SPE 69458 Rock Typing: A Key Approach for Petrophysical Characterization and Definition of Flow Units, Santa Barbara

Field, Eastern Venezuela Basin

J. C. Porras, PDVSA EPM, and O. Campos, PDVSA-Intevep

Copyright 2001, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc. This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2528 March 2001. This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Rock types were considered for the definition of injection intervals, and were also used to construct stratigraphic flow profiles, which were validated with production logs. Grouping similar rock types was found to be an excellent method for defining simulation layers. Rock type areal distribution maps were constructed to help delineate the best reservoir areas. The characterization of a reservoir into rock types in order to determine flow units effectively integrates geological, petrophysical and production data into descriptions of zones with similar flow characteristics, and is fundamental for the development of secondary recovery processes. Introduction The Santa Barbara Field is located in the North Monagas Area, Eastern Venezuela Basin (Fig. 1). The complex pore system present in the area made necessary a detailed petrophysical model based on the study of pore and pore throat geometry, for tertiary and cretaceous formations.

Abstract The Santa Barbara Field is located in the North Monagas Area, Eastern Venezuela Basin. Reservoirs in the area are characterized by high initial temperature and pressure, and high initial production rates. The drive mechanism is solution gas drive and fluid expansion, with reservoir pressure declining rapidly. The hydrocarbon column varies from a gascondensate cap at the top of the structure to heavy oil at the bottom. A detailed petrophysical model was necessary to optimize the secondary recovery processes implemented in the field. The petrophysical characterization incorporated the analysis of the complex variations in pore and pore throat geometry that control initial and residual fluid distribution and fluid flow through the reservoirs. Conventional porosity and permeability, mercury injection capillary pressure, relative permeability, and mineralogical data were used to characterize the reservoir pore systems into rock types having similar flow and storage capacity. Water Saturation, all of which is considered immobile, was found to be dependent on rock type, with pore throat being the dominant control on the flow characteristics of the reservoirs. Mercury injection capillary pressure data provided useful information about effective pore throat radii, which were semi-quantitatively related to several reservoir responses, such as permeability, porosity, irreducible water saturation, and a capillary pressure profile or pore throat type curve. Plots of pore throat obtained from empirical equations versus pore throat estimated from capillary pressure tests showed that the dominant interconnected pore system that controls flow in the reservoirs is best represented by the pore throat on a capillary pressure curve corresponding to 45% mercury saturation.

Monagas PIRITAL
BUC RE E
BOS E- F BO SQUE-

OS Q U

F N- 9 1

F UL 1 6 BUC A RE D T C T N OR T E P IC E MU C 4 5
E B

FUL 1 1 FUL 1 0 F UL 1

TACAT
P I C1 E S BC 1 8 PI C 5 E C 2 E

C- 22 E PI C 3 E M UC 1E F UC FU 1 F UL 2

13 F UL 21

SB

3 S BC 1

M UC 3

11

CASUPAL TONORO

S BC 4

S BC 1 9

EL FURRIAL CARITO

SANTA MULATA BARBARA

Fig. 1-Relative location map of the Santa Barbara Field

Pore throat size may be estimated from routine core porosity and permeability data (at ambient conditions). Combining these data with mercury injection capillary pressure results, Winland (1972) developed an empirical relationship between porosity, air permeability and pore aperture corresponding to a mercury saturation of 35% (R35). The Winland equation was used and published by Kolodzie (1980) and is given below:

J.C.PORRAS, O.CAMPOS

SPE 69458

Log(R35) = 0.732+0.588Log(kair)-0.864Log() Where: R35 is the pore aperture radius (microns) corresponding to the 35th percentile, kair is uncorrected air permeability (md), and is porosity (%). R35 pore throat radius is defined as the pore throat size from mercury injection capillary pressure data where the nonwetting fluid (mercury) saturates 35% of the porosity. R35 pore throat radii is a function of entry size and pore throat sorting, and is a good measure of the largest connected pore throats in a rock with intergranular porosity (Hartmann and Coalson, 1990). In 1992, Pitmann, based on Winlands work, developed R35-type equations for pore throats corresponding to mercury saturations from 10% to 75% (Fig. 2).

capillary pressure data where the non-wetting fluid (mercury) saturates 45% of the porosity.

R35-Pc Vs. R35-Pitmann

10 10

R40-Pc Vs. R40-Pitmann

R35-Pitmann

R40-Pitmann
0 2 4 6 8 10

R35-Pc

10

R40-Pc

R45-Pc Vs. R45-Pitmann

10 30 25 8

R50-Pc Vs. R50-Pitmann

R45-Pitmann

R50-Pitmann

20

15

10

2 5

0 0 2 4 6 8 10

0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

LogR10 LogR15 LogR20 LogR25 LogR30 LogR35 LogR40 LogR45 LogR50 LogR55 LogR60 LogR65 LogR70 LogR75

= 0.459 = 0.333 = 0.218 = 0.204 = 0.215 = 0.255 = 0.360 = 0.609 = 0.778 = 0.948 = 1.096 = 1.372 = 1.664 = 1.880

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + +

0.500*LogKair 0.509*LogKair 0.519*LogKair 0.531*LogKair 0.547*LogKair 0.565*LogKair 0.582*LogKair 0.608*LogKair 0.626*LogKair 0.632*LogKair 0.648*LogKair 0.643*LogKair 0.627*LogKair 0.609*LogKair -

0.385*Log 0.344*Log 0.303*Log 0.350*Log 0.420*Log 0.523*Log 0.680*Log 0.974*Log 1.205*Log 1.426*Log 1.666*Log 1.979*Log 2.314*Log 2.626*Log

R45-Pc

R50-Pc

Fig. 3-Plots of pore throat radii estimated from capillary pressure data versus pore throat radii calculated using Pitmanns R45 equation

Once the equation to be used in the area was determined, R45 pore throat values were calculated for data at both ambient and reservoir conditions. Crossplots were constructed to obtain the corresponding relationships (Fig. 4).

Tertiary
1e+02 1e+01
SBC-21 SBC-24 SBC-29 SBC-33 SBC-35 SBC-44 SBC-50 SBC-51 SBC-56 SBC-57 SBC-7 SBC-96

Cretaceous
1e+02

1e+02

Fig. 2-Pitmanns equations for mercury saturations of 10% to 75%

R 45 (f t )

SBC-21 SBC-24 SBC-50 SBC-57 SBC-70 SBC-90 SBC-96

1e+02

1e+01

1e+01

1e+01

1e+00

1e+00

R 45 (f t)

1e+00

1e+00

R45 (f t)

In the present study, conventional core porosity and permeability data from 17 key wells, and mercury injection capillary pressure data from 11 of them, were used to determine the pore throat model. Pore Throat Radius Analysis In order to determine the most appropriate equation for estimating pore throat size in the study area, plots of pore throat radius from capillary pressure data versus pore throat radius obtained from Pitmanns equations were constructed (Fig. 3). As shown in the figure, the R45 equation best honors and reproduces core capillary pressure data, and was therefore selected to estimate pore throat radius in the area. Pitmanns R45 equation is given below: Log(R45) = 0.609+0.608Log(kair)-0.974Log() Where: R45 is the pore aperture radius (microns) corresponding to the 45th percentile, kair is uncorrected air permeability (md), and is porosity (%). R45 pore throat radius can then be defined as the pore throat size from

1e-01

1e-01

1e-01

R45 (f t)
1e-01 1e-02 1e-02

1e-02

1e-02

1e-02 11.9 9.5 7.1 4.8 2.4 0.0 1e-02

1e-01

1e+00

1e+01

1e+02

0.0 2.9 5.7 8.6 11.4 14.3

R 45 (f t )
9.0 7.2 5.4 3.6 1.8 0.0

1e-02

1e-01

1e+00

1e+01

1e+02

0.0 1.7 3.3 5.0 6.6 8.3

R 4 5 (f t)

1e-01

1e+00

1e+01

1e+02

R 45 (f t )

1e-02

1e-01

1e+00

1e+01

1e+02

R 4 5 (f t)

Fig. 4-Pore throat radius at reservoir conditions versus pore throat radius at ambient conditions, for Tertiary and Cretaceous Formations

Pore Throat Radius Versus Water Saturation The absence of an active aquifer in the area, as well as the enormous size of the hydrocarbon column, make the water in the reservoirs immobile. Water saturation variations, as shown in resistivity logs, are then dependent on rock type and not dependent on changes in fluid volume. Based on this premise, R45 values were plotted against water saturation (Fig. 5), in order to determine a possible relationship between both properties. The results shown in figure 5 indicate that water saturation values are directly associated to the geometry of the pore system, and can be used in areas like the Santa Barbara Field,

SPE 69458

ROCK TYPING: A KEY APPROACH FOR PETROPHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION

where the mobile fluid is hydrocarbon, and the water existent in the formation can be considered to be irreducible. Irreducible water saturation was obtained from mercury injection capillary pressure data (Fig. 6).

Once calibrated with cores, Spectral Gamma Ray Logs were used to determine clay types and to detect possible formation changes (Fig. 8).

lgp_Area_22_ CALI 6 ( in ) SGR ( gAPI ) CGR ( gAPI ) 16 150 -6 0 0 POTA ( %) TORIO URANIO 6 0.01 0.1 lgp_Area_18_ UPRA ( ) TURA ( ) 100 1 100 TPRA ( ) TPRA 100

Areas 1/3/5

Areas 2/4

MD 150 1 : 600 ft 15550

15600

Possible Tertiary
15650

15700

15750

Possible Cretaceous

15800

Fig. 5-Plots of pore throat radius (y-axis) vs. water saturation (xaxis), showing the relation between both properties

Fig. 8-Spectral Gamma Ray log showing mineralogical change between Tertiary and Cretaceous formations

10000

1000

Injection Pressure, psi

100

Determination of Porosity Compressibility tests performed on cores indicate that confining pressure has a minor effect on porosity (Fig. 9). Porosity core data at reservoir conditions were available, and used in the core-log correlation. Porosity was calculated from logs and calibrated with core data.

10

1 100.0

12. 0
90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0

Mercury Saturation, % Pore Space

11. 5 11. 0

Porosity ( %)

Fig. 6-Mercury injection capillary pressure data from a key well in the Santa Barbara Field

10. 5 10. 0 9. 5 9. 0 8. 5 8. 0 000

Spectral Gamma Ray Analysis Clay type played an important role in the definition of rock types. Two main clay types were present in the area and their differentiation was based in the analysis of spectral gamma ray logs run to the cores. Thorium versus Potassium crossplots were constructed (Fig. 7), which showed the changes in clay type. High thorium/potassium values indicate Kaolinite-type clays, while low thorium/potassium values indicate Illite-type clays.
Kaolinite Illite THOR (ppm)

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

Confining Pressure (psi)

Fig. 9-Data from compressibility tests in a key well of the Santa Barbara Field. Note the little decrease in porosity as pressure increases

Determination of Rock Types Reservoir rock was classified based on R45 pore throat radius, which is a dominant control on the permeability and flow characteristics of the reservoirs. The reservoir rock was divided into five petrophysical categories: Megaporous, defined by a pore throat radius > 10 microns Macroporous, defined by a pore throat radius between 2.5 and 10 microns Mesoporous, defined by a pore throat radius between 0.5 and 2.5 microns Microporous, defined by a pore throat radius between 0.2 and 0.5 microns (microporous) Nannoporous, defined by a pore throat radius < 0.2 microns

POTA (%)

Fig. 7-Plot of Thorium (ppm) versus Potassium (%) showing different trends for kaolinite and illite-type clays

J.C.PORRAS, O.CAMPOS

SPE 69458

Pore throat radii lines obtained using Pitmanns R45 equation were superimposed on porosity versus permeability plots and used in the the recognition of rock types (Fig. 10).

10000.
Mega

30 1000. 10 5

100.

2.5 1
Meso

10.

0.5 0.2 0.1

Micro

Pore Throat radius (microns)

Permeability (md)

Macro

Determination of Permeability Once porosity was estimated, and R45 pore throat radius was obtained from water saturation, permeabilty was calculated using Pitmanns R45 equation and calibrated with core data. Five different equations to estimate permeability in the area were obtained from the porosity versus permeability plots, by rock type, at reservoir conditions (Fig. 13).
M egaporous M acroporous M esoporous

1.

0.1
Nanno

0.01

0.001 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3

Porosity

M icroporous

Nannoporous

Fig. 10-Porosity versus permeability plot showing R45 pore throat lines, and rock type classification

Sedimentological analysis from thin sections and Scanning Electronic Microscope were used to help visualize the different rock types. (Fig. 11).
Megaporous Macroporous

Fig. 13-Porosity versus permeability plots, by rock type

Based on these equations, a sensitivity analysis was performed in order to observe the variation of permeability with efective porosity by rock type (Fig. 14).

10000.00

Mesoporous

Microporous
1000.00

100.00 MEGA MACRO MESO MICRO NANNO

K (md)

10.00

1.00

Fig. 11-Thin section and SEM photographs for different rock types

0.10

0.01

Rock types can be semi-quantitatively related to several reservoir response characteristics useful in formation evaluation, such as permeability to porosity ratio, immobile water saturation, initial production rates, and a capillary pressure profile (Fig. 12).

0.00 0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

PHIE (fraction)

Fig. 14-Effective porosity versus permeability relations for different rock types

1 0000

1
100 0

100

10

1 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Mercury Saturation, %

1: M egaporous 3: M esoporous

2: M acroporous 4: M icroporous

Fig. 12-Capillary pressure profile for different rock types

Definition of Reservoir Flow Units A petrophysical flow unit is defined as an interval of sediment with similar petrophysical properties such as porosity, permeability, water saturation, pore throat radius, storage and flow capacity, that are different from the intervals immediately above and below. Petrophysical flow units are usually grouped to define containers. Rock types having similar flow capacity were grouped and used in the detemination of reservoir flow units (Fig. 15). A detailed sedimentological study had been previously done in the study area, and the integration of these results with the petrophysical analysis proved to be a valuable tool in the definition of simulation layers.

Capillary Pressure, psi

SPE 69458

ROCK TYPING: A KEY APPROACH FOR PETROPHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION

12

Rock Type Distribution Maps Rock type distribution maps (Fig. 17) were construted using information from cored wells and from wells evaluated using the core-log correlation determined in this study. Figure 17 shows the occurence of the different rock types, in percentage, for simulation flow unit 6. Best reservoir areas are circled, where the highest frequency of megaporous and macroporous rock types occur.
70 84

10

13
Rock Type: Megaporous
1068000

Rock Type: Macroporous

1068000

1066000

1066000

14 11
Fig. 15-Sample well showing the adjustment of flow units 9,10,11 into flow units 12,13,14 after regrouping by rock types

1064000 416000 418000 420000 0 422000 2000 424000 4000 426000 428000

1064000 416000 418000 420000 0 422000 2000 424000 4000 426000 428000

0 70

0 65

Rock Type: Mesoporous

1068000 1068000

Rock Type: Microporous

A total of 21 layers were defined in the sedimentological study (14 for Tertiary, and 7 for Cretaceous formations). With the introduction of the rock type concept, the tops of the simulation layers were re-adjusted to obtain a total 12 units (10 for Tertiary, and 2 for Cretaceous formations), improving simulation results (Fig. 16).

1066000

1066000

1064000 416000 418000 420000 0 422000 2000 424000 4000 426000 428000

1064000 416000 418000 420000 0 422000 2000 424000 4000 426000 428000

0 70

PREVIOUS FLOW UNITS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

ADJUSTED FLOW UNITS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Rock Type: Nannoporous

1068000

1066000

1064000 416000 418000 420000 0 422000 2000 424000 4000 426000 428000

Tertiary

Fig. 17-Areal rock type distribution maps for simulation unit 6, showing best reservoir areas (circled)

10

16 17 18 19 20 21

11

12

Fig. 16-Comparison between previous and adjusted simulation flow units after grouping by rock types, for both Tertiary and Cretaceous formations

Conclusions 1. Reservoir rock was classified in five petrophysical rock types, based on pore throat radius. 2. Different rock types have different quality in terms of flow capacity and recovery efficiency. 3. A definite relation between water saturation, all of which is immobile, and pore throat radius, was found for both Tertiary and Cretaceous formations 4. Rock types are an important parameter to be used in the definition of simulation layers and reservoir flow units. 5. Rock type areal distribution maps are an excellent tool to help delineate the best reservoir areas.

Cretaceous

J.C.PORRAS, O.CAMPOS

SPE 69458

Nomenclature kair = uncorrected air permeability, md ============= core porosity, % ========e = effective porosity, fraction R35 = pore aperture radius (35th percentile), R45 = pore aperture radius (45th percentile), Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank PDVSA EPM for permission to publish this paper. References
1. Coalson, E. B., Hartmann, D. J., and Thomas, J. B., 1985, Productive Characteristics of Common Reservoir Porosity Types: S. Texas Geol. Soc. Bull., v. 25, n. 6, pp. 35-51. Gunter, G.W., Finneran, J.M., Hartmann, D.J. and Miller J.D., Early Determination of Reservoir Flow Units Using an Integrated Petrophysical Method, SPE 38679, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, pp. 373-380. Hartmann, D. J. And Thomas J. B., Basic Petrophysical Methods, Petrophysics XXVIII, Amoco Production Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma. Hartmann, D. J. and Coalson, E. B., 1990, "Evaluation of the Morrow Sandstone in Sorrento Field, Cheyenne County, Colorado, in S. A. Sonnenberg, L. T. Shannon, K. Rader, W. F. Von Drehl, y G. W. Martin (Editors), Morrow Sandstones of Southeast Colorado and Adjacent Areas, The Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, Denver, Colorado, pp. 91 - 100. Kolodzie, S., Jr., 1980, Analysis of Pore Throat Size and Use of the Waxman-Smits Equation to determine OOIP in Spindle Field, Colorado: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 55th Annual Fall Technology Conference, SPE-9382, 10 pp. Pittman, E. D., 1992, Relationship of Porosity and Permeability to Various Parameters Derived from Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure Curves for Sandstone: AAPG Bulletin, v. 76, No. 2, pp. 191 - 198. Porras, J.C., 1996, Caracterizacin Petrofsica del Campo Carito Norte, Corpoven S.A. Porras, J.C., 1998, Determination of Rock Types from Pore Throat Radius and Bulk Volume Water, and their Relations to Lithofacies, Carito Norte Field, Eastern Venezuela Basin, 39th SPWLA Annual Symposium, Paper OO. Winland, H. D., 1972, "Oil Accumulation in Response to Pore Size Changes, Weyburn Field, Saskatchewan," Amoco Production Research Report No. F72-G-25.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7. 8.

9.