World Oil

Originally appeared in

OCTOBER 2013 issue, pgs 53-61. Posted with permission.

RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT

3D geomechanical modeling, wellbore stability analysis

improve fields performance

As demonstrated in a field
onshore Oman, utilization of
3D geomechanical modeling
can identify problems in the
potential wellbore path that
can make the difference
between financial success
and failure at the wellsite

LI QIUGUO, XING ZHANG and KHALID

AL-GHAMMARI, Schlumberger; and LABIB
MOHSIN, FADI JIROUDI and AHMED AL
RAWAHI; Oman Oil Expl. and Prod. LLC

Although 70 years are just a blip in

geologic time, they represent the entire
period that oil and gas companies have
been modeling and simulating reservoirs.
Of course, much has changed in terms of
the technology available since the early
1940s, but the fundamental purpose has
remained the same. Critical field investment and development decisions must be
based on the best possible information,
predictions and intelligence, gained from
accurate, detailed modeling.
With the increasing requirement for
hydrocarbon exploration and development in deepwater, unconventional
A geological model of Abu Butabul field.

and other challenging environments,

accurate geomechanical modeling has
become ever more critical for ensuring
safe, cost-effective operations. Coming to the forefront over the last several
years, it seeks to explain, and predict,
changes to the mechanical rock state
brought about by drilling, production or
injection. These changes can be costly,
considering that geomechanical issues
are thought to be responsible for almost
half of all drilling-related, non-productive time in high-pressure/high-temperature (HPHT), deepwater and other
difficult environments.
These potential risks loom large, when
it comes to drilling design. Subsurface
stresses, wellbore stability, and pore pressures must be understood, and modeled,
to establish safe mud weight boundaries in
deep, complex wells. A modern mechanical earth model is a numerical representation of the geomechanical state of a reservoir, field or basin. In addition to property
distribution and the fracture system, the
model incorporates pore pressures, state of
stress, and rock mechanical properties.
The ability to identify problems in the
potential wellbore path relating to compaction and subsidence, well and completion integrity, cap-rock and fault-seal integrity, and fracture behavior, before they
occur, is often the difference between financial success and failure.
These advantages can be illustrated
with reference to geomechanical simulation undertaken for Abu Butabul field,
Oman, in which a geomechanical modeling study was conducted to understand
causes of wellbore instability problems,
and provide recommendations for new
well locations.
ABU BUTABUL FIELD

Discovered in 1998, the Abu Butabul

gas-condensate field is onshore, within
Block 60, in the western region of the
central Omani desert, Fig. 1. The main
reservoir is the Cambro-Ordovician clastic bank formation, buried 4,200 m below

sea level, with very low porosity and permeability. Oman Oil had experienced instability problems while drilling appraisal
wells in the field, especially in the shallower Natih, Nahr Umr and Gharif formations, and the deeper Safiq, Ghudun and
Mabrouk formations, Fig. 2.
Abu Butabul is situated on a regional
high, between the two early Cambrian salt
basins that provided the principal source
kitchens for northern Oman. The Barik
sandstone comprises a prograding, braid
delta plain and shoreface succession. The
top seal is provided by marine mudstones
of the Mabrouk member, and the base seal
is formed by marine mudstones of the Al
Bashair member. Internal seals are likely
to be associated with intra-Barik marine
flooding surfaces. The Barik sandstone
is the principal reservoir interval that has
been appraised in the structure.
Wellbore instabilitycaused by excessive stress concentrations at the borehole
wall and inadequate mud supporthad
accounted for significant non-productive
time while drilling appraisal wells. Oman
Oil was keen to undertake 3D geomechanical analysis, to determine the appropriate mud weight to maintain stability
for future well trajectories, prior to drilling. A 3D geomechanical model, once
constructed, would provide essential
geomechanical data for wellbore stability analysis, for any location. In addition,
it would reduce the amount of time required for wellbore stability calculations
and planning for new well locations.
GEOMECHANICAL STUDY

The objectives of the geomechanical

modeling study were to characterize mechanical rock properties, pore pressures,
and in-situ stresses, based on nine appraisal wells. The team also wanted to understand wellbore instability mechanisms
and predict wellbore stability for future
well trajectories.
To determine formation mechanical
properties, pore pressures, in-situ stress
orientation and magnitudes, 1D MeWorld Oil/OCTOBER 201353

RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT

Fig. 1. Abu Butabul field is located within

onshore Oman Block 60 in the Western
region of the Central Oman Desert.

Fig. 2. Stratigraphy of Abu Butabul field.

Fig. 3. A comparison between log-derived elastic and strength properties, and those
measured on core samples.

chanical Earth Models (MEMs) were

constructed for the nine Abu Butabul
appraisal wells. Each model described
rock elastic and strength properties (Fig.
3), in-situ stresses and pore pressure as a
function of depth, referenced to a stratigraphic column.1 The MEMs consisted of
continuous profiles (Fig. 4) of the following rock mechanical data and parameters
along the well trajectories:
Mechanical stratigraphy, the differentiation of clay-supported rock
from grain-supported rock
Formation elastic properties, including dynamic and static Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio
Rock strength parameters, including
unconfined compressive strength
(UCS), friction angle and tensile
strength
Pore pressures
In-situ stress state, including the
azimuth of the minimum horizontal
stress, magnitudes of vertical stress,
minimum and maximum horizontal
stresses.
The team used wireline logs (compressional slowness, shear slowness, bulk
density, etc.) to compute rock elastic and
strength properties, and in-situ stresses.
Rock mechanical testing data was available from six of the nine appraisal wells.
Tests on core samples taken from the
Mabrouk, Barik and Al Bashair formations included triaxial and unconfined
54OCTOBER 2013/WorldOil.com

compression, rock scratch, and Brazilian

Tensile Strength. Static Youngs modulus
was also measured on both vertical and
horizontal core plugs. The values obtained were similar, suggesting that the
rock samples were relatively isotropic.
Correlations for calculating static Youngs
modulus, static Poissons ratio, UCS, and
friction angle were established, based
on the rock mechanical testing data and
wireline logs.

STRESS AND PRESSURE

CALCULATIONS

Vertical stress at any point in the formation is equivalent to the weight of the
formation materials above. The team integrated the bulk density log to calculate
these values. Pore pressure was computed,
using pressure gradients based on measured pore pressures, and the mud weight
used for appraisal well drilling. Minimum
horizontal stress azimuth was determined

RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT

from borehole breakout observations,

and drilling-induced fractures from the
FMI borehole image and dual-caliper
logs. It ranged from S20E to S40E across
the field, which is consistent with the regional stress direction. Minimum and
maximum horizontal stress magnitudes
were determined, using the poro-elastic
horizontal strain model.2 The minimum
horizontal stress was calibrated, based on
data from leak-off tests, extended leak-off
tests, and closure pressures, interpreted
from hydraulic fracturing pressures.
Since the magnitude of the maximum
horizontal stress cannot be directly measured, it was inverted from analyzing
fracture initiation pressures, and verified
by conducting wellbore stability analysis
and matching simulated shear and tensile
failures with observed borehole breakout,
and drilling-induced fractures.
The stress regime in the majority of
the formations was found to be strike-slip,
with the vertical stress being the intermediate principal stress. The mud weight
window, and the agreement between
the predicted borehole breakout and the
borehole enlargement, indicated that
wellbore instability problems during drilling were due to borehole failures, induced
by inadequate mud weight. Borehole failures occurred mainly in the Natih, Nahr
Umr and Gharif formations, and the bottom part of the Al Khalata, Safiq, Ghudun
and Mabrouk formations. This was consistent with drilling observations.
INTEGRATING 3D SEISMIC
INVERSION

A simultaneous inversion workflow

was then applied to Abu Butabul field,
to map out good porosity sand distribution, and obtain elastics property volumes
for use in the 3D geomechanical model.
Next, elastic rock properties, P-Impedance, S-Impedance, density and Vp/Vs,
were determined from simultaneous inversion, by applying the full Zoeppritz
equations to the angle of incidence range
response in the seismic data.
Detailed petrophysical analysis and
rock physics modeling were applied to
correct any existing well log problems.
The amended well logs were then calibrated with the seismic data, to ensure
good sonic and density logs were tied to
appropriate seismic events. Then, wavelets were extracted simultaneously from
angle gather stacks at multi-well locations.
After that, the low-frequency elastics

Fig. 4. 1D MEM and wellbore stability analysis.

property volumes for P-impedance, Simpedance and density were built, using
horizons, stratigraphy information, and
filtered log data. Finally, the simultaneous AVO inversion is run on angle gather
stacks, with their respective wavelets, to
generate P and S-impedance, and Vp/Vs
property volumes, which were verified by
comparison with the well logs.
With this information in place, the team
could turn to constructing the 3D geomechanical model in three stagesmodel
geometry construction, model properties
definition, and initial stress modeling.
The geometry of the 3D model was
based on an existing 1.7-million-cell,
17.2-by-46.7-km, geological model covering the surface down to the base of the
Miqrat formation. Depth ranged from
4,453 m to 5,002 m, subsea level, with a
water depth range of 54.1 m to 198.6 m.
It included two bounding faults that intersect overburden and reservoir, as well as
26 other faults in the Barik reservoir.
The new models finite element mesh
was constructed, based on the existing
grid, with eight-noded brick elements.

To reduce the impact of boundary constraints on simulated stresses in the 3D

model, 20 additional rows of cells were
added to each lateral direction, as well as
an additional 25 layers underneath.
Material elastic and strength properties needed to be defined before initial
stress modeling could be performed.
The team used the Mohr-Coulomb
constitutive model to simulate formation yield and plastic deformations, with
properties taken from the 1D MEMs.
Material properties were populated using a co-kriging algorithm. Acoustic impedance from a seismic inversion study
was used to guide property distribution.
Formation property variation between
well locations was characterized, using
the seismic information, as well as model-area well data.
Fault material properties were defined
separately, based on the mechanical properties of the intact rock surrounding the
faults and existing data sources. Properties include normal stiffness, shear stiffness, cohesion, and friction and dilation
angles. Fault element material properties
World Oil/OCTOBER 201355

RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT

were also calculated, using both intact

rock properties, and equivalent material
properties methodology.3
Pore pressures in the 3D model were
calculated, using pressure gradients estimated from the 1D MEMs. To simulate the initial in-situ stresses, horizontal stresses were applied to the model
boundaries. Horizontal stress gradients
were then determined from the horizontal stresses contained in the MEMs.
Applied stresses, at the base of the
model, were based on the gravity loading computed, using the density in all
the elements.
Initial stresses were then simulated,
Fig. 5. The team validated the results by
comparing principal stresses in the elements along the trajectories of the nine
appraisal wells, with the stresses contained in the 1D MEMs. Agreement between the two solutions was achieved at
all nine well locations, indicating that a
representative stress state in the 3D geomechanical model had been established.
The team also discovered that faults were
having significant impact on the distribution of stressesboth magnitude and
direction were altered in the vicinity of
faults, Fig. 6.
Since there was no production in the
56OCTOBER 2013/WorldOil.com

field at the time, the initial stress state was

also the present day stress state, allowing
the 3D geomechanical model to be used
in wellbore stability analysis for additional
appraisal and developmental well drilling.
WELLBORE STABILITY
PREDICTION

After the 3D geomechanical model was

constructed, it was used to predict wellbore
stability for several planned developmental
wells in Abu Butabul field. Rock mechanical properties, pore pressure, and stress
tensor components for cells intersected by
the planned well trajectory were extracted
from the model. Mud weight windows,
comprising pore pressure, fracture gradient (from minimum principal stress), borehole breakout and fracture initiation pressure gradients, were then calculated, based
on extracted data for the planned well,
Fig. 7. The team observed that formations
predicted to require higher mud weight, to
prevent borehole breakout, were similar to
those seen in the appraisal wellsmainly
Khuff, Gharif and Safiq. A mud weight of
1.3 to 1.35 g/cc was required to drill without significant borehole breakout. The
fracture initiation pressure gradient was
as low as 1.5 g/cc in the Al Khalata formation, meaning hydraulic fractures might be
induced, if the Equivalent Circulating Density (ECD) exceeds that figure while drilling or tripping. However, since the fracture
gradient was 1.65 g/cc, significant losses
were not expectedeven if hydraulic fractures could be induced near the wellbore.
With the designed mud weight following the mud weight windows, the
subsequent developmental well drilling proved to be successful, in terms of
wellbore stability. No significant borehole instability-related drilling problems
were encountered.
Petrel geomechanics modeling software was used to build a 3D geomechanical model of Abu Butabul field, incorporating 1D MEM data, which revealed
that the majority of the borehole enlargement and wellbore instability drilling problems in the appraisal wells were
caused by shear formation failures, due
to inadequate mud weights. The 3D geomechanical model constructed using 1D
MEMsthe existing geological model
and seismic inversion resultsproved to
be essential in characterizing the lateral
variation of mechanical properties, providing better prediction throughout the
full field.

Stresses simulated in the model, using the softwares finite element modeling tools, showed good agreement with
the stresses shown in the 1D MEMs at
the appraisal well locations, allowing the
team to conclude that this was representative of the in-situ stresses in the field.
The 3D model also revealed the extent
to which faults effected stress state, clariFig. 6. Stress magnitude and direction
alteration in the faulted region.

Fig. 7. Predicted mud weight windows

for a development well, based on the
3D geomechanical model. PP (blue) is
pore pressure gradient; breakout (red)
is the minimum mud weight required
for preventing borehole breakout; P3
(light blue) is the fracture gradient and
breakdown (black) is the maximum mud
weight that can be applied before drillinginduced fractures are created on the
borehole wall.

500
PP
Breakout
P3
Breakdown

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500
MD, m

Fig. 5. A comparison of stresses at the well

location from 1D and 3D solutions. TZSP is
vertical stress, TXSP is minimum horizontal
stress, and TYSP is maximum horizontal
stress from 1D MEM. Total P1 is minimum
principal stress, Total P2 is intermediate
principal stress, and Total P3 is maximum
principal stress from the 3D geomechanical
model.

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500
5,000
1.0

1.1

1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0

Mud weight window, g/cc

RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT

fying that both stress magnitudes and

stress direction were altered in the vicinity of faults.
Intelligence from the 3D model ultimately enabled the team to efficiently analyze wellbore stability for planned wells
in Abu Butabul field. The resulting mud
weight recommendations were used to
reliably maintain borehole stability, and
ensure drilling success.
REFERENCES
1. Plumb, R. A., S. Edwards, G. Pidcock, and D. Lee, The
mechanical earth model concept and its application to
high-risk well construction projects, SPE paper 59128,
presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New
Orleans, La., Feb. 23-25, 2000.
2. Fjaer E., R. M. Holt, P. Horsrud, A. M. Raaen and R.
Risnes, Petroleum Related Rock Mechanics, 2nd Edition,
Elsevier, 2008.
3. Zhang X., N. Koutsabeloulis, T. Kristiansen, K. Heffer,
I. Main, J. Greenhough and A. M. Hussein, Modelling
of depletion-induced microseismic events by coupled
reservoir simulation: Application to Valhall field, SPE
paper 143378, presented at the SPE EUROPEC/EAGE
Annual Conference and Exhibition, Vienna, Austria,
May 23-26, 2011.
LI QIUGUO is a principal geomechanics
engineer at Schlumberger. He joined the
company in 1998, after obtaining an MS degree
in petroleum engineering.
DR. XING ZHANG is a geomechanics advisor
at Schlumberger, with experience in leading, or
advising on, more than 50 major geomechanics
projects worldwide. Dr. Xing holds an
engineering PhD from UST, Beijing, and a
geoscience PhD from Imperial College, UK.
KHALID AL-GHAMMARI is recruiting and
training manager for Schlumberger in the
Middle East. He graduated from Sultan Qaboos
University in Oman with a BS degree in
geophysics.
LABIB MOHSIN holds a bachelor's degree in
geophysics. He joined Schlumberger in 2003 as
a wireline engineer. Since 2010, he has worked
as petroleum engineering operation team lead
in Oman Oil Exploration and Production.
AHMED AL RAWAHI joined OOCEP in 2010 as
a geophysicist in Oman, responsible for seismic
interpretation and reservoir characterization.

Article copyright 2013 by Gulf Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

Printed in U.S.A.

World Oil/OCTOBER 201357

Not to be distributed in electronic or printed form, or posted on a website, without express written permission of copyright holder.