The International Journal Of Engineering And Science (IJES)

||Volume|| 2 ||Issue|| 12 || Pages || 94-99 || 2013 ||

ISSN (e): 2319 – 1813 ISSN (p): 2319 – 1805

Well Correlation and Petrophysical Analysis, a Case Study of

“Rickie” Field Onshore Niger Delta
Abraham-Adejumo M. Richardson
Department of Applied Geophysics
Federal University of Technology, PMB 704, Akure Ondo State, Nigeria

-------------------------------------------------------ABSTRACT---------------------------------------------------
A suite of geophysical wire-line logs from an oil field inNiger delta have been examined and analyzed. The logs
include gamma ray(used for the identification of lithology), resistivity/conductivity(used for the delineation
hydrocarbon bearing reservoirs) and neutron and formation density ) tools (used to map out
gas bearing zones). Lithostratigraphic correlation sections of four wells (R1, R2, R3 and R4) depict that the
subsurface stratigraphy is that of sand – shale interbedding. Three prominenthydrocarbon bearing reservoirs
(L,P andS), located at depths of 9,650ft (2,943m), 10,650ft (3,248m) and 12298ft (3935m)were identified and
mapped. Petrophysical parameters of the reservoirs which included porosity, hydrocarbon saturation, volume of
shale, formation resistivityand formation factor were computed. The reservoirs have averaged porosity of
30.2%, water saturation 19.7% and hydrocarbon saturation of 80.3%.These research findings will contribute
immensely in oil field development programmes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Submission: 14 December 2013 Date of Acceptance: 15 January 2014
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. INTRODUCTION
Generally the earth constitute of rocks that varies in properties (i.e. chemically and physically). The
complexity of the earth due to it inhomogeneity impedes the ability to explore it resources maximally. Hence,
the ability to understand the physical and chemical properties of the earth has been in use at greater extents for
the detailed study of the subsurface and it constituents. A potential tool in use has been the contrast in physical
properties of the subsurface constituents. The earth’s properties include: magnetic susceptibility, dielectric
constants and gravity constants, elastic properties among others. Investigation of the earth’s interior using
geophysical methods, involves taking measurement at or near the surface of the earth for analysis that can
expose both vertical and lateral variations of the physical properties of the earth’s subsurface. The significance
of hydrocarbon to the present day economy has been called for so many methods that are geology and
geophysics based. The uses of exploratory wells that are drilled through prospective geological structures have
been of greater assistance in evaluating the hydrocarbon potential of so many locations. In order to know the
quantity of hydrocarbon accumulation in reservoir rocks (sandstone, limestone or dolomite), some basic petro
physical parameters must be evaluated. These parameters include porosity, thickness and extent of formation,
hydrocarbon saturation and permeability. Logs ranging from electrical, nuclear and acoustic have been in use for
deriving these parameters.According to Asquith and Krygowski (2004) well logs are used to correlate zones
suitable for hydrocarbon accumulation, identify productive zones, determine depth and thickness of zones,
distinguish between gas, oil and water in a reservoir and to estimate hydrocarbon reserves. Basically this project
utilizes a suite of borehole geophysical wire lines logs for the evaluation of the hydrocarbon potential of an oil
field in Niger Delta.

II. LOCATION AND BRIEF PETROLEUM HISTORY OF THE STUDY AREA

The study area is located within the onshore continental margin, south west Niger Delta. It occupies an area
enclosed by the geographical grids of latitude 5.3 0 and 5.40N and longitude 6.00 and 6.20E.Shell-British Petroleum brought
the first well on stream in 1958 at 5,100 barrels per day. From 1958 until the Biafran War in 1967, exploration and
production increased in Nigeria. The war curtailed both activities until its end in 1970, when world oil prices were rising and
Nigeria again could benefit economically from its petroleum resources in the Niger Delta. The Delta is rich in both oil and
gas. The general consensus is that the most effective source rock, in Niger Delta sequence is the marine shale of the Akata
Formation and the shale interbedded with the paralic sandstones of the Agbada Formation and that they have both yielded oil
and gas. The Akata Formation has yielded about 97 billion bb1 of reserved oil while the Agbada Formation has yielded only
about 21 billion bb1. These estimates suggest that the Akata Formation is by far the most important source rock, although its
expulsion and migration efficiency is much lower than that of the Agbada Formation (Ejedawe 1981).

www.theijes.com The IJES Page 94

 Well Correlation and Petrophysical Analysis, a Case Study of “Rickie” Field Onshore Niger Delta

III. METHODOLOGY
Lithology Identification (Correlation Panel)was the first major evaluation that was carried out in this
research.
The gamma ray log measures natural radioactivity in the formation. Shale free sandstones have low
concentration of radioactive materials, and give low gamma ray readings. Therefore increase in shale content on
the other hand gives high gamma ray response. Based on this principle, a general lithostratigraphy of the study
area consisting of alternating sand and shale lithologyhave been carefully evaluated across the wells using the
defined gamma ray response. The studied units lie within a depth range of 7400ft (2368m) to about 11300ft
(3616m)
Based on the suite of logs used for this research, the estimated parameters include Gamma ray index
(IGR), Volume of shale (Vsh), True formation resistivity (Rt), Water saturation (Sw), Hydrocarbon saturation
(Sh), Formation factor (F), Bulk volume water (BVW) and Porosity (Ф).With the aid of Neutron (NPHI) and
Formation Density (RHOB) tools, distinguishing the oil, water and gas zones was also carried out.
Volume of Shale (Vsh). Before computing the volume of shale, gamma ray index was first calculated with the
aid of gamma ray log, using equation 1

(1)

Where:Igr= Gamma ray index, GRlog = Gamma ray reading of formation, GRmin = Minimum gamma ray (clean
sand or carbonate) and GRmax= Maximum gamma ray (Shale). Niger Delta reservoirs are made of
unconsolidated sandstones. Therefore, equation 2for tertiary unconsolidated rocks was used in the computation
of the values obtained for volume of shale.

(2)
(Dresser Atlas 1979)

True Resistivity (Rt), Based on the logs that are available for this work, the values obtained for formation true
resistivity were read out from points of maximum deflection of resistivity log signature on the reservoir and
averaged.

www.theijes.com The IJES Page 95

 Well Correlation and Petrophysical Analysis, a Case Study of “Rickie” Field Onshore Niger Delta

Water Saturation (Sw) this is the water held in the pore spaces by capillary forces. It is determined using the
equation 3
. (3)

Where F=formation factors and was determined using equation 4

(4)

Where Ф = porositym = Cementation exponent (usually 2 for sands) a = tortuosity factor (taken as 0.62)
Bulk Volume Water This is the product of the formation’s water saturation and porosity.

Ф (5)

Where; = Water saturation of Uninvaded zone and = Porosity.

Porosity the computation of porosity was made possible through the use of density log. Readings were
taken directly from the log. The said values were then computed using;

(6) Where den = density derived

porosity, ma = matrix density, = formation bulk density, = fluid density (which was taken 1.0 in this
research work).
Water Saturation w . Thewater saturation values were read out at intervals and averaged from the available
water saturation log at point of minimum deflection adjacent to the reservoir of interest.
Hydrocarbon Saturation h) is the fraction of pore volume occupied by hydrocarbon and it is dependent on
water saturation. It is calculated thus:
(7)

Where: = water saturation and = Hydrocarbon saturation.

IV. DATA PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The evaluation of the hydrocarbon potential of an area is dependent upon a range of factors that are
geology and geophysics based. The basic understanding of the formation and critical evaluation and
interpretation of geophysical/geological data and features are not negligible. Constructed correlation panel were
made available to depict the general stratigraphy and subsurface geometry of the rock strata. Here in this
research, 4 wells (R1, R2, R3 andR4), were evaluated. Reservoir parameters such as Permeability (K), Porosity
),Water saturation (Sw), Hydrocarbon saturation (Sh), Bulk Volume Water (BVW), Irreducible water
saturation (Swiir), Volume of shale (Vh), (TABLES 1, 2 and 3) have been carefully analysed as a way to
describe and evaluate the hydrocarbon potential and economic viability of “Rickie” oil field.

Reservoir Analysis
Table 1: Results of the Petrophysical Analysis of Reservoir L.
WELL h w h wiir
R1 33 30 9 13 87 10 6.0
R2 207 30 8 100 00 10 6.0
R3 31 30 35 30 70 10 5.5
R4 55 32 4 15 85 11 6.0

Across the wells, reservoir Lshows an average porosity of 30.5% and Volume of shale of 14%. In R1,
R2and R4 it has an averaged hydrocarbon saturation of 80.7%. R2 is 100% water saturation. The wells show
almost constant values of Bulk Volume Water and irreducible water saturation. This is suggesting homogeneity
of the zone as regards irreducible water saturation.

www.theijes.com The IJES Page 96

 Well Correlation and Petrophysical Analysis, a Case Study of “Rickie” Field Onshore Niger Delta

Table 2: Results of the Petrophysical Analysis of Reservoir P

WELL h w h wiir
R1 99 30 41 19 81 10 6.0
R2 97 28 9 95 05 10 6.0
R3 90 32 12 22 78 10 6.0
R4 50 32 30 82 18 15 6.0

Across the wells, reservoir P shows averaged porosity and volume of shale of 30.5% and 23%
respectively. R1and R3 shows averaged hydrocarbon saturation of 79.5%.The values of hydrocarbon saturation
in R3and R4 are not inviting at all.
Table 3: Results of the Petrophysical Analysis of Reservoir S
WELL h w h wiir
R1 103 30 17 18 82 10 6.0
R2 97 29 14 32 68 10 6.0
R3 75 27 06 06 94 2 7.0
R4 113 32 05 95 05 2 7.0

Across the wells, reservoir S shows an averaged porosity of 29.5% and Volume of shale of 10.5%. In
R1, R2 andR3 it has an averaged hydrocarbon saturation of 81.3%. R4 shows little hydrocarbon saturation. R1and
R2show constant values of Bulk Volume Water, while R3and R4values also have the same values. If the values
for Bulk Volume Water, calculated at several depths in a formation, are constant or very close to constant, they
indicate thatthe zone is homogenous and at irreducible water saturation ( wirr). When a zone is at irreducible
water saturation, water captured in the uninvaded zone will not move because capillary forces hold it. Thus,
hydrocarbon from a zone at irreducible water saturation should be water-free (Morris and Biggs, 1967). Also,
low bulk volume water values across reservoirs are an indication of high hydrocarbon potential.
Reservoirs Correlation
The alternation of sands and shale in various proportions and thicknesses within the evaluated depth
conforms to that of the Agbada formation. The evaluated depth and the thicknesses of the various overlaying
shale units, suggest a comfortable room for accumulation of matured hydrocarbon- prospective sequence in the
studied area. The thickening of the lithilogic (figure 2) unit at one end with subsequent thinning at the other end
could be as a result of delay in depositional periods or different in the volume of sediments deposited per time.
From the correlation panel there are series of synthetic and antithetic faults that are closing up on each other,
forming closures and indications of rollovers and collapsed crest as explained by Doust and Omotsola (1990).
Rollover anticlines are good traps for hydrocarbon. Therefore the trapping mechanism is assisted by the faults
and the anticlinal structures which collectively form the structural closures. Obviously the reservoirs are
juxtaposed against shale; hence the reservoirs are structurally control. They have good seals /cap rocks and
traps. The presence of hydrocarbons in these identified traps is confirmed using wire-line logs(Kearey and
Brooks, 1991).
Gas Bearing Zones
Figure 3 shows the depth of occurrence of gas in the reservoir. The presence of gas in a formation leads
to a reduction in neutron porosity with a corresponding increase in density porosity. Thus an increase in contrast
between these logs (Neutron (NPHI) and Formation Density (RHOB) was picked as an indication of gas
presence in the sand unit, while closeness in the logs signature shows that the reservoir sand is oil-bearing.
Consequently, Gas-Up-To (GUT) and Gas-Down-To (GDT) were also delineated between 10600ft and 10700 ft
in R3.

www.theijes.com The IJES Page 97

 Well Correlation and Petrophysical Analysis, a Case Study of “Rickie” Field Onshore Niger Delta

www.theijes.com The IJES Page 98

 Well Correlation and Petrophysical Analysis, a Case Study of “Rickie” Field Onshore Niger Delta

V. CONCLUSION
Neutron, density, gamma ray, resistivity/conductivity logs were employed in the analyses and
examination of an oil field in western Niger Delta. Four wells, R1, R2, R3 and R4 were considered.
Lithostratigraphic correlation section of these wells depicts that the subsurface stratigraphy is that of sand shale
interbedding.Three hydrocarbon bearing reservoirs (L,P and S) of varying thicknesses were identified and
mapped at the depthsof 9,650ft (2,943m),10,650ft (3,248m) and 12298ft (3935m) respectively.Across the wells,
reservoir Lshows an averaged porosity of 30.5 % and Volume of shale of 14%. In R1, R3and R4 it has an
averaged hydrocarbon saturation of 80.7%. R2 is 100% water saturated.Reservoir P shows averaged porosity and
volume of shale of 30.5% and 23% respectively. R1and R3 shows averaged hydrocarbon saturation of 79.5% the
reservoir is not economically viable in R2 and R4 at all.Reservoir S shows an averaged porosity of 29.5% and
Volume of shale of 10.5%. In R1, R2 andR3 it has an averaged hydrocarbon saturation of 81.3%. The reservoir is
not yielding well in R4.

VI. RECOMMENDATION
It is therefore recommended that 3-D seismic data should be incorporated to allow for detailed and
complimentary study of “Rickie” field. This will give room for the generation and analyses of 3-D images that
will show more revealing details of the geometry of the geologic features and also the area extent with which
volumetric reservoir estimations can be calculated.

REFERENCES
[1] Asquith, G. and Krygowski, D: Relationships of Well Log Interpretation in Basic Well Log Analysis Method in Exploration
Series: American Association of Petroleum Geologists. 2004, No 16.p.140.
[2] Ejadewe, J. E. Patterns of Incidence of Oil Reserves in Niger Delta Basin. American Association of Petroleum Geologists,
1981,Vol. 65, pp. 1574-1585.
[3] Dresser Atlas.Log Interpretation Charts (Houston, Texas, Dresser Industries Inc. 1979 p. 107).
[4] Morris, R.L. and Biggs, W.P. Using log-derived values of water saturation and porosity. Soc. Professional Well Log
Analysts,1967, 8th Ann Logging symp. p. 13.
[5] Doust, H., And Omatsola, E:Niger Delta, In, Edwards,J.D., and Santogrossi, P.A., Eds., Divergent/Passive Margin Basins,
AAPG Memoir 48: Tulsa, American Association of Petroleum Geologists,1990,pp. 239-248.
[6] Kearey, P. and Brooks, M. Introduction to Geophysical Exploration. Blackwell Scientific Publication, Oxford.1991, (2nd
edition) pp. 44-47.

BIOGRAPHY

Abraham-A. M. Richardson has Geology background with Post-Graduate Diploma Degree (PGD) and a
Masters’ Degree (M.Tech) in Applied Geophysics and Exploration Geophysics respectively, from the Federal
University of Technology Akure (FUTA), Ondo State, Nigeria. He has successfully carried out some research
works both individually and in group in the areas of Biostratigraphy, Groundwater Geophysics, Seismic and
Petrophysics. His areas of interest also include; General Geology, Environmental Geophysics and Engineering
Geophysics.

www.theijes.com The IJES Page 99