Abstract
The effect of volume of shale different calculation methods on reservoir petrophysical parameters was analytically modelled and evaluated using ‘PETRARCAL.’ It is essential to characterize the hydrocarbon reservoir as precisely as possible in other to calculate petrophysical properties of interest in the region and to decide the most effective way of recovering as much of the hydrocarbon as economically possible and to rank the reservoir involved in the integration of vast amount of data needed in reservoir characterization. A petrophysical parameter calculator ‘PETRARCAL’ was programmed. The graphic user interface was designed using MATLAB to calculate the reservoir petrophysical properties such as gamma-ray- Index, the volume of shale using different calculation methods, and other volumes of shale dependent petrophysical parameters such as permeability, porosity, hydrocarbon saturation, water saturation, and hydrocarbon pore volume were mathematically coded in MATLAB. The plot of all the computed volume of shale versus gamma-ray index for different mathematical relationships Showed a similarity between tertiary, consolidated, and Steiber volume of Shale computational methods, trending exponential to almost linear curve. However, the Clavier method was completely different, with a decrease hyperbola curve. From the wireline log, with GRlog of 52, GRMin of 19, and GRmax of 81, the computed IGR is 0.53228. The resulting shale volume is 0.360, 0.242, and 2.319 0.275 for Dresser consolidated, Dresser tertiary, Clavier, and Stieber computational methods. Density corrected porosity (ϕDC) values from the wireline were determined to be 69.8%, 73.7%, 4.5%, and 75.6% for dresser consolidated, dresser tertiary Clavier, and Steiber methods, respectively. Permeability was computed to be 10,778, 16,858, 0.0021, and 14,912 for consolidated, tertiary,Clavier, and Stieber methods, respectively. Arbitrary use of just any of the volume of shale calculation methods will be an abuse of its application without understanding the environment of study. PETPARCAL can be used as a petrophysical parameter calculator for quick reservoir evaluation for petrophysicists and geoscientists. The efficacy of MATLAB application in geoscience modeling is excellent as it has been applied in this study.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aigbedion I, Iyayi SE (2003) Computation of petrophysical parameter of two onshore wells in the Niger Delta using well log. Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology (JSET) 12:26–39
Archie GE (1942) The electrical reservoir log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics. Trans AME 146(19):54–64
Asquith G, Krygowski D (2004) Basic Well Log Analysis. Second Edition. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Methods in Exploration Series, vol 16, pp 123
Buller M, Bateman RM, Konen CE (1970) The log analyst and the programmable pocket calculator. Log Anal 18(5):3–11
Clavier AV (1970) An investigation of permeability. Porosity and residual water saturation relationship for sandstone reservoirs. Log Anal 10(5):119–121
Crain ER (2002) Crain’s petrophysical handbook. Spectrum 2000 Mindware Ltd. 3rd Millennium Edition, pp 33
Dresser Atlas (1979) Log Interpretation Charts. Houston Dresser Industries Inc, pp 1–10
Fajana AO (2020) Hydrocarbon reservoir characterization using multi-point stochastic inversion technique: a case study of Pennay field. Natural Resources Research, pp 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11053-020-09762-9
Fajana A.O · Ayuk M A, P. A Enikanselu and · A. R Oyebamiji (2019). Seismic interpretation and petrophysical analysis for hydrocarbon resource evaluation of ‘Pennay’ field, Niger Delta. J Pet Explor Prod Technol, 9(2), 1025–1040.
Schlumberger (1972) Log interpretation, principles and application, Schlumberger wireline and testing, Houston. Texas, vol 1, pp 21–89
Stieber SJ (1984) The distribution of shale in sandstone and its effects on porosity. SPW. Sixteen Annual Logging Symposium, vol 47, no 5, pp 7
Tixier MP (1956) Fundamentals of electrical logging – Microlog and microlatero1og.- In: Fundamentals of logging. Univ. Kansas, Petroleum Eng. Conf. 2 and 3, April, 1956
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fajana, A.O. Analytical modeling of effect of volume of shale different calculation methods on reservoir petrophysical parameters. Earth Sci Inform 14, 543–561 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-020-00563-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-020-00563-5