SPE-183279-MS

Pore Pressure Prediction Based on Seismic Data for Exploration Well Before
Drilling

Chen Xin, Wei Xiaodong, Wang Hongmei, Zhao Mingqiu, Tian Wenyuan, Wang Yuwei, Li Yanjing, Xia Yaliang, Yan
Xiaohuan, and Zhou Xiaomig, BGP, CNPC.

Copyright 2016, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 7-10 November 2016.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Pore pressure prediction before drilling is significant on ensuring drilling safety, reasonable drilling mud
density, and designing well profile. It can also reduce the drilling cost and protect the hydrocarbon reservoir.
With the increasing quality of seismic data and widely application of new methods, high-resolution seismic
was used to reduce the uncertainty of the pore pressure prediction in this paper.
Through the past years study, workflows were developed which use the high resolution seismic for
pore pressure prediction. The workflows mainly include three steps. The first step is the mechanisms
analysis for pore pressure prediction. The geological genesis is the key to pore pressure prediction. Base
on the geological genesis, Fillippone method was optimization and adjustment, such as seismic velocity
analysis and variation rate of seismic velocity estimation based on geological consistency. After the method
optimization, the overburden pressure and pore pressure will be estimated by the seismic data, integrated
with regional geological data and shallow well logging data.
A postmortem from southwest of Iraq is presented showing a successful well that were better predicted
before the well were drilled. The prediction result accuracy error is less than 5% compared with the measured
data which is tested by well drilling and this indicates that the method can greatly improve the accuracy of
pressure prediction before drilling.
With the increasing quality of seismic data, the high-resolution seismic data will play more and more
important role in pore pressure prediction. The method integrated seismic, geological and well logging data
for formation pressure prediction will reduce the uncertainty greatly.

Introduction
Pore pressure prediction before drilling is significant on ensuring drilling safety, reasonable drilling mud
density, and designing well profile. It can also reduce the drilling cost and protect the hydrocarbon reservoir.
The origin of abnormal pore pressures is complicated. Chilingar (2002) systematically classified the main
origin factors causing abnormal pressures. Since Penebaker predicted the pressures firstly with seismic data
in 1968, the prediction of the pressures has made great progresses over the years. At present, common
methods for predicting abnormal pore overpressures main include Eaton formula method(1975), Equivalent
2 SPE-183279-MS

depth method, Eberhart-Phillips method (1989), Bowers formula method(1995), and Fillippone formula
method(1982). But, many methods are developed after-drilling or while-drilling, and the error of pre-driling
pore pressure prediction was big. With the increasing quality of seismic data and widely application of new
methods, high-resolution seismic was used to reduce the uncertainty of the pore pressure prediction in this
paper (Daniel Mujica,2013).

Data and Method

Available Data
The available data for pore pressure prediction of exploration well mainly include: high-resolution seismic
data, regional geological data. Not any deep well meet the target formation Jurassic. In order to improve
the accuracy of pore pressure prediction before drilling, logging data and drilling data from adjacent fields
was used.

Method
The workflow for pore pressure prediction were developed based on the high resolution seismic, and
intergeted the geological data, logging data and drilling data (see Fig.1). The method mainly include three
key steps.

Figure 1The workflow of pore pressure prediction for exploration well before drilling

Geological origin factors analysis. To analyze the formation mechanisms, tectonic and sedimentary
evolution and distribution of abnomal pore pressure for regional sub-basin be summarized based on the
seismic data, geological data, logging data and drilling data. In this step, the adjacent fields are similar with
the target oilfield in tectonic and sedimentary evolution were found, the main controlled origin factors in
all the high abnormal pore pressure formation of adjacent fields were summarized.
Method selection and optimization.. Common methods for predicting abnormal pore overpressures can
be classified into three categories: Category I pore pressure prediction methods based on under-compact
theory, including equivalent depth method and Eaton formula method. Category II pore pressure prediction
methods based on logging data, including Eberhart-Phillips method and Bowers formula method. Category
SPE-183279-MS 3

III pre-drilling pressure prediction methods based on seismic data, including Fillippone formula method
and modified Fillippone formula method. Considering the geological origin factors and available data only
seismic data, Fillippone formula method (see formula 1) was selected.

(formula 1)

In the Fillippone formula: P is pore pressure, and Vmax is a skeleton velocity while porosity is close to zero;
V is interval velocity calculated with seismic data, and Vmin is close to pore fluid veloci V0 ty; is intercept
of RMS velocity at the moment t0; k is variation rate of velocity over the time; t is seismic travel time, and
S is overburden pressure.
In order to improve the accuracy of pore pressure prediction, three parameters were optimized.
To improve the accuracy of overburden pressure (S), seismic inversion and seismic attribute analysis
were applied base on seismic data and well data similar with adjacent fields. The lithology and density
curves were predicted for overburden pressure (S).
To improve the accuracy of seismic velocity (V & V0), geological consistency method (Satinder Chopra,
2006) for seismic velocity interpretation was applied base on lithology prediction results, seismic data and
well data in similar with adjacent fields (see Fig 2). After the seismic velocity interpretation by geological
consistency method, the interval velocity (V) matched with the velocity of lithology prediction results, and
the RMS velocity (V0) are more reasonable.

Figure 2seismic velocity analysis based on geological consistency

4 SPE-183279-MS

To improve the accuracy of seismic velocity variation rate (k), respectively calculate method was applied.
Different lithology have different k values. The accurate k can be respectively calculated base on lithology
prediction results and seismic velocity interpretation results (see Fig 3).

Figure 3Variation rate of seismic velocity analysis by seismic interpretation

After the method optimization, the overburden pressure and pore pressure will be estimated by the seismic
data, integrated with regional geological data and well logging data from adjacent fields.

Results
Well 01 from southwest of Iraq is presented showing that the results were good predicted before the well
was drilled. Abnormal high pressure zone can be identified by new seismic velocity after optimization
(see Fig 4). Abnormal high pressure can be predicted more accurately by Fillippone formula based on the
optimization of overburden pressure (S), seismic velocity (V & V0), and seismic velocity variation rate (k)
(see Fig 5 and Tab.1). The erros of pore pressure prediction in this well is about 1%~4.7%, the average
erros is about 2.6%.
SPE-183279-MS 5

Figure 4Abnormal high pressure identification by new seismic velocity (Abnormal low velocity area is high pressure area)

Figure 5Pore pressure prediction results compared with pressure test results
6 SPE-183279-MS

Table 1Pore pressure prediction results compared with pressure test results

Prediction Pore Test Pore Relative

Well name Layers Lithology Depth (m)
Pressure (Psi) Pressure (Psi) Error (%)

Well 01 Yamama limestone 4028.83 11498 12067.2 4.7

Well 01 Gotnia limestone 4097 11789 12228.61 3.6

Well 01 Najmah limestone 4388 12494 13097.18 4.6

Well 01 Sargelu limestone 4788 14137 14291.09 1.1

Well 01 Mus limestone 4944 14479 14756.71 1.9

Well 01 Butmah limestone 5131 15089 15314.86 1.5

Well 01 Triassic limestone 5381 15894 16061.06 1

Conclusions
With the increasing quality of seismic data, the high-resolution seismic data will play more and more
important role in pore pressure prediction. The method based on the high-resolution seismic data, and
integrated geological and well logging data for formation pressure prediction will reduce the uncertainty
for exploration well before drilling.

Rreference
Chilingar, Serbryakov and Robertson. 2002, Origin and prediction of abnormal formation pressures [M], Elsevier Science:
2123.
Pennebaker, E.S., 1968. Seismic data indicate depth, magnitude of abnormal pressure, World Oil (166) 7378.
Eaton, B. A., 1972, Graphical method predicts geopressures worldwide: World Oil, 5156.
Eaton B. 1975, The equation for geopressure prediction from well logs [C]. Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers of AIME: 5554: 15.
Eberhart-Phillips D, Han D, Zoback M. 1989, Empirical relationships among seismic velocity, effective pressure, porosity
and clay content in sandstone [J]. Geophysics, 54: 8289.
Bowers G. 1995, Pore pressure estimation from velocity data: accounting from overpressure mechanisms besides
undercompaction [J]. SPE Drilling & Completion, 10: 8995.
Fillippone W. 1982, Estimation of Formation Parameters and the Prediction of Overpressures from Seismic Data [C].
62nd Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts: 502503.
Daniel Mujica and Abdulfattah Aldajani. 2013, Pore Pressure Prediction from 3D Seismic Data: A Feasibility Study for
Unconventional Gas in Saudi Arabia [C]. 83th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts: 23312335.
Satinder Chopra, Alan R. 2006, Velocity determination for pore- pressure prediction[J]. The Leading Edge, (12):
15021515.