ARMA 24-00134

Application of a Modified Warpinski Method for In-Situ

Horizontal Stress Prediction Coupled with Thermal Effects
Duarte, M. C.
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Fernandes, F. B.
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Gildin, E.
Harold Vance Department of Petroleum Engineering of Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
Braga, A. M. B.
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Copyright 2024 ARMA, American Rock Mechanics Association
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 58th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium held in Denver, CO, USA, 25–28 June
2024. This paper was selected for presentation at the symposium by an ARMA Technical Program Committee based on a technical and critical
review of the paper by a minimum of two technical reviewers. The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of ARMA,
its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written
consent of ARMA is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 200 words; illustrations may not
be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented.

ABSTRACT: Understanding the effect of in-situ stresses on geological formations has been modeled over the years aiming
to evaluate their behavior in zones of interest. The relationship between horizontal stress, pore pressure, and fracture gradient
significantly predicts the safe range of drilling fluid weight, avoiding kick, wellbore instability, and loss of circulation material.
The challenges in estimating horizontal stress include the lack of information on rock properties, which entails the need for open-
hole well tests and/or coring analysis. These techniques collaborate to estimate the stresses in a specific area well but are not
applicable to all scenarios. The Warpinski method proposes an approach for elastic and viscoelastic rock behavior, introducing the
relationship between stress and strain when deriving horizontal stress. This research presents a case study in which the Warpinski
method is applied, assuming temperature variation and its effect compared to a second scenario when the temperature is assumed
to be constant. The preliminary data were derived from a prior study referenced throughout the paper, and the results were
compared to previous methods that were well-known in the oil industry. The data obtained from the Warpinski method shows a
good approach related to the other methods mentioned, showing results that are in accordance with what is expected.

1 INTRODUCTION voir management. The interaction between rock forma-

tions and the stress conditions is integral to mitigating
Over the years, researchers have developed models to un- risks such as wellbore collapse, induced seismicity, and
derstand how in-situ stresses affect geological formations, fluid migration. The correlation among horizontal stress,
intending to assess their behavior in specific zones of in- pore pressure, and fracture gradient is a crucial predictor
terest. Furthermore, as the pursuit of sustainable energy for determining a safe range of drilling fluid weight, pre-
solutions intensifies, it requires intricate comprehension venting kicks, and the loss of circulation material (Lesage
of the in-situ stress-strain dynamics, which makes it a et al., 1991).
paramount consideration in diverse subsurface engineer- In the context of geothermal energy extraction, knowledge
ing applications, playing a pivotal role in the realms of of in-situ stress is instrumental in the design and execu-
oil field development, geothermal energy extraction, and tion of efficient reservoir stimulation strategies, ensuring
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) initiatives. sustainable and effective energy production (Meller et al.,
In the oil field, accurate estimations of in-situ stress are 2017). In the emerging field of Carbon Capture and Stor-
imperative for addressing challenges associated with bore- age (CCS), where the sequestration of CO2 is central to
hole stability, hydraulic fracturing optimization, and reser- climate change mitigation, understanding in-situ stress is
crucial. It directly influences the integrity of geological fective stress principle (Clayton et al., 1995).
storage reservoirs, affecting the containment and perma-
nence of injected CO2 (Aminu et al., 2017). 𝜎 ′ = 𝜎 − PP (1)

The principle was refined by incorporating rock compress-

ibility and porous media considerations, where alpha is
defined as the Biot’s coefficient (Geertsma, 1957).

𝜎 ′ = 𝜎 − 𝑎PP (2)

The in-situ stresses represent pivotal parameters in the

analysis of geomechanics and the design of rock engineer-
ing projects (Zhang et al., 2023). The vertical (effective)
stress alone doesn’t suffice to characterize the stress state
Fig. 1: Schematics of stresses acting on a well (Wu and Salehi, in a solid. The state of stress can be comprehensively de-
2022). picted by three independent normal stresses perpendicular
to each other. When vertical stress is the principal one,
the two remaining principal stresses manifest horizontally.
While open-hole well tests and/or coring analysis methods The maximum principal stress in the horizontal scenario is
work together to provide a reliable estimation of stresses denoted as (𝜎𝐻 ), while the minimum horizontal stress is
in a particular region, their applicability is not universal. represented by (𝜎ℎ ) (Wu and Salehi, 2022).
The Warpinski method introduces a time-history approach
to comprehend elastic and viscoelastic rock behavior, es- The determination of the minimum horizontal stress (𝜎ℎ )
tablishing the connection between stress and strain when is typically achieved through direct measurements, com-
determining horizontal stress (Warpinski, 1989). monly employing hydraulic fracturing or its oil field
equivalents, including leak-off test (LOT), extended leak-
Throughout this paper, we delve into the Warpinski off test (XLOT), diagnostic fracture injection test (DFIT),
method, outlining its adaptability to account for thermal mini-frac, wireline tests, or logging-while-drilling (LWD)
effects. We explore the intricacies of in-situ stress and micro-frac tests (Zhang, 2019). Furthermore, minimum
strain predictions, drawing attention to the potential varia- horizontal stress (𝜎ℎ ) is estimated to be equivalent to frac-
tions induced by temperature changes. Additionally, the ture closure pressure since when the pressure inside the
results of this study were compared to previous meth- fracture is less than the in-situ stress, the fracture is closed.
ods well-known in the oil industry, e.g., Eaton (1969), (Belyadi et al., 2016). The maximum horizontal stress
Matthews (1967),Yoshida et al. (1996), and Breckels and can be approximated through the extended leak-off test
Van Eekelen (1982) to validate the efficacy of the mod- (XLOT) (Li and Purdy, 2010). Lin et al. (2020) pro-
ified method, offering insights into its real-world utility poses the estimation of in-situ maximum horizontal prin-
and applicability. cipal stress magnitudes from borehole breakout data using
machine learning.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW AND STATE OF THE ART Without the aforementioned tests, horizontal stresses can
be indirectly estimated using well-log data (Almalikee and
In essence, the overburden stress (𝜎) is the outcome of Alnajm, 2019). In 1989, Norman R. Warpinski devised
a force exerted on a plane, with specific magnitude, di- a technique to estimate the values of horizontal stresses
rection, and orientation, divided by the area of that plane. using formation history data over geological time. This
Pore pressure (PP ) can be defined as the pressure of the approach considers variations in pore pressure, tempera-
fluid contained within the porous spaces of the rock. It ture gradients, consolidation, and diagenesis, considering
will depend on the fluid density of the formation and the changes in formation properties over time, as well as tec-
loads it is bearing. The presence of pore pressure acting tonic variations and nonzero horizontal strains (Warpin-
in all directions within the pores of a rock helps to support ski, 1989). When estimating stress using real-time for-
or alleviate a significant portion of the total applied stress. mation evaluation data, the time-history approach is no
Thus, when a rock is subjected to a force, the effective longer necessary, relying instead on assumptions of con-
stress (𝜎 ′ ) applied to its matrix is equal to the total stress stant rock and fluid properties within the sedimentary base
minus the pore pressure, which consists of Terzaghi’s ef- (de Oliveira, 2017).
Zhang et al. (2023) reiterate that certain field tests are time 𝑡1 will be the initial moment when formation data is
available for measuring horizontal stresses; however, they available, and the reference time 𝑡2 will be the moment
may not be accessible at the desired depth. Furthermore, when predicting in-situ stresses is desired (de Oliveira,
numerous theoretical and empirical methods have been 2017).
suggested for estimating horizontal stresses in isotropic
Integrating the equation 5 in terms of minimum horizontal
rocks, yet they still entail significant uncertainty in deter-
effective stress,
mining horizontal stress.

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 𝜈 𝑑𝜎𝑉′

∫ 𝑡2 ∫ 𝑡2
𝐸 𝑑𝜀 ℎ
Δ𝜎ℎ′ = 𝑑𝑡 + 2
𝑑𝑡
The mathematical formulation presented in this paper ex- 𝑡1 1 − 𝜈 𝑑𝑡 𝑡1 1 − 𝜈 𝑑𝑡
∫ 𝑡2 ∫ 𝑡2 (7)
tends the equation proposed by De Oliveira and Carrasco 𝜈𝐸 𝑑𝜀 𝐻 𝛼𝐸 𝑑𝑇
+ 𝑑𝑡 + 𝑑𝑡
(2020) and is based on the following assumptions: 𝑡1 1 − 𝜈
2 𝑑𝑡 𝑡1 1 − 𝜈 𝑑𝑡

• Uniform horizontal deformations;

Integrating the equation 6 in terms of maximum horizontal
• Uniform horizontal effective stresses; effective stress,
• Linear-elastic behavior;
• Constant rock properties. 𝜈 𝑑𝜎𝑉′
∫ 𝑡2 ∫ 𝑡2
′ 𝐸 𝑑𝜀 𝐻
Δ𝜎𝐻 = 𝑑𝑡 + 2 𝑑𝑡
𝑑𝑡
𝑡1 1 − 𝜈 𝑑𝑡 𝑡1 1 − 𝜈
The analysis of the thermal effect incorporated in the ∫ 𝑡2 ∫ 𝑡2 (8)
𝜈𝐸 𝑑𝜀 ℎ 𝛼𝐸 𝑑𝑇
model will involve comparing it with the temperature- + 𝑑𝑡 + 𝑑𝑡
2
negligible model proposed by the authors. 𝑡1 1 − 𝜈 𝑑𝑡 𝑡1 1 − 𝜈 𝑑𝑡

3.1. Analytical Model for Estimation of In Situ Stress Considering the assumptions of constant rock properties
with Thermal Effect and linear-elastic behavior, the equations referenced as 7
Warpinski (1989) proposes a differential relationship be- and 8 can be simplified as follows:
tween strain and stress for materials with linear-elastic, The minimum horizontal effective stress is defined as,
homogeneous, and isotropic behavior:
Considering minimum horizontal effective stress and 𝜈 𝐸𝜀 ℎ 𝜈𝐸𝜀 𝐻 𝛼𝐸𝑇
𝜎ℎ′ = 𝜎𝑉′ + + + (9)
strain, 1−𝜈 1 − 𝜈2 1 − 𝜈2 1 − 𝜈

The maximum horizontal effective stress is defined as,

𝐸 𝑑𝜀 ℎ = 𝑑𝜎ℎ′ − 𝜈(𝑑𝜎𝐻
′
+ 𝑑𝜎𝑉′ ) − 𝛼𝐸 𝑑𝑇 (3)

′ 𝜈 𝐸𝜀 𝐻 𝜈𝐸𝜀 ℎ 𝛼𝐸𝑇
Considering maximum horizontal effective stress and 𝜎𝐻 = 𝜎𝑉′ + + + (10)
strain,
1−𝜈 1 − 𝜈2 1 − 𝜈2 1 − 𝜈

As proposed from uniform effective horizontal stresses as-

𝐸 𝑑𝜀 𝐻 = ′
𝑑𝜎𝐻 − 𝜈(𝑑𝜎ℎ′ + 𝑑𝜎𝑉′ ) − 𝛼𝐸 𝑑𝑇 (4) sumption, 𝜎ℎ′ = 𝜎𝐻
′ :

In terms of minimum horizontal effective stress, 𝜈 𝐸 𝛼𝐸𝑇

𝜎ℎ′ = 𝜎𝐻
′
= 𝜎𝑉′ + 𝜀ℎ + (11)
1−𝜈 1−𝜈 1−𝜈
𝜈 𝐸 𝑑𝜀 ℎ 𝜈𝐸 𝑑𝜀 𝐻 𝛼𝐸 𝑑𝑇
𝑑𝜎ℎ′ = 𝑑𝜎𝑉′ + + + (5) For strain estimation in the case of leak-off test (LOT) per-
1−𝜈 1 − 𝜈2 1 − 𝜈2 1−𝜈
formed, the equation 11 can be rearranged as,
In terms of maximum horizontal effective stress,
!
𝜈 ′ 𝛼𝐸Δ𝑇 1 − 𝜈
′ 𝜈 𝐸 𝑑𝜀 𝐻 𝜈𝐸 𝑑𝜀 ℎ 𝛼𝐸 𝑑𝑇 𝜀 = LOT − PP − 𝜎 − (12)
𝑑𝜎𝐻 = 𝑑𝜎𝑉′ + + + (6) 1−𝜈 𝑉 1−𝜈 𝐸
1−𝜈 1 − 𝜈2 1 − 𝜈2 1−𝜈
The solution for the equations 5 and 6 involves integrating Consequently, upon estimating the strain, the horizontal
both equations with respect to time, where the reference stress can be derived.
3.2. Methodology and Field Data 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The paper’s analysis relies on data from de Oliveira (2017) The section presents an analysis of the results derived
about an offshore well in Brazil. The author underscores from the methodology applied in this study. Figure 2 rep-
the interpretation of indirect field rock mechanical mea- resents the compressional and shear slowness of the for-
surements via commercial software packages such as In- mation logged from 3,139 m to 4,880 m.
teractive Petrophysics (IP) and SEST TR. 2.0© .
Analyzing the changes in compressional and shear slow-
The subsequent approach encompassed the consideration ness, it becomes apparent that three geological zones de-
of specific methodologies for geomechanical parameter lineated by De Oliveira and Carrasco (2020) can be dis-
analysis: cerned: shale, carbonate, and sandstone zone.

• The calculation of vertical effective stress followed

the method proposed by Eaton (1969);
• The dynamic Poisson’s ratio was determined using
the subsequent expression:

𝑉 𝑝2 − 2𝑉𝑠2
𝜈dyn = (13)
2(𝑉 𝑝2 −𝑉𝑠2 )

• The dynamic Young’s Modulus was acquired

through the utilization of the following equation:

𝐸 dyn = 2𝜌𝑟 (1 + 𝜈dyn )𝑉𝑠2 (14)

• The empirical angular-linear coefficient (C) for

the horizontal effective stress, as proposed by
de Oliveira (2017) and utilizing Matthews (1967),
was established at 2.45.
• The compressional and shear waves are expressed
by:
√︄
𝑘 + 43 𝜇
𝑉𝑝 = (15) Fig. 2: Compressional and shear slowness.
𝜌

√︂
𝜇 As previously stated, determining vertical stress is a piv-
𝑉𝑠 = (16) otal aspect of our investigation. Figure 3 illustrates the
𝜌
vertical stress obtained by Eaton’s method, where the
• Slowness is the inverse of velocity and is defined as: weight of the overlying rock and sediment exerts pressure
on the underlying layers. Vertical stress increases steadily
𝜇 𝑝 = 1/𝑉 𝑝 (17) and uniformly as depth increases since this method pro-
poses a constant rate change with depth.
Although contemporary techniques allow for indirect esti-
𝜇 𝑠 = 1/𝑉𝑠 (18) mation of overburden stress through methods such as well
logs, seismic surveys, and geomechanical modeling, as
• The temperature variation is estimated employing well as direct measurements using downhole pressure sen-
the expression proposed by Serra de Souza and F.O. sors like Measurement-While-Drilling (MWD) and wire-
(2015): line tools, employing a mathematical model for determin-
ing this parameter can provide valuable support for initial
(1 − 𝜈)Δ𝑃 analyses of target locations. This approach can be further
Δ𝑇 = (19) enhanced through validation using correlation wells.
𝐸𝛽
 various points of LOTs distributed along the trajectory of
the well. Accordingly, the strain can be deduced utilizing
Equation 12, as depicted in Figure 4.
In this context, positive strain values indicate lateral com-
pression, while negative values indicate lateral spread-
ing. An observable disparity in strain trends becomes ev-
ident during logging of the shale zone, characterized by
a pronounced deviation towards higher negative values.
This demonstrates a more heterogeneous lateral spread-
ing within this zone. However, beyond the 3500m mark,
strains exhibit a reduced and more uniform lateral spread-
ing pattern. Positive strains indicating lateral compres-
sion can also be identified. This is based on the equation
12 and the Poisson’s ratio results (derived from compres-
sional and shear slowness) at corresponding depths. The
decrease in Poisson’s ratio reduces the effect of overbur-
den stress, reducing spreading behavior and resulting in
deformation in the compressional direction.
Ultimately, the horizontal stress can be determined once
the strain is predicted. Figure 5 illustrates the variation of
horizontal stress along the wellbore. A comparable profile
Fig. 3: Vertical stress derived from Eaton (1969). to Figure 2 is evident, underscoring the method’s sensi-
tivity to the formation slowness, which is also utilized in
deriving Young’s Modulus.

Fig. 4: Scattering plot for strain prediction.

As proposed by De Oliveira and Carrasco (2020), based

on two leak-off tests (LOTs) conducted in this particular Fig. 5: Horizontal stress prediction coupled with thermal effects
well, a linear interpolation method is employed to estimate using Warpisnki method.
Figure 6 explores a comparative analysis between hori- Secondly, A comprehensive examination of the chart re-
zontal stress coupled with thermal effects and horizon- veals that within carbonate and sandstone intervals, the
tal stress under conditions where temperature effects are deviation exhibits a linear correlation with depth. This be-
considered negligible. Disregarding the distinction within havior primarily occurs due to equation 11. Upon consid-
the carbonate zone, where it concentrates very low de- ering all terms in the expression, it becomes evident that
formation results leading to the similar response of both each component exhibits a linear trend beyond 3500m, in-
stresses, it becomes apparent that horizontal stress cou- cluding Poisson’s ratio and Young’s modulus. These pa-
pled with thermal effects becomes prominent, resulting in rameters directly correlate with compressional and shear
the separation of both curves. The increasing divergence slowness. Consequently, since the disparity between both
with depth is expected, as drilling deeper leads to higher methods is predominantly attributable to the term repre-
geothermal gradients. sented by the thermal effect, it contributes a linear fraction
to calculating horizontal stress.

Fig. 6: Comparative analysis between horizontal stress coupled

with thermal effects and horizontal stress where temperature ef- Fig. 7: Discrepancy between horizontal stress coupled with
fects are negligible. thermal effects and horizontal stress where temperature effects
are negligible.

The discrepancy plot depicted in Figure 7 illustrates the

In order to mitigate uncertainty and minimize the impact
relative deviation between the method proposed in this
of other parameters, as well as to validate the method-
study and the one introduced by De Oliveira and Carrasco
ology proposed in this study, comparisons were made
(2020). The greater the relative difference between both
with other methods already utilized within the industry:
methods, the more pronounced the discrepancy becomes.
Eaton (1969), Matthews (1967),Yoshida et al. (1996), and
The chart illustrates two distinct effects. Firstly, within Breckels and Van Eekelen (1982). This calibration process
the shale interval, a notable disparity exists in comparing was undertaken to refine the model and enhance its accu-
the methods, indicating that temperature and strain pre- racy. In summary, all methods exhibit a more erratic re-
dictions play a significant role in the observed differences. sponse in the initial logged meters, particularly where the
Additionally, compared to the methodology applied in this lithology is predominantly categorized as shale. Shales
work, a fraction of the difference may be influenced by are recognized for their intricate mineralogical composi-
factors related to horizontal stress computation or other tion, characterized by notable heterogeneity in terms of
parameters, such as Poisson’s ratio and Young’s modulus. composition, texture, and structure. Additionally, variabil-
ity in pore pressure distributions within shale formations ployed in this study enhances the response by considering
can further contribute to the observed response (Veytskin temperature deviations and their implications on forma-
et al., 2017). These factors, combined with the inherently tion compaction and lateral spreading.
soft nature of shale formations, render them highly sus-
As geothermal energy extraction and Carbon Capture and
ceptible to stress alterations. In contrast to other meth-
Storage (CCS) initiatives continue to expand, with tem-
ods, the Warpinski method incorporates the relationship
perature playing a pivotal role in both endeavors, incorpo-
between stress and strain, thereby significantly contribut-
rating thermal effect analysis into studies can offer signif-
ing to the calculation and enabling more accurate predic-
icant advantages.
tions of horizontal stress.

NOMENCLATURE
𝛼 = coefficient of linear thermal expansion (°C−1 )
𝑎 = Biot’s coefficient
𝐶 = empirical angular-linear coefficient
𝐸 = Young’s modulus (psi)
𝜀 ℎ = strain in minimum horizontal stress direction
𝜀 𝐻 = strain in maximum horizontal stress direction
PP = pore pressure (psi)
𝜎ℎ = minimum horizontal stress (psi)
𝜎𝐻 = maximum horizontal stress (psi)
𝜎ℎ′ = minimum horizontal effective stress (psi)
′ = maximum horizontal effective stress (psi)
𝜎𝐻
𝜎𝑉′ = vertical effective stress (psi)
𝜎 ′ = effective stress (psi)
𝑇 = temperature (°C)
𝑡 = time (h)
Fig. 8: Comparison of Horizontal Stress Prediction Methods:
Eaton (1969), Matthews (1967),Yoshida et al. (1996),Breckels 𝜈 = Poisson’s ratio
and Van Eekelen (1982), De Oliveira and Carrasco (2020), and
Warpinski method coupled with thermal effects. 𝑉 𝑝 = compressional wave (ft/us)
𝑉𝑠 = shear wave (ft/us)
5 CONCLUSIONS 𝑘 = bulk modulus (psi)
This study builds upon the model introduced by 𝜇 = shear or rigidity modulus (psi)
De Oliveira and Carrasco (2020) by incorporating ther-
𝜇 𝑝 = compressional slowness (us/ft)
mal effects into the prediction of horizontal stress. The
model accounts for uniform horizontal deformation, hori- 𝜇 𝑠 = shear slowness (us/ft)
zontal effective stresses, linear-elastic behavior, and con- 𝜌 = density (g/cm3 )
stant rock properties. The proposed methodology offers
a potential alternative for obtaining more accurate hor-
izontal stress predictions, thereby enhancing aspects of SUBSCRIPTS
wellbore stability analysis, addressing directional drilling 𝑑𝑦𝑛 = dynamic;
challenges, managing fracture initiation and propagation,
𝑒 = effective;
mitigating lost circulation events, minimizing formation
damage, and optimizing wellbore trajectory. ℎ = minimum;
The thermal effect integrated into the methodology em- 𝐻 = maximum;
𝑝 = pore; stress.(compiled from the work of k. terzaghi and aw skemp-
ton). Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-
𝑟 = rock; Geotechnical Engineering, 113(4):191–205.
𝑉 = vertical; 6. de Oliveira, A. S. S. (2017). Estimativa das tensões in situ
a partir do método de Warpinski. Universidade Estadual do
Norte Fluminense (UFF), Niterǿi.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 7. De Oliveira, A. S. S. and Carrasco, A. M. V. (2020). Uti-
lização do método de warpinski na estimativa das tensões
The author extends sincere gratitude to the Pontifical in situ. Technical report, Universidade Estadual do Norte
Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio) for the Fluminense (UFF), Rio de Janeiro.
unwavering support and resources provided throughout 8. Eaton, B. A. (1969). Fracture gradient prediction and its ap-
the course of this research endeavor. The academic mi- plication in oilfield operations. Journal of petroleum tech-
nology, 21(10):1353–1360.
lieu at PUC-Rio has played an integral role in facilitat-
9. Geertsma, J. (1957). The effect of fluid pressure decline on
ing the advancement of scholarly pursuits. The author volumetric changes of porous rocks. Transactions of the
wishes to express profound appreciation to the esteemed AIME, 210(01):331–340.
faculty members, dedicated staff, and fellow researchers 10. Lesage, M., Hall, P., Pearson, J. R., and Thiercelin, M. J.
at PUC-Rio for their invaluable guidance, encouragement, (1991). Pore-pressure and fracture-gradient predictions.
and scholarly discourse. The author would also like to ex- Journal of Petroleum Technology, 43(06):652–654.
tend gratitude to Allicia Sthel Santos de Oliveira for all 11. Li, S. and Purdy, C. (2010). Maximum horizontal stress and
the efforts providing data, support, and consultation. wellbore stability while drilling: Modeling and case study.
In SPE Latin America and Caribbean Petroleum Engineer-
This paper extends heartfelt dedication to the author’s ing Conference, pages SPE–139280. SPE.
spouse, Thaisa Duarte, and their newborn child, Bento 12. Lin, H., Kang, W.-H., Oh, J., and Canbulat, I. (2020). Esti-
Duarte, for their unwavering support and understanding mation of in-situ maximum horizontal principal stress mag-
nitudes from borehole breakout data using machine learn-
in managing the author’s career aspirations alongside nur- ing. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining
turing a loving family. Sciences, 126:104199.
This work owes its fruition to the exceptional infrastruc- 13. Matthews, W. (1967). How to predict formation pressure
and fracture gradient from electric and sonic logs. Oil and
ture, state-of-the-art facilities, and conducive academic Gas, 20:92–106.
environment fostered by PUC-Rio. The author is deeply
14. Meller, C., Bremer, J., Baur, S., Bergfeldt, T., Blum, P.,
indebted to the university for its pivotal contribution to this Canic, T., Eiche, E., Gaucher, E., Hagenmeyer, V., Heber-
endeavor. ling, F., et al. (2017). Integrated research as key to the de-
velopment of a sustainable geothermal energy technology.
The authors state that there are no financial conflicts of Energy Technology, 5(7):965–1006.
interest. 15. PETROBRAS, G.-R. . C. (2018). SIMULADOR DE ES-
TABILIDADE EM TEMPO REAL - SEST TR 2.0.
This paper constitutes a part of the master research related
to geomechanics of the first author, Matheus C. Duarte. 16. Serra de Souza, A. and F.O., L. F. (2015). R&d in reservoir
geomechanics in brazil: Perspectives and challenges. In Off-
shore Technology Conference Brasil, page D031S039R001.
OTC.
REFERENCES
17. Veytskin, Y. B., Tammina, V. K., Bobko, C. P., Hartley,
1. Almalikee, H. S. and Alnajm, F. M. (2019). Estimation of P. G., Clennell, M. B., Dewhurst, D. N., and Dagastine,
minimum and maximum horizontal stresses from well log, R. R. (2017). Micromechanical characterization of shales
a case study in rumaila oil field, iraq. American Journal of through nanoindentation and energy dispersive x-ray spec-
Geophysics, Geochemistry and Geosystems, 5(3):78–90. trometry. Geomechanics for Energy and the Environment,
9:21–35.
2. Aminu, M. D., Nabavi, S. A., Rochelle, C. A., and Manovic,
V. (2017). A review of developments in carbon dioxide stor- 18. Warpinski, N. R. (1989). Elastic and viscoelastic calcu-
age. Applied Energy, 208:1389–1419. lations of stresses in sedimentary basins. SPE Formation
Evaluation, 4(04):522–530.
3. Belyadi, H., Ebrahim, F., and Belyadi, F. (2016). Hy-
draulic fracturing in un conventional reservoirs. Belyadi, 19. Wu, Y. and Salehi, S. (2022). Wellbore/borehole stability
F. Ebrahim, F. Belyadi–Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. in shale formation. In Unconventional Shale Gas Develop-
ment, pages 125–154. Elsevier.
4. Breckels, I. and Van Eekelen, H. (1982). Relationship be-
tween horizontal stress and depth in sedimentary basins. 20. Yoshida, C., Ikeda, S., and Eaton, B. A. (1996). An inves-
Journal of Petroleum Technology, 34(09):2191–2199. tigative study of recent technologies used for prediction, de-
tection, and evaluation of abnormal formation pressure and
5. Clayton, C., STEINHAGEN, M., Steinhagen, H., Powrie, fracture pressure in north and south america. In IADC/SPE
W., Terzaghi, K., and Skempton, A. (1995). Terzaghi’s Asia Pacific Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibi-
theory of consolidation, and the discovery of effective tion?, pages SPE–36381. SPE.
21. Zhang, J., Fan, X., Huang, Z., Liu, Z., Fan, Z., and Liu,
L. (2023). In situ stress determination in isotropic and
anisotropic rocks and its application to a naturally fractured
reservoir. Geomechanics and Geophysics for Geo-Energy
and Geo-Resources, 9(1):51.
22. Zhang, J. J. (2019). Applied petroleum geomechanics, vol-
ume 1. Gulf Professional Publishing Houston, TX, USA.