Fracture Gradient Determination

Fracture Gradient Determination

Hubbert and Willis Matthews and Kelly Ben Eaton Christman Prentice Leak-Off Test (experimental)

Fracture Gradient Determination

Read AWC Chapter 4 all

Well Planning
Safe drilling practices require that the following be considered when planning a well:
Pore pressure determination Fracture gradient determination Casing setting depth Casing design H2S considerations Contingency planning

The Hubbert & Willis Equation

Provides the basis of fracture theory and prediction used today. Assumed elastic behavior. Assumed effective stress exceeds the minimum by a factor of 3.

The Hubbert & Willis Equation

If the overburden is maximum, the assumed horizontal stress is: H = 1/3(ob - pp) + pp Equating fracture propagation pressure to minimum stress gives pfp = 1/3(ob - pp) + pp

The Hubbert & Willis Equation

pfp = 1/3(ob - 2pp) (minimum) pfp = 1/2(ob - pp) (maximum)

Matthews and Kelly

Developed the concept of variable ratio between the effective horizontal and vertical stresses, not a constant 1/3 as in H & W. Stress ratios increase according to the degree of compaction eH = KMKev

Matthews and Kelly

eH = KMKev KMK = matrix stress coefficient Including pore pressure H = KMK(ob - pp) + pp

Matthews and Kelly

Equating fracture initiation pressure to the minimum in situ horizontal stress gives pfi = KMK(ob - pp) + pp and gfi = KMK(gob - gp) + gp

Example 4.8
Given: Table 4.4 (Offshore LA) Estimate fracture initiation gradient at 8110 and 15,050 using Matthews and Kelly correlation

Example 4.8
For 8110 gfi = 0.69(1 - .465) + .465 gfi = 0.834 psi/ft For the undercompacted interval at 15,050, the equivalent depth is determined by: De = [15050-(.815*15050)]/.535 = 5204

KMK = 0.61 KMK = 0.69

Example 4.8
gfi = 0.61*(1-.815)+.815 = .928 psi/ft Note: Overburden gradient was assumed to be 1.0 psi/ft

Penebakers Gulf Coast

gfi = Kp(gob - gp) + gp where Kp is Penebakers effective stress ratio

Penebakers overburden gradient from Gulf Coast region

Depth where t = 100 sec/ft

Penebakers Effective Stress Ratio

Example 4.9
Re-work Example 4.8 using Penebakers correlations where the travel time of 100 sec/ft is at 10,000

Example 4.9
At 8110 gfi = 0.77(0.945 - 0.465) + 0.465 gfi = 0.835 psi/ft At 15050 gfi = 0.94(0.984 - 0.815) + 0.815 gfi = 0.974 psi/ft

Eatons Gulf Coast Correlation

Based on offshore LA in moderate water depths E (g ob g p ) + g p g fi = 1 E
Note the bracketed Poisson' s ratio term is an effective stress ratio

Mitchells approximation

Mitchells approximation

Mitchells approximation

Example 4.10

Example 4.10

Summary
Note that all the methods take into consideration the pore pressure gradient. As the pore pressure increases, so does the fracture gradient

Summary
Hubbert and Willis apparently consider only the variation in pore pressure gradient. Matthews and Kelly also consider the changes in rock matrix stress coefficient and the matrix stress

Summary
Ben Eaton considers variation in pore pressure gradient, overburden stress, and Poissons ratio. It is probably the most accurate of the three.

Summary
The last two are quite similar and yield similar results. None consider the effect of water depth.

Christmans approach
Christman took into consideration the effect of water depth on overburden stress.

Example 4.11
Estimate the fracture gradient for a formation located 1490 BML. Water depth is 768, air gap is 75. Repeat for water depth of 1500

Example 4.11

Example 4.11

Christman
Christman also noted that anomalously low fracture gradients seemed to be associated with formation having low bulk densities for the burial depth. He then developed the correlation in Fig 4.45

Example 4.12
Re-work the first part of Example 4.11 if the logged bulk density at 1490 BML is 2.08 g/cc

gfi = 0.6 * (0.73-0.452) + 0.452 gfi = 0.619 psi/ft

Prentice method
Water depth of 1000 Total depth = 4000 Water gap = 200

Prentice method
Convert the water depth to an equivalent section of formation.
E.g. 1000 * 0.465 psi/ft = 465 psi

From Eatons overburden stress chart the stress gradient at 4000 equals 0.89 psi/ft

Prentice method
465 psi/0.89 psi/ft = 522 equivalent depth Calculate and convert apparent fracture gradient to actual fracture gradient
522 + 3000 = 3522 equivalent

Prentice method
From Eatons fracture gradient chart, the gradient at 3522 = 13.92 ppg or Fracture pressure = 0.052 * 13.92 * 3522 = 2549 psi

Prentice method
The effective fracture gradient from the mud flow line at the drill ship deck to the casing seat is: 2549 * 19.23/(200 + 1000 + 3000) = 11.67 ppg F = 2549/4200 = 0.607 psi/ft 0.607/.052 = 11.67 ppg

Experimental Determination
Leak-off test, LOT, - pressure test in which we determine the amount of pressure required to initiate a fracture Pressure Integrity Test, PIT, pressure test in which we only want to determine if a formation can withstand a certain amount of pressure without fracturing.

??

PIT
10.0 ppg How much surface pressure will be required to test the casing seat to a 14.0 ppg equivalent? ps = (EMW - MW) * 0.052 * TVDshoe ps = (14.0 - 10.0) * 0.052 * 4000 4000 ps = 832 psi

LOT

Rupture Leak-off Propagation

Example 4.22 - 2
Interpret the leak-off test.

Solution
Pfi = 1730 + .483*5500 - 50 1730 psi = leak off pressure 0.483 psi/ft = mud gradient in well 5500 depth of casing seat 50 psi = pump pressure to break circulation Pfi = 4337 psi = 0.789 psi/ft = 15.17 ppg

What could cause this?

Poor Cement Job

Example
Surface hole is drilled to 1500 and pipe is set. About 20 of new hole is drilled after cementing. The shoe needs to hole 14.0 ppg equivalent on a leak off test. Mud in the hole has a density of 9.5 ppg.
9.5 ppg

1500

Example
What surface pressure do we need to test to a 14.0 ppg equivalent? (14.0 - 9.5) * .052 * 1500 = 351 psi

Example
The casing seat is tested to a leak off pressure of 367 psi. What EMW did the shoe actually hole? 367/.052/1500 + 9.5 = 14.2 ppg EMW

Example
After drilling for some time, TD is now 4500 and the mud weight is 10.2 ppg. What is the maximum casing pressure that the casing seat can withstand without fracturing?
10.2 ppg

1500

4500

Example
Max. CP = (EMW - MW) * .052 * TVDshoe Max. CP = (14.2 - 10.2) * .052 * 1500 Max. CP = 312 psi

Example
Now we are at a TD of 7500 with a mud weight of 13.7 ppg. What is the maximum CP that the shoe can withstand? Max. CP = (14.2 - 13.7) * .052 * 1500 Max. CP = 39 psi