Estimation of Formation Pressures from Log-Derived
Shale Properties
C. E. HOHMANN
R. K. JOHNSON
JUNIOR MEMBER A/ME
ABSTRACT
Fluid pressure within the pore space of shales can be
determined by using data obtained from both acoustic
and resistivity logs. The method involves establishing rela-
tionships between the common logarithm of shale transit
time or shale resistivity and depth for hydrostatic-pres-
sure formations. On a plot of transit time vs depth, a
linear relationship is generally observed, whereas on a
plot ot resistivity vs depth, a nonlinear trend exists. Diver-
gence of observed transit time or resistivity values from
those obtained from established normal compaction trends
under hydrostatic pressure conditions is a measure of the
pore fluid pressure in the shale and, thus, in adjacent
isolated permeable formations. This relationship has been
empirically established with actual pressure measurements
in adjacent permeable formations. The use of these data
and this method permits the interpretation of fluid pres-
sure from acoustic and resistivity measurements with an
accuracy of approximately 0.04 psi/ft, or about 400 psi
at 10,000 ft. The standard deviation for the resistivity
method is 0.022 psi!.ft, and for the acoustic method 0.020
psi/ft.
Knowledge of the first occurrence of overpressures, and
of the precise pressure-depth relationship in a geologic
province, enables improvements in drilling techniques,
casing programs, completion methods and reservoir eval-
uations.
INTRODUCTION
GENERAL STATEMENT
Operators engaged in the search for and production of
hydrocarbon reserves in Tertiary basins are more and
more frequently confronted with complications associated
with overpressured (abnormally high fluid pressure) for-
mations. This is particularly true in the Texas-Louisiana
Gulf Coast area. The problems associated with these
formations are of direct concern to the combined activi-
ties of all phases of operations, i.e., geophysical, drilling,
geological and petroleum engineering.'" Knowledge. of
the pressure distribution of a given area of operatiOns
would greatly reduce the magnitude of many of these
complexities and in some cases would completely elimi-
nate specific problems.
This paper presents techniques developed for estimat-
ing formation pressures from interpretations of acoustic
and electric log data. Specifically, the acoustical and
electrical properties of shales, reflected by conventional
Original manuscript received in Society of Petroleum Engineers office
Jan. 8 1965. Revised manuscript received April 26. 1965. Paper (SPE
1110) to be presented at 40th Annual SPE' Fall Meeting in Denver, Colo..
Oct. 31·6, 1965.
1References given at end of paper.
JUNE, 1965
SHELL DEVELOPMENT CO.
HOUSTON, TEX.
SHELL OIL CO.
NEW ORLEANS, LA.
acoustic and electrical surveys, can be used to infer cer-
tain reservoir properties, such as formation pressure, at
any level in a well. It has been possible ~o develop the~e
techniques because of a firm understandmg of the baSIC
principles that govern and apply to such overpressured
provinces.
NORMAL PRESSURES
Normal pressures refer to formation pressures which
are approximately equal to the hydrostatic head of a col-
umn of water of equal depth. If the formations were
opened to the atmosphere, a column of water from the
ground surface to the subsurface formation depth would
balance the formation pressure. On the Gulf Coast, the
shallow, predominantly sand formations contain fl~ids
which are under hydrostatic pressure. These formations
are said to be normally pressured or to have a normal
pressure gradient. * Experience has shown that the normal
pressure gradient on the Gulf Coast is approximately 0.465
psi/ft of depth.
OVERPRESSURES
Formations with pressures higher than hydrostatic are
encountered at varying depths in many areas. These
formations are referred to as being abnormally pressured,
abnormally high pressured, or overpressured. Formation
pressures up to twice the, hydrostatic pressure have been
observed. These formations require extreme care and
much expense to drill and to exploit.
COMPACTION-FLUID PRESSURE RELATIONS
THEORY
The generation of overpressured formations in Tertiary
sections of the Gulf Coast and several other Tertiary sedi-
mentary basins is, in general terms, considered to be pri-
marily the result of oompaction phenomena.' This por-
tion of the paper presents a brief review of the theory
which associates compaction and fluid pressure relations,
and should thus provide the necessary background for
an understanding of the techniques presented. See Hubbert
and Rubey' for a more comprehensive treatment of this
subject.
The theory of the consolidation of a water-saturated
clay' has been well established by workers in soil me-
chanics. The concept is explained by a model with perfo-
rated metal plates separated by metal springs and water
and enclosed in a cylindrical tube. Fig. 1 is a schematic
representation of such a model (see Ref. 5, Fig. 27, page
74). The springs simulate communication between clay
particles, and the plates simulate the clay particles. Mano-
*Pressure gradient is defined as p/D. where p is the reservoir pressure
at depth D.
717
meters are used to record the fluid pressure. Upon appli-
cation of pressure to the uppermost plate, the height of
the springs between the plates remains unchanged as long
as no water escapes from the system. Thus, in the initial
stage the applied pressure is supported entirely by the
equal and opposite pressure of the water.
A useful manner of recording this pressure is in terms
of the ratio of the fluid pressure p to the total pressure
S, which is defined as .\ and is symbolically represented
by Eq. 1:
.\= ~-. (1)
At conditions for Stage A in Fig. 1, .\ has a value of 1;
the system is overpressured. As water is allowed to escape
from the system, the plates move downward slightly (the
system compacts), and the springs carry part of the ap-
plied load. As more and more water is allowed to escape
from the system, the springs carry a greater share of the
load, and .\ has a value less than 1. Finally, sufficient
water escapes from the system for the springs to attain
their compaction equilibrium. At this stage-terminal
compaction equilibrium-the applied load is supported
jointly by the springs and the water pressure, which is
simply hydrostatic. The value of .\ is approximately 0.465.
This model is analogous to a clay undergoing essentially
uniaxial compaction in response to an axial component
of total stress S (overburden pressure), where
S = p,,,,gD . (2)
Here, ,pb'O is the mean value of the water-saturated bulk
density of the overlying sediments, g is the acceleration
of gravity and D is the depth of burial. Hubbert and
Rubey' (Eqs. 48, 53 and 75) have demonstrated that the
load S is supported jointly by the fluid pressure p and the
grain-to-grain bearing strength a of the clay particles,
where
a= S-p; . (3)
a then is analogous to the support afforded by the springs
in the Terzaghi-Peck model.'
As stated by Hubbert and Rubey,' "The effective stress
a exerted by the porous clay (or by the springs in the
model) depends solely upon the degree of compaction
S
S
A=I A< I> 0.465
STAGE A STAGE
~ PERFORATED PLATES
KI~IIII WATER
FIG. I-SnIF:MATIC REPRESENTATION OF SHALE CO:\IPACTIO'i (AFTER TERZAGHI AND PECK, REF.
718
of the clay, with a increasing continuously as compac-
tion increases. A useful measure of the degree of com-
paction of a clay is its porosity ep, defined as the ratio
of the pore volume to the total volume. Hence, we may
infer that for a given clay there exists for each value
of porosityep some maximum value of effective com-
pressive stress a which the clay can support without furth-
er compaction."
From Eqs. 2 and 3 and from the foregoing, we can
state that the porosityep at a given burial depth D is de-
pendent upon the fluid pressure p. If the fluid pressure is
abnormally high (greater than hydrostatic), the porosity
will be abnormally high for a given burial depth.
Considering the conditions as they exist in the geologic
column, and applying the previous model concept, factors
which can influence the overpressuring of a section are
the ratio of shale thickness to sand thickness, the mean
formation permeability, the elapsed time since deposi-
tion, the rate of deposition and the amount of overburden..
Dickinson' reported on the first recognized association of
the occurrence of overpressures and the relative propor-
tion of sand and shale in the geologic column when he
stated, "Abnormal pressures occur commonly in isolated
porous reservoir beds in thick shale sections developed
below the main sand series". The interrelation of all these
parameters controls the compaction of the sediments.
Overpressuring can result if compaction is restricted.
In the Tertiary sediments of the Gulf Coast, shale inter-
vals of great thickness are frequently encountered. Many
of these intervals are deep-water marine shales contain-
ing isolated sands. These sediments have essentially been
subjected only to uniaxial compaction, the compressive
stress of the overburden. Eqs. 2 and 3 should therefore
apply to such a region.
For a shale to compact, fluids must be removed. Sands,
which are highly permeable media, act as avenues of fluid
escape. These sands may be thought of as pipelines. The
near-absence of sands in thick shales reduces the rate
of fluid removal from these shales in comparison with
thinner shales sandwiched between sands. Fractures and
nonsealing faults can also act as avenues of fluid escape,
but sands are believed to be the more important avenues.
In such shale intervals, the permeability is quite small
S
A= 0.465
B STAGE C
A= .f..
D
5).
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY
and fluid removal is restricted; thus, the shale fluid pres-
sure will be large for a given burial depth D.
As previously stated, a useful measure of the degree of
compaction of a clay is its porosity. Obviously, then, an
estimation of clay or shale porosity as a function of depth
will reveal the degree of compaction. A section which is
"undercompacted" with regard to a given burial depth
will be a section whose fluid pressure is abnormally large
(in excess of hydrostatic pressure) or overpressured for
the burial depth. The data recorded by various logs can
be utilized to infer the degree of compaction. Thus,
through the interrelated parameters discussed, a practical
method of estimating formation pressures is achieved.
METHODS OF ESTIMATING PRESSURE
ACOUSTIC METHOD
The development of the acoustic log several years ago
provided a new means for estimating the porosity of sedi-
mentary rocks. The longitudinal acoustic velocity recorded
by the various types of acoustic logs may be thought of
as primarily a function of porosity and lithology. If a
given lithology such as shale is investigated, the acoustic
log response will be essentially a response to porosity
variations. The change of porosity with depth can be
studied in this manner to gain an insight into shale com-
paction. An investigation of the response of an acoustic
log in normally pressured shales indicates a relation be-
tween the column logarithm of shale travel timet.t('h) and
depth. An example of the type of relation for Miocene
and Oligocene sediments is presented in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2 illustrates that the travel time decreases (velocity
increases) with increasing burial depth. This indicates that
porosity decreases as a function of depth. This trend
represents the "normal compaction trend" as a function
of burial depth, and the fluid pressures exhibited within
this normal trend will be hydrostatic.
If intervals of abnormal compaction are penetrated,
the resulting data points will diverge from the "normal
o
I
I o
2000
,I
compaction trend". If overpressured formations are en-
countered, the data points will diverge from the normal
trend toward abnormally high transit times for a given
burial depth, since the porosity is higher. Fig. 3 illus-
trates such data. A lesser degree of compaction is also
borne out by bulk density measurements upon shale
cores, as illustrated in this figure.
The amount of divergence of a given point from the
established "normal compaction trend" has been related
to the observed pressure in adjacent reservoir forma-
tions. Fig. 4 presents a schematic plot oft.t('h) vs depth
and the parameters used to determine pressures. The re-
lation between the ,t.t('h) parameter and pressure for Mio-
cene and Oligocene formations is presented in Fig. 5.
Pertinent information used to establish this empirical re-
lation is presented in Table 1. The standard deviation
from the line representing the data of Fig. 5 is 0.020
psi/ft.
To estimate the formation pressure of reservoirs from
adjacent shale acoustic log data, the following steps are
necessary.
1. The "normal compaction trend" for the area of
interest is established by plotting the logarithm of f:.t(,h)
vs depth (see Figs. 2 and 3).
2. A similar plot is made for the well in question.
3. The top of the overpressured formations is found
by noting the depth at which the plotted points diverge
from the trend line.
4. The pressure of a reservoir at any depth is found
as follows:
(a.) The divergence of adjacent shales from the extra-
polated normal line is measured (See Fig. 4).
(b.) From Fig. 5 the fluid pressure gradient (FPG)
corresponding to the t.t'b('h) -,t.t.('h) value is found.
(c.) The FPG value is multiplied by the depth to
obtain the reservoir pressure.
A pressure gradient profile can be constructed for a
well by using the above procedure.
WELL llH lI I
JEFFERSON CO., TEXAS

.>~.
~
J: •
2000 .
~:
4000
I
...j:~r_.
~
4000

. ... I
6000
I
~ 6000

j
I
.::

... .
f-
tl.
W I
o 8000 f-
tl.

•.:.
W
o f- TOP OF OVER-
8000 PRESSURES

10,000

,
.
j
. 10,000
r- t
I
~.1
12,000 I
I
...
.~ .
I
12,000

14,000
50 100 200 500
I
.
Llt(Sh) , !LS/lt 14,000
50 .[00 150 200 2,[ 2.2

FIG. 2-SHALE THAVEL Tr:m: vs DUtiAL llJ:I'TIT Fon ;\IIOCENE A:'iD Cll(sh) , J.L sift Pb(sh)' 9 Icc
OLIGOCENE SHALES, UpPEn TEXAS AND SOETHEn" LOGISIANA
GULF COAST. FIG. 3-SHALE TRAVEL TIME AND BULK DE1'<SITY VS BURIAL DEPTH.

JUNE. 1965 719

 TABLE I-PRESSURE AND SHALE ACOUSTIC LOG DATA, OVERPRESSURED MIOCENE-OLIGOCENE WElLS

Parish or County Depth Pressure FPG' ~t()b(sh) - ~t"'($h)

and State Well J.ftL ~ (p,i/It) (miero,ee/fl)
Terrebonne, La. 1 13,3B7 11,647 0.87 22
Offshore Lafourche, La. 2 11,000 6,820 0.62 9
Assumption, La. 3 10,820 8,872 0.82 21
Offshore Vermilion, La. 4 11,900 9,996 0.84 27
Offshore Terrebonne. La. 5 13,118 11 ,281 0.86 27
Eosr Baton Rouge, La. 6 10,980 8,015 0.73 13
St. Martin, La. 7 11,500 6,210 0.54 4
Offshore St. Mary, La. 8 13,350 11,481 0.86 30
Calcasieu, La. 9 11,800 6,608 0.56 7
Offshore St. Mary, Lo. 10 13,010 10,928 0.84 23
Ofl,hore St. Mary, La. 11 13,825 12,719 0.92 33
Offshore Plaquemines, La. 12 8,874 5,324 0.60 5
Cameron, La. 13 11,115 9,781 0.88 32
Cameron, La. 14 11,435 11,292 0.90 38
Jefferson, Tex. 15 10,890 9,910 0.91 39
Terrebonne, La. 16 11 ,050 8,951 0.81 21
Offshore Galveston, Tex. 17 11,750 11,398 0.97 56
Chambers, Tex. 18 12,080 9,422 0.78 18
*Formation fluid pressure gradient.

RESISTIVITY METHOD tivity vs depth for hydrostatic shales is established for a

Logging specialists on the Gulf Coast have for several
years observed and recognized that shale resistivity de-
creases in overpressured zones. This phenomenon has
been used in various areas to detect the presence of so-
called "sheath" material near salt domes; it has also been
considered a qualitative indication of high formation pres-
sure gradients. The next logical step is to determine how
shale resistivity can be used to estimate actual forma-
tion pressures.
Little is known of the effects of the many factors which
influence shale resistivity. It is reasonable that many of
the same parameters which influence the resistivity of
reservoir rocks will also affect shale resistivities. Among
these, the more important are (l) porosity, (2) tempera-
ture, (3) salinity of the contained fluid and (4) mineral
composition. Rather than attempt to isolate the effect of
each factor on shale resistivity, we have investigated the
resultant combination of all of these factors. However,
we should consider the individual effects (summarized in
Table 2) so that we can recognize the problem if we
encounter an anomalous situation.
As in the acoustic method, a trend of shale resis-
o RESERVOIR
2000
given area. Typical trends of data from hydrostatic pres-
sure sections are illustrated in Fig. 6. These data points
were obtained from standard electrical resistivity logs;
the amplified short normal device was used because of
its readability and because of negligible borehole correc-
tions in the range of resistivities considered. These trends,
in a given area, reflect the "normal compaction trend"
as a function of depth. If overpressured formations are
encountered, the shale resistivity data points diverge from
the normal trend toward lower resistivity values, owing
to exceptionally high porosity. An example resistivity-
depth plot is presented in Fig. 8 (a). The degree of di-
vergence of a given point from the established "normal
compaction trend" has been related to the observed pres-
sure gradient in adjacent reservoir formations. The perti-
nent information used to establish this empirical relation
is presented in Table 3 and is plotted in Fig. 7. The maxi-
mum deviation of the data from the smooth curve in
Fig. 7 is approximately 0.08 psi/ft, and the standard
deviation is 0.022 psi/ft. Fig. 7 illustrates that an increase
in the ratio of extrapolated normally pressured shale re-
sistivity to actual recorded shale resistivity signifies an
increase in formation pressure gradients. The trend iI-
EQUIVALENT
FPG, MUD WEIGHT,
psi/It lb/llCl
0.400

/ 0.50

\ -
4000 10.0

/ -

'\
0.60
6000 - 12.0
-J

:I: ~
.....
n. 0
Q: -
w ,~ 0.70 0

\
o 8000
-

/~
[4.0

-
0.80 0
I

~
10,000
- 160

/ -
0.900
12,000 TT .-!
I - I 8.0
"-
I : "-
' ...
14,000
II I !;,lil n
li/ tob
1.000
o 20 40 60
50 100 200 30C lilob(sh)_liln(sh)' I"s/ It
lil(sh),l"s/lt
FIG. 5 - RELATION BETWEEN SHALE ACOCSTlC
FIG. 4-SCHDIATIC PLOT OF SHALE TRAVEL Tnn: PARAMETER .!ltob (81l) -.!ltn('h) AND RESERVOIR
vs BCRIAL DEPTH. FunD PRESSCRE GRADIENT (FPG).

720 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 TABLE 2-EFf6CT OF VARIOUS FACTORS UPON RESISTIVITY TABLE 3-PRESSURE AND SHALE RESISTIVITY RATIOS, OVERPRESSURED
MIOCENE·OLIGOCENE WELLS
Resistivity Resistivity Shale
Increases Decreases Parish or Resistivity
With WIth County Pressure FPG' Ratio··
and State Well (psi/tl)
lower Porosity Higher Porosity
Depth
~- ~_-m)
Lower Salinity Higher Temperature St. Martin, La. A 12,400 10,240 0.B3 2.60
lower Temperature Higher Salinity Cameron, La. B 10,070 7,500 0.74 1.70
High Nonclay Mineral Content Lower-than·Averog8 Nor-clay Fraction Cameron, La. B 10,150 B,OOO 0.79 1.95
C 13,100 11,600 0.89 4.20
D 9,370 5,000 0.53 1.15
lustrated in Fig. 7 should be considered an example plot Offshore E 12,300 6,350 0.52 1.15
St. Mary, La. F 12,500 6,440 0.52 1.30
and should be used only as a guide until actual pressure 14,000 11,500 0.82 2.40
and log data are obtained for the particular region under Jefferson Davis, G
H
10,948 7,970 0.73
0.70
1.78
1.92
La. 10,800 7,600
study. H 10,750 7,600 0.71 1.77
Cameron, La. I 12,900 11,000 0.85 3.30
To estimate the formation pressure of reservoirs from Iberia, La. J 13,844 7,200 0.52 1.10
adjacent shale resistivity data, the following steps are lafayette, La. K
15,353
12,600
12,100
9,000
0.79
0.71
2.30
1.60
necessary. 12,900 9,000 0.70 1.70
L 11,750 8,700 0.74 1.60
1. The normal "compaction trend" for the area of in- M 14,550 10,BOO 0.74 1.85
Cameron, La. N 11,070 9,400 0.85 3.90
terest is established by plotting the logarithm of shale Terrebonne, La. 0 11 ,900 8,100 0.68 1.70
resistivity from the amplified short normal device vs Jefferson, Tex. P
13,600
10,000
10,900
8,750
0.80
0.88
2.35
3.20
depth. (Usually, numerous wells in the area are examin- St. Martin, lao 0 10,800 7,680 0.71 1.60
Cameron, La. R 12,700 11,150 0.88 2.80
ed.) 13,500 11,600 0.86 2.50
13,950 12,500 0.90 2.75
2. A similar plot is made for the well in question. *Formation fluid pressure gradient.
3. The top of the overpressured formations is found **Ratio of resistivity of normally pressured shale to observed resistivity of over~
by noting the depth at which the plotted points diverge pressured shale: Rn(sh)/RoIJ(.'·hl.
from the trend line.
4. The pressure gradient of a reservoir at any depth is zones at considerable depths may lead to anomalously
found as follows: high resistivity values and will make it extremely diffi-
(a.) The ratio of the extrapolated normal shale resis- cult, if not impossible, to use the resistivity method of
tivity to the observed shale resistivity is determined. pressure estimation. The acoustic log data can frequently
(b.) The fluid pressure gradient (FPG) correspond- be used in such an area. Variations in shale clay min-
ing to the calculated ratio is found (from Fig. 7). eralogy and nonclay constituents impose difficulties upon
5. The reservoir pressure is obtained by multiplying the either technique. Prudent choice of data points can greatly
FPG value by the depth. reduce this problem. Care should always be taken to se-
A pressure gradient profile for the well can be con- lect zones of low SP deflection and uniform resistivity
structed by repeating the above procedure at numerous or sonic readings.
depths. The use of the acoustic and resistivity techniques has
been most successful in Tertiary Age sediments, particu-
LL\IITATIONS
larly those of the Miocene and Oligocene. Success has
The conditions of the borehole and the surrounding
been achieved in Quaternary and Cretaceous Age sedi-
disturbed formation will have an influence upon the re- ments with difficulty. In general, for sediments of any
cordings of both the acoustic and resistivity logs. Gener-
age the correlations of acoustic transit time vs depth are
ally, these effects can be overcome by employing normal
more easily established than the trends of shale resistivity
borehole correction procedures. If there is a large temp- vs depth. This is undoubtedly true because fewer pa-
erature disturbance caused by drilling, it may prove rameters influence the acoustic properties as compared
necessary to use one of the longer spaced resistivity de- with the number that influence the resistivity of shales.
vices to determine shale resistivity. The caliper survey These techniques are limited to areas in which the gen-
should be used to determine zones of extreme borehole
enlargement which can lead to erroneous shale transit
RESERVOIR EQUIVALENT
times owing to weak signal and cycle skipping. FPG. MUD WEIGHT,
In general, the presence of fresh- or brackish-water psi 1ft Ib/gal
0.4

4 -
I I \ I
I
I
'\
~I kil
6
12>"'; !~
I
I
I
-- ----
0.5

"\. I0.0

I-
~ 8
\ \\ -- - - 0.6
-

~ ",.
---

l.L \ - I 2.0

~ \
g; 10
1\ -
\I~
0.7
z .~

'"
<t
~,\ ••
(f) - I 4.0
~

§? 12
• "'-..
~\(
I- 0.8
i--
~
:I:
I- - I 6.0
\ •
~
• ~ '---- •
14
o -

16 iD AVERAGE OLIGOCENE-MIOCEN-
SW LA.
,
\
\
0.9
--- - I 80

® MIOCENE, JEFFERSON PH., LA. \\

10
18
® MIOCENE, IBERIA PH. LA. 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 4.0 50
0.2 OA 0.6 O~ I~ ~O ~O NORMAL-PRESSURED R(Sh) I 08SERVED R(sh)

R(sh)' OHM·METERS-
FIG. 7--REl.ATIO;'>i BETlI"EEN SHALE RESISTIVITY PAHA~IETER
FIG. 6-SHALE RESISTIVITY VS BURIAL DEPTH. Rn(,,,/Rob('h) AND RESERVOIR FU:lD PRESSCRE GRADIE:'iT (FPG).

JUNE, 1965 721

 4
WE~L uR" \
CAMERON PH. •
t- t- 6,f--f--+---+--+---l-+--H-----;1'-+---1
w LUUi::i ITAl w
~ w
W
lL.

8-T-TI
lL.
lL. lL. 8
o o
,
,
(f)
01 o ,I:
~ I0 --+--++J--t-~~--.:.-...j
z I
~ i i
~ ,-,-"
<l:
(f)

6 12 TEST,
I ~ \ '-1
~
o 12 ---
!'!
! : Ii!
i--+----r1--1-+-+h-~I.-+--1
:I:
t-
A--

£1 4 C----
B-- '::: \\ + Ai
Bl
:I:
t-_
TEST A -
TEST B -
--t- B
Ali)

Ct!J-H~-i
t-
o..
w I I~\ • EST. FPG FROM
CI
~ :4 -- -I~ST~~~ OF O--VER- • EST. FPG FROM
°1 6 TOP OF OVER= SHALE RESISTIVITY
• MUD GRADIENT t PRESSURES
SHALE TRAVELTIME
, MUD GRADI ENT

8
1
0.2 0.4
IIIISUREIS

0.6 0.8 1.0

iBPRESSURES FROM

2.00.4
T ST
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 50 100 200
®PRESSURES FROM

0.4
TESTS
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
R(shl' ohm-m FPG, psi/ft 1I t(sh)' fLs/f t FPG, psi 1ft
(a)- (b) (a) (b)

FIG. 8 -EXAClIPLE OF ESTLlIA1T\G Pm:ssum:s FRO}I FIG. 9~ExA}lPLE OF ESTIMATING PRESSURES FROM
HESISTtVITY LOG. ACOUSTIC LOG.

eration of overpressures is primarily the result of com-
paction processes in response to the stress of overburden.
APPLICATIONS
Knowledge of the reservoir pressure is of considerable
engineering value. Such knowledge will provide the means
for improving drilling techniques and designing better
casing programs and completion methods. From data
gathered from surrounding wells, it is possible to predict
the probable pressure profile that will be encountered by
a drilling well. In addition, this pressure information will
enable the reservoir engineer to make more accurate re-
serve estimates and performance predictions.
EXAMPLE
To illustrate the techniques of estimating formation
pressures from shale properties, we have selected a well
drilled in Cameron Parish, La. This well penetrated sev-
eral thousand feet of overpressured sediments, and there
are three actual bottom-hole pressure measurements to
verify the accuracy of the methods.
In Fig. 8 (a), shale resistivity is plotted against depth
on semilog grid. The average normal resistivity trend,
fitted to the data as discussed in the preceding sections,
is shown. The top of overpressures occurs at approxi-
mately 10,400 ft, as can be determined by the departure
of the observed shale resistivity points from the normal
trend. The ratio of the observed resistivity to the "normal
trend resistivity" at the same depth is determined at num-
erous levels. From Fig. 7, the fluid pressure gradient
at each level is determined; these data are plotted in
Fig. 8 (b). For comparison, the mud column pressure
gradient used while the well was being drilled is shown.
Also, three bottom-hole pressure readings were obtained
from tests at 12,700, 13,500 and 13,900 ft, respectively.
The calculated pressure gradients are within 0.04 psi/ft
of the measured gradients.
Observed shale travel times are plotted against depth
in Fig. 9(a). A straight line is drawn through the shal-
low shale compaction trend. The deviation of observed
points from the normal compaction trend occurs at ap-
proximately 10,400 ft and designates the top of over-
pressured formation. The departure of the observed shale
transit times from the trend line is measured at numerous
levels, and the corresponding pressure gradient is ob-
tained from Fig. 5. The resultant trend of pressure grad-
ient with depth is plotted in Fig. 9 (b). As above, the
mud column hydrostatic gradient and the measured pres-
sure gradients from tests of the formations are shown
722
for comparison. Excellent agreement is observed between
the estimated pressure gradient and the measured pres-
sures.
CONCLUSIONS
The degree of compaction of a shale in response to an
axial component of total stress S depends upon several
variables. The fluid pressure can be related to the degree
of compaction and burial depth. The degree of compac-
tion can be ascertained from techniques which utilize
various logging data; thus, fluid pressures of isolated
reservoir rock can be estimated from adjacent shale
compaction data.
Shale acoustic and resistivity log data have been ex-
tensively and successfully used to estimate reservoir for-
mation pressures. The acoustic log and resistivity methods
have an accuracy of fluid pressure predictions of approxi-
mately ± 0.04 psi/ft. The standard deviations for the
resistivity and acoustic methods are 0.022 and 0.020
psi/ft, respectively.
The examples presented in this paper are from the
Gulf Coast, but the principles of the techniques presented
here will apply equally well to other Tertiary sedimentary
basins in which the principal stress has been the result
of overburden weight.
Knowledge of the first occurrence of overpressures,
and indeed of the precise pressure-depth relationship in
a geologic province, enables improvements in drilling
techniques, casing programs, completion methods and res-
ervoir evaluations. From data gathered from surrounding
wells, we can predict the probable pressure profile that
will be encountered by a drilling well.
REFERENCES
1. Dickinson, G.: "Geological Aspects of Abnormal Reservoir
Pressures in the Gulf Coast Region of Louisiana, U.S.A.",
Proc., Third World Petroleum Cong., The Hague (951) 1.
2. Thomeer. J. H. M. A. and Bottema, J. A.: "Increasing Occur·
rences of Abnormally High Reservoir Pressures in Boreholes and
Drilling Problems Resulting Therefrom", Bull., AAP'G (1961)
45, No. 10, 1721, 1730.
3. Mullins, John D.: "Some Problems of Superhigh-Pressure Gas
Reservoirs in the Gulf Coast Area", Jour. Pet. Tech. (Sept.,
1962) 935.
4. Hubbert, M. King and Rubey, W. W.: "Role of Fluid Pressure
in Mechanics of Overthrust Faulting, Part I", Bull., GSA (Feb.,
1959) 70.
5. Terzaghi, Karl and Peck, R. B.: Soil Mechanics in Engineering
Practice, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., N. Y. (948) 566. ***
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY