Exploration & Production Geology http://www.epgeology.com/ |
|
Advice for Petrophysical Modelling http://www.epgeology.com/petrel-f13/advice-for-petrophysical-modelling-t1703.html |
Page 1 of 1 |
Author: | sld312 [ Mon Dec 12, 2011 2:28 pm ] |
Post subject: | Advice for Petrophysical Modelling |
Advice for Petrophysical Modelling I have noticed that in some models they modeled porosity (PHIE) by using the Kriging method then they remodel it by using SGS (Sequential Gaussian Simulation) method Co-Kriging with secondary variable the porosity (PHIE) already modeled (porosity by Kriging method) using local varying mean; My question is what is the benefit or the purpose from this and when it’s recommended or unnecessary?. Otherwise for the permeability they modeled it by using SGS (Sequential Gaussian Simulation) method Co-Kriging with secondary variable the porosity (PHIE) who’s already modeled by SGS method Co-Kriging (porosity PHIE by Kriging method) using collocated co-Kriging (Coefficient=0.8) is this also recommended or just co-kriged the permeability with PHIE modeled directly by SGS without doing the first thing said above? In addition to that when should we skip using variogram in data analysis I mean Orientation (preferential direction) and ranges (in major, minor and vertical directions) and keep them as default? Are these related to the intensity of erosion and degree of the Diagenesis or related to what? Or should we identify the orientation (Azimuth preferential direction) and ranges (in major, minor and vertical directions) anywhere to include them late in property modelling? please email me at: rtld312@yahoo.fr Thanks in advance. |
Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC + 1 hour |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |