Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 22: Line 22:  
After lithofacies analysis, a careful petrophysical analysis of shows and production should be made and compared to lithofacies distribution. The table below suggests a procedure for petrophysical analysis.
 
After lithofacies analysis, a careful petrophysical analysis of shows and production should be made and compared to lithofacies distribution. The table below suggests a procedure for petrophysical analysis.
   −
{| class = "wikitable"
+
# Gather all available fluid data regarding production, shows, and pressures from prospective intervals.
|-
+
# On structural [[cross section]]s, plot intervals that …
! Step
+
#*  Were perforated  
! Action
+
#*  Had DSTs  
|-
+
#*  Had RSTs  
| 1
+
#*  Had mud log shows
| Gather all available fluid data regarding production, shows, and pressures from prospective intervals.
+
## Annotate the intervals with the results.
|-
+
# Divide potential reservoir units on the cross sections into intervals of similar petrophysical character (flow units) using log data and, if available, porosity-[[permeability]] data. Categorize each flow unit by port type as mega-, macro-, meso-, or microporous.
| 2
+
# Calculate water saturation (S<sub>w</sub> ) of intervals that …
| On structural [[cross section]]s, plot intervals that …
+
#*  Are productive  
*  Were perforated  
+
#*  Had shows
*  Had DSTs  
+
#*  Are potential reservoirs
*  Had RSTs  
+
## Annotate the log intervals with S<sub>w</sub> values.
*  Had mud log shows
+
# Estimate the height above free water for zones that appear to have oil or gas.
 
+
# Analyze the fluid data in the context of the petrophysical data.
Annotate the intervals with the results.
+
#*  Do S<sub>w</sub> values, shows, and fluid pressures make sense in context with other geological data, including hydrocarbon column height?  
|-
+
#*  Do the shows or S<sub>w</sub> values indicate the presence of an updip or downdip trap?
| 3
+
# Determine whether a relationship exists between the development of reservoir-quality rocks, seal-quality rocks, and lithofacies that can be used to predict location and economic viability of prospective traps.
| Divide potential reservoir units on the cross sections into intervals of similar petrophysical character (flow units) using log data and, if available, porosity-[[permeability]] data. Categorize each flow unit by port type as mega-, macro-, meso-, or microporous.
  −
|-
  −
| 4
  −
| Calculate water saturation (S<sub>w</sub> ) of intervals that …
  −
*  Are productive  
  −
*  Had shows
  −
*  Are potential reservoirs
  −
 
  −
Annotate the log intervals with S<sub>w</sub> values.
  −
|-
  −
| 5
  −
| Estimate the height above free water for zones that appear to have oil or gas.
  −
|-
  −
| 6
  −
| Analyze the fluid data in the context of the petrophysical data.
  −
*  Do S<sub>w</sub> values, shows, and fluid pressures make sense in context with other geological data, including hydrocarbon column height?  
  −
*  Do the shows or S<sub>w</sub> values indicate the presence of an updip or downdip trap?
  −
|-
  −
| 7
  −
| Determine whether a relationship exists between the development of reservoir-quality rocks, seal-quality rocks, and lithofacies that can be used to predict location and economic viability of prospective traps.
  −
|}
      
==Example: calibrating logs to cores and shows==
 
==Example: calibrating logs to cores and shows==

Navigation menu