SUBSURFACE ANALYSISINTERPRET / SERVICE 11
Bring core descriptions, CT imagery, analytical measurements and borehole information together to support geological interpretation.
THE QUESTION
Datasets often use different reference frames and scales. A consistent depth and sample framework supports meaningful comparisons of facies, structures and reservoir-quality variations.
CORE TO RESERVOIR
Connect what the rock looks like, how it was deposited and how its pore system has evolved. CTS brings core description, imaging and laboratory evidence into a consistent interpretation for clastic and carbonate reservoirs.
SEE THE CONNECTION
Compare the visible rock fabric with internal CT structure, then relate recognisable features to borehole images.
Surface observations establish the sedimentological context.
Unwrapped CT imagery extends the view around the core.
Corresponding traces support orientation and dip interpretation.
BEDDING TO ARCHITECTURE
Bounding surfaces and stratification patterns help distinguish depositional elements and their internal geometry. These observations inform assessment of heterogeneity and possible flow pathways.
Avalanche strataWind-ripple strataSabkha
Colours follow the source interpretation; this is a geological interpretation, not a simulated flow result.
Reference figures: © Badley Ashton, supplied CT/BHI aeolian-deposits case study. Views are presented separately, not as a common-scale aligned log.
Describe lithology, grain size, sedimentary structures and bed boundaries. Build facies associations and stacking patterns that connect core observations with depositional environments and reservoir geometry.
Interpreted core logs · facies schemes · key surfaces
Combine core photographs, circumferential CT images and borehole images (BHI). Match recognisable features, reconcile depth and orientation, and examine bedding and bounding surfaces in their directional context.
Aligned image panels · orientation records · dip interpretation
Integrate thin sections, SEM, XRD, routine core analysis and MICP to assess how texture, clay, cement and pore systems influence reservoir quality. Relate rock types to the sedimentological framework.
Rock-type schemes · property comparisons · geological controls
Review fractures, faults and deformation bands using core, CT and borehole images. Distinguish natural features from drilling-related damage where the evidence allows, and examine their relationship to mechanical stratigraphy.
Classified feature picks · fracture sets · structural panels
Calibrate wireline responses against core observations and analytical results. Integrate stratigraphic evidence, map key surfaces and assess changes in facies, connectivity and potential flow barriers between wells.
Correlation panels · depositional concepts · model inputs
Where core is limited, combine cuttings petrography, mineralogy and wireline logs to constrain lithology and facies. Targeted cement and fluid-inclusion studies can investigate diagenetic history where suitable material is available.
Integrated descriptions · diagenetic sequences · interpretation reports
A CLOSER LOOK / CORE–CT–BHI
The value is in matching the evidence. Circumferential CT can reveal internal stratification; borehole images provide an orientation reference. Core description supplies the geological context for both.
Review core recovery, image quality, log coverage and depth references.
Splice CT sections, match features and record depth and relative rotation adjustments.
Use suitable BHI matches to reconstruct orientation to north and interpret geological features.
Export aligned panels, interpreted picks and a traceable record of assumptions.
Orientation requires recognisable, reliable matches. Poor recovery, disturbed core and variable image quality can leave intervals unresolved; those uncertainties remain part of the interpretation.
DELIVERABLES
Outputs are selected around the decision—not simply the available tests. The programme can run from a focused single-well review to integrated multi-well interpretation.
AI INTEGRATION & PREDICTIVE MODELLING
Align core measurements, pXRF, wireline curves and suitable reference data. Review lithofacies coverage, define prediction targets and establish a blind-validation strategy. A readiness review does not deliver a predictive model.
Develop initial models for selected properties such as porosity, permeability or facies where the inputs support them. Assess preliminary performance and uncertainty before deciding whether further development is justified.
Refine promising models, test against withheld reference data and quantify uncertainty. Any application to further core or another well requires a separate assessment of geological coverage and applicability.
Where supported by calibration data, extend the scope to density, strength, elastic properties or mineralogy. Deliver agreed prediction curves, figures and technical reporting with measured and modelled outputs kept distinct.
Predictive work depends on representative training and independent reference data. Mineralogical prediction may require XRD or QEMSCAN calibration. Delivery of curves or reports does not automatically include executable models or source code.
Connect rock typing with petrography ↗CTS is your point of contact for planning the programme and bringing the results together. Where specialist laboratory or interpretation input is required, delivery responsibilities are identified in your proposal.
The scope distinguishes the measurement package and its included outputs from additional processing, interpretation and interactive reporting. Sample requirements and method limitations are confirmed before work begins.
A CONNECTED WORKFLOW
Interpretation boundary
Orientation and correlation depend on available data quality and coverage. Uncertain matches remain identified as uncertainties.