2010 SPWLA Topical Conference

Integration of
Reservoir Rock Types
in Simulation Models

Shawket Ghedan, PhD

Petroleum Institute
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 1
Development and Identification of RRTs

Reservoir Rock Types, RTTs developed by integrating:

 Petrophysical Lab data,
 Pore system information, and
 Capillary Pressure Data.

RRTs can be identified by the following parameters:

 Rock Fabric: texture, grain size, packing & pore geometry
 Proportion of primary porosity and secondary porosity.
 Porosity/ permeability relationships
 Range of, and similarity in pore throat size distribution,
 Similar Pc curves and saturation end points.

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 2

RRTs in Static and Dynamic Models

Static RRTs are routinely employed for:

 Modeling of reservoir petrophysical attributes, as well as
 Building & assigning the required water/ oil and Gas/ oil
Kr curves to the different cells of the simulation models.

There is a problem with the second application:

 Static RRT schemes do not consider the reservoir
multiphase flow properties of wettability, fluids IT, etc…

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 3

Static vs Kr-Defined RRTs

 Hamon introduced the Kr-defined rock types (SPE

84035, 2003 ATCE).

 Definition of Kr-Defined Rock Types:

Kr-defined rock types are defined as units of rock
characterized by similar ranges of pore geometry and
wettability indicators resulting in a unique relative
permeability saturation relationships.

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 4

Kr-Defined RRTs or Dynamic RRTs

 For the same saturation history cycle in a reservoir,

the rock multiphase flow properties would only be a
function of wettability only for any static RRT.

 In a reservoir with a wettability profile, each RRT

would have many Wettability Driven Dynamic RRTs.
 Therefore, imposing the effect of reservoir wettability
on the RRTs is essential in developing and assigning
the Kr curves to the cells of simulation models.
 Each would have unique relative permeability curves
and saturation endpoints.
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 5
USBM WI vs Depth from Well A of Hawiyah area

SPE SPE 105114

105114
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 6
USBM WI versus Depth from Well B of Hawiyah area

SPE SPE 105114

105114
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 7
USBM WI versus Depth for Uthmaniyah area

SPE 105114
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 8
Reservoir Wettability Profile

Wettability Tests along with Producers and Injectors Perforations Distribution

 Wells perforations
Wettability Index, -1 to +1, Distributions, 0 to 100%
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
x8400
Producers down to X000 ftss
x8600 Injectors up to X150 ftss
x8800
 Wettability
Depth , tvdss

x9000
Oil Wet at Top structure
x9200 Water Wet Below DOL.
x9400

x9600

x9800
Wettability Index Producers Perforations Injectors Perforations
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 9
Transition Zone?
Sw log , %
0 20 40 60 80 100

 Transition zones in Carbonate 650

reservoirs could be fairly thick.

600

550
depending on reservoir 500

characteristics.

Height above FWL @ 9200 ftss

450

400

 Transition zone is conventionally 350

defined as that part of the reservoir 300

where water saturation start to 250

200
deviate from irreducible saturation 150
down to 100% saturation. 100

50

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 10

 Static Reservoir Rock Types
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Dry
x8960 Oil Limit

x8970
300 oil producers, screened to identify Well-5
Well-25

xDeepest
8980 perforations of dry oil producers, and Well-32
Depth of Dry Oil Limit, ftss

Static RRTs of their producing layers. Well-33

x8990 Well-49
Well-91
From
x9000 Which Identified the Dry Oil Limit of the Well-98
reservoir RRTs. Well-106
x9010
Well-124
Well-129
x9020
Well-149

x9030 Well-154
Well-15
x9040 DOL

x9050
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 11
Alternative Definition of TZ
Sw log , %

 DOL for any rock type was found to be 650

0 20 40 60 80 100

always appreciably deeper than the top 600

of the conventional transition zone. 550

500

The difference depends on the rock

Height above FWL @ 9200 ftss

450

400
types encountered and profile of rock 350

wettability changes. 300

250

 Transition zone is better defined as 200

the reservoir part where both phases 150

of oil and water are mobile. 100

50

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 12

 Requirements of Saturation Tables

 Log-derived W/O Pc curves.

 Swirr at top of structure, Swc at
Dry Oil Limit
Umm Shaif Arab C and D
Swirr (8600 ftss) & Swcmax (at DOL ftss) Vs Rock type
60%

50%
Swirr or Swc , %PV

40%
30%

20%

10%

0%
RT7
RT6

RT0
RT4

RT5

RT9
RT1

RT2

RT3

RT8

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 13

Swirr 8600ftss Swc at DOL ftss
 History Matching of Available Exp Kr Data
 Use Corey Model for history matching
 For various RTs determined No and Nw with Depth
Nw
 Sw  Swc 
No
Krw  Krwmax *   1  Sw  Sorw 
Kro  
1  Swc  Sorw  1  Swc  Sorw 
plug 87-163 plug 87-162
1.00 1.00
rock # 7 Kron
rock # 7
0.90 0.90 Kron
Krwn Krwn
0.80 0.80
Krw Krw
0.70 Kro 0.70 Kro
0.60 No=4.2
0.60
n=4.7 No=3.8 n=3.2
0.50
0.50
No=3.6
0.40
Nw=1.8 0.40
0.30 Nw=2.0
n=1.4 0.30 n=1.9
0.20 Nw=2.1
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 14

 History matching of Available Exp Data
 Exp Kr data for RT1
 No and Nw variation with Depth
plug 155-13 plug 76-163B X-axis is Swn
1.00 1.20
rock#1 rock # 1
0.90 Kron Kron
1.00 Krwn
0.80 Krwn
Krw Krw
0.70 n=3
Kro 0.80 n=4.8 Kro
0.60
No=3.0
0.50 No=2.7 0.60

0.40 No=2.6
Nw=1.7 0.40
0.30
n=0.9 Nw=1.9
0.20 Nw=2.0 n=2
0.20
0.10

0.00 0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 15

Variation of Corey Exponents

Fitted Corey Exponents

20 Water/Oil Kr Lab. Tests

6.0
N o or N w Corey Exponent

5.0
No exp.
Nw exp.
4.0
RT1 No
3.0 1.5 RT9 No
RT1 Nw
2.0 RT9 Nw

1.0

0.0
8500 8600 8700 8800 8900 9000 9100
x Poorer
x x RTs Increasing
x , ftss
Depth x x Depth
x Porosity
No = (2.8 to 5.0)
No Increase Decrease Constant
Nw = (1.3 to 2.6)
Nw
Feb 10 Increase Increase Constant
Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 17
Correlation of Sorw vs. Swi or Swc
Dolomites Rock Types
Correlation of Sorw vs. Swi
70 Sorw  a * Swi  b
60
Sorw , % PV

50
40
30
20
10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Swi , %PV

RT7 : -1.08*Swi+70.44 RT5 : -1.08*Swi+63.2

RT3 : -1.08*Swi+49.4 RT1 : -1.08*Swi+38.1
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 18
 Effect of Wettability on Krwmax and Sorw
Kro at Swi
1

It is well established that

Sorw as well as Krwmax at 0.8

Sorw would be lower for

Relative Permeability
more water wet rock.
Krwmax  f * Sorw  g 0.6

0.4

Krw at Sor

0.2
Oil wet
From Dave Bowen of Core Lab Water wet

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models Water Saturation 20

Krwmax versus Sorw

The available data did not yield clear relationship

between Krw(Sorw) Vs Sorw Umm Shaif Arab C and D
20 Water/Oil Lab. Tests - Krw against Sorw correlation
But a straight
line 0.80
relationship 0.70
Krwmax  f * Sorw  g
was forced 0.60
Krw(Sorw) , fraction

Dolomites
that fits the 0.50
Limestones
general trend 0.40 Dol. Correl.
of the data. 0.30 Lim. Correl.
0.20

0.10

0.00
0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 22
Sorw , fraction of PV
 Sw log , %

Number of DRRTs Per Static RRT 650

0 20 40 60 80 100

600

The number of DRRTs 550

generated per each SRRT is 500

decided by the number of the

Height above FWL @ 9200 ftss

450
Sw increment employed to go
from Swirr down to Swc at the 400

DOL of each drainage Pc curve 350

of each static RRT. 300

250
For instance, using a 5% Sw
200
increment with seven maximum
steps would produce up to 21 150

DRRTs (Kr sets) for each static 100

RRT. 50

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 0 23

 Generation of DRRTs (Kr Curves)

1. For each depth, Swc is picked from any drainage Pc

curve, ranging from Swirr up to Swc at DOL, then:
2. Use Swc to determine Sorw from the proposed
correlations, similar to Land correlation

Sorw  a * Swi  b
3. Use depth and rock type to determine Corey’s
exponents, Nw and No, using a table look up.

4. Use Sorw to determine Krwmax from the proposed

correlation (Kromax is taken as 1.0):
Krwmax  f * Sorw  g
Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 24
 Generation of Kr Curves

5. Use the Corey Krw and Kro models to determine Krw

and Kro for any water saturation between any Swc
and its Sorw.
Nw
 Sw  Swc 
Krw  Krwmax * 
1  Swc  Sorw 

No
 1  Sw  Sorw 
Kro  
1  Swc  Sorw 

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 25

Generation of Kr Curves

Set of Kr curves for Limestone RRT 4 of 15% porosity.

Umm Shaif Arab C and D New Saturation Tables
Limestone RT 4 - Porosity 15% - Tables 45 to 50

1.0
140
0.9
0.8 120

Pc w ater/oil , psia
0.7
100
Kro , Krw

0.6 Krw
80
0.5 Kro
0.4 60 Pc
0.3
40
0.2
0.1 20

0.0 0
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Sw , %PV

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 26

2010 SPWLA Topical Conference

Feb 10 Integration of RRTs in Sim Models 27