How To Characterize Fractured Reservoirs

How to Characterize a Fractured Reservoir ?
Naturally fractured reservoirs
Part 2 - How to Characterize a

Fractured Reservoir?
@Beicip-Franlab
232, Avenue Napolon Bonaparte

P.O. BOX 213
92502 Rueil-Malmaison
France
Phone: +33 1 47 08 80 00
Fax: +33 1 47 08 41 85
info@beicip.fr
How to characterize fractured reservoirs ?

MAIN OUTLINES
METHODOLOGY
INTERWELL SCALE DATA

- Outcrops
- Seismic analysis
- Geomechanical models
2
Part 2 - How to Characterize a Fractured Reservoir?
@Beicip-Franlab
BOREHOLE SCALE DATA:

- Core data
- BHI data
- Cores to BHI calibration
- Statistical fracture analysis
BEICIP-FRANLAB
NATURALLY FRACTURED RESERVOIRS

ADMA-OPCO - from 06 to 07 of January 2008
Copyright 2008. Beicip-Franlab - All rights reserved
Part 2A - Page 1
How to characterize a fractured reservoir?
@Beicip-Franlab
Methodology to characterize fractured

reservoirs
Fracture analysis
Data integration: conceptual model
Data Integration for Fracture Network Modelling
Production Tests
Core data
Q
0
LO SS
75
( l/m in )
150
225
3845
3846
3847
3848
3849
3850
Mud Losses
Image Logs
Wireline Logs
Outcrops
Seismic Attributes
@Beicip-Franlab
Geologic Models
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 2
FRACA workflow
WELL DATA :
Core data, Logs
(GR, NPHI, ), BHI / DSI
Fracture analysis
OUTCROPS
GEOLOGIC MODEL
facies, porosity, matrix K
Fracture modeling
Joints, fault related fractures, sub seismic faults
SEISMIC DATA
GEOMECHANICS
Fault map, Seismic horizons, Seismic
attribute maps, Stress/Strain maps
MULTI SCENARIO
fracture length, fracture conductivity
Kf
c
b
Kfx, Kfy, Kfz, a, b, c, f
Kf Tensor & Matrix Block Size for

Each Model Cell
A. BOREHOLE SCALE DATA

B. INTERWELL SCALE DATA
@Beicip-Franlab
Model validation
Geological data Simulation of synthetic PLT and welltest
@Beicip-Franlab
DYNAMIC DATA :
PLT, well tests, PI, Kh maps, interference
test, production history
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 3

BOREHOLE SCALE DATA
1. Cores
2. Borehole images
- Microresistivity tools (FMS/FMI/STAR)
- Acoustic logs: UBI / CBIL
- OBM combined resistivity / acoustic logs (Earth)
- Television
3. Fluid flow logs

- Flowmeter logs, Production Logging Tool (PLT)
- Mud logging,
4. Stress information
- 4 arms calipers (breakout / washout), BHI data (stress orientation)
- DSI (shear waves anistropy)
- Leak-off tests, Minifrac (stress magnitude)
@Beicip-Franlab
5. Others
- Weight on hook, ROP,

BOREHOLE SCALE DATA
1. FRACTURES FROM CORE OBSERVATIONS
Objective 1: identify the main types of fractures that may or not
impact the reservoir performances
Natural fractures
Induced fractures
Other features
@Beicip-Franlab
Objective 2: provide fracture morphology (aspect ratio, etc. ),

orientations, intensity, aperture
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 4
@Beicip-Franlab
Core Quality
Tectonic fractures joints in quartzitic reservoir

Joints form with a maximum stress oriented parallel to the joint surface
Oil staining open fractures

@Beicip-Franlab
Open fractures
10
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 5
@Beicip-Franlab
Tectonic fractures Partly open and cemented fractures in tight bed
11
Tectonic fractures - Breccia
Carbonate
@Beicip-Franlab
Sandstone
12
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 6
Faults - Evidences of faults in cores
The possible presence of a fault in the red inset is showed by:

-The drastic contact between limestones (right) and shaly mudstones (left);
-The core in the red inset is highly broken
-Some pieces in the broken zone show striated surfaces, with slickensides
@Beicip-Franlab
Fault damaged zone / fault core zone
13
Early diagenetic fractures
@Beicip-Franlab
Compaction hair-like fractures
14
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 7
Early diagenetic fractures
The thin planar fractures only

affect the central bed (early
diagenesis criteria)
Facies are shaly limestones
@Beicip-Franlab
Those fractures always exhibit a low

aspect ratio (Length/width < 100)
15
@Beicip-Franlab
Early diagenetic cemented fractures
16
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 8
Early diagenetic features
@Beicip-Franlab
Cracks associated with dolomitic beds
17
Diagenetic features: stylolites

Stylolite related fractures observed on cores
Tectonic fractures
Tension
gashes
Paleo-minimum
stress direction
Stylolite peaks
Tight zone related
to pressuresolution
Stylolite
Fracture
@Beicip-Franlab
overburden
18
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 9
1 cm thick
Stratigraphic
stylolite
@Beicip-Franlab
Associated tension gashes
19
Associated fracture
@Beicip-Franlab
20 cm thick
Stratigraphic
stylolite
20
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 10
10
@Beicip-Franlab
Diagenetic features: micro-stylolites
21
Stylolite related fractures
@Beicip-Franlab
Tension gashes (indicated by the white arrows) associated to the

micro-stilolites.
22
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 11
11
Artefact related breaks
@Beicip-Franlab
Plug induced fracture
23
@Beicip-Franlab
Disking 100% (1 cm)
24
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 12
12

Examples of not conventional core disking
@Beicip-Franlab
This photograph shows that disking is an

obvious artifact: the core external
surface is not affected by the slicing.
25

Examples of not conventional core disking
Artificial breaks >>

core disking
post-slabbing desegregation.
@Beicip-Franlab
comma-shaped
disking
26
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 13
13
Example of core description sheets
GENERAL
DISKING
cm
6b
Dampened Styl.
%
6a
Microstylolites
Visual Sat.
5
Small strati. Styl.
Core quality
4
Class 5
Boxes
3
Aver. disk thickn.
Depth dril. TOP

2
Affected thick.
Core Number
1
STYLOLITES
General information, disking,

Stylolite related fractures
Amp. Num. Cum. Amp. Affect. % Cum. Amp.

7
8
9
10
FRACTURE RELATED FEATURES
P
18
@Beicip-Franlab
U/L/B S/X/Y/Z
16
17
STAINING
mm
15
TIPS
deg. to core axis

14
FRACTURE TYPE
WIDTH
numblength numb length numb length

11
12
13
DIP
UNCEMENTED
PART. CEMENT.
CEMENTED
Fracture information
27

BOREHOLE SCALE DATA
2. FRACTURES FROM BHI DATA

Basis of fracture picking
Data QC
Tool resolution
Cores to BHI calibration
Statistical analysis of fractures
Fracture density log
The main types of fractures from BHI
Bed thickness record ?
@Beicip-Franlab
28
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 14
14
Principle of fracture picking on BHI images
Fractured zone on acoustic log
Sinusoide on BHI log
Fracture
plane
@Beicip-Franlab
Bedding
plane
29
Resistivity
Accoustic
@Beicip-Franlab
Tool resolution
30
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 15
15
The different features on BHI
Vertical displacement
along the fracture plane
Fault breccia
@Beicip-Franlab
Faults identification
31

Natural fractures identification
@Beicip-Franlab
Conductive open fractures
Resistive closed fractures

32
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 16
16

Induced fractures identification
Induced fractures
Breakouts
@Beicip-Franlab
Induced fractures
33
BHI and Maximum horizontal stress
Induced fractures
SHmax
@Beicip-Franlab
Breakouts
34
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 17
17
@Beicip-Franlab
Tectonic stylolite in core and in BHI image
35
@Beicip-Franlab
Shaly intervalle
36
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 18
18
CLOSED FRACTURE
Here the fracture is filled with soft material (gypse)
@Beicip-Franlab
Low amplitude fractures
37
The core broken zone correspond to a N030E oriented fracture

swarm on borehole imagery
@Beicip-Franlab
Broken zone in the core
38
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 19
19

Correlation between facies (shaly limestones & tight limestones) and FMI images
Shaly limestones
@Beicip-Franlab
Tight limestones
39
Example of fracture analysis (1/5)
Polar projection of fractures
Density of points after bias correction
@Beicip-Franlab
40
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 20
20

Upper fracture zones and FMI image
CLUSTER
@Beicip-Franlab
41

Validation with cores
Fault
Fractures are partially

open
@Beicip-Franlab
CLUSTER
42
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 21
21

Example of sub-horizontal fractures
DIFFUSE
2
Projection polaire des fractures
@Beicip-Franlab
43

Validation with cores
Fractures are partially
open
BRECCIA
@Beicip-Franlab
44
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 22
22
Statistical fracture analysis (1/3)
Multi-well integrated analysis

Fracture set identification / characterisation
@Beicip-Franlab
Statistical analysis of borehole imagery interpretation
45

BOREHOLE SCALE DATA
Statistical analysis of borehole imagery interpretation

N70E
Avg. Strike
Fisher Strike Avg. Dip
Fisher Dip
0,5m
N70
5,2
85
6,6
N110E
0,49m
N105
3,3
85
4,6
N20E
0,46m
N23
2,6
88
3,7
Multi well integrated analysis

Fracture sets identification / characterisation
@Beicip-Franlab
Avg. Spacing
46
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 23
23

The fracture density log
Mean strike=N081
Well by well integrated analysis

Fracture type identification / characterisation
@Beicip-Franlab
47
The fracture density log
@Beicip-Franlab
The bias correction
48
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 24
24
Drivers on fracture density
DEVIATED WELL
BEDDING DIP VARIATION
BEDDING THICKNESS VARIATION
NO-DATA INTERVALS
FRACTURE SWARMS
@Beicip-Franlab
FACIES VARIATION
49
The main scales of fractures

Cluster analysis: fracture swarm / fault
1
1
2
3
3
4
@Beicip-Franlab
50
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 25
25

Cluster analysis: diffuse fractures / joints
@Beicip-Franlab
51

Examples of diffuse fractures in outcrops
Vertical variations of the diffuse
fracture distribution are generally due
to lithology and bed thickness.
@Beicip-Franlab
Fractures extension from metric to decametric
52
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 26
26
Influence of lithology
Testing the relationship between lithology and fracture density
3 sets of fractures:
Mean strike N071, mean dip = 82
@Beicip-Franlab
Main fractured intervals

are found in tight sandstones
53
Shalyness has a large impact on fracture density

@Beicip-Franlab
54
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 27
27
@Beicip-Franlab
Shaly interval
Fracture density
55
Diffuse fractures are bed limited

@Beicip-Franlab
Influence of bed thickness
56
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 28
28
@Beicip-Franlab
Beds thickness / fracture density relationship 1/2
57
Beds thickness / fracture density relationship 2/2
Conceptual model of fracture distribution

@Beicip-Franlab
FD = Fracture density
58
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 29
29
Strain partitioning in a fold

Fractures produced by extension are pure extensional and open fractures
Fractures produced by compression are closed, stylolitic and/or partially open.
Present-day geo-structural setting

around well A
Well A
@Beicip-Franlab
Extension
Compression
59
Fracture aperture from cores/BHI data

Thin section
analysis
BHI data
Fracture aperture
35
4000
30
3500
3000
25
Poiseuille law
2500
20
2000
15
1500
10
C = hydraulic conductivity in mD.m

e = fracture aperture
1000
500
Aperture (microns)
Limitations: questionable fracture aperture estimation that may have a

very strong impact on fluid flow computation
@Beicip-Franlab
Samples
-6
C = e / (12*0,98*10 )
60
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 30
30

@Beicip-Franlab
Outcrops
Seismic data
Geomechanical models
Others
61

A posteriori fault and fracture detection
From outcrop analysis
From seismic data
conventional picking
surface attributes
seismic facies analysis
seismic anisotropy
@Beicip-Franlab
Geomechanical modelling
geological times
curvature based approach
geomechanical based
62
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 31
31
Outcrop analogs analysis
SWARMS
JOINTS
Limitations due to decompaction and weathering:

questionnable fracture densities and fracture length measurements
cannot be used for fracture aperture
@Beicip-Franlab
Usefull observation to determine the type of fractures,

the fracture chronology
63
Seismic data analysis
Objectives:
To identify fault AND sub-seismic faults in the reservoir
To define the geometrical properties of the fault pattern (for

extrapolation to lower scale)
@Beicip-Franlab
To assess their impact on the reservoir fluid flow behaviour
64
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 32
32

CONVENTIONAL PICKING
Conventional seismic picking
faults and flexures location
@Beicip-Franlab
fault throw measurement

fault geometry
65
Seismic noise
Spikes
Top 1
Seismic cross-section
@Beicip-Franlab
Top 1
66
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 33
33

Curvature methodology
1. The deformation (fault) induce a
curvature (positive and negative)
2. Smoothing
Horizon map
Fault plane
Positive curvature
Initial
topography
Negative curvature
After n steps of
smoothing
4. The interpretation is computed between

positive and negative lineaments
@Beicip-Franlab
3. The second derivative of

curvature highlights the deformation
67
Impact of smoothing on curvature signal
SM=200
@Beicip-Franlab
10 Km
68
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 34
34
SM=100
@Beicip-Franlab
10 Km
69
SM=50
@Beicip-Franlab
10 Km
70
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 35
35
SM=30
@Beicip-Franlab
10 Km
71
SM=15
@Beicip-Franlab
10 Km
72
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 36
36
Impact of smoothing step on curvature signal

SM=200
SM=100
10 Km
SM=10
@Beicip-Franlab
SM=50
73

Large scale features interpretation : curvature analysis
N
Negative curvature
@Beicip-Franlab
Positive curvature
74
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 37
37

The main types of curvature:
Principal curvature (maximum of curvature)

Oriented curvature
Minimum curvature
N70 oriented curvature

N160 oriented curvature
@Beicip-Franlab
Maximum of curvature
75
Curvature analysis
NORTH
Curv min = 0
Fold or flexure
EAST
Curv min
Curv max
Low curvature
Fault zone
High curvature
@Beicip-Franlab
Local or regional scale
76
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 38
38
Top of the Reservoir Formation
Maximum curvature processed in Fraca
@Beicip-Franlab
77
Integration of seismic data: curvature analysis

N130E is the main trend
seismic faults (blue)
sub-seismic lineaments (yellow)
E-W is a minor (only sub-seismic lineaments)
Validation with the other seismic
@Beicip-Franlab
attributes
78
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 39
39

SEISMIC ATTRIBUTES ANALYSIS
Red = high amplitudes

White = medium
Blue = low
Dip map
illuminated from NW
Yellow = areas dipping toward NW

Red = areas dipping away from NW
Black = steep dips away from NW
Correlation map
Red = areas of good correlation

Purple = poor correlation
A number of linear features occur on all 3 maps, many of which can be interpreted as faults;
generally the shorter the lineament the less confident the interpretation
@Beicip-Franlab
Amplitude map
79

SEISMIC FACIES ANALYSIS
Objective : Analyze the character of seismic traces and relate, if
possible, its variations to geological variations of the reservoir.
Deliverables: Maps or cubes of seismic facies with the associated
interpretation.
Previous seismic interpretation not required

@Beicip-Franlab
Methodology: Statistical methodology based on principal

component analysis that includes pattern recognition techniques.
80
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 40
40
Seismic facies analysis (1/4)

Selection of relevant seismic attributes
1250
1250
1250
1250
1000
1000
750
High
1250
1250
1250
1000
1000
1000
1000
750
750
750
750
500
500
500
500
250
250
250
250
High
1000
1000
750
750
750
500
500
500
500
250
250
250
250
High
Low
cdp
line
cdp
line
150 250 350 450
Curvature
Dissimilarity
Low
cdp
line
Low
150 250 350 450
cdp
line
150 250 350 450
Dip
Edge
@Beicip-Franlab
150 250 350 450
1250
81

Seismic facies definition
Statistical segmentation
Seismic
facies 3
dip
Edge
Seismic
facies 1
Ap
curvature
A2
A1
Seismic
facies 2
Attribute space
@Beicip-Franlab
Dissimilarity
A3
82
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 41
41

Seismic facies definition
Attribute #3
facies 3
Attribute #p
Attribute #2
facies 1
KS1
KS3
KS2
Attribute #1
facies 2
Facies 1
Facies 1
Facies 2
Facies 3
Facies 2
Facies 3
Facies 4
Facies 5
Facies 6
Facies 4
@Beicip-Franlab
Facies 5
83

Mapping of seismic facies that shows fracture occurrence
5 km
@Beicip-Franlab
Seismic facies
84
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 42
42
Fault geometry analysis
Thin lines show the portions of the curves which fit lines with slopes of C. Because these data were collected
from two-dimensional samples of three-dimensional volumes, equation (1) and the data in figure describe twodimensional fault populations. The actual (three-dimensional) power-law exponent for small faults is C + 1 (Marrett &
Allmendinger 1991). Also shown are the areas (A) in square kilometers of the maps from which the data were
collected.
@Beicip-Franlab
Fault length analysis
85
Fault displacement
analysis
Results of the combined analysis

of nine data sets (lines),
@Beicip-Franlab
with the source data (symbols)
86
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 43
43

ILLUSTRATION OF THE FRACTAL DIMENSION ON THE FAULT PATTERN
Fractal dim. = 1.4

Fractal dim. = 1.6
High values increase the lateral dispersion

@Beicip-Franlab
Fractal dim. = 2
87
2. Compartments analysis
- From geometric criteria: comparison of reservoir thickness and fault
throws (fault displacement contours)
- From fault surface properties: clay smearing related to throw
magnitude and to shalyness of reservoir blocks
- Compartmentalization also controlled by geomechanical criteria:
@Beicip-Franlab
(reverse faults are more likely sealing; controlled by present-day stress)
88
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 44
44

A posteriori faults and fractures detection

From outcrop
From seismic
conventional picking
surface attributes
seismic facies analysis
shear waves analysis
@Beicip-Franlab
geological times
curvature based approach
elastoplastic approach
89
TIME
CURVATURE ANALYSIS
TOTAL DEFORMATION
T5
No deformation
T4
Max. of deformation
T3
T2
Deformation = Curv.(T1) Curv.(T2)
T1
@Beicip-Franlab
A coupled back-striping / curvature approach is required
90
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 45
45
The conceptual fracture model
Fractures
corridors
Fault
@Beicip-Franlab
Diffuse
fractures
10 m
91
Not fractured well (2)

Not fractured well (1)
Fracture swarms
@Beicip-Franlab
Faulted well
92
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 46
46
Fractures were clustered along the main faults and developed in spite
of the lithological variations.
@Beicip-Franlab
1. The reservoir unit was fractured by means of large-scale fractures (faultrelated) (Northern Africa)
93
Two proven main geological drivers on lateral and vertical distribution of

diffuse fold-related fractures: lithology and the structure.
@Beicip-Franlab
2. The reservoir unit was intensely fractured by means of diffuse and largescale fractures (Mexico)
94
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 47
47
Locally connected fractures
@Beicip-Franlab
Regional diffuse fractures
95

FRACTURE MODELLING
To integrate fracture characterisation results for
reservoir engineering purposes:
1. to predict the distribution of fracture sets properties within the

reservoir volume
2. to build 3D models of the fracture network for fluid
flow computation:
- to calibrate fracture hydraulic properties
- to compute large-scale flow properties (input for field-scale
flow simulation)
@Beicip-Franlab
Objective:
96
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 48
48
How to model a fractured reservoir?

Reservoir scale
Simulation cell scale
Well scale
1m
5 km
100 m
Joints
Swarms
Faults
@Beicip-Franlab
Faults
[Sub Seismic faults
Swarms]
97

The choice of the FRACTURE MODELLING APPROACH depends on
fracture SCALE :
FAULTS (km ; throw: >10m)

Large-scale
fractures
sub-seismic faults (100 m-1 km ; throw: 0-20m)

and
Global (reservoir-scale)
discrete fracture model
fracture swarms (10 m -1 km; no throw)
Matrix
anisotropy
JOINTS (cm - 10 m)
Local discrete
fracture model
microfractures (mm - cm)

@Beicip-Franlab
Small-scale
fractures
98
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 49
49

FRACTURE MODELLING OF LARGE SCALE FEATURES
Procedure:
1. Integration of deterministic information
- basic surfaces (geologic horizons, faults) are built from sets of points provided by the
seismic
- relationships between these surfaces are specified (according to faulting history, )
- use of a statistical discrete modelling method based on the fault geometric properties
. fault orientation map,
. distribution law of fault lengths,
. fractal dimension.
@Beicip-Franlab
2. Extrapolation at lower scales: sub-seismic fault (or fracture swarms) modelling
99

Modelling of sub-seismic faults
3D SEISMIC
Major faults used as

deterministic
modelling constraints:
@Beicip-Franlab
2 sets
1 orientation map for each set
100
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 50
50

CONDITIONING the sub-seismic fault model
From 3D seismic attributes
picking
@Beicip-Franlab
To the map of
initiation probability
for the stochastic modelling
of sub-seismic faults
101

MODELLING of sub-seismic faults
Seismic-derived
(sub-seismic)
fault
Fault
map
Constrained stochastic modelling
@Beicip-Franlab
Simulated
fault network
102
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 51
51

SMALL-SCALE FRACTURES MODELLING
Procedure:
1. Analysis and quantification of fractures from wellbore information:
- distribution of fracture azimuths and dips (Schmitt diagram,)-->identification of
fracture sets
- fracture density (m2/m3) and fracture spacing (measurement depends on the relative
orientation of fracture set and wellbore trajectory), in relation with lithology
- identification of fracture swarms (versus systematic joints)]
2. Building a RESERVOIR DISTRIBUTION MODEL of fracture properties (orientation,

density,..) : the global geocellular fracture model
- by indexing fracture density: on lithology (global geocellular facies model)

on proximity to faults
indexing fracture density and orientation on local curvature.
@Beicip-Franlab
- by interpolation of property values between wells
103

Curvature analysis
Geomechanics
Interpolation between wells
Conventional Geo-cellular model
Maps of fracture properties
Spatial distribution of fractures
Local model at cell size
Modeling subseismic faults

@Beicip-Franlab
Discrete model of faults
104
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 52
52

Discrete fracture model
Example of stylolite related fractures modelled at cell size
@Beicip-Franlab
Top View
Side View
105

3D view of the diffuse fractures generated by Fraca
N150
N140
100x100 m cell
@Beicip-Franlab
N080
106
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 53
53

CONCLUSIONS (1)
Fracture analysis and fracture modelling
Identify the main type of fractures,
Identify the geological drivers on fracture distribution
Qualitatively asses the role of fractures on fluid flow
Prepare upscaling phase through adapted modelling of objects
with various scales
All relevant data must be integrated in a rigourous package
A transversal expertise to be shared by geologists,
geophysicists and reservoir engineers
@Beicip-Franlab

107

CONCLUSIONS (2)
1. Borehole scale data
A carefull expertise of cores with BHI data is important to identify the
main tectonic features that may have an impact on the reservoir
Discriminate between tectonic fractures, induced fractures, etc...
- Statistical analysis of the main fracture sets, fracture

orientations, fracture dips, fracture density and statistical
dispersion
- Identification of the fracture types
@Beicip-Franlab
BHI data provide essential informations on fractures orientation
108
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 54
54

CONCLUSIONS (3)
2. Interwell scale data
Seismic data are of primary importance to locate main fractured areas in
the reservoir (faults and sub-faults)
A posteriori observations (seismic picking, seismic attributes,
seismic facies, shear waves seismic)
evolution of deformation through geological times (via curvature or
geomechanical modelling)
@Beicip-Franlab
They provide geometrical properties of fault and fracture patterns for

extrapolation to lower scale
109

CONCLUSIONS (4)
Main sources of uncertainties:
Poor sampling (compared to matrix)
Fracture extension is poorly defined
uncertainty on the connectivity of the fracture network
Fracture aperture (filling) is hard to constrain
uncertainty on the fracture porosity estimated from such models

uncertainty on fracture network equivalent permeability
Hydraulic characterization is required to calibrate discrete fracture
@Beicip-Franlab
models
110
BEICIP-FRANLAB

Part 2A - Page 55
55

How To Characterize Fractured Reservoirs

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

How To Characterize Fractured Reservoirs

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

How to Characterize a Fractured Reservoir ?

Naturally fractured reservoirs

Part 2 - How to Characterize a

232, Avenue Napolon Bonaparte