olusioner Pengembangan Lapangan, Teknologi dan Kebijakan Migas Guna Meningkatkan Ketahanan Energi Dalam Rangka Ketahan

COMPARTMENT ANALYSIS USING FAULT SEAL PREDICTION IN

MIOCENE CARBONATE RESERVOIR OF BANGGAI BASIN AND
ITS IMPLICATION TO FIELD DEVELOPMENT
Darojatun Fakhrul Dzakirin1, Achmad Zaidy1, Luqman1, Putu Yoga Pratama1, Rizaldy
Rahadian1, Sartika Anastasia1, Waris Budi Raharjo1, Arsyan Hilman Sasoni2, Nailul Marom2.
JOB Pertamina – Medco E&P Tomori Sulawesi, Indonesia1, PT. Geoservices, Indonesia2

Abstract
Research area is located in colision zone between Banggai-Sula microcontinent and Sulawesi
Ophiolite Belt with Miocene carbonates deposited during to post colision. In this structure,
hydrocarbon entrapment is controlled by fault dominated resulted from compressional event.
Fault capacity may act as a conduit or a barrier for hydrocarbon flow. The objective of this
reserach is to analyze compartments in producing field in order to optimize development
scenarios.
Due to the rarely presence of impermeable layer in carbonate platform reservoir, fault seal
analysis method that being used in this research was generating shale gouge ratio, which were
confirmed by cut offs of porosity-vshale, porosity-permeability, and permeability-SGR.
These cut offs were made to determine the minimum limit of hydrocarbon flow through faults
in carbonate reservoir. To confirm connectivity of the compartments, pressure test analysis
was performed on wells separated by faults. The pressure difference may confirm
compartmentalization in reservoir.
The results are showing different characteristics of each fault. Porosity with 2% cut off and
vshale with 0.8% cut off becomes the minimum value for flowing hydrocarbon in reservoir.
Then the value of porosity cut off was associated in porosity-permeability relationship to
obtain the minimum limit of permeability for flowing hydrocarbon, which is 4.6mD. Then
this permeability value is used in permeability-SGR crossplot. From the generated crossplot,
the minimum SGR value is 0.045. based on the analysis, the faults were categorized as
sealing faults, partial sealing faults, and leaking faults. These results also confirmed by RFT
pressure analysis which performed in wells separated by faults.
This Research highlights the possibility for carbonate reservoir compartments in adjacent
fault blocks to be hydrocarbon bearing, water bearing zone or connectivity of the reservoir
itself. Thus it is important for developing oil and gas fields with faulted reservoir.

1. Introduction evolution of the northern margin of the

The research Area is situated along the Australia-New Guinea continental plate,
tectonically complex eastern arm of Sulawesi which formed during the Mesozoic break-up
and includes part of a collision complex of Gondwana. Reorientation of Eurasia,
formed during the Miocene (figure-1). Pacific and Indoaustralian plates promotes
Product of the collision of Banggai-Sula the westwards drift of the northern
Micro-continental plate and a Tertiary non- Australian continental margin in the form of
volcanic arc forming what is currently a sliver micro-continent through the south
known as Central Sulawesi. Sula-Sorong Fault (Figure-2). During the
westward drift of the Banggai-Sula micro-
2. Basic Theory
continent, an aerially extensive Miocene
Geological evolution of the Banggai-Sula
carbonate shelf with localized reef growth
micro-continent is closely related to the
developed along the microcontinental
margin. Research area is located in collision zone between Banggai-Sula Spur and Sulawesi
IATMI 18-XXX
1
Ophiolite Belt. The collision happened in The stratigraphy of Eastern Sulawesi (figure-
Neogene time. Banggai-Sula Spur is part of 4) is related to two distinct depositional time
northward drifting Australia Continent. periods. Firstly representing a continental
Australia–SE Asia collision began in the margin rift / drift sequence of Banggai-Sula
Early Miocene when the Sula Spur collided deposition prior to the collision, and
with the North Sulawesi volcanic arc. secondly representing a foreland basin
Subduction rollback began at about 15 Ma flysch-molasse sequences, deposited in front
into the Jurassic Banda Embayment causing of an easterly-migrating thrust front after
extension of the Sula Spur (Hall, 2012). collision had occurred. A generalized
stratigraphic column of the Tomori-Banggai
Banggai-Sula Spur then collided with Basin is presented in Figure-3. Basement is
ophiolite belts and another associated rocks overlain locally by thin the Late Eocene –
of East Sulawesi. During the drifting of the Early Oligocene basal clastics and
Banggai-Sula Microcontinent to collision carbonates, and regionally by a thick section
with Sulawesi Ophiolite Belts in Miocene, of the Miocene carbonates and clastics,
depositional environment in Banggai-Sula namely the Salodik Group. This carbonate
appears as shallow to deep marine which is group includes the Tomori, Matindok,
good for carbonate growth, reefal to clastic, Minahaki and Stratigraphic Sequences.
thus this carbonate acts as main reservoir Tomori Formation, which is essentially of
rock in the research area. This carbonates the Lower Miocene age, consists
sequence continued to deposited as the predominantly of shallow-water bioclastic
Banggai-Sula collided with Sulawesi platform limestones, occasionally dolomitic,
Ophiolite Belt. The collision affected the with minor claystones and coals. The Tomori
reservoir to be thrusted and faulted. In this Formation contain good to excellent
research area, hydrocarbon entrapment is potential source rocks, which are believed to
controlled by fault dominated resulted from be the origin of the hydrocarbons in this area
compressional event (figure-3). and other structures in the Eastern Sulawesi
area. The Matindok Formation is Middle
The Miocene carbonate shelf has been
Miocene age consists predominatly of
identified as the Salodik Group and
claystone and shale with sandstone,
comprises the Tomori, Matindok and
limestone and coal. Shale and coals within
Minahaki formations. In the Late Miocene,
this unit indicate fair potential gas prone
the Banggai-Sula micro-continental shelf
source rocks. The Minahaki Formation in the
approached the eastern part of proto-
research area and adjacent areas consists of
Sulawesi and induced a collision system,
clean platform facies limestones and
which is manifested by an Ophiolite Belt,
dolomites of Upper Miocene age, which is
resulted in folding, thrusting and imbricating
capped at the top by reefal buildup namely
structures of micro-continental shelf
Mentawa Member, and basinal facies
sections, and creation of a foreland basin
limestone, marl and claystone namely
controlled by thrust loading. Presently, there
Stratigraphic Sequence. The Minahaki
are three principal exploration play types
bioclastic limestone platform facies and
found in Research Area: Miocene carbonate
Mantawa reefal buildups provide good
buildup, wrench fault anticline and thrusted
productive gas reservoirs (figure-5).
anticline. The main objectives of this
research is carbonate buildup and wrench 3. Methodology
anticline play type. Regional geology data, seismic
interpretation, and petrophysical analysis
were provided to accomplish this research.
The best method to be adopted would be
quantitative analysis which divided into two
steps; geological literature study and data the capillary entry pressure of fault rocks and
interpretation. juxtaposed stratigraphies) reaching equilibrium
across the fault over geological time (Fisher et
Generally, a static hydrocarbon column held al. 2001). The geometrical relationships of
across a fault is caused by aquifer and faults, their sealing properties, and the
buoyancy pressure of fluids (applied against geometry and petrophysical properties of

IATMI 18-XXX
2
faulted blocks have been used by many hydrocarbon, which is 4.6mD (table-1,
researchers to quantify the effects faults can Figure-7 & figure-8).
have on migration pathways and entrapment
of hydrocarbons within sedimentary basins
(Yoshioka 1986; Knipe 1992; Fulljames et 5. Conclusion
al. 1997; Freeman et al. 1998). However, Firstly, fault throw analysis needs to be
modelling the sealing effects of faults based conducted to determine compartement in
on the geometry and petrophysical properties reservoir by fault seal analysis. It is
of the faulted blocks and the parameters of important to be known that the value of fault
deformation is deterministic (Hesthammer & throw as parameter in calculating Shale
Fossen 2000; James et al. 2004; Bjorlykke et Gouge Ratio. After done with analysing the
al. 2005; Ligtenberg 2005). Due to the rarely fault throw, the lithology juxtaposition also
presence of impermeable layer in carbonate needs to be analysed between downthrown
platform reservoir, fault seal analysis method lithology and upthrown lithology. This
that being used in this research was lithology juxtaposition analysis resulting a
generating shale gouge ratio, which were cross section of the horizon divided by
confirmed by cut offs of porosity-vshale, faults. These analysis followed by
porosity-permeability, and permeability- correlating Shale Gouge Ratio with
SGR. These cut offs were made to determine permeability based on porosity-permeability
the minimum limit of hydrocarbon flow cut off with values of 4.6mD, no gas flow in
through faults in carbonate reservoir. To this test interval. This SGR-Permeability
confirm connectivity of the compartments, correlation is generated in each faults which
pressure test analysis was performed on likely to form compartements among wells
wells separated by faults. The pressure in the reservoir. From the generated crossplot
difference may confirm between fault permeabiility vs SGR, the
compartmentalization in reservoir. minimum SGR value is 0.045. Based on the
analysis, the faults were categorized as
4. Result and Discussion
sealing faults and leaking faults (figure-9 &
The results are showing different
figure-10).
characteristics of each fault. Porosity with
2% cut off and vshale with 0.8% cut off Calculates fault zone permeability (Kfz)
becomes the minimum value for flowing from the following expression (Manzocchi et
hydrocarbon in reservoir. Then the value of al, 1999) :
porosity cut off was associated in porosity-
permeability relationship to obtain the Log(Kfz)=-4*SGR-0.25*log(D)*(1-SGR)5
minimum limit of permeability for flowing
SGR equals Shale Gauge Ratio (Yielding et
al, 1997) and D equals fault displacement.

To confirm connection among

compartements which divided by faults, it
also important to analyze pressure in the
reservoir. This pressure analysis was done by
comparing pressures among the wells which
divided by faults. Pressure difference at same
datum intervals in the reservoir indicated that
the reservoir is divided into compartements.
The pressure data samples were taken at the
same datum. This comparison shows the fault modeling shows low cut off for SGR
differences among wells which separated by on the suspected sealing faults, correlation of
faults, shown by pressure difference. There XX-6, XX-4, XX-1 shows different log
are four faults suspected as sealing faults that response and pressure plot from each wells
created compartments (red lines on the map, shows different trends (figure- 11,12,13,14).
figure-12). The eveidences are : results of

IATMI 18-XXX
3
6. Recommendation American Association of Petroleum
Based on the analysis in this paper, the Geologists Memoir, p. 108-121.
author recommends that in terms of
developing the field, the compartments in the Embry, AF, and Klovan, JE, 1971, A Late
reservoir may become the concern for Devonian reef tract on Northeastern Banks
drilling or well placements. Island, NWT: Canadian Petroleum
Geology Bulletin, v. 19, p. 730-781.
7. Acknowledgement Fisher, Q. J., dan R. J. Knipe, 1998, Fault
The authors wish to thank the managements Sealing Processes in Siliciclastic
of J.O.B Pertamina – Medco E&P Tomori Sediments, dalam G. Jones, Q. J. Fisher
Sulawesi, for their permission to publish this dan R. J. Knipe, Faulting, Fault Sealing
manuscript, and also wish to thank the team and Fluid Flow in Hydrocarbon
for the great teamwork. Reservoirs:Geological Society (London)
Special Publication 147, p. 117 – 134
8. References
Allan, U. S., 1989, Model for Hydrocarbon Hall, Robert, 2012, Late Jurassic–Cenozoic
Migration and Entrapment Within Faulted reconstructions of the Indonesian region
Structures, The American Association of and the Indian Ocean. Tectonophysics 570
Petroleum Geologist Bulletin, v.73, p. 803- – 571, p.1-41.
811. Pertamina – BPPKA, 1996, Petroleum
Antoniellini, M., dan A Aydin, 1994, Effect Geology of Indonesia Basins.
of Faulting on Fluid Flow in Porous Wilson, J.L. (1975) Carbonate Facies in
Sandstones: Petrophysical Properties: The Geologic History. Springer-Verlag, New
American Association of Petroleum York.
Geologist Bulletin, v.78, p. 355 – 377
Bretan, Peter., Graham Yielding, dan Helen
Jones., 2003. Using Calibrated Shale
Gouge Ratio to Estimate Hydrocarbon
Column Heights. The American
Association of Petroleum Geologist
Bulletin, v. 87, p. 397 – 413.
Dunham, R. J., 1962, Classification of
carbonate rocks according to depositional
texture. In: Ham, W. E. (ed.),
Classification of carbonate rocks:

IATMI 18-XXX
4
List of Figures

Figure-1. Location of research area

Figure-2. Tectonic event illustration of Banggai Sula (Hall, 2012)

Figure-3. Tectonic schematic of Banggai Sula (Sani, 2012).

IATMI 18-XXX
5
 Figure-4. Stratigraphic column (Pertamina – BPPKA,1996)

Figure-5. Petroleum System Chart of Banggai Basin (Satyana, 2006)

Figure-6. Research area subsurface map location

IATMI 18-XXX
6
 Figure-7. Porosity vs Vsh Cut Off

Figure-8. Porosity vs Permeability Cut Off

Figure-9. Fault modeling by SGR model result

Figure-10. SGR vs Fault Permeability cut off to determine sealing and leaking faults
 Figure-11. Animated cross section shows reservoir divided by faults.

Figure-12. Well correlation of XX-6, XX-4 and XX-1.

Figure-13. Fault modelling results in suspected sealing faults and the crossplot of SGR vs Kfz
 Figure-14. Pressure data of wells in northeastern structure and northwestern structure.

List of Tables

Table-1. Wells, depth, reservoir properties and hydrocarbon flow rates.

Depth Perm HC Flow Rate
Well Poro Vsh DST result
(ft) (mD) (mmscfd)
XX-1 6106 0.277 0.003 30.937 Gas Flow 26
XX-2 6588 0.269 0.009 1.197 Gas Flow 3.7
XX-2 6550 0.305 0.015 2.841 Gas Flow 6.4
XX-2 6081 0.32 0.007 2617 Gas Flow 20.4
XX-3 6524 0.268 0.035 4.699 Gas Flow 8.43
XX-3 6458 0.31 0.021 17.71 Gas Flow 12.1
XX-4 6674 0.235 0.024 75 No Flow 0
XX-4 6662 0.2 0.008 4.61 No Flow 0
XX-5 6540 0.31 0.0098 424.654 Gas Flow 0.864
XX-5 6030 0.265 0.025 5.511 Gas Flow 5.128
XX-6 6451 0.275 0.01 44.816 Gas Flow 4