65 views

Uploaded by Ana Araújo

- Assignment I SKPU1123 1213 2
- Pore Pressure Basic Level
- Pressure Prediction
- Full Text%2C Master Thesis%2C Babak Mohammadi %286200532%29
- 00027488- Bowers Method
- MSEC2019_3108_new
- 7. Pore Pressure
- 09 Drilling Hydraulics Hydrostatics
- FS-gates
- Reservoir Geology
- Pan System Type Curves
- Formation Pressure
- ARMA-06-916dfadfd
- Methods of Pore Pressure Detection
- SPE 156337 MS Compressibility
- Liquid and Gas Sizing
- Permeability Consideration
- Advective and Dispersive Mixing
- PETE 331-Session 2-07_10_2011
- lab1rfe12.doc

You are on page 1of 4

**BOB BRUCE, BHP Petroleum, Houston, Texas, U.S. GLENN BOWERS, Applied Mechanics Technologies, Houston, Texas, U.S.
**

luid pressures in the pore spaces of rocks are critical to several aspects of petroleum exploration and production. However, a general understanding of some basic concepts has been obscured by a lack of consistency in terminology. It is the intent of this paper to clarify the meaning of certain terms so that the many disciplines involved with, and affected by, pore pressures can communicate effectively and clearly. A most confusing aspect of pressure terminology arises from mixing the terms for pressure and pressure gradients. The word “gradient” is often dropped when referring to pressure increases with depth. Even when the gradient distinction is made, it can confuse because it can either mean pressure changes referenced from the surface or pressure changes measured over short depth ranges. It is important to understand pressures in absolute terms before beginning to work with gradients. Please note that the terms “pressure” and “stress” are used interchangeably in the following. They are not strictly the same, but can be so considered for this discussion. (Stress is a tensor while fluid pressure is isotropic.) Pressure concepts. Figure 1, a very stylized diagram of pressure versus depth for a fictional well, illustrates several concepts. The “hydrostatic” line gives the pressure due to a column of water. The slope would be .433 psi/ft for pure water, but is usually .45 - .465 for formation waters. An important concept is that, for a simple porous rock with pore spaces continuously connected to the surface (i.e. an open system), the pressure of the fluid in the pore space is just the pressure exerted by the weight of the overlying fluids. This “normal or hydrostatic pressure” is simply the pressure due to a column of water. The “overburden” stress is the pressure exerted by all overlying material, both solid and fluid. Below the water bottom, this line has an approximate slope of 1 psi/ft, but the true slope depends on the density of the rock and tends to increase with depth because rock density tends to increase with depth. The “pore pressure” is the pressure of the fluid in the pore space of the rock. As suggested in Figure 1, this can be higher than hydrostatic pressure. The point at which pore pressures exceed hydrostatic pressures is the “top of overpressures.” In overpressure, fluids are trapped in the pores and bear part of the weight of the overlying solids. Two definitions are illustrated in Figure 1. First, the amount of pore pressure exceeding the hydrostatic line is termed the overpressure (i.e., it is the amount of pore pressure in excess of the hydrostatic pressure for a given depth). Any pressure over the hydrostatic pressure is overpressure. The second definition is effective stress. It is the difference between overburden stress and pore pressure—essentially the amount of overburden stress that is supported by the rock grains. Another concept implied in Figure 1 is that pore pressure does not reach overburden stress. As pore pressure approaches overburden stress (actually, the least principal confining stress which is usually less than overburden stress), fractures in the rock open and release fluids and pressures.

170 THE LEADING EDGE FEBRUARY 2002

F

Figure 1. Pressure plotted against depth in a fictional well. Overpressure is the amount of pore pressure in excess of hydrostatic pressure.

Figure 2. Typical trend curves for resistivity, sonic velocity, and density. Blue curves denote normal compaction trends. Arrows indicate deviations due to overpressure.

Figure 3. Cross-section of hypothetical reservoir unit. In the absence of fluid flow, the difference in pore pressure between points A and B is simply the weight of the fluid in the vertical reservoir column. As seen in Figure 1, when pore pressure is normal (hydrostatic), effective stress increases with depth. Laboratory studies have confirmed that effective stress actually controls compaction. It follows that the sonic velocity, density, and resistivity of a normally pressured formation will generally increase with depth of burial. The way that a rock property varies with burial under normal

knowing a formation has a pore pressure of 4500 psi gives no indication of how difficult or easy it will be to drill. the difference in pore pressure between points A and B is simply the weight of the fluid in the vertical reservoir column. This is important because it means that overpressure in a continuous reservoir unit must be constant throughout the water-bearing portion of the reservoir. However. and density. it equals the slope of a pressure versus depth curve.0519 psi/ft. does not imply a gradient. (Salinity and temperature effects often cause a resistivity increase near the surface. we mean the mud density is 10.25 . pore pressures follow a hydrostatic trend. However. The differences in pore pressure between points A and C are again simply due to the weight of pore fluids.5 lb/gal @10 000 ft. Figure 6. It is easy to show that. (This slope may be 0. In Figure 6. If we relate weight to a volume.90 psi/ft = 17. This extra “boost” in overpressures is the “buoyancy effect. For example. and drilling wells. Because of its simplicity for some applications.” Figure 2 shows typical normal trend curves for resistivity. This becomes apparent when the equivalent mud weights at these two depths are compared: @ 5000 ft.1 . which means that overpressure at each depth is the same. We have tried to use slope throughout this discussion to mean the local gradient. from the perspective of drillers and others concerned with planning Figure 4. (Sea water is about 8. Without question.2 psi/ft for gas and 0. we have density and density does convert to a gradient.pore pressure conditions is termed its “normal compaction trend. a scale has been added with mud weights. However. Pressure gradients. Figure 4 is a hydrocarbon-bearing version of the reservoir in Figure 3. This is a density. equivalent mud weight is a far more meaningful measure of pressure. EMW = 4500/10 000 = 0.0. expressing pore pressures in units of density is scientifically incorrect. If this fluid is water. Weight. 4500 psi corresponds to hydrostatic pressure but at 5000 ft it represents substantial overpressure.54 lbs/gal. Above the hydrocarbon/water contact. If the reservoir is overpressured.) Because hydrocarbons are lighter than water. we can derive the pressure of the borehole fluids by drawing a line from the origin through the appropriate mud weight to the depth and get the pressure for that depth. Pressure plotted against depth with mud weight scale added. Its utility is that for any depth below the surface. the amount of overpressure in the hydrocarbon column increases with elevation above the hydrocarbon/ water contact. When we refer to mud weights as ten point five pounds. pore pressure at any elevation in the reservoir must follow a hydrostatic slope. EMW = 4500/5000 = 0.. Pressure profile for hypothetical reservoir unit in Figure 4. however. sonic velocity. A local pressure gradient defines how pressure varies over small depth ranges. Hydrocarbon-bearing version of Figure 3.65 lb/gal So drillers use mud weight as a fundamental measure. We also need to be careful in referring to the reference points for measuring gradients. the most basic pressure gradient that we use is equivalent mud weight (EMW). An example of a local pressure gradient is the fluid density gradient.) Figure 3 is a cross-sectional view of a hypothetical reservoir unit. the shorthand of pressure gradients is very useful.4 for oil. which is why the resistivity trend is different from that of the sonic and density trends in the shallow section. At the smallest scale. albeit offset from normal hydrostatic pressure. pressures follow a slope that depends on hydrocarbon density. Figure 5. The FEBRUARY 2002 THE LEADING EDGE 171 . in itself. in the absence of fluid flow.433 pst/ft Local gradients are most useful when working with absolute pressure. we need to keep clearly separated in our minds the concepts of absolute pressure and gradients (changes in pressure). Below the hydrocarbon/water contact.” Figure 5 is a pressure profile for a hypothetical reservoir unit such as in Figure 4. A conversion factor for local gradients is 1 g/cm3 = .5 lbs/gallon. pore pressures track a line parallel to the normal hydrostatic pressure curve.) A conversion factor for equivalent mud weights is 1 lb/gal = . another stylized plot of pressure versus depth. It is the rate at which pressure varies along a uniform column of fluid due to the fluid’s own weight. At a depth of 10 000 ft.45 psi/ft = 8.

it becomes overpressured. Hysteresis effects may significantly complicate estimations of sand and shale pore pressures Figure 8. we drill to a specific depth and set casing. If we want to more fully understand pressures. (This lack of dewatering is the basis for the overpressure mechanism known as disequilibrium compaction. The casing protects the shallower formations from possible fracturing that could be caused by the heavier mud needed to contain pore pressures at greater depths (Figure 9). so drilling begins with lower weights. if the borehole pressure exceeds the fracture pressure. Shale pore pressure does not. that porosity reduction and compaction are not simply reversible under effective stress increase and reduction. If we were to begin drilling with 14 lb/gal mud. Figure 7 is a schematic illustrating the pore pressure between the hydrostatic gradient and the fracture gradient. Diagram illustrating pore pressure between hydrostatic gradient and fracture gradient.Figure 7. unloading. lateral and vertical transfer of pressures to the updip position may actually reduce effective stress on the sands. The centroid is the depth at which sand and shale pore pressures are equal. Casing points and mud weight profile for hypothetical situation in Figure 8. Just as with pore pressures. This is the view preferred by drillers. however. we must consider what happens in three dimensions.) This may set up the case in Figure 10 in which sand and shale pressures follow different gradients with depth. A mud-induced pressure that is too low 172 THE LEADING EDGE FEBRUARY 2002 . Either case presents a drilling hazard. we can change the pressure axis to a gradient axis. we have the case illustrated. This is the preferred view of drillers (Figure 8). we would immediately fracture the formation. If we recast Figure 7 using the mud weight scale in Figure 6. The centroid concept arose from the observation that shale pressures and sand pressures must follow different local gradients (Figure 10). There is a “window” between pore pressure and fracture pressure for the borehole fluid (mud) pressure. To keep within the window. The value of the centroid concept is that it emphasizes the difference between sand and shale pore pressures. Most pore-pressure prediction techniques emphasize shale properties such as velocity and resistivity but do not address this essential mismatch of the shale and sand pore pressures. the sands go from one compaction state to a lesser one and are “unloaded” by this transfer of pore pressures. In some cases. Within the last several years consideration of pressures in 3-D has significantly improved understanding pore pressure mechanisms and basin plumbing. pressures due to mud weight start at the surface and mud weight relates directly to pressure gradient as referenced to the surface. As mentioned previously. The overburden in the subsided portion is higher and if the burial is sufficiently fast (i. Figure 11 is a simple illustration of lateral transfer. If one side of a basin subsides and fills with shale. the sands (our reservoirs) provide the mechanism for fluid escape including hydrocarbons. The sand acts as a conduit to transfer pressures updip. At depth shale pore pressures exceed sand pore pressures but shallow sand pore pressures exceed shale pore pressures. pore pressure must follow a hydrostatic gradient. repressurization. the shale can’t dewater quickly enough). Such concepts as centroids. As basins subside and dewater. fractures will form. pore pressure is bounded on the upper side by the fracture gradient. Using mud weight changes pressure axis of Figure 7 to gradient axis. This concept also points out that sands provide a mechanism for vertical and lateral transfer of pressures. But lower mud weights will not be able to contain pore pressures as we drill deeper. Figure 8 shows that there is a window between these two curves. We must drill with constant mud weights and these have to fall between the pore pressure equivalent mud weight and the fracture gradient equivalent mud weight. Note.e. If so. would allow formation fluids to flow into the borehole and one that is too high may fracture the formation and lose mud into the formation. Because overpressure of a sand is constant. Pressures in three dimensions.. Figure 9. and lateral transfer have emerged as keys to pressure prediction.

to determine reservoir connectivity. Simple illustration of lateral transfer when one side of a basin subsides and fills with shale. no mention of geopressure. it becomes overpressured. Other mechanisms for “repressurization” similarly complicate pressure prediction. velocity. L Corresponding author: Bob. But overpressure itself is not a gradient and should not be confused with one. from compaction effects on porosity. But more work needs to be done and that work will require clear communicaE tion between diverse disciplines.Figure 10.” This could be defined as pressures approaching the fracture pressure. if burial is sufficiently fast that the shale can’t dewater quickly enough. There has been. Unfortunately. and resistivity. Overburden in the subsided portion is higher and. and to predict hydrocarbon entrapment and migration. Some have tried to refer to hard pressures as anything requiring 16 lb/gal mud. This is known as disequilibrium compaction. deepwater drilling has shown that 16 lb/gal mud might always exceed the fracture gradient.com FEBRUARY 2002 THE LEADING EDGE 173 . Conclusion. This term is often used interchangeably with overpressure. Another term that has been avoided is “hard pressure. Idealized illustration of centroid concept. Much has been done to apply an understanding of pressures to improve drilling safety. A few commonly used terms have not been discussed here.Bruce@BHPBilliton. and it has become common to apply this term when equivalent mud weights exceed a certain value. It may be best to keep away from terms that have gained “baggage” through misuse. but that can cause confusion in other ways. Applying pressure concepts to petroleum exploration and development is the next and significantly more interesting step to understanding pressures and their implications for our work. for example. Figure 11.

- Assignment I SKPU1123 1213 2Uploaded byRajab Ali
- Pore Pressure Basic LevelUploaded byAmlk Martinez
- Pressure PredictionUploaded byLeopard Eyes
- Full Text%2C Master Thesis%2C Babak Mohammadi %286200532%29Uploaded byIFTIKUET
- 00027488- Bowers MethodUploaded byEnrique Daniel Contreras Avila
- MSEC2019_3108_newUploaded byDavide Piovesan
- 7. Pore PressureUploaded bydriller22
- 09 Drilling Hydraulics HydrostaticsUploaded bytotos20
- FS-gatesUploaded bysanbarun
- Reservoir GeologyUploaded byMehrnoosh Aref
- Pan System Type CurvesUploaded bymemos2011
- Formation PressureUploaded byJim Bode
- ARMA-06-916dfadfdUploaded byRaul Dolo Quinones
- Methods of Pore Pressure DetectionUploaded byAlexandru Spanu
- SPE 156337 MS CompressibilityUploaded byCamilaAriza
- Liquid and Gas SizingUploaded byVishy
- Permeability ConsiderationUploaded bysumprerona
- Advective and Dispersive MixingUploaded bymariush
- PETE 331-Session 2-07_10_2011Uploaded byrustampenji
- lab1rfe12.docUploaded bya3007707
- fluid statics.pdfUploaded byratnabooks
- theUploaded bydeogmozyx
- Physical Properties of Aggregates 1Uploaded byAhmed Bilal Siddiqui
- Hydraulics CalculationUploaded bySudish Bhat
- 5-In SG 15K GAUGE CARRIER - Statement of Design & Manufacturing BasisUploaded byAnne Sophia
- SPE-144208-MSUploaded byKilaparthi Satyavamma
- Weymouth EquationUploaded byCHANADAS
- Geometry and Formation of Gypsum Veins in MudstonesUploaded byLidia Nutu
- SPE-123561-MSUploaded byJosé Timaná
- Numerical Integration No.1Uploaded bySyra Cos

- Decifrando a TerraUploaded byAna Araújo
- Oliva FieldUploaded byAna Araújo
- 7 - Estratigrafia Bacias costeirasUploaded byMarcela Ribeiro Cezar
- Pefilagem Geofisica em Poço aberto (1990) - Geraldo Girão Nery[1]Uploaded byAna Araújo
- Zoback Et Al 1993 Stresses in the Lithosphere and Sedimentary Basin FormationUploaded byAna Araújo
- Oslo - Porosity LogsUploaded bychutule
- 00. Petroleum Geology of the Campos and Santos BasinsUploaded byAna Araújo
- Ajuste de histórico, mapas de pressão e saturação_ValmirRissoUploaded byAna Araújo
- GEOFÍSICA BÁSICAUploaded byAna Araújo
- An Outline of the Geology and Petroleum Systems of the Paleozoic Interior Basin of South AmericaUploaded byAna Araújo
- Obtenção de Dados de Saturação e pressão por meio de sismica 4D - Rafael Medeiros de SouzaUploaded byAna Araújo
- Facies ModelsUploaded byAna Araújo
- Facies ModelsUploaded byAna Araújo
- Estratigrafia - INTRODUÇÃO AO ESTUDO DE ESTRATIGRAFIA[1]Uploaded byAna Araújo
- Puc Sismica Time LapseUploaded byAna Araújo

- Rainfall FLAC (2)Uploaded byRajni Sharma
- permeability -4 Mtech.pptxUploaded byViky Shah
- Tunnels in Cohesion Less SoilUploaded bySiddeshkn Siddesh
- CE5101 Lecture 3 - Seepage Theory and Flow Nets (SEP 2011)Uploaded bybsitler
- Wrana-2015-4a (2)Uploaded bycelalunal58
- Soil MechanicsUploaded byAloke Majumder
- Side Resistance Capacity of pilesUploaded bymalangpeer
- Vertical Stress in the GroundUploaded bysk m hassan
- Triaxial Testing - Soil Mechanics - Laboratory WorkUploaded bytolga
- Pile Load Capacity – Calculation MethodsUploaded byIbrain Paucar Medina
- n Lj 82201406Uploaded byKamel Fedaoui
- Seepage Theory and Flow Nets (13 SEP 2011)Uploaded bybsitler
- Ch3 Stres GroundUploaded byCristian Giurgea
- Shear Strength of SoilUploaded byNiraj Bohara
- Geotech Solved ExamplesUploaded byRaj Nigam
- Vertical Stress in the GroundUploaded byRabindraSubedi
- Application of Two-dimensional Effective StressUploaded byshachen2014
- Ch9 Soil Strength and Slope StabilityUploaded bytutisarmiento1
- Design considerations for offshore piles.pdfUploaded byarkadjyothiprakash
- 26_31_engUploaded byYisus Cuautle
- Infiltration and GW Flow - Influence on Tunnel Face StabilityUploaded byVinodh Kumar Yalla
- Budhu Soil Mechanics Foundations 3rd TxtbkUploaded byNadeem Abbasi
- Soil Plug Capacity in Pile DrivingUploaded byΈνκινουαν Κόγκ Αδάμου
- Martin2002bUploaded byFranco04
- Broere_2015Uploaded byandresmelod
- Geotechnical EngineeringUploaded byhahadu
- Tutorial 07 Finite Element Groundwater SeepageUploaded byDheka Lazuardi
- fisoilUploaded byRaja Sundaram
- 4th sem GTUploaded byASHIK BELLARY
- soil stressesUploaded byHarry Basada