Geological Interpretation of Wireline Logs

Understanding STOIIP GIOWL xx.x

This is the STOIIP Equation: Stock Tank Oil Initially In Place. We could also consider GIIP for gas or Conversion Factors
HCIIP to represent generic hydrocarbon. This is an important equation because it tells us what our STOCK TANK Atmospheric pressure of 14.696 psi, temperature of 60oF (16oC)
from to X by
focus should be. We need to get the best possible measurements or estimates of each of the
parameters in this equation to make reliable volumetric estimates of STOIIP. ft m 0.3048
m ft 3.281
STOIIP = (BRV * N:G * Ø * So * RF *𝟏Τ𝐅𝐕𝐅 ) * RF FVF - Formation Volume Factor: Bo and Bg in mm 25.4
But how do we remember this equation? The best way is to visualise it as an image, which also helps The hydrocarbon volume change from the reservoir to the stock tank. mile km 1.609
us understand the relationships between the parameters, the nomenclature that we must Depends on:
consistently use and the methods we could employ to determine these parameters and the workflow. • Fluid composition (API gravity, Gas-Oil-Ratio -GOR) acre ha 0.4047

Workflow: Note the order that we determine the parameters below: • Changes in Pressure and Temperature between reservoir and stock tank ha acre 2.471
B0 for oil, Bg for gas. Typical Bo: high GOR oil 1.4, low GOR oil 1.2, bitumen 1.05 Sq mi ha 259
• BRV: First we establish the bulk rock volume from seismic mapping. The lowest closing contour
should define the spill point Sq mi km2 2.59

• N:G: Once we have the BRV, we need to determine the lithological make-up of the BRV from Sq mi acre 640
cores and lithological logs if we have wells, or analogues and depositional models if we do not. RF - Recovery Factor bbl m3 0.1590
The logs we would use are typically gamma-ray, and neutron-density. The volume of hydrocarbon that we can actually get out of the reservoir. Typically
around 30-35% for oil and around 70% for gas. m3 bbl 6.2898
• Ø – Porosity: Once we have a handle on the lithologies we need to define the porosity. Given that
Depends on: scf m3 0.02832
lithology and porosity are closely linked, this tends to be an integrated / iterative process. The
• Rock flow properties (Ø, Kh)
main porosity logs would the neutron, density and sonic logs. If we have no wells available for the m3 scf 35.31
• Hydrocarbon type (gas, light oil, heavy oil)
prospect, we must defer to analogues and predictive models.
• Fluid-rock interaction (wettability, capillary pressure) Boe (1) Btu ca. 5.80 x 106
• S0 – Oil Saturation: Once the pore volume is established, we can turn our attention to the fluid • Sandbody connectivity scf Btu ca. 1050
saturations which are ideally determined from cores and logs. If no wells have been drilled, we • Drive Mechanism
scf boe ca. 1.79 x10-4
again turn to analogues and models.
boe scf ca. 5600 (2)
Direct Well Measurements: Ideally the
parameters we need should be measured Core analysis lb kg 0.4536
directly from cores or logs. But this is not Resistivity logs NET PAY Pa Nm2 1
possible in undrilled prospects. Where no Saturation Models So bar kPa 100
wells have been drilled we must refer to
analogues and models. psi kPa 6.895
Core analysis
Analogues and Models: A model should Porosity logs NET RESERVOIR atm kPa 101.3
ideally be based on data from nearby Porosity Models Ø Torr kPa 0.1333
wells, from the same petroleum system,
in the same basin setting. If this is not 1. Barrel of Oil Equivalent (boe) is
Core analysis NET SAND a measure of energy, not
possible we have to calibrate our models
from data in other systems, which may Lithology logs N:G volume. However, it is used as
pseudo-volume comparator
not be so reliable and bring greater Depositional Models when comparing oils of
uncertainty.
BRV different gravities, or oil and
gas. There are no standard
Seismic mapping, identifying closing contours conversion factors.
2. Some sources suggest 6000.

Spill Point HWC

Hydrocarbon / Water Contact.
Identified by mapping the lowest Could also be Oil Water Contact
closing contour of the trapping (OWC) or Gas Water Contact (GWC).
structure using seismic

Author: Greg Samways; Date: 05/12/2016; Version: 1.0 © Geolumina 2016: Please share with your colleagues