IPA18-144-G

PROCEEDINGS, INDONESIAN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION

Forty-Second Annual Convention & Exhibition, May 2018

COMPLEXITY OF PORE PRESSURE AND STRESS ANALYSES IN MAHAKAM MEDIAN AXIS

OF THE LOWER KUTAI BASIN, KALIMANTAN, INDONESIA.

Roni Herdiyanto*
Joe-Anderson Siadary*
Dhanny Fadlan*

ABSTRACT fields, thus helping with a suitable well design

The Mahakam Delta has been developed for more
than 40 years and many wells have been drilled to
develop the area and to increase production. The
Tunu, Bekapai and Peciko Fields are located in the
Median Axis of the Mahakam Delta and collectively
have contributed a large volume of production. In the
current context of mature fields, there are many
drilling problems found, i.e. kick and lost circulation
issues due to the reservoirs becoming more depleted,
but on a positive note, isolated high pressure still
exists. This complexity makes pore pressure and
stress analyses in the research area essential in order
to support the massive drilling and production
activities in this area.
The result of well data analysis shows that there are
three pore pressure patterns in the study area, i. e.
normal pressure, low over pressure and high over
pressure. The analysis of cross-plot of sonic and
density logs shows that low overpressure is
generated by loading mechanism, while high
overpressure is generated by non-loading
mechanism. The loading mechanism is caused by
relatively rapid sedimentation in the study area,
while the non-loading mechanism is caused by
kaolinite to illite transformation and gas generation.
The analysis of pore pressure (Pp) and minimum
horizontal stress (Shmin) shows that there is
coupling relation, especially in the Tunu Field. This
relation is proven by the increase in the hydraulic
fracture value starting at the top of overpressure and
by the presence of a lost circulation zone that
coincides with the presence of a depleted reservoir
zone. The coupling ratio of ∆Shmin/∆Pp in
overpressure zone shows a relatively low value. This
condition indicates that the overpressure is more the
cause, rather than the effect of the increase in Shmin
in that zone. This analysis will help to increase the
understanding of pressure behavior in Mahakam
strategy for further development and to unlock the
remaining field potential.
Keywords: pore pressure, over pressure, stress
INTRODUCTION
The Mahakam Delta is a part of the Lower Kutai
Basin which is characterized by Miocene clastic
deposition. The Middle Miocene marks the start of
positive tectonic inversion in the Kutai Basin, with
deformation migrating progressively from the West
to the East. Three main structural axis can be
distinguished, the Internal Axis, the Median Axis and
the External Axis (Total E&P Indonesie, 2003)
(Figure 1).
The Tunu, Bekapai, and Peciko Fieds have
contributed a large volume of production which is
still continuing to this day. The reservoirs now are
depleted to pressure as low as 0.20 sg. Drilling in
over pressure zone and highly depleted reservoirs
have increased drilling challenges, such as lost
circulation, high differential pressure, difficult
logging, and inability to reach the target, which have
risen the non-productive time (NPT). The drilling
events related to over pressure are still being
experienced and also lost circulation events which in
most cases happened after increasing the mud weight
to encounter the higher pressure during drilling
operation. The analysis and prediction of pore
pressure, fracture pressure, and stress are becoming
important in designing casing point and mud
programs which are crucial parameters in order to
make the drilling operation as efficient and safe as
possible.
Previously, a pore pressure profile was generated and
calibrated to pressure test and drilling events which
indicate underbalanced conditions. This method
succeeded to determine the pressure profile of the

* Pertamina Hulu Mahakam

well by having a lot of reservoir pressure information
by depth, virgin pressure condition, and drilling
events as calibration. Likewise fracture pressures
were calibrated to the leak off test (LOT) and this
method also succeeded to estimate maximum
pressure as a limit for drilling pressure windows to
avoid potential for lost circulation.
Nowadays, a lot of new wells are being drilled
through zones that have already been produced.
When a reservoir is depleted from earlier fluid
extraction, and there remains a possibility to have a
virgin/high pressure reservoir below it, the window
between the pore pressure and the fracture pressure
for the section gets narrower, making the pressure
prediction more challenging. In the development
phase, pore and fracture pressure profiles are
expected to be more accurate and precise to avoid
drilling hazards. The utilization of gamma ray, sonic,
resistivity and density logs are becoming important
tools for pore pressure estimation and prediction
methods. Different approaches are made to answer
specific cases in the Mahakam Median Axis. This
paper discusses the complexity of the analysis
methods to provide a better understanding and
estimating of pore pressure and stress.
METHODOLOGY
In this paper, the main objectives are to analyze and
estimate pore and fracture pressure. The fundamental
method for estimating the pore pressure in this study
is using the cross plot of sonic – depth, resistivity –
depth, sonic – density, and classic formula by Eaton
(1969). The most important technique for this
method is mudrock discrimination (Mouchet and
Mitchell, 1989; Ramdhan and Goulty, 2011,
Ramdhan, 2017). All analysis and estimation
methods of pore pressure will be done consistently in
the mudrocks.
PORE PRESSURE
Vertical stress (Sv) and normal compaction stress
(NCT)
The log used for vertical stress calculation is density.
Vertical stress at given depth is the stress exerted by
the weight of the overlying sediment (Mouchet and
Mitchell, 1989). This stress is also called overburden
or lithostatic stress.
σv = ρbgZ (1.1)
Where, σv is vertical stress (ML-1T-2), ρb is bulk
sediment density (ML-3), g is gravity (LT-2), and Z is
depth refer to specific datum.
Correction of the density log must be done. Caliper
and/or borehole size data is needed to correct the log
due to its sensitivity.
Analysis and estimation of the pore pressure and
normal compaction analysis have to be done in
mudrocks (Ramdhan, 2017). The main data to build
NCT is sonic. The analysis is done using the NCT-
3P equation (normal compaction three parameters)
for internal normal compaction trend analysis, as
follows:
Δtn = (Δtmax – Δtmin)e-z/KAM + Δtmin (1.2)
Where, Δtmax is the maximum transit time at surface
(T L-1), Δtmin is the minimum transit time at rock
matrix (T L-1), and KAM is the curvature parameter.
Those parameters can be retrieved from a sonic log
in a normally pressured interval.
Over pressure generating mechanism analysis
and estimation
Generating mechanism analysis has been obtained by
observation of sonic and/or resistivity – depth plot
and density – sonic cross plot (Bowers, 2001;
Ramdhan, 2017). The cross plot of sonic – density
can be used to identify the compaction (Bowers,
2001) and clay mineral transformation (Dutta, 2002).
The result of this analysis can be used to build the
NCT for mechanism analysis and estimation of pore
pressure.
In logs, the disequilibrium compaction or loading
mechanism will be evidenced by constant data of
density, sonic and resistivity. Meanwhile, the non-
loading mechanism will be strongly evidenced by
sonic and resistivity reversals (Ramdhan and Goulty,
2010) (Figure 2).
Advanced analysis had been done to enrich the
analysis of over pressure generating mechanism. The
result of cutting analysis in the laboratory is utilized
to define the relationship between the clay mineral
transformation with over pressure generating
mechanism.
Pore pressure estimation and distribution
Eaton (1975) performed a statistical and empirical
analysis in the Gulf of Mexico in wells that
penetrated the over pressure zone and were
formularized as follows:
P = σv – (σv – Pn)(Δtn/Δt)3 sonic (1.3)
P = σv – (σv – Pn)(R/Rn)1.2 resistivity (1.4)
Log evaluation is important for this method,
especially log at mudrocks intervals and in the
normal compaction trend. This method estimates the
over pressure magnitude by the log deflection from
its NCT.
In the Peciko Field, wells in the study area provide
relatively complete dataset and interval velocity cube
that can be used as a data source to analyze the pore
pressure distribution. Some exploration and
delineation wells are used and were analyzed for pore
pressure post mortem to define the top of over
pressure.
A specific approach and methodology to improve
better understanding of the pore pressure distribution
is needed. A seismic interval velocity can be used to
interpret the distribution of the pore/over pressure. A
key step is to correlate the interval velocity to the
sonic and a good correlation coefficient is needed in
this method. The pore pressure distribution has been
determined by correlating pressure profiles to the
response of interval velocity by depth.
PORE PRESSURE AND MINIMUM
HORIZONTAL STRESS
The drilling operations in Tunu Field experienced
several lost circulation events, meanwhile the
equivalent circulating density of the applied mud
weight was even lower than the LOT value below the
casing shoe. The relationship of the lost circulation
with the depleted reservoir had been observed
(Fadlan, et al., 2016).
Shmin or minimum horizontal stress is one of the
types of stress that can be estimated directly from
measurement. The LOT is the source of Shmin data
which is performed and measured at the borehole
below the casing shoe. In the industry, Shmin is also
known as the fracture pressure; the limitation of
applied pressure to initiate lost circulation.
Pore pressure and in situ stress analyses have been
done to identify their relationship. Pore pressure
analysis is performed as mentioned above.
Meanwhile, the in situ stress analysis is performed
by calculating the magnitude of the Shmin and Sv
from the LOT, well logs and drilling report.
The coupling ratio method (Swarbrick, 2016) was
performed to define the relationship between the
pore pressure, Sv and Shmin (Figure 3). The ratio
that needs to be analyzed is ∆Shmin/∆Pp. ∆Shmin is
the change of the Shmin from normal pressure to
become over or depleted pressure. In the other hand,
∆Pp is the change of pore pressure from normal
condition to become over and depleted pressure. The
∆Shmin - ∆Pp cross plot is important to be done to
observe the coupling ratio between them. The slope
of the regression is the coupling ratio that shows the
change of the ∆Shmin over the ∆Pp. The main data
for this method are LOT, mini frac test and
equivalent circulating density (ECD) value during
lost circulation event.
RESULTS
1. Pore pressure estimation and mechanism
analysis
The analysis is built by integration of pressure test,
drilling event, sonic log, gamma ray log, resistivity
log, density log, and mud weight data. The first
analysis is done by plotting the pressure – depth
where the pressure profile of normal and over
pressure is clearly recognized. Specific observations
of over pressure in the Mahakam Median Axis can
be defined as low over pressure and high over
pressure.
The normal pressure can be characterized by
increased effective stress. The low over pressure is
characterized by constant effective stress, meanwhile
the high over pressure is characterized by decreased
effective stress.
In further analysis, logs are utilized and analyzed by
cross plots of sonic – depth, resistivity – depth,
density – depth, and sonic – density. A strong
relationship was observed between pore pressure
profiles with the log response. Increased sonic
slowness, resistivity and density by depth are the
indication of normal pressure. Those plots are
utilized to build the normal compaction trend (NCT)
of sonic and/or resistivity logs. The cross plot of
sonic – density in normal pressure interval and is
generating the virgin curve which is representing the
NCT. The over pressure is represented by the
deflection of sonic and resistivity data from NCT
(Figure 4).
Based on effective stress, log responses to NCT, and
sonic – density cross plot, the over pressure
generating mechanism of low over pressure is
loading whereas the high over pressure is both
loading and non-loading. In the Mahakam Median
Axis, those pore pressure profiles can be recognized
in each field.
The pore pressure estimation has been done by
utilizing the Eaton formula (Equation 1.3 and
Equation 1.4) and some equations were used to build
main parameters (Equation 1.1 and Equation 1.2).
The result of standard Eaton’s power matched to the
origin pressure test and drilling event data (Figure 4).
Generally, in the Mahakam area, the loading over
pressure related to rapid sedimentation (Bates, 1996
and Bois, et al., 1994). Particularly in the Bekapai
Field, the laboratory result of clay mineral is used to
prove the relationship of the high/non-loading over
pressure with the clay mineral transformation. The
sample was taken from an exploration well. The top
of high/non-loading over pressure is recognized at
3500 m, meanwhile the clay mineral transformation
based on cross plot is defined in the interval 3400 –
4000 m. The laboratory results indicate that the
percentage of kaolinite reduces with depth and the
percentage of illite increases with depth. This
phenomenon is well recognized especially in areas of
high temperature (~130 oC). The zone of clay mineral
transformation can be recognized on a sonic –
density cross plot and the reversed sonic represents
the interval of high/non-loading over pressure  the same axis as the Peciko Field, the non-loading
(Figure 5). The result is increasing our understanding
of the over pressure generating mechanism and the
utilization of the Dutta’s sonic – density cross plot to
define over pressure.
2. Pore pressure distribution
The interval velocity has generated very good
correlation coefficient (above 93 %) with the sonic
(Figure 6). It means the interval velocity is also
related to the pore/over pressure as is the sonic log.
The increase velocity by depth is representing the
normal pressure. The constant and reverse velocities
by depth are representing low/loading and high/non-
loading over pressures. The interval velocity’s lateral
data utilized to distribute the pore/over pressure,
qualitatively (Figure 7).
3. Coupling of pore pressure and minimum
horizontal stress
The relationship between the pore pressure and
Shmin is proven in the Tunu Field. The LOT
magnitude is increasing from the top of over pressure
to the greater depth. Coupling ratio of ∆Shmin/∆Pp
in the over pressure zone is 0.52, meanwhile in
depleted reservoir intervals it is 0.40. It means the
Shmin increased 52 % of the increased of pore
pressure and Shmin reduced 40 % due to depletion
(Figure 8). It represented the Shmin is increasing in
the over pressure zone compared to a normal zone.
Lost circulation coincides with depleted reservoirs
(Figure 9).
DISCUSSION
Many studies have examined the mechanisms
generating over pressures in the Mahakam Area.
Bates (1996) and Bois, et al. (1994) concluded the
over pressure generated by disequilibrium
compaction or loading mechanism, meanwhile
Ramdhan and Goulty (2010, 2011, 2014) observed
the non-loading mechanism as the cause. In this
paper, both mechanisms are observed by analyses of
effective stress analysis, log cross plot, interval
velocity and clay mineral transformation.
In the Mahakam area, the non-loading mechanism
generated the high over pressure. Gas generation and
clay diagenesis are plausible causes (Ramdhan and
Goulty, 2011). Specifically in Median Axis, gas
generation is proven in the Peciko Field. The top of
high over pressure coincided with vitrinite reflectant
data at 0.6 % and the clay mineral transformation
proved by the sonic – density cross plot (Ramdhan
and Goulty, 2011). In the Bekapai Field which is in
generating mechanism is more related to clay
mineral transformation as evidenced by the clay
mineral analysis, the sonic – density cross plot, and
the vitrinite reflectant data. The affect of gas
generation in causing over pressure is difficult to be
prove with the available data in the Bekapai Field.
The coupling ratio of ∆Shmin/∆Pp in overpressure
zones shows a relatively low value compared to the
tectonic active area. In the tectonic active area, the
ratio is 0.80 (Tingay, et al., 2003), meanwhile in the
Tunu Field, the ratio is 0.40 – 0.52. This condition
indicates that the overpressure is more the cause,
rather than the impact of the increasing Shmin.
All analyses on logs based on data were done in
mudrock intervals. It means the estimated pore/over
pressure is representing the mudrock pressure which
is anchored to the original reservoir pressure or
drilling events. There are some minor processes that
contribute to over pressure (Ramdhan, 2017).
Hydrocarbon buoyancy, hydraulic head and osmosis
are considered as minor processes which may
generate over pressure related to reservoir
connectivity. Minor generating mechanisms have not
been considered yet in this paper, therefore
estimating the reservoir pressure for drilling purpose
is still challenging due to reservoir connectivity.
Reconciliation of geologist, geophysicist, reservoir
engineer and pore pressure analyst input is
mandatory for better understanding and prediction of
pore pressure (Sukapradja, et al., 2017).
CONCLUSIONS
Pore pressure profiles from the Peciko, Tunu and
Bekapai Fields represent the pressure regime in the
Mahakam Median Axis. The profile consists of
normal pressure, low over pressure and high over
pressure.
Log responses and its cross plot represented and
characterized pressure regimes as well as pressure
test and drilling event. Those methods can be utilized
to estimate and recognize the over pressure and its’
generating mechanism. In the Mahakam Median
Axis, low over pressure is generated by loading
mechanism, meanwhile high over pressure is
generated by loading and non-loading mechanism.
The analysis of Bekapai’s clay mineral is proven to
explain the generating mechanism of high over
pressure in the Mahakam Median Axis. The clay
mineral changed from kaolinite to illite at high
temperature, which coincided with the interval of
high over pressure.
Peciko’s pore pressure can be distributed very well
by utilizing the interval velocity cube. A good match
between the sonic log and interval velocity is a key
for pore pressure distribution. The normal pressure
zone is represented by increasing velocity with
depth. The low and high over pressure zones are
represented by constant or reducing velocity with
depth.
The pressure – stress plot and coupling ratio analysis
are proven to explain the pressure – stress coupling
relationship in the Tunu Field. The over pressure is
increasing the Shmin, meanwhile the depletion is
reducing the Shmin. This method is un-locking the
understanding of the depleted reservoir – lost
circulation event’s relationship. The drilling window
in the Mahakam Median Axis is getting narrow.
Pressure and stress analysis are useful in the
understanding of pressure and stress behaviour in
the Mahakam Median Axis. This study
demonstrated a continuous improvement initiative
and commitment in terms of safety and future
potential.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our gratitude and
appreciation to the management of PT. Pertamina
Hulu Mahakam and Migas for kind permission to
publish this paper.
REFERENCES
Bates, J.A., 1996, Overpressuring in the Kutei Basin:
distribution, origins and implication for the
petroleum system, IPA 2006, 25th Annual
Convention Proceedings, 93 - 115.
Bois, M., Grosjean, Y., dan de-Pazzis, L., 1994,
Shale compaction and abnormal pressure evaluation
application to the offshore Mahakam, IPA 23rd
Annual Convention Proceedings. IPA94–1.1–187.
Bowers, G.L., 2001, Determining an appropriate
pore pressure estimation strategy, Offshore
Technology Conference 2001, OTC 13042.
Dutta, N.C., 2002, Deepwater geohazard prediction
using prestack inversion of large offset P-wave data
and rock model, The Leading Edge, February 2002.
Eaton, B.A., 1975, The equation for geopressure
prediction from well logs, Society of Petroleum
Engineers of AIME, SPE 5544.
Fadlan, D., Herdiyanto, R., Saragih, B., Priastomo,
Y., Sitorus, R., dan Lesmana, R., 2016, Fracture
pressure predictions in highly depleted reservoir: an
approach to prevent mud losses while drilling in the
mature Tunu Field, 40th Indonesian Petroleum
Association Proceeding, 40
Ramdhan, A.M., 2017, Overpressure in Indonesia’s
sedimentary basin, volume 1: The Lower Kutai
Basin, Institut Teknologi Bandung, 147.
Ramdhan, A.M dan Goulty, N.R., 2010,
Overpressure-generating mechanisms in the Peciko
Field, Lower Kutai Basin, Indonesia, Petroleum
Geoscience, 16, 367 – 376.
Ramdhan, A.M dan Goulty, N.R., 2011,
Overpressure and batulempung compaction in the
Lower Kutai Basin, Indonesia: A radical reappraisal,
The American Association of Petroleum Geologist
bulletin, 95, no 10, 1725 – 1744.
Ramdhan, A.M dan Goulty, N.R., 2014,
Overpressure in the shelfal area of the Lower Kutai
Basin, IPA 2014, 38th Annual Convention
Proceedings, IPA14-G-357.
Sukapradja, A., Herdiyanto, R., Clark, J., Adam, C.,
Ashari, U., Saragih, B., Sitorus, R., and Giriansyah,
B., 2017, Integrated 3D pore pressure
characterisation and modeling: Methodology and
application in Sisi Nubi Field, Mahakam – Indonesia,
Society of Petroleum Engineers. SPE-186310-MS.
Swarbrick, R.E. dan Lahann, R.W., 2016, Estimating
pore fluid pressure-stress coupling, Marine and
Petroleum Geology, 78, 562 – 574.
Tingay, M.R.P., Hillis, R.R., Morley, C.K.,
Swarbrick, R.E., dan Okpere, E.C., 2003, Pore
pressure/stress coupling in Brunei Darussalam –
implications for shale injection, Geological
Society, London, Special Publications, 216, 369 –
379.
Total E&P Indonesie, 2003, Mahakam Synthesis,
Internal report Total E&P Indonesie, unpublished.
Figure 1 - The location map of Lower Kutai Basin. Peciko, Bekapai, and Tunu Fields are located in Mahakam
Median Axis (Ramdhan, et al., 2011).
 
 
 

 
  

Figure 2 - Idealized trends of pore pressure profiles and responses of logs. (a) The over pressure generated by
loading mechanism. (b) The over pressure generated by non-loading mechanism (Ramdhan and
Goulty, 2010).

Figure 3 - Schematic diagram with LOT trend developed from normal pressure interval and extended as a
reference trend-line where over pressure condition exist (Swarbrick, 2016).

 
 
 
SONIC DENSITY RESISTIVITY
40 140 240 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0.1 1 10

500
0 0

500
0

500
PRESSURE PROFILE
PRESSURE (MPa)
1000 1000 1000 0 50 100 150
0
1500 1500 1500

Vertical stress
2000 2000 2000
Pressure Test
500
2500 2500 2500
Drilling Event
3000 3000 3000
Hydrostatic Pressure
3500 3500 3500
1000 Mud Weight
4000 4000 4000 PP Eaton^3
4500 4500 4500 1500

5000 5000 5000

2000

DEPTH (mTVDSS)
60 80 100 SONIC  120 140 160
2

2.1 2500

σ'v (+)
2.2
3000 Top of 
2.3 Low over pressure

DENSITY
3500
2.4

σ'v (=)
2.5 4000
Top of 
2.6 Illite Trend High over pressure
Smectite Trend 4500
Normal pressure zone
2.7
Low over pressure zone
σ'v (‐)
Hard over pressure zone 5000
2.8 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00 2.20 2.40
Pressure Gradient (SG)

Figure 4 - Log plot, sonic – density cross plot, pressure plot, and effective stress for over pressure generating
mechanism analysis. Pore pressure profile in Mahakam Median Axis, i. e. normal pressure, low
over pressure, and high over pressure. Low and high over pressure are generated by loading and
non-loading mechanisms.

 
Figure 5 - Bekapai’s over pressure mechanism analysis. (a) High over pressure generated by non-loading
mechanism with clay mineral transformation at high temperature as stronger cause, rather than
gas generation based on hydrocarbon maturity. (b) The clay mineral transformation by sonic –
density cross plot has been confirmed by the laboratory analysis result.

 
Figure 6 - Sonic – Interval velocity correlation in Peciko Field. Good correlation of sonic and interval velocity
at well scale (R2 > 93 %).

 
Figure 7 - A North – South cross section of interval velocity in Peciko Field. The velocity by depth represents the pore pressure profile. The normal pressure interval
represented by increasing velocity, the low over pressure interval represented by constant velocity, and high over pressure interval represented by reducing
velocity.

 
 (a) OVER PRESSURE ZONE (b) DEPLETED PRESSURE ZONE
5000 5000

y = 0.52x y = 0.4067x
R² = 0.9575 R² = 0.8417
4000 4000

∆Shmin (psi)
∆Shmin (psi)

3000 3000

0.52 0.40
2000 2000

1000 1000

0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

∆Pp (psi) ∆Pp (psi)

Figure 8 - Coupling ratio of ∆Shmin/∆Pp in Tunu Field. (a) Coupling ratio at over pressure interval is 0.52.
(b) Coupling ratio at depletion interval is 0.40.

 
Figure 9 - Pressure/stress – depth plot in Tunu Field. Shmin increased by depth at over pressure interval.
Shmin decreased at depletion interval coincided with the lost circulation events.