1 / 22

Update: Rock Model Council Grove Group Panoma Field, Southwest Kansas

Update: Rock Model Council Grove Group Panoma Field, Southwest Kansas. Martin K. Dubois Alan Byrnes. Kansas Geological Survey Hugoton Project. Core Descriptions Core Analysis . 6 4 39. 10 35 14. Core Analysis Data Set. Core Data Sources.

gyda
Download Presentation

Update: Rock Model Council Grove Group Panoma Field, Southwest Kansas

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Update: Rock Model Council Grove GroupPanoma Field, Southwest Kansas Martin K. Dubois Alan Byrnes Kansas Geological Survey Hugoton Project

  2. Core Descriptions Core Analysis 6 4 39 10 35 14

  3. Core Analysis Data Set

  4. Core Data Sources

  5. Wells with LAS Files by Consortium Members 3900 Gross 3200 Net Wells

  6. Idealized Depositional Model

  7. Major Lithofacies Nonmarine Shaly Siltstone Nonmarine Siltstone Dolomite Med – Coarse Grained Pkst-Grnst V. Fine – Fine Grained Pkst-Grnst Phylloid Algal Bafflestone Mudstone – Wackestone Silty Mudstone-Wkst Marine Siltstone Marine Shale

  8. Lithofacies Distribution in Six Council Grove Cores

  9. Council Grove Strat Column Formation Member Informal Mapped Interval top of A Shale to base of C Lime

  10. Council Grove GroupStructure and Isopach Maps

  11. Marine vs. Nonmarine (thickness)

  12. Marine vs. Nonmarine (% total)

  13. Mapped Intervals Gross thickness from the top of Council Grove (A Shale) to the top of the Roca Shale (D Shale, base of Grenola, base of C Limestone) • Nonmarine Silstones and Sandstones • Nonmarne Shaley Siltstones • Marine Carbonates (“clean”, shallow) • Marine Silica-rich Rocks (deeper) These four major groups are fairly easily recognized with minimum electric log suites.

  14. NonmarineSilt and Sand vs. Shale and Silt (thickness) NM Sand (1-3), NM Silt (1-2) NM Shly Silt (1-0>1)

  15. NonmarineSilt and Sand vs. Shale and Silt (% of total nonmarine) NM Sand (1-3), NM Silt (1-2) NM Shly Silt (1-0>1)

  16. Nonmarine Siltstones

  17. MarineCarbonate vs. Silica-rich (thickness) Pkst-Grnst (4>5-4>6-_ _1>9), Dol. (6>8), Baff-stone (_7), Mdst-Wkst (5-0>3) Silty Mdst-Wkst (3>4-0>3), Mar. Shale, Silt, Sand (0,2-1>7)

  18. MarineCarbonate vs. Silica rich (% of total marine) Pkst-Grnst (4>5-4>6-_ _1>9), Dol. (6>8), Baff-stone (_7), Mdst-Wkst (5-0>3) Silty Mdst-Wkst (3>4-0>3), Mar. Shale, Silt, Sand (0,2-1>7)

  19. Med-Coarse Grained Packstone-Grainstone

  20. Phylloid Algal Bafflestone cm

  21. Marine Carbonate Reservoir Lithofacies(Thickness and % of Marine Rocks) Pkst-Grnst (4>5-4>6-_ _1>9), Dol. (6>8), Bafflestone (_7)

  22. Conclusions • On a gross scale, major rock types show predictable distribution patterns throughout the Panoma Field. • Thinning in the marine rocks to the northwest is compensated by thickening in the nonmarine intervals. Overall thickness of the Council Grove is relatively consistent throughout Panoma. • The influx of quartz silt, very fine sand and clay from the west and northwest is quite dramatic, on a regional scale, and is evident in both the nonmarine and marine intervals. • Better marine carbonates reservoir rocks tend to be concentrated in the in the central and southeast portions of Panoma. • Conversely, better nonmarine reservoir rocks tend to be concentrated in the west and northwestern portion of the Panoma field

More Related