acquisition & use of outcrop analogue data - reservoir characterization

7/30/2019 Acquisition & Use of Outcrop Analogue Data - Reservoir Characterization

1/33

The Acquisition and Use of Outcrop Analogue Data in Reservoir Characterisation*

Tobias H.D. Payenberg1

and Simon C. Lang2

Search and Discovery Article #40359 (2008)

Posted November11, 2008

*Adapted from oral presentation at AAPG Annual Convention, San Antonio, Texas, April 20-23, 2008

1Energy Technology Company, Chevron Energy Technology PTY LTD, Perth, WA, Australia ([email protected])2Woodside Energy Ltd, Perth, WA, Australia

Abstract

Petroleum companies need to overcome uncertainties in reservoir and seal continuity prediction at all stages of field appraisal and

development. Because of the common scarcity of data to reveal the lateral continuity of geobodies, analogue data is used as a mean to

estimate continuity. A common challenge in the industry is the prediction of reservoir continuity which leads to great uncertainly in a

geological model. Therefore, good quality analogue data is imperative to building good reservoir models.

Outcrop analogues can be used to reduce a variety of uncertainties. The most frequent usage is that of supplementing depositional

architecture. Width:thickness:length ratios, and lateral facies relationships can rarely be investigated in any other way. But fracturepatterns, post-depositional deformation, faulting, and diagenesis are also aspects that can be assessed using outcrop analogues.

The way in which outcrop analogue data is acquired is extremely important for the industry. Because data acquisition is very time

intensive, it is ideally suited for the academe. It provides superb training for students and early career researchers and often enablesadventurous travels to remote locations. However, for the outcrop data to be useful in subsurface predictions, close collaboration and

dialogue between industry and academe is needed. In addition, outcrop data acquisition and interpretation takes time, and long leadtimes and foresight, for the results have to be taken into account by all parties.


2/33

The acquisition and use of outcrop

analogue data in reservoir characterisation

Tobias H.D. Payenberg, Chevron ETC, Perth, Australia

Simon C. Lang, Woodside Energy Ltd, Perth, Australia

2008 Chevron Corporation


3/33

The authors would like to thank colleagues and the following institutions

Australian School of Petroleum, University of Adelaide

Chevron Energy Technology Pty Ltd

Woodside Energy Ltd

2008 Chevron Corporation 2

for stimulating the ideas voiced in this presentation


4/33

Rationa e

Analogues in reservoir characterisation workflow

Research Training opportunities

Aspect ratio W:T ata

Plan form geometric data

Facies models

onc usions Recommen ations



5/33

Rationa e





Facies models




6/33

Common scarcity of data to reveal the lateral

continuity of geobodies causes uncertainties in

reservoir and seal continuity at all stages of fieldappraisa an eve opment.

Analogue data (outcrop and subsurface) is often used

as a mean to estimate continuity.

Therefore, good quality analogue data is

models.



7/33

Most frequent use of outcrop analogues is in supplementing.

Width:thickness:length ratios, and lateral facies relationships can

rarely be investigated in any other way.

No one analogue is perfect strong need for multiple analoguesto assess full range of uncertainties.

Opportunity: Outcrop analogue projects ideallysuited for the academic research providing superbtraining for students and early career researchers,and often enables adventurous travels to remote

locations.

Challenges: 1) Data consistency within and across


.to cross-sectional data. 3) Consistent facies models


8/33

Rationa e





Facies models




9/33

Where do analogues contribute to

PETROPHYSICS

Wire line Log Porosity vs C ore Porosity (Overburden C ondit ions)

Wonnich 1

y=1.1855x- 5.3549

R2=0.6556

y=1.4298x-11.649

R2=0.7237

y=1.9823x-22.08

R2=0.6591

y=0.9832x +1.5599

R2=0.5622

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

0 5 10 15 20 25

Overburden Core Poros i t y (%)

WirelineLogPorosity(%)

Density-Neutron Porosity

WylliePorosity

Hunt-Raymer-GardnerPorosity

DensityPorosity

+2 800 3 20 0 3 60 0 4 00 0

2400

2200

2000

1800

Pressure(psia)

Eleva

tion(m

SS)

Flag

Malouet


HYDRODYNAMICS

2800

2600


10/33

Outcrop analogues in reservoir



11/33

Rationa e





Facies models




12/33

Research training opportunities:

Flinders Ranges, South Australia

Lake Eyre, Central Australia

2008 Chevron Corporation 11Photo courtesy of LEBARG


13/33


Photo courtesy of LEBARG



14/33


2008 Chevron Corporation 13Photos courtesy of LEBARG


15/33

Rationa e



Aspect ratio W:T ata Plan form geometric data

Facies models




16/33

Distributary channel outcrop Miocene

4m

~

4m

Preserved channel thickness: ~2.5m

W:T ratio = 14:1

Preserved sandstone width:~20m

Preserved sandstone thickness: ~2.5m

2008 Chevron Corporation 15Payenberg & Lang 2003

W:T ratio = 8:1


17/33

Shale plug

Point bar sands

Jurassic


Birk ea FmnLang et al 2002 AAPG Hedberg


18/33

John Henry Member, Straight Cliffs

stacked sandstone bodies

Laterally discontinuousLaterally continuous

2008 Chevron Corporation 17Photo montage courtesy of Bryan Bracken

sandstone bodies


19/33

Are these

dimensions?

Aspect ratios of reservoir

sandstone bodies oftenconsistent within onepublication/research group

2008 Chevron Corporation 18Data compiled by Jon Allen


20/33

Compilation of aspect ratios from various

bodies inconsistent across researchgroups/publications

2008 Chevron Corporation 19Data compiled by Jon Allen


21/33

Aspect ratios for seal depositional

.Does suggest usability


Lang et al 2002 AAPG Hedberg


22/33

-

Inconsistent recording and interpretation of

stratigraphic architecture between

projects/researchers leads to incomparable results!

Clearly only a consistent acquisition or classification

of reservoir (and seal) elements can lead to acomplete comparative database



23/33

Rationa e



Aspect ratio W:T ata Plan form geometric data

Facies models




24/33

Channel? Channel belt?

2008 Chevron Corporation 23Morrison channel plan view photo courtesy of Bryan Bracken

S i i h l h ll G lf f


25/33

Seismic geomorphology shallow Gulf of

High-sinuosity river:narrow channel wide

channel belt

classification are key to a gooddatabase!

High-sinuosity river:narrow channel,

2008 Chevron Corporation 24From Hathaiporn Samorn (2006)

narrow channel belt


26/33

Channel

Down stream variability in:

Channel width

Channel bar forms

Channel beltfrequency

2008 Chevron Corporation 25Image courtesy of googlemaps.com


27/33

-

Little quantitative geometric plan form data available

Seismic, satellite, aerial photographs readily

available

Most data is single-sourced and not well tied to faciesmodels

Challenge is relating plan form geometry to

-



28/33

Rationa e





Facies models




29/33

Facies associations define geobodies reservoir

elements

Geometric data of reservoir elements therefore needto be tied to facies models

developed (incorporating processes more)

reates necess ty to re e ne an nterpret

geometric data Good facies models and good geometric data

go hand-in-hand



30/33

Rationa e





Facies models




31/33

Outcrop analogue data is imperative for the

petroleum industry

Ideall suited to academia: ood research traininstrong industry support and fun!

-

and interpreted consistently between research

Plan-form data is sparse and equally needed within

Quality geometric data requires up to date facies


models and vice versa


32/33

References

Fielding, C.R., and R.C. Crane, 1987, An application of statistical modeling to the prediction of hydrocarbon recovery factors in fluvial reservoir sequences, in

F.G. Ethridge, R.M. Flores, M.D. Harvey, and J.N. Weaver, editors: SEPM Special Publication 39, p. 321-327.

Lang, S.C., J. Kassan, J. Benson, C. Grasso, T. Hicks, N. Hall, and C. Avenell, 2002, Reservoir characterization of fluvial, lacustrine and deltaic successions;

applications of modern and ancient geological analogues: Indonesian Petroleum Association 28th Annual Convention Proceedings, v. 1, p. 557-580.

Payenberg, T.H.D., and S.C. Lang, 2003, Reservoir geometry of fluvial distributary channels; implications for northwest shelf Australia, deltaic successions:APPEA Journal, v. 43/1, p. 325-338.

Samorn, H., 2007, Fluvial reservoir architecture from near-surface 3D seismic data, Block B8/32, Gulf of Thailand: AAPG Annual Convention, 1-4 April 2007,

Long Beach, California, digital CD-ROM program abstracts.


33/33


acquisition & use of outcrop analogue data - reservoir characterization

Documents