SPE
SocIetuofPetroleum~of A!ME
SPE 13529
Modelling the Effects of Shales on Reservoir Performance:
Calculation of Effective Vertical Permeability
by S.H. 8egg and P.R. King, British Petroleum Co. pIc
Copyright 1985, Society of Petroleum Engineers
This paper was presented attha SPE 1985 Reservoir Simulation Symposium held in Dallas, Texas, Feb,,!ary 10-13,1985. The materia.1 is subject to cor.
rection by the author. Permission to copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Write SPE. P.O. Box 833836, RIchardson, Texas
75083-3836. Telex: 730989 SPE OAL.
In this paper we present four methods of
estimating the effective vertical permeability of a
reservoir containing stochastic shales in both two
and three dimensions. The methods vary in their
accuracy, speed and range of applicability. The
first is based on numerical simulation, the second
is an analytical method, the third and fourth are
based on calculating approximate streamline
lengths. The methods give consistent results for
similar models and are used to show that the
effective vertical permeability is strongly
dependent on the shale dimensions, shale fraction
and layer thickness. It is also shown that the
results of the two-dimensional models are
inappropriate even when the megascopic flow is uni-
directional.
1 III'l'RODUC'lIO.
In this paper we address the problem of
estimating the effective vertical permeability of a
reservoir volume which contains a distribution of
small, laterally discontinuous permeability barriers
embedded in a porous medium. Because such
barriers are frequently shales we use this term
throughout the paper, although the methods described
are applicable to any similar barriers. Likewise we
use the term "sand" for the porous medium.
A major step forward in addrersing this
problem was taken by Haldorsen and Lake who devised
a method for calculating the equivalent homogeneous
effective permeability of a reservoir simulation
grid block which contains both shale and sand.
Their method is based on estimating the increase in
streamline tortuosity due to the presence of the
shales. However, it is described only 'for the two-
dimensional case and has the restrictions that the
grid block length should be at least ten times its
height and comparable to the mean shale length.
They also assume that the shales are
References and illustrations at end of paper
331
impermeable and that the sand has a homogeneous
permea bi l i ty.
We present four methods in which some or
all of the above restrictions can be lifted. This
makes a range of techniques available for use
depending on how much is known about the sand and
shale properties and how accurate, quick or cost~
effective a solution is desired. The methods are
applied to a hypothetical distribution of shales in
order to investigate the difference between two-
dimensional (2D) and three dimensional (3D) models.
We also investigate the effect of facies thickness,
shale length and shale length:width ratio on
effective vertical permeability.
2. HCHIUQUES
In this section we describe the four
methods which we have used and discuss their
validity in different situations. The assumptions
common to all four methods are that we have steady-
state flow of a single, incompressible fluid and
that the macroscopic flow is uni-directional.
2.1 Simulation Method
Suppose we have a simulator grid block
with a distribution of shales such as shown in
Fig. 1a. We now overlay a fine-scale grid on which
we can define the positions of the shales by setting
the permeability of each fine-scale block to that of
shale if the majority of the block area is occupied
by shale. This allows, if known, variable and
anisotropiC permeabilities for both sand and shale.
Using the previous assumptions we solve
(by finite differences) Darcy's law with
conservation of mass for the pressure in each fine-
scale grid block. The boundary conditions which we
use are, a) no flow through the sides of the.model
and b) constant pressures, P2 and P1' along 1ts top
and bottom edges. Also, the model is assumed t~ ~e
of unit width (two-dimensional case) and harmon1c
averaging of the permeabilities is used for adjacent
2 CALCULATION OF EFFECTIVE VERTICAL PERMEABILITY
blocks. The total volumetric" flow rate through the
model is then given by Darcy's Law:
Q line segment of length 2a (2D) or a disc of radius a
where: kik grid block permeability
n : fluid viscosity
NX total number of blocks in the i
direction
NZ total number of blocks in the k
direction
6X grid block length
bZ grid block height
Pik = grid block pressure
We now suppose that the grid is replaced
by a single block with an apparently homogeneous
effective vertical permeability, KVE - see
Fig. lb. For the same boundary conditions the total
flow through this block is given by:
Q (2)
where H is the block height and L its length.
Equating these flows gives the effective
permeability to be:
This is easily extended to three dimensions ~
setting the boundary conditions to no flow through
the walls of the model and constant pressures on its
upper and lower surfaces. In this case:
where W is the width of the model and 6Y is the
width of each of NY fine-scale grid blocks in the
second horizontal dimension.
The main disadvantage of this method is
that of computing time which limits the size of the
fine-scale grid. This in turn limits our ability to
resolve detailed shale distributions, especially for
3D problems.
2.2 Analytical Method
In this section we determine the effective
vertical permeability of both a single shale and a
random array of shales of uniform length in both two
and three dimensions. The idea of the method is to
332
SPE 13529
calculate the flow around a single shale given a
uniform flow across the surface of an averaging
volume. For this purp~se it is best to use
elliptical 300rdinates (2D) or oblate spheroidal
coordinates (3D) with the shale represented by a
(3D). For many shales we then assume that the
external uniform flow is that due to the sum of the
individual flows and that perturbations in the flow
are confined to within the averaging volumes of the
individual shales.
2.2.1 Single Shale-2D
Before treating the array of shales we
determine the flow around a single shale. The model
is an isolated shale (a line segment of length 2a in
two dimensions) embedded in a homogeneous medium of
permeability K. We impose a uniform flow at an
angle a to the shale, through the surface of an
averaging area, as shown in Fig. 2. We describe the
flow by Darcy's law with incompressibility:
! -KVp V.v =0
These equations along with the assumption
of uniform background permeability mean that the
pressure is given ~ Laplace's equation,
v2 p =0 (6)
taken along with the boundary conditions of no flow
through the shale.
It is most convenient to use elliptical
coordinates x = a cosh u cos v, y = a sinh u sin v.
The averaging area is bounded ~ the ellipse u=ul
(see Appendix). In the appendix we show that the
pressure within this ellipse is:
p = ;Q cosh u { cos v cos a + coth u
1
sin v sin a}
(7)
To determine the effective permeability of
the ellipse we replace it with an homogeneous medium
such" that the pressure distribution over the surface
is equivalent to (7). The pressure drop across the
surface is calculated for various directions of
applied flow. First we consider two points on the
surface of the ellipse whose separation vector is
perpendicular to the shale (u 1 ,v an~ u 1 ,2w-v 1 ).
1
The distance between two such p01nts is:
d = 2a sinh u sin v (8)
1 1
For flow in the y direction the pressure drop
between these points from (7) is:
2aQ
6p = K cosh u coth u sin v1 (9)
1 1
Hence the vertical permeability is given by;
Q (10)
2
or: K tanh u ( 11)
1
SPE 13529
where u1 is given by the ellipse dimensions (see
Appendix). By considering flows in the other
directions the whole permeability tensor can be
shown to be:
As expected, flow parallel to the shale is
unperturbed because of the shale's infinitesimal
thickness. In the vertical direction the
permeability is low if the shale is large compared
to the averaging area.
2.2.2 Many Shales-2D
We assume an irregular array of shales,
each one having the same direction and orientation -
see Fig. 3. We also assume that the averaging
ellipse is "typical" for the many shale problem.
That is the uniform external flow is that due to the
other shales. If the shales are well separated then
the perturbed flows around each of the shales are
independent so the total flow is the sum of the
individual flows. We call the number of shales per
unit area p. The single shale is then equivalent to
a part of the many shale problem (with number
density of one shale in the area bounded by u=u1) in
,which u1 is given qy:
p 2.3.1
'If a2 sinh u cosh u
1 1
This, along with (11) leads to the following
expression for the vertical permeability.
IL
'-VE
= -K4 {( (-liP a 2 )+ 4) 1/2 - lIpa2}2
2.2.3 Single and Many Shales-3D
In three dimensions we assume that the
shales are discs of radius a, again infinitesimally
thin and with the same orientation. We use exactly
the same reasoning as before except that we use
oblate spheroidal coordinates. We just present the
final results here as the reasoning is identical to
the two dimensional case.
The vertical permeability of an isolated
shale in an ellipsoid bounded by u=ul is:
2 preserved by applying the same boundar,y conditions
sech u
1
K,,=K{1+ -1
E sinh u cot sinh u
1 1 - 1 -"2 sinh u 1
where u1 is given by the ellipsoid dimensions (see
Appendix).
S.H. Begg and P.R. King 3
The vertical permeability of an array of
shales with number denSity (number of shales per
unit volume) p is given qy (15) where u1 is:
sinh u1 {_3_+ (1- + (_3_)2)1/2}1/3
811pa 3 27 811pa 3
( 12)
+
{_3__ (L + (_~)2)1/2}1/3
( 16)
811pa3 27 811pa 3
2.3 Streamline Methods
In this secti?n we present a modification
of Haldorsen and Lake's work which enables us to
remove their restrictions on the length and aspect
ratio of the simulator grid blocks. We also show
that the method is applicable to three dimensional
models. However, it is still necessar,y to assume
that the shales have zero permeability. Our method
is based on reducing the problem to one of
estimating the lengths of a sample of stream-
tubes. We describe two wars of doing this. The
first requires an explicit~escription of the shale
distribution (suc~ as produced qy a random
generation scheme , or is known deterministically)
and gives a solution for that particular shale
arrangement. The second is statistically based and
only requires a cumulative probability density
function (CDF) of shale lengths and an estimate of
shale density for the input.
Theory
Following Haldorsen & Lake 1 we consider
the block shown in Fig. 4. The volumetric flow rate
through this block is given qy:
K
Q"'-W -
~
n S S
(14) where S is the total length along the centre of the
flow path and Ws is the effective streamtube
width. We now treat the problem slightly
differently from the previous workers by considering
a block whicp is divided into an arbitrary sample of
NS equally spaced streamtubes such as shown in
Fig. 5. In this case Equation 17 can be rewritten
as:
Q ( 18)
Now suppose that this block is replaced qy
one with a homogeneous effective vertical perme-
ability (see Fig. 1b) so that the flow rate is
of no flow through the sides and constant pressures
11 along the upper and lower boundaries. Equating (2)
and (18) yields:
( 19)
333
4 CALCULATION OF EFFECTIVE VERTICAL PERMEABILITY
For the above boundary conditions each streamtube
starts and finishes at the same horizontal
position. If we combine this with the assumption of
incompressibility we can further assume that the
areas (in 2D) of the streamtubes are equal (though
the cross-sectional width may vary along a stream
tube) and are given by the total area of sand
divided by the number of streamtubes so that:
A. (20)
~
where WS' is the arithmetic mean width of a
streamtuBe and FS is the fraction of shale. The FS
term can either be determined from the total
thickness of shale observed in wells or it can be
put in as random variable calculated from the number
of shales encountered and a CDF of shale thicknesses
(again from well data). The validity of using the
arithmetic mean is discussed in Section 5. We can
use equation (20) to substitute for WSi in equation
( 19) to gi ve :
S~ ~
and the problem is now.one of estimating the lengths
of a sample of streamtubes. Because we use a sample
of streamtube lengths, rather than just one
effective length, this allows us to drop the
restriction that .the grid length should be
comparable to the mean shale length. Furthermore,
if the same analysis is carried through for the
three-dimensional problem (where the volumes of the
streamtubes are assumed to be equal) it is found
that the extra terms for the width of the grid block
cancel to give equation (21) again.
In the following sections we describe two
methods of calculating approximate streamtube
lengths which allow us to drop the restriction that
H/L should be less than 0.1.
2.3.2 Explicit Method
This method requires the shales to be
defined on a fine-scale numerical grid similar to
that described for the simulation method. The major
difference is that, at present, the sand perme-
ability must be constant and that of the shale
zero. An algorithm was written to trace approximate
streamlines through the grid (see Fig. 6 for a
graphioal description) by following a vertical line
from each starting point until a shale is
encountered. The streamline is then forced to go to
the end of the shale closest to its (horizontal)
home position and the process is repeated until the
top of the grid is reached. Routines are included
to deal with overlapping shales and configurations
which block the streamlines. The fraction of shale
is easily obtained by scanning the grid in each
direction and summing the areas of all fine-scale
grid blocks which have been assigned a zero perme-
ability. The effective permeability is then
calculated using equation (21).
334
SPE 13529
2.3.3 Statistical Method
This method is based on calculating
approximate streamline lengths from the shale length
statistics combined with a knowledge of the number
of shales which a streamline is likely to encounter
(e.g. from well data). For the present we assume
that all the shales are aligned normal to the flow
and thus further assume that a streamline travels a
random fraction of the length of each shale
encountered plus a length equal to the height of the
model, H. The differences between this and the
explicit method are firstly that here the average
number of shales encountered per metre is specified
in advance and is the same for each streamline.
Secondly the shale lengths are taken directly from
the CDF without recourse to the intermediate step of
explicitly generating a shale distribution. Using
this scheme KVE is calculated using equation (21)
where:
Hs+1
s.
~
H + L rl.
J
(22)
j=1
and
s number of shales per metre (e.g. from
well cores or logs)
r random number between 0 and 1
Ij length of the jth shale taken from CDF
Further, if the formation is sufficiently
thick, so that the number of shales per metre in a
well drilled at any point is approximately constant,
we can assume that the length of each streamtube is
approximately constant and given by:
S= H + Hs 2i (23)
where I is the mean shale length. Thus equation
(21) reduces to:
K (1 - F )
S
(24)
(1 +
which gives a quick, simple estimation of KVE with
minimal input required.
The method is easily extended to 3D by
choosing both a length and a width for each shale
encountered (from the same or different CDF's). A
random fraction of both length and width is then
calculated and the minimum of these chosen as the
amount by which to increment the streamline
length. That is, Si is given by:
Hs+1
H + L min (r 1 ., r w .)
1 J 2 J
j=1
where w is the width of the jth shale. The
physicat reasoning behind using the minimum length
is that the streamtubes will take the shortest path
available to minimise the kinetic energy.
SPE 13529 S.H. Begg and P.R. King
It can be shown that the 3D equivalent to
equation (24) is:
K (1
(26)
I 2
(1 + s -)
3 line of length H drawn normal to their orientation
For flows which are not normal to the shales an
approximate KYE could be determined by replacing rlj
by r ~osa Ij in equations (22) and (25) and 1 by
cosa 1 in (24) and (26).
3. VALIDA'rIOI, COllPARISOI AD LIJII'l'HIOIS OF TIlE
JlftHODS
The simulation method can be checked
against an exact solution for the case of a single
shale which extends completely across the grid.
Consider a 30 x 30 grid with a sand permeability of
300md and a shale which is three blocks thick with a
permeability of 0.1 md. The true effective
permeability is given by the harmonic mean of the
layer permeabilities which is 1.543md for the above
model. The simulation method gave a KVE of 1.528md
which is only about 1% in error. We thus take the
simulation method as an acceptable standard with
which to compare the other methods.
3.1 Comparison and Validation
The analytical and explicit streamline
methods were compared with the simulation method in
both 2D and 3D. For the case of a single shale of
variable length, in a box of fixed length 1, Fig. 7
shows the 3D results. It can be seen that there is
very good agreement between the three methods,
particularly when the shale length is less than two-
thirds (1/1>1.5) of the box length.
For the case of more than one shale we
compared the explicit streamline method with the
simulation method for 11 specific shale distri-
butions. The KyE's which we obtained are plotted in
Fig. 8 where the number of shales in each grid are
also indicated. As can be seen the points lie close
to a line of unit slope. Thif result is comparable
to that of Haldorsen and Lake
For the case of a statistically
homogeneous array of many shales of uniform length
we compared the explicit (equation (21 and
statistical (equations (24) and (26 streamline
methods with the analytical method. The 2D results
are shown in Fig. 9 and the 3D results in Fig. 10.
against the term pI
2
Note that the effec ive p~rmeability is plotted
(pI in 3D) which is a
dimensionless factor which describes the shale
length and density.
The number of shales en~ountered by a
streamline, shale fraction and pI are related in
the following way. The number density p is defined
as the number of shales divided by the total area A
of the region in which they occur. Hence the shale
fraction is:
335
5
(27)
where t is the (constant) shale thickness. For a
statistically homogeneous array of shales the shale
fraction is also given by the amount of shale
intersecting a line drawn through the array. For a
this is:
(28)
and equating these two expressions gives:
(29)
Thus given values of p, 1, H , and t we can
determine FS and NS for ~se with the statistical
streamline method and pI for the analytical
method. Note that the streamline results are
calculated for shales of various length:thickness
ratios to show the effect of shales of finite
thickness - the analytical method assumes that the
shales are infinitesimally thin. The following
points can be made.
As the shale length:thickness ratio increases
the KYE/K ratio approaches that given by the
analytical method.
The 3D effective vertical permeability is higher
than the 2D value for shales of the same
dimension.
The two streamline methods agree well with each
other at low densities. No results were
obtained at high densities because of problems
with the algorithm for tracing streamlines
through densely packed shales.
The agreement between the streamline methods and
the analytical method is worst at low
densities. This is because, in the former
methods, the approximation of the streamline
lengths (grid height plus, on average, half the
length of each shale encountered) is an
overestimate for low tortuosity streamlines.
Thus we have shown that for a single shale
the analytical and explicit streamline methods agree
well with the simulation method. In the analytical
case the differences that do exist are due to the
models being slightly different in terms of their
boundary conditions. In the streamline case they
are due to the streamline lengths being approxi-
mated. In the many shale cases any differences will
be due to statistical fluctuations which will be
small for large arrays of shales. Also, the
behaviour of the statistical streamline method
approaches that of the analytical method when the
models become similar (i.e. the shales become long
and thin) and so we can say that the statistical
streamline method is also a good approximation to
the simulation method.
Therefore, since:
6 CALCULATION OF EFFECTIVE VERTICAL PERMEABILITY
a) we take the simulation method as being
correct, and
b) we get consistent results between the
methods for similar models in both two and
three dimensions
we can say that this validates the methods.
3.2 Limitations
As was mentioned earlier the main
limitation of the simulation method is one of CPU
time and so only small grids can be used. One is
therefore limited in the size and resolution of
shale distributions which can be analysed. However,
the method could be useful in determining the
effective vertical permeability of a region where
there are only a few shales whose positions are
known by correlation of well cores and logs.
On the other hand the analytical method
requires the assumption of a statistically
homogeneous (and therfore large) array of shales and
gives a very quick result. It is limited though in
that strictly it applies only to sparse, infini-
tesimally-thin shales of constant length. However,
we have shown that the sparsity and thickness
constraints need not be fulfilled and so it is only
the constant length assumption that is troublesome
when the shale lengths form a broad distribution.
This is because it is not obvious which length
should be taken as "typical".
The explicit streamline method can be used
for reasonably large problems (we have used it on a
50 x 50 x 50 grid) and is not restricted to shales
of constant length or thickness. Nor is it
restricted to random distributions of shales but can
be applied to arrays in which the user defines
trends or specific patterns. Its main limitations
are,
the algorithm fails for dense and/or complex
shale configurations
although up to 1000 times faster than the
simulation method it is still time consuming for
repeated application to large problems
the shales must be defined explicitly.
The statistical streamline method has the
advantages that it can be applied directly to a CDF
of shale lengths and is very quick. It could also
be applied to a layered system with different CDF's
and sand permeabilities in each layer as long as the
layers are thick enough to give a statistically
homogeneous shale distribution. It cannot be
applied to specific shale distributions or ones
which contain very few shales. However, in the next
section we show that a mean KVE can be obtained for
sparse sub-sections of a large array (which is
statistically homogeneous) if we have some knowledge
of how the shale density is distributed.
336
SPE 13529
4. APPLICATIOIl
In this section we apply the methods to a
hypothetical geological facies in which the shale
length distribution is that shown in Fig. 11, the
sand permeability is 700 md and the shale fraction
is 0.055. Such a shale distribution could be
arrived at by consideration of the depositional
environment and mechanism~ or measurements taken
from outcrops, e.g. Zeito
4.1 Variation of KVi with Facies Thickness
The basic technique used here is to make a
large number of measurements (500) of KVE at a
variety of sample grid heights (equivalent to facies
thicknesses) and then calculate the geometric mean
of each set of 500 values. The geometric mean was
calculated since it was thought to be more "typical"
of the resulting skew distributions than the
arithmetic. This was initially done using the 2D
explicit streamline method for a large array of
shales generated by a scheme rimilar to that
described by Haldorsen & Lake - see Fig. 12. The
mean value of each facies thickness is plotted in
Fig. 13. The size of array needed for the largest
thickness was 1000 x 400 blocks which required very
large amounts of CPU time (approximately 16 hours on
a VAX 11/780) to obtain 500 values. Because we
wished to extend the analysis to three dimensions
and to determine the sensitivity of KVE to shale
lengths and widths we decided to make use of the
statistical streamline method.
To use the statistical method for thin
facies (where the shale distribution is not
homogeneous in the sample grid) it was necessary
first to sample the large array to obtain CDF's of
the number of shales intersected by lines of the
same height as the grids used to produce the
explicit curve in Fig. 13. In a field application a
rough CDF could be obtained by examining the number
of shales encountered in sections of the facies
which are observed in wells.
Having obtained a set of CDF's for
different grid heights we proceeded to use equations
(21) and (22) by choosing a value of NS at random
from the relevant CDF for each of the 500 samples of
each grid height. The lengths of 50 streamlines
were calculated for each sample for both the
explicit and statistical methods. As can be seen
from Fig. 13 the resulting curve matches the
explicit method curve very well.
The statistical method was then applied to
the three-dimensional problem in which it was
assumed that the statistics shown in Fig. 11
described both the length and width of the shales.
The curve for these results is also shown in
Fig. 13. From the three curves we conclude that:
the statistical streamline method can be applied
to SUb-sections of a sta.istically homogeneous
shale distribution which themselves may no
longer be statistically homogeneous.
SPE 13529 S.H. Begg and P.R. King
for facies which are not thick enough to give a
statistically homogeneous distribution the
effective vertical permeability is strongly
dependent on the thickness
the three-dimensional model gives a higher
effective permeability than the equivalent two
dimensional ,model.
4.2 Sensitivity of KVi to Shale Length CPF
To investigate the effect of different
shale length distributiona on KYE we approximated
the hypothetical distribution shown in Fig. 10 by a
triangular one based on the minimum, maximum and
most likely shale lengths. This enabled us to
calculate analytically the associated CDF's for
various most likely shale lengths. One hundred
values were calculated at each length by the 3D
statistical streamline method (equations (21) and
(25 for a 125m thick facies - i.e. one where the
gradient of the KVE v. thickness curve is nearly
zero and therefore can be considered statistically
homogeneous. The means of each set of 100 values
are shown in Fig. 14 where it can be seen that the
effective permeability decreases rapidly for short
shale lengths and therefore any uncertainty in such
~engths could lead to a large error in the estimated
VEe
4.3 Sensitivity of KVi to Shale Length;Width
Ratio
In this section we again use the 3D
statistical streamline method but vary the shale
length:width ratio. This was done by using the
original CDF to choose shale lengths and then
calculating 100 values of KVE for various specified
shale widths. The mean KYE for each shale width is
plotted in Fig. 15.
This model can be checked at two widths.
The first is at the width which is equal to the
(arithmetic) mean shale length (113m). In this case
we are solving a problem very similar to the earlier
case where the same CDF was used for both length and
wid th and the facies was thick (- 100m). Fig. 14
gives a value of 52md and Fig. 15 of 45md. This is
a good agreement considering that the models are
somewhat different. The second place where the
curve can be checked is at very large shale widths
in which case the 3D model becomes very similar to
the 2D model. For a shale width of 2000m (mean
length 113m) the 3D model gives a KYE of 21md
whereas the 2D model for thick facies gives 20md.
This consistency between model results gives
increased confidence in their validity.
5 DISCUSSIOIf
In section 2.3.1 we used an expression for
the arithmetic mean width of a streamtube to
substitute for the effective streamtube width in
equation (19). Strictly we should use a harmonic
mean width so that the effective width decreases
337
7
rapidly for shale arrangements which cause a severe
constriction of the streamtube over a short section
of its length. In this case there will be a large
difference between the arithmetic and harmonic mean
widths. Such a situation would only occur for the
case of a sparse non statistically homogeneous shale
distribution where the shales overlap to leave a
narrow gap for the streamlines to pass through. The
problem does not occur for densely packed shales as
the streamtubes will be constricted over most of
their lengths and so there will not be a great
difference between the arithmetic and harmonic mean
widths.
Of prime importance in the application of
any of these techniques is the question of whether a
2D or 3D model should be used. In section 4.3 we
showed that the 2D and 3D models only gave similar
results in the extreme case of a shale length:width
ratio of less than about 1:20. This is because even
when the large (compared to shales) scale flow
pattern is uni-directional the local flow near a
shale is always three-dimensional. Since the
effective permeability is calculated by estimating
the combined perturbations caused by individual
shales the local 3D flows do affect the final
result, It is only in rare circumstances therefore
that a 2D model can be used.
The streamline methods require only minor
modifications to make them applicable to layered
systems with different sand permeabilities in each
layer. It must also be stressed that all of the
methods described here have only been tested for
single phase flow. Further investigation is needed
to determine the effective vertical permeability in
a region where there is gravity segregation of two
phases.
6 COIfCLUSIOIfS
1. Four methods of determining the effective
vertical permeability of a distribution of
shales in a porous medium have been described.
The methods vary in their range of applic-
ability, speed, ease of use and quantity of
input data which is required. They are found to
give consistent results for similar models in
both two and three dimensions.
2. Effective vertical permeability is strongly
dependent on the shale dimensions, shale density
and facies thickness.
3. The results of two dimensional models are
inappropriate even when the major flow is uni-
directional and normal to the alignment of the
shales. An exception to this is the unlikely
case when the shales themselves can be
considered to have effectively only one
horizontal dimension.
4. The methods described provide a practical
set of techniques for estimating the effective
vertical permeability of a shaley region. They
offer the hope of better predictions of
8 CALCULATION OF EFFECTIVE VERTICAL PERMEABILITY SPE 13529

effective vertical pe~eability, based on APPERDIX

geological data, for use in reservoir
simulators.
The elliptical coordinate system used is
shown in Fig. 16 where the curves u = constant are
ellipses. The curve u=O is the line joining the
7. .IOJIDCLA'fURB foci and is coincident with the shale. In these
coordinates Laplace's equation becomes:

FS fraction of shale
H height of block
(Al)
L length of a block
1 or 2a z shale length
NS number of streamtubes This has the general solution:
r random number between 0 and 1
S streamline length P = I (an sinh nu + bn oOsh nu).
s number of shales per metre n=o
(c n sin nv + dn cos nv) (A2)
t shale thickness
W width of block
The boundary condition for no flow through the shale
Ws streamtube width is:
effective streamtube width
Ws (~) .. 0
w shale width u=o
p shale number density
Hence ~ .. 0 for all n.
a angle of the major flow direction
with respect to the shales. From this the flow across an ellipse u = u1 is:

q =
8. ACDOVLKDGBDft

We would like to thank colleagues in the

Reservoir Technology Branch for critical comment on
this study and manuscript. Permission to publish
was given by the British Petroleum Company pIc.
where u1 is related to the size of the ellipse by
_ h- (semi-majOr axis)
u1-cOS 1 a
9. urERBlCBS
Uniform flow at an angle a across this ellipse is
Haldorsen, H.H. and Lake, L.W.: "A New given by:
Approach to Shale Management in Field Scale
Simulation Models", SPE 10976.

2. Weber, K.G.: "Influence of Common

Sedimentary Structures on Fluid Flow in
Reservoir Models", SPEJ, March 1982.
{sinh u cos v cos a + cosh u sin v sin a} (A5)
Morse, P.M. and Feshbach, H.: "Methods of 1 1
Theoretical Physics", McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1953.
Comparing terms shows that only the n ,. 1
4. Neale, G. and Nader, W.K.: "Prediction of terms remain and the coefficients are:
Transport Processes wi thin Porous Media",
AICHE J., 22(1), pp 182-188, 1976.
c1 = a KQ coth u 1 sin a (A6)
Zeito, G.A.: "Interbedding of Shale Breaks
and Reservoir Heterogeneities", J. Pet.
Tech., Oct. 1965, pp 1223-1228. d
1
= ~Q
K
cos a

which leads directly to (7).

338
 Oa P
Oa Uo
2

APPARENTLY
HOMOGENEOUS
BLOCK WITH
IIH
EFFECTIVE
PERMEABILITY

K
VE

P, . ..
L
a) b)
Fig. l-(a) Shales delined on a linescale grid. and (b) equivalent block with a homogeneous K VE '
Uo
Fig. 2-Flow around a single shale.

{Jo
-2-0-
(3
en
tuo
-0

-
f'T1

Fig. 3-Uniform flow through an array of shales.

....... W
VJ
s
Fig. 4-Single tortuous streamtube.
U1
rv
'"
 rv
r--

Fig. 5-Sample of uniformly spaced streamtubes.

Fig. 6-Approxlmation of str<lamline length.

1.0

0.8 SINGLE SHALE 3D

~

" 0.6
~
~

0.4

------- Explicit Streamline

U)

~ 0.2 Simulation

....... Analytical
VJ
U1
0.0 I , I , I f

rv 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

,.() L/I
Fig. 7-Comparison of methods-single shale in 3~.
 1.0 ~
100.
Analytical
"0 o.a statistical streamlfne:
E BO . 2 ~
4. 14. .!Ie 24m long IIhales
2 ./""3
W . . . Explicit streamline:

~
>
60.
3
"
~
~
0.6 4. t 4. &: 24m long shales

W 4
z
3~6
:J f 0.4
~ 40.
W
a:::
0.2
~ 20. ~ 44-./-2

o. V

O. 20.
t

40.
,

60.
I I

80.
!

100.
0.0 ' , , ,====--- , ,
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
SIMULATION KVE. md pl2
FJg. t-CompariaOfl of methOd.......sav.ra! ,haIN in 20. F.o t-Compafison of methods-many shalft. in 20.

1.0. 3D
0.006
t ... SHALE LENGTH PDF
Analyttcal

o.al ~ StatistIcal streamline:

~
~
. 4. 14. .!II!: 24m long shal
Expltclt streamline:
4, 14, .!II!: 24m long .hal
iii
~
0.005

" 0.6 Q 0.004

~ )..
~ ....
:::; O.oo.s
......
0.4 III
~
~ 0.002

t ~
~
0.2 0.007

en
-0
IT1 0.0 I , , I ----, I O.OOO~
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 o. 700. 200. .sOD. 400. 500.
pi- SHALE LENGTH, rn
......... Fig. 1ct-Comparlson of mathoc-.,.."y thalli to 30, fig. l1-ProbabiIlty denalty func1ion of .m.lengthl .

VJ
V1
N
~
 -- -- --- ---- -- - ......---
----
- --=--
- --- or-_----
----- =--
-=---
-- - - - - -- - --- --
-
=-- ---

- -
--- ~-

----=- ~-~:::---=
-- -~

--
-=.-
-- -- -
-=- -
--
~--=---
-::r--
--- -=-
- - --
-=--
--~
.

---==:II'- --- -
;;;.---,-::.
----

- -- ----= -= -
fig. 12-Shale section produced by a random generation scheme.

0$50.
SENSITIVITY OF K TO
VE
FACIES THICKNESS 2D&30
JOO.

250.

1)
E 200.
.
150.
~~
100.
3D

50.
20
EXPLICIT
o.o.
20. 40. 60. SO. 100.
FACIES THICKNESS. m
Fig. l3-Sensitivity of KVE to facies thickness.

13529
 140. SENSITIVITY OF KVE TO
SHALE LENGTH 3D
120.

100.

1)
E BO.

60.
~!

40.

20.

O.
O. 50. 100. 750. 200.
MOST LIKL Y SHALE LENGTH. n7
Fig. 14-Sen.~jyily of K\IE 10 shale width.

SENSITIVITY OF K
VE
400. TO SHALE WIDTH

300.

"~200.
~

100.

O.L-______~~~~~----~~~~~~~~~
O. 100. 200. 300. 400. 500.
SHALE WIDTH. rn
Fig. 15-Sensilivity of Kve to .hale length COF.

SPE 13529
 v=n/2
v-21T'/3 vC=1T'/3

v=1T' v=Q
v-21T'

v = 41T'/3 v=51T'/3
V== 1T/2
Fig. 16-Two-dimensional elliptical coordinates.
ERRATUM

SPE 13529

MODELLING THE EFFECTS OF SHALES ON RESERVOIR

PERFORMANCE: CALCULATION OF EFFECTIVE
VERTICAL PERMEABILITY
S.H. Begg and P.R. King

Equation (14) on page 3 should read

KV E =
K [\(11'
4" ft 2 2+)412
p a) - 7T P
2 2
a ]