Rock Compressibility and Failure as
~=e~ervoirM-echanisms
-.----—-. in Geopressured
Gas Reservoirs
David W. Harville,* SPE-AIME, Louisianastate U.
Murrsy F. Hawkins, Jr., SPE-AIME,Louisiana State U.
Introduction
Rock compressibility has long been recognized as an
important factor in material balance calculations of
Qfl im place for closed reservoirs producing above
bubble-point pressure. 1 For example, if the pore vol-
ume compressibtity of the reservoir rock is half of
t~e g~m-pm~sih~ty Of tie undersaturated oil, neglect
of the rock compressibtity term results in about a 50
percent overestimation of oil in place. In general, it
may be stated that in material balance calculations on
closed reservoirs, consideration of rock compressibti-
ty becomes increasingly importantas the fluid com-
pressibility decreases. For this reason the effect of
rock compressibility is commonly neglected in studies
on gas reservoirs where gas compressibfity is usually
great.
Because gas compressibilities decrease with in-
creasing pressures, the consideration of rock compres-
sibility becomes increasingly important for deeper,
high pressure gas reservoirs. For example, the com-
pressibility of the gas in the reservoir to be discussed
is 30 microsip** at an initial reservoir pressure of
8,921 psia. For a nominal pore volume rock com-
pressibtity of 6 microsip, neglect of rock compressi-
bility in material balance calculations on a closed
reservoir will result in a 20 percent overestimation of
initial gas in place. If the rock compressibfity is
larger than 6 microsip, then a still larger overestima-
dcn ~f ~u~~ ~!ace ~.~l~t~$In this study we propose
“Now with Phillips Patmleum Co., Mo~an City,
. .Abb~aVia~~n f~~ 10-6 ~i-1, ~i~m being 10-c
inches per pound) being psi-l.
A study of the North Ossun field, Louisiana, reveals that as reservoir pressure is
depleted the increase in net overburden pressure initially causes rock failure and as the
failure continues with decreasing pore pressure, rock compressibility decreases until
eventually it reaches a normal value.
1528
“.
that because of low net Overburden pressures, mek
compressibilities in geopressured reservoirs are con-
siderably greater than for similar rocks in normally
pressured reservoirs. We further suggest that as reser-
voir pressure is depleted, the increase in net over-
burden pressure initially causes inelastic rock com-
paction or rock failure. As failure continues with de-
creasing pore pressure, rock compressibility deaeaaes
and eventually reaches normal values in the range of
6 microsip.
North Ossun F]eld, Louisiana
The mechanisms proposed in the previous paragraph
are believed to be illustrated by the performance of
the NS2B reservoir of the North Ossun field, Lafay-
ette Parish, La. This is a geopressured gas reservoir
with an initial pore pressure of 8,921 psia at 1Z,5W
ft subsea depth, or a gradient of 0.725 psi/ft. Table
1 gives pertinent data on this reservoir. Oood geologic
control is indicated by the structure map, Fig. 1. Al-
though a gas-water contact exists, it is doubtful that
the associated aquifer is very large because the rese-
rvoir appears to shale out on the west. III addition,
considerable complex faulting in the area almost eer-
tairdy closes the reservoir with a small aaswiated
aquifer.
Good core and log data have been used to cakm-
1... . . -u-
;.;t;~l ..J.--.—--—
lCWall hvtkmarkn
-— volume of 583 mil-
—rnnre
La. lion cu ft, and, with PVT dataj to calculate an initial
and sip (aqll are
gas in place of 114 Bscf. The pressure-production
 TABLE 1-RESERVOIRDATANORTHOSSUNFIELD* ~_GBS
LAFAYEITE PARISH, LA., NS2B RESERVOIR P— ~ y[l + c.(P, – p)] + (G – G,)%

Depth, ft 12,500 (l?ater) (Gas)

Pressure, psia
Gradient, psi/ft
Temperature, “F
Gas-water contact, ft
Average gross sand, tt
Porosity (33 s% quite uniform)
(electric ioga)
Connate water (eiectric logs)
Permeability, md (33 SS)
Producing walls
Geologic controi weils
Dew-point pressure, psia
initial GOR, bbi/MMacf
Condensate gravity, *APi
Net bulk gas volume, MMcf
inithi Z fSCtO;
Initiai gas in piace, Bscf (volumetric)
Initial gas compressibility
history of the reservoir is shown in Fig. 2, and p/z
vs cumulative production is shown in Fig, 3. For pres-
sures below the dew point, two-phase gas deviation
factors were calculated from the PVT data as de-
scribed in Chapter 2 of Ref. 1,
Fig. 3 indicates, from extrapolation in the early
life, an initial gas in place of 220 Bscf, almost twice
the volumetric estimate of 114 Bscf. It is proposed
that during the early life the pressure is partially
sustained by high rock compressibfity resulting from
rock failure as described previously. After the pro-
duction of some 20 Bscf, rock failure is essentially
completed and rock compressibfity drops to a nor-
mal value of about 6 microsip, at a pore pressure of
about 6,500 psi. At thk pore pressure the gas com-
pressibility is up to about 75 microsip, which makes
rock c.ompressibfity a comparatively small factor.
Thus extrapolation of the curve after about 20 Bscf
has been produced should be valid, and in fact it ex-
trapolates to 118 Bscf to agree well with the volu-
metric estimate of 114 Bscf.
A further analysis of thk reservoir includes the
calculation, with the following equation, of total ap-
parent reservoir pore volume as a function of pres-
sure.
8,921
. . . . . . . . .. (1)
0.725
248 As used in this study, tbe connate water Sw included
12,580 only that water in the gas reservoir. In other calcula-
100 tions presented by Harville2 the connate water value
0.235
0.24 was increased to include water in associated limited
0.34 aquifers. In one case the aquifer size was assumed to
200 be equal to the size of the gas reservoir, and in an-
4 other case is was assumed to be twice the size of the
18 gas reservoir. Pressure equalization between the res-
6,920 ervoir and the aquifer was shown to be a valid as-
160 sumption for these small aquifers and for the indi-
47
cated rock and fluid properties.
2,480
1.472
Fig. 4 shows the pore volume calculated by Eq. 1
~~ ~ $GEc~oEof pm ?~ssu~, ~&g no aaeoci-
114
30 X iO-O p~i-’ at ated aquifer and using for. the
. . i&ial
. gas in place the
8,S$2i @a
. . - ...nti..r.a nf
volumetric estimate of i 14 BSCI. The d=rivau.. “.
this curve may be used to calculate the rock com-
pressibility at each point. As indicated in Fig. 4, the
rock compressibfity reaches a maximum of 28 micro-
sip during the early depletion where rock failure is
presumed to occur. Below about 6,000 psi, according
to thk interpretation, rock failure is essentially com-
plete and the calculated rock compressibility drops
to a more usual I alue of 6 microsip. Because of lower
rock and h@er gas compressibilities at lower pore
pressures, reservoir performance is very close to that
of a constant volume system, and the p/z extrapola-
tion is reasonably accurate. It may be only coinci-
dental that rock compressibility drops to more usual
values when the pore pressure reaches a normal value
for the reservoir depth; i.e., a gradient of about 0.50
psi/ ft.
The foregoing presentation does not prove, of
course, that rock failure is the major source of pres-
sure support of this reservoir during depletion. (How-
ever, Fig. 5, taken from work by Fatt,a provides a
striking similarity in the behavior of a Sespe sand-
stone sample that had not undergone high overburden
pressures during its geologic history.) Corroboration
for the suggestion — that rock failure is a major
source of pressure support during depletion — is

14 lg

4 ,;%-’-...::’””’ “w c“”’””
Ig
.*

b~
*>
.....
,6* “--------

0
k’
18
“’2‘i 4
0
. . ..
‘.
3

20
a s ,) ~
1 g9 25 ~
.*’ 12 0----
--- 0
-. #-
<8 20:
-------------
-.. . .-9
6 Z
07 15 z
:. 7
:
. . . . . ..-Q”-””--”””
;6 102
1: ~
5 5
+’:~~’
~o
-.7
0
59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66
Year
II& l—Structure mep, top of sand, NS2B reservoir,
North Oesun field, Le. Fig. 2—Pressure-produdion histov, NS2B r$servoir.

DECEMBER,1%9 1529
 found in the difficulty of explaining the character of
the support by generally accepted water influx the-
ories, because the strong initial support rather sud-
denly drops to a very small value. In the additional
studies by Harville, not presented here, which con-
sidered small associated aquifers, the character of the
pressure support was unchanged, and only the values
of the rock compressibil@ were reduced, during both
the initial assumed rock failure interval and the later
stage.
It has been suggested that pressure support in this
~~ of reservoir may be water influx from the over-
lying and underlying shales. Preliminary studies of
this possibility indicate that the adjacent shales can
provide neither the volume nor the character of the
pressure support indicated by Fig. 4. On the other
1 hand, rock failure rather nicely explains both.
\ l~~efiyei ~~ fi~f ~~ f~~.~ oc~~-rsh tajs tyrpe of
reservoir, it should not be forgotten that normal rock
compressibtity and connate water expansion are im-
Gas Production ( BCF) portant reservoir mechanisms at higher pore pressures
because of decreasing gas compressibility. It should
Fig. 3-p/z vs cumulative production for the also be realized that what we have just said is even
NS2B reservoir.
more important with oil reservoirs because of their
very low fluid compressibilities.
With regard to geopressured gas reservoirs, it is .
understood that many that we bdieved to be essen-
tially closed systems exhibit a large discrepancy be-
tween the volumetric estimate of gas in place and that
estimated by extrapolation of the p/z plot. Commonly
mentioned is a ratio of about 2 between the figmes,
which is the ratio found in thk study. We hope that
this study will encourage other studies that may shed
more light on this discrepancy and the reservoir
mechanism or mechanisms controlling production
from geopressured reservoirs.
Nomenclature
B, = gas volume factor at pressure p, cu ft/8cf
B,l = gas volume factor at initial pressure,
W2
Cu ft/scf
Pressure, PSIA (000 ‘s) c* = connate water compressibtity, psi-i
(used 3 X 10+ psi-’)
Fig. 4-Calculated pore volume of the NS2B resenroir,
assuming no water influx and G = 114 Bcf. G = initial gas in place, scf
G, = gas produced when pressure is p, scf
p = average pore pressure at later time, psia
Pi = initial reservoir pore pressure, psia
& = connate water saturation, fraction
v, = total pore volume, cu ft
References
1. Craft, B. C. and Hawkins, M. F., Jr.: Applied Petroleum
Reservoir Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Engiewood
cliffs, N. J. (1959) 135-138.
2. Harville, D. W.: “Rock Collapse as a Producing Mechsn-
ism in SuperpressureReservoira”,MS thesis, Louisiana
StateU., BatonRouge(1967).
3,Fatt, I.: “Compreasibdityof Sandstonesat Low to Mod-
:~5~ Preasuses”,Bull., AAPG (1954) 4% No. 8, 1924-
JWT

0 2 4 6 e 10 12 14
External Pressure, PSI (000 ‘s)
Original manuscript raceivad March 24, 1969. Raviaad manu-
script received July 9, 1969. Paper (SRZ 2600) wos pmntad at
Fig.5-Bulk volume change of a Seapa sandstone sample, Symposium on Abnormal Subsurface Praasum held st Louiaisma
zero pom pressure (after Fatt), Pore volume compreasi. Stste U., Baton Rouga, April 28, 1967.0 copyright 1969 Amaricsn
bilities are based on porosity of 25 percent. hsatituta of Minin& Matelluraicsl, and Petroleum Ssseineass, k.

1530 JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNO~OGY