SPE-5950

PREDICTION Of FRACTURE GRADIENTS IN SAMAAN FIELD

By

E. R. Parriq, Junior Member, SPE-AiME

lOTH.'S 1E5O. - E.R. PAllIAl

E. R. Parriag is a senior Petroleum Engineer with Am:x:D Trinidad Oil

Company whom he joined in 1971. He earned II as degl88 in Chemical
Engineering from M; MIster University, Hamilton, Canada, in 1971. His
experience includes thl88 (3) )i981S in Am:x:D~ Production and Drilling
operations offshore Trinidad. He is currently vvorking as an Engineering
SupeIVisor. E. R. Parriag is also a Director of the Local SPE Section in
Trinidad.

ABSTRACT in 1969 developed a method which is a modification

of the Hubbert and Willis approach.
This study was undertaken to develop a correlation
curve to show the variation of fracture pressure Hubbert and Willis Method
gradient with depth in the Samaan Field Offshore 2
Hubbert and Willis used the following equation to
Trinidad. The method used to predict the Samaan
determine fracture gradient:
formation fracture gradients is that of Ben Eaton 1. The
results indicate that Samaan fracture gradients vary
from 0.6 psi/it at 1000 feet to 0.99 psi/it at 12,000 feet. Pw =(5 _~)~)+
ODD II - J.l
p
0
(U'

INTROOUcnON (A) (B) (e)

Fracture pressure gradients are necessary in designing
casing and mud programs and help to avoid lost
circulation problems while drilling. Fracture gradient
has been shown to be a function of three independent
variables, namely formation pore-pressure,
over-burden stress gradient and Poisson's ratio. In this
study, each of the above three variables has been de-
termined for the Samaan area and the resulting fracture
pressure gradient curve has been constructed.
Term (A) is the effective stress gradient, (B) is the hori-
zontal to vertical stress ratio and (e) is the formation
pressure gradient. Hubbert and Willis assumed that
the over-burden stress gradient SID was equal to 1.0
psi/it and Poisson's ratio ( f.l) equal to 0.25. Substitu-
tion of these values in equation (1) results in the
following:
-----(2)

PREDICTION METHODS
However, these assumptions of Hubbert and Willis
have been shown to be in error in many areas.
Several studies have been carried out to arrive at a
method of predicting formation fracture gradients.
Matthews and Kelly Method
Hubbert and Wjllis2 in 1957 and Matthews and Kelly3
in 1967 published papers outlining two different Matthews and Kelly3 presented· a fracture gradient
methods of predicting fracture gradients. Ben Eatonl equation similar to equation (1). In it, they used a

59
variable horizontal to vertical stress ratio and assumed
a single value of 1.0 psi/ft for over-burden stress
gradient. The Matthews and Kelly approach showed
two weaknesses. One is the assumption that
over-burden stress is 1.0 psi/ft of depth. The other is
that the stress ratoo used in calculating the fracture
gradient in abnormally pressured formations is that of
the deepest normally pressured formation.
Ben Eaton's Method
The Ben Eaton Method is a modification of thatof'
Hubbert and Willis. It requires that the horizontal to
vertical stress ratio be calculated once the formation
pressure gradient and over-burden stress gradientare
determined with actual field data for fracture gradient
also available. j..t
The stress ratio ·1 -'f.J. is calculated from equation
(1). When the stress ratio is determined along ·.vith
the over-burden stress gradient and pore-pressure
gradient curves, fracture gradient P w should be
D
calculated using the nomogram in Fig. 1. Ben Eaton
also calculated the over-burden stress gradient starting
with a plot of bulk density vs depth.
Over-burden Stress Gradient
A single value of over-burden stress gradient equal to
1.0 psi/ft has often been used in predicting fracture
gradients. This value is not strictly correct, since
wherever formations are compressible, the variation
of over-burden stress with depth must be determined.
Forthis study, over-burden stress was determined from
a plot of bulkdensity vs depth, the bulk density values
being taken in the shale zones between sands and
averaged over the longest possible intervals. Bulk
density values in shales immediately above gas sands
were discarded because they were non-uniform and
hence not representative. The over-burden gradient
obtained was therefore an average value and is more
applicable than a specific point value. The Samaan
Field curve is shown in Fig. 2. From this curve, it is
apparent that the Samaan over-burden gradient does
not equal 1.0 psi/ft but ranges from 0.88 psi/ft near the
surface to 1.05 psi/ft at 12,000 feet.
Formation Pressure Gradient
The formation pressure gradient was developed for the
Samaan area using Bottom Hole Pressure data from all
the producing sands on Samaan 'A' Platform and DST
data from two exploratory wells in the Samaan area.
The pore-pressure gradient is normal at 0.46 psi/ft for
depths down to 8000 feet True Vertical Depth and
becomes abnormal at deeper levels Fig. 3 shows the
Samaan area pore-pressure gradient.
60
Stress Ratio
The horizontal to vertical stress ratio was calculated
from equation (1) (due to Hubbert and Willis2 ) using
the above formation pressure and over-burden
gradients and actual field data obtained from high
pressure squeeze jobs in Samaan area wells (see page
1, Appendix).
Poisson's Ratio
Poisson's ratio was calculated from the stress ratio and
the resulting values were plotted vs depth. The results
are displayed on Fig. 4. Poisson's ratio for the Samaan
Field varies from 0.25 at 1000 feet to 0.49 at 12,000
feet and is entirely different from the value of 0.25
which has been. assumed in many areas when
computing fracture gradients. Poisson's ratio also
achieves.an extreme upper limit of 0.50 and appears to
become asymptotic.
Fracture Gradient
Using the values of over-burden stress gradient, stress
ratio and formation pressure gradient, fracture
gradients were computed using the modified Hubbert
and Willis method of Ben Eaton (see Appendix). The
values varied from 0.6 psi/ft at 1000 feet to 0.99 psi/ft
at 12,000 feet (Fig. 5& Tablel).
For depths less than 5000 feet, the derived Samaan
curve shows values less than the Shell curve4 , while
below 5000 feet the Samaan values are higher. Below
8000 feet, the Samaan derived curve diverges sharply
from the Shell curve. This is because the Samaan
pore-pressure gradient becomes abnormal below
8000 feet (Fig. 3). At 12,000 feet, the Samaan fracture
gradient is 0.99 psi/ft which is considerably higher
than the Shell value of 0.88 psi/ft.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Fracture gradients in the Samaan area vary
from 0.6 psi/ft at 1000 feet to 0.99 psi/ft at 12,000 feet
(Fig. 5).
2. In comparison to the Shell fracture gradient
curve, the derived Samaan area curve pre-
dicts lower fracture gradients for depths less
than 5000 feet and higher gradients for
depths below 5000 feet TVD. The high
fracture gradient values in the Samaan area
below 8000 feet indicate that. these forma-
tions below 8000 feet are abnormally pre-
ssured.
3. The over-burden stress gradient in Samaan is
not equal to 1.0 psi/ft which is often used as a
 single value, but instead ranges from 0.88 psi/ft REFERENC-ES
near the surface to 1.05 psi/ft at 12,000 feet
(Fig. 2). 1. Eaton, Ben A -
4. Poisson's ratio for rocks varies in Samaan from "Fracture Gradient Prediction and its appl i-
0.25 at 1000 feet to 0.49 at 12,000 feet (Fig. 4).
cation in Oilfield Operations," Journal of
5. Poisson's ratio achieves an extreme upper limit Petroleum Technology (October, 1969)
of 0.50 and appears to become asymptotic (Fig. 1353 - 1360.
4).
2. Hubbert, M. King and Willis, D.G.
6 The formation pore-pressure gradient in Sa-
maan is normal at 0.46 psi/ft down to 8000 "Mechanics of Hydraulic Fracturing" Trans.
feet, but increases rapidly below 8000 feet AIME (1957) 210, 153 - 156.
and becomes abnormal (Fig. 3).
3. Matthews, W.R. and Kelly, John -
NOMENCLATURE
"How to Predict Formation Pressure and
Fracture Gradients" Oil and Gas Journal
D = depth, feet (February 20, 1967).
P = wellbore pressure, psi
w 4. Private Communication.
P = formation pressure, psi
S = over-burden stress, psi
= Poisson's ratio.

61
 TABLE 1

SAMAAN 'A' - CALCULATION OF FRACTURE GRADIENTS

DEPTH STRESS RATIO

S
D
(PSI/FT) . -DP (PSI/FT)
P
..J! (PSI/FT)
( p.. ) D
(1 - fV )

1000 0.33 0.903 0.460 ·0.605

2000 0.41 0.925 0.460 ·0.650

3000 0.48 0.947 0.460 0~694

4000 0.54 0.967 0.460 0.734

5000 0.60 0.985 0.460 ·0.775

6000 0.66 1.004 0.460 .0.819

7000 0.72 1.018 0.460 .0,862

8000 0.77 1.030 0.460 0.. 897

9000 0.82 1.042 0.467 0.939

10,000 0.87 1.050 0.535 0.983

11,000 0.90 1.050 0.545 0.995

12,000 0.90 1.050 0.545 0.995

62
 APPENDIX 1

********"'*******

SAMPlE CALCULAnONS

63
 DETERMINATION OF POISSON'S RATIO FOR SAMAAN AREA

Using the Hubbert and Willis equation.

p
w P
+
D D

Use OPR-14 squeeze job as example:-

S
For D = 4105' TVD, D = 0.97 psi/ft (from Fig. 2).

P
D
= 0.-46 (psi/ft)

p
w = 0.74 psi/ft, ( P. =
D 1 - ft

0.74 = (0.97 - 0.46) (xl) + 0.46

= (0.28) = 0.549 0.55

(0.51)

! ,if )_ 0.55 and p = 0.354

,,1 '- fl- -

For Case (2) (OPR-14 Squeeze)

S p
o = 6155',
D
= 1.005 (Fig. 2), D = 0.46

P
D
w = 0.798, Let X
2 =
6::/"- ~ 6155

x
2 = 0.798 - 0.46
=
0.338
= .62
1.005 - 0.460 0.545

fL = 0.383

64
For Case (3) MM-5B Squeeze (Samaan-A-l)

D = 7880' , -S
D
= 1.03, -DP = 0.46,
P
w = 0.894
D

x = (0.894 - 0.46) = 0.761

3
(1.030 - 0.46)

=
fL 0.432

For Case (4)

D = 9855,
D
S
= 1.045, -DP = 0.538,
P
w = 1.00
D

x
4 = (1.0 - .538)/ (1. 045 - .538) = 0.91. Then P' = 0.476

For Case (5) MM-9 x Squeeze (Samaan-A-l}

S P p
D = 10,219' ,
D
= 1.05,
D
= 0.59, w = 1.00
D

= (1.00 - 0.59) = 0.89

1.05 - 0.59)

= 0.472

Determination of Fracture Gradient curve based on Hubbert and Willis equation and derived values of

Poisson's ratio and overburden stress gradient.

65
Hubbert and Willis equation is as follows:-

p
w + P
D D (1)

(S)
can be obtained from Fig. 2.
CD)

( P' ) can be obtained from Fig. 4.

(l -p- )

(P)
can be obtained from Fig. 3.
(D)

Using these values at given depth (D) obtain fracturet gradient.

S P
E.g. for D = 6000 ft. (TVD); = 1.004 psi/ft; = 0.46 psi/ft;
D D

(P, )
0.66
(l-p )

Pw (1.004 - 0.460) (0.66) + 0.460

D

Pw 0.819
D

Proceeding as above, the fracture gradient vs. depth curve for the Samaan "A" area was constructed and is

shown in Fig. 5.

66
 FIG. 1

FRACTURE GRADIENT NOMOGRAPH (I)

'-00

~ ~o
1·0 04 0-110

E ~
.
::, 0·.
~ ..
!
0:
e>a 0-•

e>a ~"""<>7 o-eo

Z ....... E
2l
i
i ~
'-10',0
......
ill
L
<>11

..
007
~
0: 11M) 00711
~ Ii
;:;
i .... '8-0 0:
H
o-.~~ ." 0·70
5.
0-4
...
z
0
• ·0

...0
o·e
...
~
c
o-ee z;:
0

c
I .,'"a: '"
:II

.
14-0

.....
0:

15-0
0·7 t ,,-eo e
0:

~
c •
11:-0
o-e
:>
u

"''"
0'-
f ..·0 "-
10-0
0·5 0-110

gxAMPLE DETERMINE FRACTURE GRADIENT AT 12,000' WITH

fORMATION PRESSURE OF O·67PSI/FT. AT 12,000' 0045
OVERBURD~N LOAD IS O'9~ t.No POI$SCN s r;'ATIO
IS 0-45. FROM NOMOG~APH FRACTURE GRADIENT IS
O·VI PSI/FT OR 17·5 PPO.
0-40

(I) DU€ to Ben A. Eaton

67
 FIG. 2

COMPOSITE BULK DENSITY COMPOSITE OVERBURDEN STRESS

CURVE - SAMAAN AREA GRADIENT-SAMAAN AREA

O-r---r--------------, 0 - r - - - - - . . . . - - - - - -.......- - - - - - 1

2 2

·4 • 4

-0
6 6
0
0
SINGLE- VALUE
OF 1.0 PSI/FT. _
OFTEN USED
:I:
I-
a.
w 8 8
(;)

10 10

12 12

14+--.----,,..----,--"""T""--"'T"""----l
2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10
BULK DENSITY- GM/CC. OVERBURDEN STRESS GRADIENT PSI/ FT.

68
 ao
SAMAAN FIELD-BOTTOM /
HOLE PRESSURE VS DEPTH

12.6 PPG MUD TO

BALANCE KICK
I
7.0

6.0
0
0
2
.
~
VI
0-

ed I i
w
Q:
Ii

Ii
::>
VI
VI ~Ii
W lA' Ii
Q:

~0~
0- ~~ABNORMAL PR
INDICATION ESSURE
~ BEGINS

0 ... 80

2.0 LEGEND
MM-2 0
MM-4 0
MM-4A
MM-5B *fJ.
1. MM-6 &l.
MM-7 0
x
MM-9
SANO-OPR-15
•• "11
FORMATION
TEST X ~
01
o 2 3 4 567 8 9 10 II 12
SUBSEA DEPTH - FEET x 1000
 FIG.4

POISSON'S RATIO VS DEPTH STRESS RATIO VS DEPTH

SAMAAN AREA
(~) VS D

O..,...------r-------T"'""---r O-r------------------;

VARIABLE
~ OVERBURDEN
2

VALUE OF
5 0-25 USED BY 5
HUBBERT 8 WILUS
I-'
LL EXTREME
0 6
0
Q
.-UPPER LIMIT
I 7
~
0-
....
0

10

11 11

12 _ 12

o -\ ·2 -3 -4 -5 -6 0·3 0-4 0-5 0·6 0·7 0·8 o

POISSON'S RATIO (f.!)- STRESS
(l!:)-
RATIO I-IJ.

70
 FIG. 5

FRACTURE GRADIENT VS
DEPTH SAMAAN AREA

LBS/GAL
.....~_I...
O.,..._IO I _~.,.1...
2 1.3_
.. _1...
4 1.L5 '..:..6 1:. L.7_ _-.:.i.18=--_-.:.i.19=--_ _...

""
""
"
""
2
"" \

""\

""\
4 :\

\
\
\
\
\
t-= \
lL.
\
0 \
0 \
x2 \
\

I
! \
\
\
8 \
t- \
o. \
W \
0 \ ,,
,,
,,
\
\
\
\
SHELL CURVE-'
\

12
\
,,
\

CURVE DERIVED IN THIS STUDY

USING MODIFIED HUBBERT 8
WILLIS EQUATION

14

0.5 0.6 Q7 Q8 09 1.0

FRACTURE GRADIENT PSI/FT.

71