Estimating Mechanical Properties
of Shale From Empirical Correlations
Per Horsrud,* SPE, SINTEF Petroleum Research
Summary
Borehole-stability prediction requires knowledge of the mechanical
properties of the formations which is rarely available in shale sec-
tions. This paper presents empirical correlations to assist in predict-
ing shale mechanical properties. The correlations are based on
extensive laboratory testing of shale cores primarily from the North
Sea. The acoustic P-wave velocity is a primary input parameter in
several of the correlations; thus, various sources of the P-wave
velocity such as sonic wireline, sonic measurement while drilling
(MWD), and acoustic measurements on cuttings may be used to
obtain somewhat continuous estimates of shale mechanical proper-
ties. Borehole-stability evaluations can be made at different stages
in the drilling process (planning, while drilling, and post-analysis).
Other applications of the correlations where shale mechanical prop-
erties are required are evaluation of overburden compaction during
depletion and optimization of the drilling process (selection of bit
type, bit parameters, etc.).
Introduction
The properties and response of shale are important for the petro-
leum industry in basin modeling, interpretation of seismic
response, and drilling with respect both to potential borehole-
stability problems and drillability. However, the shales are not
the primary target; therefore, shale samples (cores) from deep
boreholes are scarce because of the additional cost related to cor-
ing operations in deep boreholes.
Stability problems during drilling may be very costly. Drilling
of long sections at high angles in shales may represent a consid-
erable challenge. This has motivated operators to core and test
potentially troublesome shales in the overburden.1 Coring, how-
ever, can provide only discrete data points for use in a stability
evaluation and can cover only a very limited depth range. There is
an obvious need for methods that can provide shale properties
both on a more continuous basis and at less cost. Such methods
can be based on different information sources (e.g., wireline logs,
MWD, and drill cuttings). Static mechanical properties are not
measured directly by any of these tools. More or less empirical
correlations have been used extensively in sandstones and to some
extent in shales and mixed lithologies.25 Publicly available corre-
lations often suffer from an overrepresentation of strong rock sam-
ples, which is not ideal for a stability evaluation. Further, they are
based frequently on published data from different sources, where
it is difficult to control the consistency of test material, test proce-
dures, and data interpretation.
This paper presents correlations which have been developed
from a dedicated testing program on a number of shale cores, mainly
from the North Sea. The testing program included measurements of
a wide range of petrophysical and mechanical properties. Several of
the shales were potential candidates for instability problems; thus,
weak shales also are represented in this data set.
Procedures and Apparatus for Triaxial Testing
of Shales
Shales have certain characteristic features that make them diffi-
cult to handle correctly. The two most important characteristics
are low permeability69 and sensitivity to contacting fluids.
* Now with Statoil Research Center, Trondheim
Copyright 2001 Society of Petroleum Engineers
Original SPE manuscript received for review 11 February 1999. Revised manuscript
received 15 August 2000. Paper (SPE 56017) peer approved 27 March 2001.
68
Special precautions must be taken to preserve the core,1 and spe-
cial conditions must be applied during laboratory handling and
testing.2,6,10 The shale is unloaded from pressure and temperature,
and this may cause damage and alterations in several ways (e.g.,
creation of microcracks, disking, and reduced saturation caused
by expansion). A shale taken from a deep borehole may not be
100% saturated under atmospheric conditions. This makes the
laboratory testing susceptible to artifacts10,11 unless special pro-
cedures are applied. Because of the low permeability of these
shales, testing of mechanical response can be very time-consuming
and thus relatively expensive.
The field cores that were tested were all well preserved so that
loss of pore water after coring was prevented. Test samples were
drilled from the core with the sample axis normal to the apparent
bedding plane. The samples used for triaxial testing were 11/2 in. in
diameter and approximately two times longer than the diameter.
The triaxial tests were run as consolidated-undrained (CU) tests, a
commonly used type of test for low-permeability shales. The tests
consisted of the three segments illustrated in Fig. 1: loading to a
predetermined level of confining pressure and pore pressure; con-
solidation (i.e., a period of constant confining pressure and
drainage of the pore fluid against a constant pore pressure); and
undrained axial loading under a constant axial displacement rate
until failure of the sample. In this last phase, the pore pressure will
increase because of the undrained boundary condition.
Internal instrumentation of the test sample is shown in Fig. 2. In
addition to measurement of external load, pressure, and deformations,
the pore pressure at both ends of the sample and acoustic-wave trains
in both the axial and radial directions are recorded.
The time required to run a test depends on the permeability of
the shale. Concepts from soil-mechanics testing can be applied to
determine when consolidation is completed, and also to determine
the appropriate displacement rate in the undrained part of the test,12
to make sure that pore-pressure equilibration is ensured throughout
the sample.
Shale Testing and Database Establishment
Table 1 gives an overview of the field cores that have been tested
and some key parameters for these shales. Some outcrop
clays/mudstones included in the database13 and in the basis for the
correlations are included. Table 1 shows a considerable spread in
the properties of the shales. For Tertiary shales, porosity is gener-
ally high, with 55% porosity for the shallowest shale. As expected,
porosity decreases with increasing depth and age, down to 3%
porosity for the deepest shale.
Triaxial testing is the primary basis for the empirical correla-
tions developed. This paper will present how the shale properties
of the correlations have been determined. At the initiation of the
project it was difficult to anticipate which parameters could be
correlated. An extensive test and characterization program was
carried out for each core. This included additional testing and
characterization such as mineralogy (X-ray diffraction), petro-
graphic description using scanning electron microscopy (SEM),
water content and bulk density, specific surface area, cation
exchange capacity, pore size distribution, and permeability. For
details about this and a more in-depth discussion of the shales, the
reader is referred to another publication.6
Failure Properties. In the correlations for static mechanical
properties, the failure properties of a linear Mohr-Coulomb failure
criterion have been used (i.e., the uniaxial compressive strength, Co,
and the failure angle, b). Because of the requirement of testing
shales with a pore pressure, uniaxial compression tests cannot be
June 2001 SPE Drilling & Completion
Stress stress paths obtained from the triaxial tests of the Tertiary Paleocene
(2) shale. The corresponding failure parameters, Co and b, were cal-
culated using linear regression of the peak stress values. The stress-
path plot uses the differential stress (axial minus radial stress) and
Axial stress the mean effective stress (axial stress plus two times the radial stress
minus three times the pore pressure) on the axes; therefore, the
properties of the straight line in the figure do not correspond directly
Radial stress to the Mohr-Coulomb failure properties. However, stress-path data
can be transformed easily to effective principal stresses (smallest
and largest) required by the Mohr-Coulomb criterion.
Consolidation
Pore pressure
Static Elastic Properties. Static elastic properties, Youngs modulus
and shear modulus, were obtained from the undrained triaxial part
of the test. These were taken as tangent values of the stress vs.
Time strain curve at 50% of the peak stress value. The same tests as used
for the failure properties have been used to obtain one averaged
Fig. 1Schematic illustration of a CU triaxial test of shale.
value for each of the static elastic parameters.

used. The failure parameters have been interpreted from several P-Wave Velocity. The P-wave velocity appeared to be an impor-
tests at different effective confining pressures. Fig. 3 shows the tant parameter in the correlations. It was, however, necessary to
Pore pressure

Steel piston (for axial stress)

Confining oil
(for radial stress) Acoustic
transducer
(transmitter)

Permeable Sintered plate Permeable Sleeve

wrapping wrapping

Acoustic Sample Acoustic transducer Acoustic

transducer (receiver and AE detector) transducer
(transmitter) Directions of (transmitter)
radial strain measurements
Sleeve
Sintered plate
Axial strain
LVDT
transducer Axial strain
LVDT transducer
Acoustic
transducer Steel piston
(receiver)
Pore pressure

Fig. 2Triaxial cell instrumentation for CU triaxial testing of shale.

TABLE 1BULK MINERALOGY AND POROSITY FOR SAMPLES FROM DEEP BOREHOLES IN THE NORTH SEA AND
FROM OUTCROP MATERIALS
Depth Clay Clay types
Shale Geological Period (m) Content Chl Ka Mi/Ill ML Sm Porosity
TM Tertiary Miocene 1370 0.53 .06 .15 .12 .19 .01 0.55
TE Tertiary Eocene 1570 0.82 .02 .03 .06 .00 .71 0.41
TP1 Tertiary Paleocene (1) 1720 0.34 .00 .0 .06 .16 .03 0.31
TP2 Tertiary Paleocene (2) 1870 0.56 .01 .20 .03 .03 .29 0.34
TP3 Tertiary Paleocene (3) 1940 0.52 .01 .23 .13 .06 .09 0.31
CRE Cretaceous 2090 0.46 .03 .12 .12 .18 .01 0.29
UJ1 Upper Jurassic (1) 3160 0.32 .04 .12 .06 .09 .01 0.30
UJ2 Upper Jurassic (2) 2630 0.58 .06 .36 .10 .06 .00 0.10
UJ3 Upper Jurassic (3) 2550 0.47 .02 .14 .22 .09 .00 0.17
TR Triassic 2440 0.65 .06 .40 .13 .06 .00 0.15
MJ Middle Jurassic 4870 0.49 .05 .11 .32 .01 .00 0.03
Smectite Cretaceous 0 0.99 .00 .00 .00 .00 .99 0.57
London Clay Tertiary 0 0.65 .08 .10 .20 .00 .27 0.45
Mo Clay Tertiary 0 0.25 .00 .00 .03 .00 .22 0.72
Key: Chl=chlorite, Ka=kaolinite, Mi/Ill=mica and illite, ML=mixed layer, Sm=smectite.

June 2001 SPE Drilling & Completion 69

 20
TABLE 2CORRELATONS FOR PREDICTING STATIC
C o =14.3 MPa MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF SHALES
= 49.1 2
Correlation r S
Differential stress , MPa 15
2.93
Co = 0.77v P 0.99 3.4 MPa
- 0.96
Co = 243.6 0.98 3.7 MPa
10 3.23
E = 0.076v P 0.99 0.4 GPa
3.30
G = 0.03v P 0.99 0.2 GPa

5
0
0 5
Mean effective stress, MPa
Fig. 3Stress paths of Tertiary Paleocene (2) shale.
find a consistent procedure of calculation that could take into
account possible variations with stress level, sample variation, etc.
The basis here is the set of samples from one given depth tested at
different confining pressures to provide the static elastic properties
and the failure properties previously discussed.
At least one of the samples at each depth was tested at a con-
fining pressure equal to or higher than the in-situ effective over-
burden. Although the P-wave velocity in high-porosity shales does
not vary significantly with stress level, there may be significant
variations in shales with lower porosity.14
The next step was to correct for possible sample variation. This
is done by using the P-wave velocity at 2.5 MPa as a reference
point, because all tests were run at effective confining pressures of
2.5 MPa or higher. First, the P-wave velocity for all the involved
samples at a given depth is averaged; then the P-wave velocity at
2.5 MPa for the sample used to extract the P-wave velocity at the
in-situ stress level is subtracted from this average value.
The final P-wave velocity was corrected for changes occurring
during the consolidation phase of the tests. This correction is
included because the loading rate was not always low enough to
ensure completely drained conditions during the loading phase.
The sample therefore had to be left at constant load for some time
to allow consolidation and equilibration. The P-wave velocity normal
to the bedding at downhole stress is calculated as
nP=nPs +(n Pp2.5-nPp2.5)+DnPcon.
Porosity. The porosity of the shales was estimated from determi-
nation of the free water content. The free water content was deter-
100
90 Correlation
Uniaxial compressive strength, MPa
mined by drying a small sample at 105C until constant sample
weight was reached. With this method, it is necessary to have well
preserved samples. An alternative is the more standard helium-
10 15 20
porosity method which requires drying the sample at 60C before
measuring the porosity with helium. However, this latter method
was found to give consistently lower porosity, and with a differ-
ence that increased with the smectite content.6 The main reason for
this difference is believed to be the compaction of the smectite
structure during the pretest drying.
Correlations
Possible correlations between the measured static-mechanical
properties of the shales and other parameters were investigated in
both single variable and multivariate models. This paper will focus
on the best correlations for predicting the static-mechanical prop-
erties of shales summarized in Table 2. The correlation coefficient,
r 2, and standard error of the estimate, S=square root of the vari-
ance of the estimate, are included.
Figs. 4 through 7 show the correlations plotted together with
the data points. The number of data points does not always match
the number of shales given in Table 1 because not all properties
were available for all the shales.
Included in Fig. 5 is the correlation given by Lashkaripour and
Dusseault,4 showing a very similar relation between porosity and
strength, Co=193.4f-1.143. Their correlation is based on 13 data
points from publicly available sources and their own testing of
shales that were generally stronger and with lower porosity. The
mean of the uniaxial compressive strength is approximately 79
MPa; nine of these 13 points have 10% porosity or less. This dif-
ference between the two data sets may easily explain the difference
between the correlations.
It is evident from Table 2 that a correlation between porosity
and P-wave velocity must also exist. This is given as (f in percent,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1) nP in km/s)
-2.37
f=227.8nP , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
where r 2=0.98 and S=6.4%.

Correlation data points 90

80 Tests after correlation establishment Correlation
80
Uniaxial compressive strength, MPa

70 Data points
70
60 From Lashkaripour and Dusseault
4
60
50
50
40
30 40

20 30

10 20
0 10
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5
0
P-wave velocity normal to bedding, km/s
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Fig. 4Correlation between uniaxial compressive strength and Porosity, %
P-wave velocity normal to bedding. The uniaxial compressive
strength is estimated from several tests at nonzero confining Fig. 5Correlation between uniaxial compressive strength
pressure using a linear Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion. and porosity.

70 June 2001 SPE Drilling & Completion

 16
14 Correlation
Youngs modulus, GPa 12 Data points
10
8
6
4
2 1
0 0
1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
P-wave velocity normal to bedding, km/s
Fig. 6Correlation between Youngs modulus and P-wave
velocity normal to bedding.
Failure Angle Estimation. The failure angle, b, in the Mohr-Coulomb
failure criterion is a required parameter for a complete stability evalu-
ation. The failure angle of a shale is normally in the 45 to 60 range,
but this parameter is not directly available when core testing is not
possible. Good correlations between the failure angle and other param-
eters have not been established, but certain trends have been found.
The failure angle tends to increase with shale strength (and
then also with P-wave velocity).
The failure angle tends to decrease with increasing clay-
mineral content.
The failure angle shows some dependence on kaolinite content.
Table 3 lists these relations, including the correlation coeffi-
cient and the standard error of the estimate.
Note that these correlations are rather poor, with a significant
error of the estimate. One may also question the validity of using
the P-wave velocity for determination of both the compressive
strength and the failure angle. Used with care, these trends may
help to reduce the uncertainty of the failure angle estimate, espe-
cially if several of the above trends can be used simultaneously.
Similar trends have been found by others1 (e.g., increasing fail-
ure angle with increasing strength).
P-Wave Velocities From Field Data. The good correlation
between the laboratory-measured P-wave velocity of shales and
the mechanical properties of the shales makes it possible to esti-
mate the mechanical properties from several sources.
Wireline Logs. Using the P-wave interval transit time from the
sonic log, Dt P, in ms/ft, the correlations can be written as
Co=0.77(304.8/Dt P)2.93, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)
E=0.076(304.8/Dt P)3.23, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
and G=0.030(304.8/Dt P)3.30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
This implies that more or less continuous estimates of shale
mechanical properties can be obtained directly from the sonic log
in shale intervals.
Fig. 8 shows examples of how the uniaxial compressive
strength has been estimated from sonic log values for three differ-
TABLE 3CORRELATIONS BETWEEN FAILURE ANGLE
AND OTHER PARAMETERS
49.8+0.3Co
39.9+5.5vP
61.0+0.13Ccl
50.70.032Ccl + 0.24Cka
June 2001 SPE Drilling & Completion
7
6 Correlation
Data points
5
Shear modulus, GPa
4
3
2
4 4.5 5 5.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5
P-wave velocity normal to bedding, km/s
Fig. 7Correlation between shear modulus and P-wave velocity.
ent wells. These estimates are compared with estimates from labo-
ratory triaxial testing. As shown by the figure, there is reasonably
good agreement between the estimates.
MWD. An alternative to the sonic wireline log is to run the sonic
in the MWD setup. This would provide a close to real-time
mechanical properties log and could thus be used to continuously
monitor borehole stability. MWD data were not available, however,
and a comparison based on MWD sonic was not possible.
Obtaining sonic logs both from MWD and wireline also opens up
several interesting applications. This would provide a means of mon-
itoring the time-dependent effects after drilling, comparing the
response of the formation while drilling and some time after drilling,
especially if the MWD is applied also during tripping. This may
reveal effects of time-dependent instabilities, breakouts, etc.
Drill Cuttings. Methods for sonic measurements on shale cuttings at
the rigsite have been developed.15,16 The advantage of the cuttings/
cavings is that they can provide both more continuous measurements
and closer to real-time (on the rig) estimates than core measure-
ments. The disadvantage is that cuttings/cavings are more suscepti-
ble to alterations caused by the drilling process, such as drill
fluid/drill-bit effects.
Cuttings measurements also represent a potential for studying
shale-fluid interactions and possible fluid effects on mechanical
properties.
Discussion of Corrections and Uncertainties
P-Wave Velocity. The correlations are based on P-wave velocity meas-
urements under laboratory conditions. Using the P-wave velocity
from the sonic log instead introduces several possible uncertainties.
Even if the stress dependence of the P-wave velocity is small
for high-porosity shales,14 there may be unloading effects causing
different effects on cores and downhole, and in particular on lower
porosity shales. This has been addressed to a large extent by the
correction scheme summarized in Eq. 1.
The correlations are based on measurements at room tempera-
ture, while both static and dynamic shale mechanical properties are
temperature dependent. Stiffness, strength, and P-wave velocity
decrease with increasing temperature.6,17
Fig. 9 shows the P-wave velocity measured on core samples in
the laboratory compared with the P-wave velocity from the sonic
log at corresponding depths. One set of points shown has been cor-
rected from the laboratory temperature (20C) to the appropriate
downhole temperature for each core. These corrections are based
on measurements at room temperature and at 80C. With only two
r2 S
temperatures, there is some uncertainty attached to these correc-
0.36 3.5 tions, both with respect to interpolation and extrapolation beyond
0.48 3.3 80C. Further testing is required to develop a more reliable and
0.32 3.6 generally applicable temperature correction scheme. The laboratory-
0.59 3.0 measured P-wave velocity is, however, consistently higher than the
P-wave velocity from the sonic log. This indicates that there is a
71
 -5
-4
Tertiary Eocene Triassic
-3
Depth relative to core depth, m
-2
-1
0
1
2
3 1
4
5 0
0 10 20 30
Estimated uniaxial compressive strength, MPa
Fig. 8Uniaxial compressive strength estimated from sonic log
and from laboratory triaxial tests.
systematic error, and apparently the temperature effect may
account for at least some of this difference, because the agreement
is improved when temperature corrections are applied.
Ideally, the correlations should include a temperature-correction
term to account for arbitrary downhole temperatures. Alternatively,
one could apply a three-step correction scheme: correct the P-wave
velocity from downhole temperature to 20C; apply the correlation;
and correct the estimated mechanical property to downhole tem-
perature. Until such a correction scheme becomes available, it is
recommended to use the logged P-wave velocity directly in the
correlations. This will account for some of the systematically induced
temperature error, although the final uncertainty is not known.
Dispersion effects caused by the difference in frequency used in
the laboratory and during downhole logging may contribute to a
difference between logged and laboratory-measured velocities.
However, assuming that Biot flow (fluid flow relative to the frame-
work) and local flow or squirt flow (fluid flow between pores and
cracks as a result of volume change induced by the sound wave)
are the dominant mechanisms for frequency-dependent velocity
dispersion, no correction is needed when applying ultrasonic
results to downhole sonic measurements.18 If the shale is heteroge-
neous, the difference in sampling scale between the laboratory and
sonic-logging tools is another possible source of error.
An alternative to using the laboratory-measured P-wave velocity
could be to correlate directly with the P-wave velocity obtained
from sonic logging. However, not all the cored wells had been
logged. Thus, the correlation would have been based on fewer data
points. In most cases, the depth correction between drilled and
logged depth is unknown. Basing the correlations on measure-
ments of the same sample of material was considered to be more
consistent and qualitatively more sound.
The correlations with P-wave velocity are based on wave
propagation normal to the bedding of the shale. The shales in the
database exhibit some anisotropy, with a P-wave velocity parallel
with the bedding that is 0 to 25% higher than normal to the bed-
ding.14 This implies that sonic wireline or sonic MWD data should
preferably be from near-vertical wells, given that the bedding is
primarily horizontal.
General Validity of the Correlations. An obvious question is how
generally applicable these correlations may be (i.e., with respect to
different shale types, geographical locations, etc). The data are
mainly from the North Sea, and the Tertiary period has the largest
sample population. A wide range of depths, porosities, and clay
mineral constituents is covered within this population.
Being aware of the large natural variation of shale properties
and constituents, one has to exert some care when using the corre-
lations in different areas. Such a generalization can be obtained
only through further use and testing of the correlations. The
authors experience so far from the Norwegian Continental Shelf is
72
6
P-wave velocity measured in lab
5 Lab-measured velocity corrected to
P-wave velocity from log, km/s
downhole temperature
4
Lab value (TE)
Lab value (TR)
Lab value (MJ) 3
2
Middle Jurassic
0
1 2 3 4 5 6
40 50 60 70 80 P-wave velocity from lab, km/s
Fig. 9Comparison between log-derived P-wave velocity and
laboratory-measured P-wave velocity (measured at 20C and
corrected to downhole temperature) at corresponding depths.
that additional data points fit well into the already established cor-
relations (four cores have been tested since the correlations were
established), thus providing some confidence in the correlations in
this area (see Fig. 4). The correlations, however, have not been tested
with samples from fields situated in deep waters (>1000 m), nor is
any experience from other parts of the world available.
One case of significant discrepancy has been uncovered.19 This
was a zone of a few meters thickness offshore mid-Norway with
low-density and high-porosity rock which initially was thought to
represent a problem zone during drilling. Coring and testing
revealed that this was a rock with a very high content of noncrys-
talline (amorphous) siliceous microfossils that possessed an unex-
pectedly high strength, a factor almost double that predicted by
the correlation.
It should also be realized that there are still uncertainties which
have not been fully quantified with respect to shale core measure-
ments, such as sample-size effects, core-unloading effects, etc.
Some of these effects will be extremely difficult to quantify,
because it is difficult to establish the reference point. In total, the
uncertainty in applying the correlations in the source area is esti-
mated to be up to 50% in the low-strength range (Co<10 MPa),
while it is probably 10 to 20% for the higher strength range
(Co>50 MPa). The correlations should be a useful tool for more
continuous and more reliable predictions of mechanical properties
than what has been available previously for shales.
Potential Applications
The most obvious application of the correlations is borehole-stability
evaluation. With the sources available for P-wave velocity estimates,
this can be done in all stages of drilling, (i.e., planning, follow-up
during drilling, and post-analysis). Correlations can be implemented
directly in log analysis software, for example, thus providing a
shale mechanical-properties log.
The time-dependent response of the shale during the openhole
period may be monitored also by comparing one or more sources
(MWD, wireline log, etc.) from different times after drilling.
Mechanical properties are used also as a basis for other drilling
parameters, selection of drill bits, etc.3,5 This is another potential
application of the correlations.
The correlations provide a possibility of mapping the mechani-
cal properties of the shale in the overburden of a field. These are
important input parameters in a subsidence analysis for a poten-
tially compacting reservoir.
Because the P-wave velocity in the shale is the primary input to
the correlations, it is recommended to include P-wave velocity log-
ging routinely in overburden sections, at least in the early stages of
field development.
The correlations are limited to shales; therefore, a lithology
check should be performed. The clay mineral content should be
larger than approximately 30% to ensure a clay-bearing structure.
June 2001 SPE Drilling & Completion
The correlations are based on data from the North Sea and the
Norwegian Continental Shelf, where they appear to apply with
reasonable confidence for normal shales. However, extremities
in shale types exist and may be encountered. Therefore, some
standard types of characterization (mineralogy, porosity, etc.) are
recommended for the specific zones of interest. When bringing
the correlations to new geological and geographical areas, tests
are recommended to check the correlations.
Conclusions
A dedicated testing program for North Sea shale cores has provided
a valuable database for shale properties, especially for weaker shales
that may cause borehole-stability problems.
Using these data, empirical correlations for prediction of shale
mechanical properties have been developed. From these correla-
tions, static mechanical properties can be predicted from various
sources such as sonic wireline log, MWD sonic, and acoustic
measurements on cuttings and at various stages in the process of
drilling a borehole. The P-wave velocity in the shale is a key
parameter in several of the correlations.
These correlations can be used as an engineering tool to pro-
vide more reliable and more continuous estimates of mechanical
properties of shales, keeping in mind that the validity of the cor-
relations should be checked when used in other geological and
geographical areas. Other sources of uncertainty also exist (e.g.,
core-damage effects and temperature effects) that should have a
focus in further work.
The primary application of the correlations is within borehole-
stability evaluation (planning, while drilling, and post-analysis), but
other potential applications are in drilling optimization (bit type, bit
parameters, etc.) and evaluation of overburden compaction.
Nomenclature
Ccl = total clay content, m/m, %
Cka = kaolinite content, m/m, %
Co = uniaxial compressive strength, m/Lt2, MPa
E = Youngs modulus, m/Lt2, GPa
G = shear modulus, m/Lt2, GPa
r 2 = correlation coefficient
S = standard error of estimate (square root of the variance
of the estimate)
Dt P = P-wave interval transit time, t/L, ms/ft
nP = P-wave velocity normal to bedding, L/t, km/s
nPp2.5 = P-wave velocity measured at 2.5 MPa confining pres-
sure, L/t, km/s
n Pp2.5 = average P-wave velocity at 2.5 MPa confining pressure,
L/t, km/s
nPs = P-wave velocity measured at overburden stress, L/t, km/s
n Ps = average P-wave velocity measured at overburden stress,
L/t, km/s
DnPcon = change in P-wave velocity during consolidation, L/t, km/s
b = failure angle, degrees
f = porosity, L3/L3, %
s = stress, m/Lt2
Acknowledgments
The author thanks the companies that have participated in the
Shale Stability Project at SINTEF Petroleum Research, Amoco
Norway Oil Co., Den norske stats oljeselskap a.s., Elf Petroleum
Norge AS, Norsk Agip A/S, Norsk Hydro ASA, Norske Conoco
AS, and Saga Petroleum ASA for their financial support and also
for supplying the cores to this study. The persons who have per-
formed the testing are acknowledged, together with coworkers in
the project, Eyvind F. Snsteb and Rune M. Holt, who have con-
tributed with comments to this paper.
References
1. Wong, S.-W. et al.: Optimising Shale Drilling in the Northern North
Sea: Borehole Stability Considerations, paper SPE 26736 presented at
June 2001 SPE Drilling & Completion
the 1993 Offshore European Conference, Aberdeen, 710 September.
2. Steiger R.P. and Leung P.K.: Quantitative Determination of the
Mechanical Properties of Shales, SPEDE (September 1992) 181;
Trans., AIME, 293.
3. Mason, K.L.: Three-Cone Bit Selection With Sonic Logs, SPEDE,
(June 1987), 135.
4. Lashkaripour, G.R. and Dusseault, M.B.: A Statistical Study on Shale
Properties: Relationships Among Principal Shale Properties,
Probabilistic Methods in Geotechnical Eng., Li and Lo (eds.),
Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (1993).
5. Onyia, E.C.: Relationships Between Formation Strength, Drilling
Strength, And Electric Log Properties, paper SPE 18166 presented at
the 1988 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston,
25 October.
6. Horsrud, P., Snsteb, E.F., and Be, R.: Mechanical and
Petrophysical Properties of North Sea Shales, Intl. J. Rock Mech. Min.
Sci. (1998) 35, No. 8, 1009.
7. Katsube, T.J., Mudford, B.S., and Best, M.E.: Petrophysical
Characteristics of Shales From the Scotian Shelf, Geophysics, (1991)
56, No. 10, 1681.
8. Best, M.E. and Katsube, T.J.: Shale Permeability and Its Significance
in Hydrocarbon Exploration, The Leading Edge (1995), 14, No. 3, 165.
9. Chenevert, M.E. and Sharma, A.K.: Permeability and Effective Pore
Pressure of Shales, paper SPE/IADC 21918 presented at the 1991
SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, 1114 March.
10. Schmitt, L., Forsans, T., and Santarelli, F.J.: Shale Testing and Capillary
Phenomena, Intl. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci. (1994) 31, No. 5, 411.
11. Santarelli, F.J. and Carminati, S.: Do Shales Swell? A Critical
Review of Available Evidence, paper SPE/IADC 29421 presented at
the 1995 SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, 28 February
2 March.
12. Head, K.H.: Manual of Soil Laboratory Testing, Vols 13. Pentech
Press, London (1992).
13. Nakken, S.J. et al.: Mechanical Behaviour of Clays at High Stress
Levels For Wellbore Stability Applications, Proc., Rock at Great
Depth, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands (1989).
14. Holt, R.M., Furre, A.-K., and Horsrud, P.: Stress Dependent Wave
Velocities In Sedimentary Rock Cores: Why and Why Not? Intl. J.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. (1997) 34:3, paper No. 128.
15. Nes, O.-M. et al.: Rig-site and Laboratory Use of CWT Acoustic
Velocity Measurements on Cuttings, SPEREE (August 1998) 282.
16. Marsala, A.F. et al.: Sonic While Drilling: Have You Thought About
Cuttings? paper SPE 30545 presented at the 1995 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, 2225 October.
17. Horsrud, P. et al.: Time Dependent Borehole Stability: Laboratory
Studies and Numerical Simulation of Different Mechanisms in Shale,
paper 28060 presented at the 1994 SPE Eurock Conference, Delft, The
Netherlands, 2931 August.
18. Liu, X., Vernik, L., and Nur, A.: Effects of Saturating Fluids on
Seismic Velocities in Shales, Expanded Abstracts from the 1994
SEG Intl. Exposition and 64th Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, 2328
October, 1121.
19. Stjern, G., Horsrud, P., and Agle, A.: Improved Drilling Performance
in Troublesome Clay Formations in the Heidrun Field, paper SPE
59219 presented at the 2000 IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New
Orleans, 2325 February.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
ft 3.048* E - 01 = m
F (F - 32)/1.8 = C
psi 6.894 757 E - 03 = MPa
*Conversion factor is exact. SPEDC
Per Horsrud is a staff engineer for Statoil at the Research
Center in Trondheim, Norway. e-mail: peho@statoil.com. He
was a senior scientist at SINTEF Petroleum Research. His primary
interest is petroleum-related rock mechanics. He served on the
SPE 1998 Eurock Committee and the Trondheim section from
199294. Horsrud holds an MS degree in physics from the
Technical U. of Norway.
73