SPE 75213

Saturation Modeling in a Multilayered Carbonate Reservoir Using Log-Derived

Saturation-Height Function
Rajesh Kumar,SPE, P.K.Cherukupalli,SPE, B.L.Lohar and Dinesh Chandra,SPE, Oil & Natural Gas
Corporation Ltd., India
Copyright 2002, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium
held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1317 April 2002.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.

Abstract
The conventional and widely used way of distributing
saturation arrays in reservoir simulation models is through
porosity-weighted water saturation values. In this way, each
grid cell has an assigned porosity and initial water saturation.
The porosity and water saturation are estimated with the help
of well logs using established procedures. However, for
producing reservoirs, log derived saturations may not
represent initial saturations due to various reasons like
depletion due to production and effect of water injection etc.
One of the ways to estimate the initial water saturation is by
the use of relationship between depth and bulk volume of
water (BVW). Such relationship, known as Saturation-Height
function is used to estimate saturation values away from the
well locations and to calculate the hydrocarbons in place
volumetrically. This approach has been used in a multi layered
carbonate reservoir of an Indian offshore field.
Layer-wise saturation height functions are developed by
establishing relationships between height above the free water
level and bulk volume of water derived from the wells drilled
in the initial phase of field development. The scatter in the
BVW plot has been reduced by further classifying the data for
different porosity facies. These porosity intervals are treated as
rock types for that layer. Since each layer has a particular
range of porosity, different porosity based rock types are
identified. Height above the free water level versus water
saturation plots are then generated for different rock types
using the relationship developed for each geological
layer.These equations were used to assign initial water
saturation in the reservoir simulation model.

Introduction
The distribution of water saturation within a 3-D reservoir
model is a key task of an integrated reservoir description.
Possible ways of distributing water saturation values to the
various layers in a reservoir simulation model are,
1.

2.

By mapping, so each grid cell has an assigned initial

water saturation, calculated by integrating porosityweighted water saturation values over the mapped zone
for each well. This entails the use of pseudo capillary
pressures at each grid cell to maintain initial equilibrium.
By the use of relationship such as bulk volume of water
(BVW) versus depth curve. BVW has the added
advantage of compensating to a certain extent for
different
average
porosity
levels
within
comparable zones.

Initially, efforts were made to establish different rock types

using core analysis based capillary pressure data. Fig.1 shows
the layer wise capillary pressure versus water saturation plot.
It is evident that it would be difficult to identify different rock
types for different layers as in each layer irreducible water
saturation values cover a wide range and overlap with other
layers. Therefore, In order to calculate saturation-height
functions without using core measurements, an alternative
method was adopted.
A significant amount of work to generate saturation height
functions is available in the literature1-5. These functions
calculates water saturation based on one or more of the
parameters like, porosity, oil water contact, gas water contact,
irreducible water saturation, height above contact etc. But, all
these functions have their own merits and demerits. Saturation
height function based on bulk volume of water and height
above the free water level has also been reported in the
literature6-7. A methodology for identifying different rock
types based on the variation of porosity in each layer in a
multi-layered carbonate reservoir using saturation height
function concept is discussed in the present paper.

R. KUMAR, P.K.CHERUKUPALLI, B.L.LOHAR AND D. CHANDRA

Brief Description of the Field

Geological layers
The reservoir under consideration is a heterogeneous, multilayered carbonate reservoir interbedded by thin shale bands
and argillaceous limestones. The top of this reservoir is easily
identifiable on logs due to the presence of a thick over-lying
shale. The shallowest litho-stratigraphic reservoir unit is
designated as the A1 layer and is underlain by another
regional shale marker, known historically as the M shale in
this Indian offshore field. The various sub units and
interbedded shales are presented below:

A1
M shale
A2-1
M1-Shale
A2-2
M2-shale
A2-3
F-41 Shale
A2-4
M3-shale
A2-5
M4-shale
A2-6
M5-shale
A2-7
N-shale
B
O-shale
C
P-shale
D

Shale layers M, F-41, N, O and P are correlatable over the

larger part of the field, whilst the shale layers Ml to M5
are not laterally persistent throughout the field area.
These shales grade into carbonate facies at certain
locations across the field. This provides open windows
between
some
of
the
layers
for
fluid/pressure transmission.
The porosity range in different layers broadly vary as
A1(13-29%),A2I(11-22%),A2II(12-27%),A2III(13-28%),
A2IV(12-28%),A2V(13-30%),A2VI(10-26%), A2VII(1429%), B(14-29%), C(15-24%) and D(12-22%). The

SPE 75213

porosity variation in layers A1, A2IV, A2VII and C are

shown in Figs. 2,3,4 and 5 respectively.
Fluid contacts
The reservoir under consideration is a saturated oil reservoir
with gas cap and edge water. The free water levels for
different layers are presented below:

Oil Water Contacts by Layer

Sub sea Depth
Geological Layer(s)
(metres)
A1 to A2-IV
1408
A2-V to A2-VII
1398
B
1379
C
1379
D
1362
Saturation - Height Function Approach
Methodology and Discussion of Results
A water saturation-height function can be used in the
volumetric calculation of the hydrocarbons in place using the
porosity and water saturation values from well logs. This
function is based on the bulk volume of water, which is the
product of porosity and water saturation. To apply this
approach in this multi-layered carbonate reservoir, a total
number of 53 wells were selected. All of these wells were
drilled prior to the commencement of water injection and were
covering the entire field.
Height above the free water level (free water level depth
minus the mean MSL depth of well), Hfwl of all the wells
versus BVW ( i.e. product of well averaged Phi and Sw values
from logs) on log-log scale were plotted for each layer.
Established a regressed straight line of the type,
log (BVW ) = a log (Hfwl) + b
as depicted in Figs. 6,7,8 and 9 for some of the layers A1,
A2IV, A2VII and C. In these figures BVW calculated from
both using conventional log water saturation values and Sw
derived from saturation height function (shf) approach have
been plotted against Hfwl. The values of the constants a and b
of the regressed straight lines for all the layers are given in
Table 1.
Using these equations, height above the free water level
(Hfwl) versus Sw plots for each layer were made on linear
scale as shown in Figs. 10,11,12 and 13 for layers A1, A2IV,
A2VII and C. These plots were made for different porosity
classes depending on the variation of porosity in each layer. It
is seen that in case of all the layers,
i)
As Hfwl decreases, Sw increases for all porosity
classes. From top to bottom in the reservoir i.e. from
layer A to A2VII or C, Sw increases at a much faster
rate as Hfwl decreases. In other words, the shape of

SPE 75213

ii)

SATURATION MODELING IN A MULTILAYERED CARBONATE

RESERVOIR USING LOG-DERIVED SATURATION-HEIGHT FUNCTION

the saturation-height curve tends to tilt towards

higher Sw values from nearly straight line portion of
the curve from top to bottom in the reservoir. This
indicates that relatively higher saturation values will
be obtained in bottom layers in comparison to upper
layers upto few meters above their respective free
water levels.
As the porosity class interval increases,
Sw
decreases at all values of Hfwl. Therefore, the curves
corresponding to different porosity ranges would
distribute the Sw values in a more accurate manner
rather than distributing Sw values corresponding to
averaged value of porosity.
Although porosity class intervals in layers A1 and
A2VII are almost similar, the saturation distribution
would be much different. Therefore, almost identical
porosity class would act as different rock types for
these two layers because of their different
relationships with Hfwl.

Based on the porosity variation, different rock types in each

geological layer are presented in Table 2. It is seen that 5
distinct rock types in each of the 11 layers could be
established. Saturation Height Functions for all the layers with
respect to single free water level are shown in Fig.14. This
gives the estimate of different capillary pressure threshold
values for different layers.
To validate this approach, layer wise well to well
comparisons between Sw(log) i.e.Sw from logs and Sw(shf)
i.e. Sw computed from saturation-height functions were made
as shown in Figs. 15,16,17 and 18 for layers A1, A2IV,
A2VII and C. A reasonably good match has been observed on
well to well basis in each layer. It was observed that there is a
difference of less than or equal to 5% in Sw values in about
50% of the wells considered for the present study.The
equations so developed for different layers of this multilayered carbonate reservoir were used to calculate water
saturation away from the well locations and hence to assign
initial water saturation in the reservoir simulation model.
Conclusions
The quality of reservoir description plays a very important role
in the performance of any reservoir simulation study. The
distribution of water saturation within a 3-D reservoir model is
a key task of an integrated reservoir description. SaturationHeight function approach has been found very suitable for this
purpose in a multi-layered carbonate reservoir. It also helped
in identifying layerwise porosity based rock types for further
enhancing the quality of description of the reservoir.
Acknowledgements
Authors are grateful to management of ONGC for giving
permission to publish this work. Authors also acknowledge
GGM-Head, IRS, ONGC,Ahmedabad, for providing an
opportunity and all necessary facilities to prepare this paper.

References
1.

Haseldine, G.M. : A method of averaging capillary pressure

curves, The Transactions of the Society of Professional Well
Log Analysts, 15th Annual Logging Symposium, June 2-5, 1974.

2.

Lee, S.T. :Capillary-gravity equilibria for hydrocarbon fluids in

porous media , 64th Annual SPE Tech Conference, 1989, SPE
19650.

3.

Ma, S, .Jiang, M.X., Morrow,N. R. : Correlation of capillary

pressure relationships and calculation of permeability, 66th
Annual SPE Tech Conference, 1991, SPE 22685.

4.

Prickeu, H.D., Bremer, R.E. : Improved initial water saturation

distribution for a three dimensional model, 6th SPE Middle East
Oil Show, SPE 17958, 1989.

5.

Xie, X. :A formulation for the capillary pressure relationship

and a statistical description of pore distribution, Academia,
SPE 21890, 1991.

6.

Cuddy, Steve, Allinson Gareth and Steele Richard :A simple

convincing model for calculating water saturations in southern
north sea gas fields, SPWLA 34th annual logging symposium,
June 13-16, 1993.

7.

Skelt, Christoper and Harrison, Bob :An integrated approach

to saturation height analysis, SPWLA 36th annual logging
symposium, Paris, France, 1995.

R. KUMAR, P.K.CHERUKUPALLI, B.L.LOHAR AND D. CHANDRA

TABLE 1- SATURATION-HEIGHT CORRELATIONS

FOR DIFFERENT LAYERS

SPE 75213

TABLE 2 - POROSITY BASED ROCK TYPES FOR DIFFERENT

LAYERS

Layer Porosity
Range
%
A1
13-29
A2I
11-22
A2II
12-27
A2III
13-28
A2IV
12-28
A2V
13-30
A2VI
10-26
A2VII
14-29
B
14-29
C
15-24
D
12-22

BVW = 10**(-a*LOG(Hfwl)-b)
Layer
fwl
a
b
A1
1408
0.1685
0.685
A2I
1408
0.1375
0.723
A2II
1408
0.1877
0.618
A2III
1408
0.3319
0.477
A2IV
1408
0.1874
0.812
A2V
1398
0.2278
0.645
A2VI
1398
0.1435
0.710
A2VII
1398
0.4462
0.270
B
1379
0.2909
0.648
C
1379
0.4870
0.322
D
1362
0.2293
0.726

II

13-17
11-14
12-16
13-18
12-17
13-18
10-15
14-19
14-17
15-17
12-14

17-20
14-16
16-18
18-20
17-19
18-21
15-17
19-21
17-19
17-19
14-16

Rock Types
III
IV
20-23
16-17
18-20
20-22
19-22
21-23
17-19
21-23
19-21
19-20
16-17

160
A1

capillary pressure, meters

140

A2I

120

A2II

100

A2III
A2IV

80

A2V

60

A2VI

40

A2VII
B

20

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

w ater saturation, %

Fig.1- Layerwise capillary Pressure versus water saturation

70

80

90

100

23-26
17-20
20-22
22-24
22-24
23-26
19-21
23-25
21-24
20-21
17-19

V
26-29
20-22
22-27
24-28
24-28
26-30
21-26
25-29
24-29
21-24
19-22

SATURATION MODELING IN A MULTILAYERED CARBONATE

RESERVOIR USING LOG-DERIVED SATURATION-HEIGHT FUNCTION

SPE 75213

0.2

0.16

Frequency, fraction

Frequency, fraction

0.2

0.12
0.08
0.04

0.16
0.12
0.08
0.04

0
1

6 11 16 21 26 31 36

Porosity, %

Fig.2- Porosity Distribution in Layer A1

11 16 21 26 31 36
Porosity, %

Fig.3- Porosity Distribution in Layer A2IV

0.2

0.2

0.16

Frequency, fraction

Frequency, fraction

0.12
0.08
0.04
0
1

11 16 21 26 31 36
Porosity, %

Fig.4- Porosity Distribution in Layer A2VII

0.16
0.12
0.08
0.04
0
1

11 16 21 26 31 36
Porosity, %

Fig.5- Porosity Distribution in Layer C

R. KUMAR, P.K.CHERUKUPALLI, B.L.LOHAR AND D. CHANDRA

SPE 75213

1000
1000
100
Hfwl, m

Hfwl, m

100

10

10
1

BVW(log)

BVW(shf)

0.1
0.01

BVW(shf)

0.1
0.01

BVW(log)
0.1

0.1

BVW

BVW

Fig.6- Log-Log plot of BVW versus Hfwl for Layer A1

Fig.7- Log-Log plot of BVW versus Hfwl for Layer A2IV

1000

1000

100
Hfwl, m

Hfwl,m

100

10

0.1
0.01

10
1

BVW(shf)
BVW(log)
0.1

BVW

Fig.8- Log-Log plot of BVW versus Hfwl for Layer A2VII

0.1
0.01

BVW(shf)
BVW(log)
0.1

BVW

Fig.9- Log-Log plot of BVW versus Hfwl for Layer C

SATURATION MODELING IN A MULTILAYERED CARBONATE

RESERVOIR USING LOG-DERIVED SATURATION-HEIGHT FUNCTION

SPE 75213

160

12-17

17-20

120

17-19

120

20-23

100

19-22

100

23-26

80

26-29

Hfwl, m

Hfwl, m

140

13-17

140

60

22-24

80

24-28

60
40

40

20

20

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Sw , f raction

Sw , fraction

Fig.11-Porosity based Rock Types for Layer A2IV

Fig.10-Porosity based Rock Types for Layer A1

120
100

14-19

80

19-21

70

21-23
23-25
25-29

60

Hfwl, m

Hfwl, m

80

40

15-17
17-19

60

19-20

50

20-21

40

21-24

30
20

20

10
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Sw , f rac tion

Fig.12- Porosity based Rock Types for Layer A2VII

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Sw , fraction

Fig.13- Porosity based Rock Types for Layer C

R. KUMAR, P.K.CHERUKUPALLI, B.L.LOHAR AND D. CHANDRA

160

A2I
A2II

120

0.8

A2III

100

A2IV
A2V

80
60

A2VI
A2VII

40

20

C
D

0
0

0.1

0.2

Sw(shf)

Hfwl, m

A1

140

SPE 75213

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.3

0.2

BVW

0.4

0.6

0.8

Sw (log)

Fig.14- Saturaion Height Functions for different Layers

Fig.15- Sw(log) versus Sw(shf) for Layer A1

0 .8

0.8
0 .4

Sw(shf)

Sw(shf)

1
0 .6

0 .2

0.6
0.4
0.2

0
0

0 .2

0 .4

0 .6

0 .8

S w ( lo g )

0
0

Fig.16- Sw(log) versus Sw(shf) for Layer A2IV

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Sw (log)

Fig.17- Sw(log) versus Sw(shf) for Layer A2VII

1

Sw(shf)

0 .8
0 .6
0 .4
0 .2
0
0

0 .2

0 .4

0 .6

0 .8

S w ( lo g )

Fig.18- Sw(log) versus Sw(shf) for Layer C