Grain Size Analysis

February 24, 2011

Lab Section 002, Thursday

Performance Rating
Manager:

Ashok Bhusal

_______________________

____

Researcher:

Garrett Rachal

_______________________

____

Technician:

Hussain Al-Merza

_______________________

____

Analyst:

Jafar Alzaid

_______________________

____

Researcher:

Khoa Dao

_______________________

____

Editor:

Justin Rasor

_______________________

____

Academic Integrity Statement

On my honor, I affirm that I have neither given nor received inappropriate aid in the completion of this
exercise.
Name: _______________________________ Date: ________________________

Abstract:
Grain-size distribution is a fundamental tool for interpreting sedimentary units within
depositional systems (Cheetham). In the experiment conducted two different methods were
used in order to calculate the grain size and distribution of a sand mixture. In each method a
different piece of equipment was used to calculate the results. The first method, conducted using
a Sieve Shaker calculated a mean grain size for samples T (top), M (middle), B (bottom) to be
0.149594432, 0.22329821, and 0.20161873. These mean diameter results indicate a fine grained
sample. The second method using a Laser Particle Analyzer (LPA) calculated a mean grain size
0.169103801, 0.266411378, 0.236092665. These results indicate that samples T and B are fine
grained while sample M is medium grained. These differences in grain size affect the
permeability of the samples, with the coarser, medium grained sample M, having a higher
permeability than the more fine samples T and B. Based on our analysis of the data gained in
both methods it was determined that sample M would produce the best reservoir due to the fact
that it was the most coarse grain sample which would indicate a higher permeability.
Introduction:
Grain size analysis is one of the key fundamentals in predicting the performance of a
reservoir. This is due to its direct correlation with porosity and permeability. Although other
factors may be involved, the size of the sand grains composing an oil bearing formation to a
great extent determine the permeability of that rock with reference to the flow of water, oil, air or
gas through its pores(Panyity). When analyzing grain size, for the purpose of predicting
reservoir performance, it is also important to understand the size distribution of grains in the
reservoir. This is because, It is recognized that the nature of the size distribution, in terms of
the spread of the particles about the mean, affects the permeability(Krumbein) Typically
when a reservoir contains well sorted grains with high porosity and permeability it is
characterized as a good reservoir. Through this experiment we will analyze each samples grain
size and distribution and calculate each samples permeability. In turn this will allow us to
determine which sample would be the best reservoir. Also, by comparing the data from the
Sieve Shaker and the Laser Particle Analyzer we will also be able to determine which method of
grain analysis is more accurate.
Experimental procedure:
Sieve analysis:
For the first experiment, we used the sieve shaker to measure the particle size distribution. The
device includes a column of sieves with screens. Each sieve is stacked on top of each other. The
top sieve has the largest screen openings whereas the smaller sieve diameters are on the bottom.
At a base is a round pan to collect the aggregate that passes through the smallest screen. Before
the sieves are placed on the mechanical shaker, they must be brushed to remove all particles that
still remain on the screen from previous experiments. A sample of 300g is weighed, mixed
thoroughly, crushed to a suitable size and then poured into the top sieve. Once the sample has
been poured in, the stack of sieves is secured with a cap. The machine is then allowed to agitate
for 20 minutes for each sample at amplitude of 60. After the shaking is complete, each sieve was

removed one at a time and the particles on the screens of each sieve is weighed and recorded
separately. This process is done individually for all three samples used in the experiment.

Figure 1: Classical sieve assembly with shaker pans and screens. The timer is nominally set to 20
minutes and the amplitude to 60.
Figure 2: Beckman-Coulter particle size analyzer. Sample is poured into the sample input chamber
and sucked into the analysis system.

Particle Size Analyzer:

In the second experiment, we use the Beckman-Coulter Laser Diffraction particle size analyzer
to measure grain size and its distribution. For this method, we used 14.3007gm, 14.9876gm and
15.2142gm of top, middle and bottom sample respectively. Once the sample is put into the
analyzer, the micro filter vacuum sucks it through an optical chamber. In the chamber, particles
will cast their shadows as they pass through a fixed focal length measurement system. The grain
size is then derived from the shadows. The data resulting from this analysis was recorded by a
computer and saved for further study. The separate process was done for top, middle and bottom
samples.
Analysis:
Using the data gained from the sieve and particle analyzer methods we graphed the grain size distribution
by plotting the grain size (mm) vs. the weight (%).

Weight percentage (%)

Figure A: Grain diameter vs. weight percentage (Sieve)

50
40
30

Top

20

Middle

10

Bottom

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Diameter (mm)

Weight percentage (%)

Figure B: Weight percentage vs. diameter (LPA)

12
10
8
6

Top

Middle

Bottom

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Diameter (mm)

Sieve shaker
Average diameter (mm)
S_vgr
Shape factor
Permeability (Carman - Cozeny) (Darcy)
Permeability K_z
Permeability (Krumbien and Monk)

Top
0.149594432
473.3137911
1.278175287
6.858410392
1.06E-07
16.43788881

Middle
0.22329821
325.2685448
0.878381791
14.5223752
3.26E-07
17.11609211

Particle analyzer
Average diameter (mm)
Specific surface area
Shape factor
Permeability (darcy)

Top
Middle
Bottom
0.169103801 0.266411378 0.236092665
0.046538618 0.095090002 0.110072438
0.007869857 0.025333063 0.025987295
7.089243793 1.698076155 1.267271608

Figure 3: Comparison between Sieve and Particle Size analyzer

Bottom
0.20161873
354.9086654
0.958424398
12.19799863
2.51E-07
16.72824581

From the data obtained by the sieve and the Particle analyzer, we can conclude that the average
grain diameter is similar for both. However the grain size obtained from the sieve shaker is
slightly smaller than that from laser analyzer. This is because the sieve shaker cant give us the
weight of particles whose diameter is more than 8 (in phi scale). We used Carmen-Kozeny
equation to calculate the permeability of the grain size from the sieve analysis.

Cumulative weight percentage (%)

Figure C: Cumulative weight percentage finer than diameter (phi

scale/sieve)
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

top
middle
bottom
0

Diameter (phi scale)

Figure D: Cumulative weight percentage vs. Grain diameter

100

Cumulative weight percentage

(%)

80
60

Top
Middle

40

Bottom

20
0
0

6
Phi Scale

10

12

Also, based on the Wentworth Scale, we can conclude that the three samples are sand. The cumulative
weight percentage for particles whose size is less than 4(on phi scale or greater than 1/16mm) is above
95% for both 3 samples (see figure 4)

Particle size classification (sieve shaker)

Top
Clay
Silt
Sand

Middle
Bottom
0
0
0
3.141855493 1.138213019 1.532555468
96.85814451 98.86178698 98.46744453

Particle size classification (particle analyzer)

Top

Middle

Bottom

Clay
Silt
Sand

0.000830376 0.222298718
4.0249719 0.83412294
95.97419772 98.94357834

0.251767
1.410426
98.33781

Figure 4. Particle size classification for sieve and particle analyzer.

Conclusion:
Grain size is one of the most important properties used to determine the production of a
reservoir. This is because we can use grain size to determine permeability. Where porosity is
generally independent of grain size, permeability is strongly dependent on grain
size(Kharrat). During our experiment it was determined by both the Sieve Shaker and the Laser
Particle Analyzer that Sample M had the largest grain size distribution, and in turn had the
largest permeability. This being said Sample M would be from the best reservoir. Although the
data we obtained from both methods was slightly different it can be seen that the data showed the
same trends and that the differences in calculations were from human error. Most likely this
error occurred during the weighing phase of the Sieve method. Due to human error we
concluded that both the Sieve Shaker and Laser Particle Analyzer are both accurate ways to
measure grain size. The consistently strong correlation and similar grain size statistics between
the laser diffraction and the sieve/hydrometer results show that these methods are compatible.
Provided that sample preparation is consistent, these methods can be used together within a
study, while maintaining high accuracy. These results also show that historical sieve/hydrometer
data can be compared with confidence to modern laser diffraction data (Cheetham).
References
Cheetham, Michael D., Annabelle F. Keene, Richard T. Bush, Leigh A. Sullivan, and Wayne D. Erskine. "A Comparison of Grain-size
Analysis Methods for Sand-dominated Fluvial Sediments." Sedimentology 55.6 (2008): 1905-913. OnePetro. Web. 22 Feb. 2011.
Krumbein, W.C. "Permeability as a Function of the Size Parameters of Unconsolidated Sand." Petroleum Transactions 151 (1943): 153-63.
OnePetro. Web. 22 Feb. 2011.
Panyity, L.S. "Practical Interpretation of Core Analysis." Petroleum Transactions 92 (1931): 320-28. OnePetro. Web. 22 Feb. 2011.
Beckman Coulter <http://www.beckmancoulter.com/coultercounter/product_LS13320.jsp.>
Kharrat, Riyaz. "Rock Type and Permeability Prediction of a Heterogeneous Carbonate Reservoir Using Artificial Neural
Networks Based on Flow Zone Index Approach." SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show Conference (2009).

APPENDIX
Calculation of Sample

Equation 1: Xave = (Grain Size * Mass of Sample in Sieve) / Total Mass of Sample

Equation 2: To calculate the

Where d is the diameter in mm.

Equation 3: To calculate surface area per volume of each grain

Equation 4: Total Surface area per unit grain volume

Equation 5: Carman Kozeny equation

Equation 6: Correcting for Tortuosity

Where

Equation 7: Krumbien and Monk equation

Weight percentage (%)

Weight percentage vs. diameter

(LPA)
15
10
Top
5

Middle
Bottom

0
0

Tables, Graphs and Data

Paricle Size Classification:

0.2

0.4

0.6

Diameter (mm)

0.8

Udden- Wentworth Scale

Sieve shaker:
Table 1-a
Top

total

Weight
(gm)
0.275
0.274
0.573
10.608
57.797
124.124
23.12
36.313
29.978
7.31
9.419
299.791

lost

Grain
diameter
(mm)
0.70612
0.65024
0.50673
0.33401
0.21336
0.15113
0.1143
0.09652
0.08128
0.0635
0.05334

0.299

Weight
percentage
(%)
0.091730572
0.091397007
0.191133156
3.538465131
19.27909777
41.40351111
7.712039387
12.1127719
9.999633078
2.438365395
3.141855493
100
Average
diameter (mm)

Diameter of grains
* mass percentage
(mm)
0.000647728
0.0005943
0.000968529
0.011818827
0.041133883
0.062573126
0.008814861
0.011691247
0.008127702
0.001548362
0.001675866

Mean
Standard Error
Median
Mode
Standard Deviation
Sample Variance
Kurtosis
Skewness
Range
Minimum
Maximum
Sum

0.149594432 Count

Weight percentage (%)

Top Sample
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Grain diameter (mm)

Figure 1-a. Weight percentage vs. grain diameter of the top sample
Kurtosis
Skewness
Table 1-b
Weight

4.85851995
2.103683798

Grain

Weight

Middle
Diameter of

0.013599494
0.006030251
0.008127702
#N/A
0.02000008
0.000400003
3.226282065
1.958822689
0.061978826
0.0005943
0.062573126
0.149594432
11

(gm)

total

diameter
(mm)

percentage
(%)

1.239

0.70612

0.415756465

0.997
5.764
69.167

0.65024
0.50673
0.33401

0.334551409
1.934156793
23.20954596

121.039

0.21336

40.61561486

69.149
9.999
4.74
8.26
4.265
3.392
298.011

0.15113
0.1143
0.09652
0.08128
0.0635
0.05334

23.20350591
3.355245276
1.590545315
2.771709769
1.431155226
1.138213019
100
Average
diameter
(mm)

lost

2.079

grains * mass
percentage
(mm)
0.00293574 Mean
Standard
0.002175387 Error
0.009800953 Median
0.077522204 Mode
Standard
0.086657476 Deviation
Sample
0.035067458 Variance
0.003835045 Kurtosis
0.001535194 Skewness
0.002252846 Range
0.000908784 Minimum
0.000607123 Maximum
Sum

0.22329821 Count

Weight percentage (%)

Middle sample
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Grain diameter (mm)

Figure 1-b. Weight percentage vs. grain diameter of the middle sample
Kurtosis

1.718759758

0.020299837
0.009699467
0.00293574
#N/A
0.032169494
0.001034876
1.134047818
1.610081015
0.086050353
0.000607123
0.086657476
0.22329821

11

Skewness

1.629351474

Table 1-c

Weight
(gm)
0.295
0.154
1.323

total

46.273
138.841
63.35
19.101
9.932
7.287
6.619
4.563
297.738

lost

2.352

Grain
diameter
(mm)
0.70612
0.65024
0.50673

Bottom
Weight
percentage
(%)
0.0990804
0.051723327
0.444350402

Diameter of grains
* mass percentage
(mm)
0.000699627
0.000336326
0.002251657

0.33401
0.21336
0.15113
0.1143
0.09652
0.08128
0.0635
0.05334

15.54151637
46.63193815
21.27709597
6.415371904
3.33581874
2.447453802
2.223095473
1.532555468

0.051910219
0.099493903
0.032156075
0.00733277
0.003219732
0.00198929
0.001411666
0.000817465

Average
diameter (mm)

Mean
Standard Error
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
Sample Variance
Kurtosis
Skewness
Range
Minimum
Maximum
Sum
Count

0.20161873

Weight percentage (%)

Bottom sample
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Grain diameter (mm)

Figure 1-c. Weight percentage vs. grain diameter of the bottom sample

0.018328975
0.009538764
0.002251657
#N/A
0.031636503
0.001000868
4.121883796
2.085910387
0.099157577
0.000336326
0.099493903
0.20161873
11

Kurtosis
Skewness

4.937900327
2.188445245

Weight percentage (%)

Grain diameter vs. weight percentage(sieve)

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Top
Middle
Bottom

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Diameter (mm)

Figure 1-1. Weight percentage vs grain diameter (sieve)

Figure 1-1. Weight percentage vs grain diameter (sieve)

Cumulative weight percentage finer than

diameter (phi scale/sieve)

Cumulative weight percentage (%)

120

100

80

top

60

middle
bottom

40

20

0
0

0.5

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Diameter (phi scale)

Figure 1-2. Diameter (phi scale) vs. Cumulative weight percentage

Particle analyzer
Table 2
From
To
Volume
Mean:
Median:
D(0,0):
Mean/Median ratio:
Mode:
S.D.:
Variance:
C.V.:
Skewness:
Kurtosis:
d10:

Top
0.375198
2000
100
177.177
164.176
10.2386
1.07919
168.872
84.8475
7199.1
47.8886
1.33737
3.20145
86.2038

Middle
0.375198
2000
100
279.13
260.629
1.17403
1.07099
269.216
114.467
13102.8
41.0086
1.02356
1.8329
158.194

Bottom
0.375198
2000
100
247.364
236.994
1.17026
1.04376
245.24
99.1104
9822.86
40.0666
0.82765
1.72302
135.528

d50:
d90:
Specific Surf. Area:

164.176
279.001
444.181

%<

Size
10
25
50
75
90

%>

Size
86.2038
119.608
164.176
218.491
279.001

Size
10
25
50
75
90

Size

428.864
334.895
260.629
202.924
158.194

0
0.12
15.4
100
%>

10
25
50
75
90

Group6_02_
_04_Top.$ls
Particle
Diameter
um <
86.2038
119.608
164.176
218.491
279.001

369.706
299.655
236.994
183.351
135.528
%<

0.024
0.32
2.37
100
%>

100
99.9
84.6
0

135.528
183.351
236.994
299.655
369.706
Size

%<

1
10
100
1000
Volume
%

158.194
202.924
260.629
334.895
428.864

279.001
218.491
164.176
119.608
86.2038

1
10
100
1000

236.994
369.706
414.311
Size

Size

%<

Size

260.629
428.864
363.329

0.027
0.37
4.46
100
%>

99.98
99.7
97.6
0
Group6_02_
_03_01.$ls
Particle
Diameter
um <

99.97
99.6
95.5
0
Group6_02_
_02_01.$ls
Particle
Diameter
um <

158.194
202.924
260.629
334.895
428.864

135.528
183.351
236.994
299.655
369.706

Channel
Diameter
(Lower)
um

Diff.
Volume
%
0.375198
0.411878
0.452145
0.496347
0.544872
0.59814
0.656615
0.720807
0.791275
0.868632
0.953552
1.04677
1.14911
1.26145
1.38477
1.52015
1.66876
1.8319
2.011
2.2076
2.42342
2.66033
2.92042
3.20592
3.51934
3.8634
4.2411
4.65572
5.11087
5.61052
6.15902
6.76114
7.42212
8.14773
8.94427
9.81869
10.7786

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.58E-05
0.000774609
0.00255335
0.0047953
0.00746415
0.01036
0.0132924
0.0161214
0.0187065
0.0209511
0.0227533
0.0240881
0.0249655

Diff.
Volume
%

Diff.
Volume
%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.000275588
0.00366301
0.0109561
0.0173199
0.0218319
0.0244894
0.025325
0.0245338
0.0224129
0.0193447
0.0157381
0.0119986
0.00848698
0.005499
0.00325237
0.00187296
0.00134148
0.0015438
0.00241313
0.00384392
0.00564538
0.00761828
0.00959036
0.0114222
0.0130106
0.0142741
0.0151481
0.01561
0.0156857
0.0154602

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.000321671
0.00427224
0.0127577
0.0201098
0.0252446
0.0281698
0.0289439
0.0278218
0.0251794
0.0214895
0.0172492
0.0129421
0.0089881
0.00572144
0.00337379
0.0020514
0.00167921
0.00213062
0.00332058
0.00507755
0.00716577
0.0093598
0.0114761
0.0133801
0.0149888
0.0162503
0.0171415
0.0176875
0.0179579
0.0180638

11.8323
12.9891
14.2589
15.6529
17.1832
18.863
20.7071
22.7315
24.9538
27.3934
30.0714
33.0113
36.2385
39.7813
43.6704
47.9397
52.6264
57.7713
63.4192
69.6192
76.4253
83.8969
92.0988
101.103
110.987
121.837
133.748
146.824
161.177
176.935
194.232
213.221
234.066
256.948
282.068
309.644
339.916
373.147
409.626
449.672
493.633

0.0255193
0.0259967
0.0268342
0.0286922
0.0324476
0.0392646
0.0503911
0.0669206
0.0893205
0.117133
0.14966
0.187377
0.233736
0.295735
0.383049
0.507122
0.680691
0.919031
1.24229
1.67415
2.23408
2.92851
3.74758
4.66574
5.64036
6.60731
7.47765
8.14148
8.48557
8.42486
7.92777
7.02811
5.82527
4.46911
3.14543
2.03297
1.2538
0.833434
0.67162
0.615724
0.520918

0.0150815
0.0147296
0.0146292
0.014961
0.0158934
0.0175306
0.0199203
0.0231447
0.0272386
0.0323883
0.0387306
0.0460672
0.0538356
0.0610925
0.0672462
0.0725996
0.0792233
0.0925019
0.120627
0.171576
0.249029
0.351798
0.482281
0.660235
0.933494
1.38033
2.09567
3.15402
4.5573
6.19552
7.84638
9.22017
10.0405
10.1322
9.47973
8.23935
6.68773
5.12703
3.78566
2.75161
1.99257

0.0181383
0.0183206
0.0187837
0.0196828
0.0212397
0.0237507
0.0275472
0.0328683
0.0396084
0.047624
0.0570242
0.0683768
0.0827339
0.100951
0.123344
0.150152
0.183249
0.228482
0.295899
0.396947
0.539856
0.726901
0.958461
1.24404
1.61814
2.15476
2.95863
4.11454
5.61582
7.31618
8.93234
10.1142
10.5596
10.1248
8.88567
7.1165
5.20332
3.50532
2.23534
1.42703
0.961039

541.892
594.869
653.025
716.866
786.949
863.883
948.338
1041.05
1142.83
1254.55
1377.2
1511.84
1659.64
1821.89
2000

0.299857
0.0764253
0.00418745
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1.42039
0.956788
0.573924
0.267551
0.0662237
0.00390891
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0.683116
0.459179
0.17552
0.0147723
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Particle analyzer
Table 2-b
Top
Mean
Standard Error
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
Sample Variance
Kurtosis
Skewness
Range
Minimum
Maximum
Sum
Count

Middle

Bottom

0.002966733
0.000625889
0.000167279
#N/A

0.00346
0.000825
6.8E-06
#N/A

0.003148
0.000782
7.47E-06
#N/A

0.004725355
2.2329E-05
1.215801204
1.592767096
0.015398264
1.96261E-09
0.015398266
0.169103801
57

0.00724
5.24E-05
3.501159
2.164663
0.026739
1.99E-09
0.026739
0.266411
77

0.006771
4.59E-05
4.367157
2.335157
0.026015
2.32E-09
0.026015
0.236093
75

Weight percentage vs. diameter

12

Weight percentage (%)

10
8
Top

Middle
4

Bottom

2
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Diameter (mm)

Figure 2-a. Weight percentage vs. grain diameter (Particle Analyzer)

Cumulative weight percentage vs. Grain diameter

100
90
80

Cumulative weight percentage (%)

70
60
Top

50

Middle

40

Bottom
30
20
10
0
0

6
Phi Scale

10

Figure 2-b. Cumulative weight percentage vs. grain diameter (phi scale)

12

Sieve shaker
Average diameter (mm)
S_vgr
Shape factor
Permeability (Carman - Cozeny) (Darcy)
Permeability K_z
Permeability (Krumbien and Monk)

Top

Middle

0.149594432 0.22329821 0.20161873

473.3137911 325.2685448 354.9086654
1.278175287 0.878381791 0.958424398
6.858410392 14.5223752 12.19799863
1.06E-07
3.26E-07
2.51E-07
16.43788881 17.11609211 16.72824581

Particle analyzer
Average diameter (mm)
Specific surface area
Shape factor
Permeability (darcy)

Top
0.169103801
0.046538618
0.007869857
7.089243793

Middle
0.266411378
0.095090002
0.025333063
1.698076155

Bottom

Bottom
0.236092665
0.110072438
0.025987295
1.267271608

Particle size classification (sieve shaker)

Top
Clay
Silt
Sand

0
3.141855493
96.85814451

Middle
0
1.138213019
98.86178698

Bottom
0
1.532555468
98.46744453

Particle size classification (particle analyzer)

Clay
Silt
Sand

Top
Middle
Bottom
0.000830376 0.222298718
0.251767
4.0249719
0.83412294
1.410426
95.97419772 98.94357834
98.33781