1887
Volume 30, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1354-0793
  • E-ISSN:

Abstract

The evaluation of seal in conventional stratigraphic and structural traps requires the characterization of the capillary top seal to assess the capacity to hold a hydrocarbon column. Typically, this seal analysis addresses the static seal and does not consider the role that hydrodynamics (the flow of water into or out of the reservoir) may play in influencing the seal capacity. Although possessing extremely low permeability, shale seals are not perfect seals and water can seep through them under an imposed hydraulic gradient. Likewise, water can move vertically through trapped hydrocarbon columns even though relative permeabilities are very low. The impact of this flow on the capillary seal capacity can, in theory, be quite profound and should be considered in seal analysis workflows. This paper revisits the Manzocchi & Childs model for hydrodynamic effects on capillary seals and employs it directly in real-world trap analysis. The implementation of this model is described, and a workflow developed to incorporate the impact of hydrodynamics into column height prediction. The technique is applied to several known over-pressured fields from the Norwegian continental shelf to evaluate its applicability. Preliminary results from Monte Carlo modelling are promising and with some agreement between the observed column heights and the predicted hydrodynamic seal-controlled columns, dependant on the parameterization used. Further testing is ongoing, but the methodology should be considered in exploration prospect evaluation. The impact of hydrodynamics on seal capacities should not be discounted.

This article is part of the Fault and top seals 2022 collection available at: https://www.lyellcollection.org/topic/collections/fault-and-top-seals-2022

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2023-016
2023-12-19
2024-04-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Berg, R.R.1975. Capillary pressures in stratigraphic traps. American Association of Petroleum Geologist, Bulletin, 59, 939–956.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bjorkum, P.A., Walderhaug, O. and Nadeau, P.1998. Physical constraints on hydrocarbon leakage and trapping revisited. Petroleum Geoscience, 4, 237–239, https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo.4.3.237
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cicchino, A., Sargent, C., Goulty, N. and Ramdhan, A.2015. Regional variation in Cretaceous mudstone compaction trends across Haltenbanken, offshore mid-Norway. Petroleum Geoscience, 21, 17–34, https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2014-035
    [Google Scholar]
  4. England, W.A., MacKenzie, A.S., Mann, D.H. and Quigley, T.M.1987. The movement and entrapment of petroleum fluids in the subsurface. Journal of the geological Society, London, 144, 327–347, https://doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.144.2.0327
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Flemings, P.B.2021. A Concise Guide to Geopressure: Origin, Prediction, and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Goulty, N.R. and Sargent, C.2016. Compaction of diagenetically altered mudstones - Part 2: Implications for pore pressure estimation. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 77, 806–818, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.07.018
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Grant, N.T.2020. Using Monte Carlo models to predict hydrocarbon column heights and to illustrate how faults influence buoyant fluid entrapment. Petroleum Geoscience, 2, petgeo2019-156, https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2019-156
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Heidbach, O., Rajabi, M., Reiter, K. and Ziegler, M.2016. World Stress Map 2016. GFZ Data Services, https://doi.org/10.5880/WSM.2016.002
  9. Heum, O.R.1996. A fluid dynamic classification of hydrocarbon entrapment. Petroleum Geoscience, 2, 145–158, https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo.2.2.145
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hildenbrand, A., Schlomer, S. and Krooss, B.M.2002. Gas breakthrough experiments on fine-grained sedimentary rocks. Geofluids, 2, 3–23, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468-8123.2002.00031.x
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hoth, S., Knaust, D., Sanchez-Loez, A., Kassold, S. and Sviland-Ostre, S.2018. The Gudrun field: gravity flow deposition during rifting and inversion. In:Turner, C.C. and Cronin, B.T. (eds) Rift-Related Coarse-Grained Submarine Fan Reservoirs: The Brae Play, South Viking Graben, North Sea. AAPG Memoir, 115, 387–422.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Hubbert, M.K.1953. Entrapment of petroleum under hydrodynamic conditions. American Association of Petroleum Geologist, Bulletin, 37, 1954–2026.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Jackson, C.2018. Temporal throw rate variability on gravity-driven faults: constraints from the Gudrun fault, South Viking graben, Offshore Norway. In:Turner, C.C. and Cronin, B.T. (eds) Rift-Related Coarse-Grained Submarine Fan Reservoirs: The Brae Play, South Viking Graben, North Sea. AAPG Memoir, 115, 423–444.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Karlsen, D.A., Skele, J.E. et al.2004. Petroleum migration, faults, and overpressure. Part II. Case history: the Haltenbanken Petroleum Province, offshore Norway. Geological Society London, Special Publication, 237, 305–372, https://doi.org/10.1144/GSL.SP.2004.237.01.18
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Manzocchi, T. and Childs, C.2013. Quantification of hydrodynamic effects on capillary seal capacity. Petroleum Geoscience, 19, 105–121, https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2012-005
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Montelli, A., Dowdeswell, J.A., Ottesen, D. and Johansen, S.E.2017. Ice sheet dynamics through the Quaternary on the mid-Norwegian continental margin inferred from 3D seismic data. Marine & Petroleum Geology, 80, 228–242, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.12.002
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Nhabanga, O.J. and Ringrose, P.S.2021. Comparison of shale depth functions in contrasting offshore basins and sealing behaviour for CH4 and CO2 containment systems. Petroleum Geoscience, 28, petgeo2021-101, https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo2021-101
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Nordgard Bolas, H.M., Hermanrud, C. and Teige, G.M.G.2005. Seal capacity estimation from subsurface pore pressures. Basin Research, 17, 583–599, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2117.2005.00281.x
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Ottesen, D., Rise, L., Andersen, E.S., Bugge, T. and Eidvin, T.2009. Geological evolution of the Norwegian continental shelf between 61oN and 68oN during the last 3 million years. Norwegian journal of Geology, 89, 251–265.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Revil, A. and Cathles, L.M., III1999. Permeability of shaly sands. Water Resources Research, 35, 651–662, https://doi.org/10.1029/98WR02700
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Rise, L., Ottesen, D., Berg, K. and Lundin, E.2005. Large scale development of the mid-Norwegian margin during the last 3 million years. Marine & Petroleum Geology, 22, 33–44, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2004.10.010
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Rodgers, S.1999. Discussion of the paper ‘Physical constraints on hydrocarbon leakage and trapping revisited’ by P.A. Bjork et al: further aspects. Petroleum Geoscience, 5, 421–423, https://doi.org/10.1144/petgeo.5.4.421
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Rubey, W.W. and Hubbert, M.K.1959. Role of fluid pressure in mechanics of overthrust faulting. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 70, 167–205, https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1959)70[167:ROFPIM]2.0.CO;2
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Sales, J.K.1997. Seal strength vs trap closure – a fundamental control on the distribution of oil and gas. In:Surdam, R.C. (ed.) Seals, Traps, and the Petroleum System. AAPG Memoir, 67, 57–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Stump, B.B., Flemings, P.B., Finkbeiner, T. and Zoback, M.D.1998. Pressure differences between overpressured sands and bounding shales of the Eugene Island 330 field (offshore Louisiana, USA) with implications for fluid flow induced by sediment loading. In:Mitchell, A. and Grauls, D. (eds) Overpressures in Petroleum Exploration: Proceedings Workshop Pau, April 7th-8th: Bulletin Centre Research. Elf Exploration Production Memoir, 22, 83–92.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Swarbrick, R.E. and Lahann, R.W.2016. Estimating pore fluid pressure-stress coupling. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 78, 562–574, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.10.010
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Teige, G.M.G., Thomas, W.L.H. and Hermanrud, C.2006. Relative permeability to wetting-phase water in oil reservoirs. Journal of Geophysical Research-Solid Earth, 111, B12204, https://doi.org/10.1029/2006.JB003804
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Undershultz, J.R.2007. Hydrodynamics and membrane seal capacity. Geofluids, 7, 148–158, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-8123.2007.00170.x
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Vrolijk, P., James, B., Myers, R., Maynard, J., Sumpter, L. and Sweet, M.2005. Reservoir Connectivity Analysis - Defining reservoir connections and plumbing. SPE Middle East Oil and Gas Show and Conference, Kingdom of Bahrain, March 2005, SPE-93577.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Wendebourg, J., Biteau, J.-J. and Grosjean, Y.2018. Hydrodynamics and hydrocarbon trapping: concepts, pitfalls, and insights from case studies. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 96, 190–201, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2018.05.015
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Yang, Y. and Aplin, A.C.2007. Permeability and petrophysical properties of 30 natural mudstones. Journal of Geophysical Research, 112, B03206, https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JB004243
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Yang, Y. and Aplin, A.C.2010. A permeability-porosity relationship for mudstones. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 27, 1692–1697, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2009.07.001
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Yang, Y. and Mahmoud, K.A.2016. Equations for defining hydrodynamic oil-water contact surface and an alternative approach, ‘structure surface transformation’ for mapping hydrodynamic traps. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 78, 701–711, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.09.021
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2023-016
Loading
/content/journals/10.1144/petgeo2023-016
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

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