Stress Magnitudes from Logs: Effects of Tectonic Strains and Temperature

T.L. Blanton, SPE, Mobil Oil Corp., and J.E. Olson, SPE, The University of Texas at Austin Summary An improved method of calibrating in-situ stress logs was validated with data from two wells. Horizontal stress proles are useful for hydraulic fracture design, wellbore stability analysis, and sand production prediction. The industry-standard method of estimating stresses from logs is based on overburden, Poissons ratio, and pore pressure effects and gives an estimate of minimum horizontal stress. The model proposed here adds effects of temperature and tectonics and outputs of minimum and maximum horizontal stress magnitudes, which are particularly important to the successful completion of horizontal and deviated wells. This method was validated using data collected from a GRI research well and a Mobil well. Seven microfrac stress tests in GRIs Canyon Gas Sands Well of Sutton County, Texas, provided a means of comparing the predictive capability of different methods. First, one of the seven stress tests was selected as a calibration standard for the stress log. Then the results obtained from the two calibration methods were compared to stress magnitudes from the other six stress tests. This process was repeated using each of the seven stress tests as a calibration standard and comparing predictions to the other six. In every case, the method incorporating tectonic strain and thermal effects produced signicantly more accurate values. The Mobil well is located in the Lost Hills Field in California, and pre-frac treatment breakdown tests were used to calibrate a log-derived stress prole. All of the data were used simultaneously to get a best t for the log-derived stress. The log and its fracture height growth implications compared favorably with available fracture diagnostic data, and maximum horizontal stress values were consistent with published values for a similar, nearby reservoir. The hmin formula is obtained by solving linear poroelasticity equations for horizontal stress with vertical stress set equal to the overburden and horizontal strains set to zero. The only deformation allowed is uniaxial strain in the vertical direction. Overburden stress, vert , is determined from an integrated density log. Poissons ratio, , is calculated from compressional and shear wave velocities given by an acoustic log. When independent measures of horizontal stress magnitudes are available from microfracs or extended leak-off tests, there is often a discrepancy between the log-derived and measured values, leading to the conclusion that the uniaxial strain assumption inherent to Eq. 1 is inadequate. In order to improve the estimated stress values, an adjustment calibration is made by adding an additional stress term to Eq. 1 , thereby shifting the prole to match the measured values.48 For the purposes of this article, a constant shift with depth is used, tect , which in some cases has been referred to as tectonic stress.5 Eq. 1 then becomes what we term here the conventional method stress equation:
h min vert pp pp tect ,

where
tect h min vert pp pp

Introduction Advances in well completion technology have made accurate proles of horizontal stresses more important to successful eld development. Data on in-situ stress have always been important to hydraulic fracture design, wellbore stability analysis, and sand production prediction. More recent work has shown that accurate stress proles can be used to optimize fracturing of horizontal wells and designing multizone fracture treatments. In fracturing horizontal wells, stress proles can be used to select zones for the horizontal section that optimize fracture height.1 For multizone fracturing, the success of advanced limited-entry techniques depends on having accurate proles of horizontal stresses.2 Theory Conventional Method. The industry-standard method39 of calculating stresses from logs is based on the following equation:
h min

The primes indicate parameter values at the calibration depth, z , where a measure of the minimum horizontal stress, h min , is available. When measured values are available for several zones, slightly different calibration techniques are used, such as multiplying the log-based stress by a constant factor and adding a tectonic gradient.6 These calibrations have physical implications. When horizontal stress is applied as in Eq. 2 , the zero lateral strain boundary conditions used to derive Eq. 1 are no longer appropriate. If we assume the strain in the direction orthogonal to the applied tectonic stress is zero plane strain , the normal strain in the direction of the applied calibration stress, (z), can be written as E z z 1 z
2 tect ,

where E and are functions of depth. Given that typical geologic sequences are layered in elastic moduli, Eq. 4 implies that a constant tectonic stress calibration exemplied in Eqs. 2 and 3 results in horizontal strains that may be discontinuous across layer boundaries, which is a nonphysical consequence of the conventional log-derived stress calibration approach. Strain-Corrected Method. In this article, an attempt is made to apply physical constraints to the calibration process. Two weak assumptions in the conventional method represented by Eq. 1 are that rocks behave purely elastically and that overburden and pore pressure are the only sources of rock stress. Rocks may behave inelastically for signicant periods in their history, with material properties that vary with time due to consolidation and diagenesis.10,11 This complicated history can have an inuence on the development of in-situ stress, but time-dependent constitutive models for rock are difcult to constrain. McGarr12 describes the
62

vert

pp

p p.

Copyright 1999 Society of Petroleum Engineers This paper (SPE 54653) was revised for publication from paper SPE 38719, rst presented at the 1997 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 58 October. Original manuscript received for review 7 October 1997. Revised manuscript received 5 November 1998. Paper peer approved 23 November 1998.

SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng. 2 1 , February 1999

1094-6470/99/2 1 /62/7/$3.50 0.15

problems associated with assuming rock is elastic throughout geologic time and proposes that the nontectonic state of stress should be considered lithostatic ( h min h max vert) rather than being described as in Eq. 1 . In this article, we maintain the assumption of time-independent elastic properties which are the core of the conventional stress calculation method. The model proposed here is a step toward alleviating the second weakness of the conventional method of stress estimation by including tectonic and thermal effects in addition to overburden and pore pressure as sources of horizontal stress. It could be argued that tectonic effects have already been included in Eq. 2 but, as we have discussed, this calibration method has nonphysical implications for the strain eld. A more realistic way of applying a tectonic effect is to impose a constant horizontal strain across different zones. A thermoelastic strain term is also included to approximate the effects of burial history on the horizontal stress. These assumptions result in the following strain-corrected equations for horizontal stresses in the x and y directions:
hx vert pp pp

stress has been determined by some method such as a microfrac or an extended leak-off test. h min is the measured value of the minimum horizontal stress and C 1 and C 2 include the rock properties, pressures, and temperatures for the depth at which h min was measured. In the absence of measured values for the thermal coefcient of expansion, 5.56E-6/F can be used for sandstones, 5.00E-6/F for shales, and 4.44E-6/F for carbonates.15 We recommend using either the geothermal gradient (dT/dz) published for a basin or one estimated from a static bottomhole temperature to calculate T versus depth, where T dT z. dz 14

1
x

E
y

As a practical matter, the thermal term usually increases the calculated horizontal stress by an amount that makes it greater than measured values. Thus, in the calibration process the tectonic strain term is usually extensional, although for the Lost Hills case discussed below, the calculated strain was compressive, consistent with the local tectonic interpretation. Whether the tectonic strain value will match the true tectonics in every case may be questionable. Some discrepancies may be expected because the straincorrected model proposed here does not include the full complexity of tectonic and thermal histories of basins. Still, it appears to be an improvement over the conventional method as will be shown in the following examples. Applications Sonora Field. The Phillips Ward Well C-11 in the Sonora Field of Sutton County, Texas, provides an excellent data set with which to test the two models. The Gas Research Institute sponsored data collection there as part of their Tight Gas Sands Program. The target zones lie in the Canyon Sands interval, which consists of a lower interval of discrete sandstones bounded by shales and an upper interbedded sandstone-shale sequence. For more detail refer to Miller et al.,6 from which all the data used here were taken. To compare the accuracy of the two stress-proling methods, the stress measured from one zone is used as a calibration stress for calculating log-derived stresses for the other six zones, while the other six stresses measured are used as standards of comparison. The result of this process with the middle sandstone as a calibration point is shown in Fig. 1. For this case, the accuracy of the two methods is about the same for the sandstones but the strain-corrected method is better for the shales. A data set from which statistical inferences can be drawn has been generated by using each of the seven stresses measured as calibration points sequentially to calculate six log-derived stresses for each zone. Averages and standard deviations for the two methods are compared to the measured values in Fig. 2. For each zone, the strain-corrected method gives a stress value closer to the measured stress Fig. 3. The average difference between log-derived and measured stresses for the conventional method is 332 psi compared to only 122 psi for the strain-corrected method. The strain-corrected method is consistently better for the shales, whereas the results for the sandstones are better in two cases and about the same in two cases. The standard deviations are consistently lower for the strain-corrected method in each zone Fig. 4. The average standard deviation is 329 psi for the conventional method compared to 131 psi for the strain-corrected method. The calibration stresses calculated from zone to zone for the strain-corrected method are dominated by their proportionality to the Youngs modulus, E see Eqs. 7 and 11 . The calibration stress for the conventional method is identical over the entire log. The Sonora Field case has essentially a bimodal distribution of E, where E 4 106 psi for the shales and E 7 106 psi for sandSPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999 63

hy

1
x

vert

pp

pp

E
y

Similar equations have been derived by others for developing stress-history models for basins.1013 Thiercelin and Plumb14 proposed similar equations without temperature for calculating stresses from core measurements. To limit the adjustable parameters in the model, we make the plane strain assumption that horizontal strain in one direction is equal to zero. The strain in the other direction is used as a calibration or tectonic strain. If the tectonic strain is extensional negative , the equations for minimum and maximum horizontal stress proles are given by
h min

C1

tect

C2 ,

and
h max

C1

tect

C2 .

If the tectonic strain is compressive positive , the equations are slightly different:
h min

C1

tect

C2 ,

and
h max

C1

tect

C2 .
tect

10 are dened as 11

For both cases, the parameters C 1 , C 2 , and E C1 1

2

, 1 2 1
pp

C2 and

vert

12

h min tect

C2

C1

13

The primes in the last equation indicate that these terms are associated with the particular depth at which the minimum horizontal
T.L. Blanton and J.E. Olson: Stress Magnitudes from Logs

Fig. 1Comparison between log-derived and measured stresses using middle sandstone as a calibration point for the Sonora Well.

Fig. 3Absolute value of the difference between log-derived and measured stresses for the Sonora Well.

stones. The calibration stresses from the strain-corrected method are approximately constant for different layers of the same lithology but almost twice as large for the sandstones as for the shales. Thus, if tect for the conventional method is based on matching microfrac data from a sandstone, the conventional log will mimic the strain-corrected log for all of the sandstones but will be very

different in the shales, which is what we see in Fig. 1. If we had calibrated the conventional method to a shale for Fig. 1, the conventional log would have matched the strain-corrected log in the shales while the sandstone stress values would have been less accurate. Since the strain-corrected method accounts for the variation in E through the section, we can calibrate it using microfrac

Fig. 2Average log-derived stresses compared to measured stresses for the Sonora Well. 64 T.L. Blanton and J.E. Olson: Stress Magnitudes from Logs

Fig. 4Standard deviations of log-derived stresses for the Sonora Well. SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999

data from either the shales or the sandstones and still get a good match overall; the conventional method as we have presented it can only match the shales or the sandstones, not both. Lost Hills Field. The Lost Hills Field is located on the western margin of the San Joaquin Basin, approximately 45 miles northwest of Bakerseld. The Lost Hills One Fee that was operated by Mobil Oil Corporation the current operator is Aera Energy is on the southeast plunging nose of this northwest-southeast trending Lost Hills Anticline.16 The reservoir consists of 600 to 800 ft of interbedded Opal-A diatomite, diatomaceous shale and diatomaceous silt of the lower Etchegoin Formation Pliocene in age . This interbedding results in strong variations in both mechanical and ow-related properties including porosity and permeability. The average porosity for the well considered is approximately 60%, but the permeability is on the order of 1 md, characteristic values for diatomite reservoirs. Hydraulic fracturing is required to make production from this reservoir economical.17 Consequently, a prediction of the minimum in-situ stress is a major consideration when planning completions of a well. Recent studies16,18 suggest that height growth is limited in diatomite reservoirs, probably due to a combination of the low Youngs modulus of the formation which results in very wide fractures and the presence of stress barriers throughout the section. In an effort to study hydraulic fracture geometry in Lost Hills, mechanical property data were collected from acoustic logs and core plugs. For all rock types, the Youngs modulus measured dynamically by acoustic logs is typically much higher than that measured statically through triaxial compression tests.19 By comparing the static Youngs modulus measurements for core plugs from a nearby well with the acoustic log from the same interval, we determined that a dynamic-to-static correction factor of 0.65 best matched the data and utilized that value for this study. Poissons ratio and the corrected Youngs modulus are plotted in Fig. 5 along with the formations bulk density. Poissons ratio

Fig. 6Reservoir pressure based on RFT data for the Lost Hills Well.

Fig. 5Rock property logs for the Lost Hills Well. T.L. Blanton and J.E. Olson: Stress Magnitudes from Logs

tends to decrease with depth and ranges from a maximum of 0.43 to a minimum of 0.1. The Youngs modulus varies from a maximum of 350 000 psi at the bottom of the well to a minimum of 120 000 psi. Above 2200 ft, there is a weak correlation between density and Poissons ratio, but the Youngs modulus tracks the density almost exactly. The major density drop at 1800 ft indicates the top of the diatomite section, and the increasing density at the base of the log indicates the onset of the phase transition from Opal-A to Opal-CT. Reservoir pressure plays an important role in the stress calculation equation, and we used Repeat Formation Tester RFT data from a nearby well tests at 19 different depths to estimate the pore pressure. The RFT data show that reservoir pressures differ signicantly from hydrostatic, with low pressures near the top of the reservoir and very high pressures at the bottom Fig. 6. The measured minimum stress data for the calibration of the test well were interpreted from the shut-in pressures recorded after the perforation breakdown pump cycles of the four propped fracture stages. The vertical height over which stress was measured by these pump-ins was interpreted to be the thickness of the lowest stress zone of each perforated interval and it ranged from 15 to 50 ft. These breakdowns were pumped at 50 bbls/min and involved approximately 100 bbls of linear gel, so they do not represent the precise and controlled stress data of a microfrac, but measure stress over a broader zone. The advantage of using breakdown tests for stress measurement is they are routinely performed in the process of preparing for fracture treatments and thus incur no extra cost. The resultant stress curves for Lost Hills are shown in Fig. 7. Calibration values for both the conventional and strain-corrected methods were determined by minimizing the squared error for the depth intervals of the bottom three breakdown measurements. The top breakdown measurement was thrown out since it was much lower than the log-derived values. We attributed this discrepancy
SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999 65

Fig. 7Comparison of log-derived and measured stresses for the Lost Hills Well. Fig. 8Comparison of stress prole and after-fracture radioactive tracer log for the Lost Hills Well.

to possible depletion that was not accounted for in the pressure data Fig. 6 . Like in the Canyon Sands case, the primary deviation in results between the conventional method and the plane strain approach is manifested in the value of the stress in barrier zones, since our calibration values come from the low stress, higher porosity zones. The strain-corrected method predicts consistently higher barrier stresses than the conventional method for the Lost Hills well, particularly below 2400 ft. The increase in zone-to-zone stress contrast for the strain-corrected method is again due to the contrast in the Youngs modulus from zone to zone that is evident in Fig. 5. Thermal strain adds compression to the log values that scales with the Youngs modulus and geothermal gradient 0.019 /ft in this case . The calculated tectonic strain for this well ( tect 0.0013) also added compression to the logderived stresses, which is consistent with the known tectonics in this region.20,21 Using the conventional method, a constant compressional tectonic stress of 105 psi was added over the entire log interval. The magnitude of stress variation indicated in the log suggests that there will be signicant fracture height containment to the low stress zones. Available data on fracture height growth conrm this hypothesis and thus lend credibility to our stress interpretations.16 The predictions of fracture containment effects are also consistent with the after-fracture radioactive tracer log Fig. 8. In the rst stage at the bottom of the well, no fracture growth occurred below the stress barrier at 2400 ft, although perforations extended from 2270 to 2460 ft. The top of the fracture seen coincides with the stress rise at 2250 ft. In the second stage from the bottom perforated from 2130 to 2210 ft , the fracture height is contained between the stress peaks at 2120 and 2200 ft. The third stage from the bottom perforated from 1980 to 2080 ft shows the highest radioactivity and presumably the most fracture growth from 1960 to 2010 ft, correlating well with the depths of the low stress zone from 1965 to 2020 ft. The remainder of the fracture occurs between this low stress zone and the stress peak at
66 T.L. Blanton and J.E. Olson: Stress Magnitudes from Logs

2100 ft. In the fourth stage from the bottom of the well perforated from 1810 to 1930 ft , the measured vertical extent of the fracture 1800 to 1920 ft is contained between the stress peaks at 1800 and 1960 ft, although fracture growth did expand beyond the lowest stress layer between 1820 and 1860 ft. Another interesting aspect of the strain-corrected log for Lost Hills is the comparison of the minimum and maximum horizontal and the vertical stresses Fig. 9. There are several zones where the minimum horizontal and vertical stresses are approximately equal, and the maximum horizontal stress exceeds the vertical stress over much of the log. Allowing for the precision of logderived stresses, the zones where the vertical and minimum horizontal stresses are calculated as being equal could represent layers where the vertical stress is actually the minimum principal stress, and horizontal fractures might result from a hydraulic fracture treatment. Wright et al.22 observed horizontal fracture growth in the deeper intervals of Chevrons Lost Hills diatomite reservoir, and identied several mechanisms to explain this phenomenon, including the response of a reservoir with a varying Youngs modulus to the presence of a tectonic horizontal strain. Horizontal fracture was not detected in the Mobil Lost Hills Well discussed here, but the perforated intervals did not include the zones where horizontal fracture was most probable. Documented cases of fracture dip change in diatomite reservoirs due to the poroelastic stress effects of production and water injection23 suggest that the stress anisotropy in Lost Hills may not be very large. Our analysis suggests that the relative magnitudes of the three principal stresses ( h min , h max , and vert) which govern hydraulic fracture orientation24,25 change with depth through the reservoir. The vertical stress may represent the maximum, intermediate or minimum principal stress depending on depth in the well Fig. 9 . A similar observation was made for the
SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999

ing zones since this is the factor controlling fracture geometry. The statistical analysis of the Sonora data suggests that the straincorrected method provides more accurate stress magnitudes for the bounding shales even when the calibration value is in a sandstone. The implications are that uncalibrated or improperly calibrated log-derived stresses cannot accurately reect the zone-tozone stress variations necessary for fracture height prediction. In the Lost Hills Field, the log-derived stresses were consistent with observations of height containment and horizontal fracture growth. The strain-corrected method also has the advantage of providing estimates of both maximum and minimum horizontal stresses, which would be useful in applications like wellbore stability. The minimum and maximum stress values for the Lost Hills case indicated a fairly low horizontal stress anisotropy ( h max h min) on the order of 200 psi over much of the interval. This small stress anisotropy is consistent with the reports of fracture orientation change with water injection in diatomite reservoirs. The small stress differences were also similar to those measured in nearby South Belridge Field. Nomenclature
P T

C 1,2 z E
tect x,y

Fig. 9Minimum and maximum horizontal stresses calculated for Lost Hills Well using the strain calibration method. Note the areas where minimum stress equals vertical stress and maximum stress exceeds vertical stress.

p
h max h min tect vert

South Belridge diatomite reservoir based on hydraulic fracture stress tests.21 This variation represents the presence of all three generalized tectonic regimes normal, strike-slip and thrust faulting 25 depending on depth. Although the magnitudes of the maximum horizontal stress are not conrmed through any direct measurements in Lost Hills, the 100 to 200 psi difference in the log-derived horizontal stresses is similar to the 100 to 500 psi difference measured in South Belridge.21 Discussion and Conclusions The more complete physics used in the strain-corrected method, which incorporates a more complete characterization of the rock by including the effects of the Youngs modulus and thermal expansion, appears to improve the accuracy of log-derived stresses. Both methods must be calibrated to give stress magnitudes. The conventional method shifts the log by a tectonic stress to adjust it to the calibration standard, such as a microfrac stress test. The proposed strain-corrected method applies tectonic and thermal strains to t the calibration standard. The latter is more realistic since, in most cases, it is strains rather than stresses that are constant in a contiguous section during burial and tectonic activity in a typical basin. Extensive stress measurement in producing and bounding zones like that done in the Sonora Field, while useful in advancing technology, is not practical in commercial eld development. It is more common to have only one measurement obtained from a pre-frac breakdown to use for calibrating a stress prole. Also, stress testing in shales can be difcult and undesirable. Breaking down a potential barrier zone can be risky, and for cased holes there would be additional perforating in potential barrier zones. Still, it is crucial to get an accurate stress prole across the boundT.L. Blanton and J.E. Olson: Stress Magnitudes from Logs

hx,hy

Biots poroelastic constant thermal coefcient of expansion, F 1 constants dened by Eqs. 8 and 9, psi depth, ft the Youngs modulus, psi calibration or tectonic strain Cartesian horizontal strains Poissons ratio pore pressure, psi maximum horizontal total stress, psi minimum horizontal total stress, psi calibration or tectonic total stress, psi vertical total stress, psi Cartesian horizontal total stress, psi temperature at a particular depth minus the ambient surface temperature, F the value measured at a particular depth

Acknowledgments We thank Mobil Exploration and Producing Technical Center for granting permission to publish this work. References
1. Soliman, M.Y. et al.: Fracturing Aspects of Horizontal Wells, J. Pet. Technol. 42, 966 August 1990 . 2. Olson, K.E. and El-Rabaa, A.W.M.: Hydraulic Fracturing of the Multizone Wells in the Pegasus Devonian Field, West Texas, paper SPE 27718, Presented at the 1994 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, 1618 March. 3. Anderson, R.A. et al.: Determining Fracture Pressure Gradients From Well Logs, J. Pet. Technol. 25, 1259 November 1973 . 4. Gatens III, J.M. et al.: In-Situ Stress Tests and Acoustic Logs Determine Mechanical Properties and Stress Proles in the Devonian Shales, SPE Form. Eval. 5, 248 September 1990 . 5. Ahmed, U. et al.: Enhanced In-Situ Stress Proling With Microfracture, Core, and Sonic-Logging Data, SPE Form. Eval. 6, 243 June 1991 . 6. Miller II, W.K. et al.: In-Situ Stress Proling and Prediction of Hydraulic Fracture Azimuth for the West Texas Canyon Sands Formation, SPE Prod. Facil. 9, 204 1994 ; Trans., AIME, 297 1994 . 7. Cipolla, C.L. et al.: Practical Application of In-Situ Stress Proles, paper SPE 28607, Presented at the 1994 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, 2528 September. 8. Iverson, W.P.: Log-Derived Stress in Anisotropic Formations, The Log Analyst 38, 33 SeptemberOctober 1996 . SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999 67

9. Hareland, G. and Harikrishnan, R.: Comparison and Verication of Electric-Log-Derived Rock Stresses and Rock Stresses Determined From the Mohr Failure Envelope, SPE Form. Eval. 11, 219 December 1996 . 10. Prats, M.: Effect of Burial History on the Subsurface Horizontal Stresses of Formations Having Different Material Properties, SPE J. 658 December 1981 ; Trans., AIME, 21, 271 1981 . 11. Warpinski, N.R.: Elastic and Viscoelastic Calculations of Stresses in Sedimentary Basins, SPE Form. Eval. 4, 522 December 1989 . 12. McGarr, A.: On the State of Lithospheric Stress in the Absence of Applied Tectonic Forces, J. Geophys. Res. 93, 13609 November 1988 . 13. Narr, W. and Currie, J.B.: Origin of Fracture PorosityExample from Altamont Field, Utah, Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull. 66, 1231 1982 . 14. Thiercelin, M.J. and Plumb, R.A.: A Core-Based Prediction of Lithologic Stress Contrasts in East Texas Formations, paper SPE 21847, Presented at the 1991 SPE Rocky Mountain Regional/Low Permeability Reservoirs Symposium and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 1517 April. 15. Clark, S.P. Jr.: Handbook of Physical Constants, Geol. Soc. Amer. Memoir 97, 94 1966 . 16. Fast, R.E. et al.: Description and Analysis of Cored Hydraulic Fractures, Lost Hills Field, Kern County, California, paper SPE 24853, Presented at the 1992 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Washington, DC, 47 October. 17. Strubhar, M.K. et al.: Fracturing Results in Diatomaceous Earth Formations, South Belridge Field, California, J. Pet. Technol. 36, 495 March 1984 . 18. Nelson, D.G. et al.: Optimizing Hydraulic Fracture Design in the Diatomite Formation, Lost Hills Field, paper SPE 36474, Presented at the 1996 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 69 October. 19. Jaegar, J.C. and Cook, N.G.W.: Fundamentals of Rock Mechanics, Chapman and Hall, London 1979 p. 189. 20. Mount, V.S. and Suppe, J.: State of Stress Near the San Andreas Fault: Implications for Wrench Tectonics, Geology 15, 1143 1987 . 21. Hansen, K.S. and Purcell, W.R. : Earth Stress Measurements in the

22.

23.

24. 25.

South Belridge Oil Field, Kern County, California, SPEFE 4, 541 December 1989 ; Trans., AIME 287. Wright, C.A. et al.: Horizontal Hydraulic Fractures: Oddball Occurrences or Practical Engineering Concern?, paper SPE 38324, Presented at the 1997 SPE Western Regional Meeting, Long Beach, California, 2327 June. Wright, C.A. et al.: Reorientation of Propped Refracture Treatments in the Lost Hills Field, paper SPE 27896, Presented at the 1994 SPE Western Regional Meeting, Long Beach, California, 2325 March. Hubbert, M.K. and Willis, D.G. : Mechanics of Hydraulic Fracturing, Trans. Soc. Pet. Eng. 210, 153 1957 . Zoback, M.L. and Zoback, M.D.: State of Stress in the Coterminous United States, J. Geophys. Res. 85, 6113 1980 .

SI Metric Conversion Factors F 5/9* ft 1.0** psi 6.894 757

*Temperature difference. **Conversion factor is exact.

E 00 E 03 E 00

K Pa/s kPa SPEREE

Tom Blanton is a consultant with Blanton Assoc. near Ramah, Colorado. Previously, he worked on the Rock Mechanics Team at Mobil Technology Co. in Dallas and for Rock Mechanics Inc. in Monument, Colorado, SAIC in Steamboat Springs, Colorado, and Halliburtons Research Laboratory in Duncan, Oklahoma. He holds a BS degree from Washington & Lee U., an MS degree from Syracuse U., and a PhD degree in geology from Texas A&M U. Jon Olson is an assistant professor in the Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering Dept. at The U. of Texas at Austin. His research interests include hydraulic fracturing, rock mechanics, and fractured reservoir characterization. Previously, he was a research engineer on the Stimulation and Rock Mechanics teams at Mobil Technology Co. in Dallas. He holds BS degrees in earth sciences and civil engineering from the U. of Notre Dame and a PhD degree in geomechanics and engineering geology from Stanford U.

68

T.L. Blanton and J.E. Olson: Stress Magnitudes from Logs

SPE Reservoir Eval. & Eng., Vol. 2, No. 1, February 1999