UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA

GRADUATE COLLEGE

PETROPHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BARNETT SHALE PLAY


A THESIS
SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE





BY
SAGAR KALE
Norman, Oklahoma
2009
PETROPHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF BARNETT SHALE PLAY




A THESIS APPROVED FOR THE
MEWBOURNE SCHOOL OF PETROLEUM AND GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING



BY



Dr. Chandra Rai, Chair



Dr. Carl Sondergeld



Dr. Richard Sigal











































Copyright by SAGAR KALE 2009
All Rights Reserved.




















To my parents and sister for their motivation & constant support and to my wife for
her encouragement and patience
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to begin by expressing sincere gratitude to the members of my committee,
Dr. Chandra Rai, Dr. Carl Sondergeld and Dr. Richard Sigal, for their constructive
criticism and invaluable advice. I thank them for regularly taking time off their busy
schedule for evaluating my work at every stage. A successful completion of this work
wouldnt have been possible without their help. I also thank Dr. Deepak Devegowda
for his help with the cluster analysis exercise.
I would like to express sincere thanks to Mr. Gary Stowe and Mr. Bruce Spears for
teaching me how to operate various equipments at Integrated Core Characterization
Center. I also thank Mr. Moin Khan for helping me make the petrophysical
measurements on Barnett shale samples. My thanks to fellow graduate students,
undergraduate students at IC
3
lab as well as the faculty and the staff at Mewbourne
School of Petroleum and Geological Engineering for their help all through my
Masters.
Last but not the least, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my parents and
my sister who believed in me and encouraged me to take up higher studies. I can not
thank them enough for their selfless love and affection. My accomplishments so far
are as much theirs as they are mine. I take this opportunity to say a big Thank you to
my wife, Dhanashree, who has been a constant source of inspiration throughout my
work.
Sagar Kale

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES ..viii
LIST OF TABLES .....xii
ABSTRACT ...xiii
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Natural gas industry in USA 1
1.2 Introduction to shales and their importance as a resource ...2
1.3 Challenges in petrophysical characterization of shale gas play ...5
1.4 Purpose and scope of the study 6
1.5 Geology of Barnett shale Fort Worth basin ..7
2. LITERATURE REVIEW .12
2.1 Definition of mudrocks and shales .12
2.2 Mineralogy and clay structure ....13
2.3 Kerogen and its types .16
2.4 Total organic carbon and thermal maturity 18
2.5 LECO Method for estimating TOC ...21
2.6 Rock-Eval pyrolysis/oxidation technique for estimating TOC and thermal
maturity 22
2.7 Vitrinite reflectance measurement .26
vi
2.8 Geochemical data reported in Barnett shale ...27
2.9 Rock typing techniques ..28
2.9.1 Rock Quality Index (RQI) and Flow Zone Indicator (FZI)
technique for rock typing .28
2.9.2 Winlands R
35
approach ..30
2.9.3 Pitmans modification of Winlands approach ...30
2.9.4 Prediction of permeability from Hg injection data .31
2.10 Rock type through Principal Component and Cluster Analysis ..35
2.10.1 Principal Component analysis ...35
2.10.2 Cluster analysis .36
3. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE ...37
3.1 Sampling procedure ...37
3.2 Helium porosity, bulk and grain volume measurement .38
3.3 FTIR mineralogy ....41
3.4 Mercury injection capillary pressure measurement ...44
3.5 Total organic carbon (TOC) measurement 51
4. OBSERVATION AND RESULTS ...53
4.1 Helium porosity . 53
vii
4.2 FTIR mineralogy 54
4.3 Total organic carbon (TOC) and thermal maturity 60
4.4 Mercury injection capillary pressure measurement ...62
4.5 Classification of lithofacies 66
4.6 Rock typing 70
4.7 Rock typing through Principal Component & Cluster analysis .78
4.8 SEM study of rock types 88
4.9 Correlation of petrofacies with production data .90
4.10 Summary of observations and results ..94
4.11 Field Applications 97
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...98
5.1 Conclusions 98
5.2 Recommendations ..99
REFERENCES .......101
APPENDIX A ..106
APPENDIX B ..112



viii
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 Production from six major shale plays from United States over last ten years (NCI,
2008) ..3
1.2 Number of producing wells each year in Barnett shale and timeline of major
modifications in drilling and completion techniques (Martineau, 2007) ...4
1.3 Map of Barnett shale play showing geographic, tectonic features and variation in
thickness of Barnett shale (Pollastro, 2003) ...8
1.4 Location map of study wells (Modified after Singh, 2008) ...10
1.5 Generalized stratigraphic column and stratigraphic subdivision of Barnett shale
(Modified after Pollastro, 2003 and Montgomery et al., 2005)11
2.1 Sheet structure of illite (Grim, 1968) .14
2.2 Sheet structure of smectite (Grim, 1968) ...15
2.3 Sheet structure of kaolinite (Grim, 1968) ..16
2.4 Model of organic carbon distribution (Jarvie, 1991) .19
2.5 Conversion of convertible organic matter into EOM and secondary cracking of oil
into gas with increasing thermal maturation (Modified after Jarvie, 2004) .21
2.6 Van Krevelen diagram (Emeis and Kvenvolden, 1986) ........................................24
2.7 Three Stages in Rock-Eval Pyrolysis (Modified after Jarvie, 2004) ..................25
2.8 Change in color and vitrinite reflectivity with increasing thermal maturation in
Barnett shale samples (Modified after Jarvie, 2004) ...26
ix
3.1 Barnett shale core images ..38
3.2 Histogram showing particle size distribution 40
3.3 Plasma asher setup for removing organic matter from the sample before FTIR
mineralogy measurement .44
3.4 Cumulative Hg intrusion plot showing real and false intrusion .47
3.5 Penetrometer and its components ......49
3.6 AutoPore IV machine used for running mercury injection measurement ..50
4.1 Histogram showing porosity variation of the dataset .....53
4.2 Waterfall chart showing mineralogy variation in all four wells 54
4.3 Contribution of each carbonate to overall carbonate content averaged over entire
dataset ...56
4.4 Contribution of each clay mineral to overall clay content averaged over entire
dataset ...57
4.5 Average mineral composition and standard deviation of the entire dataset ...57
4.6 Porosity variation with calcite content ...58
4.7 TOC variation with calcite content 59
4.8 Histogram showing calcite variation of the dataset ...60
4.9 Histogram showing TOC variation of the dataset ..61
4.10 Incremental and cumulative mercury intrusion plot for type A samples ..63
x
4.11 Incremental and cumulative mercury intrusion plot for type B samples ...63
4.12 Incremental and cumulative mercury intrusion plot for type C samples ...64
4.13 Lithofacies occurrence for the dataset ..67
4.14 Average porosity, TOC and calcite content of each lithofacies ...68
4.15 Average porosity, TOC and calcite content of three petrofacies .74
4.16 Porosity - TOC plot for all the samples from well C and well D ...75
4.17 Relationship between Hg rock types and petrofacies ..77
4.18 Relationship between principal components and percentage variance they explain
(11 variable case)..80
4.19 Pairwise scatterplot showing relationship of variables with each other and with
the three principal components (11 variable case)81
4.20 Relationship between principal components and percentage variance they explain
(5 variable case)83
4.21 Pairwise scatterplot showing relationship of variables with each other and with
the three principal components (5 variable case)......84
4.22 Average porosity, TOC and calcite content of three clusters ...87
4.23 Secondary electron image of petrofacies 1 sample using environmental scanning
electron microscope .88
4.24 Secondary electron image of petrofacies 2 sample using environmental scanning
electron microscope .89
xi
4.25 Secondary electron image of petrofacies 3 sample using environmental scanning
electron microscope .89















xii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 Thermal maturity data for all four wells ..61
Table 4.2 Porosity and TOC data for three Hg rock types ...69
Table 4.3 Mineralogy data for three Hg rock types .69
Table 4.4 Porosity and TOC data for three petrofacies 73
Table 4.5 Mineralogy data for three petrofacies ..73
Table 4.6 One to one correspondence between petrofacies and Hg rock types ...78
Table 4.7 Porosity and TOC data for three clusters .85
Table 4.8 Mineralogy data for three clusters ...85
Table 4.9 Relationship between clusters, petrofacies and Hg rock types 87
Table 4.10 Comparison of production data with petrofacies 1 thickness 91








xiii
ABSTRACT
With the contribution of shale gas towards the overall natural gas production in North
America increasing steadily, petrophysical characterization of these unconventional
plays has become extremely important for identifying sweet spots in the reservoir.
However; conventional techniques of rock typing, based on porosity permeability
cross-plots, do not work in shales due to a lack of dynamic range for these parameters
and the difficulties involved in a direct permeability measurement. In this exercise,
rock typing has been attempted by integrating geological core description with the
petrophysical measurements.
Petrophysical measurements are made on shale plugs recovered from four wells from
different parts of the Newark East field. Measurements of porosity, mineralogy and
total organic carbon (TOC) are made on approximately 800 plugs. Mercury injection
capillary pressure measurements are done on approximately 130 plugs to obtain a
dataset of petrophysical parameters for rock typing.
Based on core description, Singh (2008) identified 10 distinct lithofacies in the Barnett
shale that represented unique geological settings at the time of deposition. However,
she did not rank the lithofacies in terms of their importance towards gas production. I
have tried to bridge the gap between the geological core description and the well
productivity by supplementing the geological core description with the petrophysical
description of the core.
From the petrophysical measurements on the samples from all ten lithofacies, it is
observed that some of these lithofacies have similar petrophysical properties. That
xiv
presents an opportunity of combining them into fewer groups so that each group has
unique petrophysical properties. These groups are termed as petrofacies. Even
though the petrofacies have a narrow dynamic range for some of the petrophysical
parameters, they are distinct in terms of their calcite content. Porosity and TOC also
show a strong correlation with calcite as both of them decrease with increasing calcite
content.
Based on porosity, TOC and calcite content, I have reduced the 10 lithofacies into 3
petrofacies Samples from petrofacies 1 have 0-10% wt. calcite content with a porosity
range of 6.0-6.3% (average 6.1%) and a TOC of 4.7-5.0%. Petrofacies 2, with 10-25%
wt. calcite, has a porosity range of 5.8-6.3% (average 6.0%) with a TOC 3.4-3.8%.
Petrofacies-3, with over 25% wt. calcite, has a porosity range of 3.4-4.0% (average
3.7%) and a TOC from 1.6-1.9%.
After ranking the petrofacies on the basis of their petrophysical properties, it is
observed that petrofacies 1 represents calcite lean reservoir rock (<10% wt.) with the
highest porosity and TOC. The quartz content of petrofacies 1 is also the highest
making it ideal for initiating hydraulic fracture. Petrofacies 1 represents the reservoir
rock with the best petrophysical properties.
From Hg injection measurements, three distinct capillary pressure curves are
observed. They correlate very well with the three petrofacies with a few exceptions.
In order to verify if petrofacies 1 is also a better gas producer, I compared the
cumulative gas production of two vertical wells with similar completions with the
thickness of petrofacies 1 over the perforated interval. It is observed that the well with
xv
long and nearly continuous intervals of petrofacies 1, over the perforated zone,
produces better than the well where petrofacies 1 is discontinuous and separated by
thick intervals of petrofacies 2 and 3 over the perforated zone. This proves that
petrofacies 1 not only has the best petrophysical properties; it is a better gas producer
as well.
Petrofacies 1 represents the best reservoir rock in the field.
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Natural gas industry in USA:
The importance of natural gas in the energy industry has increased steadily. Relative
abundance of natural gas and its clean burning characteristics make it a very attractive
energy resource. Natural gas finds extensive use in residential and commercial
applications, for power generation and as an alternative transportation fuel.
However for a very long time natural gas production was not actively pursued mainly
due to lack of infrastructure for transporting it to its end users. Natural gas associated
with oil production was considered nuisance and used to be flared. However with the
growing natural gas pipeline network, advent of specialized ships for transporting
natural gas as LNG, depleting oil reserves and stringent anti flaring regulations have
made natural gas production attractive. In United States, where extensive natural gas
pipeline network is already in place, we now see many independent operators dealing
solely with natural gas.
USA is one of the largest producers of natural gas with annual natural gas production
of 20.6 TCF in year 2008. EIA forecasts production of 25.4 TCF by 2030 (Annual
Energy Outlook, 2009). US dry natural gas reserves are estimated as 1680 TCF as of
year-end 2007 with over 40% contribution coming from unconventional resources
such as tight gas sands, shale gas and coal bed methane. Shale gas alone contributes
274 TCF, over 16% of total reserves. However some estimate that this value can be as
high as 842 TCF, over 37% of total reserves. (NCI, 2008)
2
1.2 Introduction to shales and their importance as a resource:
Shales are defined as laminated sediments containing very fine grade (less than 4
micron in size) particles predominantly made of clays. Shales are the most common
sedimentary rocks in the earths curst and they are characterized by low porosities and
nano-darcy permeabilities. The first commercial gas well drilled in USA was actually
producing from shales. It was drilled in 1821 in Fredonia, New York. However, for a
very long time after that, sandstones and carbonates overshadowed shales as reservoir
rocks. Shales, due to their ultra-low permeability, were only considered as geological
seals; preventing hydrocarbon escape from conventional reservoirs. They were drilled
through to reach conventional sandstone or carbonate reservoirs. Since shales were not
treated as reservoir rocks, they were never studied in detail.
However shales can serve as a source and a reservoir rock if they are rich in organic
matter. The organic matter, under anaerobic conditions, transforms into high
molecular weight polymeric compounds called kerogen due to bacterial action. At
high pressures and temperatures, kerogen transforms into liquid hydrocarbons and
further into methane depending on prevailing temperature and pressure (Tiab and
Donaldson, 2004). This gas is then either adsorbed on the surface of the organic matter
or clay, escapes through the network of natural fractures or remains within the pores of
the shale (Frantz, 2005). Shales can hold enormous amount of free and adsorbed gas,
most of which can be commercially recovered through modern drilling and completion
techniques. Fig.1.1 shows natural gas production from six major shale gas plays in
mainland USA. It can be seen that natural gas production from Barnett shale far
exceeds that from other shale plays. Barnett has grown from 94 MMSCF/day to 3
3
BSCF/day over last 10 years, an increase of over 3000% (NCI, 2008). This increase in
production for Barnett shale also coincides with the modification in drilling and
completion techniques as shown in Fig.1.2.









Fig.1.1: Daily gas production from six major shale gas plays in USA over last ten years (NCI, 2008);
contribution of Barnett shale to overall shale gas production in United States has steadily increased over last ten
years
Over 6200 wells, both horizontal and vertical, are completed in Barnett; producing 2
BSCF/day natural gas by September 2006. After 1997, the wells were completed with
water fracturing and sand as proppant. The horizontal wells that are 1000 to 3500 ft
long are completed with multistage hydraulic fracturing (Martineau, 2007).



4








Fig.1.2: Number of producing wells in Barnett with time along with start periods of major completion and
drilling events (Martineau, 2007); operators started out drilling vertical wells and fracturing them with foam or
cross-linked gel in Barnett shale, by 1997 water fracturing replaced gel fracturing, by 1999 operators started
refracturing the wells that were originally gel fractured with water. It resulted into almost 60% increase in
recoverable reserves. By 2003, horizontal drilling became popular as it reduced the risk of fracturing water
bearing Ellenberger formation. Most of the drilling in Barnett since 2003 has been horizontal.
Although Barnett shale is also produced from Delaware basin in West Texas, it is the
Fort Worth basin in North-East Texas that contributes the most to overall gas
production from Barnett shale play. Data presented in Fig.1.1 and Fig.1.2 represents
Barnett shale from Fort Worth basin only.
Since shales are now considered as reservoir rocks with potential for significant gas
production; the interest in their petrophysical characterization, necessary for better
prediction of reserves and identification of gas rich zones, has grown tremendously.




5
1.3 Challenges in petrophysical characterization of shale gas play:
Petrophysical characterization of the reservoir aims to classify the reservoir rocks into
groups with unique petrophysical parameters. Such groups are known as rock types.
Since each rock type has a distinct range of petrophysical properties, it can be used for
distinguishing good reservoir rock from bad.
In conventional sandstones, rock types are identified from porosity-permeability cross-
plots. RQI (Rock Quality Index), Winlands R35 method use these cross-plots for rock
typing. (Various methods for rock typing, reported so far, are summarized in Chapter-
2 on literature review.) However porosity and permeability values from conventional
reservoirs typically have a very wide dynamic range which makes identifying rock
types from such cross-plots very easy. Rock types so identified usually differ by an
order of magnitude in permeability and have broad range for porosity.
Rock typing from porosity-permeability cross-plots is not feasible in shale gas
reservoirs for two main reasons. First: unlike sandstones, the dynamic range for
porosity in shales is very narrow; second: shales are characterized by nano-darcy
matrix permeabilities which are few orders of magnitude lower than even tight gas
sands.
For reservoir characterization, we need a significantly large dataset of petrophysical
parameters. Generation of such a large dataset, through core plug measurement, is
expensive and time consuming. We typically overcome this problem by correlating the
rock types with the log measurements from the same interval and then use these
correlations along with logs for predicting petrophysical properties in the uncored
6
intervals. However in shales, rock types may have overlapping ranges for certain
petrophysical parameters; making it harder to establish such correlations. Since shales
are heterogeneous at all scales, correlations established in one part of the field often do
not hold up in the other parts.
Since the dynamic range of petrophysical properties in shales is rather narrow, it raises
a question of how important petrophysical characterization really is in these
unconventional plays. However when we look at the production profiles and well
completions in Newark East field, we observe that some part of the field produce
much better than others. This could mean that the reservoir rock is different in
different parts of the field and subtle differences in their petrophysical properties may
be responsible for this big variation in production. These subtle differences in
petrophysical properties, if captured through rock typing, can help us distinguish
between the good and the bad reservoir rock. Petrophysical characterization of shale
gas reservoir through rock typing if successfully done can provide that vital piece of
information for optimizing gas production from these unconventional resources.
1.4 Purpose and scope of the study:
This study attempts a petrophysical characterization of a Barnett shale play through
rock typing so that the sweet spots in the reservoir can be identified and targeted
through suitable completion techniques for optimal gas production. Rock typing is
based on geological core description (Singh, 2008) and the petrophysical
measurements made on approximately 800 core plugs, from four wells located in
different parts of Newark East Field at Integrated Core Characterization Center at
7
University of Oklahoma. The measurements made were helium porosity, FTIR
mineralogy, total organic carbon (TOC) and Hg injection capillary pressure. Rock
types so identified are observed to differ in terms of their petrophysical properties with
a little overlap. Comparison of these petrophysical properties among different rock
types helps us identify the best reservoir rock type in the field.
In order to verify that the reservoir rock type identified as a best reservoir rock is
indeed the best, we compared the production data for two wells with the thickness of
each rock type over the perforated interval of the well. The results of this comparison
are discussed under the Observations and Results (Chapter 4).
In a completely independent exercise, we attempted rock typing through principal
component and cluster analysis using a program called Efacies developed by Dr. A.
Datta-Gupta from Texas A&M University. The details of this method are reported
under Literature Review (Chapter 2). The results of this exercise are included in
Observations and Results (Chapter 4).
1.5 Geology of Barnett shale Fort Worth basin:
Fort Worth basin is a north-south elongated basin in North-East Texas. It roughly
covers 15,000 square miles (Singh, 2008). As shown in Fig.1.3, Fort Worth basin is
enclosed by Red River arch from North, Munester arch from North-East, Ouachita
thrust belt from East, Llano uplift from South and Bend arch from West. The
generalized stratigraphic column is shown in Fig.1.5. Barnett shale from Fort Worth
basin is of Mississipian age, marine shelf deposit (Shelley et al., 2008). It is black,
organic rich, calcareous shale with nanodarcy range matrix permeability (Shelly et al.
8
2008). It is also a source rock for many conventional clastic and carbonate reservoirs
such as Pennsylvanian Bend, Strawn and Canyon groups of Fort Worth basin
(Pollastro et al., 2007). Barnett shale is therefore a fully self sustained petroleum
system that serves as a source, a seal and a reservoir rock (Jarvie, 2005).
As shown in Fig.1.3 A) and Fig.1.3 B), thickness of Barnett shale in Fort Worth basin
decreases from NE-SW transect (A-A).









Fig.1.3: A) Map of US Geological Survey Province 50, Fort Worth Basin, TX, showing major tectonic
features, geographic extent of Barnett shale, lines of well log cross section A-A and B-B and contours
showing thickness of Barnett shale in the Fort Worth basin, B) Generalized NE-SW well log cross section
showing thickness of Barnett Shale, C) Generalized SE-NW well log cross section showing thickness of
Barnett Shale (Pollastro, 2003)
Barnett is almost 1000 feet thick close to Munester Arch towards North East but it
gradually decreases to 100 feet towards the South-West end of the basin. Along the
NW-SE transect (B-B), as shown in Fig. 1.3 A) and Fig. 1.3 C); Barnett is much
9
thinner with maximum thickness of around 300 feet and minimum thickness of around
10 feet over Chappel limestone shelf.
Our focus in this study is on Newark East field, a mature gas field located in the
North-East region of the basin, closer to Munester Arch where the thickness of Barnett
shale is probably the highest. The core area (Highlighted with green in Fig.1.4) of this
filed is located in Denton, Wise and Tarrant county; however the field also extends
into Parker county. The 4 cored well studied and discussed in this thesis are marked on
Fig.1.4. Two of these four wells (Well A and Well B) are in the core producing
area, towards the right of Viola Pinchout, where Barnett is sandwiched between two
carbonate formations with Marble Falls on the top and Viola at the bottom. Here
Barnett is also subdivided into two producing intervals, upper and lower by another
carbonate rich interval called Forestburg. Forestburg thickness varies from 20 feet to
150 feet (Shelley et al., 2008). Forestburg thinning is observed from NE to SW before
it completely disappears in the extended part of the field as shown in Fig.1.5.
In the extended part of the field, towards the left of Viola Pinchout, the formation
overlying Barnett is still Marble Falls but the underlying formation is Ellenberger
limestone.




10











Fig.1.4: Map showing the core area of Newark East Field, Viola Pinchout and approximate locations of
cored wells studied in this thesis (Modified after Singh, 2008); area shaded in green represents original core
area of production in Barnett shale play. Two of the cored wells (Well A and Well B) included in this study
are from the core area. They are vertical wells. Well C and well D are from the extended area and they are
horizontal wells.






Well A Well B
Well C
Well D
Well A Well B
Well C
Well D
11











Fig.1.5: (A) Generalized stratigraphic column (Modified after Pollastro, 2003). (B) Stratigraphic subdivision
of Barnett shale and details of formations overlying and underlying Barnett shale at different locations along
NE-SW transect (Modified after Montgomery et al., 2005)







12
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
With the introduction of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, the number of
completions and overall gas production from Barnett shale has increased exponentially
over last ten years. Since 2001, Barnett shale has been the largest contributor to
overall shale gas production in United States (see Fig. 1.1).
In spite of the growing interest in shales, our understanding of these unconventional
gas plays is still limited. The aim of this chapter is to review the state of knowledge on
shale gas plays in general and Barnett shale in particular.
The chapter describes the structure, the mineral composition and the geochemistry of
shales. It details the techniques for TOC and thermal maturity measurements and also
summarizes the geochemical measurements reported on Barnett shale. The chapter
covers various rock typing techniques reported on conventional reservoir rocks and
explains why they do not work in shales. It concludes by providing a brief summary
on principal component and cluster analysis techniques used for identifying rock
types.
2.1 Definition of mudrocks and shales:
Mudrocks are siliclastic sedimentary rocks, made up of silt sized particles (0.0625 to
0.0039 mm) and clay sized particles that are even finer (< 0.0039 mm). They are the
most common class of sedimentary rocks constituting 50-80% of earths sedimentary
rock shell (Prothero and Schwab, 2004). Shales are a class of mudrocks that exhibit
13
laminations, fissility along the bedding planes and are predominantly made up of clay
sized particles. Shales are believed to be deposited under low energy environment
where weak currents carry flake shaped mica and clay minerals without too much
abrasion. Shales therefore exhibit a preferred fabric caused by the preferential
alignment of flaky mica and clay minerals into thin, parallel sheets. The thickness of
these parallel sheets can range anywhere between 0.5 mm to 10 mm (Prothero and
Schwab, 2004). This sheet like fabric/bedding plane is responsible for the fissility in
shales. They are observed to split or peal off along the bedding plane very easily.
2.2 Mineralogy and clay structure:
Clays are the dominant minerals in shales with illite, kaolinite, smectite, chlorite being
the most common clays. Clays have two basic building blocks which can be used to
construct most of the clay minerals. The first is a tetrahedral silicate sheets with
oxygen ions at the corners. The second is an octahedral arrangement where hydroxyl
ions occupy the corners and surround calcium, magnesium or aluminum ions. Most of
the clays are composed of sandwiches of these building blocks repeated over and over.
Most of the clays exhibit 2:1 or three sheet sandwich structures, in which an
aluminum-hydroxyl octahedral sheet is sandwiched between two oxygen-silicon
tetrahedral sheets. The cations present in these sandwiches are responsible for the
variation in clays. Illite is the most abundant clay mineral. It is potassium rich 2:1 clay
that has an octahedral sheet (where K
+
has replaced Al
+3
as cation) sandwiched
between two tetrahedral sheets (where silicon is sometimes substituted by aluminum)
(see Fig. 2.1). The presence of potassium ion provides the structure with strong ionic
bonding, preventing water from percolating through and clay from swelling (Prothero
14
and Schwab, 2004). Smectites on the other hand have small amount of Mg
+2
ion
substituting Al
+3
ion in the octahedral structure resulting into slightly negatively
charged octahedral layers (negative charge is smaller than the charge in illite). The
positive ions such as Na
+
, K
+
and Ca
+2
from interlayers balance this charge (see Fig.
2.2). Since the net charge in smectites is lower than illite, water is readily absorbed in
the interlayers which makes the smectite structure expandable (Prothero and Schwab,
2004). They are known to double in volume when they absorb water. Chlorites too
have 2:1 sheet structure with the octahedral interlayer having Mg
+2
and Fe
+2
replacing
Al
+3
at the lattice center.








Fig.2.1: Sheet structure of illite (Grim, 1968); potassium rich 2:1 clay with an octahedral sheet sandwiched
between two tetrahedral sheets



15









Fig.2.2: Sheet structure of smectite (Grim, 1968); 2:1 sheet structure with small amount of Mg
+2
substituting
Al
+3
in the octahedral sheet
Kaolinite on the other hand has a much simpler structure with one tetrahedral sheet
and one octahedral sheet in each repeating layer (see Fig. 2.3). These layers are tightly
bonded together by hydrogen as cation. Unlike most other clays, kaolinites lack space
for water, hydroxyl or larger cations between the layers (Prothero and Schwab, 2004).





16





Fig.2.3: Sheet structure of kaolinite (Grim, 1968); simple sheet structure with one tetrahedral sheet and one
octahedral sheet in repeating layers
Natural clays are often observed as regular or random mixtures of multiple clay types.
They are termed as mixed clays with the mixture of illite-montmorillonite being the
most common. In addition to clays, other minerals such as quartz, feldspar, carbonates
(calcite, dolomite, siderite and aragonite), pyrites, apatites and anhydrite are also
found in shales. FTIR mineralogy technique (Explained in Chapter 3), used for
mineralogy measurement of Barnett shale samples at Integrated Core Characterization
Center, can determine the presence of these minerals along with their quantities in
weight percentages.
2.3 Kerogen and its types:
Shale plays rich in organic matter are the only once with commercial importance. It is
the organic matter in shale that makes it a source rock. Organic matter in shale is in a
form of kerogen. Kerogen is a product of anaerobic decomposition of organic matter
from dead plants and animals. At deeper burial depths, high temperature and high
pressure convert these decomposition products into high molecular weight polymeric
compounds of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. They are called kerogen.
17
As the sediments get buried deeper, they encounter increased pressures and
temperatures that induces further reactions; transforming the kerogen through liquid
bitumen into liquid petroleum product (Tiab and Donaldson, 2004). If oil produced
this way stays trapped in a source rock, the overburden and the high temperature at
deeper depths results in cracking of oil into gas.
The type of hydrocarbons produced depends on the kerogen type. Type I kerogen is
deposited in a relatively quite and calm lacustrine environment (deposition in lakes)
(Tissot, 1984). It is derived primarily from algal matter and it has undergone
considerable modification due to microorganisms residing in the sediment. In terms of
elemental composition, type I kerogens are known to have high hydrogen to carbon
ratio (>1.3) and low oxygen to carbon ratio (<0.1). They are oil prone with as much as
70% wt. of organic matter transforming into oil upon thermal maturation. Type I
kerogens are known to produce paraffins and light oils. Type III kerogens on the other
hand are known to originate from woody matter deposited in marine or non-marine
environment and have undergone a moderate degradation (Tissot, 1984; Jarvie, 1991).
This kerogen type is characterized by low hydrogen to carbon ratio (<1.0) and high
oxygen to carbon ratio (>0.2). They are known to generate dry gas as less than 30%
wt. of organic matter present is capable of transforming into oil. Type II kerogen are
somewhere in between type I and type III in terms of their elemental composition.
They are known to originate from herbaceous plants. They produce both oil and gas.


18
2.4 Total organic carbon and thermal maturity:
The extent of organic matter inside a sample is characterized by a term called Total
Organic Carbon or TOC. TOC values are reported in terms of weight percentage of
organic carbon; meaning 1% wt. TOC represents 1 gm of organic carbon in 100 gm of
sediment sample (Jarvie, 1991). TOC is composed of three components. It has 1.
Extractable organic matter (EOM) 2. Convertible carbon and 3. Residual carbon
fraction or dead carbon. Extractable organic matter represents organic carbon present
as oil and gas that is already been produced but not yet expelled. Convertible carbon
represents that fraction of TOC which has the potential to transform into oil and gas.
Under right pressure and temperature conditions, this part of the TOC would transform
itself into bitumen then into oil and finally into gas. Residual carbon fraction
represents that part of the organic matter which has no potential to generate oil and gas
because of its low hydrogen content per unit of organic carbon. As convertible carbon
transforms itself into oil and gas, it leaves behind a dead residue; increasing the
residual carbon fraction of TOC. Fig.2.4 shows the organic carbon distribution in
sediment sample. The picture shows all three constituents of TOC.





19















Fig.2.4: Model of organic carbon distribution (Jarvie 1991; adapted and modified from Espitalie, 1982);
TOC is made up of oil and gas already produced and kerogen which accounts for organic matter capable of
producing oil and gas and dead carbon.
From Fig.2.4, it can be seen that for a commercial gas accumulation to take place,
having only high TOC is insufficient. High TOC also needs to be complemented by
high thermal maturation to ensure that convertible carbon has seen high temperatures
and pressures necessary for its transformation into commercially valuable oil and gas
products. At sufficiently high temperatures, the oil produced is known to undergo
secondary cracking and transform into gas. Secondary cracking depends on the
temperatures reached and the composition of oil. In Barnett shale formation, it is
known to take place at temperatures beyond 150
o
C (302
o
F) (Jarvie, 2004).
During thermal maturation of organic carbon, TOC of the sample stays unchanged;
however the contribution of each component to TOC undergoes a change. As shown
20
in Fig. 2.5, when an immature shale sample, capable of producing oil and gas (i.e.
having convertible carbon) undergoes thermal maturation, convertible carbon
transforms into oil, gas and leaves behind carbon residue or dead carbon. This results
into increase of EOM as well as residual carbon and decrease of convertible carbon.
The oil and gas produced often undergo periodic expulsion as the pressure builds up
during the process of thermal maturation and sources hydrocarbons to conventional
reservoir rocks with good storage and flow characteristics.
However in Barnett shale and other shale plays of commercial importance, the gas
produced is known to stay behind in the source rock instead of being expelled. Jarvie
et al. (2007) propose two main mechanisms of gas storage in a source rock: 1. Gas
stays behind in a source rock in a sorbed state (absorbed and adsorbed) to or within the
organic matrix; with organic richness, kerogen type and maturity impacting the
sorptive capacity. 2. As a free gas in pore spaces and fractures; created either by
organic matter decomposition or other diagenetic or tectonic processes (Jarvie et al.,
2007). It has also been reported that, in Barnett shale, reservoir rocks with high TOC
and high thermal maturity produce better (Jarvie, 2004); confirming that organic rich
portion of Barnett shale retains significant amount of produced gas. Therefore TOC
content and thermal maturity can be used as an indicator of a gas bearing zone. It
justifies using TOC as one of the petrophysical parameters for identifying the best
petrofacies in Barnett shale play.


21










Fig.2.5: Conversion of convertible organic matter into oil and gas with increasing thermal maturation
(Modified after Jarvie, 2004); Thermal maturation stages of organic matter: Stage 1: A sample with high
amount of convertible organic matter yet to undergo thermal maturation, Stage 2: Conversion of this organic
matter into oil and gas upon thermal maturation and increase in residual carbon, Stage 3: Continued
conversion of organic matter into oil and gas upon further maturation as well as secondary cracking of oil into
gas
TOC measurements provide information about its organic richness and thermal
maturity measurement provides information about the level of maturation of the
organic matter into commercially valuable oil and gas.
The measurement techniques for estimating the TOC content of the organic matter and
the extent of its maturation are summarized below.
2.5 LECO method for estimating TOC:
LECO TOC method gives a measure of the total organic carbon present in a sample.
This technique requires about 1 gm of crushed sample (Jarvie, 1991). In this method,
inorganic carbon in the form of carbonates is separated from the organic matter by
soaking the sample in HCl for 12 to 16 hours with intermittent stirring. Carbonates
Convertible Carbon
Dead
Carbon
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
EOM Carbon
Convertible
Carbon
Dead
Carbon
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
EOM Carbon
Convertible
Carbon
Dead Carbon
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
EOM Carbon
Gas Oil
Oil Gas
Gas
Oil
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e

i
n

T
h
e
r
m
a
l

M
a
t
u
r
i
t
y

&
S
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
C
r
a
c
k
i
n
g
o
f
O
i
l Convertible Carbon
Dead
Carbon
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
EOM Carbon
Convertible
Carbon
Dead
Carbon
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
EOM Carbon
Convertible
Carbon
Dead Carbon
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
EOM Carbon
Gas Oil
Oil Gas
Gas
Oil
I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e

i
n

T
h
e
r
m
a
l

M
a
t
u
r
i
t
y

&
S
e
c
o
n
d
a
r
y
C
r
a
c
k
i
n
g
o
f
O
i
l
22
present in the sample are converted into CO
2
and bubble out of HCl solution. Once the
conversion of carbonates into carbon dioxide is complete, no more effervescence from
the solution is observed. The remaining sample is then freed of HCl by rinsing it with
water. Filter paper and filtering flask is used during rinsing to avoid losing any
sample. Rest of the sample is then oxidized to convert organic carbon into carbon
dioxide. CO
2
vapors are routed through an infrared detector which determines the
amount of CO
2
produced and then back calculates the organic carbon present in the
sample using the material balance.
2.6 Rock-Eval pyrolysis/oxidation technique for estimating TOC and thermal
maturity:
In addition to the total organic content of the sample, this technique can determine the
kerogen type and the thermal maturity of the sample.
Rock-Eval method combines pyrolysis with oxidation cycle for complete
geochemical analysis of the sample. The sample undergoes programmed temperature
heating in a pyrolysis oven. The temperature of the oven is increased up to 300
o
C and
held constant to allow release of free hydrocarbons present in the sample. Free
ionization detector (FID) connected with the pyrolysis oven records the first peak
corresponding to the release of free hydrocarbons. This peak is labeled as S
1
.
Temperature is then gradually ramped up to 600
o
C at a rate of 25
o
C per minute. This
results in cracking of organic matter or convertible carbon resulting into yet another
peak. The second peak recorded by FID is labeled as S
2
and it corresponds to the
convertible carbon present in the sample. S
1
and S
2
peaks when normalized by
23
multiplying by 0.083 to provide estimates of EOM and convertible carbon respectively
in terms of gm of carbon per 100 gm of sample (0.083 is derived from average wt.
percent of carbon in hydrocarbons and by conversion of mg of hydrocarbon per gm of
rock or parts per thousand to parts per hundred (%)) (Jarvie, 1991). S
2
peak is also
used to determine hydrogen index (S
2
100/TOC) of the sample. Hydrogen index (HI),
measured in terms of mg of hydrocarbon per gm of TOC, is an indicator of the
hydrogen content per unit of organic carbon and along with oxygen index (OI)
determines the type of kerogen present. Oxygen index (OI) of the sample is
determined by allowing the sample to cool down to room temperature after pyrolysis
is complete. During cool down, the trapped CO
2
is released resulting in a third peak
S
3
. S
3
is used to determine OI (S
3
100/TOC) of the sample. OI is measured in terms of
mg of CO
2
per gm of TOC. Knowing HI and OI, the kerogen type can be easily
determined from Van Krevelen plot as shown in Fig. 2.6.
However as kerogen undergoes thermal maturation, convertible organic carbon
transforms itself into oil and gas and hydrogen deficient residual carbon resulting into
reduction of hydrogen index. OI also decreases upon thermal maturation. Therefore,
in order to determine the kerogen type, HI and OI measurement needs to be made on a
sample with low thermal maturity (~0.6% Ro).




24














Fig. 2.6: Van Krevelen diagram (Emeis and Kvenvolden, 1986). Hydrogen and oxygen index cross-plot for
estimating kerogen type of the source rock; Type I kerogens have HI greater than 600 and OI less than 50
when they are thermally immature, Type II kerogens tend have HI in between 200 and 600 when thermally
immature, Type III kerogens are characterized by OI that can be as high as 160 and HI under 200 when
thermally immature. As samples undergo thermal maturation, both HI and OI of the sample decrease.
The temperature corresponding with S
2
peak is called as T
max
and it is a measure of
thermal maturity of the sample. Any sample with T
max
less than 430
o
C is considered
thermally immature. Samples with T
max
between 430-450
o
C are considered thermally
mature and in oil or wet gas window and the samples with T
max
over 450
o
C are
considered to be in gas window (Emeis and Kvenvolden, 1986).
The TOC value used for normalizing S
2
and S
3
peaks can be determined independently
or can be obtained from Rock-Eval measurement itself. In a direct measurement of
TOC using Rock-Eval technique, EOM and convertible carbon present in the sample
is determined through S
1
and S
2
peaks observed during pyrolysis. However for
completing the TOC estimation, the measure of residual carbon is also needed and it is
25
obtained by oxidizing the sample following pyrolysis. The sample is heated in an
oxidation oven so that residual carbon converts to CO
2
and then by measuring the
amount of CO
2
generated during oxidation, the residual organic carbon can be back
calculated. The residual carbon is then added to the extractable carbon and the
convertible carbon to obtain a full measure of TOC. Fig.2.7 shows the process of
Rock-Eval measurement.









Fig.2.7: Rock-Eval Pyrogram showing three stages during pyrolysis (Modified after Jarvie, 2004); S
1
peak
represents extractable organic matter in the sample in the form of oil and gas that is already been generated, S
2

peak represents convertible carbon which is capable of transforming into oil and gas upon thermal maturation.
The temperature corresponding to this peak represents T
max
which gives the thermal maturity of the sample, S
3

peak corresponds with the release of trapped CO
2
during cool down following pyrolysis and is used to estimate
OI.





Time
Y
i
e
l
d
Time Time
Y
i
e
l
d
26
2.7 Vitrinite reflectance measurement:
Vitrinite reflectance (%Ro) is an optical technique used to gauge the thermal
maturation of the source rock. It provides an indication of the maximum
paleotemperatures seen by the source rock (Jarvie et al., 2007). This is an optical
method in which microscopic examination of kerogen or the entire rock sample is
carried out and the reflectivity of the particle is recorded via a photomultiplier tube.
Since formation of vitrinite indicates thermal maturity of the rock sample, samples
with higher vitrinite reflectance are more thermally mature. Fig.2.8 shows change in
color and vitrinite reflectivity with organic maturation. It also shows typical vitrinite
reflectance values observed in Barnett shale samples in different stages of thermal
maturation.








Fig. 2.8: Change in color of samples having different thermal maturity (%Ro) observed in Barnett shale
samples (Modified after Jarvie, 2004); samples with over 1.0% Ro are considered thermally mature and are
likely to have produced oil and gas in a commercially significant quantity
27
2.8 Geochemical data reported on Barnett shale:
Jarvie (2004), Jarvie et al. (2007), Pollastro et al. (2007), Zhao et al. (2007) report that
Barnett shale is organic rich, kerogen type II, oil prone marine shale with an initial
average TOC content of 5.5-6.4%, hydrogen index of 340-430 mg HC per gm of TOC
with a vitrinite reflectance of 0.44%Ro. Convertible carbon from Barnett shale is
known to generate about 30% gas in oil window (0.6-0.99%Ro). The oil produced,
upon further maturation, undergoes secondary cracking to produce more gas. Present
day Barnett shale is known to be in a wet gas window between 1.1-1.4 %Ro in most
parts.











28
2.9 Rock typing techniques:
Gunter et al. (1997) defines rock types as units of rocks deposited under similar
geological condition, undergone similar digenetic processes resulting in unique
porosity-permeability relationships, capillary pressure profile and water saturations for
a given height above free water. Thus rock typing is a technique of classifying
reservoir rocks with similar petrophysical properties into groups so that each group is
characterized by a set of unique petrophysical properties. Rock samples classified
under one rock type tend to have similar storage and flow characteristics, similar
response on a capillary pressure curve and similar relative permeability curves.
Petrophysical properties of rock types identified from core measurement are correlated
with the log response in a cored interval and these correlations along with the log
measurements are then used to predict the petrophysical properties in the uncored
interval of the reservoir.
Some of the commonly used techniques for rock typing in conventional sandstone and
carbonate reservoirs are described below:
2.9.1 Rock Quality Index (RQI) and Flow Zone Indicator (FZI) technique for
rock typing:
Amaefule et al. (1993) introduced a concept of Rock Quality Index (RQI) by
modifying general form of Kozeny-Carman equation. RQI correlated porosity and
permeability as follows:
29
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
e
k
Sqrt RQI
|
0314 . 0 .....(2.1)
Where, k = absolute permeability of the system in md and |
e
is effective porosity. RQI
is expressed in m.
RQI calculated above is then plotted against on a log-log plot.
Where, is normalized porosity index defined as a ratio of pore volume to grain
volume and calculated as follows:
( )
e
e
z
|
|
|

=
1
..(2.2)
A plot of RQI vs. yields a straight line with unit slope and its intercept when =1
is termed as Flow Zone Indicator (FZI). FZI can also be calculated as follows:
z
RQI
FZI
|
= ..(2.3)
Rock samples with similar FZI values are observed to fall on one line on a log-log plot
of RQI and . They constitute one rock type. Samples from different rock types have
different FZI values and they are observed to fall on other parallel straight lines. FZI
includes geological features such as texture and mineralogy of distinct pore geometries
since parameters such as surface area, shape factor and tortuosity of flow path go into
its calculation. A clear distinction between clean sand and shale can be obtained
through FZI index calculation as clay rich, poorly sorted, fine grained sedimentary
rocks have a lower FZI value whereas less shaly, coarse grained and well sorted sands
have high FZI value.
30
2.9.2 Winlands R
35
approach:
Winlands R
35
approach is based on mercury injection, air permeability and porosity
measurements on a core sample. Based on the measurements made on a set of 82
sandstone and carbonate samples, Winland developed following correlation:
( ) ( ) ( ) | log 864 . 0 log 588 . 0 732 . 0 log
35
+ = k R .....(2.4)
Where,
R
35
represents pore throat radius (m) corresponding to 35% mercury saturation
during capillary pressure measurement, k is air permeability in md and is porosity
in percent. 35% mercury saturation was chosen because the best correlation, between
the pore throat radius estimated using the equation and measured through the mercury
injection experiment, was observed at this saturation.
Samples with high porosity and permeability have larger R
35
values and samples with
lower porosity and permeability have smaller R
35
values. Knowing the porosity and
the permeability, one can calculate a corresponding R
35
value for every sample and
then plot them on a Winland Plot (A semi-log permeability vs. porosity plot with
standard R
35
pore throat lines). Cluster of samples with similar R
35
values are grouped
into individual rock types.
2.9.3 Pitmans modification of Winlands approach:
Winland in his approach did not offer justification for using a correlation between
porosity, permeability and pore throat radius at 35% mercury saturation. Pittman
(1992) suggested a modification to Winlands approach by introducing a concept of
31
dominant pore throat radius. He proposed a concept of grouping the rocks based on the
dominant pore throat radius in the samples.
The dominant pore throat radius was estimated by plotting mercury saturation divided
by capillary pressure on y-axis and mercury saturation on x-axis. The apex or
inflection point on this graph represented the dominant pore throat radius as a function
of saturation. Pittman also extended the correlation between porosity, permeability and
pore throat radius to saturations other than 35%. Hence after determining the
saturation at which maximum samples exhibit inflection, an appropriate equation can
be chosen to correlate porosity, permeability with pore throat radius. Samples with
similar pore throat radii are grouped together into one rock type.
2.9.4 Prediction of permeability from Hg injection data:
If the direct measurement of permeability is not available, permeability can be
predicted from Hg injection data. Swanson (1981) and Thomeer (1960, 1983)
proposed a relationship to estimate permeability from Hg injection data.
Thomeer (1960, 1983) observed a correlation between air permeability (k), Hg
displacement pressure (P
d
), total connected pore space (S
b
) and the shape of the
capillary pressure curve expressed in terms of pore geometric factor (F
g
). He proposed
a following equation to correlate them:
2
3334 . 1
8068 . 3
|
|
.
|

\
|
=

d
b
g
P
S
F k ....(2.5)
The correlation was developed based on the Hg injection measurements on sandstones
and carbonate samples from different formations. All three parameters required for
32
estimating permeability were obtained by plotting measured values of capillary
pressure (P
c
) and percentage pore volume occupied by mercury (S
b
) on a log log
scale. The plot is hyperbolic in shape for conventional reservoir rocks.
Swanson (1981) developed his correlation based on the same plot. However, his
correlation uses capillary pressure (P
c
) and percentage pore volume (S
b
) corresponding
to the inflection point of the hyperbolic plot. He proposed following correlation to
estimate air permeability.
691 . 1
399
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
c
b
P
S
k ....(2.6)
These equations predict permeability well as long as the air permeability of the sample
is 10 millidarcy and higher. These equations do not take into account Klinkenberg gas
slippage, hence they do not predict accurately at lower permeability values.
Kamath (1992) has also reported a similar observation. He observes that the accuracy
of permeability estimation declines with the permeability level of the sample. He
reports that for a 95% confidence interval, the permeability estimation ability is within
a factor of 3.3 for high permeability (>10 millidarcy) samples. For samples with
moderate permeability (between 1 to 10 millidarcy), the estimation ability is within a
factor of 5.4 and in the low permeability samples (<1 millidarcy); the permeability
estimation can vary by a factor as high as 9.7.
The correlations estimating permeability have been developed based on Hg injection
measurements made on sandstones and carbonates. The dataset used for developing
these correlations do not include shales. Shales are characterized by nanodarcy matrix
33
permeability which is well outside the range of permeability within which these
correlations work. During Hg injection measurements on shale samples, the entire
connected pore space is often not filled up as the pore throats controlling access to
large pore volumes are smaller than what Hg can pass through at 60,000 psi. It means
that the capillary pressure against Hg saturation plot which is used for obtaining the
parameters to be used in Swansons and Thomeers correlation is not always available
in shales. Therefore, permeability prediction using Swansons and Thomeers
approach is not feasible in shale samples.
We observe that all the conventional approaches of rock typing correlate porosity with
permeability measured over the cored interval. Direct measurements of both porosity
and permeability are made on core samples constituting the sample set. If a direct
measurement of permeability through pressure or pulse decay technique is not
available, it can be estimated from Hg injection measurement. The sample set in most
of these correlations is limited to sandstones and carbonates and does not include
shales. The core samples in these sets have a wide dynamic range for porosity and
have air permeabilities in a millidarcy range at least.
However, with nanodarcy matrix permeability, the conventional techniques of
permeability measurement do not work in shales. Since permeability prediction from
Hg injection also does not work, coming up with permeability dataset required for
porosity-permeability correlation is almost impossible. In conventional reservoirs,
there is also a considerable variation in porosity; whereas in shales, porosity has a very
narrow dynamic range. Since both porosity and permeability lack the dynamic range
necessary for rock typing, identifying rock types through conventional techniques in
34
shale gas reservoirs is not possible. Hence instead of using porosity-permeability
cross-plots, we have attempted rock typing using geological core description and
petrophysical measurements other than permeability in Barnett shale play.
















35
2.10 Rock typing through Principal Component and Cluster analysis:
In an entirely independent exercise, rock typing was attempted on the same dataset
through multi-variable analysis based on Principal Component and Cluster Analysis
techniques. Rock typing was carried out using efacies program developed by Dr. A.
Datta-Gupta from Texas A&M University. Lee et al. (2002) have described this
technique in detail. A summary on techniques behind the working of this program is
provided below:
2.10.1 Principal Component analysis (PCA):
Principal Component analysis (PCA) technique is used for summarizing the data
effectively without losing too much information. PCA technique reduces the
dimensionality of the problem by introducing principal components. Principal
components are identified within the defined variable space. They provide an alternate
coordinate system in multi-dimensional space for displaying data without too much
lose of information. Principal components are constructed through linear combination
of variables. The eigenvectors and covariance matrix provide the coefficients for
principal component transformations.
The total variance of the dataset is the sum of individual variances associated with
each principal component. Hence addition of every principal component increases the
percentage of variance explained. The maximum number of principal components
equals the number of variables and all the principal components together explain
100% variance. Principal components correlate well with the variables in the problem;
e.g. principal component 1 (PC1) may correlate well with porosity and PC2 may show
36
a good correlation with clay percentage. The first few principal components often
explain most of the variance in the dataset and are usually adequate to reveal the
structure of the dataset without too much loss of information. By selecting only the
first few principal components for data analysis, one can reduce the dimensionality of
the problem (Lee et al., 2002). For example, in a seven variable problem, if the first
four principal components explain over 90% variance of the dataset then by selecting
the first four principal components for cluster analysis, the dimensionality of the
problem can be reduced from seven to four. Every principal component is then a
coordinate of the data point in a four dimensional space.
2.10.2 Cluster analysis:
Cluster analysis aims to classify data points into groups that are internally
homogeneous and externally isolated (Lee et al., 2002). The number of clusters to be
identified is specified by the user.
In a rock typing exercise, where input is in the form of petrophysical properties
measured at every depth, a cluster represents a collection of samples with similar
petrophysical properties which are considerably different from the petrophysical
properties of the samples from another cluster.



37
Chapter 3
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
This section describes the laboratory procedures followed for making petrophysical
measurements in detail.
3.1 Sampling procedure:
Cores recovered from four wells located in different parts of Newark East field were
used in this study. The core recovered is continuous and has a very few missing
intervals. Porosity and mineralogy measurements are made on samples recovered at
every two feet interval. Two foot interval for sampling is selected to ensure fair
representations of all possible mineral compositions and minimize sampling bias
towards certain lithofacies. Due to the time and expense involved in mercury injection
measurements, samples for these measurements are recovered at every ten feet. TOC
measurements are performed on the samples from selected depths. Dataset of
petrophysical measurements used in rock typing has 796 porosity and mineralogy
measurements, 436 TOC measurements and 130 Hg injection results.
Fig. 3.1 shows core images taken at various depths in the interval of study. The extent
of heterogeneity of Barnett shale play is clearly visible in these pictures. We
frequently observe carbonate rich zones (predominantly calcite) and fine interbedding
of calcite and clay in addition to clay rich zones throughout the cored interval. In order
to ensure that the samples, used in the measurements made at one depth, are as
38
homogeneous as possible; we recover a large single piece of a rock at every depth and
break it down into smaller pieces.






Fig. 3.1: Barnett shale core images. (Top left:) 7491.5 ft, well A, sharp boundary between clay rich and calcite
rich zones; (Top right:) 7544.6 ft, well A, clay rich black shale; (Bottom left:) 7595.3 ft, well A, fractured
rock, predominantly calcite; (Bottom right:) 7606.6 ft, well A, inter-bedding of thin streaks of calcite with clay
3.2 Helium porosity, bulk and grain volume measurement:
Porosity measurement is used to measure the void space in the sample. Void volume
of a sample is calculated by subtracting the grain volume of the sample from its bulk
volume. Mathematically, porosity is expressed as follows:
100 100

= =
B
G B
B
P
V
V V
V
V
| (3.1)
Where is the pore volume of the rock sample, is the bulk volume of the sample,
is the grain volume of the sample and is the porosity of the sample. Bulk
7491.5 7544.6
7595.3 7606.6
7491.5 7544.6
7595.3 7606.6
39
volume of the sample is obtained by using mercury immersion technique where the
sample is immersed in a mercury bath and the Hg displacement is recorded as it equals
the bulk volume of the sample from Archimedes Principle.
In order to estimate pore volume of the sample; gas, free water and volatile
hydrocarbon filled pore space must be accounted for. Karastathis (2007) developed a
technique for estimating water and volatile hydrocarbon free effective porosity,
exclusively for shales, at IC
3
lab. The brief summary of this methodology is as
follows:
About 10~14 gm of a shale sample is recovered and heated in a oven at 100
o
C for 12
hours to remove free water present in the sample. After the first heating cycle, the
sample is allowed to cool in a desiccator for 30 minutes before recording its bulk
volume ( ) using a technique already described above. The sample is then crushed
using a crucible and pestle. Based on the particle size distribution measurements, the
mean particle size of the crushed sample averaged over a total of 41 samples from all
four wells is 392 +/- 192 m. Histogram showing variation of mean particle size is
shown in Fig. 3.2.




40












Fig.3.2: Histogram showing particle size distribution for a set of 41 crushed samples from all four wells;
mean particle size shows a wide variation from 100 to 800 m. Average mean particle size for the dataset is 392
+/- 192m.
Sample is handled with extreme care during the process of crushing so that the weight
loss is minimized (<0.1% wt.). Porosity measured is later corrected to account for the
weight loss during crushing. Crushed sample is collected in low pressure pycnometer
(LPP) aluminum cells. The sample is then heated again under the exact same
conditions as the first heating cycle. After heating and cooling in a desiccator, the
aluminum cells carrying the sample are run in a LPP machine. LPP machine works on
a principle of Boyles law. Here helium is introduced at low pressure (20 psi) in
aluminum cells carrying the sample. The pressure drop across the aluminum cell with
Histogram - Particle Size Distribution,
All Four Wells
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 More
Mean Particle Size (Microns)
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y
Total No. of Samples = 41
Average Particle Size = 392 Micron
41
and without the sample is used to determine the grain volume ( ) and grain density
( ) of the sample in the cell. Grain volume of the sample is corrected for grains lost
during the process of crushing using following formula:
G
G G
m
V V

A
+ =
~
..(3.2)
Where, is corrected grain volume and is weight loss during crushing.
Water and volatile hydrocarbon free effective porosity of the sample is then estimated
as follows:
100
~

=
B
G B
V
V V
| .....(3.3)
3.3 FTIR mineralogy:
Mineral composition of the samples is obtained by using Fourier Transform Infrared
Spectroscopy (FTIR). Sixteen minerals, typically found in sedimentary rocks, can be
detected and quantified using this technique. These minerals are quartz, calcite,
dolomite, siderite, aragonite, illite, kaolinite, smectite, chlorite, mixed clay, oligoclase
feldspar, orthoclase feldspar, albite, pyrite, apatite and anhydrite. Accuracy of
measurement of FTIR mineralogy technique is comparable with other quantitative
methods of mineralogy measurement such as X-ray diffraction and thin section
analysis. The major advantage of FTIR technique is that it is much faster than other
techniques with the results available in a matter of minutes after initial sample
42
preparation is complete. This enables the use of FTIR technique at the wellsite for
acquiring mineralogy at multiple data points over a large cored interval.
The principle behind FTIR mineralogy technique is as follows: Most of the minerals
constituting sedimentary rocks have covalent bonds between the atoms. These
covalent bonds have resonating frequencies in mid-infrared region (4000 cm
-1
to 400
cm
-1
). The resonant frequencies depend on the bond type and the atoms bonded
together. Naturally, these frequencies are different for different minerals. When a
sample containing these minerals is exposed to radiation from mid-infrared region,
minerals constituting the sample absorb energy at characteristic resonant frequencies.
Part of the energy that is absorbed by the bond is termed as its absorbance and the rest
is termed as transmittance. In FTIR technique, the transmittance at every frequency is
measured then converted into absorbance at that frequency using equation 3.4.
100
log
10
T
A = (3.4)
Where, is the absorbance and is percent transmittance (Griffiths and De Haseth,
1986). Absorbance is then plotted against frequency to generate a FTIR spectrum for
the sample. FTIR spectrum so obtained is then inverted using software developed in
IC
3
lab to identify and quantify the minerals present in the sample. The minerals are
quantified in terms of their weight percentages.
43
The FTIR measurement technique is discussed in detail by Sondergeld and Rai (1993)
and Ballard (2007). The procedure for measuring mineralogy using FTIR technique is
summarized below:
We start with very small amount of crushed sample (already available from helium
porosity measurement) and grind it further to a point where we are unable to feel any
particles and the sample is as fine as talc powder. After grinding the sample, moisture
and organic carbon present in the sample is removed. This is necessary because both
moisture and organics tend to exhibit very strong peaks in mid-infrared region;
masking the absorption peaks of other minerals. Moisture is removed by heating the
powdered sample at 100
o
C overnight. Organic matter is then removed by oxidizing the
sample in a low temperature plasma asher. A sample is combusted in presence of
oxygen at a low temperature for 16 hours. Carbon dioxide formed during the oxidation
of organic matter is continuously removed using a vacuum pump. The set up of
plasma asher is shown in Fig. 3.3.





44






Fig.3.3: Plasma asher setup. Samples are introduced in a plasma asher using a porcelain boat. The machine is
hooked up to oxygen cylinder that introduces oxygen into the oxidation chamber. Here the samples are oxidized
at a low temperature for a period of sixteen hours. CO
2
produced during oxidation of the sample is continuously
removed by using a vacuum pump. The change in the color of the sample from black to gray indicates that the
oxidation process is complete.
After removing the organic matter, a small amount (0.0005 gm) of powdered sample is
mixed with 0.3 gm of potassium bromide (KBr) and pressed under 10 ton pressure in a
die to form a semi-transparent disc. The disc is placed in a sample holder and run in
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer (FTIR) to acquire the spectrum. Mineralogy
of a sample is then obtained through an inversion of this spectrum.
3.4 Mercury injection capillary pressure measurement:
Mercury injection capillary pressure measurement estimates pore throat distribution in
a sample and also measures the connected pore space. In conventional reservoir rock,
this measurement can be used to measure effective porosity and estimate permeability
of the sample.

Oxidation Chamber

Oxidation Chamber
45
The experiment is conducted on 8-10 gm chip by introducing mercury under pressure.
The pressure is increased from the entry pressure (set at 5 psi) to 60,000 psi at
predefined pressure steps. The pressure table is set in such a manner that the pressure
points are evenly spaced on a logarithmic scale. There are a total of 197 pressure
points. At each pressure point, the pressure is held constant to allow mercury to
intrude into the pore space. The system waits till a pressure equilibrium (stable over 60
second period) is reached to ensure that the mercury intrusion at that pressure step is
indeed complete. The intrusion volume at each pressure step is recorded. After
reaching 60,000 psi pressure, pressure is reduced stepwise down to 19 psi and
extrusion volume at each pressure step is recorded. The number of steps during
extrusion are fewer than intrusion as it takes longer for pressure to equilibrate during
extrusion.
Since pore throats control access to the pore space, mercury first fills up the pore
space it can access through the largest pore throats. Mercury then passes through
smaller and smaller pore throats as pressure increases and eventually fills up the entire
connected pore space. At 60,000 psi pressure, mercury can enter pore throats as small
as 3 nanometers in diameter.
In shales, pore throats that control access to most of the pore space are very small.
Most of the intrusion in shale samples is typically seen at pressures above 10,000 psi.
This corresponds to a pore throat diameter of 18 nanometers and matrix permeabilities
of few tens of nano-darcies (Sigal, 2007).
46
Mercury injection capillary pressure measurement is based on Washburns equation:
( )
R
Cos P
Rock Hg c
1
=

u o .(3.5)
Where, = Capillary pressure, = Interfacial tension of mercury, =
Contact angle between Hg and rock sample, = Pore threat radius
Since the interfacial tension of mercury (480 dyne/cm) and contact angle (140
o
)
between mercury and rock sample is already known, knowing the pressure at which
the mercury passes through the pore throats; the pore throat radius can be estimated.
In addition to obtaining pore throat distribution, the data obtained during intrusion and
extrusion cycle are also used for plotting incremental and cumulative Hg intrusion
curves. An incremental intrusion curve is obtained by plotting incremental Hg
intrusion as a function of pressure. Cumulative intrusion for a pressure point is
estimated by summing incremental intrusion at all pressure points less than and equal
to that pressure point. These data when plotted against pressure gives a cumulative
mercury intrusion curve. Incremental intrusion curves are typically made by including
data obtained during intrusion cycle only. Cumulative intrusion curves are made by
including the data points from intrusion as well as from extrusion cycle. The shapes of
the incremental and cumulative mercury intrusion curves are often unique for different
rock types; hence these curves can be very useful during rock typing. A cumulative Hg
intrusion plot is used to verify if the observed intrusion into the sample is real.
Whenever the mercury intrusion into the sample is real, hysteresis between saturating
47
and desaturating curves is observed (see Fig. 3.4, left). This is because not all the
mercury that enters the pore space comes out when the pressure is released. Lack of
hysteresis on a cumulative intrusion plot is an indication that the intrusion is not real
(see Fig. 3.4, right).



Fig.3.4: Cumulative Hg intrusion plots showing real and false intrusion; (left): There is a considerable
hysteresis between the saturating and the desaturating curve. Some of the Hg that went into the pore space
during the intrusion cycle remained inside even after the pressure was released. It means that the Hg intrusion
in a sample is real, (right): Lack of hysteresis between the saturating and the desaturating curve indicates false
intrusion.
Before running a Hg injection experiment, a sample is first dried to remove any free
water present in the pore space. The heating is carried out 12 hours at 100
o
C
temperature. After cooling to room temperature in a desiccator over 30 minutes, the
sample is placed in a penetrometer. Penetrometer is a glass apparatus used in this
experiment. It is sealed using a cap, plastic o-ring and apiezon grease. Sealed
penetrometer is introduced in a low pressure section of AutoPore IV machine. After
evacuating the low pressure chamber down to 200 mm of Hg column, pressure is held
at that level to remove any remaining moisture and air from the sample and the
penetrometer system. Mercury is introduced into the penetrometer at 5 psi through its
stem. Hg fills up the stem and the remaining volume in the penetrometer bulb as it
Normalized Cumulative Hg Intrusion Curve -
Real Intrusion
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Cumulative Hg Injection Curve - False
Intrusion
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Saturating Curve
Desaturating Curve
Desaturating Curve
Saturating Curve
Normalized Cumulative Hg Intrusion Curve -
Real Intrusion
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Cumulative Hg Injection Curve - False
Intrusion
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Saturating Curve
Desaturating Curve
Desaturating Curve
Saturating Curve
48
completely surrounds the sample. Mercury is pressurized from outside using nitrogen
in a low pressure section of AutoPore IV machine. As Hg is pressurized from
outside, it applies equivalent hydrostatic pressure on the sample and begins intruding
into the pore space. Pressure is raised stepwise up to 25 psi in a low pressure section
and then up to 60,000 psi after transferring the penetrometer into high pressure
section. Mineral oil is used in a high pressure section for applying pressure.
Penetrometer stem is made up of glass and has metallic coating from outside. Since
mercury and metal coating are conductors and glass is an insulator, a penetrometer
filled with mercury acts like a capacitor whose capacitance changes with the receding
level of mercury in the penetrometer stem. Thus the amount of Hg intrusion is
recorded by measuring the change in capacitance of the penetrometer stem at every
pressure step.
Penetrometers come in different stem volumes. Depending on the pore space inside
the sample, a penetrometer with an appropriate stem volume can be selected. Since
shale samples have a very low connected porosity, penetrometers with the least stem
volume (0.366 cc) are selected. These penetrometers are called type-I penetrometers,
with the minimum and maximum measurable volume of 0.0784 cc and 0.3136 cc,
respectively.
Fig. 3.5 shows penetrometer assembly in detail and Fig. 3.6 shows AutoPore IV
machine used for running Hg injection measurements.

49







Fig.3.5: Penetrometer along with its components; after placing the sample in a penetrometer bulb,
penetrometer is tightly sealed using a metallic cap, plastic o-ring and apiezon grease. Penetrometer is then
introduced into the low pressure section of AutoPore IV machine for running the experiment.








Cap Components
Stem
Bulb
Cap Components
Stem
Bulb
50













Fig.3.6: AutoPore IV machine used to run Hg injection measurements; sealed penetrometer assembly is
introduced into the low pressure section of the machine where mercury is introduced into the penetrometer and
pressure is raised stepwise up to 25 psi with nitrogen. Penetrometers are then transferred in to high pressure
section where mineral oil is used to raise the pressure up to 60,000 psi.
Hg injection measurements suffer from two common sources of error. They are known
as a blank error and a conformance error. As a result of these errors, we end up
recording higher than actual mercury injection. Blank error occurs at higher injection
pressures due to the compression of the sample and the mercury. Blank errors are
significant only at higher pressures (10,000 psi and higher). Typically blank
corrections are made by measuring apparent intrusion on a non-porous sample of a
comparable volume and material. True mercury intrusion is then obtained by
subtracting the blank curve from a measured curve for the sample (Sigal, 2009).
However a satisfactory rock frame for measuring the apparent intrusion has not been

High Pressure Section
Low Pressure Section
Nitrogen Cylinder

High Pressure Section
Low Pressure Section
Nitrogen Cylinder
51
found for shale samples, hence the mercury injection curves for the shale samples are
not corrected for the blank effect.
Conformance error occurs when mercury entering the penetrometer does not fill up the
empty space inside the penetrometer completely. This is typically observed in samples
with an irregular shape and/or a rough surface. Since mercury does not conform to the
sample at the filling pressure, it starts to fill up the remaining void space around the
sample as the pressure is raised during the experiment. This results into reduction of
Hg filled volume of a penetrometer stem and gets recorded as mercury intrusion into
the sample. Depending on the aperture size of these surface irregularities, the
conformance error may or may not be significant. If the surface irregularities have
large apertures that Hg can fill up at lower pressures then conformance error is not
likely to be significant. This is because the conformance error will not influence the
shape of the capillary pressure curve as most of the Hg intrusion in shales occurs only
after 10,000 psi pressure. However, conformance error may be significant incase the
aperture size of the surface irregularities is small enough that Hg conforms to the
sample beyond 10,000 psi pressure. Sigal (2009) has discussed both these errors in
detail.
3.5 Total organic carbon (TOC) measurement:
Total organic carbon (TOC) measures the organic matter present in shale. Shales
samples with higher TOC content are richer in terms of organics and possess higher
hydrocarbon generation potential. Along with the TOC content, the thermal maturity
52
of shale samples is equally important. It indicates the extent of transformation of the
organic matter into oil and gas. TOC and thermal maturity measurements on Barnett
shale samples are carried out by a commercial lab.













53
Chapter 4
OBSERVATIONS AND RESULTS
Helium porosity and FTIR mineralogy measurements were carried out on 796 core
plugs recovered from four wells from different parts of Newark East field. The results
obtained from these measurements are summarized and discussed in this chapter.
4.1 Helium porosity:
Water free effective porosity, measured using a technique developed by Karastathis
(2007), yielded average helium porosity of 5.7% for 796 samples. As shown in Fig.
4.1, helium porosity of these samples exhibits a very wide range (2-10 %). The
accuracy of these measurements is +/-0.5 % and the standard deviation is 2.1 %.








Fig.4.1: Porosity histogram for 796 samples from 4 different wells; porosity measurement on the entire sample
set shows a wide variation (2 10%). Average porosity for the dataset is 5.7 +/- 2.1%.

Porosity Histogram - All Four Wells
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 More
Porosity (%)
N
o
.

o
f

S
a
m
p
l
e
s
Total no. of samples = 796
Average Porosity = 5.7+/- 2.1%
54
4.2 FTIR mineralogy:
FTIR mineralogy technique was used to determine the mineral composition of the
sample set. Sixteen minerals typically found in the sedimentary rocks were identified
as well as quantified using this technique. Mineralogy of the samples exhibited
considerable variation with depth in all the four wells (Refer Fig. 4.2).













Fig.4.2: Bar charts showing mineral variation for all four wells; mineral composition with depth for both
upper (UB) and lower Barnett (LB) is shown for wells A, B and C is shown. Forestburg interval that
separates UB and LB has disappeared in well D; hence Barnett in this well is continuous without any
distinction as UB and LB. 1. UB seems to be richer in carbonate and leaner in clays where as it is other way

55
around in LB in wells A, B and C 2. Apart from carbonate rich intervals, quartz content stays fairly
uniform throughout in wells A, B and C whereas in well D it is observed to decrease with depth. 3. Clay
content increases with depth in well D.
We know that calcite rich Forestburg interval separates Barnett shale into two parts.
The upper part (also known as Upper Barnett) seems richer in carbonates than the
lower part (also known as Lower Barnett) in well A, well B and well C.
Carbonate content in well A is fairly uniform throughout lower Barnett with
occasional carbonate rich streak but in lower Barnett of well B carbonate content is
observed to be highly variable with both thick and thin carbonate intervals occurring
intermittently. Well C exhibits a stark contrast in the carbonate content of the upper
and the lower Barnett with the carbonate content of upper Barnett being significantly
higher than that of the lower Barnett. Wells A, B and C have higher clay content
in the lower Barnett than the upper Barnett. Apart from carbonate rich intervals where
quartz content is significantly lower, we observe fairly uniform quartz content
throughout in all the four wells. Feldspars are mainly observed in well A and well
B while they are present in a significantly lower quantity in well C. Feldspar
content is observed to stay fairly uniform throughout the upper and the lower Barnett.
In the Newark East field, Forestburg thinning is known to occur from North-East to
South-West direction. Since well D is located in the Parker County in the south-west
part the field where Forestburg has already disappeared and there is no distinction
between upper and the lower Barnett here. Carbonate content is actually observed to
be higher in the lower part of the cored interval in this well.
FTIR mineralogy measurement detects four carbonate minerals: calcite, dolomite,
siderite and aragonite. Fig.4.3 summarizes the contribution of each carbonate to the
56
overall carbonate content of the sample set. We observe that calcite is a dominant
carbonate mineral in these samples. Similarly, from Fig.4.4, illite is observed to be the
dominant clay, contributing 70% by wt. to overall clay content of these samples.







Fig. 4.3: Contribution of different carbonate minerals to overall carbonate content (wt.% basis) averaged
over a sample set with 796 samples from all four wells; calcite is a dominant carbonate mineral with an
average contribution of 64% wt. to overall carbonate content. Calcite is followed by siderite and dolomite with
contributions of 21% and 14% wt. respectively. Aragonite is present in a negligible quantity.
















Calcite
64%
Dolomite
14%
Siderite
21%
Aragonite
1%
Calcite Dolomite Siderite Aragonite
57








Fig.4.4: Contribution of different clays minerals to overall clay content (wt.% basis) averaged over a sample
set with 796 samples from all four wells; illite is the dominant clay followed by mixed clay. Chlorite, smectite
and kaolinite are present in negligible quantities.








Fig.4.5: Average mineral composition and associated standard deviation for the dataset; among the 16
minerals identified from FTIR mineralogy, only calcite, quartz and illite have the dynamic range necessary for
observing mineralogy variation among rock types. Since standard deviation associated with calcite content is the
highest, calcite has the widest dynamic range; making it the most suitable mineral for identifying rock types.
Illite
70%
Chlorite
8%
Mixed Clay
19%
Smectite
1%
Kaolinite
2%
Illite Smectite Kaolinite Chlorite Mixed Clay
Average Mineral Composition for Dataset of 796
Samples - All Four Wells
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Q
u
a
r
t
z
C
a
l
c
it
e
D
o
l
o
m
it
e
I
l
lit
e
S
m
e
c
t
i
t
e
K
a
o
lin
it
e
C
h
l
o
r
i
t
e
P
y
r
it
e
O
r
t
h
o
O
lig
o
M
i
x
e
d

C
l
a
y
s
A
l
b
it
e
A
n
h
y
d
r
it
e
S
i
d
e
r
it
e
A
p
a
t
it
e
A
r
a
g
o
n
it
e
Mineral Name
M
i
n
e
r
a
l

C
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n

(
%

w
t
.
)
58
From Fig.4.5, we observe that quartz, calcite and illite are the dominant minerals in
these samples. High standard deviation for calcite means that the calcite content of the
dataset exhibits considerable variation (see Fig.4.8). Fig.s 4.6 and 4.7 suggest that the
calcite content actually correlates well with the porosity and the TOC and seems to be
responsible for their variation. The porosity and the TOC both decrease with the
increase in the calcite content of the samples.
Rest of the minerals either does not correlate well with the porosity and the TOC or
lack the dynamic range. Therefore, most of the correlations developed during the rock
typing exercise are based on the calcite content of the samples.










Fig.4.6: Porosity variation with the calcite content for the entire dataset of 796 samples; porosity shows a
decreasing trend with increasing calcite content except in samples with less than 10% wt. calcite where no clear
trend is observed

Porosity vs Calcite Content Correlation - All
Four Wells
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Calcite (% wt.)
P
o
r
o
s
i
t
y

(
%
)
59











Fig. 4.7: TOC variation with the calcite content for samples from Well C and Well D; even though the
spread in the data is very large for samples having low calcite content, a clear negative trend is observed between
TOC and calcite








TOC and Calcite Content Correlation - Well
'C' and Well 'D'
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Calcite (% wt.)
T
O
C

(
%
)
60









Fig.4.8: Calcite histogram for 796 samples from 4 different wells; almost 60% of the total samples have calcite
content less than 10% wt.

4.3 Total organic carbon (TOC) and thermal maturity:
Total organic carbon (TOC) measurements were made on a total of 436 samples.
These included all the samples from well C and well D and selected samples from
well A and well B. Rock-Eval measurements for determining thermal maturity
were also carried out on selected samples from well B, C and D. The results of
these measurements are presented in Fig. 4.9 and Table 4.1.



Calcite Content Histogram - All Four Wells
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 70 More
Calcite Content (wt.%)
N
o
.

o
f

S
a
m
p
l
e
s
Total no. of Samples = 796
Average Calcite Content = 14 +/- 18.3 %wt.
61









Fig.4.9: TOC histogram for 436 samples from 4 different wells; TOC measurement on the entire sample set
shows a wide variation (1 7%)
Average TOC content of the sample set is 4.0 +/-1.6 % (wt.%). TOC content is
observed to vary from 1 to 7% (Refer Fig.4.9). The TOC content correlates well with
the mineral composition. In Fig. 4.7, we see a good correlation between the calcite
content and the TOC with TOC decreasing with the increasing calcite content.




Table 4.1: Thermal maturity data for all four wells; well A and D have the highest TOC, average TOC
content of well B and C is lower than the average TOC of the entire dataset, kerogen of well B only is in a
dry gas window with well C and D in condensate gas window
TOC Histogram - All Four Wells
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 More
TOC (%)
N
o
.

o
f

S
a
m
p
l
e
s
Total no. of Samples = 436
Average TOC = 4.0 +/- 1.6%
Well TOC (%) T
max
(
o
C)
Vitrinite
Reflectance
(%Ro)
Hydrogen Index (mg of
HC/gm of TOC)
A 4.3 NA NA NA
B 3.7 486 1.58 33
C 3.8 461 1.14 87
D 4.3 460 1.12 74
62
From Rock-Eval measurements, we observe that average T
max
for well B, C and
D is well above 440
o
C, indicating that the samples are thermally mature (Jarvie et
al., 2007). Average vitrinite reflectance calculated from T
max
for these three wells is
higher than 1.0% Ro which indicates that the organic matter is in a gas window. In
Newark East field, samples with 1.1-1.4% Ro are known to represent condensate/wet
gas window and those with over 1.4% Ro represent dry gas window. Average
hydrogen index (HI) for these wells varies from 30 to 90 mg of HC/gm of TOC. Even
though HI measurements represent kerogen type III, these measurements are made on
thermally mature samples and they do not represent the kerogen type during
deposition. In general, the results of Rock-Eval measurements are consistent with
those reported in literature (Jarvie et al., 2007 and Jarvie, 2004).
4.4 Mercury injection capillary pressure measurement:
Mercury injection measurements were made on a total of 130 samples recovered from
all four wells. Incremental and cumulative mercury intrusion recorded during these
measurements is normalized by helium pore volume so that capillary pressure curves
for all the samples can be plotted on the same scale, from 0 to 1. The normalization
also helps us determine how much of the helium pore volume is actually connected.
We use the bulk density and the porosity of a companion sample and the weight of a
mercury injection sample for calculating its helium pore volume.
Three distinct capillary pressure curves are observed from mercury injection
measurements. They are labeled as A, B and C. Incremental and cumulative
63
intrusion curves, normalized by helium pore volume, representing the three rock types
are plotted in Fig. 4.10, 4.11 and 4.12.






Fig.4.10: Incremental and cumulative Hg intrusion curve type A normalized with respect to helium pore
volume; Incremental intrusion curve type A exhibits monotonous increase without a well defined peak.
Hysteresis between saturating and desaturating curves in a cumulative intrusion plot shows a net Hg intrusion.






Fig.4.11: Incremental and cumulative Hg intrusion curve type B normalized with respect to helium pore
volume; Incremental intrusion curve exhibits a distinct maximum before reaching 60,000 psi pressure. Once
again there is a net Hg intrusion reflected in the cumulative Hg curve.





Normalized Incremental Hg Intrusion Curve - Type A
0.000
0.010
0.020
0.030
0.040
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

I
n
c
r
e
m
e
n
t
a
l

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Cumulative Hg Intrusion Curve - Type A
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Incremental Hg Intrusion Curve - Type A
0.000
0.010
0.020
0.030
0.040
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

I
n
c
r
e
m
e
n
t
a
l

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Cumulative Hg Intrusion Curve - Type A
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Cumulative Hg Intrusion Curve - Type B
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Incremental Hg Intrusion Curve - Type B
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

I
n
c
r
e
m
e
n
t
a
l

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Cumulative Hg Intrusion Curve - Type B
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Incremental Hg Intrusion Curve - Type B
0.000
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020
0.025
0.030
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

I
n
c
r
e
m
e
n
t
a
l

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
64






Fig.4.12: Incremental and cumulative Hg intrusion curve type C normalized with respect to helium pore
volume; false intrusion, overlapping saturating and desaturating curves indicate that little to no Hg is left in the
sample. This suggests that little to no Hg intruded the sample during the experiment.
From Fig. 4.10, 4.11 and 4.12, we make a general observation that most of the
intrusion in these samples takes place at and above10,000 psi. This corresponds to
pore throat diameter of 18 nm and a matrix permeability of few tens of nanodarcies.
We also observe that mercury fills up only a certain fraction of helium pore volume
during these experiments. For samples with type A capillary pressure curve, the ratio
of mercury to helium pore volume is between 50 to 65%. For samples with type B
curve, this ratio increases to 65 to 75% and for samples with type C curve, it is
observed to be between 25 to 50%. This indicates that some of the pore space is either
unconnected as mercury can fill up only the connected pore space or there is a
significant pore volume in these samples that can be accessed through the pore throats
smaller than 3 nm. The unconnected pore space seems to become accessible only after
the sample is crushed during helium porosity measurement. This could explain why
helium pore volume is always higher than Hg pore volume. The process of
fragmentation during helium porosity measurement may also be removing additional
moisture that may not be removed during heating. This may also explain the
Normalized Cumulative Hg Injection Curve - Type C
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Incremental Hg Intrusion Curve - Type C
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

I
n
c
r
e
m
e
n
t
a
l

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Cumulative Hg Injection Curve - Type C
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
Normalized Incremental Hg Intrusion Curve - Type C
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Pressure, psi
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

I
n
c
r
e
m
e
n
t
a
l

H
g

I
n
t
r
u
s
i
o
n
65
difference between helium and mercury porosity measurement; however there is no
way to prove this.
Even though Hg injection measurement provides an estimate of the connected pore
space; in this exercise, more emphasis has been placed on the shape of the capillary
pressure curve. From Fig.4.10, we observe that incremental intrusion curve type A
increases monotonously without reaching a plateau till 60,000 psi pressure. It means
that in these samples, the largest pore volume is either accessed by pore throats
smaller than 3 nm in diameter or pore throats are actually compressed at higher
pressures during the experiment so that the pore throats that were initially over 3 nm in
diameter became smaller than 3 nm during the experiment. A distinct maximum is
observed in the incremental Hg intrusion curve type B (see Fig. 4.11). Pore throats
accessing the largest pore volume in these samples are larger than 3 nm in diameter.
All the samples that exhibit this type of a response are expected to have the highest
permeability. We observe that these samples also have the highest porosity.
Incremental Hg intrusion curve type C (shown in Fig.4.12) and incremental Hg
intrusion curve type A (shown in Fig 4.10) have similar shapes. However they differ
in terms of their cumulative Hg intrusion plots. Cumulative Hg intrusion curve type
C does not exhibit hysteresis between the saturating and the desaturating curves
where as significant hysteresis is observed in cumulative Hg intrusion curve type A.
As discussed in Chapter 3, lack of hysteresis between saturating and desaturating
curves is a sign of false intrusion. We also observe that the normalized incremental
intrusion curve for type C samples barely crosses 0.01 cc. Such a small amount of
intrusion also indicates that the Hg intrusion into the sample may not be real.
66
4.5 Classification of lithofacies:
Classification of lithofacies has been considered as the first step in the rock typing
exercise. Singh (2008) identified 10 different lithofacies in Barnett shale formation.
Each of these lithofacies represents a unique depositional environment; hence
geologically they are different from one another. However petrophysical
measurements on various samples from different lithofacies showed that the samples
from different lithofacies had similar petrophysical properties. That along with the fact
certain lithofacies contribute very little thickness to the entire stratigraphic column
provides an opportunity of combining these lithofacies into broader groups so that
each group has a suite of petrophysical properties that are distinct. In order to do that,
we attributed lithofacies to every sample recovered for petrophysical measurements
using stratigraphic columns for these wells constructed by Singh (2008). Fig. 4.13
shows distribution of these samples among 10 different lithofacies.








67










Fig.4.13: Lithofacies occurrence for 796 samples from four different wells; among the ten lithofacies,
lithofacies 1, 2, 3 and 6 dominate the sample population
From Fig.4.13, it can be seen that lithofacies 1, 2, 3 and 6 are the dominant lithofacies
in the cored interval with most of the 796 samples for petrophysical analysis coming
from one of these lithofacies.
From Fig.4.1, and 4.9, helium porosity and TOC is seen to vary considerably. From
Fig. 4.6 and 4.7, we also see that these parameters correlate well with calcite content.
Since lithofacies 1, 2, 3 and 6 account for the majority of samples used in the
petrophysical measurements; these lithofacies are responsible for the petrophysical
variation observed.
Lithofacies Occurance
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Lithofacies
N
o
.

o
f

S
a
m
p
l
e
s
1. Siliceous non-calcareous mudstone, 2. Siliceous calcareous mudstone, low calcite,
3. Siliceous calcareous mudstone, high calcite, 4. Silty-Shaly deposits, 5. Phosphatic
deposits, 6. Limy mudstone, 7. Dolomitic mudstone, 8. Calcareous laminae, 9. Concretions,
10. Fossilif erous deposits
Total no. of samples = 796
68
In order to identify lithofacies with similar petrophysical characteristics, we plotted
helium porosity, TOC and calcite content of all lithofacies on one chart. The result of
this exercise is presented in Fig. 4.14.










Fig.4.14: Average porosity, TOC and calcite content of all ten lithofacies; lithofacies 1 is observed to have
high porosity and high TOC with least calcite content, lithofacies 2 and 3 have the highest porosity, lower than
average TOC and moderate calcite content, lithofacies 6 has the highest calcite content and the lowest porosity
as well as the lowest TOC. Lithofacies 1, 3 and 6 represent three main rock types.
From Fig. 4.14, we observe that lithofacies 1, 2, 3 and 6 are quite distinct in terms of
their petrophysical properties. They seem to represent three main groups or rock types.
Lithofacies 1 (Siliceous non-calcareous mudstone) exhibits high porosity (>5.5%) as
well as high TOC (>4.5%). Lithofacies 1 also has the lowest calcite content (<5%)
amongst all the lithofacies as shown in Fig.4.14. It represents group of rocks with high
porosity and high TOC (Rock Type 1). Lithofacies 3, with over 10% calcite, also has
Avg. Porosity, TOC and Calcite Content
of Various Lithofacies - All Four Wells
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Lithofacies
A
v
g
.

P
o
r
o
s
i
t
y

&

A
v
g
.

T
O
C

(
%
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
A
v
g
.

C
a
l
c
i
t
e

(
%
w
t
.
)
Porosity TOC Calcite
1. Siliceous non-calcareous mudstone, 2. Siliceous calcareous mudstone, low calcite,
3. Siliceous calcareous mudstone, high calcite, 4. Silty-Shaly deposits, 5. Phosphatic
deposits, 6. Limy mudstone 7. Dolomitic mudstone, 8. Calcareous laminae,
9. Concretions, 10. Fossiliferous deposits
Total No. of Samples = 796
69
high porosity (>6%) but its TOC is rather low (<3%). Lithofacies 3 represents a group
of rocks with high porosity but low TOC (Rock Type 2). Lithofacies 6 exhibits low
porosity (<3.1%) and low TOC (<1.5%) and represents the third group of rocks which
have both low porosity and low TOC (Rock Type 3). Calcite content of lithofacies 6 is
the highest (>50%).
Another reason for limiting the rock types to three can be attributed to three distinct
capillary pressure curves observed from mercury injection measurements. In order to
relate these capillary pressure curves with three main rock types, we determined key
petrophysical parameter associated with each Hg injection curve using petrophysical
properties of the companion samples. The results obtained are tabulated below (Refer
Table 4.2 and Table 4.3).



Table 4.2: Porosity and TOC data for three Hg injection curve types; Hg type B has the highest porosity but
its TOC is not so high. Hg type A has both; high porosity as well as high TOC. Hg type C has the least
porosity and the least TOC of all three types



Table 4.3: Mineralogy data for three Hg injection curve types; three mercury rock types are distinct in terms
of their quartz and calcite content but have overlapping clay content. Calcite content is seen increasing going
from Hg rock type A to rock type C
From Table 4.2, we observe that the helium as well as the mercury porosity of the
samples exhibiting a type B capillary pressure curve is the highest among the three
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
A 5.6 5.2-5.9 3.0 2.7-3.3 4.4 4.1-4.7
B 7.0 6.4-7.7 4.8 4.3-5.3 3.0 2.7-3.4
C 3.0 2.2-3.8 1.3 0.8-1.8 2.8 1.8-3.8
Hg
Injection
Curve
Type
Helium Porosity Mercury Porosity TOC
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
A 29 27-32 6 4-9 38 35-40
B 21 17-25 15 11-18 37 33-41
C 15 8-21 41 27-56 19 14-24
72
43
15
Quartz Calcite Clay
No. of Samples
Hg
Injection
Curve
Type
70
types. This is consistent with our observations from Fig. 4.11 that these samples have
the largest pore throats and the cumulative Hg intrusion in these samples is highest
among the three types. However the TOC content associated with these samples is not
very high. Average TOC content of these samples is 3% which is much lower than the
average TOC content of samples with type A capillary pressure curve. From Table
4.3, we observe that the samples with type B capillary pressure curve have moderate
calcite content. Samples with type A capillary pressure curves also exhibit good
porosity. Even though the helium porosity of these samples is not as high as that of the
samples with type B curve, it is still close to the average helium porosity (5.7%) of
all the samples taken together. The average TOC content of type A samples (4.4%)
is also the highest among the three types. From Table 4.3, we observe that type A
samples are clay rich with the least calcite content (6% wt). Samples with type C
capillary pressure curves have the lowest porosity (both helium and mercury) and the
lowest TOC. They represent calcite rich rocks with average calcite content of over
40% wt.
4.6 Rock typing:
Based on the petrophysical measurements of the samples from 10 different lithofacies
and mercury injection measurements on 130 samples, we have identified three
different lithofacies (1, 3 and 6) that represent three distinct groups or rock types.
Using porosity, TOC and the calcite content, the remaining lithofacies can then be
classified under these rock types. The rock types so formed are then correlated with
the three unique capillary pressure curves described earlier.
71
Lithofacies 5 (phosphatic deposit) has high porosity, high TOC and less than 10% wt.
calcite content (see Fig.4.14). Phosphatic deposit intervals are typically seen
associated with lithofacies 1 in stratigraphic column. Hence lithofacies 5 can be
included under rock type 1. Lithofacies 10 (fossiliferous deposits) also exhibit high
porosity and high TOC. But fossiliferous deposits are often seen associated with
lithofacies 2 and 3. Their calcite content (~25%) also seems to be closer to lithofacies
3 than lithofacies 1. Hence they are included under rock type 2. Lithofacies 7
(dolomitic limestone) exhibits high porosity but its TOC content is low. It is therefore
included under rock type 2. Lithofacies 8 (calcareous laminae) represents thin calcite
rich intervals mainly found in lower Barnett. In spite of their high calcite content
(>20%), their porosity (~4%) and TOC (~3.8%) is not very low. Hence lithofacies 8
can also be included under rock type 2.
Lithofacies 9 (concretions) represents calcite rich intervals found in both upper and
lower Barnett. These intervals are at times couple of feet thick. The porosity and the
TOC of these intervals are low. Petrophysically they seem to be similar to lithofacies
6. Hence they are grouped under rock type 3. Lithofacies 4 is not very well
represented in the stratigraphic column as the number of samples from this lithofacies
is very small. These samples exhibit high calcite content, low porosity and low TOC.
They are similar to lithofacies 6 and 9 and can be included under rock type 3.
Lithofacies 2 is found in both upper and lower Barnett and has an average calcite
content of 9%. Lithofacies 2 includes samples from both ends of spectrum; those with
low calcite content (<10%) tend to have similar porosity and TOC as lithofacies 1 and
those with high calcite (>10%) content tend to have both porosity and TOC similar to
72
lithofacies 3. Samples from lithofacies 2 can therefore go under rock type 1 as well as
rock type 2.
After classifying the lithofacies in three groups, the three rock types appear as follows:
Rock type 1: Includes samples from lithofacies 1, 5 and some samples from
lithofacies 2 (<10% wt. calcite).
Rock type 2: Includes samples from lithofacies 3, 7, 8, 10 and the remaining samples
from lithofacies 2 (>10% wt. calcite).
Rock type 3: Includes samples from lithofacies 4, 6 and 9.
The three rock types so formed are termed as Petrofacies.
The three petrofacies differ considerably in their calcite content. The average calcite
content of the lithofacies included under petrofacies 1 is under 10%. The average
calcite content of the lithofacies included under petrofacies 2 is between 10 and 25%.
Hence if we use 10% and 25% wt. calcite content as a cut-off for petrofacies 1 and
petrofacies 2 respectively then the samples can be easily classified under appropriate
petrofacies based on its mineralogy.
All 796 samples are then classified under appropriate petrofacies based on their calcite
content. Samples with less than 10% wt. calcite are included under petrofacies 1,
samples with less than 25% wt. calcite are included under petrofacies 2 and the
remaining samples are then included under petrofacies 3. After attributing petrofacies
to each sample, they are plotted on a depth scale for all four wells (similar to
73
stratigraphic columns showing variation of lithofacies with core depth). Petrofacies
variation with depth is included under Appendix A for all four study wells.
The key petrophysical parameters for the three petrofacies are summarized in Table
4.4 and 4.5. Average porosity, TOC and calcite content of the three petrofacies are
also plotted in Fig. 4.15.




Table 4.4: Porosity and TOC data for three petrofacies identified in Barnett shale from core measurements
as well as the lithofacies combined under each petrofacies; petrofacies 1 and 2 have similar porosities but
petrofacies 1 has much higher TOC. Petrofacies 3 has both low porosity and low TOC and represents the worst
rock in the reservoir




Table 4.5: Mineralogy data for three petrofacies identified in Barnett shale form core measurements;
petrofacies 1, 2 and 3 are distinct in terms of all three major minerals. Petrofacies 1 represents clay rich rock
with the lowest calcite and the highest quartz content, petrofacies 3 is a clay lean, calcite rich rock with the
lowest quartz content. Petrofacies 2 is in between petrofacies 1 and 3 in terms of its mineralogy




Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
1 6.1 6.0-6.3 4.8 4.7-5.0 1, 2, 5
2 6.0 5.8-6.3 3.6 3.4-3.8 2, 3, 7, 8,
3 3.7 3.4-4.0 1.8 1.6-1.9 4, 6, 9
Petrofacies Lithofacies
Helium Porosity TOC
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
1 30 29.2-31.0 3 2.7-3.3 44 43.0-44.7
2 21 19.4-22.2 15 14.6-16.2 36 34.6-37.6
3 12 10.7-13.4 46 43.4-48.8 19 17.2-20.4
Petrofacies
Quartz Calcite Clay
74








Fig. 4.15: Average porosity, TOC and calcite content of three petrofacies identified in Barnett shale;
Petrofacies 1, 2 and 3 are distinct in terms of their calcite content with calcite content increasing from
petrofacies 1 to petrofacies 3. TOC shows a negative relationship with calcite as it decreases from petrofacies 1
to 3. Petrofacies 1 has higher than average porosity and TOC and represents the best rock in the field.
From Fig.4.15, Table 4.4 and 4.5, we conclude the following:
Petrofacies 1 represents a calcite lean clay rich rock with high porosity and the
highest TOC among all three petrofacies. The quartz content of petrofacies 1 also
happens to be highest which makes this reservoir rock relatively easy to fracture.
Petrofacies 1 thus represents the best reservoir rock in the field. Petrofacies 2
represents reservoir rock with moderate calcite content. It also exhibits high porosity
similar to petrofacies 1 but its TOC content is not so high. Petrofacies 3 represents
calcite rich rock similar to Forestburg interval. The porosity and the TOC of this
petrofacies are the least among all the three petrofacies. It represents petrophysically
the worst reservoir rock in the field and is not expected to contribute much to
production.
Porosity, TOC and Calcite Content of Three
Petrofacies - All Four Wells
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
1 2 3
Petrofacies
A
v
g
.

P
o
r
o
s
i
t
y
,

A
v
g
.

T
O
C

(
%
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
A
v
g
.

C
a
l
c
i
t
e

(
%
w
t
.
)
Porosity TOC Calcite
75
From Fig.s 4.6 and 4.7, we know that both the porosity and the TOC correlate well
with calcite. However, they do not exhibit any correlation with each other in general
(see Fig. 4.16). When samples from each petrofacies are considered individually, a
very weak increasing trend is observed between the porosity and the TOC in samples
from petrofacies 3.









Fig. 4.16: Porosity - TOC plot for all the samples from well C and well D; samples are color coded on the
basis of petrofacies. The porosity and the TOC do not show any correlation in the samples from petrofacies 1
and 2. A weak increasing trend between the porosity and the TOC is observed in the samples from petrofacies 3.
Comparing petrophysical properties of the petrofacies (From Table 4.4 and 4.5) with
those of the mercury rock types (From Table 4.2 and 4.3) we observe that petrofacies
1 and mercury rock type A both have similar helium porosity and TOC values which
are higher than the average porosity and TOC values for all the samples. Both
Porosity vs TOC Plot for Well C and Well D
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
TOC (% wt.)
P
o
r
o
s
i
t
y

(
%
)
Petrof acies 1 Petrof acies 2 Petrof acies 3
76
represent rock samples with very low calcite content (<10% wt.). Petrofacies 2 and
mercury rock type B both have high porosity (higher than average for all 796
samples) but lower than average TOC. They are similar in terms of their calcite
content as well (>10% wt.). Petrofacies 3 and mercury rock type C also seem similar
in terms of their porosity, TOC and calcite content. They represent the tightest and the
least productive rock in the field.
In order to verify if there is any one one correlation between the petrofacies and Hg
rock types, we attributed petrofacies to all the samples on which Hg injection
measurement was made. This was done based on the mineralogy measured on the
companion sample. Correlations between the petrofacies and Hg rock types obtained
this way are then plotted in Fig. 4.17.










77











Fig.4.17: Relationship between Hg injection rock types and petrofacies identified in Barnett shale play; Hg
rock types and petrofacies exhibit a good correlation with a minor overlap. Petrofacies 1 correlates well with Hg
type A, petrofacies 2 with Hg type B and petrofacies 3 with Hg type C.
Hg rock type A is observed to be the dominant rock type among the samples from
petrofacies 1. Hg rock type B dominates petrofacies 2. The maximum samples from
petrofacies 3 exhibit type C capillary pressure curve. Petrofacies and mercury rock
types exhibit fairly good one-one correlation with a minor overlap. The correlation
between petrofacies and mercury rock types is shown in Table 4.6.





Relationship between Hg Rock Type and
Petrotypes for all 4 wells together
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1 2 3
Petrotype
N
o
.

o
f

S
a
m
p
l
e
s
Hg Rock Type A (Hg Phi-3.0%, He Phi-5.6%, TOC-4.4%)
Hg Rock Type B (Hg Phi-4.8%, He Phi-7.0%, TOC-3.0%)
Hg Rock Type C (Hg Phi-1.3%, He Phi-3%, TOC-2.8%)
Total No. of Samples = 130
78
Petrofacies Dominant Hg Capillary Pressure Curve
1 A
2 B
3 C
Table 4.6: One to one correspondence between petrofacies and Hg injection capillary pressure curves
Based on the petrophysical properties of the three petrofacies and three mercury
injection rock types, petrofacies 1 and Hg injection rock type A seem to represent the
best reservoir rock in the field.
4.7 Rock typing through Principal Component & Cluster analysis:
I tried to verify that the results of rock typing were not biased by attempting rock
typing from the same dataset using principal component and cluster analysis program
(Efacies) developed by Dr. A. Datta-Gupta from Texas A&M University, in an
entirely separate exercise.
11 different parameters that could possibly influence the rock typing are selected as
variables in this exercise. These parameters are porosity, TOC, quartz, calcite,
dolomite, illite, mixed clay, siderite, total feldspar, total carbonate and total clay
content. Since 11 variables are selected for rock typing, 11 principal components
explain 100% variance of the dataset. Among the 11 principal components, first three
principal components are the most important as together they explain almost 70%
variance (see Fig. 4.18).
Fig. 4.19 shows the relationship between the variables by plotting them against each
other and against the three principal components. A strong negative correlation
79
between total carbonate content and principal component 1 (PC1) is observed (see box
J12 in Fig. 4.19). Among different carbonate minerals, calcite correlates best with PC1
(see box D12 in Fig. 4.19). As PC1 alone explains over 44% variance of the dataset, a
strong correlation between PC1 and calcite underscores the importance of calcite in
rock typing and justifies classification of samples into petrofacies on the basis of
calcite content. PC1 also shows good positive correlation with total clay content and
among different clay minerals, it correlates best with illite (see box K12 and F12 in
Fig. 4.19). It is also observed to correlate weakly with porosity and TOC. A
correlation between PC1 and TOC is expected considering a strong correlation
between PC1 and calcite content.
Principal component 2 (PC2) is observed to correlate well with mixed clays (see box
G13 in Fig. 4.19). PC2 alone explains over 14% variance. PC3, which explains almost
11% variance of the dataset, exhibits a weak correlation with quartz (see box C14 in
Fig. 4.19).







80









Fig.4.18: Relationship between the number of principal components selected and variance they explain; first
three principal components explain almost 70% variation in the dataset.




















81























Fig.4.19: Pairwise scatter plot showing variation of 11 variables with each other and with the three principal
components; a very good negative correlation is observed between total carbonates and principal component 1
(see J12). Among different carbonates, calcite correlates best with PC1 (see D12). Total clay and PC1 exhibit
strong positive correlation with illite correlating best with PC1 (see K12 and F12). PC2 and mixed clays
correlate well (see G13). PC3 correlates weekly with quartz (see C14).

From Fig.s 4.18 and 4.19, it is observed that out of the 11 variables only 6 (calcite,
illite, mixed clay, porosity, TOC and quartz) exhibit some sort of correlation with the
3 main principal components. Since these 6 variables only are important for rock
typing, the number of variables is reduced from 11 to 6 before proceeding to cluster
analysis. The number of variables is reduced further from 6 to 5 by considering total
clay content as one variable instead of considering illite and mixed clays as two
different variables.

TOC
Quartz
Calcite
Dolomite
Illite
Mixed
Clay
Siderite
Tot.
Feld
Tot.
Carb
Tot.
Clay
PC1
PC2
PC3

TOC
Quartz
Calcite
Dolomite
Illite
Mixed
Clay
Siderite
Tot.
Feld
Tot.
Carb
Tot.
Clay
PC1
PC2
PC3
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

TOC
Quartz
Calcite
Dolomite
Illite
Mixed
Clay
Siderite
Tot.
Feld
Tot.
Carb
Tot.
Clay
PC1
PC2
PC3

TOC
Quartz
Calcite
Dolomite
Illite
Mixed
Clay
Siderite
Tot.
Feld
Tot.
Carb
Tot.
Clay
PC1
PC2
PC3
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
82
The principal component analysis is repeated with 5 variables and the results are
plotted in Figs. 4.20 and 4.21. It is observed from Fig. 4.20, that first three principal
components explain over 90% variance of the dataset. The number of principal
components is limited to three for cluster analysis exercise. Each data point is then
plotted in a three dimensional space with the three principal components being the
three coordinates.
From Fig. 4.21, a strong negative correlation is observed between calcite and PC1 (see
box D6 of Fig. 4.21); which explains over 57% variance. PC1 exhibits weak
correlations with all other variables as well.
PC2 and PC3 do not correlate strongly with any of the variables. They end up
explaining much lower variance in the dataset as compared to PC1. PC2 shows a weak
correlation with porosity and quartz (see box A7 and C7 of Fig. 4.21). PC3 also
correlates weakly with porosity (see box A8 of Fig. 4.21).
Cluster analysis attempts to group closely grouped points into clusters. Since rock
types are limited to three, three clusters are identified from the three dimensional
space. After grouping the samples into three clusters, the average petrophysical
properties for each cluster are calculated and tabulated in Table 4.7 and 4.8. The three
clusters are labeled as X, Y and Z.



83








Fig.4.20: Relationship between the number of principal components selected and variance they explain; first
three principal components explain more than 90% variation in the dataset and by selecting first three principal
components, the dimensionality of the problem can be reduced from five to three.











84













Fig.4.21: Pairwise scatter plot showing variation of porosity, TOC, quartz, calcite and total clay with each
other and with three principal components; calcite shows a very good negative correlation with principal
component 1 (see D6) and weak correlations with TOC (see B6) and total clay(see E6) content. Principal
component 2 exhibits weak correlations with porosity (see A7) and quartz content (see C7). Principal component
3 shows a weak correlation with porosity (see A8).






1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
A B C D E F G H
Tot.
Clay

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
A B C D E F G H
Tot.
Clay
85




Table 4.7: Porosity and TOC data for three clusters identified using Efacies; porosity of cluster Y is the
highest, however its TOC content is not very high. Cluster X has both high porosity and high TOC. Cluster Z
has the least porosity and the least TOC.




Table 4.8: Mineralogy data for three clusters identified using Efacies; cluster X, Y and Z are distinct in
terms of their calcite content, however they seem to be having overlapping quartz and clay content.
It is observed that all three clusters have distinct calcite content with calcite content
increasing from cluster X to cluster Z. We also observe that cluster X with
average porosity close to the average porosity of the entire dataset and higher than
average TOC is similar to petrofacies 1 and Hg rock type A. The average calcite
content of cluster X is under 5% wt. Cluster X is therefore an aggregation of the
rock samples that are lean in calcite and rich in clay. They also happen to have the
highest quartz content. Cluster Y has the highest porosity among all the three
clusters; much higher than the average porosity of the dataset but its TOC content is
considerably lower than the average for the dataset. The average calcite content of
cluster Y is also higher than 10% wt. which is similar to petrofacies 2 and Hg rock
type B. Cluster Y is therefore an aggregation of rock samples with moderate calcite
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
X 5.7 5.5-5.9 5.1 5.0-5.2 377
Y 7.2 6.9-7.5 3.0 2.8-3.2 153
Z 4.7 4.4-5.0 2.2 2.0-2.3 266
No. of
Samples
TOC Helium Porosity
Clusters
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
Avg.
95%
Confidence
Interval
X 32.5 31.7-33.4 2.9 2.6-3.3 41.4 40.5-42.3
Y 15.0 13.9-16.1 10.8 9.4-12.1 49.7 48.2-51.2
Z 18.8 17.4-20.1 31.5 28.9-34.0 24.4 23.1-25.8
Calcite Quartz Clay
Clusters
86
content, high porosity but low TOC. Cluster Z represents calcite rich samples. The
average calcite content for this cluster is over 30% wt. Cluster Z also has the least
porosity and the least TOC among all three clusters. Petrophysically, it seems similar
to petrofacies 3 and Hg rock type C.
The classification of the samples using this technique is not as distinct as the one
obtained through classification of lithofacies. We observe that these clusters exhibit an
overlap in terms of certain petrophysical parameters. We can see that cluster X and
cluster Y have overlapping clay content. In fact the average clay content of cluster
Y (Cluster Y is similar to petrofacies 2) is higher than the average clay content of
cluster X (Cluster X is similar to petrofacies 1). From Table 4.4 and 4.5, we
observe that in case of petrofacies, it is exactly opposite with petrofacies 1 having
much higher clay content than petrofacies 2. A similar observation can also be made
regarding the average quartz content of cluster Y and cluster Z. Thus classification
of rock samples using Efacies technique is not as distinct as the one obtained through
classification of lithofacies into petrofacies.
In spite of the overlap, for most of the petrophysical parameters, we observe trends
that are similar to those observed while classifying samples into petrofacies and into
Hg rock types. We can therefore say that a fairly good one to one correlation exists
between the clusters identified using Efacies program, petrofacies and Hg rock types
as shown in Table 4.9. Variation of some of the key petrophysical parameters in the
three clusters is shown in Fig.4.22.

87
Cluster Petrofacies Hg Rock Type
X 1 A
Y 2 B
Z 3 C
Table 4.9: Relationship between clusters, petrofacies and Hg rock types; good one to one correlation is
observed between clusters, petrofacies and Hg rock types.









Fig.4.22: Average porosity, TOC and calcite content for three clusters; all three clusters have distinct calcite
content. Negative correlation is observed between TOC and calcite content of the clusters with TOC decreasing
from cluster X to cluster Z. Cluster X has both good porosity and good TOC and, similar to petrofacies 1,
seems to represent the best reservoir rock in the field.



Avg. Porosity, TOC and Calcite content of Three
Clusters Indentified in Barnett Shale
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
X Y Z
Clusters
A
v
g
.

P
o
r
o
s
i
t
y

a
n
d

A
v
g
.

T
O
C

(
%
)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
A
v
g
.

C
a
l
c
i
t
e

C
o
n
t
e
n
t

(
%

w
t
.
)
Porosity TOC Calcite
Total No. of Data Points = 796
88
4.8 SEM study of Rock Types:
Moncrieff (2009) selected samples from three petrofacies and studied them under
Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope (ESEM) at Integrated Core
Characterization Center (IC
3
) at University of Oklahoma. The study was focused on
the microstructure, extent of kerogen and the location of pores in these samples. Some
of the images borrowed from his work are presented here. These are secondary
electron images of samples that are polished and ion milled. The cross section of the
sample photographed in these images is about 25-35 m wide. The images are also
taken at higher magnification to focus on the organic matter present in these samples.
The main image and its zoomed image are presented side by side in Fig. 4.23, 4.24
and 4.25.






Fig. 4.23: (Left) Secondary Electron image of a sample from Petrofacies 1. The image covers 31 m width of
the sample, (right) higher resolution image (5 m wide) of a same sample (Moncrieff, 2009); Dark black spots
seen in the picture represent the organic matter in the sample. Pore space in the organics is clearly visible in the
picture on the right.
The black spots in the left image represent the organic matter in the sample.
Significant amount of organic matter can be seen in samples from petrofacies 1. We


89
also observe from the picture on the right that the organic matter has considerable
porosity in it.






Fig. 4.24: (Left) Secondary Electron image of a sample from Petrofacies 2. The image covers 34.5 m width
of the sample; (right) higher resolution image (4.7 m wide) of a same sample (Moncrieff, 2009); Dark black
spots representing the organic matter are far fewer than petrofacies 1. Once again the porosity inside the
organic matter is clearly visible.
Compared to petrofacies 1, organic matter in petrofacies 2 samples is considerably
lower. Organic matter again displays considerable pore space.






Fig. 4.25: (Left) Secondary Electron image of a sample from Petrofacies 3 (Moncrieff, 2009). The image
covers 26 m width of the sample, (right) higher resolution image (8.7 m wide) of a same sample; very few
dark black spots are seen in the picture as these samples are lean in terms of TOC.


90
Organic matter in petrofacies 3 samples is very low. Hardly any black spots are visible
in samples from petrofacies 3.
The three petrofacies appear distinctly different under ESEM due to significant
variation in their organic content. From Fig.s 4.23, 4.24 and 4.25, we can conclude
that the three petrofacies not only have distinct petrophysical properties, they vary in
terms of their texture as well.
From the ESEM images of the three petrofacies, the organic matter is clearly seen
decreasing going from petrofacies 1 to petrofacies 3. That is consistent with the results
of TOC measurements on the three petrofacies. We also observe considerable porosity
in the organics. If the majority of the pore space in Barnett shale is in the organics then
we should observe a good positive correlation between the TOC and the porosity.
However, no such correlation has been observed (see Fig.4.16). It means that there is
some pore space outside the organic matter as well. From Hg injection measurements,
we know that considerable porosity is accessed through the pore throats which are few
nanometers in diameter. Since the standard ESEM machine has a maximum resolution
down to few tens of nanometers, there is a possibility that the pore space outside the
organic matter have connecting pore throats that are smaller than what standard ESEM
machine can resolve; hence not well captured in these images.
4.9 Correlation of petrofacies with production data:
Based on the petrophysical measurements and the lithofacies classification into the
petrofacies, petrofacies 1 seems to be the best reservoir rock in the field. Having
populated the three petrofacies through out the cored interval (see Appendix A), we
91
know where the petrofacies 1 is located in all four wells. In this exercise, we measure
the relative thickness of petrofacies 1 over the perforated interval (see Appendix B)
in two vertical wells (they are two of the four wells included in this study) completed
in a similar manner and compare it with the production profile for these wells. Both
these wells are located in a core production area of the Newark East field, with well
A located in Wise county and well B in Denton county.
As discussed earlier, well A and well B are both vertical wells. They are perforated
in the upper as well as in the lower Barnett interval. Both these wells are hydraulically
fractured with water being the fracturing fluid and sand being the proppant. Both these
wells came on production in year 2003, with well A producing from September 2003
and well B producing from January 2003. Till June 2009, well A produced for 70
months straight and well B produced for 78 months. For the sake of this comparison,
we have only included the first 70 months of production data from these wells. The
results of this comparison are included in Table 4.10.



Table 4.10: Comparison of the thickness of petrofacies 1 with well productivity
From Appendix B, we observe that petrofacies 1 is nearly continuous over the
perforated interval in well A with thin streaks of petrofacies 2 and petrofacies 3 in
between. From Table 4.10, petrofacies 1 is observed to contribute over 83% thickness
to the perforated interval in well A. In well B, petrofacies 1 is not nearly as
Upper Barnett Lower Barnett Total
ft ft ft % MCF
Well 'A' 56 215 271 83.7 628,039
Well 'B' 72 470 542 51.7 440,611
Well Name
Thickness of Perforated Zone
Petrofacies 1
in Total
Perforated
Zone
Cumulative
Production
over 70
months
92
continuous as it is in well A. We observe thick intervals of petrofacies 2 and 3
frequently separating petrofacies 1. As a result, petrofacies 1 contributes only about
52% thickness to the perforated interval in well B. The thickness of petrofacies 1
over the perforated interval seems to affect the gas production as well. The cumulative
gas production over the first 70 months for well A is observed to be 42% higher than
well B (see Table 4.10).
Petrofacies 1 also has the highest quartz content which makes it the most suitable for
initiating a hydraulic fracture. If petrofacies 1 is continuous over the perforated
interval then the vertical growth of the fracture is expected to cover the entire
perforated interval. As petrofacies 2 and 3 differ considerably from petrofacies 1 in
terms of mineralogy, they are expected to have different mechanical properties. As a
result, thick intervals of petrofacies 2 and 3 may inhibit the fracture growth and act as
fracture barriers. In well A, where petrofacies 1 is nearly continuous, the hydraulic
fracture is expected to have covered the entire perforated interval. Hence the
producing interval and the perforated interval, in well A, are expected to have a
similar thickness. In well B, thick intervals of petrofacies 2 and 3 may have
prevented the hydraulic fracture from going all the way through the perforated
interval; resulting in a producing interval that is much smaller than the perforated
interval.
A comparison between the thickness of petrofacies 1 and the overall gas production
seems to suggest that the continuous intervals of petrofacies 1 with few interruptions
over the perforated zone of a vertical well are desirable for higher gas production. The
well with long and continuous intervals of petrofacies 1 produces better.
93
This substantiates our conclusion that petrofacies 1 is the best reservoir rock in the
field.

















94
4.10 Summary of observations and results:
- Porosity and TOC have a wide dynamic range: (2-10%) and (1-7%),
respectively. The average porosity of the entire dataset is 5.7 +/- 2.1% and
average TOC is 4.0 +/-1.6%.
- Quartz, calcite and illite are the dominant minerals. Calcite is observed to have
the widest dynamic range and is therefore most suitable for reporting
mineralogy variation among petrofacies.
- Calcite also correlates well with porosity and TOC. It shows a good negative
correlation with porosity and TOC.
- Based on porosity, TOC and calcite content, samples can be grouped in three
classes which are described as Petrofacies.
- Average values of porosity, TOC and calcite for the three petrofacies are as
follows:
Petrofacies
Porosity
(%)
TOC
(% wt.)
Calcite Content
(% wt.)
1 6.1 4.8 3
2 6.0 3.6 15
3 3.7 1.8 46
95
Petrofacies 1 has the highest porosity and TOC and has the highest quartz and
the least calcite content. Petrofacies 3 is a calcite rich rock with the least
porosity and the least TOC. Petrophysically, petrofacies 1 and petrofacies 3
represent the best and the worst rock in the field respectively.
- Three distinct capillary pressure curves (A, B and C) are observed based on Hg
injection measurements on 130 samples. A good one to one correlation
(petrofacies 1 with Hg rock type A, petrofacies 2 with Hg rock type B and
petrofacies 3 with Hg rock type C) is observed between the capillary pressure
curve types and petrofacies.
- In an independent exercise, three clusters (X, Y and Z) were identified using
the same dataset which was used in rock typing. The three clusters showed a
good separation in terms of their average petrophysical properties. The average
properties of the three clusters were on the same lines as the average
petrophysical properties of three petrofacies. The clusters and petrofacies thus
correlated well, with petrofacies 1 correlating with cluster X, petrofacies 2
correlating with cluster Y and petrofacies 3 correlating well with cluster Z.
- The samples from the three petrofacies exhibit considerable variation in texture
in the ESEM images.
- ESEM examination of the samples shows a clear decreasing trend in TOC
going from petrofacies 1 to petrofacies 3, which is consistent with the results
of the petrophysical measurements. Most of the visible pore space is observed
in the organic matter. Since porosity and TOC do not correlate from the
96
petrophysical measurements, there should be some pore space outside the
organic matter as well. The pore space outside the organic matter is probably
connected by the pore throats which are smaller in diameter than the maximum
resolution of standard ESEM machine; hence not captured in ESEM images.
- The thickness of the petrofacies correlates well with the overall gas production.
When the thickness of the petrofacies 1 over the perforated interval for the two
vertical wells (well A and well B) is compared with the overall gas
production from these wells over the first 70 months, we observe that well A,
in which petrofacies 1 contributes 83% thickness to the perforated interval,
produces 42% more gas than well B, in which petrofacies 1 contributes only
52% thickness to the perforated interval.










97
4.11 Field Applications:
Rock typing is an exercise of separating a good reservoir rock from bad. Even though
the distinction between a good and a bad reservoir rock is not as clear cut in shales as
it is in sandstones or carbonates; on a finer scale, they can be separated into rock types
with distinct petrophysical properties. Knowing the spatial distribution of the best
reservoir rock type in a shale play, a horizontal well can be placed in such way that its
contact with the best reservoir rock is maximized and the hydraulic fractures are
propagated through a zone that is most likely to bear gas; resulting in optimum gas
production.
However, there could be other variables that may dictate the placement of horizontal
well such as keeping the horizontal wellbore away from the water bearing zones or
placing them in a silicious section which is easier to fracture. Along with these
considerations, the location of best reservoir rock in the field can also be taken into
account while deciding the location of kick-off point of the horizontal well.







98
Chapter 5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions:
The main conclusions of this study are:
- A methodology based on porosity, mineralogy, TOC and Hg injection capillary
pressure has been developed for identifying petrofacies (rock types) in shales.
- Using this methodology, three distinct petrofacies are identified in Barnett
shale play. These three petrofacies are distinct in terms of their calcite content
with calcite content increasing from petrofacies 1 to petrofacies 3.
- Petrofacies 1, with porosity and TOC higher than the average for the dataset,
represents the best reservoir rock in the field. The quartz content of this
petrofacies is also the highest making it the most suitable for initiating a
hydraulic fracture treatment.
- TOC shows a strong negative correlation with calcite. ESEM imaging confirms
the same.
- Petrofacies not only vary in terms of their petrophysical properties, they
exhibit variability in their texture as well.
- Considerable porosity in these samples is accessed from pore throats that are
few nanometers in diameter and beyond the resolution of standard ESEM
machines. Since this pore space is not captured through ESEM imaging, the
99
correlation between porosity and TOC, observed from ESEM imaging can not
be verified.
- Comparison of production data with the occurrence of petrofacies, in two
cored vertical wells (from this study) with similar completions, confirms that
the well with the long continuous intervals of petrofacies 1 with minimum
interference of other petrofacies over the producing interval produces the best
in terms of overall gas production over the same time frame.
5.2 Recommendations:
- The rock typing methodology developed for Barnett shale needs to be tested in
other shale gas plays. If it is observed to work in other shale gas plays as well
then we will have a standard method for rock typing in shales.
- Correlation between the thickness of the petrofacies and the production data
need to be tested in other wells from Newark East field.
- In order to use this work in the field, it is important to identify the best rock
type spatially. Spatial distribution of petrofacies can then be used as another
consideration while deciding on the horizontal well placement location. Spatial
distribution of petrofacies can be achieved by correlating log data with core
measurements over the cored interval. These correlations along with
geostatistical tools can then be used to populate the petrofacies throughout the
field.
100
- Three petrofacies vary considerably in terms of their mineralogy and are
expected to have considerably different mechanical properties. Mechanical
properties should be measured on the core plugs from the three petrofacies to
check if any of these petrofacies could possibly act as a fracture barrier.















101
REFERENCES
1. Amaefule J.O., Altunbay M., Tiab D., Kersey D.G. and Keelan D.K., 1993,
Enhanced Reservoir Description: Using Core and Log Data to Identify
Hydraulic (Flow) Units and Predict Permeability in Uncored Intervals/Wells,
SPE 26436 presented at Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Houston, Texas, 3-6 October
2. Annual Energy Outlook, 2009, US Energy Information Administration,
Report# DOE/EIA 0383 (2009), http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/gas.html
3. Ballard B.D., 2007, Quantitative Mineralogy of Reservoir Rocks Using Fourier
Transform Infrared Spectroscopy, SPE 113023-STU, Presented at Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Anaheim, California, 11-14 November
4. Emeis K.C. and Kvenvolden K.A., 1986, Shipboard Organic Geochemistry on
JOIDES Resolution: Technical Note Ocean Drilling Program, 7: 130
5. Frantz J. Jr. and Jochen V., 2005, When your gas reservoir is unconventional
so is our solution, Schlumberger,
http://www.slb.com/media/services/solutions/reservoir/shale_gas.pdf
6. Griffiths P.R. and De Haseth J.A., Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometry,
2
nd
Ed., 2007, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons
7. Grim R.E., Clay Mineralogy, 51-99, 2
nd
Ed., 1968, New York: McGraw-Hill
8. Gunter G.W., Finneran J.M., Hartmann D.J. and Miller J.D., 1997, Early
Determination of Reservoir Flow Units Using an Integrated Petrophysical
102
Method, SPE 38679 presented at Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
San Antonio, Texas, 5-8 October
9. Jarvie D.M., 1991, Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Analysis in Treatise of
Petroleum Geology: Handbook of Petroleum Geology: Source and Migration
Processes and Evaluation Techniques, Ed. R.K.Merrill, AAPG Press., Tulsa,
OK
10. Jarvie D.M., 2004, Evaluation of Hydrocarbon Generation and Storage in
Barnett Shale, Ft. Worth Basin, Texas, Humble Geochemical Services
Presentation (Unpublished)
11. Jarvie D.M., 2005, Shale Gas Potential of Source Rocks along the Ouachita
Thrust Front, Barnett Shale Symposium III, June 8-9 2005, Pg.3,
http://www.beg.utexas.edu/pttc/archive/barnettshalesym/2005barnettshale
symp..pdf
12. Jarvie D.M., Hill R.J., Ruble T.E. and Pollastro R.M., 2007, Unconventional
Shale Gas Systems: The Mississippian Barnett Shale of North-Central Texas as
One Model for Thermogenic Shale-Gas Assessment, AAPG Bulletin, V.91(4):
475-499
13. Kamath J., 1992, Evaluation of Accuracy of Estimating Air Permeability from
Hg Injection Data, SPEFE, V.7(4): 304-310, SPE 18181-PA, doi:
10.2118/18181-PA
14. Karastathis A., 2007, Petrophysical Measurements on a Tight Gas Shale,
Masters Thesis, Oklahoma U., Norman, Oklahoma
103
15. Lee S.H., Kharghoria A. and Datta-Gupta A., 2002, Electrofacies
Characterization and Permeability Prediction in Complex Reservoirs, SPE Res.
Eval. & Eng. V. 5(3): 237-248, SPE 78662-PA, doi: 10:2118/78662-PA
16. Martineau D.F., 2007, History of Newark East Field and the Barnett shale as a
gas reservoir, AAPG Bulletin, V. 91(4): 399-403
17. Moncrieff J., 2009, Microstructure of Shales, Masters Thesis (In Progress),
Oklahoma U., Norman, Oklahoma (Unpublished)
18. Montgomery S.L., Jarvie D.M., Bowker K.A. and Pollastro R.M., 2005,
Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, North-Central Texas: Gas
Shale Play with Multi-Trillion Cubic Foot Potential, AAPG Bulletin, V.89(2):
155-175
19. Navigant Consulting Inc. (NCI), 2008, North American Natural Gas Supply
Assessment, prepared for US Department of Energys 2009 Annual Energy
Outlook,
http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/pdfs/ng_supply_assessment_2.pdf
20. Pittman E.D., 1992, Relationship of Porosity and Permeability to Various
Parameters Derived from Mercury Injection Capillary Pressure Curves for
Sandstones, AAPG Bulletin V.76(2): 191-198
21. Pollastro R.M., 2003, Geologic and Production Characteristics Utilized in
Assessing the Barnett Shale Continuous (Unconventional) Gas Accumulation,
Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Fort Worth Basin, Texas, Barnett
104
Shale Symposium, Pg.7,
http://foundation.aapg.org/library/2003barnettshalesymp.pdf
22. Pollastro R.M., Jarvie D.M., Hill R.J. and Adams C.W., 2007, Geologic
Framework of the Mississippian Barnett Shale, Barnett Paleozoic Total
Petroleum System, Bend Arch Fort Worth Basin, Texas, AAPG Bulletin,
V.91(4): 405-436
23. Prothero D.R. and Schwab F., Sedimentary Geology: An Introduction to
Sedimentary Rocks and Stratigraphy, 2
nd
Ed., 2004, New York: W.H.
Freeman
24. Shelley B., Grieser B., Johnson B.J., Fielder E.O., Heinze J.R. and Werline
J.R., 2008, Data Analysis of Barnett Shale Completions, SPE J. Vol.13 (3):
366-374, SPE 100674-PA
25. Sigal R.F., 2007, Capillary Pressure Measurements on Barnett Core, Progress
Report, Barnett Shale Research Program, University of Oklahoma, Norman,
Oklahoma (Unpublished)
26. Sigal R.F., 2009, A Methodology for Blank and Conformance Corrections for
High Pressure Mercury Porosimetry, Meas. Sci. Technol. 20 (2009), 045108:
11pp
27. Singh P., 2008, Lithofacies and Sequence Stratigraphic Framework of the
Barnett Shale, NorthEast Texas, Phd. Dissertation, Oklahoma U., Norman,
Oklahoma
105
28. Sondergeld C.H. and Rai C.S., 1993, A New Concept of Quantitative Core
Characterization, The Leading Edge, V.12(7): 774-779
29. Swanson B.F., 1981, A Simple Correlation Between Permeabilities and
Mercury Capillary Pressures, JPT, V.33(12): 2498-2504
30. Thomeer J.H., 1960, Introduction of a Pore Geometrical Factor Defined by the
Capillary Pressure Curve, JPT, V.12(3): 73-77
31. Thomeer J.H., 1983, Air Permeability as a Function of Three Pore Network
Parameters, JPT, V.35(4): 809-814
32. Tiab D. and Donaldson E.C., Petrophysics Theory and Practice of Measuring
Reservoir Rock and Fluid Transport Properties, 2
nd
Ed., 2004, Boston: Gulf
Publishing Co.
33. Tissot B.P., 1984, Recent Advances in Petroleum Geochemistry Applied to
Hydrocarbon Exploration, AAPG Bulletin, V.68(5): 545-563
34. Zhao H., Givens N.B. and Curtis B., 2007, Thermal Maturity of the Barnett
Shale Determined from Well-Log Analysis, AAPG Bulletin, V.91(4): 535-549
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
Petrofacies distribution over the cored interval in Well A
Appendix A
106
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
Petrofacies distribution over the cored interval in Well A continued..
107
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
Petrofacies distribution over the cored interval in Well B
108
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
Petrofacies distribution over the cored interval in Well B continued..
109
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
Petrofacies distribution over the cored interval in Well C
110
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
Petrofacies distribution over the cored interval in Well D
111
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
Petrofacies distribution over the perforated interval in Well A
Appendix B
112
Perforated
Interval Only
Petrofacies distribution over the perforated interval in Well B
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
113
Perforated
Interval Only
Petrofacies 1 Petrofacies 2 Petrofacies 3
Petrofacies distribution over the perforated interval in Well B continued..
114
Perforated
Interval Only