Abnormal Pressures in Hydrocarbon Environments 1998
DOI: 10.1306/m70615c4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Shale Porosities from Well Logs on Haltenbanken (Offshore Mid-Norway) Show No Influence of Overpressuring

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As a test of the hypothesis of Hermanrud et al (1998), and, by implication, Bowers (2001), the resistivity log should react in a similar manner to the sonic log, that is, a response to sediment unloading. This paper focuses primarily on two wells, B-11 in the Bekapai Field and SEM-39 in the Semberah Field.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As a test of the hypothesis of Hermanrud et al (1998), and, by implication, Bowers (2001), the resistivity log should react in a similar manner to the sonic log, that is, a response to sediment unloading. This paper focuses primarily on two wells, B-11 in the Bekapai Field and SEM-39 in the Semberah Field.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It also has utility in interpreting pore pressure, and is commonly used for this purpose, more often in association with Eaton (1975), where disequilibrium compaction is present. The hypothesis tested here is based on observations by Hermanrud et al (1998) where log responses in the intra-Jurassic shales, Norway, revealed that neutron and density logs do not show a significant difference in porosity between shales that are low vs. high in overpressure, whereas the sonic and resistivity responses show higher (apparent) porosity differences. It is suggested that the porosity is unaffected by differences in pore pressures, but that the sonic and resistivity logs are reacting to textural changes induced in the shales by overpressure rather than high porosities due to undercompaction.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The comprehensive compaction curve (Figure 3) plotted for all 10 members in the study area (Chang 1-10), shows a trend that, from Chang 1 to Chang 4 + 5, the acoustic travel time decreases, while the deep lateral resistivity increases, the formation density increases, and the neutron porosity decreases; below Chang 4 + 5, from Chang 6 to Chang 8, the acoustic travel time, resistivity, density, and neutron porosity show reverse behavior and are synchronized. Only when this synchronization occurs can the segmented compaction of mudstone be confirmed (Fertl and Timko, 1972;Hermanrud et al, 1998). Thus, it can be confirmed that Chang 1 to Chang 4 + 5 is a normal compaction segment, and Chang 6 to Chang 8 is an under-compaction segment.…”
Section: Segmentation Of Mudstone Compactionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Measured pressure data, mud weight and well logs can reflect the relationship between formation pressure and depth (Hermanrud et al, 1998;Tingay et al, 2013). The principle of the equilibrium depth method is that in a set of strata with the same properties, regardless of the formation temperature, where strata at different depths have the same porosity, the skeleton stress between rock particles will be the same.…”
Section: Pressure Evolution 421 Pressure Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%