MODULE 1

DETERMINATION OF CORE SAMPLE POROSITY BY GAS POROSIMETER

Name : Cinndy Claudia

NIM : 12217010

Group : Jumat02_02

Date of practical work : Februari, 22nd 2019

Date of submission : Februari, 28th 2019

Lecturer : Prof. Dr. Ir. Pudji Permadi

Module’s assistants : Abdel Mohammad Deghati 12215032

Rafli Herdiansyah 12215081

PETROPHYSICS LABORATORY

STUDY PROGRAM OF PETROLEUM ENGINEERING

BANDUNG INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

2018/2019

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................2

TABLE LIST......................................................................................................................3

PICTURE LIST ................................................................................................................4

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................5

1.1 Module Title...............................................................................................5

1.2 Practical Work Objectives..........................................................................5
1.3 Fundamental Theory...................................................................................5

CHAPTER II DATA PROCESSING .............................................................................6

CHAPTER III ANALYSIS ..............................................................................................9

3.1 Assumtions.................................................................................................9

3.2 Tools Analysis............................................................................................9

3.3 Practical Work Analysis ............................................................................9

3.4 Result Analysis...........................................................................................10

CHAPTER IV CONCLUSIONS .....................................................................................12

CHAPTER V SUGGESTION .........................................................................................13

5.1 For Practical Work......................................................................................13

5.2 For Assistant...............................................................................................13

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................14

2
 TABLE LIST

Table 1. Experiment Data of Callibration Disk ................................................................6

Table 2. Experiment Data of Core Sample .......................................................................6

Table 3. Experiment Data of Core Sample with Callibration Disk ..................................6

Table 4. Experiment Data of Callibration Disk ................................................................6

Table 5. Experiment Data of Core Sample .......................................................................7

Table 6. Vgrain of Core Sample .......................................................................................8

Table 7. Vgrain of Core Sample with Callibration Disk ..................................................8

Table 8. Porosity of Core Sample .....................................................................................8

Table 9. Porosity of Core Sample with Callibration Disk ................................................8

3
 PICTURE LIST

Graphic 1. Volume Grains vs P1/P2 of Callibration Disk.................................................7

Picture 1. Gas Porosimeter .............................................................................................10

Picture 2. Core Sample ...................................................................................................10

Picture 3. Cup Matrix .....................................................................................................10

4
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Module Title

The title of this first module is Determination of Core Sample Porosity by Gas
Porosimeter.

1.2 Practical Work Objectives

1. Understand about gas porosimeter’s working procedure.

2. Determine a core sample porosity by using gas porosimeter.
3. Understand the concept of porosity and the its application in petroleum engineering.

1.3 Fundamental Theory

Reservoir rocks commonly consists of a set of grains, pores and cement material that
binding those grains. Fluid contained in reservoir rocks is accumulated at pores or holes
inside the rocks. Porosity is one of rock’s physics characteristics that stated the rasio
between pore volume to the whole volume of rocks. Porosity is representated by
fractions or percentation.

Either of big or small the porosity value, depends on pores of rock but pores of rock itself
has its own characteristics that affect to the porosity value, there are :

1. Grains arrangement
There are a variant of grains arrangements that has different porosity value.
2. Sorting
Sorting represents the uniformity of rock grains.
3. Cementation
Cementation represents the bond strength between grains.
4. Compaction
Compaction is caused by overburden pressure affect to the grains arrangement that
will be more incompressible.
5. Angularity
Angularity represents the shape of grains.

5
 In this experiment, rock’s porosity will be measured by using Gas Porosimeter that work
based on Boyle’s Law principles.

CHAPTER II
DATA PROCESSING

4.1 Data
 Experiment Data of Callibration Disk
Table 1. Experiment Data of Callibration Disk
Disk Number Reference’s Volume (cc) P1 (psig) P2 (psig)
2 4,821 100 9,9
3 6,426 100 10,3
4 9,658 100 11
5 16,083 100 13
4+2 14,479 100 12,4
 Experiment Data of Core Sample
Table 2. Experiment Data of Core Sample
Core Sample Code Diameter (cm) Height (cm) P1 (psig) P2 (psig)
T-13 2,4783 3 100 11,4
U-12 2,5703 3,35 100 12,5
 Experiment Data of Core Sample with Callibration Disk
Table 3. Experiment Data of Core Sample with Callibration Disk
Core Sample Code P1 (psig) P2 (psig)
& Disk Number
disk 5+disk 2+T13 100 23
disk5+disk2+U-12 100 28,1

4.2 Calculation
1. The calculation of bulk volume of core sample and calibration disk.

By using the assumption that the core is perfectly cylindrical shape, the volume can

1 2
be meaured by this equation : V = π D t
4

 Experiment Data of Callibration Disk

Table 4. Experiment Data of Callibration Disk
Disk Number Reference’s Volume (cc)
2 4,821
3 6,426
4 9,658

6
 5 16,083
4+2 14,479
 Experiment Data of Core Sample
Table 5. Experiment Data of Core Sample
Core Sample Code Diameter (cm) Height (cm) Volume (cc)
T-13 2,4783 3 14,47750281
U-12 2,5703 3,35 17,38909936
2. Plot Graphic between Grains Volume and The Rasio of P1 with P2 of
Callibration Disk
Graphic 1. Volume Grains vs P1/P2 of Callibration Disk

y = -4,7404x +52,633

3. The calculation of V grain

From the graphic, obtained the regression equation for calculate the V grain :

P1
V grain=a ( )
P2
+b

P1
V grain=−4,7404 ( )
P2
+52,633

 Core Sample
Table 6. Vgrain of Core Sample
Core Sample Code V grain(cc)

7
 T-13 11,05054
U-12 14,7098
 Core Sample with Callibration Disk
Table 7. Vgrain of Core Sample with Callibration Disk
Core Sample Code V grain(cc)
disk 5+disk 2+T-13 32,02257
disk5+disk2+U-12 35,76325
V grain only for T-13 : 32,02257-16,083-4,821 = 11,11857

V grain only for U-12 : 35,76325-16,083-4,821 =14,85925

4. The calculation of porosity

V bulk −V grain
∅=
V bulk
 Core Sample
Table 8. Porosity of Core Sample
Core Sample Code V bulk ( cc) V grain(cc) Porosity Porosity
(fraction) (%)
T-13 14,47750281 11,05054 0,236709525 23,671
U-12 17,38909936 14,7098 0,154079 15,4079
 Core Sample with Callibration Disk
Table 9. Porosity of Core Sample with Callibration Disk
Core Sample Code V bulk ( cc) V grain(cc) Porosity Porosity
(fraction) (%)
T-13 14,47750281 11,11857 0,23201051 23,2011
U-12 17,38909936 14,85925 0,145484784 14,5485

CHAPTER III
ANALYSIS

3.1 Assumtions
The assumtions of this module experiments are :
 Core sample is perfectly cylindrical shape.

8
 Callibration disk is perfectly cylindrical shape so V bulk =V grain
 The gas is an ideal gas, too fulfill the Boyle’s Law principle.
 Gas fill the whole interconnected pores.
 There is no gas leak.
 The core sample is pure, there is no contamination.

3.2 Tools Analysis

In this experiment, there are some tools are used for taking data :
 Gas Porosimeter (PORG-200TM Unit)
Gas porosimeter is a tool to measure the porosity value. This tool work based on
Boyle’s Law principle. In this tool, there two valve. The first one, is useful for
connect and drain the nitrogen gas from the tube to the gas porosimeter. The second
one, is useful for connect and drain the gas from gas porosimeter to the matrix cup
where core sample or callibartion disk is placed on. There is also a regulator to control
the gas pressure. This tool work properly.
 Nitrogen Gas Tube and Regulator
Nitrogen gas tube is used as the container of nitrogen gas that needed in this
experiment. We choose nitrogen as the gas needed because the nitrogen is an inert gas
so there is no reaction happens either wih the tool or core sample. Also because the
price of nitrogen gas is economical. There is a regulator on the nitrogen gas tube. This
thing is useful as pressure control.
 Calipers
In this experiment, calipers is a tool for measure the dimension of core sample. This
tool work properly.
3.3 Practical Work Analysis
Module 1 practical work started with initial test and followed by procedure also
tools test. This things are useful for examine the understanding of concepts and
mastery of tools that will be used. In this experiment, each of group member has to
contribution to get the data.There are four kinds of callibartion disk and two kinds of
core sample used in this experiment. All steps of experiment are done accordingly
steps that are stated on the module. The experiments work properly although each of
us find a litlle difficulty while doing the pressure control.

9
 Picture 1. Gas Porosimeter Picture 2. Core Sample

Picture 3. Cup Matrix

3.4 Result Analysis

From the callibration using four kinds of callibration disk, obtained the regression
equation :
P1
V grain=−4,7404 ( )
P2
+52,633

This equation shows that the gradient value is negative, which means the greater ratio
of PI and P2 cause the smaller grain volume. With this regression equation, V grain of
core sample can be calculated by substitute the pressure’s ratio of each experiments.
Then, the porosity of core sample can be calculated by using this equation :
V bulk −V grain
∅=
V bulk

So, the result is :

 Core Sample
Core Sample Code V bulk ( cc) V grain(cc) Porosity Porosity
(fraction) (%)

10
 T-13 14,47750281 11,05054 0,236709525 23,671
U-12 17,38909936 14,7098 0,154079 15,4079
 Core Sample with Callibration Disk
Core Sample Code V bulk ( cc) V grain(cc) Porosity Porosity
(fraction) (%)
T-13 14,47750281 11,11857 0,23201051 23,2011
U-12 17,38909936 14,85925 0,145484784 14,5485

As known before, the porosity value obtained in this experiment is an effective

porosity, which is only interconnected pores measurement. The interconnected pores
are being urged by the gas and affect to the changing of pressure. From the result, T-
13 as a core sample has a bigger porosity value than U-12. It means T-13 has more
interconnected pores compared the other one. In petroleum industry itself, the greater
value of porosity means the better kind of reservoir. Porosity represents how many
hidrocarbon can be accumulated. From the experiment, as an engineer, we better
choose the T-13 as the reservoir rock, because it potentially to produce hidrocarbon
more than U-12.
In this experiment, practicant also try two kinds of method to get the porosity of each
sample. First, we only measure the pressure changing of core sample. The second one,
we measure the pressure changing of core sample with callibration disk. Nevertheless,
it should be has the same value of porosity. But after doing all the calculations, we got
that porosity of only core sample not exactly the same with the porosity of core
sample with callibration disk ( ∅1 ≠ ∅2 ). There is an error about 2% for core sample T-
13 and about 6% for core sample U-12. This is a pretty good thing because the
differences are not so significant. Below are some factors that can caused the
difference in result :
- The experiment condition. The experiments are doing not exactly in the same time
that may have a different surroundings to the measurement and affect to the result.
- There is any gas leak while doing experiments.
- The Boyle’s Law principle is not fulfilled. The application of Boyle’s Law
requires the gas in isothermal and ideal condition, but actually it never happens.

CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions which can be taken to answer those objectives are :

11
1. Gas porosimeter is working based on Boyle’s Law principle which states that pressure is
inversely proportional to volume. Therefore the matrix volume of sample can be
calculated by knowing the pressure.
2. Below is the porosity of core sample with different method of measurement
- Core Sample
Core Sample Code V bulk ( cc) V grain(cc) Porosity Porosity
(fraction) (%)
T-13 14,47750281 11,05054 0,236709525 23,671
U-12 17,38909936 14,7098 0,154079 15,4079
- Core Sample with Callibration Disk
Core Sample Code V bulk ( cc) V grain(cc) Porosity Porosity
(fraction) (%)
T-13 14,47750281 11,11857 0,23201051 23,2011
U-12 17,38909936 14,85925 0,145484784 14,5485

3. Porosity is ratio between pore volume with whole volume of rock. In this experiments,
the porosity value obtained is an effective porosity. Effective porosity is a ratio between
interconnected pore volume to the whole volume of rock. Effective porosity also
represents the porosity used in petroleum industry, as a thing associated with
accumulated fluid in reservoir that may be streamed to the surface.
The application of porosity concept in petroleum industry :
- Parameter in J-function calculation and Archie equation.
- Determine the potential reserve of oil or gas reservoir.
- Determine type of rocks.
- Determine the permeability of pores.
- Determine the recovery factor.

CHAPTER V
SUGGESTIONS

5.1 For Practical Work

This first module consists of a simple procedure compare to other modules.
Neverthless, each us need to be focus while doing experiments. This is because we
directly contact with nitrogen gas in pretty big pressure. The only one suggestion for this

12
 module is about the place where nitrogen gas tube is located. As we known, it take place
on the side of building with only about one metre widht. I think this may be dangerous if
a practicant suddenly slip while walking and fell down to the ground, moreover
nowadays is a rainy season.
5.2 For Assistant
 Impressions to Bang Abdel :
Bang Abdel is such an easy-going but serious kind of person. This is because, he
always make sure that practicant own the right concept about the experiment and
doing the experiment comfortably. Beside examine us to give the right answer, he
also explain more and more about the question is. So, I have learnt a lot of new
insight from Bang Abdel. If practicant wrongly answer, Bang Abdel would lead us to
the right ones.
 Impressions to Bang Rafli :
Bang Rafli is kind of person that treat practicant so well. He is so fun and
understanding. He doesn’t get mad or even reduce practicant’s points if practicant can
not answer the question. Instead that all, he allow practicant to ask another practicant
to get the right answer by “Calling friend” system. The explanation is also easy to
understand.

Overall, thankyou for all assistants that accompany us as practicants along the
experiment of the first module.

Suggestions : honestly, the question of the preliminary question is too difficult for us
as a beginner. Maybe assistants need to decrease the difficulty level of questions.
However, I know assitants has prepared it well and just try to give us more perception
of the module about.

REFERENCES

Amyx, James W. 1960. Petroleum Reservoir Engineering “Physical Properties”.New York :

McGraw-Hill Book Company.

13
Monicard, R.P. 1980. Properties of Reservoir Rock : Core Analysis. Gulf Publishing Co.,
Edition Technic.

Gatlin, C. 1960. Petroleum Engineering Drilling and Well Completion. New York : Prentice
Hall Inc.

Hawkins, Craft. 1959. Applied Petroleum Reservoir Engineering. New York : Prentice Hall.

F. David Martin, Robert M. Colpitts P.G. 1996. Standard Handbook of Petroleum and

Natural Gas Engineering, Volume 2.
http://www.drillingformulas.com/rock-compressibility/ accessed on Tuesday, February 26th
2019 at 7.46 pm

QUESTIONS

1. Mention 5 service company!

 Schlumberger

14
 Halliburton
 Baker Huges
 Weatherford
 Ensco
2. Mention 5 oil company!
 Pertamina
 Exxon Mobil
 ConocoPhillips
 CNOOC
 Saudi Aramco
3. Mention the differences between oil and service company!
Company Headquarters
Pertamina Jakarta, Indonesia
Exxon Mobil Irving, Texas
Oil Houston Energy Corridor, Houston, texas,
ConocoPhillips
Company U.S.
CNOOC Beijing, China
Saudi Aramco Dhahran, Saudi Arabia
Principal executive offices :
Paris,France
Houston, Texas, US
London, UK
Schlumberger
The Hague, Netherlands
Legal domicile
Service
Willemstad, Curacao
Company
Kingdom of the Netherlands
Halliburton Houston, Texas, U.S.
Baker Huges Houston, Texas, U.S.
Weatherford Baar, Switzerland
London, UK (incorporation)
Ensco San Felipe Plaza
Houston, Texas, USA (operational)

4. Derive the fluid compressibility which has relationship with porosity!

 Compressibility is a relative volume change of a fluid or solid in a response to

a pressure change. We can relate this into a reservoir engineering aspect.
Overburden pressure is rock weight and it typically has a gradient of 1 psi/ft.

15
 Rock metric and formation fluid in pore spaces supports the weight of rock
above. When petroleum is produced from reservoir rocks, pressure of fluid in
pore space decreases, but overburden is still the same. This will result in the
reduction of bulk volume of rock and pore spaces. The reduction on volume in
relation to pressure is called “pore volume compressibility (cf)” or “formation
compressibility” and it can be mathematically expressed like this.

Where

Vp = pore volume

dVp = change in volume

dp = change in pressure, psi

cf = rock compressibility, 1/psi

Note: The actual measurement of rock compressibility is expensive and it is

required to have a formation sample. In practical, utilizing Hall correlation to
determine rock compressibility is acceptable.
Hall’s rock compressibility correlation is a function only of porosity. The
correlation is based on laboratory data and is considered reasonable for
normally pressured sandstones.

 From other source:

Rock Compressibility
The isothermal rock compressibility is defined as the change in volume of the
pore volume with respect to a change in pore pressure:
cf=1Vp(∂Vp∂p)T
where cf is the formation (rock) compressibility with common units of psi−1,
Vp is pore volume, p is pressure in psi, and the subscript T denotes that the
partial derivative is taken at constant temperature. The effective rock
compressibility is considered a positive quantity that is additive to fluid

16
compressibility; therefore, pore volume decreases as fluid pressure decreases .
Since overburden pressure of a reservoir is essentially constant, the differential
pressure between the overburden pressure and the pore pressure will increase
as the reservoir is depleted. Thus, porosity will decrease slightly, on the order
of only one-half percent for a 1,000 psi change in internal fluid pressure. For
different reservoirs, porosities tend to decrease as overburden pressure (or
depth) increases. Therefore, porosity under reservoir conditions may differ
from values determined in the laboratory . For sandstones with 15% to 30%
porosity, reservoir porosity was found to be about 1% lower under reservoir
conditions; for low porosity limestones, the difference was about 10% .
One of the commonly cited correlations between rock compressibilityand
porosity was developed by Hall(Figure 5-34) for several sandstone and
limestone reservoirs. All measurements were conducted with an external
pressure of 3,000 psi and internal pressures from 0 to 1,500 psi. Fatt [67]
found no correlation between compressibility and porosity, although the
porosity range studied (10% to 15%) was very narrow. Van der Knapp, citing
his measurements and those of Carpenter and Spencer, observed a general
trend of increasing pore volume compressibility with decreasing porosity. For
a particular limestone reservoir, Van der Knapp [68] found that pore
compressibility and porosity were related by a simple empirical formula.
However, in a more extensive study, Newman suggests that any correlation
between pore volume compressibility and porosity does not apply to a wide
range of reservoir rocks. As shown in Figure 5-35a, Newman's study in
limestones showed poor agreement with the correlations of Hall and Van der
Knapp. Figures 5-35b to 5-35d show a comparison of Newman's data with
Hall's correlation for consolidated sandstones, friable sandstones, and
unconsolidated sandstones. While the general trend of Newman's data on
consolidated sandstones (Figure 5-35b) is in the same direction as Hall's
correlation, the agreement is again poor. Figure 5-35c shows no correlation for
Newman's friable sandstones and Figure 5-35d for unconsolidated sandstones
shows an opposite trend from the correlation presented by Hall. From
Newman's data, ranges of compressibilities for various types of reservoir rocks
are given. Clearly, formation compressibility should be measured with samples
from the reservoir of interest.

17
Figure 5-34. Effective rock compressibility vs. porosity

18
Figure 5-35. Pore-volume compressibility at 75% lithostatic pressure vs.
sample porosity

19