See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324457775

Downhole Estimation of Relative Permeability With Integration of

Formation-Tester Measurements and Advanced Well Logs

Article  in  PETROPHYSICS · April 2018

DOI: 10.30632/PJV59N2-2018A8

CITATIONS READS
2 3,101

9 authors, including:

Mehdi Azari
Consulting
89 PUBLICATIONS   365 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Hydraulic Fracture Modeling View project

How to start and grow a business View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mehdi Azari on 23 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

PETROPHYSICS, VOL. 59, NO. 2 (APRIL 2018); PAGES 234–244; 11 FIGURES. DOI: 10.30632/PJV59N2-2018a8

Downhole Estimation of Relative Permeability With Integration of Formation-Tester

Measurements and Advanced Well Logs1
Hamid Hadibeik2, Mehdi Azari2, Mahmoud Kalawina2, Sandeep Ramakrishna2, Sami Eyuboglu2, Waqar Khan2,
Mona Al-Rushaid3, Hamad Al-Rashidi3, and Munir Ahmad3

ABSTRACT

Reservoir relative permeability as a function of pressure-transient analysis of mini-drillstem tests (mini-

saturation is critical for assessing reservoir hydrocarbon
recovery, selecting the well-completion method, and
determining the production strategy. It is a key input to
reservoir simulation for predicting lifetime production
of a well. Estimation of relative permeability curves at
reservoir conditions is also a crucial task for successful
reservoir modeling and history matching of production
data. The relative permeability data estimated from core
analysis may cause concern regarding representativeness,
and adjustments are typically necessary for successful
production forecasting. This paper proposes a new method
to obtain relative permeability curves with downhole
DSTs) and well-log-derived saturations.
The new approach was based on performing mini-
DSTs in the free water, oil, and oil-water transition
zones. Analyses of the mini-DST buildup tests provided
absolute formation permeability, endpoints of relative
permeability to both oil and water, and curvature of the
relative permeability data. Additionally, porosity and
resistivity logs were used to determine irreducible water,
residual oil, and transition zone saturations. Combining
all of these downhole measurements provided the relative
permeability curves.

INTRODUCTION measurement include core data analysis in the laboratory

When multiphase Àuids Àow in a reservoir, the Àow
rate of each phase depends on the effective permeability of
that phase (Alkafeef et al., 2016). Effective permeability
is obtained from absolute permeability of a reservoir
multiplied by the relative permeability. Although absolute
permeability is a function of reservoir pore geometry and
does not change with Àuid type, relative permeability is a
Àuid-dependent parameter and mainly depends on Àuid
saturation, pore geometry, viscosity, and surface tension
(Goda and Behrenbruch, 2004).
Relative permeability is important during ¿eld
development and secondary oil-recovery processes.
WaterÀooding plans and injector and producer well
assignments are not successful without a good estimation of
relative permeability. Additionally, production forecasting
is possible through a reservoir model that includes proper
relative permeability (Galley, 2016).
Conventional methods of relative permeability
(Honarpour and Mahmood, 1988). This type of measurement
has been widely used in the industry; however, it has
shortcomings (Richardson et al., 1954; Keelan, 1972;
Mungan, 1972; Cuiec, 1975; Anderson, 1987; Kokkedee et
al., 1996). Transferring the core from downhole conditions
to surface removes the con¿ned pressure and stresses.
Additionally, cleaning and processing the core for testing
may change the pore structure of the core. Moreover, the
Àuid used in the laboratory is not identical to the downhole
in-situ Àuid. Although there are mitigations, such as special
cleaning and using reservoir Àuids, core measurements
might not be always representative of in-situ reservoir
relative permeability (Rose, 1951; 1980; 1987; Heaviside et
al., 1983; Beal and Nunes, 1984; Honarpour et al., 1986;
Huang and Honarpour, 1996; Crotti and Rosbaco, 1998;
Chen and Wood, 2001; Nguyen et al., 2005).
Considering the previously mentioned concerns, there
is a need to estimate relative permeability using undisturbed
downhole measurements (Angeles et al., 2010).

Manuscript received by the Editor July 28, 2017; revised manuscript received December 15, 2018; manuscript accepted December 18, 2017.
1
Originally presented at the SPWLA 58th Annual Logging Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA, 17–21 June, Paper QQQ.
2
Halliburton
3
Kuwait Oil Company

234 PETROPHYSICS April 2018

 Downhole Estimation of Relative Permeability With Integration of Formation-Tester Measurements and Advanced Well Logs
FIELD BACKGROUND
The Greater Burgan ¿eld (Fig. 1), discovered in 1938,
is located in southeast Kuwait and comprises the Magwa,
Ahmadi, and Burgan ¿elds, constituting the largest known
siliciclastic oil reservoir on Earth. The size of the ¿eld itself,
20-km wide and 37.5-km long, provides an estimate of its
large extension. The three main formations, Wara, Burgan,
and Mauddud, have a total thickness of 1,500 ft with
complex behaviors resulting from Àuvial/tidal depositional
settings. Because of these complexities, it is necessary
to generate a reservoir model consisting of several rock
types, ranging from clean, coarse, and massive sands to
silty or shaly sandstones and silts. Each rock type has been
characterized by its petrophysical properties and reservoir
behavior (shale volume, porosity, permeability, and water
saturation). Dynamic data are necessary because of these
variations and the distribution of sediments to help improve
the model. However, the number of core samples analyzed
in the laboratory was not suf¿cient to provide appropriate
relative permeability and capillary pressure curves for the
dynamic reservoir model (Hetherington, 1961). Downhole
relative permeability estimation was determined to be an
alternative to core sample analysis, and it was executed in
the Burgan middle sand.
Fig. 1—Greater Burgan ¿eld map (Sorkhabi, 2012).
April 2018
DOWNHOLE RELATIVE PERMEABILITY
ESTIMATION
WorkÀow
Formation-tester measurements were used to estimate
relative permeability based on the workÀow depicted in Fig
2. The inputs of this workÀow were pressure measurements
from mini-DSTs in oil, water, and transition zones, and water
saturation logs. The followings steps are described in Fig. 2:
1. The absolute permeability value multiplied by
thickness contributing to Àow, k×h, is estimated from
the pressure-transient analysis of a buildup test that
was performed below the free water level (FWL).
2. The oil effective permeability multiplied by thickness
contributing to Àow, ko×h, is estimated through
analysis of a pressure buildup test in the oil zone that
is at irreducible water saturation.
3. The water effective permeability multiplied by
thickness contributing to Àow, kw×h, is estimated
through pressure-transient analysis of the buildup
test at the water zone below the oil-water contact
(OWC). This point is optional in the relative
permeability estimation. In the ¿eld case presented
in this paper, the authors did not perform a buildup
test to determine this endpoint is because
the relative permeability of water equals 1 at 100%
water saturation, as shown in Fig. 2 (the red point).
Therefore, the authors were still able to estimate the
water relative permeability curve despite not
estimating the endpoint of water (blue point in Fig.
2).
4. The effective permeabilities of oil and water
multiplied by thickness (ko×h and kw×h) are divided
by the absolute permeability multiplied by thickness
(kabs×h), which provides the relative permeability
values. Fig. 3 illustrates the steps for this part.
5. The irreducible water and residual oil saturations
were calculated from resistivity-based saturation log.
Other logs, such as an NMR log, can also be used
to increase the con¿dence level in the calculated
saturation. Irreducible water saturation, Swirr, is
estimated in the oil zone, and residual oil saturation is
estimated below the OWC.
6. To determine the curvature of relative permeability,
the effective permeabilities of oil and water
multiplied by thickness are measured in the transition
zone. Figure 4 shows how to obtain relative
permeability of oil and water in the transition zone.
Increasing the number of mini-DSTs in the transition
zone adds con¿dence to the estimated curvature.
PETROPHYSICS 235

Fig. 2—Estimation of relative permeability curves with integration of
formation tester and well logs.
Fig. 3—Determining the endpoints of relative permeability curves from
formation-tester measurements.
Fig. 4—Estimation of relative permeabilities
measurements in the transition zone.
236
Hadibeik et al.
Assumptions in the WorkÀow to Estimate Downhole
Relative Permeability
The main assumption in this workÀow is that the entire
tested interval is vertically connected. This assumption
ensures that the relative permeability curve that is obtained
in the tested interval is the average of relative permeability
curves of all the rock facies in the tested interval. In other
words, this assumption ensures that the tested interval has
an average absolute permeability. This assumption is also
important because if the thickness of tested interval, h, is
common among all the tests, permeability times thickness,
k×h, can be used instead of permeability. The pressure-
transient analysis of buildup tests also provides k×h. Since
the Burgan middle sand was vertically continuous and no
boundaries were detected in the analysis of pressure buildup
data, this assumption is valid.
During Àuid pumpout in the transition zone, the Àow rate
was maintained at a steady rate to reassure that the water-oil
ratio was constant at each pumpout station. Additionally,
the formation Àuid viscosity, which is necessary to calculate
permeability in pressure-transient analysis (PTA), is
estimated by knowing the Àuid gas-oil ratio (GOR), pressure,
temperature, and density. Another unknown factor needed
for PTA is the reservoir pay-zone height that is open to Àow
(h). This height is not the same as the tool probe height and
should be estimated from vertical interference tests or well
logs. Well logs, such as gamma ray (GR) and density, were
used in the Burgan reservoir to determine the pay zone open
to Àow.
Calculation of Water Saturation from Well Logs
Water saturation (Sw) was estimated using shallow
and deep resistivity logs. Resistivity-based interpretation
methods use the Archie model (Eq. 1) to identify oil-
and water-bearing intervals and provide highly accurate
saturation estimates in the virgin zone.
, (1)
where the formation water resistivity value, Rw, was obtained
based on analysis of water samples taken from the Burgan
formation; the saturation exponent n and the cementation
exponent m values are based on core analysis results; a is a
constant derived empirically; Rt is formation resistivity; and
‫ ׋‬is porosity.
Designing Formation-Tester Pumpouts
A formation tester with a simple circular probe was used
to perform the mini-DST because of the large mobility that
was expected in the reservoir. Based on the logs, four points
from mini-DST were selected for Àuid pumpout; from the top the ¿rst point
PETROPHYSICS April 2018
 Downhole Estimation of Relative Permeability With Integration of Formation-Tester Measurements and Advanced Well Logs

is at irreducible water saturation Swirr; the second and third
points are in the transition zone; and the last point is in the
free water zone. Fig. 5 shows the pumpout points.
Pumpout Depth 1: Water Zone
The ¿rst pumpout point was in water. The objective of
this point was to determine the average absolute permeability
for this sand; hence, it was taken below FWL. The measured
density by the formation tester (1.08 g/cm3) indicated a water
sample of 160,000-ppm salinity.
A total of 150 L was pumped during this drawdown
test. Figure 6 shows the log-log, semi-log, and simulation
match along with the results of the mini-DST. Absolute
permeability multiplied by thickness, k×h, was determined
to be 68,773 md-ft.
Pumpout Depth 2: Oil Zone
Pretest pressure measurements indicated an oil gradient
of 0.338 psi/ft, corresponding to a Àuid density of 0.78 g/
cm3, which correlated well with the density of 0.78 g/cm3

Fig. 5—Log display. Track 1 shows gamma ray, SP, caliper, and bit size; Track 2 shows density, neutron, PE, and correction applied on the density log.
Track 3 is the array of resistivities. Track 4 shows the water and hydrocarbon volumes. Pumpout stations are depicted by black dots on the Track 4.

April 2018 PETROPHYSICS 237

 Hadibeik et al.

measured at this sampling depth during the pumpout. The oil
gradient obtained from the pretest pressure measurements
was con¿rmed by the oil pumpout at this depth. The objective
of this point was to determine the endpoint of the relative
permeability curve at Swirr. This saturation was computed to
be 7% based on the openhole resistivity logs at the depth of
testing.
A total of 130 L was pumped. Fluid density was
measured as 0.78 g/cm3 by the sensor located at the outlet
of the pump. Figure 7 shows the log-log, semi-log, and the
simulation match along with the results of the mini-DST.
Effective permeability to oil times thickness, ko×h, was
determined to be 58,617 md-ft.

Fig. 6—Log-log, semi-log, simulation match, and the analysis results for mini-DST at the water zone.

Fig. 7—Log-log, semi-log, simulation match, and the analysis results for mini-DST in the oil zone.

238 PETROPHYSICS April 2018

 Downhole Estimation of Relative Permeability With Integration of Formation-Tester Measurements and Advanced Well Logs
Pumpout Depths 3 and 4: Transition Zone
The objective of the pumpout in the transition zone was
to de¿ne the curvature of the relative permeability curve.
A weighted-density average approach was mathematically
derived (Appendix 1) to compute the individual phase rates
from the total rate measured while pumping out by means of
a wireline formation tester.
A total of 139 L was pumped at the third point. Fluid
density was measured at 0.808 g/cm3 by the density sensor
located at the outlet of the pump, indicating a mixture of
oil and water Àowing. The water saturation read from logs
at the third point was estimated at 35.49%. Figure 8 shows
the log-log, semi-log, and simulation match along with the
results of the mini-DST. Effective permeability to oil times
thickness, ko×h, was determined to be 54,806 md-ft, and the
effective permeability to water times thickness, kw×h, was
determined to be 2,234.4 md-ft. Similarly, another pumpout
was performed in the transition zone about 20 ft below
the third pumpout depth. Based on the well logs, Sw at this
point was estimated at 65.6%. Figure 9 shows the log-log,
semi-log, and simulation match along with the results of
the mini-DST. Effective permeability to oil times thickness,
ko×h, was determined to be 9,082.5 md-ft, and the effective
permeability to water times thickness, kw×h, was determined
to be 21,735 md-ft.
Fig. 8—Log-log, semi-log, simulation match, and the analysis results for mini-DST for pumpout Depth 3 in the transition zone.
April 2018
Relative Permeability Curves
The downhole effective permeability estimation was
described in detail. After following the workÀow, the
effective permeability data obtained from the mini-DST
analyses were divided by the absolute permeability to yield
the relative permeability curves shown in Fig. 10. A best-¿t
line connects the points. The relative permeability of Fig. 10
shows a mixed to water-wet reservoir rock for the Burgan
middle sand.
DISCUSSION
The surface laboratory-measured relative permeability
cannot duplicate the Àuid Àow in the reservoir because the
rock stresses and geometry of any microfracture in the core
will change. Duplicating the reservoir Àuid to Àow through
the core is another issue that in the authors’ opinion makes
laboratory-generated relative permeability less reliable
compared to downhole Àow measurements. The downhole
relative permeability helps to establish realistic Àow-rate
expectations from a reservoir and hence prevent costly
workover. It also helps with reservoir-management decisions
concerning the proper enhanced oil recovery method to use.
Estimation of saturation, particularly in the transition
zone, adds uncertainty to the corresponding relative
permeability values. To overcome the uncertainty in
PETROPHYSICS 239
 Hadibeik et al.

saturation for each tested depth, resistivity, dielectric, and
NMR logs were run to estimate Àuid saturation independently.
The minimum and maximum saturation values were chosen
based on these measurements, and an uncertainty envelope
was generated for the relative permeability curves shown in
Fig. 11.
This study was performed to obtain the two-phase
relative permeability between oil and water. For a three-
phase relative permeability, it is necessary to use a reservoir
that has all the three phases of oil, gas, and water Àowing. A
gas cap in communication with the oil below it, or a saturated
reservoir below the bubblepoint pressure is necessary to
obtain three-phase relative permeabilities.

Fig. 9—Log-log, semi-log, simulation match, and the analysis results for mini-DST for pumpout Depth 4 in the transition zone.

Fig. 10—Relative permeability curves obtained from mini-DST analysis.

Fig. 11—Uncertainty bounds for relative permeability based on
saturation.

240 PETROPHYSICS April 2018

 Downhole Estimation of Relative Permeability With Integration of Formation-Tester Measurements and Advanced Well Logs

kabs = absolute permeability

CONCLUSIONS ko = relative permeability of oil
kw = relative permeability of gas
A new workÀow was developed to estimate relative kro = relative permeability to oil
permeability in downhole conditions. The advantages of krw = relative permeability to water
using this method are based on in-situ measurements that m= Archie cementation exponent
include the actual reservoir Àuids and are performed under mt = total Àuid mass
reservoir conditions of formation stress, pore pressure, and mo = mass of oil
temperature. The estimated relative permeability represents mw = mass of water
the entire interval tested with a formation tester. n= Archie saturation exponent
This method does not disturb the core to obtain the Rt = formation resistivity
relative permeability curve. Issues, such as maintaining core Rw = water resistivity
integrity, accidental microfracture formation during coring, Sw = water saturation
using the exact Àuids present in the reservoir, and accidental Swirr = irreducible water saturation
wettability changes during core cleaning, are avoided using Vt = total Àuid volume
this direct downhole relative permeability estimation. Vo = volume of oil
Another bene¿cial advantage of the downhole Vw = volume of water
measurement is the sample size. The relative permeability ȡo = density of oil
obtained by core analysis uses a small sample of the reservoir ȡw = density of water
rock, while this in-situ technique uses the entire pay zone ‫=׋‬ porosity
contributing to the Àow and extending into the reservoir up
to the radius of investigation.
REFERENCES
Finally, downhole relative permeability estimation can
be achieved much faster than core-derived values because
Alkafeef, S., Hadibeik, H., Azari, M., and El-Daou, M.,
rock and Àuid conditioning are not necessary.
2016, Effects of Pore Pressure and Two-Phase Flow
The limitation of this evaluation technique is a need to
on Permeability Estimation of Reservoir Rock, Paper
test all the phases, such as oil, transition, and water zones.
SPE-183136 presented at the Abu Dhabi International
In addition, all of the Àuid column should be vertically
Petroleum Exhibition & Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE,
connected.
7–10 November. DOI: 10.2118/183136-MS.
Anderson, W., 1987, Wettability Literature Survey—Part
NOMENCLATURE
4: Effects of Wettability on Capillary Pressure, Paper
SPE-15271, Journal of Petroleum Technology, 39(10),
Abbreviations
1283–1300, DOI:/10.2118/15271-PA.
DST = drillstem test Angeles, R., Torres-Verdín, C., Hadibeik, A., and
DPS = dual-probe section Sepehrnoori, K., 2010, Estimation of Capillary
GR = gamma ray Pressure and Relative Permeability From Formation-
GOR = gas-oil ratio Tester Measurements Using Design of Experiment and
MD = measured depth Data-Weighing Inversion: Synthetic and Field
NMR = nuclear magnetic resonance Examples, Journal of Petroleum Science and
PBU = pressure buildup Engineering, 75(1–2), 19–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.petrol.
PTA = pressure-transient analysis 2010.10.006.
PE = photoelectric log Beal, B.A., Jr., and Nunes, C.S., 1984, Velocity and Gravity
OWC = oil-water contact Effects In Relative Permeability Measurements,
FWL = free water level unpublished MS thesis, Department of Petroleum
Symbols Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
A = constant derived empirically https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/research/geoth/
fo = fractional Àow of oil publications/techreports/SGP-TR-082.pdf. Accesed
fw = fractional Àow of water March 15, 2018.
h = thickness or height Chen, A.L., and Wood, A.C., III, 2001, Rate Effects on
k = permeability, md Water-Oil Relative Permeability, Paper SCA 2001-19
presented at the SCA International Symposium,

April 2018 PETROPHYSICS 241

 Hadibeik et al.
Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 17–19 September.
Crotti, M.A., and Rosbaco, J.A., 1998, Relative Permeability
Curves: The InÀuence of Flow Direction and
Heterogeneities; Dependence of End Point Saturations
on Displacement Mechanisms, Paper SPE-39657
presented at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery
Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, 19–22 April. DOI:
10.2118/39657-MS.
Cuiec, L.E., 1975, Restoration of the Natural State of Core
Samples, Paper SPE-5634 presented at the Fall Meeting
of the Society of Petroleum Engineers of AIME, Dallas,
Texas, USA, 28 September–1 October. DOI: 10.2118/
5634-MS.
Galley, S.V., 2016, Pay Cutoff De¿nition Based on Dynamic
Reservoir Parameters, Paper Y, Transactions, SPWLA
57th Annual Logging Symposium, Reykjavik, Iceland,
25–29 June.
Goda, H.M., and Behrenbruch, P., 2004, Using a Modi¿ed
Brooks-Corey Model to Study Oil-Water Relative
Permeability for Diverse Pore Structures, Paper SPE-
88538 presented at the SPE Asia Paci¿c Oil and Gas
Conference and Exhibition, Perth, Australia, 18–20
October. DOI: 10.2118/88538-MS.
Heaviside, J., Black, C.J.J., and Berry, J.F., 1983,
Fundamentals of Relative Permeability: Experimental
and Theoretical Considerations, Paper SPE-12173
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, San Francisco, California, USA, 5–8
October. DOI: 10.2118/12173-MS.
Hetherington, G., Jr., 1961, Relative Permeabilities and
Capillary Pressure in the Burgan and Wara Sands, Paper
SPE-81 presented at the SPE Middle East Regional
Meeting, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, 27–29 March. DOI:
10.2118/81-MS.
Honarpour, M.M., Koederitz, L.F., and Harvey, A.H., 1986,
Relative Permeabiliy of Petroleum Reservoirs, CRC
Press. ISBN: 978-0849357398.
Honarpour, M., and Mahmood, S.M., 1988, Relative-
Permeability Measurements: An Overview, Paper SPE-
18565, Journal of Petroleum Technology, 40(8), 963–
966. DOI: 10.2118/18565-PA.
Huang, D.D., and Honarpour, M.M., 1996, Capillary
End Effects in CoreÀood Calculations, Paper SCA-9634,
presented at the SCA International Symposium,
Montpellier, France, 8–10 September.
Keelan, D.K., 1972, A Critical Review of Core Analysis
Techniques, Paper PETSOC-72-02-06, Journal of
Canadian Petroleum Technology, 11(2). DOI:
10.2118/72-02-06.
Kokkedee, J.A., Boom, W., Frens, A.M., and Maas, J.G.,
1996, Improved Special Core Analysis: Scope for a
242 PETROPHYSICS
Reduced Residual Oil Saturation, Paper SCA-9601
presented at the SCA International Symposium,
Montpellier, France, 8–10 September.
Mungan, N., 1972, Relative Permeability Measurements
Using Reservoir Fluids, Paper SPE-3427, SPE Journal,
12(5), 398–402. DOI: 10.2118/3427-PA.
Nguyen, V.H., Sheppard, A.P., Knackstedt, M.A., and
Pinczewski, W.V., 2005, The Effects of Displacement
Rate and Wettability on Imbibition Relative
Permeabilities, Paper SCA2005-39 presented at the SCA
International Symposium, Toronto, Canada, 21–25
August.
Richardson, J.G., Perkins F.M., Jr., and Osoba, J.S., 1954,
Differences in Behavior of Fresh and Aged East Texas
Woodbine Cores, Paper SPE-408-G presented at the Fall
Meeting of the Petroleum Branch of AIME, San Antonio,
Texas, USA, 17–20 October.
Rose, W., 1951, Some Problems of Relative Permeability
Measurement, Paper WPC-4130 presented at the 3rd
World Petroleum Conference, The Hague, The
Netherlands, 28 May–6 June.
Rose, W., 1980, Some Problems in Applying the Hassler
Relative Permeability Method, Paper SPE-8034,
Journal of Petroleum Technology, 32(7), 1161–1163,
DOI: 10.2118/8034-PA.
Rose, W., 1987, Relative Permeability, Chapter 28, Paper
SPE-1987-28-PEH, in Bradley, H.B., Editor, Petroleum
Engineering Handbook, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
ISBN: 1-55563-010-3
Sorkhabi, R., 2012, The Great Burgan Field, Kuwait,
GeoExPro, 9(1), 42–46.
APPENDIX 1
To calculate the effective oil and water permeabilities,
the Àow rate to both the water and oil phase must be
determined. To do so, a density sensor was used based on
the following mathematical derivation:
The total Àuid volume is:
Vt = Vo + Vw , (A1)
where Vo is oil volume and Vw is water volume. Similarly, the
total mass is:
m t = mo + mw , (A2)
where mo is mass of oil and mw is mass of water. Fluid density
is calculated as:
, and (A3)
April 2018
 Downhole Estimation of Relative Permeability With Integration of Formation-Tester Measurements and Advanced Well Logs
, (A4)
where ȡo and ȡw are density of oil and water respectively. The
fractional Àow is calculated as:
, and (A5)
, (A6)
where fo and fw are fractional Àow of oil and water,
respectively.
Using Eqs. A2, A3, and A4, total density can be written
as:
, (A7)
and can be rearranged to:
(A8)
The fractional Àow of oil and water can be written as:
, and (A9)
(A10)
From the fractional Àows and total Àow rate, the phase Àow
rates are calculated to estimate the effective permeabilities.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Hamid Hadibeik is a reservoir engineer with the
Halliburton Deepwater Reservoir Solutions Center. He has
been involved in the global operation of wireline projects
performed by Halliburton, integrating advanced well logs
to provide solutions for ¿eld exploration and development.
Before Halliburton, He was an exploration petrophysicist
for the Gulf of Mexico at Maersk Oil. He holds MSc and
PhD degrees in petroleum engineering from the University
of Texas at Austin and is a member of SPWLA and SPE.
Mehdi Azari is a senior technical advisor for
Halliburton with more than 35 years of experience in the oil
and gas industry. He is currently working in the Reservoir
Solutions Center of the Wireline and Perforating product
line in Houston. He was previously a professor of petroleum
engineering at the University of Wyoming and worked at
the OSCO computer center in Abadan, Iran. He holds a
April 2018 PETROPHYSICS
BSc degree in chemical engineering from Abadan Institute
of Technology and MSc and PhD degrees in petroleum
engineering from the University of Southern California. He
is a registered professional engineer, has authored more than
85 publications, and holds 14 US and international patents.
Mahmoud Kalawina joined Halliburton in 2012 as
a petrophysicist working in the Formation and Reservoir
Solution sub-PSL. Based in Kuwait, he is responsible for
petrophysical evaluation, handling data processing, and
presenting interpretation for advanced well logs, such as
NMR, dielectric, and mineralogical logs. He received his BSc
degree with honors in geology from Al-Azhar University,
Egypt. Before joining Halliburton, he worked for three years
as a petrophysicist for Bapetco E & P Company and a joint
venture of Royal Shell in Egypt.
Sandeep Ramakrishna manages the Deepwater
Reservoir Solutions Center in the Formation and Reservoir
Solutions (FRS) sub-PSL at Halliburton and is based in
Houston. This center comprises a multidisciplinary team
providing reservoir characterization services to operators
globally. Before joining Halliburton, He worked for an
independent oil and gas company in the US midcontinent
area and has also worked for Geoservices in the Middle East.
He has more than 18 years of experience in the industry and
has been actively involved in the development of techniques
to analyze conventional and unconventional reservoirs.
He holds an MSc degree in petroleum engineering from
the University of Tulsa, Oklahoma, and a BSc degree in
geology from the University of Pune, India. He is a member
of SPWLA, SPE, and AAPG.
Sami Eyuboglu became a Global Formation Testing and
Sampling Advisor at the Halliburton Deepwater Reservoir
Solutions Center in Houston in January 2016. Before that
role, he worked in Saudi Arabia for four years with different
roles in both Technology and Wireline and Perforating
Services. He has been with Halliburton since April 2008.
He specializes in both wireline pumpout formation testers
and logging while drilling. Previously, He was a research
professor at The Ohio State University. He received his BSc
and MSc degrees in mining engineering from Hacettepe
University, Ankara, Turkey, and his PhD degree in applied
physics from the University of Arkansas, Little Rock.
Waqar Khan is a reservoir engineer with the Halliburton
Deepwater Reservoir Solutions Center. During his time in
the industry, Khan has worked extensively on both offshore
and onshore reservoirs. Currently, he is focused on global
deepwater projects specializing in pressure testing and
243
 Hadibeik et al.

sampling, production management, and reservoir simulation.

He has experience working in deepwater reservoirs in the
Gulf of Mexico, Angola, the Falkland Islands, and Brazil. He
holds an MSc degree in petroleum engineering from Texas
A&M University and is a member of SPWLA and SPE.

Mona Al-Rushaid is a senior specialist petrophysicist

with 15-plus years of experience in ¿eld development of the
south and east Kuwait directorate. She leads a petrophysical
project and daily operation logging activities, and leads an
FE team for SEK. She is also involved in geotechnical studies
for Burgan. Recently, She led and managed the reservoir
characterization unit for the Wara and Burgan reservoir
project for the Great Burgan well log data to improve the
petrophysical model. She is interested in becoming the
petrophysical adviser for SEK and focuses on subservice
uncertainty risk management. She has several publications
and is a member of SPE and SPWLA.

Hamad Al-Rashidi is the head of the reservoir

technology cluster in the Research and Technology group at
Kuwait Oil Company (KOC). He has more than 10 years of
experience in the Àuid and rock characterization domain and
has been actively involved in the establishment of the KOC
Capability lab in 2016 to conduct and analyze advanced
PVT analysis. He holds a BSc in petroleum engineering
from the College of Engineering and Petroleum, Kuwait and
is a member of SPE.

Munir Ahmad joined Kuwait Oil Company (KOC) in

2014 as a specialist geologist in the Subsurface Team of the
Research and Technology Group. Before joining KOC, he
worked as a senior geologist for Long Run Exploration Ltd,
Calgary, Canada, from 2006. He has more than 23 years of
industry experience, including more than ¿ve years as an
oil and gas consultant in Calgary, Canada. He holds a BSc
and MSc in applied geology from the University of Punjab,
Lahore, Pakistan and an MSc and PhD in exploration
geophysics from the University of Leeds, UK. Ahmad is
a professional member of the Association of Professional
Engineers and Geoscientists of Alberta (APEGA) and an
active member of CSPG, AAPG, and SPE.

244 PETROPHYSICS April 2018

View publication stats