Sie sind auf Seite 1von 21

Second International Conference on the Role of Applied Geology in Environmental Development, Dec.

2009

P. 1 - 21

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION OF RUDEIS RESERVOIR IN JULY OIL FIELD, GULF OF SUEZ, EGYPT Gamal. R. Gaafar*, Gamal Attia**, Khaled A. Khaled** and Sameh. M. Ibrahim*** * Senior Petrophysicist, Petronas Carigali, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia **Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Helwan University, Helwan, Egypt. *** Geophysicist, PGS Data Processing ME, Cairo, Egypt. . , , : , . , ) ( . , ) ( . . ABSTRACT July oilfield is one of the most prolific fields on the Gulf of Suez; it is located in the central part of the Gulf of Suez. It is delineated by latitudes 28 13\ and 28 18\ to the north, and longitudes 33 11\ and 33 17\ to the east. Rudeis reservoir encountered of the main reservoirs in the central part of Gulf of Suez in general and in July oilfield in particular. Petrophysical characteristics of Rudeis reservoir had been evaluated using different analytical techniques based on well logging and core sample analyses. Different deduced petrophysical parameters, lithological and mineralogical constituents, and fluid saturations were estimated and represented in a number of vertical LithoSaturation crossplots and lateral distribution maps. The identification of the matrix components is well defined through the crossplot technique. The basic idea of such a technique is the different types of matrix that appear by combining different well log parameters (b -N, M-N and Uma-Pma). Effect of clay minerals on reservoir properties have been studied by applying number of crossplots (Pe-K, Pe-Th/K ratio and Th-K) reflecting a mixed nature of minerals such as montmorillonite, mixed layer clays, chlorite and kaolinite. Therefore, the major type existed is kaolinite which has less affecting the porosity of the reservoir. Reservoir quality and heterogeneity have been studied through the hydraulic unit concept. The reservoir could be subdivided into distinct petrophysical types; each distinct reservoir zone has a unique Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) value, Reservoir Quality Index (RQI), and Normalized Porosity Index (NPI). The combination of porosity and permeability data in terms of FZI, RQI, and NPI was convenient for use with routine core analysis data, giving a tremendous advantage in addressing the differences between reservoir core samples and reservoir zones at a particular depth. INTRODUCTION The geology and stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez have been attracted the attention of a large number of authors, out of them in addition to mentioned before, Ghorab, (1961); Said and El-Hiny, (1967); Abd El-Gawad, (1970); Bartov, et al.,(1980); Evans, (1990); Zahran and Meshref, (1988); Hassouba, et al. (1994), and Zein ElDin et al., (1995 and 1997). The petrology and petrophysical characteristics of the reservoir rocks in the Gulf of Suez have been discussed by Pittman and Hozayen, (1982); El Shaarawy, (1987); Metwalli et al. (1987); El-Kodsh, (1997); Gaafar, (1998); Mahmoud, (2000); and Gouda, (2002). July oilfield is located in the central part of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt. It is delineated by latitudes 28 13\ and 28 18\ to the north, and longitudes 33 11\ and 33 17\ to the east (Fig. 1). The study area is located 18 km from RasGharib Town and approximately 20 km from El Morgan oil field. The field is the fifth largest oil field in Egypt. The Rudeis Formation overlies the Nukhul Formation and is composed essentially of highly fossiliferous shales and marls referred to as the Globigerina Marls, (Globogerina Marl of Moon and Sadek, 1923) and the sandstones. This formation is oil bearing in Belayim Land, Belayim Marine, Morgan and other fields. The Rudeis Formation grades upwards into the Kareem Formation across a laterally extended anhydritic level (Schlumberger, 1984). This study shed light on petrophysical characteristics and storage capacity properties of Rudeis reservoir
1

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

by using different analytical techniques based on well logging and core sample analyses. The reservoir quality discrimination was carried out by using the technique published by Amaefule et al. (1993) which allows a more precise definition of reservoir discrimination through a combination of the permeability and porosity data. Lithostratigraphy The generalized stratigraphy of the study area and the Gulf of Suez for which three depositional phases are generally assumed (Fig. 2). Said, (1990) mentioned that, the stratigraphic sequence in the Gulf of Suez province is characterized by three depositional phases related to the Miocene rifting events. These are: Pre-rift phase (Early Paleozoic to Eocene); Syn-rift phase (Early-Middle Miocene) and Post-rift phase (Late Miocene and Pliocene). The first phase comprises the deposition of formations ranging in age from a postulated Devonian to Eocene. These formations, which include the Nubia sands, are important as reservoir rocks and to a lesser extent as source rocks. The second phase is represented by the Lower Miocene and is characterized by its overall excellent qualities as source, reservoir and seal rocks. The third phase, of the Upper Middle Miocene to Upper Miocene and Pliocene age in essence and is characterized by its evaporite seal. It closes the depositional history of the Gulf of Suez graben area (Darwish and El Araby, (1993)). Ouda and Massoud, (1993) stated that the Burdigalian sediments are distinguished into two distinct facies: a) Deep water clastic facies deposited along the entire stretch of the Gulf of Suez basins, in which whose axes were more or less coincident with the axes of the present Gulf, and b) Shallow water carbonate facies with tendencies for reefal development toward both sides of the Gulf. GUPCO subdivided the Rudeis Formation into Lower and Upper Rudeis using the biostratigraphic evidences only. According to the NSSC, (1964 and 1974) and Hosny et al., (1986), Rudeis Formation could be distinguished into four members Muheiherat, Hawara, Asl and Mreir. Within the study area, the Rudeis Formation is encountered in all wells drilled in the area, with thickness ranging from 36 ft in J25-28A well to 2265 ft in J22-22 well (Figs. 3, 4). The Upper Rudeis Formation at July field consists of deposits of a submarine-fan system that was sourced from the western rift shoulder and transported through the Morgan structural transfer zone. In areas of the Suez rift not near structural transfer zones, the Upper Rudeis Formation is predominantly fine grained, supporting the idea that structural transfer zones control the distribution of coarse-grained facies in rift basins. (Lambiase and Bosworth, 1995). Structural Features And Outlines Of July Oilfield July field is a large, asymmetric, generally northeast-dipping horst bounded to the southwest by southwest-dipping, large-displacement normal faults and to the northeast by northeast-dipping, smaller displacement normal faults (Figures 5, 6). The July-B fault is the major southwest-dipping, block-bounding fault has about 1200m (<3900 ft) of throw at the pre-Miocene level (Fig.6). A series of synthetic faults is present in the hanging wall of the July-B fault, including the west July fault, which has about 500 m (1600 ft) of throw at preMiocene level (Fig. 6). Faults that strike north-northeast and northeast (cross faults) also occur in the main structural block and commonly serve as linking faults between northwest-striking, rift-parallel faults (e.g., Patton et al, 1994). Well Logging Data Analysis Application of the computer processed interpretation for nine wells in study area has been done by GEOLOG Formation Evaluation program. The logging tools that used in the computer-processed interpretation in the study area are SP, caliper, resistivity, density, neutron, sonic, gamma ray logs. A- Litho-Saturation crossplot The litho-saturation crossplots are constructed for Rudeis reservoir in nine wells J4-4, J10-70, J15-98, J25-28A, J37-93, J58-82, SG310-5A, SG310-5C and GS302-3 drilled in the studied area. The litho-saturation crossplot (Fig. 7) represents the interval from depth 11145 ft to 11745.5 ft. The Rudeis reservoir rock composed mainly of sandstone with intercalations of shale and limestone. The shale content in the Rudeis reservoir ranges from none to 8% except in the uppermost part of the studied section and in the lowermost where it reaches up to 50%. The gross sand in this well is about 142 feet with a net pay of 55 feet. The effective porosity of this reservoir rock is found to be good at most levels and varies from 12% to 13.4% with an average value of 12.7%. Such a porosity level may store commercial quantities of hydrocarbons with hydrocarbon saturation of 61% and water saturation of 39%.
2

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

B- Horizontal distribution of Petrophysical parameters and Hydrocarbon Occurrences The horizontal distribution of petrophysical parameters and hydrocarbon occurrences can be presented and explained through Petrophysical Iso-parametric maps. These maps represent the various distribution maps as cumulative presentation of the areal extension of each of the petrophysical and fluid saturation parameters (gross sand, net pay, shaliness, effective porosity, hydrocarbon saturation and water saturation) in the investigated area. Average reservoir parameters for Rudeis reservoir rock encountered in the July oil field are shown in table (1). Gross Sand Distribution Map The Gross Sand Distribution Map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (Fig. 8), shows variation in gross sand values from (75ft) at well GS302-3 to (864ft) at well J10-70 and also illustrates two focal areas of maximum gross sand thickness around wells J37-93 and J10-70 in the central part of the map. Therefore, it is clear that the gross sand thickness increases toward the central part of the map. The changes of the thickening confirming the structural setting of the area, where the presence of cross faults affecting the area. Net Pay Distribution Map The Net Pay Distribution Map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (Fig. 9), has the same configuration and trend as in the gross sand distribution map. Therefore, it is clear that the net pay thickness increases toward the central part of the map. The values of net pay thickness graded from minimum value (55ft) at well SG310-5A to maximum value (675ft) at well J10-70. Also as in gross sand distribution map, the changes of the thickening of net pay confirming the structural setting of the area where the presence of cross faults affecting the area. Shale Volume Distribution Map The Shale Volume Distribution Map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (Fig. 10), shows non to less considerable shale occurrences where the values of shale volume percentage graded from minimum value (1.46%) at well J15-98 to maximum value (9.49%) at well J37-93. Such changes are trending toward the central part of the area in a way confirming the distribution of the effective porosity, gross sand and net pay. Effective Porosity Distribution Map The Effective Porosity Distribution Map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (Fig. 11), show variations of the effective porosity values varies from (10.40%) at well SG310-5C to (18.18%) at well J10-70. Such a trend is nearly matching with the gross sand and net pay distribution maps. Hydrocarbon Saturation Distribution Map The Hydrocarbon Saturation Distribution Map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (Fig. 12) has the same configuration and trend as in the effective porosity distribution map. The Hydrocarbon saturation values varies from (61 %) at well SG310-5A to (78 %) at well SG310-5C. Water Saturation Distribution Map The Water Saturation Distribution Map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (Fig. 13) has the same configuration and trend as in the effective porosity distribution map and gives a reverse relation with hydrocarbon saturation distribution map. The water saturation values varies from (22 %) at well SG310-5C to (39 %) at well SG310-5A. Lithologic Components Identification The identification of the matrix components is well defined through the different crossplot technique. The basic idea of such a technique is that different types of matrix appear by combining different well log parameters. These are b-N, M-N and Uma-Pma. By this way, the rock types of the Rudeis Formation on the available studied wells can be illustrated as follows: J25-28A Well: The b-N crossplot (Fig. 14) shows that the major lithology is sandstone with some effect of presence of shale shifted the points downwards. The porosity values ranging from 10% to 20%.The M-N crossplot (Fig. 15) shows also that the major lithology is sandstone with cementation of limestone.The Uma-Pma crossplot (Fig. 16), confirming that the major lithology is sandstone with amount of limestone as cement. J37-93 Well: The b-N crossplot (Fig. 17), shows that the major lithology is sandstone with amount of limestone and there is a trend of points toward shale. The porosity values ranging from 5% to 21%. The Uma-Pma crossplot (Fig. 18), confirming that the major lithology is sandstone with limestone and the remaining points suggest the existence of shale and heavy minerals. The N-D crossplot (Fig. 19), shows that the clay contamination with the examined interval is of dispersed to laminated habits with heavy mineral and hydrocarbon effects. SG310-5A Well: The b-N crossplot (Fig. 20), shows that the major lithology is calcareous sandstone and there is a trend of points toward shale. The porosity values ranging from 5% to 12%. The Uma-Pma crossplot (Fig. 21), confirming that
3

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

the major lithology is calcareous sandstone and the remaining points suggest the existence of shale and heavy minerals. The N-D crossplot (Figs. 22) shows that the clay contamination with the examined interval is of dispersed to laminated habits with heavy mineral and organic matter effects. Effect of Clay Minerals on Reservoir Properties In order to evaluate the type of shale, whether effective (montmorillonite and illite) or noneffective (kaolinite and chlorite), number of cross plots (Pe-K, Pe-Th/K ratio and Th-K) (Figs. 23, 24and 25) respectively are established in SG310-5A Well, for clay minerals identification for the Rudeis Formation, reflecting a mixed nature of minerals such as montmorillonite, mixed layer clays, chlorite and kaolinite. Therefore, the major type existed is kaolinite which has less affecting the porosity of the reservoir. In addition, the photoelectric effect (Pe) has a wide range of values, reflecting a mixed nature of minerals. The radioactivity level of uranium is high especially in the lower most part of this well, revealing shales and carbonates of organic affinity (source rocks). Reservoir Characteristics Based on Core Analysis Data Reservoir porosity and permeability are the two fundamental rock properties, which relate to the amount of fluid contained in a reservoir and its ability to flow when subjected to applied pressure gradients. These properties have a significant impact on petroleum fields operations and reservoir management. Evaluation of Permeability and Porosity Actual core analysis data was obtained on J58-82 well for reservoir evaluation. The core porosity and permeability cross-plot is presented in Fig. 26. It shows that there is a strong relationship between the permeability and porosity, the correlation coefficient was calculated to be 0.89. The permeability increased as porosity increased. It is interesting to note that for a given porosity, the permeability of the samples can vary by several orders of magnitude. In addition, the highest permeability does not correspond to the highest porosity for this well. Fig. 27shows that there is a strong relationship between the horizontal and vertical permeability, the correlation coefficient was calculated to be 0.84, which indicated that the Rudeis reservoir is homogenous. Reservoir Quality The hydraulic unit concept (Amaefule et al., 1993) was selected to subdivide the reservoir into distinct petrophysical types. Each distinct reservoir type has a unique Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) value, Reservoir Quality Index (RQI), and Normalized Porosity Index (NPI). The method uses a modified version of the Carman (1939) equation and the mean hydraulic radius concept in order to measure the reservoir rock quality and heterogeneity. Furthermore, the method can be carried out on scales from the small-scale (pore level) to large scale wellbore level. An attempt was applied to provide useful insights into the mechanism of porosity and permeability variation using practical analytical solution (Civan, 2001). The reservoir quality index (RQI) is defined as the square root of the ratio between permeability and porosity. Flow zone indicator (FZI) can also provide a representation of the flow zones based on the ratio between Reservoir Quality Index and Normalized Porosity Index. The concept of Amaefule et al.'s method is based on the calculation of two terms, RQI, and NPI, defined as follows:

RQI = 0 .0314

K /

(Amaefule et al., 1993) (Amaefule et al., 1993) (Amaefule et al., 1993)

(1) (2) (3)

NPI FZI

= =

1 RQI NPI

Where: RQI = Reservoir quality index, m K = Permeability, md = Porosity, volume fraction NPI = Normalized Porosity Index, fraction FZI = Flow Zone Indicator, m
4

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

The combination of porosity and permeability data in terms of FZI, RQI, and NPI, convenient for use with routine core analysis data, gives a tremendous advantage in addressing the differences between reservoir core samples and reservoir zones at a particular depth. In order to present, the techniques listed above, actual core analysis data was obtained on J58-82 well for a quantitative definition of reservoir zonation. Fig. 28 shows FZI and RQI versus depth for J58-82 Well. Based on RQI and FZI, the total depth was divided into five zones. Zone 1 has high values of RQI and FZI at a depth of 9627 ft. Zones 2, 3 and 4 have high values of RQI and FZI at depths of 9643, 9708 and 9766 ft, respectively. The porosity and permeability for each zone in this well are calculated to describe the quantity of each one compared to the observation that had been made in terms of differentiation between flow zones for the entire depth. These are clearly demonstrated in Fig. 29 for porosity versus depth and Fig. 30 for permeability versus depth. Fig. 29 is a plot of the porosity as a function of depth for J58-82 Well. The super-k zones in different depths had low to moderate porosity. Fig. 30 shows the core permeability versus depth for J58-82 Well. The super-k zones and high potential of super-k zones in different depths had high permeability. This observation agrees with FZI and RQI for this well, as was discussed previously. Fig. 31 shows FZI for each zone individually versus depth for J58-82 Well. Zones that contain super-k zones or high potential of super-k had high flow zone indicator values.

Figure (1) Location of the available wells and cross sections at the July oilfield, Gulf of Suez.

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

Figure (2) Generalized lithostratigraphic column of the Gulf of Suez (Schlumberger, 1984).
6

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

Figure (3) Stratigraphic Cross section A-A, July oilfield.

Figure (4) Stratigraphic Cross section B-B, July oilfield.


7

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

Figure (5) Structural contour map on the top of the Asl sandstone (After Pivnik et al, 2003).

Figure (6) Structural cross section A-A from 3D Seismic interpretation (After Pivnik et al, 2003).
8

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION
KB Elevation
Depths Analysed (FEET)
11145.0-11745.5 ft.

Driller's TD - ft 11800.0 Bit Size - in

100.0 ft
BHT

Maximum Deviation deg. RM


@-

Logging Contractor RMC


@-

Date Logged

Drilling Mud

DFD -

RMF
@-

- in

- deg. F

DT_1
140 0.95 V/V 40 -0.05 10

Elevation(TVD)

FORMATION NAME

DRHO_1
B/C3

PEF_1
1 B/E

DEPTH

RES_FLAG_3
0 15 0.45

NPHI_CORR_1
V/V -0.15 -0.15 2.95 2.95 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

rs
OHMM 2000 2000 2000 2000

VOL_UWAT_2
0.35 35 V/V 0 0 0 0 100 1

PAY_FLAG_3
LOGICAL 10 0 0 0.45 1.95 1.95

APLC_1
V/V

AHT90_1
OHMM

GR_2
0 2 GAPI 100 16

wire.perfsq_1
5 UNKNOWN 0

FEET

FEET

phihco_1
%

cosw
V/V

RHOB_1
G/C3

rd
OHMM

CALI_1
IN

WIRE.PERFS_1
6 UNKNOWN 0.35 0

PHIE_2
V/V

SWE_2
V/V

RHOB_CORR_1
G/C3

rm
OHMM

11145.0

-9600

11200
-9650 ASL
173

11250
-9700

11300
11318

-9750

11350
-9800

11400
-9850

11450
-9900

11500
HAWARRA -9950
427

11550
-10000

11600
-10050

11650
-10100

11700
-10150
11745.5

Figure (7) Litho-Saturation crossplot, SG310-5A well


9

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

Well Name J4-4 J10-70 J15-98 J25-28A J37-93 J58-82 SG310-5A SG310-5C GS302-3

Gross sand (FT) 646 864 389 240 746 262 142 206 75

Net Pay (FT) 275 675 309 225 442 252 55 176 74

eff. (%) 15.30 18.18 16.08 10.63 15.75 15.60 12.70 10.40 12.47

Sw (%) 31.10 23.60 29.20 26.60 29.10 26.00 39.00 22.00 34.67

Sh (%) 68.90 76.40 70.80 73.40 70.90 74.00 61.00 78.00 65.33

Vsh (%) 5.35 8.25 1.46 4.97 9.49 8.62 4.43 5.99 3.50

Table (1): Average petrophysical parameters of the Rudeis reservoir rock.

Figure (8): Gross sand distribution map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (C.I:50 ft)

10

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

Figure (9): Net Pay distribution map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (C.I:50 ft)

Figure (10): Shale Volume distribution map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (C.I:50 ft)
11

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

Figure (11): Effective Porosity distribution map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (C.I:50 ft)

Figure (12): Hydrocarbon Saturation distribution map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (C.I:50 ft)

12

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

Figure (13): Water Saturation distribution map of the Rudeis reservoir rock (C.I:50 ft)

Figure (14): b-N crossplot for 25-28A Well (Schlumberger, 1985)

Figure (15): M-N crossplot for 25-28A Well (Schlumberger, 1985)


13

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

Figure (16): Uma-Pma crossplot for 25-28A Well (Schlumberger, 1985)

Figure (17): b-N crossplot for J37-93 Well (Schlumberger, 1985)

Figure (18): Uma-Pma crossplot for J37-93 Well (Schlumberger, 1985)


14

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

Figure (19): Shale type crossplot for J37-93 Well (Brook, 1984)

Figure (20): b-N crossplot for SG310-5A Well (Schlumberger, 1985)

Figure (21): Uma-Pma crossplot for SG310-5A Well (Schlumberger, 1985)


15

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

Figure (22): Shale type crossplot for SG310-5A Well (Brook, 1984)

Figure (23): Pe-K crossplot for SG310-5A Well (Schlumberger, 1986)

Figure (24): Pe- Th/K ratio crossplot for SG310-5A Well (Schlumberger, 1986)
16

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

Figure (25): Th-K crossplot for SG310-5A Well (Schlumberger, 1986)


Core Permeability versus Core Porosity (well J58-82)
10000 Core Permeability (md) 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0 5 10 15 Core Porosity % 20 25 30 y = 0.0057e
2 0.5369x

R = 0.893

Figure (26): Core Porosity versus Core Permeability crossplot for J58-82 Well.
Vertical Permeability versus Horizontal Permeability (well J58-82)
Vertical Permeability (md) 10000 1000 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 y = 0.6079x 2 R = 0.8472
0.9798

Horizontal Pe rmeability (md)

Figure (27): Horizontal Permeability versus Vertical Permeability crossplot for J58-82 Well.
17

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

Figure (28): Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) versus Reservoir Quality Index (RQI) crossplot for J58-82 Well. The plot design after (Al-Dhafeeri et al., 2007).

Figure (29): Porosity Profile for each Zone crossplot in J58-82 Well. The plot design after (Al-Dhafeeri et al., 2007).

18

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

Figure (30): Permeability Profile for each Zone crossplot in J58-82 Well. The plot design after (Al-Dhafeeri et al., 2007).

Figure (31): Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) for each Zone crossplot in J58-82 Well. The plot design after (Al-Dhafeeri et al., 2007).

19

Gaafar, G.R.et al.

CONCLUSIONS Petrophysical characteristics of Rudeis reservoir on July oil Field, Gulf of Suez, Egypt had been evaluated using different analytical techniques based on well logging and core sample analyses. This integrated study assists to understand the characterization of reservoir rock and how they are related to additional hydrocarbon potentiality. The main results of this study can be concluded as follows:- The Rudeis reservoir rock composed mainly of sandstone with intercalations of shale and limestone, with average effective porosity of about 14.12%, average shale volume about 5.78%, average water saturation of about 29.03%, and average hydrocarbon saturation of about 70.97%. - The horizontal distribution of petrophysical parameters and hydrocarbon occurrences can be presented and explained through Petrophysical Iso-parametric maps. From these maps it was found that, most of these parameters were affected with the structural setting of the area rather than any other factors. - Number of cross plots (Pe-K, Pe-Th/K ratio and Th-K) respectively are established, for clay minerals identification for the Rudeis Formation, reflecting that the major type existed is kaolinite which has less affecting the porosity of the reservoir. In addition, the photoelectric effect (Pe) has a wide range of values, reflecting a mixed nature of minerals. The radioactivity level of uranium is high especially in the lower most part of this well, revealing shales and carbonates of organic affinity (source rocks). - Based on actual core analysis data, there is a strong relationship between horizontal and vertical permeability, and porosity versus permeability that indicated that Rudeis reservoir is considered fairly homogeneously and homogenous. - From petrophysical and core analysis data it was found that there is a good matching between the core porosity and effective porosity, in the same time there is a good matching between them and core permeability. - Usage of Amaefule et al., 1993 parameters allowed for reservoir zonation and reservoir quality. - Based on RQI and FZI versus depth for J58-82 Well, the total depth was divided into five zones. Zone 1 has high values of RQI and FZI at a depth of 9627 ft. Zones 2, 3 and 4 have high values of RQI and FZI at depths of 9643, 9708 and 9766 ft, respectively. The super-k zones and high potential of super-k zones in different depths had high permeability. Zones that contain super-k zones or high potential of super-k had high flow zone indicator values. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors would like to acknowledge Egyptian General Petroleum Cooperation (EGPC) and Gulf Of Suez Petroleum Company (GUPCO) for supplied data. The authors are praying for ALLAH by summoning to be merciful toward the spirit of Prof. Dr. Mohamed A. Ragab for his support at the beginning of this work. REFERENCES Abd El Gawad, M., (1970):The Gulf of Suez; A brief review of stratigraphy and structure, Phil., Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A., v. 267, pp. 41-48. Al-Dhafeeri, A.M. and Nasr-El-Din, H.A., (2007): Characteristics of high-permeability zones using core analysis, and production logging data, J. Petrol. Scie. and Eng. Vol. 55, Issues 1-2, Jan. 2007, pp. 18-36. Amaefule, J.O., Altunbay, M., Tiab, D., Kersey, D.G., Keelan, D.K., (1993): Enhanced reservoir description: using core and log data to identify hydraulic (flow) units and predict permeability in uncored intervals/wells. SPE 26436. Presented at the Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX, pp. 36. October. Bartov,Y., Stenitz, G., Eyal, M. and Eyal, Y. (1980):Sinistral movement along the Gulf of Aqaba-its age and relation to opening of the Red sea, Nature 285, (2), pp. 220-222. Brook, J., (1984): ''Analyzing your logs'', Volume II (Advanced open hole log interpretation), Petro-Media, Inc., USA. Carman, P.C., (1939): Permeability of saturated sands, soils and clays J. Agricultural Sciences, Vol. 29, pp.57 68. 2730. Civan, F., (2001): Scale effect on porosity and permeability: kinetics, model, and correlation AIChE J. 47 (2), 271287. Darwish, M. and El Araby, A., (1993):Petrography and diagenetic aspects of some siliclastic hydrocarbon reservoir in relation to the rifting of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt, Geol. Soc. Egypt., Spec. Publ. No.1, p. 155-187. David A. Pivnik, Mohamed Ramzy, Brad L. Steer, Jay Thorseth, Zarif El Sisi, Ihab gaafar, John D. Garing, and Robert S. Tucker (2003): " Episodic growth of normal fault as recorded by syntectonic sediments, July oil field, Suez rift, Egypt" AAPG Bulletin, v. 87, No. 6 (June 2003), pp. 1015-1030.
20

PERTROPHYSICAL EVALUATION

El Kodsh, A. A. M., (1997): Formation evaluation of the reservoir rocks in the zeit bay field, Gulf of Suez, Egypt, PH.D. Thesis, Geophysics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University: 63-65. El Sharawy, O. (1987):Study of the oil potentialities of Darag basin, Gulf of Suez, Egypt, based on subsurface geologic studies, M.sc Thesis, Ain Shams Univ., 190p. Evans, A. L., (1990): Miocene sandstone provenance relation in the Gulf of Suez: insights into synrift unroofing and uplift history, AAPG Bull., V.74, p. 1386-1400. Gaafar, G.R. (1998): ''Hydrodynamics and reservoir evaluation study of the Nubia sandstone, October field, Gulf of Suez Egypt'', PH.D. Thesis, Geology Department, Faculty of Science, Menoufia University. P. 10-15. Ghorab, M. A., (1961):Abnormal Stratigraphic features in Ras Gharib Oilfield, 3rd. Arab Petroleum Cong. Alexandria, Egypt, 2 pp. 1-10. Gouda, S.M. (2002): ''Subsurface Geological studies of some Miocene reservoirs in West of Morgan area,Gulf of Suez, Egypt: based on Well logging Analysis'', M.sc. Thesis, Geophysics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University. P. 20-25. Hassouba, M., Sawari, M., and Saker, S., (1994):Early synrift sedimentation in October field area, a stratigraphic model for hydrocarbon accumulation, 12th EGPC Exploration and Production Conference, Cairo, Vol.1, 10 p. Hosny, W. A. and Gaafar I., and A. A. Sabour, (1986):Miocene Stratigraphic Nomenclature in the Gulf of Suez, 8th EGPC Exploration Seminar, Cairo, 10 p. Lambiase, J. J., and W. Bosworth, (1995):"Structural controls on sedimentation in continental rifts", in J. J. Lambiase, ed., Hydrocarbon habitat in rift basins: London, Geological Society of London, p. 117-144. Mahmoud, A.F. (2000): ''The effect of minerals-source rocks of the Lower Miocene on the hydrocarbon products in the southern part of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt'', PH.D. Thesis, Geophysics Department, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University. P. 10-15. Metwalli, M. H., Darwish, M. and Abd El Shafy, A. (1987):New lights on the Cretaceous sedimentary succession in the Gulf of Suez region, A. R. Egypt, Acta Geol. Pol., v. 2, pp14. Moon, F. W., and H. Sadek, (1923):Preliminary geological report on Gebel Khoshera area (West Sinai), Petrol. Res. Bull. 9, Government Press, Cairo, 40pp. NSSC (1964):Oligocene and Miocene rock-stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez region, report of the Stratigraphic Committee, Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation, 142pp. NSSC (1974):National Stratigraphic Sub Committee) Stratigraphic Subcommittee of the National Committee of Geological Sciences, Miocene rock stratigraphy of Egypt. Ouda, K. H. and Masoud, M., (1993):Sedimentation history and geological evolution of the Gulf of Suez during the Late Oligocene-Miocene, Geol. Soc. Egypt, Spec. Publ. No.1, p.47-88. Patton, T. L., Moustafa, A. R., Nelson, R. A. and Abdine, S. A., (1994):Tectonic evolution and structural setting of the Suez rift. In: Landon, S. M., (ed). Interior Rift Basins. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir No. 59, p. 9-55. Pittman, E. D., and M. Hozayen (1982):Petrology of Turonian and Lower Senonian, west Abu Rudeis area, Gulf of Suez, 6th EGPC Exploration seminar, Cairo, 15p. Said, R., (1990):Geology of Egypt, Balkema, A. A., Rotterdam, Netherlands, 743p. Said, R., and I. El Hiny, (1967):Planktonic Foraminifera from the Miocene rocks of the Gulf of Suez region, Egypt, Cushman Found. Forma. Research Center, V. 18, pt.1, pp. 14-26. Schlumberger (1984): ''Well Evaluation conference, Egypt'', P. 15-32. Schlumberger, (1986):Log Interpretation Charts. Schlumberger Well Services, New York, U.S.A, pp. 44-45. Zahran, M. E., and Meshref, W., (1988):The northern Gulf of Suez basin evolution, Stratigraphy and facies relationship, EGPC 9th Exploration International Conference, Cairo, 28 p. Zein El-Din, M. Y., E. A. Abd El-Gawad, and G. M. Donia (1997):Evaluation of source rocks in the south Ghara Area, Gulf of Suez, Egypt, Abstracts 18th International Meeting on organic Geochemistry, 22-26th September 1997, Netherlands. Zein El-Din, M. Y., E. Klitsch, M. A. Abd-Hady and E. A. Abd El-Gawad (1995):Evaluation of Kareem/Rudeis Carbonate Reservoir in Zeit Bay Field, Gulf of Suez, Egypt, Abstracts 1st International Conference (Science and Development) Al Azhar Univ., Fac., Sc., March 20-23, 1995 Cairo, Egypt.

21

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen