Professional Documents
Culture Documents
By
Nova Energy
Table of Contents
HRT1
HRT2
HRT3
HRT4
X-Sections displaying lateral and vertical
HRT5
HRT6
relationships between HRTs.
HRT7
HRT8
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types
A A´
FU 1
FU 2
FU 3
FU 4
OWC=-1193 SSTVD
FU 1
FU 2
FU 3
FU 4
8100
Depth (ft bRT)
8200
Seal
8300 Unit C
Seal
Unit 6
8400
Unit 7
Seal
8500
3000 3200 3400 3600 3800 4000 0.1 (Ohm.m) 100 1.95 (g/cc) 2.95
Pressure (mD/cP) 45 (p.u.) -15
(psia)
Potential Seal Micro LL Neutron
Tight Streak R2 (20”) Densi ty
RCI BU Pressure RX (120”)
DD Mobility
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types
WFT
Comparison of WFT and Production Test Transients
DST
MacroScale MegaScale
1000
k = 127 mD 100
Comparison of WFT and Production Test Transients
ri =Production
Comparison of WFT and 16 ft Test Transients 10
Change
10000
1
Derivative
1000
1000
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 ri = >5000 ft
1000
10 Time (s)
100
100
Comparison of WFT and Production Test Transients
10
1100001 k = 700 mD
Pressure(psi)
10 ri = 10 ft
0.11 k = 7 mD
0.1
0.1 1 10= 8 ft100
ri 1000 10000 100000
0.01 0.01
Time (s)
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
0.1 1 Time (s)10 100 1000 10000 100000
Time (s)
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types
Phi (% )
Sw (% ) K (mD) Qi (10E3 m3/d)
P. Formacion
0
0 30
100 0.002 20 0 60
0 500
C3a
0. 1000
C3b 0. 0100
0. 0010
Seat s eal
C4
0.004mD 0.01 mD
Rock Types and CapCurves are the properties that describe reservoir characteristics at multiple scale levels
HRT below 5
The Pore Medium – K-PHI Relationships
HRTs
HRTs are in different color codes
HRT 6
HRT 8
HRT 5
HRT 7
HRT below 5
Classifying Pore Systems
Rocks can be classified on the basis of their pore geometry into four major
pore categories that can be divided into ten subcategories. Extensive
experience and laboratory analysis show that these pore type categories have
a particular behavior when interacting with fluids that can be used to predict
the behavior of reservoir systems over time.
Classifying Pore Systems
Critical elements of pore-system geometry
Connectivity
Even very large pores contribute nothing to fluid flow unless they connect to other
pores. Connectivity increases with the size of pore throats and with increasing number
of pore throats surrounding each pore. The number of pore throats that connect with
each pore is the Coordination Number (Wardlaw and Cassan, 1978).
Examples
Contact Angle
os − ws = os cos = 90 o Intermediate Wettability
90 o Oil wet
Capillary Pressure in a Tube
dc
2
po
R= =
rc
Radius of meniscus
R cos cos
pw
2 2
dc pc = po - pw = = cos
R rc
Capillary pressure
po pw
Parameters Controlling Pc
In a mercury capillary pressure test, a rock with a measured porosity is immersed in a mercury pressure cell.
The pressure in the cell is raised to a predetermined pressure level (P1, figure below). When the cell comes to
equilibrium, the volume of injected mercury is measured (V2). Since the porosity of the test sample is known
prior to the test, the volume of injected mercury can be converted to the percent of the total pore volume
filled with mercury (for example, 10% at 10 psi for point M1). All the pores filled with mercury at this point in
the test have at least one 10µ pore throat radius or larger and represent 10% of the sample’s pore volume. This
procedure is repeated several more times at different pressures (for example, points M2 through M5).
Determining Pore Throat Size from Pc Curves
Pore throat profiles
A curve is drawn through the measured points at test completion. This capillary
pressure curve also represents a pore throat size profile for the tested sample. It
relates a given pore throat size to its capillary resistance (Pc). The diagram below
shows the curve drawn through the points in the figure.
Determining Pore Throat Size from Pc Curves
Converting capillary pressure to pore throat size
Example:
The minimum pore throat radius entered when Sw is 20% and Pc is 200 psi is 0.5μ.
Characterizing Rock Quality
Analyzing air permeability (Ka) and porosity (Ø) data separately to characterize rock quality can be deceiving. Analyzing Ka and Ø data using
the Ka/Ø ratio or the r35 method (Pittman, 1992) is much more effective for determining quality. The Ka/Ø ratio or the r35 method yields
information about the fluid flow and storage quality of a rock.
Using Ka and Ø data separately to characterize reservoir rock quality is misleading. Consider the rocks shown in the SEM microphotographs in
the figure below. Flow unit 1 is a mesoporous, sucrosic dolomite. Its average PHI is 30% and average Ka is 10 md. Flow unit 2 is a
macroporous, oolitic limestone. Its average PHI is 10% and average Ka is 10 md. Initially, we might think that flow unit 1 is higher quality
because it has three times more porosity and the same permeability as flow unit 2.
However, in terms of fluid flow efficiency and storage, as shown by the Ka/Ø ratio or r35, flow unit 2 is actually the better rock. In a reservoir
section, increasing Ø and constant Ka indicate pores are becoming more numerous and smaller and pore surface area is increasing. Immobile
water saturation for a reservoir (Sw) becomes greater as more surface is available to the wetting fluid. Higher immobile Sw decreases the
available pore storage space for hydrocarbons. Also, as the pore size decreases, so does the pore throat size. Flow unit 2 above is the better
reservoir rock because it has larger pore throats and lower immobile Sw. Ka/PHI ratio or r35 accounts for the interrelationship of Ka and PHI,
making them effective methods for comparing rock quality.
Characterizing Rock Quality
Mean Hydraulic Ratio
Ka and PHI are standard components of many reservoir engineering wellbore flow performance equations. The Ka/PHI ratio reflects rock
quality in terms of flow efficiency of a reservoir sample. When clastics and carbonates are deposited, they have a close correlation of particle
size to the Ka/PHI ratio. Mean pore throat radius increases as grain or crystal size increases, but modification to grain shape and size tends to
“smear” the distribution. In the example on the preceding page, flow unit 1 has a Ka/PHI value of 33 and flow unit 2 has a Ka/PHI value of
100. Even though PHI is greater and Ka is the same for flow unit 1, the lower Ka/PHI value indicates its quality is lower than flow unit 2.
On the plot below, the contours represent a constant Ka/PHI ratio and divide the plot into areas of similar pore types. Data points that plot
along a constant ratio have similar flow quality across a large range of porosity and/or permeability. The clusters of points on the plot below
represent hypothetical Ka/PHI values for flow units 1 and 2 presented. The position of the clusters relative to the Ka/PHI contours indicates
flow unit 2 has higher quality in terms of Ka/PHI ratio than flow unit 1.
Characterizing Rock Quality
R35
H.D. Winland of Amoco used mercury injection–
capillary pressure curves to develop an empirical
relationship among PHI, Ka, and pore throat radius
(r). He tested 312 different water-wet samples.
The data set included 82 samples (56 sandstone
and 26 carbonate) with low permeability corrected
for gas slippage and 240 other uncorrected
samples. Winland found that the effective pore
system that dominates flow through a rock
corresponds to a mercury saturation of 35%. That
pore system has pore throat radii (called port size,
or r35) equal to or smaller than the pore throats
entered when a rock is saturated 35% with a
nonwetting phase. After 35% of the pore system
fills with a non-wetting phase fluid, the remaining
pore system does not contribute to flow. Instead, it
contributes to storage. Pittman (1992) speculates,
“Perhaps Winland found the best correlation to be
r35 because that is where the average modal pore
aperture occurs and where the pore network is
developed to the point of serving as an effective
pore system that dominates flow.” The capillary
pressure curve and pore throat size histogram
below illustrate Pittman’s point.
Characterizing Rock Quality
The Winland r35 equation
Winland (1972, 1976) developed the following equation to calculate r35 for
samples with intergranular or intercrystalline porosity:
log r35 = 0.732 + 0.588 log Ka – 0.864 log PHI where:
• Ka = air permeability, md
• PHI = porosity, % (not decimals)
Solving for r:
r35 = 10 ^(0.732 + 0.588 log Ka – 0.864 log PHI)
Characterizing Rock Quality
The Winland r35 equation
Rock quality is easily characterized using r35. Consider the clusters of points representing flow
units 1 and 2 on the Ka/PHI plot below. The diagonal curved lines represent equal r35 values.
Points plotting along the same lines represent rocks with similar r35 values and have similar
quality. By interpolation, r35 for flow unit 1 is approximately 1.1µ, and r35 for flow unit 2 is
approximately 3µ. The r35 in flow unit 2 is almost three times as large as flow unit 1. Therefore,
flow unit 2 has better flow quality.
Characterizing Rock Quality
Characterizing rock quality with r35
Using r35 instead of the Ka/ PHI ratio for characterizing rock quality of water-wet
rocks has advantages:
• r35 is an understandable number; Ka/ PHI ratio is a dimensionless number
• r35 can be determined from capillary pressure analysis and related to Ka/ PHI values
• If two variables are known (Ka, PHI, or r35), then the other variable can be
calculated using Winland’s equation or estimated from a Ka/ PHI plot with r35
contours
PREDICTING RESERVOIR SYSTEM QUALITY – ROCK
TYPING
Defining Rock Typing
• The importance of the Rock Typing is centered around the recognition of the
influence of pore structure (i.e. pore and pore throat dimensions, geometry,
size, distribution, etc.) on fluid flow and storage properties rather than pore
volume
• It also explains the geological aspects of the current pore structure and
geometry settled by diagenesis processes as well as depositional setting
characteristics
Defining Rock Types
• Rock Typing is a methodology that integrates both large scale geologic elements and
small-scales rock petrology with the physical rock properties for hydrocarbon
reservoirs.
• Fundamental to this process model are identification and comparison of three different
rock types:
● Depositional — These are rock types that are derived from core-based descriptions of
genetic units which are defined as collections of rocks grouped according to similarities in
composition, texture, sedimentary structure, and stratigraphic sequence as influenced by
the depositional environment. These rock types represent original large-scale rock
properties present at deposition.
Defining Rock Types
● Petrographic — These are rock types which are also described within the context
of the geological framework, but the rock type criteria are based on pore-scale,
microscopic imaging of the current pore structure — as well as the rock texture and
composition, clay mineralogy, and diagenesis.
● Hydraulic — These are rock types that are also defined at the pore scale, but in
this case we define "hydraulic" rock types as those that quantify the physical flow
and storage properties of the rock relative to the native fluid(s) — as controlled by
the dimensions, geometry, and distribution of the current pore and pore throat
structure.
Defining Rock Types
• Each rock type represents different physical and chemical processes affecting rock
properties during the depositional and paragenetic cycles. Since most reservoirs
have been subjected to post-depositional diagenesis, a comparison of all three
rock types will allow us to assess the impact of diagenesis on rock properties
• However, if the reservoir rock has been subjected to significant diagenesis, the
original rock properties present at deposition will be quite different than the
current properties. More specifically, use of the depositional environment and the
associated rock types (in isolation) to guide field development activities may result
in ineffective exploitation.
Defining Rock Types
Summary of Selected Rock Typing Studies and Definitions for Carbonate Reservoirs
Defining Rock Types
Defining Rock Types
Defining Rock Types
Data Sources and Evaluation Techniques for
Rock Typing
• The main data source for Rock Typing analysis comes from cores, which constitute the
calibration points for further expansion of the described characterization
CORE STUDIES
SCAL CCAL
WELL A WELL B WELL C
GR DT SP
CATRIEL
Intermediate
rock types
SIERRAS
Good BLANCAS
rock types
Intermediate
to low
PUNTA rock types
ROSADA
Data Sources and Evaluation Techniques for
Rock Typing: DRTs
• For DRTs, key aspects of the sedimentary rock that may be derived from core
descriptions include lithology, texture, biogenic features, and identification of sand
beds and sedimentary structures (facies and facies association descriptions)
• The primary tools used for describing PRTs are microscopic imaging techniques — i.e., thin
section descriptions, x-ray diffraction analysis, and scanning electron microscopy imaging, as
well as Capillary Pressure measurements
– Thin section studies utilize optical techniques to identify rock texture, composition, and quality (i.e.,
certain aspects of the pore structure and volume).
– X-ray diffraction (XRD) is more of a qualitative technique that provides information on the average
rock composition from a determination of the mineral atomic structure. All materials with a
crystalline structure (particularly clays and shales) exhibit a unique x-ray diffraction pattern
– Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analyses are an excellent tool for evaluating the rock pore and
pore-throat system, as well as the degree of connectivity among all pores. SEM can also provide
information on mineralogy, clay content, and both pore-filling and pore-lining cements and clays. We
may also identify natural fractures, diagenetic features, and fossil content
– Hg-Injection Capillary Pressure Measurements are an effective technique to quantify pore geometry
— particularly the size and distribution of pore bodies and throats
• Included in these evaluations are descriptions of sediment source, rock composition and
texture, mineralogy, and clay types. An important component of the petrographic rock typing
is an assessment of the types of diagenesis and the potential impact on rock flow and storage
capacity
Data Sources and Evaluation Techniques for
Rock Typing: HRTs
• The primary tools for identifying hydraulic rock types are routine core analysis which
includes measurements of total and effective porosity, absolute permeability, and pore
size and distribution from mercury-injection capillary pressure data
• Porosity, which is a measure of the rock's storage capacity, is affected not only by the
primary depositional processes but also by all subsequent diagenetic processes.
Effective porosity quantifies only that pore volume that is connected, while total
porosity is a measure of all pore volumes, regardless of their connectivity
Gm
Sg Fl-Fm: Grey-red Mudstones.
1469 - Sh Interc. between ssts
Gm Plane, ripple lam., massive
Sm
1470 - Bed thickness up to 0,35 m.
Rock Typing
Depositional Rock Type Recognition
UNIFORM DRT CODE
Code Description
61 Conglomerate (clast-supp) Gh Gx Gm
60 Conglomerate (matrix-supp) Gmm
51 Conglomeratic sandstone Sx Slp St
50 Conglomeratic sandstone Sh Sm Sg
41 Very coarse-medium sandstone Sx Sr
40 Very coarse-medium sandstone Sm Sh
31 Very fine- fine sandstone Sr Sx St Sp
30 Very fine- fine sandstone Sm Sh
22 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sx St Slp
21 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sr
20 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sm Sl Sh Sb
10 Mudstone Fm Fl Fr P
Rock Typing
Depositional Rock Type Recognition
SEDIMENTARY DEPOSITION OIL STAIN PORE PERMEAB. CAPILLARY
LITHOLOGY FEATURES SYSTEM PRESSURE
Medium-coarse Sst Massive (Sm) Mod. energy, Moderate. Mean Por 27 % Mean 2.6 D 30
Feldesp. litharenite Bioturbated (Sb) Tractive Uniform Range 24-30% (0.6 - 5.0 D) 25
PMN 1013
Argil. matrix minim (burrows, rhizolith currents Intergr > intragr 20
V. fine-medium sst Ripple laminat (Sr) Mod. energy, Moderate Mean Por 24% Mean 0.6 D 25
PMN-1013
Feldesp. litharenite Diffuse X-bed. (Sx) Tractive -low Range 21-26 % (0.1 - 1.1 D) 20
1483.1 m
40 51
1478 - 51
31
51
31
1474 - 20
1480 - 41
20
40 51
1482 - 40 10
1476 -
40 10
30 50
60
1485 - 61
1478 -
Depositional Rock Type
Summary Depositional Environment
DISTRIBUTARY FLUVIAL SYSTEM Miocene Ebro basin
AND UNCONFINED FLOWS Spain
PETROGRAPHIC ROCK TYPE DETERMINATIONS
Rock Typing
Petrographic Rock Types (PRTs)
• As DRTs, PRTs are described in the context of the large-scale geologic framework, but are
based on a pore-scale microscopic imaging (thin sections, XRD, SEM) of the current pore
structure
• Constituent mineral distribution, composition and habitat influence the PRT classification,
so the description includes rock texture and composition, clay mineralogy and diagenesis.
Both the framework and matrix components have a “cause and effect” relationship on the
diagenetic processes, resulting in preservation, loss or enhancement of original rock
properties
Rock Typing
Petrographic Rock Types (PRTs)
XRD
Rock Typing
Petrographic Rock Types (PRTs)
Quartz overgrowth
Calcite cement
• HRTs are quantified at the pore scale and represent the physical rock flow and
storage properties as controlled by the pore structure
• HRT classification provides a measure of the rock flow and storage properties at
current conditions, i.e., reflecting the current pore structure as modified by
diagenesis
• The first step in the HRT recognition is the identification of the non-wetting phase
saturation at which fluid can move through an interconnected pore system that
dominates fluid flow (named PORT SIZE)
• The principle underlying this method is that the pore throats, rather than the
overall pore volume (i.e., porosity), control flow capacity in reservoir rock. In other
words, porosity alone is not an accurate predictor of rock quality
Rock Typing
HRTs Recognition: Apex Plot
• These plots can also complement the Apex plot. They are build by calculating the
Port Sizes by two different physical methods and plotting them to find the best
correlation factor.
Laplace Equation
Pc = 2 σ*cos (Φ) / r
Rock Typing
HRTs Recognition: One-to-One Plots
Rock Typing
HRTs Recognition: Port Size categories
• Based on the results obtained from both Apex and One-to-One plots, the non-
wetting phase saturation level that reflects the optimal radius of interconnected
pore throats that dominates fluid flow is selected
• This continuous Port Size vertical log is transformed in a discrete curve with a
standard Port Size classification (Doveton,1995)
Microns
Mega > 10
Macro 2–10
Meso 0.5–2
Micro 0.1–0.5
Nano <0.1
Modified from Doveton, 1995.
Rock Typing
HRTs Recognition: Port Size categories
Log R30 [µm] = 0.215 + 0.547 Log Kair [mD] – 0.420 Log Phi [%]
Rock Typing
HRTs Recognition: Port Size categories
• Another way to classify the HRTs is to plot pore throat radius (computed from the
capillary pressure measurements) against incremental mercury saturation
• The X-axis represents ΔS / ΔP and the different peaks of each curve correspond to the
“most frequent” pore radius (Monicard, 1980)
• The problem with this plot is that the classification depends upon the capillary
pressure measured samples. If better or worse reservoir rocks are present in the field,
they will not be represented
C
Rock Typing
HRTs Recognition: K-Phi Relationships
Log R40 [µm] = 0.360 + 0.582 Log Kair [mD] – 0.680 Log Phi [%]
Microns
Mega > 10
Macro 2–10
Meso 0.5–2
Micro 0.1–0.5
Nano <0.1
Modified from Doveton, 1995.
Rock Typing
HRTs Recognition: K-Phi Relationships
Log R40 [µm] = 0.204 + 0.531 Log Kair [mD] – 0.350 Log Phi [%]
CONCEPTUAL INTEGRATION OF ROCK TYPES
Conceptual Integration of Rock Types
Loma Montosa Fm
HRT 5 MACRO
HRT 4 MESO
UPPER
HRT 3 MICRO
LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO
HRT 1
NANO
DRT 9
Conceptual Integration of Rock Types
Loma Montosa Fm
HRT 5 MACRO
HRT 4 MESO
UPPER
HRT 3
MICRO
LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO
HRT 1
NANO
DRT 15
Conceptual Integration of Rock Types
Sierras Blancas Fm
COARSER SEDIMENT
60% 41 Coarse-
medium
sandstone
50% 40
40% 31 Fine-medium
COARSE clean
SANDSTONE
30 sandstone
30%
22
20% Fine-medium
MUDSTONE & FINE SANDSTONE
CLAYEY FINE SST 21 argillaceous
10% sandstone
20
0%
HRT 1 HRT 2 HRT 3 HRT 4 HRT 5 HRT 6 HRT 7 HRT 8 10 Mudstone
INCREASE ROCK QUALITY
RESERVOIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT
Reservoir Quality
Lorenz Plot
• To help the assessment of HRTs and their reservoir quality, Lorenz plots can be
elaborated using all porosity-permeability data available
• These are cumulative plots displaying the relationship between the storage and
flow capacity and they are designed to graphically identify the flow and storage
capacities of the reservoirs
• They show the fractional or the total flow capacity (%k*h) versus the fractional or
the total storage capacity (%Φ*h), both expressed as cumulative footage over the
reservoir section
Reservoir Quality
Lorenz Plot
CUMULATIVE LORENZ PLOT HRTs
80 10
9
70
Lorenz
Plot 8
60
50
FLOW CAPACITY (K*h)
40
HRTs 5
MACRO
PORTS
2 µm 4
30 MESO
PORTS
0.5µm 3
UPPER
20 MICRO
PORTS
0.25µm
LOWER
2
Poor Quality
MICRO
Reservoir
K*H
250000 250000
200000 200000
150000 150000
100000 100000
50000 50000
0 0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Phi*H Phi*H
500000
HRT 3
500000
HRT 4 FLOW UNIT 2
450000
400000
450000
400000 Moderate
350000 350000
300000 300000
Reservoir
K*H
K*H
250000 250000
200000 200000
150000 150000
100000 100000
50000
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
50000
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
IP 0.1 - 5
Phi*H Phi*H
(qi = 1,000 l/h)
Reservoir Quality
Lorenz Plot vs. Productivity Index
HRT 5 HRT 6 FLOW UNIT 3
500000
450000
500000
450000 Good Reservoir
400000 400000
350000 350000
300000 300000
K*H
K*H
250000 250000
200000
150000
200000
150000
IP 5-12
100000
50000
0
100000
50000 (qi = 8,000 l/h)
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Phi*H Phi*H
K*H
250000 250000
200000 200000
150000 150000
100000
50000
100000
50000 IP 13+
0 0
0 5000 10000 15000
Phi*H
20000 25000 0 5000 10000 15000
Phi*H
20000 25000
(qi = 20,000 l/h)
ESTIMATING ROCK TYPES USING LOG DATA
Log-derived HRT Generation
Introduction
• Based on the calculated HRT vertical logs in the cored intervals, HRTs derived
from logs can be generated in order to replicate, as accurate as possible, the
hydraulic characteristics of the core-derived HRTs
• Data is divided up into manageable data clusters. The number of clusters should
be enough to cover all the different data ranges seen on the logs
• The second step, which is mostly interpretative, takes the 15 to 20 clusters and
group them into a smaller number of clusters, each of them corresponding to the
core-derived HRTs
• The applied clustering methodology is trained through the cored intervals, and
then extended to the rest of wells
Log-derived HRT Generation
Cluster Analysis Cross-plots
Log-derived HRT Generation
Cluster Analysis Stage-1 results
Log-derived HRT Generation
Stage-2 results
LATERAL CONGRUENCY OF ROCK TYPES – FLOW UNITS
Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units – Statistical Validation
Hydraulic Rock Types Statistical Analysis
K*H
250000 250000
200000 200000
150000 150000
100000 100000
50000 50000
0 0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Phi*H Phi*H
500000
HRT 3
500000
HRT 4 FLOW UNIT 2
450000
400000
450000
400000 Moderate
350000 350000
300000 300000
Reservoir
K*H
K*H
250000 250000
200000 200000
150000 150000
100000 100000
50000
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
50000
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
IP 0.1 - 5
Phi*H Phi*H
(qi = 1,000 l/h)
Lateral congruency of Rock Types
Lorenz Plot vs. Productivity Index
HRT 5 HRT 6 FLOW UNIT 3
500000
450000
500000
450000 Good Reservoir
400000 400000
350000 350000
300000 300000
K*H
K*H
250000 250000
200000
150000
200000
150000
IP 5-12
100000
50000
0
100000
50000 (qi = 8,000 l/h)
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000
Phi*H Phi*H
K*H
250000 250000
200000 200000
150000 150000
100000
50000
100000
50000 IP 13+
0 0
0 5000 10000 15000
Phi*H
20000 25000 0 5000 10000 15000
Phi*H
20000 25000
(qi = 20,000 l/h)
Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units – Statistical Validation
Hydraulic Rock Types Statistical Validation
FLOW UNIT
FLOW UNIT
FLOW UNIT
FLOW UNIT
HRT1
HRT2
HRT3
HRT4
HRT5
HRT6
HRT7
HRT8
Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units
OWC=-1193 SSTVD
FU 1
FU 2
FU 3
FU 4
EXAMPLES OF ROCK TYPING METHODOLOGY
Rock Typing
Core Database
• 16 DRTs were identified from core-derived Selley descriptions, thin sections and core
photo observations
Rock Typing
Dolomitized Fenestral
bindstone/wackestone. Massive to Scarce to moderate,
7 Intertidal to Supratidal
diffuse lamination, pelecipod molds intercrystalline porosity
filled with anhydrite; bird eyes texture.
Dolomitized peloidal-bioclastic
Moderate to good, moldic
9 Packstone/Grainstones. Massive to finely Subtidal
porosity
laminated, ocassionally flaser structures
Facies Facies Description Facies Association Petrophysics Thin Section Sample Core Sample
Massive crystalline dolostone (originally Mud-supported Limestone
Moderate to good,
mudstones/wackestones). Scarce to conglomerates. Ocassionally reworked,
1 Subtidal intercrystalline-vuggy Scarce to moderate,
moderate bioturbations represented by composed of subrounded peloidal
meso to macro porosity 10 Subtidal intercrystalline to moldic
horizontal and vertical tubes. dolostones floating in a dolomitized
micro-porosity
Argillaceous crystalline dolostone micrite matrix. Ocassionally related to
(originally mudstones?). Diffuse Scarce to moderate, facies 11.
2 Subtidal
lamination to massive; slightly intercrystalline porosity
bioturbated.
Argillaceous crystalline dolostone Hetherolithic (wavy bedding) peloidal Scarce to moderate,
(originally mudstones?) with Crinckle Scarce to moderate 11 dolostones and dolomicrites, in cm scale Subtidal intercrystalline to moldic
3 Subtidal No thin section photo beds. Slightly to strongly bioturbated. micro-porosity
lamination; intense bioturbations porosity. No thin sections
represented by horizontal tubes.
Bindstone. Algally controlled, subparallel
lamination, ocassionally bioturbated. Argillaceous dolostone. Distinctive
Scarce to moderate, opaque greenish color, due to smectite
4 Relicts of halite cubes replaced with Intertidal to Supratidal
intermatrix porosity matrix content and mafite components Scarce to moderate,
anhydrite reflects extremely arid
conditions. 12 (including Pyrite). Moderate abundance Supratidal, Mud flat intercrystaline-moldic
of silty siliciclastic grains. Slightly micro-porosity
bioturbated (horizontal tubes).
Argillaceous crystalline dolostone
Ocassional fracture enhancement.
(originally mudstones?) with crinckle Scarce to moderate
5 Subtidal to Intertidal No thin section photo
lamination. Horse-tail deformation porosity. No thin sections
Scarce to moderate,
features and siliceous nodules. Peloidal Packstones/grainstones. Diffuse, High-energy, mid to inner
13 intercrystalline-vuggy
high-angle cross-stratification. ramp
meso-porosity
Mud-supported Limestone
conglomerates. Ocassionally reworked,
Scarce to moderate,
composed of subrounded peloidal
10 Subtidal intercrystalline to moldic
dolostones floating in a dolomitized
Rock Typing
Petrographic Rock Types (PRTs)
• As DRTs, PRTs are described in the context of the large-scale geologic framework, but are
based on a pore-scale microscopic imaging (thin sections, XRD, SEM) of the current pore
structure
• Constituent mineral distribution, composition and habitat influence the PRT classification,
so the description includes rock texture and composition, clay mineralogy and diagenesis.
Both the framework and matrix components have a “cause and effect” relationship on the
diagenetic processes, resulting in preservation, loss or enhancement of original rock
properties
• All thin sections available were summarized and ordered according the DRT they belong
to. As a result, they were grouped in six PRTs
Rock Typing
PRT Classification
PRT PRT Description Included DRTs Pore Sizes Pore Types Observations Thin Section Example
Intercrystalline,
Dolostones with Intercrystalline, Micro to mesopores Anhydrite (DRT 7) and calcite
III 2, 5, 7 and 10 scarce moldic and
Micro to Meso-porosity (0.01-0.15 mm) cementation
fenestral
Meso to micropores
Dolomitized Pelletoidal Moldic, scarce
(0.25-0.01 mm), Pellets and scarce bioclastic
IV Packstone/Grainstones with 13 intercrystalline
occasional macropores dissolution molds
Moldic, Meso-porosity and intragranular
(0.8 mm)
Diffuse to contorted
Fenestral and
Dolomitized Bindstones with Micro to mesopores lamination between micritic
V 4 moldic, scarce
Fenestral, Micro to Meso-porosity (0.01-0.25 mm) pellets laminae and fine
intercrystalline
dolostones
• HRT classification provides a measure of the rock flow and storage properties
at current conditions, i.e., reflecting the current pore structure as modified by
diagenesis
• The main tools for identifying HRTs are routine core analysis which includes
measurements of total and effective porosity, absolute permeability, and pore
size & distribution from capillary pressure data
Rock Typing
Capillary Pressure curves for HRTs
• Capillary Pressure curves from 3 wells were available. The span of different curve
behaviors are observed on the samples, ranging from the poorer rock quality with the
higher Swirr (at the right of the figure) to the more permeable rocks with very low
entry pressures and low Swirr (at the left of the figure)
120.00
110.00
100.00
90.00
Capillary Pressure (Kg/cm2)
20.00
10.00
• At this pressure, the fluid can move through an interconnected pore system that dominates fluid
flow. If the threshold pressure is high, the pore throat apertures are narrow and tortuosity is
incremented
6.50
PMS-1007 (LM100) 1421.21
6.00
5.50 PMS-1007 (LM100) 1422.38
Low
SHg/Pc
Rock Typing
Port Size Saturation: One-to-One Plots
• This graphs complements the Apex plot. They are build by calculating of the Port
Sizes by two different physical methods and plotting them to find the best
correlation factor.
• The first method implies the calculation of the Port Size at different values of the
non-wetting phase saturation (Rn), utilizing core derived standard poro-perm data
(Pittman, 1992) . He derived a set of empirical equations corresponding to non-
wetting phase saturations ranging from 10 to 75% that permit the construction of a
calculated effective pore-aperture-radius distribution curve
Rock Typing
Port Size Saturation: One-to-One Plots
• The second method obtains the pore throat radii from the Washburn (1921) equation using the
fluid interfacial tensions coefficient corresponding to an air-mercury system. The equation is:
Pc = 2 σ cos (Φ) / r
Rock Typing
One-to-One Plots
Rock Typing
HRTs Definition & Classification
• Based on the results obtained from both Apex and One-to-One plots, the non-
wetting phase saturation level that reflects the optimal radius of interconnected
pore throats that dominates fluid flow is 30%. Furthermore, the corresponding
Pittman’s R30 equation is as follows:
Log R30 [µm] = 0.215 + 0.547 Log Kair [mD] – 0.420 Log Phi [%]
• This continuous R30 vertical log is transformed in a discrete curve with the
following standard Port Size classification thresholds (Doveton,1995).
Port Size
Port Size Category HRT
Microns
Mega > 10 6
Macro ,2-10 5
Meso 0.5 - 2 4
Upper Micro 0.25 - 0.5 3
Lower Micro 0.1 - 0.25 2
Nano < 0.1 1
Rock Typing
Core Phi/K related to HRTs
10 µm
MACRO
PORTS
2 µm
MESO
PORTS
0.5µm
UPPER
MICRO
PORTS
0.25µm
LOWER
MICRO
PORTS
0.1µm
NANO
PORTS
Rock Typing
R30 and HRTs vertical logs example
Rock Typing
Reservoir Quality Assessment
• To help the assessment of HRTs and their reservoir quality, Lorenz plots were
elaborated using all porosity-permeability data available from the five Lower Loma
Montosa cores
• These are cumulative plots displaying the relationship between the storage and
flow capacity and they are designed to graphically identify the flow and storage
capacities of the reservoirs
• They show the fractional or the total flow capacity (%k*h) versus the fractional or
the total storage capacity (%Φ*h), both expressed as cumulative footage over the
reservoir section
Rock Typing
Reservoir Quality – Lorenz Plot
CUMULATIVE LORENZ PLOT HRTs
80 10
9
70
Lorenz
Plot 8
60
50
FLOW CAPACITY (K*h)
40
HRTs 5
MACRO
PORTS
2 µm 4
30 MESO
PORTS
0.5µm 3
UPPER
20 MICRO
PORTS
0.25µm
LOWER
2
Poor Quality
MICRO
Reservoir
UPPER UPPER
HRT 3 HRT 3
MICRO MICRO
LOWER LOWER DRT 2
HRT 2 MICRO
DRT 1 HRT 2 MICRO
HRT 1
HRT 1 PRT III
NANO NANO
PRT I
PRT I
HRT 5 MACRO HRT 5 MACRO
UPPER UPPER
HRT 3 MICRO HRT 3 MICRO
LOWER LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO DRT 3 HRT 2 MICRO DRT 4
NANO NANO
Rock Typing Integration
DRT 5 to DRT 8
HRT 5 MACRO HRT 5 MACRO
UPPER UPPER
HRT 3 MICRO HRT 3 MICRO
LOWER LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO HRT 2 MICRO
UPPER UPPER
HRT 3 MICRO HRT 3 MICRO
LOWER LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO HRT 2 MICRO
HRT 5 MACRO
PORTS
Rock Typing Integration
HRT 4: Good Reservoir Quality
HRT DRTs PRTs
DRT 1: Massive Dolostones
DRT 3: Highly bioturbated,
Argillaceous Dolostones
PRT I: Intercrystalline,
4 DRT 10: Mud supported, Dolostone
Macro-porosity
Breccias/Conglomerates
DRT 3
DRT 15: Bioturbated to massive,
supratidally influenced Dolostones
MESO
HRT 4 PORTS
Rock Typing Integration
HRT 3: Good Reservoir Quality
HRT DRTs PRTs
UPPER
HRT 3 MICRO
Rock Typing Integration
HRT 2: Poor Reservoir Quality
HRT DRTs PRTs
DRT 9: Massive to finely laminated,
Dolomitized Pelletoidal/Bioclastic PRT II: Moldic, Meso to
DRT 11: Wavy-bedded, Pelletoidal Macro-porosity
Dolostones and Dolomicrites
DRT 2: Massive, diffuse laminated
argillaceous Dolostones
DRT 5: Crinckled laminated, deformed
Argillaceous Dolostones
PRT III: Intercrystalline,
DRT 13 DRT 9
DRT 7: Massive to diffuse laminated, Micro to Meso-porosity
dolomitized fenestral wackestones
2
DRT 10: Mud supported, Dolostone
Breccias/Conglomerates
DRT 13: Diffuse high angle, cross-stratified PRT IV: Moldic, Meso-
Peloidal Packstones/Grainstones porosity
PRT V: Fenestral, Micro
DRT 4: Finely laminated Bindstones
to Meso-porosity
NANO
HRT 1 PORTS
HRT Log Generation
Introduction
• Based on the calculated R30 and HRT vertical logs in the cored intervals, HRTs
derived from logs were generated in order to replicate, as accurate as possible,
the hydraulic characteristics of the core-derived HRTs
• Due to the restricted log suite for the oldest wells in the field, a simple clustering
model with small number of raw logs was developed, so the consistency can be
assured across all the concession
• Data is divided up into manageable data clusters. The number of clusters should
be enough to cover all the different data ranges seen on the logs. 15 clusters
appeared to be a reasonable number for the core data set
• The second step, which is mostly interpretative, takes these 15 clusters and group
them into a smaller number of clusters, each of them corresponding to the five
core-derived HRTs previously defined
• The applied clustering methodology is trained through the cored intervals, and
then extended to the rest of wells in the area
NORTH BLOCK
CENTRAL BLOCK
GR DT SP
CATRIEL
Intermediate
rock types
SIERRAS
BLANCAS
Good
rock types
Intermediate
to low
rock types
PUNTA
ROSADA
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
INTERPRETATION
FACIES DESCRIPTION
SEMIARID
Gt-Gh: Congl. sst, F-M ALLUVIAL
1466 - clast-sup congl. Graded, Ø 13 %
K 0.4D
FAN SYSTEM
Horiz bed, trough x-bed
Convolute. Bed thick: 0.2-
1468 - FU cycles dominated
0.3 m
by hyperconcentrated
1470- Gmm: F-M matrix-sup congl. Ø 11 % flows, tractive currents,
Poorly sort. Massive/graded. K 0.006D and mud flows.
1472 - Poorly-developed
Sg: F-M sst w/scatterd paleosols
Ø 17 %
1474 - clasts. Graded, Horiz K 0.2D
bedding, x-lam. Bed Shallow braided-
thick: 8-40 cm. channel fills.
1476 -
Code Description
61 Conglomerate (clast-supp) Gh Gx Gm
60 Conglomerate (matrix-supp) Gmm
51 Conglomeratic sandstone Sx Slp St
50 Conglomeratic sandstone Sh Sm Sg
41 Very coarse-medium sandstone Sx Sr
40 Very coarse-medium sandstone Sm Sh
31 Very fine- fine sandstone Sr Sx St Sp
30 Very fine- fine sandstone Sm Sh
22 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sx St Slp
21 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sr
20 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sm Sl Sh Sb
10 Mudstone Fm Fl Fr P
2.1 CORE LITHOFACIES RECOGNITION
Feldesp. litharenite Bioturbated (Sb) Tractive Uniform Range 24-30% (0.6 - 5.0 D) 25
PMN 1013
Argil. matrix minim (burrows, rhizolith currents Intergr > intragr 20
R40 from Pc
R40 from logs
Calculated R40
A FU 1
FU 2 A´
FU 3
Rock Typing
Lateral distribution of HRTs and FU
HRT1
HRT2
HRT3
B HRT4
HRT5
HRT6
B´
HRT7
HRT8
Rock Typing
Lateral distribution of HRTs and FU
FU 1
B FU 2 B´
FU 3
Rock Typing
Lateral distribution of HRTs and FU
C C´
HRT1
HRT2
HRT3
HRT4
HRT5
HRT6
HRT7
HRT8
Rock Typing
Lateral distribution of HRTs and FU
C C´
FU 1
FU 2
FU 3
Rock Typing
Areal distribution of FU
Flow Unit 3
THANK YOU!
BACK - UP
POROSITY
What is the pore system? - pore type
recognition and consequences
Pressure
gauge
Sealable sight window
Mercury
level Mercury
reservoir
Sample chamber
The pyncnometer allows the measurement of the bulk volume of the sample by measuring the
amount of mercury displaced (Displacement). By sealing the sight window, pressure can be
applied to the mercury, injecting it into the pore space within the rock sample (Injection).
Porosity Measurement - grain volume by
Boyle’s Law
Advantages Drawbacks
• Porosity and saturation • Water volumes
data inaccurate where
• Fast hydrateable minerals
present
• Destructive
• Porosity and
permeability not from
same depth
OVEN
350-
400o
COOLANT
TANK
Measurement Choices - bulk volume by
resaturation
Advantages Drawbacks
• Accurate • Incomplete resaturation
• Non-destructive leads to inaccuracies in
• Can be used as check to porosity value
ensure 100% saturation • Wetting of rock surfaces
after pore volume may be difficult
determination
Measurement Choices - Boyle’s Law grain
volume (ambient porosity)
Advantages Drawbacks
• Very accurate • Time required to clean
• Non-destructive and dry samples
• Rapid (after cleaning • Pressure equilibrium
and drying) difficult to achieve in
• Grain density easily low permeability
calculated samples
Measurement Choices - Boyle’s Law pore
volume (overburden porosity)
Advantages Drawbacks
• Accurate measurement • Time required to clean
of porosity at and dry samples
overburden • Pressure equilibrium
• Comparison of change difficult to achieve in
in porosity from stress low permeability
to ambient samples
• Rapid (after cleaning • Some samples may be
and drying) damaged by application
of stress
PERMEABILITY
What is permeability?
GAS
LIQUID
Permeability Measurement - routine gas
measurement
Upstream nitrogen
pressure
Confining
Pressure on
Hassler Sleeve to
prevent gas
bypass along
sample edges
Downstream nitrogen
Plug Rubber “Hassler” pressure with varying
sample Sleeve orifice
A B C D
Permeability Measurement - routine gas
measurement
⚫ Darcy equation:
Kg = Q*m*PA*L*2000 mD
A*[(P1+PA)2 - (P2+PA)2]
Where: L = length
D = diameter
A = cross sectional area = (D/2)2*p
m = gas viscosity
PA = atmospheric pressure
P1 = upstream pressure
P2 = downstream pressure
Q = flow rate = orifice constant
Air Permeability (Kair)
Steady State
Disadvantages
• samples susceptible to damage caused during
preparation
– incompatible drill bit lubricant
– damage to rock fabric during cleaning with boiling solvents
– damage during oven drying
• pre-test screening required
• sampling frequency
– standard - one sample per foot
• sampling bias
– Kair is not a constant but depends on the type of gas used in the
permeability measurement and upon its mean pressure
– Routine measurements typically made at low confining pressure
Hydrogen Nitrogen Carbon Dioxide
Kg
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Reciprocal Mean Pressure
Statistical Approach
• The second method of averaging capillary
pressure data is to analyse a number of
representative samples and treat the data
statistically to derive correlations.
• Correlations used with porosity and/or
permeability data can be used to compute
water saturations
Correlation Of Water Saturation With Permeability For Various
Capillary Pressures
Pc=75 (167')
1000 Pc=50 (112')
Pc=25 (56')
Pc=15 (33')
Pc=10 (24')
Pc=5 (11')
Permeability (mD)
100
10
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Saturation (%)
Pore size distribution - applications
2 .• cos • C
Ri =
Pc
Drainage
14000
Imbibition
12600
11200
Capillary Pressure (kpa)
9800
8400
7000
5600
4200
2800
1400
0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Wetting Phase Saturation (fractional)
Pore Entry Radii Calculations
Pore Size Distribution (Normalised)
Mercury Saturation
1.0
Pore Size
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Pore Thoat Radius (microns)
Laboratory Methods For The
Determination Of Capillary Pressure
Pressure
gauge
Sealable sight window
Mercury
level Mercury
reservoir
Sample chamber
The pyncnometer allows the measurement of the bulk volume of the sample by measuring the
amount of mercury displaced (Displacement). By sealing the sight window, pressure can be
applied to the mercury, injecting it into the pore space within the rock sample (Injection).
Mercury Injection Pc Measurement
• Advantages • Disadvantages
– Speed (2 samples/day) – Destructive (very)
– Mercury is non-wetting
– Suitable for low
– Conversion to other systems
permeability samples varies with lithology
– Cylindrical plug samples – Injection pressures will
not necessary damage sensitive clays
– Large no. of data points – Vuggy porosity results in
• 0-2000psi - 20-25 large volume of mercury
injected at Pc of zero
• 0-60000psi - 250
– High pressure injection into
– No. of data points allows micropores results in errors
accurate calculation of in Sw calculation (too low)
Pore Size Distribution
Comparison of methods
Outlet Inlet
face face
100
Sw%
Time
Centrifuge Pc
Core
Plug
Brine
Porous plate out
Problems Associated With The Air-Brine
Porous Plate Cell Test
Gas in RESISTANCE
Porous
plate
Brine out
Si At > 0 (σos > σws) cos θ > 0 (θ < 90°) Mojabilidad al Agua
Si At < 0 (σos < σws) cos θ < 0 (θ > 90°) Mojabilidad al Petróleo
Repaso
Concepto de Mojabilidad
• La mojabilidad de las rocas reservorio es muy importante porque determina la
distribución de los fluidos en el espacio poral
• Debido a las fuerzas de atracción, la fase mojante tiende a ocupar los espacios
porales más pequeños y la fase no mojante ocupa los canales más abiertos en la
roca
• Sin embargo, existen rocas con mojabilidad intermedia y/o mixta, incluso
mojables al petróleo. Esto se debe a compuestos polares asfálticos en el petróleo
que pueden adsorberse a las paredes porales
Repaso
Concepto de Mojabilidad
Roca Mojable al
Agua
Roca Mojable al
Petróleo