Introduction to Well logging and Reservoir

Characterization
Part 3: Reservoir Characterization
Mostafa Haggag, SPEC, MBA
Petrophysics Consultant Expert & Instructor
Feb. 2024
Outline
• Introduction
• Hydraulic Flow Units
• Permeability and HFU Prediction
• Generate Saturation Height Modeling
Formation Evaluation and Reservoir Characterization ?
Both are crucial steps in the exploration and production of hydrocarbons. They involve a detailed analysis
of the geological formations and fluid properties in a reservoir to understand its potential for oil and gas
production:
• Formation Evaluation:
❑ This involves the analysis of data obtained from well logging, core analysis, and other sources to
evaluate the properties and characteristics of the formations in a reservoir.
❑ Formation evaluation can help to identify the productive zones, estimate the hydrocarbon
saturation, and evaluate the reservoir potential¹.
• Reservoir Characterization:
❑ This involves the study of the physical properties and behavior of the reservoir rock and fluids to
understand their impact on the flow of hydrocarbons.
❑ Reservoir characterization can include the analysis of data from seismic surveys, well logs (open /
cased), core samples, and production data.
Integrated Reservoir Characterization Workflow
Shape

Geometry ` Size
Update
Position

Storage Flow capacity

capacity (Φ) (K)
SCAL

Reservoir Properties Lithology Ls,

Understand
SS…
Description
Fluid Types
Connectivity Mechanical

Results
Gas
3D Modeling
Sustain
Performance production
Contents Oil

Water
Proper

Maintain
Pressure

Optimum
Change in Sw
Monitoring &
Management
Zonal
Contribution

New Wells Development

Results
EOR
Mostafa Haggag
The Role of the Petrophysical Reservoir Characterization in Reservoir Modeling Process
It is a critical process in reservoir studies as it provides a primary source of input data for integrated
reservoir characterization and resource evaluation.
Logs/ Core Data Inputs Structure Framework
• Optimum Log Data Acquisition • Seismic calibration (Tie in) with logs
• Data QC , logs and cores • Fluid substitution
• Log Interpretation • Image interpretation

Facies / RRT Modelling

• Generate continuous
Saturation Modelling HFU @ well location
• Provide continuous log and un-cored wells
SW @well location Facies/RRT Modelling
• Provide SHF to model Sw
between wells using PC
data

Porosity Modelling
• Provide log Φ @ well location
Permeability Modelling
(calibrated to core Φ)
• Provide continuous K @
well location.
• Poro-Perm transforms
Go through
Data Available and Deliverables
Type of Data
• Log Data
Logs + Full Core Logs + Partially Cored Logs + No Core ❑ Raw : Den- Neu -GR-Res-Sonic
❑ Inter: PHIE- Sw-Volumes
• Core Data
❑ K– Φ - MICP – Core Description
• Local Knowledge

Distribution
• Wells with Logs + Full Core
• Wells with Logs + Partially Cored
• Wells with Logs Only

Deliverables
• At Wells Location :
❑ From Logs : SW, Φ
❑ Continuous Predicted : HFU, K Reservoir Characterization
• Between Wells Process Using Analysis and ML
Saturation Height Function SHF
Mostafa Haggag
Hydraulic Flow Units (HFU)
Definitions
• Rock Type (RT)
Generic, no special meaning, a type of rock
• Geological Facies (GF) :
Sedimentology + diagenesis results from core + TS description up to 20 per reservoir
• Petrophysical Group (PG)***
❑ Defined in the Poro-Perm and Pc domain to characterize rocks that display a common poro-
perm relationship.
❑ Results from RCA and SCA
❑ Up to 7-8 per reservoir
• Petrophysical Rock Type (PRT)
Defined in the MICP domain to characterize rocks with similar Pc (First Drainage) behavior, hence
Sw
• Static Rock-Types (SRT)
❑ Geology and Petrophysics (core and log scale) results from reconciliation of GF and PG
❑ Up to 7-8 per reservoir
• Dynamic Rock Type (DRT)
Defined in the Dynamic Simulation domain to characterize rocks with similar up scaled properties
such as Sw/Pc, Kr, Sorw, Sorg, wettability, etc.
• Reservoir Rock Type (RRT)***
❑ Defined in the Rock domain (Lithofacies / Facies Association and Diagenesis) to characterize rocks with similar Pc (First
Drainage) behavior, hence Sw (Kr ? Wettability ?)
❑ Archie, 1950; rock typing is classifying reservoir rocks into distinct units:
o Deposited under similar conditions, and similar diagenetic processes.
o Unique porosity-permeability relationship, and similar capillary pressure profile
o Same water saturation for a given height above the free water level for each rock type
• Hydraulic Flow Unit (HFU)
❑ The concept has been developed to identify and characterize rock types, based on geological and physical parameters
at pore scale.
❑ Ebanks et al., 1992: The HFU is defined as a mappable portion of the total reservoir and affect the flow of fluids are
consistent and predictably different from the properties of the other reservoir rock volume
❑ Bear (2013) defined the hydraulic flow unit as the representative elementary volume of the total reservoir rock within
which geological and petrophysical properties are the same. These properties are similar in the same flow unit but
differ from one unit to another.
❑ Porosity and permeability are two key parameters that influence the flow in the reservoir. They can be measured
directly by core analysis.
*** Most popular
Pc vs. Sw Function Reflects Reservoir Quality
Core Pore Petrophysical Gamma Ray Flow
Core Lithofacies
Plugs Types Data Log Units
Capillary
Φ vs k
Pressure

High Quality
5

Low Quality
1

Function moves up and right, and becomes less “L” shaped as reservoir quality decreases
Techniques to Determine RRT&HFU
Facies Analysis

Diagenesis
Geological Based
Sequence
HFU / RRT Determination Stratigraphy

RCA
Φ/ K/ Pc / TS

Rock Fabric Number

RQI/ FZI
Core data
Winland/ Pittman Stratigraphic Flow
Plot Profile

Petrophysical Based
Graphic Methods Str.Mod. Lorenz

Log Data Bulk Volume Method Mod. Lorenz

(Buckles Plot)

All techniques should be integrated to define RRT and flow units for reservoir modelling
By: Mostafa Haggag
Generating HFUs Workflow
• Data preparation and QC
• The porosity and permeability data are into Hydraulic Flow Units based on the following methods :
1. Rock Quality Index (RQI).
2. Winland R35 method.
3. Pittman methods, includes the Pittman R10, R15, R20, R25, R30, R35, R40, R45, R50, R55, R60, R65, R70 and R75
equations.
4. Lucia Carbonate Rock Fabric Number (RFN).
• Initial flow unit division boundaries “grouped” can be made using cluster analysis.
• The flow unit boundaries can be adjusted using an interactive histogram. A Lorenz Plot can used to pick flow
boundaries.
• Once the flow unit boundaries have been picked then an output HFU curve is created. Both a numerically and a Text
curve can be output.
• The Lucia Carbonate Rock Class typing does not produce Hydraulic Flow units but is included with the other HFU
methods since it is based on the same type of porosity permeability plots.
• The module works equally well with core or log porosity, permeability data. It is recommended not to mix log and core
data due to up scaling resolution problems.
Data Preparation
1- Create Flags 2- Log Editing 3- RCA QC
• Location Flag • Log Depth Matching • Log- Core Depth Match
❑ North : 1 • HC Correction • Comparison between core and log Φ
❑ Center : 2
❑ South : 3 • Logs Normalization • X-Plot K-Φ
• Data Quality
❑ Good Data: 1
❑ Bad Data :0
• Zones Flag
Boundaries of the Flow Units “Lorenz Plot”
• Graphical tools used to determine the boundaries of flow units
• These methods support an easy description of reservoir flow units established based on
storage capacity (ΦH), flow capacity (KH), the sorted data is then linearly accumulated
and normalized to a give a maximum value of 1.0.
• The main aim of understanding the flow unit’s characterizations is to identify the
barriers, speed zones and baffles.
• Used to define the boundaries of HFU with different techniques, FZI, R35……
1.Reservoir Quality Index (RQI) & Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) Concept
• Reservoir Quality Indicator
RQI = .0314 𝑲/𝚽

• Normalized Porosity (Pore-Grain volume ratio)

𝚽
Φz =
𝟏−𝚽

• Flow Zone Indicator

.0314 𝑲/𝚽
FZI = RQI/ Φz = 𝚽
𝟏−𝚽
Where :
K: Air Perm.
Φ: Porosity

• Log (RQI)= Log (Φz) + Log (FZI) , a log/log plot will show the same flow unit on straight line
with unit slope.
• Samples that have same FZI will be classified into the same Hydraulic Flow Unit (HFU), the
intercept with Φz =1 is the FZI
• Each unit has a similar pore geometry and rock textures (i.e., grain size, sorting, diagenesis)
which exhibiting a similar fluid flow characteristics
Number of HFUs and Boundaries
Lorenz-----> Boundaries

X-Plot-----> Clustering

HFU

FZI-----> Value @ Φz=1

2. HFU by Winland Plot
• Winland tested 312 samples with 82 Carb. and SS with low K, he found that the effective pore
system that dominants flow through a rock corresponds to mercury saturation of 35% .
• That pore system has pore throat radii (called port size, or R35, so the 35th percentile was
taken to approximate the model class of pore throat size where the pore network becomes
interconnected forming a continuous fluid path through the sample i.e., effectively contribute
…. the rest of pores contribute to storage not in flow.

• log R35 = 0.732 + 0.588 log K air – 0.864 log Φ

R35 = 10 0.732 + 0.588 log K air– 0.864 log Φ
Example
3. HFU by Pittman Plot
The Pittman method has 14 different equations. The user must first select the appropriate equation for the rock type. The
appropriate equation can be determined from ‘Apex’ plots of mercury injection capillary pressure measurements

Log(R10) = 0.459 + 0.500 Log(K) - 0.385 Log (Φ)

Log(R15) = 0.333 + 0.509 Log(K) - 0.344 Log (Φ)
Log(R20) = 0.218 + 0.519 Log(K) - 0.303 Log (Φ)
Log(R25) = 0.204 + 0.531 Log(K) - 0.350 Log (Φ)
Log(R30) = 0.215 + 0.547 Log(K) - 0.420 Log (Φ)
Log(R35) = 0.255 + 0.565 Log(K) - 0.523 Log (Φ)
Log(R40) = 0.360 + 0.582 Log(K) - 0.680 Log (Φ)
Log(R45) = 0.609 + 0.608 Log(K) - 0.974 Log (Φ)
Log(R50) = 0.778 + 0.626 Log(K) - 1.205 Log (Φ)
Log(R55) = 0.948 + 0.632 Log(K) - 1.426 Log (Φ)
Log(R60) = 1.096 + 0.648 Log(K) - 1.666 Log (Φ)
Log(R65) = 1.372 + 0.643 Log(K) - 1.979 Log (Φ)
Log(R70) = 1.664 + 0.627 Log(K) - 2.314 Log (Φ)
Log(R75) = 1.880 + 0.609 Log(K) - 2.626 Log (Φ)

Avg. Apex @ Sw=40%

4. Lucia Rock Classes (RC)
• In carbonate
• Rock-Fabric Numbers (RFN)
• Classify the rocks into
❑ Class 1: Grainstone
❑ Class 2: Grain dominant
❑ Class 3: Mud dominant

𝐋𝐨𝐠 𝐊 = 𝟗. 𝟕𝟗𝟖𝟐 − 𝟏𝟐. 𝟎𝟖𝟑𝟖𝐋𝐨𝐠 𝐑𝐅𝐍 + (𝟖. 𝟔𝟕𝟏𝟏 − 𝟖. 𝟐𝟗𝟔𝟓 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝐑𝐅𝐍 𝐋𝐨𝐠 (Φip))
K : Permeability Φip: Interparticle porosity RFN: Rock Fabric Number
Permeability and HFU
Prediction
Permeability Theme in Carbonates

1’
Permeability Estimation Workflow
Yes No Yes
Estimated K
1 Logs Check with core K Calculated K Check with core K

K No
K

Empirical Others
Equations Core Data
Neural Network

MLR

ML methods using
available log & core data

Bad

R2
2 Good
Transform +
Log Φ

Est. K

Check with core K

Yes No
Estimated K OK

By: Mostafa Haggag

• Permeability Estimation by Empirical Methods
❑ Core measurement is the only direct measurement for the permeability, any other permeability value is just
“estimated” and should be calibrated with core measurements.
❑ Many techniques are used for permeability estimation :
o Porosity/ Permeability X-plot(equation)
o Empirical Equations From Logs ( for specific reservoirs)
✓ Wyllie and Rose (1950)
𝟐
𝚽𝟑
𝒌= 𝟐𝟓𝟎𝒙 ……medium-gravity oil
𝑺𝒘𝒊𝒓𝒓

𝟐
𝜱𝟑
𝒌= 𝟕𝟗𝒙 ……...dry gas
𝑺𝒘𝒊𝒓𝒓

✓ Timur (1968)
𝟐
𝟗𝟑𝒙 𝜱𝟐.𝟐
𝒌=
𝑺𝒘𝒊𝒓𝒓

✓ Coates and Dumanoir (1973)

𝟐
𝐂𝐱 𝚽 𝐖
𝐤=
𝐖 𝟐 𝐗 𝐑𝐰ൗ𝐑𝐭
(@𝐒𝐰𝐢)

Where W and C are constants, “W “ i𝐬 𝐅𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐑𝐰 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐑𝐭 (@𝐒𝐰𝐢) & "𝐂" 𝐢𝐬 𝐅𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝛒24𝐡
✓ Permeability from NMR
▪ SDR (Schlumberger Doll Research)
𝐊 𝐒𝐃𝐑 = . 𝟓 ∗ 𝚽 𝟐 ∗ ( 𝛒𝐓𝟐𝐋𝐌 )𝟐
𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 ∶ 𝛒 ∶ 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐱𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐭𝐲;
𝐚𝐝𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐊 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐞 ~ 𝟐 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐞
𝐓𝟐𝐋𝐌 :is log mean average of 𝐓𝟐 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧
▪ Timur/Coats
𝐊 𝐓𝐂 = 𝐂𝐓 ∗ 𝚽 𝟐 ∗ (𝐅𝐅𝐕 ⁄ 𝐁𝐅𝐕)𝟐
Where: Φ= FFV+BFV
C: constant is adjusted for specific formation

✓ Permeability from Formation Tester

𝐤
Mobility is function of K where; it is
𝛍

25
ML Techniques
Multiple Linear Regression (Permeability Only)
Allows to predict a result curve from several input curves, using a least squares regression routine,
which will try and find the best fit to the input data.
• Create Regression Model to determine Formula coefficients
• Run Model to apply Formula to all wells selected

?
Cluster Analysis
The module works in two stages.
1- K-Mean Clustering Cluster Means
2- Cluster Consolidation
The data is divided up into manageable data clusters covering all data
range, then the second step, which is more manual, is to take these 15 to
20 clusters and group them into a manageable number of geological facies.
This may involve reducing the data to 4 to 5 clusters

Validation
• Contingency Table
• Blind Test

Consolidation
Results

Calibration
Fuzzy Logic
Fuzzy logic is the logic of partial truths
• The statement, today is sunny

1. 100% true if there are no clouds

2. 80% true if there are a few clouds
3. 50% true if it's hazy
4. 0% true if it rains all day
This is mathematics of probabilities
• If we can work out the probability of each event outcome, then we can predict the most likely result
More details read ‘The Application of the Mathematics of Fuzzy Logic to Petrophysics’ - Steve Cuddy
• Predict petrophysical properties from any combination of data.
• Predict: Facies ,Permeability , Logs ..
• Use: Raw logs, Petrophysical results, Core results
• Two basic modes of prediction depending on input data.
• Reproduces the dynamic range better than regression
Results
• The Most Likely and 2nd Most Likely curves are ‘bins’ i.e., they are stepped curves
• The weighted Average is a smooth curve
Neural Network
• Usually use several small intervals
❑ Default 5 samples
❑ May need to increase
• Training zones graphically selected
• Discrete data such as core data may require to use longer
intervals
Self Organizing Maps (SOM)
• SOM module uses a mathematical technique to organize data into groups
Train
to produce a map.
• Then, it is calibrated either by a facies type curve or to predict a continuous
varying curve like permeability.
• Finally run the model and validate the results by contingency table and
blind test

Run Model
Calibrate
Contingency Table
Validate the number of HFUs:
1. Integration of geological data
2. Log responses ( e.g., resistivity separation…)
3. MDT/RFT
4. Saturation change behind casing, RST
5. PLT interpretation

Reference: Carlos
Haro
Saturation Height Function
What does Saturation Height Function (SHF) mean?
A technique to estimate the water saturation between wells using the capillary pressure measurements

Well3
No Well
Well1 Sw+Pc+HFU
RRT1
Sw+Pc+HFU RRT2
RRT3

No Well
Sw No Well

Well2
Sw+Pc+HFU RRT1
RRT1 RRT2
RRT3
RRT2
RRT3

H
H

Sw
Sw
Water Saturation Prediction Workflow
Sw for the Geological Model

At Well Location Between Wells

Core Analysis logs Capillary Pressure

• Dean-Stark Resistivity, Sigma, EPT, NMR Sw, Porosity, Permeability,
• Retort VS TVDSS RRT, VS Height
Used for Sw verification

RRT Sw
Average Pc “J-Function” Sw-Height Function/ RRT ,Φ
+FWL

Sw-Height Function/ RRT, Φ By :Mostafa Haggag

Capillary Pressure Curve? (Schlumberger Glossary)
• The relationship describing the capillary pressure required to obtain a given non-wetting phase
saturation in a rock.
• Rocks have a distribution of pore throat sizes, so as more pressure is applied to the non-wetting phase,
increasingly smaller pore openings are invaded.
• The capillary pressure curve is important for understanding saturation distribution in the reservoir and
affects imbibition and multiphase fluid flow through the rock.
Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure (MICP)
• Measurement Method
❑ MICP is used extensively for Sw height and rock typing, quick test (mins, hrs)
❑ High Pressure Mercury Injection (HPMI up to ~ 60,000 psi Hg Air)
❑ Conversion required between mercury-air Pc data to reservoir fluid system
❑ Significant challenges due to small sample size and high pressures; potentially
disrupting pore system
❑ Hazardous testing material
• Factors affecting the capillary pressure :
❑ Fluids: IFT, Density
❑ Rock: Pore size distribution, Mineralogy
❑ Rock / fluid interaction: Wettability, Contact angle
Capillary Curve Main Components
• Displacement/Entry / Threshold Pressure
❑ The pressure at which non-wetting phase starts entering the pore network.
❑ Extrapolated displacement pressure is the pressure at which the extrapolated plateau and zero non-
wetting phase saturation lines intersect. It determines the difference in height between the
OWC/GWC/GOC and the FWL
❑ Threshold pressure is defined as the pressure at which mercury forms a connected pathway across the
sample. This is estimated from the inflection point of a graph like that
• Plateau or Seat
• Steep Slope
• Transition zone (TZ)
• Irreducible water saturation, Swir
Capillary Pressure Implementation Workflow
1. Measurements
❑ QC
2. Corrections and conversions
❑ Lab to reservoir fluids
❑ Closure
❑ Stress
❑ Clay
3. Curve Fitting and Smoothing
4. Grouping and Averaging
5. Reconciliation with logs
Pc Main Equations

Modified from SENERGY

MICP Report Sample
Core data/ Log data Overview
Capillary Pressure Data QC
• Criteria for good MICP data set to be used:
❑ Samples are well distrusted over the zone of interest ?
❑ Match between the log response & geological
descriptions and the cap. curve shape ?
❑ Is there a match between entry pressure, Φ, K and
core description ?
• Check the representative of the sample by comparing the
Φ of parent plug and Φ chip samples
• If there is big difference ; the sample should be excluded
due to heterogeneity (exclude the outliers).
• The “good for use” MICP curve should have :
❑ Complete measurements
❑ Regular pressure increment
❑ Acceptable trend?
Capillary Pressure Corrections
• Closure Correction
• Clay-Bound Water Correction
• Stress Correction
• Wettability and IFT correction (Reservoir Condition)
MICP Data Conversion and Correction
1. Conversion from Laboratory to Reservoir
𝐏𝐜, 𝐫𝐞𝐬=(𝛔 𝐂𝐎𝐒 𝜽)𝒓𝒆𝒔/((𝛔 𝐂𝐎𝐒 𝛉)𝒍𝒂𝒃) 𝐏𝐜, 𝐥𝐚𝐛

2. Closure Correction
The closure correction is run on all valid MICP Data

3. Stress Correction
∅𝒓𝒆𝒔 −𝟎.𝟓
• 𝐏𝐜, 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 = 𝐏𝐜, 𝐥𝐚𝐛 ∅𝒍𝒂𝒃
∅𝒓𝒆𝒔
• 𝐒𝐰, 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 = 𝐒𝐰, 𝐥𝐚𝐛 ∅𝒍𝒂𝒃

4. CBW Correction (Hg – Air)

Accounts for clay CBW eliminated from air-mercury tests
Data Visualization
MICP/
K

MICP /Φ

Core data/ Log data Overview Cap. Pres. Data Visualization

Curve Fitting and Smoothing
• To produce a continuous curve from the
measured capillary pressure data some kind
of curve interpolation is necessary.
• Lambda is the first choice
• 𝐒𝐰𝐰𝐞𝐭 = 𝐚. 𝐏𝐜 −𝛌 +𝐛
Where:
a, b and λ are all regression constants
• The Lambda Function has been used to fit
curves through the 4 capillary pressure
datasets.
• The fit is excellent
Pc Grouping and Averaging
• The data is reduced by deriving average cap. curves
or saturation-height functions for each RRT.
• There are several techniques for averaging capillary
curves data available suitable for input to geological
and reservoir models.
• The comparison with the original data is the real test
of a saturation-height function.
• If the comparison is excellent, then use that
function.
Equations for Predicting Water Saturation from Pc
Model (1) : Pc model11_Combined
Equation type : J = 0.2166 * (Pc / (σ Cosθ)) √(K / Φ)
Result equation
Sw = 1.06974 * J^(-0.15374) - 0.51982
Model (2) : Pc model 12 combined
Single equation used to fit all Cap Pressure curves
Equation type : J = 0.2166 * (Pc / (σ Cosθ)) √(K / Φ)
Result equation
Sw = 0.35433 * J^(-0.54661) - 0.04022
Model (3) : Pc model 21COBMINED
Equation type : J = 0.2166 * (Pc / (σ Cosθ)) √(K / Φ)
Result equation
Sw = 0.23265 * J^(-0.94908) - 0.01617
Model (4) : Pc model 22 COMBINED
Equation type : J = 0.2166 * (Pc / (σ Cosθ)) √(K / Φ)
Result equation
Sw = 0.16642 * J^(-0.99541) - 7.39654E-3
Model (5) : Pc model31 Combined
Single equation used to fit all Cap Pressure curves
Equation type : J = 0.2166 * (Pc / (σ Cosθ)) √(K / Φ)
Result equation
Sw = 0.26534 * J^(-0.86606) - 0.01373
Model (6) : Pc model41 Combined
Single equation used to fit all Cap Pressure curves
Equation type : J = 0.2166 * (Pc / (σ Cosθ)) √(K / Φ)
Result equation
Sw = 0.1108 * J^(-1.92874) + 5.07302E-3
Model (7) : Pc model 42_all Comined
Equation type : J = 0.2166 * (Pc / (σ Cosθ)) √(K / Φ)
Result equation
Sw = 0.2011 * J^(-1.26844) + 3.1032E-4
Model (8) : Pc model51Combined
Deriving Functions from Log Measurements
• Use Sw from logs to derive saturation height function
• Only those intervals at initial saturations and belonging to the same
lithofacies should be grouped together.
• Flushed or swept zones and non-reservoir should be excluded .

Sw = a*J^(- λ)+b
Where:
J= .2166*((Pc/σcosΘ))/ √K/Φ
σcosΘ= 25.98
Pcres = 0.433(ρWater − ρoil)*H
– H: Height above FWL, ft,
– FWL@ -xxxxx
– ρWater : 1.04 gm/cc
– ρoil : 0.7 gm /cc
Reconciliation with Log Data
Reasons for Difference in Matching
• Some of the RRTs didn’t reflect the variation in permeability, k/Φ
may help for differentiation.
• The capillary pressures data has been grouped for each RRT; if
the RRT is “uncertainly” assigned to certain interval; then, the
consequent assigned capillary pressure will be uncertain over
that interval and the resultant saturation height function will be
also “inexact”. Contingency table may help
• The log water saturation may not reflect the initial saturation
condition, it could be increased due to water encroachment
“breakthrough”. Use wells before water breakthrough.
• Some RRTs haven’t enough capillary measurements to get
satisfactory representation.
Thank You