Production-Induced Compaction
of a Sandstone Reservoir:
The Strong Influence of Stress Path
M.H.H. Hettema, SPE, TU Delft;* P.M.T.M. Schutjens, SPE, Shell RTS;** B.J.M. Verboom
and H.J. Gussinklo, SPE, NAM
Summary
The decrease of pore pressure during hydrocarbon production
共depletion兲 leads to compaction of the reservoir, which in turn
changes the stresses acting on the reservoir. The prediction of
reservoir compaction and its consequences is usually based on
laboratory experiments performed under uniaxial strain condi-
tions, i.e., allowing no lateral strain during depletion. Field data of
the Groningen gas field 共The Netherlands兲 indicate that the stress
development of the field deviates significantly from the stress path
under uniaxial strain conditions. Laboratory experiments show
that the applied stress path has a strong influence on the depletion-
induced compaction behavior. We discuss the consequences of
these results for the field compaction behavior by considering the
responsible deformation mechanisms active in reservoir and ex-
periment. The new Groningen field data, in combination with our
experimental results, provide an explanation for the difference
between the prediction of compaction and subsidence based on
uniaxial experiments and the measurement of compaction and
subsidence in the Groningen field. With the use of the new stress
path, the predicted and measured compaction and subsidence are
in agreement.
Introduction
The prediction of the amount of depletion-induced reservoir com-
paction and its adverse consequences 共such as subsidence, casing
deformation, and seismicity兲 requires three types of input param-
eters: The mechanical behavior of the reservoir rock and the rock
surrounding the reservoir, the reservoir stress path induced by the
depletion, and the dimension and depth of reservoir and overbur-
den formations. Also, a model is required to upscale the labora-
tory experiments to predict reservoir compaction and the associ-
ated surface or seabed subsidence during and after depletion.
The first two types of input parameters 共mechanical behavior
and stress path兲 are actually linked: The depletion leads to com-
paction and deformation of the reservoir, which in turn changes
the total stresses acting on the reservoir. It is the combination of
pore pressure change and total stress change, which alters 共and
generally increases兲 the effective normal and shear stresses acting
on the load-bearing grain framework. This results in elastic 共re-
coverable兲 and inelastic 共permanent兲 deformation which, in turn,
has a time-independent component, usually referred to as plastic-
ity, and a time-dependent component, referred to as creep. The
bulk rock compaction is the result of the various micromecha-
nisms activated by the depletion, and their dependence on stress
path and stress rate 共typically, a few MPa per year兲, stress level
(⬍100 MPa), and temperature (⬍200°C), and possibly also pore
fluid composition.1-3
Ideally, the laboratory experiments are performed along the
same stress path that the reservoir undergoes during depletion.
However, the reservoir stress path is not known before depletion
starts, and analytical or numerical models for the stress develop-
*Now with Statoil.
**Now with SINTEF Petroleum Research.
Copyright © 2000 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 65410) was revised for publication from paper SPE 50630, first presented
at the 1998 SPE European Petroleum Conference, The Hague, 20–22 October. Original
manuscript received for review 15 February 1999. Revised manuscript received 22 Janu-
ary 2000. Paper peer approved 30 May 2000.
342 SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng. 3 共4兲, August 2000
ment in depleting reservoirs are very sensitive to the input param-
eters mentioned earlier. To make things worse, field data describ-
ing depletion-induced changes in total stress are very scarce, so
only a few case studies are available to guide the design of labo-
ratory experiments. In most studies it is assumed that the reservoir
compacts uniaxially; that is, there is only vertical compaction and
no horizontal deformation. During uniaxial compaction of sand-
stone with 10 to 30% porosity, the ratio of change in total hori-
zontal stress per change in pore pressure is typically in the range
0.7 to 0.9.3
For the Groningen gas reservoir 共The Netherlands兲 a similar
strategy was followed, and a large amount of uniaxial compaction
experiments were performed, partly published.3 The tested rock
types ranged from low-porosity 共5 to 10%兲 conglomerates to
highly porous 共25 to 30%兲 coarse sandstone. However, the com-
paction and subsidence prediction based on these uniaxial strain
experiments is larger than the measured compaction and subsid-
ence in the Groningen field, and the reason for this is still un-
known.
This paper describes the important role of stress path in com-
paction prediction and offers a new explanation for the difference
in predicted and measured compaction and subsidence in the
Groningen field. We start with an analysis of the changes of the
total stresses during reservoir compaction, using basic rock me-
chanics theory. Then, new field stress data are presented and ana-
lyzed to estimate the production-induced stress path of the
Groningen gas field. Next, the results of triaxial compaction ex-
periments on Groningen core samples are shown, indicating a
strong influence of stress path on compaction. Finally, we discuss
the experimental results and the consequences of the stress path to
the compaction behavior by considering the underlying compac-
tion mechanisms. Although we discuss only field data and core
measurements from the Groningen gas field, we think that our
conclusions can be generalized, and may be of value to other
studies aimed at the prediction of depletion-induced reservoir
compaction.
Reservoir Stress Changes During Production
Prior to production, the Earth’s stress field determines the state of
stress in the reservoir. Production causes a decrease of the fluid
and/or gas pressure in the pores. These pressure changes also
result in changes in the total vertical and horizontal stresses acting
on the reservoir. Strong evidence for this comes from the occur-
rence of seismic events inside and close to compacting
reservoirs.4,5
Geertsma6 developed a theory of the subsidence and stress
changes associated with reservoir compaction, based on linear po-
roelastic rock behavior. Regarding the total vertical stress, the
depletion-induced stress changes at the axis just above a disk-
shaped compacting reservoir can be written as6
冉 冊冉冊
h⌬p 1⫺2 ␯ d
⌬ ␴ V⫽ f . 共1兲
r 2⫺2 ␯ r
For reservoirs that are laterally extensive relative to their depth
(r⬎d), the function f (d/r)⬍1. For the Groningen reservoir
(d/r⫽0.17), the function f (d/r) has a value of 0.11. Defining the
parameter ␥ V as the ratio of change of the total vertical stress per
change in pore pressure, Eq. 1 gives
1094-6470/2000/3共4兲/342/6/$5.00⫹0.50
 TABLE 1– TYPICAL PROPERTIES OF THE GRONINGEN
RESERVOIR*
Parameter Symbol Value
Depth d 2900 m Parameter (Unit)
Radius (average) r 17 km
Thickness (average) h 150
Uniaxial compressibility** Cu 1.1⫻10⫺4 MPa⫺1
Poisson’s ratio ␯ 0.15 ¯ p (MPa)
*See Refs. 3 and 7.
**Averaged laboratory determined value on cores with porosities in the range of 15 to
20%.
␥ V⫽
⌬p
⫽ 冉 冊冉冊
⌬ ␴ V h 1⫺2 ␯
r 2⫺2 ␯
f
d
r
, 共2兲
indicating that the induced vertical stress changes are proportional
to the thickness/radius ratio (h/r) of the reservoir. With the use of
the data in Table 1,3,7 Eq. 2 gives ␥ V ⫽0.0004. In general, Geerts-
ma’s model6 predicts that the compaction-induced change in the
total vertical stress is very small for laterally extensive reservoirs.
It must be noted that the model assumes equal elastic properties
for the reservoir and the overburden. Stiffness contrasts between
reservoir and overburden can have a strong influence on ␥ V .
However, for laterally extensive reservoirs, numerical modeling8
shows that even a stiffness contrast of a factor 10 gives a negli-
gible low ␥ V .
For many reservoirs, the in-situ stress changes during produc-
tion are directly related to the change in pore pressure. To de-
scribe the field stress path during depletion, often the ratio of the
change in effective minimum horizontal stress to the change in
effective vertical stress is used:
⌬ 共 ␴ H min⫺ ␣ p 兲
K⫽ . 共3兲
⌬共 ␴ V⫺ ␣ p 兲
Here, ␣ is Biot’s effective stress parameter. This definition has
two serious drawbacks: The effective stress parameter ␣ must be
known, and both the total vertical and total horizontal stress as a
function of depletion must be known. The parameter ␣ is usually
assumed to be 1, but recent work suggests that for sandstone this
is not always the case.9,10 The total vertical stress is usually cal-
culated from integration of the density of the overburden, and it is
assumed to be constant during depletion. The total horizontal
stress, finally, can be deduced from hydraulic fracture or micro-
fracture operation, and is now regarded as a standard, though ex-
pensive technique.
Assuming that the horizontal stresses are isotropic, a more di-
rect way to define the horizontal stress changes of a compacting
reservoir is with the stress path parameter:
⌬␴H
␥ H⫽ . 共4兲
⌬p
This parameter depends neither on rock-mechanical parameters
nor on the boundary conditions of the reservoir, and can be deter-
mined directly from field measurements. Only under the condition
that the total vertical stress does not change during depletion, the
parameter ␥ H is related to K by
␥ H ⫽ ␣ 共 1⫺K 兲 .
From this point onwards, we write for brevity: ␥ H ⫽ ␥ . The pa-
rameter ␥ is controlled by the applied stress/strain boundary con-
ditions. One extreme condition is that the total horizontal stress is
independent of the pore pressure: ␥ ⫽0. Another extreme condi-
tion may be that the effective horizontal stress does not change
during depletion: ␥ ⫽ ␣ . It appears from this reasoning that
0⭐ ␥ ⭐ ␣ .
Hettema et al.: Production-Induced Compaction of a Sandstone Reservoir
TABLE 2– INITIAL STRESSES FOR THE GRONINGEN
FIELD AND STRESSES AFTER DEPLETION UNDER
CONSTANT ␥
Unit
Stress, Pressure
Initial After Depletion
m ␴ V (MPa) 63 63
␴ H (MPa) 43 43⫹ ␥ ⌬ p
36 36⫹⌬ p
K i ⫽( ␴ H ⫺ p )/( ␴ V ⫺ p ) 0.26
p i / p ni 1.2
From the theory of linear poroelasticity it follows that under the
uniaxial strain condition the horizontal stress equals
␴ H ⫺ ␣ p⫽
␯
共 ␴ ⫺␣ p 兲,
1⫺ ␯ V
共7兲
which gives
␥ u⫽ ␣ 冉 冊
1⫺2 ␯
1⫺ ␯
. 共8兲
Eq. 8 gives ␥ u ⫽ ␣ for ␯ ⫽0 and ␥ u ⫽0 for ␯ ⫽0.5.
It is also possible that the development of the horizontal stress
during compaction is controlled by nearby faults at, or near, the
stress state at which sliding occurs. Addis and co-workers11-13
presented analyses of depletion-induced horizontal stress changes
in faulted regions. If the total horizontal stress is limited by the
friction along the fault, for a normal faulting region:
冉 冊
2 sin ␺
␥ fault⫽ ␣ , 共9兲
1⫹sin ␺
where ␯ ⭓(1⫺sin ␺)/2, with ␺ being the fault friction angle. If
␯ ⬍(1⫺sin ␺)/2, the minimum horizontal stress re-orientates par-
allel to the strike of the fault and the stress path becomes
␥ fault⫽ ␣ 冉 sin ␺ ⫹1⫺2 ␯
1⫹sin ␺
. 冊 共10兲
Groningen Stress Data
The Groningen gas field is situated in the northeastern part of The
Netherlands and was discovered in 1959. The producing horizon
is the Slochteren sandstone in the Permean Rotliegendes forma-
tion. The reservoir mainly consists of well-consolidated sand-
stone, with porosity in the range of 15 to 20%. The original res-
ervoir pressure was 36 MPa and presently, after 36 years of
production, the pressure has decreased to about 14 MPa.
Table 2 shows the initial 共pre-production兲 stress state for the
Groningen field. The value for the total vertical stress is calculated
from formation density data measured with wireline logging. The
vertical stress is the maximum stress, and assuming it is a princi-
pal stress, the field is in a normal faulting regime. The initial
stresses and the depletion-induced stress changes 共assuming that ␥
is constant during production兲 are shown in Table 2. Note that for
depletion, ⌬p⬍0. The initial stresses give an effective stress ratio
of K i ⫽0.26, which seems to be a low value for a reservoir at a
depth of 2900 m. The ratio of initial pore pressure over normal
共hydrostatic兲 pore pressure is 1.2, so the reservoir was initially
共5兲 mildly overpressured.
Fig. 1 shows the minimum total horizontal stress in the Gronin-
gen field, plotted as a function of the reservoir pressure. The set of
three data points at about 35 MPa reservoir pressure were inferred
from static weights of the mud column in three Groningen wells,
where severe mud losses were observed during drilling. We inter-
pret these observations as the point where faults/fractures formed
or opened due to the mud pressure, and that they reflect the mini-
共6兲 mum in-situ horizontal stress at, or closely after, the start of gas
SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 3, No. 4, August 2000 343
Fig. 1–In-situ minimum total horizontal stress in relation to the
reservoir pressure in the Groningen gas field, The Netherlands.
production 共in 1964兲. The two data points at about 20 MPa reser-
voir pressure were interpreted from minifracture tests performed
in 1988 in two different Groningen wells.
The scarcity of the Groningen field stress data prevents an
elaborate analysis, but if we assume that 共1兲 the field data repre-
sent the total horizontal stress evolution in the Groningen reser-
voir, and that 共2兲 the change in total horizontal stress linearly
depends on the change in reservoir pressure, the data suggest that
␥ field⫽0.4⫾0.2. 共11兲
The large uncertainty in ␥ field is due to the uncertainty in the
horizontal stress measurement, and because the horizontal stresses
were obtained only at two reservoir pressure values. The initial
total horizontal stress measurements of about 43 MPa are lower
than calculated from the regional stress trends developed by
Breckels and van Eekelen.14 However, detailed inspection of their
data for the region The Netherlands, onshore 共see their14 Fig. 13兲
shows four stress data points for sandstone at a depth of 2900 m in
the range of 40 to 47 MPa. Our horizontal stress data fall in this
range.
Analysis of Groningen Stress Data
The field stress path from Fig. 1 is low compared with the path
measured under uniaxial strain conditions. Laboratory measure-
ments on Groningen sandstone cores give typical values of ␯
⫽0.15 and ␣ ⫽0.9, which inserted into Eq. 8 yields: ␥ u ⫽0.74.
The field stress path can also be controlled by friction along faults.
A compilation of field data13 shows that a realistic range of 共re-
sidual兲 fault friction angles is 10°⭐ ␺ ⭐30°. Using this range,
together with the rock properties from the core measurements
listed above, yields 共with Eq. 10兲: 0.67⭐ ␥ fault⭐0.72. It is possible
that Poisson’s ratio on the reservoir scale is much larger than
measured in the laboratory.15 In that case, Eq. 9 applies and much
lower stress paths in the range of 0.27⭐ ␥ fault⭐0.60 are predicted.
These results only apply if ␯ ⭓0.25 for ␺ ⫽30° 共upper limit兲 and
if ␯ ⭓0.41 for ␺ ⫽10° 共lower limit兲. It is unknown at present what
Poisson’s ratio is on the Groningen field scale. However, our re-
sults show that if the total horizontal field stress is controlled by
frictional sliding along normal faults, the reservoir stress path can
have a much lower value than determined from laboratory experi-
ments under uniaxial strain.
An alternative explanation for the low stress path of the
Groningen reservoir could be the presence of a halite unit 共Zech-
stein兲, which above the Groningen reservoir has a thickness in the
range of 100 m to over 1 km. Breckels and van Eekelen14 already
pointed out that the presence of salt could be responsible for a
relatively low initial horizontal stress. Because of their ductile
behavior under the slow geologic stress changes, salt rocks tend to
equalize the stresses to hydrostatic over time, so horizontal
stresses approximate the vertical stress. Consequently, they may
take up a large proportion of the far-field horizontal force, which
is reflected in a lower total horizontal stress state in the reservoir.
344 Hettema et al.: Production-Induced Compaction of a Sandstone Reservoir
Fig. 2–Compilation of uniaxial compressibility and axial com-
pressibility data measured under constant ␥ in relation to the
porosity. Each data point represents the average compressibil-
ity in one experiment, measured during the first loading phase.
The experiments were performed both at room temperature
„20°C… and at reservoir temperature „120°C…. No influence of
temperature on compaction was observed.
Laboratory Measurements
Numerous compaction experiments were done over the past de-
cades to study the uniaxial compaction of core samples from the
Groningen reservoir. Experiments were performed in triaxial cells
in the RTS laboratory 共Rijswijk, The Netherlands兲 and in the
Dietz laboratory 共T.U. Delft, The Netherlands兲 under various
stress paths. In order to exclude well-to-well variations, the
present data analysis is limited to measurements on core samples
from three different wells, which cover the lithology variation in
the Groningen reservoir. Two types of uniaxial experiments were
performed: 共1兲 pore pressure depletion and 共2兲 axial stress in-
crease under a constant pore pressure 共1 MPa兲. The uniaxial com-
pressibility C u is defined as
C u ⫽⫺
⌬␧ V
⌬p
冏 ␧ H ⫽0
. 共12兲
Previous experiments on twin samples showed that both types of
experiments gave similar uniaxial compressibilities,3 implying
that the applied effective stress paths were similar, i.e., that ␣ is
close to 1.
The bulk of the Groningen reservoir has porosity in the range
of 15 to 20%. Samples with a porosity of less than 20% always
showed a linear relationship between the uniaxial strain and the
increase in effective vertical stress,3 that is, a constant uniaxial
compressibility C u . In some samples with porosity greater than
20%, C u increased with increasing effective axial stress, in par-
ticular, at effective axial stresses above 50 MPa 共compaction
weakening3兲.
Fig. 2 shows a compilation of the average uniaxial compress-
ibility 共open circles兲 as a function of the sample porosity mea-
sured at ambient conditions (20°C, 0.1 MPa兲 before the experi-
ment. It was already pointed out previously1-3 that porosity is one
of the dominant microstructural features controlling the compac-
tion. The present data also show that C u increases with porosity.
The data spread in the compressibility of about 10⫺4 MPa⫺1 is
attributed to variations in microstructure and grain composition
between samples.
The horizontal stress path in the experiments can be derived
from the stresses, which were required to maintain uniaxial strain
conditions. For the pore pressure depletion experiments, ␥ was
determined directly using its definition 共Eq. 4兲. For the axial
stress-increase experiments, K was determined using Eq. 3 and
the corresponding value of ␥ was calculated with Eq. 5. Biot’s
effective stress parameter in Eq. 5 was determined from core mea-
surements using a special technique.10 For Groningen samples
having porosities in the range of 12%⭐ ␾ ⭐23%, under effective
confining stresses of 6 to 12 MPa, the results are ␣ ⫽0.9⫾0.1.
Fig. 3 shows the values for ␥ u for all uniaxial strain experiments.
The results are
SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 3, No. 4, August 2000
Fig. 3–Stress path during uniaxial compaction in laboratory ex-
periments on laboratory core as a function of the porosity.

␥ u ⫽0.8⫾0.1. 共13兲 Fig. 4–Mohr diagram, showing stress path scenarios for the
Groningen field depleting under constant ␥.
This is roughly a factor of 2 higher than the ␥ value obtained
from the field measurements ( ␥ ⬇0.4), and it motivated us to
perform a new series of experiments on Groningen sandstone core
at a stress path of ␥ ⫽0.4 to 0.6, rather than under uniaxial strain
conditions. These results are also shown in Fig. 2 共black squares兲.
The axial compressibility C ␥ also increases with increasing initial
C ␥⫽
1
3G
␥⫹
1
3K b
2
␣⫺ ␥ .
3 冉 冊 共16兲

porosity. However, at a given porosity, C ␥ is about half of C u
共Fig. 2兲. The nonlinear behavior observed during uniaxial com-
paction of the high-porosity samples did not occur in the experi-
ments performed at ␥ in the range 0.4 to 0.6. Also, the post-
depletion creep and acoustic emission rate were significantly
smaller in the experiments during the compaction at ␥ in the range
0.4 to 0.6 than under uniaxial strain conditions, with ␥ in the
range 0.7 to 0.9. Because the samples from both series of experi-
ments were largely taken from the same cores, we interpret these
experimental observations as evidence for a strong influence of
stress path on the compaction behavior of Groningen reservoir
sandstone.
Discussion: Consequences for Reservoir Compaction
Ref. 16 used diagnostics of hydraulic fracture stimulation con-
ducted in the Ekofisk field to determine the change in effective
minimum horizontal stress as a function of pore pressure deple-
tion. For the field stress path during depletion, it was found that
K field⬇0.2. The compaction behavior of the chalk measured on
cores under uniaxial strain condition16 gave K u ranging from
about 0.4 to 0.5. The results show that for the Ekofisk reservoir,
the laboratory-derived stress path defined by uniaxial strain con-
This relationship shows the influence of the stress path ␥ on the
elastic part of the compaction. With increasing ␥, the contribution
from the shear strain increases while the contribution from the
bulk compression decreases. Eq. 16 also shows that the compress-
ibility has a maximum sensitivity for the stress path ␥ for a rock
that is stiff in compression (K b ⰇG). For the experimentally com-
pacted sandstone with a low porosity ( ␾ ⬍20%), we found the
stress-path sensitivity ( ␥ ) of the compressibility to be in accor-
dance with Eq. 16, but for the high-porosity samples ( ␾
⬎20%), the differences were too large to be explained by the
theory of linear poroelasticity alone.
The influence of the stress path ␥ on the inelastic part of the
depletion-induced compaction can be illustrated in a Mohr dia-
gram. Fig. 4 shows the stress changes for the Groningen field 共see
Table 2兲, along three hypothetical stress paths ␥ ⫽0.5, 0.7, and
0.9. For these calculations, the final reservoir pressure is chosen to
be 2 MPa. The top of the Mohr circle describes the maximum
shear stress and the average normal effective stress. During deple-
tion under constant ␥, these stress components change by
⳵␶
⳵p
冏 top
⫽⫺
␥
2
,

冏
ditions is not representative for a compacting reservoir. The same
⳵␴ n,e ␥
conclusion was reached for several sandstone reservoirs, when ⫽ ⫺␣. 共17兲
comparing field and laboratory-derived stress path data.11-13,15 In ⳵p top
2
summary, there are a number of field cases indicating that ␥ field
In the Mohr diagram, the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope with
⫽ ␥ u , and the few field data from the Groningen field suggest that
an angle of internal friction ␣ f will be approached by the stress
it may also be the case in Groningen.
path vector if
The results of the laboratory experiments on Groningen cores
showed that the applied stress path ( ␥ ) has a strong influence on
the depletion-induced compaction. The influence of the stress path
can partly be explained by the theory of linear poroelasticity. Un-
⳵␶
⳵␴ n,e
冏 top
⫽
␥
2␣⫺␥
⬎sin ␣ f . 共18兲

der the condition that the horizontal stresses are isotropic, the If the failure envelope is stress dependent, the criterion can still
vertical strain equals be applied. The angle of internal friction can then best be deter-
␴V 2␯ ␣ 共 1⫺2 ␯ 兲 mined under the initial 共pre-production兲 effective confining stress.
␧ V⫽ ⫺ ␴ ⫺ p. 共14兲 For the special case of uniaxial compaction 共Eq. 8兲, the stress-path
E E H E vector approaches the failure envelope if 共from Eq. 18兲
Under a constant total vertical stress, the pressure derivative of sin ␣ f ⬍ 共 1⫺2 ␯ 兲 . 共19兲
Eq. 14 gives a compressibility of

冏
This criterion depends only on the rock properties. For a rock
⳵␧V 2␯ ␣ with ␯ ⭐0.2, Eq. 19 shows that under uniaxial strain conditions
C ␥ ⫽⫺ ⫽ ␥⫹ . 共15兲
⳵p E 3K b the failure envelope is approached for ␣ f ⭐37°. Because this
␴ V ⫽c
combination of properties is common for many sandstones, com-
This relationship shows that the compressibility has a contribu- paction weakening related to failure processes is expected to oc-
tion from the stress path ( ␥ ) and from the bulk compression (K b ). cur during uniaxial compaction. For the more general case of
Using the definition of the elastic constants, Eq. 15 can be rewrit- depletion under constant ␥, rearranging Eq. 18 gives a critical
ten as stress path of

Hettema et al.: Production-Induced Compaction of a Sandstone Reservoir SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 3, No. 4, August 2000 345
 2 ␣ sin ␣ f Conclusions
␥ c⫽ . 共20兲 During the production of laterally extensive sandstone reservoirs,
1⫹sin ␣ f
changes in the pore pressure cause significant changes in the total
horizontal stress and, to a much lesser extent, changes in the total
vertical stress.
As an example, for sandstone with ␣ ⫽0.9 and ␣ f ⫽30°, Eq. 20 The stress path defined by the uniaxial strain condition applied
in the laboratory experiments ( ␥ u ⫽0.8⫾0.1) deviates signifi-
gives: ␥ c ⫽0.6. As compaction occurs under ␥ ⬎ ␥ c , failure-
cantly from the Groningen field stress path inferred from the field
associated processes can occur, which facilitate inelastic compac-
data ( ␥ field⫽0.4⫾0.2).
tion mechanisms resulting in additional plastic deformation and Laboratory experiments show that the stress path 共␥兲 has a
creep. In sandstone, micromechanical processes such as cement strong influence on the depletion-induced compaction behavior.
bond breakage, failure of grain contacts, and failure of grains can Experiments under uniaxial conditions 共under high ␥兲 give rela-
eventually lead to failure.1-3 tively high compressibilities: C u ⬇2•C ␥ ⫽0.4⫺0.6 .
Eq. 20 provides a necessary condition for the stress path to The theory of linear poroelasticity can only account for a com-
approach the failure envelope. Whether or not failure actually pressibility that is proportional with ␥. This is insufficient to ex-
occurs depends also on the initial stress state, the amount of deple- plain the sensitivity of the compressibility of the high-porosity
tion, and the cohesion of the rock 共see Fig. 4兲. The relationships sandstone ( ␾ ⬎20%) to the stress path.
derived for a critical stress path 共Eqs. 18–20兲 only apply to failure The strong influence of the stress path ␥ on the compaction
by brittle deformation mechanisms described by a Mohr-Coulomb behavior of the high-porosity sandstone is dictated by the position
failure criterion. Phenomena such as pore collapse or pressure of the stress path vector relative to the failure envelope. Ap-
solution are not taken into account. It must also be noted that proaching the failure envelope enhances inelastic compaction
close to failure, Biot’s effective stress parameter ␣ tends to ap- mechanisms, resulting in additional plastic deformation and creep.
proach 1, thereby changing the critical stress path. The new Groningen field data, in combination with our experi-
For the laboratory experiments on cores from the Groningen mental results, provide an explanation for the difference between
field, we found that the inelastic compaction of the high-porosity the prediction of compaction and subsidence based on uniaxial
sandstone ( ␾ ⬎20%) was related to failure. The mechanism was experiments and the measurement of compaction and subsidence
probably grain sliding and grain rotation triggered by intergranu- in the Groningen field. With the use of the new stress path, the
lar fracturing and cement bond and asperity breakage. This is predicted and measured compaction and subsidence are in agree-
ment.
confirmed by the acoustic emissions measured during and after
Knowledge of the depletion-induced field stress path is crucial
the depletion-induced compaction.3 Other studies also point to
for the design, interpretation, and application of laboratory experi-
inter/intragranular fracturing as the dominant mechanism control- ments in models to predict reservoir compaction.
ling the extent and rate of inelastic deformation under the condi-
tions prevailing in depleting sandstone reservoirs.1-3,9,16,17 For this Nomenclature
reason, compaction under high ␥ can lead to large vertical strains,
i.e., high compressibilities. In laboratory experiments on very C ⫽ compressibility, 1/MPa, Lt2/m
high-porosity sandstone ( ␾ ⬎25%), samples can even fail during d ⫽ reservoir depth, m, L
uniaxial compaction.3,17 This stress state is shown in Fig. 4, when E ⫽ Young’s modulus, GPa, m/Lt2
the Mohr stress circle for ␥ ⫽0.9 touches the failure envelope. We h ⫽ thickness of the reservoir, m, L
conclude that the compaction behavior of sandstone reservoirs, K ⫽ ratio of change of effective minimum horizontal stress
ranging from linear elastic to nonlinear failure-associated behav- to change of effective vertical stress
ior, strongly depends on the development of the horizontal
Kb ⫽ bulk modulus, GPa, m/Lt2
stresses during depletion ( ␥ ). This implies that for an accurate p ⫽ pore pressure, MPa, m/Lt2
prediction of reservoir compaction, the field stress path should be r ⫽ radius of the reservoir, m, L
known. ␣ ⫽ Biot’s effective stress parameter
Despite the limited field data from the Groningen field, we
␣f ⫽ angle of internal friction, degrees, rad
␧ ⫽ strain, millistrain, L/L
finally discuss the implications of our findings. The compaction of
␾ ⫽ porosity
the Groningen field has been measured in situ by the monitoring
␥ ⫽ ratio of change in total horizontal stress to change in
of the distance between radioactive markers shot at regular dis- pore pressure
tances across the reservoir.7 Data measured from 1982 to 1994, ␯ ⫽ Poisson’s ratio
during which the reservoir pressure decreased from 22 to 17 MPa, ␳ ⫽ density, kg/m3, m/L3
resulted in reservoir compressibilities in the range of (0.35 ␴ ⫽ stress, MPa, m/Lt2
⭐C field ⭐0.75)10⫺4 MPa⫺1. These values were in agreement with ␶ ⫽ shear stress, MPa, m/Lt2
compressibilities inferred from surface subsidence data.7,18 In ␺ ⫽ fault friction angle, degrees, rad
light of our experimental observations, it is significant to note that
the C u values obtained from the uniaxial experiments overesti- Subscripts
mate the reservoir compaction by a factor of about 2. The C ␥
values obtained in the new series of tests conducted at the field- c ⫽ critical
e ⫽ effective 共stress兲
representative stress path of ␥ ⫽0.4 to 0.6 bring the compaction
H ⫽ horizontal
prediction and in-situ compaction measurement for Groningen
i ⫽ initial
well in line. In this respect, it should be kept in mind that there n ⫽ normal 共stress兲
may be other factors influencing reservoir rock compressibility u ⫽ under uniaxial strain
and its use in compaction prediction, including coring-induced V ⫽ vertical
damage,19 pre-production stress state, core sample representative- ␥ ⫽ under constant ␥
ness, and total vertical stress changes 共e.g., due to stress arching兲.
Nevertheless, we think that for an accurate compaction prediction, Acknowledgments
the difference between the stress path obtained from uniaxial We thank the Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij 共NAM兲 and
compaction experiments ( ␥ ⬇0.8) and the stress path inferred Shell Research and Technical Services 共SIEP-RTS兲 for their per-
from the Groningen field data ( ␥ ⬇0.4) offers a new explanation mission to publish this paper. We also thank the present and pre-
for the difference between predicted and measured compaction vious Shell compaction researchers for providing additional data
and subsidence in the Groningen field. for the compilation. We wish to thank C.J. de Pater 共Technical U.

346 Hettema et al.: Production-Induced Compaction of a Sandstone Reservoir SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 3, No. 4, August 2000
Delft兲 and J. W. Rudnicki 共Northwestern U., Chicago兲 for fruitful
discussions on stress path in relation to reservoir compaction. We
thank P. Marchina, M. Bouts, and D. Doornhof of NAM for pro-
viding the Groningen field stress data. Skillful technical assistance
at SIEP-RTS was provided by H. de Ruig, H. Visser, and E. van
der Geest, and at T.U. Delft by J. Etienne.
References
1. Bernabé, Y., Fryer, D.T., and Shively, R.M.: ‘‘Experimental Obser-
vations of the Elastic and Inelastic Behavior of Porous Sandstones,’’
Geophys. J. Int. 共1994兲 117, 403.
2. Wong, T.-F. and Baud, P.: ‘‘Mechanical Compaction of Porous Sand-
stone,’’ Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 共1999兲 54, No. 6, 715.
3. Schutjens, P.M.T.M., Fens, T.W., and Smits, R.M.M.: ‘‘Experimental
Observations of the Uniaxial Compaction of Quartz-Rich Reservoir
Rock at Stresses Up To 80 MPa,’’ Land Subsidence, F.B.J. Barends,
F.J.J. Brouwer, and F.H. Schröder 共eds.兲, Balkema, Rotterdam 共1995兲
389.
4. Grasso, J.R.: ‘‘Mechanics of Seismic Instabilities Induced By the Re-
covery of Hydrocarbons,’’ PAGEOPH 共1992兲 139, No. 3/4, 507.
5. Segall, P.: ‘‘Earthquakes Triggered by Fluid Extraction,’’ Geology
共1989兲 17, 942.
6. Geertsma, J.: ‘‘A Basic History of Subsidence Due To Reservoir
Compaction: The Homogeneous Case,’’ Verh. K. Geol. Mijnbouwk.
Gen. 共1973兲 28, 43.
7. Mobach, E. and Gussinklo, H.J.: ‘‘In-situ Reservoir Compaction
Monitoring in the Groningen Field,’’ paper SPE 28094 presented at
the 1994 SPE/ISRM Eurock, Delft, The Netherlands, 29–31 August.
8. Morita, N. et al.: ‘‘A Quick Method To Determine Subsidence, Res-
ervoir Compaction, and In-Situ Stress Induced By Reservoir Deple-
tion,’’ JPT 共January 1989兲 71.
9. Bouteca, M.J. et al.: ‘‘Contribution of Poroelasticity to Reservoir En-
gineering: Laboratory Experiments, Application To Core Decompres-
sion and Implication in HP-HT Reservoirs Depletion,’’ paper SPE
28093 presented at the 1994 SPE/ISRM Eurock, Delft, The Nether-
lands, 29–31 August.
10. Hettema, M.H.H. and de Pater, C.J.: ‘‘The Poromechanical Behavior
of Felser Sandstone: Stress and Temperature Dependent,’’ paper SPE
47270 presented at the 1998 SPE/ISRM Eurock, Trondheim, Norway,
8–10 July.
11. Addis, M.A., Last, N.C., and Yassir, N.A.: ‘‘Estimation of Horizontal
Stresses at Depth in Faulted Regions and Their Relationship to Pore
Pressure Variations,’’ SPEFE 共March 1996兲 11.
12. Addis, M.A., Choi, X., and Gunning, J.: ‘‘The Influence of the Res-
ervoir Stress-Depletion Response on the Lifetime Consideration of
Well Completion Design,’’ paper SPE 47289 presented at the 1998
SPE/ISRM Eurock, Trondheim, Norway, 8–10 July.
13. Wu, B., Addis, M.A., and Last, N.C.: ‘‘Stress Estimation in Faulted
Regions: The Effect of Residual Friction,’’ paper SPE 47210 pre-
sented at the 1998 SPE/ISRM Eurock, Trondheim, Norway, 8–10
July.
14. Breckels, I.M. and van Eekelen, H.A.M.: ‘‘Relationship Between
Horizontal Stress and Depth in Sedimentary Basins,’’ JPT 共Septem-
ber 1982兲 2191; Trans., AIME, 273.
15. Santarelli, F.J. et al.: ‘‘Reservoir Stress Path: The Depletion and the
Rebound,’’ paper SPE 47350 presented at the 1998 SPE/ISRM Eu-
rock, Trondheim, Norway, 8–10 July.
Hettema et al.: Production-Induced Compaction of a Sandstone Reservoir
16. Teufel, L.W., Rhett, D.W., and Farrell, H.E.: ‘‘Effect of Reservoir
Depletion and Pore Pressure Drawdown on In-Situ Stress and Defor-
mation in the Ekofisk Field, North Sea,’’ In: J.C. Roegiers 共ed.兲 Rock
Mechanics as a Multidisciplinary Science, J.C. Roegiers 共ed.兲,
Balkema, Rotterdam 共1991兲 63–72.
17. Schutjens, P.M.T.M. et al.: ‘‘Depletion-Induced Compaction of an
Overpressured Reservoir Sandstone: An Experimental Approach,’’
paper SPE 47277 presented at the 1998 SPE/ISRM Eurock, Trond-
heim, Norway, 8–10 July.
18. Doornhof, D.: ‘‘Surface Subsidence in The Netherlands: The Gronin-
gen Gas Field,’’ Geologie en Mijnbouw, Kluwer Academic Publish-
ers, Dordrecht 共1992兲 71, 119.
19. Holt, R.M. et al.: ‘‘Core Damage Effects on Compaction Behavior,’’
paper SPE 28027 presented at the 1994 SPE/ISRM Eurock, Delft,
The Netherlands, 29–31 August.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
bar ⫻ 1.0* E⫹05 ⫽ Pa
ft ⫻ 3.048* E⫺01 ⫽ m
°F 共°F⫺32兲/1.8 ⫽ °C
lbf/in.2 共psi兲 ⫻ 6.894 757 E⫺03 ⫽ MPa
lbm/ft3 ⫻ 1.602 E⫹02 ⫽ kg/m3
mile ⫻ 1.0* E⫹00 ⫽ km
*Conversion factors are exact. SPEREE
Marc Hettema is a staff engineer in the Well and Production
Technology Dept., Rock Mechanics team, at Statoil in Sta-
vanger. e-mail: mhett@statoil.com. Previously, he was a scien-
tific researcher at Delft U. of Technology in The Netherlands.
Hettema holds an MS degree in geophysics from Utrecht U.
and a PhD degree in rock mechanics from Delft U. of Technol-
ogy. Peter Schutjens is a research petrophysicist for reservoir
mechanics studies, experimental core deformation, and mi-
crostructural analysis. e-mail: peter.schutjens@iku.sintef.no. He
worked for 10 years at Shell Research Laboratory in Rijswijk and
is now at SINTEF Petroleum Research in Trondheim, Norway, as
part of a researcher exchange agreement between Shell and
SINTEF. Schutjens holds an MS degree in geology and a PhD
degree in earth science, both from Utrecht U. in The Nether-
lands. Bert Verboom works with the Subsidence Group at
NAM in Assen, The Netherlands, as part of a team implement-
ing production technology software. Previously, he worked for
Shell as a petroleum technologist in Brunei, the U.K., Denmark,
Oman, and Syria. Verboom holds a degree in mining engi-
neering. H.J. Gussinklo joined the Dutch Oil Co. (NAM) in
1965 and held various positions in drilling operations for several
years. After assignments with Shell Expro, Shell Nicaragua and
Shell Pakistan, he returned to NAM to work in the Petrophysics
Dept. Currently, he is head of the Subsidence Group. Gussin-
klo holds a degree in mining engineering.
SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 3, No. 4, August 2000 347