Porosity Measurement and Petrophysical Properties of the

Indonesian Limestone as Reservoir Rock by Using X-Ray

and Neutron Imaging Technique
F Akbar a), A Ramadhanib), P K Gabrielc), Bharotod), and G S Sulistiosoe)

Center for Science & Technology of Advanced Material – National Nuclear Energy Agency of Indonesia BATAN,
Kawasan PUSPIPTEK Gd. 40, Tangerang Selatan, Banten, 15314, Indonesia
a)
Corresponding author: fahrurrozi.akbar@gmail.com
b)
achmad.ramadhani@gmail.com
c)
gabriel_prasuciptoymail.com
d)
bharoto@gmail.com
e)
sulistioso@gmail.com

Abstract. The oil and gas are usually trapped inside the reservoir rock pores such as Limestones or Sandstone. Most of the
oil and gas companies use the common method for calculating rock total porosity by using Helium (He) or Nitrogen (Ni)
gas. But this technique is limited only in total porosity information of the limestone, not the petrophysical properties of the
sample. Another powerful technique that can be used to investigate the internal structure of the rock is Neutron Imaging
(NI). Several experiments related to NI about porous rocks have been done by another researcher, but an experiment about
the reservoir rock properties with NI has not been done. Porosities are one of the most important parameters to predict the
availability of oil or gas. X-Ray Imaging (XRI) was describing perfectly these porosities, but again the XRI only provide
porosities information of the limestone. To surpassing this limit, NI was employed. NI does not limit only to visualize the
rock porosity but also can distinguish inhomogeneities materials inside the limestone. In this paper, the Limestone sample
has been investigated by employing tomography methods of both XRI and NI technique. The total porosity from both
technique then compared by the java petroleum systems databased (conventional method). From the experiment knew that
the total porosity of the Limestone was about 28.4%, 34.36%, and 30% - 36% by an XRI, NI and conventional method
respectively. XRI detected all porosity including a traped pores, channel pores / interparticle, Intercrystalline and Vugular
pores. It was known that there were a lot of channel pores inside the sample which made the oil flow in the centre of the
stone while the crude oil extracted by the oil company. On the other hand, NI gives more information about inhomogenous
minerals inside the Limestone belongs to Dolomite, Aragonite, Calcite, Magnesite, Ankerite, and Siderite.

INTRODUCTION
Limestone is one of the reservoir rock that contains oil and or gas, but not all of the limestone contains both or one
of them [1]–[4], that is why the preliminary study is needed before the oil and gas companies open the mines. The
most common methods that are usually used by taking the core (Limestone sample) and measuring the total porosity
inside the reservoir rock matrix. If the total porosity is about 20 to 30% means that the site is very potential to get oil
or gas.
XRI is a well-known technology that has been implemented for many applications. One of them is a preliminary
study about petrophysical properties of the reservoir rock such as pore types, quality total porosity including porosity
profile and pore-throat which was been successfully investigated by Joao, 2018 by mean of X-ray microtomography
[5]. With these methods, petrophysical properties were understandable. But again, it provided only pores information
of the limestone.
Another technique that can be used to investigate reservoir rock non-destructively is NI. This method is very
common in nuclear industries but still does not explore a lot in the geological application. The study about porous
rocks related to the NI has been written by several researchers such as Mike F and Frikkie C De Beer [6]–[10]. both
of them were discussed the fluid flow inside the porous rock because the neutron is a very good contrast for light
elements like Hydrogen, boron and carbon, but the investigation of the inhomogeneous properties of the limestone
has not been done.
Indonesia has a lot of carbonate rock formation which are very potential to become reservoirs. These reservoirs
rock dominantly consist of limestone and followed by dolomite [11]. Limestones are primarily composed of the
mineral calcite. It is sediment formed by the precipitation of minerals from solution in water, either the result of
biochemical reactions (the action of plant and animal life that extract calcium carbonate (CaCO3) from the water in
which they live) or by inorganic chemical processes (precipitated directly from water). Most common minerals that
can be found in carbonate rock are Aragonite (CaCO3, 2.93g/cm3), Calcite (CaCO3, 2.71g/cm3), Magnesite (MgCO3,
3.0g/cm3), Dolomite (CuMg(CO3)2, 2.84g/cm3), Ankerite (Ca(FeMg)(CO3)2, 3-3.1g/cm3), and Siderite (FeCO3,
3.96g/cm3) [12].
Indonesia has a nuclear research reactor in Serpong, well known as Reaktor Serba Guna (RSG) Siwabessy. It is a
thermal reactor with 30MWatt full power, but due to the energy efficiency, only half power is operated. Several
laboratories have been installed at the reactor main building- one of them is the NI facility which has 105 - 107 n/cm2s
neutron flux and 83 of L/D ratio. NI Laboratory is a powerful technique to investigate several macro samples such as
automotive engine block, porous rocks, implant material, archaeological and water flow transport.
NI in National Nuclear Energy Agency - BATAN has four major methods, they are film method, neutron
radiography with a camera, neutron computed tomography and dynamic radiography method. The chosen methods
are very dependent on experiment purposes. In this experiment, only the computed tomography method (both XRI
and NI) was employed because the research purposes were calculated porosity and identifying inhomogeneous
materials inside the limestone sample.

METHODOLOGY

Scintillator

X-ray/
neutron
beam
Guide tube
CCD
Sample Limestone
Computer table
Darkbox
FIGURE 1. Sample preparation for NI and XRI

The sample preparation for NI and XRI is shown in Figure 1. In this experiment, the Limestone was placed in 5
meter away from the source (neutron/X-ray) and placed as close as a detector. XRI was employed 120 keV of applied
voltage, 627 raw data images and rotated sample at 360°, while the NI was used 15MWatt thermal energy, 105-107
neutron/ cm2s neutron flux, 710 raw data images, rotated sample 360°, and 40s of exposure time per image which was
taken by Andor charge-coupled device (CCD) camera. All of the data recorded by the computer and ready for the next
step, XRI and NI tomography reconstruction.
 FIGURE 2. Block diagram of tomography reconstruction to measure porosity and detected inhomogeneous minerals of the
Limestone sample.

In Figure 2 shows that all of the raw images data must be optimized using ImageJ-FIJI software to reduce white
spot noise. After that, all of the images data would be reconstructed by Octopus software. Some parameter should be
considered in this reconstruction such as Beam Hardening Correction (BHC) [13]–[15], tilting correction, and ring
filter. The final data from the Octopus software was called cross-section images. The cross-section images should be
cropped (for about 80% of the total volume of the sample) and resized to make it easier during porosity calculation.
The cross-section images from XRI and NI then would be stacked to create a 3Dimentional (3D) image by using a
Volume Graphic (VG) Studio. In this step, the total porosity of the Limestone sample was calculated. VG Studio has
successfully reconstructed and calculated the Limestone porosities but failed to explain why in the centre of the sample
there were a lot of porosities with a grey colour. That was why transforming the normal cross-section images into
binary cross-section images and adjusting the image threshold were needed to get more clear information about the
porosities. Unfortunately, this transforming techniques worked only for XRI, not NI.
Determining inhomogenous minerals need a comparison between the XRI and NI cross-section images in the same
position based on a different grey level between them. XRI worked by density while NI depends on the minerals
element. With images comparison technique and grey value measurement in the specific areas, the inhomogenous
minerals could be determined. The grey level calculation follows simple equation 1 (for XRI) and 2 (for NI calculation)
below:
'
$%&
'(
𝜇𝑥 = %&(*+,) (1)

'
$%&
'(
∑𝑥 = (2)
%&(*+,)

Where µ is a density (gr/cm2), Σ is a macroscopic cross-section (barn), X is a thickness (cm) and I/I0 is the intensity
/ Grey value.
 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The total porosity of the limestone was 28.4%, 34.36% and 30% - 36% which were measured by XRI, NI and
conventional techniques. In this case, the NI porosities measurement was in the range of 30-36% compared to the XRI
measurement which had 2% below the conventional method. Even though the NI had 34.36% porosities, but this data
cannot be used as reference data of the Limestone porosities. See Figure 3 below to explain this one.

TABLE 1. Total Porosities measurement

Methods Total Materials (%) Total Porosities (%)

X Ray 71.60 28.4 ± 1
Neutron 65.64 34.36 ± 1
Conventional (Gas)[16] 70-64 30-36

2 2
1 1

3 3

4 4

NI XRI
FIGURE 3. Cross-section image of NI and XRI at the position of 2.4mm from the top of the limestone

In Figure 3 shows several measurement areas (area 1 to 4) which had a different grey level between NI and XRI.
In NI cross-section image areas, they were dominant with black colour. It means that those areas were very porous
minerals compare to the XRI cross-section image which has a light grey colour in the same positions. The different
grey level of the NI and XRI had indicated the inhomogeneous minerals of the Limestone sample. More detail about
inhomogeneous minerals will be discussed after NI and XRI porosity explanations.

TOP

Bottom
FIGURE 4. Porosities distribution of the Limestone by mean of XRI investigation
 FIGURE 5. XRI Porosities measurement and porosities profile of the Limestone. a) transverse plane, b) sagittal plane, c) front
plane and d) 3D image

TOP

Middle

Bottom
FIGURE 6. Porosities distribution of the Limestone by mean of NI investigation

The pores distribution can be measured statistically by using the ImageJ software. Figure 4 shows that porosities
were distributed evenly from the top to the bottom of the sample, while the NI (Figure 5) showed that porosities were
very different from the top to the bottom of the sample. The most darker area was detected in the centre of the
Limestone sample (it was agreed in both technique), it means that they were more pores and permeability in the centre
area. The 3D image for both XRI and NI shows that there were trapped porosities (the images with colours) in the
peripheral area. It pores had varies volume in the range of 0.01mm3 to 0.81mm3 and 0.001mm3 to 1.01mm3 for the
XRI and NI respectively. Another information gained from the NI that the distribution of the mineral differently from
the top to the middle and from the middle to the bottom.
The next step was to find out the petrophysical properties of the Limestone by using VG Studio Max. In this
experiment, XRI had been successfully detected and identified all of the porosities inside the Limestone sample. Four
types of porosities detected belongs to Vugular pores, Channel pores, Intercrystallyne pores and Trapped pores. See
Figure 6 below to get a global image of the pore types of the Limestone sample.
Figure 6 shows the porosities measurement and porosities profile of the Limestone by mean of the XRI method.
This cross-section image / transverse plane image was taken in a 2.665cm position from the top of the Limestone
sample and found that all of the pores were detected perfectly. Figure 6 (b) sagittal plane image shows that mostly
porosities were dominated by the channel pores which was in the centre of the sample, while trapped pores were
distributed in the peripheral of the stone in the varies volume from 0.01mm3 (blue colour) to 0.81mm3 (red colour).
Based on this data, the oil will flows in the centre of the sample when oil companies treat the oil field with high water
pressure.
The total porosity and trapped porosities have been successfully measured by the NI technique, but this data can
not be used to predict the exact porosity of the sample. It because the neutron interaction with matter very depends on
the sample elements. In this case, the Limestone sample has some elements which were very transparent with neutrons.
Comparison of NI and XRI gave complete information to find out the inhomogenous minerals inside the sample.

FIGURE 7. the cross-section images of the limestone at the position of 1 cm, 2 cm and 3 cm from the top of the limestone

Figure 7 shows the different cross-section / transverse plane image of NI and XRI. The NI cross-section shows
several grey level values started from the darker area (pores area) to the brighter area (material/ mineral area).
Meanwhile, for the XRI cross-section image, the image area was almost homogeneous because of minerals density
ware almost equal to each other. In Figure 7 showed that there are bright areas in the XRI cross-section images which
belonged to materials that have high density. The density of Dolomite, Aragonite and Calcite was 2.84 g/cm³, 2.93
g/cm³ and 2.71 g/cm³ respectively. Meanwhile, Magnesite and Ankerite have 3.0 g/cm³, so that means only Siderite
was the highest density among them (was about 3.96 g/cm³).
Inhomogenous of the Limestone material can be shown by the NI cross-section image supported by the XRI cross-
section image. XRI cross-section image was needed to validate the existence of the minerals and pores. The darker
image area in the NI cross-section image can be minerals or pores. See Figures 8 and 9 of the NI cross-section image,
area number 4 shows that the grey level of the image was almost dark. It means that this area was pores but from the
XRI perspective knew that that area was mineral, not porosity.

a) B)
Aragonite Aragonite

Dolomite Dolomite

Calsite Calsite

Ankerite Ankerite
Magnesite Magnesite

FIGURE 8. cross-section image of a) XRI and b) NI.

 a) b)
4 4

Siderite Siderite

FIGURE 9. Cross-section image of a) XRI and b) NI.

TABLE 2. Density measurement in the 6 different areas from both NI and XRI

Area NI StdDev NI XRI StdDev XRI

1 2.301 0.04 0.961 0.03
2 1.881 0.06 0.743 0.04
3 1.634 0.04 0.806 0.03
4 1.331 0.08 0.695 0.04
5 1.64 0.02 1.109 0.05
6 2.349 0.04 1.267 0.03

FIGURE 10. Inhomogeneous material properties of the Limestone by mean of XRI and NI measurement

Based on the NI and XRI comparison, 6 minerals inside the Limestone can be distinguished perfectly. In Figure
10 shows that areas 2, 3 and 4 almost have the same result, measured by the XRI, while the NI gave a different result
in their intensities. Based on the density information, it knew that Dolomite, Aragonite and Calcite have densities
2.84gr/ cm3, 2.93gr/cm3 and 2.71gr/cm3 respectively. Dolomite contains Mg element which was better contrast than
Aragonite and Calcite which has Ca element in the NI perspective. In areas 1 and 5, the densities were the same but
in the NI measurement knew that area 1 has good intensity than area 5. It means that area 5 had the element which
was a very good contrast against neutron. Look again between the Ankerite and Magnesite, it knew that the Fe element
in Ankerite was much better contrasting than Mg element in Magnesite. The last area was siderite because the density
was the highest one compare to the others and also, it has a high-intensity level by mean of NI measurement (almost
the same level as area 1).
In this experiment, the researcher tried to find out the existence of the water or oil inside the sample by
investigating one by one of the NI and XRI cross-section images. Unfortunately, there was no water or oil detected.
The present of the water and oil inside the Limestone sample can be found in the area of the XRI cross-section image
gives a lower grey level (dark colour / mentioned as a pore) while the area of the NI cross-section image gives a very
good contrast (white colour image).

CONCLUSION

XRI had been successfully detected the existence of the porosities, including porosity profile and porosity
measurement. Total porosity was about 28.4%, 34.36% and 30% - 36% measured by XRI, NI and conventional method
respectively. The most porosities present in the sample was channel pores which were located in the centre of the
sample. In the peripheral of the Limestone, there were several trapped porosities. Comparison between NI and XRI
cross-section images and grey level measurement gave very good information to distinguish 6 materials inside the
limestone sample belongs to Dolomite, Aragonite, Calcite, Magnesite, Ankerite, and Siderite. Unfortunately, the
Limestone sample did not contain water or oil. The next experiment should be included crude oil or water inside the
Limestone sample to find out the XRI and NI performance in the Limestone as a reservoir rock.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Special thanks to RSGA Siwabessy which provide neutrons for this experiment, Also thank you very much to
Edward Tech and Lemigas who provide the Limestone sample. Many thanks to the head of the neutron beam
technology division Dr Iwan Sumirat who allowed completing this experiment. Thank you very much also to neutron
imaging team, Mrs Juliyani and Mr Setiawan as a technician who supported this experiment.

REFERENCES

1. C. Chang, M. D. Zoback, and A. Khaksar, Empirical relations between rock strength and physical properties
in sedimentary rocks, J. Pet. Sci. Eng., 2006.
2. Carbonate Reservoir Characterization. 2007.
3. T. Ahmed, Fundamentals of Rock Properties, in Reservoir Engineering Handbook, 2010.
4. P. L. Churchel, P. B. French, J. C. Shaw, and L. L. Schramm, Rock properties of Berea sandstone, Baker
dolomite, and Indiana limestone, 1991.
5. J. P. T. Zielinski, A. C. Vidal, G. F. Chinelatto, L. Coser, and C. P. Fernandes, Evaluation of pore system
properties of coquinas from morro do chaves formation by means of X-ray microtomography, Rev. Bras.
Geofis., 2018.
6. M. F. Middleton and I. Pàzsit, Neutron radiography: A technique to support reservoir analysis, Explor.
Geophys., 1998.
7. F. C. de Beer and M. F. Middleton, Neutron radiography imaging, porosity and permeability in porous rocks,
South African J. Geol., 2006.
8. M. R. Deinert, J. Y. Parlange, T. Steenhuis, J. Throop, K. Ünlü, and K. B. Cady, Measurement of fluid contents
and wetting front profiles by real-time neutron radiography, J. Hydrol., 2004.
9. F. C. De Beer, M. F. Middleton, and J. Hilson, Neutron radiography of porous rocks and iron ore, in Applied
Radiation and Isotopes, 2004.
10. C. Degueldre et al., Porosity and pathway determination in crystalline rock by positron emission tomography
and neutron radiography, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 1996.
11. R. Atmadibrata, D. Muslim, R. F. Hirnawan, and A. Abdurrokhim, Characteristics of Arun Carbonate
Reservoir and Its Implication To Optimize the Most Potential Gas Resource Zone In Arun Gas Field, Aceh,
Indonesia, Indones. J. Geosci., vol. 6, no. 2, 2019.
12. M. Mehmood, Dolomite and dolomitization model - a short review, Int. J. Hydrol., 2018.
13. W. Zbijewski, Model-based image reconstruction in X-ray Computed Tomography, 2006.
14. L. G. Tumlinson, H. Liu, W. K. Silk, and J. W. Hopmans, Thermal Neutron Computed Tomography of Soil
Water and Plant Roots, Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 72, no. 5. pp. 1234, 2008.
15. W. J. Richards, M. R. Gibbons, and K. C. Shields, Neutron tomography developments and applications, in
Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 2004, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 551–559.
16. M. G. Bishop, Petroleum Systems of The Northwest Java Province, Java and Offshore Southeast Sumatra,
Indonesia, North, 2000.