Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics

Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

Question 1:
Assume that the permeability and porosity data in the following Table are representative of
several thousand data points taken for permeability-porosity measurements of a reservoir.
a. Plot the data and develop an equation that represents the relationship between
permeability and porosity. Show the limits of the applicability of this equation.
b. Give an explanation for the deviation of the data that occurs for the high-permeability
core.
c. Determine the correct mean value of the permeability.
d. What is the matrix permeability of the core if the effective pore throat radius is 3.5 μm
and the cementation factor is 2? Estimate the tortuosity of the sample.
Sample No. K (mD) 
1 0.022 0.088
2 0.061 0.100
3 0.115 0.110
4 0.438 0.118
5 1.050 0.121
6 1.120 0.130
7 2.202 0.140
8 2.500 0.150
9 2.900 0.159

Answer:
a. The tabulated result and plot of the data within the linear regression as per shown
below:
log k log φ log k vs log φ
-1.6576 -1.0555 0.5000
-1.2147 -1.0000 0.0000
-0.9393 -0.9586 -0.5000
log k

-0.3585 -0.9281 -1.0000

0.0212 -0.9172 -1.5000
0.0492 -0.8861 -2.0000
-1.1500 -1.0500 -0.9500 -0.8500 -0.7500
0.3428 -0.8539
log φ y = 8.9892x + 7.8902
0.3979 -0.8239 R² = 0.9346
0.4624 -0.7986

The developed equation: log 𝑘 = 7.8902 + 8.9892 log ∅

The limits of the applicability of this equation: assuming all of the sample comes from
the same hydraulic flow unit, however we can see that the trend is to be deviated
when the permeability is 2.5 md or up.

b. Comments/Explanation for the deviation of the data that occurs for the high
permeability core: the deviation can be as the outcome of the difference of hydraulic
flow unit.
∅3
c. By using the relationship between k and ∅𝑅 = (1−∅)2, we can get better linear
regression between k and ϕ as per following:

Page 1 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

k (φ^3)/((1-φ)^2)
0.022 0.000819329
k vs φRy = 674.1962x - 0.7243
R² = 0.9513
0.061 0.001234568 4
0.115 0.001680343 3

k, md
0.438 0.002112073 2
1.05 0.002292864 1
1.12 0.002902629
0
2.202 0.003710114 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006
2.5 0.00467128 φR = (φ^3)/((1-φ)^2)
2.9 0.005683284

Taking arithmetic averaging on ϕ data then we input the result into above regression
linear equation, so that we can get the mean permeability:
3
∅ 0.1243
𝒌 = 674.1962 2 − 0.7243 = 674.1962 − 0.7243
(1 − ∅) (1 − 0.124)2
= 𝟎. 𝟗𝟓𝟎𝟖 𝒎𝒅
Other methods:
1) Use the effective permeability obtained from core data, estimated from (taken
from Tiab and Donaldson’s book in chapter Permeability and Porosity
Distributions):

ln ki (ln ki - ln k ave)^2
-3.81671 9.459689922
-2.79688 4.226434856
-2.16282 2.021433393
-0.82554 0.00713762
0.04879 0.62385054
0.113329 0.729966242
0.789366 2.342179169
0.916291 2.746784711
1.064711 3.260778823
kg ave 0.756511 3.177281909 variance
ln k ave -0.74105 3.259202114 ke

Page 2 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

2) Arithmetic averaging, geometric averaging and harmonic averaging:

a) Arithmetic:

kA average = 1.1564 md
b) Geometric:

kG average = 0.4766 md
c) Harmonic:

kH average = 0.1186 md
d. For r = 3.5 μm and m = 2 within conversion factor of k from μm2 to md, C =
2

1,000/0.986923, hence we can get the tabulated results (τ and k in md for each
porosity ϕ) as per following the relationship below:

τ k, md
11.36364 12.01512
10 15.51539
9.090909 18.77363
8.474576 21.60364
8.264463 22.71609
7.692308 26.22102
7.142857 30.41017
6.666667 34.90964
6.289308 39.22447

Sample calculation: Core Sample #1

ϕ = 0.088 → τ = 0.088-1= 11.3636 and k =
(3.52/(8*11.3636))*0.088*(1,000/0.986923) = 12.0151 md → ⁖ k = 12.0151 md

Question 2:
a. If a core has a porosity of 18% and an irreducible water saturation of 24%, what is the
permeability of the sample?
b. An NMR log was run in an oil well, indicating a porosity of 13% and log mean of
relaxation time 25 ms at the depth of 7500. Estimate the permeability at this depth for
this well.

Answer:
a. Timur (1968) empirical correlation (from Course Slide):

Page 3 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

100∅4.5100(0.18)4.5
𝑘= = = 0.7732 𝑚𝑑
𝑆𝑤𝑖𝑟𝑟 2 (0.24)2
Coates and Dumanoir (1981) correlation:

Therefore: k = 105.2676 md
Tixier (1978) correlation:

Therefore: k = 36.9056 md

b. Schlumberger Doll Research (SDR) correlation:

Case sandstones: k = 0.714 md

Case carbonates: k = 0.0179 md

Question 3:
Core analysis for permeability and porosity of 36 one-foot core samples obtained from a well
located in a clean sandstone formation is provided in the following table.
a. Is the permeability distribution with depth linear, exponential, or logarithmic? Find the
best curve-fit straight line.
b. Calculate the Dykstra-Parsons coefficient. Is the formation homogeneous or
heterogeneous? Justify your answer
c. Find arithmetic, geometric, and harmonic means of the permeability. Also, calculate
the standard deviation, normalized mean, and dispersion of the three means.
d. Determine the arithmetic porosity mean and the median porosity.
e. Determine the best permeability-porosity correlation.
f. What is the average grain diameter of each sample?
g. Calculate RQI and plot against porosity.
h. Determine the number of flow units and corresponding FZI.
Sample No. k (mD)  Sample No. k (mD) 
1 100 0.268 19 1720 0.266
2 822 0.354 20 500 0.275
3 436 0.264 21 495 0.269
4 220 0.260 22 612 0.206
5 348 0.258 23 897 0.264
6 256 0.272 24 974 0.272
7 150 0.256 25 790 0.351
8 127 0.255 26 955 0.358
9 36 0.272 27 1030 0.273
10 779 0.257 28 784 0.266

Page 4 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

11 945 0.263 29 491 0.262

12 815 0.295 30 623 0.313
13 1190 0.277 31 557 0.255
14 928 0.355 32 937 0.358
15 238 0.286 33 854 0.279
16 78 0.274 34 818 0.272
17 1780 0.262 35 363 0.285
18 1510 0.269 36 306 0.315

Answer:
a. The permeability distribution with depth tends to be logarithmic rather than linear and
exponential, but power distribution is the best, as per shown in the following figures:

Depth vs k in semilog k plot Depth vs k in log-log plot

sheet sheet
1 10 100 1000 10000 1 10 100 1000 10000
0 1

10

15

20 10

25

30
y = 4.452ln(x) - 9.2452
35 y = 1.1343x0.4064
R² = 0.1438
R² = 0.1777
40 100

Depth vs k semilog Depth Depth vs k in semilog k plot

sheet sheet
0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 500 1000 1500 2000
1 0

10

15

10 20

25

30

35
y = 9.0222e0.0007x y = 0.006x + 14.402
R² = 0.117 R² = 0.0628
100 40

Page 5 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

b. We can calculate the Dykstra-Parson coefficient from the following procedures as per
detail explanation from Tiab and Donaldson’s book:
1) Using graphical method, as per detail explained below:

Sample No. k (mD)  Freq Freq > ki Cum Freq Dist % > ki
17 1780 0.262 1 0 0.0000%
19 1720 0.266 1 1 2.8571%
18 1510 0.269 1 2 5.7143%
13 1190 0.277 1 3 8.5714%
27 1030 0.273 1 4 11.4286%
24 974 0.272 1 5 14.2857%
26 955 0.358 1 6 17.1429%
11 945 0.263 1 7 20.0000%
32 937 0.358 1 8 22.8571%
14 928 0.355 1 9 25.7143%
23 897 0.264 1 10 28.5714%
33 854 0.279 1 11 31.4286%
2 822 0.354 1 12 34.2857%
34 818 0.272 1 13 37.1429%
12 815 0.295 1 14 40.0000%
25 790 0.351 1 15 42.8571%
28 784 0.266 1 16 45.7143%
10 779 0.257 1 17 48.5714%
30 623 0.313 1 18 51.4286%
22 612 0.206 1 19 54.2857%
31 557 0.255 1 20 57.1429%
20 500 0.275 1 21 60.0000%
21 495 0.269 1 22 62.8571%
29 491 0.262 1 23 65.7143%
3 436 0.264 1 24 68.5714%
35 363 0.285 1 25 71.4286%
5 348 0.258 1 26 74.2857%
36 306 0.315 1 27 77.1429%
6 256 0.272 1 28 80.0000%

Page 6 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

15 238 0.286 1 29 82.8571%

4 220 0.26 1 30 85.7143%
7 150 0.256 1 31 88.5714%
8 127 0.255 1 32 91.4286%
1 100 0.268 1 33 94.2857%
16 78 0.274 1 34 97.1429%
9 36 0.272 1 35 100.0000%

k vs Cum Freq Dist % > ki in log-normal

probability sheet
10000

1000
k, md

100

10

1
0.0000% 20.0000% 40.0000% 60.0000% 80.0000% 100.0000%
Cum Freq Dist % > ki

From above graph and table, we can get k50 = 701 and k84.1 = 259.55 (interpolated)
Therefore: VK = 0.6297

2) Using the arithmetic mean of permeability, this is the original Dykstra-Parson’s

method as per following below:

Page 7 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

In this case, we get kA = 679.5556 md (using function AVERAGE in Excel); s =

437.9468 and VK = 0.6445
3) Using the arithmetic and geometric mean of permeability, we input them into the
following equation:

In this case, we get kA = 679.5556 md; kH = 303.1733 md (using function

HARMEAN in Excel) and VK = 0.5928

Comments on the results: Refer to the following explanation taken from Tiab and
Donaldson’s book:

In this case, we get VK in between of 0.5 and 0.75 for all methods as per shown above,
hence we may say that the reservoir is very heterogeneous so that a combination of
geometric and harmonic averaging technique is necessary.

c. From the previous answer, we already knew that kA = 679.5556 md and kH = 303.1733
md, for kG refer to the following equation, we can get kG = 508.8451 md:

For all of mean values, we can calculate the normalized k on each mean value by using
the following correlation, then we can take the averaging of normalized k values:
𝑘
𝑘𝑖,𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑚 = 𝑘 𝑖 where M = Arithmetic, Geometric and Harmonic
𝑀
Tabulated results:
norm k a norm k h norm k g 71.2230 159.6446 95.1174
14.7155 32.9844 19.6523 178.2106 399.4547 237.9978
994.3028 2228.7053 1327.8776 96.4395 216.1668 128.7936
279.7358 627.0209 373.5832 33.1099 74.2150 44.2178

Page 8 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

23.7346 53.2006 31.6973 1184.0224 2653.9571 1581.2454

1.9071 4.2748 2.5469 1396.0242 3129.1539 1864.3709
892.9969 2001.6306 1192.5849 918.3944 2058.5584 1226.5029
1314.1310 2945.5922 1755.0036 1342.0904 3008.2626 1792.3431
977.4403 2190.9084 1305.3579 1561.1674 3499.3184 2084.9174
2083.8620 4670.9254 2782.9687 904.4971 2027.4079 1207.9432
1267.2753 2840.5665 1692.4286 354.7628 795.1920 473.7807
83.3545 186.8370 111.3187 571.1512 1280.2214 762.7645
8.9529 20.0677 11.9565 456.5469 1023.3387 609.7121
4662.4591 10450.7873 6226.6492 1291.9753 2895.9309 1725.4150
3355.2812 7520.7803 4480.9313 1073.2250 2405.6074 1433.2770
4353.4336 9758.1143 5813.9500 984.6494 2207.0675 1314.9856
367.8875 824.6108 491.3086 193.9047 434.6326 258.9570
360.5665 808.2010 481.5316 137.7901 308.8530 184.0167
551.1602 1235.4121 736.0668

Hence, we can get the normalized mean value for: arithmetic = 953.955 md, harmonic
= 93.5908 md and geometric = 508.8451 md.
For calculating the dispersion (variance) and standard deviation (square root of
variance), we can use the following correlations:
1) Case arithmetic mean permeability:

Where s is the standard deviation, in this case, we can get s = 437.9468 and
variance (s2) = 191,797.3968
2) Case geometric mean permeability:
2
𝑛 𝑘𝑖
√∑𝑖=1 (ln𝑘𝐺
)
𝑠 = exp
𝑛−1

[ ]
In this case, we can get s = 2.4535 and variance = 6.0197
3) Case harmonic mean permeability:
𝑛−1
𝑠= 2
2
√ 1 1
∑𝑛𝑖=1 [( ) −( ) ]
𝑘𝑖 𝑘ℎ
In this case, we can get s = 199.7619 and variance = 39,904.8265

d. Changing the term of k to be ϕ, we can get the ϕA = 0.272; from function MEDIAN on
the Excel, we can get ϕ50 = 0.2816
e. Pass after answering f to h, after estimating the hydraulic flow unit group, we can get
the following correlation between k and ϕ for each HFU group, with the comments on
the results are from the 1st and 5th Group that get R2 < 0.75 (this may cause of
heterogeneity on those HFU groups) and because of the clean sandstone reservoir only,
we can correlate on single regression line-type (power regression line):

Page 9 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

k vs φ
10000

y = 411660x4.676 y = 278908x3.8663
R² = 0.4889 R² = 0.952
1000

y = 87109x4.412
y = 611891x5.4386
R² = 0.9779
100 R² = 0.8869

y = 30184x3.9349
R² = 0.9575
10
y = 5E-10x-19.61
R² = 0.1724
1
1 0.1

f. By using the following equation from Tiab and Donaldson’s book, we can get tabulated
results as following after:

Sample No.  k (mD) k (μm^2) dgr, mm

9 0.272 36 35.5292 0.2518
16 0.274 78 76.9800 0.5325
1 0.268 100 98.6923 0.7345
8 0.255 127 125.3392 1.0991
36 0.315 306 301.9984 1.3186
7 0.256 150 148.0385 1.2815
15 0.286 238 234.8877 1.4105
6 0.272 256 252.6523 1.7905
4 0.26 220 217.1231 1.7858
25 0.351 790 779.6692 2.3819
2 0.354 822 811.2507 2.4097
35 0.285 363 358.2530 2.1764
32 0.358 937 924.7469 2.6469
26 0.358 955 942.5115 2.6977
14 0.355 928 915.8645 2.6953
30 0.313 623 614.8530 2.7416
5 0.258 348 343.4492 2.8976
20 0.275 500 493.4615 3.3727
3 0.264 436 430.2984 3.3651
21 0.269 495 488.5269 3.5911
29 0.262 491 484.5792 3.8860
12 0.295 815 804.3422 4.3607
31 0.255 557 549.7161 4.8204
33 0.279 854 842.8322 5.4926
34 0.272 818 807.3030 5.7212
28 0.266 784 773.7476 5.9022

Page 10 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

10 0.257 779 768.8130 6.5701

24 0.272 974 961.2630 6.8123
23 0.264 897 885.2699 6.9233
27 0.273 1030 1016.5307 7.1172
11 0.263 945 932.6422 7.3856
13 0.277 1190 1174.4384 7.8374
18 0.269 1510 1490.2537 10.9548
22 0.206 612 603.9969 10.7103
19 0.266 1720 1697.5076 12.9488
17 0.262 1780 1756.7229 14.0876
The color will represent the hydraulic flow unit group in this case that will be
explained on the next answer

g. From the following tabulated results and plot graph of RQI vs ϕR, after sorting based
on the calculated FZI, all of the equations come from the Tiab and Donaldson’s book
and Course Slides (detail on answer for number 4):

Sample No. 1/φz svp φz RQI FZI

9 2.6765 0.0619 0.3736 0.3612 0.9668
16 2.6496 0.0422 0.3774 0.5298 1.4037
1 2.7313 0.0368 0.3661 0.6065 1.6567
8 2.9216 0.0319 0.3423 0.7007 2.0473
36 2.1746 0.0228 0.4599 0.9787 2.1282
7 2.9063 0.0294 0.3441 0.7601 2.2090
15 2.4965 0.0247 0.4006 0.9058 2.2613
6 2.6765 0.0232 0.3736 0.9633 2.5783
4 2.8462 0.0245 0.3514 0.9134 2.5996
25 1.8490 0.0150 0.5408 1.4897 2.7544
2 1.8249 0.0148 0.5480 1.5131 2.7612
35 2.5088 0.0199 0.3986 1.1206 2.8114
32 1.7933 0.0139 0.5576 1.6064 2.8808
26 1.7933 0.0138 0.5576 1.6218 2.9083
14 1.8169 0.0139 0.5504 1.6054 2.9169
30 2.1949 0.0160 0.4556 1.4009 3.0748
5 2.8760 0.0194 0.3477 1.1532 3.3166
20 2.6364 0.0167 0.3793 1.3389 3.5298
3 2.7879 0.0175 0.3587 1.2761 3.5575
21 2.7175 0.0166 0.3680 1.3470 3.6603
29 2.8168 0.0164 0.3550 1.3593 3.8289
12 2.3898 0.0135 0.4184 1.6504 3.9443
31 2.9216 0.0152 0.3423 1.4675 4.2875
33 2.5842 0.0129 0.3870 1.7372 4.4894
34 2.6765 0.0130 0.3736 1.7220 4.6088
28 2.7594 0.0131 0.3624 1.7047 4.7039
10 2.8911 0.0129 0.3459 1.7287 4.9979
24 2.6765 0.0119 0.3736 1.8790 5.0291
23 2.7879 0.0122 0.3587 1.8303 5.1027
27 2.6630 0.0116 0.3755 1.9287 5.1362
11 2.8023 0.0119 0.3569 1.8822 5.2745
13 2.6101 0.0109 0.3831 2.0581 5.3718
18 2.7175 0.0095 0.3680 2.3526 6.3930

Page 11 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

22 3.8544 0.0131 0.2594 1.7115 6.5967

19 2.7594 0.0089 0.3624 2.5250 6.9673
17 2.8168 0.0086 0.3550 2.5881 7.2903

RQI vs φz
10.0000

1.0000

0.1000
1.0000 0.1000

h. Taken the value of RQI at ϕz = 1 as the FZI for each group, hence we can tabulate the
result as following below:
Group Sample FZI Symbol k(φ) = R2
1 9, 16, 1 1.2 Diamond 5E-10φ-19.61 0.1724
2 8, 36, 7, 15 2 Circle 30184φ3.9349 0.9575
3 6, 4, 25, 2, 35, 32, 26, 14, 30 2.8 Square 87109φ4.412 0.9779
4 5, 20, 3, 21, 29, 12 3.4 Star 611891φ5.4386 0.8869
5 31, 33, 34, 28, 10, 24, 23, 27, 11, 13 4.6 Triangle 411660φ4.676 0.4889
6 18, 22, 19, 17 6.5 Cross 278908φ3.8663 0.952

Question 4:
The conventional core analysis property values and the specific area per unit pore volume
obtained by image analysis are summarized in the following table for a sandstone reservoir.
Calculate:
a. Specific area per unit-grain volume (SVgr)
b. Pore-level effective zoning factor (KT)
c. Lithology index (J1)
d. Reservoir quality index
e. Number of flow units
Sample No.  k, (mD) Spv, m-1
1 0.197 728 0.0241
2 0.153 25.9 0.0522
3 0.129 28 0.038
4 0.101 3.51 0.0543
5 0.152 5.29 0.0719
6 0.129 1.78 0.0846
7 0.122 2.09 0.0824
8 0.102 0.47 0.0864
9 0.202 646 0.0284
10 0.173 114 0.0538
11 0.134 412 0.0158
12 0.069 1.65 0.0194

Page 12 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

13 0.198 6.5 0.0732

14 0.125 3 0.0288

Answer:
Using the following correlations, we can solve all of the sub-question on tabulated result
display as per following after, then recalculate all on each hydraulic flow unit group:

Sample Spv, m-

 k, (mD) 1 Svgr φR KT JI RQI FZI
No.
1 0.197 728 0.0241 0.0059 0.0119 0.4659 1.4650 1.9088 247.7889
9 0.202 646 0.0284 0.0072 0.0129 0.3877 1.6060 1.7757 223.4046
11 0.134 412 0.0158 0.0024 0.0032 1.3028 0.8761 1.7411 358.3516
2 0.153 25.9 0.0522 0.0094 0.0050 2.1680 0.6792 0.4085 72.0271
3 0.129 28 0.038 0.0056 0.0028 3.1905 0.5598 0.4626 99.4747
4 0.101 3.51 0.0543 0.0061 0.0013 9.7592 0.3201 0.1851 52.4724
10 0.173 114 0.0538 0.0113 0.0076 0.5243 1.3811 0.8060 122.7125
12 0.069 1.65 0.0194 0.0014 0.0004 111.1122 0.0949 0.1535 65.9809
5 0.152 5.29 0.0719 0.0129 0.0049 5.5581 0.4242 0.1852 32.9123

Page 13 of 14
Homework #2 – PETE 592 – Advanced Petrophysics
Nur Iman Khamidy – 201703210 – PhD Student, PETE Dept, CPG, KFUPM

6 0.129 1.78 0.0846 0.0125 0.0028 10.1258 0.3143 0.1166 25.0809

7 0.122 2.09 0.0824 0.0114 0.0024 8.5972 0.3411 0.1300 29.7871
8 0.102 0.47 0.0864 0.0098 0.0013 29.0720 0.1855 0.0674 18.8984
13 0.198 6.5 0.0732 0.0181 0.0121 5.6850 0.4194 0.1799 23.2078
14 0.125 3 0.0288 0.0041 0.0026 50.2347 0.1411 0.1538 34.2929

Spv vs 1/φz=(1-φ)/φ
0.1

0.01

0.001
1 10 100

RQI vs φz = φ/(1-φ)
10.0000

1.0000

0.1000
1 0.1 0.01

Group Sample Svgr FZI kT JI Symbol

1 1, 9, 11 0.004 9 771.6049 0.036 Circle
2 2, 3, 4, 10, 12 0.006 2.5 4444.444 0.015 Square
3 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14 0.01 0.88 12913.22 0.0088 Triangle

Page 14 of 14