Seismic Data Driven Reservoir Analysis FORT CHADBOURNE 3-D Coke and Runnels Counties, TX ODOM LIME AND GRAY SAND

Seismic Data Driven Reservoir AnalysisSeismic Data Driven Reservoir Analysis FORT CHADBOURNE 3-DFORT CHADBOURNE 3-D

Coke and Runnels Counties, TXCoke and Runnels Counties, TX

ODOM LIME AND GRAY SANDODOM LIME AND GRAY SAND

Comments, Well DataComments, Well Data• 20 wells used for multi-mineral evaluation; 72 wells used for porosity estimation.• For 3 wells with no sonic log, correlations were applied (FCOLU_A_106, FCOLU_17_11 and FCOLU_51_33).• 4 Wells with shear velocity (FCOLU_08_30, FCOLU_51_32,

FCOLU_A_107 and FCOLU_A_110). A shear velocity model was calibrated and applied to the other 16 wells.• Main interval of interest: ODOM LIME; secondary intervals: GRAY SAND and CAMBRIAN SAND.• Main clay types used for modeling: Illite and Chlorite. Sandstone, Limestone, Dolomite and Feldspar were used in also in the modeling.• Fluids: water 108.000 ppm of salinity and OIL of 30 API.• Fluid susbtitution made in well FCOLU_51_32.

Petrophysical analysisPetrophysical analysisObservations & ConclusionsObservations & Conclusions

• Clay type analysis indicates presence of chlorite and illite.• 6 main facies types determined. An extra facies was used to

differentiate bad-hole sections.• Odom lime thickness is fairly constant throughout the area,

varying from 42 to 54 ft gross thickness. Two exceptions are, FCOLU_52_02 (86 ft thick) and FCOLU_51_32 (61 ft thickness).

• Gray sand thickness is highly variable, but usually ranging from no sand to ~40 ft thick. Exceptions though are FCOLU_17_11 (51 ft) and Sallie_Odom (61 ft).

• Multi-mineral analysis of the Odom lime indicates an average effective porosity between 8 and 10%, and water saturations from 25 to 75%.

• Gray sand effective porosities average 9%, while water saturations are normally very high, between 80 and 90%. Wells FCOLU_8_33, FCOLU_13_93, FCOLU_13_95, FCOLU_17_11 and Sallie_Odom have few feet with water saturations lower than 70%.

Elastic PropertiesElastic PropertiesObservations & ConclusionsObservations & Conclusions

• Shear wave velocity estimation in all wells was based on a correlation made with the recorder shear data in 4 wells (FCOLU_08_30, FCOLU_51_32, FCOLU_A_107 and FCOLU_A_110).

• Acoustic impedance (AI) vs. Poisson’s ratio (POIS) cross plot shows a very good differentiation between facies.

• Facies with high AI (> 42.000 f/s.g/c3) and high POIS (>0.25) are the limestone facies. In this group the points with less AI correspond to the porous limestone's.

• AI < 42.000 f/s.g/c3 correspond to the clastic facies, POIS less than 0.25 correspond to the porous sands, and porosity increases when decreasing Poisson’s ratio. POIS greater than 0.25 correspond to very shaley sands and shales.

• Lambda Rho vs. Mu Rho cross plot can also be used to differentiate facies and porosity.

• Acoustic vs. Elastic impedance cross plot is ambiguous for facies discrimination

Fluid SubstitutionFluid SubstitutionObservations & ConclusionsObservations & Conclusions

• Fluid substitution for ODOM LIME in well FCOLU_51_32 shows only a very small change in elastic properties for 100% water saturated limestone versus 90% oil saturated. This effect is mainly due to the low porosities observed in ODOM, and the small density difference between Oil and Water.

• Fluid substitution in Gray sand also shows also very small difference between the oil and water saturated cases. However, increased oil saturation decreases AI and Poisson’s ratio.

Seismic Grid

Location Map and Selected Well DataLocation Map and Selected Well Data

2 Miles

Wells with No DT Log

Well with Shear Log

N

Wells addedfor structural

control

New wellFor inversion

Update

Lithology Review – Clays typeLithology Review – Clays type

Odom lime Gray sand

Rati

o N

eutr

on

/ D

en

sity

poro

sity

Difference Neutron – Density porosity (v/v)

Z axis: well number

Z axis: well number

Ch

lori

te t

ren

d

Illite tre

nd

Ch

lori

te t

ren

d

Illite tre

nd

Lithology Review – Matrix lithologyLithology Review – Matrix lithology

Odom lime Gray sand

Rati

o N

eutr

on

/ D

en

sity

poro

sity

Difference Neutron – Density porosity (v/v)

Z axis: well number

Z axis: well number

Clean points in Limestone region,

some sandstone and dolomite can be

expected

Clean points between sandstone and

limestone region, both lithologies can

be expected

Summary of Reservoir Properties Summary of Reservoir Properties (ODOM)(ODOM)

WELL NAMEWELL NAME Gross / Net (G/N) Gross / Net (G/N) Thickness (ft)Thickness (ft)

Effec. Porosity/Effec. Porosity/

Total Porosity (%)Total Porosity (%)Sw Sw (%)(%)

Petrophysical Petrophysical EvaluationEvaluation

(see attachments)(see attachments)

FCOLU_08_27FCOLU_08_27 48 / 39 (0.81)48 / 39 (0.81) 8.1-13.6 / 8.6-14.28.1-13.6 / 8.6-14.2 30-5530-55

FCOLU_08_30FCOLU_08_30 48 / 27 (0.56)48 / 27 (0.56) 6-14 / 6.5-146-14 / 6.5-14 20-5020-50

FCOLU_08_31FCOLU_08_31 47 / 27 (0.57)47 / 27 (0.57) 5.3-13 / 5.6-135.3-13 / 5.6-13 5050

FCOLU_13_87FCOLU_13_87 54 / 8 (0.15)54 / 8 (0.15) 6.8-8.9 / 7-8.96.8-8.9 / 7-8.9 50-6550-65







FCOLU_13_93FCOLU_13_93 45 / 24 (0.53)45 / 24 (0.53) 6-7.6 / 6-7.86-7.6 / 6-7.8 20-3020-30

FCOLU_13_95FCOLU_13_95 44 / 4 (0.09)44 / 4 (0.09) 6-10 / 6-106-10 / 6-10 3535

FCOLU_17_11FCOLU_17_11 42 / 2 (0.05)42 / 2 (0.05) 6.4 / 6.56.4 / 6.5 3838

FCOLU_26_18FCOLU_26_18 43 / 21 (0.49)43 / 21 (0.49) 7.4-11.8 / 7.4-11.87.4-11.8 / 7.4-11.8 10-4010-40







FCOLU_33_12FCOLU_33_12 54 / 20 (0.37)54 / 20 (0.37) 6.5-10 / 6.6-116.5-10 / 6.6-11 15-3815-38

FCOLU_50_01FCOLU_50_01 57 / 0 (0)57 / 0 (0) -- --

FCOLU_51_31FCOLU_51_31 51 / 25 (0.49)51 / 25 (0.49) 6.3-9.7 / 6.5-9.96.3-9.7 / 6.5-9.9 36-5036-50

FCOLU_51_32FCOLU_51_32 61 / 41 (0.67)61 / 41 (0.67) 6-12.5 / 6.6-136-12.5 / 6.6-13 36-6036-60







FCOLU_51_33FCOLU_51_33 50 / 12 (0.24)50 / 12 (0.24) 6.2-7.8 / 6.6-7.86.2-7.8 / 6.6-7.8 55-7055-70

FCOLU_52_02FCOLU_52_02 86 / 38 (0.44)86 / 38 (0.44) 6.1-12.5 / 6.6-12.76.1-12.5 / 6.6-12.7 70-70-100100

FCOLU_8_33FCOLU_8_33 52 / 17 (0.33)52 / 17 (0.33) 6.2-10 / 7-116.2-10 / 7-11 23-3223-32

FCOLU_A_106FCOLU_A_106 47 / 12 (0.26)47 / 12 (0.26) 6.1-9.1 / 6.1-9.16.1-9.1 / 6.1-9.1 45-8545-85







FCOLU_A_107FCOLU_A_107 52 / 30 (0.58)52 / 30 (0.58) 6-11.3 / 6.2-11.56-11.3 / 6.2-11.5 33-7833-78

FCOLU_A_110FCOLU_A_110 49 / 26 (0.53)49 / 26 (0.53) 6.1-13 / 6.7-13.56.1-13 / 6.7-13.5 65-1565-15

MCDONALD_1MCDONALD_1 50 / 15 (0.3)50 / 15 (0.3) 6-10 / 6.3-12.16-10 / 6.3-12.1 40-40-100100

SALLIE_ODOM_10SALLIE_ODOM_1011

44 / 0 (0)44 / 0 (0) -- --

Summary of Reservoir Properties Summary of Reservoir Properties (GRAY)(GRAY)






FCOLU_08_27FCOLU_08_27 34 / 32 (0.94)34 / 32 (0.94) 7-10 / 10-137-10 / 10-13 9090

FCOLU_08_30FCOLU_08_30 9 / 9 (1)9 / 9 (1) 7-12.7 / 10-13.47-12.7 / 10-13.4 8080

FCOLU_08_31FCOLU_08_31 39 / 19 (0.49)39 / 19 (0.49) 6.6-13 / 8-156.6-13 / 8-15 9090

FCOLU_13_87FCOLU_13_87 19 / 15 (0.79)19 / 15 (0.79) 7-12.8 / 10-14.37-12.8 / 10-14.3 8585

FCOLU_13_93FCOLU_13_93 22 / 6 (0.27)22 / 6 (0.27) 8-12 / 11-128-12 / 11-12 2727

FCOLU_13_95FCOLU_13_95 18 / 15 (0.83)18 / 15 (0.83) 10-12.8 / 11-13.210-12.8 / 11-13.2 67-8567-85







FCOLU_17_11FCOLU_17_11 51 / 19 (0.37)51 / 19 (0.37) 7-10 / 10-137-10 / 10-13 54-54-100100

FCOLU_26_18FCOLU_26_18 13 / 5 (0.38)13 / 5 (0.38) 8-13.4 / 11-14.98-13.4 / 11-14.9 9595

FCOLU_33_12FCOLU_33_12 41 / 10 (0.24)41 / 10 (0.24) 6-9 / 9.9-12.16-9 / 9.9-12.1 8080

FCOLU_50_01FCOLU_50_01 15 / 0 (0)15 / 0 (0) -- --

FCOLU_51_31FCOLU_51_31 9 / 6 (0.67)9 / 6 (0.67) 8-10.7 / 12-13.98-10.7 / 12-13.9 8585

FCOLU_51_32FCOLU_51_32 26 / 10 (0.38)26 / 10 (0.38) 7-11.4 / 8.7-11.47-11.4 / 8.7-11.4 8080







FCOLU_51_33FCOLU_51_33 7 / 3 (0.43)7 / 3 (0.43) 7 / 8.27 / 8.2 100100

FCOLU_52_02FCOLU_52_02 NO SANDNO SAND -- -- --

FCOLU_8_33FCOLU_8_33 28 / 17 (0.61)28 / 17 (0.61) 8-12.4 / 10-14.48-12.4 / 10-14.4 6868

FCOLU_A_106FCOLU_A_106 16 / 12 (0.75)16 / 12 (0.75) 8-11.1 / 11-12.78-11.1 / 11-12.7 100100

FCOLU_A_107FCOLU_A_107 30 / 12 (0.4)30 / 12 (0.4) 8.3-12.4 / 12.2-8.3-12.4 / 12.2-14.514.5

100100

FCOLU_A_110FCOLU_A_110 31 / 14 (0.45)31 / 14 (0.45) 6-9.2 / 8.4-12.36-9.2 / 8.4-12.3 100100







MCDONALD_1MCDONALD_1 24 / 18 (0.75)24 / 18 (0.75) 7-13 / 9-137-13 / 9-13 100100

SALLIE_ODOM_10SALLIE_ODOM_1011

61 / 59 (0.96)61 / 59 (0.96) 11 / 1211 / 12 30-30-100100

Facies and Elastic Facies and Elastic Rock Property Rock Property

AnalysisAnalysis

Facies AnalysisFacies Analysis6 facies were determined. Facies No 7 was included to differentiate bad-hole readings.

The productive facies are No. 5 and 6.

Elastic properties analysis was performed over Gray sand and Odom lime intervals, together with shales above and below.

Elastic properties analysis was done in the 4 wells with Shear recorded data.

Shear Wave EstimationShear Wave EstimationShear wave estimation was based on a correlation established from 4 wells with recorded shear data: FCOLU_08_30, FCOLU_51_32, FCOLU_A_107 and FCOLU_A_110.

Velc (ft/s)

Vels

(ft

/s)

Z-axis: facies

Correlation in Odom limeCorrelation in Gray sand

Shear Wave EstimationShear Wave Estimation

Velc (ft/s)

Vels

(ft

/s)

Z-axis: facies

Correlation in Odom lime

Correlation in Gray sand

Z-axis: facies

Z-axis: facies

4 wells recorded shear

4 wells estimated shear

13 wells estimated shear

AI vs. POIS, Clastic FaciesAI vs. POIS, Clastic Facies

0 - POIS - 0.5

200

00

-

AI (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

60

000

Z-axis: facies

Background shale (purple) has very low acoustic impedance.

Porous sandstone (yellow) has the lowest Poisson’s ratio and the presence of shale in sands (green) increases the Poisson’s ratio, making them hard to differentiate from the background.

AI vs. POIS, Carbonate FaciesAI vs. POIS, Carbonate Facies

0 - POIS - 0.5

200

00

-

AI (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

60

000

Z-axis: facies

When carbonate cement is present in sands (light blue), the Poisson’s ratio becomes higher as well as the acoustic impedance. Placing the points in an transition position between the carbonate and sandstone facies.

No porosity limestone (dark blue) has the highest acoustic impedance; the acoustic impedance gets lower when porosity is present (orange).

AI vs. POIS, Facies AnalysisAI vs. POIS, Facies Analysis

0 - POIS - 0.5

200

00

-

AI (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

60

000

Z-axis: facies

While Poisson’s ratio differentiate the porous sands from the shales, cemented sandstones and carbonates

Acoustic impedance differentiates the carbonate from the shale facies. But there is overlap between porous limes and the sands.

AI vs. POIS, Facies AnalysisAI vs. POIS, Facies Analysis

0 - POIS - 0.5

200

00

-

AI (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

60

000

Z-axis: facies

Within the carbonates, the lower the acoustic impedance the higher the porosity. This can be seen in more detail in the next slide.

AI vs. POIS Cross-Plot AnalysisAI vs. POIS Cross-Plot Analysis

0 - POIS - 0.5

20

00

0 -

A

I (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

6

00

00

Z-axis: Calcite Z-axis: Quartz Z-axis: Clay

Z-axis: PHIT Z-axis: PHIE

Porosity trend in carbonates (less AI)

Porosity trend in sandstones (less POIS)

Shale increase (more POIS and less AI)

AI vs. POIS AnalysisAI vs. POIS Analysis

0 - POIS - 0.5

20

00

0 -

A

I (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

6

00

00



Porosity trend in carbonates (less AI)

Porosity trend in sandstones (less POIS)

LambdaRho vs. MuRhoLambdaRho vs. MuRho

0 - LambdaRho - 250

0

-

MuR

ho

-

100 Z-axis: facies

LambdaRho can separate carbonates (dark blue and orange) from sandstones, while MuRho will help to differentiate sand (yellow) from shale (purple) and shaley sands (green).

LambdaRho vs. MuRho crossplot is also very useful to differentiate facies.


0 - LambdaRho - 250

0 -

M

uR

ho -

1

00



LambdaRho it’s highly affected by porosity in sandstone, while in carbonates both LambdaRho and MuRho has an important effect.

Porosity trend in carbonates

Porosity trend in sandstones

Shale trend in sandstones


0 - LambdaRho - 250

0 -

M

uR

ho -

1

00



LambdaRho it’s highly affected by porosity in sandstone, while in carbonates both LambdaRho and MuRho has an important effect.

Porosity trend in carbonates

Porosity trend in sandstones

AI vs. EI30 (30 degrees) AI vs. EI30 (30 degrees) AnalysisAnalysis



Elastic impedance poorly differentiates facies and petrophysical properties.

20

00

0 -

A

I (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

6

00

00

20000 - EI30 (ft/s.g/c3) - 60000

Fluid SubstitutionFluid Substitution

Odom lime – AI vs. Pois, Odom lime – AI vs. Pois, FCOLU_51_32FCOLU_51_32

Z-axis: PHIE

0 - POIS - 0.5

200

00

-

AI (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

60

000

Z-axis: PHIE Z-axis: PHIE Z-axis: PHIE

100% WATER 75% WATER – 25% OIL

10% WATER – 90% OIL

Increasing oil saturation, decreases AI and POIS.A greater effect is seen in AI.

Odom lime – AI vs. Pois, Odom lime – AI vs. Pois, FCOLU_51_32FCOLU_51_32100% water100% water

0 - POIS - 0.5

60

00

0 - A

I (ft/s.g/c3

) - 20

00

0

Z-axis: PHIE

75% water – 25% oil75% water – 25% oil

0 - POIS - 0.5

60

00

0 - A

I (ft/s.g/c3

) - 20

00

0

Z-axis: PHIE



0 - POIS - 0.5

60

00

0 - A

I (ft/s.g/c3

) - 20

00

0

Z-axis: PHIE


Gray Sand – AI vs. Pois – Gray Sand – AI vs. Pois – FCOLU_51_32FCOLU_51_32

0 - POIS - 0.5

200

00

-

AI (f

t/s.

g/c

3)

-

60

000

Z-axis: PHIE Z-axis: PHIE Z-axis: PHIE

100% WATER 75% WATER – 25% OIL

10% WATER – 90% OIL

Increasing oil saturation, decreases AI and POIS

Gray sand - AI vs. Pois – Gray sand - AI vs. Pois – FCOLU_51_32FCOLU_51_32100% water100% water

0 - POIS - 0.5

60

00

0 - A

I (ft/s.g/c3

) - 20

00

0

Z-axis: PHIE

Gray sand - AI vs. Pois – Gray sand - AI vs. Pois – FCOLU_51_32FCOLU_51_32


0 - POIS - 0.5

60

00

0 - A

I (ft/s.g/c3

) - 20

00

0

Z-axis: PHIE

Gray sand - AI vs. Pois – Gray sand - AI vs. Pois – FCOLU_51_32FCOLU_51_32


0 - POIS - 0.5

60

00

0 - A

I (ft/s.g/c3

) - 20

00

0

Z-axis: PHIE

ATTACHMENTSATTACHMENTSMulti-min AnalysisMulti-min Analysis

Petrophysical Properties - Well Petrophysical Properties - Well FCOLU_08_27FCOLU_08_27

Lithology Depth (ft) Porosity Sw



























Petrophysical Properties - Well Petrophysical Properties - Well FCOLU_A_106FCOLU_A_106






Petrophysical Properties - Well Petrophysical Properties - Well MCDONALD_1MCDONALD_1


Petrophysical Properties - Well Petrophysical Properties - Well SALLIE_ODOM_101SALLIE_ODOM_101


Documents

Seismic Data Driven Reservoir Analysis FORT CHADBOURNE 3-D Coke and Runnels Counties, TX ODOM LIME AND GRAY SAND