12 views

Uploaded by mhdstat

- Geological Society of America Special Papers-2015-Egenhoff-2015.2515_00
- 10.1.1.53.2555
- Everythingwrongwithstatistics072915topdf 150803203458 Lva1 App6892(2)
- spe papers_energy resoures.xls
- PNAS-1950-Nash-48-9
- A Method for Estimating Yet-To-find in Hydrocarbon
- Pvalue
- DeRos PetroLedge AAPG2007
- Simpson
- Paper Saturation Height Methods
- Ndx Johnson
- Course
- Oil Reserve Definitions Bp 2015
- TOC
- 11999_2010_Article_1402
- m 00001589
- Reliability and Validity Testing of a New Scale for Mesuring
- In Game Theory, No Clear Path to Equilibrium
- 1705.06345
- 9780262015998_sch_0001

You are on page 1of 12

Clastic Reservoirs

Michel Claverie, David F. Allen, Nick Heaton, and Georgiy Bordakov, Schlumberger

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Florence, Italy, 19–22 September 2010.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by

the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members.

Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an

abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract that reduce the uncertainty of fluid volumes and rock flow

LRLC reservoirs are increasingly at the forefront of the properties.

industry’s concern in diverse projects ranging from offshore Introduction

deep-water exploration of turbidites to the development of Recent advances in measurement technology have provided

brown-field secondary objectives. Although LRLC reservoirs the petrophysicist with powerful new tools for the

have been under production for many years, their identification and quantitative evaluation of low resistivity and

identification and the calculation of their reserves and flow low contrast pay in clastic reservoirs. As new improved

properties remains a difficult challenge. This paper compares measurements are introduced, it is essential that appropriate

different petrophysical workflows for clastic reservoirs where interpretation methodologies are also developed which

thin conductive laminations and high bound water fraction are capitalize on the additional information available. In order to

the source of low resistivity and contrast, with a view to bring the new measurements to bear on the problem of LRLC

reducing uncertainty in saturations and improving pay, it is crucial that interpretation workflows not only provide

producibility prediction. accurate evaluations but that they are also efficient and that

When thinly laminated reservoir layers are intercalated answers can be delivered in a timely manner to facilitate

with conductive non-reservoir layers, the apparent formation critical decision making.

resistivity is dramatically reduced and the apparent clay Triaxial induction tools1 have been developed over the past

volume is increased, and the hydrocarbon volume and the decade, providing measures of resistivity anisotropy that relate

permeability calculated from conventional petrophysics are directly to sand-shale laminations. Quantitative analysis,

underestimated. We describe new developments in laminated usually based on a bimodal formation model comprising

sand analysis and the practical implementation of resistivity resistive hydrocarbon-bearing course sand and conductive

anisotropy, including corrections for clay intrinsic anisotropy shale or fine grain layers, yields fluid saturations in the

and thin non-reservoir resistive layers. resistive layers.

Reservoirs with fine grain material, grain-coating clays, or Few would argue that proper integration of measurements

dispersed clays may display high bound water volumes, yet is not essential for robust petrophysical interpretation. Indeed,

possess significant quantities of producible hydrocarbon. most commercial petrophysics software packages today

While conventional petrophysical analysis can provide reliable provide multi-mineral solvers which perform a global

water saturation, it does not distinguish clay- and capillary- optimization of parameters (eg fractional volumes) to fit

bound water from free water. Also, shaly and silty reservoirs arrays of diverse log measurements. In general, it is relatively

often present a complex mineralogy which makes estimates of mature log measurements which are incorporated in

clay volume and grain density uncertain. We describe the commercial interpretation applications. New generation tools

application of nuclear spectroscopy and NMR logs to calculate often remain detached from integrated analysis, either due to a

clay volume, porosity and bound water volume and illustrate natural lag in implementation time, or because existing

their impact on the quality of the resulting evaluation. interpretation frameworks themselves do not readily

Although the petrophysical methods presented were accommodate the new measurements. In this paper, we

developed for thinly bedded reservoirs, we show that they can present results of fit-for-purpose workflows which have been

improve the analysis of both LRLC and conventional clastic designed specifically to address the processing and integration

reservoirs. In particular, we propose fit-for-purpose workflows of multiple new generation tools to address petrophysical log

interpretation in LRLC formations.

2 SPE 134402

The overall workflow is shown in Figures 1 & 2. First a The porosity of the sand component is computed from the

conventional analysis of mineralogy & porosity, followed by measured total porosity, the fraction of laminated shale and

water saturation using Archie, Waxman Smits or Dual Water, the shale porosity (selected in a nearby thick shale):

along with a thin bed flag driven by analysis of resistivity

PHI_sand = (PHIT – PHI_sh * Fsh) / (1- Fsh) (1)

anisotropy. Next, each interval to be evaluated is determined

to be either thickly bedded and adequately evaluated by the in which:

logs or thinly bedded, requiring bimodal analysis. PHI_sand is the porosity of the sand laminations

These two sequential workflows begin with raw tool data PHI_sh is the porosity of the shale laminations

and finally generate interpreted logs with accompanying Fsh is the fraction of shale laminations

reports. Non-standard measurements such as nuclear

spectroscopy, NMR, dielectric dispersion and triaxial To avoid instability at high shale fractions, PHI_sand is set

induction logs are integrated efficiently with conventional log to PHIT when Fsh = 1. PHI_sand is gradually bent towards

data in tailored workflows, maximizing the value of the PHIT when Fsh exceeds 70%. Similar logic sets the sand

measurements and providing reliable timely input for critical resistivity to Rv at high values of Fsh.

decision making.

Maintaining Compatibility & Combining the Results

Logic to Analyze Thickly Bedded LRLC Reservoirs Many softwares exist to perform conventional analysis and

(Conventional Analysis – CA) others exist to perform bimodal analysis. A number of

While different mechanisms of low resistivity and low difficulties arise which can reduce efficiency and cause

contrast pay have long been recognized and understood, differences in the two types of analyse that are accidental,

characterization of LRLC formations was limited initially by rather than due to systematic differences in the models:

the lack of suitable log measurements. Fortunately, several • The input data selected may be different.

key technologies are now available which address some of the • Computed, intermediate curves common to each such

specific challenges in these environments. For example, the as total porosity may not be the same.

accurate determination of clay volume, permeability and • The equations, exponents and parameters may not be

irreducible water saturation from mineralogy, ideally derived the same. Retaining identical zoning is also

from nuclear spectroscopy data2 has been key in reducing important.

uncertainty in petrophysical evaluation of clastics. Similarly, • It is difficult to combine (splice) the results because

pulsed NMR logging tools, first introduced in the early the set of output arrays is usually different.

nineties3,4 have since evolved significantly5,6 and are now • When computing net reservoir and pay, and average

regularly employed for delineating LRLC formations. & integrated properties the cutoff parameters are

NMR logs are unique in that they respond to fluid usually different, and care must be takes to use the

mobility, providing quantitative estimates of bound and free same cutoff values.

fluid volumes. For example, low resistivity pay associated The thin bed interpretation software described here

with anomalous high bound water volume in fine grained overcomes these difficulties by building all of the logic into a

sediments can be identified from NMR logs. Similarly, the single application. Changes to parameter settings for one

occurrence of movable fluids detected by NMR in low method are automatically echoed to the other parts of the

resistivity shaly formations often belies the presence of computation. Final summations are then applied to a

laminations which may be easily overlooked by inspecting homogeneous, consistent, spliced data set. The cutoffs used

conventional logs. are listed in Table 2.

The approach taken here is to compute irreducible water

saturation and permeability using both the mineral volume / Thin Bed Detection Flag

specific surface area and NMR approaches. After optimizing Direct detection of thinly bedded pay zones by inspection of

parameters the analyst selects one of the two results for use. resistivity anisotropy – the ratio of Rv to Rh – was one

application which drove development of triaxial induction

Logic to Analyze Thinly Bedded LRLC Reservoirs tools12. However, it soon became apparent that the

(Bimodal Analysis – BA) interpretation of resistivity anisotropy was more complex than

Leveraging resistivity anisotropy data via a bimodal model has had initially been hoped. Shales were sometimes found to

proved successful for quantitatively evaluating reservoirs have intrinsic anispotropy in excess of that present in thinly

where the beds of interest are thinner than the vertical bedded LRLC zones, causing LRLC zones to remain

resolution of the input logs7,8,9. The method relies on the overlooked. Conversely, the presence of thin low porosity

validity of the bimodal model, the accuracy with which shale (high resistivity) stringers can occasionally result in increased

resistivity and porosity are known, and the accuracy of anisotropy, leading such zones to be falsely detected as LRLC

estimated shale fraction (Fsh). pay.

Fsh is estimated from NMR10, the Rh/ Rv crossplot (Klein A new anisotropy flag has been designed to reflect

plot)9 or an indicator such as GR or Swb. The Thomas-Steiber resistivity anisotropy which is solely due to the thin beds

method11 is also included. Sw in the sands is computed from unresolved by lithology and porosity while taking into account

the resistivity of the sand fraction and its porosity using intrinsic resistivity anisotropy of shales and low porosity

Waxman Smits, Dual Water or the Archie equation. In the stringers. The definition is based on the petrophysical model

absence of other data, the sands are taken to be 100% clean. of shaly sands governed by the following assumptions:

SPE 134402 3

1. The formation is divided into “slabs” – thin uniform and BVsand can be expressed as functions of Rh bed and

layers corresponding to clay bound water saturation

Swb and total porosity φt measurements, which are Rh bed . From inversion results the total volume of

grouped in “beds” – thicker layers for which average hydrocarbons in a bed can be calculated as

horizontal and vertical resistivity measurements are

k

2.

assigned from triaxial induction logs.

Horizontal and vertical resistivities for each slab are Voil = ∑ φt i ⋅ 1 − Swt i( )

i =1

defined based on dual water equations, while average

resistivities for a bed are obtained from slab

resistivities through proper averaging – harmonic for Typical inversion results are presented in Figure 3.

horizontal and arithmetic for vertical resistivity. This figure illustrates the conclusion that for a given bed

horizontal resistivity, bed vertical resistivity can only have

Based on Swb values relative to a cutoff Swb shale

( )

3.

values in a particular range from Rvbed min Rhbed to

slabs are considered either isotropic “sands” or

4.

anisotropic “shales”.

Capillary bound and free water volumes are divided

( )

Rvbed max Rhbed , which can be determined by inversion of

in two parts – water associated with clays and with the model equations. The boundaries of this range include

sands. information on lithology and porosity and account for shale

a. Water saturation associated with clays is resistivity anisotropy. For a fixed horizontal resistivity the

assumed to be proportional to Swb . The range becomes wider with more variability of Swb and φt

proportionality coefficient d is considered and narrower with less variability (for fixed Swb and φt the

constant within a bed. range degenerates to a single point).

b. Water volume associated with sands BVsand is Therefore if resolution of lithology and porosity data is good

assumed constant within a bed. enough the range covers the measured vertical resistivity. If

c. Both assumptions above apply unless total water this resolution is poor the range becomes narrow and likely

does not cover the vertical resistivity value. Thus a corrected

saturation Swt calculated based upon them is resistivity anisotropy ratio defined as

less than 100%. Otherwise cutoff value of 1 is

used for Swt . ⎧ Rvbed

⎪ (

, Rvbed ≤ Rvbed min Rhbed )

With this model the average horizontal and vertical (

⎪ vbed min Rhbed

R )

⎪

resistivities of a bed are defined by the equations: raniso = ⎨1, ( ) (

Rvbed min Rhbed < Rvbed < Rvbed max Rhbed )

⎪

⎪ R

Rhbed ( d , BVsand ) = vbed

(

, Rvbed ≥ Rvbed max Rhbed )

−1

⎪R (

⎩ vbed max Rhbed )

⎡ k m ⎛ Swbi Swt i − Swbi ⎞⎤

k ⎢ ∑ φt i sand i ⋅ Swt i ni −1 ⋅ ⎜ + ⎟⎟ ⎥ , is an indicator of unresolved thin beds in which Bimodal

⎜ Rwbi

⎣⎢ i =1 ⎝ Rw f i ⎠ ⎦⎥ Analysis (BA) is recommended. In other intervals, CA is

preferred. An advantage of the proposed anisotropy flag

Rvbed ( d , BVsand ) = definition is in the fact that it is free from the formation

−1 bimodality assumption.

1 k ⎡ mnet i ⎛ Swbi Swt i − Swbi ⎞⎤

∑ ⎢φt i ⋅ Swt i ni −1 ⋅ ⎜

k i =1 ⎣⎢ ⎜ Rwbi

+ ⎟⎟ ⎥ ,

Note that because porosity is an input to the computation of

⎝ Rw f i ⎠ ⎦⎥ Rvbed max variations in porosity due to thin tight layers result

in an increased Rvbed max . Such intervals of “bed anisotropy”,

⎛ BVsand ⎞

Swt i = min ⎜ 1, Swbi + + d ⋅ Swbi ⎟ , are falsely interpreted as hydrocarbon bearing with Bimodal

⎜ φt i ⎟

⎝ ⎠ Analysis but are excluded by the thin bed flag logic.

⎧ msand i , Swb < Swb shale Merge logic

mnet i = ⎨

⎩ mshalei , Swb ≥ Swb shale Example 1

The importance of identifying intervals containing laminated

where i is a slab index, Rwb , Rw f are respective clay shale for analysis with bimodal analysis methods, versus those

in which the shale is dispersed and conventional analysis

msand , mshale are

bound water and free water resistivities, applies is explored in Figure 4. The figure contrasts

Archie cementation exponents for sands and shales, and n is intermediate results key for computation of saturation from the

an Archie saturation exponent. two interpretations over three intervals, noted as Upper,

By inversion of the equations above the model parameters d Middle and Lower. Assuming that an interval is

homogeneous and that the clay is dispersed (or structural),

4 SPE 134402

reduces porosity and increases water saturation. Assuming over the conventional analysis. The dielectric dispersion log

that the interval is layered and that the shale is laminated is inverted to calculate a shallow (1 in.) and a deep (4 in.)

decreases the water saturation. water-filled porosity3. We observe a small separation between

Using Conventional Analysis (CA) the interval is the shallow and deep dielectric measurements, caused by a

interpreted to consist of 129 feet of shaley sand. Of this 24.5 shallow filtrate invasion into the high viscosity oil reservoir.

feet meet the cutoffs for reservoir and 17 feet meet the However, the 4 in. inversion reaches into the non-invaded

additional Sw cutoff for pay. Using Bimodal Analysis (BA) zone and the deep dielectric saturation matches the saturation

the interval is interpreted to consist of 58 feet of clean sand from the resistivity anisotropy bimodal analysis. The small

and 71 feet of shale. Of the sand, 47 feet meet the cutoffs for volume of filtrate invading the formation is also observed as a

reservoir and pay. It is the Fsh cutoff, 75%, that accounts for late node (300 ms) on the NMR T1 distribution at 1.5 in. depth

the reduction from 71 feet of total sand to 47 ft of reservoir of investigation. We also note that the shallow invasion,

sand. Differences in the evaluation are shown in more detail which is a sign of hydrocarbon mobility, is not observed on

in Table 1. the Rxo log which has a depth of investigation of 4 in.

The large differences between the BA and CA analyses in The lower section is very thinly laminated, with a small

this well are due to resistivity anisotropy (Rv > Rh, so Rsand sand fraction Fsand of 20%. The anisotropy is picked up by

>> Rh) and the way that the shale content is treated in the two the thin bed detection flag, and Rsand is boosted to 25 ohm.m

models. The BA model assumes that the shale is laminated. from a Rh of 2 ohm.m, resulting in a gain of hydrocarbon

Since the shale porosity is less than the total porosity in the saturation of 30 s.u.. However, the borehole image indicates

zone of interest the porosity of the sand fraction is that the sands are a fraction of an inch thick, and we note that

significantly increased. The CA model assumes that the shale the dielectric porosity, despite an intrinsic vertical resolution

is dispersed. This leads to computation of a significant of 1 in., does not readily identify the hydrocarbon in these

volume of clay bound water in the sand and a reduction in sands thinner than 1 inch. We also notice that the NMR does

effective porosity. not identify filtrate invasion, as it did in the upper section, so

we suggest that this lower section is unlikely to be productive.

Example 2

Figure 5 shows a thinly bedded interval overlaying a clean Discussion

sandstone. Development of thin beds is indicated by the thin High resolution measurements not only indicate the presence

bed detection flag, reflecting the increase in resistivity of potential hydrocarbon-bearing thin beds, but also can be

anisotropy. used to determine more accurate sand/shale fractions and may

A dielectric dispersion log was also recorded over this allow relaxation of the bimodal approximation used in low

interval (Figure 6). This log measures a high-resolution resolution analysis14, 15. Future work is ongoing to

water-filled porosity which, subtracted from total porosity, quantitatively incorporate high-resolution measurements and

provides a direct volume of hydrocarbons independent of resolution enhancement methodologies.

water salinity and Archie electrical parameters13. The Additional priorities include incorporation of additional

dielectric porosity accurately measures the hydrocarbon methodologies for analysis of LRP reservoirs and enabling

volume in thin beds above XX10 ft, and matches the results of analysis of the sensitivity of the result to input measurements

the resistivity anisotropy evaluation. Where the resistivity & parameters.

anisotropy evaluates the bulk hydrocarbon volume, the

dielectric log measures the individual thin beds water-filled Conclusions

porosity. The conventional porosity-resistivity evaluation A new LRLC interpretation workflow has been developed

significantly underestimates the hydrocarbon volume in the incorporating existing logic appropriate for thick bedded &

thin beds zone, but matches the two thin beds analysis thin bedded intervals LRLC reservoirs. The two methods are

methods in the thick reservoirs section below XX17 ft. implemented in a parallel, linked manner to ensure consistent

This is a high viscosity oil reservoir (already described in parameters and equations are applied, and that the resulting

Ref. 13), with very shallow to no invasion. In these conditions, analyses can be compared quantitatively.

the shallow dielectric porosity measures the fluids in the Newly developed logic exploits resistivity anisotropy to

uninvaded zone. The high oil viscosity volume is also detect thinly bedded intervals where bimodal analysis should

observed as the short node (approx. 3 ms) of the NMR T1 be applied. The detection flag is based on resistivity

distribution. anisotropy corrected for intrinsic anisotropy of shales and

variations of porosity. This flag definition is free from the

Example 3 formation bimodality assumption.

A 2nd example from the same well illustrates the application of The software incorporates a merged analysis step and

resistivity anisotropy in thinly bedded reservoirs, and its integrated reservoir summations enabling the analyst to select

complementarity with other LRLC analysis methods. Figure 7 the appropriate result for each interval.

displays the analysis across 2 sections of distinct properties.

The upper section – above XX85 ft – is laminated with Acknowledgements

sands thicknesses of a few inches as shown by the borehole The authors wish to thank the Thin Beds Advisor development

image. We observe a Rv/Rh contrast from which we compute team.

a large sand fraction Fsand of 95%. The bimodal analysis

(BA) calculates an additional 10 s.u. hydrocarbon saturation

SPE 134402 5

References 8. Clavaud, J.B., Nelson, R., Guru, U, and Wang, H. Field Example

of Enhanced Hydrocarbon Estimation in Thinly Laminated

1. Rosthal, R., Barber, T., Bonner, S., Chen, K., Davydycheva, I., Formation With a Triaxial Array Induction Tool: A Laminated

Hazen, G., Homan, D., Kibbe, C., Minerbo, G., Schlein, R., Sand-Shale Sequence With Anisotropic Shale, 2005, SPWLA

Villegas, L., Wang, H., and Zhou, F.: "Field tests of an 46th Annual Logging Symposium.

experimental fully triaxial induction tool," presented at 2003 9. CaoMinh, C., Clavaud, J.B., Sundararaman, P., Froment, S.,

SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, June 22-25, Galveston, Caroli, E., Billon, O., David, G., and Fairburn, R., 2008,

TX, paper QQ Graphical Analysis of Laminated Sand-Shale Formations in the

2. Herron, S.L. and Herron, M.M. : “Quantitative Lithology: An Presence of Anisotropic Shales, Petrophysics, Vol. 49, NO. 5

application for open and cased hole spectroscopy”, Transactions (October 2008).

of the SPWLA 37th Annual Logging Symposium, New Orleans, 10. Cao Minh, C. and Sundararaman, P., 2006, NMR Petrophysics in

LA, June 16-19, 1996. Thin Sand-Shale Laminations, SPE 102435: Society of

3. Miller, M.N., Paltiel, Z., Gillen, M.E., Granot, J. and Bouton, J.C.: Petroleum Engineers, presented at the SPE Annual Technical

“Spin Echo Magnetic Resonance Logging: Porosity and Free Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas.

Fluid Index Determination,” paper SPE 20561, presented at the 11. Thomas, E.C. and Stieber, S.J., The Distribution of Shale in

65th SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Sandstones and its Effect Upon Porosity, SPWLA 16th Annual

Orleans, Louisiana, USA (September 23-26, 1990. Logging Symposium Transactions, 1975.

4. Kleinberg, R.L., Sezginer, A., Griffin, D.D. and Fukuhara, M.: 12. Klein, J.D., Martin, P.R., and Allen, D.F., 1997, The Petrophysics

“Novel NMR Apparatus for Investigating an External Sample,” of electrically anisotropic reservoirs, The Log Analyst, May-

Journal of Magnetic Resonance 97, No. 3 (1992), 466-485). June, pp.25-36.

5. McKeon, D., Cao Minh, C., Freedman, R., Harris, R., Willis, D., 13. Hizem M., Budan H., Devillé B., Faivre O., Mossé L., Simon

Davies, D., Gubelin, G., Oldigs, R., Hurlimann, M. : "An M. : Dielectric Dispersion: A New Wireline Petrophysical

Improved NMR Tool Design for Faster Logging", 1999, Measurement; 2008, SPE-116130, SPE Annual Technical

SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, Oslo, Norway. Conference and Exhibition; Denver, Colorado.

6. DePavia, L., Ayers, D., Freedman, R., Harris, R., Heaton, N., 14. Allen, D.F.: “Laminated Sand Analysis”, 1984, SPWLA 25th

Jorion, B., Kovats, J., Luong, B., Rajan, N., Taherian, R., Annual Logging Symposium.

Walter, K., and Willis, D., "A Next Generation Wireline NMR 15. Tabanou, J.R., Cheung, P., Liu, C.B., Hansen, S., Lavigne, J.,

Logging Tool," presented at the 2003 SPE ATCE. Omeragic, D., Pickens, T., Borbas, T., Wendt, B. : "Thinly

7. van Popta, J., Hofstra, P., and van Houwelingen, S., 2004, An Laminated Reservoir Evaluation in Oil-Base Mud: High

Advanced Evaluation Method for Laminated Shaly Sands Resolution versus Bulk Anisotropy Measurement - a

Including Uncertainty and Sensitivity, SPWLA 45th Annual comprehensive evaluation", 2002, SPWLA 43th Annual

Logging Symposium. Logging Symposium.

6 SPE 134402

Mineralogy,

Porosity & Clay

Anisotropy Analysis

for Thin Bed Flag

Rv

Formations (resolved Formations (not resolved

by the standard logs) by the standard logs) ~ 2 ft

Rh

isotropic model applied applied depth-by-

depth-by-depth. depth.

Anisotropic Shale

~ 2 ft

Isotropic Sand

Analysis of

Irreducible water. Analysis of sand

Permeability & water properties.

cut

Figure 1: Flow chart of resistivity anisotropy analysis, with parallel paths for thick bedded and thin bedded formations.

Conventional Bimodal

Analysis Analysis

Merge

Reservoir

Summation

SPE 134402 7

Bimodal

Analysis

2

10 0.19

0.18

Rv (ohm.m)

Phit Variability

Rv

1

10 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16

Single Answer

0.11 Conventional

Analysis

0.10 0.12

Voil (v/v)

Voil

0.09

Minimum

MinimumRv Rv @ Rh

Rh

0

MaximumRv

Maximum Rv@@ Rh

Rh

10

0 1

10 10

Rh Rh

(ohm.m)

Figure 3: Typical results of the Rv/Rh inversion for the proposed petrophysical model of shaly sands. The applicability conditions of either Conventional

Analysis or Bimodal Analysis are illustrated.

8 SPE 134402

Upper

Middle

Lower

Figure 4: Resistivity and porosity inputs to Conventional Analysis and Bimodal analysis – example 1

• Track 1: Conventional volumetric analysis.

• Track 2 Sand Fraction (1 – Fsh) for use in Bimodal analysis.

• Track 3: Resistivities - horizontal resistivity (black) is used as Rt for saturation computation in conventional analysis, Sand resistivity (blue) from

bimodal analysis, Vertical resistivity (red) from inversion of multi-component resistivity anisotropy.

• Track 4: Thin bed flag. Regions of potential interest for Bimodal Analysis are cross-hatched and shaded orange.

• Track 5: Porosity curves - Total Porosity (black dashed) from the volumetric analysis, Effective Porosity (black) computed by conventional analysis,

porosity of the sand fraction (blue) from bimodal analysis.

SPE 134402 9

Analysis Analysis change

Upper Net Pay 0 31.5 ft. n.a. Thin Beds detected.

Average sand 0 0.29 n.a. Bimodal Analysis preferred.

porosity Conventional analysis completely overlooks this

portion of the reservoir.

Hydrocarbons in 0 6.4 φ-ft n.a.

place

Permeability 0 35 darcy-ft. n.a.

thickness

Middle Net Pay 9.5 ft. 12.3 ft. 29% Thin Beds detected.

Average sand 0.29 0.34 Bimodal Analysis preferred.

porosity 17% Conventional analysis is pessimistic. Top of interva

computes high Sw.

Hydrocarbons in 1.7 f-ft. 3.4 φ-ft.

place 100%

Permeability 24 darcy-ft. 40 darcy-ft.

thickness 67%

Lower Net Pay 8.5 ft. 9.8 ft. 15% No thin beds detected.

Average sand 0.29 0.3 Bimodal Analysis over estimates hydrocarbons in

porosity 3% place & reservoir quality.

Conventional analysis provides accurate evaluation.

Hydrocarbons in 2.0 f-ft. 2.5 φ-ft.

place 25%

Permeability 5 darcy-ft. 15 darcy-ft.

thickness 200%

Table 1: Summations and averages from conventional analysis and bimodal analysis applied to example 1, in figure 4.

Vclay < 40% Sw < 50%

Porosity > 0.23

Permeability > 100 md.

Shale Fraction < 75%

Table 2: Cutoffs utilized in the analysis of example 1, yielding the results in Table 1.

10 SPE 134402

XX00

XX05

XX10

XX15

XX20

XX30

XX35

• Track 1: Conventional volumetric analysis.

• Track 2: Thin bed flag. Regions of potential interest for Bimodal Analysis are cross hatched and shaded orange

• Track 3: Resistivities - Horizontal resistivity (black) is used as Rt for saturation computation in conventional analysis, Sand resistivity (blue) from

bimodal analysis.

• Track 4: Water saturation curves - Total water saturation (black) computed by conventional analysis, water saturation of the sand fraction (blue)

from bimodal analysis.

• Track 5: Wellbore image indicating fine scale layering in the interval where the thin bed detection flag is active.

• Track 6: Conductivity from a high resolution, high frequency pad tool, indicating fine scale layering in the interval where the thin bed detection flag

SPE 134402 11

XX95

XX00

XX05

XX10

XX15

XX20

XX30

Figure 6: Conventional and thin bed analysis from resistivity anisotropy and dielectric dispersion (scale 1:60 ft) – example 2

• Track-1: SP, caliper and computed matrix permittivity

• Track-2: Conventional Sw (black dashed), bimodal bulk anisotropy Sw (orange), dielectric shallow Sw (black)

• Track-3: Detailed mineralogical analysis and porosity

• Track-4: Depth and stand-off / mudcake thickness from resistivity (green), density (red) and dielectric dispersion (black)

• Track-5: Microresistivity (green), reconstructed microresistivity from dielectric conductivity (blue), 90 in. induction (red), vertical resistivity (orange

dashed), horizontal resistivity (blue dashed)

• Track-6: Total porosity (black), conventional water volume Vw (black dashed), bimodal bulk anisotropy Vw (orange), dielectric shallow Vw (blue)

• Track-7 & 8: Dielectric permittivity dispersion, dielectric conductivity dispersion

• Track-9: Borehole microresistivity image (dynamic normalization)

• Track-10: NMR T1 distribution (green), logarithmic mean (orange), and bound fluid cut-off (yellow)

12 SPE 134402

XX70 XX70

XX75 XX75

XX80 XX80

XX85 XX85

XX90 XX90

XX95 XX95

Figure 7: Conventional and thin bed analysis from resistivity anisotropy and dielectric dispersion (scale 1:40 ft) – example 3

• Track-1: Sand fraction from Rv/Rh contrast

• Track-2: Thin beds flag

• Track-3: Rh (blue), Rh shale (blue dashed), Rv (red), Rv shale (red dashed), Rsand (green)

• Track-4: SP, caliper and computed matrix permittivity

• Track-5: Conventional Sw (black dashed), bimodal bulk anisotropy Sw (orange), dielectric deep Sw (red dashed), dielectric shallow Sw (purple

dashed)

• Track-6: Detailed mineralogical analysis and porosity

• Track-7: Microresistivity (green), 90 in. induction (red), vertical resistivity (orange dashed), horizontal resistivity (blue dashed)

• Track-8: Borehole microresistivity image (dynamic normalization)

• Track-9: NMR T1 distribution (green), logarithmic mean (orange), and bound fluid cut-off (yellow)

- Geological Society of America Special Papers-2015-Egenhoff-2015.2515_00Uploaded bymhdstat
- 10.1.1.53.2555Uploaded bygmokley
- Everythingwrongwithstatistics072915topdf 150803203458 Lva1 App6892(2)Uploaded bymhdstat
- spe papers_energy resoures.xlsUploaded bymhdstat
- PNAS-1950-Nash-48-9Uploaded byCristina Moraru
- A Method for Estimating Yet-To-find in HydrocarbonUploaded bymhdstat
- PvalueUploaded byDurvesh Meshram
- DeRos PetroLedge AAPG2007Uploaded bymhdstat
- SimpsonUploaded bymhdstat
- Paper Saturation Height MethodsUploaded byjulisarj
- Ndx JohnsonUploaded bymhdstat
- CourseUploaded bymhdstat
- Oil Reserve Definitions Bp 2015Uploaded bymhdstat
- TOCUploaded bymhdstat
- 11999_2010_Article_1402Uploaded bymhdstat
- m 00001589Uploaded byabdounou
- Reliability and Validity Testing of a New Scale for MesuringUploaded bymhdstat
- In Game Theory, No Clear Path to EquilibriumUploaded bymhdstat
- 1705.06345Uploaded bymhdstat
- 9780262015998_sch_0001Uploaded byDhileeban Sat
- ACCURACY ANALYSIS OF ARCHIE PARAMETERS AND RELEVANT EFFECT ON WATER SATURATION VALUESUploaded byari_si
- No Clear Path to Equilibrium in Game TheoryUploaded bymhdstat
- HBR Classic Skills of an Effective Administrator KatzUploaded bymhdstat
- RiskyBusiness-GeoNeuraleNEWS-MARCH2009Uploaded bymhdstat
- Reducing overconfidence in forecasting with repeated judgement elicitationUploaded bymhdstat
- Geological Society, London, Special Publications 2010 Jolley 1 8Uploaded bymhdstat
- Oil Reserve Definitions Bp 2015Uploaded bymhdstat
- document(24).pdfUploaded bymhdstat
- PJST16_1_336mypaperUploaded bymhdstat

- CODEX Std LabellingUploaded byYanfa Jeza Jaelani
- Chapter 1Uploaded byWan Hafiza
- MANOMETROSUploaded bySantiago Chinome
- Drugs Drugs and Youth A Parents Guide ADAUploaded byPedro Afonso
- L-2(NKK)(IE) ((EE)NPTEL)Uploaded bygeneralclimatic
- BAB 1 Buku Qasim.pdfUploaded byRd Nur Muhammad
- CE2252-—-STRENGTH-OF-MATERIALSUploaded bymuru0105
- 98ff1edcafa42ab7c9db76ad29577bc7fe4f3078.1.pdfUploaded byCao Minh Trí
- Detailed Lesson Plan in Grade 7Uploaded byJeremy Pomar
- Buoyant ForceUploaded byChristian Bauso
- Aqa Biol2 w Qp Jan10Uploaded byThanuj Perera
- salt and sugar with boiling water 1Uploaded byapi-384212693
- 32 Road Compaction R&B1014Uploaded byAnonymous 8kRPSXXTZ7
- PHY210Uploaded byNasuha Mutalib
- Chapter1 Basic Concepts of ThermodynamicsUploaded byPrya Suthan Sathiananthan
- Supernova Simulation LabUploaded byAlli A
- Cosmothene g812 LdpeUploaded bydanu
- CSM LP 2015 - 2016.pdfUploaded byOliver Magpantay
- PEEK PropertiesUploaded byyatheendravarma
- MASTERFLOW 322-1Uploaded byekacipta
- AcceleratedUploaded byVeles666
- CCB_-_orglet_2007_9_355Uploaded byNarendra Kumar
- CEUploaded byawasarevinayak
- pile_spring.xlsUploaded bykaleswara_tellakula
- Soy Lecithin Fact SheetUploaded byaware123
- Series in Sensors R.S. Popovic Hall Effect Devices Institute of Physics Pub 2004Uploaded byGLADIS
- Gelatin IntroUploaded byMihai Sebastian
- Magnetic Particle Examination ProcedureUploaded byShankey JAlan
- nmrUploaded byHitesh Katariya
- Siphon CalcUploaded byfaridhassani