Permeability Prediction by Hydraulic Flow
UnitsĊTheory and Applications
Maghsood Abbaszadeh, SPE, Japan Natl. Oil Corp.; Hikari Fujii, SPE, Arabian Oil Co. Ltd.; and
Fujio Fujimoto, Japan Natl. Oil Corp.
Summary
An improved technique based on the concept of hydraulic flow units
or hydraulic units (HU’s) is presented to calculate permeability dis-
tribution in uncored wells. Graphical probability methods, nonlin-
ear regression, and the Ward’s analytical algorithm are presented to
perform cluster analysis on core data and identify prevailing HU’s
in a formation. A Bayesian-based probabilistic approach is dis-
cussed next to estimate HU’s and permeability distributions in
logged wells. This is an inverse problem that requires constructing
an a priori training database to capture implicit relationships be-
tween core-derived HU’s and various well log measurements. In-
formation from the database is drawn statistically to infer HU dis-
tributions at target logged wells. The method is applied to two
heterogeneous reservoirs, a carbonate formation, and a laminated
sandstone formation. Comparisons of permeabilities calculated by
the HU approach and other conventional techniques are provided
that demonstrate the usefulness of the HU method.
Introduction
Estimation of permeability in uncored but logged wells is a generic
problem common to all reservoirs. Any field-scale reservoir charac-
terization study inevitably requires knowledge of petrophysical prop-
erties at drilled wells for its starting point. Therefore, scientifically
sound and geologically compatible procedures must be sought to al-
low for reliable calculation of permeability distributions in wells.
Traditional approaches for estimation of permeability are based
either on simple linear regressions or empirical inferences that use
correlations among various well log responses. Usually, these em-
pirically inferred models apply locally because there may be large
differences in depositional characteristics at other locations. The re-
gression method assumes that a linear relationship exists between
core porosity and the logarithm of core permeability. Another linear
regression establishes dependency between measured core porosity
and well log-derived porosity. These two regression models, when
combined, allow calculation of permeability at logged wells. The
method explicitly ignores the scatter of data about the regression
lines and implicitly attributes any scatter to measurement errors or
second-order fluctuations in reservoir characteristics.
A partial improvement to this method is achieved by first identi-
fying lithological categories of the formation1-3 and then calculat-
ing linear regression lines for petrophysical core measurements that
belong to each lithology class. Because the regression methods
smooth data, the predicted permeability values from these regres-
sion models lack the variability seen on actual core data. For this
reason, probability field simulations may be applied to add stochas-
tic fine-scale variations to the predicted permeability values.4,5
A more reasonable approach for prediction of permeability is to ad-
dress the development of permeability in reservoir rocks from funda-
mentals of geology and physics of flow at pore network scale. This
is best achieved by attributing the nature of interdependency between
permeability and porosity to geological variations in reservoir rock
and by seeking functional relationships for permeability that capture
geological controls on flow properties. This will require establishing
causal relationships between core-derived pore-throat parameters
and log-derived macroscopic petrophysical attributes.6 Such relation-
ships are achieved best if rocks of similar fluid conductivity are iden-
Copyright 1996 Society of Petroleum Engineers
Original SPE manuscript received for review 6 July 1995. Revised manuscript received 30
October 1996. Paper peer approved 31 October 1996. Paper (SPE 30158) first presented at
the 1995 SPE Petrovietnam Conference held in Hochiminh, 1–3 March.
SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996
tified and grouped together. Each grouping is referred to as an HU.
The HU’s do not necessarily correspond to lithofacies, which have
been referred to as geological flow units.4
Petrophysical properties are controlled by both depositional char-
acteristics, such as grain-size and sorting, and by diagenetic features,
such as the amount and type of cement or clay minerals. Thus, an HU
involves more than a genetic facies of a depositional system. General-
ly, the variability of petrophysical properties is large among the HU’s
and low within them. Permeability calculation by HU’s offers an im-
proved estimation over traditional regression-based averaged rela-
tionships by incorporating geology and fluid-flow principles. The ex-
tent of improvement depends mainly on the geological characteristics
of the formation, where larger enhancements are usually achieved in
more heterogeneous deposits. In any case, the method can describe
permeability variations in a reservoir more comprehensively and real-
istically because it integrates geology, petrophysics, and engineering.
This paper presents an improved technique for permeability es-
timation using HU’s. The basic concept of HU’s is first reviewed,
and the theoretical basis for their classification in cored wells is pro-
vided. Next, a statistically based inference method is presented to
identify HU’s in uncored but logged wells and thereafter to calculate
permeability distributions. Lastly, the applicability of the improved
permeability estimation technique to a carbonate and a sandstone
reservoirs is illustrated.
Method
Concept of HU’s. An HU is defined as the representative volume
of total reservoir rock within which geological properties that con-
trol fluid flow are internally consistent and predictably different
from properties of other rocks. Thus, a flow unit is a reservoir zone
that is continuous laterally and vertically and has similar flow and
bedding characteristics.7 HU’s are related to geological facies dis-
tributions but do not necessarily coincide with facies boundaries.
The parameters that influence fluid flow are mainly pore-throat geo-
metrical attributes. The pore geometry is in turn controlled by min-
eralogy (type, abundance, location) and texture (grain size, grain
shape, sorting, packing). Various combinations of these geological
properties can lead to distinct rock flow units that have similar fluid
transport properties. Therefore, an HU can include several rock fa-
cies types, depending on their depositional texture and mineralogi-
cal content. The grouping of rocks based on their fundamental geo-
logical flow attributes is the basis of HU classification.
If a porous medium is simulated as a bundle of straight capillary
tubes, the following expression for rock permeability is obtained by
combining Darcy’s law for flow in porous media and Poiseuille’s
law for flow in tubes8:
2
k + r f e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
8
This is a simple but important relationship because it shows that the
factor that relates permeability to porosity depends on the pore char-
acteristic (here, pore radius), which is a geological feature of a sedi-
mentary rock. For a realistic model of a porous medium where the
connected pore structure is not straight, Kozeny,9 and later Kozeny-
Carman,10 added a tortuousity factor and used mean pore radius in
Eq. 1. The mean pore radius is defined as the ratio of crosssectional
area and wetted perimeter. This is related to the surface area per unit
grain volume. The generalized Kozeny-Carman equation with these
modifications to Eq. 1 results in10
f 3e 1 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)
k+
ǒ1 * f eǓ 2 F st 2S 2gv
263
where k is in mm2 and sgv is in mm–1. The effective porosity, fe , is
obtained from core or appropriate log data. The constant Fs t2
is known as the Kozeny constant, which is usually between 5 and
100 for most reservoir rocks. This variation in Fs t2 is the main li-
mitation for the universal use of the model because in practice the
Kozeny constant is not known for a given formation. The entire term
Fs t2Sgv is a function of geological characteristics of porous media
and varies with changes in pore geometry. Thus, this term captures
the geological aspect of HU’s. The determination and discrimina-
tion of the Fs t2Sgv group is the central part of the HU classification
technique, which is described in the following. Eq. 2 can be written
in field units (i.e., permeability is in md) as
0.0314 Ǹfk + 1 *f f ǸF 1tS ,
e
e
e s gv
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)
where the constant 0.0314 is the conversion factor from mm2 to md.
Define flow zone indicator (FZI) as
Fz i + 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4)
ǸF s tS gv
and reservoir quality index (RQI) as
I rq + 0.0314 Ǹfk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
e
Then, Eq. 3 becomes
I rq + f z F zi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (6)
or
logǒI rqǓ + logǒf zǓ ) logǒF ziǓ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7)
where
fe
fz + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (8)
1 * fe
Thus, Fzi can be calculated from Eq. 6 for each sample point where
permeability and porosity values are measured. A plot of Irq vs. fz
on log-log coordinates will be a straight line with the slope equal to
one if Fzi is constant for all core samples. Representation of data on
a log-log graph is more useful because unit slope lines can be distin-
guished fairly easily. Data samples with similar but not identical FZI
values will be located around a single unit-slope straight line with
a mean FZI value. Samples with significantly different FZI will lie
on other parallel unit-slope lines. Each line is a HU with an
associated mean FZI value. The mean FZI value is the intercept of
a unit-slope line with the coordinate fz +1. The scatter of data about
the straight lines is owing to measurement errors in core data analy-
sis6 and minor fluctations around main geological controls on pore-
throat characteristics of rock samples.
The basic idea of HU classification is to identify groupings of data
classes that form the unit-slope straight lines on a log-log plot of Irq
vs. fz . Permeability of a sample point is then calculated from a per-
tinent HU using its mean FZI value and the corresponding sample
porosity,
2 f 3e
k + 1014ǒF ziǓ 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (9)
ǒ1 * f eǓ
It is interesting to note that the group k/fe has had a basic use in res-
ervoir characterization in delineating layering based on the speed of
flow in the layers.11 This provides an interesting link between the
concept of HU and the previously proven useful reservoir character-
ization method. The following section describes the methodology
for the classification of HU’s.
HU Classification Using Core Data. After calculating pore-throat-
related parameters of RQI and FZI from core information, HU’s can
be identified based on FZI values. Although there should exist one
single FZI value for each HU, a distribution for each FZI around its
true mean results because of random measurement errors in core
264
Fig. 1—Schematic of flow-zone identification.
analysis. When multiple HU groups exist, the overall FZI distribu-
tion function is a superposition of the individual distribution func-
tions around their mean FZI. Identification of each mean FZI, or the
corresponding HU, would require decomposition of the overall FZI
distribution into its constituting elements. This is a desuperposition
problem and cluster analysis techniques allow for such a decom-
position process.
Three approaches, histogram analysis, probability plot, and the
Ward’s analytical algorithm, are discussed for cluster analysis, al-
though there are other declustering procedures, such as dendrogram
or rose diagram.12 The declustering of FZI is performed on the basis
of logarithm of FZI because FZI values calculated from actual field
data usually exhibit log-normal distribution. This can be attributed
to the strong dependency of FZI on permeability, which in turn often
is log-normal Gaussian distribution.
Graphical Clustering Method. Graphical clustering methods of
histogram analysis and probability plot provide a general visual
image of an FZI distribution to determine the number of HU’s, their
mean values, and their distribution types. Although these visual ap-
proaches may carry biased errors throughout the analysis, many
field problems can be handled reasonably well with this method. A
combination of graphical approaches with regression analysis and
analytical clustering methods would be most useful in better delin-
eation of the flow units.
Histogram Approach. Because FZI distribution is a superposition
of multiple log-normal distributions, a histogram of FZI (with the
log scale in the x-axis) should show “n” number of normal distribu-
tions for “n” number of HU’s. This is schematically shown in Fig.
1. The convolved frequency distribution for a mixture of multiple
Gaussian probability density functions is described by
ƪ ƫ
NU
ȍǸw
2
i (z * z i)
f+ exp * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10)
i+1 2ps 2i 2s 2i
and,
NU
ȍ w + 1,
i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (11)
i+1
where the weight factors wi are for generalization purposes to em-
phasize some distribution functions, if desired. In general, wi are
themselves from a probability density function. For equally
weighted distributions,
w i + 1 for all i + 1, . . . , N U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12)
NU
When clusters are distinctly separate, the histogram clearly delin-
eates each HU and provides their corresponding FZI values. This is
the easiest and the simplest approach. However, it is often difficult
SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996
to separate the overlapped individual distributions from a histogram
plot. Therefore, this method is not suitable for most field applica-
tions because the transition zones between HU’s often clouds the
judgment on their identity.
Probability Plot Approach. The probability plot (or cumulative dis-
tribution function) is the integral of histogram (probability density
function), and, as such, it is a smoother plot than the histogram. The
scatter in data is reduced on this plot and the identification of clusters
becomes easier. The cumulative distribution function is given by
F+1 1)
2
ƪ NU
ȍ w erf (z 2s
i+1
i
*z)
i
i
ƫ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (13)
A normal probability plot has a specially arranged coordinate sys-
tem where a normal distribution forms a distinct straight line.
Hence, the number of straight lines and the limiting boundary values
of FZI or each HU can be obtained from the probability plot of
log(Fzi ). Because mean FZI values are not calculated from probabil-
ity plots, the representative FZI value for each HU is obtained by av-
eraging all the FZI values within the corresponding HU limits. This
exactly corresponds to a linear least-squares regression of data
where the slope of the regression line is equal to unity. The probabil-
ity method is more useful than the histogram method because it is
easier to identify straight lines visually, although the superposition
effects may shift or distort the straight lines to some degree.
Nonlinear Regression. Because FZI distribution function is a
complex convolution of multi-Guassian distributions, nonlinear re-
gression analysis offers a robust means for decomposing such a
multimodal distribution. In this approach, an objective function is
minimized and the unknown parameters of mean and standard devi-
ation of the comprising distribution functions are obtained. The ob-
jective function is defined as
n all
W+ ȍƪF *
j
2
* F jǒz i, s i, N UǓƫ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (14)
j+1
where F* is the measured cumulative distribution function, and F
is the calculated one by Eq. 13. Equivalently, the regression can also
be done on the histogram data. Any standard nonlinear regression
algorithm13 can be used to optimize W in Eq. 14. The mean of indi-
vidual distribution functions from Eq. 14 corresponds to the FZI val-
ues of each HU. It is also possible to regress on the number of HU’s
as an unknown parameter.
Ward’s Algorithm. The Ward’s algorithm is an analytical tech-
nique in hierarchical cluster analysis.12,14 In this method, the dis-
tance between data points (FZI values) are calculated, initially treat-
ing each sample data as a cluster. Next, the two clusters that are
closest in distance are merged and the distance of new clusters from
other clusters is computed. The process of distance calculation and
merging of clusters is continued until all available data points are
merged or until the required number of clusters is attained. The
number of clusters is an input into the Ward’s algorithm. Graphical
methods, especially the probability plot, provide a good means to
determine an appropriate number of HU’s for a data set.
One of the advantages of the Ward’s algorithm over the others is
its special treatment of the cluster variances. Clusters are formed so
as to minimize the increase in the within-cluster sums of squares of
deviations from their mean. The distance between two clusters
causes an increase in the sum of squares if the two clusters were
merged. Therefore, each cluster tends to attain a minimum spread
around its mean value while having maximum separation from the
other clusters. This is exactly what is expected from a HU. The with-
in-group sum of squared deviations is calculated as
ng ni
W+ ȍ ȍǒz ij * z iǓ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (15)
2 method and is shown in Fig. 3, where only two well logs have been
i+1 j+1
HU Prediction Using Log Data. The major task is to predict HU’s
in wells where only well log measurements are available. This is an
SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996
Fig. 2—Correlating well log measurements to core-derived HU’s.
inverse process that requires a probabilistic approach. Three steps
are needed for the inference of HU distribution at logged wells.
First, those logs that are sensitive to dynamic flow parameters of
pore-throat attributes are identified. This is done by either assessing
the degree of correlatability of various logs with permeability or FZI
through rank correlation, or by performing principal component
analysis.15,16 The second step involves constructing a training data-
base that captures information on the inter-relationship between
logs and HU’s. The third step uses the database information and well
log measurements to infer distribution of HU’s statistically along
the logged wells. The following discusses these steps in detail.
Rank Correlation. Spearman’s rank correlation calculates the de-
gree of correlation between a set of measurements on two variables.
Each variable is ranked in descending or ascending order, and the
correlation number between ranks of any two variables is computed.
In this work, the correlation between various electrical well log
measurements and core data such as permeability, RQI, or FZI are
investigated, and logs with higher magnitudes of rank correlation
are selected. The number of logs to be used is rather subjective, but
generally those with high-correlation numbers should be used. Al-
though the exact nature of variations in well log and core measure-
ments are not considered in rank correlation, the procedure is ex-
tremely useful because it identifies well logs with poor correlation
numbers effectively. These logs are eliminated from the process of
HU prediction as they have no impact in relating HU’s to log meas-
urements.
The rank correlation number between ranks of two variables X
and Y (for example, FZI and gamma ray log from all wells com-
bined) is computed from
ȍ(X * Y)
n
2
6
i+1
rs + 1 * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (16)
n(n 2 * 1)
Training Database. A training database that captures interde-
pendency of well logs and core information is developed by corre-
lating the HU category of each cored sample data with the selected
well logs. The correlation process is illustrated in Fig. 2 for a well
that is both cored and logged. At each depth where core measure-
ments of porosity and permeability are available, a HU category can
be determined by the procedure described earlier. Well log parame-
ters of x1, x2 , . . . , xN are assigned to that HU group. The process
is repeated for all depths until all available log information are used
and each depth is assigned a HU category.
Next, a multidimensional crossplot or histogram of well logs is
constructed and the depth-assigned HU information is transferred to
this crossplot. Each axis of this crossplot is divided into classes (or in-
tervals) to create cells that group similar well log data; thus, each cell
contains a distribution of HU categories. This is a simple binning
considered and only one cell has been highlighted for illustration pur-
poses. The numbers in the cell represent HU’s that could be obtained
for all values of Log 1 within Class 6 and Log 2 within Class 5 through
the entire well depths where log measurements were made. From
these numbers, a distribution function for HU’s is obtained in that cell.
265

Fig. 3—Construction of training database.
For data where changes over the range of a log measurements are
heavily dependent on the log value (say, resistivity data), some non-
linear scale change (for example, logarithm transformation) is neces-
sary. A similar crossplot approach has been used by Telzaleff et. al17
for obtaining facies distributions from well logs.
In each cell of the histogram, the conditional probability of occur-
rence of an individual HU, p(U|x), given well log measurements of
x is calculated using information contained in the same cell. These
probability calculations require Bayesian inferences discussed next.
Bayesian Inference. The principal is to assign a probability dis-
tribution of log values to each HU and then identify to which popula-
tion the given set of log readings most likely belong. Bayes’ theorem
gives the posterior conditional probability of HU “i” given pertinent
well log measurements of “x” as follows:
f (x|U i)p(U i)
p(U i|x) + NU
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (17)
ȍ[f (x|U )p(U )]
i i
i+1
The term f(x|U) is the probability of log reading given the HU. This
is the likelihood function. p(U) is the prior probability obtained from
core data classification only, and p(U|x) is the posterior probability,
which includes well log information. Using discrete cells for vector
x in this HU approach, Eq. 17 can be simplified further by consider-
ing the number of data points of various HU categories as follows:
n n n n
ǒ n n
p(U i|x) + nUix n Ui ń nU1x nU1 ) nU2x nU2 ) . . .
Ui all U1 all U2 all
Ǔ one of them is cored. To develop a representative training database
n Uix
+ cause these wells have similar distributions of reservoir parameters
n U1x ) n U2x ) . . .
n
+ nUix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (18)
Ux
After calculating the probability of occurrence of HU categories in
each cell through Eq. 18, probability distribution of HU’s along
Fig. 4—Histogram of flow-zone indicator, carbonate reservoir.
266
logged wells is computed. The HU at each depth of a well is obtained
deterministically by choosing the HU category with the highest prob-
ability in the corresponding cell of the training database. The Monte
Carlo method would be another good choice for the HU selection be-
cause a HU with a low probability also has a chance to be realized.
If there are empty cells in the database, the probabilities of occur-
rence of HU’s in these cells are estimated by an inverse-squared-dis-
tance interpolation scheme. The probability in an empty cell x is es-
timated using all other cells with prior information as below:
ȍ Pd xi
2
i
+
ȍ d1
Px . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (19)
2
i
Once HU categories are estimated, permeability distribution in a
well is constructed from the pertinent HU classes and their corre-
sponding FZI values according to Eq. 9.
Application Results
Two reservoirs with different depositional characteristics are used
to illustrate the validity and limitations of the method. These hetero-
geneous reservoirs are a carbonate formation and a laminated sand-
stone formation.
Carbonate Reservoir Example. Geological Background. This het-
erogeneous carbonate reservoir is of Cenomanian age and is com-
posed mainly of lower argillaceous limestone with 20% clay and 10%
dolomite and upper porous limestone with high-calcite content.
Seven lithofacies of bioclastic rudest/coral packstone/grainstone, bio-
clastic algal packstone, bioclastic packstone, peloidal bioclastic
wackstone, intraclastic packstone/grainstone, argillaceous poorly
sorted bioclastic wackstone, and argillaceous bioclastic peloidal
wackstone have been identified from detailed core and thin section
studies. Smaller-scale multiple shallowing upward units are identi-
fied from resistivity log measurements, where each unit consists of an
upper porous and a lower argillaceous part. Deposits are primarily of
channel type. The distribution of lithofacies and depositional units in
the reservoir is heterogeneous at larger spatial scale with some uni-
formity occuring within smaller regions of the reservoir.
Although 18 wells in the target area have well log records, only
for HU classification, core data from four wells in the surrounding
area in the same field and the same formation were also included be-
as those in the target area. Core measurements are done under simu-
lated reservoir conditions by routine core analysis.
HU Classification. The first step is to define HU’s from core data
by graphical methods. The histogram of log (FZI) from all cored
wells shows superposition of a number of normal distributions.
However, the exact number of HU’s and the threshold values be-
Fig. 5—Probability plot of FZI, carbonate reservoir.
SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996
 Fig. 7—Permeability-porosity relationship for carbonate reser-
voir.

The k*fe relationship constructed from the HU’s is illustrated in

Fig. 6—Hydraulic flow-unit delineation, carbonate reservoir.
tween them are not distinguished easily because the individual dis-
tributions are not distinct enough. Figs. 4 and 5 show the core-
derived histogram and probability plot of FZI distribution. Six HU’s
for the reservoir are identified, as seen by six straight lines on Fig.
5. Based on the HU definitions obtained from the probability plot,
a combined RQI vs. fz graph was made for the wells and is shown
in Fig. 6. The unit slope lines were drawn through segments of data
according to mean FZI values calculated for each group of data
within the straight lines of Fig. 5. The mean FZI values are used to
fix the intercept with the fz +1 vertical line.
Fig. 7. The selected six HU’s are deemed sufficient in minimizing the
scatter around the HU lines, especially for the high-permeability
ranges. It is practically the high-permeability regions where a reliable
definition of k*fe relationship is most important. Some outliers that
are observed in the characterization of the low permeability regions
in Fig. 7 will have insignificant effect on fluid-flow prediction. A
comparison between calculated and measured permeabilities is
shown in Fig. 8, where the 45° line shows a nearly perfect correlation.
HU Inference. Rank correlation calculations were performed to
select the well logs that could be used for HU inference, as shown
in Table 1. The individual rank correlations are computed for all the
points combined from all wells. The three electrical logs of density,
deep resistivity [deep induction log (ILD) or deep laterolog (LLD)],
and gamma ray exhibited high-correlation numbers and thus were
chosen for inference of HU in logged wells.
The results of permeability prediction for these wells are shown
in Figs. 9 and 10, respectively. These predicted results were ob-

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
tained by assuming that Well C1 or Well C2 had been logged only
and did not have core data, while in reality core data were available

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
at both these wells. This was done only to check how accurately the
TABLE 1—RESULTS OF RANK CORRELATION FOR
HU method would predict permeability in these wells if they had not

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
CARBONATE RESERVOIR
been cored. As seen, the profiles of the log-derived HU and perme-

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Well C1 ability calculations agree with core data.
Comparisons of the histograms of the predicted HU’s and the core-

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
LOG Type Permeability FZI
derived HU’s in Well C1 is shown in Fig. 11. The upper-left to lower-
*0.17 *0.12

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Caliper right diagonal elements indicate that correct HU inferences have re-
Nphi 0.50 0.42 sulted from log data, and the off-diagonal elements show the

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Rhob *0.46 *0.36 mismatch. Fig. 11 clearly demonstrates that the probability of assign-

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Delta-T 0.53 0.41
GR *0.61 *0.55

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
SP *0.26 *0.15

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ILD 0.55 0.55

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ILM 0.50 0.53
LLD N.A. N.A.

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
LLS N.A. N.A.

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
MSFL/RXO 0.47 0.56

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Well C2

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
LOG Type Permeability FZI
Caliper *0.17 *0.31

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Nphi 0.71 0.48

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Rhob *0.70 *0.49

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Delta-T 0.78 0.55
GR *0.74 *0.50

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
SP 0.54 0.29

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ILD N.A. N.A.

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ILM N.A. N.A.
LLD 0.72 0.73

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
LLS 0.74 0.73 Fig. 8—Accuracy of permeability predictions by HU technique,
MSFL/RXO 0.58 0.66 carbonate reservoir.

SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996 267

Fig. 9—Comparisons of core- and log-derived parameters, Well
C1, carbonate reservoir.
ing a correct HU distribution through well log data is extremely high.
The more pronounced mismatch around HU 4 can be improved by
further subdividing this unit into more units, as is also evident from
Fig. 7. This would further improve the permeability prediction for re-
gions around HU #4 in Figs. 9 and 10. Nevertheless, the HU predic-
tion is particularly accurate in high-permeability units, HU 2 and 3.
Because the HU approach tends to eliminate the effect of averaging
through its use of multiple flow units, the method can characterize the
extremes in permeability distribution that are critically important in
predicting reservoir performance in flow simulations.
In addition to visual comparison of core and HU-derived perme-
ability and their univariate statistics, Fig. 12 compares patterns of
spatial correlation of measured and predicted permeability. The fig-
ure shows normalized autocorrelation for three sets of data: meas-
ured core permeability, permeability predicted by the HU method,
and permeability predicted by a modified correlation of Coates-
Dumanior.18,19 The modified Coates-Dumanior correlation is20
k + 125.9f 3.76R 0.5
t , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20)
Fig. 11—Statistical HU comparison for Well C1 of carbonate res-
ervoir.
268
Fig. 10—Comparisons of core- and log-derived parameters, Well
C2, carbonate reservoir.
where Rt is deep resistivity and porosity is calculated from a com-
bination of other well logs. The autocorrelation of a standardized se-
quence of data is computed by
np
C k(ȏ) + n1
p
ȍ k(x )·k(x ) ȏ) ,
i i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (21)
i+1
where Ck (ȏ) is the log separation distance between two standardized
permeability values and np is the number of pairs for that lag. This
is similar to variogram analysis. The results of Fig. 12 indicate that
the HU method not only provides a closer match to measured core
data but also preserves the spatial correlation of permeability data.
This is a very desirable feature of the HU method in reservoir char-
acterization studies.
An interesting comparison between the HU-based permeability
calculations and a conventional regression method was made for
Well C3, which had a transient pressure buildup test on it. The val-
Fig. 12—Normalized autocorrelation of core- and log-derived
permeabilities.
SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996
 Fig. 13—HU definitions for Well S1 of sandstone reservoir.

ues of permeability-thickness product, kh, obtained from the pres-

sure buildup test, HU method, and linear regression by facies are
3,360 md-ft, 3,400 md-ft, and 640 md-ft, respectively. The poor
permeability prediction by facies is attributed to inaccuracies in de-
fining facies from logs in this well. The excellent agreement of well
test kh and the value computed from the HU method demonstrates
the applicability of the HU technique. Fig. 14—Clustering of core data using probability plot approach
sandstone reservoir well.
Sandstone Reservoir Example. The HU approach was applied to
wells within a small-scale enhanced oil recovery pilot area in a sand- Conclusions
stone reservoir. The prediction of HU in a given well with the aid of
information from other wells as the source of database is the objec- 1. A technique based on HU’s has been developed that allows for
tive of the study for this example. Simply, the goal is to investigate better estimation of permeability at uncored wells or uncored inter-
how the HU technique performs in blind wells. vals of otherwise cored wells. The method generates good results
HU Classification. The probability plot in Fig. 13 shows six provided that its limitations and range of applicability are honored
trends for Well S1 in this formation, which have been highlighted and taken into account.
with straight lines. Based on this graphical analysis, a plot of RQI 2. The HU technique first identifies the prevailing HU’s in a reser-
vs. the porosity group is made and is shown in Fig. 14. The Ward’s voir using core data and various cluster analysis techniques. A
analytical clustering algorithm was also applied to the same data us- Bayesian-based statistical method is then used to infer HU and
ing six clusters. The result of the HU classification by the Ward’s al- permeability distributions at logged wells.
gorithm is shown in Fig. 15 and Table 2. Although minor differ- 3. The HU technique was applied to two reservoirs of different de-
ences are found between the results of the probability plot and the positional environments—a heterogeneous carbonate reservoir and
Ward’s algorithm, the analytical algorithm is useful because it re- a laminated sandstone formation. Excellent results for both reser-
moves the bias that may be introduced by visual selections of clus-
ters. Furthermore, the algorithm also corrects for the approximate
nature of the probability plot for multimodal distributions.
HU Inference. The HU distributions in the pilot wells were esti-
mated using information from the selected three logs of SP, RHOC
(corrected density log), and RXO (flushed zone resistivity log), which
showed high-correlation rank numbers (these are not included here).
First, a training database was built based on the core-derived
HU classification and the selected three well logs. The adequacy
and accuracy of the training database in subsequent predictions is
found to be a function of the number of classes used to discretize
each well log, where the prediction of HU improved as the number
of classes increased. However, the computation time also increased
rapidly with the increase in the number of classes. Based on this re-
sult, the class number of 20 was judged to be adequate, producing
an almost perfect prediction for the well whose core and log data had
been used in building the training database. This served as a check
for the HU technique on this well.
Fig. 16 shows HU inferences for Well S2 using the database
constructed from core and log measurements in Well S1. It is seen
that the HU inferences are not exact because the prior probabilities
based on Well S1 alone do not describe the reservoir characteristics
completely around Well S2. This result illustrates impact of data in-
sufficiency or the effect of reservoir inhomogeneity. However, as
data from more wells are included, a certain level of homogeneity
in the database is reached and the calculation of HU distributions at
the wells improves. This was proved by predicting HU at either Well
S1 or S2 using a database that included information from both wells. Fig. 15—Clustering of core data using Ward’s algorithm for the
Those results are not included here for brevity purposes. sandstone reservoir well.

SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996 269

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
TABLE 2—CLASSIFICATION OF HU IN WELL S1 OF
STANDSTONE FORMATION

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
Graphical Method Ward’s Algorithm

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
HU FZI a b FZI a b

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
1 0.23 0.35 0.34 0.60

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
2 0.44 0.35 0.60 0.90 0.60 1.30

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
3 0.90 0.60 1.50 1.92 1.30 2.30
4 2.01 1.50 2.50 2.66 2.30 3.00

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
5
ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
3.96

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
2.50 4.00 3.32 3.00 4.00

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
6 5.45 4.00 5.45 4.00

ÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ
a+lower limit on FZI
b+upper limit on FZI

voirs were obtained, illustrating the potential and applicability of

the HU method. For example, the permeabilities predicted in a well
by the HU method matched closely the value calculated from a tran-
sient pressure buildup test in that well.
4. The training database that links cores to log measurements has
a strong influence on the results. The database should contain ade-
quate information about reservoir characteristics to allow reliably
for inference of HU in logged wells. If reservoir characteristics
around a target well are vastly different from those used to build the
database, the predicted permeability distribution at the target well
could be poor.

Nomenclature
Ck + autocorrelation coefficient Fig. 16—HU distribution in Well S2 using database from Well S1.
di + distance between cell x and Xi
erf+ error function Acknowledgment
f+ distribution density function We thank management of Japan Natl. Oil Corp. and Arabian Oil Co.
F+ cumulative distribution, 0tFt1 for permission to publish this work. The contribution of Nobuo Ni-
Fs + shape factor shikiori is appreciated.
Fzi + flow zone indicator
HU+ hydraulic flow unit References
Irq + reservoir quality index
1. Busch, J.M., Fortney, W.G., and Berry, L.N.: “Determination of Litholo-
k+ permeability
gy from Well Logs by Statistical Analysis,” SPEFE (December 1987)
l+ lag separation distance 412–418.
np + number of paired data 2. Testerman, J.D.: “A Statistical Reservoir-Zonation Technique,” JPT
nall+ total number of available data (August 1962) 889–893: Trans., AIME.
ng + number of cluster groups 3. Stiles, J.H., Jr. and Hutfilz, J.M.: “The Use of Routine and Special Core
NU+ number of hydraulic units Analysis in Characterizing Brent Group Reservoirs, UK North Sea,”
nUi + number of data of HU i in whole data JPT (June 1992).
nUix + number of data that belong to HU i in cell x 4. Jian, F.X. et al. : “A Genetic Approach to the Prediction of Petrophysical
nUx + number of data in cell x Properties,” J. Pet. Geology (January 1994) Vol 17, 1, pp 71–88.
ni + number of observations in ith group 5. Srivastava, R.M.: “Reservoir Characterization with Probability Field
p+ prior probability without well log data Simulation,” SPE 24573, presented at the 1992 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Washington DC.
Px + estimated HU probability at cell x
6. Amaefule, J.O., Altunbay, D., Tiab, D., Kersey, D.G., and Keelan, D.K.:
Pxi + HU probability at cell xi
“Enhanced Reservoir Description: Using Core and Log Data to Identify
Rt + deep resisitivity log Hydraulic (Flow) Units and Predict Permeability in Uncored Intervals/
r+ capillary tube radius Wells,” SPE 26436 (1993).
rs + rank correlation number 7. Hearn, C.L., Ebanks, W.J., Tye, R.S. and Ranganathan, V.: “Geological
Sgv+ surface area per unit grain volume, mm–1 Factors Influencing Reservoir Performance of the Hartzog Draw Field,
U+ hydraulic unit indicator Wyoming,” JPT, August 1984, 1335–1344.
W+ within-cluster sums of squares 8. Lake, L.W.: Enhanced Oil Recovery, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
x+ vector containing well log information New Jersey (1989) 44–47.
X,Y+ rank of variables X and Y 9. Kozeny, J.: “Uber Kapillare Leitung des Wassers im Boden, Stizurgs-
z+ log(FZI) berichte,” Royal Academy of Science, Vienna, Proc. Class I (1927) V.
zi + mean of ith observation 136, 271–306.
10. Wyllie, M.R.J., and Gardner, G.H.F.: “The Generalized Kozeny-Car-
zij + jth observation in the ith group
men Equation,” World Oil, March and April 1958.
fe + effective porosity
11. Chopra, A.K., Stein, M.H., Ader Jr.: “Development of Reservoir De-
t+ tortuousity scription to Aid in Design of EOR Project,” SPE 16370 presented at the
wi + weight of ith HU distribution function 1987 SPE California Regional Meeting, Ventura, California.
si + standard deviation of ith distribution 12. Anderberg, M.R.: Cluster Analysis For Applications, (1973) Academic
Ω+ objective function of minimization Press, New York, NY.

270 SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996

13. Abbaszadeh, M.D. and Brigham, W.E.: “Analysis of Well-to-Well Trac-
er Flow to Determine Reservoir Layering,” JPT (October 1984)
1753–62.
14. IMSL User’s Manual Version 1.1, IMSL Inc., December 1989.
15. Johnson, R.A. and Wicheron, D.W.: Applied Multivariate Statistical
Analysis, Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood, California, NJ (1982)
461–531.
16. Busch, J.M., Fortney, W.G., Berry, L.N.: “Determination of Lithology
from Well Logs by Statistical Analysis,” SPEFE (December 1987)
412–18.
17. Telzlaff, D.M, Rodriguez, E. and Anderson, R.L.: “Estimating Facies
and Petrophysical Parameters from Integrated Well Data,” Paper 8 in
Log Analysis Software Evaluation and Review Symposium Transac-
tions, Soc. of Well Log Analysists, London, England, December 13–15,
1989.
18. Miller, R.L. and Kahn, J.S.: Statistical Analysis in the Geological
Sciences, (1962) John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
19. Coates, G.R. and Dumanior, J.L.: “A New Approach to Improved Log-
Derived Permeability,” Trans. SPWLA, 14th Annual Logging Sympo-
sium, Lafayette, May 6–9, 1973.
20. Nishikiori, N.: “Characterization of Permeability and Application of Es-
timation Methods to a Carbonate Rock Reservoir,” presented at the 3rd
JNOC-TRC International Symposium on Reservoir Characterization:
Integration of Geology, Geophysics and Reservoir Engineering, Chiba,
Japan, February 20–23, 1995.
SI Metric Conversion Factors
ft 3.048* E*01 +m
md 9.869 233 E*04 +mm2
*Conversion factor is exact. SPEFE
Maghsood D. Abbaszadeh is a research advisor at the TechnoloĆ
gy Research Center of Japan Natl. Oil Corp. in Chiba. He conĆ
SPE Formation Evaluation, December 1996
ducts research on reservoir characterization, reservoir modeling,
and well testing and consults on reservoir engineering issues. His
interests include flowĆthrough heterogeneous media, reservoir
characterization, pressureĆtransient testing, and classical reserĆ
voir engineering. Previously, he was a principal research engiĆ
neer at Arco Oil & Gas Co. in Plano, Texas, and the section manĆ
ager in the Interpretation Dept. at Schlumberger Well Services in
Houston. Abbaszadeh holds a BS degree in chemical engineerĆ
ing from the Abandon Inst. of Technology and MS and PhD deĆ
grees in petroleum engineering from Stanford U. He is a Review
Chairman, a member of the 1993ć96 PressureĆTransient Testing
Technical Program Committee, and was a 1988ć92 Technical
Editor. Hikari Fujii is a reservoir engineer with Arabian Oil Co. in
Khafji, Saudi Arabia, where he is in charge of reservoir manageĆ
ment and field development of the Khafji field. Previously, he
worked in the Tokyo head office, mainly in reservoir manageĆ
ment and characterization. He holds a BS degree from the U. of
Tokyo and an MS degree from Stanford U., both in petroleum enĆ
gineering. Fujio Fujimoto is currently assigned as the Chief RepreĆ
sentative of Japan Natl. Oil Corp.'s (JNOC) Jakarta Office, covĆ
ering upstream business environment in Asian countries. He was
a director of the Reservoir Engineering Laboratory at the TechnolĆ
ogy Research Center of JNOC in 1993 and 1994, focusing on resĆ
ervoir simulation, hydraulic fracturing, core analysis by XĆray CT
scanner, and the field study of reservoir characterization for imĆ
provement of low productive carbonate reservoirs. His backĆ
ground is in reservoir simulation and reserve estimation. Fujimoto
holds a BS degree in petroleum engineering from the U. of Tokyo.
Abbaszadeh Fujii Fujimoto
271