Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 49 (2005) 57 – 62

www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

BVW as an indicator for hydrocarbon and reservoir homogeneity

Walid M. Mabrouk *
Geophysics Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Received 24 January 2005; received in revised form 11 June 2005; accepted 14 June 2005

Abstract

Bulk Volume Water (BVW) which is defined as the product of water saturation and the porosity is one of the most important
reservoir parameters in: (1) Defining the state of rock whether homogeneous or not, (2) Determining reservoir permeability, and
(3) Indicating shaliness effect. The purpose of this paper is mainly two folds:

(1) To evaluate such parameter using Resistivity and Gamma ray data in shaly sand reservoirs and in absence of the
porosity data, especially in old wells that suffer from lake of data; as a function of formation water resistivity (R w),
corrected true resistivity (R t), gamma ray readings (GR ) and shale resistivity (R sh), and
(2) To use such parameter as a hydrocarbon indicator. Such method was checked and successfully applied in three
examples; one from San Juan Basin, USA is used to test the proposed formula in determining such parameter and the
other two from Gulf of Suez Basin of Egypt, the first to serve the second fold of the paper, the use of (BVW) as a
hydrocarbon indicator; whereas the second well is used to test and apply the two folds of this paper to illustrate how
far such treatment is more or less reliable and accurate.

D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Bulk volume water; Hydrocarbon indicators; Reservoir homogeneity; Shaliness effect; Water volume

1. Introduction neous and close to irreducible water saturation (i.e.

Bulk volume water in reservoir evaluation is sim-
ply define as the product of water saturation and
porosity, when the values of such parameter take the
form of hyperbolic lines, the formation is homoge-
* Tel.: +20 25676797 (Office), +20 123763238 (Mobile).
E-mail address: walid_mabrouk@yahoo.com.
0920-4105/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2005.06.003
bulk volume water define the state of rock whether
homogeneous or not, If such parameters calculated at
several depths in a formation come very close to
constant, then it is stated that the zone is homogenous
and at irreducible water saturation). As the amount of
formation water increases, the BVW becomes scat-
tered from hyperbolic lines and the formation has
more water than it can hold by capillary pressure.
Thus more water is produced relative to oil that
58 W.M. Mabrouk / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 49 (2005) 57–62

indicates heterogeneity of the formation (Morris and Eq. (6), which is based on the accuracy of determining
Biggs, 1967). connate water resistivity (R w), corrected true resistiv-
Anther use of BVW is the determination of log- ity (R t), shale volume (V sh), and shale resistivity (R sh),
derived permeability through cross-plotting porosity represents a straightforward approach for estimating
and water saturation on a log derived permeability bulk volume water (BVW) especially in the absence
chart (Schlumberger, 1969) which demonstrate that of porosity tools.
permeability is a function of both porosity and bulk From Eq. (5), BVW should be nearly equal in wet
volume water. BVW can also indicate shaliness effect, zones to measured porosity and separated in hydro-
(As clay content increases, irreducible water satura- carbon-bearing intervals. So, the continuous plotting
tion and bulk volume water (BVW) increase, but of BVW from Eq. (6) and / from the available tools
permeability decreases). gives good and simple indicators for water and hy-
Finally, BVW considered an important parameters drocarbon bearing zones.
in defining the state of rock whether homogeneous or To apply Eq. (6), it is recommended the use of self
not, determining permeability, and Indicating shali- potential or ratio method for determining R w (Schlum-
ness effect. berger, 1986). True resistivity (R t) can be reached
using LLD or ILD device provided that such values
has to be corrected for the bore hole effects (Bateman
2. Mathematical treatment for estimating BVW and Konen, 1977), Shale volume can be achieved by
Schlumberger (1975), and Shale resistivity can be
In 1942, Archie introduced the following water selected opposite to shale zone.
saturation equation in shaly sand formations.
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
  2.1. Validity of the suggested equation
aRw 1 Vsh
Sw ¼  ð1Þ
/m Rt Rsh 1. In the absence of porosity logs; especially in old
well, and where only resistivity and Gamma-ray
Usually a = 1 and m = 2, so, Eq. (1) becomes: logs are available.
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2. In reservoir at irreducible water saturation.
 ffi
Rw 1 Vsh 3. To make quick interpretation for reservoir homo-
Sw ¼  ð2Þ geneity, since it depends only on resistivity and
/2 Rt Rsh
gamma ray data.
Eq. (2) can be rewritten in the following form: 4. Calculated BVW can be used with / if present to
indicate hydrocarbon-bearing zones.
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 ffi
1 1 Vsh
Sw ¼ Rw  ð3Þ 2.2. Test example #1
/ Rt Rsh
2.2.1. Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan
And rearrange, we get: Basin, USA
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 ffi Asquith and Gibson (1982) presented several case
1 Vsh studies for evaluating major petrophysical para-
Sw / ¼ Rw  ð4Þ
Rt Rsh meters. One of these cases, confined to the Creta-
ceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone of the San Juan
Since from the definition of bulk volume water: Basin (USA) and representing a shaly-sand interval
BVW ¼ Sw / ð5Þ (from depth 1926 to 1952 ft), was taken as a test
example for the Eq. (6). The available log package
Substituting Eqs. (5) into (4) we get: included in this example helps in estimating BVW.
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 ffi The shale volume (V sh) was computed from the
1 Vsh
BVW ¼ Rw  ð6Þ available gamma ray using the equation adopted by
Rt Rsh Schlumberger (1975). Shale resistivity was chosen
 W.M. Mabrouk / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 49 (2005) 57–62 59

Table 1
Log evaluation table of cretaceous pictured Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan Basin, USA
DEPTH ILD SFL /i N /D GR V sh / ND S w–sh BVW BVW Eq. Error
(ft) (V-m) (V-m) (%) (%) (API) (%) (%) (%) observed (6) %
1926 11 16 25 14.5 70 9 18 67 0.139 0.147 5.51
1928 12 15 27.5 18 70 9 21 56 0.132 0.140 5.90
1930 13 14 26.5 17 64 0 22 57 0.138 0.141 2.48
1932 14 17 24.5 17 72 11 18 57 0.123 0.126 2.75
1934 15 19 24.5 16 74 14 17 55 0.119 0.118 0.48
1936 16 20 25 16.5 74 14 17 52 0.112 0.114 1.57
1938 17 20 24 17 72 11 18 51 0.112 0.113 0.60
1940 17 23 23.5 14.5 72 11 17 55 0.112 0.113 0.60
1942 18 20 24 17.5 74 14 17 48 0.109 0.106 3.19
1944 15 18 23 17.5 74 14 17 55 0.119 0.118 0.48
1946 14 15 23 16 76 17 15 89 0.125 0.121 3.49
1948 15 17 25.5 17 84 29 14 49 0.108 0.102 5.22
1950 15 18 23 18.5 70 9 19 55 0.118 0.123 4.50
1952 14 20 23 16 68 6 18 61 0.128 0.131 2.32
Minimum 0.108 0.102 5.90
Maximum 0.139 0.147 5.22
Average 0.121 0.122 0.95
R w = 0.26 V-m, R sh = 11 V-m.

from ILD log opposite to shale zone. Self potential
and ratio method were used for determining R w
(Schlumberger, 1986). By knowing, true resistivity,
shale volume, shale resistivity and water resistivity,
BVW is obtained.
The results obtained are illustrated in Table 1 and
Figs. 13 from which one can easily state that:
3. Fig. 2 illustrate the vertical variation of the observed
and calculated (Eq. (6)) bulk volume water which
indicates that the suggested equation gives good
result with other.
4. Finally, Fig. 3 represents the minimum, maxi-
mum, and average values of BVW (calculated
and observed).

1. Eq. (6) has proved its ability for estimating BVW

in shaly sand formations, since the error not 3. Hydrocarbon indicators
exceeds 5%.
2. Fig. 1 represent the correlation made between the The second fold of this paper is the use of BVW
bulk volume water computed using Eq. (6) and as a hydrocarbon indicator. It is important to point
that observed in the case, which show good agree- out which intervals need careful formation evalua-
ment with R (squared) = 95%. tion, only intervals with hydrocarbons need wellsite
evaluation. With several thousand feet of hole to
0.15 evaluate quickly, methods were needed to remove
0.14 the nonhydrocarbon-bearing bwetQ intervals and
BVW-Eq.6

0.13 quickly locate possible hydrocarbon-bearing inter-

0.12 vals. The five prime techniques which used (Best
et al., 1978; Bigelow, 1972; Fertl, 1978) as hydro-
0.11 R2 = 0.95
carbon indicators are:
0.10
0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15
(1) Apparent water resistivity (R w).
BVW-observed
(2) F R-R o overlays.
Fig. 1. Correlation between BVW observed and calculated (Eq. (6)), (3) Movable-oil plot (MOP).
Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan Basin, USA. (4) The R xo / R t indicator, and
60 W.M. Mabrouk / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 49 (2005) 57–62

BVW (2) A careful determination of water resistivity, and

0.100 0.120 0.140 0.160 (3) Shale resistivity must be selected opposite to
1925 shale zones.

1930
The following example is used to serve the second
fold of the paper which concern on the usage of BVW
as a hydrocarbon indicator.
1935

3.1. Test example #2

Depth

1940
1945
1950
1955
BVW-mea BVW-Eq.6
Fig. 2. Vertical comparison between measured and calculated BVW,
Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan Basin, USA.
(5) The neutron-density gas overlay. Most of these
older techniques are used in current wellsite
computer interpretation.
From Eq. (5), BVW should be nearly equal in wet
zones to measured porosity and separated in hydro-
carbon-bearing intervals. So, the continuous plotting
of BVW from Eq. (6) and / from the available tools
gives a good and simple indicator for water and
hydrocarbon bearing zones. There are some still con-
siderations when using Eq. (6):
3.1.1. Gulf of Suez Basin, Egypt
Eq. (6) for computing BVW in shaly formation, was
applied to one well (X-1) in the Gulf of Suez Basin in
Egypt which covered the depth from 3490 to 3540, the
interval was taken as an example for computing BVW
using Eq. (6). By plotting BVW from Eq. (6) versus
effective porosity (Fig. 4) we get two zones A and B, in
zone A, BVW nearly equal to effective porosity which
indicates that this zone is wet (100% water saturation),
whereas in zone B there is a great separation between
them which indicates the presence of hydrocarbon and
it needs more and careful examination.
Fig. 5, on the other hand, illustrates bulk volume
hydrocarbon observed in zone B after calculating
hydrocarbon saturation.
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
3496
3506

(1) BVW from Eq. (6) must be equal or less than

effective porosity.
Depth

3516
0.2

0.15

3526
0.1

0.05

3536
0
minimum maximum average
PHI-E BVW-Cal.
BVW-mea. BVW-Eq.6
Fig. 4. of BVW from Eq. (6) and effective porosity Gulf of Suez
Fig. 3. Minimum, maximum and average values of measured and Basin, Egypt (Zone A from 3496 to 3504, Zone B from 3504 to
calculated (Eq. (6)) BVW, San Juan Basin, USA. 3536).
 W.M. Mabrouk / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 49 (2005) 57–62 61

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

producibility, It is indicated also that BVW is a good
3496
parameter for delineating reservoir at irreducible water
saturation. The paper introduced a formula to evaluate
such parameter using Resistivity and Gamma ray data
3506
in shaly sand reservoirs and in absence of porosity
data, as a function of formation water resistivity (R w),
corrected true resistivity (R t), gamma ray readings
(GR) and shale resistivity (R sh), and how such param-
Depth

3516 eter can be used as a hydrocarbon indicator. Such

method was checked and successfully applied in
three examples; one from San Juan Basin, USA and
the other two from Gulf of Suez Basin of Egypt are
3526 used to illustrate how far such treatment is more or
less reliable and accurate. Finally, application of this
new approach to shaly-sand examples and reservoirs
producing oil and gas, with the help of additional
3536

BVHC
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Fig. 5. Bulk volume hydrocarbon for Zone B (BVHC = /*S h), Gulf 0
of Suez Basin, Egypt.

3.2. Application of the proposed equation 10

The two folds of the paper were applied to one well

20
within the Lower Miocene Rudeis Formation, which
consists mainly of shaly-sand penetrated by the well J-
22. This well is located in the central portion of the 30
Gulf of Suez Basin of Egypt and covered the depth
from X250 to X400 ft. The interval was taken as a
40
good example for computing Bulk Volume Water
Zone No.

from Eq. (6), the result are illustrated in Fig. 6. Fig.

6 represents a vertical variation of BVW from Eqs. (5) 50
and (6) with effective porosity which indicates (1)
good agreement between both BVW’s, and (2) hydro-
60
carbon and water bearing zones are indicated from the
separation between BVW and effective porosity, (i.e.,
from zone number 1 to 32 there is a large separation, 70
hydrocarbon-bearing zone; which it needs more exam-
ination, from 32 to 100 indicates the presence of water phi-e
80
with different amount.
BVW-Eq.6
90
4. Conclusions BVW-Eq.5

100
Bulk volume water (BVW) is an important param-
eter that can be used to interpret the state of rock Fig. 6. BVW from Eqs. (6) and (5) with effective porosity July Oil
whether homogeneous or not and reflect the reservoir Field, Gulf of Suez Basin, Egypt.
62 W.M. Mabrouk / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 49 (2005) 57–62

geophysical tools, is strongly recommended to con- physics Dept., Cairo University for his valuable
firm the reliability of findings. advice

Nomenclature References
BVW Bulk volume water
Rw Water resistivity (V-m) Archie, G.E., 1942. The electrical resistivity log as an aid in
a Tortuosity factor determining some reservoir characteristics. Trans., AIME 146,
V sh Shale volume (%) 54 – 62.
Asquith, G.B., Gibson, C., 1982. Basic Well Log Analysis for Geol-
Ild Induction laterolog deep ogists; Textbook. AAPG, Tulsa, Oklahoma, U.S.A. 216 pp.
/D Density derived porosity Bateman, R.M., Konen, C.E., 1977. The log analyst and the pro-
BVW-mea Measured bulk volume water grammable pocket calculator. Log Anal. 18 (5), 3 – 11.
S w–sh Saturation from Schlumberger (1975) Best, D.L., Gardner, J.S., Dumanoir, J.L., 1978. A computer-pro-
cessed wellsite log computation. 19th Ann. Soc. Prof. Well Log
GR Gamma ray log (API)
Analysts Logging Symposium, El Paso, Paper Z.
R sh Shale resistivity (V-m) Bigelow, E.L. abt, 1972. The bFQ Overlay Technique and Construc-
m Cementation exponent tion of the M.O.P.
Lld Laterolog deep Fertl, W.H., 1978. Rwa method: fast formation evaluation. Oil Gas J.
/N Neutron-derived porosity 76 (37), 73 – 76 (Advanced Interpretation of Wireline Logs).
Sh Hydrocarbon saturation Morris, R.L., Biggs, W.P., 1967. Using log-derived values of water
saturation and porosity. Soc. Professional Well Analysts, 8th
Rt True resistivity (V-m) Ann. Logging Symp. Trans., Paper O.
Sw Water saturation Schlumberger, 1969. Log Interpretation/Charts. Schlumberger Well
/ Measured porosity Services Inc., Houston, Texas.
V-m Ohm-meter Schlumberger, 1975. A Guide to Wellsite Interpretation of the Gulf
% Percentage sign Coast. Schlumberger Well Services Inc., Houston. 85 pp.
Schlumberger,, 1986. Advanced Interpretation of Wireline Logs.
Phi-e Effective porosity
BVHC Bulk volume hydrocarbon

Acknowledgement

The author would like to express his gratitude to

Professor Dr. M.H. Kamel, Chairman of the Geo-