IPA14-G-358

PROCEEDINGS INDONESIAN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION

Thirty-Eighth Annual Convention & Exhibition, May 2014

SHIFTING OF COMPACTION TREND IN THE NORTH SUMATRA BASIN AND ITS

IMPLICATION TO OVERPRESSURE ESTIMATION IN THE NORTH SUMATRA BASIN

Mohammad Syaiful*
Darius G. Siahaan*
Lambok M. Hutasoit*
Agus M. Ramdhan*
Agus Haris Widayat*
Irawan Youdha Tribuana*

ABSTRACT Keywords: North Sumartra Basin, normal

The North Sumatra Basin has been long recognized
as an area possessing high overpressure condition.
The top of overpressure in this basin is mostly
located near top of Baong Formation. The previous
researchers notice the difficulty of predicting the
magnitude of overpressure within the Baong
Formation. They always overpredict the
overpressure in this formation.
Our comparison with some compaction trend from
western Indonesia’s sedimentary basin shows that
there is a strong indication that the present normal
compaction trend in this area has shifted towards
highly compacted area. Consequently, the direct
usage of this normal compaction trend to estimate
overpressure magnitude in the overpressure
sequence will result in severely overprediction of
the magnitude.
We suggest that the cause of the shifting in the
normal compaction trend is a shallow cementation.
The possible cause of the cementation in this
relatively shallow depth thus low temperature
environment is carbonate cementation widely
distributed in this sequence. Clearly, this hypothesis
needs to be tested by examining petrographical
works in the normally pressured strata.
To predict overpressure in this area, we suggest to
use normal compaction from other nearby area or
from other Indonesia’s sedimentary basin where the
shallow cementation is not intensive. Our trial of
using normal compaction trend from Mahakam
Area, Lower Kutai Basin, to estimate overpressure
in this area shows a reasonably good match of
overpressure magnitude.
* Institute of Technology Bandung
compaction trend,shallow cementation,
overpressure estimation
INTRODUCTION
The research area is located in the Aru Field, The
North Sumatra Basin (Figure 1). The North Sumatra
Basin is well-known as an overpressured basin in
Indonesia. Several researchers that have recognized
the presence of overpressure in this basin are Aziz
and Bolt (1984), Manik and Soedaldjo (1984), and
Hutasoit et al (2013). Aziz and Bolt (1984)
investigated overpressuring in Arun Field, and
several important point from their investigation are
that overpressure in this area is caused by loading
and some thermal influence, top of overpressure is
located at Middle Keutapang and Baong formations,
and the maximum of overpressure magnitude is
around 15 ppg. Manik and Soedaldjo (1984)
investigated overpressuring in Langkat, Rantau,
Aru, and Tebing Tinggi, and they found that
overpressure could be detected from sonic reversal
towards high sonic value or low velocity value.
Hutasoit et al (2013) investigated overpressure
characteristics in Aru Field as shown in Figure 2. It
can be seen that top of overpressure is located at top
of Baong Formation, and the magnitude of
overpressure is slightly increase into ‘mild’
magnitude of overpressure in the Upper Baong, and
it goes back into normal or lower overpressure
magnitude in the Mid-Baong Sand, and then it
increases into high overpressure zone in the Lower
Baong, and finally it reaches normal hydrostatic
value at Aru carbonate build-up.
We found an intriguing circumstance in Aru Field
related to the magnitude of overpressure as shown
in Figure 3. In the figure, it can be seen that we
have a very strong reversal of sonic in the Upper
Baong Formation, yet the overpressure magnitude is
low (‘mild’ overpressure according to Hutasoit et al,
2013). The same magnitude reversal could produce
lithostatic-scale overpressure in several basins in the
world such as in the Lower Kutai Basin (Figure 4)
and in the Gulf of Mexico (Figure 5).
In this paper, we try to investigate the cause of such
a large shifting that is not accompanied by high
magnitude of overpressure, by analysing two
possible causes. The first possible cause is that the
mudweight used during drilling as shown in Figure
3 was in underbalance condition. The second
possible cause is that we have shallow cementation
causing shifting in the normal compaction trend.
We use three typical wells in Aru Field to analyse
this possibilities.
METHODOLOGY
The methodologies used in this research are post-
mortem drilling parameter analysis in order to
investigate whether drilling was performed in
underbalance condition or not, and M-N
mineralogical plot in order to analyse the possibility
of the presence of shallow cementation. The
candidate minerals to cause the shallow cementation
are the minerals that are soluble in low temperature.
The example of such minerals is carbonate
minerals.
If drilling was performed in underbalance condition,
then we will find several indications such as the
presence of kick, caving, sloughing shale, and the
increase in background gas.
If such indications are absent, then we can infer that
drilling was in overbalance condition.
The M-N mineralogical plot is a standard
Schlumberger plot (Schlumberger, 1989). The
graphical form of M-N plot is shown in Figure 6. M
is calculated by using the equation of:
t f  t
M  0.01
b   f
and N is calculated by using the equation of:
Nf  N
N
b   f
where:
t f = interval transit time of fluid (189 µs/ft for
fresh mud and 185 µs/ft for salt mud)
t = interval transit time from the log
b = bulk density of formation
N = neutrol porosity of the formation
 NF = neutrol porosity of fluid (use 1)
RESULT
Three wells exhibiting large sonic reversals are
chosen to be analysed in this paper. They are GBD-
1, STD-1, and WPU-3. As discussed in the
Introduction, firstly we investigate whether we have
underbalance drilling condition or not by examining
drilling parameters in those wells.
Drilling condition analysis
Pressure-depth plot as inferred from mudweight
used during drilling and its associated drilling
events, together with sonic log in shale section in
GBD-1 is shown in Figure 7. The mudweight used
during drilling was increased with the purpose of
handling the presence of drilling events such as trip
gas, caving, gas-cut mud, sloughing shale, and
drilling break. According to the drilling report,
those events disappeared with the increasing
mudweight.
Therefore, it can be inferred that the mudweight
reflect the maximum pore pressure that may be
encountered in this well. Or, in other word, the
drilling was in slightly overbalance condition
instead of in underbalance condition, and thus the
second possibility causing the large shifting (30
µs/ft), i.e. shallow cementation, needs to be
considered.
Pressure-depth plot as inferred from mudweight
used during drilling and its associated drilling
events, together with wireline logs in shale section
in STD-1 is shown in Figure 8. The mudweight
used during drilling was increased with the purpose
of handling the presence of drilling events such as
overpull and increase in background gas. According
to the drilling report, those events also disappeared
with the increasing mudweight. Therefore, it can
also be inferred that the mudweight reflect the
maximum pore pressure that may be encountered in
this well. Again, the large shifting in sonic (40
µs/ft) right below top of overpressure needs to be
explain by the second possibility, i.e. shallow
cementation.
Pressure-depth plot as inferred from mudweight
used during drilling and its associated drilling
events, together with wireline logs in shale section
in WPU-3 is shown in Figure 9. The mudweight
used during drilling was increased with the purpose
of handling the presence of drilling events such as
trip gas and well flow (kick). According to the
drilling report, those events also disappeared with
the increasing mudweight. Therefore, it can also be
inferred that the mudweight reflect the maximum
pore pressure that may be encountered in this well.
Again, the large shifting in sonic (40 µs/ft) right
below top of overpressure needs to be explain by
the second possibility, i.e. shallow cementation.
Shallow cementation analysis
M-N plot for GBD-1 is shown in Figure 10. We
only have limited density data, so the M-N plot
could only be performed until the depth around
2300 ft. It can be seen that the shallow shale points,
which are in normal hydrostatic condition, contain
calcite, dolomite, and anhydrite. This circumstance
opens the possibility of the occurrence of shallow
carbonate and evaporite cementations that may
cause shifting in normal compaction trend as
discussed above.
M-N plot for GBD-1 is shown in Figure 11. It can
be seen that down to the depth of 3000 ft (in normal
hydrostatic regime), the shale is dominated by clay
mineral, but starting from the depth of 3000 ft down
to the depth of 4000 ft, where the pore pressure is
still normal hydrostatic condition, the influence of
anhydrite could be observed fairly good. This
circumstance opens the possibility of the occurrence
of shallow evaporite cementation that may cause
shifting in normal compaction trend as discussed
above.
M-N plot for WPU-3 is shown in Figure 12. It can
be seen that down to the depth of 3000 ft (in normal
hydrostatic regime), the shale is dominated by clay
mineral, but starting from the depth of 3000 ft down
to the depth of 4000 ft, where the pore pressure is
still normal hydrostatic condition, the influence of
calcite and anhydrite could be observed fairly good.
This circumstance opens the possibility of the
occurrence of shallow carbonate and evaporate
cementation that may cause shifting in normal
compaction trend as discussed above.
DISCUSSION
Based on the observation above, it can be inferred
that large shifting in sonic log from normal
compaction trend is not attributed to the
underbalance drilling condition. Instead, there is a
clue for the presence of shallow cementation due to
the presence of carbonate and evaporite minerals in
normally pressured shale.
Therefore, the shallow cementation may responsible
for the large shifting in sonic log. As an addition,
the large shifting cannot be caused by uplift
followed by erosion, since the uplift will shift not
only shale in the normally pressured section, but
also the overpressured section. In our case, we only
have a shifting in normally pressured section.
The general stratigraphical column of the North
Sumatra Basin is shown in Figure 13. The normally
pressured shale is located in Holocene Alluvium,
Peistocene Terrace, Julurayeu, Seurula, and
Keutapang Formations. Those formations were
deposited in fluvial – shallow marine environment.
Considering the marine environment deposition, it
is not surprising if we have carbonate and anhydrite
present in the shale sequence. However, more
thorough petrographical analyses (thin section,
SEM, and XRD) are required to proof the
hypothesis of shallow carbonate and evaporite
cementations.
The implication of the shallow cementation to pore
pressure prediction is that if we use the cemented
normal compaction trend, the standard method to
predict of overpressure (e.g Equivalent Depth
Method and Eaton’s Method with the exponent of
3) will result in overestimation of overpressure
magnitude. The example of applying Eaton’s
Method with the exponent of 3 in GBD-1 is shown
in Figure 14. It can be seen that the standard
Eaton’s Method severely overpredicts the
overpressure magnitude as indicated by the
corrected mudweight data.
In order to improve pore pressure prediction in the
research area, we propose to construct ‘generic’
normal compaction trend for a field scale in Aru
Field, by constructing ‘pre-cementation’
compaction curve. This method can be done by
searching of non-cemented shale in normally-
pressured section from the North Sumatra Basin, or
even from other basin as long as the geological
condition, apart from the presence of shallow
cementation, is relevant.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above observation, we conclude the
following points:
1. The shifting in the normal compaction trend in
Aru Field is most likely attributed to the
shallow cementation of normally pressured
shale by carbonate and evaporite minerals.
2. The drilling in Aru Field was performed in
slightly overbalance condition, and therefore,
the mudweight reflects the maximum possible
pressure.
3. The usage of normal compaction trend from
normally pressured section shale in Aru Field
will result in severely overpredict overpressure
magnitude.
4. It is required to develop pre-cementation
compaction curve to improve pore pressure
prediction in Aruf Field.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We thank to SKK Migas for organizing
overpressure research in Indonesia’s sedimentary
basin, and also Pertamina for sponsoring
overpressure study in onshore part, North Sumatra
Basin.
REFERENCES
Aziz, A., and Bolt, L. H.,. 1984. Occurrence and
detection of abnormal pressures from geological
and drilling data, North Sumatra Basin. Indonesia
Petroleum Association, 13th Annual Convention
Proceedings, p. 195-220.
Hutasoit, L.M., Suseno, W., Siahaan, D., Ramdhan,
A.M., Goulty, N., Syaiful, M., Bachtiar, A.,
Iskandar, I., Hendarmawan, Sadirsan, W., Arifin,
M., Bahesti, F. and Endarmoyo, K. 2013.
Overpressure characteristics in Pertamina’s area in
the North Sumatra Basin. Indonesian Petroleum
Association, 37th Annual Convention Proceedings ,
IPA13-G-153.
Manik, P. and Soedaljo. 1984. Prediction of
abnormal pressure based on seismic data. A case
study of exploratory well drilling in Pertamina UEP
I and UEP II work areas. Indonesia Petroleum
Association, 13th Annual Convention Proceedings,
p. 507-532.
Schlumberger, 1989. Log Interpretation
Principles/Applications
Figure 1 - Research area (highlighted by purple line) (figure source: IHS, 2004).
Figure 2 - Overpressure characteristics in Aru Field, North Sumatra Basin (Hutasoit et al, 2013).
Figure 3 - Strong sonic reversal that is not accompanied by high overpressure magnitude in the Aru Field.
Figure 4 - Sonic reversal value and its associated overpressure magnitude in the Lower Kutai Basin.
In this basin, 20µs/ft reversal is associated with lithostatic-scale overpressure
(Figure source: Ramdhan & Goulty, 2011).

Figure 5 - Sonic reversal value and its associated overpressure magnitude in the Gulf of Mexico area.
In this basin, 40µs/ft reversal is also associated with lithostatic-scale overpressure
(Figure source: Bowers, 1995).
Figure 6 - M-N plot used to determine mineral constituents of clay in this study (after Schlumberger,
1989).
Figure 7 - Pressure-depth plot as inferred from mudweight corrected by drilling events and sonic reversal at GBD.
Figure 8 - Pressure-depth plot as inferred from mudweight corrected by drilling events and sonic reversal at STD-1.

Figure 9 - Pressure-depth plot as inferred from mudweight corrected by drilling events and sonic reversal at WPU-3.
Figure 10 - M-N plot of GBD-1.
Figure 11 - M-N plot of STD-1.
Figure 12 - M-N plot of WPU-3.
Figure 13 - General stratigraphic column of the North Sumatra Basin (modified from Pertamina
BPPKA, 1996).
Figure 14 - The application of Eaton’s exponent of 3 in estimating overpressure in GBD-1. It can be seen clearly that the method result in severely
overestimation of overpressure magnitude.