SPE 152724

Correlation between Rock Permeability and Formation Resistivity Factor-A

Rigorous and Theoretical Derivation
Kegang Ling, SPE, University of North Dakota

Copyright 2012, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Middle East Unconventional Gas Conference and Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 2325 January 2012.

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 have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper 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 SPE copyright.

Abstract

Rock permeability is one of most important rock properties for fluid flow in reservoir. According to Darcys law flow rate is
proportional to permeability holding other variables constant. The methods to get permeability include direct core
measurement, well test interpretation, estimating from nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) logs, and calculating from other
properties such as porosity using correlations. It is noted that these methods have their own limitations. Core measurement is
expensive, time consuming and limited by core availability. NMR logs are high cost. Correlations are often obtained from
scatter data point thus their reliabilities cannot be guaranteed. Therefore new method needs to be found to get permeability.

Starting from multiple-capillary tubes concept, we derived a rigorous relationship between permeability and formation
resistivity factor. Through this correlation permeability can be calculated from known formation resistivity factor or vice
versa. Since formation resistivity factor is often obtained from lab experiment, the new correlation provided an important
supplement in permeability estimation without additional cost. In other words, if permeability is known, the new correlation
can be used to verify the formation resistivity factor measured from lab experiment, again, without adding cost. The new
correlation also provides a unique approach to quantify the radius of capillary tube, which is not available in the literature
before this study.

Introduction to Rock Permeability

Rock properties are crucial to petroleum engineering by affecting the fluid flow in reservoir. Rock properties related to
exploration and production consist of porosity, permeability, compressibility, wettability, and capillary pressure. Rock
permeability is one of most important rock properties for fluid flow in reservoir according to Darcys law. It is a measure of
the ease with which a fluid, such as gas, oil and water in petroleum engineering, can move through a porous rock.

Rock permeability is determined by rock type, textural of rock, effective porosity, pore throat size, geometry of the pore,
and connection and distribution of pores. The importance of rock permeability cannot be over emphasized as it dictates the
fluid flow in reservoir. To achieve desirably commercial oil and gas production rate a certain value of permeability is
imperative. Knowledge of permeability distribution across the entire reservoir is a must to optimize the recovery from the
field. Field development plan and production design rely on knowing permeability because well lever and field lever capacity
need to fit the reservoir flow capacity. Numerous efforts and tremendous expense had been used to obtain permeability in
order to evaluate the flow capacity of the reservoir, thus the commerciality of the project. The spatial distribution of
permeability requires a lot of permeability data in 3-D crossing the reservoir, which means drilling- coring-logging in many
wells, running well test, and measuring core permeability.

Methods to Obtain Permeability

Permeability can be obtained by running nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) log, well test, core measurement, and
correlation. It should be borne in mind that the scares of permeability from core measurement, well log interpretation, and
well test are different. The permeability from core measurement is small-scare. Permeability from well log is medium.
2 SPE 152724

Permeability from well test is large-scare. Therefore it is inappropriate to compare these three permeabilities without properly
adjustment. On the other hand, the variation of these permeabilities is an indication of reservoir heterogeneity. Permeability
can be calculated from other properties such as porosity using empirical correlations.

It is noted that these methods have their own advantages and limitations. Core measurement is conducted in the lab with
measuring the core flow capacity based on Darcy's law. The experiment measures the flow rate under different pressure
drops, then permeability can be calculated by knowing core length, flow cross-section area, and fluid viscosity. Core
measurement gives accurate result but with cost expensive, time consuming and limited by core availability. Core
permeability is constrained by small-scare. It cannot be used to represent the whole reservoir before verification. Well logs
make the estimation of permeability at any interval penetrated by well possible. Therefore, well log permeability covers a
wider range than those of core and well test. The shortcoming of well log permeability is that log quality is sensitive to mud
filtrate, wellbore geometry, mud-cake property, thickness, infiltration radius, and other downhole condition. Well test
permeability is the average permeability of tested interval. From the production point of view it is the most appropriate value
used for flow capacity in well design. The disadvantage of well test permeability is its limited number comparing with other
methods due to high cost and time consuming. Usually there are not enough samples to map an iso-permeability map across
the field if only well test permeability is used. Empirical correlation provides a simple and low cost method to predict gas
viscosity. Common used correlation calculates permeability from porosity. Engineers should be aware that a correlation is
only as good as the data it based on. Permeability-porosity plot based on a specific rock type is not appropriate for other types
of rock. Different rock types will have different permeability-porosity correlation.

Formation Resistivity Factor and its Application

The formation resistivity factor, F, is defined as the ratio of the resistivity of a porous rock that is completely saturated with
an ionic brine solution to the resistivity of the brine. It is an intrinsic property of a porous medium, which is related to the
degree of efficiency or inefficiency for the electrolyte-filled pores, or effective pores, to conduct electrical current through the
medium. We should always keep in mind that the formation resistivity factor pertains to and is intrinsic to the insulating
medium only. It is independent of the electrical conductivity of the electrolyte in its pores. In other words, the formation
resistivity factor is a single number for a certain rock sample no matter what electrolyte is used in the experiment as far as
electrolyte does not alter the rock. As well as permeability, formation resistivity factor is determined by rock type, the
textural of rock, effective porosity, pore throat size, geometry of the pore, and connection and distribution of pores. Of many
empirical formula proposed by former investigators, Archies empirical formula is the most important formula that indicates
a power-law dependence of formation resistivity factor on porosity.

Archie (1942) proposed an empirical equation through which formation resistivity factor and porosity are interrelated.
His equation was based on measuring on cores from hydrocarbon producing zones in the gulf coast region and Nacatoch sand
in the Bellevue area, Louisiana. Archies equation is expressed as
a
F= (1)
m
where
= rock porosity
a = constant, it is the intercept on the log-log plot of formation resistivity factor vs. porosity
m = cementation factor, it is a constant for a specific type of rock

Both a and m are related to the pore geometry. The constant, m, is the slope obtained from a log-log plot of formation
resistivity factor vs. porosity. The constant, a, is the intercept obtained from same log-log plot as well as m. The value of m
varies from 1.8 to 2 for consolidated, shale free sandstones. For clean, unconsolidated sands, m is around 1.3. For sand with
cementation locates between these two extremes, Archie proposed m values of 1.3 to 2.

Several other common used correlations are Humble equation, Phillips equation, and Chevron Formula. All these are
empirical correlations derived from experimental data using best fit method.

Humble equation was proposed by Winsauer et al. (1952) who relied on core experiments consisting of 30 samples,
among which were 28 sandstones core plugs, one limestone plug, and one unconsolidated sand sample. Humble equation
inherited the spirit of Archies equation:
0.62
F= (2)
2.15

Phillips equation: comparing with Winsauers relatively small data source, Carothers (1968) collected 793 sandstone
SPE 152724 3

reservoirs and developed Philips equation, which is represented by:

1.45
F= (3)
1.54

Chevron formula: the database used by Timur et al. (1972) to develop Chevron Formula included 1833 sandstone
samples. The best fit of these data ended up with a formula incurring the same form as Archies equation:
1.13
F= (4)
1.73

Derivation of Permeability from Concept of Capillary Tube

The concept of capillary tube to represent the connected pores contributing to flow through porous media was first proposed
by Kozeny (1927) and later modified by Carmen (1939). It is based on fundamental flow principles by considering the porous
media as a bundle of capillary tubes with the spaces between filled with a non-porous cementing material. Figure 1 is a
schematic representation of the capillary tube model.

Figure 1. A schematic representation of the capillary tube model.

The permeability can be derived assuming fluid flow through these capillary tubes in Figure 1. For simplicity we consider
one portion of rock that contains one capillary tube. The whole rock can be considered as an assembly of n capillary tubes
distributed uniformly. Before the deriving of permeability it is necessary to derive Poiseville's equation. The situation we deal
with is an incompressible fluid flows through a circular tube with radius R and length L at a velocity of u(r). It is noted that
the velocity is not uniform but varies with the radius, r. Figure 2 shows the schematic of fluid flow in a tube.

r=R
r

p1 r=0 p2
u(r)

Figure 2. Schematic of fluid flow through a tube

4 SPE 152724

The Poiseville's equation will be valid only if the following assumptions hold.
1) Single phase incompressible fluid flows in the tube.
2) Steady-state laminar flow is the only flow regime inside the tube.
3) The fluid at the walls of the tube is assumed to be stationary, and the flow rate increases to a maximum at the center
of the tube. No slippage happens during the flow.
4) The fluid is homogeneous.
5) Tube is in horizontal position so that the effect of gravitational force on flow can be neglected.
6) Temperature is constant throughout the tube.
7) Tube is circular with constant radius, R.

r=R u=0 at r=R

r

p1 r=0 p2
u=Maximum at r=0

Figure 3. Fluid flow profile in a circular tube

Starting from the concept of viscosity, = F / A = (u / y ) , the drag forces (friction force) acting on a fluid layer
at radius r as it moves ahead at a velocity of u(r). The drag force Fd acting on a cylinder of fluid at radius r and length L is
Fd du (r )
= (5)
A dr
where
Fd = the drag force on the surface of layer
r = radius of the layer, measured from center of tube
R = radius of tube
u(r) = fluid velocity at radius of r
A = surface area of the layer of fluid, which is equal to 2rL ,
L = length of the tube
= fluid viscosity
= shear stress

Substituting surface area into the definition of viscosity we have drag force
du (r )
Fd = 2rL (6)
dr
Basing on force balance, forces in the horizontal direction should be summed up to zero for steady-state flow, which can be
expressed as
(Force resulting from p1)= Fd + (Force resulting from p2)
Expressing in pressure gives
p1r 2 = Fd + p 2r 2 (7)
or
Fd = ( p1 p 2 )r 2 (8)
where
p1 = inlet pressure,
p2 = outlet pressure,
r2 = cross-section area of the tube.
SPE 152724 5

Substituting Equation 6 into Equation 8 yields

du (r )
2rL = ( p1 p 2 )r 2 (9)
dr
Separating variables gives
( p1 p 2 )r 2 ( p1 p 2 )r
du = dr = dr (10)
2rL 2 L
Integrating from the pipe wall to the center and applying boundary conditions
u (r) = u (11)
and
u(r=R)=0 (12)
we obtain
u ( p1 p 2 ) r ( p1 p 2 ) r 2 R2
0
du =
2 L R
rdr =
2 L 2


2


(13)

Therefore the velocity of the fluid can be expressed as a function of radius, r.

u=
( p1 p2 ) (R 2 r 2 )
(14)
4 L
Using control element concept we can calculate the volumetric flow rate through the pipe q. Integrating the fluid velocity, u,
over each element of cross-sectional area 2rdr (Figure 4).

dr
Area of
Control
Element
dA=2rdr r Control
Element
R

Tube Wall

Figure 4. Cross section view of a circular tube

Thus we come up with

( p1 p 2 ) R 4 ( p1 p 2 ) R 2 R 2 ( p1 p 2 )
q=
R

0 4 L
(R r )2rdr = 8L = 8
2 2

L
(15)

where
q = volumetric flow rate,
Equation 15 is the famous Poiseville's equation.
Recalling Darcys law we have
R 2 ( p1 p 2 )
q=k
L
or
R2
k= (16)
8
where
k = rock permeability

At this stage the concept of tortuosity can be introduced into consideration to account for the complexity of pore system
6 SPE 152724

in rock. As shown in Figure 5, the tube is not straight as in Figure 1, but tortuous. The tortuosity is defined as the ratio of
length of tortuous tube to straight tube, which is
Ltortuous
= (17)
Lstraight
where
= rock tortuosity
The fluid flow through the rock actually overcomes the viscous force along the length of tortuous tube, Ltortuous. As a result,
Equation 15 is modified into
R 2 R 2 ( p1 p2 ) R 2 R 2 ( p1 p2 )
q= = (18)
8 Ltoruous 8 Lstraight

Figure 5 A schematic representation of the tortuous capillary tube model.

Therefore, for the real rock the permeability is expressed as

R2
k= (19)
8
In reality, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to measure radius of capillary tube. In the permeability experiment it is also
impossible to measure pore cross-section area. The cross-section area of rock and flow rate are used to calculate permeability
based on Darcy law, which is
Arock k ( p1 p 2 )
q= (20)
Lstraight
Flow rate, q, is the time of velocity and flow area. For rock we have two sets of velocity and flow area to calculate flow rate,
which are
q = Aporeutrue = Arock usup erficial (21)
where
utrue = true fluid velocity
usuperficial = superficial fluid velocity
Then we have the relationship between superficial velocity and true velocity
A pore = Arock (22)
Equation 18 can be rewritten to
R 2 R 2 ( p1 p 2 ) Arock k ( p1 p 2 )
q= = (23)
8 Lstraight Lstraight
Canceling out the same terms on both hand-sides we get
SPE 152724 7

R 2 R 2
k= (24)
8 Arock
It is noted that the porosity under tortuous capillary tube situation is defined as
Vtortuous
= (25)
Vrock
Expressing in capillary tube radius we have
R 2 Ltortuous
= (26)
Arock Lstraight
or
R 2
= (27)
Arock
Equation 24 can be reshaped into
Arock 2 R 4 2
k= (28)
8 3 Arock
2

Substituting Equation 27 into 28 we obtain

Arock 2
k= (29)
8 3
The importance of this equation is that it shows permeability is proportional to , which is often observed in field.
2

Permeability is reverse proportional to 3. As a result, the higher the tortuosity is, the lower the permeability.

Derivation of Formation Resistivity Factor

The formation resistivity factor, which is always greater than one, is a function of the porosity of the rock, pore structure, and
pore size distribution, pore throat size, composition of the rock and confining pressure (overburden). Zaki (1994) calculated
the formation resistivity factor using the same multi-capillary tube concept. It is assumed that the matrix is not conductive;
only pores filled with salt water contribute to the rock conductivity. Omhms law indicates that
L
RE = (30)
A
where
RE = resistance,
= resistivity
L = length
A = area
For a porous rock filled with salt water, its resistance is
Lrock
RE rock = rock (31)
Arock
where
RErock =rock resistance,
rock = rock resistivity
Matrix resistivity can be considered as infinite. This is resulting in infinite resistance of matrix according to Omhms law,
which is
L pore
RE m = m = (32)
A pore
where
REm =matrix resistance,
m = matrix resistivity
For the pore filled with salt water, the resistance is
L pore
RE w = w (33)
A pore
8 SPE 152724

where
REw =pore (filled with salt water) resistance,
w = pore (filled with salt water) resistivity
The whole rock resistance can be calculated by assuming pore and matrix are parallel to each other. Recalling infinite
resistance of matrix we obtain
1
RE rock = = RE w (34)
1 1
+
RE w RE m
Considering the tortuosity, the pore resistance can be expressed as
Le
RE w = w (35)
Ae
where
Le =equivalent length
Ae =equivalent cross-section area,
To have the same resistance, the equivalent cross-section area of water volume needs to be
Arock Lrock
Ae = (36)
Le
Substituting Equation 36 into 35 we have
Le L2e
RE w = w = w (37)
Arock Lrock Arock Lrock
Le
Since RE rock = RE w , equating Equations 31 and 37 yields
Lrock L2e
rock = w (38)
Arock Arock Lrock
Canceling out the same terms on both hand-sides and rearranging we have
rock L2e
= 2 (39)
w Lrock
Recalling the definition of tortuosity (Equation 17)
Ltortuous
= (40)
Lstraight
we have
rock 2
= (41)
w
where length of straight tube is equivalent to length of rock.
Lstraight = Lrock (42)
It is noted that the formation resistivity factor, F, is defined as
rock
F= (43)
w
Substituting Equation 41 into 43 we obtain
2
F= (44)

Permeability- Formation Resistivity Factor Correlation

Since permeability is a measure of the easy with which a fluid can move through a porous rock, and formation resistivity
factor is a measure of the hard with which a current can move through a porous rock, their product can eliminate the
SPE 152724 9

tortuosity of rock so that other variable such as radius of capillary tube can be derived. Now multiplying Equation 29 with
44 yields
Arock 2 2
kF = (45)
8 3
or
Arock
kF = (46)
8
Substituting Equation 27 into 46 we have
R 2
Arock
Arock R2
kF = = (47)
8 8

The importance of this derivation can be indicated by Equations 29, 44, and 47. Rock tortuosity can be calculated
through Equation 44 once we obtain formation resistivity factor and porosity of rock from lab. The important of Equation
47 is that the radius of capillary tube can be calculated providing permeability and formation resistivity factor are available.
Usually the radius of capillary tube and the tortuosity are coupled together. Equation 47 shows that the product of
permeability and formation resistivity factor eliminates the tortuosity of rock thus leave the radius of capillary tube to be
solved. Equation 29 provides a way to relate porosity to permeability. Similar rock types have similar texture or tortuosity.
Consequently it can be used to estimate permeability from porosity once tortuosity is determined. Since formation resistivity
factor is often obtained from lab experiment, the new correlation provided an important supplement in permeability
estimation without additional cost. In other words, if permeability is known, the new correlation can be used to verify the
formation resistivity factor measured from lab experiment, again, without adding cost.

Conclusions

Upon the completion of study, we made the following conclusions:

I. A correlation between rock permeability and formation resistivity factor had been constructed through rigorous
derivation.
II. This correlation provides a way to calculate permeability from formation resistivity factor, which is often available
from special core analysis.
III. The correlation gives a unique solution to estimate the radius of capillary tube, which is the only quantitative
approach available so far to the authors best knowledge.
IV. The tortuosity of rock can be determined from porosity and formation resistivity factor.
V. The equation related porosity to permeability indicated that the empirical permeability-porosity correlation often
applied in petroleum engineering does have theoretical base.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the for supporting this study.

Nomenclature

Symbol Description
A surface area of the layer of fluid, which is equal to 2rL
A area
Ae equivalent cross-section area
a constant, it is the intercept on the log-log plot of formation resistivity factor vs. porosity
Fd the drag force on the surface of layer
k rock permeability
L length of the tube
L length
Le equivalent length
m cementation factor, it is a constant for a specific type of rock
p1 inlet pressure
p2 outlet pressure
q volumetric flow rate
10 SPE 152724

R radius of tube
RE resistance
REm matrix resistance
RErock rock resistance
REw pore (filled with salt water) resistance
r radius of the layer, measured from center of tube
u(r) fluid velocity at radius of r
utrue true fluid velocity
usuperficial superficial fluid velocity
rock porosity
fluid viscosity
shear stress
rock tortuosity
resistivity
m matrix resistivity
rock rock resistivity
w pore (filled with salt water) resistivity

Reference:

Archie, G.E. 1942. The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics. Trans AIME, v.
146: p. 54 - 67.

Carman, P.C. 1937. Fluid flow through granular beds: Transactions IChemE, v. 15, p. S32-S44.

Carman, P. C. 1956. Flow of gases through porous media, Butterworths Scientific Publications, London.

Carothers, J.W. 1968. A Statistical Study of Formation Factor Relationship. The Log Analyst, Sept.-Oct. p. 14 - 20.

Kozeny, J. 1927. Ueber kapillare leitung des wassers im boden: Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien,
v. 136, 271-306.

Timur, A., Hempkins, W. B., and Worthington, A. E. 1972. Porosity and Pressure Dependence of Formation Resistivity
Factor for Sandstones. Trans Canadian Well Logging Society, 4(D).

Winsauer, H.M. 1952. Resistivity of Brine-Saturated Sands in Relation to Pore Geometry. AAPG Bulletin, 36(2): p. 253-277

Zaki, B. 1994. Theory, Measurement, and Interpretation of Well Logs, SPE textbook series