IPTC 13581

A Mid-Jurassic Carbonate Reservoir Case Study, Offshore Qatar:

How to Capture High Permeable Streaks in a 3D Reservoir Model
Agus Sudarsana, Mariem Abdelouahab, Robert Chanpong, Vance Fryer, Qatar Petroleum,
Jonathan Hall, Edwin Vizcarra, SPE, Qatar Petroleum
Copyright 2009, International Petroleum Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Doha, Qatar, 79 December 2009.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IPTC Programme Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the International Petroleum Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily
reflect any position of the International Petroleum Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Papers presented at IPTC are subject to publication review by Sponsor Society Commit-
tees of IPTC. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the International Petroleum Technology Confe-
rence is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowl-
edgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, IPTC, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax +1-972-952-9435.

Abstract
Since few publications exist regarding the Middle Jurassic Uwainat carbonate sedimentology in Qatar, this paper con-
tributes significantly to the understanding of Uwainat sedimentology and depositional process in Qatar and in the
southern area of the Arabian Gulf. This paper also demonstrates how a detailed sequence stratigraphic framework for
Uwainat, established for the first time in Maydan Mahzam and Bul Hanine Fields, was integrated with sedimentology,
to build proper stratigraphic and facies models. In addition, the results of this study confirmed that a facies based
model is an excellent solution for capturing and predicting the high permeable facies/dynamic rock types in their
proper time/depth location within a high resolution stratigraphic cycle. Compared to previous work on Uwainat in
Maydan Mahzam field, this study allowed a good and promising early history matching of the field performance. In-
tegrating various disciplines to analyze data and build a 3D geological model of a heterogeneous carbonate reservoir
is key to a proper workflow. The work flow developed for this study could be used to describe other carbonate reser-
voirs in the region.

Introduction
The Mid-Jurassic reservoirs are part of Qatar Petroleums Maydan Mahzam and Bul Hanine offshore oil fields. These
reservoirs, Araej Upper, Uwainat, Araej Lower and Izhara have been on production for 20 years.
Bul Hanine (BH) and Maydan Mahzam (MM) are mature fields located Offshore Qatar some 120 kms east of Do-
ha. In both the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Qatar, the Middle Jurassic comprises the Izhara and Araej Forma-
tions. The Middle Jurassic is known as Dhruma Formation in Saudi Arabia and other places in the Arabian Gulf. The
Araej Formation is divided into three members: Araej Upper, Uwainat and Araej Lower.
The Uwainat reservoir is the middle member of the Araej Formation (Bathonian-Callovian age) and is considered
as the most significant horizon of the Middle Jurassic Formations. The Uwainat thickness, approximately 180 feet, is
relatively uniform throughout the southern area of the Arabian Gulf and consists of 5 to 20 ft thick sedimentary cycles
of alternating low permeability lime wacke-/packstones, and 0.5 to 5ft thin relatively permeable pack/grainstone lay-
ers. The grainstone layers, which impact reservoir performance, cannot be reliably detected directly from logs.
Diagenesis plays a crucial role in reservoir development. The main diagenetic processes are early compaction, ear-
ly leaching, dolomitization, cementation, stylolitisation and late leaching. In the main porous wack/packstones porosi-
ty is mainly of the leached secondary fine inter-particle and leached secondary intra-particle type. In the permeable
grainstone beds, primary and secondary inter-particle/granular porosity are the dominant pore types.
The dominant grain types in the Uwainat sediments are pellets/peloids, benthonic foraminifera, echinoderm, shell
fragments and mud. Corals are especially common in the upper part of the Uwainat reservoir and oncoids appear only
in the lower part. Most of the grains are largely micritized. Throughout the Uwainat, sediments have been affected by
bioturbation.
The Uwainat sediments were deposited in a shallow marine shelf environment, the nature of which is slightly re-
stricted in the lower Uwainat, and normal marine in the upper Uwainat. The overall energy of deposition is moderate
to high.
The grainstone layers within the Uwainat, which impact reservoir performance, cannot be reliably detected direct-
ly from logs because of their limited thickness. The better porosities and permeabilities occur mainly in the upper half
of the reservoir.
2 IPTC 13581

Image log interpretation has provided information on the abundance of fractures in the Uwainat reservoir. Two
groups of fractures have been identified. The first is open fractures which strike along the NE-SW direction while the
second is cemented fractures which strike along the NW-SE direction. The open fractures might contribute to high
production rates.
Uwainat is a low-resistivity reservoir characterized by the presence of significant proportions of micro-porosity.
Micro-porosity has a major impact on hydrocarbon reserve estimation, as it leads to an overestimated Water Satura-
tion (Sw) such that some potentially productive intervals could be bypassed. In order to capture the Uwainat reservoir
heterogeneity, an integrated approach was used to develop a suitable workflow for building 3D geological reservoir
model.

Methodology
Sedimentological Reconstruction.
More than 970 feet of core and about 706 thin-sections were examined during this study. Thin sections were impreg-
nated with blue dyed epoxy and stained with alizarin red for carbonates. Detailed sedimentological core description
was carried out for seven wells covering the entire Uwainat interval. The new description focused on three major sub-
jects:
Relationship of Facies/Reservoir facies: since the diagenetic overprint has a dramatic effect on the Uwainat Re-
servoir, the diagenetic effects on rock properties were described in order to define the reservoir facies or pre-
rock types in comparison with the depositional facies;
Sequence stratigraphy: since sequence stratigraphic layering was applied, the contact type between cycles was
described; in addition the upper limit and the base of Uwainat were investigated in order to place the middle
Araej member in its regional context;
Depositional settings: by incorporating the regional settings and comparing Uwainat in BH and MM to Dukhan
in terms of sedimentary facies, the depositional environment model specific to Uwainat was established.
Later on, the new core description was integrated with the existing description in order to build the depositional
environment and facies model of BH Uwainat.

Depositional Facies
Uwainat reservoir is composed of dark to light grey aphanitic lime wackestones and packstones in its lower part and
by light grey to brownish lime packstones interbedded with grainstones in its upper part. The Uwainat member is gen-
erally very fossiliferous containing abundant foraminifera, echinoderm fragments and corals, which occur mainly in
the upper part. However, the dominant grain types in Uwainat are peloids and composite grains. The grains are strong-
ly micritized and often lose their original internal fabric and are generally poorly sorted. The Uwainat is also highly
bioturbated indicating a low sedimentation rate. The Uwainat reservoir contains a wide variety of facies due to the
presence of various grain types and sizes. Based on our own observation, from this work, Uwainat facies can be sum-
marized and classified into nine depositional facies (Figure 1).
Grainstone GOP: is predominately composed of ooids and peloids. It also comprises a faunal association of mainly foramini-
fera, echinoderm debris and coral fragments, This facies is generally not bioturbated, occasionally shows parallel lamination,
cross-bedding and thin graded bedding. Grain sizes vary from fine to coarse but dominated by medium grains (Figure 2a).
Grainstone GPB: consists mainly of peloids, foraminifera, echinoderm debris, coral fragments and other shell debris (bra-
chiopods, bryozoa, sponges). Aggregates such as grapestones are also present. This facies is generally moderately to poorly
sorted and occur as massive beds (Figure 2c).
Grainstone GPA: consists of peloids, shell fragments, oncoids and aggregates. The composite grains are algal lumps contain-
ing peloids, foraminifera or other shell debris. This rock is very poorly sorted and deposited as massive thin beds (Figure 2b).
Packstone PPB: is formed by very fine grains, generally peloids, in addition to various shell debris (foraminifera, echino-
derm, brachiopod, bryozoa, ostracods, pelicipods, sponge) and coral fragments which are very abundant in the upper Uwai-
nat. This packestone facies is generally very poorly sorted, and is highly bioturbated (Figure 2d).
Packstone PPA: consists of oncoids and composite grains, such as lumps, in addition to the predominant peloids and shell
debris. Coral fragments are rare or totally absent in this facies which generally occur in lower Uwainat. Grain sizes vary from
very fine to very coarse but dominated by very fine grains. It is very poorly sorted and shows occasionally graded bedding
(Figure 2f).
Wackestone WBP: contains very fine to fine peloids and bioclasts (pelicipods, brachiopods, foraminifera, sponge). It is in-
tensely burrowed rock where burrows are filled with more grainy rock. This facies shows various pressure solution stylolites
and seams (bedding parallel anastomosing, wispy parallel sets and horse tail structure). It is very poorly sorted (Figure 2e).
Mudstone M: occurs as thin beds mainly in the lower Uwainat. It contains fine bioclasts such as pelicipods and foraminifera
in addition to mud. It shows pressure solution seams and is rarely bioturbated. Porosity is mainly intra-particle.
Dolostone D: occurs locally as tight massive beds in lower Uwainat, separated by stylolites. Dolomite crystals present as
scattered rhombs and range from 50-150 microns. No primary depositional texture could be recognized.
IPTC 13581 3

Conceptual Depositional Model

Although the interpretation of the depositional setting of Uwainat is complex because of its diagenetic alteration (mi-
critization, cementation, dissolution, dolomitization), during the sedimentology study, core description interpretation
was integrated with regional geologic knowledge to construct a conceptual depositional model and sequence strati-
graphic framework for the Uwainat.
The depositional model was built by integrating results from the depositional facies interpretation and the mid-
Jurassic regional depositional settings1, 2 and 3.
Uwainat sediments were deposited on a shallow marine homoclinal ramp type platform, mainly in the middle and
outer ramp environments where sea-level fluctuation and storm waves are considered to be the crucial elements which
control the different facies types. Storm deposits are observed in Uwainat core, especially in its lower part characte-
rized by erosive surfaces and graded bedding. The high amount of composite grains such as lumps and oncoids indi-
cates the presence of reworked and transported sediments by currents. The high energy sediments described in the
middle part of Uwainat indicates the presence of oolitic-peloidal and bioclastic sand shoals. These shoals could be the
result of storm reworked grainstone shoals (Figure 3).
Sedimentary structures are very rare in Uwainat facies due to the intense bioturbation activity and to the strong di-
agenetic overprint.
The abundance of coral fragments was observed in crestal wells in higher amount than the other described wells
for the same stratigraphic layer. In addition the size of these coral fragments is very small (few millimeters) compared
to those in the non crestal wells. Consequently, at Uwainat time, topography in BH field was probably not flat; a
slight paleohigh is possible at the crestal area.
Meniscus cement in an oolitic grainstone layer is present in one well but not in the other wells for the same strati-
graphic grainstone layer. This layer was observed in all described wells and interpreted as deposited in a shoal setting.
The southwestern part of the field, was probably shallower at that time with only few meters of water depth or was
probably sub-areally exposed.

Sequence Stratigraphy Framework.

Sequence stratigraphy was used to define depositional cycles in the Uwainat member at different scales and to corre-
late cycles across the Maydan Mahzam and the Bul Hanine fields.
The Uwainat member is probably a smooth short term 3rd order depositional sequence composed of three strati-
graphic para-sequences, probably equivalent to 4th order cycles Figure 4.

A transgressive systems tract (TST) characterized by low energy fine grained peloidal bioclastic packstones and
wackestones with occasional fining upward pack/grainstones rich in aggregates and oncoids, and deposited in middle
to outer ramp environment. The grain supported sediments, which have erosive burrowed surfaces, interpreted as re-
worked and transported sediments by current from shallower environment. This sequence comprises high resolution
shallowing up and deepening upwards cycles. The base Uwainat corresponds to light grey lime grainstone (peloidal-
oolitic with the presence of fauna) overlaying the dark grey argillaceous wackestones/packstones of Araej Lower. The
contact is sharp and characterized by the presence of clasts, boring and intense bioturbation. The lime grainstone rich
in ooids at the base of Uwainat, possibly a transgressive lag deposits, is the only layer containing ooids in the lower
part of Uwainat. The ooids seem to be transported from oolitic shoal sand and deposited probably in the windward
side of the inner ramp not far from the original ooids factory, to develop a reworked grainstone shoal.

A highstand systems tract (HST) divided into three para-sequences of probably 4th order. The lower para-sequence
set corresponds to a prograding cycle from low energy facies deposited in the outer ramp environment to low energy
facies interbedded with coarse grain facies deposited in middle ramp where storm deposits are frequent. The para-
sequence ends with a high energy peloidal-oolitic grainstone layer. The middle para-sequence of the HST is inter-
preted as a transgressive cycle where low energy deposits are interbedded with graded grain/packstones. The upper
parasequence of the highstand is a prograding cycle from middle ramp to shoal environment. It is characterized by
fine grained packstones to medium and coarse grainstones. The presence of storm deposits has been noticed in the
middle ramp at the beginning of this parasequence with very coarse grained facies similar to rudstones. The parase-
quence terminates with high energy oolitic grainstone rich in bioclasts. The end of this parasequence corresponds to
maximum progradation and the end of the highstand.

A transgressive systems tract (TST) divided in two transgressive para-sequences of probably 5th order dominated by
peloidal bioclastic packstones rich in coral fragments and deposited in middle ramp. The upper part of the second
transgressive para-sequence is characterized by intense bioturbation activity (up to 15ft vertical section of bioturbated
sediments.
The top of this para-sequence is erosional and is characterized by a dark condensed section of few inches and cor-
responds to a hardground with boring and burrowing. The condensed section is completely cemented. The upper part
of the contact is characterized by the presence of a high amount of shell fragments and clasts. This surface corres-
4 IPTC 13581

ponds to the limit between the overlying Araej Upper and Uwainat and interpreted as an important break in sedimen-
tation called hiatus.
Sharland3 described top Uwainat in the South East of the Arabian plate as the probable Early Bathonian-Callovian
hiatus. The Late Bathonian-Late Callovian unconformity was indentified in the Middle East and the break in sedimen-
tation of at least 7 million years is recognized in Saudi Arabia4 of at least 7 million years between the early Bathonian
and the middle Callovian. De Matos5 identified important hiatuses during Mid-Jurassic which clearly occurred at Wa-
di Naqab in the U.A.E. and confirmed that during parts of mid-Jurassic there were regional breaks of sedimentation in
the Arabian Peninsula.
Based on the sequence stratigraphy study, the thin, high quality, lime grainstone layers are localized on top or at
the base of the high resolution stratigraphic cycles. Grainstones are generally characterized by relatively high gamma
ray values due to the nature of their upper or lower limit (stylolite, lithification). In order to capture those high perme-
able streaks, a facies based model was constructed where both coarse and fine layering correspond to time stratigraph-
ic limits.
The resulting sequence stratigraphic framework was integrated with the sedimentological core description and
Uwainat conceptual depositional model in order to build the 3D numerical depositional model.

Rock typing
Porosity versus permeability distribution of all samples is very scattered. The range of porosity values varies from 0
to 26 p.u. and permeability values vary from 0.01 to 2400 mD. Moreover, for a porosity value of 16 p.u. permeability
values may vary up to four orders of magnitude (from 1 to 1200mD). It is therefore needed to define reservoir facies
also named pre-rock types. A detailed workflow on how rock types were derived is presented in Figure 5.

ReservoirFacies
Based on the depositional facies interpretation and the diagenetic effects on these facies, and based on porosi-
ty/permeability relationship analysis for each facies, reservoir facies were defined from core for simulation in the
modeling software PetrelTM (Figure 6).

Reservoir Electrofacies
Reservoir facies were described from core data for the seven cored wells. Electro-facies were then recognized from
logs for cored wells and propagated to the un-cored wells using the Interactive PetrophysicsTM Fuzzy Logic module.
Fuzzy logic classification describes the probability density distribution, PDF, of the input data for each target facies.
This classification method was used in supervised mode, such that input data are matched to core facies at each
depth level where both log and core are available. The choice of the training examples and the set of wells that con-
tain the training samples play a major role on the quality and the accuracy of the results. Therefore, the training set of
wells must be representative of the field which means all reservoir facies must be present.
The logs used as input are resistivity, neutron porosity, bulk density, sonic and computed porosity. The model de-
rived from the training data set was, thereafter, used to derive facies in those wells without core.
We observe in thin section that initial depositional fabrics, grainstone, packstone and wackestone are diagentically
altered by either leaching and/or cementation. Cementation occludes the porosity with respect to the original fabric
and leaching enhances it. Our reservoir facies classification system captures these observations with Grainstone 1,
Packstone 1 and Wackestone 1 representing the better quality rock after alteration for each lithotype and Grainstone 3,
Packstone 3 and Wackestone 2 lesser quality rock. The input logs density, neutron and sonic are highly auto corre-
lated, all being porosity devices.

Dynamic Rock types

As described by many authors, rock types or rock/pore types or hydraulic flow units are units of rock deposited under
similar conditions and experienced similar diagenetic processes resulting in a distinct porosity-permeability relation-
ship, a unique capillary pressure profile and water saturation for a given height above free water level (FWL) in a re-
servoir. During this study two graphical tools were used to determine rock types:

1) Winland porosity-permeability cross plot:

Winland Plot is a semi-log cross-plot of permeability (mD) versus porosity (%), with isopore throat lines (R35 Ports).
R35 ports correspond to the calculated pore throat radius (microns) at 35% mercury saturation from a mercury injec-
tion capillary pressure test (Figure 7).
The above figure illustrates that for BH Uwainat dataset of conventional core air permeability and helium expan-
sion porosimetry pairs, the data fall into clusters that strongly correlate with the identified reservoir facies in core.
This observation also confirms that the core description is both accurate and consistent and it points to a pore struc-
ture or morphological explanation for observed variations in rock quality consistent with well test data.
IPTC 13581 5

2) Reservoir Quality Index (RQI) versus normalized porosity

Traditional plots of permeability versus porosity, in which permeability is plotted against porosity in a semi-log for-
mat to reduce the size of scatter, have little mathematical justification. By combining Darcys equation and Poi-
seuilles equation, Kozeny derived a formalized mathematical relationship between porosity and permeability. This
work was extended by Amaefule and others6 to define a Reservoir quality index (RQI) which can be used to group
rocks with similar properties.
k
RQI = 0.0314

Using the above graphical tools, five rock types (RT) have been defined where each rock type represent one or
more reservoir facies identified earlier from core data interpretation (Figure 8).
A detailed core description has allowed an analysis of the relationship between flow capacity (permeability) and
storage capacity (dynamically effective porosity) for each identified reservoir facies. This provides a vehicle for fur-
ther refinement of the classification into Rock types so as to provide an engineering significant scheme for inter-well
geo-modeling and reservoir simulator grid block parameter assignment.
Reservoir facies Packstones 1 & 2 plus Wackestone 1 have high levels of microporosity that may only charge in
part or at high capillary pressures (elevations high above the FWL). The effect of this is that because of the apparently
lower permeability associated with a moderate porosity, the Reservoir Quality Index (which is equivalent to the mean
hydraulic radius) of the associated cluster of data is of lower than expected magnitude and, further, is observed to be
displaced with respect to similar rock without micro-porosity. Wackestone 1 and Packstone 2 inhabit coterminous
regions in this plot and similar levels of micro-porosity. They have been combined into one rock type. Reservoir fa-
cies Grainstones 1 and 2 (G1 & G2) have little micro-porosity and represent good quality reservoir rock. Grainstone 3
(G3) is cemented and Grainstone 1 is leached.
From these analyzes we may consider that Grainstones 1, 2 & 3 represent a continuum of better to poorer quality
reservoir rock and similarly Packstones1, 2 & 3 and Wackestone 1 & 2. In the future, further cluster grouping into
similar rock types is justified in geo-modeling and reservoir model initialization.

Permeability Transforms
Permeability transforms/equations were developed based upon the reservoir facies type from cores for the different
rock types. Reservoir facies are assigned to Rock Types (RT) on the basis of common permeability porosity relation-
ships.
All equations are first or second order polynomials as a function of RT and porosity. The figure below is a cross-
plot of the core permeability versus the CPI Permeability (Computer processed interpretation) with core facies and
permeability as inputs. The correlation factor is close to 0.8 indicating a good match (Figure 9). For those wells with-
out core reservoir facies, the log derived reservoir facies and log derived porosity were input to the aforementioned
transforms to compute the permeability.

3D Geological Model
The 3D geological model was built with PetrelTM software using the results of the sedimentological, petrophysical, geophysi-
cal and engineering studies. The main steps of the modeling workflow are as follow:
Geometrical grid building based on new seismic interpretation on top Uwainat and new fault model;
Generating structure maps on top of each reservoir interval based on sequence stratigraphic layering
Stochastic distribution of facies using 2D trend maps;
Stochastic distribution of rock types conditioned to reservoir facies geometrical distribution;
Stochastic distribution of porosity/permeability conditioned to rock types;
Water saturation distribution using Pc curves per rock types. Pc curves were determined from Special Core
Analysis (SCAL) experiments and calibrated to cased hole Pulsed Neutron Logs (PNL) log data;
Calculation of the hydrocarbons originally in place in the reservoir based on six different hypotheses;
Upscaling of the fine grid and the 3D properties into the reservoir model.

Structural Framework
Fault Model Construction.
The fault system used to build the structural model originates from the most recent interpretation of the 3D seismic volume of
Bul Hanine Field and Maydan Mahzam Field. Fault polygons are introduced in PetrelTM and were used to create 3D fault
planes using fault modeling module. All faults are normal faults, vertical to sub-vertical and strike along the NW-SE direc-
tion or the NE-SW direction. The major faults crossing the field and recognized from Arab-D horizon down to Uwainat and
Araej Lower horizons are oriented NW-SE. Fault planes crossing Uwainat reservoir are adjusted later when introducing hori-
zontal wells in the stratigraphic modeling step.
6 IPTC 13581

2D Grid Definition.
Following the reservoir engineers recommendation, the geological grid skeleton was defined with horizontal cell size of ap-
proximately 100m x 100m. In order to avoid cell shape problem along faults and to ensure the correct location of wells with
respect to faults, it was decided to constrain the grid shape and orientation by I and J directions parallel to fault orientations.
The BH Uwainat grid was divided into 3 segments in order to allow flexibility for later export to the simulator. Only one
segment was exported to the Eclipse simulator in order to minimize the total cell number. It was planned that 2D cell sizes
remain the same in Eclipse and only vertical cell size is coarsened during the up-scaling phase. In total, BH Uwainat 2D grid
has 57,960 cells.

Structure and Stratigraphic Model Building.

The Uwainat horizon is the best seismic pick compared to the other horizons within the mid-Jurassic seismic data. Therefore,
the other horizons were built based on Uwainat as primary depth structure.
The structural and stratigraphic modeling was carried out in 4 steps:
1) Perform well tops correlation for top Uwainat and the stratigraphic cycles within the Uwainat reservoirs, known as
zones in PetrelTM.
2) Generate top Uwainat horizon using the fault model and tied to well tops
3) Create zones and isochores using vertical and deviated wells only
4) Adjust the stratigraphic model while introducing horizontal wells using control points when necessary.
Sequence stratigraphy was the basis of stratigrahic correlation for all the wells. The defined cycles or para-sequences are
very extensive, very continuous throughout the field and show minor thickness variations. The total Uwainat interval thick-
ness estimated from vertical and deviated wells varies from 181ft to 190ft.
Top Uwainat was previously defined at a high GR peak which corresponds to a stylolite in the upper most part of Uwai-
nat. During the sedimentological study, the top Uwainat was interpreted as a hiatus and corresponds to an upper high GR
peak (Figure 10). The difference between the previous top Uwainat and the current top used during this study is about 5-10 ft
shallower.
After well top correlation was performed in the well correlation module in PetrelTM for all wells, isochores maps were
generated using vertical and deviated wells only, in order to check the consistency of the tops and also the thickness trends of
the different Uwainat cycles.
From the top Uwainat horizon, six sub-grid zones were generated representing the top of each parasequence within the
Uwainat reservoir. The zones were built using well tops for each interval (UW1, UW2, UW2a, UW3, UW4 and UW5) con-
formable to the top Uwainat horizon and along pillars (Figure 11). During make zones process isochores or thickness maps
were generated using convergent algorithm. Once zones are built, the isochores are calculated for each individual zone to
ensure that the thickness inside each zone is consistent. This process went through several iterations, especially where intro-
ducing horizontal wells. During this process well tops and faults are adjusted in order to ensure the exact location of horizon-
tal drains.
At the end of the stratigraphic model construction, the different Uwainat zones are built and then the final isochores maps
are generated along pillars using the convergent gridding algorithm and including all well tops.
From the isochore maps (Figure 12), it appears that major directions are controlling the thickness variations NW-SE and
NE-SW. In intervals UW1 and UW2, a thickening of about 8ft occurs from NE towards the SW. These two cycles represent
the latest transgressive para-sequences of Uwainat. In interval UW2a, a thickening towards the NE is observed. This UW2a
cycle represents a prograding para-sequence where a shoal environment is reached at the end of this cycle. In interval UW3,
the thickening seems to be occurring towards the South-West similar to UW1 and UW2. This interval also represents a trans-
gressive para-sequence.
In interval UW4, a thinning observed along NE-SW direction and a thickening towards the SE and the NW. This interval
corresponds to the prograding para-sequence in the lower part of UW. This thickness trend is different from the other UW
intervals and needs to be confirmed by drilling more wells. In interval UW5, a thickening is observed towards the NE. This
interval corresponds to the lower transgressive para-sequence in UW. These trends were used as a guide to better understand
the facies trends while modeling the depositional facies in the stochastic modeling stage.

Vertical Layering and 3D Grid

Since no unconformity in the Uwainat interval was observed from well to well correlation and Uwainat thickness variation is
not significant, the proportional layering option was chosen as the best method to create fine layering. In total 88 fine layers
were created within Uwainat grid and represent the fine grid in the Z direction with an average thickness of 2.1ft.
In conclusion, the final geo-cellular 3D grid represents a total number of 5.1 millions cells, with cells having a dimension
of 100m x 100m x 2.1 ft in X, Y and Z directions which represent 230 x 252 x 88 cells in the I, J and K directions.

Stochastic Property Modeling

Prior to using well data for stochastic modeling, the following steps are crucial:
IPTC 13581 7

Data scale-up: the well data is up-scaled to the cell size of the geological grid (88 vertical layers). The cells in-
tersected by the wells are identified and each cell is given a value for the various log properties.
Data analysis is important for understanding the property distribution within the reservoir and consists of ver-
tical proportion curves calculation, variograms definition, data normalization, etc. More details about data
analysis for each property are given in the following sections.
2D trend maps are generated for facies modeling using facies index.

The 3D property modeling workflow was as follows:

Depositional Facies distribution: reservoir facies were first grouped into facies and facies index were then
created in order to generate 2D trend maps. Facies were later distributed using the Truncated Gaussian Simula-
tion algorithm; (Figure 13).
Reservoir facies distribution: core reservoir facies and reservoir-electrofacies were distributed with condition-
ing to the previous facies distribution using the Sequential Indicator Simulation algorithm;
Rock type distribution: two cases were performed to distribute rock types:
(1) The 3D reservoir facies previously distributed are transformed directly into 3D rock type distribution result-
ing in rock type distribution conditioned to reservoir facies (Figure 14).
(2) Rock types were distributed stochastically in the 3D grid using Sequential Indicator Simulation method
with no conditioning to facies.
The property modeling in the 3 dimensional model was then performed using the two RT distributions above, (1) and (2).
Porosity distribution: two cases were made for porosity referring to the two type distribution cases above:
(1): porosity distribution has been conditioned to rock type (1).
(2): porosity distribution has been conditioned to rock type (2).
Both porosity distributions were performed using Sequential Gaussian simulation algorithm (Figure 15).
Permeability distribution: two cases were performed for permeability and referring to the two cases described
above. The permeability distribution for each case is made in two steps: permeability transforms were applied to po-
pulate the 3D grid then core permeability is distributed using the Sequential Gaussian Simulation method with the
option of co-kriging where the secondary variable was defined as the permeability resulting from the transforms (Fig-
ure 16).

Conclusions
Based on the depositional facies interpretation and the diagenetic effects on these facies, in addition to porosity permeability
relationship analysis for each facies, reservoir facies were defined for Uwainat reservoir. These reservoir facies were then
extended to un-cored wells using Fuzzy Logic technique. Detailed core description conducted has allowed an analysis of the
relationship between flow capacity (permeability) and storage capacity (dynamically effective porosity) for each identified
reservoir facies. This provides a vehicle for the classification of reservoir facies into Rock type so as to provide an engineer-
ing significant scheme for inter-well geo-modeling and reservoir simulator grid block parameter assignment.
The depositional model was built by integrating results from the depositional facies interpretation and the Mid-Jurassic
regional depositional settings1, 2, 3 and 7.
Ten reservoir facies and five dynamic rock types were defined which can be related directly to the core described facies.
Based on the sequence stratigraphy study, the thin high quality, lime grainstone layers are localized on top or at the base of
the high resolution stratigraphic cycles. Grainstones are generally characterized by relatively high gamma ray values due to
the nature of their upper or lower limit (stylolite, lithification). In order to capture those high permeable streaks, a facies
based model was constructed where both coarse and fine layering correspond to time stratigraphic limits.
The resulting 3D depositional facies model reflects the facies lateral continuity observed in the cores and logs with the va-
riability of grainstone deposits and their lateral extent which are very important for the reservoir production. The vertical he-
terogeneity observed in the core and log data is also represented in the final 3D facies model, and the different transgressive
and prograding high resolution cycles are captured.
The 3D static properties of Uwainat model reflect the vertical and lateral heterogeneity described from core and capture
the highly potential rocks (Figure 17).
The 3D geological model for each Uwainat reservoir was populated with facies probabilities, reservoir facies, rock types,
petrophysical properties (porosity, permeability and water saturation). This is the first 3D models created in-house by QP,
and was upscaled for Eclipse simulation. Both the Uwainat geological and Eclipse models have successfully captured the
heterogeneity of dynamic rock types and their petrophysical characteristics. The models will be of great importance for the
future development plans for Uwainat reservoir in Qatar Petroleums offshore fields.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the management of Qatar Petroleum for their permission to publish this paper. We
would like also to express our appreciation for the support and constructive criticism of Dr. Dick Koepnick, Dr. Ste-
8 IPTC 13581

phane Jory and Jean-Marc Chautru. We are most grateful to Sabrina Diddaoui and Dr. Ghazi M. Kraishan for their
help to prepare the manuscript. Thanks to our colleagues who made helpful suggestions.

References
1. Al-Saad H. et al.: Lithofacies and depositional setting of the Middle Jurassic Araej Formation in the Dukhan Oil Field,
Western Qatar. Arabian Gulf, N. Jb. Geol. Paleontol. Mh., (1992), 10, 614.
2. Al-Sharhan A.S. and Whittle G.L.: Sedimentary-diagenetic interpretation and reservoir characteristics of the Middle
Jurassic (Araej Formation) in the southern Arabian Gulf, Marine and Petroleum Geology (June, 1995), 12, 615.
3. Sharland P.R. et al.: Arabian Plate Sequence Stratigraphy, GeoArabia, Special Publication No.2 (2001), 371.
4. Le Nindre, et al.: Subsidence modelling of the Arabian Platform from Permian to Paleogene outcrops, Sedimentary Ge-
ology (February, 2003), 156, 263.
5. De Matos J.E.: Sequence Stratigraphy and Sedimentation of the Araej Formation (Middle Jurassic), UAE: Outcrop and
Subsurface Compared, Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emi-
rates. (2002), Oct. 13-16.
6. Amaefule et al.: Enhanced reservoir description: using core and log data to identify hydraulic (flow) units and predict
permeability in uncored intervals/wells, SPE PAPER 26436, presented at the 1993, Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Houston, TX, 36 Oct. 3-6.
7. De Matos J.E., et al.: The biostratigraphy of the Lower Jurassic of the U.A.E.: Outcrop and subsurface compared, 6th
Abu Dhabi International petroleum Exhibition and Conference (1994), 449.
IPTC 13581 9

Lithology/ Skeletal & non-skeletal Sedim entary

Facies Texture Bioturbation Grain size Main Porosity Types
Mineralogy com ponents structures

Ooids, coral fragments, Echinoderm, Massive, occasionally Interparticles, moldic &

GOP Limestone Grainstone None Coarse to Medium
Foram Sponges crossbeddded vuggy

Peloids, coral fragments,

Very coarse to Interparticles, moldic &
GPB Limestone Grainstone Echinoderms, Foram, Sponges, Massive Occasionally
medium to fine vuggy
Bryozoa

Aggregates/lumps, peloids, oncoids,

Coarse to medium to
GPA Limestone Grainstone foram, Echinoderm, Brachiopod, Massive or Layered Occasionally Interparticles & moldic
fine
Bryozoa

Peloids, coral fragments,

Coarse, fine to very
PPB Limestone Packstone Echinoderms, Foram, Sponges, Occasionally layered Intense Moldic, Interparticles & vugs
fine
Ostracods, Brachiopods, Bryozoa

Peloids, algal grains, oncoids,

PPA Limestone Packstone Massive Little Fine to very fine Moldic & Intraparticles
ostracods, brachiopods, foram

Peloids, pelicipod, brachiopods, Anastomosing set,

WPB Limestone Wackestone Intense Fine to very fine Moldic & Intraparticles
foram Wispy

Peloids, aggregates, pelicipod, Anastomosing set,

WPA Limestone Wackestone Little Fine to very fine Moldic & Intraparticles
ostracods, foram Wispy

Pressure compaction
M Limestone Mudstone Foram, pelicipods, Little to Intense Very fine Intraparticles
solutions

D Dolostone Dolo-w ackestone Crystals None None Fine to very fine Intercrystalline

Figure 1: Depositional facies summary.

10 IPTC 13581

Figure 2: Uwainat facies description.

IPTC 13581 11

InnerRamp MidRamp OuterRamp

Fewmeters
totensofmeters Fairweatherwavebase

Stormreworking, Stormwavebase
Sandshoals
SandShoal StormDeposits

GPB GOP
PPB PPA
G GPA WBA/M
GPA GPB GPB
G GPA
W BP/M GOP GPB P PA/W BP
P PB

Shallowmarinehomoclinal rampmodel Coral

Bioturbation

Figure 3: Uwainat conceptual model.

4th Order

5thOrder

frequency
Order

4 5th
Order

High
3rd

Cycles G P WM

UW1
NPHI
UWAINAT

UW2
TST

HST

UW2a

UW3

UW4

UW5

TST

Figure 4: Uwainat sequence stratigraphic framework.

12 IPTC 13581

Coredata RCALplugdata Thinsectiondata

Sedimentological description
Porosity Albumofthinsectionphotographs
1b)Depositionalfacies 1a)Microfacies
Permeability
Diagenetic facies
Stratigraphic sequenceanalysis
Graindensity

Dataintegration&reconciliation
Wirelinelogdata
Pcdata
2)ReservoirFacies
Compositelog
Depthmatchingcore/log PcversusSHg curve

Porethroatsize
FuzzyLogic

3)Reservoirelectrofacies

Winland &ReservoirQualityIndexPlots

4)DynamicRocktypes

Figure 5: Rock typing Workflow.

Deposotional
Reservoir Lithology/ Skeletelal & non-skeletal Main Porosity
Texture Description Facies
Facies Mineralogy components Types
Correspondance

Oolithic, peloidal, bioclastic & Interparticles, moldic

G1 Limestone Grainstone Vuggy grainstone GOP & GPB
oncoidal & vuggy

Oolithic, peloidal, bioclastic &

G2 Limestone Grainstone Interparticles & moldic Non vuggy grainstone GOP,GPB & GPA
oncoidal

Non vuggy,
G3 Limestone Grainstone Peloidal, bioclastic & oncoidal Interparticles & moldic tight/micritised GPB & GPA
grainstone

Interparticles, moldic Vuggy & bioturbated

Pk1 Limestone Packstone Peloidal, bioclastic & oncoidal PPB
& vugs packstone

Interparticles, moldic
Pk2 Limestone Packstone Peloidal, bioclastic & oncoidal Non vuggy packstone PPA & PPB
& intraparticles
Non vuggy &
Pk3 Limestone Packstone Peloidal & bioclastic Moldic & Intraparticles tight/micristised PPA & PPB
packstone
Moldic, Intraparticles Bioturbated & vuggy
Wk1 Limestone Wackestone Peloidal & bioclastic WPB
& little vugs wackestone

Non bioturbated/tight
Wk2 Limestone Wackestone Peloidal & bioclastic Moldic & Intraparticles WPB & WPA
wackestone
M Limestone Mudstone Bioclastic Intraparticles Mudstone M

D Dolostone Dolo-wackestone Crystals Intercrystalline Tight dolomite D

Figure 6: Uwainat reservoir facies description.

IPTC 13581 13

BHUwainatFormation RockTypeClassification Basedon R35

10000

G1

1000 G2

PK1

PK2
100

WK1
AirPermeability, mD

G3
10
PK3

WK2
1
R35=7

R35=2.8

0.1 R35=1

R35=0.18

0.01
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

TotalPorosity, %

Figure 7: Winland porosity-permeability cross plot.

Reservoir Rock
- Types
Litho Facies

G1 RT1

G2 RT2

Pk1 RT3
RT1
Pk2
RT4
RT2 Wk1
RT3

G3

Pk3
RT4 RT5
Wk2
RT5
M
RQI=0.0314*(K/Phi)0.5
Phiz=Phi*(1-Phi) D

Figure 8: Reservoir Quality Index (RQI) versus normalized porosity (Phiz) plot & Uwainat rock types classifica-
tion.
14 IPTC 13581

RT CORE PERM & POR (GEO)

Y=f(x): Log(ANAL:KH_RT_G) = 0.2012 + 0.8469 * Log(CORE:KHCORE_G) R2= 0.7922

KH RT (CORE PHI [GEO)]

KH CORE (GEO)

Figure 9: Cross-plot of core permeability versus

permeability (KH_RT) computed from core facies
and permeability from the RT permeability equa-
tions.

BH-025 [SSTVD] BH-021 [SSTVD] BH-019 [SSTVD] BH-026 [SSTVD] BH-036 [SSTVD]
SSTVD 60 GR 0 0 LLD 2000 0.0000 PHIE0.2500 UW Facies SSTVD 60 GR 0 0 LLD 2000 0.0000 PHIE0.2500 UW Facies SSTVD 60 GR 0 0 LLD 2000 0.0000 PHIE0.2500 UW Facies SSTVD 60 GR 0 0 LLD 2000 0.0000 PHIE0.2500 UW Facies SSTVD 60 GR 0 0 LLD 2000 0.0000 PHIE0.2500 UW Facies
0.20 LLS 2000.00 0.20 LLS 2000.00
8560 0.20 LLS 2000.00 8855 0.20 LLS 2000.00 0.20 LLS 2000.00

8840
8880
8875
8565 8860

8845
8885
8880
8570 8865

Newinterpreted
UW1
UW 1 UW 1 UW 1 UW1 8850 UW 1
UW1
8890
UWTOP Wk2
W k2

8885 Wk2
W k2

8575 8870
Pk2
W k2

Pk3
Pk2
Pk3 8855
UW
P k3

8895
Wk2
Pk3 UW
UW
W k2

8890
Pk3 8875
UW 8580
Pk3
P k3

PreviousUWTOP
P k2

Pk3 8860
P k2

UW UW
UW 8900
Pk2
P k2

8895
Pk2 8880
Pk1 8585
P k2

Wk2
Pk3
Pk2 Pk3
Pk2 8865
8905
Wk2
8900 Wk2 Pk3
P k2

Md 8885
8590
Wk2
Pk2
Pk2 Pk2
8870
Pk3
P k1

8910
Pk2 Pk2 Pk2
8905
8595 Pk1 8890 Pk2
Pk1
P k1

P k2

P k2

8875
P k2

P k2

8915
8910 Pk2 Wk2
P k1

Pk2 8895
8600
P k1

Wk2 Pk2
Pk2
8880
P k1

8920
P k1

Pk2
8915
8605 8900
P k1

P k2
P k2

UW2
8885 UW 2
UW2
P k2

Pk3
P k2

8925 Pk1
Wk2
8920 G1
UW 2
UW 2 UW 2
Pk1
UW2 Pk1
Wk1 8610 8905 Pk1

Pk2
P k2

G1 8890
P k2

8930
P k2

8925 Pk1

8615 8910
Pk1
P k2
G1

P k1

Pk1 Wk1
8895
8935 Pk1
P k1
P k1

G2
Pk2
8931 8937 8620 8915 G1 8898

Figure 10: Top Uwainat Interpretation

IPTC 13581 15

Figure 11: Uwainat Stratigraphic Model.

Figure 12: Uwainat Thickness Map.

16 IPTC 13581

Depositional Facies Distribution Reservoir Facies Distribution

Layer56 Layer56

Figure 13: Example of 3D view of Reservoir facies versus facies distribution.

Rock type Distribution (1) Rock type Distribution (2)

Layer59 Layer59
Figure 14: Comparison between RT distribution (1) and RT distribution (2).
IPTC 13581 17

Figure 15: Comparison between Porosity distribution (1) and Porosity distribution (2).

Figure 16: Comparison between permeability distribution (1) conditioned to facies and permeability dis-
tribution (2) non-conditioned to facies.
18 IPTC 13581

Figure 17: Vertical and lateral heterogeneity described in the 3D Uwainat static model.