Introduction to Special Core Analysis

By

Steve Cannon

With thanks to Roman Bobolecki, Iain MacNeil

and Jess Stiles
Course Objectives

Look at the challenges associated with the data

Review the acquisition and validity of SCAL data

Planning a SCAL analysis programme

• Wettability and Capillarity
• Initial water saturation
• Oil-Water and Gas Oil Relative Permeability
• Residual Oil Satuation
Refining the data for use in simulation
• Reservoir Characterisation
What is SCAL?

Everything other than routine core analysis….or….

measurements dependent on fluid saturation and
wettability

Where does it fit in?

Core

Sedimentology RCA SCAL

petrography facies poro-perm capillary relative acoustic electrical

grain dens pressure permeability properties properties

V-shale zonation zonation Simulation simulation fluid log saturation

diagenesis electrofacies modelling log saturation substitution
How does a reservoir work?

Fluids move through a reservoir by a combination of small

scale forces:
• Gravitational
• Capillary
• Viscous
The effects are microscopic but measurable: the challenge is
to validate the results before they are used.
Why do Special Core Analysis?

To determine important rock characteristics that effect:

• Field performance and recovery mechanism
• Recovery efficiency, ultimate recovery
• Pressure variation vertically, laterally and temporally
Properties that vary with time and production
Properties that vary from reservoir to reservoir and field to field
Challenges and meeting them….

Identifying and validating reliable results

• Review the history of the samples and techniques used to give
results
• Understand the inherent uncertainty in the data and results
Refining results – adapting, extending
• Understanding the techniques used with their strengths and
weaknesses
• How to best use the results and integrate them
Characterising samples into rock types
• Understand the results as part of an overall reservoir study
Effects of drilling mud and sample treatment
Same plug sample used for each test

100
1. Original sample drilled with OBM
2. Sample after solvent extraction and

Relative Permeability (%)

drying

80
3. With wettability restored 1

60
3

40 20
0 2

0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Saturation (% pore volume)
Different reservoirs
Relative Permeability by Reservoir

Etive Etive Tarbert Tarbert

Comparison of oil relative 1.2

permeability from the Brent Field

1

• Tarbert – shallow marine sand

• Etive – shoreface sand 0.8

• Cannot average this data and

K r , fr a c ti o n
expect to get meaningful results 0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Sw, fraction
 Unreliable data

100
A suspicious looking Krw curve Kro

Relative Permeability (%)

80
• At low Sw the curve is too straight

60
• At high Sw the curve dips
downwards

40
Krw

20
0

0 20 40 60 80 100
Water Saturation (% pore volume)
 Apparent relationships…

1
The apparent relationship
between the rate of the water

0.8
flood and Kro is only seen for High rate flood

Kro, fraction
high Sw values

0.6
Disregard such results from
Low rate flood
that portion of the curve

0.4 0.2
0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Sw, fraction
Some definitions….

Wettability – the tendency of one fluid to wet the grain surfaces in the
presence of another immiscible fluid

Drainage – flow resulting in a decrease in Sw as oil initially migrates into a

water bearing reservoir

Imbibition – flow resulting in an increase in Sw due to a natural water influx or

through water flooding

Irreducible water saturation (Swirr) – minimum Sw at high capillary pressure

and the saturation as Krw approaches zero

Connate water saturation (Swi) – water saturation in the reservoir at time of

discovery (Swi < Swirr)

Hysteresis – a term applied to the properties of rocks that are dependent not
only on saturation but on saturation history: capillary pressure, relative
permeability and electrical properties
Some more definitions…

True residual oil saturation – theoretical minimum considering all gravitational,

viscous and capillary pressures acting on the reservoir: where oil saturation
approaches zero

Residual oil saturation (Sor) – the final oil saturation achieved at the end of a
laboratory experiment

Remaining oil sataturation (ROS) – the minimum oil saturation achieved when
considering all the microscopic forces acting in the reservoir during production:
oil in those pores which have been contacted and swept. Thus ROS is a
function of the true residual saturation and will vary through different part of the
reservoir
What is a core?

The best static representation of the reservoir available, but

many uncertainties
• Location, location, location!
• No longer part of the reservoir
• Core handling and preservation
Modern cores are cut in continuous fibre-glass barrels
reducing many uncertainties but…
Changes after coring

RESERVOIR AS RECEIVED CHANGE

Reservoir Ambient Stress relief; fluid

Pressure expansion
Swi So <= 1-Swi So reduced

Reservoir Ambient Precipitation of

Temperature salts
Formation Fluid Mud filtrate Salinity
invasion
Anaerobic Aerobic Oxidation
Wellsite Core Preparation

Mobile gamma

Core Cutting

Sampling

Core Preservation
Core Preservation

Seal peel with inert plastic film and aluminium foil

Paraffin wax

Anaerobic jars/containers with oxygen-free preserving fluid –

brine or kerosene

Core freezing

ProtecCore – heat-seal laminate bags

Preservation Techniques

Technique Cost Implementation Technical Geological Storage Comment

Stability Inspection

ROUTINE LOW DIFFICULT – time POOR NO EASY Limited shelf life:

consuming difficult to QC
(Seal Peal)

ANAEROBIC HIGH QUICKER, GOOD YES COSTLY Requires

JARS EASIER maintenance; long
term effects
unknown
BAREX LOW UNCERTAIN VARIABLE YES EASY Sealing unproven;
ideal concept
(solvent
resistant seal)
FIBRE GLASS - - GOOD NO EASY Removal from
barrel

FREEZING - - UNCERTAIN NO COSTLY Numerous

unknowns
What is Routine Core Analysis
Laboratory measurements at ambient conditions
Horizontal samples taken every 12” or 25cm
Vertical samples taken every 10ft or 3m
Cleaned and dried under extreme conditions
• Porosity derived from pore volume using helium expansion
• Grain volume and density from helium expansion
• Permeability to air/nitrogen
• Residual fluid saturation from retort
Rapid results forming the basis of a static model
Used to calibrate log analysis results

Core

Sedimentology RCA SCAL

petrography facies poro-perm capillary relative acoustic electrical

grain dens pressure permeability properties properties

V-shale zonation zonation Simulation simulation fluid log saturation

diagenesis electrofacies modelling log saturation substitution
Core Gamma
Sodium Iodide crystal detector

Total or spectral profile – K, Th, U

isotope decay spectra

Belt speed around 0.2-1 m/minute

Stretch and squeeze depth correction

Calibration with low emission salt

tubes, e.g. KCl

Results can be used to depth-shift

core
Core Photography

White light UV light

Plug Sample Preparation

Plugging with liquid Trimming end faces Cleaned plugs

Nitrogen

Sleeve-mounting
unconsolidated core
Plug Sample Cleaning

Plugs are cleaned to

remove residual
formation fluids

Various solvents are

used: methanol,
toluene, xylene,
trichloroethane

Ensure solvents do not

damage minerals in • Soxhlet
plugs and pore
• Dynamic miscible
structure
flushing
• Critical point drying
Saturation Analysis

Two main methods

Dean+Stark (solvent extraction)

Retort extraction (destructive test)

Both methods can yield summation porosity

Require calibration

Dean+Stark can be refined using plug

porosity/pore volume

Fluid saturation can be used to calibrate log

saturations
Porosity

Storage capacity of a
reservoir
• Ratio of pore volume to bulk
volume (Ø = Vp/Vb)
• A non-dimensional parameter
expressed as a fraction or percent; a
static property
• Complex network of spaces of
different shapes and sizes: many
classification types
• Primary, secondary, fractures,
karsts
 Porosity Determination

Indirect pore volume determination by

helium injection (Boyle’s Law)

Direct pore volume measurement by

mercury injection
Permeability

Measure of the ability of the

reservoir to conduct fluids
• A dynamic property dependent on rock
and fluid properties
• Absolute, effective and relative
measurements are required
• Matrix and fracture flow
• Log-normal relationship with porosity
• Key input for simulation
• Integration of data at all scales; core,
log and well test
 Permeability Determination

Plug and full diameter permeability

(Darcy’s Law)

Probe permeametry
• Klinkenberg effect
Nitrogen is flowing fluid
• Forcheimer (turbulence)
Normally under low confining
(sleeve) pressure
 Typical RCA Results Sheet

Report No.------ Well-------Core No--- LAB REF-----

Sample Depth Horizontal Vertical Helium Fluid Residual Saturation Grain Remarks
No Metres Permeability Permeability Porosity Summati Density
on %
mD mD % g.cm3
Porosity
Ka Kl Ka Kl OIL WATER
%
1 3456 0.27 0.12 0.20 0.17 13.4 15.5 5.4 58.5 2.64

2 3456.25 1.53 1.06 18.5 2.65

3 3456.50 Dam 8.6 2.70 Cemented

4 3456.75 80.6 69.9 21.6 2.66

5 3457.00 0.62 0.41 0.30 0.50 8.3 15.5 0.0 61.1 2.55 ???

6 3457.25 5.13 3.88 18.4 2.69

Core Porosity vs Permeability Cross-plot

10000
10000

Poro-perm plot by facies

1000
1000

Two trends need to be captured:

100
100
• Good Quality Trend
• Less Good Quality Series1
Series1

• Note the overlaps 1010 Series2

Series2
Series3
Series3

What about flow zones?

11

• Often permeability derived but much

more complicated… 0.1
0.1

0.01
0.01
00 0.05
0.05 0.1
0.1 0.15
0.15 0.2
0.2 0.25
0.25
Plug measurements for petrophysics

In OBM, formation water saturation can be used to calibrate

log saturation

Grain (matrix density) used to calibrate input to density log

porosity

Stress-corrected porosity used to calibrate computed log

porosity

Stress and fluid-corrected permeability used to derive

permeability relationship for scale correction to well test
What is SCAL?

Everything other than routine core analysis….or….

measurements dependent on fluid saturation and
wettability

Where does it fit in?

Core

Sedimentology RCA SCAL

petrography facies poro-perm capillary relative acoustic electrical

grain dens pressure permeability properties properties

V-shale zonation zonation Simulation simulation fluid log saturation

diagenesis electrofacies modelling log saturation substitution
Electrical Measurements

Somewhere between RCA and SCAL

• Required for petrophysical calibration of log saturation interpretations
Main measurements are:
• Formation Resistivity Factor (F) give “a” and “m”
• Resistivity Index (RI) gives “n”
• Cation Exchange Capacity corrects for shales Qv
Measurements at ambient and overburden
• Samples cleaned, but not dryed, and then saturated.
• Resistivity measured (FRF) then desaturated by porous plate technique to give RI
CEC is measured for calculation of shale bound water conductivity
(F*)
Archie
Archie’s experiments established the following relationship between
resistivity, porosity and water saturation:

1
⎡ a.Rw ⎤ n
Sw = ⎢ m ⎥
⎣ Rt .φ ⎦
Where : Sw is the water saturation as a fraction of the pore volume
Rt is true resistivity, the resistivity of the formation
Rw is the resistivity of the water in the formation
Ø is the porosity of the formation
m is the cementation exponent
n is the saturation exponent
a is the tortuosity factor
Revised Formation Resistivity Factor
Archies’s formation factor was
revised to account for cementation,
tortuosity, grainsize and shape
⎡ a ⎤
a is a “local” correction factor, F =⎢ m⎥
usually equal to 1
⎣φ ⎦
m is the cementation factor: how the
grains are held together and is
typically about 2
⎡ Rw ⎤
Rt = ⎢F n ⎥
n is the saturation exponent and is
also typically 2
Graphically, porosity is related to the
⎣ Sw ⎦
formation factor for several known
formations, and different a and m
values
 Formation Factor vs Porosity

100

10

m=2.8
P orosity

Well cemented: m~2.1-2.4

Mod cemented: m~1.8-2.0 m=2.5
0.1

Poor cemented: m <1.8 m=1.8 m=2.2

0.01
1 10 100 1000
Formation Factor - F
Formation Factor Apparatus

Resistivity measured using multiple

electrode set-up to reduce contact
resistance
Like early logging tools, voltage is induced
via separate set of electrodes to current
measurement
Measurements made under full and partial
brine saturation conditions
Measurements made under zero and
effective reservoir stress
Hydrostatic loading
Pore volume reduction
Uniaxial correction
Porous Plate De-saturation

Usually air-brine fluid system

Multiple (6-10) equilibrated saturation

points

Saturation points derived at a series

of fixed desaturation pressures

Samples unloaded, weighed and

resistivity measured, prior to re-
loading at higher pressure

Test normally takes a minimum of 3

months

Testing normally at zero stress

 Formation Factor
Formation Factor Resistivity
Resistivity Index Index

1000 100

100
F o r m a t io n F a c t o r

FR F
Series1 10

10

1 1
0.01 0.1 1 0.1 1
Porosity (fraction) Brine Saturation (fraction)
Plug Saturation in petrophysics

Dean-Stark used to calibrate log saturation

Capillary pressure used to calibrate log saturation and derive
Sw height and FWL
J-function used to populate Sw in simulator
Formation Factor for suite of plugs derives Archie parameters
“a” and “m” for fully saturated samples
Resistivity Index (partial saturations) for saturation exponent
“n”
 Electrical Properties - advances

Testing performed under overburden conditions with corresponding

compaction measurement
Continuous Injection method for resistivity index
• Multi-point measurement
• Overcomes manual handling and unloading/re-loading of samples
• Can define bi-modal pore systems and variable n
• Considerable expertise required in performing analysis at correct flow rate and
consequent evaluation of unstable/stable saturation regimes
SCAL: Core retrieval and handling

Quickly and carefully to prevent damage:

• Drying out, oxidation will effect fines and wettability

Preservation under anaerobic conditions

• Heavy plastic jars filled with brine or kerosene and pressurised with
nitrogen can be stored for long periods
In the lab: CT scanning of samples

• Ensures representative, homogenous samples selected

• Cross-sectional images can be viewed
• Determination of detailed structures related to properties
• Used to study fluid movements during experiments
Screening of Core Samples I
X-ray scanning of
preserved cores
Performed prior to SCAL
plug sampling
Rock heterogeneity
Fractures or mechanical
damage
CT Scanner
Density grey scale

CT Scanning
SCAL: Sample preparation

Samples must not be allowed to dry out and should only be treated
with compatible fluids

Plugs are cut and trimmed with simulated brines or kerosene

minimising chemical reactions

Frozen core samples are cut with liquid nitrogen

Samples should be cleaned gently to minimise rock-solvent

interaction: cool solvent flush

Plugs are not dried until all SCAL measurements have been made:
prevents damage to clays

After cleaning plugs are saturated with methanol and then displaced
with formation brine until fully saturated
 Screening of Core Samples II

Thin section Mineral sensitivity

Screening for cleaning and
drying methods
Input into results interpretation

Electron Microscopy

X-ray Diffraction
What is SCAL?

Everything other than routine core analysis….or….

measurements dependent on fluid saturation and
wettability

Where does it fit in?

Core

Sedimentology RCA SCAL

petrography facies poro-perm capillary relative acoustic electrical

grain dens pressure permeability properties properties

V-shale zonation zonation Simulation simulation fluid log saturation

diagenesis electrofacies modelling log saturation substitution
Rock-Fluid Properties

Used to describe multiphase flow in the reservoir

• Wettability
• Capillary Pressure
• Relative Permeability
Their correct definition and spatial distribution are essential for
accuracy of results….

……but they are amongst the most difficult to quantify

Hysteresis
Multiphase flow is an irreversible process and

40
path dependent: therefore fluid distribution is
also dependent on direction of the saturation
change

32
Imbibition – when the saturation of the wetting

Capillary Pressure (psi)

phase is increasing

24
Drainage – when the saturation of the non-
wetting phase is increasing

16
Both capillary pressure and relative
permeability curves exhibit both cycles: Drainage
important to know which is dominant in the

8
reservoir
Imbibition
In any simulation study both cycles must be

0
considered and uses explicitly if the reservoir 0 20 40 60 80 100
history dictates Oil Saturation (% pore volume)
Wettability

Tendency for one fluid to adhere to a rock surface in the presence of

other immiscible fluids
• Water wet – the whole rock surface is coated with water; oil or gas fill the centre of
pores
• Oil wet – oil coats the rock surface and water fills the remaining pore space
• Intermediate – a tendency for both oil and water to adhere to the rock surface
Critical to the microscopic flow properties resulting in different
displacement processes

Sample recovery and handling likely to change original wettability:

cleaned samples strongly water wet and will influence storage options
and test procedures
Wettability….

Controls fluid saturation and

distribution
Therefore affects relative Wettability
permeability data
Must have representative rel perm Test procedures
data to ….
…..have representative wettability
data Relative
Only then can we define correct Permeability
preparation and test procedures
Definitions of wettability

Water wet: most reservoirs are water wet prior to migration of oil; the
entire rock surface is coated in water. Oil and gas found in the centre
of pores
Oil wet: oil completely coats the rock surface with water found in the
centre of pores. Generally very low connate water saturation and
high resistivity from logs
Intermediate wettability: some tendency for both oil and water to wet
the rock surface. An ability for spontaneous imbibition of oil and
water. Neutral is a special case where there is an equal tendency
Mixed wettability: a special case where oil preferentially wets
connected larger pores resulting in a continuous oil phase at low
saturations
Fractional wettability: another special case! Some pores are water
wet some are oil wet: perhaps a function of capillarity? Lab case only
(Dalmation or spotty wettability)
Controls on Wettability

Oil and water composition

• Oils with high asphaltene content are related to oil wet reservoirs
Rock mineralogy
• Carbonates reservoirs are more likely to be oil wet than clastic
reservoirs which thus tend to be water wet
Connate water saturation
• Lower connate water saturation tends to give oil wet conditions.
Therefore wettability is a function of height above the free water
level
What is wettability?

Represents a balance of forces between three phases, one of which is

a solid

Young, in 1805 developed a relationship as follows:

σos - σws + σow.cosθc = 0

Where σos is interfacial tension between oil and solid

σws is interfacial tension between water and solid

σow is interfacial tension between oil and water

And cosθc is the contact angle

Caused by adsorption of molar compounds or deposition organic

matter on to the rock surface
 Capillary Pressure and Wettability

θ= θ<
90° 90°
Water wet
Neutral

h
• Routine sample handling
induces strongly water wet rock
θ> in most reservoirs but not all
90°

0 Sw 100
• Most reservoirs are probably
intermediate or variable
Oil wet –
reduced
transition
zone
Wettability and Relative Permeability

Relative Permeability by Wettability

Two water floods carried out on the same
material but with different states of wettability Water wet Water wet Intermediate Intermediate

1.2

An intermediate or “native” wettability case is

in the natural state and is flooded at reservoir 1

conditions with reservoir fluid

The water wet case is after cleaning, drying 0.8

and resaturation with brine.

K r , fr a c ti o n
The large difference between the two sets of 0.6

data will impact on reservoir performance,

timing of water breakthrough and recovery 0.4

0.2

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Sw, fraction
 Effect of wettability on displacement

oil

Strongly water wet

• imbibition process

Strongly oil wet Water

oil
• drainage process

Residual saturation and

ultimate recovery will be very
different

Water
Measuring wettability

Three basic ways of measurement:

• Measure the contact angle or the product of interfacial tension and
contact angle (σow.cosθc)
• Measure the relative amounts of oil and water displaced under similar
conditions (Amott, USBM)
• Observation of displacement or surface phenomena associated with
the oil or water phase
The first is most difficult, the second most common and the
third most varied in terms of methods and results
Amott-(Harvey)Test

Sample is flooded in oil to connate water (Swi) in a centrifuge

Immersed in formation brine and the amount of brine spontaneously imbibed is

measured ΔSws
Returned to centrifuge under water and spun till ROS is obtained: this “forced”
value of imbibition is noted and ΔSwt calculated
The sample is immersed in oil and the volume of oil spontaneously imbibed
measured, ΔSos
This is then followed by immersion in oil in the centrifuge and the “forced”
volume of oil measured at connate water, Sot
Total of Sot should equal Swt
Displacement ratios are calculated: δw = ΔSws/ΔSwt and δo = ΔSos/Sot
and the wettability index calculated from them
WI = δw - δo
 Amott Wettability
A = Swi

Range C = Sor
+ AB = Vo1
Water wet +0.3 to +1.0
BC = Vo2
Slightly water wet +0.1 to +0.3 CD = Vw1
DA = Vw2
Neutral -0.1 to +0.1

Slightly oil wet -0.3 to -0.1 Pc

100% Sw
0
A B D C 0% S0
Oil wet -1.0 to -0.3

DRAINAGE

IMBIBITION

-
USBM Test

Similar test procedure that defines

imbibition and drainage curves at + WI = log(A1/A2)
different pressures (speeds)

The USBM Wettability Index is

calculated from the areas under the
different curves A1
Pc
WI = log(A1/A2) 0
100% Sw
A B D C 0% S0

If WI>0 ~ water wet etc.

A2
DRAINAGE
A modification of the technique allows IMBIBITION
Amott and USBM indices to be
calculated -
Craig variation

Water wet Oil wet

A proposal to classify
wettability from three
parameters taken from water-
oil relative permeability Swi >20-25% <15%
curves:
• Connate water saturation
• Water saturation where Krw and Kro Sw where >50% <50%
are equal Kro=Krw
• The Krw endpoint
Important that samples are
unaltered Krw <0.3 >0.5
endpoint
Alteration of wettability

Drilling muds and coring fluids

Poor core preservation

• Dehydration
• Loss of lighter hydrocarbon components
Laboratory procedures – extraction and drying

Fluids used in laboratory tests

Temperature and pressure changes

Restoration and aging

Procedure:
• Thorough solvent extraction to remove all hydrocarbons
• Complete re-saturation with representative formation brine
• Flood with reservoir oil to connate water saturation
• Age at reservoir temperature and pressure
Only option if you believe wettability has been altered but full of
uncertainty: how do you know whether it is right?
Wettability Summary

Critical measurement to make even though it is not used

directly in any calculations

Dependent on rocks and fluids and is therefore variable in a

reservoir

Natural wettability is easily altered and difficult to recreate

Wettability Index useful in comparing fields and reservoirs, and

for integrating results
What is SCAL?

Everything other than routine core analysis….or….

measurements dependent on fluid saturation and
wettability

Where does it fit in?

Core

Sedimentology RCA SCAL

petrography facies poro-perm capillary relative acoustic electrical

grain dens pressure permeability properties properties

V-shale zonation zonation Simulation simulation fluid log saturation

diagenesis electrofacies modelling log saturation substitution
 Reservoir dynamics Water distribution Relationship
in a homogenous between wetting
sandstone fluid and sand
column grains

By what process does the reservoir

30%
fill?

What are the initial conditions of the Pendular Region

Buoyancy Pressure
reservoir?

Height above FWL

How does fluid saturation change?

What about wettability?

How can we represent the saturation

history in the lab?
34%
50%

Free Water Level defined as where

100%

Funicular Region
the capillary pressure is zero and
the water saturation is 100% FWL Saturation Region
0 Water Saturation 100
Connate vs Irreducible Water Saturation

Connate is defined as the water Irreducible is defined as the

saturation when the reservoir is water saturation where relative
discovered permeability to water
approaches zero
Swc >> 5%
Swirr < 5% only at great
Even when Swc < 10% not at distance above FWL
Swirr and will show slight
relative permeability to water Swir < Swc always

Lab results from drainage curve

are used as they are not as
dependent on wettability
Capillary Pressure

Capillary pressure is the difference in pressure between co-existing

pore-filling fluids

Theoretically Pc = 2σcosθ/r
• Where σ = Interfacial tension of fluids
• cosθ = contact angle (wettability)
• r = capillary radius (pore throat)
Any variation in these properties induces a change in water saturation

At the FWL capillary pressure is by definition null

In field terms Pc=h (ρwater-ρoil )/144

• Where h is the height above FWL and 144 a conversion factor from atmospheres to
psi/ft that takes care of the gravitational term
 Capillary Pressure and Water Saturation

0 Sw 100

Effects of pore size and distribution (texture) on capillary pressure

 Capillary Pressure

Porous plate

High pressure mercury • Air-brine or oil-brine fluid

Ultracentrifuge
injection systems
Mercury injected from • Saturation determined by
• Air-brine, air-oil, oil-
vacuum brine drainage and
gravimetric material
imbibition
balance
Injection pressures up
• Pressures routinely up to
• Centrifugal pressure
to 60,000 psia
displacement
200 psig
Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure - method
Performed from vacuum up to 2,000 psia (larger samples),
or high range up to 60,000 psia on small samples, or
plug trims Air pressure introduced at
constant but differing
Multiple pressure steps (>20), which can yield useful levels gives PC
description of pore throat distribution and hydraulic radii
Equilibration achieved at each point, when using pressure- Removable cap
step mode
High pressure injection provides data across virtually whole
pore size range. Lower pressure test describes pores
more within the range of the reservoir.
Drainage and drainage and imbibition curves
Good screening test as is rapid (hours rather than months) Cleaned and dry
but destructive test sample of known
pore volume
Normally performed without confining pressure, but recent
advances have enabled testing to be performed at
overburden
Conversion from air-mercury to brine-hydrocarbon system Mercury injected and
required volume monitored
 MICP Profiles
2000

2000

0.05
Minimum unsaturated pore volume:

Effective Pore Throat Radius (microns)

Umin = 100 - Smax
Mercury Injection Pressure

Mercury Injection Pressure

Smax
unsorted

0.1
poorly sorted

Residual bimodal
mercury
saturation

0.5
Injection
Pd - displacement Well sorted

1
Withdrawal
0

100 Mercury Saturation (%) 0 100 Mercury Saturation (%) 0

 Porous Plate Capillary Pressure - method

Non-wetting fluid under

Air-brine (drainage), oil-brine fluid systems Closed cylinder to
constant pressure at
hold pressure of
(drainage+imbibition) non-wetting phase several points gives Pc

Equilibrated average saturation

Displacement at 6+ stable pressures up to 200 psig.
Constant temperature maintained
Multiple sample, ambient conditions. Usually Layer of
diatomaceous
performed with no confining pressure/overburden earth for
capillary
Saturation equilibration time dependent on sample contact
length and permeability. Can be up to 4 weeks
per pressure point
Pressure released and samples unloaded at each
desaturation
Good practice to perform Dean+Stark extraction upon
completion of test
100% water 100% water
Limited facilities for performing test at increased saturated porous saturated
pressure and temperature. permeable plate sample

Complexity of test overrides advantage of increased Water moves from core

data quality through contact material and
outside cell
Centrifuge

Rotation recreates the

gravitational force Water spun from
sample read while
centrifuge is in
De-saturation is more rapid than motion

porous plate method

Still requires equilibration

Typical fluids used

100% water
saturated sample
• Air-brine (initially
• Oil-water Rotation at
• Air-kerosene constant speed
for each step

Test can be performed using

overburden
Quality Control of Capillary Measurements

Porous Plate
• Insufficient time for equilibration at each step
• Poor capillary contact with plate – saturation does not change with each pressure level
• Removal of sample for weighing after each step
Centrifuge
• Insufficient time for equilibration at each step
• Stopping and restarting the centrifuge can introduce hysteresis effects
• Correct reporting of inlet-face saturations as opposed to average saturations
Special cleaning required for delicate interstitial clays
• Illite formation at temperatures > 95°C ~ 3,000m
Measurement at confining pressure where other rock properties are known
to be sensitive to overburden
Conversion from lab to reservoir

Required prior to grouping of results by rock type

Pcres = Pclab*[σcosθ]res / [σcosθ]lab

After conversion results can be related to Height above FWL:

where Pc = 0
Pc = 0.0981(ρw - ρo)*h
As capillary pressure measurements to define connate water
saturation should be done on strongly water wet samples,
contact angle should be 0°, therefore cosθ is 1
Typical values

System Contact Angle Interfacial σcosθ

Tension
(°) (dynes/cm)
(dynes/cm)
Laboratory
Air-water 0 72@70°F 72

Oil-water 0 48 48

140 480 367

Air-mercury
Reservoir
Gas-water 0 50 50

Oil-water 0 30 30
Grouping results by rock type

Typical approach is to plot all

results and determine best fit: may
work in a homogenous reservoir

Better approach is to group results

by rock type

Software can now do this using J-

function technique:

Pc k
J ( Sw) =
σ cos θ φ
J-functions from cores

Must start by recognising different

rock types, hopefully related to
geology!

Displaying the data on a semi-log plot

gives an indication of variation in the
entry pressure which helps to
characterise the rock types

Finally grouping data results in four

rock types
Converting to height above FWL

Substitute for Pc in J-function equation

• Pc = 0.0981(ρw-ρo)h

Can use similar relationships to calculate

trap sealing capacity and height
Alternative uses for Pc data
Correlation of Pc Data

Relation with permeability 10

Permeability (k, md)
100 1000
0

• Correlate Pc curves on a semi-log plot of k

and Sw
0.2

Relation with porosity

• Correlate Ø with Sw and defined Pc 0.4

S aturation (S w)
curves
Comparison with logs
0.6

• Requires reliable permeability predictor

• Log Sw error ~10units 0.8

1
Capillary pressure summary

Capillary pressure data can define connate water saturation

using porous plate and centrifuge techniques
Mercury injection results should only be used for pore size
distributions
Sample material should be thoroughly cleaned such that it is
strongly water wet
Results should be grouped by rock type before correlation
Both J-function and permeability techniques depend on a
reliable permeability predictor
Results should be reconciled with log derived saturations and
from oil-based cores
What is SCAL?

Everything other than routine core analysis….or….

measurements dependent on fluid saturation and
wettability

Where does it fit in?

Core

Sedimentology RCA SCAL

petrography facies poro-perm capillary relative acoustic electrical

grain dens pressure permeability properties properties

V-shale zonation zonation Simulation simulation fluid log saturation

diagenesis electrofacies modelling log saturation substitution
Which Permeability?

Absolute

Effective

Relative
Constant Rate
Measure Pressure P1
Water Injection

P1 − P2
L sand q=K
pack L

Measure Pressure P2
Absolute Permeability

Based on Darcy’s Law kA Δ p

Q =
μL
• Where Q = volume rate of flow
• k = permeability
• μ = viscosity of fluid
• A = cross-sectional area
• Δp = pressure differential
• L = length of sample
Applies to a single phase that fully saturates the available pore
space
Effective Permeability

Applied to each phase present in the reservoir

Can still use Darcy assuming fluids are immiscible,

incompressible and no gravitational forces

Alternatively normalise the specific fluid permeability

relative to the absolute…….
Relative Permeability

Normalised to the value of Oil-Water Relative Permeability

absolute permeability (k) for a 1

particular fluid phase 0.9

Ko(So ) Kw(Sw )
0.8 Krow(So =1− Sw ) = Krw(Sw ) =
(kro, krg, krw) K K
0.7

Relative contribution of each 0.6

phase to the total flow Krow

K ro w
0.5
Krw

Key element in reservoir 0.4

description for simulation 0.3

0.2

0.1
Swi Sor
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Water Saturation, Sw

kro = ko/k krg = kg/k krw = kw/k

Water-Oil Relative Permeability

Important value to quantify because:

• Impact on displacement efficiency and ultimate recovery
• Defines whether displacement is stable or not
• Influences variation in pressure throughout field production
Challenge to quantify properly because:
• Uncertainty in natural wettability in field and laboratory
• Sample size can also influence capillary effects
 Challenges in using data
Relative Permeability by Reservoir

Data is often questionable because of Etive Etive Tarbert Tarbert

changes to wettability and capillary 1.2

effects
• Incorrect coring fluid, core handling and
preservation 1

• Unrepresentative test conditions and

procedures
0.8

Results often need refinement prior to

K r , fr a c ti o n
use 0.6

• At high saturations permeability of both

phases may be underestimated if inadequate
pressure differential is applied (low rate vs high 0.4

rate floods)

0.2

Assigning results to different rock types

is difficult where too few measurements 0

are made and the results are 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Sw, fraction
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

questionable
 Describing the curves (1)

Ko(So ) Kw(Sw )
Swi is the connate water Kro(So =1− Sw) = Oil-Water Relative Permeability Krw(Sw ) =
K K
saturation at start of test 1

0.9

• Achieved by oil flood or desaturation 0.8

As water saturation increases two 0.7

Krw End point

curves are defined Kro & Krw 0.6

Krow
Kro
0.5
Krw

Final value for oil saturation is 0.4

termed Residual Oil Sat’n 0.3

Krw End point is value of Krw at 0.2

Sor 0.1

Swi Sor
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Water Saturation, Sw
Describing the curves (2)

Oil-Water Relative Permeability

Displaying on a semi-log plot 1

helps construct a Kro curve at

low water saturations where
little data may be available 0.1

Krow
Kro
Krw

0.01

0.001
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Water Saturation, Sw
Refining the curves

A log:log plot of normalised oil

saturation against Kr gives a straight
line
⎛ 1 − Sw − Sor ⎞
Son = ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 1 − Swi − Sor ⎠

Kro, fraction
The slope is 4 and is termed the
Corey Exponent (No)

From this the oil relative permeability

can be calculated
⎛ 1 − Sw − Sor ⎞
4

K ro =⎜ ⎟
⎝ 1 − Swi − Sor ⎠
The same can be done for Krw where
Nw = 3 0 ⎛ 1 − Sw − Sor ⎞
Son = ⎜
1
⎛ 1 − Sw − Swi ⎞ ⎟
Swn = ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 1 − Swi − Sor ⎠
⎝ 1 − Swi − Sor ⎠
Laboratory Measurement of Relative Perm

Steady State – more accurate, reliable

• A fixed ratio of fluids is passed through the sample until pressure and
saturation equilibrium is reached. The effective permeability of each phase is
calculated by application of Darcy’s law
Unsteady State – cheaper and quicker
• The experiment measures the effluent from a core during an imposed
displacement process and back calculating the relative permeability ratio
consistent with that outcome
Still great uncertainty with results dependent on sample
preparation, laboratory procedures and human error
Establish Initial Water Saturation

Swi by Oil Flooding

With all methods necessary to
establish oil and water saturations 1

present in the reservoir

Either centrifuge, porous plate or oil
0.1

flood:
0.01
• Centrifuge is preferred; it’s quicker

Kro, fraction
• Porous plate is more difficult and slower
• Oil flood can be error prone if rate of 0.001
flood is inappropriate

0.0001

If a water flood is started where Swi

is too high, the results are not
representative 0.00001
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Sw, fraction

Qo = 4.9ml/hr Qo = 50ml/hr Qo = 361ml/hr Centrifuge

Data from Norske Hydro

Steady state waterflood

Preferred method but time consuming and

expensive Measurement Electrodes

Brine and oil are flowed at constant rate using

double reciprocating pumps
OIL
At each stage a fixed ratio of oil and brine is
flowed until steady conditions are reached – WATER

pressure differential and saturation

Generally 6 intermediate automatic 100%

measurements are made providing an 80%

OIL wt
accuracy of +/- 1%
Time
Often supplemented with centrifuge imbibition
method for low oil saturations and high

OIL wt
permeability 65%

Time
Steady state waterflood

Automated technique ensures equilibrium

at each stage
Define Krw at low saturations
Avoids Krw instability issues
Straight forward calculation using Darcy
Can be done at reservoir conditions

Time consuming and expensive

Must restart test if disrupted
Capillary effects at plug ends
No Kro at low oil saturations
Few laboratories have the equipment
Unsteady state waterflood

Waterflood effected by two reciprocating

pumps delivering flow rates between
0.3ml/hr and 6000ml/hr
Test can done under overburden pressure
up to 10,000psi and temperatures to 70°C
using viscosity matched mineral oil or dead
crude
Waterflood is at a constant rate chosen on
the characteristics of the sample –
permeability and wettability
Low rate tests are followed by a high rate
“bump” flood to ensure against capillary
effects
All tests are continued to high throughput
to determine true residual oil saturation
Unsteady state waterflood

Less time consuming & expensive • Plot Swav against Ql (Quantity of displacing
phase injected)
More laboratories have the equipment
dS w av 1
Fo = =
Good agreement with steady state in dQi K rw μo
most cases 1+ ×
K ro μ w
Hence Kro/Krw
Considered as the “standard”
• Plot 1/QlIR against 1/Ql, where IR =ΔPi / ΔP*1/Qi
Capillary instability affects Krw curve • fo is the oil fraction
fo
No Kro values at low oil saturations Kro =
[d (1/ Qi I R ) d (1/ Qi )]
Sophisticated equipment required
Hence Kro and therefore Krw from above
Calculation not as straight forward and
• Welge’s correction
commonly ignores Pc
S w = S wav − f o × Qi

Hence plot Kro and Krw against Sw2

Relative Permeability by centrifuge

Tests at reservoir temperature

Uses de-gassed reservoir oil

Kro from rotation at constant speed

Imbibition Pc from series of

increased speeds
 Relative Permeability by centrifuge

Inexpensive and fast

1109 q o μ o
K ro =
Test several samples together
[k a A Δ ρ g ]
Instability problems avoided
Where :
Kro is defined over wider range of
So Kro = oil relative permebility
Ka = absolute permeability
No Krw curve defined, only
Krw@Sor qo = oil drainage rate, cc/sec

Few labs can conduct NOBP μo = oil viscosity, cp

A = cross-sectional area, cm2
Cannot use live crude
Δρ = density difference, g/cc
Must validate against “good”
unsteady state floods g’ = centrifugal acceleration, g

Calculation not straight forward

 Comparison of floods and centrifuge

Waterflood vs Centrifuge Waterflood vs Centrifuge

1 1

0.1 0.1

Kro, fraction
Kro, fraction

0.01 0.01
High Rate Flood
0.001 Low Rate Flood 0.001
Centrifuge Centrifuge - Kro
Waterflood - Kro
0.0001 0.0001
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Sw, fraction Sw, fraction

After Haugen, 1993 Eider Field, Stiles, 1992

In certain circumstances centrifuge data will add value to waterflood

tests: (a) at low oil saturations and (b) due to capillary effects
Wettability and Relative Permeability
Gas-oil Relative Permeability

Presents the same challenges as oil-water data

• Sorting out valid results from dubious ones
• Sorting results by rock type
• Integrating data from different types of test
The general case of gas-liquid relative perm applies to many different
displacement cases
• Solution gas drive
• Primary or secondary gas cap expansion
• Gas injection
In almost all cases gas is considered to be the non-wetting phase;
therefore a drainage process

Connate water may still be present in a sample but the is considered as

part of the total liquid fraction
Measurement methods

Steady state method

• Normally done on short plugs: results are highly unreliable because of difficulty
with establishing initial saturations
Unsteady state method
• More reliable as the samples are longer and composite. Still problems with early
gas breakthrough due to flood instability and capillary effects
Centrifuge method
• Based on oil saturated sample down to low values, when sample is removed to a
steady state core holder for determination of the Krg end-point
Relative Permeability Summary

Use of water-oil relative permeability is challenging:

• Wide variety of tests and procedures
• Incomplete tests or results only partially valid
• Wettability and capillary effects
• Rock type, permeability and connate water saturation
Integration of results desirable
• Waterflood, centrifuge and Pc data
• Extend waterflood data to lower saturations
Characterise material for rock typing
• Avoid averaging unless same rock type
Interrogate results thoroughly with different plots
Core to Log Integration
F1A

F1B

F2A
Review and QC of reports

Review all reports and data with a critical eye: assume the worst!

Try to record the history of the core from the original programme to
the final analyses
• Why was the core cut? Did it achieve the objectives?
• What was the coring fluid?
• Was the core preserved and how soon after cutting?
• How was the core handled in the laboratory?
• Were samples stored for a long period of time?
• What type or experiments were run to get the results?
• Are the samples representative of the reservoir?
Review the following topics

Coring fluids and methods

Preservation technique
Core handling on the rig and in the lab
Plug selection
Test procedures
Fluids used in test
Environmental conditions
Any indication of problems during the tests
Anomalous results of all sorts
Coring Fluids

Chose the correct fluid for the job

Use Bland WBM for wettability related tests

Avoid materials such as surfactants, deflocculants, corrosion

inhibitors

Use a similar mud for ROS measurements

Use low water content muds for Swi tests

Obtain samples of the coring fluids

Fluids for experiments

Water-oil Relative Permeability

• Reservoir oil
• Formation brine or synthetic brine saturated with gas
Water-oil Imbibition Capillary Pressure
• De-gassed reservoir oil
• Formation brine
Gas-oil Relative Permeability
• Low viscosity refined oil or reservoir oil
• Saturated gas
Drainage Capillary Pressure
• Oil/brine
• Air/keosene
• Air/brine
Representative samples

Two trends in the data 10000

representing three facies

1000
Which one is representative of
the reservoir?
100

Which should be analysed?

Series1
10 Series2

And how should the results be Series3

used? 1

Where do they come from wrt

fluid contacts? 0.1

0.01
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Review Strategy – two steps

Preliminary Review
• Discard those samples which are clearly invalid, highly questionable or non-
representative
• Often associated with water-oil relative perms because of wettability issues
Detailed Review
• Validate data from remaining reports and prepare for use
• Consult drilling programmes and wellsite reports for critical information on coring
operations
• Contact laboratory where work was performed to validate test procedures and
techniques
• Document results for future use
• (See check list)
Measurement Advances

Main errors occur during the measurement of saturation and

saturation change
Due to sample handling, test method, or measurement sensitivity
This is true for all saturation-dependent measurements
Development of non-invasive monitoring techniques
Radioactive isotope
Gamma source
X-ray scanning
With end-point calibration, partial saturations can be accurately
determined without the need to unload, handle and weigh samples