See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/274410446

Effect of glauconite on the elastic properties, porosity, and permeability of

reservoir rocks

Article  in  The Leading Edge · January 2003

DOI: 10.1190/1.1542755

CITATIONS READS
10 2,729

4 authors:

Elizabeth Díaz Manika Prasad

Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México (UAEM) Colorado School of Mines
26 PUBLICATIONS   342 CITATIONS    208 PUBLICATIONS   5,616 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Gary Mavko Jack Dvorkin

Stanford University King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
309 PUBLICATIONS   14,653 CITATIONS    202 PUBLICATIONS   14,266 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Fluid flow in porous media View project

Unconventional Project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Manika Prasad on 15 November 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Effect of glauconite on the elastic properties, porosity, and
permeability of reservoir rocks
ELIZABETH DIAZ, MANIKA PRASAD, GARY MAVKO, and JACK DVORKIN, Stanford University, California, U.S.

Figure 1. Optical
Glauconite is an iron rich variety of clay that can be found image of a glau-
as individual pellets, composite grains, and intergranular conitic sandstone
cement. Its density ranges between 2.4 g/cm3 and 2.95 (made at 20X mag-
g/cm3, averaging 2.67 g/cm3. It has a Moh’s scale hardness nification) showing
of 2. Authigenic glauconite is formed under a limited range formation of a
pseudomatrix that
of geologic and geochemical conditions; it typically devel- occludes the original
ops on the outer margins of continental shelves, in areas of primary porosity.
low sediment input (Odin, 1980), and its presence is valu- Glauconite=green,
able as an indicator of transgressive sequences. Quartz=white.
Identifying glauconite in the subsurface is important for
depositional environment interpretation, stratigraphic cor-
relation, dating, tracing of unconformities, and geochemi-
cal exploration for source and reservoir rocks (Srivastava, Figure 2. Location
of Putumayo Basin.
1986). A number of commercial hydrocarbon reservoirs are
glauconitic sandstones—for example in Colombia, Ecuador,
Peru, Venezuela, Australia, Eastern China, North Sea, United
States, Canada, Saudi Arabia, and Ireland.
Although glauconite tends to exist as grains and as such
is part of the rock framework, under moderate overburden
pressure, these grains are easily compacted (Figure 1) and
may form a pseudomatrix that occludes the original primary
porosity. This behavior is in contrast to that observed in clay
minerals. This problem, and the fact that there are no pub-
lished studies about the elastic properties of glauconite and
glauconitic sandstones, motivated this research to under-
stand their rock physics properties. We present analyses of
data from five lithologies containing varying amounts of
glauconite and identify the best seismic attributes to eval-
uate its presence and the reservoir quality. Figure 3.
Sedimentary section
Samples and lithology. The samples in this study come of Caballos
from Caballos Formation in Putumayo and Upper Formation,
Putumayo Basin,
Magdalena Basins, Colombia (Figure 2), which is described Colombia (after
as a marine transgressive blanket sandstone deposited in a Ecopetrol, 2000).
shallow water environment. The glauconitic samples are in
the upper part of the formation (Figure 3).
The lithology identification of the 34 samples used was
based on thin section description and X-ray diffraction analy-
sis. The five categories (Table 1) were classified as quartz-
sandstones, sandstones with glauconite (content of
glauconite = 10-60%), sandstones with glauconite and car-
bonates (content of carbonates > 10%), siltstones, and glau-
conitic wackestones (only glauconite and carbonates).
Figure 4 shows typical optical images of thin sections
for all lithologies (1-5).
The samples showed large porosity and permeability
variations, 2-19% for porosity and 0.01-1200 mD for per-
meability. Glauconite occurred as grains and as matrix. In
all samples, the grains were mainly quartz and the matrix
was mainly glauconitic, calcareous, and clay.

Seismic attributes. We analyzed the effects of lithology,

porosity, and permeability on the seismic attributes of P-
impedance (velocity ǂ density) and Poisson’s ratio (Figures
5-11) by assigning a color to each lithology (Table 1).
In Figures 5, 7, 9, and 11, the color assigned to each sam-
ple is according to the lithology. In Figures 6 and 8, the color
assigned to each sample is according to the permeability
(mD) and in Figure 10 is according to the values of P-imped-
ance given in Mrayls (1 Mrayl=106 Kg/m3 m/s).

42 THE LEADING EDGE JANUARY 2003 JANUARY 2003 THE LEADING EDGE 0000
 Table 1. Lithology classification
Categories Lithological Color code Classification Mineralogy Main characteristic
code
Lithology 1 1 Dark blue Quartz sandstones Mainly quartz Qtz < 90%
Lithology 2 2 Light blue Calcareous-glauconitic Quartz + glauconite + carbonate Carb > 10%
sandstones
Lithology 3 3 Green Glauconitic sandstones Quartz + Glauconite Glauc 10-60%
Lithology 4 4 Orange Quartz-siltstones Quartz + clay Qtz + clay
Lithology 5 5 Red Glauconitic wackestones Glauconite + carbonate Glauc + carb

Figure 5. Plot of porosity versus acoustic impedance discriminated by

lithology. The color bar on the right shows colors assigned to the litholo-
gies defined in the study. At the same porosity, the glauconitic sandstones
of lithology 3 (green) have lower P-impedance values than the quartz-
sandstones of lithology 1.

Figure 4. Optical images of the five lithologies at 4X magnification. In the

images, glauconite grains are green. The pore space is masked by blue-dye
epoxy, and quartz and occasional feldspar grains are white.

The plot of porosity versus P-impedance discriminated

by lithology (Figure 5), shows two trends. An upper trend
is shown by the quartz-sandstones (lithology 1), the cal-
careous-glauconitic sandstones (lithology 2), the quartz-silt-
stones (lithology 4), and the glauconitic wackestones
(lithology 5). The glauconitic sandstones (lithology 3) fall
on a lower trend. At the same porosity values as the lithol-
ogy 1 sandstones, the glauconitic sandstones (lithology 3)
have lower P-impedance. The same plot discriminated now
by permeability (Figure 6), again shows two clouds: sam-
ples with higher values of permeability (lithologies 1 and
3) and samples with lower permeability (lithologies 2, 4, and
5). The plot also shows that, at the same porosity, the glau-
conitic sandstones have, in addition to lower P-impedance, Figure 6. Plot of porosity versus acoustic impedance, discriminated by
permeability. The quartz and glauconitic sandstones have higher perme-
lower permeability values than the quartz-sandstones of ability than all other samples. At the same porosity, glauconitic sand-
lithology 1. Thus, P-impedance can be a useful quality dis- stones have lower permeability than quartz-sandstones.
criminator for this reservoir, because higher permeability
samples are characterized by lower P-impedance. sandstones (lithology 2), and glauconitic sandstones (lithol-
The plot of porosity versus Poisson’s ratio, discrimi- ogy 3) have lower values of Poisson’s ratio (0.13-0.24).
nated by lithology (Figure 7), shows that quartz-siltstones The same plot, discriminated by permeability (Figure 8),
and glauconitic wackestones (lithologies 4 and 5, respec- shows the higher values of permeability for lithologies 1 and
tively) have high values of Poisson’s ratio (> 0.25). In con- 3 (quartz-sandstones and glauconitic sandstones). Lower
trast, quartz-sandstones (lithology 1), calcareous-glauconitic values of permeability correspond to lithologies 2, 4, and 5

0000 THE LEADING EDGE JANUARY 2003 JANUARY 2003 THE LEADING EDGE 43
 Figure 7. Plot of porosity versus Poisson’s ratio, discriminated by lithol- Figure 9. Plot of porosity versus permeability, discriminated by lithology.
ogy. The color bar on the right shows colors assigned to the lithologies The color bar on the right shows colors assigned to the lithologies defined
defined in the study. in the study. Quartz-sandstones (lithology 1) have the best reservoir
properties, high permeability and high porosity.

Figure 8. Plot of porosity versus Poisson’s ratio, discriminated by perme-

ability. Lithologies 1 and 3 (quartz-sandstones and glauconitic Figure 10. Plot of porosity versus permeability, discriminated by P-
sandstones) have higher values of permeability (green to red), while impedance in Mrayl. High Ip corresponds to nonreservoir rocks (calcare-
lithologies 2, 4, and 5 (calcareous-glauconitic sandstones, siltstones and ous-glauconitic sandstones, glauconitic wackestones, and
glauconitic wackestones) have lower values of permeability (blue). quartz-siltstones), and low Ip indicates reservoir-quality sandstones.

(calcareous-glauconitic sandstones, siltstones, and glau- reservoir rocks (calcareous-glauconitic sandstones, glau-
conitic wackestones). Poisson’s ratio, in this case, is not the conitic wackestones, and quartz-siltstones), and low Ip indi-
most reliable reservoir quality discriminator because it can- cates reservoir-quality sandstones.
not discriminate between quartz-sandstones, glauconitic In fact, within the reservoir-quality sandstones, inter-
sandstones, and calcareous-glauconitic sandstones. mediate values of Ip (11 Mrayls), indicates very good qual-
Figures 9 and 10 show the relation between porosity and ity rocks (quartz-sandstones) and values of Ip below 10
permeability, discriminated by lithology (Figure 9) and by Mrayls, corresponds to moderate reservoir rocks (glauconitic
acoustic impedance (Figure 10). Figure 9 shows that quartz- sandstones).
sandstones (lithology 1) have the best reservoir properties, Finally, the combination of P-impedance versus Poisson’s
high permeability, and high porosity. The presence of glau- ratio (Figure 11) shows that the samples can be discriminated
conite in quartz-sandstones (lithology 3) reduces the per- by lithology. Quartz-sandstones and glauconitic sandstones
meability in samples of similar porosity and, as result, (lithologies 1 and 3) show relatively low impedance and low
deteriorates the reservoir quality. In addition, the presence Poisson’s ratio. Although both lithologies have similar
of calcareous cement in the sandstones (lithology 2) drasti- Poisson’s ratio values, the lower P-impedance values of the
cally reduces the reservoir quality. As expected, the very fine- glauconitic sandstones of lithology 3 allow a further sepa-
grained rocks, glauconitic wackestones and quartz-siltstones, ration between them. In contrast, quartz-siltstones, calcare-
show very poor quality reservoir properties. ous-glauconitic sandstones, and glauconitic wackestones
The same plot, discriminated by P-impedance (Figure (lithologies 2, 4, and 5) exhibit higher values of impedance
10), shows that this seismic attribute (Ip) is a reliable reser- and Poisson’s ratio.
voir quality discriminator. High Ip corresponds to non-

44 THE LEADING EDGE JANUARY 2003 JANUARY 2003 THE LEADING EDGE 0000
 rocks (quartz-sandstones) and values of Ip below 10 Mrayls
correspond to moderate quality reservoir rocks (glauconitic
sandstones).
At fixed porosity, the presence of glauconite reduces
permeability, velocity, and P-impedance in quartz-sand-
stones. The additional presence of carbonates with glau-
conite further reduces permeability and also decreases
porosity.
At the same porosity, glauconitic sandstones show lower
velocity and P-impedance, than all other lithologies inves-
tigated here. Additional presence of carbonates increases
velocity and P-impedance.

Suggested reading. “Glauconitization and phosphatization

environments: A tentative comparison in Marine phosphorites”
by Odin (Special publication 29, Society of Paleontologists and
Mineralogists, 1980). “Glauconite: Form and Function “ by
Srivastava (Current Trends in Geology X, 1986). “Genetic char-
acteristics of glauconite and siderite: Implications for the ori-
gin of ambiguous isolated marine sand bodies” by Stonecipher
Figure 11. Plot of acoustic impedance versus Poisson’s ratio, discrimi-
nated by lithology. The color bar on the right shows colors assigned to the (SEPM Special Publication, 1999). “Velocity and attenuation
lithologies defined in the study. Quartz-sandstones and glauconitic sand- characteristics of Daqing sandstones: Effects of permeability on
stones (lithologies 1 and 3) show relatively low impedance and low velocity and attenuation anisotropy” by Prasad et al. (EOS,
Poisson’s ratio. 1999). TLE
Conclusions. An evaluation of the best seismic attributes to Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the Stanford Rock Physics
identify reservoir quality requires assessing the effects of and Borehole Geophysics Project and by the Department of Energy (under
each physical property on the attributes. Award DE-FC26-01BC15354). Thanks to Amos Nur for his support and
We find that P-impedance (Ip) is the most reliable elas- advice, to Mario Gutierrez for his valuable comments and discussions,
tic property to discriminate reservoir quality. High Ip (above and to Ecopetrol and Petrobras for providing the core samples.
12 Mrayls) corresponds to nonreservoir quality rocks, and
low Ip (below 12 Mrayls) indicates reservoir-quality sand- Corresponding authors: E. Diaz (now at Occidental Oil and Gas Corp.),
stones. Within the reservoir-quality sandstones, intermedi- Elizabeth_Diaz@oxy.com; M. Prasad, manika@pangea.stanford.edu
ate Ip values (11 Mrayls) indicate very good quality reservoir

0000 THE LEADING EDGE JANUARY 2003 JANUARY 2003 THE LEADING EDGE 45

View publication stats