ARMA 23-748

Coupled Pore Pressure and Geomechanical Modeling of a

Naturally Fractured Reservoir

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/ARMAUSRMS/proceedings-pdf/ARMA23/All-ARMA23/ARMA-2023-0748/3269004/arma-2023-0748.pdf/1 by Universidad De Los Andes, Luis Felipe Fajardo on 23 October 2023
Qiuliang Yao and Andrew Madyarov
Teverra LLC, Houston, TX, USA

Copyright 2023 ARMA, American Rock Mechanics Association

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 57th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium held in Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 25-28 June
2023. This paper was selected for presentation at the symposium by an ARMA Technical Program Committee based on a technical and critical
review of the paper by a minimum of two technical reviewers. The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of ARMA, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent
of ARMA is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 200 words; illustrations may not be copied.
The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgement of where and by whom the paper was presented.

ABSTRACT: Natural fractures play a significant role in oil and gas production by serving as the primary fluid pathways in
reservoirs with low matrix permeability. However, their behavior is sensitive to stress change. The depletion of reservoir pressure
will increase the effective stress and may cause natural fractures to close. Closure of opened fractures may create pressure barriers
and impede further depletion. Numerical simulation of a naturally fractured reservoir remains challenging. A fully coupled finite
element model is developed in this study using commercial finite element method (FEM) software. The interaction between total
stress and reservoir pressure is computed using a Biot-Gassmann poroelastic model, and the depletion is modeled as pressure
diffusion using Darcy’s law. The closure of natural fractures is modeled by associating the permeability to stress using a subroutine
that reads the stress at each time iteration to compute the corresponding permeability and update the material property at each
material point. A scenario study successfully demonstrates the modification of the depletion pattern because of the closure of
natural fractures.

modification of fracture transport properties attributed to

1. INTRODUCTION
When natural fractures develop within a reservoir,
geomechanical and hydraulic properties interact with
one another (Davies & Davies, 2001). The initial spatial
distribution of opened fractures has a significant impact
on fluid flow and pressure depletion (Heffer et al.,
1994). The in-situ stress field responds to reservoir
pressure changes according to porous media constituting
material laws. On the other hand, hydraulic properties of
natural fractures are sensitive to stress conditions.
Closure of opened fractures creates a pressure barrier
and can impede further depletion. Such interactive
behaviors are highly dynamic and should be modeled in
a coupled manner (Jin et al., 2000). Most current
modeling approaches involve two separate simulation
platforms: (1) fluid flow and reservoir pressure modeled
with reservoir simulators and (2) stress evolutions
modeled using FEM simulators (Myers et al., 2017).
Such approaches depend on a large amount of data
repeatedly transferred between the two platforms.
Recently lots of efforts of coupled modeling have been
reported or implemented into commercial software.
Generally, the reservoir simulator is the master or host in
the coupled process, therefore the focus is on fluid
simulation, but the stress is typically handled
oversimplified. Furthermore, properly modeling the
stress variations remains challenging (Gao & Gray,
2022).
2. COUPLED PORE FLUID AND
MECHANICAL MODELING
Subsurface formation rock is a porous medium
consisting of a solid matrix and pore fluid. Following the
concise notation in Berryman (1999) and further
reducing it to only consider hydrostatic stress and strain,
the elastic behavior of a porous media filled with fluid
can be described as:
 = a11 + a12 p (1)
 = a21 + a22 p (2)
Here, ε is bulk strain, ξ is fluid change normalized to
bulk volume, σ is total external stress increment, and p
is the pore pressure increment. Coefficients aij are
related to grain bulk modulus K0, dry bulk modulus Kd,
porosity φ, and fluid modulus Kf.
It is evident that even in a single isolated volume of
formation rock, pore fluid and mechanical behavior are
fully coupled to each other. When considering the fluid
exchange to neighboring rock units, transport properties
of the rock will be involved to further complicate the

1
solution (Biot, 1956). Eqs. (1) and (2) are simplified to
the hydrostatic stress, but for most of the subsurface
problems, the stress should be treated as a tensor with
six or more components. Furthermore, if the coefficients
aij and transport properties change with time, solving the
large number of coupled equations becomes extremely
challenging.
There are continuous efforts to provide fully coupled
simulations within academia and industry (Dean et al.,
2006; Matsunaga et al., 2018; Alpak, 2014); but for now,
various simplification and approximation approaches
have been proposed and practiced (Simulia.com, 2015).
Fig. 1Fig. 1 compares the different types of approaches
for a typical subsurface modeling workflow. EM, RM,
and GM represent geological earth model, reservoir
modeling, and geomechanical modeling, respectively.
Ideally, after the EM is constructed, reservoir and
geomechanical simulations (in either the static or
dynamic modeling process) should be fully coupled at
every time step to precisely reflect the physical behavior
of the formation. However, because of the mathematical
complexity, the reservoir and geomechanical simulations
are often solved with two separate engines. At the first
level of compromise, the simulations should be halted at
the end of every time step, and the results from both
engines should be transferred to one another to update
the input for the next time step. Additionally, it is quite
common to use a further compromised workflow where
data is only transferred one way. The choice of approach
is a matter of application as well as cost. For example, if
the reservoir’s transport properties are not expected to
have large modifications, then the one-way transfer
workflow can be considered as a cost-effective
approach.
Fig. 1. Comparison between fully coupled fluid and
mechanical simulations with uncoupled approaches,
depending on transferring data.
However, for a reservoir where transport and mechanical
properties are highly interactive to each other, the one-
way approach will not capture the primary characters of
the formation, and simulation results can be far from
reality. On the contrary, the two-way transferring
approach is extremely time consuming and cost
2
prohibitive. For unconventional field developments, the
natural fracture plays an important role with providing a
fluid pathway within a low permeable matrix; however,
its contribution to fluid flow is highly dependent on
stress conditions, which are dynamically influenced by
fluid flow. Therefore, a coupled modeling workflow
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/ARMAUSRMS/proceedings-pdf/ARMA23/All-ARMA23/ARMA-2023-0748/3269004/arma-2023-0748.pdf/1 by Universidad De Los Andes, Luis Felipe Fajardo on 23 October 2023
without data transfer becomes highly demanded.
A commercial finite element simulation software
Abaqus was used for this study to create such a fully
coupled workflow.
Because the “pore fluid/stress” element with a porous
elasticity material model is used, the interaction between
total stress and reservoir pressure is fully coupled. The
numerical simulation results from a separate verification
model were compared to analytical results computed
using the Biot-Gassmann poroelastic model (Skempton,
1954) with satisfactory performance.
Depletion is modeled as pressure diffusion using
Darcy’s law (Darcy, 1856).
𝑘
𝑞 = − 𝜇 ∇𝑝 (3)
Here, q is flow rate, k is permeability, μ is dynamic
viscosity of the fluid, and p is pore pressure.
This is probably an oversimplified approach compared
to most commercial reservoir simulation software
because it doesn’t manage anything beyond a single-
phase fluid flow; therefore, this workflow should not be
applied to applications where multiphase fluid flow and
phase change are important. However, for
unconventional applications where mechanical and
transport property interactions are the more important
factor to account for and where production is dominated
by one fluid, such as gas, this workflow can capture the
primary physics with significantly lower computational
cost.
3. PERMEABILITY REDUCTION BECAUSE
OF NATURAL FRACTURE CLOSURE
It is well known that reservoir rock permeability is a
function of stress. The sensitivity of this dependency
varies widely with the type of pore structures (Abass et
al., 2007). For rocks dominated with round-shape pores,
such as carbonate without fractures, their permeability
typically exhibits little dependency on stress change.
However, presence of elongated pores, such as
microcracks and fractures, makes the rock extremely
sensitive to stress changes for many of its properties,
including acoustic properties such as compressional and
shear velocity and transport properties such as resistivity
and permeability.
Early reservoir simulators typically did not have the
capability to update rock properties with time; this is
probably acceptable to most conventional well
consolidated reservoirs. However, to properly simulate
reservoir behavior where natural fractures are well
developed, it is important to include such permeability
modifications during the life of the field. There are
attempts to update permeability as a function of void
ratio, pore pressure, or, simply, time (Kasap and Bush,
2003), but these approaches do not capture the proper
permeability variation mechanism. For example, the
method based on the porosity permeability relationship
fails to model the closure of natural fractures where
permeability reduces for multiple orders of magnitude,
but the change of porosity is insignificant.
The best field parameter to characterize permeability
change is probably effective stress. Most laboratory
measurement data are conducted using this method (Fig.
2Fig. 2).
Fig. 2. Permeability vs. confining pressure for various types of
fractures and matrices (Abass et al., 2007).
For a coupled pore fluid and mechanical simulation, the
stress field is calculated at the end of each time iteration;
therefore, it is suitable to use it as an independent
variable to compute the corresponding permeability.
Fig. 3Fig. 3 shows the workflow to update permeability
with stress change. In the center of the workflow is the
finite element simulation software output database (odb)
file. Besides common solutions such as stress, strain,
pore pressure, etc., an additional field variable (FV) is
defined and written in the odb file at the end of each
time iteration. This FV is accessible by both the
subroutine and the software’s primary job executing
module. For the subroutine, the FV can be computed as a
function of any available field solution, such as stress or
strain, at that point in time. It is then written back to the
odb file and passed through to the next time iteration. On
the other side, the software allows users to define
3
permeability as a function of that field variable in the
input file; therefore, permeability keeps updating at each
iteration based on stress solutions at the last time
iteration. In the 2021 release, an optional parameter was
introduced in Abaqus for user defined fields to directly
specify an available scalar field to copy into the FV.
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/ARMAUSRMS/proceedings-pdf/ARMA23/All-ARMA23/ARMA-2023-0748/3269004/arma-2023-0748.pdf/1 by Universidad De Los Andes, Luis Felipe Fajardo on 23 October 2023
This allows users to avoid using subroutines in simple
cases of parameter dependency, e.g., on a single stress
component or invariant.
Material Model Abaqus .odb Subroutine: USDFLD
• Solutions like
S, E, Pp, …
k = f(FV) FV = f(E, S, …)
• Field variable
(FV)
Fig. 3. Permeability updating using subroutine.
4. A CASE STUDY
Integrating these techniques to demonstrate the proposed
concept and workflows, a model was created to simulate
the 10-year depletion history of a simple reservoir. A
producing well is placed at the center of a 10 × 10-km
reservoir with 1000-m thickness; the model is relatively
large to minimize boundary effects. The original
reservoir pressure is 105 MPa. A roller boundary
condition is set at the bottom, while the top and sides of
the model are loaded with pressure boundary conditions
to represent far field in-situ stresses. For the fluid flow, a
constant pressure is applied at the sides with no flow at
the top and bottom surfaces. The production is simulated
by applying a lower bottomhole pressure of 73.5 MPa
along the wellbore and holding it for the simulated 10
years. Table 1Table 1 lists the mechanical properties of
the reservoir rock and fluid together with stresses and
pore pressure.
Table 1. Mechanical properties of the reservoir rock and fluid.
Young's modulus 20 GPa
Poisson's ratio 0.2
Grain bulk modulus 37 GPa
Fluid bulk modulus 2.5 GPa
Overburden stress, Szz 121 MPa
Minimum horizonal stress, Syy 110 MPa
Maximum horizontal stress, Sxx 115 MPa
Pore pressure, Pp 105 MPa
As a baseline scenario, the reservoir pressure is depleted
around the well location with a radial symmetry (Fig.
4Fig. 4, top). A minor distortion is caused by the effects
from rectangular model boundaries.
For the case study, a 200-meter-wide strip of a naturally
fractured zone is placed 400 m away from the producing
well (Fig. 5Fig. 5). The strip may represent a damage Pa
zone

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/ARMAUSRMS/proceedings-pdf/ARMA23/All-ARMA23/ARMA-2023-0748/3269004/arma-2023-0748.pdf/1 by Universidad De Los Andes, Luis Felipe Fajardo on 23 October 2023
No Fracture Zone

Pa
Section
x=0m

Section
y = 400 m

Fractured
Zone

Stress Dependent Frac Perm

Pa

Constant Frac Permeability

Fig. 4. Comparison of depletion results with no fracture zone

(top), a fracture zone with permeability reduction with
increasing stress (middle), and a fracture zone with constant
permeability (bottom).

4
around a fault with conductive fractures formed aligned
with the orientation of the fault. Thus, as the initial
condition, the hydraulic property of the natural fractured
zone is characterized by an anisotropic permeability
kxx = kzz = 500 md, kyy = 10 md. Outside of the fractured
zone, the reservoir is assigned an isotropic permeability

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/ARMAUSRMS/proceedings-pdf/ARMA23/All-ARMA23/ARMA-2023-0748/3269004/arma-2023-0748.pdf/1 by Universidad De Los Andes, Luis Felipe Fajardo on 23 October 2023
of 10 md.
Fractured
Zone

Depletion
Well

Reservoir Rock
10 km  10 km  1 km

Fig. 5. Reservoir model with a fractured zone.

First, let the anisotropic permeability in the fracture zone

have no dependency on stresses so that the fractures stay
open during the entire simulation time. The pressure
distribution after 10 years of production for this case is
show in Fig. 4Fig. 4, bottom. Compared to the baseline
scenario, the final reservoir pressure distribution loses its
radial symmetry and exhibits a seemingly smaller
depletion zone, especially on the opposite side of the
fractured zone from the well. This effect is caused by the
enhanced permeability in the x direction in the fracture
zone that helps bringing additional fluid inflow into the
system from the left and right boundaries of the model,
where constant pore pressure is applied.
Finally, a stress dependency of the permeability in the
fractured zone is introduced in the model. It is assumed
that the natural fractures begin to close when the
effective stress yy (which is perpendicular to the
fractures) reaches 8 MPa. This is implemented by
specifying the permeability–stress relationship in a
tabular form (Table 2Table 2). The stress component
selection, normal to the assumed fracture orientation, is
for demonstration purposes only. In real applications,
other components, invariants, or their combination can
be implemented in the user subroutine to drive the
permeability changes, depending on the nature of the
fractured zone.
Table 2. Permeability dependence on normal stress.

Permeability kxx, kzz, md Effective Stress yy, MPa

500 5
100 8
10 8.1 Fig. 6. Effective stress yy distributions for stress dependent
fracture permeability: at year 1 (top), year 2 (middle), and year
10 (bottom).

5
The results of the simulation with stress dependent
permeability in the fractured zone are presented in Fig.
4Fig. 4, middle. Initially, while the fractures are fully
open, the solution follows the constant frac permeability
solution from Fig. 4Fig. 4, bottom. Then, as the pressure
depletion area propagates to the fault, the effective stress
comparison, by considering the stress dependency, the
closure of fractures stops such inflow, thus the final
pressure profile recovers to what is generated in the
scenario without the fractured zone. The bottom plot
shows the pressure profiles along a straight line just
above and parallel to the fractured zone (labeled as

increases and causes the fractures to close, reducing the
permeability in the x and z directions. The solution
deviates towards the baseline scenario from that point.
The changes in the normal effective stress controlling
the permeability change are shown in Fig. 6Fig. 6. The
dark grey area signifies the region where the effective
stress yy has overcome the threshold value of 8 MPa.
When this area grows into the fractured zone (by the end
of year 2 of production), it starts triggering fracture
closure.
110
X = 0 m, t = 10 years
105
100
Pore Pressure, MPa
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/ARMAUSRMS/proceedings-pdf/ARMA23/All-ARMA23/ARMA-2023-0748/3269004/arma-2023-0748.pdf/1 by Universidad De Los Andes, Luis Felipe Fajardo on 23 October 2023
Section y = 400 m in Fig. 4Fig. 4, middle). Similarly, in
the scenario with no stress dependence, the continuous
fluid supply through those never-closed fractures will
maintain a relatively higher pore pressure even in the
vicinity of the production well. After closure of the
fractures, the pressure profile, again, recovers to the case
similar to no fracture zone.
The relative production rate histories in three scenarios
are compared in Fig. 8Fig. 8 Without the fractured zone,
the production rate gradually declines due to the
depletion effect as expected. With the fractured zone,
and ignoring the stress dependency, the extra inflow
through the open fractures significantly increases the
initial production rate and slows down the decline rate.

By considering stress dependency, the production rate

95
transits from an initial high value to a normal value, due
90 to the closure of the fractures.
85 100

Stress Dependence Stress Dependence

80 95
No Stress Dependence No Stress Dependence
Relative Production Rate

75 90 No Fracture Zone
No Fracture Zone
70 85
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
Y, km 80
106
75
Y = 400 m, t = 10 years
104 70

102 65
Pore Pressure, MPa

100 60
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

98 Time, years

96 Fig. 8. Relative production rate as a function of time for the

94
92
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
X, km
Fig. 7. Pore pressure profiles across the fractured zone (top),
parallel to the fractured (bottom) after 10 years of production.
The final pore pressure distributions in three scenarios
are compared in Fig. 7Fig. 7. The top plot shows the
pore pressure profiles along a straight line across the
well and perpendicular to the fractured zone (denoted as
Section x = 0 m in Fig. 4Fig. 4, middle). Without
considering the stress dependency, the fractures will stay
open and enable higher fluid inflow from the left and
right sides of the model. A higher pressure gradient
remains between the well and the fractured zone. In
Stress Dependence three scenarios.
No Stress Dependence
No Fracture Zone
5. SUMMARY
2 3 4 5
A fully coupled fluid flow and geomechanical
simulation workflow is developed with the capability to
update permeability with changing stress. A scenario
study demonstrates that this workflow can easily capture
the closure of natural fractures and simulate the
depletion of a naturally fractured reservoir more
realistically. The current workflow can only manage the
single-phase fluid flow; therefore, its application should
be limited to reservoirs where multiple-phase flow and
phase change is not important. Further development is
necessary to expand the workflow to more general field
applications.

6
References
1. Abass, H. H., Ortiz, I., Khan, M. R., Beresky, J. K., &
Sierra, L. 2007. Understanding Stress Dependant
Permeability of Matrix, Natural Fractures, and
Hydraulic Fractures in Carbonate Formations. SPE
Saudi Arabia Section Technical Symposium, Dhahran,
13. Myers, R. D., Crawford, B. R., Barron, J. W., & Huang,
H. 2017. Predicting stress sensitive productivity of
naturally fractured reservoirs in low strain
environments. SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and
Conference, MEOS, Proceedings, 2017-March.
https://doi.org/10.2118/183926-ms.

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/ARMAUSRMS/proceedings-pdf/ARMA23/All-ARMA23/ARMA-2023-0748/3269004/arma-2023-0748.pdf/1 by Universidad De Los Andes, Luis Felipe Fajardo on 23 October 2023
Saudi Arabia, 7–8 May. 14. Simulia.com. 2015. RESERVOIR GEOMECHANICS,
How reservoir geomechanics is being addressed by
2. Alpak, F. O. 2014. Robust Fully-Coupled Multiphase SIMULIA, a whitepaper by Dassault Systemes Simulia
Flow and Geomechanics Simulation. SPE Large Scale Corporation.
Computing and Big Data Challenges in Reservoir
Simulation Conference and Exhibition, Istanbul, 15. Skempton, A. W. 1954. The pore-pressure coefficients
Turkey, 15–17 September. A and B. Geotechnique. 4: 143–147.
3. Berryman, J. G. 1999. Origin of Gassmann’s equations:
Geophysics. 64: 1627–1629.
4. Biot, M. A. 1956. Theory of propagation of elastic
waves in fluid-saturated porous solid. I. Low frequency
range: Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 28:
168–178.
5. Darcy, H. 1856. Les Fontaines Publiques de la Ville de
Dijon. Paris: Dalmont.
6. Davies, J. P., & Davies, D. K. 2001. Stress-dependent
permeability: Characterization and modeling. SPE
Journal, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.2118/71750-PA.
7. Dean, R. H., Gai, X., Stone, C. M., & Minkoff, S. E.
2006. A Comparison of Techniques for Coupling
Porous Flow and Geomechanics. SPE Journal. 11.
8. Gao, C., & Gray, K. E. 2022. A coupled geomechanics
and reservoir simulator with a staggered grid finite
difference method. Journal of Petroleum Science and
Engineering, 209.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2021.109818.
9. Heffer, K. J., Last, N. C., Koutsabeloulis, N. C., Chan,
H. C. M., Gutierrez, M., & Makurat, A. 1994. The
influence of natural fractures, faults and earth stresses
on reservoir performance - geomechanical analysis by
numerical modelling. Publikasjon – Norges
Geotekniske Institutt, 192. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
94-011-0896-6_16.
10. Jin, M., Somerville, J., & Smart, B. G. D. 2000.
Coupled Reservoir Simulation Applied to the
Management of Production Induced Stress-Sensitivity.
Proceedings of the International Oil and Gas
Conference and Exhibition in China, IOGCEC.
https://doi.org/10.2118/64790-ms.
11. Kasap, E., & Bush, E. S. 2003. Estimating a
Relationship Between Pore Pressure and Natural
Fracture Permeability for Highly Stressed Reservoirs.
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Denver, Colorado, 5–8 October.
12. Matsunaga, R., Watase, S., & Furui, K. 2018. A
Rigorous Yet Simple Technique for Coupled Reservoir
and Geomechanics Simulation. SPE Asia Pacific Oil
and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Brisbane,
Australia, 23–25 October.