EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 266 (2021) E3S Web Conf., 266 (2021) 01015 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 266, 2021
Topical Issues of Rational Use of Natural Resources 2021
Article Number 01015
Number of page(s) 16
Section New Sustainable Approaches to the Challenges of the Oil and Gas Sector
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202126601015
Published online 04 June 2021
  1. C. M. Sayers, G. M. Johnson, G. Denyer Pore pressure prediction from seismic tomography, Proceedings of the Annual Offshore Technology Conference, 1(1), 173–179 (2000). [Google Scholar]
  2. N. C. Dutta Geopressure prediction using seismic data: Current status and the road ahead, Geophysics, 67(6), 2012–2041 (2002). [Google Scholar]
  3. M. D. Zoback, Book Reservoir Geomechanics. (Cambridge University Press. 2007). [Google Scholar]
  4. J. B. Foster, H. E. Whalen Estimation of formation pressures from electrical surveys-Offshore Louisiana, SPE Reprint Series, (49), 57–63 (1966). [Google Scholar]
  5. J. P. Mouchet, A. Mitchell Abnormal Pressures While Drilling. (Boussens, France, Elf Aquitaine. 1989). [Google Scholar]
  6. B. Eaton, The Equation for Geopressure Prediction from Well Logs. (in Proceedings of Fall Meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME. Society of Petroleum Engineers. 1975). [Google Scholar]
  7. J. Zhang Effective stress, porosity, velocity and abnormal pore pressure prediction accounting for compaction disequilibrium and unloading, Marine and Petroleum Geology, 45, 2–11 (2013). [Google Scholar]
  8. C. Sayers, R. Latimer An introduction to this special section: Carbonates, Geophysics 20(1), (2008). [Google Scholar]
  9. S. Chopra, A. R. Huffman Velocity determination for pore-pressure prediction, Leading Edge (Tulsa, OK), 25(12), 1502–1515 (2006). [Google Scholar]
  10. Z. Wang, R. Wang Pore pressure prediction using geophysical methods in carbonate reservoirs: Current status, challenges and way ahead, Journal of Natural Gas Science andEngineering, 27, 986–993 (2015). [Google Scholar]
  11. V. Atashbari, M. Tingay Pore pressure prediction in carbonate reservoirs, SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference Proceedings, 1, 43–62(2012). [Google Scholar]
  12. J. Castagna, M. Batzle, T. Kan, M. Backus, Offset-Dependent Reflectivity-Theory and Practice ofAVO Analysis, Offset-Dependent Reflectivity-Theory and Practice ofAVO Analysis. (Society of Exploration Geophysicists.1993). [Google Scholar]
  13. F. S. Anselmetti, G. P. Eberli Controls on sonic velocity in carbonates, Pure and Applied Geophysics PAGEOPH, 141(2-4), 287–323. [Google Scholar]
  14. A. R. Najibi, M. Ghafoori, G. R. Lashkaripour, M. R. Asef Reservoir geomechanical modeling: In-situ stress, pore pressure, and mud design, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 151, 31–39 (2017). [Google Scholar]
  15. K. Terzaghi, P. B. Ralph, M. Gholamreza Soil mechanics in engineering practice (1996). [Google Scholar]
  16. M. A. Biotl, D. G. Willis Theory of consolidation, Developments in Geotechnical Engineering, 48(6), 324–422 (1989). [Google Scholar]
  17. L. Qiuguo, H. Denis., Z. Liangxiao, C. Yuxin Abnormal Pressure Detection and Wellbore Stability Evaluation in Carbonate Formations of East Sichuan, China, IADC/SPE Drilling Conference (2000). [Google Scholar]
  18. W. Zhu, W. Yu, K. Li Formation pressure prediction in carbonate, Beijing 2009 International Geophysical Conference and Exposition, Society of Exploration Geophysicists 153–153 (2009). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.