Está en la página 1de 55

Technology Centre

D. Sustainability and Technology

REPORT

Real time 24hr support of


1D Geomechanical Model &
Wellbore stability analysis for
well Mashira 57-18-6X

Authors:
Pablo Enrique Vargas Mendoza
José Alvarellos Iglesias
Lakshmikantha M.R.

March 2017

CONFIDENTIAL Page 1 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

CONTENTS

CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................. 2
TABLE OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. 4
1. GENERAL WELL DATA ..................................................................................................... 6
2. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 7
3. TECHNICAL SCOPE .......................................................................................................... 9
4. PREDRILL GEOMECHANICAL MODEL ............................................................................. 10
4.1. ROCK PROPERTIES............................................................................................................... 11
Strength Properties .............................................................................................................................. 11
Stiffness Properties .............................................................................................................................. 12
4.2. STRESS STATE .................................................................................................................... 14
Overburden (Sv) ................................................................................................................................... 14
Pore pressure (Pp) ............................................................................................................................... 15
Horizontal stresses (SH & Sh)............................................................................................................... 18
4.3. WELLBORE STABILITY .......................................................................................................... 19
Fracture gradient (FG) ......................................................................................................................... 19
Borehole collapse (BHC) ...................................................................................................................... 20

5. REAL TIME SUPPORT .................................................................................................... 23


5.1. WORKFLOW ...................................................................................................................... 23
5.2. LOG COMPARISON .............................................................................................................. 24
5.3. ROCK PROPERTIES COMPARISON ............................................................................................ 25
5.4. OVERBURDEN UPDATE......................................................................................................... 26
5.5. PORE PRESSURE UPDATE ...................................................................................................... 26
5.6. WELLBORE STABILITY .......................................................................................................... 28
6. POST-MORTEM ANALYSIS ............................................................................................ 30
6.1. WORKFLOW ...................................................................................................................... 30
6.2. FORMATION TOPS AND CASING DIAGRAM ............................................................................... 30
6.3. MECHANICAL STRATIGRAPHY ................................................................................................ 31
6.4. INPUT LOGS ....................................................................................................................... 32
6.5. DAILY DRILLING REPORT ...................................................................................................... 34
6.6. ROCK PROPERTIES............................................................................................................... 36

CONFIDENTIAL Page 2 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

6.7. PORE PRESSURE ................................................................................................................. 37


6.8. STRESS STATE .................................................................................................................... 38
6.9. WELLBORE STABILITY .......................................................................................................... 40
6.10. MUD WINDOW .................................................................................................................. 46
7. FINAL COMMENTS ....................................................................................................... 47
8. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 49
9. APPENDIX .................................................................................................................... 50
9.1. LOG COMPARISON BY SECTION .............................................................................................. 50
9.2. ROCK PROPERTIES BY SECTION .............................................................................................. 53

CONFIDENTIAL Page 3 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Table of Figures

Figure 1. Mashira 57-18-6X well prognosis referenced to KB ........................................................ 6


Figure 2. Location of Mashira Prospect .......................................................................................... 7
Figure 3. Available data in Mashira 57-18-6X pre-drill model ...................................................... 10
Figure 4. Rock properties in Mashira 57-18-6X pre-drill model. From left to right: well
schematic, UCS, Internal friction angle, Dynamic Young Modulus, Static Young modulus,
Poisson’s ratio. In gray properties extracted from Halliburton’s pre-drill model and in light color
properties computed inside GEOSmart1D. .................................................................................. 11
Figure 5. Relationship between dynamic and static Young modulus. .......................................... 13
Figure 6. Overburden log computation. At right column is compared GEOSmart1D computation
(thick light green line) based on synthetic input density log and Halliburton’s pre-drill
Overburden (thin blue line). ......................................................................................................... 14
Figure 7. Pore pressure scenarios defined in final pre-drill report [4] and [5]. ............................ 15
Figure 8. Eaton’s method based on resistivity and sonic porosity indicators. ............................. 16
Figure 9. Bowers and Millers methods based on synthetic sonic log (interpreted pore pressure
P50). .............................................................................................................................................. 17
Figure 10. Stress state computation. ESRmin=0.96, ESRmax=1.02. ............................................. 18
Figure 11. Maximum horizontal stress computation: Halliburton’s pre-drill SHmax (light green
line), GEOSmart1D computation (dark green line). At left: ESRmax=1.02, at right: ESRmax=1.2
(report [5]). ................................................................................................................................... 19
Figure 12. Fracture gradient computation: Halliburton’s pre-drill (gray line), GEOSmart1D
computation (orange line). At left: Mathews and Kelly model, at right: poro-elastic model for
sands. ............................................................................................................................................ 20
Figure 13. Borehole collapse pressure workflow. ........................................................................ 21
Figure 14. Comparison between Halliburton’s pre-drill collapse pressure (gray) and
GEOSmart1D borehole collapse computation (dark magenta). ................................................... 21
Figure 15. Summary of model: Pore pressure (blue line), Fracture gradient (red line), Borehole
collapse (dark magenta) and Poro-elastic fracture for sands (orange line) ................................. 22
Figure 16. Mashira 57-18-6X 24H real-time support workflow. ................................................... 23
Figure 17. Example of summary of daily drilling reports (DDR) included in geomechanics real-
time report (GMR). ....................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 18. Comparison between pre-drill logs (reports [4] and [5]) and Real-Time acquired logs.
....................................................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 19. Comparison between pre-drill rock properties (reports [4] and [5]) and computed
properties from real-time acquired logs. ..................................................................................... 26
Figure 20. Interpreted pore pressure based on resistivity logs (Eaton’s method). ...................... 27
Figure 21. Interpreted pore pressure based on resistivity and sonic logs (Eaton’s method). ..... 28
Figure 22. Borehole instability thresholds. Pp: Pore pressure, Pc: Collapse pressure, Pf: Fracture
pressure, FBP: Fracture breakdown pressure, Pm/MW: Mud pressure/Mud Weight. ............... 28
CONFIDENTIAL Page 4 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 23. Mud Window plot updated from real-time acquired logs, daily drilling reports and
daily geologic reports.................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 24. Workflow for post-mortem geomechanical analysis. ................................................. 30
Figure 25. Mashira 57-18-6X. Formation Tops and Casing diagram............................................. 31
Figure 26. Mechanical stratigraphy using real-time gamma ray logs........................................... 32
Figure 27. Real-time logs (light lines) and pre-drill stretched logs (gray lines). ........................... 33
Figure 28. Composite logs used in post-mortem geomechanical model ..................................... 34
Figure 29. Summary of daily drilling reports analyzed from spud date (15-dec-2016) to TD date
(23-jan-2017). ............................................................................................................................... 35
Figure 30. Synthetic pre-drill rock properties (gray line) and computed rock properties from
DTCO/DTSM real-time logs (light lines). ....................................................................................... 37
Figure 31. Pore pressure interpretation based on Eaton’s method. ............................................ 38
Figure 32. Post-mortem stress state model for Mashira-57-18-6X well. From left to right:
Density composite log (orange line), Overburden (light orange), ESRmin/ESRmax(red/green),
horizontal stresses in absolute pressure and gradient. ................................................................ 39
Figure 33. Fracture gradient compositor. Mathews and Kelly method is selected as fracture
gradient pressure. ......................................................................................................................... 40
Figure 34. Pre-drill (gray line) and computed (dark magenta) borehole collapse pressure values.
....................................................................................................................................................... 42
Figure 35. Sensitivity analysis of collapse pressure regarding well survey at maximum collapse
pressure values. ............................................................................................................................ 43
Figure 37. Geomechanical model: Stiffness properties, strength properties, stress state and
collapse pressure. ......................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 36. Summary of values computed for Mashira 57-18-6X post-mortem analysis.............. 45
Figure 37. Comparison between drilling experience, pore pressure interpreted, mud pressure
and ECD acquired, and collapse pressure and fracture gradient computed................................ 46
Figure 38. Well log comparison. 16” Section @4287 ftMD. ......................................................... 50
Figure 39. Well log comparison. 14.5x12¼” Section @7026 ftMD. ............................................. 51
Figure 40. Well log comparison. 8½” Section @8835 ftMD. ........................................................ 52
Figure 41. Rock properties. 16” Section @4287 ftMD. ................................................................ 53
Figure 42. Rock properties. 14.5x12¼” Section @7026 ftMD. ..................................................... 54
Figure 43. Rock properties. 8½” Section @8835 ftMD. ................................................................ 55

CONFIDENTIAL Page 5 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

1. GENERAL WELL DATA


BASIC WELL DATA
Well Name MASHIRA 57-18-6X
Block 57
Geographic Location Peru, Junin, Satipo province, Rio Tambo district.
Basin Ucayali
Field MASHIRA
Well Category Exploratory
WELL OBJECTIVES
Evaluate hydrocarbon potential in the target reservoirs.
Primary Upper Nia, Lower Nia, Noi-Ene
Secondary Vivian & Chonta Clastic
WELL INFORMATION
Ground Level / RT 1581.2 ft / 1613.1 ft
Expected / Real TD 10057 ft MD / 8835 ft MD
Spud Date (dd/mm/yy) 15/12/2016
TD Date (dd/mm/yy) 23/01/2017
SURFACE LOCATION
Longitude (D,M,S) E 73º 30’ 18.6188” W
Latitude (D,M,S) N 11º 22’ 58.7275” S
Geodetic Datum WGS84
X (Easting) 663,103.513
Y (Northing) 8,741,253.774
Trajectory Vertical well

Figure 1. Mashira 57-18-6X well prognosis referenced to GL

CONFIDENTIAL Page 6 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

2. INTRODUCTION
Mashira 57-18-6X well is located in the Peruvian Ucayali Basin, inside Block 57, at a distance of
17 km toward west from Sagari 4XD and 9.2 Km toward east from Mapi 5X well (Figure 2). Block
57 is located in the southern part of the Ucayali Basin, approximately 400 km to the East of
Lima in the Peruvian foothills.

The primary reservoirs to Mashira 57-18-6X are the following, Upper Nia Fm., Lower Nia and
Ene-Noi Units, which are the main hydrocarbon production units in Kinteroni and Sagari fields
in Block 57. The secondary reservoirs are Vivian Fm. and Chonta Clastic Unit.

Figure 2. Location of Mashira Prospect

This report includes the geomechanical model built for the 24hr real time support for the
drilling campaign of well Mashira 57-18-6X and the post-mortem analysis calibrated with the
events extracted from daily drilling reports, logs, measurements while drilling and available
wireline data.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 7 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

The project was done in three main stages:


 Pre-drill geomechanical model in GEOSmart1D to reproduce Halliburton’s
geomechanical pre-drill model (reports [4] and [5]). This stage allows verification of rock
properties, stress state and stability along planned well.
 Real-time support while drilling Mashira 57-18-6X well that comprises update
geomechanical model based on acquired LWD, MWD and Wireline data, comparison
between pre-drill and acquired logs to identify probable changes and recommendation
of updated mud window.
 Post-mortem analysis of the borehole to verify the main assumptions in the pre-drill
model (like Effective Stress Ratios (ESR) and rock strength correlations) and wellbore
stability to explain main geomechanical issues while drilling.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 8 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

3. TECHNICAL SCOPE
Provide 24hr real time support for the drilling campaign of well Mashira 57-18-6X. The
technical scope for this task is listed below.

1. 1D Geomechanical Model (1DGM) for the well Mashira 57-18-6X with the daily data
from the rig/well site, the 1D model was updated and compared with the predrill model
every day. 1DGM includes:
 1D Pore Pressure Model from surface to current depth of the day, including
buoyancy and centroid effects.
 1D Total Stress Models from surface to current depth of the day:
 Overburden Total Stress Model
 Minimum Total Horizontal Stress Model (magnitudes)
 Maximum Total Horizontal Stress Model (magnitudes)
 Azimuth of the Maximum Total Horizontal Stress Model
 1D Mechanical Properties Model (elastic properties, internal friction angle and
unconfined compressive strength).

2. Validate the Geomechanical model with detailed daily drilling experiences and logs
(calipers, image logs) and any other daily information.

3. Shear failure analysis of the trajectory and the recommended mud windows.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 9 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

4. PREDRILL GEOMECHANICAL MODEL


This section includes main assumptions used to reproduce pre-drill geomechanical model
performed by Halliburton reports [4] and [5] using following data:

 Available synthetic input logs (Figure 3).


o Gamma Ray.
o Resistivity.
o Compressional slowness.
o Shear slowness.
o Density.
 Prognoses formation tops (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Available data in Mashira 57-18-6X pre-drill model

CONFIDENTIAL Page 10 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

4.1. Rock properties

Strength properties (unconfined compressive strength and internal friction angle) were
computed in GEOSmart1D applying correlational equations used in Halliburton’s pre-drill final
report [4] and [5], equations (1), (2) and (3).

Stiffness properties (Young modulus and Poisson’s ratio) were computed in GEOSmart1D using
Gatens’ correlations [6] equations (4), because Halliburton’s final reports [4] and [5] did not
include reference to equations for elastic properties.

Rock properties computed in GEOSmart1D (Figure 4) shows a good agreement with


Halliburton’s pre-drill model parameters.

Figure 4. Rock properties in Mashira 57-18-6X pre-drill model. From left to right: well schematic, UCS, Internal
friction angle, Dynamic Young Modulus, Static Young modulus, Poisson’s ratio. In gray properties extracted from
Halliburton’s pre-drill model and in light color properties computed inside GEOSmart1D.

Strength Properties
Unconfined Strength (UCS)
 Materials based on sandstone (McNally [2] from final reports [4] and [5]):

CONFIDENTIAL Page 11 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

(1)

 Materials based on Shale and Claystone (Lal [3] from final reports [4] and [5]):

(2)

Friction angle

Correlation is not included in final reports [4] and [5]. Therefore Lal’s Vp correlation [3] was
used for sandstone and shale.

(3)

Stiffness Properties

Correlations are not found in final reports [4] and [5]. Dynamic properties were computed with
Gatens’ correlations [6]:

CONFIDENTIAL Page 12 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

(4)

Static Young modulus

Correlation is not found in final reports [4] and [5]. A crossing plot between dynamic and static
Young modulus is performed to define their relationship (see Figure 5).

Figure 5. Relationship between dynamic and static Young modulus.

Static Poisson’s ratio

Correlation is not found in final reports [4] and [5]. Static Poisson’s ratio equal to dynamic
Poisson’s ratio is assumed (see equation 3) and good agreement is found (see Figure 4).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 13 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

4.2. Stress state


Overburden (Sv)
Overburden (vertical stress) is computed by integrating formation density from surface to the
depth of interest:

(5)

Final report [5] defines the computation of pseudo-density when compressional velocity is
available with Gardner’s correlation using following calibrated values.
 Gardner’s coefficient : constant value = 0.229
 Gardner’s exponent: constant value = 0.251

Pre-drill overburden stress was computed using available synthetic density log (Figure 6 and
Figure 3).

Figure 6. Overburden log computation. At right column is compared GEOSmart1D computation (thick light green
line) based on synthetic input density log and Halliburton’s pre-drill Overburden (thin blue line).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 14 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Pore pressure (Pp)

Figure 7 shows available scenarios analyzed in pre-drill reports [4] and [5]. The main difference
between them corresponds to expected pore pressure below Chonta Clastic formation (8000
ftMD).

Figure 7. Pore pressure scenarios defined in final pre-drill report [4] and [5].

Pre-drill geomechanical model to real-time support was focused on PP_INT_ P50 (reports [4]
and [5]). Pore pressure P50 was verified based on following assumptions:

 Eaton’s exponent was reduced in all porosity indicators from 3.0 to 2.5 for slowness and
0.5 for resistivity (see page 35 [5]). Results are shown in Figure 8.

 Bowers and Millers method were applied and results are shown in Figure 9.

 Buoyancy effect (Gas) is assumed in Upper Nia, Lower Nia and Noi units (see lower part
of Figure 9).
CONFIDENTIAL Page 15 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 8. Eaton’s method based on resistivity and sonic porosity indicators.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 16 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 9. Bowers and Millers methods based on synthetic sonic log (interpreted pore pressure P50).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 17 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Horizontal stresses (SH & Sh)


Figure 10 shows stress state computed from following basic assumptions (final reports [4] and
[5]):
 Maximum horizontal stress orientation : 240º +/- 10º
 Effective stress ratio (ESR) for minimum horizontal stress : 0.96
 Effective stress ratio (ESR) for maximum horizontal stress: 1.02 (revised value taken
from comparison with values in report [5] – see Figure 11).

Figure 10. Stress state computation. ESRmin=0.96, ESRmax=1.02.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 18 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 11. Maximum horizontal stress (SH_max) computation. In purple: Halliburton’s pre-drill SH_max log
(ESR=1.20. Report [5]), in green GEOSmart1D SH_max computation, at left: ESR=1.02, at right: ESR=1.2.

4.3. Wellbore stability

Fracture gradient (FG)

Fracture pressures were calculated using a Mathews and Kelly model (K=0.96) for shale and the
poro-elastic model for more brittle formations (see report [5], page 20).

𝐹𝐺 = 𝐾 ∗ (𝜎𝑣 − Pp) + Pp

where: (6)
Pp : Pore pressure
𝜎𝑣 : Overburden
𝐾 : Mathews and Kelly constant

CONFIDENTIAL Page 19 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 12 shows comparison between Halliburton’s fracture gradients (report [5]) and values
computed in GEOSmart1D.

Figure 12. Fracture gradient computation: Halliburton’s pre-drill (gray line), GEOSmart1D computation (orange
line). At left: Mathews and Kelly model, at right: poro-elastic model for sands.

Borehole collapse (BHC)

Modified Lade failure criterion [7] was used to calculate collapse pressure along planned well
(see Borehole Collapse in Figure 13) based on rock strength correlations (section 5.1.1) and
stress state (section 5.2).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 20 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 13. Borehole collapse pressure workflow.

Figure 14 shows good agreement when is compared Halliburton’s pre-drill collapse pressure
and GEOSmart1D borehole collapse computation.

Figure 14. Comparison between Halliburton’s pre-drill collapse pressure (gray) and GEOSmart1D borehole collapse
computation (dark magenta).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 21 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 15 shows a summary of the geomechanical model including pore pressure, fracture
gradient and borehole collapse to perform the follow up in real time.

Figure 15. Summary of model: Pore pressure (blue line), Fracture gradient (red line), Borehole collapse (dark
magenta) and Poro-elastic fracture for sands (orange line)

CONFIDENTIAL Page 22 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

5. REAL TIME SUPPORT


Shared web space was enabled by Peru Business Unit to download acquired real-time data as
daily reports (Drilling Reports, Geologic Reports, Geomechanics Report), Logging While Drilling
(LWD), Measure While Drilling (MWD) and Wireline data.

5.1. Workflow

Figure 16 shows workflow applied to 24H real-time support depending on data available.

Figure 16. Mashira 57-18-6X 24H real-time support workflow.

Update geomechanics (pore pressure, rock properties and stress state) depends on data
availability, i.e. rock properties were updated only when sonic (wireline) was available. When a
change in formation tops was detected (i.e. Vivian formation), a new stretched pre-drill model
was required to ensure correct comparison between pre-drill and real-time data.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 23 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Daily drilling and geology reports bring information about geomechanical events and updated
formation tops useful to update pre-drill assumptions. Figure 17 shows a summary plot of daily
drilling reports from spud date, the plot includes relevant events to be analyzed from
geomechanical point of view.

Figure 17. Example of summary of daily drilling reports (DDR) included in geomechanics real-time report (GMR).

5.2. Log comparison


Log comparison was performed regarding available data. Figure 18 shows comparison between
pre-drill logs (gray line) regarding to real-time data (light lines).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 24 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 18. Comparison between pre-drill logs (reports [4] and [5]) and Real-Time acquired logs.

Comparison between pre-drill and real-time logs allows identify the changes in lithology, rock
properties, pore pressure and stress state of the rock. The changes can be affect minimum mud
weight to avoid instabilities/kicks and the reduction of maximum equivalent circulating density
to avoid partial/total losses.

Figure 18 also shows how real-time logs capture the change in formation tops, moving Vivian
formation top 1000ft above from 7177ftMD (prognosed) to 6175ftMD (revised).

5.3. Rock properties comparison

Figure 19 includes rock comparison between Halliburton’s pre-drill reports [4] and [5] (gray
line) and GEOSmart1D computed values (light lines). Comparison was done only when real-time
sonic log was available

CONFIDENTIAL Page 25 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 19. Comparison between pre-drill rock properties (reports [4] and [5]) and computed properties from real-
time acquired logs.

5.4. Overburden update

Overburden computation in upper part of well (above 7000ftMD) was done based on
Halliburton’s pre-drill reports [4] and [5]. Real-time density log was available only below
7000ftMD and acquired values are very close to synthetic density log (pre-drill reports [4] and
[5]), therefore changes in overburden computation are not relevant.

5.5. Pore pressure update


Pore pressure interpretation was updated with Eaton’s method applied to real-time resistivity
log (A40H) using pre-drill normal compaction trend. Results were compared with pre-drill pore
pressure in reports [4] and [5] (Figure 20). When real-time sonic log was available, Eaton’s
method was also applied to compressional sonic (Figure 21).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 26 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 20. Interpreted pore pressure based on resistivity logs (Eaton’s method).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 27 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 21. Interpreted pore pressure based on resistivity and sonic logs (Eaton’s method).

5.6. Wellbore stability


Fracture gradient and borehole collapse pressure were updated when pore pressure, stress
state or rock properties changes. Figure 22 shows the comparison between pore pressure (Pp),
fracture gradient (Pf) and collapse pressure (Pc) regarding safe and stable borehole. Borehole
instability thresholds allow defines minimum mud weight and maximum equivalent circulation
density to control instabilities/losses in borehole.

Figure 22. Borehole instability thresholds. Pp: Pore pressure, Pc: Collapse pressure, Pf: Fracture pressure, FBP:
Fracture breakdown pressure, Pm/MW: Mud pressure/Mud Weight.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 28 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 23. Mud Window plot updated from real-time acquired logs, daily drilling reports and daily geologic reports.

Figure 23 shows a summary of relevant events for geomechanical analysis. The events were
extracted from daily drilling reports. Figure 23 also shows dog-leg severity (values less than 5
deg/100ft) as well as borehole stability plot comparing pore pressure, fracture gradient and
collapse pressure. In Figure 23, Mud Window (green zone) at 7026 ftMD is restricted at left by
borehole collapse pressure (MW=11ppg) and at right by fracture gradient (ECD=18.9ppg).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 29 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

6. POST-MORTEM ANALYSIS

6.1. Workflow

Figure 24 shows workflow applied to post-mortem geomechanical analysis. The result of each
task performed in this workflow was compared with stretched Halliburton’s pre-drill reports [4]
and [5]. Stretching procedure was applied to pre-drill model to update formation tops from
prognosed to real ones.

Figure 24. Workflow for post-mortem geomechanical analysis.

6.2. Formation tops and Casing diagram

Figure 25 shows final formation tops and casing diagram for Mashira-57-18-6X.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 30 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 25. Mashira 57-18-6X. Formation Tops and Casing diagram.

6.3. Mechanical stratigraphy

Mechanical stratigraphy is a simplified petrophysical description of the stratigraphy that allows


assigning the best rock strength correlation. In a geomechanical model, the lithology is used to
define between different mechanical behaviour of rocks. In this model, the mechanical
stratigraphy has been differentiated between grain-supported (called “Sand”) and matrix-
supported (called “Shale”).

This information is important to choose which correlation will be used to compute mechanical
properties and to analyze rock failure at a given depth. Figure 26 shows the mechanical
stratigraphy for Mashira 57-18-6X well obtained using a gamma-ray cutoff.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 31 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 26. Mechanical stratigraphy using real-time gamma ray logs.

6.4. Input logs

Compressional and shear slowness logs as well as density log in some depths are not available,
therefore pre-drill stretched logs were used to complete the data in all sections.

Figure 27 shows the comparison between available real-time logs and pre-drill stretched logs in
all section of borehole and Figure 28 shows composite logs used in post-mortem analysis.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 32 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 27. Real-time logs (light lines) and pre-drill stretched logs (gray lines).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 33 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 28. Composite logs used in post-mortem geomechanical model

6.5. Daily Drilling Report

The provided drilling reports have been reviewed in order to be aware of the events that took
place while drilling and could be related to geomechanical issues.

The data that we look for in these reports are:


 Tight hole
 Reaming
 Overpull
 Packoff
 Stuck pipe
 Kick
 Gas
 Cuttings
 Ballooning

CONFIDENTIAL Page 34 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

 Total losses, Partial losses

These events can be classified in two groups: indicators of wellbore failure and indicators of
elevated pore pressure. Among the indicators of wellbore failure are: overpull, breakouts,
washouts, reaming, stuck pipe, tight hole or cuttings. Among the indicators of elevated pore
pressure are influx (kicks) and high gas cut. Reported losses (partial or total) and ballooning
events provide information for the characterization of the minimum horizontal stress.

The mud weight used while drilling provides information about the pressure that the well is
subjected. The relation between the mud weight density, analytical stress concentration
models around the well and drilling events provides the information needed to create
checkpoints for stress models calibration.

The analyzed drilling reports for Mashira-57-18-6X borehole are summarized graphically in the
Figure 29. Drilling advance is represented in the left axis (in ftMD) and mud weight on the right
axis (in PPG). Remarkable geomechanics related events are presented in the figures. Also
additional information is showed as well schematic and well trajectory.

Figure 29. Summary of daily drilling reports analyzed from spud date (15-dec-2016) to TD date (23-jan-2017).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 35 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

No mayor events related with geomechanics were found. Frequent events in daily drilling
reports were tight-spots, some overpull and also Gas have been found. No mayor issues while
drilling were found.

6.6. Rock properties

Mechanical rock properties are determined from laboratory information and/or log
correlations. The main elastic properties used are Young’s modulus and Poisson's ratio. These
can be derived from empirical correlations of the dynamic moduli to static moduli. The dynamic
moduli (small strain less than 10-7) can be calculated from wave’s propagation velocities. Static
moduli better represent the response to (slow) engineering activities. Therefore, the values of
static elastic moduli are usually smaller than the dynamic ones. The static Poisson’s ratio is
assumed equal to its dynamic counterpart. These parameters were computed in GEOSmart1D
using equations (4).

The parameters encompassing strength properties are UCS (unconfined compressive strength),
and the angle of internal friction. UCS could be measured in the laboratories. If UCS is not
available, post-prediction wellbore stability (WBS) can be used as a quality control check of
adjusted UCS base on log correlation (using sonic for instance). The angle of internal friction can
be derived from laboratory tests or by using correlations based on logs (sonic, gamma ray or
effective porosity). These parameters were computed in GEOSmart1D applying correlational
equations (1), (2) and (3).

Figure 30 includes rock comparison between pre-drill stretched rock properties and
GEOSmart1D computed values.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 36 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 30. Synthetic pre-drill rock properties (gray line) and computed rock properties from DTCO/DTSM real-time
logs (light lines).

6.7. Pore pressure

The assumed pore pressure generation mechanism in shales is subcompaction. Pore pressure
has been calculated applying Eaton’s method with a normal compaction trend (NCT) for the
resistivity and sonic logs. Results were compared with in situ pressure measurements (Moduler
Dynamic Tester - MDT).

Figure 31 shows the pore pressure interpretation when NCT lines are defined for resistivity and
sonic logs. In Figure 31 also can be seen overpressures at base of Lower Red Beds formation
and Chonta formations.

Buoyancy effect was not taken into account in the model (Nia and Noi formations), because of
lower values in gas peaks measurements.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 37 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 31. Pore pressure interpretation based on Eaton’s method.

6.8. Stress state

Overburden computation was done with composite density log (Figure 28) and equation (5).

The magnitude of the horizontal stresses has been defined based on pre-drill basic assumptions
(final reports [4] and [5]):
 Maximum horizontal stress orientation : 240º +/- 10º
 Effective stress ratio (ESR) for minimum horizontal stress : 0.96
 Effective stress ratio (ESR) for maximum horizontal stress: 1.02.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 38 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Formation Integrity Test (FIT) instead Leak-off Test (LOT) were performed in Mashira-57-18-6X.
Measured FIT values fall below computed minimum horizontal stress, therefore ESRmin
assumption is assumed as good.

Fracture pressures were calculated using a Mathews and Kelly model (K=0.96) for shale,
equation (6) and the poro-elastic model for more brittle formations.

Figure 32. Post-mortem stress state model for Mashira-57-18-6X well. From left to right: Density composite log
(orange line), Overburden (light orange), ESRmin/ESRmax(red/green), horizontal stresses in absolute pressure and
gradient.

Figure 33 shows comparison between fracture gradient computation with Eaton’s method and
Mathews and Kelly method (K=0.96).

CONFIDENTIAL Page 39 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 33. Fracture gradient compositor. Mathews and Kelly method is selected as fracture gradient pressure.

6.9. Wellbore stability

Wellbore stability is predicted by calculating the near-wellbore stress conditions and their
orientations and the comparison of these stresses with a given rock failure criterion (such as
the Modified Lade or Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion). The failure criterion applied
corresponds to the modified Lade criterion [7], equation (7), a general three-dimensional

CONFIDENTIAL Page 40 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

criterion widely used for rocks and soils. This criterion is formulated in terms of the first and the
third stress invariants of the stress tensor slightly modified by a strength coefficient, S0,
equation (8). It involves only two independent material parameters (unconfined compressive
strength,𝐶0 , and the coefficient of internal friction, 𝜇).

I13
𝐹= − (27 + η) (7)
I3

where:
3 3

𝐼1 = ∑(𝜎𝑖 + 𝑆0 ) ; 𝐼3 = ∏(𝜎𝑖 + 𝑆0 ) (8)


𝑖=1 𝑖=1
9√ 𝜇2 + 1 − 7𝜇
𝜂 = 4𝜇 2 (9)
√𝜇 2 + 1 − 𝜇
√ 𝜇2 + 1 − 𝜇
𝑆0 = 𝐶0 · (10)
2𝜇

𝐶0 : Unconfined compressive strength (UCS)


𝜇: coefficient of internal friction

Wellbore collapse pressure is defined as the mud weight needed to have a breakout with a
critical (or allowable) width (Max_allow_BKO). Critical breakout width is a linear function of the
well inclination (INCL) and it is represented in the equation (11). Max_allow_BKO is 90 degrees
for a vertical well and 30 degrees for a horizontal well (Figure 34).

2
Max_allow_BKO = − (INCL) + 90 (11)
3

The adopted definition of wellbore failure (allowable breakout width) is standard in the
industry and it is based on the experience in different wells, regions (state of stresses), rock
types and under different drilling operation conditions.

Figure 34 shows comparison between borehole collapse pressure from pre-drill model (gray
line) and computed in GEOSmart1D (dark magenta). Computed borehole collapse pressure
corresponds to the same trend but slight higher values than pre-drill model.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 41 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 34. Pre-drill (gray line) and computed (dark magenta) borehole collapse pressure values.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 42 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Wellbore stability results are used to define which the mud weight window is recommended
from a geomechanical point of view. The mud window is the difference between the lowest
and the highest acceptable mud weights for a given set of drilling conditions. Breakouts will
occur if drilling takes place using a mud weight lower than the wellbore collapse and the ability
of drilling that section will be linked to the hydraulics of the well. The maximum value of the
mud weight window (dynamic in this case) corresponds to the fracture gradient. If this value is
exceed, the high ECD could fracture the rock and losses would occur (Figure 34).

Figure 35. Sensitivity analysis of collapse pressure regarding well survey at maximum collapse pressure values.

Figure 35 shows the sensitivity analysis of borehole collapse pressure regarding Mashira 57-18-
6X trajectory at maximum values of collapse pressure and it shows that vertical direction
(inclination = 0º) was the more favorable direction to drill regarding collapse pressure and
horizontal direction (inclination = 90º) at minimum horizontal azimuth is the worst to drill.

Figure 36 shows the final results for post-mortem analysis in Mashira-57-18-6X geomechanical
model and Figure 37 includes a summary of the values computed by formation name.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 43 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 36. Final results for post-mortem analysis in Mashira 57-18-6X geomechanical model.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 44 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
CONFIDENTIAL
Technology Centre

Mashira-57-18-6X (Post Mortem): Stress Field


Depth (ft) Section MW Pore Pressure (ppg) Fracture Gradient(Sand)Fracture Gradient (Eaton) Shear Failure Gradient Overburden GradientMaximum Horizontal Stress
Formation
MD TVD Depth Bit size (PPG) Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std
Red Upper 50.0 50.0 30-304 26" 9.3-10.0 3.09 8.63 8.24 0.59 9.14 23.21 18.95 1.50 6.20 18.58 17.58 1.48 0.49 8.56 6.30 1.56 6.33 18.99 17.97 1.52 6.39 19.20 18.16 1.54
D. Sustainability and Technology

Beds Lower 3177.0 3176.4 304-4288 16" 9.4-10.6 8.49 10.10 8.89 0.33 15.61 18.15 17.00 0.44 18.58 18.95 18.82 0.10 7.77 12.29 9.21 1.13 18.99 19.34 19.23 0.10 19.20 19.56 19.44 0.10
Vivian 6175.0 6174.4 4288-6295 14 1/2" 10.6 8.49 8.50 8.49 0.00 15.19 15.99 15.49 0.25 18.90 18.92 18.92 0.01 8.04 10.78 8.59 0.83 19.34 19.36 19.35 0.01 19.56 19.57 19.57 0.01
Shale 6360.0 6359.4 10.6-10.8 8.50 10.27 9.94 0.50 15.97 16.84 16.61 0.19 18.92 18.99 18.98 0.02 8.07 12.99 11.30 1.02 19.35 19.36 19.35 0.00 19.53 19.57 19.54 0.01
Chonta 6295-7026 12 1/4"
Clastic 6653.0 6652.4 9.4-11.0 8.67 10.30 9.59 0.60 12.87 16.76 15.57 1.10 18.91 19.01 18.97 0.03 8.28 12.41 9.98 1.16 19.34 19.37 19.36 0.01 19.54 19.58 19.56 0.01
Upper 7145.0 7144.4 9.4 8.49 8.67 8.53 0.05 13.55 15.01 14.29 0.37 18.85 18.91 18.87 0.02 8.12 13.22 8.62 0.85 19.28 19.34 19.30 0.02 19.50 19.55 19.52 0.02
Nia Middle 7395.0 7394.4 9.4 8.49 8.49 8.49 0.00 13.63 16.21 15.37 0.69 18.85 18.93 18.87 0.02 8.12 9.36 8.44 0.32 19.28 19.35 19.31 0.02 19.50 19.57 19.52 0.02
Lower 7810.0 7809.4 9.2-9.4 8.49 8.49 8.49 0.00 13.41 16.28 13.88 0.51 18.92 18.93 18.92 0.00 8.14 9.37 8.16 0.13 19.35 19.36 19.35 0.00 19.57 19.58 19.57 0.00
7026-8835 8 1/2"
Shinai 8204.0 8203.4 9.2 8.49 8.49 8.49 0.00 13.61 15.92 14.67 0.53 18.92 18.98 18.94 0.01 8.15 10.96 8.70 0.72 19.36 19.40 19.37 0.01 19.58 19.62 19.59 0.01
Noi-Ene 8521.0 8520.4 9.2 8.49 8.49 8.49 0.00 13.74 16.21 14.39 0.58 18.98 19.02 19.00 0.01 8.16 9.10 8.21 0.17 19.40 19.44 19.42 0.01 19.62 19.66 19.64 0.01
Copacabana 8779.0 8778.4 9.2 8.49 8.49 8.49 0.00 16.21 16.72 16.43 0.12 19.01 19.02 19.01 0.00 8.17 8.17 8.17 0.00 19.44 19.45 19.44 0.00 19.66 19.67 19.66 0.00
TD 8835.0 8834.4 Note: All pressures are given in PPG

Mashira-57-18-6X (Post Mortem): Elastic & Strength Rock Properties


Depth (ft) Section MW Friction Angle UCS Poisson Ratio Static Young Modulus Dynamic Young Modulus
Formation
MD TVD Depth Bit size (PPG) Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std Min Max Avg Std
Red Upper 50.0 50.0 30-304 26" 9.3-10.0 19.16 37.81 29.32 3.12 1,075 12,559 3,781 1,853 0.22 0.45 0.39 0.03 0.187 2.275 0.710 0.323 0.436 4.503 1.559 0.664
Beds Lower 3177.0 3176.4 304-4288 16" 9.4-10.6 24.73 43.02 30.97 2.57 2,092 9,688 3,556 1,275 0.10 0.44 0.38 0.03 0.283 4.385 0.869 0.343 0.652 7.769 1.887 0.680
Vivian 6175.0 6174.4 4288-6295 14 1/2" 10.6 28.11 34.19 32.38 1.09 2,585 8,016 5,544 1,623 0.25 0.39 0.33 0.02 0.596 1.593 1.216 0.175 1.335 3.309 2.592 0.344

outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Shale 6360.0 6359.4 10.6-10.8 24.40 37.21 28.92 2.99 1,891 11,153 3,157 1,216 0.10 5.15 0.42 0.43 0.308 33.658 1.105 2.965 0.708 32.020 1.996 2.961
Chonta 6295-7026 12 1/4"
Clastic 6653.0 6652.4 9.4-11.0 25.03 42.99 33.86 4.04 2,092 21,840 6,651 4,608 0.10 3.76 0.32 0.19 0.446 21.925 1.655 1.302 1.014 24.861 3.302 1.766
Upper 7145.0 7144.4 9.4 22.38 46.25 35.85 3.21 1,314 24,815 8,026 3,823 0.10 0.39 0.26 0.05 0.637 4.176 1.830 0.580 1.422 7.504 3.705 1.027
Nia Middle 7395.0 7394.4 9.4 35.70 46.06 39.57 1.78 4,137 29,190 7,848 5,109 0.10 0.33 0.25 0.05 1.767 5.897 3.252 0.748 3.629 9.851 6.080 1.145
Lower 7810.0 7809.4 9.2-9.4 35.71 45.01 38.78 1.59 4,133 26,522 13,941 3,076 0.11 0.29 0.18 0.04 2.029 6.590 3.206 0.665 4.095 10.726 6.016 0.989
7026-8835 8 1/2"
Shinai 8204.0 8203.4 9.2 30.15 45.22 38.64 3.13 2,926 26,306 8,989 5,705 0.11 0.33 0.24 0.04 1.212 6.580 3.133 1.071 2.587 10.716 5.846 1.667
Noi-Ene 8521.0 8520.4 9.2 34.72 45.57 39.04 2.71 4,787 27,933 13,958 5,111 0.12 0.28 0.21 0.04 2.019 7.719 3.603 1.350 4.077 12.081 6.549 1.965
Copacabana 8779.0 8778.4 9.2 43.91 44.53 44.45 0.16 6,566 25,339 22,786 6,553 0.12 0.19 0.17 0.02 6.625 7.325 6.965 0.147 10.771 11.620 11.187 0.178
TD 8835.0 8834.4 Note: UCS in psi, Static and Dynamic Young modulus in M psi

Figure 37. Summary of values computed for Mashira 57-18-6X post-mortem analysis.

Page 45 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

6.10. Mud window

Figure 38 shows final results of the geomechanical analysis (interpreted pore pressure, collapse
pressure and fracture gradient) and compare these results with acquired logs (MWTI, ECD) and
drilling events (tight spots, overpull and gas peak).

Figure 38 highlight at 6750ftMD some tight-spots in a zone where collapse pressure is higher of
mud pressure applied while drilling.

Figure 38. Comparison between drilling experience, pore pressure interpreted, mud pressure and ECD acquired,
and collapse pressure and fracture gradient computed.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 46 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

7. Final Comments
1D Geomechanical post-mortem model for Mashira-57-18-6X well has been built based on:

• Correlations applied in pre-drill model for the computation of rock mechanical


properties (UCS, internal friction angle).
• Pre-drill maximum horizontal stress orientation : 240º +/- 10º
• Pre-drill effective stress ratio (ESR) for minimum horizontal stress : 0.96
• Pre-drill effective stress ratio (ESR) for maximum horizontal stress: 1.02
• Mechanical lithology based on GR log data
• Elastic properties and strength properties computed from density and sonic data.
• Pore pressure using NCT in resistivity and sonic data.

Synthetic pre-drill logs were stretched from prognosed tops to real formation tops in order to
perform comparisons between pre-drill, real-time data and computed properties.

Real-time acquired logs exhibit same trend as synthetic pre-drill logs, therefore rock properties
computation from real-time logs results in close values as pre-drill prognosed ones.

Principal events in daily drilling reports correspond to tight spots, some overpull and few gas
peaks (below 800ppm). Tight spots in Chonta formations probably occur due low mud pressure
regarding collapse pressure.

Overburden stress was computed from density composite using pre-drill synthetic log (0-
7000ftMD) and density real-time log (available after 7000ftMD). Computed values are quite
similar to pre-drill since density real-time log had values very close to synthetic log.

Pore pressure computation was done based on Eaton's method applied to resistivity real-time
log. A new normal compaction trend was defined based on real-time data and a new
interpretation was done at lower part of Lower Red Beds formation due overpressure. Eaton's
method applied to sonic real-time log was included to check interpretation based on resistivity,
also Millers and Bowers were computed to check pore pressure interpretation.

Pore pressure is mainly hydrostatic. Overpressures around 10.10 ppg at base of Lower Red Beds
formation and around 10.30 ppg at Chonta formations were interpreted.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 47 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Minimum horizontal stress computation was done without change assumptions included in pre-
drill reports (ESRmin=0.96). Two Formation Integrity Test (FIT) was done along Mashira-6x well.

Fracture pressures were computed with Matthews & Kelly method and effective stress ratio of
0.96 (ESR=0.96), their results are same values as minimum horizontal stresses along well.
Minimum values of fracture gradient below Vivian formation was found at Middle Nia (18.85
ppg).

Maximum horizontal stress computation was done with ESRmax=1.02 pre-drill assumptions, it
results in average values of 19.56ppg ± 0.20ppg.

Collapse pressure computation exhibit small changes regarding pre-drill model due small
changes in pore pressure at lower part of Lower Red Beds formation. Maximum absolute values
computed were found at Upper Nia formation (13.22ppg) and maximum average values at
Chonta Shale (11.30ppg ± 1.02ppg).

No mayor events related with geomechanics were found. Frequent events in daily drilling
reports were tight-spots, some overpull and also Gas have been found. No mayor issues while
drilling were found.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 48 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

8. REFERENCES
[1] D.E. Desarrollo Técnico E&P (2014, September 15). Geomechanics Applied to Drilling. Rev
2.0. Code 20-00030GU. Retrieved January 31, 2017 from:
http://repsolnet/apps/Modulos/VisorDocumentum/visorDocumentum.aspx?idfichero=090
217f0818706d1&extension=pdf&buscador=Normativa

[2] McNally, G.H. (1987). Estimation of coal measures rock strength using sonic and neutron
logs. Geo exploration, 24: 381-395.

[3] Lal, M. (1999, January 1). Shale Stability: Drilling Fluid Interaction and Shale Strength.
Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/SPE-54356-MS

[4] Pre-Drill_PPFG-WBS_Mashira6X-Repsol_11-30-15.pdf

[5] Final_Report_RMA_Mashira6X_Pre-Drill_30nov.pdf

[6] Gatens, J. M., Harrison, C. W., Lancaster, D. E., & Guidry, F. K. (1990, September 1). In-Situ
Stress Tests and Acoustic Logs Determine Mechanical Propertries and Stress Profiles in the
Devonian Shales. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/SPE-18523-PA

[7] Ewy, R. T. (1998, January 1). Wellbore Stability Predictions Using a Modified Lade Criterion.
Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/SPE-47251-MS

CONFIDENTIAL Page 49 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

9. APPENDIX

9.1. Log comparison by section

Figure 39. Well log comparison. 16” Section @4287 ftMD.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 50 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 40. Well log comparison. 14.5x12¼” Section @7026 ftMD.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 51 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 41. Well log comparison. 8½” Section @8835 ftMD.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 52 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

9.2. Rock Properties by section

Figure 42. Rock properties. 16” Section @4287 ftMD.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 53 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 43. Rock properties. 14.5x12¼” Section @7026 ftMD.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 54 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.
Technology Centre
D. Sustainability and Technology

Figure 44. Rock properties. 8½” Section @8835 ftMD.

CONFIDENTIAL Page 55 of 55

This document is property of Repsol, S.A., the party who receives it is liable for the custody and good use which is provided to it, since its
contents are CONFIDENTIAL. The document must not be totally or partially reproduced and/or revealed to unauthorised persons or remitted
outside Repsol, S.A. without the proper written authorisation from its legal representatives.