engineering

© All Rights Reserved

18 views

engineering

© All Rights Reserved

- Exercise Pressure Q
- A Handbook for Seismic Attributes
- Simm & Bacon (2014) - Seismic Amplitude. an Interpreters Handbook
- NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE LOG EVALUATION OF LOW RESISTIVITY SANDSTONE RESERVOIRS BY-PASSED BY CONVENTIONAL LOGGING ANALYSIS
- 2 SonicScope Schlumberger
- Petrophysical Analysis of Well Logs for Reservoir Evaluation a Case Study of Aja Oil Field Niger Delta
- fisika batuan
- Three Dimensional SeismicWell Logs and Structural Interpretation Over ‘X – Y’ Field in the Niger Delta Area of Nigeria
- 2. ConsolidatedGeology 05-07.pdf
- Vacuum Questionnaire
- SPWLA-2016-v57n1a3
- Design and Management of Fluidized-sand Bio Filters
- Handbook Cpwd NoPW
- Reservoir Engineering for Geologists
- Pore Structure and Adsorption
- On Similarity of Pressure Head and Bubble Pressure Fractal Dimensions for Characterizing Permo-Carboniferous Shajara Formation, Saudi Arabia
- Raman Fibre Science Hi-Sep Brochure - Nov 01 2008.31640525
- Answers
- Paper Yordan 22314008
- Petro Physical Analysis

You are on page 1of 40

Hampson-Russell

July 18, 2014

Brian Russell

Introduction

This document discusses the rock physics templates

(RPT), and how we have implemented the RPT

approach in the Hampson-Russell software release

HRS-9.

The method is based on theory proposed by Dvorkin

and Nur (1996) and degaard and Avseth (2003).

We will show the equations and the concepts behind

the theory using graphical methods.

We will also use log and inverted seismic data from the

Colony sand of central Alberta to illustrate these

methods.

2

The rock physics template (RPT)

(2003) proposed a

technique they called the

rock physics template

(RPT), based on theory

by Dvorkin and Nur

(1996), in which the fluid

and mineralogical content

of a reservoir could be

estimated on a crossplot

of VP/VS ratio against

acoustic impedance, as

shown here.

3

The degaard/Avseth/Dvorkin/Nur RPT

involves computing the VP/VS ratio

and P-Impedance of various rock

types based on their mineralogy,

porosity, fluid type, pressure and

grain contacts.

Computing the moduli of the dry rock frame for a given

porosity/pressure using the Hertz-Mindlin theory.

Computing the moduli of the dry rock frame over a range of

porosities using the lower Hashin-Shtrikman bound.

Performing fluid substitution with the Gassmann equations.

Computing the density, P-wave velocity, S-wave velocity for each

scenario and cross-plotting VP/VS ratio versus P-impedance. 4

Computing the initial dry rock values

The dry rock values can be computed in various ways:

Using Hertz-Mindlin contact theory.

Using the Gregory-Pickett method (the Lower Hashin-Shtrikman

bound).

Using Dvorkin and Nurs cemented sand model.

5

Hertz-Mindlin contact theory

Hertz-Mindlin contact theory requires a knowledge of:

The mineral bulk and shear moduli of the dry rock skeleton.

The pressure acting on the rock.

The porosity of the rock.

And the number of contacts per grain, as we assume the rock

consists of spherical grains.

grain, n, in a three-dimensional packing of

spheres, is shown on the right.

6

Hertz-Mindlin contact theory

Using the normal compression

of two identical grains shown on

the left of this figure, Hertz

computed the effective bulk

modulus.

Normal (left) and tangential (right)

shown on the right, Mindlin displacement in a two-particle

computed the effective shear system. (From Mavko et al., 2009)

modulus.

7

Hertz-Mindlin contact theory

The final terms needed in Hertz-Mindlin (HM) contact theory

are the shear modulus and Poissons ratio of the mineral

grains, the pressure and the critical porosity, giving:

1 1

n 2 (1 c ) 2 m2 3

4 4 m 3n 2 (1 c ) 2 m2 3

K HM = P , HM = P ,

18 (1 m ) 5( 2 m ) 2 (1 m )

2 2 2 2

where : P = confining pressure, K m = mineral bulk modulus,

m = mineral shear modulus, m = mineral Poisson' s ratio

c = high porosity end - member, and n = contacts per grain.

We get the mineral bulk modulus by noting:

3K m 2 m 2 (1 + m )

m = Km = m

2(3K m + m ) 3 6 m

8

The lower Hashin-Shtrikman bound

a given critical porosity) to all porosities by using the lower

Hashin-Shtrikman bound:

1

/ c 1 / c 4

K dry ( ) = + HM

K HM + ( 4 / 3) HM K m + ( 4 / 3) HM 3

1

/ c 1 / c HM 9 K HM + 8HM

dry ( ) = + z, z = ,

HM + z m + z 6 K HM + 2 HM

and = porosity.

9

The cemented sand model

mineral and the cement, the porosity of both components,

how the cement is deposited and the number of contacts.

effective bulk and shear moduli by:

1 4 3 3

K eff = n(1 c ) K cmt + cmt Sn , and eff = K eff + n(1 c ) cmt S ,

6 3 5 20

Sn and S = scaling functions based on cmt , cmt , grain , grain and ,

0.25 0.5

c 2(c )

= 2 for cement at grain contacts, and =

3n (1 c ) 3(1 c )

for cement deposited evenly on grain surface, = por. of cemented sand.

10

The Modified Gregory-Pickett Method for Moduli

The Gregory-Pickett method is a simpler method for the moduli,

proposed by Hilterman (1983).

In this method, the dry rock bulk modulus is estimated at a known

porosity by assuming a dry rock Poissons ratio.

Next, the pore space stiffness is computed from:

1 1

= +

Kdry Km K

Where Kdry = dry rock bulk modulus, = porosity, Km = mineral bulk

modulus and K = pore space stiffness.

From the pore space stiffness, the dry rock bulk modulus can be

estimated for a range of porosities, and gives the correct value in the

mineral case.

This method was modified by Russell (2013) to perform the same

computation for the shear modulus.

11

The Modified Gregory-Pickett Method for Moduli

Poissons ratio at a given porosity

modulus Mdry (either bulk,

K, or shear, ) as a

function of porosity. Mm is

the mineral modulus.

We first compute the

modulus at calibrated

porosity cal.

We then compute it at a

new modulus Mnew.

12

The Modified Gregory-Pickett Method

the Reuss bound.

porosity are accounted for.

that the starting moduli values are calibrated from the logs.

13

The Gassmann equation

By considering the pressure effects on samples of a dry

and saturated rock, Mavko and Mukerji (1995) succinctly

show how the Gassmann equation can be derived.

The compressibility of the rock, C, which is the inverse of

the bulk modulus K, is the change of the volume of the rock

with respect to pressure, divided by the volume:

1 1 dV

C = = , where : V = volume, P = pressure.

K V dP

pressure: confining pressure, PC, and pore pressure, PP.

Also, there are three different volumes to consider: the

volume of the bulk rock, the mineral and the pore space.

14

The Gassmann equation

Utilizing these concepts, we can build three simple models of

the rock volume, as shown here (Mavko and Mukerji, 1995):

and dry pore, and in C the mineral and saturated pore.

15

The Gassmann equation

Combining cases A and B (mineral and dry) gives:

1 1

= + , where :

K dry K min K

K dry = dry rock bulk modulus, K m = mineral bulk modulus,

K = dry pore space stiffness, and = porosity.

Combining cases A and C (mineral and saturated) gives:

1 1

= + ~ , where :

K sat K m K

~ Km K f

K sat = saturated rock bulk modulus, K = K +

Km K f

is the saturated pore space stiffness, and K f = fluid bulk modulus.

16

The Gassmann equation

Combining these equations gives the Gassmann equation,

a function of porosity () and water saturation (SW):

K sat K dry Kf

= + = dry ( ) + fluid ( , SW )

K m K sat K m K dry ( K m K f )

The fluid bulk modulus is computed with the Ruess average

(normal case) or the Voigt average (patchy saturation):

1

Sw 1 Sw

Reuss : K f = + , Voigt : K f = S w K w + (1 S w ) K hc

Kw K hc

HM and HS- we simply re-arrange the equation to give:

1

1

K sat (new , S w _ new ) = K m 1 +

dry ( ) + fluid ( , S )

new new w _ new 17

The Gassmann equation

Once we have computed the dry rock bulk and shear

moduli at various porosities, we compute their values at

various fluid saturations, using the Gassmann equation.

Gassmann showed that the shear modulus is

independent of fluid content.

He also showed that the bulk modulus of the various

components are related by the following equation:

K sat K dry Kf

= + , where :

K m K sat K m K dry ( K m K f )

1

Sw 1 Sw

Kf = + = fluid bulk mod., K m = mineral bulk mod.

Kw K hc

The next page shows this in a more intuitive way.

18

Intuitive development of Gassmann

dry bulk modulus Kdry

(in red) and the fluid

bulk modulus Ksat as a

function of porosity.

There are two ways to

go from the dry high

porosity value (dry_cal)

to the saturated low

porosity value (sat_new):

1. Up to the saturated That is, as shown in the appendix, the

curve and along the dry.

Gassmann equation is a combination

2. Along the dry curve and of movement along the saturated and

up to the saturated one. dry modulus paths. 19

Other bounds

M stand for either the bulk or shear modulus, the Reuss

bound is the harmonic average given by:

1 1 / c / c

= +

M R ( ) M cal Mm

The Voigt bound is the arithmetic average given by:

M V ( ) = (1 / c ) M cal + ( / c ) M m

The Hill bound is the mean of the Voigt and Reuss bounds:

M H ( ) = ( M V + M R ) / 2

The upper and lower Hashin-Shtrikman bounds are more

complex and are described in the appendix.

The figure on the next page compares all the bounds.

20

Comparison of the five bounds

The five bounds for the bulk modulus (left) and shear modulus (right) from

the mineral value ( = 0) to the calibrated value (c = 0.4). The heavy lines

are the Hashin-Shtrikman upper bound, or HS+, in red, and Hashin-

Shtrikman lower bound, or HS-, in blue, and the dashed lines show the

Voigt, Hill and Reuss bounds. 21

Computing the density and velocities

Once we have the moduli computed, we compute the

velocities.

This also requires that we compute the density at each

porosity and saturation, using the formula:

sat ( , S w ) = m (1 ) + w S w + hc (1 S w )

and fluid saturation allows us to compute the velocities:

K sat ( , S w ) + ( 4 / 3) ( ) ( )

VP ( , S w ) = , VS ( , S w ) =

sat ( , S w ) sat ( , S w )

computed and crossplotted, as shown in the next page.

22

The degaard/Avseth/Dvorkin/Nur RPT

physics template method.

The default RPT in our software is the one by degaard and

Avseth, which involves the following steps:

Compute the moduli of the dry rock frame for a given

porosity/pressure using Hertz-Mindlin (HM) theory.

Compute the moduli of the dry rock frame over a range of

porosities using the lower Hashin-Shtrikman bound.

Performing fluid substitution with the Gassmann

equations.

Compute the P-wave velocity, S-wave velocity for each

scenario and cross-plot VP/VS ratio versus P-impedance.

23

The degaard/Avseth RPT

porosities and water saturations, in a clean sand case. 24

The rock physics template (RPT)

shown in the degaard

and Avseth (2003)

paper. Obviously, the

gas sands and brine

sands shown here can

be modeled by the

previous theory. We will

compare this fit on a

shallow Alberta sand.

25

The rock physics template (RPT)

P-impedance

VP/VS

Depth (m/s*g/cc)

Ratio Shales

(m)

600

Top Gas Wet sands

Cemented sands

Base Gas Gas sands

700

I will illustrate its applications using the values between 600 and 700 m for a

gas sand from Alberta, as shown on the right above. Note the agreement

with the previous template for the various lithological units.

26

The rock physics template (RPT)

Here, we have computed and drawn the rock physics template using the

default parameters. The fit is reasonably good but certainly not perfect.

27

Adjusting the fit

and visually observe the result.

However, another approach is to use the computed values

of the dry rock bulk and shear moduli and then tweak

them interactively with the option User Input.

The resulting values at all porosities and saturations are

then computed as before, using the the lower Hashin-

Shtrikman bound and Gassmann substitution.

As we change the input dry moduli, we can observe the fit

to the real data get better or worse.

The final result is shown in the next figure.

28

The rock physics template (RPT)

By adjusting the dry bulk and shear moduli, we are able to adjust the

template so that the gas sand is predicted very well. However, the wet and

cemented sands are not predicted very closely. 29

The rock physics template (RPT)

On this plot, we have used the cemented sand model and also adjusted the

temperature and pressure of the reservoir to get a much better fit. 30

The shale line

shale type parameters. By adjusting the dry terms, we get a reasonable fit. 31

Transforming to LMR space

If you prefer mu-rho versus lambda-rho (i.e. vs. ) as your elastic constants

for cross-plotting (or some other combination), the transform simply involves

right clicking on the names on each axis. The result is shown here for LMR.

32

Adjusting the fit

In this example, I will use the inverted data from the 2D

line that is intersected by the well just discussed.

I will also illustrate the new interactive multiple cross plot

window option in HRS-9 R2.

The final result is shown in the next figure.

33

Application to real seismic data

A pre-stack inversion was done over the seismic volume associated with

the gas well, with VP/VS ratio shown in color and the traces showing

acoustic impedance. 34

Application to real seismic data

Shale

Gas Sand

Cemented

Sand

The picked horizons and the crossplot zones corresponding to shale, gas

sand and cemented sand are shown here.

35

Application to real seismic data

2.9

Shale

Cemented

Sand

VP/VS Ratio

Gas Sand

1.7

1200 6400

P-Impedance (m/s*g/cc)

Here is the VP/VS Ratio versus P-impedance crossplot of the three

picked zones from the previous cross-section. 36

Application to real seismic data

3.5

VP/VS Ratio

1.5

1200 P-Impedance (m/s*g/cc) 6400

The superposition of the rock physics template built from the well logs on

top of the seismically derived values, showing a reasonable match.

37

Future enhancements

around the method proposed by degaard and Avseth,

which involves computing the the dry rock frame moduli

using Hertz-Mindlin theory and the moduli over a range of

porosities using the lower Hashin-Shtrikman (HS) bound.

In HRS-10 we plan to offer the user the option to use all

five of the bounds described in this talk: Reuss, Voigt, Hill

and both the upper and lower HS bounds.

This will implement the Gregory-Pickett method in the

same way as described by Hilterman (1983) and Russell

(2013), in which the Reuss bound was used.

We also plan to expand the RPT approach to include the

theory of Vernik and Kachanov (2010).

38

Conclusions

physics template (RPT) and how we have implemented

this method in the Hampson-Russell software suite.

The method is based on papers by Dvorkin and Nur

(1996) and degaard and Avseth (2003), involving Hertz-

Mindlin, Hashin-Shtrikman, cemented sand and

Gassman substitution theory.

Instead of focusing on the more complicated equations

(given in the appendix), I illustrated the concepts behind

the theory using graphical methods.

Using log and inverted seismic data from the Colony

sand of central Alberta, I illustrated the use of the RPT.

39

References

Theory for two North Sea data sets: Geophysics, 61, 1363-1370.

Hilterman, F. J., 1984, Seismic Exploration Modeling Course Notes:

Geophysical Development Corporation, Houston, Texas.

Mavko, G., and T. Mukerji, 1995, Seismic pore space compressibility and

Gassmann's relation: Geophysics, 60, 1743-1749.

degaard, E. and Avseth, P., 2003, Interpretation of elastic inversion

results using rock physics templates: EAGE, Expanded Abstracts.

Russell, B., 2013, A Gassmann-consistent rock physics template: CSEG

Recorder, June Issue, 22 30.

Vernik, L. and Kachanov, M., 2010, Modeling elastic properties of

siliciclastic rocks: Geophysics, 75, E171-E182.

40

- Exercise Pressure QUploaded byabdounou
- A Handbook for Seismic AttributesUploaded byFurqan Mahmud
- Simm & Bacon (2014) - Seismic Amplitude. an Interpreters HandbookUploaded byTran Dang Sang
- NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE LOG EVALUATION OF LOW RESISTIVITY SANDSTONE RESERVOIRS BY-PASSED BY CONVENTIONAL LOGGING ANALYSISUploaded byari_si
- 2 SonicScope SchlumbergerUploaded bysudiptodatta
- Petrophysical Analysis of Well Logs for Reservoir Evaluation a Case Study of Aja Oil Field Niger DeltaUploaded byPetro Man
- fisika batuanUploaded byKattari Dwi
- Three Dimensional SeismicWell Logs and Structural Interpretation Over ‘X – Y’ Field in the Niger Delta Area of NigeriaUploaded byMailaniKhairunnisa
- 2. ConsolidatedGeology 05-07.pdfUploaded byFigueiredo Marcos
- Vacuum QuestionnaireUploaded byLaszlo Matty
- SPWLA-2016-v57n1a3Uploaded bybayu
- Design and Management of Fluidized-sand Bio FiltersUploaded byassatpute
- Handbook Cpwd NoPWUploaded byAijaz Zende
- Reservoir Engineering for GeologistsUploaded bytassili17
- Pore Structure and AdsorptionUploaded byAnonymous atX2GqDl
- On Similarity of Pressure Head and Bubble Pressure Fractal Dimensions for Characterizing Permo-Carboniferous Shajara Formation, Saudi ArabiaUploaded byProfessor Khalid Elyas Mohamed Elameen Alkhidir
- Raman Fibre Science Hi-Sep Brochure - Nov 01 2008.31640525Uploaded bypuneetsinghla
- AnswersUploaded byPungky Suroyo
- Paper Yordan 22314008Uploaded byWahyu
- Petro Physical AnalysisUploaded bybimo wicaksono
- A 20 Años Del Uso Del PTAUploaded bynatali
- PoroUploaded byNadia Nina
- ndx_hillUploaded byAhmed Gharbi
- tp amir mustaqim bin majdiUploaded byapi-356891103
- .Uploaded bySaina Andira
- Acceptance Level TWI SampleUploaded byFadhlan D Luffy
- BPSM Kuliah Geomigas 24 Okt 2016Uploaded byMuhamad Ridho
- Theory of Porous Ducts - Rev. 1Uploaded byscarre
- Baetens Et Al. - 2010 - Vacuum Insulation Panels for Building ApplicationsUploaded byminsara madt
- youngwook-01Uploaded byUllas Krishnan J N

- MADM 3500Uploaded byrksingh00722
- Justy Subaru Obd2Uploaded byJUAN
- Revision Booklet c2aUploaded bysadetaiwo
- JavaTut1Uploaded bySuvarna Mondal
- Mcd Slb801 EnUploaded bydino_p
- Autoinspekt ReportUploaded byParesh Dhake
- QHY163M Review EnUploaded byrsanchez-
- [Edu.joshuatly.com] Trial SMK Green Road Kuching STPM 2010 Physics [94D70FF7]Uploaded byChan Q ON
- Eee-Vii-high Voltage Engineering u1Uploaded byمحمد فرج
- Check ValvesUploaded byarvint_1999
- Syllabus CH Chemical Engineering 2017Uploaded byaditya_lomte
- ConstantCurrentSource.pdfUploaded byAnonymous TPVfFif6TO
- DENTAL CEMENTS ---.pptxUploaded bydrbaraa93
- Test Your C-Skills[Yashwant Kanitkar]Uploaded byKamlesh Kumar
- Program Schedule of Procurement & Contract Management Training for DUDBC Officials (FINAL)Uploaded bybunty
- Introduction to Eurocodes March 20051Uploaded byint8
- What Determines the Impact of an EarthquakeUploaded byMalia Damit
- Start, Stop, Configure and Administer Oracle Grid InfrastructureUploaded byPrashanth Reddy
- Catalysis and Sustainable (Green) ChemistryUploaded byIonela Dorobantu
- 8_kazakhstanUploaded bycost_ji051453
- Xpelair Ventilation GuideUploaded bymangjit
- QC INSPECTOR ElectricalUploaded byMuhammad Akif Naeem
- curlstUploaded bySingh Anuj
- ATR-42 Engine ChangeUploaded byWaqar Ahmad Khan
- Wipro 3+ Interview QuestionsUploaded bySri Kanth K
- EVN Smart Grid PlanUploaded byMarcusHuynh88
- SRX 101A BrochureUploaded byCristian Fortin
- Computer General Knowledge_001Uploaded byPrashanKumarThakur
- Log InUploaded bykiran44000
- SFD-AISC-360-05Uploaded byElkin Mauricio López Morantes