See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322540341

Application of rock physics parameters for lithology and fluid prediction of

‘TN’ field of Niger Delta basin, Nigeria

Article  in  Egyptian Journal of Petroleum · January 2018

DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpe.2018.01.001

CITATION READS

1 297

3 authors:

Abbey Chukwuemeka Emele Okpogo

American University of Nigeria University of Lagos
8 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS    9 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ifeyinwa Obiageli Atueyi

University of Lagos
6 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Geostatistical Approach in Estimating Reservoir Properties beyond the Well Points View project

Effect of Ahaliness on Water Saturation: A Case Study of TN Field of Niger Delta View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abbey Chukwuemeka on 11 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Egyptian Journal of Petroleum

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com

Full Length Article

Application of rock physics parameters for lithology and fluid prediction

of ‘TN’ field of Niger Delta basin, Nigeria
Chukwuemeka Patrick Abbey a,⇑, Emele Uduma Okpogo b, Ifeyinwa Obiageli Atueyi c
a
School of Arts and Science, American University of Nigeria, Nigeria
b
Gemfields Technologies Ltd, Nigeria
c
University of Lagos, Nigeria

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Rock physics analysis was employed to predict the fluids and lithologic elements of ‘TN’ Field of Niger
Received 7 August 2017 Delta. Sand and shale were delineated by the well log analysis and validated by the various crossplots.
Revised 18 December 2017 The Lamé parameters k (incompressibility) and l (rigidity) were employed to discriminate hydrocarbon
Accepted 4 January 2018
filled sandstone from water filled sandstone. Gas sand, oil sand, brine and shale were all discriminated
Available online 17 January 2018
using the various rock physics cross plots. Sand is the predominant lithology in the near-surface while
the percentage of shale increases with depth to a point where the percentage of shale exceeds that of
Keywords:
sand. It was shown that shale has higher density value than sand across the field. Furthermore, the special
Lithology
P-impedance
arrangement of the reservoir fluids shows that brine has the highest density and gas has the lowest. The
Formation lowest density and lambda rho region represents the gas zone which is characterized by low compress-
Incompressibility ibility. Velocity ratio log reveals some pitfalls in gamma ray lithology description when taken into con-
Nigeria sideration the corresponding resistivity log. However, although gamma ray is a better lithology
indicator than velocity ratio, in a case of ambiguity, velocity ratio is necessary to validate the result
obtained from gamma ray analysis. Both Mu-rho and density are lithology discriminators but density
has advantage over mu-rho when it comes to fluid prediction in reservoir. The cross plotted Lambda
rho and mu-rho is effective as lithology and fluid discriminator.
Ó 2018 Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open
access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction the accurate determination of porosity, saturation, and permeabil-

Lithology identification of geological beds in the subsurface is
fundamental in reservoir characterization, as one cannot predict
the fluid content of any geological bed without first of all knowing
the lithology that the fluid is associated with. To make accurate
petrophysical calculations of porosity, clay volume, water satura-
tion, permeability, net pay and reserve volume, the various litholo-
gies of the reservoir interval must be identified and their properties
understood. Accurate determination and understanding of lithol-
ogy, pore fluid, pore shapes, and sizes are fundamental to other
petrophysical analysis which is key for effective exploration and
production of hydrocarbon [11]. However, accurate prediction of
lithology and pore fluid is very essential, and it will continue to
be, a key challenge for hydrocarbon exploration and development
[7]. The accurate determination of lithology and pore fluid aids in
Peer review under responsibility of Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute.
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: chukwuemeka.abbey@aun.edu.ng (C.P. Abbey), emele@
gemfieldslts.com (E.U. Okpogo).
ity. The economic viability of a hydrocarbon field is reliant on the
quality and accuracy of lithology and pore fluid determination [6].
There are various approaches to lithology and fluid determina-
tion, but the most reliable is through direct observation of the core
sample from the intervals of interest. This process of acquiring core
samples from borehole is very expensive; this necessitates the use
of indirect method to determine lithologies and fluid properties
through the well logging response. Beds Lithology is often pre-
dicted using the gamma ray log response to distinguish lithologies
into sand and shale based on their radioactive mineral presence in
the formation. Most times this is accompanied by the density log
response from down hole tools as it also assist in delineating for-
mations with coal and carbonate characteristics. This is made pos-
sible since density log measures formation bulk density and photo
electric absorption index of the lithologic column penetrated by
the bore hole. In conventional well log interpretation, the combine
suit of Neutron-density and deep resistivity logs are used in reser-
voir fluid prediction in formations under investigation. This
approach cannot be said to be absolute as there are uncertainties

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2018.01.001
1110-0621/Ó 2018 Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
854 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866

Fig. 1. Index map of Nigeria and Cameroon. Map of the Niger Delta showing Province outline (maximum petroleum system); bounding structural features; minimum
petroleum system as defined by oil and gas field center points [16]

associated with it (misinterpretation due to radioactive elements, that rock physics study gives physical insight on how the elastic
and low resistivity pay zone in intervals of interest). properties of different litho-fluid classes can be distinguished [14].
The use of rock physics in reservoir analysis reduces the uncer- In this paper, the focus is on using the rock physics template to
tainties related to the conventional method of predicting lithology constrain geological lithology prediction as well as the fluid con-
and pore fluid. Luanxiao et al., [15], backed this assertion by stating tent from well log. The elastic parameters such as velocity ratio,
Poisson’s ratio, and Lamé parameters will be derived from density,
compressional wave velocity and shear wave velocity logs in other
to differentiate between sand and shale and comprehensive lithol-
ogy prediction. The fluid content of these lithologies will be deter-
Table 1 mined using Poisson’s ratio and velocity ratio cross plot .The result
Velocity ratio model for different rock lithologies [17] obtained will be compared with the conventional approach of
Range of Vp/Vs Lithology lithology and fluid prediction.
0.1–1.2 Fine grained sand
1.2–1.45 Medium grained sand
2. Geology of the study area
1.46–1.6 Coarse grained sand
1.6–1.8 Sandstone
Above 2 Clay or shale The Niger Delta is situated in the Gulf of Guinea and extends
throughout the province [9] as shown in Fig. 1. From Eocene to pre-

Table 2
Statistical values of log parameters in well 1.

Density Gamma ray Log Resistivity log P-wave log S-wave log
N 12803 12804 9401 12685 12685
Minimum 1.74 15.03 1.12 59.32 557.85
Maximum 2.61 149.95 165.42 160.34 3457.68
Mean 2.3349 86.864 6.3785 101.107 1608.3806
Std. Deviation 0.11552 29.58342 8.16141 14.22404 382.09469

Table 3
Statistical values of log parameters in well 2.

Density Gamma ray Log Resistivity log P-wave log S-wave log
N 12297 12301 12260 12099 12099
Minimum 1.43 22.31 0.59 56.5 806.42
Maximum 2.62 149.31 19.67 139.92 3687.44
Mean 2.2681 81.0328 3.7377 101.2947 1587.0905
Std. Deviation 0.14042 27.92392 2.52265 11.5133 326.42823
C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866 855

Fig. 2. Cross Section of Logs in Well 1.

Fig. 3. Cross Section of Logs in Well 2.

856 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866

Fig. 4a. Cross plot of VP versus VS in Well 1.

Fig. 4b. Cross plot of VP versus VS in Well 2.

 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866 857

Fig. 5a. VPVS ratio versus P-impedance Well 1.

sent, the delta has prograded southwestward leading to the forma- 3. Materials and method
tion of depobelts which amounts to the largest regressive deltas in
the world [2]. Of this area of about 30,000 km2 [10], sediment vol- ‘TN’ Field is situated in Niger Delta Hydrocarbon Province. The
ume of about 500,000 km3 [5] and sediment thickness of over 10 field comprises Five (5) well logs with suits of logs, density, resis-
km [8], the Delta has only one identified petroleum system which tivity, gamma, neutron, sonic logs.
is called the Tertiary (Akata-Agbada) petroleum system [3,10]. The P-wave and S-wave velocities were determined using Oga-
Short and Stäuble [13], Avbovbo, [1], Doust and Omatsola [2], gure [12] localized Vp and Vs relationship model for Niger Delta
Evamy et al., [4] and Kulke, [10] in their analysis stated that Ter- sedimentary region.
tiary Niger Delta is divided into three formations, which represents
V P ¼ 1:11702V S þ 1279:08 ð3:1Þ
the prograding depositional facies of sand and shale. The Akata
Formation at the base of the delta is of marine origin and is com-
0:305
posed of thick shale sequences (potential source rock), turbidite V P ¼ 1000000  ð3:2Þ
Dtp
sand (potential reservoirs in deep water), and minor amounts of
clay and silt. The second is the Agbada formation which is the
0:305
major petroleum-bearing unit, it began in the Eocene and contin- V S ¼ 1000000  ð3:3Þ
ues into the Recent [. Its formation consists of paralic siliciclastics
Dts
over 3700 m thick and represents the actual deltaic portion of the where Dtp and Dts are the interval transit times recorded by the
sequence. The clastics accumulated in delta-front, delta-topset, compressional and shear sonic logs respectively, in lsec/ft.
and fluvio-deltaic environments. In the lower Agbada Formation, The rock physics parameters such as velocity ratio, Lamé
shale and sandstone beds were deposited in equal proportions, parameters and Poisson’s ratio were estimated from the logs using
however, the upper portion is mostly sand with only minor shale Goodway et al.’s (1997) [18], and the calculated P-wave and S-
interbeds. The Agbada Formation is overlain by the third forma- wave logs. This becomes imperative to the fact that Lamé parame-
tion, the Benin Formation, a continental latest Eocene to Recent ters can be used in lithology and fluid determination in a formation
deposit of alluvial and upper coastal plain sands that are up to as well as Poisson’s and velocity ratios [11].
2000 m thick [1].
858 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866
Fig. 5b. VPVS ratio versus P-impedance Well 2.
Vp
Velocity ratio; which is given as m ¼
Vs
where Vp and Vs are the P-wave and S-wave velocities respectively.
Incompressibility ðlamba RhoÞ k ¼ qðVp2 Þ  2ðqVs2 Þ
Rigidity modulus ðmho RhoÞ l ¼ qðVs2 Þ
k
Poisson s ratio u ¼
0
2ðk þ lÞ
Velocity ratio was employed to discriminate the formation
lithology using the Castagna et al., [17] model (Table 1), and it
was compared with the gamma ray lithology log.
The obtained velocity ratio is independent of the rock density
and was used to derive Poisson’s ratio, which helps to compliment
lithology identification/prediction.
The Lamé parameters k (incompressibility) and l (rigidity), was
employed to discriminate hydrocarbon filled sandstone and water
filled sandstone, since hydrocarbon filled sunstone is denser than
water filled sand, and has a low lambda compared to water filed
sandstone. Rigidity l on the other hand discriminates sand and
shale lithology, with the later (sand) having a higher rigidity l than
shale. Table 2 and 3 gives the statistical value of well log parame-
ters used in the evaluation.
4. Results and discussions
ð3:4Þ
Figs. 2 and 3 are the display of the two wells and their associ-
ated logs, the well logs depict lithologies of the formation via
gamma log and Vp/Vs ratio cross plot log. Figs. 4a and 4b and 5a
ð3:5Þ and 5b represents the cross plot of Vp against Vs for wells 1 and 2.
ð3:6Þ
4.1. Lithology prediction from velocity ratio
ð3:7Þ The gamma ray log were distinguished into sand and shale
lithology, with 85 below as sand (Yellowish) and 85 above shale
(Gray) as shown in the gamma ray log of wells 1 and 2. This
became possible based on the geology (sand and shale sequence)
of the study area. From the velocity ratio model for different rock
lithology’s in Table 1, the lithology were characterized as sand
and shale based on velocity ratio values. This (sand as yellowish
and shale as gray) was also loaded in the wells using HRS software
package. The result reveals how velocity ratio serves as a good
lithology indicator when compared with gamma ray log in wells
1 and 2. In reservoir A2001in well 2 velocity ratio log revels some
pitfall in gamma ray lithology description when taken into effect
the corresponding resistivity log. The high in resistivity log from
reservoir A2001 corresponds to the velocity ratio description of
sand with hydrocarbon, while gamma ray log missed the kick in
resistivity log. Although in reservoirs A001 and B001 in well 1,
 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866 859

Fig. 6. Cross section of VpVs versus P-impedance Well 1.

gamma ray log serves as a better lithology indicator compared to shows the resolved pore fluids and lithologies of each mapped
velocity ratio. reservoir in the two (1 and 2) wells respectively.

4.3. Lithology and fluid prediction using Lamé parameters

4.2. Pore fluid and lithology prediction using Vp/Vs and P-impedance
The density coloured velocity ratio (Vp/Vs) versus P-impedance
cross plot which cuts across the five (5) reservoirs in wells 1 and 2
signifies three zones, the hydrocarbon zone (red polygon), the
brine zone (blue polygon) and the shaly zone (yellow polygon).
The well attribute cross section of the cross plot in Figs. 6 and 7
The cross plot of muo-rho against density in wells 1 and 2 as
shown in Figs. 8 and 9, respectively depicts four zones of interest,
the gas zone (pink), oil zone (red zone), brine sand (blue zone), and
shale (yellow zone). These zones are made visible in the well attri-
bute cross section in Figs. 10 and 11 for wells 1 and 2 respectively,
and the mapped reservoir corresponded with the zones. Both Mu-
860 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866

Fig. 7. Cross section of VPVS versus P-Impedance Well 2.

rho and density are lithology discriminators but density has advan-
tage over mu-rho when it comes to fluid prediction in reservoir.
The density value for shale is higher which is made visible from
the cross plot. In the fluid aspect, brine is denser than hydrocarbon
(gas and oil), then as hydrocarbon gas is less dense than oil as plot-
ted in Figs. 8 and 9 below.
The cross plotted Lambda rho and mu-rho in well 1(Fig. 12) and
well 2 (Fig. 14) below is used to also discriminate lithology and
fluid. The identified zones, gas (pink), oil (red), brine (blue) and
shale (yellow) zones in the cross plot were compared with the well
attribute cross section of well 1 and 2, Fig. 13 and Fig. 15 respec-
tively of the cross plot. The result confirms what we have in the
cross plotted zones of the test wells. The cross plot where coloured
with density log which helps in the interpretation. The lowest den-
sity and lambda rho region represents the gas zone which com-
press easily, this is because the presence of gas in sand stone
causes a significant decrease in its incompressibility.
5. Conclusion
The use of rock physics in lithology and fluid prediction can
never be over emphasized in hydrocarbon exploration. The two
wells that were employed in this research TN1 and TN2 were
mapped individually as seen in Figs. 2 and 3 respectively. The
calculated velocity ratio from the two wells reveals that Vp/Vs
ratio is a good lithology indicated if carefully applied and this
was proven when correlated with gamma ray log in the wells.
Various fluids as well as lithologies were also predicted from
each of the mapped reservoirs in the wells using different rock
physics cross plot indicators. Gas sand, oil sand, brine and
C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866 861

Fig. 8. Mu-Rho vs Density Well 1.

Fig. 9. Mu-Rho vs Density Well 2.

862 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866

Fig. 10. cross section of density vs mu-rho Well 1.

C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866 863

Fig. 11. cross section of density vs mu-rho Well 2.

Fig. 12. Lambda rho vs Mu-rho Well 1.

864 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866

Fig. 13. cross section of lambda rho vs Mu Rho Well 1.

shale were all predicted using the various rock physics cross Muo rho, P-impedance and velocity ratio is a good lithology
plots and made visible in the cross section. This research work and fluid predictor irrespective of where the field is
has again showed that rock physics parameters, Lambda rho, situated.
 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866 865

Fig. 14. Lambda rho vs Mu-rho Well 2.

Fig. 15. cross section of lambda rho vs Mu Rho Well 2.

References [6] K. Hami-Eddine, P. Klein, Loic Richard, B. Ribet, M. Grout, A new technique for
lithology and fluid content prediction from prestack data: An application to
carbonate reservoir, Interpretation (2015) 1.
[1] A.A. Avbovbo, Tertiary lithostratigraphy of Niger Delta, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol.
[7] J.A. Kupecz, J. Gluyas, S. Bloch, Reservoir quality prediction in sandstones and
Bull. 62 (1978) 295–300.
carbonates: an overview, 1997.
[2] H. Doust, E. Omatsola, Niger Delta, in: J.D. Edwards, P.A. Santogrossi (Eds.),
[8] A. Kaplan, C.U. Lusser, I.O. Norton, Tectonic map of the world, panel Tulsa,
Divergent/passive Margin Basins, AAPG Memoir, Vol. 48, American Association
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, scale 1:10,000,000, 1994.
of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, 1990, pp. 239–248.
[9] T.R. Klett, T.S. Ahlbrandt, J.W. Schmoker, J.L. Dolton, Ranking of the world’s oil
[3] C.M. Ekweozor, E.M. Daukoru, Northern delta depobelt portion of the
and gas provinces by known petroleum volumes: U.S. Geological Survey Open-
Akata-Agbada petroleum system, Niger Delta, Nigeria, in: L.B. Magoon, W.G.
file Report-97-463, CD-ROM, 1997.
Dow (Eds.), The Petroleum System-From Source to Trap, AAPG Memoir,
[10] H. Kulke, Nigeria, in, Kulke, H., ed., Regional Petroleum Geology of the World.
Vol. 60, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, 1994, pp. 599–
Part II: Africa, America, Australia and Antarctica: Berlin, Gebrüder Borntraeger,
614.
1995, pp. 143–172.
[4] B.D. Evamy, J. Haremboure, P. Kamerling, W.A. Knaap, F.A. Molloy, P. Rowlands,
[11] C. Obeng-Manu, Lithology and pore fluid prediction of a reservoir using
Hydrocarbon habitat of Tertiary Niger Delta, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 62
density, compressional and shear wave logs: a case study of the tano basin,
(1978) 277–298.
2015.
[5] J. Hospers, Gravity field and structure of the Niger Delta, Nigeria, West Africa,
[12] D.O. Ogagure, Localized Vp-Vs relationship for the Niger Delta sediments, Pac.
Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 76 (1965) 407–422.
J. Sci. Technol. 9 (2) (2008) 558–561.
866 C.P. Abbey et al. / Egyptian Journal of Petroleum 27 (2018) 853–866

[13] K.C. Short, A.J. Stäublee, Outline of geology of Niger Delta, Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. [17] J.P. Castagna, M.L. Batzle, Eastwood Relationships between
Bull. 51 (1965) 761–779. compressionalwave and shear-wave velocities in clastic silicate rocks,
[14] I.L. Zhao, G. Jianhua, H. De-hua, C. Jiubing, G. Tonglou, Rock physics based Geophysics 50 (1985) 571–581.
probabilistic lithology and fluid prediction in a heterogeneous carbonate [18] W. Goodway, T. Chen, J. Downton, Improved AVO fluid detection and lithology
reservoir. Society of Exploration Geophysicist Houston Annual Meeting, 2013, discrimination using Lamé petrophysical parameters; ‘‘kq,” ‘‘mq,” ‘‘k/m fluid
p. 2387. stack,” from P and S inversions: 67th Annual International Meeting, Society of
[15] Z. Luanxiao, G. Jianhua, H. De-hua, C. Jiubing, G. Tonglou, Rock physics based Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts, 183–186, 1997.
probabilistic lithology and fluid prediction in a heterogeneous carbonate
reservoir, SEG Houston, 2013, pp. 2387–2390.
[16] M.L. Tuttle., R.R. Charpentier, M.E. Brownfield, The Niger Delta petroleum
system: niger delta province, nigeria, cameroun and equatorial guinea, Africa:
USGS Open-File Report, 1999, pp. 99–50H.

View publication stats