Shaly Sand Petrophysics PDF

Evaluation Techniques for Thinly
Bedded Sandstones
Petrophysics
Jan van der Wal, Senergy
The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

April 10th 2013 | Bergen, Norway
Outline
• What are Thin Beds?
• Part 1: Evaluation Techniques

• Part 2: Revisiting Normalised Qv of Juhasz
• Example
(NL: Spekkoek)

• Introduction

Introduction
Thin Beds Concept
• What are ‘Thin Beds’?
• Laminations of sand and shale, with..
• .. beds so thin that logs do not read true properties.
• Why do we care? In Thin Beds..

• .. conventional evaluation can miss pay,
• .. phi & perm are too low,
• .. resistivity reads too low, and
• .. saturation height functions give too low HC.

Introduction
When to Apply?
• Consider
• Bed thickness
• Shale percentage, ~50 %?
---
• Laminated, or dispersed?
• Depositional Environments, can we model it?

Introduction
What is Thin?
• Depends on logging tool as well, < 1m?
Thomas Stieber paper
Sabah

Introduction
What is Thin?
• Porosity
• Old logs < 0.5-1 m
• High res < 0.4 m?
• Resistivity
R corr
• Old indution < 2m R meas
• Recent < 0.8m?
2
Bed Thickness
Introduction
How much shale
• Porosity in Thin Beds
• Not OK: ‘Effective Porosity’ = PhiT – Vsh*PhiShale
• NTG variable with PHIsand
• Problems (missing reservoir) when Vsh > ~40%
• Resistivity
• Water bearing: resistivity contrast small, little effect
• HC bearing: resistivity contrast large, 25% Shale obscures
high resistivity. HC underestimated.

• Part 1.
• Techniques
• Cuttings
• Images
• Volumetric/Probabilistic
• NMR
• 3-D res
• SHF

Techniques
Vshale from Images
• Core Photos in XLS
• detailed Sand flag
(0,1)
• Smooth to log
resolution (por
~1ft, res 1m)

Techniques
Vshale from Image Logs Conductive Dark
Resistive Light
NEU/DEN/SON

Techniques
Vshale from NMR (1/2)
• Assumes ClayBoundFluid relates to Vshale
• Shale volume
• Vshale = (CBFV/ClayPhiShale)
• Vshale = (BFV/PhiShale)
• Complications:
• dispersed components with additional BF

Techniques
Vshale from NMR (2/2)
• Clay bound
• Laminated: Cap.BF
and FFV
• Clean sand

Techniques
Vshale from 3D-res
• 2000’s, revived thin beds

• Tensor Model
• Horizontal and Vertical, or
• Parallel Conductivity and Serial Resistivity
Res HOR
Res VER
+

Techniques
Volumetric / Probabilistic
• Probabilistic
• Allows for more components, glauconite?
• Cementation?
• Requires more input curves
• Deterministic: Thomas Stieber (1975)
• Input: Phi and Vsh,
• Outputs: Phi_sand, Vsh_lam, Vsh_disp

Techniques
Core Porosity – of sands!

Techniques
Saturation from core
• Dean Stark
• Capillary Pressures
1. Get Swirr.
2. What is max Rsand?
3. Optimize shale model

Techniques
Saturation - Height Function
• Derive SHF from thick beds

• Apply to thin beds
• But is rock quality the same?

Techniques
Summary – part 1
• Fairly common, also in North Sea
• Vshale: Cuttings, Core, Image logs, NMR, 3D-res
• NTG curve
• Porosity: Core Phi <-> sand lamination
• Porosity of sand
• If Resistivity still problematic -> SHF

• Part 2. 3D resistivity workflow
• Thomas Stieber
• Conductive dispersed components

3D-resistivity workflow
Case Study data – where is the HC?
Vshale Neutron &
Deep Res
Original Density
Publication

April 10th 2013 | Bergen, Norway Case Study, Clavaud, 2005
steps
• Aim: properties of sand lamination
1. Thomas Stieber (1975)

• Φ, Vsand, Vsh.disp
2. Resistivity of the sand lamination
• 3D-res 2000’s
• Rsand
3. Saturation computation (SwRT)
• Juhasz 1981

Thomas Stieber Definitions
• Shale (not clay)

• Shale types:

3D-resistivity workflow - Step 1
Thomas & Stieber, 1975
• 2 endpoints + 1
Clean Sand
‘Pure Shale’
Porosity
Volume of Shale
3D-resistivity workflow - Step 2:
Resistivity of Sand Laminations 3D-res
• 2a) Tensor Model

• Horizontal and Vertical, or
• Parallel Conductivity and Serial Resistivity
Res HOR
Res VER
+
• 2b) Anisotropy Model
• Smart Tensor Model;
• Inputs Thomas Stieber
3D-resistivity workflow - Step 3
Saturation Calculation
• Which equation?
• Conventional (deterministic) Poupon, parallel conductor
• Laminated Shaly sand eqs: 1


1  V sh

   Sw 
m n V sh

• Poupon, Indonesia, Simandoux Rt Rw R sh
• Thin Beds (dispersed clay/shale in sand

lamination)
• Dispersed Shaly sand eqs:
• Dual Water, Waxman Smits, Normalised Qv Juhasz

Saturation from Resistivity
• Waxman Smits equation

Shale corr
Archie
• For waterleg assume SWT = 1, (and a*=1):

Waxman Smits in Xplot
Y = aX +b
Y=
Slope B
X=

April 10th 2013 | Bergen, Norway (cousin of Pickett-plot)
Juhasz
• Juhasz: if no core Qv available,
• Qv = f(Vshale)
1/Rw_shale
1/Rw_shale
~ Conductivity
=
shale conductivity
+
1/Rw 1/Rw
Qv_shale 100%
Shale

Juhasz Normalised Qv
• Juhasz: Qv = f(Vsh), or Qv = f(Phi), f(1/Phi)
• Qv = f(1/Phi, Vsh) = f(RPD), (similar to ~Qvn)

• Relative Porosity Difference
• Assume Qv = RPD*C, substitute

To better pick BC
= CWA
Slope B*C
1/Rw
RPD
To better pick Rw
• Terms divided by RPD:
CWA/RPD
Slope 1/Rw
BC
1/RPD
Data Example
BC Rw

RPD in Thin Beds?
• RPD of Bulk not good enough

• => RPD of Sand lamination (RPDs)
• RPDs = f(1/PHIs, Vsh.disp), or

Vshale Neutron & H+V Res & POROSITY POROSITY POROSITY
Original Density Parallel Conv Conv & Thin Beds &
Publication Conductor Par.Cond. 3D-Res
BVirr
CPI with eval HC H20
The Study,
Case 20th SPE Bergen
data One Day Seminar
of Clavaud
Summary
• In case of: 3D resistivity, no core, water leg
• Optimise Thomas Stieber with Tensor Model

• Resistivity Sand from Anisotropy model
• Relate Qv to RPD
• Compute RPD for sand lamination only
• New Xplots for picking Rw and ‘BQv’

References
• Cao-Minh, C., Clavaud, J., Sundararaman, P., Froment, S., Caroli, E., Billon, O., Davis, G. & Fairbairn, R., Graphical
Analysis of Laminated Sand-Shale Formations in the Presence of Anisotropic Shales, 2008, PETROPHYSICS, Vol 49,
No. 5, October 2008, pp. 395–405.
• Clavaud, J. B., Nelson. R., Guru, U. K. and Wang, H., 2005, Field Example of Enhanced Hydrocarbon Estimation in
Thinly Laminated Formation with a Triaxial Array Induction Tool: A Laminated Sand- Shale Analysis with Anisotropic
Shale, SPWLA 46th Annual Logging Symposium, June 26-29, 2005.
• Juhasz, I., 1981, Normalised Qv. The Key to Shaly Sand Evaluation using the Waxman-Smits Equation in the Absence
of Core Data. SPWLA 22nd Annual Logging Symposium, June 23rd-26th, 1981.
• Passey, Dahlberg, Sullivan, Yin, Brackett, Xiao, Guzman-Garcia, 2006,Petrophyscial Evlauation of Hydrocarbon
Pore-Thickness in Thinly Bedded Clastic Reservoirs, AAPG Archie Series, No 1
• Stromberg S., Nieuwenhuijs R., Blumhagen, C., Edwards, J., Ramamoorthy R., Herold, B., 2007, Reservoir Quality,
Net-to-Gross and Fluid Identification in Laminated Reservoirs from a new generation of NMR logging tools.
Examples from the Gharif Formation, Southern Oman. Transactions of the SPWLA 1st Annual SPWLA Middle East
Regional Symposium April 15- 19.
• Thomas, E. C., Stieber, S. J., 1975, The distribution of shale in sandstones and its effect on porosity. Transactions of
the SPWLA 16th Annual Logging Symposium, June 4-7, 1975.
• Van der Wal, J., Stromberg S., 2012, Correcting the water saturation calculation for dispersed clay in thinly
bedded sandstones, Revisiting the Normalised Qv Equation of Juhasz, Transactions of the SPWLA 53rd
Annual Logging Symposium
• Waxman, M.H. & Thomas, E. C., 1974. Electrical Conductivities in Shaly Sands-I. The Relation between
Hydrocarbon Saturation and Resistivity Index; II. The Temperature Coefficient of Electrical Conductivity. J. Pet Tech.
213-23. Trans., AIME, 257.
• Worthington, P.F., 2000, Recognition and evaluation of low-resistivity pay, Petroleum Geoscience, Vol 6 2000 (as
published in Geological Society London, one-day seminar Hidden Hydrocarbons, 2001)

• Backup

Logging programs
• Dip meter
• Image logs
• NMR
• 3D resistivity
• High resolution, Consider slow logging
• See AAPG Archie series No 1

Conclusions
• Workflow can be based on log data only
• New form of Norm Qv of Juhasz applied to thin beds

• Qv estimate refined
• Conventional: low HC
• Conventional with 3D res (Parallel Res): more HC
• Thin Beds with 3D res: most HC

What is RPD?
• Middle East for Carbonate stringers (PDO)

• Shaliness indicator
• Combines 1/PHIT and Vshale (~ Neu-Den separation)
• RPD= (Neu + Co – PhiT)/ PhiT
• How to get ‘Co’

• Use ND overlay
• For clean sand: RPDs ~ 0
• Clean but conduct: RPDs > 0

What if no 3D resistivity available?
• Make cases for vertical resistivity

• Check with Thomas Stieber
• Simplest: Rv = Rh * C
• Better: Rv = Rh * C * Vsh_lam, or
• Rv = Rh + C * Vshl * (Rh – RshH)
• Rv = Rh + (C* Vshl / ((1/RshH – 1/Rh))

What is Parallel Conductor model?
• Ct = Vsand * Csand + Vsh.lam * Cshale, or

• 1/ RT = Vsand / Rsand + (1-Vsand) / Rsh.hor
Res HOR

When to apply Thin Beds
• Neutron Density Data GR

• Intermediate GR?
• Dispersed, Laminated,
or Both?
3 < Density > 2

April 10th 2013 | Bergen, Norway 3 < Neutron > 2
• Conductive dispersed shale? DeepRes
3 < Density > 2

April 10th 2013 | Bergen, Norway 3 < Neutron > 2
What if you do have core?
• Are plugs of the sand lamination?

• Porosity:
• Calibrate Clean Sand endpoint to match the high porosity
• Optimise input PHIT
• Calibrate BC & RPD to match the predicted QV curve

Depositional Environments
Fluvial systems (1/2)
8m
100m
Static Model
(25x25x0.5)
Dynamic Model Arbroath, Scotland
(100x100x10)
Introduction
Also in North Sea
Sele and Forties
Article:
Turbidite reservoirs of the Sele Formation, Central North Sea: geological challenges
for improving production
M. HEMPTON, J. MARSHALL, S. SADLER, N. HOGG, R. CHARLES and C. HARVEY
From Abstract
• Fields: Forties, Nelson, Montrose–Arbroath, Scoter, Pierce, the Gannet cluster, Guillemot A, Mirren and Merganser, Phyllis, Starling and
Blane are under appraisal/development.
• ‘Forties’ submarine fan system sourced from feeder channels in northwest and
west.
From 3D seismic & wells:

• Near sources (updip): thicker, higher N/G, and more channelized.
• Downdip: thinner, finer grained and stacked lobes and minor channels
(controlled by accommodation space and salt movement).

Introduction

Techniques
Bed Thickness vs Occurrence
Nr of Beds thicker than h
Bed Thickness
• Altered carbon cycling and coupled changes in Early Cretaceous
weathering patterns: Evidence from integrated carbon isotope and
sandstone records of the western Tethys
•The 20th SPE
Ulrich Bergen
Georg One Daya,Seminar
Wortmann
, , Jens Olaf Herrleb, , Helmut Weissertb
• Where (and when) should we expect Thin
Beds issues?

How much shale
Sw vs computed Sw
Vshale 0.15;
• Theoretical parallel conductor model PhiShale 0.18; ShaleRes 3.09;
PhiSand 0.2; SandRes from Archie

Techniques
Rock quality
• Does NTG correlate to bed-thickness?

• Does bed-thickness correlate with quality?

• Geo Models

Scale - Fluvial systems
8m
Static Model
(25x25x0.5)
100m
Dynamic Model Arbroath, Scotland
(100x100x10)
Good news: Turbidites
(image from
geo ExPro)
Kota Kinabalu
Sabah,
Oligocene
deepwater,
among most
sand-rich
outcrops

How much shale
Shale vs Sw
• In ideally laminated,
more than 10% of shale
is problem
Model:
• Sw = 20% in sands
• Assumed perfect
(theoretical) parallel
conductor model

Workflow
• Conventional • Thin Beds

• Vshale • Vshale
• Porosity • Porosity
• Saturation • Sand Phi & Shale
• Rsand & Saturation

Techniques
Vshale from Core (2/2)
• Calibrate traditional
techniques (GR, ND)
to downscaled (i.e.
smoothed) core
sand/shale flag
calcite
calcite
calcite
Introduction
GR
• Neutron Density Data

• Intermediate GR?
• Dispersed, Laminated,
3 < Density > 2

or Both?
3 < Neutron > 2


Shaly Sand Petrophysics PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shaly Sand Petrophysics PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation Techniques for Thinly

Jan van der Wal, Senergy

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• What are Thin Beds?

• Part 1: Evaluation Techniques

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Why do we care? In Thin Beds..

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Depends on logging tool as well, < 1m?

Thomas Stieber paper

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Recent < 0.8m?

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• 2000’s, revived thin beds

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Derive SHF from thick beds

• But is rock quality the same?

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

1. Thomas Stieber (1975)

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Shale (not clay)

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• 2a) Tensor Model

• Laminated Shaly sand eqs: 1

• Thin Beds (dispersed clay/shale in sand

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Waxman Smits equation

• For waterleg assume SWT = 1, (and a*=1):

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Juhasz: Qv = f(Vsh), or Qv = f(Phi), f(1/Phi)

• Qv = f(1/Phi, Vsh) = f(RPD), (similar to ~Qvn)

• Assume Qv = RPD*C, substitute

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Terms divided by RPD:

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• RPD of Bulk not good enough

• RPDs = f(1/PHIs, Vsh.disp), or

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

CPI with eval HC H20

• In case of: 3D resistivity, no core, water leg

• Optimise Thomas Stieber with Tensor Model

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• See AAPG Archie series No 1

The 20th SPE Bergen One Day Seminar

• Workflow can be based on log data only

• New form of Norm Qv of Juhasz applied to thin beds