Reservoir Geomechanics Course Overview

Reservoir Geomechanics
In situ stress and rock mechanics applied to reservoir processes

Week 1 Lecture 1
Course Overview

Mark D. Zoback
Professor of Geophysics
Stanford|ONLINE gp202.class.stanford.edu

Why is Geomechanics Important?
Drilling and Reservoir Engineering
Compaction, Compaction Drive, Subsidence, Production-
Induced Faulting Prediction
Optimizing Drainage of Fractured Reservoirs
Hydraulic Propagation in Vertical & Deviated Wells
Wellbore Stability During Drilling (mud weights, drilling
directions)
Completion Engineering (long-term wellbore stability, sand
production prediction)
Well Placement (Azimuth and Deviation, Sidetracks)
Underbalanced Drilling to Formation Damage


2
Reservoir Geology and Geophysics
Optimizing Drainage of Fractured Reservoirs
Pore Pressure Prediction
Understanding Shear Velocity Anisotropy
Fault Seal Integrity
Hydrocarbon Migration
Reservoir Compartmentalization

3
Exploitation of Shale Gas/Tight Gas/Tight Oil
Properties of Ultra-Low Permeability Formations
How Formation Properties Affect Production
Optimizing Well Placement
Multi-Stage Hydraulic Fracturing
Importance of Fractures and Faults on Well Productivity
Interpretation of Microseismic Data
Simulating Production from Ultra-Low Permeability
Formations

4
Text for Class
Part I Basic Principles
Chapters 1-5

Part II Measuring Stress
Orientation and Magnitude
Chapters 6-9

Part III Applications
Chapters 10-12

5
Course Syllabus Part I - Basic Principles
Week 1
Lecture 1 Introduction and Course Overview
Lecture 2 Ch. 1 - The Tectonic Stress Field
HW-1 Calculating S
V
from density logs
Week 2
Lecture 3 - Ch. 2 - Pore Pressure at Depth
HW-2 Estimating pore pressure from porosity logs
Lecture 4 - Ch. 3 - Basic Constitutive Laws

Week 3
Lecture 5 - Ch. 4 - Rock Strength
HW-3 Estimating rock strength from geophysical logs
Lecture 6 - Ch. 4 - Fault Friction and Crustal Strength
HW-4 Calculating limits on crustal stress
Week 4
Lecture 7 - Ch. 5 - Faults and Fractures
HW-5 Analysis of fractures in image logs

6
Course Syllabus Part II In Situ Stress
Week 4
Lecture 8 - Ch. 6 - Stress Concentrations Around Vertical Wells

Week 5
Lecture 9 - Ch. 7 - Hydraulic Fracturing, Measuring S
hmin
, Limiting Frac
Height and Constraining S
hmax

HW-6 Analysis of stress induced wellbore failures
Lecture 10 - Ch. 8 - Failure of Deviated Wells

Week 6
Lecture 11 - Ch. 9 - State of Stress in Sedimentary Basins
HW-7 Identification of critically-stressed faults

7
Course Syllabus Part III - Applications
Week 6
Lecture 12 - Ch. 10 - Wellbore Stability -1

Week 7
Lecture 13 - Ch. 10 - Wellbore Stability 2
Lecture 14 - Ch. 11 - Critically-Stressed Faults and Flow
HW-8 Development of a geomechanical model
Week 8
Lecture 15 - Ch. 11 - Fault Seal and Dynamic Hydrocarbon Migration
Lecture 16 - Ch. 12 - Effects of Depletion, Reservoir Stress Paths

Week 9
Lecture 17 - Ch. 12 - Compaction of Weak Sands and Shales and Subsidence


8
Course Syllabus Additional Topics

Week 9
Lecture 18 Geomechanics and Shale Gas/Tight Oil Production - 1

Week 10
Lecture 20 - Geomechanics and Triggered Seismicity


9

Exploration Appraisal Development Harvest Abandonment
Geomechanical Model
Time
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
Wellbore Stability
Pore Pressure Prediction
Sand Production Prediction
Compaction
Depletion
Subsidence
Casing Shear
Fault Seal/Fracture Permeability
Fracture Stimulation/ Refrac
Coupled Reservoir Simulation
Geomechanics Through the Life of a Field

10
Components of a Geomechanical Model
S
v
Overburden
S
Hmax
Maximum horizontal
principal stress
S
hmin
Minimum horizontal
principal stress
S
v
S
hmin
S
Hmax
Principal Stresses at Depth
UCS
Pp
P
p
Pore Pressure
UCS

Rock Strength (from logs)
Fractures and Faults (from Image
Logs, Seismic, etc.)
Additional Components of a
Geomechanical Model

11
Week 1
HW-1 Calculating S
V
from density logs
Week 2

Week 3
Week 4

12
Anderson Classification of Relative Stress Magnitudes
Tectonic regimes are
defined in terms of the
relationship between
the vertical stress (S
v
)
and two mutually
perpendicular
horizontal stresses
(S
Hmax
and S
hmin
)
Normal
Strike-slip
Reverse
Map View Stereonet Cross-section
S
Hmax
S
hmin
S
Hmax
S
hmin
S
Hmax
S
hmin
X
!
hmin
!
v
"
!
Hmax
!
v
a.
c.
b.
S
v
> S
Hmax
> S
hmin
S
Hmax
S
hmin
S
v
Normal
S
Hmax
> S
v
> S
hmin
S
Hmax
> S
hmin
> S
v
Strike-Slip
Reverse
S
Hmax
S
hmin
S
v
S
hmin
S
Hmax
S
v

13

14
Range of Stress Magnitudes at Depth
Hydrostatic P
p
Figure 1.4 a,b,c pg.13

15
Week 1
HW-1 Calculating S
V
from density logs
Week 2

Week 3
Week 4

16
Variations in Pore Pressure Within Compartments,
Each With ~Hydrostatic Gradients
Figure 2.4 pg.32

17
Range of Stress Magnitudes at Depth
Overpressure at Depth

Figure 1.4 d,e,f pg.13

18
Week 1
HW-1 Calculating S
V
from density logs
Week 2

Week 3
Week 4

19
Laboratory Testing
S
t
r
e
s
s

(
M
P
a
)

Figure 3.2 pg.58

20
Constitutive Laws
Figure 3.1 a,b pg.57

21
Figure 3.1 c,d pg.57
Constitutive Laws

22
Week 1
HW-1 Calculating S
V
from density logs
Week 2

Week 3
Week 4

23

Section 1
Compressive Strength
Strength Criterion
Strength Anisotropy

Section 2
Shear Enhanced Compaction
Strength from Logs, HW 3

Section 3
Tensile Strength
Hydraulic Fracture Propagation
Vertical Growth of Hydraulic Fractures


24
Outline of Lecture
Week 1
HW-1 Calculating S
V
from density logs
Week 2

Week 3
Week 4

25
Limits on Stress Magnitudes
Hydrostatic P
p

!
S
v
"P
p
S
hmin
"P
p
= 3.1
S
hmin
=
S
v
"P
p
3.1
+P
p
S
hmin
# 0.6S
v
Critical S
hmin

Critical S
Hmax

Critical S
Hmax

!
S
Hmax
"P
p
S
v
"P
p
= 3.1
S
Hmax
= 3.1 S
v
"P
p
( )
+P
p

!
S
Hmax
"P
p
S
hmin
"P
p
= 3.1
S
Hmax
= 3.1 S
hmin
"P
p
( )
+P
p

26
Week 1
HW-1 Calculating S
V
from density logs
Week 2

Week 3
Week 4

27
Normal
Strike-slip
Reverse
Map View Stereonet Cross-section
S
Hmax
S
hmin
S
Hmax
S
hmin
S
Hmax
S
hmin
X
!
hmin
!
v
"
!
Hmax
!
v
a.
c.
b.
S
v
> S
Hmax
> S
hmin
S
Hmax
S
hmin
S
v
Normal
S
Hmax
> S
v
> S
hmin
S
Hmax
> S
hmin
> S
v
Strike-Slip
Reverse
S
Hmax
S
hmin
S
v
S
hmin
S
Hmax
S
v
Stress Regimes and Active Fault Systems

28
Week 4

Week 5
hmin
, Limiting Frac
hmax


Week 6

29
Stress Concentration Around a Vertical Well

30
Compressional and Tensile Wellbore Failure
UBI Well A FMI Well B
Well A

31
Week 4

Week 5
hmin
, Limiting Frac
hmax


Week 6

32
Drilling Induced Tensile Wall Fractures
FMI
FMS

33
Visund Field Orientations

34
Regional Stress Field in the Timor Sea

35
Complex Stress Field in the Elk Hills Field

36

Horizontal Principal Stress Measurement Methods

Stress Orientation

Stress-induced wellbore breakouts (Ch. 6)

Stress-induced tensile wall fractures (Ch. 6)

Hydraulic fracture orientations (Ch. 6)

Earthquake focal plane mechanisms (Ch. 5)

Shear velocity anisotropy (Ch. 8)

Relative Stress Magnitude


Absolute Stress Magnitude

Hydraulic fracturing/Leak-off tests (Ch. 7)

Modeling stress-induced wellbore breakouts (Ch. 7, 8)

Modeling stress-induced tensile wall fractures (Ch. 7, 8)

Modeling breakout rotations due to slip on faults (Ch. 7)


37

Horizontal Principal Stress Measurement Methods

Stress Orientation

Stress-induced wellbore breakouts (Ch. 6)

Stress-induced tensile wall fractures (Ch. 6)

Hydraulic fracture orientations (Ch. 6)


Shear velocity anisotropy (Ch. 8)

Relative Stress Magnitude


Absolute Stress Magnitude

Hydraulic fracturing/Leak-off tests (Ch. 7)

Modeling stress-induced wellbore breakouts (Ch. 7, 8)

Modeling stress-induced tensile wall fractures (Ch. 7, 8)

Modeling breakout rotations due to slip on faults (Ch. 7)

Why do we use these techniques?
1. Model is developed using data from
formations of interest
2. Every well that is drilled tests the model
3. They work!

38
Obtaining a Comprehensive Geomechanical Model
Vertical stress
S
v
z
0
( )
= ! g dz
0
z
0
!
S
hmin
" LOT, XLOT, minifrac
Least principal
stress
S
Hmax
magnitude " modeling
wellbore failures
Max. Horizontal
Stress
Pore pressure
P
p
" Measure, sonic, seismic
Stress
Orientation
Orientation of Wellbore failures
Parameter Data
Rock Strength
Lab, Logs, Modeling well failure
Faults/Bedding
Planes
Wellbore Imaging

39
Week 4

Week 5
hmin
, Limiting Frac
hmax


Week 6

40
Wellbore Wall Stresses for Arbitrary Trajectories

41
Week 4

Week 5
hmin
, Limiting Frac
hmax


Week 6

42
Generalized World Stress Map
180
180
270
270
0
0
90
90
180
180
-35 -35
0 0
35 35
70 70
S
Hmax
in
compressional
domain
S
Hmax
and S
hmin
in strike-slip
domain
S
hmin
in
extensional
domain
9-2
M.L. Zoback (1992) and subsequent papers

43
Week 6

Week 7
Week 8

Week 9


44
~5cm/yr
Critically-Stressed
Faults and Fluid Flow

45
Exploration Success
Targeting Critically-
Stressed Faults in
Damage Zones
Reservoir Faults
&
Damage Zones
Hennings et al (2012)

46

47
a
d
h
k
j
a
k
h

48
Week 6

Week 7
Week 8

Week 9


49
Depletion in Gulf of Mexico Field X

50
Pp
S3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
F
e
b
-
8
2
N
o
v
-
8
4
A
u
g
-
8
7
M
a
y
-
9
0
J
a
n
-
9
3
O
c
t
-
9
5
J
u
l
-
9
8
A
p
r
-
0
1
J
a
n
-
0
4
P
p

(
p
s
i
)
Pp
S

3
Depletion in Gulf of Mexico Field X

51
Elliptical reservoir at 16300 ft
depth with single well at centre
Reservoir dimensions 6300 x
3150 x 70 ft, grid 50 x 50 x 1
Average permeability 350
md, #
init
30%
Oil flow, little/no water influx, no
injection
IP 10 MSTB/d, min. BHP -
1000 psi, Econ. Limit 100
STB/d
Ran for maximum time of 8000
days
Compaction Drive

52
Simulation Result - Recovery
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
days
C
u
m
.

O
i
l
,

M
M
S
T
B
Elastic strain only
(Constant compressibility)
Compaction drive
Compaction drive with
permeability change
Compaction Drive

53
National Geographic, October 2004

54
Land Loss 1932-2050
Land Gain 1932-2050

Oil and gas fields
are pervasive
through the region
of high rates of
land loss.
55

56
Study Area
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
!
"
!
#
$
% & =
% & & =
'
'
(
&
(
&
) ) ) *
) ) ) *
)
)
d r J R J e pHR C r u
d r J R J e pHR C r u
D
m r
D
m z
1
0
1
0
0
1
1 2 0 ,
1 2 0 ,
( ) ( )
!
" = "
H
m
dz z p z C H
0
Assuming R>>H, total
reduction in reservoir
height:
For a circular reservoir, surface displacements are:

Geertsma Model
57

58
Geertsma Model

Study Area: LaFourche Parish
59
Leeville Subsidence

60

Week 9

Week 10


61
Palo Duro
Woodford
Avalon
Barnett
24-252 Tcf
Haynesville
(Shreveport/Louisiana)
29-39 Tcf
Fayetteville
20 Tcf
Floyd/
Conasauga
Niobrara/Mowry
Cane
Creek
Monterey
Michigan Basin
Utica
Shale
Horton Bluff
Formation
New Albany
86-160 Tcf
Marcellus
225-520 Tcf
Antrim
35-160 Tcf
Lewis/Mancos
97 Tcf
Green River
1.3-2 Trillion Bbl
Gammon
Colorado Group
>300 Tcf
Bakken
3.65 Billion Bbl
Montney Deep Basin
>250 Tcf
Horn River Basin/
Cordova Embayment
>700 Tcf
0 600
MILES
Eagle Ford
25-100+ Tcfe
OIL SHALE PLAY
GAS SHALE PLAY
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Current Shale Gas/Tight Oil Research Projects
!
!

62
Eagle Ford Shale Pore Structure
50m
10 m
500 nm
Shale Permeability is a Million Times
Smaller Than Conventional Reservoir

63
Horizontal Drilling and Multi-Stage Slick-Water Hydraulic Fracturing
Induces Microearthquakes (M ~ -1 to M~ -3)
To Create a Permeable Fracture Network
S
Hmax
Multi-Stage Hydraulic Fracturing
Dan Moos et al.
SPE 145849

64
Palo Duro
Woodford
Avalon
Barnett
24-252 Tcf
Haynesville
(Shreveport/Louisiana)
29-39 Tcf
Fayetteville
20 Tcf
Floyd/
Conasauga
Niobrara/Mowry
Cane
Creek
Monterey
Michigan Basin
Utica
Shale
Horton Bluff
Formation
New Albany
86-160 Tcf
Marcellus
225-520 Tcf
Antrim
35-160 Tcf
Lewis/Mancos
97 Tcf
Green River
1.3-2 Trillion Bbl
Gammon
Colorado Group
>300 Tcf
Bakken
3.65 Billion Bbl
Montney Deep Basin
>250 Tcf
Horn River Basin/
Cordova Embayment
>700 Tcf
0 600
MILES
Eagle Ford
25-100+ Tcfe
OIL SHALE PLAY
GAS SHALE PLAY
We Need to Dramatically Improve Recovery Factors

Dry Gas ~25%
Petroleum Liquids ~ 5%

65

Week 9

Week 10


66
Recent Publications

Physical properties of shale reservoir rocks
Sone, H and Zoback, M.D. (2013), Mechanical properties of shale-gas reservoir
rocksPart 1: Static and dynamic elastic properties and anisotropy, Geophysics,
v. 78, no. 5, D381-D392, 10.1190/GEO2013-0050.1

Sone, H and Zoback, M.D. (2013), Mechanical properties of shale-gas reservoir
rocksPart 2: Ductile creep, brittle strength, and their relation to the elastic
modulus, Geophysics, v. 78, no. 5, D393-D402, 10.1190/GEO2013-0051.1

Slowly slipping faults during hydraulic fracturing
Das, I. and M.D Zoback (2013), Long-period, long-duration seismic events during
hydraulic stimulation of shale and tight gas reservoirs Part 1: Waveform
characteristics, Geophysics, v.78, no.6, p. KS107KS118.

Das, I., and M.D Zoback (2013), Long-period long-duration seismic events during
hydraulic stimulation of shale and tight gas reservoirs Part 2: Location and
mechanisms, Journal of Geophysics, , v.78, no.6, p. KS97KS105.


67
Recent Publications

Why slow slip occurs
Kohli, A. H. and M.D. Zoback (2013), Frictional properties of shale reservoir
rocks, Journal of Geophysical Research, Solid Earth, v. 118, 1-17, doi: 10.1002/
jgrb. 50346

Zoback, M.D., A. Kohli, I. Das and M. McClure, The importance of slow slip on
faults during hydraulic fracturing of a shale gas reservoirs, SPE 155476, SPE
Americas Unconventional Resources Conference held in Pittsburgh, PA, USA 5-7
June, 2012

Fluid transport/adsorption in nanoscale pores
Heller, R., J. Vermylen and M.D. Zoback (2013), Experimental Investigation of
Matrix Permeability of Gas Shales, AAPG Bull., in press.

Heller, R. and Zoback, M.D. (2013), Adsorption of Methane and Carbon Dioxide
on Gas Shale and Pure Mineral Samples, The Jour. of Unconventional Oil and
Gas Res., in review.


68
Recent Publications
.

Viscoplasticity in clay-rich reservoirs
Sone, H. and M.D. Zoback (2013), Viscoplastic Deformation of Shale Gas Reservoir
Rocks and Its Long-Term Effects on the In-Situ State of Stress, Intl. Jour. Rock Mech.,
in review.

Sone, H and M.D. Zoback (2013), Viscous Relaxation Model for Predicting Least
Principal Stress Magnitudes in Sedimentary Rocks, Jour. Petrol. Sci. Eng., in review.

Discrete Fracture Network Modeling in Unconventional Reservoirs
Johri, M. and M.D. Zoback, M.D. (2013), The Evolution of Stimulated Reservoir
Volume During Hydraulic Stimulation of Shale Gas Formations, URTec 1575434,
Unconventional Resources Technology Conference in Denver, CO, U.S.A., 12-14
August 2013

Case Studies
Yang, Y. and Zoback, M.D., The Role of Preexisting Fractures and Faults During
Multi-Stage Hydraulic Fracturing in the Bakken Formation, Interpretation, in press


69

Week 9

Week 10


70
An Increase in Intraplate Seismicity

Prague, OK*
Nov. 2011 M 5.7
Prague, OK
3 M5+ Eqs
Nov., 2011

Zoback (2012)

71
An Increase in Intraplate Seismicity

Prague, OK*
Nov. 2011 M 5.7
Prague, OK
3 M5+ Eqs
Nov., 2011

Ellsworth (2013)

72
Managing Triggered
Seismicity

73
EARTH April, 2012
Hurd and Zoback (2012)
Earthquakes Spreading Out Along an Active Fault
Horton (2012)

74
- Avoid Injection into Potentially Active Faults
- Limit Injection Rates (Pressure) Increases
- Monitor Seismicity (As Appropriate)
- Assess Risk
- Be Prepared to Abandon Some Injection Wells
Seismicity Triggered by Injection
Guy Arkansas
Earthquake Swarm

75

Reservoir Geomechanics Course Overview

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Reservoir Geomechanics Course Overview

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Reservoir Geomechanics

In situ stress and rock mechanics applied to reservoir processes

S-ar putea să vă placă și