Advanced Petroleum Geology - 8

Petroleum Geology
Resrvoir Rocks or Rocks as Pore Systems
Abid Hussain
Geologist
Pakistan Petroleum Limited
Aim of this Section
How the pore network controls the storage and flow of fluid through that network
The geology that controls the pore network
The petrophysics we use to measure and describe the properties of the pore
network and the reservoir engineering of fluid movement
Drainage:
Migration of non-wetting phase
fluid & displacement of the
wetting phase
(e.g. filling of HC traps)
Imbibition:
Injection of wetting phase fluid
& displacement of the nonwetting phase
(e.g. waterflooding)
Porosity
The most important fact about reservoir rocks is that, by definition,
they are not completely solid, but rather are porous to one degree or
another. The degree to which they are porous is quantified by a
parameter known as the porosity.
The fraction of the cylinder that is occupied by pore space is known
as the porosity, and is usually denoted by :
= Vp /Vb
Effective porosity which measures only the pore space that is
interconnected and can potentially form a flow path for the
hydrocarbons.
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4INTRO
What is the role of the geologist?
To understand the acquisition and use of wireline log data to calculate porosity
and saturation
Persuade your local petrophysicist that the geologist has an important

contribution to make
Decide quantitatively what is reservoir and what is not, based on log response
and (maybe) core and test data
Divide the reservoir into rock types whose properties can be calibrated by logs (or
seismic) according to relationships you have defined
Map those rock types between wells and predict them beyond
Recognise and understand small-scale variation in flow and storage properties

and know how to average or upscale it so that the important flow effects are
preserved
Pore Type Classifications

Many ways to cut and slice it:
Mode of formation (primary, secondary, dissolution)
Descriptive (inter-, intra-granular)
Size (macro-, micro-porosity)
Connection (catenary, cul-de-sac, isolated or vug)
Special terms for carbonates
In this class: nice pores and naughty pores
All classifications are aids to thinking and a means to an end. Lets not get too hung up
Key Objective: To Represent This By a Handful of Numbers
White is grain, blue is pore and the field of view is about 2 cm high. It is a sandstone of Permian age and aeolian in
origin. I guess porosity at 20-25% and permeability in the low hundreds of mD. Cute quartz overgrowths are visible
around the coarser grains. The dark clusters are remnants of rock fragments; almost all the rest of the grains are quartz.
Note that the pore system is patchy and heterogeneous but homogeneously heterogeneous. The areas dominated by
large pores would tend to contain a higher saturation of oil and most of the permeability.
AND THESE
THIS GRAIN IS
0.1 mm
0.2 mm
THESE TOO
Sandstone Pore Systems
Key Variants
1.
Grain size, sorting
2.
Compaction, cementation
3.
Clay content and distribution
4.
Cement type and content: overgrowth (quartz), pore lining, pore blocking
5.
Matrix content (usually compacted, sand-sized mud or lithic clasts)
6.
Grain types (e.g. lots of feldspars to dissolve)
Sandstone problems* usually involve clays (authigenic or detrital),

or extreme lowness of permeability
* Problems = requiring more care than usual in analysis: departing from the routine
Pore Type Variety
Sandstones tend to be straightforward
Grain size is almost always the primary control thus facies
Diagenesis is generally a secondary influence
Carbonates have a greater range of pore types
Grain type before size
Carbonate diagenesis starts early and is much

more capable of creating porosity
Grains v matrix: sorting
Carbonate mudstone can be reservoir
Effect of granular texture on porosity
After Beard & Weyl, 1973
Effect of granular texture on permeability
After Beard & Weyl, 1973
Influence of textural & mineralogical maturity on sandstone pore

space properties & reservoir quality
Nagtegaal, 1978
Effect of clay mineral distribution
Modified after Serra, 1984
Effect of authigenic clay mineral types & habit

Types of dispersed clay in sandstone reservoirs:
discrete particle kaolinite
Photo Courtesy of PetroTech Associates 2002, Neasham 1977

RMS021882A1

pore lining chlorite

RMS021882A1

pore bridging illite

RMS021882A1
Discrete particle kaolinite:

mainly reduces porosity
Pore lining chlorite:

may retard later diagenesis
Pore-bridging illite:
about as bad as it gets for permeability reduction!
RMS021882A1
From the Middle Jurassic Brent Group,

Cormorant Field (Block II), North Sea
Pc curves vs type of dispersed clay
Pore-bridging
(e.g. illite)
Pore-lining
(e.g. chlorite)
Discrete particle
(e.g. kaolinite)
Neasham, 1977
DGH861883
Carbonate Pore Systems (1)

Key Variants
1.
Mouldic / intragranular /
intergranular
2.
Sorting: mudstone
wackestone - packstone
- grainstone
3.
Diagenesis: secondary
porosity, karst,
crystallinity
Carbonate Pore Systems (2)
Diagram re-drawn from F. Jerry Lucia, 1995. Rock-Fabric/Petrophysical Classification of Carbonate Pore Space for
Reservoir Characterization, BAAPG, 79(9), 1275 - 1300; see also Lucia, 2002, Carbonate Reservoir
Characterization, Springer, 226 pp
Carbonates
Carbonate problems
usually involve
extremes of pore
connectivity
Carbonates
Oolites as an
example of
diversity
Effectiveness of Pore Types
Connected macroporosity nice pores
Has a higher saturation than the bulk rock of the

least-wetting phase
Contains most of the permeability
Relatively easy to deal with and measure
The Rest naughty pores
Microporosity
Vugs
Fractures
Nice porosity
- always effective
Naughty Pores
Microporosity
Largely ineffective for hydrocarbon storage and

fluid flow
Vugs
Enhances conductivity and capillarity
May hold hydrocarbon, but ineffective for flow
Fractures
So effective for flow that other pore systems are

likely to be bypassed
May be counted but not quantified by wireline
Key point: to be able to recognise when nonstandard circumstances arise
Summary of carbonate pore systems
Weber & van Geuns, 2004
Porositypermeability relationships, for the Tor, Ekofisk and Lower

Cretaceous Sola and Tuxen Formation carbonates in the Danish Central
Graben.
For the same porosity, the matrix

permeability of the Ekofisk will be
ca. one tenth that of the Tor
F
r
Tor = Maastrichtian (U. Cretaceous); Ekofisk = Danian (L. Tertiary)
Influence of burial & compaction on Chalk reservoir properties:

Chalk porosity preservation during burial history
Porosity-depth relationships, Dan Field, Denmark
Subsea Depth (m)
Daan Field Porosity vs Depth

Dan Field
Porosity-Depth
0
-100
-200
-300
-400
-500
-600
-700
-800
-900
-1000
-1100
-1200
-1300
-1400
-1500
-1600
-1700
-1800
-1900
-2000
-2100
-2200
-2300
FY Log
H eidim iao Log
Putaohua Log
FY C ore
10
20
Porosity
30
40
50
Dan Field
Top Chalk
Depth Map
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4
4.83%
PORE TYPES
0.02 mD
Measuring pore size
Inject mercury into a cleaned

and dried core plug, record
pressure and saturation
Injection record (top right) can
be converted to pore-size
distribution (bottom right)
It measures THROATS!
19.3%
1702 mD
And the Point of All That?
To think about pore types in terms of their

effectiveness
Theres physics in it and theory out there if

you want it
There are geological techniques that bridge

the gap toward petrophysical rock
characterisation
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4 PORE NETWORKS
Summarising: (1of 3)
1. In describing the characteristics of rocks that govern fluid storage and flow we are
mainly concerned with the pore space.
2. Grain texture and composition, and their modification by diagenesis, are of interest
only insofar as they determine the physics and chemistry of the pore walls.
3. The same physics and chemistry apply in conventional and unconventional reservoirs,
although the weighting of forces and the importance of particular characteristics
increase in unconventional reservoirs.
4. Real pores are irregular, tortuous and complicated spaces but they result from
geological processes and it is part of the geologists job to understand the rock from
the pore-scale upwards.
5. The tasks are to understand the system well enough to be able to give an accurate
description and prediction, and to recognise a non-standard rock when you see it,
adapting your analysis accordingly.
6. The key collaborator of the geoscientist in this task is the petrophysicist.
Summarising: (2 of 3)
7. Coarse-grained, well-sorted rocks have lots of big pores with wide, clean
throats, high permeability, low capillary pressure, low irreducible water
saturation, low residual oil saturation and thus a high displacement

efficiency.
8. They also permit easy and accurate log analysis and conform to standard
formation evaluation methods.
9. All these characteristics are reversed in fine-grained, poorly-sorted rocks: it

is the fundamentals of the pore network which limit hydrocarbon saturation
and recovery in poor reservoir and which also make evaluation and recovery
more difficult.
10. Conversely, the same pore network (capillarity) processes control initial trap
filling and the determination of reservoir/seal boundaries (both stratigraphic
& fault-related).
Summarising: (3 of 3)
11.The main reason why carbonate pore systems can be more difficult than
sandstone is solubility.
12.A sandstone is unlikely to be cemented at shallow burial and then leached

deeper but a carbonate can.
13.A clastic mudrock is probably non-reservoir forever, but a carbonate
mudrock may change (e.g through dissolution, dolomitisation, etc.).
14.The solubility of carbonates leads to a greater variety of pore types, with the
possibility of having very poorly connected pores (high porosity, low
permeability) or the opposite.
15.The physics of pore systems is deep, but its out there if that helps.
16.Pore systems can be classified according to a variety of schemes, but select

the system that addresses the question in hand.
Contents
Pore types: sandstone/carbonate/nice/naughty
Henri Philibert Gaspard Darcy
Core analysis
Permeability in lab and reservoir
Porosity-permeability plots
Capillarity
Wettability and rel perm
Henri Philibert Gaspard Darcy: Permeability

Q/A = (k/)(P/L)
Flow per unit area is proportional to mobility and pressure gradient. Mobility
is permeability divided by viscosity
Note that for constant viscosity, flow is linear with permeability. Plotting
permeability on a log scale may be convenient but is misleading
Q/A = flow per unit area
k = permeability of the rock
= viscosity of the flowing fluid
Pic 2
P/L = pressure gradient
HPGD, 1803-1858
Pic 3
and his
experiment
Units
Permeability has the dimension L2 e.g. m2.
1 m2 is a bit big
Oilfield units
Darcies and millidarcies
1 Darcy allows a fluid of 1cP viscosity to flow at 1 cm3s-1 through an

area of 1 cm2 under a pressure gradient of 1 atm/cm
1 D = 0.987 x 10-12 m2
1 mD = 0.987 x 10-15 m2
Flow is Linear With Permeability

1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0.001
2770
2770
2870
2870
2970
2970
3070
3170
0.010
0.100
1.000
3070
3170
LINEAR SCALE:
LOG SCALE:
PROPERLY REPRESENTS
FLOW POTENTIAL
CLUTTER!
10.000
100.000
1000.000
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS
Contents
Core analysis
Capillarity
Routine Core Analysis
Porosity
A known volume of helium is expanded into the sample: Boyles Law does the
rest
Sample can be any shape
Accurate to 0.5 p.u.
Also measures grain density
Permeability
Measure flow rate of helium or nitrogen through a confined sample
Only on regular plugs
Good to 15% mid range; 50% low and high*
KEY POINT: Be aware of problems in sample preparation and handling
* I have not found an analysis of this. In my experience, the accuracy of the measurement is much
less of a problem than the preparation of the sample and the heterogeneity of the rock
Routine Core Analysis Process

Remove from sleeve Inspect Continuity log
Core Gamma CT scan Preserved samples

Take plug samples
Clean and dry Plugs
Porosity permeability
Grain Density
Overburden Phi/K
SCAL subset
Hotshot Phi/K
Bag and label trims

Fluid saturations
Hg-Injection
Petrography
Klinkenberg
Slab Core Resinate - Photograph
Final Report
A CONSTANT DIALOGUE BETWEEN CLIENT PETROPHYSICIST/OPS

GEOLOGIST AND LAB IS CRUCIAL
Routine Core Analysis
Core Labs kit, the CMS-300
Manufacturers spec:
18 samples at a time,
automated
0.05 D to 15 D
0.01-40%
280-9,800 psi
Cleaned and dried samples
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4 METHODS
From Reservoir to Lab

1.
Sit around quietly for 100 million years
2.
Notice approaching vibration
3.
Flushed with mud filtrate
4.
Rattled around in core barrel
5.
3000 psi pore pressure, 3000 psi confining pressure to 14 psi and zip in a few hours
6.
100C to 10 C
7.
Dropped on rig floor
8.
Laid in core box, dropped, shuffled, put back in core box upside down
9.
Truck / boat / helicopter ride
10.
Sit around on a pallet for 3 months in baking sun / freezing cold / driving rain
11.
Plugged
12.
Boil in solvent
13.
Bake in oven
..Measure porosity and permeability
Delicate Clay Textures
Clay textures can be wrecked in the process of preparing samples: the effect of
different drying methods on illite texture is well documented
Dried at the critical-point: fluffiness

preserved
Air-dried: bad hair day

From
Kantorowicz,
1992
Grain Density
2.70
2.75
2.80
2.85
2.90
2.95
3.00
3000
The data are a by-product of the
porosity measurement
Most useful geologically in
3025
3050
carbonates: calcite v dolomite v

anhydrite
In clastics, can be a check for
3075
3100
anomalous mineralogy or a measure

3125
of carbonate cementation
3150
Used by petrophysicists to calibrate
density logs, thus in calculating
3175
porosity and acoustic impedance

3200
CALCITE
DOLOMITE
ANHYDRITE
How Much Data is Enough?
In principle, every bed should be sampled with sufficient frequency to give

a stable mean
There is no answer to this that is both practical and statistically rigorous in

vertical sections of sedimentary rocks
A 2-step empirical approach is necessary:

1.
has the core sampled the full range of log response of the
reservoir?
2.
What is the visible heterogeneity of the core compared to

the 1-ft or 0.3-m plugging?
Core plugs are likely to miss the extremes, which is important only if the
extremes are features big enough to influence well performance
A 25x25x1 m geomodel cell is 8 million times bigger than the 3 core plugs
it might contain
GO SEE THE CORE
Step 1: Representative geological & petrophysical core analysis

measurements of all key facies & flow units
RMS976006
Modified After Ebanks, Scheihing, Atkinson, 1992
Step 2: Full petrophysical & petrographic analyses
Sneider et al, 1984
Step 3: Facies/rock type/flow unit to log calibration

Sneider et al, 1984
Step 3: Rock type/flow unit to log calibration (cont.)
Sneider et al, 1984
Step 4: Rock type/flow unit to fluid flow calibration
Can. Well Log, Soc.

After Connally & Reed, 1983
Step 5: Net pay definition
STEP
PROCEDURE
1. Geologically
Characterize Reservoir
Core Description, Wireline Log Calibration, Lithofacies

Determination, Depositional Environment Analysis
2. Determine Reservoir
Properties
Core Analysis (Porosity, Permeability, Fluid Saturation),

Wireline Log Analysis (Porosity, Fluid Saturation)
3. Delineate Reservoir
& Nonreservoir
Rocks & Characterize
Pore Space Geometry
Porosity / Permeability Crossplots, Thin Section Petrography,

Pore Cast Electron Microscopy, Mercury Injection Capillary
Analysis; Apply Cut-off Criteria
4. Evaluate Pay and

Nonpay
Mercury Injection Capillary Analysis, Fluid Saturation

Analysis; Apply Cut-off Criteria
5. Confirm Pay Zones
Measure Well Performance Using Spinner, Temperature,

Flowmeter Data And Production Results; Observations
Noted During Drilling, Including Shows
After Gaynor & Sneider, 1992
Step 5: Net pay definition-summary
Contents
Core analysis
Capillarity
Something to Bear in Mind.
Lab-measured permeability is lovely, but for the prediction of

reservoir behaviour we need to know the relative permeability to
hydrocarbon at reservoir conditions, and its behaviour as saturation
varies
Correcting to In Situ Conditions
Labs measure the permeability to nitrogen at 400 psi. Few reservoirs

match those conditions
It is necessary to correct for liquid, overburden and two phases
1.
Liquid
2.
44
Calibration
Measure a subset at confining pressure
At least 2 phases
Klinkenberg correction
Because gas flow in pores is less affected by grain surfaces
Overburden
3.
44
44
Relative permeability
SCAL (Special Core Analysis)
SADLY, ALL THESE CORRECTIONS ARE DOWNWARDS
Correcting to In Situ: Klinkenberg
Make measurements at
different gas pressures, plot k
against 1/P (reciprocal

pressure) and extrapolate to
1/P = 0 to find Klinkenberg
corrected perm
Done by the core analysis lab

as a standard procedure
average gas permeability, mD
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
0.2
1/P, 1/atm
0.4
0.6
Correcting to In Situ: Overburden

Routine phi v. percent left at overburden
100
Charts show the percentage of the
80
property measured at standard
60
conditions (400 psi) which is
retained at overburden pressure
40
20
The reservoir is at 2900 m,

normally pressured, mechanically
0
0
10
20
30
robust.
40
Routine k v. percent retained at overburden
100
1 across a range of percentage
80
60
Perm correction looks wicked.

Multiply by 0.8 would cover a lot of
40
it, but is the scatter to do with
20
geology? More analysis required
0
0.00
Porosity correction is easy: subtract
0.01
0.10
1.00
10.00
100.00
1000.00
Correcting to In Situ: Overburden

SPE 56813
Chart shows the cumulative
frequency of permeability retained at

pressure: 50% of the samples (red
arrow) retain 40% or less of
unstressed k (blue arrow)
GoM and California sands: typically

30% porosity, 2 D pemeability at
standard conditions (300 psi), so
they are mechanically weak
Exceptions and Pitfalls

Acquisition, Transport and Preparation
You have choices in all these which will affect the quality of the data
Consult the experts: the drillers, your petrophysicist, your Ops group and the
service companies
Sampling and Measurement Processes
Rough plugs
Isolated vugs
Damage to rock during coring: weak rocks and delicate textures
Damage to rock texture during preparation
The Dataset
How much data is enough?
Bad sampling
Under-sampling the crumbly bits
Go see the core and check
Contents
A very small piece of pore network theory
Core analysis
Capillarity
Gus E Archie
M. Gassman and Herr Zoeppritz
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4 PHI v k
Porosity v Permeability
Lets say that the

colours represent
porosity and there are 4
different facies in this
volume
How then do you do the

permeability?
Porosity v Permeability
Fundamental to understanding reservoir rock types
Not much use unless integrated with grain size, facies, thin section
Replete with waffly, ineffective description but limited understanding
There is theory, but rocks are messy
Applications:
Define rock types
Pick layers
Selection and application of SCAL data
Whats a rock type?
A lithology that can be distinguished stratigraphically or geographically or by its wireline log

characteristics and which has flow properties that can be deduced reliably in uncored wells. Something
measurable from the logs (e.g. porosity, GR value) can be used as input to a rule for calculating
permeability and choosing cap pressure and rel perm curves. This definition assumes you want to
know about flow. If you just want storage (volumetrics), life is easier.
Sandstone 1: Grain-size Control

9/8a-B02 C ore Plu g Data
10000
MU l
ML u
l
TheML
standard
is to plot
1000
1000
porosity linear on the xFU u
Permeability, mD
Khg
(mD)
axis, permeability
FU l
100
100
FL u
logarithmic on the y
FL l
Colours mark different
grain-size classes
10
10
Black squares are the
coarsest facies, red is
11
0.1
finer, green is finer again
10
0
11
12
13
14 10
15
16
17
18
19
Porosity, %
Porosity (%)
20
20 21
22
23
Sandstones 2
10000
1000
100
Permeability, mD
10
Several datasets
are shown in order

to see behaviour
0.1
across 9 orders of
magnitude of
0.01
permeability, from
Tight Gas Sand, East Texas
0.001
0.0001
Uncemented sst, Germany, fg or greater
ten darcies to ten
Uncemented sst, Germany, vfg or less
nano-darcies
Brent Group, Ninian
0.00001
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
Porosity
0.25
0.3
0.35
A Model Sandstone
Bryant and Cade, 1993. Permeability prediction from

geologic models, BAAPG, 77, 1338-50
Cade, Evans and Bryant, 1994. Analysis of permeability
controls a new approach. Clay Minerals, 29, 491-501
The chart is from BP work dating from

the early 90s. It shows the calculated
permeability and porosity of a
digitised random bead pack
They took a random pack of spherical
1000 um (vc/c)
500 um (c/m)
250 um (m/f)
125 um (v/vf)
62.5 um (vf/silt)
Compaction + pore-fill
Pore-fill only
1,000,000
beads, all the same size. The pack
100,000
was solidified, sectioned and the
Knowing the bead centres and bead

diameter, porosity and permeability
could be calculated
Compaction was modelled by moving

the bead centres closer vertically:
cementation by growing the beads or
by nucleating blockages in pore space
There are some approximations along

the way, but the output of the model
matches nicely what rocks do, and
heres the important bit helps in
understanding the rocks
Permeability, mD
position of the bead centres recorded
10,000
1,000
100
10
1
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Porosity
0.25
0.30
0.35
A Model Sandstone So What?

106
1,000,000
Probably not great for

predicting permeability in real
rocks
100,000
Permeability, mD
10,000
103
1,000
100
K DISAPPEARS STEEPLY
10
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Porosity
0.25
0.30
0.35
But it sure helps in interpreting

porosity-permeability plots
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
10000
Sandstone
control
9/8a-B021:C great
ore Plugrain-size
g Data
1 00
1 0
0. 00
0. 05
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
MU l
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
ML u
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
1000
1000
1 0 ,0 0 0
Permeability, mD
Khg
(mD)
1 ,0 0 0
100
100
ML l
FU u
FU l
FL u
1 00
FL l
1 0
10
10
0. 00
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
The colour-coding indicates

grain size: Black squares are
the coarsest facies, red is
finer, green is finer again
11
0.1
0. 05
10
0
11
12
13
14 10
15
16
17
18
19
Porosity, %
Porosity (%)
20
20 21
22
23
Gradient and relative

positions match the model
0. 35
0. 30
0. 35
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
Sandstones 2
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
0. 00
0. 05
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
10000
1000
100
125 m, compaction
line: right where the
green triangles should
be
Blue triangles sit on a

finer grain-size trend
0.1
Brent samples show a
wide range of grain size
and a trend indicating
cementation and
compaction
0.01
0.001
0.0001
Permeabilities by Rock Type
Uncemented sst, Germany, fg or greater

1,000.000
Uncemented sst, Germany, vfg or less

100.000
Brent Group, Ninian
0.00001
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
Not nearly
as good a fit
0.2
Porosity
0.25
Per m eabi l i t y, D
Permeability, mD
10
10.000
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
1.000
0.3
0.35
0.100
0.1
0.15
0.2
Porosity
0.25
0.3
0. 35
Travis Peak Fmn, E Texas a Tight Gas Sand

LIFE
MODEL
100
1,000,000
100,000
10
10,000
A microscope view.
White is pore, black
is grain
1,000
100
0.1
10
0.01
1
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.001
0.25
0.30
0.35
Permeabilities by Rock Type

1,000.000
Pore-filling cement
0.0001
100.000
Tight Gas Sand, East Texas

0.00001
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
No use
Per m eabi l i t y, D
Permeability, mD
0.00
10.000
Type 1
Type 2
Type 3
1.000
0.100
0.1
0.15
0.2
Porosity
Porosity
0.25
0.3
SPE17729, 39917
Modified after Lucia 1995, BAAPG. See also Carbonate Reservoir Characterisation by Jerry Lucia (Springer, London, 366 pp., 2007)
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
Carbonates 1: Lucias system
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
0. 00
0. 05
0. 10
Grain-dominated
1000.0
Mixed
Permeability, mD
100.0
10.0
Crystalline
1.0
Mud-dominated
0.1
These must be porous wackestones

and mudstones and they sit on a grainsize trend
0.0
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
Porosity
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
0. 35
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
Carbonates 2: Chalk
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
100.00
0. 00
0. 05
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
Mid East Aptian Chalk
Permeability, mD
10.00
1.00
These are porous

wackestones and
mudstones and they sit
on grain-size trends: the
Danian Chalk is finer
Maastrichtian Chalk
0.10
Danian Chalk
0.01
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Porosity
0.25
0.30
0.35
0. 35
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
Carbonates 3: Suspect Device Field
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
0. 00
1000.000
Permeability, mD
100.000
10.000
1.000
0.100
Coloured according to reservoir layer. Theres

a lot of rock here and the chart is a big mess,
but the layering is starting to sort things out
0.010
0.001
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Porosity, %
25%
30%
35%
40%
0. 05
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
0. 35
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
Carbonates 3: Suspect Device Field
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
0. 00
Porosity
1000.000
Permeability, mD
100.000
10.000
1.000
0.100
0.010
0.001
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Same original facies (oolites again), similar porosity,

buried in the same location 400 ft apart vertically:
1000x difference in perm
40%
0. 05
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
0. 35
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
Suspect Device: Dolomites 1
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
0. 00
1000
100
This lot looks grainy and

are organised along a
grain-size trend
Permeability, mD
10
0.1
These are crystalline dolomites: the

steepest phi-k relationship youll see
other than fractured plugs
0.01
2 wells: Coloured according to reservoir layer

0.001
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Porosity, %
30%
35%
40%
45%
0. 05
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
0. 35
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
Suspect Device: Limestones
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
0. 00
1000
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
No correlation between
por and perm: these are
oomouldic
100
Permeability, mD
0. 05
10
0.1
This layer is a bit of a mess, but

theres a trend to part of it
suggesting grainstones
0.01
2 wells: Coloured according to reservoir layer
0.001
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Porosity, %
25%
30%
35%
40%
0. 25
0. 30
0. 35
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
Suspect Device: Classification Without Understanding
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
Permeability, mD
0. 00
Porosity, %
0. 05
0. 10
0. 15
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
0. 35
1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0
1 00
1 0
0. 00
Most wells are not cored, so permeability has to be derived, usually from porosity
Understanding a bit about pore networks and poroperm relationships allows more
0. 05
0. 10
0. 15
effective selection of rock types, which should allow more effective description of the
reservoir (and better selection of cap curves, rel perm)
Understanding comes from looking down the microscope, visiting the core and talking
to your colleagues
This report is a compilation of 70 published datasets

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2003/ofr-03-420/ofr-03-420.html
0. 20
0. 25
0. 30
0. 35
Who Does What?
Petrophysicist
Coordinator of core analysis programme
Custodian of core analysis data
Geologist
Informed user of core analysis data
Coordinator of core description programme
Reservoir Engineer
Informed user of core analysis data
Service Company
Will have broad experience and advice, but not necessarily the detailed
knowledge of your reservoir
N.B. Workflow sheet
Contents
Core analysis
Capillarity
Capillarity
Contents
Some basic science
The practical effects of the physics how it works in rocks
(it controls the static distribution of fluids in the reservoir)
Capillary entry pressure
Saturation v height and free-water levels
How we deal with it measurement and quantification
Bouyancy, entry pressure and saturation
IN A NUTSHELL
The greater the
buoyancy force,
the smaller the
pores that can be
entered by the oil,
overcoming
capillary
resistance
Basic concepts
Buoyancy versus capillary pressure
Fluid pressure gradients v. API gravity
Some typical fluid pressure gradients

Material
A: Sediment/rock
B: Salt sat. brine
C: Pure water
D: 60 API oil
E: Dry gas
Pressure Gradient
A: 1.00 psi/ft
B: 0.50 psi/ft
C: 0.433 psi/ft
D: 0.321 psi/ft
E: 0.100 psi/ft
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4 CAPILLARITY
The Result is a Hydrocarbon Column

RFT data
Top of transition zone
Depth
Transition Zone
Irreducible water
Immobile Oil
Entry pressure
Deepest oil production

Practical OWC range
Lowest detectable oil
Free Water Level
0
Swirr
Water Saturation
Sor
Simplified air-mercury injection capillary pressure

laboratory measurements
After Core Labs

laboratory measurements: Step 1 (initial conditions)
After Core Labs

laboratory measurements: Step 2 (initial Pd)
After Core Labs
P1= Pd = Displacement Pressure

laboratory measurements: Step 3 (intermediate Pc)
After Core Labs

laboratory measurements: Step 4 (Pc at Swi)
After Core Labs
Typical air-mercury Pc curve
Range of Pc curves for different rock types
Drainage v. Imbibition
Drainage:
Migration of non-wetting phase
fluid & displacement of the
wetting phase
(e.g. filling of HC traps)
Imbibition:
Injection of wetting phase fluid
& displacement of the nonwetting phase
(e.g. waterflooding)
Pore Throats
Permeable rock may be treated as a

network of capillary tubes
Oil must overcome capillary forces to pass

through pore throats
Standard technique is mercury porosimetry
Cap pressure curves may change with

overburden stress
To get to Sw v h, convert air-mercury to

oil-brine (PcB = PcA(.cos)B/(.cos)A)
and pressure to height (h = Pc/. g)
Apparent Stepped OWCs
Are the lower 4 horizons coarsening or fining up?
In Practice
Very commonly, Sw v h is
picked from log data
FWL may not be known
Rocks are messy
But each rock type should

have a distinctive cap curve
The Leverett J-Function is a normalisation of capillary pressure for permeability and
porosity
Diagram from GTA Manual M30
Curious Transition Zone Effect

PORE AND
THROAT
HIGH IN
THE OIL
COLUMN
IN THE
TRANSITION
ZONE
LARGE PORE
MEDIUM PORE
SMALL PORE
Residual oil saturation is less in the transition zone

Check out SPE87921: the saturation effect is small but the rel perm
difference is very significant: more oil can be recovered Diagram from SPE71609
In Practice
Capillary forces determine the static state of the reservoir
Volumetric calculations need to take account of Sw v h and thus

capillary pressure, but small in good reservoir and negligible for
gas
Reservoir simulation models need cap pressure information

because it affects hydrocarbon movement
Cap pressure is relatively easy to relate to geologic controls
because it is strongly determined by grain size and sorting
Cap pressure by mercury-vacuum, air-brine or oil-brine is

standard SCAL technique
Contents
A very small piece of pore network theory
Core analysis
Capillarity
Gus E Archie
M. Gassman and Herr Zoeppritz
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4 WETTABILITY
Oil-wet v Water-wet
N.B. This is
a real pore
system
DIAGRAMS MODIFIED FROM GTA MANUAL M6
In the oil-wet case, the pore wall

has a greater electro-chemical
affinity for oil than for water
Example of a Non-Wetting Surface
(when properly polished, of course)
Wettability Tips
Tending to oil-wet:
Oil with a high concentration of polar compounds
Kaolinite, chlorite
Coarse-grained, high porosity (because lower Swirr)

Heavy oils in carbonates
Tending to water-wet:
Oil with low concentration of polar compounds
Quartz, feldspar, illite
Fine-grained, low porosity (because higher Swirr)
Water-wetness is predominant (all reservoirs start out water-wet), although in detail
many rocks are probably of mixed wettability, simply because they are so
heterogeneous at the microscopic scale. Wettability is a complex phenomenon of
hydrocarbon and surface chemistry and electrostatics
Modified from Worden et al, Petroleum Geoscience, 4, 130
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4 2-PHASE FLOW
Relative Permeability
FULLY SATURATED WITH
OIL: NO PERMEABILITY
TO WATER
Kr = FRACTION OF
ABSOLUTE
PERMEABILITY
BOTH WATER AND OIL

FLOWING
A
0
0
SW
OIL NO LONGER
CONTINUOUS:
residual oil saturation

irreducible water
saturation
DIAGRAMS MODIFIED FROM GTA MANUAL M6
Relative permeability curves
Relative permeability v. Capillary Pressure
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4 2-PHASE FLOW
Tight Gas Rel Perm

Tight gas
reservoir
No fluids flow
THIS IS CONTROVERSIAL, but
it allows me to make a point
about the importance of rel
perm curves
Regular
reservoir
Two fluids flow
From Shanley et al., BAAPG, 2004
Capillary pressure and wettability are the rock properties that determine
fluid saturation
Wettability affects electrical properties, rel perm and reservoir

performance (accelerates water breakthrough; retards, but may not
reduce, oil recovery)
Fluid movement is powerfully determined by rel perm. Rel perm can be

difficult to measure, especially in poor reservoir. Tweaking the rel perm
curves is a favourite dodge of reservoir engineers
ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4 ROCK PROPERTIES
What I Was Trying to Say (1)

1. This section took us from the porosity-permeability territory that is most familiar to
the geoscientist through to the flow properties of pore systems occupied by more than
one phase of fluid.
2. Capillary pressure describes the way a pore system prefers to hold on to a particular
phase. When oil or gas are migrating into a reservoir the capillary pressure resists their
entry and has to be overcome by buoyancy. The balance between buoyancy and
capillary pressure is what determines the hydrocarbon saturation.

3. Poor reservoir (smaller pores) has a greater cap pressure so it is more difficult to get
hydrocarbon in. Any reservoir will show different hydrocarbon saturation between the
larger and smaller pores, if they could be isolated.
4. During a waterflood, the high capillary pressure rock preferentially attracts the water.
At the small scale the pace of the displacement is accelerated or retarded according to
capillary pressure behaviour.
5. The wettability of a rock is determined by the electro-chemistry of the hydrocarbon,
water and mineral surfaces.

6. All reservoirs are initially water-wet, which is to say that water lines the mineral wall
while the hydrocarbon sits in the middle, not touching the mineral surface at all.
7. Some reservoirs become oil-wet, lots probably are mixed.
8. Oil-wetness affects the flow behaviour. From an oil-wet reservoir production overall
will be more watery (the water rel-perm curve is higher than for oil-wet) but if you can
handle the produced water the ultimate oil recovery can be greater because the oil
tends to remain as a continuous film to low saturations. This film can be squeezed and
flowed (the oil rel perm curve goes to zero only at very high water saturation).

9. Relative permeability curves are what controls most directly the flow in the reservoir.
The fluids in the pore space share between them the absolute permeability of the dry
rock, which is what we measure in routine core analysis.
10. The relative permeability curves describe how this sharing occurs as saturation
changes.
11. Getting the relative permeability curves right is extremely important for modelling
reservoir performance and is measured in the lab as part of the bag of routines we call
Special Core Analysis (SCAL).
12. It can be expensive and time-consuming and is usually done on not nearly enough
samples.
13. There is geology in the choice and use of relative permeability curves, but these
secrets are usually held deep in the heart of reservoir engineering territory.

Advanced Petroleum Geology - 8

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Advanced Petroleum Geology - 8

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Petroleum Geology

Resrvoir Rocks or Rocks as Pore Systems

Aim of this Section

ROCKS AS PORE SYSTEMS 4INTRO

What is the role of the geologist?

Persuade your local petrophysicist that the geologist has an important

Recognise and understand small-scale variation in flow and storage properties

Pore Type Classifications

Mode of formation (primary, secondary, dissolution)

Descriptive (inter-, intra-granular)

Size (macro-, micro-porosity)

Connection (catenary, cul-de-sac, isolated or vug)

Special terms for carbonates

In this class: nice pores and naughty pores

Key Objective: To Represent This By a Handful of Numbers

Sandstone Pore Systems

Grain size, sorting

Clay content and distribution

Matrix content (usually compacted, sand-sized mud or lithic clasts)

Grain types (e.g. lots of feldspars to dissolve)

Sandstone problems* usually involve clays (authigenic or detrital),

Pore Type Variety

Sandstones tend to be straightforward

Grain size is almost always the primary control thus facies

Diagenesis is generally a secondary influence

Carbonates have a greater range of pore types

Grain type before size

Carbonate diagenesis starts early and is much

Grains v matrix: sorting

Carbonate mudstone can be reservoir

Effect of granular texture on porosity

After Beard & Weyl, 1973

Effect of granular texture on permeability

After Beard & Weyl, 1973

Influence of textural & mineralogical maturity on sandstone pore

Effect of clay mineral distribution

Modified after Serra, 1984

Effect of authigenic clay mineral types & habit

Photo Courtesy of PetroTech Associates 2002, Neasham 1977

Effect of authigenic clay mineral types & habit

Photo Courtesy of PetroTech Associates 2002, Neasham 1977

Effect of authigenic clay mineral types & habit

Photo Courtesy of PetroTech Associates 2002, Neasham 1977

Discrete particle kaolinite:

Pore lining chlorite:

From the Middle Jurassic Brent Group,

Pc curves vs type of dispersed clay

Carbonate Pore Systems (1)

Carbonate Pore Systems (2)

Effectiveness of Pore Types

Connected macroporosity nice pores

Has a higher saturation than the bulk rock of the

Contains most of the permeability

Relatively easy to deal with and measure

The Rest naughty pores

Largely ineffective for hydrocarbon storage and

Enhances conductivity and capillarity

May hold hydrocarbon, but ineffective for flow

So effective for flow that other pore systems are

May be counted but not quantified by wireline

Key point: to be able to recognise when nonstandard circumstances arise

Summary of carbonate pore systems

Weber & van Geuns, 2004