Advertisement

International Journal of Earth Sciences

, Volume 108, Issue 1, pp 155–172 | Cite as

High-resolution lithofacies and porosity modeling of the mixed siliciclastic–carbonate deposits of the Burdigalian Dam Formation, Eastern Saudi Arabia

  • Abdallah A. AbdelkarimEmail author
  • Osman M. Abdullatif
  • Lamidi O. Babalola
  • Mohammed H. Makkawi
  • Mohamed A. Yassin
Original Paper
  • 100 Downloads

Abstract

Conventional subsurface models of reservoir bodies are limited with respect to the good understanding of small-scale heterogeneities at inter-well spacing. Uncertainties associated with data limitation of such large-scale models can be enhanced by information from small-scale modeling. These high-resolution models may provide a realistic three-dimensional insight into their relevant subsurface reservoir setting. In this context, outcrop studies are frequently used to produce high-resolution models. In this paper, the Burdigalian Dam Formation outcrop in eastern Saudi Arabia was targeted to construct high-resolution models of lithofacies and porosity variations. These models were used to identify small-scale heterogeneities in lithofacies and porosity distribution using geostatistical modeling. Ten different lithofacies were identified and modeled. Indicator semivariogram analysis of the lithofacies showed good continuity in NW–SE direction but less continuity in NE–SW. The porosity model showed differing porosity distributions in different carbonate lithofacies. Several realizations of lithofacies and porosity models were generated and ranked against the input data set. Furthermore, the porosity variation was investigated through detailed petrography and SEM analyses for each of the studied lithofacies. The models demonstrated the presence of patterns of lithofacies and porosity variation at a small scale that cannot be obtained from conventional subsurface models. The study indicated the importance of such models in reducing the uncertainty associated with subsurface modeling as a result of data limitation.

Keywords

Dam Formation Burdigalian Lithofacies model Porosity model Saudi Arabia 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the Geosciences Department and the Centre for Integrative Petroleum Research of King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM).

References

  1. Adams JE, Frenzel HN (1950) Capitan barrier reef, Texas and New Mexico. J Geol 58:289–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams AE, Mackenzie WS (1998) A color atlas of carbonate sediments and rocks under the microscope. Manson Publishing Ltd., London, p 180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahr WM (2011) Geology of carbonate reservoirs: the identification, description and characterization of hydrocarbon reservoirs in carbonate rocks. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Al-Enezi SS (2006) Comparison of recent and Miocene foraminifera from Eastern Saudi Arabia. Unpublished Master of Science thesis. King Fahd University of Petroleum and MineralsGoogle Scholar
  5. Al-Khalifah FA, Abdullatif OM, Makkawi MH (2004) Sedimentology and geostatistical modeling of Quwarah Member, Qasim Formation: Paleozoic Sandstone Reservoir Outcrop Analog, Saudi Arabia. In: Sixth Middle East geosciences conference, GEO 2004. GeoArabia Abstract, vol 9(1), p 30Google Scholar
  6. Alnazghah MH, Bádenas B, Pomar L, Aurell M, Morsilli M (2013) Facies heterogeneity at interwell—scale in a carbonate ramp, Upper Jurassic, NE Spain. Mar Pet Geol 44:140–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Al-Saad H, Ibrahim MI (2002) Stratigraphy, micropalaeontology, and palaeoecology of the Miocene Dam Formation. Qatar GeoArabia 7(1):9–28Google Scholar
  8. Bashri M, Abdullatif O, Salih M (2017) Sedimentology and facies analysis of Miocene mixed siliciclastic–carbonate deposits of the Dam Formation in Al Lidam area, eastern Saudi Arabia. Arab J Geosci 10(21):472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bellian JA, Kerans C, Jennette DC (2005) Digital outcrop models: applications of terrestrial scanning lidar technology in stratigraphic modeling. J Sediment Res 75(2):166–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chan SA, Kaminski MA, Al-Ramadan K, Babalola LO (2017) Foraminiferal biofacies and depositional environments of the Burdigalian mixed carbonate and siliciclastic Dam Formation, Al-Lidam area, Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. Palaeogeogr Palaeoclimatol Palaeoecol 469:122–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Choquette PW, Pray LC (1970) Geologic nomenclature and classification of porosity in sedimentary carbonates. AAPG Bull 54(2):207–250Google Scholar
  12. Davis RA Jr, Dalrymple RW (2011) Principles of tidal sedimentology. Springer Science & Business Media, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  13. Dill HG, Botz R, Berner Z, Stüben D, Nasir S, Al-Saad H (2005) Sedimentary facies, mineralogy, and geochemistry of the sulphate-bearing Miocene Dam Formation in Qatar. Sed Geol 174(1):63–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dunham RJ (1962) Classification of carbonate rocks according to depositional texture. AAPG Mem 1:108–121Google Scholar
  15. Felletti F (2004) Statistical modelling and validation of correlation in turbidites: an example from the Tertiary Piedmont Basin (Castagnola Fm., Northern Italy). Mar Pet Geol 21(1):23–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gingras MK, Maceachern JA, Dashtgard SE, Zonneveld JP, Schoengut J, Ranger MJ, Pemberton SG (2012) Estuaries. In: Knaust D, Bromley RG (eds) Trace fossils as indicators of sedimentary environments. Developments in sedimentology, vol 64. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 463–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hegab OA, Abd El-Wahed AG (2016) Origin of the glauconite from the Middle Eocene, Qarara Formation, Egypt. J Afr Earth Sc 123:21–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hewaidy A (1991) Contribution to the stratigraphy of Miocene Sediments in Qatar, Earth science series, vol 5. Middle East Research Center, Ain Shams University, Cairo, pp 160–170Google Scholar
  19. Irtem O (1986) Miocene tidal flat stromatolites of the Dam Formation, Saudi Arabia. Arab J Sci Eng 12(2):145–153Google Scholar
  20. Kendall CG, Warren J (1987) A review of the origin and setting of tepees and their associated fabrics. Sedimentology 34:1007–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Khalifa H, Mahmoud M (1993) New occurrence of algal stromatolites and benthonic foraminifera from the Miocene of Al-Nikhsh area, southwest Qatar Peninsula: implication on their palaeoenvironmental meaning. Arab Gulf J Sci Res 11(3):325–338Google Scholar
  22. Koehrer BS, Heymann C, Prousa F, Aigner T (2010) Multiple-scale facies and reservoir quality variations within a dolomite body—outcrop analog study from the Middle Triassic, SW German Basin. Mar Pet Geol 27(2):386–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kupfersberger H, Deutsch CV (1999) Methodology for integrating analog geologic data in 3-D variogram modeling. AAPG Bull 83(8):1262–1278Google Scholar
  24. Martin AJ (2000) Flaser and wavy bedding in ephemeral streams: a modern and an ancient example. Sediment Geol 136(1):1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mazzullo SJ, Chilingarian GV (1992) Depositional models of carbonate reservoirs. Dev Pet Sci 30:109–198Google Scholar
  26. Mitchell JC, Lehmann PJ, Cantrell DL, Al-Jallal IA, Al-Thagafy MR (1988) Lithofacies, diagenesis and depositional sequence; Arab-D Member, Ghawar Field, Saudi Arabia. Soc Econ Paleontol Miner 12:459–514Google Scholar
  27. Odin GS, Fullagar PD (1988) Geological significance of the glaucony facies. In: Odin GS (ed) Green marine clay, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 295–332Google Scholar
  28. Olea RA (1994) Fundamentals of semivariogram estimation, modeling, and usage. In: Yarus J, Chambers RL (eds) Stochastic modeling and geostatistics principles, methods and case studies. AAPG vol II, computer applications in geology, vol 5. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, pp 27–35Google Scholar
  29. Powers RW, Ramirez LF, Redmond CD, Elberg EL Jr (1966) Geology of the Arabian Peninsula—sedimentary geology of Saudi Arabia, vol 560-D. USGS professional paper, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  30. Pringle JK, Westerman AR, Clark JD, Drinkwater NJ, Gardiner AR (2004) 3D high-resolution digital models of outcrop analogue study sites to constrain reservoir model uncertainty: an example from Alport Castles, Derbyshire, UK. Pet Geosci 10:343–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pringle JK, Howell JA, Hodgetts D, Westerman AR, Hodgson DM (2006) Virtual outcrop models of petroleum reservoir analogues: a review of the current state-of-the-art. First Break 24:33–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Richard P, Matthew D, Jackson D, Gary J (2009) Three-dimensional modeling of a shoreface-shelf parasequence reservoir analog: part 1. Surface-based modeling to capture high-resolution facies architecture. AAPG Bull 93:1155–1181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sahin A, Ghori SG, Ali AZ, El-Sahn HF, Hassan HM, Al-Sanounah A (1998) Geological controls of variograms in a complex carbonate reservoir, Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia. Math Geol 30(3):309–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shinn (1968) Practical significance of birdseye structures in carbonate rocks. J Sediment Res 38(1):215–223Google Scholar
  35. Shinn EA (1983) Tidal flat environment. in: carbonate depositional environments. AAPG Mem 33:171–210Google Scholar
  36. Tleel JW (1973) Surface geology of Dammam Dome, Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia. AAPG Bull 57(3):558–576Google Scholar
  37. Tucker ME, Wright VP (1990) Carbonate sedimentology. Blackwells, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Weijermars R (1999) Surface geology, lithostratigraphy and tertiary growth of the Dammam Dome, Saudi Arabia: A new field guide. GeoArabia 4(2):199–226Google Scholar
  39. Wentworth CK (1922) A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments. J Geol 30(5):377–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ziegler MA (2001) Late Permian to Holocene paleofacies evolution of the Arabian plate and its hydrocarbon occurrences. GeoArabia 6(3):445–504Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abdallah A. Abdelkarim
    • 1
    Email author
  • Osman M. Abdullatif
    • 1
  • Lamidi O. Babalola
    • 2
  • Mohammed H. Makkawi
    • 1
  • Mohamed A. Yassin
    • 1
  1. 1.Geosciences DepartmentKing Fahd University of Petroleum and MineralsDhahranSaudi Arabia
  2. 2.Center for Integrative Petroleum ResearchKing Fahd University of Petroleum and MineralsDhahranSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations