University of Texas at Austin Libraries Home | Mobile | My Account | Renew Items | Sitemap | Help
support us
University of Texas Libraries
details contents options

Table of Contents

  1. Facies and stratigraphy of the San Andres formation, northern and northwestern shelves of the Midland Basin, Texas and New Mexico


    3. Introduction

    4. Methods

    5. Stratigraphy

    6. Lithofacies

    7. Dolomite

    8. Limestone

    9. Anhydrite

    10. Red Beds

    11. Salt

    12. Depositional Environments

    13. Porosity Controls

    14. Oil And Gas Production

    15. Concolusions

  2. Illustrations
    1. Untitled

    2. Untitled

    3. Figure 1. Map of the Northern and Northwestern Shelves showing oil fields and percent total accumulative San Andres oil production within each region. Darkened fields produce from pre-San Andres strata.

    4. Figure 2. Map of study area in Texas showing San Andres oil production, shelf margins, and surface lineaments. Surface lineaments are from Finley and Gustavson (1981), and shelf-margin positions are from J. H. Nicholson (personal communication, 1980).

    5. Figure 3. Map of the Northern and Northwestern Shelves showing well control and lines of cross section.

    6. Figure 3 (continued).

    7. Figure 4. Schematic block diagram of depositional environments during a regressive depositional phase in early San Andres time.

    8. Figure 5. North-south cross section of San Andres Formation across the Northern Shelf. Line of section C-C' illustrated in figure 3.

    9. Figure 6. Distribution of lithofacies during much of early San Andres time. The thickness of the major porosity zone is also shown.

    10. Figure 6 (continued).

    11. Figure 7. Gamma-ray, neutron log, and lithic interpretation of San Andres strata, Shell Ivey and McCary No. 1, Lamb County, Texas.

    12. Figure 8. Dolomitized mudstone and intraclasts, Tenneco Bryson No. 15, Yoakum County, Texas.

    13. Figure 9. Photomicrograph (SEM) of dolomite rhombs from a San Andres oil-producing zone in the Cato field, Chaves County, New Mexico. Photomicrograph by Holly Lanan.

    14. Figure 10. Wispy-laminated crinoidal packstone, Atlantic Oil Ryan No. 1, Lamb County, Texas. Photograph by M. W. Presley.

    15. Figure 11. Fossiliferous dolomite, DOE-Gruy Grabbe No. 1, Swisher County, Texas.

    16. Figure 12. (a) Laminated, nonporous anhydrite and dolomite, lower San Andres Formation, Atlantic Oil Ryan No. 1, Lamb County, Texas. (b) Laminated anhydrite and dolomite, DOE-Cruy Grabbe No. 1, Swisher County, Texas, (c) Laminated anhydrite and dolomite with enterolithic folding, DOE-Gruy Grabbe No. 1, Swisher County, Texas, (d) Massive gypsum in outcrop, Cottle County, Texas. Photographs a through c by M. W. Presley.

    17. Figure 13. Concentrated organic matter adjacent to displacive nodules of anhydrite, Argonaut Energy (Crown Petroleum) Baumgart No. 1, Lamb County, Texas. Width of photograph equivalent to 2.66 mm of thin section.

    18. Figure 14. Replacement of skeletal debris and voids by secondary anhydrite, Argonaut Energy (Crown Petroleum) Baumgart No. 1, Lamb County, Texas. Width of photograph equivalent to 2.66 mm of thin section.

    19. Figure 15. Erosional upper contact of San Andres cycle 4 salt, DOECruy Grabbe No. 1.

    20. Figure 16. Banded salt, DOE-Gruy Grabbe No. 1, Swisher County, Texas. Photograph by M. W. Presley.

    21. Figure 17. Histogram of impurities in San Andres cycle 4 salt, DOE-Gruy Grabbe No. 1 and DOE-Gruy White No. 1, Randall and Swisher Counties, Texas.

    22. Figure 18. Chaotic mud salt, upper Clear Fork Formation, DOE-Gruy White No. 1, Randall County, Texas.

    23. Figure 19. North-south cross section of San Andres Formation across the Anton Irish field, Texas. Line of section B-B' illustrated in figure 3.

    24. Figure 20. Structure map, base of San Andres Formation.

    25. Figure 20 (continued).

    26. Figure 21. Structure map of TT marker.

    27. Figure 21 (continued).

    28. Figure 22. Structure map, top of San Andres Formation. Different marker bed is used for the top of the San Andres Formation in Yoakum and Terry Counties.

    29. Figure 22 (continued).

    30. Figure 23. Isopach map, lower San Andres Formation. Hachured contours represent stratigraphic thins, not structural lows.

    31. Figure 23 (continued).

    32. Figure 24. Isopach map, upper San Andres Formation. Hachured contours represent stratigraphic thins, not structural lows.

    33. Figure 24 (continued).

    34. Figure 25. Isopach map, San Andres Formation. Hachured contours represent stratigraphic thins, not structural lows. Different marker bed is used for the top of the San Andres Formation in Yoakum and Terry Counties.

    35. Figure 25 (continued).

    36. Figure 26. Isopach map, upper San Andres Formation, Yoakum and Terry Counties, Texas. Hachured contours represent stratigraphic thins, not structural lows.

    37. Figure 27. Plot of porosity versus permeability in the Yellowhouse dolomite; resistivity log of same interval is included, Littlefield Northeast field, Lamb County, Texas.

    38. Figure 28. Gamma-ray, neutron log, and lithic interpretation, San Andres strata, Pan American Fitzgerald No. 1, Yoakum County, Texas.

    39. Figure 29. Gamma-ray, sonic log, and lithic interpretation, San Andres strata, Tenneco O'Dowd No. 5, Yoakum County, Texas.

    40. Figure 30. Isopach map of cycle 4 salt (including interbeds), San Andres Formation, Palo Duro Basin, Texas and New Mexico. Hachured contours represent stratigraphic thins, not structural lows.

    41. Figure 31. Cross section of cycle 4 salt, San Andres Formation, across an area of salt thinning. Line of section S-S' illustrated in figure 30.

    42. Figure 32. Structure map, basal mudstone of cycle 4, San Andres Formation, Palo Duro Basin, Texas and New Mexico.

    43. Figure 33. Structure map, top of Yellowhouse dolomite, San Andres Formation, northern Hockley and southern Lamb Counties, Texas

    44. Figure 34. Map of the Northern and Northwestern Shelves showing San Andres petroleum productivity in each region. Darkened fields produce from pre-San Andres strata.

    45. Figure 35. Distribution of source-rock fades, Yoakum, Hockley, Terry, and adjacent counties, Texas.

    46. Figure 36. North-south cross section of San Andres Formation across Levelland and Slaughter fields, Texas. Line of section D-D' illustrated in figure 3.

    47. Figure 37. Isopach map of interval between the top of the Yellowhouse dolomite and the TT marker, San Andres Formation. Hachured contours represent stratigraphic thins, not structural lows.

    48. Figure 37 (continued).

    49. Figure 38. Isopach map of interval between the total depth of producing oil wells (with open-hole completions) and the TT marker, San Andres Formation. Hachured contours represent stratigraphic thins, not structural lows.

    50. Figure 39. North-south cross section of San Andres Formation across the Northwestern Shelf, New Mexico. Line of section A-A' illustrated in figure 3.

    51. Figure 40. Gamma-ray, density log, and lithic interpretation of lower San Andres Formation, Skelly Oil Hobbs No. ST, Roosevelt County, New Mexico.

    52. Figure 41. Structure map, TT marker, Twin Lakes oil field, Chaves County, New Mexico.

Report of Investigations No. 128

?* =HtIES AND STRATIGRAPHY » J»m ANDRES FORMATION, NORTJ SHELVES % fpHDLAND BASIN, TEXAS m Kr AND NEW MEXICO

Paul J. Ramondetta

Bureau of Economic Geology W. L. Fisher, Director The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78712