Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
Question 1:
Assume that the permeability and porosity data in the following Table are representative of
several thousand data points taken for permeability-porosity measurements of a reservoir.
a. Plot the data and develop an equation that represents the relationship between
permeability and porosity. Show the limits of the applicability of this equation.
b. Give an explanation for the deviation of the data that occurs for the high-permeability
core.
c. Determine the correct mean value of the permeability.
d. What is the matrix permeability of the core if the effective pore throat radius is 3.5 μm
and the cementation factor is 2? Estimate the tortuosity of the sample.
Sample No. K (mD)
1 0.022 0.088
2 0.061 0.100
3 0.115 0.110
4 0.438 0.118
5 1.050 0.121
6 1.120 0.130
7 2.202 0.140
8 2.500 0.150
9 2.900 0.159
Answer:
a. The tabulated result and plot of the data within the linear regression as per shown
below:
log k log φ log k vs log φ
-1.6576 -1.0555 0.5000
-1.2147 -1.0000 0.0000
-0.9393 -0.9586 -0.5000
log k
The limits of the applicability of this equation: assuming all of the sample comes from
the same hydraulic flow unit, however we can see that the trend is to be deviated
when the permeability is 2.5 md or up.
b. Comments/Explanation for the deviation of the data that occurs for the high
permeability core: the deviation can be as the outcome of the difference of hydraulic
flow unit.
∅3
c. By using the relationship between k and ∅𝑅 = (1−∅)2, we can get better linear
regression between k and ϕ as per following:
Page 1 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
k (φ^3)/((1-φ)^2)
0.022 0.000819329
k vs φRy = 674.1962x - 0.7243
R² = 0.9513
0.061 0.001234568 4
0.115 0.001680343 3
k, md
0.438 0.002112073 2
1.05 0.002292864 1
1.12 0.002902629
0
2.202 0.003710114 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006
2.5 0.00467128 φR = (φ^3)/((1-φ)^2)
2.9 0.005683284
Taking arithmetic averaging on ϕ data then we input the result into above regression
linear equation, so that we can get the mean permeability:
3
∅ 0.1243
𝒌 = 674.1962 2 − 0.7243 = 674.1962 − 0.7243
(1 − ∅) (1 − 0.124)2
= 𝟎. 𝟗𝟓𝟎𝟖 𝒎𝒅
Other methods:
1) Use the effective permeability obtained from core data, estimated from (taken
from Tiab and Donaldson’s book in chapter Permeability and Porosity
Distributions):
ln ki (ln ki - ln k ave)^2
-3.81671 9.459689922
-2.79688 4.226434856
-2.16282 2.021433393
-0.82554 0.00713762
0.04879 0.62385054
0.113329 0.729966242
0.789366 2.342179169
0.916291 2.746784711
1.064711 3.260778823
kg ave 0.756511 3.177281909 variance
ln k ave -0.74105 3.259202114 ke
Page 2 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
kA average = 1.1564 md
b) Geometric:
kG average = 0.4766 md
c) Harmonic:
kH average = 0.1186 md
d. For r = 3.5 μm and m = 2 within conversion factor of k from μm2 to md, C =
2
1,000/0.986923, hence we can get the tabulated results (τ and k in md for each
porosity ϕ) as per following the relationship below:
τ k, md
11.36364 12.01512
10 15.51539
9.090909 18.77363
8.474576 21.60364
8.264463 22.71609
7.692308 26.22102
7.142857 30.41017
6.666667 34.90964
6.289308 39.22447
Question 2:
a. If a core has a porosity of 18% and an irreducible water saturation of 24%, what is the
permeability of the sample?
b. An NMR log was run in an oil well, indicating a porosity of 13% and log mean of
relaxation time 25 ms at the depth of 7500. Estimate the permeability at this depth for
this well.
Answer:
a. Timur (1968) empirical correlation (from Course Slide):
Page 3 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
100∅4.5100(0.18)4.5
𝑘= = = 0.7732 𝑚𝑑
𝑆𝑤𝑖𝑟𝑟 2 (0.24)2
Coates and Dumanoir (1981) correlation:
Therefore: k = 105.2676 md
Tixier (1978) correlation:
Therefore: k = 36.9056 md
Question 3:
Core analysis for permeability and porosity of 36 one-foot core samples obtained from a well
located in a clean sandstone formation is provided in the following table.
a. Is the permeability distribution with depth linear, exponential, or logarithmic? Find the
best curve-fit straight line.
b. Calculate the Dykstra-Parsons coefficient. Is the formation homogeneous or
heterogeneous? Justify your answer
c. Find arithmetic, geometric, and harmonic means of the permeability. Also, calculate
the standard deviation, normalized mean, and dispersion of the three means.
d. Determine the arithmetic porosity mean and the median porosity.
e. Determine the best permeability-porosity correlation.
f. What is the average grain diameter of each sample?
g. Calculate RQI and plot against porosity.
h. Determine the number of flow units and corresponding FZI.
Sample No. k (mD) Sample No. k (mD)
1 100 0.268 19 1720 0.266
2 822 0.354 20 500 0.275
3 436 0.264 21 495 0.269
4 220 0.260 22 612 0.206
5 348 0.258 23 897 0.264
6 256 0.272 24 974 0.272
7 150 0.256 25 790 0.351
8 127 0.255 26 955 0.358
9 36 0.272 27 1030 0.273
10 779 0.257 28 784 0.266
Page 4 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
Answer:
a. The permeability distribution with depth tends to be logarithmic rather than linear and
exponential, but power distribution is the best, as per shown in the following figures:
10
15
20 10
25
30
y = 4.452ln(x) - 9.2452
35 y = 1.1343x0.4064
R² = 0.1438
R² = 0.1777
40 100
10
15
10 20
25
30
35
y = 9.0222e0.0007x y = 0.006x + 14.402
R² = 0.117 R² = 0.0628
100 40
Page 5 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
b. We can calculate the Dykstra-Parson coefficient from the following procedures as per
detail explanation from Tiab and Donaldson’s book:
1) Using graphical method, as per detail explained below:
Sample No. k (mD) Freq Freq > ki Cum Freq Dist % > ki
17 1780 0.262 1 0 0.0000%
19 1720 0.266 1 1 2.8571%
18 1510 0.269 1 2 5.7143%
13 1190 0.277 1 3 8.5714%
27 1030 0.273 1 4 11.4286%
24 974 0.272 1 5 14.2857%
26 955 0.358 1 6 17.1429%
11 945 0.263 1 7 20.0000%
32 937 0.358 1 8 22.8571%
14 928 0.355 1 9 25.7143%
23 897 0.264 1 10 28.5714%
33 854 0.279 1 11 31.4286%
2 822 0.354 1 12 34.2857%
34 818 0.272 1 13 37.1429%
12 815 0.295 1 14 40.0000%
25 790 0.351 1 15 42.8571%
28 784 0.266 1 16 45.7143%
10 779 0.257 1 17 48.5714%
30 623 0.313 1 18 51.4286%
22 612 0.206 1 19 54.2857%
31 557 0.255 1 20 57.1429%
20 500 0.275 1 21 60.0000%
21 495 0.269 1 22 62.8571%
29 491 0.262 1 23 65.7143%
3 436 0.264 1 24 68.5714%
35 363 0.285 1 25 71.4286%
5 348 0.258 1 26 74.2857%
36 306 0.315 1 27 77.1429%
6 256 0.272 1 28 80.0000%
Page 6 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
1000
k, md
100
10
1
0.0000% 20.0000% 40.0000% 60.0000% 80.0000% 100.0000%
Cum Freq Dist % > ki
From above graph and table, we can get k50 = 701 and k84.1 = 259.55 (interpolated)
Therefore: VK = 0.6297
Page 7 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
Comments on the results: Refer to the following explanation taken from Tiab and
Donaldson’s book:
In this case, we get VK in between of 0.5 and 0.75 for all methods as per shown above,
hence we may say that the reservoir is very heterogeneous so that a combination of
geometric and harmonic averaging technique is necessary.
c. From the previous answer, we already knew that kA = 679.5556 md and kH = 303.1733
md, for kG refer to the following equation, we can get kG = 508.8451 md:
For all of mean values, we can calculate the normalized k on each mean value by using
the following correlation, then we can take the averaging of normalized k values:
𝑘
𝑘𝑖,𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑚 = 𝑘 𝑖 where M = Arithmetic, Geometric and Harmonic
𝑀
Tabulated results:
norm k a norm k h norm k g 71.2230 159.6446 95.1174
14.7155 32.9844 19.6523 178.2106 399.4547 237.9978
994.3028 2228.7053 1327.8776 96.4395 216.1668 128.7936
279.7358 627.0209 373.5832 33.1099 74.2150 44.2178
Page 8 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
Hence, we can get the normalized mean value for: arithmetic = 953.955 md, harmonic
= 93.5908 md and geometric = 508.8451 md.
For calculating the dispersion (variance) and standard deviation (square root of
variance), we can use the following correlations:
1) Case arithmetic mean permeability:
Where s is the standard deviation, in this case, we can get s = 437.9468 and
variance (s2) = 191,797.3968
2) Case geometric mean permeability:
2
𝑛 𝑘𝑖
√∑𝑖=1 (ln𝑘𝐺
)
𝑠 = exp
𝑛−1
[ ]
In this case, we can get s = 2.4535 and variance = 6.0197
3) Case harmonic mean permeability:
𝑛−1
𝑠= 2
2
√ 1 1
∑𝑛𝑖=1 [( ) −( ) ]
𝑘𝑖 𝑘ℎ
In this case, we can get s = 199.7619 and variance = 39,904.8265
d. Changing the term of k to be ϕ, we can get the ϕA = 0.272; from function MEDIAN on
the Excel, we can get ϕ50 = 0.2816
e. Pass after answering f to h, after estimating the hydraulic flow unit group, we can get
the following correlation between k and ϕ for each HFU group, with the comments on
the results are from the 1st and 5th Group that get R2 < 0.75 (this may cause of
heterogeneity on those HFU groups) and because of the clean sandstone reservoir only,
we can correlate on single regression line-type (power regression line):
Page 9 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
k vs φ
10000
y = 411660x4.676 y = 278908x3.8663
R² = 0.4889 R² = 0.952
1000
y = 87109x4.412
y = 611891x5.4386
R² = 0.9779
100 R² = 0.8869
y = 30184x3.9349
R² = 0.9575
10
y = 5E-10x-19.61
R² = 0.1724
1
1 0.1
f. By using the following equation from Tiab and Donaldson’s book, we can get tabulated
results as following after:
Page 10 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
g. From the following tabulated results and plot graph of RQI vs ϕR, after sorting based
on the calculated FZI, all of the equations come from the Tiab and Donaldson’s book
and Course Slides (detail on answer for number 4):
Page 11 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
RQI vs φz
10.0000
1.0000
0.1000
1.0000 0.1000
h. Taken the value of RQI at ϕz = 1 as the FZI for each group, hence we can tabulate the
result as following below:
Group Sample FZI Symbol k(φ) = R2
1 9, 16, 1 1.2 Diamond 5E-10φ-19.61 0.1724
2 8, 36, 7, 15 2 Circle 30184φ3.9349 0.9575
3 6, 4, 25, 2, 35, 32, 26, 14, 30 2.8 Square 87109φ4.412 0.9779
4 5, 20, 3, 21, 29, 12 3.4 Star 611891φ5.4386 0.8869
5 31, 33, 34, 28, 10, 24, 23, 27, 11, 13 4.6 Triangle 411660φ4.676 0.4889
6 18, 22, 19, 17 6.5 Cross 278908φ3.8663 0.952
Question 4:
The conventional core analysis property values and the specific area per unit pore volume
obtained by image analysis are summarized in the following table for a sandstone reservoir.
Calculate:
a. Specific area per unit-grain volume (SVgr)
b. Pore-level effective zoning factor (KT)
c. Lithology index (J1)
d. Reservoir quality index
e. Number of flow units
Sample No. k, (mD) Spv, m-1
1 0.197 728 0.0241
2 0.153 25.9 0.0522
3 0.129 28 0.038
4 0.101 3.51 0.0543
5 0.152 5.29 0.0719
6 0.129 1.78 0.0846
7 0.122 2.09 0.0824
8 0.102 0.47 0.0864
9 0.202 646 0.0284
10 0.173 114 0.0538
11 0.134 412 0.0158
12 0.069 1.65 0.0194
Page 12 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
Answer:
Using the following correlations, we can solve all of the sub-question on tabulated result
display as per following after, then recalculate all on each hydraulic flow unit group:
Page 13 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM
Spv vs 1/φz=(1-φ)/φ
0.1
0.01
0.001
1 10 100
RQI vs φz = φ/(1-φ)
10.0000
1.0000
0.1000
1 0.1 0.01
Page 14 of 14