Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour.
(2021)7:56
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40948-021-00256-3(0123456789().,-volV)
( 01234567
89().,-volV)
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Investigation of pore pressure, in-situ stress state
and borehole stability in the West and South Al-Khilala
hydrocarbon fields, Nile Delta, Egypt
Mahmoud Leila . Souvik Sen . Mohamed Abioui
Received: 6 January 2021 / Accepted: 6 May 2021
 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
Abstract This work interprets the pore pressure
distribution and in-situ stress magnitudes in the *
10,600 feet thick Neogene succession of the West and
South Al-Khilala gas fields, onshore Nile Delta. The
Messinian incised valley-fill (IVF) fluvio-marine
sediments host the principal gas-bearing zones having
a 0.47 PSI/feet pore pressure gradient, as seen from the
downhole measurements. Early Pliocene is marked by
a dramatic regional sea-level rise which deposited
thick marine shales unconformably above the Abu
Madi IVF reservoir facies. A high sedimentation rate
during Pliocene retained excess porosity and trans-
lated to a mild overpressure of around 0.55 PSI/feet in
the Kafr El Sheikh Formation due to compaction
disequilibrium. Vertical (Sv), minimum (Sh), and
M. Leila
Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Mansoura
University, Mansoura City, Egypt
S. Sen (&)
Geologix Limited, Dynasty Building, Wing A, Level 4,
Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai,
Maharashtra 400059, India
e-mail: souvikseniitb@gmail.com
M. Abioui
Department of Earth Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, Ibn
Zohr University, Agadir, Morocco
A. Moscariello
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Geneva,
Geneva, Switzerland
. Andrea Moscariello
maximum (SH) horizontal stress gradients are esti-
mated as 0.97–0.98; 0.64–0.76, and 0.86–1 PSI/feet,
respectively. Interpreted stress magnitudes decipher a
normal to strike-slip stress state in the studied fields.
B-Quality wellbore breakouts with * 600 feet cumu-
lative length infer NNE-SSW SH orientation, almost
parallel to the motion direction of the African plate.
Wellbore stability analysis indicated a minimum mud
weight of 11.45 PPG needs to be maintained against
the Pliocene shales which exhibited major wellbore
instability issues in the exploratory drilling campaign.
Based on the interpreted pore pressure, Sh, and
collapse pressure gradients, a safe drilling mud
window is proposed to ensure borehole stability.
Article highlights
• Pliocene marine shales have mild overpressure
resulting from disequilibrium compaction, while
the Miocene Abu Madi reservoirs have 0.47 PSI/
feet pore pressure gradient.
• Normal to strike-slip stress state in inferred in the
West and South Al-Khilala gas fields.
• B-Quality wellbore breakouts infer NNE-SSW SH
orientation.
• Collapse pressure and safe mud weight window are
inferred to ensure borehole stability in the Miocene
shales.
123
56 Page 2 of 16 Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
Keywords In-situ stress  Horizontal stress
orientation  Pore pressure  Wellbore stability  Al-
Khilala field  Nile Delta
1 Introduction
Geomechanics has critical impacts on the well plan-
ning, drilling and completion designs and hydrocarbon
field development decisions (Rajabi et al. 2016; Najibi
et al. 2017; Taghipour et al. 2019; Baouche et al.,
2021). It has direct implications on the assessment of
wellbore stability, shear slip potential of faults and
related seismicity, optimization of perforation and
hydraulic fracturing, reservoir stability during deple-
tion and fluid injection as well as caprock integrity
applicable for enhanced recoveries and geological
sequestrations (Kim and Hosseini 2016; Liang et al.
2018; Rahimi and Nygaard 2018; Yang et al. 2018;
Kang et al. 2019; Ngo et al. 2019; Lund Snee and
Zoback 2020; Rabe et al. 2020; Yujie et al. 2020; Jia
et al. 2021; Kassem et al., 2021). The primary input
parameters of every geomechanical analyses are
magnitudes of formation pressure and principal stress
components (Sv, Sh and SH) and orientation of SH. This
study focuses on estimating the above mentioned
parameters from an onshore hydrocarbon field in Nile
Delta region of Egypt. The Nile Delta hosts many
onshore as well as offshore hydrocarbon fields and
considered to be one of the most prolific areas in Egypt
(Abu El-Ella 1990; Salem et al. 2005; Leila et al.
2020a, b). The majority of the Nile Delta production is
contributed by the Miocene and Pliocene clastic
reservoirs (Palmieri et al. 1996; Abdel Aal et al.
2001; Samuel et al. 2003; Kellner et al. 2018). In the
post Messinian salinity crisis (MSC) Nile Delta and
circum-Mediterranean, numerous valleys were sub-
aerially-incised (e.g., Eonile canyon) (Dalla et al.
1997; Salem et al. 2005) and later infilled by the
backstepped fluvio-marine Abu Madi incised valley-
fill (IVF) sequence (Rubino et al. 2015). The IVF
became the main target for regional hydrocarbon
exploration after the discovery of the Abu Madi-El
Qara gas fields (EGPC 1994; Palmieri et al. 1996).
The studied West and South Al-Khilala fields are
onshore fields with proven gas reserves primarily in
the IVF sediments of the Messinian Abu Madi
Formation (Fig. 1). West Al-Khilala (WAK) was
123
discovered in 2005 (Well WAK-1), followed by an
appraisal well drilling campaign to delineate the areal
extent and down-dip limit of the Abu Madi fluvio-
marine reservoirs. Two years after the WAK-1
success, the exploratory well South Al-Khilala-1
(SAK-1) was successfully drilled in 2009 approxi-
mately 10 km to the south of the WAK field. The
average gas production rate from these two fields
during 2011 was 83.2 MMcfpd (million cubic feet per
day), respectively, and continues to exhibit exemplary
production performance characteristics with no water
or sand production. As of 2011, the combined proved
and probable resources of these two fields are
estimated as 338 Bcf (billion cubic feet). A lot of
works have been published so far which focused on the
geological and geophysical aspects of the Al-Khilala
fields. Khadragy et al. (2017) interpreted the reservoir
characteristics (porosity, permeability, water satura-
tion) of the Late Miocene Abu Madi Formation and
presented a 3D static model of the WAK field. Similar
reservoir characterization works are also published by
Eysa et al. (2015) and El Gendy et al. (2016). Leila and
Moscariello (2018) and Leila et al. (2019) discussed
the depositional environments, diagenetic controls,
and petrophysical attributes and their effects on the
trapped hydrocarbon volume in the Messinian reser-
voirs. Despite hosting the main gas-bearing zones in
the Nile Delta, none of the published literature
investigated the pore pressure and in-situ stress
distribution of the Abu Madi Formation. Also, severe
wellbore washouts are observed in the exploratory
wells, which require proper mud weight modeling to
ensure borehole stability in the development drilling
campaign. The unavailability of the geomechanical
studies set the premise of this work. The principal
objectives of this paper are: (1) interpret the pore
pressure gradients in the Cenozoic stratigraphy, (2)
determine Sv, Sh and SH magnitudes, (3) infer the SH
orientation from wellbore failures, and (4) character-
ize the formation failure gradient to address wellbore
instabilities and provide a safe drilling mud window.
2 Geological settings
The Nile Delta is a part of the slightly deformed
unstable shelf in the northern African margin (Said
1990). Structurally it evolved as a part of the tectonic
evolution of the Eastern Mediterranean Basin (e.g.,
Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56 Page 3 of 16 56

Fig. 1 Location map of the West Al-Khilala (WAK) and South Al-Khilala (SAK) fields along with the studied wells

123
56 Page 4 of 16 Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
Garfunkel 1998; Guiraud and Bosworth 1999; Dolson
et al. 2001, 2005). The region had experienced a
prolonged extension in the Mesozoic followed by a
continued thermal cooling and subsidence during
Paleogene. During the opening of Neotethys during
Early Jurassic, an E-W trending hinge line (Fig. 1) was
formed which subdivides the Nile Delta into northern
and southern basins (Harms and Wray 1990; Sestini
1995). The Early Cretaceous extensional trends
(Temsah and Rosetta) were reactivated during the
Neogene period (Kerdany and Cherif 1990) and three
sub-basins were formed in the northern Nile Delta
Basin (i.e. eastern, central and western sub-basins).
The studied West Al-Khilala (WAK) and South Al-
Khilala (SAK) fields lie within the central sub-basin
which hosts thicker Neogene facies (EGPC 1994).
A regional lithostratigraphic succession is pre-
sented in Fig. 2. It is dominated by a massive thickness
of clastic sediments of Oligocene-Pleistocene age. The
Eocene–Oligocene consist mainly of fluvial facies
accumulated in the Nile Delta through deep canyons
incised after the Gulf of Suez rifting and uplift of the
Red Sea rift shoulders. The Miocene succession
comprises of shallow marine to marine transgressive
sediments, deposited over the Oligocene continental
sediments. The entire Miocene sequence hosts numer-
ous reservoir sandstone intervals belonging to Early
Miocene Tineh, Qantara, Middle Miocene Sidi Salim,
Late Miocene Qawasim and Abu Madi Formations
(Fig. 2). This work focuses on the Abu Madi reservoirs
deposited during the Late Messinian transgressive
phase as back stepped MSC fluvio-marine facies
within the Eonile canyon system (Barber 1981; Pigott
and Abd El Fattah 2014). It typically represents
incised valley fills (IVF) and rests unconformably over
the pre-MSC Qawasim Formation. Marine transgres-
sion in the circum-Mediterranean had deposited a
thick marine shale (Kafr El Sheikh Formation), lying
unconformably over the MSC Abu Madi facies (Leila
and Moscariello, 2018, 2019).
3 Material and methods
This work investigates four onshore exploratory wells
(WAK-1, 2, 3, and 5) in the West Al-Khilala field and
two wells (SAK-1 and 2) in the South Al-Khilala field.
123
These wells penetrate approximately 1000 feet of
clastic Cenozoic stratigraphy comprising of Pleis-
tocene Mit Ghamr sandstones, Pliocene shales of Kafr
El Sheikh Formation, followed by the Miocene Abu
Madi IVF, which is the primary gas-bearing reservoir
of the WAK field. The chosen five wells provided the
best data coverage and hence used for the geome-
chanical analysis. Drilling data, geophysical logs,
direct formation pressure measurements, and well
reports were studied and utilized in this work.
3.1 Determination Pore pressure (PP)
The pressure exerted by the pore fluid is termed as pore
pressure (PP). Accurate PP quantification is crucial for
a safe and successful well delivery process (Baouche
et al. 2020b; Sen and Ganguli 2019; Sen et al.
2019, 2020). It also contributes to the Sh and SH
magnitudes, thus plays an important role in geome-
chanical modeling. In an ideal geological scenario,
porosity decreases exponentially with depth because
of overburden-induced compaction and a shale com-
paction trend can be established from the porosity-
TVD plot (TVD = true vertical depth). In case of a
high sedimentation rate, deposited sediments might
not get enough time to expel the pore water and as a
result of compaction disequilibrium, high pore pres-
sure is retained (Sen et al. 2018a, 2018b). Downhole
measurements provide the most confident and direct
PP interpretation (Baouche et al., 2020c). Compres-
sional sonic slowness is extensively employed to
estimate shale PP indirectly. The standard practice is
to define a normal compaction trend (NCT) against the
shales. Shales that follow the NCT are usually in
hydrostatic pore pressure condition (PH), which
translates to a 0.446 psi/feet PP gradient considering
a formation water density of 1.028 g/cc (saline water)
(Agbasi et al. 2021; Baouche et al. 2020d). We have
defined NCT on a sonic slowness log (Dt) to estimate
PP by Eaton’s equation (Eaton 1975):
 3
Dtn
PP ¼ Sv  ðSv  PH Þ  ð1Þ
Dt
where Sv = vertical stress, Dtn = Dt response against
normally compacted shale on NCT. The difference
between Dt and Dtn translates to the magnitude of the
overpressure.
Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56 Page 5 of 16 56

Fig. 2 Regional
lithostratigraphic succession
of the study area. The
studied exploratory wells
were drilled till the Late
Miocene Abu Madi
Formation

123
56 Page 6 of 16 Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56

3.2 Estimation of in-situ stresses LOT, where a predefined downhole pressure is tested
without fracturing the formation. The FIT value
Relative magnitudes of these three stress components indicates that the formation can withstand that much
(Sv, Sh and SH) define the tectonic stress regime of an downhole pressure safely without creating any
area and influence the geomechanical aspects of oil hydraulic fracture and mud loss. Therefore, FIT values
and gas drilling and production processes. Vertical cannot be utilized to calibrate the estimated Sh. Due to
stress is estimated from density log (qb) by the these shortcomings and unavailability of further
equation below (Plumb et al. 1991): relevant downhole data; we have provided the lower
Z bound of minimum horizontal stress by the following
Sv ¼ r qbðZÞ*g dZ ð2Þ expression (Li and Purdy 2010):
0
Sv  PP þ qf*PP
where g =gravitational acceleration (9.8 m/s2). We Sh  ð7Þ
qf
have employed the poroelastic horizontal strain model
to determine minimum (Sh) and maximum horizontal where, ‘qf’ is a function of internal friction angle
stress (SH) magnitudes. This model integrates hori- (h):
zontal strain components (Liu and Harpalani 2014; 1 þ Sinh
Najibi et al. 2017; Javani et al. 2017; Amiri et al. 2019; qf ¼ ð8Þ
1  Sinh
Baouche et al. 2020b, c, d, a a; Ganguli and Sen 2020;
Sohail et al. 2020; Abdelghany et al. 2021). The Internal friction angle is estimated from P- wave
equations of the poroelastic strain model are as velocity (Vp):
  
follows: 1 Vp  1000
h ¼ Sin ð9Þ
m E Vp þ 1000
Sh ¼ ðSv  PPÞ þ PP þ ðex þ mseyÞ
1m 1  m2 SH magnitude cannot be directly measured like the
ð3Þ two other stress components. Researchers constrained
SH from wellbore breakout width data gathered from
m E
SH ¼ ðSv  PPÞ þ PP þ ðms ex þ eyÞ Image logs (Zoback 2007; Baouche et al. 2021).
1m 1  m2
However, the availability of image logs has always
ð4Þ
been a concern, especially in the producing fields. The
where m and E are Poisson’s ratio and Young’s same was experienced in our present study as well.
modulus. These are estimated from density and sonic Since image logs were unavailable, SH could not be
velocities. 0 ex0 and 0 ey0 are the two horizontal strain calibrated, and we have utilized frictional faulting
elements: theory to infer its upper bound (Zoback 2007):

m

1
 S1  PP h 2 0:5 i2
ex ¼ Sv 1 ð5Þ  l þ 1 þl ð10Þ
E 1m S3  PP
  S1 and S3 represent the maximum and the least
m m2 principal stresses.l = coefficient of internal friction,
ey ¼ Sv 1 ð6Þ
E 1m commonly an average value of 0.6 is assumed for this
parameter (Zoback 2007; Baouche et al. 2020a; Sohail
et al. 2020), when core-based data is unavailable. The
3.3 Constraining horizontal stress limits
selection of these parameters is discussed in the latter
part.
Estimated horizontal stresses are usually validated
with fracture closure pressure or leak-off pressure,
3.4 Orientation of horizontal stresses
available from extended leak-off tests (LOT) or
minifrac tests. However, in the studied West Al
Sh and SH orientations are critical to achieve
Khilala field, only formation integrity tests (FIT) were
stable wellbore and optimum completion and stimu-
performed. FITs can be considered as incomplete
lation results.. We had a four-arm caliper log available

123
Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
from one of the studied wells. This consists of two
mutually perpendicular caliper pads along with
azimuth data. From the mutual readings of the caliper
sets, borehole ovalisation was assessed to identify
breakout zones and SH azimuth was interpreted by
adjusting the tool rotation effects. Quality of the
interpreted stress orientation was ranked following the
WSM guidelines (Heidbach et al. 2016, 2018).
3.5 Assessment of borehole stability
Borehole stability is assessed by the collapse pressure
(CP). If the drilling mud weight is lower than the
formation collapse pressure, it fails under compres-
sion. Accurate estimation of the failure gradient helps
to understand the lower limit of allowable mud weight
to avoid wellbore instability issues (Maleki et al.
2014). Mohr–Coulomb rock failure criterion is fol-
lowed to estimate CP (Zhang 2013; Gholami et al.
2014):
f3SH  Sh  UCS þ ðqf  1Þ PPg
CP ¼ ð11Þ
qf þ 1
where UCS denotes the uniaxial compressive
strength. Estimated failure pressure has been corrob-
orated with the caliper responses in the over gauge
well sections.
Fig. 3 NE-SW seismic
profile illustrating the
seismic-stratigraphy of the
Abu Madi IVF facies
bounding by two distinctive
seismic sequence
boundaries
Page 7 of 16 56
4 Results
4.1 Seismic stratigraphy of the reservoir
succession
The Abu Madi IVF sequence is confined within two
main sequence boundaries. A laterally extensive, high
amplitude seismic reflector defines the basal bound-
ary, displaying a wide (* 12 km) V-shaped depres-
sion (incised valley) erosionally truncating the
underlying pre-MSC reflections and is onlapped by
the Messinian salinity crisis (MSC)-reflections
(Fig. 3). This corresponds to the basal erosional
disconformity defining the bottom of the subaerial
Eonile canyons that scoured the Nile Delta at the
beginning of the MSC (Lofi et al. 2011a, b). The top of
the IVF sequence is bounded by another high ampli-
tude seismic reflection surface separating the reservoir
sequence from the overlying shale dominated Pliocene
sequence and can be regionally correlated with the
cessation of MSC event. This surface is concordant to
the Pliocene reflections and occasionally truncating
the MSC facies. In the study area, the MSC seismic
facies displays vertically-variable amplitude reflec-
tions. The bottom erosional boundary is paved by very
low-amplitude, semi-transparent, and chaotic reflec-
tions. Middle section has higher amplitude, and the
upper section again has lower amplitude reflections.
The chaotic nature of the lower seismic facies
represents the subaerial collapse and fluvial lag
deposits accumulated during and/or shortly after the
canyon incision (e.g. Leila and Moscariello 2019). It
corresponds to the forced-regression deposits due to
123
56 Page 8 of 16 Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
the collapse of the canyon wall after the incision and,
therefore, represents the early MSC depositional
environment. The MSC IVF, with high amplitude
continuous reflections, constitute the fluvio-marine
facies which marks the initiation of the canyon infill
sedimentation during a normal regression phase after
an early rise of the regional base level (Rubino et al.
2015).
4.2 Pore pressure distribution
The West and South Al-Khilala fields host an exten-
sive 6000ft thick Pliocene shale succession overlying
the Messinian Abu Madi IVF reservoir sandstones.
The porosity-depth trend in the WAK-1 well (Fig. 4a)
illustrates that the porosity of the top part of the
Pliocene shales (El Wastani and the top * 200 feet of
the Kafr El Sheikh Formation) follows the porosity
compaction trend before it deviates by retaining more
porosities. The same porosity-depth trend is also
observed in the South Al-Khilala wells. Following
this, a NCT was established on the Dt log (Fig. 4b) and
PP was estimated by Eaton’s equation. Pliocene shales
Fig. 4 Pore pressure assessment in the well WAK-1. a porosity-
TVD response and the porosity compaction trend. b compres-
sional sonic log (Dt) response along with the sonic normal
compaction trend line (NCT) used for Eaton PP calculation.
123
yielded a maximum pore pressure gradient of 0.55
PSI/feet (Fig. 4c) and this entire section was success-
fully drilled with 0.60 PS/feet drilling fluid gradient
without any downhole complexity. To understand the
pore pressure generating mechanism, a density-sonic
cross plot was prepared (Fig. 4d). The qb-Dt data
distribution followed the compaction disequilibrium
trend indicating the same to be the dominant factor
behind the overpressure in the Pliocene shales. It is to
be noted that these shales were deposited due to the
histrionic sea level rise after the Messinian salinity
crisis, i.e. Zanclean flooding. This geological event
deposited a thick pile of transgressive marine shale
facies regionally. A higher sedimentation rate during
Pliocene flooding was responsible to retain the pore
fluid in the rock interstices and produce overpressure
within the post-MSC succession. The syn-MSC IVF
Abu Madi Formation exhibits around 0.47 PSI/feet
pore pressure gradient, which is the principal gas-
bearing reservoir in the West and South Al-Khilala
fields. Direct downhole measurements are used to
establish the Abu Madi reservoir pressure gradient
(Fig. 4c). The interpreted pore pressure gradient thus
c calculated and interpreted pressure profiles along with various
direct downhole data. d sonic-density cross plot following the
compaction disequilibrium trend
Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
deciphers sensitivity to the regional sea-level changes
from syn-MSC Miocene (regressive) to post-MSC
Pliocene (transgressive) across the Neogene
stratigraphy.
4.3 In-situ stress distribution and present-day
stress field
Neogene stratigraphy of the studied fields is charac-
terized by shale-dominated thick Pliocene interval
followed by interbedded sand and shale in the
Messinian succession. Estimated in-situ stress magni-
tude profiles of the West (WAK-1) and South Al-
Khilala (SAK-1) fields are presented in Figs. 5 and 6,
respectively. Vertical stress gradient is assessed as
0.97–0.98 PSI/feet in the study area. The elastic
property-based method provided a Sh gradient of 0.76
PSI/feet in the Pliocene shale and 0.64 PSI/feet in the
Messinian interval. A higher pore pressure magnitude
in the marine shales of the Pliocene Kafr El Sheikh
Formation is responsible for the elevated minimum
horizontal stress gradient, while the reservoir bearing
Fig. 5 Presents the rock-elastic properties and pressure
magnitudes in the well WAK-1, drilled in the West Al-Khilala
oil field. a plots the gamma-ray log response. b and c presents
Page 9 of 16 56
Abu Madi Formation possesses a pore pressure
slightly higher than hydrostatic gradient (i.e. water
gradient). This pore pressure heterogeneity from
Messinian to the overlying Pliocene sediments is
reflected in the horizontal stress magnitudes. Recorded
FIT measurements are well below the estimated Sh and
hence a confident calibration could not be established,
and therefore we deciphered the Sh gradient lower
limit. It varies from 0.57 to 0.69 PSI/feet from
Messinian to Pliocene interval. The poroelastic hor-
izontal strain model reveals the SH gradient to be
roughly 1 PSI/feet in the Pliocene shales (SH [ Sv)
and 0.86–0.90 PSI/feet (Sv C SH) in the Messinian
Abu Madi Formation. The fact that the Sh magnitude
being lower than the Sv is indicative of normal or
strike-slip faulting tectonic regime. However, the
poroelastic modeling deciphers SH [ Sv [ Sh in the
Pliocene and Sv C SH [ Sh in the Messinian (Figs. 5
and 6), which translates to a more normal faulting
scenario in the syn-MSC Abu Madi Formation and
tectonic regime-changing to a more strike-slip domain
in the post-MSC Pliocene (transgressive) sequence.
log-derived Poisson’s ratio and Young’s modulus, respectively.
d estimated PP and stresses with Sh lower limit, SH upper bound,
and direct formation pressure measurements
123
56 Page 10 of 16 Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
Fig. 6 Presents the rock-elastic properties and pressure
magnitudes in the well SAK-1, drilled in the South Al-Khilala
oil field. a plots the gamma-ray log response. b and c presents
Based on the inferences, we intended to contain the SH
upper bound following the frictional faulting mecha-
nism. Within the Pliocene stratigraphy, SH is the
maximum principal stress (S1 in Eq. 10) and Sh is
confidently interpreted as the least principal stress (S3
in Eq. 10). Accordingly, Eq. (10) constrained an upper
SH gradient limit of 1.08 and 1.03 PSI/feet in the
Pliocene and Miocene shale intervals, respectively.
4.4 Horizontal stress orientation
Four arm caliper logs recorded in the Kafr El Sheikh
Formation were utilized to characterize the borehole
ovalization based on the magnitude difference
between the two caliper sets. The results are presented
in Fig. 7.Atleast20 distinct breakout zones with a
cumulative length of * 600 feet are observed along
with E-W orientation. A mean SH azimuth of N12E is
inferred from the breakout azimuth distribution which
has a standard deviation of 13.5. Based on the WSM
quality ranking scheme of caliper log-based breakouts,
the interpreted stress indicator falls under B-Quality
which has a requirement of a minimum of 6 breakout
123
log-derived Poisson’s ratio and Young’s modulus, respectively.
d estimated PP and stresses with Sh lower limit, SH upper bound,
and direct formation pressure measurements
zones, with a combined length [ 100 m (328 feet)
and B 20 standard deviation (Heidbach et al. 2016).
The NNE-SSW SH trend is almost parallel to the
motion direction of the African plate.
4.5 Borehole stability
Drilling the reservoir section through the Messinian
IVF Abu Madi Formation faces severe wellbore
stability issues in the WAK field. This section hosts
a sandstone-shale sequence and was being drilled with
an average 9.8–10 PPG drilling mud weight. The
caliper logs indicate heavy washouts selectively
against the shale sections (Fig. 8). Our borehole
stability analysis indicates a higher shale CP gradient
over 10 PPG, which was used during drilling. It also
reveals that the * 10 PPG mud weight was sufficient
to avoid failure against the reservoir sandstone inter-
vals and therefore the caliper reading against the
reservoir facies was very close to the bit size. A
minimum mud weight of 11.45 PPG should be used to
maintain the downhole pressure above the shale
Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56 Page 11 of 16 56

Fig. 7 Borehole breakout

analysis in the well WAK-1.
a presents two mutually
perpendicular Caliper sets (1
and 2) along with the bit
size. b interpreted breakout
zones and breakout
orientations with depth.
c rose diagram for the
inferred Sh and SH azimuths
based on the breakouts

Fig. 8 Wellbore stability analysis of the Miocene interval well c presents the estimated collapse pressure gradients in parts per
WAK-2. a plots the gamma-ray log response, b bit size-caliper gallon (PPG) unit (mud weight equivalent), along with the
response, the lower part of the interval indicates severe interpreted pore pressure and Sh. A safe drilling mud window is
washouts, and the failure zone is marked by light pink color. demarcated by a light green color

123
56 Page 12 of 16 Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
failure gradient (Fig. 8) and thus a gauged wellbore
can be maintained.
5 Discussions
5.1 Regional pore pressure distribution
in the Tertiary stratigraphy
Shale overpressure offers critical challenges in drilling
and successful well delivery processes. Due to differ-
ential sedimentation rates, the Pliocene shales of the
Nile Delta have a wide range of pressure distribution
spanning from normally pressured to overpressure
(Nashaat 1998). A very high PP gradient of 0.89 PSI/
feet is documented against the Lower Miocene and
Oligocene Formations in the eastern part of the Nile
Delta, possibly contributed by the aquathermal expan-
sion and hydrocarbon generation processes (Hanafy
et al. 2017). In the offshore Nile Delta region, presence
of the Messinian evaporites also contributed over-
pressure in the pre-Messinian Formations by inhibit-
ing pressure dissipation (Nashaat 1994; Andreoletti
et al. 2009). In the offshore Nile Delta region, the
Pliocene shales of the Kafr El Sheikh Formation have
significant overpressure offering very narrow drilling
mud window margin (Heppard and Albertin 1998;
Rowley et al 2002). Based on the regional shale
overpressure dataset from the offshore and onshore
Nile Delta hydrocarbon fields, Nashaat (1992) inferred
hard overpressure in the Lower Miocene and Oligo-
cene Formations near to our study area with a top of
Tertiary overpressure at around 11,000–12,000 ft. The
studied wells, presented in this work were drilled till
Upper Miocene Abu Madi targets (\ 10,500 ft TVD)
and the entire stratigraphy did not encounter any
significant overpressure. Hussein and Taha (1993)
studied the Abu Madi, Nidoco and El-Qara wells from
the northern part of the onshore Nile Delta and inferred
hydrostatic PP in the El Wastani shales followed by a
mild overpressure against the Kafr El Sheikh Forma-
tion, with a maximum pore pressure of about 10.5 PPG
(* 0.546 PSI/feet). These observations of the pres-
sure regimes across the Tertiary stratigraphy perfectly
correlates with our observation, where we interpreted
pore pressure increasing from hydrostatic regime in
the Top Pliocene El Wastani Formation to compaction
disequilibrium-induced mildly overpressured regime
(0.55 PSI/ft, similar to Hussein and Taha 1993) within
123
the Pliocene Kafr El Sheikh Formation. The Abu Madi
reservoir pore pressure gradient is mostly in the
hydrostatic range across the Nile Delta; however it can
be sub-hydrostatic due to field specific production-
induced reservoir depletion. In the offshore regions,
these reservoirs are overpressured (Heppard and
Albertin 1998). A regional 1.03 gm/cc virgin pore
pressure is concluded by Hussein and Taha (1993),
which translates to approximately 0.45 PSI/feet, which
is very close to what we observed in the Miocene Abu
Madi reservoir sandstones in the studied Al Khilala
fields.
5.2 Regional stress field
The study area lies on the moderately deferent external
margin of the African plate (i.e. unstable shelf, Said
1962), which extends along the northern coast of the
Mediterranean Sea. Mohamed et al. (2021) studied the
seismicity data gathered from the GNSS stations
distributed at the Egyptian Delta and inferred the
velocity of the Northern Delta as 14–22 mm/year. The
horizontal stress orientation is complexly distributed
within the Nile Delta. Tingay et al (2012) presented
extensive work on the stress field orientation utilizing
a large volume of breakouts and drilling induced
tensile wellbore failures from image logs. They have
inferred two dominant SH trends: NNE-SSW in the
western offshore Nile Delta and ESE-WNW in the
Central region. In the eastern Nile Delta region, SH
orientation changes from E-W in the supra-salt (below
evaporites) to NNW-SSE within sub-salt (above
evaporites) (Tingay et al 2012). We inferred the
breakouts interpreted from four arm caliper and our
interpreted SH azimuth (NNE-SSW) corroborates with
the regional trends of the Western Nile Delta as well as
sub-salt Formations.
The tectonic stress regime of the Nile Delta has
been highly dependent on the pore pressure distribu-
tion. Normally pressured sequences exhibit normal
faulting regime, moderately overpressured zones
(13–16.5 MPa/km or 0.57–0.72 PSI/feet) exhibit a
borderline normal to strike-slip regime and highly
overpressured zones show a strike-slip behavior
(Tingay et al. 2012). Also, we inferred a normal
faulting setting in the hydrostatically pressured
Miocene section and a strike-slip stress field (SH-
C SV) in the mildly overpressured Pliocene Forma-
tion. These results from the onshore Khilala fields
Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
extensively support the observations made by Tingay
et al (2012) from the offshore Nile Delta region.
5.3 Implications for drilling and field
development
This work provides critical inferences in drilling and
reservoir development from a geomechanical perspec-
tive. The interpreted pore pressure and Sh define the
drilling mud window. In terms of conservative drilling
safety and execution, this lower constraint of Sh serves
the maximum allowable drilling fluid pressure to
avoid any fluid loss and near-wellbore formation
damage due to mud invasion. However, to ensure
wellbore stability it is critical to maintaining the
downhole drilling pressure gradient above the inter-
preted CP. Hussein and Taha (1993) investigated the
various drilling hazards in the onshore Nile Delta
wells. They concluded the caving of the Tertiary
shales as the primary hole instability mechanism and
recommended using higher mud weight to overcome
hole caving and bridging resulted from hydration and
swelling pressure. As a consequence, correlating the
same observations to the Al Khilala fields, the final 8
‘ inch drilling section in the studied wells had been
critical in terms of borehole stability and wall failure,
especially against the Miocene Abu Madi shales. Our
rock failure analysis suggests a lower mud weight
limit of 11.45 PPG to prevent such washouts. There-
fore, an effective mud window between 11.45 PPG
and 13.1 PPG (i.e., Sh) should be followed (Fig. 8) to
design the drilling fluid gradient, this will avoid any
formation fluid influx, mud loss, or wellbore instability
issues. Being in a strike-slip or normal to strike-slip
transitional tectonic regime, a horizontal well will be
less prone to compressive failures. Wells should be
deviated along with the Sh orientation, i.e. E-W to
minimize failure issues. This will also ensure an
optimum stimulation design and thus a higher perme-
ability gain since hydraulic fracture propagates paral-
lel to SH (i.e. NNE in the studied field).
6 Conclusions
This work provides well-based geomechanical mod-
eling to assess the pore pressure, in-situ stress
magnitudes, and formation collapse pressure gradients
in the West and South Al-Khilala fields, onshore Nile
Page 13 of 16 56
Delta. Sonic log-based pore pressure estimation infers
a mild overpressure of 0.55 PSI/feet gradient within
the Pliocene transgressive shales of Kafr El Sheikh
Formation, possibly due to the disequilibrium com-
paction process. Formation pressure retreats to 0.47
PSI/feet gradient within the Messinian clastic interval
which hosts the primary gas reservoir. The poroelastic
horizontal strain model is utilized to infer the
horizontal stresses. In the absence of direct downhole
calibrations, this work constrained the lower and upper
limits of Sh and SH. Relative magnitudes of Sv and Sh
(Sv [ Sh) is an indicative normal or strike-slip tectonic
regime. B-Quality breakouts identified in the four arm
caliper log data deciphered an NNE-SSW orientation
of maximum horizontal stress. Collapse pressure
analysis has inferred the formation shear failure
gradient in the Miocene interval (i.e. production
section), which exhibited major wellbore instability
issues in the exploratory drilling campaign. This study
concludes the subsurface pressure gradients and
suggests an optimum drilling mud window to ensure
a safe and stable wellbore.
7 Conflict of interests
The authors declare that they have no competing
interest.
Acknowledgements The authors express their sincere
gratitude to Professor P.G. Ranjith, Editor in Chief of
Geomechanics and Geophysics for Geo-Energy and Geo-
Resources, and the two learned reviewers for their
constructive comments, which benefited our manuscript. The
authors are grateful to Mansoura Petroleum Company for
providing the dataset and permission to publish the results of our
work. GEO Suite of software by Geologix Limited is utilized for
the analyses presented in this work. The interpretations
presented here are solely of authors and do not necessarily
represent their respective organizations.
Funding Not applicable.
References
Abdel Aal A, El Barkooky A, Cerrits M, Meyer H, Schwander
M, Zaki H (2001) Tectonic evolution of the eastern
mediterranean basin and its significance for the hydrocar-
bon prospectivity of the nile delta deepwater area.
GeoArabia 6(3):363–384
123
56 Page 14 of 16 Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
Abdelghany WK, Radwan AE, Elkhawaga MA, Wood DA, Sen
S, Kassem AA (2021) Geomechanical modeling using the
depth-of-damage approach to achieve successful under-
balanced drilling in the Gulf of Suez rift Basin. J Pet Sci
Eng 202:108311
Abu El Ella R (1990) The Neogene quaternary section in the
Nile delta, Egypt, geology and hydrocarbon potential. J Pet
Geol 13:329–340
Agbasi OE, Sen S, Inyang NJ, Etuk SE (2021) Assessment of
pore pressure, wellbore failure and reservoir stability in the
Gabo field, Niger Delta, Nigeria Implications for drilling
and reservoir management. J Afr Earth Sci 173:104038
Amiri M, Lashkaripour GR, Ghabezloo S, Moghaddas NH,
Tajareh MH (2019) Mechanical earth modeling and fault
reactivation analysis for CO2 enhanced oil recovery in
Gachsar an oil field, south-west of Iran. Environ Earth Sci
78(4):112
Andreoletti C, Bienati N, Capponi G, Bellucci N (2009) Inte-
grated approach to imaging pore pressure prediction in the
nile delta. In: International Petroleum Technology Con-
ference, Doha, Qatar. IPTC-13380
Barber P (1981) Messinian subaerial erosion of the proto-Nile
Delta. Mar Geol 44(3–4):253–272
Baouche R, Sen S, Chaouchi R, Ganguli SS (2021) Modeling in-
situ tectonic stress state and maximum horizontal stress
azimuth in the Central Algerian Sahara A geomechanical
study from EL Agreb, EL Gassi and Hassi Messaoud fields.
J Nat Gas Sci Eng 88:103831
Baouche R, Sen S, Boutaleb K (2020a) Present day in-situ stress
magnitude and orientation of horizontal stress components
in the eastern Illizi basin, Algeria A geomechanical mod-
eling. J Struct Geol 132:103975
Baouche R, Sen S, Boutaleb K (2020b) Distribution of pore
pressure and fracture pressure gradients in the Paleozoic
sediments of Takouazet field, Illizi basin. Algeria. J Afr
Earth Sci 164:103778
Baouche R, Sen S, Sadaoui M, Boutaleb K, Ganguli SS (2020c)
Characterization of pore pressure, fracture pressure, shear
failure and its implications for drilling, wellbore stability
and completion design A case study from the Takouazet
field, Illizi Basin. Algeria. Mar Pet Geol 120:104510
Baouche R, Sen S, Ganguli SS (2020d) Pore pressure and in-situ
stress magnitudes in the Bhiret Hammou hydrocarbon
field, Berkine Basin Algeria. J Afr Earth Sci 171:103945
Dalla S, Hamed H, Serrazi M (1997) Hydrocarbon exploration
in a complex incised valley fill, an example from the late
Messinian Abu Madi Formation (Nile Delta Basin, Egypt).
Lead Edge 16(12):1819–1824
Dolson JC, Boucher PJ, Siok J, Heppard PD (2005) Key chal-
lenges to realizing full potential in an emerging giant gas
province: nile Delta/Mediterranean offshore, deep water,
Egypt. In: Doré AG, Vining BA (eds) Petroleum geology:
North-West Europe and global perspectives, vol 6. Geol.
Soc. London, Petroleum Geology Conference Series,
pp 607–624
Dolson JC, Shaan V, Matbouly S, Harwood C, Rashed R,
Hammouda H (2001) The petroleum potential of Egypt. In:
Downey W, Threet C, Morgan A (eds) Petroleum Pro-
vinces of the Twenty-first Century, vol 74. AAPG Bull,
pp 453–482
123
Eaton BA (1975) The equation for geopressure prediction from
well logs. In: Fall meeting of the society of petroleum
engineers of AIME, Dallas, TX, USA Sept 28–Oct 1. SPE-
5544-MS
Eaton BA (1969) Fracture gradient prediction and its application
in oilfield operations. J Pet Technol 21(10):25–32
EGPC (1994) Nile Delta and North Sinai: field discoveries and
hydrocarbon potentials (a comprehensive overview).
EGPC, Cairo
El Gendy N, Metwaly F, Kh BM, El-Farmawy A (2016)
Reservoir characterization of Messinian Abu Madi sand-
stone by incorporating NMR Log with Conventional Logs:
a Case study Nile Delta. Egypt IOSR j Appl Geol Geophys
4(6):88–97
El Khadragy AA, Eysa EA, Hashim A, Abd El Kader A (2017)
Reservoir characteristics and 3D static modelling of the
Late Miocene Abu Madi Formation, onshore Nile Delta.
Egypt J Afr Earth Sci 132:99–108
Eysa EA, El Khadragy AA, Hashim A, Abd El Kader A (2015)
Lithological and petrophysical characteristics of the late
Miocene Abu Madi reservoir, West Al Khilala Field, On-
Shore Nile Delta. Egypt IOSR J Appl Geol Geophys
3(6):50–67
Ganguli SS, Sen S (2020) Investigation of present-day in-situ
stresses and pore pressure in the south Cambay Basin,
western India: Implications for drilling, reservoir devel-
opment and fault reactivation. Mar Pet Geol 118:104422
Garcia-Castellanos D, Estrada F, Jiménez-Munt I, Gorini C,
Fernàndez M, Vergés J, De Vicente R (2009) Catastrophic
flood of the Mediterranean after the Messinian salinity
crisis. Nature 462(7274):778–781
Garfunkel Z (1998) Constrains on the origin and history of the
Eastern Mediterranean basin. Tectonophysics
298(1–3):5–35
Gholami R, Moradzadeh A, Rasouli V, Hanachi J (2014)
Practical application of failure criteria in determining safe
mud weight windows in drilling operations. J Rock Mech
Geotech Eng 6(1):13–25
Guiraud R, Bosworth W (1999) Phanerozoic geodynamic evo-
lution of northeastern Africa and the northwestern Arabian
platform. Tectonophysics 315(1–4):73–104
Hanafy S, Nimmagadda SL, Mahmoud SE, Mabrouk WM
(2017) New insights on structure and stratigraphic inter-
pretation for assessing the hydrocarbon potentiality of the
offshore Nile Delta basin. Egypt J Petrol Explor Prod
Technol 7:317–339
Harms J, Wray J (1990) Nile Delta. In: Said R (ed), Geology of
Egypt. A. A. Balkema/ Rotterdam/Brookfield, pp 329–343
Heidbach O, Rajabi M, Cui X, Fuchs K, Müller B, Reinecker J,
Reiter K, Tingay M, Wenzel F, Xie F, Ziegler MO, Zoback
M-L, Zoback MD (2018) The World Stress Map database
release 2016: Crustal stress pattern across scales.
Tectonophysics 744:484–498
Heidbach O, Barth A, Müller B, Reinecker J, Stephansson O,
Tingay M, Zang A (2016) WSM quality ranking scheme,
database description and analysis guidelines for stress
indicator. World Stress Map Technical Report 16–01, GFZ
German Research Centre for Geosciences
Heppard PD, Albertin ML (1998) Abnormal pressure evaluation
of the recent Pliocene and Miocene gas discoveries from
Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
the Eastern Nile Delta, Egypt, using 2D and 3D seismic
data. Houston Geol Soc Bull 41(3):16–23
Hussein NK, Taha ALAE (1993) Hole stability in Nile Delta
area: Abu Madi, Nidoco, and El-Qara wells. In: Middle
East Oil Show, Bahrain, April. SPE 25544
Javani D, Aadnoy B, Rastegarnia M, Nadimi S, Aghighi MA,
Maleki B (2017) Failure criterion effect on solid produc-
tion and selection of completion solution. J Rock Mech
Geotech Eng 9(6):1123–1130
Jia Y, Tang J, Lu Y, Lu Z (2021) The effect of fluid pressure on
frictional stability transition from velocity strengthening to
velocity weakening and critical slip distance evolution in
shale reservoirs. Geomech Geophys Geo-Energ Geo-Re-
sour 7:25
Kang JQ, Zhu JB, Zhao J (2019) A review of mechanisms of
induced earthquakes: from a view of rock mechanics.
Geomech Geophys Geo-Energ Geo-Resour 5:171–196
Kassem AA, Sen S, Radwan AE, Kassem WA, Abioui M (2021)
Effect of depletion and fluid injection in the Mesozoic and
Paleozoic reservoirs of the October oil field, Central Gulf
of Suez Basin – Implications in drilling, production and
reservoir stability. Nat Resour Res 30:2587–2606
Kellner A, Brink G, El Khawaga H (2018) Depositional history
of the western Nile Delta, Egypt: Late Rupelian to Pleis-
tocene. AAPG Bull 102(9):1841–1865
Kerdany M, Cherif O (1990) Mesozoic. In: Said R (ed) Geology
of Egypt. Balkema/ Rotterdam/Brookfield, pp 407–438
Kim S, Hosseini SA (2016) Study on the ratio of pore-pressure/
stress changes during fluid injection and its implications for
CO2 geologic storage. J Pet Sci Eng 149:138–150
Leila M, Eslam A, El-Magd AA, Alwaan L, Elgendy A (2020a)
Formation evaluation and reservoir characteristics of the
Messinian Abu Madi sandstones in Faraskour Gas Field,
onshore Nile Delta. Egypt J Petrol Explor Prod Technol
11(1):133–155
Leila M, Moscariello A, Kora M, Mohamed A, Samankassou E
(2020b) Sedimentology and reservoir quality of a Messi-
nian mixed siliciclastic carbonate succession, onshore Nile
Delta. Egypt. Mar Pet Geol 112:104076
Leila M, Moscariello A (2019) Seismic stratigraphy and sedi-
mentary facies analysis of the pre-and syn-Messinian
salinity crisis sequences, onshore Nile Delta, Egypt:
implications for reservoir quality prediction. Mar Pet Geol
101:303–321
Leila M, Moscariello A, Šegvić B (2019) Depositional facies
controls on the diagenesis and reservoir quality of the
Messinian Qawasim and Abu Madi formations, onshore
Nile Delta. Egypt Geol j 54(3):1797–1813
Leila M, Moscariello A (2018) Depositional and petrophysical
controls on the volumes of hydrocarbons trapped in the
Messinian reservoirs, onshore Nile Delta. Egypt Petroleum
4(3):250–267
Liang M, Peng S, Du W, Lu Y (2018) Tectonic stress estimation
from ultrasonic borehole image logs in a coal bed methane
well, northeastern Qinshui Basin. China J Nat Gas Sci Eng
52:44–58
Li S, Purdy CC (2010) Maximum horizontal stress and wellbore
stability while drilling: Modeling and case study. In: SPE
Latin America and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering
Conference, Lima, Peru, Dec 1–3. SPE-139280-MS
Page 15 of 16 56
Liu S, Harpalani S (2014) Evaluation of in situ stress changes
with gas depletion of coal bed methane reservoirs. J Geo-
phys Res Solid Earth 119(8):6263–6276
Lofi J, Sage F, Deverchere J, Loncke L, Maillard A, Gaullier V,
Thinon I, Gillet H, Guennoc P, Gorini C (2011a) Refining
our knowledge of the Messinian salinity crisis records in
the offshore domain through multi-site seismic analysis.
Bul Soc Geol Fr 182(2):163–180
Lofi J, Deverchere J, Gaullier V, Gillet H, Guennoc P, Gorini C,
Loncke L, Maillard A, Sage F, Thinon I (2011b) Seismic
atlas of the ‘‘Messinian salinity crisis’’ markers in the
mediterranean and black seas. Mém Soc Geol Fr 179:1–72
Lund Snee J, Zoback MD (2020) Multiscale variations of the
crustal stress field throughout North America. Nat Com-
mun 11(1):1951
Maleki S, Gholami R, Rasouli V, Moradzadeh A, Riabi RG,
Sadaghzadeh F (2014) Comparison of different failure
criteria in prediction of safe mud weigh window in drilling
practice. Earth-Sci Rev 136:36–58
Mohamed A-MS, AbuBakr MM, Awad MH, Sakr KO, Etman
MS (2021) Utilisation of GNSS and seismicity for moni-
toring crustal deformation of the Northern part of the Nile
Delta. Egypt NRIAG J Astron Geophys 10(1):1–9
Najibi AR, Ghafoori M, Lashkaripour GR, Asef MR (2017)
Reservoir geomechanical modeling: In-situ stress, pore
pressure, and mud design. J Pet Sci Eng 151:31–39
Nashaat M (1998) Abnormally high fluid pressure and seal
impacts on hydro-carbon accumulations in the Nile Delta
and North Sinai Basins, Egypt. In: Law BE, Ulmishek GF,
Slavin VI (eds) Abnormal pressures in hydrocarbon envi-
ronments, vol 70. AAPG Memoir, pp 161–180
Nashaat M (1992) Geopressure and geothermal studies in the
Nile Delta. Thesis, Al Azhar University, Egypt
Nashaat M (1994) Abnormal pressure origin and impacts on
hydrocarbon prospectivity in the Nile Delta and North
Sinai Basins, Egypt. AAPG Hedberg abnormal pressure
conference, Golden, Colorado, U.S.A., June 8–10
Ngo DT, Pellet FL, Bruel D (2019) Modeling of fault slip during
hydraulic stimulation in a naturally fractured medium.
Geomech Geophys Geo-Energ Geo-Resour 5:237–251
Palmieri G, Harby H, Martini J, Hashem F, Dalla S, Shash M
(1996) Baltim Fields complex, an outstanding example of
hydrocarbon accumulations in a fluvial Messinian incised
valley. Proc. 13th EGPC Expl. Prod. Conf Cairo Egypt
1:256–269
Pigott JD, Abdel-Fattah M (2014) Seismic stratigraphy of the
Messinian Nile Delta coastal plain, Recognition of the
fluvial Regressive Systems Tract and its potential for
hydrocarbon exploration. J Afr Earth Sci 25:9–21
Plumb RA, Evans KF, Engelder T (1991) Geophysical log
responses and their correlation with bed to bed stress
contrasts in Paleozoic rocks, Appalachian Plateau. New
York J Geophys Res 96(B9):14509–14528
Rabe C, Perdomo PRR, Roux PF, Silva CG, Gamboa LAP
(2020) Coupled fluid flow and geomechanics: a case study
in Faja del Orinoco. Geomech Geophys Geo-Energ Geo-
Resour 6:14
Radwan A, Sen S (2021) Stress path analysis for characteriza-
tion of in situ stress state and effect of reservoir depletion
on present-day stress magnitudes: reservoir geomechanical
123
56 Page 16 of 16 Geomech. Geophys. Geo-energ. Geo-resour. (2021)7:56
modeling in the Gulf of Suez Rift Basin. Egypt Nat Resour
Res 30:463–478
Rahimi R, Nygaard R (2018) Effect of rock strength variation on
the estimated borehole breakout using shear failure criteria.
Geomech Geophys Geo-Energ Geo-Resour 4:369–382
Rajabi M, Tingay M, Heidbach O (2016) The present-day state
of tectonic stress in the Darling Basin, Australia: implica-
tions for exploration and production. Mar Pet Geol
77:776–790
Rowley E, Dolson J, Malossi A (2002) A regional evaluation of
the Pliocene Nil Delta pore pressure regime. AAPG
International Convention, Cairo, Egypt, Oct 27–30
Rubino J, Crouzy E, Campo R, Jardine C, Khalil M, Rives T,
Rossi T (2015) Architecture and Stratigraphy of Messinian
Deposits (Abu Madi Fm.) at the Mouth of Messinian Nile
Canyon, Offshore Egypt. 77th EAGE Conference and
Exhibition, Madrid
Said R (1990) The Geology of Egypt. A. Balkema Publishers,
Rotterdam, Brookfield
Salem AM, Ketzer JM, Morad S, Rizk RR, Al-Aasm IS (2005)
Diagenesis and reservoir-quality evolution of incised val-
ley sandstones, evidence from the Abu Madi gas reservoirs
(Upper Miocene), the Nile Delta Basin. Egypt J Sed Res
75(4):572–584
Samuel A, Kneller B, Raslan S, Sharp A, Parsons S (2003)
Prolific deep-marine slope channels of the Nile Delta.
Egypt AAPG Bull 87(4):541–560
Sestini G (1995) Egypt. In: Kulke H (ed) Regional petroleum
geology of the world, part II, Africa, America, Australia
and Antarctica contributions to the regional geology of the
earth, vol 22. Schweizerbart Science Publishers, Stuttgart,
pp 66–87
Sen S, Corless J, Dasgupta S, Maxwell C, Kumar M (2017)
Issues faced while calculating overburden gradient and
picking shale zone to predict pore pressure. In: First EAGE
Workshop on Pore Pressure Prediction, Mar 19–21, Pau,
France, paper Mo PP1B 02
Sen S, Kundan A, Kumar M (2018a) Post-drill analysis of pore
pressure and fracture gradient from well logs and drilling
events—an integrated case study of a high pressure
exploratory well from Panna East, Mumbai Offshore basin,
India. In: Pore Pressure and Geomechanics from Explo-
ration to Abandonment, AAPG Geosciences Technology
Workshop, Perth, Australia, June 6–7
123
Sen S, Maxwell C, Kumar M (2018b) Real time pore pressure
interpretation from drilling events—a case study from high
pressure offshore exploratory well. In: Operations Geo-
science Adding Value, The Geological Society, London,
Nov 7–8
Sen S, Ganguli SS (2019) Estimation of pore pressure and
fracture gradient in volve field, Norwegian North Sea. In:
SPE oil and gas india conference and exhibition, Mumbai,
India, Apr 9–11. SPE-194578-MS
Sen S, Kundan A, Kalpande V, Kumar M (2019) The present-
day state of tectonic stress in the offshore Kutch-Saurashtra
Basin. India Mar Pet Geol 102:751–758
Sen S, Kundan A, Kumar M (2020) Modeling pore pressure,
fracture pressure and collapse pressure gradients in off-
shore Panna, western India: implications for drilling and
wellbore stability. Nat Resour Res 29:2717–2734
Sohail GM, Hawkes CD, Yasin Q (2020) An integrated petro-
physical and geomechanical characterization of Sembar
Shale in the Lower Indus Basin, Pakistan, using well logs
and seismic data. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 78:103327
Taghipour M, Ghafoori M, Lashkaripour GR, Moghaddas NH,
Molaghab A (2019) Estimation of the current stress field
and fault reactivation analysis in the Asmari reservoir, SW
Iran. Petrol Sci 16:513–526
Tingay M, Bentham P, Feyter AD, Kellner A (2012) Evidence
for non-Andersonian faulting above evaporites in the Nile
Delta. J Geol Soc London Special Publications
367:155–170
Yang Q, Zan Y, Xie LG (2018) Comparative analysis of the
nonlinear unified strength criterion for rocks and other
three-dimensional Hoek-Brown strength criteria. Geomech
Geophys Geo-Energ Geo-Resour 4:29–37
Yujie Z, Xiaoli L, Enzhi W (2020) Influence of impoundment
gravity and pore pressure on reactivation of faults. Geo-
mech Geophys Geo-Energ Geo-Resour 6:64
Zhang J (2013) Borehole stability analysis accounting for ani-
sotropies in drilling to weak bedding planes. Int J Rock
Mech Min Sci 60:160–170
Zoback MD (2007) Reservoir Geomechanics. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.