A New Correlation for the Cementation
Factor in Low-Porosity Carbonates
A.M. Borai, SPE, Abu Dhabi Marine Operating Co.
Summary. The use of common correlations for the cementation factor, m, has led to discrepancies between log interpretation
and actual test results in several tight carbonate formations offshore Abu Dhabi. While logs indicate high water saturations, pro-
duction tests resulted in unexpected dry hydrocarbons.
The existing common correlations for carbonates yield constant m (Archie) or an increasing m with a decrease in porosity (Shell
formula). In the carbonates found offshore Abu Dhabi, m decreases with decreasing porosity. Based on core and log data from five
formations in 14 structures, a more representative correlation for m has been derived. This new correlation successfully eliminates
the discrepancies between log and test results. Examples confirming the validity of the new formula are included.
Introduction
Recent interpretation of openhole logs offshore Abu Dhabi has in-
dicated high water saturations across some zones. Hydrocarbon in-
dications during drilling and correlation with nearby wells have
shown these zones to be hydrocarbon-bearing. Testing of these zones
produced dry hydrocarbons, thus casting doubts on log interpreta-
tion results.
Because of the discrepancies between logs and test results, the
validity of the different parameters used in log interpretation waS
investigated. The results indicate that the main reason for these dis-
crepancies is the use of an improper cementation factor, m.
This paper reviews logs and core measurements that led to a new
m correlation and discusses examples where discrepancies between
log and production test results have been reconciled.
General Cementation-Factor Relationships for
Carbonate Formations
In 1942, Archie' showed experimentally that the resistivity of a
rock completely saturated with a conductive fluid, R o, is related
to the resistivitY of the conductive fluid, R w ' by
Ro=FRR w , .......•...••..•........•.••.•...•.... (1)
where F R is the formation resistivity factor. When Archie plotted
FR vs. rock porosity, C/>, for various clean formations, he found that
FR=c/>-m, (2)
where m represents the slope of the linear trend of FR vs. c/> when
plotted on logarithmic scales. Archie stated that m will vary ac-
cording to the degree of cementation of the rock. Therefore, m is
generally referred to as the "cementation factor."
Archie's relationship was later modified by Winsauer et at. 2 to
the general form
FR=ac/>-m, (3)
where the constant a 'was introduced to account for the presence
of solid conductors and/or clay in the formation.
Successive work by other authors has confirmed these two rela-
tions for different rock types leading to different values of the con-
stants a and m. However, the values generally used for carbonate
rocks are a=1 and m=2.
Another relationship recommended for use in evaluating low-
porosity carbonates is the Shell formula 3,4
m=1.87+0,OI9/c/> (4)
_Copyright 1987 Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE Formation Evaluation. December 1987
This formula increases m values with a decrease in porosity.
The following values of m were used in our log interpretation:
(1) Archie's formula with m=2 for medium- to high-porosity for-
mations, and (2) the Shell formula for low-porosity formations of
less than 10%. '
Study of Cementation Factor Behavior
Offshore Abu Dhabi
The study was initiated when intervals showing high water-saturation
values in log data processing were tested and produced virtually
dry hydrocarbons. The study covered the concession area offshore
Abu Dhabi of about 3,860 sq miles [10,000 km 2 ] (Fig.!).
Both log and core data from the main carbonate reservoirs en-
countered offshore Abu Dhabi were used. These reservoirs lie within
a sedimentary succession of more than 17,090 ft [5182 m] (Fig.
2). The lithology of these formations is mainly limestone; how-
ever, dolomite and dolomitic limestones commonly occur. The
reservoirs are essentially clean.
Log Data. Log data were obtained from the water-bearing forma-
tions in 12 different fields (Table 1). Care was taken to use wells
where good hole conditions and completeness of logging suites al-
lowed reliable estimation of porosities and resistivities. A cutoff
on the gamma ray was used to retain the clean intervals only.
The formation resistivity factor, FR , was calculated as R/R w.
R t was calculated from induction and duallaterolQgs, while R w was
obtained from laboratory analysis of formation Water samples.
Porosities were derived from a combination of density and neu·
tron logs and use of a dual mineral model for a limestone/dolomite
matrix.
The data were presented as crossplots of the formation resistivity
factor, F R , vs. porosity, C/>, on logarithmic scales. Fig. 3a through
3d represents typical examples of FR-VS.-c/> crossplots obtained for
different types of lithologies.
Fig. 3a through 3c demonstrates that the variation of FR with
porosity was consistent for all the carbonate formations within the
concession area. The presence of scattered anhydrite nodules in
some carbonate formations in iimited areas was noted. These nod-
ules, however, did not alter the shape of the curve of F R vs. porosi-
ty, but raised the F R values above the average values noted with
clean carbonates (Fig. 3d).
The findings from logs of limestone, dolomitic limestone, and
dolomite formations were confirmed by core measurements.
Core Measurements. Formation resistivity was laboratory-
. measured in 64 core plug samples 1 or 1 V2 in. [2.54 or 3.81 cm]
in diameter covering limestone, dolomitic limestone, and dolomite
formations. The plugs were chosen from cores from six different
fields (Table 1). The samples were leached in hot solvents and dried
4Q'i
 TABLE 1-FIELDS AND FORMATIONS STUDIED
TO ESTABLISH THE NEW CORRELATION
FOR THE CEMENTATION FACTOR

Formation
Field Khuff Araej Arab Thamama Mishrif
Belbazem L,G,E,' L,G,E L,G,E L
Bu Haseer L
Bu Jafir E E
Geem L L
Ghasha G
Hair Dalmah G G L,G L L
Havan L
Nasr L G L,G
Umm AI Dholou L L L L
Umm Lulu L,E
Umm Salsal L L L L
Umm Shalf L L,G L,G,E L L
Yaser L L L L
Zakum L,G L L,G,E L
Fig. 1-0ffshore Abu Dhabi. • L =log data. C = core measurements, and E = EPT,

mation resistivity factor was calculated at different overburden

1lI11. \[1111 I 'OI.UIOtI IITMOIOn pressures as the ratio between the electrical resistivities of the brine·
QUATlftHAI''''
saturated samples and the saturant brine (F R =;Ro/R w)'
, The formation resistivity factor measured at the equivalent for·
~ mation overburden pressure for each of the 64 core samples was
....
'Llot...

....... IA(HUU/rII ~~T;·-h'

plotted vs. the formation porosity at the same pressure (Fig. 4).
This plot confirmed the trend of F R obtained from log data-at low
~

•• P...·OCDC "'''AIIII porosities, the slope m decreases with decreasing porosity.

;:
•... IOCIHC 0' .......
New Correlation for Cementation Factor
"VI ' • ..4-+.'
The observed response of both log and core measurements in car·
...... 111
,",IOC'" .. AOM ........
bonate formations offshore Abu Dhabi led to the new relationship

• t..... "
m=;2.2-0.035/(¢+O.042). . (5)
U,."." 'to",

. HAllJl

Fig. 5 represents the Shell, Archie (m=;2), and new formulas

..""
0
§ IIttIHIII'
derived from the actual data. We can readily see the poor fit at low
~ IlllOOlr
:~ porosities between the cementation factor, m, derived from the ac-
'•"
. u_
Oi""
" '-----
. . . . . . . lift tual data and from the Shell formula commonly used in low-porosity
" uu.... carbonates. While in the Shell formula m increases as the porosity
LOW'" i~" decreases, the actual data show an opposite behavior-Le., a
! ....... ,,
c
decrease of m toward the low porbsities .
This trend was further confirmed by the Electromagnetic Propa-
V... ,'"
AIt" gation Tool (EPT™).
"~ Ill''''
•• 1Ii.OOlf
..... EPT/R xo Approach
~ ~'.f· ~

Wllltlli lOU-lUi
lO_1Il The EPT can measure water saturation in the flushed zone, Sxo'
!l
V""UI IUL""'''" independent of the cementation factor. The resistivity of the flushed

·.::
iii

Z
IIHOOlI I
p.g!~" -
LOwU
SUOA,iJI

.HUf'
zone, 'R xo ' can be determined from the Microspherical Focused
Log (MicroSFeM ) measurements corrected for mudcake effect.
When Sxo obtained from the EPT is used in combination with Rxo
i V""." in Archie's relationship, it is possible to calculate m continuously.
•
·'"
lIi;!t- '"I,"HU" ~
When this approach was applied to different formations in five
separate fields (Table I), it confirmed the previously noted trend
of decreasing cementation factor with decreasing porosity. Fig. 6
Fig. 2-Stratlgraphic sequence offshore Abu 'Dhabi. compares the cementation factor trend obtained by the EPTIRxo
approach with that from the new m correlation curve.

in a humidity·controlled oven. Porosity was calculated by helium
injection followed by evacuation and pressure saturation with a simu-
lated formation brine. The electrical resistivities of the brine-
saturated samples and the saturant brine were measured on con-
secutive days until the results stabilized. The samples were then
mounted in a hydraulic core holder, and their electrical resistivi-
ties were measured at different effective overburden pressures.
Reduction in PV with increasing overburden pressure was moni-
tored by measuring the brine displaced from the samples. The for-
496
Practical Applications
The significance of the new formula is for low-porosity matrices
where small changes in m have a large effect on the value of water
saturation. The new formula yields water saturation values in the
low-porosity range much lower than those of the Shell fonnula (Fig.
7). In our case, the use of the Shell formula or any other correla-
tion that tends to show high water saturation might lead to over·
looking potential hydrocarbon-bearing zones.
The following examples compare the test results obtained from
different low·porosity formations in different wells with two suc-
SPE Forl11ation Fvaillat ion. [)cccl11hrr !lJR7
 '00''',---------------·-----,
LIMESTONE DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE

\ . .:,
'....

a POROSITY, %
c POROSITY , ".

DOLOMITE ANHYDRITE - CARBONATE

.
':"
:
;,.:.~: ';.
.:":'
.. !,

b
POROSITY, %
d
.
POROSITY, ".

Fig. 3-Examples of log measurements in different lithologies compared with the new m cor-
relation curve. .

1‫סס‬OO'---------------------,

SHELL
,000 2,'

'"t-
D

§'" U
<l
IL
1l!
Z
zD I.-
Ei::E
100
'. D
;::
<l
:::" '.
t-
Z
~ "
w
::E
w , NEW CORRE LA TION
u
10 I.' ,.; .

,
I'------------~-----------'"
10 100
I
0 12 Ie 24
POROSITY. % POROSITY, %

Fig. 4-Core measurements fitted with the new m correlation Fig. 5-Common correlations for m compared with the new
curve. correlation.

cessive log interpretations, The first uses the Shell formula and the
second the new formula. In both examples, log interpretation across
the tested intervals that used the Shell formula showed high water
saturations, while reprocessing of the logs with the new formula
for m significantly reduced the water saturation, Production tests
on the two wells produced virtually dry hydrocar.bons.
Umm Salsall Lower Araej Formation. The Umm Salsal struc-
ture lies in the central part of the concession a,rea and is one of
three small neighboring, but separate, closures.
The Lower Araej formation consists of a 367-ft [111.9-m] sec-
tion of mudstone/packstone with rare recrystallized grainstone with
negligible visible porosity. A wackestone/packstone and grainstone
with fair intergranular and vuggy porosity is present in the middle
part of the sequence.
Initial log processing using the Shell formula (left side of Fig.
8) showed the porous interval to be water-bearing, with water satu-
ration values ranging from 50 to 100%. On the basis of a peak of
.10% methane on the mud logging system and hydrocarbon indica-
tions from the cores, however, we decided to test this interval.
A production test across the marked interval produced 419 B/D
[66.6 m 3 /d] condensate and 7.741 MMscf/D [220 X 10 3 std m 3 /d]
gas with 0% basic sediment and water (BS&W). This result is in
agreement with the results of log reprocessing with the new m for-
mula (right side of Fig. 8), which show the water saturations in
the range of 40 to 60 %.

SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987 497

 100.-----------------------,

2,0

~ 00
z
•
CI)

IL- ~ _'_ ~ _ _ J ' _ __ _ ~

o 12 II 24 00 100
POROSITY, % s. (SHELL ), %

Fig. 6-Trend of cementation factor obtained with the Fig. 7-Effect of the Shel! formula and the new correlation
EPTIR xo approach. on the calculated water saturation.

Ghasha 8 Arab D Formation. The Ghasha is a large, irregular, veloped to cover the full range of porosities encountered offshore
double-domed structure in the southwestern part of the concession Abu Dhabi. .
area. The Arab D formation in Gasha 8 is 424 ft [192 m] thick Use of this new m relationship has significantly reduced com-
and consists of dolomite and limestone with poor to fair vuggy and puted water saturations in low-porosity carbonates and eliminated
intergranular porosity. the discrepancies between log and test results.
Processing with the Shell formula (left side of Fig. 9) showed
water-saturation values ranging from 60 to 100% across the porous
interval. However, on the basis of a correlation with a nearby well, Nomenclature
we decided to tc:;st this interval. a = empirical constant
A production test across the marked interval produced 16.28 FR = formation resistivity factor
MMscflD [461 X 10 3 std m 3 /d] gas and 1,925 BID [306 m 3 /d] oil m = cementation factor
(47.4°API [0.79 g/cm 3 ]) with 2% BS&W.
R( = true formation resistivity, {). m
Again, the test results agreed well with the log results obtained
from the new cementation factor formula (right side of Fig. 9), Rw = resistivity of electrolyte solution (formation water),
{)'m
which show water saturations in the range of 50 to 70%.
R xo = resistivity of flushed zone, {). m
Conclusions R o = resistivity of rock 100% saturated with electrolyte,
{)'m
A study of carbonate formations offshore Abu Dhabi has revealed
that the commonly used correlations for the cementation factor, m, Sw = water saturation, %
fail to represent the formation fluid saturations in the low-porosity Sxo = saturation of flushed zone, %
range. A new correlation for the cementation factor has been de- ¢ = porosity, fraction

Hrdroc.orbon
HYdrocorbon.orOIlIJondFIuldi H),drocorPon~O"I)'ondFIUld'
Anol,.11
'00',.,. .00':':" b, ,.,m. Al'IOly.r. Anolym by volume

·:·t
Wet_ Solurotloa lI.tld'llol lIloodl 1I:,lul...1 11I0'1'_
Waler Sotulollon Wolfr Waitt Soturollon Wol.r
00 100 'I. 0 50 -t. a 100 ~. 100' 0

USING m OF USING m OF
"HFI FORMULA SHELL FORMULA -

Fig. 8-Umm Salsal 1 log processing for water saturation

using the Shell and new formulas. Fig. 9-Gasha 8 log processing for water saturation using the
Shell and new formulas.

498 SPE Formation Evaluation. December 1987

'Acknowledgments
I thank the management of Abu Dhabi Marine Operating Co. for
permission to publish this paper. I also thank M.A. Muhsin and
A.N. Kellesly of ADMA-OPCO and G. Mathieu of Schlumberger
for their assistance'. , .
2. Winsauer, W.O. et al.: "Resistivity of Brine Saturated Sands in Relation
to Pore Geometry," AAPG Bulletin (Feb. 1952) 36.
3. "Log Interpretation Charts," Schlumberger, Houston (1984) 15.
4. "Log Interpretation Charts," Dresser Atlas, Houston (1983) 43.
SPEFE

References Orlglrial SPE manuscript received for review Sept. 22, 1985. Paper accepted for publication
Dec. 11, 1986. Revised manuscript received Feb. 13, 1987. Paper (SPE 14401) first present·
1. Archie, G.E.: "The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determin- ed at the 1985 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held In Las Vegas, Sept.
ing Some Reservoir Characteristics," Trans., AIME (1942) 146, 54-60. 22-25.

SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1987 4C)Q