SPE 48880

The Integration of Geology and Well Testing for Improved Fluvial Reservoir
Characterisation
Patrick Corbett*, Shi-Yi Zheng*, Moe Pinisetti* and Abdallah Mesmari, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, and
George Stewart*, Edinburgh Petroleum Services Ltd. (EPS), Edinburgh
*SPE Members
Copyright 1998, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1998 SPE International Conference and
Exhibition in China held in Beijing, China, 2-6 November 1998.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract 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 an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract 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
Fluvial reservoirs are important hydrocarbon reservoirs
world-wide. It is the fluvial depositional characteristics that
give rise to the complex reservoir architectures/geometries,
spatial
distributions/patterns,
internal
heterogeneities/petrophysical properties as well as the
connectivity between flow units/channel sands that combine to
give great uncertainty in characterising the effective reservoir
properties.
Well testing, which measures the dynamic response of the
reservoir, is potentially a very important tool for investigating
these properties in fluvial reservoir systems. Through the
integration of geoscience and engineering, the uncertainty
resulting from reservoir description and well test analysis in
such heterogeneous systems can be substantially reduced.
This paper reviews the latest techniques developed from
the integration of geology and well testing for fluvial reservoir
characterisation. Starting from the classification of fluvial
systems, deterministic geological models, based on the two
end members of fluvial systems (Meandering and Braided),
have been mapped out.
A well test interpretation model for meandering channel
reservoirs, the Pseudo-channel model has been distilled,
which removes the assumption of the uniform formation
thickness. Numerical solutions, termed Geotype curves have
been derived. A new measure for the reservoir heterogeneity

leading to an Effective flow interval has been developed,

which shows a significant improvement from the conventional
core analysis method. Geoskin as a geological phenomena has
been identified and the technique quantifying its value with
respect to geology has been developed. A wealth of geological
data sets, derived from ancient (outcrops) and modern rivers,
have been integrated. Fluvial Flow System Diagnostic Plots
(FFSDP) have been developed, with which ten well tests of
Tertiary channel sand reservoirs from the Gulf of Thailand
have been evaluated.
Based on these studies, a Two-stage diagnostic procedure
for well test analysis has been developed. A confident
interpretation requires that the tested system should be clearly
mapped out prior to the transient data analysis in ensuring the
correct selection of the interpretation model. Then the
meaningful reservoir parameters can be inverted. The final
match to the tested data should be made by the Numerical
solution from the defined reservoir system, rather than force
an analytical model, which are mostly idealised, for the match.
An improved understanding on the scale and limits of the
disciplines involved in reservoir characterisation is crucial for
the integrated studies. This study gives insights into the
integration and scaling of measurements as well as the need
for improved geological, petrophysical and dynamic
descriptions.
Introduction
Fluvial reservoirs are those whose sediments have been
deposited by the action of rivers. These reservoirs are
heterogeneous in nature with respect to its external geometry
and internal properties due to its complex depositional and
diagenesis processes. However, they are important
hydrocarbon reservoirs world-wide 53.
Fluvial channel systems are economically important
because of their large oil and gas reserves throughout the
world. Examples include the Gulf of Thailand which has long
been recognised as a fluvially dominated petroleum province
where the excellent seismic image of subsurface fluvial
systems can be mapped 8, 53 (Fig.1). The Middle Jurassic Ness
Sands of the North Sea is also typical of the channelised

PATRICK CORBETT, SHI-YI ZHENG, M. PINISETTI, A. MESMARI AND G. STEWART

systems. The heavy oil sands of the Cretaceous Athabasca,

Canada and numerous large to small fields in mature areas
such as the Gulf Coast (Cretaceous Travis Peak Fields) are
channel and bar type reservoirs, while Triassic Sherwood,
Bunter and Lower Jurassic Statfjord Sandstones in North Sea,
Triassic Sandstones of North Africa, Prudhoe Bay Field in
Alaska and fields in the Cooper Basin in Australia are braided
systems. According to the statistics, the preserved
hydrocarbon in fluvial facies reservoirs in China are about
53% of total recoverable reserves 48.
The developed or appraised oil fields in which major
reservoir units are of braided fluvial origin probably contain
remaining proven recoverable oil reserves of at least well over
30,000 MMSTB in petroleum provinces including Alaska, the
North Sea and the Sirte Basin of Libya. This is approximately
equal to original UK total oil reserves, or about 4% of world
cumulative oil production. Remaining proven gas reserves are
more difficult to quantify but may be at least 40 TSCF;
comparable to around 2% of world cumulative gas production
35
.
Fluvial reservoirs are often characterised by laterally
discontinuous reservoir units. The evaluation of such
reservoirs by petrophysical measurement and well testing is
crucial to the determination of formation lateral continuity,
connectivity and total reservoir productivity. The development
strategy for fluvial reservoirs is largely based on the
interpretation and analysis of well tests. Estimation of channel
sandbody dimensions and interconnectivity will help to
determine well spacing, completion strategy, production rate
and the ultimate recoverable reserves 53.
A large amount of geological outcrop data on fluvial sands
(width/thickness or aspect ratio, length/width ratio and
stacking arrangement/pattern) have been collected and are
now being used in the deterministic and stochastic
(conditional) modelling of fluvial channel reservoirs 32, 38.
Well testing is an effective measure to calibrate and detect the
dynamic performance of the modelled system, which
ultimately leads to an improved reservoir characterisation and
reservoir model for flow simulation.
The improved understanding in both geology and reservoir
engineering have motivated the integrated studies in
heterogeneous reservoir well testing and characterisation. The
importance and advantages of such integration in reducing the
uncertainties involved have been fully demonstrated through
case studies, reservoir modelling and simulations in the recent
literatures 2, 20, 37,47, 53.
This paper is aimed to summarise these studies and to
present the techniques developed in the project.
Geological Classification
The measurement of architectural elements in fluvial systems
(channel geometries, shale lengths, etc.) at outcrops has
become widespread in recent years 1, 21, 42. These data from
ancient fluvial systems are being supplemented by geometrical
data in present day fluvial systems/modern rivers 23 and
laboratory models. A hierarchial system of architectural

SPE 48880

elements provides the framework for the sedimentological

classification of fluvial systems 39. The spatial distributions
and geometry of fluvial architectural elements produce
reservoirs that are heterogeneous. These studies have formed
the basis for reservoir modelling and flow simulations.
Fluvial Channel Reservoir Models. In general, fluvial
reservoirs are broadly of two types: relatively low net/gross
channelised systems and high net/gross massive braided
systems. These are two end-members of fluvial systems that
have been recognised in the previous studies of
hydrodynamics and sedimentology. The Meandering channel
and Braided channel reservoirs contain a range of, often
complex geometries and internal characteristics. These
systems are shown in Fig.2 53. These channel sands range
from limited, isolated point-bars deposited by rapidly avulsing
meandering rivers to the deposits of sand rich braidplains. In
meandering systems, with the increasing sinuosity, the pattern
or style of the system developed from ribbon channel,
anastomosing channel, meandering channel to isolated pointbar sand bodies. The braided systems include layered flood
plain and massive braidplain. The former gives rise to socalled commingled reservoir while the latter forms the crossflow reservoirs. In space, these systems can be connected or
stacked and together form more complex cross-cutting or
multistorey reservoir systems.
In strongly meandering systems (high sinuosity), it is
possible for the accumulations of reservoir quality material
deposited on the inside of the meander loops to become
isolated as single point-bars, which have a lunate geometry
and can be separated within impermeable materials 51. In low
sinuosity fluvial systems, more linear channels will develop.
The development of the fluvial system through geological
time will determine if cross-cutting or composite channel
systems are deposited and preserved.
Fluvial Flow System Diagnostic Plots (FFSDP). The fluvial
channel geometry is conveniently defined by its depth,
width/depth (aspect) ratio, and sinuosity 39. But once the
meandering channel has been discriminated from braided
systems (mainly by sinuosity, 22), the description of a
meandering channel architecture becomes the thickness, width
and length.
The geological studies of modern and ancient fluvial
systems in the past several decades have accumulated a huge
amount of valuable data and knowledge. Meandering and
braided channel reservoir systems have a distinct difference in
terms of internal heterogeneity, geometry and dimensions.
Recent studies have shown that meandering channel sandbody
dimensions have the same order of magnitude of the channel
dimensions itself 41. So, the studies of ancient channel
(outcrops) can be linked in a way to those of modern rivers.
Modern rivers are easier to measure than outcrop data because
it is hard to have the third dimension data from outcrop.
Example includes the studies to the modern river deposits,

SPE 48880

THE INTEGRATION OF GEOLOGY AND WELL TESTING FOR IMPROVED FLUVIAL RESERVOIR CHARACTERISATION

such as point-bars, using ground-penetrating radar (GPR),

which have provided detailed data in 3-D. This yields the
volume of such sandbodies 7.
Well testing can derive reservoir geometry as well as the
volume, however, the results are highly uncertain due to its
non-uniqueness nature. So, there is a need to integrate the
knowledge of geology with well testing to develop a way that
can reduce such uncertainty. Well testing derived channel
width and formation thickness together give rise to the aspect
ratio (width/thickness ratio) of the tested channel sand. By
applying ten fluvial reservoir well test data sets derived in this
way to the modern and ancient river data envelope from
Bryant and Flint 9, an aspect ratio consistency between
modern, ancient and subsurface channel sands can be
observed (Fig.3). The well test data points all fall within the
scattered data envelope, but around the averaged line from the
modern rivers.
This results tell an underlying truth that regardless of the
channel sands have been deposited at different locations
(surface/subsurface, North Sea or Gulf of Thailand), in
different geological age (ancient/modern), but as long as the
fluvial process that formed these sandbodies are similar, the
dimensions such as width/thickness/length of a certain type of
channel sands, such as point bars, are of the same order of
magnitudes. With this result, an encouraging idea has been
explored in which the surface channel sand data from fluvial
geology may be used to develop a diagnostic tool for the
subsurface fluvial systems when well testing data are
available. In this way, the geology and well testing can be
effectively integrated.
The averaged relationships of the fluvial sand dimensions
have been available in the literature for many years 6, 9, 17, 34, 36,
46
. By employing a FORTRAN programme incorporating
these data, the relationships of sand body width/thickness and
its volume/thickness for braided and meandering channel
systems have been generated. For meandering systems, the
shape of the channel sand cross sectional profile (parabolic
and tabular) has been considered. By plotting these data in a
log-log scale, two plots in terms of sand body width/thickness
and volume/thickness for braided and meandering channel
systems have been developed. These plots have been defined
as Fluvial Flow System Diagnostic Plots (FFSDP). These
together with ten well testing results from fluvial channel
reservoirs in the Gulf of Thailand are shown in Fig.4 and
Fig.5 respectively. The region between braided and
meandering systems is considered as composite reservoir
systems. These results are very encouraging, but the
uncertainties are still remain as shown by arrows on the data
points, because the uncertainty still exists with respect to the
possible faults and flow intervals used for well test
interpretation. The detailed structural geology map and high
resolution seismic data will be helpful in resolving this
problem.
Numerical Well Testing
Based on the geological classifications, well testing model can

be distilled. The solution of the defined system in terms of

geometry and heterogeneity can be derived directly from
numerical simulations. For some reservoirs, such as a system
with variable kh, an analytical solution is not possible to
derive and a numerical approach is needed. Also, the
numerical solution will give the pressure distributions within
the reservoir, while the analytical solution can only give the
wellbore pressure. As an example in the fluvial reservoir
systems, a meandering point-bar has been studied in this way.
Modelling. Since reservoir geometry has a profound impact
on flow dynamic performance, its dimension variables such as
length, thickness and width only have precise meaning when
applied to a specified shape. Steel 43 has found through the
experiment that the bottom boundary of a channel can be
characterised by a parabolic equation. A model with this
approach will yield an equivalent transient behaviour in a
system with variable thickness such as a wedge and
triangle shaped reservoirs 10, 28, 49. Since well testing
characterises the behaviour of a geological system, the
interpretation model is very much different from a geological
object, so this model has been defined as pseudo-channel.
Fig.6 shows the geometry of the model in 3-D.
The pseudo-channel model has been constructed
numerically using Eclipse-200. The parabolic shape of the
channel model profile has been approximated by setting the
permeability and porosity in the cells outside the parabolic
boundary to zero. The internal properties such as lateral
accretion surfaces as well as the permeability contrasts
between layers have been modelled by varying the
transmissibility vertically and horizontally. The model
dimensions have been constrained by the derived averaged
relationships from the fluvial geology as described above. The
resulting numerical model plan view, cross sectional profile
and in 3-D are shown in Fig.7, the contrasts in colour show
the transmissibility variations.
Numerical Solution and Interpretation. Using the pseudochannel model, the corresponding mathematical descriptions
in terms of initial and boundary conditions have been derived.
The dimensionless variables such as PD and TD as well as the
simulation sensitive groups have been derived by using
inspectional analysis. The corresponding numerical solutions
have also been derived. A fluvial reservoir field example from
North Sea has been analysed using this method 51. Here in
this paper, solutions to address the problems in the reservoir
systems with variable thickness (pinching-out and thickening
away from wellbore) along with the system with rectangular
parallelepiped geometry (constant thickness) will be
presented.
Fig.8 shows the numerical solutions for these three cases
on the diagnostic plot. The difference between responses from
reservoir with constant thickness and reservoir with variable
thickness (thickening and pinch-out) is significant. The solid
line in the figure represents the solution from the model with a

PATRICK CORBETT, SHI-YI ZHENG, M. PINISETTI, A. MESMARI AND G. STEWART

rectangular profile, which is identical to analytical solution

derived from the system with rectangular parallelepiped
geometry. The flow regimes as classified in the previous
studies include early time region (ETR), middle time region
(MTR), late time region (LTR) and semi-steady-state flow
(SSS). This solution is suitable for the analysis of a ribbon
channel with tabular profile. In contrast, the dotted line above
is solution from a well located in the centre of the pseudochannel model where after a much shorter MTR, the pressure
derivatives go up increasing due to formation thickness pinchout toward the channel parallel margins. The dotted line
below the solid line has been generated from a well located in
a reservoir with reverse-parabolic profile. Again, with a much
shorter MTR, the pressure derivatives decrease after MTR due
to formation thickness (flow capacity) increasing toward the
channel parallel boundaries, where the negative derivative
slope is a reflection of the flow convergence. Here, the
convergence flow is a parabolic flow.
Since the slope of the pressure derivative curve reflects the
flow regime, the flow regime reflects the reservoir geometry,
the total flow regimes experienced by a pressure transient
together are a dynamic description of the reservoir. Since
every reservoir is unique, the test resulted response
characterised by a derivative curve is a specialised measure of
the corresponding subsurface system, here such a dynamic
description with the corresponding geological contents has
been defined as geotype curve. Geotype curve study will
enhance the understanding and interpretation of a geologically
heterogeneous reservoir system.
Integrated Studies In Fluvial Reservoirs
Characterisation of a geologically heterogeneous system such
as fluvial reservoir system requires a multi-disciplinary
integration. Multi-discipline studies are the integration of the
data from all relevant measurements. An understanding of the
scale and limits of the individual subjects involved is the key
for such integrated studies. A geological, petrophysical and
engineering description of a subsurface fluvial reservoir
combines its static characteristics and dynamic behaviour
together have ensured a great improvement in this process.
Petrophysics of the Fluvial Reservoir Systems. The
heterogeneous nature of fluvial channel reservoirs gives rise to
the considerable variation in the magnitude and pattern of
porosity and permeability. This heterogeneity is very marked
at a number of scales 5. Small scale heterogeneities exist at
the meter and sub-meter scale because of the high preservation
potential of bedforms. Variability at the large scale is
determined by sandbody continuity and interconnectivity 18, 44.
The measurement of small scale permeability is made by core
plug or more recently, the probe measurement 30. The value
of this modern technique in characterising fluvial reservoir
heterogeneity has been reported recently in the literature 13, 19,
25, 27, 31, 33
. However, the only way to measure the reservoir
property such as permeability at large scale is through well
test analysis. The evaluation of the reservoir permeability

SPE 48880

from core and well testing needs an understanding of the

limits, scale and mechanism of these different measurements
53
.
A traditional method for the measurement of porosity and
permeability in reservoir sandstones is by laboratory tests on
core plugs. The dimensions of core plugs (i.e., prepared rock
cylinders) are 0.025m in diameter and length which are very
close to the length scale of variation in petrophysical
properties caused by lamination (cm scale). Such core plugs
are an inappropriate volume to determine either lamina
properties or the effective (average) bedform properties 15.
The grain size, sorting, compaction, cementation and early
time diagenetic modifications in a fluvial channel sand deposit
yield a scattered porosity/permeability relationship which can
be difficult to analyse. Fig.9 shows the porosity/permeability
cross plots across the perforated interval from a fluvial
channel reservoirs in North Sea. It is hard to see a clear
relationship between porosity and permeability from such a
plot, where, for a given porosity, permeability may vary by
several orders of magnitude. So, it is not possible to predict
permeability from traditional density log transforms or to
relate these small scale measurements to larger scale measures
such as well testing without careful up-scaling. The interrelationships between porosity, permeability and sediment
properties can only be used predictively if they can be built
into up-scaled models considering reservoir heterogeneities 53.
Another problem from the core plug measurement is due
to the sampling spacing. The traditional one plug per foot
(0.3m spacing) is also inappropriate for characterising the
heterogeneous reservoir elements that occur at the meter scale
(i.e., bedform scale). In Fig.10, the core plug permeability
data from a fluvial meander-loop, braided and multi-storey
reservoirs show a scattered distributions within certain ranges,
but the geological information that can be inferred from plugs
alone is ambiguous. Comparison of these measurements with
corresponding probe data at a cm-spacing demonstrates
additional details of the geological sequence.
The arithmetic average of the plug data will only give a
good estimate of the reservoir permeability in a relatively
homogeneous, layered reservoir. However, no reservoir has
uniform properties in reality and, secondly, the core taken
from the borehole may not adequately represent the whole
formation under investigation by a well test in a
heterogeneous system. The core plug measures often miss the
high and low permeability sections which will give a
significantly different average if they had been taken into
account. As shown in Fig.11, the core photos from a fluvial
channel reservoir in North Sea, only a few core plugs have
been taken from the non-permeable sections, most of these
sections (such as shale and coaly layers) have been missed.
However, this is not uncommon in practice. Upscaling the
core permeability from such a heterogeneous system needs
high density measurements such as probe measurements 12.
Geoskin and Its Impact on Transient Behaviour. The
negative skin due to high permeable "streaks" within a lower

SPE 48880

THE INTEGRATION OF GEOLOGY AND WELL TESTING FOR IMPROVED FLUVIAL RESERVOIR CHARACTERISATION

permeability matrix in the braided fluvial system has been

identified as a geological phenomena. Its pressure transient
behaviour is equivalent to that of a well intersecting the
natural fractures or fissures in the reservoir (early time linear
flow). The term geoskin has been defined to address this
phenomena as a diagnostic of the depositional environment
(e.g., a braided system with small channels), and such high
permeable streak has been defined as pseudo fracture
channel (PFC) 16. As shown in Fig.12, the magnitudes of the
negative skin due to the extent of a PFC , the PFC thickness
relative to the perforated interval, permeability contrasts
between PFC and matrix have been derived through the
numerical simulations. In return, the extent of a PFC can be
derived if the skin and the permeability contrasts are known.
This study has also found that to be able to diagnose the
reservoir system from well testing, the PFC have to be
intersected by wellbore and its length have to be less than
10% of the radius of investigation during the test. Otherwise,
the reservoir behaviours as a two-layer system such as double
permeability and double porosity depending on the
permeability contrasts. The data from high density
permeability measurements and PLT will greatly help the
interpretation of this phenomena.
A Dynamic Measure of the Core Data and Effective Flow
Interval (EFI). In a fluvial reservoir system, the
heterogeneous formation gives rise to the non-uniform flow
profile. This means that the interval or net pay derived by a
cut-off from the cross plot may different from that actually
flowing. In contrast to this traditional method of the core data
analysis, a dynamic measure which takes reservoir flow
capacity (kh) and storage capacity ( h) into account has been
developed on the basis of Lorenz plot (LP). The new approach
has combined LP with Modified Lorenz Plot (MLP) in
characterising the reservoir heterogeneity. By the integration
of high density core permeability measurements, composite
logs and PLT, the interval contributing to flow in a
heterogeneous formation can be quantified. Such an interval
has been defined as effective flow interval (EFI) 40.
In Fig.13, this method has been applied to analyse a fluvial
reservoir from the North Africa. The cumulative kh as a
permeability predictor is compared with the PLT and
permeability distributions from logs, where the flow interval
and interval not flowing are obvious. The further study has
found that whether a sub-section of a perforated interval
contributes to flow or not does not depend on its absolute
permeability magnitudes, but its relative value to the
neighbouring layers, i.e., the permeability contrasts.
Since well testing permeability depends on the reservoir
transmissivity (kh), it is very important to have EFI correctly
defined in a well test interpretation. Otherwise, the effective
reservoir permeability will be over- or under-estimated. As
shown in Fig.14, it has been found that a parallel line to the
homogeneous diagonal line across the inflection point on
the LP will give the percentage of flow from the percentage of

reservoir storage capacity. Here, in this case, 80% of the flow

from about 28% of the storage capacity.
Crossflow versus Commingled Systems. Testing layered
reservoirs has been a petroleum engineering challenge for
many years. In a massive braided reservoir system, two type
of reservoirs are common in practice. One has been termed
commingled reservoir where the flow from layers
contributes to the wellbore directly, but no flow between
layers. The second has been termed cross-flow reservoir
where there are flows from layers into the wellbore as well as
between these layers. Distinguishing commingled from crossflow reservoir systems from pressure transient analysis has
been proved almost impossible. However, by the integration
of geology, logs, and PLT, it may resolve the problem. As
shown in Fig.15, a field example from a southern North Sea
gas reservoir, where the major reservoir units consist of either
aeolian or fluvial sandstones. These units are laterally
continuous and can be easily correlated between wells spaced
1-2 km apart. Fluvial and aeolian units have contrasting
petrophysical properties. Aeolian sandstones have the best
reservoir quality, with core plug horizontal permeabilities of
up to 100 mD, which is two orders of magnitude higher than
the sandsheet or fluvial genetic units 40.
In this example, the PLT and cumulative transmissibility
(kh) have been superposed together with the flow units
(facies). The two curves matched each other are considered
due to cross-flow between layers, while the two curves do not
overlay are considered commingled layers since the rate ratio
of the intervening layer (or layers) within that zone is not
equal to the transmissibility ratio (greater or less). This
disparity is due to the fact that the layers in a commingled
system can deplete independently. This can be easily seen
when an inflow performance curve (IPR) (plot of bottomhole
pressure versus downhole flowrates) for the two layers is
plotted and also explains why a commingled reservoir cannot
have a unique flow profile as seen from a time lapse PLT.
The production log data indicates three main inflow points.
These correspond to high permeability zones within the
aeolian units. High permeability streaks commonly occur 2-3
feet above the base of aeolian dune sets, where the coarsest
sand was deposited. The flowrate and transmissibility curves
do not overlay for these zones, suggesting that they are
commingled rather than crossflowing. The three flowing
aeolian zones are separated by tight fluvial layers.
Integration with 3-D Seismic Data. Since both 3-D seismic
and well testing can yield the reservoir geometry such as
channel width and volume. In a geological background
(FFSDP), within the seismic resolution, a range of well testing
channel width/thickness can be derived from the analysis of
the effective flow interval using the core data. The predicted
area where the results from the four disciplines converges will
give rise to the most possible subsurface reservoir system in
reality 14, 52.

PATRICK CORBETT, SHI-YI ZHENG, M. PINISETTI, A. MESMARI AND G. STEWART

A field example from the fluvial reservoir in the Gulf of

Thailand, has been interpreted in this way. The analysis results
from the four disciplines involved are in agreement, which
shows the potential of the 3-D seismic in such integrated
studies. As shown in Fig.16, the formation thickness
contributing to flow has been quantified using the developed
techniques, further well test interpretation has been made by
changing the thickness input. With the corresponding
thickness input, the permeability, then channel width are
derived. Superposing well test and seismic-derived channel
width in FFSDP, the tested reservoir system has been located
in the most likely area with more confidence 14.
Improved Fluvial Reservoir Description/Modelling
The fluvial environment provides a full range of
heterogeneous reservoirs from jigsaw braided streams to
labyrinth meandering channels 44. Characterisation and
interpretation of fluvial channel reservoirs are of great
challenges 4, 24. Recent technological advances and the
increasing emphasis on maximising recovery from existing oil
and gas fields has led to an upsurge of interest in reservoir
characterisation and quantitative modelling of physical rock
properties 9. The detailed reservoir description is required to
ascertain the degree of inter-connectivity of the channel sands
and the definition of separate or isolated reservoir elements
within the field.
The increasing application of reservoir dynamic data in
conjunction with geology on conditional reservoir modelling
and description has re-established the role of well testing. The
difference between the static and dynamic properties of a
reservoir, the reservoir heterogeneities vary at a hierarchy of
different scales and the requirement to characterise and model
the reservoir at a proper scale are the critical issues that need
to be addressed in detailed reservoir characterisation.
With the integration of the disciplines involved by using
the developed techniques described above, a two stage
diagnostic procedure has been developed for the integrated
well test interpretation. A flow chart to demonstrate this
process is shown in Fig.17. In the first stage, the data from
geology, core, composite logs, RFT/MDT, PLT and seismic
are analysed to yield an interpretation model. Then transient
data are analysed and the results are used to calibrate the
subsurface flow system. The test interpretation is made and
the transient data are matched by numerical simulation using
the calibrated reservoir model. Finally, the parameters in terms
of reservoir geometry as well as the heterogeneity are derived.
These data will be considered for the future reservoir
modelling and flow simulations. In this process, the correct
selection of the reservoir model is more important than a
perfect match. With a wrong reservoir model, a perfect
match could be achieved, but the results derived are
meaningless.
As shown in Fig.18, a geostatistical fluvial reservoir
model from North Sea, UK has been built by integrating all
the data available. Two exploration wells, P3 and P9, have
been drilled in this block. The realisations of this model have

SPE 48880

been produced. The challenge in this study is how to transfer

this model into flow model by upscaling and to evaluate the
reservoir performance as well as the effective properties
without losing the essential geological details. What should be
preserved and what should be ignored in terms of flow is still
a question. Due to the inverse nature of either history match or
numerical well test simulation, a perfect match can never be
considered as a convincing solution to the reservoir model. An
agreement in the predictions from all the disciplines involved
is more important. Integration of geology and well testing for
heterogeneous reservoir characterisation is still an engineering
challenge. In this process, one should always bear in mind that
every subsurface reservoir is unique, but the solution or
reservoir models/realisations are highly nonunique.
Summary And Conclusions
A multidisciplinary research project, "Integration of geology
and well testing for fluvial reservoir characterisation" has
made a systematic approach which progressed logically from
the disciplines/methods of fluvial geology (outcrops/models),
fluvial reservoir sedimentology, formation petrophysics,
modern/ancient
fluvial
channel
assessments,
numerical/analytical modelling/simulation to well test
analysis/interpretations (case studies). The integration of these
disciplines/methodologies
along
with
the
static
variability/dynamic performance of fluvial channel reservoirs
has made a significant step forward in fluvial reservoir well
testing and characterisation. These include:
The relavent aspect of the disciplines involved in detailed
fluvial reservoir description has been explored and an
integrated approach has been developed through the
analysis of the field examples from North Sea, UK, Gulf
Coast, SE Asia and N. Africa.
The fluvial reservoir database including geology,
petrophysics, core data, sedimentology, composite logs,
RFT/MDT, PLT, 3-D seismic and pressure transient
(dynamic) data have been built, which will provide the key
parameter inputs for the reservoir modelling. As shown in
Table 1, a individual discipline can only give parameters
addressing a specific aspect, but can not provide all
parameters required. The integration of all these
disciplines, especially well testing, may satisfy the need.
A framework of fluvial reservoir systems have been
established. The classification of Braided and Meandering
systems has improved the engineering image of fluvial
reservoirs. This provides valuable information for well test
modelling, test design, completion strategy and test
interpretations.
A geological object - an isolated channel reservoir has
been modelled and the corresponding numerical solutions
have been derived. The resulting Geotype curves, as the
dynamic response of the modelled system, can be stored as
tabulated PD functions. These specialised curves can be

SPE 48880

THE INTEGRATION OF GEOLOGY AND WELL TESTING FOR IMPROVED FLUVIAL RESERVOIR CHARACTERISATION

recalled from the stored database through the

interpolations when needed for the diagnostic and
interpretations.
The methods and procedures to evaluate the core,
petrophysics and well testing have been explored through
case studies. The importance of probe measurements for
detailed fluvial reservoir description have been studied.
A new approach which combines the geoscience and
engineering has been made to give rise to a flow system
diagnostic tool - Fluvial Flow System Diagnostic Plots
(FFSDP). This tool provides a means for helping the
interpretation model selection in well test analysis. The
agreement in matching the outcrops, modern rivers and
well testing results have shown confidence and potential of
this technique.
Combining FFSDP with Geotype curves, a Two-Stage
Diagnostic Process which integrates geology, petrophysics
(core, sedimentology) and well testing has been developed
through the studies of a variety of field examples.
Acknowlodgements
We acknowledge the following companies and organisations
for funding this work within the Integration of Geology and
Well Testing for Fluvial Reservoir Description project at
Heriot-Watt University and the permission to publish this
paper: Arco British, Shell, Statoil, Norsk Hydro, Mobil and
Unocal. Phillips and Amoco are also thanked for assisting the
continuation of this work. We also thank Geoquest RT and
Edinburgh Petroleum Services Ltd. (EPS) for the provision of
software to undertake this study.

8.
9.

10.
11.

12.
13.

14.

15.
16.
17.

References
1. Alexander, J.,: A Discussion on the Use of Analogues for
Reservoir Geology, 1993, in Ashton, M. (eds), Advances in
Reservoir Geology, Geol. Soc. Spec Publ. No. 69, 175-194.
2. Ayestaran L.C., Nurmi R.D., and Shehab G.A.K., and El si si
W.S.: Well Test Design and Final Interpretation Improved by
Integrated Well Testing and Geological Efforts, 1989, SPE
17945.
3. Ball, L.D., Corbett, P.W.M., Jensen, J.L. and Lewis, J.J.M.: The
Role of Geology in the Behaviour and Choice of Permeability,
1994, SPE 28447.
4. Bowman, M., McClure, N.M. and Wilkinson, D.W.: Wytch Farm
Oilfield: Deterministic Reservoir Description of the Triassic
Sherwood Sandstone, 1993, in Parker, J.R.:Petroleum Geology of
NW Europe, Proceedings of the 4th Conference. geological
Society, 1513-1518.
5. Brayshaw, A.C., Davies, G.W.
and Corbett, P.W.M.:
Depositional Controls on Primary Permeability and Porosity at
the Bedform Scale in Fluvial Reservoir Sandstones, 1996,
Advances in Fluvial Dynamics and Stratigraphy, PA Carling and
MR Dawson (eds), by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 373-394.
6. Bridge, J.S. and S.D. Mackey: A Theoretical Study of Fluvial
Sandstone Body Dimensions, 1993, in Spec. Publs. Int. Ass.
Sediment., 15, 213-236.
7. Bridge, J.S.; Alexander, J.; Collier, R. E. LL.; Gawthorpe, R.L.

18.

19.
20.
21.

22.
23.

24.

and Jarvis, J.: Ground Penetrating Radar and Coring Used to

Study the Large-scale Structure of Point-bar Deposits in Three
Dimensions, 1995, Sedimentology 42, 839-852.
Brown, A.R.: Interpretation of Three-Dimensional Seismic Data,
1991, Third edition. Memoir 42. American Association of
Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa.
Bryant, I.D. and S.S. Flint: Quantitative Clastic Reservoir
Geological Modelling: Problems and Perspectives, 1993, Special
Publ. No.15 of the International Association of Sedimentologists.
Flint, S.S. and Bryant, I.D., (eds) by Blackwell Scientific
Publications. 3-20.
Chen Chih-Cheng, and Rajagopal, R.,: Computing Pressure
Distribution in Wedges and Pinch-Outs, 1995, SPE 30555.
Corbett, P.W.M. and Jensen, J.L.: Application of Probe
Permeametry to the Prediction of Two-Phase Flow Performance
in Laminated Sandstones (Lower Brent Group, North Sea), 1993,
Marine and Petroleum Geology, V.10, Aug. 335-346.
Corbett, P.W.M., and Jensen, J.L.: Estimating the mean
permeability - How many measurements do you need?, 1992,
First Break, 10, 89-94.
Corbett, P.W.M., and Jensen, J.L.: Quantification of Variability
in Laminated Sediments: A Role for the Probe Permeameter in
Improved Reservoir Characterisation, 1993, in C.P. North and
D.J. Prosser (eds), Characterisation of Fluvial and Aeolian
Reservoirs, Geol. Soc. Spec. Publ., 73, 433-442.
Corbett, P.W.M., Emery, A., Zheng, S.Y., and Arthur, M.: On the
Geophysical and Engineering Images of A Reservoir Unit - A
Geoengineering Case Study from the Gulf of Thailand, June,
1997, Submitted to Petroleum Geoscience.
Corbett, P.W.M., M. Pinisetti, Mario, T.R., and G. Stewart: The
Comparison of Plug and Well Test Permeabilities, 1996, Dialog,
V.4, Issue 2, April.
Corbett, P.W.M., Mesmari, A. and Stewart, G.: A Method for
Using the Naturally-Occurring Negative Geoskin in the
Description of Fluvial Reservoirs, 1996, SPE 36882.
Crane, R.C.: A Computer Model for the Architecture of Avulsion
Controlled Alluvial Suites, 1982. Unpublished PhD Dissertation,
University of Reading, 534.
Davies, D.K., Williams, B.P.J. and Vessell, R.K.: Reservoir
Geometry and Internal Permeability Distribution in Fluvial,
Tight, Gas Sandstones, Travis Peak Formation, Texas, 1993,
SPE, Reservoir Engineering, Feb., 7-12.
Dreyer, T., Scheie, A. and Walderhaug, O.: MinipermeameterBased Study of Permeability Trends in Channel Sand Bodies,
1990, AAPG, V. 74, April, 359-374.
Du, K.F. and Stewart, G.: Reservoir Description from Well Test
Interpretation, 1994, North Sea Oil and Gas Reservoir -- III,
339-356, Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH ).
Fielding, C.R. and Crane, R.C.: An Application of Statistical
Modelling to the Prediction of Hydrocarbon Recovery Factors in
Fluvial Reservoir Sequences, 1987, (Recent Developments in
Fluvial Sedimentology), SEPM, 321-327.
Friend, P.F. and Sinha R.: Braided and Meandering Parameters,
1993, in Best. JL. & Bristow, C.S. (eds), Braided Rivers, Geol.
Soc. Spec Publ. No. 75, 105-111.
Gawthorpe, R.L., Collier, R.E.L., Alexander, J., Leeder, M.R.
and Bridge, J.S.: Application to Sandbody Geometry and
Heterogeneity Studies, 1993, Ground Penetrating Radar by C.J.
North and J. Prosser (eds), Characterisation of Fluvial and
reservoirs, Geol. Soc. Spec Publ.
Geehan, G.W., Lawton, T. F., Sakurai, S., Klob, H., Clifton,
T.R., Inman, K.F. and Nitzberg, K.E.: Geologic Prediction of

25.

26.
27.

28.
29.
30.
31.

32.
33.

34.
35.

36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.

43.
44.

PATRICK CORBETT, SHI-YI ZHENG, M. PINISETTI, A. MESMARI AND G. STEWART

Shale Continuity, Prudhoe Bay Field, 1986, in Lake, L.W. and

Carroll, H.B. (eds), Reservoir Characterisation, 63-82.
Gibbons, K., Haldorsen, C. and Siring, E.: Vertical and
Horizontal Permeability Variation Within A Sandstone Reservoir
Based on Minipermeameter Measurements, 1993, Marine and
Petroleum Geology, V.10, Aug., 325-334.
Hartkamp-Bakker, C.A., and M.E. Donselaar: Permeability
Paterns in Point-bar Deposits: Tertiary Loranca Basin, Central
Spain, 1993, Spec. Publs. Int. Ass. Sediment. 15, 157-168.
Hartkamp-Bakker, C.A.: Permeability Heterogeneity in Crossbedded Sandstones. Impact on Water/Oil Displacement in Fluvial
Reservoirs, 1993, PhD Thesis, TU Delft. Krips repro meppel,
Meppel, Netherlands.
Horne, R.N. and Temeng, K.O.: The Recognition and Location
of Pinch - Out Boundaries by Pressure Transient Analysis, 1981,
SPE 9905.
Horne, R.N.: Modern Well Test Analysis, 1995, Petroway Inc.
185.
Hurst, A., and Goggin, D.: Probe Permeametry: An Overview
and Bibliography, 1995, AAPG B., V. 79, No. 3, March, 463473.
Jacobson, T., and Rendall, H.: Permeability Patterns in Some
Fluvial Sandstones. An Outcrop Study from Yorkshire, North
East England, 1991, in Lake, L.W., Carroll, H.B. Jr. & Wesson,
T.C. (eds), Reservoir Characterisation-II. 315-339.
Keijzer, J.H., and Kortekaas, T.F.M.: Comparison of
Deterministic and Probabilistic Simulation Models of channel
Sands in the Statfjord Reservoir, Brent Field, 1990, SPE 20947.
Kerr, D.R., Andrew, R.S., Grigsby, J.D. and Raymond, A.L.:
Minipermeameter Study of Fluvial Deposits of the Frio
Formation (Oligocene), South Texas: Implications for Gas
Reservoir Compartments, 1991, NIPER, V.2, Nov.
Leeder, M.R.: Fluviatile Fining-upwards Cycles and the
Magnitude of Palaeochannels, 1973, Geol. Mag., 110, 265-276.
Martin, J.H.: A Review of Braided Fluvial Hydrocarbon
Reservoirs: The petroleum engineers perspective, 1993, in Best,
J.L. and Bristow, C.S. (eds), Braided Rivers, Geological Society
Special Publication, 75, 333-367.
Martinius A.W.: The Sedimentological Characterisation of
Labyrinthine Fluvial Reservoir Analogues, 1996, PhD Thesis,
Delft University of Technology. 300.
Massonnat G.J. and Bandiziol D.,: Interdependence Between
Geology and Well Test Interpretation, 1991, SPE 22740.
Meling, L.M., Morkeseth, P.O., and Langeland, T.: Production
Forecasting for Gas Fields with Multiple Reservoirs, 1990, Dec.,
JPT, 1580-1587.
Miall, A.D: The Geology of Fluvial Deposits, 1996, Sedimentary
facies, Basin Analysis, and petroleum Geology. Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg. 582.
Pinisetti M.; Well Testing Modelling and Characterisationin of
Braided Fluvial Reservoirs, 1997, unpublished PhD thesis,
Heriot-Watt University.
Poissonnier Maud: Volumetric Modelling of Point-bar
Geobodies, 1996, Msc thesis, Heriot-Watt University.
Ravenne, C.R., Eschard, R., Gallia, A., Mathieu, Y., Montadert,
L. and Rudkiewicz, J-L.: Heterogeneities and Geometry of
Sedimentary Bodies in A Fluvio-Deltaic Reservoir, 1987, SPE
16752.
Seifert Dirk: Uncertainties in Spatial Modelling of Static
Reservoir Properties, 1997, PhD thesis, Heriot-Watt University.
Steel T.J.: A Simple One-Operator Technique For CrossProfiling Tidal and River Channels, 1995, Journal of

SPE 48880

Sedimentary Research, VOL. A65, No. 3, 577-579.

45. Weber, K.C. and Van Geuns, L.C.: Framework for Constructing
Clastic Reservoir Simulation Models, 1990, JPT, 1248-1297.
46. Weber, K.J., Eijpe, R., Leinjnse, D. and Moens, C.: Permeability
Distribution in A Holocene Distributary Channel-Fill Near
Leerdam (The Netherlands), 1972, Geologie en Mijnbouw, V. 51,
53-62.
47. Williams, G.P.: River Meanders and Channel Size, 1986, J.
Hydrol., 88, 147-164.
48. Wilson, D.C.: Petroleum Engineering: The State of The Art,
1985, Developments in Petroleum Engineering - 1, edited by
Dawe, R.A. and Wilson D.C., Elsevier Applied Science
Publishers.
49. Xue, P.H.: A Point-bar Facies Reservoir Model - SemiCommunicated Sandbody, SPE 14837, 1986.
50. Yaxley L.M.: New Stabilised Inflow Equations for Rectangular
and Wedge Shaped Drainage Systems 1987, SPE17082.
51. Zheng, S.Y., Corbett, P.W.M. and Stewart, G.: Scaling Pressure
Transient in Fluvial Channel Reservoirs by Inspectional
Analysis, 1998, The 6th European Conference on the
Mathematics of Oil Recovery (ECMOR VI).
52. Zheng, S.Y., Corbett, P.W.M. and Stewart, G.: The Impact of
Variable Formation Thickness on Pressure Transient Behaviour
and Well Test Permeability in Fluvial Meander Loop Reservoirs,
SPE36552, 1996.
53. Zheng, S.Y.: Well Testing and Characterisation of Meandering
Fluvial Channel Reservoirs, 1997, PhD Thesis, Heriot-Watt
University.
54. Zheng, S.Y.and Corbett, P.W.M.: Uncertainty in Well Test and
Core Permeability Analysis: Case Studies in Fluvial Channel
Reservoirs, North Sea, 1998, Submitted to AAPG Bulletin.