Abstract

This paper reports on a study with the objective to validate a set of core analysis data using a combination of mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP) data and statistical correlation techniques. The data set is from an off-shore reservoir in Atlantic Canada. Analysis of this reservoir was complicated by the fact that the permeabilities of the samples were high, greater than 2400 mD. The analysis was done using an existing data set, not a data set specifically tailored for the techniques used in the analysis. The data analyzed included samples that represented seven zones in a single well. Porosities and permeabilities were available for the MICP samples. Electrical properties, along with porosities and permeabilities, were available on samples from each zone, but not from the same depths as the MICP samples. Steady-state relative permeabilities (SSRP) were available for stacked samples in each zone; one of the samples in the stack was a companion sample for one of the MICP samples from that zone. The MICP results were used to validate the permeability measurements using both the Swanson method (SM) and the Ruth-Lindsay-Allen (RLAM) method. The SM, using published correlation parameters, significantly under-predicted the permeabilities; the RLAM, which uses no correlation parameters, gave predictions within a maximum error of just over 33% and a mean error of -12%. The MICP data was used to validate the shapes of the SSRP curves using the Gates and Tempelaar-Lietz method (GT-LM), the Burdine method (BM), and a modified Burdine method (MBM). The GT-LM, which uses no correlation parameters, provided good predictions of the wetting phase SSRP curves but very poor predictions of the non-wetting phase SSRP curves. The BM, using published correlation parameters, provided poor predictions of the wetting phase SSRP curves but improved predictions of the non-wetting phase SSRP curves. The MBM provided good predictions of the wetting phase SSRP curves and acceptable predictions of the non-wetting phase SSRP curves. The MBM method does use a correlation parameter but a single value was used for all seven zones. This work provides a protocol for validating core analysis data that can be implemented in a straightforward manner to determine the “quality” of the data. The results emphasize the importance of MICP as an experimental technique. A proposed modified workflow is presented that would optimize the validation protocol.

Highlights

  • Whenever core analysis data is reviewed, the question of data validity must be addressed

  • All of the samples have validation process relies on the availability of high permeabilities, ranging from just over 2000 mercury injection capillary pressure curves.The mD to just under 8000 mD

  • There is no evident trend in this data. Both the Swanson method (SM) and the Ruth-Lindsay-Allen method (RLAM) rely on interpreting the mercury injection capillary pressure (MICP) curves to obtain a representative pore diameter on which to base the permeability prediction

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Whenever core analysis data is reviewed, the question of data validity must be addressed. The last row in this number of different core analysis tests can be table are the permeabilities calculated by the rationalized without the use of a large number of service laboratory from the MICP data using the correlation (“fitting”) parameters. All of the samples have validation process relies on the availability of high permeabilities, ranging from just over 2000 mercury injection capillary pressure curves.The mD to just under 8000 mD. There is no evident trend in this data Both the SM and the RLAM rely on interpreting the MICP curves to obtain a representative pore (tube) diameter on which to base the permeability prediction. It is important to note that this method does not use any fitting parameters – it is based strictly on the model assumptions

Relative Permeability Validation
A Revised Experimental
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call