## 5 Results and Analysis
### Sensitivity Analysis  
Besides the dimensionless permeability modulus \((\gamma_{\text{D}})\), other parameters may have effects on the type curve and the relative difference between the pseudo-pressures with and without the effect of the stress sensitivity. Therefore, it is critical to conduct the sensitivity analysis of relevant parameters. Figures 9 and 10 show the effects of the fracture conductivity coefficient (\(C_{\rm fD}\)) on the type curve and the relative difference between the pseudo-pressures with and without the effect of the stress sensitivity, respectively. It is obvious that the impact of the \(C_{\rm fD}\) on the type curve takes place in the early periods (i.e., from the TFAWSP to the LFP), where the values of the pseudo-pressure and its derivative increase with the decrease of the magnitude of the \(C_{\rm fD}\). Furthermore, it was found from Figure 9 that as the value of the \(C_{\rm fD}\) increases, the duration of the BFP becomes shorter and the start time of the LFP becomes earlier. As shown in Figure 10, the \(\delta\) was little affected by the \(C_{\rm fD}\) in all periods, and this was because the main impact of the \(C_{\rm fD}\) on the pseudo-pressure occurred in the early periods, but the effect of the stress sensitivity on the pseudo-pressure was negligibly small in the early periods. Figures 11 and 12 show the effects of the length of the hydraulic fractures (\(L_{\rm f}\)) on the type curve and the relative difference between the pseudo-pressures with and without the effect of the stress sensitivity, respectively. It is seen from Figure 11 that the \(L_{\rm f}\) has an important effect on the magnitudes  
Figure 10: Effect of the \(C_{\rm fD}\) on the relative difference between the pseudo-pressures with and without the effect of the stress sensitivity (\(n=4\), \(L_{\rm f1}=L_{\rm f2}=X_{\rm f}=50\) m, \(L_{\rm B}=L_{\rm f4}=Y_{\rm f}=50\) m, \(\theta=90^{\circ}\), \(S_{\rm f}=10^{-3}\), \(C_{\rm D}=0.1\), \(\gamma_{\rm D}=0.1\)). Figure 9: Type curves for the bottom-hole pseudo-pressure of a vertical fractured well with multiple hydraulic fractures in stress-sensitive gas reservoirs with different values of the \(C_{\rm fD}\) (\(n=4\), \(L_{\rm f1}=L_{\rm f2}=X_{\rm f}=50\) m, \(L_{\rm f3}=L_{\rm f4}=Y_{\rm f}=50\) m, \(\theta=90^{\circ}\), \(S_{\rm f}=10^{-3}\), \(C_{\rm D}=0.1\), \(\gamma_{\rm D}=0.1\)). of the pseudo-pressure and its derivative in the intermediate and late flow periods (i.e., from the BFP to the PRFP). Decreasing the \(L_{\mathrm{f}}\) reduced the duration of the BFP and resulted in the increase of the pseudo-pressure and its derivative during and after the BFP. Furthermore, it was found from Figure 12 that the \(\delta\) increased with decreasing the magnitude of the \(L_{\mathrm{f}}\) in the late flow period, indicating that the pseudo-pressure obtained by the conventional model without the effect of the stress sensitivity will result in a much bigger error when the length of the hydraulic fractures becomes shorter. Figures 13 and 14 show the effects of the angle between the two adjacent hydraulic fractures (\(\theta\)) on the type curve and the relative difference between the pseudo-pressures with and without the effect of the stress sensitivity, respectively. As shown in Figure 13, with the decrease of the \(\theta\), the start time of the TFALPF becomes earlier, and the magnitudes of the pseudo-pressure and its derivative in the TFALPF increase. This is because decreasing the \(\theta\) results in the earlier and stronger interference between the hydraulic fractures, which makes the pressure drop increase to remain the constant rate of the produced well. Furthermore, it is seen from Figure 14 that the \(\delta\) increases with decreasing the magnitude of the \(\theta\) during and after the TFAIFP, indicating that the effect of the stress sensitivity on the pseudo-pressure becomes greater when the \(\theta\) decreases.