault detection and inclusion into the reservoir modelling is
very important since it can affect the fluid flow direction and
subsequently the decision on efficient production scenario (well
numbers, well location, etc.). In general, the faults are classified into
sealing and non-sealing categories. The sealing faults completely
stop the lateral flow and might even act as a trapping mechanism
for the hydrocarbon accumulation. The throw of a sealing fault will
juxtapose the permeable strata on one side of the fault against the
impermeable strata on the other side. A non-sealing fault usually
has an insufficient throw to cause complete separation of the
permeable strata on both sides of the fault. Therefore, some lateral
flow is usually allowed. The transmissibility of this zone is less than
the undisturbed permeable strata due to mechanical processes
such a grain crushing, bed deformation, and clay smearing. This
situation is usually referred to as a partially communicating fault.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petlm.2018.07.001
2405-6561/© 2019 Southwest Petroleum University. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under
the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
296 B. Pouladi et al. / Petroleum 5 (2019) 295e302
We need to note that this is not the only cause of leaky faults and
Strike-slip faults which have no throw can also act as leaky faults.
Reservoir characterization requires integration of both static
data for reservoir geological description as well as dynamic data for
description and calibration of dynamic reservoir behavior. Well
testing provides important information on reservoir dynamic
behavior on large scale and can be effectively used to finally reach
the maximum accuracy reservoir model for efficient forecasting.
However, the validity of the well test interpretation lies on some
factors, the representivity of the measured field data and the
interpretation approach and the model. The classical well test
interpretation is based on analytical models that are mainly based
on simplified and idealized reservoir characteristics [2e5] and may
not be applicable in more complex situation like composite reser-
voir [6] or reservoir models with different complex fault configu-
ration. However, there exist some works on analytical models for
well testing in reservoir with faults and leaky fault. Stewart and
Westaway [7] were the first to consider the impact of Partially
Communicating Faults (PCF) and introduced the idea of modelling
them as a linear, vertical, semipermeable barrier with negligible
capacity. The analytical solution of PCF was also obtained by Yaxley
in 1987 [8] by generalizing Bixel et al.'s [9] solution approach for
reservoirs with a semi-impermeable linear discontinuity and the
active well response in constant rate drawdown. Later in 1989
Ambastha et al. [10] analytically modeled the partially communi-
cating faults as a thin skin region in the reservoir based on skin
concepts presented by van Everdingen [11] and Hurst [12].
Although analytical solution in the case of existence of infinite
faults are present in the literature, there is no analytical solution for
the case where we are dealing with limited extent fault or baffle.
The well-known method of image wells can generate the response
of infinite faults, whereas in practice many faults are of limited
extent and may be termed “baffle”. Stewart [7] mentioned that such
boundaries cannot be modeled analytically. He proposed using
numerical well testing for solving these kinds of problems. Nu-
merical well testing is simply the act solving diffusivity equation
numerically, using finite difference or finite element approaches.
This approach can be used for handling cases where analytical
models fail (i.e. complex geometry or high nonlinearity in the
model). In a work by Hamdi et al. [13], they have proposed a novel
framework for integration of well test data into reservoir models by
the use of geological well testing instead of numerical well testing
which is basically numerical simulation of transient tests by setting
up detailed geological models, within which different scales of
heterogeneity are present. In a study by Elwahabi et al. [14], they
utilized numerical well testing to match results from numerical
methods with pressure transient data which helped them to
characterize and estimate the degree of connectivity between two
reservoirs separated by a very thin tight layer. Recently, Azamifard
et al. [15] have proposed a new black oil reservoir simulator which
takes velocity dependent relative permeability into account. It was
then applied for numerical well testing of gas condensate reservoirs
and successfully validated their developed simulator results with a
commercial one. They compared the behavior of two gas conden-
sate fluids, namely rich and lean, and investigated the effect of
velocity on different parameters.
It must be noted that numerical well testing is costly for reser-
voir characterization, since it involves some inversion steps which
requires lots of simulation runs. This problem is more pronounced
specially in giant reservoir as computational cost increases signif-
icantly with a number of grid blocks and may pose a serious
problem to application of numerical well testing.
Fast Marching Method (FMM) is a very quick technique to track
front propagation and has been successfully applied in mimicking
flow simulation during transient period. FMM is an excellent tool
for application in mimicking flow simulation and exploring the
reservoir model due to very fast run time compared to conventional
numerical simulators [16,17].
In this work, the Fast Marching Method (FMM) is applied to
effectively model heterogeneity including complex faults. Fast
Marching Method (FMM) is a technique to track front propagation of
pressure. FMM has found many applications in different reservoir
engineering areas such as tracking of pressure front propagation due
to production. This method actually calculates the arrival time of
pressure drop front for every point in reservoir. FMM enable us to
record investigated volume with respect to time. In this work we
describe the well pressure behavior using the value of investigated
pore volume and time given by FMM. Then reservoir bulk perme-
ability, distance to the fault, and fault transmissibility are calculated.
The results comply well with those of numerical simulation and
analytical approaches. Proposed method can be appropriately
applied to any type of leaky faults. This method can also be applied to
any complicated structure combination including multi leaky faults,
intersecting leaky faults, limited fault (baffle), etc. This method has
an extremely efficient algorithm that allows us to capture dynamic
reservoir behavior and extract reservoir properties and degree of
communication across faults. We have also extended the approach
to apply it for flow diagnostic using reservoir dynamic data (well
testing data). It is also applicable to investigate behavior of any
complicated type of heterogeneous porous media.
2. Theory
2.1. Fast marching method
Level Set Method and Fast Marching Method (FMM) are nu-
merical techniques introduced by Sethian [18] to solve interface
evolution problems. These methods have been applied in various
problems, including wave front movement and burning flame
propagation dealing with the interface motion. The two methods
differ in application in a way that FMM can only handle propagation
problems in which the interface is strictly expanding or contracting,
while level set method can handle both. FMM is also being
employed in several areas of petroleum engineering. Karlsen et al.
[19] applied fast marching method to formulate fractional flow of
two-phase, incompressible and immiscible flow. They concluded
that this easy-to-program method is accurate, effective, and avoids
most of the numerical difficulties related to streamline methods.
Later, Berre et al. [20] modified the aforementioned work done by
Karlsen. They found the Karlsen's method is deficient when there is
a jump value in the calculated time of flight. They believed that the
problem is caused by inappropriate discretization technique and
suggested an adaptive discretization scheme to tackle the problem.
Prodanovic et al. [21] used a level set method to investigate the flow
between fracture and matrix in the drainage and imbibition pro-
cesses. More recently, FMM has received a lot of attention in
description of the reservoir dynamic response. Datta-Gupta et al.
[22] introduced FMM as a powerful tool for calculation and visu-
alization of the depth of investigation and drainage volume under
very general conditions for reservoirs without any need to perform
flow simulations. Xie et al. [23] then presented a pseudo-steady
state volumetric pressure approximation based on the investi-
gated drainage volume to predict the transient behavior of wells in
unconventional reservoirs. In another attempt, Zhang et al. [24]
used FMM to analyze the performance of unconventional reservoirs
with complex flow geometries and also modified the FMM to be
applicable in corner point gridding. Sharifi et al. [25] employed the
FMM as an efficient tool for permeability upscaling. Their approach
was based on the minimization of difference between dynamic
behavior (propagation time) of fine-scale and up-scaled reservoir
 B. Pouladi et al. / Petroleum 5 (2019) 295e302 297

model that is provided by FMM. They found that this method is an discretization scheme is briefly discussed. For more insight into the
improvement over statistical methods. In another work by Zhang procedure, interested readers are invited to study the work by Yang
et al. [26], they proposed a simulation approach based on FMM et al. [32]. Consider Fig. 2b and let us assume that the value of time
aimed to provide rapid performance assessment of shale gas res- of flight for node A and B is known and thus we want to calculate
ervoirs. Their approach was analogous to streamline simulation and the value of time of flight for node C.
based on coordinate transformation from the physical space Let s
! and s
! represent the unit vector from A to C and B to C,
AC BC
(spatial coordinate) to the one dimensional space (diffusive time of respectively.
flight) derived from FMM solution. Later Fujita et al. [27] developed
a flow simulator designed for unconventional reservoirs using s
!
! 1
AC ¼ =b  ðxA  xC ; yA  yC ÞsBC ¼ =b  ðxB  xC ; yB  yC Þ
1

FMM. Their simulation approach entails two steps. Firstly the (2)
calculation of drainage volume and diffusive time of flight using
FMM and then performing numerical simulation along one Assuming a linear approximation to t locally, we have the
dimensional diffusive time of flight. Sharifi et al. [16] also used FMM following finite difference equation:
for ranking of geo-cellular models and showed that FMM is more

!1

!
=b  ðtC  tA Þ ¼ Dt: sAC =a  ðtC  tB Þ ¼ Dt: sBC
1 (3)
efficient compared to flow simulation and can capture the dynamic
connectivity of the reservoir well. In a study by Leem et al. [28],
If we define the matrix P with rows
s
! and
s
AC

!, then the
BC
they utilized FMM along with Ensemble Kalman Filter (EnKF) for
characteristic direction Dt can be calculated using equation (4).
the purpose of history matching in shale gas reservoirs. They
employed the FMM as the simulator and concluded that unification 00 1 0 11
B tA=b CC
of FMM and Ensemble Kalman Filter can provide fast and reliable C
BB
Dt ¼ P 1 BB1 1 C B CC
results. More recently, Pouladi et al. [17,29] applied FMM for sector
@@ =b =aCtC  @
A AC
A
(4)
modelling and well placement optimization. tB=a
FMM is a front tracking method that can efficiently solve the
Eikonal equation. The general form of Eikonal Equation is as
Substituting the above Dt into Eikonal equation (3), we obtain a
follows.
quadratic equation with tC as the unknown parameter. We note
that the value of calculated tC will only be accepted if the computed
FðxÞjVtðxÞj ¼ 1 (1) characteristic direction lie inside the triangle.
This method calculates the arrival time of pressure front at a
specific location as long as the velocity function (F(x)) is known. Xie 3. Methodology
et al. [23], derived the pressure drop front propagation in porous
media in the form of Eikonal equation and showed that the velocity 3.1. Pressure transient data from investigated volume
function is dependent on porous media and fluid properties at that
location (see Fig. 1). Diffusivity equation in porous media can be written in the form
In Cartesian coordinate, by knowing the values of fluid and of Eikonal equation. Details on derivation of Eikonal equation is
porous media properties at the position of (x,y,z) and setting the given by Xie et al. [23]. Diffusivity equation is the basis of pressure
arrival time (tðxÞ) at the starting point to zero, using FMM we may transient analysis, so one can expect to be able to tackle well testing
find the arrival time at other locations by solving the derived problems by solving diffusivity equation. In the current work, FMM
Eikonal equation. It is worth mentioning that this method is not was used to solve diffusivity equation and then to address well
restricted to Cartesian coordinate and can be also applied to testing in complex structures in the presence of faults.
triangular and unstructured gridding schemes. However, for FMM provides us with the investigated drainage volume as a
simplicity in our application only the Cartesian gridding is dis- function of diffusive time of flight (arrival time) which can be
cussed. Implementation procedure of FMM in Cartesian coordinate further used to predict the well pressure behavior using the pseudo
is comprehensively investigated in our previous publications steady state volumetric pressure approximation presented by Xie
[16,17,29]. Fig. 2a schematically shows how FMM can be imple- et al. [23]. The derivation of volumetric pressure approximation for
mented in a 2D reservoir. For details of algorithm implementation radial flow is as shown below [23]. Consider the diffusivity equation
in a structured grid, one can refer to Sharifi et al., 2014 [16]. There for radial flow and well-known Darcy equation:
are extensive works in the literature that describe the FMM
  
implementation in untrusted grids [30,31]. In this study, FMM vp 1 v k vp
ct f ¼ r (5)
implementation for unstructured grids based on the Eulerian vt r vr m vr

kAðrÞ vp
Q¼ (6)
m vr

here AðrÞ ¼ 2prh is the surface area for cylindrical flow. Differen-
tiating equation (7) with respect to r and dividing it by the surface
area AðrÞ results in the term in right hand side of equation (6).
equation (6) can now be rewritten as:

vp 1 vQ
ct f ¼ (7)
vt AðrÞ vr

then the investigated pore volume dVp ¼ AðrÞfdr is introduced into

Fig. 1. Fault categories. (a) Sealing fault (b) Non-sealing faults (regenerated from the aforementioned equation. After applying the chain rule, the
Stewart, 2012). final form of the equation becomes:
298 B. Pouladi et al. / Petroleum 5 (2019) 295e302

Fig. 2. A: Example of FMM implementation in 2D [30]. B: Local Eikonal Solver based on Eulerian discretization [33].

also a typical example of front propagation in the reservoir. The

vp vQ well-known diffusivity equation in porous media can be written in
ct ¼ (8)
vt vVp form of Eikonal Equation as follows.
Integrating the above equation gives us the final form of the sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
volumetric pressure approximation. kðxÞ
jVtðxÞj ¼ 1 (13)
mct fðxÞ
ZVp Z0
vp Here m, ct are reservoir fluid viscosity and compressibility, kðxÞ
ct dVp ðtÞ ¼ dQ (9)
vt and fðxÞ are reservoir permeability and porosity respectively. It is
0 Qw
worth mentioning that hydraulic diffusivity is the speed of front
propagation in Eikonal Equation which is a function of porous
vp 1 Qw media and fluid properties at that location. We should also note
¼ (10)
vt ct Vp ðtÞ that travel time has the same dimension as the square root of real
time and must be converted to it. The formula which was
Zt mentioned above calculates the arrival time of pressure front for
Qw dt every grid block in the reservoir. Knowing their properties, we can
pð0; tÞ ¼ pi  (11)
ct Vp ðtÞ calculate the investigated pore volume as a function of arrival time
0
and thus calculate pressure derivative using an equation.
where, Qw is the well flow rate and Vp ðtÞ is the investigated pore It is obvious that in well testing, pressure variation is more
volume. This pseudo steady state pressure approximation is valid significant than the pressure itself. This is due to the fact that most
within the drainage volume and also assumes that Darcy flux is of the well testing interpretation techniques deal with the slope of
negligible beyond the drainage volume. pressure when plotted versus time. Considering the previous
statement, the following volumetric approximation for pressure
3.1.1. Well testing and fast marching method derivative given by Yang et al. [33] is of our interest.
As mentioned before this is the general form of Eikonal Equation
dðpw Þ dpw 1 qw
¼ t  xt  (14)
FðxÞjVtðxÞj ¼ 1 (12) dðlnðtÞÞ dt ct Vp
Where FðxÞ is the speed of the front and t is arrival or travel time FMM provides investigated pore volume in every instance of
which is different from the real time. Pressure drop movement is time and can be effectively used for the above formulation.
 B. Pouladi et al. / Petroleum 5 (2019) 295e302 299

3.1.2. Fault modelling
Dynamic response of the reservoirs that contains faults, espe-
cially leaky faults and baffles, is very complex. The response can be
even more complicated whenever multiple intersecting leaky faults
and baffles exist. In such situations the analysis of reservoir dy-
namic data using an analytical model is not possible. Therefore,
numerical methods are utilized to interpret the dynamic data.
However, numerical methods may be time consuming for fine-grid
reservoir models with large number of grid cells and are not easy to
use. Here, FMM can be an alternative to model the dynamic
reservoir response for any type of reservoir and fault in just a few
seconds. Reservoir complexity is well accounted in the value of
arrival time calculated by FMM. In the following section the
application of Fast Marching Method in modelling of leaky faults
and baffles is shown.
4. Discussions
In this part, firstly the application of FMM in presenting dynamic
response of leaky faults and then its application in modelling of
baffles and flow regime identification is shown. For the base case,
one well was located at the center of the homogenous reservoir
producing at a constant rate. FMM was conducted and the reservoir
volume in which pressure wave travels for every instance of time is
calculated.
4.1. Leaky faults (semi-conductive faults)
In our base case a leaky fault has been considered. Pressure
derivative for different values of leakage factor is shown in Fig. 3.
Leakage factor is defined as below:
, and FMM can be used to generate different pressure responses in a
kf h
a¼ kh (15)
lf m Lm
where kf and k are fault permeability and reservoir permeability, lf
and L are half fault length and well distance to fault respectively. It
can be seen that FMM exhibits the effect of leaky faults sufficiently
(Through a hump in the plot). It is worth noting that in the case of a
sealing fault, the values of derivatives become doubled but here we
see that in this case (leaky fault), the derivative values first reach a
peak, and eventually approach their original value. The last visible
unit slope straight line corresponds to the pseudo steady state
period. In order to generate different fault responses, different
reservoir models with different fault characteristic (fault perme-
ability, half fault length, etc.) which correspond to different leakage
factors are generated and fed to FMM. FMM uses the defined fault
and model characteristics to generate a pressure response which
would be further used to find the best fault characteristics
mimicking the observed real response.
4.2. Baffles (limited faults)
Another application of this new approach is modelling limited
faults or baffles. In contrast to the famous image well solution for an
infinite fault, there is no analytical solution here. Fig. 4 shows the
effect of baffle faults (limited faults) on flow behavior when a baffle
is placed in our base model. It can be seen that, same as leaky faults,
pressure derivative value reaches a peak and then continues to go
back to its original value and unlike leaky faults the increasing and
decreasing slope of pressure derivative values are roughly the
same.
4.3. Flow diagnostic
Flow Diagnostic refers to a set of numerical flow experiments
that are utilized to probe a reservoir model. Flow Diagnostic can
also be used to assess and calibrate a reservoir model using dy-
namic data. it may be replaced with conventional numerical
simulation which normally requires a lot of computational time for
giant, high resolution reservoir models. For instance, the flow
diagnostic can be used to find the fault location as well as orien-
tation with respect to a well. An ensemble of different realizations
(different fault location, orientation, properties, etc.) can be created
very short time instead of the time consuming numerical simula-
tion. The generated pressure response would then be compared to
the real response, and then an appropriate fault distance and
orientation with respect to the wellbore could be chosen. Below, we
will show that the changes in the flow regime and direction, that
may be caused by existence of different faults orientation, can be
precisely modeled with FMM.
Considering Equation (1) for pressure derivative, we can write
the following equations for different flow regimes using the for-
mula proposed for the radius of investigation.

Radial
dpw 1 qw dpw 1 qw q m
t  xt  Vp ¼ pr 2 hf  t  xt   ¼C w (16)
dt ct Vp dt ct  kt kh
p f
mct f

Linear
dpw 1 qw dpw 1 qw q rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
m pffiffi
w
t  xt  Vp ¼ Arf  t  xt  sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ¼ C t
dt ct Vp dt ct  kt  A kct f (17)
A f
mct f

Spherical
 
dpw 1 qw 4 dpw t qw qw m1:5 f0:5 ct 0:5  0:5  (18)
t  xt  Vp ¼ pr 3 f  t  x ¼C t
dt ct Vp 3 dt ct 4 3 k1:5
pr f
3
300 B. Pouladi et al. / Petroleum 5 (2019) 295e302

Fig. 3. Pressure Derivative Predication by FMM for different values of leakage factor in leaky faults in a homogenous reservoir.

Fig. 4. Pressure Derivative Predication by FMM for Baffle Faults in a homogeneous reservoir.

Log-Log plot of pressure derivative and time can be used as a
flow regime diagnostic plot [34] and more information can also be
obtained from this plot (Through its interception with the vertical
axis). Based on the previous formula derived for different flow
geometries, this plot results in a horizontal line for a radial flow,
straight line with a slope value of 0.5 for a linear flow and a
straight line with a slope value of -0.5 for a spherical flow. Fast
Marching Method is also able to track the changes of flow ge-
ometries. In order to show the ability of FMM in capturing flow
regimes, two parallel faults were placed in our base case while the
producing well remained in the center. It is expected to observe an
early radial flow, followed by a linear flow. The following plot
generated by this new approach shows the changes of the flow
geometry from a radial flow to a linear flow as soon as the pres-
sure drop reaches the no flow boundaries. As the plot shows flow
geometry is radial until the pressure drop propagation wave rea-
ches the no flow boundaries (faults), then the flow becomes linear
(Fig. 5). Distance to the source of the linear flow (Sealing faults)
can also be estimated.
A sample of Spherical flow plot is given here. A homogenous
thick reservoir with a well at the center which is perforated only at
the center (partially penetrated well) is one of the most classic
examples of a spherical flow. It can be seen in Fig. 6 that the new
approach is able to capture spherical geometry in a log-log plot
(slope 0.5).

Fig. 5. Representation of examined reservoir and different flow geometries.

 B. Pouladi et al. / Petroleum 5 (2019) 295e302
Fig. 6. Flow diagnostic plot for spherical flow.
Fig. 7. Scaling of CPU Time: Conventional Numerical Flow Simulator vs. Fast Marching
Method [29].
4.4. Time efficiency
The current subsection presents a general comparison of the
time required by conventional simulators and FMM with respect to
number of grid cells in the reservoir model. It can be seen that FMM
requires much less computation time compared to flow simulation
for the same value of grid cells. Flow simulation for large reservoir
models can be very time consuming and pose a real challenge for
the tasks like model calibration and history matching, which
require frequent flow simulation. FMM can be very advantageous
for such flow calibration problems. Fig. 7 shows the CPU time
comparison for reservoir simulators and FMM.
5. Conclusions
We have proposed a new approach to calibrate and model high
resolution and large reservoirs that contain any type of faults using
reservoir dynamic response. The New approach is extremely fast
and can be an alternative to conventional flow simulations. This
method can also replace the current numerical well testing
methods. In this study the effects of leaky faults, limited extent
faults and parallel faults on bottom hole pressure are successfully
simulated using FMM. This is very beneficial for reservoir models
with fine grids which involve time-consuming flow simulations.
Also flow diagnostic approach using FMM has been introduced
which can be useful for calibration of reservoir model flow simu-
lation. The flow diagnostic approach using FMM has an especial
application in high resolution reservoir models in which flow
simulation is very time consuming. Last but not least, we need to
bear in mind that FMM doesn't replace the analytical models and it
is merely a tool to investigate the reservoir models.
301
References
[1] Shi-Yi Zheng, Fighting against non-unique solution problems in heteroge-
neous reservoirs through numerical well testing, in: SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas
Conference and Exhibition, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2006.
[2] Firoozabad, Mohammadreza Mohammadnia, Multipoint Flux Approximation
Methods for a Numerical Well Testing Reservoir Simulator, The University of
Tulsa, 2017. Diss.
[3] H. Hamdi, P. Ruelland, P. Bergey, P.W. Corbett, Using geological well testing for
improving the selection of appropriate reservoir models, Petrol. Geosci. 20 (4)
(2014) 353e368.
[4] H. Hamdi, Y. Hajizadeh, M.C. Sousa, Population-based sampling methods for
geological well testing, Comput. Geosci. 19 (5) (2015) 1089e1107.
[5] H. Hamdi, M.C. Sousa, Calibrating multi-point geostatistical models using
pressure transient data, in: SPE Europec Featured at 78th EAGE Conference
and Exhibition, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2016, May.
[6] Q. Liu, H. Lu, L. Li, A. Mu, Study on characteristics of well-test type curves for
composite reservoir with sealing faults, Petroleum (2018). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.petlm.2018.03.011.
[7] George Stewart, Well Test Design & Analysis, PennWell Corporation, 2011.
[8] L.M. Yaxley, Effect of a partially communicating fault on transient pressure
behavior, SPE Form. Eval. 2.04 (1987) 590e598.
[9] H.C. Bixel, B.K. Larkin, H.K. Van Poollen, Effect of linear discontinuities on
pressure build-up and drawdown behavior, J. Petrol. Technol. 15.08 (1963)
885e895.
[10] A.K. Ambastha, P.G. McLeroy, A.S. Grader, Effects of a partially communicating
fault in a composite reservoir on transient pressure testing, SPE Form. Eval.
4.02 (1989) 210e218.
[11] A.F. Van Everdingen, The skin effect and its influence on the productive ca-
pacity of a well, J. Petrol. Technol. 5.06 (1953) 171e176.
[12] William Hurst, Establishment of the skin effect and its impediment to fluid
flow into a well bore, Petrol. Eng. 25.11 (1953) B6eB16.
[13] Hamidreza Hamdi, Yasin Hajizadeh, Mario Costa Sousa, Population-based
sampling methods for geological well testing, Comput. Geosci. 19.5 (2015)
1089e1107.
[14] B.A. Al-Wehaibi, N.M. Anisur Rahman, M.B. Issaka, Estimating the degree of
inter-reservoir communication between two reservoirs using advanced nu-
merical well testing model, in: SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical
Symposium and Exhibition, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2016.
[15] Arash Azamifard, Mahnaz Hekmatzadeh, Bahram Dabir, Evaluation of gas
condensate reservoir behavior using velocity dependent relative permeability
during the numerical well test analysis, Petroleum 2.2 (2016) 156e165.
[16] Mohammad Sharifi, Mohan Kelkar, Asnul Bahar, Tormod Slettebo, Dynamic
ranking of multiple realizations by use of the fast-marching method, SPE J.
19.06 (2014) 1e069.
[17] Behzad Pouladi, Mohammad Sharifi, Mohammad Ahmadi, Mohan Kelkar, Fast
marching method assisted sector modeling: application to simulation of giant
reservoir models, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 149 (2017) 707e719.
[18] J.A. Sethian, A. Vladimirsky, Fast methods for the Eikonal and related
HamiltoneJacobi equations on unstructured meshes, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
Unit. States Am. 97 (11) (2000) 5699e5703.
[19] K. Karlsen, Hvistendahl, K.-A. Lie, N.H. Risebro, A fast marching method for
reservoir simulation, Comput. Geosci. 4.2 (2000) 185e206.
[20] I. Berre, K.H. Karlsen, K.A. Lie, J.R. Natvig, Fast computation of arrival times in
heterogeneous media, Comput. Geosci. 9.4 (2005) 179e201.
[21] Masa Prodanovic, Steven L. Bryant, Zuleima T. Karpyn, Investigating matrix/
fracture transfer via a level set method for drainage and imbibition, SPE J.
15.01 (2010) 125e136.
[22] A. Datta-Gupta, J. Xie, N. Gupta, M.J. King, W.J. Lee, Radius of investigation and
its generalization to unconventional reservoirs, J. Petrol. Technol. 63.07 (2011)
52e55.
[23] J. Xie, N. Gupta, M.J. King, A. Datta-Gupta, Depth of investigation and depletion
behavior in unconventional reservoirs using fast marching methods, in: SPE
Europec/EAGE Annual Conference, Society of Petroleum Engineers, 2012.
[24] Y. Zhang, C. Yang, M.J. King, A. Datta-Gupta, Fast-marching methods for
complex grids and anisotropic permeabilities: application to unconventional
reservoirs, in: SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium, Society of Petroleum
Engineers, 2013.
[25] Mohammad Sharifi, Mohan Kelkar, Novel permeability upscaling method
using fast marching method, Fuel 117 (2014) 568e578.
[26] Y. Zhang, N. Bansal, Y. Fujita, A. Datta-Gupta, M.J. King, S. Sankaran, From
streamlines to fast marching: rapid simulation and performance assessment
of shale gas reservoirs using diffusive time of flight as a spatial coordinate, in:
SPE Unconventional Resources Conference, Society of Petroleum Engineers,
2014.
[27] Yusuke Fujita, Akhil Datta-Gupta, Michael J. King, A comprehensive reservoir
simulator for unconventional reservoirs based on the fast marching method
and diffusive time of flight, in: SPE Reservoir Simulation Symposium, Society
of Petroleum Engineers, 2015.
[28] J. Leem, K. Lee, J.M. Kang, Y. Park, J. Park, History matching with ensemble
Kalman filter using fast marching method in shale gas reservoir, in: SPE/IATMI
Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and Exhibition, Society of Petroleum Engi-
neers, 2015.
[29] Behzad Pouladi, Sahar Keshavarz, Mohammad Sharifi, Mohammad
302 B. Pouladi et al. / Petroleum 5 (2019) 295e302

Ali Ahmadi, A robust proxy for production well placement optimization
problems, Fuel 206 (2017) 467e481.
[30] Timothy J. Barth, James A. Sethian, Numerical schemes for the
HamiltoneJacobi and level set equations on triangulated domains, J. Comput.
Phys. 145.1 (1998) 1e40.
[31] Shu-Ren Hysing, Stefan Turek, The Eikonal equation: numerical efficiency vs.
algorithmic complexity on quadrilateral grids, Proc. ALGORITMY 22 (2005).
[32] Changdong Yang, Michael J. King, Akhil Datta-Gupta, Rapid simulation of
naturally fractured unconventional reservoirs with unstructured grids using
the fast marching method, in: SPE Reservoir Simulation Conference, Society of
Petroleum Engineers, 2017.
[33] Changdong Yang, Vishal Sharma, Akhil Datta-Gupta, Michael J. King, A novel
approach for production transient analysis of shale gas/oil reservoirs, in:
Unconventional Resources Technology Conference (URTEC), 2015.
[34] Philippe Renard, Damian Glenz, Miguel Mejias, Understanding diagnostic
plots for well-test interpretation, Hydrogeol. J. 17.3 (2009) 589e600.