Environmental Geology (1993) 21:37-41 9 Springer-Verlag 1993

Z. R. Fattohi 9 B. Al-kayat

Interpretation of reservoir rock mechanical properties

by direct methods
A study on two oil-bearing limestone units

Received: 5 February 1992 / Revision received: 19 May 1992

Abstract Direct core analysis results of bulk density, For an oil field not yet being fully developed, an accu-
porosity permeability, resistivity, transit time, and strength rate and precise rock properties evaluation is needed for
were correlated with logging data from an oil well. The reservoir estimations. Helander (1984) classified the in situ
interpretations were made in terms of index values between rock measurements for petroleum engineering work into
field and laboratory data obtained for the two reservoir four categories:
units studied. An engineering classification scheme was
suggested. Other rock engineering properties such as sonic 1. Drilling operation log (mud logs): this includes cuttings
velocity and dynamic modulus were calculated as well. An analysis and the drilling data.
attempt was made to predict the fracture pressure gradient 2. Core analysis: quantitative and qualitative measure-
(FPG) of rock formation. This work has revealed the ments (rock lithology, microscopic studies, porosity,
possibility of using the direct measured data to evaluate permeability, formation factor).
some of the in situ rock behavior. 3. Wire line well logs: this is to include most continuous
logs such as SP logs, resistivity logs, acoustic (sonic)
Notations logs, density logs, neutron logs, and so on.
KL = Liquid Permeability (m.d.) 4. Productivity measurements: to study the productive
Gas permeability rock formation properties such as the drill steam test
g 9
a = Constant dependent on rock type DST logs.
I~ = poissons ratio
R c = Resistance of brine saturated core (ohm.m) This work is an attempt to improve the practical utilities
R w = Resistivity of Brine (Salt water) (ohm.m) of direct measurement of oil-bearing rock types as catego-
I s = Point Load Index value (Kg/cm2) rized in item 3 above. An exploration well was selected and
g = accelaration constant of gravity.
~ a c = Apparant acoustic log porosity considered for this aspect. The reservoir rocks are mainly
q~o = Apparent density log porosity
carbonate, partly crystalline and dolomitic in places, and
q = Shaliness index contain vugs and some lamination. Two units were studied
p = Poisson ratio index
and are classified as unit A and unit B limestone.
Po = Over burden preSsure (Psi) An extensive testing program was set up for this job,
which included the preparation of more than 90 core sam-
ples prepared from original core recovery intervals. The
Introduction testing included the following direct petrophysical prop-
erties: density, porosity, permeability, sonic velocity, resis-
The interpretation of reservoir rock engineering properties tivity, and strength. The results obtained were compared
with different methods of formation evaluation provide with those measured directly by well logs. It was found that
the techniques needed to identify the lithology and the the data resulting from the core analysis method are quite
hydrocarbon-bearing rock formations in the field of coincident with data obtained from well logs. Rock for-
petroleum engineering. Usually bore hole measurements, mation factor (Fr) based on lab results, together with
known as well logging, were used for this purpose. the cementation factor (m) for each rock unit, were also
predicted.
z. R. Fattohi Correlations were made and shown in different dia-
Department of Petroleum and Mining Engineering College of grams representing the lab core analysis and the field log
Engineering University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq measurements. The rock elastic properties were also con-
B. Al-kayat sidered, and the fracture pressure gradient (FPG, psi/ft)
Northern Oil Co. Central Oil Fields was estimated too.
38
Qb(g/cc) ffc(kg/rn 2) Vp(m/s) ~ (~ KL(md)
Reservior rock evaluation 2 2,5 400 800 8000 4000 20 30 0 100
2000 i i
' iI
In terms of rock mechanics and engineering geology, the ITI

t i
rock properties may be classified in two groups: the rock
material properties, which are the core analysis lab studies,
and the rock mass properties. Rock mass properties often 50 IE! t" V-
deal with rock character as it has occurred in situ; such in I
p
situ rock characters are given by the different logging meth- q~

ods. Monicard (1980) stated, "Examination and analysis of

such core[s] are probably the most important basic tech- 9 .s
~100 ,llO --~ O 03
nique available to the petroleum industry for optimum ~D
IIu II
I~1 1 [I II
recovery in exploitation of reserves." ( or oJ, "o
t I
I
Rock material properties 150 J
,J
c II '--, l L "~ ]...a
/ [ -~ I
Two reservoir calcareous units were selected to represent 121 ~*
different depth intervals up to 36 m total. Unit A is as I~l
follows: light brown soft to medium hard partially crystal- 200 / I1
line, lightly porous, contains fossils and calcite veins. Unit
B is a white to light grey medium compacted fine crystalline Fig. 1. Average trend properties for units A and B
and porous limestone, but changes with depth to brown,
medium 9 slightly fractured limestone, with calcite
veins and some vugs, contains fossils. It appears from Table 2 that ~bin the horizontal direc-
tion for unit A is slightly lower than ~b in the vertical
direction, while K L in the horizontal flow is much higher
Result of Pb, Per, O, KL, and K o than that in vertical direction. This may be due to the
The density and porosity were measured, using the satura- horizontal laminations and fissuring occurring in the rock.
tion and mercury displacement techniques and case cham- The Pb for both directions is almost identical for A and B.
per methods for permeability tests (gas and liquid satura-
tion). Values of bulk density (Pb) were calculated from the Table 2. Isotropic rock properties
grain density (po~, g/cc) and fractional porosity (~b)accord-
ing this relation: Unit ~I Pb Ir KL I~ K o Ir

_ Pb - Po~ (1) A 0.97 1.01 10.01 10.81

Pb B 0.947 19 1.73 1.70

More than 63 core plugs were tested for the above

parameters for unit A and about 51 cores for unit B. The
average values obtained are listed in Table 1. Transit time and resistivity measurements
Variations of these parameters through units A and B For measuring the ultrasonic pulse time through the rock
can be traced from Figures 1 and 2. It can be seen from the studied, cylindrical-shaped samples 6-7 cm long and 2.5
average values shown in Figure 1 that the overall trend cm diameter were prepared. A portable pulse-wave genera-
properties between A and B are slightly different, i.e., in- tor was used for this purpose; the transit time for the
creased with depth. compressional wave is measured in microsecond, and the
In other hand, the isotropic rock properties were evalu- velocity calculated in meters per second. Variation of sonic
ated in terms of rock porosity, permeability, and density wave velocity (Vp, m/sec) values are shown in Figure 3.
by considering the ratio index values (I,) of the horizontal From the figure, one can notice the abrupt decrease of Vp
direction and vertical direction measured properties in the for unit A at 2038 m and 2050 m and for unit B at 2166 m.
form of H/V readings9 These index ratios are summarized This might indicate some changes in rock formation char-
in Table 2. acter, such as lithology (Farmer 1968), or increases in the
intensity of fracturing, or there is the possibility of a tight
T a b l e 1. zone (barrier)9 However, the rock saturation condition of
the rock in situ also has a great effect on Vp values.
pg~ KL The resistivity results (Re) were obtained by using an
Unit (g/cc) Pb {b (~o) (rod) Kg RTU-2 resistivity meter on brine (salt water) saturated
cores. Twenty-three tests for unit A and 22 tests for B were
A 2.68 2.195 23.3 19 29
B 2.69 2.195 22.9 3.7 4.9
carried out. The results of these tests are drawn in Figure
2A and 2B. The Rc values for unit A were found to range
 39

Fig. 2a,b. a Pb (bulk) lab and field with R~ Q b(g/cc) -- Rr (f~rn) : EE -

(lab brine sat.) R~ field (hydro. sat) and the 2 2.2 2.4 2.5 10 100
formation factor (F.F.) at different depths, 2030 t I I I

b Pb (bulk) lab and field with R~ (lab brine

sat.), R~field and the formation factor (F.F.) I

at different depths II
~lc2,J I

Rc .~
E q
J;:
~.2040
121 _ Io

blab.,, ` qblOg . i!i I

2050
) Rc

A
@ b(g/cc) Rc (~2 m) F. F,
? 2,.2 2.4 2.6 o.1 10 20 30 40 50

R Clog.hydro. -'* ')

7 1 "\"\ i
k\\ ~r
Rcleb"brine~ k \

1
IlL
from 128 to 35 ohm or 2.4 to 0.51 ohm.m, and for B ranges The constant a in Eqs. 2 and 3 was found to be 0.618
from 157 to 43 ohm or 1.22 to 0.68 ohm.m. Resisitivity for unit A and 0.656 for B. Monicard (1980), concluded
of the brine used was 0.048 ohm.m at 30%. On the other that when ~bbecomes higher than 15 percent, a = 0.75.
hand, the formation factor (F,) was also calculated as
shown in Figure 2 by dividing R c for the brine-saturated
Strength and elastic properties
sample by the R w of the brine used. Values of F, versus ~b
are plotted on a log scale. The tog scale is shown in Figure Ten samples were advocates for point load strength index
4 and has a correlation factor o f t = - 0 . 9 8 2 for unit A and value (Is) five samples for each unit; a width/height ratio
- 0 . 8 5 7 for unit B. of 1 was used. Uniaxial compressive strength (c, kg/cm 2)
This relationship is of the form: was estimated using the method out lines in the commis-
sion on rock strength by the International Society of rock
log F, = log a - rn log ~b (2) mechanics ISRM (1972) as in this relation:

or may be written in the form of an Archi equation: c = I~ x 24 (4)

F, = ar -"~ (3) The average values for unit A were 518 kg/cm 2 (5.1 x
104 kp) and for unit B = 675 kg/cm 2 (6.6 x 104 kp). Figure
where m is the cementation factor that represents the ma- 1 shows the general average trend properties for both
trix rock material condition and was found to be 2.125 for units. This value of strength was grouped by other authors
unit A and 2.188 for B. Pirson (1958) classified the forma- (Fattohi 1985; Jaeger 1972) as medium strength rock. The
tion factor according to degree of cementation (m). He dynamic modulus of elasticity (Ee, kg/cmZ), one of the
considered that when m = 2.2 the rock is highly cemented, important elastic constants, was calculated as follows:
while when it ranges from 2 to 1.8, the rock becomes
moderately cemented and finally for m -- 1.5 the rock is F v z P o T . ( l +/J)(1 - 2/4
only sightly cemented.
Ea / / (5)
L g J (1-~)
 40

Fig. 3a,b. a Values of Vpsonic lab and field with Sonic velocity (m/s) Edyn.(kg/cm 2)
Edyn lab and field at different depths, b Values 3000 3500 4000 2 3 &xlO5
of Vp sonic lab and field with Ear. lab and field
at different depths t i
2030 I
)
I Elab.
I

N
Vp[ab. ), ',
leo I /'" (
2040
E [0 I ] ( Vpfl,

2050

\ I
2060 [
A
Sonic velocity (m/s) Edyn.(kg/cm2)
3000 3500 4000 4500 2 3 4 5405
2 1 5 5 ~

2160 lob ~~

~'~E field
\

1001 I I I I [
- l o g Fr=log a-mlog
I I I I I the term
9 Fr=a r (1 + #)(1 -- 2~)
(1 - #)
I.L
50
0 can be neglected because it has no effect on the results
"5 when it is applied to small rock samples.
2 ~
t- The values are shown in Figure 3. It was found that for
O unit A E d = 2.58 • l05 k g / c m 2 (25.3 • 106 kp) and for B,
0 Ed = 2.75 • 105 kg/cm 2 (26.97 • l06 kp). In general the
t-E above results represent a m o d e r a t e l y hard limestone (Fat-
O
LI- tohi 1985; Jaeger 1972; Yousif and Fattohi 1985). Accord-
ing to Jeager (1972) they fall within class M20-MS00 of
m o d u l u s ratio.

1
0.1 0.5 Well log properties
Porosity fraction
Rock mass petrophysical properties were studied by using
Fig. 4. Formation resistivity factor versus porosity as a function of Schlumberger log types such as the S F L U resistivity log
cementation factor (m) (ohm.m), the Dt (gsec/ft) sonic log, R H O B G/c3 density
 41

log, N P H I neotron porosity log, and the permeability log Table 3. Lab and field rock properties index value
from production test. Some results of the above logs are
shown in Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2 is a plot of Pb log lab Unit Pb"I VpI En" I r I K L 9 I
and field, together with Rc lab (brine saturated) correlated
A 0.955 0.855 0.790 0.896 2. t 1
with R c field (hydrocarbon saturated). B 0.953 0.889 0.764 1.041 0.09
It is clear from the diagram that they matching each
other almost perfectly. However, from this correlation of
Rc values for both units, it is possible to confirm the occur-
rence of the tight zones at the depth mentioned earlier. Based on data given in Table 3, it is possible to adopt
On the other hand, the Ee field values increase up to an index scale for an engineering evaluation or classifica-
4 x 105 kg/cm 2 (3.9 x 107 kp) for unit A and up to 5 x l0 s tion of the reservoir rock types:
kg/cm 2 (4.9 x 10 ~ kp) for B (Figure 3A and B).
Index value Reservoir rock property

0.9 Excellent rock homogeneity

In situ rock conditions 0.9-0.8 Highly homogeneous
0.8-0.6 Moderate to high
A determination of the in situ stress condition of the rock 0.6-0.4 Low to moderate
units studied was also attempted. Following the Sethi's 0.4 Very low
(1981) procedure, the Poisson ratio was predicted from the
shaliness index as follows: It is therefore possible to use these qualitative terms,
which are based on quanitative measurements, to study the
q~c - q~D
engineering characters and properties of any reservoir rock
q - Cac (6) type. Finally, as a general conclusion, this work indicates
that there is a good correlation between the engineering
The values of Caoand ~bvwere taken from the Schlumberger property data given by the logs and that measured directly
(1984) chart and the Poisson ratio was found to be: by different core analysis methods.

P = 0.1259 + 0.27 (7) Acknowledgments The writers would like to express their
Sincere thanks and appreciations to Northern Oil Com-
The overburden pressure was calculated at D (depth) = pany (Central Oil Fields) and to the Central Laboratory
2040 m for unit A and D = 2160 m for B by multiplying adminstration for their help in testing program. Our thanks
these depths by the in situ density of rock. The formation also due to the Engineering College, the Dept. of Petro-
pore pressure (py, psi) gradient used was 0.48 psi/ft. Then leum and Mining Engineering, University of Baghdad.
the formation fracture pressure gradient (FPG) was de-
duced from:

Pf P [Po- Pfl
F P G = F + I - p[_ D J (8) References
Farmer IW (1968) Engineering properties of rocks. London: E and
This value was found to be equal to 0.668 psi/ft for unit FN Spon Ltd. p 180
A and 0.684 psi/ft for B. It is well known that knowledge Fattohi ZR (1985) Rock mechanics, [in Arabic] Dar-Alkutib, Iraq:
of F P G gradient is highly important in petroleum well Mosul University Press, Ministry of Higher Education, 1st ed.
p387
completion operations, such as cementing, weak material Helander DP (1984) Fundamentals of formation evaluation, 2nd
consolidation and compactions, hydraulic fracturing as printing. Tulsa, Oklahoma: OGCI Publications, p 331
well as acidizing work. This factor is also useful in tunnel- Jaeger C (1972) Rock mechanics and engineering. Cambridge, U.K.:
ing design, especially at the abnormal zones. In secondary Cambridge University Press, p 417
ISRM (1972) Suggested methods for determining the uniaxial com-
recovery, for example, this gradient must be kept lower pressive strength of rock material and the point load index. Com-
than the operating pressure, otherwise reservoir damage mittee on Lab. Tests Documents No. 1 Final Draft~p 12
may be expected. Monicard RP (1980)Properties of reservoir rocks core Analysis. Gulf
Publishing Company, p 168
Pirson SJ (1958) Oil reservoir engineering, 2nd ed. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Schlumberger (1984) Log interpretation charts. Schlumberger well
Conclusion services, p 106 printed in U.S.A.
Sethi DK (1981) Well log applications in rock mechanics. Society of
As a result of this research and in order to evaluate the Petroleum Engineering, Proceedings of SPE/DOE on low perme-
reservoir rock engineering properties, index values were ability symposium, Colorado May 1981, pp 45-53
Yousif SI and Fattohi ZR (1985) The difference between static and
found to represent the ratio of lab results and field values dynamic modulus of elasticity for certain Iraqi rocks. Proceedings
(Table 3). of the first conference of engineering ICE, Baghdad, pp. 345, 349