Clastic Rocks = Siliciclastics

Siliciclastic Rocks
Unconsolidated Consolidated

 Gravel  Conglomerate
 Sand  Sandstone
PGE 517-617 Petrophysics  Silt  Siltstone
Prof. Dr. Salih SANER
 Mud  Shale, mudstone

Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus

Main Factors Affecting

Petrophysical properties
 Grain properties
Grain Properties
 Minearal types Petrophysical
static and flow
 Depositional properties
processes

 Diagenetic
processes

Grain Size Classification mm = 2-F

Grain Properties 4096 mm -12 PHI
Boulder Wentworth, 1922.
256 mm -8 PHI
 Grain size
Nomenclature
Gravel Cobble
64 mm -6 PHI
Pebble
4 mm -2 PHI
 Sorting Granule
2 mm -1 PHI
Very coarse sand
 Grain form 1 mm 0 PHI
Coarse sand
0.5 mm 1 PHI
 Sphericity Sand Medium sand
0.25 mm 2 PHI
Grain morphology Fine sand
 Roundness Very fine sand
0.125 mm 3 PHI
0.062 mm 4 PHI
Coarse silt
 Grain surface features 0.031 mm 5 PHI
Silt Medium silt
0.016 mm 6 PHI
 Packing Fine silt
Udden, 1898. Ratio of 0.008 mm 7 PHI
Very fine silt 2 between successive
classes 0.004 mm) 8 PHI
Clay Clay Krumbein, 1963.
PHI Scale
 Statistical Distribution Parameters
Cumulative and Frequency Curves
Median (Md) = F50
100
95%
84%
F16 + F50 + F84
80 Mean (Mz) =
75% 3
F R E Q U E N C Y (% )

60 F84 - F16 F95 - F5

Sorting (σI) = +
50% 4 6.6
40
F16 + F84 - 2 F50 F5 + F95 - 2 F50
25% CUMULATIVE (%) Skewness (SkI) = +
20
2 (F84 - F16) 2 (F95 - F5)
16% FREQUENCY (%)

5%
0
F95 – F5
Kurtosis (Kg) =
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.44 (F75 – F25)
GRAIN SIZE (PHI)

Sorting Scale F
Skewness and Kurtosis <0.35 1. Very well-sorted
0.35 - 0.50 2. Well-sorted
How closely the distribution 0.50 - 0.71 3. Moderately well-sorted
approaches the normal Gaussian
0.71 - 1.00 4. Moderately sorted
probability curve
1.00 - 2.00 5. Poorly sorted
2.00 - 4.00 6. Very poorly sorted
>4.00 7. Extremely poorly sorted

9
S. Saner 10

Importance of Grain Size Sorting

1. Provenance and origin

2. Energy of the depositional environment
3. Petrophysical properties

11
S. Saner 12
Spherical Grains of Different Size, Cubic Packing
Mixture of
A, B and C

(B) Porosity = 47%

(A) Porosity = 47%

?
Porosity = 10%

(C) Porosity = 47%

Sphericity
Grain Form Measure of the relation
between the three dimensions Grain Form

1. Compact (equidimensional)
2. Elongated (rodlike)
3. Platy (disklike)

S. Saner 15 S. Saner 16

Sphericity Roundness
Avg radius of curvature of all corners
How nearly equal the three
divided by the largest inscribed circle
dimensions are (Waddel)

Riley Sphericity Least Projection Elongation Avg (r)

Poundness =
Ri
Dc

Di r6

Ri
r5
r4
Least projection width r1
Sp = (Di / Dc)1/2 Sp = r2
Least projection length r3
S. Saner 17 S. Saner 18
 Grain Roundness Roundness
1. Very angular
2. Angular
3. Subangular
4. Subrounded
5. Rounded
6. Well rounded

S. Saner 19 S. Saner 20

Spherical Particle Packing

Surface Features Pore = 0.73 d
a. Cubic b. Rhombohedral
Pore = 0.41 d

PT = 0.41 d PT = 0.154 d

f = 47.6 % f = 26%
1. Frosted K = 25 D K = 1.8 D

2. Scratched
3. Polished

22
S. Saner 21

Pore body and throat contributions in

Interparticle Pore Size porosity and permeability
(Ma and Morrow, 1996)
1. Grain size
2. Grain shape
Throats Pore body
3. Packing
4. Sorting Porosity 0.69% 99.31%
5. Compaction (repacking, pressure
dissolution, ductile flow)
Permeability 99.69% 0.31%
6. Cement filling
23 24
Pore Size Scale (Choquette and Pray, 1970)
Porosity Grades
256 mm
Large
MEGAPORE 32 mm 0–5% Negligible porosity
Small 5 – 10% Poor porosity
4 mm
Large
10 – 15% Fair porosity
MESOPORE 0.5 mm 15 – 20% Good porosity
Small >20% Very good porosity
0.062 mm
MICROPORE

Gravel, Sand, Mud Mixtures

Granulometric Nomenclature

27 28

Sand, Silt, Clay Mixtures

Mineralogical Nomenclature

29 30
 Clean Sandstone Nomenclature
Siliciclastic Rock
Classification

31 32

Clay
 Particles smaller than 4 microns
Occurrence of Clay  Hydrated alumino silicate with layered atomic
structure

1. Allogenic origin
2. Authigenic origin

33 34

Allogenic Clay Occurrences

Principal Clay Minerals

 Kaolinite
 Smectite (Montmorillonite)
 Illite
 Chlorite

35 36
Authigenic Clay Occurrences
Kaolinite Chlorite

37 38

Smectite Illite
Harmful Effects of Clay Minerals

 Porosity reduction by pore filling

 Microporosity (ineffective for flow)
 Excess electrical conductivity
 Formation damage

39 40

Bedding Thickness Classification

Massive bedding
100 cm
Sedimentary Structures Thick bedding
30 cm
Medium bedding
10 cm
Thin bedding
3 cm
Very thin bedding
1 cm
Thick laminated
3 mm
Thin laminated
1 mm
41
S. Saner 42
 TABULAR CROSS BEDDING TROUGH CROSS BEDDING

GRADED BEDDING WITHOUT MATRIX GRADED BEDDING WITH MATRIX

FLASER BEDDING WAVY BEDDING LENTICULAR BEDDING

RIPPLE MARKS AND RIPPLE CROSS LAMINATION

Burrowing

LOAD CAST
 Post Depositional Processes
Process
Repacking

COMPACTION
Mechanical Grain deformation

Diagenesis Cracking
Crushing
Pressure solution
Welding
Cementation
Chemical Neomorphism
Recrystallization
Replacement
Dissolution
Disintegration
50

Depth vs Porosity in Secondary Porosity

Several Tertiary
Sandstones at Texas
Gulf Coast

51 52

Quartz Sandstone, No Silica Overgrowth Quartz Sandstone, Silica Overgrowth

53 54
 Core Specimen Heterogeneity
Carbonate Rocks Clean Sandstone Grainstone

Mold

Intra
Vug particle

PGE 517-617 Petrophysics

Prof. Dr. Salih SANER Quartz Various allochems
Massive grains Micro porous grains
Interparticle pore type Heterogeneous pore type
Uniform pore size Heterogeneous pore size
Uniform pore shape Heterogeneous pore shape
Unimodal pore throat size Bimodal pore throat size 2
Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus

Porosity in Grainstone SEM Views of a Clean Sandstone and a

Carbonate Grainstone
Micro (BC) Macro (BG) Clean Sandstone Carbonate Grainstone

0 .5
Incremental Saturation (%)

( S a m p le 3 8 0 ) ( S a m p le 7 - 2 3 )
Incremental Saturation (%)

0.5
0 .4
0.4
0 .3
0.3

0 .2
0.2

0.1
0 .1

0.0 0
0 .0 0 1 0 .0 1 0 .1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 .0 0 1 0 .0 1 0 .1 1 1 0 1 0 0

3 P o re T h r o a t R a d iu s ( m ic
Pore Throat Radius (micron) ro n ) Pore Throat Radius (micron) 4

Common Carbonate Rock

I’ve been there Classifications

1. Compositional
2. Grain size
3. Textural
a. Folk (1959, 1962)
b. Dunham (1967)

5
S. Saner 6

1
 Grain Size Classification
F = -log2(mm)

Compositional Classification mm = 2-F

4096 mm -12 PHI

Boulder Wentworth, 1922.
Limestone Anhydrite Nomenclature
256 mm -8 PHI
Dolomitic Limestone
Gravel Cobble
64 mm -6 PHI
Calcareous Dolomite Pebble
4 mm -2 PHI
Dolomite Granule
2 mm -1 PHI
Anhydritic Limestone Very coarse sand
1 mm 0 PHI
Anhydritic Dolomitic Limestone Coarse sand
0.5 mm 1 PHI
Anhydritic Calcareous Dolomite Sand Medium sand
Anhydritic Dolomite 0.25 mm 2 PHI
Fine sand
Anhydrite 0.125 mm 3 PHI
Very fine sand
0.062 mm 4 PHI
Coarse silt
0.031 mm 5 PHI
Silt Medium silt
0.016 mm 6 PHI
Fine silt
Udden, 1898. Ratio 0.008 mm 7 PHI
Very fine silt of 2 between
successive classes 0.004 mm) 8 PHI
7
Clay Clay Krumbein, 1963.
PHI Scale

Carbonate Granulometric Classifications

Textural Folk Classification
Size mm Particle Crystal
Orthochemical components
Very coarse calcirudite
Calcirudite

64
Coarse calcirudite Extremly coarse crystalline Microcrystalline calcite ooze - Micrite
16
4
Medium calcirudite Sparry calcite cement – Sparite
Fine calcirudite Very coarse crystalline
1
Coarse calcarenite
Calcarenite

0.5
Medium calcarenite Coarse crystalline Allochemical components
0.25
0.125
Fine calcarenite Intraclasts
Very fine calcarenite Medium crystalline
0.062 Oolites
0.031
Coarse calcilutite
Fossils (skeletal particles)
Calcilutite

0.016
Medium calcilutite Fine crystalline
0.008
Fine calcilutite Pellets (peloids)
0.004
Very fine calcilutite Very finely crystalline
Aphano-crystalline
9 10

Textural Folk Classification

Folk Textural Classifications
SPARITE MICRITE
Oosparite
ARENITE

Oomicrite Oolite bearing micrite

Pelsparite Pelmicrite Pelletiferous micrite
Biosparite Biomicrite Fossiliferous micrite
Intrasparite Intramicrite Intraclast bear micrite

*Biohermal ls.,Biolithite ls. = Growing in situ like coral or algal reefs

11
S. Saner 12

2
Textural Dunham Classification
Dunham Textural Classifications

1. Mudstone
2. Wackestone
3. Packstone
4. Grainstone
5. Boundstone
6. Crystalline carbonate
13
S. Saner 14

CaCO3 Dissolution

Carbonate Diagenesis
CaCO3 + H2O + CO2 Ca++ + 2HCO3-

*Reaction direction depends on Ph and Eh

15
S. Saner 16

Petrophysical Pathways of Diagenetic Processes

Post Depositional Processes
Process Sandstone Carbonate
Channel
Fracture

Repacking  (0-100 m)
COMPACTION

 475 D
Log of Permeability (mD)

Mechanical Grain deformation Initial Coarse

Cracking  Grst
Crushing  (50-200 m)
Pressure solution  (600-1000 m) Fining grains
Welding  (600-1000 m) Flow barrier (Gr shape)

Cementation (200-..m) (0-…m)

Neomorphism
Chemical 
Initial
Recrystallization  Chalk
Replacement  Chalk or
Chalky ls
Dissolution  Mudstone 42%
Disintegration  75%
17 Porosity (%) 18

3
 Pore Types
Pore Size Scale (Choquette and Pray, 1970)
256 mm
Large
MEGAPORE 32 mm
Small
4 mm
Large
MESOPORE 0.5 mm
Small
0.062 mm
MICROPORE

Interparticle Porosity Intercrystal Porosity

Channel and Vug Porosity Fracture Porosity

4
Compressional vs Tensional Fractures Intraparticle Porosity

Moldic Porosity

Grainstone Early cementation

29 30

5
Early cementation, No repacking Packstone

31 32

Wackestone Mudstone

33 34

No Cement No Compaction Repacking

35 36

6
Grain Deformation, Ductile Flow Disintegration, Cracking, Crushing

400 µ

37 38

Dolomitic Limestone Porous dolomite

39 40

Tight dolomite Microcrystalline Dolomite

41 42

7
 Porosity Routine Core Analyses
 Geological core description
 Petrographic and mineralogical analyses
 SEM-EDS, XRD, XRF
 Continuous core measurements
 Surface gamma logging
Surface density logging
PGE 517-617 Petrophysics


 Profile permeability measurements

Prof. Dr. Salih SANER  Core imaging
 Basic core measurements
 Porosity
 Permeability
 Grain Density
 CT scanning
Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus
S. Saner 2

Porosity
Special Core Analyses
 Water – Oil Saturation  Ratio of the volume of
 Electrical Measurements interstices of a material to the
 Geomechanical Tests volume of its mass
 Acoustic Tests
 Capillary Pressure Tests
 Centrifuge
Pore Volume
= * 100
 Porous Plate
Bulk Volume
 Mercury

 Relative Permeability tests

 Wettability Tests
 Porosity is the reservoir storage
 Recovery Tests
capacity
S. Saner 3

Reservoir Composition
Porosity Grades
 Rock matrix
(grain, mud,
cement) 0–5% Negligible porosity
 Pore space 5 – 10% Poor porosity
 Water 10 – 15% Fair porosity
 Oil and gas 15 – 20% Good porosity
>20% Very good porosity

Rock matrix Water Oil and/or gas

1
 Absolute (Total) Porosity (Eff+Ineff.)
Types of Pores Total pore volume
=
Bulk volume
 Interconnected pores
Effective Porosity
 Deadend pores (cul-de-sac)
Vol. of interconnected + Vol. of deadend
 Isolated pores =
Bulk volume

Ineffective Porosity
Vol. of isolated pores
=
Bulk volume

Classification
 Primary (original) porosity
 Developed at time of deposition
 Usually more uniform than induced porosity
 Typified by
 Inter-granular sandstones
 Inter-crystalline

 Secondary (induced) porosity

 Developed by geologic process occurring after
deposition
 Typified by
 Fracture development in some low porosity rocks
 Vugs, molds and solution cavities in carbonates

Porosity
Parameters Influencing Porosity

 Grain size distribution

 Grain shape

 Grain sorting

 Clay content

 Compaction (packing)

 Cementation

2
 Effect of Packing and Sorting

Porosity Methods
 Well logging
 Basic (routine) core measurements

Porosity Determination in the Lab

 Petrographic thin section estimation
Volumes Comprised by Rock
 Saturation method
 Mercury injection
 Drawing air out and measuring BV = PV + GV
 Compress air in a chamber and measure (Boyle’s law)
 Disaggregate and measure the volume of grains
 Determine grain volume by dividing weight by grain (Bulk, Pore, Grain Volumes)
density (mono-mineral)
 CT scan
 Helium expansion If two are determined, the third one can be calculated
Grain volume
Pore volume

3
 Volume Principles 1. Bulk Volume Measurements

2r
Vp = Vb – Vg (pore volume, cc) a. From dimensions of geometric plugs
Grain
 = Vp / Vb (porosity, fraction)
b. Volumetric displacement (Water or Hg)
L
Pore rg = Wt / Vg (grain density, g/cc)
c. Archimedes principle (gravimetrically)
Wt = Weight (measured, g) • Coating w/wax
Vg = Grain vol. (measured, cc)
Vb = p r2 L (bulk volume, cc) • Saturating with same brine

S. Saner 19 S. Saner 20

1b. Bulk Volume from

1a. Bulk Volume from Dimensions
Volumetric Displacement
 Submerge core, observe volume change
p d2 L Prevent liquid from entering pore space
Vb  

4 of sample
 Coat with paraffin
 Pre-saturate with liquid Vb

 Use mercury as test liquid

1c. Bulk Volume from Archimedes Method 2. Pore Volume Measurements

Wdry Wsat Wsub
a. Summation of extracted fluids
b. Helium expansion porosity (Boyle’s
Law)
c. Saturation porosity (Archimedes
Method)
Wsat - Wdry Vp
Vp =
rfluid = Vb d. Mono-Mineralic Rock Dry Weight
Vb =
Wsub
rma = Wdry e. Core flooding in a core flooding
rfluid Vm
apparatus
Wsub - Wsat + Wdry Wdry
Vm = rb = f. Mercury injection method
rfluid Vb

4
 2a. Summation of Fluids Porosity

(Vg + Vw + Vo)
Vb

Dean Stark Units 2b. Helium Porosity - Boyle’s Law

(Grain Vol. Determination)
Helium
Small molecules
V2 = Vcell-Vg Vcell
Inert no adsoption

Ideal gas (constant P*V)

P1
Plug
V1

P1 * V1 = P2 * (V1 + V2)
V2 = (P1*V1 – P2*V1) / P2
Vg = Vcell – V2
S. Saner 28

2bb. Helium Porosity - Boyle’s

Law (Grain Vol. Determination)

(P1-P2) V1 = (P-P2) (V1+V2)

P1 V1+P2 V2 = P(V1+V2)

V1 (P1 – P)
V2 =
(P – P2)

V2 = Vc – BV + PV
P1 = Initial pressure of V1
P2 = Atmospheric
V2 - Vc + BV P = Pressure after opening valve
=
BV

5
 2c. Saturation Porosity (Archimedes
2bbb. Helium Porosity - Boyle’s Law
Method)
(Pore Vol. Determination) Wdry Wsat Wsub

Wsat - Wdry Vp
Vp = =
rfluid Vb

Wsub Wdry
Vb = rma =
rfluid Vm

Wsub - Wsat + Wdry Wdry

Vm = rb =
rfluid Vb

2d. Mono-Mineralic Rock Dry Weight 3. Grain Density and Grain

Volume Measurements
Wdry *a. Helium expansion – Boyle’s Law
Vg =
rr *b. Immersion in liquid - Archimedes
*c. Mono-mineralic dry weight
Wdry = Dry weight d. Powdered sample for total and
isolated porosity
Vg = Grain volume
rr = Rock matrix density
*As explained for porosity

3d. Powdered sample for total and CT Scan Porosity Determination Static Scan

isolated porosity
Determine Vb first then grind
the sample

Wdry
Vg =
rr Dynamic Scan
Wdry = Dry weight
Vg = Grain volume
rr = Rock matrix density CTwr - CTar
wr = water-rock
ar = air-rock
=
w = water
CTw - CTa
a = air

6
 Averaging of Porosity Porosity vs Confining Pressure
50

40
Sandstones
1 = 0.35

h1 = 10 ft 30

2 = 0.06
h2 = 2 ft 20

3 = 0.31 Shales
h3 = 5 ft 10

 Mean=0.24 0
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000
 h-wt avg.=0.30 Overburden pressure, psi

Overburden Effect on Porosity and Permeability

S. Saner 39

Porosity Definitions
TOTAL POROSITY

Neutron log porosity

Matrix Density log porosity

Vsh Humidity dried porosity

Clay Clay Micro

Sand Matrix Matrix Macro Pores
Interlayer Pore

Clay
Structur
al OH-
Swir Displaced
Bound Humidity or low temp (<55˚C) dried
Water
Oven (80 - 120˚C) dried

Decomposition of clay (750 - 850˚C)

7
 Permeability Flow Through Porous Media

PGE 517-617 Petrophysics

Prof. Dr. Salih SANER

Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus S. Saner 2

Darcy’s Setup and Mathematical

Permeability, k Expression

Fluid transmissivity of the rock which

determines the production capability of Q
h1-h2

the reservoir.
A
 Flow capacity h1
 Fluid conductivity h2
L
 Capacity of the rock to transmit fluids when Q: Flow rate, m3/sec
a single phase is present
K: Hydraulic conductivity, m/sec
A: Cross sectional area, m2
 Is the property of rock independent of the L: Length, m
properties of the flowing fluid h1, h2: Hydraulic head at inlet
S. Saner 3 and outlet, m S. Saner 4

Alternative Equation Darcy’s Investigation

Restricted to the water flow through sand

pack 100% saturated with water

Later investigators extended it to other fluids

where K=k/µ, where m is viscosity
dP/dL: Pressure gradient over a length, N/m2/m
dP: Pressure difference, N/m2
h: Difference between hydraulic gradients, m
: Fluid density, kg/m3
g: Gravity acceleration, 9.81 m/sec2
S. Saner 5 S. Saner 6

1
 Darcy’s Equation With
Extended Darcy’s Equation With m Appropriate Dimensions

Using K=k/m
m: viscosity
Q: flow rate, m3/sec
k: permeability
k: absolute permeability, m2
A: Cross sectional area, m2
 Core saturated 100% with flowing fluid
P: Flowing pressure drop, N/m2
 Flowing fluid is incompressible µ: viscosity, N sec/m2
 The flow is horizontal, steady state, under laminar regime L: length, m
 The flow is under viscous regime of fluid
 Fluid does not react with the medium
S. Saner 7 S. Saner 8

Darcy Unit Definition in

Honour of Henry Darcy Darcy Conversions

One Darcy is the permeability

where:
Q: flow rate, cm3/sec
 A single phase fluid of 1 cP flows through k: absolute permeability, Darcy
A: Cross sectional area, cm2
 At a rate of 1 cm3/sec
P: Flowing pressure drop, atm
 Under a viscous flow regime µ: viscosity, cP
1 D = 1000 mD or
 Under a pressure gradient of 1 atm/cm L: length, cm
1mD = 0.001 D
 Through a 1 cm2 cross sectional area
S. Saner 9 S. Saner 10

Application of Darcy,s Law to

Darcy Conversions Inclined Flow
Q: flow rate, m3/sec
k: absolute permeability, m2
1 D = 1000 mD or A: Cross sectional area, m2
1mD = 0.001 D P1-P2: Flowing pressure drop, N/m2
µ: viscosity, N sec/m2
L: length, m
: Fluid density’ kg/m3
G: gravity acceleration (9.81 m/sec2)
a:dip angle

S. Saner 11 S. Saner 12

2
 Application of Darcy,s Law to Averaging of Permeabilities for
Radial Flow Parallel Flow

re

rw

k: Absolute permeability, m2
Q: Flow rate, m3/sec
h: Thickness, m
Pe: Pressure at drainage radius, N/m2
Pwf: Flowing pressure, N/m2
µ: Viscosity, N sec/m2
re: Drainage radius, m
rw: Wellbore radius, m S. Saner 13 S. Saner 14

Averaging of Permeabilities for

Fluid Flow Through capillary
Series Flow
Tubes (Poiseuille Eq.)

Darcy Eq. A = pr2

r = radius, m
Permeability k = permeability, m2

S. Saner 15 S. Saner 16

Fluid Flow Through Fracture Darcy’s Law in Field Units

( is flow velocity (Q/A), m/sec,
(1) h is fracture thickness, m)
Conversion to barrels/day
1 m3 = 6.2898 bbl
Q mL Or
(2) P = Darcy Eq., or 1 Day = 86400 sc
Ak 1 m3/sc = 543 438 bbl/day

(3) v: interstitial flow velocity Q in barrels/day

k in Darcy
A in ft2
P in psi
Permeability m in cp
from 1 and 3 L in ft
S. Saner 17 S. Saner 18

3
Schematic of a Gas and Liquid Absolute Permeability
Permeameter Measurement Using Gasses
Measurements of individual For compressible gases the flux (Q/A) is not constant at all sections
variables in Darcy’s Eq. of the flow path. Hence this necessitate the modification of Darcy Eq.
Using water or degassed
crude oil (nonreactive
liquids), or gas

Measurement of all
parameters at reservoir
conditions is preferred Q2 = flow rate at outlet, m3/sec
k = absolute permeability, m2
P1 = inlet pressure, N/m2
P2 = outlet pressure, N/m2
m = gas viscosity, N sec/m2
L = length, m
S. Saner 19 S. Saner 20

Klinkenberg (Equivalent Liquid)

Permeability Klinkenberg Correction

Permeability of a core measured with gas is higher

than that of measured using liquid, due to GAS
SLIPPAGE occurs when capillary openings
approach the mean free path of the gas.

Increasing permeability as increasing reciprocal of kgas

mean pressure (1/((P1+P2)/2) Equivalent liquid
permeability, kL

Mean free path of a gas is the function of molecular

size and kinetic energy

S. Saner 21 1/p S. Saner 22

4. Mechanical Factors
Klinkenberg’s Observations
 Overburden or confining pressure

H
CO2

 The higher the porosity and permeability, the

S. Saner 23 higher the percentage of reduction S. Saner 24

4
 Porosity and Permeability
Relationships Permeability vs. Porosity Relations
SANDSTONE
10000

 No general correlation y = 0.0049e

0.4266x

1000
R 2 = 0.9356

 Best fit valid for particular rock types 100

Permeability at 2500 psi (mD)

 Zero porosity zero permeability 10

1
 100% porosity infinite permeability
0.10

0.01
0 10 20 30 40

S. Saner 25 Porosity at 2500 psi (%)

S. Saner 26

Permeability versus Porosity Permeability vs. Porosity Relations

CARBONATE
10000.00 10000

Macroporosity
y = 7E-11x
9.5128 y = 1.7316e-2 * 10^(0.14410x)

1000.00 samples
2
R = 0.7867 1000 R^2 = 0.741

100.00 100
Permeability (mD)

10.00 10

1.00 Microporosity 1

samples
0.10 0.1

0.01 .01
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
S. Saner 27 Porosity (%) S. Saner 28
POROSITY (%)

Permeability vs Porosity
Permeability Transforms 10000.00

1000.00
10000 10000
Permeability (mD)

100.00
Permeability (mD)

1000 1000

100 100 10.00

10 10
1.00
1 1

y = 6E-05x 4.7143 y = 0.0276x 3.7209 0.10

0.1 0.1
R2 = 0.4362 R2 = 0.9055
0.01 0.01 0.01
0 10 20 30 40 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 10 20 30 40

Porosity (%)
Total Porosity (%) Interparticle Porosity (%)
Por: 4.29 – 30.32, avg 22.97%
S. Saner 29 S. Saner 30
Perm: 0.01 – 1067, avg 283 mD

5
Kozeny (1927) Relationship Permeabilities of Reservoir Rocks
Darcy Poiseuille
Solvink k from the Common range 0.1 to 1000 mD
combination of Darcy
and Poiseuille Eq
k > 250 mD Very good
f k < 1 mD Poor
k=
kz Sp2
k : Permeability
f : Porosity
kz : Kozeny constant
Sp : Specific surface area
S. Saner 31 S. Saner 32

Porosity and Permeability Data

of Some Reservoirs

S. Saner 33 S. Saner 34

6
 Rock Mechanics
Mechanical Properties
Study of strength properties of
rocks

PGE 519-617 Petrophysics Petroleum Related Rock Mechanics

Prof. Dr. Salih SANER
Reservoir rocks at subsurface conditions
High pressure
High temperature
Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus Dynamic conditions
S. Saner 2

Major Earth Crust Stresses Stress, s

Stress is the external force (load per unit
Tectonic
area) applied to a rock.
Compressional
F
Tensional s=
Shear A
Overburden
s : stress, Pa or MPa=106 Pa
Total
Net (=Total – Pore Pressure)
F : force, N
A : area, m2
S. Saner 3 S. Saner 4

Stress Conditions Strain

Strain is the relative change in shape or size of a
material due to externally applied forces (stress).
In other words it is the measurement of deformation.
Example: Extensional
strain of a core
L - Lo
Tensile Compressive Shear
e=
Lo

e : strain, fraction (or %)

Lo : initial length
L : length after deformation
S. Saner 5 S. Saner 6

1
 Deformation of a Core on
Application of Stress Stress-Strain Relationship

Caracteristics:
Ductility

Brittleness

Yield point

Compression Extension Tests:

Uniaxial

Stress
Start of plastic
Biaxial
deformation
Triaxial

Elastic limit
S. Saner 7 Strain S. Saner 8

Factors Affecting Stress-

Strain Relationship Rock Strength
TEST CONDITIONS Uniaxial
• Confining pressure Biaxial
• Temperature  Lab Triaxial Ability to resist stress without yield or
Slow loading
• Time
  Reservoir to resist the deformation
 Fast loading
• Reservoir fluids  Dry
 Saturated •Tensional strength
ROCK PROPERTIES
•Compressive strength
• Minerals
• Texture •Shear strength
• Anisotropy  Brittle
• Porosity  Ductile
• Permeability
• Cement type and degree
S. Saner 9 S. Saner 10

Unconfined Compressive Strengths

Under Dry and Saturated Conditions Rock mechanics Parameters

• Poisson’s Ratio
40000
Dry
Unconfined compressive strength (psi)

35000 Saturated

30000 • Young’s Modulus

25000
• Modulus of Rigidity
20000

15000 • Bulk Modulus

10000

5000

S. Saner 11 S. Saner 12

2
Poisson’s Ratio Young’s Modulus

Elastic constant defined as the The ratio of longitudinal stress to

ratio of latitudinal strain to longitudinal strain
longitudinal strain

F/A
E =
ΔL/L0

S. Saner 13 S. Saner 14

Modulus of Rigidity (Shear

Modulus) Bulk Modulus

Measure of the resistance of a body The change in the bulk volume of a solid
to change in shape, expressed as substance as the pressure on it is changed
the ratio of shear stress to shear
strain.

Shear stress It is reciprocal of matrix compressibility

G =
Shear strain

S. Saner 15 S. Saner 16

Lab Measurements Triaxial Test

Compressive Strength a. Axial pressure in equal increments

• Uniaxial test
b. Axial pressure at a constant rate
• Biaxial test
• Triaxial test
a. Dry
Tensile Strength b. Saturated
• Direct pull test
• Brazilian test
• Beam flexure test a. Drained
b. Undrained
S. Saner 17 S. Saner 18

3
Triaxial Test System Triaxial Cell

S. Saner 19 S. Saner 20

Axial vs. Confining Pressure Plot

of Seven Granodiorite Samples Compressibility (psi-1)
 Rock matrix (grain) compressibility

 Rock bulk compressibility

 Pore compressibility

or Almost total
compressibility
S. Saner 21 S. Saner 22

STRAIN ELIPSE
Compression

Thrust fault

Thrust fault

23 Compression

4
 TYPES OF FAILURE
(AT VARYING CONFINING PRESSURE)

Shortening
s1
Extension
s3
s2
Extension s3
Shortening s1
s2
s2
1 bar 300 bars 1000 bars
Extension SEMIBRITTLE PLASTIC
EXTENSION BRITTLE SHEAR
s3 FRACTURES FAILURES SHEAR FAILURE
FAILURE
Shortening s1
25

Karot 33 test öncesi Karot 33, test sonrası

Karot 35L, test öncesi Karot 35L, test sonrası

Brittle-Ductile
Brittle Transition
Ductile

5
 Tectonic fractures in Hofuf Fm (N9E & 77W)
Dam Limestone
N

9m
49 m
HOFUF FM
18 m
17 m
DAM FM
90 m
S. Saner 31 S. Saner 32

Hofuf Calcareous Sandstone

UNIAXIAL TEST
9m

PETROGRAPHY
49 m
HOFUF FM
18 m
17 m
DAM FM
90 m

S. Saner 33 S. Saner 34

UNIAXIAL TEST PETROGRAPHY 7400

Stress Width Profiles Width Contours
Width (in.)
% Length
0
0
0.005
20
7450 0.01

2A
40
0.015
60
0.02
80
0.025
90
0.03
7500 95
0.035
99

2B
0.04
0.045
0.05
7550

3A
TVD (ft)

7600

7650
3B
7700

7750
Ju
7800
4000 5000 6000-0.10-0.05 0 0.050.10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Stress (psi) Width (in.) Length (ft)

S. Saner 35
Frac. geometry - UTMN 387, (mean+1 SD) k, 34500 bpd
S. Saner 36

6
 7400
Stress Width Profiles Width Contours
Width (in.)
% Length
0
0
0.004
20
7450 0.008
2A
2A
40
60
80
0.012
0.016
0.02
90
0.024
7500 95
0.028
99
2B2B 0.032
0.036
0.04
7550

3A3A
TVD (ft)

7600

7650 3B
3B
7700

7750 Ju
7800
4000 5000 6000-0.10-0.05 0 0.050.10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Stress (psi) Width (in.) Length (ft)

Frac. geometry - UTMN 387, (mean+1 SD) k, 34500 bpd

S. Saner 37 S. Saner 38

7
 Electrical Conduction in Rocks
Rock Resistivity
• Electrolytic conduction
• Metallic conduction
PGE 517-617 Reservoir Rock Properties • Surface conduction of clay
Prof. Dr. Salih SANER

Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus

Electrical Flow in a Total Resistance, rt

Conductor (Ohm, 1827)
a) Serial Connected:

E rt = r1 + r2 + ………… + rn
i= r
b) Parallel connected:
i : Current flow, ampere 1 1 1 1
E : Potential difference, volt =( + +……... + )
rt r1 r2 rn
r : Resistance, Ohm

Resistance of a Substance Conductivity

L A 1000
r= R or R= r C=
A L
R
R : Resistivity, ohm-m
r : Resistance, ohm R : Resistivity, ohm-m
A : Area, m2 C : Conductivity, millimho-m-1
L : Length, m

1
 Reservoir Conditions Core Electrical Test System

Formation Resistivity Factor

Test Cell (Archie, 1942)

Inlet
Ro
TEST VESSEL
Ro = F . Rw or F=
Rw

F : Resistivity factor
SAMPLE Rw : Brine resistivity, ohm-m
Porous
plate
Ro : Water saturated rock resistivity, ohm-m

Formation Resistivity Factor Tortuosity

(Archie, 1942)
Departure of a porous system from being made up by a bundle
100 of straight bore capillaries
Da ta p o in t
m Fit t ed

a t
FORMATION FACTOR

F=
fm F=
f
10

SAMPLE
Av erage La
P or (%) = 22.97
F = 9.334 F : Resistivity factor
F : Resistivity factor m = 1.433
L
t : Tortuosity (La/L)2
f : Porosity, fraction 1

f : Porosity, fraction
1 10 100

m : Cementation factor P OR OSIT Y (%)

a : Intercept (function of tortuosity and m)

2
 Resistivity Index (Archie, 1942)

swn = am . Rw
100

R Resistivity Index (Rt/Ro)

I= t
Ro
10
n = 1.930
f Rt
1Ro
Swn = =
Rt I ELECTRICAL PARAMETERS
m = Cementation Factor
1
Sw : Brine saturation, fraction 1 10 100 n = Saturation Exponenet
Water Saturation (%) a = Structural Parameter
Ro : Resistivity of fully brine saturated rock, ohm-m
Rt : Resistivity of partially brine saturated rock, ohm-m
n : Saturation exponent

FORMATION WATER RESISTIVITY, Rw

Salinity
Temperature
ROCK STRUCTURE (FORMATION FACTOR, F)

ARCHIE’S FINDINGS Porosity, f

Intercept, a
Cementation factor, m
Degree of cementation
Rock texture
Pore geometry

a=1
Tortuosity, t
Constrictions existing in porous system
Conductive solids (mainly clay)
Compactions (due to overburden pressure)
Thermal expansion
Salinity of water (if clay exists)

m=n=2
PRESENCE OF HYDROCARBONS (OR WATER SATURATION, Sw)
Water saturation, Sw
Pore geometry
Cation exchangeable clays
Saturation exponents, n
Wettability
Rock texture
Presence of clay
Measurement techniques
Nature of displacing fluids
Overburden pressure

Archie Equation for Sw in non-Archie Reservoirs

1 Rw ƒ(b)
Rt = am . n Rw
Sw = m . f sw + ƒ(Vsh)
n
-
f Rt
m = Cementation factor
n = Saturation exponent
ELECTRICAL PARAMETERS
ф = Porosity m = Cementation Factor
Rw= Formation brine resistivity n = Saturation Exponenet
Rt = Formation resistivity a = Structural Parameter
ƒ(b)= Function of non-Archie effect
Sw= Water saturation
S. Saner 17

3
 1000

Time versus resistivity and desaturation plot of Sample 1042. m = 2.001

Resistivity (ohm-m)

1000 14

Expelled Water (cc)

Formation Factor
1 2 4 8 15 30 60 120
12
p si p si p si p si p si psi p si psi
100
10
a = 2.126
8
100
4 -p o le
m = 1.522
6
2 -p o le
W a te r 4

2
10
10 0
0 100 200 30 0 400 500 600 700

Elapsed Time (hrs)

1
1 10 100
19
Porosity (%)

Brine Resistivity-Salinity-Temperature Confining Pressure Dependency

Relations of the Cementation Factor
2.50

Y = A . x^0.0232

2.25
Cementation Factor

2.00

Sample 412
Sample 414
Sample 418
Sample 419
1.75 Sample 431
Sample 434

F = Ro / Rw
Arps formula:
R2 = R1(T1+21.5)/(T2+21.5)
F=1/fm 1.50
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

Confining Pressure
(psi)

Temperature Dependency of
the Cementation Factor Dependency of “m” on the degree
2.50
of cementation
Y = A . x^0.0378

2.25
Cementation Factor

2.00

Sample 412
Sample 414
Sample 418
Sample 419
Sample 433
1.75
Sample 434

F = Ro / Rw
F=1/fm 1.50
20 40 60 80

Temperature (Degree C)

4
 Constriction
Definition of
Low-Resistivity Pays

Reservoirswith Sw>50%
Demonstrating Rt<1 ohm-m
Producing water-free hydrocarbons

Causes of low-resistivity
1. Thin bedding effect on logs
2. Minerals of metallic conductance
3. Conductive ion layers of clays
4. High surface area of clays
5. Dual porosity (lamination and clay)
6. High Swir
7. Rock-fluid interaction and wettability
8. Brine salinity effect
9. Temperature

5
 Interfacial Tension Introduction of Concepts
and Wettability
 Single fluid – single set of force
 Attraction between rock and fluid
 Porosity
Adequate to define Fm characteristics
 Permeability

PGE 517-617 Petrophysics

 Two fluid systems – 3 set of forces
Prof. Dr. Salih SANER  Fluid 1  Fluid 2
 Fluid 1  Rock
 Fluid 2  Rock
 Interfacial tension
 Wettability
 Capillary pressure Necessary to define Fm characteristics
Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus  Relative permeability
S. Saner 2

Dependency of Fm
Characteristics

Interfacial Tension
Surface Tension

S. Saner 3

Interfacial and Surface Interface of Unbalanced

Tensions,  Molecular Forces

Two immiscible fluids in contact are separated by an

interface (few molecular diameters in thickness) where
different magnitude forces are unbalanced on both sides

Free energy of a fluid-interface is interfacial tension, 

(mN/m or 10-3N/m or dyn/cm.

Surface tension (ST): liquid - gas

Interfacial tension (IFT): liquid - liquid

S. Saner 5 S. Saner 6

1
Surface Tension Change
with Temperature

Surface Tension Generally

Decreases as Pressure and
Temperature Increase

S. Saner 7 S. Saner 8

Oil-Brine Interfacial Lab Measurement of

Tension Data Interfacial Tension, 
Water 72.6 dyns/cm
Avg = 25 mN/m Tensiometers Benzene 28.9
 Wilhelmy plate Cyclohexane 25.3
N-hexane 18.4
 DuNouy ring N-octane 21.8
 Spinning drop
 Maximum pull force
 Pendant drop – Suitable for reservoir fluids at HPHT

S. Saner 9 S. Saner 10

DuNuoy Ring Method for Pendant Drop Method

Interfacial Tension,  The size and shape of the drop is a function of IFT or ST

 : Interfacial tension (dyn/cm)

Dr : Density difference between two fluids (g/cc)
g : Acceleration due to gravity (cm/sec2)
de : Equatorial max diameter (cm)
ds : Diameter at de distance from tip (cm)
H : Drop shape factor using S=ds/de and
published tables
S. Saner 11 S. Saner 12

2
 Pendant Drop System

Wettability

S. Saner 13

Wettability Wettability Affects

1. Relative distribution of fluids in porous medium

Wettability involves the forces between solid and 2. Capillary pressure
fluids along with IFT and ST
3. Relative permeability characteristics

The relative ability of a fluid to 4. Hydrocarbon production

adhere to a solid surface in the
presence of another immiscible fluid

S. Saner 15 S. Saner 16

Mineral - Fluid Interaction Adhesion Tension and Wettability

One of the fluid has greater degree of affinity toward

the solid surface and tends to spread over the surface.
Spreading tendency is adhesion tension (AT)

AT = so - sw
Contact angle
so - sw
cosqow = ow
AT =ow cosqow

* Oil-water IFT,s are around 25 mN/m and magnitude of AT is dictated by

S. Saner 17 the q, making contact angle the predominant measure of wettability
S. Saner 18

3
 Contact Angle Wettability
Index (WI) Contact Angle Tests

Two different minerals and four different oils

Neutral Water
Oil Wet Wet Wet

WI = AT = -1 0 +1
q= 180 110 90 70 0

Intermediate

S. Saner 19 S. Saner 20

Water-Wet Reservoir Pore Oil-Wet Reservoir Pore

Fluids at Different Stages Fluids at Different Stages
After oil After After oil After After
Before oil accumulation production Before oil accumulation wettability production
accumulation DRAINAGE IMBIBITION accumulation DRAINAGE alteration DRAINAGE

Sw = 100% Swi Sor Swi Swi

Sw = 100% Sor
Water-wet Oil-wet

Oil Oil
Water Water

Wettability Types Wettability Tests

1. Water-Wet 1. Contact angle

2. Oil-Wet 2. Amott test
3. Intermediate Wet Reservoir samples
3. U.S Bureau of
4. Fractional (Dalmatian) Wettability Mines (USBM) test a. Native state
5. Mixed Wettability b. Restored

S. Saner 23 S. Saner 24

4
 Contact Angle (42°)
Water-Advancing Contact Angle

Calcite

Oil

Brine

S. Saner 25 S. Saner 26

Contact Angle Contact Angle HP-HT

Measurement Setup Test Cell And Microscope

S. Saner 27 S. Saner 28

Sample Restoration for

Amott and USBM Tests Amott Test
Procedure - steps
 Immersion of the core (at Sor) in oil for
1. Remove all fluids by extraction and dry spontaneous disp. of water by oil (Vws)
 Forced disp. of water by oil to Swi (Vwf)
2. Saturate with reconstituted formation brine  Immersion of the core (at Swi) in water for
spontaneous disp. of oil by water (Vos)
3. Displace brine with synthetic oil (Isopar-L) to
 Forced disp. of oil by water to Sor (Vof)
Swi
Vwt = Vws + Vwf
4. Flood with reservoir oil at reservoir temp.
Vot = Vos + Vof
(still Swi)
Displacement by oil ratio
5. Age the sample in reservoir oil at reservoir
do = Vws / Vwt
pressure and temp. up to 1000 Hr (40 days)
Displacement by water ratio
S. Saner 29 dw = Vos / Vot S. Saner 30

5
 Amott Cells (water disp. position)
Amott 2. Water & 2. Oil Displacement
2.5

2.0

Water Produced (cc)

Sam ple 63
1.5 Sam ple 65
Sam ple 68
Sam ple 79
1.0

0.5
Tem perature increas ed
from 23 to 50 °C
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Elapsed Time (Hrs)

2.5
Sam ple 63
2.0 Sam ple 65

Oil Produced (cc)

Sam ple 68
Sam ple 79
1.5
Tem perature increas ed
from 23 to 50 °C
1.0

0.5

0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
S. Saner 31
Elapse d Time (Hrs)

Amott- Harvey Wettability

Amott Wettability Indices Indices
Amott-Harvey test starts at Swi with spontaneous oil
displacement by water. Index IAH
IAH= dw - do
Amott-Harvey Wettability Indices

Slightly Slightly
Oil-wet Neutralt Water-wet
Oil-wet water-wet

S. Saner 33 -1 -0.3 -0.1 0.1 0.3 1S. Saner 34

60
USBM Test Rock-Fluid Centrifuge (RFC-732)
1. Centrifuge from 100% water (or
from Sor) to Swi
40
2. Displace oil by water from Swi to
Sor at incremental steps recording
2 effective pressure and oil
Capillary Pressure (PSI)

20 production
3. Displace water by oil from Sor to
Swi at incremental steps recording
Swi A1 effective pressure and water
0 production
Sor
A2 4. Plot pressure vs water saturation
for both stages on a standard USBM
format
-20 1 5. Calculate wettability index

IUSBM = log(A1/A2)
-40
IUSBM > 0 water wet
IUSBM < 0 oil wet
-60
0 25 50 75 100 IUSBM near 0 neutral wet
Brine Saturation (%) S. Saner 35 S. Saner 36

6
Factors Affecting Wettability Drainage and Imbibition

1. Composition of the reservoir oil Drainage: Displacement of wetting phase with

2. Composition of the brine
3. Reservoir pressure and temperature
non-wetting phase (oil accumulation process)
Imbibition: Displacement of non-wetting
phase with wetting phase (oil production
process)

S. Saner 37 S. Saner 38

• Swi in water-wet rocks is generally 20-25%

• Swi in oil-wet rocks generally is < 15%

• Low oil recoveries (high Ro) on either

wettability extremes

S. Saner 39 S. Saner 40

7
 Saturation

Fluid Saturation • Fluid saturation quantifies how much of pore

space partitioned among gas, oil, and water
(fraction or percent)

• Volume of hydrocarbon in place requires

saturation data
PGE 517-617 Petrophysics
Prof. Dr. Salih SANER • Volume of target oil in place for EOR projects
• Strong influence on relative permeability
functions

Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus

Saturation Mathematical Definition of Saturation

• Forces controlling fluid distribution in pores

are:
Total volume of the
fluid phase
Fluid Saturation =
• Gravity forces
Pore volume
• Capillary forces
Sw = Water saturation
So = Oil saturation Sw + So + Sg = 1
Sg = Gas saturation

Pore and Bulk Volume

Saturations Samples for Saturation Test
Pore Rock

 Native state (Preserved)

 After SCAL test by backcalculating the
Matrix original saturations
Pore vol 70%

Sg Bulk = 1.5 %

So Bulk = 22.5 % Pore

30%
Sw Bulk = 6 %

S. Saner 5 S. Saner 6

Printed by BoltPDF (c) NCH Software. Free for non-commercial use only.
 Saturation Mesurement
Methods Retort Distillation

 Retort distillation (Using heat)

PROCEDURE
 Dean Stark distillation (Using heat and
 Weigh sample
organic solvent)
 Heat in the system up to 650
°C in stages or directly
 Collect vaporized and then
condensed water and oil
 Calculate saturations

S. Saner7 S. Saner8

Disadventages of Retort
Retort Distillation Curve Distillation

1. Destructive
Cumulative water recovery (cc)

Water of crystallization 2. Removal of bound (crystallization)

water
3. Cracking or cooking oil (decrease vol)
Pore water 4. Oil-water emulsions

Heating time (min)

S. Saner9 S. Saner10

Dean-Stark Disadventages of Dean

-Stark
Distillation Distillation

PROCEDURE 1. Long duration

 Weigh the sample 2. Premature termination of
 Boil Toluene extraction
 Collect vaporized and then
condensed liquid in graduated 3. Oil and gas are calculated indirectly
tube
 Measure water at bottom
while Toluene– oil mixture
floods back to flask
110 C
S. Saner11 S. Saner12

Printed by BoltPDF (c) NCH Software. Free for non-commercial use only.
 Dean -Stark Calculations Critical Gas Saturation, Sgc

Saturation of gas increases from zero to higher values

Wwet – Wdry = Mg + Mo + Mw below bubble point pressure and when it forms a
continuous phase in the pores, in the other term reaches
to critical saturation (Sgc), it starts flowing.
Wwet – Wdry = Vg g + Vo  o + Vw  w
Evolving gas is compressible, maintains reservoir
pressure high and expels oil out while expanding. This
Vp – Vw = Vg + Vo recovery mechanism is called “ Solution gas drive ”

After Sgc gas starts flowing and hampering the oil

2-Eqs vs 2 -Unknowns can be solved production

S. Saner 13 S. Saner 14

Critical Gas Saturation

Occurrence Residual Oil Saturation, Sor

1. Definition
 Saturation after primary production
 Saturation after gas or water displacement
2. Is the target for EOR

S. Saner 15 S. Saner 16

Residual Oil Saturation

Calculation

PV – Vol of oil produced Trapped oil

Sor = =
PV PV

Evolvement of
Residual Oil
Saturation
S. Saner 17 S. Saner 18

Printed by BoltPDF (c) NCH Software. Free for non-commercial use only.
 Irreducible Water Causes of Variations of Swi
Saturation, Swi in a Reservoir
1. Permeability
Minimum water saturation in the 2. Lithology
reservoir rock 3. Height above free water table
4. Gravity-capillary equilibrium
Other terms
• Interstitial water saturation
• Initial water saturation
• Connate water saturation
• Capillary bound water

S. Saner19 S. Saner20

Averaging Sw Factors Affecting Sw

(Thickness and porosity weighted
) Determinations

 Inaccuracies of measurement
techniques
 Improper core drilling, handling and
preservation
 Drilling mud and filtrate invasion
 Drill with oil
-based mud
 Fluid expansion
(l ) represents gas, oil, or water
S. Saner21 S. Saner22

Mud Filtrate Invasion

S. Saner23 S. Saner24

Printed by BoltPDF (c) NCH Software. Free for non-commercial use only.
 Concept
Relative Permeability  Quantifying the amount of flow for each
phase in a multiphase situation

 Allows comparison of the fluids flows in the

presence of each other (two-phase or three
PGE 517 Petrophysics phase)
Prof. Dr. Salih SANER
 Dimensionless

 When single phase is present relative

permeability is 1.0

Near East University, Nicosia TRNC S. Saner 2

Definition Displacements in the Field

Two phase
Gas – Oil
Gas – Water
Oil – Water
Three phase
Gas – oil - water

S. Saner 3 S. Saner 4

Definition Base Permeability

Effective permeability
Relative permeability =
Base permeability
 Absolute gas permeability (Klinkenberg
ke A different effective permeability at
corrected)
kr = each saturation, hence relative perm
k data is presented in the form of curves  Absolute liquid permeability
keg Effective oil permeability at Swi
Gas, krg = 
k
keo
Oil, kro =
k
kew
Water, krw =
k
S. Saner 5 S. Saner 6

1
 Oil-Water Rel Perm Curve Saturation Changes in an
(non-preserved sample Oil-Water Rel Perm Test
1. Absolute permeability
measurement, then
displacement with oil to Swi
2. Start of Rel Perm test
displacing oil w/water to
Sor at steps
3. Determine saturations in
samples by Dean Stark

S. Saner 7 S. Saner 8

Saturation Changes in an
Oil-Water Rel Perm Curve
Gas-Oil Rel Perm Test
1.0 kro
End point saturations:
krw
Relative Permeability kr (fraction)

1. Swi
0.8 2. Sor=1-Swterminal

0.6
End point End point
kro = 1 kro = 0
0.4 krw = 0 krw = Max

0.2
Swi Sor=1-Swterminal

0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Saturation Sw (%) S. Saner 10
S. Saner 9

Gas-Oil Rel Perm Curve

1. Saturate with water, 2. disp w/oil (Sl=Swi+So=100%) Direction of Tests
3. Disp liquid w/gas to max Sg Slir (Swi+Sor)

1.0 kro
End point saturations: krg  Gas relative perm tests always drainage
Relative Permeability kr (fraction)

1. Swi+So=100%
0.8 2. Slir=Swi+Sor
Gas-oil: Gas displacing oil
Gas-water: Gas displacing water
0.6 End point  Oil-water:
kro = 0
0.4 krg = Max Wetting water displacing oil – imbibition
End point
kro = 1
Oil displacing wetting water – drainage
Slir=Swi +Sor
0.2 krg = 0 * If oil is wetting phase, converse is true

0.0
100 80 60 40 20 0
Total Liquid Saturation (Swi+So) (%) S. Saner 12
S. Saner 11

2
Rel. Perm. Test Samples Rel. Perm. Test Fluids

 Preserved cores 


Air
Nitrogen
 Native state  Synthetic oils
Model oils
 Plug from uninvaded centeral part 

 Degassed reservoir oil

 Cleaned cores  Bottomhole live oil
Simulated live oil
Aged – wettability restored


 Formation brine
 Reconstituted brine

S. Saner 13 S. Saner 14

Rel. Perm. Test Conditions Flow Chart of Rel. Perm. Test

 Lab conditions
Gas injection at constant differential pressure


Fluid injection at constant flow rate



 Reservoir conditions
Elevated pressure and temperature


Live oil and formation brine (reconstituted)



S. Saner 15 S. Saner 16

Inlet pressure during oil flood for

determining effective perm @Swi
Relative Permeability Setup

Main Components
Air bath (oven)
Displacement pump
Hassler core holder

Fluid collector and separator

Floating piston fluid cells

Hydraulic pump

Back pressure regulator

Differential pressure transducers

S. Saner 17 S. Saner 18

3
Hydrostatic Core Holder Rel. Perm. Test Rig

S. Saner 19 S. Saner 20

Rel. Perm. Test Rig Lab Rel. Perm. Test Methods

 Steady state method

 Unsteady state method
 Centrifuge method

S. Saner 21 S. Saner 22

Steady State Test

 Injecting two fluids at a certain volumetric Steady

ratio until stabilization of both the pressure State Test
drop across the core and the effluent
volumetric ratios

S. Saner 23 S. Saner 24

4
 Unsteady
Unsteady State Test State Test

 Water injected at a constant flow rate,

pressure drop and oil production are
recorded as a function of time

S. Saner 25 S. Saner 26

Unsteady State Test Oil and Water Unsteady State Rel. Perm. And Sw
Production Calculations

 Johnson-Bossler-Neuman method
 Buckley-Leverett

S. Saner 27 S. Saner 28

Factors Affecting Relative

Permeability Measurements Oil-Water Rel Perm Curve

 Fluid saturation
 Saturation history
 Magnitude of initial saturations especially Swi
 Wettability
 Rock pore structure
 Overburden stress
 Clays
 Temperature
 Interfacial tension and viscosity
 Displacement rates
S. Saner 29 S. Saner 30

5
Oil-Water Rel Perm Curve

S. Saner 31 S. Saner 32

6
 Definitions
Capillary Pressure  When a paper tissue is put in
water, although gravity water
moves up and wet the paper due to
Pc
 An oil drop from sea bottom rises
PGE 517 - 617 Petrophysics to the surface but within a pore
system experiences resistance, Pc
Prof. Dr. Salih SANER
 Although gravitational segregation
of gas oil and water, water remains
in HC zones due to Pc
 Pc plays a major role in
displacement
Near East University, Nicosia, Cyprus

Mathematical Expression of
Definition of Capillary Pressure Capillary Pressure

When two immiscible fluids present in Pc = Pnw – Pw

the pore space, the pressure difference
Pnw
across the curved interface is capillary Pc = Capillary pressure
pressure (Pc). Pnw = Pressure in nonwetting phase Pw
Pw = Pressure in wetting phase
 Curved surface is due to interfacial energy,
Pc
Pcgo = Pg – Po (Gas-oil)
Pcgw = Pg – Pw (Gas-water)
Pcow = Po – Pw (Oil-water/water wet)
Pcgw = Pcgo+Pcow (3-phase)

S. Saner 3 S. Saner 4

Liquid Rise in Capillary Tube

(Water-air) Adhesion Tension and Wettability

Two forces on raised liquid in One of the fluid has greater degree of affinity toward
capillary tube: the solid surface and tends to spread over the surface.
Force up = AT x 2pr Spreading tendency is adhesion tension (AT)
Force down = pr2hrg AT = sso - ssw
Force up = Force down
h = 2AT / rrg sso - ssw
cosqow = sow
AT = adhesion tension (dyn/cm)
r = radius of the tube (cm)
AT = sow cosqow
h = height of the capillary rise (cm)
r = density of the liquid (g/cc) * Oil-water IFT,s are around 25 mN/m and magnitude of AT is dictated by
g = force of gravity (cm/sec2) S. Saner 5 the q, making contact angle the predominant measure of wettability
S. Saner 6

1
 Capillary Pressure Equation Capillary Pressure
A function of: Interfacial tension, wettability, pore geometry
Two forces on raised liquid in capillary tube:
Interfacial tension Wettability
Force up = AT x 2pr
Force down = pr2 . hrg
2s. cos q . C
Pc = r
Area Pc
AT = adhesion tension (dyn/cm) Pore geometry

Force up = Force down
AT . 2pr = pr2 . Pc
Pc = AT . 2pr / pr2 =
Pc = 2 sow cosqow / r
r = radius of the tube (cm) Pc = Capillary pressure, psi
h = height of the capillary rise (cm) s = Interfacial tension, dynes/cm
r = density of the liquid (g/cc)
q = Contact angle, degrees
g = force of gravity (cm/sec2)
r = Pore radii, microns
Pc= capillary pressure
C = Conversion constant (0.145)
S. Saner 7 S. Saner 8

Pc Dependency on Pore Size and

Capillary Pressure is a Function of Wettability

1. ST and IFT
2. Pore size and pore geometry
3. Wetting characteristics

h above OWC in Oil/Water systems

Force up = Force down
Use of Capillary Pressure sow . cosqow . 2pr = pr2 . h . (rw - ro) . g
Pc up = Pc down
Force up/ Area = Force down/ Area
sow .cosqow . 2pr/ pr2 = pr . h . (rw - ro) . g / pr2
2

 Sw interpretation above water level 2sow .cosqow / r = h. (rw - ro) . G

 Pore throat size distribution
h = 2sow .cosqow / r (rw - ro) . g
 Relative permeability calculation h = Pc / (rw - ro) . g
h = 0.102*Pc / Dr

h in m
Pc in N/m2
Dr = (rw - ro) in kg/m3
g = 9.81 m/sec2
S. Saner 11 S. Saner 12

2
 h above OWC in Oil/Water systems
Force up = Force down
sow . cosqow . 2pr = pr2 . h . (rw - ro) . g Capillary Pressure Lab Methods
Pc up = Pc down
Force up/ Area = Force down/ Area
sow .cosqow . 2pr/ pr2 = pr2 . h . (rw - ro) . g / pr2
2sow .cosqow / r = h. (rw - ro) . G  Porous plate (diaphragm) method
 Mercury injection method
h = 2sow .cosqow / r (rw - ro) . g
h = Pc / (rw - ro) . g  Centrifuge method
h = 144*Pc / Dr

h in ft
Pc in psi
Dr = (rw - ro) in lbmass/ft3
g = 32.2 ft/sec2
S. Saner 13 S. Saner 14

Drainage and Imbibition Leveret’s Drainage and Imbibition

 Drainage: Displacement of wetting phase by

non-wetting

Drgh k 1/2
Drainage curve
 Imbibition: Displacement of non-wetting phase s f

by wetting phase

Imbibition curve
* Pc increases as wetting phase saturation
desreases
0 100
Sw (%)
S. Saner 15 S. Saner 16

Multiple
Sample
Porous Plate
Porous Plate Method Cell

Tissue paper & 100% water saturated core Air

Diatomaceous plugs (initially) pressure
earth for inlet
capillary contact

100% water saturated ceramic plate

Water
outlet
S. Saner 18

3
Single Sample
Porous Plate Cell Porous Plate at Stress

S. Saner 19 S. Saner 20

Pc Drainage and
Imbibition

Mercury Injection Method

S. Saner 21

Manual Mercury Injection

Pump Mercury Pc Curves

S. Saner 23 S. Saner 24

4
Pore Throat Size Distribution Mercury Capillary Pressure Tests
0 .0 0 1 100000 0 .0 0 1 100 000

In j e c tio n
I n je c t io n
W ith d r a w a l
R e i n j e c ti o n
R e i n j e c ti o n
W it h dr a w al
0 .0 1 0 10000 0 .0 1 0 100 00

Pore Throat Size (micron)

Capillary Pressure (psi)

Pore Throat Size (micron)

Capillary Pressure (psi)

0 .1 0 0 1000 0 .1 0 0 100 0

1 .0 0 0 100 1 .0 0 0 100

1 0 .0 0 0 10 1 0 .0 0 0 10

1 0 0 .0 0 0 1
1 0 0 .0 0 0 1
0 .3 0 0 .25 0 .2 0 0 .1 5 0 .10 0 .0 5 0 .0 0 0 .4 0 0 .3 5 0 .3 0 0 .2 5 0 .2 0 0 .1 5 0 .1 0 0 .0 5 0 .0 0

M e rc u r y I n j e c te d ( c c ) Me rc u r y In je c te d ( c c )

0.5 0 .5
(Sample 11/68) ( S a m p le 1 3 /9 6 )

0.4 0 .4

Incremental Saturation (%)

Incremental Saturation (%)
0.3 0 .3

0.2 0 .2

0.1 0 .1

0 0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0 .0 0 1 0 .0 1 0 .1 1 10 10 0
Pore Throat Radius (micron)
P o r e T h r o a t R a d iu s ( m ic r o n )

Centrifuge

Centrifuge Method

S. Saner 28

RFC-732 Sw Profile in a Sample at a

Centrifuge RPM Stage
Sw less than average
at upstream end

downstream end
Sw = 100% at

Water saturation

S. Saner 30

5
 SCAL Applications
Operation
• Sample preparation (saturation & desaturation) • About 8 rotation speed steps
for other applications
• Spinning time 4 to 24 hrs at each step
• Capillary pressure tests
• Amott-USBM wettability tests • A set of 3, 4 or 6 samples requires 32 to
• Relative permeability tests 192 hrs (8 days non-stop) spinning

• Lab conditions core electrical tests

Capillary Pressure Calculation Pc and Sw Changes While Testing

r0
ri 1

Pc = 0.5 Δρ ω2 (r02 – ri 2)

Sw
0.5

Swi
Pc = Capillary pressure at inlet end, dyn/cc2
0
Δρ = Density difference between 2-fluids, g/cc Pc

0
0

ω = Rotation speed, radian/sc

r0 = Radius to outside face of sample, cm
ri = Radius to inside face of sample, cm
SAMPLE
ω = RPM / 60 * 6.283183
psi = 68947.57 dyn/cc2

Pc and Sw Changes While Testing Pc and Sw Changes While Testing

1 1
Sw

Sw

0.5 0.5

Swi Swi
0 0
Pc Pc
Pi3

Pi5
0

SAMPLE SAMPLE

6
 Pc and Sw Changes While Testing Presentation of Centrifuge
Test Results
1 1200

1000 Raw Data

Hassler-Brunner

Sw
0.5 Full Hoffman

C a p illary P re ss u re, p s i
800

Swi 600
0
Max

Pc
0
400

200

SAMPLE 0
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
Saturation

Applications of Pc Data

 Pore throat size distribution

 Assesment of Sw to calculate OOIP
 Determine the heights of fluid columns
 Determine the transition zone
 Zonation
 Locations of fluid contacts
 Modeling oil displacement
S. Saner 39 S. Saner 40

Pc Curves of Samples of
Linear and Logarithmic Pc Plots Different Permeabilities
200 1000.0

(A) 4/67 (B)

6/67 k1>k2>k3>k4>k5
150 24/67 100.0
27/67
Capillary Pressure (psi)
Capillary Pressure (psi)

18/68

100 10/96 10.0

4/67 (93 mD)
6/67 (149 mD)
24/67 (2.6 mD)
1.0 27/67 (3.1 mD)
50
18/68 (4.3 mD)
10/96 (910 mD)

0.1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
0 20 40 60 80 100 Water Saturation (%)
Water Saturation (%)

S. Saner 41 S. Saner 42

7
 1000
Pore Throat Size Calculation
100 y = 851.34x -1.4759
R2 = 0.9078
Permeability (mD)

10

0.1

0.01

0.001
1 10 100 1000 10000

Displacement Pressure (psi)

43
S. Saner 44

Mercury Capillary Pressure Tests

0 .0 0 1

I n je c t io n
100000 0 .0 0 1

In j e c tio n
100 000
Transition Zone
W ith d r a w a l
R e i n j e c ti o n
R e i n j e c ti o n
W it h dr a w al
0 .0 1 0 10000 0 .0 1 0 100 00
Pore Throat Size (micron)

Capillary Pressure (psi)

Pore Throat Size (micron)

Capillary Pressure (psi)

0 .1 0 0 1000 0 .1 0 0 100 0

1 .0 0 0 100 1 .0 0 0 100

1 0 .0 0 0 10 1 0 .0 0 0 10

1 0 0 .0 0 0 1
1 0 0 .0 0 0 1
0 .3 0 0 .25 0 .2 0 0 .1 5 0 .10 0 .0 5 0 .0 0 0 .4 0 0 .3 5 0 .3 0 0 .2 5 0 .2 0 0 .1 5 0 .1 0 0 .0 5 0 .0 0

M e rc u r y I n j e c te d ( c c ) Me rc u r y In je c te d ( c c )

0.5 0 .5
(Sample 11/68) ( S a m p le 1 3 /9 6 )

0.4 0 .4
Incremental Saturation (%)
Incremental Saturation (%)

0.3 0 .3

0.2 0 .2

0.1 0 .1

0 0
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0 .0 0 1 0 .0 1 0 .1 1 10 10 0
Pore Throat Radius (micron)
P o r e T h r o a t R a d iu s ( m ic r o n )

S. Saner 46

Oil-water Transition Zone

S. Saner 47 S. Saner 48

8
 (ft)

S. Saner 49 S. Saner 50

Oil-Water Contact Averaging Pc: J Function

(ft)

S. Saner 51 S. Saner 52

J Function vs Water Saturation

S. Saner 53 S. Saner 54

9
 Coring and Core
Analysis Flow

PGE 517-617 Petrophysics

Prof. Dr. Salih SANER

Search for subsurface

Near East University, Nicosia Northern Cyprus

Petroleum and Gas Engineering

Subject
Rock
Formation Evaluation
Fluid (Oil, Gas, Brine)
Rock & Fluid Interaction
 The process of using borehole
Scientific Skills & Techniques
measurements to evaluate the
Physics Lab measurements
characteristics (geological, petrophysical,
Chemistry Field techniques
geomechanical) of subsurface formations
Math Mapping
Geology Computer applications
Geophysics Modeling

}
Fluid mechanics English language
 Well tests Engineer
 Well Logs Log Analyst PETROPHYSICIST
Synthesis  Cores&Cuttings Core Analyst

Utilization S. Saner 5

Prudhoe Bay Oil Field (1968)

Anticlinal/Unconformity
Course Contents South
Brooks
AnticlinalTrap
Combination Trap
Beaufort
North
Range Sea
• Coring
Sea Level
• Siliciclastic reservoir rocks
• Carbonate reservoir rocks
10,000
• Porosity, definitions and porosity types in terms of geology and petrophysics Seal
• Permeability, Darcy law, parallel and series flow, lab measurement methods, unconformity Reservoir
absolute permeability, gas and liquid permeability, Porosity permeability 20,000 120°F
relationship, Factors affecting permeability Barrow
• Petroleum related rock mechanics Arch
30,000
• Rock electrical properties Kitchen
• Fluid saturations
• Interfacial tension and wettability
• Largest NorthAmerican field
• Capillary pressure and measurement methods
• More than 8 billion barrels recoverable
• Relative permeability – steady state and unsteady methods American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 1990
JMA

1
 Anticlinal Theory Drilling
Petroleum Accumulates in Structural Closure
Coring
Coring Program Types
 Problems involved coring
 Company policy involved
Gas
coring
Oil
Water
Rock Bit Cuttings Core (Diamond) Bit Core

JMA

Rocks in hydrocarbon
Coring Program Depending On
accumulation

 Source rocks – Generation efficiency

 Coring objectives
 Drilling
 Reservoir rocks - Recovery efficiency  Geological
 Reservoir Engineering
 Cap (cover) rock – Sealing efficiency
 Production Engineering
 Company policy
S. Saner 8

Coring Operations Core Samples

Flow Specific Objectives

Course Objectives
 Coring and analysis
procedures
 Available reports for
utilization
 Available samples for
utilization

2
Additional Objectives
Fluid Retention Coring

 High pressure coring

 Sponge coring
 Gel coring
 Gas trapper / liquid trapper

Rotary Coring Types

 Conventional coring
 Diamond coring
 Wireline coring
 Unpreserved
 Preserved

 Oriented

Conventional
Sidewall Coring Coring

 6 m (20 ft) core at

 Shooting explosive filled bullets each run
 Horizontal plug drilling

S. Saner 18

3
 Diamond Coring Sidewall Coring
 Better recovery, core breaks less  Possible sampling
 20 m (60 ft) core at each run method after drilling
 Percussion: Driving
explosive charged
hallow cylinder or
 Rotary

S. Saner 19 S. Saner 22

Wireline Coring Sponge Coring

 Sponge liner in the inner barrel
 5 m (15 ft) core at each
run
 Small diameter inner
barrel is run inside the
drill pipe
 No need for pulling
drillstring up

S. Saner 20 S. Saner 23

Rubber-Sleeve
Cores Preserved Cores

 Unconsolidated sand  Preserve from mechanical damage

coring  Rubber sleeved
 Keep frozen
 Doubled sleeve between
inner and outer barrels  Preserve wettability
slips over core  Wrap in saran film and Al-foil
 Immersion in wax (Core SealTM)
 Keep in a tube filled with brine

S. Saner 21

4
 Conventional Wellsite Procedures
Core Sample Splits
 Whole core  Clean mud off on the derrick floor
 Plugs  Mark depths by taking core lost
intervals into account
 1/3 and 2/3 slabs
 Wellsite core description
 Veneers
 Place cores in labeled trays, boxes or
 Spot samples tubes
 Transfer to laboratory

Oriented Cores
 Scratched for in situ positioning

Core Segment (3 ft)

Handle Carefully
The value of a core plug is more
than the value of the same
weight of gold

5
Epoxy Resin Injection Core Recovery (%)
Recovered core length
 . 100
Drilled core length

Lost Core may Suggest

• Faulting
• Porous zone
• Unconsolidated bed
• Solution cavity
• Salt

Lost Core may Suggest

• Faulting
• Porous zone
• Unconsolidated bed
• Solution cavity
• Salt

Core Numbering
Tray 12

Core 1 (44 ft) Core 1

Tray 8 Recovery 73%
Core 2

Core 3
Tray 5

Tray 1 Core 4
S. Saner 36

6
 Core Numbering Receive
Open

Core-1 60 ft Receive Clean Arrange Clean

Storage boxes
20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Trays

Core-2 58 ft
20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Core-1
Core-3 33 ft
12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Core-2

Core-3 Core-4 60 ft
Core-4 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
S. Saner 40

DBase Report Report Report Report Report Report Report

Core Database
Identif Hole Asses Length Length Property Core # of Length Length
Property NT Core
icationRefere Company Name sment on Hand on Hand Referenc Labe Box Drilled Drilled Other Info
Name S# Location
# nce # # (Ft.) (M) e# l es (Ft.) (M)

6b Brunswick Mining & Madran

4b 5b 6c 12a GB-
0243 Smelting
Gilman 21J No
No Data No Data 031
GB-
Shed 26 495.3 151 No Data
Profile perm Geological description Petrography (TS, SEM, Basic core tests 001 Brook /10 Data 001
Digital image
scan XRD) ф, k, ρg Corporation Ltd. 37B1r01
Brunswick Mining & Madran
GB- Gilman 21J No GB-
0244 Smelting No Data No Data 031 Shed 16 318.2 97 No Data
002 Brook /10 Data 002
Corporation Ltd. 37B1r08
1/3 Slab

5c Brunswick Mining & GB- Madran

11a GB-84- Gilman 21J No
Epoxy impregnated TS & other 0245 Smelting No Data No Data 031 84- Shed 19 332.6 101.4 boxes 6, 8-11, 24 missing
samples Repair 001 Brook /10 Data
improper plugs Corporation Ltd. 001 37B1r12
Brunswick Mining & GB- Madran
pieces

GB-84- Gilman 21J No

End

0246 Smelting No Data No Data 031 84- Shed 16 280 85.37 No Data
002 Brook /10 Data
Corporation Ltd. 002 37B1r18
Plug
Brunswick Mining & GB- Madran
1/3 GB-84- Gilman 21J No
0247 Smelting No Data No Data 031 84- Shed 40 708 215.85 No Data
003 Brook /10 Data
2 2/3 Corporation Ltd. 003 37B1r22
Fix pieces
4a 5a 6a 7a 8a 9a
Mark depths 3 Cut whole cores Trim Soxhlet Endface Oven dry & Digital BH-79- Miramichi Lumber
Burnt Hill 21J
No
BH- Madran logs, analyses for Wo, Mo,
Mark orientation GR Scan cleaning grinding plug 3066 Tungsten /10 410 125 197 79- Shed 21 410 125 Ag, Bi, and Sn in F'ton Core
Mark whole cores Dens scan
Slab (1/3 & 2/3) Vacuum
cool photos 10a 001 Company Ltd. Data
Mark for V&H plugs Cut biscuits-if needed Dimensions, Deposit W 001 88B1r08 Bldg.
Drill plugs wt measure,
Veneer cut-if needed plug
description Burnt Hill 21J BH- Madran logs, analyses for Wo, Mo,
BH-79- Miramichi Lumber No
3067 Tungsten /10 787.2 240 197 79- Shed 39 787.2 240 Ag, Bi, and Sn in F'ton Core
003 Company Ltd. Data
Deposit W 003 88B1r12 Bldg.
Burnt Hill 21J BH- Madran logs, analyses for Wo, Mo,

Routine Core Analysis

BH-79- Miramichi Lumber No
3068 Tungsten /10 380.4 116 197 79- Shed 19 380.48 116 Ag, Bi, and Sn in F'ton Core
005 Company Ltd. Data
Deposit W 005 88B1r20 Bldg.
1
Receive
Open
Clean
Flow Chart BH-79-
006
3069
Miramichi Lumber
Company Ltd.
Burnt Hill 21J
Tungsten /10
No
Data
738 225 197
BH- Madran
79- Shed 38 738 225
logs, analyses for Wo, Mo,
Ag, Bi, and Sn in F'ton Core
Storage boxes
Deposit W 006 88B2r03 Bldg.

DBase Report Report Report Report Report Report Report DBase Report Report Report Report Report Report Report

4b 5b 6b 6c 12a 4b 5b 6b 6c 12a
Profile perm Geological description Petrography (TS, SEM, Basic core tests Profile perm Geological description Petrography (TS, SEM, Basic core tests
Digital image XRD) ф, k, ρg Digital image XRD) ф, k, ρg
scan scan
1/3 Slab

1/3 Slab

5c 11a 5c 11a
Epoxy impregnated TS & other Epoxy impregnated TS & other
samples Repair samples Repair
improper plugs improper plugs
pieces

pieces
End

End

Plug Plug
1/3 1/3

2 2/3 2 2/3
Fix pieces
4a 5a 6a 7a 8a 9a Fix pieces
4a 5a 6a 7a 8a 9a
Mark depths 3 Cut whole cores Trim Soxhlet Endface Oven dry & Digital Mark depths 3 Cut whole cores Trim Soxhlet Endface Oven dry & Digital
Mark orientation GR Scan grinding plug Mark orientation GR Scan plug
Mark whole cores Dens scan
Slab (1/3 & 2/3) cleaning Vacuum
cool photos 10a Mark whole cores Dens scan
Slab (1/3 & 2/3) cleaning grinding Vacuum
cool photos 10a
Mark for V&H plugs Cut biscuits-if needed Dimensions, Mark for V&H plugs Cut biscuits-if needed Dimensions,
Drill plugs wt measure, Drill plugs wt measure,
Veneer cut-if needed plug Veneer cut-if needed plug
description description

1
Routine Core Analysis 1
Routine Core Analysis
Receive
Open
Clean
Flow Chart Receive
Open
Clean
Flow Chart
Storage boxes Storage boxes

7
 Fix pieces
Mark depths
Mark orientation

Mark Up
Mark whole cores
Mark for V&H plugs Spectral Gamma & Density Scans

S. Saner 43 S. Saner 46

Core Spectral Gamma Ray Log

Core Density Log

Laboratory Sampling
 Every 10 ft (3 trays) one (1 ft) whole core
 Every foot one horizontal plug
 Every 10 ft vertical plug

Conventional Plug Numbering Spectral Gamma & Density Depth Shift

Before
After
Density

Log GR

Gamma

Density
Log

Core

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 1 Trays
Core

4 3 2
Core-1
1 2 3 …………………………..………………………………………...………60 Plugs

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Core-2
61 62….……………………………..…………………………………...………..105

12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Core-3
106 …………………………...……..……………126

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Core-4
127 128……………………………..………………………………………………..183

8
Spectral Gamma & Density Depth Shift
Core Plugs

Density
Density
Log GR

Gamma

Before
Core
Log

Core

After S. Saner 52

Slabbing & Plug Drilling Cut whole cores

Slab (1/3 & 2/3) Slab and Plug
Cut biscuits-if needed
Drill plugs
Veneer cut-if needed

S. Saner 50 S. Saner 53

Plug Drilling from a Whole Core

Slabbed & Drilled Except Whole Core

S. Saner 51 S. Saner 54

9
 Trimming Drying
 Trimming for even circular surfaces  Vacuum oven 80-110°C
 Appropriate length  Humidity controlled oven (60°C, 45% humid)

 Plug end pieces for thin section

petrography

* Cooling under vacuum

S. Saner 55 S. Saner 58

DBase Report Report Report Report Report Report Report

Cleaning
4b 5b 6b 6c 12a
Profile perm Geological description Petrography (TS, SEM, Basic core tests
Digital image XRD) ф, k, ρg

Soxhlet hot toluene and alcohol circulation

scan


 Forced cleaning by CO2 and hot toluene injection

1/3 Slab

5c 11a
Epoxy impregnated TS & other
samples Repair
improper plugs
pieces
End

Plug
1/3

2 2/3
Fix pieces
4a 5a 6a 7a 8a 9a
Mark depths 3 Cut whole cores Trim Soxhlet Endface Oven dry & Digital
Mark orientation GR Scan cleaning grinding plug
Mark whole cores Dens scan
Slab (1/3 & 2/3) Vacuum
cool photos 10a
Mark for V&H plugs Cut biscuits-if needed Dimensions,
Drill plugs wt measure,
Veneer cut-if needed plug
description

1
Routine Core Analysis
Receive
Open
Clean
Flow Chart
Storage boxes
S. Saner 56

Endface Grinding Plug Images

 Parallel circular surfaces (0.002 inch
accuracy)

13 14 15 16

17 18 19 20

S. Saner 57 S. Saner 60

10
 Digital Plug Photos
Basic Petrophysical Properties

 f
 k
 rg
01/96 02/96 03/96 04/96

05/96 06/96 07/96 08/96 S. Saner 64

Weight & Dimensions Porosity

Sample Depth Weight Length Avg. Lng. Diameter Avg. Dia. Bulk Vol Remarks Repaired
No (ft) (gm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (cc) Plugs

5.752 3.843
 Ratio of the volume of
interstices of a material to the
5.757 3.839

1 13,251.0 171.460 5.760 5.755 3.846 3.842 66.733 Hz fractures / split

5.753

5.753
3.840

3.844
volume of its mass.
5.750 3.837

5.746 3.837

2 13,252.0 176.930 5.747 3.837 66.455 Hz fractures / hold

5.746 3.838

5.752 3.837

5.739 3.837

5.739 3.830

5.742 3.838

3 13,253.0 175.100 5.740 5.739 3.838 3.836 66.331 Hz fractures / hold

5.742 3.838

5.731 3.837
S. Saner 62

Core Plug Repair

Core Porosity
2r
Wt = Weight (measured, g)
Vg = Grain vol (measured, cc)
Grain
Vb = p r2 L (bulk volume, cc)
(1) (2)
L
Pore Vp = Vb – Vg (pore volume, cc)

f = Vp / Vb (porosity, fraction)

rg = Wt / Vg (grain density, g/cc)

(3) (4) S. Saner 66

11
 Permeability Transforms
Boyle’s Law 10000 10000
Vcell
1000

Permeability (mD)
1000

V2 = Vcell-Vg 100 100

P1 10 10
Plug
V1 1 1

y = 6E-05x 4.7143 y = 0.0276x 3.7209

0.1 0.1
P1 * V1 = P2 * (V1 + V2) R2 = 0.4362 R2 = 0.9055
0.01 0.01
V2 = (P1*V1 – P2*V1) / P2 0 10 20 30 40 0 5 10 15 20 25

Vg = Vcell – V2 Total Porosity (%) Interparticle Porosity (%)

S. Saner 67

QTIF-96 MINIPERMEAMETER MEASUREMENTS

Permeability (mD)

Profile Permeability
1 10 100 1000 10000
6950

Permeability
Probe permeability
Plug permeability

7000

Transmissivity
7050


7100

7150

7200

Modified
Injection Rate Darcy’s Law
& Pressure
2mQ1P1Tact
kg =
Tip Seal Q1 P1 2 2
aG0 (P1  P2 )Tref 7250

P2 = Atmospheric
Pressure
Sample
G0 = geometric factor
Surface

a
S. Saner 71
7300

Well A Well B
Core 4 Pe rm e ability (m D)
Cor e 3 Pe r m e ability (m D)
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
12275 12630
Gas

Permeability
7 Pt Moving Avg

(Ability to transmit fluid)

Gas
12280
12635
7 Pt Moving A vg

12640
12285

12645

Q.m.L 12290

k= 12650

DP . A
12295
Depth (ft)

12655

12300

12660
Depth (ft)

k = Permeability, D (=1000mD) 12305

12665

Q = Flow rate, cc/sec 12310

12670

L = Length, cm 12315 12675

A = Area, cm2 12320

12680

m = Fluid viscosity, cp Measured Gas and Averaged

12685

DP = Pressure differential, atm Permeabilities 12690

12695

S. Saner 69

12
 Conventional Gas vs Probe Permeability
Correlation of Plug Samples

10000

1000

X = Y
Probe Permeability (mD)

100

10

0.1

0.01

0.001
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Conventional Gas Permeability (mD)
Core image

DIGITAL
CORE
IMAGING
Image database
Slab images
Circumferential images
Core re-orientation

Digital core imaging camera system Correlation with well logs

Unrolled image

CORE
0 .0 0 1 10 00 00

ROCK & PORE

I n je c tio n
W ith d ra w a l
R e in je c tio n
0 .0 1 0 10 00 0

DESCRIPTION CHARACTERIZATION
Pore Throat Size (micron)

Capillary Pressure (psi)

0 .1 0 0 10 00

THIN SECT, SEM-EDS, XRD, XRF etc.

1 .0 0 0 10 0

International Mineral characterization 1 0 .0 0 0 10

standards
Clay minerals 1 0 0 .0 0 0
0 .4 0 0.35 0 .3 0 0.25 0 .2 0 0.15 0 .1 0 0.05
1
0 .0 0

Spreadsheet database Pore characterization

M e rc u r y In je ct e d ( c c)

0 .5
( S a m p le 1 3 / 9 6 )

0 .4

Lithic log plots

Incremental Saturation (%)

MERCURY INJECTION
0 .3

0 .2

Pore interconnectivity 0 .1

0
0 .0 0 1 0 .0 1 0 .1 1 10 1 00
P o r e T h r o a t R a d iu s ( m ic r o n )

13
Core Reports Special Core Analyses
 Core database
 Water – Oil Saturation
 Core GR and Density Logs  Electrical Measurements
 Profile Permeability  Geomechanical Tests
 Acoustic Tests
 Core Images
 Capillary Pressure Tests
 Plug Images  Centrifuge
 Porous Plate
 Geological description
 Mercury
 Petrographic Analyses  Relative Permeability tests
 Basic Core Data  Wettability Tests
 Recovery Tests
S. Saner 82

Core Data Utilization

Stored Material
 Drill Cuttings (Washed, Unwashed)
 Core
 Whole Core Samples
 2/3 Portion
 1/3 portion - Only for Archiving
 Biscuits - Only for Archiving
 Plugs (V, H)
 Plug End Pieces
 Thin Sections

Routine Core Analyses




Geological core description
Petrographic and mineralogical analyses
Safety Comes First
 SEM-EDS, XRD, XRF
 Continuous core measurements
Surface gamma logging
High pressure
High Temperature


 Surface density logging

Profile permeability measurements
Hazardous chemicals


 Core imaging
 Basic core measurements
 Porosity
 Permeability
 Grain Density
 CT scanning
S. Saner 81

14
Unbalanced (insufficient theory and practice)

S. Saner 86

15