Characterization of carbonate reservoir by

using nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)

logging analysis at hydrocarbon field C South
Sumatera
Cite as: AIP Conference Proceedings 2023, 020261 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5064258
Published Online: 23 October 2018

C. Darmawan, M. S. Rosid and R. Rulliyansyah

ARTICLES YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

Carbonate reservoir characterization with pore type inversion using differential effective
medium (DEM) model at “X” field, East Java
AIP Conference Proceedings 1862, 030179 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4991283

Identification of fractures in carbonates using sonic imaging log: Example from the central of
East European Plain
Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics 23, 030003 (2015); https://doi.org/10.1121/2.0000060

Carbonate reservoir rock type classification using comparison of Naïve Bayes and Random
Forest method in field “S” East Java
AIP Conference Proceedings 2168, 020019 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5132446

AIP Conference Proceedings 2023, 020261 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5064258 2023, 020261

© 2018 Author(s).
 Characterization of Carbonate Reservoir by Using Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance (NMR) Logging Analysis at
Hydrocarbon Field C South Sumatera
C. Darmawan1, M. S. Rosid1, a), and R. Rulliyansyah2
1
Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences (FMIPA),
Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, Indonesia
2
PT Pertamina Exploration Production, Jalan Prof. Dr. Satrio, Jakarta 12950, Indonesia
a)
Corresponding Author: syamsu.rosid@ui.ac.id

Abstract. Carbonate reservoirs are known to have very complex petrophysical parameters compared to sandstone
reservoirs. This is due to the porosity and permeability of rocks that are often heterogeneous and unconnected. Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance (NMR) is a well logging method that can characterize the reservoir by using porosity parameters
including pore distribution and fluid type determination in pores. Determination of rock porosity is important for
predicting the quality of the reservoir. The T2 cutoff value is reflected in the valley values between peaks of the T2
distribution data due to the proton movement in the rocks. The permeability prediction using NMR is strongly influenced
by the value of T2 cutoff. This is because the pore state is affected by porosity-permeability. Interpretation to characterize
reservoir is influenced by determination of T2 cutoff value. Porosity as the main result of NMR processing will result in an
estimation of the permeability value. The hydrocarbon field C is located in the basin of South Sumatra and produces gas.
Based on an earlier petrophysical analysis, the Baturaja formation is a production zone. The NMR yield on the well M4
has a T2 cutoff value of 92 ms and R1 well has a value of 100 ms. This value is compared with conventional core and
petrophysical samples. The NMR response results in this study support NMR behavior on carbonate samples, which
sensitive to NMR measurements on porosity. A small T2 cutoff value would represent a small porosity compared to a large
T2 cutoff that would represent a large porosity. The NMR product analysis is used for the evaluation of rock formations.

INTRODUCTION

Porosity in carbonate rocks is a combination of various primary and secondary pore types that can affect the
permeability and porosity of rocks. As a petrophysical parameter, the effect of porosity on permeability is influenced
by the connectivity capability of the pore type. Primary porosity is usually found only in young carbonate rocks
which usually have little effect on the reservoir. One of the advantages of NMR is to measure the independent
porosity of mineralogy in rock formations [1]. The echo curve is only affected by the hydrogen content of the
formation fluid and is not affected by rock-bulk proportions [1]. The NMR-based permeability estimate requires a T2
cutoff value that is due to the pore type affecting the porosity-permeability relationship [2]. The core sample
measurements showed 33 ms T2 cutoff that support for siliclastic sediments [3], while for carbonate rocks had a T2 cutoff
value of 92 ms [4], but various publications show T2 cutoff can range from 90 to 700 ms depending on the type of
carbonate rock [1, 5, 6].
In the formation evaluation, NMR logging is a tool used for evaluation at the wells of the Sumatera Selatan
Basin production through Talang Akar and Baturaja Formations. Hydrocarbon field C is located in South Sumatera
and has two wells namely M4 and R1. Baturaja Formation formed at the age of early Miocene in the form of
carbonate deposit and become zone of exploration evaluation. In this case, NMR logging is done after the resistivity
log, litho-density and PEF-log triple combo. NMR tool has advantages for complex formation evaluation techniques
such as carbonate reservoir because it is capable of measuring independent-lithologic porosity called productive
porosity (Free Fluid Volume). Combined with other logs, CMR (Combinable Magnetic Resonance) can be expected

Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Current Progress in Mathematics and Sciences 2017 (ISCPMS2017)
AIP Conf. Proc. 2023, 020261-1–020261-6; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5064258
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1741-0/$30.00

020261-1
for oil-water contact determination (OWC), which is difficult to do with other wireline logs. The identification of the
presence of hydrocarbons in the formation is one of the most important tasks in petrophysical interpretation. NMR is
a proton measurement analogous to the identification of porosity formation for formation evaluation. Evaluation on
Baturaja Formations in wells M4 and R1 is notoriously difficult with varying porosity properties. The main purpose
of identifying the formation to delineate the reservoir zone. Fluid distribution and flow characteristic such as
permeability and productive fluid volume are important to many wells development.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

NMR, Core and Drill Stem Test for Evaluation of Rock Formation.
Figure 1 illustrates the implementation steps of NMR with other wireline logs to characterize petrophysical
properties of reservoir carbonate. The workflow contains several steps; each step provides answers and input
information as a subsystem step. Processing begins with conventional petrophysics such as density, resistivity, PEF
and neutrons to determine lithology and porosity. On the other hand, NMR processing is done for porosity
determination and divides porosity as porosity calibration from conventional petrophysics. As the quality control of
the processing required data from the core rock and stem drill test to ensure proper processing.
Logging NMR is a measure of the total porosity and able to divide the total porosity into pore-space distribution
and fluid content. Measurements are made with the main static magnet B0 which generates M0 magnetization on the
hydrogen atoms in the formation. M0 is a proportional of many hydrogen atoms and counts as porosity of NMR
(ϕNMR). The application of magnetic interference B1 from the radio frequency causes the T2 relaxation time of the
hydrogen proton contained in the pores of the fluid. CMR log is done with standard T2 measurement mode. 200 spin
echoes with inter time echo (wait time) 200 microseconds. These spin sequence groups are referred to as phase-
alternated pairs (PAPS) consisting of echo amplitude X, echo amplitude R and echo amplitude CMR. Then the total
acquisition for 1 PAP is 0.3 - 3000 milliseconds with a logging speed of 700 feet/hour.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Volumetric Formation
Figure 2 is a NMR product of dividing the T2 distribution against a T2 cutoff that produces a volumetric Formation
at a depth of 1919.86 mMD. The response of the T2 distribution will vary depending on the hydrogen atom binding
structure in the rock pores. In theory T2 has two peaks which is the time of relaxation due to the disturbance of high
energy level of B1 to low energy level of B0 as shown in Fig. 2. Amplitude M0 decays with time relaxation T2 as
follow the Equation 1,
−t

M (t ) = M 0e T2 (1)

FIGURE 1. Overview of integrated analysis of petrophysical Logs

020261-2
 FIGURE 2. Interpretation of T2 distribution curve to volumetric formation.

FFV=0.009*CORE POR+0.0032
R=0.869; R2=0.748; RMSE=0.009

FIGURE 3. FFV curve to effective porosity of core rock of well M4.

The fluid present in the pore causes T2 decay faster than bulk fluid if the fluid interacts with the rock surface
causing NMR relaxation. In short the fluid diffusion limit of T2 is given by Equation 2.

1 S 1 (2)
= ρ2 ( ) + ( )
T2 V T2 B

where S is the surface area of the pore, V is the volume of the pores, T2B is the transversal time relaxation of bulk
fluid. The value of ρ2 is influenced by the mineral surface and the type of rock fluid.
Total porosity is the total area below the T2 curve. BFV and FFV are the area under the T2 curve after being
separated by T2 cutoff. The T2 cutoff value used 92 ms to define the productive porosity of FFV. It is therefore necessary
to determine the appropriate T2 cutoff to obtain a more appropriate formation of volumetric formation. A good porosity
is the porosity that can place fluid flow so that hydrocarbons can be accumulated. Clay bound water is part of the
porosity that can not become fluid accumulated because of the clay content so that porosity will disappear along
with clay cementation. BFV is a part of the porosity that can not drain fluid due to the adhesion force between the
fluid and the rock matrix. FFV is a part of porosity that can be a place for hydrocarbon accumulation because it is
easy to move.

020261-3
 Determining a good T2 cutoff for determination of free fluid volume is done by comparing and validating FFV to
the effective porosity of neutron-density. The general T2 cutoff of the service product is 33 ms, while the FFV
validation results on the M4 well with the effective porosity of core rock samples show better results at a value of 92
ms and RMSE = 0.009 as shown in Fig. 3. For R1 well, FFV is compared with effective porosity of neutron-density
due to absence of core rock sample and has T2 cutoff value better of 100 ms with RMSE 0.022 as shown in Fig. 4.
Defining the proper porosity is important due to the estimation of permeability is influenced by porosity as
shown in Equation 3 and Equation 4. The second part of Equation 3 and Equation 4 is obtained from the distribution
of T2, corresponding to Ktc and KSDR with the grain size distribution.

Multiple T2 cut off Model

To explain the pore space the total porosity is divided into several partitions called the Multiple T2 cutoff model as
shown in Fig. 5. The Multiple T2 cutoff is a model of the total porosity classification of the T2 distribution into an
overview of the pore space. The pore space is classified into three i.e. micro, meso and macro. The macro pore space
has a porosity above 5 microns while the micro pore has 0.5 microns pore space [7]. The Multiple T2 cutoff model is
defined by bin porosity by calculating the porosity of each bin each depth and classifying the bound and free fluid
volume. T2 cutoff 0.3 – 3 ms shows micro porosity, T2 cutoff 10 – 33 indicates meso porosity, whereas T2 cutoff 100 – 3000
indicates macro porosity. The parameter of this property is obtained from the distribution of T2 as shown in Fig. 5.
The T2 classification scheme, dividing large and medium porosity with macro and meso [8] is also an experimental
presentation of the classification scheme and the permeability subsets and rock type estimates. This scheme deals
with the proportion of micro porosity, meso and macro. DST measures the presence of hydrocarbons for
determination of productive capacity, pressure, permeability and oil and gas recovery capabilities in the reservoir.
There is a relationship between the presence of hydrocarbons and macro porosity i.e. hydrocarbons having more
complex chain atoms can accumulate in mesos to macro porosity.

FFV=0.67*PHIE_ND-0.0035
R=0.811; R2=0.657; RMSE=0.022

FIGURE 4. FFV curve to effective porosity of neutron density of well R1.

FIGURE 5. Multiple T2 cut off model by partitioning total to bin porosity.

020261-4
 FIGURE 6. Example NMR in reservoir zone Well M4 (2013 – 2919 mMD) Baturaja Formation.

Permeability Estimation
Permeability is the ability of rock to drain the fluid caused by the connection between the pores of the rock. This
parameter is expressed in units of mD. There are two equations for permeability estimation of NMR measurement
i.e. Timur-Coaste [3]
φ FFV 2
K TC = a.( NMR ) 4 .( )
100 BFV (3)
and Schlumberger-Doll-Research (SDR) equation [9]
φ
K SDR = b.( NMR )4 .(T2 log, mean )2
100 (4)

Figure 6 is an example of a product of the standard T2 NMR mode with conventional petrophysical analysis. This
proves FFV as productive porosity (Track 7). The Multiple T2 cutoff model is defined as geological information in
porosity (Track 11). Hydrocarbons will be able to accumulate on the porosity macro (Track 12), but require gamma
ray logs to see the presence of clay on rock pores. The existence of a slight shale (Track 2) and no washout (Track 1)
in this zone supports the presence of hydrocarbons. The reservoir zone of Fig. 6 is selected because of the presence
of a gas indicator in the form of an enlarged FFV, no washout, reduced water saturation, enlarged formation
resistivity and meso pore state conditions. The success of the formation evaluation is used to determine the best
reservoir zone. This is evidenced in Fig. 6 with a value of Qoil = 289.8 BOPD and Qgas = 1.498 MMCFD.
Hydrocarbons in this zone are gas and oils that are confirmed by a relatively small gas indicator.
The carbonate reservoir in this zone is the reservoir of gas and oil. The bonding compound of carbon atoms C
which binds to the H hydrogen atom will be relatively lighter in the gas state than in the oil state. Changes in gas
phase and oil state may occur due to changes in pressure and temperature in the reservoir.

CONCLUSIONS
Carbonate reservoirs that have complex petrophysical properties can be characterized using NMR, triple combo
logs and DST. The NMR log shows advantages in describing porosity and volumetric rock formations in the

020261-5
exploration stage in complex reservoirs. The well M4 has a T2 cutoff of 92 ms and R1 has a T2 cutoff of 100 ms with M4
characters tighter than R1 because M4 has a longer T2 cutoff than R1. The permeability estimation of NMR is
performed by two models in which KTC is more sensitive to the variation of fluid type in the pore than the KSDR.
Integrated analysis can be applied as a comparison of NMR and petrophysics.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank the management of Paku Gajah Development Project, PT Pertamina EP for permission
to present the data. We also would like to thank Universitas Indonesia for valuable financial support through PITTA
2017 Grant with contract No. 664/UN2.R3.1/HKP.05.00/2017.

REFERENCES
1. D. F. Allen et al., The Practical Application of NMR Logging in Carbonates: 3 Case Studies, in SPWAL
42nd Annual Logging Symposium, Houston, 2001 (Society of Petrophysicists and Well-Log Analysts,
Houston, 2001). SPWLA-2001-K.
2. F. J. Lucia, AAPG Bulletin 79, 1275 (1995).
3. A. Timur, J. Petroleum Tech. 21, 775 (1969).
4. C. H. Minh, M. Petricola, and B. Dennic, Middle East Well Evaluation Rev. 20, 34–55 (1997).
5. M. Akbar, et al., Classic Interpretation Problems: Evaluating Carbonates, in Oilfield Review Spring 1995
Volume 7 (Schlumberger, Houston, 1995). pp. 38–57.
6. L. A. Melim, F.S. Anselmetti, and G.P. Eberli, in Subsurface Geology of A Prograding Carbonate Margin,
Great Bahama Bank: Results of the Bahamas Drilling Project, edited by R. N. Ginsburg (Society for
Sedimentary Geology (SEPM), Broken Arrow, 2001). Special Publication Volume 70, pp. 217-240.
7. C. Morriss, D. Rossini, C. Straley, P. Tutunjian, and H. Vinegar, Core Analysis by Low-field NMR, in The
Log Analyst Volume 38 (Society of Petrophysicists and Well-Log Analysts, Houston, 1997). SPWLA-1997-
v38n2a3, pp. 84-94.
8. R. J. Dunham, Classification of Carbonate Rock According to Depositional Texture, in Classification of
Carbonate Rocks, edited by W. E. Ham (American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, 1962).
A038, pp.108-121.
9. W. E. Kenyon, Petrophysical Principles of Applications of NMR Logging, in The Log Analyst Volume 38
(Society of Petrophysicists and Well-Log Analysts, Houston, 1997). SPWLA-1997-v38n2a4, pp. 21-43.

020261-6