Chapter 4

Reservoir Parameters for Shaly Sand Reservoir: A Case Study

The case study is based on the interpretation of well log data for a shaly sand reservoir
from a particular field of Eastern offshore basin, India. Available data is in three different
tracks. Track 1 includes caliper and gamma logs in meters and API units respectively. Track
2 includes resistivity data both LLD and LLS in ohm-m respectively. Track 3 includes two
porosity logs namely Neutron Log and Density log in gm/cc. Well Log record is shown in
Annexure.
The data has been interpreted manually and by using excel for reservoir parameters
estimation of this particular field. Data from well log data have been digitized at 0.1524
meter interval.

Fig 4.1 Layout preparation for different Log types

4.1. Identifying the Reservoir

For this particular log data the reservoir zones of interest have been identified by
using the combination of all available logs. The most reliable indicator of reservoir rock will
be from the behavior of the density/neutron logs, with the density moving to the left (low
density) and touching or crossing the neutron curve. In clastic reservoirs in nearly all cases
this will correspond to a fall in the gamma ray (GR) log. In a few reservoirs, the GR is not a
reliable indicator of sand, due to the presence in sands of radioactive minerals.
Shales can be clearly identified as zones where the density lies to the right of the neutron.
The greater the crossover between the density and neutron logs, the better the quality of the
reservoir.

4.2. Identifying the fluid type and contacts:

If regional information is available regarding the positions of any gas/oil contact (GOC)
or oil/water contact (OWC), then convert these subsea depths in to measured depths in the
current well and mark them on the logs.

If the formation pressures have already been measured, then any information on possible free
water levels (FWLs) or GOCs can also be marked on the log.

Start by comparing the density and deepest reading resistivity log for any evidence of
hydrocarbons. In the classic response the resistivity and density (and also GR) will be seen to
follow each other to the left or right in water sands and to be a mirror image of each other in
hydrocarbon sands. However, some hydrocarbon/water zones will not exhibit such behavior,
the reasons being:

• When the formation-water salinity is very high, the resistivity may also drop in clean
sands.
• In shaly sand zones having a high proportion of conductive dispersed shales, the
resistivity may also fail to rise in reservoir zones.
• If the sands are thinly laminated between shales then also resistivity may remain low.
For this particular log data the reservoir zones of interest have been identified by using the
combination of all available logs. As stated earlier gas zones will exhibit a greater
density/neutron crossover than oil zones. In very clean porous sands any GOC can be
identified on the log relatively easily.
I have proposed here so many ways like crossplots, shale baseline shifts to identify gas zones,
oil and water bearing zones and their contacts in a reliable manner. I have interpreted the
given depth of interval comprising three different fluids of gas, oil and water. From the above
I have made the zonation depending on fluid type.

Reservoir extends from a depth of 4220.06 m to 4309.976 m that is almost 90 meter

thick reservoir. This 90 meter thick reservoir consist of several packets of potential zones and
others very thin reservoir units. Potential zones include:
Zone 1: 4220.06 - 4264.71
Zone 2: 4264.71 - 4289.70
Zone 3: 4289.70 - 4309.97
These all zones have been interpretated for their reservoir parameters estimation.

HC ZONE IDENTIFICAT

Fig 4.2 Hydrocarbon Zone identification

 Fig 4.3 Zonation based on N-D Cross plot data and pressure plot data

4.3. Parameters Estimation

All the parameters have been estimated for the given well log data.

4.3.1. Formation Water Resistivity Estimation

The following two methods have been used in order to estimate the formation water
resistivity. These include:
Archie’s Equation
Pickett Plot

For Archie’s equation a zone which seems to be clean, having low resistivity and 100
percent saturated with water have been selected. Formation water resistivity has been found
to be 0.09 ohm-m. For further interpretation a value of 0.09 ohm-m was chosen for
formation water resistivity.

4.3.3. Volume of shale Estimation

Volume of shale for this particular case has been estimated by using two methods.
They are Gamma method and Neutron-Density method.

From gamma ray log

Vsh_GR = (GR-GRmin ) / (GRmax - GRmin )

GR = Gamma ray log reading

GRmin = Gamma ray log reading in 100% clean zone
GRmax = Gamma ray log reading 100% shale
All readings are API units

Vsh from Neutron – Density:

Vsh_ND = (φ N-φ D) / (φ N_sh -φ )
D_sh

Where
Vsh_ND = volume of shale
φ D = Porosity from Density
φ N = Neutron porosity
φ D_sh = Shale density
φ N_sh = Shale Neutron porosity

Vsh from N-D: (In Gas bearing zones)

Vsh_ND = (φ D-φ N(φ D/φ N)max) / (φ -φ

D_sh N_sh (φ D/φ N)max)
Where
 Vsh_ND = volume of shale
φ D = Porosity from Density
φ N = Neutron porosity
(φ D/φ N)max = Maximum ratio from interested zone

The limits are under the tolerance limit so one may consider the zones as relatively clean
with minor amount of shaly component present in the zones of interest.

4.3.4. Effective Porosity Estimation

In order to calculate formation water resistivity and water saturation, there requires only
one porosity that is effective porosity. Porosity estimated should be corrected for volume of
shale and compaction. After correcting the porosities they should be plotted on cross plot
charts and an estimate of effective porosity can be done. The other method uses mathematical
equation for estimating effective porosities.

Effective Porosity Estimation:

φ e = φ t – Vsh_min*φ t_sh

φ e = effective porosity
φ t = total porosity
φ t_sh = total porosity of shale
Vsh_min = minimum of shale volume calculated from logs (GR, N-D etc.)

• (0.3*PHIN+0.7PHID) for gas bearing zones

• (PHIN+PHID)/2 for water or oil bearing zones
Zone-1 Zone-2

Zone-3

Fig 4.4 Shale volume and Porosity estimation for all three zones
4.3.5. Water Saturation Estimation

The ultimate aim of any log interpretation is to estimate the water saturation. As far as
shaly sand types of reservoirs are concerned, various equations and models have been
proposed for estimating the water saturation. The most common and widely used are Archie’s
equation, Indonesian Equation and Dual water model. Archie’s equation has been used for
estimating water saturation for the zones of the interest.

Generalized Archie’s equation is:

Here

Here, Φ denotes the porosity,

Sw is the brine saturation,

m is the cementation exponent of the rock (usually in the range 1.8–2.0),

n is the saturation exponent (usually close to 2) and

a is the tortuosity factor.

4.3.6. Petrophysical Cut-offs:

Effective porosity ≥ 0.06

Water Saturation ≤ 0.85

Volume of Shale ≤ 0.9

4.3.6 Gross to Net calculation:

Pay: Thickness of productive reservoir

Gross Pay: Total vertical interval of productive zone
Net Pay: Thickness of actual productive intervals, excluding intervening non productive
layers.
 Fig 4.5 Difference b/n Net pay and Gross pay
4.4. Results and Discussions
The results obtained after detailed interpretation for all zones of interest can be
summarized as:
Formation Water Resistivity (Rw) 0.09 ohm-meters
Lithology Clean Sand, shaly sand with some
intercalations of calcite steaks
Average Vsh
Average Phie
Average Swe
Fluid Type Major Gas, minor Oil, and a water zone.

Hydrocarbon Pore Thickness

Gross Pay
Net Pay Zone 1:
Zone 2:
Zone 3:

For the given well all the reservoir parameters has been estimated manually. Based on
these estimated values of parameters, well can be considered as potentially viable for
production having hydrocarbon saturation about 31-88%. However there are certain points
which have to be discussed in order to interpret the well correctly.

Volume of shale for all zones of interest has been calculated by using all available
methods and a lower value has been chosen.
 One of the most important parameter for characterizing a reservoir is its effective
porosity. A reservoir in order to be called potentially viable should have good values of
effective porosity. But the porosities derived from these logs have effect of presence of shale,
compaction and others. So they should be corrected in order to estimate effective porosity.
Density and neutron porosities have been corrected for volume of shale. Cross plots and
mathematical formulas have been used for estimating effective porosities for all zones.

The ultimate aim of any log interpretation is to estimate its water saturation. Various
methods have been used for estimating water saturation for this well. Which method will give
right value depend on a number of parameters. These include type of shale present in the
reservoir, lithology and available data. For zones having a shale volume less than 9%
Archie’s saturation equation have been used for estimating water saturation.
.