4.5 Article

A further verification of FZI* and PSRTI: Newly developed petrophysical rock typing indices

期刊

JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
卷 175, 期 -, 页码 693-705

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.petrol.2019.01.014

关键词

Petrophysics; Rock typing; FZI-Star (FZI*); PSRTI; Winland r35; FZI

资金

  1. NSERC/Energi Simulation
  2. Alberta Innovates Chairs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the differences between petrophysical static (PSRTs) and dynamic rock types (PDRTs), previous indices were unable to distinguish between them. FZI-Star (FZI*) and PSRTI are recently developed petrophysical dynamic and static rock typing indices, respectively. Considering the importance of rock typing in reservoir characterization and the need for reliable and user-friendly techniques, in this study we attempt to further verify the performance of FZI* and PSRTI by comparing them with FZI, Winland r35, and MFZI using data belonging to a heterogeneous carbonate reservoir from the Asmari Formation. The experimental data set includes 10 primary drainage mercury injection, 29 water-oil, and 45 gas-oil capillary pressure tests for PSRTs prediction in conjunction with 52 water-oil and 51 gas-oil relative permeability data for PDRTs. Moreover, we investigated the correlation between various indices and several petrophysical attributes. We defined these attributes as the integrals of mercury injection capillary pressure, mercury injection threshold capillary pressure, measured r35, capillary pressure, and relative permeability curves along with residual saturations. The results showed that our indices are able to successfully identify static and dynamic rock units with higher accuracy than other indices. Among the other existing methods, Winland r35 was the only one that showed an acceptable outcome; while, FZI, and MFZI underperformed in identifying the existing rock types. Using the experimental data we also propose the empirical equations that can be used to model capillary pressure and relative permeability characteristics of rocks.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据