1887

Abstract

Summary

Albian carbonates are important oil reservoirs on the NE coast of Rio de Janeiro. In this work, aiming to evaluate the porosity of these deposits, we used basic well logs, geological information and petrophysical laboratory data from two oil fields of this region. However, proposed models to study this kind of reservoirs consider combinations of porosities derived from density and neutron logs, but do not recognize the importance of sonic porosity in the identification of fractures that distort the porosity models when they are compared with experimental data. Still, joint analysis of porosities derived from these three logs is addressed in this study and a new regression is proposed, which showed high correlation with the petrophysical data in both fields, regardless the differences of diagenetic processes that every oil field was submitted. Furthermore, the linear regression model applied to the calculation of Archie’s cementation coefficient (m) demonstrated that in zones with not connected porosity the value of m will be greatly increased and should not to be considered to calculate the saturation. Finally, using porosity cross plots derived from density and sonic logs allowed to identify different kind of porosities and to visualize the effective porosity along the geological formations.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201600889
2016-05-30
2024-04-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ahr, W.
    [2011] Geology of carbonate reservoirs: the identification, description and characterization of hydrocarbon reservoirs in carbonate rocks. John Wiley & Sons.
  2. Archie, G.
    [1942] The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics. I. Pet Tech, 5.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Brie, A., Johnson, D. and Nurmi, R.
    [1945] Effect of spherical pores on sonic and resistivity measurements. 26th Annual Logging Symposium. SPWLA, 1.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Crain, E.
    [1986] Log analysis handbook. PennWell Books, Tulsa, OK.
  5. Doveton, J.
    [2014] Principles of Mathematical Petrophysics. Oxford University Press.
  6. Dubois, M., Byrnes, A., Bohling, G. and Doveton, J.
    [2006] Multiscale geologic and petrophysical modeling of the giant hugoton gas field (permian), Kansas and Oklahoma, USA. AAPG Special Volumes.
  7. Guardado, L., Gamboa, L. and Lucchesi, C.
    [1990] Petroleum geology of the Campos Basin, Brazil, a model for a producing Atlantic type basin. Divergent/passive margin basins. AAPG Memoir, 48, 3–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Lucia, F. et al.
    [1983] Petrophysical parameters estimated from visual descriptions of carbonate rocks: a field classification of carbonate pore space. JPT, 35(3), 629–637.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. IP.
    IP. [2015] Interactive Petrophysics Users´ Manual.
  10. Raymer, L., Hunt, E. and Gardner, J.
    [1980] An improved sonic transit time-toporosity transform. In: Trans. SPWLA 21st Annu. Log. Symp., P1–P13.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Schön, J.
    [2011] Physical properties of rocks: A workbook. [S.l.]: Elsevier.
  12. Wyllie, M., Gregory, A. and Gardner, L.
    [1956] Elastic wave velocities in heterogeneous and porous media. Geophysics, 21(1), 41–70.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201600889
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201600889
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error