SPE 100200

Permeability Modeling in Porous Media: Setting Archie and Carman-Kozeny Right

C.F. Haro, SPE, Occidental Oil & Gas

Copyright 2006, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

• A quantitative rock catalog can be implemented applying
This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Europec/EAGE Annual Conference and
Exhibition held in Vienna, Austria, 12–15 June 2006.
practical rock type definitions.
• Supported by these concepts, synthetic production logs
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as can be generated to anticipate well performance, and to
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
effectively assist in history matching.
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at • Archie law ceases being merely empirical. We gain a
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 thorough physical understanding of its power law
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not more than 300
(fractal?) behavior. Rock responses can now be clearly
words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous explained and evaluated.
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
Archie empirical law is the basis of quantitative Petrophysics.
The physical significance of this law is not well understood.
This issue involves substantial uncertainty in oil in place.
Similarly, Carman-Kozeny (C-K) relationship is source of
several permeability models. C-K is derived from Poiseuille
equation, applicable in laminar viscous flow in straight non-
communicating uniform tubes. Neither Poiseuille nor C-K
formulae consider convective/inertial accelerations caused by
changes in either cross section or flow direction. Implications
include sizeable limitations in permeability modeling.
In this paper, appropriate hydrodynamic and electrical
models are created using fluid mechanics analytical methods.
The models delineate the velocity and electrical potentials,
streamlines and controls, represented by C-K and Archie
equations. This approach theoretically verifies both relations
and demonstrates that:
• Fluid circulation and permeability are optimally modeled
invoking superposition of viscous and inertial regimes in
nozzles, throats, diffusers, pipe networks, and arrays of
solid particles. These hydraulic components, once
assembled, emulate porous media well.
• Changes in fluid and electric flow direction are
characterized by the flow around a corner solution of
Laplace differential equation.
• The solution precisely defines rock frame, conductive
phase, and hydraulic tortuosities, enabling direct ties to
pore geometry. This facilitates permeability calculations
utilizing the “perfect permeability transform” procedure.
Several experiments/examples are discussed to show validity.
Some conclusions and technical contributions/applications are:
• Electric measurements can predict hydraulic and
petrophysical rock properties.
• Cementation exponent can be continuously computed
employing acoustic tools and rock physics principles.
• Saturation exponent can be geometrically related to
wettability and saturation using pore-scale modeling.
Introduction
Archie and C-K are very popular/famous equations. Their
usage is widespread despite a common lack of full
comprehension of these relationships.1 Different versions of
Archie and C-K equations exist. Their parameters adopt
varied values based on simplifying assumptions, which affect
the accuracy of water saturation and permeability estimates.
Both oversimplification and ambiguity, created by the
diversity of Archie and C-K equation forms, will be addressed
first. Then, fluid mechanics and electric field considerations
will be employed, to quantify the influence of both the
viscosity of the fluids and the geometry of porous media. This
quantification is the main difficulty in permeability modeling,
and in understanding fluid and electric flow.
A general tactic to solve the problem dictates a blend of
theory and experiment. A wealth of experimental results is
already available in the literature. Although this paper is more
centered in the theory, the purpose is to join these notions with
existing experimentation, relieving doubts and gaining
exactitude in the calculations.
Archie. A tortuosity coefficient (a) always equal to 1 is an
unreasonable assumption according to Adisoemarta et al.1
They sustain that a ≥ 1 should be used, based on core
measurements and the definition of tortuosity. Other authors
claim that a should be 1 to comply with physical bounds at
100% porosity.2,3 Archie himself assumed a = 1.4 Some
publications promote values of a ≤ 1.5 Mavko et al. mention
that a > 1 is usually needed to fit the data of non-Archie
rocks.6 In general, a = 1 is employed for simplification
purposes. There is not an universal agreement about the
correct value of a.
Numerous hypotheses about the variation of cementation
exponent (m) values are available, especially for non-Archie
rocks. Formation factor (F) exhibits noticeable curvature
close to the origin on the Co-Cw (rock vs. brine
conductivities) plot for shaly sands, suggesting that m should
vary if formation water salinity changes.7
2 SPE 100200
There are also specific studies dealing with unusual values
of m in vuggy porosity8 and natural fractures.9 Different
names (cementation exponent, tortuosity exponent, lithologic
exponent, shape factor)10 are used for this parameter, denoting
correlations with distinct rock characteristics. Table 1
displays typical values of m.
Service company chart books support combining the
tortuosity coefficient with the cementation exponent.5 Default
versions are the Humble formula for soft formations, and the
Shell formula for low porosity carbonates. A generic form of
a, m and porosity (Ø) has been adopted to accommodate
various possibilities.7 Archie equation thus becomes:
aRw
n
Sw = …………………………………………..(1)
φ m Rt
where Rw is formation water resistivity, Rt is formation
resistivity, Sw is water saturation and n is saturation exponent.
Value of n is more uncertain, with an accepted range 1.1-
2.5. Archie proposed a starting value of 2.4 Oil wet rocks
have higher n as compared to water wet rocks.6
Shang et al. mention that a coefficient (b) associated with
the saturation exponent is often employed to enhance
correlations. However, b ≠ 1 does not comply with physical
bounds at 100% water saturation. They also report a curved
resistivity index response in dual logarithmic domain,
indicating non linearities in the Archie equation.11
Errors in the value of a are not trivial. Using 1 instead of a
different value may lead to pessimistic oil in place
calculations.1 The same observation is applicable to the other
Archie equation parameters. Are a, m and n merely empirical
fitting parameters?3 Is there a solution to improve accuracy?
Carman-Kozeny. The bundle of capillary tubes, which is the
theory behind C-K equation, forms the basis of J functions and
countless permeability models. Applicability of this equation,
as we know it, resides on compliance of several assumptions:
• Laminar, incompressible, steady state flow.
• Fluid should be Newtonian and should behave as a
continuum, with no-slip at the wall.
• End effects (“entrance length” to build-up the parabolic
profiles required by Poiseuille law) can be neglected.
• Reynolds number (Re) ≈ 1-10 (negligible inertial forces).6
Eq. 2 characterizes fluid flow through a stack of tubes that do
not communicate with each other:
φ
3
k= ………….………..…………..…………(2)
τ 2 Fs S 2
where k is effective permeability to oil (as used herein), τ is
hydraulic tortuosity, and Fs is a shape factor. The specific
surface area (S) is calculated from the total surface of the
capillary tubes, divided by the total volume of the porous
sample. This derivation is geometrically consistent.
Eq. 2 plots as a family of parallel lines (slope = 3) in log-
log permeability-porosity coordinates, with varying both τ2Fs
product (Kozeny constant) and S.
C-K equation can be also expressed as function of the
specific surface area of the grains (Sgv).12 However, this area
(spheres) is not equal to the surface area of the capillary tubes
(cylinders), and is not consistent with the tube model of
Poiseuille equation.6 Consequently, Eq. 3 presents
geometrical inconsistencies in its mathematical derivation:
φ
3
k= ……………..……….………..(3)
τ 2 Fs S gv2 (1 − φ ) 2
This equation plots very close to straight lines on log-log
permeability-porosity coordinates.13 The equivalent porosity
exponent (slope) is higher than 3 on this plot.
Civan proposed a variable porosity exponent (β) and some
other modifications to model communication among the
capillary tubes, which should occur in the real case. These are
leaky tubes represented by Eq. 4,14 derived using fractal
theory:
β
k ⎡ φ ⎤
=γ⎢ ⎥ …………………………………….(4)
φ ⎣α − φ ⎦
where α is a cementation exclusion factor and γ is an
interconnectivity parameter. Which one is the right equation?
The missing criterion. The importance of pore system
tortuosity is well recognized. For example, it is implicitly
assumed that similar rock types have the same tortuosity in
deriving J functions.15 Tortuosity is partially taken into
account in both Archie and C-K formulations, allowing for
prolonged path lengths (a and τ).
Velocity is the main unknown in fluid flow. Velocity is so
important that some authors stipulate that, when velocity is
established, the problem is already solved.16 However,
velocity variation, produced by a series of changes in cross
section and in direction of flow, has been consistently ignored
in modeling porous media. These changes repeatedly take
place within the rock framework, due to pore-morphology and
tortuosity, as fluids pass through the narrow winding conduits
of the rock (Fig. 1). This precludes laminar flow,15 negating
C-K assumption. Fluids with high viscosity resist changes in
speed and direction more than fluids with low viscosity.
Figure 1 – Continuous changes in direction of flow.
Kinematics of solids and fluids. Different laws apply to
curved and straight trajectories of moving solids. It is not
enough to correct for the additional length in the curves.17
While simple linear relationships apply to velocity in straight
sections, centrifugal acceleration and the corresponding
velocity variations are fundamental in the curves. The
problem must be subdivided into straight and curved
segments. Even a change in coordinates, from rectangular to
SPE 100200
polar, usually becomes necessary to quantify rigid-solids
displacement.
By analogy, a velocity correction scheme must be
implemented in fluid motion problems to gain computational
accuracy. To prove this, some theory and methods (regarding
various pertinent flow cases) will be discussed as treated in
fluid mechanics and electricity.
Fluid Mechanics and Electric Fields Similarities
Electric-current and hydraulic flow phenomena exhibit many
similarities. Fluid transport problems were solved using
resistance networks and electromagnetic principles in the
past.16,18 This is theoretically valid since analogous equations
apply to both electric and hydraulic systems.
Important commonalities between Ohm and Darcy laws
have been documented.18 Both equations have comparable
ingredients (voltage-pressure, current-flow rate, resistivity-
inverse of mobility, cross section, path length). The
mathematical structure is exactly the same. Ohm law, which
describes macroscopic properties, is reproduced as Eq. 5:
V (res )(l )
R= = ..………………………………….(5)
I Area
where R is resistance, V is voltage, I is electric-current, res is
resistivity, l is length and Area is cross section. Darcy law is
shown below, ordered in a “matching” manner:
ΔP ⎛ μ ⎞ l
=⎜ ⎟ …....………………………………..(6)
q ⎝ k ⎠ Area
where μ is viscosity, ΔP is change in pressure, and q is flow
rate or flux. Mobility is the ratio (k/μ).
Electric and hydraulic problems can be analyzed in a
similar fashion. In electricity, the objective is to determine an
equivalent to a pool of resistances connected in series, parallel,
or in more complicated layouts. The equivalent resistance
corresponds to a geometrically simplified macroscopic
arrangement, with the same external voltage-current ratio.
In hydraulics, Poiseuille equation gives microscopic
details of the viscous fluid distribution, within a collection of
equal innumerable capillary tubes. Darcy law applies to
macroscopic volumes, much larger than grain or pore-scale.6
C-K, the combination of Darcy and Poiseuille equations,
calculates one single permeability value, which represents the
pressure-flow relation of one equivalent straight tube.
Streamlines. Hydraulic problems require simultaneous
solution of the continuity (conservation of mass) and
momentum equations (Newton second law). The streamline
solution replaces these two equations by one higher order
differential equation. Hence, streamlines eliminate the need of
simultaneity, simplifying mathematical handling. Streamlines
have a nice geometric representation in bidimensional space:
• Fluid velocity is always tangential to the corresponding
streamline function.
• Velocity potential lines are perpendicular to flow.
• The change in the stream function across an element is
numerically equal to the volume flow through the element
• Mathematical integration along streamlines is zero.
Streamlines are useful in both electric and hydraulic problems.
They are better known as lines of flux (or force) in electricity.
3
Equipotential lines (voltage) are comparable to velocity
potentials. Let us find these lines in a relevant problem.
Inviscid (zero viscosity) flow. The potential distribution
function ƒ(z) is the solution of Laplace differential equation
(Eq. 7),16,19 both in electrostatics and in fluid mechanics,
whenever particles are free of viscosity effects:
∂2E ∂2E ∂2E
∇2E = + + = 0 ……………..…….(7)
∂x 2 ∂y 2 ∂z 2
Equipotential lines are found in electrostatics using Eq. 7,
assuming a steady electric field E applied to a homogeneous,
isotropic media with absence of charges (source-free region).
Velocity potential distribution is established in fluid
mechanics with Eq. 7, assuming an inviscid-irrotational
situation. This flow implies slip at the liquid/solid interface.
Flow around a corner. Since this is not a common problem,
potential distribution of an electric field around a corner has
not been mathematically analyzed or solved in electrostatics.
The answer to this problem is unraveled in fluid mechanics for
inviscid flow. The solution is applicable in both
electrostatics19 and hydraulics.16 This is a solution of Laplace
differential equation (Eq. 7) under appropriate boundary
conditions (geometry of the walls).6
r,θ
c=3, δ=600 c=2, δ=900 c=1.5, δ=1200
Figure 2 – Batchelor (1967). Flow around a corner model.
c
Solution: ƒ(z)=D(Z ). Angle δ is equal to π/c (in radians). Only
streamlines are shown. Velocity potentials are orthogonal.
This flow pattern, which involves a change in flow direction,
has an impressively simple streamlines solution (Fig. 2).16
This result is presented in polar coordinates in Eq. 8:
f ( z ) = DZ c = Dr c cos(cθ ) + iDr c sin(cθ ) …....(8)
where D is an amplitude coefficient, c is a curvature-angle
exponent. Pole of the coordinates is located at the vertice of
the walls, and streamline points are defined by the pair (r, θ),
being θ the point angle with respect to one of the walls.
This function describes both the families of streamlines
and velocity potentials. It is expressed in complex numbers
notation (real and imaginary parts) to ensure that both
components are orthogonal at all times. Eq. 8 demonstrates
that ƒ(z) varies according to (r)c in the region around the
corner. In electricity, ƒ(z) and 1/R are proportional to (r)c, or
to Areac in terms of cross section. The geometric implications
are striking considering that c = 180o/δ, which permits a nice
physical interpretation of streamlines as depicted in Fig. 2.
Wedge flow. This type of flow can exist when boundaries are
angular. It obeys the same mathematical relationship as the
flow around a corner.16 It contains a stagnation point, and the
aperture angle is 2δ.
4 SPE 100200
Pipe networks. Both hydraulic and electric systems can be
evaluated using either of the following generic rules:
• Net flow (or current) into any junction is zero.
• Pressure (or voltage) change around closed loops is zero.
This solution supposes minor or no friction, no losses, and that
all network branches are connected. These calculations,
known as Kirchoff laws, are mathematically linear.
Real pore networks have various degrees of branchiness,
or several flow paths emanating from the same point. Not all
trails are bonded. Percolation theory shall prove useful in the
case of dead-end pores. Total fluid flow at a junction should
be equal to the summation of individual contributions.
Fluid Mechanics and Electric Fields differences
Archie equation is similar to Poiseuille equation, in the sense
that both denote microscopic fluid distribution within the
pores. However, Archie equation deals with pure inviscid
particles (as seen by electricity), whereas Poiseuille equation
relates to viscous materials (as seen by fluid mechanics).
Friction (as it is used in hydraulics) is a physical attribute
applicable to fluids, where Reynolds number plays a central
role. Friction becomes significant in turbulent flow (high
velocity) and in long rough pipes. Friction has a different
connotation in electricity, and is treated in quantum mechanics
(particle collisions) and thermodynamics (Joules law).
Poiseuille equation describes a parabolic distribution of
viscous particles running through circular straight tubes, with
zero velocity in the periphery (no-slip). This fluid distribution
alters into a more planar one at high fluid velocities, for
turbulent flow. On the contrary, particles in high frequency
electric fields tend to move through the periphery of
conductors, triggering a modified electric charge movement
profile also known as skin effect.
Viscosity is a fluid property. Viscous flow applies strictly
to fluid mechanics, not to low frequency electric-current flow,
which always behaves as inviscid. As such, discussion of
boundary layers (presented next) is only relevant to fluids,
since boundary layers involve coexistence of viscous (with no-
slip at the liquid/solid interface) and inviscid (with slip) flow.
Hydraulic components and boundary layer model
Navier-Stokes equations are formidable, too hard to analyze
for arbitrary flows like the ones encountered in porous media.
Prandtl was the first to propose a simple model of viscous and
inviscid layers (for low viscosity fluids) to tackle complicated
problems like these. He published a paper in 1904 detailing a
new model, which has been recognized as the single most
valuable tool in modern flow analysis.16
Prandtl model consists of a layer (thickness = Lt) around a
solid surface (or interface) where viscous flow prevails. This
layer merges with an ideal inviscid core-flow at some distance
from the surface. Mathematical patching of the two regions
works best in water and gas, with Re > 100 in the boundary
layer. Validity of this model requires Re >> 1. Simple
relationships like Euler and Bernoulli equations apply in the
inviscid region.
The boundary layer is a thin sector around a body, where
fluid sticks to the borders and can produce significant shear
stress. This layer will exist even at low viscosity values,
where fluid flow can be laminar or turbulent, depending on Re.
One characteristic of the boundary layer is that it attaches with
no-slip to the solid when favorable pressure gradients exist,
and separates with slip under adverse circumstances. Flow in
the boundary has low energy, and is more easily driven by
changes in pressure. The boundary layer gives objects an
effective shape, which is usually slightly different from the
physical form.
The boundary layer model is a simplifying necessity for
certain flow classes, like the ones occurring in nozzles,
diffusers and around an array of solid particles.16 Navier-
Stokes equations become too complicated in this case, because
particles are moving through zones of spatially varying
velocity, and are affected by complex convective
accelerations. It is not purely viscous/laminar displacement.
Inviscid and viscous conditions can coexist in reality. A
typical case is the one in a uniform duct. Whilst the entrance
to the duct is considered inviscid (except near the boundaries),
flow for oil and water is generally assumed to be entirely
viscous a few diameters of length from the entrance (Le up to
≈ 140d for laminar flow, where Le is entrance length and d the
fixed duct diameter).
Flow in nozzles, throats and diffusers. A diffuser is a tube
expansion or area increase, designed to reduce velocity to
recover the pressure head of fluid flow. A nozzle is a
reduction in area, which initiates fluid velocity growth while
pressure decreases. Fluid flow performance in pipes can be
controlled using a combination of nozzles and diffusers.
The increasing pressure in the diffuser creates an
unfavorable gradient. This causes the viscous boundary layers
to break away (slip) from the walls of the solid, reducing fluid
flow performance and generating instability. Conversely, flow
in a nozzle produces a favorable gradient (no-slip) and never
contributes to separation, nor does the throat flow where the
pressure gradient is approximately zero.16 This behavior can
be visualized in Fig. 3. Backflow
Separation
Boundary layer
Nozzle Diffuser
Inviscid flow 2ζ
Viscous flow
Throat
Figure 3 – Conduit model. Flow tends to separate from
solid walls whenever there is an area expansion, and creates
instability. Flow tends to attach to the walls in an area reduction.
Stability maps for flow in a diffuser are available in the
literature. Those maps depict four basic regions:
• Steady viscous flow with moderately good performance.
• Transitory stall pattern with unsteady flow with best
performance. Divergence angle 2ζ < ~40o.
• Steady bistable stall with poor performance.
• Jet flow.
 SPE 100200
An area ratio (AR) captures the change in area between the
diffuser and throat, and determines the stability region in the
maps. If the area ratio is high, the possibility of turbulence
and backflow is larger, and flow performance is poorer. Flow
in a diffuser can be mathematically expressed as a multiplier
(pressure-recovery coefficient). A first pass approximation
utilizes the area ratio to calculate the multiplier = [1-(AR-2)],
which might work up to 2ζ = 40o. The recovery coefficient in
a nozzle can approach 100%.16
External and internal flow. External flow develops
whenever the boundaries to flow are distant. Internal flow is
by definition enclosed in adjacent boundaries, for example
flow in uniform ducts or pipes. Distinction between internal
and external flow is important, to know where viscous effects
and friction/drag (relative to the solid walls) become
significant. The literature shows that external flow (above and
below particles) is inviscid, while viscous flow dominates
close to the particles and interfaces.16 Poiseuille equation
supposes 100% internal flow.
External
External Flow
Flow
Boundary layer
Instability
Separation
Direction
of flow
External
flow
Figure 4 – Flow around submerged objects. Flow tends
to attach (no-slip) to solid walls at the front and flanks. Flow
tends to separate (slip) from walls at the rear, creating instability.
Flow past an array of solid particles. A favorable pressure
gradient is found on the front and in the flanks of solid
particles, and an adverse gradient is in the rear. A boundary
layer at the front and flanks will tend to attach with no-slip. A
boundary layer past a solid particle will tend to separate/slip,
facilitating inviscid flow. Flow past the solid particles might
become turbulent, with intricate trajectories when velocity is
high.16 The interaction between viscous and inviscid flow
occurring in the rear of particles (especially if there is back
flow) could be quite complex, strong and definitely non-linear,
as illustrated in Fig. 4. There will be continuous attaching and
detaching in an array of particles, as soon as fluid comes near
and then passes far from the individual particles.
Electric and hydraulic models
A tortuous pore model for electric flow. Among all of the
fluid mechanics options already discussed, only the flow
around a corner involves a non-linear relationship, which
could mathematically explain Archie power law response.
The other types of flow, which might coexist in porous media,
are primarily linear or not applicable to electric flow.
The tortuous pore model for electric flow, with an absence
of charges, is conceived as follows:
• It is an equivalent model defined when a low frequency
electric-current is circulating, free of dielectric effects.
5
• Electric flow is 100% efficient.
• It is set up in 2 steps, as a fluid substitution problem.
• Trajectories of electric flow under 100% and partial water
saturation are different, as opposed to conventional
assumption that they are equal.
• Tortuosity requires path length and velocity compensation
to fully characterize the electric flow.
Change of coordinates. This task is needed to establish
mathematical connection between the flow around a corner
model and Archie equation. The pole at a vertice in the
periphery of the pore is moved to its center: r from Eq. 8 is a
function of pore radius (r1). The result using Fig. 5 is
displayed as Eq. 9:
r1 (1 − cos ϕ )
r= …………………………………….(9)
cos θ
where r1 and φ are the polar coordinates of the new system.
This result indicates that the flow pattern function will be also
proportional to (r1)c or (area1)c.
Center
φ of pore
r1
r
θ
Vertice
Figure 5 – Required change in coordinate systems from
the periphery of the pore to its center.
Demonstration of Archie equation. The matrix is assumed
to be built of pure insulator material,3 with negligible surface
conductance. Special considerations are indispensable when
conductive minerals, like pyrite or clays, are present. Archie
defined m when the rock is fully saturated with water.4 Thus,
m should be free of wettability effects by definition. Concept
of wettability implies the existence of two immiscible fluids.
Usage of sole Ohm law (Eq. 5) has been historically an
erroneous demonstration strategy. This equation (macro)
suffices when electric-current describes straight lines of flux,
and circulates through a constant cross section. Micro scale
complex layouts entail a solution that also incorporates the
geometry of flow,6 like Eq. 8, since form of the electric field
inside conductors is governed by the shape of the conductors.
Derivation of Archie first equation has been attempted
many times,1 with the following disappointing results:
Ro l Lu a
=F= = …..….…………..(10)
Rw Area1 Areau φ
where Ro is the resistivity of the rock when it is fully saturated
with conductive water, l is the tortuous length, Lu is the
reference length of the unit block, Area1 is the cross section
porous area available for electric flow, and Areau is the cross
section of the unit block.
6 SPE 100200

The numerator of Eq. 10 compensates for the extra length It is clear that a cannot be lower than 1 (assuming 100%
due to tortuosity. Previous demonstration attempts correctly efficiency), and that a and m are interrelated. Furthermore, m
considered aerial porosity as a good representation of the ratio is closely linked to tortuosity, expressed as turning angles,
of cross section areas (Eq. 11):17 signifying that tortuosity exponent is an appropriate name. It
Area1 π (r1 )
2 is not necessary to force a = 1 for simplification purposes,
= = φ ……………..………………..(11) since δ is the only unknown.
Areau π (ru2 ) Fig. 6 is an idealized case. Geometrical conditions might
where r1 is the pore radius, and ru is the radius of the unit get very complicated. However, Eqs. 14 and 15 represent an
block. Areau has been also expressed as an equivalent square. equivalent model, which nicely complies with the theoretical
As shown in Eq. 10, all earlier demonstrations have ended limits: δ is 180o and a is 1, whenever there are no turns
with a denominator with a constant-fixed porosity exponent involved, as in straight uniform capillary tubes with no
(e.g.: Ø exponent = 1), which did not fit experimental data.1 communication with each other. This also happens when
Then, to correct the problem and for generalization purposes, a porosity is 100% (all fluid, no solid) with no barriers to
variable porosity exponent is assumed, without any deviate the flow. This confirms that the model complies with
mathematical or physical justification. the physical bounds cited by several authors.2,3,4,17
The mathematical and physical reason for a variable m
exponent is to offset the velocity variation caused by the
continuous change in direction of the electric-current.1 In fact,
voltage and current are not straight lines, but they follow the
patterns shown in Fig. 2. Hence, the model of “flow around a
corner,” which responds to Area1c, must be utilized to modify
Ohm law and obtain Archie first equation. A Laplace
differential equation is valid, since flow is fully inviscid and
electrostatic conditions apply (no charges in a low frequency
angle = 90 degrees, Ø=48% angle = 60 degrees, Ø=26%
domain: only resistance, not reactance).19 Eq. 10 becomes:
Ro l Lu a tightest
=F= = m ……………..(12) loosest
Rw ( Area1 Areau ) m
φ
Consequently, tortuous pore geometry (depicted in Fig. 1) can
be modeled using a series of straight segments, describing
flow around numerous corners. Every change in direction can
be expressed in terms of a turning angle δ as shown in Fig. 6.
Eq. 8 holds under these conditions. From Fig. 6 we infer:
1 Lu ⎛π δ ⎞ ⎛δ ⎞
= = cos⎜ − ⎟ = sin ⎜ ⎟ ≤ 1 ….….…....(13) Figure 7 – Spheres of uniform grain size (same sorting).
a l ⎝ 2 2⎠ ⎝2⎠ Differences in packing (pore geometry). Grains and pore
morphology.
δ/2
Lu Table 2 displays some theoretical values for spherical grains.
Area1
In the loosest cubic packing, with Ø = 48%, δ = [(4 * 90o) +
l 180o)]/5, a = 1.236 and m = 1.67.17 This case is isotropic. A
star-like grain-boundary-pore forms in this situation. The
tightest rhombohedral style, with Ø = 26%, with corner angles
of 60o, 120o, and 90o, 1.346 ≤ a ≤ 1.494 and 1.87 ≤ m ≤ 2.14.17
Angle δ
Areau This case is anisotropic. Fig. 7 illustrates these examples.
Straight uniform open fractures, with no turning angles to
Figure 6 – Porous media model conductor: Electric- connect to other fractures (δ = 180o), exhibit a = 1, and m = 1.
m m
current flow around a corner: a = l / Lu, (Area1 / Areau) = Ø . (Not This result is in line with the theory.9 The sugar cube model
to scale). for fractures result in values of a = 1.236 and m = 1.67 (or
lower). The m values for the two configurations of fractures
The tortuosity exponent and coefficient can be calculated
are within the limits published in the charts.5
using Eqs. 14 and 15, respectively:
The single a and m values reflect the statistical average of
180 o a variety of turning angles (that the electric-current is forced to
m= ……….……………………………….…..(14)
follow) through the conductive-winding pathways of the rock.
δ
Four types of angles are averaged: throat-body (~diffuser),
1
a= …..…………….……………………….(15) body-throat (~nozzle), wedge, and pore body itself. The latter
⎛δ ⎞ is the dominant type, since it involves changes of the bulk of
sin ⎜ ⎟ the fluid stream. Single a and m values presume an isotropic
⎝2⎠ media. This average will be different in an anisotropic rock,
This way, Archie first equation is fully proved. depending on the direction of the electric-current.
SPE 100200
Demonstration of Archie second equation is analogous to
the first one. This equation is a ratio of resistances too,
identical to Eq. 12, which must include the lengths-areas
relation.
Electric-current is flowing only through the electrically
connected water portion (thin films) of the rock. So, a
conductive phase coefficient b should exist in the formulation.
This accounts for the additional length in electric-current
trajectory, when water occupies only part of the porous system
(Fig. 8). This is in line with the improved correlations
reported by Shang et al.,11 when b is included. Ratio of cross
sections is the aerial water saturation (Sw).
Absence of film
b’
l’
crevice
ε boundary layers, inviscid core regimes, flow around corners,
Thin water film
Figure 8 – Porous media model conductor: Electric-
current flow around a corner; b = length ratio = 2b’/l’, Area ratio =
n n
(area occupied by water/areal porosity) =Sw . Red line….Electric-
current path with pores full of water. Blue line…Electric-current
through restricted water films around the rock walls.
Exponent n has the same previous connotation: it symbolizes
an average of the turning angles, that current must follow,
through the restricted-narrow corridors of the water. Both,
extra length and turning angles, are obtained by comparison to
the case when the rock is fully saturated with water. Fig. 8
illustrates this condition. Notice that saturation exponent will
be small if there are no significant changes in aspect ratio
(e.g.: elongated grains), since turning angles will be large.
Eqs. 16, 17, and 18 show the modified Archie relationships:
180 o
n= ……….….…………………………….…..(16)
ε slip and facilitates corner flow. Therefore, tortuosity of
1 porous media requires path length (coefficient) and
b= ………...….…………………………….(17)
⎛ε ⎞
sin ⎜ ⎟
⎝2⎠
n
Sw aR R 1
= m w = o = ..………………………..(18)
b φ Rt Rt I r
where Ir is resistivity index, l’ and b’ (b = 2b’) are tortuous
and conductive phase lengths, and ε is turning angle. This
way, Archie second equation is also fully demonstrated.
A turning angle of 90o occurs in symmetrical pores with a
shape that can be inscribed in a semicircle. A value of n = 2
and b = 1.414 will be valid under this condition, at
approximately 0 contact angle (thin water film) and small
throat radius. This example serves as a visual reference point.
Conventionally, n is assumed constant. However, a closer
analysis of Fig. 8 confirms its variance with respect to water
7
saturation. As water saturation increases, the electric route
under partial saturation becomes more similar to the one when
Sw = 1, n decreases and approaches a value of 1.
Dependence of n with respect to water saturation has been
reported in the literature11 (drainage n at Swi ≠ imbibition n at
Sor). A theoretical n value at Sor can be calculated using
geometric considerations. The average turning angle ε will be
different in anisotropic rocks, depending on the direction of
the electric-current. These observations imply that special
procedures should be followed in laboratory tests. Cores
should be oriented, and water saturation careful monitored.
This means that it is not theoretically correct to use the same n
for virgin (Sw) and flushed zone water saturation (Sxo)
calculations.
A tortuous pore model for hydraulic flow. Flow in porous
systems cannot be accurately characterized simply using a
viscous laminar flow model. The bundle of uniform capillary
tubes that do not communicate with each other is not
enough.14 Intricate arrangements of nozzles, throats, diffusers,
pipe networks, and arrays of solid particles emulate porous
media pretty well. Back flow, laminar and turbulent flow,
and wedge flow probably coexist in this environment. These
modeling difficulties call for more thorough solutions.
There is not a single mathematical model, which complies
with all the above boundary conditions, and solves
concurrently these obstacles. However, the mathematical
ingredients and answers for every case are available. It is a
matter of pragmatically combining the separate models, after
recognizing the relevant mechanisms.
Models should reflect a balance of practical and accurate
representation of physical phenomena. As such, the tortuous
pore model for hydraulic flow is conceived as follows:
• Invoking boundary layer theory, an approximate viscous-
inviscid model is used in lieu of a mathematically
complicated viscous-inertial regime (Navier-Stokes).16
• Flow tends to be straight, viscosity controlled, with no-
slip in narrow passages like the pore throats.
• Flow tends to be inviscid within the pore bodies, favored
by the detaching of the boundary layers, which permits
inertial velocity compensation (exponent).
• The switching between viscous and inviscid
characteristics and the flow around corners, repeat over
and over in an array of solid particles of real rocks. This
breaks any smooth laminar flow.15 Necessity of velocity
compensation cannot be ignored for this reason.
• The model captures a geometric-viscous interaction.
Thus, it is resolved using superposition of effects.
• Despite the possible complexities, flow past an array of
particles is considered similar to the one obtained in
nozzles and diffusers, which can be handled employing an
efficiency multiplier. These models are complementary.
Viscosity is like friction between the various fluid laminae.
The closer the laminae to each other and to the solid, the larger
the viscosity impact is. Inertial forces result from gradual or
sudden changes in geometry and viscosity distribution. Flow
8 SPE 100200
in porous media builds from a continuous competition
between viscous and inertial forces, dictated by flow type/Re.
Modification of Carman-Kozeny equation. Current most
popular versions of C-K equation (Eqs. 2 and 3) are too
simplistic because they assume:
• Viscous flow everywhere within the pores (internal flow).
• Only a length correction is needed to compensate for the
tortuous paths, completely ignoring acceleration effects.
• No connection among the uniform capillary tubes.14
These versions do not catch all the essentials behind viscous
and pore geometry changes. Fluid flow in porous media is an
amalgamation/interaction of viscous and inviscid flow in the
pore throats and bodies. Expansions and reductions in cross
section of the pores, and continuous changing in direction of
the flow-trails in this pipe network, make the inherent
complications clear.15 Mathematical superposition is required.
Hydraulic flow tends to be straight in the pore throats due
to the confined pathways, whereas it makes turning angles in
the pore bodies forced by the solid walls configuration. This
behavior leads to the following quantitative considerations:
• A porosity exponent (A) lower than 3 is valid in the pore
throats close to the entrance of the pore system, where
viscous flow is not fully developed and q = ƒ(r12). This is
also appropriate if, due to superposition effects, flow
behaves predominantly as inviscid in straight tubes
(planar profile, not parabolic).
• A = 3 is legitimate in the C-K equation, whenever a
parabolic fluid flow distribution prevails (pure viscous
flow). This occurs in the pore throats far from the
entrance, in straight sections where full Poiseuille flow
has buildup, and q = ƒ(r14). This is correct whenever
Reynolds number is low, fluid laminae are close to each
other, with dominance of steady creeping flow.
• A variable exponent larger than 3 is applicable in tortuous
sectors in the pore bodies (Eq. 8). Its magnitude depends
on the severity of the corner angles, degree of slip
(viscosity distribution), and extent of blockage of the flow
routes, which means increased hydraulic tortuosity.
• A variable exponent is in agreement with wedge flow (in
case of sharp edged grains), and with viscosity changes.
A variable porosity exponent must be utilized in Eq. 2 to
combine the various effects; it cannot be a fixed value.13,14,20,22
It primarily depends on the dominant flow type. Experiments
and data from around the world confirm a variable porosity
exponent in permeability formulation,6,8,13,14,20,21,22 including in
simple Fontainebleau sandstone, and in complicated rocks like
carbonates. As such, the following relationship applies:
(λ )φ
A
k= …..…….………………………………(19)
τ 2 Fs S 2
where λ is a pressure recovery efficiency multiplier related to
the pore throat-pore body expansion, and A is the variable
porosity exponent linked to hydraulic tortuosity τ. The
multiplier offsets the continuous changes in cross sectional
area in rather straight sections (nozzle, throat, diffuser effects).
It is related to the interconnectivity parameter recommended
by Civan,14 which better handles total or partial occlusion of
the flow trajectories.
Fluid distribution model in partially saturated pores
Anderson showed that wettability has a profound impact on
electrical properties.23 Most specifically, saturation exponent
depends on distribution of the conducting phase, and it is
largerly governed by wettability. For this reason, a review of
immiscible fluids distribution within the rocks is required
before quantifying n.
Water is distributed differently within the pores, dictated
by the equilibrium of different forces, and thermodynamics.24
Gladkikh et al. indicate that water can be located around grain
contacts as pendular rings (liquid bridges), as menisci at pore
throats, or filling completely imbibed pores.25 Water can be
also spread over the rock surface as thin coating layers
(films),26 drops or lenses.
Rings will exist whenever capillary pressure is smaller
than external pressure, being the maximum volume of the ring
around 0.09 of the volume of the grain. Theoretical maximum
volume of the ring changes with wettability.6 Rings will start
to merge at high ring sizes. Snap-off will tend to occur when
the maximum equilibrium pressures are exceeded, and new
fluid configurations and/or fluid coalescence will take place,
imbibing completely small pores.25 As an example,
saturations in terms of maximum dimensions of the rings are
depicted in Fig. 9 for a rhombic packing.27
0.9
0.8 Pendular rings Contact
0.7 Rhombic packing (tightest) angle
Saturation, decimal
0.6
50
0.5 40
0.4
30
20
0.3 10
0.2
0
Limit
0.1
Merging of rings
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Ring Size, degrees
Figure 9 – Water saturation magnitude of pendular rings
for rhombic packing. Lower values of water saturation are
reported for cubic packing.
27
The “limit” curve illustrates the
27
maximum theoretical saturation when capillary pressure is zero.
Irreducible conditions. Gvirtzman et al. stipulate that, at low
water saturations, volume of water in films is negligible,
compared to the volume found in pendular rings, for spherical
grains greater than 3 microns in radius (silt size grain or
larger).28 Electrical connection throughout the rock is possibly
achieved when the size of the rings is maximum, because then
the edges of the rings will be probably touching. Since
pendular ring arcs are concave around the crevices in water
wet zones, a delimiting circumference can be inscribed, which
better mimics the geometry of Poiseuille tubes.
Accumulation of capillary bound water is expected in the
crevices as pendular rings, where grains come into closer
contact. Water completely filling the pores is most likely
found in microporous systems. A portion of the brine can
even be trapped or isolated in dendritic fingers.23 Hence,
water in pendular rings and in possible small imbibed pores
will primarily contribute to irreducible water saturation (Swi).
SPE 100200 9

This configuration does not preclude the possibility that thin Applications
(occasionally molecular) films might add to Swi, which further
facilitates electrical flow. Therefore, in the general case: Wettability and quantification of Saturation exponent. An
equivalent simplified model, as depicted in Fig. 10, can be
S wi = S wf + S wc + S wp used to assess the impact of water films and wettability on n.
……………………………..(20)
Eqs. 21 through 23 show how n and wettability are interrelated
where Swf is the water saturation in the films, Swc is water (Fig. 11) in presence of water films in the pore throats and
saturation in the crevices, and Swp is water saturation in the pore bodies:
small pores or denditric fingers.
ω/2 1
Electrical equivalent film model. Films dominate in strongly (mult ) S wf sin(2ς ) = − ….(21)
⎧ ⎛ ω ⎞⎫
2
⎛ω ⎞
water wet systems, when the spreading coefficient Sc < 1.
⎨sin ⎜ ⎟⎬ tan⎜ ⎟
Electric connection throughout the rock should exist under ⎩ ⎝ 2 ⎠⎭ ⎝2⎠
these conditions. Rocks are classified as weak water wet
when Sc > 1, where droplets replace film morphology.29 In
⎡ 2 ⎤
weakly water wet systems, films or droplets might disappear mult = ⎢1 + ……….………………………..(22)
when water saturation is low, and conductive routes for the ⎣ ar − 1⎥⎦
electric-current become limited or vanish. Brine is located in
the centers of larger pores in oil wet rocks. Oil coats grain 1
surfaces and causes disconnections and isolation of globules tan(ς ) = ..…….……………..(23)
or lenses of brine, which are then unable to conduct electric- ⎛ S wf ⎞
⎜⎜1 − ⎟ tan(ε / 2)
current.23
⎝ 2 ⎟⎠
Although films (or droplets) sometimes might be
volumetrically less significant than other fluid distributions,28 where ω/2 is the contact angle (in radians), h is height of the
connection or disconnection of films is the mechanism that equivalent droplet, r2 is radius of the equivalent droplet, rpt
largely controls electric conductivity. Consequently, an radius of the pore throat, ar is aspect ratio, and mult is a
equivalent film model looks more geared for saturation function of ar.
exponent quantification. It is in the films where Archie Equivalent film model
equation more directly applies. The model assumes that water
accumulates and thickens the films as saturations increase, in l’ rpt
line with the literature.30 ω/2
Conversely, fluid in the grooves and crevices is essential to
explain capillary pressure, Swi, residual oil (Sor) and non-
Archie effects. The latter are generally created by the absence ζ
h ε/2 Swf
of films due to changes in wettability. Electrical connection r1
dramatically diminishes in this case, and n increases rapidly. r2
Since the conductive phase must be saturated to a certain
level to conduct electricity, a critical water saturation (Sw*) b’
should be defined,11 which takes into account a threshold
ω/2
water saturation where the pore system begins to electrically
disconnect. This is the value where the Ir-Sw line departs from
Figure 10 – Idealized equivalent pore space in a capillary
film response, and the slope of the line starts to be more half-tube. The areas in the film and its equivalent water droplet
pronounced. In shaly sections in the absence of films, electric should be equal to reflect the same water saturation.
conductivity might still exist through the conductive layers of 2.1 Swf=0.05

clay particles. Swf=0.10

Later on, it will be demonstrated that weak water wet and 1.9
ζ = 45o Swf=0.15

Swf=0.20
oil wet conditions can be quantitatively incorporated into 2
y = -3E-05x - 0.0062x + 1.99
2 Swf=0.30
R = 0.9999
Archie formulation, by accounting for the degree of electric
Saturation exponent

Swf=0.40
1.7
disconnection. This can be done since effects of n seem Swf=0.50

additive in oil and water wet conditions,26 as Sharma et al.

Swf=0.60
1.5 Swf=0.70
pointed out. Swf=0.80

Turning angles mainly occur in the pore bodies, which 1.3

Swf=0.90

relate to n according to Archie equation. As such, it is in the Swf=1.00

pore bodies where wettability and water distribution are more ζ = 30o div ang=45

1.1 div ang=30

important. Thus, a transversal section along the path is ζ = 15o div ang=15

required to visualize the changes. This contrasts with 0.9

Poly. (div
ang=45)

conventional practice in electrical properties pore network 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

modeling, which concentrates in quantitative changes in Contact Angle (degrees)

morphology and resistivity in the pore throats and around Figure 11 – Saturation exponent and contact angle
grain contacts, and uses a cross sectional aerial view. variation. Applicable to water films in the pores when ar = ∞
(current circulating through the edges of the pore throats).
10
Saturation exponent n is linked to ε through Eq. 16. A
mathematical correlation of n as function of contact angle is
shown for ζ = 45o, as depicted in Fig. 11.
Electric-current will tend to circulate through the edge of
the pore throats, which constitutes the shortest distance, and
not through the center. Therefore, although theoretically ar
has significant influence on values of n according to Eq. 22, in
practice it does not affect much, and behaves as rpt = 0 or ar =
∞.
Eqs. 21 and 23 constitute an equivalent model, valid in the
low, middle and high range of water saturations where Archie
equation applies, and where electrically connected water films
exist. Values of n, calculated this way, are a benchmark to
assess when film distribution prevails in a pore system.
Uniform films will form after long periods (geologic time),
once equilibrium is reached. This distribution reflects the
static configuration of pore space fluids under steady state.
This distribution should be found in native state cores.23 Its
saturation exponent values should correspond to values
obtained at connate conditions in the reservoir.
Drainage and imbibition displacement lab tests
(desaturation processes) performed in short periods of time
will not be uniform, and smooth, electrically continuous films
will not always form. Varied degrees of disconnection will be
created while injecting and displacing the fluids. This would
explain inconsistencies in n measurements, attributed to
saturation hysteresis, and to strong dependency on saturation
history. Changes in wettability (fluid affinity/adhesion to
rock) during the various cycles will aggravate the situation.23
Permeability from logs and cores. Archie and C-K
equations symbolize the ease of electric and hydraulic flow.
Tortuosity exponent and coefficient, both describe the sinuous
electrical conduits within the rock skeleton when it is fully
saturated with water. Saturation exponent and coefficient
express the conductive water distribution within the pores
when they are partially saturated. A and τ explain the complex
tracks open to the flow of one fluid phase through a wetted
pipe network, whereas they also respond to the alternating
viscous inviscid behavior of the fluid.
Star-like Pore Irreducible water
Crevices &
pendular
Film
Inscribed
rings
circumference
Touching edges Open to flow
of the rings Ø(1-Swi)
Figure 12 – Idealized star-like grain-boundary-pore (water
wet). Irreducible water is occupying a space (crevices and films),
which otherwise would be available to non-wetting fluid flow.
Cross sectional aerial view.
The lengthier the corridors, the longer the fluids will take to
travel through the rock. The more sinuous the trail, the more
SPE 100200
likely the main flow stream will alter velocity. Both effects
modify permeability. Parameters like a, b and τ balance the
differences in enlargement of electric and hydraulic paths,
while m, n and A correct electric and hydraulic velocities for
the continuous changes of direction within the pores. So,
these are indispensable variable controls for an appropriate
permeability modeling. Contrary to popular wisdom, neither
a, b, τ are always equal, nor m, n, A.17 Fluid viscosity and
rock geometry variations justify most of the discrepancies.
Archie and C-K formulae characterize electric and
hydraulic permeability. Both are ƒ(Ø), defined at pore-scale
(microscopic) level; these equations have similar components
and suitable controls and can be theoretically merged. Archie
law comprises a static/geometric measurement, whilst C-K
includes the dynamic reservoir parameters needed to evaluate.
Archie equation is dimensionless, offering scale generality
like type curves15 or the pi theorem in dimensional analysis.16
C-K provides to Archie law the calibration proportions (S2),
essential to become a reliable permeability predictor.
Fluid transport within a permeable rock depends on the
void space geometry, connectivity, and the solid surface/fluid
chemistry:31 Irreducible water saturation Swi and Ø represent
the aerial void porosity open to flow (valid for any shape),
both in the pore bodies and pore throats,20 as illustrated in Fig.
12. Larger Swi causes lower k. Since Swi magnitude depends
on interfacial tension, geometry and wetting angle of the solid-
fluid system, Swi captures the corresponding rock response.
Cementation exponent m is a measure of tortuosity, which
incorporates 3-D connectivity among the capillary tubes.
Higher m (more compaction/cementation) yields lower k.
Saturation exponent responds to wettability, Sw distribution,23
and to angle ζ. Larger n and ζ dictate larger rate of flow
through the hard rock walls composed of diverse minerals,
with varied adhesion affinity for fluids of distinct chemistries.
Hence, Archie equation has the necessary permeability
ingredients,31 all reported to correlate with k.
The procedure to be outlined next has been verified in a
previous SPE paper using oil based core data.20 C-K Eq. 19
can be expressed in a generic form as Eq. 24:
Log(kS2 ) = [Alog(Ø)] + B ….…………..………(24)
where B (Eq. 25) is an independent term, which combines the
Kozeny constant and efficiency of flow:
B = − log ⎢
( )
⎡ τ 2 Fs ⎤
⎥ ……..……..…….……..………(25)
⎣ λ ⎦
Using the modified Archie equation, it is possible to write:20
Rw
− n log( S wi ) + log(ab ) = m log(Φ ) − log( ) ...(26)
Rt
where water saturation requires irreducible conditions. Eqs.
24 and 26 have analogous mathematical forms of Ø. Equating
the corresponding coefficients, we obtain:20
B R
= (1 / m) log( t ) …………….………………(27)
A abRw
m
1
(kS 2 ) A = n
….……………..……………….…..(28)
S wi
SPE 100200
Eqs. 27 and 28 are dimensionally homogeneous.16 These
simultaneous equations necessitate an estimate of specific
surface area, either from cores, from mineral composition, or
from NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance tool). Since k =
ƒ(Swi), k is effective to oil @ Swi, not absolute k (kabs).
Models are only as good and useful as our ability to
measure or calculate their corresponding parameters in a
practical manner. Hydraulic tortuosity, shape factor, and
pressure recovery efficiency are difficult to acquire.17 The
degree of viscous and inviscid flow in a rock sample is also
hard to establish through measurements. Equivalent
macroscopic effects of these parameters, characterized by A
and B values, are mathematically obtained using the “Perfect
Permeability Transform” procedure.20 This is a pragmatic
alternative to quickly calculate permeability (with a
correlation coefficient of 0.99) using cores and logs.
Benefit of the method can be appreciated, considering that
Archie equation is immune to changes in flow regime caused
by viscosity distribution variations, which complicates
calculations using C-K alone. A perfect fluid (with no
viscosity) circulates in electric flow, reducing significantly
difficulties in computations.
Diagenesis and estimation of cementation exponent. Lucia
divides diagenesis processes for carbonates according to their
conformance to depositional patterns. He states that this
characteristic is important, because it permits interwell
predictions of textures and petrophysical parameters through
mapping.8 He recognizes three groups:
1. Cementation, compaction and selective dissolution.
2. Dolomitization and evaporite mineralization.
3. Massive dissolution, collapse brecciation, and fracturing.
The first group, the only mapable,8 will be discussed next.
Compaction and cementation are two diagenetic processes,
which can be normally linked to depositional textures, both in
clastics and carbonates. Compaction can be mechanical or
chemical. Cementation can be a product of chemical
compaction. It is generally accepted that it is hard to separate
the impact of compaction and cementation, because both
phenomena produce similar effects on rocks, like reducing
porosity.
Tighter packing of the grains (other conditions unchanged)
means more acute corner angles, which translates into higher
m. This is in line with an observed cementation exponent rise
whenever overburden is applied. This is consistent with
compaction studies, and explains why authors have found a,
b, m and n responding to confining pressure. Inclusion of
coefficient b in the Archie formulation, clarify this and several
other issues especially raised for carbonate reservoirs
(complex rocks).32
Turning angles can be directly associated with the normal
(Sn) and tangential contact stiffness (St) of the rock, as treated
in rock physics. Stiffness is equal to the force, divided by the
corresponding elongation in the same direction. The acting
force on a particle is perpendicular to the contact surface,
under equilibrium conditions. As a consequence, the sum
(resultant) of vectors Fn (normal force) and Ft (tangential
force) is tangent to the grain contacts. Thus, δ = angle1 +
angle2, where angle1 is the force angle (with respect to the
vertical) at contact point 1, and angle2 is the angle at contact
11
point 2, as shown in Fig. 13. As such, δ, a and m, can be
expressed as function of the elastic properties of the rock.
This observation opens new possibilities: a and m can be
calculated using compressional (Vp) and shear (Vs) sonic wave
velocities, and rock mechanics/stiffness models.6 This agrees
with correlations reported in the literature for oolites,
characterized by round grains.33 This technique supposes no
pressure dissolution of the grains.
Calculations can be generated with Eqs. 14, 15, 29, where
a and m are computed using Vp and Vs to obtain Poisson’s ratio
(ν), and Hertz Mindlin model. Eq. 29 is derived from this
model, intended for precompacted granular rocks. It assumes
no-slip between grains, identical elastic spherical isotropic
spheres, no breaking or interpenetration of the grains, small
strain conditions, and smooth shape at the contact. Its main
mechanism is rearrangement of the grains. Results presuppose
that there is lateral connectivity of the pores, and contact
between the grains.
Ft 2(1 − ν )
= ……………………………..……….(29)
Fn υ (2 − ν )
Angle1
δ
Ft
Angle2
Fn
Figure 13 – Relation between normal and tangential
contact forces of the rock and the “angle around a corner” model.
Rock physics offers other alternatives: Digby model is used in
cases of non smooth contacts. Walton model admits slip. The
Brandt model is designed for spheres of different sizes with
the same mechanical properties.6 Petrophysical analysis
practice will most probably require adjustments to the models,
to take into account the spatial differences between these
idealized models and the real cases.
Grains will be loose in unconsolidated formations,
favoring lower corner angles. Addition of cement will
increase the overall tortuosity of the rock, and more acute
corners will exist. Rise in m value is consistent with rock
cementation. In highly cemented sands, cement will block
some or most pathways creating dead-end pores, and m > 2 is
very likely.
Different types of cements exist. The most common are
quartz and calcite for clastics, whilst calcite carbonate is the
most frequent for carbonates. Cements occupy the pore space,
mostly around the contacts of the original grains
(overgrowths). Cements can be deposited either at grain
contacts (meniscus cement), or evenly on the grain surface
(e.g.: pendular cement), or unevenly distributed.6,8 Cements
generally have a different Poisson ratio compared to the
grains. Grain contact models for cemented rocks take into
account this difference.
12
Using Vp and Vs, a and m and the amount of the different
types of dispersed cements can be calculated using the models,
assuming certain schemes of cement deposition.6 This
approach will not work as well, either for noncontact cement
or for conductive cement distributed around the grains.
Both a and m can be much higher in nontouching vuggy
carbonates, compared to rocks with intercrystalline or
intergranular porosity. Electric-current is forced to meander
around the vugs, describing much longer pathways under these
conditions. Interparticle porosity can be calculated by
radioactive and acoustic measurements comparisons.8
Relationships to estimate m were derived by Lucia using
correlations. Theoretically, stiffness models, turning angles,
and vuggy/interparticle porosity ratio can be further used to
get independent assessments of a and m.
In touching vuggy carbonates, the voids themselves create
an easy conductive trail for the current, which justifies lower
tortuosity values as shown in Table 1. This effect is referred
as accessibility of the electric-current to the vugs.32
Petrophysical evaluation, m zoning. The same m value is
generally used to perform the petrophysical evaluation in a
given formation, due to lack of a better technique to calculate
m at every depth. This practice is source of many reported
non-Archie effects. It makes more geological sense to assume
the same turning angle instead, varying with depth from one
formation to the other. This approach incorporates an implicit
correlation of m with porosity, which is a variable m scheme
often used. Preferably, cementation exponent should be
calculated using Vp/Vs, whenever these measurements are
available, and wherever it applies.
Pickett plots are a good technique to estimate tortuosity
exponent in water zones. Problems usually arise when
correlation is indiscriminately performed among zones with
large variations of m or water salinity, formation is shaly, or
when the “water line” is not clear. Vertical variations in m can
coalesce to create an apparent line. Values of a lower than 1
should be considered symptom of poor Pickett plot zoning,
because this result is against the theory.1
Clay effects on m and n. Distribution, amount, shape and
type of clay material play an essential role in tortuosity
behavior.10 Degree of deviation of the electric-current always
depends on the resistivity contrast between formation water
and clay water, and their relative amount. When formation
water is fresh and clay water is conductive and abundant,
maximum deviation (most acute angles) develops, in line with
high m. If salinity of formation water is high, deviation is
limited because the easiest way for the electricity is the
formation water itself; m does not change much, n increases.7
Dispersed clays around the grains (pore lining clays) cause
acute angles. Electric flow deviates from its original straight
trajectories (center of the pores) to pass through the
continuous more conductive solids (periphery of the pores).
This response is consistent with higher m that correlates with
shaliness. This effect on m can be very pronounced. Under
this condition, the corridor of electric flow does not change
much in partial water saturation as compared to the case when
Sw = 1, because the current is already circulating close to the
fluid solid contact. This means that n tends to decrease.18
SPE 100200
When cement concentration reaches certain levels, contact
cement (that lies between grain contacts) turns into pore
filling, and then evolves into pore bridging. In presence of
clay crystals filling or bridging the pores, clays plug interstitial
pores impeding hydraulic flow, and facilitate electric flow
(some current redirects through the center of the pores). Thus,
m might not change, n varies.
Different considerations are applicable to laminated and
structural clays. For example, structural clay constitutes an
easy path for electric-current, and m and n decrease. For
laminar clay, depending on its thickness, one m value should
apply to the sand portions, and another one to the clay
laminae. Therefore, knowledge of clay distribution within the
rock (Fig. 14) is critical for appropriate m, n, water saturation,
porosity and permeability calculations.
Dispersed clay
(as pendular
cement)
Key questions:
Laminated clay
Where is the most
conductive material?
How is it distributed?
Structural clay
Figure 14 – Clay distribution in the pore space will
influence differently the Archie equation exponents.
Rock Types. The right hand side of Eq. 27 includes the Swi*Ø
product (BVI), m and n effects.20 BVI values (Buckles
number) have been historically used to differentiate rock
types, consistent with Swi or one fluid production (0 water cut)
in presence of two fluids. Buckles number lacks the internal
structure information (tortuosity and saturation distribution)
that Eq. 27 contains. Hence, this equation proves superior to
recognize rocks, because it captures essential pore-scale
geometry (texture) and wettability data.
Both definitions permit to connect permeability, capillary
pressure, and relative permeability formulations through Swi,
which is just a point of their respective curves. As such, these
are pragmatic rock type definitions, which enable to
quantitatively link vital rock properties that control fluid flow.
The flow zone indicator (FZI) concept is employed in rock
typing,12 associated with the variation of the independent term
of Eq. 24. However, B grouping is not sufficient to define
unique flow units since A also varies. The alternative is to use
the whole line (in log-log space) as an equivalent hydraulic
rock type. Eq. 27 parametrically permits the connection
between microscopic electrofacies and rock hydraulic
macroscopic response at well level using logs.20 This is
practical upscaling.
SPE 100200
Mathematical relationships to generate rock types, based
on rock physics and engineering concepts, thus can be
established in cored and uncored wells with logs. Rock types
also need to be determined at interwell scale. Interwell data
necessarily has to be generated, honoring geological data
(complemented by geophysical data), in a space where hard
data is scarce or does not exist. Geological mapping shall help
us to reconstruct the interwell geometry, and to assist in
populating interwell volumes with the most appropriate data.8
Consequently, connection at well level between
engineering and geology calculations is a requirement, which
can be generally handled by a change in coordinates.20
Engineering quantification works best at well level, whereas
geology is superior at interwell scale. In reservoir
characterization, the best option is to use the combination of
both sciences, using them where their value is optimal. These
concepts should be the basis to create adequate rock catalogs.
Synthetic production logs. Most authors report that history
matching is generally good at field level. However, it usually
exhibits problems and mismatch at well locations. Some of
the objectives of simulation efforts are usually to help
positioning new wells, and recommending intervals to open, to
balance production off take and to improve sweep efficiency.
Accordingly, a better understanding and predictability of
production behavior at well level is a requisite. Generation of
synthetic production logs (variable over time since production
conditions change) is a good alternative to mitigate these
difficulties. A typical integration scheme to create these logs
is outlined below.
Conventional (porosity and permeability) and electrical
properties (F and Ir) core data can be used to calibrate logs
through the “perfect permeability transform procedure.”
Capillary pressure can be utilized to assess Swi, k in the
transition zone,20 and the magnitude of Sw with respect to the
position of the rock in the oil column. Eq. 27, which defines
rock types, permits to connect Ø, Swi, m and n with capillary
pressure and relative permeability in a consistent manner.
Figure 15 – Synthetic production log in a carbonate
reservoir. All open hole data has been integrated to get estimates
of zonal and total production and water cut. Results were
validated with metered production data.
13
Fluid flow at every depth is calculated using a radial flow
equation, combining permeability transform values, oil and
water viscosity, pressure from formation testers, and downhole
flowing pressure measurements. Drainage area is an
important consideration. Total production is obtained adding
the various contributions, which is a process equivalent to
upscaling. Synthetic production logs then are compared to
true production logs, and can be further calibrated to match
permeability from transient pressure analysis and surface
production metered data. Skin can be incorporated.18 Thus,
there is a clear venue of data integration and validation.
Figure 16 – Synthetic production log in a sandstone
reservoir. All open hole data has been integrated to get estimates
of total production and water cut. Results were validated with
metered production data.
The procedure just described constitutes history matching at
well level. This facilitates to generate improved forecasts. A
couple of examples are presented in Fig. 15 and Fig. 16,
which depict results in carbonates and sands, respectively.
Discussion and Validation
Archie equation physical bounds. The proposed Archie
relationship, Eq. 18, complies with physical bounds:2,3,11,17 a =
1 when porosity is equal to 1. The same observation is valid
for b = 1 when water saturation is equal to 1. The premise is
proved, since the angle (δ and ε, respectively) is equal to 180o
in both cases.
Some typical and atypical responses. Sharma et al.
discussed extensively saturation exponent and wettability.26
They explained that film response dominates in water wet
systems, with n in the 1-2 range. Film domination results
because thin films are stable, even at high capillary pressure
and low saturation (5-10%), in strongly water wet systems.26,34
Rougher grain textures mean thicker films and lower n values
because Swf increases.30 The Ir-Sw curve flattens when films
are thick, again explained by higher Swf values. Concave Ir-Sw
curve is observed in double logarithmic coordinates for water
wet rocks. This effect is more pronounced when divergence
angle ζ is larger. All the results above are supported by Eqs.
21 and 23. Therefore, validity of these equations is verified.
14
Microporosity (void space full of continuous conductive
water), pyrite, glauconite, and other conductive materials
constitute an easy path to the electric flow. They create some
non-Archie effects; m and n will tend to diminish. These
examples do not negate Archie mathematical form (Eq. 18).
These observations just demonstrate that a, m, b and n vary
with respect to the relative volumes and distribution of
formation water, conductive rock matrix and clay, as opposed
to common assumption that they are constants and unique.23
1000
Partially
Films, oil wet
Water
wet
Sw*
Resistivity
index
10
Rough
texture
0.1
0.01 0.1
Water saturation
Figure 17 – Variation of saturation exponents, as function
30
of water saturation. Generated using Eq. 21 & 23, and Fig. 18.
Exponents behavior due to disconnection and blockage.
The adopted electrical model presents a and m interrelated, in
conformity with Gomez-Rivero observations.35 This gives the
possibility of quantifying reported non-Archie effects of both
non-connected vuggy porosity and oil wet rocks, which
determine abnormally high values of m and n, respectively.
Both effects signify some degree of disconnection of the
electric paths.
A typical value of length ratio, when all electrical paths are
connected, is 1.414 for δ = 90o. Simplistically, tortuosity
length will double when, in average, only every other pore is
effectively connected, equivalent to a ratio of 2.83. This
matches with an m value of around 4 as shown in Fig. 18.
This agrees with m calculations reported by Lucia for non-
touching vuggy carbonates, when vuggy to primary porosity
ratio is close to 1.8 The same procedure can be used to
estimate various degrees of disconnection, and the
corresponding rock morphology parameters.
Pendular rings prevail in oil wet rocks with absence of
films, and n is generally larger than 2. The actual value of n
and the porosity exponent A from C-K equation can be
estimated from Fig. 18, considering the additional path length
due to lost of electric contacts and hydraulic flow blockage,
respectively. Conductive paths are also lost when brine is
completely surrounded by insulating wetting phase, creating
pseudo-dead-end pores. Saturation exponent values become
very high, as high as ~15 for 70% fractional oil wettability.23
Lithology and wettability. Carbonates tend to be more oil
wet than sandstones,32 due to the different rock chemistry.
Authigenic clays might promote oil wet characteristics.36
Sands with quartz overgrowths behave as tube like models
with films, without crevices, because of their smooth surfaces.
SPE 100200
20
18 δ or ε = 10o
16
14
exponent (m or n)
12
10 Series1
8 δ or ε = 20o
δ or ε = 30o
6
4
2
div=45 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
div=30
length ratio (a or b)
div=15
Oil Wet Figure 18 – Variation of Archie equation exponents, as
function of length ratio. Valid for both tortuosity and saturation
Rough
exponents, since the same mathematical equation form applies to
formation factor and resistivity index.
Other methods to estimate n. Saturation exponent n also can
be calculated using permeability formulation,20 Pickett plots,
or using the combination of resistivity and dielectric
1
measurements. High frequency electric-current will circulate
through the periphery of the conductive phase,19 which might
complicate calculations. A practical observation might be that
m and n vary in opposite direction to a certain degree.32
Reynolds number, Darcy and Poiseuille equations. General
wisdom believes that non-Darcy flow only arises in gas
reservoirs. Part of the problem is the confusion of terms and
scales. Non-Darcy and turbulent flows are most of the time
used interchangeably.15
Belhaj et al. explain the distinction between non-darcy and
turbulent flow. Non-darcian characteristics are attributed to
the continuous cross section and direction change of the flow
through porous media. Non-darcy flow is triggered at lower
Reynolds number values as compared to turbulent flow, where
Reynolds number represents the ratio between inertial and
viscous forces. In this context, they report that non-Darcy
flow also happens in fractured and multipermeability systems
in oil reservoirs.37
Slider recognizes that laminar-Darcy flow would be very
difficult to obtain in reservoir pores. Non-Darcy flow will
appear at lower Reynolds numbers than normally expected.15
SPE literature38 specifies that the value of Reynolds number,
as an indicator of the laminar-turbulent transition, varies
depending on flow geometry. While Re = 2100 is accepted for
flow in a straight tube, a value of 600 is applicable for flow in
a slit. Although a firm transition value for flow through
permeable media is not defined, it is mentioned that it could
range from 0.1 to 0.5.38 It is also stated that:
• Laminar flow rarely occurs in porous networks, given that
local geometry of rock grains and their surfaces are so
irregular that fluid flowlines usually cross each other,
except at very small rates.
• The pore-tubes are not long enough to be free of entrance
or exit flows, and Poiseuille equation does not hold either.
This is especially true near the wellbore, within the rock
volume where cores and electric logs are acquired.
SPE 100200
Andrade et al. showed that inertial effects are fully developed
at Reynolds number of 15.6 in porous media.39 Dibbs et al.
indicate that boundary layers start gradually building at Re ≈ 1,
and an inertial core is formed at Re ≈ 10. A steady non-linear
regime, called the inertial regime, persists up to Re ≈ 150.
Wake oscillations and unsteady regime begin at this Re value,
and vortices initiate at Re ≈ 250. Flow becomes very chaotic
at Re > 300, similar to turbulent flow.40
These observations signify that the likelihood of
occurrence of fluid flow, as conceived in this paper, is high.
Data from around the world6,8,13,14,20,21,22 supports both, this
conclusion and C-K variable porosity exponent. The models
applicable in nozzles, throats, diffusers, flow around a corner,
etc. can be safely adopted. Molecular (~armstrongs) and pore
dimensions (~microns) differences are large enough to permit
buildup of the corresponding flow profiles.
Threshold Re values in porous media, although uncertain
according to the literature, are lower than the ones quoted in
fluid mechanics, taking into account differences in
dimensions, viscosity and geometry. Due to the presence of
irreducible water in hydrocarbon zones, liquid-liquid contact
within the pores (as opposed to liquid-solid) also favors lower
Re values. In fact, liquid-liquid condition permits more slip,
hence inviscid flow around corners. As such, these limiting
values, which determine the changes of flow regime, are less
restrictive. They are met under lower velocity/higher viscosity
conditions than normally anticipated in oil reservoirs.
Length scale used in calculations of Re is grain diameter
(Gd).38,39 Since Re determines variations in flow regime, this
link explains why grain size controls permeability to some
extent.8,13 Boundary layer model applicability requires Gd >>
Lt.
Carman-Kozeny parameters. Hydraulic tortuosity (τ) is not
necessarily equal to electric tortuosity (a) for several reasons:
• Electric flow is pure inviscid, well behaved and responds
to the resistivity of fluids and rock. Hydraulic flow can
be chaotic. It is a combination of viscous and inviscid
flow, and particle displacement is not uniform or equal.
• Conductive water droplets might impede flow of other
fluids (e.g.: an oil blob) when the water is filling narrow
rock passages (pore throats). However, this does not
constitute any restriction to the electric-current.
• Water imbibed pores are an obstacle to oil flow. These
are an easy path to electric flow if the water is conductive.
• Current can circulate through the clayey conductive
portions of the rock in shaly rocks, while hydraulic flow
would be completely prevented if clay is jamming the
pore throats.
• Electric-current is deviated by conductive materials.
Fluid flow is not influenced if there is no chemical
interaction.
• The absence of water films does not affect much
hydraulic flow. Electric flow depends on the presence of
connecting films.
Hydraulic tortuosity τ is usually larger than electrical
tortuosity a.10,41 In general, hydraulic tortuosity should be
smaller than the fluid-dependent electrical tortuosity (product
a times b) in partially saturated rocks (Sw < 1).
15
If aspect ratio is small (quasi-uniform cross section), b will
be ≈ 1. This also signifies that hydraulic tortuosity τ will be
closer to electrical tortuosity a. Porosity exponent A might
approximate to (m + 2) under these conditions, reflecting only
the viscosity difference of the electric (inviscid) and hydraulic
fluid. This assumes no blockage of the pores.
Archie and Poiseuille equations similarities. Additional
quantitative similarities exist between these equations, worth
discussing to better understand Archie equation.
Flow rate is proportional to area (Eq. 6), and area is
proportional to r2. However, due to fluid viscosity, q does not
respond to r2, it actually responds to r4 in Poiseuille equation.
This occurs because velocities of the various fluid laminae
change: velocities are function of radius, which determines
their position in the cross section area. Similarly, Eq. 7 has
proved that electric potential and 1/R, the basis for Archie
equation, are proportional to aream, not merely to area1, due to
the geometry of the conducting paths (flow around corners).
Eq. 30 would be a more correct version of Ohm law to
apply in Petrophysics, instead of Eq. 5. This one dimensional
equation permits to handle some irregular geometric forms in
conductors. Eq. 30 is presented here because it is easier to
understand than Laplace Eq. 7, which is volumetric:
l
V (res )dl
=R=∫ ….……………………………...(30)
I 0
Area
where dl is change in length. In porous media, cross section
keeps changing (magnitude and direction) as the current
moves along the flow routes around the corners. Thus, Area is
function of length l. It cannot be taken out of the integral, as
opposed to Eq. 5 that presupposes constant area.
This result has significant implications. It means that
some popular formulae (like Waxman-Smits, Simandoux, dual
water), derived at pore scale level, need revision.42 In their
derivation, they suppose that the same relationships apply to
either resistivities (res) or resistances (R), to obtain parallel or
series equivalents, via volumetric weighted averages. They do
not consider the complex geometry, evidenced by the
meandering electric paths and clay spatial distribution.
Resistivity and resistance formulations are not directly
interchangeable. They need an exponent and a coefficient in
the volumetric terms, whenever electric-current changes cross
section and direction.
Summary
Archie equation has been fully demonstrated. It is not an
empirical relationship any more. Its theoretical demonstration
is backed up by a plethora of examples acquired over the
years, which reveal its validity and limitations.
Two parameters (angles δ, ε) are needed with the new
formulation, instead of 3 (a, m, n). This ends in improvements
in Sw calculation.32 This alleviates some of the problems
reported by Holtz et al. concerning a variability.43
Electric parameters a & m respond to the pure geometric
tortuosity of the rock, considering that electric current is
inviscid. A, τ reflect the physical interaction of the internal
geometry of the solid rock and the viscosity of the circulating
fluid, which imposes the incidence of various flow regimes.
16
Rock sinuous corridors can be properly modeled using a
series of straight lines, making corner angles through the
pores. Final (a, m), (b, n), (τ, A) values are the statistical
average of all the described angles. Tie of these parameters
with pore geometry and rock texture is evident, which
facilitates calculation of petrophysical properties (k, Sw) and
permits an easier connection to the geology.43
Electric-current or hydraulic flow does not circulate only
at 45o with respect to the average direction of flow, as it has
been stipulated in the literature.1,17 The value of the angle is
dictated by the severity of the corner angles of the rock.
Electric (a, m), (b, n) and hydraulic tortuosities (τ, A)
volumetrically include two types of information: the winding
pathways data of the rock frame, and the degree of lateral
connectivity.32 They have 3-D repercussion. Therefore,
oriented values of tortuosity and saturation exponents must be
obtained because rocks are not spatially isotropic.44
Tortuosity exponent m depends on the distribution and
contrast between formation water Rw and clay water
resistivity. It also depends on the type and amount of clay
material. Its value is generally lower than 2 if the electric
paths are not occluded. It is larger than 2 if some or many of
the electric routes are discontinuous.
Tortuosity exponent m varies between 1 and 2 for fractured
rocks, in agreement with the literature.5 Variation is attributed
to the degree of connectivity among fractures.
Tortuosity exponent has been linked to overburden
pressure, to explain effects of compaction,32 as shown in Fig.
13. Its value can be calculated using shear and compressional
velocity data, by means of Poisson ratio. This opens the
possibility of estimating m with geophysical information, in
sections where only “soft data” is available.
In this paper, the “equivalents” concept (under stable,
steady state conditions) has been used, in the same way it is
employed in electricity. This strategy has been adopted to turn
problems into more manageable, and to generate practical
parameters for petrophysical analysis. This contrasts with
current tendency of creating dynamic physical models to
simulate the whole flow process (drainage and imbibition).
Rock frame, conductive, and hydraulic tortuosities,
ingredients of Eq. 28 (m, n, A), symbolize the geometric and
viscosity controls on permeability. Specific surface area
characterizes the lithologic rock component on k (missing in
previous formulation),20 considering the significant differences
in values among the different rock mineralogies: 0.22, 2, and
60 m2/g for quartz, carbonate and clay, respectively.42
Permeability-porosity crossplots and Archie equation are
recognized as good examples that express the interdependency
of petrophysical properties, even in complex carbonate
rocks.43 This is in line with the C-K & Archie equation
mathematical connection that the “Perfect Permeability
Transform” procedure advocates.
Conclusions
Archie exponents have now a clear physical meaning: m and n
signify the average turning angles that the current is forced to
follow within the tortuous water conduits, when pores are
fully and partially saturated. This is demonstrated by Eqs. 14
and 16.
SPE 100200
Knowing the average angles (δ & ε), m, a, n, b can be
calculated using Eqs. 14, 15, 16, and 17. These parameters are
not constant. Their variable quantitative behavior clearly
explains reported non-Archie responses.
Rock frame, conductive phase, and hydraulic tortuosities,
represented by the interrelated pairs (a, m), (b, n) and (τ, A)
respectively, are not generally identical to each other.
Exponent A is variable, and compensates for the velocity
variations caused by the hydraulic tortuosity τ of the rock. A
also reflects the various flow regimes, created by the diverse
viscosity distributions that fluid adopts as it travels through the
rock. C-K equation requires an efficiency multiplier like λ to
offset the relentless changes in cross section of the pores.
Saturation exponent varies as function of water saturation,
as it was shown in Figs. 11 and 17. Thus, it is not correct to
use the same n for Sw and Sxo calculations. It should be
measured at the correct saturation cycle (drainage, imbibition).
Its value, measured in the lab, shows marked saturation history
dependence.
Eqs. 21 through 23, based on pore scale modeling of water
films, let us obtain n as function of water saturation and
equivalent wettability angle.
Eq. 29 (and similar Eqs.) permits continuous calculation of
a and m, whenever the theory is applicable (precompacted,
touching grains), and compressional and shear sonic
measurements are available.
Geometry inferred from thin sections can be used to assess
tortuosity and saturation exponents. However, caution should
be exercised because the angles from thin section are not
always the same as the true 3-D corner angles.
Non-Archie effects (e.g.: vuggy porosity) and hydraulic
blockage can be quantified using thin sections, accounting for
the volumetric ratio of disconnection of the pores. Then, Fig.
18 can be used.
Resistivity and resistance formulations are not
volumetrically/mathematically interchangeable. Resistivity
needs a coefficient/exponent scheme, if the cross section and
direction of the electric flow keeps changing along the path.
Eqs. 18 and 19 are the modified recommended Archie and
C-K equations. Both hydraulic and electric modeling of
porous media requires a merger of macro and micro scales for
an effective upscaling. As such, Eq. 19 is a mathematical
blend of Darcy, Poiseuille and Laplace equations. Eq. 18
results from the mixture of Ohm law and Laplace equation.
Eqs. 27 and 28 are the amended simultaneous k equations.
They prove that fusion of electric measurements and hydraulic
principles can predict rock properties; k to oil (not kabs) is
computed because that is what truly matters in oil reservoirs.
Acknowledgments
The author thanks Occidental Oil & Gas for their permission
to publish this paper. I am grateful to those colleagues who
helped correcting this manuscript.
REFERENCES
1. Adisoemarta, P.S., Anderson, G.A., Frailey, S.M., Asquith,
G.B.: “Historical Use of m and a in Well Log Interpretation:
Is Conventional Wisdom Backwards,” paper SPE 59699
presented at the 2000 SPE Permian Basin Oil and Gas
Recovery Conference, Midland, Texas, March 21-23.
SPE 100200
2. Shang, B.Z., Hamman, J.G., Caldwell, D.H.: “A Physical
Model to Explain the First Archie Relationship and Beyond,”
paper SPE 84300 presented at the 2003 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado,
October 5-8.
3. Bussian, A.E.: “A Generalized Archie Equation,” SPWLA
23th Annual Logging Symposium (1982).
4. Archie, G.E.: “The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in
Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics,” AIME
Petroleum Tech. (1942), 1-8.
5. Log Interpretation Charts, Schlumberger Publication (1984)
15.
6. Mavko, G., Mukerji, T., Dvorkin, J.: The Rock Physics
Handbook, Cambridge University Press (1998) 260.
7. Serra, O.: Advanced Interpretation of Wireline Logs,
Schlumberger Publication (1986), 110.
8. Lucia, F. J.: Carbonate Reservoir Characterization, Springer
(1999) 68.
9. Aguilera, R.: Naturally Fractured Reservoirs, PennWell
Books, Tulsa, Oklahoma (1995), 521.
10. Salem, H.S.: “Derivation of the Cementation Factor
(Archie’s Exponent) and the Kozeny-Carman Constant from
Well Log Data, and Their Dependence on Lithology and
Other Physical Parameters,” paper SPE 26309, 1993.
11. Shang, B.Z., Hamman, J.G., Caldwell, D.H.: “Water
Saturation Estimation Using Equivalent Rock Element
Model,” paper SPE 90143 presented at the 2004 SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas,
September 26-29.
12. Amaefule, J.O., Altunbay, M., Tiab, D., Kersey, D.G.:
“Enhanced Reservoir Description: Using Core and Log Data
to Identify Hydraulic (Flow) Units and Predict Permeability
in Uncored Intervals/Wells,” paper SPE 26436 presented at
the 1993 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, Texas, October 3-6.
13. Jennings, J.W., Lucia, J.: “Predicting Permeability From
Well Logs In Carbonates With A Link to Geology for
Interwell Permeability Mapping,” paper SPE 71336
presented at the 2001 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, September 30-October
3.
14. Civan, F.: “Fractal Formulation of the Porosity and
Permeability Relationship Resulting in A Power-Law Flow
Units Equation –A Leaky- Tube Model,” paper SPE 73785
presented at the 2002 SPE International Symposium and
Exhibition on Formation Damage Control, Lafayette,
Louisiana, February 20-21.
15. Slider, H. C.: Worldwide Practical Petroleum Engineering
Methods, Revised Printing, Pennwell Books, Tulsa,
Oklahoma (1983) 13.
16. White, F.M.: Fluid Mechanics, Mac Graw Hill (2003) 250.
17. Wyllie, M.R.J., Spangler, M.B.: “Application of Electrical
Resistivity Measurements to Problem of Fluid Flow in
Porous Media,” Bull. Am. Assoc. Petro. Geologists
(February 1952), 359.
18. Bradley, H.: Petroleum Engineering Manual, Society of
Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, Texas (1992) 26-10.
19. Jordan, E.C., Balmain, K.G.: Electromagnetic Waves and
Radiating Systems, Prentice-Hall Inc. (1968) 46.
20. Haro, C.F.: “The Perfect Permeability Transform Using Logs
and Cores,” paper SPE 89516 presented at the 2004 SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston,
Texas, September 26-29.
21. Nelson, P.: “Permeability-Porosity Relationships in
Sedimentary Rocks,” The Log Analyst (May-June 1994) 35,
No. 3, 39.
17
22. Bourbié, T., Coussy, O., Zinszner, B.: Acoustics of Porous
Media, Editions Technip (1987) 13.
23. Anderson, W.G.: “Wettability Literature Survey-Part 3: The
Effects of Wettability on the Electrical Properties of Porous
Media,” Journal of Petroleum Technology (1986).
24. Hirasaki, G.J.: “Wettability: Fundamentals and Surface
Forces,” paper SPE 17367 SPE Formation Evaluation, June
1991, 217.
25. Gladkikh, M., Bryant, S.: “Mechanistic Prediction of
Capillary Imbibition Curves,” paper SPE 90333 presented at
the 2004 SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, Texas, September 26-29.
26. Sharma, M.M., Garrouch, A., Dunlap, H.F.: “Effects of
Wettability, Pore Geometry, and Stress on Electrical
Conduction in Fluid-Saturated Rocks,” The Log Analyst
(September-October 1991) 32, No. 5, 511.
27. Frankenfield, J.: “Pendular Rings with non-zero Contact
Angles,” www.snowman-jim.org, 1996.
28. Gvirtzman, H., Roberts, P.V.: “Pore Scale Spatial Analysis
of Two Immiscible Fluids in Porous Media,” Water
Resources Research (June 1991), 27, No. 6, 1165.
29. Gladkikh, M., Vivek, J., Bryant, S., Sharma, M.:
“Experimental and Theoretical Basis for a Wettability-
Interfacial Area-Relative Permeability relationship,” paper
SPE 84544 presented at the 2003 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, October 5-8.
30. Toumelin, E., Torres-Verdin, C.: “Influence of Oil Saturation
and Wettability on Rock Resistivity Measurements: A
Uniform Pore-scale Approach,” SPWLA 46th Annual
Logging Symposium (2005).
31. Silin, D.B.,Jin, G., Patzec, T.W.: “Robust Determination of
the Pore Space Morphology in Sedimentary Rocks,” paper
SPE 84296 presented at the 2003 SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, October 5-8.
32. Ara, T.S., Talabani, S., Vaziri, H.H.: “In Depth Investigation
of the Archie Equation in Carbonate Rocks,” paper SPE
67204 presented at the 2001 SPE Production and Operation
Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, March 24-27.
33. Mitchell-Tapping, H.J.: “Acoustic Velocity Relationship to
the Cementation Factor (m) in the Sligo Oolite,” The Log
Analyst (May-June 1981) 22, No. 3, 8.
34. Melrose, J.C.: “Scaling Procedures for Capillary Pressure
Data at Low Wetting-Phase Saturations,” paper SPE 19594
SPE Formation Evaluation, June 1991, 227.
35. Gomez-Rivero, O.: “A Practical Method for Determining
Cementation Exponents and Some Other Parameters as an
Aid in Well Log Analysis,” The Log Analyst (Sep-Oct 1976)
17, No. 5, 8.
36. Hamada, G.M., Al-Awad, M.N.J., Alsughayer, A.A.: “Water
Saturation from Laboratory, 3D Regression,” Oil & Gas
Science and Technology (2002), 57, No. 6, 637.
37. Belhaj, H.A., Agha, K.R., Nouri, A.M., Butt, S.D., Vaziri,
H.F., Islam, M.R.: “Numerical Simulation of Non-Darcy
Flow Utilizing the New Forchheimer’s Diffusivity
Equation,” paper SPE 81499 presented at the 2003 SPE 13th
Middle East Oil Show & Conference, Bahrain, April 5-8.
38. Whipple, T.: “Reservoir Characterization: From the
Laboratory to the Field,” SPE on-line demo course.
39. Andrade, J.S., Costa, U.M.S., Almeida M.P., Makse, H.A.,
Stanley H.E.: “Inertial Effects on Fluid Flow through
Disordered Porous Media,” Physical Review Letters (June
1999) 82, No. 26, 5249.
40. Dybbs, A., Edwards, R.: Fundamentals of Transport
Phenomena in Porous Media, Dordrecht (1984), 199.
18 SPE 100200

41. Zhang, X., Knackstedt, M.A.: “Direct Simulation of res =Resistivity

Electrical and Hydraulic Tortuosity in Porous solids,” R =Resistance
Geophysical Research Letter (1995), 22, 17, 2333-2336. Re =Reynolds number
42. Luthi, S.M.: Geological Well Logs, Springer, Berlin, Ro = Formation resistivity at 100% Sw, ohm-m
Germany (2001), 26.
43. Holtz, M.H., Jackson, J.A., Jackson, K.G., Major, R.P.:
Rt = Formation resistivity, ohm-m
“Petrophysical characterization of Permian Shallow-Water Rw = Formation water resistivity, ohm-m
Dolostone,” paper SPE 75214 presented at the 2002 S = Specific surface area
SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, Tulsa, Sc = Spreading coefficient
Oklahoma, April 13-17. Sgv = Specific surface area of the grains
44. Worthington, P.F.: “The Influence of Formation Anisotropy Sn = Normal Stiffness
upon Resistivity - Porosity Relationships,” SPWLA 22nd Sor =Residual oil saturation, fraction
Annual Logging Symposium (1981). St = Tangential Stiffness
Sw = Water saturation, fraction
Nomenclature Sw* = Critical water saturation, fraction
a = Tortuosity coefficient Swc = Water saturation in the crevices, fraction
A = Porosity exponent/branchiness Swf = Water saturation in the films, fraction
Angle1 = Contact stiffness angle at point 1 Swi = Irreducible water saturation, fraction
Angle2 = Contact stiffness angle at point 2 Swp = Water saturation in small pores, fraction
ar = Aspect ratio Sxo =Flushed zone water saturation, fraction
AR = Area ratio V =Voltage
Area = Cross section area Vp =Compressional velocity
Area1 = Cross section porous area Vs =Shear velocity
Areau = Cross section area of the unit block full of water α = Cementation exclusion factor
b = Conductive phase coefficient β =Porosity exponent
b’ = Conductive phase length δ =Turning angle (tortuosity exponent)
B =FZI or interconnectivity parameter ƒ(z) =Potential distribution function
BVI =Irreducible water saturation-porosity product γ =Interconnectivity parameter
c =curvature-angle exponent ΔP =Change in pressure, psi
Co =Rock conductivity ζ = Divergence angle
Cw =Brine conductivity ε = Turning angle (saturation exponent)
D = Amplitude coefficient τ = Hydraulic tortuosity
d =Fixed duct diameter λ = Efficiency factor
dl =change in length φ = Angle, polar coordinates
E = Electric Field Strength Ø = Porosity, fraction
F = Formation factor θ = Angle, polar coordinates
Fn =Normal force ν =Poisson’s ratio
Fs = Shape factor μ =Viscosity
Ft =Tangential force ω =Wettability angle (in radians)
FZI =Flow zone indicator
Gd =Grain diameter Table 1 – Typical Values of cementation exponent, a=1
h =Height of the droplet Type of rock M
I =Electric-current Unconsolidated sand 1.3
Ir = Resistivity index
Slightly cemented sand 1.5-1.7
k = Effective permeability to oil @ Swi, md
Moderately cemented sand 1.8-1.9
kabs = Absolute permeability, md
Highly cemented sand 2.0-2.2
l =Tortuous coefficient
l’ = Tortuous length Chalky limestone 1.7-1.8
Le = Entrance length Crystalline & granular carbonates 1.8-2.0
Lt = Boundary layer thickness Nontouching vuggy carbonates 1.8-4.0
Lu = Reference length of the unit block full of water Touching vuggy carbonates & fractures <1.8
m = Cementation-Tortuosity exponent Natural fractures 1.0
mult = Function of aspect ratio
n = Saturation exponent Table 2 – Values of a and m according to this model
NMR = Nuclear magnetic resonance Angle a m Description
q =Fluid flow, flux [o]
r = vector, polar coordinates 180 1.000 1.0 Straight non-communicating tubes
rpt = radius of the pore throat 120 1.155 1.5 Communicating-round equal grains
r1 = pore radius 90 1.414 2.0 Communicating-round equal grains
r2 =radius of the droplet 60 2.000 3.0 Communicating-round equal grains
ru = radius of the unit block