You are on page 1of 225

ROCK TYPING COURSE

By
Nova Energy
Table of Contents

1 – Reservoir System Basics


2 – The Pore Medium
3 – The Pore-Fluid Interaction
4 – Predicting Reservoir System Quality - Rock Typing
5 – Depositional Rock Type Determinations
6 – Petrographic Rock Type Determinations
7 – Hydraulic Rock Type Determinations
8 – Conceptual Integration of Rock Types
9 – Reservoir Quality Assessment
10 – Estimating Rock Types Using Log Data
11 – Lateral Congruency of Rock Types - Flow Units
RESERVOIR SYSTEM BASICS
Defining Reservoir Systems
A reservoir system is a water–hydrocarbon system contained within the pores of a rock unit. A
reservoir system has three main components: a reservoir, an aquifer, and a transition zone (interface)
between the two.
• A reservoir is a porous and permeable rock saturated with oil or gas in buoyancy
pressure equilibrium with a free water level (zero buoyancy pressure). It has one or
more containers and is located below a seal.
• A transition zone is the interval of rock separating the reservoir from the aquifer; it
is less than 100% saturated with water.
• An aquifer is a porous and permeable rock 100% saturated with water. It has one or
more containers that may or may not be shared with a reservoir.
Defining Reservoir Systems

Reservoir system quality is the capacity of a reservoir to store


and transmit oil or gas. The quality of a reservoir system is
determined by:

• Pore throat size distribution and pore geometry (including


natural fractures)
• Pore volume
• Permeabilities to hydrocarbon
• Water saturation (hydrocarbon pore volume)
• Lateral continuity, number, and position of flow units and
containers
• Reservoir pressure and drive mechanism
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types

To predict reservoir performance and quality and to understand


reservoir rock–fluid interaction, reservoir systems can be subdivided
into rock types, flow units and containers.

Wellbore hydrocarbon inflow rate is a function of the pore throat size,


pore geometry, number, and location of the various flow units exposed
to the wellbore; the fluid properties; and the pressure differential
between the flow units and the wellbore.

Reservoir performance is a function of the number, quality, geometry,


and location of containers within a reservoir system; drive mechanism;
and fluid properties. When performance does not match predictions,
many variables could be responsible; however, the number, quality,
and location of containers is often incorrect.
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types
Reservoir Container
A container is a reservoir system subdivision consisting of a pore system, made up of
one or more flow units, that responds as a unit when fluid is withdrawn.
Containers are defined by correlating flow units between wells. Boundaries between
containers are where flow diverges within a flow unit shared by two containers . They
define and map reservoir geology to help us predict reservoir performance.
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types

Upscaling Scale Domain REV Descriptor Properties Domain of the


Micro Pore/Throat Thin Section Intrinsic Establish initial / Sgv, T, Rh microscopic
residual hydoc.
Distribution and Scale
fluid flow
Meso Rock Type Core Plug Textural and Individualize K, Phi
mineralogic depositional &
diagenetic controls
on pore geometry
Domain of the
porous
Macro Reservoir
medium
Hydr. Units Hydraulic Vertical and Lateral Cap
Container behaviour Continuity of Curves,R35
Reservoir Properties

Mega Field Hydroc. Field Spatial Formulate controls N/G, GRV


Boundaries Properties for spatial variance
Variation of reservoir
parameters
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types

Flow Unit Definition


A flow unit is a reservoir subdivision defined on the basis of similar pore type.
Petrophysical characteristics, such as distinctive log character and/or
porosity–permeability relationships, define individual flow units. Inflow
performance for a flow unit can be predicted from its inferred pore system
properties, such as pore type and geometry. They help us correlate and map
containers and ultimately help predict reservoir performance.
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types
Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types
A A´

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

Flow Units corresponding to HRTs.


Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types

OWC=-1193 SSTVD

FU 1
FU 2
FU 3
FU 4

Lateral Distribution of FU and Fluid Contacts


Defining Containers, Flow Units and
Rock Types
Resistivity / Neutron /
Pressure Depth Plot Mobility Density
7900
Unit A
Seal
8000
Unit B

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

(psi) & Derivative (psi)


10000

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

Pressure Change &Pressure


0.1

Pressure Change & Derivative (psi)


10000 100
k = 70 mD
0.01
10 0.11 10 100
Comparison of WFT and1000 10000 100000
Production Test Transients
1000 1 ri = 6 ft
Time (s)

Comparison of WFT and Production Test Transients


0.1
k = 300 mD

Pressure Change & Derivative (psi)


10000
100

Change & Derivative (psi)


0.01
10000

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

Pressure Change & Derivative


0.1
1000
0.10.01
100
1 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
10
0.01 Time (s)

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

I nitial Pres s ure


(320 kg/cm2)
RT5
100. 0000
RT4
RT3
RT2
10. 0000
RT1
C2
Top s eal

K abs ol ut a (mD , cor ona)


1. 0000

C3a

0. 1000

C3b 0. 0100

0. 0010
Seat s eal

C4

Poros i dad (%, corona)


0. 0001
0 5 10 15 20

0.004mD 0.01 mD

Rango de Permeabilidades de Corte

Storage and permeability


Cut-of f

Rock Types and CapCurves are the properties that describe reservoir characteristics at multiple scale levels

Stor age r ange affected by C/O

TODOS LOS POZOS


THE PORE MEDIUM
The Pore Medium – K-PHI Relationships

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

The pores of a rock occur between grains or crystals, in


fractures, or in vugs. A rock’s storage capacity is
controlled by the size and number of pores. A rock’s
permeability (flow capacity) is controlled by the size,
shape, and number of the pore throats (connections) per
pore. Four critical elements of the geometry of a rock’s
pore system are:

• Pore system shapes


• Pore and pore throat sizes
• Pore connectivity
• Ratio of pore throats to pores
Classifying Pore Systems
Pore System Shapes
Choquette and Pray’s (1970)
porosity types include two
different groups of pore system
shapes:
petrophysically simple Archie
porosity and
petrophysically complex non-
Archie porosity.
In most cases, water saturation
(Sw) of rocks with Archie
porosity can be predicted from
log analysis using the Archie
equation
Sw = ( 1 × Rw )1/n Φm Rt
without modification.
To predict water saturation in
rocks with non-Archie porosity,
we modify the Archie equation.
The table describes pore system
shapes and other important
characteristics of Archie and
non-Archie rocks (after Coalson
et al., 1994).
Classifying Pore Systems
Pore and Pore Throat Sizes

Pore and pore throat sizes have two


defining parameters
• Absolute size
• Aspect ratio

Pore and Pore Throat Sizes


Absolute size of a pore throat is the radius
of a circle drawn perpendicular to fluid
flow and fitting within its narrowest point.
Absolute size of a pore is the radius of the
largest sphere that will fit inside it. The
cross-sectional shape of fluids moving
through intergranular porosity is roughly
circular. Both pores and pore throats can
be divided into petrophysically significant
size ranges.
Connectivity and Pore Throat Size

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).

Connectivity and Pore Throat Size


How do pore shape, pore throat size, and pore throat abundance affect the flow
dynamics of a reservoir?

Pore shape, throat size, and throat abundance


How does one characterize the size of a pore system: by pore size or by pore throat
size?
Characterizing the size of a pore system by pore size presents problems. For example,
how do we accurately measure and average pore size in rocks with poorly sorted pore
sizes? Pore systems are easily characterized by size using pore throat size. Pore throat
sizes can be measured using capillary pressure curves.
Connectivity and Pore Throat Size
Classifying Pore Systems

Combining pore shape and size into classes


Pore geometry is categorized as intergranular, intercrystalline, vuggy/moldic, or
fracture. Pore throat sizes are categorized into mega-, macro-, meso-, and micro-
port types. Combining both pore geometry and port type into a classification
scheme is an effective method of describing pore systems. For example, a very
fine-grained sandstone might be classified as having intergranular mesoporosity
or a limestone as having vuggy macroporosity.
Connectivity and Pore Throat Size
Typical rock types by pore class
THE PORE-FLUID INTERACTION
Surface and Interfacial Tension

Surface phenomena due to molecular attractions appearing when two


immiscible fluids are in contact, expressed in dyn/cm.

▪ Surface tension – liquid / air


▪ Interfacial tension – liquid / liquid

Examples

▪ Mercury surface tension = 480 dyn/cm


▪ Water surface tension = 75 dyn/cm
▪ Water/oil interfacial tension ~ 28 – 30 dyn/cm
Wettability

Contact Angle
 os −  ws =  os cos  = 90 o Intermediate Wettability

Young-Dupre Equation   90 o Water wet

  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 the pore system Pc is controlled by:


 Fluid property – Interfacial tension

 Rock-fluid property – Contac angle

rp Rock property – Capillary radius


Determining Pore Throat Size from Pc Curves

Pc is the resistant force to hydrocarbon migration. It is a function of


the interfacial tension (  ), the contact angle (  ), and pore throat
radius (r). Pc increases with decreasing pore throat size, increasing
interfacial tension, and increasing contact angle (greater oil wetting). It
can be expressed as follows:

This expression assumes the capillary phenomenon occurs within a


tube with a circular cross section. Real pores only approximate this,
and then only if they are intergranular or intercrystalline (Coalson,
personal communication, 1997).
Capillary Pressure Curves
for Rocks with Different Permeability

Small pore diameter


low permeability
high cap. pressure

Large pore diameter


high permeability
low cap. pressure

Amyx et al. 1960


Determining Pore Throat Size from Pc Curves
What is capillary pressure?

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

Capillary pressure curves are converted to


profiles of pore throat size by solving the
previous equation for r:
Determining Pore Throat Size from Pc Curves
Converting capillary pressure to pore throat size
Port throat size profile from the Washburn (1921) equation using the fluid interfacial tensions
coefficient corresponding to an air-mercury system. The equation is:
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

• Both conventional and unconventional reservoirs are characterized by complex


geological and petrophysical systems as well as heterogeneities, at all scales

• Rock Typing consists in a systematic approach that allows to understand


reservoir behavior, and gives a comprehensive reservoir heterogeneity
description and characterization

• 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

Depositional Petrographic Hydraulic Reservoir


Rock Type Rock Type Rock Type Zonning

Macroscopic Microscopic Reservoir


Pore Scale
Scale Scale Scale
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

• If diagenesis is minor, the depositional environment (and depositional rock types)


as well as the expected rock properties derived from those depositional conditions
will be good predictors of rock quality

• 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)

• Knowledge of the vertical distribution of DRTs helps to define the depositional


environment which then leads to a description of the reservoir geometry and flow
properties

• Interpretation of vertical or stratigraphic sequences also provides an


understanding of the overall reservoir architecture which will then allow us to use
geological concepts and models to predict locations of the DRTs with the best
production potential
Data Sources and Evaluation Techniques for
Rock Typing: PRTs

• 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

• Permeability is defined as "a measure of the rock's ability to transmit fluids“. In


particular, absolute or specific permeability is the "permeability to one fluid when the
rock is completely saturated with that same fluid"

• Permeability is affected by most pore-scale rock properties, i.e., texture, composition,


and diagenesis. Clay composition, distribution, and structure in the pore throats may
also significantly impact a rock's permeability
Data Sources and Evaluation Techniques for
Rock Typing: HRTs
• Capillary pressure data from mercury injection is an effective
technique to quantify pore geometry — particularly the size
and distribution of pore bodies and throats

• Mercury is a near-perfect non-wetting fluid phase, but it will


enter the rock pores only when pressure is applied. Larger pore
spaces are saturated initially, but mercury progressively invades
smaller pore spaces as pressure is increased

• If a sufficiently high pressure is reached, then the entire


connected pore system, including even the smallest pore
throats, can be completely saturated. The magnitude of the
entry or displacement pressure (Pd) reflects the largest
connected pore throat in the system.

• In addition, the curvature and rate of increase of the capillary


pressure data characterize the size and distribution of the
pores. We may also identify bi-modal pore size distributions
from the shape of the capillary pressure data.
DEPOSITIONAL ROCK TYPE DETERMINATIONS
Rock Typing
Depositional Rock Types (DRTs)
• These are rock types derived from core-based descriptions of genetic units
(similar to Lithofacies) 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

• DRTs represent original large-scale rock properties present at deposition


Rock Typing
Depositional Rock Type Recognition
WELL A SIERRAS BLANCAS Fm Lower Section
FACIES DESCRIPTION INTERPRETATION
1468 -
Sl: M-F sst. Low SHEET FLOOD
angle x-bedding Ø 24 %
1470 - K 0.6 D FLUVIAL SYSTEM
Mod consolidated Poorly
sorting
Unconfined to
1472 - tractive high-energy,
shallow sheetfloods
Sm 2: M-C sst. and subordinated
1474 - Ø 26 %
Massive, poorly K 2.4 D denser flows (massive)
consolidated Mod sorting
1476 - Unstable or ephemeral
Frequent mottling
and bioturbation streams
1478 -
Soil development
Sr: M-C sst. Low Ø 29 % (roots and invertebr.)
1480 - K 3.0 D
angle x-lam & suggesting interrupted
massive. Biot Good sorting accumulation.
1482 -
Sh: F-M sst. Low Ø 22 %
angle x-bed & horiz. K 0.4 D - No typical channel
Poor sorting bodies
Sm 1:F sst w/scat Ø 20 %
1485 - to coarse clasts. K 0.3 D
Bioturb Poor sorting
Rock Typing
Depositional Rock Type Recognition
WELL B SIERRAS BLANCAS Fm Upper Section
FACIES DESCRIPTION INTERPRETATION
Sg Gm: F-M Congl. moderately
Gm(i)
sorted. Scarce sandy matrix. BRAIDED FLUVIAL SYSTEM
1462 - Ø 17 %
Sg
Sg Massive, imbricated clasts, K 30 mD
Fm cross or horizontal bedding Gravel bodies formed as
1463 - Sm
Gm(i) Bed thickness 0,10-0,40 m bars into channels.
Sg
Hiperconcentrated flows
1464 - Sg Sg: VF Congl , shale clasts.
Ø 20 %
Sg Sandy matrix. Massive, graded K 20 mD Unconfined sheet floods
1465 - Gm x-bed. Bed thickness: 2-10 cm
Sm Fine decantation in
Sm
F abandoned channels
1466 - Sm-Sh-Sp: VF-M sst, good
Sm (Floodplain)
sorted. Scarce clay matrix.
Sm Massive, laminated, planar, low- Ø 18 %
1467 -
angle x-bedding. K 645 mD
Sp
Sg Bed thickness 0,10-0,70 m
1468 - Sh

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

CAPILLARY PRESSURE [psi]


1480.9 m
Smect, Chlor, Illite mottling) Macrop. well 15

Cement scarce (Q) Low-ang X bed (Sl) connected 10

Sorting mod-well Difuse X bed (Sx) Microp. scarce 5

Consolid. mod-poor Horiz laminat (Sh) Sec por. scarce 0

Clasts subang-round. Grain contacts


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
WATER SATURATION[%VP]

point-point & long

CORES THIN-SECTION SEM

burrows/ Minimal clay matrix Dominant


root trace ? Scarce quartz cement Intergranular
Excelent poral system Porosity
Intragranular
Sx Moderate-well sorted
Sb Moderate-poor consolidated
porosity
Massive, bioturb. Cross-bedded sst
Rock Typing
Depositional Rock Type Recognition
SEDIMENTARY DEPOSITION OIL STAIN PORE PERMEAB CAPILLARY
LITHOLOGY FEATURES SYSTEM PRESSURE
30

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

CAPILLARY PRESSURE [psi]


Sc (5%) argil. matrix Finning-up beds currents Non Intergr > intragr 15

Smectite,chlorite,illite Massive (Sm) uniform (moldic) 10

Scarce cement:Q,Fld Horiz laminat. (Sh) Sec Por Fld dissol. 5

Sorting poor to well Non-scarc bioturb. Grain cont: long, 0

Moderat consolidat. conc-conv 0 10 20 30 40 50 60


WATER SATURATION[%VP]
70 80 90 100

Freq subhoriz fractur. PS downgraded


Subang-rounded by clays

CORES THIN-SECTION SEM

Scarce clay matrix


Scarce cement (Q & Fld)
Good-excellent porosity
Poorly to well sorted Dominant integranular
Sh Angular-subrounded clasts Porosity
Fld dissolution (arrows)
Sm Sm-Sr Moderate consolidated
Depositional Rock Type Recognition
Summary
2 Unified classification of DRTs in all cores
1 Recognition of DRTs in all cores
FACIES DESCRIPTION
Code Description
INTERPRETATION
1468 -
Sl: M-F sst. Low 61 Conglomerate (clast-supp) Gh Gx Gm
SHEET FLOOD
angle x-bedding Ø 24 %
1470 -
Mod onsolidated K 0.6 D
FLUVIAL SYSTEM 60 Conglomerate (matrix-supp) Gmm
Poorly
1472 - sorting
Unconfined to
tractive high-energy,
51 Conglomeratic sandstone Sx Slp St
Sm 2: M-C sst.
shallow sheetfloods
1474 -
Massive, poorly
consolidated and subordinated
50 Conglomeratic sandstone Sh Sm Sg
Ø 26 %
denser flows (massive)
Frequent mottling
and bioturbation
K 2.4 D 41 Very coarse-medium sandstone Sx Sr
1476 - Mod sorting Unstable or ephemeral
Streams 40 Very coarse-medium sandstone Sm Sh
1478 - Soil development
(roots and invertebr.) 31 Very fine- fine sandstone Sr Sx St Sp
Ø 29 % suggesting interrupted
Sr: M-C sst. Low angle x-lam
1480 -
K 3.0 D accumulation. 30 Very fine- fine sandstone Sm Sh
& massive. Biot Good sorting - No typical channel
1482 -
Sh: F-M sst. Low Ø 22 % bodies 22 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sx St Slp
K 0.4 D
angle x-bed & horiz.
Poor sorting 21 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sr
Sm 1:F Sst w/scatterd Ø 20 %
1485 -
Fine to coarse clasts. K 0.3 D 20 Very fine- fine argillaceous sandstone Sm Sl Sh Sb
Bioturbation Poor sorting
10 Mudstone Fm Fl Fr P

3 Identification of DRTs at constant intervals (10 cm) 4 Characterization of DRTs


1468 - Code Code
1466 -
31 31
31 20
1470 -
40 22
1468 - 51
51
1472 - 60
40
61
30
22
1474 - 30 1470-
20
51 61
40 51
1476 -
40 1472 - 51

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

Matrix Clay recrystallization


Fibrous Illite

Thin Sections SEM Capillary Pressure


HYDRAULIC ROCK TYPE DETERMINATIONS
Rock Typing
Hydraulic Rock Types (HRTs)

• 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

ONLY WITH Hg-INJECTION CAPILLARY PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS!


Rock Typing
HRTs Recognition: One-to-One Plots
• The Apex plot can only be constructed with Hg-injection capillary pressure
measurements. In the cases where Porous plate measurements are available,
another kind of graph can be used: One-to-One Plots.

• 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.

• 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
HRTs Recognition: One-to-One Plots
• The second method obtains the pore throat radii from the Laplace equation using
the fluid interfacial tensions coefficient corresponding to an air-mercury system

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

• Using the correspondent Pittman equation, and based on routine petrophysical


core measurements of porosity and permeability, Port Size can be calculated for
each core sample and a vertical log of Port Size in microns can be obtained for each
cored interval

• This continuous Port Size vertical log is transformed in a discrete curve with a
standard Port Size classification (Doveton,1995)

Port Size Category

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 [%]

Port Size Category

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

Fine Sandstones and


HRT 6 Mudstones Conglomerates
HRT 6
Conceptual Integration of Rock Types
Sierras Blancas Fm
COMPOSITION OF DEPOSITIONAL ROCK TYPES
100%
61
Conglomerate
90% CONGLOMERATE
60
80% 51 Conglomeratic
sandstone
70% 50
CONGLOMERATIC SANDSTONE

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

10 Good Reservoir PORTS


Quality 0.1µm 1
No Reservoir Very Good Reservoir NANO
Quality PORTS
0 0
0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 1000.0 1200.0
STORAGE CAPACITY (PHI*h)
Reservoir Quality
Lorenz Plot vs. Productivity Index
Lorentz graphs in sequential order of increasing HRT.

HRT 1 HRT 2 FLOW UNIT 1


500000 500000
450000
400000
450000
400000
Seal
350000 350000
300000 300000 Non-Productive
K*H

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

HRT 7 HRT 8 FLOW UNIT 4


500000
450000
400000
500000
450000
400000
Excellent
350000
300000
350000
300000
Reservoir
K*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

• Cluster Analysis and other methods (Neural Networks, Principal Components)


can be tested with several configurations of open hole logs in order to obtain a
representative log-derived HRT curve
Log-derived HRT Generation
Example of Clustering Analysis

• The Cluster Analysis works in two stages:

• 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

BEST ROCK QUALITY 


BEST ROCK QUALITY 
Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units – Statistical Validation
Hydraulic Rock Types Statistical Analysis

BEST ROCK QUALITY 


BEST ROCK QUALITY 
Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units – Statistical Validation
Hydraulic Rock Types Statistical Analysis

BEST ROCK QUALITY 


Lateral congruency of Rock Types
Lorenz Plot vs. Productivity Index
Lorentz graphs in sequential order of increasing HRT.

HRT 1 HRT 2 FLOW UNIT 1


500000 500000
450000
400000
450000
400000
Seal
350000 350000
300000 300000 Non-Productive
K*H

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

HRT 7 HRT 8 FLOW UNIT 4


500000
450000
400000
500000
450000
400000
Excellent
350000
300000
350000
300000
Reservoir
K*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

BEST ROCK QUALITY 


BEST ROCK QUALITY 
Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units – Statistical Validation
Hydraulic Rock Types Statistical Validation

FLOW UNIT

BEST ROCK QUALITY 


BEST ROCK QUALITY 
Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units – Statistical Validation
Hydraulic Rock Types Statistical Validation

FLOW UNIT

BEST ROCK QUALITY 


Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units – Statistical Validation
Hydraulic Rock Types Statistical Validation

FLOW UNIT

BEST ROCK QUALITY 


Lateral congruency of Rock Types –
Flow Units

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

WELL A WELL B WELL C WELL D WELL E


Rock Typing
Depositional Rock Types (DRTs)
• These are rock types derived from core-based descriptions of genetic units (Lithofacies)
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

• DRTs represent original large-scale rock properties present at deposition

• 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.

Summary of Identified DRTs 8 Shales with diffuse lamination. Mainly subtidal


Very low effective
porosity
No thin section photo

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

Anhydrites. Nodular beds, massive, Floatstone. Pelecipod and gastropod


Moderate to good, moldic-
6 chicken-wire textures. Ocassionally Supratidal to intertidal No Porosity No thin section photo valves of more than 2 mm of size. Massive High energy, mid to inner
14 intercrystalline, meso to
interbedded with bindstones. or diffuse lamination due to horizontal ramp
macroporosity
orientation of valves. Locally bioturbated.

Dolomitized Fenestral Massive crystalline dolostone (originally


bindstone/wackestone. Massive to Scarce to moderate, bioclastic wackestones?). Disolution moderate to good,
7 Intertidal to Supratidal
diffuse lamination, pelecipod molds intercrystalline porosity fractures and moldic porosity filled with Subtidal with supratidal intercrystaline-moldic-
15
filled with anhydrite; bird eyes texture. anhydrites. Moderate to intense influence vuggy, micro to
bioturbations represented by horizontal macroporosity
and vertical tubes.
Very low effective
8 Shales with diffuse lamination. Mainly subtidal No thin section photo
porosity
Laminated muddy wackestones with
Very low effective
16 dolomite cement. Brecciated aspect. Supratidal No thin section photo
porosity
Dolomitized peloidal-bioclastic Interbedded with bioclastic lenses.
Moderate to good, moldic
9 Packstone/Grainstones. Massive to finely Subtidal
porosity
laminated, ocassionally flaser structures

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

Dolostones with Intercrystalline, Intercrystalline, Diagenetic controls in DRTs 3,


I 1, 3, 14 and 15 Macropores (0.3-1.2 mm)
Macro-porosity scarce moldic 14 and 15

Meso to micropores (0.2-


Dolostones with Moldic, Meso to Moldic, scarce Packstones with skeletal and
II 9 and 11 0.01 mm), occasional
Macro-porosity intercrystalline non-skeletal dissolution molds
macropores (0.4-0.5 mm)

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

Micropores (0.01-0.06 Ocassionally laminated with


VI Anhydrites 6 Fenestral
mm) irregular fenestrae dolomicrite
Rock Typing
Hydraulic Rock Types (HRTs)
• 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 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)

Capillary Pressures curves (Purcell Method) - Lower LM


130.00

120.00

110.00

100.00

90.00
Capillary Pressure (Kg/cm2)

PMS-1007 (LM100) 1420.36


80.00 PMS-1007 (LM100) 1421.21
PMS-1007 (LM100) 1422.38
70.00
PMN.a-1015 (LM100) 1379.35
PMN.a-1015 (LM100) 1382.07
60.00
PMN.a-1015 (LM100) 1382.37
50.00 PMN.a-1015 (LM100) 1382.67
PMN-1069 (LM96) 1383.34
40.00 PMN-1069 (LM96) 1391.12
PMN-1069 (LM96) 1391.61
30.00

20.00

10.00

0.00 Zoomed area for next Figure


0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Water Saturation (%)
Rock Typing
Capillary Pressure curves for HRTs
• The Threshold Pressure is the pressure at which the non-wetting phase (mercury) forms a connected
pathway across the sample, and it corresponds to the inflection point on a capillary pressure plot

• 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

Capillary Pressures (Purcell Method) - Lower LM


10.50
10.00
9.50
9.00
8.50
Relative High threshold
8.00
Pressure
7.50
7.00
PMS-1007 (LM100) 1420.36
Capillary Pressure (Kg/cm2)

6.50
PMS-1007 (LM100) 1421.21
6.00
5.50 PMS-1007 (LM100) 1422.38

5.00 PMN.a-1015 (LM100) 1379.35

4.50 PMN.a-1015 (LM100) 1382.07


4.00 PMN.a-1015 (LM100) 1382.37
3.50 PMN.a-1015 (LM100) 1382.67
3.00
PMN-1069 (LM96) 1383.34
2.50
PMN-1069 (LM96) 1391.12
2.00
PMN-1069 (LM96) 1391.61
1.50
1.00
0.50 Relative Low threshold
0.00 Pressure
30.000 35.000 40.000 45.000 50.000 55.000 60.000 65.000 70.000 75.000 80.000 85.000 90.000 95.000 100.000
Wetting Phase Saturation (%)
Rock Typing
Port Size Saturation: Apex Plot
• Since capillary pressure curves reflects the distribution profile of pore throat sizes,
the Apex Plot is an accurate method to determine the percentage of non-wetting
phase that reflects the optimal radius of interconnected pore throats (known as
Port Size) that dominates fluid flow

High Average Apex at


SHg/Pc SHg = 30%

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 [%]

• Using routine petrophysical core measurements of porosity and permeability,


Port Size can be calculated for each core sample and a vertical log of R30 in
microns can be obtained for each cored interval.

• 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

10 Good Reservoir PORTS


Quality 0.1µm 1
No Reservoir Very Good Reservoir NANO
Quality PORTS
0 0
0.0 200.0 400.0 600.0 800.0 1000.0 1200.0
STORAGE CAPACITY (PHI*h)
Rock Typing Integration
DRT 1 to DRT 4
HRT 5 MACRO HRT 5 MACRO

HRT 4 MESO HRT 4 MESO

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

HRT 4 MESO HRT 4 MESO

UPPER UPPER
HRT 3 MICRO HRT 3 MICRO
LOWER LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO DRT 3 HRT 2 MICRO DRT 4

HRT 1 PRT V HRT 1

NANO NANO
Rock Typing Integration
DRT 5 to DRT 8
HRT 5 MACRO HRT 5 MACRO

HRT 4 MESO HRT 4 MESO

UPPER UPPER
HRT 3 MICRO HRT 3 MICRO
LOWER LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO HRT 2 MICRO

PRT III HRT 1


PRT VI HRT 1
NANO NANO

HRT 5 MACRO HRT 5 MACRO

HRT 4 MESO HRT 4 MESO

UPPER UPPER
HRT 3 MICRO HRT 3 MICRO
LOWER LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO HRT 2 MICRO

PRT III HRT 1 HRT 1


NANO NANO
Rock Typing Integration
HRT 5: Very Good Reservoir Quality
HRT DRTs PRTs
DRT 1: Massive Dolostones
DRT 3: Highly bioturbated,
Argillaceous Dolostones
PRT I: Intercrystalline,
5 DRT 14: Massive to diffuse
Macro-porosity
laminated, Dolomitized Floatstones
DRT 1 DRT 15
DRT 15: Bioturbated to massive,
supratidally influenced Dolostones

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

DRT 2: Massive, diffuse laminated


argillaceous Dolostones

DRT 10: Mud supported, Dolostone


PRT III: Intercrystalline,
3 Breccias/Conglomerates
Micro to Meso-porosity
DRT 15: Bioturbated to massive,
supratidally influenced Dolostones DRT 10
DRT 16: Laminated muddy
wackestones

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

PRT VI: Anhydrite (with


DRT 6: Chicken wire, nodulose, massive
dolomicrite), fenestral
Anhydrites
micro-porosity
LOWER
HRT 2 MICRO
Rock Typing Integration
HRT 1: No Reservoir
HRT DRTs PRTs
DRT 2: Massive, diffuse laminated
argillaceous Dolostones
DRT 3: Highly bioturbated, Argillaceous PRT III: Intercrystalline,
Dolostones Micro to Meso-porosity
DRT 7: Massive to diffuse laminated, PRT V: Fenestral, Micro
dolomitized fenestral wackestones to Meso-porosity
DRT 15: Bioturbated to massive,
1 DRT 2 DRT 6
supratidally influenced Dolostones
PRT V: Fenestral, Micro
DRT 4: Finely laminated Bindstones
to Meso-porosity
PRT VI: Anhydrite (with
DRT 6: Chicken wire, nodulose, massive
dolomicrite), fenestral
Anhydrites
micro-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

• The Cluster Analysis and other methods (Neural Networks, Principal


Components) were tested with several configurations, but the best results were
obtained with three logs: SP, Shallow Resistivity and Acoustic or Sonic

• However, SP and DT logs have different vertical resolution compared to Shallow


Resistivity, so filtering was applied to these logs to improve and enhance their
vertical resolution. The process is known as Frequency Normalization
HRT Log Generation
Example of Frequency Normalization
HRT Log Generation
Cluster Analysis
• The Cluster Analysis works in two stages:

• 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

• As the Cluster Analysis is an independent process respect the core-derived HRTs


generation, consistency has to be assured in the cases where Log-derived
Effective Porosity (PHIE) is very low. Clipping was applied to log-derived HRTs, in
order to have values of HRT = 1 (no reservoir) where PHIE curve is lower than 4%
HRT Log Generation
Cluster Analysis Cross-plots
HRT Log Generation
Cluster Analysis Stage-1 results
Electrofacies Log (HRT) Generation
Stage-2 results
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
SEDIMENTOLOGIC CORE STUDIES (Scarce, good distribution)

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 -

Sl-Sh: F-M sst. Graded. Ø 16 %


1478 - motted, Low angle x-lam. K 0.03D

Fm(P): Reddish, massive,


Ø 13 %
mottled mudstones. K 0.005D
Irregular vertical bioturbation
(rhizoliths).
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm

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

UNIFORM LITHOFACIES CODE

WELL A WELL B WELL C


Code Code 1466 - Code
1468 - 50
31 51 31
31 1462 - 61 20
31 20 22
31 61 1468 - 51
1470 - 10
40 50 60
51 1463 - 50 61
40 50 22
1472 - 30 50 20
61
30 22 1470- 20
51 1464 - 20 61
40 20 51
1474 - 51 20 51
40 10 51
1465 - 20
41 20 1472 - 51
1476 - 40 22 51
40 20 51
40 10 20
1466 - 20
31 20 20
1478 - 31 50 1474 - 51
31 20 10
41 1467 - 50 10
41 51 50
51
1480 - 40 51 60
40 61 50
40 1468 - 20 1476 -
61
51 51
1482 - 50
31 50 61
31 51 51
31 1469 - 51 51
51 50 1478 - 61
51 50 61
50
1485 - 51 1470 - 50
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
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

CAPILLARY PRESSURE [psi]


1480.9 m
Smect, Chlor, Illite mottling) Macrop. well 15

Cement scarce (Q) Low-ang X bed (Sl) connected 10

Sorting mod-well Difuse X bed (Sx) Microp. scarce 5

Consolid. mod-poor Horiz laminat (Sh) Sec por. scarce 0

Clasts subang-round. Grain contacts


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
WATER SATURATION[%VP]

point-point & long

CORES (PMN-1013) THIN-SECTION SEM

burrows/ Minimal clay matrix Dominant


root trace ? Scarce quartz cement Intergranular
Excelent poral system Porosity
Intragranular
Sx Moderate-well sorted
Sb Moderate-poor consolidated
porosity
Massive, bioturb. Cross-bedded sst
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
R40 Calibration – One to One plot

R40 from Pc
R40 from logs

Calculated R40

Calibrated Port Size selected on the


Minimum R having highest correlation
Coefficient. Port Size selected was R40
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm

Capillary pressure Samples


Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
Rock Typing
Sierras Blancas Fm
Rock Typing
Lateral distribution of HRTs and FU
HRT1
HRT2
HRT3
A HRT4
HRT5 A´
HRT6
HRT7
HRT8
Rock Typing
Lateral distribution of HRTs and FU

A FU 1
FU 2 A´
FU 3
Rock Typing
Lateral distribution of HRTs and FU
HRT1
HRT2
HRT3
B HRT4
HRT5
HRT6

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

• Porosity requires to be interconnected to be “effective”


• Macropores are easily visible in thin section or to the
naked eye (size >20 microns)
• Micropores are only easily visible under SEM - associated
with clays, interstices etc. (size <20 microns)
• Porosity in sandstones typically varies from 10% - 40%
• Porosity in carbonates is more variable
• Boyle’s Law porosity determination is said to measure
effective porosity (i.e. totally isolated pores are not
reached by the helium used)
Controls on Porosity

• The controls on porosity include:


– Lithology
– Depositional environment
– Texture (grain size, packing etc.)
– Geochemical environment
– Diagenesis
• Restrictions in pore size result from:
– Depositional fabric (& compaction)
– Original clay content
– Authigenic clay content
– Authigenic mineral cements
Porosity Measurement

• Require two of three variables - bulk


volume, grain volume and/or pore volume

Phi (%) = (pv/bv) * 100


Where: pv = pore volume (bv-gv)
gv = grain volume (bv-pv)
bv = bulk volume (gv+pv)
Porosity Measurement - bulk volume

• Direct measurement of bulk volume by


mercury displacement
• Repeated caliper or laser measurements to
obtain length x area
• Saturation in liquid of known density

Wtair - Wtin liquid / densityliquid


Mercury Pyncnometer

Pressure
gauge
Sealable sight window

Mercury
level Mercury
reservoir

Sample chamber

Rock sample Piston

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

• Sample is placed in chamber and known


volume of gas is expanded into chamber
• Change from initial to final gas pressures are
measured by a transducer
gv = (m * (Pi/Pf )) + c
Where: m = volume of reference chamber
Pi = initial pressure
Pf = final pressure
c = volume of total system
• Grain density is calculated from the weight
divided by the grain volume
Porosity Measurement - pore volume by
summation of fluids

• Measure water volume and oil volume from


retort
• Measure bulk volume by mercury
displacement
• Measure gas volume by mercury injection
pv = Vgas + Voil + Vwater
Porosity Measurement - pore volume at
reservoir overburden

• Ambient porosity is optimistic for poorly


consolidated samples due to relaxation on
release from reservoir overburden stress
• Pore volume of sample may be measured at
overburden by placing in a hydrostatic holder
and flooding with helium
• Grain volume from ambient condition
measurement is used in the calculation since
only pore volume should vary
Measurement Choices –
Summation of fluids

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?

• Permeability is the ability of porous material to allow


the passage of fluids through that material
• Permeability is measured in Darcies (D) or
millidarcies (mD)
• One Darcy represents flow of ~1 barrel per day of
one centipoise oil through one foot of rock with a
pressure differential of one p.s.i.
• Permeability is frequently highly variable and may
range from <0.01 mD to over 10 D
• Permeability is a constant under certain conditions
Permeability Controls - 1

⚫ Similar controls to those for porosity:


⚫ lithology
⚫ depositional environment
⚫ texture (grain size, packing etc.)
⚫ geochemical environment
⚫ diagenesis
⚫ Clean coarse sands/granular
carbonates - high K
⚫ Fine, muddy sands/microcrystalline
carbonates - low K
Permeability Controls - 2

⚫ Restrictions to pore size and


connectivity will reduce permeability
⚫ Depositional fabric (& compaction)
⚫ Mineral orientation
⚫ Original clay content
⚫ Authigenic clay content
⚫ Authigenic mineral cements
⚫ Permeability anisotropy may be due to
compaction
⚫ Whole core analysis used to provide
maximum and minimum values
Permeability Controls - 3

⚫ Rocks with low matrix permeabilities


represent amongst the most productive
reservoirs due to fracturing
⚫ Fractures also cause permeability
anisotropy
⚫ Plug analysis may not be the most
appropriate
⚫ Whole core analysis will allow provide
directional information
Gas Permeability and the Klinkenberg Effect

⚫ Permeability is a constant when:


⚫ laminar flow prevails
⚫ no rock/fluid interaction
⚫ one phase present at 100% pore space
saturation

⚫ Gas moves through pore at constant rate


⚫ Liquid almost static near pore walls
⚫ Gas permeability is therefore optimistic,
especially at low mean pressure
⚫ Need to perform “Klinkenberg” correction
(from tables or by measurement)
Gas Permeability and the Klinkenberg Effect

GAS

LIQUID
Permeability Measurement - routine gas
measurement

⚫ Dry nitrogen flowed through cleaned


and dried samples
⚫ Samples placed in “hassler” cell held
by confining pressure
⚫ Flow rates and pressure differentials
are recorded and permeability
calculated from the Darcy equation
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

• Industry standard for decades


• Advantages
– Equipment inexpensive, easy to build
– Easy to operate, calibrate and maintain
– Rapid measurement (after sample
preparation)
– Cost effective
Air Permeability (Kair)

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

Variation in gas permeability with gas type and mean confining


pressure
Permeability to air (Kair)

Samples susceptible to damage during preparation


Kair is variable with mean pressure
Kair is optimistic due to gas slippage
Klinkenberg permeability is equivalent to a non
reactive liquid permeability at 100% saturation
Measurements typically made at low confining
pressure
Liquid Permeability

Liquid permeability to one fluid in the


presence of a second immobile phase e.g. oil
permeability at irreducible water saturation
Single phase liquid permeability on core
saturated 100% in one fluid
Liquid Permeability (Ko @ Swir)

Cut plugs with oil


Mount samples in core holders at reservoir
stress
Flush with oil to Swir
Determine oil permeability at Swir
Measure Rt (optional)
Measure Swir by Dean Stark or proceed to
in situ flush cleaning
Liquid Permeability (Kw)

Flush clean samples using low rate miscible


solvent flush
Replace solvent with brine
Determine specific permeability to brine
Measure Ro (optional)
CAPILLARY PRESSURE
Sw Determination

There are three methods available for the


determination of reservoir water saturation.
• Coring with an oil base or tagged water base
mud
• Calculated from electric logs
• Determined from laboratory capillary pressure
data
Conversion of Laboratory Data To Reservoir
Data

• Prior to using laboratory capillary pressure


data it is necessary to convert to reservoir
conditions
• Laboratory data are obtained using either gas-
water, oil-water or gas-mercury systems
• Data must be converted to an equivalent
reservoir fluid system e.g. air-mercury Pc
curves must be converted to oil-brine or oil-
gas
Conversion of Laboratory Data To Reservoir Data

• Capillary pressure (Pc) is given by:


( 2  cos  )
Pc =
r

where  = interfacial tension,


 = contact angle and
r = pore radius
and one system can be converted to another by:
Pc system1 (  cos  ) system1
=
Pc system2 (  cos  ) system2
Converting Pc Data To Height Above Free
Water Level

• All height measurements are from the free


water surface.
• This surface is not necessarily defined by the
level at which only water is produced but is
that surface defined by zero capillary pressure.
Convert capillary pressure data to height
above the free water level

The following conditions must be satisfied.


• The pressure in the oil and water must be
equal at the free surface
• The water and oil columns must be
continuous and connected throughout the
range of the calculations
• The system must be in static equilibrium
Averaging Capillary Pressure Data

• Capillary pressure curves for clastic


formations generally correlate with
permeability.
• Certain carbonate formations however can
correlate better with porosity.
• Due to the complexity of the controlling
factors no generalised capillary pressure
saturation relationship exists.
• It is necessary to determine the
relationship for each formation.
Averaging Capillary Pressure Data

• Two methods are generally used to correlate


capillary pressure data for a reservoir.
– Leverett J Function.
– Statistical approach.
Pc K
1. Leverett J Function J ( Sw) = ( )
 cos 

Pc = capillary pressure, dynes/cm2


 = interfacial tension, dynes/cm
2
K = permeability, cm
 = fractional porosity
cos  = contact angle
Averaging Pc Data

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

▪ Comparison of pore geometry from various zones within the


reservoir
▪ Identifies the presence of dual porosity
▪ Used to select the correct mud solids size to ensure effective
mud fluid loss control. This data can also be supplied to
injection water filtration
▪ Indicates the relative contribution of the different pore sizes to
permeability. useful when interpreting capillary pressure and
relative permeability data
Pore Entry Radii Calculations

Pore Entry Radii Calculation

2  .• cos • C
Ri =
Pc

Ri = Pore radii, microns


Pc = Capillary pressure in lab, psi
 = Interfacial tension, dynes/cm
 = Contact angle, degrees
C = Conversion constant = 145.1-3
Pore Entry Radii Calculations
Mercury Injection Pc versus Wetting Phase Saturation
(Drainage And Imbibition Mode)

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

• Three basic methods exist for the


determination of capillary pressure in the
laboratory.
– 1) Mercury Injection
– 2) Centrifuge
– 3) Porous plate/membrane
Mercury Pyncnometer

Pressure
gauge
Sealable sight window

Mercury
level Mercury
reservoir

Sample chamber

Rock sample Piston

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

• Theoretically it should be possible to convert and directly compare one


system with another
• Comparative work performed however suggests the inclusion of the
contact angle in the conversion may be invalid. This is due to the
complexity of the pore geometry and therefore the relationship between
the curvature of the interface and the radius of the pore may not
necessarily be a function of the contact angle
• Each varying lithological case must therefore be considered separately
Centrifuge Capillary Pressure

• This method involves placing saturated


samples in centrifuge cups and spinning at
increasing speeds
• At each step the volume of the displaced
phase is measured
• This measurement is taken when all
production at the set speed has ceased
Centrifuge Capillary Pressure

Outlet Inlet
face face
100

Sw%

Wetting phase Water produced


production versus time for a given
controlled by speed of rotation
relative perm.

Water Water production


out dominated by
capillary pressure

Time
Centrifuge Pc

• Centrifuge capillary pressure measurement is


influenced by relative permeability and vice
versa
• In the conventional capillary pressure test by
centrifuge it is vital that all fluid flow has
ceased for a given capillary pressure in order
to avoid errors in the saturation value caused
by relative permeability effects
Advantages Of The Porous Plate Test

• Air-brine and oil-brine systems can be used


• Electrical properties can be run in conjunction
with the test
• Relatively inexpensive to perform
• Can be run on single samples at reservoir
confining pressure
Humidified
gas in

Core
Plug

Brine
Porous plate out
Problems Associated With The Air-Brine
Porous Plate Cell Test

• Starting sample saturation assumed to be


100%
• Poor capillary contact between sample and
plate
• Samples are handled frequently
• Temperature fluctuations
• Samples are left for insufficient time at each
pressure
Problems Associated With The Air-Brine
Porous Plate Cell Test

• Surface porosity desaturation at the low


pressures.
• Sample heterogeneity
• Sample suitability for testing can be aided by
pre-screening.
• Samples are cleaned and rendered water wet
prior to testing
CAPILLARY PRESSURE UNDER RESERVOIR PRESSURE
P

Gas in RESISTANCE

Silver wire Sample


electrodes on 100% Sw
sample at start
circumference

Porous
plate

Brine out

Electrical Properties In Conjunction


With In Situ Porous Plate

Four wire method eliminates influence


of porous plate. If resistance of porous
plate with brine is known, two wire
measurement can be used.
WETABILITY
Repaso
Concepto de Mojabilidad
• En un medio poroso que contiene dos o más fluidos inmiscibles, la Mojabilidad es
una medida de la tendencia preferencial de uno de los fluidos para “mojar”
(adherirse) la superficie poral de la roca

• Para entender la Mojabilidad, se define la Tensión Interfacial: en un sistema agua-


petróleo, es la fuerza resultante debido a la atracción de las moléculas de agua por
debajo de la misma y las moléculas de petróleo que tiene por encima

• En la interfase, las moléculas de un fluido tienden a minimizar la superficie “jalando”


las moléculas de la interfase tendiendo a formar una esfera. Estas fuerzas actuantes
en la superficie de la interfase crea un capa tipo “membrana” de moléculas en
tensión.
Repaso
Concepto de Mojabilidad

• Otro concepto muy importante es el de Ángulo de Contacto: ángulo medido en la


interfase entre líquido y sólido. Una mojabilidad completa tendría un ángulo de
contacto de 0°, mientras que un líquido completamente no mojante tendría un
ángulo de 180°

• Siempre se mide sobre el fluido de mayor densidad en el punto de triple contacto


(ambos fluidos inmiscibles y fase sólida)
Repaso
Concepto de Mojabilidad
• ¿Cómo puede entenderse la mojabilidad en función de la tensión interfacial (σ) y del
ángulo de contacto (θ)?

• Se define a la Tensión de Adhesión (At) a la propiedad física que determina que


fluido mojará un sólido

At = σos – σws = σow * cos θ


Si At = 0 (σos = σws) cos θ = 0 (θ = 90°) Mojabilidad Intermedia

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

• La mayoría de las rocas reservorio son mojables al agua. Es natural, considerando


el origen sedimentario de las mismas, depositadas y/o afectadas por agua
durante su acumulación

• 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

You might also like