Paper RFT Petr Scie

Petroleum Science and Technology
Fo
rP
ee
DETERMINATION SOME OF RESERVOIR CHARACTERISTICS

OF BAHARIYA FORMATION IN BED-1 FIELD, WESTERN
rR
DESERT, EGYPT, BY USIN THE REPEAT FORMATION TESTER
Journal: Petroleum Science and Technology

ev
Manuscript ID: Draft
Manuscript Type: Original Papers

ie
Date Submitted by the

n/a
Author:
w
Complete List of Authors: Shazly, Tarek; Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute, Exploration
Well logging, Repeat Formation Tester, RFT, Reservoir

Keywords:
On
Characterestics, Bahariya Formation

ly
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/lpet Email: jamessp8@aol.com

Page 1 of 15 Petroleum Science and Technology
1
2
3
4
5 DETERMINATION SOME OF RESERVOIR CHARACTERISTICS OF
6
7 BAHARIYA FORMATION IN BED-1 FIELD, WESTERN DESERT, EGYPT, BY
8
9 USIN THE REPEAT FORMATION TESTER
10
11
12 BY
13
14 T. F. Shazly* and A. Z. Nouh**
15
16 * Prof. Ass. In The Egyptian Petroleum Research Institute, Cairo, Egypt.
Fo
17
18
19 E-mail: tarekshazly@hotmail.com
20
rP
21 ** British University in Egypt

22
23
24
ABSTRACT
ee
25
26 In the present study the Repeat Formation Tester (RFT) data is used for
27
28 interpreting some of reservoir characteristics such as the nature of fluids and
rR
29
30
31 permeability for the Bahariya Formation by using five wells in Bed-1 Field in the
32
33 Western Desert of Egypt.
ev
34
35 The Schlumberger Repeat Formation Tester (RFT) is an open hole wireline
36
iew
37
38 device showing a continuous recording of the pressure leads to construct the pressure
39
40 gradient. These gradients give an information about the fluid density and then the nature
41
42 of fluids (gas, oil and water). Also the depths of contacts between water and
43
On
44
45 hydrocarbon products can be located by the abrupt change in the pressure gradients.
46
47 In the present study, the, the permeabilities of Bahariya Formation are evaluated
ly
48
49
50
qualitatively by the direct interpretation of the pressure curve recorded at each test and
51
52 quantitatively by the analysis of drawdown pressure data.
53
54 Moreover, the porosities of reservoir rocks were determined by using the
55
56
57 available logs of density and neutron. These porosities were corrected for the effect of
58
59 shale. Also, the saturation of hydrocarbon is determined and then these values of
60
1
Petroleum Science and Technology Page 2 of 15
1
2
3
4
5 porosities and saturation of hydrocarbon were presented, zone wise to show their
6
7 vertical variation within the wells.
8
9 INTRODUCTION
10
11
12 The nature of fluids and permeability are important parameters for reservoir
13
14 characteristics, these parameters can be determined by one of the most important tool
15
16 which is the Repeat Formation Tester (RFT).
Fo
17
18
19 The RFT is a wireline formation tester that can be set any number of times
20
rP
21 during a single trip in the well. Gamma ray or sp curves are used for depth control.
22
23
24
These pressure data are recorded at the surface on both analog and high resolution
ee
25
26 digital scales (M. A. Reda et. al., 2003).
27
28 The pretest fluid samples are not saved. However, after a successful pretest in a
rR
29
30
31 zone of interest, a larger fluid sample can be taken and retained. In one trip, a
32
33 segregated fluid sample can be recovered from one test depth or two samples can be
ev
34
35 recovered from different depths (Schlumberger 1986).
36
iew
37
38 Also, different of the petrophysical information such as the volume of shale,
39
40 porosity and the hydrocarbon saturation are important to be determined to see the
41
42 qualification of the reservoir rock if it has oil.
43
On
44
45 This study is applied on Bahariya Formation for five wells located in Bed-1 field
46
47 in the Western Desert of Egypt. These wells are Bed 1-5, Bed 1-6, Bed 1-8, Bed 1-10
ly
48
49
50
and Bed 1-11 (Fig. 1).
51
52 I- Geology of the Study Area:
53
54 The Badr El-Din concession is located in the Egyptian Western Desert some 300
55
56
57 Km west of Cairo. This field is located on the edge of the Qattara Depression.
58
59
60
2
1
2
3
4
5 The target formation which is considered in this study is the Bahariya
6
7 Formation, The formation extends in the subsurface over most of the Western Desert, it
8
9 rests conformably on the Kharita Member of the Burg el Arab Formation.
10
11
12 The lithologies, microfauna and flora associated with the formation in the
13
14 Western Desert indicate that most of the formation was deposited on a wide, extensive
15
16 shallow marine shelf.
Fo
17
18
19 The Bed-1 structure is a NE dipping, elongated NW-SE trending fault block,
20
rP
21 approximately 10 km long and up to 2 km wide. It is dip closed to the NE, NW and SE

22
23
24
and bounded to the south by a WNW-ESE trending, SSW hading normal fault (Abu El-
ee
25
26 Ata, 1988). The formation is characterised by fine to very finegrained-sandstone, with
27
28 subordinate shale (Said, 1990).
rR
29
30
31 II- Repeat Formation Tester (RFT):
32
33
ev
34 The Repeat Formation Tester (RFT) can perform an unlimited number of tests in
35
36 a well during the same trip. The RFT has a seal packer – carrying pad and a hind pad
iew
37
38
39 which pushes against the opposite sidewall. Its opening is hydrolic, but with a pump
40
41 driven electrically from the surface. The operating sequences are controlled by solenoid
42
43
On
valves and can thus be repeated indefinitely.

44
45
46 A schematic diagram of the RFT pretest and sampling system is shown in Fig.
47
ly
48 (2). When the tool is set, the pretest is automatically and sequentially activated. The low
49
50
51
flow rate pretest withdraws 10 cm3 of fluid from the formation by movement of a piston
52
53 in chamber 1. The second pretest follows immediately and withdraws 10 cm3 at a higher
54
55 flow rate into chamber 2. In permeable zones, the two chambers are filled in
56
57
58 approximately 25 seconds (Smolen, 1977).
59
60
3
1
2
3
4
5 The pressure gauge is located in the flow line down-stream of the filter probe.
6
7 During a pretest, the pressure drop in the flow line is essentially negligible and the
8
9 pressure indicated by the gauge is that at the formation face in contact with the probe.
10
11
12 A typical recording of a pressure profile is shown in Fig. (3). The analog
13
14 pressure recording provides an excellent means of evaluating the integrity and general
15
16 character of the pretest and the producibility of the formation. The pressure is initially at
Fo
17
18
19 hydrostatic (mud) condition. When the piston stops, the pressure build up due to
20
rP
21 continued comparison of the packer, but suddenly drops again at the beginning of the
22
23
24
pretest. At time t1, the piston in chamber No. 1 is fully withdrawn and the first pretest is
ee
25
26 completed. It is immediately followed by the higher flow rate and hence larger pressure
27
28 drop of the second pretest. At time t2, the piston in the second chamber is fully
rR
29
30
31 withdrawn and the pressure builds up to the formation pressure (Desbrandes, 1985).
32
33 Beside the valuable information which can be gained, RFT also save rig time (Serra,
ev
34
35 1986).
36
iew
37
38 III- Determination of Density and Nature of Fluids:
39
40 The Repeat Formation tester which can make any number of accurate test in one
41
42 run in open hole, has application in the determination of reservoir pressure, fluid density
43
On
44
45 and fluid contact. Many pressure reading within a single reservoir can be taken.
46
47 The different measured formation pressure opposite the reservoir is plotted
ly
48
49
50
against the depth, and from this plot the nature of the flowing fluids (oil, gas or water)
51
52 can be identified from their gradients. If this analyzed gradient give the value of density
53
54 of water then, the continuous phase is water, while if the measured densities are that of
55
56
57 oil or gas, the continuous phase will be oil or gas.(Serra 1986).
58
59
60
4
1
2
3
4
5 Also, the depth of free water level can be estimated by studying the abrupt
6
7 change in pressure on the pressure gradient.
8
9 The pressure readings when plotted versus depth will normally produce
10
11
12 gradients with pressures increasing with depth in which the slope of a particular
13
14 gradient (extrapolated line) is related to fluid density within the reservoir (Basal, 1996).
15
16 The relationship between fluid density and the pressure gradient can be expressed as
Fo
17
18
19 follow:
20
rP
21 fluid density (g/cm3) = 2.31 ∗ pressure gradient …..(1)

22
23
24 in which : pressure gradient = 1/m = Pressure in Psi / depth in ft …..(2)
ee
25
26
27
where: m is the slope of the extrapolated line.
28
rR
29 Also, the intersection of the water gradient with the oil or gas gradient represents
30
31
32 the free water level, as shown in the following figures.
33
ev
34 Figures (4-8) represents the formation pressure against the depth, for Bahariya
35
36
Formation in Bed 1-5, Bed 1-6, Bed 1-8, Bed 1-10 and Bed 1-11 wells. The pressure
iew
37
38
39 profile clearly indicates two distinct trends in Bed 1-5, Bed 1-8, Bed 1-10 and Bed 1-11
40
41 wells. The first gradient represents the oil gradient with a density of 0.69, 0.74, 0.6, 0.6
42
43
On
44 g/cc and the second is the water gradient with a density of 1.4, 1.4, 1.5, 1.7 g/cc
45
46 respectively. while, in Bed 1-6 it shows one phase with fluid density equal 1.2 g/cc
47
ly
48 which indicate the water fluid. The two gradients in the wells represent a reservoir
49
50
51 composed mainly from sandstone.
52
53 However, the differences in the pressure values in each well indicated a lack in
54
55 the lateral communication.
56
57
58
59
60
5
1
2
3
4
5 The free water level is determined by the sudden change in gradients, it was
6
7 found to be 3584.38, 3609.32, 3597.59, 3563.22 m. in Bed 1-5, Bed 1-8, Bed 1-10 and
8
9 Bed 1-11 wells.
10
11
12 IV- Evaluation of Permeability
13
14 The permeability of a medium can be defined as its capacity to permit the flow
15
16 of the mobile (gas, oil and water). It is represented by the symbol (k) and the unit of
Fo
17
18
19 measurement is the Darcy or millidarcy (Desbrands 1985).
20
rP
21
22 A – Qualitative Interpretation of Permeability:
23
24 The permeability of reservoir rock can be interpreted qualitatively from the
ee
25
26 pressure curve which is recorded with the measured formation pressure (Hilchie 1982).
27
28
rR
29 The pressure difference during the pretest, as indicated by ∆p1 and ∆p2 in Fig. (3), is
30
31 sensitive to the formation permeability. Generally, the greater the pressure drop
32
33
ev
34 required, to maintain the pretest flow rate, the lower the permeability (Serra 1986).
35
36 In high permeable interval (about 100 mD) neither ∆p1 nor ∆p2 can be observed
iew
37
38
39
in this record while, in formation with lower permeability (about 10 mD) clearly shows
40
41 the shape of the theoretical curve in Fig. (3).
42
43 In case of 1 mD permeability, it is almost exactly the same as the theoretical
On
44
45
46 curve in Fig. (3) but, the shape of the curve recorded in a very low permeability (0.1
47
ly
48 mD) shows no difference between the two ∆ps on the analog recording (Schlumberger,
49
50
51
1986).
52
53 By applying the qualitative interpretation on the curves of the studied wells, it is
54
55 found that the permeability is nearly poor to moderate which, is about 1 to 10 mD.
56
57
58
59
60
6
1
2
3
4
5 B – Quantitative Interpretation of Permeability:
6
7 Permeability can be deduced from the flow rate measurements made with the
8
9 Repeat Formation Tester (RFT) data, as follows:
10
11
12 – Permeability deduced from the drawdown Pressure:
13
14 Flow inside the formation may be of different types depending on the nature and
15
16 configuration of the formation. It is generally considered to be spherical flow, which is
Fo
17
18
19 acceptable in an isotropic formation, towards the packer and sampling probe.
20
rP
21 The permeability is given by : kd = (5660 * Q * µ ) / ∆P …..(3)

22
23
24 where: kd is the permeability deduced from drawdown in
ee
25
26
27 Q is the flow rate in cm3/s, µ is the fluid viscosity in centipoise , and ∆P is the
28
rR
29 pressure drop in (Psi) during drawdown.

30
31
32 This type of permeability of the pressure drope ∆P occurs in the first five
33
ev
34 millimeters of the formation (Crain, 1986).

35
36
Figure (9) shows the representation of permeability vertically in the
iew
37
38
39 studied five wells. The permeability of Bed 1-6 well indicates that it is poor
40
41 permeability, it has a range between 0.2-0.6 mD. While, in Bed 1-5, Bed 1-8 and
42
43
On
44 Bed 1-11 they have low permeability in the range of 1-4 mD.
45
46 The exception is in Bed 1-10 well, it shows a good permeable formation
47
ly
48
with range between 10-60 mD.
49
50
51 Then the permeabilities of the studied formation are nearly moderate, as deduced
52
53 qualitatively and quantitatively from the (RFT) pressure curve.
54
55
56 V- Petrophysical Analysis:
57
58 Many steps is used to evaluate the reservoir unit as follows:
59
60 A- Net Sand Determination:
7
1
2
3
4
5 The presence of shale in any formation is considered as one of the serious
6
7 problems in the determination of the formation porosities and the contained fluid
8
9 saturations. It causes erroneous determinations for the different rock matrices.
10
11
12 According to Schieber, Zimmerle, and Scthi, (1998), the shale volume is
13
14 derived from the gamma-ray log using:
15
16 Vsh = (GR – base sand line) / (base shale line – base sand line) …..(4)
Fo
17
18
19
20 B- Porosity Derivation:
rP
21
22 Porosity is the volume of the non-solid portion of the rock that is filled with fluids
23
24
divided by the total volume of the rock. It is often referred to in terms of percentages.
ee
25
26
27 Porosities have been calculated throughout using the density and the neutron logs.
28
rR
29
30
The grain density for Bahariya Formation was assumed to be 2.66 g/cc and fluid density
31
32 equal 0.9 g/cc.
33
ev
34
35 C- Saturation Determination:
36
iew
37
38 Many of the models determine the water saturation in the clean formations, while
39
40 the others determine the water saturation in the shaly formations, assuming the shale
41
42
43 exists in a specific geometric form (i.e. laminar or structural or dispersed) in the shaly
On
44
45 sands. All these models are composed of a clean sand term, described by Archie water
46
47 saturation equation, plus a shale term. All the models are reduced to the Archie water
ly
48
49
50 saturation equation, when the fraction of shale is zero. The water saturation of the
51
52 studied interval is calculated according to these equations.
53
54
Since water saturation is the natural result of the previous calculations, it is often
55
56
57 reported by the log analyst as one of “the answers” (Chilinger, 2005). However, the
58
59 amount of oil is determined
60
8
1
2
3
4
5 The values of porosity and saturation of hydrocarbon is represented
6
7 vertically as shown in Figures (10 and 11).
8
9 Figure (10) shows that the target formation of Bed 1-5 well has a porosity
10
11
12 with average 10% while, the hydrocarbon saturation reaches to 65%.
13
14 Since the RFT tool shows the oil gradient in the Bahariya Formation of
15
16 this well and the formation consist of sandstone with suitable values of porosity,
Fo
17
18
19 hydrocarbon saturation and permeability so, if the formation is perforated, it may
20
rP
21 floe some oil.

22
23
24
Figure (11) indicates that the porosity can reach to 15% (with average)
ee
25
26 and the hydrocarbon saturation to 70% added to that the considered permeability
27
28 is good so, it is expected to extract oil from this formation.
rR
29
30
31 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
32
33 The Repeat Formation Tester is an important tool for production and reservoir
ev
34
35 engineering. RFT pressure data can be interpreted to obtain formation permeability and
36
iew
37
38 actual formation pressure that can be applied for a better understanding of petroleum
39
40 reservoirs.
41
42 The application is applied on Bahariya Formation in five wells distributed in
43
On
44
45 Bed -1 Field in the Western Desert of Egypt. It is based on the analysis of RFT pressure
46
47 profiles. Plotting formation pressures versus true vertical depth produces a pressure
ly
48
49
50
profile. Evaluating the gradient of this profile provide information about the type of
51
52 fluids and the contact between them.
53
54 The values of Bahariya Formations pressure were calculated for each test and
55
56
57 then plotted versus the depth to obtain the pressure gradients, which enable to identify
58
59 the natures and densities of the gas and fluids ( oil or water). Also, these measurements
60
9
1
2
3
4
5 specified and located the depths of contacts by monitoring the abrupt changes in the
6
7 pressure gradients. The pressure profiles of Bahariya Formations in Bed 1-5, Bed 1-6,
8
9 Bed 1-8, Bed 1-10 (unit 3 and 4) and Bed 1-11 wells were constructed. The free water
10
11
12 level is located at 3584.38, 3609.32, 3597.59, 3501.82, 3563.22 ft in Bed 1-5, Bed 1-8,
13
14 Bed 1-10 (unit 3 and 4) and Bed 1-11 wells.
15
16 In the present study, the permeabilities of Bahariya Formations are evaluated
Fo
17
18
19 both qualitatively and quantitatively by using the RFT data.
20
rP
21 The qualitative evaluation of permeability includes the direct observation of the

22
23
24
pressure curve recorded at each test. On the other hand, the quantitative assessment of
ee
25
26 permeability includes the analysis of drawdown pressure data.
27
28 The qualitative and quantitative interpretation indicates that the permeability of
rR
29
30
31 Bahariya Formation in the studied area is mainly low except in Bed 1-10 well.
32
33 Beside the previous study the values of porosity and saturation of hydrocarbon
ev
34
35 have been calculated to see the quality of the reservoir rocks. They have been
36
iew
37
38 represented zone wise vertically.
39
40 Both the wells of Bed 1-5 and Bed 1-10 shows that the oil can flow from
41
42 Bahariya Formation where, they have suitable values of porosity, saturation of
43
On
44
45 hydrocarbon and permeability added to this, the RFT tool proved the present of the oil
46
47 gradient in the reservoir rock.
ly
48
49
50
REFERANCES
51
52 A. Abu El-Ata, 1988: The Relation Between the Local Tectonics of Egypt and
53
54 the Plate Tectonics of the Surrounding Regions, Using Geophysical and Geological
55
56
57 Data, EGS Journal, Vol. 1.
58
59
60
10
1
2
3
4
5 Basal, A.M.K. (1996): Rock Wettability Determination as an aid for
6
7 understanding the Reservoir Performance, Third Int. Conf. Geology of the
8
9 Arab World (GAW), Cairo University, p. 329-352.
10
11
12 Crain, E.R. (1986): The Log Analysis Hand Book; Penn-Well, Publ.
13
14
15
Co., Tulsa, Oklahoma, U.S.A.
16
Fo
17
Chilingar, G.V., Buryakovsky, L.A., Eremenko, N.A. and
18
19
20 Gorfunkel, M.V., (2005): Oil and gas bearing rocks, Development in
rP
21
22 petroleum science, V. 52, P.19-38.
23
24
ee
25 Desbrandes, R. (1985): Encyclopedia of Well Logging, Gulf

26
27 Publishing Co., Houston Texas.
28
rR
29
30 Hilchie, D.W. (1982): Advanced Well Logging Interpretation. Golden Colorado,
31
32 D.W. Hilchie, Inc.
33
ev
34
35 Mohamad A. Reda, M.A. Ghorab and T.F. Shazly, (2003): Determination of
36
iew
37 permeability and density and nature of fluids of some Miocene-Pre Miocene rocks in
38
39
40 the central Gulf of Suez, Egypt. J. Appl. Geophs., Vol. 2, 2003, p. 129-138.
41
42 Said, R. (1990): The Geology of Egypt”; A.A. Balkeme/ Rotterdam/ Brookfield.
43
On
44
45 Schieber, J., Zimmerle, W., and Scthi, P. (1998): Shale and Mudstone, volume
46
47 1s and 2. Stuttgart: Schweizerbart'sche Verlags buchhandlung.
ly
48
49
50 Schlumberger ltd, (1986): Repeat formation tester.
51
52 Schlumberger ltd, (1989): Log Interpretation principles and Applications.
53
54
Serra, O. (1986): Advanced Interpretation of Wireline Logs.
55
56
57 Schlumberger Publications.
58
59
60
11
1
2
3
4
5 Shazly, T.F.(2002): Reservoir Monitoring of the pay zones in Rudeis- Sidri Area,
6
7 Gulf of Suez, EGYPT, utilizing Well Log interpretation ; PhD. Thesis, Fac.Scien.Ain
8
9 Shams Univ.
10
11
12 Smolen, J.J and Litesy, L.R. (1977): Formation Evaluation Using Wireline Formation
13
14 Tester Pressure Data, SPE 6822, SPE 52 nd, Annual Fall Meeting, Denver Co.
15
16
Fo
17
18
19 Mediterranean Sea
20
rP
21
22
23
24 N 3307500
ee
25 Bed 1-8
26 Bed 1-11 Bed 1-6

27 N 3305000 Bed 1-5
28 Bed 1-10
rR
29
o 100 200Km
30 E 642500 E 647500
31
32
33
ev
34 FIG.
35 (1)
36 LOCATION MAP OF THE STUDY AREA.
iew
37
38
39
PRESSURE
HYDROSTATIC
40
PRESSURE
41
42
43
On
q1 q2
44
t=0
45
46
47
T1
P1
ly
48
49
50
t1
51
52 P2
T2
53
54 FIG. (2) SCHEMATIC OF RFT PRETEST
t2
PRESSURE Ps
55 AND SAMPLING SYSTEM.

SHUT-IN
56
t
TIME
57
58
FIG. (3) RFT ANALOG PRESSURE RECORDING
59
60
12
1
2
3
4
5 3300
Depth
6
7
8 3400
9 0.30 psi/ft
10 density=0.69 g/cc
11
3500
12
13
14
15 3600 FWL = 3584.38 m.
0.6 psi/ft
16 density=1.4 g/cc
Fo
17
18 Formation Pressure
3700
19
5200 5300 5400 5500 5600
20
rP
21 FIG. (4) PRESSURE PROFILE OF BAHARIYA FORMATION IN BED 1-5 WELL

22
23
24 3480
ee
25
Depth
26
27
28 3500
rR
29
0.5 psi/ft
30 density=1.2 g/cc
31 3520
32
33
ev
34
3540
35
36
iew
38 3560
39 5390 5400 5410 5420 5430 5440
40
41 FIG. (5) PRESSURE PROFILE OF BAHARIYA FORMATION IN BED 1-6 WELL
42
43
On
3400
44
Depth
45
46 3450
47 0.322 psi/ft
density=0.74 g/cc
ly
48 3500
49
50 3550
51
52 3600
FWL = 3609.32 m. 0.61 psi/ft
53 density=1.4 g/cc
54 3650
55
3700
57
58 5200 5250 5300 5350 5400 5450 5500
59
FIG. (6) PRESSURE PROFILE OF BAHARIYA FORMATION IN BED 1-8 WELL
60
13
1
2
3
4
5
3300
6
Depth
7
8
3400
9
10 0.25 psi/ft
density=0.6 g/cc
11
12 3500
13
14
15 3600 FWL = 3597.59 m. 0.66 psi/ft
density=1.5g/cc
16
Fo
17
Formation Pressure
18 3700
19 5100 5200 5300 5400 5500
20
rP

21
22
23 3450
Depth
24
ee
25 0.26 psi/ft
3500
26 density=0.60 g/cc
27
28 3550
rR
29 FWL = 3563.22 m.
30
3600
31 0.74 psi/ft
32 density= 1.71 g/cc
33
ev
3650
34
3700
36
iew
37 5200 5300 5400 5500 5600
38
39
40
41 Bed 1-5 Bed 1-6 Bed 1-8 Bed 1-10 Bed 1-11
0 4 8 12 0 20 40 60 0 2 4 6
42 0 2 4 0.2 0.4 0.6
3450
3300 3480 3400 3300
43
On
44
45 3450
46 3500
3400
47 3400 3500
ly
48 3500
49 3550
Depth
50
51 3500 3520 3550 3500
52
3600
53
3600
54
55 3600 3540 3600
56 3650
3650
57
58
59 3700 3560 3700 3700 3700
60
Fig. (9) QUANTITATIVE VALUES OF PERMEABILITY DEDUCED FROM THE DRAWDOWN PRESSURE
14
1
2
3
4
5 Porosity Hydrocarbon Saturation
0 4 8 12 16
6 3510 3510
25 50 75 100
7
8
9
10
11 3520 3520
12
13
Depth
14
15
16 3530 3530
Fo
17
18
19
20
rP
3540 3540
21
22
23
24
ee
25 3550 3550
26
27
28
rR
29
30 3560 3560
31 Fig. (10) REPRESENTATION OF POROSITY AND HYDROCARBON

32 SATURATION OF BED 1-5 WELL.
33
ev
34 Hydrocarbon Saturation
Porosity
35 0 10 20 30 20 40 60 80 100
36
iew
37
38 3440 3440
39
40
Depth
41
42
3460 3460
43
On
44
45
46
47 3480 3480
ly
48
49
50
51 3500 3500
52
53
54
55 3520 3520
56
57
58
59
3540 3540
60
Fig. (11) REPRESENTATION OF POROSITY AND HYDROCARBON
SATURATION OF BED 1-10 WELL.
15

Paper RFT Petr Scie

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Paper RFT Petr Scie

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Petroleum Science and Technology

DETERMINATION SOME OF RESERVOIR CHARACTERISTICS

DESERT, EGYPT, BY USIN THE REPEAT FORMATION TESTER

Journal: Petroleum Science and Technology

Manuscript ID: Draft

Manuscript Type: Original Papers

Date Submitted by the

Well logging, Repeat Formation Tester, RFT, Reservoir

Characterestics, Bahariya Formation

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/lpet Email: jamessp8@aol.com

21 ** British University in Egypt

21 approximately 10 km long and up to 2 km wide. It is dip closed to the NE, NW and SE

valves and can thus be repeated indefinitely.

21 fluid density (g/cm3) = 2.31 ∗ pressure gradient …..(1)

21 The permeability is given by : kd = (5660 * Q * µ ) / ∆P …..(3)

29 pressure drop in (Psi) during drawdown.

34 millimeters of the formation (Crain, 1986).

21 floe some oil.

21 The qualitative evaluation of permeability includes the direct observation of the

25 Desbrandes, R. (1985): Encyclopedia of Well Logging, Gulf

26 Bed 1-11 Bed 1-6

55 AND SAMPLING SYSTEM.

21 FIG. (4) PRESSURE PROFILE OF BAHARIYA FORMATION IN BED 1-5 WELL

FIG. (7) PRESSURE PROFILE OF BAHARIYA FORMATION IN BED 1-10 WELL

37 5200 5300 5400 5500 5600

31 Fig. (10) REPRESENTATION OF POROSITY AND HYDROCARBON

Potrebbero piacerti anche