Fracture Gradient Determination

Fracture Gradient Determination

Hubbert and Willis
Matthews and Kelly
Ben Eaton
Christman
Prentice
Leak-Off Test (experimental)
Fracture Gradient Determination
Read AWC Chapter 4 all
Well Planning
Safe drilling practices require that the following
be considered when planning a well:
Pore pressure determination
Fracture gradient determination
Casing setting depth
Casing design
H
2
S considerations
Contingency planning
The Hubbert & Willis Equation
Provides the basis of fracture theory and
prediction used today.
Assumed elastic behavior.
Assumed effective stress exceeds the
minimum by a factor of 3.
The Hubbert & Willis Equation
If the overburden is maximum, the assumed
horizontal stress is:

H
= 1/3(
ob
- p
p
) + p
p
Equating fracture propagation pressure to
minimum stress gives
p
fp
= 1/3(
ob
- p
p
) + p
p
The Hubbert & Willis Equation
p
fp
= 1/3(
ob
- 2p
p
) (minimum)
p
fp
= 1/2(
ob
- p
p
) (maximum)
Matthews and Kelly
Developed the concept of variable ratio
between the effective horizontal and vertical
stresses, not a constant 1/3 as in H & W.
Stress ratios increase according to the
degree of compaction

eH
= K
MK

ev
Matthews and Kelly

eH
= K
MK

ev
K
MK
= matrix stress coefficient
Including pore pressure

H
= K
MK
(
ob
- p
p
) + p
p
Matthews and Kelly
Equating fracture initiation pressure to the
minimum in situ horizontal stress gives
p
fi
= K
MK
(
ob
- p
p
) + p
p
and
g
fi
= K
MK
(g
ob
- g
p
) + g
p
Example 4.8
Given: Table 4.4 (Offshore LA)
Estimate fracture initiation gradient at 8110
and 15,050 using Matthews and Kelly
correlation
Example 4.8
K
MK
= 0.69
For 8110
g
fi
= 0.69(1 - .465) + .465
g
fi
= 0.834 psi/ft
K
MK
= 0.61
For the undercompacted
interval at 15,050, the
equivalent depth is
determined by:
D
e
=
[15050-(.815*15050)]/.535
= 5204
Example 4.8
g
fi
= 0.61*(1-.815)+.815 = .928 psi/ft
Note: Overburden gradient was assumed to
be 1.0 psi/ft
PenebakersGulf Coast
g
fi
= K
p
(g
ob
- g
p
) + g
p
where K
p
is Penebakerseffective stress
ratio
Penebakers overburden
gradient from Gulf
Coast region
Depth where
t = 100 sec/ft
Penebakers Effective Stress Ratio
Example 4.9
Re-work Example 4.8 using Penebakers
correlations where the travel time of 100
sec/ft is at 10,000
Example 4.9
At 8110
g
fi
= 0.77(0.945 - 0.465) + 0.465
g
fi
= 0.835 psi/ft
At 15050
g
fi
= 0.94(0.984 - 0.815) + 0.815
g
fi
= 0.974 psi/ft
Eatons Gulf Coast Correlation
Based on offshore LA in moderate water
depths
( )
ratio stress effective an is
term ratio s Poisson' bracketed the Note
1
p p ob
E
E
fi
g g g g +

Mitchells approximation
Mitchells approximation
Mitchells approximation
Example 4.10
Example 4.10
Summary
Note that all the methods take into
consideration the pore pressure gradient.
As the pore pressure increases, so does the
fracture gradient
Summary
Hubbert and Willis apparently consider only
the variation in pore pressure gradient.
Matthews and Kelly also consider the
changes in rock matrix stress coefficient
and the matrix stress
Summary
Ben Eaton considers variation in pore
pressure gradient, overburden stress, and
Poissons ratio.
It is probably the most accurate of the three.
Summary
The last two are quite similar and yield
similar results.
None consider the effect of water depth.
Christmansapproach
Christmantook into consideration the effect
of water depth on overburden stress.
Example 4.11
Estimate the fracture gradient for a
formation located 1490 BML. Water depth
is 768, air gap is 75.
Repeat for water depth of 1500
Example 4.11
Example 4.11
Christman
Christmanalso noted that anomalously low
fracture gradients seemed to be associated
with formation having low bulk densities
for the burial depth. He then developed the
correlation in Fig 4.45
Example 4.12
Re-work the first part of Example 4.11 if
the logged bulk density at 1490 BML is
2.08 g/cc
g
fi
= 0.6 * (0.73-0.452) + 0.452
g
fi
= 0.619 psi/ft
Prentice method
Water depth of 1000
Total depth = 4000
Water gap = 200
Prentice method
Convert the water depth to an equivalent
section of formation.
E.g. 1000 * 0.465 psi/ft = 465 psi
From Eatons overburden stress chart the
stress gradient at 4000 equals 0.89 psi/ft
Prentice method
465 psi/0.89 psi/ft = 522 equivalent depth
Calculate and convert apparent fracture
gradient to actual fracture gradient
522 + 3000 = 3522 equivalent
Prentice method
From Eatons fracture gradient chart, the
gradient at 3522 = 13.92 ppg
or
Fracture pressure = 0.052 * 13.92 * 3522
= 2549 psi
Prentice method
The effective fracture gradient from the
mud flow line at the drill ship deck to the
casing seat is:
2549 * 19.23/(200 + 1000 + 3000)
= 11.67 ppg
F = 2549/4200 = 0.607 psi/ft
0.607/.052 = 11.67 ppg
Experimental Determination
Leak-off test, LOT, - pressure test in which
we determine the amount of pressure
required to initiate a fracture
Pressure Integrity Test, PIT, pressure test in
which we only want to determine if a
formation can withstand a certain amount of
pressure without fracturing.
PIT
4000
10.0 ppg
??
How much surface pressure will be
required to test the casing seat to a
14.0 ppg equivalent?
p
s
= (EMW - MW) * 0.052 * TVD
shoe
p
s
= (14.0 - 10.0) * 0.052 * 4000
p
s
= 832 psi
LOT
Leak-off
Rupture
Propagation
Example 4.22 - 2
Interpret the leak-off test.
Solution
P
fi
= 1730 + .483*5500 - 50
1730 psi = leak off pressure
0.483 psi/ft = mud gradient in well
5500 depth of casing seat
50 psi = pump pressure to break circulation
P
fi
= 4337 psi = 0.789 psi/ft = 15.17 ppg
Poor Cement Job
What could cause this?
Example
Surface hole is drilled
to 1500 and pipe is
set. About 20 of new
hole is drilled after
cementing. The shoe
needs to hole 14.0 ppg
equivalent on a leak
off test. Mud in the
hole has a density of
9.5 ppg.
9.5 ppg
1500
Example
What surface pressure do we need to test to
a 14.0 ppg equivalent?
(14.0 - 9.5) * .052 * 1500 = 351 psi
Example
The casing seat is tested to a leak off
pressure of 367 psi. What EMW did the
shoe actually hole?
367/.052/1500 + 9.5 = 14.2 ppg EMW
Example
After drilling for some
time, TD is now 4500
and the mud weight is
10.2 ppg. What is the
maximum casing
pressure that the
casing seat can
withstand without
fracturing?
10.2 ppg
1500
4500
Example
Max. CP = (EMW - MW) * .052 * TVD
shoe
Max. CP = (14.2 - 10.2) * .052 * 1500
Max. CP = 312 psi
Example
Now we are at a TD of 7500 with a mud
weight of 13.7 ppg. What is the maximum
CP that the shoe can withstand?
Max. CP = (14.2 - 13.7) * .052 * 1500
Max. CP = 39 psi