| 
					
					
					 Fracture Porosity and Permeability From Fracture
                Aperture Resistivity
				image logs are widely used to assess fracture aperture.
				Unfortunately, the image tends to exaggerate fracture aperture,
				especially for very small fractures. The fracture noted on the
				image at the right looks to be about 1 mm aperture (black streak
				on the image). This is about the minimum size that  a
				fracture can appear on a log because of the pixel density of the
				image, electrode spacing on the tool, and erosion of the
				wellbore adjacent to the fracture. The fracture frequency may
				also be exaggerated if the dip correlation processing picks the
				same fracture at different depths. If fracture dios are
				hand-picked, fracture frequency will be more accurate.
 
			Fracture aperture exaggeration on acoustic image logs is even more
			severe and these logs probably should not be used for aperture
			estimation.
                 These
			visual difficulties can be overcome with a post-processing technique
			that uses a resistivity inversion model and the mud filtrate
			resistivity to calculate aperture, independent of any visual
			artifacts. 
			The algorithm
                is based on the concept that higher electrical conductivity means a larger
                open fracture. The fracture aperture and fracture frequency can
                be combined to obtain fracture porosity and fracture permeability.1.
                            PHIf = 0.001 * Wf * Df * KF1
 
 The fracture permeability equations are attributed to Dr Zoltan
			Barlai:
 2: Kfrac = 833 * 10^11 * PHIfrac^3 / (Df^2 * KF1^2)
 3: Kfrac = 833 * 10^5 * PHIfrac * Wf^2
 4: Kfrac = 833 * 10^2 * Wf^3 * Df * KF1
   
                 Where: KF1 = number of main fracture directions
 = 1 for sub-horizontal or sub-vertical
 = 2 for orthogonal sub-vertical
 = 3 for chaotic or brecciated
 PHIfrac = fracture porosity (fractional)
 Df = fracture frequency (fractures per meter)
 Wf = fracture aperture (millimeters)
 Kfrac = fracture permeability (millidarcies)
 Note:
                Equations 2, 3, and 4 give identical results. Example
                1: Df = 1 fracture per meter
 Wf = 1.0 millimeters
 PHIfrac = 0.001 * 1 * 1 = 0.001 fractional (0.1%)
 Kfrac = 833 * 100 * 1^3 * 1 * 1 = 83300 millidarcies
 Example
                2: Df = 10 fractures per meter
 Wf = 0.1 millimeters
 PHIfrac = 0.001 * 10 * 0.1 = 0.001 fractional (0.1%)
 Kfrac = 833 * 100 * 0.1^3 * 10 * 1 = 833 millidarcies
 These
                examples represent well fractured reservoirs. You can see that
                the volume of hydrocarbon is very small but the permeability is
                very high.  If
                you believe that the phrase “fracture porosity” is
                a literal definition, then this porosity will usually be pretty
                small - in the order of 0.0001 to 0.01 fractional porosity (0.01
                to 1.0%). If you believe that the phrase includes vuggy and solution
                porosity related to the presence of fractures, then the value
                could be much higher. The important thing is to recognize that
                there are two definitions for “fracture porosity”. An
                example of a fracture aperture log from a program called Frac-View
                is shown below. The permeability calculation was not
                available in this program. 
				
				 Fracture frequency, aperture, and porosity log derived from
				a resistivity image log.
 
 
					 Calculating Permeability From Stoneley Attenuation 
  While
                propagating along the borehole wall, the Stoneley wave is able
                to exchange energy with the formation fluid in a process called
                acoustic flow. This communication between the borehole and formation
                is proportional to the mobility of the fluids, which in turn is
                proportional to permeability and fluid viscosity. Increases in
                communication decrease Stoneley amplitude, because energy is used
                up when acoustic flow is initiated. This is equivalent to increased
                Stoneley attenuation, which therefore can be calibrated to predict
                formation permeability. 
				Permeability from Stoneley wave attenuation  The
                attenuation data can be represented as pseudo-permeability and
                presented on a qualitative scale: low attenuation corresponding
                to low permeability and high attenuation to high permeability.
                To facilitate comparisons of pseudo-permeability to actual formation
                producibility, the attenuation data can be integrated to provide
                a potential flow profile for comparison to an actual spinner flowmeter
                log. . This
                curve could be correlated to core permeability to obtain a calibrated
                permeability curve. Correlation is usually as good as porosity
                and saturation correlations, which have been used for many years,
                and often much better than these in fractured and vuggy zones.
 |