SPE/DOE
SPE/DOE 10796
Volumes, Types, and Distribution of Clay Minerals in Reservoir Rocks Based on Well Logs
by N. Ruhovets and Walter H. Fertl*, Dresser Petroleum Engineering Services, Dresser Industries, Inc.
*Member SPE-AIME
The paper was presented at the SPE/DOE Unconventional Gas Recovery Symposium of the Society of Petroleum Engineers held in Pittsburgh,
PA, May 16-18,1982. The material is subject to correction by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words. Write: 6200 N. Central Expwy., Dallas, TX 75206.
INTRODUCTION
Reliable evaluation of hydrocarbon resources
encountered in shaly clastic reservoirs of low porosity
and low permeability is an important although dif-
ficult task.
Log-derived estimates of the volume, type and
distribution modes of various clay minerals, deter-
mination of cation exchange capacity (CEC) and Q v
(CEC per unit of total pore volume), and properly
selected water saturation calculation models assist for-
mation evaluation.
Since shaly clastic reservoir rocks require extensive
core sampling for CEC and Q v analysis, which is
tedious, time consuming, and expensive, attempts
have been made to correlate such CEC and Qv data
with one specific or a combination of several well
logging measurements. The latter include the spontan-
eous potential, gamma ray, natural gamma ray spec-
tral data, dielectric constant and acoustic-, density-
and/ or neutron-derived porosity, etc. Constraints
associated with these concepts will be reviewed.
Discussed in this paper, is an innovative digital shaly
sand evaluation approach (CLASS), which provides
information on total and effective reservoir porosity,
total and effective fluid distribution based on the
Waxman-Smits equation, reservoir productivity, silt
volume, and volumes, types and distribution modes of
clay minerals present in subsurface formations.
Both basic concepts and field case examples will
illustrate this method.
CLA Y MINERA LS
Clay minerals, used as a rock and particle term,
describe an earthy, fine-grained, natural material
which develops plasticity when mixed with a small
amount of water. Such clay minerals significantly
affect important reservoir properties such as porosity,
water saturation, and permeability.
Clay minerals are composed of small crystalline par-
ticles which are classified according to their crystal
structure. Important ones of interest to the petroleum
engineer and geologist are kaolinite, montmorillonite,
illite, chlorite, and mixed~layer minerals. They are
essentially layered hydrous aluminum silicates which
may contain small amounts of alkalies and alkaline
earths and have some substitution of aluminum by
other cations, such as magnesium, iron, etc. (I)
The most common clay minerals, their composition,
matrix density, hydrogen index, and distribu-
tion of potassium, thorium, and uranium based on
natural gamma ray spectral information are listed in
Table I.
Numerous experimental data show that the CEC
value of clays is directly related to their capacity to
absorb and hold water. Clays of the montmorillonite
(smectite) group have the greatest capacity to absorb
water and also the highest CEC values. Kaolinite and
chlorite have very low CEC, and their capacity to hold
water is also low.
Shales can be defined as an earthy, fine-grained,
sedimentary rock with a specific laminated character.
Based on the analyses of 10,000 shales Yaalon(2)
describes the mineral composition of the average shale
as follows: clay minerals (predominantly illite), 590'/0;
quartz and chert, 20070; feldspar, 8070; carbonates, 7070;
iron oxides, 3070; organic materials, 1070; others, 2070.
Generally speaking, illite appears to be the dominant
clay mineral in most of the shales investigated.
Chlorite mica is frequently present, smectite is a com-
mon component in Mesozoic and younger shales, and
kaolinite usually occurs in small amounts only.
Therefore, a typical shaly clastic reservoir rock and/ or
a typical shale formation may consist of several com-
ponents. Hence, no universal shale parameter can be
used to characterize a specific type of argillaceous
sediment or rock.
 VOLUMES, TYPES, AND DISTRIBUTION OF CLAY MINERALS
IN RESERVOIR ROCKS BASED ON WELL LOGS
Clay Volume
Since most geophysical well logging responses are
affected by clay minerals, a multitude of log-derived
clay (shaliness) indicators have been developed over
the years. Several of these indicators are presented in
Table II. However, for natural radioactivity
measurements alone (gamma ray, spectral gamma ray)
there exists a multitude of additional empirical cor-
relations, the most notable ones for Tertiary rocks by
Larionov(3), Stieber(4) and Clavier et al.(5)
In routine well log analysis, several such clay indica-
tors are comparatively used to derive the most likely
shaliness value which then frequently equals the
minimum calculated value based on all the indicators
available.(6)
The constraint inherent to all these techniques is
that clay properties in the clastic reservoir and the
adjacent shales are assumed to be identical, an
assumption frequently not realistic.
For example, kaolinite, and mixed-layer mont-
morillonite-illite are present in interlaminated sand-
stones and shales from the Eocene Wilcox Formation
of the Texas Gulf Coast at depths of 6,500 ft to 13,000
ft (Howard, 1979).(7) Ratios of kaolinite to illite are
higher in sandstones than in the interlaminated shale.
These mineralogical differences are interpreted to
reflect a significant difference in the solution
chemistry of pore water in sandstones from that of
pore waters in the interlaminated shales.
Nevertheless, such log-derived shaliness estimates
provide useful information as to porosity corrections,
empirical permeability transforms, and in fluid satura-
tion estimates based on laminar(8) dispersed(9,10) and
total shale models.o I) . with specific single or combined well logging
In our opinion, one of the best ways to determine
clay volume is by using natural gamma ray spectral
data. In any clay volume determination, the uranium
content can thus be excluded, thereby drastically
reducing the influence of silt and organic components.
Thorium and potassium content varies for different
types of clay. (Tab. I) Usage of only one of these two
indicators for clay volume determination could lead to
incorrect results. Hence, both Th and K curves are
used simultaneously by calculating the product index
of thorium and potassium.
The advantage of the product index is that it is vir-
tually independent of clay types. This product index
method of clay determination was proposed by
Lawrence(l2) on the basis of typical potassium.
uranium, and thorium concentrations for several clays
and minerals presented by FertJ.(l J) Using these con-
cepts. a crossplot of potassium vs thorium shows that
illite, glauconite. biotite, and muscovite have high
potassium and low thorium concentrations; while
kaolinite. montmorillonite, bentonite. and bauxite are
high in thorium, but low in potassium values. These
clays tend to form a hyperbolic pattern on K vs Th
SPE 10796
crossplots. On the basis of this crossplot, the product
index (PI) is calculated as follows:
PI (K + a)(Th + b) (1)
where:
a,b zero offset constants, K potassium
in percent,
Th = thorium in ppm
The product index can then be used for clay volume
determination in a manner similar to GR or SP,
by selecting a maximum reading for 100070 clay and a
minimum value in clean intervals.
With the advent of CEC and Qv-related fluid
saturation models(l4,15,16) additional emphasis is
focused on log-derived estimates of CEC and Qv.
CEC and Q v - Estimates
The Q v value of a reservoir rock is defined as CEC
per unit pore volume i.e., Qv = CEC (l - ~)
Pma~ I. CEC values can be measured on rock
samples obtained from conventional or side-wall
cores.
Typical clastic reservoir rocks are rarely
homogeneous, and extensive core sampling for CEC
and Qv analysis is tedious, time-consuming, and
expensive. CEC values can be measured on rock
samples using the ammonium or borium exchange
techniques.(I7,18,19) Therefore, several attempts have
been made to correlate CEC and Qv measurements
parameters. Such correlations allow a continuous
computation of CEC and Q v values in a given forma-
tion, geologic section, or localized area. They all
require both core and well logging data over the same
zone of interest. A recent study of low-salinity shaly
sand reservoirs in Kern River, California showed that
Q v values obtained on sidewall samples favorably
agree with the test results on conventional cores, pro-
vided proper analytical prccautions arc takcn.(20)
However, no single unique mathematical transfor-
mation bctween CDC (and/or Qv) and well log
responses should be expected to exist for all clastic
reservoir rocks which reflect different composition,
texture. degree of l'ementation, geologic age, and
depositional environments.
The following correlations or CDC and Qv with
logging parameters were previously considered.
Q\I vs Self Spontaneous Potential (SP curvc)12 J .n.2.1)
Qv f(SP)
CEC aSP + b
SPE 10796 N. RUHOVETS AND WALTER H. FERTL
SP-curve must be usable in a straight forward fashion,
i.e. effects due to thin beds, invasion, hydrocarbons,
electro-kinetic potential, salt water flow, decreasing
contrast of Rw vs R mf , etc., are not present or can be
corrected for. "Normalized" SP information recently
assisted in the evaluation of the shaly, low-salinity
Upper Cretaceous and Shannon sandstones in the
Spindle Field, Colorado.(23)
Q v vs Gamma Ray(24,25)
Qv = f(GR)
Constraints include drastically varying clay types,
radioactive accessory minerals (monozite, zirkon,
etc.), glauconite, feldspar, silt, severe borehole, ami
special drilling mud conditions, etc.
Q v vs Dielectric Constant(26,27)
Very tight gas sand reservoir samples (CEC from 10
to 100 mequ/lOOg) were investigated in the
laboratory. A simple mathematical function of dielec-
tric constant and porosity accurately predicted shale
conductivity (Cd)' However, no significant correlation
of C el and CEC could be established for this rock type.
Qv vs Reservoir Porosity(28,29,30,31)
Several correlative functions have been established
which correlate Q v with reservoir porosity based on a
single or combination of porosity logs, i.e. ~TOT
~DEN ~TOT = 0.5 [~DEN + ~CN]' Published field
data include clastic reservoir rocks in California;
Farewell structure in the Mackenzie Delta, Canada;
Jurassic Brent sands, North Sea; Eocene sands,
Maracaibo Basin, Venezuela; South China Sea; and
Oman, Middle East.
Qv b
a ~TOT
Qv b
a ~TOT
Qv f (~TOT' ~EFf)
Qv f (~DEN' ~CN' V d)
Porosity needs to be primarily controlled by type
and amount of clay minerals present in the reservoir.
Constraints include large variations in reservoir
cementation, texture, sortings and grain size distribu-
tion, unrecognized hydrocarbon, and environmental
effects on logging tool response.
Q v vs Gamma Ray and Reservoir Porosity(21)
Q"vs Clay Composition and Reservoir Porosity(29,32)
Qv f (CEC, clay composition, ~TOT)
This approach has been applied in heavy oil reser-
voir evaluation in the Rocky Mountains.
Clay mineralogy has to be known or needs to stay
fairly constant. In other words, Q v is estimated in a
continuous form from density and compensated
neutron log data on the basis of clay mineralogical
data obtained from conventional cores or sidewall
samples.
Q" vs Water Content in Shales and Total Porosity(49)
This approach is applicable to formation sequences
of constant salinity and clay mineralogy.
CEC vs Electrical Conductivity(33,34)
C sh f (CEC, [:'t, depth, TOF)
CEC data, measured on conventional and sidewall
cores from wells in California, Louisiana, Oklahoma,
and Wyoming, have been correlated with the above
logging parameters based on regression-type data
analysis.
Q" vs Natural Gamma Ray Spectral Data(25,35,36)
Log -deri ved na t ural gam ma ray s pect ral
measurements provide a continuous quantitative
record of in-situ potassium, uranium, and thorium
variations.
Correlation of these log measurements with core-
derived Q v values describes the empirical trend
characteristic for a given formation. Such calibration
curves which allow a continuous Q v estimate from
spectral gamma ray logging data have been developed
for shaly tuffaceous sandstones, Argentina; Tertiary
U.S. Gulf Coast sands, Texas; Jurassic Cotton Valley
sands, East Texas; shaly sands in Alaska; and Lower
Cretaceous Muddy l-formation, Rocky Mountains.
As one would expect (see Tab. I), experience shows,
that depending on the mineralogical composition of a
formation, either the log-derived potassium (K) or
thorium (Th) curve values or both will provide reliable
correlation with Qv' Total volume of clay minerals
may change but the type and proportion of clay pres-
ent will have to remain relatively constant.
In several Tertiary U.S. Gulf Coast sands in South
Texas and elsewhere, poor Qv correlations are
observed with potassium due to high and drastically
varying K-feldspar content (5 to 45070). In these and
other micaceous shaly reservoirs better results are ob-
tained with Q v vs thorium correlations.(36)
 VOLUMES, TYPES, AND DISTRIBUTION OF CLAY MINERALS
IN RESERVOIR ROCKS BASED ON WELL LOGS
In the Lower Cretaceous Muddy J formation a
good correlation of uranium vs CEC was obtained,
with smectite being the major source of uranium
radiation,oS) This observation should not be too sur-
prising since laboratory studies of montmorillonites
confirm that even with diluted uranyl solutions, com-
plete U-saturation of the clay is possible, i.e. the
absorption sites are the exchange sites of the mont-
morilloniteP7)
CEC vs Bound Water and Equilibrium
Solution Salinity
Hill et a1P4) expreimentally developed the relation-
ship between the amount of bound water, the
equilibrium solution salinity, and the cation exchange
capacity of the rocks for salinity ranging from 13
g/liter NaCI to saturated solutions. It was observed
that at a constant salinity the relationship between
bound water and CEC should be linear, pass through
the origin of the parameters crossplot, and exhibit a
slope equal to (0.084 Co 0.5 + 0.22).
Thus, CEC can be found from the equation
CEC B w /(O.084 Co 0.5 + 0.22) (2)
and Qy which represents CEC per total pore volume,
can then be calculated from:
(3)
This concept is incorporated in the CLASS
Epilog@ model(l6) which allows a continuous depth
level by depth level calculation of Qy and clay types
based on density-neutron and natural spectral gamma
ray d!lta. This technique eliminates the requirement
for any core data.
CLAY TYPES
Origin, type, compOSitIOn and classification
schemes for layer-lattice clay minerals have been
documented in extensive literature.o ,38,39) Hence it is
well known that clays vary widely in morphology of
the individual particles, in their aggregate morphology
and their effect on effective reservoir porosity, effec-
tive water saturation, and reservoir permeability,(40-47)
Table I lists several properties of clay minerals
which relate to the response of geophysical well
logsP6) Initial attempts to recognize clay types from
well logs have focused on natural gamma ray spectral
logging information(l3,48,49) which provides con-
tinuous downhole measurements of total natural
radioactivity and the individual concentrations of
radioactive potassium. uranium, and thorium. In
many formations this concept has yielded satisfactory
results.
SPE 10796
Furthermore, a more generalized model was propos-
ed, which relates all available logging measurements
via analytical regression-type techniques to the ex-
pected clay types.(S0,51) Natural radioactivity measure-
ments were found to be statistically significant for
estimating the volumes of feldspar, kaolinite, and
chlorite from log data. Unfortunately the details of the
numerical technique applied were not discussed.
Recently, use of the "cation exchange capacity I
hydrogen index of dry clay," i.e. CEC/HI, ratio has
been proposed as a clay mineralogy indicator(29,49).
Seen in Table I, illites and chlorites exhibit similar
CEC values, whereas the H I value of dry chlorite is
three times greater than that of illite. While kaolinite
has the lowest CEC and high HI value of dry clay,
montmorillonite (smectites) have the highest CEC and
low H I values. For different types of clays, the ratio of
CEC/HI varies as follows:
CEC/HI Average CEC/HI
Kaolinite 0.08- 0.7 0.25
Chlorite 0.3- 1.1 0.7
Illite 0.8- 3.3 2.1
Montmorillonite 6.1-11.5 8.8
CLASS, a digital shaly sand evaluation approach,
provides log-derived calculations of cation exchange
capacity (CEC) and hydrogen index of dry clay (H I)
and, hence, gives a log-derived estimate of the clay
types present in a reservoir rock.o 6) No core data is re-
quired for the CLASS Epilog@ Analysis.
The innovative interpretation concepts utilized in
CLASS are based on density, neutron and natural
gamma ray spectral logging data which allow the
determination of two variable parameters, clay density
(Pel) and neutron response to 1000"/0 clay (N eI ), at every
depth point in a reservoir rock. Accurate determina-
tion of these two parameters requires the clay volume
to be obtained as precisely as possible. This is achieved
by applying the "product index" which calculates the
clay volume from both thorium and potassium
simultaneously and is essentially independent of the
clay types.
This clay volume and the response of the compen-
sated density and neutron logs then define the clay line
on a density~neutron crossplot. (Fig. 1) Finally, to
calculate at each depth point the values of Pc\ and Nc\,
the ratio of the log-derived potassium content to the
clay volume. the potassium index, is also taken into
consideration. Having determined Pc\' Nc\. and Vc\
both values for CEC and H I can be calculated and a
log-derived clay-typing is achieved. The flow chart,
and mathematical concepts of the CLASS approach
has previously been published in detaiU l6 )
SPE 10796 N. RUHOVETS AND WALTER H. FERTL
CLAY MINERAL DISTRIBUTION
Distribution of clay minerals in a potential reservoir
rock to a large degree controls effective porosity.
effective water saturation, permeability and, hence,
interval producibility.
Laminated, dispersed, structural, and the combina~
tions of the former encompass the main types of clay
distribution. Since laminated clay replaces sand grains
and pore space, while dispersed clay replaces only pore
space and structural clay replaces only sand grains, the
possible combinations of these types of clay distribu-
tion in a given point can be only as follows: laminated-
structural clay or laminated - dispersed clay.
Any of these types of clay mineral distributions
reduce the clean sandstone porosity (~max) to an effec-
tive reservoir porosity (~c) in a well-defined fashion,
such as:
Laminated clay ~e = ~max (1 Vel) (4)
Dispersed clay ~e ~max (5)
Structural clay ~e = ~max (6)
In case the effective reservoir porosity is only a
function of clay volume and type distribution, the lat-
ter can be determined from the relationship between
porosity in the clean sand, effective porosity in shaly
sand, and the volume .of clay.
Laminated clay present in shaly reservoirs can be ex-
pressed as:
(7)
This volume of laminated clay is compared to clay
volume Vel determined from a Density-Neutron
crossplot or another clay indicator. Three conditions
may exist:(I6)
1. Vell = Vel Laminated clay only is present.
(Equ. 7)
2. Vel < VcI- Laminated and structural clays are
pre~ent.Since Equation (7) gives proper volume of
laminated clay, the volume of structural clay (V clS)
can be defined as:
3. Vcl > Vcl dispersed or combination of dis-
per~ed and laminated clays are present; thus, Equa-
tion (7) does not give the proper amount of
laminated clay. Since no structural clay is present,
the individual volumes of dispersed and laminated
clays can be found as follows:
Volume of clay filling the pore space (V dp) is
defined as:
(9)
with the volume of laminated clay (V cllM) which
replaces the sand matrix expressed as:
(10)
The part of laminated clay which replaces the pore
space is defined as:
[V cl - (~max ~e}] .-. ~max
(11 )
1 - ~max
Total volume of laminated clay then can be ex-
pressed as:
..k..k
('Ymax - 'Ye)] (1 + -----' )
~max
1 ~max
(12)
(~max ~max)
and the volume of dispersed clay (V dD) is
calculated as:
(13)
CASE HISTORIES
The newly developed clay analysis and shaly sand
evaluation model (CLASS) was tested on many wells
and results are quite satisfactory regarding clay
volume, types, and distribution, as well as, evaluation
of basic properties of shaly reservoirs (CEC, Qv,
porosity, water saturation). Two examples from dif-
ferent U.S. areas are briefly described below. In both
cases the conventional approach could not provide
satisfactory results in log interpretation.
Case 1
The well is located in the southern U.S. According
to the core and log data, the formation consists of
shaly to very shaly sands and shales with the cleanest
portion containing 17070 to 50070 clay. (Fig. 2) All ma-
jor types of clay are present, but montmorillonite is
the dominant clay type. The comparison of core and
log derived CEC values shows their reasonable cor-
relation. (Tab. III) The relatively high accuracy of
CEC determination on the basis of log interpretation
is also proven by the goo,d correlation of CEC and
ratios CEC/HI derived from the logs and the mont-
morillonite content in fines determined by x-ray dif-
fraction analysis of cores. (Tab. III) Also, similar
hydrocarbon saturation and porosities have been
received from both core analysis and log interpreta-
tion. (Tab. III, Fig. 2)
 VOLUMES, TYPES, AND DISTRIBUTION OF CLAY MINERALS
IN RESERVOIR ROCKS BASED ON WELL LOGS
Case 2
The well is located in the northern U.S. The forma-
tion is composed mostly of shales and thin laminaes of
siltstone which can be permeable and saturated with
hydrocarbons (predominantly gas). Application of
CLASS program for log interpretation shows several
thin intervals with relatively high effective porosity (up
to 15-20Il7o) and very high effective hydrocarbon
saturation. (Fig. 3) Effective permeabilities are low
although higher for hydrocarbons than for water, thus
marginal production of hydrocarbons can be ex-
pected. CEC are very low while hydrogen index
changes from about 0.2 to 0.4 indicating the presence
of such clays as illite, chlorite, and kaolinite. Ac-
cording to core data, illites and chlorites are the basic
types of clay present in this formation.
Natural gamma ray spectral measurements indicate
a very high uranium content in all hydrocarbon bear-
ing zones suggesting silt laminae in these intervals.
(Fig. 4)
CONCLUSIONS
1. The CLASS Epilog~ based on the Density,
Neutron, and Spectralog combination provides a
realistic and detailed evaluation of shaly sand reser-
voirs.
2. Effective and total porosities and fluid saturations,
bound water content in clays, hydrogen index of
dry clay (HI), CEC and Q v are calculated.
3. Natural gamma ray spectral data provide reliable
clay volume estimates independent of the type of
clay minerals present.
4. Based on log-derived values for HI and CEC the
predominant clay types present in subsurface for-
mations can be determined continuously.
5. An innovative analytical model has been developed
to determine from logging information the type of
clay distribution, such as dispersed, laminated, or
structural.
6. Two examples are presented to illustrate recent
field experiences, where conventional log analysis
did not provide satisfactory results.
REFERENCES
1. Grimm, R.E. Clay Mineralogy, 2nd Edition,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., New York City,
1968.
2. Yaalon, D.H. Mineral Composition of the Average
Shale, Clay Minerals BUll., pp 31~36.
72
SPE 10796
3. Larionov, V.V. Borehole Radiometry, Nedra,
Moskwa, 1969.
4. Stieber, S.J. Pulsed Neutron Capture Log
Evaluation in the Louisiana Gulf Coast, (SPE
2961). 45th SPE of AIME Fall Meeting, Houston,
Texas, October 1980.
5. Clavier, C., Hoyle, W., and Meunier, D. Quan-
titative Interpretation of Thermal Neutron Decay
Time Logs, Part I, Fundamentals and Techni-
ques. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 1971, pp
743-755.
6. Frost, E., and Fertl, W. H. Integrated Core and
Log Analysis Concepts in Shaly Clastic Reser-
voirs, The Log Analyst, Marchi April 1981, pp
3-16.
7. Howard, J.J. Mixed-layer Clays in Eocene Inter-
laminated Shales and Sandstones, Annual
AAPG-SEPM Meeting, Houston, Texas, April
1-4, 1979.
8. Poupon, A., Loy, M.E., and Tixier, M.P. A
Contribution to Electric Log Interpretation in
Shaly Sands, Journal of Petroleum Technology,
August 1954.
9. DeWitte, L. Relation Between Resistivities and
Fluid Contents of Porous Rocks, Oil and Gas
Journal, August 24, 1950, pp 120-132.
10. Alger, R.P., et. al. Formation Density Log Ap-
plications in Liquid-Filled Holes, Journal of
Petroleum Technology, March 1963.
11. Simandoux, D. Measures Dielectriques en Milieu
Poreaux, Application a Mesure des Saturations en
Eau, Etude Comportement des Marrifs Argilleaus,
Review French Petroleum Institute, 1963, Sup-
plementary Issue pp 193-215.
12. Lawrence, T. Proposed Spectralog Product Index
for Clay Volumes. Interoffice Correspondence,
Dresser Atlas, Houston, 1980.
13. Fertl, W.H. Gamma Ray Spectral Data Assists in
Complex Formation Evaluation, Transactions 6th
European SPWLA Formation Evaluation Sym-
posium, March 1979; The Log Analyst, 1979, pp
3-38.
14. Waxman, M.H., and Smits, L.J.M. Electrical
Conductivities in Oil Bearing Shaly Sands, SPE
Journal. June 1968, pp 107-122.
15. Clavier, C., Coates, G., and Dumanoir, J.L. The
Theoretical and Experimental Basis for the Dual
Water Model for the Interpretation of Shaly For-
mations, (SPE 6859). SPE of AIME Fall Meeting,
Denver, Colorado, October 9~ 12, 1977.
SPE 10796 N. RUHOVETS AND WALTER H. FERTL
16. Ruhoveh, N., and Fertl, W.H. Digital Shaly Sand
Analysis Based on Waxman-Smits Model and
Log-derived Clay Typing, Transactions 7th Euro-
pr>an ,)'PWLA ,))mposium, SAID/SPWLA,
Paris, France, October 21-23,1981.
17. Worthington, A.E. An Automated Method for
the Measurement of Cation Exchange Capacity of
Rocks, Geophysics, February 1973, pp 140-153.
18. Bush, D.C., and Jenkins, R.E., CEC Determina-
tions by Correlation with Absorbed Water, Tran-
sac/ions SPWLA (paper H). 1977.
19. Keelan, D.K , and McGinley, D.C. Application
of Cation Exchange Capacity in a Study of the
Shannon Sand of Wyoming, Transactions
SPWLA (paper W). 1979.
20. Koeperich, E.A. Utilization of Waxman-Smits
Equations for Determining Oil Saturation in a
Low-salinity, Shaly Sand Reservoir, lournal of
Petroleum Technology, October 1975, pp
1204-1208.
21. Johnson, W. Effect of Shaliness on Log
Responses, CWLS lournal, June 1979, pp 29-57.
22. Smits, L.J.M. SP Log Interpretation in Shaly
Sands, Society of Petroleum Engineers lournal,
June 1968, pp 123-136; Transactions AIME, pp
243.
23. Kolodzie, St. Analysis of Pore Throat Size and
Use of the Waxman-Smits Equation to Determine
OOIP in Spindle Field, Colorado, (SPE 9382).
55th Annual SPE of AIME Fall Meeting, Dallas,
Texas, September 21-24, 1980.
24. Johnson, W.L., and Linke, W.A. Some Practical
Applications to Improve Formation Evaluation
of Sandstones in the McKenzie Delta (paper C).
Transactions SPWLA, 1978.
25. Donovan, W.S., and Hilchie, D.W. Natural
Gamma Ray Emissions in the Muddy J. Forma-
tion in Easter Wyoming, The Log Analyst, 22 (2):
17-22.
26. Hoyer, W.A., and Rumble, R.C. Dielectric Con-
stant of Rocks as a Petrophysical Parameter
(paper 0). Transactions SPWLA, 1976.
27. Kern, J.W., Hoyer, W.A., and Spann, M.M.
Low Porosity Gas Sand Analysis Using Cation
Exchange and Dielectric Constant Data (paper
PP). Transactions SPWLA, 1976.
28. Lavers, B.A., and Smits, L.J .M., Some Fun-
damental Problems of Formation Evaluation in
the North Sea, The Log Analyst, October 1975,
pp 1-10.
29. Juhasz, I. The Central Role of Q v and Formation
Water Salinity in the Evaluation of Shaly Forma-
tions (paper AA). Transactions SPWLA, 1979.
30. Neuman, C.H. Log and Core Measurements of
Oil in Place, San Joaquin Valley, lournal of
Petroleum Technology, August 1980, pp
1309-1315.
31. Howells, H.M., and Wilkinson, l.R.
Petrophysical Evaluation of the Farewell Struc-
ture and Reservoirs, Mackenzie Delta (paper I).
Transactions 6th Formation Evaluation Sym-
posium, CWLS, Calgary, October 24-26, 1977.
32. Chestnut, D.A., and Cox, D.O. Log Analysis in
the Rocky Mountain Heavy Oil Reservoir, Trans-
actions SPWLA, 1978.
33. Patchett, J.G. An Investigation of Shale Conduc-
tivity (paper U). Transactions SPWLA, 1975.
34. Hill, H.J., Shirley, 0.1., and Klein, G.E. Bound
Water in Shaly Sands-Its Relation to Q v and
Other Formation Properties, The Log A nalys!,
May/ June 1979, pp 3-19.
35. Frost, E., and Fertl, W.H. Integrated Core and
Log Analysis Concepts in Shaly Clastic Reservoir
Rocks, Transactions CWLS, Calgary, 1979.
36. Fertl, W.H., and Frost, E. Evaluation of Shaly
Clastic Reservoir Rocks, lournal of Petroleum
Technology, September 1980, pp 1641-1645.
37. Tsunashima, A., Brindley, G.W., and Bastovanov,
M. Absorption of Uranium from Solutions by
Montmorillonite; Compositions and Properties of
Uranyl Montmorillonites, Clay and Clay
Minerals, 29 (1): 1981, pp 10-17.
38. Van Olphen, H.J. Clay Colloid Chemistry, New
York, London, Sidney: Interscience Publishers,
1965.
39. Weaver, C.E., and Pollard, L.D. The Chemistry
of Clay Minerals, Amsterdam-New York:
Elsevier Scientific Publishing, 1975, pp 213.
40. Neasham, J.W. The Morphology of Dispersed
Clay in Sandstone Reservoirs and Its Effect on
Sandstone Shaliness, Pore Space and Fluid Flow
Properties, (SPE 6858). SPE of AIME 52nd An-
nual Fall Meeting, Denver, Colorado, October
9-12, 1977.
73
 VOLUMES, TYPES, AND DISTRIBUTION OF CLAY MINERALS
IN RESERVOIR ROCKS BASED ON WELL LOGS
41. Wilson, M.D., and Pittman, E.D. Authigenic
Clays in Sandstones: Recognition and Influence
on Reservoir Properties and Paleoenvironmental
Analysis, Journal Sedimentary Petrology, 47:
1977, pp 3-31.
42. Gaida, K.H., Ruhl, W., and Zimmele, W.
Rasterelektronen Mikroskopische Untersuchungen
des Porenraumes von Sandsteinen, Erdoel Erdgas
Zeitschrift, 85: 1973, pp 379-390.
43. Wilson, M.D. Origins of Clays Controlling
Permeability in Tight Gas Sands, (SPE/DOE
9843). SPE/DOE Low Permeability Symposium,
Denver, Colorado, May 27-29, 1981.
44. Shelton, J.W. Authigenic Kaolinite in Sandstone,
Journal Sedimentary Petrology, 34: 1964, pp
102-111.
45. Webb, J .E. Relation of Oil Migration to Secon-
dary Clay Cementation, Cretaceous Sandstones,
Wyoming, AAPG Bulletin, 58: 1974, pp
2245-2249.
46. Wilson, H.H. "Frozen-in" Hydrocarbon Ac-
cumulations on Diagenetic Traps-Exploration
Targets, AAPG Bulletin, 61: 1977, pp 483-491.
47. AI-Shaieb, Z., and Shelton, J.W. Migration of
Hydrocarbons and Secondary Porosity in Sand-
SPE 10796
stones, AAPG Bulletin, 65 (11): 1981, pp
2433-2436.
48. Hassan, M.A., Hossin, M., and Combaz, A.
Fundamentals of the Differential Gamma Ray
Log-Interpretation Technique, (paper H), Tran-
sactions SPWLA, 1976.
49. Juhasz, I. Normalized Qy - The Key to Shaly
Sand Evaluation Using the Waxman-Smits Equa-
tion in the Absence of Core Data, (paper Z),
Transactions SPWLA, 1981.
50. Serra, 0., Baldwin, J., and Quirein, J. Theory,
Interpretation and Practical Applications of
Natural Gamma Ray Specroscopy, Transactions
SPWLA, 1980.
51. Quirein, l.A., Baldwin, J.L., Terry, R.L., and
Hendrix, M. Estimation of Clay Types and
Volumes from Well Log Data - An extension of
the Global Method, (Paper B). 8th Formation
Evaluation Symposium, Canadian Well Logging
Society, Calgary, Canada, September 27-30,
1981.
52. Juhasz, I. Normalized Qy the Key to Shaly
Sand Evaluation Using the Waxman-Smits Equa-
tion in the Absence of Core Data, Transactions
SPWLA, June 23-26, 1981.
7.4
 TABLE I
CLAY MINERALS PARAMETERS IMPORTANT IN FORMATION EVALUATION(36)

SPECTRAL GAMMA RAY

HYDROGEN CATION EXCHANGE DISTRIBUTION (avg.)
CLAY DENSITY INDEX CAPACITY C ec Potassium Uranium Thorium
MINERALS COMPOSITION REMARKS P cl(g/cmJ) HI (meq/l00g) K(%) U(ppm) 'Th(ppm)
-----
Chlorite Low water absorptive properties As 260-296 034 10·m
coating and or pore hrldglng In reservOir
pore space Small effect on resistivity
measurement dlJe to 'noderate surLKe
area

illite No absorbed water As coating (pore- 264-269 012 10-40 45 1 5 < 20

lining} and'or pore bridging In reservoir
pore space Reduce resistivity measure-
ments Moderate surface area
2 Biotite As pore bndglng and or trl1n 2 73 2 012 6 1-83 <001
K2{Mg,Fe t )64(Fe +3,AI.TI}O 2 )
mica seams as laminae In
( reservOir rock
[SI6-SAI2-302010o-2(OH,F)4-2
MUSCOVite DrastiC eflect on vertical 2 76-30 o 13 79-98 <001
permeability

Kaolinite "Patchy' Kaolinite as dls- Theoretical 261 036 3-15 042 1 5-3.0 6-19
crete particles In reservOir denSity
pore space As mIgrating
hnes creating Internal for- ExtenSive 260-268
mahon damage Small Literature
effect on reslslv1ty
measurements Low surface Most Ire- 263
area quently
quoted

Smectltes (".,Ca.Na)0,7(AI.Mg.Fe)4(SI.Al)s020(OH)4 MontmOrillonIte. montronlte As coall ng 2 20-2 70 013 80-150 016 20-5 a 14-24
and/or pore bridging In reservOIf pore
space Cntlcal to phYSical and chemical
formatIon damage Large reducing effect
on resistivity measurements High surface
area

LOW-Iron smectIte 253

36% Iron content 2 74

·Oata in this table compiled

Bentonite < 05 '-20 6-50
from extensive literature.
 TABLE II
LOG·DERIVED CLAY CONTENT INDICATORS(36)
LOGGING CURVE MA THEMA TICAL RHA TIONSHIP FAVORABLE CONDITONS UNFAVORABLE CONDITIONS

; 1,0 -"
POTENTIAL shaly sands
(SP·curve)
c< 1.0 as function of
clay type
V" 1.0 C Xu
1.0 " log Allog I(A - V,, X B)/(l ~. V" X Bll Knowledge of several parameters required, including
a. R" R", R." Similar limitations as tor straight
where A R,/R"" forward SP equations
B R.lR"
1.0 " (KV"W)/(KV"W + I2IS K = log derived coefficient, W clay porosity from
bulk and matrix p, ,; S", = flushed zone water saturation;
laboratory·derived, too many requirements.

GAMMA RAY Only clay minerals are Radioactive minerals other

radioactive. than clays (mica, feldspar,
silt)

V, C(GR GR"..l/(GR "" - GR ffl ,,) C< 1 ,0, frequently Only potassium·deficient
approximately 0.5 when kaolinite present. Uranium
V,,<40% enrichment in permeable
fractured zones

V,, (GR - W)/Z area Radiobarite scales on

casing, Severe washouts
(<<GR)

V, = 033(2'" 10)" Highty consolidated and Younger, unconsolidated

Mesozoic rocks rocks

°
V, '" 083(2' - 10)'
'where Vsh = (GR - GR~")/(GR~,,, GR_",)
Tertiary clastics Older consolidated rocks

SPECTRALOG V" (A A.. ,,,)/(A .. ,,, - Am,,,) Conditions similar to Similar to gamma ray
Gamma ray spectrat gamma ray discussion discussion
logging provides A SpectralOg readings However, uranium enrich·
Individual (K in %, Th in ppm), ment in permeable,
measurements of A.. ", minimum value fractured zones and radio-
potassium (K, %) (K or Th) in clean zones barite buildUP are no
and thorium (Th, V" = 0.33(2"" 1.0)' A,,,,,, maximum values limitations.
ppm) content (K, in essentially If Th·curve is used,
pure localized bentonite streaks
V"=0 083(2' -1.0)' should be ignored.
'where Vsh = (A -- A""")/(A,,," A.",,)
RESISTIVITY V" (R,JR,)'" Low porosity zones High porosity waler sand,
If several (Carbonate, marls), pay high R" values
resistivity logs zones with lOw (S. - S. ,f.
are available,
use the one which where b 10 R, ,/R,from 0.5 to 1.0
exhibits highest b 2.0 R" approaches R,.
resistivity values
in subject well

V,, IR,,(R .. ,," R,)/IR,(R .. ,- R.)j}'" In clean hydrocarbon

bearing zones one
calculates V" =0,
v,, = same as above,
where
(lib) 1.0 when R.JR,;.0.5
(lib) 0,5/(1 - R,,/R,) when RJR,<0.5

NEUTRON V" 121,/(1)". High gas saturation or 0", is low,

very low reserVOir
porosity

V" (O, 121,,,,)/(0,, 0,,,,) can be vaned

0 ffl .,.
PULSED NEUTRON V" (2 2 .. ")/(2 .. ,, 2 .. ,,,) Fresh water environment
low porosity and gas
bearing zones

V" calcu lates lero In

clean lones,
DENSITY ,N EUTRON p, .. (0,.... 101 0, ·(P .. " p,) p, '0, .. + P .. " Too low V" In prOlific
v,, gas zones
(p" , p,)'(0'ffl 10)·- (121, .• - 1 O)"(P .. , - p.)

Don't use with severe

hole conditions

Lithology affected
DENSITY ACOUSTIC
V"
(6t~" 6t,)'(p, p,) (p~ P,)'(b\.. 6t,)
Less dependent on Badly washed out, wellbores
lithology and fluid
conditions than DEN,NEU Highly undercompacted
crossplot formations (shallow,
overpressur,es)
Use in gauge boreholes

NEUTRON·ACOUSTIC 0, '(6t~, 61.) 6t'(0,~" - 10) X L\L + 0'ffl,' 6t,

V,.
(6t~" 6I,)'(0N" 10) (0N_" 10) (6t" 61,)
Use only In gas bearing Similar effects due to
zones with low S•. shaliness on both logs
 TABLE III
COMPARISON OF CORE-AND LOG-DERIVED RESERVOIR PARAMETERS (CASE 1)

CORE DATA LOG DATA

*FINES FRACTION «5/J), %

DEPTH SO 0 K Vel CEC
GEG GEG HI - -
S"
Hid"
M I KA CH Q F CA
X091 51 25.5 10 38 56 10 9 4 6 13 15 030 072 0
X092 6.' 143 099 13.9 26 0.20 136 0
X097 5.8 22.5 4.7 47 7 3 10 7 18 53 10 0.29 070 10
X102 6.1 26.4 29 51 55 4 6 4 10 14 32 0.17 1.86 0
9.4 32 0.18 173
X103
Xl06
1.0
122
19.1
29.4
2.2
1150 45 44 10 12 7 8 1 18 18 0.19 159 °
14
24 16 31 0.24 1.11 27
Xl09
Xl14
10.3
3.6
14.3
27.3
24.8
33,7
167
99
43
50
36
34
23
5
4
7
3
16
13
9
12
7
13
15
21
°
1
26
50
5
7
7
0,31
0.27
0.65
0.91
18
22
X118
X124 17.0 27,4 18 52 7 2 12 15 17 2 45 12,3 9 0.22 1.17 16
X127 3,0 29.8 6.2 14.4 12 0,29 0.77 15
X128 69 23.2 1,4 12.0 9 0.28 078 16

• M :::: Montmorillonite. I = Illite, KA = Kaolin Ite, CH = Chlorite, A = Quartz. silt, F = Feldspar. CA = Calcite
No Data

2.0

~<v
2.2
~J...
"V
"
0-
9;-0
MONTMORILLON ITE
0
u
u
~~
0, ~Q
0~
>"
I-
(fJ
Z
2.4
«I t:
u"V
UJ
0
~
...J
:J ILLITE
[])

KAOLIN ITE-CH LORITE

2.6

2.8
o 20 40
NEUTRON, POROSITY, %

Fig. 1 - Location of clay mineral groupings on density-neutron crossplot(16)

 POROSITY AND FLUIDS FORMATION
DEPTH LITHOLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS FLUID ANALYSIS BULK VOLUME BULK VOLUME
100

CI:C TOTAL WAH~ £:!:!:ECTIVI: TOTAL POROSlrY

EF!:ECTIVE
SAru~ATION POROSITY POROSlrY
PI: RMI:ABI LI TY
INDI:XI:S 100 "0 50 o 50 ao
a rneqll00 g 100 -------.+------+------~ QUART Z
-------- I:FFECTIVE HYDROCARBON HYDROCARBON
." ... ..... .
HYDROCARBON HYDROGEN WATER
SILT
SATURATION
a 50 INDEX OF
100°0
DRY CLAY 100 Q BOUND
CLAYS
WATER
LAMINATED
WATER
HYDROCARBON ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ ::. ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ O~_~:.,~:.',~:.: : -:.,:.: : -,:.: : -':.: : -~.: : _.~:-:~,-:':':-: ':-:'.:;":-:_~
'
o 50
-------- VOLUME
CECIHI DRY"
o x SHR 25 DISPERSED
CALIPER
HYCARBWATER 0 15 20 o 20
~---------------.t_---..:.....;.,...;...;....;...._I

HYDROCARBON
WEIGHT
........",

o ,~xSHRxpH 25
:- ------ - - - -- --
p..:-: L:"--- (-
1:-__ 1:-_
L-- ._

;-...

~:~-- [:-:...-.~ :.---. ~

l-:"-r:"--:"- ,-- ,-- ,.,.
l-_-. 1-
>< ilI".- L-
o ~__ I:-_- . __ . __-~ ...
o
1:"- ._- --..,

1:::-.

.x
lJ1
o

Fig. 2 - CLASS epilog in tertiary sand/shale sequence along U.S. Gulf Coast (Case 1)
 PRODUCTION & LITHOLOGIC FLUID FORMATION
BULK
DE-PTH CHARACTERISTICS ANALYSiS POROSITY AND FLCIDS VOLUME
BULK VOLUME

CEe EFFECTIVE TOTAL

EFFECTIVE TOTAL WATER
MEQ/l00G SATURATION POROSITY POROSITY
PERMEABILITY
ROCK
INDEXES:

.1

VOLUME-
WEIGHT CALIPER(-)BIT SIZE

-4 0 12
r-T-,-T-l

~::
I

t,

I:;.

j--
• -

Fig. 3 - CLASS epilog in shale/siltstone formation in northern U.S. (Case 2)

 GAMMA RAY SPECTRALOG
API UNITS DEPTH COUNTS PER MINUTE

Potassium <'S%/CO) 10
0

Uranium (2 PPM leo)

1----- -------- ---------
0 24

Thorium (7PPM/CD)
0 200 ,~- - " ....... - - - - - - - - ~ - --
0 42

D L--P- .......
r- .~~
... .::t

R.
"0
;

c..... p - - -. -- , '"
.'
rz
~,....
t-- I~
~

i--...

V --~
- - -
I--
~ t- "...;,

.-.-
( .--"
c::
t::> '!..
---... - '.
c"'- <;~ . "

'-.... t'--. ~tl '1-~

(-
~ ~ - r-
~
---- -- I--
---
- -
:

--
.:'
""'---r -.... I

'-- -- '-
c: ~ c:::: ~:.:: -
F: I-- t--- to-- .k: II
r.:--
---
.-
-.
c::: t-- p
- ....
I.e- ~
.c:::
Rp. --- -- 1-- J!.. ..... ..
-"-

,-
~

v~
<r-- ~ "'- c:- -' '.

.....
v
V
"') ;'
-
---::
",,- -" '.
:
~
L ~ 1..£ V
.t._
-. - ....
~ -< t--
r-- -- - ~
<~
b r - -- 1--
.-
~ .... <C "

~[)
II,
,Ct' :

.... ~ - I=~~
-~
....
~ , -:.~

",
-
K ~h
r- -
i-'"....
" - "

~
f
'-.,
::..

:>
~ ~ ..
r-
....
j
:

..... t;:t
l--
p r"'_
..... :
(
l"- I--
~
15' "(
-- --
-=-!: .~- --~
'.
c~ t--.
~-

1,.- ~
~"";;..
1-_
:
I~ "l....
«: t:> ......
-- .-
V ,f
1\0 ...
~-
~
..
<V ~ ~ ;
t' -',

> D0- .::'{-,.

~
(5) (p
~
-
b ~ ....

.. I--
- ~~
./ '-
-- -: ,-- -I--
---
i--

- 10---
-- - - -- I-"... ""' ... -- i--

Fig. 4 - Natural gamma ray spectral information (spectralog) over shale/siltstone

formation in northern U.S. (Case 2)