Porosity determination

Introduction
Porosity is the ratio of void space within a rock (or sediment)
relative to bulk volume, reported either as a decimal fraction or
as a percentage of total bulk volume. Sedimentary rocks that
form petroleum reservoirs (e.g., Figure 1) typically have an
average porosity value that will be between 5 and 40%.
Permeability is the ability of porous media to transmit fluid. At
the most basic level, porosity determines the amount of fluid
present within a reservoir, permeability governs what is
recoverable. Because porosity and permeability represent
important characteristics of a reservoir rock, the detection and
evaluation of porosity and the inferred presence or absence of
permeability are two important duties of the geologist.
There are many ways of determining the porosity of a reservoir
rock. Porosity can be: Figure 1. Drill cuttings containing 14% intergranular
Visually estimated from drill cuttings or core fragments. porosity, click on the image to zoom in/out (image
courtesy of Calgary Rock and Materials Services Inc.
Determined for a given interval from petrophysical logs. and Hayden Geological Consultants).

Measured by analyzing the injection behavior of a fluid or gas into rock cuttings or core fragments.
However, when values from different types of analysis are compared to one another, for the same sample or sample
interval, discrepancies may occur. One potential discrepancy relates to the physical size of the sample and sample
interval. Visual estimates of porosity and laboratory measured porosity values are typically conducted on small
samples, derived from drill cuttings (Figure 2A) and/or selected core plug samples removed from drill core (Figure
2B).
Drill cuttings represent a sampled of a drilled interval, the size of which is prescribed in the drilling prognosis or plan.
Typically sample intervals are 3 to 5 m (approx. 10 to 30 feet) in
the upper part of an offshore exploration well (known as top B
hole), decreasing to perhaps a 1 m (3 feet) sample interval as the
drilling rate slows towards total depth (TD); for the sample in
Figure 2A the interval is 3 m (approx. 10 feet). Because of the
relative high cost of drill core, cored intervals are selected over
zones of specific interest (i.e., potential reservoir) and therefore
vary in length, but are typically 9m to 30m (27 to 90 feet). The drill
core in Figure 2B is 5.7 m (19 feet).

Figure 2. Geological samples, showing drill

cuttings obtained over a sample interval of 3
m (approx. 10 feet), the yellow scale bar is 0.5
cm (A); drill core in which the measured
length is 5.7 m (19 feet), the scale bar is
subdivided into cm. The removal of a core
plug leaves cylindrical holes in the drill core,
the scale bar is in cm (drill core image
courtesy of K.M Bergman).

1
Therefore, drill cuttings typically represent the first, and sometimes only, geological samples from an exploration
well. Furthermore, while it is possible to derive measurements of permeability on drill cuttings, generally more
accurate, laboratory based, determinations are possible with drill core, which of course can be linked to a detailed
geological description of the drill core and petrophysical logs.
The industry is heavily reliant on data derived from petrophysical logs via devices and methods of increasing
sophistication. However, it is important to remember that the majority of porosity determinations from petrophysical
logs are derived via the analysis of the mineral plus matrix density or the fluids within a given rock over an interval of
depth. Petrophysical logs cannot directly measure void space! Figure 3 summarizes the relationship between various
mineral and pore characteristics and various modes of analysis. Note that the absolute or total porosity (Figure 3)
consists of isolated, unconnected pores and connected pores of varying size. Also note that there is significant
difference between total porosity and the hydrocarbon pore volume.

Figure 3. A simplified pore-system schematic that relates mineralogy, pore type, fluid type
and state, and various means of determining porosity (after Cone & Kersey, 1992)

Figure 3 implies that both Neutron and Density log could report a higher percentage for porosity compared to the
hydrocarbon pore volume, as could laboratory derived assessments of porosity. This is because when samples are
prepared for either mercury, or gas porosimetry, samples are initially cleaned using reagents and/or solvents then
subsequently dried, with the aim of removing all hydrocarbons. However, sample preparation may inadvertently
reduce, or eliminate, the irreducible water content, which may generate an exaggerated porosity value (Figure 3). In
contrast, petrophysical log analysis may also include clay-bound structural water; therefore care and caution must be
exercised when evaluating data derived from all modes of analysis.
None of this is meant to imply that petrophysical log
determinations and laboratory assessments of porosity are error
prone and to be avoided, quite to contrary! They are widely used
within the industry; petrophysical logs are discussed later in a
chapter devoted to petrophysical logging. However, every
technique has limitations! In a similar way the visual assessment
of porosity takes practice, skill and due diligence. The reporting
geologist must instill a high level of confidence by creating data
that has high levels of both accuracy and precision; Figure 4 Figure 4. Accuracy and precision.
conveys the point!

Pore Type
Carbonate rocks
Because the porosity within a carbonate rock can be the product of diagenesis and/or the conditions of deposition (Lucia,
1995), more pore types have been identified for carbonate than siliciclastic rocks (i.e. sandstone). A number of different
types of porosity may be recognized in core and in drill cuttings. However, the classification scheme of Choquett and
Pray (1970) initially subdivides porosity into three groups, known as Fabric Selective, Not Fabric Selective and Fabric
Selective or Not Fabric Selective (Figure 4). Within the Fabric-selective group, the character of the grains or crystals (i.e.
the fabric) of the rock defines pores types. In contrast, the Non-fabric selective porosity cross-cuts the rock fabric, and in
Fabric selective or not pores may display a fabric control or not!
2
Fabric-selective porosity
Intergranular / interparticle: primary porosity that exists
between grains or particles.
Intraparticle: pores within the grains or particles.
Intercrystal: occurs between replacive crystals of dolomite.
Mouldic/Moldic: due to selective removal of fossil material.
Fenestral: small pores that typically form due to desiccation and
/or gas generation.
Shelter: pores formed beneath larger particles.
Framework: created by the growth of frame-building organisms.
Not-fabric-selective porosity
Fracture: due to tectonic deformation, slumping or solution
collapse.
Channel: created by dissolution, these are elongate pores with a
length to width ratio of 10:1.
Vug: pores with a diameter greater than 1/16mm, pinpoint
porosity is often used to describe micro-vuggy porosity.
Cavern: diameter greater than 1m. Difficult to detect in cuttings! Figure 4. A schematic of the three basic porosity-types
for carbonate rocks: fabric selective, not fabric
Fabric-selective or Not-fabric-selective can be difficult to
selective and fabric selective or not fabric selective, and
detect in drill cuttings (Swanson, 1981). sub-types (after Choquette and Pray, 1970)

Siliciclastic rocks
Pittman (1979) recognizes four basic types of porosity in sandstone
rocks (Figure 4) which include:
Intergranular: Porosity that exists between grains.
Microporosity: Pore-throats are less than 1m (Pittman, 1971)
and difficult to detect with a 10x binocular microscope.
Dissolution: Porosity formed by the partial or complete
dissolution of framework grains and / or the cement. Figure 4. A schematic of the four basic pore-types for
siliciclastic rocks: intergranular, microporosity,
Fracture: Created by the natural fracturing of the rock fabric.
dissolution and fracture (after Pittman, 1978)
Swanson (1981) also includes a Moldic porosity category for
siliciclastic rocks, created by the leaching of soluble grains; also noting that this type of porosity can be difficult to detect
in siliciclastics.

Porosity type and drill cuttings/core

Drill cuttings analysis and the visual determination of porosity from drill cuttings present unique challenges. Firstly,
lithological characteristics, including porosity, are described for each recognizable lithology per sample interval.
Secondly, the geologist must examine several rock chips, per lithology, in order to get a good overview of distinguishing
characteristics, especially porosity. Thirdly, you will not be able to use all terms devised by Pittman or Choquette and
Pray, which were originally devised for thin section analysis; because of the level of magnification, some types of
porosity are more readily recognizable than others. A listing of terms commonly used by well site geologists includes:
Intergranular*, interparticle*, intercrystalline* (porosity between grains/particles/crystals respectively)
Vuggy* (voids greater than 1/16mm)
Pin-point* (appear as though created by a pin prick) less than 1/16mm
Fenestral* (looks like tiny gas bubble)
Fracture* (the result of tectonic deformation)
Moldic (mouldic) (due to the leaching of soluble grains)
Earthy (i.e. low porosity)
Terms denoted by (*) are perhaps those most commonly used. Figure 5 and 6 are images of drill cuttings that contain
intergranular porosity. Figure 5 shows a coarse-grained basal sandstone, whereas Figure 6 shows a medium grained
sandstone (A) and a very-fine grained sandstone (B and C). The predominant porosity type is intergranular and the
amount

3
of porosity the same for all three examples. Note the increased degree of difficulty in identifying porosity with decreasing
grain size! Lastly, porosity is easier to recognize in dry samples rather than wet!

Figure 5. Images of a porous and permeable coarse-grained basal sandstone. Showing the drill cuttings as a thin section
micrograph in which the pores are coloured blue (A); drill cuttings under moderate high magnification [note scale bar for reference],
large intergranular pores are visible at this magnification (B). The area outlined in yellow in B shown at higher magnification [note
scale bar for reference], this magnification reveals a large number of intergranular pores some of which are indicated (see arrows) (C)
(images courtesy of Calgary Rock and Materials Services Inc. and Hayden Geological Consultants).

Figure 6. Different drill cuttings with similar measured porosity. Showing drill cuttings of a medium grained sandstone under
moderate high magnification pores are visible at this magnification (see arrows) (A). Also showing drill-cuttings for a vf-grained
sandstone under higher magnification [note scale bar for reference], at this magnifications pores are still somewhat difficult to
detect (B), unless using a higher magnification (C); (images courtesy of Calgary Rock and Materials Services Inc. and Hayden
G l i lC lt t )

Porosity amount
In addition to describing the physical appearance of
pore type, the relative proportion or amount of porosity
must be estimated also. A percentage chart (Figure 7)
used in conjunction with samples of known proportion
is a useful and good start; after that it is a matter of
practice and diligence. As a general rule, do not over
exaggerate volumes and never fabricate data. For
example, you cannot see porosity in shale and it is
unlikely that you will see pores in siltstone, unless you
have access to a high quality, very high magnification
microscope!
For example, if you were to estimate the porosity type
and amount using the example in Figure 1, you should
recognize intergranular porosity and estimate an amount
of 14%. A series of self-test examples follows.

4
 Figure 7. Volume percentage chart (courtesy of AAPG)

Self test:
Siliciclastic rocks
Examine the suite of samples given below. For each sample, attempt an estimation of the amount (in %) and type of
porosity. Each sample is represented by a thin-section micrograph and a micrograph of the drill cuttings. You should
attempt to use the cuttings. The thin section micrographs are for assistance only. Answers are given after the references!

Figure 8. Sample 1. Porosity type = ___________________; porosity amount _______ %;

(image courtesy of Calgary Rock and Materials Services Inc. and Hayden Geological Consultants)

Figure 9. Sample 2. Porosity type = ___________________; porosity amount _______ %;

(image courtesy of Calgary Rock and Materials Services Inc. and Hayden Geological Consultants)

Figure 10. Sample 3. Porosity type = ___________________; porosity amount _______ %;

(image courtesy of Calgary Rock and Materials Services Inc. and Hayden Geological Consultants)
5
Carbonate rocks
Describe the amount (in %) and type of porosity for each sample using the nomenclature of Choquette and Pray
(1970. X.N. crossed nicols (cross-polarized light), G.P. gypsum plate (Quartz Red I plate) inserted. The red scale
bar indicates a scale distance of 0.10 mm.

Figure 11. Sample 4. X.N. Figure 12. Sample 5. X.N.

Holocene oolite, Great Salt Lake, Utah. Porosity in black. (Scholle, 1978) Up. Eocene Ocala Fm., Florida. Porosity in black. (Scholle, 1978)
Porosity type = ____________; porosity amount _____ %; Porosity type = ____________; porosity amount _____ %;

Figure 13. Sample 6 X.N. Figure 14. Sample 7. X.N.

Holocene oolite, Great Salt Lake, Utah. Porosity in black. (Scholle, 1978) Up. Oligocene Suwanne Fm., Florida. Porosity in black. (Scholle, 1978)
Porosity type = ____________; porosity amount _____ %; Porosity type = ____________; porosity amount _____ %;

Figure 15. Sample 8. G.P. Figure 16. Sample 9. X.N.

Up. Oligocene Suwanne Fm., Florida. Porosity in purple. (Scholle, 1978) Mid. Ordovician Black River L.S. PA. Porosity in black. (Scholle, 1978)
Porosity type = ____________; porosity amount _____ %; Porosity type = ____________; porosity amount _____ %;

6
References
Cone, M.P. and Kersey, D.G. (1992), Porosity, in The Development Geology Reference Manual, (Morton-Thompson, D and A. M
Woods Eds.) AAPG Methods in Exploration Series, No. 10, The American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa,
Oklahoma, U.S.A., p204 to 209
Choquette, P.W. and Pray, L.C. (1970) Geological nomenclature and classification of porosity in sedimentary carbonates. AAPG
Bulletin, v54, 207-250
Lucia, F.J. (1995), 'Rock-fabric/petrophysical classification of carbonate pore space for reservoir characterisation', AAPG Bulletin,
v79, p1275-1300
Pittman, E.D., 1979, Porosity, diagenesis and productive capability of sandstone reservoirs: in, Aspects of Diagenesis
(Scholle, P.A. and P.R. Schluger, Eds.), Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists Special
Publication 26, p.p.159-173.
Swanson, R.G., 1981, Sample Examination manual, AAPG Methods in exploration Series, AAPG, Tulsa, Oklahoma,
35p.
Tucker, M.E. and Wright, P.V. (1990) Carbonate Sedimentology, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, London,
Edinburgh, Boston, Melbourne 482p

Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the following for their kind permission to use images in this linked exercise.
The AAPG
Calgary Rock and Materials Services Inc. and Hayden Geological Consultants
K.M. Bergman

Answers
Figure 8. Sample 1. Porosity type = intergranular; porosity amount 14%
Figure 9. Sample 2. Porosity type = intergranular; porosity amount 10%
Figure 10. Sample 3. Porosity type = intergranular; porosity amount 8%
Figure 11. Sample 4. Porosity type = interparticle; porosity amount ~26%
Figure 12. Sample 5. Porosity type = intergranular (interparticle); porosity amount ~18_ %
Figure 13. Sample 6. Porosity type = vuggy (not fabric selective); porosity amount ~32%
Figure 14. Sample 7. Porosity type = moldic; porosity amount ~17 %
Figure 15. Sample 8. Porosity type = interparticle and intraparticle; porosity amount ~23 %
Figure 16. Sample 9. Porosity type = fracture; porosity amount ~8 %