.

@oloty-of Petrobun En#wwsj

SPE 27966

Barriers b How in TidaI Sandstone Reservoirs, Sun Ranch Field,

Wyoming
R,W.TMman,* Consulting
Geologist,
and E.D.Pittman,
Consulting
Geologist
●SPE Member

ccpvight WS4, society of Pewokm Ewinwa Inc.

miapaper was preparedfor prwaentetion

81the Wikereitj...{ m,~a
. . . @tinnI.SI ~twm Engineeringsymposiumhefd in TUk3.9,OK U.S.A., *31 Au9u* 1~.

This paper was selectedfor presentationby an SPE ProgramCommitteefollowingreview’of informationoomeinedin en ebetrec4SUbmm@W iii W@@). @n!e@ Qfthe P-!
se presented,have not been reviewedby the Sookty oi PelrofeumEngineersand are subjectto correctionby the author(s).The material,es Presented,dose not neCeeS@YWW
SIIYPOS~~ Ofth SOOW of P-m En9iwm, ~ MCW% w Mm-. PSPM P-nt@ at Sf’E -i- we S* to @l* r~~ W Ed~~l ~mw of the -W
of PetroleumEngineers.Permleaiontooopyisremrkted10en ebetmcfofnotmorethan310 words.Illuefretiorrsmaynotbe copied.The ebetrecfshouldcontainconapkuwe acknwledgmanf
~ ware end by whom the paper in presented.wr~e Libr@an, SPE. f’.o. ~ -, Rkh~~n, TX 7~, U.S.A, Telex, 163245 SPEUT.

ABSTRACT as baffles to flow; and (5) are the focus

of diagenetic clay formation. Because of
Tidal1y deposited valley-fi11 sandstones, the significant amounts of clay present in
when sourced from the sea, as is the case in some tidal and tidally-reworked fluvial
Sun Ranch field, Wyoming, general1y form sand valley fills, they have significantly lower
bodies which contain smaller pores, (finer porositv and Dermeabilitv and smaller “Port
grained) and contain significantly more pore sizes’’--than‘ most fl[vial and deltaic
throat plugging by detrital (and d’iagenetic) deposits.
clay than most superficially similar fluvial
or distributary channel sandstones. The INTRODUCTION
detrital clay occurs as thin beds, drapes,
clasts and “grains.“ Calculated log porosi- Sun Ranch fie d (Fig. 1), which produces
ties are significantly lower where clay from the Cretaceous ~ge Muddy Sandstone in
occurs in otherwise h igh quality reservoir the Wind River Basin of Wyoming, was dis-
sandstones. The quality of the reservoir is covered in March, 1987, by Sun Oil Company
comonly masked on 1ogs by the effect of the and its partners. The discovery well, the
clay clasts. Sun Ranch No, 1, initially produced 1048
STB/D. Within a year most of the 10 wells
Individual tidal valley-fil1 deposits are that produce in the field were completed
demonstrably separable laterally and gener- and a number of significant production pro-
ally have several locally continuous hori- blems were observed indicating the presence
zontal shaley beds which form baff1es or of reservoir heterogeneity. Production data
barriers that slow or prevent vertical flow. for Sun Ranch field is given in Table 1.
These very thin horizontal beds are: (1) dom-
inantly clay and fine sand and silts deposit- In Novembere 1988, the field was shut in by
ed during marine to brackish flooding events; the Wyoming Oil and Gas Commission, pending
(2) are easily recognizable in core but not unitization. Several events indicated sig-
on most logs; (3) have very low porosity and nificant compartmentation of the reservoir.
permeability; (4) prevent or deter vertical Following unitization, the field was re-
flow between reservoir compartments and act turned to production in Octobers 19893 and
gas injection was begun in the Sun 12-22
well. After seven months with no apparent
References and illustrations at end of paper. response in the down dip wells the 12-22

97
2 BARRIERS TO FLOW IN TIDAL SANDSTONE RESERVOIRS, SUN RANCH FIELD, WYOMING
gas injection pcir!t was moved to another
,.lal
1 the Sun 7-22. Gas injection in the
“=,,,
7-22 was slightly more successful than in the
earlier well, however, numerous wells in the
field had little or no response to the in-
jected gas. Numerous other production pro-
blems during the history of the field, in-
cluding production of oil above gas, also
indicated significant reservoir heterogene-
ity. In 1992, the authors of this paper
undertook a field-wide study of Sun Ranch
field with the expectation that they could
geologically characterize the field in such
a way that a historical reservoir simulation
could be carried out in a fashion that would
better characterize the field than was done
at the time of the unitization. Detailed
geological analysis, using seven cored wells,
indicated that the reservoirs in the field
were deposited primarily by tidal back-fill
of an incised valley. Erosion of the valley
occurred during a regional relative sea-level
drop in the Cretaceous seaway, which extended
from north to south through western North
America (Fig. 2).
BACKGROUND
The field is located on the steeply-dipping
(14=18° NE) southeast flank of the Wind River
Basin (Fig. 3) and produces from subsea
depths from -2400 to -4200’ (Fig. 4). The
Muddy Sandstone producing interval in Sun
Ranch field is similar to that producing
from Grieve field located approximately
eight miles to the southeast and in North
Grieve field which adjoins Sun Ranch field
(Fig. 5). All of these fields produce from
sandstone deposited in incised valleys, which
were eroded by rivers into the underlying
“marine” Skull Creek Shale. The producing
sandstone in Sun Ranch field is called the
Grieve sandstone (Fig. 6) and within the
field area it ranges in thickness from O to
at least 71 feet.
Early interpretations for the depositional
environment of the reservoirs at Sun Ranch
field were primarily fluvial (river). Sub-
sequent work by the co-authors and by Charles
Pritchard2 have verified the fluvial origin
of the incision, however, the reservoirs in
Sun Ran- are primarily the result of
98
SPE 027966
sandstone being deposited in an incised
valley (estuary) by tidal processes c!tiri
several relative sea ?evel rises. During
sea level rise the valleys were filled ini-
tially nearest the sea and with additional
sea level rises gradually back-filled up-
valley.
FIELD PARAMETERS
During unitization of the field a net
isopach map was constructed for the field
(Fig. 7). The initial oil/water contact on
the northeast side of the field was estab-
lished to be at approximately -3800 feet.
Within the Unit area the reservoir, as map-
ped, thins from 67 to O feet. Subsequent
work, described below, indicates that this
isopach map is exceedingly oversimplified.
Mapping, during this project, indicates
that the reservoir is larger and much more
complicated than the unit map (Fig. 8) in-
dicates (Tillman, et al5). There is abun-
dant evidence for the necessity of faulting
in the Skull Creek Shale to provide accom-
modation space for valley-fill deposits at
Sun Ranch field as well as other Muddy
Sandstone fields in Wyoming as was summar-
ized by Tillman, et a16.
Using a flooding surface at the top of the
valley as a datum, offsets on numerous
vertically distributed parallel and hori-
zontal marker beds observable in the Skull
Creek Shale on detailed stratigraphic cross
sections indicate pre-valley fill faulting.
Evidence for generation of accommodation
space by faulting prior to valley filling
includes: (1) marker beds initially depos-
ited horizontally above and below the
valley fills have the greatest vertical
separation where Skull Creek graben blocks
are observed; (2) thicker valley-fil1 de-
posts accumulate in graben blocks bounded
by “crossing faults” with vertical separa-
tions of 5 to 35 feet than in adjacent
blocks; (3) faults terminate upwards at
the base of valleys as evidenced by lack of
offset of markers within the open bay-fill
in the upper portion of the valleys and
horizontality and parallelism of marine or
estuarine flooding surfaces overlying the
m 027965 RODERICK W. TILLMAN AND EDWARD D. PITTMAN
the valleys; (4) accommodationspace is not
proportional to the thickness of compressible
mudrocks within, adjacent to, or below
valleys; and (5) equivalent lateral thicknes-
ses beween subhorizontal mudrock markers be-
low and adjacent to valleys indicate a lack
of significant differential compaction prior
to incission of valleys.
Evidence for creation of significant valley-
fill accommodationspace during filling of the
valley by differential compaction is appar-
ently lacking. However, differential compac-
tion has influenced the present geometric
configuration of the mudrocks above, below,
within and lateral to the valleys. An isopach
map of the valley filling Grieve sandstone,
constructed by the authors and including Sun
Ranch and North Grieve fields, indicates a
potential elongation of the Sun Ranch reser-
voir to the south and a separation between
the Sun Ranch and North Grieve field sand
bodies (Fig. 8).
At the time of unitization, and until 1992,
faulting within the field was considered to
be unimportant. Subsequent work by the
authors indicates that some of the grabens
(low areas) created by faulting were areas of
thickest reservoir sandstone accumulation
(Fig. 9). The faults within and bordering
the field are mapped as normal faults and are
p!’oba~lyrelated to deeper-seated strike slip
faultlng observed on seismic (Pritchard, per-
sonal cunmunication).
GEOLOGIC ANALYSIS
Numerous detailed cross sections, supple-
mented by sedimentologic core interpreta-
tions, indicate that the southern part of
the reservoir is formed by a series of tid-
ally deposited vertically stacked sand-
stones, which abut laterally against valley
walls and are commonly separated vertically
by reservoir-wide, less permeable shaley
sandstones and shales (Fig. 10). The lateral
extent of individual sand bodies was mapped
(Figs. 11-13). All except H1 and HZ are
primari”y tidal deposits. The highest pro-
duction is from the northeast portion of
the fie’d (shaded area of Fig. 11). This
portion of the field, also tidally deposited,
99
3
was deposited following a second major
valley-cutting erosional event that removed
almost all of the sandstone units shown in
Figure 10. This second fill of the valley
followed a second relative sea level fall,
and occurred during a subsequent sea level
rise. Accommodation space for the later-
deposited valley-fill in the northeast part
of the field resulted from destruction of
large portions of earlier deposited valley-
fills by intense storm-tide and/or fluvial
erosion. This resulted in laterally and
obliquely adjoining valley-fills, which at
least locally were separated by low perme-
ability barriers and/or baffles.
PRODUCTION CHARACTERISTICS
Gravity drainage has greatly enhanced pro-
duction in specific wells in the northeast
portion of the field, while at the same
time several wells have watered out as a
result of the rise ~n the oil/water contact.
Individual tidally deposited sand bodies
have mappable lateral boundaries (Figs. 11-
13). Most of these sand bodies (designated
as 1 through 6 and A through G) have little
or no vertical communication and have
either baffles or barriers to flow at the
margin of each individual sandstone.
The reservoir geometry and producing char-
acteristics of the tidally deposited
valley-fill sandstones in Sun Ranch field
differ from fluvially deposited valley-fill
sandstones observed in other superficially
similar fields. Tidal deposits contain
significant amounts of clay, which was de-
posited along with the sand during slack
periods of the tidal cycle or during minor
sea level rises.
Tidal valley-fill deposits generally have
numerous locally continuous very thin low-
permeabil~ty horizontal barriers or baffles
to flow (Fig. 10). These surfaces are form-
ed by erosion during storms or minor rela-
tive sea level rises within the valleys or
estuaries. These intervals are significant
in that they: (1) are dominantly clay with
minor amounts of fine sand and silts,
all of which were deposited during
marine to brackish flooding events (Fig.
4 BARRIERS TO FLOW IN TIDAL SANDSTONE RESERVOIRS, SUN RANCH FIELD, WYOMING
14); (2) are easily recognizable in core but
not on most logs; (3) have very low porosity
and permeability; (4) prevent or deter verti-
cal flow between reservoir compartments and,
where they are discontinuous, act as baffles
to flow; and (5) are the focus of diagenetic
clay formation in immediately adjacent sand-
stones.
Detrital clay may also occur as drapes on
cross laminations and ripples (Fig. 14). The
clay drapes form baffles to flow. If the
clay drapes are eroded they may form clasts,
which are distributed throughout the sand
(Fig. 14). Where clay clasts are abundant,
in otherwise high quality reservoir sand-
stone: the quality of the sands may be marked
on logs by the effect of the clay clasts.
PETROGRAPHY
Nine cores were studied from Sun Ranch field
and the adjoining North Grieve field. Both
fields produce from the Muddy (Grieve) Sand-
stone and both produce primarily from tidal
back-filled sandstone facies. One hundred
thin sections from the two fields were stud-
ied and selected X-ray diffractometry and
Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) studies
were carried out. Thin sections were taken
from porosity and permeability plugs when
available or immediately adjacent to the plug
1ocations. Quantitative data concerning rock
composition, pore size and geometry and pet-
rophysical results were determined from the
thin section, SEM and X-ray data.
Ninety-eight percent of the detrital miner-
.ologyin the Grieve sandstone in Sun Ranch
field is quartz with the remainder being
feldspar and rock fragments. Porosity is
intergranular and for values above 1 md
forms a pattern with little scatter when
plotted against permeability (Fig. 15).
This is the common pattern for intergranular
porosity (Pittman7). Scatter in this fig-
ure below 1 md is the result of shaley mater-
ial and mineral cements. Microporosity,
which is usually associated with clays, is
not important in the sandstones.
100
SPE 027966
PETROPHYSICS
When individual data points on the kill plot
(Fig. 16) are identified three areas of data
are observed. The best production charac-
teristics are above the oil water contact
or in the oil/water transition zone in the
G2 reservoir (a portion of G in Fig. 11).
Intermediate values in this figure are from
the largely uneconomic G3 tidal-flat sand-
stone, which is locally 16 feet thick and
occurs as the upper sandstone in several
wells in the northeast part of the field.
The low values of porosity and permeability
are alnost all below the oil/water contact
in the G2 sandstone. Many of the low
values are the result of cementation by
kaol?nite and quartz; other low values in
the G2 sandstone are at least partially
facies controlied and are 1ow-efiergyshaley
tidal deposits.
A useful indicator of potential productiv-
ity is port size. Port size, as defined by
Hartmann and CoalsonB, is the pore throat
aperture (radius) corresponding to the 35th
percentile of a mercury injection plot cal-
culated using Winland’s equation:
Log R35 = 0.732 + 0.588*log k-O.864*log 0
Pittman7 compared the range of port sizes
in a large number of productive sandstones
and determined that all port sizes that
exceed 2.5 microns are high quality reser-
voirs. Figure 17 shows that a significant
number of values in Sun Ranch field exceed
2.5 microns and, hence, are regarded as
excellent reservoirs.
Port size, when compared to single porosity
or permeability plots, better illustrates
the relative difference is reservoir qual-
ity between poor and excellent reservoirs
(Fig. 18). Shaley facies, although thin,
form vertical barriers to flow within Sun
Ranch field. As many as seven units in the
Sun Ranch Federal A-2 well form vertica’
barriers (or baffles) to flow (Fig. 18)
In this well fluvial and tidal accretiol
bank sandstones form high quality reser-
voirs. Mean values for individual unit
in the A-2 well range as follows: Fluvial
SPE 027966 RODERICK W. TILLMAN AND EDWARD D. PITTMAN 5

k = 100-300 md, o = 11-15%; tidal accre- barriers is required in at least one ‘we!l
tion-bank, k = 112-200 md, $ = 13-16%. where oil is produced above gas.
Port sizes exceed 12 microns in the
fluvial sandstone and range from 7 to 14 The initial oil/water contact was at about
microns in the tidal accretion-bank sand- -3800 feet and has moved slowly upward as
stones. fluids are produced during primary produc-
tion. Production on several of the most
In contrast, port sizes in the BHP Sun down-dip wells has been impaired by upward
Ranch federal well do not exceed 10 microns movement of the water. Little, if any,
in any of the facies (Fig. 19) and, as is water drive occurs in wells in the field.
discussed in a following section, the average However, once the oil/water contact rises
l.,--m+ffetion
monthly ~1vuuw.. . . for this well is less than so as to encounter the more updip wells
IOZ Of that in the Sun A-2 well. Production (tipdipof the F sandstone, Fig. 12) the
in this well is from the 5, 6, D and E2 relatively abundant compartments caused by
reservoirs in Figures 10-12. the thin shale and shaiey layers will fur-
ther complicate producibility.
Another way to visually represent reservoir
quality on a well to well basis is to plot As illustrated ~n Figure 21, the Sun A-2
cumulative kh vs porosity. In Figure 20A (Map Wel1 No. 7) has the highest average
and 20B high cumulative data indicate a good production over the life of the field. It
reservoir. In contrast, the low values in produces an average of 11,600 barrels of
Figure 20C indicate marginal to low produc- oil per month, while the adjacent wells
tion potential. produce only 7100 and 4500 barrels per
month. In the southwest part of the field
PRODUCTION individual wells average less than 1100
barrels per i~i)tith. ,,,,”wide variat’iOfl in
Thic
Production from individual wells varies producibility can be explained in part by
greatly in Sun Ranch field. In general, gravity drainage, but the decreased kh and
wells penetrating the G2 sandst~ne in the shale compartmentation and the lateral seg-
northeast part of the field (Fig. 11) pro- regation of the reservoir as a result of
duced the most oil because: (1) the G2 sand- numerous individual sand-body deposits are
stone has the best reservoir qualities of responsible for a significant portion of the
any sandstone; (2) is the most laterally decrease in reservoir quality in some of
continuous of any sandstone; (3) extends the up-dip wells.
well above the oil/water contact; and (4)
receives gravitv drainage because it is the The lack of communication among wells in the
lowest part of~he field. ~pdip ~r~~s is illustrated by the problems
encountered when the BHP 12-22 well (Hap
Reservoirs that are perforated in the F Well No. 20) was seiected for use as a gas
sandstone (Fig. 12) also receive some benefit injection well. After seven months of in-
from gravity drainage and have reasonably jection in the 12-22 well there was no
good reservoir properties. Sandstones that apparent response to the gas in any of the
produce from neither the F, G1 or G2 sand- down-dip wells. We can conclude then that
stones have inferior reservoir quality pri- this well was effectively sealed off from
marily due to absence of thick non-shaley the adjacent wells; probably in part by the
sandstones, thinner total sandstone thickness small fault inferred to exist north of the
and more abundant vertical compartinentaticfi well (Fig. 9) and in part due to the verti-
by thin relatively continuous shales. These cal separation of the reservoir sandstones
shales prevent or slow gravity drainage from by horizontal shale barriers (Fig. 10). The
updip of the wells and locally isolate com- gas injection well was relocated to well
partments from the perforated portions of the 7-22 (Fig. 1) and, as expected on the basis
well. Compartmentation by horizontally de- of our reservoir analysis (Fig. 22), better
posited (and structurally tilted) shale(?) pressurization results were achieved for
portions of the field.

101
6 BARRIERS To FLou IN TIDAL SANDSTONE RESERVOIRS, SUN RANCH FIELD, WYOMING SPE 027966

RESERVOIR HETEROGENEITY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Reservoir heterogeneity characteristics are Funding for this field study was primarily
as follows: from S6 IR/DOEproject DE-FG05-90ER80976.
In-kind support was provided by BHP
1. Reservoir thickness and continuity are (Americas).
highly variable from well to well in tidally
back-filled valley-fill reservoirs. Discussion on the nature and history of
2. Several thin “shales” (<1.0’), which have Sun Ranch field with Phil Schenewerk and
nearly field-wide extent, occur as vertical Charles Pritchard was especially helpful.
flow barriers in many wells. James Hopper contributed to construction
3. More than one valley-filling event has of reservoir maps and cross sections. Dick
occurred in wells in the northeast part of Banks, from SCA, produced the final
~~e f~~~~o computer-generatedmaps.
4. Faulting with offsets of less than 50
feet influences the production and reservoir REFERENCES
thickness in many wells.
5. The character of subsurface gamma-ray 1. Lawson, D.E., “Sun Ranch field, Sym-
logs are locally misleading due to the pre- Oil and Gas Fields,
sence of clay in a variety of forms within
the sands. Association, 1989,
6. Some parts of the valley-fill are non- p* 491.
productive siltstones and shales. Some
wells within and ad.iacentto the Sun Ranch 2. Pritchard, C., “Sequence analysis of
unit contain no ~andstones and are non- North Grieve and Sun Ranch fields,
productive (Pritcha d2). Eastern Mind River Basin, Wyoming”, in
Strock and Andrews (eds), Wvomi~
CONCLUSIONS

1. Tidal back-fil”ed incised-valley reser-

voirs vary from we”1 to well in: a. Thick-
ness; b. porosity and permeability; c. oil
in place. 3. Keefer, W. R., “Geology of Petroleum
2. There is more than one valley-filling in Wind River Basin, Central Wyoming”,
event in the area of highest production (NE Amer. Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bulletin,
part of field). 1979, p. 1839-1865.
30 Small faults (<50 ft.) influence reservoir
thickness and lateral boundaries of valley- 4. Mitchell, G. C., “Grieve Oil field: A
fill. lower Cretaceous estuarine deposit”.
4. Barriers and baffles to flow occur on at in R. C. Boyd (cd.), Field-6u~de:
least three scaies in valley-fill: a. Marine ~sources of the Wind River Basin,
~ha~e~ form ~~tera~ seals at edge of valley- Wyoming Geolo~
fill; bl. individual sand bodies (A-G, 1-6) Annuai-Field Conference !iu~c!ebook$
are laterally defined and some sand-body 1978, p. 147-165.
margins are barriers or baffles to flow; b2.
thin “field-wide” tidal or open-bay shales 5 Tillman, R. W., E. O. pittman, p.
form barriers to vertical flow; c. relatively Schenewerk, M. EMalik, B. Kara, NC
abundant clay drapes on cross-laminations and Navarette and Kasap, “Sun Ranch
ripples form baffles to flow. field and Muddy S~ndstone outcrops;
5. Variability of production rates of indi- multiple scale valley-fill sandstone
vidual wells is controlled by: a= Gravity heterogeneities
..and geologic and engin-
* -;w3+”fin
eering reservoir characberr~ablvf. a al-
~n-.
segregation (15° dip); b. water encroachment;
c. primary and injected gas. ysis, Phase II”, Annual Report to DOE

102
SPE 027966 RODERICK W. TILLMAN AND EDWARD D. PITTMAN 7

for project DE-FG05-90ER880976, December,

1992.

6. Tillman, R. W., J. F. Hopper, J. Cole,

“The necessity for faulting in providing
accommodationspace for some valley-fill
deDosits in the Cretaceous of the Western
ln~erior”, in Program and Abstracts VOl-
ume, Geologfi Society of Amerlca Annual
w, Boston, Massachusetts, 19939
● .

7* Pittman, E. D., “Relationship of porosity

and permeability to various parameters
derived from mercury injection-capillary
pressure curves for sandstone”, Amer.
Assoc. Petrol. Geol. Bull., 1992, V. 76,
p. 191-198.

R
-: Hartmann$ D.J. and E. Coalson, ‘iEvaluation
of the Morrow Sandstone in Sorrento field,
Cheyenne County, Colorado”, ~ Morrow
Sandstones of Southeast Colorado a-

-’
of Geo oglsts,‘ocky
1990, ‘oun’a’n ‘Ssoc’at’on
p. 91-100.

103
 2
r
.——-!
-...
SUN RANCH UNIT

4!
5

I-:AF?
+ \ --- . ,
4$16

VALLEY

1: I
12 13 ~., I
3-22

16 17
.
~ EDGE OF SAND-
. . ..
SIN.f\ ~ 6--Z G-Z 7:z ~ FILLED VALLEY
I
-:9 [

1+
I

r-
/

10 (MAP WELL NUMBER)

●
~
4-22 (VNK WELLNUMBER) o MILE

Fig. 1 sun Ranch field. Unit boundary markedby

dashed line. Unit well numbers are below well loca-
tion, map well numbers are above well location. Edges
of valley containing reservoir sandstones are shown.

\L

Fig. 2 Western interior seaway paleogeography. Seaway

during portions of Cretaceous time extended from Alaska
to the Gulf of Mexico. Muddy reservoir sandstone wa$
deposited in valleys cut during drop in sea level in
this seaway.

104
 TABLE 1, SUN RANCHFIELD RESERVOIR DATA

F.*-.+<
rurmabiGR: Muddy (Grieve Sand); Lower Cretaceous

Lithology: Sandstone

Discovery Date: November 3, 1987

Porosity: 11.5% (Mean Core%)

Permeability: 83.5 md (Mea!?Core %)

Average Pay Thickness: 35 feet

Oil/Gas Column: 1700+ feet

Oil/WaterContact: 3800’ (Initial)

Gas/Oil Ratio: Variable; 931:1

Initial Pressure: 4300psi (@ 10,100 feet)

Drive Mechanism: Gas expansion, gravity, water invasion

Rw and/or Salinity: 1.4 @ 60°F

Bottom Hole Temperature: 150°F @ 10,240 feet

Character of Hydrocarbons: Gravity 35.9° API @ 60°F. Gas BTU-1132 drya

83% Methane. 11% Ethane. 3% Propane

Continuity of Reservoir: Limited. Two periods of estuarine valley-fill. Laterally

la ~aye~s fgrm barriers to vertical flow and
cont~nuotissha,=
individual laterally and obliquely related sand bodies have
lateral barriers and baffles to flow.

Cumulative Production (Primary; 1992) 1,033,522B0,

5,569,943 FCFG, 52,4112BW

Secondary Recovery: None (1992)

Estimated Ultimate Recovery: Unknown

(Table based on Lawsonl)

105
 of Sun Ranch field (hachured
Fig. 3 Outline of Wind River Basin and location
square) west of Casper, Wyoming. Structure contours are on Permian age rocks.
(Modifiedfmm Keefer3)

Dipbelow
of valley; top of Skull Creek Shale,‘base of the
Fig. 4 Structure map at base The elevation at the
and within unit is to NE. C.l: =.100 f$et”
reservoir decreases 2000 feet w~thln a mile.

106
 11

MUDDY ISOPACH NIERVAl-

conmuf Intewal 20’
5 miles
‘* ‘~
, p’l- 1 I
ii i I l-. ~ .

Fig. 5 Isopach map of Muddy (Grieve) Sandstone valley-

Wind River Basin, WyMing.
fill estuarine reservoirs,
(Modifiedfrom Mitchel14).

aw.lumll
SUNEXPLORAW ANOPROOU-N
SUNRANCHFED.NO.Z SUNRANW FIEO
SWNESEC.1S733NRS4W(NON-DEVWW WELL).NA~OM COUWf, WVOMWO
. Cbven n ,.cm

SNSLL
Cnlmu
mp#
P&Mm

TOP
Gmsvs
smo=~~’
——-

sKULL
cum

Fig. 6 Sun Ranch fl--- ..,.

level
stone is valley-fill reservoir ;n yalley cut uring
Intodl
: .-*..
Creek Shale during dropValley
in relatlve seaduring closely
was filled
early Cretaceous ti~..
following sea level rise.
107
 I t ~—= 11
I I II II
12 I

., .=, I *9CI I

I I

Fig. 7 Sun Ranch unit net-pay isopach map compiled ~

1988 by the Sun Ranch unitization c~mit:ee. Wells ate
numbered according to unit well designation.

1
-.-.-k

Fig. 8 Grieve (Muddy) Sandstone grossOutllne san$ ~sopacrl

of Sun
map, Sm Ranch and North Grieve fle~ds”
Ran~h field is dashed. ‘a? ?r!p!!Y.!{.$?.a~~Rr~~
LOCaL.lon UI t,Iw=- -------
Wells have unique numbers.
A’ is indicated. Compare with Figure 7.
 Y .———-. s

,....,
~..—. : I I
\—OfW CONTACT
/

?ALEOTIIMGRAPHIC

s
EOGC OF V/$LLtW
ti
=
MOIW’MORIEW
~
Fig. 9 Faulting (lines with ‘teeth’) in western portion of Sun Ranch field
(T33NR86w). Offsets are indicated at Dakota silt marker designated Iby
Mitchellq as URB.
/1 Id Ular *

Bottom Hole Location

Cored wall
I-u d.”.
Faults (listed in order of occurrence; sawteeth point down fault plane)

Vertical separation across fault at that location.

]&s ——-—
-------

i ‘-----

Fig. 11 Sand body location map. Individual tidally-

deposited sand bodies (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, G) have demon-
strable lateral extent and at margin of sand body there
may be a barrier or baffle to flow. Most of the oil
production in the field is from sand body G (see text).
Refer to Fiaure 10 for vertical extent of some of the
sand bodie!s.
Iw
‘W
 A’
INORTH
A
SOUTti
8HP PETR. AMERICAS INC.
BHP PET?%AMERICAS INC. SUN FtANCH FEDERAL #4-22
BHP PEITL AMEfWICAS INC.
SUN RANCH FIEDERAL #5-22 ,10
SUN RANCI{ FEDE13AL #12-22
●115
@ 20
160~ ~ — 1200.—~1350’ —
——-
GR DEN f!
GR DEN Ji
GR DEN g
/
J
<
?OP Muoor
SANOS1OME
r-
.. .
—— —

<

sunrluti
top * *fAut!r

k’
lc#l&
—. —

msti {W vuL-
:.

.-
.

.——

TOP Owo?a
$ANOS1ON6
FMXJNDAFIV

@ O [1 <
cross section through a portion of Sun Ranch
Fig. 10 North-south stratigraphic have low porosit,yand
I)iaglonally
h achured intervals are shaley and..
field.
permeability. Individualsand layers have defined vertl(-alextents= The 10~;
base of the valley and a !SequenceBoundary.
wavy lime is the unconformable units 3 and 4 is a within-the-llalley
unconformabllesurface (wavy 1ine) betwe:en
erosion surface. Individualsandstones are d%ignatedl th~oughl$ . and
Lociit’iOII
A ‘[hroughOf
G. Pre-vallley-filling faults are on both sides of well .
this cross-$ectionshown in Figure 8.
 R86W
R86W 19 14

,s
~ “1
\ “NCONFORhl~y W

WNRANCM ~--,

:
/
d
/
/ I m

.,A,.EoT(J?OORAFt8 Ic
EUGE OF VALLMY

“ %#+i-si---;-----; !,
0
--------------J *

m i-

- .!!
*
. 01
---- - --1
IALEOTO~;RArlfiC * I
. 1
s I
0 L

~
n
.
/1 u s
.
m
v
e
.ex

“
e

——---
_.. —..-
1, ------. ”-- _. -----
,, — --—
~ _-..—

Fig. 13 Sand body location map” Individual tidally depositd sand bodies A
Refer to Figure 10 for vertical extent
Individual tidallY
Fig. 12 Sand Body 1ocation map. and C andlmarine sand bodies HI and H2.
deposited sand bodies (1),E2 E3, F and J) have demon- of some c~fthe sand bodies.
strable lateral extent and at margin of sand body there
maybe a barrier or baffle to flow. Refer.to Figure 10
for vertical extent of some of the sand bodies.
 BAFFLES
SHALE BARRIERS AND
16
——-- -.. ,R =HALE
e. .. .-— ON
— ---
sHALE BEDS ANU sHALE CLA= S
CROSS-LAMINAE
SHALEY SANDSTONE

. . . . . .
: .. . . . . .
. \
.“.
. . . .
. . . .-

. .
. . . . . . .
..” - .
. . . .. . . . . ..
.. . . . .

ERODED INTO
EDGE OF VALLEY VALLEY FILL
sILTY SHALE
sHALE ON RIPPLES CUT INTO MARINE SHALE

. .. . . . . . .. .
. . . ..”..
. . . .. . .. .
. .
. . .. .
. . ..-Z . / . - -. /
“. / . . .. . . . ./
.. . .. . . ---- MM, . . . ---
. . ..-, * // . “. . .
. . ..- ,Z . . . J ~ ‘.
. . .
. . ..~, ..-
.
mm

@b=

Fig. 14 Shale barriees and baffles to f1ow typical of Sun Ranch f1eld reser-
voirs.

SUN RANCH FIELD, WYOMING

A OA

A A

A!!
8 AA
A A

-_J
i 5 10
poRoSln (%)
20

five cored WI Is ●

“ig. 15 Porosity vs permeability,Sun Ranch field. Data from

112
 1000.M
“SANDSTONE G2
(OIL &
TRANSITION
100.00-
ZONE)

.RESERVOIR G3
~CHANNEL G2
(FED. A2)
● (FED.2}

:iiz!=!d
● (GARFIELD)

QCHANNEL F

● CHANNEL G1
0 5 ?0 15 20
PoROSITY %

Fig. 16 Po?osity vs permeability from five wells in Sun Ranch Field. Separa-
tion of values in G2 reservoir is based on location relative to oil/ water
contact; highest values are within and above the oil/water transion interval in
the field. The G3 Reservoir is non-economic tidal-flat sandstone which is 16
feet thick eve? the northeast part of the field.

1000

100

10

.1

.0?

05 10 15 20 25 30 35

POROSITY(%)

F~g. 17 Port sizes (curved lines) plotted against porosity and permeabilityin
flve cord wel1s in Sun Ranch field. Port sizes are related to the sizes of
the pore throats. Values above 2.5 microns are excellent reservoirs (Pittman7)
Port sizes are innsicrons.

113
 l--
~—
-.-— - ~— 03
ENvIRONMENT
NO. K $
SUN E &P, SUN RAN-=H~Eb-ERAL A-2 m
PERMEABILITY (red) PoROSITY ~/0) PORT SIZE (microns)

~j+y~

pi!& p -rIn
, At AWRFfi)N
“Nl;~m
TIDAL FLAT !3ANIDSTONE

‘- BANK sANDSTONE
I
15 B,C 1112 13
,“fi&. ““... .-. . -– --
II All .xii-
m el o

l=~~*ELSANDSTONE lit, “;i ‘i’

: :,6

rm:~:$!z$:::~’
PEN~~ SHALE : 2,3A
~ z 25 6
cd
o ~—
~~ Sun Ranch Federal A-2
Exploration and Production,
as are environmentsof deposition.
Fig. 18 Port size, core pororsity and permeability plots for Sun
contribute to vertical compartmentati(on
(tqapNo. 7) well. Average porositY and average permeabilityfor units a~e given,
all shale y shaley ‘andstOnfwJ~h,qote that the port-size plot accentuates
Units 2, 3A, ~, 5* 6, 12, 13, 148 arehave permeabllitlesexceeding
of reservoir. None of the “shales” , and baffle to barrier (sealing) facies.
the relative differencesbetween hlighquallty reservoirs

-------------
BHP SUN RANCH FEDERAL 12-22
POROSITY(%) PORT SIZE (microns)
HORIZONTALKMAX (red)

1000 4 6 810121416
g.ol
ul
o
.1

--.------
10

:
3
--------~
-----------------
‘r? TIDALSILTSTONE
Fig. 19 Port size, core porosity and permeability plots
Federal 12-22 (Map Nlo. 20).
for Sun BHP Sun
. . Ranch
Maximum port sizes in this ‘ell<,are‘ignl~~~e~~~
smaller (<10 microns) than those in the Sun Federal A-2 (Fig.
18).

Id
ANDSHALE
w (s-8) “ cored is through the best pay in this well.
m / ..
ol
0 ~ TIDAL AcCRETION

(4)
co r oQIDAL;:K
co
4 (1,2)
0

H
 .

19

CUMULATIVE kh VS. POROSITY

SUN E & P SUN RANCH BHP FEDERAL 7“22

SUN E & P SUN RANCH

! Z* :m :17

g3 ‘I*, o ,..,[. 1 ‘;lB 0 , ~<(;, .1 2’%.,,,{!

0 5 10 15 .1
20
z 0 5 1’ 15 2’
= 0 5 1’ 15 *o
o PnRt3SiTY
.-. .-— ( %’.)
POROSITY ( ~0)
POROSln ( %)
for individual wells.
Fig. 20 Plot of cumulative kh (md ft) vs porosity

——-— —.— *
5000+ STB

2000-5000 STB
1 1 1 r- I <ZOOO STB

VALLEY

:+
I I
--l
o I Mile
within Sun Ranch Unit through
Fig. 21 Per well average monthly oil production
January, lg93. C.1, =1000S~.

115
20

\l R86W

411
39
. ~1
----
a
—.. %mO:A% ●
lml-. -—-.

EDGE OF SANQ e

16
17
2a
a Mu
33 *
y
M
J..

in which individualtidal sand bodies are perforated”

Fig. 22 Location of wells Square wells produce from F
P<-.1-A IJ-llSoroduce from G2 (and ‘3) ‘a.nd~tlnhe.s ”e=m~=+nnad~sianated as 5 as
~~’J~wn~-iti \iiangular wells produce ~rO’”~a~d~t&&{Fi9~j il-13) for out-
well as others” Refer to maps of lndlvldual
line of producing sand bodies.

116