Resolving Carbonate Complexity

Mariam Ibrahim Al-Marzouqi

Sultan Budebes
Emad Sultan
Abu Dhabi Marine Operating Company
Abu Dhabi, UAE
Iain Bush
Gatwick, England
Roger Griffiths
Kais B.M. Gzara
Raghu Ramamoorthy
Abu Dhabi, UAE

Assessing basic rock properties using traditional logging suitesusually a straightforward process in sandstone reservoirsmay be difficult or impossible in carbonate
reservoirs. Also, when dealing with carbonates, determining optimal locations for
new wells from petrophysical analysis often becomes little more than a statistical
exercise. However, new tools, techniques and interpretation methodologies are
helping petrophysicists unravel the complexities posed by carbonate reservoirs.
Equipped with this information, operators are able to drill and produce these reservoirs while better managing uncertainty.

Alexis Husser
Sugar Land, Texas, USA
Ziad Jeha
Juergen Roth
Ahmadi, Kuwait
Bernard Montaron
Beijing, China
Srinivasa Rao Narhari
Sunil Kumar Singh
Kuwait Oil Company
Ahmadi, Kuwait
Xavier Poirier-Coutansais
Mabruk Oil Company
Tripoli, Libya
Oilfield Review Summer 2010: 22, no. 2.
Copyright 2010 Schlumberger.
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Lisa
Stewart, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA; and Joelle Fay,
Gatwick, England.
AIT, Carbonate Advisor, DeepLook-CS, EcoScope, ECS,
FCM, FMI, HRLA, Litho-Density, MD Sweep, Petrel, Q-Land,
Sonic Scanner and SpectroLith are marks of Schlumberger.

40

Oilfield Review

Characterizing and evaluating carbonate reservoirs from conventional logging data can be
daunting. Traditional approaches that work perfectly well for determining basic petrophysical
properties in siliciclasticssuch as porosity,
saturation, permeability and rock mechanical
propertiesmay yield inaccurate results in carbonates. In addition to the difficulties in evaluating rock properties, many carbonates have lateral
structural heterogeneities; rock properties vary
greatly across the field. Drilling to maximize production can thus become a statistical exercise:
Drill enough wells and some will be successful.
Experts estimate that 60% of the worlds oil
reserves, as well as vast quantities of natural gas,
lie in carbonate reservoirs. The rewards for deciphering these enigmatic formations are very
attractive. But to do so, petrophysicists and engineers who evaluate and produce hydrocarbons
from carbonates have learned that they must use
methods that differ substantially from those used
for sandstones. Fortunately, new tools are available that increase analysts reservoir understanding and decrease risks associated with field
development and reservoir management.
This article describes several recently introduced techniques, beginning at the drill bit and
extending to fieldwide seismic studies that strive
to clarify carbonate complexity. Included are
advances in logging-while-drilling (LWD) technology that help geologists overcome difficulties they
encounter evaluating carbonates when using conventional logging suites. We also review an integrated software workflow that addresses
characteristics unique to carbonates. In addition,
a seismic workflow method is presented that, combined with other data sources, identifies highquality reservoir sections by detecting fracture
corridors. Case studies from the Middle East demonstrate applications of these techniques.
The Problem with Carbonates
Carbonate sediments differ from siliciclastics in
nearly every aspect: origin, deposition, diagenesis, oil filling and evolution.1 Because abundant
examples exist in the literature describing these
differences, it might seem that carbonates are so
well understood that new techniques would provide only incremental assistance in their evaluation. However, the problems experienced by log
analysts evaluating carbonates still provide significant opportunities for the development of
new technologies and interpretation methods.
The problem is not that carbonates are poorly
understood; geologists and petrophysicists have
been studying and describing them since the
dawn of the oil industry. They have developed

Summer 2010

Mudstone

Wackestone

Packstone

Grainstone

Less than
10% grains

More than
10% grains

Grain supported

Lacks mud,
grain supported

Boundstone

Original
components
bound together

Crystalline

Depositional
texture not
recognizable

Mud supported
Contains mud, clay and fine silt-size carbonate
Original components not bound together during deposition
Depositional texture recognizable

Depositional
Depositional
aspects dominate.

Hybrid 1
Diagenetic
aspects
dominate.
Diagenetic
Enhanced
Reduced
Dissolution
Compaction
Replacement
Cementation
Recrystallization Replacement

Porosity
Size and shape
Vugs separate
Vugs touching

Hybrid 2
Diagenesis influences
brittle behavior.

Interskeletal
Intraskeletal
Stromatactis vugs
Constructed voids
Detrital infill

Interparticle
Intraparticle
Fenestral
Shelter or keystone
Reef

Hybrid 3
Depositional character
influences fractures.
Fracture

> Carbonate classification systems. The Dunham classification system (top), devised in 1964, is based on
rock texture and grain size. (Adapted from Akbar et al, 2000/2001, reference 1.) The Ahr classification
system (bottom), published in 2005, maps pore geometry and attempts to relate stratigraphy to field-level
permeability predictions. (Adapted from Ahr et al, reference 1.) Although these parameters are important
for characterizing carbonate rock properties, neither classification system adequately describes key
reservoir storage capacity or flow characteristics.

numerous classification systems that focus on

1. For more on carbonates and carbonate evaluation:
particular carbonate peculiarities, such as texAkbar M, Petricola M, Watfa M, Badri M, Charara M,
Boyd A, Cassell B, Nurmi R, Delhomme J-P, Grace M,
ture, pore size and internal rock structure
Kenyon B and Roestenburg J: Classic Interpretation
(above).2 These efforts, however, do not equate to
Problems: Evaluating Carbonates, Oilfield Review 7,
no. 1 (January 1995): 3857.
understanding specific reservoir rock properties
Akbar M, Vissapragada B, Alghamdi AH, Allen D, Herron M,
in a given well or field.
Carnegie A, Dutta D, Olesen J-R, Chourasiya RD, Logan D,
Stief D, Netherwood R, Russell SD and Saxena K:
Difficulties begin with quantifying basic in
A Snapshot of Carbonate Reservoir Evaluation,
situ mineral, fluid and textural properties using
Oilfield Review 12, no. 4 (Winter 2000/2001): 4260.
conventional logging tools. Petrophysicists use Ahr WM, Allen D, Boyd A, Bachman HN, Smithson T,
Clerke EA, Gzara KBM, Hassall JK, Murty CRK, Zubari H
these log data to characterize and identify quality
and Ramamoorthy R: Confronting the Carbonate
TSFigure
01
reservoir rocks and guide drillers to the best
proConundrum,
Oilfield Review 17, no. 1 (Spring 2005): 1829.
ducing zones. Because of the complexities of car- 2. For more on carbonate classification systems:
Scholle PA and Ulmer-Scholle DS: Carbonate
bonate reservoirs, evaluation programs often rely
Classification: Rocks and Sediments, in Scholle PA and
Ulmer-Scholle DS (eds): A Color Guide to the Petrography
on conventional coring to decipher heterogeneof Carbonate Rocks: Grains, Textures, Porosity, Diagenesis.
ities in rock properties. Coring provides lithology,
Tulsa: American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
AAPG Memoir 77 (2003): 283292.
qualitative and quantitative estimation of porosity

41

When the skeletal remains of biogenic carand permeability, and invaluable fracture information. Even when rock properties are quantified bonates stay where the organism lived, such as
for a particular well, measurement analogs coral or algal reefs, geologists refer to these accubeyond the near wellbore may not be valid at res- mulations as autochthonous.3 Lacking the interervoir scales because of the inherent heterogene- granular permeability of clastics, these structures
ity and diagenetic history of the carbonates within usually require additional internal connectivity
the field.
to be productive, most often in the form of natuPetrophysicists must overcome a number of ral fractures (above). In contrast, allochthonous
difficulties when evaluating carbonates. To begin carbonate deposits are composed of transported
with, carbonates differ from sandstones in that shells and skeletal remains or bioclastic fragthey often have some type of organic origin and are ments eroded from reworked deposits.
more susceptible to chemical and mechanical
Once the carbonate fragments come to rest,
reactions. They usually consist of skeletons and they eventually become cemented together, genshells of animals that settled near where they erally with calcite, in a process of lithification.
livedtypically in warm, shallow marine environ- Because these deposits can consist of finements. Those biological structures were built from grained particles or broken shell fragments, they
the calcium carbonate the animals extracted from may have clastic characteristics similar to those
seawater. The climatic conditions, the types of of sandstone. During lithification, the deposits
organisms and the manner in which they existed often undergo chemical and biological diagenein their ecosystem all contribute to the reservoir sis, which produces metastable compounds that
heterogeneity of carbonate structures.
are 02
susceptible to change (see Diagenesis and
TSFigure
By contrast, the particles that make up sand- Reservoir Quality, page 14). After deposition,
stone and mudstone deposits may travel thou- these rocks can become radically altered through
sands of kilometers to reach their final resting diagenesis, which can enhance hydrocarbon storplace. Their size, shape and sorting have much to age and production capacity (porogenesis) or
do with the energy of the depositional environ- destroy it (poronecrosis).
ment. Because carbonate sediments usually are
The most abundant carbonate form is calnot transported far from their source, these depo- cium carbonate, or calcite [CaCO3]. A less stable
sitional characteristics are not nearly as impor- polymorph, aragonite, has the same chemical
tant. And, although most carbonate reservoirs composition. Calcite is one of the more common
are biogenically sourced, deepwater carbonate minerals on Earth, accounting for 4% by weight
accumulations and precipitations that are not of of the Earths crust. Its chemical instability
biological origin have also been discovered. makes it susceptible to transformation into
These can cover wide expanses and also act as other mineral types.4 Siderite [FeCO3] can form
hydrocarbon traps.
when calcite is exposed to iron. Various other

42

20
Calculated density porosity, %

> Complexity of carbonates. The carbonate matrix often tends to be complex and is composed of
varying concentrations of limestone, dolomite and other minerals. Vuggy facies may make up a
significant portion of carbonate reserves. Wells with connectivity through vug-to-vug contact in
fracture networks generally are more prolific producers than wells with matrix permeability alone.
(Core slab photograph courtesy of the Whiting Petroleum Corporation, used with permission.)

carbonate varieties exist, each having characteristic physical properties that affect matrix density and texture. The two most common
carbonate reservoir rocks are limestone and
dolomite. Limestone refers to the sedimentary
rock form that contains calcite, although these
two terms are often used interchangeably.
Determining the correct lithologybe it limestone, dolomite or a combination of mineralsis
an important step in carbonate reservoir evaluation.5 Lithology establishes the matrix density, or
grain density, used for computing porosity from
density tools. It is also an input for other porosity
measurements, such as those from thermal and
epithermal neutron measurements. An accurate
porosity value is a crucial input for calculating
water and hydrocarbon saturations, determining
total fluid volumes and estimating reserves.

15

70% error

10

Limestone matrix
2.71 g/cm3

density = matrix
matrix

Dolomite matrix
2.85 g/cm3

bulk
fluid

density = density porosity

matrix = matrix density, or grain density
bulk = bulk density measurement
fluid = fluid density
> Matrix effects on density-porosity measurements.
Density porosity is computed using a value for
matrix density. If the input is unknown or incorrect, the density-porosity measurement error can
be substantial. For example, a 10% porosity
limestone has a bulk density of 2.539 g/cm3. If the
rock is dolomite, the porosity is 17% with that
same bulk density measurement. This 70% error
could be the difference between a commercial
well and abandonment.

Oilfield Review

Measuring Basic Properties

Porosity is a basic petrophysical measurement,
usually obtained from well logs. It is commonly
computed from bulk density data. Density porosity is sensitve to both the pore fluids and the
matrix, especially the matrix. There are several
methods available for computing porosity, and
these often are affected by the fluids in the rock
and the mineralogy. Depending on environmental conditions and operational constraints, integrating these measurements plays a role in
decoupling the effects of the matrix on the
porosity value.
Examples of porosity measurements include
those from lithology-dependent thermal neutron, lithology-independent neutron, acoustic,
thermal neutron capture spectroscopy and
nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) tools.
Neutron and NMR porosity tools are blind to the
presence of gas, and NMR measurements are
also blind to porosity filled with tar, bitumen,
microporosity-bound water and hydrates.
In contrast to the NMR and neutron tools, bulk
density tools respond to both fluid and lithology.
Density porosity ( density) is computed using two
fixed inputs, matrix density ( matrix) and fluid density ( fluid), and the bulk density measured by the
tool (previous page, bottom). The fluid density
used in calculating porosity is that of the fluid filling the pores of the formation, typically 1.0 g/cm3,
while the matrix density depends on the rock type.
The matrix density of limestone is 2.71 g/cm3, dolomite is 2.85 g/cm3, siderite is 3.89 g/cm3 and sandstone (quartz) is 2.65 g/cm3.
Uncertainty in lithology translates into large
errors in computed porosity. For instance, a 10%
porosity limestone formation has a measured bulk
density of 2.539 g/cm3. However, a dolomite matrix
could have the same measured bulk density but its
porosity would be 17%. If the rock type is not correctly identified, this significant discrepancy in
the computed porositya 70% errormight be
the difference between commercial viability and
the decision to abandon a well.
3. Vernon RH: A Practical Guide to Rock Microstructure.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
(2004): 3437.
4. There is disagreement on how dolomite forms in nature;
some scientists suggest that biogenic origins are the
primary source. For more on dolomite: Al-Awadi M,
Clark WJ, Moore WR, Herron M, Zhang T, Zhao W,
Hurley N, Kho D, Montaron B and Sadooni F: Dolomite:
Perspectives on a Perplexing Mineral, Oilfield Review 21,
no. 3 (Autumn 2009): 3245.
5. For more on difficulties with carbonate reservoir
evaluation: Ramamoorthy R, Boyd B, Neville TJ,
Seleznev N, Sun H, Flaum C and Ma J: A New
Workflow for Petrophysical and Textural Evaluation
of Carbonate Reservoirs, Petrophysics 51, no. 1
(February 2010): 1731.

Summer 2010

Anhydrite nodule

Pore-filling anhydrite

> Mineralogical effects. Anhydrite is just one of many minerals found within
carbonate reservoir rocks. The manner in which this mineral is dispersed may
affect fluid flow in the reservoir. It may also impact the porosity measurement.
In the case of anhydrite nodules, the porosity of the reservoir rocks tends to
be underestimated and fluid flow is not greatly affected (core photograph,
right). If the anhydrite is dispersed within the pore structure (micrograph, left),
the porosity measurement will be reduced, as will fluid flow. (Adapted from
Ramamoorthy et al, reference 5.)

The matrix may be a single mineral type but is ments and reservoir producibility is crucial for
often a mixture. Small concentrations of minerals, geologists who study carbonates. Core analysis
if unaccounted for, can introduce considerable often becomes a major factor in determining
error in the computed porosity. A common noncar- commerciality of a field. Logging data lack the
bonate mineral associated with limestone reser- fine resolution of core analysis, but they provide a
voirs, the evaporite anhydrite, has a bulk density of continuous record of petrophysical properties
2.98 g/cm3. Dispersed within the rock matrix, a such as porosity and lithology.
small percentage of anhydrite can significantly
increase the measured bulk density. When the Complexity, Texture and Relative Permeability
anhydrite is found in the form of nodules, the mea- Perhaps the most common lithology-determinasured porosity will be lower than the true value tion method from logging data uses the photobecause logging tools average the response from electric effect (PEF) measurement, which
both rock types (above). The formation may responds primarily to the minerals in the formaappear to be of poor quality, although the carbon- tion. This measurement is routinely acquired
ate portion may, in fact, have good porosity and using formation density devices, such as the
permeability but be masked by the anhydrites Litho-Density and LWD density tools.7 Although
effects on the measurement.6
useful in differentiating pairs of minerals among
Low-porosity carbonates with heavy minerals, sandstone, limestone, dolomite and anhydrite,
such as anhydrite, are emerging as major sources of additional measurements are required when
more
bypassed hydrocarbons. Understanding the manner
TSFigure
04than two minerals are present. Also, the
in which these minerals affect porosity measure- measurement is affected by barite in drilling-mud
systems, and borehole conditions such as thick
6. Ramamoorthy et al, reference 5.
mudcake and hole rugosity may render it useless.
7. The PEF is a log of photoelectric absorption (Pe) properties
A better method for solving complex litholoof the rock matrix that is acquired along with formation
density measurements. Common minerals encountered in
gies
and determining mineralogical concentraoil and gas wells have specific Pe values: sandstone (1.9),
tions,
which may vary widely across a field
dolomite (3.1), limestone (5.1) and anhydrite (5.0).
8. Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC),
depending upon the diagenetic history and fluids
formerly Japan National Oil Corporation (JNOC), and
percolating through the reservoir, is an elemental
Schlumberger collaborated on a research project to
develop LWD technology that reduces the need for
thermal neutron capture spectroscopy measuretraditional chemical sources. Designed around the
ment. For example, the ECS elemental capture
pulsed neutron generator (PNG), EcoScope service uses
technology that resulted from this collaboration. The
spectroscopy and the LWD EcoScope tools offer
PNG and the comprehensive suite of measurements in
this type of measurement.8 These tools measure
a single collar are key components of the EcoScope
service that deliver game-changing LWD technology.
the concentrations of specific elements that correspond to mineralogy. Various matrix properties

43

Resistivity
Rxo
Array 5

Bit Size
6

Depth, 6
ft
0

in.

16

Array 4

Caliper

Array 3

in.

Array 2

16

Gamma Ray
gAPI

Bulk Density
1.95

2.95

PEF
3

13

T 2 Distributions

Array Porosity
45

Array 1
100 0.1

g/cm3

15

Neutron Porosity

T 2 Log Mean

ms

ohm.m 1,000 45

15 0.3

6,000

X,000

X,050

> Pore size and geometry. Measurements from NMR logging tools are more
sensitive to pore size and geometry than are resistivity and other porosity
measurements. The gamma ray log (Track 1), resistivity logs (Track 2) and
porosity measurements (Track 3) are consistent throughout the interval shown.
The NMR data (Track 4) indicate a large increase in pore size above X,040 ft
that is not seen in the other measurements. (Adapted from Ramamoorthy et al,
reference5.)

Total porosity
Oil in place
Microporosity

0.5
microns

NMR T2
response

Porosity
below short
T2 cutoff

Mesoporosity

Macroporosity

5
microns
Porosity
above long
T2 cutoff

> NMR porosity partitioning. When NMR logging tools were introduced to
the oil industry, the T2 distributions were scaled as pore sizes. For a number
of reasons, this practice was abandoned. However, the concept works fairly
well for carbonates. Pore sizes are determined according to a range of T2
distributions, and then the porosity is partitioned into macro-, meso- and
microporosity based on these measurements. The longest T2 distributions
correspond to macroporosity, large pores and vugs. The shortest T2
distributions respond to microporosity. Oil migrating into water-filled rock
displaces water in macro- and mesopores first. Micropores generally remain
water filled.

44

can also be computed from the yields, including

grain density.9 Grain density represents an effective matrix density and varies according to the
elements present in the formation. It yields moreaccurate density porosity than when computed
using a fixed-value matrix density.
Texture and pore geometry are also important
properties for identifying reservoir-quality rock
because knowledge of correct mineralogy and
porosity measurement alone is not sufficient to
infer flow characteristics in carbonate reservoirs.
In fact, some experts believe that characterization of pore geometry is the most important component in carbonate evaluation.10 Complex pore
shapes and sizes often result from reservoir deposition and the ensuing processes of dissolution,
precipitation and recrystallization. Although
time-consuming, core analysis can reliably identify and quantify pore geometry. The standard
resistivity and porosity measurements of a triplecombo logging suite often do not respond to
changes in pore size and texture. NMR data, however, have been shown to identify changes in pore
size distribution not detectable by these conventional logs (left).
To better evaluate reservoir rock quality using
logging data, experts developed a technique for
characterizing carbonate pore geometry by partitioning the total porosity measurement into three
classes of pore spaces based on sizemicro(less than 0.5 microns), meso- (0.5 to 5 microns)
and macroporosity (larger than 5 microns). From
these partitions, reservoir quality and fluid-flow
properties are inferred.11 Partitioning of formation porosity by pore size uses specific ranges of
transverse relaxation times, T2, from NMR data.12
Core data are often used to refine T2 measurement ranges (left).
Another partitioning method maps relative
pore geometry into eight rock classes (next page,
bottom left).13 The resulting ternary diagram was
first developed through systematic analysis of
texture-sensitive borehole logs, which included
NMR data, borehole images, full-waveform acoustic logs and dielectric data.14 A similar ternary
diagram has been derived from mercury injection
capillary pressure (MICP) tests on core.
For macroporosity evaluation, geophysicists
have recently begun to use acoustic data, such as
those from the Sonic Scanner tool, to estimate
the fraction of vuggy porosity. One application of
these data is to fine-tune the cementation exponent, m, in Archies water saturation equation.
Vugs tend to increase the cementation exponent,
while large intergranular pores do not. Use of
macroporosity fractions from NMR data alone

Oilfield Review

can result in elevated estimates of m because the

measurement is based on pore size, not shape.
Combining vuggy porosity estimates from fullwaveform acoustic data improves log-derived
estimations of the m exponent.
NMR data are also used to compute permeability. The technique evolved from empirically
derived relationships, which work well in sandstones but are not always relevant in carbonates
because the pores may not be connected.
Relative permeabilities and fractional flow in
hydrocarbon zones may, however, be derived
from array resistivity log data when the well is
drilled with water-base mud.15 The invading mud
filtrate acts as an uncontrolled two-phase flow
experiment that can be analyzed in a manner
similar to relative permeability measurements
conducted on core.
This mud-filtrate invasion method not only
provides information about in situ fractional flow
and relative permeabilities, it also improves the
accuracy of formation resistivity measurements
and water saturation estimates. The processing
involves forward modeling based on relative

permeability parameterization, radial invasion

models, petrophysical models and tool response
to specific conditions. The inputs required for
computing water saturations using Archies equationformation water and bulk formation resistivitiesare more accurate when obtained using
this method, as are the ultimate computed fluid
volumes. Even so, log analysts have discovered
that Archies equation may not be as reliable for
characterizing fluids in carbonate reservoirs as it
is in sandstones.
Whats Wrong with Archie?
In 1942 Gus Archie laid the foundation for modern log interpretation by introducing a relationship linking water resistivity, formation porosity
and formation resistivity to fluid saturation
(right). Variables in the equationa, m and n
are empirically fit based on reservoir characteristics. In the absence of specific data they are
generally assumed to equal 1, 2 and 2, respectively.16 Assumptions in the formulamorphology of the pore space, connectivity of the pores
and wettability of the rockare best suited to

Carbonate Pore System Classes and Permeability

100%
macroporosity
Carbonate rocks with abundant
macroporosity
Well-connected pores (large
pore throats)
Carbonate rocks with intergranular
porosity (no macroporosity)
Permeability is controlled by
porosity and the volume of
Permeability, k, is controlled by
macroporosity (Vmacro).
porosity and the average pore
(grain) size.
k = 1.0 2 [Vmacro /(Vmeso + Vmicro )] 2
k = 0.35 2 ( T2LM ) 2
T2LM is the
logarithmic mean of
the T2 measurement.
100%
microporosity

100%
mesoporosity

> A ternary diagram based on pore size. Carbonate pore geometry and size are
inputs to this ternary diagram, which indicates reservoir quality. On the lower left
side of the triangle, permeability is a function of grain size. For the upper section,
permeability is controlled by the volume of macropores. On the lower right, the
permeability is a function of both grain and pore size.

9. For a thorough review of neutron capture spectroscopy:

Barson D, Christensen R, Decoster E, Grau J, Herron M,
Herron S, Guru UK, Jordn M, Maher TM, Rylander E
and White J: Spectroscopy: The Key to Rapid, Reliable
Petrophysical Answers, Oilfield Review 17, no. 2
(Summer 2005): 1433.
10. Archie GE: Classification of Carbonate Reservoir Rocks
and Petrophysical Considerations, AAPG Bulletin 36,
no. 2 (1952): 278298.
11. Hassall JK, Ferraris P, Al-Raisi M, Hurley JF, Boyd A and
Allen DF: Comparison of Permeability Predictors from
NMR, Formation Image and Other Logs in a Carbonate
Reservoir, paper SPE 88683, presented at the Abu Dhabi

Summer 2010

International Petroleum Conference and Exhibition,

Abu Dhabi, UAE, October 1013, 2004.
12. In NMR logging, transverse relaxation time, T2 , results
from interactions of hydrogen atoms with their
surroundings, including effects of bulk fluids, pore
surfaces and diffusion in magnetic field gradients.
Short T2 times correspond to small pores, and longer
T2 times correspond to larger pores.
13. Hassall et al, reference 11.
14. Ramamoorthy et al, reference 5.
15. For more on this technique: Ramakrishnan TS,
Al-Khalifa J, Al-Waheed HH and Cao Minh C:
Producibility Estimation from Array-Induction Logs

100

Water Saturation

Water Saturation

n = 2,
m = 2.3 to 1.7

m = 2,
n = 2.5 to 1.0

0 100

Sw = n a R w
m R t
S w = Archies water saturation
R w = resistivity of formation water
R t = true formation resistivity
= porosity
a = formation-factor multiplier
m = cementation exponent
n = saturation exponent
> Archies water saturation equation (bottom).
Porosity and Rt are log-derived measurements.
Rw is either derived from water salinity or
measured from produced water and converted to
downhole temperature. Variables a, m and n are
empirically fit based on reservoir characteristics.
They are assumed equal to 1, 2 and 2, respectively,
in the absence of specific data. A sensitivity
analysis (top) demonstrates the effects of varying
m and n on computed water saturation. First, n
is set to 2 and m is varied from 2.3 to 1.7 (Track
1). Next, m is fixed and n is varied from 2.5 to 1.0
(Track 2). The baseline water saturation curve
using default inputs for m = n = 2 is presented in
both tracks (red curve). (Adapted from Griffiths et
al, reference 17.)

and ComparisonTSFigure
with MeasurementsA
06A Case Study,
Transactions of the SPWLA 38th Annual Logging
Symposium, Houston, June 1518, 1997, paper X.
16. The a constant, a tortuosity or consolidation factor,
was not in Archies original equation but was added
later as a means of correcting for saturation in known
water-filled reservoir rocks. For more on this subject:
Archie GE: The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in
Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics,
Petroleum Transactions of AIME 146 (1942): 5462.
Winsauer WO, Shearin HM, Masson PH and Williams M:
Resistivity of Brine Saturated Sands in Relation to Pore
Geometry, AAPG Bulletin 36, no. 2 (1952): 253277.

45

Micropores
Macropores

Mesopores

Water-filled vug

Path of least resistance

> Carbonate reservoir filling and resistivity measurements. Water (blue) originally fills the pore spaces of carbonate
reservoirs (left). As oil (green) migrates into the rock, large pores fill first. If there is no connectivity, some pores may remain
water filled (center). Because resistivity tools measure through a path of least resistance (red line), the current may bypass
oil-filled pores (right), which will increase the measured resistivity. Thus the resistivity values may be substantially lower
than expected and not be representative of the true bulk resistivity.

siliciclastic rocks.17 Although most water saturation methods utilize some form of Archies equation, it is generally recognized that there are
problems with this approach when applied to
carbonates. Even Gus Archie stated that he
doubted the applicability of his equation in carbonate evaluation.18
In addition, the complex nature of carbonates
makes determination of the a, m and n variables
difficult, and these values may change rapidly
throughout the reservoir.19 Other problems with
using Archies saturation equation in carbonates
include matrix complexity, pore size heterogeneity, pore shape and distribution, variability in formation water salinity and uncertainty in the true
formation resistivity measurement.

Sandstone = 4.3

The process of filling the reservoir creates

some of the difficulties encountered when using
Archies water saturation equation: Water fills
the pores initially and then hydrocarbons enter,
charging the complex carbonate structure. The
macropores fill first, because they have the lowest capillary entry pressure. A proportion of the
mesopores fill next and, because of capillary
pressure, micropores may remain water filled. As
a result of the basic nature of carbonate grain
surfaces, there is an affinity for crude oil, which
typically contains acidic components. Hence, the
pores that fill with oil may become oil wet, while
micropores that never fill with oil remain water
wet. This results in a mixed-wettability rock.
Moved by natural or injected water sweeping
through producing fields or by filtrate during
drilling, reservoir fluids are displaced in the largest pores first. Because of the altered wettability

Dolomite = 4.7

Lithology

Calcite = 7.1
Clays

Anhydrite = 12
, cu
Fluid

10

15

Gas

20
Oil

Sw =

25

30

Fresh water

35

40

45

50

Increasing salinity

( bulk grain) ( grain HC )

TSFigure 08
( water HC )

S w = formation water saturation

= formation porosity
bulk = measured formation capture cross section
water = capture cross section of the water
grain = formation grain capture cross section
HC = hydrocarbon capture cross section
> Sigma equation for water saturation. Standard values for the matrix sigma, grain, are shown (top),
although the measurement can be refined with spectroscopy data. Values for water can be calculated
using fluid salinity, computed from log responses or directly measured from produced water samples.
This equation (bottom) provides a water saturation value that is not based on resistivity measurements.

46

in the rock, these pores present the least resistance to the ingress of the fluids. Fluid capillary
effects and differences between the original
charging pressure and reservoir pressure during
production may result in some of the mesopores
remaining oil filled even as the macro- and micropores are water filled. This creates a complex
fluid distribution inside the pore network. Thus,
Archie parameters are different for the invaded
rock of the near-wellbore area than for the uninvaded zones of the same rock (above).
The complex wettability of carbonates makes
use of Archies saturation equation problematic
as well. Unlike sandstone reservoirs that are usually strongly water wet, most carbonate reservoir
rocks have some degree of moderate oil-wet character. Preferentially oil-wet surfaces, located on
the walls of meso- and macropores, have been in
contact with oil. This reduces the connectivity of
the water phase in the porous rock and contributes to an increase in the resistivity compared
with the value predicted by Archies equation.
On the other hand, micritic grainstightly
packed micron-size calcite crystals with submicron poresare fully water saturated and
water wet and dramatically enhance the connectivity of water in the medium. The effect of
micrite counteracts the effect of oil-wetness on
the rocks electrical properties. Carbonate rocks
with a large volume fraction of micrite may have
a resistivity similar to that of shaly sandstone
rocks. Carbonate rocks with little or no micritic
content, such as dolomite, may have a pronounced opposite response typical of oil-wet
rocks. These resistivity behaviors can be modeled
by the connectivity equation.20
In Archies saturation equation, the term for
formation water, Rw, assumes a simple fluid distribution with a single value of formation water resistivity. Complex fluid distributions, such as mixed
filtrate or injection waters, are a departure from

Oilfield Review

the model. The true resistivity in the reservoir, Rt,

can be difficult to measure as well. Water-filled
microporosity and mesoporosity provide paths of
lower resistance for the sensor current. Thus the
average bulk resistivity measured in the formation
is significantly lower than that in rocks with identical porosity and fluid saturations but with unimodal pore-throat or pore-body size distributions.
These occurrences, referred to as low-resistivity
pay formations, have led to underestimated hydrocarbon reserves and bypassed hydrocarbons.
For these and other reasons, Archies saturation equation is unlikely to be accurate for carbonates without making empirical adjustments
to the input variables. An alternative to Archies
equation derives saturation from the macroscopic thermal neutron capture cross section
measurement, or sigma (, measured in capture
units, cu), which has been used for cased hole
evaluation for many years. A pulsed-neutron generator (PNG) emits high-energy neutrons that
interact with the nuclei of the elements present
in the surrounding formation. Of the elements
generally found in the reservoir, chloride ions
[Cl], primarily found in salt water, have the
greatest neutron capture capacity, also referred
to as capture cross section. The rate of neutron
capture is predominately a function of chloride
concentration, which can be related to the volume and salinity of the formation water.
Hydrocarbons have a low capture capacity, and as
long as there is sufficient salinity in the formation water to produce a usable sigma contrast
between hydrocarbons and water, sigma can be
used to compute water saturation.
Inputs for computing water saturation using
sigma are porosity and macroscopic capture cross
section for formation matrix ( grain), formation
water ( water), expected hydrocarbons in place
( HC) and the sigma measured by the tool ( bulk)
(previous page, bottom). If the lithology is known,
matrix sigma can be input as a constant, or it can
be derived from the elemental thermal neutron
capture spectroscopy measurement in a manner
similar to determining grain density for porosity
calculations. The value of water can be measured
directly, estimated from downhole measurements
or calculated from the salinity of produced samples. Finally, HC, a constant used in the saturation equation for the hydrocarbon type, is derived
from expected fluid properties at downhole temperature and pressure.
The depth of investigation of the sigma
measurement is quite shallow compared with
that of resistivity measurements. Thus the ability
to characterize the uninvaded portion of the reservoir may be significantly hindered because

Summer 2010

Phase resistivity

Attenuation resistivity

Sigma, sourceless neutron

porosity, spectroscopy and
neutron-gamma density
Azimuthal density
and PEF

> EcoScope LWD tool. The EcoScope tool incorporates resistivity, neutron
porosity, sigma and neutron capture spectroscopy sensors into a single
compact device. Wireline and LWD tools generally use chemical sources for
neutron porosity and neutron capture spectroscopy measurements. The
EcoScope tool generates neutrons with a pulsed-neutron generator that
operates only when mud is being pumped through the tool.

mud filtrate invades the near-wellbore zone dur- factors as drilling rate of penetration (ROP), foring the drilling process. The sigma measurement mation porosity, formation permeability, mud
may respond primarily to the filtrate. As a conse- properties, mud pressure overbalance and the
quence, wireline sigma measurements acquired elapsed time between the first drilling in the forin open hole have not proved useful for evaluat- mation and the time of acquiring the sigma meaing water saturation in the virgin zone. One surement, the invaded zone may not extend into
exception to this occurs when the invaded and the region of the measurements depth of investiuninvaded zones remain similar, such as when gation. Acquiring data close behind the drill bit
drilling in oil-bearing formations at irreducible and prior to invasion overcomes many of the limiwater saturation with oil-base mud. In this case tations of sigma acquisition using wireline meththe time of the measurement does not matter, but ods. This capability has been available for several
the assertion that the formation is at irreducible years with the EcoScope tool, a multifunction
LWD service that combines resistivity sensors
water saturation must be validated.
Cased hole sigma logs have provedTSFigure
more with10a PNG for sigma and sourceless thermal neubeneficial than openhole logs because they are tron porosity logging (above). The EcoScope tool
acquired after the filtrate has dissipated. Even
17. Griffiths R, Carnegie A, Gyllensten A, Ribeiro MT,
so, the measurement may be degraded by the
Prasodjo A and Sallam Y: Evaluation of Low Resistivity
Pay in CarbonatesA Breakthrough, Transactions of
effects of casing, cement and residual fluids. This
the SPWLA 47th Annual Logging Symposium, Veracruz,
has led to differences between saturations meaMexico, June 47, 2006, paper E.
sured with cased hole tools and those derived 18. Griffiths et al, reference 17.
19. Griffiths et al, reference 17.
from openhole logs.
more on wettability and carbonates, especially
An alternative to openhole and cased hole 20. For
modeling of resistivity: Montaron B: Connectivity
sigma measurements from wireline tools is sigma
TheoryA New Approach to Modeling Non-Archie
Rocks, Transactions of the SPWLA 49th Annual Logging
measured using an LWD tool. Depending on such
Symposium, Edinburgh, Scotland, May 2528, 2008,
paper GGGG.

47

is considered sourceless because once power

which is generated from mud flowing through the
toolis no longer applied to the PNG, it ceases to
emit neutrons. Conversely, chemical sources are
always on.
The neutron output from the PNG also makes
thermal neutron capture spectroscopy measurements possible. Similar to the measurements
from the wireline ECS tool, the EcoScope spectrometry service delivers elemental yields of silicon [Si], calcium [Ca], iron [Fe], sulfur [S],

Standard SpectroLith
Processing

titanium [Ti], gadolinium [Gd], potassium [K],

hydrogen [H] and chlorine [Cl]. Although the
EcoScope tool was not able to differentiate limestone from dolomite in the past, the tool response
was recently recharacterized to include a magnesium [Mg] measurement (below). The ability to
measure Mg is fundamental for distinguishing
dolomite from limestone. In barite-weighted mud
systems, this becomes a crucial measurement for
determining formation lithology because the PEF

Calcite-Dolomite
from PEF

Calcite-Dolomite from
Enhanced Spectroscopy

Dolomite

Dolomite

Quartz-Feldspar-Mica

Calcite

Calcite

Clay

Anhydrite

Anhydrite

Anhydrite-Gypsum

Quartz

Quartz

Pyrite

Bound Water

Bound Water

Carbonate

Illite

Illite

> Refining lithology determination. Standard SpectroLith processing (left)

cannot distinguish calcite from dolomite in the absence of a PEF or
magnesium measurement and assumes that all calcium is associated with
calcite. When lithology is computed using the PEF measurement from a
Litho-Density tool, the software is able to distinguish dolomite from calcite
(center), but the PEF measurement can be affected by barite in the drilling
fluids and by hole conditions. The excessive anhydrite shown in the center
track is attributed to these effects. If more than two minerals are present,
the PEF measurement is less accurate. Spectroscopy that includes a
magnesium measurement (right) distinguishes dolomite from calcite and is
not affected by hole conditions and fluid properties. Other minerals can be
accurately quantified as well.

48

Oilfield Review
Autumn 10
CleanPhase Fig. 11
ORAUT10-CLNPSE Fig. 11

measurement from a Litho-Density tool is rendered unusable by the effects of the barite. In
complex mineralogy the spectroscopy measurement helps identify mineral constituents and provides an effective matrix density, or grain density,
for more-accurate density-porosity computations.
Complex Middle East Carbonate
Recently the EcoScope tool was run in an offshore
Abu Dhabi carbonate field.21 Production from this
field began in 1968 from Lower Cretaceous, Upper
Jurassic, Upper Permian and Lower Triassic formations. In 2006 Total decided to drill and develop
the Late Triassic (Gulailah) and Lower Jurassic
(Hamlah) Formations, which had not been previously produced.
The Hamlah reservoir is 50 m [164 ft] thick
and comprises two intervals separated by shale.
The lower interval is a micro- to very fine-grained
crystalline dolomite interbedded with limestone
streaks. The upper interval grades between limestone, wackestone to packstone, with some grainstone and dolomite. Porosity ranges from 6% to
8%, and permeability ranges from very low to low.
The Gulailah reservoir is 250 m [820 ft] thick,
with alternating dolomitic and anhydritic beds.
The dolomites are sucrosic to finely crystalline,
anhydritic and occasionally argillaceous. Porosity
ranges from 8% to 13% and permeability is low to
very low.
Deviated wells were drilled using 1.35-g/cm3
[11.3-lbm/galUS] barite-weighted mud systems.
This barite significantly degraded the PEF measurement. The EcoScope tools spectroscopy
measurement was able to accurately distinguish
calcite from dolomite and provide the matrix
grain density.
Another common complication encountered in
evaluating deviated wellsespecially in carbonatesis resistivity anomalies caused by shoulderbed effects. These arise when the measurement
volume includes regions with large conductivity
contrasts. Electromagnetic averaging and charge
buildup along the interface between layers result
in polarization horns, seen as anomalous spikes in
the resistivity data (next page).22
Although shoulder-bed effects are generally
small in vertical wells, for deviated and horizontal wells these effects may be prominent in long
intervals as wells approach, intersect and depart
from layer boundaries. Resistivities affected by
shoulder beds can produce misleadingly high
hydrocarbon saturations when calculated using
Archies saturation equation.

Oilfield Review

1 ohm.m

1 ohm.m

50 ohm.m
50 ohm.m

Resistivity, ohm.m

1,000

100

10

1
1 ohm.m
5,000

5,010

50 ohm.m
5,020
Distance from boundary, ft

5,030

5,040

1,000
1 ohm.m

50 ohm.m

Sigma, cu

100

10

1
5,000

5,010

5,020
Distance from boundary, ft

5,030

5,040

> Shoulder-bed effects on LWD resistivity measurements. Averaging of resistivity measurements affects the output at
bed boundaries. In wells drilled nearly perpendicular to the layering (top left), these effects tend to be localized as
the tool crosses a resistivity interface. Horizontal wells may cross multiple zones with large resistivity contrasts (top
right). In this situation, charges accumulate at the interface and induce a polarization horn, or spikeswhich are
dependent on the depth of investigationthat are not representative of the actual resistivity (middle). If not
accounted for during interpretation, the elevated resistivities produce misleadingly high hydrocarbon saturations
using Archies saturation equation. The sigma measurement (bottom) does not suffer from the polarization effect,
permitting a more accurate evaluation of the hydrocarbon saturation in high-angle wells.

The superiority of sigma-based saturation

measurements over conventional methods is
compromised in the presence of significant mudfiltrate invasion. Resistivity-response modeling
has shown that invasion less than 5 cm [2 in.] has

Summer 2010

negligible effects on the sigma measurement.

Generally, because the measurement is taken so
close to the bit, the formation does not have time
to become significantly invaded before the
EcoScope tool acquires
data. The
TSFigure
12 tools resistivity
sensor array, collocated with the sigma measure-

ment, can determine the degree of invasion in

the area sampled.
21. Griffiths R and Poirier-Coutansais X: Complex
Carbonate Reservoir EvaluationA Logging While
Drilling Field Example, paper AA, presented at the
SPWLA Regional Symposium, Abu Dhabi, UAE,
April 1618, 2007.
22. Griffiths and Poirier-Coutansais, reference 21.

49

Resistivity
40-in. Blended LWD Tool
40-in. 2-MHz Phase Shift

Neutron Porosity
50

28-in. 2-MHz Phase Shift 50

16-in. 2-MHz Phase Shift
0.2

ohm.m

Clay-Bound Water
Irreducible Water
Free Water

Matrix-Adjusted Porosity

2,000 50

Density Porosity
%

Total Porosity
%

250-ppt Salinity
a = 1, m = n = 2

SpectroLith Apparent Salinity

0 400

ppt

Sigma Apparent Salinity

0 400

ppt

Water Saturation
(Sigma)

150-ppt Salinity
a = 1, m = n = 2
SpectroLith Apparent Salinity

100

4 100

0 400

Clay-Bound Water
Irreducible Water
Free Water
Water Saturation
(Sigma)
100

4 100

ppt
4
Water Saturation 400
Water Saturation
(Archie)
(Archie)
Sigma Apparent Salinity
ppt

> Improved Archies equation and sigma saturation measurements. Apparent formation salinity is computed assuming the
formation is 100% water saturated (Tracks 3 and 5, green curves). Apparent salinity from the spectroscopy chlorine/hydrogen
(Cl/H) ratio measurement (Tracks 3 and 5, blue curve) is presented for comparison. Archie saturation is calculated using n and m
exponents set to 2 and an Rw based on the assumed salinity corrected for downhole conditions (Tracks 4 and 6, blue curve).
Sigma-based saturations (red curve) are computed using two different water salinities: 250 and 150 parts per thousand (ppt).
The red lines in Tracks 3 and 5 indicate the salinity input used for each analysis. The analysis using 250-ppt salinity water
(Tracks 3 and 4), which was the original assumption, exhibits a large separation between the two saturation solutions. Also, the
SpectroLith apparent salinity (blue curve) does not match the salinity used in the analysis (red line). For the 150-ppt salinity
analysis (Tracks 5 and 6), the SpectroLith apparent-salinity curve (blue) tracks the salinity value used in the analysis (red line),
and both saturation methods are in much closer agreement (Track 6). This simultaneous solution yields a more reliable saturation
measurement and a more reasonable choice for formation-fluid salinity. Note the lack of separation between deep and shallow
resistivities (Track 1) indicating shallow invasion and acceptable sigma measurement. Neutron and density porosities, adjusted
for matrix lithology from spectroscopy data, are also presented (Track 2). (Adapted from Griffiths and Poirier-Coutansais,
reference 21.)

In the Total well, the preinvasion sigma from

the EcoScope tool provided a valid water saturation measurement independent of formation
resistivity. As an added benefit, petrophysicists
were able to determine appropriate inputs to
Archies water saturation equation to match the
sigma-based measurement. Because carbonate
reservoirs often have unknown Rw values, simultaneously solving for water salinity provided a
realistic Rw and water output that satisfied both
equations (above).
Sum Greater than Parts
The EcoScope approach provides answers about
fluid saturations in carbonates, but a preinvasion
sigma measurement is often unavailable.
Recognizing the challenges in carbonate

50

evaluation, Schlumberger scientists devised a

workflow for petrophysical and textural evaluaReview
tion that Oilfield
integrates
standard wireline logging
suites withAutumn
recently10introduced measurements.
CleanPhase Fig. 13
Several independent
research efforts
ORAUT10-CLNPSE
Fig. 13focusing on
discrete aspects of carbonate evaluation are combined using this systematic methodology. The
workflow evolved into the Carbonate Advisor software program (next page, top left). Each step in
the workflow provides a piece of the puzzle and
facilitates subsequent steps.
Petrophysicists applied this methodology to a
Cretaceous Middle East carbonate well that had
a comprehensive suite of wireline logs. The logging program included array resistivity (both
induction and laterolog), gamma ray, density,
thermal and epithermal neutron, NMR, full-wave-

form acoustic, neutron capture spectroscopy and

microresistivity imaging tools.
The analysis hierarchy began with lithology
and mineralogy determinations from fluid- and
matrix-sensitive data, including NMR information, density and neutron porosity logs, PEF logs
and neutron capture spectroscopy data. The petrophysicist can emphasize the importance of a
particular measurement based on its relevance
and the borehole environment to obtain a simultaneous solution that includes input from all
measurements.23 In this case the mineralogy consists predominantly of calcite with small amounts
of dolomite. Siliciclastic material and anhydrite
were also observed (next page, top right).
Elemental thermal neutron capture spectroscopy data quantified the dolomite, anhydrite,

Oilfield Review

Input Data

Outputs

Density, PEF, neutron,

NMR, spectroscopy

Lithology, porosity,
fluid type

NMR, borehole images,

acoustic data

Porosity partitioning

Dolomite

Formation testers

Calcite
Anhydrite
Quartz

Petrophysical
rock types
NMR pore size
transforms

Capillary pressures

Resistivity, sigma,
dielectrics, 3D NMR data

Fluid saturations

Array resistivities,
formation tester data

Fractional flow

Bound Water

Calcite

Porosity Correction

Anhydrite

Illite

Integrated carbonate
evaluation

Permeability

Dolomite

> Integrated carbonate solution. This flowchart shows the workflow sequence
for analyzing carbonate reservoirs using Carbonate Advisor software.

Microporosity
Mesoporosity

T 2 Distributions
T 2 Cutoff Long
0.5

Depth,
ft
0.5

ms

Total Porosity
50,000 50

T 2 Cutoff Short
ms

Free Fluid, NMR

Macroporosity

30

Computed Permeability
0 0.1

Core Microporosity
50,000 50

mD

10,000 30

Core Permeability
0 0.1

mD

10,000 30

Macroporosity Cutoff
%

Core Macroporosity
%

X,500

X,600

TSFigure 14

> Porosity partitioning of NMR data. The distribution of T2 transverse relaxation time data (Track 1) from
the NMR tool is partitioned based on cutoffs that can be refined from core analysis. In this example
volumes computed from distributions to the left of the red line (Track 1) represent microporosity, which
correspond to the blue shaded volume in Track 2. Microporosity measurements from core are plotted
along with the microporosity volume for confirmation. The area between the red and blue lines in Track 1
is mesoporosity, corresponding to the green shading in Track 2. The macroporosity (red shading) is
associated with remaining porosity (Track 1, right of the blue line). Permeability from core data is
plotted with permeability computed from NMR data (Track 3). The free-fluid volume computed from
NMR data can be similarly partitioned (Track 4). Fluid volume to the right of the cutoff (blue line) is
associated with mesoporosity, and the volume to the left is macroporosity. Core data points agree with
computed data. (Adapted from Ramamoorthy et al, reference 5.)

Summer 2010

> Lithology defined by the ECS tool. The

measurement principle for neutron capture
spectroscopy is the same for both the ECS and
the EcoScope tools; the difference is the neutron
source. The ECS sonde has a chemical source
and the EcoScope tool uses a pulsed-neutron
generator with a higher neutron output.
Traditional methods for determining lithology use
PEF data from a Litho-Density tool (left). This
method is best suited for two-mineral models. By
adding elemental yield data from the ECS tool
(right), the lithology can be refined, providing a
more accurate density-porosity measurement
because the grain density reflects the true
mineralogy. The porosity difference between
using a fixed limestone matrix density value and
an effective grain density computed from ECS
mineralogy is presented (Track 2, orange
shading). (Adapted with permission of the
SPWLA from Ramamoorthy et al, reference 5.)

quartz and clay (illite) volumes to generate an

Oilfielddensity,
Reviewallowing an accurate
effective grain
10
porosity toAutumn
be obtained.
CleanPhase Fig. 15
The lithology-corrected
porosity
was next parORAUT10-CLNPSE
Fig. 15
titioned into pore geometry components based
on NMR data, which were fine-tuned with borehole image and full-waveform acoustic data. In
contrast to the lithology and mineralogy, the pore
geometry was highly variable, with zones containing significant amounts of macroporosity interspersed with zones dominated by mesoporosity
and lesser amounts of microporosity (left).
23. Ramamoorthy et al, reference 5.

51

Lithology
Kaolinite
Chlorite
Illite (dry)
Montmorillonite
Siderite
Quartz
Anhydrite

Depth,
ft
AIT Tool
HRLA Tool

NMR Porosity Partition

Microporosity
Mesoporosity
Macroporosity

Calcite
Dolomite
Pyrite
Water
Hydrocarbon
Moved Hydrocarbon

Total Porosity
50

Contributing Flow
0

Computed Permeability
0 0.1

Core Porosity

T2 Distributions
100

Ternary Porosity Partition

Macroporosity
Macromesoporosity
Mesoporosity
Macromicroporosity
Mesomicroporosity
Micromacroporosity
Micromesoporosity
Microporosity

50

mD

10,000

Min

Core Permeability
0 0.1

mD

10,000 0

Capillary Pressure

Max

Water Saturation
%

100

X,400

X,500

X,600

> Integrated output. Shown is the final product from the Carbonate Advisor
program. These outputs provide an integrated and comprehensive
evaluation of the key properties that describe a reservoirs storage and flow
capacity. The petrophysicist may weight the data from specific tools and
choose between tools (Depth track, AIT array induction imager tool, green;
and HRLA high-resolution laterolog array, gold). Complex lithology and fluid
volumes (Track 1) are shown along with a moved-hydrocarbon analysis
(orange) from microresistivity data. Fluid-flow models are constructed from
resistivity data (Track 2). Porosity from NMR data (Track 3) are partitioned
and the results graphically displayed (Track 4). A full ternary analysis (Track 5)

The partitioned porosity from NMR data had

good correlation with data from MICP test
results. Analysts next used the partitioned porosity to estimate permeability. These log-derived
values compare well with minipermeameter
probe measurements made on core plugs.
Relative permeability and fluid saturations
were computed using both array induction and
array laterolog resistivity measurements. Because
of the high salinity of the borehole fluid, the induction measurement was unreliable at high resistivi-

52

is useful for identifying better quality reservoir rock. Drainage capillary

pressures are computed from NMR pore geometry data, adjusted to match
MICP data when available, and then plotted with water saturation (Track 6).
The dark-blue shading indicates the pore space that can become oil filled at
low capillary pressure. The shading transitions from blue to red,
corresponding to successively higher capillary pressures required to fill
additional pore volumes. Thus the layer around X,600, with more dark-blue
shading than the mostly red and yellow layer around X,500, represents
better quality rock. (Adapted from Ramamoorthy et al, reference 5.)

Oilfield
Review section. The laterolog
ties in the main
hydrocarbon
Autumnin10these zones.
data are preferred
CleanPhase Fig. 17
Drainage
capillary pressures
ORAUT10-CLNPSE
Fig.were
17 also computed based on NMR data transforms.24 Because
the NMR data provide pore size from T2 distributions, assuming bulk and diffusion effects are
minimal, by integrating the T2 distribution, a capillary pressure versus saturation relationship can
be developed. To convert T2 data to capillary pressure, a small calibration constant is required.
This constant is obtained by comparing the NMR
data with MICP measurements taken from similar core samples. Using the Carbonate Advisor

program, the analyst manually determines the

constant by comparing MICP entry pressures
with those computed from NMR log data.
The integrated approach of the Carbonate
Advisor software provides comprehensive evaluation of key properties that describe reservoir
storage capacity and flow characteristics (above).
The software follows a set workflow, but throughout the process the petrophysicist has interactive
control over how data are input, a particularly
useful feature when measurement conditions
may be less than optimal.

Oilfield Review

Seismic Observations

Data Analysis

Model Representations

Diffuse fractures

Seismic anisotropy

Anisotropy analysis and inversion

Implicit fracture models or DFN

Fracture corridors

Subtle discontinuities and scattering

Fracture cluster mapping

Fracture patch sets

Faults

Dislocated horizons

Ant tracking, fault transmissivity

Structural faults

Macroscale

Mesoscale

Microscale

Geologic Features

> Multiscale seismically constrained fracture characterization. Fractures

may exist over a wide range of scales from very small cracks to very large
faults. Understanding their distribution and properties at these different
scales is essential to characterize naturally fractured reservoirs. The scales
can be divided into three ranges: micro- (less than 1 m), meso- (10 to 100 m)
and macro- (greater than 100 m). Microscale fractures include layer-bound
diffuse fractures that can pervade across a geologic layer and are
frequently observed in image logs such as those from the FMI fullbore
formation microimager. Typically, these fracture types are the primary
controls used to build geologic models containing fractures, such as implicit
fracture models or discrete fracture networks (DFN). Although these diffuse
fractures are smaller than surface seismic wavelengths, a large population
density of such fractures can be detected with seismic measurements by
analyzing the seismic anisotropy. Mesoscale fracture corridors and
subseismic faults are the most difficult scale of fractures to characterize;

Searching Above Ground

Approaches discussed so far apply to data acquired
downhole. Because of the heterogeneity of carbonate reservoirs, the shallow depth of investigation
of most logging tools may limit their use for optimizing well positioning. For instance, fracture orientation obtained from imaging tools can be
influenced by local effects and may not reflect the
predominant trend in the reservoir. However, new
developments in seismic technology are providing
operators with assistance in detecting fracture
swarms within a reservoir and this knowledge can
be used to optimize well locations.
Three-dimensional surface seismic surveys
offer an expanded view of reservoir heterogeneity, extending over the entire field. Variations in
the reservoir properties such as porosity, clay
content and water saturation can all be characterized using seismic measurements, although
their resolution and detection level are limited

Summer 2010

they are at the lower end of surface seismic resolution and few wells may
intersect them. These narrow features cross layer boundaries and, with
suitable 3D seismic data and careful analysis such as with the fracture
cluster mapping workflow, they can be detected as subtle discontinuities in
the data. Because mesoscale fracture corridors can have very high
permeabilities and have major influence over reservoir dynamics, they
should be incorporated into geologic models as individual fracture patch
sets. In contrast to micro- and mesoscale fractures, macroscale faults are
comparatively easy to detect with 3D seismic data and form the basis for
structural modeling. Computer interpretation methods for fault detection,
such as the ant tracking algorithm used in the Petrel seismic-to-simulation
software, are available to automate the process and may be able to
overcome analyst bias. Detailed analysis of the seismically derived rock
properties around these faults may help in assessing fault transmissivity.

by the seismic wavelengths used, survey design

and other factors such as near-surfacegenerated noise. Recent developments in seismic
acquisition tools and processing techniques have
increased the usable bandwidth and signal-tonoise ratio such that higher resolution data with
enhanced signal fidelity are now obtainable.
Consequently, geoscientists are able to characterize in finer detail the heterogeneous porosity
and lithology variations and the multiscale fracture networks present in carbonate reservoirs.25
Most carbonate reservoirs are naturally fracTSFigure 22
turedfrom microscale diffuse fractures (less
than 1 m [3 ft]) to macroscale faults (greater
than 100 m [330 ft]). At the intermediate mesoscale (10 to 100 m) subseismic faults and fracture swarms, or corridors, may prevail (above). A
typical fracture corridor can consist of thousands
of parallel fractures of variable dimensions
densely packed together, forming a volume that is

typically a few meters wide, a few tens of meters

high and several hundred meters long.
Permeabilities in these corridors can range well
above 10 darcies. These corridors often act as
major conduits for fluid flowing within the reservoir and may be responsible for early water
breakthrough from natural drive or waterflooding. Therefore, to manage field production effectively and maximize total recovery, it is crucial
that the locations of fracture corridors are accurately known and modeled.
24. For more on the computation of capillary pressure:
Ouzzane J, Okuyiga M, Gomaa R, Ramamoorthy R,
Rose D, Boyd A and Allen DF: Application of NMR T2
Relaxation to Drainage Capillary Pressure in Vuggy
Carbonate Reservoirs, paper SPE 101897, presented at
the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
San Antonio, Texas, September 2427, 2006.
25. Singh SK, Abu-Habbiel H, Khan B, Akbar M, Etchecopar A
and Montaron B: Mapping Fracture Corridors in
Naturally Fractured Reservoirs: An Example from
Middle East Carbonates, First Break 26, no. 5
(May 2008): 109113.

53

X-2

X-5

X-3

X-1

X-4

X-6
2 km
1 mi

> Surface relief map of Sabriyah field in northern

Kuwait. This field, the first of five to be analyzed,
was considered a key area in the study.
Geoscientists used the FCM workflow to evaluate
existing seismic data. Wells X-5 and X-6 were to
be drilled based on study results. Borehole
images and core from these wells validated the
fracture clusters predicted by the FCM model.

One method for identifying these corridors

using seismic data is the FCM fracture cluster
mapping technique. Geoscientists have developed the FCM workflow to identify discontinuities in the 3D surface seismic data associated
with subseismic faults and fracture corridors.
Two key factors contributing to the success of
this technique are the suitability of the seismic
acquisition and processing. The workflow
assumes that large clusters of natural fractures,
which constitute a fracture corridor, produce
coherent structural discontinuities that are
detectable with 3D seismic data. The complete
FCM workflow integrates expert interpretation
of high-quality seismic data and borehole measurements with geologic modeling and dynamic
simulation, which enables a detailed characterTSFigure 19
ization of naturally fractured reservoirs.
26. Acquisition footprints, seen on 3D seismic time slices,
are patterns that correlate to surface-acquisition
geometry and distort amplitude and phase of reflections.
This form of noise can obscure true subsurface
reflections and should be removed prior to
interpretation, if possible. Although the FCM workflow
might detect them, an experienced interpreter should
be able to identify them as noise rather than fractures.
27. The Q-Land system is a point-receiver acquisition and
processing system capable of acquiring 30,000 channels
of data in real time. Point-receiver data are recorded
with variable densities and processed with

54

The discontinuity extraction software identifies subtle inconsistencies that appear as lineaments in the seismic data. Generally, the raw
lineaments that are extracted are associated
with either geologic discontinuities in the reservoir or nongeologic residual features in the data
such as acquisition footprints or near-surface
noise contamination.26 To focus on detecting fracture clusters, the process is constrained and calibrated with a priori knowledge that includes
regional and local structural geology, tectonic
history, reservoir geomechanics, core analysis,
borehole images, sonic logs, vertical seismic profile data, well tests and production history.
Results are strongly dependent on the seismic
acquisition geometry and data quality and will be
less reliable with poor imaging, poor spatial and
temporal bandwidth, low signal-to-noise ratio
and acquisition footprints. Thus, there are stringent requirements on the 3D seismic data quality
to provide a meaningful input for detecting fracture clusters. Custom design of processing and
data acquisition, especially when using singlesensor data such as those provided by the Q-Land
seismic system, may be necessary.27
The FCM technique offers a radically different
technology for characterizing fractured reservoirs.
Historically, only the properties of diffuse fractures
have been characterized through the interpretation of a variety of seismic attributes, such as azimuthal anisotropy observations. However, with the
fully integrated FCM workflow, the location of individual fracture corridors can be detected and
embedded into a multiscale 3D reservoir model
containing faults and diffuse fractures. Dynamic
simulation of the fluid flow through these multiscale models and calibration with production logs
verify the major flow pathways. Operators can use
this information to locate injector and producer
wells to maximize reservoir sweep efficiency and
minimize water breakthrough.
Locating the Well
The FCM workflow was used to model five
Jurassic carbonate reservoirs in Kuwait. One of
these fields, the Sabriyah field, was selected as
the key area for study because of its challenging
structural setting and a drilling schedule that
complementary digital group forming (DGF) techniques.
DGF processed raw sensor measurements provide a
clean group-formed trace with improved resolution
and low noise.
28. Riedel shears produce a geometric fracture pattern
commonly associated with strike-slip fault systems.
They may form echelon patterns inclined 10 to 30 to
the direction of motion.
29. Refae AT, Khalil S, Vincent B, Ball M, Francis M,
Barkwith D and Leathard M: Increasing Bandwidth for
Reservoir Characterization with Single-Sensor Seismic
Data, Petroleum Africa (July 2008): 4144.

Depth,
ft
X,950

Y,000

Y,050

Y,100

Y,150

Y,200

> Crosswell seismic imaging. At the absolute best,

3D surface seismic data (left) can resolve features
down to tens of meters. Crosswell imaging, such
as the DeepLook-CS seismic imaging service,
acquires data from downhole sources and
receivers placed in separate wells. Using higher
frequencies extending to kilohertz provides
ultrahigh-resolution images between wells and
can resolve features as small as 1.5 m [5 ft]. Seen
in the crosswell data (right) is a subseismic fault
(magenta line) and the detailed multilayered
reservoir structure. Fracture corridors, interpreted
from discontinuities detected in a 3D seismic
volume, can also be verified from this type of
crosswell seismic imaging.

included four new wells (above left). An abundance of lineaments across the reservoir were
identified after initial analysis of the seismic
data. Further analysis of these lineaments
revealed a predominant population oriented
NNE-SSW along the main axis of the anticline
structure and a secondary population consisting
of orthogonal lineaments (next page). In contrast, borehole image data showed a dominant
ENE-WSW fracture orientation.
This analysis suggested that the dominant
NNE-SSW trend in the lineaments is probably associated with longitudinal fold-related fractures and
that the secondary set of orthogonal lineaments
correlate with the fractures identified from the
TSFigure 23
borehole image data and are possibly Riedel
30. The nominal fold is defined as the number of different
source-receiver locations that illuminate a particular
subsurface sampling point or bin. Each of the many
source-receiver pairs, corresponding to a given bin
location, will record reflections along different raypaths
and can be characterized by its nominal azimuth and
offset. A broad and uniform distribution of sourcereceiver offsets and azimuths within each bin provides
more information for seismic reservoir characterization.
31. Singh et al, reference 25.

Oilfield Review

X-3 Dipmeter Data

90
135

45

180

X-2

225

X-2

315
270

X-4 Dipmeter Data

90

X-3

135

X-3

45

X-5

X-5
180

X-1

225

X-1

315
270

X-4

X-4
in-line

in-line
135

x-line

Filters:
Search azimuth: All 360
Dip angle: Features dip > 70

135

45

x-line

225

315
in-line

45

x-line

x-line

315

225
in-line

Filters:
Search azimuth: 45 to 135 and 225 to 315
Dip angle: Features dip > 70

> Refining and defining fracture clusters. Existing seismic data were processed using discontinuity extraction software (DES) models without filters (left),
and the orientation of the fractures is overwhelmingly in line with the axis of the anticlinal structure (NNE-SSW). Logging data from Wells X-3 and X-4
indicated ENE-WSW orientation (insets). This is attributed to Riedel shears caused by NNE-SSW strike-slip faults. Azimuth filters applied to the seismic
data detected fracture clusters with different orientations (right). The orientation of these clusters is masked in the original processing. (Adapted from
Singh et al, reference 25.)

shears.28 While this limited study indicated the

presence of numerous structural discontinuities
across the field that could be related to subseismic
faults or fracture corridors, such interpretations
can be validated only through further integration
of other data sources and ultimately through drilling. An example of validation from other sources is
the use of ultrahigh-resolution crosswell seismic
imaging (previous page, top right).
To obtain more-detailed information about the
fractures in the carbonate reservoirs of Kuwait,
Kuwait Oil Company (KOC) acquired a state-ofthe-art 3D seismic pilot survey over 100 km2
[38 mi2] of the Northwest Raudhatain field using
the WesternGeco Q-Land technology. This system
employs maximum displacement vibroseis sweep
and single-sensor receivers (see Land Seismic
Techniques for High-Quality Data, page 28). The
MD Sweep technique enhances low-frequency
content by optimally designing the drive force and
variable sweep rate of the vibroseis units.29 Singlesensor deployment enables dense sampling of the
wavefield for removal of source-generated noise.

Summer 2010

The advanced acquisition design consisted of

a wide-azimuth square patch, resulting in a very
high nominal fold of 990 for 12.5-m by 12.5-m
[41-ft by 41-ft] bin size with uniform offsetazimuth distribution up to 6 km [3.7 mi].30 This
design is ideal for seismic fracture characterization using P-wave data. The Northwest Raudhatain
field presents an additional challenge because
the seismic reflections are contaminated by a
series of multiple-reflected seismic waves that
interfere with the primary reflections over the
reservoir. Advanced data processing is currently
being applied to suppress these multiples and
maximize the extraction of information from the
3D seismic data for an extensive seismically
guided fracture characterization.
In the past, engineers have proposed that
fracture corridors result in early water breakthrough but did not have effective tools to detect
TSFigure 20
their presence. Historically, fracture clusters
detected in wellbores were incorporated in stochastic 3D models to explain their effects on production. The ability to identify fracture clusters

away from the wellbore using the FCM workflow

and to visualize their orientation with 3D maps
will help optimize field development and avoid
unexpected water breakthrough.31
Hydrocarbons from Carbonates
Much of the worlds remaining hydrocarbon
reserves are thought to lie in carbonate rocks
whose complexity has often confounded petroleum engineers, geophysicists and geologists
working to extract their riches. Step-change
improvements in a wide variety of interpretation
techniques and sensor technologies are making it
possible for these professionals to more effectively
evaluate, drill and produce carbonate reservoirs.
By integrating techniques and technology, the statistical odds inherent in drilling and maximizing
recovery from carbonates are being shifted in
favor of todays petroleum technologists. TS

55