PORE-PRESSURE-FRACTURE PRESSURE
COUPLING
AGENDA
Problem Statement
Part 1: Drilling window assessment study
Theory
Modeling reduced fracture gradient for -- due to pore pressure
depletion
Uncertainty analysis
Conclusions
2
BACKGROUND
Request for geomechanical support for on following lines:
1) Assessment of a “drilling window” – wells for deeper reservoirs are planned to be drilled
after production from shallow reservoirs. It needs to be established how much depletion is
acceptable in order not to jeopardize deep well drilling
2) Assessment of depletion induced subsidence
3) Update existing geomechanical model with data from recent well
4) Top seal failure analysis and fault reactivation study
5) Borehole stability analysis for new wells
Current study addresses number 1 and 2
2.0
PART 1: DRILLING WINDOW ASSESSMENT
STUDY
4
OBJECTIVE AND APPROACH
Objective –
To model expected reduction in total minimum horizontal stress a.k.a.
fracture gradient with depletion in pore pressure as a function of time
Interpret impact of reduction of drilling window on current well design (
casing depth, number of casing strings, borehole stability)
Approach –
Theory of poroelasticity is used to model changes in total horizontal
stresses due to pore pressure depletion for uniaxial strain
5
2.1
THEORY
6
HORIZONTAL STRESSES A.K.A. FRACTURE GRADIENT: BASICS
In passive environment formations are restrained laterally while undergoing
vertical compaction through deposition
Uniaxial Strain Conditions
Therefore, horizontal effective stress is generated to counteract the natural
tendency of a formation to dilate laterally in response to vertical loading
Material’s Poisson’s ratio measures its tendency to dilate laterally in response to
vertical loading
Horizontal stress is not always a good estimate of fracture gradient 7
HORIZONTAL STRESSES/FRACTURE GRADIENT CONTINUED
Effective minimum horizontal stress
Effective vertical stress
Poisson’s Ratio
A high Poisson’s ratio implies high tendency to dilate and therefore a high
effective horizontal stress is built up in response to vertical loading.
In terms of total stresses:
8
FRACTURE GRADIENT: EFFECT OF LITHOLOGY
For the same overburden pressure and pore pressure, sands will have lower
horizontal stress (fracture pressure) compared to shales
Fracture pressure curve display more variation with depth, reflecting
greater sensitivity to lithology than pore pressure
9
FRACTURE GRADIENT ACROSS DIFFERENT LITHOLOGY
Higher fracture
pressure for shales
10
TOTAL HORIZONTAL STRESS VS. FRACTURE GRADIENT
Fracture pressure- used in drilling community- loosely defined term
Refers to pressures above which drilling fluid is lost to formation
Fluid loss can occur by various mechanisms
1. Fracture pressure ~ Total minimum horizontal stress
when fluid loss is due to tensile fracturing
P0 > Sh + T0
2. Fracture pressure < Total minimum horizontal stress
when losses occur in vuggy/permeable formations or by shear reactivation
of pre-existing faults/fractures
11
WHAT HAPPENS TO HORIZONTAL STRESSES WITH PORE
PRESSURE DEPLETION?
∆ ∆ ∆ ∆
With change in pore pressure, horizontal stresses also change
S hor,min a 1 2 1 2
hor
Pp 1 1
Response of total horizontal stress to pore pressure depletion modeled by a
factor called stress path coefficient or depletion constant
a - Biot-Willis coefficient ~ 1
Formations being drilled are not homogenous: Intra-reservoir low permeability
shales would not drain over production time scales
12
FRACTURE PRESSURE REDUCTION: EFFECT OF LITHOLOGY
Root of the problem with drilling wells late in a field’s life:
Initial sand fracture pressure is lower than the initial shale fracture pressure
and the sand fracture pressure declines at an increased rate relative to the
shale fracture pressure
After reservoir depletion, sand fracture gradient may have declined below the
value necessary to maintain shale stability in adjacent shale and below the
value of un-drained nearby sands
Footer 13
FRACTURE PRESSURE REDUCTION: EFFECT OF LITHOLOGY
Low initial fracture pressure in sands and
faster rate of reduction of fracture pressure
14
DRILLING WINDOW – SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
Drilling window
A Pore Pressure Gradient
PoreFracture
Pressure / Gradient
Hole Collapse Pressure
Fracture Pressure Gradient
Overburden Gradient
Hydrostatic Gradient
B Mud Weight used
Casing shoe
RES
15
DRILLING WINDOW CLOSURE – SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
Drilling window
/ Hole Collapse final
A
final
final
B
Pore Pressure Gradient initial
Fracture Pressure Gradient initial
Mud Weight used initial
Intra- reservoir shales would not deplete
RES
16
ESTIMATING DEPLETION CONSTANT FOR TUKAU TIMUR
RESERVOIR
Poisson’s ratio can be estimated using log data
Elastodynamic PR is defined as:
Vp 2 2Vs 2 - Compression wave velocity
elstodynamics Vp
2(Vp 2 Vs 2 ) Vs - Shear wave velocity
#
Elastodynamic value converted to static value using: static sand elstodynamics * 0.91
Base case γ used for predicting fracture
pressure – 0.75 – 0.80
17
MODELING OF REDUCTION IN FRACTURE GRADIENT
Static Mud Weight ECD
Drilling window closes after 5 yrs
18
2.3
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS
19
RANGE OF H FROM FIELDS ACROSS THE GLOBE
Literature on change of total horizontal stress with depletion
1. North Sea - Norway, Ekofisk h = 0.76, 0.85, 0.87
2. North Sea - Norway, Valhall h = 0.9 and 0.65
3. Nortn Sea - Norway, Saga field h = 0.44 and 0.76
4. North Sea - U.K. Brent fracture = 0.4 to 0.5
5. Permian gas - N.-Netherlands, satellite fields 0.87 and 0.89
6. Permian gas - N.-Netherlands, Groningen 0.4 (+/- 0.2)
7. Texas Waskom field, USA fracture decreasing non-linearly from 0.6 to 0.33
with depletion
8. GOM : Field X h = 0.44
9. GOM : Ursa-11 fracture <= 0.5 (?)
Slide courtesy – Peter Schutjens
20
UNCERTAINTY IN HORIZONTAL STRESS PATH
Value of gamma horizontal assuming uniaxial strain highly uncertain
General observation from field experience (literature review): Horizontal
stress path coefficient from uniaxial strain tend to be conservative
Therefore, from values of stress path coefficient seen across the globe we
take γh as –
γh low case = 0.5 (Corresponds to Poisson’s ratio of 0.33)
γh high case = 0.85 (Corresponds to Poisson’s ratio of 0.13)
21
FRACTURE GRADIENTS– HIGH, BASE AND LOW CASE
Fracture Gradient scenarios after 10 yrs of depletion
22
2.4
CONCLUSIONS
23
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions -
With current well design and mud weight, drilling across shallow
reservoirs possible upto 5 years into depletion
Depletion beyond 5 years leads to gradual
closure of drilling window
For favorable values of hor ( hor = 0.5), drilling window closure is not an
issue even after 10 years into depletion
Recommendation -
Stress measurement: LOT/mini-frac is recommended after commencement
of production to accurately constrain hor
24
WAY FORWARD
Shales and mudstones in the open hole section dictate the lower bound mud
weights which can be used to drill.
Reason for using high mud weight (~ 2 ppg overbalance)? Well-bore
stability study done by GMI to be reviewed
(If high MW are required for the reasons of shale instability, the rate of formation
pressure decline can be critical for determining the timing of infill wells in the
development plan)
Intra-reservoir shales?
25
SOME GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ABOUT DRILLING
DEPLETED RESERVOIRS FROM EXTERNAL LITERATURE
In-situ stresses in caprock are seen to change with depletion too. This occurs because of:
1. Pore pressure change due to dehydration of shale layers to reservoirs
2. Horizontal stress reduction due to arching
Casing shoe should be ~ 15 feet above the depleted reservoir top.
Synthetic muds yield inherently lower fracture propagation pressure than water based muds
However, there would be no benefit from initial fracture opening standpoint
26
