0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

1 просмотров4 страницыMar 04, 2020

© © All Rights Reserved

0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

1 просмотров4 страницыВы находитесь на странице: 1из 4

Range

Paulus S. Adisoemarta, George A. Anderson, Scott M. Frailey, and George B. Asquith

Center for Applied Petrophysical Studies, Texas Tech University

Measurement Methods

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Several methods to determine the value of n are as follows:

Conference held in Midland, Texas, 15–16 May 2001.

core measurement, combination of core measurement and log

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of

information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as

data, and log data only.

presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to Core measurement. This method can resolve the value of

correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any

position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at n by varying core water saturation and correlate it against the

SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of

Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper

rock resistivity. The slope of a log-log plot yields n. It is

for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is important to note that for water-wet core samples, the various

prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300

words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous saturations must be derived during the drainage process not

acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. the imbibition process. The core starts out 100% saturated

Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

with water and oil is used to displace the water. At various

water saturations resistivity measurements are taken.

Abstract Combination of core and log. This method combines

Saturation exponent n in Archie’s water saturation equation is core derives Sw with Rt values from log. One technique in this

the exponent value in water saturation that establishes the method is to log-log crossplot Rt versus Swirr and the slope of

relationship between water saturation of the rock to the ratio the line is saturation exponent n.

of fluid filled rock resistivity to the actual rock resistivity. Another technique is to determine Swirr, porosity,

Most theoretical derivations show that there is no exponent or cementation exponent m and tortuosity factor a from a core

that n is equal to one. However, decades of results from core sample, and solve for n using Rt values from log. The Swirr is

analyses and openhole log analyses show n greater than one from capillary pressure data. A variation of this technique is

and most often assumed to be two. to use Swirr from relative permeability data [Asquith et al.,

Most of the literature is in agreement that the saturation 1997].

exponent is affected by wettability and saturation history Log data only. Dielectric logs can independently solve

(drainage or imbibition). Furthermore, the saturation exponent for Sxo. Using the values of Rxo from resistivity tools, a log-

depends on rock type, primarily the manner in which the log plot of Rxo versus Sxo yields a slope of the line equal to the

conductive water is connected and configured. Several saturation exponent n.

authors quote values of n ranging from as low as 1 to over 20

for strongly oil wet rocks. Too often an assumed value is Field Observed Factors Affecting n

accepted as correct. Several factors has been observed in the field that affects the

value of n. These factors are:

This paper reevaluates the relationship between water • wettability

saturation and rock resistivities in order to determine the

• texture roughness

significance of n and make recommendations on improving an

• microporosity

assumed value for n.

Each of these factors is discussed briefly.

Introduction

Wettability. The preference of grains to contact with a certain

The quest to determine and understand n began shortly after

fluid defines wettability. In water-wet rocks, water coats each

Archie’s earliest work correlating water saturation to

grain and provides a continuous path for ion at any saturation.

resistivity (or resistivity index). Surprisingly theoretically

As the path is relatively unobstructed the resistivity is low

based derivations show that n does not exist (or arguably is

hence n is small. On the other hand, water is trapped in the

one). This paper identifies some of the features that are

middle of oil in the pore space for the case of oil-wet rock. As

influence n and core and logging methods of estimating n.

water saturation decreases water is separated from neighboring

2 Paulus Adisoemarta, George Anderson, Scott Frailey, and George Asquith SPE 70043

pores and hence breaking the path for ionic conduction, for a porous sample 100% saturated with water:

creating a very high resistivity and so the value of n is high. r A

Keller [1953] showed the comparison of resistivity-saturation Ro = o

L

measurements of water-wet and oil-wet sandstones that proved where ro is

the effect of wettability on n. Sweeney and Jennings [1960] R L

did the same but on carbonates. ro = w a

Aa

Texture Roughness. Diederix [1982] observed the effect of because only water is considered conductive. The subscript

texture roughness on the value of n. On the North Sea sample “a” represents the apparent cross-sectional area and length.

that has clean smooth grains the resistivity-saturation plot Substituting the last equation into the previous yields:

shows a constant value of n. For the case of samples that have R ( L / L)

rough grains, the plot shows a knee where the value of n Ro = w a

(A a / A)

changes as a function of Sw. A confirmation of this field

observation was made thorough a sandpack modeling where By analogy, the same sample saturated with less than 100%

smooth beads and rough beads was used. The resistivity- water saturation yields the definition of Rt:

R ( L / L)

saturation plot of this bead models show the same trend as the R t = w at

field data, where the smooth bead shows a constant value of n, (A at / A)

and the rough bead has a varying value of n. The subscript “at” designates the apparent cross-sectional area

and length in the case of Sw<100%. Substituting the Rt and Ro

Microporosity. Microporosity is defined as pore size of less equation into the definition of I yields:

than 0.5 micron in diameter [Keith and Pitmann, 1984]. The (A a / A at )

effect of microporosity to saturation exponent is a change of I=

(L a / L at )

slope on the log-Rt vs. log-Sw [Diederix, 1982]. Diederix

commented that by using a constant value of n across the Representing the cross-sectional area, Aat as

whole range of Sw will make the water saturation calculation Aat = φ SwA

too high on the lower end of Sw. Swanson [1985] observed gives the final theoretically derived relation between water

this phenomenon on both shales, where the micropores occur saturation and resistivity as

between the clay crystals, and clean sands such as chert. L R

S w = at o

Swanson’s observation showed that a decreasing Sw will La R t

increase the value of n until at a certain Sw where n starts to

(Other derivations show Lat and L instead of La.)

decrease.

Water saturation-resistivity derivations of this type do not

show Sw with an exponent. Only the statistical approach of

Theoretical Derivation

Wyllie and Spangler shows a saturation exponent, but it is

The early literature on correlating water saturation to electrical

through the derivation of the cementation exponent, m.

measurements (Wyllie and Spangler, 1952; Cornell and Katz,

An unanswered questions remains. Why do measured Sw-

1953; Bassiouni, 1994) provides derivations of the general

Rt data require an n-exponent to form an equality?

form:

R

Sw ∝ o Basic Problem of Relating Sw to Resistivity

Rt There is a fundamental problem with Sw-R relationships that

Only laboratory and field observations suggest that this Sw basic to the description of porous media. A series of

relationship should have an exponent to become an equality. interconnected pore bodies and pore throats describes many

Archie’s formula for water saturation equation can be used in types of porous media. Water saturation is dominated by the

any of the general forms below: largest volume of water in porous media, which is the pore

R FR w aR bodies. Resistivity is dominated by the smallest restrictions in

S nw = o = = mw the ion path within the porous media, which is the pore

Rt Rt φ Rt throats.

No matter which parameters are used to find water saturation, The observations that concluded the necessity of n>1 may

n is required. be due to relating a pore body dominated property (water

Most derivations start with the definition of the resistivity saturation) to a pore throat dominated property (resistivity).

index, I: This has been noted with φ-R and k-φ relationships, also.

R (Adisoemarta, et al., 2000, Kumar and Frailey, 2001)

I= t

Ro

and the relationship between resistivity and resistance: Effect of n on Sw

Using one of the variations of Archie’s saturation equation

rA

R= without n (or n=1) as theoretical derivations suggest results in

L Sw that is too small compared to observations. In other words,

SPE 70043 SATURATION EXPONENT N IN WELL LOG INTERPREATION: ANOTHER LOOK AT THE PERMISSABLE RANGE 3

n>1 increases the predicted value of Sw from Archie’s the water in the pore bodies; this is the case of a oil-wet rock

equation. Figure 1 shows Sw as a function of Ro/Rt for n = 1, at low water saturation. The estimated n value for the simple

2, and 4. n has the largest correction to Sw at the lower range geometric shaped porous media shows a higher value for all

of Sw. cases of Lp/Lpt.

As an example, for Ro/Rt = 0.20, theory (n=1) predicts Sw =

20%, while the commonly accepted value of n=2 predicts Sw Conclusions

= 44.7%. The pore throat dominated resistivity only requires Historical observation and the theoretical development of this

20% of the pore space to be occupied by water to measure paper are in general agreement. Factors that have been

Ro/Rt = 0.20, while the pore may have a large proportion of observed to influence n can be simplified and explained in

water present (another 24.7% in this example) that does not terms of variations of cross-sectional area of the water.

influence the resistivity significantly. Again, the difference Many laboratory and field observations observe that

relates to the pore body vs. pore throat influenced properties. wettability and saturation history (drainage and imbibition)

change n.

Range of n Because Lat/La disappears from Archie’s water saturation

To quantify and understand the physical meaning of n, a equation (when comparing theoretical vs. observation based

comparison of the theoretical relation to observation is derivation), n must compensate for variation in pore throat and

necessary. This is difficult for two reasons: 1) n does not body size and Lat/La. This makes estimating n for simple

appear in the theoretically derived equation and 2) Lat/La geometric difficult without assuming Lat/La of one.

disappears completely from the equation developed from A fundamental inconsistency in Archie’s water saturation

observation. In a previous publication that quantified and and formation resistivity factor is that water saturation and

explained the physical meaning of m and a (Adisoemarta, porosity are pore body properties, while resistivity

2000), theory could only provide a value of a but not m. In measurements are pore throat properties. Consequently, any

comparison, theory does not predict the exponent m and m changes or manipulations to Archie’s equation may be

only exists to correlate theory to observation. n correlates applicable only to a specific formation. In this sense, Archie’s

theory to observation and replaces the term Lat/La. This is equations are truly correlations.

understandable because these terms cannot be measured;

however, a is proportional to La/L which is cannot be Nomenclature

measured but is not dropped from the Fr relationship. a = tortuosity factor

Consequently to identify a range of n by comparing A = area

observation to theory, Lat/La is assumed to be close to one. Aa = apparent cross-section area, Sw=100%

The introduction of Sw into the derivation is to approximate Aat = apparent cross-section area, Sw<100%

the cross-sectional area to ion movement as φSwA. Because φ Ap = cross-section area of a pore

and Sw are dominated by pore bodies, and Ro and Rt are Apt = cross-section area of a pore throat

dominated by the pore throats, n may be correcting the d = grain diameter

measured resistivities to the measured Sw due to the difference F = formation resistivity factor

in φSw in the pore bodies and pore throats. I = resistivity index

From the previous derivation, m = cementation factor

S w = A at / A a or A at = S w A a n = saturation exponent

r = resistance of the material

but observation suggests R = resistivity

A at = S nw A a Ro = formation resistivity when 100% saturated with water

Following the example and simple geometric configuration of resistivity Rw, Ω.m

of porous media that Adisoemarta, et al. (2000) used to Rt = formation resistivity when Sw<100%, Ω.m

quantify m, similar results are obtained for n. Because the Rw = water resistivity, Ω.m

only factors that influence resistivity are the apparent length L = length

and cross-sectional area, the results for m and n are identical. La = apparent length, Sw=100%

(Table 1 is a duplicate of table 2 of Adisoemarta et al (2000) Lat = apparent length, Sw<100%

for the case of n.) This provides a theoretical based Lp = pore length

explanation of why historical observations have seen n and m Lpt = pore-throat length

of similar value (and equal to 2). Sw = water saturation, a fraction of the pore volume

Fractured porosity, (Ap=Apt) appears to have the same α = angle between fluid path and the bulk fluid direction,

affect on n as it does on m. n decreases and approaches one as degrees

Apt approaches Ap. A simple data set shows this, also. τ = tortuosity

wettability effects may be inferred from this table, also. φ = porosity

The larger values of Ap/Apt represent decreased cross-sectional

area of the water in the pore throats with respect to the area of

4 Paulus Adisoemarta, George Anderson, Scott Frailey, and George Asquith SPE 70043

References

Adisoemarta, P.S., Anderson, G.A., Frailey, S.M., and Asquith, G.B.: TABLE 1. VALUES OF n AS A FUNCTION OF Ap / Apt

“Historical Use of m and a in Well Log Interpretation: Is AND Lp / Lpt

Conventional Wisdom Backwards?”, SPE 59699 presented at Values of Values of Lp / Lpt

the 2000 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas Recovery Conference,

Midland, March 21-23. Ap / Apt 0.25 0.5 1 2 4

Amyx, J.W., Bass, Jr., D.M., and Whiting, R.L.: Petroleum Reservoir

Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York (1960). 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

“Archie II: Electrical Conduction in Hydrocarbon-Bearing Rock”,

The Technical Review, Vol 36. No. 4; pp 12-21. 2 1.11 1.20 1.33 1.50 1.67

Asquith, G.B., S.P. Dutton, A.G. Cole, Muhammad Razi, and Jose 4 1.18 1.33 1.60 2.00 2.50

Guzman.: “Petrophysics of the Ramsey Sandstone, Ford Gerald

Unit Reeves and Culberson Counties, Texas: in Permian Basin 8 1.21 1.41 1.78 2.40 3.33

Oil and Gas Fields: Turning Ideas into Production”, W.D.

Demis, ed., West Texas Geological Society, Publ. #97-102, 16 1.23 1.45 1.89 2.67 4.00

1997, p. 61-69.

Bassiouni, Z.: Theory, Measurement, and Interpretation of Well 32 1.24 1.48 1.94 2.82 4.44

Logs, Textbook Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1994) 4.

∞ 1.25 1.50 2.00 3.00 5.00

Cornell, D. and Katz, D.L.: “Flow of Gases Through Consolidated

Porous Media,” Ind. Engr. Chem., (1953) 45.

Diederix , K.M.: “Anomalous Relationships Between Resistivity

Index and Water Saturations in the Roetliegend Sandstone, (The Effect of n on Archie Water Saturation

0.9

Keith, B.D., and E.D. Pittman,1984.: “Bimodal Porosity in Oolitic

Reservoirs-effect on Productivity and Log Response, Rodessa 0.8

Archie Water Saturation

0.6

1399.

Keller, G.V.: “Effect of Wettability on the Electrical Resistivity of 0.5

Kumar, N. and Frailey, S.M.: “Using Well Logs to Infer

0.3

Permeability: Will There Ever Be a Permeability Log?”,

n=1

Southwestern Petroleum Short Course, Lubbock, TX (April 24- 0.2

n=2

5, 2001). 0.1

n=4

Electrical Resistivity in Porous Media”, presented at the 18th 0

0.000 0.100 0.200 0.300 0.400 0.500 0.600 0.700 0.800 0.900 1.000

Petroleum Society of CIM, Banff, Canada (May 1967), pp 20- Ro/Rt

25.

Swanson, B.F.: “Microporosity in Reservoir Rocks – Its Figure 1: Impact of n on calculated water saturation using Archie’s

Measurement and Influence of Electrical Resistivity”, equation

Transactions of the SPWLA 26th Annual Logging Symposium,

Dallas (June 17-20, 1985)

Tiab, D. and Donaldson, E.C.: Petrophysics: Theory, and Practice

of Measuring Reservoir Rock and Fluid Transport Properties,

Gulf Publishing, Houston (1996).

Sweeney, S.A., and Jennings, H.Y. Jr.: “The Electrical Resistivity of

Preferentially Water-Wet and Preferentially Oil-Wet Carbonate

Rock”, Producers Monthly no.7 (May 1960), pp 29-32

Wyllie, M.R.J., and Gardner, G.H.F.: “The Generalized Kozey-

Carman Equation,” World Oil (March and April 1958).

Wyllie, M.R.J., and Spangler, M.B.: “Application of Electrical

Resistivity Measurements to Problem of Fluid Flow in Porous

Media,” Bull. Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geologists (February 1952) p.

359.

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.