Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Egyptian Journal of Petroleum

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com

Full Length Article

Sedimentary facies analysis of the Upper Bahariya sandstone reservoir in

East Bahariya C area, North Western Desert, Egypt
Radwa.O. Almoqaddam a,⇑, M. Darwish b, A.N. EL-Barkooky b, C. Clerk c
a
Qarun Petroleum Company (QPC), Egypt
b
Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Egypt
c
Apache Egypt, Oil and Gas Exploration and Production, Egypt

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The present work aims to deduce the depositional processes of the Lower Cenomanian Bahariya
Received 3 December 2017 Formation, that is one of the main hydrocarbon siliciclastic reservoirs in the Northern Western Desert
Revised 19 March 2018 of Egypt. This has been achieved through the analyses of the core photographs, micro-resistivity image
Accepted 27 March 2018
logs, mud logs and conventional wireline logs. The Bahariya Formation comprises a complex of deposi-
Available online 3 July 2018
tional lithofacies such as interbedded siltstone, shale, sandstones and pebbly sandstones. The current
work highlights the effectiveness of the integrative approach. A variety of datasets including core pho-
Keywords:
tographs, micro-resistivity image logs, mud logs and conventional wireline logs are integrated to define
Sedimentary facies analysis
Core
the conceptual depositional model in the study area.
Micro resistivity image Different recorded sedimentary features point to various depositional processes. Hummocky cross
Storm deposits stratification (HCS) is the common sedimentary structure indicating the storm action. Wave ripples are
Tidal evidence recorded providing evidence for fair-weather action on shoreface. Rhythmic heterolithics, tidalites indi-
Shoreface cate the tidal processes. The upper part of the Bahariya Formation has been influenced by wave and storm
Tempestite processes more than the lower parts. The core and image facies are designated, being dominated by
Conceptual facies model Sandstone (S), Siltstone (Z), Mudstone (M), Heterolithic (H) and Limestone (L.s). The studied core and
Bahariya
image facies with wireline logs facies are grouped into five major facies associations (FA). They are
Western Desert Egypt
Tidal Channel and Tidal Creeks, Tidal Flat, Storm, Shoreface, Offshore Transition to Offshore Facies
Associations. The integrative approach indicates that the Upper Bahariya Member has been deposited
in a storm influenced tidal coastal realm.
Ó 2018 Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open
access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction
The study area is described and interpreted based on sedimen-
tary facies analysis. Detailed petrophysical reservoir parameters
evaluation is a subject for another research preparation.
The recorded sedimentary facies of the Bahariya Formation in
the study area suggest variable mixtures of energies and deposi-
tional processes. The present work deals with the complexity of
that depositional system as it influenced by interaction of tides,
waves and storms.
The differentiation in coastal depositional environments caused
by waves and tides have been defined since the early 70s by
Peer review under responsibility of Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: robbaha@qarun.net (R.O. Almoqaddam), mdarwish@sci.cu.
edu.eg (M. Darwish), abarkooky@sci.cu.edu.eg (A.N. EL-Barkooky), colin.clerk@
apacheegypt.com (C. Clerk).
[8,16,9]. Armas and Sánchez [1] mentioned that authors such as
[4] who suggested the definition of tidal flats as environments
dominated by tides with a gentle slope and little influence of
waves, unlike beach or shoreface environments, in which the
slopes are greater and are subject to strong wave action. Although
existing models of shoreface depositional systems, rarely consider
the effects of tides [5]. This occurs in a wide range of coastal sys-
tems and presents great variability controlled by relative changes
in sea level, the influence of storm and fair-weather waves and
tides [5,6]. Reinson [13] classically divided the shoreface in to three
sub-environments (from seaward to landward): the lower, the
middle, and the upper shoreface. The lower-shoreface deposits
accumulate at the break in slope where the shoreface grades into
the shelf. The boundaries between these zones, and between the
lower shoreface and the offshore, are not always clearly defined.
For example, with greater storm domination, the effective wave
base is lowered to depths approaching the storm-wave base. As a
result, erosive amalgamated tempestite erroneously attributed to

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2018.03.009
1110-0621/Ó 2018 Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
1104 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112

‘‘lower shoreface” conditions may actually have been deposited
well below fair-weather wave base [12]. Indirect tidal influences
are more pronounced in the upper and lower shoreface, and are
recorded through the interbedding of sedimentary structures pro-
duced by shoaling waves, breakers, surf, swash, backwash, and sur-
face runoff. The boundaries between shoreface subenvironments
are correspondingly poorly defined [6]. The deeper shelf area
between the fair weather and storm wave base is called the off-
shore transition zone. The offshore zone is the region below storm
wave base and extends out to the shelf edge break at around 200 m
depth [11]. A crucial issue to understand, is that coastal environ-
ments are considered to result from mixtures of energies and their
depositional processes. Identification of facies associations helped
in construction of the conceptual depositional facies model of the
upper member of the Bahariya Formation (UB) in this area.
1.1. Objective of the study
This study is to provide a detailed integrated facies analyses
within a stratigraphic framework thus, a coherent conceptual
depositional facies model can be constructed and identified for
the study area.
1.2. Available dataset
The present study is based on four selected wells. They are cov-
ered by conventional wireline logs (gamma ray, density, neutron,
photoelectric effect logs), except one well which is covered only
by gamma ray in addition to dich cuttings mud logs. Raw borehole
image data are available in three wells. Core photographs are avail-
able in one well.
1.3. Applied workflow and methodologies
1- Constructing multi correlation panels using wire line logs
across the study area.
2- Conventional core datasets depth matching, facies recogni-
tion, description, and interpretation for the core sedimen-
tary facies.
3- Processing of the raw borehole images, manually hand pick-
ing, image to core tying, and then image facies delineation.
4- Integration between interpreted core to image facies relative
to the conventional logs facies and classifying the major rep-
resentative facies associations.
5- Construction of the conceptual depositional facies model
based on the interpreted facies associations.

Fig. 1. Dimensional index map presenting the location of the study area (marked by the square). It depicts the spatial distribution of the main East-West sedimentary basins
and the major tectonics in the North Western Desert, Egypt, after [2]. Associated base map is showing the studied wells locations.
 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112 1105

2. Geological setting Table 1

A code for the lithofacies described in this study.

2.1. Location of the study area Interpreted Lithofacies Description Facies

Code
The East Bahariya-C (EBAH C) oil field is part of the EBAH Laminated Sandstone Sl
development lease of Apache Corporation and Qarun Petroleum Cross-Bedded Sandstone Sx
Rippled Sandstone Sr
Company (QPC). It is located in the Eastern part of Abu Gharadig
Massive Sandstone Sm
basin, specifically on the margin between Abu Gharadig basin laminated Heterolithics (Mudstone/Sandstone) dominated Hl (M/S)
and Kattania high (Fig. 1). laminated Heterolithics (Sandstone/Siltstone) dominated Hl (Z/S)
laminated Heterolithics (Mudstone/Siltstone) dominated Hl (M/Z)
Bioturbated laminated Heterolithics (Mudstone/Sandstone) Hlb (M/S)
2.2. Stratigraphic framework dominated
Bioturbated laminated Heterolithics (Mudstone/Siltstone) Hb (M/Z)
Authors such as [15], reconstructed the Western Desert strati- dominated
graphic column and classified the Albian-Cenomanian sections in Silt Z
Massive Siltstone Zm
the Western Desert (Fig. 2a) in to two tectonostratigraphic events.
Laminated Siltstone Zl
They are: (1) Albian fluvio marine sand-rich Kharita Formation Cross-Bedded Siltstone Zx
within a passive margine of progradation event and (2) the regio- Rippled Siltstone Zr
nal transgression of the Late Albian to Early Cenomanian event of Biouturbated Siltstone Zb
Mudstone M
the Bahariya Formation. This event ended by Upper Cenomanian
Laminated Mudstone Ml
marine shale and carbonates of Abu Roash G Member deposition. Biouturbated Mudstone Mb
The Bahariya Formation with all its members show correlatability Limestone L.S
in the study area. The actual penetrated stratigraphic sequence is Fossiliferous Limestone L.S f
presented in (Fig. 2b), while in (Fig. 2c) the Upper Bahariya interval
is enlarged with its units subdivisions UB0, UB1, UB2 and UB3, the
black highlights refer for the scored intervals while the borehole borehole image facies and integrating them to present the major
image is covered all the sequence. facies associations of the study area. All those interpreted facies
from cores, borehole images, wireline logs are integrated to desig-
nate the ‘‘Facies Associations” in terms of their depositional envi-
3. Detailed integrated facies analyses
ronment settings.
Twenty lithofacies are recognized, described, interpreted, cod-
ded and tabulated in (Table 1) as a result of the integrated analyses. 3.1. Facies analyses results
The code used for their nomenclature (Table 1) is based on the cri-
teria outlined by [10]. Thus, the first letter refers to grain size, and 3.1.1. Facies associations
the second to the associated sedimentary structures. Identifying According to [14] the facies sequences or associations are easily
primarily the core lithofacies makes it possible to tie them to the defined as characteristics of a specific depositional environment. In

Fig.(2b): Stratigraphic Interval of the

Bahariya Formation Upper, Middle
and Lower Members in the studied
wells.

Fig.(2a): General Stratigraphic Column

of Western Desert of Egypt . after, [14].
Fig.(2c):-Representative penetrated strati-
graphic interval, of the Upper part from
Bahariya Formation, in the cored well from
the study area.
- Black highlighted intervals refer to the
cored intervals.

Fig. 2. Delineated stratigraphic cored and non-cored intervals relative to the general stratigraphic column of the Abu Gharadig Basin Western Desert-Egypt.
1106 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112
facies associations analysis, individual or groups of lithofacies are
separated by bounding surfaces of different order. Thus, individual
facies association is recognized based up on the type of the bound-
ing surface and internal variations in lithofacies content
3.1.1.1. (FA1) facies association one: tidal channel/tidal creek.
3.1.1.1.1. Description. The interpreted integrated core and image
facies of this association are: (Sx), (Sm), (Zx), (Zm), (Zb). The man-
ually picked image sedimentary features are bed boundaries, cross
bedding, scouring, cross-bedding and faintly structureless patterns.
The borehole image texture shows mixed motifs between resistive
and conductive. Its geometry is irregular showing amalgamation of
resistive and conductive bands. This facies association such as in
(Fig. 3), is either erosionally based or sharp bounded. Erosive sur-
faces are picked as common sedimentary boundaries from the
borehole images. Rip-up mud clasts and fluid-mud injections are
common. Wireline logs present either low gamma ray and fining
upward trend.
3.1.1.1.2. Interpretation. FA1 as in (Fig. 3), shows a dominant high
energy of bed loading deposition of massive sandstone with local
bidirectional cross lamination and common uni-directional cross
stratification, and abundant mudstones showing thick-thin alter-
nations, which indicates a tidal energy fluctuation. Less bioturba-
tion suggests stressed environmental conditions. The base of
almost tidal channel is marked by an erosive surface that cuts
downward into sandstone having mud interclasts and load casts,
according to [11].
Fig. 3. Composite layout presenting a combination of different scales for the same facies associations presenting FA2. Fig. ‘‘A” is presenting the interpreted corefaceis
association scale 1:10. Fig. ‘‘B” presenting the a snapshot of the tied corefacies to the images facies with the interpreted sedimentary dips and their related azimuth rose
steronets on both static and dynamic images scale 1:20.Fig.‘‘C” is presenting the GR and E-logs response for this depositional element and their related cuttoffs, scale 1:200ft.
3.1.1.2. (FA2) facies association two: tidal flats. This facies associa-
tion could be distinguished into FA2a and FA2b.
3.1.1.2.1. FA2a: tidal mud flat. Description: The influence of tide is
recorded by rhythmic cyclicity and this is clearly recognized in the
hetrolithics deposits as in (Fig. 4). The main represented core and
image facies are (Ml), (Mb) and (Zl). Manually picked sedimentary
features from both static and dynamic image logs are bed bound-
aries, lamination, heterolithic banding with intra-clasts and nodu-
lar concretions. Breakouts are common as mechanical features.
Borehole images show alternation of resistive and conductive beds
with low dip angel to horizontal. Conventional logs reflect a high to
moderate gamma ray, serrated, erratic, fining upward trend, retro-
grading to an aggrading general stacking pattern.
3.1.1.2.2. FA2b: tidal sand flat. Description: Core and image facies
for this element are (Sl) and (Zl). Manually picked sedimentary fea-
tures from both static and dynamic images are mainly bed bound-
aries, bioturbation and bedding features. Conventional logs show
either serrated, erratic, and spiky coarsening upward trends,
aggrading to prograding general stacking pattern or moderate to
high gamma ray with steady aggrading stacking pattern.
3.1.1.2.3. FA2c: tidal mixed flat. Description: This facies association
represented in (Fig. 4) is silty to muddy sandstone interbedded
with sands. Heterolithics are the dominant facies representing this
association. An alternation between resistive degradations and
conductive gradations on micro-resistive images and in core
banded layers shows mixed lithologies of heterolithics. Integrated
recognized core and image facies are interpreted to be (Sl), (Zl) and
(Ml). Manually picked sedimentary features on both static and
 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112 1107

Fig. 4. Composite Layout presenting a combination of different scales for the same facies associations presenting FA2. Fig. ‘‘A” is presenting the interpreted corefaceis
association scale 1:10, for the tidal flats. Fig. ‘‘B” presenting the a snapshot of the tied corefacies to the images facies with the interpreted sedimentary dips and their related
azimuth rose steronets on both static and dynamic images scale 1:20. Fig. ‘‘C” is presenting the GR and E-logs response for this depositional element and their related cuttoffs,
scale 1:200ft.

dynamic images are: bed boundaries, bedding, lamination, nodular
concretions. Common mechanical features are breakouts. Image
facies fabric, presents rhythmic chromatic variation of alternated
thinly bedded resistive and conductive horizontal beds, which
always have a low dip angle. Wireline logs show a serrated, erratic,
and spiky coarsening upward trend, aggrading to prograding gen-
eral stacking pattern. Moderate to high serrated gamma ray log
value shows an aggrading pattern.
3.1.1.2.4. Interpretation. FA2 such as in (Fig. 4) is defined as the
area covered at high tide and exposed at low tide. Sedimentary
structures such as tidalites and rhythmic pattern of its laminated
facies, short lived cyclicty associated with mud intraclasts support-
ing the idea of the tidal influence. Sedimentary structures suggest
the deposition of low to moderate flow regime in case of the sand
and mixed tidal flats. Rhythmic structures and the associated fla-
sers confirmed the tidal action influence. Lamination sedimentary
structure formed by suspension process suggested the deposition
on tidal flats in response to fluctuations in energy levels and sedi-
ment supply during tidal cycles [3]. Mixed tidal flats facies com-
posed and recognized several heterolithic, with an irregularly
and indistinctly bounded zone seaward of the mudflats and in
the neighborhood of the tidal channels is occupied by sand flats
and mixed sand mud flats and transported along the channels that
can spill over onto the flats and form either sand flats or thin sand
layers alternating with mud (mixed sand-mud flats) in favorable
cases laminae accumulated during flood and ebb currents form
tidal rhythmites [7].
3.1.1.3. (FA3): shoreface facies association.
3.1.1.3.1. Description. This facies association as in (Fig. 5) is recog-
nized by symmetrical wave ripples, thin parallel lamination with
mud drapes, planner and horizontal lamination, with common
intense bioturbation and vertical burrows cuttings within lamina-
tion associated with the mottling appearance and crossbedded
sandstone with low sedimentary dip angle. They are clearly recog-
nized from both core photographs and borehole images. Presented
core and image facies are summarized to be (Sr), (Sl), (Zl), (Sx), (Sb),
(Mb) and (M). Conductive mottling and bioturbation features cut-
ting through resistive sandstones are common image facies fabric.
This association is presented by low gamma ray values, coarsening
upward trend and prograding stacking pattern.
3.1.1.3.2. Interpretation. Wave ripples indicate the fairweather
conditions and the action of waves. The shoreface is characterized
by sandy beds with symmetrical (wave) ripple lamination and hor-
izontal stratification, although sedimentary structures may be
obscured by intense bioturbation [11].
Low angle cross stratification suggests lower shoreface process
reflected with a chaotic dip pattern which is normal and distinctive
for shoreface environment. Vertical burrows are found to be rea-
sonable and suitable to this moderate energy conditions [7,11].
3.1.1.4. (FA4) storm facies association.
3.1.1.4.1. FA4a: Proximal tempestite. Description: This association
as in (Fig. 6) shows a poly directional dip azimuth trend and many
scour surfaces. Recognized core and image facies are (Sl), (Zl), (Sx),
(Sr), (Zx), (Zm), (Mb). Manually picked sedimentary features from
1108 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112

Fig. 5. Composite layout presenting a combination of different scales of FA3. ‘‘A” presenting the interpreted core facies association scale 1:10ft, ‘‘B‘‘ presenting the a snapshot
of the tied core-facies to the images facies with the interpreted sedimentary dips and their related azimuth rose Steronet on both static and dynamic images scale 1:20ft. ‘‘C”
is presenting the enlarged interval with the same interval of both interpreted static and dynamic images. ‘‘E” is presenting the GR and E-logs response for this architectural
element and their related cutoffs, scale 1:200ft.

Fig. 6. Composite integrated layouts, present the interpreted image facies with its picked sedimentary dips, the recognized core facies with its graphical interpretation and
the conventional wireline logs cutoffs, of (FA4a), Storm Facies Association (STF). The cartoon sedimentary log profile of [6] of the (Proximal Tempestite) section is considered
as an analogue in the present study.
 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112 1109

Fig. 7. Composite integrated layouts, present the interpreted image facies with its picked sedimentary dips, the recognized core facies with its graphical interpretation and
the conventional wireline logs cutoffs, of (FA4b), Storm Facies Association (STF). The cartoon sedimentary log profile of [6] of the (Distal Tempestite) section is considered as
an analogue in the present study.

Fig. 8. Composite integrated layout for the (Amalgamated Tempestite) section. It presents the interpreted image facies with, the recognized core facies with its graphical
interpretation and the conventional wireline logs cutoffs of (FA4c), Storm Facies Association (STF).
1110 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112
Fig. 9. This composite figure depicts the Offshore Transition to offshore Facies Association, associated with the distal tempestite deposits. It is presented in carbonates intercalated
with muds with high content of shell hash which may reflects the sudden storm evidence. The layout is integrating between multiscales of facies analysis interpretations.
Fig. 10. The upper ternary diagram is developed strictly for shoreface considering
the three main influences on sediment deposition: fair-weather (FW) waves, storm
waves, and tides. After [11]. The lower diagram considers only tidal processes
(currents and tidal range) and their influences on shoreface character [11], modified
after [3,4]. Red highlights plotted on both diagrams refer to the coastal shoreface
environment, where the influence of all depositional process are recognized (Tides,
Waves and Storms).
both static and dynamic images are bed boundaries, bedding, cross
bedding, laminations, nodular concretions and graded bedding.
The image facies fabric, shows mixed amalgamated chromatic vari-
ation, ranging between highly resistive white to less resistive yel-
lowish orange. Conventional logs show moderate gamma ray,
serrated, and spiky fining upward, with an aggrading to prograding
general stacking pattern.
3.1.1.4.2. FA4b: distal tempestite. Description: The represented core
and image facies of this facies association as in (Fig. 7) are: (Ml),
(Zl), (Zb), (Mb), (M) and (Sm). Manually picked features from both
static and dynamic images are bed boundaries, scour surfaces, ero-
sional surfaces, bedding and nodular concretions. Image facies tex-
ture for this element, presents a resistive with conductive
amalgamation behaviour with faint horizontal thin resistive lami-
nation with low dip angle. Mottling conductive behaviour is com-
mon. Conventional logs show an aggrading stacking pattern.
3.1.1.4.3. FA4c: amalgamated tempestite. Description: This is repre-
sented in (Fig. 8). The core and image facies representing this asso-
ciation are: (Sb), (Zm), (M), (Sl), (Zl) and (Sr). Manually picked
features are bed boundaries, bedding, nodular concretions. The
image facies fabric shows a high conductive brownish orange to
dark orange color amalgamated with more conductive black mot-
tling and nodules. This fabric always associated with the breakouts
as mechanical picked image features. Conventional logs motif
show moderate to high gamma ray serrated with an aggrading
stacking pattern.
3.1.1.4.4. Interpretation. Hummocky cross-stratification reflects
moderate to high-energy. Hummocky and swaley cross-
stratification are believed to form as a result of combined flow, that
is, the action of both waves and a current. This occurs when a cur-
rent is generated by a storm at the same time as high-amplitude
waves reach deep below the surface. The strong current takes sand
out into the deeper water in temporary suspension and as it is
deposited the oscillatory motion caused by the waves results in
deposition in the form of hummocks and swales [10].
Laminations reflect low energy of deposition or deposition in
subtidal shelf areas where thin sand layers that accumulate owing
to storm activity may alternate with very thin mud laminae formed
 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112
during periods of slower accumulation [3]. While normal graded
bedding and vertical burrows on the top of the succession cutting
a pre-existing crossbeds, reflect the calm condition of the last stage
of the storm action according to [7].Thick shell hashes and lag deb-
ris amalgamated in limestone beds with mud reflect the off-shore
transition conditions and the distal tempestite settings [7,11].
Chaotic dip pattern in specific intervals reflects the sudden effect
of the storm action and tempestite deposition. Gradation energy
levels of deposition from high to moderate then to low with small
thickness interval scoured at the base supports the idea of tem-
pestite sequence deposition [7].
3.1.1.5. (FA5): offshore transition to offshore facies association.
3.1.1.5.1. Description. This FA5 is represented in (Fig. 9). Represen-
tative core and image facies are: (Zb), (Sb), (Zm), (M) (Sl),(Zl), (Sr).
Presented manually picked sedimentary features from both static
and dynamic images are bed boundaries, bedding, bioturbation,
concretions and mottling. Image facies fabrics show a high resis-
tive white to pale light yellow resistive carbonate beds, interbed-
ded with conductive bioturbated muds and silts. The ability to fit
a sign wave was poor. Conventional logs show both high gamma
ray and density values, GR log shows steady aggrading stacking
pattern, with slightly fining upward trend.
3.1.1.5.2. Interpretation. This lime mud-dominated facies shows
internal lamination and low-to-moderate bioturbation suggesting
slow rates of sedimentation from suspension The high intensities
of bioturbation also indicate a slow deposition under low energy
Fig. 11. Conceptual depositional facies model for the Upper Bahariya Member of the study area in relation to its representative interpreted facies associations and their
distinctive sedimentary log profiles with their main indicative sedimentary structures.
1111
[3]. Concentrations of shell fragments with lag deposits may indi-
cate a minor storm event [7].
The offshore transition and offshore zones of shelves and epi-
continental seas are too deep for the effects of the surface tidal cur-
rents to be felt and are sites for mud deposition [11].
4. Facies modeling and discussion
Facies modeling, as understood today, involves a synthesis of
information from ancient and recent depositional environments,
in an effort to understand the nature, scale, heterogeneity, and con-
trolling physical processes of the elements represented in each
environment [14]. Facies defined on a variety of scales, in the pre-
sent study according to [14], it is defined based on the abundance
of the descriptive features in the studied strata. Wave and tidal
processes exert a strong control on the morphology of coastlines
and the distribution of different depositional facies. A coastal envi-
ronment can comprise a variety of zones [11]. The processes of
waves, storms and tides on a shelf are related to the water depth
and hence the characteristics of shelf sediments are largely con-
trolled by relative positions of the sea floor and the sea level [11].
The conceptual facies model of the study area constructed
based on the interpreted facies associations and their relative dis-
tributions. The model delineates the Upper Bahariya Member
deposition in a shallow water environment, under the influence
of coastal settings such as tides, storms, and shoreface waves pro-
cesses. Upper part of the Bahariya Formation is modeled to be a
1112 R.O. Almoqaddam et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 1103–1112
storm influenced tidal shoreface environment. Plotting that on the
ternary diagram (Fig. 10), the net result of the integrated facies
analysis presented on the boundary between both tide and storm
influence conditions. General depositional setting in terms of the
facies associations is constructed and presented in an integrated
conceptual facies model to illustrate the depositional setting for
each interpreted facies association. (Fig. 11).
5. Conclusion
Integrated facies analyses delineated the depositional setting of
the Upper Bahariya Member in East Bahariya C area. The Upper
Bahariya Member is represented by five major facies associations.
They are: tidal channel/tidal creek facies association, tidal flat
facies association, shoreface facies association, storm facies associ-
ation, and offshore transition to offshore facies association. The
Upper Bahariya Member depositional facies model is considered
as storm-tide influenced coastal depositional environment. The
sedimentary record helped to detect the evidence of mixing inter-
actions between different depositional energies and processes. This
approach provided a classification of the relative quality of each
rock type reservoir separately. It also helped in identifying the
reservoir heterogeneity vertically through a well and also along
the field wells laterally. Rapid transitions between the interpreted
facies of each reservoir rock type is confirming the general hetero-
geneity of the Upper Bahariya Member reservoirs. The reservoir
rock type quality is classified relatively based on its poro-perm
relationship. It ranges generally from poor to excellent. In the shal-
low reservoirs such as tidal creeks; massive or crossbedded sand-
stone reservoirs, show a good poro-perm relation. Tidal sand flat
reservoir, with laminated sandstone facies, shows a moderate to
good poro-perm relationship. Mixed tidal flat with dominant het-
erolithic facies presents the poor por-perm relationship. lower
shoreface, with rippled sandstone facies also, shows a moderate
poro-perm relationship to good. Proximal tempestite rock types
are varying in their performance according to the represented
reservoir facies, such as crossbedded sandstone facies, rippled
sandstone facies or laminated sandstone facies. However, the gen-
eral trend of the proximal tempestite reservoir poro-perm relation
is ranging between good to excellent.
6. Recommendations
1. The 3-D static model of the Upper Bahariya Member reservoirs
should be constructed or updated (if present), guided by the
reservoir facies rock types and facies association characteristics
proposed by the current study.
2. Facies-dependant reservoir rock typing catalog is recommended
to help the right decision of drillsites and perforation.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the Egyptian General Petro-
leum Corporation (EGPC) and Qarun Petroleum Company(QPC)
for providing the data used in this manuscript.
References
[1] P. Armas, M.L. Sánchez, Hybrid coastal edges in the Neuquén Basin (Allen
Formation, Upper Cretaceous, Argentina), Andean Geol. 42 (2015) 97–113.
[2] T. Bayoumi, The influence of interaction of depositional environment and
synsedimentary tectonics on the development of some Late Cretaceous source,
rocks, Abu Gharadig Basin, Western Desert, Egypt, 13th E.G.P.C. Expl. & Prod.
Conference, v.2, 1996, pp. 475–496.
[3] J.D. Collinson, D.B. Thompson, Sedimentary structures, second ed., Chapman
and Hall, London, 1989, p. 207.
[4] R.W. Darlymple, B.A. Zaitlin, R. Boyd, Estuarine facies models: Conceptual basis
and stratigraphic implications, J. Sediment. Petrol. 62 (1992) 1130–1147.
[5] S.E. Dashtgard, M.K. Gingras, J.A. MacEachern, Tidally modulated shorefaces, J.
Sediment. Res. 79 (2009) 793–807.
[6] .E. Dashtgard, J.A. MacEachern, S.E. Frey, M.K. Gingras, Tidal effects on the
shoreface: Towards a conceptual framework, Sediment. Geol. 279 (2012) 42–
61.
[7] G. Einsele, W. Ricken, A. Seilacher (Eds.), Cycles and events in stratigraphy,
Springer-Veriag, Berlin, Heidelberg, N.Y., 1991, p. 955.
[8] W.E. Galloway, Process framework for describing the morphologic and
stratigraphic evolution of deltaic depositional systems, in: M.L. Broussard
(Ed.), Deltas, Models for Exploration, vol. 7–9, Houston Geological Society,
Houston, Texas, 1975.
[9] M.O. Hayes, Barrier island morphology as a function of tidal and wave regime,
in: S.P. Leatherman (Ed.), Barrier Islands from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to the
Gulf of Mexico: New York, vol. 1–27, 1979.
[10] A.D. Miall, The Geology of Fluvial Deposits, Sedimentary Facies, Basin Analysis,
and Petroleum Geology, Springer-Verlag, Germany, 1996.
[11] G. Nichols, Sedimentology and Stratigraphy, second ed., Wiley-Blackwell,
2009, p. 419.
[12] S.G. Pemberton, J.A. MacEachern, S.E. Dashtgard, K.L. Bann, M.K. Gingras, J.-P.
Zonneveld, Shorefaces, in: D. Knaust, R. Bromley (Eds.), Trace Fossils as
Indicators of Sedimentary Environments, Developments in Sedimentology
Series 64, Elsevier, 2012, pp. 563–606.
[13] G.E. Reinson, Barrier-island and associated strand–plain systems, in: R.G.
Walker (Ed.), Facies Models, Geoscience Canada, reprint series1, Geol. Ass.
Can., St. Johns, 1984, pp. 119–140.
[14] R.G. Walker, Facies models revisited: introduction, in: H.W. Posamentier, R.G.
Walker (Eds.), Facies Models Revisited, Society for Sedimentary Geology, Tulsa,
Oklahoma, USA, 2006.
[15] Wescott et al., Jurassic Rift Architecture in the Northeastern Western Desert,
Egypt, in: W.A. Wescott, M. Atta, D.C. Blanchard, M. Roger, R.A. Cole, T. Steven,
S.T. Georgeson, D.A. Miller, W.O. Hayer, A. Wilson, J.C. Dolson, A. Sehim (Eds.),
AAPG international Conference and Exhibition (ICE 2011), Milan, Italy, 2011.
[16] L. Wright, Sediment transport and deposition at river mouths: a synthesis,
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 88 (1977) 857–868.