Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Shaly Sands
123
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
124
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Burial
Deposition
L.1
125
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Critical Porosity
We observe that the clastic sand-clay system is divided into
two distinct domains, separated by a critical porosity φc.
Above φc, the sediments are suspensions. Below φc , the
sediments are load-bearing.
L.1
126
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Critical Porosity
127
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L.2
The first thing to note is that the clean (clay free) materials
fall along a remarkably narrow trend. These range from
very low porosity, highly consolidated sandstones, to high
porosity loose sand.
(Data from Yin et al., 1988; Han et al., 1986. Compiled and
plotted by Marion, D., 1990, Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford
University.
128
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Critical “Mush”
L.3
129
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Velocity in rocks
M
VP =
ρ
ρ = (1− φ ) ρmineral + φρ fluid
The usual Voigt estimate of modulus
φ
φ=
φc
0 ≤ φ ≤ φc 0≤φ ≤1
130
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L.4
131
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
132
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
133
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Chalks
L.5
134
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L.6
135
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L.7
136
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Han’s Study on Phi-Clay in Sandstones
Vp = (5.6-2.1C) - 6.9φ
C=.05
.15
.35 .25
Vs = (3.5-1.9C) - 4.9φ
C=.05
.25 .15
.35
L.8
Han (1986) found the usual result: velocities tend to decrease with
porosity, but with a lot of scatter about the regressions when clay
is present (water saturated).
137
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
138
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Han’s empirical relations between ultrasonic Vp and Vs in km/s with porosity and clay
volume fractions.
Clean Sandstones (determined from 10 samples)
Water saturated
40 MPa Vp = 6.08 - 8.06φ Vs = 4.06 - 6.28φ
Shaly Sandstones (determined from 70 samples)
Water saturated
40 MPa Vp = 5.59 - 6.93φ - 2.18C Vs = 3.52 - 4.91φ - 1.89C
30 MPa Vp = 5.55 - 6.96φ - 2.18C Vs = 3.47 - 4.84φ - 1.87C
20 MPa Vp = 5.49 - 6.94φ - 2.17C Vs = 3.39 - 4.73φ - 1.81C
10 MPa Vp = 5.39 - 7.08φ - 2.13C Vs = 3.29 - 4.73φ - 1.74C
5 MPa Vp = 5.26 - 7.08φ - 2.02C Vs = 3.16 - 4.77φ - 1.64C
Dry
40 MPa Vp = 5.41 - 6.35φ - 2.87C Vs = 3.57 - 4.57φ - 1.83C
L.9
139
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L.12
Shaly Sands
mixes of sand
and kaolinite
observed
modeled
L.13
141
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
mixes of sand
and kaolinite
observed
modeled
L.14
142
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Dispersed sand-clay mixes tend to
form “V”-shape in various domains
L.15
143
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Dispersed
Amoco's Well in clay “V”-shape
the Hastings in nphi-rhob
Field (On-Shore Gulf Coast)
domain
Density vs. Neutron Porosity Poorly
Consolidated Shaly Sands
2.00
Laminar Clay
2.10 Model
2.20
rhob (g/cm 3)
2.30
2.60
2.70
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
L.18
nphi
144
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
4000
sandy leg
Vp
3500
3000
2500
shaley leg
2000
1500
1000
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Porosity
145
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
int
0.5 r po
e
at
w
To
0.4
nt
oi
rp
te
0.3
wa
G as Sd
φD
To
Sand
d s
an
0.2 A
e rS C
at
W
0.1 n
ea
Cl B Cl
Sh
t
Q Sh o
in
po
Po in t
Cl
y
L.19
φN
Dr
To
Schlumberger, 1989
146
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L.20
147
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
0%
10 3
5%
Permeability (mD)
10 2 10%
20%
15% 30%
10 1 65%
25% 40% 100%
50%
0 85%
10
0 MPa
10 MPa
-1
10 20 MPa
30 MPa
50 MPa 40 MPa % clay content by weight
10 - 2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
L.21
Porosity
148
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L.22
149
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L.23
150
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Velocity-porosity trend is non-unique and is determined
by the geologic process that controls porosity
Varied Velocity-Porosity Trends
6000
Gulf of Mexico (Han)
5000
Cementing
Trend
4000
Oseberg
Vp
3000
Troll
2000
1000
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5L.36
Porosity
Han’s large data set spans a large range of depths and
clearly shows the steep cementing trend, which would be
favorable for mapping velocity (or impedance) to porosity.
Other data sets from the Troll and Oseberg indicate much
shallower trends.
151
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Cementing vs. Sorting Trends
6000
Gulf of Mexico (Han)
5000
Cementing
Trend
4000
Oseberg
Vp
3000
Troll
Sorting
2000 Trend
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Porosity
The slope of the velocity-porosity trend is controlled by the
geologic process that controls variations in porosity. If
porosity is controlled by diagenesis and cementing, we
expect a steep slope – described well by a modified upper
bound. If it is controlled by sorting and clay content
(depositional) then we expect a shallower trend – described
well by a modified lower bound.
152
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
4 clean
cementing
trend
Vp
3
sorting
2 trend
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Porosity
L.36
153
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
6
shallow oil sand
deeper water sand
5
4 increasing
cement
Vp
3
poor sorting
Suspension
2 Line
1
• all zones converted to brine
• only clean sand, Vsh <.05
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Total Porosity
L.37
154
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
North Sea
Clean vs. Shaly Sands
6
2508-2545 m, vsh<.05
2508-2545 m, Vsh>.3
5 2701-2750 m, vsh<.05
2701-2750 m, Vsh>.3
4 increasing
cement
Vp
3
more clay
poor sorting
Suspension
2 Line
1
all zones
converted to brine
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Total Porosity
L.37
155
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
L39
Data Before (blue) and After (red) Cementing Data Before (blue) and After (red) Cementing
6000 6000
5000 5000
4000 4000
Vp
Vp
Cementing Trend
2000 2000
1000 1000
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Porosity Vs
156
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Decrease porosity 5% by Sorting
L39
Data Before (blue) and After (red) Sorting Data Before (blue) and After (red) Sorting
6000 6000
5000 5000
4000 4000
Vp
Sorting Trend
Vp
3000 3000
Sorting Trend
2000 2000
1000
1000
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Porosity Vs
157
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
2000
Shale Compaction
20 40 60
Porosity (%)
L.37
158
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
5500
5000
4500
4000
sandy leg
Vp
3500
3000 Sand
point
2500
shaley leg
2000 Sand
point
1500
1000
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Porosity
159
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
3000
P – Velocity
Shaley 50 MPa
Sand
Shale Clean Sand
2000
5 MPa
0 MPa
20 40 60
Porosity (%)
160
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Clean SST
Clayey Shale
161
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
GR
Reservoir quality
Diagenetic
Diagenetic Trend
Trend
Vp
Vp
Depositional
Depositional
Trend
Trend
Porosity
Porosity ( Density)
162
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Dvorkin’s Cement Model
Jack Dvorkin introduced a cement model that predicts the
bulk and shear moduli of dry sand when cement is deposited
at grain contacts. The model assumes that the cement is
elastic and its properties may differ from those of the grains.
It assumes that the starting framework of cemented sand is
a dense random pack of identical spherical grains with
porosity φ0 ≈ 0.36 , and the average number of contacts per
grain C = 9. Adding cement reduces porosity and increases
the effective elastic moduli of the aggregate. The effective
dry-rock bulk and shear moduli are (Dvorkin and Nur, 1996)
1 ) 3 3 )
K eff = C (1− φ 0 ) M c Sn µeff = K eff + C (1− φ 0 )µc Sτ
6 5 20
where
2
M c = ρ cVPc µC = ρ cVSc2
ρ c is the cement's density; and V and V are its P- and S-
Pc Sc
€
wave velocities. Parameters S n and S τ are proportional to
the normal and shear stiffness, respectively, of a cemented
two-grain combination.
€ They depend on the amount of the
contact cement and on the properties of the cement and the
grains. (see next page)
A Grain
B C
Contact
cement
R a a
Non-contact
cement Scheme 1 Scheme 2
163
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
€
€
164
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
A Grain
B C
Contact
Dvorkin’s cement
R a a
cement model
Non-contact
cement Scheme 1 Scheme 2
165
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
166
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Sand models can be used to “Diagnose” sands
167
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
1/3
C 2 1 – φ0 2 G 2
K HM = 2 2 P
18 π 1– ν
1/3
3C 2 1 – φ 0 2 G 2
G HM = 5 – 4ν 2 P
5 2–ν 2
2π 1 – ν
168
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Dvorkin’s Uncemented Sand Model
In order to find the effective moduli at a different porosity,
a heuristic modified Hashin-Strikman lower bound is used:
φ / φ0 1 – φ / φ 0 –1 4
K eff = + – G HM
4
K HM + G HM K + G HM 4 3
3 3
G eff = [G HM + HM
G
φ / φ0
9K HM + 8G HM
6 K HM + 2G HM
+
G
G + HM
1 – φ / φ0
9K HM + 8G HM ] –1
6 K HM + 2G HM
G 9K HM + 8G HM
– HM
6 K HM + 2G HM
169
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Dvorkin’s Uncemented Sand Model
This model connects two end members: one has zero
porosity and the modulus of the solid phase and the other
has high porosity and a pressure-dependent modulus as
given by the Hertz-Mindlin theory. This contact theory
allows one to describe the noticeable pressure dependence
normally observed in sands.
The high-porosity end member does not necessarily have to
be calculated from the Hertz-Mindlin theory. It can be
measured experimentally on high-porosity sands from a
given reservoir. Then, to estimate the moduli of sands of
different porosities, the modified Hashin-Strikman lower
bound formulas can be used where KHM and GHM are set at
the measured values. This method provides accurate
estimates for velocities in uncemented sands. In the figures
below the curves are from the theory.
170
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
171
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Well #1 Well #2
2.1
1.7
Depth (km)
Depth (km)
2.2
1.8
2.3
1.9 Marl
Limestone
2 3 40 80 120 2 3 4 40 80 120
A Vp (km/s) B GR C Vp (km/s) D GR
3
Well #2
2.5
Unconsolidated Well #1
Line
172
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
0.4mm 0.4mm
0.4mm 0.4mm
173
Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko
Shaly Sands
Thin-Section and SEM Analyses
Unconsolidated Cemented
(Facies IIb) (Facies IIa)
0.25 mm 0.25 mm
0.1 mm
0.1 mm
174