@
A Review of Geopressured Evaluation
From Well Logs Louisiana Gulf Coast
R. A. Lane, SPE-AIME, Shell Oil CO.
L, A. McPherson,* SPE-AIME, Shell Development Co.
Introduction
Since the beginning of geopressured drilling in the
Louisiana Gulf Coast, : empts have been made to
quantify log parameters as an aid in pressure prediction.
In 1965, Hottman and Johnson presented an empiri-
cal correlation relating Am.mal formation pressures to
departures from normal shale velocity and resistivity
trends observed in Gulf Coast formations. These rela-
tionships have been used widely for predicting younger
Tertiary abnormal pressures, although both sets of data
were obtained from Miocene-Oligocene sediments.
In recent years, other empirical but large] y un-
documented resistivity relationships, based chiefly on
mud- weight observations, have been established and are
commonly used offshore. These account for local trend
anomalies wherein the Hottman and Johnson resistivity
relationship is not suitabi y accurate. Some of these er-
ratic trends have been found to be systematic either in
kind or areal extent and, once recognized, can be inter-
preted. In 1972, while this study was in progress,
Eaton2 suggested that variations in overburden gradient
might be responsible for irregularities in departure
trends.
Since 1965, drilling activity has moved farther off-
shore into younger Pleisto-Pliocer.e sediments. With the
onset of production in these newer fields, some 50 ad-
ditional pressure measurements in virgin geopre~-
sured reservoirs have become available. The density 1C6
has become the primary porosity log offshore, and the
*Now with Shell 011 Co.. New Orleana, La.
*
Recent Gulf Coast drilling experience and log data reveal irregularities in resistivity trends.
Anomalies caused by age boundaries, younger sediments, and other phenomena muy make
log relationdtips di~cult to apply. The geographic distribution and interpretation techniques
for some of these anomalies are presented. Resistivity-trend departurelpressure relationships
are examined.
SEPTEMBER, 1976
prevalence of density data provides a meand to calculate
overburden gradients in these fields. It is considered
timely to include the new data with those of Hottman
and Johnson. Resistivit y data are emphasized because
the resistivity device often is the only log run over suf-
ficient intervals of borehole.
Pressure estimation
To estimate formation pressures from logs in the Gulf
Coast, the following information is necessary: (1) an
established normal log response trend in hydropressured
shales, (2) an observed departure from the normal
trend, and (3) an empirical relationship between this
trend departure and formation pressure gradient.
Hydropressured Trends
The first trends of sonic and. resistivity dztti for the
offshore Miocene-Oligocene were presented by
Hottman and Johnson. These trends are averages of
early observed data in the Louisiana Gulf Coast. How-
ever, since compaction trends probably depend not only
on depth but also on rate of compaction, cementation,
and overburden, these Miocene-O1igoccne data should
not necessarilyy apply to the Pleisto-Pliocene sediments
presently being explored. Fig. 1 shows the observed
normal pressure resistivity trends superimposed on an
age-correlation dip section from Atchafalaya Bay
through Vermilion Block 321. Because of sediment
age, the Hottman and Johnson trends apply to Atcha-
falaya Bay and Eugene Island Block 100. However,
%3
 ,
because of tie younger sediments encountered, some
deviation might be expected from Eugene Island Block
188 gulfward.
Note that the trend of Eugene Island Block 276 has a
resistivity shift at the paleo-marker at about 7,500 ft.
Note also that the normal-trend section at Ship Shoal
Block 274 is very short and that no obvious trend exists
at Vermilion Block 321. Although other local
anomalies in other areas of the Gulf arc likely, the trend
situations found along the dip section are analyzed by
describing five general cases.
Case 1 Normal Miocene-Type Trends. These ap-
pear to be applicable near shore in Miocene sections
and in long Pliocene sections. Although some shallow
Pleistocene is present in these areas, geopressured occur
much deeper in the section. Discrepancies owing to
Pleistocene sediments are unimportant, as illustrated in
Fig. 2, and these trends are zimilar to the Hottman-
Johnson data.
case 2 Long Pleistocene Sections With Geopres-
sured Within Pliocene. Fig. 3 shows resistivity, acous-
tic, and density data with percent sand from Eugene k.-
land Block 276 field. Note that one line could be drawn
through the ac{ ustic data to yield a normal-trend line.
However, the density and resistivity trends exhibit ob-
vious departures at Paleo-Marker B (base Pleistocene)
and pressure data confirm that two normal trends are
actual] y present.
There appears to be a shale compaction or composi-
tion change at PaIeo-Marker B not associated with geo-
pressured. This trend shift has been observed in tdl the
wells at Eugene Island Block 276 field. It rdso has been
observed at South Marsh Island Block 73 field (Fig. 4)
at a paleo-marker and in East Cameron Block 185 (Fig.
5, not as obvious), again at a paleo-marker. These three
AT CHAFALAYA El.
BAY BLK.
2,000 - ----
---
--. +--
4,000 -
---
6/200 -
8/300 -
10,000
12,000 -
14,000 -
16000 -
lls/Joo~
Fig. 1 Louisiana Gulf Coast approximate age-correlation dip section.
%4
examples indicate that this shift usually occurs at a
paleo-msrker and in proximate areas in the Gulf. They
also illustrate why paleo-markers should be included as
supplementary data on all pressure plots.
Pressure detection can be difficult when geopressured
initiate in the interval between normal trends, as in East
Cameron 185 (Fig. 5). However, this shift thickness
appears to be a fairly uniform 600 to 800 ft and the
resistivity ratio (shift) is almost constani at about 0.75.
Once recognized, transparent overlays can be con-
structed that define the onset of geopressured within the
transition zone between normal trends.
Case 3 Long Pleistocene Sections With Pressures
Initiating at Pliocene Contact. An example of this is
Ship Shoal Block 230 field with the interpretation as
shown in Fig. 6. Although the normal section is very
short, the trend appears to be valid.
Case 4 Long Pleistocene Section With Observable
Trend Line and Pressures Initiating Within Pleisto-
cene. An example of this is Ship Shoal Block 274 with
the interpretation as shown in Fig. 7.
Case 5 Long Pleistocene Section With Abnor-
mally High Resistivities in Long, Normally Pt es-
sured Shale Sections. Several fields, including South
Marsh Island Block 115, Eugene Island Block 331, and
Vermilion Block 321, appear to have this type of anom-
aly that makes normal-trend definition difficult to as-
sess. Fig. 8 presents a data set from Vermilion Block
321. An example of this case has been investigated
more fully.
Investigatio~~ of Case 5. An apparently normal straight-
line acoustic trend is evident through the high-resis-
tivity shale sections. These high-resistivity shaie anom-
PALEO CONTROL
EXTRAPOLATE
El. El. $.$. VER.
ICQ BLK. 188 9LK. 276 BLK. 274 8LK. 321
--- ----- ---
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
03PWALE0 WADn RKISTIVITY (Q -m) fLT I p S[C/fl) P b (!#CC) MUDW. [PPCI

x 1000 2 .4 1 10 15 20 70 100 150 200 2.0 2I 22 23 24 25 10 12 14 Is 18

t.

4-

6-

a-

10-

1?-

14-

16-

Fig, 2 Trend interpretations, OCS-G 0798 lease, Eugene island Piock 100 field.

OfPTH/PALIO SAND% RfSISllVllY (it-m) h~ [p s[c/fll ~b (g/CC) HODVI IPPCI

x 1040 100 0 2 .4 7 10 15 20 70 Ico 150 2W ?0 21 22 ?3 24 25 10 12 14 16 18

2-

4-

s- A

-0 ,,,
1,
8- ITOP ?, ~: I
-c

10-
MEA
BHP

12-

14-
I

16-
Fig. 3 Trend interpretations, OCS-G 0985 lease, Eugene Island Block 278 fieid.

DEPIH/PALIO SABO% ll[SISTIVilY (.Q -m) AI (# SfC/ill Pb (dCC) lluOWT. (PPC)

x 1000 100 0 2 4 1 10 15 20 10 100 150 2@l 20 ?1 22 t3 24 2$ [0 12 14 16 10

2-

4-

-A
s- Y
B

8-

10-
-c

12. d
-D
MEA
BHP
14-

14~

Fig. 4 Trend interpretations, OCS-G 1194 lease, South Marsh Island Block 73 field.
 .-
+

OfPIHIML[O size% MSl, W?? (Q-m) AT (IL SfC/fl) #b (@! WOW. IW6)

IIMO 100 0 ?0 100 150 2M 20 21 22 23 24 25 10 12 14 16 N

101

B
12

14 ~ FRoM PREV1OUS WELLS -

16t
I 1111111
Fig. 5 Trend interpretations, OCS-G 2035 ieaae, East Cameron Biock 185 fieid.

OfPTHIPALfO MWD% Rf$lSWll (0 -m) AT (p StC/fT) P b (91CC) Ullo w, (PPCI

I 1040 100 0 ~ .4 7 10 Is 20 70 100 1s0 Ml

3:
\

10-

12-

14-

.
la-

Fig. 6 Trend interpretations, OCS-G 1026 iease, Ship Shoal Biock 230 field.

OfPTH/PAlfO Wlo m R151S11V11Y

(Q -m) AT ( P :fC/111 P&9/cc) WI w [PPCI

I 1000 100 0 2 .4 7 10 Is 20 70 100 150 204 ?0 ?1 ?2 23 ?4 23 10 12 14 16 18

?-

$-

6-

1-

10-- A

12-

14-

.
I1-

Fig. 7 Wend interpretations, OCS-G 1043 lease, Ship Shoal Biock 274 fieid.

Y66 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 ..
.

OfPTH/MLfO $Allo% RUISIIWTV (~ -m) Al (p SfC/Fl) Ph (dd 12uam. (PP6)

x 10( 100 0 2.0 2 I 2; 23 24 25 10 12 14 H 10

12

14

16

Fig. 8 Trend interpretations, OCS-G 2088 lease, Vermilion Block 321.

alies, therefore, could be due to either salinity or to cl~y tical comparison technique, where an observed
conductivityy changes in the section. Clean shales are abnormal-trend value is compared with an equal
rare in the Gulf Coast. Mineralogical analyses indicate normal-trend value and the overburden between them is
typical shales contain 30- to 50-percent quard fines. used to calculate formation pressure, and the horizontal
These observations provide a basis for considering the comparison technique, where observed abnormal-trend
shales to be quite similar to very shaly sands and for and extrapolated normal-trend values are compared at
describing their conductivities by the Waxman-Smits3 the same depth and related empirically to formation
equation: pressures.
All the data presented in this paper are derived from
the horizontal method, since the two parameters pre-
Co=-&e QD+C w), ................ .(1) sented are ai the same depth and, hence, at appr@xi-
matel y the same temperature.
whe~
Pressure Gradient Relationships
Co= specified conductance of sand, 100-percent
saturated with aqueous salt solution Shale Resiativity Relationships. The resistivity pres-
FR* = formation resistivity factcr for shaly sands sure data of Hottrnan-Johnson can be replcmed on a co-
B,= equivalent conductance of clay-exchange ordinate scale as shown in Fig, 10. The relationship may
cations be expressed approximately by the equation
Q= effective concentration of clay-exchange
cations
CW= specific conductance of aqueous electrolyte
gp=0.465+m
(1-* ) , 8.
......... . .(2)
solution.
Analyses were made of shale sidewall samples from
a well (smtth Marsh Island Block 115, Well A) similar 10G VAt Ut$

to the one shown in Fig. 8. Laboratory measurements x

1
T
@
x <Alc,>lkl to. m s? 1

)
SrDf - w~t; SAMPLE
of QO and soluble chloride contents coupled ,vith WIT nRr,,l NG MUD
C0t47AhNNA7E0

temperature-corrected B values (as described by I

Waxman and Thomas4) indicate that the anomalous re-
sistivities are caused by changes in salinity and not
porosity or lithology. A comparison of observed log LOG VAIUE
s
values with laboratory-calculated resistivities (Eq. 1)
over the sampled intervals using laboratory data (sup-
plied by Waxman) is shown in Fig. 9. They are in ex-
tl
cellent agreement.
The Fig. 9 data also indicate that, in practice, the
normal-trend line should be drawn through the lower-
-_ __x

1 resistivity (higher sand-shale ratio) sections as shown in

I Fig. 8. - -
9 1- ~L 1 1 1 1
Departures From Hydropreasured Trenda Related to 04 0s 06 07 08 09 10 11

Geoprewures RfSl$TIVIT V,lOMM -M)

(After w.-)

Two techniques have been used in the past for compr- Fig. 9 Shale resistivities vs depth, 0C8-G 2094 No. A,
ing departures from nonmal trends. These are the ver- South Marsh Island Block 115.

SWTEMBER, 1976 %7
 where
gp = formation pressure gradient
m= slope
R$h~~= observed shale resistivity
R,hN = normal shale resistivity.
A least-squares fit of these data forced through (gP =
+.+++.~+-l
0.465 at R8hoEjR,M = 1.0) yields m = 0.592.
To investigate the validity of the resistivity relation-
,,-+1+.. ,.
;7T?H-H ship and review the more recent offshore Louisiana
data all reliable BHP data in virgin, geopressured res-
ervoirs were collected. The results (shown in Table 1)
am plotted in Fig. 11. An unfmved least-squares fit of
the data yields m = 0.519. All new data were obtained
from short normal electric logs to facilitate comparison
with the Hottman and Johnson data.
An attempt was then made to incorporate overburden
gradient into the pressure-msistivity relationships to de-
termine whether a correlation existed. Offshore overbur-
den gradients wem determined chiefly from composite
-iJi-L!iQ density-log responses using a mean sea-level depth
damm. These are presented in Fig. 12. Because of a
scarcity of suitable density logs, onshore Louisiana
overburden gradients were more difficult to establish.
Gravimeter data for Cote Blanche Island and Iowa
fieldss were ultimately used but are confirmed by avail-
able derisity-log data. These overburden stresses were
applied to Johnsons pressure points (Table 2). Next, all
Fig. 10 Pressure-gradient/resistivity relationship of data points were grouped in three categories:
Hottman and Johnson.
0,85< go s 0.90
0.90< go s 0,95
0.95 c go = 1.00,
where gO = overburden gradient.
Fig. 13 presents the dat~ and the least-squares-fit
Lo
lines through the du se groups. The relationships are
forced through the point where gP = 0.465 and resistiv-
I--i-l!l ,8M-b*~
.9 -1 9m. lns 95a L-u
ity ratio = 1.0. The standard deviations and coefficients
of determinations presented are for the unforced fits that
are very similar (see Table 3).
.8

.1
-t--

,6 \
?
i
m??? ~
n~

.-j -
-
..-.
1
1 -+
4
1=
,, I I
I I I
.4 $ .6 .7 .a .9 Ln Y ,9
#,(Pw n.)
~mm I ~mlffl I b (~1~1 )
Ftg. 11 Presswe-gre..t&:istivity relationships --
Fig. 12 Overburden gradients.

%8 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 The dependence of the trend departure data on over-
burden is obvious. The data for the younger (less dense)
sediments farther offshore show lower pressure gra-
dients (for the same resistivity ratio) than those pre-
dicted by the Johnson trend. The results are in agree-
ment with observed mud- weight requirements and other
drilling and production histories.
ShaIe Acoustic Travel-Time Relationships. To re-
evaluate Hottmans acoustic pressure relationship, the
acoustic data available offshore were collected (Table
4), but were found to be meager because (1) few acous-
tic logs are available ovsr entire sections, so normal 1
trends are diftlcult to establish, and (2) few bottom-hole
pressure analyses are available from wells with acoustic
logs since density logs are the primary porosity tools in
development programs.
Fig. 14 presents the acoustic relationships from re-
cent offshore data together with Hottmans. They show
good agreement and augment considerably the soft
geopressured region of Hottrnans empirical trend.
Conclusions
1, Abnoimal pressure-resistivity trend departure rela-

TABLE 1 NEW OFRHORE PRESSURE-RESISTMTV DATA

Depth Pressure
Field Well - (ft) .(psi) (P%) R8~oBlRItN (p%t)
Eugene Island A 19,605 6,213 0.575 0.810 0.937 Miocetie
Block 18 B 12,500 9,280 0.740 0.400 0.954 Miocene
Eugene Island c 13,020 9,345 0.717 0.568 C.959 Miocene
Block 100
Eugene Island D 9446 4,953 0.524 0.918 0.891 Pliocene
Block 276 E 10,269 5,892 0.57A 0.842 0.894 Pliocene
F 9,361 4,488 0.479 0.308 0.891 Pliocene
10,023 5,250 0.523 0.861 0894 Pliocene
G 10,929 6,107 0.559 0.816 0.895 Pliocene
H 10,230 5,872 0.574 0.872 0.894 Pliocene
10,483 6,097 0.582 0.837 0.694 Pliocene
I 10,517 6,126 0.562 0.792 0.895 Pliocene
J 10,516 5,944 0.565 0.792 0.695 Pliocene
10,857 6,002 0.553 0.895 Pliocere
10,758 6,181 0.574 U% 0.895 Pliocene
11,186 6,258 0.559 0.700 0.896 Pliocene
10,230 5,073 9.496 0.903 0.894 Pliocene
11,395 6,048 0.530 0.800 0.697 Pliocane
11,913 8,155 0.684 0.636 0.900 Pliocene
10,250 5,139 0.501 0.907 0.894 Pliocene
10,297 5,282 0,511 0.83: 0.894 Pliocene
Q 9,531 4,839 0.514 0.875 0.892 Pliocene
9,571 4,907 0.513 0.875 0.692 Pliocene
R 9,469 4,763 0.503 0.921 0.892 ITiocene
10,161 5,984 0.587 0.904 0.894 p!iocene
South Marsh Island s 12417 7,580 0.610 0,742 0.907 Pliocene
Block 73 T 12,345 6,131 0.497 0.857 0.907 Pliocene
u 13,023 6,449 0.495 0.902 0.910 Pliocene
12,<33 5,936 0.477 0.917 0.907 Pliocene -
J 11,979 6,564 0.548 0.745 0.905 Pliocene
x 11,C25 6,989 0.591 0.714 0.305 Pliocene
Ship Shoal Y 6,50/ 3,509 0.539 0.844 0.888 Pliocene
Block 230 6,604 3,710 0.562 0.8~7 0.889 Pliocene
AZA 6,344 3,484 0.549 0.857 0.866 Pliocene
Ship Shoal DB 9,053 5,372 0.553 0.745 0941 Pleistocene
Block 274 8,966 5,410 0.6!J3 0.745 0.940 Pleiswcene
cc 8,314 5,055 0.608 i).762 0.938 Pleistocene
C)D 8,306 5,043 0.607 0.750 0.938 Pleistocene
8,206 5,047 0.615 0.750 0.936 Pleistocene
8,864 5,380 0.607 0.768 0.940 Pleistocene
Ba: Marchand 13,076 8,903 0.680 0.615 0.940 Miocen~
Block 2 13,086 8,689 0.678 0,657 0.940 Miocene
12,391 8,120 0.655 0.714 0.937 Miocene
13,312 9,035 0.679 0.621 0.942 Miocene
12,353 6,644 0.554 0.763 0.940 Miocene
12,087 7,487 0.619 0.788 0.935 l~iocene
12,200 7,631 0.625 0.726 0.936 Miocene
12,016 6,197 0.516 0.821 0.935 Miocene
12,324 8,104 0.658 0.667 0.937 Miocene
NN 12,747 8,350 0.655 0.714 0.338 Miocene
13,130 8,278 0.630 0.655 0.940 Miocene
00 10,938 5,398 0.493 0.903 0.930 Miocene
11,203 6,337 0.566 0.756 0.932 Miocene
West Cameron Pp 11,494 9,397 0.816 0.264 0.920 Miocene
Block 192

SEPTEMBER, 1976
 TABLE 2 PRESSURE-RESISTIWfY DATA FROM HOllMAN MD JO~SON
Depth Pressura
Field Well -__@_ (psi) (P%) RhoBIRdw (P%t) Age
Belle River 12,400 10,240 0.826 0.385 0.973
Chalkley 10,070 7,500 0.745 0.588 0,941 Oligocene
10,150 8,000 0.788 0,513 0.942 Oligocene
D 13,100 11,600 0.885 0.238 0.960 Oligocene
E 9,370 5,000 0.534 0.870 0.938 Oligocene
Eugene Island 12,300 6,350 0.516 0.870 0.951 Miocene
Block 100 : 12,500 6,440 0.515 0.769 0.953 Miocene
H 14,000 11,500 0.821 0.417 0.867 Miocene
Iowa I 10,948 7,970 0.726 0.562 0.946 Oligocene
10,300 7,800 0.704 0.521 0.945 Oligocene
i 10,750 7,600 0.707 0.565 0.945 Oligocene
Kings Bayou L 12,900 11,000 0.653 0.303 0.959 Oligocene
North Jeanerette M 13,844 7,200 0.520 0.908 0.982 Miocene
N 15,.353 12,100 0.788 0.435 0.891 Miocene
North Oesun o 12,600 9,000 0.714 0.625 0.975 Oligocene
12,800 9,000 0.698 0.568 0.976 Oligocene
: 11,750 6,700 0.740 0.625 0.970 Oligocene
R 14,550 10,800 0.742 9.540 0.986 Oligocene
North Sabine Lake s 11,070 9,400 0.849 0.256 0.946 Oligocene
South Chauvin T 11,900 8,100 0.681 0.588 0.970 Miocene
u 13,600 10,900 0.801 0.426 0.96U Miocene
Vlterbo v 10,000 8,750 0.875 0.312 0.941 Oligocene
West Lake Verret w 10,600 7,680 0.711 0.625 0.964 Miocene
Cameron Ph. 12,700 11,150 0.878 0.357 0.958 Oligocene?
13,500 11,600 0.859 0.400 0.963 Oligocene?
13,950 12,500 0.896 0.364 0.966 Oligocene?

:0

3
I

0.4

05

REV ~
%

:
.
g 07
R ELATIONSHIPOF HOTT . ,~
1 *
1

-H--H+Y-PRIH-H 88

09

I
I ,,.
.

a s
I 5 6 ,7 I .9 10 .

,.
! . m
*(PWfl , q-.@lN(Kc /fT.)
Fig. 13 Pressure-gradient/resistivity relationships Fig. 14 Pressure- radient/interval-transit-time
all points. re7ationship.

970 IoURNALOFFETGOLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 TAELE 3 STANDARD DEVfAT~NS AND COEFFICtENTS OF DETERMINATIONS
FOR UNFORCED FtTS
Standard Deviation Coefficient ;!
Group (psi/ft) (ppg) Determination Number of Points
Johnsons data 0.0344 0.661 0.9174 26
Reeent offshore data 0.0281 0.560 0.8367 53
Combined data 0.0323 0.621 0.9253 79
0.65< g. s 0.90 0.0303 0.583 0.5224 24
0.90< go== 0.95 0.0299 0.575 0.9126 35
o.85<g, s 1.00 0.0382 0.735 0.9?14 20

TABLE 4 NEW OFFS+DRE PRESSURE-ACOUSTIC DATA

Pressure A TOB- AT,q
Field _Well _Depth (psi) (p%ft) @ec/ft)
Eugene lslaI,d A 9,531 4,888 0.514 5
Block 276 B 9,463 1,763 0!503 3
10,161 5,964 0.587
Bay Marchand C 13,076 8,903 0.680 1!
Block 2 D 13,312 9,035 0.879 10
E 13,086 8,869 0.678 10

tionships we dependent on overburden stress. The ob-
served variance can account for significant changes in
pressure prediction from log plots.
2. Younger reeks (Pleisto-Pliocene) appear to be
generally less dense per equivalent depth than older
(Mio-Oligocene) sdrnents.
3. Normal resistivity trends offshore frequently show
reversals not associated with abnormal pressure. These
usually reflect major depositional boundaries, often oc-
curring at the base of Pleistocene or some other promi-
nent paleo-marker.
4. Gross water-salinity changes also account for
spurious resistivity anomalies. These usually occur in
low sand-shale ratio intervals. Acoustic and density logs
that are relatively unaffected by salinity change can
Original manuacripr received in Society of Petroleum Engineers office July 11,
1974. Paper accepted for publication Oat, 16, 1974 Revised manuecriDt
ceived May 28.1976. Paper (WE 60S3) was first Dresentad at tha SPE-AIME
Annual Fall Meeting, held in Houeton. Oct. 6-9, 1974. @ Copyright 1976 Ameri-
can Institute of Mining, Metallurgical. and Petroleum Engmeera. Inc.
be used to recognize and resolve these anomalous
resistivities.
5. Within the limited field sampling available, some
of the resistivity anomalies (in Conclusions 3 and 4)
appear to occur in discrete geographic mess.
Refereneea
1. Hottman, C. E. artd Johnson, R. K.: Estimation of Formation
Pressures From Log-Derived Shale Prcpertiea, J. Per. Tech.
(June 1%5) 717-722 Trans., AIME, 234.
2. Eaton, B. A.: llte Effect of Overburden Stress on Geopreasure
Redcdon From Well Logs,* J. Per. Tech. (Aug. 1972) 929-934.
3. Waxrnan, M. H. and Smite, L. J. M : Ekctricet Cmsductivities
in Oil-Bearing Sttaty Sands, Sot. Per. Eng. J. (June 196S) 107-
12Z Trans., AIME, 243.
4. Waxmarr, M. H. setdThomas, E. C.: E1ectricatConductivities in
Shaty Sands L lhe Relation Between H@ocarbon Saturation
and Resistivity Index. ft. The Temperature Coefficient of Ekctri-
cal Conductivity, J. Pet. Tech. (Feb. 1974) 2 13-22S; Trtms.,
AIME, 257.
re-
4Sfh
5. Stuart, C. A.: Geopressured, Supplement to Proceedings of the
Second Symposium on Abnormal Subsurface Ressure, Baton
Rouge, La., Jm. 1970. ~T