1887

Abstract

Summary

The effect of pressure was tested on to a joint ultrasonic and resistivity datasets for 67 shaly reservoir sandstones classified into four groups according to clay distribution. We investigated the role of pore-filling and load-bearing clay on the pressure-sensitivity of the relationships between resistivity and velocity (G1), resistivity and attenuation (G2), and velocity and attenuation (G3).The results give useful information for joint property model development for improved hydrocarbon reservoir characterization.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700569
2017-06-12
2024-03-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aladwani, N. et al.
    , 2016. Clay Distribution Effects on the Joint Elastic-electrical Properties of Shaly Sandstones. In 78th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2016.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Eberhart-Phillips, D.
    , 1989. Empirical relationships among seismic velocity, effective pressure, porosity, and clay content in sandstone. Geophysics, 54(1), p.82.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Han, T. et al.
    , 2016. Are self-consistent models capable of jointly modeling elastic velocity and electrical conductivity of reservoir sandstones?, 81(4), pp.363–368.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , 2011. Pressure effects on the joint elastic-electrical properties of reservoir sandstones. Geophysical Prospecting, 59, pp.506–517.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Harris, P.E. et al.
    , 2009. Joint interpretation of seismic and CSEM data using well log constraints: An example from the Luva Field. first break, 27(5).
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Hoversten, G.M. et al.
    , 2006. Direct reservoir parameter estimation using joint inversion of marine seismic AVA and CSEM data. Geophysics, 71(3), p.C1.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Jing, X.D., Archer, J.S. & Daltaban, T.S.
    , 1992. Laboratory study of the electrical and hydraulic properties of rocks under simulated reservoir conditions. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 9(2), pp.115–127. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/026481729290084R.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Khaksar, a., Griffiths, C.M. & McCann, C.
    , 1999. Compressional- and shear-wave velocities as a function of confining stress in dry sandstones. Geophysical Prospecting, 47, pp.487–508.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. MacGregor, L.M., Constable, S. & Sinha, M.C.
    , 1998. The RAMESSES experiment - III. Controlled-source electromagnetic sounding of the Reykjanes Ridge at 57 degrees 45 ’ N. Geophysical Journal International, 135(3), pp.773–789.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Mahmood, S.M., Maerefat, N.L. & Chang, M.M.
    , 1991. Laboratory measurements of electrical resistivity at reservoir conditions. SPE Formation Evaluation, 6(3), pp.291–300.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Sørensen, M., Best, A.I. & Fabricius, I.
    , 2015. Classification of sandstone by shale distribution and the effects on saturated elastic moduli. 3Iwrp.Org, pp.1–4. Available at: http://3iwrp.org/submissions/abstracts/AB_MS20141211–RAD89CCB.pdf.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700569
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201700569
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