Pressure and Compaction in the

Rock Physics Space

Jack Dvorkin

June 2002
 Compaction of Shales
Freshly deposited shales and clays may have enormous porosity of ~
80%. The speed of sound is close to that in water ~ 1500 m/s. The S-
wave velocity is small but not negligible. As a result, Poissons ratio
approaches 0.5.
As the overburden increases, the shale compacts. Porosity decreases
and velocity increases.
Compaction in on-shore shale and
0
in GOM.
NPP
7
200

6
Depth (m)
(m)

g/cc)
Depth

(km/s g/cc)
GOM
5

Ip (km/s
600 GOM
4
Ip
Compaction
800 3
NPP
1000 2
50 100 150 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.0 2.5 0.2 0.4 0.6
GR RHOB (g/cc) Vp (km/s) Porosity
 Difference in Compaction of Shales and Sands
Sands are much less compactable than shales (unless the grains break or
diagenesis sets in).

50% Sand DRY

Compaction in dry kaolinite, 2.0 50% Clay
Ottawa sand, and a 50/50
mixture thereof (Yin, 1992).
Sand
Vp(km/s)
(km/s)
40 MPa
1.5
Vp

Clay

1.0 10 MPa

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Porosity
 Compaction of Shales
As long as shale is load-bearing, the compaction trend in the impedance-
porosity space seems to be universal among wells logs and lab data.
Compaction in on-shore shale and in GOM + Yin's clay and
sand/clay data.
7
YIN 50/50
6
g/cc)
(km/s g/cc)

GOM
5
IpIp(km/s

4
Compaction

3
YIN
Kaolinite
NPP
2
0.2 0.4 0.6
Porosity
 Compaction and Undercompaction Due to Pore
Pressure
Abnormal pore pressure results in undercompaction and porosity
and velocity reversals

0.4 SHALE: 120 > GR > 90

Porosity

Porosity Reversal
Porosity

0.3

0.2

3
Vp (km/s)
(km/s)

Velocity Reversal
Vp

2 SHALE: 120 > GR > 90

1 km
 Compaction and Undercompaction Due to Pore
Pressure -- Same Rock Physics Trend
Normally- and over-pressured parts of the well project onto the
same rock physics trend, same as the lab data.

8
YIN 50/50
7
g/cc)
(km/s g/cc)

GOM
6
Ip (km/s

5
Ip

3 YIN
Kaolinite
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
Porosity
 Universality of Compaction and Undercompaction
in Rock Physics Space
Moreover, well log data from different wells worldwide fall onto the
same Ip-porosity trend. Different color means different well.
Depth (m)

500 9

8
1000

g/cc)
7

Ip (km/s)
1500

Ip (km/s
2000

2500
4

3000
3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
3500 Porosity
50 100 150 0 .2 .4 .6 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
GR Porosity Ip (km/s g/cc)
 Universality of Compaction and Undercompaction
in Rock Physics Space
The curves are from unconsolidated sediment model that relates elastic
properties to porosity, lithology, and pore fluid compressibility.

10
(GPa)

25 50% 50% 30%

(GPa)

30% 8

(GPa)
Modulus

Modulus (GPa)
20
Compressional Modulus

ShearModulus
6
15
Compressional

C = 4

Shear
100%
10
NPP 2
C = NPP
5 100%
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Porosity Porosity
 Rational Effective-Medium Model
Uncemented Particles
Hertz-Mindlin Theory + Modified Lower Hashin-Shtrikman
100
SOLID

(GPa)
MODIFIED
LOWER 80
HASHIN-SHTRIKMAN

Modulus
WITH

(GPa)
HERTZ-MINDLIN 60

M-Modulus
Increasing
Compressional
Pressure
40

20

HERTZ-
MINDLIN
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Porosity

Hertz-Mindlin theory provides expressions for the contact stiffness between

two elastic particles. Based on these expressions, we can derive the elastic
moduli for uncemented sediment at critical porosity depending on pressure
and pore fluid.
 Compaction and Undercompaction Due to Pore
Pressure in AI-EI Space
Abnormal pore pressure also results in AI and Poisson's ratio
reversals
Ip Reversal
g/cc)

8
(km/sg/cc)

7
6
Ip(km/s

5
4
ALL
Ip

PR Reversal
PRRatio

0.4 PR Reversal
Poisson's

0.3
ALL
0.2 Hi-P Gas

10 15 20 25 30
1 km Differential Pressure (MPa)
 Compaction and Undercompaction Due to Pore
Pressure in AI-EI Space
PR is very sensitive to mineralogy. We may want to use it to
detect mineralogical changes associated with onset of
overpressure. May help resolve the non-uniqueness of
universality of Ip- trends

Pressure
Zone Above
Just 7 Pressure
Zone
Shales
g/cc)
(km/sg/cc)

6
Ip (km/s
Ip

5 Below
Pressure
Zone

0.3 0.4 0.5

Poisson's Ratio
 High Pressure in Gas Sands

High pore pressure in rock with gas results in smaller Poissons ratio.
Velocity may vary a lot among rocks but PR behavior is universal.

Plots based on lab data.

.2
PR
PR

.1
Sand
Sand Sand 35% Porosity
36% Porosity
27% Porosity
0
30 20 10 0 30 20 10 0 30 20 10 0
Pp (MPa) Pp (MPa) Pp (MPa)
 Normal Compaction in Shales
Log data show monotonic compaction versus depth.

(m)
Depth (m)
Depth
2000

2500

3000

0 50 100 150 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2 3 4 5

GR RHOB (g/cc) Vp (km/s)
 Normal Compaction in Shales
Log data show monotonic compaction versus depth.

Left -- color coding by GR highlights compaction trends for shale and sand.
Right -- color coding by depth shows porosity collapse and impedance increase.

13 160 13

12 12 3200
140
11 11 3000
120
10 10
2800
(km/s g/cc)

(km/s g/cc)
g/cc)
g/cc)

9 100 9
2600
8 8
IpIp(km/s

IpIp(km/s
80
7 7 2400
60
6 6 2200
40
5 5
2000
4 20 4
1800
3 3
0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 GR 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5TVD
Porosity Porosity
 Undercompaction in Shales
Log data show reverse compaction versus depth.
Color coding by depth shows porosity and impedance reversal.
Overpressured shales stay on the same rock physics trend as normally
pressured shales.
9

8.5 2850
Reversal -- Deeper
8
Shale Plots to 2800
7.5 Low-Right
Ip (km/s g/cc)
g/cc)

7 2750

6.5 2700

6
2650
5.5
2600
5
2550
4.5

4 2500
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4TVD
Porosity
 Undercompaction in Shales -- Example 2
Mudweight Steps Approximately Match Porosity and Velocity Flattening

UPSCALED

UPSCALED
UPSCALED
MD (kft)

AT_136_1
9

10

11

12
2 kft

13

14

15

16
40 60 80 100 .2 .4 1 3 .1 .2 .3 .42.0 2.5 3.0 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4
GR Rt Porosity Vp (km/s) Ip (km/s g/cc) MW (lb/gal) Pp (kpsi) Peff (kpsi)
 Undercompaction in Shales -- Example 2
Overpressured shales stay on the same rock physics trend as normally
pressured shales.

Color-Coded by Depth

7.5
Overpressured
Shale 4.5
7

6.5
4
g/cc)
P-Impedance

6 SAND
Ip (km/s

3.5
5.5

5
3

4.5

2.5
4

0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 Depth (km)

Porosity
 Undercompaction and Vp/Vs Ratio
In overpressured (softer) sediments, the Vp/Vs ratio is high and deviates
from the established Vp/Vs relations.
In overpressured gas sands the opposite is true -- the Vp/Vs ratio is small.
3.5
Overpressured
Shale
Figure shows a Vp/Vs versus
3.0 Vp plot for a well with an
Pore Pressure
overpressured shale section
Increase (green) and overpressured
gas sand (red). Black
Vp/Vs
Vp/Vs

2.5 symbols are for normally

Mudrock pressured shales. Blue
Williams
Sand
curves show established
Williams relations for water-saturated
Shale
2.0 sediment.

Overpressured
Gas Sand
1.5
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Vp (km/s)
 Compaction and Unloading in Sands
Loading and unloading produce different strain paths in sand

Compaction and elastic unloading in a sand.

0.43 2 1.2
Galveston Galveston Galveston
1.0
Envelope Envelope
0.42
0.8

(km/s)
(km/s)
Porosity

Vp (km/s)

Vs(km/s)
Porosity

0.41 1 0.6
Vp

Vs
0.4
0.4
0.2

0.39 0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43
Pressure (MPa) Porosity Porosity
 Compaction and Unloading in Sands
Static and Dynamic Moduli

SAND 1 SAND 2
4
(GPa)

3
Modulus (GPa)

Static
Unloading
Modulus

Static Dynamic
Dynamic
Bulk

Unloading
Bulk

1 Static

Static Static
Static
Loading Loading
0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Effective Pressure (MPa) Effective Pressure (MPa)
 Conclusion

The projection of compaction (loading) process into

the impedance-porosity plane produces a universal
trend typical for many soft shales and independent
of depth.

AI/EI technique may help detect pressure-

associated lithology changes in shales. But what to
do in frontier areas where impedance inversion is
difficult?

Unloading (uplift) is different from loading

(compaction) and will produce a different trend
because of irreversible porosity reduction.
 Pore Fluid and Pressure Diagnostic from AI and EI
The softer the rock with liquid the larger the Poissons Ratio. The softer the
rock with gas the smaller the Poissons ratio.

0.4
BRINE

NORTH SEA
0.3 SAND
Pore
PR Ratio

Pressure
Poisson's

0.2

Pore
0.1 Pressure

0 GAS

2 3 4 5 6
P-Impedance (km/s g/cc)