GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA OPEN FILE 7995 SASKATCHEWAN GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MISCELLANEOUS REPORT 2016-3 Porosity and permeability evaluation for the Devonian- Mississippian Lower Middle Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan K. Hu, D. Kohlruss, C. Yang, and Z. Chen 2017
50
Embed
Porosity and Permeability Evaluation for the Devonian ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA
OPEN FILE 7995
SASKATCHEWAN GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
MISCELLANEOUS REPORT 2016-3
Porosity and permeability evaluation for the Devonian-
Mississippian Lower Middle Bakken Member
in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan
K. Hu, D. Kohlruss, C. Yang, and Z. Chen
2017
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA
OPEN FILE 7995
SASKATCHEWAN GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
MISCELLANEOUS REPORT 2016-3
Porosity and permeability evaluation for the Devonian-
Mississippian Lower Middle Bakken Member
in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan
K. Hu1, D. Kohlruss2, C. Yang2, and Z. Chen1
1 Geological Survey of Canada, 3303-33rd
Street NW, Calgary, Alberta 2 Saskatchewan Geological Survey, Saskatchewan Ministry of the Economy, Regina, Saskatchewan
1. Units A, B, and C of the Middle Bakken Member were classified using the parameters set
from core and well logs (Kohlruss and Nickel, 2013).
2. Map of the study area showing all wells and cross-section lines in the Viewfield Pool in
southeastern Saskatchewan.
3. Examples from two wells showing log signatures on the Bakken Formation in the Viewfield
Pool of Saskatchewan, including the Upper Member (upper shale), the Middle Member (Unit
C, Unit B and Unit A) and the Lower Member (lower shale). Units A, B and C, classified by
Kohlruss and Nickel (2013), can be identified by using well logs.
4. Core porosity (PHICORE) distribution for units A, B and C of the Middle Bakken Member in
the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan.
5. Core maximum permeability (KMAX) distribution for units A, B and C of the Middle Bakken
Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan.
6. Core horizontal permeability (KH) and vertical permeability (KV) distribution for units A, B
and C of the Middle Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan.
7. Core grain density distribution for units A, B and C of the Middle Bakken Member in the
Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan.
8. Comparison of measured core porosity (PHICORE) with calculated porosities from single
porosity log for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member of Viewfield Pool, southeastern
Saskatchewan.
9. Comparison of dual-log calculated porosities with core porosity for Unit A of the Middle
Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan.
10. Quantitative relationship between core porosity and sonic transit time log (a), including
linear equation and polynomial equation. Quantitative relationship between measured core
porosity and bulk density log reading (b). All the data are from Unit A of the Middle Bakken
Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan.
11. Examples showing the comparison of computed porosities derived from proposed porosity
models using wireline logs with core porosity measurements for the Middle Bakken Member
in the Viewfield pool, southeastern Saskatchewan.
12. Core maximum permeability (KMAX) versus core porosity (PHICORE) for 21 selected wells
for Unit A of the Middle Member of the Bakken Formation in the Viewfield Pool in
southeastern Saskatchewan. Quantitative relationships between core permeability and
porosity has been obtained based on regression analysis when several anomaly points with
very high porosity (>15%) and permeability (>4 mD) were removed.
13. Results of a complete log set that was run in wells 111/04-16-010-08W2 (a), 131/08-03-008-
08W2 (b), and 111/01-17-008-06W2 (c) in the Viewfield Pool. Detailed porosity and
permeability interpretations are displayed from the NMR logging set for the Middle Member
of the Bakken Formation in all three wells.
25
14. NMR permeability KSDR computed using Schlumberger-Doll-Research (SDR) and KTIM
using Timur-Coates model from two wells 131/08-008-08W2, and 111/01-17-008-06W2, as
shown in Figures 13(b) and (c), respectively. Good quantitative relationships are obtained
between KSDR, KTIM and TCMR at semi-logarithm axis for Unit A of the Middle Member of
the Bakken Formation in the Viewfield Pool.
15. Comparison of permeability models for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member in the
Viewfield Pool. (a) Two relationships, KCORE equation (19), and KSDR equation (20),
between permeability and porosity from core analysis and advanced NMR log interpretation.
(b) Relationships between permeability and porosity from combined dataset from core
analysis from 21 wells and most of KSDR-TCMR data pairs from two wells, including linear
equation (22) and on-linear equation (23) at semi-logarithm axis.
16. Examples showing a comparison of NMR porosity and permeability with calculated porosity
and permeability derived from proposed porosity and permeability models in this study for
Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member for three wells 111/04-16-010-08W2 (a), 131/08-03-
008-08W2 (b), and 111/01-17-008-06W2 (c) in the Viewfield Pool of southeastern
Saskatchewan.
17. Stratigraphic cross section A-A’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and
permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale
has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of the Lower Bakken shale is the end
depth of the correlation.
18. Stratigraphic cross section B-B’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and
permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale
has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of the Lower Bakken shale is the end
depth of the correlation.
19. Stratigraphic cross section C-C’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and
permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale
has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of the Lower Bakken shale is the end
depth of the correlation.
20. Stratigraphic cross section D-D’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and
permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale
has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of the Lower Bakken shale is the end
depth of the correlation.
21. Stratigraphic cross section E-E’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and
permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale
has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of the Lower Bakken shale is the end
depth of the correlation.
22. Stratigraphic cross section F-F’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and
permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale
has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of the Lower Bakken shale is the end
depth of the correlation.
Figure 1. Core log of the Bakken Formation (based on well core 141/15-31-3-11W2) , showing its stratigraphic subdivisions, gamma ray and sonic transit time logs. Units A, B, and C of the Middle Bakken Member were classified using the parameters set from core and well logs (Kohlruss and Nickel, 2013).
26
11 10 9 8 7 6
11
10
9
8
7
Twp6
all drilled wells
wells with core cored wells used for K statisticsCORE
N
Viewfield Poolboundary
Rge 5 W2
A
A’
B’
BC
C’
D’
E’
F’
F
E
D
0 2.5 5 7.5 10km
cored wells with NMR logs
Figure 2. Map of the study area showing all wells and cross-section lines in the Viewfield Pool in southeastern Saskatchewan.27
1735
1740
1745
1750
1755
0 150GR (GAPI)
500 100DT (s/m)
50 -50SP (mv)
1500 3000
3RHOB (kg/m )
0 100
0 100
PHINls (%) RS (ohmm)
RD (ohmm)
0.2 200
DEPTHm KB
0.2 200PHIDls (%)
Unit C
Unit B
Unit A
Lithology Unit Member
Bakken Formation
Upper
Middle
Lower
RM (ohmm)0.2 200
(b) 141/16-01-006-09W2
calcareous fine grainedsandstone
dolomiticfine grained sandstone
dolomitic siltstone
calcareous siltstone
shale
1725
1730
1735
1740
1745
0 150 SGR (GAPI)
500 100DT (s/m)
100 -50SP (mv)
1500 3000
3RHOB (kg/m )
0 100
0 100
PHINls (%)RM (ohmm)
RD (ohmm)
0.2 200
DEPTHm KB
Unit C
Unit B
Unit A
Lithology Unit Member
Bakken Formation
Upper
Middle
Lower
(a) 131/12-15-006-11W2
0.2 200PHIDls (%)
Figure 3. Examples from two wells showing log signatures for the Bakken Formation in the Viewfield Pool of Saskatchewan, including Upper Member (upper shale), Middle Member (Unit C, Unit B and Unit A) and Lower Member (lower shale). Units A, B and C, classified by Kohlruss and Nickel (2013), can be identified by using well logs.
GR - gamma ray
SGR - spectral gamma ray
SP - spontaneous potential
DT - borehole compensated sonic transit time
RHOB - bulk density
PHIDls - limestone calibrated density porosity
PHINls - limestone calibrated neutron porosity
RD - deep resistivity
RM - medium resistivity
RS - shallow resistivity
28
0
10
20
30
40
Nu
mb
er
of
sa
mp
les
Nu
mb
er
of
sam
ple
sN
um
ber
of
sam
ple
s
Figure 4. Core porosity (PHI ) distribution for units A, B and C of the Middle Bakken CORE
Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan. N: total number of samples.
(a)
Unit BN=91
(b)
42.9% (of samples)
33% (of samples)
average: 11.1median: 11.8
50
(c)
<3 6 9 12 15 18 213
0
100
200
300
400
Core porosity PHI (%)CORE
51.3% (of samples)
23.3% (of samples)
Unit AN=836
average: 10.4median: 11
500
<3 6 9 12 15 18 213
0
10
20
30
40
<3 6 9 12 15 18 213
35.1% (of samples)
30.9% (of samples)
Unit CN=97
average: 8.6median: 8.3
Core porosity PHI (%)CORE
Core porosity PHI (%)CORE
29
0
10
40
20
30
50
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Core maximum permeability K (mD)MAX
Nu
mb
er
of
sam
ple
s
Figure 5. Core max permeability (K ) distribution for units A, B and C of the Middle Bakken MAX
Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan. N: total number of samples.
52.8% (of samples)
19.1% (of samples)
Unit BN=89
average: 4.55median: 0.45
(a)
(b)
(c)
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Nu
mb
er
of
sa
mp
les
Unit AN=817
56.5% (of samples)
38.4% (of samples)
0
100
200
300
400
500
average: 0.32median: 0.13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0.01 0.1 1 10
Nu
mb
er
of
sam
ple
s
56.7% (of samples)
30% (of samples)
Unit CN=90
100
average: 1.87median: 0.22
Core maximum permeability K (mD)MAX
Core maximum permeability K (mD)MAX
30
Figure 6. Core horizontal permeability (K ) and vertical permeability (K ) distribution for units H V
A, B and C of the Middle Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan. N: total number of samples.
0
20
30
40
50
Core permeability (mD)
Nu
mb
er
of
sam
ple
s
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
K , N=69H
K , N=39V
Unit B
10
(a)
(b)
(c)
Core permeability (mD)
Nu
mb
er
of
sa
mp
les
0
50
100
150
200
250
0.01
K , N=476H
K , N=262V
Unit A
0.1 1 10 100
300
K , N=50H
K , N=27V
Unit C
Core permeability (mD)
Nu
mb
er
of
sam
ple
s
0
10
20
30
40
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
31
3Core grain density (kg/m )
Figure 7. Core grain density distribution for units A, B and C of the Middle Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan. N: total number of samples.
Unit BN=9129% (of samples)
25% (of samples)
0
10
20
30
<2620 2650 2680 2710 2740 2770 2800 28302620
Nu
mb
er
of
sam
ple
s
average: 2702median: 2720
24% (of samples)
(a)
(b)
(c)
3Core grain density (kg/m )
Unit AN=786
14.6% (of samples)
57% (of samples)
0
100
200
300
400
<2620 2650 2680 2710 2740 2770 2800 28302620
Nu
mb
er
of
sa
mp
les
average: 2714median: 2720
500
17.2% (of samples)
0
10
20
30
<2620 2650 2680 2710 2740 2770 2800 28302620
Unit CN=87
35.8% (of samples)
25.9% (of samples)
Nu
mb
er
of
sam
ple
s
14.8% (of samples)
average: 2730median: 2733
3Core grain density (kg/m )
32
0
0 0Clay-corrected neutron porosity f (%)NC1
Matrix and clay calculated sonic porosity PHIS1 (%)
Matrix and clay corrected neutron porosity PHIN (%)
(b)
(d)
Figure 8. Comparison of measured core porosity (PHI ) with calculated porosities from single porosity log for Unit A CORE
of Middle Bakken Member of Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan. N: total number of samples. (a) - matrix- and clay-corrected density porosity using equation (7), (b) - matrix- and clay-corrected sonic porosity using equation (10),
(c) - clay-corrected neutron porosity (with limestone calibration) using equation (12), (d) - matrix- and clay- corrected neutron porosity using equation (14).
N=701
N=400 N=400
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 5 10 15 20 25
Co
re p
oro
sit
y P
HI
(%
)C
OR
E
Matrix and clay corrected density porosity PHID1 (%)(a)
N=407
0
5
10
15
20
25
0
5
10
15
20
25
0
5
10
15
20
25
5 10 15 20 25
5 10 15 20 255 10 15 20 25
f =PHINC1 CORE
(c)
Co
re p
oro
sit
y P
HI
(%
)C
OR
E
Co
re p
oro
sit
y P
HI
(%
)C
OR
EC
ore
po
rosit
y P
HI
(%
)C
OR
E
PHID1=PHICORE PHIS1=PHICORE
PHIN=PHICORE
33
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 5 10 15 20 25
Calculated density-sonic porosity PHDS (%)
Calculated neutron-density porosity PHND (%)
Co
re p
oro
sit
y P
HI
(%
)C
OR
E
(a)
(b)
Figure 9. Comparison of dual-log calculated porosities with core porosity for Unit A of Middle Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan. N: total number of samples. (a) - calculated density-sonic porosity using equation (15) versus measured core porosity, (b) - calculated neutron-density porosity using equation (16) versus measured core porosity.
N=331
N=381
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 5 10 15 20 25
Co
re p
oro
sit
y P
HI
(%
)C
OR
E
PHDS=PHICORE
PHND=PHICORE
34
3Bulk density r (kg/m ) b
Sonic transit time Dt (ms/m)
2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000
R² = 0.5121
R² = 0.5290
4
8
12
16
20
160 180 200 220 240 260 280
-1PHIS2�= 2.1415*10 Dt - 37.9601
-3 2PHIS2 = -4.0166*10 Dt +2.0379Dt - 244.7855
-2PHID2�= -3.2763*10 * + 94.2668rb
R² = 0.5286
Figure 10. Quantitative relationships between measured core porosity and sonic transit time log (a), including linear equation and polynomial equation. Quantitative relationship between measured core porosity and bulk density log reading (b). All data are from Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan. N: total number of samples.
N=359
N=619The linear equation:
The polynomial equation:
(a)
(b)
0
4
8
12
16
20
Co
re p
oro
sit
y P
HI
(%
)C
OR
EC
ore
po
rosit
y P
HI
(%
)C
OR
E
35
Figure 11. Examples showing comparison of computed porosities derived from proposed porosity models using wireline logs with core porosity measurements for the Middle Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool, southeastern Saskatchewan.
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logSP - spontaneous potential logPHID1 - computed density porosity from volume model using equation (7)PHIS1 - computed sonic porosity from volume model using equation (10) PHIN - corrected neutron porosity from volume model using equation (14)PHDS - computed density-sonic porosity from volume model using equation(15)PHND - computed density-neutron porosity from volume model using equation (16)PHID2- computed density porosity from core-based model using equation (18)PHIS2- computed sonic porosity from core-based model using equation (17a) or (17b)PHI - measured core porosityCORE
PHICOREPHICORE
PHICORE PHICORE PHICORE PHICORE
36
Figure 12. (K ) versus core porosity (PHI ) for 21 selected wells for Unit A of the Middle Member of max CORECore maximum permeability the Bakken Formation in the Viewfield Pool in southeastern Saskatchewan. Quantitative relationships between core permeability and porosity has been obtained based on regression analysis when several anomaly points with very high porosity (>15%) and permeability (>4 mD) were removed.
(a) Core porosity versus permeability
(b) Well locations in the Viewfield Pool. The red dots represent the 21 wells used for K CORE
equation statistics. The blue triangles stand for the three cored wells with NMR logging set.
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
0 5 10 15 20
Co
re m
axim
um
perm
eab
ilit
y K
(m
D)
max
100
Core porosity PHI (%)CORE
0.0001
cored wells used in K1-PHI statistics
Viewfield Poolboundary
A
A’
B’
BC
C’
D’
E’
F’
F
E
D
7.5 10km
cored wells with NMR logs
-3 0.3971fK =1.5321x10 eCORE2R =0.6694
441 core samples from 21 wells, the red dots in (b)
37
1425
1430
1435
0 150SGR (GAPI)
0 100
DT (ms/m)100 -50
SP (mv)
HURA (PPM)
1500 3000
3RHOB (kg/m )
500 100 CMFFBFV
DEPTHm(KB)
Unit C
Unit A
U. Shale
L. Shale
111/04-16-010-08W2
0.0001 10(mD)
1590
1595
1600
131/08-03-008-08W2
0 150GR (GAPI)
100 -50SP (mv)
1500 3000
3RHOB (kg/m )
0 10PEF (B/E)
DEPTHm(KB) CMFF
0.0001 10(mD)
Unit C
Unit A
U. Shale
L. Shale
Figure 13. Results of the complete log set that was run in wells 111/04-16-010-08W2 (a), 131/08-03-008-08W2 (b), and 111/01-17-008-06W2 (c) in the Viewfield Pool (blue triangles on Figure 2 and 12). Detailed porosity and permeability interpretations are displayed from NMR logging set for the Middle Member of the Bakken Formation in all three wells.
1495
1500
1505
1510111/01-17-008-06W2
0 150GR (GAPI)
100 -50SP (mv)
1500 3000
3RHOB (kg/m )
0 10PEF (B/E)
DEPTHm(KB) CMFF
0.0001 10(mD)
Unit C
Unit A
U. Shale
L. Shale
PHICORE
CMRP
TCMR
PHICORE
CMRP
TCMR
PHICORE
0 100PHIN (%)
0 100PHIN (%)
0 100PHIN (%)
RS
RD
0.2 200
RM(ohmm)
RS
RM
RD
0.2 200(ohmm)
RS
0.2 200
RM
(ohmm)
CMRP
TCMR
0 40
0 40
(%)
(%)
0 40(%)
KMAX
0 10PEF (B/E)
KSDR
KTIM
0 300HCAL (mm)
0 300HCAL (mm)
0 300HCAL (mm)
(a)
(b)
(c)
RHOB-density logDT- sonic transit time logPHIN- neutron porosity logPEF- photoelectric factorRD- deep resistivity log
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logSP - spontaneous potential logHURA- uranium concentrationHCAL- caliper
Schlumberger-Doll-Research (SDR) modelK - NMR permeability from TIM
Timur-Coates equationK - measured core maximum permeabilityMAX
RM- medium resistivity logRS- shallow resistivity log
KMAX
KSDR
KTIM
KMAX
KSDR
KTIM
interval where difference occurs between NMR permeability and core measurements
38
-410
10
0.1
1.0
NM
R p
erm
ea
bilit
y (
K)
(mD
)N
MR
0 5 10 15 20
from logKTIM
from logKSDR
Total CMR porosity (TCMR) (%)
-310
-210
210
CMR porosity: porosity from high-resolution combinable magnetic resource tool.NMR permeability K : permeability computed using Schlumberger-Doll-Research (SDR) model.SDR
NMR permeability K : permeability computed using free-fluid (Timur-Coates) model.TIM
Figure 14. NMR Schlumberger-Doll-Research (SDR) and permeability computed using KSDR
KTIM rom two wells 131/08-008-08W2, and 111/01-17-008-06W2, using Timur-Coates model fas shown in Figures 13(b) and (c) respectively. Good quantitative relationships are obtained between , and TCMR at semi-logarithm axis for Unit A of the Middle Member of the K KSDR TIM
Bakken Formation in the Viewfield Pool.
2R = 0.8128
-12 10.3136K = 3.2834*10 fTIM
97 data points from K log:SDR
95 data points from K log curve:TIM
2R = 0.8395
-5 0.7352fK =9.6609*10 eSDR
39
Total CMR porosity (PHI ) (v/v)CMR
5 10 15 20
(b)
0 5 100 15 20
Co
re o
r N
MR
perm
eab
ilit
y (
Kre
/K)
(mD
)M
AX
SD
R
-410
10
0.1
1.0
-310
-210
210
Core or CMR porosity (PHI /TCMR) (%)CORE
(a)
-3 0.3971fK =1.5321x10 eCORE2R =0.6694
441 core samples from 21 wells (the red dots)
97 points from two wells with NMR logging set (the blue circles)
-3 0.4371fK =1.0665*10 eCOM2R =0.6827
N: number of data points, from 21 cored wells and two wells with NMR data.
2R = 0.8395
-5 0.7352fK =9.6609*10 eSDR
-6 4.048K =8.3995*10 fCOM
2R =0.6767
The non-linear equation:
K<0.01mD
Figure 15. Comparison of permeability models for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member in the Viewfield Pool. (a) - Two relationships, K equation (19), and K equation (20), between permeability and porosity from core analysis and advanced NMR log interpretation. CORE SDR
(b) - Relationships between permeability and porosity from combined dataset from core analysis from 21 wells and most of K -TCMR data SDR
pairs from two wells, including linear equation (22) and non-linear equation (23) at semi-log axis.
f≤6.7%
K≥0.01mD
Core or CMR porosity (PHI /TCMR) (%)CORE
f>12.5%
The linear equation:N=528
40
1425
1430
1435
0 150SGR (GAPI)
0 100
DT (ms/m)100 -50
SP (mv)
HURA (PPM)
1500 3000
3RHOB (kg/m )
500 100DEPTHm(KB)
Unit C
Unit A
U. Shale
L. Shale
111/04-16-010-08W2
1590
1595
1600
131/08-03-008-08W2
0 150GR (GAPI)
100 -50SP (mv)
1500 3000
3RHOB (kg/m )
0 10PEF (B/E)
DEPTHm(KB)
Unit C
Unit A
U. Shale
L. Shale
1495
1500
1505
1510111/01-17-008-06W2
0 150GR (GAPI)
100 -50SP (mv)
1500 3000
3RHOB (kg/m )
0 10PEF (B/E)
DEPTHm(KB)
Unit C
Unit A
U. Shale
L. Shale
0 100PHIN (%)
0 100PHIN (%)
0 100PHIN (%)
RS
RD
0.2 200
RM(ohmm)
(ohmm)
RS
0.2 200
RM
(ohmm)
0 10PEF (B/E)
0 300HCAL (mm)
0 300HCAL (mm)
0 300HCAL (mm)
(a)
(b)
(c)
0.0001 10(mD)PHIcore
0 40(%)
PHID1
TCMR
(mD)(%)
0.0001 10(mD)PHIcore
PHID1
TCMR
0 40(%)KMAX
KSDR
Figure 16. Examples showing a comparison of NMR porosity and permeability with calculated porosity and permeability derived from proposed porosity and permeability models in this study for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member for three wells 111/04-16-010-08W2 (a), 131/08-03-008-08W2 (b), and 111/01-17-008-06W2 (c) in the Viewfield Pool of southeastern Saskatchewan.
RHOB-density logDT- sonic transit time logPHIN- neutron porosity logPEF- photoelectric factor
0.0001 10
PHIcore
PHID1
TCMR
0 40
RS
RD
0.2 200
RM
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logSP - spontaneous potential logHURA- uranium concentrationHCAL- caliper
TCMR- CMR porosity logPHID1- calculated density porosity using volume model, equation (7)PHI measured core porosityCORE-
K - measured core maximum permeabilityMAX
K - calculated permeability using core-based CORE
model, equation (19)K - calculated permeability using combined COM
Figure 17. Stratigraphic cross section A-A’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of Lower Bakken shale is the end depth of the correlation.
ms/m (%)
mD
g/cc
GAPI
600 100DT
0 50PHID1
0 150GR
1.8 2.8RHOB
-410 10
KCOM
ms/m (%)
mD
g/cc
GAPI
500 100DT
0 50PHID1
0 150GR
1.8 2.8RHOB
-410 10KCOM
ms/m (%)
mD
g/cc
GAPI
500 100DT
0 50PHID1
0 150GR
1.8 2.8RHOB PHICORE
-410 10
KCOM
ms/m (%)
mD
g/cc
GAPI
500 100DT
0 50PHID1
0 150GR
1.8 2.8RHOB
-410 10
KCOM
ms/m (%)
mD
g/cc
GAPI
500 100DT
0 50PHID1
0 150GR
1.8 2.8RHOB
-410 10
KCOM
ms/m (%)
mD
g/cc
GAPI
500 100DT
0 50PHID1
0 150GR
1.8 2.8RHOB
-410 10
KCOM
ms/m (%)
mD
g/cc
GAPI
500 100DT
0 50PHIS1
0 150GR
1.8 2.8RHOB
-410 10KCOM
ms/m (%)
mD
g/cc
GAPI
KMAX
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logRHOB-density logDT- sonic transit time logPHID1- calculated density porosity using volume model - equation (7)
PHIS1- calculated sonic porosity using volume model - equation (10)PHI - measured core porosityCORE
K - calculated permeability using core-NMRCOM
permeability model - equations (22) / (23)K - measured core maximum permeabilityMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
11 10 9 8 7 6
11
10
9
8
7
Twp6
all drilled wells wells with core cored wells used for K statisticsCORE N
Figure 18. Stratigraphic cross section B-B’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of Lower Bakken shale is the end depth of the correlation.
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logRHOB-density logDT- sonic transit time logPHID1- calculated density porosity using volume model - equation (7)
PHIS1- calculated sonic porosity using volume model - equation (10)PHI - measured core porosityCORE
K - calculated permeability using core-NMRCOM
permeability model - equations (22) / (23)K - measured core maximum permeabilityMAX
11 10 9 8 7 6
11
10
9
8
7
Twp6
all drilled wells wells with core cored wells used for K statisticsCORE N
Figure 19. Stratigraphic cross section C-C’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of Lower Bakken shale is the end depth of the correlation.
1525
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logRHOB-density logDT- sonic transit time logPHID1- calculated density porosity using volume model - equation (7)
PHIS1- calculated sonic porosity using volume model - equation (10)PHI - measured core porosityCORE
K - calculated permeability using core-NMRCOM
permeability model - equations (22) / (23)K - measured core maximum permeabilityMAX
11 10 9 8 7 6
11
10
9
8
7
Twp6
all drilled wells wells with core cored wells used for K statisticsCORE N
Figure 20. Stratigraphic cross section D-D’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of Lower Bakken shale is the end depth of the correlation.
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logRHOB-density logDT- sonic transit time logPHID1- calculated density porosity using volume model - equation (7)
PHIS1- calculated sonic porosity using volume model - equation (10)PHI - measured core porosityCORE
K - calculated permeability using core-NMRCOM
permeability model - equations (22) / (23)K - measured core maximum permeabilityMAX
11 10 9 8 7 6
11
10
9
8
7
Twp6
all drilled wells wells with core cored wells used for K statisticsCORE N
Figure 21. Stratigraphic cross section E-E’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of Lower Bakken shale is the end depth of the correlation.
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logRHOB-density logDT- sonic transit time logPHID1- calculated density porosity using volume model - equation (7)
PHIS1- calculated sonic porosity using volume model - equation (10)PHI - measured core porosityCORE
K - calculated permeability using core-NMRCOM
permeability model - equations (22) / (23)K - measured core maximum permeabilityMAX
11 10 9 8 7 6
11
10
9
8
7
Twp6
all drilled wells wells with core cored wells used for K statisticsCORE N
Figure 22. Stratigraphic cross section F-F’ showing the basic log signature, calculated porosity and permeability for Unit A of the Middle Bakken Member. The top of the Upper Bakken Shale has been used as a stratigraphic datum, and the bottom of Lower Bakken shale is the end depth of the correlation.
1530
1540
1490
1500
1440
1445
1450
1455
1515
1520
1525
1495
1535
1545
1510
1520
1515
1490
1500
1495
1505
1410
1420
1405
1415
1525
Unit B
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
PHICORE
KMAX
GR - gamma ray logSGR- spectral gamma ray logRHOB-density logDT- sonic transit time logPHID1- calculated density porosity using volume model - equation (7)
PHIS1- calculated sonic porosity using volume model - equation (10)PHI - measured core porosityCORE
K - calculated permeability using core-NMRCOM
permeability model - equations (22) / (23)K - measured core maximum permeabilityMAX
11 10 9 8 7 6
11
10
9
8
7
Twp6
all drilled wells wells with core cored wells used for K statisticsCORE N