2022
DOI: 10.18599/grs.2022.4.9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The rock typing of complex clastic formation by means of computed tomography and nuclear magnetic resonance

Abstract: This study provides a new rock-typing approach for low-resistive and low-permeable clastic rocks. The approach includes integrated interpretation of routine core analysis data with microstructural characteristics, acquired from computed tomography (CT) and nuclear-magnetic resonance (NMR) data. The studied formation comprises siltstones in its bottom, which are replaced by sandstones in its top. Sandstones form the main part of the oil reservoir, whereas siltstones were originally considered as water-saturated… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 22 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These layers exhibit distinct resistivity patterns indicative of their unique geological characteristics. For instance, areas with low resistivity values may signify conductive fracture zones, clay-rich materials, and subterranean sandstone formations (Tchistiakov et al, 2022). The concordance between VES analysis and dipole-dipole methodologies lends credibility to the geological model, offering insights into subterranean movements and structures.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…These layers exhibit distinct resistivity patterns indicative of their unique geological characteristics. For instance, areas with low resistivity values may signify conductive fracture zones, clay-rich materials, and subterranean sandstone formations (Tchistiakov et al, 2022). The concordance between VES analysis and dipole-dipole methodologies lends credibility to the geological model, offering insights into subterranean movements and structures.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%