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

net/publication/294877150

Facies analysis & Reservoir modeling KF1 oil field North of Iraq

Thesis · July 2010

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4558.0564

CITATIONS READS

3 245

1 author:

Qays Dezday
Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS
16 PUBLICATIONS   9 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Facies analysis & Reservoir modeling KF1 oil field North of Iraq View project

HETEROGENEITY, CONNECTIVITY AND GEOLOGICAL MODELING OF TERTIARY CARBONATE RESERVOIR IN BAI HASSAN OIL FIELD, NORTHERN IRAQ View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Qays Dezday on 18 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 STATUS OF THESIS

Title of dissertation Facies analysis & Reservoir modeling KF1 oil field North of Iraq
I Qays Mohammed Sadeq hereby allow my thesis to be placed at the Information
Resources Center (IRC) of Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS (UTP) WITH the
following conditions:

1. The thesis becomes the property of UTP

2. The IRC of UTP may make copies of the dissertation for academic purposes only.
3. This thesis is classified as

√ Confidential

Non-confidential

Endorsed by

Date: Date:

i
 UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGY PETRONAS
Approval by supervisors (s)
The undersigned certify that they have read, and recommend to The Postgraduate
Studies Programme for acceptance, a dissertation entitled “Facies analysis &
Reservoir modeling KF1 oil field North of Iraq” submitted by Qays Mohammed
Sadeq for the fulfillment of the partial requirements for the degree of MSc Petroleum
Geosciences.

Date

Signature :

Supervisor : AP Wan Ismail Wan Yussof

Date :

ii
 Title page

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI PETRONAS

FACIES ANALYSIS & RESERVOIR MODELLING
KF1 OIL FIELD
NORTH OF IRAQ

By

Qays Mohammed Sadeq

A DISSERTATION
SUBMITED TO THE POSTGRADUATE STUDIES
PROGRAMME AS A PARTIAL REQURMENT FOR
THE
DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN PETROLEUM
GEOSCIENCE PROGRAMME
BANDAR SERI ISKANDER,
PERAK
JUNE,2010

iii
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the dissertation report is based on my original work except for
quotation and citations which have been duly acknowledged. I also declare that it has
not been previously or concurrently submitted for any other degree at UTP or other
institutions.

Signature:

Name: QAYS MOHAMMED SADEQ

Date:

iv
 Dedication

I dedicate this thesis to our God Almighty, who has continuously guided me in all my
Endeavours.
I dedicate this dissertation to the all my family, my tripe, my friends
I dedicate this thesis to my parents, who have offered me unconditional love and
support throughout my life.
I dedicate this thesis to my wife for her love, support, your laughter, and everything
else we share together each day.
I dedicate this thesis to my son Garmo and my daughters gleana, Sara, and Alla; you
all are the Inspiration in everything I do.
Thanks to you all for being so patient and supporting to me while I have spent untold
Periods of time away from you working on this research.
I dedicate this thesis to all oil engineering department staff in North Oil Company for
them unlimited help when I was doing my IIP.
Great thank to my mangier Mr. Abood Husain Fadoos for his help in providing the
data for me.

v
 Acknowledgements

From the formative stages of this thesis, to the final draft, I owe an immense debt of
gratitude to my supervisor AP. Wan Ismail bin Wan Yussof. He provided a worthy
support and encouragement during the research and writing of this thesis. His sound
advice and careful guidance were invaluable.
I am thankful to Co supervisors Dr Abdlhakeem Ramadhan, and Dr Aboosh Al-
hadede for them supervise in Iraq. Great thanks to my mangier Mr Abood Hussain
Fadoos for his data providing used in the case studies and for the support and
permission to publish our results. I thank also PETRONAS for bestowing upon the
author a scholarship in 2008 to pursue a Master of Science in Petroleum geoscience.
I thank Prof. Alain Mascle and all IFP teachers they are really great teachers.

vi
ABSTRACT
The Zagros basin (Iraq) constitutes a rich petroleum province. The Lower
Cretaceous Qamchuqa Group comprises one of its major reservoirs. Data from
about 30 wells, drilled in a limited sector corresponding to a northwest-southeast
anticlinal structure situated in the Kirkuk region, permit analysis of several
sedimentological and diagenetic events that led to the formation of this reservoir.
Facies changes took place and divided the structure into three parts: the
northwestern part in which neritic facies dominate the central part in which basinal
influence is considerable, and the southeastern part that shows basinal mudstone-
type facies. The Lower Cretaceous carbonate platform in the northwestern part of
the study area displays good primary porosity.
During the course of burial, high secondary porosity related to dolomitization
appeared. However, a major part of the porosity was produced when the reservoir
was fractured during the Priabonian after the collision between the Arabian and
Eurasian plates.
The sedimentological study and facies analysis divided the upper qamchuqa into 4
rock units (UQ1, UQ2, UQ3, and UQ4) and Jawan formation into 2 units (Ja1,
andJa2) a new model of depositional environment estimated depending on the well
log and core data provided. On the other side the integration of these data with the
petrophysical and geophysical analysis were the input data to establish a static
geological model to be the input of the dynamic fluid flow model.
The static mod el improved the view of the kf1 reservoir for both geoscientists and
reservoir engineers. The preparatory work for the petrophysical analysis created a
digital database of well logs suitable for on-going studies.
Application of a matrix inversion technique to solve for porosity and mineralogy
worked well. Probable clay mineralogy was identified from a plot of spectral
gamma ray data. The sonic response of the reservoirs indicates that secondary or
vuggy porosity is significant in the Cretaceous reservoirs. The Archie parameters
for calculating water saturation are defined or constrained enough to produce high

vii
quality water saturation estimates. Core data permitted the Archie cementation
exponent, m, to be expressed as a function of porosity.
The phenomenon of the cementation exponent m decreasing as porosity decreases
has been noted before in Middle Eastern carbonates. This constraint on m values in
turn constrained or reduced the uncertainty of the estimate of formation water
resistivity from Pickett plots. The saturation exponent, n, was not similarly defined
by core data. Formation temperatures from borehole records were less than ideal,
but still good enough. The completed geocellular model or static model becomes
the input model for reservoir simulation. The geomodel, which includes the
reservoir properties as well as the structural geometry, can export as an ASCII file
in GRDECL format. Exported properties include porosity, matrix permeability,
Vdolomite, Vlimestone, Vshale, Vanhydrite, and the X-Y grid origin. Depth
structure contour maps and fault frameworks for the Upper Qamchuqa at FK1 have
been mapped using lattices of vintage 2-D seismic data tied to well control.
Seismic interpretation of the FK1 lattice of 2-D seismic lines produced maps of
reservoir time structure. The study proved more than one fault system in the study
area.

viii
LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE NO.

Tab 1-1 type of the logs in studied wells 5

Tab 1-2 shows the cores described intervals and production index 7
Tab 2-1 numbers and names of the facies 15
Tab 3.1 Three–Component Matrix Setup with Four Log Inputs 38
Tab 3.2 Mineral & Fluid Parameters for Lithology & Porosity Determination 39
Tab 5.1 Cretaceous Section Nomenclature 61
Tab 6.1 Grid Layout 75

Tab 6.2 Cell Sizes in Static Model 75

Tab 6.3 Layer Thickness in Static Model 76

Tab 6.4 Comparison of Measured & Modeled Perms 81

ix
LIST OF FIGUREES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE NO.

Fig (1.1) Regional Structure map and the location for study area 2
Fig (1. 2) Structural map and the location for study area 2
Fig (1.3) Structural contour map for study area 3
Fig (1.4) Structural map for study area 3
Fig 2.1 Age relationsheps ofr named mesozoic and palaeozoicrock units 10
Fig (2.2 –A) dolomite texture classification 16
Fig (2.2 –B) dolomite texture classification 17
Fig 2-3 shapes of dolomite texture and the crystal faces 18
Fig2.4 the classification of anhydrite texture fabric 18
Fig. 2.5 shape classification of basic porosity types in carbonate rocks 19
Fig 2.6 pore volume classification in carbonate rocks 20
Fig (2.7) Isopach facies map upper cretaceous 22
Fig 2.8 Orbitolina lime wackstone 23
Fig: 2.9 1: Peloidal Packstone – Grainstone microfacies 24
2: Peloidal lime packstone microfacies, peloids 24
Fig 2.10 1: Wackstone Submicrofacies, Milliolid (arrow), Textularia, 25
2: Oolitic Packstone – Grainstone Submicrofacies 25
Fig2.11 The studied outcrop sections 26
Fig2.12 Depositional model for Arabian platform 27
Fig. 2.13 Diagrammatic cross section of Iraq (NE-SW direction) 29
Fig2.14 dolomitization models 31
Fig 2.15 Environment of Deposition of upper Qamchuqa / Jawan formations 33
Fig2.16 core from upper qamchuqa 34
Fig2.17 different facies appears in A-96 core interval (1456 -1462). 34
Fig 2.18 oil show in the fracture planes well A-52 35
Fig 2.19 different stactures in anhydrite rocks in well A-52 35
Fig 2.20 1: shows bioturbation in A- 96 interval (1478 -1483.87). 36
2: fracture plane at the same interval. 36

x
Fig 3 Petrophysical Workflow Overview 37
Fig 3.1 Clay Content versus Porosity 41
Fig 3.2 All Core Data Archie “m” versus Porosity 42
Fig 3.3 Porosity versus Archie m Exponent 42
Fig 3.4 Representative Bottom Hole Temperatures versus Depth 43
Fig 3.5 Clay Mineral Identification from Spectral Gamma Ray 44
Fig 3.6 KF1, Sonic DT versus Core Porosity 46
Fig 4 Stratigraphic Chart 48
Fig4.1 Comparison of Seismic Lines Q-364 and A-364C 49
Fig 4.2 FK1 – A-60 Well Tie to 2-D Seismic Line A-10 51
Fig4.3 TDCV Model for KF1 Field 52
Fig4.4 TDCV Model for KF1 Field 54
Fig4.5 Top U. Qamchuqa O&G Reservoir – KF1 55

Fig 5.1 FK1 Field Location 59

Fig5.2 Remote sensing image processed 60
Fig 5.3 FK1 2-D seismic dip line Q-46A 61
Fig5.4 Cretaceous Stratigraphic Column 63
Fig 5.5 shows fluid contacts 68
Fig 6.1 The modeling building process is comprised of a static portion 70
Fig6.2 Grid Geometry & Horizontal Resolution 71
Fig6.3 Cretaceous Geocellular Model 72
Fig 6.5 Cretaceous Model Vertical Layering 77
Fig6.6 Petrophysical modeling workflow using the porosity parameter 79
Fig6.7 Poro-Perm Transform – Shiranish Formation 82
Fig6.8 Poro-Perm Transform – Mushorah Formation 83
Fig 6.9 Poro-Perm Transform – U. Qamchuqa Formation 84
Fig 6.10 Poro-Perm Transform – Jawan Formation 84
Fig 6.11 Poro-Perm Transform – L. Qamchuqa Formation 85
Fig 6.12 Interpreted Lithology Log – A-125 86

xi
TABLE OF CONTENT

Chapter1 introduction……………………..……………………………….1
1.1 Abstract………..……………………………………………………….2
1.2 location of study area………………………………………………….4
1.3 Methodology………………………………………………..…………5
1.4 Previous studies…………………………………………………..……6
1.5 Objective………………………………………………………….……8

Chapter 2 literature review………………………………………..……….8

2.1Abstract…………………………………………………….…………..8
2.2 upper qamchuqa formation…………………………………………..…9
2.3rock units of upper qamchuqa formation……………………………..…9
2.3.1 First rock unit (UQ1)………………………… …………….…….…..9
2.3.2 Second rock unit (UQ2)………… …………….……………………11
2.3.3 Third rock unit (UQ3) ..................................................................…...11
2.3.4 Fourth rock unit (UQ4) ………………………………………………12
2.4 Jawan formation………………………………………………..………13
2.5 Rock units of Jawan formation…………………………………………13
2.5.1 First rock unit (Ja1) ………………………………………………….13
2.5.2 Second rock unit (Ja2)……………………………………… ………14
2.6 Facies analyses and depositional environment………………………...14
2.7 Shallow-marine carbonate facies and facies models…………………..20
2.8 Main sedimentological facies in UQ and JA fn……..………….….….22
2.9.1 Marly limestone lithofacies..........................................................…....22
2.9.2Lime mudstone and wackstone microfacies…………………………..23
2.9.3 Orbitolina Lime Wackstone microfacies………………………….…..23

xii
2.9.4 Peloidal packstone-grainstone microfacies…………………………..24
2.9.5 Oolitic Packstone–Grainstone microfacies........................…………..25
2.10Environment of Deposition…………………………......................….25
2.11Reef Environment from outcrop………………………………………26
Chapter 3
3. Petrophysical Analysis............................................................................. 37
3.1 Petrophysical Interpretation Process Overview.……............................. 37
3.2 Matrix Models for Porosity and Lithology Calculation ….................... 38
3.3 Dry Clay Volume and Clay Porosity Estimation................................... 40
FK1 Field Discussions.................................................................................. 40
3.4 Basis for Archie Saturation Parameters m and Rw................................ 40
3.5 Basis for KF1 Temperature Gradient..................................................... 43
3.6 Basis for Clay Mineralogy...................................................................... 40
3.7 Comments on Pore Types from Sonic Log Response........................... 41

Chapter4
4. Geophysical Interpretation....................................................................... 47
4.1 Summary..................................................................................................47
4.2 Introduction ............................................................................................47
4.3 2-D Seismic Interpretation.......................................................................49
4.4 Time to depth conversion………………………………………………..50
4.5 Depth Structure Mapping .........................................................................50

Chapter 5
5. Geological Interpretation...........................................................................56
5.1 KF1 Structure .........................................................................................56
5.2 FK1 Stratigraphy……………………………………………………….57
5.3 Cretaceous Stratigraphy......................................................................... 58
5.3.1 Shiranish Formation.............................................................................62
5.3.2 Bai Mushorah / Kometan Formation...................................................62
5.3.3 Upper Qamchuqa (Mauddud)............................................................. 63
5.3.4 Jawan Formation................................................................................. 64
5.3.5Lower Qamchuqa Formation................................................................64
5.4 KF1 fault model………………………………………………………..65
xiii
5.4.1shallow thrust faults............................................................................. 66
5.4.2 Leading edge thrust faults.................................................................. 66
5.4.3back thrust faults................................................................................. 66
5.4.4 fold-axis perpendicular faults..............................................................66
5.4.5 Crestal faults ……………………………………………….…..........67
5.5 cretaceous fluid contacts ………………….………….………………..67

Chapter 6
6. Geological Modeling .................................................................................70
6.1 Structural & Stratigraphic Framework.....................................................70
6.2 Gridding.................................................................................................. 71
6.3 Generating 3D Modeling Grids.............................................................. 74
6.4 grid layout ………………...................................................................... 74
6.5 horizontal resolution ………………….………….…………….….........74

6.6 vertical resolution……………….……………..……….……….……….75

6.7 Property Modeling................................................................................... 75
6.8 well data input (well blocking) …………………………….……………77
6.9 Facies Modeling........................................................................................ 77
6.10 Petrophysical Modeling…….................................................................. 78
Chapter 7
7 Conclusions…………………….………………………………………..…87
7.1 Sedimentological study...................................................................... …...87
7.2 Reservoir modelling………………………………….………….…….….88
Recommendation…………………………………………….………....……89
References…………………………………………………….……………...90

xiv
xv
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1. Abstract:

FK1 oil field considered one of important north Iraq oil fields it has been discovered
in early stages of oil explorations in Iraq in (1929).
Cretaceous sequences considered as a very important reservoirs it known by (middle
reservoir) for this age, and it represented by upper Qamchuqa (Maodud formation).
The carbonate Platform sequence of the Upper Qamchuqa Formation (Albian) of
Kirkuk embayment, northern Iraq, is extensively affected by pervasive dolomitization.
These dolomite rocks become the most productive Cretaceous reservoirs of several oil
fields in the area. Core and log data analysis of eight wells from FK1 oil field in the
area (fig 1.3) shows that understanding the dolomitization impact would greatly
enhance reservoir quality prediction model.
These carbonates are about 120m thick and consist of three basic lithologic units from
top Unit:
1- Alternation of sucrosic dolomite and dolomitized limestone.
2- Massive coarse crystalline dolomite with intercalations of dolomitic marl.
3- Alternating shale, marly limestone and fine crystalline dolomite.
The upper unit include six good quality reservoir units of variable thickness but
closely similar petrophysical properties. Thickness of these units is ranging between
3-10 meters, and consists often of saturated fairly homogenous dolostone of fine to
medium crystalline planar-s to Planar-e dolomite mosaic with excellent
intercrystalline pore network. Porosity ranges between 10-25% and permeability
exceed in some case 50 md.
Successive burial diagenesis leads to enhance their petrophysical properties by
dissolving resistant undolomitized bioclasts which support the additional moldic and
vug porosity.
Overall fracturing of the reservoir enhances reservoir potentiality. The origin and
paragensis of this dolomite is discussed in term of fluctuation of sea level and burial
history.

1
 1.2 Location of study area:

FK1 oil field is located geographically North West of Kirkuk (north of Iraq) in a
folded zone according to (Dunnington, 1958) or zone of Hamren – Makhool
according to (Buday&Jassim, 1987), which it is an unstable shelf zone.

Fig (1.1) Regional map and the location for study area

Fig (1. 2) Structural map and the location for study area

2
Structurally the oil field is asymmetrical elongated anticline extended for 40km in
length and 13.5km in width in-between Kirkuk and Qarachoq anticlines. (Fig 1.2, 1.3,
and1.4) shows structure map for upper Qamchuqa formation. The field contain from 2
domes (in SE – NW direction)Kitka Dom and Dauod Dom previously Separated by a
narrow saddle called Shahill saddle, Kitka dome is bigger in size and higher
structurally by (300m ) than Dauod dome. Fig (1.2)
The number of wells drilled to the time of the preparation this study reached 185
wells, 15 of them penetrate the study interval (upper Qamchuqa formation) in kitka
dome and while only 3 are in Dauod dome.

Fig (1.3) location of the studied wells on the map

Fig (1.4) Structural map for study area

3
 1.3 Methodology

1. The study included two parts: study of sedimentary facies and unit’s for both
Qamchuqa and Jawan formations study.
Core study and description for 3 wells A – 52, A – 102, and A – 184 ( 375m )in
lengths taking into account the lithology properties hardness, colour, sedimentary
structures, oil saturation and type of porosity shown from fractures and vags.
Rock slides (thin section) study and petrography description were reviewed (350
slides from core and cutting samples).18 additional slides were treated with Alizarin
red according to (Friedman, 1959) to recognized calcite from dolomite.
Estimate environment of deposition depending on the described cores and well logs.
2. The second part is the reservoir study using the Petrel software to:
Building a static geological model depending on the data provided.
Petrophysical interpretation process overview: The initial petrophysical
interpretation consisted of a two-phase workflow. The first interpretation phase
consisted of calculating both the dry mineral volumes such as calcite and dolomite
and the total porosity using a matrix solution procedure. For a full suite of lithology
and porosity measurements (gamma ray, sonic, density, and neutron) up to four
mineral components plus porosity were calculated.
1. The fault model applied to the FK1 geocellular model is developed from
several data sources. Sources include the final well reports, remote sensing images,
and reprocessed 2D seismic data.
2. 2-D seismic interpretations using sets of vintage seismic surveys revealed
differing levels of confidence attached to each survey’s geographical coordinates
(navigation).
(Table1. 2) shows the detailed information extracted from well log data.

4
1.4 previous studies

The reservoir parts of lower Cretaceous sequences received many geological and
reservoir studies.
They focused on upper Qamchuqa formation because of high quality of this formation
as a good reservoir in Kirkuk, Jambour, and FK1 fields.
Full description for this formation was done in 1959 by (Bellen et al,),Iraq
stratigraphy.
Later on a series of geological and reservoir studies were initrates on this formation
Gaddo, ( 1965, 1966) divided Qamchuqa formation to upper and lower in both Kirkuk
and Jambour fields, considering upper Qamchuqa better than the lower in reservoir
properties.
Al Shakiry( 1977) studied sedimentology and diagenesis in upper Qamchuqa
formation for 4 selected sections in Jambour field.
Al – Sadooni (1978) studied the sedimentology of upper Qamchuqa from outcrops in
Safen mountain in north of Iraq, and subsurface study in (Kirkuk, Jambour and FK1).
Buday (1980) gave a detailed description to upper Qamchuqa formation and its lateral
extension and expansion in north and middle of Iraq.

Table 1-1 type of the logs in studied wells

TYPE OF LOG
WELL RESISTIVITY POROSITY caliper
NO LOG LOG
A - 52 RLLD – RLLS FCD - CNL 9
-RMSFL
A- 102 RLLD – RLLS FCD - CNL 9
-RMSFL
A- 184 RLLD – RLLS FCD - CNL 9
-RMSFL

5
Franlab (1976) completed a geological and reservoir study on Cretaceous formations
in FK1 field followed by north oil company’s study both geological and reservoir
after drilling many other wells.
Dolomitization study on upper Qamchuqa formation in FK1 field was done by Sahar,
(1987) followed by north oil company’s geological study after drilling another 15
production wells.
Abdulrazzaq and Salih (1992) studied hydrocarbon accumulation in Cretaceous
reservoirs including upper Qamchuqa in FK1 oil field.
Another research about maturation time, migration pathways, accumulation of
hydrocarbon and sedimentology sequences for Qamchuqa group done by Al- shididi
et al. (1995).
Latest studies done by Werde, (2000) followed by unpublished Bioneer oil company
and Conoco Philips studies.

1.5 OBJECTIVES
The main purpose is to study sedimentology and reservoir properties of upper
Qamchuqa formation in FK1 oil field, this include:
1. The study of laterally and vertically distribution of lithofacies and microfacies
and the effect of diagenesis on petrophysical properties.
2. The study of petrophysical properties of studied intervals and dividing it into
porosity units to calculate flow unit and how they behave in the field throughout.
3. Attempt to link the geological study of the Sedimentology and reservoir to
develop model shows.
4. Divide upper Qamchuqa formation into permeability units and there development
in all directions in the field and the best reservoir units by measuring values of
water saturation and porosity from well logs and laboratory.
5. Application of the petrophysical study and facies analysis and rock unit
classification on Petrel software to build up static geological detailed model.
6. Estimate the best well positions for future drilling depending on the high
permeable zone resulted from the geological model.
7. A principal objective for building models at FK1 was to integrate the geological,
geophysical and reservoir data collected over several decades in order to visualize
and evaluate the interactions between these data using full-field reservoir

6
 simulation. In addition, oil and gas volumes in both the Tertiary and Cretaceous
reservoirs were to be determined using available field data.

Tab 1-2 shows the cores described intervals and production index

WELL TOP OF BOT(M) THIK (M ) CORE(M ) PI

NO. UQ (M )
A - 52 1555 1749.5 194.5 281

A - 54 1987 2196 209 2000 - 2009 H.O

A - 86 1967 2096 129 1974 – 1989.5 25

1989.5 - 1991

A - 93 1708 1848 140 1.7

1734 – 1752.7
A - 96 1730 1894 164 1752.7 – 1761.7 138
1761.7 – 1770.7
1770.7 – 1779.8

1840 – 1849
A - 102 1730 1896 166 1849 – 1858 606
1858 – 1867
1880 - 1885
2103 - 2112

A - 134 1835 1992 157 625

A - 138 1711 1756.5 45.5 11

1731
A - 178 1553 1696 143

1742-1749
A - 184 1746 1912 166 1749-1766

7
 CHAPTER TWO
LERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Abstract
Cretaceous age depositions are as economic importance in oil field zone northern Iraq
because of the high quality reservoir they contain, such as upper Qamchuqa formation
Cretaceous age contains the following formations from oldest to youngest:
Lower Sarmord formation, Garago formation, middle Sarmord formation, lowers
Qamchuqa formation, upper Sarmord formation, and upper Qamchuqa formation (fig.
2.1)
The Albian in the study area represent different sequences of lithofacies and a second
order sedimentary cycle (super sequence Al- Shididi et al., 1995), limited at the top
and bottom by unconformity surface, including both upper Sarmord and upper
Qamchuqa beside the effects of Jawan formation.
Upper Qamchuqa formation from multi reservoirs structurally, stratigraphically, and
diagenesesally.
The diagenesis played the main role for porosity generation as the storage of the
hydrocarbons.
This is the main reason of this study as we try to understand the geological aspects
and their ties with the reservoir properties, in order to make a simple model for the
Cretaceous reservoir of FK1 oilfield.

2.2 Upper Qamchuqa formation

Upper Qamchuqa formation is considered as one of largest distributed subsurface
formations in north and north-east of Iraq. It is laterally correlated with the Maodud
formation by lithology and age in the middle and south of Iraq (Buday, 1980).
First description of the formation was done by (Wetzel 1950, in Bellen et al., 1959).
Typical sections are in Qamchuqa village west of Sulaymannia city, which shows 6
super imposed Interbeded Limestone and Dolomite rocks.
AL-Naqib, (1960) added Cretaceous age deposits in Kirkuk area are:
Kometan and Kulnere formations from Turonian;
Dukan formation from Cenomanian and both upper Qamchuqa and upper Sarmord
from Albian.

8
Upper Qamchuqa named Mauddud by (Chatton andHart, 1960) contain sequence of
dolomite and limestone which deposited in neritic environment, sometimes shoal
environment in north and northeast Iraq (Buday, 1980), with the age extending from
Hauterivian to Albian (Chatton andHart, 1960).
Al- shididi et al. (1995) considered upper Qamchuqa as a part of Albian –
Cenomanian sedimentation cycle, deposited in neritic shoal environment with a lot of
sub environments from deduced and lateral change in facies.
The top and bottom of the formation: all the previous studies considered the bottom
of the formation conformity and a steped surface with the upper Sarmord formation
and equivalent to Batewa shaley limestone. Top of the formation is unconformity and
erosional surface with Dokan limestone formation from oligocene, This is very
coherent with the result of this study through the observation of change in the upper
rock unit thickness resulted from differential erosion and development of a lot of
vags, increases the porosity decreases (sea level fluctuation dissolved and eroded the
surface which surrounded by stylobrecia as been observed in A-81well interval),
beside the fracture nets which enhanced the permeability (tab.2-5).

Through studying available rock samples (both core and cuttings) and depending on
well log records upper Qamchuqa formation has been divided into 4 rock units from
top to bottom: (UQ1, UQ2, UQ3, UQ4 ). These 4 rock units are seen continuously in
well intervals of (A-23, A-102, and A-81). UQ2 and UQ4 disappears to the north-
west direction of the studied field, as observed in A-16 and A-90 well intervals, which
upper Qamchuqa rock units intercalated with Jawan facies .

2.3.1 First rock unit (UQ1)

This unit is bounded from the top by an unconformity surface with Dokan formation,
at the bottom with a barrier limestone layer separate it from unit (UQ2) and an
anhydrite layer from Jawan formation, in the north-western part of the field.
This unit shows different thickness about between 17 m to 34.5 m because of
asymmetrical differential erosion for the upper part of the unit. The core of this unit in
A-102 and A-23 wells intervals shows not big change in lithology mainly it consists
brown to dark brown hard to medium hardness oil saturated bright fractured dolomite.
a little limestone facies overlapped with this unit becomes larger to north-west, as
observed in A-90, and A-81.

9
Fig 2.1 Age relationsheps of named mesozoic and palaeozoic rock units in northern
Iraq

10
This limestone facies appears as thick and single in the middle and bottom of the rock
unit in A-16. This unit is the best within upper Qamchuqa formation in term of oil
saturation and porosity, characterized by vag porosity triple porosity beside fracture
and matrix porosity, intercrystalline and itergranular Oil saturation and porosity
increase generally into north-west direction in FK1 oil field because of decrease of the
dolomite facies, increase of limestone facies, and the effect of the cement which infill
fractures and vags partially and totally as shown in A-81 well interval (tab.2-2 and 2-
4), as well as the appearances of anhydrite which looks like nodes (tab. 5-4) or as a
cement material.

2.3. 2 second rock unit (UQ2)

This rock unit appears in A-23, A-81, and A-102 well intervals so it covers Kithke
dome to the south- east of Shahill graben with a thickness approximately 67-76
meters.
The facies of this unit overlaps latterly with Jawan formation in well A-90 interval.
The top of this unit is when the facies changes to a layer of shaly limestone.
The interval of this layer between 6 – 9 meters is lateral equivalent to anhydrite facies
of Jawan formation in direction of north- west of the field forming barrier, and non
porous layers reflected from well logs which refers to non – very low porosity.
The bottom of this unit is determined by the abrupt change of its microfacies. Same
change can observe from the logs separating it from the 3ed rock unit (UQ3) (FIG2-
14).
the Lithology of this unit (depending on the well logs, cutting, and core analyses) in
specific intervals of A-23, and A-10 2shows homogeneous facies of light brown to
dark gray dolomitic limestone, with weak oil shows.

2.3.3 Third rock unit (UQ3)

This unit is extended in all FK1 field homogeneously in both lithology and thickness
(10.5m-18m).
The bottom and top surfaces of this unit in north-east area (Kithke dome) are a facies
change which can be seen on the gamma ray changing from low to very high beside
low value to both density and neutron which intersected sometimes.

11
In the north-west part of the field this unit is surrounded above and below by
anhydrite facies of Jawan formation.
The lithology of this unit is: Interbeded limestone and dolomitic limestone at the
upper part with medium oil shows.
The rest of the interval is a high porosity, and high oil show dolomite facies, the
limestone, and dolomitic limestone facies increasing in the direction of A-81 well
gradually the porosity and oil show decreasing generally, to the north-west direction
of the field in this unit.

2.3.4 Fourth rock unit (UQ4)

This unit appears in three well interval A-23, A-102, and A-81 means it covers south-
west part of Kithke dome with a thickness approximately 38-54 meters.
The bottom of the unit is the upper Sarmord formation (Batewa) in the south- east part
of the field, which can be proven by the abrupt change in lithology, and porosity
(depending on density-neutron log).
In the north-west part of the field anhydrite facies of Jawan formation starts to appear
under this unit beginning from A-81 well interval and to the direction of north-west.
The top of this unit been explained above with UQ3 unit.
From the cores, cuttings, and well logs of this unit contains dolomite, dolomitic
limestone, and limestone.
The dolomite facies behaves as medium porosity, high oil saturation, to medium
porosity, vagy and fractured and it represent most of A-23 well interval.
It decreases in directions of A-102, and A-81 well.
Either the limestone facies behaves as a medium hardness, light gray colour, weak
porosity and oil shows, sometimes as spots inside the fractures. The occurrences of
this facies increase and appear as thick layers into north-west direction instead of
dolomitic facies.
The dolomitic limestone facies appears at the bottom of A-23 well interval and
increases in the middle and upper parts of this unit to north-west direction.
The hardness is medium, colour is light to gray with weak oil show and it represent
the medium case in-between dolomite facies and limestone facies in term of porosity
and oil saturation.

12
2.4 Jawan formation
First description for this formation was by (Dunnington. 1959, In Bellen et al, 1953).
In Ja-2 well interval the description included the following: shaly limestone,
recrystalline fine grain limestone with a lamination of pseudo ooids limestone and
dolomite rocks with the anhydrite layers, Dunnington, (1959) considered this layers as
an independent unit, while Buday, (1980) considered it apart of Jawan formation
which appears as a deferent thicknesses when overlapped with upper Qamchuqa
formation or equivalent to Albian age Mauddud formation.
Jawan formation in FK1 oil field appears above the upper Sarmord formation with a
conformity surface, characterized by the beginning of anhydrite facies.

2.5 Rock units of Jawan formation

According to lithofacies study form core, cutting, rock thin slides, and well logs we
can divide this formation into two rock units from top to button as Ja1 and Ja2
separated each from the other UQ3 in the area of A-90, and A-16 well intervals into
north- west direction

2.5.1 First rock unit (Ja1)

This unit appears in north-west zone (Daoud dome and north-west part of Kithke
dome including Shahill graben .This unit has a thickness of 110 -151m.
The increases of the thickness observed in direction to Kithke dome. The thickness of
this unit in A-16well interval is about the double of the thicknesses of the lateral
equivalent of second unit of upper Qamchuqa formation UQ2.
The top surface of this unit characterize by the beginning of anhydrite facies appears
while the bottom surface characterized by the disappearing of anhydrite facies and the
appearing the UQ3 unit facies this can be observed from GR\FDC-CNL.
This unit consist mainly of massive anhydrite (70% at A-16 well interval)
Interbeded with but thinner are limestone and dolomite.
Carbonate rock layers disappears to the north-west of the field (fig 2-14).
The anhydrite facies consist from solid layers of massive anhydrite white-light blue
colour.
The dolomite facies in this unit consist of brown-light brown high to medium oil
saturation.

13
Limestone facies characterized by thin layers Interbeded with anhydrite and dolomite,
the thickness of this facies increases to the north-west direction and contains weak oil
shows.

2.5.2 Second rock unit (Ja2)

The extension and thickness of this unit are greater than those of the first unit well A-
81, A-90, and A-16 by (thicknesses 4.85m, 42m, and 60.5m respectively).
The upper surface of this unit is being put when the anhydrite facies of UQ3 appears
and the carbonate facies disappears, while the lower surface is the contact with the
upper Sarmord shaly limestone formation.
The core of this unit are not available so most of the data are from on well logs and
cuttings which shows that unit is mainly consist of anhydrite rocks Interbeded with
thin layers of limestone, and dolomite (few centimetres in thickness).
The dolomite facies is well developed in A-90well and disappears in A-16.The oil
shows in this unit is weak because of anhydrite and limestone facies, except in the
dolomite facies at A-90 well shows a medium-high porosity and oil saturation.

2.6 Facies analyses and depositional environment

One of our objectives in this project is the study of the sedimentological facies and the
establishment of a link it with petrophysical properties and the effect of lateral and
verticals facies distribution on reservoir properties.
To do so, we should define sedimentological facies accurately. Sedimentological
facies is the part of the rocks which has specific properties and deposited under
specific environment. Because of multi lithology, many facies for Upper Qamchuqa
and Jawan formations, specially carbonate facies, this study used the method below to
classify, numbering, and name the facies (tab 2-1)
1. Numbers (1, 2, 3, and 4) gives to groups of lithofacies which contain the interval
(dolomite, dolomitic limestone, limestone, and anhydrite).
2. Capital letters to the right of the numbers (M, W, P, G, and C) represent
mudstone, wackstone, packstone, Grainstone, and crystalline rocks. According to
Dunham classification.

14
3. In case of general type of grain contains in the facies the small letters (m, o, b, I,
and p) To represent Peloid, interclast, Bioclast & shell dipres, and the fossils of
Orbitolina and Milliolidia.

Table 2-1 numbers and names of the facies

lithology symbols Facies symbols Grain types symbols
(Dunham,1962)
dolomite 1 mudstone M Peloid p
Dolomitic 2 Wackstone W Intraclast I
limestone Packstone P Bioclast & shell b
debris
limestone 3 Grainstone G Orbitolina o
anhydrite 4 Crystalline C Milliolidia m

Because of diagenesis processes like dolomitization which play the main role of
removing the original texture of the facies and replacing by mosaic dolomite rhomb in
the south-west sector from the field, while the original texture from the case is less
affected in the north-east sector the best, we took the desire to use decision of
Randozzo and Zachos, (1984) classification. The facies with ghosts and traces of the
grains appears after dolomitization (fig 2-2) should be turned to the origin to predict
depositional environment.
For the facies which had been completely affected by dolomitization and its difficult
to recognize the origin or for the facies showing weak trace, same classification from
Amthore and Friedman, (1991) been used depending on the surface and the shape of
the crystals (fig 2-3).

15
 A-homogeneous dolomitization

Fig (2-2 –A) dolomite texture classification

16
B-heterogeneous dolomitization

Fig (2-2 –B) dolomite texture classification

17
Fig 2-3 shapes of dolomite texture and the crystal faces
For anhydrite facies the study used (Maiklem et al, 1969) classification to modify the
textures (fig2-4).

Fig2-4 shows the classification of anhydrite texture fabric by (Maiklem et al, 1969).

18
For the porosity Choqutee and Pray, (1970) have been used (fig2-5) and for
volumetric classification the study depended on Luo and Machel, (1995) classification
(fig2-6).

Fig. 2-5 shape classification of basic porosity types in carbonate rocks.

19
20
accretion of subtidal carbonates, (4) migration of carbonate sand bodies and (5)
resedimentation processes, especially shoreface sands to deeper subtidal environments
by storms, and off-shelf transport by slumps, debris flows and turbidity currents.
Carbonate platforms are regionally extensive environments of shallow subtidal and
intertidal sedimentation. Storms are the most important source of energy, moving
sediment on to shoreline tidal flats, reworking shoreface sands and transporting them
into areas of deeper water. Progradation of tidal flats, producing shallowing upward
sequences is the dominant depositional process on platforms. Two basic types of tidal
flat are distinguished: an active type, typical of shorelines of low sediment production
rates and high meteorologic tidal range, characterized by tidal channels which rework
the flats producing grainstone lenses and beds and shell lags, and prominent storm
layers; and a passive type in areas of lower meteorologic tidal range and higher
sediment production rates, characterized by an absence of channel deposits, much
fenestral and cryptalgal peloidal micrite, few storm layers and possibly extensive
mixing-zone dolomite. Fluctuations in sea-level strongly affect platform
sedimentation.
Shelves are relatively narrow depositional environments, characterized by a distinct
break of slope at the shelf margin. Reefs and carbonate sand bodies typify the
turbulent shelf margin and give way to a shelf lagoon, bordered by tidal flats and/or a
beach-barrier system along the shoreline. Marginal reef complexes show a fore-reef—
reef core—back reef facies arrangement, where there were organisms capable of
producing a solid framework. There have been seven such phases through the
Phanerozoic. Reef mounds, equivalent to modern patch reefs, are very variable in
faunal composition, size and shape. They occur at shelf margins, but also within shelf
lagoons and on platforms and ramps. Four stages of development can be
distinguished, from little-solid reef with much skeletal debris through to an evolved
reef-lagoon-debris halo system. Shelf-marginal carbonate sand bodies consist of
skeletal and oolite grainstones. Windward, leeward and tide-dominated shelf margins
have different types of carbonate sand body, giving distinctive facies models.
Ramps slope gently from intertidal to basinal depths, with no major change in
gradient. Nearshore, inner ramp carbonate sands of beach-barrier-tidal delta
complexes and subtidal shoals give way to muddy sands and sandy muds of the outer
ramp. The major depositional processes are seaward progradation of the inner sand
belt and storm transport of shoreface sand out to the deep ramp.

21
 Most shallow-marine carbonate facies are represented throughout the geologic record.
However, variations do occur and these are most clearly seen in shelf-margin facies,
through the evolutionary pattern of frame-building organisms causing the erratic
development of barrier reef complexes. There have been significant variations in the
mineralogy of carbonate skeletons, ooids and syn-sedimentary cements through time,
reflecting fluctuations in seawater chemistry, but the effect of these is largely in terms
of diagenesis rather than facies.

2.8 Main sedimentological facies in Upper Qamchuqa formation

Fig (2.7) Isopach facies map upper Cretaceous (Albian).(Iraqi exploration company,
1989).

2.9.1 Marly limestone lithofacies

This facies is dominant in the top of the lower, middle and upper parts of the sections
(Figs.2), in addition to transition zone between Qamchuqa and Sarmord formations.
This facies uses make up more than 5% of the total thickness of the sections. This
facies is interbedded occasionally with highly fossiliferous limestone beds, which
contain rudist, whole skeletons, pelecypods bioclasts and orbitoid forams. It is
possible that they are formed during the sea level rise (Local drowning of the Arabian

22
platform) in the lagoon or on the reef when high amount of erosion is happened by
stormy episode, and the product is deposited in more oxygenated and less saline
lagoon in which organisms survived.

2.9.2Lime mudstone and wackstone microfacies

This facies is the more common facies after the dolostone facies and makes up more
than 60% of the limestone units and about 30% of the total thickness of the formation.
The matrix consists of dark brown micrite with some silt and sand sized bioclasts of
algae, mollusk and few benthonic forams such as miliolids. This microfacies are
common, especially in the lower part of the sections, in the L1. L2. In this facies, the
grains of wackestone usually range between (10–15) percent in a micritic matrix.
Skeletal grains include; bryozoans, echinoderms and algae. Non-skeletal grains
include intraclasts and pelloids.

2.9.3 Orbitolina Lime Wackstone microfacies

This microfacies is characterized by a high content of large benthonic foraminifera
(Orbitolina), within light color, slightly argillaceous mudstone (marly limestone)
(Fig.2.8) with bioclasts pelecypods. This submicrofacies is found in some beds in the
upper part of all sections (L4)as well as in A-102 core interval, in addition to
transition zone of the type section(Fig.2.8).This submicrofacies is a typical for open
marine of circulation conditions (Wilson,1975).

Fig 2.8: Orbitolina lime wackstone which can be observed in the L4 of the
Piramagron and Qarasard anticlines as well as in A-102 core interval,

Orbitolina has been described from the undolomitized horizons, in the type locality of
the formation by Dunnington (1958), and has been used as a stratigraphic tool. At the
same location, Qaradaghly (2007) recorded this fossil in the upper part of Sarmord

23
 Formation also which is assumed as transition zone in this study. The Orbitolina bed
is present both in the neritic zone and in the fore slope sediments (Henson, 1940
unpublished report). The same author mentioned that Orbitolina has been described
from Iran, Oman, Sudia Arabia, Syria and Lebanon. Orbitolina species have been
described from many localities of the Middle East and Tethys Sea and have been
considered an important fossil in the Early Cretaceous deposits in the region. Al-
Sharhan, (1995) has recorded Orbitolina-rich lime mudstone and wackstone in the
Middle Cretaceous rudist bearing carbonate in Arabian Gulf. These facies (rocks) are
interbedded with thin beds of buff to gray shale. According to Pittet, et al., (2002)
discoidal orbitolinids and calcareous algae were deposited during early transgression.

2.9.4 Peloidal packstone-grainstone microfacies

Peloids are structureless oval or spherical grains (0.2—2mm), but may be irregular
due to crystallization and dolomitization of micritic composition, which constitute
major components of this facies. In this facies some intraclasts, few milliolids and
echinoderms occur too (Fig.2.9).

Fig: 2.9 1: Peloidal Packstone – Grainstone microfacies, X20, P.L.

2: Peloidal lime packstone microfacies, peloids (P). X20, P.L.

The presence of this facies is limited within the lower part of the sections in the
Qamchuqa Formation, and in the transition zone with Sarmord Formation. The
peloidal packstone microfacies may be deposited in shallow warm waters with
moderate circulation (Wilson, 1975), possibly in lagoonal environment.

24
 2.9.5 Oolitic Packstone–Grainstone microfacies
The oolids in this study are characterized by presence of one or few thin laminae that
surround large nuclei tangentially, which belongs to superficial types and contains
some composite ooids that consist of more than one ooids (Fig.2.10), which are
encircled by the laminae. This facies is located in the top of L1 in the Halladin
section; It has a thickness of about 5m and is associated with pale green sandy marl.
This facies, laterally changes to pale yellow, crystallized and slightly dolomitized
limestone Obed and El-Hiyari (1986) have found in Cenomanian gypsum bearing
horizon in Jordan ooids which are nearly similar to those of Qamchuqa Formation.
The occurrence of superfacial ooids may provide a distinct delineation on
paleoenvironmental condition, which is closely associated with relatively low-energy
environments.

Figure 2.10: 1: Wackstone Submicrofacies, Milliolid (arrow), Textularia, X40, P. L.

2: Oolitic Packstone – Grainstone Submicrofacies, X20, P.L.

Oolids are smaller than oncolites (0.5-2mm) and the lamina are formed by chemical
precipitation of calcium carbonate. However, it is possible to be formed by process of
organic accretion as mentioned by Tucker (1991), within the possibility of
development of oolids by organic precipitation.
He called them micro-oncoids. Blomeier and Reijmer (1999) found ooids similar to
those of the present study; they called them tangential–structure ooids.

2.10Environment of Deposition
Although the studied area is represented less than 10% of the geographic distribution

25
of the formation, the studied facies are mostly new and gives strong evidences for the
depositional environment of the whole Arabian Platform. According to these facies
the rock body of the platform has been deposited in barrier reef with associated back
reef and fore reef. They alternated several time during Early Cretaceous (fig. 2.11).
The environment was relatively calm and warm with some current restriction Ameen,
(2008) for more detail l about this issue).

Figure 2.11: The studied outcrop sections which consist of four limestones (L) and
dolostone (D) successions (intervals).

2.11Reef Environment from outcrop

Seven evidences can be observed in the studied area that indicate that the platform is
consisted of a barrier reef instead of a ramp, as previously assigned by Al-Sadoony
(1978) and Al–Shakry (1977), Jassim and Goff (2008) and Bawa(2008).

26
Figure2.12: Depositional model for Arabian platform during Early Cretaceous (Green:
Qamchuqa Formation (Platform limestone and dolostone), Yellow: Balambo
Formation (Pelagite), White: Nahr Omer Formation (mainly siliclastics).

The first is alternation of thick limestone and dolomite successions. The vertical
facies change from limestone to dolomite rapid and the contact is relatively sharp.
This sudden change of facies is more common in reefal setting than in ramp because
there is more isolation between different parts (lagoon, core, sand flat and fore reef) of
the reef than ramp.
The sharp contact can be observed between miliolid and coral bearing successions in
Qamchuqa section and between dolostone and limestone successions in all section.
The second is that there are two thick limestone successions (L1 and L2) of reefal and
lagoonal limestone at the lower part of the formation.
The L1 is about 50m thick and consist of massive algal boundstone and coral
bufflestone which makes reefs core. Reijmer and Immenhauser (2005) have
mentioned that the coral-rudist-microbolite (algal) boundstone is related to episodes
of reef development at the platform margin (which is applicable for the studied area).
This thick succession of lagoonal facies is more suitable for reefal environment than
ramp since in the ramp, there is more sediment dispersal than reef and the vertical and
lateral facies change are more or less gradational.
The third is that the reefal environment is clear in Qamchuqa Formation from outcrop
and thin section study. In outcrop, all sections contain thick alternation of massive

27
limestone or dolomite. They consist of light grey coral, algal and stromatolitic
limestone with various types of rudist gastropods and pelecypods.
The fourth fact is that the cross sections that are drawn by Dunnington (1958) for the
north eastern Iraq during Lower Cretaceous show topographies that more resemble
reef than ramp (Fig.2.13). When the ramp considered on these topographies, it doesn’t
agree with facies distribution from the southwest toward the northeast.
If the platform was ramp, the deep facies must be in the northeast of the platform not
in the southwest or west. But the actual facies distribution is opposite. This is because,
the shallowest facies such as oolitic grainstone, stromatolite bounstone and rudist
rudstone are located in the extreme northeast near the border with Iran. When the
angle of the slope of the ramp is assumed to be 0.5 degree the depth of the water will
change from zero to 800m if the distance is about 100km (for example the distance
between Ranyia town and Kirkuk City(Fig. 2.13). This distance was longer during
Lower Cretaceous than present due to absence of shortening that is resulted from later
folding. But the actual depth estimation by facies shows no such change of depth from
southwest towards northwest and nearly a fixed depth along 100km distance can be
inferred from facies. To the north of Ranyia town and east of Qladiza town, the
relatively sudden facies change to pelagic limestone (Blambo Formation) can be
observed which passes through fore reef facies (bioclast grainstone and rudstone).
The fifth evidence is that, in all sections, there are no important terrigenous clastics.
Ameen (2008) and Bawa (2008) recorded a bed (about 15cm thick) of limestone that
contains disseminated quartz grains. These grains are angular and do not show any
sign of roundness (Fig.2.10). Therefore, the origin of these grains is not clear.
Qaradaghi, et al (2008) mentioned that quartz grains of Nahr Umr Formation (as
equivalent of Qamchuqa Formation) are sub-rounded to well round.
The sixth, the terrigenous source (Western Desert) of these grains is excluded but the
intraformational source is not excluded as reworked early authigenic quartz grain or
may be transported by wind.
The seventh fact is that when the ramp setting is considered, the boundary of the
Arabian Platform is not clear which is indicated in the fore reef area of Qamchuqa
(Mauddud or Shuaiba) Formation. In contrast to this, this boundary is not clear in case
of ramp setting since the boundary of the inner, mid and outer ramp is not indicated
previously. Rreigers and Hisu, (1986) not included ramp in the definition of a
platform and gave it separate definition.

28
Many authors mentioned or recorded patchy reef in the Qamchuqa Formation, among
them are Al-Sadoony (1978) and Al–Shakry (1977).
The attribution of the deposition of the Qamchuqa Formation to patchy reef is not
ascertained in the present study, due to two points.
The first one is the patchy reefs are commonly associated with terrigenous influx
which does not exist in Qamchuqa Formation, at least in the studied area. During
studying of the outcrops these patchy reefs were not recognized and could not be
missed because they are clear for their massiveness and resistance to erosion and
appear as mound. However, their occurrence is not excluded in the lagoonal or
forereef areas.

Fig. 2.13: Diagrammatic cross section of Iraq (NE-SW direction) during: A) Albian-
Cenomanian, and B) Valanginian–Aptian (Dunnington, 1958) show topographies that
better fit shelf (reef) than ramp. C) Calculation of depth (in the present study) when
the suggested ramp has the slope of 0.5 degrees. The depth is about 800m which doest
agree with existed observed facies.

29
Therefore, according to these observations it is clear that the platform was a reef not
as ramp as assigned previously, and the use of platform is more suitable than ramp.
When the term platform is used it means it may contain both ramp and shelf either
specially and temporally.
Rreigers and Hisu (op. cit) and (Bosence, 2005) mentioned that ramp and shelf are
interchangeable with time.
Therefore, a reef (barrier reef) model is drawn for the depositional environment and
topographic relief of the basin of Qamchuqa Formation. By this model the position of
nearly all facies are indicated in which the thick and massive dolomite successions are
located at the back reef and derived from dolomitization of sand flat(Fig.2.7).
According to the model, this flat consists of wide area behind the reef (between the
reef core and lagoon). The sediments, in this flat area, were porous bioclastic (mostly
high Mg) and were in contact with Mg-rich water of the lagoon for early
dolomitization when the wind and sea level changes was supportive for invasion of
lagoonal water. The dolomitization is aided by bioturbation organism, which may
have stirred the sediments several times and then enriching with high Mg lagoonal
water, during each stirring phase.
The prevalence of mudstone and dolostone lithofacies and occurrence of rare oolitic
and bioclastic grainstone reveal calm environment while it was winnowing for some
short interval time. In this connection, Einsele (2000) showed by diagram that
association of green algae, coral; and others are survived in wet tropical seas. These
fossils and lithofacies indicate that the environment of the lower part was consisted of
low–latitude circulated normal marine platform environment as typical algal and coral
reef is developed (Fig.2.12).
Toward the upper part thick and massive–bedded succession of dolomite increases,
this might be attributed to increase of temperature, salinity and isolation (relative
restriction). This may be related to the green house phenomena that prevailed during
Early Cretaceous (Barremian–Aptian) as mentioned by Friedrich (2003) and
Hillgärtner et al. (2003).
The former author added that the mid-Cretaceous (nearly coincide with deposition of
upper part of the Qamchuqa Formation) was the extremely warm while the Late
Cretaceous (Campanian–Maastrichtian) interval marks the onset of waning
greenhouse conditions. This warm condition and restricted circulation was favoured

30
by high evaporation and early dolomitization of the sediments in the upper part. In
this connection, (Millman and Muller, 1973, and Sartori, 1974, in Reading, 1991)
Mentioned that high Mg calcite precipitated during high-elevated temperature.
Evidence to the warmness of the climate during Albian–Cenomanian is the deposition
of the evaporite concurrently with deposition of upper part of Qamchuqa Formation in
the western Iraq as Jawan Formation (Buday, 1980, Dunnington, 1958 and Jassim and
Goff, 2006).

Fig 2.14 dolomitization models.

Another possible reason for occurrence of thick dolostone in the upper part is the
narrowing of the Southern Neo-Tethys in which Balambo and Qulqula Radiolarian
formations were depositing during Mid Cretaceous. The cause of narrowing is
attributed to the southwest advance of Iranian Plate (see Ameen, 2008) which led to
limited circulation and decrease of the tidal current in the southern Neo-Tethys. These
currents, are generated (now days) by gravitational interaction between earth and both
moon and sun.
The scarcity of large forams, except orbitolina, can be signal for the restricted and
some higher degree of salinity than normal marine water. According to Pittet, et al.,
(2002), orbitolinid beds and carbonates formed by microbolites and microencrusters

31
seem to be the shallow-water carbonate response to global changes, affecting Late
Barremian to Aptian palaeoclimate and palaeocean-ography. When one compare
between the rudists of Upper Cretaceous (Aqra Formation) with that of Qamchuqa
Formation, he realize the relative intolerable environment of the latter formation as
compared to the former one. The rudist of Aqra Formation gained sizes larger three
times than that of Qamchuqa Formation for same genus.
Prevailing wind has great role in accumulation of the bioclastic or lithoclastic
sediments in the backreef area and either supplying food (aiding growing of reef) or
increasing turbidity preventing reef growth. This is can be seen in both north-eastern
and south-western coastal area of the Arabian Gulf respectively now. As concerned to
the prevailing wind direction in the Qamchuqa basin it is possible that the nearly same
wind system (north easterly and south westerly winds) as the present was prevailing
during Early Cretaceous as topography and main water body were similar to present
time if the main water body was to the northeast during Early Cretaceous while the
topography was at southwest (western desert). But now this geography is reversed as
the main body of sea consist of Mediterranean and Arabian Gulf.

32
Fig 2.15 Environment of Deposition of upper Qamchuqa / Jawan formations.

33
 2

Fig2.16 core from upper Qamchuqa refers to:

1-interval C2 (1476.9 – 1486.12) shows saturation of the oil.
2- Shows solution collapse breccias (styllolithe) at depth (1478.2).

Fig2.17 different facies appears in A-96 core interval (1456 -1462).

34
Fig 2.18 oil show in the fracture planes well A-52

35
Fig 2.19 different stactures in anhydrite rocks in well A-52.

1 2

Fig 2.20 1: shows bioturbation in A- 96 interval (1478 -1483.87).

2: fracture plane at the same interval.

36
 CHAPTER THREE
Petrophysical analysis

3.1 Petrophysical interpretation process overview

The initial petrophysical interpretation consisted of a two-phase workflow. The first

interpretation phase consisted of calculating both the dry mineral volumes such as
calcite and dolomite and the total porosity using a matrix solution procedure. For a
full suite of lithology and porosity measurements (gamma ray, sonic, density, and
neutron) up to four mineral components plus porosity were calculated. If fewer
measurements were available, simpler lithology models were employed. Standard
lithology models were set up for the observed assemblages of rock types. For
example, models for the calcite-dolomite-anhydrite-porosity assemblage and the
dolomite-calcite-clay-porosity assemblage were set up. When available, core data
were used to check the interpretation model results and to adjust the model. The
second interpretation phase calculated the water saturation using the Archie water
saturation equation. After completion of this initial, two phase interpretation
procedure; the results were exported to the same common data set containing the
well log and core data.

37
 Figure 3: Petrophysical Workflow Overview
3.2 Matrix models for porosity and lithology calculation
The petrophysical interpretation process was a model driven process, which employed a
matrix solution technique. A simple, three-component setup is illustrated in (Table 3.1).

Table 3.1: Three–Component Matrix Setup with Four Log Inputs.

Log V 1st Matrix V 2nd Matrix V of 3rd Matrix

Value Value Value
response component componen component
of 1st of 2nd of 3rd
Component Component Component

RHOBO V lst. 27.15 V dolo 2.559 PHIT 1

DT V lst. 47.84 V dolo 43.48 PHIT 189
NPHI V lst. 0 V dolo 0.0249 PHIT 1
GR V lst. 11.2 V dolo 7.97 PHIT 0

This matrix is set up to solve for calcite (VLMST), dolomite (VDOLO), and water
(PHIT) and is an over determined case. There are response equations for the density
(RHOB) measurement, the sonic (DT) measurement, the neutron (NPHI) measurement,
and the gamma ray (GR) measurement. Once the system of equations is set up with the
matrix values for the selected mineral assemblages and the corresponding well log
measurements, the matrix is inverted to solve for the component volumes. These three
components could be solved for with as few as two well log measurement inputs since
the unity equation, the last line in the table, which requires all volumes to sum to 1, is
always part of the system of equations.
Systems of equations for any assemblage of minerals, such as the three component
system above, can be set up from a table of mineral values. There is no single,
consistent set of matrix responses published. The values shown in (Table 3.2) were
taken from the MULTIMIN module in the GEOLOG system.
Some comments about this table. This is a starting point. Shales typically contain
multiple clay mixtures. In order to keep the clay response component to a single entry,
mixtures were constructed by volume weighting the clay constituents. For example, a

38
50:50 mixture of illite and kaolinite would have the matrix responses: density 2.70,
neutron 0.35, sonic 85, and gamma ray 132.
The gamma ray responses especially are just starting values. Radioactive dolomites are
common, and in the rock column worked with here, the Jeribe interval always displayed
an elevated radioactivity response. Ad hoc adjustments were made based on the
observed well log responses.

Table 3.2: Mineral & Fluid Parameters for Lithology & Porosity Determination.

Mineral Volume Matrix Matrix Matrix Matrix

Name Name Density Neutron Sonic Gamma
Ray
Calcite VLMST 2.71 0.000 47.8 11
Dolomite VDOLO 2.85 0.025 43.5 8
Halite VSALT 2.04 -0.018 67.0 5
Anhydrite VANHY 2.98 -0.020 50.0 5
Illite VSH 2.78 0.250 85.0 160
Smectite VSH 2.63 0.220 85.0 168
Kaolinite VSH 2.62 0.450 85.0 104
Chlorite VSH 3.42 0.500 85.0 56

Fresh Water PHIT 1.00 1.000 189.0 0

This technique assumes that the linear, volume weighting of components in the
response equations is a valid model. The density response equation is truly a linear,
volume-weighted model and the modern neutron tools have near linear responses. A
linear model is not as accurate for the sonic and gamma ray responses. Additionally,
real rocks often contain more minerals than can be solved for with a limited number of
well log measurements. Therefore, these models must be set up to capture the most
abundant mineral volumes.
Fortunately, due to the large contrast between fluid and mineral properties, this
technique is a robust estimator of porosity even when the mineral model is deficient.
Additionally, the implementation of this technique has constraints such that only

39
positive values for volumes are allowed as solutions in order to keep the results
physically valid. Negative volumes are valid mathematically, but not physically. Within
these constraints, the solution is reached by minimizing an error function. This matrix
technique is commonly applied in mixed, carbonate – evaporate sequences and goes by
different names in different software packages.

3.3 Dry clay volume and clay porosity estimation

A key point to emphasize here is that these model setups are for matrix volumes or dry
mineral volumes, the solid mineral grain volume only. All liquids are shown in the fluid
volume named PHIT. If clay such as illite or kaolinite is one of the components, any
water distributed within the clay fraction as interparticle microporosity or intercalated
within the clay layers will appear in the fluid fraction, PHIT.
Therefore, estimating an “effective” porosity requires knowledge of porosity within the
clay fraction so that the water volume can be partitioned between that held by the clay
particles and that water in the antiparticle or intercrystalline porosity of the carbonate
fraction which is commonly referred to as effective porosity. No measurements of clay
fraction porosity were available for this data set. Clay porosity was estimated from
global databases; see figure (2.1), which shows that clay porosity can be expected to be
in the 20% to 25% range. A value of 25% was used to estimate effective porosity.

FK1 field discussion:

3.4 Basis for Archie saturation parameters M and Rw

Advanced core data analyses for FK1 cores were abundant enough to allow a study of
porosity versus the Archie cementation exponent m. The data and results are plotted
below.

40
Figure 3.1: Clay Content versus Porosity.

Archie m as a function of porosity is given as m=1.5727(porosity 0.0467). This study

showed that for the available data set, m decreased as porosity decreased. This m trend
impacted the saturation calculation by producing lower water saturation values at the
lower porosity values than if a constant value of the m parameter had been used, for
example a value such as 1.85 which is appropriate for porosity values in the mid-
thirties.
The net effect increased the hydrocarbon pore volume slightly in the low porosity range.

41
Figure 3.2: All Core Data Archie “m” versus Porosity.

Figure 3.3: Porosity versus Archie m Exponent.

42
3.5 Basis for FK1 temperature gradient
The gradient shown in the figure 3.3 is adequate for resistivity interpretation.
Formation water resistivity values are dependent upon formation temperature, but are
not so sensitive that an error of five to ten degrees Fahrenheit is critical.
This is fortunate, because the maximum-recorded temperatures listed in the well log
headers were of highly variable quality. Temperatures often were not listed.
In most cases, the same temperature was listed on each log run across the same depth
interval. Generally temperature is expected to increase on the second and third or fourth
log runs as the cooling effect of circulation diminishes. Then measurements of
temperature versus time since circulation stopped form the basis of extrapolating to true
formation temperature. This was not possible for this data set.

Figure 3.4: Representative Bottom Hole Temperatures versus Depth

43
3.6 Basis for clay mineralogy
Three conclusions are readily drawn from the above cross plot of potassium, POTA,
versus thorium, THOR, content. Illite is the dominant clay type. Mixtures of illite and
kaolinite do occur. The colouring of the data points by uranium content, URAN, shows
that the highest levels of uranium occur near the origin of the plot. The uranium is not
associated with increases in clay content. The data sets with spectral gamma ray
measurements indicate that the elevated gamma ray responses in the Jeribe Formation
and in the carbonate beds inter-bedded with anhydrite above the Jeribe are caused by
uranium, not clay content. Since most wells did not have spectral gamma ray
measurements, shale endpoints were adjusted as needed in the lithology models for
these intervals in order to prevent the uranium contribution from skewing the clay or
shale volume calculation.

Figure 3.5: Clay Mineral Identification from Spectral Gamma Ray Measurements*
*(Thorium THOR, Potassium POTA, and Uranium URAN).

3.7 Comments on pore types from sonic log response

44
Sonic responses in carbonates are sensitive to pore configuration or the presence of
vugs. This knowledge has been used for several decades as a way to estimate a
secondary porosity index, but the results have been mixed. The response can be
quantified for a specific reservoir rock type with a careful analysis of the amount of
touching vugs from thin section studies.
In the absence of specific knowledge about the pore system of a carbonate, only
qualitative inferences can be drawn about the nature of the pore system from the
observed sonic response. The basis of the inferences is a comparison of the observed
responses with that predicted by the Wyllie equation as given below.
Three basic, qualitative interferences can be made from comparing the observed sonic
porosity transforms with the Wyllie transform. With the axes arranged as in the
following plots, the three inferences are listed below.

PHIT = (DT – DTma) / (DTfl – DTma)

PHIT = porosity
DT = well log sonic transit time
DTma = transit time for matrix (47.8 for calcite)
DTfl = transit time for fluid (189 for fresh water)

• Rocks dominated by micro porosity, such as mudstones, plot above the Wyllie line.
Rocks dominated by intergranular or intercrystalline porosity, such as sucrosic
dolomites, plot on or near the Wyllie line.
• Rocks dominated by vuggy porosity plot below the Wyllie line.
This is especially pronounced in oomoldic pore systems because spherical pores
enhance the departure from the Wyllie line.

45
Figure 3.6: FK1, Sonic DT versus Core Porosity

46
 CHAPTER FOUR
Geophysical Interpretation

4.1 Summary
Fault framework has been interpreted from the 2-D seismic lines covering the field.
The field is a northwest-southeast trending, doubly plunging anticline, interpreted as
thrust faulted detachment fold; the south-western limb are faulted by dual (minor
offset) north-eastern dipping front thrust coupled with a single south-western dipping
back thrust. In addition, the FK1 structure shows north-eastern - south-western
oriented tear faults allowing differential movement occurred on separate and distinct
segments of the front and back thrust sheets.
One tear fault is interpreted to separate the northwest Daoud Dome from the
southeast Kithke dome.
The detachment level is a Paleozoic salt.

4.2 Introduction
FK1 oil and gas field is located in the north eastern sector of Iraq within the foothills
region of the northwest-southeast trending Zagros Fold and Thrust Belt the field have
been mapped previously as northwest-southeast trending doubly plunging anticline
manifested as classic four-way structural closures.
The Jeribe reservoirs of KF1 occur in Tertiary (Eocene age) carbonates, while
Qamchuqa reservoirs are carbonates of Albian age the Upper Qamchuqa reservoirs
carbonates are of Albian age: Figure 3.1.
2-D seismic interpretation, and subsequent time-to-depth conversion of the key
reservoirs within FK1 field has extended previous mapping to include associated fault
frameworks consisting of an imbricate front thrust and back thrust fault set within
each of the two structures; in addition, northeast-southwest trending tear faults are
present within the FK1 structure to accommodate differential fault movement on the
separate and loosely coupled lateral thrust sheet segments comprising the front and
back thrusts

47
Figure 4: Stratigraphic Chart.

48
4.3 (2D) Seismic interpretations
Phased 2-D seismic interpretations using sets of vintage seismic surveys revealed
differing levels of confidence attached to each survey’s geographical coordinates
(navigation). FK1 Q vintage 2-D seismic lines proved to carry reliable coordinates as
evidenced by minimal misties of seismic events and character at line intersections,
while FK1 A vintage lines showed varied accuracy in position, with several A lines
removed from the interpretation set due to large and inconsistent Misties with both Q
and other (A) lines (the remaining subset of the A survey was judged to carry reliable
navigation): lines removed are A-2, A-11A, and A-304C.
It was noted that line A-364C and line Q-364 both post at the same location on the
seismic base map. While they supposedly overlay each other, Figure 3.2 shows that
they are very different in their time structure and event arrival times. Furthermore, A-
364C shows no correlation with the adjacent dip lines (A-8, 10, 12) and will not tie
with strike Lines Q-19 and A-13.

Figure 4.1: Comparison of Seismic Lines Q-364 and A-364C.4

Figure 4.2 Comparison of seismic lines Q364 and A-364C, which are shown to post at
the same position on the seismic basemap. It is evident that they are not the same line
and therefore, were not included in the FK1 interpretation.

49
Line Q-364 also is inconsistent with adjacent lines, as it does not exhibit west rollover
as seen on adjacent dip lines A-10 and A-12. Once the actual location of these lines
can be determined, it would be prudent to include them in future interpretations. In the
meantime, both lines have been removed.
In general the set of X vintage 2-D seismic lines covering Jambur demonstrated
reliable ties at line intersections with the exception of X-30. In total, 24 2-D lines
(roughly 540 line kilometres) were used in the 2-D seismic interpretation of the FK1
reservoirs, while 17 2-D lines (310 line kilometres) were used on Jambur.
, 2-D seismic grids covering each structure were calibrated to well control using
synthetic seismograms.
datum, set at 200 meters above mean sea level (AMSL), from ground level using the
check-shots’ near surface velocity. The adjusted check-shots provided the preliminary
time-depth linkage from 2-D seismic travel time to formation tops within individual
wells; synthetic seismograms matched to actual seismic on nearby 2-D seismic lines
(fig4.3) firmed up the calibrations.
The resultant time structure maps are shown in: Figure 4.4: top Upper Qamchuqa –
FK1.
4.4 Time to depth conversion
Construction of time-to-depth conversion velocity (TDCV) volumes and maps for
KF1, required to convert the time structure maps interpreted from the individual
lattices of 2-D seismic lines covering the fields, into top reservoir depth structure
maps, followed the multi-step approach summarized in the ensuing text.
The first step involved deriving interval velocities and their associated time-depth
curves from matching synthetic seismograms computed for selected key wells of each
field tied into the 2-D seismic lattice covering the field.
Distance from available 2-D seismic lines as well as data quality issues such as noise,
steep time dip and a limited number of wells with sufficient footage of sonic and
density logs narrowed the choice of key wells to seven in KF1. This field specific key
well were used as a basis to assign time-depth curves to surrounding wells based on
distance criteria, as well as a loose conformance to time structure, e.g., a timedepth
curve attached to a down flank well on the southwestern limb would not be applied to
a well near the crest on the opposite limb.

50
Figure 4.2: FK1 – A-60 Well Tie to 2-D Seismic Line A-10.

51
Figure 4.3: TDCV Model for KF1 Field
Figure 4.4: TDCV model for KF1 field. This initial velocity model was constructed
from seven wells with timedepth curves and three seismic horizons: 1) near Lower
Fars, 2), near Jeribe, and 3) near Upper Qamchuqa.

52
Time-depth curves in the key wells and their surrounding surrogates were then fused
with the field’s time horizon grids (interpreted on the field’s 2-D seismic lattice) to
produce preliminary TDCV models which are subsequently used to assign time-depth
curves to the remaining wells within the fields (e.g., post well tops). Figure 35
displays the TDCV model for KF1.
The entire process of 2-D seismic interpretation, mapping of horizon specific
velocities, and assigning velocity trends outside of well control is bootstrapped
(iterated) until a technically sound TDCV model is built.

Trends extrapolated off-structure are derived using cross plots of assigned horizon
velocities versus two-way-travel time, and pseudo wells are sited into the area outside
of well control and assigned these extrapolated velocities.
The final velocity modeling step involves the amalgamation of interpreted seismic
time horizons and all available well control, i.e., with penetrations into a particular
reservoir. TDCV data appropriate to a given reservoir and field is derived at each well
and pseudo well location, subsea depth divided by the tops assigned two-way travel
time and mapped across the structure. Figure 40; contain the Upper Qamchuqa TDCV
map at KF1

4.5Depth Structure Mapping

Depth structure contour maps and fault frameworks for the Upper Qamchuqa oil and
gas reservoirs at FK1 have been mapped using lattices of vintage 2-D seismic data
tied to well control. Seismic interpretation of the FK1 lattice of 2-D seismic lines
produced maps of reservoir time structure with served a two-fold purpose: 1) in
alliance with well control (subsea depths to reservoir tops), provided travel-times to
reservoir tops and as such furnished the travel-time component necessary to construct
the TDCV model, 2) suitably multiplied by the TDCV map appropriate to the
reservoir horizon, to produce reservoir depth structure contour maps which honor well
control, as wells as structural trends away from well control. In like fashion, depth
structure contour maps have been produced for the Jeribe and Upper Qamchuqa oil
and gas reservoirs at Jambur. The seismic interpretation and depth conversion
methodology at Jambur is identical to the workflow summarized above for FK1.

53
Figure 4.4: TDCV Map – Top U. Qamchuqa O&G Reservoir – KF1

Figure 4.5: TDCV map of the top Upper Qamchuqa oil and gas reservoir for the KF1
field. This velocity map was constructed using well control (drilled and pseudo wells)
tied to the interpreted seismic time horizons (i.e., subsea depth of reservoir divided by
its one-way-time in seconds) and mapped across the structure.

54
Figure 4.5: FK1 – Top U. Qamchuqa Time Structure Interpreted.

55
 CHPTER FIVE
GEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION

5.1 FK1 Structure

FK1 Field is one of several elongated, asymmetrical, doubly plunging anticlines that
characterize the Foothills region of the Unstable Shelf Zone in eastern Iraq (Figure 5.1
modified from Buday, 1984).
The northwest-southeast trending structure measures 34 km long and 3.8 km wide. Bed
dips on the flanks are approximately 40 degrees while the noses plunge at
approximately 5 degrees.
Dipmeter data acquired on early wells show local dips in excess of 50 degrees that are
most likely associated with faults. The top of the structure is relatively flat with dips
less than 10 degrees noted.
Two individual domes separated by a shallow saddle make up the FK1 structure.
Kithke Dome is the larger and more prolific of the two domes.
It has a significant surface expression that is easy to see on remote sensing images
(Figure 5.2). Daoud Dome does not have a surface expression, is smaller, and less
prolific.
Consequently, it was not discovered and produced until several years after production
was established on Kithke Dome.
The two domes are physically separated by the Shahl Saddle. It is highly likely that the
Shahl Saddle is associated with a deep seated, axis-perpendicular, extension fault that
was reactivated and influential in the general structural development of FK1 during
Miocene compression and folding. It is also likely that the structure is still in
compression today.
Two distinctly different periods of tectonism are responsible for the creation of the
present day structure and resulting stratigraphy. Early pre-Tertiary rifting caused by
extension of the Arabian and Eurasian plates created a graben system of normal faults
and basement fault blocks that were covered with a thick succession of platform
carbonates.
The onset of compression in the early Tertiary resulted in the closing and shallowing of
the ancestral Cretaceous seaway.

56
This resulted in the deposition of fore-reef and reef associated carbonates and buildups.
Continued shortening during the Miocene resulted in the folding and thrusting that
ultimately created the present day structures of the Zagros Fold Belt including FK1.
It is likely that this event caused a breach in the late Cretaceous-Early Tertiary seals,
thereby allowing oil to migrate vertically into the lithifying Tertiary carbonate
reservoirs.
Sabkha evaporites and continental clastics finished filling what remained of the
ancestral foredeep thereby sealing the hydrocarbons in the anticline.
Defining fault patterns has proven difficult because of the types and vintages of data
available for interpretation.
Laboratory models and analog structures Exposed to similar tectonic forces
demonstrate frontal thrust faults associated with the folding episode.
These faults would not extend to the surface through the ductile evaporites and,
similarly, would sole out in the plastic shales of the Lower Cretaceous and Jurassic.
A relief fault or back thrust fault would be expected to develop and terminate against
the main front thrust faults. It, too, would not be expressed at the surface.
The older extension faults associated with Pre-Cretaceous rifting would be obliterated
post thrusting and may be redeveloped as scissor faults, thrust faults, or strike-slip
faults. The only set of faults confirmed by well data and seismic data are a set of
shallow thrust faults that extend from the surface and sole out in the evaporites of the
Transition Beds. These faults are not involved in reservoir development and production.
Another model-based set of faults assumed to exist are crestal graben extension faults
along the axis of the structure.
These faults are indirectly supported by the problems associated with drilling crestal
wells, e.g. mud loss. The FK1 structure appears to be filled to spillpoint and contains
both an oil leg and associated gas cap in the Tertiary.
There is no evidence of an original gas cap in the Cretaceous. Data suggests that the
two domes are in communication, therefore, the original oil-water contact is assumed to
be consistent between both domes, albeit tilted.

5.2 FK1 Stratigraphy

FK1 Field produces from two distinctly different reservoir sections. The prolific
Tertiary section is stratigraphically separated from the under-exploited Cretaceous
section by the outer neritic and basinal deposits of the Jaddala and Aaliji formations.

57
The ductile Jaddala and Aaliji formations can get up to 200 meters thick, thereby,
presenting an effective seal to vertical fluid flow out of the Cretaceous.
These formations, however, must have been breached at several times during their
burial history in order to allow hydrocarbons to migrate vertically from the Jurassic and
L. Cretaceous source beds to the Tertiary reservoirs.
It appears that they have also had the ability to quickly and effectively heal themselves.
The Tertiary fluids are ultimately trapped by the overlying, thick, evaporitic sections of
the Transition Beds. Seismic data (Figure 5.3) indicates that the Jeribe through L.
Qamchuqa formations are essentially conformable.
The tightly folded structure and the conformability of these strata results in a shrinking
reservoir area with depth. In other words, the L. Qamchuqa reservoir area is
significantly smaller than the Bajawan reservoir area as the fold structure tightens with
depth.
At some depth, however, a detachment surface must exist that serves as a glide plane
associated with the thrusting events that formed FK1.
Structural elements (hydrocarbon traps) below this detachment (paleozoic age) surface
may be very different from the typical FK1 traps.

5.3 CRETACEOUS STRATIGRAPHY

The Cretaceous stratigraphic section nomenclature it is divided into the Upper and
Lower Cretaceous units (Table 5.1). The Upper Cretaceous section consists of the outer
shelf, neritic limestones of the Shiranish, Mushorah, and Kometan formations. The
Lower Cretaceous, the most prolific non-Tertiary reservoir, consists of the Dokan,
Upper Qamchuqa (Mauddud), Jawan and Lower Qamchuqa (Shuaiba) formations. The
U. Qamchuqa and Jawan formations are near-reef deposits that include dolomitized
fore-reef and reef facies, as well as, back-reef dolomitized marlstones and evaporites.
The Upper Sarmord shales and mudstones separate the L. Qamchuqa from the Jawan
and U. Qamchuqa. The L. Qamchuqa (Shuaiba) is a minor producing reservoir in the
Lower Cretaceous section at FK1. The Yamama and Garagu limestone units complete
the lower Cretaceous section; neither has been shown to have economic value at FK1.
Thick Jurassic shales (probable source rocks) complete the section at FK1. Only one
well, the A-81, has been drilled deep enough to encounter the Jurassic. Grouping the
formations is done to be more efficient in building the static model.

58
Figure 5.1: Bai Hassan Field Location

59
Figure 5.1: FK1 Field Location

Fig5.2 Remote sensing image processed by K.A. Soofi, CoP Technology

60
 Figure 5.3: FK1 2-D seismic dip line Q-46A showing front thrusts and coupled back
thrust.
Orange reflector is Saliferous Beds; light green is top Jeribe; yellow is top U.
Qamchuqa (Mauddud); dark green is top L. Qamchuqa (Shuaiba); wells shown are A-
17, 13, 128.

The grouped formations are subsequently divided into several layers (Table 5.1) that
have all the details available from the wireline logs and final well reports. The grouping
of common formations or rock types is for convenience and simplicity. All
petrophysical details are preserved throughout the blocking and gridding processes.

Table 5.1: Cretaceous Section Nomenclature

Age Formations Static model layer

Upper Shiranish 1–6
Cretaceous Mushorah 7 – 26
Kometan
Lower Upper 27 – 31
Qamchuqa
Jawan 32 – 36
Lower 37 - 41
Qamchuqa

61
 5.3.1 Shiranish Formation
The Shiranish along with the Mushorah and Kometan formations appear to reflect a
period of relatively little change at FK1. All three formations are comprised of similar
neritic limestones and marlstones. Shiranish porosity from whole core plugs routinely
measures less than 10 percent and averages 4.2%. Porosity values distributed in the
static model range from 0% to 14.5% and have an average porosity value of 5.4%.
This is good agreement considering that the core is available on only three wells and
petrophysical data from wireline logs is available from ten wells. Low matrix
permeability values are consistent with the low porosity values. All whole core plug
permeability values were measured as 0.01 md. This is suspicious and may indicate:
(1) values too small to accurately measure, or (2) problems in the testing. Since the
permeability measurements for all porosities were 0.01 md, the model probably does
not accurately reflect the range of permeabilities.
The TVT thickness of the Shiranish ranges from 85 m (279 ft.) to 181 m (594 ft.) in
the static model; average thickness is 120.7 m (396 ft.).

5.3.2 Mushorah / Kometan Formation

For the purposes of this study, the Mushorah and Kometan formations are combined
and presented as the stratigraphic section from the top of the Mushorah to the top of
the Kometan shale.
The lithology of the Mushorah / Kometan is virtually indistinguishable from the
overlying Shiranish. A thin, shaly parting at the base of the Shiranish is used as a
guide in picking the top of the Mushorah. The base of this unit is easily identified by
the first occurrence of the continuous Kometan shale.
The TVT thickness of this formation varies from 175 m (574 ft.) to 523 m (1715 ft.) in
the model.
The average thickness is 316 m (1036 ft.). Several porosity and permeability
measurements were made on core plugs taken from wells drilled through the Mushorah
/ Kometan. Porosity values from 1% to 29% are noted in the core samples while
porosity values up to 22% are measured by wireline logs and ultimately distributed in
the static model. Most values, however, are less than 8 percent. Measured permeabilities

62
noted in the core plugs are generally low; however, some values were measured up to
62 md. These areas should provide acceptable, economic production rates.

5.3.3 Upper Qamchuqa (Mauddud)

The Lower Cretaceous, the most prolific non- Tertiary reservoir, consists of the Upper
Qamchuqa (Mauddud), Jawan, and Lower Qamchuqa formations. The Upper
Qamchuqa and Jawan formations are near-reef deposits that include dolomitized fore-
reef and reef facies, as well as, back reef marlstones and evaporites. The Upper
Qamchuqa, also known as Mauddud, is the target of most Cretaceous wells drilled to
date at FK1.

Figure5.4: Cretaceous Stratigraphic Column

An extensive library of core has been cut and analyzed from the Upper Qamchuqa.
A broad range of porosities from less than 1% to almost 36% suggests that the data set
contains multiple petrophysical facies.

63
The average of porosities across the structure is 11%. The average porosity captured in
the static model is 12.5 % and values distributed in the model range from 1% to 31%.
This suggests that the modeled distribution reasonably represents the observed core
values.
A permeability measurement from core plugs range from 0.01 md to 284 md with an
average value of 16.1 md. The thickness of the reservoir in the geomodel ranges from
26.5 m (87 ft.) to 73.5 m (241 ft.). This is consistent with the values furnished by the
NOC in the final well reports.

5.3.4 Jawan Formation

A facies change is noted in the Jawan formation as it Grades laterally from a primarily
non-reservoir dolostone / evaporite unit at Daoud dome to a dolomitized limestone
reservoir unit at Kithke dome. It is expected that the facies change should manifest itself
in the core data as different porosity permeability transforms.
In general, porosities are low for the Jawan. Only a couple samples exceed 5%
porosity, even though measurements range from less than 1% to 17%. Similarly,
permeability measurements from core plugs are quite low with only one sample shown
to be greater than 7.0 md. The TVT thickness of the Jawan formation in the model
ranged from 122 m (400 ft.) to 396.6 m (1301 ft.), however, within the outline of the
structure the maximum thickness values were 259 m (851 ft.). The Jawan formation
may be producing in some wells, but due to the typical completion practice of large
open-hole intervals that extend over multiple formations, production cannot be proven.

5.3.5 Lower Qamchuqa Formation

The Lower Qamchuqa, also known as the Shuaiba formation is the deepest producing
formation at FK1. For the purposes of this study, the Lower Qamchuqa is defined as
the stratigraphic section from the top of the L. Qamchuqa (Shuaiba) to the top of the
Chia Gara as picked in A-81. This is the only well exposed to the full section;
therefore, the thickness of this unit in the static model was made constant at 212.5 m
(697 ft.).
While it is comparatively thick, it has not been a prolific producer. Most of the
Cretaceous wells drilled at FK1 penetrated the top of the L. Qamchuqa; however, only
four wells have been completed in the interval. Abundant core data is available, albeit
from the top of the unit, to calculate a representative porosity-permeability transform.

64
Measured core porosity values ranges from 0.1% to 21%. Permeabilities measured in
the core plugs range from 0.01 md to 86 md. The distribution of porosity and
permeability becomes very interpretive and is directly attributable to the small amount
of wireline log data available for modeling.

5.4 FK1 fault model

The fault model applied to the FK1 geocellular model is developed from several data
sources. Sources include the final well reports, remote sensing images, and reprocessed
2D seismic data. The final well reports noted fault cuts encountered by the well bore.
These wells cut shallow faults; however, very few of the wells cut any of the faults
believed to be instrumental in the development of the asymmetric fold or faults relevant
to the productive reservoirs. Remote sensing images highlight surface features such as
fault scarps and lineaments that may or may not be related to fold development and, as
such, do not have a role in effecting the productive reservoirs. The larger, more
significant faults were observed on the reprocessed 2D seismic data. The resolution was
not adequate to image additional faulting associated with crestal graben collapse, as
well as, other features that are undoubtedly present. Placement of faults and their
throws, consequently, are strongly influenced using a model-based approach that
examines the fault patterns from analogous asymmetrical anticline structures created
under similar processes.
It is believed that the faults act primarily as a conduit in the Tertiary reservoir section
and may be more of a permeability barrier in parts of the Cretaceous section. As noted
earlier, the Tertiary “Main Limestone” is significantly thicker than the throw on any of
the faults. Limestone is grinding past limestone during faulting making a fault gouge
material composed solely of porous and permeable limestone. No ductile layers such
as shale are available to be incorporated into the gouge to provide a sealing agent.
Fluids, therefore, can likely find a pathway from one fault block to an adjacent block.
Faults in the Tertiary section may act as permeability baffles rather than barriers
allowing the reservoirs to equilibrate quickly.
The Cretaceous section is composed of more deep-water, fine-grained carbonate
oozes and shales. Incorporating these rock types into the fault gouge would result in
more effective barriers, therefore, reducing the lateral and vertical permeability to oil.
We see separate oil-water contacts in the upper producing Cretaceous section
(Shiranish, Mushorah), middle producing Cretaceous section (Upper Qamchuqa,

65
Dokan), and the lower Cretaceous (Lower Qamchuqa), whereas, the Jeribe, Bajawan,
and Baba combine to act as a single reservoir.
Five sets of faults have been included in the FK1 model. These are: (1) shallow
thrust faults, (2) leading edge thrust faults, (3) back thrust faults, (4) fold axis
perpendicular faults, and (5) crestal faults.

5.4.1shallow thrust faults are encountered by a large number of wells and are
expressed as thickened sections. Several of these faults manifest themselves as surface
lineaments that cut down-section through the upper Miocene formations and sole out
in the anhydrites and salts of the Transition Beds. These faults do not have a role in
describing the productive reservoirs or affecting Tertiary or Cretaceous production.

5.4.2 Leading edge thrust faults are picked on the 2D seismic sections. It appears
that these faults do not cut all the way to the surface; rather they terminate in the
ductile layers of the Transition Beds and Saliferous Beds. It is assumed that these
faults sole out as bedding plane faults in the Jurassic shales, although, it cannot be
imaged on seismic data. The geomodel does suggest that wells A 106, 108, 34, 115,
35, 20, 78, 111, and 112 might have cut the leading edge fault. The throw on these
faults is approximately 150 meters.

5.4.3back thrust faults are not readily apparent on seismic data and are, therefore,
model-based. They have been constructed to terminate against the leading edge thrust
faults and, like the leading edge faults, die out in the overlying Transition Beds and
Saliferous Beds. A number of wells are modeled to have cut the back thrust fault
including A 116, 14, 82, 70, 109, 21, 32, 79,117, 100, 137, 36. The model is built with
approximately 100 meters of throw on the back thrust faults, although, it is not
verified by seismic or well data.

5.4.4 fold-axis perpendicular faults exist that does not have a well-defined direction
of displacement or throw magnitude. Two seismic lines located off structure indicate
their existence. The placement of these faults across FK1, therefore, is linked to
surface expressions. The “river fault” is coincident with the trace of the Lesser Zeb
River, which takes an unusually straight path over the Qara Chauq, FK1, and Kirkuk
surface anticlines. A second fold axis perpendicular fault is placed in the Shahl Saddle

66
where the FK1 structure flexes and separates Kithke Dome from Daoud Dome. Both
of these faults are oriented northeast-southwest, which is parallel to the current day
maximum horizontal stress direction. They appear to be regional in scope and are
likely related to reactivation of older basement faults created during rifting along the
eastern margin of the Arabian plate.
The vertical throw varies from 150 meters to zero meters as the displacement
“scissors” along its trace.

5.4.5 Crestal faults are model-based features. The seismic data does not resolve these
faults; however, drilling experiences significant lost circulation problems in many of
the wells drilled on the crest. Folded structures like FK1 are typically associated with
stretching (extension) along the crest in response to fold propagation and fold growth.
Relaxation of the compressive stress results in a normal displacement of the strata and
opening of the fault network. The faults are typically non-regional and are confined to
the axial portions of the structure.

5.5 CRETACEOUS FLUID CONTACTS

Separate oil-water contacts have been interpreted for the upper Cretaceous and lower
Cretaceous sections (fig5.5).
The interpretation and analysis, consequently, relies on well tests, production histories,
and workovers to remediate water or gas incursion. Original contacts, the upper
Cretaceous original oil-water contact have been placed at -1417.7 m.
Wells A-41, 13, 102, and 16 either produced from the upper Cretaceous (Shiranish) or
had “good shows of oil” down to -1290.3 m. (MSL). The contact, therefore, is
bracketed between -1290 m MSL and -1453 m MSL by the well data. Dynamic
reservoir simulation which history matches the reservoir pressure, production
volumes, and occurrence of water through time in these key wells is used to refine the
range and predict the contact at -1417.7 m MSL. Well A-86 in Daoud dome, however,
does not record any oil shows in the Shiranish at -1235 m MSL, which does not
support the interpretation. Placing the original contact at -1417.7 m, consequently, is
an aggressive interpretation for Daoud dome and may lead to an over-estimation of
reserves at Daoud. Additional analyses are recommended to validate the data and
attempt to rectify this apparent contradiction.

67
There is no data available to suggest that oil should not be present all the way to the
crest of the structure at -910 m. (MSL).
The original oil-water contact in the Cretaceous U. Qamchuqa has been interpreted at -
1905.5 m. Key wells used to constrain the contact include A-14, 23, and 54. Similarly,
wells A-54 and 138 are useful in monitoring fluid movement because of when they
were drilled AND when workovers were undertaken to mitigate water influx. Well A-
14 establishes a HKW at -2414 m.

Fig 5.5 shows fluid contacts

68
Well A-23 encountered heavy oil through the Upper Qamchuqa section that permits
placing a “low known oil” (LKO) at -1983 m. This section, however, was never
produced or tested. Well A-54 showed oil down to -1779.1 m.
As late as 1980 when it was completed in the U. Qamchuqa. The contact, therefore, is
bracketed between -1779 m and -2414 m. An original oil-water contact located at -
1905.5 m. is a compromise that includes all of the known production down to -1779 m
plus some portion of the “heavy oil” column. A critical workover was performed on
A-54 to plug back the middle Cretaceous to -1746.1 m. in 1996 to avoid water
production. Cretaceous wells drilled after the workover in 1996 did not drill deep
enough to challenge the validity of the possible oil-water contact depth of -1746.1 m.
In 2002, the A-138 well tested the Cretaceous down to -1782.5 m., which should be in
the oil column. The well, completed as a producer, has not yet been put on production.
Results from this well are critical to monitoring the movement of the U. Qamchuqa
contact.
Oil is believed to fill the structure to the top of the U. Qamchuqa at -1247.4 m.The L.
Qamchuqa original oil-water contact was placed at -1992 m. Wells A- 23, 16 and 54
encountered water and established a “high known water” (HKW) at -2032 m. A drill
stem test was performed on the A-13 that “tested water” at -1860 m., Wells A-52, 70,
86, 90, and 96 encountered oil with a LKO established by A-86 at -1962 m, therefore
bracketing the contact within a 70-meter range between -1962 m and -2032 m.

69
 CHAPTER SIX

GEOLOGICAL MODELING
Geocellular models are created for many reasons include data integration and 3D
visualization, calculating volumetrics, uncertainty analysis, and reservoir simulation well
planning. A principal objective for building models at FK1 was to integrate the geological,
geophysical and reservoir data collected over several decades in order to visualize and
evaluate the interactions between these data using full-field reservoir simulation. In
addition, oil and gas volumes in both the Tertiary and Cretaceous reservoirs were to be
determined using available field data. a static geocellular model is comprised of many
individual parts as noted in Figure 6.1.
The finished product of that static model becomes the input in the dynamic modeling
process. This static model is only as good as the individual components that go into
constructing the model.

OOIP from Structure and Volumetric Major Facies Fracture

Mat Bal Stratigraphy OOIP fault determina model
mapping tion

Figure 6.1: The modeling building process is comprised of a static portion

(geocellular model)

In other words, uncertainty in the fault patterns or fracture model directly impacts
the accuracy of the static model and consequently, the reliability of well production
history matching and production forecasting. The following sections will describe
building the model’s framework and populating the model with reservoir character
data.

6.1 Structural & Stratigraphic Framework

The structural framework is created from 2D structure maps constructed from

horizon tops picked off wireline logs and a seismic interpretation, a fault model and

70
well bore trajectories. Figure 6.3 is structure map generated on the top of the Upper
Qamchuqa (Mauddud) formation as L. Cretaceous. The map was constructed using all
available well picks from the Final Well Reports and the 2D seismic data volume.
Similarly, the seismic data was used to develop the fault model. The basic shape of
the FK1 structure is dictated by two sub-parallel leading-edge thrust faults and a
single back thrust fault that terminates against the leading-edge faults. The leading-
edge faults, subsequently, sole out as bedding plane faults below the depth of well
coverage. Well bore trajectories were loaded from XY location information and
available directional surveys.

The FK1 structural model (see Figure 6.3) is composed of data from multiple sources.
These sources included seismic data, well data including petrophysical interpretations,
and outcrop analysis using remote sensing images. One interpreted seismic horizons,
namely U. Qamchuqa, is used as the basis for the stratigraphic framework fig(6.4).
The newly created surface is then tied to the faults at the intersection points and tied
to the well data.
6.2 Gridding
The Cretaceous model contains 198,000 cells in 161 rows, 30 columns and 41 layers.
Petrophysical and lithological properties were distributed and modeling performed on
these grids fig (6.2).
Some cells were made inactive using porosity and lithology cutoffs of one –percent
Porosity and fifty-percent shale. No up-scaling was necessary in the final export to the
simulator.

Fig 6.2 Grid Geometry & Horizontal Resolution

71
Figure 6.3: Cretaceous Geocellular Model shows 2D seismic interpretation of fault
pattern with a pair of leading edge thrust faults & a single backthrust fault continuing
the entire structure’s length. The structure is further cut by two axis-perpendicular
faults that separates FK1 into three domes: Daoud, North Kithke and South Kithke.

72
Figure 6.4: Top U. Qamchuqa Structure Map Depth structure map on Top Upper
Qamchuqa (Mauddud) interpreted from 2D seismic data and well data. This map is a
key interpreted horizon used in building the 3D static geocellular model.

73
 6.3 Generating 3d modeling grids

The 3D grid is the basic cellular framework that contains the reservoir property
information used in modeling. The grid design is based on the interpreted structural
and stratigraphic framework that reflects the geology of the area. Two-dimensional
surfaces used in building the framework are combined to construct 3D zones or
subgrids. Between every two surfaces is a rock volume that represents the
stratigraphic interpretations of that subgrid. The summation of all zones or subgrids
defines the total rock volume of the structure. The FK1 Tertiary model has four
subgrids; the Cretaceous model utilizes 5 subgrids. The rock volume will become
more important once hydrocarbon contact information is added to the model.

Each subgrid is further divided into smaller units or cells. All geological and
petrophysical information is contained in the cell. The size of the cells is designed to
capture the degree of reservoir heterogeneity, in other words, to model the smallest
resolvable feature. Cell size, therefore, is a compromise between capturing the
heterogeneity of the subgrid and the amount of time required to run the simulation;
e.g. the more cells, the finer the detail that can be modeled, the longer it takes to run a
simulation. This is necessary for both the spatial heterogeneity (map view), as well as,
the vertical heterogeneity (crosssection).

6.4 Grid layout

Grid layout refers to the orientation and geometry of the grid. The full field model is
built using the gridding tool in the Roxar RMS modeling program. The tool permits
the user to orient the grid 38.56° northwest-southeast to align with the FK1 structure
and its leading-edge thrust faults and back thrust faults. The grid is then regularized
along faults to maintain cell orthogonality while preserving the pore volume.

6.5 Horizontal Resolution

Horizontal resolution is defined by the length and width of the cell and is annotated as
the number of rows and columns that occupy the reservoir area. Ideally, the cells in
this coarse-gridded model were pre-determined to be 200 m by 200 m.

74
 Table 6.1: Grid Layout

MODEL X - DIRECTION Y - DIRECTION

AVG. MIN. MAX. AVG. MIN. MAX.

SIZE(m) SIZE(m) SIZE(m) SIZE(m) SIZE(m) SIZE(m)

CERTACEOUS 222 48 464 200 144 259

The presence of fault cuts, depth taper, and irregularly shaped objects, however, cause
the cell size to vary from the original design. Table 6.2 shows the cell size statistics
for Cretaceous model. The Cretaceous grid was trimmed back to 160 rows by 30
columns. Figure 6.5 shows the horizontal layout in the FK1 model.

Table 6.2: Cell Sizes in Static Model

MODEL X - DIRECTION Y - DIRECTION

AVG. MIN. MAX. AVG. MIN. MAX.

SIZE(m) SIZE(m) SIZE(m) SIZE(m) SIZE(m) SIZE(m)

CERTACEOUS 222 48 464 200 144 259

6.6 Vertical Resolution

Vertical resolution refers to the thickness of the cells created by layering. The layering
in the FK1 model is defined by an assigned number of conformable layers within each
subgrid. As the thickness of the subgrid changes laterally, so does the thickness of the
layers. Ideally, the numbers of layers assigned to a subgrid is calculated to create cells
that articulate the finest bedding features or bodies. Table 6.3 shows the range of
values and average layer thickness for each zone. As a result, the Cretaceous model
has 41 layers. Figure 6.6 show the vertical layout in the Cretaceous models.

6.7 Property modeling

Reservoir properties are distributed within the 3D gridded volume. The primary data
sources for property modeling are well data and a facies model. The well data are the
source of the cell-based properties used to define the formation heterogeneity. The
process of converting and upscaling well data for use in a static geocellular models is

75
called well blocking. The facies model is created to capture large-scale changes in the
heterogeneity of the reservoir, i.e. lateral facies changes. Using the well data and a
facies model as inputs, petrophysical properties of the reservoir, such as porosity,
permeability, and rock type, is distributed throughout the reservoir to coincide with
the lateral lithologic / facies changes. Distribution of these properties based on facies
is referred to as petrophysical modeling.

Table 6.3: Layer Thickness in Static Model

ISOCH THICKNESS RANGE

ZONE
MIN. MAX. AVG NO.OF LAYER
LAYERS THICKNESS
THICKNESS THICKNESS
(m)
(m)
(m) (m)

SHIRANISH 85.1 181.0 120.8 6 20.1

MUSHORAH/ 174.9 523.0 315.9 20 15.8

KOMETAN
U. 26.5 73.5 5 9.9
QAMCHUQA

JAWAN 122.0 396.8 204.8 5 41.0

L. 212.5 212.5 212.5 5 42.5

QAMCHUQA

76
 Figure 6.5: Cretaceous Model Vertical Layering

6.8 Well data input (well blocking)

Porosity, permeability and rock properties observed from cuttings, cores, and wireline
logs are the key inputs in generating a description of the reservoir. The well data
obtained from these methods, measured in centimetres and meters, need to be re-
scaled to the resolution of the 3D grid layout, which is measured in tens to hundreds
of meters.
Each grid cell intersected by the wellbore is assigned an average value of all the
measured values obtained within that cell’s thickness. In the example shown in
figure4.1.1, the assigned blocked PHIE value for that cell in that layer is 0.155 while
the measured values from logs in that cell range from 0.094 to 0.259. The blocked
well values, instead of the raw log values, are used in petrophysical modeling and
retained in the final model. Typical properties measured and upscaled include porosity
and permeability. FK1 had some log 17 Cretaceous wells to block and include in the

77
petrophysical modeling. The log properties that were modeled are described in Figure
6.6.
6.9 Facies modeling

A facies model is created to convert the geological interpretation of depositional

environments into a discrete numerical model. The facies model is used as a guide in
distributing rock properties across the structure. Variations of rock types are less
within the same facies than between facies, therefore, using a facies model will ensure
a more representative distribution of reservoir heterogeneity. It was determined that a
facies model was not required to accurately distribute and represent the lithologies.
Reasons for this decision include: (1) the vast amount of lithologic data obtained from
well descriptions; (2) the excellent data coverage across the structure particularly in
the Tertiary; and, (3) that the structural tops picked by the Iraqi geoscientists are tied
directly to paleontologic occurrences and lithologies. The structural picks, by
definition, are facies picks. Mapping of the structural picks, consequently, are aligned
with facies distributions. FK1 formations include lagoonal / back-reef, reef, neritic,
semi-basinal and basinal facies.

6.10 Petrophysical modeling

Petrophysical modeling produces a set of cell-based 3D parameters that represent the

reservoir properties in the gridded model. The modeling process is based on
geostatistical analysis of the well data (inputs). It is subsequently influenced by facies
descriptions and further conditioned by field observations (e.g., structural trends,
permeability trends, etc.).

A three-dimensional display for each petrophysical parameter is generated by the

program from the two-dimensional data points. A stochastic, pixel-based approach is
used that randomly distributes the data across the area-of-interest. The random
distribution is controlled by the input geostatistics so that the output 3D picture has
the same “look” as the input 2D data.

Data trends and data distribution (histograms) are obtained from the well logs. Simple
transformation sequences using normally distributed data are established for each
petrophysical property and each layer. The only exception is the permeability

78
parameter, which has a logarithmic transformation added to the sequence. Variograms
are subsequently calculated to describe the spatial relationship between parameters.
The well logs provide the means to derive vertical variograms;
The well control is used to derive the lateral variogram. The variogram model type,
range and anisotropy are adjusted to generate a result that most replicates the
observed trends. Figure 6.6 shows this workflow for a single parameter. Results are
exported as arrays of numbers each representing a single reservoir property.

Figure 6.6: Petrophysical modeling workflow using the porosity parameter as an

example. Note that the histograms for the raw porosity data, blocked well data, and
the histogram analysis of the porosity map (grid) are very similar. This quality check
technique compares the input raw well data against the finished result. The same
workflow is used in distributing lithologies.

79
 1- Porosity

There are two types of porosity logs displayed in the model data queue; namely, PHIT
(total porosity) and PHIE (effective porosity). Total porosity, PHIT, is determined
directly from wireline log observations (sonic, density, neutron). Effective porosity,
PHIE, is created using reservoir flag logs as the bias logs. The effective porosity log
preserves the porosity values from reservoir quality rock, like dolomite and limestone,
by filtering out porosity values from non-reservoir rock, like shale (clay), anhydrite
and salt.
This becomes important when blocking wells that may have high porosity streaks due
to shales or some other non-reservoir rock type. The Cretaceous section, however, has
a greater amount of non-reservoir quality rock mixed in the section; therefore, PHIT is
optimistically high compared to PHIE. Effective porosity, PHIE, has the high
porosity, non-reservoir shale values removed from well blocking and is the preferred
porosity value distributed in the FK1 models.

2- NTG (NET-TO-GROSS)
A significant benefit in using 3D dynamic models over the older, traditional “cutoff
method” in calculating net reservoir and in-situ hydrocarbon volumes is the ability to
use all of the data and not rely on arbitrary porosity, permeability, and water
saturation cutoffs to sort out good reservoir from bad reservoir. In other words,
modeling allows the simulator to evaluate all the data and determine good rock from
bad rock. The result is a better representation of the field’s hydrocarbon potential,
which in turn, allows for better decision-making on the application of new
technologies and capital to recover reserves. This can be particularly critical in
reservoirs / fields that rely on an effective fracture network to produce. It is common
that low porosity reservoir rock with a highly efficient fracture network provide
excellent producers. Applying artificial cut-offs removes this reservoir rock. This in
turn leads to inaccurate pore volume calculations, apparent over-produced reservoirs,
and pessimistic estimated ultimate recoveries (EUR).

Small porosity cutoffs may be used, however, to reduce the number of active cells in a
large model for simulation runs as long as it does not impact the hydrocarbon pore
volume. This is done only to reduce run times and optimize the reservoir simulation.
The FK1 Cretaceous model, consequently, used a 1% porosity cutoff.

80
 3- Permeability
Permeability is not directly measured in wells and, as such, requires an indirect
method for populating the static geomodel. Permeability, consequently, is calculated
from porosity data using simple equations derived from porosity-permeability
measurements made on well core plugs. A single, unique poroperm transform is
calculated for each stratigraphic formation. This method is made possible because of
the large number of whole cores cut and thoroughly analyzed during FK1 field
delineation and development. While it is routine that cores are cut in major reservoirs,
Core plug porosity and permeability data was sorted and graphed by formation. A
“best-fit” line was calculated that relates a measured porosity value to a measured
permeability value.
Figure 6.7 through Figure 6.1 show these plots for each horizon. Each grid cell with a
porosity value is then populated with a permeability value calculated from the
porosity-permeability transform equation unique to its formation. The transformations
are performed at the layer (horizon) level to preserve the relationship between the
effective porosity (PHIE) trends and the influence of lithology.

Table 6.4: Comparison of Measured & Modeled Perms

core STATIC MODEL

SUBGRID
ΦRANGE ΦAVG KRANGE KAVG. ΦRANGE ΦAVG. KRANGE KAVG.

(fract) (fract) (md) (md) (fract) (fract) (md) (md)

SHIRANISH 0.01 - 0.1 0.04 0.01 - 0.15 0.06 0.01 0.01

No data
No data

MUSHORAH/ 0.01 - 0.29 0.10 0.01 - 62 1.2 0.01 - 0.22 0.04 0.01 - 2.7 0.06

KOMETAN
U. QAMCHUQA 0.01 - 0.36 0.11 0.01-284 16.1 0.02 - 0.31 0.13 0.02 - 482 6.3

JAWAN 0.01 - 0.17 0.02 0.01 - 16 0.21 0.01 - 0.13 0.04 0.01 - 7.0 0.3

L. QAMCHUQA 0.01 - 0.21 0.07 0.01 - 86 1.6 0.01 - 0.14 0.03 0.01 - 2.1 0.1

81
 4- Lithology

Four reservoir rock types are calculated during the petrophysical analysis from
electric log data, namely, shale (VSH), limestone (VLMST), dolomite (VDOLO), and
anhydrite (VANHY). The petrophysical workflow and calculations are described in
greater detail in the petrophysical section of this report. The lithology logs created
from these curves is loaded as raw curves into RMS. Well blocking and petrophysical
modeling similar to the procedures used to upscale and distribute the porosity curves
is applied to each of the newly created lithology curves. Dolomite is brittle and,
therefore, enhances fracture development, whereas, layers with high volumes of
ductile shale or anhydrite reduce the fracture density of a cell.
SHIRANISH

Figure 6.7: Poro-Perm Transform – Shiranish Formation.

Shiranish: All whole core plug permeability values were measured as 0.01 md. This is
suspicious and may be an indication of either: (1) rock that is so tight that the values
are too small to accurately measure or (2) problems in the testing procedure. Since the
permeability measurements for all porosities were 0.01 md, the model probably does
not accurately reflect the range of permeabilities.

82
MUSHORAH / KOMETAN

Figure 6.8: Poro-Perm Transform – Mushorah Formation

Mushorah / Kometan: The permeability values calculated from the poro-perm

transform and, subsequently distributed in the static model range from 0.01 md to 2.8
md. The plot shows that some low porosity-hi permeability rocks are present (red
oval) and not adequately captured in the simple transform. The inability of the
transform to capture this trend may be explained by the presence of more than one
facies in the rock samples.

UPPER QAMCHUQA (MAUDDUD)

Upper Qamchuqa (Mauddud): The data table shows that the range of permeability
values between the core data and the modeled data are in fairly good agreement. The
core data ranges from 0.01 md to 481 md while the data distributed in the model
ranges from 0.01 md to almost 300 md using the transform function. The wide range
of values at any single porosity value or permeability value, however, suggests more
than one petrophysical facies is contained in the data set. Average permeabilities are
16.1 md and 6.3 md from core plug measurements and the static model, respectively.

83
 Figure 6.9: Poro-Perm Transform – U. Qamchuqa Formation

JAWAN

Figure 6.10: Poro-Perm Transform – Jawan Formation

Jawan: The facies change in the Jawan formation creates a need for two different
transform functions in order to allow for lithologic differences. Application of the

84
transform, consequently, was dependent on the lithology. Any cell that contained
anhydrite used the “low perm” transform. Similarly, the “high perm” transform was
applied to cells without anhydrite, which typically occurred on Kithke dome.

LOWER QAMCHUQA

Figure 6.11: Poro-Perm Transform – L. Qamchuqa Formation

L. Qamchuqa (Shuaiba): Most of the wells drilled into the Cretaceous penetrated the
top of the L. Qamchuqa; however, only four wells have been completed in the
interval. Abundant core data is available, albeit from the top of the unit, to calculate a
representative porosity-permeability transform. The scatter around the poro-perm
trendline, once again, illustrates the existence of multiple petrophysical facies. The
simple transform created from the core data, consequently, does not effectively
capture the high-end permeabilities in the static model. Permeabilities measured in the
core range from 0.01 md to 86 md.

85
Figure 6.12: Interpreted Lithology Log – A-125 Interpreted lithology log for well A-
125 (on left) showing the volumes of the rock types calculated from the petrophysical
evaluation.

86
 Chapter 7
Conclusion & recommendation

Conclusions & Recommendation:

7.1 Sedimentological study:

1-The low energy (lagoonal) facies of the Early Cretaceous Arabian platform are
miliolid–bioclast mudstones, stromatolite sheetstone (or boundstone).
2- The high energy reefal facies includes ooid packstones to grainstone and pelloidal
packstone to grainstone, Rudstone microfacies, coral pillarstone and floatstone.
3- Oncoids lithofacies (ballstone), rudist pillarstone, Orbitolina bearing lithofacies,
chert bearing lithofacies and Peloid wackstone to packstone are deposited in deposited
in intermediate energy environment which typified by more or less agitation.
4-The most abundant lithofacies is dolostone which most possible deposited on the
sand flat directly behind the reef body.
5-These facies indicates the most north-western boundary of the Arabian Platform
during Early Cretaceous.
6- The environment was consisted of barrier reef with associated fore and back reef
(lagoon) environment which was relatively calm and warm with more or less
restriction in circulation.
7-The Formation was deposited in reef, forereef and back reef environments. The reef
was barrier reef.
8-The environment of the Qamchuqa Formation was relatively quiet and warm with
short interval of agitation.
9-The upper part of the formation shows more restriction of the circulation than lower
part.
10-The reef body consists of reef builders such as coral, rudist, algae and stromatolite.
11-The environment was changing in response to sea level change and tectonic
subsidence and uplift.

87
7.2 Reservoir modelling:

1. The preparatory work for the petrophysical analysis created a digital database of
well logs suitable for on-going studies.
2. Application of a matrix inversion technique to solve for porosity and mineralogy
worked well. Probable clay mineralogy was identified from a plot of spectral
gamma ray data.
3. The sonic response of the reservoirs indicates that secondary or vuggy porosity
is significant in the Cretaceous reservoirs.
4. The Archie parameters for calculating water saturation are defined or
constrained enough to produce high quality water saturation estimates. Core data
permitted the Archie cementation exponent, m, to be expressed as a function of
porosity.
5. The phenomenon of the cementation exponent m decreasing as porosity
decreases has been noted before in Middle Eastern carbonates. This constraint
on m values in turn constrained or reduced the uncertainty of the estimate of
formation water resistivity from Pickett plots. The saturation exponent, n, was
not similarly defined by core data. Formation temperatures from borehole
records were less than ideal, but still good enough.
6. The completed geocellular model or static model becomes the input model for
reservoir simulation.
7. The geomodel, which includes the reservoir properties as well as the structural
geometry, can export as an ASCII file in GRDECL format.
8. Exported properties include porosity, matrix permeability, Vdolomite,
Vlimestone, Vshale, Vanhydrite, and the X-Y grid origin.
9. Depth structure contour maps and fault frameworks for the Upper Qamchuqa
at FK1 have been mapped using lattices of vintage 2-D seismic data tied to
well control.
10. Seismic interpretation of the FK1 lattice of 2-D seismic lines produced maps
of reservoir time structure.
11. The study proved more than one fault system in the study area.

88
Recommendation:

1. These kinds of study should apply on all the other hydrocarbon fields in
northern Iraq.
2. Most dolomitize zone in the field has good porosity and permeability should
be the future locations for the drill wells.
3. My strong recommendation for the managements of North Oil Company is
going through the contract of baying the modeling software’s systems instead
of using the license system; this will provide the use of the software to most
reservoir engineers’ department staff to go forward in modeling processes.
4. Make 3D seismic survey in all North Oil Company area to have clearer look
of subsurface of the fields, also to go deeper to predict older age potential
(Palaeozoic).

89
 References:

• Al-Sadooni,F., 1978. The sedimentology and petroleum prospects of the

Qamchuqa Group from Kirkuk, Bai Hassan and Jambur oil fields. Un. pub. Ph.
D. thesis Unv. of Bristel, 367p.
• Al-Shakiry, A. J., 1977. The petrology of part of the Qamchuqa Formation in
Jambur oil field –Iraq. Un.pub.Ms.C.thesis Unv. of Baghdad, 155p.
• Ameen, B.M., 2008. Lithostratigraphy and Sedimentology of Qamchuqa
Formation from Kurdistan Region, NE−Iraq. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis.
University Of Sulaimani, 147p.
• Abawi, T. S., and Hammondi, R. A., 2006. Foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the
Turonian – Early Campanian depositional subcycle from selected oil wells in
Iraq, Anuario do instituto Geociencias Jour. Earth Sci., Vol.29, p.651.
• Bakhtiar Mohamad Ameen, Kamal Haji Karim
Depositional environment of early Cretaceous arabian platform: an example from
kurdistan region, NE-Iraq
Department of Geology, college of science, University of Sulaimani. Sulaimani-
Iraq
Published in: Proceeding of 3rd scientific conference of the College of Science,
University of Baghdad. 24 to 26 March 2009.

• Bawa, R.M. A. 2008. Diagenesis and Geochemistry of Qamchuqa, Dokan, and

Kometan Formations from selected sections in Kurdistan Region, NE Iraq.
Unpolished MSc Thesis, Unversty of Sulaimani, pp.142.
• Bellen, R. C. Van, Dunnington, H. V., Wetzel, R. and Morton, D., 1959. Lexique
Stratigraphique, Interntional. Asie, Iraq, vol. 3c. 10a, 333 p.
• Brigitte Doligez, Sylvain Boyer, and Anne Jardin: Reservoir Characterization
and Modelling, PETREL Exercises basic geostatistics Alwyn field model.

• Borai, A. M.: A New Correlation for the Cementation Factor in Low-Porosity

Carbonates,” paper SPE 14401, SPE Formation Evaluation (1987) Vol. 2, No. 4,
pp. 495 – 499.

90
• Buday, T., 1980. Regional Geology of Iraq: Vol. 1, Stratigraphy: I.I.M Kassab
and S.Z. Jassim (Eds) D. G. Geol. Surv. Min. Invest. Publ. 445p.
• Buday, T. and Jassim, S.Z., 1987. The Regional geology of Iraq: Tectonism,
Magmatism, and Metamorphism. I.I. Kassab and M.J. Abbas (Eds), Baghdad,
445 p.
• Dunnington, H. V., 1958. Generation Migration and Dissipation of Oil in
Northern Iraq. Arabian Gulf, Geology and Productivity. AAPG, Foreign Reprint
Series No. 2.
Einsele, G., 2000. Sedimentary Basin, Evolution, Facies and Sediment Budget.
Springer-Verlag Berlin,790 p.
• Holtz, M. G., and Major, R. P.: “Petrophysical Characterization of Permian
Shallow-Water Dolostone,” paper SPE 75214 presented at the 2002 SPE / DOE
Improved Oil Recovery Symposium.
• Jassim, S.Z. and Goff, J. C. 2006. Geology of Iraq. Published by Dolin, Prague
and Moravian Museum, Berno. 341p.
• Kamal H. Karim* and Zardasht A. Taha*
Tectonical history of Arabian platform during late Cretaceous: an example from
Kurdistan region, NE-Iraq
*University of Sulaimani, Department of Geology
Published in : Iranian Journal of Earth Sciences, 2009
• Karim, K.H. 2004. Basin analysis of Tanjero Formation in Sulaimanyia area, NE-
Iraq, Ph.D. thesis, University of Sulaimaniyai, 135 p.
• Karim, K.H., and Surdashy, A. M. 2005a. Paleocurrent analysis of Upper
Cretaceous Foreland basin a case study for Tanjero Formation in Sulaimanyia
area, NE-Iraq, 2005, Iraqi Journal of Earth Science,Vol.5, No.pp.30-44.
• Karim, K.H., and Surdashy, A. M. 2005b. Tectonic and depositional history of
Upper Cretaceous Tanjero Formation in Sulaimanyia area, NE-Iraq, Journal of
Zankoi Sulaimani,Vol.8. No.1.p.47-62.
• Karim, K.H., Surdashy, A.M. and Al-Barzinjy, S.T., 2007.Concurrent and lateral
deposition of flysch and molasse in the Foreland Basin of Upper Cretaceous and
Paleocene from NE-Iraq, Kurdistan Region, GERMENA II, 2007, P.757-769.
• Karim, K. H., and Ameen, B. M. 2008. New sedimentologic and stratigraphic
characteristics of the upper boundary of Qamchuqa Formation (Early Cretaceous)

91
 in Northwest of Erbil Governorate, Kurdistan Region, NE/Iraq, Iraqi Geological
Journal, Vol.4, No.2.
• Numan, N.M.S. 1997. A plate tectonic senario for the Phanerozoic Succession in
Iraq. Iraqi, Geol. Jour. Vol.30, No. 2, pp 85–110.
Nichols, G. 1999. Sedimentology and Stratigraphy, Blackwell Science. 354p.
• Qaradaghi, A. I., Abdul-Kareem and Jassim A. Al-Jassim. 2008. Petrography ,
diagenesis and depositional environment of Nahr Umr Formation, from seceteted
section wells in central Iraq. Iraqi Bulletin of Geology and Mining, Vol.4. No.1,
67-94p.
• Reiger ,J.j.A. and Hsu,K.L.j.,1986. Manual of Carbonate sedimentology: a
Lexicographical approach, 302pp.
• Read J. F., 1985. Carbonate platforms facies models. Am. assoc. pet. Geol.
Bull.69, pp.1-21.
• Reijmer J. J. G. and Immenhauser A., 2005. Sedimentology in the 21st century,
Elsevier
• Tucker, M. E., 1991. Sedimentary Petrology. Blackwell Science Publication Co.
260 p.
• Taha, Z.A., 2008. Sedimentology of Upper Cretaceous Formation from Kurdistan
region NE-Iraq, Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Sulaimanyia,
department of Geology. 122p.

92

View publication stats