SPE-171142-MS

Understanding the Movable Oil and Free-Water Distribution in Heavy-Oil

Sands, Llanos Basin, Colombia
Ulises Bustos, Schlumberger; Giovanni Salazar, Ivan Aldana, Wilson Moreno, and Henry Zamora, Pacific
Rubiales Energy S.A.

Copyright 2014, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Heavy and Extra Heavy Oil Conference - Latin America held in Medellin, Colombia, 24 –26 September 2014.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Colombia’s Oil production is around 1.1 million barrels per day (bpd), where 57% is from Heavy Oil
fields. Current oil recovery is in the 15% to 17% range; with targets to increase it up to 50% through
different methods. A typical reservoir exhibits hydrocarbon viscosity variations in hundred of centipoises,
with formation water salinity typically below 5000 ppm and heterogeneities driving a complex fluids
distribution. Since the low amount of salt in these environments prevents low frequency conductive
devices for contrasting water versus hydrocarbons, where additionally, resistivity profiles are ambiguous
to assess fluids mobility in the reservoirs.
In this context, the incorporation of additional physics of measurements opens a new perspective in the
reservoir evaluation in Llanos basin, by reducing uncertainties and helping in the initial reservoir
characterization. The new generation of wireline measurements supporting the present job is represented
by multifrequency dielectric propagation, radial magnetic resonance and dynamic testers, in addition to
the conventional triple combo logs.
Since good-oil bearing rocks (high porosities and permeabilities, very clean sands, high oil saturations)
do not guarantee oil production (very high water cut is likewise common), the identification of movable
oil and free water volumes in low salinities is mandatory. Understanding its distribution across sands is
also a critical factor in heavy oil environments.
As a resistivity and salinity-independent reservoir evaluation approach, the combination of dielectric
dispersion and radial magnetic resonance, provides a valuable sensitivity for the evaluation of displaced
oil, free and irreducible water, viscosity and rock quality variations. Dielectric Dispersion is the variation
of relative permittivity and conductivity versus frequency, enabling pore fluids determination. With a
dielectric analysis at two depths of investigation, integrated with NMR-based diffusion mesurements, a
direct identification of movable oil under filtrate invasion conditions and free water presence is achieved.
The correlations encountered between the dielectric dispersion is encouraging; whereas a better
understanding on the movable oil occurrence and estimation of the fluid to be moved during production
is achieved. Discussions with case studies in Llanos Basin are presented in this paper.
2 SPE-171142-MS

Introduction
The reservoirs under analysis, located in Llanos basin in Colombia, are fluvial sands saturated with heavy
oil (viscosities of hundred of centipoises, around 12-15 API). The porosity is in the 30% range, clay
volumes below 10% and permeabilities of several Darcies. The sandy packages look pretty continuous
without obvious evidence of reservoir compartmentalization or internal barriers, whereas formation water
salinity has a broad range from 5000 ppm down to values as low as 100 ppm.
The main challenges are the identification of fresh water vs oil, where resistivity-based Sw computation
does not work well because of the low formation salinity. The estimation of movable oil and the free water
volume in the reservoirs, where viscosity are hundreds of centipoises, are critical factors for the well
completion success and initial reservoir characterization. In fact, high water production (above 80%)
occurs even in high resistive sands (above 100 ohm.m) with computed Sw values around 25% or less. The
salinity also varies across sandstones and tortuosity factors are suspected to vary as well, increasing the
uncertainty in the petrophysical analysis. The reservoirs wettability is not well understood (given the lack
of measurements in every reservoir), where suspected variations might be present. Qualitative magnetic
resonance-based analysis provides some insights regarding this reservoir property.
Predicting movable oil occurrence and/or defining any particular petrophysical property creating
favourable conditions for oil production (other than fluids properties itself) is a not attainable task with
conventional logs (triple combo / resistivity).
Rock typing approach that aims to assess net pay and hydrocarbon volumes by the quantification of
flow units (based on geologic framework, petrophysical rock/pores types, storage capacity and flow
capacity, among other reservoir parameters) with porosity and permeability inputs, is challenging in
Heavy Oil reservoirs (where hydrocarbon mobility has a big impact on flow capacity). Other parameter
like wettability, with common occurrence in heavy oil sands, creates additional challenges when trying to
predict oil production and defining the better reservoirs for well completion.
In Llanos basin, good reservoir properties (high porosities and permeabilities, low clay volumes–
tipically below 10%-, low water saturations– below 30%-) are not directly linked to oil production,
therefore very high water cut also takes place under the mentioned reservoir properties. The oil viscosity
is not by itself an indicator of good reservoirs: in a broad oil viscosity ranges, a reservoir can produce
either oil or water.
The incorporation of petrophysical cut-offs on several reservoir attributes (clay volume, porosity,
permeability, saturation) that aims to discriminate the reservoir fraction that will not contribute to
hydrocarbon production, is widely used in many reservoirs with coherent results when compared with
production. In Heavy Oil bearing sands however, if other reservoir properties involved in the oil mobility
are not properly assessed, the relationship between petrophysical cutoffs and rock types might fail to
properly quantify the economically recoverable hydrocarbons within a reservoir. Therefore, the net pay
estimation in heavy oil reservoirs needs additional elements to be better estimated and make it more useful
for well completion and field development strategy.

Dielectric Propagation
As electromagnetic waves travel from the device transmitters to the receivers, no change takes place if the
measurement is done in a vacuum. However, when a medium (formation) is placed in front of the tool pad,
changes in the electromagnetic field occur in both amplitude and phase (Figure 1). Those changes are
directly related to the dielectric permittivity and conductivity in the formations.
The molecular orientation happens when molecules have a permanent dipole moment. The arrangement
or geometry of the atoms in some molecules is such that one end of it has a positive electrical charge and
a negative charge in the other side. In this case the molecule is a polar molecule (Figure 2), meaning that
is has electrical poles. Otherwise, it is a “non-polar molecule” (oxygen, nitrogen).
SPE-171142-MS 3

Figure 2—Schematic diagram of a polar molecule

Figure 1—Electromagnetic Field: Changes of Amplitud and Phase when
measuring a formation

Water is a polar molecule because of the way the

atoms bind together, such that there are excess of
electrons on the Oxygen side and a lack (or excess)
of positive charges on the Hydrogen side. The geo-
metric separation between the centroids of positive
and negative charges, due to the asymmetric shape Figure 3—Schematic diagram of a bipolar molecule (Water)
of the water molecule, results in an electric dipole
(Figure 3). In fact, water molecules have a perma-
nent dipole moment.
When an external electrical field is applied to a medium, the non polar molecules will respond by the
displacement of their cloud of atoms. This phenomena, stronger at higher frequencies, is known as
electronic polarization. Since the water molecules are asymmetric–as described previously-, the propa-
gation of an electromagnetic field produces a rotation of the dipoles. This in fact leads to the orientational
polarization. It is important to highlight that orientational polarization has a much bigger contribution than
electronic polarization, to the dielectric dispersion measurement. In addition, under the same electric field,
a concentration of charges at interfaces (Maxwell-Wagner polarization effect) leads to the third polar-
ization mechanism: the interfacial polarization. The presence of ions enhances the interfacial polarization,
which contribution to the permittivity is much higher at low frequency range (around 100 Mhz and
below), thus generating sensitivity to the rock texture (tortuosity, cation exchange capacity). The figure
4 illustrates the three polarization mechanisms (electronic, orientational and interfacial) sensed by the
multifrequency dielectric device.
Since the relative permittivity of a medium is proportional to the electric dipole moment per unit
volume, the water has a large contribution to the measurement. Consequently, since there is a large
contrast between the relative permittivity of the water and other constituents (fluids and minerals), this
makes the dielectric a sensitive measurement–particularly at high frequencies- to the water filled porosity;
unlike low frequency resistivity devices that strongly depends on salinity to derive a water volume in the
formation1.
Since the data acquisition is carried out at four frequencies from 20MHz to 1GHz, a full extent of
dielectric dispersion for both permittivities and conductivities is achieved. In order to properly evaluate
the near well-bore region, where mudcake, mud, filtrate/fines invasion occurs, a multi-spacing measure-
ment is performed2,3.
The low water salinities and lack of constrast between mud filtrate invasion (the wells are drilled with
fresh mud systems) and formation water, highly increases the resistivity-based evaluation uncertainties;
furthermore this finds a good application range and reduced uncertainties for dielectric-based evaluations.
Since the current dielectric device support this analysis at two depths of investigation, and since shallow
invasion is found in Heavy Oil reservoirs, a direct identification of movable oil under filtrate invasion
conditions is achieved.
4 SPE-171142-MS

Figure 4 —Polarization mechanisms with a multifrequency dielectric device

Figure 5—Measurement of diffusion, T1 & T2 for fluid typing with magnetic resonance

Radial Magnetic Resonance

Using a multifrequency-multispacing magnetic resonance wireline tool, continuous measurements of
diffusion, longitudinal relaxation times T1 and transversal relaxation times T2, are carried out4. Since the
three measurements are linked to fluid properties, a 3D inversion technique generating Diffusion-T1-T2
maps allows the computation of every fluid volume encountered in the pore space5,6. Nuclear magnetic
resonance also provides a lithology independent porosity that combined with a 3D Fluid mapping
technique7, yields the saturation and distribution of each fluid in the formation including free water and
irreducible water, oil, gas and mud filtrate (Figure 5).
Measuring diffusion, longitudinal relaxation times T1 and transverse relaxation times T2 is done by:
first, a variable Wait Time sequence to measure T1; second, diffusion editing sequences consisting of two
long echo spacings (TEL) for the two initial echoes (2 ⫻ TEL) followed by a given number of echoes
acquired with the smaller echo spacing available to maximize signal to noise ratio; third, a series of short
time polarization bursts to reduce noise at short relaxation times, important in heavy oils. A fourth-
dimensional inversion is then carried out on the three measurements described above from which the
Diffusion-T1, Diffusion and T1-T2 maps, at different radial depths inside the formation, are generated8,9.
These contain diffusion coefficient lines for water, oil and gas at reservoir temperature. These plots
provide the basis for fluid identification in which volumetric fractions of free water, irreducible water and
hydrocarbons are found. This methodology has the additional advantage of being done at up to three
distinct depths of investigation. Thus, the radial saturation provides a powerful tool to better understand
the movement of fluids during the invasion process and helping to assess the free water fraction (whether
it comes from mud filtrate or formation fluids).
The data acquisition with multi spacing resonance consists of a saturation profiling pass measuring
simultaneously at 1.5, 2.7 and 4 inches within the reservoir. The magnetic resonance aims at identifying
both free and bound water fractions (in the total water volume obtained with dielectric propagation) and
SPE-171142-MS 5

oil viscosity estimation. By inspecting trasverse relaxation times for the water volume in the deepest NMR
shell, some qualitative wettability indications can be obtained.

Field Examples
Case 1
The case 1 is represented by porous sands, with pore volumes around 30% (Figure 6), where four main
bodies are identified and labelled 1, 2, 3 & 4 respectively. Varying resistivity values from 20 ohm.m (sand
1) to 400 ohm.m (sand 3) is present. The water saturation (Sw) computed with resistivity, using a salinity
of 1000 ppm (from offset wells), give a very prospective vision, particularly in sands #2, #3 and #4, with
saturations below 15%. The sand body #1 results in a Sw around 45%. Continuous cores confirms the
hydrocarbon presence with oil shows and fluorescence in all the sands. The resistivity arrays shows a
subtle separation all over the sand (with a more pronounced separation in the sand #3), indicating a
shallow to moderate filtrate invasion, where consequently, good oil mobility would be expected in all the
reservoirs. However, even with such low water saturation values, many wells in the area are water
producers or producing with a very high water cut (above 90%).
A dielectric propagation device was run in this well, aiming to evaluate the saturation in a salinity &
resistivity-independent approach and to detect movable vs non-movable hydrocarbons. The petrophysical
evaluation based on dielectric providing water filled porosities at two radial depths, enable to compute
good hydrocarbon saturations in sands #2 (average Sw 60%), #3 (average Sw 25%) and #4 (average Sw
50%). The sand #1 with saturations above Sw 70%, does not look very promising. The salinities derived
from dielectric propagation are in the 1800 ppm range (mud filtrate salinity is 2700 ppm), exhibiting
subtle variations across sands. Since the shallow Rxo curves obtained with dielectric are always below the
true resistivity (Rt), some invasion is expected so the dielectric-derived salinity should be representative
of formation salinity whenever Rxo is as close as possible to Rt. The reservoir tortuosity indicator
(MN_XD_ADT curve) displays minimum values of 1.75 in the main sand (sand #3, at xx75ft/x120ft),
whereas MN around 2 is observed in sands #2 & #4. This is an important piece of information, since
variable tortuosity was not expected in these reservoirs.
The oil mobility assessment is very important in these heavy oil bearing sands10. Comparison of water
filled porosity at two depths of investigation (PWXD_ADT & PWXS_ADT) indicates that movable oil
is just present in the interval xx70ft/x125ft (sand #3). Almost not movable oil is present in the reservoirs
#2 and #3, meanwhile the bottom section in sand #3 (just below x125ft, black dashed line in fig. x) has
not oil mobility in spite of the good saturation (Sw just below 40%). Since resistivity arrays at multiple
depths of investigation are showing invasion, the reservoirs #2 and #3 displaced water during filtrate
invasion with almost not oil mobility. In fact, similar behavior occurs below x125ft, where the deep
resistivity is not sensitive to this change in oil mobility. Note that even with oil saturations in the 60%
range, the reservoir is just displacing water.
Inspecting both the conductive and dispersive behavior in the dielectric signal (deep radial response),
less dispersive pattern (less variation vs frequency) tends to be present in movable oil zones, whereas
higher dispersion is observed in non-movable oil sands. In this case, this is in good relation with the
tortuosity (MN_XD_ADT) output, where less dispersion is pretty aligned with lower MN values. This
could imply that the heavy oil is creating higher tortuosity across the pore system in the reservoir and that
by integrating dielectric dispersion and MN outputs can help to better understand and supporting the
prediction of intervals with movable oil presence.
Case 2
The case 2 is a reservoir composed of seven main sand bodies, labelled from #1 to #7 in the figure 7.
According to a conventional analysis, the resistivity-based water saturation results in good potential for
the seven sands. In fact, the Sw is always below 20% in sands #3 to #7 and in the 30% range in sands
6 SPE-171142-MS

Figure 6 —Case Study #1, with Triple Combo and Dielectric measurements. The reservoir #3 clearly exhibits a movable oil zone (orange) with
identical resisvitity values when compared with non-moved oil (green) intervals (further comments within the text).
SPE-171142-MS 7

Figure 7—Case Study #2, with Triple Combo, Dielectric and Radial Magnetic Resonance. Reservoirs 4, 5, 6 & 7 are water bearing reservoirs, spite
of the higher resistivity readings in the section. Sands 1, 2 & 3 are oil bearing sands, but movable oil is just observed in reservoirs 2 & 3
8 SPE-171142-MS

#1 and #2; pretty coherent for an Rt that is around 150 ohm.m in reservoirs 1 & 2, whereas an Rt ~ 400
ohm.m in sand #3 and around 200-300 ohm.m for the reservoirs #4 to #7. From a field development point
of view, all these sands could have been completed and horizontal wells could have been planned
accordingly, as a typical field development practice in Llanos area. The resistivity arrays are showing
invasion patterns in all the reservoirs, leading to estimate hydrocarbon mobility in all the sands (based on
a conventional approach), as also observed in other heavy oil basins11.
However, when incorporating the dielectric and radial magnetic resonance, a different scenario is
observed. The dielectric-based water filled porosity leads to good hydrocarbons volumes in the sands #1,
#2 and #3 (oil saturations around 60%), meanwhile below ⫻200ft the sand are mostly water bearing. The
sands #2 & #3 are the best ones with oil mobility (meaning that the resistivity profile would correspond
to displaced hydrocarbons during the invasion process) and the sand #1 exhibits very low hydrocarbon
mobility. Below x200ft the reservoir has a residual oil volume around 15% (meaning that the resistivity
profile would correspond to displaced water during the invasion process). Tortuosity values around 1.6 are
present in the movable oil zones, meanwhile the water bearing sands below x200ft exhibits MN values
in the 1.9 range. By inspecting the conductivity vs frequency, higher conductivity with higher dispersion
(conductivity increase vs frequency increment) is observed in the water bearing sands (reservoir #6).
Lower conductivities with less dispersive behavior is present in sands #2 and #3, meanwhile higuer
conductive dispersion is observed in sand #1. The lack of oil mobility in relation to a subtle viscosity
increment, could be adding some additional tortuosity to this reservoir. These observations encourage to
further use dielectric dispersion as an additional tool to evaluate the better potential producible sands.
The radial magnetic resonance confirms the oil volumes in the reservoirs 1, 2 & 3 with estimated
viscosities around 400 cP. A subtle viscosity increase is observed in the reservoir #1, with values in the
500 cP range, which would be coherent with the reduced movable oil volume determined with dielectric
propagation. Anyway, the estimated oil viscosity variation might be subtle and not conclusive to establish
a clear relationship with the oil mobility in this case study (similar results were reported in other heavy
and ultra heavy basins12).
The three sands under analysis exhibits some free water, however the sand #2 (having some movable
oil) would have a better “isolation” from the main water bearing sand underneath.The sand 3, in spite of
the moved oil detected, is very close to the water bearing interval where high water cut would be expected
during production.
In spite of the high resistivity (200-300 ohm.m), the sands below x200ft have an average of 10%
irreducible water saturation, with 80% of free water and a remaining 10% represented by residual
hydrocarbon. The NMR longitudinal relaxation times (T1) distribution in these reservoirs exhibits a
relatively uniform distribution around 1000 milliseconds, meanwhile the estimated bulk T1 relaxation for
the water at the present reservoirs conditions is above 3000 milliseconds. Since this would imply surface
relaxation present in the NMR signal, wettability to the water could be expected13,14. Similar observation
is made for the sands above x200, where the heavy oil signal is clearly identified around 5 milliseconds
and most of the water signal at 700 milliseconds. At least the water signal might not be at its bulk
relaxation at downhole conditions (surface relaxation would be also present), then the water would be in
contact with the pore walls.

Case 3
The Case 3 shows a classical triple combo response in these environments (Figure 8). From a petro-
physical point of view, the density-neutron porosity is around 30%, with an estimated clay volume around
5%. The lithology is mainly sand-shale with resistivity values in the 100 ohm.m range in the interest
zones. A resistivity-based water saturation (Sw) estimation, using a salinity data from a correlating well
(around 500 ppm) with cementation exponent M⫽2 and N⫽2, results in a prospective interval with a
continuous 60% of hydrocarbon all over the section, below xx50ft, in particular, down to the bottom (note
SPE-171142-MS 9

Figure 8 —Case Study #3, with Triple Combo, Dielectric and Radial Magnetic Resonance. Reservoirs 3 & 4 are water bearing reservoirs, spite of the
higher resistivity readings in the section. Sands 1 & 2 are oil bearing sands, but movable oil is just observed in reservoirs 2. (further comments within
the text)
10 SPE-171142-MS

that below xx50 ft, the highest resistivities are present). A sand body just above xx50ft, seems to be a
non-prospective interval with an 80% water saturation.
Since some varying salinities were encountered in some areas in this field, with formation water
salinities from 300 ppm up to 2600ppm, different saturations were computed for this salinity range. The
last track in figure 8 shows four Sw outputs, resulting in water saturation going from 20% (salinities ⫽
2600 ppm) to 50% (salinities ⫽ 300 ppm). The upper sand above xx50ft shows a very high water
saturation using salinities below 1000 ppm. These evidences demonstrates how sensible are the water
saturation estimation in a narrow range of formation water salinity variation, in fresh water environments.
The lack of a precise salinity input can results in an optimistic or very pessimistic scenario. Also, potential
salinity variations across the sands are not being taken into account, the lack of a depth by depth salinity
data leads to consider a closest salinity from an offset well and the same value for the entire section.
When adding the combination of dielectric propagation and magnetic resonance, a clearer picture on
the reservoir potential is obtained. The water filled porosity from dielectric shows good oil saturations in
the upper section, just above xx70ft. Unlike resistivity-based Sw, the dielectric response shows water
saturations above 90% below x100ft. A possible oil-water contact is observed at xx65ft, whereas a subtle
increase in oil saturation is observed just below xx80ft (with an increase in water volumes below this
depth). This could suggest that the sandstones bodies above and below xx85ft are different units each with
their own fluids contact.
The interval xx50ft-xx65ft is the better zone in the well, having a dielectric-based oil saturation around
60% with movable oil. A second interval in the upper section, xx10ft-xx30ft zone is shown, where the
hydrocarbon saturation is around 40% with scarce evidence of oil mobility.
The tortuosity factor MN is showing averages values around 1.6, where a subtle increase at 1.8 is
observed towards the oil bearings sands in the top (particularly in the sand #1) and towards the water
bearing sands in the base of the well (below x200ft). Although a continuous invasion profile is observed
across the interval, where shallow Rxo_ADT curves are always below RT, the lowest salinity value
obtained with dielectric is 380 ppm. Considering that the mud filtrate is 2600 ppm at reservoir conditions
and in spite of the salinity estimated with dielectric is contaminated with mud filtrate, using 380 ppm in
the resistivity-based water saturation equation results in a Sw computation that reasonably matches the
dielectric-based water saturation in the upper zone of reservoir #2. The water sands #2 & #3, however,
would have a much lower salinity since using 100 ppm a 20% oil saturation is still computed (this
saturation would be still overestimating the hydrocarbon volume, given the fact that the combination of
dielectric and radial resonance are showing an hydrocarbon volume close to a residual oil saturation
around 7%).
The NMR-based oil viscosity estimates in this well, exhibits values around 700 cP (600 cP to 800 cP
range). When comparing the viscosity values with the movable oil volume from dielectric analysis, a clear
relationship between oil mobility and viscosity could not be established (as in the previous case study).
The water NMR T1 distribution below xx80ft exhibits a relatively uniform distribution around 1000
milliseconds, whereas above xx80ft it occurs at around 600 milliseconds. The oil signal is, on the other
hand, located at around 2 milliseconds. Since the estimated bulk relaxation for the water at the present
reservoirs conditions would be around 2500 milliseconds, this would imply that surface relaxation is
present in the NMR water signal, therefore wettability to the water would be expected, at least in the water
bearing sands. Similar observation is made for the sands above xx80ft, where most of the water signal is
located at 700 milliseconds, quite below to its bulk relaxation. Then in the oil bearing sands, some
wettability to the water could be expected (wettability to the oil– eventually mixed wettability- is not
discarded either).
Wireline dynamic tester information is also available in this well. In addition to the pressure
measurements and considering that fluids estimation based on gradients is not accurate when the heavy
oil and water has low contrast in density, two pumping stations were carried out for fluid typing. Optical
SPE-171142-MS 11

Figure 9 —Fluids Identification with Optical Analyzer in sand # 4 (water bearing) from case study #3.

Figure 10 —Fluids Identification with Optical Analyzer in sand # 2 (oil bearing) from case study #3.

analyzers were located in the tool’s flow line with the purpose of evaluating the type of fluids (each fluid
has its own optical properties) flowing from the reservoir to the wellbore. The first station was taken at
x155ft, whereas the second one was carried out at xx55ft. In order to ensure removing any filtrate invasion
and inspecting true reservoir fluids, around twenty four hours were spent in the first pumping station,
whereas fifteen hours was invested in the second test.The bottom test was initially moving some filtrate
invasion (confirmed with both optical analyzer with a water response and with a resistivity cell showing
values coherent with the mud filtrate) and a continuous salinity decrease vs time, with stabilized values
around 80 ppm after one day pumping. Not hydrocarbon traces were detected in dynamic conditions
(Figure 9).
The second station, taken in the oil bearing sands as per the Petrophysical model, had an initial water
flow with resistivity values coherent with mud filtrate invasion. After fourteen hours pumping, 50% of oil
was already flowing from the reservoir as per detection in the dynamic tester flowline with optical
analyzers (Figure 10). For operational reasons and time constraints, the test was finished one hour later
since the hydrocarbon production had been confirmed with some flow properties also assessed.
The fluids identification with both pump-outs are pretty consistent with Petrophysical model based on
dielectric and magnetic resonance.
Poro-Perm vs Oil Mobility
Several crossplots porosity-permeability are presented in figure 11. Following the “Windland” approach,
six to seven rock types were defined based on pore-throat radius boundaries. The porosity input is derived
from the Petrophysical model in each case, whereas the continuous permeability estimation was obtained
from a NMR-Timur derived and corrected for heavy oil. The purpose of this step was intended to
12 SPE-171142-MS

Figure 11—Porosity-Permeability crossplots for the 3 case studies. Orange dots corresponds to movable oil intervals, whereas green dots are the
non-movable oil zones. Note that the poro-perm relationship and rock type with the movable oil occurrence, is not obvious.

understand if the movable and non movable oil occurrence has any particular relationship with specific
rock types and/or specific porosity/permeability values in the present case studies. From the crossplots in
figure 11, very good Petrophysical properties are generally observed; rock Types 0, 1, 2, 3 & 4 are the
SPE-171142-MS 13

most common ones. Both movable oil (orange dots) and non movable oil (green dots) intervals were
plotted. It is clear that hydrocarbon occurrence takes place in a broad porosity and permeability range,
however, no movable oil occurrence was observed below 10 millidarices, but also present in porosities as
low as 10%. Also, it is observed that movable oil is encountered in rock types 0 to 3. The non movable
oil, on the other hand, is encountered in similar porosity and permeability ranges that the movable
hydrocarbons. In addition, there is not a particular rock type associated to the non movable fraction. The
hydrocarbon mobility is not showing then a clear affinity to any particular rock type, any rock type with
permeabilities above 10 millidarcies can contain movable oil.

Conclusions
The reservoir evaluation in the heavy oil reservoirs of Llanos basin have proven to be complex given the
fresh water reservoirs, combined with heavy oils and free water occurrence. The resistivity-based methods
can lead to ambiguous water saturation computations. Identical resistivity values can be related to oil
bearing or water bearing interval. The heavy oil presence represents an additional complexity, making oil
mobility and free water assessment critical for well completion and field development strategy. The
dielectric measurements are providing multi-spacing water volume detection hence a direct detection on
oil mobility. The radial magnetic resonance provides the volume fractions of free vs. irreducible water and
viscosity changes detection among the reservoirs, where indirect evidence of wettability condition can
also be attained. Special acquisition sequences for heavy oil detection and evaluation were applied,
enhancing the heavy oil signal encountered at very short T2’s and facilitating hydrocarbon detection. The
analysis of radial saturation at independent depths of investigation inside the formation provides a very
valuable insight as to whether the fresh water origin is related to mud filtrate invasion or coming from the
reservoir. Evaluating the conductive dispersion as a reservoir tortuosity in relation with the movable oil
occurrence, is an interesting approach still under analysis.
A summary of the key notes from the case studies presented in this paper is given below:
● Standalone resistivity-based methods for evaluating saturation are not recommended.
● Sensitive analysis on salinity inputs demonstrate that for relatively small changes in salinity in
Llanos reservoirs leads to very different results in Sw estimation. High impact, given the very low
salinity condition.
● Multifrequency dielectric propagation is an efficient approach to detect movable vs non-movable
oil zones. Standalone radial magnetic resonance analysis, enable to achieve free water assessment,
viscosity and wettability estimates.
● A direct relationship between viscosity and movable oil at downhole conditions is not obvious,
therefore using viscosity as a predictive tool for oil production is not enough.
● Low MN values and low conductive dispersion observed with dielectric propagation is frequently
associated to movable oil zones.
● Water NMR spectrum at downhole conditions is relaxing both close to its bulk relaxation but with
evident surface relaxation, which helps to carry out some estimations on reservoir wettability. That
certainly required laboratory measurements for better understanding.

Acknowledgments
The authors express their gratitude to Pacific Rubiales Energy for the permission to publish the present
paper. The authors also thank the Schlumberger Wireline and PetroTechnical Services groups for the
continuous support during the execution of the jobs presented in this publication.
14 SPE-171142-MS

References
Cheruvier, e., Suau, j.: “Applications of microwave dielectric measurements in the various logging
environments”, SPWLA Transactions 27th Annual Logging Symposium, paper MMM, 1986.
Hizem M, et alet al.: “Dielectric Dispersion: A New Wireline Petrophysical Measurement”, SPE
116130, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, USA, 20 september-2
October 2002.
Mosse l., Carmona r., Decoster e., Fraivre o., Mehdi H.: “Dielectric Dispersion Logging in Heavy Oil:
A Case Study from the Orinoco Belt”. Paper presented at the SPWLA 50th Annual Logging Symposium,
June 21-24, 2009, held in The Woodlands, Texas, United States, June 21-24, 2009.
Pavia, l. et alet al.: “A Next-Generation Wireline NMR Logging Tool”, SPE 84482 paper presented
at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, 5-8 October, 2003
Freedman, r. et alet al.: “A New NMR Method of Fluid Characterization in Reservoir Rocks:
Experimental Confirmation and Simulation Results”, SPE 75325 published in the SPE Journal, 2001.
Hurlimann, M. et alet al.: “Diffusion editing: new NMR measurement of saturation and pore
geometry”, Transactions of the SPWLA 43rd Annual Logging Symposium, Oslo, Japan, June 2-5, 2002,
paper FFF
Cao Minh, C. et alet al.: “Planning and Interpretation of Magnetic Resonance Fluid Characterization
Logs”, SPE 84478, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2003.
Heaton, N. et alet al.: “Applications of a New-Generation NMR Wireline Logging Tool”, SPE 77400,
SPWLA 48th Annual Logging Symposium held in Austin, Texas, USA, June 3-6, 2007.
Heaton, N. et alet al.: “4D NMR – Applications of the Radial Dimension in Magnetic Resonance
Logging”, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA, 21-24 Septem-
ber 2008.
Carmona R., Decoster E.: “Assessing Production Potential of Heavy Oil reservoirs from the Orinoco
Belt with NMR logs” Transactions of the 42nd SPWLA Annual Logging Symposium, paper ZZ, Houston,
TX, June 17-20, 2001.
Yusbisay R., Chavez M., Bustos U., Decoster E.: “Reservoir Evaluation & Completion Optimization
in Heavy Oil Sands with Dielectric & Diffusion Measurements”. Paper presented at the SPE Latin
America and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, held in Mexico City, Mexico, April 16-18,
2012.
Bustos U., Rendon L., Chapellin A.: “Improved Net Pay quantification with Dielectric Dispersion and
Porosity Spectrum in Heavy Oil Sands”. Paper presented at the SPE Western Venezuela Petroleum
Section, held in Porlamar, Edo. Nueva Esparta, Venezuela, October 22-25, 2013.
Freedman R., Heaton N., Flaum M., Hirasaki G.J., Flaum C., Hurlimann M.: “Wettability, Saturation
and Viscosity Using the Magnetic Resonance Fluid Characterization Method and New Diffusion-Editing
Pulse Sequences”. SPE 77397, SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas,
September 29th – October 2nd, 2002.
Looyestijn W. J.: “Wettability Index Determination from NMR Logs”. Petrophysics magazine,
Vol.49, n2, p. 130 –145, April 2008.