ADPC-gO

021322 Sedimentology and Diagenesis: Basic Keys to Reservoir

Layering--Example of the Umm Shaif Arab Zone C Reservoir
Ph. Lapointe, ADMA-OPCO; H. Karakhanian, ADMA-OPCO

Copyright 1990 Society of Petroleum Engineers

This manuscript was provided to the Society of Petroleum Engineers for distribution
and possible publication in an SPE journal. The material is subject to correction
by the author(s). Permission to copy is restricted to lim abstract of not more than
300 words. Write SPE Book Order Dept., Library Technician, P.O. Box 833836,
Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U.S.A. Telex 730989 SPEDAL.

ADNOC/SPE
Abu Dhabi National Oil Company/Society of Petroleum Engineers
Sedimentology & Diagenesis: Basic Keys to Reservoir
Layering. Example of the Umm Shall Arab Zone C Reservoir
by Ph. Lapointe and H Karakhanian
Abu Dhabi Marine Operating Company
ABSTRACT
The ARAB formation is currently
subdivided into carbonate reservoir zones
and subzones separated by dense
interzones and intersubzones, mainly
made of assumed massive anhydrite. This
layering was previously used as a
guideline for the geological modeling
applied in the reservoir simulation studies
and production.
Some current problems of layering e.g.
thickness change, existing log types,
discrepancies due to deviation surveys, can
easily be solved by the core examination.
However, the most important result of the
study of the cores cut in the Umm Shaif
Arab zone C is the lack of effective
reservoir barrier as inferred from
layering based on log correlations and in
some cases was due to wrong lithology
derived from misinterpretation of wireline
logs. The peak to peak log correlation
indicates discontinuity of some anhydrite
layers that can be explained from the
sedimentology. The rapid variations of the
reservoir characteristics are explained
from the diagenetic grounds by the
dolomitization and/or anhydritization
processes intensity. The microfacies
analysis do not reveal any significant
variations between zone C and the
underlying zone D.
The study of the cores cut in the Umm Shaif
zone C has emphasized the importance of
the sedimentology and diagenesis in
understanding the layering based on log
correlation alone. This study has also
stressed upon the discrepancies which exist
between the geology (i.e. lithology,
sedimentology, stratigraphy and
diagenesis) and the layering based on log
SPE 21'22
, (~PK 395~
correlations alone as a tool for reservoir
assessment.
GENERAL GEOLOGY
The Arab Formation forms the principal
oil reservoir in the western half of the Abu
Dhabi offshore area. The most important
oil occurrence within this formation is in
the Umm Shaif field (see Figure 1) where
oil occurs in the four Arab zones.
The overlying Hith Formation is the
ultimate cap rock for the Arab reservoirs
except for the Abu Al Bu Koosh field where
the Hith is breached with faulting.
The stratigraphic attribution for this
Formation is Upper Jurassic: Callovian -
Oxfordian, after BANNER and WOOD 1•
The Arab Formation is usually divided
into four zones, classified in Abu Dhabi
offshore areas as zone A, B, C, D. Arab
zones A and B include minor reservoirs
separated by dense massive intervals.
Arab zone C is subdivided into (see Figure
2) subreservoir separated by dense inter-
reservoirs made of assumed massive
anhydrite.
The lithology of the Arab formation
consists of porous dolomites and dolomitic
limestones with some limestone relicts in
the Arab A, B, C, and Upper D. Middle and
Lower Arab D reservoirs are made of
limestones.
LOG LAYERING
 seE 2132 2

SETTING CON TIN E N TAL SHE L F

MARINE
STAGE SILICICLASTIC CARBONATE r--SILICICLASTIC --I CARBONATE
PROVINCES PROVINCES I PROVINCES I PROVINCES
r -,
PILLOW Stacked fluvio- Mud-rich supratidal I High-energy, well I High-energy, Submarine carbonate
detlaic sand in flats or Sabkha I winnowed sandstonesl skeletal and and siliciclastic
areas between with thick porous I above the pillow oolotic grainstones sands tend to stack
pillows, high grainstones wedging I structure and coralgal reefs up between p~llows
porosity, high out into the Sab~~al while the pillow crest
permeability units in the area above I are covered with
pinching out about
edge of the rim
the pillow
,
I mudsand hemilpelagic
oozes.
syncline I
I
DIAPIR Muddy sediments, coarser - grained Same as the pillow
Little or no coarser - grained sediments and/or stage but only at the
sediments preserved sediments may be reefs can form on flank.
over the crest of deposited adjacent areas above turtle
the structure to the diapir structures.
whatever the
setting.

r
POST DIAPIR Same as in the Pillow stage although on a much smaller scale.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table 1 - Porosity distribution

......
Ci'

Ph. Lapointe and H. Karakhanian
Introduction
The Arab zone C is currently divided into
three main reservoir subzones, namely Cl,
C2 and C3. These subzones are separated
by dense intervals caned respectively
Anhydrite 3 and 4.
Anhydrite 2 is the dense interval between
zone B and C.
Anhydrite 5 is the dense interval between
zone C and D. . found mostly in the interface between
A detailed layering system based on
electrical logs was investigated and·
devised in order to define Arab C and its
main subzones and standardize the
existing zonal and subzonal boundaries.
The study surveyed a total of 201 wens
including 17 entirely or partiany cored
wells at the Cleve!.
Methodology
The wel1 to well correlation method use
Gamma Ray, density and Neutron logs.
The first step as in the common correlation
methods was to choose markers which are
correlatable events as the dense barriers.
This layering is mainly based on the
presence and the extension of permeability
and porosity barriers inferred from the log
readings. The top of the Arab zone C is
defined as the base of the second massive
anhydrite bed found after the Hith and
caned Anhydrite 2. This level was also
chosen as a datum for the correlation
diagrams. The base of the Arab zone C is
defined at the top of the fifth massive
anhydrite bed usual1y found after the Hith
and caned Anhydrite 5 (see Figure 2).
Unfortunately the core study thereafter
revealed the local disparition of this
marker.
Then the correlation charts were
constructed running mainly E-W , with
some N-S correlation sections (see Figure
3).
Problems Enoountered
Various difficulties and problems were
encountered while identifying the
sublayers. Among them are: existing log
SP.E 21'22
133
types, discrepancies due to the deviation
surveys, succession of alternating
carbonates and anhydrite and/or dense
and porous intervals, thickness changes.
Lateral lith9facies variations are suspected
from logs. The validity of the chosen
marker for the Arab C base appears
questionable in the south part of the field.
Thes.e difficulties and the Major
inconsistencies were widely scattered over
large areas of the field and were not
limited to a specific sublayer. However
they were more associated with and were
original subzones C2 and C3 including a
tight interval within C2 and with less
frequency, in the correlation of Anhydrite 5
in the southern parts of the field.
Results
This detailed subdivision of the Arab C and
the Anhydrite 5 produced a layering model
having a total of 18 sublayers. Out of this
total, 13 of the identified sublayers are in
the Arab C and 5 in the Anhydrite 5.
Subzone Cl is not subdivided as it is a thin
layer of 8 to 10 feet thickness and it is
considered as a single unit. Subzone C2 is
subdivided into 3 sublayers: 2 porous and 1
tight. Subzone C3 is subdivided into 7
sublayers: 4 relatively thick and porous
reservoir units which alternate with 3
relatively thin and tight horizons. This
detailed subdivision is presented on
Figure 4 with the characteristic pattern of
the log curves. Figure 5 provides a field-
wide example of this sublayering.
CORES STUDY
Methodology and Main Results
An the cores were studied using the
fol1owing:
• Macrofacies observations: core des-
cription including sedimentary
structures, macroporosity appraisal,
fractures and stylolites study.
• Microfacies observations: petro-
graphical and sedimentological
analyses of thin sections cut from core
plugs or core ships.

134 Sedimentology and Diagenesis
The results were compared with the electric
logs and the conventional core analyses.
The main constituents of the Arab zone C
are: dolomite, anhydrite and in a minor
amount limestone. Mixed lithologies as
dolomitic limestone or nodular anhydrite
with dolomitic matrix are also found.
Three main diagenetic processes can be
figured out in the Arab C. They consist of
dolomitization, anhydritization and
micritization. Almost the entire original
limestone has been dolomitized.
Dolomitization is pervasive and appears
following five steps: biologically induced
primary dolomite rhombs, eodiagenetic to
mesodiagenetic pervasive dolomite,
chemical overgrowth of the crystals,
development of dolomite crystals after
evaporites, saddle dolomite. The
dolomitization process is more intense on
the top of the structure. Anhydritization by
dehydration of gypsum cement is the most
important porosity killer for the reservoir.
Lithology
From the core study, the main lithological
features identified are:
• There is a general sharp contact between
the so-called Anhydrite 2 and the Cl
reservoir Subzone, except for rare cases.
• The dense Anhydrite 3 is not found in 2
wells. Its thickness is reduced to less
than or equal to 4 feet in 5 wells out of 11.
This layer is mainly made of nodular
anhydrite and grades sometimes to
mosaic then to massive anhydrite.
• Anhydrite 4 appears as a discontinuous
and rather thin layer. Similar to
Anhydrite 3, it is not found in 2 other
wells. Its thickness is reduced to less
than or equal to 4 feet in 8 wells out of 11.
It is mainly made of nodular anhydrite
and sometimes grades to nodular
mosaic then to mosaic bedded anhydrite.
• Anhydrite 5 is not a massive bed made
of pure anhydrite, but made of a variable
number of relatively thin anhydritic
beds (from 2 to 4) essentially nodular.
Interbeds are made of porous dolomite,
similar to those of the reservoir layers.
Most of the correlations within these
anhydrite streaks are doubtful. The short
seE 21322
scale of the lithological variations,
particularly for the anhydrite beds
constitutive of the different layers do not
allow to correlate anhydrite occurrences as
continuous beds but as locally developed
. lenses or masses: These results are
presented and compared with the log
layering on Table 1
Geological Model
The previous sedimentological model
describes the Umm Shaif Arab zone C
sedimentation as a a sabkha model
proposed by WOOD and WOLFE (2 ). A
new approach is suggested, based on the
contemporaneous deposition of marine
gypsum in deeper marine water among
algal mounds or bioclastic shoals areas.
Relative sea level fall provided subaerial
exposure for the shoal complex leading to
possible sabkha development as well as
overall restriction in the water circulation
and formation of marine evaporites.
APPLICATION OF THE CORES
STUDY TO THE LOG LAYERING
PROBLEMS
Wide set ofTool
The first well was drilled in 1958 in the
Umm Shaif field. 201 wells have been
drilled since the discovery. During this 32
years, the electric log tools run in the open-
hole have been improved, modified or
newly born. Particularly, various porosity
and density logs have been used. Their
responses are sometimes different. The
changes in curve shapes of the recorded
logs lead to some uncertainties. When
cores are available, the comparison of the
log with the core lithology allows a direct
check and a proper calibration for these
various log responses (see Figure 6 ).
Discrepancies Due to Deviation
Survey
The further use of the layering is for a
reservoir simulation model. This model is
run using true vertical depth (TVD)
values. To check the validity of the
computation and the deviation survey used
to convert log depth to true vertical depth, the
proposed layering was checked on the TVD
logs. A second objective of this application

Ph. Lapointe and H. Karakhanian
was to check thickness variation of the
Arab zone C independently of the well
deviation. Some discrepancies appear.
They are related mainly to the computation
and lor too large scale of sampling for the
deviation measurements. The core
analyses allow to identify the abnormal
thickness variations for the considered
sublayers and lor the apparent lithological
changes related to the log compaction.
"Cyclicity" & Thickness Changes
Cyclicity in the Arab Formation succession
consists of alternating carbonates and
anhydrites andlor dense and porous
intervals. Their repetitive pattern, coupled
with lithological and thickness changes
provided difficulties to identify and
correlate some of the sublayers with their
corresponding peaks (see Figure 7 ). As
previously seen, this is the main problem of
the correlation within Anhydrite 5 in the
southern part of the field (see Table 1) but
the C3/C2 interface is also concerned. The
geological and log correlation charts of the
Figure 5 expose this problem. The
petrographical analyses do not point out
major change between the rocks
constituting the zone C, "Anhydrite 5" and
the upper part of the zone D. It can be found
also for other sublayers in other sector of the
field (see Figure 4, Table 2 ).
As inferred from the cores study, the
anhydrite beds have a lensoidal shape and
seem hardly continuous. Their correla-
tions with the peak to peak method as a
continuous layer is doubtful. Nevertheless
pure log correlations allow "to find" all the
expected layers, but bring doubt as the
thickness of the considered sublayer has to
increase or decrease considerably in a
rather localized area. The tentative
correlation of the well X shows a good
example of this problem. The two possible
interpretations are sketched on the Figure
8. In the upper case (Fig. 8 A) we have to
consider an anhydritic lens instead of a
continuous bed. This hypothesis fits well
with the geological observations i.e. the
potential lack of Anhydrite 3. In the lower
case (Fig. 8 B), the far fetched correlation
leads to an important thickness increase
for the reservoir Cl. This drastic change is
hardly explained from the core study and
the sedimentology as there is correlatively
a thickness decrease for the reservoir C2.
SPE 2132·2
135
Lithological Changes
Some lateral lithological changes are
suspected from the log section analyses (see
Figure 5). A geological layering does not
allow to correlate such lithologies unless a
proof that they are time equivalent has been
presented. On the other hand, the reservoir
layering, based on their reservoir
characteristics allows some correlation
regarding their porosity and permeability.
In the case of the well X , the study of the
porosity vs. permeability, porosity vs. core
depth and, permeability (horizontal and
vertical) vs. core depth cross-plots allows to
identify the reservoir trends and the dense
barriers. The cross-plots are computed
using experimental data (see Figure 9).
The porosity vs. permeability cross-plot
(see Figure 9) allows to identify a good
reservoir trend with values ranging from
10 to 20% of porosity and 4 to 100 mD of
permeability.
The porosity vs. depth cross plot (see Figure
9B) shows from top to botfom:
• Anhydrite 2 layer which appears as a
dense layer without porosity,
• The upper C1 reservoir with values over
10%,
• A break related to the so called
Anhydrite 3 described from the log
layering characterized by a reduced
porosity but a similar lithology,
• The C2 reservoir with porosity values
close to those ofthe C1,
• A massive anhydrite interlayer,
confirmed by the petrographical
analysis, which acts as a porosity
barrier.
The permeability vs. depth cross-plots
(horizontal, Figure 9C, and vertical,
Figure 9D) confirm this analysis:
• Anhydrite 2 is an impervious bed acting
as a reservoir barrier,
• The low porosity streak between C1 and
C2 reservoirs shows some horizontal
permeability and rather low vertical

136 Sedimentology and Diagenesis
permeability. It could act as a barrier
accordingly with the questionable
layering nevertheless, its rather small
thickness restricts its barrier efficiency
in some areas.
• The massive anhydrite bed appears
clearly as a barrier which could prevent
fluid circulations from reservoir
compartments.
Other Discrepancies
The comparison of the lithologically and
petrographically determined sublayers
with the log layering (see Table 2) shows
some other discrepancies of various types:
Minor Discrepancies
• They are minor depth variations of 1 to 2
feet between geological and log layering
alone. This seems to be related to the
core vs. log depth matching and it is not
significant of any change for the
sublayering.
• The variations of depth greater than 2
feet are more questionable and can be
related either to core vs. log depth
matching as in the case of severe
discrepancies, or to log quality.
Major Discrepancies:
• The depth variations greater than 3 feet
are related to poor electrical log
response, due to possible well-bore
anomaly or related to old tool.
• As mentioned above, when, the
Anhydrite layer is missing due to the
absence of anhydrite or even the dense
carbonates. Such lithological ano-
malies are currently interpreted as true
Anhydrite layer in the log layering and
should be noted. Figure 10 A shows the
log correlations, Figure 10 B shows the
same correlations (linear) seen through
the core description and Figure 10 C
shows an other tentative geological
correlations (hypothesis of lense).
Impact of the Diagenesis
The thin section lithological description
does not show major changes between the
reservoir C3, the dolomite within the
SPE 2132·2
Anhydrite 5 and the Upper part of the
reservoir D. This does not allow to
establish a geological sublayering. The
problem can be solved by examining the
diagenetic history of these rocks.
Diagenesis study allows to make
distinction between porous and less porous
zones with the same dolomite lithology,
providing clues for the sublayering when
the log response is not very clear.
The anhydritization process is mainly the
dehydration of a primary or secondary
gypsum cement sealing partly or totally the
porous net. The result is the presence of
crystalline anhydrite. The study of its
distribution explains the slight departures
of the density log curves. The apparent
density increases slightly over the normal
dolomite readings as a function of the
crystalline anhydrite content logged from
the thin section analyses.
The Arab zone C has suffered a pervasive
dolomitization. An incipient dolomitiza-
tion is a favourable factor for increasing
the reservoir characteristics. In the other
hand, a heavy dolomitization process leads
to strongly interlocked dolomite crystals.
Such a mosaic dolomite has rather poor
reservoir characteristics. The study of the
dolomite crystal size provide valuable
information, coupled to the conventional
core analyses. These studies could provide
more precise reservoir layering which
may appear different from the lithological
and log layering. .
Reservoir Communications
The log sublayering performed on the Arab
zone C leads to suspect some
communications between reservoirs of the
Zone C and between zone C and zone D.
'rhe geological study of the cores
emphasized the lack of effective barriers
suspected from the logs. The Anhydrite 3
and 4 beds cannot act as barrier throughout
the field as they are not continuous.
Examination of the Anhydrite 5 layer leads
to a similar conclusion, particularly in the
southern part of the field. This conclusion
is supported also by the fact that Arab C and
D reservoir pressure decrease (with no
production for the zone C) and the
temperature decrease of the zone C after
water injection in the D zone.

Ph. Lapointe and H. Karakhanian
CONCLUSIONS
The sublayering performed only from the
electrical logs leads to some problems
which are solved by a geological study.
The lithological and petrographical studies
performed on the cores provide field-wide
valuable information and allow to check
and calibrate the log responses.
The diagenesis study from the thin sections
allows to better understand and evaluate
the reservoir characteristics, to provide a
rather confident definition of the reservoir
and non-reservoir zones in order to check
the log sublayering.
The geological studies reveal and precise
the potential communications between the C
and D reservoirs.
So far, the Anhydrite 3 and 4 within the C
zone and the Anhydrite 5 between C and D
zones which do not have a field-wide
SPE 21'2'2
137
distribution and are not made, mineralogi-
cally, of only pure anhydrite, ought to be
named DENSE LAYER 2,3, 5, instead of
the present use of a rather confusing name.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to thank ADMA·OPCO
management for permission to prepare and
present this paper.
REFERENCES & HLUSTRATIONS
1. BANNER F.T. and WOOD G.V., Lower
Cretaceous - Upper Jurassic stratigraphy of
Umm ShOOf field, Abu Dhabi Marine Areas,
Trucial Coast, Arabia. Bull. of Amer. Assoc. of
Petro Geologists, Vol. 48, No 2 (1964 ), pp 191-
206.
2. WOOD G.V. and WOLFE M.J., Sabkha
cycles in the ArabIDarb formation off the
Trucial Coast of Arabia, Sedimentology, 12
(1969 ), pp 165-191.
 SPE 2132·2
138

TABLE 1

US WELL No OF THICKNESS OF THICKNESS OF CUMULATIVE LAYER RATIO % POROSITY

No ANHYDRITE THICKEST AN THINNEST AN AN THICKNESS AN/LAYER %-MAX.
STREAKS STREAK STREAK THICKNESS
H 4
3
7.25
5.5
3.25 - 18.75
9.25
25.25
19.75
74 20
L 0.5 47 17
M 2 8 5.5 13.5 17 79 18
N 4 5.5 1.75 11.25 22.5 50 20
0 2 0.5 0.5 1 10 10 22
P 3 9.5 1.5 17.5 23.25 75 14
S 2 4.75 7 7 7 7 7
T 2 3.5 0.5 4 14 29 23
U 3 3.5 1.5 7.5 21.5 35 23
N 4 5 2.5 15 22.5 66 16
W 4 4.5 1.5 11.5 19.5 59 15

TABLE 2 TOP L:\VIERS - COMPARISON CORES vs LOGS - ARAB ZONE 'C'

C1 C1 AN3 AN3 C2 C2 AN4 AN4 C3 C3 AN5 AN5 02 02

WEll CORE LOG CORE LOG CORE LOG CORE LOG CORE LOG CORE LOG CORE LOG

K NC n09 7720 7719 n23.5 7725 n38 n39 n41 n42 NC 7814 NC 7837
H 8085 8084 8094.8 8094 8100.5 8099 8116 8115 8121 8121 8186 8188 8211.3 8211
L 8550 8548 8564 8561 8568 8565 / 8583 / 8589 8653.8 8653 8673.5 8674
M NC 8462 NC 8473 NC 84n NC 8493 NC 8497 8567 8564 8584 8585
N 8545 8545 8550 8551 8557 8557 8579 8558 8582.5 8570 8647.5 8647 8670 8667
0 NC 8435 8446.8 8444 8451.5 8449 8474.5 8458 8478.5 8464 8553.5 8540 8563.5 8563
P 8586 8588 8596 8598 8600 8602 8617.3 8609 8620 8618 8689.3 8692 8712.5 8714
Q NC 8534 8543.8 8544 8546.5 8548 8563.5 8562 8565.3 8567 8632 8634 NC 8655
X 8951 8950 / 8959 / 8961 8982 8981 NC 8985 NC 9047 NC 9068
R 9090 9091 / 9101 / 9103 9121.5 9122 9126 9127 9189.5 9190 NC 9210
S NC 9118 NC 9126 NC 9130 NC 9141 NC 9145 9234.5 9234 9254.8 9256
T 8596.8 8598 8607 8605 8611.3 8611 8625 8627 8629 8629 8696 8695 8709.5 8720
U NC 8516 NC 8526 NC 8533 NC 8549 NC 8553 8624 8623 8645.5 8646
V NC 8655 NC 8664 NC 8667 NC 8681 NC 8685 8752.5 8754 8n5 8n5
W NC 9213 NC 9218 NC 9223 NC 9237 NC 9239 9327 9325 9346.5 9346
Y 8198.5 8199 8207.5 8207 8212 8215 8231 8229 8231 8232 NC 8302 NC 8327
Z 8144 8147 NC 8156 NC 8162 NC 8174 NC 8176 NC 8252 NC 8276
NC=NOCORES I = NO CONSIDERED LAYER
 SPE 21322
139

;<>- - ,
ABU AL BU KOOSH _-' .... "
r~ - "
/ ~ I "

•
/
/ ""
/
/
""
,-,
•
•;
v
/' UMM SHAlF ""
.., .......... - --"
o

Figo 1 • Field location· Abu Dhabi· United Arab Emirates

:cas
.c
o
N
...
0 CO') a "It
CO')
0 It) .c
:3
II: II: II: c:(

~
W
.. i
~i
W W W
t:
II:
a> t:
II:
a> t:
II:
a> t:
II: .. .i t:
C II: C II: C II: C
...
CI)
>
:I:
Z
<
w
rn
W
II:
>
:I:
<
Z
w
rn
W
II:
>
:I:
Z
<
w
rn
W
II:
>
:I:
Z
<
~j ~ II
H
-
:3
.!!!
u
t:
CI)

~ .
// ..
· . ". ..
E
o
t:
. .
::: ;

.. :. ". .. : r .
':,:,
, ·.
. · · ., .".. .,". .
u
°iii
, ..
: ;

·. · . .'. . .' rn
: ~I c "
...as
1I3AYl Z-1I3AYl 1:-1I3AYl l!'-1I3AYl s
..,:3
W
II:
o v I jN>. S :>-3NOZ 0-3NOZ
1I3AYl
...
:I: £
l-
3NOZ
CI)
0.
0.
rn e(
NOIlVWllO~
lL
lL ~
OVllV ::J
o ~
I

&L

:r
!::
:r
----------------------......"

WELL A
i j I
• • :. I' I. 't ft " • • II • II • M
,
It M " " • II •
.. 0
GR
• II It
BULK DENSITY
.rt , ....
. . c.,. ..".,
' I
I. (.,
•• SUB SUB ~
.. ~ . . t: =
to
''lit LAYER ZONE I ZONE

~
t. _.•'-=: I-
~ ."
A A
ANHYDRITE
, ...... ttl
.J".....
~ l- A
A
• A
2
.. f-
I- ~ f:::=
~I- ., ~ 1 Cl
.~
." ~I--- ""1-
A A A

- ::.
2
'~:. -
••M1D1IT1·J

t.
~ ~~ 1--
to

f:::t:: --- C2

"
1
::.
._~
A A A
5
6 AlHTDIITl .• III
=~
~i
II
1-.
.. ~ =~ - 7

~ I-~-"- -- .- -8 .- i
=~
Iii:~
.- 1=
"Hotel l.'

"
..
.. J

.
"Ie", :
I:P'

~
~

-~
-
---
9
.:: 10- m: !
It It -I-
;::r= 11
C3 I

- I Ii
I" t.

II
I"
::..~ ;= = -I\" I- f! .::. I
.t
I
..:..t: ~=
I: II
c-'):
I-~
==
--
~-
- 13 ni!
r'IOOD, I'I· • J ,'. . . .

rc;"""
A
.....
A A
14_
15
ANHYDRITE
I

i
I 'I' ,. r"l Ie T1 II " If If t I ,. M _ It M '. ft .. Ie • " • ,
r--~.
A

A'""I"
A
-- -
.-
16
,y-- 5 I
'8
i i SCALE
I .~ ~~
...... =: -- 02 IAtABI
o I
•
•
I
,
I
,
4
,
, ....
,

I Fig. 3 - L1ne!..!i.~orrelatlon Sections I Fig.4 - Sub Layering Type Section

CJ
""t
r

...
1\

.....
I\:

'"
 SPE 21322 141

WELL B WELL c: WELL. 0 WELL E

Flg.5 - Correlation of Sub Layers »n an EW Section

WELL A WEL.L H WELl.. I WELL ""

.....,.,... :

Fig.6 - Correlations in Wells of Different 'log Types

WELL F WELL G

I ,. FOA~TION D£H1I~Y
............... I I I I I I I I I , I +- ~
II • 1otj:'1~.:Jw Q

.::t- = ~ i • '.:.";.-'::~:~~~;~!.'

•.•..~·I "< ~~.~~.··II~;"f·;~E~~*;ii

Fig.7 - Cyclicity in Lithology as soen by the Logs
 SPE 2132·2

142

USX US xx
TopC1
-----+---- - - - - - -----11----'-
BOtlOm;C1 ,.../7/ op An 3
-~----c~U ~
TopC2 ~ '~~"""~OPC2
G 0
~- - - - - - --®-O- ~
B Otl
"""""''''''''''''t-'-''''''''''""- --II-_ __ _ ; C2

Fig. 8 A - Hypothesis 1 - anhydrite lenses

USX US xx
TopC1
___--+ --+ --r

~n3

. .C2

Fig. 8 B Hypothesis 2 - Far-fetched correlation,

C1 thickness increases considerably

Fig. 8 - US X correlations example

 SPE 21322

143

AOMA-opeo,
PET.DEV.DIV
I K-HOR VS FLD-POR%
AoMA -OPC 0,
PET.DEV.DIV
I CORE BRT' VS FLD-POR%
1000

.
""
"
.
""
"
.j

ANI IvORITE 2
\00 ""
"""

. ... "..
""

10
"
...". .
"
" Cl
" :" " 0-
s: . A~ HYORI~ E3
" W
Il<
a .. .
"
. "
~
. " (2
IN RA C2 ANHYO ~ITE
."
"
" Ia"
.. .
0.1
. " . . (2
"

0.01 91158
o \0 20 30 10 50 8 III 28 38 18
FLo-PORle
A FLD-POR);
B

ADMA-OPCO
PET.DEV.DIV
I CORE BRT' VS K-HOR
ADMA-OPCD
PET.DEV.DIV
I CORE BRT' VS K-VERT
!
.
I
9_ 91198

.
.
. • .. . . . •.
0-
. "
0-
. ·
..
Il< Il<
m m
" W

~ " • B .
· .
.. •
. .
.. " . "
.. •.
lKl:'8 91158
8.81 8.1 18 \88 11100 11.111 9.1 18 1fI18 11100

c K-HOR o K-VERT

Fig. 9 - Well US X - reservoir study

 BULK DENSITY (gm/cc) NEUTRON POROSITY INDEX %
4Z 36 2'
24 POROSITY (%) SPE 2 1 '2·2
Z,Z5 Z5
I "
2 75
,I
, .~
, I ! I I , , I ! I r'6 1 ! ,
IS
, • • • ,
0
I I -,"
I
25 7-S 10

-- .~EF
:..._ I
:::;::r •
8
8650

,
C1 Qlnn
~.

.. ~
1
~ ....~ ~
-!- -,::-~~-.1
.... - - - ~ - - ... - ~- - ' .. ;, /"~
i- -:-

, "
r----,
- .. - -1- ... _ ....... _ .. _. I----__ . . ~ ~
"
I I ..... ; /

. , .] ~
, L

C2
I
f ~._.2::L---:-j:;;
~T__--. -
,.=i /'---
~--- ·----'l
-.:;;;
-- 8=J~~'1
-+.. ~--;; , ~:_' .-- I ,----

--
::t
,
-- .!:---~
-.-
.. -
~~
.//
'.J
//1 8650

.~ .. , ._' ' '1

/:--·----1:----I--I----~
--.. -----
'_ ~- ::::::::1/
/ / !

---------~-=-= .. -" ' ,

-;.--~--

------.
--:;:;:'
pw. ~

1
F
C3 ~-....'
,
f-+ ~I
.,. ...-
....---
.--'" ~l
~+I •...
o
'~.l o
, "
I----!- -'-' 8750
,
!'---
~.. I
E=;j,
i'
-
- -
F-

-- -
9200

..... , -.-- :.---

...
i'""'i
. .;,.'
~- ,","\-
02
WELLR ... -
,

WELLN
WELLP
Fig. 10 A - Well log sublayering correlations
 SPE 21 32·2
145

-1571

C1
oI,ao
-----~=-==
C2

C3
"'110
.....

.."'"
TOPD2 ---
WELLR WELLP WELLN

Fig. 10 8 - Core lithologies - tentative correlations ( linear)

..571

C1
,,'ao

C2

C3
..,so
.....
LEGEND

doIoml"

ISs; 3 mi.... UlllolOVY

dolomlllc UmeslOM

1ImII~1"'"

.."'"
TOPD2 ---
WELLR WE~.L P WELLN

Fig. 10 C - Core lithologies - tentative correlations ( lenses)