Petrophysical Properties Analysis of Reservoir Rock Using

Core Analysis and Interpretation Log Data Method To

Estimated The Water Saturation (Sw) at OD-1 and OD-2
Wells in The X-Area
Ordas Dewanto1,a), Bagus Sapto Mulyatno 1,b), Sri Rizky 1,c), Alimuddin 1,d)
1
Geophysical Engineering, Lampung University
a)
[email protected]
b)
[email protected]
c)
[email protected]
d)
[email protected]

Abstract.

The technology developments of reservoir characterization show importance of understanding the relationships between
petrophysical properties of rocks, reservoir parameters and seismic wave parameters. The goal of this study is the
evaluation of reservoir condition by analyzing petrophysical properties change in reservoir rock to see the amount of Sw
oil and gas in OD1 and OD2 wells by using log interpretation and core analysis method. The porosity () is determined
by the results of cross-plot between density log (RHOB) and porosity log (NPHI) when Sw was simply determined by
using the Archie equation. The core analysis data showed value of tortuosity factor a=1, and saturation exponent n=2 as a
parameter in Sw-Archie equation. Porosity value of reservoir rock in OD1 well is 5.5% to 20%, while OD2 well is 4% to
36%. This study used pickett plot method as the determination of water resistivity (Rw, Rt, Ro) on water bearing area.
The results of this research shows OD1 well with =35%, Rw=0.11m and cementation factor m=2 obtained Rt=1m
and Sw=100%, Rt=1.2m and Sw=90%, Rt=1.6m and Sw=80%, Rt=4m and Sw=50%, Rt=11m and Sw=30%.
While on OD2 well with =42%, Rw=0.13m and cementation factor m=2.3 obtained Rt=1m and Sw=100%, Rt=2m
and Sw=70%, Rt=5m and Sw=45%, Rt=20m and Sw=22.4% and so on. If there is a petrophysical parameters (, Rt,
Rw, m or a) change, there will be also a change in the fluid saturation (Sw). The conclusion is the changes in the
petrophysical properties of rocks affects Sw and Sw distribution is very important to predict the oil and gas reserve in the
reservoir rock.

INTRODUCTION
The history of research in the field of formation evaluation indicates the number of operations and approaches
have been made to create a reliable method with the purpose of obtaining reservoir model information (eg; the
distribution of porosity and fluid saturation). An attempt to establish a methodology for the use of laboratory
acoustic data to support the estimates of porosity and fluid saturation from seismic surveys have been conducted on
the research Dewanto et al (2006). As a basic supporting data, laboratory acoustic measurements on core samples of
rock taken from an oil reservoir in Sumatra has been done. Measurements made carefully, conducted on a variety of
effective overburden pressure and fluid saturation. From the results of the propagation time measurement of P and S
waves can be derived parameters and the propagation velocity of elastic properties such as Poisson's Ratio, Young's
Modulus and Bulk Modulus. The relationship between these parameters, is used as an indicator of porosity and fluid
saturation. To generate relationship that applies more widely, cross plot between the parameters mentioned above
parameters is done with the help of a combination of measurement results and mathematical modeling. The results
show good agreement for porosity and fluid saturation between the model and the measurement results. The
distribution of rock porosity and fluid saturation that filling the reservoir rock is considered two things that are very
important in the construction of a reservoir model.
This research generally has the objective evaluation of the condition of a reservoir in order to predict the fluid
and gas reserves and the amount of fluid produced. The specific purpose of this study is to estimate porosity and
fluid saturation through identifying and analyzing the changes in the physical properties of the reservoir rock.
The determination of rock physics is done by two methods, core analysis in the laboratory and log data
interpretation. One alternative in determining the physical properties of rocks carried by acoustic waves propagate in
rocks. Core analysis data resulting from the measurement and analysis of reservoir rocks in the lab is the information
that is needed to determine the physical properties of rock very specific, which in this study is used to predict the
performance of the reservoir rock. Analysis of reservoir rock used in this research is the analysis of core routine and
special core.
Well log analysis generates porosity (), water saturation (Sw) and several other petrophysical parameters for the
interval in question. Although the interpretation of the logs themselves can be regarded as susceptible to uncertainty,
but the results are considered as a reference to truth and used to process the correlation of the results of data analysis
core.
The first step is determining the potential layers to see the gamma ray log is small, these characteristics indicate
permeable layer. The second stage determines the productive layer, this layer characteristics detected by the
separation log NPHI and RHOB supported by log LLD. The third phase determines Sw and  on the layer and
productive potential. Porosity is determined based on the cross-log plot RHOB and NPHI, and is determined by the
equation Archie Sw. With the help of core analysis of data obtained by a = 1 (tortuosity factor), and n = 2 (exponent
saturation) as the parameter Sw-Archie.
The benefits of this research are: first, obtaining a practical methodology for preparing the results of acoustic
measurements on core samples of rock to estimate the usefulness of fluid saturation and porosity; second, of the
results of these measurements with the help of well log data and mathematical modeling, acquired a systematic
method to prepare the laboratory test results that can be considered ready for use in the output seismic; Third, the
results of these measurements can be used as supporting data for the evaluation of the condition of a reservoir in
order to predict the fluid and gas reserves and the amount of fluid produced.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Reservoir characterization technology developments indicate the possibility of seismic survey results were used
to determine the distribution of fluid saturation in the reservoir. This implies the need to understand the relationships
between petrophysical properties of rocks, reservoir parameters and seismic wave parameters which can either be
done by recording log data interpretation and analysis in the field of rock core in the three laboratories. Based on
these requirements, this study presents an attempt to improve the acoustic measurements on rock core samples in the
laboratory and recording log data interpretation, to determine the hydrocarbon content and predicting oil and gas
reserves in the reservoir rock. As well as the previous research, for example, King (1966) presents a general concept
of the use of four-dimensional seismic surveys, as a means to monitor changes in fluid saturation in the reservoir due
to the processes of exploitation. Another example is Munadi et al (1995 & 1996) examines the feasibility of using
elastic rock properties, derived dynamically from the results of the seismic survey, to achieve that goal. This implies
the need to understand the changes in the physical properties of rock and acoustic signals that can either be done in
the laboratory. By the results of such research, with the help of well log data and mathematical modeling, it expected
to form a systematic method to prepare the results of laboratory testing with the aim to estimate the fluid saturation
and porosity in accordance with the conditions of the relevant reservoir.
Interpretation of well log data is a method that is very supportive in formation evaluation using the results of the
survey tool recording logging as the main source of information. The result of this interpretation is the information
that is needed to determine the physical properties of rock very specific, which will eventually be used to predict the
performance of the reservoir rock. Interpretation of the data logging can be done both quantitatively and
qualitatively. The interpretation is done by combining data obtained from each log. Furthermore, from a quantitative
log interpretation parameters derived porosity (), water saturation (Sw) and permeability index (K), while for the
understanding of the petrophysical properties of rocks and determination of the amount obtained from the
petrophysical log interpretation quantitatively.
 The emergence of the idea of the study also came from some earlier research, which is a bit much to have a
relationship with the research conducted. Previous research which associated with this research are:
Kusumastuti (1994) in his research on The Relation Speed Acoustic Waves With Porosity In The Reservoir Rock,
gives the conclusion that the acoustic wave velocity measurements in rocks with overburden pressure variation
showed a good relationship. The higher the overburden pressure, the speed is higher.
Wang (1992) and Munadi, Triharjanto and Rubiyanto (1995) provides an overview of the physical properties of
the seismic data into a new hope in enhancing the success of the exploration. One year later Munadi, Hermansyah
and Widarsono (1996) conclude that the gas saturation estimation of seismic data is one of the conceptual
approaching.
Widarsono and Saptono (1997) in his study of Support In The estimated porosity and fluid saturation from seismic
surveys, give some conclusions that the method of acoustic measurements in the laboratory has several advantages
over methods of logs, among other, in terms of measurement accuracy dynamic parameters are required. In addition
it also concluded that the magnitude inkompresibilitas and rigidity rock in dry conditions has been shown to play an
important role in determining water saturation and porosity.
Dewanto (2001) in his research on Analysis of the Relationship Between Porosity on Thermal Conductivity
Rock Results Measurement and Calculation, and Dewanto (2003), in her research on Analysis of Acoustic Velocity
and Porosity Relationship in Reservoir Rock giving some conclusions, first: the price of porosity rocks have price
variations, due to temperature differences and heat in these rocks, second; the price of the thermal conductivity of
rocks is influenced by pressure, thus increasing the depth of the greater heat conductivity of rocks. Furthermore
Dewanto et al (2004) conducted research on the influence of the physical properties of reservoir rocks, and in 2005
Surtono re-examine more in one of the physical properties of rock that is the bulk modulus in the laboratory.
Research in 2007 is a continuation of research Dewanto (2006) on The Analysis of The Effects of Physical
Properties Changes Using Laboratory Measurements to Estimate Porosity and Water Saturation. This research
studied more deeply about the changes in physical properties of rocks obtained from measurements in the laboratory
and results log interpretation. Furthermore, the results of both methods are associated with fluid saturation and
porosity, and analyzed more deeply. By analyzing some of the changes in physical properties of rocks, obtained
from acoustic measurements on samples rock core, with the help of well log data and mathematical modeling, is
expected to form a systematic methods to prepare the results of laboratory testing with the aim to estimate the fluid
saturation and reservoir porosity in accordance with the relevant conditions.
Contributions to science and national development: first, the results of this study can be used as the basis for a
theory of applied science in industrial scale; second, systematic method that can be used in the oil and gas
companies primarily in predicting fluid reserves of oil and gas; Third, the method used in this study is expected to
make fundamental discoveries of new methods, especially in the world of hydrocarbon exploration.

METHODOLOGY
Detailed and complete implementation of the research indicated in Flow Chart on Figure 1 below:
 PROCESSING

Figure 1. Research Flow Chart

DISCUSSION AND RESULTS

Interval is an area that has a porous permeable layer or an interval estimated as productive layers are layers
containing hydrocarbons (oil and gas). By looking at the graph and log GR SP log, can be determined permeable and
non-permeable layer. If the SP log graph points to the right (large value), GR log graph pointing to the left (precious
little), then this area is an interval of porous (permeable layer), while the non-permeable layer has properties
opposite.
At Wells OD-1 interval porous contained at a depth of 5805 ft to 5830 ft, 5970 ft to 6300 ft, 6320 ft to 6460 ft,
6540 ft to 6620 ft, 6665 ft to 6815 ft, and 6865 ft to 7000 ft. While on Well-second intervals there are porous at a
depth of 4360 ft to 4384 ft, 4408 ft to 4422 ft, 4468 ft to 4488 ft and 4504 ft to 4542 ft. Conditions on the walls of
the well wells and wells OD-1 OD-2, which is the layer of shale (shale interval showed) caliper value worse than the
bit-size, then the well dilated and the state of the well is not compact. While on a layer of sand (sand interval shows),
the walls of the well is not so wide, because the price approaching caliper-size bits. So the state of the wall of the
well in the area of sand fairly compact / hard (well). Tools bed-boundary indicators used in this research that the GR
logs and SP logs. For GR log, it looked firmly at each boundary layer and deflection toward shale. As for the SP log,
the deflection leading to the sand, so they form a separation (the opposite of the porous separation) on each bed-
boundary (the boundary layer).
Interval depicting porous permeable layer, non-permeable and productive layer on Well OD-1 can be seen in
Figure 1B and 2. While at Wells OD-2 is shown in Figure 3 and 4. In the picture also depicts the condition of the
well wall and tools indicator of bed-boundary (the boundary layer).

Porosity ()
Porosity determination is done by NPHI log, RHOB log, and log Sonic cross-plot, with the help of Chart
Schlumberger CP-1b. The results of the cross-plot is used as the basis for determining the value of porosity () at
depth and a certain thickness. OD-1 wells and wells OD-2 has a porosity varying prices for each interval. The results
of data processing using cross-plot method Chart Schlumberger CP-1b are shown in Table 1 for wells OD-1 and
Table 2 for wells OD-2. Porosity values after the cross-plot using Schlumberger Chart CP-1b between 5.5% to 20%.
This is consistent with the theory that explains that prices in general porosity ranging from 5% to 40%, this
condition also occurs in wells OD-2.

Water Resistivity (Rw)

To determine the water resistivity (Rw, Rt, Ro) used several methods, the methods SP log, Rwa methods,
methods Pickett Plot, and methods Hingle plot. In this study, the authors use Pickett Plot method only.
Determination of resistivity at the Pickett Plot method using data on water bearing area, that is an area at porous
intervals or permeable interval, where the sand show graphs constant, while NPHI and RHOB clustered as well as
having a low porosity. This area also shows a low resistivity at the LLD chart.
For resistivity obtained by observing the charts on resistivity logs, namely price and LLS Rt. All data are
indicated by resistivity log generally include curves and curves GR SP. Then after a straight line drawn through the
same point or a line, the price can be searched using the formula log Rt= -m log +log (a Rw) was a valuable
reference for 100% porosity.
Estimated value of Rw the OD-1 well is determined by using the data shown in Table 3. These data are located
in water bearing area, ie in the depth interval 6070 ft to 6290 ft. To find out the price of Rw in this method is to first
determine the actual porosity (porosity after cross-plot), by plotting NPHI log, RHOB log, and Sonic log. Then, after
a cross plot porosity associated with the resistivity price, so didapatlah graph porosity and resistivity which can be
seen in Figure 5 and Figure 6. For the determination of the value of Rw and Sw on Well OD-1, using methods
Pickett Plot, can be seen in Figure 5.
Well known from the data log-1, f = 1.1 g / cc, the results of cross-plot porosity with Rt (LLD) using CP-1d
Shlumberger Chart shown in Figure 5. The value of m = 2 is obtained from a straight line that has Sw = 100%,
determined by a formula gradient m = y / x. Furthermore, determining the value of Rw, namely by as follows:
log Rt   m log   log ( a Rw)
m  2  log Rt   2 log   log ( a Rw )
  100% ; a Rw  0.11  log Rt   2 log (1)  log 0.11
log Rt  0  log 0.11
Rt  0.11 ohm-m
So, Rt  a Rw
(a=1)  0.11 1 Rw  Rw  0.11 ohm-m, at Sw=100%
At OD-2 wells Rw estimate are determined using the data in Table 4, that is the data on area water bearing
intervals are located within 4504 ft to 4540 ft. For the determination of value of Rw and Sw on Well OD-2, by
using the method of Pickett Plot, shown in Figure 6.
 At the Well log data OD-2, f = 1.1 g / cc, the results of cross-plot porosity with Rt (LLD) using CP-1d
Shlumberger Chart shown in Figure 4.35. The value of m = 2.3 is obtained from a straight line that has Sw = 100%,
determined by a formula gradient m = y / x. Next determine the Rw value by:
log Rt   m log   log ( a Rw)
m  2.3  log Rt   2.3 log   log ( a Rw)
  100%  log Rt   2.3 log (1)  log ( a Rw )
log Rt  0  log ( a Rw )
Rt  a Rw ohm-m
a Rw  0.13 ohm-m  Rt  0.13 ohm-m
( a  1)  0.13  1 Rw
So, Rw  0.13 ohm-m, at Sw=100%

Water Saturation (Sw)

Archie water saturation models is the basis of the calculation of water saturation. This model is typically used in
the rocks free of clay minerals. As unity in determining water saturation turtuositas a parameter, cementation factor
m, and the saturation exponent n is a part that cannot be separated. These parameters have been determined at the
time of rock core analysis lab results in the form of data core.
Based on the value of Sw obtained from Pickett Plot method on both well log, showed the price almost equal to
the price Sw on calculations using the Archie equation. Due to the content of shale permeable layer of small
amounts, so Sw Archie formula used as the method widely used by experts log interpretation. The method of
determining the value of Sw on Well OD-1 is shown in Figure 5, and the elaboration briefly shown in Sw
Determination well OD-1 attachment. For wells OD-2 method of determining the value of the same as well Sw OD-
1, shown in Figure 6, and the elaboration briefly shown in Determination Sw Well OD-2 attachment.

Hydrocarbon Bearing Layer

At Wells OD-1 intervals contain hydrocarbons into the permeable layer and an interval productive area.
Permeable layer containing hydrocarbons at 5805 ft to 5830 ft, 5960 ft to 6060 ft, 6065 ft to 6160 ft, 6170 ft to 6300
ft, 6330 ft to 6370 ft, 6380 ft to 6460 ft, 6540 ft to 6620 ft, 6675 ft to 6812 ft and 6862 ft to 7000 ft.
The hydrocarbon type at 5805 ft to 5830 ft is oil, because at a depth of 5805 ft, the value of the density (RHOB)
experienced a sharp decline and constant to a depth of 5830 ft, with a porosity (NPHI) is low, and is in the region
porous interval. If RHOB and NPHI do cross-plot, the type of lithology shows limestone and sandstone. While 5960
ft to 6060 ft is gas because the value of the density (RHOB) suddenly dropped the price of changing to a depth of
6060 ft. Price porosity in this interval is not too high and it is located in the permeable layer, while the prices of its
high LLD with state NPHI and RHOB form of separation is quite wide. At 6065 ft to 6160 ft, the hydrocarbon type
is oil, because the density price smaller but do not change drastically. While the price of NPHI low and LLD (Rt) is
small, and is located on a permeable area. 6170 ft to 6300 ft is water bearing area. At certain depths density suffered
a sharp drop, while the price is low and relatively high porosity. Type hydrocarbon oil is expected in this area. 6540
ft to 6630 ft is permeable layer with the type of hydrocarbon is gas as the density prices is uneven and capricious,
and formed a wide separation, while the price of LLD (Rt) is quite large. At 6675 ft to 6812 ft, the type of
hydrocarbon is oil, because the value of the density (RHOB) suddenly drop and constant, while prices LLD is quite
small. In the area of porosity (NPHI) is low and it is located on a permeable layer that is productive.
At Wells OD-2 intervals containing hydrocarbons (productive layer) is at 4366 ft to 4374 ft and 4474 ft to 4484
ft. The hydrocarbons type at 4366 ft to 4374 ft is gas, because the density (RHOB) suddenly decreased by changing
prices. Price porosity in this interval is not too high and is located on the permeable layer, while the prices of its high
LLD with state NPHI and RHOB form of separation is quite wide. Hydrocarbon type at 4474 ft to 4484 ft is oil,
because the porosity (NPHI) price is not too high and the value of its density (RHOB) is quite large, while the price
of LLD (Rt) is small.
 RESUME
1. OD-1 wells and wells OD-2 is a two wells were equally productive, it can be seen from some of the second
interval of the well has a productive permeable layer containing hydrocarbons. The analysis showed that the
OD-1 well is estimated hydrocarbon reserves greater than the OD-2 wells.
2. Well OD-1 has a thickness of the layer containing the oil and gas greater or more than the OD-2 wells.
Throughout the depth of 5800 ft to 7000 ft on Well OD-1, is dominated by several productive layers
containing hydrocarbons (oil and gas). As for the OD-2 wells, only two productive layers containing
hydrocarbons (oil and gas), and also the condition of a thin layer (not too thick or large).
3. Description Well OD-1 as mentioned above, resulted in a decision that hydrocarbon reserves are expected to
be ready for production is well OD-1, it is supported also by the value of fluid saturation and porosity are
good, that Sw = (30% to 90 %),  = (15% to 40%).

REFERENCES
1. Achmad dan Fitriani., 2013, Study Of Petrophysical, Fluids Properties, And Hydrocarbon Potential In Well
FA On Prabumulih Field PT. Pertamina Ep Region Sumatera, Unsri, Palembang.
2. Amadei, B., Savage, W.Z. & Swolfs, H.S., 1987, GravitationalStresses in Anisotropic Rock Masses. Int. J.
Rock Mech. Min. Sci. and Geomech. Abst., 24:5-14.
3. Darling., Toby., 2005, Well Logging and Formation Evaluation, Oxford: Elsevier Publishing Company.
4. Darman, H., Sidi, F.H., 2000, An Outline of the Geology of Indonesia, IAGI Vol 20th, Indonesia, Page 45-
67.
5. Dewanto, O., 2002, correlation Analysis Porosity Rock Against Thermal Conductivity Measurement and
Calculation on Oil Well, Science Jurnal and Technology Unila ISSN 0853-733X Vol. 8 No. 2, years 2002
page. 27-41.
6. Dewanto, O., 2002, Analysis of Acoustic Waves Creep Speed Relations with the rock porosity Reservoir,
Science Jurnal and Technology Unila ISSN 0853-733X Vol. 8 No. 3, year 2002.
7. Dewanto, O., 2004, Analysis of Effect of Changes in Physical properties of rocks against Speed Acoustic
Wave Rock Reservoir, Proceedings of the Seminar on Scientific Research Results with science and
technology Development and Application Scene Welcoming the Era of Globalization, Universitas
Lampung. I Edition, September 2004, ISBN 979-8287-65-7.
8. Dewanto, O., 2006, Analysis of Effect of Changes in Physical Properties of Hydrocarbon Maturation rocks
to level the reservoir rock, Science Jurnal and Technology Unila ISSN 0853-733X, Vol. 12 No.2, Augustus
2006, p.113-120.
9. Diaz, M., Prasad., et al., 2002, Effect of Glauconite on the Elastic Properties Porosity and Permeability of
Reservoirs Rocks, AAPG Annual Meeting, Houston, Texas on article.
10. Dresser Atlas, 1982, Well Logging and Interpretation Techniques, The Course For Home Study, Dresser
Industries Inc., p. 22-32, 39-94, 102-129, 165-178.
11. Dwiyono, Imam F., and Sarju, W., 2014, Compilation Methods Water Saturation in Formation Evaluation.
Proceedings of the National Seminar on Earth 7 UGM, Yogyakarta.
12. Ellis, D V., and Singer, J M., 2008, Well Logging for Earth Scientist 2nd Edition, Springer, Netherlands.
13. Fahdie, M., et al., 2015, Well Formation Evaluation GJN for Determination of Initial Gas Reserves ( OGIP
) in the field " X " , National Seminar Scholars, Faculty of Earth and Energy Technology, Trisakti
University.
14. Harsono, A., 1993, Log Evaluation, Schlumberger Data Services, Mulia Center L.17, Kuningan, Jakarta,
p.19-21.
15. King, M.S., 1966, Wave Velocitities in Rocks as a Function of Changes in Overburden Pressure and Pore
Fluid Saturants, Geophysics, 31.
16. King, M.S., 1970, Static and Dynamic Elastic Moduli of Rocks Under Pressure, Proc. 11th US Symp. On
Rock Mechanics, Berkeley, California, p. 329-351.
17. Kusumastuti, D.L., 1994, Speed Relations With Acoustic Wave On Rock Reservoir Porosity, Jurnal UNAS,
Jakarta.
18. Munadi, S., Triharjanto, B. & Rubiyanto, D., 1995, Estimation of Petrophysical Properties From Seismic
Data : A New Hope Improvement Success Exploration, Proceeding Science Industrion VIII PPPTMGB
“LEMIGAS”, Jakarta, 13-14 June, p. 9-19.
19. Munadi, S., Hermansyah, & Widarsono, B., 1996, Estimated Oil and Gas Saturation From seismic data : A
conceptual approach, PIT XXI HAGI, Jakarta, Oktober.
20. Munadi, S., 2000, The Physics Aspect exploration Seismology, Geofisika UI, Jakarta, p.24-41.
21. Nuryanto, A., and Bagus, J S., 2014, Formation evaluation using Data Log and Core Data On Fields " X "
East Java Basin Northern Section, Jurnal Sains and Seni Pomits Vol. 3, No. 2 Jurusan Fisika, FMIPA,
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS), Surabaya.
22. Prawoto, A A., dkk., 2015, Hydrocarbon Potential Formation Air Benakat , Fields ' Ca ' , South Sumatra
Basin, Bulletin Of Scientific Contribution, Volume 13, No 1, Fakultas Teknik Geologi Universitas
Padjadjaran.
23. Putri, A., 2015, Analysis of Productive Zones determination and calculation of the initial oil reserves using
data Logging on APR Field, Seminar Nasional Cendekiawan.
24. Rider, M., 2002, The Geological Interpretation of Well Logs. Second Edition,Sutherland, Skotlandia.
25. Schlumberger., 2007, Users Manual Interactive Petrophysics 3.4, PGL-Senergy, Scotland.
26. Telford, W.M.L.P. Geldart and Sheriff, R.E., 1990, Applied Geophysics, Second Edition, Cambridge
University Press. Chap 4. p.147.
27. Wang, Z. & Nur, A., 1992, Elastic Wave Velocities in Porous Media: A Theoretical Recipe. in Seismic and
Acoustic Velocities in Reservoir Rocks, Vol. 2: Theoretical Model, Chapter 1, SEG, Tulsa-USA, p.1-35.
28. Widarsono, B. & Saptono, F., 1997, The estimated porosity supports and fluid saturation of Seismic
Survey, Proceeding Simposium dan Konggres V IATMI, Jakarta, Oktober.
ATTACHMENT
SP RHOB
-80 20 1.7 2.7
GR NPHI
0 200 60 0

Productive layer Oil

Gas
Productive layer

Oil

Oil

Fluida?
Permeable layer

Fluida?

Productive layer
Gas

Productive layer Oil

Permeable layer Fluida?

FIGURE 1. The result of processing and interpretation log data in well OD-1: Gamma Ray (GAPI), SP (MV),
RHOB (G/C3), NPHI (V/V)
 -80 SP 20 0.2 LLS 2000
0 GR 200 0.2 LLd 2000
10 CAL 20

Productive layer Oil

Gas

Productive layer Oil

Oil

Fluida?
Permeable layer
Fluida?

Productive layer Gas

Productive layer
Oil

Permeable layer Fluida?

FIGURE 2. The result of processing and interpretation log data in well OD-1: Gamma Ray (GAPI), SP (MV), CAL
(IN), LLS (ohm-m), LLd (ohm-m), RHOB (G/C3), NPHI (V/V)
 SP RHOB
-80 20 1.7 2.7
GR NPHI
0 200 60 0

Productive layer gasOil/Gas

Permeable layer Gas

Productive layer Oil/Gas

Oil

Permeable layer

FIGURE 3. The result of processing and interpretation log data in well OD-2: Gamma Ray (GAPI), SP (MV),
RHOB (G/C3), NPHI (V/V)
 -80 SP 20
0.2 LLS 2000
0 GR 200
10 CAL 20 0.2 LLd 2000
10 BS 20

Oil/Gas
Gas
Productive layer

Permeable layer Gas

Productive layer Oil

Oil/Gas

Permeable layer

Permeable layer

FIGURE 4. The result of processing and interpretation log data in well OD-2: Gamma Ray (GAPI), SP (MV), CAL
(IN), BS (IN), LLS (ohm-m), LLd (ohm-m)
FIGURE 5. Result of processing log data: Rw and Sw value In well OD-1, using Pickett Plot method
FIGURE 5. Result of processing log data: Rw and Sw value In well OD-2, using Pickett Plot method
TABLE 1. well OD-1 porosity, before and after cross-plot using Chart Schlumberger CP-1b
Porosity
No Depth
Before Cross-plot After Cross-plot
1 5805 ft – 5830 ft 8.4% - 15% 13.8% - 20%
2 5960 ft – 6060 ft 6% - 14.4% 11% - 18.9%
3 6065 ft – 6160 ft 11.1% - 15% 16% - 19.6%
4 6170 ft – 6300 ft 6% - 12% 9% - 16.4%
5 6330 ft – 6370 ft 3% - 11.7% 8.2% -15%
6 6380 ft – 6460 ft 3% - 8.7% 5.5% - 12.2%
7 6540 ft – 6620 ft 6% - 11.4% 9% - 14.3%
8 6575 ft – 6812 ft 6% - 10.5% 9% - 14.6%
9 6862 ft – 7000 ft 6.6% - 10.2% 8.8% - 16%

TABLE 2. well OD-2 porosity, before and after cross-plot using Chart Schlumberger CP-1b
Porosity
No Depth
Before Cross-plot After Cross-plot
1 4366 ft – 4374 ft 24.6 % - 31.5 % 30 % - 36 %
2 4474 ft – 4484 ft 3 % - 33 % 4 % - 32,2 %.

TABLE 3. Water bearing Data in well OD-1

Depth Rt/Lld  b Cross-plot
No Lithology
(ft) ( m) (NPHI) (RHOB) Porosity
1 6070 8 12 % 2.42 gr/cc 14.5 % Sandstone
2 6080 6 10.8 % 2.35 gr/cc 17.0 % Sandstone
3 6090 5 13.2 % 2.35 gr/cc 18.5 % Sandstone
4 6100 4,5 15 % 2.325 gr/cc 19.8 % Sandstone
5 6120 3,3 15 % 2.30 gr/cc 20.8 % Sandstone
6 6140 5,4 10.8 % 2.40 gr/cc 15.5 % Sandstone
7 6160 3,5 14.4 % 2.325 gr/cc 19.6 % Sandstone
8 6180 7 9.0 % 2.40 gr/cc 14.3 % Sandstone
9 6200 8 9.0 % 2.45 gr/cc 13.2 % Sandstone
10 6220 7 12.0 % 2.40 gr/cc 16.0 % Sandstone
11 6240 13 9.0 % 2.495 gr/cc 11.9 % Sandstone
12 6260 13 9.0 % 2.53 gr/cc 10.0 % Limestone
13 6290 30 3.0 % 2.565 gr/cc 6.00 % Sandstone

TABLE 4. Water bearing data in well OD-2

Depth Rt/Lld  b Cross-plot
No Lithology
(ft) ( m) (NPHI) (RHOB) Porosity
1 4504 1.8 43.2 % 1.85 45% Sandstone
2 4506 2 33 % 2.2 32 % Limestone
3 4508 2.6 33 % 2.3 31 % Dolomite
4 4510 3 30% 2.03 37 % Sandstone
5 4512 9 24 % 2.4 22 % Limestone
6 4514 3 30 % 2.35 29 % Dolomite
7 4516 2 33 % 2.2 32.5 % Limestone
8 4518 4 33 % 2.2 32.5 % Limestone
9 4520 3 30 % 2.4 27.3 % Dolomite
10 4522 3 24 % 2.35 29 % Limestone
11 4524 3 33 % 2.25 32 % Limestone
12 4526 9 24 % 2.30 24.5 % Limestone
13 4528 8 22.5 % 2.5 20 % Dolomite
14 4530 4 27 % 2.25 28 % Limestone
 15 4532 10 30 % 2.35 28 % Dolomite
16 4534 1.8 34.5 % 2.2 33 % Limestone
17 4536 2 40.5 % 2.0 42.6 % Sandstone
18 4538 3 24 % 2.1 30 % Sandstone
19 4540 6 24 % 2.5 21.5 % Dolomite

Determination Sw in well OD-1

In Sw=100%   =35%, and Rt=1=Ro
Ro
 formula: Sw2 
Rt
Then, based on  =35%
Ro 1
 Rt=1.2 ohm-m  Sw    0.90 atau Sw=90%
Rt 1.2
Ro 1
 Rt=1.6 ohm-m  Sw    0.80 atau Sw=80%
Rt 1. 6
Ro 1
 Rt=1.4 ohm-m  Sw    0.50 atau Sw=50%
Rt 1.4
Ro 1
 Rt=11 ohm-m  Sw    0.30 atau Sw=30%
Rt 11
Ro 1
 Rt=25 ohm-m  Sw    0.20 atau Sw=20%
Rt 25
Ro 1
 Rt=100 ohm-m  Sw    0.10 atau Sw=10%
Rt 100

Determination Sw in well OD-2

In Sw=100%   =42%, and Rt=1=Ro
Ro
 formula: Sw2 
Rt
Then, based on  =42%
Ro 1
 Rt  2 ohm-m  Sw    0.70 atau Sw  70%
Rt 2
Ro 1
 Rt  5 ohm-m  Sw    0.45 atau Sw  45%
Rt 5
Ro 1
 Rt  20 ohm-m  Sw    0.224 atau Sw  22.4%
Rt 20