Discrete Modelling of Vuggy Carbonates

Alma Ornes; Rick Chalaturnyk University of Alberta

1 BACKGROUND !
Carbonate deposits in Alberta hold over 450 billion barrels of inplace bitumen resources. The Grosmont formation alone holds over 400 billion barrels of bitumen, yet this resource is not considered part of Albertas reserves due to the lack of commercial operations (ERCB, 2012). The Grosmont has presented challenges since the 70s and 80s, when multiple pilot projects were attempted with mixed results (Alvarez et al., 2008).! The Grosmont is described as a dual porosity reservoir with a primary porosity in the rock matrix and secondary porosity due to networks large vugs, fractures, channels and caverns produced during its complex diagenesis (Luo and Machel, 1995). The reservoir is known for its high heterogeneity, multiple porosity types, and paleokarst system. Some of the largest resources are within the vuggy dolomites in the Grosmont C or Upper Grosmont 2 (picture on the left). ! The current research uses a discontinuum modelling software, Particle Flow Code 3D (PFC3D), to simulate geomechanical tests on vuggy rock samples. !

3 METHODOLOGY!
Sphere Prolate 1:2 Oblate 1:2 Prolate 1:4 Scalene 1:2:4 Oblate 1:4 !

4 RESULTS (Cont.)!
Eight different materials were created with BPM from Itascas PFC3D (Potyondy and Cundal, 2004), generating cylindrical samples 0.05m diameter and 0.125m height.Vug networks were superimposed to the samples with different vug positions and shapes. The vug shapes were based on ellipsoids and spheres.!
Material! M1.1! M1.2! M1.3! M1.4! UCS (MPa)! 118.7! 127.1! 130.3! 135.8! 194.9! 73.9! 50.2! 60.6! Youngs Modulus Poissons (GPa)! 33.3! 33.7! 34.5! 35.0! 66.3! 38.8! 1.8! 1.9! Ratio! 0.17! 0.17! 0.16! 0.17! 0.18! 0.15! 0.24! 0.25! Sample Resolution! 12.5! 19! 22! 25! 12.5! 12.5! 12.5! 19!

The location of the vugs was observed to have an effect on the UCS results.Vugs arranged in a symmetric pattern exhibited a lower reduction in UCS strength with increasing vug volume. This effect was not observed on the tensile and stiffness results. !

!"

$"#

%" !

&"

The volume of the balls assigned to the vugs was tracked. A vug volume ratio was calculated by dividing the volume of balls assigned to vugs by the total initial volume of balls. This geometric parameter is used to compare different samples. !

M2! M3! M4.1! M4.2!

The UCS to tensile ratio decreased with increasing volume of vugs for random vug arrangements. This trend was reversed if vugs were placed symmetrically or in an orderly pattern. !

5 CONCLUSIONS!
" The trends were observed across different material strengths, stiffness and resolutions! " Both strength and stiffness decreased exponentially with increasing voids, which corresponds well with existing knowledge of porosity effects! " UCS correlations with porosity and knowledge of intact material properties present a good alternative for strength estimation, but more research is needed to determine good stiffness correlations! " Resolution had an effect on stiffness but not on strength! " The shape of the vugs does not appear to strongly affect strength! " PFC3D can expand on lab testing to predict strength for larger scale samples!

4 RESULTS
1.2!
PFC3D Med-High strength M1.1! PFC3D Med-High strength M1.2! PFC3D Med-High strength M1.3! PFC3D Med-High strength M1.4!

1!

PFC 3D High Strength M2! PFC3D Medium Strenght M3! PFC3D Low Strength M4.1! PFC3D Low strength M4.2! Eq. (1) Table 4!

2 PURPOSE
UCSvuggy/UCSintact!

0.8!

Eq. (2) Table 4! Eq. (3) Table 4! Eq. (4) Table 4! Eq. (5) Table 4! Expon. (all)!

OBJECTIVE: To determine if we can predict strength of vuggy carbonate samples by combining knowledge if intact properties with a geometric representation of vugs.! ! MOTIVATION:! " We can test intact strength in the lab, but testing large samples (or many samples) can be prohibited ! " Imaging techniques for digital representation are available and increasingly more common! " Combinations of intact properties with superimposed joint fracture networks have been used successfully in PFC3D for the Synthetic Rock Mass approach (Mas Ivars et al., 2011).! !

0.6!

The results from UCS and direct tensile were normalized to the respective intact material and the effect of increasing vug volume. The UCS and modulus decreased with volume of vugs; the results were compared with existing correlations for predicting UCS and E from porosity. !
1!
PFC3D Med-High strength M1.1! PFC3D Med-High strength M1.2! PFC3D Med-High strength M1.4! PFC3D Medium Strenght M3! PFC3D Low Strength M4.2! Eq. 7 Table 4! Expon. (all)!

0.4!

y = e-5.31x! R" = 0.95!

0.9! 0.8! 0.7!

PFC3D Med-High strength M1.3! PFC 3D High Strength M2! PFC3D Low Strength M4.1! Eq. 6 Table 4! Eq. 8 Table 4!

0.2!

Vvuggy/Vintact!

Evuggy/Eintact!

0! 0.00!

0.05!

0.10!

0.15!

0.20!

0.25!

0.30!

0.35!

0.40!

0.6! 0.5! 0.4! 0.3! 0.2! 0.1! 0! 0.00!

" UCS results correspond well with correlations in the literature! " Normalized E results plotted above existing correlations after 0.15 vug volume! " UCS, tensile strength, and stiffness decrease exponentially with increasing vuggy porosity! " Volume was the most important parameter, over shape and number of vugs!
1.00 !
PFC3D Med-high strength M1.1!

y = e-3.82x! R" = 0.97!

0.05!

0.10!

0.15!

Vvuggy/Vintact!

0.20!

0.25!

0.30!

0.35!

0.40!

6 REFERENCES!
" " " " " " " " " Alvarez, J.M., Sawatzky, R.P., Forster, L.M, and Coates, R.M., 2008. Albertas bitumen carbonate reservoirs moving forward with advanced R&D. In Proceedings for the World Heavy Oil Congress March 10 to 12, 2008 Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.! Ameen, M.S., Smart, B.G.D, Somerville, S.J.M, Hammilton, S., and Naji, N.A. 2009. Predicting rock mechanical properties of carbonates from wireline logs (A case study: Arab-D reservoir, Ghawar eld, Saudi Arabia). Marine and Petroleum Geology, 26(4): 430 444.! Buschkuehle, B.E., Hein, F.J., and Grobe, M., 2007. An overview of the geology of the Upper Devonian Grosmont carbonate bitumen deposit, Northern Alberta, Canada. Natural Resources Research 16(1): 3 15.! Chang, C., Zoback, M.D., and Khaksar, A., 2006. Empirical relations between rock strength and physical properties in sedimentary rocks. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 51: 223 237.! Farquhar, R.A., Somerville, J.M., and Smart, B.G.D. 1994. Porosity as a geomechanical indicator: An application of core and log data and rock mechanics. In Proceedings for the European Petroleum Conference in London, U.K., October 25 27, 1994.! Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB), 2012. Albertas Energy Reserves 2011 and Supply/Demand Outlook 2012-2021. Energy Resources Conservation Board, ST98-2012.! Luo, P., and Machel, H.G., 1995. Pore size and pore throat types in a heterogeneous dolostone reservoir, Devonian Grosmont formation, Western Canada Sedimentary Basin. American Association of Petroleum Geologist, 79(11): 1698 1720.! Mas Ivars, D., Pierce, M.E., Darcel, C., Reyes-Montes, J., Potyondy, D.O.,Young, R.P, and Cundall, P.A. 2011. The synthetic rock mass approach for jointed rock mass modelling. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & mining Science 48(2): 219 244.! Potyondy, D.O., and Cundall, P.A. 2004. A bonded-particle model for rock. International Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences 41(8): 1329 1364.!

0.90 ! 0.80 ! 0.70 !

PFC3D Med-high strength M1.2! PFC3D High Strength M2! PFC3D Medium Strength M3!

dTvuggy/dTintact!

0.60 ! 0.50 ! 0.40 ! 0.30 ! 0.20 !

y = e-5.25x! R" = 0.91!

PFC3D Low Strength M4.1! PFC3D Low Strength M4.2! Expon. (All)!

Intact Specimen!

Vuggy dolostone (from Buschkuehle et al., 2007)!

Vug network!

Prediction!

0.10 ! - ! 0.00!

0.05!

0.10!

0.15!

Vvuggy/Vintact!

0.20!

0.25!

0.30!

0.35!

0.40!