2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.jngse.2015.09.032
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pore pressure prediction using geophysical methods in carbonate reservoirs: Current status, challenges and way ahead

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0
2

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
11
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Hence, the RFT data of those wells was used to validate the pore pressure prediction. (3) and Miller methods equation (5), pore pressure for the study was successfully predicted for 6 wells. As a result, the Eaton DT method with Eaton exponent 3 and Miller method with velocity exponent 3 have able to predict reasonably consistent pore pressure that matches the measured RFT data at well locations.…”
Section: A Pore Pressure Prediction Methodsmentioning
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Hence, the RFT data of those wells was used to validate the pore pressure prediction. (3) and Miller methods equation (5), pore pressure for the study was successfully predicted for 6 wells. As a result, the Eaton DT method with Eaton exponent 3 and Miller method with velocity exponent 3 have able to predict reasonably consistent pore pressure that matches the measured RFT data at well locations.…”
Section: A Pore Pressure Prediction Methodsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…Overpressure has been one of the major global geological challenges in the drilling operations in the oil and gas industry, while predrill pore pressure remained as the basic input data for proper selection of casing optimization and specifying a reliable of a drilling fluid density [4]. Thus, implied that validated pore pressure (over or under pressure) prediction is crucial for the oil and gas industry due to its decisive impact on the safety and cost of drilling for petroleum exploration and production [5]. Hence, precise pore pressure prediction is required to minimize the risks of drilling incidents such as blowouts, kicks, instability of wellbore, whole washouts, loss of drilling fluid circulation and protect the pay formation [3].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lithology, porosity, and fluid content variations have a significant effect on the accuracy and precision of pore pressure estimation based on P-wave velocity (Obradors-Prats et al, 2016;Wang and Wang, 2015;Oloruntobi et al, 2018). This can be explained by the strong dependence of P-wave velocity with lithological and geomechanical parameters.…”
Section: Discussion and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The conventional workflow starts with editing the acquired data by careful investigation of caliper log to locate the wellbore collapses, and identify outlier data points outside the three standard deviations from the mean (Wang and Wang, 2015). Then, we calibrate the Bowers relationship (equation 1) in offset wells via regression analysis of the calculated effective stress at depths with available P-wave velocity (figure 5A significant.…”
Section: Conventional Bowers and Tau Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation