Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

Petroleum Geoscience

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Harris, D. Articles by Nell, P. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Using Shale Gouge Ratio (SGR) to model faults as transmissibility barriers in reservoirs: an example from the Strathspey Field, North Sea

¹ Badleys, North Beck House, North Beck Lane, Hundleby, Spilsby PE23 5NB, UK (e-mail:david{at}badleys.co.uk)
² Texaco North Sea Ltd, Langlands House, Aberdeen, UK (Present address: ChevronTexaco Overseas Petroleum, 4800 Fournace Place, BOB W1064, Bellaire, TX 77401-2324, USA)
³ Texaco Upstream Technology, Houston, USA (Present address: T-Surf Corporation-The GOCAD Company, 11011 Richmond Avenue, Suite 350, Houston, TX 77042, USA)
⁴ Texaco North Sea Ltd, Langlands House, Aberdeen, UK (Present address: Halliburton Reservoir Services, Halliburton House, Pitmedden Road, Aberdeen AB21 0GS, UK)

Since the onset of production in 1993, extraction and injection in Strathspey has focused on the central region of the field, around the ‘Central Fault’. Analysis of RFT measurements from intermittent, but regular drilling on either side of this fault has allowed reconstruction of footwall/hanging wall pore-pressure fields for particular time instances. Comparison of these similar age pressure fields shows the Central Fault capable of maintaining up to 1300 psi pressure differentials. The results of the pressure analysis were used to calibrate a fault seal attribute, termed Shale Gouge Ratio (SGR) which is an estimate of clay concentration within fault gouge, mapped across the surface of the Central Fault. The calibration showed that as SGR increases, so does the measured pressure differential across the fault. This positive relationship between SGR and pressure differential suggests SGR is a guide to potential fluid-flow resistance exerted by faults. We therefore suggest that SGR can potentially be used as a guide to defining differences in permeability within and between faults in a given field. This ‘scaleability’ of SGR as an indicator of fault permeability within a field could provide hitherto unachievable flexibility in the systematic modelling of the hydraulic behaviour of faults during fluid flow simulations.

KEYWORDS: permeability (rock), fault (geology), reservoir, fluid flow, producing

This article has been cited by other articles:

				O. V. Kostenko, O. V. Kostenko, S. J. Naruk, W. Hack, M. Poupon, H.-J. Meyer, M. Mora-Glukstad, C. Anowai, and M. Mordi Structural evaluation of column-height controls at a toe-thrust discovery, deep-water Niger Delta AAPG Bulletin, December 1, 2008; 92(12): 1615 - 1638. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. A. Flodin, L. J. Durlofsky, and A. Aydin Upscaled models of flow and transport in faulted sandstone: boundary condition effects and explicit fracture modelling Petroleum Geoscience, April 1, 2004; 10(2): 173 - 181. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]