PERMEABILITY PREDICTION

BASED ON
CAPILLARY MODEL

Outline

Motivation
Objective
Reservoir System & Data
Existing Methods for
Permeability
Prediction
Development of
Hydraulic
Conductivity Method
Comparison with Previous Method
Conclusions

1/18

2/18

Motivation

1
1
2

Core Description

Log Description

No.

Depth

GR

SP

Rt

(mSS)

(fraction
)

(mD)

(GAPI)

(MV
)

(m)

1975.9
9

0.224

30

25.5

-15

26

1982.4
1

0.205

108

37.5

-11

17

Point 1 large pore size but small pore throat

Point 2 small pore size but large pore throat

Better log characters (GR, SP & Rt) do not always

mean better reservoir quality

Objective
To develop a method for estimating permeability based on a
fundamental capillary model, and apply the method to a field case.

3/18

Reservoir System & Data

4/18

X FIELD
SSW - NNE STRUCTURAL CROSS SECTION

500

1000

1500

MAIN
MAIN

2000

2. WATER

2500

3000

GAS
250 m
3500
500 m

OIL
WATER

Main Zone Focus of Study

1500 mSS 2200 mSS
23 multi-stacked reservoir layers
deposited in
Delta Plain & Delta
Front
30 m < h < 50 m
5 producing wells
145 sandstone samples
0.042 < < 0.46
0.28 mD < k < 7442 mD

Existing Methods
for
Permeability Prediction

Existing Methods
for Permeability Prediction
k Crossplot
Empirical Correlations
Hydraulic Flow Unit

5/18

k- Crossplot

log k = m + n

Not have strong basic theory & geological justification

The resulted equation may exceedingly overpredict or
underpredict the permeability

6/18

Hydraulic Flow Unit

7/18

log RQI log z log FZI

RQI 0.0314

FZI

1
Fs S gv

FZI
HFU1
HFU2
HFU3
HFU4
HFU5
HFU6
HFU7

Does not account for sedimentary environment of multistacked reservoirs

Development of
Hydraulic Conductivity
(HC) Method

Method Development
k 1014 C
3

0.5

1
Fs 2 S pv 2 2

1014 C
2

k
log

0.5

0.5

FG

f 0.5log C

Leverett: dH (mean hydraulic

diameter)

8/18

Theoretical Half Unit Slope Line

pore

There are tendencies of data points to be clustered

to form several straight lines.
Each cluster may indicate the same
type of origin or facies group (FG).

Method Development (Contd)

9/18

DELTAIC SYSTEMS
MAIN DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS

SECTION OF A CHANNEL

Source: IFP School

10/18

Method Development (Contd)

11/18

Medium to High
Quality Reservoir
35 mD < k < 7442 mD
Low
Quality Reservoir
0.28 mD < k < 35 mD

Slope 0.5 Medium to High quality reservoir, larger mean

hydraulic pore diameter, relatively simpler pore throat geometry
Slope < 0.5 Low quality reservoir, smaller mean hydraulic pore
diameter, relatively more complex pore throat geometry

Method Development (Contd)

k a d Hb
k 1014 C
3

2
1
1014C
log d H log log

b
b
a

Gauss-Newton Iteration
a , b, d H

Final Iteration Result:

Conductivity Unit 5
(CU5)
Res.

19-1aN

19-3aN

FG

0.115

0.214

kact

6.2

34

15.856

1.74

dHmax

17.571

dH

2.021

3.76

kcorr

6.201

34

k equation obtained:
The
(
%
)

0.016

k 15.856 d

1.74
H

12/18

Method Development (Contd)

Equation in
The Developed HC Method:

Archie Equation:

k 15.856 d

k a d
Common values for

13/18

b
H

(Exponent of Pore Throat Geometry)

are 1.2 < m < 2

1.74
H

a Rw
Rt m n
Sw
Common values for m
(Cementation Exponent)
are 1.3 < m < 2

14/18

Method Development (Contd)

log log d

d H 10

H MAX

k 15.856 d H1.74

dHmax@ =1
HCU1
HCU2
HCU3
HCU4
HCU5
HCU6 HCU7

Method Development (Contd)

Identify data points w/
their from logs
Analyzing characters of the logs
Determine dHmax
according to appropriate HCU
log log d

d H 10

H MAX

k 15.856 d

1.74
H

15/18

Comparison w/ Previous Method

16/18

CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions

17/18

The developed method (HC), as

compared to HFU method, overall, yields
relatively better permeability prediction.

The theoretical correlation, k / vs.

hydraulic conductivity C, shows that
slope deviating from m = 0.5 reveals
the degree of reservoir quality.

Conclusions (Contd)
It is also found that the theoretical
capillary model is able to distinguish
the reservoir quality based on
sedimentary environment.

18/18

Thank You