The dimensions and connectivity of fluvial reservoirs vary greatly, making it challenging to characterize them using conventional approaches. In this study integrated channel belt dimension analysis from seismic geomo...The dimensions and connectivity of fluvial reservoirs vary greatly, making it challenging to characterize them using conventional approaches. In this study integrated channel belt dimension analysis from seismic geomorphology and empirical equations, well log facies, and petrophysical analysis were performed to characterize the fluvial reservoirs. The study interval consists of fluvial deposits and is divided into three reservoir zones, which are defined by four key regional markers (B, D, K, O). In these intervals, six (6) fluvial facies have been identified. Based on the log facies proportions and their stacking relationships, it is interpreted that the reservoirs in zone 1 (B to D) were deposited in a proximal reach of a meandering system, zone 2 (D to K) in a marginal marine setting, and zone 3 (K) in a distal reach of a meandering system. The dimensions of fluvial channels and channel belts were determined using empirical equations. The results were compared with the observed dimensions of fluvial channels and channel belts from the seismic horizon and stratal slices of the same intervals. Zones 1 and 3 are characterized by broad meander belts (1000–4000 m) compared to zone 2 (600–1300 m). Petrophysical analysis showed zones 1 and 3 have the better petrophysical properties compared to zone 2. Though zone 3 has the most well-developed sand bodies, the best reservoir interval is zone 1 because of its higher porosity. Although channel belt dimensions have a significant influence on reservoir connectivity, they do not seem to have control on reservoir properties. The channel belt dimensions obtained from the empirical equations and interpreted from the seismic geomorphology analysis were found to be strikingly similar. Since three-dimensional seismic data is not available everywhere and seismic imaging quality decreases with depth, empirical equations can be used to analyze fluvial reservoir parameters and their connectivity at greater depths.展开更多
文摘The dimensions and connectivity of fluvial reservoirs vary greatly, making it challenging to characterize them using conventional approaches. In this study integrated channel belt dimension analysis from seismic geomorphology and empirical equations, well log facies, and petrophysical analysis were performed to characterize the fluvial reservoirs. The study interval consists of fluvial deposits and is divided into three reservoir zones, which are defined by four key regional markers (B, D, K, O). In these intervals, six (6) fluvial facies have been identified. Based on the log facies proportions and their stacking relationships, it is interpreted that the reservoirs in zone 1 (B to D) were deposited in a proximal reach of a meandering system, zone 2 (D to K) in a marginal marine setting, and zone 3 (K) in a distal reach of a meandering system. The dimensions of fluvial channels and channel belts were determined using empirical equations. The results were compared with the observed dimensions of fluvial channels and channel belts from the seismic horizon and stratal slices of the same intervals. Zones 1 and 3 are characterized by broad meander belts (1000–4000 m) compared to zone 2 (600–1300 m). Petrophysical analysis showed zones 1 and 3 have the better petrophysical properties compared to zone 2. Though zone 3 has the most well-developed sand bodies, the best reservoir interval is zone 1 because of its higher porosity. Although channel belt dimensions have a significant influence on reservoir connectivity, they do not seem to have control on reservoir properties. The channel belt dimensions obtained from the empirical equations and interpreted from the seismic geomorphology analysis were found to be strikingly similar. Since three-dimensional seismic data is not available everywhere and seismic imaging quality decreases with depth, empirical equations can be used to analyze fluvial reservoir parameters and their connectivity at greater depths.
