The Challenges for Carbonate
Petrophysics in Petroleum
Resource Estimation
Vivian K. Bust, SPE, Joshua U. Oletu, SPE, and Paul F. Worthington, SPE, Gaffney, Cline & Associates
Summary
An examination of the core and log analysis of carbonate reservoirs
has confirmed that identified shortcomings are rooted in disparate
pore character. Many of the interpretation methods were developed
for clastic rocks, which typically show an intergranular porosity,
sometimes augmented by fracture porosity. In carbonate reservoirs,
the primary pore system comprises interparticle porosity that coex-
ists with a highly variable secondary system of dissolution voids
and/or fractures. As a consequence, carbonate reservoirs are mark-
edly heterogeneous from pore to reservoir scales, and this variability
poses significant challenges to data acquisition, petrophysical evalu-
ation, and reservoir description. For example, the ranges of carbon-
ate facies and their pore character often control the distributions of
net pay, porosity, and hydrocarbon saturation. Putting these mat-
ters together, conventional petrophysical practices that exclusively
use reservoir zonation based on lithology/mineralogy have limited
application in carbonates. Instead, recourse is made to a zonal dis-
crimination that draws upon the distribution of microporosity and its
connectivity with macroporosity and fractures. The discrimination
scheme uses downhole technologies such as high-resolution imaging
and magnetic resonance logs, supported by advanced core analysis.
On this basis, a value-adding workflow is proposed to increase
confidence in those petrophysical deliverables that are used in static
volumetric estimates of petroleum Resources.
Introduction
Petroleum Resource estimation underpins field appraisal, devel-
opment, and management. At least in the earlier stages of field
life, static volumetric methods form the basis for estimates of
hydrocarbons in place and, thence, ultimate recovery. Petrophysics
sits firmly on this critical path through the evaluation of reservoir
size, net-to-gross pay, porosity, and hydrocarbon saturation. Yet,
although the uncertainties associated with these technical building
blocks can be usefully quantified for clastic reservoirs, they are
much less predictable in carbonates.
The reasons lie in the fundamental differences between clastic
and carbonate reservoirs. Clastic reservoir rocks are predominantly
sandstones that comprise quartz and other mineral components.
These are transported from elsewhere and modified through weath-
ering, lithification, and diagenetic processes to form a clastic reser-
voir system. Sandstones can show a wide range of reservoir quality
through variations in mineralogy, grain-size distribution and sorting,
texture, and degree of induration. On the other hand, carbonate rocks
are mostly formed in situ through the growth of calcitic organisms
and precipitation, with subsequent evolution being governed by
compaction, cementation, dolomitization, dissolution, and other
diagenetic processes. Carbonates can show a very wide range of
reservoir quality through pore-size distribution, pore connectivity,
fracturing, and the degree of dolomitization. In essence, therefore,
sandstone reservoir quality is governed by mineralogy and texture
whereas carbonate reservoir quality is governed by pore character.
Copyright © 2011 Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper (SPE 142819) was revised for publication from paper IPTC 13772, first
presented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha, 7–9 December
2009 and revised for publication. Original manuscript received for review 5 January 2010.
Revised manuscript received 25 May 2010. Paper peer approved 13 September 2010.
February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
Traditionally, most petrophysical practices use mineralogical cri-
teria, so they are notionally tuned to sandstones. Therefore, their
application to carbonate pore characterization is not straightforward
and, because of this, it is more uncertain.
This paper sets out to redress this disparity by examining the
practices of carbonate petrophysics so that identified shortcomings
can be remedied for purposes of Resource estimation. In so doing,
reservoir complexity is the overarching issue because geoscience
and engineering databases add maximum value only when they
are fit for purpose. In many situations, reservoir databases are not
conformable with reservoir complexity, partly because perceptions
of reservoir complexity are often simplified as a consequence of
data sampling limitations. Moreover, reservoir complexity can be
expected to be different for discrete reservoir zones. The ethos
of this paper is to search out practical solutions to facilitate the
petrophysical evaluation of carbonates in the face of pronounced
reservoir heterogeneity that is rooted in a markedly variable pore
character. These matters are important because carbonate reser-
voirs contain approximately 50% of Earth’s estimated petroleum
Reserves. The aim is to deliver a high-level, process-driven over-
view of core- and log-based approaches to carbonate Resource
estimation by focusing on the issues that must be addressed in a
meaningful petrophysical evaluation exercise. In so doing, we have
adopted the Petroleum Resources Management System (SPE et al.
2007), so that the capitalized word “Resources” implicitly relates
to recoverable volumes. Overarching technical reference texts are
Chilingar et al. (1972), Cosentino (2001), and Lucia (2007).
The Essence of the Carbonate
Petrophysics Problem
The carbonate petrophysics problem is three-fold: recognition of
log-identifiable rock types; establishment of partitioned datasets
each of which has an exclusive set of defined interpretive algo-
rithms; and identification of net-pay intervals.
Log-Identifiable Rock Types. For clastic rocks, the term lithofa-
cies has been used to describe rock types each of which has a semi-
quantitative flag for texture and mineralogy [e.g., Miall (1990)].
The term electrofacies has been used to describe log-identifiable
rock types (Serra and Abbott 1982). These concepts have been
developed into one of electrolithofacies, to describe lithofacies with
sufficiently exclusive log signatures that lithofacies can be identified
beyond cored intervals (Rider 1996). In so doing, it is important
that the resulting rock types are architecturally significant from a
geological perspective. In other words, they must be correlatable
or distributable throughout a geocellular model in accordance with
strict geological controls, so that the resulting deliverable is a geo-
science model as opposed to a geomathematical model.
For carbonate rocks, the requirement of architectural signifi-
cance rooted in geology is retained, but mineralogy is generally
not sufficiently diagnostic to govern the populating of a geocellular
model, with the potential exception of a role for dolomitization.
Here, the key components are rock texture and pore-size distribu-
tion. Jennings and Lucia (2003) pulled these matters together by
referring to rock-fabric facies [i.e., a rock type with a characteristic
(range of) pore size inferred from particle (grain) size and sorting,
the distribution of interparticle porosity, and the nature and size
of vuggy porosity (Lucia et al. 2003)]. The term electroporefacies
25
will be used here to describe a rock-fabric facies partitioned in
terms of pore character and that has a sufficiently exclusive set of
log signatures. Although the terminology is different, the related
concepts partially correlate with schemes used by others [e.g.,
Gomes (2008)]. It is also important to take account of natural
fracture porosity, produced by the impact of in-situ stress regimes
on carbonate brittleness, and fissure porosity, here taken to be a
lineated dissolution feature.
The recognition of log-identifiable carbonate rock types through
pore characterization therefore takes the form of identifying elec-
troporefacies. The logs required to do this go beyond the standard
suites that have served the industry so well in the case of clastic
rocks [e.g., Dewan (1983)].
Interpretive Algorithms. The second facet of the carbonate
petrophysics problem is the requirement to establish interpretive
algorithms. Because petrophysics has a philosophy of indirect-
ness in that we cannot measure what we want to know but rather
something related to it, interpretive algorithms provide the vital
bridgehead between measurements and reservoir properties. Here,
the need is to identify petrophysical rock types, for each of which
there is a sufficiently exclusive set of interpretive algorithms. These
include Archie’s laws for the evaluation of water saturation, predic-
tive equations for the estimation of interparticle permeability, and
fluid saturation-vs.-height functions for application in the construc-
tion of a geocellular model.
A rock type that is defined by a workable set of interpretive
petrophysical algorithms has been termed a petrophysical facies
unit, or petrofacies for short (Worthington 2002). A petrofacies unit
is characterized by a set of interpretive algorithms, at least one of
which is statistically distinct from the corresponding algorithm(s)
associated with the other petrofacies within the same interpretive
exercise. Of course, there may be some correspondence between
petrofacies and electroporefacies, but since the former covers
complete data ranges and the latter is associated with subsets of
those ranges, this is not a foregone conclusion. It is more likely
that the petrofacies system will remain distinct from the electro-
porefacies system, until the former is discarded on completion of
the petrophysical evaluation. That point is initially reached after
application of the saturation/height function(s), but the process of
petrophysical interpretation is often iterative.
In carbonates, the petrofacies problem is compounded rela-
tive to many clastic rocks in that the Archie porosity exponent m
and saturation exponent n may not be constant even for a given
petrofacies unit but may show variations with porosity ␾ and
water saturation Sw , respectively. In such cases, the identification
of a petrofacies includes the mutual exclusivity of the regression
constants that quantify the relationships between m and ␾ [e.g.,
Focke and Munn (1987), Ragland (2002)] and between n and
Sw [e.g., Bouvier and Maquignon (1991)]. In these respects, the
petrofacies concepts for carbonates have to be extended relative
to those for clastics.
Fissure and fracture porosities complicate the process of petro-
physical evaluation still further. Methods for recognizing the pres-
ence and estimating the contribution of these secondary features
broadly track those used for clastic rocks (Aguilera 1995).
Net Pay. Following the preceding discussion, the identification of
net pay should take full account of pore character and how hydro-
carbons are distributed within the pore space. Complicating factors
include the greater tendency of carbonates to become oil-wet, the
presence of microporosity, the connectivity of micro- and macropo-
rosity, and the acquisition of key information needed to implement
a data-driven approach to the identification of dynamically condi-
tioned net-pay cutoffs (i.e., cutoffs that are tied back to permeability
in some way). These matters are important because to be admitted
as net pay, a reservoir (interval) must show a capability for both
storing hydrocarbons and allowing them to flow (to a well) in suf-
ficient quantities to make their recovery potentially economic.
Some of these complicating factors give rise to low resistivity
(contrast) pay that cannot be distinguished from water-bearing
intervals through the inspection of well logs alone. These problems
26
are exacerbated where the hydrocarbon-bearing reservoir rock is
present within a geologically layered system for which the thick-
nesses of the individual layers are below the spatial resolution of
those logs that are to be used for petrophysical evaluation. Indeed,
laminated reservoirs account for a major proportion of overlooked
pay in the world today.
The concept of net pay has to be changed in those fractured res-
ervoirs for which interparticle flow of hydrocarbons is very weak.
Here, the massive rock is likely to be classified as nonpay, because
it does not contribute significantly to direct flow into the wellbore.
However, the massive rock can feed the fractures away from
the wellbore, especially in the presence of differential pressure
between the interparticle pore space and the fracture network.
Philosophy of Approach
Our approach represents an attempt to overcome the problems out-
lined in the preceding section. The aim is to describe the geometry
of the reservoir pore system and then to use this information to
determine the physical properties of the rock. The approach is gov-
erned by three conditioning factors: carbonate reservoir character,
logging tool response, and core calibration of log analysis.
Carbonate Reservoir Character. Carbonates vary from chalks
through limestones to dolomites. They can contain evaporites
such as disseminated anhydrite, clay minerals, and electronically
conducting minerals such as pyrite. Unlike the evaluation of clastic
reservoirs, in which mineralogy and pore geometry often show a
workable relationship, carbonate reservoirs show little such cor-
relation. This means that some other basis for carbonate reservoir
characterization has to be found.
The pore geometry of carbonates is fundamental in controlling
fluid distribution and flow in these porous media. Three key param-
eters worthy of consideration include pore-body size, pore-throat
size, and pore-coordination number. It has been shown that the pore-
body to pore-throat size (PT) ratio is important in controlling oil
displacement processes because lower PT ratios allow the solvent to
propagate more easily for better miscible displacement (Dehghan et
al. 2009). It has been demonstrated in earlier work that for large PT
ratios, recoveries or displacement efficiencies are reduced (Wardlaw
1980). Direct measurements of pore-body and pore-throat sizes
can be made through visual observations of thin-sections, scanning
electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray computed tomography (CT),
and mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP) curves (Varva et
al. 1992). The third parameter, pore-coordination number (CN), is
defined as the number of pore throat connections per pore body
(Yuan 1981; Chatzis et al. 1983; Civan 2002). Microscopic math-
ematical models and laboratory-based empirical models that apply
X-ray computed microtomography (XMT) methods have been
used in algorithms to calculate CN values (Thompson et al. 2005).
Attempts to relate pore-body and pore-throat sizes to petrophysi-
cal parameters have been extensive and successful, in comparison
to relating CN to petrophysical parameters. The practical issue of
upscaling CN relationships established at the microscale to the
reservoir scale is an emerging area of study.
Important features of carbonates are the pronounced variations
of pore geometry and pore-size distribution from the microscale
upward. Early work associated the description of pore type, size,
and geometry of carbonate rocks with their petrophysical proper-
ties (Archie 1952; Aschenbrenner and Chillingar 1960). In further
advancements, a (Lucia) “rock fabric” classification scheme was
developed that relates carbonate rock matrix and petrophysical
properties to pore-size distribution (Lucia 1983, 2007; Jennings
and Lucia 2003).
Other work saw the development of Winland relationships
between pore-throat size and petrophysical properties of silica-
clastic rocks, and these methods were applied subsequently to
carbonates (Pittman 1992; Kolodizie 1980). Yuan (1981) attempted
correlation of CN with porosity in carbonates, but with limited suc-
cess. Civan (2002) mathematically demonstrated that a relationship
can be developed between CN and an interconnectivity parameter
[flow zone indictor (FZI): part of a hydraulic flow unit (HFU)
classification scheme; Amaefule et al. (1993)].
February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
 Clearly, all the established relationships are described through
different algorithms that contribute differently to the static and
dynamic characterization of carbonate reservoirs. The overarching
problem is how to quantify the input parameters from well logs so
that appropriate interpretation algorithms can be applied.
Even if the interpretive algorithms have been established
comprehensively, their application may not be straightforward.
For example, although Archie (1950, 1952) observed core data
trends between measured formation factor and interparticle poros-
ity/permeability for a specific population of limestone samples,
those relationships may not be generally applicable at the well-log
and larger scales at which other forms of carbonate porosity can
predominate [e.g., Ara et al. (2001)].
The relative brittleness and solubility of carbonate rocks give
rise to secondary porosity in the form of natural fractures and dis-
solution fissures, respectively. Where these features are open, their
occurrence enhances drainage locally and/or regionally. Where
they are closed or sealed, they act as flow inhibitors and can even
compartmentalize reservoir units. It is important to distinguish
between the two cases.
Putting these matters together, any approach to carbonate reser-
voir characterization must include well logs that are diagnostic of
pore geometry, dolomitization, evaporite content, natural fractures,
and interconnectivity of dissolution voids. They should allow the
identification of both electroporefacies and petrofacies.
Logging Tool Response. The preceding discussion points to fab-
ric-sensitive logs as the fulcrum of a strategy for the petrophysical
evaluation of carbonates. The authors’ experience with the standard
tools [spontaneous potential (SP), gamma ray, density, neutron,
resistivity, and sonic] is that they generally cannot resolve or
identify carbonate electroporefacies or petrofacies to the degree
necessary to enhance log analysis significantly.
The problem is three-fold. First, hydraulic layering (of beds
with different storativity and transmissibility) is often below the
spatial resolution of logging tools. Second, even with full tool
resolution, the identification of log signatures for different rock
types requires more than mineralogical discriminators. Third, car-
bonates often show a dual- or even multiporosity system that has
an impact on log responses to reduce the petrophysical visibility
of hydrocarbons and thence the identification of net pay.
Solutions call for higher-resolution logs with the ability to
distinguish different pore geometries. They also call for innova-
tive approaches to the quantification of hydrocarbon saturation. In
addition to the standard logs used in clastics, a basic logging suite
for carbonates should include: sonic wavetrain (Stoneley) measure-
ments; an elemental or geochemical log to help quantify mineral
compositions; a magnetic resonance log to sense different types of
porosity and the constituent fluids; microimaging tools to identify
fractures and fissures; formation testers for evaluating formation
pressure, fluid sample properties, and the permeability of both local-
ized sample points and packed-off intervals; and production logs to
identify borehole intake levels during a well test. These recommen-
dations go beyond many reported case studies [e.g., Gomaa et al.
(2006)]. Such a suite should be run at least in a designated key well
(see Data Acquisition section), which would then form a reference
basis for well-log interpretation elsewhere within the same reservoir
system. Of course, a key well should also be fully cored.
Core Calibration for Log Analysis. The nature and scale of car-
bonate heterogeneity poses three fundamental questions for core
analysis. What constitutes a representative sample? How is this
data set to be measured under simulated reservoir conditions? How
many measurements are required for fit-for-purpose applications?
Representative Core Samples. A core plug can be regarded as
representative of its specific rock type if it is at least two orders
of magnitude greater than the largest pore size it contains. This
requirement is satisfied in clastic reservoir rocks, where macropore
diameters are within the range 20–100 μm and conventional core
plugs have diameters upwards of 25 mm. In contrast, carbonate
pore-size distributions are extended by vugginess. Note that vuggi-
ness as a concept may not be the same for petrophysical purposes
February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
as for geological purposes. Standard core plugs are inadequate for
all zones other than those that show only interparticle flow, and
recourse is made to whole core samples of diameter 100 mm and
length of approximately 250 mm. Whole core analysis is more
costly and time consuming than core-plug analysis, but the results
are closer to the well-log scale and, therefore, more useful, provided
that they are quality assured. The guidelines are to use whole core
unless there is exclusive evidence for interparticle porosity. This
decision can be made on the basis of X-ray CT scans of whole core
in conjunction with a semiquantitative definition of what constitutes
heterogeneity. If whole core is used, the scale of measurement and
volume sampled should be sufficiently close to the well-log scale
for useful core/log integration purposes. If core plugs are used,
a higher conventional core-sampling interval of 15 cm is recom-
mended to accommodate the greater heterogeneity of carbonates.
Stress Sensitivity of Core. Carbonates show greater vari-
ability of stress sensitivity than do clastics. The key parameters
are porosity and permeability, whose responses to applied stress
will vary with pore character. The usual practice is to measure
a subset of core samples for various petrophysical parameters
at elevated stresses, to interpolate values of these parameters at
effective reservoir stress, and to establish through regression a
parametric correction factor from ambient conditions to effective
reservoir stress. In some clastic reservoirs, the nature of the stress
response of permeability has been shown to vary with porosity and
permeability character, leading to the concept of “stress facies”
(i.e., rock classes based on stress response) (Worthington 2008).
The need for this form of classification is expected to be greater
in carbonates. The stress facies concept forms part of an overall
petrofacies scheme.
Requisite Number of Core Measurements. A key question is:
How many measurements are needed for core data to be fit for
purpose as a groundtruth? In this respect, we admit both measure-
ments on core plugs and minipermeameter data from whole core
analysis. There are two aspects. The first concerns the number of
core measurements No needed to furnish meaningful average values
of porosity and permeability of a designated interval, which might
be an electroporefacies unit or a grid-cell height within a geocel-
lular model. It is possible to deliver these estimates, provided that
an acceptable tolerance can be specified. The approach is based on
Hurst and Rosvoll (1991) and Corbett and Jensen (1992a, 1992b),
and it uses the following equation, which delivers estimates at the
95% confidence level:
No = (200 s/amp)2, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
where s is the standard deviation of a sample population, am is the
mean parametric value, and p is the percentage tolerance that can
be accepted in an estimate of am. Information from the application
of Eq. 1 can be used to construct analogs for use elsewhere. The
approach is illustrated through a carbonate sample data set from the
Upper Shuaiba formation in the Daleel field in Oman, for which
three HFUs were identified (Abbaszadeh et al. 2000). Figs. 1 and 2
show the numbers of measurements from a core column required to
estimate mean porosity and horizontal permeability, respectively,
using the entire data set and also the discrete data subsets for each
of the three HFUs. As expected, the tighter the specified tolerance,
the more measurements are needed. Figs. 1 and 2 indicate what is
achievable with the given data sets.
The second aspect concerns the number of measurements
needed to define a petrophysical algorithm and the ranges of
uncertainty associated with the defining parameters. This comment
refers to the uncertainty in the computed regression terms and not
to the uncertainty of prediction of the reservoir property that is the
dependent variable. The treatment is an extension of Worthington
(2002). Returning to the porosity and permeability sample data set
from the Daleel field, the following regression equation has been
established for each of the three reported HFUs and also for the
entire sample data set:
log k = A ␾ + B, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
27
 35
Minimum Number of measurements to Estimate
Unit1 Unit2
30
Mean Porosity within tolerance for Unit
25
20
15
10
0
10 20 30 40
Specified tolerance, %
Fig. 1—Minimum number of measurements needed to estimate
mean porosity to within specified tolerance for flow units of the
Daleel field, Oman [Data from Abbaszadeh et al. (2000)].
where k is interparticle permeability, ␾ is porosity, and A and B are
regression constants. The key question is: How many pairs of mea-
surements of k and ␾ would be needed to establish Eq. 2 for each
unit? In this case, we follow Worthington (2002) but with a fixed
nonzero intercept. The results are shown in Fig. 3. For each data set,
this chart indicates the number of data pairs of porosity and log k that
is needed to establish the coefficients of Eq. 2 with a tolerance that
critically corresponds to the inherent uncertainty (in the coefficient)
and is sourced from the measurement uncertainty associated with
the independent variable (porosity). Again, the confidence level has
been set at 95%. Therefore, with this critical number of data pairs,
there is a 95% probability that the predicted value of the coefficient
will approximate the “true” value to within this computed toler-
ance. There would be little point in introducing additional data pairs
because the inherent uncertainty would prevail. Fig. 3 indicates that
Unit 3 has the smallest data requirement in order to characterize it
fully from the standpoint of Eq. 2, subject to the assumption that
the data set is fully representative of Unit 3. However, the principal
message of Fig. 3 is that there are no universal guidelines for ensur-
ing the petrophysical and hydraulic characterization of carbonate
reservoir units, even where interparticle flow is predominant. Each
case must be investigated separately and thoroughly. As suggested
earlier, the principal value of analyses such as those of Fig. 3 lies
in setting up analogs to guide studies elsewhere.
Data Acquisition
The underlying principle is the key-well concept (Worthington
2004a; Amabeoku et al. 2008). Essentially, a key well is identified
as representative of an appraisal front. It is drilled using a low-inva-
500
characterize petrophysical algorithm for unit
Number of paris of measurements to
400
300
200
100
0
1 2 3 4
1, 2, 3=Units 1, 2, 3 and 4=all data
Fig. 3—Numbers of pairs of measurements needed to establish
the coefficients of Eq. 2 for flow units of the Daleel field, Oman
[Data from Abbaszadeh et al. (2000)].
28
500
Unit1 Unit2 Unit3
Unit3
Minimum Number of measurements to Estimate
Mean Permeability within tolerance for Unit
400
300
200
100
0
10 20 30 40 50
50
Specified tolerance, %
Fig. 2—Minimum number of measurements needed to estimate
mean permeability to within specified tolerance for flow units of
the Daleel field, Oman [Data from Abbaszadeh et al. (2000)].
sion coring bit with a tracer-tagged oil-base mud. It is cored as fully
as possible with core being preserved on recovery for subsequent
laboratory analysis. It is logged with a comprehensive suite of
standard and specialized tools. It is flow- and pressure-tested with
fluid sampling both at discrete levels and over target intervals.
When implemented, these comprehensive but targeted data acqui-
sition programs greatly reduce subjective assumptions in formation
evaluation and reservoir modeling studies, and they constitute a mean-
ingful basis for reasonable certainty in Reserves estimation and clas-
sification (Truman and Davidson 2003; Worthington 2007). Although
the benefits of a key-well data acquisition program are equally appli-
cable to clastics and carbonates, the complexity of carbonates calls
for extra diligence in designing and implementing data acquisition
protocols and in interpreting the acquired petrophysical data.
The design of data acquisition programs is influenced by
diverse factors that vary between regions and include, but are not
limited to, the maturity of the regional/local knowledge of regula-
tory restrictions and costs, field setting and ease of operations,
available data-acquisition technology, formation character, and res-
ervoir complexity. Again, these issues are not unique to carbonates.
However, data acquisition protocols in carbonate field development
should include more coring and formation testing with both donut
and dual-packer seals in addition to extensive use of specialized
well logs (e.g., magnetic resonance and microelectrical imaging)
compared to sandstone formations in an equivalent basin setting.
One of the major difficulties in handling petrophysical data is
that diverse elements of the petrophysical data relate to different
scales of measurement. Reconciling different scales of measure-
ment is one of the biggest challenges in contemporary petrophysics
and, to date, only a partial solution is available. The reconciliation
of scale for core and log data has been achieved with some mea-
sure of success (Worthington 2004b). A similar approach can be
applied to the comparisons of core-calibrated, log-derived perme-
ability with mobility or transmissibility estimated from well tests.
Analyses of this kind can lead to semiquantitative estimates of the
degree of fracture and matrix flow.
Data Preparation
Essentially data preparation reduces to the identification of electro-
porefacies and petrofacies units, but these must lead to the mean-
ingful recognition of HFUs for initialization of a simulator. The
process is iterative, and it attempts to identify the dominant pore
types using logs only (electroporefacies) and core data (petrofacies),
if available. Dominant pore-type classes generally do not fit directly
into existing rock-fabric classes (Lucia et al. 2003), Winland pore-
throat size classes (Pittman 1992), and HFU classes (Amaefule et al
1993). Fig. 4 shows a comparison of the different schemes using
limestone core data (Ragland 2002). There is a tendency for some
pore types to fall into Lucia’s classes. For example, the moldic pore
February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
 1000

Class 1 Class 2
Dominated Pore Type (LS only)
Interparticle
Moldic Class 3
Dissolution Connected NFS
100
Vuggy
Interparticle/Moldic

Air Permeability, mD
Multiple PoreType
Intercrystaline

10

Lucia's Rock-fabric
Facies Classes
0.1
Iso-Pore throat size lines
(Winland R35 of 0.5, 1, 2, 5 & 10 microns)
Iso-Hydraulic Flow Unit (HFU) lines
( Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) 0.5, 1, 2, 5 & 10)
0.01
1 10 100

Total Porosity, %
Fig. 4—Comparisons of different carbonate classification schemes using data from Ragland (2002).

type and the dissolution connected nonfabric sensitive (NFS) pore
type mostly fall into Lucia’s Classes 2 and 3, whereas the interpar-
ticle and interparticle/moldic pore types tend to fall into Lucia’s
Classes 1 and 2. Each pore type covers a spread of Winland classes,
but some correspondence with discrete HFUs is evident. However,
overall, there is no direct correlation between dominant pore types,
rock-fabric classification, pore-throat sizes, and HFUs.
Differences in the carbonate facies classification are also
demonstrated using the carbonate core data from the Daleel field,
Oman (Abbaszadeh et al. 2000). These data have been examined
from the standpoint of the carbonate classification scheme of Jen-
nings and Lucia (2003). It can be seen from Fig. 5 that the entire
limestone database of peloidal packstone and wackestone, which
comprises the most productive portion of the reservoir, appears to

100

HFU with FZI value Class 1 Class 2 Class 3

HFU # 1 FZI=0.435
HFU #2 FZI=0.310
HFU #3 FZI=0.225
Core Air Permeability, mD

10

0.1 Lucia's Rock-fabric

Facies Classes
Iso-Pore throat size lines
(Winland R35 of 0.1, 0.5, 1, & 2 microns)
Iso-Hydraulic Flow Unit (HFU) lines
(FZI of 0.225, 0.310 & 0.435)
0.01
1 10 10 0
Core Total Porosity, %
Fig. 5—Comparisons of different carbonate classification schemes using data from the Daleel field, Oman (Abbaszadeh 2000).

February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering 29


Low High
High
Macroporosity
Low
Fracture density
Reservoir quality
Potentially non
nonreservoir
Fig. 6—Semiquantitative matrix of reservoir quality in terms
of interparticle and fracture porosities. Macroporosity is pre-
sumed to be related to free-fluid interparticle permeability, both
positively and monotonically.
fall into one of Lucia’s classes. Yet, an HFU analysis following
Amaefule et al. (1993) reveals a three-fold subdivision.
In viewing Figs. 4 and 5 relative to the concept of CN (num-
ber of pore throats per pore body), one would expect higher
CNs (increasing pore connectivity) to correspond with increasing
permeability, flow capacity, or reservoir quality. It is important
to recognize that rock classification schemes are not necessarily
mutually exclusive but rather that they coexist within an overall
technical framework whence they can be applied in a fit-for-pur-
pose manner.
Electroporefacies. These constitute part of the basis for populating
geocellular models. They may also have a role in the recognition of
petrofacies units. In such a case, the electroporefacies scheme will
have to be revisited after the process of petrophysical evaluation is
complete. For carbonates, the principle is straightforward to explain
but difficult to enact. The starting point is some simple pore-classi-
fication scheme that takes account of three reference pore characters
and three levels of fracture development. Such a scheme is shown
in Fig. 6. The scheme is notionally based on standard logs plus
electrical microimaging logs and magnetic resonance logs, perhaps
with elemental/geochemical logs, but it is supported over cored
intervals by pore-size analysis, free-fluid porosity measurements,
TABLE 1—RESULTS OF REGRESSION OF log k ON φ AS PER EQ. 2
HFU A A−2SE(A)
1 5.75 5.13
2 7.01 6.67
3 7.44 6.85
All data 6.94 6.34
Notes: Eq. 2: log k=A φ+B, SE=Standard Error
30
assessments of wettability and capillary character, and X-ray fluo-
rescence/diffraction. However, it is important that, after calibrating
the process, electroporefacies are identifiable from log data alone.
Fig. 6 serves to distinguish in terms of reservoir quality those inter-
vals over which interparticle flow is dominant from intervals where
natural fractures provide the overriding flow conduits. Of course,
many reservoirs benefit from both flow mechanisms. More specifi-
cally, high reservoir quality over a substantial carbonate section is
achievable only with strong interparticle flow.
Once the interpretation process has been completed, at least on
a first pass, the electroporefacies scheme is refined as a basis for
populating geocellular models. There are various ways in which
this can be done. Whatever approach is adopted, there is a balance
to be struck between the meaningful inclusion of detail and the
simplifications that are required for a 3D model to be workable. To
some extent, these issues can be reconciled through the judicious
use of scale. At some point, upscaling will be required before geo-
modeling and/or simulation. Whatever the scale, the populating of
geocellular models should take account of free-fluid porosity and
permeability, as well as net-to-gross reservoir based on dynami-
cally conditioned cutoffs. For each data package, porosity and per-
meability are quantified by averaging over net reservoir intervals.
Petrofacies. The aim is to establish exclusivity between algorithms
so that petrofacies can be identified to enhance petrophysical evalu-
ation. As an example, we again use the porosity-vs.-permeability
data from the Daleel field. The regression results from Eq. 2 are
shown in Table 1. The analysis confirms that the three flow units
are exclusive as petrofacies units from the standpoint of Eq. 2 (i.e.,
statistically different versions of Eq. 2 have been established for
all three HFUs at the 95% confidence level). In particular, note
that HFU 1 is exclusive from the standpoints of both coefficient
A and intercept B. HFUs 2 and 3 have statistically similar values
of A but different values of B, and, therefore, they are also mutu-
ally exclusive. This means that from the standpoint of Eq. 2, the
pre-identification of HFU (Abbaszadeh et al. 2000) also serves to
identify petrofacies units. This is an important observation because
petrofacies units are discarded after the petrophysical evaluation
has been performed. Of course, there may be other admissible data
partitionings that also lead to exclusivity from the standpoint of
Eq. 2. Yet again, the existence of a petrofacies unit depends on all
the algorithms that form part of the petrophysical evaluation exer-
cise. At the extreme, it is possible that no workable data partition-
ing can be achieved. In such cases, the petrofacies concept breaks
down and recourse might have to be made to the mathematical
solution of log-response equations.
HFUs. The outcome of the previous subsection should not be
presumed. Each data set should be investigated separately and
thoroughly. In general, petrofacies units are not the same as HFUs
and, as a point of principle, they should be kept separate. The HFU
concept uses the equivalent circular pore diameter of Leverett (1941)
[i.e., (k/␾)0.5] and repackages this composite parameter as a reservoir
quality index (Amaefule et al. 1993). When identifying flow units
from log data alone, it is especially important that permeability not
be derived solely from porosity but rather from (the conjunctive use
of) other sources such as magnetic resonance imaging, Stoneley-
wave measurements, and electrical microimaging [e.g., Hassall et al.
A+2SE(A) B B−2SE(B) B+2SE(B)
6.37 0.739 0.905 0.572
7.35 1.46 1.55 1.37
8.04 1.84 1.98 1.69
7.53 1.30 1.46 1.14
February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
 Electroporefacies Iteration Process
Pore Type
Electroporefacies Analysis
Specialized Well Logs
Interparticle or
Non-interparticle

Core Program Design

Electroporefacies
• Acquisition and Analyses
Standard Well Logs
• Log Calibration

Start Refined Electroporefacies

Deliverable is an Improved
Pore-type Classification

Fig. 7—Iterative scheme for identifying electroporefacies.

(2004)]. At the core scale, this requirement is satisfied. However, at
the log scale it may not be if only standard tools are available. For
this reason, HFUs should be established using core data although if
core data are used exclusively, the resulting classification will relate
only to interparticle flow. Up to now, most applications have used
deliverables of conventional core analysis (i.e., total porosity and
air permeability). We advocate a cultural change to free-fluid poros-
ity and free-fluid permeability, where the permeating hydrocarbon
matches that in the reservoir zone under consideration. The details
as to how this might be achieved are beyond the scope of the pres-
ent paper, which is set at a higher (overview) level and primarily
references the static volumetric method of estimating hydrocarbons
in place and, thence, recoverable volumes.
Workflow for Petrophysical Evaluation
A value-adding carbonate workflow is proposed to increase the
confidence in those petrophysical deliverables that are used in
static volumetric estimates of petroleum Resources. The workflow
is designed to identify fundamental elements of carbonate forma-
tion evaluation and to integrate these elements systematically.
Workflow designs are driven by coexisting strategies, such as those
that seek to address specific corporate objectives, to re-evaluate
currently available information, or to develop plans for data acqui-
sition that will technically enhance the current data set to sharpen
the petrophysical deliverables and thence reduce uncertainty.
Electroporefacies classification is an iterative process that pro-
gresses as more information is gleaned about pore-size distribution
through specialized well-logging suites (Fig. 7). Electroporefacies
classification begins with the standard well logs and iteratively
continues to be developed with the evaluation of specialized
well logs. The benefits of this iterative approach from a key-well
standpoint as field development proceeds is that electroporefacies
classification may be used to identify core intervals for optimizing
data acquisition and thence for gaining the most valuable additional
information about reservoir storage and flow properties.
The workflow for well-log evaluation shown in Fig. 8 sets forth
a generalized systematic approach for reservoir characterization
of carbonates that includes electroporefacies classification. An

WELL LOGS : LITHOLOGY AND POROSITY DETERMINATION

Rock Fabric Pore Space
Lithology/ Mineralogy Porosity Type Fracture Description
Elemental Analysis Logs Image Log Image Log
Multi-Array Sonic Multi-Array Sonic
Rock Fabric Description
Pore-size Distribution
Grain or Mud Dominated
Magnetic Resonance Logs

ELECTROPOREFACIES CLASSIFICATION
Dominantly Interparticle Mixed Pore Types Dominantly Microporosity

Fractured or Nonfractured
Assign “m” and “n” exponents based on reservoir or analog information

HYDROCARBON SATURATION ESTIMATION

Fig. 8—Workflow for well-log evaluation.

February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering 31

 CORE-LOG: LITHOLOGY,
CORE : LITHOLOGY, POROSITYAND
POROSITY, ANDPERMEABILITY
PERMEABILITY
Rock Texture
Rock Fabric Pore
PoreSpace
Space
Geological Description
Geological
Rock fabric Core
ClassesDescription Identification
Identification ofofVugs,
Vugs, Moldic
Moldic Pores
Pores and Fractures
and Fractures
Conventional
Rock Fabric Core Analysis
Classes Thin section
Thin sectionand
andSEM
SEM
PKS & Grain Density
Conventional Measurements
Core Analysis CT CT
Scan Scan
Empirical Algorithms & Cross Plots CoreCore Image
Image
Porosity, Perm, Saturations
Fitting Functions
Grain Density Measurements
Special CoreAnalysis
Special Core Analysis
Mineral & Elemental Analysis MICP
MICP Pore-throat-size distribution
Pore-throat-size distribution
Mineral and Elemental Analysis NMR T2measurement
NMR T2 measurementPore-size
Pore-size distribution
distribution
XRD, XRF
XRD, XRF Coordination Number (CN)

PETROFACIES CLASSIFICATION
Dominantly Interparticle Mixed PoreTypes Dominantly Microporosity

Fractured or Nonfractured

Perform Core-Log Calibration and Establish Interpretative Algorithms

HYDROCARBON
HYDROCARBONSATURATION
SATURATIONESTIMATION
ESTIMATION

Fig. 9—Workflow for core acquisition and analysis.

electroporefacies scheme, when properly defined, most benefi-
cially contributes to the assessment of the storage capacity of the
reservoir, thus improving the estimate of in-place volumes. The
workflow for core acquisition and analysis shown in Fig. 9 may
be designed in part on the basis of electroporefacies information.
Throughout this workflow process, ideally a rigorous database is
maintained and information is judiciously entered into the petro-
physical and 3D geological modeling software for analysis. The
deliverable is the static 3D geological model used to estimate
in-place volumes.
identified through the use of dynamically conditioned net reservoir
cutoffs [i.e., cutoffs that implicitly are tied to (free-fluid) perme-
ability]. Second, the prediction of free-fluid permeability must
be based on algorithms established using only net-reservoir data.
Our experience has shown that adoption of these principles leads
to a more readily attainable history match at the simulation stage.
The superposition of natural fracture flow is a complex function
of the relative contributions of interparticle and fracture flow, of
variations in the hydraulic character of both components, and of
the way in which they are coupled.

Discussion
Regardless of project maturity, the estimation of petroleum
Resources is governed by the degree of certainty that is associ-
ated with the delivered estimates of recoverable hydrocarbon
volumes. Available methods for estimating Resources fall into two
categories: geology-based methods and production-based methods.
Petrophysics primarily contributes to geology-based methods.
These are the static volumetric approach and uncalibrated reservoir
simulation (i.e., not history matched). From a petrophysical per-
spective, the governance relates to those petrophysical deliverables
that are input to the estimation of hydrocarbon volumes using
either of these methods.
For the static volumetric method, the key petrophysical inputs
are porosity, hydrocarbon saturation, and net-to-gross reservoir.
A major challenge is to relate these three inputs to free-fluid pore
space. The exercise is reservoir-specific. For example, liquids in
micropores may never be produced but gases might be, hence the
importance of the nature of wetting. The classical approaches are
routed in applications to clastic reservoirs. In carbonates, where
pore character is more diagnostic than mineralogy, a more incisive
breakdown of the pore system in terms of electroporefacies and
petrofacies is particularly beneficial. The static volumetric method
is often applied using zonal averages and, through these, interwell
correlation.
The geoscience model constitutes the basis for simulation.
The geoscience model will have been populated with net-to-gross
reservoir and with porosity and hydrocarbon saturation, both aver-
aged over net-to-gross reservoir for each grid cell (height). The key
challenges here are two-fold. First, noncontributing cells must be
Conclusions
The challenges facing carbonate petrophysics have been evalu-
ated from the standpoint of petroleum Resource estimation. In
particular, the technical challenges of acquiring and analyzing an
optimal petrophysical data set to characterize a carbonate pore
system have been elucidated. The degree of uncertainty associated
with Resource estimates is dependent on the heterogeneity of the
reservoir system. Because carbonate reservoirs tend to be more
heterogeneous than clastic reservoirs, the need for a sound and
comprehensive data set is paramount if unworkable uncertainty
is to be avoided. The adoption of the key-well strategy should
result in a much sounder assessment of reservoir properties and
their associated uncertainty and thence provide a more definitive
basis for development decision making. These matters have been
incorporated into a pragmatic workflow that recognizes coexisting
classification schemes for carbonate reservoirs.
Acknowledgments
This paper is an updated version of Paper IPTC 13772 presented at
the International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Doha on
7–9 December 2009. The authors wish to recognize those geosci-
entists and engineers within the petroleum community whose col-
laboration over the years has contributed to this formulation of ideas.
Thanks are also due to Gaffney, Cline & Associates for supporting
the progression of this work into the peer-reviewed literature.
References
Abbaszadeh, M., Koide, N., and Murahashi, Y. 2000. Integrated Character-
ization and Flow Modeling of a Heterogeneous Carbonate Reservoir in

32 February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering

 Daleel Field, Oman. SPE Res Eval & Eng 3 (2): 150–159. SPE-62514-
PA. doi: 10.2118/62514-PA.
Aguilera, R. 1995. Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, second edition. Tulsa:
Pennwell Books.
Amabeoku, M.O., Kersey, D., Al-Harbi, A.A., Al-Belowi, A.R., and Bin-
Nasser, R.H. 2008. Successful Application of the Key Well Concept
to Enhance Formation Evaluation. Paper IPTC 12579 presented at the
International Petroleum Technology Conference, Kuala Lumpur, 3–5
December. doi: 10.2523/12579-MS.
Amaefule, J.O., Altunbay, M., Tiab, D., Kersey, D.G., and Keelan, D.K.
1993. Enhanced Reservoir Description: Using Core and Log Data to
Identify Hydraulic (Flow) Units and Predict Permeability in Uncored
Intervals/Wells. Paper SPE 26436 presented at the SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, 3–6 October. doi:
10.2118/26436-MS.
Ara, T.S., Talabani, S., and Vaziri, H.H. 2001. In-Depth Investigation of the
Validity of the Archie Equation in Carbonate Rocks. Paper SPE 67204
presented at the SPE Production and Operations Symposium, Okla-
homa City, Oklahoma, USA, 24–27 March. doi: 10.2118/67204-MS.
Archie, G.E. 1950. Introduction to petrophysics of reservoir rocks. AAPG
Bulletin 34 (5): 943–961.
Archie, G.E. 1952. Classification of carbonate reservoir rocks and petro-
physical considerations. AAPG Bulletin 36 (2): 278–298.
Aschenbrenner, B.C. and Chillingar, G.V. 1960. Teodorovich’s Method for
Determining Permeability from Pore-space Characteristics of Carbon-
ate Rocks. AAPG Bulletin 44 (8): 1421–1424.
Bouvier, L. and Maquignon, S.M. 1991. Reconciliation of Log and
Laboratory Derived Irreducible Water Saturations in a Double Porosity
Reservoir. In Advances in Core Evaluation II: Reservoir Appraisal, ed.
P.F. Worthington and D. Longeron, 275–292. Reading, UK: Gordon and
Breach Science Publishers.
Chatzis, I., Morrow, N.R., and Lim, H.T. 1983. Magnitude and Detailed
Structure of Residual Oil Saturation. SPE J. 23 (2): 311–326. SPE-
10681-PA. doi: 10.2118/10681-PA.
Chilingar, G.V., Mannon, R.W., and Herman, H.R. ed. 1972. Oil and Gas
Production from Carbonate Rocks. New York City: Elsevier Science.
Civan, F. 2002. Relating Permeability to Pore Connectivity using a Power-
Law Flow Unit Equation. Petrophysics 43 (6): 457–476.
Corbett, P.M.W. and Jensen, J.L. 1992a. Variation of reservoir statistics
according to sample spacing and measurement type for some intervals
in the Lower Brent Group. The Log Analyst 33 (1): 22–41.
Corbett, P.M.W. and Jensen, J.L. 1992b. Estimating the mean permeability:
how many measurements do you need? First Break 10 (3): 89–94.
Cosentino, L. 2001. Integrated Reservoir Studies. Paris: Editions Tech-
nip.
Dehghan, A.A., Kharrat, R., Ghazanfari, M.H., and Farzaheh, S.A. 2009.
Studying the Effects of Pore Geometry, Wettability and Co-Solvent
Types on the Efficiency of Solvent Flooding to Heavy Oil in Five-Spot
Models. Paper SPE 123315 presented at the Asia Pacific Oil and Gas
Conference & Exhibition, Jakarta, 4–6 August. doi: 10.2118/123315-
MS.
Dewan, J. 1983. Essentials of Modern Open-Hole Log Interpretation.
Tulsa: PennWell Publishing Company.
Focke, J.W. and Munn, D. 1987. Cementation Exponents in Middle Eastern
Carbonate Reservoirs. SPE Form Eval 2 (2): 155–167. SPE-13735-PA.
doi: 10.2118/13735-PA.
Gomaa, N., Al-Alyak, A, Ouzzane, D., Saif, O., Okuyiga, M., Allen, D.,
Rose, D., Ramamoorthy, R., and Bize, E. 2006. Case Study of Perme-
ability, Vug Quantification, and Rock Typing in a Complex Carbonate.
Paper SPE 102888 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 24–27 September. doi:
10.2118/102888-MS.
Gomes, J.S. 2008. Carbonate Reservoir Rock Typing—The Link Between
Geology and SCAL. Paper SPE 118284 presented at the Abu Dhabi
International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE,
3–6 November. doi: 10.2118/118284-MS.
Hassall, J.K., Ferraris, P., Al-Raisi, M., Hurley, N.F., Boyd, A., and
Allen, D.F. 2004. Comparison of Permeability Predictors from NMR,
Formation Image and Other Logs in a Carbonate Reservoir. Paper
SPE 88683 presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum
Conference and Exhibition, Abu Dhabi, UAE, 10–13 October. doi:
10.2118/88683-MS.
February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering
Hurst, A. and Rosvoll, K.J. 1991. Permeability variations in sandstones and
their relationship to sedimentary structures. In Reservoir Characteriza-
tion II, ed. L.W. Lake, H.B. Carroll Jr., and T.C. Wesson, 166–196.
San Diego, California, USA: Academic Press.
Jennings, J.W. Jr. and Lucia, F.J. 2003. Predicting Permeability From Well
Logs in Carbonates With a Link to Geology for Interwell Permeability
Mapping. SPE Res Eval & Eng 6 (4): 215–225. SPE-84942-PA. doi:
10.2118/84942-PA.
Kolodzie, S. Jr. 1980. Analysis of Pore Throat Size and Use of the Wax-
man-Smits Equation To Determine OOIP in Spindle Field, Colorado.
Paper SPE 9382 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Dallas, 21–24 September. doi: 10.118/9382-MS.
Leverett, M.C. 1941. Capillary Behavior in Porous Solids. SPE-941152-G.
Trans., AIME, 142: 152–169.
Lucia, F.J. 1983. Petrophysical Parameters Estimated from Visual
Descriptions of Carbonate Rocks: A Field Classification of Carbon-
ate Pore Space. J. Pet Technol 35 (3): 629–637. SPE-10073-PA. doi:
10.2118/10073-PA.
Lucia, F.J. 2007. Carbonate Reservoir Characterization: An Integrated
Approach, second edition. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Lucia, F.J., Kerans, C., and Jennings, J.W. Jr. 2003. Carbonate Reservoir
Characterization. J. Pet Technol 55 (6): 70–72. SPE-82071-PA. doi:
10.2118/82071-MS.
Miall, A.D. 1990. Principles of Sedimentary Basin Analysis, second edi-
tion. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Pittman, E.D. 1992. Relationship of porosity and permeability to various
parameters derived from mercury injection-capillary pressure curves
for sandstone. AAPG Bulletin 76 (2): 191–198.
Ragland, D.A. 2002. Trends in Cementation Exponents (m) for Carbonate
Pore Systems. Petrophysics 43 (5): 434–446.
Rider, M. 1996. The Geological Interpretation of Well Logs, second edition.
Houston: Gulf Publishing Company.
Serra, O. and Abbott, H.T. 1982. The Contribution of Logging Data to
Sedimentology and Stratigraphy. SPE J. 22 (1): 117–131. SPE-9270-
PA. doi: 10.2118/9270-MS.
SPE, WPC, AAPG, and SPEE. 2007. Petroleum Resources Manage-
ment System, http://www.spe.org/industry/reserves/docs/Petroleum_
Resources_Management_System_2007.pdf.
Thompson, K.E., Willson, C.S., White, C.D., Nyman, S., Bhattacharya, J.,
and Reed, A.H. 2005. Application of a New Grain-Based Reconstruc-
tion Algorithm to Microtomography Images for Quantitative Charac-
terization and Flow Modeling. SPE J. 13 (2): 164–176. SPE-95887-PA.
doi: 10.2118/95887-PA.
Truman, R.B. II and Davidson, J.A. 2003. SEC Defined Reserves Booking:
What the Petrophysicist Needs to Know. Paper SPE 84388 presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, 5–8
October. doi: 10.2118/84388-MS.
Vavra, C.L., Kaldi, J.G., and Sneider, R.M. 1992. Geological applications
of capillary pressure; a review. AAPG Bulletin 76 (6): 840–850.
Wardlaw, N. 1980. The Effects of Pore Structure on Displacement Effi-
ciency in Reservoir Rocks and in Glass Models. Paper SPE 8843
presented the SPE/DOE Enhanced Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa,
20–23 April. doi: 10.118/8843-MS.
Worthington, P.F. 2002. A Validation Criterion To Optimize Core Sampling
For The Characterization Of Petrophysical Facies. Petrophysics 43 (6):
477–493.
Worthington, P.F. 2004a. Maximizing the Effectiveness of Integrated
Reservoir Studies: Practical Approaches to Improving the Process and
Results. J. Pet Technol 56 (1): 57–62. SPE-83701-MS. doi: 10.2118/
83701-MS.
Worthington, P.F. 2004b. The effect of scale on the petrophysical estimation
of intergranular permeability. Petrophysics 45 (1): 59–72.
Worthington, P.F. 2007. A road map for improving the technical basis for
the estimation of petroleum reserves. Petroleum Geoscience 13 (4):
291–303. doi: 10.1144/1354-079306-732.
Worthington, P.F. 2008. A diagnostic approach to quantifying the stress
sensitivity of permeability. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 61 (2–4): 49–57. doi:
10.1016/j.petrol.2008.03.003.
Yuan, H.H. 1981. The Influence of Pore Coordination on Petrophysical
Parameters. Paper SPE 10074 presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 4–7 October.
doi: 10.2118/10074-MS.
33
Vivian K. Bust is a Senior Reservoir Engineer/Geologist with
Gaffney, Cline & Associates, where she is engaged in petro-
leum reserve analysis that involves 3D static and dynamic
modeling, petrophysical analysis, and evaluation of reservoir
performance and field development plans for conventional
and unconventional reservoirs. Previously, she was a consulting
geologist/petroleum engineer for Occidental Petroleum in the
Wilmington Oil Field waterflood, hydrogeologist with Converse
Consultants of California, and petrophysical engineer with
Shell Oil Company. Bust holds MS and BS in geology, and BS
in civil engineering degrees, all from Michigan State University.
She is a licensed petroleum engineer, registered professional
geologist and certified hydrogeologist. As the 2000 Chair of LA
SPE, Bust led efforts that resulted in the Section being awarded
the SPE President’s Award for Section Excellence. She was the
recipient of the SPE Western North American Regional Service
Award in 2004 and was on the 2010 Board of the GCS SPE.
Joshua U. Oletu is a Senior Petrophysicist with Gaffney, Cline &
Associates, where he has conducted numerous reservoir char-
acterization studies and reserve assessments for oil and gas
fields in the United States, Europe, Russia, Latin America, Africa,
and Middle East. He has carried out extensive petrophysical
34
analysis of nonconventional reservoirs such as heavy oil res-
ervoirs, fresh water reservoirs, and tight sandstone and shale
gas/oil reservoirs. Oletu holds a B. Eng. Degree in mechani-
cal engineering from the University of Benin and an MBA
degree from Ellis College, New York Institute of Technology.
Paul F. Worthington is a Principal Advisor with Gaffney, Cline &
Associates, where his main interests are integrated reservoir
studies for equity redetermination, reserves estimation, and
reservoir management. Previously, he spent 13 years with BP,
mostly as head of formation evaluation at the BP Research
Center in Sunbury-on-Thames, England. Worthington’s degrees
include a PhD and a DEng, both from University of Birmingham,
UK. He currently holds a visiting professorship in Petroleum
Geoscience and Engineering at Imperial College, University
of London. Worthington has served as President of SPWLA, as
an SPE Distinguished Lecturer and an SPWLA Distinguished
Lecturer, and as an SPE Distinguished Author, and he has twice
chaired the SPE Formation Evaluation Committee. He is a
member of the SPE Distinguished Lecturer Committee, and he
was Program Chairman for the 2010 SPE HEES. Worthington is
a former Editor of Petrophysics and is currently a Coeditor of
Petroleum Geoscience.
February 2011 SPE Reservoir Evaluation & Engineering