GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 1/12

geodesi dan geod ynam ics 2 0 1 6, volx no x, 1 e 1 2

Tersedia secara online di www.sciencedirect.com

65

ScienceDirect
66
1
67
2
68
3
69
4
70
beranda jurnal: www.keaipubl ishing.com/en/ journals / geog ;
5
ht tp: / / www. jgg09.com/ jweb_ddcl_en / EN / volumn / home.shtml 71
6
72
7
73
8
9 Interpretasi fasies sedimen dari log Gamma Ray (GR) sebagai log sumur 74
75
10
dasar di Cekungan Indus Tengah dan Bawah Pakistan
76
11
77
12
78
13
79
14
80
15
81
16
P4 Adeel Nazeer Sebuah , * , Shabeer Ahmed Abbasi b , Sarfraz Hussain Solangi b 82
17
83
Sebuah Pusat Geologi Murni dan Terapan, Universitas Sindh, Jamshoro, Pakistan
18
84
b Pakistan Petroleum Limited, Islamabad, Pakistan
19
85
20
86
21
87
22
articleinfo abstrak 88
23
89
24
Sejarah artikel: Batuan dan sebagian besar jenis tanah memancarkan Sinar Gamma (GR) dalam jumlah yang bervariasi. Unsur-unsur pemancar 90
25
Diterima 15 Maret 2016 Diterima radiasi gamma primer meliputi kalium 40, uranium, dan torium yang berasosiasi dengan mineral pembentuk batuan dalam jumlah 91
26
dalam bentuk revisi 15 Juni 2016 yang bervariasi. Log GR digunakan untuk memprediksi variasi litologi dalam lubang bor dengan mengukur emisi spontan radiasi GR 92
27
dari batuan. Peran log GR dalam identifikasi fasies bawah permukaan adalah tema utama penelitian yang difokuskan dari naskah ini 93
28
94
29 Diterima 15 Juni 2016 Tersedia termasuk dengan tujuan pengenalan singkat log GR dan aplikasinya dalam identifikasi fasies di bidang Geosains Minyak Bumi
95
30 online xxx dengan menganalisis contoh log GR ( s) dari sumur, Cekungan Indus Bawah, Pakistan.
96
31
97
32 Kata kunci:
98
33 Formasi Goru lebih rendah © 2016, Institut Seismologi, Administrasi Gempa China, dll. Produksi dan 99
34 Log Gamma Ray hosting oleh Elsevier BV atas nama KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. Ini adalah akses terbuka 100
35
Litho-facies artikel di bawah lisensi CC BY-NC-ND ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/ 101
36
Lingkungan paleo deposisi 4,0 / ). 102
37
Blok Badin dan sabuk Sulaiman Lipat monoklin 103
38
Sindh 104
39
105
Pakistan
40
106
41
107
42
108
43
Bagaimana mengutip artikel ini: Nazeer A, dkk., Interpretasi fasies sedimen dari Log Gamma Ray (GR) sebagai log sumur dasar di Cekungan Indus Tengah dan Bawah Pakistan, Geodesi dan 109
44
Geodinamika (2016), ▪, 1 e 12, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006. 110
45
111
46
112
47
113
48
waktu deportasi hingga kedatangannya di pelabuhan sebagai tujuan akhir. Demikian pula, log 114
49 1. pengantar sumur mencatat setiap peristiwa pengeboran, berdasarkan kedalaman yang dibor secara real 115
50
time. Perubahan litologi dan dampaknya pada operasi pemboran merupakan prinsip dasar di 116
51
Secara umum dipercaya kata itu “ baik log ” diambil dari nomenklatur kapal, sebagai log 117
balik teori tersebut
52
kapal yang melacak setiap peristiwa dari nya 118
53
119
54
120
55 * Penulis yang sesuai. Pakistan Petroleum Limited (PPL), Gerry ' s Center, Justice Abdul Rasheed Road, 7th Avenue, Sector G-6/1, Islamabad, Pakistan. 121
56 P1 122
57 Alamat email: a_nazeer@ppl.com.pk (A. Nazeer).
123
58 Tinjauan sejawat di bawah tanggung jawab Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration.
124
59
125
60
126
61
Produksi dan Hosting oleh Elsevier atas nama KeAi 127
62
128
63 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
129
64 1674-9847 / © 2016, Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, dll. Produksi dan hosting oleh Elsevier BV atas nama KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. Ini adalah artikel akses terbuka di
bawah lisensi CC BY-NC-ND ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ).

Silakan mengutip artikel ini di media sebagai: Nazeer A, dkk., Interpretasi fasies sedimen dari Log Gamma Ray (GR) sebagai log sumur dasar di Cekungan Indus Tengah dan Bawah Pakistan,
Geodesi dan Geodinamika (2016), http: // dx .doi.org / 10.1016 / j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 2/12

2 geodesi dan geod ynam ics 2 0 1 6, volx no x, 1 e 1 2

1 dari penebangan kabel. Pada awal 1900-an, penebang sumur menulis laporan sumur secara memiliki kandungan shale gas yang tinggi. Tzortzis dan Tsertos (2002) 66
2 real time dan menyiapkan bagian stratigrafi pada informasi yang tersedia, masalah yang [13] mengukur konsentrasi uranium, thorium dan kalium dalam siprus dan menemukan bahwa 67
3 dihadapi dalam pengeboran, kecepatan pengeboran dan zona hidrokarbon. Informasi seperti itu uranium, thorium dan kalium hadir dalam kapur, gipsum, napal, batu pasir berkapur, batu kapur, 68
4 69
selalu memakan waktu dengan kehilangan interval stratigrafi sebagai catatan lengkap dari deposit beech dan tanah liat merah. Ini berarti bahwa sumber radioaktif dikaitkan dalam berbagai
5 70
lubang bor. Masalah ini diatasi dengan induksi pendekatan wireline log. Biasanya, catatan jalur komposisi
6 71
kabel yang berbeda mencatat informasi berikut:
7 72
dan tergantung atas itu pengendapan
8 73
lingkungan Hidup. Itulah alasan utama mengapa tren GR normal digunakan untuk menafsirkan
9 74
10 fasies sedimen bawah permukaan tanpa adanya data seismik 3D dan data inti sumur. 75
11 76
12 ➢ Batasan zona permeabel dan non permeabel direkor- 77
13 ded dengan log SP. 78
14 ➢ Gamma Ray (GR) merekam intensitas sumber radioaktif 3. Bentuk kurva log: alat prediksi untuk fasies 79
15 80
(mineral lempung sebagai komponen utama) disajikan dalam komposisi mineralogi bagian penafsiran
16 81
batuan.
17 82
➢ Log kepadatan digunakan untuk mengukur kepadatan massal. Selley (1978) [11] menganggap bentuk kurva well-log sebagai alat dasar untuk
18 83
➢ Log porositas neutron mengukur jumlah pori-pori yang masuk menginterpretasikan fasies pengendapan karena bentuk log berhubungan langsung dengan
19 84
bagian yang dibor. ukuran butir suksesi batuan. Cant (1992) [3] mendefinisikan lima bentuk kurva log yang berbeda
20 85
➢ Log resistivitas digunakan untuk membedakan sifat fluida masuk yang digunakan untuk menafsirkan lingkungan pengendapan dan juga menganggap studi inti
21 86
22 formasi geologi. yang berhubungan dengan log sebagai alat penting interpretasi fasies di bawah permukaan 87
23 ➢ Log sonik digunakan untuk mengukur kekakuan batuan (seperti yang ditunjukkan pada Gambar 1 ). 88
24 mengukur kecepatan gelombang sonik di bagian yang dibor. 89
25 ➢ Alat pencatatan gambar digunakan untuk identifikasi patah tulang dan Tabel 1 menunjukkan lima tipe utama kurva log. Profil vertikal ukuran butir sebagai 90
26 orientasinya di bagian yang dibor. lingkungan spesifik memiliki karakteristik dan ukuran saluran tertentu [11] . Prograding delta dan 91
27 92
bar penghalang mengendapkan profil ukuran butir kasar ke atas. Seiring dengan perubahan
28 93
Praktis “ rasa malu ” digunakan untuk menunjukkan intensitas GR yang dihasilkan oleh ukuran butir, motif batang kayu juga berubah dan mengembangkan pola litologi. Profil ukuran
29 94
sumber radioaktif. Karena serpih umumnya ditemukan di alam dan mengandung kalium (K) butir dalam urutan sand-shale dapat ditunjukkan dengan log GR dan log SP.
30 95
dalam komposisi kimianya, setiap serpih memiliki sumber radioaktif berbeda yang digunakan
31 96
untuk membedakan serpih dan batupasir, serpih dan batugamping dan bahkan serpih dari
32 97
33 evaporit. Karena itu, “ rasa malu ” diperkenalkan dalam petrofisika untuk identifikasi signifikan Log GR mewakili profil vertikal dari ukuran butir, karena kandungan serpihan (kandungan 98
34 serpih dan ini adalah alasan utama bahwa fluktuasi GR menunjukkan perubahan dalam radioaktivitas / shalines) di batupasir meningkat seiring dengan penurunan ukuran butir. 99
35 mineralogi dan digunakan untuk menafsirkan kurva lito untuk identifikasi. Namun perhatian yang Demikian pula, GR juga menunjukkan kecenderungan de de dengan peningkatan pasir. Kessler 100
36 cermat diperlukan untuk menafsirkan litofasies dan itu tidak dapat dilakukan tanpa pengetahuan dan Sachs (1995) [6] menggunakan log GR dan karakteristik seismik untuk mempelajari proses 101
37 tentang log lumpur / litologi sampel pemotongan sumur. Hal inilah yang menjadi alasan utama sedimen batupasir Irlandia. Chow dkk. (2005) [4] menggunakan fasies log GR dari sembilan 102
38 mengapa GR log selalu diartikan sebagai hubungan antara log lumpur, kondisi lubang bor 103
sumur untuk mencerminkan profil vertikal ukuran butir dan untuk menyimpulkan
39 104
(caliper log, ukuran bit) dan log wireline lainnya (potensi spontan paleo-lingkungan dari Erchungchi “ SEBUAH ”
40 105
41 106
42 107
Anggota di daerah Hsinyin dan Pachanchi di Taiwan dan dianggap sebagai metode yang paling
43 108
44 cocok untuk interpretasi fasies jika inti batuan tidak ada. Namun, pemahaman tentang 109
45 “ SP ” dan sonik khususnya) yang biasanya berjalan paralel dengan log GR. lingkungan pengendapan laut adalah alat dasar untuk flu burung 110
46 111
47 Hadirnya sejumlah buku dan literatur tentang interpretasi wireline dengan angka relasi e analisis fasies delta ( Gambar 1 ). Kebanyakan GR digunakan sebagai motif kayu gelondongan 112
48 matematis. Tetapi makalah ini menekankan pada pendekatan praktis aplikasi GR di bidang umum untuk menginterpretasikan fasies sedimen pasir dan serpih. 113
49 sedimentologi terapan untuk interpretasi dan identifikasi berbagai fasies dengan tujuan berbagi 114
50 115
pengetahuan untuk mahasiswa, pemula dan profesional PetroleumGeosciences. Contoh praktis Berikut adalah lima jenis kurva log yang dibahas secara singkat dengan karakteristiknya
51 116
kayu gelondongan telah didiskusikan dari Cekungan Indus Tengah dan Bawah Pakistan. dalam Tabel 1 .
52 117
53 118
a) Bentuk silinder / gerbong
54 119
b) Bentuk corong
55 120
56 c) Bentuk lonceng 121
57 d) Bentuk busur 122
58 e) Bentuknya tidak beraturan 123
59 2. Sumber radioaktif alami 124
60 125
61 Russell (1944) [10] dan Bigelow (1992) [2] diamati 3.1. Cylindrical/boxcar shape 126
Q2
62 127
radioactive source in most of sedimentary rocks. Evaporates (NaCl salt, anhydrites) and coals
63 128
typically have low levels of GR radiation and contents of GR radiation increases with shale This type of log shape is characterized by sharp boundaries at the upper and
64 129
content due to presence of potassium. Marine shale bottomboundaries with relatively consistent gamma log readings which indicate consistent
65 130
lithology

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 3/12

g e o d e s y and g e o d ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2 3

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
Fig. 1 e Morphology of marine environment from beech to shelf edge to continental slope is basic principle for understanding of associated depositional environments. Fine grain
59 124
sediments deposits at deeper part and coarse sediments in shallower part of oceans.
60 125
61 126
62 127
63 128
( Fig. 2 ). In the simple words cylindrical/boxcar trends shows uniform lithology overall. 3.1.1. Characteristic
64 129
Sharp top and base with consistent trend of GR values.
65 130

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 g
coc
nt tre
a n e
ra siste d n a e
s anan d
d n a r db n l/b n
in ytod b
o fa

6 g
0 ll o
.0 l
6 e
.0w
6
1 s ic
0a
.2
gs b
oa
e
g
.o g
/j l
6)
1 R
0G
.1(
0 y
1 a
/R
rg
o
i. m
o
.da
xG
d f
:// o
tp n
t t io
ha
),t
6r e
1p
0 r
2
(t e
s in
ic
m ei
ac
n
y fa
d
o ry
e ta
G n
d e
n
a im
y d
s e
e
d l.,S
o a
e
G t
, ,e
n A
ta r
is
k z
a a
P
f :N
o s
in s
s s
a
B re
s p
u in
d
In
r
e
w
o
L
d
n
a
l
tra
n
e
C
o e n) u n a
g , an
n
r t
se x
d

in
s

e
e

le

rtic
a
is
th

ite
c
se
a
le
P
fiete ic
e ee
s), lith
w s e
lta ll, h s
, f sh fl o
ith
a
tid eu lo p a
lf v
e n
a ia g d
y

098
3111
1227654321 12 12 12 12 1

56666655555555554444444444333333333322222222221111111111987654321
64321098765432109876543210987654321098765432109876543210
l l
a
v
a
rie
su b C Gu A P
a re ra p b ro
ty

21 22
b r ru
m , v i wa g
d a n ra
a p o
e sse sr t d F
rin f
zi d
lta
to a u o
e sp
e tr p
tio n th
fro
i en
n n
fa w n
n
la
cd e e
n
t,
y re ith l r
lo ,
a
s lo
sh riv
c h
b se
o a g
e o e s a p
r s
re rse e h
m
fa a
o n p

0
29 1
1 11 11 11 11 1
c
e u in
, th e
g s
re

87654
la
tiv
p b F Gu A R
ro a lu ra p b e
r, ru tro e
x v iw
im d ia n a to
p g
e l sr t ra
a lta p zi d b th
B
11
1 11

l o e tr a d
d ic in se a e e
e de tio ll
3 1 12 11 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 82818 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6

e d t en s
p istrib b cd w
n s e
a re ith h d
se r
, a a im
a p
10 19 0876543

se
, u tid fi e
se ta s n e
a in n
ttin rie l to
p g
s o lo
g , in
g
1000001

t ica

l
re
ea tra Ss c Id P
nn ae h C tl o e la
vd n nq aepe tro
S
iro m du na a tio
sg
ye gn lly
g
y
ni re e in ra
m n
on
mx e ss fc in g ro
d m s
fe u h
ed sh fr tu in
n iv op n e ip
t tid e oo w d g tric
rmd ir a e & (m
a sh e
00 09876543210987654321098765432109876

d
l bt
rd re a
fl e a o ty b l o
a lf
r p in t a tro
s d
ts sa , g re se
h ify
u n g a
n d a ra
d
p n p
d d e a
s in fte
g
r
[3
,4
c tid F sa In G Irre A ,1
a lu g
n n tR g
1
a v e S ,1
y l d rl g ra
o fl
ia s -o u e 2
n l bg la d rra
a e in ]).
fi t fl d r
, o g te
ll d o d p
e e a sh
b
d d tte d
p /s
ris sh a
la rn p a
fl in a
/sp
e w
o le
w, m 's to
ik
ai a e o
nx n s th
de d d
o
f
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 5/12

g e o d e s y and g e o d ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2 5

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 Fig. 2 e Cylindrical/box shaped logs are characterized by sharp boundaries at the upper and 87
23 bottom boundaries with relatively consistent gamma log readings which indicate consistent 88
24 lithology. Salt in lagoon environment is good example. 89
25 90
26 Fig. 3 e Rock salt with left boxcar/cylindrical GR log trend in Marot-1 well drilled in Punjab 91
27 platform, Middle Indus Basin, Pakistan (modify after Ahmad et al., 2013 [1] ). 92
28 93
29 94
3.1.2. Depositional environment
30 95
Cant (1992) [3] defined cylindrical trend as clean trend and considered aeolian (sand
31 funnel shape environment. While Crevasse splay, river mouth bar, delta front, shoreface, 96
dunes), fluvial channels, carbonate shelf (thick carbonate), reef, submarine canyon fill as suitable
32 submarine fan lobe may also indicate depositional environment of funnel shapes [3] . If trend of 97
33 environment of cylindrical/boxcar shape. Selley (1978) [11] 98
coarsening upward is not clean and trend of funnel shape is serrated, lithology is interpreted as
34 99
varying lithology. Change in irregular trend of GR in shoreface sand of Fig. 4 is due to
35 considered (a) tidal sands, (b) grain flow fill and (c) prograding delta distributaries channels as 100
inter-bedding of fine grain beds.
36 favorable sedimentary environment for funnel shape environment in clastics. 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
3.1.3. Types of cylindrical/boxcar shape
40 3.2.3. Types of funnel shape 105
Siddiqui et al. (2013) [12] considered the muddy tidal flat as favorable depositional
41 Chow et al. (2005) [4] identified two types of funnel shapes as (i) thick funnel shape 106
environment for consistent trend of GR in right side; showing high value of GR in shale and
42 succession and (ii) thin funnel shape succession in the Erchungchi Formation, Hsinyin, 107
called as right boxcar. Similarly, consistent trend of GR with low value is called as left boxcar.
43 SWTaiwan. All thin funnel-shaped successions are less than 8 m, which interpreted as crevasse 108
Thick salt (Pre Cambrian) in Marot-1 well drilled in Punjab platform, Indus Basin, Pakistan is a
44 splay of a deltaic channel; seems too thin to interpret prograding delta. 109
45 good example of left boxcar trend in GR ( Fig. 3 ). 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 3.2. Funnel shape 3.3. Bell shape 114
50 115
51 116
In the funnel shape, GR values decrease upward consistently frommaximum value of log In the bell shape, GR values increases upward consistently fromminimum value of log
52 117
reading in trend, or may decrease relatively from maximum values, indicating decrease of shale reading in trend, or may increases relatively from minimum values, indicating increasing shale
53 118
content, forming coarsening upward trend overall. The funnel motif indicates coarsening or content, forming fining upward trend. The Fig. 5 is showing fining upward trend in IEDS
54 119
cleaning upwards of thick sediments with rapid deposition in clastics [4] . Sequence of Goru Formation (Late Cretaceous) of Zindapir-1 well drilled in Zindapir Anticline,
55 120
56 eastern Sulaiman Fold belt, Pakistanwith sharp base. 121
57 122
58 123
59 3.2.1. Characteristic 124
60 Coarsening upward trend with abrupt top. 3.3.1. Characteristic 125
61 Fining upward trend with abrupt base. 126
62 127
3.2.2. Depositional environment
63 128
Selley (1978) [11] considered (a) regressive barrier bars, (b) prograding submarine fans and 3.3.2. Depositional environment
64 129
(c) prograding deltas or crevasse splay favorable sedimentary environment for The bell-shaped successions are usually indicative of a transgressive sand, tidal channel or
65 130
deep tidal channel and

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 6/12

6 g e o d e s y and g e od ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
Fig. 6 e Relatively left bow shaped trend in IEDS 8 Sand (Goru Formation of Early
20 85
Cretaceous) in Zindapir-1 well drilled in Central Indus Basin, Pakistan.
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
Fig. 4 e Relatively coarsening upward trend in IEDS Sequence of Goru Formation (Late
25 90
Cretaceous) Zindapir-1 well drilled in Zindapir Anticline, eastern Sulaiman Lower Indus Basin, trend of similar grain size without sharp breaks. The opposite of this, the trend is right bow
26 91
Pakistan. shape. Fig. 6 is showing relatively left bow shaped trend in IEDS 8 Goru Sand of Zindapir-1 well
27 92
drilled in Central Indus Basin, Pakistan.
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
3.5. Irregular shape
32 97
33 98
34 Irregular shaped GR logmotifs is consisted of fluctuated GR reading with high and low 99
35 values over very short interval of vertical well profile. Such trends show variation of lithology in 100
36 laminated beds, beds of shale and sand. Such trend may represent the slope deposits and some 101
37 time called as turbidities. Such depositsmay also have interpreted as flowof debris along slope. 102
38 However careful attention is required for concluding remarks. Fig. 7 is showing Irregular trend 103
39 104
inAllozai Formation of Zindapir-1 well.
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 Fig. 5 e Relatively fining upward trend badin shale (Goru Formation of Early Cretaceous) of 111
47 112
Jagir-4 well drilled in Badin Monocline, Lower Indus Basin, Pakistan.
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 fluvial or deltaic channel. Fluvial point bar, tidal point bar, deep sea channels, braided streams, 117
53 118
detail distributaries, proximal deep sea setting are associated with bell shape in literature. The
54 119
bell shaped successions with carbonaceous detritus are deposited in environments of fluvial or
55 120
deltaic channels [11] . If trend of fining upward is not clean and trend of bell shape is serrated,
56 121
and lithology is interpreted as varying lithology.
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
3.4. Bow shape
63 128
Fig. 7 e Irregular trend in Allozai Formation of Zindapir-1 well drilled in Sulaiman Fold belt,
64 129
This shape is formed as gradual cleaning upward sequence which changes from its Middle Indus Basin, Pakistan.
65 130
maximum value with dirtying-up

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 7/12

g e o d e s y and g e o d ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2 7

1 66
2 4. Indication of deposition break 67
3 68
4 GR log is good indicator of deposition break and it is indicated by sharp change in depth 69
5 showing sharp change in lithology/depositional system. However careful attention is required to 70
6 conclude deposition break and require regional knowledge of stratigraphic framework of study 71
7 area. Actually marking of unconformity is art. In this paper, we discussed three example of 72
8 73
showing depositional break bymissing facies.
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
a) Let's suppose there is sharp contrast of GR log trend along the boundaries of two formations;
13 78
14 interpreting that shallow marine environment is overlain by deep marine setting or vice 79
15 versa. This shows that transitional zone of sedimentary facies between two deposition 80
16 system is missing. Best example is carbonates of Parh Formation which is overlain by 81
17 basinal facies of Goru Formation in Zindapir-1 ( Fig. 8 ) of Sulaiman Fold belt and interpreted 82
18 as sequence boundary (SB2) by Iqbal et al., 2011 [8] showing missing upper Goru facies in 83
19 84
Zindapir-1 well.
20 85
21 86
22 Fig. 9 e Shoreface to inner shelf facies of Nagur Formation (Precambrian) is separated from 87
23 overlying evaporite of basal Bilara Formation (Precambrian) by sharp contrast of GR. 88
b) Abrupt change of GR indicate different environment of deposition by sharp break. In Punjab
24 89
25 platform, Marot-1, Nagur Formation is separated from overlying evaporite of basal Bilara 90
26 Formation (Precambrian) by sharp contrast of GR ( Fig. 9 ). In simple words, back stepping of 91
27 shoreline deposited evaporite in lagoon environment after deposition of Nagur Formation. 92
nonconformity. Log motif of GR has sharp contrast between overlying sedimentary rock and
28 The depositional break is indicated by sharp change in GR log motifs of two different 93
29 underlying crystalline rock. Fig. 10 is showing sharp contrast of GR between basement and 94
depositional system.
30 overlying formation. 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
c) Sharp contrast of GR log motif due to basement rocks and overlying younger sedimentary
34 5. Shoaling up sequence in carbonates 99
rocks is good indication of
35 100
36 Iqbal et al. (2011) [8] has discussed the shoaling up sequence by using GR logs, porosity 101
37 102
logs and mud logs. Value of GR in pure limestone is low as compared to clastics. In high energy
38 103
carbonates, grain size is bigger with brighter chances of iolites and nodules or particles of sands
39 104
or clays
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
63 128
Fig. 10 e Nonconformity between igneous basement rock (Precambrian) and overlying
64 129
Fig. 8 e Carbonate of Chiltan (Jurassic) is overlain by basinal facies of Goru Precambrian evaporites of Hanseran Formation in Marot-1 of Punjab platform.
65 130
Formation.

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 8/12

8 g e o d e s y and g e od ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2

1 Siltstone: Whitish grey, greenish grey, dark greenish grey, grey, dark grey, light green, at 66
2 places blackish grey, brownish grey, firm to medium hard, sub blocky, in parts blocky, sub platy. 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
Marl: Off white, whitish grey, white, light grey, firm to mediumhard, i/p soft, pasty, i/p soluble,
6 71
sub blocky to blocky, silty, grading to argillaceous lime stone.
7 72
8 73
Argillaceous Limestone: Whitish grey, creamy, off white, i/ p light grey, medium hard, in
9 74
10 parts soft, microcrystalline to cryptocrystalline, compact, dense, sub blocky, sub platy to play, 75
11 argillaceous, marly, non-fossiliferous. 76
12 77
13 Limestone: Creamy, off white, grey, medium hard, in parts hard, microcrystalline to 78
14 cryptocrystalline, compact, dense, sub blocky, sub platy, non-fossiliferous. 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
b) Inner shelf to outer shelf
18 83
19 84
Shale: Dark grey, blackish grey, brownish grey, dark brownish grey, brown, earthy brown,
20 85
dark grey to blackish, medium hard to hard, in parts firm, well indurated, sub fissile to fissile,
21 86
22 splintery, sub blocky to blocky, sub platy, silty, in parts. 87
23 88
24 89
25 Siltstone: Dark grey, grey, blackish grey, dark greenish grey, whitish grey, brownish grey, 90
26 brown, at places greenish grey, dark green, medium hard to hard, in parts firm, in parts very 91
27 92
hard, well consolidated, sub blocky, in parts blocky, sub platy, argillaceous, glauconitic, pyretic,
28 93
slightly to non calcareous.
29 94
30 95
Fig. 11 e GR curve of Zindapir-1 well is showing shoaling up sequence in Chiltan Formation
31 96
(Increase in neutron porosity “ NPHI ” shows increase in grain size) of Jurassic age. Probably Limestone: Creamy, off white, grey, mediumhard, i/p hard, microcrystalline to
32 97
concentric rings of carbonate are present around the grain of sand/clay particle as one of cryptocrystalline, compact, dense, sub blocky, sub platy, non-fossiliferous.
33 98
34 reasoning (Modify after [8] ). 99
35 Claystone: Light brown, earthy brown, soft to firm, sticky, pasty, slightly soluble, hydrophilic, 100
36 in parts traces of limestone, silty, non calcareous. 101
37 102
38 along the cements between grains. As a result, GR log increase with neutron porosity showing 103
39 increase in grain size ( Fig. 11 ). GR shows deflection in GR logs with increase of porosity. 104
c) Shoreface sand
40 105
41 106
Sandstone: Dirty white, whitish grey, yellowish grey, yellowish white, translucent, i/p
42 107
transparent, quartzose, abrasive, medium hard to hard, very fine to fine grained, in parts medium
43 108
44
6. Case study e facies interpretation of Goru grained, sub angular to sub rounded, well to moderately sorted, fairly to well cemented, siliceous,
109
45 Formation in Zindapir structure, eastern Sulaiman Fold belt, Central Indus in parts argillaceous, pyretic, glauconitic, in parts mafic, slightly to non calcareous, at places 110
46 Basin Pakistan traces of limestone were observed, grading to siltstone. 111
47 112
48 There are three types of litho facies identified on the basis of mud logs, wireline logmotifs 113
49 and regional study in Zindapir Anticline. Two wells Zindapir x-1 and Well X-1 are used for study 114
50 115
which were drilled in Zindapir structure, eastern Sulaiman Fold belt, Central Indus Basin Siltstone: Dark brown, brownish grey, grey, dark grey, whitish grey, medium hard to hard,
51 116
Pakistan. IEDS classification is based on biostratigraphy using regional sequence stratigraphy of well consolidated, sub blocky to blocky, glauconitic in parts pyritic, highly argillaceous, slightly to
52 117
Central and Lower basin study and discussed in detail in Refs. [7,9] . Facies interpretation is non calcareous, grading to very fine grained sandstone.
53 118
based on grain size analysis using GR logs as shown in Fig. 1 and Table 1 and well cutting
54 119
lithology in mud logs. Detail of interpreted facies is given below and facies interpretation is given
55 120
56 in Fig. 12 . 121
57 122
58 7. Case study e GR log based facies modeling 123
59 of Sembar Goru from Punjab platform (east) and Sulaiman Fold belt 124
60 (west) of Central Indus Basin, Pakistan 125
61 a) Outer shelf 126
62 127
63 128
Shale: Dark grey to grey light grey, medium hard, well indurated, sub fissile to fissile, sub The study area consists of Sulaiman Fold belt of Pakistan and Punjab platform of Central
64 129
blocky to blocky, sub platy to platy. Indus Basin Pakistan. Punjab platform separated from Sulaiman Fold belt by Zindapir
65 130

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 9/12

g e o d e s y and g e o d ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2 9

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 Fig. 12 e Facies interpretation of Goru Formation in Zindapir-1 and Well X-1; showing correlation between GR Litho Facies. Scale of Wireline Logs with coloring scheme is given separately. 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 Anticlinorium with faulted contact. Study area is filled by stratigraphic succession from Two wells Zindapir-1 and Ahmedpur-1 were selected. Initially litho-facies of age equivalent 121
57 Precambrian to recent sediments in such way that various succession of Mesozoic truncated facies of two wells were identified ( Fig. 13 ). After identification of litho-facies, simple correlation of 122
58 along Precambrian succession in east of Punjab platform along gently dipping monocline. A two wells Zindapir-1 and Ahmedpur1 were carried out. Reservoir quality of sands of Goru 123
59 Sembar-Goru Formation (Cretaceous age) is group of sedimentary package belonging to fluvial Formation is extended between two wells according to identified litho-facies. Results show that 124
60 deltaic system in study area. I.E.D.S divided the sedimentary package of Sembar-Goru package Sembar- Goru are sequences of various progrades which passes from shallow marine facies to 125
61 into nine major sedimentary sequences on the basis of paleontological data [7,9] . basinal facies. Regional study shows that Sembar basinal is not presented in Zindapir- 126
62 127
63 128
64 129
65 130

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 10/12

10 g e o d e s y and g e od ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2

1 and shown by presence of shallow facies of shoreface sand and also shown by wireline Formation is unconformable and discussed in Fig. 14 . Similarly, lower contact of Sembar-Goru of 66
2 correlation by Nazeer et al. [9] . Cretaceous with underlying Chiltan carbonate is unconformable and shown as sharp contact of 67
3 GR log motifs with change in lithology. The trend of Chiltan limestone has box car trend. 68
4 69
Upper contact of Top Goru is unconformable because there is sharp contact between Top
5 70
Goru and overlying Parh
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 127
63 128
64 129
65 130
Fig. 13 e Wireline correlation of Zindapir-1 and Ahmedpur-1.

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 11/12

g e o d e s y and g e o d ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2 11

1 66
2 67
3 68
4 69
5 70
6 71
7 72
8 73
9 74
10 75
11 76
12 77
13 78
14 79
15 80
16 81
17 82
18 83
19 84
20 85
21 86
22 87
23 88
24 89
25 90
26 91
27 92
28 93
29 94
30 95
31 96
32 97
33 98
34 99
35 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 104
40 105
41 106
42 107
43 108
44 109
45 110
46 111
47 112
48 113
49 114
50 115
51 116
52 117
53 118
54 119
55 120
56 121
57 122
58 123
59 124
60 125
61 126
62 Fig. 14 e Regional depositional model of Sembar- Goru Formation in Central Indus Basin. 127
63 128
64 129
65 130

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006
 GEOG116_proof ■ 16 November 2016 ■ 12/12

12 g e o d e s y and g e od ynam i c s 2 0 1 6 , v o l x no x , 1 e 1 2

1 [8] Iqbal M, Nazeer A, Ahmad H, Murtaza G, 2011, Hydrocarbon 66

2 8. Conclusions exploration perspective in Middle Jurassic-Early Cretaceous Reservoirs in the Sulaiman 67
3 Fold Belt, Pakistan, Proceedings PAPG/SPE Annual Technical Conference 2011, 68
4 a) GR trends is a basic logging curve used to interpret the sedimentary facies in the subsurface Islamabad, Pakistan. 69
5 as major indicator of lithology. 70
6 [9] Nazeer A, Solangi SH, Brohi IA, Usmani P, Napar LD, 71
Jhangir M, et al. Hydrocarbon potential of Zinda Pir Anticline, Eastern Sulaiman Foldbelt,
7 b) GR log is a basic tool to prepare litho curves. 72
Middle Indus Basin, Pakistan. Pak J Hydrocarbon Res June 2012 22 & 23.
8 73
c) Shapes of GR well-log curve is a basic tool to interpret depositional facies because shape of
9 74
log is directly related to. [10] Russell WL. The total gamma ray activity of sedimentary
10 75
rocks as indicated by Geiger counter determinations. Geophysics
11 76
d) The grain size of rock successions. 1944;9(2):180 e 216.
12 77
[11] Selley RC. Concepts and methods of subsurface facies
e) Five different log curve shapes of GR defined by Nazeer et al. [9] , may be used to interpret
13 78
analysis: American Association of Petroleum Geologists. Contin Educ Course Notes
14 the depositional environment. 79
Ser 1978;9. 82 p.
15 80
[12] Siddiqui NA, El- Ghali MA, Mijinyawa A, ben-Awuah J.
16 f) Sharp contrast of GR may indicate depositional break. Depositional Environment of Shallow-Marine Sandstones from Outcrop Gamma-Ray 81
17 g) GR log may be used to interpret subsurface facies. Logs, Belait Formation, Meragang Beach, Brunei Darussalam. Res J Environ Earth Sci 82
18 h) Mud log is always adding additional benefit during subsurface interpretation using GR log. 2013;5(6):305 e 24. 83
19 84
20 [13] Tzortzis M, Tsertos H. Gamma-ray measurements of 85
21 naturally occurring radioactive samples from Cyprus characteristic geological rocks, 86
22 UCY PHY 02/02. Cyprus: Department of Physics, University of Cyprus; 2002. 87
23 88
24 Q3 Uncited reference 89
25 90
26 [5] . 91
Adeel Nazeer got his B.Sc andM.Sc inApplied Geology from
27 University of Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan. He is serving in Pakistan 92
28 Petroleum Limited as Senior Geologist. He served in various 93
29 projects of oil industry. He is registeredasCertifiedProfessional 94
Acknowledgements
30 Geologist (CPG) 95
31 96
32 We thank Mr. Tom Darin (GS Software Inc., USA) for providing free license and support for of American Institute of Professional Geologist. He also 97
33 evaluating the wireline. We are thankful to University of Sindh for providingWire Line Logs. We represents GS Software, USA in Pakistan. He is a Ph.D. 98
34 also acknowledge Dewan Petroleum Limited for providing data for phD Research Project. ResearchScholar from Centre for Pure and Applied Geology, 99
35 University of Sindh, Jamshoro, Pakistan. 100
36 101
37 102
38 103
39 references Shabeer Ahmed Abbassi is a Ph.D. 104
40 Research Scholar from Centre for Pure and Applied Geology, 105
41 University of Sindh, Jamshoro, Pakistan. He is doing research 106
42 on tectonic evolution of structures and their hydrocarbon 107
[1] Ahmad A, Farooq M, Javed T, Mir A, Ali M, 2013, Exploring the
43 potential in southern Indus Basin, Pakistan. He got his master in 108
infra-Cambrian petroleum system in Punjab platform-lesson learnt from Bahawalpur X-1,
44 Geophysics from Department of Earth Sciences, Quaid-e-Azam, 109
2013, Proceedings PAPG/SPE Annual Technical Conference 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan.
45 University, Islamabad. He is active member of American 110
[2] Bigelow EL. Introduction to wireline log analysis. Houston,
46 Association of Petroleum Geoscientists 111
47 Texas: Western Atlas International; 1992. 112
48 [3] Cant DJ. Subsurface facies analysis. In: Walker RG, James NP, 113
49 editors. Facies models, response to sea level changes; 1992. 114
(AAPG) and Society of Exploration Geophysicists (SEG). He also contributed many publications
50 p. 27 e 45. Geol. Assoc. Canada. 115
as author and co-author.
51 [4] Chow JJ, Ming-Ching Li, Fuh S. Geophysical well log study on 116
52 the paleoenvironment of the hydrocarbon producing zones in the Erchungchi Formation, 117
53 Hsinyin, SW Taiwan. TAO 2005;16(3):531 e 43. 118
54 Professor Dr Sarfraz Hussain Solangi is Meritorious Professor 119
[5] Engler TW. Lecture notes for PET 37. 2012. http://infohost. inUniversity of Sindh, Jamshoro, Pakistan and also acting as
55 120
nmt.edu/~petro/faculty/Engler370/fmev-chap7-GR.pdf . Pro Vice Chancellor, Thatta Campus University of Sindh,
56 121
[6] Kessaelar lG, Sach SD. Depositional setting and sequence Jamshoro, Pakistan. He obtained hismasters fromCentre
57 122
stratigraphic implications of the Upper Sinemurian (Lower Jurassic) sandstone interval, forPureandApplied
58 123
North Celtic Sea/St George's Channel Basins, offshore Ireland. Geol Soc Lond Spec
59 124
Publ January 1995;93(1):171 e 92. Geology, University of Sindh, Jamshoro, Pakistan and Ph.D
60 125
degree in Sedimentology andPostDoctorate
61 126
[7] Integrated Exploration and Development Services, 1995, A fromUniversityofWales,
62 127
sequence stratigraphic study of Lower Goru-Sembar formations of Lower and Middle United Kingdom. He has published more than 60 research
63 128
Indus Basin of Pakistan and Rajasthan. Multi-client study (Unpublished). articles.
64 129
65 130

Please cite this article in press as: Nazeer A, et al., Sedimentary facies interpretation of Gamma Ray (GR) log as basic well logs in Central and Lower Indus Basin of Pakistan, Geodesy and
Geodynamics (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2016.06.006