Petrophysical evaluation for the K exploration prospect

9/18a-B3, 9/19-2, 9/19-6, 9/19-7 and 9/19-7S1

Yu Ling Wu, SUKEP-UIO/W/D

January 2015
Document number: EP201501208218

1
EP201501208218

Introduction
The primary target reservoirs of the K prospect are Upper and Lower Beryl. The secondary reservoir
targets are Triassic, Upper Jurassic and Tertiary injectites. The five key regional wells are 9/18A-B3 and
9/19-2, 9/19-6, 9/19-7 and its sidetrack 9/19-7Z. The key uncertainties for this prospect are faulting and
the presence of upper Beryl/ onlap of Beryl unit onto Triassic high.

9/18A-B3
Buckland

9/19-7
K prospect
9/19-6
9/19-2
Skene

Figure 1: Map showing the key wells.

Data preparation
The tables below show which reservoir targets are penetrated. The logs that were acquired in the
relevant hole sections.
Table 1: Overview of the penetrated reservoir targets.

9/18A-B3
9/19-2
9/19-6

9/19-7
9/19-7Z

Tertiary
Only GR

Upper Jurassic
Yes (Heather)

Beryl formation
Yes

Jurassic (other)
-

Triassic
Not penetrated

Yes (Frigg, Balder,

Sele)
Yes (Frigg, Balder,
Sele)

Not seen

Yes (Lower
Beryl)
Yes (Beryl,
Lower Beryl)

Linnhe, Dunlin,
Eiriksson
Linnhe

Yes (Lewis 3, 2, 1)

Only GR-RES-DT,
not evaluated
In original hole

Not
penetrated
Yes (Heather,
Katrine, J50J40-J30sands)

Not penetrated

Only few feet into

the Lewis formation
=> not evaluated
Not penetrated

Yes (Beryl,
Lower Beryl)

Linnhe

Not penetrated

Yes (Heather)

2
EP201501208218

Table 2: Overview of acquired log data.

Operator
9/18A-B3

Mobil

9/19-2

Conoco

Spud
date
3 Nov
1998
30 Jan
1976

Hole
section

8.5
12.25
8.5

9/19-6

Conoco

15 Nov
1981

12.25

8.5
9/19-7

Conoco

9/19-7Z

Conoco

20 June
1983

12.25
8.5

Interval
ftMD
978712850
503511045
1104512846
514010890
1089013084
504011780
1225614080

Mud
OBM
WBM
(lignosulfate)
WBM
(lignosulfate)
WBM
(seawater/
polymer)
WBM
(lignosulfate)
Inverted oil
emulsion
Inverted oil
emulsion

Logging
contractor
Schlumberger

GR

DEN

NEU

RES

DT

GR

LDL

CNL

ILD

BHC

Schlumberger

GR

FDC

CNL

ISF

BCSL

Schlumberger

GR

FDC

CNL

BCSL

Schlumberger

GR

FDC

CNL

ISF,
DLL
DIL

Schlumberger

GR

FDC

CNL

DIL

BHC

Schlumberger

GR

DIL

SLS

Schlumberger

GR

DIL

SLS

FDC

CNL

BHC

Well 9/19-7 was side-tracked because the drill string became irretrievably stuck in hole whilst drilling at
13224ftMD. The hole was plugged back and sidetracked from 12256ftMD.
The density data over the Sele formation in well 9/19-2 was of poor quality. Over the Jurassic the
borehole of 9/19-6 showed washouts which may have affected the density readings. The poor quality
intervals are flagged with a red flag in the miniplots.

Analysis and Results

Porosity
The porosity was derived from the density according to the equation:

=

, where = porosity and = density.
The density of sand=2.65 g/cc has been used as the matrix density. The fluid densities are calculated
from estimated fluid compositions. In all cases it was estimated that the fluid was made up of 20%
connate water, 20% mud filtrate and 60% of oil in the oil leg or water in the water leg. At a formation
salinity of 68 kppm and a temperature around 200oF, the water density is 1.0 g/cc. The mud filtrate of
OBM was estimated to be 0.85 g/cc, the mud filtrate of the WBM 1.0 g/cc. The oil density at reservoir
temperature was estimated to be 0.77 g/cc (the oil is estimated to have an API of 40). In case it was
inconclusive whether an interval contained oil or water it was assumed the fluid was oil, which leads to
slightly lower calculated porosities.

3
EP201501208218

WBM
WBM
OBM
OBM

Oil leg
Water leg
Oil leg
Water leg

Connate
water
= 1.0 g/cc
0.2 x1.0
0.2 x1.0
0.2 x1.0
0.2 x1.0

Oil
=0.77 g/cc

Water
=1.0 g/cc

0.6 x0.77
0.6 x1.0
0.6 x0.77
0.6 x1.0

OBM mud WBM mud

filtrate
filtrate
=0.85 g/cc
= 1.0 g/cc
0.2x1.0
0.2x1.0
0.2 x0.85
0.2 x0.85

Total fluid
density
0.86 g/cc
1.0 g/cc
0.83 g/cc
0.97 g/cc

Saturation
The water saturation was calculated with the Archie equation:
/
= (
)

, where:
Sw= water saturation
a= tortuosity factor
Rw= formation water resistivity
Rt= true formation resistivity = here deepest reading resistivity
= porosity
= density porosity as defined above
m= cementation factor
n= saturation exponent
a
m
n
Rw
Frigg, Balder
1
1.8
1.8
0.1 ohm.m (from Pickett plot)
Sele
1
1.8
1.8
0.04 ohm.m (from Pickett plot)
Katrine, J, Heather, 1
1.84
1.85
0.07 ohm.m (from Pickett plot)
Beryl, Lower Beryl
Dunlin, Eiriksson,
Linnhe
Lewis
1
1.85
1.95
0.04 ohm.m at 200oF (68 kppm)
(from An integrated petrophysical field study of the
Beryl alpha area, Woods, 2001)

4
EP201501208218

Rw=0.1 ohm.m
m=1.8

Figure 2: Pickett-plot for the Frigg and Balder formation over the water bearing sands.

Rw=0.04 ohm.m
m=1.8

Figure 3: Pickett-plot over the Sele formation over the water bearing sands.

5
EP201501208218

Rw=0.07 ohm.m
m=1.84

Figure 4: Pickett-plot over the Jurassic over the water bearing sands.

Net-to-gross
The net-to-gross was based on a Gamma ray based Vshale. The Vshale was a linear function of the
gamma ray:
=

As the GR_sand and GR_shale the 5th and 95th percentile were taken. There were a couple of exceptions:
- The Heather in 9/18A-B3 did not contain any sands, as can be seen from the density-neutron
curves and no sand was observed in the cuttings. As the GRsand the same value was taken as
the GRsand in the Beryl formation.
- In 9/19-7S1 the Heather, Katrine and J-sands hardly encountered sand. The GRsand was
estimated by drawing a baseline through the sandy interval around 12370ftMD.
The table below summarises the GRsand and GRshale. The Vshale cut-off used was 0.5. In addition a
porosity cut-off of 0.20 v/v was used for the Linnhe formation to cut out coal streaks.
Well
9/18A-B3
9/19-2

9/19-6

Formations
Heather
Beryl
Frigg, Balder
Sele
Lower Beryl
Linnhe, Dunlin, Eiriksson
Lewis
Frigg, Balder
Sele

GRsand
21
21
35
24
18
23
47
29
23

GRshale
155
74
60
68
82
92
105
53
64
6

EP201501208218

9/19-7
9/19-7S1

Heather
Beryl, Lower Beryl
Linnhe
Frigg, Balder
Sele
Heather, Katrine, J-sands
Beryl, Lower Beryl
Linnhe

52
15
15
20
24
30
16
47

118
87
85
56
69
112
93
105

Overall interpretation well-by-well

The information below is a summary of the information on the composite well logs and the log
evaluation.
9/18A-B3
- Beryl: The logs show an oil-down to (ODT)=11326ftTVDSS. Contrary to the logs, the cuttings did
not have any visual porosity. There were no shows on the cuttings.
9/19-2
- Frigg: the resistivity log shows ODT=5672ftTVDSS, but because the hole conditions are poor no
reliable porosity and saturation calculation can be done. Down to this depth there are increased
gas readings and good shows. Below this depth the logs indicate water and there are no
increased gas readings but there are good shows and some oil staining.
- Balder: The logs indicate the Balder is water-bearing. During drilling there were no increased gas
readings and no shows on the cuttings.
- Sele: The density is of poor quality and therefore the log interpretation is not always reliable.
There are some intervals with increased gas readings and some poor to good shows. During an
FIT (formation interval test) done at 6888ftMD a sample with no gas, 200cc oil (black, heavy,
viscous, dead oil) and 9800cc mud filtrate was obtained.
- Lower Beryl: The logs show ODT 11474ftTVDSS. The presence of oil is supported by increased
gas readings and poor to good oil shows on the cuttings. DST #4C over the interval 1156811593ftMD below the ODT produced only water.
- Jurassic below the Beryl: There are no hydrocarbons seen on the logs. On the cuttings there
were poor shows and no visible oil staining.
- Triassic: The Lewis 3, 2 and 1 are hydrocarbon bearing based on log data. This interpretation is
supported by poor to moderate shows on the cuttings and increased gas readings while drilling.
There were two successful DSTs (#1A and #3B) done during which gas and condensate were
produced.

7
EP201501208218

9/19-6
-

Frigg-Balder: The logs do not show any indications of hydrocarbons. The cuttings had fair shows,
scattered visible oil staining and faint-dull fluorescence. There were some but no large increases
in the gas readings. Currently, these formation are water bearing but at some point in time they
probably contained hydrocarbons.
Sele: There are no indications of hydrocarbons on the logs. The cuttings had some poor shows
and visible oil: no to rare intergranular bitumen, dark brown-black and very viscous. Currently,
these formation are water bearing but at some point in time they probably contained
hydrocarbons.
Heather: The borehole is washed out and therefore the density log and the calculated porosity
and saturation are not reliable. There were no shows on the cuttings and no increased gas
readings.
Beryl: The logs indicate the Beryl formation is water-bearing. There were some increased gas
readings, but the cuttings had only poor shows and no visible oil staining.
Below the Beryl the logs indicate only water. There were no shows on the cuttings.

9/19-7 and 9/19-7S1

- Tertiary: The logs indicate the Frigg, Balder and Sele are water bearing. There were also no
shows on the cuttings.
- Upper Jurassic: The logs indicate the Upper Jurassic is water bearing. There were also no shows
on the cuttings.
- Beryl: The calculated water saturation is not exactly 1. But probably the Beryl formation is water
bearing because there were only poor oil shows and no visible oil staining. That the calculated
water saturation is not exactly 1 could be because no corrections on the resistivity were done to
obtain the true formation resistivity. The deepest reading resistivity curve was taken. In this well
the Beryl formation was drilled with oil based mud, whereas the 9/19-2 and 9/19-6 drilled it
with water based mud.

8
EP201501208218

Sums and averages

The sums and averages are given in TVDSS. The net-to-gross is the TV net interval (including net with
poor hole quality) divided by the TV gross interval (including gross with poor hole quality). The average
porosity is calculated over only the sands over which the log quality is good. The saturation is only given
for intervals above the OWC, including the transition zone.
The miniplots are at the back of this document. Some wells have several miniplots to focusing on the
various formations. In the miniplots the porosity and saturation are only shown over the intervals where
the log quality was good.

Well
9_19-2
9_19-6
9_19-2
9_19-6

Well

Zones
Frigg
Frigg
Balder
Balder

9_18A-B3
9_19-6
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1
9_19-7S1

5741.0
5928.0
6167.0
6173.0

Top
ftMD

Zones

9_18A-B3 Sele
9_19-2
Sele
9_19-6
Sele

Well

Top
ftMD

6200.0
6600.0
6610.0

Top
ftMD

Zones
Heather
Heather
Heather
J36
J42
J44
J46
J52
J54 A
J54 B
J54 C
Katrine

11600.0
11242.0
12150.0
12825.6
12809.2
12772.2
12761.0
12711.5
12632.7
12599.7
12567.7
12373.0

Bottom
ftMD
6167.0
6173.0
6600.0
6610.0

Bottom
ftMD
7180.0
10977.0
11077.0

Bottom
ftMD
12305.0
11981.0
12373.0
12972.0
12825.6
12809.2
12772.2
12761.0
12711.5
12632.7
12599.7
12567.7

Top
Bottom
ftTVDSS ftTVDSS
5661.0
5851.0
6087.0
6096.0

6087.0
6096.0
6520.0
6532.9

Top
Bottom
ftTVDSS ftTVDSS
6111.8
6520.0
6532.9

7069.1
10897.0
10932.2

Top
Bottom
ftTVDSS ftTVDSS
10724.6
11094.7
12062.7
12732.3
12716.1
12679.7
12668.8
12619.9
12542.1
12509.5
12477.8
12284.8

11300.3
11822.5
12284.8
12876.1
12732.3
12716.1
12679.7
12668.8
12619.9
12542.1
12509.5
12477.8

Gross
TV
426.0
245.0
433.0
436.8

Gross
TV
957.2
4377.0
4399.3

Gross
TV
575.7
727.8
222.0
143.8
16.1
36.4
11.0
48.8
77.8
32.6
31.7
193.1

Net
TV
167.5
59.0
169.0
185.9

Net
TV
477.9
1917.0
1648.6

Net
TV
4.1
240.3
48.8
1.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
2.0
1.0
0.5
2.0
28.3

Net to
Gross
0.39
0.24
0.39
0.43
0.38

Net to
Gross
0.50
0.44
0.38
0.42

Net to
Gross
0.01
0.33
0.22
0.01
0.00
0.03
0.00
0.04
0.01
0.02
0.06
0.15
0.16

Gross TV
(good hole
only)
199.0
245.0
248.5
272.0

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
84.0
0.256
unknown
59.0
0.276
35.0
0.256
60.5
0.318
0.277

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
957.2
477.9
0.380
2460.0
1453.5
0.162
3872.0
1542.8
0.163
0.192

Gross TV
(good hole
only)

Gross TV
(good hole
only)
575.7
0.0
193.7
143.8
16.1
36.4
11.0
48.8
77.8
32.6
31.7
193.1

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
4.1
0.046
0.0
33.9
0.046
1.0
0.035
0.0
1.0
0.054
0.0
2.0
0.039
1.0
0.055
0.5
0.022
2.0
0.036
28.3
0.083
0.060

9
EP201501208218

Well

Zones

9_18A-B3 Beryl
9_19-6
Beryl
9_19-7S1 Beryl

Well

9_19-2

Well
9_19-2

Well
9_19-6
9_19-2
9_19-2
9_19-2

Top
ftMD
11366.0
12063.0
13350.0

Top
ftMD

Zones

9_19-2
Linnhe
9_19-6
Linnhe
9_19-7S1 Linnhe

Well

12305.0
11981.0
12972.0

Zones

9_19-2
Lower Beryl
9_19-6
Lower Beryl
9_19-7S1 Lower Beryl

Well

Top
ftMD

11694.0
12258.0
13990.0

Top
ftMD

Zones
Dunlin

11850.0

Top
ftMD

Zones
Eiriksson

11855.3

Top
ftMD

Zones
Lewis
Lewis 1
Lewis 2
Lewis 3

12975.0
12318.2
12275.6
12000.4

Bottom
ftMD
12907.5
12063.0
13350.0

Bottom
ftMD
11694.0
12258.0
13990.0

Bottom
ftMD
11850.0
12561.0
14101.0

Bottom
ftMD
11855.3

Bottom
ftMD
12000.0

Bottom
ftMD
13103.0
12651.0
12318.2
12275.6

Top
ftTVDSS
11300.3
11822.5
12876.1

Top
ftTVDSS
11286.0
11903.2
13246.1

Top
ftTVDSS
11614.0
12095.3
13871.0

Top
ftTVDSS
11770.0

Top
ftTVDSS
11775.3

Top
ftTVDSS
12801.4
12238.2
12195.6
11920.4

Bottom
ftTVDSS
11791.1
11903.2
13246.1

Bottom
ftTVDSS
11614.0
12095.3
13871.0

Bottom
ftTVDSS
11770.0
12393.7
13979.1

Bottom
ftTVDSS
11775.3

Bottom
ftTVDSS
11920.0

Bottom
ftTVDSS
12927.5
12571.0
12238.2
12195.6

Gross
TV
490.8
80.7
370.0

Net
TV
328.2
53.7
328.5

Gross
TV
328.0
192.1
624.9

Net
TV
231.5
66.0
426.7

Gross
TV
156.0
298.4
108.2

Net
TV
33.0
96.0
10.2

Gross
TV
5.3

144.7

Gross
TV
126.0
332.8
42.6
275.2

0.67
0.67
0.89
0.75

Net to
Gross
0.71
0.34
0.68
0.63

Net to
Gross
0.21
0.32
0.09
0.25

Net
TV
0.5

Gross
TV

Net to
Gross

Net to
Gross
0.09
0.09

Net
TV
8.5

Net to
Gross
0.06
0.06

Net
TV
0.0
185.5
8.9
270.1

Net to
Gross
0.00
0.56
0.21
0.98
0.60

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
490.8
328.2
0.162
0.33
32.5
24.6
0.120
370.0
328.5
0.138
0.149

Gross TV
(good hole
only)

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
328.0
231.5
0.128
0.47
192.1
66.0
0.083
624.9
426.7
0.117
0.117

Gross TV
(good hole
only)

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
156.0
33.0
0.108
70.9
40.4
0.089
108.2
10.2
0.050
0.092

Gross TV
(good hole
only)

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
5.3
0.5
0.045
0.045

Gross TV
(good hole
only)

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
144.7
8.5
0.216
0.216

Gross TV
(good hole
only)

Gross TV
(good hole
only)
126.0
332.8
42.6
275.2

Net TV
Av_Hydrocarbon
(good Average
Saturation above
hole
Porosity
the contact
only)
0.0
185.5
0.130
0.39
8.9
0.098
0.25
270.1
0.112
0.24
0.119

10
EP201501208218

ODT
11326
ftTVDSS

Figure 5: Miniplot of 9/18A-B3 Heather and Beryl formation.

11
EP201501208218

ODT
5672
ftTVDSS

Figure 6: Miniplot of 9/19-2: Frigg and Balder formation. The Sele and Jurassic formations are shown in separate miniplots.

12
EP201501208218

Figure 7: Miniplot of 9/19-2 Sele formation. The shallower and deeper formations are shown in separate miniplots.

13
EP201501208218

DST#4C
DST#1A

DST#3B

11474
ftTVDSS

Figure 8: Miniplot of 9/19-2 Jurassic and Triassic formations. The shallower formations are shown in separate miniplots

14
EP201501208218

Figure 9: Miniplot of 9/19-6 Frigg and Balder formation. The Sele and Jurassic formations are shown in separate miniplots.

15
EP201501208218

Figure 10: Miniplot of 9/19-6 Sele formation. Shallower and deeper formations are shown in separate miniplots.

16
EP201501208218

Figure 11: Miniplot of 9/19-6 Jurassic formations. Shallower formations are shown in separate miniplots.

17
EP201501208218

Figure 12: Miniplot of 9/19-7 Sele formation.

18
EP201501208218

Figure 13: Miniplot of 9/19-7S1 Jurassic formations.

19
EP201501208218