stotoil - oljedirektoratet · stotoil special core analysis well 30/2-1 statoil exploration &...

JDenne rapporttilhører

O STATOIL

UNO DOK.SENTERL.NR.

KODE

Returneres etter bruk

stotoil

Special core analysis

Well 30/2-1STATOIL

EXPLORATION & PRODUCTIONLABORATORY

Sept.-83 LAB 8

Den norske stats oljeselskap a.s

Jii *O

Classification

StatoilDen norske statsoljeselskap a-s

ii

Requested by

1

I

f

Terja Helgøy

Subtitle

I

fCo-workers

IR.Furdal, E.Gilje, A. Hove and K. Sørheim

I

1

1

f•

t

1

1

Title

Special core analysis

Well 30/2-1

STATOIL

EXPLORATION & PRODUCTIONLABORATORY

Sept. -83 LAB 8 3 . 3 7

Prepared Approved

3/1 0-83 [Trude Haaskjold Eide 3/1 0-83 L-Bs.Hfclthe-SørlBnsse]

oy Evdk.

9.03.21 A

JIIIIIIII1IIIIIIiiilI

CONTENTS Page

1. SUMMARY 2

2. INTRODUCTION 2

3. THEORY 3

3.1 Formation factor and resistivity index at

ambient conditions 3

3.2 Co/Cw measurements 4

3.3 Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure ' 5

4. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE 6

4.1 Sample preparation 6

4.2 Measurements of grain volume and pore volume 6

4.3 Measurements of air permeability 6

4.4 Sample description 6

4.5 Capillary pressure (air-brine) and electrical

measurements 7

4.6 Co/Cw measurements 8

4.7 Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure Measurements 9

5. RESULTS 10

6. DISCUSSION / CONCLUSION 13

7. LITTERATURS - 1 4

8. APPENDIX 15

LAB 83.37

IIIIIIIIIIItIII1II1i1

1. SUMMARY

Porosity and permeability, Klinkenberg corrected, have been

measured on 40 IV X 2V plug samples from Well 30/2-1, Ness,

Etive, and Rannoch formation.

Formation factor, resistivity index, and saturation exponents

have been determined for 20 plug samples from the three zones.

Saturation exponents from 1.73 to 2.16 were found, with a mean

value of 1.91.

Capillary pressure curves, air-brine, with eight pressure points

have been determined for the 20 plug samples.

Saturated rock conductivity have been measured with NaCl

solutions of 3 different strengths. Because of uncertainties in

the measuring method, the Qv has not been calculated

Mercury injection capillary pressure measurements have been

performed on the same 20 plug samples. The pore size

distribution are calculated. The mercury injection data show

lower irreducible water saturation then the air -brine data.

The results from the trapped gas measurements will be reported

later.

2. INTRODUCTION

Prolab was requested to make a study of capillary pressure,

air-brine and by mercury injection, electrical parameters, Co/Cw

measurements and trapped gas from well 30/2-1, Rannoch, Etive and

Ness formation. 20 plug samples were used in this study.

LAB 83.37

111Pw11

1111

3

3. THEORY

3.1 Formation factor and resistivity index at

ambient conditions

Electrical properties of porous rock are usually represented

the formation factor FF and resistivity index RI defined as:

R R,0 t

FF = and RI = 3.1R Rw o

Where R and R are resistivity of 100% water saturation and

by

.1

partially water saturated rock respectively. R is resistivity

1Im

1I

1

11

11

11

of water used in experiment.

Formation factor will often be correlated with porosity using the

expression

FF = a'0~m 3.1.2

Here, the experimental data have been curvefitted by the use

the least squares method on the logarithmic transform of

equation .

Two different methods have been tried out. First, both "a"

"m" have been determined from the curvefitting procedure,

secondly the curve have been forced through the point 0=1

FF = 1 so that a = 1.

LAB 83.37

of

and

and

Resistivity index on the other hand depend on saturation. For

clean, non-shaly sand the following relation is used:

RI = Sw~n 3.1.3

IIIII

The saturation exponent, n, are determined with the use of the

• weighted least squares method on the logarithmic transform of

equation.

IM- 3.2 Co/Cw Measurements

The measurements are done with the purpose of determining any

• possible contribution of the conductance in reservoir - rock,

caused by clay. The general equation for the conductance in

• shaly sand is given by:

C = -— = l B • O + C )M o FF* v w;

™ Plots of Co versus Cw of fully watersaturated core samples show a

•

straight line relationship. If any clay is present there is a

positive displacement of the line on the Co axis at Cw = 0.

I I = the slope of the straight line portion of the Co vs. CwFF*

curve

Co = specific conductance of 100 % brine saturated rock.

I•I Cw = specific conductance of brine

• B = the equivalent conductance of the clay counterions, 38.3

I Qv = the effective concentration of clay cations (meq/ml).

I

I

I

iLAB 83.37

II

3.3 Mercury Injection Capillary Pressue

P Primary use of these data is to find the irreducible water

saturation, Swi .

• The fractional mercury - saturation is expressed as:

• HG Vp 3.3.1

I V. . = injected volume ccinj

^ V = pore volume, cc

The equivalent water-saturation is then given by

Sw = 1 " SHg 3.3.2

The size range of the pores corresponding to each pressure are

calculated using the Washburn equation (1).

3.3.3c

1r _ 2o cos 6

T"\

o = interfacial tension, dynes/cm

I8 = contact angle, degrees

™ PC = capillary pressure, bar

I

I

1

I

I

1

iLAB 83.37

Il

6

4. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

I^ 4.1 Sample Preparation

40 1 /2" x 2 /2" plug samples had been drilled out by Geco. The

• samples were washed by extraction using toluene and methanol and

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

1

I

I

I

I

then dried at 60°C and 40% humidity.

4.2 Measurements of grain volume and pore volume

• Subsequently the samples were weighed, and the helium porosity

was measured in a Core Lab Heliumporosimeter. The bulk volume

was measured using sliding callpiper.

4.3 Measurements of 'air permeability

•; Air permeability was measured and the Klinkenberg gas slippage

~ correction was found for each sample by linear regression of at

M least 3 pressure points.

4.4 Sample Description

From a plot of log K versus porosity of routine analysis of the

40 30/2-1 plug samples, 20 plug samples were selected to cover a

wide range of K and porosity. The table below shows a listing of

these plugs.

LAB 83.37

111w1111

11PF1

1

1

\

Table 4.1

Plug no.

39.1

53.1

59.1

63.1

68.1

75.1

88.1

97.1

101.1

118.1

131.1

138.1

142.1

178.1

181.1

186.1

190.1

198.1

202.1

214.1

Depth (m)

3703.97

3714.47

3718.33

3719.68

3721.12

3723.50

3730.34

3737.00

3738.27

3749.43

3758.13

3761.12

3762.32

3775.13

3776.15

3777.87

3779.38

3782.37

3783.77

3787.93

7

Formation

Nessn

u

n

n

n

n

u

n

u

Etiven

n

n

n

u

Rannochn

u

ii

I

I

I

I

I

I

4.5 Capillary pressure (Air-brine) and electrical measurements

The plugs were evacuated and saturated with degassed simulated

formation water (see Appendix I). To ensure 100% saturation the

plugs were placed in a pressure-vessel containing brine and kept

at 40 bars for 72 hours.

The resistivity was measured by using two silver painted rubber

electrodes pressed against the plug ends.

LAB 83.37

IIIII1IIIII1IIIIIIIII

8

The plugs were mounted on a brine-saturated porous plate, which

was mounted in a cell. A layer of kiesel-guhr was put between

the samples and the plate. Pressure was applied to the cell

using air saturated with water vapor. At least five days were

allowed for water drainage to reach equilibrium. Each plug was

then weighed, and the resistivity, Rt was measured as above.

After each weighing and resistivity measurement the plugs were

mounted back on the porous plate and a higher pressure was

applied. The pressure used were: 0.143, 0.274, 0.586, 1.59,

2.77, 5.0 and 12.0 bars. All resistivities were extrapolated to

20 C. After the last pressure point the plugs were washed and

dried.

4.6 Co/Cw-measurements

Each plug sample was evacuated and saturated with degassed brine,

To ensure 100% saturation the samples were placed in a pressure

vessel containing brine and kept at 40 bars for 72 hours. The

samples were left immersed in brine until electrical equilibrium

had been attained. The resistivity of each sample was then

measured by using two silver- painted rubber electrodes pressed

against the plug ends. The plug samples were then washed and

dried.

This process was repeated until sample conductivities had been

determined with different saturating brines. The brines used

were, in chronological order, simulated formation brine, NaCl

solutions of concentration 60 000 ppm, 90 000 ppm and

120 000 ppm.

LAB 83.37

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

4.7 Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure

Measurements

20 IV diameter samples cf suitable sizes (appr. 10-12 cc) had

been drilled out by Geco. The plugs were washed by extraction

using toluene and metanol, and then dried at 60°C and 40 %

humidity. These samples were cut in two, set A and B.

The bulk volume was measured in a Ruska mercury porosimeter.

The mercury injection capillary measurements were performed using

a Ruska mercury pump designed for the range of 0-138 bar.

LAB 83.37

iIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

10

5. RESULTS

Table 5.1 gives the routine core data from 30/2-1.

Table 5.1 30/2-1

The Klingenberg corrected permeability (KL), the heliumporosity

(For) and the grain density (Grdns).

Sample nr.

39.153.159.163.168.1

• -75.188.197.1101.1118.1131.1138.1142.1178.1181.1186.1190.1198.1202. 1214. 1

Depth(m)

3703.973714.473718.333719.683721.12"3723.503730.343737.003738.273749.433758. 133761.123762.323775. 133776. 153777.873779.383782.373783.773787.93

KL(mD)

1.500.22

399.00991.001493.0056.500.280.660.38

2672.00168.00151.00326.00

1.381.574.650.040.261.612.44

For(Frac)

0.1930.1560.2560.2680.2800.2200.1600.1650.1600.2850.2730.2720.2930.2100.1960.2290.1530.1930.2330.232

Grdns(gr/cc)

2.682.672.652.652.652.912.702.693.202.652.672.662.672.702.712.732.792.702.692.67

Fig 8.1 shows a plot of permeability versus porosity.

LAB 83.37

IIIIIIIIIIIIIiiiiiiii

Table 5.2 gives the results of the electrical measurements

from 30/2-1.

Table 5.2

Electrical measurements 30/2-1.

Sample nr.

39.153.159.163.168.175.188.197.1101.1118.1131.1138.1142.1178.1181.1186. 1190.1198.1202. 1214.1

Por(frac)

0. 1930.1560.2560.2680.2800.2200.1600. 1650. 1600.2850.2730.2720.2930.2100.1960.2290. 1530.1930.2330.232

FF

37.6548.8013.4011.901 1 . 6022.0047.6037.4052.6010.7013.0015.3013.6031.9030.5023.3057.1040.5027.5024.20

n

1.741.891.901.861.842.121.911.732.162.031.992.052.091.941.952.071.871.931.941.89

Swifrac

0.4370.7430. 1100.1060.0950.4610.6140.6000.6120.0930.2250.2290.1970.5420.5770.4610.8840.8330.5670.473

Composite : FF = 0.59 0~2*43, R2 = 0.92

FF = 0~2'10 f R, = 0.91

RI = SV'1'91

LAB 83.37

IIIII

IIIIIIIIIIIIII

12

Fig.8.2 is a plot of formationfactor versus porosity.

Table 8.1-8.7 list the results of the capillary pressure

(air-brine) analysis. The capillary pressure, the corresponding

water saturation and the resistivity index.

• Fig 8.3-8.12 show the plots of resistivity index versus water

saturation for each sample.

I Fig 8.13 is a composite plot of all samples, resistivity index

versus irreducible water saturation.

Table 8.8-8.10 give the results of the Co/Cw measurements

Fig 8.14-8.33 show the plots of coreconductivity versus

brineconductivity.

The mercury injection capillary pressure data are given in table

8.11 - 8.29. The plots of capillary.pressure versus mercury

injection are given in Fig.8.34-8.37

LAB 83.37


13

6. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION.

The formation factors increase with decreasing porosity as shown

in Fig 8.2. A linear regression using Archies equation

FF = a 0'm

through 1.

FF = a 0~m, gives FF = 0.59 0~2'43 and F = 0~2'10 when forced

The saturation exponents, n, listed in table 5.2 go from 1.73 to

2.16 and a linear regression analysis on all data points gives

n = 1.91.

In the Co/Cw plots the curves have not been drawn to intersection

with the x-axis. Some of the samples will intersect with the

positive x-axis (sample no. 39.1, 53.1, 88.1, 97.1, 101.1, 178.1,

181.1, 198.1, 202.1, and 214.1) and this may be due to

uncertainties in the Co measurements. The Cw measured values

corresponds well with handbook values.

The mercury injection data are showing lower irreducible water

saturation than the air-brine data. The plugs with very low

permeability has the greatest disagreement.

LAB 83.37

14

7. LITTERATURE

III• 1. Amyx, Bass & Whiting : "Petroleum Reservoir Engineering", Me

_ Graw Hill Book Company, London 1960.

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

LAB 83.37

1111•111•

1111•

11

8. APPENDIX

Appendix

15

LIST Page

1

Simulated formation water composition 1 g

Appendix

Results

Fig. 8.1

Fig. 8.2

Table 8.

Fig. 8.3

2

from electrical measurements

Permeability versus porosity 17

Formation factor versus porosity 1 8

1 - 8 . 7 Capillary pressure, the corresponding

water saturation and the resistivity index. 19

- 8.12 Resistivity index versus water

saturation for each sample. 26

Fig. 8.13 Resistivity index versus water saturation,

Appendix

Results

Table 8.

a composite plot of all samples. 36

3

from Co/Cw measurements

8 - 8.10 Results from Co/Cw measurements 37

Fig. 8.14 - 8.33 Coreconductivity versus brine

1

1

1

1

1

1

Appendix

Results

Table 8.

conductivity 40

4

from mercury injection measurements

11 - 8.29 Capillary pressure, mercury saturation

and pore radius 60

Fig. 8.34 - 8.37 Capillary pressure versus mercury

saturation. 79

LAB 83.37

III* simulated formation water composition:

I Ha : 11480 ppm

K : 610 ppm

Mg : 1490 ppm

• Ca : 1230 ppm

16

Appendix 1

• The chloride ions of the cations above were mixed. The spesific

conductivity of the water at 20 C:

I 5.42 S/m S = 0,198 JL-x v«^ JLO°C

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

LAB 83.37

1

1

Appendix 2

1 7

• Results from electrical measurements

I F i g . 8 . 1 Permeability versus porosity

Well

| Plot

from

• All

1 8O

I ^JO-o

Q 0

1 511

1oo1 »-

111

1

1 °-m o

30/2-1

of lag K versus porosity

routine plug analysis,

samples.

<f>

oo

o° o

o

^

o

o0 *

Q

o

A o

fr

1 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30POP 1 FRAC )

1• LAB 83.37

1

o.rø


Fig 8.2 Formationfactor versus porosity

Well 30/2-1

Plot of log FF versus log For.

All samples.

8r»O

LL.u.

Oo

oa

......................t-

.;.... .j...;....;..{.-;.

0.01 0. 10 1.00

POR (FRAC J

LAB 83.37


19

Table 8.1 Well 30/2- 1

Capillary pressure, PG(bar) ,

the corresponding brine

saturation, SW (frac) and the

resistivity index, RI .

Sample 39.1, 53.1 and 59.1

Sample 39.1

PG

0 . 000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 5 3 . 1

PG

0.000.140.270 . 591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 59 . 1

PG

0.000. 140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

SW

1 . 0000.9990.9940.9530.4990.4640.4520. 437

SW

1 . 0000.9930.9830.9750.8560.8060.7800.748

SW

1 . 0000.5320.3020.2020.1380. 1200. 1160. 110

RI

1 . 001.021.071.173.563.833.904.07

RI

1.001.031.091.411.121.501.601.67

RI

1.003.699.97

21.2446.4753.9759.0164.46

LAB 83.37


20

Table 8.2 Well 30/2-1

Capillary pressure, PG(bar),



resistivity index, RI.

Sample 63.1, 68.1 and 75.1

Sample 63.1

PG SW RI

0.000.14

_0.27_0.591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 6 8 . 1

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 75 . 1

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

1 . 0000.3770.2450. 1730.1250.1100. 1070. 106

SW

1 . 0000.3100.2180.1570.1080.0970. 1020.095

SW

1 . 0000.9630.7590.6500.5150.4960.4710.461

1 . 005.97

13.6627.7052.5361.1561.1560.07

RI

1 . 007.97

16.1332.0360.3971.20

. 65.2778.68

RI

1.001.101 . 902.664.204.564.684.94

'LAB 83.37


21Table 8.3 Well 30/2-1





Sample 88.1, 97.1 and 101.1

Sample 88.1

PG 3W RI

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 9 7 . 1

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 1 0 1 . 1

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

1 . 0000.9940.9870.9820.7020.6660.6430.614

SW

1 . 0000.9970.994

0.989' 0.668

0.6360.6180.600

SW

1 . 0000.9970.9900.9850.6820.6470.6200.612

1 . 001.061.141.142.022.15") TTji. * %_>>_<

2.49

RI

1 . 001 . 051 . 091.112.092.182.232.41

RI

1.001 . 041.121.122.302.702.672.88

LAB 83.37


22Table 8.4 Well 30/2-1





Sample 118.1, 131.1 and 138.1

Sample 118.1

PG SW RI

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 1 3 1 . 1

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 138

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

1 . 0000.3600.2710.1820.1240.1050.0980.093

. SW

1 . 0000.9330.4690.3360.2400.2250.2170.225

. 1

SW

1.0000.9200.4590.3400.2520.2360.2310.229

1.008.11

15.8034.9174.5390.67

102.24116.04

RI

1 . 001.204.538.95

18.0219.5220.2118.38

RI

1.001.234.959.14

i7.2318.9420 . 3420. 15

LAB 83.37

IlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiii

23

Table 8.5 Well 3C/2-1





Sample 142.1, 178.1 and 181.1

Sample 142.1

PG SW RI

Sampl

Sampl

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

e 178 . 1

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

e 181 .1

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

1 . 0000.5540.3790.2970.2230.2110.2030. 197

SW

1 . 0000.9960.9900.9830.5970.5690.5560.542

SW

1 . 0000.9970.9930.9880.6270.6030.5920.577

1.003.287.40

12.9924.4826.4027.6729.00

RI

1.001.051.151.152.843.023.03-« . ^^-

RI

1.001.041 . 081.112.642.712.622.38

LAB 83.37

111I1

11B

I

1

11

11

111111

T a b l e 8 . 6 W e l l 3 0 / 2 - 1 2 4

C a p i l l a r y p r e s s u r e , P G ( b a

t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g b r i n e

s a t u r a t i o n , S W ( f r a c ) a n d

r e s i s t i v i t y i n d e x , RI .

Sample 186 .1 , 1 9 0 . 1 , and

S a m p l e 186 .1

PG SW

0.00 1.000 10.14 0.991 10.27 0.989 10.59 0.815 11.59 0.504 42.77 0.480 45.00 0.472 4

12.00 0.461 4

S a m p l e 1 9 0 . 1

PG SW

0.00 1.000 10.14 0.993 10.27 0.988 10.59 0.982 11.59 0.976 12.77 0.959 15.00 0.944 1

12.00 0.384 1

S a m p l e 1 9 8 . 1

PG SW

0.00 1.000 1.0.14 0.997 1.0.27 0.993 1.0.59 0.986 1.1.59 0.942 1.2.77 O.»07 1.5.00 0.387 1.

12.00 • 0.383 1.

LAB 83.37

r) ,

the

198 .1

RI

.00

.04

.10

. 66

.23

.54

.70

.35

R I

.00

.05

.14

.16

.16

.15

.18

.28

RI

0004121423222437

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

25Table 8.7 Well 30/2-1





Sample 202.1 and "244:1

S a m p l e 2 0 2 . 1

PG bW Kl

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

Sample 2 1 4 . 1

PG

0.000.140.270.591.592.775.00

12.00

1 . 0000.9980.9940.9890.6280.5830.5730.567

SW

1 . 0000.9940.9900.8520.5450.4890.4310.473

1.001.051.141.162.422.862.933.03

RI

1.001.021.181.423.073. 734.044.28

LAB 83.37

II1I1II

I

I

Fig 8.3 Resistivity index versus water saturation

Well 30/2-1

Plot of log RI versus log Sw for samples

39.1 and 53.1. Saturation exponent, n, is

given for each sample.88-,

8s'4

Sample 39 . 1

i - (..-*..!.-, t .}...._...,.. ..|._.

\ *~j- j I 'f- n = l.74

nv.xy.v.y.p.:;T.p.pq:.j• >( -• .o.-i-.j-.j-s.:

- ........ r .............. ,"•»" — ....... .................. V ..... -.j.— -

....................................... > — — ........................... -A- — --r- — -

!

'o.o i

i--f--i °—r ""*—- T*"i ; '•<i ; i\

' 'O.IO ' ' ' t.OOIFR«C l

5

]•"• -T- i *•••• j—J—».—- i-i- i -1—+...1.. 4...T-4.I.l •!• -f J-—f—J-J ;H l j. ;....(... i.. J.. i.|._

f f i.-i-i-i--r-i-— t j .—f-f-j-f.*. Sample 53.1i . . . . . . .^. bamp j. e- y -j < —+- --

, ..j...... ,—_.., ,..

- i- -i—- — < —-t- -i n = 1.89

? ft-r-rl i V-V-T—}--t m n \ :--Vri-t! v-<-f-- -••<- t : r-\T-|-i

i j....;....).- .i. -i., f-j- : j .......:.\i..:.;.. ii • : : ! : ! : : : : ; iyj : i

0.10

LAB 83.37

11* Fig 8.4 Resistivity index versus water saturation

| Wei]

Plot

1 59.]

give

1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1I

1

1d

1

1

13

1

1

L 30/2-1

; of log RI

L and 63.1.

;n for each

•• f

^

^ — ...

versus log Sw for samples

Saturation exponent, n, is

sample.

—™T — -•-.— r-r-> .- T ,.....-. ..-.,..

...

t ' . •

-

•'

t \

...

o.ot 'o.io«W IFF)

f » v— <— r-4-i-i-T ! : <— -i— -i—f"

— 1 —' 1

...

±:::z::::::A:\\\\\

f

\

\vr-..'vv

........

X.

-

..,

...

,

AC J

\\

"'I*

»•- -

P »

O.Oi 0.10

SW TUAC 1

LAB 83.37

1.00

LOO

Sample 5 9 . 1

n = 1.90

S a m p l e 6 3 . 1

n = 1.86

11|

.'28


Well 30/2-1



given.for each sample.

1 l<_ d

•I

1

1 I

I

1 I_ sr

4

89.

18

1

1

3.01

0.01

....

—

... ..-

..

-

L

^

•

L-

A

-

--

B

"V

\\

0.10

,

3.10

83.3 '

\\

*

v\

7

*....\

\\

\

V

1

\

i i

i j

- • [ - • • • i - - :: : ;: • |

; ; I

i i :

nwc i

«4—...J.,

j i i i

i ' * •

i i ;

i : i• > .

.. ..;..;..:

.. ..,.,.,

i i ii i i

• i i i

v j !

i i Uji

1 FK»C l

Sample 68.1

n = 1.84

Sample 75.1

n = 2.12

11• Fiq 8.6 Resistivity index versus water saturation

§ Wei]

Plot

1 88.:giv«

1 8-i-

1

1

1

1

1

1

1• 8-

1

1

1 o

1

1

8

1

1

L 30/2-1

: of log RI versus log Sw for samples

L and 97.1. Saturation exponent, n, is

jn for each sample.

t » ;.»H— *—>>--<— <*? » ; <—•

\

\

•! *

\\\

...l.-'w.-L-j-.: C ^ m r i l o PR 1

—

».•«

' + -*,

.]..! n - 1 9 1

'H

: i

• -i--:

-H

.{..

: <* .i — • — — , 1 • i0.01 0.10 1.00

SN LFIMC 1

!>

V — 4«- j— >«j|....1...4..J..

•J-— ...^- ---..-.

• «i *

\\\

\

....

1

1"""""*

..^.

«.

: : b amp ie y / . i

;

...i, n = 1.73

._.;.,

.. .:..;

'. ;

i i

i I

• iO.O1 'o.lO 'l .OO

SW IFWIC 1

LAB 83.37

130


• Wei:

— Plol

1 101

giv«

1 1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1

18-

1

1<T

19.

1

18

1

L 30/2-1


.1 and 118.1. Saturation exponent, n, is

2n for each sample.

. ;... — 4.....; —

»••••...i.. 4....<.i...j...

...

...

, ••i

....\\

..»M4.......4-..

*,\

fc. .V---

0.01 0.10

•> - i- — •—

;

1 —

....

»T-*"t "\

(..1.

>--\

\'\

\\

\

V

...

...

• •-,

.-»-4»

—..

-•

-•

-

FRf^C

.....

,.-

-•...

--

•

•

-

—"i

•

^

• •

••

..

• •

-

0.01 'o.lO

M i r**c i

LAB 83.37

c

1.20

1.00

Sample 101.1

n = 2.16

Sample 118.1

n = 2.03

IIII

31


Well 30/2-1



give

1 -8-

1

1

1

1

1

1

19 8-

1

1

19_

1

1

8

1

1

sn for each sample.

t 1 — -

—

—f—"••h"! r fv t

i 1

; j

l

i 1

\ '•

\

\

\

\\

\v...\:

A

........

•S

...;-4-— -:•••»••- H"i.-4--1.1.:

>,

i i i

•T"*"!

; 1 ;

K : i

; y;

o.oi 'o. io 'iU 1 FRAC 1

: j ,'....j...4--i...i..<.j. i ; j....i.. ..;..j.i.|t"' '

......, \

••• \: j

i i

\

\N

j.

\\\•A--

•— 1—

--

— !---)-•;

--

i • •

--i-j-i

* i '

K i0.01 O.tO

SV 1 FR»C 1

LAB 83 .37

Sample 131.1

n = 1.99

Sample 138.1

n = 2.05

132


• Wei]

Plot

1 142<

give

1 ;111 i1111 i91

1

1d

1

1

18

1

1

. 30/2-1


1 and 178.1. Saturation exponent, n, is

;n for each sample.

• » • '...«...!.....

* -

0.01

— **— j«4-*-i«!- »

1

• • \'IT \

Ii

"1r-1".' •

%\..V— .

«

•

SJ

...

...

• : •

•--•••'

j

\

1

\

\v--V\

....

\

....

,..

...

"i"

_

FRAC

...;..f.

\\

-

-

-

-

-•-

-

0.01 0.10

s« ir«iAc J

LAB 83.37

1.00

r

i1'.00

Sample 142.1

n = 2.09

Sample 178.1

n = 1.94

I1•

IIIIIIIIIIIIII

II


Well 30/2-1



given for each sample.

S

0.01

0.01 0.10

a-

0

**

^

....

....

...

...

— i

...

-

-- -

--,

•«

i

v .... ...

...

h

-•>••;••:

-14-i

• i '

• i i

> • i

'T:"l; i

"ri"

i i •; '• ;

: • 1

Sample 181.1

n = 1.95

'i.no

BI

8O

§

,v

N•\

N

v

... ,.j

: i !

: ! :

j '• }

. • .

; ; •

•• ; :! '• ij ' :

.,..<...

i • :

: :

Sample 186.1

n = 2.07

1.CO

LAB 83.37


34


Well 30/2-1



given for each sample.

0_ Jr

d

*

R

8

•*

... «.••t

H......-.-H

•"

...

...

...

- .4.-;

-j-i S a m p l e 1 9 0 . 1

i

.1, n = 1.87

i

.:..:

-i- *

: --»-:

\

0.10

t.

a°

§O.QI

i-f — — —

}....i— •

—

•-•i-

. _!iii..i.

•••i-•>

a. 10

— s

...i—

^

...

^..

...

-<•••••i-- i

i j

i j; 1

: i

,r ;

{ :

i i

.....

• :

*<• <1

S a m p l e 198 .1

n = 1.93

IFRAC l

LAB 83.37

11™ Fig 8.12 Resistivity index versus water saturation

| Wei]

Plot

1 202.

give

1 8-*i

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 I

1

1

1O

1

1

•1

1

. 30/2-1


1 and 214.1. Saturation exponent, n, is

;n for each sample.

•<• t — r— .—»-•:•' — r -. — i----. .-••>•:

f••J-- '|

;

•

i .i

l-.t-• - h -•4- •

i

! ;

0.01

\V-•\-

1

\

\

\\

...

...

\

--

\

4." S

.].. n

: :

"T" i

- -

:

i

\l0.10 1.00

SW inw,c i

•• i ;...H'-..4— i.--1— i--i i i i...i-4-.i..i..i....J-.

1

>.-i.

••l f

: \\\*>•\

\\

-<—

....

._,

•

\"0.01 0.10 l .CO

su : FBA: i

LAB 83.37

Sample 202 . l

n = 1.94

Sample 214.1

n = 1.89


36


Well 30/2-1

Plot of log RI versus log Sw.

All samples.

-

-

r "

Xu...*

•ML

*

AX

* *k,X

\* å

+

P,.---

.4*..

X

....,

...

%. VN

D

»

4

3<

...

kSB

a

^3

*!

A

*

\

A

V

•*•X

a

o

*A7

*X

a

*o•A

7t

55.53.63.68.75.88.37.101.

KB.131.

138.

H2.178.

181.

186.

190.

198.

202.2H.1

0.01 0.10 1.00SW

LAB 83.37

II

I

•

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

37

Appendix 3

Table 8.8 Co/Cw measurements from 30/2-1. Sample 39.1-88.1

Conductivities are given in Siemens/m.

Sample

no.

39.1

53.1

59. 1

63.1

68.1

75.1

88.1

Salinity

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

40700

ppm

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

.14

.42

.11

.42

.41

.42

.46

.42

.47

.42

.25

.42

.11

.42

60000

ppm

0

7

0

7

0

7

0

7

0

7

0

7

0

7

.20

.63

.17

.63

.54

.63

.60

.63

.60

.63

.35

.63

.17

.63

90000

ppm

0

10

0

10

0

10

0

10

0

10

0

10

0

10

.30

.21

.23

.21

.70

.21

.80

.21

.80

.21

.44

.21

.23

.21

120000

ppm

0

13

0

13

0

13

1

13

1

13

0

13

0

13

.41

.17

.34

.17

.95

.17

.03

.17

.05

.17

.62

.17

.32

.17

LAB 83.37

rii

i

iiiiiii

38

Table 8.9 Co/Cw measurement from 30/2-1.Sample 97.1 - 178.1

• Conductivities are given in Siemens/m.

Sample Salinity 40700 60000 90000 120000

• no. ppm ppm ppm ppm

I

I97.1 Co: 0.15 0 . 2 2 0.30 0 .40

Cw: 5 .42 7 .63 10.21 13.17

101.1 Co: 0.10 0.16 0.21 0 .29

Cw: 5 .42 7 . 6 3 10.21 13.17

118.1 Co: 0.51 0 .66 0.88 1.16

• Cw: 5 .42 7 .63 10.21 13.17

131.1 Co: C . 4 2 0.51 0 .69 0.97

Cw: 5 . 42 7 .63 10.21 13.17

138.1 Co: 0 .36 0 . 4 8 0 .63 0 .85

Cw: 5 . 4 2 7 .63 10.21 13.17

142.1 Co: 0 . 4 0 0 .54 0 . 7 0 0 .93

m Cw: 5 . 42 7 .63 10.21 13.17

178.1 Co: 0.17 0.21 0 .36 0 . 4 7

Cw: 5 .42 7.63 10.21 13.17

LAB 83.37


39

Table 8.10 Co/Cw measurements from 30/2-1. Sample 181.1 -214.1

Condutivities are given in Siemens/m.

Sample

no .

181.1

186.1

190.1

198.1

202. 1

214.1

salinity

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

Co:

Cw:

40700

ppm

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

.18

.42

.23

.42

.10

.42

.13

.42

.20

.42

.22

.42

60000

ppm

0

7

0

7

0

7

0

7

0

7

0

7

.27

.63

.34

.63

.14

.63

.20

.63

.28

.63

.31

.63

90000

ppm

0.

10.

0.

10.

0.

10.

0.

10.

0.

10.

0.

10.

37

21

47

21

18

21

26

21

35

21

44

21

120000

ppm

1

13

0

13

0

13

0

13

0

13

0

13

.50

.17

.58

.17

.22

.17

.36

.17

.53

.17

.59

.17

LAB 83.37


LAB 83.37


8Ld

m

(/) O CC£ fO JD

B

ooLJet:8

LD

CO

_O

I

\

\\

\

°d

in1o

8d

So*

Sd

g

LAB 83.37

IIIIIIIIII

IIIIIIIII

IooLJ

00 O

IQ

.^ E^ §(f)

OO

VO

co

42

.O

\

\

1o

LAB 83.37


IQ

8LJ

IQZOoLJ

oo

oo

43

-JS

-S

-B

\

i

00d

tod

«o

\oi\

LAB 83.37


IQ

OOLJ

CQ ,-co

<7> o* cLd — -X

O

OOLJC£OOco

oo

-00

i

-CM

CO

610o

cs0

LAB 83.37

45

8LJ

CECD

-S

-co

co o

\

OoLdOdOo

\

\X

co

•HCn

LAB 83.37

IIIiiiIiIlitilliilili

IQ

OoLd

CD 0000

IQZOOLdo:oooCM

•

CO

o">

-SJ

.o

-«j

\

\

r~

sd 8d

Sd

od

nod

oqd

LAB 83.37

Iiiiiiiiltiiiiiiiiili

oLJ

K)

D

|dooLJCEOo

(M

co

&•HCn

io

h 1

-SJ

.o

i

\

\

\

S

00

LAB 83.37

liiiiiiiiitiiiiiiitii

oooo

m

gOoLJ&.oo

CN(N

•

00

CP•Hfc,

48

oHl

O

_O

-a

\

\\ -04

Sd o

lU/SOQ

od

oqd

LAB 83.37

IIIItI1IIIIiliilitiii

8LJ

>lEt oC_ (/)

S

8LJa:OOmCN

oo

-to

-to

\

\

\

\

CO6

to6

csd

LAB 83.37

riiliiiiliiiiiliitiii

lQ

8UJ

m

8LJccOOTCN

oo

-Eo

</>

.O

\

\

\

\

cqd

od d

csd

iit/S

LAB 83.37

Iiililiiliiiiiliiiiii

8LJ

££OD

00

b

z>Q•z.OoLUCXoo

oo

en•H

CM

atd

.o

i

cod

rxd

(Dd

«d

•od

\p

°o

LAB 83.37

IIIitii§iiiiiiIiiiiii

lo

8LJ

Sm

.ooLdD^OoCN

CO

l-S

-co

\

oqd

(O6

LAB 83.37

IIIIII1iiiiiiiiiiiiii

8LJ

<D

1OoUl

ooCN

oo «.o

.o

J.

-•*

2 K»

6

UJ/S OQ

LAB 83.37

-JIIlIIiiiiiiiitiiiiii

la8LJ

cEm oo

ldoo

OocoCM

oo

a-•Ht.

in

_o

! i

\

Kld

od

LAB 83.37

II1IiiiiiiiiiiiItiiii

IQ

8LdZ r-Q£ (DDDTM

O

Q

OOLdCXOO

<Tl<N

oo

tr>•Hfc-,

55

-Jt

tod

-ID

\

-CM

IO K)d

qd

00

LAB 83.37

IIIIiiiiiiiiiiiIiiiii

8Ld

CD en

|Q

OOLJ

Oooro

00

•HM-4

-O

-co

\

1 1n o

d d

i iin od d

UJ/S°0

I

Bd

\(

. <\ t

LAB 83.37

IIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIIIII

IQ

OOLd

S!CD

oen

s

OoLJo:OO

ro

co

D•HCn

O

d

57

.o

i-«o

-•*

\

in

dSd

od

ind

od

8d

o0

UJ/SOQ

LAB 83.37

III1II11IIIIII

I1IIII

OQ

OOUl

5S CNm YP

If!

Q

OOLd01Oo

CNro

oo

53

to6

-O

oK)6

o6

LAB 83.37

ISIIIIII

I

8

CD.CN

<N

fcIQ

OOLJCEOO

mm

oor"

(Od

«o

I-P

(-co

H)d

C4

d dqd

LAB 83.37

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitfi

Appendix 4

Table 8.11

Capillary pressure (bar),

mercury saturation (%) and

pore radius (micron).

Well 30/2-1

PH6 3HG

sample 53.1

0.400.700.907.207.507.908.30a.ao9.209.9010.401 1 . 001 1 . 7012.3013.6015.1016.1017.4018.6020.3021.4023.4025.5028. 1030.8034.9038.9043.4048.7055.0063.3072.6084.4097.10110.30127.90168. 10226.60350.60489.40

0.51.12.12.85.08.211.514.720.223.426.730.433.736.939.142.343.945.547.148.750.351.353.455.056.658.159.661.262.664.165. 667.068.369.671.572.775.076.877.078.4

18.35010.4868.1561.0190.9790.9290.8840.8340.7980.7410.7060.6670.6270.5730.5400.4860.4560.4220.3950.3620.3430.3140.2880.2610.2330.2100.1890. 1690. 1510. 1330. 1160.1010.0370.0760.0670.0570.0500.0440.0400.032

LAB 83.37

IlIIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIII

51

Rafale 8 .12

Capillary pressure (bar) ,


pore radius (micron) .

Well 30/ 2-1 sample 59.1

PHG SHS R

0.00 0.0 0.0000.23 4.3 31.9130.40 12.5 18.3500.70 20.5 10.4861.00 39.7 7.3401.35 53.5 5.4372.10 67.0 3.4952.31 68.9 3.1773.03 73.7 2.4224.43 78.7 1.6579.52 85.6 0.771

15.10 87.8 0.48625.20 89.9 0.29149.80 90.4 0.14774.40 92.0 0.099

105.50 93.4 0.070131.60 93.9 0.056

LAB 83.37

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIIII

62

Table 8.13 Caoillarv oressure data





PHG SHS R

0.000.360.450.63O.SO0.991.201.632.975.018.1812. 1019.8039.3070.80100.00132.40

0.019.827.029.434.140.551.664.378.635.788.991.393.796.097.699.299. 2

0 . 00020.33916.31111.6519.1757.4146.1174.5032.4711.4650.8970.6070.3710. 1340. 1040.0730 . 055

LAB 83.37

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

o 3

lable 6.14 Caoillarv oressure_data_





PH6 SHG R

0.000. 100.400.500.600.701.011.514.0016.3025.5050.3079.60100.50135.00

0.03. 115.7Ttr c-w'wJ . U

47.854.462.868.977.432.785.088.189.039.589.5

0.00071.26218.35014.63012.23310.4867.2674.8611 . 8350.4500.2880. 1460.0920.0730.054

LAB 83.37

11 Table 8 . 1 5

1

3agillarv

Capillary

^5 4

pressure data

pressure (bar) /


I

1

I

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1


Well 307 2-1

PHG

0.000.200.400.601.011.503.094.065.047.019.13

13. 1017.1025.0040.0062.1099 . 00

1 33 . 80

SHG

0.0 0.0.6 36 .0.6 18.0.6 12.1.1 7.1.1 4.4.4 2.6.5 1.8.2 1.9.5 1.

13.9 0.20.3 0.24.9 0.30.5 0.42.7 0.53.2 0.64.4 0.69.2 0.

LAB 83.37

R

000700350233267893375808456047804560429294183118074055

sample 75 .1


65

Table 8 . 1 6 S^B^ll^ri'-EI6. — — 6.

Capillary pressure ( b a r ) ,




PHG SH6 R

0.00 0.0 0.0001.01 2.5 7.2671.76 2.5 4.1705.45 2.5 1.3477.03 3.5 1.044

10.60 10.3 0.69232.90 47.2 0.22348.40 54.2 0.15259.60 62.5 0.12374.00 66.9 0.09999.70 71.2 0.074

114.60 73.6 0.064135.00 75.0 0.054

LAB 83.37


66

Table 8 . 1 7 2§Eii]:a^Y_pressure_data

Capillary pressure (ba r ) ,



Well 30/ 2-1 sample 97 .1

PHG SH6 R

0.00 0.0 0.0000.41 1.1 17.9021.49 1.4 4.9263.15 1.4 2.3305.06 2.7 1.4517.02 6.0 1.046

10.00 13.4 0.73415.10 26.7 0.48621.30 39.8 0.34525.20 45.5 0.29135.00 52.9 0.21049.50 62.7 0.14870.20 66.4 0.10598.90 72.5 0.083

108.50 72.9 0.068132.80 73.6 0.055

LAB 83.37


67

Table 8.18




Well 30/ 2-1 s a m p l e l O I . 1

PHG 3HG R

0.00 0.0 0.0000.49 1.1 14.9801.01 1.2 7.2675.11 1.8 1.4367.04 5.0 1.0439.90 18.2 0.741

15.10 35.1 0.48620.10 43.7 0.36525.30 49.2 0.29035.20 56.3 0.20949.30 63.7 0.14770.20 69.4 0.10590.30 73.2 0.081

109.20 77.3 0.067138.00 . 78.9' 0.053

LAB 83.37

Table 8.19





PHG SHG R

0.00 0.0 0.0000.11 9.8 66.7270.20 25.7 36.7000.66 48.0 11.1211.01 51.4 7.2672.46 59.1 2.9603.47 62.2 2.1155.34 66.1 1.3757.11 68.8 1.0329.48 71.4 0.774

12.10 73.5 0.60716.10 73.5 0.45625.30 75.7 0.29041.40 76.9 0.17762.60 79.2 0.11798.50 80.9 0.075

128.30 80.9 0.057

LAB 83.37


59

Table 8.20 9a2illarY_p_ressure_data_





PHB 3HG

0.00 0.0 0.0000.31 3.0 23.6770.60 4.3 12.2331.01 23.7 7.267^ "T*7 T1 1 T 1 AAJ^ •%_>.£. W 1 • 1 •_» • 1 O*T

3.70 43.2 1.9845.47 55.3 1.3427.67 62.2 0.9573.68 64.9 0.846

12.50 70.4 0.58718.10 74.9 0.40624.90 78.1 0.29534.90 81.1 0.21050.60 33.9 0.14575.80 86.6 0.09799.40 38.1 0.074

131.60 89.5 0.056

LAB 83.37


70

Table 8.21 £ap_illarY_p_ressure_data_





PHG 3HB

0.000.020. 100.300.500.680.750.810.850.900.961.011.151.251 . 501.722.002.643.505.177.0010.0020.0030.0050.00100.00135.00

0.00.81.41.62.44.79.015.220.426.130.8-re; Q•kj • C

42.145.550.954.156.961.064.468.271.373.975.382.885.989.090.0

0.000367.00073.40024.46714.68010.7949.7879.062OB C3-_'tJ

3.1567.o467. 2676 ~*Q~!• •-'O

5.8724.8934.2673.6702.7802.0971 . 4201.0490.7340.3670.2450. 1470.0730.054

LAB 83.37


71

Table 8.22 2apillarY_p_ressure_data_

Capillary pressure • (bar) ,




PHG SHG R

0.000.050.200.430.550 . 600.700.750.830.951.011 . 203.454.506.0010.3015.0020.0030.0040.4061.0090.00120.00135.00

0.01.72.04.410.320.635.540.544.849.350.754.265.668.070.774.777.579.982.384.386.298.288.939.4

0 . 000146.30036.70017.07013.34512.23310.4869.7878.8437.7267.2676.1172.1231.6311.2230.7130.4890.3670.2450.1820. 1200.0820.061O.G54

LAB 83.37


v:

Table 8.23 £§p_illarY_p_ressure_data_





PHG SHG R

0.000.100.300.721.002.604.505 . 005.585.906.306.307.543.5010.7012.5015.0017.5020.0023.5027. 0031 .0040.0050.0060.0075.00100.00115.00135.00

0.01.41.41.72.12.35.27.915.920.325.428.8--'•J • O

36.742.045.549.753.255.759.161.664.467.774.073.876.679.080.681.3

0.00073.40024.46710.1947.3402.8231.6311.4681.3151.2441.1651 . 0790.9730.8640 . 6860.5870.4390.4190.3670.3120.2720.2370.1830. 1470. 1220.0980.0730.0640.054

LAB 83.37

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Table 8 .24

73

Capillary pressure data_ _ . • _» «. _ «• .» — — —• •«- — — —




Well 30/ 2-1

PHG SH6

LAB 83.37

sample 181.1

0.000.200.501 . 002.003.204.004.504.925.205.405.706.006.406.907.628.008.609.20

1 0 . 001 1 . 0012.3014.001 5 . 0016.5018.5021.0024 . 0027.0030.0035.0040.0045.0050.0060.0070.0080.5090.00

100.00120.00135.00

0.01.41.61.81.92.64.06.1

10.613. 717.121.124.227.730.634.3W O • VJ

38.440.442.244.347.250.151.453. 356. 158.561.263.665.767.670.772.874.377.378.980.881.782.834.635.2

0.00036.70014.6807.3403.6702.2941.8351.6311.4921.4121.3591.2881.2231.1471 . 0640.9630.9180.8530.7980.7340.6670.5970.5240.4890.4450.3970.3500.3060.2720.2450.2100. 1330. 1630.1470. 1220. 1050.0910.0820.0730.0610. 054


Table 8.25





PH6 SHG R

0.000.721.002.544.155.396.389.16

10.501 1 . 9015.0020.3025.0034.7048.8074.5098.50

129.60

0.02.0n TJim . •_'

5.427.1T JL *-lOO» *.

40.850.052.555.360.266.069.975.380.184.987.688.7

0.00010. 1947.3402.3901.7691.3621.1500.8010.6990.6170.4890.3620.2940.2120.1500.0990.0750.057

LAB 83.37

111H

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Table 8 .26 CapillarY

Capillary

75

pressure data

pressure (bar) ,



Well 30/

PHG

0.000.651.002.303.786.099.62

1 1 . 8015.0018.1020.9025.3029.8038.7049.6073.4098. 10

133.30

2-1

SHG

0.0 0.2.0 11.2.3 7.2.5 3.2.5 1.3.5 1.5.2 0.7. 1 0.

14.9 0.22.7 0.29.6 0.37.5 0.44.2 0.53.8 0.59.4 0.68.2 0.73.5 0.77.5 0.

LAB 83.37

sample 190 .1

R

000

340191942205763622489406351290246190148100075055

76

Table 8.27




Well 307 2-1 sample 198.1

PHG SHG R

0.00 0.0 0.0000.38 1.2 19.3161.00 2.4 7.3404.98 2.6 1.4747.38 2.6 0.9959.98 6.3 0.735

12.40 15.9 0.59214.90 23.4 0.49318.40 34.6 0.39920.10 39.7 0.36525.50 50.2 0.28829.°0 54.8 0.24537.10 60.6 0.19843.70 63.8 0.16855.10 68.7 0.13370.50 72.8 0.10490.00 76.8 0.082

111.30 80.0 0.066134.50 80.5 0.055

LAB 83.37

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1iI

77

Table 8 .28




Well 30/ 2-1 .

PHG

0.000.251.003.815.886.823.519.90

12.5016.0020.3024.9036.5050.1075.2099.10

130.20

SH6

0.01.41.55.0

20.424.131.035.739.945.950.754.561.865.068.871.474.3

sample 2 0 2 . 1

LAB 83.37

0.00029.3607.3401.9271.2481.0760.8630.7410.5870.4590.3620.2950.2010.1470.0980.0740.056


7 s/ ^

Table 8 .29 ?§p_illarv_p_ressure_data_




Well 30/ 2-1 sample 2 1 4 . 1

PHG SH6 R

0.00 0.0 0.0000.66 1.4 11.1211.00 1.4 7.3406.64 22.4 1.1058.90 26.8 0.825

10.20 30.0 0.72013.70 36.7 0.53615.90 40.7 0.46219.50 43.7 0.37624.90 47.5 0.29531.20 50.7 0.23540.90 53.5 0.17950.40 55.7 0.14673.50 60.2 0.100

100.40 62.9 0.073132.50 65.4 0.055

LAB 83.37

IIIIIII1IIIIIIIIIIIII

Fig .8.34

0.00

Capillary pressure versus mercury

saturation.

Well 30/2-1

Plot of PHG versus SHG for samples

5 3 . 1 , 5 9 . 1 , 6 3 . 1 , 6 8 . 1 a n d 7 5 . 1 .

--*>•- 59.1,*^6S.\«^. 68. i

100.00IFRHC J

LAB 83.37


Fig. 8.35 Capillary pressure versus mercury

saturation.

Well 30/2-1

Plot of PHG v e r s u s SHG for s amples

88 .1 , 9 7 . 1 , 1 0 1 . 1 , 1 1 8 . 1 a n d 1 3 1 . 1

-. 97.1^ \Q{.. ne.~ 131.

0.00 20.00 100,00

IFRAC J

LAB 83.37


31

Fig. 8. 36 Capillary pressure versus mercury

sa tura t ion.

Well 30/2-1

Plot of PHG versus SHG for samples

1 3 8 . 1 , 1 4 2 . 1 , 1 7 8 . 1 , 181 .1 a n d 186 .1

. 138.-. »42.-*. 118.. 18».

^ 186.

0.00 20.00 10.00 60, CC

SHG80.00 100.00

(FRAC t

LAB 83.37


Fig. 8.37 Capillary pressure versus mercury

saturation.

Well 30/2-1

Plo t o f PHG v e r s u s SHG fo r s amples

190. 1 , 198. 1 , 2 0 2 . 1 and 2 1 4 . 1 .

0.00

LAB 83.37

190.196.

100.00

stotoil - oljedirektoratet · stotoil special core analysis well 30/2-1 statoil exploration &...

Documents