Nettability Literature SurveyPart 3:

The Effects d Nettability on the

Electrical Properties of Porous Media
WMiam G. Andarson, SPE, Conoco Inc

l393f+
Summary. This paper examines the effects of wettabflity on the Archie saturation exponent and the formatiOn
factor, which are determined exper.imentally in cores. These parameters are irhportamt in the investigation of the
hydrocarbon saturation of a formation by use of resistivi~ data. obtained from well logging. The Archie
saturation exponent, n,typically has a value of about 2 in water-wet formations and clearrcd cores, whfle in
native-stnte, non-water-wet cores and formations it is generally larger than 2. In uniformly oil-wet cores with
low brine saturations, n can reach values of 10 or more. The exponent is ~gher inoil-wet cores at low
saturations because a portion of the brine is trapped or isolated in dendritic fingers where it is unable to
contribute to electrical conductivity. If a cleaned water-wet core is used to measure n and the reservoir is
actually oil-wet, interstitial water, will be underestimated during Iogging. No definite conclusions can be drawn
about the effects of nettability on the formation factor. However, the wettabilky of clays in a core is fikeIy to
affect this Lmmn3eter.
Introduction
This paper is the third irr a series on the effects of wettabllity on core analysis. 1-3Changes in the nettability of
the core have been shown to affect electrical properties,
capillary pressure, waterflood behavior, relative permeability, dispersion, tertiary recovery, irreducible water
saturation, and residual oif saturation. For core analysis
to predict thebehavior of a reservoti~ the wettabMy of
the core nmst be the sync as the w.ettabllity of the undisturbed reservoir rock.
In the first report, 1 the various kinds of nettability,
such as mixed wettabtity, were discussed. That paper also
detirred native-state, cleaned, nnd restored-state cores nnd
gave the procedures necessary to obtain each type. Note
that a restored-state core has been cleaned and then aged
with native crude oil and brine at reservoir temperature
until the native nettability is restored. This definition is
used in the majority of the more recent literature. Be
aware, however, Ilratin some papers, pwticularly older
ones, the term restored state is used for what are actually cleaned cores (e..g., see Craig4).
Wettnbtity nnd saturation hktory ire irnpopant factors
in the detcrrrtjnationof the electrical rcsistivity of a porous
medhm because they control the location and distribution of fluids. The electrical resistivi~ of acore is determined by the lengths and cross-sectional areas of the
conducting piths through the brine. Large resistivi~ is
caused .by small cross-sectional areas and long conduction paths. First, consider a 100% brine-saturated core.
The rcsistivity of tie core is much higher than the resistivity of an cquivgent volume of brine because the nonconductive rock reduces the cross-se:tiorwd area through
which the current can flow. At the same time, the rock
increases the length of the conducting paths.

CQPY@t

Journal

1986 So.f.w.f

P.tf.!wm

%$..-

of Petroleum Technology, Dec&ber 1986

The resistivitv of the core is increased further by arw

hydrocarbon sat&ation in the core because hydroca;bon_s
are also nonconductive. The incrense will depend on the
saturation, nettability, and saturation history, +e factors
that control the location and distribution of the oil and
water in the reck. Irr a water-wet rock, the brine occupies
the smaIl pores and forms a continuous fflm on the rock
surfaces. In an oil-wet rock, the brine is located in the
centers of the larger pores. Thk difference in brine distribution caused by the wettabili~ becomes very important as the brine saturation is lowered. Generally, almost
nll of the brine in the water-wet rock, remains continuous,
so the resistivity increases because of the decrease in the
cross-sectional area that can conduct flow. In an oil-wet
rock, a pmtion of the brine will lose electrical continuity
as the saturation is lowered, so the electrical rgsistivity
will increase at a faster rate.
Effects of Wettabitity on Resistivity and
the Archie Saturation Exponent
The hydrocarbon saturation of a formatiori is often estimated from resistivity data obtained by well logging. The
empirically determined Arch1e5 saturation equation is
often used

s;=+%

... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ...(1)

o
where
SW = brine saturation in the porous medium,
R, = resistivity of the porous medium at
saturation Sw, and
R. = resistivity of the 100% brine-saturated formation.
1371

The ratio of the two resistivities is called IR, the

resistivhy index. The Archie saturation exponent, n, is
a ditiensionkss erripirical parameter that is determined
experimentally fromcpr~ plugs. The value Of n depends
on the fotiation but ustially has a value of about 2 for
water-wet formations and cleaned water-wet cores.
Oil-Wet vs. Water-Wet Cores. Mungan and Moore6
have puinted out tit the Archie saturation equation rn&es
three implicit assumptions: (1) the saturation/resistivity
relation is unique, so only one resistivity will ever be
measured at a given saturation; (2) n is constant for a
mediw,
and (3) all the brtie contributes
given porous
to the flow of electric current. It has been shown that tbcse
assumptions are valid only when both the reservoir nud
core tie strongly water-wet because n depends on the distribtio, of the conductirtg phase .in the porous IIIed@III
and therefore depends on the wettabfily. If the nettability
is sltercd, the change in the spatial distribution of the fluids
alters the lengths and cross-sectional areas of the conductive pat@, which in turn changes the resistivity. Hence
the Archie equation is nonunique when ibe wettabili~ is
akcred because different resistiviiies iii be measured at
the same satiuition.
The experiments discussed below show that n can be
a great deal higher in oil-wet than in water-wet rocks.
M0rr0w7 provides additional discussion. Because the
saturation exponent depends on the nettability, n must
be measured at reservoir wetting conditions, o: invtild
saturations will be ob@ned from logs. For example, if
n is measured in a cleimed water-wet core and the reservoir is actually ox-wet, ihe water saturation in the reservoir would be underestimated. Pkson and Fraser 8 cite
an example of a well in an oil-wet reservoir that produced
onfy water. Assuming a water-wet reservoir, logs in this
sape well indicated an interstitial water satiation of only
25%.
TMeeffects of tietiabtity on the Arcbie saturation exponent become more important as the brine, saturation
decreases because, in an oil-wet system, there is more
@co@ction aid isolation of globules of brine, The isolated brine is surrounded by oil, w~ch acts.as an insiiator snd causes this brine to be unable tu conduct a current
flow. First, consider a water-wet system initially ai a high
brine saturation. The brine is Iocatcd in the smaflpores
and m a thin layer on the rock surfaces, whfie the &i is
located in the. center of the larger pores. All the brine ii
continuous and can conduct current. As the water saturation is lowered to the irreducible water saturation (NW),
essentially all of the brine in a water-wet system remains
continuous and conductive, allowing the saturation exponent to remain about 2. This continuity at all saturations
above fWS has been demonstited experimentally by
atcady:statc mistible flonds. .Thesefloods show that generally; there. is little or no trapping or isolation of any ,of
the brine by oil. 912 This implies ttiat most of the increase
in the rcsistivity is caused by the decrease in the crosssectional area available for conduction, not by increases
in tbe path length or brine t~pping..
In a uniformly oil-wet system, the oil is located in the
smull pores and on the rock surfaces, while .tbe brine is
located in the center of the Itiger pores. At high brine
saturations, the brine is continuous, jtit as it is in a watirwet system, even though its location is different. For this
1372

situation, the Arcbie resiativity/saturation relationbehaves

as it does-in the water-wet case, with n around 2. In contrast to the water-wet case, however, as the brine satura-.
tion decreases, a portion of the br@e no longer contribute
tothe current flow. In some experiment, the saturation
exponent increases as soon as the brine saturation is decreased, while in others the brine saturation must be reduced to about 35% before n increases. At very low water
saturations (<35 %), Iarge values of the saturation expOnent, n >10 can occur.
Two factors cau cause the resistivity, and hence n, to
ike more rapidiy compared wi@ the water-wet case: the
trapping of a portion of the brine by oil, and the formation of dendrites or tingera of brine. 13 As stated previously, these factora decrease the cross-sectiomd area and
increase the length of the conducting paths, thereby increasing electrical resistivi~. Flow vistrilizatiom and
steady-state miscible experiments demonstrate that a significant fraction of tie nonwetting phase becomes dkconnected
as the nonwetting
phase saturation
decreases. 4,12.W~7This isolated brine is surrounded by
nonconducting oil and cannot contribute to the current
flow. As the brine saturation is reduced, the electrical
resistivim will also be increased because some of the brine
will be located in pseudo-dead-end pores, 17,18 As.
known as tingers or dendritic structures. These fingers
consist of brine that is connected to the continuous brine
in only one location. The brine cannot conduct electricity
because of the oif/water interfaces in the remainder of the
pore throats, so the length of the conducting paths is in,.
creased.
Note that the volume of nonconducting dendrites is not
the same as the dendritic fraction measured in steady-stnte
miscible floodhg experiments. The dendritic fraction in
a miscible experiment is ameasurement of the brine that
is continuous but does not flow. 2n a water-wet system,
this includes thetnonflowing brine located in the small
pores, as well as the brine in the fingers On the other
hand, the volume of nonconducting dendrites is a measurement of the brine that is continuous but nonconducting. These two volnmes me different because the
continuous brine in the smalf pores conducts electrici~,
while the brine in the fingers does not.
I@perimental Measurements.
The experimental systems used to study theeffectsof wettabiity on the saturation exponent can be divided into three
types: (1) uniformly wetted systems; (2) reservoir cores;
which may or may not have nniform nettability; and
(3) fractional and mixed-nettability systems. In the @st
set of experiments with uniforin nettability, the wetw
bility of the entire core is varied from water-wet to oilwet. At any given nettability, the wettabfity of the entire sufface is kept as nniform as possible.
In many cases, reservoir core will not have @form
nettability. For example, the dlffefent minerals on the
rock. surface.can have different surface chemis~ and adsorption propefies, possibly causing variations in wetiabflity. The second set of experiments discussed is for
reservoir cores. Several of these cores are native-state,
where akcrations to the r+ervoir wettabitty are minimized. Finally, the third set of experiments examines the
wettab]lity effects that occur when a.core has fractions
or mixed wettabflity, where some of the rock surfaces are
,.

Xournalof Petroleum Technology, December 1986

TABLE 1ARCHIE SATURATION EXPONENTS AS A

FUNCTION OF SATURATION FOR A CONDUCTING
NONWETTING PHASES

.Ca

m,.,.,.,,

Air/NaCl SOlution
Brine
Saturation
(o/oPV)
n
66.2
65.1
63.2
59.3
51.4
43.6
39.5
23.9
30.1
28.4

1.97,
1,9s
1,92
2,01
1,93
1.99
2.11
4.06
7,50
8,90

Srine
Saturation
(0/0Py
64,1
63.1
60.2
55.3
50.7
44.2
40,5
36.8
34.3
.33.9
31.0

n
2.35
2.31
2,46
2.37
2.51
2.46
2.61
2.31
4.00
7.15
9

+
,m

,0

strongly water-wet but tbe remainder are oil-wet. In these

experiments, the effects of wettabllityare studkd by variation of the location and tine proportion of the surfaces
tiat are water-wet vs. oil-wet.
Uniformly Wetted Systerrrs. Mungan and Moore6
studied the effects of wettabfity on resistivity using both
synthetic poiytetrafluoroethylene (teflon) @ natural
cores. They found that n could be as Klgh as 9,when the
conductive liquid was the nonw:tting phase. When it was
the wetting phase, n was around 2 in the same core. The
fluid pairs used in the teflon core were metbnnollair,
airlbrine, and oilibrine. For the methanollair case,
methanol is boQr the wetting and conducting phase and
is analogotis to the brine in a water-wet rock. The saturation exponent was about 1.9, approximately what would
be measured in a water-wet resewoir cor,e with oil and
brine. This demonstrates that the location and resistivity
index of the fluids are similw in the two systems, oiU
brine/reservoir rock and air/m&thsnol/teflon, wheri the
wetting liquid is also the conducting phase.
Next, Mungan and Moore, used airlbrine Or OYbrine
as the two fluids in the teflon core. The brine is then the
conducting, nonwetig phase, bebaving in a fashion sfiku to brine in an oil-wetcore. The saturation exponents
are shown in Table 1. An examination of Mungti and
Moores datXshows what typic611yhappens in io oil-wet
system as the brine saturation is decreased. Above a certain conducting phase saturation, the exponent n @constant and near 2. Below this saturation, however, the
exponent begins to increase rapidly.
By mimovisunl examination, Mungrin and Moore found
that portions of the brine in the teflon cores started to become disconnected when the brine saturation was lowered
to about 35%. This disctrmrected brine did not conduct
electrical current because it.was completely surrounded
by tire insulating wetting phase (air or oil). Resistivity increased more rapidly as tie brine saturation was lowered
below 35%. Table 1 showsthat the exponent begins to
rise as the brine saturation drops below 40 %, eventually
increasing to about 9. Mungan and Moore concluded that
the Archle saturation equation was not ,vsld at low water
saturations in al oS-wet rock. fliey pointed out, however,
that a vtild saturation-resistivity relationship could be empirically determined if the reservoir wettabfky were preJournal of Petroleum Technology,

....

OWNaCl Solution

December1986

w,,,.

w,.

o,

1
0,2

..3

..4

0.,

,,8

!,0

served with a native-state core and reservoir fluids were

used for the measurements.
Sweeney and Jennings 1g,20 measured the effects of
wettabti~ on carbonate cores. The cores were first extracted with. toluene, which left them in a neutralwettabfity state, as determined by the imbibition
method. 1 This method is only qualitative, so the actual
wettsbility of the core was somewhere between mildly
watkr-wet and mildly oil-wet.
The electrical resistitiky of the neutrally wet core was
measured as a functinn of water saturation. The cores were
then fred at S40F [450C] to remove all of the organic
rnateris.l present, rendefing the core strongly water-wet.
Note that thk caused a slight increase in the porosity because of dksociatitm of a portion of the calcium carbonate
into calcium oxide and carbon dioxide. After the new
resistivity behavior was measured, the cores were treated witi naphthenic acids to make them oil-wet. The
resistivity bebavinr was measured again,and the results
are shown in Fig. 1. The Archie saturation exponent, n,
is the slope of each line. Ttie saturation exponent Of the
water-wet cores was about 1.6, and for the neutrally yet
cores about 1.9.
There were two different types of behavior for the cores
once they had been rendered oil-wet. In some cores,, the
saturation exponent was high (about 8) even when the
brine saturation was very high, The behavior of.tbe remainder of the cores was similar to the water-wet and neutrally wet cores until a brine saturation of about 35% was
reached. At this point, n increased rapidly to a v61ue of
about 12. This is similar to Mun 8n and Moores! findings. Sweeney arid Jennings g,zL?stated that the oil-wet
carbomte cores could also be separated into the same two
1373

,0

I I I

(0
.,
g
:
:,

.,

:.
~
;
4

,:

iI

CORE N,.44

.
~

:J(

,,,,.,,,,
~ ~ ~TRAc,,
n.

,,,,

TABLE 2EFFECT OF CLEANING ON THE

ARCHIE SATURATION EXPONENT27
Core Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
Aversge

D
.

Unextracted
2.37
2.68
2.48
2.71
2.82
2.21
2.55

Extracted
2.03
2.29
2.07
1.9t
2.44
1.91
2.11

state that these high vahres occur becauae a significant part

of tie nonwetting mercury was either trapped or located
in dendrites where it could not contribute to the conductivity.
Z1erfuss smd Makha25 measvred electrical resiativity
during waterflood of ssdstone tid limestone cores and
artificial packs. Each porous medium was saturated with
an aqueous ammonium thiocyanate solution (water),
oilflooded, and then waterflooded. The wettsbili~ was
controlled by treating the porous medlurn yi~ different
concentrations of naphthetic acids. As the system became
more oil-wet, the waterflooding behavior was altered. At
the same time, the resistivity at IWS was increased

Reservoir Core. The experiments dkcussed previously

showed the effects of wettabili~ on the saturation expo20
40
m
w
r,,
netit in uniformly wetted cores. Generally, either a teflon
WA,,*
,.7,,.,,0.,
% ,,.
core was used or the entire core was treated with a chemical to make it oil-wet. The experiments ii this section
~9. 2Ef~ct of cleaning on the Arcfde saturation
c:xponent.
demonstrate that nettability is SISOa major control parameter in the determination ofn inreservoir core. While
the Archle saturation exponent will be higher than 2 in
grotips on the basis of pore-size distribution and petronstive-state oil-wet cores, it will generally not reach the
graphic analysis. Unfortunately, they give no detsils.
very high vsfues for uniformly wetted systems. Because
,Rust21 compared tie saturation exponent for oil and
of variations in tiers.i composition, many reservoir cores
water in a cleaned sandstone before and after it had been
will probably have fractional (heterogeneous) wettabfity,
trded with an orgsnochlorosikme solution to render it
msking a portion of their surface water-wet. This will
mildfy oil-wet. He found that the saturation exponent for
decrease the rste at which the wster becomes.discome&?d
the clean water-wet sandstone was about 1.7, while for
at low water saturations and lower the saturation exponent.
the oil-wet sandstone it wss about 13.5 even at tigh brine
In addition to measurements in uniformly wetted teflon
saturations. Unfortunately, Rust miayhave had problem:
cores, Mungan and Moore6 measured the resistivity of
with his experimental apparatus, indkated by saturation
native-state re;ervoir cores that wete known to be oil-wet
exponent vuluea in the oil-wet sandstone of only 3.5 when
and had an interstitial water saturation of 10%. The
air and water were used.
resistivity was too high to be measured; implying that most
Keller, 22 Licastro aid Keller, 23 and Holmes24 measof the brine was discomected. The cores were waterured the resistivity of oil-yet and water-wet reSeIVOir, flooded and then oilflooded to 30% brine saturation, and
values of n were measured. They varied from 2 to 3.5.
cores using air and brine. The restit$ are very Similar to
ttie experiments described previously, even ihough core
Of course, at this higher brine saturation, the wettabiliv
saturations were cfianged by evaporation, which possieffects were reduced.
bly caused stilnity variations. In addition, fhe fluid disLuffel and Randa1126 gave & example of a resemoir
tribution may have differed from the distribution existing
where saturation exponents must be measured on nativewhen oil and brine were used.
state core rather than cleuued core. The saturation expo:
Goddard et al. 13 measured the electrical resistivity of
pent was first determined induectly on the basis of logs
mercury, a nonwetting fluid, as a function of saturation
snd water saturations from core cut with an oil-based mud.
in seveml sandstone plugs: Mercury was injected into the
The average saturation exponent wss determined to be
dry core and then withdrawn while the resistively was
2.6. The saturation exponent was then measured directly
measured. When the mercury was withdrawn from the
on native-state core,. nnd amaverage value of 2.8 was obsanrpk,
the
resistivity ,was at first slightly less than the
tained. In contrast, measurements on cleaned plugs gave
injection resistivity at the same saturation. It quicldy beg;$
due.f
18 of cleaning on the Arcume.much higher than the injection resistivity as the merexarnmedly
the effects
,cmy saturation was reduced, however, and was essentially
cbie saturation exponent of the Bradford Third sand,
infinite at a residual mercury saturation. Goddard et al.
which is kuown to be oi3-ivet. Six pairs of adjacent p)ugs
,0

1374

Journalof Petroleum Technology, December 1986

were cut, and one from each set was extracted with
toluene, mnking it more water-wet. The other core was
unextrscted, and left oil-wet. Note that cores were not
preserved and probably bad wettabilhies that differed from
their native wettnbdity. In sddhion, toluene extraction may
not have removed all of the organic coating on the core
so the cleaned cores may not have been strongly
water-wet.
The changes in the saturation expnnent are shown in
Table 2. Jrt each case, extraction significinily lowered the
Archle satnmtion exponent. Fig. 2 is a plotof the resistiviV index vs. the brine saturation for one core pxir. The
saturation exponent, n, is tie slope of the lines. It is bigher
for the unextmcted core amdappears to be constant. Moore
measured the reiistivity of the .unextracted core only for
brine satiations gxeater than 35 %; therefore, it is possible
that the saturation exponent increases rapidly at lower
brine saturations, as obse~ed by Sweeney and
Jer@ngs 19,20and Mung& and Moore. 6 Moores27 xnd
Luffel and Randalls26 experiments are particularly impor@t because they demonstrate that cleaning a core can
alter the saturation exponent.
Trantham and Clampitt2s measured a saturation exponent of 3.1 on plugs from h-e strongly oikwet North Burbank reservoir. The plugs were cleaned nnd resaturated
with brine and oil before measurement of the saturation
exponent. Cleaning thk core apparently dld not affect the
wettabllity; the. plugs remained strongly oil-wet even after cleaning. Trantham and Clnmpitt proposed that the oilwetness. of this reservoir is a result of a coating of
chsmosite clay rather than the more common adsorption
of surfactants from the cmde. This may explain why the
saturation exponent is very high even after cleaning.
The differences in the saturation exponent for nativestate vs. clcsned core by Mungan and Moore, 6 LuffeIl
and Rxndxll, 26 and Richardson et al. g show that the exponent should be measured on native-state or restoredstate core, where alterations tothe reservoir wettabilky
am minimized. Note that it is not known whether the cores
used in Refs. 6 nnd 26 had uniform or fractional nettability because both types of nettability are possible in
reservoirs.
Fractional and Mixed-Wet Systems. Additional w.ettnb~ity effects can occur when a system has nonuniform
nettability (either fractional or mixed), where portions
of the surface are strongly water-wet, wh~e the remainder
are strongly oil-wet. Sa.latfiel 30 irkrodticed the term
mixed nettability for a special type of fractional wettabifity in which the oil-wet surfaces form continuous paths
through the larger pores. The smaller pores remain waterwet and contain no oil. Note tlat the main distinction between mixed and fractional nettability is that the latter
does not imply either specific locations for the oil-wet and
water-wet surfaces or continuous oti-wet paths.
Fractional Wettabil@. The only researchers who have
exmnined the effects of fractional wettab]litj are
Schmid31 and Morgan and Puson.32 Morgan and Pws&
made fractionally wetted bead packs by treating aportion of the beads with an organochloroiilane solution to
render them miklly oil-wet. Theremainder of the beads
were untreated andhence water-wet. Witba variation in
the proportion of oil-wet snd water-wet beads, resistivity measurements could tie made as the proportion of oilJoumdof PetroleumTechnology,Deccmber1986

.
,,
;
%
; t.

/)
../:
%,.-,.

!:~~

,0

.,..,,

W..

Fig. 3Archie saturation

face that is oil:wet.2

.,L

WC,,.,,,

<..

!,,.mc..,

exponent vs. the fraction of sur-

wet surface was varied from O to 100%. Starting with

100% brine, tbesamration wasgradually reduced when
oif was flowed through the pack, andtheresistivity was
measured. The Arctic saturation exponent for each pack
was found by plotting resistivi~ vs. the saturation. Tbe
vaIuesofn shown in Fig. 3 mmgefrom2.5 when all of
the beads were water-wet to 25 when all of the beads were
oil-wet. These very high values of n possibly occur be-
cause of the smooth surfaces and homogeneous nature of
the bead pack.
Schmid measured the saturation exponent in fracti&ally-wetted sand packs with a portion of the sand grains
untreated and water-wet and the remsinder treated to
render them o~-wet. The saturation exponent for the IOQ%
water-wet pack was about 1.8. The resistmty index increased ataslowerrateinthk
water-wet pack when the
w&tersaturation wasless tbanabout25% PV. As expected, %&resistivity index at any given water saturation was
bigl@ for the 100% oil-wetpack, with a saturation index
of@tgbly 2.4. The resistivity indix increased rapidly,
whefi the,jjater saturatiori decreased below about 7-O
%PV,
whit] j:,:iimilar to Munganand Moores6 xnd Sweeney
and Jennings 920
, tindings.
Schrn;d ako measured the resistivity index of packings
containing 25, 50, or 75% oil-wet sand grains. Unfortunately, there does not appeq to be a clenr trend for tiese
packing$. The 75% ofl-wet pack had the same resistivityindex/saturation relationship as the 100% oil-we tpack,
except tiere was no rapid increase inresistivity index at
lower water saturations. The relationships for the 25 and
50% oil-wet packs were almost identical and were located between the completely oil-wet and comuletelsf
.
. waterwet curves.

Mired Wehizbifiiy. Unfortunately, nothing definite can

be sxid about the electrical properties of a core with mixed
wettab@. Inamixed-nettability
core, theoil-wetsurfaces form continuous paths through the Iarger pores,
while the smaller pores remain water-wet and contain no
~if, 30 A ~ed-wettabifi~
system can be generated in the
following manner. When oil initially invaded an originally
water-wet reservoir, it dkplaced water from the larger
pores, whale the smafler pore: remained water-filled beciuse of capillary forces. A mixed-nettability condhion
occurred if the oil deposited a layer of oil-wet organic
material only Orithose rock surfaces that were in direct
contact with the oil, but not on the brine-covered surfaces.
1375

oil-wet deoosits would not be formed in the small waterffled Pnre;, allowing them to remiin water-wet.
Because the small pores are water-wet, the electrical
behavior of rnixe&wettab~hy core will probably be different from the behavior ii?uniformly oil-wet systems. The
Archie saturation exponent will not reach the very high
values that can occur in uniformly wetted systems. Instead, it seems reasonable to expect that the electrical behavior of mixed-wettability cores wiff be similar to
water-wet ones because the small pores and clay patcles are water-wet and filled with water in both caaes.
As the brine saturation in a mixed-nettability core is reduced, the water in these areas will remain connected and
conduct electricity. This will alfow thesaturation exponent to behave as it would in.a water-wet core, remaining constant even at low brine saturations.
Even though the behavior of mixed-wet and water-wet
cores will be sinilar, however, this does not imply that
measurements on cleaned water-wet core are applicable
to reservoir systems. Unless the reservoir is known to be
sfrongly water-wet, the saturation exponent should be
measured on native- or restored-state core. There are
several reasons why core with the reservoir wettab]lity
is necessary. First, it appears that tie surfactants in some
cmdelbrinelreservoir rock systems can difise through
a water-film, making the entire rock surface uniformfy
oil-wet. 1 Second, if a core has mixed wetta.blity, the precise numerical value of the ArchIe saturation exponent
willprobably differ ,fiom that of awater-wet core because

havior, he stated that the waterflood behavior depended

on the aging time, a clea indication that the wet~bility
wsa still changing.
The cores were strongly water-wet befoti aging, which
is demonstrated by the fact that little or nn oil was produced after bre~through during a waterflood. The waterflood behavior also demonstrated that the wettnbllity was
altered after the coreswere aged because oil was produced
after breakthrough in the aged cores. Unfortunately, because Swanson injected only a few PVs of brine, it is
not possible to determine whether the cores had mixed
nettability. On the basis of the waterflood data, the cores
could be either uniformly mifdly water-wet, fractionally
wetted, or of mixed wettabllit y. The primary indication
of a mixed-nettability state is that very low oil saturations are reached after the injection of a very large number of PVs of brine. Tbis is caused by the conthuous
oil-wetted paths through the linger pores. 30 In summary,
no conclusions about the electrical properties of mixedwet cores can be made from Swansons data because the
wettabdity of the aged cores is unknown.

Experiments irr the Reservoir

Several
researchers have tried to estimate the effects of
nettability on resistivi~ in the reservoir. Puson and
Fraser 8 ~d Fraser 38 discussed reservoirs ~Own tO be
intermediate or oil-wet. Resistivity measured by the electric logs was compared with neutron logs and data on the
saturation from core analysis. An Archi& saturation exponent of about 3 was then determined to bring the two
0*
arge i-wetF.
Richardson
et al. 2 prowded an example of the differ- . sets of data into agreement.
Gr&aM39 used a reverse wetting agent tO eXfine the,
ence in resi<tivity for water-wet ~d mixed-wets ystems.
effects on resistivity as an originally water-wet .iock was
They measured the resistivity of nat:ve-stnte cores that
Iater were shown @ have mixed nettability. 30 The
changed to oil-wet. Experiments were coriducted both in
cores snd in situ. For the core experiments, water-wet
resistivity was high in the native-state cores, but gradually dropped after repeated cleaning as the cores became
Berea pIugs were samratid with brine, oilflonded, rben
water flooded to a residuaI oil saturation. The resistivity
more water-wet. The resistivity was measured only at
lWS, however, which was much bigher in the mixerf-wetof tie water:wet plugs was measured; then the plugs were
injected with brine containing a reverse wetting agent that
tabilily cores tbnn in the cleaned water-wet ones. Richardrenders sand and clay surfaces oil-wet. The electrical
son et al. present tie data only after they have been corresistivity of the now-oil-wet cores increased by, 100 to
rected to a 40 % saturation with Arcbies law (Eq. 1). This
makes it difficult to compare the resistivi~ measurements
200% because of the redistribution of the fluids in the
before and after cleaning to determine how n was affected.
core. Field tests also showed an increase in resistivity afSwan~on33 claimed ttvat be saw very little change ~
ter the wettabtity was changed to oil-wet. Graham recthe saturation exponent when he compared a water-wet
ommended that this treatment be used when logging in
core with the same core after it had been rest6 red to a
regions of relatively high conductivi~, where log interprepnssibly mixed-wettabfiity state. His experiments disagree
tation is difficult. Od in these regions would be revealed
by the imxea.se in re%istivityafter the fo~mation was made
with the measurements on native-stite, mixed-wettabfity
core dkcuased previously. 29 However, several problems
oif-wet by the injection of a reverse wetting agent.
with Swamnns work make it impossible to determine the
Formstion Resistivity Factor
actual wettabilh y of the restored-state cores. The nettability is indeterminate because the cors were not aged
Another equation that Archie5 determined empirically refor a long enough period for adsorption equilibrium to
lates the resistivity of the 100% brine-saturated core snd
.
be established and because the waterflood behavior does
the resistivi~ of the brine:
not indicate the nettability.
Swanson first ineasured the waterflood and electrical
FR=RO/RW, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...(2)
resistivity behavior of clean water-wet Berea sandstone
and Austin limestone cores. The cores were then &lven
where
to IWS and aged with crude oil. It is known that many
R. = re.sistivity of the brine-saturated, core,
cores must be aged for at least 30 to 40 days before the
RW = brine resistivity, and
nettability reaches its tinid state. 1.4,34.37Unfortunately,
FR = formation resistivity factor.
Swanson aged the cores only between 12 and 30 days,
Because very little work has been done on we.ttability
so his cores were tested in some ill-defined, nonequilibeffects of this pammeter, it k unclearwhether FR, changes
rium state. In fact, in his discussion OYthe waterflood beI
1376

Journal of petroleum Tmh.ology, December 1986

as the nettability of the core is &tired. Sweeney and

je.~g~ 19,20found hat tie fomtion factor ~as ~hangqd
after the nettability was altered. Because their chemical
treatment with naphthcnic acids was drastic
such as the porosity
other core properties

enough

that

were nlso altered, it is unclear whether nettability effects were demonstrated. They suggested that the naphthenic acidsused
torender the core oil-wet may have partially sealed off
pore$that had previously contributed to current flow.
Rust21 compared sandstone cores that were either
cleaned (water-wet) or cleaned and treated with nR organochlorosilane solution (mildly oil-yet). He found no
significant difference in the formation factors. Mungmi
and Moore 6 found no effects on the formation factor in
their teflon cores. They realiied, however, that tbk was
not a conclusive test because of the uniform composition
and wettabiky of the teflon. They went on to state, However, because natural cores contain clays, a chmge in core
nettability nlways brings about other changes, such as clay
swelliig and dispersion, ion exchange, effective porosity
change, and surface conductance variations, and these will
affect the measured vslues of R. and FE. Thus preservation of the natursl core nettability is always pmdent.
Conclusions
1. The Archie saturation exponeat, n, is almost independent of the wettabflity when the brine saturation is
sufficiently high that the brine is continuous.
2. Nettability effects become very important when the
brine saturation is lowered. In genersl, essentially all the
brine in a uniformly water-wet core remains continuous
and electrically conducting as the brine saturation is
lowered to the irreducible saturation. The Archie saturation exponent has a vnlue of about 2 in water-wet formations sod cleaned water-wet core.
3. The Archie

safurafion

exponent

can reach <aJues of

10or more in unifoimly oil-wet core with low brine sahJrations. This occurs because a portion of the brine is
trapped, wliile addkiomd brine is isolated in dendrhic
fingers where it cannot contribute to the eleCtriCd Conductivity. Re.sistivi@ incr@es because tbe brine crosssectionaf conducting area decreases, and the lengrbs of
the conducting paths increase.
4. Unless the reservoir ii strongly water-wet, the saturation exponent should be measured on native- or restorexstate cores. If a clean core is used to measure the saturation exponent and the resewoir is actually oif-wet; the im
terstitial water caR be underestimated when logging.
5. Although no definite conclusions cm be drawn about
the effects of tiettabdity on the formation factor, FR, it
is ~kely that the formation factor is affected by changes
in nettability.
,
Nomenclature
FR = formation resistivity factor
lR = resistivity index
E = ~atm-ati~n exponent
RO = formation resistivity when 100% saturated
with water of resistivity R W, Q. m
R, = formation resistivitj it i water
saturation S,O, S7.m
R ~ = water iesistivity, Q. m
.,
SW = water (brine) saturation
Ihmd of F~tdemT&l~O@%December1386
.

Acknowledgments
I armgrateful to Jeff Meyers for his many helpful suggestions and comments. I nlso thank tie management of
Conoco Inc. for permission to publish this paper.
References
1.Aoderson, W. G., Wettahility Literamre Survey-Part 1:
RocklOillBcine Interactions and the Effectsof Core Handfimgon
Nettability,,, .fPT (Oct. 1986) 1125-44.
2. Anderson, W. G., . Nettability Literature S.meY-ParI 2:
Tenability Measurmnenc,,, JPT (No.. 1986) 1246-62.
3. Anderm, W. G.: WwSbiliT Lherature Survey-Pan & The
Effects of Wmability on Capillary Pressure,,, paper SPE 15271
available.from SPE, Richardson, TX.
4. Craig, F. F.: T?IeReservoir Engineering Aspecfs of Waterjlooding,
Monograph Series, SPE, Richardson, TX (1971) 3.
5. Archie, G.E.: ,The Electrical Resisdvity Log as an Aid in
Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics, Trans., AIME
(1942) 146,54-62.
6. Mungan, N. and Moore, E.J.:: <Certain Wettahility Effects on
Electrical Resistivity in Pomw Media, J. cd.. Pet. Tech. (Jan.March 196S) 7, No. 1, 20-25.
7. Marrow, N, R,: .Physics and Thermodynamics of Capillaty Action
in Porous Media,,, Ind, E.g. Chem (June 1970)62, No. 6,32-56.
S, Pir$cih S.1. and Fraser, C.D.: ,LQuandfative Interpretation of
Electric Logs i Oil-Wet Rods Proposed Procedure qd Example
Application s,pa?w SPE 1562-Gpresentedat the 1960SPE AWMJ
Mmtimg, Denver, Oct. 2-5.
9. Brown, W. O.: The Mobility of Commtc Water During a Waterflood,, > Trans., AJME (1957) 210, 190-95.,
10. Jones, S.C.: Some Surprises in the Tra.sp.mt of Miscible Fluids
in the Presence of a Second Immiscible Phase, SPEf (Feb. 1985)
101-12.
11. Raimon~, P., Torcaso, M., ad Hendcrscm, J.: aThe Effectof
Imerstitial Water m the Mixing of Hydrocarbons During a Miscible
Displacernmt Process;<, ,$fitwro[ {ndustrie, Erperimenr Sradon
Circular No. 61, P,cnmylwmia State U., University Park (Oct.
23-25, 1961) 1,-34.
12. SaJter, S.J. and Mohanty, K. K.: bMuhiphase Plow in Porous
Medix 1. Macroscopic Obsewadons and Modeling, paper SPE
11017Presentedat the 1982 SPE Annual Techiicd Comferw,&md
Exhibition, New Odeam, SeQr. 26-29.
13. Goddard, R,R,, Gardner, G, H. F., md Wyllie, M. R.J.: Some
Asped$ of Mukiph&e Distribmioh in Porous Bodies, Proc.,
Europe. Federation of Cbcrnical Egineerig, Third Comgress,
Inst. of Chmnicaf Engineering, London (Jim 1962) 326-32.
14. Raimondt, P. and Torca.m, M.h.: ,Distribwion of the Oil Phase
Ohfab&d U.. Imbihiticmof Waler. SPEJ (March 1964)49-55;
Trans. , tiME, 231.
15. Shelton, J.L. md Schmider, F.N.: ,The Effects of Water Injection
on Miiscible Flood@ Methods Using Hydrocarbons and Carbon
75) 7.17-16.
.
.
Dioxide,,, SPEJ (June 197.,
16. SmJkup, F. I.: T@dacem.m of Oil by Solvent at High Water
Saturation, SPEI (Dec. 1970) 337-48.
17. TKomas, G.H., Countryman, G.R., and Fat, 1.: Miscible Displacemmt in a Mdtiphase Sysrmn,,, SPEJ (Sept. 1963) 189-96
Tram. , AIME, 228.
18. Fatt, L: .Influence of Dead End Pores on Relative Permeability
of Porous Media.,, Science (Dec. 1. 1961) 134. 1750-51.
19. Swomcy, S.A. aridJemings,H. Y,: .The Electrical Resistivity of
Preferentially Water-Wet and Preferentially Oil-wetcarbonate
ROCkS,z
Producers ,tfonfhly (May 1960) 24, No. 7, 29-32.
20. SWemey,S.A. and Jemi.gs, H. Y.: .Effect of Wetiability on the
Electrical Resistivity of Carbowde Rock from a Petroleum
Reservoir,,, J. Phys. Chem. (May 1960) 64, 551-53.
C.F.: .,X Laboratory Sfudy of Nettability Effects o Basic
21. Rq
Core Parameters, 3spaper SPE 986-G presented at the 1957 SPE
Veoezaela, #mnual Meedg, Caracas, Nov. 6-9.
22. Keller, G.V.: Effect of Nettability on the Electrical R.sistivity
of Sand,, $ 0/1 & Gas J. (Jan. 5, 1953) 31, No. 4, 62-65.
23. Lkastro, P.H. ?mdKeller, G.V.: .Resisdvity Measuremems as a
Criteria for Determining Fluid Distribution i the Bradford Sand,
Producers Mo/ith[y (May 1953) 17, No. 7, 17-23.
24. Holmes, C; R.: .Progress i Electric Loggin8 Research at the
PennsylvaniaSfateffniversi~ During 1952-53,,, Producers MOMMY
.(Jan. 1954) 18; No. 3, 33-38.

1377

,-

25. Zietiss, H. and MaUha,A.: Re@ding fhe ReiadonshipBefween

tie Fomtkm Resiwivity Index and the Oil Recovery Mechanism
During WaterRoodiDg Procedures,,. Erd61 und Kohle-ErdgasPemochenie (1967) 20,549-52. E@ish transfaficmavailable from
the John Cr.,., Library, translation m. 68-15700.
26. Luffel, D.L, md RandJ.U, R.V. : ;Coii Hmdfirig and Measurement Techniques for Obtinig Reliable Reservoir Chmacreristics,>7
paper SPE 1642-G presented at tbe 1960 SPE Fonyiticm EvahMtm Symp.mium, Housbm, Nov. 21-22.
27, Moore, J.: cLaborator$ Determined Electric Logging Pmeters
of the Bradford Third Sand,27 Producep Monlhly (March 195S)
22, No, 5, 30-39,
28, Tradmm, J.C, and Clampiti, R.L. aDetmminatioof Oif Samratim
After Waterfloodim in a Oil-Wet Reservoir-The Nmfb Burbmk
JPT (May 1977) 491-500.
Unit, Tract 97 P+,,
29. Richardson, J. G., Perkins, F. M., and Omba, J.S.: Diffmencss
i the Behavior of Fresh md Aged East Texas Woodbine Cores, SS
TmI.s, , A2ME (1955) 204, S6-91
30. Watiel, R.A.: OflRaveNby Sh#am FUmDtimgein MtidNettability Rocks,,. JPT(Oct, 1973) 1216.24; Tmns., AJME, 255;
31. Scbmid, C.: ..The Wettabili~yofPctrole.m Rocks and Res.lWof
Experitnepfs to Study the Effects of Variaions in Wetfabiliw, of
COre SamP1es,,, Erdal und Kohl<-ErdEas-Perrochemie ( 1$JS4)17,
No, 8, 605-09, English translation availablt from the Job Crerar
Libray, Iramlaticmo. TT-65-12404,
32. Morgan, W,B. and Pin., S.1,.: The Effecf of Fractional
Wenatifity o"tie Archie Salucation&pone"t,>X Tmm,, SP~,
Fifth Annuaf LoggingSymposium, Midland, TK (May 13-1S, 19@)
Sec. B.

1378

33, Sm"~on, B.F.:<` Ra~&nafizi"gtie Inflne.ce of Cmde Weui"gon

Reservoir FlmidFlow With Electrical Resiwivity Behavior, ,SJPT
(Au~. 1980) 1459-64.
34, Cui=, L. E.:,< SNdyofPmblems Related titie Resrorationofke
Natuml Shteof C.re Samplcs,,3J. Cdn. Pet. l&h. (Oct.-Dee.

1977) 16. No. 4.68-80.

35. Cuiec, L~E., +rigemn, D., a"d Pacsirsz&, J.:``O. the Nec~s$ity of Respecting Reservoir Conditions in Labmatmy Displacement
Studies,,, paper SPE 7785 presented at the 1979 SPE Middle East
Oil Technical Conference, Bahiain, March 25-29~
36. EmeW, L.W., M."San, N,, a"d Nicholso", R.W.:`<&ustic Slug
fn@ctiOni. fhe Singleton Field, JPT(Dec. 1970) 1569-76.
37. Treibsr, L. E., Archer, D.L., and Owms,W.W,:` `Lab6ramVEYduation of tie Wetfability of F@ Oil Pradwig Reservoirs,, SPEJ
(Dec. 1972) 5314Cj Tram., AfME,253.
.gsi Doil-wel
3S. Fmser, C.D.: AQumtitati,esmdYOfEl?crricL
and Fracfured Reservoirs,,, MS thesis, U, of Texas, A.sti (J.
1C15R).
39. Graham, J.W.:&`RevewWetdmg flogging,,, Trans.,.$fME(l958)
213, 30409.

m
Orii(nd manuscript (SPE 13S24) received in the Sociely of Pelrdeum Engineers oIW
Dec. 28, 1984. Paper acceped for pubkmio.
July 23, ?9G. Revised manuscript re.
mived Jan, 20, 1986.

Jomalof Petroleum TechnoloD, December 1986