Download PPT - Energistics

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
Lithology Reference
Standards
Paul Maton (POSC)
and
Gary Masters (POSC)
Outline
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Introduction
Business Drivers
Use cases
Resources
Current status
Future requirements
Conclusions
Motivation and Background
• WITSML Mud Log revision
– Lithology classification sought to enhance mud log
data transfers
• Shell proposal for revised Lithological
classification widely endorsed by DSS SIG
members in June 2004
• Need exists for lithological terminology in
Web consistent form
Business Drivers
• Operator Point of View
– Standard vocabulary and semantics for lithologies will
improve the following processes
•
•
•
•
Assimilating results of outsourced work
Information exchanges with partners, regulators
Reduction of ambiguity and uncertainty in data
Common nomenclature used for mudlog, core and other rock
sample descriptions
• Service Company Point of View
– Enable use of same nomenclature and classifications in
services and software for many customers
• Cost savings in software engineering and maintenance
• Cost savings and consistency in information produced
Use Cases
• Mudlog
– Rapid wellsite description of rock cuttings.
• Core analysis
– Full description of petrographic and quantitative
properties (porosity, permeability, density, etc.)
• Detailed Petrographic analysis
– Optical and electron microscopy analysis
Objectives and Requirements
• Provide evolving dictionary in XML of
lithological terminology for use in:
– end-2004 WITSML Version 1.3 Mudlog
specification
– revised lithological classification, 2Q05
– next WITSML Mudlog version 1.3.1, late 2005?
• Improve or simplify existing specification(s)
• Easy maintenance and extensibility
Available Resources
• Landmark Graphics
– List of Lithology Classes with Qualifiers and Symbol Codes
• Norwegian Petroleum Directorate
– Reporting requirements for Digital Well Data: Lithological
Codes
• Shell
– 1995 Standard Legend
• Statoil
– Current Listing of Lithological codes
Common Descriptors
• Primary and secondary lithologies
• Use of the following characteristics as
qualifiers
•Mineral content
•Fossil content
•Cement
•Grain size
•Sorting
•…~ 10 others
Lithology types in WITSML Mudlog
v1.3
Andesite
Coal
Granite
Anhydrite
Conglomerate
Gravel
Arkose
Diabase
Greenstones
Basalt
Diorite
Greywacke
Breccia
Dolerite
Gumbo
Calcarenite
Dolomite
Gypsum
Calcilutite
Dolomite, Calcareous
Halite
Calcisiltite
Extrusive Rock
(Volcanic)
Igneous
Chalk
Chert
Clay
Claystone
Feldspar
Gabbro
Glauconite
Gneiss
Intrusvie Rock (Plutonic)
Lignite
Limestone
Limestone, Argillaceous
Lithology types in WITSML Mudlog
v1.3
Limestone, Dolomitic
Quartzite
Syenite
Limestone, Sandy
Rhyolite
Tillite (Diamictite)
Marble
Salt
Trachyte
Marl
Sand
Tuff
Metamorphic Rocks
Sandstone
Ultrabasic
Mudstone
Schist
No Description
Serpentine
No Sample
Shale
Ophiolites
Silicilyte
Peat
Silt
Phosphate
Siltstone
Potassium and
Magnesium Salts
Slate
Qualifiers in WITSML Mudlog v1.3
Anhydrite
Chalky
Dolomitic
Argillaceous
Chamosite
Feldspar
Barite
Chert
Ferruginous/Illite
Belemnitic
Chlorite
Fissile
Bioturbated
Concretions
Forams gen
Bituminous
Conglomeratic
Fossil Frags
Bryozoans
Conglomeritic
Fossils gen
Burrowed
Coral
Glauconite
Calcareous
Crinoids
Glauconitic
Calcite concr
Diatoms
Gravelly
Calcitic
Dolomite concr
Gypsiferous
Carbonaceous
Dolomite Stringer
Halite
Qualifiers in WITSML Mudlog v1.3
Kaolinite
Pelletal
Siderite
Lignite
Pellets
Siderite concr
Limestone stringer
Peloidal
Silty
Lithic frags
Phosphates
Spicular
Marly
Plant Remains
Stylolitic
Mica
Potassium salt
Tuffaceous
Microfossils
Pyrite
Tuffite
No Description
Quartz
None
Radiolaria
Oolithic
Salty
Ostrocods
Sandy
Pebbly
Shells
Revised lithological classification
• Seeking requirements from geologists
• Probable approaches
– Base on Shell ’95 standard legend
– Add sedimentary rock types with names,
abbreviations and adjectives
– Add mineral types, names, abbreviations and
adjectives
– Provide descriptions of rock types
– Possibly provide images of rocks as go-bys
– Avoid over-complicaction
WITSML Mudlog version 1.3.1
• Seeking requirements from geologists, and
feedback from users of version 1.3.0
• Probable approaches
– Base on Shell ’95, improve current lithology list
– More sedimentary rock types with names, but test
need for abbreviations and adjectives
– More mineral types, names, but test need for
abbreviations and adjectives
– Keep specification simple, within bounds of
observational capabilities
Participant discussion
• Comments and suggestions re:–
–
–
–
–
Business case?
Resources needed – expert reviewers
Proposed approaches?
Recommendations, Next steps?
Any other aspects?
Thank you for your attention
More information from
Paul Maton
maton@posc.org
Alan Doniger doniger@posc.org
Gary Masters masters@posc.org
+44 1932 828794
+1 713 267 5124
+1 713 267 5111
Related documents