Advertisement

Formation Factor and Water Saturation

  • Lee M. Etnyre

Abstract

Almost all water saturation calculations using well log data are based on equations that make use of ratios of resistivities. The resistivity of a rock determines its resistance to the flow of electrical current. The flow of electrical current is essentially through the water in the rock’s pore system. Oil and gas as well as solid rock do not conduct electrical current and have nearly infinite resistance. They could be termed insulators. If oil or gas replaces some of the water in the pore system, the rock’s resistance to the flow of current should increase in comparison with a rock of the same porosity having only water in the pore system. The ratio of these resistivities between water-saturated and hydrocarbon-saturated rocks follows a well-established relationship. Thus, by making resistivity measurements, the water saturation of a rock can be established.

Keywords

Formation Factor Formation Water Water Saturation Pore System Resistivity Index 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. R. Crow, Principles and Applications of Electrochemistry, 2nd ed. ( Chapman and Hall, London, 1979 ), p. 52.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Author’s class notes from course on well log interpretation presented by George R. Pickett at the Colorado School of Mines, Goldon, Colorado, 1976.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sylvain J. Pirson, Handbook of Well Log Analysis for Oil and Gas Formation Evaluation ( Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1963 ), p. 36.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dresser Industries, Log Interpretation Charts (Dresser Industries, Inc., Houston, Tex., 1979 ), p. 6.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schlumberger, Log Interpretation Charts (Schlumberger Ltd, New York, 1985 ), p. 5.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Douglas W. Hilchie, “A New Water Resistivity versus Temperature Equation,” The Log Analyst 25, no. 4 (1984): p20, 21.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dresser Industries, Log Interpretation Charts, p. 6.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. I. Martin, Fundamentals of Electric Logging ( Petroleum Publishing Company, Tulsa, Okla., 1955 ), p. 3.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Author’s class notes, 1976.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dresser Industries, Log Interpretation Charts,p. 6.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schlumberger, Log Interpretation Charts ( Schlumberger Ltd, New York, 1979 ), p. 89.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Core Water Salinity Determination,” para. 6.2 in API Recommended Practice for Core-Analysis Procedure, API RP40 ( The American Petroleum Institute, Dallas, Tex., 1960 ), p. 15.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ibid., p. 15.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. L. Kaufman and C. V. Moore, “Resistivity Techniques Can Cause Unsuspected Problems,” World Oil (February 1, 1983 ).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    G. E. Archie, “The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determining Some Reservoir Characteristics,” Transactions of the AIME 146: 541–562.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. N. Sen, “The Dielectric and Conductivity Response of Sedimentary Rocks,” paper presented at the 55th Annual Fall Technical Conference and Exhibition of the SPE of AIME, Dallas, September 1980.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Archie, “Electrical Resistivity Log.”Google Scholar
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    W. O. Winsauer, A. M. Shearin, Jr., P. H. Mason, and M. Williams, “Resistivity of Brine-saturated Sands in Relation to Pore Geometry,” Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists 36, no. 2 (1952): 263–277.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schlumberger, Log Interpretation Charts, 1979, p. 12.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guy Towle, “An Analysis of the Formation Resistivity Factor-Porosity Relationship of Some Assumed Pore Geometries,” paper presented at the 3rd Annual Logging Symposium of the Society of Professional Well Log Analysts, 1962.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee M. Etnyre, Unpublished research on computer-aided study of pore geometries.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Towle, “Analysis of Formation Resistivity.”Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Winsauer et al., “Resistivity of Brine-saturated Sands.”Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Towle, “Analysis of Formation Resistivity.”Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    P. D. Jackson, D. Taylor-Smith, and P. N. Stanford, “Resistivity-Porosity-Particle Shape Relationships for Marine Sands,” Geophysics 43 no. 6 (1978): 12501268.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    R. C. Ransom, “A Contribution Toward a Better Understanding of the Modified Archie Formation Resistivity Factor Relationship,” The Log Analyst 25, no. 2 (1984): 7–11.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ibid., p. 7–11.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    A. E. Bussian, “Electrical Conductance in a Porous Medium,” Geophysics 48, no. 9 (1983): 1258–1268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lee M. Etnyre, “Practical Application of Weighted Least Squares Methods to Formation Evaluation-Part I,” The Log Analyst 25, no. 1 (1984): 11–21.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Archie, “Electrical Resistivity Log.”Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Author’s class notes, 1976.Google Scholar
  34. 34.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lee M. Etnyre

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations