You are on page 1of 62

PETE 625

Well Control
Lesson 6
Pore Pressure Prediction
2
Contents
Porosity
Shale Compaction
Equivalent Depth Method
Ratio Method
Drilling Rate
d
C
-Exponent
Moores Technique
Combs Method
Assignments
Homework # 3:
Ch 2, Problems 1 - 10
due Wednesday, September 22, 2004

Homework # 4:
Ch 2, Problems 11 - 20
due Monday, September 27, 2004

Read: Chapter 2 to page 82
4
Pore pressure prediction
methods
Most pore pressure prediction
techniques rely on measured or inferred
porosity.

The shale compaction theory is the
basis for these predictions.
5
Pore pressure prediction methods
Measure the porosity indicator (e.g.
density) in normally pressured, clean
shales to establish a normal trend line.
When the indicator suggests porosity
values that are higher than the trend, then
abnormal pressures are suspected to be
present.
The magnitude of the deviation from the
normal trend line is used to quantify the
abnormal pressure.
6
2. Extrapolate
normal trend
line
1. Establish Normal
Trend Line in good
clean shale
Transition
Porosity should
decrease with
depth in normally
pressured shales
3. Determine the
magnitude
of the deviation
7
Older shales have had
more time to compact,
so porosities would
tend to be lower (at a
particular depth).

Use the trend line
closest to the transition.

Lines may or may not
be parallel.
8
D
D
e

Equivalent Depth Method
The normally compacted
shale at depth D
e
has the
same compaction as the
abnormally pressured
shale at D. Thus,
o
V
= o
Ve

i.e., o
ob
- p
p
= o
obe
- p
ne

p
p
= p
ne
+ (o
ob
- o
obe
)

o
ob
= o
V
+ p
p

9
Example 2.6
Estimate the pore pressure at 10,200 if the
equivalent depth is 9,100. The normal pore
pressure gradient is 0.433 psi/ft. The
overburden gradient is 1.0 psi/ft.
At 9,100, p
ne
= 0.433 * 9,100 = 3,940 psig
At 9,100, o
obe
= 1.00 * 9,100 = 9,100 psig
At 10,200, o
ob
= 1.00*10,200 = 10,200 psig
10
Solution
p
p
= p
ne
+ (o
ob
- o
obe
) . (2.13)
= 3,940 + (10,200 9,100)
p
p
= 5,040 psig

The pressure gradient,
g
p
= 5,040/10,200
= 0.494 psi/ft
EMW = 0.494/0.052 = 9.5 ppg
11
X
n

X
o
The Ratio Method
uses (X
o
/X
n
) to predict
the magnitude of the
abnormal pressure
We can use:
drilling rate
resistivities
conductivities
sonic speeds
Shale Porosity Indicator
D
e
p
t
h

12
Pore pressures can be
predicted:
Before drilling (planning)
During drilling.
After drilling
13
Before drilling the well
(planning)
Information from nearby wells
Analogy to known characteristics of the
geologic basin
Seismic data
14
15
Table 2.6 Contd
16
Seismic Surveys, as used in conventional geophysical
prospecting, can yield much information about underground
structures, and depths to those structures. Faults, diapirs, etc.
may indicate possible locations of abnormal pressures
17
Typical Seismic Section
18
Under normal
compaction, density
increases with
depth. For this
reason the interval
velocity also
increases with
depth, so travel
time decreases
At = At
ma
(1-o) + At
f
o
19
Sound moves faster in
more dense medium
In air at sea level,
V
sound
= 1,100 ft/sec
In distilled water,
V
sound
= 4,600 ft/sec
In low density, high porosity
rocks,
V
sound
= 6,000 ft/sec
In dense dolomites,
V
sound
= 20,000 ft/sec
20
Example 2.7
Use the data in Table 2.7 to determine
the top of the transition zone, and
estimate the pore pressure at 19,000
using the equivalent depth method
using Pennebakers empirical correlation
Ignore the data between 9,000 and
11,000. Assume Eatons Gulf Coast
overburden gradient.
21
Solution
Plot interval travel time vs. depth on
semilog paper (Fig. 2.31)
Plot normal trend line using the
6,000-9,000 data.
From Fig. 2.20, at 19,000,
g
ob
= 0.995 psi/ft
(o
ob
)
19,000
= 0.995 * 19,000 = 18,905 psig
22
Use
Ignore
Equivalent Depth
Method:
From the vertical line,
D
e
= 2,000
o
obe
= 0.875 * 2,000
=1,750 (Fig. 2.20)
But,
p
ne
= 0.465 * 2,000
= 930 psig
p
p
= 930 +
(18,905-1,750)
p
p
= 18,085 psig
At
n

At
o

23
Pennebakers
correlation for Gulf
Coast sediments
Higher travel time means
more porosity and higher
pore pressure gradient

Example 2.7 (Table 2.7)

At
o
= 95 usec/ft @ 19,000
At
n
= 65 usec/ft @ 19,000
At
o
/ At
n
= 95/65 = 1.46
p
p
= 0.95 * 19,000
= 18,050 psig
0.95
Fig. 2.30
24
Comparison
Pore Pressure at a depth of 19,000 ft:
Pennebaker:
18,050 psi or 0.950 psi/ft or 18.3 ppg
Equivalent Depth Method:
18,085 psi or 0.952 psi/ft or 18.3 ppg
25
While Drilling
d
c
-exponent
MWD & LWD
Kicks
Other drilling rate factors (Table 2.5)
26
TABLE 2.5 -
27
Penetration rate and abnormal pressure
Bits drill through overpressured rock
faster than through normally pressured
rock (if everything else remains the
same).
When drilling in clean shales this fact
can be utilized to detect the presence
of abnormal pressure, and even to
estimate the magnitude of the
overpressure.
28
Note, that many factors can influence the drilling rate,
and some of these factors are outside the control of
the operator.
TABLE 2.8 -
29
Effect of bit weight and hydraulics
on penetration rate
Inadequate
hydraulics or
excessive
imbedding of
the bit teeth in
the rock
Drilling rate
increases more
or less linearly
with increasing
bit weight.
A significant
deviation from
this trend may
be caused by
poor bottom
hole cleaning
0
30
Effect of Differential Pressure on Drilling Rate
Differential
pressure is the
difference between
wellbore pressure
and pore fluid
pressure

Decrease can be due to:
The chip hold down effect
The effect of wellbore
pressure on rock strength
31
Drilling
underbalanced
can further
increase the
drilling rate.
32
The chip hold-down effect
The mud pressure
acting on the
bottom of the hole
tends to hold the
rock chips in
place
Important hold-down parameters:
Overbalance Drilling fluid filtration rate
Permeability Method of breaking rock (shear or crushing)
33
Drilling rates are influenced by rock strengths.
Only drilling rates in relatively clean shales are useful for
predicting abnormal pore pressures.
TABLE 2.9 -
34
o
ob
is generally
the maximum in
situ principal
stress in
undisturbed rock
35
Stresses on Subsurface Rocks
o
ob
, o
H1
, o
H2
and p all tend to increase
with depth

o
ob
is in general the maximum in situ
principal stress.

Since the confining stresses o
H1
and
o
H2
increase with depth, rock strength
increases.
36
Stresses on Subsurface Rocks
The pore pressure, p, cannot produce
shear in the rock, and cannot deform
the rock.
Mohr-Coulomb behavior is controlled by
the the effective stresses (matrix).
When drilling occurs the stresses
change.
o
ob
is replaced by dynamic drilling fluid
pressure.
37
The degree of
overbalance now
controls the
strength of the
rock ahead of the
bit.
38
Rock failure caused by roller cone bit.
The differential pressure from above provides
the normal stress, o
o

Formation fracture is resisted by the shear stress, t
o
,
which is a function of the rock cohesion and the friction
between the plates. This friction depends on o
o
.
39
Fig. 2.41 - Differential Pressure 0.1 in below the bit.
When o
ob
is replaced by p
hyd
(lower) the rock immediately below the
bit will undergo an increase in pore volume, associated with a
reduction in pore pressure.
In sandstone this pressure is increased by fluid loss from the mud.

(Induced
Differential
Pressure in
Impermeable
rock.
FEM Study)
Vertical Stress = 10,000 psi
Horizontal Stress = 7,000 psi
Pore Pressure = 4,700 psi
Wellbore Pressure = 4,700 psi
40
Drilling Rate as a Pore
Pressure Predictor
Penetration rate depends on a number
of different parameters.
R = K(P
1
)
a1
(P
2
)
a2
(P
3
)
a3
(P
n
)
an
A modified version of this equation is:

d
b
d
W
N K R
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
3
41
Drilling Rate as a Pore
Pressure Predictor
Or, in its most
used form:

in Diameter, Bit d
lbf , Bit Weight W
exponent d d
rpm N
ft/hr R
10
12
log
60
log
b
6
=
=
=
=
=
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
b
d
W
N
R
d
d
b
d
W
N K R
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
3
42
d-exponent
The d-exponent normalizes R for any
variations in W, d
b
and N
Under normal compaction, R should
decrease with depth. This would cause
d to increase with depth.
Any deviation from the trend could be
caused by abnormal pressure.
43
d-exponent
Mud weight also affects R..
An adjustment to d may be made:
d
c
= d (p
n
/p
c
)
where
d
c
= exponent corrected for mud density
p
n
= normal pore pressure gradient
p
c
= effective mud density in use
44
Example
While drilling in a Gulf Coast shale,
R = 50 ft/hr
W = 20,000 lbf
N = 100 RPM
ECD = 10.1 ppg (Equivalent Circulating Density)
d
b
= 8.5 in
Calculate d and d
c
45
Solution
34 . 1 d
554 . 1
079 . 2
5 . 8 * 10
000 , 20 * 12
log
100 * 60
50
log
d
6
=

=
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
|
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
b
d
W
N
R
d
6
10
12
log
60
log

|
|
.
|

\
|
p
p
=
c
n
c
d d
19 . 1 d
1 . 10 * 052 . 0
465 . 0
34 . 1 d
c
c
=
|
.
|

\
|
=
46
Example 2.9
Predict pore pressure at 6,050 ft (ppg):
from data in Table 2.10 using:
Rhem and McClendons correlation
Zamoras correlation
The equivalent depth method
47
TABLE 2.10

d-EXPONENT
AND MUD
DENSITY DATA
FOR A WELL
LOCATED
OFFSHORE
LOUISIANA
48
Step 1 is to plot the
data on Cartesian
paper (Fig. 2.43).
Transition at 4,700 ft?
or is it a fault?
Seismic data and
geological indicators
suggest a possible
transition at 5,700 ft.
49
Fig. 2.43
Slope of 0.000038 ft
-1

50
Rehm and McClendon
g
p
= 0.398 log (d
cn
-d
co
) + 0.86
= 0.398 log (1.18 - 0.95) + 0.86
g
p
= 0.606 psi/ft

p
p
= 0.606 / 0.052 = 11.7 ppg
51
Zamora
From Fig. 2.44
g
p
= g
n
(d
cn/
d
co
)
= 0.465 * (1.18/.95)
g
p
= 0.578 psi/ft

p
p
= 0.578/0.052
p
p
= 11.1 ppg
1.18
0.95
52
Equivalent
Depth Method
From Fig. 2.20, at
6,050 ft,
g
ob
= 0.915 psi/ft
o
ob
= 0.915 * 6,050
= 5,536 psi
53
Equivalent
Depth Method
From Fig. 2.43,
Equivalent Depth
= 750 ft
At 750 ft,
o
obe
= 0.86 * 750
= 645 psi
p
ne
= 0.465 * 750
= 349 psig
54
Equivalent Depth Method
From Eq. 2.13, at 6,050 ft
p
p
= p
ne
+ (o
ob
- o
obe
)
p
p
= 349 + (5,536 - 645) = 5,240 psig
p
p
= 19.25 * (5,240 / 6,050) = 16.7 ppg

Perhaps the equivalent depth method is
not always suitable for p
p
prediction
using d
c
!!
55
Overlays such as this can be
handy, but
be careful that the scale is
correct for the graph paper
being used;
the slope is correct for
normal trends;
the correct overlay for the
formation is utilized.
56
To improve pore pressure predictions
using variations in drilling rate:
Try to keep bit weight and rpm relatively
constant when making measurements
Use downhole (MWD) bit weights when
these are available. (Frictional drag in
directional wells can cause large errors)
Add geological interpretation when
possible. MWD can help here also.
57
Improved pore pressure
predictions
Keep in mind that tooth wear can
greatly influence penetration rates.

Use common sense and engineering
judgment.

Use several techniques and compare
results.
58
Moores Technique
Fig. 2.45
Moore proposed a practical
method for maintaining a
pore-pressure overbalance
while drilling into a
transition.
Drilling parameters must be
kept constant for this
technique to work.
59
Combs Method
Combs attempted to improve on the
use of drilling rate for pore pressure by
correcting for:
hydraulics
differential pressure
bit wear
in addition to W, d
b
, and N
60
Combs Method
( ) ( )
N d
a
n b
a
a
b
d
t f p f
d d 96
q
200
N
d 500 , 3
W
R R
q
N
W
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
q = circulating rate
d
n
= diameter of one bit nozzle
f(p
d
) = function related to the differential pressure
f(t
N
) = function related to bit wear
a
W
= bit weight exponent = 1.0 for offshore Louisiana
a
N
= rotating speed exponent = 0.6 for offshore Louisiana
a
q
= flow rate exponent = 0.3 for offshore Louisiana
61
Tooth wear factor
Correction
would depend
upon bit type,
rock hardness,
and
abrasiveness
62
Differential pressure factor
Method is too complicated and too site specific.

You might also like