Recognition and prediction of petroleum reservoirs in the fluvial/tidal transition

Feldman, Howard R.; Demko, Timothy M.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-63529-7.00014-6

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of studies (Mutti et al, 1985;Clark & Reinson, 1990;Shanmugam et al, 2000;Feldman et al, 2008;Feldman & Demko, 2015) have suggested that tidal-bars display an overall upward-coarsening sequence towards their tops. One possibility is that this is the result of differing coarse-grained sediment transport pathways during flood and ebb-tidal flows on, and around, barforms (cf.…”

Section: Does Bar-top Coarsening-upward Occur In Fluvio-tidal Mid-chamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, sandy FDTIR bars of the LCR contradict the upward-coarsening observations of interpreted tidal-bars (cf. Mutti et al, 1985;Clark & Reinson, 1990;Shanmugam et al, 2000;Feldman et al, 2008;Feldman & Demko, 2015) and instead fine-upward like fluvial braid-bars (cf. Ashworth et al, 2011;Reesink et al, 2014).…”

Section: Does Bar-top Coarsening-upward Occur In Fluvio-tidal Mid-chamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This model, however, is limited in four respects. Firstly, its foundation rests upon a small number of modern studies (Smith, , 1989Choi et al, 2004;Dalrymple & Choi, 2007;Dalrymple et al, 2012;Johnson & Dashtgard, 2014), whilst relying heavily on observations from ancient fluvial-tidal settings (Hubbard et al, 2011;Fustic et al, 2012;Feldman & Demko, 2015;Martinius et al, 2015;Jablonski & Dalrymple, 2016), where the planform geometry, and hydraulic initial and boundary conditions, are not well-constrained. Secondly, it implies that IHS is strongly related to tidal-processes, and de-emphasizes the potential importance of fluvial and wind-wave processes (Smith et al, 2009(Smith et al, , 2011Durkin et al, 2015;Moreton & Carter, 2015) in producing IHS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Knowledge of FTT stratal architecture is also beneficial to hydrocarbon exploration and production. For example, the Cretaceous bitumen-rich McMurray Formation, Alberta, Canada (Hein, 2015), is commonly interpreted as being constructed from FTT barform strata (Smith, 1988(Smith, , 1989Wightman & Pemberton, 1997;Hubbard et al, 2011;Fustic et al, 2012;Feldman & Demko, 2015;Martinius et al, 2015;Jablonski & Dalrymple, 2016), but fully-fluvial McMurray Formation barform depositional models have also been proposed (cf. Moreton & Carter, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Alluvial architecture of mid‐channel fluvial–tidal barforms: The mesotidal Lower Columbia River, Oregon/Washington, USA

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Barforms of mesotidal to macrotidal fluvial-tidal transitions, regardless of fluvial-discharge, are currently thought to display a sedimentary architecture dominated by tidal signatures. Due to the scarcity of observations from modern mesotidal fluvial-tidal transitions, especially those of multi-channelled large-rivers (mean annual discharge ≥7000 m 3 s À1 and peak discharges ≥15 000 m 3 s À1) with mid-channel bars, this concept remains unproven. The present study analyses data produced by a combination of high-resolution ground penetrating radar and coupled shallow vibracores (<5 m depth), collected from modern fluvial-tidal mid-channel bars of the mesotidal multichannelled Lower Columbia River, Washington/Oregon, USA, which can experience peak discharges ≥18 000 m 3 s À1. These data were used alongside time-sequenced aerial imagery to characterize the spatio-temporal sedimentological evolution of these barforms in singular flows or combined flows consisting of river, tidal and/or wind-wave oscillatory, current components operating in unique fluvial-tidal transition regimes. Results indicate that ca 75% of the Lower Columbia River fluvial-tidal transition produces braidbars with basal to bar-top sedimentological architectures that are indistinguishable from fluvial-only braid-bars recorded in the literature. Barform stratal characteristics within the fluvial-tidal transitions of mesotidal largerivers are therefore more likely to be dominated by downstream-oriented currents. Furthermore, a new style of low-angle (<5°) inclined heterolithic stratification found in bar-top accretion-sets within upper-mixed tidal-fluvial

show abstract

Section: Does Bar-top Coarsening-upward Occur In Fluvio-tidal Mid-chamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Does Bar-top Coarsening-upward Occur In Fluvio-tidal Mid-chamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Alluvial architecture of mid‐channel fluvial–tidal barforms: The mesotidal Lower Columbia River, Oregon/Washington, USA

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Uralian‐derived Havert Formation is dominated by heterolithic deposits, and it represents the first clastic input in the basin above the Permian–Triassic boundary. A correct characterization of these heterolithic deposits in terms of depositional environment is of great significance from a scientific point of view and for hydrocarbon exploration, not only because it affects reservoir distribution and heterogeneities (Vakarelov & Ainsworth, ; Feldman & Demko, ; Zhang et al ., ) but also because the areal extent of these deposits can be extremely significant (up to hundreds of kilometres alongshore and tens to 100 km into the basin; e.g. Birgenheier et al ., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mud‐rich delta‐scale compound clinoforms in the Triassic shelf of northern Pangea (Havert Formation, south‐western Barents Sea)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years it has become clear that many shallow‐marine heterolithic and mudstone‐dominated successions are deposited as mud belts forming part of subaqueous deltas that are related to major fluvial sources either upstream or along shore. Here the Havert Formation is presented as an ancient example of this kind of system. The Havert Formation in the south‐western Barents Sea represents shelf margin clinoforms consisting predominantly of heterolithic deposits. Sediments were mainly derived from the east (Ural Mountains), but a smaller system prograded northward from Fennoscandia. The Havert Formation holds a lot of interest due to: (i) its stratigraphic position, directly above the Permo–Triassic boundary and contemporaneous to the emplacement of the Siberian Traps; (ii) the fact that it represents the first siliciclastic input in the south‐western Barents Sea and it shows interaction between Uralian‐derived and Fennoscandian‐derived sediments; and (iii) its hydrocarbon potential. This study is focused on a detailed sedimentological analysis of cored intervals of the (Ural‐derived) Havert Formation, in combination with seismic interpretation, well‐log correlations and palynological analysis of the Havert and overlying Klappmyss formations. The cored intervals belong to the shelf environment of the Havert shelf‐margin clinoforms (300 to 500 m thick). This sedimentological analysis distinguishes six facies associations, spanning from tidally‐influenced channels at the shoreline to mud‐rich subaqueous platform and foresets of the subaqueous delta. Seismic lines and well‐log correlations show the larger‐scale evolution of the Ural‐derived Havert Formation, characterized by episodes of low‐accommodation and high‐accommodation. The palynological analyses provide the first detailed study of the Havert Formation in the Nordkapp Basin, revising its depositional age in the region as Induan to early Olenekian (Smithian). Furthermore, they strengthen the environmental interpretation; palynofacies present on the shelf record flora of tidally‐influenced coastal plains, whereas the palynofacies in the deep‐water slope contain only amorphous organic matter.

show abstract

Predicting heterogeneity in meandering fluvial and tidal‐fluvial deposits

Durkin

Hubbard

Smith

et al. 2018

Fluvial Meanders and Their Sedimentary Products in the Rock Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recognition and prediction of petroleum reservoirs in the fluvial/tidal transition

Cited by 14 publications

References 67 publications

Alluvial architecture of mid‐channel fluvial–tidal barforms: The mesotidal Lower Columbia River, Oregon/Washington, USA

Alluvial architecture of mid‐channel fluvial–tidal barforms: The mesotidal Lower Columbia River, Oregon/Washington, USA

Mud‐rich delta‐scale compound clinoforms in the Triassic shelf of northern Pangea (Havert Formation, south‐western Barents Sea)

Predicting heterogeneity in meandering fluvial and tidal‐fluvial deposits

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About