Conditional reconstruction: An alternative strategy in digital rock physics

Digital rock physics (DRP) is a newly developed method based on imaging and digitizing of 3D pore and mineral structure of actual rock and numerically computing rock physical properties, such as permeability, elastic moduli, and formation factor. Modern high-resolution microcomputed tomography scanners are used for imaging, but these devices are not widely available, and 3D imaging is also costly and it is a time-consuming procedure. However, recent improvements of 3D reconstruction algorithms such as crosscorrelation-based simulation and, on the other side, the concept of rock physical trends have provided some new avenues in DRP. We have developed a modified work flow using higher order statistical methods. First, a high-resolution 2D image is divided into smaller subimages. Then, different stochastic subsamples are generated based on the provided 2D subimages. Eventually, various rock physical parameters are calculated. Using several subsamples allows extracting rock physical trends and better capturing the heterogeneity and variability. We implemented our work flow on two DRP benchmark data (Berea sandstone and Grosmont carbonate) and a thin-section image from the Grosmont carbonate formation. Results of realization models, pore network modeling, and autocorrelation functions for the real and reconstructed subsamples reveal the validity of the reconstructed models. Furthermore, the agreement between static and dynamic methods indicates that subsamples are representative volume elements. Average values of the subsamples’ properties follow the reference trends of the rock sample. Permeability trends pass the actual results of the benchmark samples; however, elastic moduli trends find higher values. The latter can be due to image resolution and voxel size, which are generated by imaging tools and reconstruction algorithms. According to the obtained results, this strategy can be introduced as a valid and accurate method where an alternative method for standard DRP is needed.

[1]  Pejman Tahmasebi,et al.  Multiscale and multiresolution modeling of shales and their flow and morphological properties , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[2]  M. Sahimi,et al.  Three-Dimensional Stochastic Characterization of Shale SEM Images , 2015, Transport in Porous Media.

[3]  Pejman Tahmasebi,et al.  Reconstruction of nonstationary disordered materials and media: Watershed transform and cross-correlation function. , 2015, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[4]  M. Jouini,et al.  Numerical estimation of carbonate rock properties using multiscale images , 2015 .

[5]  Pejman Tahmasebi,et al.  Geostatistical Simulation and Reconstruction of Porous Media by a Cross-Correlation Function and Integration of Hard and Soft Data , 2015, Transport in Porous Media.

[6]  XiaoHai He,et al.  Reconstruction of three-dimensional porous media from a single two-dimensional image using three-step sampling. , 2015, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[7]  Pejman Tahmasebi,et al.  MS-CCSIM: Accelerating pattern-based geostatistical simulation of categorical variables using a multi-scale search in Fourier space , 2014, Comput. Geosci..

[8]  L. A. Lubis,et al.  Pore Type Classification on Carbonate Reservoir in Offshore Sarawak using Rock Physics Model and Rock Digital Images , 2014 .

[9]  Juan F. Martínez,et al.  Digital Rock Physics for Reservoir Characterization , 2013 .

[10]  E. Westphal,et al.  Elastic Properties of Carbonate Reservoir Rocks Using Digital Rock Physics , 2013 .

[11]  M. Sahimi,et al.  Cross-correlation function for accurate reconstruction of heterogeneous media. , 2013, Physical Review Letters.

[12]  H. Hassani,et al.  Application of probabilistic facies prediction and estimation of rock physics parameters in a carbonate reservoir from Iran , 2013 .

[13]  Tapan Mukerji,et al.  Digital rock physics benchmarks - Part I: Imaging and segmentation , 2013, Comput. Geosci..

[14]  Pejman Tahmasebi,et al.  Reconstruction of three-dimensional porous media using a single thin section. , 2012, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[15]  Erik H. Saenger,et al.  Digital rock physics: numerical prediction of pressure-dependent ultrasonic velocities using micro-CT imaging , 2012 .

[16]  J. Dvorkin,et al.  Rules of upscaling for rock physics transforms: Composites of randomly and independently drawn elements , 2012 .

[17]  Pejman Tahmasebi,et al.  Multiple-point geostatistical modeling based on the cross-correlation functions , 2012, Computational Geosciences.

[18]  Qian Fang,et al.  Relevance of computational rock physics , 2011 .

[19]  C. Sisk,et al.  Application of Digital Rock Physics for Geophysical Rock Properties , 2011 .

[20]  Holger Steeb,et al.  Digital Rock Physics: Effect of Fluid Viscosity On Effective Elastic Properties , 2011 .

[21]  Jens Harting,et al.  Quantitative analysis of numerical estimates for the permeability of porous media from lattice-Boltzmann simulations , 2010, 1005.2530.

[22]  Rudolf Hilfer,et al.  Continuum reconstruction of the pore scale microstructure for Fontainebleau sandstone , 2010 .

[23]  Martin J Blunt,et al.  Pore-network extraction from micro-computerized-tomography images. , 2009, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[24]  Erik H. Saenger,et al.  Numerical methods to determine effective elastic properties , 2008 .

[25]  Martin J. Blunt,et al.  Pore-scale network modeling of Ellis and Herschel–Bulkley fluids , 2008 .

[26]  M. Blunt,et al.  Pore space reconstruction of vuggy carbonates using microtomography and multiple‐point statistics , 2007 .

[27]  S. Shapiro,et al.  Effective Elastic Properties of Fractured Rocks: Dynamic vs. Static Considerations , 2006 .

[28]  M. Blunt,et al.  Pore space reconstruction using multiple-point statistics , 2005 .

[29]  M. Blunt,et al.  Prediction of permeability for porous media reconstructed using multiple-point statistics. , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[30]  Y. Keehm,et al.  Permeability prediction from thin sections: 3D reconstruction and Lattice‐Boltzmann flow simulation , 2004 .

[31]  Ole Torsæter,et al.  Reconstruction of chalk pore networks from 2D backscatter electron micrographs using a simulated annealing technique , 2002 .

[32]  Ioannis Chatzis,et al.  Permeability and electrical conductivity of porous media from 3D stochastic replicas of the microstructure , 2000 .

[33]  G. McLachlan,et al.  Finite Mixture Models , 2000, Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics.

[34]  Amos Nur,et al.  Elasticity of high‐porosity sandstones: Theory for two North Sea data sets , 1996 .

[35]  Edward J. Garboczi,et al.  An algorithm for computing the effective linear elastic properties of heterogeneous materials: Three-dimensional results for composites with equal phase poisson ratios , 1995 .

[36]  D. Rothman,et al.  Lattice-Boltzmann simulations of flow through Fontainebleau sandstone , 1995 .

[37]  G. Jenkins,et al.  Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control , 1978 .

[38]  Tapan Mukerji,et al.  Digital rock physics benchmarks - part II: Computing effective properties , 2013, Comput. Geosci..

[39]  M. Blunt,et al.  Pore-scale imaging and modelling , 2013 .

[40]  Martin J. Blunt,et al.  Computations of Absolute Permeability on Micro-CT Images , 2012, Mathematical Geosciences.

[41]  Christoph H. Arns,et al.  Digital rock physics: 3D imaging of core material and correlations to acoustic and flow properties , 2009 .

[42]  Bülent Sankur,et al.  Survey over image thresholding techniques and quantitative performance evaluation , 2004, J. Electronic Imaging.

[43]  S. Shapiro,et al.  Modeling the propagation of elastic waves using a modified finite-difference grid , 2000 .