SPE-189170-MS

Analysis of Post-Drill Pore Pressure and Fracture Gradient Model of G-Field,

Offshore, Niger Delta

C. O. George, Department of Geological Sciences, Nnamdi Azikiwe University; S. W. Thomas, M. John, and A.
Gani, Chevron Nigeria Limited; A. K. Emmanuel and A. E. Norbert, Department of Geological Sciences, Nnamdi
Azikiwe University

Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition held in Lagos, Nigeria, 31 July – 2 August 2017.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Post-drill pore pressure and fracture gradient analyses were carried out in an offshore hydrocarbon field, of
Niger DeltaBasin, the G-field, using petrophysical logs, drilling parameters and pressure data. Four wells
were analyzed and the results from the analysis will serve as a look back in building a Pre-Spud pore pressure
and fracture gradient model for future drilling of exploration and production wells. The overburden gradient
and normal compaction trend were generated based on an empirical formula. The pore pressure gradients
were computed using the Eaton’s and Miller’s method respectively. Mud weights, drilling parameters and
drilling events were used to calibrate the pore pressure gradients. Fracture gradient was computed using
Mathews and Kelly’s method with pore pressure definitive, overburden gradient and effective stress ratio
as the inputs. Based on the empirical methods, pressure transition zones were detected across the four
wells with three (3) pressure ramps of magnitude of 1.23 ppg (Pound Per Gallon), 2.55ppg and 1.52ppg
respectively. Pore pressure gradient model generated from the study revealed normally pressured zones at
the shallower part of the unconfined section in all the wells within the range of 870 and 6273 feet TVD
(True Vertical Depth) with an average shale pore pressure of 8.4ppg for Well 1,4715 and 9145 feet TVD
with an average shale pore pressure of 8.5ppg for Well 2, 2614 and 7736 feet TVD with an average shale
pore pressure of 8.39ppg for Well 3 and 4227 and 7972 feet TVD with an average shale pore pressure of
8.4ppg for Well 4. The top of the overpressured zones (>0.47 Psi/ft) (9ppg) were established across the four
wells. The analysis of pore pressure of the field shows that the depth to the overpressured zones ranges from
7498 to 8859 feet TVD for Well 1,9825 and 13582 feet TVD for Well2, 7741 and 12264 TVD for Well 3
and 8307 and 12220 feet TVD for Well 4.
Keywords: Pore Pressure, Fracture Gradient, Leak Off Test, Effective Stress, Mud weights (MW),
Fracture Gradient (FG)
2 SPE-189170-MS

Introduction
Over the years, there has been a paradigm shift in exploration activities from the normal conventional
topset onshore plays to the deep onshore and offshore prospects(Osinomo et al., 2007). These shifts have
resulted in an increase in drilling cost due to the characteristics of such terrain such as depth, temperature
and pressure conditions. These lead to a marked increase in the cost of drilling, especially in the deep water,
where wells are more complex. Given the drilling cost and the consequences arising from improper pre-
drilling monitoring programmes which results in several drilling incidents, subsurface overpressure is of
great concern to operators worldwide. Pore pressure prediction is an important part of well planning and
formation evaluation process. Knowledge of the formation pore pressure is necessary before any drilling
operation is recommended (Zhang et al., 2010). In order to drill a well safely and economically, it is
necessary to know the pore pressure and fracture pressure so that the mud density can be optimized. This
is to regulate the mud density in order for the formation integrity to be enhanced.
The well sections through the Niger Delta generally display three vertical lithofacies subdivisions, the
Benin, Agbada and Akata Formations conforming to the delta plain, delta front and pro-delta respectively.
The lithological characterizations of these lithostratigraphic units have been described (Short and Stauble,
1967; Weber and Daukoru, 1975 and Whiteman, 1982.). The Benin Formation consists of massive
continental sands and gravels, accounting for 90% of all the lithofacies with few shale intercalations, which
becomes more abundant toward the base. The Agbada Formation consists mainly of shoreface and channel
sands with minor shales in the upper part, and alternation of sands and shales in equal proportion in the
lower part. The Akata Formation comprised mainly marine shales, sandy and silty beds, which are thought
to have been laid down as turbidites and continental slope channel fills.
Most studies in the Niger Delta are done in-house and arenot in the public domain. Nevertheless, in their
works on offshore and onshore Niger Delta wells, Owolabi et al. (1990) applied the equivalent depth method
using resistivity and sonic logs and suggested that the main mechanism of overpressure is disequilibrium
compaction. In another study, Opara and Onuoha (2009) used velocities obtained from 3D seismic data
processing to conclude that a combination of mechanisms (i.e., disequilibrium compaction, gas generation,
thermal expansion, and clay diagenesis) contribute to overpressure generation at great depths, in particular,
where high pressures were observed. In this work, a deterministic approach which involves a high resolution
1 D geotechnical model was introduced to determine the relationship between effective stress and pore
pressure based on petrophysical measurements and pressure data to create a quantitative pore pressure and
fracture pressure model from rock property variations, in particular, changes in sonic velocity and resistivity
logs. This high resolution 1 D geotechnical model was introduced for a better and more accurate insight
in analyzing post-drill pore pressure and fracture gradient model from sonic (interval travel time) and
resistivity logs which will serve as a base in filling the gaps for a more robust pre-drill model in the future.
The aim of this study is to analyse the post-drill pore pressure and fracture pressure gradient model of G-
field offshore Niger Delta. In order to achieve this, we need to establish the top of overpressure zone across
the wells within the field, determine the best fit pore pressure trend based on both sonic and resistivity logs
as an essential component for further velocity works, build a pore pressure and fracture gradient model for
the field and finallyprovide good inputs for casing and well design essential for future drilling of exploratory
and production wells.

Location of the Study Area

The G-field is a brown field, located in the offshore depobelt of the Niger Delta (Fig. 1). The field was
discovered in 1981 and production commenced in 1985. Sixteen different reservoirs have so far been
penetrated by 25 wells in the field. The trapping mechanism is predominantly structurally controlled. The
field is characterized by synthetic faults which trend in the east-west with south ward throws. The lithologies
SPE-189170-MS 3

are interlayered sequence of sand and shales. The regional seismic across the field (Fig. 2) in dip section
with the arbitrary lines shows the fault orientations with different pressure cell within each fault block.

Figure 1—Map of Niger Delta showing the location of G-field

Figure 2—Composite seismic section showing the location of the wells in G-field

Data and Methodology

The principal data used for this study was provided by Chevron Nigeria Limited. It includes well data (logs,
mud weights, casing points, modular dynamic tester (MDT) and leak off test data) and Formation Tops.
Twenty three wells were provided for the study out of which only four wells had the necessary data for this
study (Table 1). Thesewells were picked based on proximity to the area of interest and depth of penetration.
All the wells had gamma ray, resistivity, sonic and density logs. For the pressure data, all the wells had
4 SPE-189170-MS

mud weights but only one had MDT and Leak Off data. The quality of the logs was quite good especially
where the whole length of the well bore was logged, but certain logs had data gaps. The study involves
a deterministic approach in pore pressure prediction using well logs and pressure data. All the available
well logs were quality checked, assured and loaded into the PREDICT software. Miller’s shallow density
method addressed the problem that is in offshore whereby shallow sediments may have very high porosities
and thus low densities that cannot be correctly described using seismic interval velocities. Miller’s near
mudline density correlation can be expressed as follows:
1
Where,
φ = porosity
φa +φb = is the mudline porosity
 d = is the depth below mudline, ft.
 k & n = empirically determined parameters

Table 1—Inventory of available logs for key wells chosen in the study area.

WELLS/AVAILABLE DATA Well 01 Well 02 Well 03 Well 04

Gamma Ray Y Y Y Y

Resistivity Y Y Y Y

Density Y Y Y Y

Sonic Y Y Y Y

Neutron N N N Y

VSH N Y Y Y

Press./MDT Y N Y N

Leak Off Test Y Y N N

Mud Weight Y Y Y Y

TD TVD 11576 13500 9898 12260

These porosity data can then be applied to calculate near mudline bulk density, ρb, directly by the
following relationship:
2
Where,
ρb = Density, g/cc
ρm = is the average density of the sediment grains (typically 2.68g/cc - shale)
ρw = is and the density of the pore water (typically 1.03g/cc)
Overburden Gradient (OBG) Curves were generated from the composite bulk density log signatures.
Shale-sand lithologic variations of the subsurface were delineated from the gamma ray signatures. The shale
points were picked using the short shale baseline method. Based on the relationship of measured resistivity
and burial depth in the formations with normal pressures, the normal compaction trend of resistivity was
generated on the resistivity track using the following equation (Zhang, 2011):
3
Rn = the shale resistivity in the normal compaction condition
SPE-189170-MS 5

R0 = the shale resistivity in the mudline;

 b = a constant
Z = the depth below the mudline.
Based on the data of the measured sonic transit time in the formations with normal pore pressures, this
relationship of the normal compaction trend of the transit time was generated (Zhang, 2011):
4
Where;
DTm = the compressional transit time in the shale matrix (with zero porosity);
DTml = the mudline transit time;
 c = the compaction constant;
Z = the depth below the mudline.
Rn from the normal compaction trend of resistivity was substituted in the Eaton’s resistivity method
of pore pressure calculation written below. Thus, the pore pressure was calculated and its gradient from
resistivity was generated.
5
Pp = pore pressure;
S = the Vertical Stress
Phyd = hydrostatic pore pressure; and the subscripts n and log refer to the normal and measured values
of resistivity (R).
Pore pressure was calculated using the Miller’s sonic method of calculating Pore pressure. Thus, the
equation is
6
Where;
V = the speed of sound in the compacting medium (shale)
Vma = the speed of sound in the matrix
Vml = mudline velocity
λ = a fitting parameter adjusted based on calibration data.
Sv = the vertical stress due to the weight of the overburden.
Fracture gradient was generated using the Mathews and Kelly method of calculating fracture gradient.
Thus;

Ki = Matrix stress coefficient

σ = matrix stress at the point of interest.
P/D = Pore Pressure Gradient.
The interpretations were done using Halliburton‘s windows based PREDICT software.
The workflow adopted in this project is outlined below (Fig. 3).
6 SPE-189170-MS

Figure 3—Post-drill pore pressure and fracture gradient workflow for this study.

Data analysis and Discussion

In all the post-drill pore pressure and fracture gradient models for all the wells, the first log track on the
formation pressuregradient model presents the gamma-ray log track (Fig. 4). The gamma-ray logs served
as lithology indicator. The second log track is the resistivity log track which was used to measure the
formation resistivity and conductivity in the borehole containing oil and fresh water. In this track, the shale
points were filtered using the moving weight average method in order to generate the Normal Compaction
Trend from the resistivity logs. The third track is the sonic log track which was used to identify the travel
time in the formation borehole. The fourth track is the density log track, used for petrophysical modeling
purposes. It was used to generate the Miller Density Trend. The final track is the formation pressure gradient
interpretation track.
SPE-189170-MS 7

Figure 4—Post-drill formation pressure gradient model of Well 01 showing the over
pressured zone, pressure ramped zone and the corresponding reduction in effective stress.

The interpretation of the formation pressure gradient model for Well 01 presents gradual increase in pore
pressure gradient from onset of the section (Fig.4). This is an indication that this section is a normally
pressured zone. Well 01 indicates an overpressure zone which was detected from 7498 to 8859 feet TVD.
Below the E3 Sand at 7498 feet TVD, the shale pore pressure ramped up from 9.01 to 10.24ppg at 7658 feet
TVD. Also, below the F 3 Sand at 8423 feet TVD, the Shale pore pressure ramped up from 9.06 to 10.58ppg
at 8613 feet TVD. The effective stress is the difference of pore pressure gradient from the overburden
gradient. Thus, increase in pore pressure (i.e. overpressure) causes reduction in the effective stress. The
overburden and pore pressure gradients at 7498 feet TVD depth is 17.81ppg and 9.01ppg. Therefore the
effective stress of the formation at that depth is 8.8ppg (i.e. 17.81- 9.01ppg). Thus, the cause of the reduction
of the effective stress and the predicted pore pressure encountered is the pressure acting on the fluids in
the pore spaces of the formations within the overpressure zone. As a result of the overpressure zone which
was experienced within the interval depth, a casing is required in order to prevent the overlying formation
from collapsing. The fracture gradient is the minimum mud weight required to fracture a wellbore while
drilling a well at a given depth.
8 SPE-189170-MS

Table 2—Summary of well 01 post-drill formation pressure analysis result

Depth (feet)

870 - 7493 Normally Pressured Zone

7498 Pressure Transition Zone

7658 Pressure ramp

8423 Pressure ramp

7498 - 8859 Overpressured Zone

The total depth interval for Well 02 ranges from 1190-13500 feet TVD. An interpretation of the pore
pressure model shows gradual increase in pore pressure gradient from onset of the section, with value
ranging from 8.3ppg to maximum of 8.89ppg with an average shale pore pressure of 8.5ppg (Fig. 5). This
is a normally pressured zone. The normally pressured zone was detected between 1299 and 9820 feet TVD.
Based on the empirical model, an over pressured zone was detected from 9825-13582 feet TVD. The normal
compaction trend (NCT) which indicates the optimum fitted linear trend of the measured overpressure and
normal pressure formation between the hydrostatically pressured and geopressured formations and thus
constitutes a pressured transition zone which was detected at 9825 feet TVD with 9.06ppg.

Figure 5—Post-drill formation pressure gradient model of Well 02 showing the over
pressured zone, pressure ramped zone and the corresponding reduction in effective stress.
SPE-189170-MS 9

However, above the A Sand at 9855 feet TVD, the shale pore pressure ramped up from 9.06-10.58ppg at
10165 feet TVD with a magnitude of 1.52 ppg. The sea water column has been taken as stand-in overburden
for the well which implies that the overburden gradient is dependent on the magnitude of the water column.
The overburden gradient within the depth of interest has a lower gradient. This shows that the overburden
gradient is low, which is an indication that the Well 02 penetrated through a higher water column. This
higher water column also enhanced the filling of the pore spaces with brine fluid which may have caused
the overpressure encountered within certain depths of the formation. Thus, increase in pore pressure (i.e.
overpressure) causes reduction in the effective stress. The overburden and pore pressure gradients at 9825
feet TVD depth is 17.81ppg and 9.05ppg. Therefore the effective stress of thewell formation at that depth is
8.85ppg (i.e. 17.9 - 9.05ppg); this suggests that there was an increase in the overpressure in the formation of
Well 02 leading to a decrease in the effective stress. Thus, the cause of the reduction of the effective stress
and the predicted pore pressure encountered is the pressure acting on the fluids in the pore spaces of the
formations within the overpressure zone. As a result of the overpressure zone which was experienced within
the interval depth, a casing is required in order to prevent the overlying formation from collapsing. The
fracture gradient is the minimum mud weight required to fracture the wellbore of Well 02 during drilling
at a given depth.

Table 3—Summary of well 02 post-drill formation pressure analysis results

Depth (feet)

1299 - 9820 Normally Pressured Zone

9825 Pressure Transition Zone

10165 Pressure ramp

9825-13582 Overpressured Zone

The total depth interval for the post-drill pore pressure and fracture gradient analysis of Well 03well
ranges from 2749 feet to 9898 feet TVD. An interpretation of the pore pressure models shows gradual
increase in pore pressure gradient from onset of the section as shown in fig. 4.6 which is an indication
that this section is a normally pressured zone. Based on the empiricalmodel, an Over pressured zone was
detected from 7741 feet to 9898 feet TVD. The normal compaction trend (NCT) is the optimum fitted linear
trend of the measuredoverpressure and normal pressure formation between the hydrostatically pressured
andgeopressured formations and thus constitutes a pressured transition zone which was detected at7741 feet
TVD with 9.02ppg. The effective stress is the subtraction of pore pressure gradientfrom the overburden
gradient. Thus, increase in pore pressure (i.e. overpressure) causesreduction in the effective stress. The
overburden and pore pressure gradients at 7741 feet TVDdepth are 17.5ppg and 9.0ppg respectively.
Therefore the effective stress of the well formation at that depth is8.5ppg; this suggests that there was an
increase in the overpressure in theformation of GC 03 leading to a decrease in the effective stress.

Table 4—Summary of well 03 post-drill formation pressure analysis results

Depth (feet)

2614 - 7736 Normally Pressured Zone

7741 Pressure Transition Zone

7741 - 9898 Overpressured Zone

10 SPE-189170-MS

Figure 6—Post-drill formation pressure gradient model of Well 03 showing the over
pressured zone, pressure ramped zone and the corresponding reduction in effective stress.

The total depth interval for the post-drill pore pressure and fracture gradient analysis of Well 04well
ranges from 3871 feet to 12260 feet TVD. An interpretation of the pore pressure modelsshows gradual
increase in pore pressure gradient from onset of the section with value ranging from 8.36ppg to maximum
of 9.00ppg with an average shale pore pressure of8.4ppg (Fig. 7). This is indication that this section is a
normally pressured zone.
SPE-189170-MS 11

Figure 7—Post-drill formation pressure gradient model of Well 04 showing the over
pressured zone, pressure ramped zone and the corresponding reduction in effective stress.

Based on the empirical model, an Overpressured zone was detected from 8307-12220 feet TVD. The
Normal Compaction Trend(NCT) is the optimum fitted linear trend of themeasured overpressure and normal
pressure formation between the hydrostatically pressured andgeopressured formations and thus constitutes
a pressured transition zone which was detected at8307 feet TVD with 9.ppg. The overburden and pore
pressure gradients at 8307 feet TVD depthis 17.6 and 9ppg. Therefore the effective stress of the well
formation at that depth is 8.6ppg; this suggests that there was an increase in the overpressure in the well
formation of Well 04 leading to a decrease in the effective stress.
12 SPE-189170-MS

Table 5—Summary of well 04 post-drill formation pressure analysis results

Depth (feet)

4227 - 7972 Normally Pressured Zone

8307 Pressure Transition Zone

8307-12220 Overpressured Zone

Results of Normal Compaction Trend generated across the wells

The decrease of the shale-resistivity behind the established NCTline from resistivity logs indicates the
overpressured zones (Fig. 8). Also, the deviations of the shale resistivity logs from the established NCT line
towards the higher values scale indicate the normal pressure zone which may be attributed to the presence
of different lithologies of shale and sandstone interbeds. This procedure was applicable to all wells. The
compressional wave velocity (Vp) from the sonic logs was used to delineate the abnormal pressure zone
and the normal pressure zone within the interval sections. Top of overpressure zone was observed along the
interpreted section of the wells. The compressional wave velocity (Vp) reversals were detected across the
wells at depths 7,498, 9825, 7741 and 8307 feet TVD. This suggests that compressional wave velocity Vp
(ft/sec) is lower in an overpressure formation. This is a dominant mechanism of overpressure formation in
deep water. The compressional wave velocities Vp (ft/sec) of the unconfined sections, which are normally
pressured zone have high readings. Therefore, it indicates that compressional wave velocities (Vp) are
higher in normally pressured zone as a result of the compaction of the formation which has no empty pores
that can enhance the invading fluids or water contents from the mud weight.

Validation of the formation pressure analysisresults of the wells within the

G-field
The first and second tracks present the normal compaction trend (NCT) from resistivity and sonic data,
identified as being clean shales in all the wells which were filtered to smooth out the effects of change in
silt content within them. The third track is the composite bulk density generated from the density logs of the
four wells. The fourth track shows the resulting definitive pore pressure, fracture and overburden gradients
plotted alongside formation pressure test results.

Discussion
An interpretation of the pore pressure models presents gradual increase in pore pressure gradient from onset
of the section for all the four wells before an overpressure zones were detected at a shallower depth in Well
01 and Well 03 and at a deeper depth in Well 02 and Well 04. This shows that Well 01 and Well 03 wells
may have a similar pressure regime compared to that of Well 02 and Well 04. From the empirical model
used, the established normal compaction trend line (NCT) for shale resistivity and sonic logs which are
designed to detect the abnormal pressure zones (overpressure zone) and normal pressure zone are consistent
across the wells. This is an indication of the reliability of the models for the post-drill pore pressure and
fracture gradient analyses. With the trending of the pore pressure gradients, it can be inferred that the major
mechanism that give rise to these overpressures are due to disequilibrium compaction. The overburden
gradient experienced a sharp increase at the shallower depth and a gentle slope at the deeper depth in some
of the wells. This means that some of the wells were penetrated under a higher water column, and thus a
decrease in overburden pressure.
SPE-189170-MS 13

Figure 8—Comparing the compaction curves for both Sonic and resistivity
logs and the top of over pressured zones across the wells within G-field.
14 SPE-189170-MS

Figure 9—Comparing the consistency of the models across the four wells regionally.

Conclusion
This study has highlighted the importance of post-drill pore pressure and fracture gradient analysis as a
tool to build a pre-drill model for future exploration and production wells. The pore pressure predictions
of the wells were comprehensively investigated and predicted using Eaton’s resistivity and Miller’s sonic
velocity methods. The travel time and resistivity are sensitive to compaction (porosity) and were used
to estimate pore pressure using Eaton’s and Miller’s equations. These empirical equations have a form
like the Terzaghi’s equation. The fracture gradient which is the minimum mud weight required to fracture
the wellbore formation during a drilling operation was calculated using the Matthews and Kelly method.
Based on the results of the high resolution 1D geotechnical model used for this work, a normally pressured
zone were detected at a shallower depth across the four wells with three pressure ramps detected at the
overpressured zones in Well 01 and Well 02. A pressure transition zone which is the interphase between
the shallower normally pressured unconfined section and the deeper confined overpressure section in a
formation was detected at a shallower depth in Well 01 and Well 03 wells and at a deeper depth in Well
02 and Well 04 regionally.
SPE-189170-MS 15

Acknowledgements
My unquantifiable gratitude goes to the Management and Staff of Chevron Nigeria Limited, the well
planning team, Reservoir Management Organization and Capability team and Applied Research and
Technology Services Division for their supports, data availability, trainings, exposures, approval for this
paper presentation and guidance during my research internship with them. Placing me under the mentorship
of Mr Thomas William Stafford was the best gift for me as a young geoscientist. His suggestions and insight
have proved to be very valuable and were used substantially throughout the project. I am also grateful to
the current Head of Geology Department, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Dr. Norbert. E. Ajaegwu and
his staff for their contribution to this research.

References
Opara, I.A. and Onuoha, M.K. (2009). Pre-drill pore pressure prediction from 3D seismic data in parts of the onshore
Niger delta basin soc. Proceedings of the Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition, (NAICE’ 09).
Osinomo, O. O., Oladunjoye, M. A., and Olayinka, A. I. (2007). Overpressure prediction Fromseismic data: implications
on drilling safety. American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting, Abstract S23A-1113.
Owalabi, O. O., Okpobiri, G. A., and Obomanu, I. A. (1990). Prediction of abnormal pressure in the Niger Delta using
well logs. CIM/SPE International Technical Meeting, Calgary, Canada.
Weber, K.J., and Daukoru, E. (1975). Petroleum geology of the Niger Delta. Proceedings of the 9th World Petroleum
Congress, Tokyo, 2: 209 – 221.
Whiteman, A. J. (1982). Nigeria-Its Petroleum Geology, Resources and Potential, 1, 270 - 275.
Zhang, J. and Roegiers, J.C. (2010). Discussion on "Integrating borehole-breakout dimensions, strength criteria, and leak-
off test results, to constrain the state of stress across the Chelungpu Fault, Taiwan". Tectonophysics, 492, 295-298.
Zhang, J., (2011). ‘Pore pressure prediction from well logs: Methods, modifications, and new approaches.’ Earth-Science
Reviews, 108, 50–63.