About Biot

Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK

Maurice Biot I remember him well

Jan Geertsma
Edited by

Younane N. Abousleiman
The PoroMechanics Institute, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, USA

Alexander H.-D. Cheng

University of Mississippi, Oxford, Mississippi, USA

ABSTRACT: Biots theory of poroelasticity was highly useful for petroleum industry in the prediction of
mechanical responses of reservoir rocks, reservoir compaction and land subsidence due to production, structural
geology, wave propagation, and hydraulic fracturing. Although I have applied Biots theory since 1950s, he first
time I met him was in 1961 in the Bellaire Laboratory in Houston.

1 HOW I MET BIOT investigations to resolve geomechanical problems in

Since I joined Shell Oil Company in 1953, there
has never been a dull moment in my career. In the
course of my work, it happened that I was one of
the happy few who were chosen to take part in an
exchange arrangement between Shells Exploration &
Production research laboratories in the US and the
Netherlands.
Until the fifties, exploration and production
research concentrated primarily on geology, seismic
exploration and multiphase fluid flow through porous
media. The behavior of the reservoir rock, once put
in production, was considered as static. Gradually it
appeared that specific know-how of the mechanical
behavior of the solid part of the reservoir was also
frequently required. It is for this reason that my work
as well as the underlying more fundamental work of
Maurice Biot entered the scene. However, this general
oversight and resistance lasted until 2002, when Ian
Palmer, in a lecture on the geomechanics of hydro-
carbon reservoirs, dared to ask: Is this ugly duckling
becoming a swan? Maybe never, simply because an
oil/gas producing company is concerned with locat-
ing hydrocarbons and bringing them to the surface.
Subsurface solids, both in the form of an overbur-
den as well as in the reservoir rock, are merely too
expensive an item for a profit-driven company to be of
interest.
I was aware of Biots work, particularly his pub-
lications, in my early career. They formed a refer-
ence for my reporting of more practically oriented
oil and gas production.
In 1961/1962 I worked for one year in the Bellaire
Laboratory in Houston. It was in that laboratory that I
first met Maurice Biot. At the same time, another well-
known geologist by the name of King Hubbert worked
in the same laboratory. Today, everybody concerned
with the hydrocarbon reserves of the world cannot be
ignorant of the Hubberts principle.
Therefore, just by accident, I was around to see the
planning of the one and only original so-called beer
can experiment designed by Biot, which is still being
conducted in present-day college structural geology
lab. It served to explain the sliding of older rock forma-
tions over younger ones. In the laboratory environment
it required merely a flat plate and a beer can. Unopened,
the beer can placed on the inclined plate does not move
when the plate is raised to an angle, resisted by friction.
However, by opening the can and let the beer bubble
out, the can slides down the plate even at the slightest
angle. The gas pressure, relieved from the beer, elimi-
nates the friction. Although it is the only experimental
activity of Maurice as far as I know, the meaning of this
simple test should not be underestimated: it is the pore
pressure that plays a dominating role, both in geology
and in hydrocarbon production.
2 DETERMINATION OF OIL IN PLACE IN
COMPACTING RESERVOIRS
Long before my sabbatical year I became already
familiar with Biots theory of three-dimensional

3
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
consolidation (Biot, 1941). In the fifties, Shell pro- 2. Measure the relevant compaction properties of the
duced oil from a number of oil reservoirs around formation from core samples and extrapolate for
and below Lake Maracaibo. The operations suffered the subsidence. The formation is a sandstone the
from significant land subsidence. Our laboratory was rotliegendes.
asked to determine the compaction properties of the 3. Conduct in-situ measurement of surface displace-
formation. More specifically, the question was to mea- ments, and if possible, in-situ compaction.
sure the influence of pore compressibility on the
Methods 1 and 2 require laboratory activities, while
determination of the oil in place.
method 3 involves field measurements, which is much
Our approach was twofold. Firstly, core samples
more expensive. The first method based on theory
were subjected to high external (bulk) and internal
turned out to be highly successful in predicting the sur-
(pore) pressure in a high pressure vessel. Secondly,
face deformation pattern. In contrast, method 2 was a
the relationship between the measured pore volume
disappointment. As a consequence, method 3 had gen-
reduction and reservoir compaction had to be for-
erally replaced method 2 and became a continuous and
mulated. The latter brought Biots general theory of
steady source of work for the operating company.
consolidation into the picture. The only drawback
The theoretical prediction of the shape of the sub-
for the experimentalists was that the material proper-
sidence bowl by the first method followed from a
ties as introduced by Biot were formulated differently
relatively simple procedure. By using the so-called
from the ones measured in the laboratory environment.
nucleus-of-strain concept developed in the theory
Therefore we rebuild the theory in terms of individual
of thermoelasticity, the steady-state displacements at
compressibilities and porosity, readily available from
the surface of a homogeneous half space could be
the laboratory tests.
obtained by adding the displacements resulting from
To my surprise, the outcome caused some com-
individual nuclei of compaction (Geertsma and van
motion when it was presented at an SPE-meeting in
Opstal, 1973). In Groningen the overburden behaved
Los Angeles (Geertsma, 1957a). But a mechanical
indeed more or less as a homogeneous linearly
engineer of fame by the name of A. Lubinsky of the
deformable mass, presumably because the displace-
late Standard Oil Co. came to my rescue. Since
ments remained small. Because of the linear behavior,
that moment, my reputation was established and my
individual displacements caused by the nuclei were
approach appeared in a number of textbooks.
additive. In this method of calculation, the transient
In the course of time, the number of high pres-
theory of consolidation by Biot is avoided as only the
sure vessels like the one described above multiplied
final settled state is sought. Furthermore, the size of
like rabbits in our lab and served quite a number of
the nuclei can be chosen at will, depending on the
geomechanical investigations.
accuracy wanted.
In comparison, the subsidence interpreted from
the compaction data measured from core samples as
3 RESERVOIR COMPACTION AND LAND
described in method 2 turned out to be on average
SUBSIDENCE
three times higher than observed in the field. On the
other hand, the theoretically predicted surface using
These subjects form so to say two hands on one
the thermoelasticity approach agreed quite well with
belly. Depending on the depth of burial and the
the in-situ measurements with the help of radioactive
areal extent of the reservoir, reservoir compaction
bullet displacements in time. Apparently, drilled core
can cause land subsidence that is large enough to
samples brought to the surface and reloaded was a
be of concern. Poroelastic theory a la Biot pre-
softer material compared with the in-situ sandstone.
dicts the relationship. Basically, the recipe originates
Since the release of the nuclei of strain computer
from the theory of thermoelasticity, as there exists an
program, the operating company was very satisfied
analogy between poroelasticity and thermoelasticity
with our support. The shape of the subsidence bowl
(Geertsma, 1957b).
according to the computer program corresponded
We worked this theory out in detail after the dis-
almost exactly with the land survey data. This was a
covery of a large gas field in the northern part of
big setback for the laboratory, but a huge money saver
the Netherlandsthe Groningen gas field. By deal-
for the operating budget.
ing with a gas field, no benefit can be derived from a
However, one must be cautioned that whether this
compaction drive. On the other hand, land subsidence
rather small subsidence predicted by the linear theory
could create serious trouble for water production.
will hold for the long term reservoir response is still
The problem can be investigated from three differ-
a matter of investigation. The laboratory compaction
ent methods:
experiments in the laboratory showed a loading rate
1. Predict the shape of surface deformations based on dependent effect. Such an effect may show up in the
poroelasticity theory using aerial reservoir extent, field, although on a completely different time-scale.
reservoir pressure drop, and core compaction data. We need to be aware that the present-day effective

4
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
stress in the formation was built up for over millions
of years. In contrast, the hydrocarbon depletion time
is about 50 years. This implies in relative scale a fast
increase in effective vertical stress. In the laboratory
environment, loading rates are still much faster. In the
short time scale, loading rates had an influence on
compaction in the laboratory testing. Will we see a
similar effect in real time after production?
4 ELASTIC WAVE PROPAGATION IN
FLUID-SATURATED POROUS MEDIA
The first impression that comes to my mind related to
the above subject is my visit to Stresa in Italy, situ-
ated on the coast of the Lake Maggiore, in 1960. At
this location I presented a paper (Geertsma, 1961).
Because the static theory of linear elasticity of porous
media by Biot was at that moment already clear to
me, it was a small step to introduce the dynamics. Of
course by now the material properties were expressed
in terms of compressibilities and porosity, which were
more familiar to petroleum engineers. In this way it
became clear that the most used relationship at that
time between acoustic wave velocity and rock and
fluid properties, the so-called time-average equa-
tion, was misleading from a physical point of view,
although frequently good porosity information was
obtained in the field. But Biots equations (Biot, 1956a,
1956b) for the propagation of dilatational waves in
fluid-saturated porous solids turned out to be a better
base to read acoustic logs in terms of porosity and fluid
content.
Actually, two dilatational sound waves propagate
through the rock material, one through the solid skele-
ton, hindered by the fluid, and a second through the
fluid, dampened by the friction with the solid skeleton.
For dry sandstones, laboratory experiments showed
an almost linear relationship between reciprocal wave
velocity and porosity in the low frequency range. With
the presence of a liquid in the pores, however, Biots
theory gave a better prediction of laboratory experi-
ments. But in the in-situ conditions, the difference in
wave velocity between dry and liquid-saturated reser-
voir rock under effective stress is usually small. Under
the same field conditions, the signal for the second
dilatational wave is usually too weak for the acoustic
receiver to detect. Sadly it is only of academic interest.
At the time I presented my lecture in Stresa I did
not yet know Biot in person. But I was told that he had
a room in a hotel situated along the lake. Probably he
enjoyed a nice view on the lake. But the road between
hotel and lake was always very busy with tourists. This
generated a lot of noise, which was another acous-
tic problem. Fortunately, I occupied a room farther
away from the lake, and slept well without the acoustic
disturbance.
5
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
5 WELL STIMULATION BY HYDRAULIC
FRACTURING
In the sixties a number of mathematical models were
developed to predict length and width of fractures
forced into oil/gas producing formations by means of
hydraulic pressures generated in wells. Two types of
model were applied, viz. by assuming either an ellipti-
cal shape with a small minor axis, and a more realistic
modeling based on a wedge-like closing at the tip of
the fracture (Geertsma and Haafkens, 1979). The lat-
ter model was introduced by a Russian physicist by the
name of Barenblatt. The first model circumvents the
stress singularity at the tip by a clever mathematical
procedure due to Griffith. Although the Barenblatt-
type model also provides an almost elliptical fracture
shape, it results in a wider fracture. More interestingly
from a physical point of view, the Barenblatt model
predicts that the fracture tip runs ahead of the fractur-
ing fluid. Both laboratory tests and field observations
were able to confirm this behavior.
Maurice Biot and co-workers [1986] circumvented
the issue of the actual shape of the fracture at the tip
more or less. They introduced a calculation method
using Lagrangian equations in terms of generalized
coordinates such as fracture length and width at the
origin of the fracture. A shape function of the frac-
ture was introduced next and could be refined later, if
needed. This variational type of analysis was in prin-
ciple an analytical forerunner of what is now known
as finite analysis in numerical calculation procedures.
As such, Biots calculation procedure did help, but
merely to allow the use of strong non-Newtonian fluid
flow in the calculations. From a procedural point of
view, however, he introduced a forceful new method
of calculation.
Now for the bad news. All three types of hydraulic
fracture models assume equilibrium fractures. This
requires rather low injection rates or rather low pump-
ing pressures. I understand that presently far higher
pumping rates are applied in practice, presumably to
reduce the settling of propping particles and to save
costs. The fracture is no longer in equilibrium. Because
the shear-strength of the formation is surpassed, shear
failures at the fracture walls result and an unpredictable
fracture shape occurs with side branches. At this
moment I do not know if there is a recipe that predicts
the limits of applicability of equilibrium fractures.This
may be an interesting new research subject.
REFERENCES
Biot, M.A., General theory of three-dimensional consolida-
tion, J. Appl. Phys., 12, 155164, 1941.
Biot, M.A., Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a
fluid-saturated porous solid, part I: low frequency range,
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 28, 168178, 1956a.
Biot, M.A., Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid-
saturated porous solid, part II: higher frequency range,
J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 28, 179191, 1956b.
Biot, M.A., Thermoelasticity and irreversible thermody-
namics, J. Appl. Phys., 27, 240253, 1956c.
Biot, M.A., Masse, L. and Medlin, W.L., A two-dimensional
theory of fracture propagation, SPE Production Engi-
neering, Jan., 1730, 1986.
Biot, M.A. and Willis, D.G., The elastic coefficients of the
theory of consolidation, J. Appl. Mech., 24, 594601,
1957.
Geertsma, J., The effect of fluid pressure decline on volu-
metric changes of porous rocks, Petroleum Trans., AIME,
210, 331340, 1957a. (Original paper presented at AIME
Petroleum Branch Fall meeting in Los Angles, Oct. 1417,
1956.
Geertsma, J., A remark on the analogy between thermo-
elasticity and the elasticity of saturated porous media,
J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 6, 1316, 1957b.
Geertsma, J., Velocity interpretation the effect of rock bulk
compressibility, Soc. Pet. Eng. J., 1, 235246, 1961.
Geertsma, J., Problems of rock mechanics in petroleum
production engineering, Proc. 1st Cong. Int. Soc. Rock
Mech., Lisbon, Vol. 1, 585594, 1966.
Geertsma, J. and De Klerk, F., A rapid method of predicting
width and extent of hydraulic induced fractures, J. Pet.
Tech., 246, 15711581, 1969.
Geertsma, J. and Haafkens, R., A comparison of the theories
for predicting width and extent of vertical hydraulically
induced fractures, J. Energy Res. Tech., ASME, 101,
819, 1979.
Geertsma, J. and van Opstal, G., A numerical technique for
predicting subsidence above compacting reservoirs, based
on the nucleus of strain concept, Verhandelingen Kon.
Ned. Geol. Mijnbouwk, 28, 6378, 1973.
6
Copyright 2005 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK
6 ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Jan Geertsma was among the first to recognize the
importance of Biots work in petroleum engineer-
ing applications. His article on the compressibility of
reservoir rocks (Geertsma, 1957a) built a link between
Biots original work on three dimensional consoli-
dation (Biot, 1941) and petroleum applications and
clearly illustrated Biots coefficients from a physi-
cal point of view. The article was first presented
in 1956, which was before Biots excellent reinter-
pretation (Biot and Willis, 1957) of his own 1941
theory. Geertsma also pointed out the analogy between
thermoelasticity and poroelasticity (Geertsma, 1957),
although he was behind Biot (1956c) in this endeavor.
In a footnote of a 1966 article, Geertsma stated
(Biots work on the theory of the elasticity and vis-
coelasticity of fluid saturated porous solid) Here-
inafter termed poro-elasticity. Hence Geertsma
has been attributed as the first to coin the com-
monly used term poroelasticity. In the same arti-
cle, he explore the use of nuclei of strain for the
solution of land subsidence problems, and the pore
pressure effect on the expansion of the wall of a
hydraulic fracture, thus reducing its width by a small
amount. He is also the G behind the so-called
KGD (Kristianovitch-Geertsma-De Klerk) hydraulic
fracture model (Geertsma and De Klerk, 1969).
Jan Geertsma is retired and presently resides in the
Netherlands.