DOCSLIB.ORG

SWEPI Rex Timber No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SWEPI Rex Timber No Information Circular 39A DFF-OG-OU-011 Structural and Stratigraphic Analysis of the Shell Rex Timber No. 1-9 Well, Southern Ouachita Fold and Thrust Belt, Clark County, Arkansas Ted Godo1, Peng Li2, and M. Ed Ratchford2 1 Shell Exploration & Production Company, Houston, Texas 2 Arkansas Geological Survey, Little Rock, Arkansas Bekki White, Director and State Geologist Arkansas Geological Survey December 2008 STATE OF ARKANSAS Mike Beebe, Governor ARKANSAS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Bekki White, Director and State Geologist COMMISSIONERS Dr. Richard Cohoon, Chairman………………………………………………..Russellville William Willis, Vice Chairman………………………………………………..Hot Springs David J. Baumgardner.........................................................................................Little Rock Brad DeVazier…………………………………………………………………Forrest City Keith DuPriest……………………………………………………………………Magnolia Becky Keogh……………………………………………………………………Little Rock David Lumbert………………………………………………………………….Little Rock i Table of Contents Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………….ii List of Figures and Table……………………………………………………....................iii List of Plates and Appendices……………………………………………………………..v Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................. vi Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1 Regional Geologic Setting.................................................................................................. 3 Well Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 6 Geochemistry.................................................................................................................... 11 Depositional Environment ................................................................................................ 16 Deepwater Elements and Terminology......................................................................... 16 Outcrop Analogs and Well Log Interpretation ............................................................. 17 Structural Evaluation ........................................................................................................ 19 Borehole Televiewer Analysis...................................................................................... 23 Sandstone Petrology ......................................................................................................... 33 General Discussion ....................................................................................................... 33 Petrographic Analysis of Well Samples ....................................................................... 34 Diagenesis......................................................................................................................... 38 Discussion......................................................................................................................... 54 References Cited............................................................................................................... 55 ii List of Figures and Table Figure 1. Surface and subcrop geology of the Rex Timber 1-9 Well, Clark County, Arkansas.............................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2. Partial stratigraphic section from the Ouachita Mountains region, Arkansas and Oklahoma............................................................................................................................ 4 Figure 3. Structural contour map of the top of the Stanley Formation near the Rex Timber No. 1-9 well……………………………………………………………………….8 Figure 4. Stratigraphic and thermal maturity evaluation of Rex Timber No. 1-9 well ... 10 Figure 5. The conversion relationship between level of maturity (LOM) and vitrinite reflectance (Ro)................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 6. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) values of samples in the Rex Timber No. 1-9 well……………………………………………………………………………………….14 Figure 7A. Interpreted electrical log shapes from the Rex Timber No. 1-9 well (1,700 – 2,000 ft)………………………………………………………………………...19 Figure 7B. Interpreted electrical log shapes from the Rex Timber No. 1-9 well (2,640 – 3,200 ft)……………………………………………………………………… 20 Figure 7C. Interpreted electrical log shapes from the Rex Timber No. 1-9 well (5,250 – 5,950 ft)……………………………………………………………………… 21 Figure 8. Seismic Line 83-506-2334 (migrated stack) displaying a dip section of the Moccasin prospect……………………………………………………………………….24 Figure 9A. Low-angle fractures (LAF) and bedding (B)………………………………..26 Figure 9B. Low-angle fractures (LAF) and high-angle fractures (HAF) ........................ 27 Figure 9C. Fracture cluster (FC) with undeformed sandstone above and below ............ 28 Figure 9D. Lines drawn parallel to the direction of maximum compressive stress σ1 during folding.................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 9E. Interval of 2,299-2,397 ft (701-731 m) showing folds above a thrust fault (F) ........................................................................................................................................... 53 Figure 9F. Lenses (L) of Jackfork sandstone in shale ..................................................... 55 iii Figure 10. Classification of sandstone examined by point counting methods using twenty-two (22) thin sections from the Rex Timber No. 1-9 well. Classification scheme is from Folk (1968)………………………………………………………………………36 Figure 11. Constituents of sandstones examined in the Rex Timber No. 1-9 well. Results based on point counts of thin sections from ditch cuttings (300 points per thin section). 37 Figure 12. EDAX elemental analysis spectrums of selected carbonates in the Rex Timber No. 1-9. Spectrums displayed from thin sections shown on Plate 4B and Plate 7D…….53 Table 1. Thermal maturity level and visual kerogen type analysis for Rex Timber No. 1-9 well……...……………………………………………….…………………………..15 iv List of Plates and Appendices Plate 1. Location map and surface geology of the southern Ouachita Mountain region, Arkansas……………………………….At the end of manuscript and separate file on disk Plate 2. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 5,040 – 5,050 ft; B) 5,040 – 5,050 ft; C) 2,370 – 2,380 ft; D) 2,370 – 2,380 ft……………………………………...39 Plate 3. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 1,530 – 1,540 ft; B) 2,370 – 2,380 ft; B) 5,210 – 5,220 ft; C) 4,670 – 4,680 ft; D) 2,620 – 2,630 ft………………..41 Plate 4. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 3,790 – 3,800 ft; B) 3,508 ft; C) 1,480 – 1,490 ft; D) 1,480 – 1,490 ft………………………………………………42 Plate 5. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 1,480 – 1490 ft; B) 5,210 – 5,220 ft; C) 3,860 – 3,870 ft; D) 5,300 – 5,310 ft………………………………………..44 Plate 6. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 4,570 – 4,580 ft; B) 4,570 – 4,580 ft; C) 4,670 – 4,680 ft; D) 4,670 – 4,680 ft……………………………………...45 Plate 7. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 1,530 – 1,540 ft; B) 3,100 – 3,110 ft; C) 1,460 – 1,470 ft; D) 1,460 – 1,470 ft……………………………………...47 Plate 8. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 3,860 – 3,870 ft; B) 3,860 – 3,870 ft; C) 5,520 – 5,530 ft; D) 5,510 – 5,520 ft……………………………………...48 Plate 9. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 3,370 – 3,385 ft; B) 1,210 – 1,220 ft; C) 1,160 – 1,170 ft; D) 3,370 – 3,385 ft……………………………………...49 Plate 10. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 5,110 – 5,120 ft; B) 5,110 – 5,120 ft; C) 3,790 – 3,800 ft; D) 3,790 – 3,800 ft……………………………………...50 Plate 11. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 5,520 – 5,530 ft; B) 5,520 – 5,530 ft; C) 1,460 – 1,470 ft; D) 5,110 – 5,120 ft……………………………………...51 Plate 12. Photomicrographs and petrographic descriptions. A) 3,515.3 ft; B) 6,150 – 6,160 ft; C) 5,110 – 5,120 ft; D) 5,110 – 5,120 ft………………………………………..53 Appendix 1. Total organic carbon (TOC) analysis for Rex Timber No. 1-9 well………60 Appendix 2. Thin section point counts from Rex Timber No. 1-9 well………………...65 v Acknowledgments The authors express their gratitude to Shell Exploration & Production Company (SEPCO) for sharing their data, technical advice, and subsurface knowledge of the Ouachita Mountains region in Arkansas for this publication. We are also thankful to the geology staff of the Arkansas Geological Survey (AGS) for reviewing the technical aspects of the manuscript and providing supplemental geologic information that is germane to this report. Finally, we would like thank Nathan Taylor and Jerry Clark, GIS specialists at the AGS for preparing the graphics and plates in this report. vi Structural and Stratigraphic Analysis of the Shell Rex Timber No. 1-9 Well, Southern Ouachita Fold and Thrust Belt, Clark County, Arkansas Ted Godo1, Peng Li2, and M. Ed Ratchford2 1 Shell Exploration & Production Company, Houston, Texas 2 Arkansas Geological Survey, Little Rock, Arkansas Introduction A joint research project between the Arkansas Geological Survey (AGS) and Shell Exploration & Production Company (SEPCO) was undertaken to report the findings of three exploration wells drilled by Shell in the 1980’s in the Arkansas portion of the Ouachita Mountains. Shell had recognized three exploration targets in the Ouachita fold and thrust belt of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • U-PB DETRITAL ZIRCONS of the SYN-OROGENIC CARBONIFEROUS DEEP-WATER CLASTIC DEPOSITS in the OUACHITA MOUNTAINS, ARKANSAS, UNITED STATES By
    U-PB DETRITAL ZIRCONS OF THE SYN-OROGENIC CARBONIFEROUS DEEP-WATER CLASTIC DEPOSITS IN THE OUACHITA MOUNTAINS, ARKANSAS, UNITED STATES By SHAUN T. PRINES Bachelor of Science, 2018 University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the College of Science and Engineering Texas Christian University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF SCIENCE IN GEOLOGY May 2020 Copyright by Shaun T. Prines 2020 Acknowledgements I would like to thank the following for all the help they have given me during my two years at TCU. First and foremost, my research advisor Dr. Xiangyang “Cheyenne” Xie for his patience and support with all the work I have ever done at TCU. His sense of humor made every single day in the “Xie Cave” enjoyable and fun. I truly believe I could not have had a better advisor or person helping me with my research during my time here at TCU. Also, I would like to thank my committee members Dr. Helge Alsleben and Dr. Walter L. Manger. I would like to greatly express my gratitude to Dr. Alsleben for his willingness to always answer my daily questions and for Dr. Manger for all his help in the field and providing insights for my research with his expertise on the geology of Arkansas. Additionally, I would like to thank family especially my mom Leslie and my grandma Bonnie who always gave their love and support to the fullest while I was working on my thesis. I would like to also thank my girlfriend Kayla for her constant love and support and always having to listen to me talk about detrital zircons.
    [Show full text]
  • Roadside Geology Series 01
    STATE OF ARKANSAS Mike Beebe, Governor Arkansas Geological Survey Bekki White, State Geologist and Director COMMISSIONERS Dr. Richard Cohoon, Chairman…………………………Russellville William Willis, Vice Chairman…………………………...Hot Springs Gus Ludwig…….…………………………………...........Quitman Ken Fritsche………………………………………………Greenwood William Cains………………………………………………Altus Quin Baber…………………………………………………Benton David Lumbert……………………………………………..Little Rock Little Rock, Arkansas 2013 Acknowledgements The research time, travel expenses, and publication costs required for the preparation of this road guide were funded by a faculty research grant from Arkansas Tech University. I wish to express my sincere thanks to the Board of Trustees, Dr. Robert Brown, President, and Dr. John Watson, Vice President for Academic Affairs for their support. The encouragement and cooperation of Ms. Bekki White, State Geologist and Director of the Arkansas Geological Survey (AGC) made the road guide concept a reality. Many of the maps and publications that served as a basis for this publication were provided by the AGC. The AGC’s professional staff members were particularly helpful by reviewing various drafts of the text. Their geological and editorial expertise served to greatly improve the final product. Ms. Lea Nondorf and Mr. Jason Tipton, also of the AGC staff, prepared many of the route and geological maps. All photography was done by me except where credited to another person. A special thank you goes to Ms. Angela Chandler, Geological Supervisor, AGC, who also prepared route and geological maps, and made a major contribution to the preparation of the publication by serving as technical editor and supervisor of the AGC’s participation in the project. Also, two other geologists were helpful in reviewing the first drafts of the text.
    [Show full text]
  • This Dissertation Has Been 62—1753 Microfilmed Exactly As Received
    This dissertation has been 62—1753 microfilmed exactly as received SEELY, Donald Randolph, 1928- STRUCTURE AND STRATIGRAPHY OP THE RICH MOUNTAIN AREA, OKLAHOMA AND ARKANSAS. PART I: OBSERVATIONAL DATA. PART H: HYPOTHESES. The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1962 Geology University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE STRUCTURE AND STRATIGRAPHY OF THE RICH MOUITTAIN AREA, OKLAHOMA AND ARKANSAS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY DONALD RANDOLPH SEELY Norman, Oklahoma 1962 STRUCTURE AND STRATIGRAPHY OF THE RICH MOUNTAIN AREA, OKLAHOMA AND ARKANSAS APPROVED BY A . Û : a / w y v ^ DISSERT iTION COMMITTEE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer is indebted to many people who have helped him complete this study# Especial thanks are due to Dr# C# W# Tomlinson (deceased) who suggested the problem and to Dr* W# D# Pitt, Assistant Professor of Geology at the University of Oklahoma, who supervised the work# Dr* Ph« Kuenen, Rijks University, Netherlands, supplied helpful literature and correspondence as did Dr* Tjeerd von Andel of Scripps Institute of Oceanography# The Oklahoma Geological Survey, directed by Dr* Carl 0* Branson, provided financial assistance for field work* Dr* Charles J» Mankin, Assistant Professor of Geology at the University of Oklahoma visited the study area and provided stimulating discussions on various petrographical and sedimentational aspects of the work# Dr. L* M* Cline, University of Wisconsin, read the manuscript and gave helpful criticism* Most of all the writer is indebted to his wife, Mary* She assisted in the field, prepared the manuscript, and contributed much toward the completion of this work# iii TABLE OF CX)NTEÎ mTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........
    [Show full text]
  • Lost Names in the Paleozoic Lithostratigraphy of Arkansas Noah Morris University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 5-2017 Lost Names in the Paleozoic Lithostratigraphy of Arkansas Noah Morris University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Geology Commons, and the Stratigraphy Commons Recommended Citation Morris, Noah, "Lost Names in the Paleozoic Lithostratigraphy of Arkansas" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 1913. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1913 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Lost Names in the Paleozoic Lithostratigraphy of Arkansas A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology by Noah Morris University of Oklahoma Bachelor of Science in Geology, 2010 May 2017 University of Arkansas This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ________________________________ Dr. Walter L. Manger Thesis Director ________________________________ ________________________________ Dr. Christopher Liner Dr. Thomas (Mac) McGilvery Committee Member Committee Member Abstract The geology of Arkansas has been studied for nearly 160 years, and our understanding of it is continually evolving. Part of this ever-changing study is the nomenclature of the stratigraphy. From the early reports to today, several lithostratigraphic names have been proposed and abandoned to improve the accuracy and clarity of the understanding of Arkansas’ geology. Over these 160 years of study, 214 names have been proposed for the Paleozoic beds of Arkansas, with nearly 80 of them currently in use today.
    [Show full text]