Journal of African Earth Sciences 145 (2018) 261–266

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of African Earth Sciences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jafrearsci

An integrated quantitative approach for determination of net reservoir T

cutoffs: A case study of Q oil field, Lake Albert, Uganda
Wei Xu∗, Xinye Zhang, Fanjie Shang, Lei Fang, Jun Liu, Xipu Yang
CNOOC Research Institute CO.,Ltd., Beijing 100028, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Petrophysical cutoff of net reservoir plays a very important role in reservoir characterization for the evaluation
Net reservoir cutoffs of hydrocarbons in place and the estimation of ultimate hydrocarbon recovery. There have been many ap-
Experiment design proaches to quantify cutoffs, yet each of these approaches yields a different reservoir model with some amount of
Proxy model uncertainties due to lack of enough data, insufficiency of knowledge and the heterogeneous nature of petroleum
Dynamic performance
reservoirs. Conventionally, net reservoirs cut-offs are evaluated by applying static petrophysical well-logs
Probability density function
without consideration of dynamic performance, which results in a crisp classification of reservoir or non-re-
servoir zones. This paper takes Q oilfield in Albert Basin of Uganda as an example, provides a new structured
quantitative approach which integrates all core, petrophysical interpretation, modular dynamics test data, re-
servoir fluid data and development wells pattern together to determine a reasonable net reservoir cutoffs. Three
dependent variables including oil initially in place (OIIP), total oil production (FOPT) and total water production
(FWPT) were selected to test the sensitivity with two independent variables, i.e. volume of clay (Vclay) and
porosity. Then experiment design and response surface method were used in constructing the proxy models that
are related to the dependent variable. After running 5000 realizations, probability density function (PDF) was
utilized to locate P50 value on the cumulative probability curve. Finally, the cutoffs of Vclay and porosity were
determined by the arithmetic mean of corresponding P50 value. The case study clearly illustrates how all
available data from a reservoir should be integrated for appropriate determination of the net reservoir cutoffs.

1. Introduction
Net reservoir, a key parameter in reservoir evaluation, has sufficient
reservoir quality and useful capability to store fluids and allow them to
flow (Worthington, 2010; Hadi, 2017). The principal part of identifi-
cation of net reservoir is to determine its cutoffs. However, although the
concept of cutoff has been continuously used since the 1950s, there is
no universal agreement on its definition and quantification methods yet
(Worthington, 2008). In the most commonly used procedure, it is
usually expressed in term of a log-derived shale volume fraction, Vclay,
being less than a Vclay cutoff and the fractional porosity being greater
than or equal to a porosity cutoff through a Vclay-porosity cross plot
(Worthington and Cosentino, 2005). Recently, some new methods in-
cluding diffusivity equation (Masoudi et al., 2011), Bayesian (Masoudi
et al., 2012a), fuzzy classifier fusion (Masoudi et al., 2012b),Demp-
ster–Shafer theory (Masoudi et al., 2014a), artificial neural network
(Masoudi et al., 2014b) and NMR T2 (Testamanti and Rezaee, 2017)
have been adopted to determine net zone. Meanwhile, the study context
has been expended from terrestrial clastic reservoirs to carbonate
(Masoudi et al., 2012c), shale-gas (Worthington and Majid, 2014) and
fractured reservoir (Kolganov and Kovaleva, 2012).
If the collected data is enough to cover a broad range of parameter
variation, even thin beds reservoir may obtain an accurate cutoff
(Carpenter, 2014). Nevertheless, Q oilfield in Albert Basin in Uganda is in
the early stage of the oilfield development (Xu et al., 2017). Cutoff de-
termination is difficult because of lack of drilled wells and other supported
data. In addition, although the reservoir cutoffs were generated and ap-
plied during the petrophysical evaluation, their impacts will be more ob-
vious in reservoir engineering. The conventional cut-off-based methods for
determining net pays are often based on static data, however Drill Stem
Test and permeability data start to be used in recent studies (Worthington,
2010; Masoudi et al., 2011, 2012a; b; c; 2014a; b). That indicates not using
dynamic data might increase the uncertainty of predicting reservoir pro-
duction (Galley, 2016; Testamanti and Rezaee, 2017). This paper takes Q
oilfield in Albert Basin of Uganda as an example, providing a new struc-
tured quantitative approach that integrates all core, petrophysical inter-
pretation, MDT test data, reservoir fluid data and development wells
pattern for determination of net reservoir cutoffs.

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: weixucug@qq.com (W. Xu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2018.05.007
Received 18 September 2017; Accepted 21 May 2018
Available online 22 May 2018
1464-343X/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
W. Xu et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 145 (2018) 261–266

Abbreviation FOPT field oil production total

FWPT field water production total
Vclay fractional volume of clay MMbbls millions barrels
SW saturation of water Adj. R-square Adjusted R-square
NTG net to pay RSM Response Surface Methodology
MDT modular dynamics test PDF Probability Density Function
OIIP oil initially in place

2. Geological setting 3.2.1. Parameter selected

Two sorts of parameters were selected in this study: independent
Lake Albert, located at the northern end of the Western branch of variable and dependent variable. Two petrophysical parameters were
the EARS, stretches over a total distance of over 500 km from Rwanda used as independent variables including Vclay and porosity while the
in the South to Sudan in the North along Uganda's western boundary three dependent variables were OIIP, FOPT and FWPT. OIIP, which refers
with the Democratic Republic of Congo (Karner et al., 2000), and has an to hydrocarbon in place, was used as a static index, and FOPT and TWPT,
average water depth of approximately 25 m (Karp et al., 2012) (Fig. 1). indicating the recoverable reserve, were used as dynamic variables.
The geological sequence in the Albert Basin is of the Miocene–Recent
age, resting on the metamorphosed Precambrian basement (Roberts
3.2.2. Experiment design and response surface
et al., 2012). The penetrated sequence comprises a series of interbed-
Experimental design allows finding an equation which relates the
ding sandstones and shales, representing a mixture of Low-stand events,
response with the variation of the input factors, and offers an evolu-
during which sedimentation was dominated by fluvial process and flood
tional model (Oguz et al., 2016). In fact, Experimental design methods
or high-stand events, during which lacustrine deposition predominated
are effectively distributing simulator runs within ranges of uncertainty
(Aanyu and Koehn, 2011; Zhang and Scholz, 2015).
parameters. Therefore, minimizing the numbers of runs is required to
The structure of Q oil field comprises a southwest-northeast
study the system. In order to seek a robust relationship between de-
trending 3-way dip-closed hanging wall anticline that seals against
pendent variable and independent variable, a four-lever experimental
basement to the south-east along the main bounding fault of the Albert
design with two variables (Vclay and porosity) was conducted. The
Basin (Xu et al., 2017). In this field, five wells were drilled to evaluate
experimental design results covered the whole data range by not too
the oil-bearing potential zone and MDT tests were carried out to assess
many cases to avoid consuming excessive time (Moras et al., 2017).
the reservoir connectivity. The core collected in K-3 well showed an
Response Surface Methodology (RSM) is a modeling technique
obvious characteristic of fan delta front that flow from east bounding
useful for building empirical model (Venkataraman, 2000; Rohmer and
fault to the west deep lake (Xu et al., 2017) (Fig. 1).
Bouc, 2010). The objective of RSM is to develop, improve and optimize

3. Dataset and approach

3.1. Dataset

3.1.1. MDT data

In this study, 78 MDT points in total were collected from five wells
by Schlumberger's new formation dynamics tester in Q oil field, in-
cluding 44 good oil points, 26 good water points, 6 tight points and 2
sample points (Fig. 2). No data has been collected in the light blue area
(Vclay: 0.35–0.48 & Porosity: 0.085–0.125) in Fig. 2 and thus it leads to
the uncertainty of net reservoir cutoff. In other words, within the blue
no-data area, if the cutoffs were selected conservatively, the estimation
of hydrocarbon in place and recoverable reserve will be pessimistic.
Otherwise, the results would be over-estimated.

3.1.2. Reservoir model

A robust static 50*50 m 3D geomodel including facies model, Vclay
model, porosity model, permeability model was established for Q oil
field (Fig. 3). And the NTG model was defined by Vclay model and
porosity model. This grid was used to calculate hydrocarbon volume
(OIIP) in static model. Then it was integrated with oil producers and
water injectors to simulate the dynamic process. The total volume of Oil
production (FOPT) and water production (FWPT) were obtained from
dynamic simulation results.

3.2. Approach

An Integrated Quantitative Approach was utilized to determine net

reservoir cutoff. Compared to the conventional methods, it took both
static and dynamic indices into consideration to obtain an appropriate
cutoff result. This structured approach encourages combining different
sorts of data to test and verify the final net reservoir cutoff value
(Fig. 4). Fig. 1. Structure background and sedimentary facies of Q oilfield.

262
W. Xu et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 145 (2018) 261–266

0.60
discrete parameter was generally defined by probability mass function
Test oil
Sample oil
(PMF) (Moeinikia and Alizadeh, 2012; Arinkoola and Ogbe, 2015). In
Vclay: 0.48 Test water
this study, OIIP, FOPT and FWPT were distributed continuously, so the
0.50
Tight PDF curve was used to obtain their probability distribution respectively.
Through Monte Carlo (Mun, 2006; Bailian et al., 2017) simulation, the
No data collected realizations were used to generate PDF. In general, the value at P50 is
0.40
believed to be reasonable, so the corresponding Vclay and porosity at
Vclay (Frac)

Vclay: 0.35 P50 were the realistic cutoff we want to determine (Arinkoola and
0.30 Ogbe, 2015).
No data collected

4. Results and discussion

0.20

4.1. Data analysis and experiment design results

Por: 0.085

Por: 0.125

0.10
MDT data in Fig. 2 show that the cutoff can be located anywhere
within the no-data area (highlighted in light blue). In the scope of this
0.00
area, Vclay value ranges from 0.35 to 0.48 and Porosity changes from
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.085 to 0.125. Each four values of Vclay and porosity were chose
Porosity (Frac) among this interval to make a four-lever experiment design (Table 1),
thus 24 = 16 NTG cases which cover all the possible situations were
Fig. 2. Porosity and Vclay cross plot for cutoff determination, dataset of MDT in
finally simulated to test the variation of dependent variable caused by
Q oilfield.
different cutoffs (Table 2).

4.2. Sensitive analysis

In this study, different NTG cutoffs lead to various reservoir sand

thickness, for instance, sand thickness in well K-4 changed less than 5%
while in other wells it changed up to nearly 40% as the cutoffs varied. This
may be related to sedimentary facies distribution in Q filed. That is to say,
well K-4 locates in the main part of the fan delta and it penetrated into the
multi-channel, however, other wells are very close to the bounding fault
and they encountered thinner sand with strong heterogeneity. Hence, the
variation of NTG cutoff may lead to a greater impact on thinner reservoir
sand with strong heterogeneity, so more attention should be paid to the
determination of NTG cutoff to have reasonable results.
Fig. 3. 3D geomodel for Q oil field: (a) Vclay model; (b) Porosity model; (c)
OIIP was calculated from static model. Then, FOPT and FWPT were
Permeability model. derived from dynamic simulation model by 16 NTG cutoff cases.
Table 3 showed that as the NTG cutoff changes, OIIP ranges from 527
MMbbls to 442 MMbbls, FOPT ranges from 151.1 MMbbls to 121.0
a response, which is influenced by different variables (Cheong and
MMbbls and FWPT ranges from 661.7 MMbbls to 529.9 MMbbls. The
Gupta, 2005; Daghbandan and Chalik, 2015). In this study, two factors,
variation of OIIP, FOPT and FWPT is 16.7%, 20.9% and 21.1% re-
Vclay (x) and porosity (y) are concerned in the process, and the Che-
spectively. The changes of FOPT and FWPT are slightly greater than
byshev polynomial model is used as the response surface proxy model.
OIIP, indicating that NTG cutoff also has an impact on reservoir sand
It is described as follows:
connectivity. Moreover, Table 3 shows that Vclay cutoff may play a
T(x, y) = T0 + A1*T1(x) + B1*T1(y) + A2*T2(x) + C*T1(x) T1(y) more important role than porosity cutoff in influencing the static and
+ B2*T2(y) dynamic simulation results. The generated dependent results have a
positive relationship with Vclay cutoff value while a negative re-
Tn(x) = cos(n*acos(x)) lationship with porosity cutoff.
Tn(y) = cos(n*acos(y))
4.3. Response surface analysis
Where, T (x, y) is the predicted response for OIIP, FOPT and FWPT. In
this study, x and y are independent variables, ranging from 0 to 1, T0 is The response surface proxy model was used to match OIIP with
an independent term, A, B and C are the terms' coefficients. Vclay and porosity to obtain a non-linear fitting equation, so were FOPT
Chebyshev polynomial, which recursively defines a series of or- and FWPT. The fitting results provided a very good correlation between
thogonal polynomial series, plays a pivotal role in the approximation the dependent variable and independent variable with high adjusted R-
theory applications (Mason and Hsndscomb, 2003). The corresponding square up to 0.99 (Fig. 5). Moreover, the residual plot showed that the
interpolation polynomial can minimize Runge phenomenon and pro- residual values are all around zero, which also can be a robust evidence
vide the best uniform approximation polynomial in continuous function for the following fitting formula results:
(Mason and Hsndscomb, 2003). Moreover, it also can provide detail
information about the interaction and the nonlinearity of the variables OIIP = −1298.98 + 1058.659*cos(acos(x)) +519.412*cos(acos(y))
(Mason and Hsndscomb, 2003). −241.84*cos(2*acos(x)) −168.067*cos(acos(x))*cos(acos(y))
−1166.67*cos(2*acos(y)) (1)

FOPT = −933.2 + 98.298*cos(acos(x))+538.678*cos(acos(y))

3.2.3. Probability analysis
+95.985*cos(2*acos(x)) −301.793*cos(acos(x))*cos(acos(y))
Probability density of continuous parameter was usually defined by
−1071.28*cos(2*acos(y)) (2)
probability density function (PDF) while probability distribution of

263
W. Xu et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 145 (2018) 261–266

Independent variables: Vclay, porosity;

Parameter Selected Dependent variables: OIIP, FOPT, FWPT

Database
Data Analysis Vclay-porosity plotting of MDT points

Four-lever experiment design with 2

Experiment Design variables, 24=16 cases in total

OIIP from static model, FOPT and FWPT

Reservoir simulation from dynamic model
Approaches

Variation of OIIP, FOPT, FWPT as Vclay-

Sensitivity Analysis porosity cutoff changes

Chebyshev polynomial used as the proxy

Response surface model to perform non-linear fitting

5000 cases calculated by the proxy

Probability Analysis model for probability density function
Result

Vclay- porosity cutoff corresponding to

Final Determination P50 value of OIIP, FOPT, FWPT

Fig. 4. Integrated quantitative approach for determination of net reservoir cutoffs.

Table 1 Table 3
The selected Vclay and porosity value for experiment design. The OIIP, FOPT and FWPT experimental results with Vclay and porosity.
Parameter Value 1 Value 2 Value 3 Value 4 Running Case Vclay Porosity OIIP MMbbls FOPT MMbbls FWPT MMbbls

Vclay 0.480 0.450 0.400 0.350 Case 1 0.480 0.085 527 151.1 661.7
Porosity 0.085 0.100 0.110 0.125 Case 2 0.480 0.100 527 151.1 661.7
Case 3 0.480 0.110 527 151.1 661.6
Case 4 0.480 0.125 525 150.0 654.0
Case 5 0.450 0.085 508 144.2 625.7
Case 6 0.450 0.100 508 144.2 625.5
Table 2 Case 7 0.450 0.110 508 144.2 625.2
The four-lever experiment design result by Vclay and porosity. Case 8 0.450 0.125 506 140.5 598.9
Case 9 0.400 0.085 478 132.3 578.2
NTG Case VClay Porosity
Case 10 0.400 0.100 478 132.3 578.2
Case 1 0.480 0.085 Case 11 0.400 0.110 478 132.3 577.8
Case 2 0.480 0.100 Case 12 0.400 0.125 476 131.3 572.4
Case 3 0.480 0.110 Case 13 0.350 0.085 443 121.5 531.4
Case 4 0.480 0.125 Case 14 0.350 0.100 443 121.5 531.4
Case 5 0.450 0.085 Case 15 0.350 0.110 443 121.5 531.4
Case 6 0.450 0.100 Case 16 0.350 0.125 442 121.0 529.9
Case 7 0.450 0.110
Case 8 0.450 0.125 Note: The above data have been processed technically.
Case 9 0.400 0.085
Case 10 0.400 0.100 4.4. Probability density function
Case 11 0.400 0.110
Case 12 0.400 0.125
Case 13 0.350 0.085 The above three formulae were respectively used as response sur-
Case 14 0.350 0.100 face proxy to calculate OIIP, FOPT and FWPT by running 5000 reali-
Case 15 0.350 0.110 zation through Monte Carlo stochastic algorithm. Then, PDF including
Case 16 0.350 0.125 probability density distribution and cumulative probability curve were
utilized to find the most reasonable results (P50) (Fig. 6). Cumulative
probability curve of OIIP showed that P50 value is 486 MMbbls and the
corresponding Vclay and porosity cutoff is 0.414 and 0.106 respec-
FWPT = −5639.68-239.967*cos(acos(x)) + 3656.692*cos(acos(y))
tively. Meanwhile, the P50 value of FOPT cumulative probability curve
+ 885.076*cos(2*acos(x)) −2510.55*cos(acos(x))
is 135.7 MMbbls and the corresponding Vclay and porosity cutoff is
*cos(acos(y))−6784.77*cos(2*acos(y)) (3)
0.418 and 0.106 respectively. FWPT cumulative probability curve also

264
W. Xu et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 145 (2018) 261–266

0.60
Test oil
Sample oil
0.50 Vclay: 0.48 Test water
Tight
Vclay: 0.414
0.40

Vclay (Frac)
Vclay: 0.35
0.30

Porosity: 0.107
Por: 0.085

Por: 0.125
0.20

0.10

0.00
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Porosity (Frac)

Fig. 7. The final determined net reservoir cutoffs projected on porosity and
Fig. 5. Three-dimensional response surface plots of OIIP (a), FOPT (b), FWPT Vclay cross plot.
(c) as a function of Vclay and porosity with corresponding residual plot (d) and
(e).
proposed a mobility-based method which incorporates economic-pro-
440 460 480 500 520 120 124 128 132 136 140 144 148 152 550 600 650 duction rate in the quantification of cutoffs. The same point on the
a OIIP 99.5 b FOPT c FWPT
99.5 99.5
application of dynamic data implies that comprehensive utilization of
Cumulative Probability
Cumulative Probability
Cumulative Probability

98 98
98
90

70
90

70
90 static as well as dynamic information will significantly improve the
70
50
30
50
30 50
accuracy of cutoff determination.
30
10

2
10

2 10
Distinct reservoir parameters should be used to determine cutoffs in
0.5
300
0.5
350
5
formation evaluation for different environments. Compared to clastic
400
250 300

250
and carbonate environment, natural fracture, total organic carbon
200 300
Counts

Counts

Counts

150
200
150
100
100
50
50
0 0
440 460 480 500 520 120
Fig. 6. Probability density function and cumulative probability curve for OIIP
(a), FOPT (b), FWPT (c), and the blue line locates at P50 value. (For inter-
pretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred
to the web version of this article.)
gives the P50 value at 591 MMbbls and the corresponding Vclay and
porosity cutoff is respectively 0.419 and 0.109. The cutoffs derived
from 3 different dependent variables’ cumulative probability curve are
very close.
4.5. Cutoff determination
OIIP as a static parameter was integrated with the dynamic para-
meters FOPT and FWPT to determine a very close cutoff through
probability density function. Therefore, an arithmetic mean value of the
three Vclay cutoffs was adopted as the final Vclay cutoff for Q oil field,
and so did porosity cutoff. Fig. 7 showed the locations of final cutoffs on
cross plot. The final Vclay cutoff is 0.414 with a loss rate at 3% and the
ultimate porosity cutoff is 0.107 with the corresponding loss rate at 5%,
both of the loss rates of reservoir are in a reasonable scope. This in-
tegrated quantitative approach has formed a positive effective circle of
the static and dynamic data interaction.
4.6. Further discussion
Cutoff determination has obvious impact on static parameters like
net pay thickness and hydrocarbon volume, consequently dynamic re-
sults alters as cutoff changes. The procedure in this paper carries out an
analysis of FOPT and FWPT to detect the fluid flowing in the porous
media. The wider range of FOPT and FWPT than OIIP indicates the
impacts on dynamic response by reservoir connectivity. Hadi, 2017
200
maturity and free gas saturation could be utilized to define cutoff for
100
net shales gas reservoir besides volume of shales and porosity
0
(Worthington and Majid, 2014). Furthermore, the same assessment of
124 128 132 136 140 144 148 152 550 600 650
the ANN-based method has showed precision of 86% and 91% in
classifying pay zones in carbonate and clastic reservoirs respectively
(Masoudi et al., 2014a). This is due to the distinct characteristic of pore
throat structure and heterogeneity of different reservoir formation in
different environment. In essence, cutoff determination is to find the
most appropriate parameters to effectively identify the net interval that
is in ability to store hydrocarbon and allow them to flow.
In general, the approach proposed in this paper is preferred because
of several advantages. First, it takes into account dynamic performance
at reservoir conditions. Second, experiment design avoids time-con-
fusing simulation in the models. Third, response surface function pro-
vides a very fast test for static and dynamic result versus cutoffs. Fourth,
it is simple, straightforward and practically rationalized with a model
grid.
5. Conclusion
This paper provides an integrated quantitative approach to de-
termine reservoir cutoff by taking static and dynamic parameter into
account, which overcomes deviation that may be caused by lack of core
test and MDT test data. The method presented in this study is in-
dependent of the core test and MDT test data, besides it considers re-
servoir connectivity to reflect the rationality of cutoff through geolo-
gical and recoverable reserves and water production meanwhile.
According to the analysis results, the reasonable reservoir cutoffs in this
oil field are Vclay at 0.416 and porosity at 0.107. It is worth noticing
that Vclay may have greater influence on reservoir compared to the
porosity. Moreover, it is more sensitive for cutoff impacting on thin
interbedding reservoir sands. Consequently, integrated static and dy-
namic data analysis should be fully utilized in the process of reservoir
cutoff determination.

265
W. Xu et al. Journal of African Earth Sciences 145 (2018) 261–266

Acknowledgments Masoudi, P., Tokhmechi, B., Jafari, A.M., 2012a. Application of Bayesian in determining
productive zones by well log data in oil wells. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 47–54 94–95.
Masoudi, P., Tokhmechi, B., Jafari, M.A., Moshiri, B., 2012b. Application of fuzzy clas-
We acknowledge the CNOOC Uganda Limited for their support and sifier fusion in determining productive zones in oil wells. Energy Explor. Exploit. 30
permission to present this work. We also acknowledge other staff from (3), 403–416.
CNOOC Research Institute, specifically Hu Guangyi, Sun Lichun, Zhang Masoudi, P., Tokhmechi, B., Bashari, A., 2012c. Identifying productive zones of the
Sarvak formation by integrating outputs of different classification methods. J.
Yingchun and Gao Boyu, who made contributions to this study. The Geophys. Eng. 9, 282–290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-2132/9/3/282.
conscientious reviews of the two reviewers and editorial guidance of Dr. Masoudi, P., Arbab, B., Mohammadrezaei, H., 2014a. Net pay determination by Dempster
Mapeo are gratefully acknowledged. rule of combination: case study on Iranian off shoreoil fields. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 123,
78–83.
Masoudi, P., Arbab, B., Mohammadrezaei, H., 2014b. Net pay determination by artificial
References neural network: case study on Iranian off shore oil fields. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 123,
72–77.
Moeinikia, F., Alizadeh, N., 2012. Experimental Design in reservoir simulation: an in-
Aanyu, K., Koehn, D., 2011. Influence of pre-existing fabrics on fault kinematics and rift
tegrated solution for uncertainty analysis, a case study. J. Petrol. Exploration Prod.
geometry of interacting segments: analogue models based on the Albertine Rift
Technol. 2 (2), 75–83.
(Uganda), Western Branch-East African Rift System. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 59, 168–184.
Moras, B., Rey, S., Vilarem, G., Pontalier, P.Y., 2017. Pressurized water extraction of
Arinkoola, A.O., Ogbe, D.O., 2015. Examination of experimental designs and response
isoflavones by experimental design from soybean flour and soybean protein isolate.
surface methods for uncertainty analysis of production forecast: a Niger delta case
Food Chem. 214, 9–15.
study. J. Petrol. Eng. 3, 1–16.
Mun, J., 2006. Modeling Risk : Applying Monte Carlo Simulation, Real Options Analysis,
Bailian, Chen, Jincong, He, Xian-Huan, Wen, Wen, Chen, Albert, C., Reynolds, 2017.
Forecasting, and Optimization Techniques. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, New
Uncertainty quantification and value of information assessment using proxies and
Jersey p.74.
Markov chain Monte Carlo method for a pilot project. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 157,
Oguz, Y., Cochrane, C., Koncar, V., Mordon, S.R., 2016. Doehlert experimental design
328–339.
applied to optimization of light emitting textile structures. Opt. Fiber Technol. 30,
Carpenter, C., 2014. Thin Beds and Cutoffs: Improved Assessment and Modeling of Net
38–47.
Porous Volume. Society of Petroleum Engineershttp://dx.doi.org/10.2118/0814-
Roberts, E.M., Stevens, N.J., O'Connor, P.M., Dirks, P.H.G.M., Gottfried, M.D., Clyde,
0071-JPT.
W.C., Armstrong, R.A., Kemp, A.I.S., Hemming, S., 2012. Initiation of the western
Cheong, Y.P., Gupta, R., 2005. Experimental Design and Analysis Methods for Assessing
branch of the East African Rift coeval with the eastern branch. Nat. Geosci. 5,
Volumetric Uncertainties. Society of Petroleum Engineershttp://dx.doi.org/10.2118/
289–294.
80537-PA.
Rohmer, J., Bouc, O., 2010. A response surface methodology to address uncertainties in
Daghbandan, A., Chalik, S.M., 2015. The prediction of the performance of an oil reservoir
cap rock failure assessment for CO2 geological storage in deep aquifers. Int. J.
by proxy model: a case study. Int. J. Chemoinf. Chem. Eng. (IJCCE) 4 (2), 46–58.
Greenhouse Gas Control 4, 198–208.
Galley, S.V., 2016. Pay Cutoff Definition Based on Dynamic Reservoir Parameters. Society
Testamanti, M.N., Rezaee, R., 2017. Determination of NMR T2 cut-off for clay bound
of Petrophysicists and Well-Log Analysts.
water in shales: a case study of Carynginia Formation, Perth Basin, Western Australia.
Hadi, Saboorian-Jooybari, 2017. A Structured Mobility-based Methodology for
J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 149, 497–503.
Quantification of Net-pay Cutoff in Petroleum Reservoirs. Society of Petroleum
Venkataraman, R., 2000. Application of the Method of Experimental Design to Quantify
Engineershttp://dx.doi.org/10.2118/183643-PA.
Uncertainty in Production Profiles. Society of Petroleum Engineershttp://dx.doi.org/
Karner, G.D., Byamungu, B.R., Ebinger, C.J., Kampunzu, A.B., Mukasa, R.K., Nyakaanad,
10.2118/59422-MS.
J., Rubondod, E.N.T., Upcottc, N.M., 2000. Distribution of crustal extension and re-
Worthington, P.F., 2008. The application of cutoffs in integrated reservoir studies. SPE
gional basin architecture of the Albertine rift system, East Africa. Mar. Petrol. Geol.
Reservoir Eval. Eng. 11 (6), 968–975.
17, 1131–1150.
Worthington, P.F., 2010. Net pay-what is it? What does it do? How do we quantify it?
Karp, Tobias, Scholz, C.A., McGlue, M.M., 2012. Structure and stratigraphy of the lake
How do we use it? SPE Reservoir Eval. Eng. 13 (5), 812–822.
Albert rift, east africa: observations from seismic reflection and gravity data. In:
Worthington, P.F., Cosentino, L., 2005. The role of cut-offs in integrated reservoir studies.
Baganz, O.W., Bartov, Y., Bohacs, K., Nummedal, D. (Eds.), Lacustrine Sandstone
SPE Reservoir Eval. Eng. 8 (4), 276–290.
Reservoirs and Hydrocarbon Systems. AAPG Memoir. vol. 95. pp. 299–318.
Worthington, P.F., Majid, A.A., 2014. The Use of Net-Pay Concepts in the exploitation of
Kolganov, V., Kovaleva, G.A., 2012. Approaches for Estimating Carbonate Fractured
shale-gas deposits. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 120, 78–85.
Reservoir Property Cutoffs. Society of Petroleum Engineershttp://dx.doi.org/10.
Xu, Wei, Fang, Lei, Zhang, Xinye, Wang, Pengfei, Liu, Jun, Yang, Xipu, 2017. Object-
2118/162071-MS.
based 3D geomodel with multiple constraints for early Pliocene fan delta in the south
Mason, J.C., Hsndscomb, D.C., 2003. Chebyshev Polynomials. CRC Press Company, pp.
of Lake Albert Basin, Uganda. J. Afr. Earth Sci. 125, 1–10.
155–157 chapter 6.
Zhang, X., Scholz, C.A., 2015. Turbidite systems of lacustrine rift basins: examples from
Masoudi, P., Tokhmechi, B., Zahedi, A., Jafari, M.A., 2011. Developing a method for
the lake kivu and lake Albert rifts, east africa. Sediment. Geol. 325, 177–191.
identification of net zones using log data and diffusivity equation. J. Min. Environ. 2
(1), 53–60.

266