PE4211 Lecture

Pore Pressure Overburden 2

and Fracture Gradient

Pore pressure overburden and fracture gradient introduction

Instructor: Runar Nygaard

 Subsurface stresses and pore pressures
obtaining in-situ stresses
• Underground stresses introduction

• Faulting and fracturing

• Vertical stress

• Pore pressure

• Fracture gradient
 Introduction

• Stresses in the subsurface arise because of gravity and geological history

• Stresses are different in different directions (not true for salt)

• Three principal stresses are orthogonal and the vertical direction is usually
one of them

• Overburden weight is = σv (+-5% in most cases)

• The lateral stresses, SHmax and Shmin are at 90 degrees to another.
 Stress tensor and principal stresses

σ11 σ12 σ13

σij = Stress tensor
σ21 σ22 σ23
σ31 σ32 σ33

σ11 0 0 Principal stresses

σij = is when no shear
0 σ22 0 stresses exists
0 0 σ33

σV 0 0 Vertical and the two horizontal

stresses are the principal
σij = 0 σHmax 0 stresses in the stress tensor
0 0 σHmin
 Subsurface stresses and pore pressures
obtaining in-situ stresses
• Underground stresses introduction

• Faulting and fracturing

• Vertical stress - overburden gradient

• Pore pressure

• Fracture gradient
Three types of faulting dependant on stress orientation

Sv>SH>Sh Normal faulting

SH>SH>Sv Reverse faulting

(Thrust fault)

SH>Sv>Sh Strike slip faulting

 Subsurface stresses and pore pressures
obtaining in-situ stresses
• Underground stresses introduction

• Faulting and fracturing

• Vertical stress overburden gradient

• Pore pressure

• Fracture gradient
 Compaction in sedimentary basins

• Volume of pore space is reduced due

to increase overburden weight due to
continuous sedimentation

• Porosity is reduced

t=1 t=2 t=3

8
 Overburden Stress

σ ob = ∫ ρb gdD
setting D
σ ob 0.052 ∫  ρ g (1 − φ ) + ρ f φ dD
0
σ ob = Overburden

ρg = Grain density

ρf = Fluid density

φ = Porosity

ρ=
b
 ρ g (1 − φ ) + ρ f φ 
9
 Overburden Stress in field units

σ ob = 0.052 ∫ ρb dD
setting D
σ ob 0.052 ∫  ρ g (1 − φ ) + ρ f φ dD
0
σ ob = Overburden

ρg = Grain density

ρf = Fluid density

φ = Porosity

ρ=
b
 ρ g (1 − φ ) + ρ f φ 
10
 Calculate the overburden stress at a depth of 7,200 ft .

D
=σ ob 0.052 ∫  ρ g (1 − φ ) + ρ f φ dD
0
• Assume
φo = 0.37
ρma = 21.7 lb/gal
ρf = 11.7 lb/gal

11
 Calculate the overburden stress at a depth of 7,200 ft

D
=σ ob 0.052 ∫  ρ g (1 − φ ) + ρ f φ dD
0

1. 4380 psi
2. 6252 psi
3. 6739 psi
4. 8124 psi

12
 Solution

D
=σ ob 0.052 ∫  ρ g (1 − φ ) + ρ f φ dD
0

=σ ob 0.052  21.7 (1 − .37 ) + 11.7.37  * 7200

σ ob = 6739 psi

13
Overburden stress
depends upon
porosity, and porosity
depends on
overburden stress
Shales are more
compactible than
sandstones.
Young shales are more
compactible than older
shales.
Limestones and
dolomites are only
slightly compactible.

14
 Rule of Thumb
A common assumption for sedimentary
deposits is gob = 1.0 psi/ft
This is not a good assumption in young
sediments

Eaton predicts that an overburden stress gradient of 1

psi/ft be achieved at a depth of 20,000 ft in the GOM

Eaton predicts that an overburden stress gradient of 1

psi/ft be achieved at a depth of 7,400 ft in the Santa
Barbara Channel
15
 0.84 psi/ft 0.89 psi/ft

Eaton’s ob
Eaton’s ob stress gradient
stress for Santa
gradient for Barbara
GOM Channel

1 psi/ ft
1 psi/ ft at 7,400’
at 20,000’

16
 Compaction in sedimentary basins

• Volume of pore space is reduced due

to increase overburden weight due to
continuous sedimentation

• Porosity is reduced

t=1 t=2 t=3

17
 Compaction Theory of abnormal
pore pressure
• During deposition, sediments are compacted
by the overburden load and are subjected to
greater temperatures with increasing burial
depth.

• Porosity is reduced as water is forced out.

18
 Compaction Theory overburden

• The average porosity in sediments, generally decreases with increasing

depth - due to the increasing overburden

• This results in an increasing bulk density with increasing depth, and

increasing rock strength

• From a porosity log, we can construct a plot of bulk density vs. depth

• From this (or directly from a density log, we can calculate overburden
stress vs. depth.

19
Normal Pressure

20
 Abnormal Pressures

• Over pressure or under pressure – related to

Hydraulic gradient

• Abnormal Pressures are formation pressures

greater than normal pressures

• Can cause severe drilling problems

• There are many possible causes of abnormal

pressure

21
 Abnormal Pressure

• All abnormal pressures require some means of

sealing or trapping the pressure within the rock
body.

• Otherwise hydrostatic equilibrium back to a

normal gradient would eventually be restored.

22
Mechanical and Chemical compaction (Diagenesis)

• In addition to the mechanical compaction

described above chemical and temperature
dependent processes may increase the overall
compaction
– Mineral transformation t=2
– Dissolution of minerals
– Solids transforms to oil and gas
– Thermal expansion

t=3

t=2 t=3 23
Porosity evolution during burial

Bjørlykke 1999
Compaction experiments in an oedomter cell
Mechanical compaction experiments

Vertical compaction, εv
Load

Reload

Unload Continued
Loading

Effective vertical stress, σ'v

 Therzagi effective stress principle

• Pores in sedimentary rocks are filled with fluids and therefore fluid
carry some of the overburden
• Effective stresses is calculated as:
Effective stress equals total stress minus pore pressure

σ`v = σv - p

σv
σh
p
 Subsurface stresses and pore pressures
obtaining in-situ stresses
• Underground stresses introduction

• Andersonian stresses and its relationship to faults and fractures

• Vertical stress

• Pore pressure

• Fracture gradient
 Abnormal Pressures

• Over pressure or under pressure – related to

Hydraulic gradient

• Abnormal Pressures are formation pressures

greater than normal pressures

• Can cause severe drilling problems

• There are many possible causes of abnormal

pressure

29
 Abnormal Pressure

• All abnormal pressures require some means of

sealing or trapping the pressure within the rock
body.

• Otherwise hydrostatic equilibrium back to a

normal gradient would eventually be restored.

30
 Overpressure Pressure

• Massive shales provide good pressure seals, but

shales do have some permeability, so, given
sufficient time, normal pressures will eventually
be established.

• It may take tens of millions of years for a normal

pressure gradient to re-occur.

31
 Over pressure

• Over pressure pore pressure above

hydrostatic conditions
• Sources of over pressure:
– Increased total stress
– Low permeability restricts fluid flow
– Tectonic compression
– Mineral reactions
– Oil and gas generation

32
Pore pressures
do not always
increase with
depth

33
 Man-Made Abnormal Pressures
Underground Casing Faulty
blowout leaks cement job

34
 Pore pressure prediction methods

• Most pore pressure prediction techniques rely on

measured or inferred porosity.

• The shale compaction theory is the basis for these

predictions.

35
 Pore pressure prediction methods
• Measure the porosity indicator (e.g.
density) in normally pressured, clean
shales to establish a normal trend line.
• When the indicator suggests porosity
values that are higher than the trend, then
abnormal pressures are suspected to be
present.
• The magnitude of the deviation from the
normal trend line is used to quantify the
abnormal pressure.
36
 Pore pressure estimation methods

• D-exponent (page 261-262 ADE)

• Equivalent depth method

• Eaton method from sonic logs (Eaton SPE paper 5544)

 Porosity should
decrease with
depth in normally
pressured shales 1. Establish “Normal”
Trend Line in good
“clean” shale

Transition

2. Extrapolate
normal trend 3. Determine the
line magnitude
of the deviation

38
Older shales have had
more time to compact,
so porosities would
tend to be lower (at a
particular depth).

Use the trend line

closest to the transition.

Lines may or may not

be parallel.

39
 Equivalent Depth Method
The normally compacted
shale at depth De has the
same compaction as the
De abnormally pressured
shale at D. Thus,
σV-eff = σVe-eff
i.e., σob - pp = σobe - pne
pp = pne + (σob - σobe)

40
Drilling Rate as a Pore Pressure Predictor

 
 log ROP 
d = 60 RPM 
 12WOB 
 log 106 d 
 b 
ROP = ft/hr
RPM = rpm
d = d − exponent
WOB = Weight on Bit, lbf
d b = Bit Diameter, in

41
 d-exponent

• The d-exponent normalizes R for any

variations in W, db and N
• Under normal compaction, R should decrease
with depth. This would cause d to increase
with depth.
• Any deviation from the trend could be caused
by abnormal pressure.

42
 d-exponent

• Mud weight also affects R…..

• An adjustment to d may be made:
dc = d (ρn /ρc)
• where
dc = exponent corrected for mud density
ρn = normal pore pressure gradient
ρc = effective mud density in use

43
 Example

• While drilling in a Gulf Coast shale,

R = 50 ft/hr
W = 20,000 lbf
N = 100 RPM
ECD = 10.1 ppg (Equivalent Circulating Density)

db = 8.5 in
• Calculate d and dc

44
 Solution

 50 
log    
 60 * 100  − 2.079  log R 
d= = d= 60N 
 12 * 20,000  − 1.554  12 W 
log    log 
 10 6 d b 
 10 * 8.5 
6

d = 1.34

 ρn 
 0.465  d c = d  
dc = 1.34    ρc 
 0.052 * 10.1
dc = 1.19
45
Sonic velocity data reveals a Velocity
reversal at ~2000m
2-32-58-23 5-3-58-22
Vp (ft/s) Vp (ft/s)
5,000 7,000 9,000 11,000 13,000 15,000 5,000 7,000 9,000 11,000 13,000 15,000
0.0 0.0

500.0 500.0

1,000.0 1,000.0
Depth (m)

Depth m
1,500.0 1,500.0

2,000.0 2,000.0

2,500.0 2,500.0

3,000.0 3,000.0
The theoretical foundation of the Eaton
method
Stress and pressure (MPa)
Vp (ft/s)
• If the water is not
free to flow, pore
5000 7500 10000
0 20 40 60 80
500 pressure builds up
above the
hydrostatic
1000 gradient
• Pore fluids carry
PPnorm
more of the
overburden
1500 PPover
Overburden
Depth

Effective stress
• E.G. Gulf of
2000 Mexico

2500

3000
Eaton’s pore pressure estimation method

3
dppover dσ Total  dσ Total dpphyd   Vobserved 
= −  −  ×  
dz dz  dz dz   Vnorm 
dσ Total
• Integrate density log to find overburden stress dz

• Establish normal compaction trend Vnorm

dpphyd
• Establish hydrostatic pore pressure gradient
dz

• Use sonic log observed velocity Vnorm

dppover
• Calculate pore pressure based on equation above
dz
 Eaton normal compaction curve

2-32-58-23 5-3-58-22
Vp (ft/s) Vp (ft/s)
1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000 10,000 100,000
0 0
Vp data
NC curve Eaton
1,000
1,000

Vertical effective stress (psi)

Vertical effective stress (psi)

2,000
2,000
3,000
3,000
4,000
4,000
5,000

5,000
6,000

7,000 6,000

8,000 7,000
 Example well -Overburden

d
Bulk density (g/cc) σ ob = ∫ 0.052 ρ Bulk dD
2.10 2.20 2.30 2.40 0
0
Depth Bulk Bulk OB OB
1000 density density stress grad.
Ft g/cc lb/gal psi psi/ft
2000
0 2.15 17.9 0 0
3000
1000 2.25 18.8 955 0.95
Depth (ft)

4000 2000 2.32 19.4 1946 0.97

3000 2.34 19.5 2957 0.98
5000
4000 2.32 19.4 3968 0.99
6000 19.2 4971 0.99
5000 2.3
7000 6000 2.29 19.1 5967 0.99
7000 2.3 19.2 6963 0.99
8000
 Example well pore pressure

Porosity (% ) pp = pne + (σob - σobe)

30 40 50 60 70
0
Depth Poro- PP OB PP
1000 sity grad stress

2000
Ft % psi/ft psi psi
0 60 0.465 0 0
3000
1000 50 0.465 954 465
Depth (ft)

4000 2000 42 0.465 1945 930

3000 38 0.465 2955 1395
5000
4000 42 0.737 3966 2948
6000
5000 44 0.812 4968 4061

7000 6000 40 0.774 5963 4642

7000 40 0.81 6958 5637
8000
Pore pressure - overburden plot

Pore pressure and OB gradient (psi/ft) Pore pressure and OB gradient (lb/gal)
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
0 0

1000 1000

2000 2000

3000 3000
Depth (ft)

Depth (ft)
4000 4000

5000 5000

6000 6000

7000 7000

8000 8000

52
 Subsurface stresses and pore pressures
obtaining in-situ stresses
• Underground stresses introduction

• Faulting and fracturing

• Vertical stress overburden gradient

• Pore pressure

• Fracture gradient
 Stresses in sediments

σ OB σ OB  σ horizontal
Overburden stress
larger than horizontal
stress
σ horizontal
Increasing overburden
tt==1
23
stress increase
horizontal stress

54
 Fracture pressure

σ horizontal

Mud

σ horizontal
Weight

55
 Determination of Fracture gradient
magnitude
• Leak-off test, LOT, - pressure test in which we
determine the amount of pressure required to initiate a
fracture

• Formation Integrity Test, FIT, pressure test in which

we only want to determine if a formation can withstand a
certain amount of pressure without fracturing.

• XLOT, Micro frac, Minifrac test, pressure test where

full break down is conducted.

56
 Experimental Determination of
Fracture Gradient

•The leak-off test

• Run and cement casing

• Drill out ~ 10 ft below the
casing seat
• Close the BOPs
• Pump slowly and monitor the
pressure
57
Leak off
test

58
 Experimental Determination of
Fracture Gradient
Example:
In a leak-off test below the casing seat at 1,000 ft,
leak-off was found to occur when the standpipe
pressure was 293 psi.

MW = 11 lb/gal.

What is the fracture gradient?

59
 Example

Pleak off = Pstandpipe + ∆PHYD

= 293 + 0.052 * 11 * 1,000
= 856 psi
PLeak −off 865
FG = = = 0.865 psi / ft
D 1000
Fracture gradient = 0.87 psi/ft

60
Example well fracture gradient

Pleak off = Pstandpipe + ∆PHYD

Depth MW BHP P-Leak Frac. Frac.

off press. grad.
Ft Lb/gal psi psi psi lb/gal

1000 11 572 293 865 16.6

2000 11 1144 614 1758 16.9
3000 11 1716 941 2657 17.0
4000 15 3120 430 3550 17.1
5000 16 4160 274 4434 17.1
6000 16 4992 323 5315 17.0
7000 16 5824 374 6198 17.0
Final mud weight window

Pore pressure and OB gradient (lb/gal)

8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
0

1000

2000

3000
Depth (ft)

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

62
 Final safe mud weight window

Pore pressure and OB gradient (lb/gal)

8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
0

1000

2000
Adding 0.5 lb/gal in trip
margin
3000
On pore pressure gradient
Depth (ft)

4000
Subtracting 0.5 lb/gal in kick
margin on fracture gradient
5000

6000

7000

8000

63
 Fracture gradients deviated wells

For a deviated well the fracture gradient needs to be adjusted:

+ (Pp − 16 )sin 2 α
1
Pfrac − deviated = Pfrac −vert
3
Pfrac is in lb/gal
Pp is pore pressure in lb/gal
α is inclination angle
(Formula assumes isotropic stress field)

Aadnoy and Larsen, 1989