Samples with >15 % VRFs

1000 Samples with < 15% VRFs

Predrill
Assessment

ol
Present-Day Ambient Permeability (md)

ich tr
- r con
l cies
100

)
of p&p

RF e
nt l fa

(V anc
co ona
ro

en
ov
i
in Frontier and

sit

Pr
po
de

y
rg
Mature Areas

ne
10

le
na
io
16%

sit
by

po
15 %

de
19%

g
S. Bloch

sin
ea
1

cr
de
17 %
32 %

37 % 29 % 47 %
0.1
1 10 100 1000
Initial
Initial Permeability
Permeability of
of Wet-Packed
Wet-Packed Sands
Sands (d)
(d)
Graphics:
Graphics: P.
P. M.
M. Kay
Kay
 © 2001 The American Association of
Petroleum Geologists and Salmon Bloch
No slides, figures, text or other matter
contained herein may be reproduced without
the written permission of both the American
Association of Petroleum Geologists and
Salmon Bloch
Volumetric Components of Sandstones

detrital grains
matrix
cement
pores
 Normal
Normal Distribution
Distribution of
of Porosity
Porosity in
in aa Sandstone
Sandstone
with
with aa Moderate
Moderate Diagenetic
Diagenetic Imprint
Imprint
14
mean, median Tertiary, offshore West Africa
mode
12
Number of Measurements

10

4
maximum
2

0
22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Core Plug Porosity (%)
(from
(from Bloch
Bloch et
et al.,
al., 2002)
2002)
Porosity Distribution in Sampled Intervals of an
Oligocene Sandstone, East Asia
70
70
nn == 177
177
60 max
max phi
phi == 22%
22%
Measurements

60
of Measurements

mean
mean phi
phi == 12.1%
12.1%
stdv
stdv == 4.4%
4.4%
50
50 median
median phiphi == 12.8%
12.8%
mode
mode == 13.5%
13.5%
40
40

30
30
Number of
Number

20
20

10
10

00
[2,6)
[2,6) [6,10)
[6,10) [10,14)
[10,14) [14,18)
[14,18) [18,
[18, 22)
22)
Porosity Distribution in an Inadequately Sampled Sand
Population
55
nn == 19
19
Porosity
Porosity range:
range: 24.1
24.1 -- 36.6%
36.6%
Measurements
of Measurements
44 Mean
Mean porosity
porosity == 30.0%
30.0%
Median
Median porosity
porosity == 28.8%
28.8%

33
Number of

22
Number

11

00
22
22 24
24 26
26 28
28 30
30 32
32 34 34 36
36 38
38 40
40
Porosity (%)
Porosity (%)
 Lognormal
Lognormal Distribution
Distribution of
of Porosity
Porosity in
in Heavily
Heavily
Cemented
Cemented Sandstones
Sandstones
120
120
Ror Formation; 15,420 - 15,750 ft.
Number of Measurements

100
100

80
80

60
60

maximum porosity
40
40

20
20

00
[0,2)
[0,2) [4,6)
[4,6) [8,10)
[8,10) [12,14)
[12,14) [16,18)
[16,18)
Core
Core Plug
Plug Porosity
Porosity (%)
(%) (from
(from Bloch
Bloch et
et al.,
al., 2002)
2002)
Bimodal
Bimodal Distribution
Distribution of
of Porosity
Porosity in
in Chlorite-Coated
Chlorite-Coated
Sandstones
Sandstones
Ile Formation; 15,100 - 15,420 ft.
120
120
φ < 15%; n = 263 φ > 15%; n = 81
mean = 8.9 mean = 20.1
Number of Measurements

100
100 median = 8.9 median = 20.4
mode = 9.0 mode = 20.0
80
80

maximum φ
60
60
anomalously high φ
40
40

20
20

00
[0,2)
[0,2) [4,6)
[4,6) [8,10)
[8,10) [12,14)
[12,14) [16,18)
[16,18) [20,22)
[20,22) [24,26)
[24,26)
Core
Core Plug
Plug Porosity
Porosity (%)
(%)
(from
(from Bloch
Bloch et
et al.,
al., 2002)
2002)
Applications of Porosity & Permeability Prediction

! Exploration
 pre-drill
pre-drill evaluation
evaluation of
of resources
resources in
in potential
potential reservoirs
reservoirs
! Production
 pore
pore volume,
volume, hydrocarbon
hydrocarbon pore
pore volume,
volume, recoverable
recoverable reserves,
reserves,
production
production rates,
rates, well
well spacing,
spacing, fluid
fluid injection,
injection, etc.
etc.
! Reservoir Simulation
 “soft”
“soft” input
input data
data
! Basin Modeling
 hydrocarbon
hydrocarbon migration
migration
 distribution
distribution of
of hydrocarbon
hydrocarbon saturation
saturation
 thermal
thermal conductivity
conductivity
! Interpretation of Seismically Derived Attributes
 porosity,
porosity, lithology,
lithology, fluid
fluid saturation
saturation acoustic
acoustic impedance
impedance
Adequacies of Essential Geologic Controls of Oil &
Gas for Plays/Prospects
PLAY
PLAY PROSPECT
PROSPECT

a.
a. TRAP
TRAP -- SEAL
SEAL -- TIMING
TIMING
Closure
Closure Volume
Volume
Seal
Seal
Timing
Timing
b.
b. RESERVOIR - POROSITY - PERMEABILITY
++ RESERVOIR
RESERVOIR FACIES
FACIES THICKNESS
THICKNESS (no (no nondeposition,
nondeposition, facies
facies
change,
change, truncation,
truncation, or
or faulting;
faulting; adequate
adequate net/gross
net/gross
++ POROSITY
POROSITY (primary
(primary or
or secondary,
secondary, not
not plugged
plugged or
or cemented)
cemented)
++ PERMEABILITY
PERMEABILITY & & CONTINUITY
CONTINUITY
c.
c. SOURCE
SOURCE -- MATURATION
MATURATION -- MIGRATION
MIGRATION
Organic
Organic Quantity
Quantity &
& Quality
Quality
Maturation
Maturation
Migration
Migration
d.
d. PRESERVATION
PRESERVATION -- HC
HC QUALITY
QUALITY -- RECOVERY
RECOVERY
Preservation
Preservation
Hydrocarbon
Hydrocarbon Quality
Quality &
& Concentration
Concentration
Recovery
Recovery
(from
(from White,
White, 1993)
1993)
 Oil Saturation
Distribution after
4 m.y. of
Migration in a
SOURCE
Carrier Bed
(k = 28md)

0.00
0.00 -- 0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05 -- 0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20 -- 0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40 -- 0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60 -- 0.80
0.80
0.80
0.80 -- 1.00
1.00
from
from Kacewicz,
Kacewicz, 1993
1993
Reservoir Properties (lithology, porosity, pore fluid)
vs Acoustic Impedance
100%
100%
Sand
Sand
δδvv == 10,000
10,000

C’
C’
C
C D
D E
E
OIL
OIL
OIL
OIL
BRINE
BRINE BRINE
BRINE
Composition
Rock Composition

δδvv == 6,000
6,000 gm
gm m/ccm
m/ccm ss
B
B
B’
B’
Rock

A’
A’ A
A

100%
100%
Shale
Shale 00 10 20 30 40
10 20 30 40
Porosity
Porosity (%)
(%) (from
(from Hardage,
Hardage, 1992)
1992)
Silica Cementation by Pressure Solution

1 2 3

Quartz
B B
B Overgrowth

Pressolved
A
A Contact
A

Reduction in
Pore Space

(from
(from Sibley
Sibley and
and Blatt,
Blatt, 1976)
1976)
 Consolidation Porosity vs. Vp and Vs
66

55
km/s
(dry), km/s
44
Vpp
Velocity (dry),

33
Consolidated
Velocity

Consolidated
Vss Pef
Pef == 40
40 MPa
MPa
22
Unconsolidated
Unconsolidated
Pef
Pef == 55 &
& 40
40 MPa
MPa
11 Unified
Unified Model
Model

00
00 55 10
10 15
15 2020 25 25 30
30 35
35 40
40
Porosity,
Porosity, %
%
For
For moderately
moderately well-sorted
well-sorted sands
sands “consolidation
“consolidation porosity”
porosity” for
for clean
clean arenites
arenites is
is 30%,
30%, and
and for
for arenites
arenites 29%.
29%. Clean
Clean
arenites
arenites have
have << 2%
2% V , arenites have 2% - 12% V clay.. The
clay, arenites have 2% - 12% Vclay
Vclay The transition
transition from
from “unconsolidated”
“unconsolidated” to to “consolidated”
“consolidated” sands
sands
(at 30% to 29% porosity) is expressed by pronounced deflections in dry frame P- and S-wave velocities.
(at 30% to 29% porosity) is expressed by pronounced deflections in dry frame P- and S-wave velocities. Fluid Fluid
substitution
substitution modeling
modeling indicates
indicates aa negligible
negligible fluid
fluid effect
effect on
on velocity
velocity below
below the
the consolidation
consolidation porosity
porosity of
of 29%
29% to
to 30%.
30%.
(Vernik,
(Vernik, 1998)
1998)
 Sandstone
Reservoir Quality

Provenance Depositional Post-depositional

Environment History

Detrital
Mineral Texture
Composition
 Requirements for Adequate Predictions

1.High predictive accuracy should be achieved from

a limited number of geological input parameters

2.Input parameters should be simple enough to be

estimated from available geological information
with reasonable confidence

3.Prediction should be based on multiple

techniques
 Porosity of Artificially Mixed Sand
S
S II ZZ E
E C
COOA
ARRS
SEE M
MEED
D II U
UMM FF II N
NEE V
VEER
RYY FF II N
NEE
SORTING
SORTING UPPER
UPPER LOWER
LOWER UPPER
UPPER LOWER
LOWER UPPER
UPPER LOWER
LOWER UPPER
UPPER LOWER
LOWER
EXTREMELY
EXTREMELY
WELL
WELL 43.1 42.8 41.7 41.3 41.3 43.5 42.3 43.0
SORTED
SORTED
VERY
VERY
WELL
WELL 40.8
40.8 41.5
41.5 40.2
40.2 40.2
40.2 39.8
39.8 40.8
40.8 41.2
41.2 41.8
41.8
SORTED
SORTED
WELL
WELL 38.0 38.4 38.1 38.8 39.1 39.7 40.2 39.8
SORTED 38.0 38.4 38.1 38.8 39.1 39.7 40.2 39.8
SORTED
MODERATELY
MODERATELY 32.4 33.3 34.2 34.9 33.9 34.3 35.6 33.1
SORTED 32.4 33.3 34.2 34.9 33.9 34.3 35.6 33.1
SORTED
POORLY
POORLY
SORTED
27.1
27.1 29.8
29.8 31.5
31.5 31.3
31.3 30.4
30.4 31.0
31.0 30.5
30.5 34.2
34.2
SORTED
VERY
VERY
POORLY
POORLY 28.6
28.6 25.2
25.2 25.8
25.8 23.4
23.4 28.5
28.5 29.0
29.0 30.1
30.1 32.6
32.6
SORTED
SORTED
(from
(from Beard
Beard and
and Weyl,
Weyl, 1973)
1973)
 Average Permeability (Darcys) of Artificially
Mixed, Wet-Packed Sand
S
S II ZZ E
E C
COOA
ARRS
SEE M
MEED
D II U
UMM FF II N
NEE V
VEER
RYY FF II N
NEE
SORTING
SORTING UPPER
UPPER LOWER
LOWER UPPER
UPPER LOWER
LOWER UPPER
UPPER LOWER
LOWER UPPER
UPPER LOWER
LOWER
EXTREMELY
EXTREMELY
WELL
WELL 475 238 119 59 30 15 7.4 3.7
SORTED
SORTED
VERY
VERY
WELL
WELL 458
458 239
239 115
115 57
57 29
29 14
14 7.2
7.2 3.6
3.6
SORTED
SORTED
WELL
WELL 302 151 76 38 19 9.4 4.7 2.4
SORTED 302 151 76 38 19 9.4 4.7 2.4
SORTED
MODERATELY
MODERATELY 110 55 28 14 7.0 3.5 2.1* 1.1*
SORTED 110 55 28 14 7.0 3.5 2.1* 1.1*
SORTED
POORLY
POORLY
SORTED 45
45 23
23 12
12 6.0
6.0 3.7*
3.7* 1.9*
1.9* 0.93*
0.93* 0.46*
0.46*
SORTED
VERY
VERY
POORLY
POORLY 14
14 7.0
7.0 3.5
3.5 1.7*
1.7* 0.83*
0.83* 0.42*
0.42* 0.21*
0.21* 0.10*
0.10*
SORTED
SORTED
** from
from formula
formula of
of Krumbein
Krumbein &
& Monk
Monk (1942)
(1942) (from
(from Beard
Beard and
and Weyl,
Weyl, 1973)
1973)
Measured Permeability Correlates Well with Estimated
Initial Permeability, Yacheng Field

(md)
6.0

Permeability (md)
6.0

Initial Permeability
5.5
5.5

5.0
5.0
R
R == 0.88
0.88
Estimated Initial

4.5
4.5 K initial ~
~ 450
K measured
of Estimated

4.0
4.0

3.5
3.5
Logarithm of
Logarithm

30
30
K initial ~
~ 80,000
K measured
2.5
2.5
-2.5
-2.5 -1.5
-1.5 -0.5
-0.5 0.5
0.5 1.5
1.5 2.5
2.5 3.5
3.5
Logarithm
Logarithm of
of Measured
Measured Permeability
Permeability (md)
(md) (Bloch,
(Bloch, 1991)
1991)
Compositional Controls on Diagenesis
Quartz
chemically
chemically
and
and mechanically
mechanically
stable
stable

Clean
chemically
chemically
and
and mechanically
mechanically
unstable
unstable

Dirty

chemically unstable
mechanically stable
Feldspars Rock fragments
(from
(from Hayes,
Hayes, 1979)
1979)
 R
RDM Classification of R
R
Sandstones,
90
Yacheng Field, South 2%M
50 50
China Sea
D
D M
M
75%R
75
5%M
R
R == rigid
rigid grains
grains
D
D == ductile
ductile grains
grains 65%R
M
M == detrital
detrital matrix
matrix

D M
upper
upper medium
medium andand coarser
coarser grained
grained ss ss (median
(median diameter
diameter >> 0.36
0.36 mm)
mm)
R
R >> 75%
75% and
and M
M << 2%
2% kk >> 100
100 md
md (a
(a few
few exceptions)
exceptions)
75%
75% >> R
R >> 65%
65% and
and MM << 5%
5% kk << 100
100 md
md (a
(a few
few exceptions)
exceptions)
RR << 65%
65% kk << 11 md
md (a
(a few
few exceptions)
exceptions)
(Bloch,
(Bloch, 1991)
1991)
Weakly-cemented (<10% cement) sandstones with a rigid
grain content >85% generally have high porosity and
permeability

44
(md)
Permeability (md)

33
of Permeability

22

11
Log of
Log

Shallow
Shallow samples
samples (( << 5.000
5.000 ft)
ft)
00 Intermediate
Intermediate burial depth (5,000 -- 10,000
burial depth (5,000 10,000 ft)
ft)
Deeply buried samples ( > 10,000
Deeply buried samples ( > 10,000 ft)ft)

10
10 20
20 30
30 40
40
Measured
Measured Porosity
Porosity (%)
(%)
 Weakly-cemented (<10% cement) sandstones with a
rigid grain content <70% have low porosity and
permeability

22
(md)
Permeability (md)

11
of Permeability

00
Log of
Log

-1
-1
Shallow
Shallow samples
samples (( << 5.000
5.000 ft)
ft)
Intermediate
Intermediate burial depth (5,000 -- 10,000
burial depth (5,000 10,000 ft)
ft)
Deeply
Deeply buried
buried samples
samples (( >> 10,000
10,000 ft)
ft)

7.5
7.5 15.0
15.0 22.5
22.5 30.0
30.0
Measured
Measured Porosity
Porosity (%)
(%)
Measured Porosity Correlates Well
with Rigid Grain Content
20
20

18
18 R = 0.81
16
16
(%)
Porosity (%)

14
14
Measured Porosity

Medium
Medium -- to to coarse-grained
coarse-grained
12 shoreline deposits
shoreline deposits
12
Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained
10
10 intertidal
intertidal flat
flat deposits
deposits
Measured

Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained delta
delta
88 front/mouth bar deposits
front/mouth bar deposits
Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained
66 bioturbated
bioturbated fanfan delta
delta front/
front/
shelfal deposits
shelfal deposits
44 Sandy
Sandy distal
distal fan
fan
22 Fine-grained
Fine-grained paludal
paludal --
lacustrine deposits
lacustrine deposits
00
20
20 30
30 40
40 50
50 60
60 70
70 80
80 90
90 100
100
Rigid
Rigid Grain
Grain Content
Content (%)
(%)
Measured Permeability Correlates Well
with Rigid Grain Content
(Md)
PermeabilityY (Md) 3.5
3.5
3.0
3.0 R = 0.85
2.5
Measured PermeabilityY

2.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5 Medium
Medium -- to to coarse-grained
coarse-grained
shoreline deposits
shoreline deposits
1.0
1.0
Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained
of Measured

0.5
0.5 intertidal
intertidal flat
flat deposits
deposits
Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained delta
delta
-.00
-.00 front/mouth bar deposits
front/mouth bar deposits
-0.5
-0.5 Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
Logarithm of

medium-grained
bioturbated
bioturbated fanfan delta
delta front/
front/
Logarithm

-1.0
-1.0 shelfal deposits
shelfal deposits
-1.5
-1.5 Sandy
Sandy distal
distal fan
fan
Fine-grained
Fine-grained paludal
paludal --
-2.0
-2.0 lacustrine deposits
lacustrine deposits
-2.5
-2.5
20
20 30
30 40
40 50
50 60
60 70
70 80
80 90
90 100
100
Rigid
Rigid Grain
Grain Content
Content (%)
(%)
Permeability in weakly-cemented samples (<10% cement)
correlates well with detrital composition
(rigid grain content)

3.0
3.0
Permeability
of Permeability

Shallow Samples
1.5
1.5 (<5,00 ft)

Intermediate Burial
Depth (5,000 - 10,000 ft)
Log of

0.0
0.0 Deeply-buried
Samples (>10,000 ft)
Log

-1.5
-1.5

50.0
50.0 62.5
62.5 75.0
75.0 87.5
87.5 100.0
100.0
Rigid
Rigid Grain
Grain Content
Content (%)
(%)
 Compaction of Ductile Grains is a Function of Sorting

! A ductile grain (brown) can be

protected from compaction by
bridging of rigid grains

! Example of random distribution of

ductile grains in a sandstone
! Although the abundance of ductile
grains is 20%, only 15% are in
deformable positions
(from
(from Franks,
Franks, 1981;
1981; unpub.)
unpub.)
 1000
In sandstones with R > 90
VRFs > 25%, 90 > R > 75; VRF < 15
permeability is very low 75 > R > 60; VRF < 15
VRF > 15
regardless 100

Ambient Permeability (md)

of grain size, at
depths > 10,000 ft
10

0.44
0.51
0.36

low-energy facies
1 0.43 > 25% VRF

15 - 25% VRF
mm

0.51
0.52

0.40
0.83mm
0.1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
VRF Content (%)
 10000
10000
.29 .48
.48
Permeability is not a .29 .32
.32.24
.13 .16
.13 .16 .14
.14 .21
.21 .24 .52
.52 .56
.56
function of depth in the
10,000 - 13,500 ft .44
.44 .43
.43 .55
.55 .67
.67
11000
11000
interval (in weakly
cemented sands; .18
.18 .48 .40.86.49
.40 .40
.48 .40 .49
.86
∆T/ ∆ Z ≈ 20°C/km)
12000
12000

(ft)
Depth (ft)
.36
.36 .44
.44 .35 .46
.35 .46 .67
.67
Depth
.34
.34
.33
.33 .51 .33 .47 .49
.33.47 .49
13000 .51
13000 .74
.74
.47
.47
.22
.22 .61 .55
.61 .55
grain size in mm
14000
14000
<< 11 md
md
11 -- 10
10 md
md
.43
.43 .83
.83 .52
.52
10
10 -- 100
100 md
md
15000
15000
>> 100
100 mdmd 55
55 60
60 65
65 70
70 75
75 80
80 85
85 9090 95
95 100
100
Rigid
Rigid Grain
Grain Content
Content (%)
(%)
 Samples with >15 % VRFs
1000
Samples with < 15% VRFs
There is an excellent
correlation between

Present-Day Ambient Permeability (md)

initial and present-

ol
ich tr
- r con
day permeability in

l cies
100

)
RF e
nt l fa

(V anc
weakly cemented

co ona
ro

en
sandstones (<10%

ov
i
sit

Pr
po
cement), except for

de

y
rg
ne
10
VRF-rich samples

le
na
io
16%

sit
po
15 %

de
19%

g
sin
ea
1
cr
de

17 %
32 %

37 % 29 % 47 %
0.1
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Initial Permeability of Wet-Packed Sands (md)
 Modes of Occurrence of Allogenic Clay in Sandstones

FLOCCULE

DISPERSED
MATRIX
MUDSTONE
ROCK
FRAGMENT
INTERCALATED
LAMINA
BIOGENICALLY
INTRODUCED
CLAY DETRITAL
MICA

RIP-UP
CLASTS

INFILTRATION
BIOGENIC RESIDUES
PELLETS
(May be alterted
to glauconite)

(from Wilson and Pittman, 1977)

Porosity and Permeability in Sandstone are Affected by the
Amount and Mode of Occurrence of Clay Minerals, and by
the Amount of Compaction
DECREASING PERMEABILITY
DUCTILE
PELLETS

SPARSE
DISCRETE BIOTURB
PARTICLES PORE
LINING MIXED
CLEAN &
INFILT.
DIRTY SD.
DEPOSIT
DECREASING POROSITY

DISPERSED
MATRIX
PARTIAL
INFILL
PORE
BRIDGING

TOTAL
INFILL

DISPERSED MATRIX
OR
PSEUDOMATRIX

RESERVOIR MARGINAL NONRESERVOIR

RESERVOIR
EFFECT OF CLAY
(from
(from Pittman,
Pittman, 1989)
1989)
 There is no discernible correlation between k and detrital clay
abundance but sandstones with >20% of detrital clay generally
have low k

shallow samples (< 5,000 ft)

intermediate burial depths (5,000 - 10,000 ft)
3.0
(md)
Permeability (md)

deeply-buried samples (>10,000 ft)

of Permeability

1.5

0.0
Log of
Log

-1.5

00 10
10 20
20 30
30 40
40
Detrital
Detrital Clay
Clay %
%
(Bloch, 1994)
Approaches to Reservoir Quality “Prediction”

GEOPHYSICAL GEOLOGICAL
detection prediction/assessment

correlation of log porosity

“process-oriented” empirical
with seismic attributes

“hybrid”

petrology -
sedimentology - statistical
burial history
 Requirements for Adequate Predictions

! High predictive accuracy should be achieved from

a limited number of geological input parameters

! Input parameters should be simple enough to be

estimated from available geological information
with reasonable confidence

! Prediction should be based on multiple

techniques
 Pre-Drill Prediction/Assessment of Porosity and
Permeability in Mature Basins
yes correlation between no
seismic attributes and
petrophysical data (φ) ? Empirical Data Available
extrapolation geohistory analysis depositional facies
of φ away (temperature & analysis; sandstone
from wells pressure history) composition

yes potential for no

anomalously high φ and k ?
mo
ich d
rtz-r es det erate/
a rita
refer to qu ston l qu low
d artz
“anomalously san
high φ and k” section φ - burial history wide range in
correlation, non-quartz cement
“Exemplar” abundance?
no yes

if cement < 10%, use φ - depth correlation qualitative

multiple regression or φ - burial history “high-low”
analysis or φ - burial history correlation assessment
divide data set into
< 10% cement < 10% cement subset and > 10% cement
> 10% cement subset

determine controls (patterns) of cement

distribution and abundance
(modified
(modified from
from Bloch
Bloch and
and Helmold,
Helmold, 1995)
1995)
 “Global” Porosity Prediction Equation
for sandstones with < 5% cement

φ = 18.60 + (4.73 x ln quartz) + 50

50
ideal prediction
(17.37/sorting) -

Porosity
Core Porosity
(3.8 x depth x 10-3) - 40
40

volume)
bulk volume)
(4.65 x ln age)

Estimated Core
30
30

(% bulk
Estimated
20
20 correlation coefficient:
(%

R = 0.98
10
10
regression line
00
00 10
10 20
20 30
30 40
40 50
50
Measured
Measured Core
Core Porosity
Porosity (%
(% bulk
bulk volume)
volume)
(Scherer, 1987)
 Approximate Ranges in Cement Volumes
for Different Styles of Diagenesis
Range
Range in in Volume
Volume Range
Range in in Volume
Volume
Style
Style of
of Diagenesis
Diagenesis of
of Principal
Principal Cement
Cement of
of Ancillary
Ancillary Cements
Cements
Quartz
Quartz dominated
dominated 55 -15%
-15% 33 -- 5%,
5%,
(increases
(increases withwith <5%
<5% late
late carbonate*
carbonate*
temperature
temperature of of burial)
burial)
Clay
Clay dominated
dominated 10
10 -- 20%
20% << 5%
5% quartz,
quartz,
(only
(only illite
illite dominated
dominated increases
increases <5%
<5% late
late carbonate*
carbonate*
with
with temperature
temperature of of burial)
burial)
Early
Early clay/late
clay/late quartz
quartz 55 -- 10%
10% clay,
clay, << 5%
5% late
late carbonate*
carbonate*
<< 5%
5% quartz
quartz
Early
Early carbonate/
carbonate/ << 20
20 -- 30%
30%
evaporite
evaporite dominated
dominated (increases
(increases in in proximity
proximity toto
evaporites/saline
evaporites/saline lake lake deposits)
deposits)
Zeolite
Zeolite 55 -- 20%
20% << 10%
10% clay,
clay,
(increases
(increases withwith increasing
increasing << 10%
10% late
late carbonate*
carbonate*
lithic
lithic content)
content)
*Can be locally < 20 - 30%
From
From Primmer
Primmer et
et al.,
al., 1997
1997
 0
Porosities available at the
onset of the project
Predicted pre-drill porosities
1
6507/12-1
6507/12-1
Depth ( x 1,000m)

(1830m)
(1830m)
2

6507/10-1
6507/10-1
(2880m)
(2880m) 6407/2-2
6407/2-2
(2460m)
(2460m)
3
6407/1-2
6407/1-2 6407/2-1
6407/2-1
(3660m)
(3660m) 6407/1-3
6407/1-3 (2940m)
(2940m)
6506/12-1
6506/12-1 (3600m)
(3600m)
4 (3970m)
(3970m)
6406/3-1
6406/3-1
(3780m)
(3780m)
6507/7-1
6507/7-1
(4300m)
(4300m)
5
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
φ (%) (Bloch,
(Bloch, 1994)
1994)
 Age (MYPB)
180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
0
Mechanical Compaction
Domain

6407/2-1
φ = 26.4%

Depth (km)
1

Differences in burial 6407/10-1

φ = 20.4%
1.5

history below 1500m 2

affect porosity
Quartz
Cementation
Domain

35

(Bloch,
(Bloch, 1994)
1994)
 -2
-2

Area of “Quartz Cementation Domain”

Porosities
Porosities available
available at
at the
the
onset
onset of
of the
the project
project
Predicted
Predicted pre-drill
pre-drill porosities
porosities
-1
-1

6507/12-1
6507/12-1
00
(Ma x km)

6407/2-2
6407/2-2
6407/2-1
6407/2-1
11 6407/1-3
6407/1-3 6507/10-1
6507/10-1
6407/1-2
6407/1-2 6406/3-1
6406/3-1
6507/7-1
6507/7-1
22
6506/12-1
6506/12-1

33
00 10
10 20 30 40 50
φ (%) (Bloch,
(Bloch, 1994)
1994)
 Porosity (%) = - 6.1 + 9.8 (1/sort) +
0.17 (Rigid Grain Content)
20
20

18
18
R2 = 0.75
16
16
(%)

14
Porosity (%)

14
Medium
Medium -- to to coarse-grained
coarse-grained
Measured Porosity

12
12 shoreline
shoreline deposits
deposits
10 Fine-
Fine- toto medium-grained
medium-grained
10
intertidal
intertidal flat
flat deposits
deposits
Measured

88 Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained deltadelta
front/mouth
front/mouth bar bar deposits
deposits
66 Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained
bioturbated
bioturbated fanfan delta
delta front/
front/
44 shelfal deposits
shelfal deposits
Sandy
Sandy distal
distal fan
fan
22 95% Confidence Fine-grained
Fine-grained paludal
paludal --
Interval lacustrine
lacustrine deposits
deposits
00

00 22 44 66 88 1010 12
12 1414 16 16 18
18 20
20
“Predicted”
“Predicted” Porosity
Porosity (%)
(%) (Bloch,
(Bloch, 1994)
1994)
 Log10 (PERM) = - 4.67 + 1.34 (grsz) +
4.08 (1/sort) + 3.42 (R/100)
3.5
3.5

R2 = 0.86
2.5
2.5
(md)
Permeability (md)

1.5
1.5
Measured Permeability

Medium
Medium -- to to coarse-grained
coarse-grained
of
Logarithm of

shoreline
shoreline deposits
deposits
Logarithm

0.5
0.5 Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained
intertidal
intertidal flat
flat deposits
deposits
Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained deltadelta
Measured

front/mouth
front/mouth bar bar deposits
deposits
-0.5
-0.5
Fine-
Fine- to
to medium-grained
medium-grained
bioturbated
bioturbated fanfan delta
delta front/
front/
shelfal deposits
shelfal deposits
-1.5
-1.5 Sandy
Sandy distal
distal fan
fan
95% Confidence Fine-grained
Fine-grained paludal
paludal --
Interval lacustrine
lacustrine deposits
deposits
-2.5
-2.5
-2.5
-2.5 -1.5
-1.5 -0.5
-0.5 0.5
0.5 1.5
1.5 2.5
2.5 3.50
3.50
Logarithm
Logarithm of
of “Predicted”
“Predicted” Permeability
Permeability (md)
(md) (Bloch,
(Bloch, 1994)
1994)
 Example of a Porosity & Permeability
Prediction in Sandstones: Summary
Input
Input Data
Data
A.
A. Outcrop
Outcrop samples
samples and
and samples
samples Predicted Total Mean Porosity
from
from closest
closest wells
wells RO - Porosity “Exemplar”
B.
B. “Best
“Best estimate”
estimate” burial/thermal
burial/thermal regression
history
history data
data Po. ss 10th percentile 7% 9%
Po. ss 50th percentile 11% 14%
Porosity
Porosity Prediction
Prediction Approaches
Approaches Po. ss 90th percentile 15% 19%
Approach
Approach 11
1. Mu. ss 10th percentile 13% 13%
1. Use
Use “best
“best estimate”
estimate” thermal
thermal Mu.ss th
50 percentile 18% 19%
history
history data
data to
to calculate
calculate Mu.ss 90th percentile 23% 24%
present-day
present-day vitrinite
vitrinite reflectance
reflectance
values
values in
in target
target (based
(based onon Burnham
Burnham && Sweeney
Sweeney kinetic
kinetic model)
model)
2.
2. Use
Use Schmoker
Schmoker & & Hester
Hester regression
regression equations
equations of
of R ROO vs.
vs. porosity
porosity

Approach
Approach 22
1.
1. Use
Use “Exemplar”
“Exemplar” to
to simulate
simulate mean
mean porosity
porosity and
and cement
cement abundance
abundance evolution
evolution
2.
2. Calculate
Calculate permeability
permeability
3.
3. Use
Use Monte
Monte Carlo
Carlo analysis
analysis to
to obtain
obtain probabilistic
probabilistic porosity
porosity predictions
predictions
 Example of a Porosity & Permeability
Prediction in Sandstones: Input
A.Expected Lithology in the Proposed Well
(Based
(Based on
on upthrusted
upthrusted outcrop
outcrop samples
samples and
and samples
samples from
from closest
closest wells)
wells)
1.
1. Detrital
Detrital composition:
composition: quartz-rich
quartz-rich (>
(> 85%
85% quartz)
quartz)
2.
2. Texture:
Texture: medium
medium to
to coarse
coarse grain
grain size
size (~0.50mm),
(~0.50mm), moderate
moderate sorting
sorting

B.Diagenesis
Diagenetic
Diagenetic History:
History:
Siderite
Siderite very
very early
early (<40
(<40OO C)
C) II
Kaolinite
Kaolinite Compaction
Compaction
Quartz
Quartz >75oo
>75 II
Fracturing
Fracturing (fractured
(fractured quartz)
quartz) II
Ankerite
Ankerite (minor
(minor ankerite
ankerite in in fractures)
fractures)
Oil
Oil Emplacement
Emplacement (oil
(oil in
in fractures)
fractures)
Uplift
Uplift oxidation
oxidation of
of siderite
siderite andand precipitation
precipitation of
of hematite
hematite
 Predicted Evolution of Effective Porosity
and Cement Abundances
4500
4500 45
45

4000
4000 evolution of 40
40
effective mean
3500
3500 porosity 35
35

Porosity (%) / Cements (%)

3000
3000 30
30
Depth (m)

burial history
2500
2500 25
25

2000
2000 20
20

1500
1500 15
15

1000
1000 10
10
siderite cement
500
500 55
quartz cement
00 0
60
60 50
50 40
40 30
30 20
20 10
10 00 AG-1 Well,
Time (Ma) Po. Sandstone
 Forecast: porosity of Po. Fm. At 0 Ma Example of a Porosity &
P10 10%
% Effective Porosity
6.75
Permeability Prediction in
20%
30%
8.14
9.25
Sandstones: Output
40% 10.31
Permeability = f (effective porosity, average
P50 50% 11.35
60% 12.24 grain size of 0.50mm, <10% clay)
70% 13.06 1000
80% 14.06
P90 90% 15.65

Estimated Permeability (md)

Forecast: porosity at Ma
500 Trials Frequency Chart 0 Outliers
.024 12 100

.018 9

Frequency
Probability

10
.012 6

.006 3

1
.000 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
0.00 5.63 11.25 16.88 22.50 Core Porosity (%)
VR values in the southern San Joaquin basin
do not correlate with depth of burial
00 50
50
Eocene
Oligocene 100
100
Lower &
5000
5000 Middle Miocene

Temperature (OF)
150
150
Depth (feet)

200
200
10000
10000
250
250

15000 300
300
15000
Oligocene
350
350
Eocene
Lower and Middle Miocene
20000
20000 Lines
Lines denote
denote trends
trends for
for
2 3 4 5 6 7 89 1 2 3 4 Gulf
Gulf Coast
Coast sandstones
sandstones
(from
(from Dow,
Dow, 1978)
1978)
Vitrinite
Vitrinite Reflectance
Reflectance
 Reservoir Quality in Volcaniclastic Sandstones

VRF-bearing sand
10%
10% VRFs
VRFs >30%
>30% VRFs
VRFs

>65% quartz lithic arkose or mafic VRF-rich

(+ other rigid grains) fieldspathic litharenite litharenite

6000 - 7,000 ft
plagioclase feldspar, POROSITY
Depth
Time // Depth

glass shards, marine- INCREASE

derived pore fluid reworking of
sediment, early
dissolution of overpressure, early

105o C
mafic VRFs entrapment of HC
Time

precipitation of albitization of plagioclase porosity destruction

complete extensive, precipitation of laumontite by ductile
& thick chlorite coats
deformation of VRFs
porosity destruction by
preservation of primary “killer” cements:
+ secondary porosity laumontite & carbonate
Compaction Model with 50% Quartz: 50% Lithic Sands for
Slate, Shale and Weathered Basalt
00
Weathered
Weathered
Basalt
Basalt
22

44
Slate
Slate
Effect on Curve
Decreases
Decreases Porosity
Porosity
ft)
(1033 ft)

66
•• High
High geothermal
geothermal gradient
gradient
Shale
Depth (10

Shale •• Decrease
80 Decrease in
in sorting
sorting
80
Depth

•• Cement
Cement (Depends
(Depends on
on Timing)
Timing)

10
10 Increases
Increases Porosity
Porosity
•• Relatively
Relatively early
early overpressure
overpressure
12 •• Creation
Creation of
of secondary
secondary porosity
porosity
12
•• Entrapment
Entrapment of
of hydrocarbons
hydrocarbons
14
14

10
10 20
20 30
30 40
40
Porosity
Porosity (%)
(%) (from
(from Pittman
Pittman &
& Larese,
Larese, 1991)
1991)
In moderately-sorted, VRF-rich (>35% VRFs) sandstones, reservoir
quality is drastically reduced below approximately 6,000 ft

1000
1000 40%
40% VRFs
VRFs

2000
2000
Interpolated
Interpolated from
from
3000 experimental
experimental
3000 compaction
compaction curves
curves
(ft)
Depth (ft)

Luzon-Cagayan
Luzon-Cagayan of
of Pittman & Larese
Pittman & Larese
4000 Basins,
Basins, (1991)
(1991)
Depth

4000
Philippines
Philippines
5000
5000

6000
6000

7000
7000

8000
8000
00 55 10
10 1515 20 20 2525 30 30 35
35 40
40
Thin-Section
Thin-Section Porosity
Porosity (%)
(%)
 Comparison of Geologic & Experimental Compaction
Contact index and contact types as a function of simulated overburden pressure, for compaction
tests conducted with Eagle River sand and triaxial overburden apparatus

contact
contact index
index
5.0
5.0 tangential
tangential
long
long
concavo-convex
concavo-convex BELUGA 7136 ft
grain
contacts // grain

4.0
4.0 φ = 0.5%

BELUGA 5561.9 ft
of contacts

3.0
3.0 φ = 5.6%

2.0
number of

2.0
number

1.0
1.0

00 11 22 33 44 55 66 77 88 99 10
10
simulated 3
simulated overburden
overburden pressure
pressure (10
(103 p.s.i.)
p.s.i.)
(from
(from Kurkjy,
Kurkjy, 1988)
1988)
Approach to Reservoir Quality Prediction in
Sandstones with a Wide Range
of Pore-Filling Cements

Calibration Data Set

< 10% Cement > 10% Cement

Predictive Model Based Predictive Model Based on
on Multiple Regression Understanding the Origin and 3D
Analysis Distribution Pattern of Cement(s)
 Conclusions

Occurrence and Abundance of Laumontite in Middle

Eocene-Late Oligocene Arkosic Sandstones of the San
Emigdio Area Exhibit Distinct Patters:
Temperature >215OO F (~100OO C)
Geologic Time Most Abundant in Upper Oligocene
Areal Distribution South of the White Wolf Fault;
Abundance Decreases
Systematically from N to S
(Increasing Distance from Volcanic Center ?)
 30

Measured vs 95% Confidence

Band +/- 8%
Predicted Porosity
Regression on Detrital Matrix

Measured Porosity (%)

and Depth for All Samples 20

10

0 10 20 30
Predicted Porosity (%)
 30
95% Confidence
+/-3.5%
Measured vs Band

Predicted Porosity

Measured Porosity (%)

Regression on Detrital Matrix
20
and Depth for Samples
with <10% Cement

10

0 10 20 30
Predicted Porosity (%)
 Three Prediction Subsets
60
60
predictable
predictable through
through
regression
regression equation
equation
50
50
laumonite
laumonite
++
Samples

chlorite/smectite carbonate
of Samples

40 chlorite/smectite carbonate
40
predictable
predictable 3D
3D not
not predictable
predictable
distribution pattern
distribution pattern
30
30
Number of
Number

20
20

10
10

00
Midpoint
Midpoint 2.5
2.5 7.5
7.5 12.5
12.5 17.5
17.5 22.5
22.5 27.5
27.5 32.5
32.5 37.5
37.5 42.5
42.5 47.5
47.5 52.5
52.5 57.5
57.5 62.5
62.5
Total
Total Cement
Cement (%)
(%)
 0

Clinoptilolite
Occurs 50

Only Below
215o F 100

Temperature (OF)
150

200

250

300

0 2 4 6 8 10
Clinoptilolite (%)
 00

Laumontite 50
50
Occurs
Only Above 100

F)
100

Temperature ((ooF)
215oo F

Temperature
150
150

200
200

250
250

300
300
00 22 44 66 88 10
10
Laumontite
Laumontite (%)
(%)
 Chlorite/Smectite and Laumontite Display a Sympathetic
Relationship on a Thin-Section Scale

50

40
Number of Samples

30

20

10

0
C/S Laumontite Laumontite No Laumontite
No Laumontite No C/S and C/S and No C/S
 30
30

Laumontite and
Carbonate Cements 25
25
Are Mutually
Exclusive 20
20

(%)
Laumontite (%)
Laumontite
15
15

10
10

55

00
00 10
10 20
20 30
30 40
40 50
50 60
60
Carbonate
Carbonate Cement
Cement (%)
(%)
 Some of the Laumontite is
Geologically Very Young
320
320

250
250

F)
Temperature ((ooF)
215
215

Temperature
175
175

100
100

32
32
60
60 40
40 20
20 00
Time
Time (my)
(my)
At Temperatures > 225o F, Zeolite Abundance in Zemorrian ss (late early &
late Oligocene) Decreases from North to South (?)

White
White Wolf
Wolf 0
Fault
Fault 0 18 (4)
(4)
(6) (7) Res
Res 11-24
11-24
(6) (7)
Tejon
Tejon
0 G
G 87-23
87-23 12-30
12-30
Block 0 (5)
(5) 11 10
Block (4)
(4)
KCL-2 (14)
(14) (3)
(3)
B-1
B-1
KCL-2 2
0 0 (13)
4-35
4-35 334
334
(13)
(5)
(5) P-1
(2)
(2) P-1
D-1
D-1
E-1
E-1

C
0

al
if
C-2 ?? Sketch
Sketch

or
C-2
Area
Area

ni
a
18 laumontite
laumontite abundance
abundance (%)
(%) 22 Km
Km
(7)
(7) number
number of
of samples
samples
20-30
20-30 well
well number
number