Curves you can interpret
Review preparation, curve quality and closure effects before deriving pore-throat distributions. Flag anomalous samples and assess whether the dataset represents the range of rock present.
← All services
CHARACTERISE / SERVICE 03
HPMI / MICP.
Mercury injection capillary pressure analysis connects pore-throat measurements with hydraulic rock typing, SCAL sample selection and reservoir calibration.
THE QUESTION
What does the pore system tell you about reservoir behaviour?
Similar porosity can conceal different pore-throat systems. Combine HPMI/MICP with routine core analysis, geology and SCAL to investigate those differences, test sample representativeness and establish which reservoir applications the evidence supports.
Methods & applications
- Mercury intrusion and extrusion measurements as scoped
- Curve processing, closure review and quality control
- Pore-throat distributions and Mean Hydraulic Radius
- Hydraulic rock typing and SCAL sample-coverage assessment
- MICP-derived permeability comparison with measured core data
- Calibrated capillary-pressure and saturation-height interpretation
- Caprock entry-pressure assessment
MEAN HYDRAULIC RADIUS
Mean Hydraulic Radius explained.
The example follows capillary-pressure behaviour through hydraulic-radius distributions to a Mean Hydraulic Radius (MHR) interpretation. Comparing pore-volume and permeability contributions helps explain why different pore systems can have different flow behaviour.
Capillary-pressure response
Pore-system distributions
Mean Hydraulic Radius
Example conditions: the source relates a maximum reservoir capillary pressure of 500 psi to a hydraulic radius of 0.2 µm for its water-saturation interpretation. These values are specific to this example and its conversion assumptions.
Source: Virtual Petrophysics; Ed Clerke, SPE Dubai 2012.
PORE-SYSTEM CHARACTERISATION
See beyond a single porosity trend.
One population. Different pore systems.
Hydraulic rock typing adds pore-system context to a porosity–permeability crossplot. Review the spread within each class, identify outliers and assess whether the selected samples cover the wider rock population.
Support representative sampling
Use this view alongside geology and laboratory QC to identify gaps before further SCAL testing or reservoir calibration.
Select any plot to inspect it at full size.
PERMEABILITY ASSESSMENT
Compare the interpretation with core evidence.
Review MICP-derived permeability estimates against core permeability across hydraulic rock types. Differences between methods and individual samples guide QC and reservoir-specific calibration.
KREV
Buiting–Clerke
Purcell
Example comparison plots. Fit statistics describe this dataset, not guaranteed predictive performance in other reservoirs.
PORE SYSTEMS & RESERVOIR APPLICATIONS
Put capillary-pressure data to work.
Connect laboratory measurements with sample selection, permeability assessment and reservoir-specific saturation modelling. Start with new measurements or bring an existing HPMI/MICP dataset for review.
HPMI/MICP records mercury intrusion against pressure. Pore-throat distributions and subsequent interpretations are derived using documented assumptions and quality checks. Measurement and QC, pore-system interpretation and calibrated reservoir applications are distinct parts of the scope—not automatic inclusions in every measurement commission.
Hydraulic rock types
Use Mean Hydraulic Radius (MHR), hydraulic rock typing (HRT) and MICP-derived permeability estimates (KREV) to investigate pore-system differences. Compare derived permeability with measured routine core analysis.
Better SCAL coverage
Assess proposed plugs and trims against the hydraulic rock-type population. Identify missing classes and target additional samples before committing to a larger SCAL programme.
Saturation & model inputs
Where the supporting evidence allows, develop GEV/Gaussian capillary-pressure parameters and saturation-height relationships. Extend calibrated results to well logs and reservoir models with documented uncertainty and quality checks.
CORE-TO-LOG INTERPRETATION
Connect the logs to capillary behaviour.
Follow the selected position across the log tracks as the corresponding modelled capillary-pressure curve updates. This animated walkthrough shows how pore-system interpretation can support water-saturation and bulk volume oil (BVO) assessment.
Prepare the core evidence
Quality-check MICP curves and assess pore-system coverage against routine core analysis and the geological context.
Calibrate the log interpretation
Fit capillary-pressure behaviour and establish reservoir-specific relationships before extending parameters to log positions.
Review saturation & BVO
Examine the selected curve alongside height above the free-water level, porosity and permeability. Assess saturation and BVO consistency using the agreed fluid and contact assumptions.
Carry the interpretation forward
Deliver calibrated saturation-height relationships and model inputs with uncertainty flags and checks against independent evidence.
CAPROCK & CO₂ STORAGE
Assess capillary sealing behaviour.
Link quality-reviewed MICP curves with baseline rock properties and mineralogy. Record the entry-pressure criterion and distinguish mercury measurements from fluid-system conversions and any separately commissioned direct CO₂ testing.
Explore caprock characterisation for CCUS ↗FIXED-SCOPE INITIAL SCREEN
Know what your data can support.
A focused review of existing MICP, routine core analysis, SCAL and log data establishes quality, sample coverage and calibration potential. Receive a data-gap assessment, technical review and a recommended next-phase scope.
A clear next step
ProceedThe evidence supports the proposed next phase.
Add targeted dataClose specific measurement or sample-coverage gaps.
Pause or reviseAdjust the scope where the evidence is insufficient.
Discuss your MICP dataset ↗COMPLEMENTARY PORE-SYSTEM MEASUREMENTS
Add surface area to the pore-system picture.
Nitrogen adsorption / BET
Measure specific surface area using nitrogen adsorption and an agreed BET evaluation. This provides complementary evidence for fine-grained rocks alongside MICP, mineralogy and microscopy.
Preparation and quality control
Agree cleaning, drying and degassing around sample sensitivity. Report the preparation conditions and evaluation basis so results can be compared meaningfully.
Legacy sample assessment
Review the condition and preparation history of archived plugs. Scope trimming, re-cleaning or re-drying where needed before starting a new MICP programme.
Integrated interpretation
Combine accessible surface-area measurements with pore-throat distributions and mineral textures. Use the evidence to guide representative sample selection and reactive-model inputs.
BET surface area is not a direct measure of CO₂ storage capacity or capillary seal strength. MICP and adsorption probe different aspects of the accessible pore system.
Connect pore-system evidence with CCUS ↗A clearly scoped delivery.
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
From question to evidence.
- 01
Review data and representative sample coverage
- 02
Measure, process and quality-check curves
- 03
Characterise pore systems and compare core evidence
- 04
Calibrate reservoir applications and document uncertainty
Interpretation boundary
MICP is destructive. Derived permeability does not replace measured core permeability. Reservoir-fluid conversion, saturation-height and model extension require reservoir-specific assumptions and calibration. Relative-permeability work requires supporting SCAL and wettability evidence; MICP alone is not a universal predictor.