Professional Documents
Culture Documents
201500010
Identification of hydraulic flow units (HFUs) is an important This makes the reservoir characterization very complicated
part of reservoir characterization. Rock samples within and sometimes an erroneous process. An improved method,
a given HFU are expected to have the same mean hydraulic referred to as FZI star method (FZI*), is presented here
radius. We show that the famous reservoir quality index-flow using the base form of the KozenyCarmen (KC) equation,
zone indicator (RQI/FZI) technique and its recent modifica- opposed to RQI/FZI method which relies on the generalized
tions do not use the concept of mean hydraulic radius. Each form of the KC equation, by proper consideration of the
predicted HFU by these methods may contain the samples mean hydraulic radius concept. The presented method is
with different pore structures, and further the rocks with sim- verified using a large set of capillary pressure measurements.
ilar structures may be distributed in more than one HFU.
Energy Technol. 2015, 3, 726 733 2015 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 726
3 1 Nooruddin and Hossain[2] developed a modified FZI
k 3 model. The relationship between tortuosity, formation resis-
1 2 FS t2 S2gv
tivity factor FR, and porosity can be written as:[9]
Since both the Equation (1) and Equation (2) have been t FRf 7
written for a circular capillary, therefore the shape factor FS
is introduced to account for non-circular capillary tubes. For The FR can be estimated using Archies equation as:[10]
the specific case of circular tube FS is equal to 2.
Amaefule et al.[1] used Equation (3) to develop the well- a
FR 8
known RQI/FZI model as: m
where RQI and FZI, both presented in mm, are defined as:
2m1 1
k 9
1 2 FS a2 S2gv
r
k
RQI 0:0314 5
Nooruddin and Hossain[2] used Equation (9) to write:
Energy Technol. 2015, 3, 726 733 2015 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 727
Similarly, all samples with similar FZI values will lie on FZI* takes into account all the pore related parameters
a straight line with unit slope on a on loglog plot of RQIIG that the KC equation provides. This FZI* model considers
versus 1 1 Swc 2. the effects of the mean hydraulic radius and tortuosity and
Since, the RQI/FZI models proposed by Nooruddin and does not include any additional parameter controlled by the
Hussain[2] and Izadi and Ghalambor[3] use the same general wetting conditions, which improves the performance of the
methodology as Amaefule et al.[1] in derivation of their modi- proposed model.
fied models, the same problem also exists in using these
models. Besides, the FZINH index proposed by Nooruddin
Model verification
and Hussain[2] does not consider the tortuosity properly in
determination of flow units. In fact, substituting the tortuosi- Our developed model was used to identify the HFUs in the
ty in the general KC equation and removing the factors that Bangestan oil reservoir in Ahvaz field which is located in the
control the texture of the rock from the FZI index, not only south west of Iran. This reservoir is mainly composed of
does not enhance the characterization of HFUs, but causes limestone with occasional dolomitized limestone intervals.
less accurate determination of HFUs than the original RQI/ Due to the complex nature of pores system, the more hetero-
FZI model. It should also be noted that Nooruddin and Hus- geneous and anisotropic a reservoir is, the more complicated
sain model is more complicated than the original FZI ap- the identification of the HFUs.[11] A high degree of heteroge-
proach due to the need for the cementation factor (m), neity in this reservoir is indicated by computing the value of
which is usually measured during SCAL experiments and is 0.9 for Lorenz coefficient. The existing HFU identification
unknown from the results of RCAL tests. In addition, the techniques failed to determine the HFUs in such a heteroge-
connate water saturation which is a function of wettability neous reservoir. Extensive sets of RCAL and SCAL data
has adverse effect on the HFU determination approach de- from the reservoir are available which enhances the valida-
veloped by Izadi and Ghalambor.[3] It means that by using tion of the new model. RCAL data of vertical (501 samples)
the Izadi and Ghalambor approach, the rocks with the same and horizontal (1680 samples) plugs from five wells are used.
pore structure but different wettability lie on two different The oilwater capillary pressure (OWCP) and mercury injec-
HFUs. tion capillary pressure (MICP) data of vertical and horizon-
tal plugs are available for checking different HFU identifica-
tion methods.
Development of an improved method to identify Figure 1 and Figure 2 show the HFUs identified by FZI
HFU and FZI* methods based on DRT and probability plot clus-
tering techniques for, respectively, vertical and horizontal
It is clear that the samples of the same HFU must have the plugs. The summary of the analyses shown in these figures is
similar effective or mean hydraulic radiuses. Hence, we sug- presented in Table 1. For each case, the number of clusters
gest using the base form of the KC equation, which includes and in each cluster the number of samples and the corre-
the pure form of the mean hydraulic unit radius to develop sponding range of FZI, FZI*, permeability, and porosity
the model for HFU. By taking the square root followed by values are also included. As summarized in this table, the
a logarithm of both sides of Equation (1), this equation can numbers and the characteristics of HFUs predicted by FZI
be re-written as: and FZI* differ significantly. Furthermore, the HFU classifi-
cation result is severely affected by the choice of the cluster-
p p ing scheme. A critical question arises here that must be an-
r
Log k log Log pmh 15 swered: which of the classifying methods (FZI or FZI*) and
t FS
clustering techniques (DRT or probability plot) lead to the
best classification of the samples into HFUs? The only way
and if presenting the permeability in mD:
to check the reliability of each model is by analyzing the ca-
p pillary pressure of the plugs as a dynamic parameter affect-
p
Log0:0314 k log LogFZI * 16 ing the fluid flow in the reservoir. The rock samples classified
as a HFU should have similar capillary curves as they have
in which, FZI* is the modified FZI in mm defined as: similar dynamic behavior. In other words, the capillary pres-
sure curves for the samples in each predicted HFU are ex-
r pected to stay together and make a clear separation from
FZI* pmh 17
t FS other HFUs.
p Only limited and selected number of plugs undergo SCAL
p
Hence, on the log-log plot of 0.0314 k versus , all sam- tests because these experiments are time consuming and ex-
ples with similar FZI* values will lie on a straight line with pensive. This is the reason that in the preceding capillary
unit slope. In reservoir characterization studies the numerical pressure plots only some of the identified HFUs may be ob-
value of FZI* for each plug can be determined using served. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the available measured
q OWCP data for, respectively the vertical and horizontal
k
FZI 0:0314 . plugs based on the FZI and FZI* methods by using different
Energy Technol. 2015, 3, 726 733 2015 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 728
Figure 1. Use of the different HFU identification methods when undergoing different clustering techniques for the vertical plugs. a) FZI and DRT analysis, b)
FZI* and DRT analysis, c) FZI and probability plot analysis, d) FZI* and probability plot analysis.
Figure 2. Use of the different HFU identification methods when undergoing different clustering techniques for the horizontal plugs. a) FZI and DRT analysis, b)
FZI* and DRT analysis, c) FZI and probability plot analysis, d) FZI* and probability plot analysis.
Energy Technol. 2015, 3, 726 733 2015 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 729
Table 1. The summary of the analyses using both FZI and FZI* methods based on DRT and probability plot techniques for the vertical and horizontal plugs.
Method Direction No. of clusters (DRT Cluster No. of FZI or FZI* Permeability Porosity range No. of clusters (probability Cluster No. of FZI or FZI* Permeability Porosity range
analysis) data range [mm] range [mD] (fraction) plot analysis) data range [mm] range [mD] (fraction)
1 20 0.10.25 0.0050.577 0.0460.201 1 33 0.130.28 0.0052.159 0.0420.25
2 275 0.250.79 0.00623.185 0.0290.314 2 315 0.281.11 0.00626.422 0.0190.314
3 143 0.82.49 0.006109.397 0.0150.271 3 81 1.112.24 0.016109.397 0.0150.271
Vertical 7 4 45 2.557.34 0.009880.2 0.0070.251 5 4 52 2.286.91 0.009880.2 0.0070.251
5 12 9.1522.01 0.0282.166 0.0050.02 5 20 7.2184.24 0.02886.877 0.0040.025
6 5 29.174.17 0.0686.877 0.0040.025
730
have been caused by errors in ex-
carbonated rocks.[1215] Second, it
curacy in the analysis, in particu-
may be the main source of inac-
method presented here is based
on the KC equation. Some sim-
curves do not obey the expected
it should be noted that even in
method provides a better classifi-
bility plot clustering schemes.
Likewise the OWCP data, in both
based on the FZI and FZI* meth-
method. In addition, when using
Figure 3. The OWCP data for vertical plugs based on different methods. a) FZI and DRT analysis, b) FZI* and DRT analysis, c) FZI and probability plot analysis,
d) FZI* and probability plot analysis.
Figure 4. The OWCP data for horizontal plugs based on different methods. a) FZI and DRT analysis, b) FZI* and DRT analysis, c) FZI and probability plot analy-
sis, d) FZI* and probability plot analysis.
Energy Technol. 2015, 3, 726 733 2015 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 731
Figure 5. The MICP data for vertical plugs based on different methods. a) FZI and DRT analysis, b) FZI* and DRT analysis, c) FZI and probability plot analysis,
d) FZI* and probability plot analysis.
Figure 6. The MICP data for horizontal plugs based on different methods. a) FZI and DRT analysis, b) FZI* and DRT analysis, c) FZI and probability plot analy-
sis, d) FZI* and probability plot analysis.
Energy Technol. 2015, 3, 726 733 2015 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 732
with the formation water for about two weeks before the In other hand, the classical equations presented in this
measurement of the OWCP curves in order to simulate ini- work may also be modified by introducing the fractal theory
tial wettability state of the reservoir before migration of the to obtain novel results. For example, Cai and Yu[15] modified
oil. As described above, not giving enough time for the aging the classical LucasWashburn (LW) equation by introducing
can be a source of error for validation of the new model with the fractal dimension for tortuous capillaries representing
the OWCP data. Fifth, since the MICP tests were performed the heterogeneity of flow in porous media. The modified LW
under very high injection pressures to fill almost all of pores equation may be called LW-CAI equation.
of the samples, loss of the original texture is a possibility.
Thus, seeing some deviations from the expected trend, partic-
ularly at high mercury saturations, can be attributed to the Acknowledgements
destruction of the original pore structures at very high injec-
tion pressures. The first and second authors thank National Iranian South
Oil Company (NISOC) and National Iranian Oil Company
(NIOC) for permission to publish this work.
Conclusions
In this work, a modified FZI method was presented using
the base form of the KC equation. The new model was veri- Keywords: capillary pressure FZI star hydraulic flow
fied using abundant capillary pressure data from a carbonated unit kozenycarmen equation mean hydraulic radius
reservoir. The following conclusions can be drawn from this
work: [1] J. O. Amaefule, M. Altunbay, D. Tiab, D. G. Kersey, D. K. Keelan,
* The base form of the KC equation, which includes the Enhanced reservoir description using core and log data to identify hy-
mean hydraulic radius term can be used to develop a more draulic flow units and predict permeability in uncored intervals/wells
reliable method for identification of HFUs. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, 3 6 October,
1993, Houston, Texas.
* The literature methods of identifying HFUs developed
[2] H. Nooruddinn, M. Hossain, J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2011, 80, 107 115.
using the general form of the KC equation do not use the [3] M. Izadi, A. Ghalambor, SPE Reservoir Eval. Eng. 2013, 16, 257
concept of mean hydraulic radius in a consistent way. Each 264.
HFU identified by the existing methods may contain the [4] J. Kozeny, ber kapillare Leitung des Wassers im Boden, Sitzungsber-
ichte. Royal Academy of Science Vienna, Proc. Class I, 1927, 136,
samples with different pore structures, and further the sam- 271 306.
ples with similar pore geometrical attributes may be distrib- [5] P. C. Carmen, Trans. AIChE 1937, 15, 150 166.
uted in more than one HFU. [6] R. B. Bird, W. E. Steware, E. N. Lightfoot, Transport Phenomena,
* Identification of HFUs is significantly impacted by the Wiley, New York, 1960.
[7] M. Abbaszadeh, H. Fujii, F. Fujimoto, SPE Formation Evaluation
choice of different clustering methods. The probability plot 1996, 11, 263 271.
clustering technique gives better results than the famous [8] M. S. El Sharawy, J. Appl. Sci. Res. 2013, 9, 4271 4287.
DRT method. [9] M. R. J. Wyllie, W. D. Rose, J. Pet. Technol. 1950, 2, 105 118.
* Employing the FZI* method along with the probability [10] G. E. Archie, Trans. AIME 1942, 146, 54 62.
[11] H. Saboorian-Jooybari, G. H. Mowazi, S. R. Jaberi, A new approach
plot clustering technique leads to much more satisfactory for rock typing used in one of the Iranian carbonate reservoir (a case
identification of HFUs. study). Paper SPE 131915 presented at the International Oil and Gas
Conference and Exhibition, Beijing, China, 8 10 June 2010. DOI:
10.2118/131915-MS.
Future works [12] J. Cai, B. Yu, M. Zou, L. Luo, Energy Fuels 2010, 24, 1860 1867.
[13] J. Cai, E. Perfect, C. L. Cheng, X. Hu, Langmuir 2014, 30, 5142
In this work, we used only two clustering techniques of DRT 5151.
and probability plot analysis. Other available clustering tech- [14] R. Masoodi, E. Languri, A. Ostadhossein, J. Colloid Interface Sci.
niques may also be used. In particular, artificial intelligence 2013, 389, 268 272.
[15] J. Cai, B. Yu, Transp. Porous Media 2011, 89, 251 263.
techniques can be considered as efficient clustering methods.
The new rock typing method presented in this study can fur-
Received: January 11, 2015
ther be verified using more SCAL data from other reser- Revised: February 13, 2015
voirs. Published online on April 15, 2015
Energy Technol. 2015, 3, 726 733 2015 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim 733