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
H2S 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 - pp) + pp
Equating fracture propagation pressure to
minimum stress gives
pfp = 1/3(ob - pp) + pp
 The Hubbert & Willis Equation
pfp = 1/3(ob - 2pp) (minimum)

pfp = 1/2(ob - pp) (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 = KMKev
 Matthews and Kelly
eH = KMKev
KMK = matrix stress coefficient

Including pore pressure

H = KMK(ob - pp) + pp
 Matthews and Kelly
Equating fracture initiation pressure to the
minimum in situ horizontal stress gives
pfi = KMK(ob - pp) + pp
and
gfi = KMK(gob - gp) + gp
 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
For 8110
gfi = 0.69(1 - .465) + .465
gfi = 0.834 psi/ft

For the undercompacted

interval at 15,050, the
equivalent depth is
KMK = 0.61 determined by:

KMK = 0.69 De =
[15050-(.815*15050)]/.535
= 5204
 Example 4.8
gfi = 0.61*(1-.815)+.815 = .928 psi/ft

Note: Overburden gradient was assumed to

be 1.0 psi/ft
 Penebakers Gulf Coast
gfi = Kp(gob - gp) + gp

where Kp is Penebakers effective 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
gfi = 0.77(0.945 - 0.465) + 0.465
gfi = 0.835 psi/ft
At 15050
gfi = 0.94(0.984 - 0.815) + 0.815
gfi = 0.974 psi/ft
 Eatons Gulf Coast Correlation
Based on offshore LA in moderate water
depths
E
g fi = (g ob g p ) + g p
1 E
Note the bracketed Poisson' s ratio term
is an effective stress ratio
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.

 Christmans approach
Christman took 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
Christman also 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
gfi = 0.6 * (0.73-0.452) + 0.452
gfi = 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
How much surface pressure will be
required to test the casing seat to a
10.0 ppg 14.0 ppg equivalent?

ps = (EMW - MW) * 0.052 * TVDshoe

ps = (14.0 - 10.0) * 0.052 * 4000
4000 ps = 832 psi
LOT
 Rupture

Leak-off

Propagation
Example 4.22 - 2
Interpret the leak-off test.
 Solution
Pfi = 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
Pfi = 4337 psi = 0.789 psi/ft = 15.17 ppg
 What could cause this?

Poor Cement Job

 Example
Surface hole is drilled
to 1500 and pipe is 9.5 ppg
set. About 20 of new
hole is drilled after
cementing. The shoe 1500
needs to hole 14.0 ppg
equivalent on a leak
off test. Mud in the
hole has a density of
9.5 ppg.
 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 10.2 ppg
and the mud weight is
10.2 ppg. What is the
1500
maximum casing
pressure that the
casing seat can
withstand without 4500
fracturing?
 Example
Max. CP = (EMW - MW) * .052 * TVDshoe

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