Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Field
Fact Book
Kent Bowker
The Weber Sandstone at Rangely Field, Colorado1
KENT A. BOWKER2
WILLIAM D. JACKSON3
j
I
I
The Permo-Pennsylvanian Weber Sandstone is the major producing horizon at the giant
I
Rangely Field, Rio Blanco County, Colorado. The Weber is separated into three major
1I lithotypes, the distribution of which is related to depositional environment. The Weber was
I
II deposited in two major depositional environments: fluvial and eolian. The fluvial deposits,
i derived fiom the ancestral Uncompahgre Uplift, are dominantly arkosic sandstones, siltstones,
i
Ii and shales. The arkosic lithofacies are not productive and act as intraformational permeability
i barriers. The eolian sediments were deposited in dune, interdune, and extradune environments
as j?ne and very $ne-grained subarkosic sand. They are either cross laminated (mostly wind-
j
ripple laminae) or massively bedded (bioturbated). The cross-laminated lithofacies is the
I major productive Eithofacies, with an average porosity of 12%. Permeability is highly direc-
i
I
tional on a small scale because of differential cementation related to grain sizes within inverse-
1 graded laminae. Permeability along the laminae averages 2 md; permeability across the lami-
i
i
i
nae averages 0.4 md. Massive sandstone has a mean porosity of 7.1% and mean permeability
i
i of 0.2 md.
!
i
The Raven Park Anticline provides the trap at Rangely. One major normal fault and several
!
I
minor normal faults affect hydrocarbon production by displacing productive zones between
i
i injection and production wells, and by acting as water and carbon dioxide conduits or thief
I
I
I
zones.
I In the diagenetic history of the Weber, much of the original porosity was destroyed by early
I
I and late cementation, although some was subsequently restored by dissolution of detrital and
! authigenic minerals. Asphaltene, which appears as moveable oil on wireline logs, was precipi-
I
1I tated near the end of diagenesis.
I
I
The Weber reservoir initially was water wet, with a water saturation of 27.5%; the current
I carbon dioxide flood could be altering wettability. The carbon dioxide flood should boost
I
I
i
ultimate recovery from the Weber to 900,000,000 BO.
I
INTRODUCTION 19,000 acres (7,689 ha) (Fig. 2). It lies at the north-
ern end of the Douglas Creek Arch, which separates
The objective of this paper is to describe each of the Uinta and Piceance basins. Rangely Field is by
the three major lithotypes identified in the Permo-
Pennsylvanian Weber Sandstone, emphasizing those far the largest of a trend of Weber Sandstone fields
petrophysical characteristics that affect oil and gas found along the northern Piceance Basin.
production. Core descriptions, core analyses, optical Petroleum migrated into the region during the
and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) , and x-ray Mesozoic, before the Late Cretaceous-Early Tertiary
diffraction (XRD) and special core analyses were used Laramide Orogeny (Campbell, 1955; Fryberger,
! to separate the Weber into three major lithotypes. 1979). Oil may have been trapped against imperme-
Distribution of these lithotypes is controlled by deposi- able Maroon rocks all along the southern terminus of
j
tional environments and is the major influence on hy- Weber deposition. Asphaltene found in sandstones
i drocarbon production in the field. throughout the region may have precipitated at that
j The giant Rangely Field (Fig. l ) , in Rio Blanco time.
County, Colorado, is one of the largest oil fields in Shallow production from the Cretaceous Mancos
j the Rocky Mountain region, covering approximately Group shales was established at Rangely from 1901
I Sandstone Reservoirs-1989 65 Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists
I
SAND WASH
WHITE RIVER
Q PRECAMBRIAN OUTCROP
Figure 1. Regional tectonic and index map. Rangely Field lies a t the north end of the Laramide-age Douglas
I Creek Arch, on the northwest margin of the Piceance Basin. (25 mi = 40.2 km)
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
iI
I
~ ~ 1 O o F r
I
~
I
I
I
Figure 2. Structure map, top of Weber Sandstone (Rangely Field). The trace of cross section N-S (Fig. 12) is
shown. The No. 139Y UPRR is the type well. Faults have a normal sense, (1 mi = 1.61 km)
Sandstone Reservoirs-1 989 67 Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists
Figure 4. Cores of major lithofacies. The photographs are from various depths of the NO. 139Y UPRR.
One-in. (2.56 cm) tick marks are located to the left of each core for scale.
A. Cross-laminated facies. Dark material a t the lower half of the center cross-bed set is asphaltene.
Carbonate cements (white streaks) excluded asphaltene precipitation in portions of some laminae. Most
of the laminations are wind ripples; grainflow deposits are located a t the base of some of the dune sets.
See Figure 8 for SEM and porosimeter data from this sample, and Plates lA, l B , and 1C for thin-section
photomicrographs. 5,657 ft (1,724 m).
B. Cross-laminated facies. The laminae coarsen upward, suggesting that they were formed by the migra-
tion of wind ripples. Note that the carbonate cement in very fine-grained portions of the laminae (white
layers) has excluded the hydrocarbon saturation seen in the remaining, fine-grained portions. White
spots in rock are poikilotopic carbonate. 5,846 ft (1,781.9 m).
C. Contorted (laminated) facies. Laminae can be seen because of precipitation of asphaltene (dark) in
the coarser-grained portions of the laminae and carbonate (lighter color) in the finer portions; moveable
hydrocarbon stains the remaining rock. 5,877 ft (1,791.3 m).
D. Massive (bioturbated) facies. Asphaltene and carbonate emphasize moderate bioturbation. See also
Figure 9 and Plates l D , 1E and l F , illustrations of this rock. 5,963 ft (1,817.5 m).
E. Core from the arkosic (fluvial) facies. The laminae in the upper half of the photograph appear to
coarsen upward, which implies that eolian processes reworked this fluvial deposit. See also Figure 10
and Plates 1G and l H , illustrations of this sample. 6,160 ft (1,877.6 m).
F. Shale (dark red), siltstone (medium red), and sandstone (light red) of the arkosic (fluvial) facies.
6,286 f t (1,916 m).
6000
\ Horizonta(
Lamination
Cross
Lamination @#
Convolute
Lamination E
Sl
Bioturbation
anom p
J
i
RootCBSIa a
Figure 5. Wireline log and core description of the No. 139Y UPRR, the type well (Fig. 2). The core descrip-
tion shows one major cycle of Weber eolian deposition. Note the fluvial unit below the base of the cycle, the
contorted beds a t the base, and the upward progression from cross-laminated facies to massive (bioturbated)
facies. Porosity decreases upward, allowing recognition of cycles on porosity logs. The fluvial zones generally
have gamma-ray values greater than 50 API units. Depths of samples described elsewhere a r e shown in the
depth column. (Depth increment = 10 ft, or 3.05 m)
I
Sandstone Reservoirs--1989 71 Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists
Radlue ( I l l l C l O i l l ~ t O l d
Figure 8. Cross-laminated facies, No. 139Y UPRR, 5657.7 f t (1,724.4m). SEM image and porosimeter data
from same rock sample.
A. SEM image of very fine to fine-grained sandstone. Note clay coats (mostly illite, C ) and quartz over-
growths (Q). Bar scale in microns.
B. Mercury porosimeter-capillary pressure data, showing distribution of pore-throat sizes for this facies.
Note abundance of pore throats 2-4 microns in radius.
Sandstone Reservoirs- 19 8 9 72 Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists
.0026
b n
RadIus (mlcromoters)
Figure 9. Massive sandstone facies, No. 139Y UPRR, 5,963.1 ft (1,817.6 m). Porosimeter and SEM data
from same rock sample.
A. SEM image of tightly cemented very fine to fine-grained sandstone. Note paucity of visible pores.
Bar scale in microns.
B. Mercury porosimeter-capillary pressure data reported as distribution of pore-throat sizes for this sam-
ple. Most of the porosity is not effective, because pore throats are smaller than one micron in radius.
.oo 1 1 -IB
Radius (micrometers)
Figure 10. Fluvial, arkosic sandstone facies; No. 139Y UPRR, 6,160.7 ft (1,877.8 m). Porosimeter and SEM
data from same rock sample.
A. SEM image of coarse-grained, tightly cemented sandstone. Even very coarse-grained sandstones of
this facies rarely are saturated with hydrocarbons. Bar scale in microns.
B. Mercury porosimeter-capillary pressure data, showing distribution of pore-throat sizes for this sample
of fluvial sandstone, which is typical of this facies. Most of the very small pore-throat radii are attrib-
uted to microporosity formed by alteration of detrital feldspar.
sins and, hence, decrease across the Rangely area unique porosity/permeability distribution. Data from
from west to east. core from the No. 139Y UPRR well, located in the
Production data indicate that clay concentrations center of Rangely Field, approximate an average
increase down-section and to the southeast. Clay Weber section in this regard (Fig. 13). Data from
concentrations average only about 5% in productive several wells across the field were not used in the
sandstones. cross plot because important depositional influences
on porosity and permeability would have been masked
RESERVOIR QUALITY by the diagenetic trends discussed above. The data
Porosity and Permeability cluster around a best-fit line (correlation coefficient
equals 0.76). However, each lithofacies has a differ-
Weber lithofacies were classified as cross laminated ent distribution along this line. The cross-laminated
(mostly dune deposits), massively bedded (bioturbated facies has the largest average porosity and permeability
eolian zones), and arkosic (fluvial sandstones, because a lack of early cementation allowed preserva-
siltstones, and shales). Each lithofacies exhibits a tion of more original porosity and permeability (Fig.
Sandstone Reservoirs-1 989 73 Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists
2o Figure 12. North-south stratigraphic cross section over Rangely Field (see Fig. 2 for location). Logs are gamma ray and porosity curves.
Effective sandstone (10% or greater porosity) is highlighted by the black bars in the depth tracks. The amount of arkosic, fluvial rocks with
5 less than 10% porosity and gamma ray values over 50 API units decreases to the south and down-section. 8.
Bluescape Page 11 of 18 12/31/2009
I
I
Bowkei- and Jackson
*.:
:. .*.a
* . *
... . .-.
-,
a:
- * *.
. .. . . . .. .
B . . :***. . ... 0.. ?.
. .. . . .............
. ....'.. . . . . . . .
0 .
4
f .*,*. .:a
........ :
c
. ...'>.. . '.. . .... * .
*.
..
.-. * : . Mean Porosity: . 0 9 7
.. . .. *... . .
...-
md Mean Permeability: 1.216 md
Fmosm PORosrrY
..
* . .
.. ..
. .
*. .
*,
. ...:"".
...
-. . . . .
. ..........-.-.- ..... .
a ,
d
c *
Mean Porosity: IJ 7 1
. . -. . Mean Porosity: .035
.. ..-................
Meen Permeability: .249 md Mean Permeability: .023 md
.. . ..........-.... ...
. .-
.-.
. ............
- ...... -.-.-.--. . *
f ...- ...-.. . . , c
c
--.- ....
I D a06 aio a16 am am abs aio a16
mosm POROSITY
Figure 13. Permeability and porosity data, Weber Sandstone. Permeability is measured to air, with no
Klinkenberg or overburden pressure corrections made; measurements made parallel to laminae, if present.
Porosity measured by Boyle's Law (helium) method. Arithmetic mean porosity and geometric mean perme-
ability reported. Data from No. 139Y UPRR well.
A. Data from all three major lithologic facies (n=641).
B. Data from the cross-laminated facies only (n=275). This is the most permeable facies.
C. Data from the massive (bioturbated) facies only (n=231). Note trend toward lower permeabilities.
D. Data from the arkosic (fluvial) facies. Includes sandstones and siltstones; shales were not analyzed
(n=135). This is not reservoir rock.
Sandstone Reservoirs-1 9 89 76 Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists
il
0 are the most effective permeability barriers in the
Weber.
Fluid Characteristics
: The presumed source of the oil produced from the
.. /
*a*:
Weber is the Phosphoria Formation (Heffner and Bar-
*J row, in prep.). Central Utah is the only location near
Rangely where the Phosphoria has a high enough con-
centration of organic carbon and where it reached the
oil generative window. The oil, if this is the correct
..... .
source, migrated some 175 mi (282 km) to Rangely.
The oil produced from the Weber has a 34 API
gravity and contains 0.7 wt% sulfur. The initial
. gadoil ratio was 300 CFG/STBO. The original gadoil
contact was at -330 f t (100 m) subsea. The oil/water
. contact was at -1,150 f t (351 m).
-
.
a
-0
/ .. . . n=l5 1
The Weber reservoir was initially water wet with a
water saturation of 27.5%. A sample of cross-lami-
nated sandstone used for relative permeability tests
(Fig. 17) exhibited some hysteresis in the water curve,
which is common in Weber samples. Water saturation
I
must exceed 50% before equal water and oil relative
I 1
O.OO1 0.bl 0.1
I
0
I
1.o
I
10 100 permeabilities are obtained; this is a clear indication
Permeability Along Lamination that the reservoir is water wet. However, there is
Figure 14. Graph of permeability across and paral- some conflicting evidence that implies that the reser-
lel to laminae, cross-lainhated facies. Permeabil- voir has mixed wettability: some fresh-state samples
ity along the laminae in the effective (greater than (i.e., unaltered samples from sponge core) of Weber
one md) portions of the reservoir is approximately will imbibe both oil and brine. The current carbon
four times that across the laminae. Permeability is dioxide flood could be altering the wettability.
approximately the same along the dip and Production History
strike of the laminae. Correlation coefficient is
0.78. Data from No. 139Y UPRR. .The decline curve of the Chevron No. 3 Fee (Fig.
18, Sec 29 T2N R102W), one of the first Weber wells
i
II
\
ers within the Weber. On a smaller scale, the tightly
Q cemented massive (bioturbated) zones also form effec-
> 1- tive barriers to fluid flow.
-
m Cross lamination, enhanced by differential cemen-
Q
E - 1 tation of the laminae, forms the smallest scale of res-
.5
p
w-//
,I
I
\
I
ervoir heterogeneity. Permeability measurements of
the cross-laminated facies vary depending on the ori-
entation of the sample plug relative to the cross lami-
nation. Fractures add to heterogeneity.
The Weber experienced a complex diagenesis,
which included, late in diagenesis, precipitation of
I I
.1 t I
I \
44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88
YEAR
I I
Figure 18; Yearly decline curve for the No. 3 Fee (Sec 29 T2N R102W). These well responses to the original
waterflood and the current carbon dioxide flood are typical. Notice how increases in oil production after
1971 were accompanied by increases in water production, until the initiation of carbon dioxide flood in late
1986. The slight increase in oil production in 1987 compared to 1986 was accompanied by a decrease in water
production. Natural gas production increased with carbon dioxide injection.
Gale, H.S., 1908, Geology of the Rangely oil district, Rio Mayer, L., L.D. McFadden, and J.W. Harden, Distribution of
Blaaco County, Colorado: USGS Bull. 350, 61 p. calcium carbonate in desert soils-a model: Geology, v. 16,
Heffner, T.A., and K.T. Barrow, in prep., Rangely Field: p. 303-306.
AAPG special publication. Raleigh, C.B., J.H. Healy, and J.P. Bredenoeft, 1976, An
King, C., 1876, Paleozoic subdivisions on the 40th parallel: experiment in earthquake control at Rangely, Colorado: Sci-
Am. Jour. Sci., 3 Ser., v. 11,.p. 475-482. ence, v., 191, p. 1230-1236.
Koelmel, M.H., 1986, Post-Mississippian paleotectonic, Warner, H.R., 1977, An evaluation of miscible C02 flooding in
stratigraphic, and diagenetic history of the Weber Sandstone waterflooded sandstone reservoirs: JPT, v. 29, p. 1339-1347.
in the Rangely Field area, Colorado, in J.A. Peterson, ed.,
Paleotectonics and Sedimentation in the Rocky Mountain
Region: AAPG Mem. 41, p. 371-396.
No. of Fields
60
I 60
....................... ........................................................................I
50 ...............................................................................................................
30 .......................................................................................................... I
0 I I
Wyoming Colorado Montana Utah Nebraska No. Dakota