SPE 88684

Petrophysical Measurements From Drill Cuttings an Added Value for the Reservoir
Characterization Process
P. Egermann, N. Doerler, M. Fleury, J. Behot, F. Deflandre and R. Lenormand, Institut Franais du Ptrole (IFP)

Copyright 2004, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

th
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 11 Abu Dhabi international Petroleum
Exhibition and Conference held in Abu Dhabi, U.A.E., 1013 October 2004.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Permeability and porosity are necessary for reservoir
characterization and cuttings can provide quick and cheap
measurements. In this paper, we present the first applications
of the method on real reservoir characterization cases and the
comparisons with logs and core data.
We first recall the method of permeability measurement from
cuttings, which is based on a pressure pulse applied on a cell
filled initially with cuttings saturated with viscous fluid and
trapped gas at atmospheric pressure. The permeability is
derived from the transient response of the oil invasion into the
cuttings by using a numerical model. We also measured the
porosity from dry drill cuttings using the routine helium
technique. These methods were tested and validated by using
various samples of crushed rock samples of known
permeability and porosity. Both measurement techniques are
fast, require light conditioning, are applicable over a large
range of permeability and need only 1 ml of sieved rock to be
realized.
Field applications of the drill cuttings measurements
(permeability, porosity, T2 distribution) have been undertaken
on various types of rocks (dolomite, carbonate, sandstone)
obtained under several drilling conditions (WBM, OBM). The
representativity issue of the cuttings towards the native
reservoir is of primary importance and was checked by using
adequate cleaning procedure and the preparation techniques
and by comparing the consistency of the porosity
measurements obtained from cuttings with other data (cores or
logs). The overall results demonstrate the added value of K
and measurements in addition to the data that are already
collected in routine.

Petrophysical methods in reservoir characterization

process
The early determination of rock petrophysical properties is one
of the main concerns during the reservoir characterization
process because it impacts directly the reserves (porosity,
saturation) and also the well deliverability (permeability). The
logs provide a good estimate of porosity and saturations along
the well but the permeability is more difficult to obtain
because this parameter refers to a flowing property of the
reservoir rock.
Routine analysis for permeability
Core analysis at laboratory is the most reliable technique to
measure permeability but is rather expensive (coring, rig time,
transportation, measurement). The data are available several
weeks after drilling. Well testing provides information on the
extension and the connectivity of the reservoir and gives an
average value of permeability. A more accurate permeability
profile can also be obtained with the MDT technique (Modular
Dynamics Tester), run with wireline or during the drilling
operations, with a spatial resolution of the order of the meter
(Proett et al., 2003). The NMR log is now widely used to
derive a fast estimation of the permeability profile along the
wells. However, the NMR tool is sensitive to the pore size
whereas permeability is sensitive to the throat size. Hence, the
permeability evaluation is obtained through empirical laws,
which need to be calibrated according to the reservoir rock and
also the fluids in place (Fleury et al., 2001).
Routine cuttings analysis
The cuttings are routinely used by the mudloggers to build the
"masterlog", where the geological description of the drilled
formation is reported. Hydrocarbon indices are also detected
from cuttings to identify the reservoir levels. Although the
cuttings rock material is coming directly from the reservoir,
few applications of permeability characterization are reported
in the literature. The published works can be divided into two
categories: the direct and indirect evaluations.
Indirect permeability evaluation methods from cuttings
The permeability is derived using empirical correlations with
properties related to pore size distribution, pore connectivity
or the spatial correlation between the pores. These parameters
are evaluated from capillary properties (mercury porosimetry),
by NMR or image analysis.

Several approaches have been proposed to derive permeability

from mercury porosimetry curves (Katz and Thompson, 1986;
Purcell, 1942; Swanson, 1981; Thomeer, 1960; Thomeer,
1983). Kamath performed a comparison between these
methods and concluded that the best result is obtained with
new correlations based on the Swanson characteristic length
(Kamath, 1992). Kamath and Swanson also reported a possible
use of mercury porosimetry curves obtained from cuttings.
Many papers have been published on the permeability
evaluation from NMR measurements, but very few refer to
application on cuttings. In this domain, the main effort was
conducted by Chevron in association with Exlog. They
developed a prototype fitted for rig conditions (Nigh and
Taylor, 1985). The cuttings are first prepared (cleaning,
drying) and placed in a portable NMR tool. The porosity is
derived from the measured volume of water and permeability
is evaluated from the whole T2 relaxation signal using the
Timur law (Timur, 1968). Recently, this approach has been
subject to further develoments (Mirotchnik et al., 2004).
A thin section can also be obtained from cuttings to evaluate
the porosity and the permeability from image analysis. The
porosity corresponds to the fraction of voids whereas the
permeability is derived from empirical law (Coskun and
Wardlaw, 1993; Ioannidis et al., 1996) or from CarmanKozeny type laws (Fens et al., 1998).
Direct permeability evaluation methods from cuttings
Few methods exist to measure directly the permeability
from cuttings. Marsala et al. (1997) proposed to establish an
effective flow into the rock by imbedding the cuttings into
disks of acrylic resin. The disks are then surfaced and mounted
in a core holder to measure the permeability under constantflow or transient-flow technique. Another method was
proposed by Luffel (1993) which is based on gas pressure
diffusion. The cleaned and dried cuttings are introduced into a
cell at atmospheric pressure. Then, the cell is put in
communication with another cell under pressure and the
decrease of the pressure is recorded and interpreted in term of
permeability. The principle is similar to well testing, using gas
instead of liquids. However, due to the low viscosity of gases,
this method can only be used on very low permeability rocks.
In 2002, IFP presented an original method to measure the
permeability directly from drill cuttings. The proposed method
does not require specific conditioning, is easy to handle and
provides consistent results in the classical range of reservoir
permeability (Egermann et al., 2002).
In this paper, we present how to integrate these direct
petrophysical measurements from samples of drill cuttings
with other available data (logs, core, ) in the reservoir
characterization process. In the first part of the paper, we
recall the principles of the technique of permeability and the
latest improvements that were introduced to make possible the
measurement on small volumes cuttings (in the order of 1
cm3). Then, some results related to the porosity measurement
from cuttings using existing techniques are shown. The
general approach to integrate the measurements from cuttings

SPE 88684

with other available data is then described and applied on a

real case in the last section. The results confirm the added
value of the measurements from cuttings as soon as their
representativity towards the native reservoir is established.
Petrophysics from drill cuttings
Permeability measurement technique
Principle of the method
The main issue is to establish a flow into the rock itself rather
than in inter-cuttings space. The originality of the proposed
method is to achieve an effective flow inside the cuttings by
compression of residual gas initially trapped into the cuttings.
A viscous oil is used as displacing fluid to decrease the
pressure diffusion kinetics into the rock. It enables to measure
permeability values corresponding to reservoir rocks, which
are not accessible from gas pressure test (Luffel et al., 1993).
The experimental apparatus is very simple and enables to
conduct the pressure test of the cuttings very easily. It is
mainly composed of a cell, where the cuttings are introduced
and a pump to inject the viscous oil. Due to its high viscosity,
the oil is not directly injected by the pump but pushed by
water. Another cell is filled with the viscous oil and nitrogen
at constant pressure. A differential pressure sensor is mounted
between the two ends of a calibrated capillary tube between
the cuttings cell and the constant pressure reservoir. A
calibration curve, obtained from injections with the pump, is
used to convert the pressure into flow rates. The volume of oil
which enter the cuttings cell is obtained by numerical
integration of the flow rate. All the data are automatically
recorded on a computer at frequency of 500 Hz to follow the
sharp variations of pressure.
Manometer
Viscous oil
N2
Cutting cell
Data acquisition

Viscous
oil
water

Cuttings

Pump
Calibrated
capillary

Bleed off line

Figure 1: experimental apparatus

Initially, the cuttings are introduced into the cell which is

filled with helium. The advantage of helium is to present a
very low dissolution coefficient into oil in order to limit the
dissolution of the residual gas when the pressure of the system
is increased. The sealing of the cuttings cell is carefully
checked before each experiment by a pressure test at 10 bar. If
no leak is detected, the pressure is dropped down to
atmospheric and the system is filled with the viscous oil using
the pump and the transfer cell. The injected oil displaces the
gas located in the inter-cuttings space and also invades the
cuttings by spontaneous imbibition. The gas expelled from the
cell and the rock is produced upwards. The duration of this

SPE 88684

period depends on the rock properties (in the order of one

hour). At the end of this period, helium is trapped inside the
cuttings as residual disconnected gas.
Initially, the cuttings cell is at atmospheric pressure and
isolated by the valves at the top and at the bottom. The
pressure in the nitrogen is set to 10 bar. Then, the bottom
valve of the cuttings cell is opened and viscous oil is injected
due to the difference of pressure. The rate of oil entering the
cell and the pressure in the cell are recorded.
The experimental results of the cuttings pressure test are
then interpreted using a numerical simulator to obtain the
permeability taking account the oil viscosity, the cuttings
geometry, their number, the initial gas saturation and the
porosity (Egermann et al., 2002). Figure 2 shows the good
agreement between the core permeability and the cuttings
permeability obtained from crushed core samples (size 2-3
mm).
10000

K reference (md)

1000
100
10
1
0.1
0.01
0.01

0.1

10

100

1000

10000

K cuttings (md)

Figure 2 : comparison between core and cuttings permeability

Dealing with small volumes of cuttings

The original apparatus described in the previous section
enabled us to develop the method but required a significant
volume of cuttings (50 cm3). It appeared from our first
measurements on real cuttings that this volume should be
significantly reduced for several reasons:
The available volume and number of drill cuttings at
the wellhead in the desirable range of size (2-3 mm)
can vary a lot according the nature of the rock, the drill
bit (tricone or PDC) but also the type of well (vertical,
slanted or horizontal). Therefore, only few cm3 of
cuttings are often retrieved from the well over several
meters of drilled reservoir,
The raw cuttings coming out from the well need to be
cleaned from the mud. This operation is time
consuming according to the mud type (WBM or
OBM). Due to the simplicity of the technique, it is our
experience that the time spent to clean the cutting
correctly can be as long as the time spent to run the
measurement itself. A reduction of the cuttings volume
is then important to reduce the costs associated to the
measurement,
A mixing of several lithologies is sometimes observed
after the cleaning process. It can result from
laminations within the reservoir or from cavings.
Whatever the reason, a sorting process is then needed

prior the measurement and can not be handled on large

volumes of cuttings,
The technique has also a wide field of application on
old cuttings collections but the available volumes are
often very limited.

The main emphasis was put on the replacement of the

differential pressure device used to measure the volume of oil
injected by a new system more accurate, more flexible and
less sensitive to the ambient conditions (mainly the
temperature that affects the calibration of the capillary tube).
In the previous system, the cuttings cell was pressurized to 10
bar using a large volume of nitrogen in the pressurized cell.
Now, we use a nitrogen volume of the same order as the
volume to compress in the cuttings cell. The cuttings are
pressurized but not at a constant pressure value and below 10
bar (the initial pressure in the nitrogen). Now, the pressure
falls off during all the compression process of the gas trapped
within the cuttings. Therefore, this procedure:
still enables to pressurized the cuttings with viscous
oil,
permits to calculate easily the volume of oil injected
from the volume of the gas cap, which is a direct
function of the recorded pressure (Boyle's law),
simplifies the apparatus since only one absolute
pressure gauge is needed to evaluate the volume of oil
injected as a function of time,
can be easily handle in the interpretation process since
the evolutive boundary condition at the edge of the
cuttings (pressure) is recorded,
can be operated with smaller volumes of cuttings.
Consequently, only 1 cm3 is necessary using the new
procedure.
Pressure gauge
viscous oil
N2

Cutting cell

PC

oil
cuttings

water
Pump

Bleed off line

Figure 3 : Experimental apparatus working with small volumes of

cuttings

The Figure 4 illustrates the evolution of the oil injected as

a function of time using the new apparatus. It is now possible
to work with volume of oil injected in the order of 0.03 cm3,
which two orders of magnitude lower than the previous
apparatus.

SPE 88684

0.06
0.06

45

0.05

40

0.04

35

0.03
Experiment

0.02

History match

0.03

Porosity rf (%)

0.04
oil injected (cm3)

oil injected (cm3)

0.05

Experiment
History match

0.02

0.01
0.01

0
0

10

20
Time (s)

30

40

30
25
20
15
10

0
0

Time (s)

Figure 4 : experimental results with 1 cm3 cuttings

10

15 20 25 30 35
Porosity cuttings (%)

40

45

Figure 6: comparison between core and cuttings porosity

Porosity measurement technique

A similar approach to Meazza et al. (1996) has been
followed to measure the porosity and the grain density
(Marsala et al., 1997; Meazza et al., 1996). We used classical
methods of core routine analysis. The solid volume was
determined using the gas expansion method. The grain density
is then obtained from the weight of the dry cuttings. The total
volume of the cuttings was measured using a powder
pycnometer (Micromeretics). The principle of the method
relies on the utilization of a size calibrated powder, which can
occupied the whole space between the cuttings (Figure 5). The
volume of powder is first measured for calibration. Then, the
cuttings are introduced into the piston and the total volume is
deduced by difference with the preliminary calibration test.
For 2-3 mm cuttings, the apparatus needs accurate calibration
with non porous rocks of similar shape and size to provide
consistent results. The cuttings porosity is then derived from
the associated solid volume obtained with helium.
Powder

cuttings

Piston

NMR measurement from cuttings

The NMR technique can provide both a porosity
measurement and the main value of T2, which is widely used
for log interpretation in terms of permeability. The cuttings
were saturated with a 20 g/l NaCl brine prior the NMR
measurement. The cuttings samples were carefully prepared in
order to remove all the brine located in the inter-cuttings
space, which leads to erroneous evaluation of porosity and
wrong values of T2 peak. This was achieved by capillary
desorption using a semi permeable membrane.
Prior to the measurement, the total volume of the cuttings
is measured using the powder pycnometer for porosity
assessment. Then, the saturated cuttings are introduced in the
NMR tool and both the volume of brine contained in the rock
and the T2 distribution are obtained. The volume of brine
corresponds to the pore volume leading to the determination of
the porosity using the total volume. The T2 distribution
obtained from cuttings is very similar to the one obtained from
a whole core (Figure 7). This feature is particularly interesting
for permeability estimates from T2 as pointed out by
(Mirotchnik et al., 2004).

cylindre
powder volume

Same T2 peak

50

cuttings total volume

45

Core

40

Figure 5 : principle of the powder pycnometer

Cuttings

35
30
Signal

This approach was tested from measurements on crushed

core cuttings. The good agreement obtained with the core
porosity values confirmed the results found by Meazza et al.
(1996). All the measurement made from cuttings fall within a
2 porosity units (P.U.) error bar, which is satisfactory.

25
20
15
10
5
0
0.1

10

100

1000

10000

T2 (ms)

Figure 7 : T2 distribution on core and cuttings

SPE 88684

the petrophysical properties.

remaining fluids can also lead
Therefore, an adapted cleaning
WBM) must be conducted in
native properties of the rock.

120
100

Amplitude

80

E8
E7
E6
E5
E4
E3
E2
E1

60
40
20
0
0.1

10

100

1000

T2 (ms)

Figure 8: T2 distribution obtained on 8 different cutting

rock samples

The presence of
to erroneous results.
procedure (OBM or
order to restore the

The efficiency of the cleaning procedure that has been

developed through our experiences with field cuttings is
shown in Figure 9. The top picture shows an example of the
cutting as received in the laboratory from the field. The
presence of a shell of fine solid particules surrounding the rock
can be easily observed under the microscope. In this case, the
cuttings were cleaned using fresh synthetic reservoir brine and
solvents. Then, the cuttings were shaked using an ultrasonic
apparatus. The bottom picture shows the surface of the
cuttings after this cleaning process. The quartz grains that
constitutes the sandstone can be clearly identified and even
some open pores seems to be visible.

Figure 8 illustrates the variability of the T2 distribution

obtained from a whole set of cuttings samples that corresponds
to different lithologies and permeabilities. It demonstrates that
such measurements on cuttings:

can give fast evaluation of key features of the rock,

can constitute a very interesting link between the

direct permeability measurements made from cuttings
and the NMR logs that are run through the reservoir.
Bringing these data together can permit to improve the
calibration and gain confidence in terms of
permeability prediction from NMR.

pores

Integration of cuttings measurements

Representativity issue
From the moment when the cuttings are generated
downhole by the drilling tool and the moment when they are
collected at the shakers, the representativity of the cuttings
towards the native reservoir can be lost for several reasons:

the lag time calculation is of primary importance to

identify to which reservoir levels the cuttings are
coming from. This calculation is often considered to
be accurate for vertical wells (in the order of the
meter) but can lead to significant errors in deviated
and horizontal wells,
Depending on the nature of the rock (for instance,
vuggy and unconsolidated rocks) and the type of
drilling bit (PDC are very destructive), the cuttings
retreived from the well may not constitute a
representative elementary volume of the native rock.
For these reasons, 2-3 mm cuttings are recommended
but it does not insure the representativity issue is
respected,
the raw cuttings are dirty because they are
contaminated by the drilling mud. The deposition of
mud solid particules can modify the rock structure and

Figure 9: cleaning process

Integration with other data

The integration of the cutting measurements must be done
with the help of all the other data available on the reservoir.
This is very similar to the quicklook approach used to interpret
the logs. Every log brings one piece of the information to
evaluate the consistency and the representativity of the data,
which permits to identify possible problems related to cavings,
contact with formation,
Because the porosity is the petrophysical properties, which
is well determined from logs in most cases, this parameter is
mainly used to check the cuttings representativity.
Several cases have been encountered. The cuttings porosity
log can exhibit the same shape as the traditional porosity log
but with a systematic shift. Here, it means that the lag time

SPE 88684

calculation need to be revisited. If the porosity values differ

significantly from the logs then the grain density can be very
helpful to identify if the differences result from an unefficient
cleaning (porosity and grain density different) or from the
interpretation of the logs. The rock description can also
identify possible problems related to the mixing of cuttings
coming from several locations within the reservoir (mixing
during the drilling operation).

Porosity from logs

(Neutron)
(Density)
(NMR)

Lag time calculation (mudlogging,

drilling)
Rock description (geologist)
Cleaning
Logs interpretation

from cuttings
Representativity
Control

Field application
The following field example concerns a carbonate
reservoir drilled with a WBM. The standard cleaning
procedure was used and the porosity data obtained from
cuttings measurements are compared with NMR log data in
Figure 12 for two different wells. A very good consistency
was found in the two cases and therefore the cuttings were
considered representative of the native reservoir.
The NMR coefficients calibration approach for
permeability prediction was validated using a serie of cores
from this reservoir. Eight samples belonging to the same rock
type were taken from cored intervals. The permeability,
porosity and NMR were first measured on the cores. Then,
each core was crushed and the same type of measurements
was conducted on cuttings. All the results are gathered in
Table 1.

Reservoir
characterization

Core data
Well tests
MDT
FTWD
Logs

Porosity Log NMR

K from cuttings + NMR from cuttings

Porosity cuttings

Depth

Porosity log NMR

Depth

Producing intervals
Porosity / permeability correlations
Logs calibration

Porosity cuttings

Figure 10: workflow for cuttings measurements integration

When the representativity control is sucessful, then the

permeability measurements are conducted. It is possible to use
these direct measurements with other available data in order to
identified
the
best
paying
intervals,
to
draw
permeability/porosity correlation according to the rock types
or improve the logs calibration. Figure 11 shows the general
workflow, which takes into account the cuttings measurements
in the calibration of the coefficients for NMR permeability
prediction.
Cuttings

Pressure diffusion
technique

NMR from
cuttings
Porosity
measurement

0.1
0.2
0.3
Porosity (fraction)

0.4

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

Porosity (fraction)

Figure 12: porosity log from NMR and cuttings

Table 1: NMR permeability log calibration
Name Phi % T2 peak
ms
R1
2.75
3.07

K core
md
9.0E-05

K cuttings
K RMN
K RMN
md
default md optimized md
1.1E-04
5.4E-07
1.1E-04

R2

8.00

27.46

3.5E-03

1.3E-02

3.1E-03

R3

9.77

47.5

1.8E-02

2.4E-02

2.1E-02

7.4E-03
1.9E-02

R4

7.89

62.45

2.8E-02

4.2E-02

1.5E-02

1.9E-02
2.0E-01

R5

19.79

142

1.0E-01

1.5E-01

3.1E+00

R6

8.75

41.4

1.2E-02

3.7E-02

1.0E-02

1.4E-02

R7

10.90

54.5

3.9E-01

2.4E-01

4.2E-02

2.7E-02

R8

3.29

9.18

1.1E-04

4.0E-04

9.9E-06

5.2E-04

K measurement

T2 peak
Porosity evaluation
Empirical law of permeability prediction
calibration from several rock types

NMR log
T2 (depth)
Better prediction of the
permeability log : K(depth)

Figure 11: calibration of coefficients for NMR permeability

prediction

The Kenyon expression was used to determine the

permeability value from NMR as suggested by Fleury et al.
(2001).

k = C T2apeak b
The default parameters recommended for carbonate rock are
listed hereafter:
C=0.1
a=2
b=4

SPE 88684

The results obtained using these parameters are gathered in

Table 1 and plotted in Figure 13. It can be observed that the
standard deviation from the core permeability is in the order of
one decade, which is not satisfactory in the context of the
reservoir characterization process.

which NMR permeability predictions are uncertain when

standard calibration coefficients are used.
logK core
-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

The results obtained using the new parametrization show a

better consistency with the core measurements since the
standard deviation decreases down to 0.25 decade (Figure 14)
comparing to one decade with default values.
-4

-3

-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6

Calibrated coefficients
K=K core+sigma
K=K core-sigma

logK core
-5

0
logK RMN (calibrated)

The Kenyon's parameters were then optimized using both the

T2 peak and the direct measurement obtained from cuttings. It
leads to the determination of the following parameters, which
differ quite significantly from the default values:
C=0.0086
a=1.15
b=1.57

-7
-2

-1

K=K core

Figure 14: NMR permeability prediction using coefficients

optimized with cuttings permeability

logK RMN (default)

-1

Acknowledgements
The authors want to thank IFP for permission to publish
these results.

-2
-3

References

-4
-5
-6

Default coefficients
K=K core+sigma
K=K core-sigma

-7

K=K core

Figure 13: NMR permeability prediction using default coefficients

The optimized expression can then be applied to the whole

log NMR data, where direct measurements on core or cuttings
are not available. Because the reservoir rocks are frequently
divided into rock types, the calibration process has to be
repeated to each of them to obtain accurate NMR permeability
prediction over the entire reservoir section.
Conclusions
In this paper, we have illustrated the application of a new
permeability measurement technique on real cuttings and
demonstrated their added value in terms of petrophysical
characterization. The different types of measurements that are
performed on the cuttings, permeability, porosity and NMR
enable to assess the representativity of the cuttings toward the
native but also bring added value to the other existing data.
Therefore, the proposed approach for reservoir
characterization with cuttings has many practical applications
on new or existing wells: completion design optimization,
permeability / porosity correlation, log calibration. This last
point is particularly interesting in carbonate reservoirs for

Coskun S.B., Wardlaw N.C., 1993, Estimation of permeability

from image analysis of reservoir sandstone, Journal of
Petroleum Science and Engineering, vol. 10, p. 1-16.
Egermann P., Lenormand R., Longeron D., Zarcone C., 2002,
A fast and direct method of permeability measurement
from drill cuttings, Petrophysics, July-August, p. 243-252.
Fens T. W., Kraaijveld M. A., and Riepe L., Archie's dream:
petrophysics from sidewall sample and cuttings, SCA #
9805, Society of Core Analyst, The Hague, The
Netherlands, 1998.
Fleury M., Deflandre F., Godefroy S., 2001, Validity of
permeability prediction from NMR measurements,
Compte rendus de l'Acadmie des sciences de Paris, vol.
4, p. 869-872.
Ioannidis M.A., Kwiecien M.J., Chatzis I., 1996, Statiscal
analysis of the porous microstructure as a method for
estimating reservoir permeability, Journal of Petroleum
Science and Engineering, vol. 16, p. 251-261.
Kamath J., 1992, Evaluation of accuracy of estimating air
permeability from mercury injection data, SPE formation
evaluation, vol. 4, p. 304-310.
Katz A.J., Thompson A.H., 1986, Quantitative prediction of
permeability in porous rock, Physical Review, vol. 11, p.
8179-8181.
Luffel D. L., Hopkins C. W., and Holditch S. A., Matrix
permeability measurements of gas productive shales, SPE

SPE 88684

#26633, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,

Houston, Texas, 1993.
Marsala A. F., Meazza O., and Rossi E., Petrophysical
characterization of reservoir rocks by measurements on
cuttings, Offshore Mediterranean Conference and
Exhibition, Ravenne, Italy, 1997.
Meazza O., Della Martera M., and Lyne A., Porosity from
cuttings: options and answers, SCA #9606, Society of
Core Analysts, Montpellier, France, 1996.
Mirotchnik K., Ktyuchkov S., and Strack K., A novel method
to determine NMR petrophysical parameters from drill
cuttings, SPWLA 45th Annual Logging Symposium, The
Netherlands, 2004.
Nigh E. and Taylor M., Wellsite determination of porosity and
permeability using drilling cuttings, Canadian Well
logging Society, 10th Formation Evaluation Symposium,
1985.
Proett M., Walker M., and Welshans D., Formation testing
while drilling, a new era in formation evaluation, SPE #
84087, Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Denver, Colorado, 2003.
Purcell W., 1942, Capillary pressures, their measurements
using mercury and the calculation of permeability
therefrom, Trans AIME, February, p. 39-48.
Swanson B.F., 1981, A simple correlation between
permeability and mercury capillary pressure, JPT,
December, p. 2498-2504.
Thomeer J.H.M., 1960, Introduction of a pore geometrical
factor defined by the capillary pressure curve, Trans
AIME, March, p. 73-77.
Thomeer J.H.M., 1983, Air permeability as a function of three
pore network parameters, Trans AIME, April, p. 809-814.
Timur A., An investigation of permeability, porosity and
residual water saturation relationship, SPWLA, 1968.