Proceedings of the 3rd (2011) CUTSE International Conference

Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia, 8-9 Nov, 2011

(224 -- 917)

Application of Hydraulic Flow Units and Intelligent

Systems for Permeability Prediction in a Carbonate
Reservoir
Tohid Nejad Ghaffar Borhani

Seyed Hossein Emadi

Chemical engineering department, Faculty of chemical and

natural resources engineering
University Technology Malaysia
Johor Bahru, Malaysia
Tohid.n.borhani@gmail.com

Chemical engineering department, Faculty of chemical

engineering
University of Tehran
Tehran, Iran
Hosseinemadi@yahoo.com

AbstractAn accurate prediction of absolute permeability is

necessary for developing effective reservoir characterization
programs.Permeability predictions in complex carbonate
reservoirs are generally complicated by the local variations in the
reservoir properties. An improvement in the prediction of
permeability values from standard well logs and core data
through the utilization of Hydraulic Flow Units Approach (HFU)
and an intelligent network is presented in this work. Besides,
combined geological-petrophysical background of HFU approach
was explained. Flow zone indicator (FZI), a unique parameter for
each hydraulic unit, was used to characterize each rock type. The
number of hydraulic flow units and mean values of FZI for each
HFU were calculated from the measured porosity and
permeability. The Cored wells permeability data is drawn based
on FZI and Hydraulic Flow Units theory. Using this approach,
the optimal number of HFUs was found to be equal to five and
the average relative error between the core permeability data
and the calculated values was 3.4%. In addition, a correlation
coefficient, R2, greater than 0.9 in each HFU was observed. Also,
values of FZI for un-cored wells calculated using Adaptive
Network Fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and well log data.
Some core data points were not used to train the (ANFIS) and
were used for validation. The set of logs NPHI, RHOB, PHIE and
GR were used as inputs for the ANFIS and the log-scale FZI was
the output. The calculated FZI values obtained from ANFIS were
fairly consistent with that of core data. Also, the average relative
error between ANFIS's calculated and the measured
permeabilites was found to be 5.9%. The presented methodology
was successfully applied to a large data set of laboratory and well
logging measurements from the largest Iranian carbonate gas
field.
Keywords-component; Permeability; porosity; Hydraulic Flow
Unit (HFU); Reservoir Rock Typing (RRT)

I.

INTRODUCTION
0B

Correct estimation of permeability is important in different

sections of reservoir engineering and reservoir simulation.
Permeability of reservoir rock is affected by different
parameters such as porosity, kind and distribution of rock
materials, mineralogy of rock matrix, residual saturation, and
size of pore throat. The common practice to estimate
permeability is to define a relationship between porosity and
permeability. Mainly there are two major approaches to
estimate permeability as follows:

A. Traditional approach
Despite the fact that this approach is usefull in some cases,
there is no valid unique empirical permeability estimation for
all porous media. One of these correlations is CarmanKozenys that shows the dependency of permeability on
average grain size, tortuosity and flow zone index [1, 2]. Tixier
developed a simple model to calculate permeability as a
function of porosity and residual water saturation [3]. Morris &
Biggs had also spotted the permeability as a function of
porosity and connate water saturation [4]. Timur and also Coats
and Dumanoir developed another models [5, 6].
5B

Generally, in the traditional approach the permeability

estimation may be achieved via two different methods:
1-Simple linear regression and modifications
In this method a linear relationship between core porosity
and the logarithm of core permeability is developed as:
(1)
Where a, b are the constant coefficients that different values
have been reported for them in different models. In these
models permeability estimation for un-cored well will be
estimated by making a simple regression equation between
well log-porosity and core-porosity or establishment of some
novel techniques such as neural network, fuzzy logic, genetic
algorithm and etc.
2-Emperical models
In these methods, the correlations are set among various
well log results and/or core analysis data such as core porosity,
clay content, grain size, tortuosity, water residua saturation and
etc. Because of depositional characteristics variety in different
fields, the empirical models are applied locally [7].
B. New approaches
The important similarity of new developed models is their
geological background. In these methods the depth of earth is
divided into the layers and zones which are lithologically and
minerlogically homogeneous. Then petrophysical properties
may be characterized in each layer. Recently geologists and
reservoir engineers attempt to correlate the permeability via
other rock and fluid properties in these layers [15]. Major
6B

Proceedings of the 3rd (2011) CUTSE International Conference

Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia, 8-9 Nov, 2011

(225 -- 917)

concept of these models is their geological or petrophysical

background. These methods are known as reservoir rock typing
[RRT]. Hydraulic flow units (HFU) method is one of the most
important approaches in this category. In the HFU method, by
defining the FZI (flow zone indicator) parameter, certain
numbers of hydraulic units in a reservoir are identified. In each
unit, petrophysical properties are homogenous.

continuous laterally and vertically and has similar flow and

bedding characteristics. The main mathematical relations of
HFU method can be achieved by following equations.

The HFU method was first defined by Bear [8] and then
developed by other investigators [9, 15]. In this paper hydraulic
flow units (HFU) was used as a petrophysical rock typing tool
in a carbonate reservoir from south pars gas field in Iran. Also,
by employing the Adaptive Network Fuzzy inference system
(ANFIS) permeability was estimated for un-cored interval.

(2)

II.

Porous media can be represented by a bundle of capillary

tubes. Combination of Darcy law and Poiseuille law for
straight cylindrical tubes yields to:

For a realistic porous media Kozeny and Carmen have

modified Eq 2. by adding a tortuousity factor as:
(3)

FIELD DESCRIPTION

About 50 percent of gas reserves in Iran have been stored in

the South Pars gas field. This huge gas field, which is the
largest offshore gas field in the world, is located about 100
kilometers from south shore of Iran in Persian Gulf. This gas
field covers an area of 9700 square kilometers in Iran and Qatar
territorial waters. Gas accumulation of this field is mostly
limited to the PermianTriassic stratigraphic units that became
prospective during the 1970s following delineation of
enormous gas reserves. These units known as the Kangan
Dalan Formations constitute very extensive natural gas
reservoirs in this field and Persian Gulf area, which composed
of carbonate evaporate series also known as the Khuff
Formation [16, 17].

Where is the shape factor, is effective porosity and

is surface area per unit grain volume. Eq. 3 can be written
in field unit as:
(4)

By using Eq. 4, three parameters are defined as follows:

(5)
Where RQI is reservoir quality index.
(6)

III.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

A. Concept of HFU.
Several authors have various definitions of flow units,
which are resultant of the depositional environment and
diagenitic process [9]. Bear defined the hydraulic (pore
geometrical) unit as the representative elementary volume of
the total reservoir rock within which the geological and
petrophysical properties of the rock volume are the same [8].
Ebanks defined hydraulic flow units as a mappable portion of
the reservoir within which the geological and petrophysical
properties that affect the flow of fluid are consistent and
predictably different from the properties of other reservoir rock
volume [10]. Hear et al. defined flow unit as a reservoir zone
that is laterally and vertically continuous, and has similar
permeability, porosity, and bedding characteristic [11]. Gunter
et al. defined flow unit as a stratigraphically continuous
interval of similar reservoir process that honors the geologic
framework and maintains the characteristic of the rock type
[12]. According to Tiab [13], a hydraulic flow unit is a
continuous body over a specific reservoir volume that
practically possesses consistent petrophysical and fluid
properties, which uniquely characterize its static and dynamic
communication with the wellbore.
Amaefule et al. proposed the hydraulic flow unit concept to
be used as a principle for subdividing reservoir in different
rock types reflecting different pore-throat attributes [14]. A
hydraulic flow unit (HFU) is a representative volume or section
of a reservoir rock. In each HFU, geological and petrophysical
properties are different from properties of other sections of the
reservoir. Thus, a flow unit is a reservoir zone that is

Where z is the pore volume to grain volume ratio or

normalized porosity.
(7)

Where FZI is flow zone indicator. Eq. 4 can be rewritten as:

(8)
Or
(9)
Finally, the relationship between permeability and FZI is:
(10)
RQI, FZI, and z are used for HFU classification which will
be discussed in more details in the next sections.

B. Hydraulic flow units zonation process

Different methods may be applied to use FZI for zonation
of the reservoir and defining flow units. Some of these
techniques are as follow: cluster analysis, probability plots
[neural networks, multivariable regression, fuzzy logic, and
multi-linear graphical clustering. Fuzzy logic, neural network,
nonlinear regression, Wards algorithm and etc. These methods
are subdivided into three main categories [7]:

Proceedings of the 3rd (2011) CUTSE International Conference

Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia, 8-9 Nov, 2011

(226 -- 917)

1) Log-Log plot of RQI versus . This method is very

simple analysis, but it is clearly not sufficient to distinguish
different rocks HFU and estimate their boundaries. All
samples with similar FZI values will lie on a straight line with
slope equal to one. Samples that lie on the same straight line
have similar pore throat attributes and thereby constitute a
hydraulic unit. The mean value of FZI can be determined from
the intercept of the unit slope straight line with = .

2) Histogram analysis. As FZI distribution is a superposition

of multiple log-normal distributions, a histogram of FZI can be
used to define n number of normal distributions for n
number of HFUs.
3) Probability plot. The probability plot or cumulative
distribution function is the integral of histogram (probability
density function). As this plot is smoother than the histogram it
is more useful to define HFUs because identification of clusters
becomes easier.
In this paper to determine the number of hydraulic flow
units, three different mentioned ways were compared. Finally
we used the sum of square errors method in company with a
visual method to obtain accurate HFU number determination.
IV.

Figure 1. Log of Permeability versus Porosity

TABLE I.

DEPTH AND THICKNESS OF OBSERVED ZONES IN WELL SP13

Formation

Zone

Kangan

K1
K2
K3
K4

Dalan

Well Name
SP13
Top(m)
Thick.(m)
2830.5
105.5
2936
47
2983
120
3103
175.5

METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS

In this paper, data obtained from conventional core analysis

and Log data in wells SP13 and SP9 were applied. Data of well
SP13 was used for producing the model and validation. Then
the model final test was evaluated by SP9 data banks.
Before any data analysis, all the fractured samples were
removed. To find the fractured samples, all of the samples were
sorted versus depth by plotting their permeability and porosity
in parallel. Each sample with very high permeability and low
porosity was considered as a fractured sample. But according
to exploration contractor team report if the fractured were
induced by the core recovery and handling process the core
samples were rejected, and if these were natural open fractures,
there was the risk of getting rid of real data which might have
an important influence on the simulation model or may be a
different rock type that needs to be catered for. So they were
not omitted.
At first, we used all core porosity and core permeability of
each core sample and established the core porosity-core
permeability semi logarithmic cross plot as is shown in Fig. 1.
This figure shows a lot of scatter, which clearly indicates that
porosity alone, is not enough to explain the permeability
variation. A correlation between Log K and indicates that the
correlation coefficient is equal to 0.31. This poor fitting and
scatter of the data points could be attributed to the change of
lithology (i.e., more than one rock type existed within reservoir
with different fluid flow properties). The combined results of
both macro and microscopic studies indicate that the Upper
Dalan and Kangan successions can be subdivided into four
distinct reservoir units including the K1, K2, K3 and K4 units.

Figure 2. All layers, Permeability versus Porosity

Figure 3. Dolomite and Limestone for All Layers

The cored intervals in these four layers and thickness of

each zone as observed in the core analysis are summarized in
Table I. The porosity and permeability of well SP13 were
related to each other in each layer as is shown in Fig. 2. There
are three main types of lithology which forming carbonate
rocks: Limestone, Dolomite, and Anhydrite. Considering the
lithological background of the pars gas field reservoir, the data
was categorized based on the lithology of each sample as is
shown in Fig. 3. Whereas the permeability of the anhydrate is

Proceedings of the 3rd (2011) CUTSE International Conference

Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia, 8-9 Nov, 2011

(227 -- 917)

supposed to be zero, all anhydrate samples were ignored. After

very precise study on dolomite and Limestone samples
permeability-porosity relationships, it has been completely
cleared that lithology can be pondered as an influential
parameter in determination of different rock types. In
summary, depositional system has important role on creating
different types of lithologies.

By plotting Log RQI against Log z , in Fig. 4, the optional

number of HFUs that exists in the reservoir may be determined
by applying the Iterative Multi-linear Regression Clustering
Technique. The proposed method is briefly summarized as
following steps:

In order to develop a relation between porosity and

permeability and classify the rock types, eight rock types were
selected based on the lithology (dolomite or limestone) and the
layer of the samples (K1 to K4). These rock types are
summarized in Table II. RTij in this table is the indicator of
rock types where i shows the layer number (K1=1, K2=2,
K3=3 and K4=4) and j shows the lithology (Dolomite=1,
Limestone=2). The anhydrate lithology in each section of the
reservoir has been pondered as a rock type with zero
permeability.

2. Plot RQI vs. z in logarithmic space as Fig. 4.

TABLE II.
Rock Type
RT11
RT12
RT21
RT22
RT31
RT32
RT41
RT42

RESERVOIR ROCK TYPES

Minimum Square
Layer K1, Dolomite
Layer K1, Limestone
Layer K2, Dolomite
Layer K2, Limestone
Layer K3, Dolomite
Layer K3, Limestone
Layer K4, Dolomite
Layer K4, Limestone

Relationship between k and

= 0.24 0.72
= 0.148 0.71
= 0.441.6
= 0.0171.56
= 0.1 2
= 0.0251.8
= 0.21.3
= 0.091.1

The correlation coefficients of these semi-logarithmic

relationships between the permeability and porosity were
clearly improved related to correlation coefficient of scattered
cross plot of log K and . It means the best correlation between
porosity and permeability can be obtained if rocks with similar
lithology and fluid flow properties are identified and grouped
together.
A. The relationship between Porosity and Permeability based
on Hydraulic Flow Unit (HFU) Method
At the first, three parameters z , RQI and FZI, were
calculated based on the previous mentioned formulas by
applying well SP13 core data. Then, all data were sorted based
on their FZI parameter value in increasing order. To determine
the number of hydraulic flow units, three different ways were
applied and compared the results.
9B

Graphical clustering using classical RQI plot is the

simplest analysis, but it is clearly not sufficient to distinguish
between different rocks HFU and estimate their boundaries
(Fig. 4). Another graphical approach is analysis of histogram
and probability plots, which are shown in Fig. 5 and 6.
Theoretically, these plots should be able to distinguish
individual distributions for each HFU, which are commonly
normal or log-normal type. However, due to overlapping of
data, the individual distributions are not distinguishable on the
histogram (Fig. 5). The cumulative probability plot allows
picking out at least 5 HFU and estimate FZI boundaries for
these rock types (Fig. 6). Finally we used the sum of square
errors method in company with one of three above visual
method to obtain accurate HFU number determination as
follow:

1. Calculate the RQI values and z from Equations (5) and (6),
respectively, using the core data given in Fig. 1.

3. Use a reasonable initial guess of the intercept of each

straight line equation: the mean value of each HFU (or each
FZI).
4. Assign core sample data to the nearest straight line.
5. Recalculate the intercept of each HFU using least squares
regression equations.
6. Compare the new and old values of the intercept for every
straight line. If the difference is not within the acceptable
tolerance, updates the intercept values and go to step 4.
7. Repeat steps 3 through 6 until the optimal location of each
straight line is found in which the error sum of squares is a
minimum for the desired number of HFUs.
By applying the above procedure to core data in Fig. 1, the
resulting error of sum squares is plotted against HFUs in Fig. 7.
This figure shows that the optimal number of HFUs is equal to
five. This means that five rock types exist in the studied
reservoir. The five unit slope lines are plotted with the data
from Fig. 1, and are shown in Fig. 4. The values of intercept
(FZI mea n ) are used to calculated permeability from the
following equation:
R

RR

(11)
The calculated permeability is plotted against the measured
ones in Fig. 8. As the average relative error (ARE) between
core permeability and the calculated ones is equal to 3.4%, this
cross-plot indicates the accuracy of calculated permeability.
(12)
As it is clearly obvious in Fig. 9, this classification method
can conduct a very competent numerical classification among
the data. The depth of each group was very scattered. The
relation between permeability and porosity for each HFU was
summarized in Table III. As you see the R2 of each correlation
clearly indicates the accuracy of HFU approach in permeability
correlating with porosity.
P

TABLE III.
Layers
HFU 1
HFU 2
HFU 3
HFU 4
HFU 5

RESERVOIR ROCK CLASSIFICATION BY HFU METHOD

Minimum Square
2 = 0.9168
2 = 0.9761
2 = 0.9252
2 = 0.9372
2 = 0.9519

Relationship between k and

= 244768 2.69
= 81529 2.9879
= 4488.3 2.8759
= 905.63 3.2457
= 15.52 2.459

Proceedings of the 3rd (2011) CUTSE International Conference

Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia, 8-9 Nov, 2011

(228 -- 917)

As a first step, the data set was divided into two sets, one
for the network training and the second for training validation.
The validation set was taken from several data points, one from
each of the flow zones. The set of logs NPHI, RHOB, PHIE
and GR were used as inputs for the ANFIS. Each of these
records was normalized, subtracting the mean and dividing by
the standard deviation. The log-scale FZI was output of the
system. FZI determined from ANFIS was matched to FZI
obtained from effective porosity and core permeability with
correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.93. The values of FZI
calculated from core data were correlated with FZI determined
from well log data (at the corresponding depth of core data),
and the evaluation is in agreement with Eq.13:
(13)
Figure 4. Plot of reservoir quality index vs. normalized porosity, Well SP13

B. Permeability estimation in un-cored intervals/wells with

Adaptive Network Fuzzy inference system (ANFIS)
In this new method, a direct mapping between well log data
and core data for a given set of experimental points is
attempted. Adaptive Network Fuzzy inference system (ANFIS)
is an ideal tool for this type of problem. First an appropriate
model for well/log data and FZI in a cored well is determined.
Then the method is generalized to un-cored well to obtain FZI
from its log data.

By substituting Equation (11) in Equation (13), the

permeability can be predicted from well log data.
(14)
In Fig. 10, the correlation between the core data of
permeability and the values predicted by the ANFIS for the
selected model was shown. The average relative error between
calculated permeability with ANFIS and measured
permeability was found to be 5.9%. As a final test, the
predicted and measured permeabilities are shown for the cored
interval in Well SP 9. Fig. 11 shows the core permeability as a
function of measured depth, adding the predicted permeability
using Log data by the method of ANFIS.

Figure 5. Histogram of Flow zone indicator, Well SP13.

Figure 7. Determination of the optimal number of HFUs, Well SP13.

Figure 8. Core permeability vs. calculated permeability after final HFU

definition , Well SP13.
FZI
Figure 6. Probability plot of FZI for well SP13.

Proceedings of the 3rd (2011) CUTSE International Conference

Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia, 8-9 Nov, 2011

(229 -- 917)

V.

Figure 9. Permeability vs. Porosity, Well SP13.

CONCLUSION

The HFU methodology was applied to the South Pars

carbonate depositional reservoir to estimate the absolute
permeability from standard well logs uses data analysis
techniques that have been successful in other areas of science
and engineering, such as neural network and principalcomponent analysis. Through the various bases of rock typing
utilizing special core analysis data, such as depth variation
classification in scattered plot, layer and sub-layer
classification, lithology and combination of lithology by layer
classification and Hydraulic Flow Units (HFU) classification,
the HFU technique certainly classified more homogenous areas
in the reservoir than other ones. Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) is
an effective parameter in correlating rock and fluid properties.
It cleared that lithology can be pondered as an influential
parameter in determination of different rock types. Using
Adaptive Network Fuzzy inference system (ANFIS), flow zone
indicator can be determined in un-cored wells.
REFERENCES
1.

2.
3.
4.

Figure 10. Permeability determined from ANFIS versus Permeability

measured from core.

5.

6.
7.

8.
9.

10

11

12

13
14.

15.
Figure 11. Permeability determined from ANFIS versus Permeability
measured from core, Well SP 9.

16.
17.

Kozeny, J.: Uber Kapillare Leitung des Wassers im Boden,

Stizurgsberichte, Royal Academy of Science, Vienna, Proc. Class I.
V. 136, 271. 1927.
Carmen, P.C.: Fluid Flow through Granular Beds, Trans, AIChE.
V. 15, 150. 1937.
Tixier, M.P.: Evaluation of permeability From Electric Log
Resistivity Gradient, Earth Sci. J., 2, 113. 1949.
Morris, R.L. and Biggs, W.P.: Using Log Derived Values of Water
Saturations and Porosity, Proceeding of SPWLA, Eighth Annual
Logging Symposium, Denver, Paper X, 1. 1967.
Timur, A.: An Investigation of Permeability, Porosity, and Residual
Water Saturation Relationships, Proceeding of SPWLA, Ninth
Annual Logging Symposium, New Orleans, Paper K, 1. 1968.
Coates, G.R. and J.L. Dumanoir.: A New Approch to Improved Log
Derived Permeability, The Log Analyst, 17. 1981.
Abbaszadeh., M., Fujii., H., Fujimoto., F.,: Permeability Prediction
by Hydraulic Flow Units-Theory and Applications, SPE Formation
Evaluation, December 1996.
Bear, J.: Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Medi, Elsevier, New York,
1972.
Tiab, D. and Donaldson, Petrophysics: Theory and Practice of
Measuring Reservoir Rock and Fluid Transport Properties, Gulf
Publishing Co., Houston, Texas, E.C. (1996)
Ebanks, W. J. The Flow Unit Concept-An Integrated Approach to
Reservoir Description for Engineering Projects. Am. Assoc. Geol.
Annual Convention, 1987.
Hear, C. L., Ebanks, W. J., Tye, R. S. and Ranganatha, V.
Geological Factors Influencing Reservoir Performance of the Hartzog
Draw Field, Wyoming. J. of Petrol. Tech, Aug. 1984, pp. 1335-1344.
Gunter, G. W., Finneran, J. M., Hartman, D. J. and Miller, J. D.
Early Determination of Reservoir Flow Units Using an Integrated
Petrophysical Method SPE 38679. SSPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, TX, 5-8 October 1997.
Tiab, D. Advances in Petrophysics, Vol. 1-Flow Units. Lecture Notes
Manual, University of Oklahoma, 2000.
Amaefule, J.O., Altunbay, M., Tiab, D., Kersey, D.G., and Keelan,
D.K.: Enhanced Reservoir Description: Using Core and Log Data to
Identify Hydraulic (Flow) Units and Predict Permeability in Uncored
Intervals/Wells, SPE 26436, presented at 68th Annual. Tech. Conf.
And Exhibit. Houston, Tx, 1993.
Svirsky, D., Ryazanov, A. , and Pankov, M.: Hydraulic Flow Units
Resolve Reservoir Description Challenges in a Siberian Oil Field,
SPE 87056, presented at the Asia Pacific Conference, Malaysia. 2004.
International Energy Agency (IEA), World Energy Outlook 2008 Chapter 12 - Natural gas resources and production prospects, Page 298
Aali, J., Rahimpour-Bonab, H., Kamali, M.R., : Geochemistry and
origin of the world's largest gas field from Persian Gulf, Iran, Journal