4.7 Article

Calculation of water saturation in low resistivity gas reservoirs and pay-zones of the Cretaceous Grudja Formation, onshore Mozambique basin

Journal

MARINE AND PETROLEUM GEOLOGY
Volume 67, Issue -, Pages 249-261

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2015.05.016

Keywords

Mozambique basin; Lower Grudja Formation; Low resistivity pay zones; Water saturation calculations

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The water saturation of a hydrocarbon bearing formation is usually calculated via the conductivity of the formation water, as defined by Archie, 1942. However, in some formations such conventionally calculated water saturation contradicts values calculated from the Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) tool and from the Drill Stem Test (DST). Here we discuss such a case of low resistivity pay zones in the J- and K-Reservoirs, of the Lower Grudja Formation of Maastrichtian age, onshore Mozambique basin, in which conventional log analysis contradicts water saturation calculated from the NMR and by the Drill Stem Test. For both, the J-Reservoir and K-Reservoir, the water saturation (S-W) was calculated using the Archie equation and the Simandoux equation, that accounts for clay bound water but not for silt, and the results were compared to NMR-calculated water saturation. A new algorithm that improves the accuracy of water saturation calculation was introduced. This new algorithm takes into account the clay- and silt-bound water within the overall reservoir resistivity. It is demonstrated that the clay- and silt-bound water must be included in water saturation calculations, where the formations are rich in silt and clay. The Simandoux equation and the new algorithm yield significant improvement in water saturation results for the J- and K-Reservoirs, when compared to water saturation calculated using the Archie's equation. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available