SPWLA 43 rd Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002
A Saturation Model for Complex Carbonates in Mexico
Oscar Dario Xochipa Lopez, PEMEX
Eduardo Viro, Schlumberger Oilfield Services
Abstract
A new petrophysical interpretation
methodology was developed during a study of
the Taratunich field in the Gulf of Mexico. In
the Taratunich field, production comes from
complex carbonates that have a heterogeneous
combination of intergranular or matrix
porosity, fractures, connected rugs,
unconnected vugs, and shale water. Under
these conditions the new methodology is both
predictive and practical, and it can be used to
predict saturation in a variety of carbonate
reservoirs, especially when they have only a
reduced log suite with no modern logs
available.
Introduction
A comprehensive study of the Taratunich field
in the Gulf of Mexico was conducted to
characterize the producing reservoirs using
three-dimensional (3D) seismic, well logs,
core and cuttings analyses, and production
data. To develop the best possible reservoir
model, considerable integration between
disciplines was attained to maximize the
economic yield of the field. Specifically, the
reservoir model provided a consistent, field-
wide stratigraphic correlation of key horizons
and faults that were interpreted using
integration of geologic, petrophysical,
engineering and geophysical data.
An important element of the model was a
new petrophysical interpretation methodology
that allowed the Archie parameters, m and n,
(Archie, 1942) to be varied to account for the
vertical changes in pore type and wettability.
The cementation exponent, m, was lowered to
account for the presence of natural fractures in
tight intervals and increased to account for the
effect of vugular or oomoldic porosity. The
resistivity index was used to model the
increased oil wettability in the deeper and
more porous reservoirs. A mathematical
algorithm was derived to calculate variable m
based on standard inputs.
Field location and geology
The Taratunich field is located about 50 mi (80
kill) northwest of Cuidad del Carmen in the
Bay of Campeche, Mexico (Fig. 1). Production
comes from a thick Jurassic (Kimmeridgian)
dolomite unit and a thinner (less than 328 fi
[100 m]) sedimentary breccia of Late
Cretaceous to Paleocene age. Production from
the two reservoir zones is not commingled in
any well. Fig. 2 is a base map of the field
showing the deviated well paths and well
locations.
The structural configuration of the
Taratunich field is a NNW-SSE-trending
faulted antiform with a salt piercement
structure at the center of the field. Reverse
faults trending NNW-SSE bound the field to
the north and south, and two subparallel
opposing normal faults bound the area of the
salt dome. The main structural event that
formed the Taratunich antiform was the
Chiapaneca orogeny, which occurred from the
late Oligocene to the early Miocene. The
present configuration of the field is consistent
with left-lateral shear of the Chiapaneca
orogeny. Salt movement and the formation of
a salt piercement dome at the center of the
antiform added to the structural configuration
and complexity of the Taratunich field.
The field is divided into three main blocks
(101, 201 and 301) (Fig. 2) by the two parallel
NNW-SSE-trending reverse faults and the two
subparallel normal faults that trend nearly N-S.
A fourth block, as yet undrilled in the
reservoirs, lies over the salt dome and has been
named Block 401. The Taratunich field
includes two main reservoir intervals and one
potential reservoir. Fig. 3 shows the geological
column. The main intervals are the Jurassic
Kimmeridgian (JsK) and the Upper Cretaceous
Paleocene Breccia (BPT-Ks).
The JsK interval is the main reservoir in
the field. It consists primarily of mostly vuggy
dolomite in the western block (301) and
limestone and shale in the eastern blocks (101
and 201). The BPT-Ks is composed of mainly
lime breccia, grainstone and mudstone
lithologies. A central block, designated Block
401, may have some potential in the BPT-Ks
and Cretaceous intervals. The JsK is
YY
SPWLA 43 r'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002
interpreted to be absent in this block because
of salt displacement. Fig. 4, a SW-NE cross
section, illustrates the structural complexity of
the field.
Lithology and porosity determination
Lithology was determined using density-
neutron logs along with the photoelectric
factor, if available. Total porosity, OT, and
matrix density, Pm~, were determined from
density and neutron logs. Fig. 5 shows an
example of a conventional density-neutron
crossplot used to describe lithology. The bulk
density, Pb, and neutron porosity, ¢)NL, define
the total porosity, matrix density and lithology.
The sonic matrix value was obtained from the
computed value of matrix density. Then, the
sonic logs allowed the determination of sonic
porosity, 0s. Shale volume was computed from
gamma ray spectroscopy logs, and effective
porosity was computed as ¢~e = Or (1 - Vsh),
where Vsh is the shale volume. When the shale-
corrected sonic porosity and shale-corrected
total porosity from density-neutron coincide,
no secondary porosity is assumed, and the
cementation exponent m - 2. On the other
hand, when the shale-corrected sonic porosity
is less than the shale-corrected total porosity
from density-neutron, secondary porosity is
assumed. In this case, the exponent m is no
longer 2; m > 2 if vugular or oomoldic
porosity predominates, and m < 2 if fracture
porosity predominates.
Microresistivity images were used to
determine secondary porosity. The images
provide a map of wellbore conductivity with
the maximum horizontal coverage varying
with hole diameter. This coverage reaches
80% for 8 1/2-in. wells and 100% for 5 5/8-in.
wells. The log has a 0.016-fi [0.5-cm] vertical
resolution, which is particularly useful in
heterogeneous formations (PEMEX, 2000).
The resistivity map (Fig. 6) was converted
into a porosity map through application of
Archie's law, assuming that, within the
volume of rock logged, the formation fluids
had been displaced by mud filtrate. Therefore
the flushed zone water saturation is Sxo - 1.
This allowed us to derive, for each
measurement depth, a porosity distribution
which, plotted as a frequency histogram,
displays typical forms as a function of porosity
type and degree of formation heterogeneity.
Fig. 7 shows two main types of porosity. The
first lobe to the let~ represents mainly primary
porosity, with a mean value that corresponds
to the central value. The lobe to the right
shows a lower occurrence frequency of
vugular porosity. Integration of the frequency
curve yields total porosity. Discrimination of
the different porosity types contributes to the
total porosity obtained through separation of
the different lobes.
Use o f wettability in petrophysicai evaluation
To determine water saturation from wireline
logs in the Taratunich field, it was necessary to
apply different degrees of wettability in the
algorithms used, based on tests conducted on
cores for each reservoir within the field.
Formation evaluation on Cretaceous and
Upper Jurassic Tithonian formations did not
present problems regarding rock wettability.
However, the Upper JsK rocks showed
different degrees of wettability in core tests
conducted on samples taken from Taratunich
A and B wells, which indicated that the rock
was preferably oil wet. Therefore, several
studies were conducted to determine the effect
of wettability on the computation of water
saturation. Pickett plots yielded extremely low
initial water saturations in water-invaded
zones. Similar results were obtained by
applying the Archie equation with constant
parameters. Therefore, it was necessary to
establish a variable n in the Archie equation to
account for the different degrees of wettability,
and to reflect results according to the response
of wireline logs and match the existing
pressure-production tests. These studies
indicated that for water-wet rocks, either from
the aquifer or the reservoir, a value of 2 for n
was adequate, and for oil-wet rocks, good
results were obtained with n > 2.
Determining wettability in Taratunich A Well
Four core samples taken in their native state,
from interval X940.07 to X942.28 m on
Taratunich A Well, were selected. Wettability
was determined by the Amott method, which
involves four steps:
1. brine immersion (static)
2. brine displacement (dynamic)
3. oil immersion (static)
4. oil displacement (dynamic).
 SPWLA 43 r'~ Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002

Table 1 shows the results obtained, where For low porosity and high Rt, this
expression tends to zero/zero. Because the
8w- water displacement ratio porosity is too low, the computed value of
80- oil displacement ratio water saturation is always very high regardless
UN- undetermined because of low of porosity type. This explains why computed
permeability to liquid. logs may show high water saturation in
producing zones with 1- to 2-p.u. porosity.
Since the goal in the Taratunich field was
Log interpretation to develop an accurate reservoir model, a new
methodology was needed to determine
In the field study, traditional methods of
predictive values for water saturation. The
interpreting density-neutron, photoelectric
various techniques found in the literature for
effect and natural spectrometry log data were
computing a variable exponent, m, in the
verified by data from petrographic studies.
Archie water saturation were inadequate. The
These conventional analyses worked well for
new variable m technique is called pivot-m,
determining porosity and lithology, but the
and it uses conventional porosity logs to
conventional methods did a poor job of
achieve excellent correlation between new
computing water saturation with m - 2. The
saturation values obtained from the model and
models did not account for the effects of
results obtained from petrographic studies in
porosity heterogeneities on the log responses,
zones with vugular porosity (high m values)
and they generated incorrect Sw values in
and in zones with intergranular porosity
carbonates with complex pore structure.
(medium m values). Since very few cores were
Specifically, the computed water saturations
from fractured zones, no comparisons were
were often too high above the hydrocarbon-
made wherever fracture porosity predominated
water contact or too low below the
(low m values). Consequently, the pivot-m
hydrocarbon-water contact. For example, a 10-
values correlate well with Lesley-m values,
p.u. clean carbonate, with water resistivity Rw
which were obtained from a linear regression
= 0.05 ohm-m and true formation resistivity Rt
of core-derived m values versus porosity.
= 50 ohm-m, would have the following values
A new relationship for the saturation
of S~, depending on the value of m used
exponent, n, in the Archie formula was
(defining the resistivity formation factor as F -
developed to represent rock wettability
1/02) • 100% if m - 3, 32% if m - 2,16% if m
changes. The n computation results were
= 1.4.
supported by laboratory analysis and capillary
Fig. 8 shows a typical log from the
pressure tests, as described later in this paper.
Taratunich field. The figure displays the
Applying both the new variable-m and
producing intervals, which show low water
variable-n techniques to more than 25 wells
saturation. In low-porosity zones (1 to 2 p.u.),
produced a good match to the existing core
where primary porosity is predominant, water
data, the known fluid contacts and the
saturation is irreducible at 100%, and nothing
production history of the field.
will flow. If opened fractures are predominant,
permeability will be higher and the zone will
produce. However, Archie's equation cannot
Pivot-m calculation
be used to predict water saturation in the
fractures because the volume of fluid is not The variable-m methodology is used to
high enough to characterize it from porosity calculate m in tight carbonates using
and resistivity. Consequently, water saturation conventional resistivity and porosity
is also very high since most interpretation measurements.
programs handle the zero/zero indetermination
as S w - 1. The indetermination comes from the
Step l" Determine lithology and porosity
following equation:
Lithology and porosity can be determined
S w 2 - R o / R t - F × R w / R t - (Rw/ Rt) / ( 1 / F ) - from crossplots or from an interpretation
(Rw / Rt) ./ Om .................................................. (1) program, either by neglecting hydrocarbon
effects on density-neutron logs for total
where Ro - wet formation resistivity. porosity computation (acceptable for medium-
to-heavy hydrocarbon types), or by evaluating

YY
SPWLA 43 ~'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002
total porosity with an equation of the type
"two ninths plus seven ninths," as in Or =
[(2/9) × 0x] + [(7/9) X ~ ] , where q~Xis neutron
porosity and ~ is density porosity.
Step 2: The variable-m curve computation
This computation can be made as follows:
A. Computing maximum and minimum
limiting values for m
B. Computing the pivot-m model
C. Constraining m curves between the
mmax and mmin
A. Computing maximum (max) and minimum
(min) limiting values for m (Vel~,squez and
Viro, 1989)
The following Dual-Water model equations
apply for mmax ( S w - 100% implies m - mmax)"
mm~tr- [log (a*Rweq / Rt)] + log OT, with
R weq- 1 / C weq, and Cweq- [(Cw x ~}~)] +
[(Cwb × ~ b ) ] / Or, .......................... (2)
where:
a = Coefficient, taken as 1 in the DWM,
Rweq= Equivalent water resistivity,
Rt - true formation resistivity,
Cweq-- Equivalent water conductivity,
Cw - formation water conductivity, at
formation temperature
q~e - effective porosity, as determined in
Step 1,
Cwb - bound water conductivity, at
formation temperature
0wb - bound water porosity (volume), as
determined in Step 1
q~r - total porosity, as determined in Step
1.
The tbllowing equations apply for mmin ( S w -
Swi implies m - mmin).
mr~n- [log (a*Rweq / Rt × Swin)] + log q~r,
with Swi- (1 p.u. + 0wb) / # ............ (3)
where S w i - irreducible water saturation and
SwTi- irreducible total water saturation,
n - Saturation exponent, normally taken - 2 .
Note that 1 p.u. (some analysts prefer 2
p.u.) corresponds to the average in'educible
water porosity (volume) assumed for
carbonates; in clastic formations, this value
ranges from8 to 10 p.u., which represents the
volume of water in the formation that will not
move.
B. Computing the pivot-m model
The proposed pivot-m method uses sonic
porosity and density-neutron or total porosity
to detect secondary porosity. The secondary
porosity index (SPI) is defined as ~ - ~.
This model applies G6mez Rivero's
recommendation (G6mez-Rivero, 1981) and
assumes that whenever the total porosity is
below 7 p.u., secondary porosity comes from
fractures; when the total porosity is above 7
p.u., secondary porosity comes from vugs. The
value of the exponent can be computed with
the following equation:
m;i,,o,- 2.0 + 0.125 × [1 - ( ~ / ~c)] ×
( 0 r e - 7) ............................................... (4)
where Osc- shale corrected sonic porosity and
q~rc- shale Corrected total porosity.
Here, the coefficient 0.125 was chosen to
produce the proper slope with q~sc/ @c equal to
5/25 - 0.2 (the highest secondary porosity
found in this field study). This slope allows
computation of a predictive value of m, which
was known from core analysis. This equation
can be varied to match local field or reservoir
data.
C. Constraining m curves between the mmax
and mm_i___v_(Velfisquez
~ and Viro, 1989)
The resulting values for variable m have to be
limited between mmax and mn~, to ensure that
computed values for water saturation are never
greater than 1 or smaller than the value of Swi.
To ensure that a Dual-Water model works
with m - 2 at 100% shale, it is advisable to
limit the resulting values as follows:
Limit m between mhigh -- 6 - 4 x Vsh, and maow
- - 2 + 4 x Vsh.

Note that m is "funneled" toward the value
m = 2 when Vsh increases from 0 to 1.
Similar control must also be applied when
the effective porosity has very low values
except when Vsh increases (which is covered
by the above funnel); the typical case is in a
clean, tight carbonate. In this case, it is
recommended that m should also tend to a
value of 2.
Step 3: Determine water saturation using the
variable m curve from Step C
The Dual-Water model equations that apply
are the following:
Total water saturation: Swr = (Roeq / R3 n, with
Roeq = F x Rweq and F = 1 / ~m.
The meaning of Rweq is explained in Step 2A,
above.
Total bound water saturation: Swb = Owb / Or.
"Effective" water saturation: Sw = (Swr- Swb) /
(1 - Swb).
Model f o r the saturation exponent n
The model for the saturation exponent n comes
from data gathered in thin beds, which suggest
the rock is oil wet. In addition, the literatm'e
confirms that the JsK formation is oil wet. The
model properly matches well test data and core
data. For water-wet rocks, the model implies
that n - 2 either in the aquifer or the reservoir.
For oil-wet rocks, n > 2. The water saturation
must be Sw < 100% to have an effect when
changing the value ofn.
The algorithm to compute the saturation
exponent is
n=4-2 xlR 1/6
where IR is the resistivity index. This equation
yields n - 2 for each value of n if IR = 1 (Sw -
1).
In the Taratunich field study, we included a
Lithostatic factor, Lf, which increases the
value of n toward the base of the JsK
formation. This factor accounts for the
increase in wettability with increasing depth.
The algorithm is
nLf = 2 + (n - 2) × L f
where
SPWLA 43 r'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002
2- D 2)/(D 2-
Lf - 1 - (1-10[2*(DTvD Top Bot
DTop211)/33
L f - 1 above TVD--Drop
where DvvD - true vertical depth, DTop -- JsK
top vertical depth, and DBot - JsK bottom
vertical depth.
Results supported by laboratory experiments
The m and n computation results were
supported by laboratory analysis and capillary
pressure tests.
Lesley correlation
Lesley Evans (PEMEX, 2000) derived the
linear regression of core-derived m values
versus porosity using total porosity instead of
secondary porosity. This correlation is
expressed as m - 0.0811 × 07" (p.u.) + 1.4328.
With this correlation, the value of the
cementation exponent m results are higher than
2 when total porosity is greater than 7 p.u. The
correlation yields m < 2 when Or is < 7 p.u.,
which fits very well with G6mez-Rivero's
(1981) observations. These results (m > 2 for
Or > 7) are obtained even when all porosity is
primary porosity, as the algorithm does not
discriminate between primary and secondary
porosity types. Fig. 9 shows a comparison
between the pivot-m model and the Lesley
correlation for variable m. The figure shows
very good agreement when there is secondary
porosity. Unfortunately, because of the
scarcity of cores from fractured zones, no
comparisons could be made where fracture
porosity predominated (low m values). The
lack of comparisons explains why the pivot-m
values match only high values of Lesley-m.
Figs. 10 and 11 show logs from the
Taratunich field over an interval with
secondary porosity. Core data are plotted over
the log. Again, the figures show excellent
agreement between values of pivot-m and
Lesley-m over zones with high values of
secondary porosity.
Capillary pressure tests
The minimum m is computed if the water
saturation is equal to the irreducible water
saturation (Sw = Sw/). The value of m cannot be
less than this number because of the limit on
irreducible water saturation. Irreducible water
saturation was determined using capillary
pressure data. These data were obtained using
YY
SPWLA 43 r~ Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002
mercury injection. Fig. 12 shows some test
results. The plot shows irreducible water
saturations varying from 19% to 100% at a
capillary pressure of 100 psi and from 5% to
20% at a capillary pressure of 10,000 psi, for
samples tested to high pressures. Trends
continue to about 400 psi. The tests also show
some samples apparently failing at low
pressures, indicating natural fractures (not
matrix) or sample failure. However, no trend
was found in Swi versus permeability data. The
tests also showed that as the height above the
free water level decreases, water saturation
increases with capillary pressure. Even high-
permeability rocks have higher water
saturations at low heights. Well logs were
calibrated to minimum water saturations in the
Kimmeridgian, Tithonian and Cretaceous
formations to average minimum saturations of
approximately 15 %.
Conclusions
The cementation exponent m curve computed
with the method presented in this paper allows
the computation of correct values for Sw from
conventional porosity and resistivity logs
when modern log data are not available. The
increased value of the saturation exponent n in
oil-wet rocks matches laboratory data. These
new methods of computing water saturation
and determining wettability proved highly
useful in deriving more accurate reservoir
interpretation studies of the Taratunich field.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to PEMEX and Schlumberger
Oilfield Services for permission to publish this
paper. Special thanks go to Lesley Evans,
geologist for Schlumberger, who derived the
linear regression of core-derived m values
versus porosity used in this study, and to our
colleagues Rafil Ledn Ventura, Robert Brown,
Eduardo Campos Iglesias for their suggestions
and many contributions.
References
Archie, G.E.: The electrical resistivity log as
an aid in determining some reservoir
characteristics. Trans. AIME 146, 54-62, 1942
Gdmez-Rivero, O • "Discussion of the
Porosity Exponent and Matrix Porosity
Resistivity Factor Relationship," paper
presented at the 1981 Society of Professional
Well Log Analysts, June 1981.
PEMEX: Estudio Integral del Campo
Taratunich, PEMEX Exploracidn y
Producci6n, Schlumberger report, Denver, CO,
USA (Dec. 2000).
Velfisquez, H.M. and Viro, E." "Estudio del
exponente m e n la prediccidn del contenido de
Fluidos,", paper presented at the 1989 AIPM
Asociacidn de Ingenieros Petroleros de
M6xico, Mexico, Nov. 16-1989.
Evans, Estudio Integral del Campo
Taratunich, PEMEX Exploracidn y
Producci6n, Schlumberger report, Denver, CO,
USA (Dec. 2000).
About the authors
Oscar Xochipa has a degree in petroleum
engineering. He has worked for PEMEX
Exploration and Production (PEP) since 1989.
Currently assigned to the Abkatun asset, he
works in reservoir characterization as a
specialist in hydrocarbon reserves, as a
petrophysicist and in integrated studies. He is a
member of CIPM and AIPM.
Eduardo Viro, an electronic engineer, earned
a degree from Buenos Aires National
University. He has worked for Schlumberger
since 1970, occupying positions as field
engineer, log analyst, interpretation
development petrophysicist, computing center
manager, and data and consulting services
project manager in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil,
Chile, Mexico, the United States, and
Venezuela. Eduardo is a member of SPWLA.
 SPWLA 43 ~dAnnual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002

Table 1. Wettability determined by the Amott method.

Sample # Depth Status Porosity Sw~ ko @ Sw~ kw @ Nor ~water ~oil Amott-Harvey Wettability
(m) (%) (%) (mD) (mS) (~) (ao) Index
Permeabil
ity

1 X940.07 Native 13.88 73.54 34.9 34.43 0.1429 0.2727 -0.1298 Oil

2 X941.67 Native 8.80 UN UN kIN 1.0 1 0 Intermediate

3 X941.96 Native 20.70 46.52 449 88.83 0.0099 0.4286 -0.4187 Oil

4 X942.26 Native 17.44 52.52 75.59 27.09 0 0.125 -0.125 Oil

J / / "t
/ 1
/
l.~\l ~... .i

f "-~ f -"- Taratunich Field

,f. "-x J I" "/ :f "" Ciudad del Carmen

" ,;i ,f :

.,...

Fig. 1. Field location in the Bay of Campeche.

YY
SPWLA 43 r'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002

Block 301

Block 101

Block 201

Fig. 2. Base map of the field showing the deviated well paths and well locations.
 SPWLA 43 r'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002

Geological column, Taratunich field

Medium- to coarse-grained great sand bodies with,

Pliocene thin-bed intercalations of shale

Shale slightly calcareous with intercalations of fine-grained

Miocene sandstones, cemented in argillaceous calcareous material

o
Jm

O Shale calcareous, bentonitic in parts, with intercalations

N Oiigocene of fine-grained sandstones
O

O
Shale calcareous with intercalations of fine-grained
Eocene sandstones and compact mudstone

Shale slightly calcareous, bentonitic in parts with

intercalations of mudstone to wackestone
Paleocene

Dolomitized breccia formed by wackestone-packstone

clasts of intraclasts and dolomitized bioclasts
Upper
Cretaceous Microcrystalline dolomite with thin. laminations of
calcareous shale and bentonitic shale

Microc~stalline dolomite and partially dolomitized

Middle mudstone with thin laminations of bituminous shale and
Cretaceous bentonite; sporadic flint fragments

Lower Dolomitic compact mudstone, dolomite and bentonitic

o calcite
Cretaceous
0
Upper Argillaceous and bituminous mudstone, occasionally
Jurassic dolomitized with intercalations of bituminous shale,
Tithonian microcrystailine dolomite and sandy siitstone

Upper Microcrystalline dolomite to argillaceous mesoc~stalline,

Jurassic sandy in parts with intercalations of sandy siltstone and
Kimmeridgian bituminous shale

Bentonitic shale slightly calcareous, sandy in parts;

Upper appears with intercalations of mudstone wackestones,
Jurassic occasionally bentonitic; sittstones grading to
Oxfordian fine-grained sandstone

Fig. 3. Geological column.

YY
SPWLA 43 r'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002

sw TRT.A TRT.B TRT.C NE

X800 X800

X3000 X3000

X3200 X3200

X3400 X3400

X3600 X3600

X3800 X3800

X4000 X4000

X4200 X4200

X4400 X4400

Fig. 4. A structural cross section depicting the complexity of the field.

Fresh water, liquid-filled holes (pr = 1,0)

1.9
45

2,0
40

2,1
35

0
2.2 30
II

2.3 25
e~
r'-t.
C~!
E
II
20
2.4 Q.

.--:..
0~
t-
15.
cl
,,._..
2.5
-1
z~ 10
x_

2.6 X
5 ._
ffJ

2,7 "D
0 43
-e-

2.8

2.9 -10

-15
3.0 . ', . .. I ........ I I I. I ......
0 i0 20 30 40
¢ONLcom n e u t r o n porosity index (pu) ( a p p a r e n t l i m e s t o n e porosity)
Fig. 5. Density-neutron crossplot for porosity and lithology determination.

lO
 SPWLA 43 r'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002

~;{;~<+++,
;7
.......A

i;
Upper Hemisphere - Wulff Projection
Top D i p = 3 9 6 4 , 1 8 m Top Zone= 3 9 5 0 . 8 7 m
Bottom Dip= 4399.74 m Bottom Zone= 4 4 0 0 . 1 4 m
GeologicalObjects:
GreatCircle Mean Orientation
S~t Name # [Dips (Dip and Azimuth) (Oip an~l Azimulh)
I~ Vugs+bedding.,. gl 69 82 t 217.22 25,24 .,' 358,43
• ;rlter-Crossge., 132 72.891 216 1,S 22.10 ! 355.43
+ Eros,i..~nal ScoLI.._ 27' 59.g9/164.55 31.14t0,133
i ~, ..... i~:;,: BedBo~lnclary. , 220 87.g21199,83 23 581 358.90

....
0
330 ~-~
/ ,'C\
/\ x \
/- ,\ ,, ...

° i?i~::i:
~i:i:]i 3ooQ % ( " , , \ I / "/- / % 60
i ---Z,. "--Z\,
,i
2~oI 7 - ~
......i:i;J7J:J:::: (--- L _ . j % / ;
\ \ ,,./-\ ../
,~?-~<-%w----.i
{...j..)
\/ ,~-
\.I i
z16"-~. .... , > - ' t 150

180

Fig. 6. Resistivity images used to generate a porosity map.

Primary + Secondary- 'Total

i.t
C "
cit

ili
I.l.

-,<

Porosity
Fig. 7. The two main types of porosity determined from the porosity map.

YY

ll
S P W L A 43 r'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002

O BYHLYAR -t00

PHtE

'~" VSLDASP 100

VSLDAS
0 100
VSLDA
10 100
HSFL VSLD
0.2 200 0 100
LLS RHOB VSL
i0:~711 ii'."i" "i~0.1 ~ ........... ~ 2.95 0 1"~
LLD DI VS
0.2 ........ 20o 140 40 0, 100
i
0.2
iLM
200 45
PHtE
t2g PHIMZ .... 4

tLD NPH ~° ~o~A 12°¸1 SMVAR | PHIE I

0.2 200 0.45 ' ' ' -5 51o 10o125 . . . . . . . 01

'I , i i-

t I ~=:

, i:i~:,~:il;ii!!

i i :,
i r iii,i ~

i~i i. L::il JI

Fig. 8. Typical log of the Taratunich field.

5 _

i
'~.increases
...... .............................................................................. | ............................. ; ...........................................................................................

0 5 7 10 15 20 25 3O
Total porosity (%)
Fig. 9. Cementation exponent m from pivot-m method and Lesley correlation.

12
 SPWLA 43 ~'~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002
............................... ..,.:,:.:--,..,: ....... , .... ................................................................................................... :: : : ~::-:: ~,-:,.: ~: ,: :,, ......
Lithology m and n Porosity
1 curves 6 50% 0

Clay . ' I Tota,~orosity

ffective p o r o s i t
I
Dolomite I Sonic Porosity "
!~!t~;~!!~!~:~!~,:i;~ii~,i~::~.;,~:,'.~i~4~!~.:~?~¢i~:~!~i~ Water saturation Core permeability Core porosity
Water 1 0 /1..:.. " •

Fig. 10. Comparison of the pivot-m method with the Lesley correlation.

YY

13
SPWLA 43 "~Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 2002

m and n Porosi~
Lithology 1 cu~es 6 50%

Fig. l 1. Comparison of the pivot-m method with the Lesley correlation.

10000 1785.0

9000
i } i: :i ~ ilr;: : 1606,5
E
8000 1428.0 ,,~
0

& 7000 i .... ....... "1249,5 ~"

0
tO
6000 11071.0
I i=
5000 892.5 ,~:
,1~.
0
4000 714.0 •

,.Q
3000 535.5 ~
0 t-

2000
| ..............
i;:;~::?'~::~ i; ![i~::;I:~~:I::~,::+:i+T::i~~
~ i~ ~ ~:i
:~(:~ ~ 'i:ii~::i; :
:T;:~: :~::::{+;:::~;::i~!;

1000 178,5
%: ~ • : i: [ .... = :: ; ~ i
.................. ....... :............ : . . . . =i .............. " ....... :I +. . . . . . . . . . . . . . - :+', ..........::+;i+ .... ( ..... ] ............ + +.:.... + ......
0 0.0

0,000 O, t00 0.200 0,300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700 0.800 0.900 1.000

Wetting phase saturation, %

Fig. 12. Mercury-injection capillary pressure curves.

14