A New Method in Preparing Laboratory Core Acoustic Data

for Assisting Seismic-based Reservoir Characterization

Bambang Widarsono, PPPTMGB “LEMIGAS” - Indonesia
Fakhriyadi Saptono, PPPTMGB “LEMIGAS” - Indonesia

Current development in reservoir characterization has demonstrated the trends towards

maximizing the use of seismic survey data for mapping rock physical properties such as
porosity and water saturation. Knowledge upon the relation between the two rock
physical properties and seismic attributes is, therefore, a prerequisite in order to enable
the deducting of porosity and water saturation from acoustic (i.e. seismic) data. Previous
efforts (e.g. Widarsono and Saptono, 1997;Widarsono and Saptono, 2000) have been
spent in modeling relation between seismic output (e.g. P-wave velocity and Poisson
ratio) and the two rock physical properties based on results of standard well log analysis
(i.e. porosity, water saturation, sonic velocity, density, and shale fraction). However, the
works also show that the common absence of rock-matrix dry elastic properties (i.e. dry
bulk and shear modulus) in well log data has prompted the need to perform a series of
laboratory acoustic measurement.

To fulfil the requirement for the data, a new procedure for processing and preparing data
of laboratory acoustic measurements on cores has been established. In contrast to the
common practice, i.e. the needed data is obtained from direct laboratory acoustic
measurement on dry core samples, the proposed procedure includes similar measurement
on core samples at various water saturation levels and at simulated reservoir condition.
Mathematical modelling is then applied on the resulting data, from which rock matrix dry
properties are produced, hence indirect measurement. The data is can then be used in
preceding modelling on the well log data mentioned earlier. This procedure has at least
two advantages when compared to the conventional/direct method. Firstly, in case of
inappropriate rock matrix data for the modelling on the well-log analysis results, the data
can be adjusted more easily and justified since the core also possesses water saturation
data (apart from porosity and P-wave velocity) to compare with the corresponding
parameter from well log. Secondly, although according to the theory of elastic wave
propagation changes in acoustic velocities of liquid-saturated rocks are caused by the
liquids’ compressibility, as have been concluded by some investigators in the past
through their experiments (e.g. King, 1984), other causes are also considered potential.
Johnston et al (1979), for instance, argued that fluids tend to lubricate rock grains
resulting in higher attenuation (i.e. lower viscosity). In compliance to this possibility it
is, therefore, considered more appropriate to obtain the ‘effective’ rock matrix data
through the proposed procedure than from the direct measurement on dry cores.
To support the application of the new approach a series of laboratory P- and S-waves
measurements has been conducted on core samples of different porosity values taken
from an oil sandstone reservoir in Central Sumatra, Indonesia. Careful preparation was
made on the samples. Synthetic brine with salinity slightly higher than formation brine
was used for preventing clay swelling. The carefully prepared measurements were made
at a simulated overburden pressure. Various water-oil saturation levels using synthetic
oil and brine with their physical properties simulated at reservoir (P and T) condition.
Several parameters have been derived from the transit time data such as P- and S-wave
velocities, Poisson ratio, bulk modulus, and Young’s modulus. Examples are presented in
Figures 1 and 2.

Following the proposed procedure the steps taken in the data processing are as follows
1. Measurement in standard manner data of porosity, water saturation, density, P-wave
and S-wave velocities, and hence the rock mechanical properties.
2. Modelling of relation between physical properties (e.g. porosity and water saturation),
P-wave velocity and Poisson ratio using a combination of Gassmann acoustic velocity
model and the theory of elastic wave propagation. The model relation is presented in
Figure 3.
3. The plot between water saturation values proves validation of the model, involving
iteration, from both model and observation (Figure 4). The ‘effective’ rock matrix
bulk and shear modulus used in the validated model is then used in the modelling on
well log data.
4. Similar modelling on well log data taking into acount the effect of variations in
density and shaliness. Adjustment on the ‘effective’ rock matrix data is made on the
line of correlating P-wave velocities from well log and core, for the same pairs of
porosity and water saturation. The correlation is presented in Figure 5.
5 . Confirmation and validation following step 3 (Figure 6), which results in the
modelled relation, ready to be used in interpreting seismic attributes. An example of
the relation (in form of a cross-plot) for two matrix density and two shale fraction
ranges is presented in Figure 7.

The new procedure proposed appears promising, and by applying this, the cross-plots can
be considered ready to support effort to determine porosity and fluid saturation
distribution derived from seismic data.

References

Johnston, D.H., Toksoz, M.N. & Timur, A., “Attenuation of seismic waves in dry and
saturated rocks: II. Mechanisms”, (1979) Geophysics 44, 691-711.

King, MS., “Elastic-wave velocities in quartz monzonite at different levels of water

saturation”, Int. Jour. Rock Mech. & Geomech. Abstr., (1984) 1, 35-38.
 Widarsono, B. & Saptono, F., “Estimating porosity and water saturation from
seismic/acoustic signals: a correction on the effect of shaliness”, (2000) accepted for
publication in journal of Lemigas Scientific Contribution.

Widarsono, B. & Saptono, F., “Acoustic measurement in laboratory: a support in

predicting porosity and fluid saturation from seismic survey”, (in Bahasa Indonesia)
(1997) Proceedings, Symposium and 5th Congress of Association of Indonesian
Petroleum Experts (IATMI), Jakarta – Indonesia.

4500
0.345

0.335
4000
0.325
Vp, m/sec

Poisson Ratio
0.315
3500

0.305

3000 0.295

0.285

2500 0.275
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Sw, % Sw, %
Figure 1. Figure 2.
Example of acoustic measurement (Vp vs Sw). Example of acoustic measurement, (Poisson ratio vs Sw).

P-Wave Velocity vs Poisson Ratio

5250
CENTRAL SUMATRA SANDSTONE
5000
Sw : .2 .6 .8 .9

φ : 0.13
4750

φ : 0.15
4500
Vp , m/sec

φ : 0.17
4250

φ : 0.19
4000
φ : 0.21
3750
φ : 0.23
φ : 0.25
3500
φ : 0.27
φ : 0.29
3250
0.110 0.130 0.150 0.170 0.190 0.210 0.230 0.250 0.270 0.290 0.310 0.330 0.350 0.370

Poisson Ratio
Figure 3. Crossplot as the result of mathematical modeling for the Central Sumatra sandstone (laboratory condition).
 100
4500
Vshale= 8 - 10%
ρ m = 2.6 -2.7 gr/cc
80
4250
Swlog , %

V p - log = 0.452( V p - model ) + 1803.1

60
R 2 = 0.7091
4000

V p - log, m/sec
40

3750
20

0 3500

0 20 40 60 80 100
Sw model , % 3250
Figure 4. 3250 3500 3750 4000 4250 4500
Model validation (Sw lab vs Sw model) V p- model , m/sec

100 Figure 5.
Vshale= 8 - 10%
ρ m = 2.6 -2.7 gr/cc Vp- model vs Vp- log, used for conversion/calibration into
situ condition. Vshale= 8 - 10 %, ρm = 2.6 - 2.7 gr/cc
80
Sw log , %

60

40
Figure 6.
20
Model validation (Sw log vs Sw model ).
Vshale= 8 - 10 %, ρm = 2.6 - 2.7 gr/cc

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Sw model , %
P-Wave Velocity vs Poisson Ratio
5250
Vshale = 0 - 5% CENTRAL SUMATRA SANDSTONE
5000 φ : 0.11 ρ m = 2.5 -2.6 gr/cc

Sw : .2 .6 .8 .9
4750
φ : 0.13
φ : 0.11
4500
Sw : .2 .4 .6 .8
φ : 0.15
Vp , m/sec

4250 φ : 0.13
φ : 0.17
4000 φ : 0.15
φ : 0.19
φ : 0.17 φ: 0.21
3750
Vshale = 8 - 10% φ: 0.19 φ : 0.23
ρ m = 2.6 -2.7 gr/cc φ : 0.21
φ : 0.25
3500 φ : 0.23 φ : 0.27
φ : 0.25 φ : 0.29
φ : 0.27
3250 φ : 0.29

3000
0.110 0.130 0.150 0.170 0.190 0.210 0.230 0.250 0.270 0.290 0.310 0.330 0.350 0.370
Poisson Ratio

Figure 7.
Examples of the resulting crossplots (in situ condition) for the Central Sumatra sandstone, with acomodating
effect of shaliness: Vsh = 0 – 5 %, ρm = 2.5 - 2.6 gr/cc and Vsh = 8 – 10 %, ρm = 2.6 - 2.7 gr/c