7. Carbonates

download 7. Carbonates

of 16

Transcript of 7. Carbonates

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    1/16

    163Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Carbonates

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    2/16

    164Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Tremendous Variety of Microstructures

    Granular Inclusions

    Diversity of pore shapes

    Microstructural diversity leads to: Non-unique velocity-porosity relations Non-unique Vp/Vs relations Uncertainty in fluid substitution practices Non-unique porosity-permeability relations Important variations in mineral moduli

    Round Grains Round Pores

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    3/16

    165Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Again, carbonate data fall along modified

    upper Hashin-Shtrikman line, now in theVp-Porosity plane. Shalier data fall below

    it, similar to clastics.

    Comparison of ellipsoidal crack models with

    carbonate data, classified by pore shape.The rocks with stiffer pore shapes fit best

    the spherical pore models, while the rocks

    with thinner, more crack-like pores fit best

    the lower aspect ratio models.

    Velocity-Porosity: Interpretation Ambiguity

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    4/16

    166Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Differential Effective Medium (DEM) model is superimposed for aspect ratios

    [.01,.03,.1,.3,1]. Chalk data (low vclay) generally follow the DEM trend. Shales (high

    vclay) follow two shale trends consisting of clay with small amounts of calcite cement.

    DEM model

    Shale trend

    Carbonate

    Velocity-Porosity

    Distinct trends for carbonates and shales

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    5/16

    167Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    C. Scotellaro

    dolomitic

    micrite

    Velocity-Porosity: Textural, Mineralogic Variations

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    6/16

    168Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Mineral Variations

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    7/16169Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    We have observed that model-based interpretation depends quite a bit

    on mineralogy. Here, we examine log data to infer mineral properties.

    The assumption is that minerals represent upper bounds for data

    clouds, in the limit of zero porosity. At least some of the data are too

    dense and too stiff to be calcite.

    Inferring Mineralogy

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    8/16170Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    The density-porosity trend should be a simple linear combination of

    fluid and mineral. These plots show that low-gamma rocks are

    consistent with calcite. Errors in porosity estimation (especially with

    shale) will lead to incorrect intercept, and misinterpreted mineral

    density.

    Inferring Mineralogy

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    9/16171Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    The density-porosity trend should be a simple linear combination of

    fluid and mineral.

    Bootstrap Analysis for Mineralogy

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    10/16172Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Water-saturated

    Greenberg-Castagna lines

    GR

    Comparison of carbonate log data with Greenberg-Castagna lines.

    Carbonate Vp-Vs Relations

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    11/16173Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Water-saturated

    Greenberg-Castagna lines

    Looking more closely at the data in the previous slide, we can find

    intervals that are more calcite-rich.

    Carbonate Vp-Vs Relations

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    12/16174Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Water-saturated

    Greenberg-Castagna lines

    In this interval, the data appear to be more dolomite-rich.

    Carbonate Vp-Vs Relations

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    13/16175Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    The Hashin-Shtrikman bounds can help detect the presence of

    dolomite in the Vp-Vs plane.

    Interpreting Pore Shape from Vp-Vs Data

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    14/16176Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    For these chalks, there is an ambiguity between mineral and pore

    stiffness.

    Well A Well B

    Carbonate Inclusion Models

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    15/16177Stanford Rock Physics Laboratory - Gary Mavko

    Example of substituting brine for oil

    There is no fundamental reason why Gassmann theory should not applyto carbonates. Yet, there are assumptions in the model:

    Homogeneous mineralogy

    Isotropic

    Well-connected pore spaceThe dominant consideration, as with Gassmann applied to any rock,

    is the stiffness of the pore space.

    Fluid Substitution

  • 8/12/2019 7. Carbonates

    16/16178St f d R k Ph i L b t G M k