Irineu Main Thesis (Rev Final 28-04-2015)

CARBONATE PORE SYSTEM EVALUATION UNDER TEXTURE
CONTROL FOR PREDICTION OF MICROPOROSITY ASPECT RATIO

AND SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY
(AVALIAÇÃO DO SISTEMA POROSO DE CARBONATOS SOB CONTROLE TEXTURAL
PARA PREVISÃO DA RAZÃO DE ASPECTO DA MICROPOROSIDADE E DA VELOCIDADE
CISALHANTE)
IRINEU DE AZEVEDO LIMA NETO
UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL DO NORTE FLUMINENSE

LABORATÓRIO DE ENGENHARIA E EXPLORAÇÃO DE PETRÓLEO
MACAÉ - RJ
MARÇO - 2015
CISALHANTE)
Tese apresentada ao Centro de Ciências

e Tecnologia da Universidade Estadual
do Norte Fluminense, como parte das
exigências para obtenção do título de
Doutor em Engenharia de Reservatório e
de Exploração.
Orientadora: Profª. Roseane Marchezi Misságia, D.Sc.
Coorientador: Prof. Marco Antônio Rodrigues de Ceia, D.Sc.
MACAÉ - RJ
MARÇO - 2015
CISALHANTE)
Tese apresentada ao Centro de Ciências

e Tecnologia da Universidade Estadual
do Norte Fluminense, como parte das
exigências para obtenção do título de
Doutor em Engenharia de Reservatório e
de Exploração.
Aprovada em 31 de março de 2015.
Comissão Examinadora:
Antônio Abel Gonzalez Carrasquilla, D.Sc. (UENF/LENEP)
Fernando Sérgio Moraes, Ph.D. (UENF/LENEP)
Igor Lopes Santana Braga, D.Sc. (INVISION GEOPHYSICS)
Klédson Tomaso Pereira de Lima, D.Sc. (PETROBRAS/UO-BC)
Marco Antônio Rodrigues de Ceia, D.Sc. (UENF/LENEP) - (Co-orientador)
Roseane Marchezi Misságia, D.Sc. (UENF/LENEP) - (Orientadora)

Dedication
This thesis and Ph.D. degree are

dedicated to my wife, Suellen, and
children, Iuri and Iago, and extended
family.
ii
Acknowledgments
First and foremost, praises and thanks to God, the almighty, for being my strength
and guide during the Ph.D. course and life.
I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my research advisor,

Professor Roseane Marchezi Misságia. In addition, thanks to my co-advisor,
Professor Marco Antônio R. de Ceia. Thank you for having assisted me in the many
tasks, especially by the encouragement and suggestions, and efforts to revise this
thesis.
Special thanks for CAPES to sponsor my Ph.D. course.
I want to express my gratitude to LENEP/UENF for the provided facilities in

infrastructure.
I wish to thank my friend Nathaly Lopes Archilha for many inspirational discussions
and partnership during our Ph.D. courses.
I would also like to thank the laboratory technicians for their support, partnership
and friendship, in special, Adrielle A. Silva, João Paulo Zambrini and Remilson B. da
Rosa.
Thanks to all students, research scientists, professors, staff and colleagues in

LENEP/UENF.
Finally, my thanks go to all the people who have support me to reach the Ph.D.
degree, directly or indirectly.
iii
Contents
List of Figures viii
List of Tables xiv
List of Symbols xvi
Abstract xviii
Resumo xix
1 Introduction 1
1.1 General Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Outline of Research Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Thesis Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.5 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2 Carbonate Rock Physics Theory 11
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2 Formation of Carbonate Versus Siliciclastic Rocks . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3 Characterization and Classification of Pore Geometry in Carbonate Rocks 14
2.4 Digital Image Analysis (DIA) of Rock Pore System . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5 Rock Physics Models for Pore System Characterization . . . . . . . . . 15
3 Data Base and Laboratory Petrophysical Measurements 24
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Contents
3.2 Albian Carbonate Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3 Great Oolite Limestone Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.4 Unfractured North Sea Chalk Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.5 Aptian and Miocene Age Carbonate Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3.6 Complementary Carbonate Data Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3.7 Synthesis of Study Data Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4 Methodology 37
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.2 Estimation of the Microporosity Aspect Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.3 Prediction of the S-wave Velocity Using Microporosity Aspect Ratio . . . 38
4.4 Evaluation of Carbonate Properties Controlled by Texture and Effective

Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.5 Pressure Effects on Pore System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.6 Assumptions, Limitations, and Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5 Results and Data Analysis 42
5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.2 Grainstone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.3 Packstone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.4 Wackestone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
5.5 Rudstone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
5.6 Mudstone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
5.7 Effects of Effective Pressure on Pore System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
6 Discussion 67
6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
6.2 Textural Elastic Properties of Carbonates under Effective Pressure . . . 68
v
Contents
6.3 Carbonate Pore System Evaluation and Velocity-porosity-pressure

Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
6.4 Considerations and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
7 Conclusions 74
7.1 General Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
7.2 Suggestions for Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
References 77
Appendix A -- Data Base Details 82
A.1 Albian Carbonate Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
A.2 Great Oolite Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
A.3 Unfractured North Sea Chalk Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
A.4 Aptian and Miocene Carbonate Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
A.5 Mixed Carbonate-siliciclastic Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
A.6 Microporous Cemented Grainstone Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
A.7 Lower Cretaceous Limestone Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Appendix B -- Triaxial Measurements 109
B.1 Triaxial and Ultrasonic Velocities Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
B.2 Summary of the Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
B.3 Data Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
Appendix C -- Estimate of elastic properties including pore geometry effect on

carbonates: a case study of Glorieta-paddock reservoir at Vacuum field,
New Mexico 119
Appendix D -- Dual pore system evaluation of Albian grainstone carbonates

from Brazil using effective elastic media theory models 133
vi
Contents
Appendix E -- Carbonate pore system evaluation using the

velocity-porosity-pressure relationship, digital image analysis, and
differential effective medium theory 139
vii
List of Figures
1 Classification of main types of models for elastic properties (SCHöN,

2011). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2 Elastic moduli calculated for limestones using “inclusion models”

Self-consistent (SC), Kuster-Toksöz (KT) and Differential Effective
Medium (DEM) for idealized pore inclusions: spheres (α = 1),
interparticles (α = 0.1) and cracks (or microporosity) (α = 0.01). . . . . 23
3 Thin section photomicrographs of Albian carbonate data set were

impregnated with blue epoxy and show textural complexities of
grainstone and mudstone core samples (magnification of 25x). . . . . . 28
4 The methodology proposed to predict the micropore aspect ratio (αmicro )

(LIMA NETO et al., 2014). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5 Grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 5 MPa. Dry

velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in
laboratory were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs
and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study. The
efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when
predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs
applying parameters calibrated by Vp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6 Grainstone (G) and grain-packstone (GP) core samples at the effective

pressure of 20 MPa. Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P-
and S-wave velocities measured in laboratory were fitted by polynomial
function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect
ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert
microporosity aspect ratio when predicted Vp is compared to the
measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp .
Vs was estimated by the methodology for samples from Weger et al.
(2009) aiming to improve crossplots in (A) and (B). . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
List of Figures
7 Grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 40-50 MPa. Dry

8 Cemented grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 5 MPa.

Dry velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in
9 Cemented grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 20

MPa. Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave
velocities measured in laboratory were fitted by polynomial function,
and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio
estimated in this study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert
measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp . 48
10 Cemented grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 40

MPa. Dry velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities
measured in laboratory were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the
trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this
study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect
ratio when predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp , and D) to
predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
11 Packstone core samples at the effective pressure of 5 MPa. Dry

ix
List of Figures
12 Packstone (P) and pack-grainstone (PG) core samples at the effective

pressure of 20 MPa. Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P-
measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp .
Vs was estimated by the methodology for samples from Weger et al.
(2009) aiming to improve crossplots in (A) and (B). . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
13 Packstone core samples at the effective pressure of 40-50 MPa. Dry

14 Wackestone (W), wacke-floatstone (WF) and wacke-packstone (WP)

core samples at the effective pressure of 5-7.5 MPa. Dry velocities
versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in laboratory
were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the
mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency
of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when predicted
Vp is compared to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying
parameters calibrated by Vp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
15 Wacke-packstone (WP) and wacke-floatstone (WF) core samples at the

effective pressure of 20 MPa. Water-saturated velocities versus
porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in laboratory were fitted
by polynomial function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean
microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency of
methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when predicted Vp
is compared to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying
parameters calibrated by Vp . Vs was estimated by the methodology for
samples from Weger et al. (2009) aiming to improve crossplots in (A)
and (B). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
x
List of Figures
16 Wacke-packstone (WP) and wacke-floatstone (WF) core samples at the

effective pressure of 40-50 MPa. Dry velocities versus porosity: A) P-
measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp . 57
17 Rudstone core samples at effective pressure of 5 MPa. Dry velocities

versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in laboratory
were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the
mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency of
methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when predicted Vp is
compared to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters
calibrated by Vp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
18 Rudstone core samples at the effective pressure of 20 MPa.

Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities
measured in laboratory were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the
trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this
study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect
ratio when predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp , and D) to
predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
19 Rudstone core samples at the effective pressure of 40 MPa. Dry

xi
List of Figures
20 Rud-dolostone core samples at the effective pressure of 20 MPa.

Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P-wave velocity
measured in laboratory and S-wave velocity estimated by the
methodology were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the trend of
Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study.
The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio
when predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp . Vs was estimated
by the methodology for samples from Weger et al. (2009) aiming to
improve crossplots in (A) and (B). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
21 Mudstone core samples at the effective pressure of 5–7.5 MPa. Dry

22 Effects of effective pressure on pore system of core samples from the

Albian carbonate data set: A) and C) show Vp scattering at effective
pressure and the relative pore volume reduction (RP V R) evaluated in
laboratory during triaxial tests for grainstone and mudstone samples,
respectively. RP V R is consistent with the stiffness of rock and
consequent closing of micropores (i.e., pores with low aspect ratio) with
the increase in pressure, causing an increase on Vp . B) and D) show
the porosity recalculated using RP V R and Vp scattering for grainstone
and mudstone samples, respectively. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
23 General view of Triaxial Rock Physics laboratory apparatus

(LENEP/UENF). (A) Computer as the main unit of control. (B) Frontal
view of the triaxial cell system. (C) Scheme of the direct pulse
transmission method adopted for pulse-travel time determination. (D)
Out-chamber view of acoustic transducers under contact with the core
sample. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
24 Determination of zero time at face-to-face transducers for P, S1 and

S2-wave forms (in a top-down view, respectively). . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
25 Full data set (rate of 20 samples per second) - triaxial test of Albian core
sample W1-Im10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
xii
List of Figures
26 Filtered data set (rate of 1 sample per 5 seconds) - triaxial test of Albian
core sample W1-Im10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
27 Filtered data set (rate of 1 sample per 5 seconds) - estimation of pore

volume reduction - triaxial test of Albian core sample W1-Im10. . . . . 118
xiii
List of Tables
1 Comparison between carbonate and siliciclastic sedimentary rocks.

Adapted from Moore (1989). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2 Mean elastic moduli of matrix mineral phase adopted in this study for
clean carbonates (after Mavko et al. (1998)). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3 Bulk modulus and density of pore inclusions for dry and water-saturated
conditions adopted in this study (after Mavko et al. (1998)). . . . . . . . 22
4 Summary of the data base: textural quantity of carbonate core samples

under effective pressure selected for this study – a total of 472 samples. 25
5 The representative macro-mesopore aspect ratio (αmacro−meso )

calibrated from (W) - Weger et al. (2009), (Ar) - Archilha et al. (2014)
and (LN) - Lima Neto et al. (2014) studies. The Dunham’s texture index
was adopted in this work for core sample identification on data base.
The mean macro-mesopore aspect ratio of wacke-floatstone was
calculated by the average between wackestone and floatstone results. . 34
6 Summary of the available data base: a general description of lithology,

laboratory measurements, and pore system characterization. . . . . . . 35
8 Summary of R² polynomial curve fitting of velocity measurements for

grainstone (G) and cemented grainstone (CG) samples (Figs. 5 - 10, A
and B) at effective pressure groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

packstone (P) samples (Figs. 11 - 13, A and B) at effective pressure
groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Wackestone (W) (wackestone, wacke-floatstone, and wacke-packstone)
samples (Figs. 14 - 16, A and B) at effective pressure groups. . . . . . . 57
List of Tables

Rudstone (R) samples (Figs. 17 - 19, A and B) at effective pressure
groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
12 General summary of polynomial curve fitting between P- and S-wave

velocities (V) and porosity (ø): V = a/o2 + bφ + c, at low (L, 5-7.5 MPa -
dry), moderate (M, 20 MPa - water saturated) and high (H, 40-50 MPa -
dry) effective pressure (P ef f ) (Figs. 5 - 21). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
13 General summary of mean microporosity aspect ratio and mean Vs

adjustment coefficient predicted for each carbonate texture (Figs. 5 - 21). 71
14 Albian carbonate data set (LIMA NETO et al., 2014): grainstone and
mudstone samples. The mudstone core samples were characterized in
this study (Part 1 - mineral matrix). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
15 Albian carbonate data set (LIMA NETO et al., 2014): grainstone and
mudstone samples. The mudstone core samples were characterized in
this study (Part 2 - velocity, density and porosity). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
16 Great oolite limestone data set (ASSEFA et al., 2003): grainstone and
packstone samples (Part 1 - mineral matrix). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
17 Great oolite limestone data set (ASSEFA et al., 2003): grainstone and
packstone samples (Part 2 - velocity and porosity). . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
18 Unfractured North Sea chalk data set (RøGEN et al., 2005): mudstone
and wackestone samples. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
20 Aptian and Miocene age carbonate data set (WEGER et al., 2009):
different kind of clean carbonate textures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
22 Mixed carbonate-siliciclastic data set (FOURNIER; BORGOMANO, 2009):

clean grainstone and wacke-packstone samples (Part 1 - porosity and
mineral matrix). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
23 Mixed carbonate-siliciclastic data set (FOURNIER; BORGOMANO, 2009):

clean grainstone and wacke-packstone samples (Part 2 - velocity and
density). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
24 Microporous cemented grainstone data set (FOURNIER et al., 2011). . . . 95
26 Lower Cretaceous limestone data set (FOURNIER et al., 2014): different

kind of clean limestone textures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
xv
List of Symbols
Roman Symbols
A Adjustment coefficient between measured and calculated velocities;

E Young’s modulus of elasticity (Pa);
K Bulk modulus (GPa);
L Pulse-travel distance (m) - e.g., length of specimen for vertical mode of
transmitter and receiver transducers;
m Mass (g);
T Uniform strain field tensor;
v Volume (cm³);
V Velocity (m/s or km/s).
Greek Symbols
α Pore aspect ratio;

γ Roundness of pores as the perimeter over an area of an individual pore
normalized to a circle;
λ Lamé’s constant (Pa);
µ Shear modulus (GPa);
ρ Bulk density of rock (g/cm³);
φ Porosity (fraction or %);
ϕ Poisson’s ratio.
List of Symbols
Subscripts
fmicro Fraction of microporosity;

fmacro−meso Fraction of macro-mesopores;
Km Bulk modulus of host material (mineral matrix) (GPa);
Kf Bulk modulus of the pore-fluid inclusion (GPa);
Tp Effective pulse-travel time (measured time minus zero time correction) of
P-wave (s);
Ts Effective pulse-travel time (measured time minus zero time correction) of
S-wave (s);
Vp P-wave velocity (m/s or km/s);
Vs S-wave velocity (m/s or km/s).
µm Shear modulus of host material (mineral matrix) (GPa);
ρm Bulk density of host material (mineral matrix) (g/cm³);
ρf Bulk density of pore-fluid inclusion (g/cm³).
Acronyms
CT Computed tomography scan, or µCT - microtomography scan;

DEM Differential effective media model;
DIA Digital image analysis;
DOM size Dominant pore-size range;
KT Kuster-Toksöz model;
LV DT s Linear variable differential transformers;
P oA Perimeter over area;
RP V R Relative pore volume reduction;
SC Self-consistent model;
SEM Scanning electron microscope;
XRD X-ray diffraction method.
xvii
Abstract
Carbonate reservoirs exhibit heterogeneous pore system which affect the rock’s
elastic properties. Therefore, this thesis aims to promote strategies to improve rock
physics models for estimation of elastic velocities and properties of carbonates. A
suite of carbonate rocks from Albian age in the Campos Basin – Brazil is evaluated in
laboratory and complemented by data from the literature, totaling 472 samples with
detailed description of diagenetic features, quantitative mineralogy analysis, and P-
and S-wave velocities (Vp and Vs ) measured at three groups of effective pressure
loading: low (5 - 7.5 MPa), moderate (20 MPa) and high (40 - 50 MPa). Digital image
analysis (DIA) was applied on microtomography (µCT ) images to quantitative
describe the macro-mesopore system of the Albian carbonates, and extended to
characterize different textures from literature data to estimate reference values for
carbonates. The methodology utilized to predict the aspect ratio of microporosity
assumes three pore-space scales in two representative scenarios: 1) measured
macro-mesopore aspect ratio from DIA, and 2) predicted microporosity aspect ratio,
using Vp measurement as the main input parameter. The differential effective medium
(DEM) model is combined with analytical theories of data to characterize
microporosity. Shear modulus and microporosity aspect ratio calibrated by this
methodology were used to predict Vs , which was compared to experimental data,
resulting in a good match for all samples. Polynomial curves are fitted with a variety of
carbonate textures by velocities at effective pressure and bulk porosity crossplots,
establishing important relationships for velocity prediction. The effects of effective
pressure on the pore system within dry plugs of Albian samples were evaluated by
combining triaxial measurements at 0-10 MPa, relative pore volume reduction
(RP V R) and microporosity aspect ratio prediction. According to the results,
micropores that exhibit low aspect ratio tend to close with stress and cause an
increase on Vp and Vs . Different digital image analysis and resolutions were employed
successfully although the wide textural heterogeneity of data base, combining rock
physics methodologies and concepts to characterize carbonate pore system as
microporosity and pressure effects.
Keywords: Carbonate textures; Microporosity; Pore system; Aspect ratio;

Pressure effects; Differential effective medium model.
Resumo
Reservatórios carbonáticos exibem sistema poroso heterogêneo que afeta as

propriedades elásticas da rocha. Assim, esta tese objetiva promover modelos de
física de rochas para estimativa de velocidades elásticas e propriedades de
carbonatos. Um conjunto de amostras carbonáticas do Albiano da Bacia de
Campos-Brasil é avaliado em laboratório e complementado por dados da literatura,
totalizando 472 amostras com descrições das características diagenéticas, análise
quantitativa da mineralogia, velocidades P e S (Vp e Vs ) medidas sob três grupos de
pressão efetiva: baixa (5 - 7.5 MPa), moderada (20 MPa) e alta (40 - 50 MPa).
Análise digital de imagens (DIA) foi aplicada em imagens da microtomografia (µCT )
para descrição quantitativa do sistema de macro-mesoporos de carbonatos do
Albiano, e extendida para caracterizar diferentes texturas dos dados da literatura,
assim estimar valores de referência para carbonatos. A metodologia utilizada para
prever a razão de aspecto de microporosidade assume três escalas porosas em dois
cenários representativos: 1) razão de aspecto macro-mesoporos medido por DIA, e
2) razão de aspecto de microporosidade calculada usando medidas de Vp como
principal parâmetro de entrada. O modelo do meio efetivo diferencial (DEM) é
combinado com as teorias analíticas de dados para caracterizar microporosidade.
Módulo de incompressibilidade e razão de aspecto de microporosidade calibrados
por esta metodologia foram usados para previsão de Vs e comparada com os dados
experimentais, resultando em bons ajustes para todas amostras. Curvas polinomiais
foram ajustadas para uma variedade de texturas carbonáticas usando crossplots
entre velocidade sob pressão efetiva e porosidade, estabelecendo importantes
relações para previsão de velocidades. Os efeitos da pressão efetiva no sistema
poroso em amostras secas do Albiano foram avaliados a partir de medidas triaxiais
entre 0-10 MPa, redução relativa do volume poroso (RPVR) e previsão da razão de
aspecto de microporosidade. Conforme os resultados, microporos que exibem baixa
razão de aspecto tende a fechar com a tensão induzida, o que causa incremento em
Vp e Vs . Diferentes abordagens e resoluções de análise de imagens foram aplicadas
com sucesso apesar da ampla heterogeneidade textural do conjunto de dados,
combinando metodologias de física de rochas e conceitos para caracterização do
sistema poroso de carbonatos, como microporosidade e efeitos de pressão.
Palavras-chave: Texturas carbonáticas; Microporosidade; Sistema poroso;

Razão de aspecto; Efeitos de pressão; Modelo do meio efetivo diferencial.
1
1 Introduction
1.1 General Review
Carbonate rocks have a great economic significance and hold more than 50-60% of
the oil and gas reserves worldwide (e.g., Burchette (2012)). In Brazil, such reservoirs
represent a significant portion of the deep-water oil production, whose importance has
increased with the recent discoveries in the post- and pre-salt oil deposits (BRUHN et al.,
2003). These rocks commonly display heterogeneities due to diagenesis and exhibit
complicated mineral composition, pore structure, and texture variations that may cause
a low hydrocarbon recovery (ANSELMETTI; EBERLI, 1993; ANSELMETTI; EBERLI, 1999; XU
et al., 2007). For example, for a given reservoir with a porosity of ~25%, the permeability
can vary by more than four orders of magnitude due to the pore structure changes. The
pore type variations can cause seismic velocity changes at a given porosity (SUN et al.,
2006), a similar behavior to that observed in the Albian carbonates in Brazil.
The relationship between reservoir rocks and elastic properties is important to

understanding and improving the practical rock physics models. Studies relating the
pore system and its impact on the elastic properties are important issues for reservoir
properties prediction from well logs and seismic data. Thus, many works have
recognized porosity and pore geometry as the main factors controlling of elastic
velocity in carbonate rocks, and the importance of pore aspect ratio (i.e. the ratio of
the smallest to the largest pore diameter) as the main geometric variable (e.g.,
Anselmetti & Eberli (1993), Assefa et al. (2003), Eberli et al. (2003), Kumar & Han
(2005), Weger et al. (2009)). In this context, the bulk and shear moduli of the dry-rock
framework are two essential parameters for fluid substitution and S-wave prediction,
for example.
The elastic moduli of a dry rock depend not only on the porosity but also on the
pore geometry (LI; ZHANG, 2011). Carbonate rocks have pore systems composed of
intergranular (interparticle) and intercrystalline primary porosity (ANSELMETTI; EBERLI,
1999). The secondary porosity commonly involves inclusions of oomoldic, moldic, and
1 - Introduction 2
vuggy pores, which are considered to be rounded and enhance the rock stiffness
compared with the interparticle pore, inducing a faster seismic wave propagation,
whereas microporosity and fractures tend to be flat and make the rock softer
(BERRYMAN, 1995; KUMAR; HAN, 2005; WANG et al., 2009; XU; PAYNE, 2009; ZHAN et al.,
2012).
Laboratory studies of complex carbonate rocks have shown the influence of

mineralogy, pore shape parameters and pressure on bulk (K) and shear (µ) moduli,
and P- and S-wave velocity (V p and V s, respectively), establishing a relationship
between acoustic properties and porosity. Although the depositional texture and facies
of carbonate rocks are not able to explain a strong scattering of elastic velocities at a
given porosity, pore type appears to strongly influence the relationships between
velocity and porosity. For example, moldic, vuggy and intergranular macropores
display significantly higher velocity compared to microporous samples, and the low
velocity of microporous limestone could be correlated to intercrystalline micropores
and/or softness of grain contacts between micrite particles in relatively loose micritic
media (FOURNIER; BORGOMANO, 2009; FOURNIER et al., 2011; FOURNIER et al., 2014). In
addition, scattering on velocities can be caused by effects of pressure loading on the
pore system, contributing to the stiffness of rock by grain-to-grain contact.
Many rock physics studies (ASSEFA et al., 2003; SALEH; CASTAGNA, 2004;
AGERSBORG et al., 2005; KUMAR; HAN, 2005; ROSSEBø et al., 2005) assume the pore
aspect ratio of inclusions as the main textural parameter that contributes to the
stiffness or softness of a rock, and influence the acoustic velocities . For carbonate
reservoirs that are dominated by the secondary porosity, Eberli et al. (2003) discussed
the velocity-porosity relationship for rocks with different pore systems, including
microporosity, moldic, interparticle, and densely cemented rocks. According to the
theoretical concept, high-aspect-ratio pores, such as molds and vugs, provide more
grain-to-grain contact than interparticle and intercrystalline pores, thus decreasing the
pore compressibility and providing more stiffness to the rock with an equal porosity
(MAVKO; MUKERJI, 1995; SALEH; CASTAGNA, 2004; WEGER et al., 2009).
The Digital Image Analysis (DIA) methodology can be applied to evaluate mineral
structures and pore systems (ANSELMETTI et al., 1998; ANSELMETTI; EBERLI, 1999). It
can be used to differentiate the pore space from a matrix material and quantify the
pore structure properties, such as size, shape, distribution of grains, cementation, and
porosity. The pore shape and pore network complexity have a strong influence on the
permeability and the values of acoustic velocities (BERRYMAN; BLAIR, 1987; MAVKO et
1 - Introduction 3
al., 1998). Weger (2006) and Weger et al. (2009) showed that carbonate rocks have
pore structures constructed of macro-, meso-, and micropores. Macro- and
mesopores can be detected in thin-section images, and the amount of microporosity
is calculated as the difference between the observed porosity in DIA and the
measured porosity from core samples. Furthermore, the microporosity can be studied
by applying an X-ray microtomography or other methods of more accurate resolution,
such as a nanotomography, which contributes to a better quantification. Some
important works in literature have employed DIA approaches to characterize
carbonate rocks and improved rock physics theory to model elastic moduli and
velocities (ASSEFA et al., 2003; RøGEN et al., 2005; FOURNIER; BORGOMANO, 2009;
WEGER et al., 2009; FOURNIER et al., 2011; FOURNIER et al., 2014; LIMA NETO et al., 2014).
This thesis summaries concepts, objectives, literature review, methods and results
developed since 2011, during the author’s doctoral studies, and published
manuscripts and expanded abstracts in rock physics area for carbonate pore system
characterization, promoting strategies to improve rock physics models, e.g., Lima
Neto & Missagia (2012), Lima Neto et al. (2013), Lima Neto et al. (2014).
1.2 Objective
This work aims to reduce uncertainties about the importance of microporosity

aspect ratio within pore system of carbonate rocks, which are difficult to detect by
laboratory measurements due to limitations on resolution. It is important to calibrate
rock physics methodology to predict the elastic velocity and characterize
heterogeneous carbonates. Therefore, the objective can be detailed as:
• to perform a literature review of rock physics theory aiming to characterize the

heterogeneity of carbonate pore system;
• to evaluate the available Albian carbonate samples (grainstones and

mudstones) in the laboratory performing triaxial tests of ultrasonic velocities and
compressive strength under effective pressure, mineralogical, density and digital
image analysis as possible;
• to complement the data base using textural carbonate samples from the literature
under similar conditions of effective pressure and saturation;
• to establish concept and methodology to characterize microporosity of carbonate

rocks that are difficult to be detected using laboratory methods;
1 - Introduction 4
• to incorporate pressure effects on carbonate pore system for modeling of elastic

parameters, including triaxial experiments as possible, for a
velocity-porosity-pressure relationship;
• to develop crossplots of analyzes between textural and elastic parameters, as

e.g., porosity versus elastic P- and S-wave velocities, according to textural,
saturation and effective pressure cases;
• to predict elastic properties of carbonate rocks (e.g., S-wave velocity).
1.3 Outline of Research Study
The research study was performed during the doctoral scholarship and many
actives have contributed to this thesis. The major publications are outlined as follows:
• Expanded abstract and presentation: LIMA NETO, I.A.; MISSAGIA, R.M.;

Modelagem Física de Rocha em carbonatos: análise do impacto da geometria
de poros. 12th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society and
EXPOGEF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2011 (in Portuguese).
• Expanded abstract and presentation: LIMA NETO, I.A.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; CEIA,
M.A.; ARCHILHA, N. L.; The pore geometry and saturation effects on the
modeling elastic properties of carbonate rocks. V SIMBGF, Salvador - BA,
Brazil, 2012.
• Published manuscript: LIMA NETO, I.A.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; Estimate of Elastic

Properties Including Pore Geometry Effect on Carbonates: A Case Study of
Glorieta-Paddock Reservoir at Vacuum Field, New Mexico. RBGf, v. 30, p.
519-531, 2012. (in Appendix C - Lima Neto & Missagia (2012)).
• Expanded abstract and presentation: NETO, I.A.L.; MISSÁGIA, R.M.; DE CEIA,

M.A.R.; ARCHILHA, N.L.; Application of effective elastic media models for pore
system evaluation of Albian grainstone carbonates from Campos Basin, Brazil.
13th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF,
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013.
• Expanded abstract and presentation: NETO, I.L.; MISSÁGIA, R.; CEIA, M.;
ARCHILHA, N.; OLIVEIRA, L.; Dual pore system evaluation of Albian grainstone
carbonates from Brazil using effective elastic media theory models. SEG
1 - Introduction 5
Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, Houston, 2013. (in Appendix D - Lima

Neto et al. (2013)).
• Expanded abstract and presentation: LIMA NETO, I.A.; MISSÁGIA, R.M.; CEIA,
M.A.; ARCHILHA, N.L.; Microporosity Prediction Using Velocity-porosity
Relationship, DIA and DEM theory for Carbonate Pore System Evaluation. 76th
EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, 2014.
• Published manuscript: LIMA NETO, I.A.; MISSÁGIA, R.M.; CEIA, M.A.;

ARCHILHA, N.L.; OLIVEIRA, L.C.; Carbonate pore system evaluation using the
velocity-porosity-pressure relationship, digital image analysis, and differential
effective medium theory. Journal of Applied Geophysics, p. 23-33, 2014. (in
Appendix E - Lima Neto et al. (2014)).
• Submitted manuscript under review at Elsevier - SEDGEO, “Sedimentary

Geology” (20 January 2015 ): LIMA NETO, I.A., MISSAGIA, R.M., CEIA, M.A.,
ARCHILHA, N.L., HOLLIS, C.; Evaluation of carbonate pore system under
texture control for prediction of microporosity aspect ratio and shear wave
velocity. The scope of this thesis was used to develop the submitted manuscript.
• Expanded abstract accepted for presentation at 77th EAGE (European

Association of Geoscientists & Engineers) Conference & Exhibition - Madrid
2015, 1-4 June 2015: LIMA NETO, I.A., MISSAGIA, R.M., CEIA, M.,
ARCHILHA, N.; Carbonate pore system evaluation based on prediction of
microporosity and S-wave velocity under pressure effects.
• Expanded abstract submitted at 14th International Congress of the Brazilian

Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF, Rio de Janeiro, 3-6 August 2015 - under
review: LIMA NETO, I.A., MISSAGIA, R.M., CEIA, M., ARCHILHA, N.,
OLIVEIRA, L.C.; Carbonate microporosity aspect ratio and S-wave velocity
prediction using 2D/3D digital image analysis and inclusion theory.
Additionally, some important contributions for expanded abstract developments can be

highlighted:
• ARCHILHA, N.L.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; CEIA, M.A.R.; LIMA NETO, I.A.;

Mineralogical and petrophysical characterization of stromatolite from Salgada
lagoon - Campos dos Goytacazes (RJ) - Brazil. V SIMBGF, Salvador - BA,
Brazil, 2012.
1 - Introduction 6
• ARCHILHA, N.L.; CEIA, M.A.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; LIMA NETO, I.A.; Comparação
entre as constantes elásticas estimadas pelas velocidades e pela composição
mineral de rochas carbonáticas. V SIMBGF, Salvador - BA, Brazil, 2012 (in
Portuguese).
• DE CASTRO, L.T.; ARCHILHA, N.L.; MISSÁGIA, R.M.; DE CEIA, M.A.R.;

NETO, I.A.L.; DE SOUZA, F.R.; Medidas de Propriedades Petrofísicas e
Identificação Mineralógica de Afloramentos Carbonáticos. 13th International
Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF, Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil, 2013 (in Portuguese).
• ARCHILHA, N.L.; NETO, I.A.L.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; DE CEIA, M.A.R.;

Petrophysical, mineralogical and elastic property characterization of Halocene
carbonates from Salgada lagoon, Brazil. 13th International Congress of the
Brazilian Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013.
• CEIA, M.; MISSÁGIA, R.; NETO, I.L.; ARCHILHA, N.; A modified Nur Model
for microporous carbonate rocks. 13th International Congress of the Brazilian
Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013.
• SILVA, A.; NETO, I.L.; CARRASQUILLA, A.; MISSÁGIA, R.; CEIA, M.;
ARCHILHA, N.; Neural network computing for lithology prediction of
carbonate-siliciclastic rocks using elastic, mineralogical and petrographic
properties. 13th International Congress of the Brazilian Geophysical Society &
EXPOGEF, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013.
• ARCHILHA, N.L. ; MISSÁGIA, R.M.; CEIA, M.A.R.; LIMA NETO, I.A.;

Petrophysical, Mineralogical and Elastic Property Characterization of Halocene
Carbonates from Salgada Lagoon, Brazil. 75th EAGE Conference and
Exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC, London, 2013.
• CEIA, M.; MISSÁGIA, R.; NETO, I.L.; ARCHILHA, N.; Estimation of the
consolidation parameter on microporous carbonate rocks. SEG Technical
Program Expanded Abstracts, Houston, 2013.
• ARCHILHA, N.; MISSÁGIA, R.; CEIA, M.; NETO, I.L.; CASTRO, L.; SOUZA, F.;
Petrophysical, mineralogical, and P-wave velocity characterization of Albian
carbonates from Campos Basin, Brazil. SEG Technical Program Expanded
Abstracts, Houston, 2013.
1 - Introduction 7
• ARCHILHA, N.; MISSAGIA, R.; CEIA, M.; NETO, I.L.; Petrophysical,

mineralogical, and elastic property characterization of Halocene carbonates
from Salgada lagoon, Brazil. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts,
Houston, 2013.
• CEIA, M.A.R.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; LIMA NETO, I.; ARCHILHA, N.L.; Relationship
between the Consolidation Parameter and Aspect Ratio in Microporous
Carbonate Rocks. 76th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, 2014.
• ARCHILHA, N.L.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; HOLLIS, C.; CEIA, M.A.R.; LIMA NETO,
I.A.; EASTWOOD, D.; 3D Pore Structure Investigation of Albian Carbonates from
Campos Basin. 76th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, 2014.
• OLIVEIRA, L.C.; LIMA NETO, I.A.; MISSÁGIA, R.M.; CEIA, M.A.R.; ARCHILHA,
N.L.; CASTRO, L.T.; SOUZA, F.R.; Elastic Properties Characterization and Pore
System Evaluation Using Kuster-Toksöz and Gassmann Models. 76th EAGE
Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, 2014.
• ARCHILHA, N.L.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; HOLLIS, C.; CEIA, M.A.R.; LIMA NETO, I.A.;
MCDONALD, S.; Key controlling factors of permeability estimated from micro-CT
images of Brazilian analogous pre-salt carbonate rock. SEG Technical Program
Expanded Abstracts, Denver, 2014.
• OLIVEIRA, G.; CEIA, M.; MISSÁGIA, R.; NETO, I.L.; ARCHILHA, N.; Pore
volume compressibilities derived from Helium porosimetry and elastic
measurements. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, Denver, 2014.
• FIGUEIREDO, L.A.B.; MISSAGIA, R.M.; CEIA, M.A.R.; ARCHILHA, N.L.; NETO,

I.A.L.; Evaluation of pore system from outcrop rocks by mercury intrusion
porosimetry. VI SIMBGF, Porto Alegre-RS, Brazil, 2014.
• Submitted manuscript under review at Elsevier - APPGEO, “Journal of Applied

Geophysics” (17 September 2014): SILVA, A.A., LIMA NETO, I.A., MISSÁGIA,
R.M., CEIA, M.A., CARRASQUILLA, A.G., ARCHILHA, N.L.; Using Artificial
Neural Network to support petrographic classification of carbonate-siliciclastic
rocks by well logs and textural information.
• Submitted manuscript under review at Elsevier - APPGEO, “Journal of Applied

Geophysics” (10 March 2015): CEIA, M.A.R., MISSÁGIA, R.M., LIMA NETO, I.,
ARCHILHA, N.; Estimation of the Consolidation Parameter in microporous
carbonate rocks.
1 - Introduction 8
• Expanded abstract submitted at 14th International Congress of the Brazilian

Geophysical Society & EXPOGEF, Rio de Janeiro, 3-6 August 2015 - under
review: CEIA, M., MISSAGIA, R., LIMA NETO, I., BASTOS JR., A.,
FIGUEIREDO, L., OLIVEIRA, G.; Comparison of static and dynamic pore
compressibilities in carbonate rocks.
• Submitted manuscript under review at AAPG Bulletin (17 March 2015):

ARCHILHA, N.L., MISSAGIA, R.M., HOLLIS, C., CEIA, M.A.R., MCDONALD,
S.A., LIMA NETO, I.A., EASTWOOD, D.S., LEE, P.: Permeability and acoustic
velocity controlling factors determined from X-ray tomography images of
carbonate rocks.
1.4 Thesis Structure
The subsequent chapters of this thesis are structured according to:
• Chapter 2: “Carbonate Rock Physics Theory”, presents some important

questions about carbonate rocks and differences between carbonates and
siliciclastics, characterization of carbonate pore system, digital image analysis
(DIA) as laboratory procedure to recognize pore system and quantify porosity
and parameters as macro-mesopore aspect ratio, and fundamental rocks
physics approaches for elastic characterization of carbonate rocks based on
“inclusion models” (or “effective elastic media models”).
• Chapter 3: “Data Base and Laboratory Petrophysical Measurements”,

summaries 472 carbonate samples with diagenetic description of texture,
quantitative mineralogy analyzes, and P- and S-wave velocities (V p and V s)
measured at three values of effective pressure loading: low (5 - 7.5 MPa),
moderate (20 MPa) and high (40 - 50 MPa) values. Many data sets were given
from literature, and Albian core samples were evaluated in the laboratory during
this work by triaxial and DIA tests. The macro-mesopore aspect ratio have been
determined for each data set aiming to establish the methodology of the study.
• Chapter 4: “Methodology”, states the proposed methods for 1) estimation of the

microporosity aspect ratio - an original approach that considers a rock
constituted by macro-mesopores inclusions (estimated from laboratory
measurements) and microporosity inclusion, that are expressed by Vp and can
be inverted as well using “inclusion model” approach adapted from DEM theory
1 - Introduction 9
as an example; 2) prediction of the S-wave velocity (Vs ) using microporosity

aspect ratio calibrated from Vp and compared to measured Vs ; 3) estimation of
carbonate properties under texture control and effective pressure - crossplot
analyzes and polynomial curves were fitted for different textural cases at
effective pressures: low, moderate and high; 4) Incorporation of pressure effects
on pore system - triaxial tests of dry Albian carbonates were evaluated aiming to
incorporate pressure effects on pore system, modeling as consequence the
relative pore volume reduction (RP V R) parameter; and, 5) assumptions,
limitations and considerations about the methodology.
• Chapter 5: “Results and Data Analysis”, shows and discusses the results
according to the proposed methodology. It allows to evaluate crossplots of
textural and elastic parameters under effective pressure, including adjustment
between calculated and measured velocities.
• Chapter 6: “Discussion”, highlights and discusses the results focusing on: 1)

textural elastic properties of carbonates under effective pressure; 2) carbonate
pore system evaluation and velocity-porosity-pressure relationship; and, 3)
general considerations and implications.
• Chapter 7: “Conclusions”, concludes about the efficiency of this study, relevance

of methodology, achieved results and contributions to characterize carbonate
rocks, according to the stated objectives, and suggestions for future research.
After that, Appendices were organized as:
• Appendix A: “Data Base Details”, shows the data base information applied in this
work.
• Appendix B: “Triaxial Measurements”, treats triaxial measurement approaches

applied in this work to evaluate Albian carbonate samples.
• Appendix C: “Estimate of elastic properties including pore geometry effect on

carbonates: a case study of Glorieta-paddock reservoir at Vacuum field, New
Mexico” - a published manuscript (LIMA NETO; MISSAGIA, 2012), and a literature
review of this work.
• Appendix D: “Dual pore system evaluation of Albian grainstone carbonates from

Brazil using effective elastic media theory models” - a published expanded
abstract (LIMA NETO et al., 2013), and a literature review of this work.
1 - Introduction 10
• Appendix E: “Carbonate pore system evaluation using the

velocity-porosity-pressure relationship, digital image analysis, and differential
effective medium theory” - a published manuscript (LIMA NETO et al., 2014), using
the main methodology approaches in this thesis and case study of Albian
Grainstones from Campos-basin, Brazil.
1.5 Contributions
The main contributions of this work are highlighted as:
• An original carbonate data base (Appendix A) composed by Albian carbonates

from Campos basin and other literature references, totaling 472 samples, under
a variety of textures and effective pressure loading, including estimated textural
properties. Thus, the mean macro-mesopore aspect ratio (a textural parameter)
was determined for many carbonate textures using digital image analysis (DIA)
methods (see Chap. 3 - Tabs. 5, 12 and 13).
• A theoretical approach to express the carbonate pore system as

macro-mesopore and microporosity inclusions aiming to calculate microporosity
aspect ratio using “inclusion theory” as DEM model, adapted to the context of
study (see Chaps. 4, 5 and App. E).
• Estimation of S-wave velocity of carbonate rocks under texture control and

effective pressure, using the calibrated microporosity aspect ratio from P-wave
velocity (see Chaps. 4, 5 and App. E).
• Evaluation of relative pore volume reduction (RP V R) to express the effects of

effective pressure on carbonate pore system (see Chaps. 4, 5 and App. E).
• Empirical fitting curves were established for many textural carbonate rocks
applied to the crossplots between elastic velocities and porosity (see Chap. 5).
11
2 Carbonate Rock Physics Theory
2.1 Introduction
Carbonate reservoirs, in general, have heterogeneous pore systems consisting of

vugs, molds, channels, and microfractures. Different types of pores and porosity imply
in several elastic moduli that impact seismic properties, as compressional and shear
wave velocities (Vp and Vs , respectively) and density (ρ). Furthermore, the properties
of the fluids present in the pores also change seismic behavior. Thus, mineralogy,
pore geometry, porosity, as well as saturation fluid properties, temperature, and
pressure, are important factors that affect seismic velocity (WANG, 1997). Some
theoretical models applied to siliciclastic rocks, for example, Biot-Gassmann (BIOT,
1956) take into consideration only average porosity of the rock matrix because it
implicitly assumes homogeneous pore distribution in the rock. However, in
carbonates, it is necessary to propose models that best represent the pore system
due to heterogeneities resulting from diagenesis. Approaches as “inclusion models”
(SCHöN, 2011), or “effective elastic media models” (MAVKO et al., 1998) were adopted in
this study aiming to characterize pore system and predict elastic properties of
carbonate rocks. In sections below (Sections 2.2 - 2.5), an overview are discussed
about important concepts of carbonate rocks, laboratory measurements and
properties, and rock physics theories.
2.2 Formation of Carbonate Versus Siliciclastic Rocks
The formation of carbonate sedimentary rocks is influenced by physical processes

dominated by complex biological and diagenetic processes that do not occur in
siliciclastic rocks. The generation of siliciclastic sediments is related to the intensity
and type of physical energy, such as winds, waves, direction and intensity of currents,
which affect sediment texture on the depositional site (FOLK, 1968). On the other
2 - Carbonate Rock Physics Theory 12
hand, the generation of carbonate sediments is affected by the organism population

dynamics and derived particles, as well as particularities of the organism
microstructure (MOORE, 1989).
The texture of the carbonates is dependent on the diagenetic process that

generates different porosity types of carbonate rocks (MOORE, 1989) and are
generally classified according to two schemes: Folk (1959) and Dunham (1962). Rock
porosity represents the volume fraction that is not occupied by solids, an important
parameter to estimate hydrocarbon storage capacity. Therefore, total porosity
represents the volume of voids, connected or not, while effective porosity corresponds
to the volume of connected pores, controlling where a fluid is allowed to flow.
In sedimentary rocks, the porosity formed during deposition process is called

primary porosity, while porosity generated after the deposition process, caused by
geochemical events such as dissolution, is referred to as secondary porosity (SUGUIO,
1998; CHAPARRO, 2002). The occurrence of fractures is common in carbonate rocks in
response to the tension generated by three main regimes: tectonics, geopressure and
formation of caves by dissolution, which can be good for the exploration of
hydrocarbon reserves due to porosity variation (CHAPARRO, 2002).
According to Moore (1989), the diagenesis in carbonates is affected by

temperature and the chemical reactions occurring in the pore fluids, such as dissolved
organic acids, carbon dioxide (CO2 ), hydrogen sulfide (H2 S), among other
components released during the mineral phase change, and thermal degradation of
organic matter and hydrocarbon. Thus, carbonates are more susceptible to
dissolution due to the high rate of chemical reactions during diagenesis, which
changes drastically the resulting porosity. Under burial, the carbonates react to
pressure more easily than siliciclastics, causing a porosity decrease with depth.
Lower rates of chemical reactions in the siliciclastics, are usually inherent in unstable
siliciclastic phases, such as feldspars, causing secondary porosity formation.
According to Spadini & Marçal (2005) anomalies in carbonate reservoirs can occur
even under great burial pressure, thus maintaining good porosity levels by
physical-chemical processes. The basic differences between siliciclastic and
carbonate rocks are summarized in Tab. 1.
Table 1: Comparison between carbonate and siliciclastic sedimentary rocks. Adapted from Moore (1989).
Carbonate Sedimentary Rocks Siliciclastic Sedimentary Rocks
Higher occurrence in the tropics Climate, water depth are not limiting
Most marine Marine or non-marine
Standing structure bodies There is no analogous procedure
Sediment texture is controlled by growth Sediment texture reflects the hydraulic
and ultra-structure of the bodies energy of sedimentation environment
2 - Carbonate Rock Physics Theory
Grain composition directly reflects deposition Grain composition reflects origin of sediment,
environment climate and tectonic of the source
Limestone shelves frequently consist of numerous Clastic shelves generally show no cyclicity
stacked sequences
Shelf is affected by sea level changes due to carbonate Shelf evolution responds to sea level in a more complex
production rate constant in the entire shelf manner due to source tectonics and climate
Often cemented in marine environment Rarely cemented in marine environment
Mud and grains may be formed by chemical Mud and grains are formed by the degradation of
precipitation pre-existing rocks
Susceptible to distortions in early diagenesis, porosity Less susceptible to early diagenesis, predictable
difficult to predict porosity related to depositional environment
More susceptible to diagenesis by burial, higher Less susceptible to diagenesis by burial, porosities
porosity on the surface relative to deeper layers
13
2.3 Characterization and Classification of Pore

Geometry in Carbonate Rocks
Carbonate texture is related to diagenetic processes, which induces the formation

of different pore types in the carbonate rocks (MOORE, 1989). Usually, the texture
of carbonates is classified according to the schemes proposed by Folk (1959) and
Dunham (1962). In addition, Suguio (1998) also defines carbonate rock porosities,
such as:
• interparticle porosity between sedimentary particles;
• intraparticle porosity resulting from the voids within individual crystals;
• microfractures or microcracks porosity results from fractured surfaces, which is

given by the percentage of open fractures relative to the total rock volume;
• channel porosity results from dissolution along the fractures or other types of
elongated pores;
• moldic or shaped porosity is defined by the voids formed by selective removal,

typically by the dissolution of components, such as shells and oolites;
• vug porosity is caused by the dissolution of dolomite or calcite crystals in the

recrystallization process.
The texture of carbonate rocks in the data base of this work was classified according
to Dunham (1962) (see Chapter 3 and Appendix A).
2.4 Digital Image Analysis (DIA) of Rock Pore System
The Digital Image Analysis (DIA) methodology can be applied to evaluate mineral
structures and pore systems (ANSELMETTI et al., 1998; ANSELMETTI; EBERLI, 1999). It
can be used to differentiate (LIMA NETO et al., 2013) the pore space from a matrix
material and quantify the pore structure properties, such as size, shape, distribution of
grains, cementation, and porosity. The pore shape and pore network complexity have
a strong influence on the permeability and the values of acoustic velocities
(BERRYMAN; BLAIR, 1987; MAVKO et al., 1998). Weger (2006) and Weger et al. (2009)
showed that carbonate rocks have pore structures constructed of macro-, meso-, and
micropores. Macro- and mesopores can be detected in thin-section images, and the
amount of microporosity is calculated as the difference between the observed porosity

in DIA and the measured porosity of core samples. Furthermore, the microporosity
can be studied by applying an X-ray microtomography or other methods of more
accurate resolution, such as a nanotomography, which contributes to a better
quantification. Thus, in this work microporosity is defined as non-detectable porosity
due limitations on magnification and resolution of laboratory measurements and
images.
Textural parameters can be calculated from a DIA procedure according to Weger

(2006). DOMsize provides an indication of a sample’s dominant pore-size range, which
is defined as the upper boundary of the pore sizes of which 50% of the porosity in a
thin-section is composed. PoA is the ratio between the total perimeter that encloses
the pore space and the total pore-space area of a thin-section. Generally, a small
PoA value indicates a simple pore system. Gamma (γ) describes the roundness of
pores as the perimeter over an area of an individual pore normalized to a circle, as
proposed by Anselmetti et al. (1998). A perfect round circle would have γ = 1. Aspect
ratio (α) is the ratio between the major and minor semiaxes of an ellipse that encloses
the pore, and it describes the elongation of the pore-bounding ellipsoid. The α can be
estimated for macro-mesopore systems using the median of pores recognized from the
thin-sections. For a spherical pore, α = 1. In this study, the ellipsoids recognized from
DIA are considered oblate (α < 1) due to the lack of an orientation reference from the
2D images. The parameters are classified into two different types: global parameters
that describe the pore system recognized on the thin-section images (DOMsize, PoA,
and fmicro ) and local parameters from individual pores (γ and α) (RUSS, 1998; WEGER,
2006; WEGER et al., 2009; CASTRO; ROCHA, 2013).
DIA of thin-section images from Albian grainstones data set were performed
previously to characterize macro-mesopores, that are detectable under image
resolution (see Appendix E).
2.5 Rock Physics Models for Pore System

Characterization
According to Schön (2011), there are many theoretical models in the literature that
can be classified in regards to the type of geometrical idealization of the real rock, e.g.
“simple layer”, “sphere” and “inclusion” models. Fig. 1 shows an overview about some
of the frequently applied model concepts. Models are an idealization of the complicated
nature of rock. Heterogeneous rock system with internal structure must be idealized in
order to elaborate elastic rock properties in terms of volume fractions and properties
of the mineral matrix and fluids, the rock texture, pressure effects, etc. This work
aims to characterize carbonate pore system using “inclusion models” (SCHöN, 2011), or
“effective elastic media models” (MAVKO et al., 1998), that can be adapted to laboratory
conditions of ultrasonic velocity measurements and pore details as pore aspect ratio
from digital image analysis (DIA) approaches.
“Inclusion models” are preferred for hard rocks with low porosity (SCHöN, 2011),
typical characteristics of many carbonate rocks. Pores or cracks/fractures are
considered as voids or inclusions in a solid matrix and modeled as ellipsoidal
inclusions in a solid host material. A wide variation of pore shape inclusions, from
spheres to elliptic cracks or needles, and the properties of the inclusion (empty,
gaseous, liquid, solid), opens a broad spectrum of cases. The shape is characterized
by the aspect ratio in “inclusion models”. For the calculation, it is assumed (MAVKO et
al., 1998; SCHöN, 2011):
• Inclusion theory simulates ultrasonic frequency of saturated rock behavior and

assumes there is no fluid flow between pores/fractures. Mavko et al. (1998)
recommends to find the effective moduli for dry cavities and then saturate them
with Gassmann’s low-frequency relations;
• Inclusions are sufficiently independent from each other and do not interact
elastically. Thus, an increase of porosity can be performed by a stepwise
addition of several inclusions into the result of new host material;
• Spherical and ellipsoidal pores are stiffest for a given porosity, and the modeled
effects of velocity increases for high aspect ratio inclusions.
Figure 1: Classification of main types of models for elastic properties (SCHöN, 2011).
The P- and S-wave velocities (Vp and Vs , respectively) can be calculated using the
estimative of bulk (K) and shear (µ) moduli, and bulk density (ρ):
s
K + 43 µ
Vp = , (2.1)
ρ
r
µ
Vs = , (2.2)
ρ
ρ = ρm (1 − φ) + ρf φ. (2.3)
where ρm and ρf are mineral matrix and fluid saturation densities, respectively; and φ is
the porosity of rock. The elastic moduli (K and µ) of rock can be calculated according
to approaches described below (Sections 2.5.1 - 2.5.4). Vp and Vs can be measured by
ultrasonic triaxial tests, as performed in this work using Albian carbonate data set (see
Appendices A.1 and B).
2.5.1 Kuster-Toksöz (KT) model
Kuster & Toksöz (1974) derived expressions under ultrasonic frequency conditions
to estimate the effective bulk (KKT ) and shear (µKT ) moduli for a variety of the
inclusions with dilute concentrations, additionally the geometric factors proposed by
Berryman (1980), can be written as (MAVKO et al., 1998):
N
∗ Km + 43 µm X
(KKT − Km ) ∗ = xi (Ki − Km )P mi , (2.4)
KKT + 43 µm i=1
N
µm + ζm X
(µ∗KT − µm ) ∗ = xi (µi − µm )Qmi , (2.5)
µKT + ζm i=1
µm (9Km + 8µm )
ζm = , (2.6)
6(Km + 2µm )
where xi is a volume concentration of porosity for N-phase composites, Km and µm are
bulk and shear moduli of host material, Ki and µi are bulk and shear moduli of the fluid
inclusions, or air properties for dry conditions. The terms P mi and Qmi are geometric
factors that depend on the aspect ratio of the inclusions (see Section 2.5.4). According
to Berryman (1995), the Eqs. 2.4 and 2.5 can be rewritten as:
4
µ K
3 m φ
+ Km (Km + 34 µm )
KKT = , (2.7)
Km + 43 µm − Kφ
µφ ζm + µm (µm + ζm )
µKT = , (2.8)
µm + ζm − µφ
N
X
Kφ = xi (Ki − Km )P mi , (2.9)
i=1
N
X
µφ = xi (µi − µm )Qmi . (2.10)
i=1
2.5.2 Self-consistent (SC) model
The SC model was introduced by Kerner (1956), and many authors have
contributed to improve suitable formulations for two-phase composites: matrix and
inclusion; e.g., the traditional Wu’s self-consistent moduli formulations (WU, 1966;
MAVKO et al., 1998) are:
∗
KSC = Km + xi (Ki − Km )P ∗i , (2.11)
µ∗SC = µm + xi (µi − µm )Q∗i . (2.12)
This method treats grains and pores symmetrically, requiring a single background
material, grains and pores can be connected or disconnected depending on the
porosity range. SC supposes a single inclusion representing one of the components is
embedded within a large surrounding matrix whose elastic properties are those of
effective medium. The elastic properties of the solid grains and pores affect the elastic
moduli of the rock. This model can incorporate multiple mineral phases for idealized
ellipsoidal pores (m = matrix, i = inclusion, and xi = volume fraction of inclusion). The
∗
effective moduli (KSC and µ∗SC ) of the infinite background matrix can be solved by
iteration for N-phase composites, according to general Eqs. 2.13 and 2.14 proposed
by Berryman (1980) (MAVKO et al., 1998):
N
X
∗
xi (Ki − KSC )P ∗i = 0, (2.13)
i=1
N
X
xi (µi − µ∗SC )Q∗i = 0. (2.14)
i=1
The geometric coefficients P and Q are calculated according to Section 2.5.4.
2.5.3 Differential Effective Medium (DEM) model
This model assumes isolated pores embedded in a host material that remains
continuous at all porosities. DEM theory simulates porosities in a composite medium
of two phases by incrementally adding small amounts of pores (phase 2) into a matrix
(phase 1) until the total porosity (φ) is attained (BERRYMAN, 1992):
d
(1 − φ) [K ∗ (φ)] = (K2 − K ∗ )P (∗2) (φ), (2.15)
dφ
d ∗
[µ (φ)] = (µ2 − µ∗ )Q(∗2) (φ),
(1 − φ) (2.16)
dφ
where K ∗ (0) = K1 and µ∗ (0) = µ1 are bulk and shear moduli of host material (phase
1); K2 and µ2 are bulk and shear moduli of the inclusions, or air properties for dry
conditions. The terms P (∗2) and Q(∗2) are geometric factors that depend on the aspect
ratio of the inclusions (see Section 2.5.4). It can be rewritten as (KEYS; XU, 2002;
KUMAR; HAN, 2005):
dφ
K ∗ (φ + dφ) = K ∗ (φ) + (K2 − K ∗ (φ))P (∗2) , (2.17)
(1 − φ)
dφ
µ∗ (φ + dφ) = µ∗ (φ) + (µ2 − µ∗ (φ))Q(∗2) , (2.18)
(1 − φ)
where dφ represents the small pore increment at each K ∗ (φ + dφ) iteration.
2.5.4 Geometric coefficients P and Q for ellipsoidal inclusions of

arbitrary aspect ratios
For dry ellipsoidal pore inclusions, the geometric coefficients P and Q are given by
the following (BERRYMAN, 1980; MAVKO et al., 1998):
1
P = Tiijj , (2.19)
3

1 1
Q= Tijij − Tiijj , (2.20)
5 3
where the tensor T relates the uniform strain field to the strain field within the
ellipsoidal inclusion (WU, 1966). Berryman (1980) gave the scalar formulation required
for calculating P and Q as follows:
3F1
Tiijj = , (2.21)
F2
F1 2 1 F4 F5 + F6 F7 − F8 F9
Tijij = + + + , (2.22)
F2 F3 F4 F2 F4
where

3 3 5 4
F1 = 1 + A (f + θ) − R f + θ− , (2.23)
2 2 2 3

3 R
F2 = 1 + A 1 + (f + θ) − (3f + 5θ) + B(3 − 4R) +
2 2
A
(A + 3B)(3 − 4R) f + θ − R(f − θ + 2θ2 ) ,

(2.24)
2

3
F3 = 1 + A 1 − f + θ + R(f + θ) , (2.25)
2
A
F4 = 1 + [3θ + f − R(f − θ)] , (2.26)
4

4
F5 = A R f + θ − − f + Bθ(3 − 4R), (2.27)
3
F6 = 1 + A [1 + f − R(f + θ)] + B(1 − θ)(3 − 4R), (2.28)
A
F7 = 2 + [9θ + 3f − R(5θ + 3f )] + Bθ(3 − 4R), (2.29)
4

f θ
F8 = A 1 − 2R + (R − 1) + (5R − 3) + B(1 − θ)(3 − 4R), (2.30)
2 2
F9 = A [f (R − 1) − Rθ] + Bθ(3 − 4R), (2.31)
µi
A= − 1, (2.32)
µm

1 Ki µi
B= − , (2.33)
3 K m µm
3µm
R= , (2.34)
3Km + 4µm
 −1
α


(1−α2 )3/2
cos α − α(1 − α2 )1/2 , (α > 1)
θ= , (2.35)
α
α(α2 − 1)1/2 − cosh−1 α , (α < 1)

(α2 −1)3/2
α2
f= (3θ − 2), (2.36)
1 − α2
where α is the aspect ratio of the inclusion; Km and µm are the bulk and shear moduli
of the rock matrix (e.g., clean carbonate mineral matrix in Tab. 2), respectively; and Ki
and µi are the bulk and shear moduli of the inclusion (Tab. 3), respectively.
Table 2: Mean elastic moduli of matrix mineral phase adopted in this study for clean
carbonates (after Mavko et al. (1998)).
Mineral rock Bulk modulus (K) (GPa) Shear modulus (µ) (GPa)
Limestone (calcite) 71 30
Dolostone (dolomite) 94.9 45
Table 3: Bulk modulus and density of pore inclusions for dry and water-saturated
conditions adopted in this study (after Mavko et al. (1998)).
Fluid Bulk modulus (K) (GPa) Density (ρ) (g/cm³)
Air (dry condition) 0.000131 0.00119
Water-saturated (distilled) 2.250 1.000
2.5.5 Comparison between inclusion models
Comparative crossplots between elastic moduli and porosity were calculated using
SC, KT and DEM models for dry and clean limestones. The pore inclusions were
idealized for spheres, interparticles and microcracks, and the tendency curve-plots are
shown in Fig. 2. Previous studies were performed to evaluate carbonate rocks using
KT and Gassmann’s models (see Appendix C), and SC, KT and DEM models (see
Appendix D).
Figure 2: Elastic moduli calculated for limestones using “inclusion models”

Self-consistent (SC), Kuster-Toksöz (KT) and Differential Effective Medium (DEM) for
idealized pore inclusions: spheres (α = 1), interparticles (α = 0.1) and cracks (or
microporosity) (α = 0.01).
Several studies in literature (e.g., Xu & White (1995), Kumar & Han (2005), Xu &
Payne (2009)) consider “inclusion models” on dual-pore inclusion approaches for
carbonate rocks. Anselmetti & Eberli (1999) showed that carbonate rocks having
intergranular and intercrystalline primary porosity. The inclusion of oomoldic, moldic
and vugular porosities cause a positive deviation from P- and S-wave velocities and
negative deviation by microporosity or fractures (KUMAR; HAN, 2005). Thus, pore
aspect ratio estimation helps to determine stiffest or softest intervals and hydraulically
fractured area. Aspect ratio (α) is related to shape pore in sedimentary rocks and
effects caused on elastic properties.
24
3 Data Base and Laboratory

Petrophysical Measurements
3.1 Introduction
The data base in this work integrates different kind of textural carbonate samples
published by Assefa et al. (2003), Røgen et al. (2005), Fournier & Borgomano (2009),
Weger et al. (2009), Fournier et al. (2011), Fournier et al. (2014) and Lima Neto et
al. (2014), summarized in Tab. 4. Additionally, this work integrates mudstone core
samples captured at non-reservoir intervals from Campos basin, southeastern Brazil,
early to middle Albian age, complementing Lima Neto et al. (2014) data set. Thus,
there are 472 carbonate samples with diagenetic description of texture, quantitative
mineralogy analysis, and P- and S-wave velocities (Vp and Vs ) measured at three values
of effective pressure loading: low (5 - 7.5 MPa), moderate (20 MPa) and high (40 - 50
MPa) values. Digital image analysis (DIA) was applied on CT images to quantitative
describe the macro-mesopore system of the Albian carbonates, and was extended
to characterize different textures from literature data to estimate reference values for
carbonates. Sections below describe each data set according to the main references
in Tab. 4 on the following page. Microporosity is defined as non-detectable pores using
DIA methods.
3.2 Albian Carbonate Data Set
This study considers laboratory measurements of 15 limestone core samples from

two cored wells in Campos basin, southeastern Brazil, early to middle Albian age,
captured from reservoir and non-reservoir intervals. The carbonate shelf cycles
consist of upward shoaling lithological sequences starting with peloidal wackestones,
followed by oncolitic/oolitic packstones and oncolitic/oolitic grainstones that were
deposited in a lower energy environment (BRUHN et al., 2003). Some grainstone
Table 4: Summary of the data base: textural quantity of carbonate core samples under effective pressure selected for this study – a total
of 472 samples.
Assefa Røgen Fournier and Weger Fournier Fournier Lima Neto
et al. et al. Borgomano et al. et al. et al. et al.
Dunham texture Index (2003) (2005) (2009) (2009) (2011) (2014) (2014)
50 7.5 5, 20, 20 5, 20, 5, 20, 2.5-10
MPa MPa 40 MPa MPa 40 MPa 40 MPa MPa
Grainstone G 8 6 36 62 7
Grain-packstone GP 11
Cemented
CG 73 2
grainstone
Wackestone W 18
Wacke-packstone WP 9 2
Wacke-floatstone WF 28
Packstone P 5 18 54
3 - Data Base and Laboratory Petrophysical Measurements
Pack-grainstone PG 10
Rudstone R 51
Mudstone M 6
Rud-dolostone RDol 29
25
3 - Data Base and Laboratory Petrophysical Measurements 26
samples are poorly sorted peloidal skeletal grainstone to clean packstone with fine
grained peloids and benthic foraminifera (i.e. grain-packstones). Thus, the core
samples selected for this work are predominantly oncolite/oolite grainstone with good
porosity (~24.8%) and permeabilities ranging from ~4 to 222 mD, oncolite/oolite
grainstone with calcite cementation causing a reduction of permeability (~0.88 - 2.03
mD), and mudstone (<10% large grains) exhibiting porosity ~19% and low
permeabilities (<1mD, commonly).
Quantitative mineralogy analyzes were performed using XRD and Rietveld

method on representative pieces of each core sample, and the results showed calcite
as the predominant mineral and non-carbonate minerals, such as quartz and feldspar,
account for less than 5% of all samples. The combined accuracy of both analysis
methods was approximately ±3% and the minimum detectable amount was
approximately 0.3% of the sample weight (ARCHILHA et al., 2013; LIMA NETO et al., 2013;
ARCHILHA et al., 2014; LIMA NETO et al., 2014). The elastic moduli of the mineral matrix
were predicted by Voigt-Reuss-Hill average method using XRD information (WANG;
NUR, 1992; MAVKO et al., 1998).
Ultrasonic Vp and Vs were measured in room dried samples at effective pressures

(0-10 MPa), using a pulse transmission method at approximately 1.3 MHz and 900
KHz, respectively. The experimental error on velocities was approximately 1%.
Volumetric reduction of the core samples was evaluated by the axial and radial
deflection values at hydrostatic loading in triaxial tests, assuming that the volumetric
reduction was caused by the closing of micropores. As a result, Vp increased due to
the predominance of rounded macro-mesopore and bulk porosity reduction at
effective pressure.
Petrographic thin section (2D) and microtomography scan (µCT 3D) analyzes
were performed in previous studies (ARCHILHA et al., 2013; LIMA NETO et al., 2013;
ARCHILHA et al., 2014; LIMA NETO et al., 2014), and complemented by this study in order
to characterize texture complexities, pore fabric and geometry (as pore aspect ratio)
(see Appendix A.1). Thin sections were taken from the top of each core sample and
impregnated with blue epoxy and digital images were taken using optical petrographic
microscopy at 764x574 pixels resolution and magnifications between 25x (~16.4
µm²/pixel) and 500x (~0.073 µm²/pixel) (Fig. 3).
Cubic 2 mm-samples were scanned using a µCT (Xradia MicroXCT - Henry

Moseley Laboratory/Manchester Imaging Facility), which was set up to work at 90 keV
and 111 µA. The magnification was 9.8x and pixel size of 1.1 µm. The samples did
not exceed the field of view and the scan time was ~12 hours per sample. Avizo Fire
software was used for data filtering, segmentation and analysis. Computed
microtomography uses X-rays to produce images of a scanned object, allowing the
study of internal structures without cutting the sample. The X-rays pass through a
rotating sample and the radiographs are collected by the detector for each angle, then
a mathematical algorithm is used to reconstruct radiograph slices into a 3D image
(LANDIS; KEANE, 2010).
The image porosity and mean aspect ratio of macro-mesopores were evaluated
by DIA of images (see Tab. 15 - Appendix A.1). In this study, the amount of
microporosity was calculated as the difference between the observed µCT image
porosity and the measured helium gas porosity from Albian core samples, as suppose
that 3D images from µCT analysis were more representative than 2D thin section
images, and micropores under resolution were defined as pores with diameter lower
than 3.3 µm (see differences of microporosity in diameter according to DIA method
resolution in Tab. 6 on page 35).
Figure 3: Thin section photomicrographs of Albian carbonate data set were

impregnated with blue epoxy and show textural complexities of grainstone and
mudstone core samples (magnification of 25x).
3.3 Great Oolite Limestone Data Set
Assefa et al. (2003) studied core samples from Great Oolite Limestone Formation
of the Weald sub-basin in Hampshire, southern England, which are hydrocarbon
reservoir rocks sampled from 3 wells. Relationships between elastic velocities,
petrophysical and textural properties were established by their work. The selected
rocks for this study are composed mainly of calcite (>90%) and textural facies vary
from oolitic and skeletal grainstones (grain-supported and lacking carbonate mud) to
packstones (grain-supported and containing mud) (Appendix A.2).
The grainstone and packstone core samples were evaluated by resin-impregnated

polished thin-section observations to investigate the relationship between pore
geometry (i.e. the aspect ratio) and P- and S-wave velocities, limited on pores that
were large enough (>20 µm) to be measured under the optical microscopy. Thin
section images showed a complex distribution of pores due to their biogenic origin,
exhibiting intragranular and intergranular pores. Primary intergranular porosity was
developed in well-sorted, oolitic and skeletal grainstones and relatively clean
packstones. Secondary oomoldic porosity was also found within ooid grains and
intergranular micrite. In addition, SEM was applied to study the rock fabric and
geometry of submicroscopic pores. Micropores (<10 µm in diameter) are also
abundant within ooids. Microporosity was estimated as ~10% of the total porosity by
SEM observations (ASSEFA et al., 1999; ASSEFA et al., 2003).
Helium porosity and nitrogen permeability measurements were carried on core

samples. The mineral matrix properties were derived from bulk and shear moduli of
the mineral weight evaluated by XRD analysis and Rietveld method, using the
Voigt-Reuss-Hill average (WANG; NUR, 1992; MAVKO et al., 1998) and the measured
grain densities. The results show calcite and dolomite predominance (~ >95%) with
minor amounts of quartz and feldspar (Appendix A.2).
Ultrasonic P- and S-wave velocities were measured at an effective hydrostatic

(confining minus pore-fluid) pressure of 50 MPa, using a pulse-echo method at
approximately 0.85 MHz and 0.7 MHz, respectively. Core samples were evaluated
under dry and saturated conditions by Assefa et al. (2003) with the overall accuracy of
velocity measurements approximately ±0.3%. Mean smallest and largest pore
diameter of some core samples were determined by thin section and SEM
descriptions, and the macro-mesopore aspect ratio was calculated. In this thesis, only
dry core samples measurements were selected from Assefa et al. (2003)’s work,
totaling 13 data samples.
3.4 Unfractured North Sea Chalk Data Set
Røgen et al. (2005) evaluated the influence of porosity, fluid content and texture
on ultrasonic velocities of unfractured chalk samples of the Upper Cretaceous from the
Tor Formation of the Dan, South Arne and Gorm fields in the Danish North Sea.
Porosity was measured by the helium-gas method with an experimental uncertainty

of 0.1%. The samples exhibit porosities between ~14% and 45%. The calcite content
was evaluated by adding a surplus of hydrochloric acid to the powdered sample and
subsequent titration by Na-hydroxide solution. The mineral weight and composition
of the insoluble residue was identified by XRD analysis and Rietveld method. The
results showed that the samples have more than 95% calcite content, the volume of
clay minerals (kaolinite and smectite) is less than 1%, and all samples contain quartz.
Thin sections were taken from samples for a visual classification of depositional
texture and classified according to Dunham’s index (DUNHAM, 1962; EMBRY; KLOVAN,
1971), using petrographic microscopy. Grain size distribution and matrix porosity were
estimated by SEM image analysis at large magnification (60 x 80 µm) and it was
assumed to be representative of microporosity (RøGEN et al., 2005). The chalk
samples were classified as mudstone (<10% large grains) or wackestone (>10% large
grains). Here, large grains are larger than 20 µm in diameter, as particles of
coarse-silt and sand size.
Ultrasonic P- and S-wave velocities of all samples were measured at 7.5 MPa
confining hydrostatic pressure and dry condition. The average of the ultrasonic
frequency pulse is 700 KHz. In this study, 55 chalk samples were selected with Vp and
Vs measurements carried at dry conditions (RøGEN et al., 2005) (Appendix A.3).
3.5 Aptian and Miocene Age Carbonate Data Set
Weger et al. (2009) studied core plug samples selected from cored wells at several
locations in the Middle East (Aptian age), Southeast Asia and Australia (Miocene age)
(BAECHLE et al., 2004), drilled from reservoir and non-reservoir intervals to capture a
wide range of total porosity, rock and pore types. All samples are either limestone or
dolomite with less than 2% of the non-carbonate mineral weight.
Porosity was estimated by the difference between measured volume of the core
sample and the real volume determined by helium gas injection in a Boyle’s law
porosimeter. Ultrasonic Vp and Vs measurements were performed using an ultrasonic
transmitter-receiver pair with piezoelectric transducers with both wave signals at
frequencies centered at 1 MHz. All samples were saturated with distilled water. An
effective pressure of 20 MPa and pore fluid pressure of 2 MPa were kept during Vp
and Vs measurements.
Thin sections were taken from the core samples and impregnated with blue epoxy
for textural classification and digital image analysis (DIA). DIA method, as established
by Weger (2006), helped to identify pore types and pore shape parameters for
macropores (pore diameter approximately >30 µm), and the macro-mesopore aspect
ratio is a sample of obtained geometric parameter. However the geometry of the

micropores was not accessed using DIA methodology due to limitations on resolution
of optical photomicrographs, the amount of microporosity was calculated as the
difference between the observed porosity in DIA and the measured helium gas
porosity from core samples.
In this study, 106 data samples studied by Weger et al. (2009) were selected with
different textures (Appendix A.4), and assumed elastic mineral properties for calcite
and dolomite supposing to be clean carbonates due to the lack of mineral weight
information or XRD analysis (see Tab. 2 on page 22 - Chapter 2).
3.6 Complementary Carbonate Data Sets
In this work, clean carbonate data samples were selected from Fournier &
Borgomano (2009), Fournier et al. (2011) and Fournier et al. (2014).
Fournier & Borgomano (2009) developed a study based on core plugs extracted
from two onshore wells (La Ciotat-1 and La Ciotat-2) drilled in Late Cretaceous rocks
of the South Provence Basin at southeast France. The data set is composed of mixed
carbonate-siliciclastic core samples that were thin-sectioned and analyzed. Dry and
saturated bulk densities were calculated from the core samples using brine saturation
method in comparison with a dry condition. Quantitative mineralogy analysis of core
samples were performed using XRD and Rietveld method with the accuracy of 5%,
and the minimum detectable mineral amount was about 0.2 - 0.5%. Ultrasonic P- and
S-wave velocities were measured on dry samples as a function of effective pressures
ranging from 5 to 70 MPa, and the pore pressure was kept at atmospheric pressure.
The experimental error was around 1% and uncertainties implied an error in bulk and
shear moduli of 5% and 3%, respectively.
Microporous cemented grainstone samples studied by Fournier et al. (2011) are

Urogonian limestone outcrops collected from Lower Cretaceous platform in southeast
France, microporous carbonate reservoir analogues which are encountered in the
Middle East (Thamama, Kharaib and Shuaiba formations). The rock samples were
selected according to the criteria: (1) a grainstone texture and (2) the absence of
intergranular, intercrystalline or moldic macroporosity.
The data set applied in Fournier et al. (2014) study consists of limestone samples
from Lower Cretaceous platform carbonates in Southeast France, and integrates
microporous cemented grainstones published by Fournier et al. (2011), totaling 214

Barremian-Aptian carbonate outcrop samples. Dry mass was measured on each
sample and dry bulk density was calculated from the dry mass and measured cylinder
volume. Grain density (ρ) and total porosity (φ) were estimated using helium
porosimetry. Ultrasonic Vp and Vs were measured at center frequency of 1 MHz, as a
function of confining pressure on dry conditions with a pore pressure equal to
atmospheric pressure (~0.1 MPa), at five different effective pressures ranging from 0
to 40 MPa.
Petrographic analysis of thin sections and SEM images provided a macroscopic

core description, and were performed by both works (FOURNIER; BORGOMANO, 2009;
FOURNIER et al., 2011; FOURNIER et al., 2014). All thin sections were point counted on
the basis of 400 point to estimate the micritic volume fraction (fm ) and to quantify the
mineralogical composition for all samples, applying the Van der Plas & Tobi (1965)
method. Micropores were defined by pores with diameters smaller than values as
showed in Tab. 4, according to the SEM resolution of each work, recognized by
intercrystalline microporosity between calcitic micrite crystals and within matrix and
micritic allochems. Thus, the micrite microporosity (φm ) was calculated by:
φ
φm = . (3.1)
fm
According to Fournier & Borgomano (2009), microporous micritic carbonate

exhibits a flat pore-network geometry bounded by planar faces of micrite crystals, that
cause a decrease in Vp and Vs with increasing porosity in contrast to the carbonates
with moldic, intergranular, or intercrystalline macroporosity.
The textural interpretation of data from Fournier et al. (2011) and Fournier et al.
(2014) showed that core samples are well-sorted and medium to very-coarse grained.
More than 50% of the grain population consists of rounded micritic peloids, and SEM
analysis showed that micrite microporosity is dominant (micritized bioclast occurrence).
Fournier et al. (2011) concluded that most samples of their study exhibit a fast,
non-linear increase on Vp in the low-effective-pressure range (2.5 - 10 MPa), which
could be attributed to the closure of microcracks (GARDNER et al., 1974; VERNIK, 1994),
and observations at higher effective pressures (>~20 MPa) showed a stabilization on
Vp , indicating that most of the microcracks were closed.
The data base of this study includes measured dry samples at effective pressures
of 5, 20 and 40 MPa, such: 1) only clean limestone (grainstone and wacke-packstone)
samples from Fournier & Borgomano (2009) that display calcite predominance (>95%,
see Appendix A.5); 2) cemented grainstones characterized by Fournier et al. (2011)
(Appendix A.6), and 3) limestone data samples from Fournier et al. (2014) with texture
classified as grainstone, packstone, rudstone, and wacke-floatstone (Appendix A.7),
assuming the amount of microporosity to be ~95% of the total porosity, in accordance
to the dominant pore type analysis.
3.7 Synthesis of Study Data Base
The macro-mesopore aspect ratio (αmacro−meso ) was calculated for data sets from
Albian, Aptian and Miocene age carbonates (according to Weger et al. (2009),
Archilha et al. (2014) and Lima Neto et al. (2014)), including Albian mudstones in this
work, and arranged for each Dunham’s texture index described from core samples
(see Tab. 4). Macro-mesopore aspect ratio of Albian grainstones data set in this work
was evaluated mainly by Archilha et al. (2014) and Lima Neto et al. (2014), using
3D-µCT and 2D-petrographic thin section images analyzes, respectively. The results
of same core samples were approximately equivalent. Weger et al. (2009) and Lima
Neto et al. (2014) performed a similar DIA approach to estimate pore aspect ratio
from petrographic thin sections. Thus, the calibrated macro-mesopore aspect ratio
was assumed for each Dunham’s texture given by Røgen et al. (2005), Fournier &
Borgomano (2009), Fournier et al. (2011) and Fournier et al. (2014) in data base of
this study, taking them to be representative of the textural similarity of rock fabric and
diagenetic processes.
The microporosity weight was estimated for data base by different methods
(described in this Chapter 3, Sections 3.2 - 3.6), and the main characteristics
(lithology, laboratory measurements, texture and pore system characterization)
adopted in this study are summarized in Tabs. 5 and 6, respectively. The differences
on the resolution for pore detection were assumed to be practically insensitive to the
microporosity aspect ratio prediction from each data set in Tab. 6. However, high
differences on image resolution from DIA may contribute to differences on
microporosity estimation, especially for complex textures that exhibit mud occurrence
(e.g., mudstone). In this case, best resolutions are required to predict pore aspect
ratio and microporosity weight satisfactorily.
Table 5: The representative macro-mesopore aspect ratio (αmacro−meso ) calibrated

from (W) - Weger et al. (2009), (Ar) - Archilha et al. (2014) and (LN) - Lima Neto
et al. (2014) studies. The Dunham’s texture index was adopted in this work for
core sample identification on data base. The mean macro-mesopore aspect ratio of
wacke-floatstone was calculated by the average between wackestone and floatstone
results.
Macro-mesopore aspect ratio (α) Quantity of Method
Dunham’s texture Index
Mean Minimum Maximum samples reference
Boundstone 0.54 0.54 0.54 1 W
Cemented
CG 0.56 0.5 0.58 4 Ar, LN
grainstone
Float-rudstone 0.54 0.54 0.54 1 W
Floatstone 0.54 0.52 0.56 2 W
Framestone 0.54 0.54 0.54 1 W
Grain-boundstone 0.56 0.56 0.57 3 W
Grain-packstone GP 0.53 0.44 0.59 11 W
Grainstone G 0.52 0.45 0.64 50 W, Ar, LN
Mudstone M 0.56 0.56 0.56 1 Ar
Pack-grainstone PG 0.58 0.55 0.6 10 W
Packstone P 0.56 0.52 0.6 18 W
Rud-dolostone RDol 0.55 0.53 0.57 29 W
Rud-floatstone 0.57 0.57 0.57 1 W
Rud-framestone 0.49 0.49 0.49 1 W
Rudstone R 0.53 0.53 0.53 1 W
Wacke-floatstone WF 0.55 - - - -
Wacke-packstone WP 0.57 0.57 0.57 2 W
Wackestone W 0.59 0.59 0.59 1 W
Table 6: Summary of the available data base: a general description of lithology, laboratory measurements, and pore system
characterization.
Description Lithology Ultra- Saturation Mineral Laboratory Porosity Estimative Micropores

sonic weight macro-mesopore (%) of approximately
velocity aspect ratio microporosity in
(αmacro−meso ) (%) diameter (µm)
Albian carbonate Clean P, S Dry XRD info DIA from thin Helium By the difference <3.3
data set (Lima limestones section and gas and between porosity
Neto et al., 2014) (>95% calcite) µCT images DIA and DIA porosity
Great oolite Clean P, S Dry XRD info Thin section Helium SEM observation <10
limestone data limestones and gas (about 10% of
set (Assefa et al., (>95% calcite) SEM total porosity)
2003) observations
Unfractured North Clean P, S Dry XRD info - Helium SEM observation <20
Sea chalk data chalk gas of matrix porosity
set (Røgen et al., limestones for each sample
2005) (>92% calcite)
Mixed carbonate- Selected P, S Dry, XRD info - Helium Thin section and <30
siliciclastic data clean Water- gas SEM images
set (Fournier & limestones saturated observation -
Borgomano, 2009) (> 95% calcite) micritic fraction
35
Aptian and Selected P Water- Unpublished, DIA Helium By the difference <30
Miocene age clean limestones saturated supposes from gas between
carbonate (suppose >95% clean thin section and porosity and
data set calcite), and dolo- limestones and DIA DIA porosity
(Weger et al., stones (suppose SEM
2009) >95% dolomite) images
Microporous Clean P, S Dry, Unpublished, - Helium Thin section and <10
cemented grainstones Water- supposes gas SEM images
grainstone data (suppose saturated clean observation -
set (Fournier et >95% calcite) limestones micritic volume
al., 2011) fraction
Lower Clean P, S Dry, Unpublished, - Helium Thin section and <10
Cretaceous limestones Water- supposes gas SEM images
limestone data (suppose saturated clean observation -
set (Fournier et >95% calcite) limestones micritic volume
al., 2014) fraction
36
37
4 Methodology
4.1 Introduction
This chapter details the methodology and procedures to calculate important

parameters for carbonate rock characterization based on laboratory measurements
and established rock physics methods as discussed in Sections 4.2 - 4.6. The
concept “microporosity” is defined as non-detectable pores using the applied DIA
methods (according to Section 3.1 - Chapter 3).
4.2 Estimation of the Microporosity Aspect Ratio
The goal of this study is to determine the most reliable aspect ratio for
microporosity that, combined with macro-mesopores, allows characterization of the
complex pore system of carbonate rocks, using elastic properties and petrophysical
measurements. This methodology follows that established by Lima Neto et al. (2014)
to predict the microporosity inclusion aspect ratio to characterize the complex
constituents and pore geometries with the elastic properties of carbonates (Fig. 4).
The rock is characterized by macro-, meso-, and micropore systems, which are
expressed in the physical properties as P- and S-wave velocities and correlated with
bulk and shear moduli of interest. The method considers three pore-space scales in
two representative inclusion scenarios: 1) the macro-mesopore aspect ratio identified
by DIA, and 2) the microporosity aspect ratio predicted by the measured Vp .
The measured Vp was assumed to better reflect the pore conditions than the Vs ,
thus simplifying the methodology (Fig. 4) by quantifying the most reliable
microporosity aspect ratio that can be combined with the representative
macro-mesopore aspect ratio, porosity, bulk density and properties of the mineral
matrix to estimate Vp in accordance with the laboratory measurements at a minimum
error, using the Differential Effective Medium (DEM) model. The DEM is an effective
4 - Methodology 38
elastic media theory that considers the bounds and mixing laws (MAVKO et al., 1998),
and idealized ellipsoidal pore inclusions, which are statistically estimated from DIA
approaches, preserving the identified pore characteristics as area and elongation.
Macro-mesopore and microporosity aspect ratios are treated as pore inclusions, and
Section 2.5.3 shows the details about DEM theory, and the relationship between
elastic moduli and P- and S-wave velocities.
Figure 4: The methodology proposed to predict the micropore aspect ratio (αmicro )
(LIMA NETO et al., 2014).
4.3 Prediction of the S-wave Velocity Using

Microporosity Aspect Ratio
Although the Vs has not been used directly to predict microporosity aspect ratio,
it can be calculated using bulk and shear moduli calibrated by pore inclusions (see
Section 2.5, Eq. 2.2 on page 17). The calculated Vs can be compared to measured
Vs , and if a good agreement is observed, it may be an indicative that the methodology
works.
4 - Methodology 39
4.4 Evaluation of Carbonate Properties Controlled by

Texture and Effective Pressure
The carbonate data base was arranged according to the texture and properties as
shown in Tabs. 4 (Section 3.1) and 6. Three groups of effective pressure for elastic
velocities analysis were created: 1) low (5 - 7.5 MPa), 2) moderate (20 MPa) and 3)
high (40 - 50 MPa). According to literature studies (e.g., Gardner et al. (1974), Vernik
(1994), Smith et al. (2009), Fournier et al. (2014)), crossplot analysis between Vp and
effective pressure of carbonate rocks express: 1) a rapid non-linear increase in Vp at
low range (~2.5 – 10 MPa) that may be attributed to rapid closing of flat micropores, 2)
Vp starts a stabilization at ~20 MPa may be caused by the closing of majority flat
micropores, and 3) when Vp exibith almost no pressure dependence at higher
effective pressures (~40 – 50 MPa). Measured velocity and porosity crossplots were
used to predict Vp , Vs and Vp /Vs relationship. The representative microporosity aspect
ratio was calculated for each carbonate texture, and Vp and Vs were calculated and
compared to the measurements. The samples at effective pressure of 20 MPa were
water-saturated according to measurements performed by Weger et al. (2009), and
other dry samples from data base at the same effective pressure were calculated for
water-saturated condition using Gassmann’s theory (see Mavko et al. (1998)). The
microporosity aspect ratio of samples was estimated directly by DEM model for each
group using the method in Fig. 4.
4.5 Pressure Effects on Pore System
The theory of poroelasticity predicts an ability of rocks to resist and recover from
the deformation induced by external forces. When an effective pressure is applied to a
drained core sample during a hydrostatic loading test, there is an approximately null
pore pressure condition, and the core sample exhibits a higher volume deformation in
contrast to the undrained case. Thus, the deformation of crystals is the mechanical
property of the smaller variations, though the rock pore space is sensitive to the
pressure effects and structural discontinuities, such as micropores, fractures, and
voids, that cause a volumetric deformation (JAEGER et al., 2007; FJAER et al., 2008).
According to Lima Neto et al. (2014), the volumetric reduction of a core sample
is assumed to be caused mainly by the microporosity diminishing when an effective
pressure is applied, which leads to an increase on the P-wave velocity by increasing the
4 - Methodology 40
predominance of rounded macro-mesopores and reducing the total porosity. This study
evaluated the Albian carbonate data set with the goal of predicting the volume reduction
of core samples during triaxial tests. The microporosity reduction was estimated by the
pore volume reduction at the effective pressure induced on each core sample. After
that, the microporosity aspect ratio and Vs can be recalculated.
4.6 Assumptions, Limitations, and Considerations
The DEM theory adopted in the methodology (Fig. 4) assumes high frequencies,
such as ultrasonic P- and S-wave velocities, measured from the drained core samples
during triaxial laboratory experiments. However, for the low-frequency (e.g., seismic
scale), an approach for upscaling is to apply the DEM theory by inserting dry
inclusions into the predicted drained rock frame and to perform a fluid saturation as
the final step using the Gassmann’s equation that assumes seismic conditions (see
the Xu-White and Xu-Payne models (XU; WHITE, 1995; XU; PAYNE, 2009)). In addition,
the saturated carbonates with interparticle and intergranular primary porosities can be
P-wave velocity modeled using the Wyllie’s time-average equation (ANSELMETTI;
EBERLI, 1999), although for dry conditions, the DEM theory can be used with
representative interparticle aspect ratio inclusions (XU; PAYNE, 2009), which is a
reference line for the oncolite/oolite Albian grainstones. Another upscaling approach
can be considered by applying the Backus’ average (BACKUS, 1962) when the
wavelength is large compared with the layer thickness at lower frequencies (seismic
scale, e.g.) from high or very-high frequencies.
It is important to recall the DEM model assumptions and limitations. Therefore,

according to Mavko et al. (1998) (additionally, see the Section 2.5.3 on page 19), the
adopted DEM model considers idealized ellipsoidal pore inclusion shapes that are
statistically estimated from digital image analysis (DIA), preserving the pore
characteristics identified as area and elongation. Despite the assumptions and
limitations of the rock physics models described in the literature, it is common to use
the calibration of parameters to study methodologies aiming to predict the properties
of interest and comparing the results with prior knowledge. The DIA study was
incorporated to reduce the limitations with the idealized pore shapes and provide a
better rock characterization. Thus, different carbonate rocks could be evaluated using
the proposed methodology by changing the DEM model for another adequate
effective elastic media theory as the Kuster-Toksöz formulation or the Self-consistent
approximations of effective moduli. The previous study (see Appendix D (LIMA NETO et
4 - Methodology 41
al., 2013)) showed the DEM model is suitable for predicting the elastic moduli and
velocities of the oncolite/oolite Albian grainstones.
42
5 Results and Data Analysis
5.1 Introduction
According to the methodology (Chapter 4), the data base was arranged by the
texture in three groups of effective pressure for crossplot analysis of elastic velocities,
as discussed in Sections 5.2 - 5.6. Thus, the results were set up by the texture of core
samples and crossplots for analysis of the relationship between velocities, pore system
and effective pressure. Crossplots between velocities and porosity (by helium gas
measurements) were analyzed and the representative microporosity aspect ratio was
calculated for each carbonate texture (according to Section 4.2), and Vp and Vs were
calculated and compared to the measurements. Vs measurements are not available
from Weger et al. (2009) data set (see Tab. 6 on page 35). Thus, the methodology of
this study was applied to predict Vs , as established by Lima Neto et al. (2014), aiming to
improve crossplots between Vp /Vs ratio and porosity (see Appendix A.4). Additionally,
Vs was calculated (see methodology in Section 4.3) for data base (Appendix A), using
the microporosity aspect ratio calibrated from Vp and compared to Vs measurements.
An adjustment coefficient (A), given by Eq. 5.1, and the crossplots between measured
and calculated Vs were used to evaluate the results.
|Vmeasured − Vcalculated |
A=1− . (5.1)
Vmeasured
Effects of effective pressure on pore system were evaluated using Albian carbonate
data set (according to method in Section 4.5), and results are shown in Section 5.7.
5.2 Grainstone
Grainstone samples were evaluated by the data set arranging into two textural
groups: 1) samples classified as grainstone rocks, including oolitic/oncolitic and
5 - Results and Data Analysis 43
cemented grainstone descriptions (Figs. 5 - 7), and 2) only cemented grainstone

(Figs. 8 - 10). The results show a high scattering in both textural groups of Vp and Vs
measurements in V − φ and Vp /Vs − φ crossplots. The R² values of polynomial curve
fitting of velocity measurements (Figs. 5 - 10, A and B) are summarized in Tab. 8. In
general, the best fitting for grainstones occurred at low effective pressure, in contrast
to the cemented grainstones at high effective pressure. This may be explained by the
presence of intercrystalline microporosity located within micritic grains and/or matrix
of cemented grainstones, exhibiting low pore aspect ratio that encloses faster with
effective pressure loading if compared to the predominant macro-mesopores in
oolitic/oncolitic grainstone. The microporosity aspect ratios of grainstone and
cemented grainstones were estimated from Vp with good average adjustment
coefficient (A ' 1, Figs. 5 - 10, C) as expected by the methodology, and Vs was
predicted with the average adjustment coefficient (A) ' 0.889 - 0.97 (Figs. 5 - 10, D).
A slight increase of mean microporosity aspect ratio calculated with the increase of
effective pressure was observed, compatible with the theory that microporosity will
diminish with increasing pressure (Figs. 5 - 10, B).
Figure 5: Grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 5 MPa. Dry velocities
versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in laboratory were fitted by
polynomial function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect
ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity
aspect ratio when predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs
applying parameters calibrated by Vp .
Figure 6: Grainstone (G) and grain-packstone (GP) core samples at the effective
pressure of 20 MPa. Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave
velocities measured in laboratory were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the trend
of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency
of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when predicted Vp is compared
to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp . Vs was
estimated by the methodology for samples from Weger et al. (2009) aiming to improve
crossplots in (A) and (B).
Figure 7: Grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 40-50 MPa. Dry
velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in laboratory were
fitted by polynomial function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity
aspect ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert
microporosity aspect ratio when predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp , and
D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp .
Figure 8: Cemented grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 5 MPa. Dry
Figure 9: Cemented grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 20 MPa.

Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in
laboratory were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean
microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to
invert microporosity aspect ratio when predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp ,
and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp .
Figure 10: Cemented grainstone core samples at the effective pressure of 40 MPa. Dry
Table 8: Summary of R² polynomial curve fitting of velocity measurements for

grainstone (G) and cemented grainstone (CG) samples (Figs. 5 - 10, A and B) at
effective pressure groups.
R² Vp Vs Vp /Vs
Texture Low Moderate High Low Moderate High Low Moderate High
G 0.925 0.9 0.774 0.929 0.858 0.788 0.764 0.817 0.61
CG 0.778 0.851 0.9 0.767 0.809 0.9 0.516 0.527 0.59
5.3 Packstone
Fig. 11 shows packstone samples from Fournier et al. (2014) data set at low
effective pressure (5 MPa) and dry condition. There is a strong scattering on P- and
S-wave velocity measurements probably caused by complexities of the pore system.
The packstone samples exhibit dominant intercrystalline microporosity and a variety of
facies associations, including rudist, calcarenitic and calcisiltite facies (FOURNIER et al.,
2014), the high variability of microporosity on the pore system could contribute to the
high scattering observed in Fig. 11 (A). A similar comportment is verified in Fig. 13 (A)
for packstone samples at high effective pressure (40 - 50 MPa) and dry condition from
Assefa et al. (2003) and Fournier et al. (2014) data sets. The best velocity curve fitting
for packstone samples was at moderate effective pressure (20 MPa) and
water-saturated, expressing the good representativeness of the data set from Weger
et al. (2009) and Fournier et al. (2014) (Fig. 12, A). The Vp /Vs − φ curve fitting is
shown in Figs. 11 - 13 (B). Tab. 9 presents the R² values of polynomial curve fitting of
velocity measurements (Figs. 11 - 13, A and B), and the quality of curve fitting was
practically insensitive to the effective pressure loading and its representation was
mainly induced by the data set. It can be interpreted as a low variation of
microporosity aspect ratio values of packstone samples from Fournier et al. (2014) at
low, moderate and high effective pressures (Figs. 11 - 13, B - αmicro = 0.12 - 0.14),
calculated by this methodology with a good average adjustment coefficient (A ' 1,
Figs. 11 - 13, C). Although strong scattering on measurements, the Vs was predicted
with good adjustment coefficient (A) ' 0.945 - 0.959 (Figs. 11 - 13, D).
Figure 11: Packstone core samples at the effective pressure of 5 MPa. Dry velocities
Figure 12: Packstone (P) and pack-grainstone (PG) core samples at the effective
pressure of 20 MPa. Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave
to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp . Vs was
estimated by the methodology for samples from Weger et al. (2009) aiming to improve
crossplots in (A) and (B).
Figure 13: Packstone core samples at the effective pressure of 40-50 MPa. Dry

packstone (P) samples (Figs. 11 - 13, A and B) at effective pressure groups.
R² Vp Vs Vp /Vs
P 0.84 0.915 0.787 0.804 0.827 0.744 0.658 0.755 0.712
5.4 Wackestone
The results for wackestone samples are shown in Figs. 14 - 16, and arranged by
Wackestone (>10% large grains), Wacke-packstone (wackestone to packstone) and
Wacke-floatstone (wackestone to floatstone). The velocity measurements of available
samples exhibited a relatively good relationship with porosity, providing a good curve
fitting for the data set at low (5 - 7.5 MPa) and moderate (20 MPa) effective pressures
(Figs. 14 - 15, A and B). In contrast, at 40 MPa of effective pressure, smaller R² values
of polynomial curve fitting are expressed (Fig. 16, A and B). Tab. 10 summarizes the R²
values of polynomial curve fitting of velocity measurements. Wackestone samples from
Røgen et al. (2005) evaluated at 7.5 MPa of effective pressure have large porosity (~13
- 32%), characterized by intragranular and moldic porosity, and presence of smectite
mineral increases the softness of the rock (RøGEN et al., 2005). Wacke-packstones from
Fournier & Borgomano (2009) have a low porosity (φ < 4.5%) and grain size ranging
from fine to coarse (i.e., from compact micrite to conglomerate occurrence, respectively
- see Fournier & Borgomano (2009)). Wacke-floatstones from Fournier et al. (2014)
have a predominance of intercrystalline micropores, and occurrence of moldic pores
that can be partially cemented plus a low occurrence of open vugs (φ < 15%). The
complexities of the wacke-packstone and wacke-floatstone pore system cause strong
scattering on velocities under effective pressure loading. The microporosity aspect
ratio was estimated from Vp with good average adjustment coefficient (A ' 1, Figs.
14 - 16, C) as expected by the methodology, and Vs was predicted with the average
adjustment coefficient (A) ' 0.965 - 0.978 (Figs. 14 - 16, D). The mean microporosity
aspect ratio resulted for wacke-packstones ranging from 0.03 to 0.08 when the effective
pressure increases, and wacke-floatstones from 0.13 to 0.21. The higher variation of
microporosity aspect ratio values for wacke-floatstone samples are probably due to the
complexities of pore system that exhibit high sensitivity to the pressure loading than
wacke-packstone samples (Figs. 14 - 16, B).
Figure 14: Wackestone (W), wacke-floatstone (WF) and wacke-packstone (WP) core
samples at the effective pressure of 5-7.5 MPa. Dry velocities versus porosity: A) P-
and S-wave velocities measured in laboratory were fitted by polynomial function, and
B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study.
The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when predicted
Vp is compared to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated
by Vp .
Figure 15: Wacke-packstone (WP) and wacke-floatstone (WF) core samples at the
effective pressure of 20 MPa. Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P- and
S-wave velocities measured in laboratory were fitted by polynomial function, and B)
the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study. The
efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when predicted Vp is
compared to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by
Vp . Vs was estimated by the methodology for samples from Weger et al. (2009) aiming
to improve crossplots in (A) and (B).
Figure 16: Wacke-packstone (WP) and wacke-floatstone (WF) core samples at the
effective pressure of 40-50 MPa. Dry velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave
to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp .

Wackestone (W) (wackestone, wacke-floatstone, and wacke-packstone) samples (Figs.
14 - 16, A and B) at effective pressure groups.
R² Vp Vs Vp /Vs
W 0.94 0.91 0.745 0.945 0.881 0.674 0.839 0.603 0.35
5.5 Rudstone
Calcitic rudstone data samples available from Fournier et al. (2014) were studied
at low (5 MPa), moderate (20 MPa) and high (40 MPa) effective pressures. Figs. 17 -
19 show the results. A strong scattering on velocity-porosity crossplots is observed,
that decreases with effective pressure loading (Figs. 17 - 19, A and B), contributing for
best polynomial curve fitting (Tab. 11). It may be explained by aragonitic bioclastic
pore system of rudstones that are partially occluded by calcite spar, and
intercrystalline micropores (>95% of the total pore volume) forming the dominant pore
type (FOURNIER et al., 2014). Micropores with low aspect ratio tend to enclose fast with
effective pressure loading, that reduce the scattering on velocity measurements as a
consequence. The mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study increases
slightly when the effective pressure increases (ranging from 0.13 to 0.18, Figs. 17 -
19, B), causing a stiffness of rock and theoretically decreasing the low pore aspect
ratio distribution. The microporosity aspect ratio was evaluated by the methodology
from Vp with good average adjustment coefficient (A ' 1, Figs. 17 - 19, C) as
expected by the methodology, and Vs was predicted with the average adjustment
coefficient (A) ' 0.956 - 0.967 (Figs. 17 - 19, D).
Figure 17: Rudstone core samples at effective pressure of 5 MPa. Dry velocities versus
porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in laboratory were fitted by polynomial
function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in
this study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when
predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp , and D) to predict Vs applying parameters
calibrated by Vp .
Figure 18: Rudstone core samples at the effective pressure of 20 MPa.

Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P- and S-wave velocities measured in
laboratory were fitted by polynomial function, and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean
microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to
invert microporosity aspect ratio when predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp ,
and D) to predict Vs applying parameters calibrated by Vp .
Figure 19: Rudstone core samples at the effective pressure of 40 MPa. Dry velocities

Rudstone (R) samples (Figs. 17 - 19, A and B) at effective pressure groups.
R² Vp Vs Vp /Vs
R 0.793 0.902 0.867 0.765 0.848 0.859 0.483 0.437 0.676
Rud-dolostone data samples from Weger et al. (2009) at moderate (20 MPa)
effective pressure and water-saturated were studied, and the results are shown in Fig.
20. The porosity ranges from ~10 to 45% and the dominant pore type varies mainly as
intercrystalline, moldic and vuggy pores (WEGER et al., 2009). The R² polynomial curve
fitting of V − φ crossplots are 0.898 (Vp − φ), 0.906 (Vs − φ) and 0.535 (Vp /Vs − φ) (Fig.
20, A and B). Vs was calculated by the methodology of study using microporosity
aspect ratio calibrated from Vp with the average adjustment coefficient (A) = 0.996
(Fig. 20, C). The mean microporosity aspect ratio of rud-dolostones was estimated as
0.1 (Fig. 20, B).
Figure 20: Rud-dolostone core samples at the effective pressure of 20 MPa.

Water-saturated velocities versus porosity: A) P-wave velocity measured in laboratory
and S-wave velocity estimated by the methodology were fitted by polynomial function,
and B) the trend of Vp /Vs and the mean microporosity aspect ratio estimated in this
study. The efficiency of methodology: C) to invert microporosity aspect ratio when
predicted Vp is compared to the measured Vp . Vs was estimated by the methodology
for samples from Weger et al. (2009) aiming to improve crossplots in (A) and (B).
5.6 Mudstone
Mudstone data samples were evaluated at low (5 - 7.5 MPa) effective pressure
from Røgen et al. (2005) and Albian age data set in this study (see Section 3.2).
Mudstones are mud-supported (<10% grains), and are generally defined as smaller
particles of clay and fine-silt size (DUNHAM, 1962). Micropores are difficult to
characterize using micrographs, SEM and/or µCT images, and a high intercrystalline
microporosity is expected. Fig. 19 shows the results of V − φ crossplots and R²
polynomial curve fitting: Vp − φ, Vs − φ (Fig. 21, A), R² = 0.859 and R² = 0.827,
respectively), and Vp /Vs − φ (Fig. 21, B), R² = 0.633). Although the strong scattering
on velocity measurements, the microporosity aspect ratio was estimated from Vp with
good average adjustment coefficient (A ' 1, Fig. 21, C) as expected by the
methodology, and Vs was predicted with the average adjustment coefficient (A) '
0.926 - 0.975 (Fig. 21, D). The mean microporosity aspect ratio results are 0.05 and
0.09 for mudstone data sets from Røgen et al. (2005) and Albian age, respectively
(Fig. 21, B).
Figure 21: Mudstone core samples at the effective pressure of 5–7.5 MPa. Dry
5.7 Effects of Effective Pressure on Pore System
The grainstone and mudstone data samples from Albian age data set (see
Section 3.2) were evaluated according to the methodology described in Section 4.5.
The volume reduction of dry core samples were evaluated during triaxial tests at the
effective pressure loading of 0-10 MPa (Fig. 22). Grainstone P-wave velocity
presented higher sensitivity compared to mudstone velocities, when the effective
pressure increases (Fig. 22, A and C, respectively). The relative pore volume
reduction (RP V R) was calculated for each sample assuming the gas helium
porosimetry measurement (φhelium−gas ) as a reference zero pressure porosity, and the
new porosity at effective pressure (φef f ective−pressure ) estimated by the difference of
rock volume reduction, as shown in Eq. 5.2.
φef f ective−pressure
RP V R = 1 − . (5.2)
φhelium−gas
Figure 22: Effects of effective pressure on pore system of core samples from the
Albian carbonate data set: A) and C) show Vp scattering at effective pressure and the
relative pore volume reduction (RP V R) evaluated in laboratory during triaxial tests for
grainstone and mudstone samples, respectively. RP V R is consistent with the stiffness
of rock and consequent closing of micropores (i.e., pores with low aspect ratio) with
the increase in pressure, causing an increase on Vp . B) and D) show the porosity
recalculated using RP V R and Vp scattering for grainstone and mudstone samples,
respectively.
The maximum RP V R results achieved for grainstone and mudstone samples are
shown in Fig. 22 (A and C), and Vp scattering under porosity estimated by effective
pressure loading effect in Fig. 22 (B and D). Grainstone samples exhibited a strong Vp
scattering and low RP V R, in contrast to mudstone samples that exhibited a weak Vp
scattering and high RP V R. Thus, RP V R results can be correlated to the
heterogeneity of pore system and stiffness of rock. When an effective pressure is
applied to a dry rock, the soft porosity (i.e. pores with low aspect ratio, as
microporosity) close during pressure loading, improving grain contact and increasing
rock stiffness and Vp . Although Albian grainstone samples are brittle and expressed
low RP V R, mudstone samples are stiffer and expressed higher RP V R.
67
6 Discussion
6.1 Introduction
This work summarized textural and petrophysical properties, and its effects on the
acoustic behavior of a wide range of carbonate rocks (Chapters 3 - 5). The high
heterogeneity of pore system and carbonate textures encountered within carbonate
reservoirs requires that rock characterization be achieved by integration of multiple
data sets, to overcome laboratory limitations and high costs. For instance, the
available data base of this study, summarized in Tab. 6 (Section 4.2), integrates
different measurements and methodologies that were performed experimentally to
estimate pore system properties, such as macro-mesopores and micropores. The
microporosity weight was calculated mainly by the difference between image and
helium porosities.
Laboratory limitations include image resolution and/or sample representativeness

and can lead to differences on pore properties estimation, as size and shape. Best
image resolution contributes to increasing image porosity values (assumed to
characterize macro-mesopores), causing a reduction of microporosity weight.
Complex textures are more sensible to the image resolution, especially to predict
microporosity parameters as aspect ratio and weight. Consequently, geometric
parameters of pore system can vary significantly according to DIA resolution.
However, the pore aspect ratio seems to express lower variation than other geometric
parameters (see Archilha et al. (2013), Archilha et al. (2014), Lima Neto et al. (2013),
Lima Neto et al. (2014)).
Rock physics approaches are important to predict the complexities of a rock pore
system and their effects on elastic moduli and P- and S-wave velocities. Thus, the
methodology applied to estimate microporosity aspect ratio in this work mostly
demonstrated: 1) a relevant issue to quantify microporosity inclusions, that generally
exhibit low aspect ratio and are difficult and/or expensive to be characterized by
laboratory tests and observations, 2) S-wave velocity prediction using microporosity
6 - Discussion 68
aspect ratio with the minimum error calibrated from P-wave velocity as the main
representative input parameter, that expresses the elastic comportment of
heterogeneous carbonate rocks, and 3) Effective pressure effects on pore system and
impacts on velocity prediction. The macro-mesopores were evaluated from different
DIA resolution adopted for each data set, and the error was iteratively minimized while
bulk and shear moduli were calibrated by measured Vp from each data set, aiming to
estimate microporosity aspect ratio (Fig. 4, Section 4.2).
Rock physics approaches can use pore aspect ratio as suitable geometric
parameter aiming to predict the elastic moduli and velocities. The methodology in Fig.
4 (Section 4.2) considers macro-mesopore and microporosity inclusions for
microporosity aspect ratio estimative, using the microporosity weight to reach
Vp−measured ' Vp−calculated . As a consequence, occurs a kind of balance between
aspect ratio and weight properties of microporosity inclusion that contributes to
predicting the carbonate elastic moduli and velocities. Thus, this work mostly
demonstrated: 1) a relevant issue to quantify microporosity inclusions, that generally
exhibit low aspect ratio and are difficult and/or expensive to be characterized by
laboratorial tests and observations, 2) Vs prediction using microporosity aspect ratio
with the minimum error calibrated from Vp as the main representative input parameter,
that expresses the elastic behavior of heterogeneous carbonate rocks, and 3)
Effective pressure effects on pore system and impacts on velocity prediction. The
macro-mesopores were evaluated from different DIA resolution adopted for each data
set (Tabs. 5 and 6), and the error was iteratively minimized while bulk and shear
moduli were calibrated by measured Vp from each data set, aiming to estimate
microporosity aspect ratio (Fig. 4).
6.2 Textural Elastic Properties of Carbonates under

Effective Pressure
The laboratorial measurements available in data base support input rock

parameters, aiming to predict elastic properties and characterize the microporosity
aspect ratio of different carbonate textures controlled by effective pressure (see Fig.
4). Measured Vp at effective pressure condition was the main input parameter to the
inversion of microporosity aspect ratio, and Vs was calculated using the shear
modulus calibrated for best microporosity aspect ratio of each sample. A good match
was verified in analysis of results between the calculated Vs results and
6 - Discussion 69
measurements for all textural cases under effective pressure. In this context, the
methodology expressed positive correlation results between velocities and textural
parameters as the calculated microporosity aspect ratio.
Crossplot analysis allowed to fit polynomial functions correlating measured

velocities with porosity expressing moderate (R² between 0.5 and 0.8) to good (R² >
0.8) accuracy (see a general summary in Tab. 12). Although the quality of the curve
fitting is sensitive to the data scattering, the methodology (Fig. 4) can be adapted for
velocity prediction improving quality of the results and applied for other studies,
including fluid saturation conditions, in a similar way to that developed in this work to
predict Vs for Weger et al. (2009) data set (see lack of Vs measurements for Weger et
al. (2009) data set in Tab. 4, and calculated Vs in Appendix A.4), with good quality as
supposed by crossplot results of calculated versus measured Vs . Vp /Vs ratio at low
effective pressure expressed a slight decrease on tendency with porosity, more
sensitive than moderate and high effective pressure cases. Many textural carbonate
samples have Vp /Vs ratio about 1.9 as demonstrated by Wilkens et al. (1984),
Rafavich et al. (1984) and Assefa et al. (2003). See a general summary of mean
microporosity aspect ratio (α) and average adjustment coefficient (A) of Vs in Tab. 13.
Available crossplots between measured and calculated Vs (Figs. 5 - 21, D)

showed a systematic difference in the some textural results, expressing a calculated
Vs from methodology (Fig. 4) slightly higher than the measured Vs . Therefore, two
main causes should be considered: 1) uncertainties about mineral weight (see lack of
XRD information for some data sets in Tab. 6), and 2) elastic moduli of mineral matrix
calculated using Voigt-Reuss-Hill average of calcite as the dominant mineral of clean
limestone (~ >95%). There are several bulk (K) and shear (µ) moduli for calcite as
reference from Mavko et al. (1998) (K = 63.7 ~ 76.8 GPa, and µ = 28.4 ~ 32 GPa),
that can produce a difference ~0.2 km/s on velocities. This work used a mean value in
Tab. 2 on page 22 aiming to minimize differences between measured and calculated
Vs . However, elastic moduli of calcite lower than the adopted mean value may
contribute to improving the Adjustment Coefficient (A) results.
The microporosity aspect ratio of dry samples evaluated at low and high effective
pressures expressed a difference correlated to the measured Vp and Vs . Pressure
loading causes a microporosity reduction by closing of low aspect ratio micropores,
that contributes to the stiffness of rock and increases the resultant microporosity aspect
ratio. The results are relevant information for pore system characterization.
Table 12: General summary of polynomial curve fitting between P- and S-wave velocities (V) and porosity (ø): V = a/o2 + bφ + c, at low
(L, 5-7.5 MPa - dry), moderate (M, 20 MPa - water saturated) and high (H, 40-50 MPa - dry) effective pressure (P ef f ) (Figs. 5 - 21).
6 - Discussion
Vp Vs Vp /Vs
Texture P ef f
a b c R² a b c R² a b c R²
Grainstone L -10.64 -9.71 6.1 0.925 -11.1 -2.68 3.16 0.929 1.73 -1.44 1.93 0.764
M 9.05 -11.87 6.35 0.9 3.05 -4.83 3.24 0.858 0.58 -0.89 1.97 0.817
H 15.23 -13.97 6.3 0.774 1.45 -4.78 3.26 0.788 3.6 -1.69 1.94 0.61
Cemented L 22.13 -17.57 6.38 0.778 7.73 -7.29 3.32 0.767 1.45 -1.31 1.93 0.516
grainstone M 20.7 -14.03 6.53 0.851 8.49 -6.21 3.38 0.809 1.21 -0.74 1.94 0.527
H 19.68 -15.8 6.47 0.9 6.68 -6.55 3.38 0.9 1.72 -1.18 1.93 0.59
Packstone L 6.17 -12.41 6.14 0.84 -5.88 -3.57 3.18 0.804 4.51 -1.82 1.94 0.658
M 16.68 -13.62 6.37 0.915 5.66 -5.27 3.22 0.827 1.37 -1.15 1.98 0.755
H 20.99 -14.77 6.26 0.787 -1.05 -4.27 3.22 0.744 6.87 -2.21 1.95 0.712
Wackestone L -0.68 -10.04 6.13 0.94 -3.09 -3.21 3.18 0.945 0.41 -1.29 1.93 0.839
M -0.3 -8.42 6.28 0.91 -0.91 -3.31 3.22 0.881 -0.5 -0.56 1.95 0.603
H 89.82 -17.54 6.36 0.745 23.13 -5.42 3.28 0.674 14.46 -2.3 1.94 0.35
Rudstone L 11.5 -12.57 6.2 0.793 -1.03 -4.16 3.21 0.765 3.57 -1.53 1.93 0.483
M 12.76 -12.07 6.39 0.902 1.66 -4.76 3.27 0.848 2.95 -0.97 1.96 0.437
H 7.92 -10.72 6.35 0.867 -2.84 -3.12 3.25 0.859 3.41 -1.46 1.95 0.676
Rud- L - - - - - - - - - - - -
dolostone M -9.43 -2.17 6.32 0.898 -8.2 0.5 3.41 0.906 1.39 -0.9 1.86 0.535
H - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mudstone L -11.95 0.42 4.16 0.859 -7.66 1.14 2.35 0.827 -0.9 -0.12 1.72 0.633
M - - - - - - - - - - - -
H - - - - - - - - - - - -
70
6 - Discussion 71
Table 13: General summary of mean microporosity aspect ratio and mean Vs
adjustment coefficient predicted for each carbonate texture (Figs. 5 - 21).
Mean microporosity Mean Vs adjustment
Texture P ef f
aspect ratio (α) coefficient (A)
Grainstone L 0.07 0.942
M 0.11 0.958
H 0.07 0.958
Cemented L 0.08 0.911
grainstone M 0.13 0.965
H 0.1 0.941
Packstone L 0.12 0.959
M 0.14 0.956
H 0.08 0.954
Wackestone L 0.07 0.967
M 0.14 0.97
H 0.14 0.978
Rudstone L 0.13 0.956
M 0.16 0.959
H 0.18 0.967
Rud- L - -
dolostone M 0.1 -
H - -
Mudstone L 0.07 0.950
M - -
H - -
6.3 Carbonate Pore System Evaluation and

Velocity-porosity-pressure Relationship
The effects of pressure on a dry pore system were analyzed for Albian carbonate
data set. The relative pore volume reduction was evaluated assuming axial and radial
deformation of core samples during pressure loading in triaxial tests, and P- and
S-wave velocities were estimated for each case of effective pressure. The
microporosity reduction was predicted by the relative pore volume reduction (RP V R)
measurements, and a new bulk porosity was calculated for each core sample at
6 - Discussion 72
effective pressure. Thus, the microporosity aspect ratio was estimated applying the
methodologies outlined in this study (Chapter 4).
The Albian grainstones display heterogeneities such as vugs and microfractures

that cause brittleness, and Albian mudstones are stiffer and exhibit a homogeneous
mud-supported texture. Therefore, dry triaxial tests were limited at the effective
pressure of 10 MPa. In analysis, the pressure loading increases fast the ultrasonic
velocities of the Albian grainstones, and causes a slight rock volume reduction that
practically establishes in agreement with the velocity (Fig. 22, A and B - Section 5.7).
However, Albian mudstones are supposed to be stiffer than Albian grainstones and
exhibited a linear tendency of ultrasonic velocities during the pressure loading,
causing a lower sensitivity to velocity, while the rock volume expressed a more
significant reduction (Fig. 22, C and D). Thus, the reduction of rock volume was
assumed to be a relative pore volume reduction (RP V R).
Observing the results from Albian age data set (Fig. 22), brittle rocks with
heterogeneous pore inclusions may have low RP V R tolerance with pressure loading,
that may cause plastic deformation and/or rupture of the core sample. Thus, the
RP V R parameter could be correlated to the heterogeneity of pore system and rock
stiffness. A new bulk porosity can be calculated at effective pressure considering the
RP V R parameter and the methodology in Fig. 4 (Section 4.2) is applied in order to
incorporate the pressure effects to calculate bulk and shear moduli, elastic velocities,
and to predict microporosity aspect ratio (see Appendix E - Lima Neto et al. (2014)).
As a result, the representative aspect ratio of microporosity tends to increase with
pressure loading, and it can be explained by microporosity with a low aspect ratio that
encloses fast, a soft porosity characteristic. However S-wave was predicted with good
adjustment, the results (Fig. 22) showed a low sensitivity of S-wave velocity predicted
using bulk porosity estimated from helium porosimetry and calculated by the relative
pore volume reduction at 10 MPa of effective pressure, correlated to samples that
expressed slight RP V R. Thereafter, the sensitivity of RP V R tends to increase with
effective pressure loading.
Many studies ignore the effects of RP V R on elastic properties of dry rocks during
triaxial tests by assuming negligible deformations. Nevertheless, this effect deserves
new studies to evaluate core samples under higher pressure loading, once RP V R
can contribute to the improvement of rock physics models and pore system
characterization.
6 - Discussion 73
6.4 Considerations and Implications
This work uses a data base in order to study different carbonate textures, totaling
472 data from a variety of samples at three different groups of effective pressures.
Discussions about quantitative mineralogical, diagenetic observations by petrographic
and digital image analysis, and petrophysical measurements were developed,
especially for grainstone and mudstone core samples available from Albian age. A
numerically effective modeling approach was applied to quantify microporosity aspect
ratio of carbonate samples using important laboratorial analyzes of pore system
characterization as volume, size and shape, mineralogy, and impacts on measured P-
and S-wave velocities under effective pressure. Polynomial curves were fitted for a
variety of carbonate textures using velocities at effective pressure and bulk porosity
crossplots, and impacts on pore system were evaluated.
The outlined methodologies contribute to the pore system characterization and

clarify theoretical rock physics models assuming pressure loading effects on pore
system, aiming to predict elastic properties of heterogeneous rocks as carbonates. In
spite of the wide textural heterogeneity of carbonate data base and the different digital
image analysis and resolutions employed to recognize the pore system, the
methodology to predict microporosity aspect ratio worked satisfactorily. Additionally,
the methodology can contribute for Vs prediction where it is unknown. In some case
studies of heterogeneous rocks, the use of other effective elastic media theory instead
of the DEM model adopted in this work may produce more realistic results of elastic
moduli and velocities (e.g., Kuster-Toksöz and Self-consistent models). Finally, the
methods and concepts applied in this work could be adapted to characterize textural
pore types and diagenetic behavior of carbonate reservoirs from a well log and
seismic data.
74
7 Conclusions
This Chapter presents the general conclusions reached by this work, in

accordance with the objectives, complementing the discussions and considerations
performed about the results (Chapter 6), and highlights suggestions for future
research.
7.1 General Conclusions
This research addressed many concepts, methods, results and considerations in

order to promote rock physics models, and reduce uncertainties about the importance
of microporosity aspect ratio within pore system of carbonate rocks, which are difficult
to be detected by laboratory measurements.
Rock physics models based on “inclusion theory” were chosen to model pore
heterogeneities of carbonates, treating pores as different scales of inclusions: micro-,
meso- and macropores. The literature review was based on own manuscripts and
expanded abstracts published during the development of this thesis (some of these
are in Appendices C - E). Moreover, the main theoretical concepts necessary to
propose the methodology were summarized in the Chapter 2. The main trouble for
pore system characterization is how to determine microporosity considering
laboratory methods limitations, and a lack of adequate rock physics approaches for
this purpose. Thus, an original supposition was established for “microporosity”
concept, treated in this study as non-detectable pores, for example, using laboratory
method by limitations on resolution. The point is: “how to determine the microporosity
of carbonates and represent its heterogeneity using rock physics models?”.
Successful solutions were achieved by the methodology.
Before to establish the methodology of study, some available Albian grainstones

and mudstones from Campos basin were studied in the laboratory, performing triaxial
tests under dry room conditions and effective pressures. Parameters as mineralogy,
7 - Conclusions 75
density, ultrasonic P- and S-wave velocities and bulk volume of core samples were
estimated according to theoretical concepts in literature and measurement results.
Digital image analyzes contributed to the macro-mesopore characterization, and
differences between image and gas-helium porosities gave an estimation of the
microporosity occurrence (non-detectable directly from DIA methods). The Albian
data set was extended incorporating different carbonate data sets from literature to
build a data base, totaling 472 samples, under a variety of textures and pressure
loading. Crossplots of analyzes between textural and elastic parameters (e.g., velocity
versus porosity) were used to understand tendencies, establish polynomial curve fits,
and promote the methodology.
At first, the methodology was focused on estimation of the microporosity aspect

ratio. The main approach consists in the concept: the rock is characterized into
macro-, meso-, and micropores systems, which are expressed in the physical
properties as P- and S-wave velocities and correlated with bulk and shear moduli of
interest. The method considers three pore-space scales in two representative
inclusion scenarios: 1) the macro-mesopore aspect ratio identified by DIA, and 2) the
microporosity aspect ratio predicted by the measured Vp . In this way, microporosity
aspect ratio was inverted at minimum error based on laboratory input parameters of
macro-mesopores, summarized in a flowchart (Fig. 4 on page 38) that uses DEM
inclusion model adapted to perform priority predominant inclusion of
macro-mesopores and microporosity, aiming to determine the calculated Vp
approximately equal to measured Vp (Vp−DEM ' Vp ). At first analysis of the results,
the microporosity aspect ratio of textural carbonates showed main values between
0.01 and 0.1, in accordance with theoretical concepts in literature. After that, Vs was
calculated using shear modulus calibrated from methodology, using the microporosity
aspect ratio inclusion calibrated by Vp as discussed, and compared with measured Vs .
The results showed a good match for all textural cases under effective pressure,
allowing us to evaluate the potential of this methodology. Consequently, the prediction
of the S-wave velocity using microporosity aspect ratio was included in the
methodology, specially to predict Vs in case of lack of this information, and it was
considered as indicative that the methodology works and contributes to the carbonate
textural characterization, according to the result analyzes and discussions.
Pressure effects on pore system were incorporated in the methodology supposing

the theory of poroelasticity, that predicts an ability of rocks to resist and recover from
the deformation induced by external forces. Triaxial tests of Albian carbonates showed
a volumetric reduction of core sample that vary according to the textural conditions at
7 - Conclusions 76
effective pressure 0-10 MPa and dry room conditions, and an increase of velocities
(specially Vp ) with pressure loading. A velocity-porosity-pressure relationship was
discussed in respect to the relative pore volume reduction (RP V R) parameter, that
was introduced aiming to correspond textural comportment of stiffness or brittleness
tendency of carbonates, incorporating pressure effects on estimation of porosity.
Thereafter, the sensitivity of RP V R tends to increase with effective pressure loading,
and it can be explained by microporosity with a low aspect ratio that encloses fast, a
soft porosity characteristic. This effect deserves new studies to evaluate core samples
under higher pressure loading that the performed in this study, once RP V R may
contribute to the improvement of rock physics models and pore system
characterization.
As discussion performed in Chapter 6, it is important to emphasize that the

methods and concepts applied in this work can be adapted to characterize textural
pore types and diagenetic comportments of carbonate reservoirs from well log and
seismic data, and the use of other effective elastic media theory instead of the DEM
model adopted in this work may produce more realistic results of elastic moduli and
velocities (e.g., Kuster-Toksöz and Self-consistent models) for other case studies of
heterogeneous rocks.
7.2 Suggestions for Future Research
• to perform triaxial tests of carbonate samples (or other rocks of interest) under
high pressure loading, and to evaluate the relative pore volume reduction (RP V R)
for dry and saturated conditions;
• to apply nanotomography techniques aiming to better characterize

heterogeneities of carbonate pore system, improving resolution limits, although
very high costs and limitations for the representativeness of core sample
properties;
• to develop seismic simulators using the velocity-porosity-pressure relationship as

established in this work, integrating laboratory and well-log data scales;
• to evaluate the permeability of carbonate rocks under pressure loading and

integrate the analysis of elastic behavior treated in the methodology of this study.
77
References
AGERSBORG, R.; JOHANSEN, T. A.; JAKOBSEN, M. The t-matrix approach for

carbonate rocks. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, p. 1597–1600, 2005.
ANSELMETTI, F. S.; EBERLI, G. P. Controls on sonic velocity in carbonates. Pure

and applied geophysics, BirkhÃCuser-Verlag, v. 141, n. 2-4, p. 287–323, 1993. ISSN
0033-4553.
ANSELMETTI, F. S.; EBERLI, G. P. The velocity-deviation log: A tool to predict pore

type and permeability trends in carbonate drill holes from sonic and porosity or density
logs. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 83, p. 450–466, 1999.
ANSELMETTI, F. S.; LUTHI, S.; EBERLI, G. P. Quantitative characterization of

carbonate pore systems by digital image analysis. American Association of Petroleum
Geologists Bulletin, v. 82, n. 10, p. 1815–1836, 1998.
ARCHILHA, N.; MISSAGIA, R.; CEIA, M.; LIMA NETO, I.; CASTRO, L.; SOUZA, F.
Petrophysical, mineralogical and p-wave velocity characterization of albian carbonates
from campos basin, brazil. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, p.
2989–2993, 2013.
ARCHILHA, N. L.; MISSAGIA, R. M.; HOLLIS, C.; CEIA, M. A. R.; LIMA NETO, I. A.;
EASTWOOD, D. 3d pore structure investigation of albian carbonates from campos
basin. 76th EAGE Conference and Exhibition, 2014.
ASSEFA, S.; MCCANN, C.; SOTHCOTT, J. Attenuation of p- and s-waves in

limestones. Geophysical Prospecting, v. 47, p. 359–392, 1999.
ASSEFA, S.; MCCANN, C.; SOTHCOTT, J. Velocities of compressional and shear

waves in limestones. Geophysical Prospecting, v. 51, p. 1–13, 2003.
ASTM D2845-08. Standard test method for laboratory determination of pulse velocities
and ultrasonic elastic constants of rock. West Conshohocken, PA, 2008.
ASTM D7012-14. Standard test methods for compressive strength and elastic moduli
of intact rock core specimens under varying states of stress and temperatures. West
Conshohocken, PA, 2014.
BACKUS, G. E. Long wave elastic anisotropy produced by horizontal layering. Journal

of Geophysical Research, v. 67, p. 4427–4440, 1962.
BAECHLE, G. T.; WEGER, R.; EBERLI, G. P.; MASSAFERRO, J. L. The role of

macroporosity and microporosity in constraining uncertainties and in relating velocity
to permeability in carbonate rocks. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded
Abstracts, v. 23, p. 1662–1665, 2004.
References 78
BERRYMAN, J. G. Long-wavelength propagation in composite elastic media. The

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, v. 68, p. 1809–1831, 1980.
BERRYMAN, J. G. Single-scattering approximations for coefficients in biot’s equations
of poroelasticity. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, v. 91, p. 551–571,
1992.
BERRYMAN, J. G. Mixture theories for rock properties. In Rock Physics and Phase
Relations. Washington, DC: Handbook of Physical Constants, American Geophysical
Union, 1995. 205-228 p.
BERRYMAN, J. G.; BLAIR, S. C. Kozeny-carman relations and image-processing
methods for estimating darcy’s constant. Journal of Applied Physics, p. 2221–2228,
1987.
BIOT, M. A. Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid saturated porous solid: I.
low frequency range. J. Acoustic Soc. Am., v. 28, n. 2, p. 168–191, 1956.
BRUHN, C. H.; GOMES, J. A.; LUCCHESE JR., C. D.; JOHANN, P. R. Campos basin:
reservoir characterization and management - historical overview and future challenges.
Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 15220, Houston, Texas, p. 1–14, 2003.
BURCHETTE, T. P. Carbonate rocks and petroleum reservoirs: a geological
perspective from the industry. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, v. 370,
p. 17–37, 2012.
CASTRO, D. D.; ROCHA, P. L. F. Quantitative parameters of pore types in carbonate
rocks. Brazilian Journal of Geophysics (RBGf), v. 31, p. 125–136, 2013.
CHAPARRO, C. I. Caracterização das fácies calcárias da formação Cimarrona, Campo
Guanduas - VMM - Colômbia. Dissertação (Mestrado) — Ciências em Engenharia
Civil: Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, 2002.
DUNHAM, R. J. Classification of carbonate rocks according to depositional texture. In:
HAM, W. (Ed.). Classification of carbonate rocks. [S.l.]: AAPG Memoir, 1962. v. 1, p.
108–121.
EBERLI, G. P.; BAECHLE, G. T.; ANSELMETTI, F. S.; INCZE, M. L.; DONG, W.; TURA,
A.; SPARKMAN, G. Factors controlling elastic properties in carbonate sediments and
rocks. The Leading Edge, v. 22, p. 654–660, 2003.
EMBRY, A. F.; KLOVAN, J. E. A late devonian reef tract on northeastern banks island,
northwest territories. Canadian Petroleum Geology Bulletin, v. 19, p. 730–781, 1971.
FJAER, E.; HOLT, R. M.; HORSRUD, P.; RAAEN, A. M.; RISNES, R. Petroleum related
rock mechanics. [S.l.]: Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2008. 26-37 p.
FOLK, R. L. Practical petrographic classification of limestones. AAPG Bulletin, v. 43, p.
1–38, 1959.
FOLK, R. L. Petrology of sedimentary rocks. [S.l.]: Austin: Hemphill’s, 1968.
FOURNIER, F.; BORGOMANO, J. Critical porosity and elastic properties of
microporous mixed carbonate-siliciclastic rocks. Geophysics, v. 74, n. 2, p. 93–109,
2009.
References 79
FOURNIER, F.; LEONIDE, P.; BISCARRAT, K.; GALLOIS, A.; BORGOMANO, J.;
FOUBERT, A. Elastic properties of microporous cemented grainstones. Geophysics,
v. 76, p. 211–226, 2011.
FOURNIER, F.; LEONIDE, P.; KLEIPOOL, L.; TOULLEC, R.; REIJMER, J. J. G.;
BORGOMANO, J.; KLOOTWIJK, T.; VAN DER MOLEN, J. A. B. Pore space evolution
and elastic properties of platform carbonates (urgonian limestone, barremian-aptian,
se france). Sedimentary Geology, v. 308, p. 1–17, 2014.
GARDNER, G. H. F.; GARDNER, L. W.; GREGORY, R. W. Formation velocity and

density: The diagnostic basis for stratigraphic traps. Geophysics, v. 39, p. 770–780,
1974.
JAEGER, J.; COOK, N. G.; ZIMMERMAN, R. Fundamentals of rock mechanics. 4th.

ed. [S.l.]: Malden, MA: Blackwell Ltd., 2007. 145-197 p.
KERNER, E. H. The elastic and thermoelastic properties of composite media.

Proceedings of the Physical Society, v. 69, p. 808–813, 1956. Section B.
KEYS, R. G.; XU, S. An approximation for the xu-white velocity model. Geophysics,
v. 67, n. 5, p. 1406–1414, 2002.
KUMAR, M.; HAN, D. Pore shape effect on elastic properties of carbonate rocks. SEG
Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, p. 1477–1481, 2005.
KUSTER, G. T.; TOKSöZ, M. N. Velocity and attenuation of seismic waves in two-phase

media, part i: Theorical formulations. Geophysics, v. 39, p. 587–606, 1974.
LANDIS, E. N.; KEANE, D. T. X-ray microtomography. Materials characterization, v. 61,

n. 12, p. 1305–1316, 2010.
LI, H.; ZHANG, J. Elastic moduli of dry rocks containing spheroidal pores based on
differential effective medium theory. Journal of Applied Geophysics, v. 75, n. 4, p.
671–678, 2011.
LIMA NETO, I.; MISSAGIA, R.; CEIA, M.; ARCHILHA, N.; OLIVEIRA, L. Dual pore
system evaluation of albian grainstone carbonates from brazil using effective elastic
media theory models. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, p. 2994–2998,
2013.
LIMA NETO, I.; MISSAGIA, R. M. Estimate of elastic properties including pore

geometry effect on carbonates: a case study of glorieta-paddock reservoir at vacuum
field, new mexico. Brazilian Journal of Geophysics (RBGf), v. 30, n. 4, p. 1–13, 2012.
LIMA NETO, I. A.; MISSAGIA, R. M.; CEIA, M. A.; ARCHILHA, N. L.; OLIVEIRA, L. C.
Carbonate pore system evaluation using the velocity-porosity-pressure relationship,
digital image analysis, and differential effective medium theory. Elsevier, Journal of
Applied Geophysics, v. 110, p. 23–33, 2014.
MAVKO, G.; MUKERJI, T. Seismic pore space compressibility and gassmann’s relation.
Geophysics, v. 60, n. 6, p. 1743–1749, 1995.
MAVKO, G.; MUKERJI, T.; DVORKIN, J. The rock physics handbook: tools for seismic
analysis in porous media. [S.l.]: Cambridge University Press, New York, 1998.
References 80
MOORE, C. H. Carbonate diagenesis and porosity. Elsevier, Developments in

Sedimentology, p. 46, 1989.
RAFAVICH, F.; KENDALL, C. H. S. C.; TODD, T. P. The relationship between acoustic

properties and the petrographic character of carbonate rocks. Geophysics, v. 49, p.
1622–1636, 1984.
RøGEN, B.; FABRICIUS, I. L.; JAPSEN, P.; HøIER, C.; MAVKO, G.; PEDERSEN, J. M.
Ultrasonic velocities of north sea chalk samples - influence of porosity, fluid content
and texture. Geophysical Prospecting, v. 53, p. 481–496, 2005.
ROSSEBø, . H.; BREVIK, I.; GHOLAM, R. A.; ADAM, L. Modeling of acoustic

properties in carbonate rocks. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, p.
1505–1508, 2005.
RUSS, J. C. The image processing handbook. [S.l.]: Boca Raton, Florida, CRC Press,
1998. 771 p.
SALEH, A. A.; CASTAGNA, J. P. Revisiting the wyllie time average equation in the case
of near spherical pores. Geophysics, v. 69, p. 45–55, 2004.
SCHöN, J. H. Physical properties of rocks: a work book. [S.l.]: Elsevier, 2011.
SMITH, T. M.; SAYERS, C. M.; SONDERGELD, C. H. Rock properties in

low-porosity/low permeability sandstones. The Leading Edge, v. 28, p. 48–59, 2009.
SPADINI, A. R.; MARçAL, R. A. Porosidade em reservatórios carbonáticos: algumas

considerações. Boletim de Geociências da Petrobras, Rio de Janeiro, v. 13, n. 1, p.
129–138, 2005.
SUGUIO, K. Dicionário de geologia sedimentar e áreas afins. [S.l.]: Bertrand Brasil,

1998. 620-623 p.
SUN, Y. F.; BERTEUSSEN, K.; VEGA, S.; EBERLI, G. P.; BAECHLE, G. T.; WEGER,
R. J.; MASSAFERRO, J. L.; BRACCO GARTNER, G. L.; WAGNER, P. D. Effects of
pore structure on 4d seismic signals in carbonate reservoirs. SEG Technical Program
Expanded Abstracts, p. 3260–3264, 2006.
VAN DER PLAS, J.; TOBI, A. C. A chart for judging the reliability of point counting
results. American Journal of Science, v. 263, p. 87–90, 1965.
VERNIK, L. Predicting lithology and transport properties from acoustic velocities based
on petrophysical classification of siliciclastics. Geophysics, v. 59, p. 420–427, 1994.
WANG, H. Y.; SUN, S. Z.; LI, Y. W.; LI, X. G. Velocity prediction models evaluation
and permeability prediction for fractured and caved carbonate reservoir: from theory to
case study. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, p. 2194–2198, 2009.
WANG, Z. Seismic properties of carbonate rocks. In: DEVELOPMENTS, S. G. (Ed.).

Carbonate seismology. [S.l.]: I Palaz and K J Marfurt, 1997. v. 6, p. 29–52.
WANG, Z.; NUR, A. Elastic wave velocities in porous media: a theoretical recipe. In:
WANG, Z.; NUR, A. (Ed.). Seismic and acoustic velocities in reservoir rocks. [S.l.]:
Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 1992. v. 2, p. 1–35.
References 81
WEGER, R. J. Quantitative pore/rock type parameters in carbonates and their

relationship to velocity deviations. Tese (Doutorado) — University of Miami, Coral
Glabes, 2006. 232 p.
WEGER, R. J.; EBERLI, G. P.; BAECHLE, G. T.; MASSAFERRO, J. L.; SUN, Y.

Quantification of pore structure and its effect on sonic velocity and permeability in
carbonates. AAPG Bulletin, v. 93, n. 10, p. 1297–1317, 2009.
WILKENS, R.; SIMMONS, R.; CARUSO, L. The ratio vp/vs as a discriminant of

composition for siliceous limestones. Geophysics, v. 49, p. 1850–1860, 1984.
WU, T. T. The effect of inclusion shape on the elastic moduli of a two-phase material.
International Journal of Solids and Structures, v. 2, p. 1–8, 1966.
XU, S.; PAYNE, M. A. Modeling elastic properties in carbonate rocks. Special section:
Rock Physics. The Leading Edge, v. 28, p. 66–74, 2009.
XU, S.; WHITE, R. E. A new velocity model for clay-sand mixtures. Geophysical
Prospecting, v. 43, p. 91–118, 1995.
XU, S. Y.; CHEN, G.; ZHU, Y.; PAYNE, M. A.; DEFFENBAUGH, M.; SONG, L.;
DUNSMUIR, J. Carbonate rock physics: Analytical models and validations using
computational approaches and log/lad measurement. IPTC-112-8-PP, 2007.
ZHAN, X.; FULLMER, S.; LU, C.; KACZMAREK, S.; HARRIS, C.; MARTINEZ, A.
Study geophysical response of middle east carbonate reservoir using computational
rock physics approach. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, p. 1–5, 2012.
82
APPENDIX A -- Data Base Details
This Appendix-chapter describes the data set values and details applied in this
work.
A.1 Albian Carbonate Data Set
Table 14: Albian carbonate data set (LIMA NETO et al., 2014): grainstone and mudstone
samples. The mudstone core samples were characterized in this study (Part 1 - mineral
matrix).
Weight (%) Mineral matrix
Sample K µ ρ Texture
Calcite Dolomite Quartz Other
(GPa) (GPa) (g/cm³)
W2-Im1 99.37 0 0.64 0.00 70.69 30.07 2.71 CG
W2-Im2 98.77 0.85 0.38 0.00 70.99 30.15 2.711 CG
W1-Im1 99.71 0.29 0 0.00 71.06 30.04 2.71 G
W1-Im2 95.20 0.92 2.13 1.75 69.32 29.97 2.709 G
W1-Im3 96.98 1.76 0.63 0.63 70.75 30.15 2.712 G
W1-Im4 96.47 0.52 1.46 1.55 69.66 29.89 2.709 G
W1-Im6 96.98 1.55 1.04 0.44 70.6 30.22 2.711 G
W1-Im7 - - - - 71 30 2.71 G
W1-Im8 - - - - 71 30 2.71 G
W1-Im11 97.46 1.34 1.2 0.00 70.69 30.31 2.711 M
W1-Im10 98.34 0.79 0.87 0.00 70.73 30.2 2.711 M
W1-Im9 98.91 0.05 0.91 0.14 70.5 30.08 2.709 M
W1-Im12 97.09 1.88 1.03 0.00 70.88 30.36 2.712 M
W2-Im3 97.41 1.12 1.47 0.00 70.51 30.31 2.711 M
W2-Im4 98.04 0.47 1.49 0.00 70.37 30.23 2.71 M
Table 15: Albian carbonate data set (LIMA NETO et al., 2014): grainstone and mudstone samples. The mudstone core samples were
characterized in this study (Part 2 - velocity, density and porosity).
Dry condition µCT Thin-section
Vp Vs Bulk Helium Aspect Aspect
Sample (km/s) (km/s) density porosity Porosity ratio (α): Porosity ratio (α): Texture
5 5 (ρ) (%) (%) macro- (%) macro-
MPa MPa (g/cm³) mesopore mesopore
Appendix A - Data Base Details
W2-Im1 3.184 1.85 2.134 21.94 0.69 0.58 9.26 0.50 CG

W2-Im2 2.984 1.74 2.185 19.72 0.55 0.55 10.41 0.51 CG
W1-Im1 3.378 1.922 2.098 23.03 8.26 0.57 8.49 0.51 G
W1-Im2 3.158 1.868 2.026 25.71 11.52 0.54 12.23 0.51 G
W1-Im3 3.115 1.868 2.118 22.07 2.59 0.57 10.92 0.50 G
W1-Im4 3.527 2.101 2.111 22.28 4.55 0.57 14.09 0.50 G
W1-Im6 3.095 1.837 2.115 22.20 4.21 0.58 2.98 0.49 G
W1-Im7 2.838 1.663 2.000 20.42 7.02 0.57 20.22 0.50 G
W1-Im8 2.761 1.666 1.959 27.96 7.43 0.57 8.73 0.50 G
W1-Im11 2.788 1.667 1.960 29.18 2.77 0.56 19.40 0.56 M
W1-Im10 3.854 2.126 2.183 19.69 1.95 0.56 13.65 0.56 M
W1-Im9 3.412 2.144 2.173 21.04 1.98 0.56 13.85 0.56 M
W1-Im12 2.431 1.446 1.779 34.68 2.45 0.56 24.10 0.56 M
W2-Im3 3.865 2.275 2.387 12.25 1.19 0.56 8.36 0.56 M
W2-Im4 4.119 2.415 2.303 15.12 1.50 0.56 10.53 0.56 M
83
Appendix A - Data Base Details 84
A.2 Great Oolite Data Set
Table 16: Great oolite limestone data set (ASSEFA et al., 2003): grainstone and
packstone samples (Part 1 - mineral matrix).
Weight (%) Mineral matrix
Sample K µ ρ Texture
Calcite Dolomite Quartz
(GPa) (GPa) (g/cm³)
H1-4 98.6 0 1.4 70.31 30.17 2.709 G
H1-5 100 0 0 71.00 30.00 2.710 G
H1-6 100 0 0 71.00 30.00 2.710 G
H1-7 98.6 0 1.4 70.31 30.17 2.709 G
H1-10 98.6 0 1.4 70.31 30.17 2.709 G
H1-13 97.3 0 2.7 69.68 30.32 2.708 G
H1-16 90.8 9.2 0 72.94 31.16 2.724 G
H1-18 99.3 0 0.7 70.65 30.08 2.710 G
H4-1 96.1 3.9 0 71.82 30.49 2.716 P
H4-5 99.3 0 0.7 70.65 30.08 2.710 P
H4-10 97.3 0 2.7 69.68 30.32 2.708 P
H4-13 95.6 3.3 1.1 71.14 30.55 2.714 P
H4-15 96.4 2.9 0.7 71.26 30.45 2.714 P
Table 17: Great oolite limestone data set (ASSEFA et al., 2003): grainstone and
packstone samples (Part 2 - velocity and porosity).
Dry condition Aspect
Vp Vs Bulk Helium ratio
Sample (km/s) (km/s) density porosity (α): Texture
5 5 (ρ) (%) macro-
MPa MPa (g/cm³) mesopore
H1-4 4.516 2.631 2.400 5.8 0.36 G
H1-5 4.227 2.474 2.320 11.5 0.10 G
H1-6 3.956 2.385 2.400 9.2 0.14 G
H1-7 4.114 2.413 2.290 13 0.26 G
H1-10 3.559 2.252 2.200 15.8 0.40 G
H1-13 4.068 2.352 2.340 11.2 0.15 G
H1-16 3.789 2.234 2.200 16.7 0.14 G
H1-18 4.281 2.489 2.340 12.4 0.36 G
H4-1 4.604 2.651 2.410 8 0.10 P
H4-5 4.041 2.370 2.280 9.2 0.06 P
H4-10 4.420 2.553 2.350 10.6 0.59 P
H4-13 4.178 2.414 2.350 9.5 0.23 P
H4-15 4.681 2.729 2.410 8.9 0.20 P
A.3 Unfractured North Sea Chalk Data Set
Table 18: Unfractured North Sea chalk data set (RøGEN et al., 2005): mudstone and wackestone samples.
Dry condition Weight (%) Mineral matrix

Vp Vs Bulk Helium
Sample (km/s) (km/s) density porosity K µ ρ Texture
Calcite Other
7.5 7.5 (ρ) (%) (GPa) (GPa) (g/cm³)
MPa MPa (g/cm³)
A755 4.050 2.420 2.031 24.5 97.9 2.1 68.51 29.9 2.69 M
A759 3.590 2.150 1.972 27.2 97.2 2.8 69.63 30.33 2.708 M
A767 3.470 2.120 1.873 30.9 98.2 1.8 70.46 30.13 2.709 M
A774 3.660 2.230 1.951 28 98.7 1.3 70.51 30.12 2.709 M
A779 3.970 2.370 2.097 22.6 98.9 1.1 70.65 30.08 2.71 M
A780 3.380 2.080 1.873 30.9 98.7 1.3 70.65 30.08 2.71 M
A782 3.680 2.250 2.038 24.8 99.0 1.0 70.8 30.05 2.71 M
A783 3.980 2.420 2.165 20.1 99.3 0.7 70.36 30.15 2.709 M
B220 3.330 2.070 1.891 30.1 99.3 0.7 59.84 30.94 2.705 M
B236 3.150 2.050 1.747 35.5 99.6 0.4 64.12 30.52 2.707 M
B240 2.570 1.680 1.690 37.6 98.7 1.3 65.65 30.39 2.708 M
B244 2.860 1.810 1.696 37.4 93.1 6.9 66.24 30.34 2.708 M
B260 2.450 1.620 1.595 41.1 92.1 7.9 64.66 30.47 2.708 M
86
B264 2.430 1.580 1.620 40.2 95.6 4.4 66.69 30.31 2.708 M
B274 2.680 1.760 1.680 38 96.7 3.3 66.84 30.3 2.708 M
C121 2.090 1.420 1.558 42.5 97.1 2.9 65.51 30.4 2.708 M
C128 2.060 1.370 1.552 42.7 96.0 4.0 65.08 30.44 2.708 M
C136 2.070 1.390 1.587 41.4 97.4 2.6 65.36 30.41 2.708 M
C151 2.200 1.440 1.525 43.7 97.5 2.5 64.52 30.49 2.708 M
C162 2.320 1.510 1.539 43.2 96.6 3.4 65.94 30.37 2.708 M
C176 2.700 1.730 1.639 39.5 96.3 3.7 64.8 30.46 2.708 M
C200 1.980 1.300 1.490 45 96.5 3.5 66.09 30.35 2.708 M
C204 1.960 1.340 1.590 41.3 95.9 4.1 66.69 30.31 2.708 M
C212 2.060 1.390 1.552 42.7 96.9 3.1 65.94 30.37 2.708 M
M003 3.390 2.120 2.061 23.9 96.1 3.9 64.12 30.52 2.707 M
M005 3.670 2.320 2.200 18.7 97.0 3.0 61.94 30.72 2.706 M
M006 3.830 2.330 2.067 23.7 97.4 2.6 66.99 30.28 2.709 M
M008 3.020 1.910 1.899 29.9 96.9 3.1 65.51 30.4 2.708 M
M014 3.180 2.010 2.009 25.8 95.0 5.0 64.8 30.46 2.708 M
M015 3.110 1.970 1.899 29.9 96.9 3.1 67.3 30.26 2.709 M
M021 3.180 1.950 1.888 30.3 95.6 4.4 66.69 30.31 2.708 M
M030 3.140 1.960 1.905 29.7 95.8 4.2 68.25 30.19 2.709 M
M031 2.840 1.840 1.856 31.5 93.9 6.1 69.08 30.13 2.709 M
M032 3.210 2.000 1.929 28.8 97.6 2.4 66.24 30.34 2.708 M
M035 2.840 1.810 1.834 32.3 96.6 3.4 67.45 30.25 2.709 M
87
M037 2.960 1.850 1.850 31.7 96.1 3.9 67.61 30.24 2.709 M
N171 3.260 2.060 2.010 25.8 97.8 2.2 66.69 30.31 2.708 M
A760 3.480 2.160 1.904 29.3 97.1 2.9 68.85 29.92 2.693 W
A763 3.520 2.180 1.943 28 98.7 1.3 69.43 29.94 2.697 W
A771 3.330 2.030 1.840 32.1 97.4 2.6 70.36 30.15 2.709 W
B216 4.300 2.600 2.341 13.5 96.4 3.6 60.98 30.82 2.706 W
M001 3.280 2.110 2.058 24 98.4 1.6 63.32 30.59 2.707 W
M002 3.510 2.130 1.975 27.1 98.9 1.1 65.94 30.37 2.708 W
M004 2.970 1.890 1.950 28 97.1 2.9 64.39 30.5 2.707 W
M017 3.100 1.930 1.861 31.3 97.9 2.1 66.24 30.34 2.708 W
M020 3.090 1.970 1.913 29.4 98.0 2.0 68.74 30.15 2.709 W
M022 2.930 1.890 1.923 29 98.7 1.3 65.22 30.43 2.708 W
N166 2.990 1.910 1.986 26.7 98.8 1.2 68.74 30.15 2.709 W
N167 3.320 2.070 1.992 26.5 98.1 1.9 68.91 30.14 2.709 W
N169 3.190 2.000 2.016 25.6 98.3 1.7 67.77 30.22 2.709 W
N170 3.100 1.950 1.981 26.9 97.4 2.6 68.09 30.2 2.709 W
N172 3.460 2.170 2.073 23.5 98.5 1.5 68.41 30.18 2.709 W
N175 3.670 2.230 2.108 22.2 97.9 2.1 67.45 30.25 2.709 W
P176 4.020 2.370 2.083 23.1 97.9 2.1 67.45 30.25 2.709 W
P177 4.180 2.460 2.137 20.8 98.5 1.5 68.34 29.76 2.698 W
88
A.4 Aptian and Miocene Carbonate Data Set
Table 20: Aptian and Miocene age carbonate data set (WEGER et al., 2009): different
kind of clean carbonate textures.
Sw condition Aspect
Vp Vs Bulk Helium Image ratio
Sample (km/s) (km/s) density porosity porosity (α): Texture
7.5 7.5 (ρ) (%) (%) macro-
MPa MPa (g/cm³) mesopore
C5-B1 3.177 1.793 2.247 28 1.2 0.52 G
C5-B100 3.185 1.793 2.253 27.6 2.3 0.59 G
C5-B101 3.262 1.844 2.207 30.4 5 0.55 G
C5-B102 3.738 2.142 2.283 25.8 4 0.54 G
C5-B103 3.866 2.219 2.275 26.3 4 0.54 G
C5-B104 3.458 1.974 2.230 29 4.6 0.54 G
C5-B105 3.853 2.214 2.318 23.7 2.1 0.59 G
C5-B106 4.050 2.307 2.215 29.9 8.5 0.54 G
C5-B108 4.893 2.744 2.498 12.8 3 0.52 G
C5-B110 4.259 2.429 2.338 22.5 5.2 0.53 G
C5-B111 4.177 2.386 2.344 22.1 5.2 0.53 G
C5-B112 3.466 1.982 2.268 26.7 0.9 0.61 G
C5-B113 3.403 1.923 2.257 27.4 8 0.56 G
C5-B114 3.377 1.915 2.247 28 5.4 0.54 G
C5-B115 3.867 2.213 2.217 29.8 6.8 0.54 G
C5-B116 3.520 1.998 2.267 26.8 8.5 0.53 G
C5-B118 3.714 2.126 2.223 29.4 5 0.57 G
C5-B119 4.782 2.685 2.414 17.9 3.1 0.55 G
C5-B120 3.513 2.012 2.242 28.3 4 0.54 G
C5-B74 4.362 2.460 2.319 23.6 13 0.54 G
C5-B79 3.179 1.785 2.273 26.4 1.3 0.5 G
C5-B85 3.768 2.164 2.262 27.1 0.8 0.57 G
C5-B90 4.023 2.306 2.356 21.4 3.4 0.51 G
C5-B95 3.481 1.994 2.217 29.8 2.3 0.48 G
C5-B99 3.156 1.775 2.247 28 1.8 0.64 G
C5-L17 5.333 2.890 2.415 17.8 2.5 0.55 G

C5-L2 3.894 2.193 2.022 41.6 23.4 0.54 G
C5-L26 5.361 2.941 2.531 10.8 0.7 0.52 G
C5-L32 5.908 2.971 2.439 16.4 5.9 0.55 G
C5-L35 5.297 2.913 2.515 11.8 0.1 0.45 G
C5-L41 5.604 2.916 2.397 18.9 8.6 0.54 G
C5-L42 4.520 2.559 2.361 21.1 2.9 0.54 G
C5-L46 4.615 2.613 2.425 17.2 2.1 0.55 G
C5-L53 5.082 2.765 2.293 25.2 14 0.56 G
C5-L6 4.093 2.330 2.222 29.5 5.2 0.53 G
C5-M69 4.477 2.540 2.366 20.8 4.5 0.54 G
C5-B117 3.974 2.266 2.290 25.4 10.3 0.55 GP
C5-B93 3.786 2.172 2.219 29.7 3.1 0.54 GP
C5-B94 3.266 1.845 2.276 26.2 1.4 0.51 GP
C5-B96 3.535 2.029 2.240 28.4 0.1 0.46 GP
C5-B98 3.692 2.117 2.349 21.8 0.3 0.44 GP
C5-L12 4.011 2.297 2.275 26.3 1.2 0.52 GP
C5-M18 4.038 2.308 2.270 26.6 6.7 0.54 GP
C5-M57 3.612 2.057 2.232 28.9 9.6 0.55 GP
C5-M59 3.671 2.103 2.280 26 3.6 0.59 GP
C5-M65 4.357 2.482 2.366 20.8 5.3 0.57 GP
C5-M73 4.092 2.345 2.323 23.4 3.3 0.57 GP
C5-B61 4.564 2.585 2.401 18.7 1.6 0.59 P
C5-B80 2.898 1.591 2.200 30.8 0.6 0.56 P
C5-B89 4.084 2.344 2.348 21.9 0.8 0.56 P
C5-L10 4.753 2.684 2.488 13.4 0.1 0.6 P
C5-L24 3.961 2.272 2.293 25.2 1.8 0.56 P
C5-L28 4.249 2.411 2.260 27.2 6 0.55 P
C5-L37 3.956 2.258 2.219 29.7 6.2 0.55 P
C5-L38 4.381 2.492 2.366 20.8 5.6 0.56 P
C5-L39 4.246 2.417 2.296 25 1.3 0.55 P
C5-L52 5.442 2.980 2.563 8.9 0.4 0.56 P
C5-L7 4.977 2.780 2.475 14.2 0.5 0.52 P
C5-M63 4.346 2.437 2.180 32 7.9 0.53 P
C5-M64 3.524 2.015 2.223 29.4 4.4 0.58 P
C5-M67 4.285 2.440 2.338 22.5 6.1 0.53 P

C5-M68 4.105 2.344 2.268 26.7 3.9 0.55 P
C5-M77 4.450 2.524 2.351 21.7 1.5 0.56 P
C5-M78 4.118 2.340 2.214 30 5.9 0.57 P
C5-M83 4.117 2.354 2.311 24.1 2.5 0.59 P
C5-B107 3.406 1.945 2.257 27.4 2.1 0.58 PG
C5-B109 3.435 1.951 2.276 26.2 3.4 0.57 PG
C5-B75 3.466 1.985 2.223 29.4 1.1 0.6 PG
C5-B84 4.171 2.386 2.377 20.1 2.6 0.57 PG
C5-B97 3.324 1.870 2.341 22.3 0.1 0.59 PG
C5-L47 4.784 2.683 2.409 18.2 5.5 0.57 PG
C5-L49 4.860 2.679 2.276 26.2 12.3 0.55 PG
C5-M56 3.725 2.127 2.156 33.5 9.7 0.58 PG
C5-M62 3.978 2.278 2.319 23.6 4.3 0.57 PG
C5-M70 3.829 2.187 2.182 31.9 4.3 0.57 PG
C5-L11 5.791 3.301 2.612 14.2 9.9 0.57 RDol
C5-L13 5.747 3.269 2.507 20 7.3 0.55 RDol
C5-L14 5.797 3.295 2.516 19.5 10.4 0.55 RDol
C5-L15 5.180 2.992 2.398 26 17.8 0.55 RDol
C5-L16 4.737 2.752 2.260 33.6 21.3 0.56 RDol
C5-L19 4.658 2.717 2.291 31.9 19.6 0.55 RDol
C5-L20 5.991 3.302 2.667 11.2 9.9 0.55 RDol
C5-L21 5.949 3.388 2.634 13 7.4 0.55 RDol
C5-L22 5.890 3.359 2.629 13.3 8.1 0.56 RDol
C5-L23 3.274 1.897 2.059 44.7 12.7 0.55 RDol
C5-L25 5.430 3.130 2.489 21 10.2 0.55 RDol
C5-L3 6.080 3.436 2.687 10.1 7.2 0.56 RDol
C5-L30 5.918 3.363 2.612 14.2 10.1 0.56 RDol
C5-L31 4.650 2.710 2.287 32.1 19.2 0.56 RDol
C5-L34 4.951 2.892 2.420 24.8 12.1 0.56 RDol
C5-L36 4.791 2.777 2.215 36.1 18.6 0.54 RDol
C5-L4 5.303 3.019 2.502 20.3 16.4 0.56 RDol
C5-L40 5.640 3.255 2.634 13 5.5 0.53 RDol
C5-L43 5.132 2.982 2.433 24.1 9.9 0.56 RDol
C5-L44 5.407 3.269 2.474 21.8 23.1 0.53 RDol
C5-L45 6.325 3.501 2.694 9.7 8.8 0.56 RDol

C5-L48 5.271 3.035 2.389 26.5 9.7 0.55 RDol
C5-L5 5.871 3.329 2.627 13.4 10.3 0.55 RDol
C5-L50 5.335 3.089 2.489 21 5.4 0.54 RDol
C5-L51 4.259 2.508 2.277 32.7 16 0.53 RDol
C5-L8 6.325 3.490 2.679 10.5 10.1 0.55 RDol
C5-L9 5.850 3.346 2.645 12.4 6.4 0.56 RDol
C5-M66 5.604 3.238 2.634 13 5 0.54 RDol
C5-M71 5.531 3.146 2.663 11.4 7.3 0.56 RDol
C5-B82 3.936 2.252 2.233 28.8 3.1 0.57 WP
C5-M76 3.696 2.122 2.248 27.9 3.6 0.57 WP
A.5 Mixed Carbonate-siliciclastic Data Set
Table 22: Mixed carbonate-siliciclastic data set (FOURNIER; BORGOMANO, 2009): clean
grainstone and wacke-packstone samples (Part 1 - porosity and mineral matrix).
Macro- Weight (%) Mineral matrix
Helium porous
Sample porosity carbonate K µ ρ Texture
Calcite Quartz Clays
(%) fraction (GPa) (GPa) (g/cm³)
(%)
LC1-5 0.44 69.86 99.8 0.2 0 70.90 30.02 2.710 G
LC1-6 0.66 69.5 99.3 0.7 0 70.65 30.08 2.710 G
LC1-8 0.65 61.87 99.8 0.2 0 70.90 30.02 2.710 G
LC1-9 1.05 69.72 99.6 0.4 0 70.75 30.06 2.710 G
LC1-12 2.65 58.75 97.9 2.1 0 69.97 30.25 2.709 G
LC1-28 2.01 66.15 97.9 2.1 0 69.97 30.25 2.709 G
LC1-2 0.39 70 98.9 1.1 0 70.46 30.13 2.709 WP
LC1-3 0.62 64.27 98.9 1.1 0 70.46 30.13 2.709 WP
LC1-4 0.18 69.43 99.2 0.8 0 70.60 30.09 2.710 WP
LC1-7 0.24 67.9 100 0 0 71.00 30.00 2.710 WP
LC1-10 1.73 71.35 99.1 0.9 0 70.56 30.11 2.709 WP
LC1-11 0.93 68.72 98.2 1.8 0 70.12 30.21 2.709 WP
LC1-13 4.44 84.17 99 1 0 70.51 30.12 2.709 WP
LC1-14 3.39 34.38 98.2 1.8 0 70.12 30.21 2.709 WP
LC1-38 4.23 81.59 95.5 4 0.5 68.60 30.26 2.707 WP
Table 23: Mixed carbonate-siliciclastic data set (FOURNIER; BORGOMANO, 2009): clean
grainstone and wacke-packstone samples (Part 2 - velocity and density).
Dry condition Sw condition Dry condition Dry Sw
Vp Vs Vp Vs Vp Vs bulk bulk
Sample (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) density density Texture
5 5 20 20 40 40 (ρ) (ρ)
MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa (g/cm³) (g/cm³)
LC1-5 6.166 3.071 6.205 3.149 6.269 3.176 2.690 2.702 G
LC1-6 5.899 3.135 6.078 3.172 6.172 3.198 2.680 2.698 G
LC1-8 5.963 3.148 6.147 3.185 6.181 3.211 2.680 2.699 G
LC1-9 6.052 3.122 6.102 3.190 6.206 3.222 2.670 2.692 G
LC1-12 5.368 2.882 5.581 2.951 5.638 2.983 2.620 2.663 G
LC1-28 6.000 3.039 6.111 3.163 6.195 3.204 2.640 2.674 G
LC1-2 6.024 3.243 6.229 3.302 6.337 3.342 2.690 2.703 WP
LC1-3 6.172 3.127 6.235 3.182 6.279 3.202 2.680 2.699 WP
LC1-4 5.969 3.154 6.038 3.208 6.069 3.227 2.690 2.706 WP
LC1-7 6.003 3.105 6.084 3.162 6.103 3.186 2.690 2.706 WP
LC1-10 5.809 3.166 5.951 3.201 6.006 3.232 2.650 2.680 WP
LC1-11 5.877 3.259 5.975 3.295 6.182 3.335 2.670 2.693 WP
LC1-13 5.327 2.860 5.531 2.961 5.651 3.034 2.580 2.633 WP
LC1-14 5.576 3.195 5.663 3.250 5.753 3.278 2.610 2.651 WP
LC1-38 5.217 2.867 5.335 2.928 5.432 2.950 2.590 2.635 WP
A.6 Microporous Cemented Grainstone Data Set
Table 24: Microporous cemented grainstone data set (FOURNIER et al., 2011).
Dry condition Sw condition Dry condition Dry Sw Aspect

Vp Vs Vp Vs Vp Vs bulk bulk Helium ratio Micrite
Sample (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) density density porosity (α): volume Texture
5 5 20 20 40 40 (ρ) (ρ) (%) macro- (%)
MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa (g/cm³) (g/cm³) mesopore
B01 3.941 2.144 4.676 2.46 4.288 2.365 2.238 2.423 16.8 0.56 65.5 CG
B02 3.997 2.274 4.565 2.454 4.108 2.333 2.260 2.436 16 0.56 58.9 CG
B03 4.103 2.360 4.703 2.537 4.233 2.413 2.296 2.448 15.3 0.56 57.5 CG
B04A 4.452 2.505 4.982 2.703 4.577 2.571 2.304 2.448 15.3 0.56 62 CG
B04B 4.255 2.409 4.824 2.59 4.401 2.46 2.260 2.426 16.6 0.56 49.1 CG
B05A 4.267 2.425 4.8 2.622 4.358 2.47 2.217 2.399 18.2 0.56 58.6 CG
B05B 4.372 2.461 4.794 2.63 4.326 2.448 2.158 2.371 19.8 0.56 68.3 CG
B06A 3.588 2.129 4.509 2.454 4.286 2.461 2.309 2.462 14.5 0.56 44.1 CG
B06B 3.648 2.178 4.655 2.531 4.44 2.512 2.288 2.438 15.9 0.56 40.9 CG
C01 3.819 2.191 4.465 2.394 3.929 2.202 2.131 2.349 21.1 0.56 59.3 CG
C03 3.978 2.273 4.736 2.587 4.216 2.418 2.141 2.351 21 0.56 64.3 CG
C06 3.673 2.126 4.472 2.418 4.027 2.163 2.103 2.322 22.7 0.56 48.7 CG
C07 3.676 2.198 4.45 2.46 3.868 2.243 2.136 2.353 20.9 0.56 63 CG
95
C08 3.892 2.198 4.659 2.507 4.199 2.339 2.187 2.375 19.6 0.56 62.7 CG
C11 3.937 2.309 4.486 2.482 3.956 2.305 2.155 2.365 20.2 0.56 67.7 CG
C12 3.739 2.091 4.417 2.389 3.865 2.235 2.069 2.315 23.1 0.56 69.3 CG
C13b 4.353 2.420 4.921 2.632 4.523 2.517 2.241 2.424 16.7 0.56 48.3 CG
C14a 4.666 2.559 5.141 2.717 4.806 2.591 2.265 2.440 15.8 0.56 55 CG
C14b 4.200 2.408 4.79 2.614 4.32 2.454 2.212 2.395 18.4 0.56 63 CG
C19a 3.285 2.024 4.536 2.473 4.018 2.341 2.073 2.303 23.8 0.56 70 CG
C20 3.813 2.259 4.859 2.644 4.675 2.622 2.343 2.462 14.5 0.56 74 CG
C21 3.978 2.334 4.653 2.557 4.206 2.419 2.190 2.387 18.9 0.56 62 CG
C22 4.116 2.395 4.705 2.572 4.25 2.443 2.219 2.411 17.5 0.56 75 CG
C23 3.803 2.240 4.376 2.425 3.846 2.257 2.117 2.346 21.3 0.56 76.1 CG
C24 4.247 2.466 5.043 2.711 4.67 2.579 2.228 2.411 17.5 0.56 50.6 CG
C25a 3.129 1.898 4.183 2.285 3.744 2.156 2.086 2.306 23.6 0.56 68 CG
C25b 3.096 1.890 4.239 2.326 3.802 2.231 2.125 2.341 21.6 0.56 51 CG
C26 4.036 2.360 4.91 2.676 4.565 2.567 2.269 2.421 16.9 0.56 64 CG
COU13 5.756 3.045 6.001 3.117 5.886 3.089 2.579 2.633 4.5 0.56 84.1 CG
COU14 4.930 2.730 5.347 2.863 5.027 2.772 2.400 2.520 11.1 0.56 79.3 CG
D02 4.004 2.292 4.758 2.545 4.391 2.425 2.212 2.400 18.1 0.56 65.7 CG
D04 4.399 2.384 4.979 2.676 4.603 2.578 2.241 2.424 16.7 0.56 77.7 CG
D07 5.004 2.733 5.47 2.927 5.217 2.858 2.429 2.544 9.7 0.56 69 CG
D09 5.223 2.844 5.5 2.948 5.248 2.867 2.450 2.546 9.6 0.56 64.7 CG
D10 4.680 2.598 5.26 2.833 5.062 2.791 2.441 2.546 9.6 0.56 81.3 CG
96
D11 4.449 2.538 5.002 2.725 4.653 2.566 2.250 2.409 17.6 0.56 81.7 CG
D12 5.044 2.771 5.432 2.904 5.13 2.82 2.386 2.517 11.3 0.56 85.3 CG
D13 4.708 2.617 5.183 2.776 4.844 2.682 2.355 2.491 12.8 0.56 70 CG
D15 5.019 2.695 5.446 2.877 5.184 2.811 2.382 2.508 11.8 0.56 65.8 CG
D16 5.677 3.003 5.972 3.113 5.865 3.095 2.584 2.636 4.3 0.56 74.3 CG
D17 4.209 2.360 4.817 2.614 4.462 2.518 2.329 2.459 14.7 0.56 71.3 CG
D18 5.590 3.014 5.861 3.095 5.69 3.072 2.568 2.626 4.9 0.56 71.3 CG
D20 5.220 2.861 5.606 2.993 5.335 2.918 2.494 2.568 8.3 0.56 62.3 CG
D21 4.682 2.630 5.184 2.818 4.802 2.702 2.362 2.479 13.5 0.56 81.3 CG
D22 3.791 2.146 4.557 2.487 4.134 2.366 2.219 2.380 19.3 0.56 82 CG
D23 5.668 3.000 5.931 3.103 5.813 3.1 2.570 2.640 4.1 0.56 52 CG
F01 3.509 2.169 4.52 2.486 4.25 2.446 2.260 2.431 16.3 0.56 60 CG
F02 4.400 2.460 4.942 2.648 4.648 2.568 2.309 2.462 14.5 0.56 62 CG
F03 3.801 2.153 4.614 2.463 4.396 2.433 2.266 2.430 16.4 0.56 60.7 CG
F04 3.976 2.281 4.892 2.636 4.684 2.605 2.346 2.486 13.1 0.56 70 CG
F05 4.762 2.699 5.435 2.896 5.247 2.857 2.455 2.549 9.4 0.56 60.7 CG
F06 4.035 2.405 4.818 2.653 4.552 2.606 2.341 2.483 13.3 0.56 42.1 CG
F07 4.749 2.638 5.285 2.818 5.013 2.757 2.405 2.529 10.6 0.56 82.3 CG
F08 4.662 2.611 5.226 2.793 4.912 2.725 2.417 2.530 10.5 0.56 67.7 CG
F09 4.762 2.625 5.274 2.809 4.979 2.739 2.437 2.532 10.4 0.56 58.3 CG
F10 4.252 2.331 4.876 2.606 4.631 2.59 2.332 2.488 13 0.56 48.3 CG
F11 5.504 2.972 5.877 3.077 5.798 3.095 2.556 2.643 3.9 0.56 50.1 CG
97
F12 3.924 2.255 4.743 2.53 4.487 2.506 2.356 2.481 13.4 0.56 52 CG
FJ06 4.170 2.383 4.958 2.674 4.65 2.587 2.359 2.477 13.6 0.56 79.7 CG
FJ07 4.234 2.410 4.722 2.549 4.339 2.455 2.300 2.462 14.5 0.56 61 CG
FJ09 3.656 2.138 4.338 2.347 3.917 2.253 2.190 2.387 18.9 0.56 68 CG
FJ12 3.958 2.232 4.492 2.381 4.063 2.274 2.279 2.438 15.9 0.56 80 CG
FJ13 5.070 2.760 5.537 2.928 5.291 2.871 2.482 2.566 8.4 0.56 57 CG
FJ16 4.017 2.247 4.632 2.481 4.243 2.353 2.176 2.363 20.3 0.56 60.5 CG
FJ17 4.733 2.612 5.263 2.796 5.011 2.711 2.358 2.488 13 0.56 55.7 CG
O12 4.012 2.300 4.658 2.523 4.222 2.402 2.241 2.414 17.3 0.56 73 CG
O74 3.480 2.007 4.319 2.32 3.843 2.201 2.144 2.353 20.9 0.56 81 CG
RR01 4.550 2.536 5.168 2.75 4.831 2.655 2.363 2.491 12.8 0.56 72.7 CG
RR05 5.078 2.749 5.48 2.915 5.224 2.843 2.411 2.527 10.7 0.56 50.8 CG
RR06 4.168 2.337 4.881 2.559 4.658 2.547 2.367 2.505 12 0.56 75.7 CG
RR07A 4.887 2.692 5.328 2.831 5.031 2.773 2.473 2.566 8.4 0.56 63.7 CG
RR07B 4.756 2.647 5.317 2.842 5.048 2.773 2.417 2.525 10.8 0.56 53.8 CG
RR07C 5.181 2.795 5.534 2.926 5.276 2.857 2.430 2.539 10 0.56 72 CG
98
A.7 Lower Cretaceous Limestone Data Set
Table 26: Lower Cretaceous limestone data set (FOURNIER et al., 2014): different kind of clean limestone textures.
Dry condition Sw condition Dry condition Dry Sw

Vp Vs Vp Vs Vp Vs bulk bulk Helium
Sample (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) (km/s) density density porosity Texture
5 5 20 20 40 40 (ρ) (ρ) (%)
MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa (g/cm³) (g/cm³)
An.B 5.666 3.023 5.863 3.035 5.746 3.065 2.629 2.659 3 G
An.C 5.793 3.019 5.969 3.073 5.955 3.121 2.588 2.633 4.5 G
An.D 4.93 2.746 5.256 2.772 5.226 2.860 2.447 2.544 9.7 G
An.E 5.945 3.163 6.010 3.176 6.052 3.243 2.537 2.601 6.4 G
An.H 5.267 2.875 5.654 2.905 5.786 2.991 2.512 2.585 7.3 G
An.P 4.529 2.555 4.811 2.559 4.773 2.659 2.323 2.465 14.3 G
An.R 3.465 2.061 4.066 2.161 4.016 2.305 2.217 2.399 18.2 G
An.U 3.921 2.276 4.287 2.311 4.234 2.426 2.225 2.404 17.9 G
An.V 4.062 2.387 4.586 2.444 4.537 2.570 2.350 2.483 13.3 G
An.W 3.958 2.337 4.331 2.324 4.260 2.439 2.279 2.438 15.9 G
An.X 3.78 2.196 4.165 2.209 4.131 2.333 2.182 2.377 19.5 G
F_C_1 5.008 2.74 5.170 2.725 5.186 2.819 2.363 2.491 12.8 G
F_C_4 3.722 2.249 4.240 2.286 4.323 2.462 2.147 2.354 20.8 G
99
F_C_6 5.105 2.814 5.302 2.810 5.263 2.883 2.447 2.544 9.7 G
F_C_8 3.978 2.273 4.480 2.370 4.547 2.532 2.244 2.416 17.2 G
F_P_1 6.285 3.172 6.375 3.226 6.357 3.249 2.694 2.700 0.6 G
F_P_2 6.189 3.382 6.354 3.202 6.329 3.245 2.694 2.700 0.6 G
F_P_3 6.267 3.218 6.373 3.267 6.393 3.297 2.680 2.691 1.1 G
F_P_4 6.269 3.162 6.361 3.197 6.354 3.206 2.696 2.701 0.5 G
F_P_5 6.148 3.083 6.262 3.171 6.306 3.209 2.672 2.686 1.4 G
F_P_6 6.171 3.353 6.359 3.373 6.188 3.382 2.688 2.696 0.8 G
F_P_7 6.243 3.178 6.361 3.227 6.331 3.251 2.694 2.700 0.6 G
F_RF_1 5.789 3.05 5.836 3.039 5.902 3.108 2.472 2.560 8.8 G
F_RF_2 4.867 2.641 5.064 2.623 5.129 2.719 2.382 2.503 12.1 G
F_RF_4 5.436 2.928 5.654 2.976 5.674 3.041 2.539 2.602 6.3 G
F_RF_5 5.273 2.847 5.419 2.847 5.412 2.920 2.474 2.561 8.7 G
F_RF_7 5.494 2.958 5.588 2.943 5.563 2.998 2.507 2.582 7.5 G
F_RF_7FR 6.02 3.142 6.111 3.151 6.230 3.220 2.526 2.594 6.8 G
F_S01_10 5.44 3.004 5.524 2.967 5.559 3.052 2.401 2.515 11.4 G
F_S01_2A 5.545 2.979 5.683 2.968 5.665 3.024 2.520 2.590 7 G
F_S01_2B 6.311 3.167 6.370 3.219 6.355 3.243 2.688 2.696 0.8 G
FS2_10 4.72 2.641 5.302 2.807 5.540 2.975 2.420 2.527 10.7 G
FS2_12B 4.059 2.313 4.417 2.373 4.473 2.536 2.193 2.383 19.1 G
FS2_19 6.22 3.145 6.319 3.194 6.287 3.214 2.680 2.691 1.1 G
100
FS2_20 6.051 3.019 6.184 3.150 6.238 3.219 2.659 2.678 1.9 G
FS2_21 6.085 3.152 6.227 3.186 6.169 3.205 2.675 2.688 1.3 G
J_2 4.223 2.47 4.537 2.450 4.549 2.583 2.274 2.435 16.1 G
J_3 3.727 2.162 4.215 2.240 4.234 2.392 2.174 2.371 19.8 G
J_4 4.382 2.571 4.650 2.515 4.670 2.640 2.306 2.455 14.9 G
Lx.A 4.956 2.75 5.155 2.733 5.069 2.789 2.458 2.551 9.3 G
Lx.B 4.777 2.626 4.917 2.587 4.878 2.680 2.336 2.474 13.8 G
Mu.A 5.556 2.917 5.972 2.978 5.867 3.019 2.672 2.686 1.4 G
Ru.C 5.65 3.007 5.859 3.016 5.709 3.040 2.634 2.662 2.8 G
S10-58A 6.047 3.166 6.147 3.167 6.094 3.190 2.642 2.667 2.5 G
S10-58B 5.906 3.149 6.138 3.176 6.026 3.191 2.672 2.686 1.4 G
S11-61 5.587 3.001 5.945 3.025 5.670 3.047 2.672 2.686 1.4 G
S11-62 5.362 2.964 5.735 3.009 5.703 3.067 2.615 2.650 3.5 G
S1-36 5.552 2.992 5.763 2.998 5.593 3.023 2.623 2.655 3.2 G
S16B-71 5.876 3.109 6.164 3.149 5.967 3.169 2.686 2.695 0.9 G
S16B-73 5.358 2.938 5.613 2.953 5.637 3.030 2.561 2.616 5.5 G
S16B-74 4.949 2.731 5.512 2.866 5.566 2.967 2.523 2.592 6.9 G
S1B-48 5.557 2.995 6.001 3.052 5.769 3.080 2.677 2.689 1.2 G
S1B-53A 4.87 2.718 5.166 2.734 5.095 2.808 2.477 2.563 8.6 G
S4-22A 5.568 3.018 5.746 3.014 5.722 3.061 2.572 2.623 5.1 G
S4-22B 5.588 3.027 5.742 3.024 5.763 3.078 2.529 2.595 6.7 G
S4-25B 5.333 2.909 5.419 2.871 5.357 2.923 2.472 2.560 8.8 G
101
S4-26 4.46 2.537 4.688 2.504 4.757 2.643 2.203 2.390 18.7 G
S5-2 6.054 3.172 6.255 3.211 6.184 3.233 2.683 2.693 1 G
S5-6 5.626 3.074 5.971 3.115 5.835 3.147 2.659 2.678 1.9 G
S5-7 5.201 2.911 5.601 2.944 5.464 3.005 2.610 2.647 3.7 G
S7-12 5.9 3.143 6.034 3.138 5.972 3.164 2.626 2.657 3.1 G
S7-16 5.929 3.133 6.172 3.170 6.039 3.187 2.680 2.691 1.1 G
An.AA 5.372 2.922 5.594 2.924 5.485 2.964 2.580 2.628 4.8 P
An.AB 5.314 2.905 5.597 2.927 5.477 2.975 2.591 2.635 4.4 P
An.AC 4.767 2.677 5.008 2.651 4.925 2.730 2.436 2.537 10.1 P
An.AD 5.448 2.942 5.776 2.967 5.634 3.013 2.637 2.664 2.7 P
An.AE 5.145 2.842 5.357 2.818 5.245 2.870 2.523 2.592 6.9 P
An.F 5.295 2.876 5.503 2.888 5.432 2.954 2.499 2.577 7.8 P
An.G 5.763 3.138 5.836 3.125 5.948 3.210 2.447 2.544 9.7 P
An.I 5.069 2.795 5.302 2.786 5.340 2.888 2.363 2.491 12.8 P
An.Q 3.418 1.907 3.756 1.892 3.516 1.960 2.203 2.390 18.7 P
An.S 3.608 2.238 4.409 2.368 4.423 2.506 2.304 2.454 15 P
An.Y 4.644 2.584 4.897 2.593 4.782 2.674 2.420 2.527 10.7 P
An.Z 5.559 3.002 5.958 3.022 5.652 3.034 2.675 2.688 1.3 P
Cl.B 5.166 2.844 5.290 2.800 5.229 2.865 2.428 2.532 10.4 P
F_C_7 4.723 2.626 4.865 2.582 4.827 2.679 2.293 2.447 15.4 P
F_C_9 4.863 2.686 5.157 2.734 5.181 2.835 2.412 2.522 11 P
F_S01_3A 4.867 2.681 5.073 2.683 5.063 2.773 2.404 2.517 11.3 P
102
F_S01_3B 5.453 2.938 5.551 2.919 5.528 2.980 2.488 2.570 8.2 P
F_S01_4B 6.23 3.13 6.339 3.191 6.341 3.219 2.683 2.693 1 P
F_S01_5 6.097 3.215 6.317 3.211 6.252 3.233 2.694 2.700 0.6 P
F_S01_9B 3.886 2.263 4.295 2.308 4.380 2.476 2.231 2.407 17.7 P
Fj.C 6.401 3.251 6.450 3.277 6.443 3.290 2.699 2.703 0.4 P
Fj.D 6.342 3.243 6.461 3.291 6.430 3.310 2.702 2.705 0.3 P
Fj.G 5.918 2.875 6.272 2.872 5.972 2.884 2.710 2.710 0 P
FS2_13 4.595 2.567 4.693 2.503 4.677 2.620 2.231 2.407 17.7 P
FS2_15 4.648 2.514 4.853 2.489 4.721 2.553 2.415 2.524 10.9 P
FS2_18 4.586 2.552 4.956 2.602 4.969 2.715 2.415 2.524 10.9 P
FS2_3 6.075 3.09 6.182 3.177 6.184 3.210 2.661 2.679 1.8 P
FS2_4A 6.206 3.144 6.327 3.188 6.362 3.225 2.677 2.689 1.2 P
J_1 5.061 2.839 5.303 2.831 5.295 2.910 2.458 2.551 9.3 P
Lx.C 5.48 2.994 5.900 3.011 5.582 3.029 2.669 2.684 1.5 P
Lx.D 5.985 3.15 6.254 3.180 6.111 3.207 2.694 2.700 0.6 P
Lx.E 6.113 3.196 6.323 3.182 6.193 3.176 2.699 2.703 0.4 P
Lx.Mound 6.203 3.306 6.441 3.221 6.322 3.241 2.707 2.708 0.1 P
Lx.mound2 6.159 3.35 6.408 3.399 6.224 3.188 2.694 2.700 0.6 P
Ru.A 5.802 3.08 5.985 3.085 5.855 3.103 2.650 2.672 2.2 P
S11-63A 5.159 2.838 5.585 2.902 5.533 2.990 2.604 2.643 3.9 P
S11-63B 5.206 2.884 5.618 2.934 5.514 3.001 2.618 2.652 3.4 P
S11-64 5.74 3.081 5.969 3.110 5.896 3.142 2.642 2.667 2.5 P
103
S13-11 5.796 3.098 5.997 3.111 5.845 3.132 2.656 2.676 2 P
S1-35 4.643 2.609 4.776 2.553 4.688 2.634 2.328 2.469 14.1 P
S1-39 4.504 2.56 4.655 2.497 4.553 2.582 2.309 2.457 14.8 P
S16-68 6.443 3.248 6.491 3.283 6.473 3.290 2.705 2.707 0.2 P
S16B-69 6.258 3.185 6.387 3.237 6.312 3.255 2.699 2.703 0.4 P
S16B-72 5.813 3.139 5.954 3.153 5.939 3.200 2.594 2.636 4.3 P
S16B-77 5.559 3.043 5.738 3.045 5.734 3.099 2.572 2.623 5.1 P
S1B-51 5.457 2.966 5.549 2.932 5.501 2.980 2.499 2.577 7.8 P
S4-18 5.147 2.832 5.260 2.796 5.189 2.859 2.442 2.541 9.9 P
S4-19 5.165 2.838 5.300 2.806 5.223 2.867 2.450 2.546 9.6 P
S4-23 4.266 2.475 4.561 2.430 4.489 2.536 2.285 2.442 15.7 P
S4-28 3.971 2.284 4.091 2.180 3.980 2.291 2.117 2.336 21.9 P
S7-13 5.633 3.049 5.727 3.030 5.656 3.069 2.558 2.614 5.6 P
S7-17 6.373 3.243 6.433 3.270 6.409 3.285 2.696 2.701 0.5 P
Si.A 5.875 3.093 6.055 3.125 6.072 3.170 2.618 2.652 3.4 P
Si.C 5.97 3.087 6.202 3.097 5.995 3.112 2.694 2.700 0.6 P
An.AF 5.488 3.01 5.678 3.021 5.656 3.086 2.518 2.589 7.1 R
An.AG 5.173 2.844 5.400 2.871 5.397 2.944 2.488 2.570 8.2 R
An.J 4.647 2.574 5.020 2.647 5.021 2.748 2.371 2.496 12.5 R
An.K 4.364 2.34 4.671 2.473 4.739 2.626 2.255 2.423 16.8 R
A 3.548 2.056 4.099 2.166 4.098 2.329 2.117 2.336 21.9 R
An.O 4.316 2.427 4.880 2.573 4.998 2.718 2.333 2.472 13.9 R
104
Cl.C 5.562 2.972 5.681 2.992 5.715 3.044 2.496 2.575 7.9 R
F_C_8FR 6.215 3.278 6.375 3.326 6.451 3.375 2.648 2.671 2.3 R
F_R1_1 6.199 3.39 6.345 3.267 6.283 3.225 2.688 2.696 0.8 R
F_R1_2 5.268 2.711 5.434 2.769 5.579 2.886 2.426 2.530 10.5 R
F_R1_4 5.993 3.034 6.167 3.129 6.214 3.183 2.661 2.679 1.8 R
F_R1_5 6.242 3.128 6.305 3.176 6.321 3.198 2.683 2.693 1 R
F_R1_6 6.032 3.037 6.195 3.124 6.203 3.171 2.667 2.683 1.6 R
F_R1_7 6.121 3.188 6.282 3.225 6.301 3.254 2.675 2.688 1.3 R
F_R1_8 6.093 3.078 6.205 3.137 6.274 3.187 2.650 2.672 2.2 R
F_R1_9 6.193 3.119 6.314 3.174 6.313 3.206 2.677 2.689 1.2 R
F_R2_1 4.728 2.657 5.140 2.724 5.219 2.862 2.491 2.571 8.1 R
F_RF_6 5.753 3 5.881 3.026 5.833 3.074 2.602 2.642 4 R
Fj.B 5.753 3 5.915 3.046 5.965 3.110 2.547 2.607 6 R
FS2_16 5.074 2.731 5.209 2.720 5.172 2.809 2.415 2.524 10.9 R
FS2_9 4.7 2.643 4.974 2.641 4.978 2.745 2.369 2.495 12.6 R
J_10 4.068 2.353 4.664 2.466 4.804 2.623 2.222 2.402 18 R
J_11 5.49 2.969 5.715 2.994 5.781 3.064 2.526 2.594 6.8 R
J_6 5.952 3.133 6.091 3.154 6.139 3.196 2.621 2.654 3.3 R
J_7 6.189 3.376 6.482 3.539 6.448 3.250 2.686 2.695 0.9 R
J_9 5.114 2.801 5.330 2.806 5.320 2.888 2.450 2.546 9.6 R
Mu.B 5.854 3.089 6.118 3.171 6.102 3.215 2.648 2.671 2.3 R
Mu.C 5.694 3.062 6.027 3.146 6.111 3.221 2.599 2.640 4.1 R
105
S1-34 4.433 2.539 4.829 2.576 4.906 2.706 2.309 2.457 14.8 R
S1-37A 4.274 2.403 4.496 2.405 4.500 2.538 2.171 2.370 19.9 R
S1-38 5.27 2.918 5.604 2.944 5.510 2.995 2.585 2.631 4.6 R
S1-40 4.948 2.746 4.964 2.655 5.028 2.761 2.241 2.414 17.3 R
S1-41 5 2.772 5.060 2.720 5.030 2.802 2.342 2.477 13.6 R
S1-42 4.956 2.785 5.188 2.781 5.159 2.865 2.434 2.536 10.2 R
S1-44 4.975 2.728 5.101 2.706 5.029 2.774 2.417 2.525 10.8 R
S16B-75 5.431 2.987 5.758 3.037 5.738 3.098 2.596 2.638 4.2 R
S16B-76 4.493 2.603 5.218 2.770 5.386 2.936 2.491 2.571 8.1 R
S16B-78 5.534 2.955 5.821 2.991 5.787 3.063 2.623 2.655 3.2 R
S16B-79 4.083 2.379 4.735 2.503 4.909 2.703 2.401 2.515 11.4 R
S1B-53B 5.521 2.997 5.669 2.996 5.637 3.051 2.556 2.613 5.7 R
S1B-54 5.686 3.053 5.957 3.106 5.961 3.151 2.621 2.654 3.3 R
S4-20 5.77 3.082 6.041 3.122 5.948 3.158 2.664 2.681 1.7 R
S4-21 5.209 2.865 5.514 2.901 5.541 2.987 2.499 2.577 7.8 R
S4-25A 5.842 3.095 6.095 3.131 5.990 3.160 2.669 2.684 1.5 R
S4-27 4.949 2.709 5.001 2.654 5.063 2.742 2.244 2.416 17.2 R
S4-29 5.942 3.123 6.194 3.170 6.089 3.189 2.680 2.691 1.1 R
S4-31 5.837 3.064 5.931 3.061 6.007 3.135 2.477 2.563 8.6 R
S4-33 4.804 2.705 5.059 2.717 5.127 2.844 2.333 2.472 13.9 R
S5-4 5.199 2.873 5.401 2.863 5.364 2.935 2.510 2.583 7.4 R
S6-10 5.424 2.9 5.654 2.933 5.845 3.016 2.518 2.589 7.1 R
106
S6B-8 5.677 3.166 5.727 3.127 5.811 3.212 2.426 2.530 10.5 R
An.A 6.131 3.037 6.314 3.083 6.313 3.114 2.702 2.705 0.3 WF
An.T 5.203 2.848 5.507 2.877 5.432 2.936 2.558 2.614 5.6 WF
F_C_2 5.134 2.866 5.308 2.806 5.391 2.905 2.363 2.491 12.8 WF
F_C_3 5.51 2.957 5.574 2.931 5.702 3.021 2.382 2.503 12.1 WF
F_C_4_FR 5.131 2.81 5.323 2.814 5.325 2.893 2.463 2.554 9.1 WF
F_C_5 5.526 2.964 5.673 2.953 5.649 3.016 2.491 2.571 8.1 WF
F_RF_3 5.636 2.996 5.870 3.057 5.940 3.121 2.561 2.616 5.5 WF
F_S01_2F 6.253 3.137 6.307 3.185 6.316 3.227 2.672 2.686 1.4 WF
F_S01_9A 5.736 3.047 5.823 3.050 5.846 3.098 2.531 2.597 6.6 WF
FS2_11 5.399 2.852 5.522 2.863 5.514 2.928 2.510 2.583 7.4 WF
FS2_14 5.553 3.029 5.626 2.993 5.698 3.078 2.415 2.524 10.9 WF
FS2_17 5.526 2.855 5.454 2.857 5.462 2.930 2.396 2.512 11.6 WF
FS2_2 6.181 3.108 6.275 3.133 6.280 3.178 2.680 2.691 1.1 WF
FS2_4B 6.284 3.221 6.379 3.235 6.353 3.253 2.696 2.701 0.5 WF
FS2_7 5.941 3.067 6.128 3.122 6.074 3.155 2.656 2.676 2 WF
J_5 6.189 3.104 6.346 3.184 6.350 3.231 2.675 2.688 1.3 WF
J_8 5.713 3.05 5.876 3.078 5.897 3.150 2.564 2.618 5.4 WF
NB-24 6.198 3.183 6.356 3.228 6.275 3.246 2.696 2.701 0.5 WF
S10-55 6.347 3.222 6.430 3.293 6.411 3.310 2.694 2.700 0.6 WF
S10-56 6.131 3.216 6.268 3.248 6.245 3.273 2.672 2.686 1.4 WF
S11-60A 6.346 3.256 6.461 3.297 6.466 3.316 2.696 2.701 0.5 WF
107
S1-43 6.133 3.202 6.320 3.234 6.198 3.252 2.694 2.700 0.6 WF
S1-45 6.25 3.23 6.334 3.251 6.302 3.267 2.683 2.693 1 WF
S1-46 6.003 3.193 6.215 3.232 6.164 3.260 2.667 2.683 1.6 WF
S4-32 5.829 3.083 6.108 3.159 6.142 3.211 2.648 2.671 2.3 WF
S5-1 5.473 3.014 5.846 3.039 5.670 3.080 2.650 2.672 2.2 WF
S5-5 5.247 2.903 5.775 3.014 5.778 3.100 2.629 2.659 3 WF
S7-14 5.426 2.92 5.867 3.017 5.822 3.119 2.659 2.678 1.9 WF
108
109
APPENDIX B -- Triaxial Measurements
This Appendix-chapter treats the triaxial measurement approaches applied in this

work to evaluate Albian carbonate samples. As summary, ultrasonic P- and S-wave
velocities are measured in the room-dried samples at effective pressures (0 - 10 MPa)
in triaxial tests, using one P-wave (1.3 MHz) and two independent orthogonally
polarized S-wave (900 KHz) piezoelectric transducers simultaneously via the pulse
transmission technique. The axial stress is calculated using load cell measurements
and the sample initial diameter (measured with a caliper). The axial deflection is
measured by LVDTs (Linear Variable Differential Transformers). The confining
pressure is measured by pressure transducers, and the radial deflection
measurements are performed using a cantilever transducer. The volumetric reduction
of the core samples is evaluated by the axial and radial deflection values at the
effective pressure induced during the triaxial tests. The Albian carbonate core
samples have heterogeneities, such as vugs and microfractures, that cause
brittleness; therefore, we limited the effective pressures to 10 MPa for the dry
condition triaxial tests. See more details in sections below (Sections B.1 - B.3).
B.1 Triaxial and Ultrasonic Velocities Measurements
The experiments were performed using an advanced triaxial system that includes
a Rock Mechanics straining frame, and P and S-wave piezoelectric transducers (in
Rock Physics Laboratory at UENF/LENEP). Test methods were performed under the
international standards: ASTM D2845-08 (2008) and ASTM D7012-14 (2014). These
methods cover the determination of strength of cylindrical rock core specimens in a
undrained state under triaxial compression loading, providing data useful in
determining the strength of rock (ASTM D7012-14, 2014), and laboratory measurements
of the pulse velocities of compression and shear waves (P- and S-waves,
respectively), and the determination of ultrasonic elastic constants (that are calculated
from the measured wave velocities and the bulk density; e.g., bulk and shear moduli,
Appendix B - Triaxial Measurements 110
Young’s modulus of elasticity, Lamé’s constant, etc.) of an isotropic or slightly

anisotropic rock (ASTM D2845-08, 2008). The significance of measured ultrasonic wave
velocities likewise may not agree with seismic velocities, but offer good
approximations and the ultrasonic evaluation of rock properties is useful for
preliminary prediction of static properties, helpful in engineering design (ASTM
D2845-08, 2008). Rock strength is known to be a function of triaxial compression (axial
and confining pressures regime and approximately null pore pressure effect for
room-drained condition) test, commonly used to simulate the stress conditions under
which most underground rock masses exist (ASTM D7012-14, 2014).
B.2 Summary of the Apparatus
Fig. 23 summarizes the triaxial system apparatus (Rock Physics Laboratory at

UENF/LENEP). Data Acquisition Station (Fig. 23 - A) keeps the control of hydraulic
pumps of pressurization system, data acquisition instruments and logging procedures
at 20 Hz sampling rate (a sampling rate of 20 times per second). The loading device
is represented by a piston with sufficient capacity to apply a load at a rate conforming
to the requirement of test. Two steel platens are used to transmit the axial load to the
ends of the rock specimen. The triaxial apparatus consist of a chamber in which the
specimen may be subjected to a constant lateral fluid pressure (confining pressure)
and the required axial load (Fig. 23 - B). There is a flexible membrane that encloses
the specimen and extends over the platens to prevent penetration by the confining
fluid, that is denominate “viton” (a sleeve of synthetic rubber), and adequate for room
(case performed in this work) or high temperature tests. The triaxial system is
configured to support specimen measuring 1.5” [38.1 mm] in diameter by ~2” [50.8
mm] in length. Axial load and confining pressure are controlled independently using
the Data Acquisition Station, and they are kept approximately equals during
hydrostatic tests. The axial deflection of specimen is measured by LVDTs (Linear
Variable Differential Transformers), and the radial deflection measurements are
performed using a cantilever transducer. The axial stress is calculated using load cell
measurements and the sample initial diameter (measured with a caliper).
Figure 23: General view of Triaxial Rock Physics laboratory apparatus (LENEP/UENF).
(A) Computer as the main unit of control. (B) Frontal view of the triaxial cell system.
(C) Scheme of the direct pulse transmission method adopted for pulse-travel time
determination. (D) Out-chamber view of acoustic transducers under contact with the
core sample.
Ultrasonic travel-time measurements depend of a typical apparatus composed by

a pulse generator unit (transducer pulser - P-S1-S2 signal input), three pairs of
piezoelectric transducers (transmitter-receiver): one P-wave (1.3 MHz) and two
independent orthogonally polarized S-wave (900 KHz) at each vertical (Z-axis,
coupled in steel platens) and lateral (X and Y-axes) positions, and a oscilloscope to
detect the signal output. Piezoelectric transducers converts electrical pulses from
pulser unit into mechanical pulses (transmitter), while the receiver works inversely
(i.e., converts mechanical pulses into electrical pulses that can be monitored using a
oscilloscope). In this study, the pulse transmission technique was applied to measure
P-S1-S2 waves that through the specimen in length. A coupling thin layer of lead foil
was used between the platens and axial faces of specimen (see Fig. 23 - C and D).
B.3 Data Procedure
The data procedure was divided in two concomitant phases during triaxial tests, as
described in subsections below.
B.3.1 Determination of pulse-travel time
At first, the zero time of circuit including both transducers was evaluated for vertical
P-S1-S2 waves. The platens transmitter and receiver were placed in direct contact with
each other (face-to-face mode) aiming to measure the delay travel times of P-S1-S2
waves directly. The measured zero time remains constant for a given rock stress level if
the circuit characteristics do not change, and it will be used as correction factor for rock
specimen travel time evaluation (Fig. 24). The detection of first transmitted P-wave
arrival is relatively easy. However, the S1- and S2-waves arrivals may be obscured
by vibrations due to ringing of the transducers and reflections of the compression (P)
wave (ASTM D2845-08, 2008).
Calculate the propagation velocities of P- and S-waves (Vp and Vs , respectively)

(m/s) as follows:
Vp = L/Tp , (B.1)
Vs = L/Ts , (B.2)
Appendix B - Triaxial Measurements
113
Figure 24: Determination of zero time at face-to-face transducers for P, S1 and S2-wave forms (in a top-down view, respectively).
where:
L = pulse-travel distance (m) - e.g., length of specimen for vertical mode of

transmitter and receiver transducers,
Tp , Ts = effective pulse-travel time (measured time minus zero time correction) (s),
for P and S-waves, respectively. Vs generally is calculated as the mean value between
S1- and S2-waves pulse travel times.
Ultrasonic elastic constants can be calculated using Vp , Vs and density (ρ) (g/cm³)
of specimen, as:
ρ = m/v, (B.3)
where, m is the mass (g) and v the volume (cm³) of specimen. Bulk (K) and shear (µ)
moduli (Pa) are given by:
K = ρ(3Vp2 − 4Vs2 )/3, (B.4)
µ = ρVs2 , (B.5)
and, Poisson’s ratio (ϕ), Lamé’s constant (λ) (Pa) and Young’s modulus of elasticity (E)
(Pa) are calculated by:
ϕ = (Vp2 − 2Vs2 )/[2(Vp2 − Vs2 )], (B.6)
λ = ρ(Vp2 − 2Vs2 ), (B.7)
E = [ρVs2 (3Vp2 − 4Vs2 )]/(Vp2 − Vs2 ). (B.8)
See details about how to calculate ultrasonic elastic constants in Mavko et al. (1998).
B.3.2 Compressive strength in the test specimen
During triaxial compression test, some strength parameters are registered by the
time for axial, radial and volume properties of rock specimen, according to apparatus
described in Section B.2. The axial load and axial stress values are a function of
vertical loading in the specimen of 1.5” in diameter. The axial deflection (mm) is
monitored based on initial length of specimen at null pressure, and proportional axial
strain (m) is estimated as axial deformation per unit of the original length. In the
same way, radial deflection (mm) and radial strain (m) are monitored based on lateral
forces applied on the specimen, and deformation per unit of the original diameter (see
log-data parameters registered during the triaxial test in Fig. 25 at 20 Hz, and the
filtered log-data in Fig. 26 resampled using a rate of 1 sample per 5 seconds, aiming
to correct some spurious values and adequate logs for interpretation).
According to poroelasticity theory for dry rocks, the deformation of crystals is the
mechanical property of the smaller variations, though the rock pore space is sensitive
to the pressure effects and structural discontinuities, such as micropores, fractures,
and voids, that cause a volumetric deformation (JAEGER et al., 2007; FJAER et al., 2008).
Thus, the volume of specimen is evaluated in this work supposing the initial volume and
effect of compressive strength during triaxial test, using axial and radial deflections
to estimate pore effect parameters as: bulk volume (mm³), pore volume (mm³) and
porosity (%) reduction, and grain volume (mm³) of specimen (Fig. 27).
Figure 25: Full data set (rate of 20 samples per second) - triaxial test of Albian core
sample W1-Im10.
Figure 26: Filtered data set (rate of 1 sample per 5 seconds) - triaxial test of Albian
core sample W1-Im10.
Appendix B - Triaxial Measurements
Figure 27: Filtered data set (rate of 1 sample per 5 seconds) - estimation of pore volume reduction - triaxial test of Albian core sample
W1-Im10.
118
119
APPENDIX C -- Estimate of elastic properties

including pore geometry effect
on carbonates: a case study of
Glorieta-paddock reservoir at
Vacuum field, New Mexico
This Appendix-chapter shows a literature review of differences between

siliciclastic and carbonate pore systems, and Kuster-Toksöz inclusion (or effective
elastic media theory) model, and Gassmann’s theory applied in a theoretical case
study of Glorieta-paddock reservoir at Vacuum field, New Mexico (LIMA NETO;
MISSAGIA, 2012).
Appendix C - Estimate of elastic properties including pore geometry effect 120
Revista Brasileira de Geofı́sica (2012) 30(4): 1-13

© 2012 Sociedade Brasileira de Geofı́sica
ISSN 0102-261X
www.scielo.br/rbg
ESTIMATE OF ELASTIC PROPERTIES INCLUDING PORE GEOMETRY EFFECT ON CARBONATES:

A CASE STUDY OF GLORIETA-PADDOCK RESERVOIR AT VACUUM FIELD, NEW MEXICO
Irineu de A. Lima Neto and Roseane M. Misságia

Recebido em 21 julho, 2011 / Aceito em 30 janeiro, 2012
Received on July 21, 2011 / Accepted on January 30, 2012
ABSTRACT. In general, carbonate rocks are composed by heterogeneous pore systems. Pore heterogeneity can be expressed by a combination of pore geometries,
correlating the changing effect of the elastic parameters to 4-D seismic sensitivity. Based on the Kuster-Toks öz model, this work characterizes and classifies different
degrees of porosity according to the following types: 1) round or spherical pores – moldic, vuggy or intraframe porosity; 2) interparticle pores - intercrystalline porosity;
and 3) microporosity or microcracks – fractures and channel occurrences. The methodology was applied to the Glorieta-Paddock carbonate reservoir at Vacuum field,
New Mexico, to estimate bulk and shear moduli, rock density and seismic velocities under dry conditions and saturated by homogeneous fluid. The results indicated
the greater potential of the Upper Paddock Formation to store fluids and the higher seismic sensitivity, due to the geometry of the interparticle porosity and the presence
of microfractures in limestone, which results in decreased rock rigidity and increased seismic sensitivity to saturation by fluids. However, Lower Paddock and Glorieta
formations, consisting of dolomites with spherical interparticle porosity, showed a reduced seismic sensitivity due to increased rock rigidity. Under the conditions of this
study, the methodology proposed by Kuster-Toksöz was more adequate to express the occurrences of seismic velocity anomalies compared to Gassmann’s model.
Keywords: pore geometry, carbonate reservoir, seismic sensitivity.
RESUMO. Rochas carbonáticas geralmente possuem um sistema de poros heterogêneo. A heterogeneidade de poros pode ser expressa por uma combinação de
geometrias porosas, correlacionando o efeito de mudanças nos parâmetros elásticos à sensibilidade sı́smica 4D. Este trabalho se baseia no modelo de Kuster-Toksöz
para caracterizar e classificar porosidades com possibilidades de variação entre os tipos: 1) poros arredondados ou esféricos – ocorrência de porosidade móldica,
vugular ou intrapartı́culas; 2) porosidade interpartı́culas – de caráter intercristalino; e 3) poros fraturados (“cracks”) ou microporosidades – ocorrência de microfraturas
ou microfissuras e canais. Com a aplicação da metodologia no reservatório carbonático Glorieta-Paddock, no campo de Vacuum – Novo México foi possı́vel estimar os
módulos de incompressibilidade e de cisalhamento, densidade e velocidades sı́smicas da rocha, sob condições drenada e saturada por fases homogêneas de fluidos.
Os resultados obtidos indicaram que a formação Paddock Superior tem maior potencial para armazenar fluidos, e maior sensibilidade sı́smica, atribuı́dos ao aspecto de
poros interpartı́culas sob influência de microfraturas no calcário, que se reflete em um menor valor de rigidez da rocha e potencializa a sensibilidade sı́smica à saturação
por fluidos. Entretanto, as formações Glorieta e Paddock Inferior, constituı́das por dolomitos com forma esférica de poros interpartı́culas, apresentaram uma redução
da sensibilidade sı́smica em virtude do incremento de rigidez da rocha. Pelas condições impostas neste estudo, é possı́vel vislumbrar que a metodologia proposta por
Kuster-Toksöz, quando comparada ao modelo de Gassmann, mostrou-se mais adequada para expressar a ocorrência de anomalias nas velocidades sı́smicas.
Palavras-chave: geometria de poros, reservatório carbonático, sensibilidade sı́smica.
Laboratório de Engenharia e Exploração de Petróleo (LENEP), Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense Darcy Ribeiro (UENF), Rod. Amaral Peixoto, km 163, s/n,
Imboacica, 27925-310 Macaé, RJ, Brasil. Phone: +55(22) 2765-6564 – E-mails: irineu@lenep.uenf.br; rose@lenep.uenf.br
2 ESTIMATE OF ELASTIC PROPERTIES INCLUDING PORE GEOMETRY EFFECT ON CARBONATES
INTRODUCTION veloped. Then, elastic modulus and density of carbonate rocks

Extensive studies of carbonate reservoir rocks have been ob- were estimated, simulating fluid saturation conditions, improv-
served recently, since they constitute the largest oil and gas re- ing the understanding of V P and VS ; and inversion of elastic
serves worldwide. Therefore, studies correlating the seismic re- parameters, important to reservoir characterization. Furthermore,
sponse of carbonate rock physical properties applying the time- the results of both models, Kuster-Toksöz and Gassmann theory,
lapse or 4D seismic techniques are important in reservoir charac- were compared.
terization and monitoring (Jack, 1997).
Carbonate reservoirs, in general, have heterogeneous pore METHODOLOGY
systems consisting of vugs, molds, channels and microfractures. Anselmetti & Eberli (1999), Kumar & Han (2005) and Xu & Payne
Different types of pores and porosity imply in several elastic (2009) demonstrated that carbonate rocks have basically three
moduli that impact seismic properties, shear (VS ) and compres- categories of pore types: 1) Rounded or spherical pores, repre-
sional wave (V P ) velocities and density (ρ). Furthermore, the senting the moldic, vug or intraparticle porosities; 2) intercrys-
properties of the fluids present in the pores also change seis- talline interparticle porosity and 3) fractured pores (cracks) or mi-
mic behavior. Thus, mineralogy, pore geometry, porosity, as well croporosity characterized by the occurrence of microfractures and
as saturation fluid properties, temperature and pressure, are im- channels. To develop rock physical models it is necessary: 1) to
portant factors that affect seismic velocity (Wang, 1997). Some characterize and classify pore geometry; 2) to define the multipore
theoretical models applied to siliciclastic rocks, for example, system for the Kuster-Toksöz model, in order to take into account
Biot-Gassmann (Biot, 1956) take into consideration only average pore geometry combinations; 3) to calculate V P and VS based
porosity of the rock matrix, because it implicitly assumes homo- on incompressibility (K ) and shear (µ) moduli, and density (ρ)
geneous pore distribution in the rock. However, in carbonates, it is for different fluid saturation conditions.
necessary to propose models that best represent the pore system
due to heterogeneities resulting from diagenesis. Kuster-Toksöz
VACUUM FIELD – GLORIETA-PADDOCK RESERVOIR
model (Kuster & Toksöz, 1974) takes into account the effect of
Figure 1 shows the geological map of the study site. The Vacuum
pore geometry, porosity and rocky matrix mineralogy, and all in-
clusions that contribute to the prediction of V P and VS . Berryman
field in New Mexico, discovered in 1929, has a sedimentary sec-
tion composed mainly of Paleozoic carbonates and evaporites,
(1995), Kumar & Han (2005), Wang et al. (2009), Xu & Payne
including the Permian dolomites of the Grayburg and San An-
(2009), Wang & Sun (2010) and Payne et al. (2010) used the
dres formations and the Glorieta and Paddock Formations, which
Kuster-Toksöz model and proposed methodologies aimed at its
define the Glorieta-Paddock carbonate reservoir (Acuna, 2000).
improvement.
Figure 2 shows the stratigraphic column of the Delaware Basin,
Acuna (2000) developed a 4D multicomponent seismic
where the Vacuum Field and the Permian provinces are located.
characterization of the Glorieta-Paddock carbonate reservoir, at
The Glorieta Formation is characterized by dolomitic sand-
Vacuum Field, New Mexico. One of the objectives of the study
stones naturally fractured, with porous isolated lenses. The Pad-
was to use the available data to quantify the effect of anisotropy
dock Formation is divided into low Lr and Upper units. The Up-
and anomalies observed in velocity dispersion of fluid saturated
per Paddock Formation is composed by dolomites with intercrys-
rocks, regarding the lithologies of interest: dolomite in Glorieta
talline and vug porosities and limestones with vug and moldic
formation; limestone in Upper Paddock formation; and, dolomite
porosities occurring at regular intervals, forming the primary
in Lower Paddock formation. Acuna (2000) concluded that the
production zone. The Lower Paddock Formation shows naturally
model developed according to the Gassmann theory (Gassmann,
fractured dolomites. Figure 3 shows rock samples of the Glorieta
1951) did not satisfactorily represent the anomalies observed in
and Paddock formations (Acuna, 2000). This study focuses on the
the Glorieta-Paddock carbonate reservoir due to its limitation to
formations of the Glorieta-Paddock carbonate reservoir.
represent the occurrence of microfractures in the Glorieta and
Paddock formations.
This study strategically proposes to use the Kuster-Toksöz Glorieta-Paddock Reservoir Data Selection
model to evaluate the Glorieta-Paddock reservoir, in order to Average elastic and petrophysical properties were estimated for
consider the effect of pore geometry and fluid inclusion. There- each reservoir-layer, using core samples from five wells located
fore, a strategy to classify the pores in clean carbonates was de- in the Chevron-Texaco concession area (Fig. 1-B). The following
Revista Brasileira de Geofı́sica, Vol. 30(4), 2012

LIMA NETO IA & MISSÁGIA RM 3
Figure 1 – Map showing Vacuum field and Permian provinces: (A) companies operating in Vacuum field;
(B) west unit in detail – study site in blue, Vacuum field – Glorieta, operated by Chevron-Texaco since
1992. Adapted from Acuna (2000) and Grammer et al. (2004).
Brazilian Journal of Geophysics, Vol. 30(4), 2012

Figure 2 – Stratigraphic column of the Delaware Basin, where the Vacuum field and the Permian provinces
are found. The Glorieta-Paddock reservoir study site is highlighted. Adapted from Acuna (2000).
Figure 3 – Rock core photos of the Glorieta-Paddock reservoir: (A) Shows the fractures in a core of the Lower Paddock
Dolomite; (B) dolomitic sand of the Lower Paddock Formation; (C) porous limestone (in blue) and permeability of the pro-
duction area in the Upper Paddock Formation; (D) dolomite of the Upper Paddock, showing low porosity and permeability,
characteristics of a not very good production area. Adapted from Acuna (2000).
formations were highlighted: Glorieta – dolomite, Upper Paddock Table 4 shows calcite and dolomite properties, the minerals most
– limestone and Lower Paddock – dolomite. Figure 4 shows the commonly found in carbonates; however, other minerals are also
ideal vertical petrophysical profiles for the average mineralogi- observed in the Glorieta and Paddock formations, justifying the
cal composition (Acuna, 2000), and Figure 5 shows the vertical average petrophysical values listed in Figure 4. The selected data
petrophysical profiles calculated according to Nur et al. (1995), will be used to implement the rock physics relationship with the
to characterize the framework for both dry and drained rocks. estimate of seismic velocity under fluid saturation.

Figure 4 – Elastic and petrophysical properties according to profile data of 5 wells (Acuna, 2000), highlighting the mineralogical averages of
Glorieta and Paddock formations: (A) mineral incompressibility modulus, (B) mineral shear modulus, (C) mineral density, and (D) porosity.
Figure 5 – Calculation of framework elastic properties (drained or dry rocks) for the Glorieta and Paddock formations,
according to Nur et al. (1995), based on the data profile of 5 wells (Acuna, 2000): (A) incompressibility modulus,
(B) shear modulus, and (C) density.
FORMATION OF CARBONATE VERSUS and derived particles, as well as particularities of the organism
SILICICLASTIC ROCKS microstructure (Moore, 1989).
The texture of the carbonates is dependent on the diage-
The formation of carbonate sedimentary rocks is influenced by netic process that generates different porosity types of carbon-
physical processes dominated by complex biological and diage- ate rocks (Moore, 1989) and are generally classified according
netic processes that do not occur in siliciclastic rocks. The gener- to two schemes: Folk (1959) and Dunham (1962). Rock poros-
ation of siliciclastic sediments is related to the intensity and type ity represents the volume fraction that is not occupied by solids,
of physical energy, such as winds, waves, direction and inten- an important parameter to estimate hydrocarbon storage capac-
sity of currents, which affect sediment texture on the depositional ity. Therefore, total porosity represents the volume of voids, con-
site (Folk, 1968). On the other hand, the generation of carbon- nected or not, while effective porosity corresponds to the volume
ate sediments is affected by the organism population dynamics of connected pores, controlling where fluid is allowed to flow.

Table 1 – Comparison between carbonate and siliciclastic sedimentary rocks. Adapted from Moore (1989).
Carbonate sedimentary rocks Siliciclastic sedimentary rocks
Higher occurrence in the tropics Climate, water depth are not limiting
Most marine Marine or non-marine
Standing structure bodies There is no analogous procedure
Sediment texture is controlled by growth and ultra-structure of Sediment texture reflects the hydraulic energy of sedimentation
the bodies. environment
Grain composition directly reflects deposition environment Grain composition reflects origin of sediment, climate and
tectonic of the source
Limestone shelves frequently consist of numerous stacked Clastic shelves generally show no cyclicity
sequences
Shelf is affected by sea level changes due to carbonate production Shelf evolution responds to sea level in a more complex manner
rate constant in the entire shelf due to source tectonics and climate
Often cemented in marine environment Rarely cemented in marine environment
Mud and grains may be formed by chemical precipitation Mud and grains are formed by the degradation of pre-existing
rocks
Susceptible to distortions in early diagenesis, porosity difficult Less susceptible to early diagenesis, predictable porosity related
to predict to depositional environment
More susceptible to diagenesis by burial, higher porosity on the Less susceptible to diagenesis by burial, porosities relative to
surface deeper layers
In sedimentary rocks, the porosity formed during deposition pro- physical-chemical processes. The basic differences between sili-
cess is called primary porosity, while porosity generated after ciclastic and carbonate rocks are summarized in Table 1.
the deposition process, caused by geochemical events such as
dissolution, is referred to as secondary porosity (Suguio, 1998; CHARACTERIZATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF
Chaparro, 2002). The occurrence of fractures is common in car- PORE GEOMETRY IN CARBONATES
bonate rocks in response to the tension generated by three main Carbonate texture is related to diagenetic processes, which in-
regimes: tectonics, geopressure and formation of caves by dis- duces the formation of different pore types in the carbonate rocks
solution, which can be good for the exploration of hydrocarbon (Moore, 1989). Usually, the texture of carbonates is classified
reserves due to porosity variation (Chaparro, 2002). according to the schemes proposed by Folk (1959) and Dunham
According to Moore (1989), the diagenesis in carbonates is (1962). In addition, Suguio (1998) also defines carbonate rock
affected by temperature and the chemical reactions occurring in porosities, such as:
the pore fluids, such as dissolved organic acids, carbon dioxide • interparticle porosity between sedimentary particles;
(C O2 ), hydrogen sulfide (H2 S), among other components re- • intraparticle porosity resulting from the voids within indi-
leased during mineral phase change, and thermal degradation of vidual crystals;
organic matter and hydrocarbon. Thus, carbonates are more sus- • microfractures or microcracks porosity results from frac-
ceptible to dissolution due to the high rate of chemical reactions tured surfaces, which is given by the percentage of open
during diagenesis, which changes drastically the resulting poros- fractures relative to the total rock volume;
ity. Under burial, the carbonates react to pressure more easily • channel porosity results from dissolution along the frac-
than siliciclastics, causing a porosity decrease with depth. Lower tures or other types of elongated pores;
rates of chemical reactions in the siliciclastics, are usually inher- • moldic or shaped porosity is defined by the voids formed
ent to unstable siliciclastic phases, such as feldspars, causing by selective removal, typically by dissolution of compo-
secondary porosity formation. According to Spadini & Marçal nents, such as shells and oolites;
(2005) anomalies in carbonate reservoirs can occur even under • vug porosity is caused by the dissolution of dolomite or
great burial pressure, thus maintaining good porosity levels by calcite crystals in the recrystallization process.

The Kuster-Toksöz model assumes pore geometry of carbon- model, according to:
4
ate rock beforehand. Thus, taking into consideration the defini-
3 µm K φ + K m K m + 43 µm
! "
KKT = , (1)
K m + 43 µm − K φ
tions proposed by Suguio (1998), an ideal classification of pore
type was adopted based on Kumar & Han (2005), Xu & Payne
(2009) and Wang & Sun (2010) in order to analyze the input data µφ ζm + µm (µm + ζm )
µK T = , (2)
of the Glorieta and Paddock Formations (Figs. 4 and 5). Basically, µm + ζm − µφ
where K m and µm are the incompressibility and shear moduli of
these authors suggest three classes for porosity volume in clean
carbonates, with possible variations among the types: 1) round
the mineral matrix, respectively. The empirical parameter ζm may
or spherical pores represent moldic, vug or intraparticle poros-
be calculated according to Berryman (1995):
ity; 2) intercrystalline, interparticle porosity; and 3) cracks or mi-
µm (9K m + 8µm )
croporosity formed by secondary processes generating microfrac- ζm = . (3)
6(K m + 2µm )
tures or microcracks and channels in low porosity carbonates. It
is assumed as reference, for carbonate rocks, the occurrence of Pore type and fluid saturation are expressed as inclusions in:
interparticle pores, either presenting rounded pores resulting in N
Kφ = φi (K i − K m )P mi ,
#
stiffer rocks, or with fractured microporosity resulting in less stiff (4)
i=1
rocks. The average pore heterogeneity shown in Figure 6 is ex-
pressed by the statistical distribution of pore shape coefficients. N
φi (µi − µm )Q mi .
#
The pore geometry coefficient is given by the ratio between the µφ = (5)
small and the great semi-axis, which is 1 for a perfect spherical i=1
geometry and tends to 0 (zero) for a more ellipsoidal geometry. According to Berryman (1995), and based on pore shape, the
Table 2 shows average pore geometry coefficient adopted for the parameters P mi and Q mi are estimated for each material phase
carbonate rocks of this study. i, inclusion of total N , in the pore volume φi . Then, the param-
eters K φ and µφ are rewritten to represent a system of multiple
Table 2 – Pore geometry coefficient adopted for pore geometries:
carbonates, according to Xu & Payne (2009). N N
Kφ f E φi (K i − K m )PEmi + f I φi (K i − K m )PImi
# #
Pore Pore geometry
i=1 i=1
composition coefficient (α)
N
(6)
Round 0.80 + fF φi (K i − K m )PFmi ,
#
Interparticle 0.15 i=1

Fractured 0.02 N N
µφ f E φi (µi − µm )Q mi
E + fI φi (µi − µm )Q mi
# #
I
i=1 i=1
Figure 7 shows in detail the variations caused by pore geom- (7)
N
etry in relation to pore volume. The crossplot V P − φ (porosity) + fF φi (µi − µm )Q mi
#
F ,
shows the Glorieta-Paddock data, calculated for drained rocks. A i=1
good correspondence with the lithological descriptions presented where f E , f I and f F are the fractions for pore types or shapes:
in Table 3 is observed. Kumar & Han (2005) emphasize that the spherical, interparticle and microfractures, respectively.
predominantly spherical pore type approaches Hashin-Shtrikman
lower limit. The interparticle pore geometry is regarded as refer- ESTIMATES OF SEISMIC VELOCITIES
ence in the study of carbonates, and may be affected by microfrac- Based on the calculation of K and µ moduli, combined with rock
tures or spherical inclusions in the pore volume. density (ρ), it is possible to estimate V P and VS , as obtained by
Mavko et al. (1998):
K + 43 µ
$
Kuster-Toksöz model: pore geometry combinations
To calculate V P and VS , Kuster & Toksöz (1974) derived ex- VP = , (8)
ρ
pressions under ultrasonic frequency conditions to estimate the %
VS =
incompressibility (K K T ) and shear (µ K T ) moduli. Berryman µ
. (9)
(1995) included pore geometry contribution in the Kuster-Toksöz ρ

Figure 6 – Illustration showing carbonate pore geometry. Reference for interparticle pores.
Adapted from Xu & Payne (2009) and Wang (1997).
Figure 7 – Diagram used to determine carbonate pore types. The red arrow indicates increasing
round pores; the purple arrow indicates increasing fractures and microporosity. The blue line is the
reference for interparticle pore (Kumar & Han (2005) and Xu & Payne (2009)). The G, U and L points
were calculated for drained rocks of Glorieta, Upper and Lower Paddock intervals, respectively. Note
the ideal porous type: (A) 80% round, (B) interparticle reference, and (C) 40% microfractures.
The fluid has zero shear modulus, therefore µ is the same for Incompressibility (K ) and shear (µ) moduli of carbonate
dry and fluid saturated rock, determined by laboratory tests or well rocks can be estimated and evaluated according to Kuster-Toksöz
profile analysis. On the other hand, K and ρ are influenced by model, Equations (1) and (2), or by Gassmann theory (1951):
saturating fluid for different phases, where: '2
K
1 − Kdr0y
&
ρ = ρ0 (1 − φ) + ρ f l φ , K Sat = K dr y + K dr y
, (11)
(10) φ 1−φ
K f l + K0 − 2 K0
is the relationship of mineral density (ρ0 ), fluid density (ρ f l ) and
µ Sat = µdr y , (12)
(φ); therefore, ρ f l dependent on fluid phases and their ratios.
Table 4 shows fluid parameters adopted and the properties of the where K Sat is the incompressibility modulus of saturated rock,
main minerals commonly found in carbonate rocks. The mean K 0 is the mineral incompressibility modulus of the matrix com-
values of the mineral properties used in this study (Table 4) are ponents, estimated by laboratory tests or well logs, K f l is the
the values of the characterization profile by Acuna (2000). fluid incompressibility modulus. Dry rock or framework incom-

Table 3 – Pore shape effect on data distribution of the wells with respect to reference
line. Interparticle: Glorieta formation, round; Upper Paddock, fractured; and Lower
Paddock, round.
Poreshape influence
Well Formation (interparticle reference)
A – round ; B – fractured
VGWU127 Glorieta 20% – A
Paddock Upper 10% – F
Lower 40% – A
WS-13 Glorieta 20% – A
Lower 40% – A
SR-9 Glorieta 40% – A
Lower 20% – A
Lower 20% – A
Lower 20% – A
pressibility modulus (K dr y ) and dry rock shear modulus (µdr y ) The formation of an effective fluid from different phases can be
may be obtained using the relationship proposed by Nur et al. estimated from the Voigt-Reuss-Hill average, using the estimated
(1995) for 0 ≤ φ ≤ φC , where, φC is rock critical porosity, fluid saturation properties, according to Batzle & Wang (1992) to
that is, the limiting porosity that a rock can have, since above this estimate the changes occurring in the reservoir with respect to
value the rock becomes loose sediments. temperature and pressure conditions. Xu & Payne (2009) sug-
gest a formula to replace fluids in carbonates, which uses the
Incompressibility of fluid-saturated rock Voigt-Reuss-Hill average to estimate the elastic modulus using
Fluid incompressibility modulus is calculated according to fluid the Kuster-Toksöz model and the Gassmann theory.
saturation model, and may be homogeneous or heterogeneous
for brine, oil and gas phases (Mavko et al., 1998). In this study, RESULTS
we considered homogeneous saturation for the ideal situations: The results obtained for V P and VS using the Glorieta-Paddock
100% brine, 100% oil and 100% gas, according to the properties data are presented and show the sensitivity of these velocities to
shown in Table 4. the imposed saturation conditions. In this study, the potential
response of each reservoir layer was evaluated under saturation
Table 4 – Elastic properties of minerals and fluids, according to Mavko et al.
conditions, followed by a discussion. As shown in Figures 8 to
(1998) and Walls & Dvorkin (2005).
12 and as initially suggested in the definition of the study site, the
K (G Pa) µ(G Pa) ρ(g/cc)
Upper Paddock Formation has a greater potential to predict the
Calcite 70.2 29 2.71 saturating fluid.
Minerals*
Dolomite 76.4 49.7 2.87 In Figure 8, the crossplot between the incompressibility
Brine 2.68 1.03 modulus of the rock saturated by fluid estimated by Kuster-Toksöz
Fluids** Oil 0.820 0.782 (K K T ) and for drained rock (K dr y ) shows the greater potential
Gas (Ethane) 0.135 0.341 of the Upper Paddock Formation to reflect changes in the satura-
*Mavko et al. (1998); **Walls & Dvorkin (2005). tion conditions. It should be noted that the drained and saturated

Figure 8 – Crossplot of incompressibility modulus of fluid saturated (K K T )

and drained (K dr y ) rocks according to Kuster-Toksöz model. Upper Paddock
cores are highlighted for displaying significant sensitivity to saturation.
Figure 9 – Crossplot K − φ of Kuster-Toksöz and Gassmann models for identical saturation situations,
to verify potential variation in the Glorieta-Paddock reservoir. Highlight shows Upper Paddock formation.
Figure 10 – Crossplot V P − φ for different saturation situations according to Kuster-Toksöz model

highlighting the Upper Paddock Formation.

Figure 11 – Crossplot V P − VS for different saturation situations according to Kuster-Toksöz

model highlighting the non-linear trend of carbonates, as shown by Castagna et al. (1993).
Figure 12 – Crossplot V P /VS − φ for different saturation and dry (drained) rocks according to Kuster-
Toksöz model highlighting the saturation changes of the Upper Paddock. It is possible to distinguish the
lithologies as stated by Castagna et al. (1993).
incompressibility moduli of Glorieta and Lower Paddock forma- to Gassmann theory. Such behavior was expected because the
tions remained practically unchanged. Figure 9 shows the cross- Kuster-Toksöz model takes into consideration pore geometry. It
plot K − φ for identical saturation conditions, in order to enable should also be highlighted that the Upper Paddock Formation
the investigation regarding the sensitivity of incompressibility has interparticle porosity affected by fracturing, which results in
modulus of the saturated rock (K ), estimated by Gassmann and micropores. The rock becomes less rigid and shows lower incom-
Kuster-Toksöz; and, potential variation in the Glorieta-Paddock pressibility values, thus reflecting increased seismic sensitivity.
reservoir. The Upper Paddock Formation has greater capacity to On the other hand, the opposite is observed for the Glorieta and
distinguish different fluid phases as a function of its porosity Lower Paddock formations with spherical interparticle pore geo-
types, and also, because it has lower incompressibility values. metries (Table 3); therefore, the rock is more rigid, incompress-
In addition, Figure 9 shows that the Kuster-Toksöz estimated ibility higher and seismic sensitivity lower. Applying the modulus
incompressibility has higher differentiation capacity compared estimated from the Kuster-Toksöz model, (V P ) was calculated for

the Upper Paddock Formation (Fig. 9), as shown in the cross- Upper Paddock to express variations between different satura-
plot V P − φ of Figure 10, demonstrating the elevated potential tion phases. Thus, the analysis of pore geometry impact on the
to distinct between saturation phases. results given by Kuster-Toksöz suggests that the physical mod-
Figure 11 shows the crossplot between V P and VS , for eling of carbonate rocks under the conditions imposed in this
drained and saturated rocks with different fluids, estimated by study resulted in an estimate of elastic modulus and density
Kuster-Toksöz. It is interesting to observe the non-linear trend that corroborates the theoretical understanding of V P and VS ;
of the curves, typical for carbonates, according to Castagna et al. and the inversion of elastic parameters, important to characterize
(1993) who suggest the influence of heterogeneity on pore geo- heterogeneous reservoirs.
metry. Differently, for siliciclastic rocks a linear trend is observed
due to the presence of predominantly homogeneous pores. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Figure 12 shows the crossplot V P /VS − φ according to Thanks are due to LENEP/UENF to the fundamental infrastructure
Kuster-Toksöz, for drained rocks and for each saturated fluid support.
phase, established in Table 4. According to Castagna et al. (1993),
this analysis is useful to distinguish areas where there is fluid REFERENCES
variation and different lithology. Hence, this case study shows
ACUNA C. 2000. 4D multicomponent seismic characterization of
the potential of Upper Paddock Formation to reflect saturation
Glorieta-Paddock carbonate reservoir at Vacuum field, New Mexico.
changes. To differentiate carbonate lithologies in drained situa- Master of Science (Geophysics) thesis, Colorado School of Mines.
tions, the variation occurs according to mineralogical composi-
ANSELMETTI FS & EBERLI GP. 1999. The velocity deviation log: A tool
tion, the average value for dolomite is 1.7 and for calcite 1.9. This
to predict pore type and permeability trends in carbonate drill holes from
confirms the expected correlation for Glorieta-Paddock reservoir
sonic and porosity or density logs. AAPG Bulletin, 83: 450–466.
in this interval, specifically the Upper Paddock Formation, lime-
stone; and Glorieta and Lower Paddock, dolomites; as a function BATZLE M & WANG Z. 1992. Seismic properties of pore fluids. Geo-
of mean elastic and petrophysical properties for the minerals that physics, 57: 1396–1408.
make up each layer, as shown in Figure 4. BERRYMAN JG. 1995. Mixture theories for rock properties. In Rock
Physics and Phase Relations: a Handbook of Physical Constants, ed.
T.J. Ahrens. Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, 205–228.
CONCLUSIONS
BIOT MA. 1956. Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid satu-
This case study implements a methodology to classify and ana- rated porous solid: I. low frequency range. J. Acoustic Soc. Am., 28(2):
lyze pore geometry in carbonate reservoirs, in order to define a 168–191.
system of multiple pore geometries as required by Kuster-Toksöz CASTAGNA JP, BATZLE ML & KAN TK. 1993. Rock physics – The link
model. This allowed us to directly estimate incompressibility and between rock properties and AVO response. In Offset-Dependent Re-
shear moduli for rocks, under both homogeneous saturation by flectivity – Theory and Practice of AVO Analysis, ed. J.P. Castagna &
the fluids, brine, oil and gas, and drained conditions. M. Backus. Investigations in Geophysics, 8, Society of Exploration Geo-
This methodology applied to the study site, Glorieta-Paddock physicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma: 135–171.
reservoir, proved that the Upper Paddock Formation is poten- CHAPARRO CI. 2002. Caracterização das fácies calcárias da formação
tially more capable of storing fluids, and has higher seismic sen- Cimarrona Campo Guanduas – VMM – Colômbia. Dissertação de mes-
sitivity. It was also verified that the interparticle porosity, with trado em Ciências em Engenharia Civil: Universidade Federal do Rio de
microfractures pore geometry in the Upper Paddock Formation, Janeiro.
resulted in lower rock incompressibility and rigidity, which en- DUNHAM RJ. 1962. Classification of carbonate rocks according to
hances the seismic sensitivity to saturation. Unlike other forma- depositional texture. AAPG Memoir, 1: 108–121.
tions, Glorieta and Lower Paddock interparticle porosity charac-
FOLK RL. 1959. Practical petrographic classification of limestones.
terized by spherical geometry results in lower incompressibil-
AAPG Bulletin, 43: 1–38.
ity and rock rigidity, and reduced seismic sensitivity. Therefore,
the results from Kuster-Toksöz and Gassmann models were com- FOLK RL. 1968. Petrology of sedimentary rocks. Austin: Hemphill’s.
pared. Gassmann results are similar to those presented by Acuna GASSMANN F. 1951. Über die elastizitat poroser medien: Verteljahrss-
(2000), and do not correspond to the anomalies observed in the christ der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Zurich, 96: 1–23.

GRAMMER GM, HARRIS PM & EBERLI GP. 2004. Integration of Outcrop SPADINI AR & MARÇAL RA. 2005. Porosidade em reservatórios car-
and Modern Analogs in Reservoir Modeling. AAPG Memoir, 80: 191– bonáticos: algumas considerações. Boletim de Geociências da Petro-
214. bras, Rio de Janeiro, 13(1): 129–138.
JACK I. 1997. Time-lapse Seismic in Reservoir Management: Distin-
SUGUIO K. 1998. Dicionário de Geologia Sedimentar e Áreas Afins.
guished Instructor Series. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 1, Sec-
Editora Bertrand Brasil: 620–623.
tion 1.
KUMAR M & HAN D. 2005. Pore shape effect on elastic properties of WALLS J & DVORKIN J. 2005. Effects of pore fluid properties at high
carbonate rocks. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, Society of pressure and temperature on seismic response. Society of Exploration
Exploration Geophysicists, Houston Annual Meeting 2005: 1477–1481. Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts 24, Houston 2005 Annual Meeting:
KUSTER GT & TOKSÖZ MN. 1974. Velocity and attenuation of seismic 1617–1621.
waves in two-phase media, part I – theorical formulations. Geophysics,
WANG HY, SUN SZ & YANG HJ. 2009. Velocity prediction models eval-
39: 587–606.
uation and permeability prediction for fractured and caved carbonate
MAVKO G, MUKERJI T & DVORKIN J. 1998. The Rock Physics Hand- reservoir: from theory to case study. 79th Annual International Meeting,
book: Tools for Seismic Analysis in Porous Media. Cambridge University Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded Abstracts: 2194–2198.
Press.
MOORE CH. 1989. Carbonate Diagenesis and Porosity. 1 Ed. New York, WANG HY & SUN SZ. 2010. A full-frequency band Kuster-Toksöz model
Elsevier. and its application in velocity dispersion analysis. Society of Exploration
Geophysicists, Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, Denver 2010
NUR A, MAVKO G, DVORKIN J & GALMUDI D. 1995. Critical porosity:
Annual Meeting: 2522–2526.
the key to relating physical properties to porosity in rocks: 65 th Annual
International Meeting, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Expanded WANG Z. 1997. Seismic Properties of Carbonate Rocks. In: PALAZ I
Abstracts: 878. & MARFURT KJ (1997). Carbonate Seismology, Geophysical Develop-
PAYNE SS, WILD P & LUBBE R. 2010. An integrated solution to rock ments, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 6: 29–52.
physics modeling in fractured carbonate reservoirs. Society of Explo-
ration Geophysicists, Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, Denver XU S & PAYNE MA. 2009. Modeling elastic properties in carbonate
2010 Annual Meeting: 358–362. rocks. Special section: Rock Physics. The Leading Edge, 28(1): 66–74.
NOTES ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Irineu de A. Lima Neto holds a BS in Computer Science from the Universidade Cândido Mendes, Campos-RJ, Brazil, 2005. M.Sc. in Reservoir Engineering and
Exploration applied Geophysics area, from LENEP/UENF; in 2008; where he is currently a Ph.D. student since 2011. Areas of interest are: seismic data processing,
characterization of physical and mechanical properties of rocks and computer sciences applied to geophysics.
Roseane M. Misságia is a civil engineer from the Universidade Católica de Minas Gerais, PUC, Belo Horizonte, Brazil, in 1985. M.Sc. and Ph.D. in Reservoir
Engineering and Exploration applied Geophysics area, from LENEP/UENF in 1988 and 2003. Currently, works as Associate Professor in the Geophysics department at
LENEP/UENF. Areas on interest are: seismic data processing and characterization of physical and mechanical properties of rocks.

133
APPENDIX D -- Dual pore system evaluation of

Albian grainstone carbonates
from Brazil using effective
elastic media theory models
This Appendix-chapter shows a literature review of “inclusion models” (or effective

elastic media theory models), and dual pore system method applied in a case study of
Albian Grainstones from Campos-basin, Brazil (LIMA NETO et al., 2013).
Main Menu Appendix D - Dual pore system evaluation of Albian grainstones 134
Dual pore system evaluation of Albian grainstone carbonates from Brazil using effective elastic
media theory models
Irineu Lima Neto*, Roseane Misságia, Marco Ceia, Nathaly Archilha and Lucas Oliveira. UENF/LENEP
Summary vuggy pores tend to have a rounded form that makes the
rock stronger. This leads to a higher seismic velocity than
Carbonates represent a significant portion of the Brazil’s that obtained with interparticle pores. In contrast, thin or
deepwater oil production, whose importance has increased elongated pores such as cracks and microporosity often
with recent discoveries in the post-salt and pre-salt oil lead to slower velocity by rock softening (Oh and Spikes,
deposits. Often carbonates are characterized by a 2012). The pore aspect ratio is a textural parameter that
heterogeneous pore system, displaying a complex pore contributes for stiffness or softness carbonate rock
structure with wide range of pore sizes and shapes. This characterization. This makes it important to investigate the
work aims towards investigating grainstone carbonates relationship between pore shape and the elastic properties
(Albian-age) of the offshore Campos Basin, Brazil by to be able to develop realistic rock physics models.
laboratorial evaluation and rock physics modeling to
predict interparticle aspect ratio and quantitative fractions In this work, we study 11 grainstone core samples from
of a dual pore system approach under ultrasonic and dry Albian age through laboratorial evaluation and rock physics
conditions. The goal is to estimate elastic moduli models application to predict the interparticle aspect ratio
considering intergranular porosity expected in of the dual pore system under ultrasonic and dry conditions.
oncolytic/oolitic grainstones using Effective Elastic Media
(EEM) theories - KT (Kuster-Toksöz), SC (Self-consistent) Data set
and DEM (Differential Effective Medium), and either a
spherical inclusions or a microporosity dominated pore Albian carbonate reservoirs from Campos basin are located
system. The results show that the KT and DEM give a best in southeastern Brazil, and into two megasequences:
compatibility with the texture of the Albian grainstone Shallow Carbonate platform (Early to Middle Albian), and
carbonates. Interparticle aspect ratio estimation and a Marine Transgressive Megasequence (Late Albian to Early
quantitative prediction of the inclusion effects helped us to Tertiary). Such samples are agreeing with Early to Middle
understand the elastic properties of Albian carbonates. Albian. Calcarenites and calcirudites form oil reservoirs in
shallow water, which are composed mostly of grainstones
Introduction and packstones containing oncolites, peloids, oolites and
rare bioclasts. Calcarenites with matrix-free and
The seismic reservoir monitoring is an important tool for oncolite/oolite-rich comprise the best reservoir facies
oil production management. Elastic moduli are affected showing porosities ranging between 20 and 34%, and
directly by rock framework, pore fluid and pore spaces permeabilities exceeding 100 mD (Bruhn et al., 2003).
factors, and indirectly factors such as temperature and
pressure. Estimation of reservoir properties for
conventional siliciclastic systems has been an active area of
research for several decades worldwide. Carbonate rocks
have great economic significance, about 60% of the
world’s oil reservoirs and represent a significant portion of
the Brazil’s deep water oil production. Thus, in contrast to
sandstones, carbonates display a complex pore structure
with wide range of pore sizes and pore shapes,
characterized by a heterogeneous pore system (Wang,
2001; Baechle et al., 2007).
The siliciclastic rocks have mainly interparticle

(intergranular) pores, while most carbonates contain a
complex pore system such as moldic, vuggy, interparticle
and intraparticle. The complex pore system makes the
porosity-velocity relationship highly scattered and the pore
type can cause about as 40% change in P-wave velocity for Figure 1: Thin sections showing the complex texture and
a given porosity. Pore shape appears to be the dominant pore fabric. The main textures are oolitic grainstones: Well
factor in carbonate rock physics. Moldic, intraframe, and 1 (A and B) and Well 2 (C and D).
© 2013 SEG DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-0652.1

SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting Page 2994
Dual pore system evaluation of Albian Carbonates
In this work, the Albian carbonate data set was evaluated in

laboratory. Thin sections show interparticle pore
predominance, texture complexities and pore fabric (Figure
1), while Table 2 shows petrophysics properties.
Mineralogical characterization was performed using XRD
(X-ray diffraction) and Reitveld method, and results shown
calcite predominance (Table 1). Grainstones of Well 1
exhibited better permeability, and grainstones of Well 2
presented more calcite cementation causing reduction of
permeability (Table 2). The mineral moduli (Table 2) were
built in order the percent weight shown in Table 1, conform
to Archilha et al. (2013). P- and S-wave velocities were
measured under dry and ultrasonic conditions using
effective pressure equal 2.55 MPa avoiding transducers
coupling noise and undesirable pore system impact with
fractures induction. Figure 2: Prediction of the interparticle aspect ratio.
Theory and Method
Anselmetti and Eberli (1999) showed that carbonate rocks

having intergranular and intercrystaline primary porosity.
Inclusion of oomoldic, moldic and vugular porosities cause
a positive deviation from P- and S-wave velocities and
negative deviation by microporosity or fractures (Kumar
and Han, 2005). Thus, pore aspect ratio estimation helps to
determine stiffest or softest intervals and hydraulic
fractured area. Aspect ratio (α) is related to shape pore in
sedimentary rocks and effects caused on elastic properties.
The goal is to estimate the elastic moduli for intergranular

porosity expected to oncolytic/oolitic grainstones by use of
Effective Elastic Media (EEM) models and inclusions
spherical or microporosity dominant. Thus, bulk (K) and
shear (µ) modulus and P- and S-wave velocities can be
estimated by EEM models: KT (Kuster-Toksöz), SC (Self-
Figure 3: Determination of the dual pore system.
consistent) and DEM (Differential Effective Medium), see
Mavko et al. (2009); Misaghi et al. (2010); and Berryman
Results
et al. (2002). The pore aspect ratio is a textural parameter
evaluated into the predominant dual pore system: (1)
Interparticle or intercristaline porosity, a reference expected Figure 4 illustrates the result of the interparticle aspect ratio
to oncolytic/oolitic grainstones; and a second expressive estimated from each carbonate sample. In addition, aspect
inclusion (2) Moldic, vuggy or spherical pore; or (3) ratio curve lines were plotted for calcite allowing
Microporosity. comparison with impure samples. In Table 1, the calcite
weight ranges from 95 to 100% of grainstone samples, and
the solid red line represents the average aspect ratio (α=0.1)
Figure 2 summarized the method: (1) Prediction of Albian
for calcite, that able us to check a good agreement for the
grainstones interparticle aspect ratio and assumption to be
low level of impurities (< 5%). Note that EEM models
representative of the average aspect ratio, calibrated from
expressed different behaviors related to the interparticle
0.01 to 1 until the absolute error between measured and
aspect ratio, as expected by the particularities of each
calculated Vp to be a minimum value. (2) Determination of
theory. All EEM models predicted interparticle aspect ratio
dual pore system inclusions considering the interparticle
for grainstone samples ranging from 0.05 to 0.15, with a
aspect ratio predicted in the previous step and measured mean acceptable value 0.1.
Vp, after then adjust of pore fraction phases for each EEM
The sphere aspect ratio for carbonates generally ranges
model by spherical pore (α = 1) or microporosity (α = 0.01)
from 0.8 to 1.0. In Figure 4, it was assumed to be equal 1.0
(Figure 3).
due to similarities of values (dashed green line), and the

microporosity aspect ratio was to be 0.01 (dashed cyan

line) as Kumar and Han (2005). Figure 5 illustrates calcite
curve lines plotted for each EEM model from interparticle
reference (α=0.1, solid red line), varying to spherical pore
or microporosity. Then, dashed lines for different
percentage of the spherical pore (blue lines) or
microporosity (black lines) were plotted varying at each
10% of inclusion over interparticle line reference.
Iteratively, dual inclusions were calibrated through Vp

calculated by EEM models with Vp measured (Figure 6).
Note that KT and DEM models tend to predict the most
impact of the microporosity, where DEM expressed a
slightly higher fraction. However, SC provided a
significant spherical pore impact in dual pore system
determination. In this investigation, we evaluated a
grainstone sample available of Well 1 (W1-03) using two
porosimeters: Helium gas (22.07%) and Mercury injection
(20.006%). Note a difference about ~2%. The mercury
density allows evaluating mainly macro and mesopores,
while the helium can be used to evaluate macro, meso and
micropores. Then, a difference was expected to get
microporosity percent estimate. Therefore, the SC may be
overestimating the spherical pore fractions, a similar
problem described in Misaghi et al. (2010).
Conclusions
This research intended to provide a methodology to predict

intergranular porosity expected to oncolytic/oolitic Albian
grainstone carbonates, and characterizes the interparticle
aspect ratio applying EEM models and a quantitative
fraction of inclusions according to dual pore system
approach under ultrasonic and dry conditions. The previous
knowledge of the mineralogy, porosity, texture and
complexities of microstructure allows the EEM models
application and represents the elastic properties of the
carbonates. After, the interparticle aspect ratios were used
to estimate fractions of inclusions for each model according
to dual pore system approach. The results assist us
understand the elastic properties of Albian carbonates. The
porosity was evaluated by two kind porosimeters. Observed
differences in values reveal that Helium gas reached more
microporosity than Mercury measurement. Thus, the KT
and DEM can be suited to model the Albian grainstone
carbonates. However, no model can be effectively Figure 4: Interparticle pore evaluation using EEM models.
recommended as the best model because the rock The color bar shows the average aspect ratio estimated for
microstructure must be studied in details by evaluation of each sample from Wells 1 and 2, in accordance to mineral
more available rock samples. properties (Tables 1 and 2), then the interparticle aspect
ratio was assumed to oncolytic/oolitic grainstones
Acknowledgments (workflow in Figure 2). The calcite aspect ratio lines
shown the interparticle aspect ratio dominant next to 0.1
We thank UENF/LENEP, CAPES, FAPERJ, ANP-PRH-20 (solid red line, α=0.1).
and PETROBRAS to sponsor this study; and Fernando
Moraes for useful discussions.

Figure 6: Fraction results between EEM models estimated

from Wells 1 and 2, and dual pore system balance.
Table 1: The mineralogical characterization.
Figure 5: P-wave velocity versus porosity for dry carbonate

samples for evaluation of the dual pore system using EEM
models. The calcite dual pore system lines shown the
interparticle aspect ratio dominant next to 0.1 (α=0.1, solid
red line), and dashed lines for a different percentage of the
spherical pore or microporosity, each 10% of inclusion
over interparticle line reference.
Table 2: Experimental acoustics and petrophysical data.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-0652.1
EDITED REFERENCES
Note: This reference list is a copy-edited version of the reference list submitted by the author. Reference lists for the 2013
SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts have been copy edited so that references provided with the online metadata for
each paper will achieve a high degree of linking to cited sources that appear on the Web.
REFERENCES
Archilha, N. L., R. M. Misságia, M. A. Ceia, and I. A. Lima Neto, 2013, Petrophysical, mineralogical and
elastic property characterization of Halocene carbonates from Salgada Lagoon, Brazil: 75th
Conference & Exhibition, EAGE, Extended Abstracts.
Anselmetti, F. S., and G. P. Eberli, 1999, The velocity-deviation log: A tool to predict pore type and
permeability trends in carbonate drill holes from sonic and porosity or density logs : AAPG Bulletin ,
83, 450–466, http://dx.doi.org/10.1306/00AA9BCE-1730-11D7-8645000102C1865D.
Baechle , G. T., A. Colpaert, G. P. Eberli, and R. J. Weger, 2007, Modeling velocity in carbonates using a
dual-porosity DEM model: 77th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 1589–
1593.
Berryman, J. G., S. R. Pride, and H. F. Wang, 2002, A differential scheme for elastic properties of rocks
with dry or saturated cracks: Geophysical Journal International, 151, no. 2, 597–611,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-246X.2002.01801.x.
Bruhn, C. H., J. A. Gomes, C. D. Lucchese, Jr., and P. R. Johann, 2003, Campos Basin: Reservoir
characterization and management — Historical overview and future challenges: Proceedings of the
Offshore Technology Conference, paper OTC 15220.
Kumar, M., and D. H. Han, 2005, Pore shape effect on elastic properties of carbonate rocks: 75th Annual
International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 1477–1480.
Mavko, G., T. Mukerji, and J. Dvorkin, 2009, The rock physics handbook, 2nd ed.: Cambridge University
Press.
Misaghi, A., S. Negahban, M. Landrø, and A. Javaherian, 2010, A comparison of rock physics models for
fluid substitution in carbonate rocks: Exploration Geophysics, 41, no. 2, 146–154,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/EG09035.
Oh, K. T., and K. Spikes, 2012, Velocity modeling to determine pore aspect ratios of the Haynesville
Shale: 82nd Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, doi:10.1190/segam2012-
0508.1.
Wang, Z. Z., 2001, Fundamentals of seismic rock physics: Geophysics, 66, 398–412,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1444931.

139
APPENDIX E -- Carbonate pore system

evaluation using the
velocity-porosity-pressure
relationship, digital image
analysis, and differential
effective medium theory
This Appendix-chapter shows an original “expanded abstract” article that was

published in 2014, using methodology approaches in this thesis, and the case study
of Albian Grainstones from Campos-basin, Brazil (LIMA NETO et al., 2014).
Appendix E - Carbonate pore system evaluation 140
Journal of Applied Geophysics 110 (2014) 23–33
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Applied Geophysics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jappgeo
Carbonate pore system evaluation using the velocity–porosity–pressure

relationship, digital image analysis, and differential effective
medium theory
Irineu A. Lima Neto ⁎, Roseane M. Misságia, Marco A. Ceia, Nathaly L. Archilha, Lucas C. Oliveira
North Fluminense State University, Brazil (UENF/LENEP): Rod. Amaral Peixoto, km 163, Av. Brenand S/N, Imboassica/27925-310, Macaé/RJ, Brazil
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Carbonate reservoirs exhibit heterogeneous pore systems and a wide variety of grain types, which affect the
Received 25 February 2014 rock's elastic properties and the reservoir parameter relationships. To study the Albian carbonates in the Campos
Accepted 24 August 2014 Basin, a methodology is proposed to predict the amount of microporosity and the representative aspect ratio of
Available online 3 September 2014
these inclusions. The method assumes three pore-space scales in two representative inclusion scenarios: 1) a
macro–mesopore median aspect ratio from the thin-section digital image analysis (DIA) and 2) a microporosity
Keywords:
Carbonates
aspect ratio predicted based on the measured P-wave velocities. Through a laboratory analysis of 10 grainstone
Microporosity core samples of the Albian age, the P- and S-wave velocities (Vp and Vs) are evaluated at effective pressures of
Inclusion scenarios 0–10 MPa. The analytical theories in the proposed methodology are functions of the aspect ratios from the
Differential effective medium theory differential effective medium (DEM) theory, the macro–mesopore system recognized from the DIA, the amount
Digital image analysis of microporosity determined by the difference between the porosities estimated from laboratorial helium-gas
Effective pressure and the thin-section petrographic images, and the P-wave velocities under dry effective pressure conditions.
The DIA procedure is applied to estimate the local and global parameters, and the textural implications
concerning ultrasonic velocities and image resolution. The macro–mesopore inclusions contribute to stiffer
rocks and higher velocities, whereas the microporosity inclusions contribute to softer rocks and lower velocities.
We observe a high potential for this methodology, which uses the microporosity aspect ratio inverted from Vp to
predict Vs with a good agreement. The results acceptably characterize the Albian grainstones. The representative
macro–mesopore aspect ratio is 0.5, and the inverted microporosity aspect ratio ranges from 0.01 to 0.07. The
effective pressure induced an effect of slight porosity reduction during the triaxial tests, mainly in the
microporosity inclusions, slightly changing the amount and the aspect ratio of the microporosity.
© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction at a given porosity (Sun et al., 2006), a behavior similar to that observed
in the Albian carbonates in Brazil.
Carbonate rocks have a great economic significance and hold more The relationship between reservoir rocks and elastic properties is
than 50–60% of the oil and gas reserves worldwide (e.g., Burchette, important to understanding and improving the practical rock physics
2012). In Brazil, such reservoirs represent a significant portion of the models. In this context, the bulk and shear moduli of the dry-rock
deepwater oil production, whose importance has increased with the framework are two essential parameters for fluid substitution and
recent discoveries in the post- and pre-salt oil deposits (Bruhn et al., S-wave prediction, for example. The elastic moduli of a dry rock
2003). Those rocks commonly display heterogeneities due to diagenesis depends not only on the porosity but also on the pore geometry (Li
and exhibit complicated mineral composition, pore structure, and and Zhang, 2011). Carbonate rocks have pore systems composed of
texture variations that may cause a low hydrocarbon recovery intergranular (interparticle) and intercrystalline primary porosity
(Anselmetti and Eberli, 1993, 1999; Xu et al., 2007). For example, for a (Anselmetti and Eberli, 1999). The secondary porosity commonly
given reservoir with a porosity of ~ 25%, the permeability can vary by involves inclusions of oomoldic, moldic, and vuggy pores, which are
more than four orders of magnitude due to the pore structure changes. considered to be rounded and enhance the rock stiffness compared
The pore type variations can also produce the seismic velocity changes with the interparticle pore, inducing a faster seismic wave propagation,
whereas microporosity and fractures tend to be flat and make the rock
softer (Berryman, 1995; Kumar and Han, 2005; Wang et al., 2009; Xu
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: + 55 22 27656564, +55 22 27738032.
E-mail addresses: irineu@gmail.com (I.A. Lima Neto), rose@lenep.uenf.br
and Payne, 2009; Zhan et al., 2012).
(R.M. Misságia), marco@lenep.uenf.br (M.A. Ceia), nathy0305@gmail.com (N.L. Archilha), Many rock physics studies assume the pore aspect ratio of inclusions,
lcesaroliveira@gmail.com (L.C. Oliveira). the main textural parameter that contributes to the stiffness or softness
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2014.08.013
0926-9851/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
24 I.A. Lima Neto et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 110 (2014) 23–33
of a rock, is a geometric variable that influences the acoustic velocities totaling 10 core-plugs (1.5″ [38.1 mm] in diameter by 2″ [50.8 mm] in
(Agersborg et al., 2005; Assefa et al., 2003; Kumar and Han, 2005; length). Thin-sections were taken from the top of each plug sample
Rossebø et al., 2005; Saleh and Castagna, 2004). For carbonate reservoirs before performing any laboratorial measurement. The porosities were
that are dominated by the secondary porosity, Eberli et al. (2003) measured by helium-gas injection and the permeabilities by nitrogen-
discussed the velocity–porosity relationship for rocks with different gas injection, with the experimental uncertainties approximately 0.3%
pore systems, including microporosity, moldic, interparticle, and and 5–10 mD, respectively. The mineralogical characterizations were
densely cemented rocks. According to the theoretical concept, performed using an X-ray diffractogram (XRD) analysis and the Rietveld
high-aspect-ratio pores, such as molds and vugs, provide more method on representative pieces of the core-plug samples. The accuracy
grain-to-grain contact than interparticle and intercrystalline pores, of the combination of both the analysis and the method was approxi-
thus decreasing the pore compressibility and providing more stiffness mately ±3%, and the minimum detectable amount was approximately
to the rock with an equal porosity (Mavko and Mukerji, 1995; Saleh 0.3% of the sample weight. The results showed that calcite predominates
and Castagna, 2004; Weger et al., 2009). and that noncarbonate minerals account for less than 5% of the samples
The Digital Image Analysis (DIA) methodology can be applied to (see Archilha et al., 2013 and Lima Neto et al., 2013). The matrix mineral
evaluate mineral structures and pore systems (Anselmetti and Eberli, moduli were predicted with the measured mineral weight percentage
1999; Anselmetti et al., 1998). It can be used to differentiate the pore and Voigt–Reuss–Hill average method (Mavko et al., 1998), except the
space from a matrix material and quantify the pore structure properties, W1-Im07 and W1-Im08 samples, which were calculated using a linear
such as size, shape, distribution of grains, cementation, and porosity. regression based on the similarity of the textural and density values
The pore shape and pore network complexity have a strong influence from the samples at depth and calibrated with the P- and S-wave
on the permeability and the values of acoustic velocities (Berryman velocity measurements. The experimental error on velocities was
and Blair, 1987; Mavko et al., 1998). Weger (2006) and Weger et al. approximately 1%. The data set is listed in the Appendix A.
(2009) showed that carbonate rocks have pore structures constructed
of macro-, meso-, and micropores. Macro- and mesopores can be 3. Differential effective medium (DEM) theory
detected in thin-section images, and the amount of microporosity is
calculated as the difference between the observed porosity in DIA and This model assumes isolated pores embedded in a host material that
the measured porosity from core samples. Furthermore, the micropo- remains continuous at all porosities. The DEM theory simulates the
rosity can be studied by applying an X-ray microtomography or other porosities in a composite medium of two phases by incrementally
methods of more accurate resolution, such as a nanotomography, adding small amounts of pores (phase 2) into a matrix (phase 1) until
which contributes to a better quantification. the total porosity (ϕ) is attained (Berryman, 1992):
In this work, 10 grainstone core samples from the Albian age were
studied, and laboratorial measurements were performed. The goal is d ð2Þ
ð1−ϕÞ K ðϕÞ ¼ K 2 −K P ðϕÞ; ð1Þ
to predict the microporosity parameters using the velocity–porosity– dϕ
pressure relationship, thin-section image analysis, and the rock physics
differential effective medium (DEM) theory under ultrasonic and dry
conditions. The method considers three pore-space scales in two d ð2Þ
ð1−ϕÞ μ ðϕÞ ¼ μ 2 −μ Q ðϕÞ; ð2Þ
representative inclusion scenarios: 1) the macro–mesopore median dϕ
aspect ratio from DIA and 2) the microporosity aspect ratio predicted
by the measured P-wave velocity. where K*(0) = K1 and μ*(0) = μ1 are the bulk and shear moduli of the
host material, respectively (phase 1); K2 and μ2 are the bulk and shear
2. Geological setting moduli of the inclusions, respectively, with K2 ≃ 0 and μ2 = 0 for a dry
rock. The terms P(⁎ 2) and Q(⁎ 2) are geometric factors that depend on
The Albian carbonate reservoirs in the Campos Basin are located in the aspect ratio of the inclusions, as predicted in Appendix B. The P-
southeastern Brazil and form part of the NE-trending, elongated shoals and S-wave velocities can be calculated using the results of bulk and
(up to 20 m thick, less than 1 km wide, and up to 2.5 km long), which shear moduli.
are composed mostly of grainstones and packstones containing
oncolites, peloids, oolites, and rare bioclasts (Fig. 1). The carbonate 4. Methodology
shelf cycles consist of upward shoaling lithological sequences starting
with peloidal wackestones, followed by oncolitic/oolitic packstones In this study, we use the DEM theory to predict the microporosity
and oncolitic/oolitic grainstones. This series represents the common inclusion aspect ratios to characterize the complex constituents and
facies associations. Most of the deposition occurred during the marine pore geometries with the elastic properties of the Albian carbonates.
regression periods. According to Bruhn et al. (2003), between the After establishing the geological setting with the measurements and
shoals, finer-grained carbonates, particularly peloidal calcisiltites, were mineral information, the physical properties of the Albian grainstones
deposited in a lower energy environment. The calcarenites and can be linked to the DIA parameters through thin-section micrographs,
calcirudites form the oil reservoirs in shallow water (100–200 m) and allowing for the characterization of macro- and mesopores. The rock is
are composed mostly of grainstones and packstones containing characterized by macro-, meso-, and micropore systems, which are
oncolites, peloids, oolites, and rare bioclasts. Thus, two megasequences expressed in the physical properties as P- and S-wave velocities and cor-
define the Albian carbonates: a shallow carbonate platform (Early to related with bulk (K) and shear (μ) moduli. The goal of this study is to
Middle Albian) and a marine transgressive megasequence (Late Albian determine the best microporosity aspect ratio that can be combined
to Early Tertiary). In this study, the Early to Middle Albian grainstone with the macro–mesopore aspect ratios, which are fractions of the
core-plug samples were selected from two cored wells. The matrix- pore inclusions and are predicted from the DIA and pore system model-
free and oncolite/oolite-rich calcarenites comprise the best reservoir ing through a DEM theory inversion (Fig. 2). The method considers
facies, with the porosities ranging between 20 and 34% and the three pore-space scales in two representative inclusion scenarios:
permeabilities exceeding 100 mD. 1) the macro–mesopore median aspect ratio and 2) the microporosity
The set of selected samples includes the oncolite/oolite grainstones aspect ratio predicted by the measured P-wave velocity.
with a good porosity (~ 24.8%) and permeability (~ 4–222 mD) from The theory of poroelasticity predicts an ability of rocks to resist and
Well 1 and the oncolite/oolite grainstones with calcite cementation recover from the deformations produced by the induced external forces.
causing a reduction of the permeability (~0.88–2.03 mD) from Well 2, Therefore, when an effective pressure is applied to a drained core
I.A. Lima Neto et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 110 (2014) 23–33 25
Fig. 1. Location map of the oil fields in the Campos Basin. The Albian calcarenite reserves are shown in light blue (Bruhn et al., 2003). (For interpretation of the references to color in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
sample during a hydrostatic loading test, there is a null pore pressure from the drained core samples during triaxial laboratory experiments.
condition, and the core sample exhibits a higher volume deformation in However, for the low-frequency as on a seismic scale, an approach for
contrast to the undrained case. In fact, if a rock is subjected to a pressure upscaling is to apply the DEM theory by inserting dry inclusions into
regime, the deformation of crystals is the mechanical property of the the predicted drained rock frame and to perform a fluid saturation as
smaller variations, though the rock pore space is sensitive to the pressure the final step using the Gassmann's equation that assumes seismic
effects and structural discontinuities, such as micropores, fractures, and conditions (see the Xu-White and Xu-Payne models (Xu and White,
voids, that cause a volumetric deformation (Fjaer et al., 2008; Jaeger 1995; Xu and Payne, 2009)). In addition, the saturated carbonates
et al., 2007). Here, it was assumed that the volumetric reduction is caused with interparticle and intergranular primary porosities can be P-wave
by the microporosity diminishing when an effective pressure is applied, velocity modeled using the Wyllie's time-average equation
which leads to an increase in the P-wave velocity by increasing the (Anselmetti and Eberli, 1999), although for dry conditions, we can use
predominance of rounded macro–mesopores and reducing the bulk the DEM theory with representative interparticle aspect ratio inclusions
porosity. The method depicted in Fig. 2 was applied under effective (Xu and Payne, 2009), which is a reference line for the oncolite/oolite
pressure conditions and the porosity was recalibrated using the measured Albian grainstones. Another upscaling approach can be considered by
volumetric reduction. applying the Backus' average (Backus, 1962) when the wavelength is
large compared with the layer thickness at lower frequencies (seismic
5. Assumptions, limitations, and considerations scale, e.g.) from high or very-high frequencies.
Despite the assumptions and limitations of the rock physics models
In this study, the DEM theory in the methodology assumes high described in the literature, it is common to use the calibration of param-
frequencies, such as ultrasonic P- and S-wave velocities, measured eters to study methodologies aiming to predict the properties of interest
fmicro) and local parameters from individual pores (γ and α) (Castro and
Rocha, 2013; Russ, 1998; Weger, 2006; Weger et al., 2009).
The thin-sections from the core samples were impregnated with
blue epoxy, and micrographs were taken using an optical petrographic
microscopy with a resolution of 764× 574 pixels and magnifications
between 25 × (~ 16.32 μm2/pixel) and 200 × (~ 0.28 μm2/pixel), to
show the textural complexities, pore fabrics, and interparticle pore
predominance (Fig. 3). The images were acquired using non-polarized
light, and small noises were eliminated from the analysis by spatial filter
applications, such as a low-pass filter that attenuates the color
gradients, and a median filter that eliminates the small discontinuities
without any geometrical consequence (Damiani et al., 2000).
After the filtering process, the thin-section digital images were stored
as 24 bit files in the RGB color model for segmentation, which includes a
neural network method for pattern recognition and assisting the
geometrical characterization of the pore microstructures. Thresholding
was performed using an inter-class variance maximization method
(Coster and Charmant, 1989), applied to the histogram of each color
component by the automated and manual information on saturation
and intensity given during the analysis. The spectrum of pores was
displayed in 2D binary images, and the pore size distribution was obtain-
ed by successive opening, which was derived from mathematical mor-
phology and using balls with increasing radius (Coster and Charmant,
1989). The resulting image can be viewed as the union of balls completely
Fig. 2. The methodology proposed to predict the micropore aspect ratio (αmicro). enclosed in the porous phase. As a result, an octagonal ellipse represents
each pore recognized, keeping approximately the same pixel area and
elongation (Fig. 3(E)), and the pore aspect ratio (α) inclusions are consid-
ered oblate (α b 1) due to the lack of an orientation reference from the 2D
images (Fig. 3(F)). Details about the filtering and segmentation processes
and comparing the results with prior knowledge. The methodology
adopted in this work are in Damiani et al. (2000).
proposed in this study uses the DEM model, an effective elastic media
Textural parameters were calculated from the thin-section image
theory including the bounds and mixing laws (Mavko et al., 1998),
analysis to quantify the pore structures and to describe several aspects
considering the idealized ellipsoidal pore inclusion shapes that are
of the pore system. We assumed that the resolution of the optical
statistically estimated from the DIA study, preserving the pore
petrographic microscopy could not characterize microporosity but
characteristics identified as area and elongation. The DIA study was
only macro- and mesopores. These types of porosity are associated
incorporated to reduce the limitations with the idealized pore shapes
with interparticle and spherical pores and are often dominant in
and provide a better rock characterization. Thus, different carbonate
grainstones. Therefore, we also assumed that the pore system described
rocks could be evaluated by applying the methodology in this work by
by the thin-section can be representative of the core plug. Consequently,
changing the DEM model for another adequate effective elastic media
the amount of microporosity (fmicro) and microporosity (ϕmicro) can be
theory as the Kuster–Toksöz formulation and the Self-consistent
calculated as the difference between the observed macro–mesoporosity
approximations of effective moduli. Our previous study (see Lima
in the DIA (ϕthin−sec tion) and the measured helium-gas porosity from
Neto et al., 2013) showed that the DEM model is suitable for predicting
the core samples (ϕhelium−gas), assuming that the helium-gas can fill
the elastic moduli and velocities of the oncolite/oolite Albian
the whole connected pore system (Fig. 4). The following equations
grainstones.
describe this relationship:
6. Data analysis and results ϕmicro ¼ ϕhelium−gas −ϕthin− section ; ð3Þ
6.1. Digital image analysis (DIA) procedure

ϕthin− section ¼ ϕmacro−meso ; ð4Þ
Textural parameters can be calculated from a DIA procedure according
to Weger (2006). DOMsize provides an indication of a sample's dominant
pore-size range, which is defined as the upper boundary of the pore sizes ϕmicro
f micro ¼ ; ð5Þ
of which 50% of the porosity in a thin-section is composed. PoA is the ratio ϕhelium−gas
between the total pore-space area of a thin-section and the total
perimeter that encloses the pore space. Generally, a small PoA value
indicates a simple pore system. Gamma (γ) describes the roundness of f macro−meso ¼ 1−f micro : ð6Þ
pores as the perimeter over an area of an individual pore normalized to
a circle, as proposed by Anselmetti et al. (1998). A perfect round circle Appendix A.3 shows the magnification acquisition values for each
would have γ = 1. Aspect ratio (α) is the ratio between the major and thin-section evaluated, including a set of all magnifications, as well as
minor semiaxes of an ellipse that encloses the pore, and it describes the a statistical representation of the pore system. Fig. 5 shows the
elongation of the pore-bounding ellipsoid. The α can be estimated for macro–mesopore aspect ratio balance and the representative median
macro–mesopore systems using the median of pores recognized from value for each core sample from Wells 1 and 2. We find α = 0.5 to be
the thin-sections. For a spherical pore, α = 1. In this study, the ellipsoids a representative aspect ratio value for the Albian grainstone core
recognized from DIA are considered oblate (α b 1). The parameters are samples studied.
classified into two different types: global parameters that describe the The PoA ratio tends to increase with magnification, and this global
pore system recognized on the thin-section images (DOMsize, PoA, and parameter is highly dependent on the image resolution due to the
Fig. 3. The thin-sections (A and C) taken from the core samples (W1-Im1 and W2-Im1, respectively) showing the complex texture and pore fabric and the respective binary images (B and
D) from the DIA methodology. The main textures from the core samples are oncolite/oolite grainstones: Well 1 (A, B) and Well 2 (C, D) — calcite cementation occurrence. The pores rec-
ognized (E) are measured in pixel and approximated to the octagonal ellipsis as oblate pore aspect ratio (α) inclusions (F).
detection of perimeter and shape in more details. In this case, we con- pressure transducers, and the radial deflection measurements are per-
sidered that the macro–mesopore system parameters DOMsize, fmicro, formed using a cantilever transducer. The volumetric reduction of the
γ, and α can be characterized using all of the magnifications available, core samples is evaluated by the axial and radial deflection values at
while PoA should be evaluated in the core sample images with the min- the effective pressure induced during the triaxial tests. The Albian car-
imal magnification (25×). The global and local parameters were com- bonate core samples have heterogeneities, such as vugs and
bined with the velocity measurements (Section 6.2) aiming to predict microfractures, that cause brittleness; therefore, we limited the
microporosity aspect ratio (Section 6.3), considering that the pore sys- effective pressures to 10 MPa for the dry condition triaxial tests (Fig. 6).
tem is composed of macro–mesopores and microporosity. According to the proposed methodology, we assume that the
volumetric reduction is caused by the closing of micropores when an
6.2. Velocity measurements effective pressure is applied. This process leads to an increased P-wave
velocity through the increased predominance of rounded macro–
The ultrasonic P- and S-wave velocities are measured in the room- mesopores and a reduction in porosity. Fig. 6 shows the scattering of
dried samples at effective pressures (0–10 MPa) in triaxial tests, using P-wave velocities versus porosity under the effective pressure
one P-wave (1.3 MHz) and two independent orthogonally polarized conditions. We see a slight porosity reduction (~ 0.4–3.6%) with the
S-wave (900 kHz) piezoelectric transducers simultaneously via the increase in pressure (Fig. 6(A)), and the impact on microporosity
pulse transmission technique. The axial stress is calculated using load (Fig. 6 (B and C)). Spherical, interparticle, and microcrack pore
cell measurements and the sample initial diameter (measured with a geometries with aspect ratios of 1.0, 0.1, and 0.01, respectively, were
caliper). The axial deflection is measured by LVDTs (Linear Variable calculated using the DEM theory and showed in Figs. 6, 7 and 9 as the
Differential Transformers). The confining pressure is measured by reference dashed lines for the dry and clean calcite limestone in the
0.4 2) the macro–mesopores from all magnification data set (Appendix A.3
W1 and A.4) and a Vp measured at an effective pressure of 3.5 MPa
W2 (Figs. 7 and 8); and,
0.3 3) the macro–mesopores from the 25× magnification data set (Appendix
A.3) and a Vp measured at an effective pressure of 3.5 MPa (Fig. 9).
The results from the case condition #1 express the effect of effective
φ Image
0.2 pressure on the pore system evaluated for each core sample (Fig. 6). The
P-wave velocity increases with a high effective pressure, and we verify a
volume reduction in the core samples during the experiments. This
pattern leads to the conclusion, according to the proposed methodolo-
0.1 gy, that a slight porosity volume reduction is caused by the effective
pressure loading (Fig. 6(A)), which causes a reduction in the micropo-
rosity fraction and a slight increase in the microporosity aspect ratio
0 as predicted (Fig. 6 (B and C)). This conclusion is explained by the
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 closing of flat micropores with low aspect ratios and the increases in
φ Gas the effect of macro–mesopores (Fig. 6(D)).
In the case condition #2, the local and global parameters were
Fig. 4. The porosity difference evaluated using Digital Image Analysis (DIA) versus helium- evaluated using the proposed DIA procedure from all magnification
gas measurements. Helium-gas porosity was assumed to access the whole connected pore data set and Vp measured at an effective pressure of 3.5 MPa (Fig. 7).
system, including microporosity.
The main idea is to evaluate the textural parameters under a minimum
effective pressure avoiding coupling noise on Vp and Vs measurements.
Vp-ϕ crossplots. The interparticle line is the main reference for the Consequently, we applied the proposed methodology to quantify the
oncolite/oolite Albian grainstones as expected, and the Vp-ϕ scattering microporosity aspect ratio, the minimum error (emin), and the
reflects an increase in the rounded inclusions (tending towards the adjustment (R) coefficients as follows:
spherical line direction) or the microporosity inclusions (tending
towards the microcrack line direction) by the fraction and aspect ratio jV Measured −V DEM j
emin ¼ ; ð7Þ
balances of the geometric inclusions. V Measured
6.3. Prediction of the microporosity aspect ratio and S-wave velocity

R ¼ 1−emin : ð8Þ
As a result of the DIA methodology, the microporosity inclusion
aspect ratio was predicted and analyzed for three proposed case
The Vp calculated by applying the DEM model achieved a good agree-
conditions using the following:
ment with the measured Vp (R ≃ 0.996) (Fig. 8(A)). The results are con-
1) the macro–mesopores from all magnification data set (Appendix A.3 sidered consistent. Although the Vs has not been used directly in the
and A.4) and a Vp measured at each effective pressure (Fig. 6); microporosity aspect ratio prediction methodology, it was calculated
Fig. 5. Results of the Digital Image Analysis (DIA) considering all magnifications available for each core sample (in Appendix A.3). (A) and (B) show the macro–mesopore aspect ratio (α)
balance from Wells 1 and 2, respectively, and (C) shows the median aspect ratio of macro–mesopore calculated for each core sample. The representative value for the Albian grainstone
core samples is α = 0.5.
Fig. 6. Textural porosity at all magnification data set and Vp at effective pressure: 0–10 MPa. The results of the analyses reflect the slight porosity volume reduction (~0.4–3.6%) by effective
pressure loading. (A) Effective pressure, (B) aspect ratio of the microporosity inclusion — results of the case condition #1, (C) and (D) microporosity and macro–mesopore fractions,
respectively, at different Vp results and effective pressures. Spherical, interparticle and microcrack dashed lines are the reference for dry calcite limestone, calculated by the DEM model.
using the bulk and shear moduli calibrated by the pore inclusions, and and the resulting pixel resolution. The PoA ratio is a good textural
showed a good agreement with the measurements (R ≃ 0.91) parameter, but its variability with image resolution requires caution.
(Fig. 8(B)). It is a good indication that the methodology works and The effective pressure influences the pore system, which mainly affects
contributes to the quality control of input parameters and to the the microporosity inclusions with respect to the aspect ratio and Vp
evaluation of the methodology efficiency. The methodology can be used relationship, and the microporosity is more sensitive at low aspect ratios.
to predict Vs in the Albian grainstones according to the obtained results. The methodology quantifies the microporosity aspect ratio with the
The textural impacts were analyzed in case condition #3, using the minimum error calibrated from the Vp measured in laboratory. The
macro–mesopores from the 25× magnification data set and a Vp S-wave velocity (Vs) was not used directly in the proposed methodolo-
measured at an effective pressure of 3.5 MPa. The PoA parameter gy to predict the microporosity aspect ratio. However, we observed a
expressed a high sensitivity to the image resolution (Appendix A.3). high potential and a good agreement for the method of using the
Thus, we decided to use the thin-section images from the core samples microporosity aspect ratio inverted from Vp to predict Vs. It can be
at the lower and representative magnification value of 25×, assuming helpful to areas where the Vs is unknown.
image resolution close to the adopted by Weger et al. (2009). In this The analytical theories in the proposed methodology are functions of
case, observe that only images of core samples from Well 1 are available the macro–mesopore system recognized in the DIA, the amount of
(see Appendix A.3) and the PoA ratios were recalculated for the analy- microporosity calculated from the difference between the porosities
ses. Fig. 9 shows the P-wave velocity at an effective pressure of estimated from laboratorial helium-gas and the thin-section petro-
3.5 MPa versus porosity and DOMsize versus PoA. The textural impacts graphic images and the P-wave velocities under dry effective pressure
are noted as red arrows according to Weger et al. (2009). The medium conditions. The results are acceptable, consistent, and suitable for
aspect ratio and quantity of macro–mesopores (fmacro−meso) were characterizing the Albian grainstone core samples. Other types of
estimated for analyses of impacts on Vp and textural parameters. heterogeneous rocks could be evaluated using the methodology
Weger et al. (2009) used a large carbonate data set and observed a described in this work. In some cases, the use of other effective elastic
relationship between the macro–mesopore inclusions that make the media theory instead of the DEM model may produce more realistic
rocks stiffer and have higher velocities and the microporosity inclusions results of elastic moduli and velocities.
that contribute to softer rocks and a lower velocity. Unfortunately, we
have a small data set but it is possible to verify that most of data points
agree with such behavior, as can be seen in Fig. 9 (C and D). Acknowledgments
7. Conclusions The authors would like to thank UENF/LENEP for the facilities
provided to perform this work and ANP-PRH-20 and PETROBRAS for
Through a laboratorial analysis of the core samples, the DIA, and the permission to use the data and sponsorship of this study. ILN and NA
proposed methodology based on the DEM model, the micropore aspect thank CAPES for their doctoral scholarships. RM acknowledges FAPERJ
ratios of the inclusions have been predicted. for the “JovemCientista” research grant. We also thank the two
In this study, the DIA procedure was applied to estimate the local anonymous reviewers for their suggestions and the ESSS Company for
and global parameters, based on the considerations of magnification the academic license of Imago software.
Fig. 7. Vp versus porosity at an effective pressure equal to 3.5 MPa. Each color bar represents a result of the Digital Image Analysis (DIA) parameters from all magnification data sets (case
condition #2). Spherical, interparticle and microcrack dashed lines are the reference for dry calcite limestone, calculated by the DEM model. (For interpretation of the references to color in
this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 8. Results of the proposed methodology to predict the micropore aspect ratios of three pore-space scales in two representative inclusions of the pore system: the macro–mesopores
and the microporosity. Results of the case condition #2: (A) and (B) show the adjustment coefficients of the P- and S-wave velocities at effective pressure of 3.5 MPa, respectively, using all
magnification data set.
Fig. 9. Results of the case condition #3: effects of the macro–mesopore and microporosity inclusions on the pore structure using Vp at an effective pressure of 3.5 MPa versus porosity, and
DOMsize versus PoA for the 25× magnification data set. (A) Macro–mesopore aspect ratio, (B) and (D) proportion of macro–mesopores, (C) Vp. Impacts on velocity are established ac-
cording to Weger et al. (2009). Spherical, interparticle and microcrack dashed lines are the reference for dry calcite limestone, calculated by the DEM model.
Appendix A. The data set
Table A.1
Petrophysical measurements (part 1 — porosity, permeability, and matrix). The Voigt–Reuss–Hill average method was applied to calculate the effective elastic moduli for a mixture of min-
eral grains (Mavko et al., 1998).
Sample Porosity Porosity thin-section Microporosity Permeability Matrix bulk Matrix shear Matrix
helium-gas (%) (DIA) (%) (%) (mD) modulus (GPa) modulus (GPa) density (g/cm3)
W1-Im1 23.03 14.10 8.93 9.0 76.85 32.03 2.710

W1-Im2 25.71 13.00 12.71 221.6 74.65 31.86 2.709
W1-Im3 22.07 11.00 11.07 31.9 76.33 32.09 2.712
W1-Im4 22.28 8.00 14.28 13.5 75.10 31.80 2.709
W1-Im5 28.51 11.00 17.51 126.6 76.47 32.44 2.720
W1-Im6 22.20 19.00 3.20 9.8 76.16 32.16 2.711
W1-Im7 26.42 6.00 20.42 4.4 75.63 31.98 2.710
W1-Im8 27.96 19.00 8.96 8.2 75.90 32.07 2.711
W2-Im1 21.94 12.00 9.94 2.03 76.55 32.08 2.710
W2-Im2 19.72 9.00 10.72 0.88 76.80 32.16 2.711
Table A.2
Petrophysical measurements (part 2 — mineralogical results of XRD and Rietveld method).
Sample Weight %
Calcite Dolomite Quartz Feldspar Fluorite
W1-01 99.71 0.00 0.29 0.00 0.00

W1-02 95.20 2.13 0.92 1.76 0.00
W1-03 96.98 0.63 1.76 0.63 0.00
W1-04 96.47 1.46 0.52 1.55 0.00
W1-05 95.56 1.19 1.37 0.00 1.88
W1-06 96.98 1.04 1.55 0.43 0.00
W1-07 – – – – –
W1-08 – – – – –
W2-01 99.37 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00
W2-02 98.77 0.38 0.85 0.00 0.00
Table A.3
Data set as a result of the Digital Image Analysis (DIA) procedure.
Sample Magnification Aspect ratio DomSize (μm) PoA (mm−1) Gamma
Macro–meso Micro
W1-Im1 ×25 0.51 0.04 78.13 112.59 2.50

W1-Im2 ×25 0.51 0.05 77.94 142.85 2.37
W1-Im3 ×25 0.50 0.04 70.67 137.69 2.60
W1-Im4 ×25 0.50 0.07 73.20 125.30 2.63
W1-Im5 ×25 0.48 0.04 68.91 93.07 2.59
×50 0.49 0.04 42.50 227.07 2.40
All 0.49 0.04 60.44 123.78 2.47
W1-Im6 ×50 0.49 0.01 41.25 199.03 2.58
W1-Im7 ×25 0.49 0.07 59.25 173.79 2.54
×50 0.50 0.07 35.70 307.51 2.48
All 0.50 0.07 42.50 251.06 2.49
W1-Im8 ×25 0.51 0.03 61.13 138.33 2.48
×50 0.49 0.03 37.65 268.46 2.52
×100 0.50 0.03 18.85 488.63 2.47
All 0.50 0.03 37.37 240.97 2.49
W2-Im1 ×100 0.49 0.04 17.83 763.81 2.51
×200 0.51 0.04 9.50 966.36 2.35
All 0.50 0.04 17.25 773.98 2.46
W2-Im2 ×100 0.51 0.03 17.39 1418.31 2.16
Table A.4
Data set as a result of the Digital Image Analysis (DIA) procedure for all magnifications and P- and S-wave at an effective pressure of 3.5 MPa.
Sample Vp (km/s) Vs (km/s) Aspect ratio Adjust coefficient R (fraction) DomSize (μm) PoA (mm−1) Gamma
Macro–meso Micro
W1-Im1 3.186 1.824 0.51 0.04 0.994 78.13 112.59 2.50

W1-Im2 3.061 1.796 0.51 0.05 0.998 77.94 142.85 2.37
W1-Im3 2.969 1.766 0.50 0.04 0.995 70.67 137.69 2.60
W1-Im4 3.367 2.016 0.50 0.07 0.996 73.20 125.30 2.63
W1-Im5 2.135 1.475 0.49 0.04 0.996 60.44 123.78 2.47
W1-Im6 2.973 1.771 0.49 0.01 0.983 41.25 199.03 2.58
W1-Im7 2.751 1.616 0.50 0.07 0.997 42.50 251.06 2.49
W1-Im8 2.635 1.597 0.50 0.03 1.000 37.37 240.97 2.49
W2-Im1 3.077 1.798 0.50 0.04 0.999 17.25 773.98 2.46
W2-Im2 2.723 1.680 0.51 0.03 1.000 17.39 1418.31 2.16
Appendix B. Geometric coefficients P(⁎ 2) and Q(⁎ 2) for ellipsoidal in- where
clusions of arbitrary aspect ratios
3 3 5 4
F1 ¼ 1 þ A ð f þ θÞ−R g þ θ− ; ðB:5Þ
For dry ellipsoidal pore inclusions, the geometric coefficients are 2 2 2 3
given by the following (Berryman, 1980; Mavko et al., 1998):
1
P¼ T ; ðB:1Þ
3 iijj
3 R
F 2 ¼ 1 þ A 1 þ ð f þ θÞ− ð3f þ 5θÞ þ Bð3−4RÞ;
2 2 ðB:6Þ
A h
i
2
1 1 þ ðA þ 3BÞð3−4RÞ f þ θ−R f −θ þ 2θ
Q¼ T ijij − T iijj ; ðB:2Þ 2
5 3
where the tensor Tijkl relates the uniform strain field to the strain field
3
within the ellipsoidal inclusion (Wu, 1966). Berryman (1980) gave the F 3 ¼ 1 þ A 1− f þ θ þ Rð f þ θÞ ; ðB:7Þ
2
scalar formulation required for calculating P and Q as follows:
3 F1 A
T iijj ¼ ; ðB:3Þ F 4 ¼ 1 þ ½3θ þ f −Rð f −θÞ; ðB:8Þ
F2 4

F1 2 1 F F þ F6 F7− F8 F9 4
T ijij ¼ þ þ þ 4 5 ; ðB:4Þ F 5 ¼ A R f þ θ− − f þ Bθð3−4RÞ; ðB:9Þ
F2 F3 F4 F2 F4 3
F 6 ¼ 1 þ A½1 þ f −Rð f þ θÞ þ Bð1−θÞð3−4RÞ; ðB:10Þ Berryman, J.G., 1995. Mixture theories for rock properties. In: Ahrens, T.J. (Ed.), Rock
Physics and Phase Relations. Handbook of Physical Constants. American Geophysical
Union, Washington, DC, pp. 205–228.
A Berryman, J.G., Blair, S.C., 1987. Kozeny–Carman relations and image-processing methods
F 7 ¼ 2 þ ½9θ þ 3f −Rð5θ þ 3f Þ þ Bθð3−4RÞ; ðB:11Þ for estimating Darcy's constant. J. Appl. Phys. 2221–2228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.
4 339497.
Bruhn, C.H., Gomes, J.A., Lucchese Jr., C.D., Johann, P.R., 2003. Campos basin: reservoir
characterization and management — historical overview and future challenges. Off-
shore Technology Conference, OTC 15220, Houston, Texas, pp. 1–14 http://dx.doi.
f θ
F 8 ¼ A 1−2R þ ðR−1Þ þ ð5R−3Þ þ Bð1−θÞð3−4RÞ; ðB:12Þ org/10.4043/15220-MS.
2 2 Burchette, T.P., 2012. Carbonate rocks and petroleum reservoirs: a geological perspective
from the industry. Geol. Soc. Lond., Spec. Publ. 370, 17–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/
SP370.14.
Castro, D.D., Rocha, P.L.F., 2013. Quantitative parameters of pore types in carbonate rocks.
F 9 ¼ A½ f ðR−1Þ−Rθ þ Bθð3−4RÞ; ðB:13Þ Braz. J. Geophys. (RBGf) 31, 125–136.
Coster, M., Charmant, J.L., 1989. Precis d'analyse d'images. Presses du CNRS, Paris.
Damiani, M.C., Fernandes, C.P., Bueno, A.D., Santos, L.O.E., Cunha Neto, J.A.B., Philippi, P.C.,
μi 2000. Predicting physical properties of reservoir rocks from the microstructural anal-
A¼ −1; ðB:14Þ ysis of petrographic thin sections. Aplicaciones de la ciencia en la ingeniería de
μm petróleo, May 08–12/2000, Foz de Iguaçu. .
Eberli, G.P., Baechle, G.T., Anselmetti, F.S., Incze, M.L., Dong, W., Tura, A., Sparkman, G.,
2003. Factors controlling elastic properties in carbonate sediments and rocks. Lead.
Edge 22, 654–660. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1599691.
1 Ki μ
B¼ − i ; ðB:15Þ Fjaer, E., Holt, R.M., Horsrud, P., Raaen, A.M., Risnes, R., 2008. Petroleum Related Rock
3 Km μm Mechanics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 26–37.
Jaeger, J., Cook, N.G., Zimmerman, R., 2007. Fundamentals of Rock Mechanics, 4th ed.
Blackwell Ltd., Malden, MA, pp. 145–197.
Kumar, M., Han, D., 2005. Pore shape effect on elastic properties of carbonate rocks. SEG
3μ m Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1477–1481 http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.
R¼ ; ðB:16Þ
3K m þ 4μ m 2147969.
Li, H., Zhang, J., 2011. Elastic moduli of dry rocks containing spheroidal pores based on
differential effective medium theory. J. Appl. Geophys. 75 (4), 671–678. http://dx.
8
doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.09.012.
> α 2 1=2
−1 Lima Neto, I., Misságia, R., Ceia, M., Archilha, N., Oliveira, L., 2013. Dual pore system
> α−α 1−α ; ðαN1Þ
<
>
2 3=2
cos evaluation of Albian grainstone carbonates from Brazil using effective elastic media
1−α

θ¼ ; ðB:17Þ theory models. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2994–2998 http://
>
> α 2 1=2 −1 dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-0652.1.
>
: 2 3=2 α α −1 − cosh α ; ðαb1Þ
α −1 Mavko, G., Mukerji, T., 1995. Seismic pore space compressibility and Gassmann's relation.
Geophysics 60 (6), 1743–1749. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1443907.
Mavko, G., Mukerji, T., Dvorkin, J., 1998. The Rock Physics Handbook: Tools for Seismic
Analysis in Porous Media. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 307–309.
Rossebø, Ø.H., Brevik, I., Gholam, R.A., Adam, L., 2005. Modeling of acoustic properties in
α2
f ¼ ð3θ−2Þ; ðB:18Þ carbonate rocks. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1505–1508 http://
1−α 2 dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.2147976.
Russ, J.C., 1998. The Image Processing Handbook. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida
where α is the aspect ratio of the inclusion; Km and μm are the bulk and (771 pp.).
Saleh, A.A., Castagna, J.P., 2004. Revisiting the Wyllie time average equation in the case of
shear moduli of the rock matrix, respectively; and Ki and μi are the bulk near spherical pores. Geophysics 69, 45–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1649374.
and shear moduli of the inclusion, respectively. Sun, Y.F., Berteussen, K., Vega, S., Eberli, G.P., Baechle, G.T., Weger, R.J., Massaferro, J.L.,
Bracco Gartner, G.L., Wagner, P.D., 2006. Effects of pore structure on 4D seismic
signals in carbonate reservoirs. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp.
References
3260–3264 http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.2370208.
Wang, H.Y., Sun, S.Z., Li, Y.W., Li, X.G., 2009. Velocity prediction models evaluation and
Agersborg, R., Johansen, T.A., Jakobsen, M., 2005. The T-matrix approach for carbonate
permeability prediction for fractured and caved carbonate reservoir: from theory to
rocks. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1597–1600 http://dx.doi.org/
case study. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2194–2198 http://dx.
10.1190/1.2147999.
doi.org/10.1190/1.3255295.
Anselmetti, F.S., Eberli, G.P., 1993. Controls on sonic velocity in carbonates. Pure Appl.
Weger, R.J., 2006. Quantitative Pore/Rock Type Parameters in Carbonates and their
Geophys. 141, 287–323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00998333.
Relationship to Velocity Deviations(PhD. thesis) University of Miami, Coral Glabes
Anselmetti, F.S., Eberli, G.P., 1999. The velocity-deviation log: a tool to predict pore type
(232 pp.).
and permeability trends in carbonate drill holes from sonic and porosity or density
Weger, R.J., Eberli, G.P., Baechle, G.T., Massaferro, J.L., Sun, Y., 2009. Quantification of pore
logs. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 83, 450–466. http://dx.doi.org/10.1306/00AA9BCE-
structure and its effect on sonic velocity and permeability in carbonates. AAPG Bull.
1730-11D7-8645000102C1865D.
93 (10), 1297–1317. http://dx.doi.org/10.1306/05270909001.
Anselmetti, F.S., Luthi, S., Eberli, G.P., 1998. Quantitative characterization of carbonate
Wu, T.T., 1966. The effect of inclusion shape on the elastic moduli of a two-phase material.
pore systems by digital image analysis. Am. Assoc. Pet. Geol. Bull. 82 (10), 1815–1836.
Int. J. Solids Struct. 2, 1–8.
Archilha, N., Misságia, R., Ceia, M., Lima Neto, I., Castro, L., Souza, F., 2013. Petrophysical,
Xu, S., Payne, M.A., 2009. Modeling elastic properties in carbonate rocks. Special section:
mineralogical and P-wave velocity characterization of Albian carbonates from
rock physics. Lead. Edge 28, 66–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.3064148.
Campos Basin, Brazil. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 2989–2993
Xu, S., White, R.E., 1995. A new velocity model for clay–sand mixtures. Geophys. Prospect.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-0676.1.
43, 91–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2478.1995.tb00126.x.
Assefa, S., McCann, C., Sothcott, J., 2003. Velocities of compressional and shear waves in
Xu, S.Y., Chen, G., Zhu, Y., Payne, M.A., Deffenbaugh, M., Song, L., Dunsmuir, J., 2007.
limestones. Geophys. Prospect. 51, 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2478.
Carbonate Rock Physics: Analytical Models and Validations using Computational
2003.00349.x.
Approaches and Log/Lad Measurement. IPTC-112-8-PP.
Backus, G.E., 1962. Long wave elastic anisotropy produced by horizontal layering. J.
Zhan, X., Fullmer, S., Lu, C., Kaczmarek, S., Harris, C., Martinez, A., 2012. Study geophysical
Geophys. Res. 67, 4427–4440.
response of middle east carbonate reservoir using computational rock physics
Berryman, J.G., 1980. Long-wavelength propagation in composite elastic media. J. Acoust.
approach. SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1–5 http://dx.doi.org/10.
Soc. Am. 68, 1809–1831. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.385171.
1190/segam2012-1137.1.
Berryman, J.G., 1992. Single-scattering approximations for coefficients in Biot's equations
of poroelasticity. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 551–571. http://dx.doi.org/10.1121/1.402518.

Irineu Main Thesis (Rev Final 28-04-2015)

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Irineu Main Thesis (Rev Final 28-04-2015)

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

CARBONATE PORE SYSTEM EVALUATION UNDER TEXTURE

CONTROL FOR PREDICTION OF MICROPOROSITY ASPECT RATIO

IRINEU DE AZEVEDO LIMA NETO

UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL DO NORTE FLUMINENSE

IRINEU DE AZEVEDO LIMA NETO

Tese apresentada ao Centro de Ciências

Orientadora: Profª. Roseane Marchezi Misságia, D.Sc.

Coorientador: Prof. Marco Antônio Rodrigues de Ceia, D.Sc.

IRINEU DE AZEVEDO LIMA NETO

Tese apresentada ao Centro de Ciências

Aprovada em 31 de março de 2015.

Antônio Abel Gonzalez Carrasquilla, D.Sc. (UENF/LENEP)

Fernando Sérgio Moraes, Ph.D. (UENF/LENEP)

Igor Lopes Santana Braga, D.Sc. (INVISION GEOPHYSICS)

Klédson Tomaso Pereira de Lima, D.Sc. (PETROBRAS/UO-BC)

Marco Antônio Rodrigues de Ceia, D.Sc. (UENF/LENEP) - (Co-orientador)

Roseane Marchezi Misságia, D.Sc. (UENF/LENEP) - (Orientadora)

This thesis and Ph.D. degree are

I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my research advisor,

Special thanks for CAPES to sponsor my Ph.D. course.

I want to express my gratitude to LENEP/UENF for the provided facilities in

Thanks to all students, research scientists, professors, staff and colleagues in

List of Figures viii

List of Tables xiv

List of Symbols xvi

1.1 General Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.3 Outline of Research Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.4 Thesis Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2 Carbonate Rock Physics Theory 11

2.2 Formation of Carbonate Versus Siliciclastic Rocks . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.3 Characterization and Classification of Pore Geometry in Carbonate Rocks 14

2.4 Digital Image Analysis (DIA) of Rock Pore System . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2.5 Rock Physics Models for Pore System Characterization . . . . . . . . . 15

3 Data Base and Laboratory Petrophysical Measurements 24

3.2 Albian Carbonate Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

3.3 Great Oolite Limestone Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3.4 Unfractured North Sea Chalk Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

3.5 Aptian and Miocene Age Carbonate Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

3.6 Complementary Carbonate Data Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

3.7 Synthesis of Study Data Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

4.2 Estimation of the Microporosity Aspect Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

4.3 Prediction of the S-wave Velocity Using Microporosity Aspect Ratio . . . 38

4.4 Evaluation of Carbonate Properties Controlled by Texture and Effective

4.5 Pressure Effects on Pore System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

4.6 Assumptions, Limitations, and Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

5 Results and Data Analysis 42

5.7 Effects of Effective Pressure on Pore System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

6.2 Textural Elastic Properties of Carbonates under Effective Pressure . . . 68

6.3 Carbonate Pore System Evaluation and Velocity-porosity-pressure

6.4 Considerations and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

7.1 General Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

7.2 Suggestions for Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

Appendix A -- Data Base Details 82

A.1 Albian Carbonate Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

A.2 Great Oolite Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

A.3 Unfractured North Sea Chalk Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

A.4 Aptian and Miocene Carbonate Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

A.5 Mixed Carbonate-siliciclastic Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

A.6 Microporous Cemented Grainstone Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

A.7 Lower Cretaceous Limestone Data Set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Appendix B -- Triaxial Measurements 109

B.1 Triaxial and Ultrasonic Velocities Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

B.2 Summary of the Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110