Integration Petrophysical To Identify Reservoir Characterization Of Baturaja Limestone In “X” Well, North West Java Basin

Authors

  • Citra Wahyuningrum Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta
  • Kevin Kevin Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta
  • Assyeh Annassrul Majid Universitas Bhayangkara Jakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61132/jupiter.v2i2.89

Keywords:

Archie, Limestone, Baturaja, Petrophysics, Integrated

Abstract

Petrophysical evaluation of the Baturaja Formation on limestone reservoirs of the Field X, using conventional well log interpretation techniques and relating the results to core data based on laboratory analysis, shows that the reservoir characterization parameters to decide future plan for the well. This study shows the role of integrated petrophysical analysis it is possible that an acceptable and can be completed within the constraints and limitations of the available data, but sometimes additional data are needed. These new data, typically additional SCAL (Special Core Analysis), RCAL (Routine Core Analysis), well test data and mud loging data it’s must be integrated. The results of research based on petrophysical parameters is baturaja formation are dominated by limestone. Based on the results of the analysis, the reservoir layer in the baturaja formation, the BRF-1 is a potential hydrocarbon zone while the BRF- 2 and BRF-3 are non-potential zones. The BRF-1 has an average shale volume is 0,187 which is classified as clean formation, a porosity is 0,134 which is classified as small and for a water saturation is 0,677. The calculation method used is the Archie method because it excels in clean formation. Meanwhile, the Simandoux method has advantages in shaly sand formation and the Indonesian method is suitable for formations in Indonesian regions where the dominant formations are shaly sand and low salinity water. Then, cuf-off for BRF-1 obtained a net reservoir of 25.9 m and a netpay of 3,4 m. The results of this data are used to obtain the initial hydrocarbon reserves using the volumetric method and the amount reserves are 84740.5 STB in the BRF-1 zone.

References

Baouche R, Nedjari A 2006 Petrophysical Analysis in Reservoir Characterization – Application in the Triassic Hamra Gas Field, Algeria. Canadian Well Logging Society.Pp 1

Dr. Ir. Ratnayu Sitaresmi, MT 2013 The Study of the Effect of Water Saturation (Sw) on Fractional Flow and Water Cut to Determine Sw Cutoff. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT). pp 3-4

Glerys G, PDVSA and Hassan A, DIGITOIL 2013 Methodology For Advanced Interpretation Of Poor Quality Logs In Multimineral Carbonate Reservoirs. J 2013 SPE WVPS Second South American Oil and Gas Congress held in Porlamar

Moses M, Mimonitu O 2019 Seonghyung J 2016 Petrophysical interpretation and fluid substitution modelling of the upper shallow marine sandstone reservoirs in the Bredasdorp Basin, offshore South Africa. Journal of Petroleum Exploration and Production Technology (2020)

Setya D, Suryantini, Wahyu S 2006 Thermal modeling and heat flow density interpretation of the onshore Northwest Java Basin. Putra et al. Geotherm Energy (2016) 4:12. Pp 2

Taeyoun K, Seho H, Seonghyung J 2016 Petrophysical approach for estimating porosity, clay volume, and water saturation in gas-bearing shale. Austrian Journal of Earth Sciences

Downloads

Published

2024-01-10

How to Cite

Citra Wahyuningrum, Kevin Kevin, & Assyeh Annassrul Majid. (2024). Integration Petrophysical To Identify Reservoir Characterization Of Baturaja Limestone In “X” Well, North West Java Basin. Jupiter: Publikasi Ilmu Keteknikan Industri, Teknik Elektro Dan Informatika, 2(2), 64–71. https://doi.org/10.61132/jupiter.v2i2.89