Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
SPE, Anadrill,
and D.M.R.
Gray Staphans,
Schlumberger
Cambridge
Research
Caoqqs
Summary.
Traditieml pore-pressure inte~retstions in tertiary undercompacted shales have been based onempirical relationships
bemveena particular measurement(such as resistivity) and pore pressure in pounds per gdlOII. It is WeU-known, however, that the
measurementssre responding to the excess porosity in the shaferatherthanto the pore pressuredirectly. Anew technique is illustrated in which all available measurementsare first chamctem ed in terms of this excess porosity snd fitholon with measurement-response
equations. This allows a matbematiczi minimht ion technique to solve simultaneously the various measurernent-respxtseequations
for tiis pormily and lithcdogy on a foot-by-fcot basis. A cenventioezl compaction porosiiyleffecdve-stress mOdelis then used to determine the additional pore pressure caused by this excess porosity. The result is a singfe pore-pressure estimate that is independent of
the number of measurementsand thst has an accmscy tiat impreves with the total number of measurementsused in the interpretsdon.
The interpretationcan be performed at the weUsitein red time by useof rateof penetration(ROP), measurementwhile driIling (MWD),
and logging wbife drifling (LWD) measurementsor afterdrilling by me of thesemeasurementsin cnnjrmcdcmwith wireline measurements.
Introduction
Technique
MerprdationMotfeL
A formationcan te descrii
copyright
2.54
{99!
eddy
of
Petroleum
Ewlnwrs
by thevolumes
shown in Fig. 1, which reprrsent the majoriq of the constituents
of sedimental recks. The volumes determined by the interpretation progmm described in this paper are ilfustmtedon the rightside
of F]g. 1. When the interpretationprogram has determined thata
shale is present, matrix (usually quartz), wet clay, overpressure
poresiv, and effective pxosi~ volumes are solved for. The saturation is set equal to unity in shales. w%en the program has determined &at porous sands are present, matrix, wet clay, effective
porosity, and water salutation are solved for. The pore pressure
cemputed in the shale above the sand is mnsidered to apply to the
sand interval also.
OverP-e
POresity to Pre35rrreCfraracteri2sfi0n. The effective stress2 and equivalent depth3 concepts are illustratedin F%.
2. k a normal pressureenvironment(rightside of Fig. 2), the r.xk
~ mmp-and
wateris expild as the overburdenstress
incresses.The watercontainedwithinshakesconsistsof waterbaud
to the clays and nonbound or free. water contained within the
pore space. The water expelled during compaction consists
predominantly of the ties water. Conventional log interpretation
nomenclature defies an effective porosity consisting of this free
water and any hydrocarbons. Although effective porosity may
not be the best term to describe shale porosity, it UN be used
thoughout the folfowing discus3i0n3in keeping with normal mage.
As the free water escapes, the effective poresity decreases snd the
effective stress on the grains increases. This stress is modeled by
Nur2 as
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(3
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...@)
II
Povb.Wr3
m %ii@z@-
,ml,
@@
2675
2325
W-,.,.
-2675
2325
Pob.10wO
2MQQ!
@@
Povb.150C0
Pwb.imoo
i
l$!w
a=-id
,$
,g
-p~)/(p.,b-pm)].
..
(4)
Measurement Characterization
Resistivity Characterization. fn sands, the resistivity is chamcterizedin termsof saturation,wet clay volume, and effective porositywiti the following modified Simandoux5 &qm.tiou
1
c mea
Yc,sw
Sg+p
. . . . . .. . . . .
+.
R mea,
R.,
,. (5)
alfw
-,
. . . . . . . . ... ....<.......(6)
Rcl
SPEDriffingE@&rir,g,
u%+
Deaanber 1991
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . ...(7)
16
~
?
J
_
14
12
10
0-=
-iS8
E
S6
a
?4
0
(O~W)g,0[2.CQ(W#.0)-l.@ .l[0.COZ(P~-PW)+l.0].
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(8)
0
-1000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Pm- Pw (PSI)
Tg. 3Mud weight and preszurs effesfs on the measursd fornatkm strsrmth.
WATER
J
?
~
E
2
~
3
In
@
POROUS
E
a
%
=
a)
c
~
Y
3
QUARTZ
D~YCUY
3
100
0
Neutron-porosity
measurement
(W)
300
O!JAR=
~
Q
m
o
z
[
~~~
z
G
z
w
u
5.
5
~
P
<
g
80
ig. 5The shalelsand boomerang allows the formation strength to ba characterizedin term!
>ftraditional volumetric.
s&engthin a manner similar to clay but to a much greaterdegree.
The increasing effective porosity trend is seen as a trendof points
to the southwest on Fig. 5. The characterizatiouof formation
strengthinto porosity, wct clay, andmatrii volumes isacbieved
with the following response equationderived fmm the crossplot
trends:
. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. (12)
Sonic.Velocity Characterization
Vcz
(omm,)gJ= Om Om om
(vc~)exl
4.
om~
+ext
(AJext
= VdGltcI+
VIZ*+ v2t~+(+, +v&+@.p)tmf Fq.
($, + bw++op)
%a.$
Lna
0.625tm
7mas=vc/7cl+v171
+v272.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. (11)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..(14)
tw is compnted with
~m=
Thebti-demitv
(13)
Vdc/tcl
+ v~q + v~q
.
k,
[1 (&+Vti+@.p)120
GM
+ (~c+vbw+%~)
,,, ~1~
hf
267
~g. 6-PtOg~
computations through ap overpressured shale and hydrocarbon-bearing sand made with MWD msistlvity,gamma
December1991
000
.=.
100
200
300,
mvlry
20,00
-La- -
[01
m)
).,0
UNCWTNNIYOF
20,00
Q4,,.W.E7ED
.AMlh
RAY [CPS)
>,00
100.0
D, ILL,W3 FLUD DENSITY
MEASURED FORMATION
HYDROCARBONS
WATER
[VN)
400.0
..---
am
$VERAQW
[INTERPRETED
---------!NTERFBE, ED FORMATIOA
,,00
{LW.3 AL)
,00
. ------
STRENOTH (KP.S)
>,00
(V/Vi
M%
PORE PRESSURE
-.-
,00,0
(,)
QAMMA RAY
STRENGTH
18,00
.00
,00,0
SIGMA
iLStOAL)
18,00
SIQMA
(LWGAL)
,8,00
,.
me
6,00
,O,AL
.QAS (%}
0,00
19. 7Pm9mm cOmPtiations showing underbalanced drllllngthrough an overpressured shale and hydrocarbon-beating sand ~
mde with MWD reslstivity, gamma ray, and formation-strength measurements.
SPEDrillingEngimaing, December1991
269
.,
lg. SProgrim coniputations made with MWD formation-strength, LWD resistivlty, gamma ray, neutron, and density meaewements.
270
SPEDrillingEngineering,December1991
t3LGBAL Interpretation
Process
A program has been developed to solve the above measnrementrespcmseequations based on tie GLOBAL9 technique. The
GLOBAL techniquerequires thatthe measurement-responseequations be writtenas functions of the un!movm volumes (Ilg. 1) and
thek associated response parameters, as shown in &Is. 5 through
16 (response parametersare the measurements re~onse to a particular volume when onfy that voltie is p~esent). T&$ GLOBAL
~cbnique determinesthe volumes that representthe best solution
to the measurement-response equations. ~ accomplish this, the
program minimizes an incoherence funmon given as
Is.,=
-..
[Czi-fi(x)]z + ~
z ~
i=*
atew:
k= 1
8k(x~2
. . . . . . . . . . . . ..(17)
r:
Data Presentation
Fig. 6 illustratesa computation made with the MWD formation
strength,gamma ray, andresisdvilythroughan overpressuredshale.
Track 1 dkplays the volumetric computations from left to right of
Vcl, VI (taken to be qwqtz), C$e,,~op, and @w. Track 2 displays
the measured and theoretical resistmmies,and Track 3 shows the
measured and Oieomticaf gamma ray and formation strength. A
fishtail PDC bit was used over the interval ilfustrat@ The high
activity of the formation str.mgth.iscm.wd makdy by ROP fluctuations that are a resultof !iOmlogical and porosity variations. fhe
computed pore pressureis displayed in Track 4 along with the mud
weight and incoherence. The shading encompassing the porepressurecuwe representstie uncetity of tie computedpressure.
It decreases as the number of input measurements increases, the
volume of overprcssure porosity increases, and the incoherence
decreases.
This interv~ was drilled as a $detsack to a well where a kick
bad occurred at the equiv~ent depthof 475 ft in this sidetrackwefl.
The kick resultedin the bottomhole assembly (BHA) beimglost in
the wefL The original hole was drifkd with 13.2 Ibm/gal mud and
the kick was measured at 16 lbm/ga3. The analysis of the sidetrack
shows thattheoriginal wdf was being drilfed sfigb!ly underbalanced
just before the kick was taken. The sidetrack analysis shows pore
pressuresas high as 15.8 Ibm/gaf from 460 to 620 ft and thatsuffl
cient overbalance was being maintained. Track 4 afso cm.aim fhe
measured mud gas, which at a depth of 610 ft correlates wefl with
the hydrocarbon show cakufated by the program.
Elg. 7 illustratesan overpressuredshalebeing drilledwithapdkd
tooth bit slightlyunderbab.needfrom 000 to 105 ft. fbe mid weight
was 13.5 lbtigal and the computed pore pressure is 14 Ibm/gal.
A hydrocarbon-bearing sand is drifled at 105 ft, and a small kick
resultedin the mud weight being raised m 14.2 ibm/@. Note also
the mud/gas show in Track 4. After drilling to 150 ft, a bit trip
was made and a fishtail PDC bit and mud motor were used to drill
the remaitig interval shown. The apparentformation strengthis
much lower for ~s bit runbecause of the greaterROP for a given
WOB compared with the milled tooth bit and is accounted for by
use of a lower Om parameter in Eq. 9. The mud weight remains
slightfybelow thepore pressureand is subsequentlyraisedin incrementsin respons to thehydrocarbon-bearingsanddrilled tlom 275
to 300 ft. Sufficient overbalance is maintained for the remainder
of the interval.
SPBDrillingEngineering,December1991
Fig. 8 illustratesthe computation with MWD and LWD measurements displayed with other interpretationsand measurements
at the weflsite in real time during drilling. Track 1 displays BHA
Mctionaf factors10computed from the downhole-measured weight
and torque. Notice the sliding friction increases untfl,the pipe was
worked at 325 tl, afterwbich it stabilizes.Track 2 containstheBHA
with theLWD tools and fbeir measure points displzyed inside the
coflars. The resisdvityigamma ray is the lowermost point and the
uPPeImostiSthe ne~tmndensity measure point. Track 3 COn,f&IS
the Iitbolofl, porbsuy, and saturatmnanalyses from this program,
with Track 4 showing the resulting pore pressure in pounds per
gallon. Track 4 also contains tie mud gas and the difference between thetotal mud flow in and out. Track 5 contains the measurements of gamma ray, formation stm@b, and ROP.
From the bit depth to the LWfJ resistivi~/gamma-ray sensor
depth, the Iithology is determined from the downhole weight and
torque % simpfy sand or shafe.11 The interpretationprogmm cOmputesa pore pressurewith the formationstrengthmeasurementwith
MS. 4,8, and 9, asimning a constant volume of wet clay for the
Mhology. Using only one measurementand assuming a constant
fitlolo~ account for the Imgeuncertaintyassociatedwith thispOrepressure computation. At the LWD resistivity/gamma-ray sensor
depth, the program incorporatestheseadditiond measurementsand
computes the volume of wet clay, quartz, effective porosity, water-.
fdled porosi,~, and overpressure porosity, as shown in Track 3.
The wet clay volume is shaded with the Mhology determined from
a predefmed data base. 12 This segmentation helps provide the
Iithologica.1boundaries for the assignment of cuttingsdescriptions.
At the LWD neutron-density-measurementsensor depth, the program recomputes and redisplays the answers, incorporating tlese
additional measurements. The Iithology spikes in Track 3 representthinbeds determinedfrom a curvdmpe anafysisof theueumndensi~ measurements, TIE d~play wrolls upwind as drilfing continues, providing a foot-by-foot analysis and picture of the formaIion characteristics and their effects on drillstring behavior. This
pmvidcs a clear indicationof when to change themud weight, make
wiper hips, and initiate other drilliig decisions.
c0nclu810ns
An interpretationprofgam thatUWtbe GLOBALtechniquebas been
devefoped for analyzingdownhole drilling, ROP, MWD, and LWO
measurementsin terms of pore pressure, MIIO1OSY,
porosity, and
saturation.This eliminatesthe need for a trend-typepore-pressure
analysis for undercompactedshalesandprovides a fcot-by-foot evaluation during drifling. Knowing these formation athibutes during
drilling helps determine the,mud weight necessary for safe, and
yet efficient, drilling.
Nomenclature
~ = fom~tion fa@or ~~~~~t
ai = Measurement i
ft
cm = measured conductivity, S
db = bit diameter, in.
D = depth, ft
Ed = bk efficiency based on tooth wear
fi(x) = Response Equation i as a function of x
Fq = sonic compaction factor
g.&x) = COn@aint Equation Number k as a function
10$ = incoherence function
Kdf = bufk modulus of dry frame
Kg, = bulk modulus of grains
m = cementation exponent
of x
John G
Rasmus
specialist
worldng
with
on
pora-pre.ssure
AnadrOl
1$
an
engineering
in Sugarland,
TX,
volumetric
and
MWD/LWD
interpretation.
He
has
of
positions,
($N)rraas
n@J@O.-pO~@
m~r.ment
4N~f
ne@wwrOsiW
r=pODse
6Nw
blogfaphlcal
information
on D.M.R. tlray
Steiahens are unavailable.
ndnenis
Mineral 2
= sonic transit time measurement
VP = ROP, ft/br
v.. = ROT.. revlmin
Vbw= vc~
(r&)c*
(Vti)d = volume of bound wafer in 100% wet clay,
fraction
vc~= volume of wet clay
Vcl,VI ,V2 = volume solved for
(Vc& = extrapolated volume of clay where (OmW)g,O=O
Vdcl = volume of dry clay= Vd VbW
Wi = user supplied uncertainty of Measurement i
Wb = downboIe WOB, Ibm
Wm = mud weight, ibm/gal
Z = vector of solution
a = BiOt~On~~t
ms
= g-a
ray measurement
M,P I A = buk-density response to 100% of the respective
mineral
PA = bu~-density response to 100% hydrocarbon
p.= = bufkdensiw measurement
Pti = b~k-densiq response to 100% md ~~~
p. = bull-density response tG lKI% shale water
Ui = internally computed uncetity
of Meamrcment i
rk = uncctity
on constmint equ2tion
@ = porosity
172
100%
mud
ffl~ate.
shale iwwer
40P = excess effective porosity in zn overpreswred shale
@w = free water volume, fraction
and
= ex~po~$~
Ovewewre
Pwsiw where
(O_)9,0
=0, fraction
4~ = hyd-bon
volume, fraction
4Nh = neuEon-pOrO~@ re-wense to 100% hydrocarbons
held
neU*owemsitY
response
tb
NO%
Acknowledgments
We thank Anadrill/Schlumberger for permission to publish this
paper and the various oil companies for providing the data.
References
1, Jorden, J.R. and Shirley, O.J.: Applicationof DrillingPerformance
Data to Overpressure Detection, JPT (Nov. 1966) 1387-94.
2. Nur, A. andByerke, I.D.: b Bxag Eff4ve StressLawForElasResearch(Sept.
ticDeformationof Reck With Fluids, J. Geoplz.wical
1971).
3. Ham,H.H.: A Methcd of Esdmadng Formation Pressures Fmm Gulf
Coast Well Logs, Trans., Gulf Coast Assn. of Geological Societies
(1966) 16.
4. Magam, K.: Compacdon and Fluid M,@on,>, Ekevier science FUbIishers (1978).
en IDik
POEUX,
applicadm
5. Simmdoux, P.: Mesures di&Ct@l.S
3.la mesure dcssaturations
eneau,6h!dedu coniportwnent des massifs
argileux, Revuede 1Inst.Frm@s du P&role,SupplementmyIssue
(1963).
6, B&e&, T.M, andtiO, W.G.: MeasuringtheWearof MilledTc.xh
Bits by Use of MWD Torque and Weight-on-flit,, paper SPE 13475
presented at the 1985 SPElfADC Drilling Conference, New Orleans,
March 5-S.
7. white, D. B., Cuny, D. A., and Gavignet, A. G.: Effects of NozzIe
Configuration on Ro!.ler-Cone-Bit Performance> paper SPE 171SS
Pmsated at the 19g8L4DCJSPE Drilling Conference. Dallas. Feb. 2gM?.rch 2.
g. Chwtlmm, C.A.: Effects of Selected Mnd Properties on Kate of
Penetm.tionin FulMkale .%& Drilling Sirmdations,xpaper WE 13465
Preserted at the 1985 SPEIL4DCDrillingConference,New Odeam,
March 5-8.
9. Mayer, C. and Sibbit, A.: GI.OBC A New Approachto Cm@erProcessd Log Interpretation, paper SPE9341presentedatthe19S0
SPE AMIMITe&icaI Conferenceand Ex&ibidon,Dallas, Sept. 21-2A.
10. J.&sage,M., Fakoner,I.G., andW,&, C,: Ewkadng Drillingpractice
SPEDE(Sem.
inDeviatedWellsW& TomueandWeis%tDafa.33
. 19g8)
24S-52.
11. Burgess,T., Falconer,I.G., andSheppird,M.: SepaatingBitand
LithologyEffectsFromDrillingMechanicsData,,,paperSPE17191
presented
atthe19SSIADC/SPEDrilfingConference,Dal&.,Feb.28Ma,ch
2.
x
x
X
X
x
factor1s exact,
1.0
3.04S*
2.54*
1.19S 264
6.894157
E+OO
E01
E+I3O
E+02
E+OO
=
=
=
=
=
Hz
m
cm
kg/m3
kpa
SPEDE
Ormm.
Sept. 22-28.
SPEDri!JingEn@eering, December1991