1887

Abstract

Disparities between wireline-driven permeability profiles and averages for carbonates versus DST/well test permeability averages or core permeability values have been a major source of errors in petrophysical and engineering calculations that require permeability input. We have devised a methodology to lessen and eventually to eliminate these errors by deriving more representative permeability profiles and averages for any given interval of carbonate rock to be used in static and dynamic modeling/simulations. Most permeability averaging techniques are devised with the concept on intergranular permeability being at the center of assumptions, hence appropriately leading to major deficiencies and errors permeability comparisons in carbonates. Hence, we would like to look at the permeability types in carbonates that can be identified via wireline logs to devise our methodology. Carbonate permeability types that can be sensed and identified via wireline are summarized below as: 1.Matrix permeability (attainable from NMR) 2.Contributions from “vug permeability” as a function of degree of connectedness of vugs (modification of matrix permeability via acoustic-driven connectivity factor) 3.Fracture permeability (empirical obtained via image log driven width/aperture) 4.Welltest permeability Correct averaging of calibrated wireline permeability enhances the accuracy of static and dynamic modeling efforts and better the history matching results.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609-pdb.340.O5
2013-03-18
2021-10-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609-pdb.340.O5
Loading
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