Accurate pore pressure and fracture pressure predictions using seismic velocities — An aid to deep water exploration and drilling design

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stan Lee ◽  
Joe Reilly ◽  
Roger Lowe ◽  
Scott Brodie
Keyword(s):  
Pore Pressure ◽  
Deep Water ◽  
Seismic Velocities ◽  
Fracture Pressure

Producing pore pressure profiles based on theoretical models in undrilled, deepwater frontier basins

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. SE13-SE32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Green ◽  
Stephen A. O’Connor ◽  
Deric E. L. Cameron ◽  
James E. Carter ◽  
William Goodman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pore Pressure ◽  
Deep Water ◽  
Seismic Velocity ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
Seal Failure ◽  
Fracture Pressure ◽  
Pore Pressures ◽  
Pressure Profiles ◽  
Model Pore

A working petroleum system was established on the shelf in offshore Labrador with the Bjarni H-81 discovery in 1973 in the Hopedale Basin. The same reservoirs as those targeted on the shelf are present in the deep water, which is currently receiving attention as the result of newly acquired seismic data. To date, only a very small number of wells have been drilled in the deep water, i.e., Blue H-28, Orphan Basin, and none off mainland Labrador. The wells that were drilled in the deep water had encountered significant overpressure, e.g., kicks that indicated overpressures of 26,850 kPa in the Mid-Cretaceous. Therefore, it was reasonable to assume that pore pressures be similarly high for any new deepwater prospects identified. To help reduce the risk in unexplored environments, we developed an approach that can be adopted to model pore pressure in deepwater settings, with Labrador as the main case study area featured, but also we discussed other global examples such as the Vøring Basin, Mid-Norway. Our results indicated, as a first approximation, that seismic velocity-based pore pressures in shale-rich intervals were similar to the geologic model down to the Lower Tertiary. Deep lithologies were, by regional analogue, likely affected by cementation that will act to preserve overpressure generated by disequilibrium compaction by reducing permeability but will not generate additional pore pressure. The cements (and any carbonate or volcanic lithologies) will, however, result in faster shales and will underpredict pore pressure by mimicking low porosity. A theoretical or “geologic modeling” approach can be used to sense-check any pore pressure interpretation from seismic velocity. The geologic approach also can be used to assess the risk for mechanical seal failure by allowing for estimates of the pore pressure, and related fracture pressure, to be made without the effects of cementation that affect the logs and seismic velocity data.

scholarly journals Physics-Based Relationship for Pore Pressure and Vertical Stress Monitoring Using Seismic Velocity Variations

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 2684
Author(s):  
Eldert Fokker ◽  
Elmer Ruigrok ◽  
Rhys Hawkins ◽  
Jeannot Trampert
Keyword(s):  
Pore Pressure ◽  
Seismic Velocity ◽  
Pressure Head ◽  
Groundwater Table ◽  
Surface Velocity ◽  
Seismic Velocities ◽  
Stress Monitoring ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
Velocity Variations ◽  
Velocity Changes

Previous studies examining the relationship between the groundwater table and seismic velocities have been guided by empirical relationships only. Here, we develop a physics-based model relating fluctuations in groundwater table and pore pressure with seismic velocity variations through changes in effective stress. This model justifies the use of seismic velocity variations for monitoring of the pore pressure. Using a subset of the Groningen seismic network, near-surface velocity changes are estimated over a four-year period, using passive image interferometry. The same velocity changes are predicted by applying the newly derived theory to pressure-head recordings. It is demonstrated that the theory provides a close match of the observed seismic velocity changes.

Probabilistic Flow Modelling Approach for Kick Tolerance Calculations

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dalila Gomes ◽  
Knut Steinar Bjørkevoll ◽  
Johnny Frøyen ◽  
Kjell Kåre Fjelde ◽  
Dan Sui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Pore Pressure ◽  
Flow Model ◽  
Transient Flow ◽  
Probabilistic Approach ◽  
Numerical Approach ◽  
Free Form ◽  
Maximum Pressure ◽  
Fracture Pressure ◽  
Calculation Process

During drilling, there must be an evaluation of the maximum pressure that the formation can handle during a well kill scenario. This will depend on various parameters like fracture pressure, pore pressure, kick volume and several other factors. The depth of the next planned hole section will depend on if a kick of a certain size can be handled safely. This evaluation is often referred to as performing kick tolerances. When starting to drill a section, one will take a leak off test to get an indication of the fracture pressure at the last set casing shoe and this will be important information for the kick tolerance results. For HPHT wells the margin between pore and fracture pressures will be small, and one often has to resort to using transient flow models to perform the kick tolerances. However, there are many uncertain parameters that are affecting the results. Some examples here are pore pressure, type of kick and kick distribution. There is a need for trying to incorporate the uncertainty in the calculation process to give a better overview of possible outcomes. This approach has become more and more popular, and one example here is reliability based casing design. This paper will first describe the kick tolerance concept and its role in well design planning and operational follow up. An overview of all parameters that can affect the results will be given. In water based mud, the gas kick will be in free form yielding higher maximum casing shoe pressures compared to the situation when oil based mud is used where the kick can be fully dissolved. Then it will be shown how both an analytical and a transient flow model can be used in combination with the use of Monte Carlo simulations to generate a probabilistic kick tolerance calculation showing possible outcomes for maximum casing shoe pressure for different kick volumes. Here uncertain input parameters that can affect the calculation result will be drawn from statistical distributions and propagated through the flow model to estimate the casing shoe pressure. Multiple runs will be needed in the Monte Carlo simulation process to generate a distribution of the maximum casing shoe pressure. This will demand a rapid and robust flow model. The resulting maximum casing shoe pressure distribution will then be compared against the uncertainty in the fracture pressure at the last set casing shoe to yield a probability for inducing losses. The numerical approach for predicting well pressures and a schematic of the total calculation process will be given. Emphasis will also be put on discussing how this should be presented to the engineer with respect to visualization and communication. It will also be shown that one of the strengths of the probabilistic approach is that it is very useful for performing sensitivity analysis such that the most dominating factors affecting the calculation results can be identified. In that way, it can help in interpreting and improving the reliability of the kick tolerance simulation results.

Pore-pressure detection sensitivities tested with time-lapse seismic data

Geophysics ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
pp. O39-O50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Øyvind Kvam ◽  
Martin Landrø
Keyword(s):  
Pore Pressure ◽  
Seismic Data ◽  
Time Lapse ◽  
Pressure Increase ◽  
Burial Depth ◽  
Velocity Analysis ◽  
Seismic Velocities ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Pore Pressure Prediction ◽  
Velocity Changes

In an exploration context, pore-pressure prediction from seismic data relies on the fact that seismic velocities depend on pore pressure. Conventional velocity analysis is a tool that may form the basis for obtaining interval velocities for this purpose. However, velocity analysis is inaccurate, and in this paper we focus on the possibilities and limitations of using velocity analysis for pore-pressure prediction. A time-lapse seismic data set from a segment that has undergone a pore-pressure increase of 5 to 7 MPa between the two surveys is analyzed for velocity changes using detailed velocity analysis. A synthetic time-lapse survey is used to test the sensitivity of the velocity analysis with respect to noise. The analysis shows that the pore-pressure increase cannot be detected by conventional velocity analysis because the uncertainty is much greater than the expected velocity change for a reservoir of the given thickness and burial depth. Finally, by applying amplitude-variation-with-offset (AVO) analysis to the same data, we demonstrate that seismic amplitude analysis may yield more precise information about velocity changes than velocity analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document