SPE- 1

SPE-

THE CHARACTERIZATION OF GEOLOGICAL FLOW UNITS IN CARBONATE

RESERVOIRS - INTEGRATION OF CORE, LOG & PRODUCTION LOGGING
DATA

Mehar Ali, Chaudhary M. Saqib, Weatherford; Syed M. Iftikhar Rizvi, Nasir Hamim, Ahsan Javed, and Syed M.
Usman Shah, Oil & Gas Development Company Ltd, Pakistan

Copyright 2021, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at PAPG-SPE ANNUAL TECHNICAL CONFERENCE 2022 to be held in Islamabad, Pakistan, 28 – 30 November 2022.
The official proceedings were published online on 9 December 2021.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s).
Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not
necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this
paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than
300 words; illustrations maynot be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Geological flow units based on reservoir rock typing can be used to characterize geological facies based
on their dynamic behavior. A procedure for identifying and characterizing geological flow units helps
resolve some of the key challenges faced in exploration and production of carbonate reservoirs. The
current work focuses on the rock typing/flow units classification for reservoir characterization in a
carbonate gas reservoir. The Sui Main Limestone (SML) Eocene reservoir, located in the southwestern
part of the Middle Indus Basin in Baluchistan Province was selected, and the study carried out using
core, wireline logs of 30+ wells and production logging data. The reservoir was previously categorized
based on the geological information into four layers.
An integrated workflow was used for characterization of Geological Flow Units based on all available
information. The Sui Main Limestone (SML) reservoir was divided into three flow units/rock types,
depending on the well log patterns, core data, Porosity–Water saturation relationships, flow zone
indicators (FZIs), and the Porosity–Permeability relationships. Production logging data was used to
validate flow unit classification.
The field is a gas bearing reservoir composed of medium hard to hard limestone characterized by high
porosity but poor/low permeability. The matrix permeabilities and porosity range from 0.01–40 mD and
0–35 percent respectively. Three rock types and groups have been identified in the SML formation; the
first group represents the poor reservoir quality (GFU-1) Highly cemented limestone, the second group
reflects the moderate reservoir quality (GFU-2) Moderately cemented limestone, and the third group
2 SPE-

represents the very good reservoir quality (GFU-3) poorly cemented limestone.
Production logging data was used to validate flow unit classification. Pressure Transient Analysis (PTA)
indicated that only partial penetration occurred, and therefore only a portion of the perforated area was
contributing to production. Specifically, the majority of inflow zones identified in the production
logging data corresponded to GFU-3 flow units. As expected, the other two flow units only provide a
small increase in production. This further validated the partial penetration model determined from PTA.
Geological flow units/rock types in these thick carbonate reservoirs and can be helpful in selecting
optimum perforation intervals rather than perforating the whole thickness. This innovative method can
save significant CAPEX without compromising the production.

Introduction
The Gas Field under study is located in Dera Bugti District in the eastern part of Baluchistan. The
discovery well X-01 was drilled in 1955 by Pakistan Petroleum Limited. However, the well was
abandoned due to high CO2 content and the license was relinquished. OGDCL acquired the license in
1986 and evaluated the area through three 2D seismic surveys of different vintages. Main reservoir
comprises of Eocene age Sui Main Limestone. This formation occurs in several other gas fields located
in the central part of Pakistan’s Western Fold Belt. Location map of the study area is shown in figure 1.
Main reservoir Sui Main Limestone is 364 meters thick and conformably overlies the Upper Paleocene
Dunghan Limestone. The reservoir is conformably overlain by the Lower Eocene Ghazij Shale which
forms the top seal for the gas reservoir. The reservoir is subdivided into four units (A, B, C, and D).
Most of the gas occurs in the porous upper three units (A, B, and C) and these average 175 meters in
thickness.
The reservoir is structurally compartmentalized into three lobes. These lobes are referred as Western,
Central and Eastern lobes. Each lobe contains gas of varying composition and heating value. The lowest
BTU rated gas (higher inert) is in the Western lobe. The BTU rating progressively increases in the
Central lobe and is highest in the Eastern lobe.

Figure 1: Location map of study area

SPE- 3

Petrophysical Evaluation
Petrophysical evaluation of well log data has always been crucial for identification and assessment of
hydrocarbon bearing zones. Petrophysical analysis deals with the properties of porous media such as:
porosity, permeability, water saturation, fluid identification, resistivity, shaliness particularly in
reservoir rock and contained fluids (Inichinbia et al. 2014). This section elaborates the methodology and
results of petrophysical evaluation and integration of the same with core measurements, log, and
production data wherever available.

Available Dataset
Total 30+ wells having various conventional log responses are available in the study area. The log data
available for wells included gamma ray (GR), spontaneous potential (SP), density (RHOB), neutron
porosity (NPHI), resistivity (MSFL, LLS, LLD) and NGS logs (URAN, THOR, POTA).
The mud log data has been utilized in the petrophysical evaluation to assist in understanding of
reservoir.
Quality of the raw log data was thoroughly checked. The overall quality of the wireline logs recorded in
the gas field is good. Sonic data is generally poor as shown in Figure 2.
Sections of enlarged borehole indicated by caliper measurements yield unreliable density and associated
porosity data in some interval can be seen. Density and Neutron derived porosity had to be used
cautiously due to poor borehole conditions.
Four (04) conventional core analysis report were available for the SML Formation, a series of core
analysis measurements were performed on 1000+ samples of the core. The core analysis measurements
includes, Horizontal and Vertical Air Permeability, Porosity, and Grain Density.

Figure 2: Generally poor Sonic Data in some wells

4 SPE-

Log Data Normalization

Curve normalization identifies and removes systematic errors from well log data so that reliable results
may be obtained for reservoir evaluation. Normalization of well log data is a common and routine
process within a petrophysical workflow and is used to correct for variations in logging curves between
wells. These variations can arise due a number of different reasons such as incorrect tool calibrations,
varying tool vintage and changes in borehole environmental conditions between the wells.
GR normalized in SML-A formation using single point offset per well as shown in Figure 3. Normalized
GR is used in synthetic permeability estimation.
No Normalization to bulk density was done. Neutron porosity (NPHI) does usually require
normalization but looking at data from all wells in SUI formation with SW > 90% (water bearing
intervals) as shown in Figure 4, points are lying on the Limestone matrix line and hence does not
suggest need for normalization.

Figure 3: GR Normalization

Figure 4: Den-Neu Normalization verification

SPE- 5

Interpretation
A shale volume estimation (VSh) was performed using the values from the GR log with the following
equation:

In gas reservoirs, computing porosity can be challenging even in single mineral shale free reservoirs.
This is primarily due to the different depths of investigations of Den-Neu and Rt, and also due to
excavation effects on NPHI due to gas. Uncertainty in depth of filtrate invasion and its effects on Den-
Neu log response is also hard to predict. A good Rxo curve and core porosity is needed to reduce
uncertainty in porosity computation.
Porosity calculations were performed using Neutron-Density and Sonic methods. Wherever, Neutron-
Density porosity was affected due to borehole enlarged conditions, sonic porosity was used to avoid the
borehole effects on porosity calculations. The final calculated porosity was calibrated with the core
porosity.
Water Saturation was computed using Archie model. Rw is calculated using pickett plot using X-4 well
as shown in Figure 5. Parameters from logs are in agreement with SCAL interpretation. Below are the
Archie parameters.
Rw=0.22, a=1, m=1.9, n=2
All available data was used in determining formation lithology. The best technique for lithological
determination is by cross-plot of Apparent Matrix Density (RHOMA) and Apparent Matrix Volumetric
Cross Section (UMA).
The Neutron-Density cross plot technique was also used to identify the rock type. Sui Main Limestone
is the potential reservoirs in the field consisting of Limestone with streaks of shale which are in
agreement with lithological descriptions of cores, cuttings descriptions.

Figure 5: Archie parameter from X-4

6 SPE-

Geological Flow Units/Rock Types

A flow unit is defined as an interval of sediment with similar petrophysical properties such as Porosity,
Permeability, Water saturation, pore-throat radius, storage, and flow capacity that are different from the
intervals immediately above and below; flow units are usually grouped to define containers; rock types
having similar flow capacity were grouped and used in the determination of reservoir flow units (Porras
and Campos 2001).
The flow unit is defined as a reservoir zone that is laterally and vertically continuous and has similar
Permeability, Porosity, and bedding characteristic (Hearn et al. 1984).
The carbonate reservoirs rocks are usually heterogeneous. Therefore, to have a better grasp of the
reservoir behavior, we need to classify these reservoirs into zones, layers, and separate units with lower
heterogeneity degrees (Mohebian et al. 2017).
Various methods were used to subdivide the main reservoirs into many flow units, in this study.

i. Wireline log
Wireline log signatures sometimes correspond with rock properties in flow units so that ranked flow
units can be mapped from log character (AHR 2008).
In this research, well logs curves were utilized to classify the main reservoir into four units as shown in
figure 6.

ii. Conditioning of core data and its analysis

Four (04) conventional core analysis report were available for the SML Formation, a series of core
analysis measurements were performed on 1000+ samples of the core. The core analysis measurements
include, Horizontal and Vertical Air Permeability, Porosity and Grain Density.
CCA data of all the wells shows smaller Grain size. Average FZI value of 0.4. Only few points are
outliers and shall be cleaned up, as shown in figure 7.
Kv-Kh xplot shows good overall consistency as shown in Figure 8. This plot will be used to QC the
CCA data.
CCA data is QC’ed using dominant trend shown by data cluster. Two zones are seen away from
dominant trend as shown in the figure 9, figure 10 and figure 11.

ZONE I:
• Zone I points are showing similar Kv – Kh, showing high confidence on core perm values.
• These points are possibly coming from grainy lithofacies.
• Not possible to see those on logs so can’t be modelled.

ZONE II:
• Zone II points are showing similar Kv – Kh, showing high confidence on core perm values.
• These points are possibly coming from dense and highly cemented or fossilized lithofacies.
• Not possible to see those on logs so can’t be modelled.
SPE- 7

Figure 6: Well Logs correlation

Figure 7: CCA data of all the wells

8 SPE-

Figure 8: Kv-Kh xplot

Figure 9: Core Data trend

SPE- 9

Figure 10: Zone I trend, highlighted on the well logs

10 SPE-

Figure 11: Zone II trend, highlighted on the well logs

iii. Synthetic Permeability

To build core Porosity-Permeability relationship to propagate to uncored wells, a neural network
approach was used. The fundamental goal of employing a network model is to forecast values from a
combination of input log data for a desired formation property, such as permeability.
The general architecture of artificial neural networks (ANN) consists of input, hidden and output layers
of neurons (Haykin, 1999).
An artificial neural network is a system of several simple processing units known as nodes, neurons, or
processing elements. Neurons in a network are organized in layers. Each layer is responsible for a
particular task. Typically, there are three kinds of layers in an artificial neural network.
SPE- 11

Input layer is responsible for presenting the network with the necessary information from the outside
world in a normalized manner. Hidden layers (there may be more than one hidden layer in a network,
this is a problem dependent factor) contain hidden neurons that are responsible for main part of the input
to output mapping. These neurons are responsible for feature extraction from the input neurons and
subsequently passing the information to the output neurons. Output layer contains output neurons that
communicate the outcome of the neural networks computation with the user.
First step towards this verification of a good match of core and log porosity at CCA domain. (Figure 12)
Final QC’s permeability in log domain for synthetic permeability estimation. Log porosity Vs Core
permeability Plot is shown Figure 13.
Synthetic permeability computed using CCA data from well X-10, X-11 and X-15. (Figure 14)
RHOB_HC, GR_n and VCL used in Neural Network. Core K-Phi against Neural network based K-Phi
for all the wells is shown in Figure 15.

Figure 12: Core Porosity-Permeability Xplot

Figure 13: Log porosity Vs Core permeability Plot

12 SPE-

Figure 14: Top plot is Synthetic permeability using CCA data from X-10, X-11 and X-15; and 45deg comparison plot
SPE- 13

Figure 15: In left is Core K-Phi for all cored wells; in right is Neural network based K-Phi (for all wells)

iv. Flow zone indicator method

The flow zone indicator (FZI) defines as a unique parameter that incorporates the geological attributes
of texture and mineralogy in the discrimination of pore geometrical (hydraulic units), and it is used to
identify the geologic variables that control the flow of fluids, especially when the geological attributes
that are based on variations in pore-throat sizes that control Permeability are considered and can be
expressed as follows (Amaefule et al. 1993):

where RQI: is the reservoir quality index (μm), ϕZ: is a normalized Porosity (pore volume-to-grain
volume ratio) (fraction), FZI: is a function of reservoir quality index and void ratio (μm), and ϕeff: is the
effective Porosity (fraction).
CMR, Core data and sedimentology shows essentially similar rock type with average FZI value of 0.5.
Three Geological Flow Units (GFUs) are defined based on porosity cut offs of 11pu and 19 pu. (Figure
16 & Table 1)
Geological Flow Units based on Porosity-Permeability and corresponding Swi as obtained from
magnetic resonance data is shown in figure 17.
14 SPE-

Figure 16: Geological Flow Units (GFUs)

Figure 17: GFUs vs corresponding Swi

SPE- 15

Table 1: Geological Flow Units (GFUs) Cut-offs

Porosity Permeability Geological

GFU Swir
Range Range description
% mD %
Highly
GFU1 0 - 11 0.01 - 0.8 > 30 Cemented
Limestone
Moderately
GFU2 11 - 19 0.1 - 8 15 - 30 cemented
Limestone
Poorly
GFU3 19 - 35 1 - 40 < 15 cemented
limestone

v. Production Logging Data Calibrations

Production Logging data was provided by OGDCL for 07 wells of X field
As shown in Figure 18 of X-11, the PI multipliers are applied against inflow zones identified in PLT.
Similarly in another well X-26 as in Figure 19, the high PI multiplier i.e., 3 or 5 are applied against PLT
inflow zones and low PI multiplier i.e., 0.01 are applied against non-productive zones. Whereas, in
wells, where PLT shows the whole perforated interval is contributed as per Geologically Flow Units
(Good contribution against good GFU’s or Rock Quality), no multiplier is applied as the case of X-31,
X-32, X-17A, X-28 & X-12.

Figure 18: X-11 PLT Inflow Zones Calibration with PI Multipliers

16 SPE-

Figure 19: X-26 PLT Inflow Zones Calibration with PI Multipliers

Conclusion
A method for identification and characterization of geological flow units has been presented. The
procedure couples petrophysical data with production logging data to establish zones of interest. This
study can be employed as a planning tool for well completions. Geological flow units/rock types in thick
carbonate reservoirs can be helpful in selecting optimum perforation intervals, rather than perforating
the whole thickness. This innovative method can save significant CAPEX without compromising
production.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Oil & Gas Development Company Ltd, Pakistan for granting permission to
publish this paper.

Nomenclature
SML: Sui Main Limestone
FZI: Flow zone indicators
GFU: Geological Flow Units
PTA: Pressure Transient Analysis
BTU: British Thermal Unit
CCA: Conventional Core Analysis
Kv: Vertical Permeability
SPE- 17

Kh: Horizontal Permeability

PLT: Production Logging Data

References
AHR, WM (2008) Geology of carbonate reservoirs: the identification, description, and characterization of
hydrocarbon reservoirs in carbonate rocks. Texas A&M University
Amaefule JO, Altunbay M, Tiab D, Kersey DG, Keelan DK (1993) Enhanced reservoir description: using core and log
data to identify hydraulic (flow) units and predict permeability in uncored intervals/wells. Society of Petroleum
Engineers
Haykin, S.S., 1999, Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation, 2nd edition: Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River,
New Jersey, 842 p.
Hearn CL, Ebanks WJ, Tye RS, Ranganathan V (1984) Geological factors influencing reservoir performance of
Hartzog Draw Field, Wyoming. JPT 36(9):1335–1344
Inichinbia S, Sule PO, Ahmed AL, Hamaza H, Lawal KM (2014) Petro physical analysis of among hydrocarbon field
fluid and lithofacies using well log data. IOSR J Appl Geol Geophys 2:86–96
Mohebian R, Riahi MA, Kadkhodaie A (2017) Characterization of hydraulic flow units from seismic attributes and
well data based on a new fuzzy procedure using ANFIS and FCM algorithms, example from an Iranian carbonate
reservoir. Carbonates Evaporites 34:349–358
Porras JC, Campos O (2001) Rock typing: a key approach for petrophysical characterization and definition of flow
units, Santa Barbara Field. Eastern Venezuela Basin. Presented at the SPE Latin American and Caribbean
Petroleum Engineering Conference, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–28 March. Paper SPE-69458-MS
www.ppisonline.com
18 SPE-

About The Authors

Mehar Ali
Mehar Ali, working in Weatherford as Petrophysicist, possesses master’s degree in
Geology from Bahria University, Islamabad, and bachelor’s degree in Geology from
University of Azad Jammu & Kashmir, Muzaffarabad, Pakistan. He has been associated
with industry for the last 6+ years.

Chaudhary M. Saqib
Chaudhary M. Saqib, Manager Reservoir Description Weatherford Pakistan, holds
master’s degree in Geophysics from Quaid-i-Azam University and M.Phill degree in
Geology from Punjab University.. He has been associated with industry for the last 22+
years having multidimensional industry experience. He has served Mathtech Inc, Baker
Hughes, LMKR, Trinidad LMKR, and Oil Indus in the past and currently working in
Weatherford as Operation Manager Reservoir Description.

Syed M. Iftikhar Rizvi

Syed Iftikhar Mustafa Rizvi joined OGDCL as “Assistant Geologist Trainee” in
November 1988. He completed his B.Sc (Hons) & M.Sc in Geology from the
University of Peshawar, Peshawar and is currently working as GM (RMD) since
December 01, 2019. He joined RMD in 1992 while previously working at the well site
in different capacities, in all regions of Pakistan. Since 1992, he has worked in the
Petrophysical Division of RMD. He is an active member of the Society of
Petrophysicist & Well Log Analyst (SPWLA) and Pakistan Association of Petroleum Geoscientists
(PAPG). He has remained focal person for a number of special projects such as first ever ESP
installation in OGDCL history as well as the first EOR project for depleted oil fields of OGDCL. He has
more than 31 years of diversified experience of working in different sections of RMD, in different
capacities.

Nasir Hamim
Nasir Hamim possesses around twelve (18) years of diversified experience in Oil &
Gas industry. Experienced Reservoir Geologist, with broad technical and commercial
vision of field development and operations, having strong background in computing.
The principal activities include reservoir modeling for field development, well
planning, interpretation, reservoir description, reservoir characterization and
petrophysical analysis. The work at Kirthar Range, Sulaiman Range and Middle and
Lower Indus Basin is helping me to utilize all the concepts learned during these passed years with a
better understanding of reservoir planning and development for both oil and gas fields.). He did his
master’s in Geology from University of Peshawar.
SPE- 19

Ahsan Javed
Ahsan Javed received his M.Sc. Degree in Applied Geology, from the University of the
Punjab, Lahore in 2007. He started his career in 2008 as a Trainee Mud Logger in
Nuricon Petroservices GmbH. Further he joined the PEL in the end of 2008 as an
Assistant Geologist and worked there for two years. Currently working in Petrophysical
Division, RMD of OGDCL as Senior Petrophysicist since October 2010. In this
department he is monitoring all exploratory, appraisal and development wells during
logging and after logged.

Muhammad Usman Shah

Usman Shah holds bachelor’s degree in Petroleum & Gas Engineering from UET
Lahore. Currently working in OGDCL as Sr. Petroleum Engineer. He has worked with
Weatherford for more than Eight Years and Industry experience is mainly in the field of
Reservoir Engineering, Field Management, Development Planning and Simulation.
Successfully delivered integrated Reservoir Simulation & field development projects
field’s simulation, management & RE analysis as Responsible Reservoir/ Simulation
Engineer along with role of Project Management. Also, as early career on Interpretation
& Processing Department, performed several Production Logging Analysis, Pressure Transient
Analysis, Perforation Designing, Formation Pressure Testers & Planning of Workover Projects.