(George B. Asquith, Charles R. Gibson) Basic Well
(George B. Asquith, Charles R. Gibson) Basic Well
a
BHT
BVW
C
CNL
c
p
Arj
At
At,
At
ma
d
h
d
di
F
FDC
GR|
0
g
GRmax
GRmin
"mc
K
a
K
e
K
r g
K
r0
K
r w
111
ML
MLL
MOS
PL
<P
PSP
Pb
Pi
Ph
Pma
RFL
K
R|LM
RlLD
R|_Ld
RLLS
Rm
r
*mc
Rmf
RMSF
Ro*
ROS
- tortuosity factor
- bottom hole temperature
- bulk volume water
- conductivity
- compensated neutron log
- compaction factor for sonic porosity
- radius of invaded zone
- interval transit time of formation
- interval transit time of fluid in borehole
- interval transit time of formation matrix
- diameter of borehole
- diameter of invaded zone (flushed zone)
- diameter of invaded zone
- formation factor
- formation density compensated log
- gamma ray reading from formation
- gamma ray reading from shale
- gamma ray reading from clean sand
- thickness of mudcake
- absolute permeability
- effective permeability
- relative permeability to gas
- relative permeability to oil
- relative permeability to water
- cementation exponent
- Microlog
- Microlaterolog
- moveable oil saturation (S
x0
- S
w
)
- Proximity Log
- porosity
- pseudostatic spontaneous potential
- bulk density of the formation
- density of fluid in the borehole
- hydrocarbon density
- density of the formation matrix
- resistivity of shallow focused log
- resistivity of invaded zone
- resistivity induction log medium
- resistivity induction log deep
- resistivity of Laterolog* deep
- resistivity of Laterolog* shallow
- resistivity of drilling mud
- resistivity of mudcake
- resistivity of mud filtrate
- resistivity of Microspherically Focused Log*
- resistivity of the formation 100% water saturated
(i.e. wet resistivity)
- residual oil saturation (1.0 - S
xo
)
R
s
RsFL
Rt
R
w
Rxo
s
h
S.N.
SNP
SP
SPI
SSP
k' wi rr
\ a
\ r
- resistivity of adjacent shale
- resistivity of Spherically Focused Log
- resistivity of uninvaded zone
- resistivity of formation water
- apparent formation water resistivity
- resistivity of flushed zone
- hydrocarbon saturation (1.0 - S
w
)
- short normal log
- sidevvall neutron porosity
- spontaneous potential
- secondary porosity index
- static spontaneous potential SSP = -K log (R
mf
/R
w
)
- irreducible water saturation
- water saturation of uninvaded zone (Archie method)
- water saturation of uninvaded zone (Ratio Method)
- moveable hydrocarbon index
- water saturation of flushed zone
- formation temperature
- volume of shale
LOG NAMES USED IN TEXT
bulk density log
caliper log
Compensated Density Log
Combination Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log
Combi nati on Neutron-Density Log
Compensated Neutron Log
density log
Dual Induction Log
Dual Induction Focused Log
Dual Laterolog*
electrode logs
gamma ray log
Induction Electric Log
induction log
Lateral Log
Laterolog*
Laterolog-8*
microcaliper
Microlaterolog* (MLL)*
Microlog* (ML)*
Microspherically Focused Log* or (MSFL)*
neutron log
normal logs
nuclear logs
porosity log
Proximity Log* or (PL)*
resistivity logs
Resistivity Spherically Focused Log* or (RSFL)*
short normal log
Sidewall Neutron Log
sonic log
Spectralog**
Spherically Focused Log* (SFL)*
spontaneous potential log (SP)
Basic
Well Log Analysis
For Geologists
~ y
George Asquith
With:
Charles Gibson
The American Association
of Petroleum Geologists
Basic Well Log Analysis for Geologists
By
George B. Asquith
Pioneer Production Corporation
with
Charles R. Gibson
Alpar Resources Inc.
Methods in Exploration Series
Published by
The American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Tulsa, Oklahoma USA
Published try
The American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74\0L USA '--'
Copyright 1982 by
The American Association of Petroleum Geologists
All Rights Reserved
Published October 1982
Second Printing: (revised), August 1983
Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 82-73052
lSBN: 0-89181-652-6
For AAPG:
Editor: M. K. Horn
Science Director: E. A. Beaumont
Project Editors: A. L. Asquith, R. L. Hart
ll
Table of Contents:
1. Basic Relationships of Well Log Interpretation . . ......... .. . . ................. .. ....... . ........ .
Introducti on . . .. ..... .. .. ... ....... . .. ... . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. . . . .. . . .... . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . . . .
Borehole Environme nt .. ............ . .... . .. .... . . . . .. . . .... . . . .. .. . ... . . . .
In vasion and Resistivit y Profiles .... . . . .... . . .
Fonnati on Temperature ........... . ..... . . . .
2
4
5
2. The Spontaneous Potential Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Fonnati on Water Resistivity (Rw) Determined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Volume of Shale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
3. Resistivity Logs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
[nductio n Electric Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Dual Inducti on Foc used Log
Late ro log* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . .
Dual Laterolog-Microsphericall y Focused Log*
Mic ru log* . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . .. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . .. .
Mic ro laterolog* and Proximity Log* .... .. .
Resisti vity Derived Porosity . ..... ..... .. . . . . . .
4. Porosity Logs
Soni c Log
Density Log
Neutron Log . ... .. ... . . ..... .. ... . . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. .
Combination Ne utron- Density Log .. . ... . . . .
42
43
43
43
44
44
66
66
66
67
68
5. Gamma Ray Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
\ b lume of Shale Calc ul ation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
6. Log Interpretation
Archie Equation
Rati o Method
Bul k Volume Water .. . . ... ... . . .. ... . .... . . . .. .... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . . ..... . .. .
Quick Look Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .... . ... . .. .
Picke tt Crosspl ot Method .. . ..... . .. . . . . . .. .. . . .
Hingl e Crosspl ot ........ . .. . .. . .. . .. . .
Permeability from Logs ........ . ... . . . ... . ... ... . .. . . . .. . . ... ... .. .. . . . . .... . .... .
Shaly Sand Analys is . . . .. . ......... ...... . .
7. Lithology Logging and Mapping Techniques . . . ........................................ . ........ .
Combination Gamma Ray Neutron Density Log . . . ...... .......... .. . ... .. .
M-N* Litho logy Pl ot .. .. .. . . .. ... .. .. . .. . .. . . .... . . . .. . .. . . . . . .. .. . .. . . .
MID* Lithology Pl ot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . .. ... . . . ... . . . .
Alpha Mapping from SP Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
Clean Sand or Carbonate Maps from Gamma Ray Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... .. .
Rock Typing and Facies Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . .. .
96
96
96
98
98
100
101
102
103
118
118
118
118
ll9
120
120
8. Log Interpretation Case Studies ............... . ... .. . . ........................................ 140
Pennsylvani an Atoka Sandstone. Permian Basin
Mi ss issippian Mi ssion Canyon Formation, Williston Basin
Eocene Wilcox Sandstone . Gulf Coast
Pennsylvanian Upper Morrow Sandstone. Anadarko Basin
Cretaceo us Pictu red Cliffs Sandstone. San Juan Bas in
Devoni an Hunton Formation, Anadarko Basin
Appendices of Charts Used in Plotting ... . .. . .... . .......... . .. . .......... . ....... . ............... 209
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
Index ...... . ........................................... . ... .... .. ... . ....... ... .............. 215
iii
Acknowledgements:
The construct of this book would have been entirely different had it not been for the creative contributions of Edward A.
Beaumont and Ronald L. Hart. As Science Director of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Mr. Beaumont early-on
recognized the need for a logging course designed especially for geologists. His efforts and encouragement led to the development
of the AAPG school on basic logging from which the text was derived. The considerable editorial talents of Ronald L. Hart,
Manager of the AAPG Projects Department and his assistance with formating and writing figure captions, helped ensure the book
would meet its goal of introducing the reader to fundamental concepts of well logging.
Perhaps the most significant contribution of all, however, was by Ann L. Asquith. She helped her husband with both the writing
and editing of the manuscript. Her unflagging efforts to improve readability, her assistance with writing, and her suggestions
concerning content were an incalculable asset. She was assisted in her editing tasks by Robert V. Brown, who critically read the
manuscript and offered many useful suggestions; the text's introduction owes much to his insight. Robert J. Mitchell also lent his
technical expertise to a review of the manuscript, as did Edith C. Campbell and Leon Williams. Their assistance is recognized and
gratefully acknowledged.
Many charts and figures used in the text were provided by Dresser Industries and by Schlumberger Well Services. Their
cooperation in allowing reproduction of these items, and their unwavering courtesy eased the task of authorship.
By assisting her husband with some of the drafting and graphic layout work, Pearl Gibson helped ensure that the text's complex
figures would be legible and easily understood. The quality of the graphics work was also enhanced by Rick Blackburn's efforts on
behalf of the photographic reproduction of various charts and figures. Bette Haimes typed the finished manuscript copy; her
commitment to accuracy, with a difficult and often tedious task, does not pass unnoticed.
IV
Preface:
This book is a basic introduction to open hole logging.
Study of the properties of rocks by petrophysical techniques using electric, nuclear, and acoustical sources is as important to a
geologist as the study of rock properties by more conventional means using optical, x-ray, and chemical methods. Nevertheless,
despite the importance of petrophysics, it is frequently underutilized by many geologists who are either intimidated by logging
terminology and mathematics, or who accept the premise that an in-depth knowledge of logging is only marginally useful to their
science because, they feel, it more properly belongs in the province of the log analyst or engineer.
The enormous importance of logging dictates that as geologists, we put aside old notions and apply ourselves diligently to
learning log interpretation. The rewards are obvious; in fact, no less than achieving an understanding of the ancient record hangs in
the balance. And, it is likely that the success or failure of an exploration program may hinge on a geologist's logging expertise.
In the interest of conciseness, and so that logs used most often in petroleum exploration are thoroughly discussed, the text is
restricted to open hole logs. I hope that the reader initiates his or her own study of other log types which are beyond the scope of this
book.
Unfortunately, learning about open hole logging requires more of the reader than a light skimming of the text's material. The plain
truth is that a great deal of hard work, including memorizing log terminology, awaits the serious student; and even then, a facility
with logs develops only after plenty of real-life experience. The intent here is simply to provide a foundation of knowledge which
can be built upon later. Consequently, many exceptions to rules are left to more advanced books.
It is quite possible that some colleagues will raise objections about the lack of time devoted to tool theory; they may also comment
on the paucity of qualifying statements in the text. These objections are understood and indeed there may be disagreements about
what constitutes over-simplification. In defense of brevity, it should be pointed out that the surfeit of information available on
petrophysics often discourages all but the most ardent beginner. Certainly, many of the difficult decisions which had to be faced in
preparing the manuscript dealt with selecting information judged indispensable at an elementary level.
Many in the audience will note frequent references to a book by Douglas Hilchie, Golden, Colorado entitled Applied Open Hole
Log Interpretation (1978). For those who are interested in expanding their knowledged of logs, his book will be a great help.
Another helpful book is The Glossary of Terms and Expressions Used in Well Logging, The Society of Professional Well Log
Analysts (1975), which explains the meaning of logging terms by extended definitions.
Finally, a last word - a substantial effort was expended to ensure that a minimum number of errors would appear in the text.
However, given the nature of the subject and the almost infinite possibility for mistakes, there may be slip-ups, regardless; hopefully
they will not be too serious.
George B. Asquith
Pioneer Production Corporation
Amarillo, Texas
October, 1982
v
Biographical Sketches:
George B. Asquith: George B. Asquith received his Ph.D. degree in geology from the University of Wisconsin/Madison and has
some 15 years experience throughout North America involving geological consulting, prospect development and evaluation,
research, and teaching. In addition to independent consulting work, he has held various positions with Humble Oil and Refining
Co.; Atlantic Richfield Co.; Alpar Resources Inc., Search Drilling Company, and with the University of Wisconsin, West Texas
State University, and Killgore Research Center. He is presently Exploration Coordinator, for the Pioneer Production Corporation,
Amarillo, Texas.
Dr. Asquith has authored two books, Subsurface Carbonate Depositional Models, and Log Analysis by Microcomputer. He has
also written numerous articles and abstracts in the fields of carbonate petrology, sandstone petrology, and computer geology, and has
served as a reviewer for the AAPG Bulletin, Texas Journal of Science, and Journal of Sedimentary Petrology.
His areas of specialization in petroleum exploration include: subsurface carbonate and clastic depositional models, identification
of lithologies from logs, and computer applications to log interpretation. He has applied his areas of specialization to a number of
different basins including the Anadarko, San Juan, Permian, and Williston basins, and also in the Gulf Coast (onshore and offshore),
Central Texas, the Rocky Mountains, and Canada.
During 1979-1981, Dr. Asquith presented short course lectures for the American Association of Petroleum Geologists throughout
the United States and in Canada and Brazil. He is currently a lecturer and Science Advisor with the American Association of
Petroleum Geologists' Continuing Education Program and serves as an AAPG Visiting Petroleum Geologist.
Charles R. Gibson: Charles Richard Gibson is exploration manager and vice-president for Alpar Resources, Inc., Perryton,
Texas. As a geologic undergraduate in 1965, he was employed by the Colorado Fuel and Iron Corporation in their Arizona project
for geologic field mapping of iron ore deposits and base metal geochemistry exploration, collecting soil samples and running wet
chemical analyses. Education was postponed for military duty where, at the termination of his advanced military training, he was
selected and qualified to serve with the 3rd Infantry (The Old Guard), Fort Myer, Virginia. Returning to the University of Southern
Colorado, Gibson received his B.S. degree in geology in 1970, and was granted a Graduate Teaching Assistantship to continue
advanced studies at West Texas State University.
Since joining Alpar Resources, Inc., in 1972, Gibson has been involved in a diverse range of subsurface clastic and carbonate
exploration and development studies from the Gulf Coast to the Williston basin and has co-authored several published technical
'papers.
He has a special interest in applying computerized log analyses to solve complex lithologic and production problems. Gibson
obtained his M.S. degree from West Texas State University in 1977. He is certified by the A.I.P.G, A.A.P.G., and is a member of
the Society of Professional Well Log Analysts.
vi
Publisher's Note:
Because most new geologists come out of college with little understanding of the industry's primary tool, and because many
experienced geologists use logs only as a means to correlate productive zones (unaware of the many other applications of logging),
we have published this book.
As with the other titles in the AAPG Methods in Geology Series, we intend for this book to become a training standard in both
industry and academia. The book is oriented toward geologists rather than engineers, and can be used in a class environment or as a
self-help program. A set of six case histories in Chapter 8 provides the reader with diverse, yet typical, log-based decisions founded
in both geology and economics.
As a special note of thanks, AAPG acknowledges the logging companies and engineers who cooperated with their advice and
examples. Because it is important to offer examples in a book of this nature, specific Schlumberger and Dresser log types are
mentioned by name; this is in no way an endorsement of these two companies, nor does it reflect on the fine logging service
companies whose examples were not used. In the text and examples, the single asterisk (*) indicates a mark of Schlumberger; a
double asterisk (**) indicates a trademark of Dresser Industries, Inc.
Note also, that many service company charts are overprinted with colored ink to highlight an example. This selection is the
author's and the associated service company is not responsible for its accuracy.
AAPG Publications
Tulsa, Oklahoma
CHAPTERI
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Introduction
As logging tools and interpretive methods are developing
in accuracy and sophistication, they are playing an
expanded role in the geological decision-making process.
Today, petrophysical log interpretation is one of the most
useful and important tools available to a petroleum
geologist.
Besides their traditional use in exploration to correlate
zones and to assist with structure and isopach mapping, logs
help define physical rock characteristics such as lithology,
porosity, pore geometry, and permeability. Logging data is
used to identify productive zones, to determine depth and
thickness of zones, to distinguish between oil, gas, or water
in a reservoir, and to estimate hydrocarbon reserves. Also,
geologic maps developed from log interpretation help with
determining facies relationships and drilling locations.
Of the various types of logs, the ones used most
frequently in hydrocarbon exploration are called open hole
logs. The name open hole is applied because these logs are
recorded in the uncased portion of the well bore. All the
different types of logs and their curves discussed in the text
are this type.
A geologist's first exposure to log interpretation can be a
frustrating experience. This is not only because of its
lengthy and unfamiliar terminology, but also because
knowledge of many parameters, concepts, and
measurements is needed before an understanding of the
logging process is possible.
Perhaps the best way to begin a study of logging is by
introducing the reader to some of the basic concepts of well
log analysis. Remember that a borehole represents a
dynamic system; that fluid used in the drilling of a well
affects the rock surrounding the borehole, and therefore,
also log measurements. In addition, the rock surrounding
the borehole has certain properties which affect the
movement of fluids into and out of it.
The two primary parameters determined from well log
measurements are porosity, and the fraction of pore space
filled with hydrocarbons. The parameters of log
interpretation are determined both directly or inferred
indirectly, and are measured by one of three general types of
logs: (1) electrical, (2) nuclear, and (3) acoustic or sonic.
The names refer to the sources used to obtain the
measurements. The different sources create records (logs)
which contain one or more curves related to some property
in the rock surrounding the well bore (see Society of
Professional Well Log Analysts, 1975). For the reader
unfamiliar with petrophysical logging, some confusion may
develop over the use of the word log. In common usage, the
word log may refer to a particular curve, a suite or group of
curves, a logging tool (sonde), or the process of logging.
Rock properties or characteristics which affect logging
measurements are:porosity, permeability, water saturation,
and resistivity. It is essential that the reader understand these
properties and the concepts they represent before
proceeding with a study of log interpretation.
Porositycan be defined as the percentage of voids to
the total volume of rock. It is measured as a percent and has
the symbol <f>.
Porosity (4>)
_ volume of pores
total volume of rock
The amount of internal space or voids in a given volume of
rock is a measure of the amount of fluids a rock will hold.
The amount of void space that is interconnected, and so able
to transmit fluids, is called effective porosity. Isolated pores
and pore volume occupied by adsorbed water are excluded
from a definition of effective porosity.
Permeabilityis the property a rock has to transmit
fluids. It is related to porosity but is not always dependent
upon it. Permeability is controlled by the size of the
connecting passages (pore throats or capillaries) between
pores. It is measured in darcies or millidarcies and is
represented by the symbol K
a
. The ability of a rock to
transmit a single fluid when it is 100% saturated with that
fluid is called absolute permeability. Effective permeability
refers to the presence of two fluids in a rock, and is the
ability of the rock to transmit a fluid in the presence of
another fluid when the two fluids are immiscible.
Formation water (connate water in the formation) held by
capillary pressure in the pores of a rock serves to inhibit the
transmission of hydrocarbons. Stated differently, formation
water takes up space both in pores and in the connecting
passages between pores. As a consequence, it may block or
otherwise reduce the ability of other fluids to move through
the rock.
Relative permeability is the ratio between effective
permeability of a fluid at partial saturation, and the
permeability at 100% saturation (absolute permeability).
When relative permeability of a formation's water is zero,
then the formation will produce water-free hydrocarbons
(i.e. the relative permeability to hydrocarbons is 100%).
With increasing relative permeabilities to water, the
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
formation will produce increasing amounts of water relative
to hydrocarbons.
Water saturationis the percentage of pore volume in a
rock which is occupied by formation water. Water saturation
is measured in percent and has the symbol S
w
.
water saturation (S
w
) =
formation water occupying pores
total pore space in the rock
Water saturation represents an important log interpretation
concept because you can determine the hydrocarbon
saturation of a reservoir by subtracting water saturation
from the value, one (where 1.0 = 100% water saturation).
Irreducible water saturation or S
w jrr
is the term used to
describe the water saturation at which all the water is
adsorbed on the grains in a rock, or is held in the capillaries
by capillary pressure. At irreducible water saturation, water
will not move, and the relative permeability to water equals
zero.
Resistivityis the rock property on which the entire
science of logging first developed. Resistance is the
inherent property of all materials, regardless of their shape
and size, to resist the flow of an electric current. Different
materials have different abilities to resist the flow of
electricity.
Resistivity is the measurement of resistance; the
reciprocal of resistivity is conductivity. In log interpretation,
hydrocarbons, the rock, and freshwater all act as insulators
and are, therefore, non-conductive and highly resistive to
electric flow. Saltwater, however, is a conductor and has a
low resistivity. The unit of measure used for the conductor
is a cube of the formation one meter on each edge. The
measured units are ohm-meter
2
/meter, and are called
ohm-meters.
R =
r x A
Where:
R = resistivity (ohm-meters)
r = resistance (ohms)
A = cross sectional area of substance being measured
(meters
2
)
L = length of substance being measured (meters)
Resistivity is a basic measurement of a reservoir's fluid
saturation and is a function of porosity, type of fluid (i.e.
hydrocarbons, salt or fresh water), and type of rock.
Because both the rock and hydrocarbons act as insulators
but saltwater is conductive, resistivity measurements made
by logging tools can be used to detect hydrocarbons and
estimate the porosity of a reservoir. Because during the
drilling of a well fluids move into porous and permeable
formations surrounding a borehole, resistivity
measurements recorded at different depths into a formation
often have different values. Resistivity is measured by
electric logs.
Conrad Schlumberger in 1912 began the first experiments
which led, eventually, to the development of modern day
petrophysical logs. The first electric log was run September
5, 1927 by H. G. Doll in Alsace-Lorraine, France. In 1941,
G. E. Archie with Shell Oil Company presented a paper to
the AIME in Dallas, Texas, which set forth the concepts
used as a basis for modern quantitative log interpretation
(Archie, 1942).
Archie's experiments showed that the resistivity of a
water-filled formation ( RJ, filled with water having a
resistivity of R
w
can be related by means of a formation
resistivity factor (F):
R
0
= F X R
w
where the formation resistivity factor (F) is equal to the
resistivity of the formation 100% water saturated (R)
divided by the resistivity of the formation water (R
w
).
Archie's experiments also revealed that formation factors
can be related to porosity by the following formula:
., 1.0
where m is a cementation exponent whose value varies with
grain size, grain size distribution, and the complexity of the
paths between pores (tortuosity). The higher the value for
tortuosity the higher the m value.
Water saturation (S
w
) is determined from the water filled
resistivity ( RJ and the formation resistivity (R,) by the
following relationship:
R.
Rt
where n is the saturation exponent whose value varies from
1.8 to 2.5 but is most commonly 2.
By combining the formulas: R, = F x R
w
and S
w
= (R
0
/R
t
)
l/n
the water saturation formula can be
rewritten in the following form:
^ w
F x R ,
R,
This is the formula which is most commonly referred to as
the Archie equation for water saturation (S
w
). And, all
present methods of interpretation involving resistivity
curves are derived from this equation.
Now that the reader is introduced to some of the basic
concepts of well log interpretation, our discussion can be
continued in more detail about the factors which affect
logging measurements.
Borehole Environment
Where a hole is drilled into a formation, the rock plus the
2
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
fluids in it (rock-fluid system) are altered in the vicinity of
the borehole. A well's borehole and the rock surrounding it
are contaminated by the drilling mud, which affects logging
measurements. Figure 1 is a schematic illustration of a
porous and permeable formation which is penetrated by a
borehole filled with drilling mud.
The definitions of each of the symbols used in Figure 1
are listed as follows:
d
h
- hole diameter
dj - diameter of invaded zone (inner boundary; flushed
zone)
dj - diameter of invaded zone (outer boundary; invaded
zone)
A
r
j - radius of invaded zone (outer boundary)
h^ -thicknessofmudcake
R
m
- resistivity? of the drilling mud
R
mc
- resistivity of the mudcake
R
raf
- resistivity of mud filtrate
R
s
- resistivity of shale
R, - resistivity of uninvaded zone (true resistivity)
R
w
- resistivity of formation water
R
xo
- resistivity of flushed zone
S
w
- water saturation of uninvaded zone
S
xo
- water saturation flushed zone
Some of the more important symbols shown in Figure 1 are:
Hole Diameter (d
h
)A well's borehole size is described
by the outside diameter of the drill bit. But, the diameter of
the borehole may be larger or smaller than the bit diameter
because of (1) wash out and/or collapse of shale and poorly
cemented porous rocks, or (2) build-up of mudcake on
porous and permeable formations (Fig. 1). Borehole sizes
normally vary from 7 7/8 inches to 12 inches, and modern
logging tools are designed to operate within these size
ranges. The size of the borehole is measured by a caliper
log.
Drilling Mud (R
m
)Today, most wells are drilled with
rotary bits and use special mud as a circulating fluid. The
mud helps remove cuttings from the well bore, lubricate and
cool the drill bit, and maintain an excess of borehole
pressure over formation pressure. The excess of borehole
pressure over formation pressure prevents blow-outs.
The density of the mud is kept high enough so that
hydrostatic pressure in the mud column is always greater
than formation pressure. This pressure difference forces
some of the drilling fluid to invade porous and permeable
formations. As invasion occurs, many of the solid particles
^Resistivity (R) =
r x A
R - resistivity in ohm-meters
2
/meters (ohm-meter)
r - resistance (ohms)
A -cross sectional area (meters
2
)
L - length (meter)
(i.e. clay minerals from the drilling mud) are trapped on the
side of the borehole and form mudcake (R
mc
; Fig. 1). Fluid
that filters into the formation during invasion is called mud
filtrate (R
mf
; Fig. 1). The resistivity values for drilling mud,
mudcake, and mud filtrate are recorded on a log's header
(Fig. 2).
Invaded Zone-The zone which is invaded by mud filtrate
is called the invaded zone. It consists of a flushed zone (R
xo
)
and a transition oxannulus (R;) zone. The flushed zone
(R
xo
) occurs close to the borehole (Fig. 1) where the mud
filtrate has almost completely flushed out a formation's
hydrocarbons and/or water (R
w
). The transition or annulus
(Ri) zone, where a formation's fluids and mud filtrate are
mixed, occurs between the flushed (R
xo
) zone and the
uninvaded (R,) zone. The uninvaded zone is defined as the
area beyond the invaded zone where a formation's fluids are
uncontaminated by mud filtrate.
The depth of mud filtrate invasion into the invaded zone
is referred to as the diameter of invasion (d
(
and dj; Fig. 1).
The diameter of invasion is measured in inches or expressed
as a ratio: dj/d
h
(where d
h
represents the borehole diameter).
The amount of invasion which takes place is dependent
upon the permeability of the mudcake and not upon the
porosity of the rock. In general, an equal volume of mud
filtrate can invade low porosity and high porosity rocks if
the drilling muds have equal amounts of solid particles. The
solid particles in the drilling muds coalesce and form an
impermeable mudcake. The mudcake then acts as a barrier
to further invasion. Because an equal volume of fluid can be
invaded before an impermeable mudcake barrier forms, the
diameter of invasion will be greatest in low porosity rocks.
This occurs because low porosity rocks have less storage
capacity or pore volume to fill with the invading fluid, and,
as a result, pores throughout a greater volume of rock will
be affected. General invasion diameters are:
dj/d
h
= 2 for high porosity rocks;
dj/d
h
= 5 for intermediate porosity rocks;
and dj/d
h
= 10 for low porosity rocks.
Flushed Zone (R
xo
)The flushed zone extends only a
few inches from the well bore and is part of the invaded
zone. If invasion is deep or moderate, most often the
flushed zone is completely cleared of its formation water
(R
w
) by mud filtrate (R
mf
). When oil is present in the
flushed zone, you can determine the degree of flushing by
mud filtrate from the difference between water saturations
in the flushed (S
xo
) zone and the uninvaded (S
w
) zone (Fig.
1). Usually, about 70 to 95% of the oil is flushed out; the
remaining oil is called residual oil (S
ro
= [ 1. 0- S
xo
] where
S
ro
equals residual oil saturation [ROS]).
Uninvaded Zone (R,)The uninvaded zone is located
beyond the invaded zone (Fig. 1). Pores in the uninvaded
3
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
zone are uncontaminated by mud filtrate; instead, they are
saturated with formation water (R
w
), oil, or gas.
Even in hydrocarbon-bearing reservoirs, there is always a
layer of formation water on grain surfaces. Water saturation
(S
w
; Fig. 1) of the uninvaded zone is an important factor in
reservoir evaluation because, by using water saturation
data, a geologist can determine a reservoir's hydrocarbon
saturation. The formula for calculating hydrocarbon
saturation is:
s
h
= 1 . 0 - s
w
S
h
= hydrocarbon saturation (i.e. the fraction of pore
volume filled with hydrocarbons).
S
w
= water saturation uninvaded zone (i.e. fraction of
pore volume filled with water)
The ratio between the uninvaded zone's water saturation
(S
w
) and the flushed zone's water saturation (S
xo
) is an
index of hydrocarbon moveability.
Invasion and Resistivity Profiles
Invasion and resistivity profiles are diagrammatic,
theoretical, cross sectional views moving away from the
borehole and into a formation. They illustrate the horizontal
distributions of the invaded and uninvaded zones and their
corresponding relative resistivities. There are three
commonly recognized invasion profiles: (1) step, (2)
transition, and (3) annulus. These three invasion profiles are
illustrated in Figure 3.
The step profile has a cylindrical geometry with an
invasion diameter equal to dj. Shallow reading, resistivity
logging tools read the resistivity of the invaded zone (R,),
while deeper reading, resistivity logging tools read true
resistivity of the uninvaded zone (R
t
).
The transition profile also has a cylindrical geometry with
two invasion diameters: d
;
(flushed zone) and dj (transition
zone). It is probably a more realistic model for true borehole
conditions than the step profile. Three resistivity devices are
needed to measure a transitional profile; these three devices
measure resistivities of the flushed, transition, and
uninvaded zones R
xo
, Rj, and R
t
; (see Fig. 3). By using
these three resistivity measurements, the deep reading
resistivity tool can be corrected to a more accurate value of
true resistivity (R
t
), and the depth of invasion can be
determined. Two modern resistivity devices which use these
three resistivity curves are: the Dual Induction Log with a
Laterolog-8* or Spherically Focused Log (SFL)* and the
Dual Laterolog* with a Microspherically Focused Log
(MSFL)*.
An annulus profile is only sometimes recorded on a log
because it rapidly dissipates in a well. The annulus profile is
detected only by an induction log run soon after a well is
drilled. However, it is very important to a geologist because
the profile can only occur in zones which bear
hydrocarbons. As the mud filtrate invades the
hydrocarbon-bearing zone, hydrocarbons move out first.
Next, formation water is pushed out in front of the mud
filtrate forming an annular (circular) ring at the edge of the
invaded zone (Fig. 3). The annulus effect is detected by a
higher resistivity reading on a deep induction log than by
one on a medium induction log.
Log resistivity profiles illustrate the resistivity values of
the invaded and uninvaded zones in the formation being
investigated. They are of particular interest because, by
using them, a geologist can quickly scan a log and look for
potential zones of interest such as hydrocarbon zones.
Because of their importance, resistivity profiles for both
water-bearing and hydrocarbon-bearing zones are discussed
here. These profiles vary, depending on the relative
resistivity values of R
w
and R
mf
. All the variations and their
associated profiles are illustrated in Figures 4 and 5.
Water-Bearing ZonesFigure 4 illustrates the borehole
and resistivity profiles for water-bearing zones where the
resistivity of the mud filtrate (R
mf
) is much greater than the
resistivity of the formation water (R
w
) in freshwater muds,
and where resistivity of the mud filtrate (R^) is
approximately equal to the resistivity of the formation water
(R
w
) in saltwater muds. A freshwater mud (i.e. R
m
f > 3 R
w
)
results in a "wet" log profile where the shallow (R
xo
),
medium (Rj), and deep (R
t
) resistivity tools separate and
record high (R
xo
), intermediate (Rj), and low (R
t
)
resistivities (Fig. 4). A saltwater mud (i.e. R
w
= R
mf
)
results in a wet profile where the shallow (R
xo
), medium
(R
;
), and deep (R
t
) resistivity tools all read low resistivity
(Fig. 4). Figures 6a and 6b illustrate the resistivity curves
for wet zones invaded with both freshwater and saltwater
muds.
Hydrocarbon-Bearing ZonesFigure 5 illustrates the
borehole and resistivity profiles for hydrocarbon-bearing
zones where the resistivity of the mud filtrate (R
m
f) is much
greater than the resistivity of the formation water (R,) for
freshwater muds, and where R
mf
is approximately equal to
R
w
for saltwater muds. A hydrocarbon zone invaded with
freshwater mud results in a resistivity profile where the
shallow (R
xo
), medium (Rj), and deep (R
t
) resistivity tools
all record high resistivities (Fig. 5). In some instances, the
deep resistivity will be higher than the medium resistivity.
When this happens, it is called the annulus effect. A
hydrocarbon zone invaded with saltwater mud results in a
resistivity profile where the shallow (R
xo
), medium (Rj),
and deep (R
t
) resistivity tools separate and record low (R
xo
),
intermediate (Rj) and high (R,) resistivities (Fig. 5). Figures
7a and 7b illustrate the resistivity curves for hydrocarbon
zones invaded with both freshwater and saltwater muds.
Basic Information Needed in Log Interpretation
LithologyIn quantitative log analysis, there are several
reasons why it is important to know the lithology of a zone
4
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
(i.e. sandstone, limestone, or dolomite). Porosity logs
require a lithology or a matrix constant before a zone's
porosity (0) can be calculated. And the formation factor
(F), a variable used in the Archie water saturation equation
(S
w
= VF x R
w
/R
t
), varies with lithology. As a
consequence, water saturations change as F changes. Table
1 is a list of the different methods for calculating formation
factor, and illustrates how lithology affects the formation
factor.
Temperature of FormationFormation temperature (T
f
)
is also important in log analysis because the resistivities of
the drilling mud (R
m
), the mud filtrate (R
m
f), and the
formation water (R
w
) vary with temperature. The
temperature of a formation is determined by knowing: (1)
formation depth; (2) bottom hole temperature (BHT); (3)
total depth of the well (TD); and (4) surface temperature.
You can determine a reasonable value for the formation
temperature by using these data and by assuming a linear
geothermal gradient (Fig, 8).
Table 1. Different Coefficients and Exponents Used to
Calculate Formation Factor (F). (Modified after
Asquith, 1980).
F = a/0
m
ttF = 1/02
ttF = 0.81/</)2
t t F = 0.62/02-15
F = 1.45/01-54
F = 1. 65/ 01"
F = 1.45/0'-
F = 0.85/02'*
F = 2. 45/ 0
108
F = 1.97/01-29
F = l.O/0<
2
-O5-<M
general relationship
Where:
a = tortuosity factor
1
'
m = cementation exponent
0 = porosity
for carbonates
for consolidated sandstones
Humble formula for unconsolidated
sands
for average sands (after Carothers,
1958)
for shaly sands (after Carothers,
1958)
for calcareous sands (after Carothers,
1958)
for carbonates (after Carothers,
1958)
for Pliocene sands, Southern
California (after Carothers and
Porter, 1970)
for Miocene sands, Texas-Louisiana
Gulf Coast (after Carothers and
Porter, 1970)
for clean granular formations (after
Sethi, 1979)
tTortuosity is a function
must travel through the
+t
Most commonly used.
of the complexity of the path the fluid
rock.
The formation temperature is also calculated (Asquith,
1980) by using the linear regression equation:
y = mx + c
Where:
x = depth
y = temperature
m = slopein this example it is the geothermal gradient
c = a constantin this example it is the surface
temperature
An example of how to calculate formation temperature is
illustrated here:
Temperature Gradient Calculation
Assume:
y = bottom hole temperature (BHT) = 250F
x = total depth (TD) = 15,000 ft
c = surface temperature = 70F
Solve for m (i.e. slope or temperature gradient)
m =
y - c
Therefore:
250 - 70
m =
15,000 ft
m = 0.0127ft or 1.27100 ft
Formation Temperature Calculation
Assume:
m = temperature gradient = 0.0127ft
x = formation depth = 8,000 ft
c = surface temperature = 70
Remember:
y = mx + c
Therefore:
y = (0.012) x (8,000) + 70
y = 166 formation temperature at 8,000 ft
After a formation's temperature is determined either by
chart (Fig. 8) or by calculation, the resistivities of the
different fluids (R
m
, R
mf
, or R
w
) can be corrected to
formation temperature. Figure 9 is a chart that is used for
correcting fluid resistivities to formation temperature. This
chart is closely approximated by the Arp's formula:
R-rf =
R
tem
P
x (Temp + 6.77)/(T
f
+ 6.77)
Where:
R
Tf
= resistivity at formation temperature
Rtemp
=
resistivity at a temperature other than formation
temperature
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Temp = temperature at which resistivity was measured
T
f
= formation temperature
Using a formation temperature of 166 and assuming an
R
w
of 0.04 measured at 70, the R
w
at 166 will be:
R,
w!66
0.04 x (70+ 6.77)/(166 + 6.77)
R
w l 6 6
= 0.018
Resistivity values of the drilling mud (R
m
), mud filtrate
(R
raf
), mudcake (R
mc
), and the temperatures at which they
are measured, are recorded on a log's header (Fig. 2). The
resistivity of a formation's water (R
w
) is obtained by
analysis of water samples from a drill stem test, a water
producing well, or from a catalog of water resistivity
values. Formation water resistivity (R
w
) is also determined
from the spontaneous potential log (discussed in Chapter II)
or can be calculated in water zones (i.e., S
w
= 100%) by
the apparent water resistivity (R
wa
) method (see Chapter
VI).
Fundamental Equations
Table 2 is a list of fundamental equations that are used for
the log evaluation of potential hydrocarbon reservoirs.
These formulas are discussed in detail in subsequent
chapters.
Table 2. Fundamental Equations of Well Log
Interpretation.
Porosity:
Sonic Log
Density Log
Neutron-Density Log
0SONIC
=
<f>DEN
=
4>N-D =
At
Atf
J-
- AW
- Au
Pma ~ Pb
Pma - Pf
4>N
2
+ 4>D
2
2
Formation Factor:
F = a/</>
m
General
F = 1.0/^2 Carbonates
F = 0.81/$
2
Consolidated Sandstones
F = 0.62/<p2 is Unconsolidated Sands
Formation Water Resistivity:
SSP=-Kxl og(R
m)
/ R
w
)
F
R*
Water Saturations:
S
w
t= F x (R
w
/R,)
S
X0
"=Fx(R
mf
/ R
X0
)
Sw =
f iWRt \ -
625
\R
mf
/R
w
/
water saturation uninvaded
zone
water saturation flushed zone
water saturation ratio method
Bulk Volume Water:
BVW = 0 X S
w
Permeability
K
e
= [25Ox(03/ S
wi r r
)Poi l
K
e
= permeability in millidarcies
K
e
= [ 79x( 03/ s
wi r r
) ] 2
g
as
S
w irr
= irreducible water saturation
+n = saturation exponent which varies from 1.8 to 2.5 but most
often equals 2.0
Review - Chapter I
1. The four most fundamental rock properties used in
petrophysical logging are (1) porosity; (2) permeability; (3)
water saturation; and (4) resistivity.
2. The Archie equation for water saturation is:
^\u
Fxj O
/ n
R,
Where:
S
w
= water saturation of uninvaded zone
F = formation factor
R
w
= formation water resistivity
R, = formation resistivity (uninvaded zone)
3. Where a porous and permeable formation is
penetrated by the drill bit, the drilling mud invades the
formation as mud filtrate (R
ra
f).
4. The invasion of the porous and permeable formation
by mud filtrate creates invasion zones (R
xo
and Rj) and an
uninvaded zone (R
t
). Shallow, medium, and deep reading
resistivity logging tools provide information about the
invaded and uninvaded zones and about the depth of
invasion.
5. The lithology of a formation must be known because:
(1) porosity logs require a matrix valuesandstone,
limestone, or dolomitein order to determine porosity; (2)
the formation factor varies with lithology; (3) the variation
in formation factor causes changes in water saturation
values.
6. The four fluids that affect logging measurements are:
(1) drilling mud, R
m
; (2) mud filtrate, R
mf
; (3) formation
water, R
w
; and (4) hydrocarbons.
7. The resistivities of the drilling mud (R
m
), mudcake
(R
mc
), mud filtrate (R
m
f) and formation water (R
w
) all vary
with changes in temperature. Consequently, a formation's
temperature (T
f
) must be determined and all resistivities
corrected to T
f
.
6
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
o
A
Resistivity of the zone
Resistivity of the
Water in the zone
Water Saturation
in the zone.
MUD
0
ADJACENT BED
0
3 1 0 H DIAMETERS)
ADJAC
ENT BED
h-^
r
l
HOLE
DIAMETER
* Kor a step-contact invasion profile
(i.e. no transition zone or annulus
zone), d, d,.
Figure 1. The borehole environment and symbols used in log interpretation. This schematic diagram illustrates an idealized
version of what happens when fluids from the borehole invade the surrounding rock. Dotted lines indicate the cylindrical
nature of the invasion.
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1977, Schlumberger.
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Schlumberger
DUAL INDUCTION SF L
W I TH LINEAR CORRELATION LOG
t
|
Q
<
2 * u
8 " 2 *
COMPANY-
WELL.
F IELD.
COUNTY. .STATE.
API SERIAL NO SEC
Other Services:
F DC/ CNL/ GR
HDT
Permanent nn. . , m. GRQLJND L E V E L
Log Measured From.
w
UK
Elev, 3731
Above Perm. Datum
Drilling Measured F rom_ KB
Elev.: K.B.
D.F.
G.L.
37^ 2
T73T
Date
6- 11- 79
Run No.
Dept h-Dri l l er
DepthLogger
Btm. Log Interval
Top Log Interval
CasingDriller
Casi ng-Logger
Bit Size
Type Fluid in Hole
Dens. Vise.
pH Fluid Loss
Source of Sample
Rm @ Meas. Temp.
Rmf @ Meas. Temp
Rmc @ Meas. Temp
Source: Rntf | Rmc
Rm (SBHT
"J Circulation Stopped
p Logger on Bottom
Max. Rec. Temp.
Equip. Location
Recorded By
Witnessed By MR.
*BHT = Bottom Hole Temperature
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 2. Reproduction of a typical log heading. Information on the header about the resistivity values for drilling mud (R
m
) and
mud filtrate (R
mf
) are especially useful in log interpretation and are used in calculations.
NOTE: Sometimes, as in this example, a value for the resistivity of mudcake (R
mc
) is not recorded on the heading.
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
STEP PROF ILE
Borehole
Wall
'xo
Ro
1
Distance-
TRANSITION PROF ILE ANNULUS PROF ILE
A
Borehol e
^ W a l l
Rxo
" ^ ^ R i
|Rpn
1
1
Rt
Ro
a
J
Distance Distance'
R
0
resistivity of the zone with pores 100% fil l ed with
formation water ( Rw) Also cal l ed wet resistivity.
o
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 3. Typical invasion profiles for three idealized versions of fluid distributions in the vicinity of the borehole.
As mud filtrate (R
m
f) moves into a porous and permeable formation, it can invade the formation in several different ways.
Various fluid distributions are represented by the step, transition, or annulus profiles.
A. Step ProfileMud filtrate is distributed with a cylindrical shape around the borehole and creates an invaded zone. The
cylindrically shaped invaded zone is characterized by its abrupt contact with the uninvaded zone. The diameter of
the cylinder is represented as dj. In the invaded zone, pores are filled with mud filtrate (R
m
f); pores in the
uninvaded zone are filled with formation water (R
w
) or hydrocarbons. In this example the uninvaded zone is wet
(100% water and no hydrocarbons), thus the resistivity beyond the invaded zone is low. The resistivity of the
invaded zone is R
xo
, and the resistivity of the uninvaded zone is either R,, if a formation is water-bearing, or R, if a
formation is hydrocarbon-bearing.
B. Transition ProfileThis is the most realistic model of true borehole conditions. Here again invasion is cylindrical, but
in this profile, the invasion of the mud filtrate (R
mf
) diminishes gradually, rather than abruptly, through a transition
zone toward the outer boundary of the invaded zone (see dj on diagram for location of outer boundary).
In the flushed part (R
xo
) of the invaded zone, pores are filled with mud filtrate (R
m
f), giving a high resistivity
reading. In the transition part of the invaded zone, pores are filled with mud filtrate (R
m
f), formation water (R
w
),
and, if present, residual hydrocarbons (RH). Beyond the outer boundary of the invaded zone (dj on diagram),
pores are filled with either formation water, or (if present) hydrocarbons. In this diagram, hydrocarbons are not
present, so resistivity of the uninvaded zone is low. The resistivity of the invaded zone's flushed part is R
xo
, and
the resistivity of the transition part is R;. Resistivity of the uninvaded zone is R
t
if hydrocarbon-bearing or R,, if
water-bearing.
C. Annulus ProfileThis reflects a temporary fluid distribution, and is a condition which should disappear with time (if
the logging operation is delayed, it may not be recorded on the logs at all). The annulus profile represents a fluid
distribution which occurs between the invaded zone and the uninvaded zone and denotes the presence of
hydrocarbons.
In the flushed part (R
xo
) of the invaded zone, pores are filled with both mud filtrate (R
mf
) and residual
hydrocarbons (RH). Thus the resistivity reads high. Pores beyond the flushed part of the invaded zone (R;) are
filled with a mixture of mud filtrate (R
mf
), formation water (R
w
), and residual hydrocarbons (RH).
Beyond the outer boundary of the invaded zone is the annulus zone where pores are filled with residual
hydrocarbons (RH) and formation water (R
w
). When an annulus profile is present, there is an abrupt drop in
measured resistivity at the outer boundary of the invaded zone. The abrupt resistivity drop is due to the high
concentration of formation water (R
w
) in the annulus zone. Formation water has been pushed ahead by the
invading mud filtrate into the annulus zone. This causes a temporary absence of hydrocarbons which, in their turn,
have been pushed ahead of formation water.
Beyond the annulus is the uninvaded zone where pores are filled with formation water (R
w
) and hydrocarbons.
Remember that true resitivity of a formation can be measured in the uninvaded zone because of its virgin nature.
True resistivity (R
(
) will be higher than the wet resistivity (R
0
) because hydrocarbons have a higher resistivity than
saltwater.
II
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
RADIAL DISTRIBUTION
OF RESISTIVITIES
R
mf >
> R
w
F RESH MUDS
R
mf
R
w
SALT MUDS
RESI STI VI TY P ROF I LE - W ATER ZONE
INVADED N.
ZONE X
/ FLUSHEDN. \
/ ZONE X \
/ / H O L E A \ 1
\ V
R
m / J 1
\ ^ "xo
"i
1
\
/
I
T
Y
R
E
S
I
S
T
I
i
R
xo
R
" 0
MUD CAKE- '
i
R
E
S
I
S
T
I
V
I
T
Y
1
R
X 0 "
R
0
1- \ l
k i INVADED ZON Ei
L-FLUSHEDZONE ]
1 INVADED ZONE
'-FLUSHED ZONE
HORIZONTAL SECTION
THROUGH A PERMEABLE
WATER-BEARING BED
UNINVADED
ZONE
Rt
S
w
> > 6 0 %
R
0
UNINVADED ZONE
o
UNINVADED ZONE
12
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 4. Horizontal section through a permeable water-bearing formation and the concomitant resistivity profiles which occur
when there is invasion by either freshwater- or saltwater-based drilling muds (see Fig. 5 for resistivity profiles in a
hydrocarbon-bearing formation).
Note: These examples are shown because freshwater muds and saltwater muds are used in different geographic regions,
usually exclusively. The geologist needs to be aware that a difference exists. To find out which mud is used in your area, ask
your drilling engineer. The type of mud used affects the log package selected, as we will see later.
Freshwater MudsThe resistivity of the mud filtrate (R
m
f) is greater than the resistivity of the formation water (R
w
)
because of the varying salt content (remember, saltwater is conductive). A general rule when freshwater muds are
used is: R
mf
> 3R
W
. The flushed zone (R
xo
), which has a greater amount of mud filtrate, will have higher
resistivities. Away from the borehole, the resistivity of the invaded zone (R[) will decrease due to the decreasing
amount of mud filtrate (R
m
f) and the increasing amount of formation water (R
w
).
With a water-bearing formation, the resistivity of the uninvaded zone will be low because the pores are filled with
formation water (R
w
). In the uninvaded zone, true resistivity (R
t
) will be equal to wet resistivity (RJ because the
formation is 100% saturated with formation water (R
t
= R where the formation is 100% saturation with formation
water).
lb summarize: in a water-bearing zone, the resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
) is greater than the resistivity of the
invaded zone (Rj) which in turn has a greater resistivity than the uninvaded zone (R
t
). Therefore: R
xo
> Rj R
t
in water-bearing zones.
Saltwater MudsBecause the resistivity of mud filtrate (R
m
f) is approximately equal to the resistivity of formation water
(R
m
f = R
w
), there is no appreciable difference in the resistivity from the flushed (R
xo
) to the invaded zone (Rj) to
the uninvaded zone (R
xo
= R; = R
t
); all have low resistivities.
Both the above examples assume that the water saturation of the uninvaded zone is much greater than 60%.
13
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
RESI STI VI TY P ROF I LE - HY DROCARBON ZONE
RADIAL DISTRIBUTION
OF RESISTIVITIES
R
mf
> > R
w
F RESH MUDS
"mf Rw
SALT MUDS
HORIZONTAL SECTION
THROUGH A PERMEABLE
OIL-BEARING BED
:J MUD CAKE-
7
! \
!
L |
to
CO
UJ
INVADED ZONE
F LUSHED ZONE
UNINVADED
ZONE
Rt
\
UNINVADED ZONE
ANNULUS
k INVADED ZONE K UNINVADED ZONE
^-F LUSHED ZONE - ANNULUS
14
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 5. Horizontal section through a permeable hydrocarbon-bearing formation and the concomitant resistivity profiles which
occur when there is invasion by either freshwater- or saltwater-based drilling muds (see Fig. 4 for resistivity profiles in a
water-bearing formation).
Freshwater MudsBecause the resistivity of both the mud filtrate (R
mf
) and residual hydrocarbons (RH) is much greater
than formation water (R
w
), the resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
) is comparatively high (remember that the
flushed zone has mud filtrate and some residual hydrocarbons).
Beyond its flushed part (R
xo
), the invaded zone (Rj) has a mixture of mud filtrate (R
mf
), formation water (R
w
), and
some residual hydrocarbons (RH). Such a mixture causes high resistivities. In some cases, resistivity of the
invaded zone (Rj) almost equals that of the flushed zone (R
xo
).
The presence of hydrocarbons in the uninvaded zone causes higher resistivity than if the zone had only formation
water (R
w
), because hydrocarbons are more resistant than formation water. So, R
t
> R. The resistivity of the
uninvaded zone (R,) is normally somewhat less than the resistivity of the flushed and invaded zones (R
xo
and Rj).
However, sometimes when an annulus profile is present, the invaded zone's resistivity (Rj) may be slightly lower
than the uninvaded zone's resistivity (R
t
).
To summarize: therefore, R
I0
> Rj R
t
in hydrocarbon-bearing zones.
Saltwater MudsBecause the resistivity of the mud filtrate (R
mf
) is approximately equal to the resistivity of formation
water (R
mf
= R
w
), and the amount of residual hydrocarbons (RH) is low, the resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
) is
low.
Away from the borehole as more hydrocarbons mix with mud filtrate in the invaded zone, the resistivity of the
invaded zone (Rj) begins to increase.
Resistivity of the uninvaded zone (R
t
) is much greater than if the formation was at 100% water saturation (R)
because hydrocarbons are more resistant than saltwater. Resistivity of the uninvaded zone is greater than the
resistivity of the invaded (Rj) zone. So, R
t
> R; > R
xo
.
Both the above examples assume that the water saturation of the uninvaded zone is much less than 60%.
15
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
QL.RA..L..J
-Tf6"6' 30.00
SP ( MV )
- 160.0 40.00
_ J
\=-
h -
1
1
_
- -
i
I
"*l
" 1 1
-p
1
r
X
t
1
s
I
/
f
\
\
/
1
~r
\
-
-
-
o "
/ -
- J
y-
V *
^
l
N.
V ,
\~ -
\
1
,
',
,
_- 1
.'
^
~"
.,-
?
t
,. -
>
-
'*.
; f *"
V
*\
^
5i^
. .:
V
^
^
P
\
- 4
/ h
,
|
/
y
....
TT7
-
i*
1
*-
.
\
:
j
' ' i
[
l
!
_...
|
|
^ )
'"] '
^J...
J_
1 _
5870
5900
5970
ILD (OHMM)
0.2000 2000.
J.LM(OHMMJl _
0.2000 " ~ ~ "266b"
SF LU (OHMM)
0. 2000 2000.
ffl
PTTT
:
-
E t ^ '
_ _ _
~ T
DEPTH
TtXt^^^^"
I
I
J_
] r
T
I
|
I
J
J^
|
j
{. z
I
b.f
I '
J \
t
I ***
jff <"
' V*
\ 1
z
v
V
4
'
1
tfr
-
-
A
^
,'
I
i
k
, '
"
^
i
,
* .
. - - . .
-
j
i
i
V
n
V-i>^-^~,
Bit Size
Type F l uid in hole
Rm at tneos. tamp
"v
l
-
X
^
-
-
?
',
- j
i
J
_-
i
. ... \
\
ffi
-----
^
M
-
"
V
\
- -
10085
i
:
f \
1 i
t 1
/
j- J
f" >
1
S
^
\-y
> 1
s
N
- - /
7 7/8
F G M
.25 at 65 " F
H
j _
SF
^
* -
f*l
H -
1
1
-
Rmt at me
-
as. temp.
Rmc at meas. temp.
Max. Rec. Te mp.
- -
.21 at 6 5
...
F
al F
1 6 0 F
16
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 6A. Example of Dual Induction Focused Log curves through a water-bearing zone. Given: the drilling mud is
freshwater-based (R
mf
> 3R
W
).
We've seen that where freshwater drilling muds invade a water-bearing formation (S
w
60%), there is high resistivity in
the flushed zone (R
M
), a lesser resistivity in the invaded zone (Rj), and a low resistivity in the uninvaded zone (R,). See
Figure 4 for review.
Ignore the left side of the log on the opposite page, and compare the three curves on the right side of the log (tracks #2 and
#3). Resistivity values are higher as distance increases from the left side of the log.
Log Curve RILDDeep induction log resistivity curves measure true resistivity (R
t
) or the resistivity of the formation,
deep beyond the outer boundary of the invaded zone. This is a measure of the uninvaded zone. In water-bearing
zones (in this case from 5,870 to 5,970 ft), the curve will read a low resistivity because the resistivity of the
formation water (R
w
) is less than the resistivity of the mud filtrate (R
mf
).
Log Curve RILMMedium induction log resistivity curves measure the resistivity of the invaded zone (R
;
). In a
water-bearing formation, the curve will read intermediate resistivity because of the mixture of formation water
(R
w
) and mud filtrate (R
mf
).
Log Curve R
SFL
Spherically Focused Log* resistivity curves measure the resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
). In a
water-bearing zone, the curve will read high resistivity because freshwater mud filtrate (R
mf
) has a high resistivity.
The SFL* pictured here records a greater resistivity than either the deep (Ri u)
or
medium (RiL
m
) induction curves.
17
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
CAL1JJN.)
6. 000 I6.00
-
6R (GAP I)
0 0 100.0
_
=F
1
t Y
GRr^
;
i_
X.
1 ;
cT'
|
(
j
1,
'
\ \ [
t ,
|
T
4--H
I
>
A v
f ,
4
^
1
1
1
1 -
T
<r
--"
r
1
- - +
' - -
* 1 * - "
7 i
f r r
j ? t
\
4
r
T
^i-4-
-^ W
J
i >
; >
! 1
^ ' ' /
~^ ^
1
= 4 \
+
- 1
- -
-
1
1 "
1 ! 1
r -
!
f-f-
,
; i
. j .
9830
9 9 0 0
9980
LLD (OHMM)
2000. 200000
RXO (
0. 2000
LLS (,
0. 2000
LLD (
0. 2000
m
^>
1
-
- + - -
- -
r- w~
"i\
T
\\
uf
T"
-
'
-
- - + -
~-
M
-
i
=ttt
4^
1 i ;
!
.
J
i I
4 - .
- r ~
|
1
!
I
- - +
Depth
- -
- - -
-
;'lf
t * .
!''
'*
;i^
J *
Ifr -
.. _J3
l i 1
rf?
5
"F
a4
Jt . ::
-
-f
t
T*l
-
+ - -
I
'
-
y
-4**i
- - + -
--
1 i T
;
""
'
1 1^
TT " '-
~"*
i
14213
Bit Size
Type F luid in hole
8
SAt
1 TENS (LB)
110000. 0.0
OHMM)
3HMf<
OHMt
2000.
i
2000.
*)
t^
3
-
- -
["
jr Sh
-r*--
" ' * -
. - *
-4 - - I
-
;
.
3/ 4
.T SEL
Rm o1 meas. l i mp. . 0 5 8 at 7 2 F
^ * v
-"
cz
-
^
M t
p
-
4 -
-
-----
4 -
-
>
* > * =
,
: 1
1
- -I *-*.
'
^4
.__.
- - ) - r
1
1
Rmf at me
t J
U
- - - - j
N
c
,
,
;
s temp.
Rmc at meas temp.
Mon. Rec . Temp .
. 0
- * - -
"
* i
t 1-
.
,
J - - -
I X -
^ "
462 at
2 0 0 0 .
_|j.
! ]
I
I
7 2 , F
. 0 8 7 at 7 2 F
268 F
18
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 6B. Example of Dual Laterolog* - Microspherically Focused Log (MSFL)* curves through a water-bearing zone. Given:
the drilling mud is saltwater-based (R
mf
R
w
).
We've seen that where saltwater drilling muds invade a water-bearing formation (S
w
60%), there is low resistivity in the
flushed zone (R
xo
), a low resistivity in the invaded zone (Rj), and low resistivity in the uninvaded zone (R
t
). Because R
m
f is
approximately equal to R
w
, the pores in the flushed (R
xo
), invaded (Rj), and uninvaded (R
t
) zones are all filled with saline
waters; the presence of salt results in low resistivity. See Figure 4 for review.
Ignore the left side of the log on the opposite page, and compare the three curves on the right side of the log (tracks #2 and
#3). Resistivity values are higher as distance increases from the left side of the log.
Log Curve LLDDeep Laterolog* resistivity curves measure true resistivity (R
t
) or the resistivity of the formation deep
beyond the outer boundary of the invaded zone. In water-bearing zones (in this case from 9,830 to 9,980 ft), the
curve will read low resistivity because the pores of the formation are saturated with connate water (R
w
).
Log Curve LLSShallow Laterolog* resistivity curves measure the resistivity in the invaded zone (Rj). In a
water-bearing zone the shallow Laterolog* (LLS) will record a low resistivity because R
mf
is approximately equal
toR
w
.
Log Curve SFLMicrospherically Focused Log* resistivity curves measure the resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
). In
water-bearing zones the curve will record low resistivity because saltwater mud filtrate has low resistivity. The
resistivity recorded by the Microspherically Focused Log* will be low and approximately equal to the resistivities
of the invaded and uninvaded zones.
19
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
QLRA ( }
- 170.0 30.00
SP j .
M V
i
- 160.0 40.00
/
1
1
|
1
i
i H
1
^
p " -
i
i'
/
i
l \
\
^
- - J
I
v
.
V
r
~ i
" t
^
i
i
M
i.
\
*
.
iv.
KJJ
p r
.
*
""'*.
. -
/ R
.
Tin
t
4
Z3
r
i
,
(
;>
;
r
8700
8748
8774
6800
0. 2000 2000.
'o'ioo'6 " " 2606".
SF LU(OHMM)
0. 2000 2000.
De 31 h
1
1
I
--H4
111
111
"TIT
~TTT
1 i 1
1
I
I ' 1
/ /^
\<
$ J
| f 1 C
\ 1
t \ ^ *J
Bit Size
Type F luid in hole
Rm at meat, temp
*,
\
*
100
3
| |
\ \
r3
'fc
- ? :
V
1
,
A "
v\
\ i
\ \
85
S_ ^ N
N.
. . wi
I L[
ILIl
7 7/8
F G M
.067 ot 67 F
r :
^
32
\r
iZ
Rm
rn
- -
>
4-
^
-
*
*
f
' i
-
f at r
Tm
*
J" '
; '
'
\
<
. . '
neas temp.
Rmc at meas. temp.
Man. Rec. Temp.
^j
.21
F
0 6!
T
1
F
at F
160 F
20
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 7A. Example of Dual Induction Focused Log curves through a hydrocarbon-bearing zone. Given: the drilling mud is
freshwater-based (R
mf
> 3R
W
).
We've seen that where freshwater drilling muds invade a hydrocarbon-bearing formation (S
w
60%), there is high
resistivity in the flushed zone (R
x0
), high resistivity in the invaded zone (R;), and high resistivity in the uninvaded zone
(R
t
). But, normally, beyond the flushed zone some diminishment of resistivity takes place. See Figure 5 for review.
Ignore the left side of the log on the opposite page, and compare the three curves on the right side of the log (tracks #2 and
#3) . Resistivity values are higher as distance increases from the left side of the log.
Log Curve ILDDeep induction log resistivity curves measure the true resistivity (R
t
) or the resistivity of the formation
deep beyond the outer boundary of the invaded zone. This is a measure of the uninvaded zone. In
hydrocarbon-bearing zones (in this case from 8,748 to 8,774 ft), the curve will read a high resistivity because
hydrocarbons are more resistant than saltwater in the formation (R, > R
0
).
Log Curve ILMMedium induction log resistivity curves measure the resistivity of the invaded zone (R;). In a
hydrocarbon-bearing zone, because of a mixture of mud filtrate (R
m
f), formation water (R
w
), and residual
hydrocarbons (RH) in the pores, the curve will record a high resistivity. This resistivity is normally equal to or
slightly more than the deep induction curve (ILD). But, in an annulus situation, the medium curve (ILM) may
record a resistivity slightly less than the deep induction (ILD) curve.
Log Curve SFLSpherically Focused Log* resistivity curves measure the resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
). In a
hydrocarbon-bearing zone, the curve will read a higher resistivity than the deep (ILD) or medium (ILM) induction
curves because the flushed zone (R
xa
) contains mud filtrate and residual hydrocarbons. The SFL* pictured here
records a greater resistivity than either the deep (ILD) or medium (ILM) induction curves.
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
_
CAL I P ER 4 1 M L la i H k n
t SAMMA RAT AP I u i l l l 1 0 0
1 0 0 t O O
<
S
7
c
^
^
c
r
<
3 ;
-7>
/
V
/" V * .
f~
\
i
R-
i
7 '
_4- L
~ i
J=
4-
i,
J J
i
i
IHV
CD
E l l
Kt 1 -
h*
(300
9306
9400
9 4 0 9 -
I
R E S I S T I V I T Y ( k m . M ' / M
MI C R O- S F L
0 . 2 1.0 10 100 I OO02OO(
SHALLOW L A T E R 0 L 0 8 - L L
0. 2 1.0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 (
DEEP LATEROLOO - L L <
0 . 2 1.0 10 I OO I 0OO20CC
^.3:
DEPTH
5 T
~~S
11,
1
LU_
P
-
mwr-^
^*-
_Ujj_
^=
*-
'
_,
__"
^
^"
T-
s
t
-p
t~
^^
'T'
i i
. :
-
z : =
- -
- -
. . .
-+^
^ :
:
~ z
" i n
T
m
?:
4-
Tt-
11122
BIT SI ZE 8 -
TYPE FLUID IN HOLE SA
"I"
"H
" m
- ! T T T
: m
rl'r
f=r:
^
w
" i
^
rv
*
^
~-t0m
- C,
= ^
& "
"
^
L..^
- T .
5^*
^^m
t
!-
^^^
P
5
=
^
=
3
^d
II
^ 5
=r~
;7:
i r *
^
~
^*
p -
r-'
c
-
es
r
L
- -
-
1 =
- 3
-*
^ -
>--
- 3;
_ _
z :
~ z
- -
- -
W ' i
_
- 7
RMF at
V 4 RM
_T MUD MA
- 'B
- - i t
fi^
i =
TTi"
^
^ =
Zzs
[ _
^
meas t emp
C at meas t emp.
X REC. TEMP.
RM at mens t emp : 0 5 6 at 7 4 F
p 2
*
n^*-
. 0 4 6 at 7 4 F
- - at - - o F
Ther momet er Br oke
22
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 7B. Example of Dual Laterolog* - Microspherically Focused Log (MSFL)* curves through a hydrocarbon-bearing zone.
Given: the drilling mud is saltwater-based (R
mf
R
w
).
We 've seen that where saltwater drilling muds invade a hydrocarbon-bearing zone (S
w
60%), there is low resistivity in
the flushed zone (R
xo
), an intermediate resistivity in the invaded zone (Rj), and high resistivity in the uninvaded zone (R,).
The reason for the increase in resistivities deeper into the formation is because of the increasing hydrocarbon saturation.
See Figure 5 for review.
Ignore the left side of the log on the opposite page, and compare the three curves on the right side of the log (tracks #2 and
#3). Resistivity values are higher as distance increases from the left side of the log.
Log Curve LLDDeep Laterolog* resistivity curves measure true resistivity (R
t
), or the resistivity of the formation deep
beyond the outer boundary of the invaded zone. In hydrocarbon-bearing zones (in this case from 9,306 to 9,409
ft), the curve will read high resistivity because of high hydrocarbon saturation in the uninvaded zone (R
t
).
Log Curve LLSShallow Laterolog* resistivity curves measure the resistivity in the invaded zone (R
;
). In a
hydrocarbon-bearing zone, the shallow Laterolog* (LLS) will record a lower resistivity than the deep Laterolog*
(LLD) because the invaded zone (Rj) has a lower hydrocarbon saturation than the uninvaded zone (R
t
).
Log Curve SFLMicrospherically Focused Log* resistivity curves measure the resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
). In
hydrocarbon-bearing zones, the curve will record low resistivity because saltwater mud filtrate has low resistivity
and the residual hydrocarbon (RH) saturation in the flushed zone (R
xo
) is low. Therefore, in a
hydrocarbon-bearing zone with saltwater-based drilling mud, the uninvaded zone (R
t
) has high resistivity, the
invaded zone (R,) has a lower resitivity, and the flushed zone (R
xo
) has the lowest resistivity.
23
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
ESTIMATION OF F ORMATION TEMPERATURE
4>
I
I
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
180OO
20000
| W H'.T HI:
^ B ::::
i Ml M
; J
; ;
rtd
; ;
- j O \ \ V\
.; ::HVV- \\
1 : | : l V.VV*
I I \ A '
h - L t - L l
i iiv
r - 1 ' V*
r i \
l
r! H' i i'V
i
l i tl 1 V
'''iti'i I"
1
>1 * r
iilliHii
1
1
i l
'
sp
1
r 1 "1
i l 1
V
:i i
;
.i
:
: i ; ;
:
:
i||i|i: i;i
;
1
i. ii J. A\
ail
::*]
;;:> p
:
r ;
r
_ u ;
j j j i fc
: : r i
: \ . \
P|f
-
: C1
: : !
:i |
i i
Bgi j
Sv
\v
V vs
Vp*
X
^ F
HT
-
-
:::r
'
;. :
f
\ :
^V
H-S
1 ' fcftj
: : l ; ' . ; : : :
!:::*:::.
;::
H
:^S
"t
~
;
if:!
V
:.'
B 1:
l Ei
:; \
::: :'
I;:;
Mi
X
: \ r ; r
:;.;a.
. 1
;t j '
!:; [J
i l l f
L::i \:
:
ir
:
'
\ !
i-iil
m
\i
::k
i i : '
tiij
;
. i -
i
1
\ '
" i i
; $
: '
\ -
i :
i f i i "!
^ 1
:fn
1|
W
! |
: ; :
r
"
;
-:-
:
p
' "
b
r
n
*a
::::
!
. ,
Nr
s
11
V v
Mijii
iffei
\ i A
1
V
* \
i
M|'J
\-
Sp:
;
\
i V
'
" :
Y
:'.".
:.:..
V;
\
i
m
i
S p
: :
gr
! : ' . ] : : ; ;
j f f i t t g
r
rL
."'
H i-*i
E]
h"
. ; ;
'.;.
i3
*."TT
;
SJt vHj
s^
1
V
v\
a; 3
: *\ nJj
V
L
V \
; i . \ : : ' '
^
;
\
it*}
M.
i ^
V
i
X
r ; r : ^
^ TTT:
^ ^
w
t::r
: _ _ .
iiiKi
S:
. i i :
Sa
: : : ; : , -
:.:;
:..
:
:
-
p
^H
V'
:
\ ^
HF:
.
fe
:
;
V
\!H?
1
1
jsj
ll|
;
'
: : ;
M
V
:
jjii
\
;
:
i \
'
\
I':
UH
::;;.
*.::.
u
~
E
|
!-;:
: : :
'IS
:
irppj
ti c
-
'::
:
.
.::
:::;
;
:
:i
'.. }
.. .!....
^
^
L: -.
-; :
H
;
'
.":
n
:'.'>
\
A
if
=M7
1
..::
':'
::":
\ -
\
v
N
v
:
IpH
\ : : :
?
*.:::
wj
\
ml
':':.
i ^
i
\
ftft
~
. ; ; :
:".:
::h..::\
.... r: r
-
:
!i
i
iil;
stH
j
;:::
;:;
:
p
"
: :
^rrf
ifK
i u
:
RH
:l^l
::':
) : :
itep-i
:;'
: -
\
tffi
i
H
"P
. . !
V
^
:
:-
:
N
;
1
!:T
\
: t i i
fe
',', *
\
>
: :
:
i i : ; : ;
jpW
^Z
' ' : I
rfif
E
.:;:
l:'y
;
1 :
i -:c!H
.
:.
:
!::
&
::':
h|i
::"
- r -
'
:
!.
:
: .
':::
:.;.
"' -
N
':
::;- t !
.:
:
:::'
1
;L
:i
;
;
-'
i!f:
|
; ; ; : : .
.*:. :
\
\
v ^
M
: : \
JHJ
IL
:
: W-
PC.
r
;
^
..:'
tt
~
!vlt
'
i::r
i | ! ^ !
..;
ail
p
\."
: ! ' ;
' "
_ _
::
:::
.
:
::_
fc
-
! i i f f " n
:HiHi:
:
;:*! ::
;
il
. .: ::.
:.. ::
ifiift;
fe
fiHpl"
M
!S^::;;:
ifei
~
: ; :
Ttir
r:r
_
,
2&i
i ^
:
:::. :.
p I.;..
. . ; : ; ; _
#
~
...
j :
.
:
.
::
r : :
p
^....
.::
i ;
:;
: :
: :
m^
: ;
-.
:.
::.:
: :
r
; ;:;
:::
.' ' .
...
::;
:.
:.
1
V
\
l y n i i j i : ; "
\l \
ifdi
ffli |fS5
M
:
M:
|
itf
;;:
:
1
1$
::::
:?t
:^^
: ; :
:T:*i:'*:|
TT=
gq
i S
::::
; - :
- : :
M
:-.:.
:
:;::
i-,*J
7*rf
: '
:
: l :
:
: - :
:::;::::
' : . : '
::."
ij n.iK
:\;:
;
:::
: : :
.:
!lii
jv
\
Immu
. . "
l i l i .
;:::
t&
$
':':':
mS
illj
i-i
I
j-*-80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
U 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340
|_mean surface temperature F
temperature
24
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 8. Chart for estimating formation temperature (T
f
) with depth (linear gradient assumed).
Courtesy, Dresser Industries.
Copyright 1975, Dresser Atlas.
Given:
Surface temperature = 80
Bottom hole temperature (BHT) = 180
Total depth (TD) = 10,000 feet
Formation depth = 6,000 feet
Procedure:
1. Locate BHT (180F) on the 80 scale (bottom of the chart; surface temperature = 80F).
2. Follow BHT (180) vertically up until it intersects 10,000 ft (TD) line. This intersection defines the
temperature gradient.
3. Follow the temperature gradient line up to 6,000 ft (formation depth).
4. Formation temperature (140) is read on the bottom scale vertically down from the point where the 6,000 ft line
intersects the temperature gradient.
NOTE: In the United States (as an example) 80 is used commonly as the mean surface temperature in the Southern States,
and 60 is used commonly in the Northern States. However, a person can calculate his own mean surface temperature if
such precision is desired.
25
B
A
S
I
C
R
E
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
H
I
P
S
O
F
W
E
L
L
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
0
>
-
O
S
-
O
O
I
-
O
S
I
-
O
O
J
-
o
o
t
-
o
o
-
0
0
9
-
O
O
i
-
O
O
O
l
-
O
O
B
f
-
O
O
O
l
-
O
O
O
I
-
O
O
O
f
r
"
0
0
0
*
-
O
O
O
i
-
0
0
0
*
0
1
-
O
O
C
f
t
l
-
k
.
0
O
,
k
a
9
o
.
0
<
-
o
,
"
"
"
O
-
O
f
^
O
n
///// /
1
u
.
o
5
I
M
c
'
5
e
No CI
;ONCENTRATION
0
o
-
S
S
S
t
a
-
-
.
d
1
1
1
1
1
1
s
:
I
I
=
^
E
"
^
^
"
^
k
>
v
h
=
g
g
f
=
^
s
-
v
1
<
=
=
-
.
_
^
1
=
:
^
r
r
r
'
;
-
-
=
"
l
E
3
^
'
a
9
f
~
=
-
^
5
-
i
.
'
"
o
t
-
"
4
-
1
^
1
^
^
r
^
1
^
^
^
^
^
-
^
^
0
"
-
^
-
.
s
O
n
.
~
^
-
1
-
<
"
-IIM
^
.
s
e
.
3
*
RESI STI VI T1
GRAP H
F OR NaCI
SOLUTIONS
1
^
S
^
L
^
C
-
^
_
-
!
r
i
-
X
L
(
/
^
.
^
f
e
w
.
t
I
0
^
1
-
-
*
"
*
5
^
S
T
-
*
^
*
,
3
d
-
r
f
l
^
p
S
p
*
r
*
^
s
d
^
*
s
s
^
:
s
=
:
f
c
-
^
,
"
5
H
-
H
-
H
3
^
^
^
j
^
'
F
^
j
-
1
^
p
f
e
p
-
5
d
=
F
3
4
s
;
-
3
"
S
J
s
=
^
1
s
'
"
^
>
^
K
r
L
5
-
^
,
^
-
<
p
^
j
^
4
,
-
i
-
J
-
|
|
[
e
F
R
-
^
f
c
L
^
P
P
r
i
J
T
N
4
:
1
-
-
J
!
7
"
!
J
f
e
s
!
-
L
S
i
J
r
T
r
^
J
i
i
'
-
^
L
4
B
4
4
-
+
=
'
d
r
^
f
>
'
f
t
"
I
b
i
^
N
s
b
^
f
e
k
.
?
S
s
^
>
-
<
n
~
r
^
B
B
J
Q
"
S
2
=
^
E
=
;
-
=
E
=
|
=
!
9
^
^
-
J
*
w
"
k
.
"
v
L
-
5
;
:
'
:
.
=
^
>
=
>
,
-
"
^
"
!
^
^
.
,
2
E
I
:
5
~
*
=
v
5
^
^
5
N
,
^
^
_
i
t
'
s
r
_
^
^
_
-
1
-
.
I
.
_
t
.
.
^
-
.
^
-
P
B
=
|
[
s
?
$
s
:
:
>
-
I
T
r
*
1
2
.
-
m
f
i
"
5
=
:
^
t
-
-
-
s
-
^
=
=
=
=
=
=
[
;
,
I
H
i
l
r
K
,
i
i
=
i
!
:
s
g
"
^
^
"
"
=
^
.
^
c
-
^
.
^
c
s
:
s
:
;
=
;
;
:
=
,
"
=
2
1
5
:
~
"
s
;
s
^
_
:
&
.
=
i
-
"
=
^
;
l
=
l
l
l
=
=
E
:
:
!
:
;
2
o
S
i
*
|
0
6
/
U
|
0
J
6
t
j
T
m
i
M
i
J
t
4
-
j
-
-
=
=
r
P
r
W
U
r
-
p
z
^
p
.
l
k
r
#
T
#
T
"
^
r
X
i
=
^
*
I
5
f
c
;
:
s
^
E
.
~
-
s
5
5
;
:
_
_
:
_
s
s
;
5
:
s
;
-
T
*
*
.
S
S
P
O
T
*
*
i
s
^
^
.
^
^
^
^
1
"
"
^
s
l
l
5
=
s
;
:
=
5
:
^
5
s
=
=
=
-
5
i
^
_
_
_
_
^
=
>
^
5
=
i
-
s
s
^
E
^
^
l
^
-
^
E
"
t
*
"
s
.
"
^
i
.
s
_
*
2
-
'
N
>
s
i
^
:
h
:
^
^
^
2
;
>
=
>
.
^
^
'
s
^
^
'
=
-
,
i
^
.
^
-
^
_
f
c
"
!
=
-
:
=
=
s
"
z
r
z
=
^
s
=
_
j
r
*
^
_
-
=
^
^
^
-
-
_
r
^
"
H
^
S
-
i
r
-
5
.
"
s
^
,
_
s
:
"
*
s
*
^
K
'B
"
^
^
*
^
P
^
.
0
?
O
o
^
-
I
t
1
I
-
'
"
i
i
r
r
r
f
0
-
:
:
,
:
:
|
-
|
|
2 3 4
to find R, at
le conversion s
-
-
-
.
-
'
S
i
o
:
!
k
l
"
!
!
i
!
'
c
"
i
p
l
;
i
\
l
:
\
m
i
?
t
+
.
!
_
:
:
.
,
.
.
'
'
c
l
i
t
,
s
:
:
:
!
i
:
'
g
-
o
c
;
:
|
:
s
;
:
;
-
8
5
8
1
r
E
;
l
:
!
i
i
j
S
t
'
,
S
"
-
:
!
-
e
J
>
t
-
5
f
i
n
n
"
t
a
i
1
s
i
i
=
E
E
=
;
E
;
,
z
-
S
+
=
=
=
!
5
5
i
=
|
-
3
g
"
8
2
x
:
:
;
;
:
:
:
:
p
"
S
I
I
g
S
i
S
i
E
l
h
!
.
-
.
3
*
*
.
,
_
^
^
:
;
:
:
!
:
:
u
.
u
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
w
^
3
0
6
5
,
,
.
;
,
5
.
v
.
a
-
=
;
-
'
-
<
;
;
t
t
$
3
;
:
;
.
:
:
;
;
:
.
^
2
l
|
g
*
;
;
:
:
:
o
i
_
u
S
"
s
:
a
.
.
.
.
M
i
u
.
.
=
.
,
m
j
_
^
_
:
:
:
:
:
=
:
;
;
-
5
j
i
i
=
!
I
i
i
:
!
-
K
^
"
2
<
1
.09 .06
" (poin
t F orm,
by the
:
!
;
;
:
;
-
O
"
.
u
|
l
,
t
-
3
T
1
.03
1.2 a
exan
proxi
:
:
;
:
:
:
:
:
<
;
;
:
:
:
:
:
;
;
_
*
T
.
a
.
:
-
!
;
:
:
:
:
^
i
"
:
=
;
;
g
t
c
"
;
;
"
*
*
,
;
:
:
:
.
:
:
E
K
|
"
"
s
.
c
w
:
>
.
,
.
.
:
)
-
*
:
m
i
u
c
J
"
a
s
;
'
.
'
;
~
m
:
:
:
.
:
S
i
:
i
_
8
I
I
i
l
_
J
o
*
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
>
o
o
o
o
g
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
g
o
Q
N
n
*
N
6
o
>
o
r
i
S
t
g
O
o
3
n
j
.
V
M
3
d
W
3
X
2
6
BASIC RELATIONSHIPS OF WELL LOG INTERPRETATION
Figure 9. Because resistivity varies with changes in temperature, you must adjust before calculation. Use the chart on the opposite
page.
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1972, Schlumberger.
Given: Resistivity of drilling mud (R
m
) equals 1.2 at 75F. Formation temperature (T
f
) = 160.
Procedure:
1. Locate the resistivity value, 1.2, on the scale at the bottom of the chart.
2. Follow the vertical line up to a temperature value of 75F (point A on the chart).
3. Follow the diagonal line (constant salinity) to where it intersects a temperature value of 160F (point B on the
chart).
4. From point B, follow the vertical line to the scale at the bottom, and find a resistivity value of 0.56.
27
CHAPTER II
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
General
This chapter and succeeding chapters (III through V)
introduce the reader to specific log types such as SP,
resistivity, porosity, and gamma ray logs. The text discusses
how different log types measure various properties in the
well bore and surrounding formations, what factors affect
these measurements, where a particular curve is recorded,
and how data are obtained from the log using both charts
and mathematical formulas.
The spontaneous potential (SP) log was one of the earliest
electric logs used in the petroleum industry, and has
continued to play a significant role in well log
interpretation. By far the largest number of wells today have
this type of log included in their log suites. Primarily the
spontaneous potential log is used to identify impermeable
zones such as shale, and permeable zones such as sand.
However, as will be discussed later, the SP log has several
other uses perhaps equally important.
The spontaneous potential log is a record of direct current
(DC) voltage differences between the naturally occurring
potential of a moveable electrode in the well bore, and the
potential of a fixed electrode located at the surface (Doll,
1948). It is measured in millivolts.
Electric currents arising primarily from electrochemical
factors within the borehole create the SP log response.
These electrochemical factors are brought about by
differences in salinities between mud filtrate (R
m
f) and
formation water resistivity (R
w
) within permeable beds.
Because a conductive fluid is needed in the borehole for the
SP log to operate, it cannot be used in non-conductive (i.e.
oil-based) drilling muds.
The SP log is recorded on the left hand track of the log in
track #1 and is used to: (1) detect permeable beds, (2)
detect boundaries of permeable beds, (3) determine
formation water resistivity (R
w
), and (4) determine the
volume of shale in permeable beds. An auxiliary use of the
SP curve is in the detection of hydrocarbons by the
suppression of the SP response.
The concept of static spontaneous potential (SSP) is
important because SSP represents the maximum SP that a
thick, shale-free, porous and permeable formation can have
for a given ratio between Rmf/R*,. SSP is determined by
formula or chart and is a necessary element for determining
accurate values of R
w
and volume of shale. The SP value
that is measured in the borehole is influenced by bed
thickness, bed resistivity, invasion, borehole diameter, shale
content, and most importantthe ratio of R
mf
/R
w
(Fig.10a).
Bed thicknessAs a formation thins (i.e. < 10 feet
thick) the SP measured in the borehole will record an SP
value less than SSP (Fig. 10b). However, the SP curve can
be corrected by chart for the effects of bed thickness. As a
general rule whenever the SP curve is narrow and pointed in
shape, the SP should be corrected for bed thickness.
Bed resistivityHigher resistivities reduce the deflection
oftheSP curves.
Borehole and invasionHilchie (1978) indicates that the
effects of borehole diameter and invasion on the SP log are
very small and, in general, can be ignored.
Shale contentThe presence of shale in a permeable
formation reduces the SP deflection (Fig. 10b). In
water-bearing zones the amount of SP reduction is
proportional to the amount of shale in the formation. In
hydrocarbon-bearing zones the amount of SP reduction is
greater than the volume of shale and is called "hydrocarbon
suppression" (Hilchie, 1978).
The SP response of shales is relatively constant and
follows a straight line called a shale baseline. SP curve
deflections are measured from this shale baseline.
Permeable zones are indicated where there is SP deflection
from the shale baseline. For example, if the SP curve moves
either to the left (negative deflection; R
mf
> R
w
) or to the
right (positive deflection; R
mf
< R
w
) of the shale baseline,
permeable zones are present. Permeable bed boundaries
are detected by the point of inflection from the shale
baseline.
But, take note, when recording non-permeable zones or
permeable zones where R
mf
is equal to R
w
, the SP curve
will not deflect from the shale baseline. The magnitude of
SP deflection is due to the difference in resistivity between
mud filtrate (R
mf
) and formation water (R
w
) and not to the
amount of permeability.
Resistivity of Formation Water (R
w
)
Calculated from the SP Curve
Figure 11 is an electric induction log with an SP curve
from a Pennsylvanian upper Morrow sandstone in Beaver
County, Oklahoma. In this example, the SP curve is used to
find a value for R
w
by the following procedure: After you
determine the formation temperature, you correct the
resistivities (obtained from the log heading) of the mud
filtrate (R
mf
) and drilling mud (R
m
) to formation
temperature (see Chapter I).
Next, to minimize for the effect of bed thickness, the SP
28
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
is corrected to static SP (SSP). SSP represents the
maximum SP a formation can have if unaffected by bed
thickness. Figure 12 is a chart used to correct SP to SSP.
The data necessary to use this chart are: (1) bed thickness,
(2) resistivity from the shallow-reading resistivity tool (R,),
and (3) the resistivity of the drilling mud (R
m
) at formation
temperature.
Once the value of SSP is determined, it is used on the
chart illustrated in Figure 13 to obtain a value for the
R
m)
/R
we
ratio. Equivalent resistivity (R
we
) is obtained by
dividing R
mf
by the R
m
f/R
we
v a m e
fr
m t n e
chart (Fig. 13).
The value of R
we
is then corrected to R
w
, using the chart
illustrated in Figure 14, for average deviation from sodium
chloride solutions, and for the influence of formation
temperature. A careful examination of Figures 11-14 should
help you gain an understanding of the R
w
from SP
procedure. But, rather than using charts in the procedure,
you might prefer using the mathematical formulas listed in
Table 3.
It is important to remember that normally the SP curve
has less deflection in hydrocarbon-bearing zones; this is
called hydrocarbon suppression, and results in too high a
Ibble 3. Mathematical Calculation of R
w
from SSP (modified after Bateman & Konen, 1977).
Instead of charts, some individuals may prefer using these formulas, especially if they want to computerize the procedure.
R
raf
at75F = R
m(K
J X (temp + 6.77)/81.77
Correction of R
mf
to 75
K = 60 + (0.133 x T
f
)
R
mf e
/R
we
= 10-ssp/Ktt
R
mfe
= (146 X R
mf
- 5)/(337 x R
mf
+ 77)
R^,. formula if R
mf
at 75F < 0.1
Rmfe = 0.85 X R
mf
R^e formula if R
mf
at 75 > 0.1
R\ve
=
Rmfe/(R
m
fe/Rwe)
R^ at 75F = (77 X R
we
+ 5)/(146 - 377 x R
we
)
R*. at 75 formula if R
we
< 0.12
R
w
at 75 F= - [0.58 - 10'
(0.69xRwe-0.24)
R
w
at 75 formula i f R
we
> 0.12
R
w
at formation temperature = R
w
at 75 x 81.77/(T
t
+ 6.77)
t
R
mf lemp
= R
mf
at a temperature other than 75F
t1
The e subscript (i.e. R
mfe
) stands tor equivalent resistivity.
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
kg
S
H
A
B
A
S
E
L
I
N
E
%
'
RMF = RW
RMF>RW
RMF:*>RW
RMF<RW
kj
si
I
SSP
SP
. RMFRW
5 _ ALL SANDS
-si
kj
^ E = | THICK CLEAN
91
rr-rl
WE T S AND
3
PSP
SP
PSP
i
THIN SAND
THICK SHALY
WET SAND
THICK CLEAN
GAS SAND
THICK SHALY
GAS SAND
10A
SSP- Kxl og(RMF/ Rw)
10B
30
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
Figure 10. Examples of SP deflection from the shale baseline.
10ASP deflection with different resistivities of mud filtrate (R
mf
) and formation water (R
w
). Where resistivity of
the mud filtrate (R^) is equal to the resistivity of the formation water (R
w
) there is no deflection, positive or
negative, from the shale baseline.
Where R
mf
is greater than R
w
, the SP line kicks to the left of the shale baseline (negative deflection). Where R
mf
greatly exceeds R
w
, the deflection is proportionately greater.
Where R
mf
is less than R
w
, the kick is to the right of the shale baseline. This is called positive deflection.
Remember, the spontaneous potential log (SP) is used only with conductive (saltwater-based) drilling muds.
10BSP deflection with resistivity of the mud filtrate (Rmf) much greater than formation water (R
w
). SSP (static
spontaneous potential) at the top of the diagram, is the maximum deflection possible in a thick, shale-free, and
water-bearing ("wet") sandstone for a given ratio of R
m
f/R
w
. All other deflections are less, and are relative in
magnitude.
SP (spontaneous potential) is the SP response due to the presence of thin beds and/or the presence of gas. PSP
(pseudo-static spontaneous potential) is the SP response if shale is present.
Note at bottom of diagram: A formula for the theoretical calculated value of SSP is given. SSP = K x log
(Rmj/RJ, where K = (.133 x T
f
) + 60.
31
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
SPONTANEOUS- POTENTIAL
MILLIVOLTS
-
20
-
-
-
-K
c[
?
V
T*^
^
/
\
\
L
,s
^
-
-
-
^1
X
7442
7450
7
5
0
0
CONDUCTI V
mlMmhoa/m
ITY
ipoo
INDUCTION
1000 500
I
RESISTIVITY
16" NORMAL
0 | 50
0 i 500
0
0
" *T'
"n
-
l|
_4
rr
zt
i t
t
ZL
\
I
T
t
I
\
1
zt
;
-
"
s
/
f,
%
,z ff*
I
/
^
\
IN
S"
=
^
DUCTION
L
J _ .
DEPTH
I T sac
TTfC PLUiD IN HOLE
MM at > . Itnp.
-
&
50
00
BOOT
9
Oil Emultio
199 at 62
n
r
1500 j
-
f
C
,
\
J
"^
/
f
_^
t
TZ
~z
'
s
\
t
!
s
---
v
J
/
s
(1
<
RH BHT
RHP M T
RHC IHT
MAX. MC TCMP
u
1
V
o.
OS
121
I3S
0
1000
e^
T
)
N
?
t ISB" F
I t U5 F
Hi 138 F
F
32
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
Figure 11. Determination of formation water resistivity (R^,) from an SP log. This example is an exercise involving the charts on
Figures 12 through 14.
Given:
R
mf
=0.51atl35(BHT)
R,n = 0.91 at 135 (BHT)
Surface temperature = 60F
Total depth = 8,007 ft
Bottom Hole Temperature (BHT) = 135F
From the Log track:
1. SP = 40mv (spontaneous potential measured from log at a formation depth of 7,446 ft and uncorrected for
bed thickness). It is measured here as two 20mv divisions from the shale baseline. The deflection is negative,
so the value (-40mv) is negative.
2. Bed thickness equals 8 ft (7,442 to 7,450 ft).
3. Resistivity short normal (Ri) equals 28 ohm-meters.
4. Formation depth equals 7,446 ft.
Procedure:
1. Determine 7}Use Figure 8 to determine the temperature of the formation (T
f
). Use BHT = 135F, TD =
8,007 ft, surface temperature = 60F, and formation depth = 7,446 ft. (Your answer should be 130F).
2. Correct R
m
and R
mf
to 7)Use Figure 9 to correct the values for the resistivity of mud and of mud filtrate,
using T
f
(130F) from step 1. Use R
m
= 0.91 at 135F and R
mf
= 0.51 at 135F. (Your answers should be: R
m
= 0.94 at 130F and R
mf
= 0.53 at 130F).
3. Determine SPRead directly from the SP curve in Fig. 11. It measures two units (at a scale of 20 mv per
division) from the shale baseline. The deflection is negative, so your answer is also (40 mv) negative.
4. Correct SP to SSPCorrecting SP for the thin-bed effect will give a value for SSP; use the chart in Figure 12
to find the SP Correction Factor.
Given Ri/R
m
(or R
sn
/R
m
) = 28/0.94 = 30. Bed thickness (read from SP log) Fig. 11 equals 8 ft. Correction
factor (from Fig. 12)= 1.3.
SSP = SP X SP Correction factor (Fig. 12)
SSP = ( - 40mv) x 1.3
SSP = - 52 mv (Your answer)
5. Determine R
m{
/R
we
ratioUse the chart in Figure 13 (Your answer should be 5.0).
6. Determine R
we
Divide the corrected value for R
mf
by the ratio R
mf
/R
we
value.
R\e
=
RmP
/
(Rmf'Rwe)
R^ = 0.53/5.0
R
we
= 0.106
7. Correct R
we
to R
w
Use the chart in Figure 14, and the R
we
value in step 6 (Your answer should be R
w
= 0.11
atT
f
).
NOTE: The term short normal describes a log used to measure the shallow formation resistivity, or the resistivity
of the invaded zone (R;). Short normal resistivity (R^) was used in Procedure Step 4 above, and its use as a
logging/resistivity term is common.
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
SP CORRECTION
8
1
1
1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
9 10
SP correction factor
34
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
Figure 12. Chart for finding SP Correction Factor used to correct SP to SSP (see exercise, Fig. 11).
Courtesy, Dresser Industries.
Copyright 1975, Dresser Atlas.
Defined:
R, = shallow resistivity
Rn, = resistivity of drilling mud at formation temperature
Example:
R/Rm = 30
Bed Thickness = 8 ft
Procedure:
1. Locate a bed thickness on the vertical scale (in this case 8 ft).
2. Follow the value horizontally across until it intersects the Rj/R
m
curve (in this example Ri/R
m
= 30, so point
will be to the right of the 20 curve).
3. Drop vertically from this intersection and read the SP correction factor on the scale across the bottom (in this
example, a value of 1.3).
4. Multiply SP by the SP Correction Factor to find SSP.
For the exercise in Figure 11:
SSP = SP x Correction Factor
SSP = -40mv x 1.3 (-40mv is SP value taken at 7,446 ft, see Fig. 11)
SSP=-52mv
35
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
. ' , . . ' . . " /
^^^^^^^^^^^^
GRAPHIC SOLUTION OF THE SP EQUATION
oi
e *
spontaneous potential (millivolts)
36
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
Figure 13. Chart used for determining the R
m
f/R
we
ratio from SSP values.
Courtesy, Dresser Industries.
Copyright 1975, Dresser Atlas.
Example:
SSP = -52mv (from SP log and Fig. 12)
T
f
= 130F
Procedure:
1. Locate an SSP value on the vertical scale (in this case -52mv).
2. Follow the value horizontally across until it intersects the sloping formation temperature line (130F; imagine
one between the lines for 100 and 150 temperature lines).
3. Drop vertically from this intersection and read the ratio value on the bottom scale (in this example, the ratio
value is5.0).
37
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
1.0
.5
.4
.3
.2
.1
B "
2
| .05
1 -04
1
g
g 03
i
* .02
.01
.005
.004
.003
.002
001
.(
R
w
F ROM R
w t
t j j ! - j
: ; : - - - -
:::M.l
rr'-r.-r
iH S i
2n i. 3;
j I i + +
PI
ffi
: . . : . . . 1.
i : " - r 1
j r . _r :r
|fi
P t
- . . - ^ L j :
ffii Et |
;":. .... .X
m
:." i ' 1
i-j ;- - f -
i:.:Ii:x::L
M i l
III trrr ~ir
m
M-ia
iiiL.i
i
1 i !
' ; ; -
; .
! { !
!
, ; .-|,..,
:
r
. ; . : - - [
: 1 j g
HEtfti-
- . .
.. .. ...
f . | 1
.. .. _ 4 , . . j . i
. i f i
-- ..--.-
.;:.| V' r:
:
: T
r l - Ki j :
-.-
Jif]
i-i-
:
:..j|j
: . ! :
. .... ..
-:-;:
1
3 1
:
r:T-:rfnil
::: z :r{r; :~r
. . . [ - - ] -
iiziii:
tt+tH-
1
:
--#F
- - - . . - - . . ~ ,
/j
t : - / /
lI^/{/l
|ffij
;
/7,Vr1
^iAszMt
Li..:.. _j _ . j
J| .
i i 1
:jT
li
/' /
I I
/
1
liL
m
34M
':!::::}::
14
flff
; I
. 1 . .
|
. ..'
;
: . : | : . ' - j
H i * .
:.::L'-:-
, 1
i.f.,.j.|,j..
::
:
t;
..;.
' ' ['
: !
I ' J :
*.. b
'-": 1 S
",<
i
1
_ / j _
/ '
f--\
' . \
jeti
1
U | |
iffl
2n
' i t ;
1
1
ijij
_:;;
li:
I
i
1
r
#
p i l l
4
1
'
.(
g .
t : - -
Pffl
; ; - ;
ffl.
Ilj)
; ..
: ' : " :
*::: j ;
1
U
.;.;,..
[\f\
:
P
^
jFH
1
p / i
r i
Li-4
tt
ps
i n :
:
"1"
1 L
;
i
1. j "
ii:
i.:.
... 1,
^
1
/
f'\
w
!-,.
! I -
#h
[ii!
i.4s|
:.:::.
.In
p
!.
:
K
M
Ji l l
1 ! ' l
1 ii 1
' . ' :
~.
;
;:-
j.
I '
J
'!:!;
i:i
' :
lit
\\\]
: H
f t
y
i
1
1
"
"" 'i _
j , ' _
v | : l
....
-
:
.; ;
... 1
.:: J
... _
1
A4
':' Z- :I
i . . ;
; . r : :
. .... ^
:-- T'l
T T :
:
_,... : t
i : |
= = * = :
: : 1
- 1 - .:. 3
r-t
:
-
......
105 .01 .02 .03 .04 .05
R^ ohm-meti
1 i
1
. . 1
. . . . '
"'.'!. : - . - : l : . ' : . : - : - :
v::'; . ;
j 1
; ; H 44-
1-
:::},
J&
- . ,
..;.., J..
! ^ S E |
i "
;
1"mi*
";
r
j rpE
?- i-:"'"
;|: '::::
| : EEi-
... . L J . J .
.;...;..] .
... +44
j M
:' " E2E
:::r : S
J E S
.. ^
J LL
~\:~ :i|..ji
T )";
/ : " : : i ; .
1 sf
1
; - :
t i r
B
:
-
]
.
1 - -
,:
M
, ; + JH
4444- '
J.
I I
!
'.
... ....
.
. ; ' : *
*" If?'
^ <*r^
... ;.|ij
:: ...
;.."'
, : U!.,
p*i#
;- ,..
It '!:.:
-;
:' I J'
i-| ;!f!
t i
,' , ,
; I :
H i !
s '
M
:: . i i :
l a
M
1
|UJ.
-
.,::
'
: i g .
t.;:.
j ..... . ....
: . : --...
!
44j
:: !. ;:;
V-;..-
;. .
:
L h\ :
^ - f
:
-
" i ' '
F T - : :. ;
... ...
......
,
r
. ,
;
!
- : { H{
Vi r; -M
m$s
fe;-.
, : : : . . - , .
- T
: : :
.._
l i - n n
X ri j Tt
^ ^ x
. .
... !
njj ... .,.
.! i +
:
;;; -... 1
igjfflS-
. ..
;
}
J?
1
if
lijil I
' IT ]
_:... .....
H x
:
;
"' ' .
':'. ~i. 2. _
.... ... 1
. : : : r ; .
t T! _: - ~ .
K -:
T
:
:.:
:
"
:
;;::! r
PI
$ 5.
| I +.
,:
:
.;, . T '
mm
mi
m
a " - -
D i i
: :
: j
.....
: 1
E|
! "
f J
; i
T
j.
- Y
.1 .2 .3 .4 .5 1.0
MS
:
38
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
Figure 14. Chart for determining a resistivity value for R
w
from R
we
.
Courtesy, Dresser Industries.
Copyright 1975, Dresser Atlas.
Given:
R
we
is calculated by dividing R
mf
corrected to formation temperature (T
f
) by the ratio R
mi
/R
we
. From the exercise
example you can calculate R
we
= 0.53/5 or R
we
= 0.106. R
mf
atT
f
= 0.53. T
f
= 130F.
Procedure:
1. Locate the value of R
we
on the vertical scale (in this case 0.106).
2. Follow it horizontally until it intersects the temperature curve desired (in this case 130F between the 100 and
150 temperature curves).
3. Drop vertically from the intersection and read a value for R
w
on the scale at the bottom (in this case 0.11).
39
THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
value for R
w
calculated from SSP. Therefore, to determine
R
w
from SP it is best, whenever possible, to use the SP
curve opposite known water-bearing zones.
Volume of Shale Calculation
The SP log can be used to calculate the volume of shale in
a permeable zone by the following formula:
PSP
V
s h
( i n%) =1. 0-
Where:
V
sh
= volume of shale
PSP = pseudo static spontaneous potential (SP of
shaly formation)
SSP = static spontaneous potential of a thick clean
sand or carbonate
SSP= -KxlogfJWRJ
K = 60+ (0.133 xT
f
)
The volume of shale in a sand can be used in the
evaluation of shaly sand reservoirs (Chapter VI) and as a
mapping parameter for both sandstone and carbonate facies
analysis (Chapter VII).
Review - Chapter II
1. The spontaneous potential log (SP) can be used to: (1)
detect permeable beds; (2) detect boundaries of permeable
beds; (3) determine formation water resistivity (K^); and (4)
determine volume of shale (V
sh
) in a permeable bed.
2. The variations in the SP are the result of an electric
potential that is present between the well bore and the
formation as a result of differences in salinities between R
raf
and R
w
.
3. The SP response in shales is relatively constant and its
continuity of amplitude is referred to as the shale baseline.
In permeable beds the SP will do the following relative to
the shale baseline: (1) negative deflection to the left of the
shale baseline where R
mf
> R
w
; (2) positive deflection to
the right of the shale baseline where R
mf
< R
w
; (3) no
deflection where R
mf
= R
w
.
4. The SP curve can be suppressed by thin beds,
shaliness, and the presence of gas.
40
CHAPTER III
RESISTIVITY LOGS
General
Resistivity logs are electric logs which are used to: (I)
determine hydrocarbon versus water-bearing zones, (2)
indicate permeable zones, and (3) determine resistivity
porosity. By far the most important use of resistivity logs is
the determination of hydrocarbon versus water-bearing
zones. Because the rock's matrix or grains are
non-conductive, the ability of the rock to transmit a current
is almost entirely a function of water in the pores.
Hydrocarbons, like the rock's matrix, are non-conductive;
therefore, as the hydrocarbon saturation of the pores
increases, the rock's resistivity also increases. A geologist,
by knowing a formation's water resistivity (R
w
), its porosity
((f>), and a value for the cementation exponent (m) (Table 1),
can determine a formation's water saturation (S
w
) from the
Archie equation:
ow
R,
l/n
Where:
S
w
= water saturation
F = formation factor (a/<
m
)
a = tortuosity factor
m = cementation exponent
R^ = resistivity of formation water
R, = true formation resistivity as measured by a deep
reading resistivity log
n = saturation exponent (most commonly 2.0)
The two basic types of logs in use today which measure
formation resistivity are induction and electrode logs (Table
4). The most common type of logging device is the
induction tool (Dresser Atlas, 1975).
An induction tool consists of one or more transmitting
coils that emit a high-frequency alternating current of
constant intensity. The alternating magnetic field which is
created induces secondary currents in the formation. These
secondary currents flow as ground loop currents
perpendicular to the axis of the borehole (Fig. 15), and
create magnetic fields that induce signals to the receiver
coils. The receiver signals are essentially proportional to
conductivityt, which is the reciprocal of resistivity
(Schlumberger, 1972). The multiple coils are used to focus
the resistivity measurement to minimize the effect of
materials in the borehole, the invaded zone, and other
t conductivity = 1000/resistivity. Conductivity in millimhos/meter;
resistivity in ohm-meters.
nearby formations. The two types of induction devices are
the Induction Electric Log and the Dual Induction Focused
Log.
A second type of resistivity measuring device is the
electrode log. Electrodes in the borehole are connected to a
power source (generator), and the current flows from the
electrodes through the borehole fluid into the formation,
and then to a remote reference electrode. Examples of
electrode resistivity tools include: (1) normal, (2) Lateral,
(3) Laterolog*, (4) Microlaterolog*, (5) Microlog*, (6)
Proximity Log*, and (7) spherically focused logs.
Induction logs should be used in non-salt-saturated
drilling muds (i.e. R
mf
> 3 R
w
) to obtain a more accurate
value of true resistivity (R
t
). Boreholes filled with
salt-saturated drilling muds (R
mf
R
w
) require electrode
logs, such as the Laterolog* or Dual Laterolog* with or
without a Microspherically Focused Log*, to determine
accurate R, values. Figure 16 is a chart which assists in
determining when use of an induction log is preferred over
an electrode log such as the Laterolog*.
Induction Electric Log
The Induction Electric Log (Fig. 17) is composed of three
curves: (1) short normal, (2) induction, and (3) spontaneous
potential or SR These curves are obtained simultaneously
during the logging of the well.
Short NormalThe short normal tool measures
resistivity at a shallow depth of investigation which is the
resistivity of the invaded zone (Rj). When the resistivity of
the short normal is compared with the resistivity of the
deeper measuring induction tool (R
t
), invasion is detected
by the separation between the short normal and induction
curves (Fig. 17). The presence of invasion is important
because it indicates a format ion is permeable.
The short normal tool has an electrode spacing of 16
inches and can record a reliable value for resistivity from a
bed thickness of four feet. The short normal curve is usually
recorded in track #2 (Fig. 17). Because the short normal
tool works best in conductive, high resistivity muds (where
R
mf
> 3 R
w
), salt muds (where R
mf
= R
w
) are not a good
environment for its use. In addition to providing a value for
Rj, the short normal curve can be used to calculate a value
for resistivity porosity if a correction is made for unflushed
oil in the invaded zone. To obtain a more accurate value of
Rj from the short normal curve, an amplified short normal
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Table 4. Classification of Resistivity Logs.
INDUCTION LOGS (measure conductivity)
ELECTRODE LOGS (measure resistivity)
A. Normal logs
B. Lateral Log'
1
'
C. Laterologs*
D. Spherically Focused Log (SFL)*
DEPTH OF RESISTIVITY LOG INVESTIGATION
E. Microlaterolog (MLL)*
F. Microlog (ML)*
G. Proximity Log (PL)*
H. Microspherically Focused Log (MSFL)*
Flushed Zone (R
m
)
Microlog*
Microlaterolog*
Proximity* Log
Microspherically Focused Log*
Invaded Zone (Rj)
Short Normal tt
Laterolog -8*ft
Spherically Focused Log*tt
Medium Induction Log
Shallow Laterolog*
Uninvaded Zone (R,)
Long Normal
Lateral Log
Deep Induction Log
Deep Laterolog*
Laterolog -3*
Laterolog -7*
Induction Log 6FF40
tFor a review of how to use Lateral logs see: Hilchie (1979).
t^When R
mf
is much greater than R
w
, the Laterolog - 8* and Spherically Focused Log* will have a shallower depth of investigation (closer to RJ
than the medium induction, shallow Laterolog*, and the short normal.
curve is sometimes displayed in track #2 along with the
short normal curve.
inductionThe induction device (Fig. 17) measures
electrical conductivity* using current generated by coils.
The transmitting coils produce an electromagnetic signal
which induces currents in the formation. These induced
currents are recorded as conductivity by receiver coils.
Modern induction devices have additional coils which focus
the current so that signals are minimized from adjacent
formations, the borehole, and the invaded zone. By
focusing the current and eliminating unwanted signals, a
deeper reading of conductivity is taken, and more accurate
values of true formation resistivity (R,) are determined from
the induction log. The induction log has a transmitter/re-
ceiver spacing of 40 inches and can measure a reliable value
for resistivity down to abed thickness of five feet.
The induction curve on the Induction Electric Log
appears in track #2 (Fig. 17). Because the induction device
is a conductivity measuring tool, an induction derived
conductivity curve is presented in track #3 (Fig. 17). The
track #3 conductivity curve is necessary to more accurately
determine the R, value of low resistivity formations, and to
eliminate possible errors when calculating true resistivity
from conductivity. Because the induction log does not
require the transmission of electricity through drilling fluid,
it can be run in air-, oil-, or foam-filled boreholes.
C, = 1000/R, where C, = conductivity in millimhos/meter, and R, = true
formation resistivity in ohm-meters.
Dual Induction Focused Log
The modern induction log is called the Dual Induction
Focused Log (Tixieretal, 1963). This log (Fig. 18) consists
of a deep-reading induction device (RrLd which measures
R,), and is similar to an Induction Electric Log. The Dual
Induction Focused Log (Fig. 18) also has a medium-reading
induction device (RiL
m
which measures Rj) and a shallow
reading (R
xo
) focused Laterolog* which is similar to the
short normal. The shallow reading Laterolog* may be either
a Laterolog-8 (LL-8)* or a Spherically Focused Log
(SFL)*.
The Dual Induction Focused Log is'used in formations
that are deeply invaded by mud filtrate. Because of deep
invasion, a deep reading induction log ( RTU )
m a v n o t
accurately measure the true resistivity of the formation (R
t
).
Resistivity values obtained from the three curves on a Dual
Induction Focused Log are used to correct deep resistivity
(R
ILd
) to true resistivity (R
t
) from a tornado chart (Fig. 19).
This tornado chart (Fig. 19) can also help determine the
diameter of invasion (d
;
) and the ratio of R
x0
/R
t
. An
example of the procedure is presented in Figure 19.
The three resistivity curves on the Dual Induction
Focused Log are recorded on a four cycle logarithmic scale
ranging from 0.2 to 2000 ohm/meters (Fig. 18) and
correspond to tracks #2 and #3 on the Induction Electric
Log. Normally, a spontaneous potential (SP) curve is placed
in track #1 (Fig. 18).
42
RESISTIVITY LOGS
The deep induction log (R]Ld) does not always record an
accurate value for deep resistivity in thin, resistive (where
R, > 100 ohm/meters) zones. Therefore, an alternate
method to determine true resistivity (R,) should be used.
The technique is called R
t
minimum (R,
min
) and is
calculated by the following formula:
R
tmin
= (LL-8*orSFL*)xR
w
/R
mf
Where:
R
t min
= true resistivity (also called R
(
minimum)
R
mf
= resistivity of mud filtrate at formation
temperature
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
LL-8*= shallow resistivity Laterolog-8*
SFL* = shallow resistivity Spherically Focused Log*
The rule for applying R,
min
is to determine R
t
from both the
Dual Induction Focused Log tornado chart (Fig. 19) and
from the R
tmill
formula, and use whichever value of R
t
is the
greater. In addition to the R
tm
j
n
method for determining R
t
in thin resistive zones, correction curves (Schlumberger,
1979, p. 54-55) are available to correct the deep induction
log resistivity (Rim) to Rt-
Laterolog*
The Laterolog* is designed to measure true formation
resistivity (R,) in boreholes filled with saltwater muds
(where R
mf
R
w
). A current from the surveying electrode
is forced into the formation by focusing electrodes. The
focusing electrodes emit current of the same polarity as the
surveying electrode but are located above and below it. The
focusing, or guard electrodes, prevent the surveying current
from flowing up the borehole filled with saltwater mud
(Fig. 20). The effective depth of Laterolog* investigation is
controlled by the extent to which the surveying current is
focused. Deep reading Laterologs* are therefore more
strongly focused than shallow reading Laterologs*.
Invasion can influence the Laterolog*. However, because
resistivity of the mud filtrate is approximately equal to the
resistivity of formation water (R
mf
= R
w
) when a well is
drilled with saltwater-based muds, invasion does not
strongly affect R
t
values derived from a Laterolog*. But,
when a well is drilled with freshwater-based muds (where
R
mf
> 3 R
w
), the Laterolog* can be strongly affected by
invasion. Under these conditions, a Laterolog* should not
be used (see Fig. 16). The borehole size and formation
thickness affect the Laterolog*, but normally the effect is
small enough so that Laterolog* resistivity can be taken as
R
t
.
The Laterolog* curve (Fig. 21) appears in track #2 of the
log and has a linear scale. Because saltwater-based mud
where R
mf
= R
w
gives a very poor SP response, a natural
gamma ray log is run in track #1 as a lithology and
correlation curve (Fig. 21). A Microlaterolog* is sometimes
recorded in track #3 (Fig. 21).
Dual Laterolog-Microspherically Focused Log*
The Dual Laterolog* (Fig. 22) consists of a deep reading
(R
t
) resistivity device (Ru_d)
an<
^
a
shallow reading (Rj)
resisitivity device (RLLS)- Both are displayed in tracks #2
and #3 of the log on a four cycle logarithmic scale. A
natural gamma ray log is often displayed in track # 1 (Fig.
22).
The Microspherically Focused Log* is a pad type,
focused electrode log (a pad type focused electrode log has
electrodes mounted in a pad that is forced against the
borehole wall) that has a very shallow depth of
investigation, and measures resistivity of the flushed zone
(R
xo
). When a Microspherically Focused Log (MSFL*) is
run with the Dual Laterolog* (Fig. 22), the resulting three
curves (i.e. deep, shallow, and MSFL*) are used to correct
(for invasion) the deep resistivity (RLL<I) to true formation
resistivity (Suau et al, 1972). A tornado chart (Fig. 23) is
necessary to correct R
LLd
to R
t
and to determine the
diameter of invasion (dj) and the ratio of R,/R
xo
. The
procedure is illustrated in Figure 23.
Microlog (ML*)
The Microlog* (Fig. 24) is a pad type resistivity device
that primarily detects mudcake (Hilchie, 1978). The pad is
in contact with the borehole and consists of three electrodes
spaced one inch apart. From the pad, two resistivity
measurements are made; one is called the micro normal and
the other is the micro inverse (Fig. 24). The micro normal
device investigates three to four inches into the formation
(measuring R
TO
) and the micro inverse investigates
approximately one to two inches and measures the
resistivity of the mudcake (R
mc
). The detection of mudcake
by the Microlog* indicates that invasion has occurred and
the formation is permeable. Permeable zones show up on
the Microlog* as positive separation when the micro normal
curves read higher resistivity than the micro inverse curves
(Fig. 24). t Shale zones are indicated by no separation or
"negative separation" (i.e. micro normal < micro inverse).
tPositive separation can only occur when Rmc > Rm > Rmf- To verify these
values if there is any doubt, check the log heading for resistivity values of
the mudcake, drilling mud, and mud filtrate.
Remember that even though the resistivity of the mud filtrate (R
m
f) is
less than the resistivity of the mudcake (Rmc), the micro normal curve will
read a higher resistivity in a permeable zone than the shallower-reading
micro inverse curve. This is because the filtrate has invaded the formation,
and part of the resistivity measured by the micro normal curve is read from
the rock matrix, whereas the micro inverse curve measures only the
mudcake (R
mc
) which has a lower resistivity than rock.
43
RESISTIVITY LOGS
However, in enlarged boreholes, a shale zone can exhibit
minor, positive separation. In order to detect zones of
erroneous positive separation, a microcaliper log is run in
track # 1 (Fig. 24), so that borehole irregularities are
detected. Nonporous and impermeable zones have high
resistivity values on both the micro normal and micro
inverse curves (Fig. 24). Hilchie (1978) states that
resistivities of approximately ten times the resistivity of the
drilling mud (R
m
) at formation temperature indicate an
impermeable zone.
The Microlog* does not work well in saltwater-based
drilling muds (where R
mf
R
w
) or gypsum-based muds,
because the mudcake may not be strong enough to keep the
pad away from the formation. Where the pad is in contact
with the formation, positive separation cannot occur.
Microlaterolog* and Proximity Log*
The Microlaterolog (MLL)* (Fig. 21) and the Proximity
Log (PL)* (Fig. 25), like the Microspherically Focused Log
(MSFL)*, are pad type focused electrode logs designed to
measure the resistivity in the flushed zone (R
xo
). Because
the Microlaterolog* is strongly influenced by mudcake
thicknesses greater than 1/4 inch (Hilchie, 1978), the
Microlaterolog* should be run only with saltwater-based
drilling muds. The Proximity Log*, which is more strongly
focused than the Microlaterolog*, is designed to investigate
deeper so it can be used with freshwater-based drilling muds
where mudcake is thicker.
Resistivity Derived Porosity
The minerals that make up the grains in the matrix of the
rock and the hydrocarbons in the pores are nonconductive.
Therefore, the ability of rock to transmit an electrical
current is almost entirely the result of the water in the pore
space. Thus resistivity measurements can be used to
determine porosity. Normally, measurements of a
formation's resistivity close to the borehole (flushed zone,
R
xo
, or invaded zone, Rj) are used to determine porosity.
Shallow resistivity devices, used to measure R
xo
and R
i;
include the following: (1) Microlaterolog*; (2) Proximity
Log*; (3) Laterolog-8*; (4) Microspherically Focused
Log*; (5) short normal log; and (6) Spherically Focused
Log*.
When a porous and permeable water-bearing formation is
invaded by drilling fluid, formation water is displaced by
mud filtrate. Porosity in a water-bearing formation can be
related to shallow resistivity (R
xo
) by the following
equations:
' Fx
v
mf
Where S
xo
= 1.0 (100%) in water-bearing zones.
square both sides:
solve for F:
remember F = a/</
m
therefore:
1.0= / F X ^
OL
1.0 = Fx -fmL
R
xo
p - "*xo
Rmf
a
_ Rxo
W
solve for porosity (<f>)
< t > =
I Rn
1/m
Where:
Rmf
= formation porosity
= resistivity of mud filtrate at formation
temperature
S
xo
= water saturation of the flushed zone
R
xo
= resistivity of flushed zone from Microlaterolog*,
Proximity Log*, Laterolog-8*, or
Microspherically Focused Log* values
a = constant
a = 1.0 for carbonates
a = 0.62 for unconsolidated sands
a = 0.81 for consolidated sands
m = constant
m = 2.0 for consolidated sands and carbonates
m = 2.15 for unconsolidated sands
F = formation factor
In hydrocarbon-bearing zones, the shallow resistivity
(R
xo
) is affected by the unflushed residual hydrocarbons left
by the invading mud filtrate. These residual hydrocarbons
will result in a value for shallow resistivity (R
xo
) which is
too high because hydrocarbons have a higher resistivity than
formation water. Therefore, the calculated resistivity
porosity in hydrocarbon-bearing zones will be too low. To
correct for residual hydrocarbons in the flushed zone, water
saturation of the flushed zone (S
xo
) must be known or
estimated. Then, a formation's shallow resistivity (R ) can
be related to porosity by the following:
Sxo
v
now square both sides:
remember: F = a/0
" T O
44
RESISTIVITY LOGS
S * = F x
R
v
,
solve for F:
Therefore:
Sxo
2 X R
xo
Rraf
a
_ S
xo
2
X R
xo
solve for porosity (</>):
a(R
mt
/R
X0
)
] "
(S
x
)
2
Where:
0 = formation porosity
R
mf
= resistivity of mud filtrate at formation
temperature
Table 5. Percentages of Residual Hydrocarbon Saturation
as a function of hydrocarbon density and porosity
(modified after Hilchie, 1978).
APrGravity RHS% S
xo
%
Gas 40 to 5 60 to 95
High gravity oil 40 to 50 10 to 5 90 to 95
Medium gravity oil 20 to 40 20 to 10 80 to 90
Low gravity oil 10 to 20 30 to 20 70 to 80
Porosity % RHS% S,%
25 to 35
15 to 20
30
15
70
85
TRANSMITTER
OSCILLATOR
TRANSMITTER
COIL
AMPLIFIER
AND
OSCILLATOR
HOUSING
-BORE HOLE
R
xo
= resistivity of the flushed zone
a = constant
a = 1.0 for carbonates
a = 0.62 for unconsolidated sands
a = 0.81 for consolidated sands
m = constant
m = 2.0 for carbonates and consolidated sands
m = 2.15 for unconsolidated sands
S
xo
= water saturation of the flushed zone
S
xo
= 1.0 minus residual hydrocarbon saturation
(RHS). See Table 5 for examples.
F = formation factor
Review - Chapter III
1. Resistivity logs are used to: (1) determine
hydrocarbon- versus water-bearing zones; (2) indicate
permeable zones; and (3) determine resistivity porosity.
2. A formation's resistivity can be measured by either
induction or electrode (Laterolog*, normal, Lateral,
spherically focused logs, Microlog*, Microlaterolog*. and
Proximity*) logs.
3. Induction logs (induction electric log or Dual
Induction Focused Log) should be run in non-salt saturated
drilling muds (where R
mf
> 3 R
w
).
4. Laterologs* or Dual Laterologs* with R
xo
should be
run in salt-saturated drilling muds (where R
mf
= R
w
).
5. By use of tornado charts, the deep resistivity log on
either the Dual Induction Focused Log or the Dual
Laterolog* with R
xo
can be corrected for the effects of
invasion to determine a more accurate value of true
formation resistivity (R
t
).
6. Most minerals which make up the matrix of the rock
and the hydrocarbons in the pores are non-conductive.
Therefore, the ability of the rock to transmit an electric
current is almost entirely a function of the water in the
rock's pores.
Figure 15. Schematic illustration of a basic two-coil induction system.
Courtesy, SchlumbergerWell Services.
Copyright 1972, Schlumberger.
45
RESISTIVITY LOGS
2. 3. 4. 5. 7.
Rmf / Rw *"
20 30
46
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 16. Chart for quick determination of preferred conditions for using an induction log versus a Laterolog* (Schlumberger,
1972).
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1972, Schlumberger.
Selection is a function of the ratio of R
m
^R
w
and, to some extent, porosity.
47
RESISTIVITY LOGS
SPONTANEOUS- POTENTIAL
MILLIVOLTS
-
20
i 1
H -
- -
?
^
^
' V
-
-
1
1
'
\
\
I
s
*.
X
7446
in
O
O
CONDUCTI V
miNimlioi/n
ITY
ipoo
atom. WI^AI
INDUCTION
1000 500
I
RESISTIVITY
16" NORMAL
0 | 50
0 i 500
0
0
~T'
* i
_t
l(
H
i t
t
j
t
n 1
1
^
INDUCTION
L
J
s^
,
3_
A
j $
zL
&*
^
,
P-"-~
S
>
DEPTH
MT WE
TYPE FLUID IN HOLE
Ml at nt. tiM.
^
**
^
50
500
8007
9
Oil ErnnMoR
L99 ol 6 2
s
F
1500 i
-
/*
<,
V
s
s
^s
/
/
,
/
/
__
f
\
1
.
V
s
\
/
N
i
'
<
P.M BHT
fmr WT
RNC BHT
MX. DEC TEDP.
1
V
J
'
as
0.5
1.21
ISO
0
1000
if
V
>
?
1 IS8 F
1 at I 39" F
ot 138 F
F
48
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 17. Example Induction Electric Log.+ The purpose for presenting this log is to illustrate the different curves and to give
you guidance on picking log values. The Induction Electric Log is normally used when R^ R
w
.
Note that log scales are shown horizontally at top of log.
Track #1The log track on the far left contains the spontaneous potential (SP) log. Typically, each increment on the scale
equals 20 millivolts, so that the value at the sample depth of 7,446 ft is about 40. Because the deflection is to the
left (negative deflection) the log value is negative, or approximately 40 mv.
Track #2The middle log track contains two resistivity curves. One measures shallow resistivity (R
;
, 16" -normal or
short normal electrode log represented by solid line) and the other measures deep resistivity (R,, an induction log
represented by dotted line). The scale values increase from left to right, but two scales are present: The first scale
measures from 0 to 50 ohm-meters in increment values of 5 ohm-meters. This first scale contains both the Ri and
R, curves. The second-cycle scale measures from 0 to 500 ohm-meters in increment values of 50 ohm-meters. It
contains no curves in this example because the second-cycle scale is used only when the resistivity curves in the
first-cycle scale exceed the maximum scale values.
At the sample depth of 7,446 ft read a value for the 16" -normal of 28 ohm-meters. This is counted horizontally as
almost 6 increments of 5 ohm-meters per increment (28 is nearly 6 x 5 or 30). The induction reading on track #2
is counted at 10 ohm-meters, or 2 increments of 5 ohm-meters per increment.
Track #3The log track on the far right contains a conductivity curve measured by the induction log. The induction log
actually measures conductivity, not resistivity, but because conductivity is a reciprocal of resistivity, resistivity can
be derived. This is done automatically as the log is recorded in track #3. However, the conductivity curve can be
used to convert values to resistivity. In this way, track #2 resistivity values can be checked for accuracy.
For example, to convert track #3 values to resistivity the procedure is as follows: The values on the conductivity
scale increase from right-to-left, and two scales are present: values from 0 to 1,000 are marked in 50 mmhos/meter
increments for the first cycle, and values from 1,000 to 1,500 are marked for the second cycle (second cycle
values are not necessary on this log). Therefore, at a depth of 7,446 ft, track #3 shows a value of 100
mmhos/meter, or 2 increments (from the right) of 50 mmhos/meter for each division.
Because resistivity equals 1,000 -f- conductivity, resistivity = 1,000/100 or, in this case, 10. So, conductivity
converted to resistivity from the induction log is 10 ohm-meters.
?On this and all subsequent logs in the text, each small division on the depth scale is equal to 2 ft.
49
RESISTIVITY LOGS
0.0 190.0
SP (MV)
160.0 40. 00
_ _QLRA ( )
160.0 4O00
SR 1GAPI)
0.2000
afooo"
0.2000
IL0_(OHIIII(__
...Jk.i9HMf<J..
SFLU (OHMM)
2000.
"Soda
rVPE FLUID IH HOLE
at wi l l . Imp.
- 5/8
1.19 ol 8 0 * F
R.MF at mioi. ttmp.
RMC l l Hi m, t l up.
MAX. REC. TEMP,
0. 11 ol SO* F
50
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 18. Example of a Dual Induction Focused Log. Use this log to pick values and determine ratios for the tornado chart
exercise in Figure 19. The Dual Induction Focused Log is normally used when R
mf
is much greater than R
w
, and also where
invasion is deep.
Track # 1 in this log suite contains a gamma ray, SP, and R
x0
/R
t
quick look curves. The gamma ray, SP, and R
xo
/R
t
quick
look curves will be discussed in subsequent chapters.
The resistivity scale in tracks #2 and #3 is a logarithmic scale from 0 to 2,000 ohm-meters, increasing from left to right.
Note the following logs.
Deep induction log resistivityThe dashed line ILD represents R^ and measures the deep resistivity of the formation, or
close to true resistivity (R
t
). At the sample depth in this exercise (13,590 ft), deep resistivity (ILD) reads a value of
70.
Medium induction log resistivityThe dotted-and-dashed line ILM represents R
ILm
and measures the medium resistivity
of the formation, or resistivity of the invaded zone (R
;
). At the sample depth in this exercise (13,590 ft), medium
resistivity (R
;
) reads a value of 105.
Spherically Focused Log* resistivitythe solid line SFL* represents RSFL* and measures the shallow resistivity of the
formation, or resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
). At the sample depth in this exercise (13,590 ft), resistivity of
the flushed zone (R
xo
) reads a value of 320.
The following ratios are needed for work on the tornado chart (Fig. 19), and the values are picked from the
example log:
*WRiLd = 320/70 = 4.6
I WRi Ld= 105/70=1.5
51
RESISTIVITY LOGS
DUAL INDUCTION-SPHERICALLY FOCUSED LOG
ILd-ILm-SFL*
THICK BEDS
8-lnt203wmJ
SKIN EFFECT
HOLE
CORRECTED
52
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 19. Dual Induction-(SFL*) tornado chart used for correcting Ri
U
values to R as an indicator of true resistivity. Log values
used in this exercise are picked from the example Dual Induction Log in Figure 18.
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1979, Schlumberger
Given:
RiLd = 70
R
1Lm
=105
R
SFL
= 320
RsFL/RiLd = 4.6
RllVRlLd =1. 5
Procedure:
By using the tornado chart, pick the following values:
R,/Ri
Ld
Plot the ratio values for RSFI/RIUI
an
d RiiVRiLd by using the scales on the vertical axis (RsFi/RiLd)
an
d
horizontal axis (RiLm/Rim)- Where the values cross, read the R/RIUJ value from the tornado chart scale depicted
by solid, vertically oriented lines. Note that the scale decreases in intensity from left to right (from 1.0 to 0.80)
and that the R
t
/R
ILd
value falls just to the left of the 0.80 line, giving us a value of 0.82.
djFind the diameter of invasion surrounding the borehole by locating the same point used above, on the dj scale
of the chart. The scale is indicated by the dashed, vertically oriented lines on the tornado chart (note that the dj
scale is given in inches across the top of the tornado, and is given in meters through the midpart of the tornado
chart), and the scale reads horzontally. In this example, the sample value is plotted midway between the 60- and
70-inch value line, so we determine that the diameter of invasion (dj) is 65 inches.
R
x0
/R
t
Ratio of resistivity of the flushed zone (R
M
) over the true resistivity of the formation (uncorrected, R
t
).
This ratio, derived from the chart, is used in later calculations. The scale is represented by the solid, horizontally
oriented lines, and the scale values are shown as whole numbers midway across the lines. In this example, the
plotted sample falls on the scale with a value of 7.0.
Finally, with values taken from the chart as outlined above, calculate corrected values for R
t
and R
x0
.
(R,/R
ILd
) x R
ILd
= R, (corrected)
(Ratio value from chart) X log value = R, (corrected)
0.82 x 70 = 57.4 (R, corrected, or true formation resistivity).
and
(R
x0
/R,) x R
t
= R
xo
(corrected)
(ratio value from chart) x (corrected R, value) = R
xo
(corrected)
7 x 57.4 = 401.8 (corrected resistivity of the flushed zone)
RESISTIVITY LOGS
54
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 20. Schematic illustration of a focused Laterolog* illustrating current flow.
Courtesy, Dresser Industries.
Copyright 1974, Dresser Atlas.
As cited in the example, A] (above) and A
2
(below) are the focusing (or guard) electrodes which direct and force the current
from the A
0
electrode into the formation. The monitoring electrodes (M, Mj' and M
2
M
2
') are brought to the same
potential by adjusting the current that emits from the focusing electrodes A! and A
2
.
55
RESISTIVITY LOGS
GAMMA RAY
ug Ra
-
eq/ton
LATEROLOG
"ohms m *vnn
MICROLATEROLOG
-ohms m
c
/ m
7.5 50 50
7.5 15
I I I I I
50 67 ICO 200 o
SPONTANEOUS- POTENTIAL
millivolts
MICROLATEROLOG CALIPER
3948
Typt Fluid in hol
Rnn at mtos. ttmp.
Rml a< mas. tmp.
7 7/8 Rmc at mtos. l i mp.
Mat. Rtc. Timp.
.062 ot 611 F
56
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 21. Example Laterolog* and Microlaterolog*. The purpose for presenting this log is to illustrate the log curves, and to give
you guidance on picking log values. These logs are used when R
mf
R
w
.
Track #1The log track on the far left in this example is a gamma ray log. Gamma ray logs are discussed in a later
chapter, but they commonly accompany Laterologs*.
Track #2The middle log track here is the Laterolog* which measures the deep resistivity (R
t
) or true resistivity of the
formation. Note that the scale increases from left to right, in increments of 5 ohm-meters from 0 to 50 on the first
cycle, and in hybrid increments from 0 to on the second cycle.
At the sample depth of 3,948 ft the Laterolog* value reads 21 ohm-meters.
Track #3The right-hand log in this suite is the Microlaterolog* which measures the resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
).
Note that the scale starts with zero between tracks #2 and #3that is, zero for the Microlaterolog* is not the
same point as zero for the Laterolog* farther to the left. The scale ranges from 0 to 50 ohm-meters in increments
of 5 ohm-meters. There is no second cycle recorded.
At the sample depth of 3,948 ft the Microlaterolog* reads 10 ohm-meters, or the depth line intersects the log curve
at two increments from zero.
Note: In order to correct (for invasion) the Laterolog* to true resistivity (R
t
), do the following (use the example at 3,948
ft):
R, = 1.67 (R
LL
) - 0.67 (R
xo
) (Hilchie, 1979)
R,= 1.67(21) - 0.67(10)
R, = 28.4 ohm-meters
Where:
R, = resistivity of the uninvaded zone
Ry. = Laterolog* resistivity (21 ohm-meters at 3,948 ft)
R*> = Microlaterolog* resistivity (10 ohm-meters at 3,948 ft)
57
RESISTIVITY LOGS
6
CALIPER 4 lam. la i MkM
IS
GAMMA RAY API unirt 100
0
100 0 0
v .
_ i
P3
S
s - )
<*-
->-
<-
^
i -Js
C
u
t*^
H
>
5^ '
- "
"f
C
* 2
-r
<
i
y-
s
^
.
^
^-<
~
.
s
ry"
1
1
s-
-I
\
\
,
|
I
I
-f c
s-
^
7 a
l
f\-
ittt
IHV
_64
i *
I M
K>i
T
_flll
i j
ft-
1
1
-
9 0 0
9324
_
9 4 0 0
RESISTIVITY okm. M M
MICRO-SFL
0.2 1.0 10 100 I000200C
SHALLOW LATEROLOQ " LL
0.2 1.0 10 100 I 000200(
DEEP LATER0L08- LLd
0. 2 LO 10 100 IO0O2OOC
^ 3 - -
= '
DEPTH
. . . . LLd
K-
. . . . _ _
*
<r?
^!
<r
BIT SIZE
TYPE FLUID IN HOLE
RM ot meas temp.
as.
21
_^
!""*
S
i _
^j
-
1* ,
* s
r
C-
*
ST"
jel .
11122
s = i
- ^*
' I
- " I
E5
V-*" ^-
E X
" ^
2^!
. . J . ' *
fi
^sf.
F^
- ^
^
pt .
* " ~~
" *
* - ^?
" T..
- ^
}=
S^
-
->
b^_
^ I B
"
^P
8 - V4
SALT MUD
. 0 6 6 at 7 4 F
^
^ ?
^=
_
*-J
y -
P
~ r
fc M
H-J.4,
*- * =
M^ i - -
'!" M
RMF at m
r t 1 m; J - -
. ! ! L=_ =
S I i " ^
-
sas t emp
RMC at meas. temp.
MAX REC. TEMP.
t :
_. -
1
j
I
1
- - --
. .
. 0 46 at
.
1
74 F
- - 01 - - F
Thermometer Broke
58
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 22. Example of Dual Laterolog* with Microspherically Focused Log (MSFL)*. Use this log to pick values and determine
ratios for the tornado chart in Figure 23. These logs are used when R
nlf
R
w
and invasion is deep.
The resistivity scale in tracks #2 and #3 is a four-cycle logarithmic scale ranging from 0 to 2,000; the values increase from
left-to-right.
Deep Laterolog* resistivityThe dashed line LLd represents R
LLd
and measures the deep resistivity of the formation, or
true resistivity (R
t
). At the sample depth of this exercise (9,324 ft), true resistivity (R
t
) reads a value of 16.0.
Shallow Laterolog* resistivityThe dotted-and-dashed line LLs represents R
LLs
and measures the shallow resistivity of
the formation or the resistivity of the invaded zone (Rj). At the sample depth of this exercise (9,324 ft), resistivity
(Ri) reads a value of 10.0.
Microspherically Focused Log (MSFL)* resistivityThe solid line SFL* represents RMSFL*
a n a
measures the resistivity
of the flushed zone (R
xo
). At the sample depth in this exercise (9,324 ft), resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
) reads
a value of 4.5.
The following ratios are needed for work on the tornado chart (Fig. 23), and the values represented are picked from the log
as shown above:
I WR MS F L * = 16/4.5 = 3.6
I W R L L
S
= 16/10= 1.6
59
RESISTIVITY LOGS
DUALLATEROLOG*-R
x
LLd-LLs-R,
60
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 23. Dual Laterolog*Microspherically Focused Log* tornado chart for correcting R
LL
d to R
t
. Log values in this exercise
are picked from the example Dual Laterolog*-MSFL* in Figure 22.
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1979, Schlumberger.
Given:
R
LLd
= 16.0
R
LLs
= 10.0
R
MSFL* = 4 . 5
RLLVRMSFL* = 3.6
RLLX/RLLS =1-6
Procedure:
Plot the values for RLIVRMSFL* (3.6) and RLIVRLLS (' ^) using the vertical and horizontal scales at the side and bottom of
the chart. Determine subsequent ratio values from the tornado chart.
R
t
/R
LLd
The scale for this value is represented by the solid, vertically oriented lines. The scale values read across the top
part of the tornado chart, and range from 1.1 to 1.8. Our value falls between the scale values 1.3 and 1.4, so we
assign a value of 1.35.
djThe diameter of invasion around the borehole is picked from the chart; the scale is represented by the dashed, vertically
oriented lines, and the scale values read across the top of the tornado chart ranging from 20 to 120 (inches) or 0.5
to 3.04 (meters). Our value falls between the scale values of 30 and 40 (inches), so we assign a value of 36 inches.
R,/R
xo
The scale for this ratio value is represented by the solid, horizontally oriented lines. The scale values read from
bottom to top on the left part of the chart, and range from 1.5 to 100. Our value falls between the scale values 3
and 5 (much closer to 5), so we assign a value of 4.5.
Finally, corrected values for true resistivity of the formation (R
t
) and resistivity of the flushed zone (R
x0
) are determined
using these ratios.
(R
t
/R
LLd
) x R
LLd
= R, (corrected R
t
)
(ratio) x log value = corrected R,
1.35 x 16.0 = 21.6 (R
t
corrected, or true formation resistivity).
And:
(corrected R,)/(R
t
/R
X0
) = R
xo
(corrected R
xo
)
(corrected R,)/(ratio value from chart) = corrected R
xo
21.6/4.5 = 4.8 (corrected resistivity of flushed zone)
61
RESISTIVITY LOGS
SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL
a CALIPER
Millivolts
" ft*
HOLE SIZE- INCHES
7 9 II 13 15
oq
is
^
s
| i p-^=
1
., .1
-
_.
_]_
t
-
(
7
J
r
(
-S
I
i
- - - i -
'^5
2
r
_
-
, r
i
- 15
-" " 3
**=
_^
/
*
..-*"_|
1
- * .
--*
*-
_2l
1
*
- - -
3
+ J I
\ ^a
:
L-
:---
-
! S
^_
1
! - /
Y
^
~
~
- -
i^v
e'
1+***
?
-
,
!''
-i
_
~~1
-
!
+
'
|
|
. *
^ t r ~
U
- ^
^ _
2
^
/
^
"r
l _. _
1
\
f-
\
-*-
^
^
SP
1 '
j<
DEPTH
(71
O
O
5146
m
ro
8
5238
RESISTIVITY
Ohmi m / m
HICRO INVERSE
I" X I"
0 20 40
i
MICRO NORMAL
2"
0 20 40
fi
^ y
j f c~
M, !
tfii
i'" I'~h*
^E^^i
rflT
~"1 '"! |5t
-,
--
-
i
Y - + (j?
t
f
H ^
-J" T^5
i. 1 < ^
It-J
i > *
i S
t - ^
- - - -
Depth
Bit 5>i
Tpe F
e
uid in hoi*
Rm al meat, temp
-
c =
Kn
t
>
*
^
_ -
r-
-
-
-
.._.
*
_
-
i
^
=s
::
^
- H
-
,--
4 'J
L
.._.
- -
" -
4-
I" T~
T^
^ ^
1 ! 1
6503
B 3/ 4
CHEM. MUD
2.0 at 6 6
c
F
,__
+
- - -
'
__._
_ ^ _
i
~ t -
-
Rmf at
f _ _
-
meot t Ti p.
Rmc at rnoas. t emp.
Max. Rec. Tt mp.
12 ot 6 6 F
2.3 at 66 F
123 F
62
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 24. Example Microlog* with spontaneous potential log and caliper. This log demonstrates permeability two ways: positive
separation between the micro normal and micro inverse logs in tracks #2 and #3 and decreased borehole size due to
mudcake, detected by the caliper log in track # 1.
Examine the log from a sample depth 5,146 ft to 5,238 ft.
Track #1Note that the caliper shows a borehole diameter of approximately 11 inches just above the sample depth, but
the hole size decreases to about 8.5 inches within the sample interval (the caliper measurement is shown by the
solid line in track #1), thus indicating the presence of mudcake and a permeable zone.
Track #2Note the positive separation between the micro normal log and the micro inverse log; the separation is about 2
ohm-meters. Positive separation is indicated where the resistivity value of the micro normal log (shown by the
dashed line) is greater than the resistivity value for the micro inverse log (shown by the solid line).
This higher micro normal resistivity value is because the micro normal curve reads deeper into the flushed zone.
The combination of mud filtrate, formation water and/or residual hydrocarbons and rock in the flushed zone gives
a higher resistivity reading than the mudcake (measured by the micro inverse curve).
63
RESISTIVITY LOGS
RESISTIVITY
OHMS M
2
/ M
MICRO NORMAL 2
10 0
MICRO INVERSE I XI
10 0
CALIPER
HOLE DIAM. IN INCHES
I I I I I I I I I
6
ML^^t f ^ *** "~ ~~ 3^ ^ ^
8
UN.
4144.
64
RESISTIVITY LOGS
Figure 25. Example of a Proximity Log* with a Microlog* and caliper. The Proximity Log* is designed to read the resistivity of
the flushed zone (R
xo
). This particular log package includes: a Proximity Log* to read R
xo
, a Microlog* to determine
permeable zones, and a caliper to determine the size of the borehole.
Examine the log curves at the sample depth of 4,144 ft.
Track #1Track # 1 depicts both a Microlog* and a caliper log. At the sample depth of 4,144 ft note that micro normal
(shown by the dashed line) shows higher resistivity than micro inverse (shown by the solid line). Note: on this
example, the resistivity values for micro normal and micro inverse increase from right-to-left. Micro inverse has a
value of about 1.5, and micro normal has a value of about 3.0; the Microlog* indicates a permeable zone. The
caliper log indicates a borehole slightly less than 9 inches.
Tracks #2 and #3The Proximity Log* measures resistivity of the flushed zone (R
xo
)- In this example the scale is
logarithmic, reading from left-to-right. At the sample depth of 4,144 ft we read a proximity curve value (R
xo
) of
18 ohm-meters.
65
CHAPTER IV
POROSITY LOGS
Sonic Log
The sonic log is a porosity log that measures interval
transit time (At) of a compressional sound wave traveling
through one foot of formation. The sonic log device consists
of one or more sound transmitters, and two or more
receivers. Modern sonic logs are borehole compensated
devices (BHC*). These devices greatly reduce the spurious
effects of borehole size variations (Kobesh and Blizard,
1959), as well as errors due to tilt of the sonic tool
(Schlumberger, 1972).
Interval transit time (At) in microseconds per foot is the
reciprocal of the velocity of a compressional sound wave in
feet per second. Interval transit time (At) is recorded in
tracks #2 and #3 (example Fig. 26). A sonic derived
porosity curve is sometimes recorded in tracks #2 and #3,
along with the At curve (Fig. 26). Track #1 normally
contains a caliper log and a gamma ray log or an SP log
(Fig. 26).
The interval transit time (At) is dependent upon both
lithology and porosity. Therefore, a formation's matrix
velocity (Table 6) must be known to derive sonic porosity
either by chart (Fig. 27) or by the following formula (Wyllie
etal, 1958):
Table 6. Sonic Velocities and Interval Transit Times for
Different Matricies. These constants are used in the Sonic
Porosity Formula (after Schlumberger, 1972).
Sandstone
Limestone
Dolomite
Anhydrite
Salt
Casing
(Iron)
V
Y
ma
(ft/sec)
18,000 to 19,500
21,000 to 23,000
23,000 to 26,000
20,000
15,000
17,500
AW
(jusec/ft)
55.5 to 51.0
47.6 to 43.5
43.5 to 38.5
50.0
66.7
57.0
At
raa
(ft sec/ft)
commonly
used
55.5to51.0
47.6
43.5
50.0
67.0
57.0
Vsonic A
"** Atf-At
Where:
Vsonic
=
sonic derived porosity
At,,,, = interval transit time of the matrix (Table 6)
At
log
= interval transit time of formation
At
f
= interval transit time of the fluid in the well bore
(fresh mud = 189; salt mud = 185)
The Wyllie et al (1958) formula for calculating sonic
porosity can be used to determine porosity in consolidated
sandstones and carbonates with intergranular porosity
(grainstones) or intercrystalline porosity (sucrosic
dolomites). However, when sonic porosities of carbonates
with vuggy or fracture porosity are calculated by the Wyllie
formula, porosity values will be too low. This will happen
because the sonic log only records matrix porosity rather
than vuggy or fracture secondary porosity. The percentage
of vuggy or fracture secondary porosity can be calculated by
subtracting sonic porosity from total porosity. Total porosity
values are obtained from one of the nuclear logs (i.e.
density or neutron). The percentage of secondary porosity,
called SPI or secondary porosity index, can be a useful
mapping parameter in carbonate exploration.
Where a sonic log is used to determine porosity in
unconsolidated sands, an empirical compaction factor or Cp
should be added to the Wyllie et al (1958) equation:
Vsonic
A
>
A
Atma
I x l/Cp
Atf-At
v
Where:
Vsonic
AW,
At, log
Atf
Cp
= sonic derived porosity
= interval transit time of the matrix (Table 6)
= interval transit time of formation
= interval transit time of the fluid in the well bore
(fresh mud = 189; salt mud = 185)
= compaction factor
The compaction factor is obtained from the following
formula:
Cp
AtshXC
100
Where:
Cp = compaction factor
At
sh
= interval transit time for adjacent shale
C = a constant which is normally 1.0 (Hilchie, 1978).
The interval transit time (At) of a formation is increased
due to the presence of hydrocarbons (i.e. hydrocarbon
effect). If the effect of hydrocarbons is not corrected, the
66
POROSITY LOGS
sonic derived porosity will be too high. Hilchie (1978)
suggests the following empirical corrections for
hydrocarbon effect:
</> = 4 w
x
0.7 (gas)
<t> = <sonic X 0 . 9 (Oil)
Density Log
The formation density log is a porosity log that measures
electron density of a formation. It can assist the geologist to:
(1) identify evaporite minerals, (2) detect gas-bearing
zones, (3) determine hydrocarbon density, and (4) evaluate
shaly sand reservoirs and complex lithologies
(Schlumberger, 1972).
The density logging device is a contact tool which
consists of a medium-energy gamma ray source that emits
gamma rays into a formation. The gamma ray source is
either Cobalt-60 or Cesium-137.
Gamma rays collide with electrons in the formation; the
collisions result in a loss of energy from the gamma ray
particle. Tittman and Wahl (1965) called the interaction
between incoming gamma ray particles and electrons in the
formation, Compton Scattering. Scattered gamma rays
which reach the detector, located a fixed distance from the
gamma ray source, are counted as an indicator of formation
density. The number of Compton Scattering collisions is a
direct function of the number of electrons in a formation
(electron density). Consequently, electron density can be
related to bulk density (p
b
) of a formation in gm/cc.
The bulk density curve is recorded in tracks #2 and #3
(Fig. 28), along with a correction curve (A
p
). Because the
modern density log is a compensated log (dual detectors),
the correction curve (A
p
; Fig. 28) records how much
correction has been applied to the bulk density curve (p
b
),
due to borehole irregularities. Whenever the correction
curve (A
p
) exceeds 0.20 gm/cc, the value of the bulk density
obtained from the bulk density curve (p
b
) should be
considered invalid. A density derived porosity curve is
sometimes present in tracks #2 and #3 along with the bulk
density (p
b
) and correction (A
p
) curves. Track #1 contains a
gamma ray log and acaliper (example, Fig. 28).
Formation bulk density (p
b
) is a function of matrix
density, porosity, and density of the fluid in the pores (salt
mud, fresh mud, or hydrocarbons). To determine density
porosity, either by chart (Fig. 29) or by calculation, the
matrix density (Table 7) and type of fluid in the borehole
must be known. The formula for calculating density
porosity is:
Where:
Aden
=
density derived porosity
p
ma
= matrix density (see Table 7)
p
b
= formation bulk density
p
f
= fluid density (1.1 salt mud, 1.0 fresh mud, and
0.7 gas)
Table 7. Matrix Densities of Common Lithologies.
Constants presented here are used in the Density Porosity
Formula (after Schlumberger, 1972).
Pma(gm/cc)
Sandstone 2.648
Limestone 2.710
Dolomite 2.876
Anhydrite 2.977
Salt 2.032
Where invasion of a formation is shallow, low density of
the formation's hydrocarbons will increase density porosity.
Oil does not significantly affect density porosity, but gas
does (gas effect). Hilchie (1978) suggests using a gas
density of 0.7 gm/cc for fluid density (p
f
) in the density
porosity formula if gas density is unknown.
Neutron Logs
Neutron logs are porosity logs that measure the hydrogen
ion concentration in a formation. In clean formations (i.e.
shale-free) where the porosity is filled with water or oil, the
neutron log measures liquid-filled porosity.
Neutrons are created from a chemical source in the
neutron logging tool. The chemical source may be a mixture
of americium and beryllium which will continuously emit
neutrons. These neutrons collide with the nuclei of the
formation material, and result in a neutron losing some of
its energy. Because the hydrogen atom is almost equal in
mass to the neutron, maximum energy loss occurs when the
neutron collides with a hydrogen atom. Therefore, the
maximum amount of energy loss is a function of a
formation's hydrogen concentration. Because hydrogen in a
porous formation is concentrated in the fluid-filled pores,
energy loss can be related to the formation's porosity.
Whenever pores are filled with gas rather than oil or
water, neutron porosity will be lowered. This occurs
because there is less concentration of hydrogen in gas
compared to oil or water. A lowering of neutron porosity by
gas is called gas effect.
Neutron log responses vary, depending on: (1) differences
in detector types, (2) spacing between source and detector,
and (3) lithologyi.e. sandstone, limestone, and dolomite.
These variations in response can be compensated for by
using the appropriate charts (Figs. 30 and 31). A geologist
should remember that neutron logs (unlike all other logs)
POROSITY LOGS
must be interpreted from the specific chart designed for a
specific log (i.e. Schlumberger charts for Schlumberger
logs and Dresser Atlas charts for Dresser Atlas logs). The
reason for this is that while other logs are calibrated in basic
physical units, neutron logs are not (Dresser Atlas, 1975).
The first modern neutron log was the Sidewall Neutron
Log. The Sidewall Neutron Log has both the source and
detector in a pad which is pushed against the side of the
borehole. The most modern of the neutron logs is a
Compensated Neutron Log which has a neutron source and
two detectors. The advantage of Compensated Neutron logs
over Sidewall Neutron logs is that they are less affected by
borehole irregularities. Both the Sidewall and Compensated
Neutron logs can be recorded in apparent limestone,
sandstone, or dolomite porosity units. If a formation is
limestone, and the neutron log is recorded in apparent
limestone porosity units, apparent porosity is equal to true
porosity. However, when the lithology of a formation is
sandstone or dolomite, apparent limestone porosity must be
corrected to true porosity by using the appropriate chart
(Fig. 30 for Sidewall Neutron Log; or Fig. 31 for
Compensated Neutron Log). The procedure is identical for
each of the charts and is shown in Figures 30 and 31.
Combination Neutron-Density Log
The Combination Neutron-Density Log is a combination
porosity log. Besides its use as a porosity device, it is also
used to determine lithology and to detect gas-bearing zones.
The Neutron-Density Log consists of neutron and density
curves recorded in tracks #2 and #3 (example, Fig. 32),
and a caliper and gamma ray log in track # 1. Both the
neutron and density curves are normally recorded in
limestone porosity units with each division equal to either
two percent or three percent porosity; however, sandstone
and dolomite porosity units can also be recorded.
True porosity can be obtained by, first, reading apparent
limestone porosities from the neutron and density curves
(example: Fig. 32 at 9,324 ft, <fo, = 8% and 4>
D
= 3.5%).
Then, these values are crossplotted on a neutron-density
porosity chart (Figs. 33 or 34) to find true porosity. In the
example from Figures 32 and 34, the position of the
crossplotted neutron-density porosities at 9,324 ft (Fig, 34)
indicates that the lithology is a limey dolomite and the
porosity is 6%.
Examination of the neutron-density porosity chart (Fig.
34) reveals that the porosity values are only slightly affected
by changes in lithology. Therefore, porosity from a
Neutron-Density Log can be calculated mathematically. The
alternate method of determining neutron-density porosity is
to use the root mean square formula.
0N-D y/ J
Where:
$N_D = neutron-density porosity
0M = neutron porosity (limestone units)
4 >
D
= density porosity (limestone units)
If the neutron and density porosities from Figure 32 at a
depth of 9,324 ft are entered into the root mean square
formula, we calculate a porosity of 6.2%. This calculated
porosity value compares favorably with the value obtained
from the crossplot method.
Whenever a Neutron-Density Log records a density
porosity of less than 0.0a common value in anhydritic
dolomite reservoirs (Fig. 32; depth 9,328 ft)the following
formula should be used to determine neutron-density
porosity:
Where:
</>N-D
=
neutron-density porosity
^ j = neutron porosity (limestone units)
<j>v = density porosity (limestone units)
Figure 35 is a schematic illustration of how lithology
affects the Combination Gamma Ray Neutron-Density log.
The relationship between log responses on the Gamma Ray
Neutron-Density Log and rock type provides a powerful
tool for the subsurface geologist. By identifying rock type
from logs, a geologist can construct facies maps.
Figure 35 also illustrates the change in neutron-density
response between an oil- or water-bearing sand and a
gas-bearing sand. The oil- or water-bearing sand has a
density log reading of four porosity units more than the
neutron log. In contrast, the gas-bearing sand has a density
reading of up to 10 porosity units more than the neutron log.
Where an increase in density porosity occurs along with a
decrease in neutron porosity in a gas-bearing zone, it is
called gas effect. Gas effect is created by gas in the pores.
Gas in the pores causes the density log to record too high a
porosity (i.e. gas is lighter than oil or water), and causes the
neutron log to record too low a porosity (i.e. gas has a lower
concentration of hydrogen atoms than oil or water). The
effect of gas on the Neutron-Density Log is a very important
log response because it helps a geologist to detect
gas-bearing zones.
Figure 36 is a schematic illustration of a Gamma Ray
Neutron-Density Log through several gas sands. It
illustrates how changes in porosity, invasion, hydrocarbon
density, and shale content alter the degree of gas effect
observed on the Neutron-Density Log.
+
Slight variations of this formula may be used in some areas. Also, some
log analysts restrict the use of this formula to gas-bearing formations, and
use <
N
_
D
= (</>
N
+ 4>D)/2 in oil- or water-bearing formations.
68
POROSITY LOGS
Review - Chapter IV
1. The three types of porosity logs are: (1) sonic, (2)
density, and (3) neutron.
2. The sonic log is a porosity log that measures the
interval transit time (At) of a compressional sound wave
through one foot of formation. The unit of measure is
microseconds per foot (ju,sec/ft). Interval transit time is
related to formation porosity.
3. The density log is a porosity log that measures the
electron density of a formation. The formation's electron
density is related to a formation's bulk density (p
b
) in
gm/cc. Bulk density, in turn, can be related to formation
porosity.
4. The neutron log is a porosity log that measures the
hydrogen ion concentration in a formation. In shale-free
formations where porosity is filled with water, the neutron
log can be related to water-filled porosity.
5. In gas reservoirs, the neutron log will record a lower
porosity than the formation's true porosity because gas has a
lower hydrogen ion concentration than oil or water (gas
effect).
6. The Neutron-Density Log is a combination porosity
log. Porosity can be determined from a Neutron-Density
Log either by a crossplot chart or by formula.
7. Additional uses of the combination Neutron-Density
Log are: (1) detection of gas bearing zones; and (2)
determination of lithology.
69
POROSITY LOGS
tsoo
9310_
_
9 40 0 "
TENS (LB)
I00OO. 0.0
DT (US/F)
80.00
0.300C
31 i I
-DM
SPHI { )
) LIMESTONE
" I
EJl
vr
I I t
om
SEC
s
wo
R\
AT
- u
Fl
AWt
TIM
lis
t ^ i
:
^
< * - ;
y
j
* e-
I * ,
* J
^*
f c = S
4
r~
^
C"
^ H
^
* =
40.00
" - 0. . 00-
1
^ ^
w.
^
^
= S
Hi
..
^
-
2=
_
_^
- s
r:
- 3
!_--
i
p
. Mt l
lt-
! *
>
If
! ^
* * .
*-
*
,
u^^
_
*
yl
> ]
>. J
i >
S-T
>
i
\i-
f c
^.
i* ^
* n
< " "
7?
/ -
__
= i =
* ^
*
< "!
,
^-
v
lj*
'
1
1
,
.
ri
- *
"* -
>T7>
I
1
70
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 26. Example sonic log with gamma ray log and caliper. This example is shown to display the scales of a sonic log, and to
be used in picking an interval transit time (At) value for Figure 27.
Track #1This track includes both the gamma ray and caliper curves. Note that the gamma ray scale reads from 0 to 100
API gamma ray units, increasing from left-to-right in increments of 10 units. The gamma ray scale is represented
by a solid line.
The caliper scale ranges from 6 to 16 inches, from left-to-right in one-inch increments, and is represented by a
dashed line.
Tracks #2 and #3Both the interval transit time (At) scale and the porosity scale are shown in this track. Sonic log
interval transit time (At) is represented by a solid line, on a scale ranging from 40 to 80 ^sec/ft increasing from
right-to-left.
The sonic porosity measurement (limestone matrix) is shown by a dashed line, on a scale ranging from 10% to
+30% porosity increasing from right-to-left.
At the sample depth used in Figure 27 (9,310 ft), read a sonic log interval transit time (At) value of 63 /xseclft.
71
POROSITY LOGS
POROSITY EVALUATION FROM SONIC
POROSITY EVALUATION FROM t
50 60 70 80 90 100 110
t , INTERVAL TRANSIT TIME, mi crosec/ft
v
ma (ft/sec) i
mi
(microsec/ft)
Sandstones 18,000-19,500 55.5-51.3
Limestones 21,000-23,000 47.6-43.5
Dolomites 23,000-26,000 43.5-38.5
72
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 27. Chart used for converting interval transit time (At) values to sonic porosity, using values picked from a sonic log.
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1977, Schlumberger.
Given:
V
ma
= 26,000 ft/sec where V
ma
is the sonic velocity of the matrix (in this case dolomite; see
Table 6). At (from log) = 63 jusec/ft at a depth of 9,310 ft (see Fig. 26).
Procedure:
1. Find an interval transit time value (At) taken from the sonic log in Figure 26 (in this example 63 jtxsec/ft) on the
scale at the bottom of the chart.
2. Follow the value (63) vertically until it intersects the diagonal line representing 26,000 ft/sec (dolomite, in this
case).
3. From that point, follow the value horizontally to the left, and read the porosity value from the porosity scale. In
this case, the value is 16.5% (0 = 16.5%).
73
POROSITY LOGS
CALI (IN)
6.000 K.00
SR (6AP0
0.0
f
J
s
7
s /
V
^
' i
v s\
\u.
^\-
i
T-
<
1
V
V,
\i
^t
^
\
1
!<
1
(
_ j _
i
^^ f\*
P* J
S
2
>
\
1
^
V^
* ^
^
k?T
)
^
Aft
f ti
* ^
E
10
^^
0.0
_
"
- *
\m
300
9310.
400
DBHO (6/C3)
0.080
1.000
2.000
r r ^
" S"
3
3:
^
2
?-
3 a*
S
zz
' 0.48001
HO (OHMM)
H0 (/C)
10000.
Ez a HXE^^: :
3G:
Ig|
2
=r=-=^>-
; z
II
5;
I
\r*n'J
74
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 28. Example of a bulk density log with a gamma ray log and caliper, and formation factor curve (F). This log is presented
to show you the scales of a density log, and is used in picking values for Figure 29.
Track #1This track includes both the gamma ray and caliper logs. Note that both scales read left-to-right; the gamma
ray values range from 0 to 100 API gamma ray units, and the caliper measures the borehole size from 6 to 16
inches.
Tracks #2 and #3The bulk density curve (p
b
), correction curve (A
p
), and formation factor curve (F) are recorded in this
track. The correction (A
p
), formation factor, and the bulk density scales increase in value from left to right.
The bulk density (p,,) scale ranges in value from 2,0 gm/cc to 3.0 gm/cc and is represented by a solid line. The
density log correction curve (A
p
) ranges in value from -0.05 gm/cc to +0.45 gm/cc in increments of 0.05 gm/cc,
but only uses the left half of the log track. The formation factor curve (F) ranges in value from 1 to 10,000
(discussed later) and is represented by a dashed line.
At the sample depth used in Figure 29 (9,310 ft) read a bulk density value (p
b
) of 2.56 gm/cc.
75
POROSITY LOGS
t
-
FORMATION DENSITY LOG
DETERMINATION OF POROSITY
FORMATION DENSITY COMPENSATED
POROSITY DETERMINATION
231
2.0
P
b
, BULK DENSITY, gm/ c c
EXAMPLE: p
b
POOL
Pt
SOLUTION: <j>
u
2.31 gm/ cc in limestone l i thol ogy
2.71 (limestone)
1.1 (salt mud)
25 p.u.
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 29. Chart for converting bulk density (p
b
) to porosity ($) using values picked from a density log.
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1977, Schlumberger.
Given:
p
ma
= 2.87 gm/cc (dolomite; Table 7)
Pi = 1.1 gm/cc (suggested constant fluid density for salt mud; see text)
Pb = 2.56 gm/cc at a depth of 9,310 ft (from log; Fig. 28)
Procedure:
1. Find a value for bulk density (p
b
) on the horizontal scale at the bottom of Figure 29 (in this example 2.56
gm/cc).
2. Follow the value vertically until it intersects the diagonal line representing the matrix density (p
ma
) used (in this
case 2.87 for dolomite).
3. From that point, follow the horizontal line to the left where the porosity (<>) value is represented on the porosity
scale at a fluid density (p
f
) of 1.1. In this case, the porosity (0) is 18%.
77
POROSITY LOGS
.
NEUTRON POROSITY EQUIVALENCE CURVES
SIDEWALL NEUTRON POROSITY LOG (SNP)
MAY ALSO BE USED FOR GNT NEUTRON LOGS
-6-
<
rr
t -
<
2
X
or
Q
UJ
o
Q
o
U_
cn
o
or
2
I d
= >
or
I -
40
30
20
c
CO
w
10 '
0
_
( )
/
1
/
0
1
t
#
.15
X
T
' j i
^
V /
1 ^
1
< k J
5/
<$
*/
/ , ,
c) ^
)
0
/
A
<>
i
1
2 0
<s
1
1969 Schlumberg
1
r~
|
3 0
er
"
4<
SNP NEUTRON INDEX (< s
N
p)c (Apparent Limestone Porosity)
CORRECTED POROSITY ( <SNP)
SNP^C
5 I - , S
- w o w 1/ -A.
LOG DERIVED POROSITY c L
N p
( %)
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 30. Chart for correcting Sidewall Neutron Porosity Log (SNP*) for lithology. Note: this is a Schlumberger example; do not
use this chart with another type neutron log (see text).
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1969, Schlumberger.
Given: The lithology is dolomite. Also, the apparent limestone porosity is 15%. The value for apparent limestone
porosity is read directly from a Sidewall Neutron Porosity Log (SNP*). A Sidewall Neutron Log (SNP*) is not
shown here; instead the value is given to you.
Procedure:
1. Find the value for apparent limestone porosity (read from an SNP* log) along the scale at the bottom of the
correction chart. In this example, the value is 15%.
2. Follow the value vertically until it intersects the diagonal curve representing dolomite.
3. From that point, follow the value horizontally to the left, and read the true porosity (0) on the left-hand scale:
12%.
79
POROSITY LOGS
T
R
U
E
P
O
R
O
S
I
T
Y
F
O
R
I
N
D
I
C
A
T
E
D
M
A
T
R
I
X
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
:
4
>
}
6
(
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
)
g
g
t
u
NEUTRON POROSITY EQUIVALENCE CURVES
COMPENSATED NEUTRON LOG (CNL)
* - t
- . . <-
. . . .
- r-^
:
- ' - ' - f -
i . , .
f .., ... .-
r ,
t /
t \ f
. . . . .
- .. - .
' ' ' ^
/. vX
. . . 4 :
^ /
' * " ;
, . , i
. - | > H
! \ /
jf \ i- - +- -
+ 4 j - ^
! * / ! t
... .+.-.- 4 -
. . . . .
..; .. i.
.1^1-
!/
+ _ _ +..._ . J ^ .
.. t .-..-I ..
,
- : - -
rrlr
y^4
'"1/^ '""
. L. , , ,
f
"t; f f
:
i . . . . - _ .
-"'] H'
H ! ! -
i - f - + - 4
1972 Sch
/ i |
/_
t" 1
" |
I " " "-
-\ -
i
a 4 J
:
4
- i
- t - l - l -
umberger
t t n ~ ( i i
-
}--
--
+
i- -
0 10 20 30 40
CNL NEUTRON INDEX ( (
CNL
)
C
(Apparent Limestone Porosity)
80
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 31. Chart for correcting Compensated Neutron Log (CNL*) for lithology. Note: this is a Schlumberger chart; do not use
this chart with another type of neutron log (see text).
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1972, Schlumberger.
Given: The lithology is sandstone. Also, the apparent limestone porosity is 20%. The value for apparent limestone
porosity is read directly from a Compensated Neutron Log (CNL*). A Compensated Neutron Log (CNL*) is not
shown here; instead the value is given to you.
Procedure:
1. Find the value for apparent limestone porosity (read from a CNL* log) along the scale at the bottom of the
chart. In this example, the value is 20%.
2. Follow the value vertically until it intersects the diagonal curve representing lithology (in this case, sandstone).
3. From that point, follow the value horizontally to the left, and read the true porosity (<j>) on the left-hand scale.
Porosity = 24%.
POROSITY LOGS
6.000
CALI (IN)
an (MPI )
i.oo
o.o
111
11
II
i
IBS:
31
SDC
100.0
3 0 0
9310-
t 4 0 0
OPHI (
0. !
O.i
1000
0 0 0
*
, _
1
ZZ
^ "
_
"
,
=
^^
^x
--
--,
-'
=
=
^~j
NF
LI
[_
" " W
~*
_
J =
=
.
"
"^
^A
_ -
^ w
,
AM
1 TENS (LI)
1 8000. 0.0
)
_ H|J_ _ 2-
l
~
^
.
^
~ " * ^
--)
- -
_ ^
_
^ _
w
"
r
-
_ _
N^j
^
-*
_ _
^
= L =
L=T
_,..
*
_ _
*
~*
^-v-4
' -
_ .
M-
^ _
*-~
a
3
"^=
"*
- ^
-
^
.
,- _
~*~-->
_ _
_
r'
* -
" K
^
^
<
-.
.-
_
= a
s
. ' >
>
"^~
- -
^-J
.* .
~ *
- T
=^
_
" " "
~-
,
^ M
^
- c =
-
5-
,=
f c
T
"i
F - ^
^
-
"
-^--^
*
* ^
__,
r i
\
- ^
* 4
<
^
_ i
-J
,
_
T -
^
i u.
^_
=^
~
__;
-
=^
If f
.
""
*
"
- ,
kJ
=
a^_
V
<
BO
^
- ^ r
'
^_
.
5!
^
*jm
^
s
^ r
-* v-*
-o.wo
- 0. 100
1
82
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 32. Example of a Combination Neutron-Density Log with gamma ray log and caliper. This log illustrates the log curves
and scales of a combination log, but is also used here for picking values for exercises in Figure 33 and Figure 34.
Track # 1This track contains both gamma ray and caliper curves. Note that the gamma ray sc ale reads from 0 to 100 API
gamma ray units and the caliper measures a borehole size from 6 to 16 inches.
Tracks #2 and #3Both neutron porosity ((foj) and density porosity ((fr>) curves are in tracks #2 and #3. The scale for
both is the same, ranging from 10% to +30% in increments of 2%, and is measured in limestone porosity units.
On this log the density porosity (</>
D
) is represented by a solid line, and the neutron porosity (0
N
) is represented by
a dashed line.
Figures 33 and 34 are charts and examples for correcting Neutron-Density Log porosities for lithology. Because
salt versus freshwater drilling muds can affect the porosity values, two different charts are used. Figure 33 is used
to correct porosity for lithology where there is freshwater-based drilling mud (where R
mf
> 3 R
w
); and the other
(Fig. 34) is used where there is saltwater-based drilling mud (where R
mf
R
w
).
At the sample depth of 9,310 ft, the neutron porosity value (<
N
) is 24%, and the density porosity value (</>
D
) is
9%.
83
POROSITY LC )C JS
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
o
o
V.
O 24
>-
t-
% 2.5
UJ
O
5 2.6-
3
00
x>
Q. 2 7
2.8
2.9
POROSITY AND LITHOLOGY DETERMINATION FROM
FORMATION DENSITY LOG AND
COMPENSATED NEUTRON LOG (CNL)
FRESH WATER, LIQUID-FILLED HOLES
.
T
J,
-
1
:
O /
V
o.
v
' "
a
v
:*.
S
s
fi-
"< J
<c
<'o
VT<
"0
i
.
' h
\ * i
d^
*
*
w
f)
o" i
k
-
;
;
/
...
xv
i
'
*,
>
V-
n
Nl
/
i
* ^1
L 1
^
N
t |
>
^
h
1
*>
y.c
'
!*
v/r
>
1
/
r -
< n
v!
/
J
o
c
c?
r
^\/
\<i
j
J
1
^ i V< ^
i* I . ^p
>>
-.
^
r
J L .
1 i
1
> J ^
1 /
S
if ?
5
, /
i
tf/
. .,
|
1
f t =1.0
'"
i
. - ,
: 1
1 "i
3
_
. . . . I . H
i i i i
< r
^>
r
TTTT
4
0 10 20 30
CNL NEUTRON INDEX (<
CNL
)
C
(APPARENT LIMESTONE POROSITY
) 4 0
35 >-
. ; H
Z CO
o
. - s o gc
o
a.
- Ul
Q
: F
<o
Ul
- 2 0 5
-~- - 1
t -
- 1 5 Z
UJ
CC
': &
- 1 0 0-
, - 5
o
o
5 _J
>
1 -
o w
- Z
I l 1
o
5
15
K)
)
84
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 33. Chart for correcting Neutron-Density Log porosities for lithology where freshwater-based drilling mud is used (where
R
m
f > 3R
W
).
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1972, Schlumberger.
Given: p
f
= 1.0 gm/cc (suggested fluid density of fresh muds; see text under the heading: Density Logs). <j>
N
= 24 %,
and <j)
D
= 9% at a depth of 9,310 ft (from log; see Fig. 32).
Procedure:
1. Locate the neutron porosity value (</>
N
) on the bottom scale (24%) and find the density porosity value (<
D
) on
the right-hand scale (9%).
2. Follow the values until they intersect on the chart. In this example, the values meet on the lithology curve for
dolomite, and the intersection shows a true porosity value of 16.5%.
85
POROSITY LOGS
;
1.9
2.0
2.1
22
u
O
^ 2.3
E
o>
>-
( - 2.4
o>
Z
UJ
Q
2.5
_l
ID
CD
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
30
^^^^m I H I ^
POROSITY AND LITHOLOGY DETERMINATION FROM
FORMATION DENSITY LOG AND
COMPENSATED NEUTRON LOG (CNL)
SALT WATER, LIQUID-FILLED HOLES
1
1
._
X
_ i _
>
<
'
T
T "
1 i
CI gL
->
k
N
c
E
^
V
^
>
V
^ < < ?
per
v ^
*
t
. L/
- t
)
5"
>K
>r&
/ ?
u n
?
c j
1
;
>l I
9*
o.
?
''e
0
*
v
F
'/
K
V
rfW
r#
!
j?
/
1 N
\
I
]>E :>
* * ,
\
0
0
l(
(
5
\
t
)
(
\
J X. \S.
'*
^
M
a
.>
*
'
i
* Ctv IL )
i
!
j
J
1
1
< |
C
*
* rt*
T'v
1
_i
i
( A
t>
2(
PI
-
1
s
; >
V
0 *
<t
1
R EN1
^*
J
o
I
*
4
r
s
vi'
/ ^
M_,
' L
I
IN * E
i
1
i ;
>
'>
>
K
'
m
j
V
!
PfU
i
\
/
1
' \
y
n
!
>< >
"f
>
Jr
/
:
:
~~
-
i
1
I
j
i
>
>
^
M
|
!
if
N
/
JV
H
I
i
:
I
!
, , 1
1 J _j . . . 1. 1 J. . 1 .
. . . ^
:s
3
T
3
01 ME P 0 Rl 3J >l r
4<
r)
I 4 0
- 3 5 >_
: 1 -
< o
0
- 3 0 CC
O
a .
^ 2 5
: 0
F
y>
^- 2 0 w
: D
UJ
c c
<
10 0-
0-
<
- 5 O
_J
I >-
0 H-
z
UJ
1-5
10
15
5
86
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 34. Chart for correcting Neutron-Density Log porosities for lithology where saltwater-based drilling mud is used (where
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1972, Schlumberger.
Given: p
f
= 1.1 gm/cc (suggested fluid density of salt muds; see text under the heading: Density Logs). $
N
= 24%, and
4 >Q = 9% at a depth of 9,310 ft (from log; Fig. 32).
Procedure:
1. Locate the neutron porosity value ($
N
) on the bottom scale (24%), and find the density porosity value (<^>
D
) on
the right-hand scale (9%).
2. Follow the values until they intersect on the chart. In this example, the values meet at a point just off the
lithology curve for dolomite, and the intersection shows a true porosity value of 17%.
87
POROSITY LOGS
POROSITY LOGS
Figure 35. Example of generalized lithology logging with Combination Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log. This figure shows
sample relationships between log responses and the rock type, and also shows changes in the log response from oil- or
water-bearing rock units compared to gas-bearing units.
This briefly shows how the Combination Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log is used as a tool for determining lithology.
89
POROSITY LOGS
6R API UNITS
0 100
DENSITY LS. POROSITY
50 20 K> 0
J I L
NEUTRON LS. POROSITY
30 20 10 0
L 1 L.
GAS.
GAS:
GAS
GAS-;
.GAS'-
GAS
:
.
-K>
- O
1
U
HIGH POROSITY
NO INVASION
r
tx
| LOW POROSITY
| NO INVASION
I
I
I NO INVASION
?h* >.7 0
| HIGH POROSITY
I INVADED
- L
-~Z2
L_ J
i
I LOW POROSITY
I INVADED
j SHALY SAND
?
h
HYDROCARBON DENSITY
Figure 36. Schematic illustration of neutron-density responses in gas-bearing sandstones (modified after Truman et al, 1972).
Generalized neutron-density log responses show how gas effect varies with depth of invasion, porosity, hydrocarbon
density, and shale content.
90
CHAPTER V
GAMMA RAY LOGS
General
Gamma ray logs measure natural radioactivity in
formations and because of this measurement, they can be
used for identifying lithologies and for correlating zones.
Shale-free sandstones and carbonates have low
concentrations of radioactive material, and give low gamma
ray readings. As shale content increases, the gamma ray log
response increases because of the concentration of
radioactive material in shale. However, clean sandstone
(i.e. low shale content) may also produce a high gamma ray
response if the sandstone contains potassium feldspars,
micas, glauconite, or uranium-rich waters.
In zones where the geologist is aware of the presence of
potassium feldspars, micas, or glauconite, a Spectralog**
can be run in addition to the gamma ray log. The
Spectralog** breaks the natural radioactivity of a formation
into the different types of radioactive material: (1) thorium,
(2) potassium, and (3) uranium.
If a zone has a high potassium content coupled with a
high gamma ray log response, the zone may not be shale.
Instead, it could be a feldspathic, glauconitic, or micaceous
sandstone.
Besides their use with identifying lithologies and
correlating zones, gamma ray logs provide information for
calculating the volume of shale in a sandstone or carbonate.
The gamma ray log is recorded in track #1 (example, Fig.
37), usually with a caliper. Tracks #2 and #3 often contain
either a porosity log or a resistivity log.
Volume of Shale Calculation
Because shale is more radioactive than sand or carbonate,
gamma ray logs can be used to calculate volume of shale in
porous reservoirs. The volume of shale can then be applied
for analysis of shaly sands (see Chapter VI).
Calculation of the gamma ray index is the first step
needed to determine the volume of shale from a gamma ray
log (the following formula from Schlumberger, 1974).
[ _ GRlog ~ GRmin
GR
max
_
GR,^,,
Where:
'GR
=
gamma ray index
GR
log
= gamma ray reading of formation
OR,, = minimum gamma ray (clean sand or carbonate)
GR
majl
= maximum gamma ray (shale)
As an example of this calculation, pick these values from
the gamma ray log in Figure 37 (they will be used in Figure
38):
GR
log
= 28 at 13,570 ft (formation reading)
GR
mi n
= 15 at 13,590 ft
GR
mi x
= 128 at 13,720 ft
Then,
2 8 - 1 5 ^_ 13
^
R
128- 15 113
IGR =0.115
Finally, the calculated value of the gamma ray index (I
GR
) is
located on the chart in Figure 38, and a corresponding value
for volume of shale (V
sh
) in either consolidated or
unconsolidated sands is determined.
From Figure 38, andusinga value for IG
R
of 0.115, find:
V
sh
= 0.057 older rocks (consolidated)
V
sh
= 0.028 Tertiary rocks (unconsolidated)
The volume of shale is also calculated mathematically
from the gamma ray index (Io
R
) by the following Dresser
Atlas (1979) formulas:
Older rocks, consolidated:
V
sh
= 0.33 [2(2 XIOR)- 1.0]
or, Tertiary rocks, unconsolidated:
V
sh
= 0.083 [2(3 7 x i
GR)
_ i o]
Where:
V
S
h
=
volume of shale
IQR = gamma ray index
Review - Chapter V
1. Gamma ray logs are lithology logs that measure the
natural radioactivity of a formation.
2. Because radioactive material is concentrated in shale,
shale has high gamma ray readings. Shale-free sandstones
and carbonates, therefore, have low gamma ray readings.
3. Gamma ray logs are used to: (1) identify lithologies;
(2) correlate between formations; and (3) calculate volume
of shale.
91
GAMMA RAY LOGS
92
GAMMA RAY LOGS
Figure 37. Example density log with gamma ray log. This example illustrates the curves and scales of a gamma ray log, and is
also used to pick values for Figure 38.
Track #1The gamma ray log is the only one represented on this track. Note that the scale increases from left-to-right,
and ranges from 0 to 150 API gamma ray units.
Tracks #2 and #3These tracks include logs representing bulk density (p
b
), density porosity ((/>
D
), density correction
curve (A), and a tension curve.
Bulk density (pt,) is represented by a solid line and ranges from 2.0 to 3.0 gm/cc increasing from left-to-right.
Density porosity (<
D
) is represented by a dashed line and ranges from 10% to +30% increasing from
right-to-left. The correction curve (A
p
) is represented by a dotted-and-dashed line and ranges from -0.25 to
+0.25 gm/cc increasing from left-to-right, but only uses the right half of the track. The tension curve is a log that
measures how much weight is being pulled on the wireline during logging. It is represented by a broken line and
ranges from 2,000 to 12,000 lbs increasing from right-to-left, but it only uses the right half of the track.
At the example depth of Figure 38 (13,570 ft), pick the gamma ray reading of the formation. It is 28 gamma ray units (the
scale measures in increments of 15 units; slightly less than two units from 0).
Next pick the minimum gamma ray reading from the log (13,590 ft; GR
min
=15 gamma ray units), and the maximum
gamma ray reading from the log (13,720 ft; GR
max
= 128 gamma ray units).
93
GAMMA RAY LOGS
1 0
0.8
0.6
JO
0.4
0.2
o
V
0
* -
...
.._
1
'
' '
' ' '
. . .
.. ! .. .
. .
J
1 1 / i l l
1 1 . / i 1 1
111
' / J
IJtJw
i _ 1
1
. .
i !
. ij-.i
.
;
j
\y
r /
SyT
,
W W
_. . .
>
m
| g
. . .
/
. 1
jr S '
/ /
1
. . . . , j : ,
1 T"j ': t ' j
-Jt rf i ! i
20 4
I
!
!
|
y
%---
-y
'
/
A
} j
j
j
0
; |
. : |
L.. i.!
i 11
4 i
L J 1 1
SH
6
AL. I NE
!
I 1
s
y
y
'
\ -1
| f
"V 1 ]
1 ;
y^
"7
. y^ i'..
-jCX .
/
/
/
;
1 !
! ! :
i
\
......
I I 1 1 I 1
t ]
. .. 1
t i l
: : ; :
:
: -
j
. . . . .
u.
. i t
0
s s
-
*
/
/
/
; "
1
1
. : . . ! !
- -
, <y^I
-JL-
/
'
: J
. r
]_
:._p
: : .
!:ii 1.]
T
: .
. ! t..
.
*
: : .
: . : .
T ! 11
T
1
U- Ui - LU
: : : h i i J
1
DrtsserMasB; : W
. i_i_.l
H \~
j
+
i
8
|
0
;
1 1
, j 1
! \ j
i i 1
ft
:
\ - j
_ 1 '
i
.
...
-
00
94
GAMMA RAY LOGS
Figure 38. Chart for correcting the gamma ray index (IG
R
) to the volume of shale (V
sh
).
Courtesy, Dresser Industries.
Copyright 1979, Dresser Atlas.
Given:
From Figure 37: GR
log
= 28, GR
min
= 15, and GR
max
=128. Using the formula (see text), calculate the gamma
ray index (I
GR
) to be 0.115.
Procedure:
1. Find the gamma ray index value (IQ
R
) on the vertical scale on the left (in this case IQR = 0.115).
2. Follow the value horizontally to where it intersects curve 3 (representing unconsolidated, Tertiary rocks) and
curve 2 (representing consolidated, older rocks). Curve 1 represents where V
sh
= I
GR
.
3. Drop to the scale at the bottom and read the values for the two intersections (measured in percent of shaliness).
Where I
GR
= 0.115, volume of shale (V
sh
) equals 5.7% for older, consolidated rocks (curve 2) and 2.8% for
Tertiary, unconsolidated rocks (curve 3).
95
CHAPTER VI
LOG INTERPRETATION
General
Once porosity and true resistivity of a potential zone are
determined, a geologist is ready to calculate and use log
parameters. Log parameters can help evaluate a zone and
determine whether a well completion attempt is warranted.
This section will cover some of the different methods which
help establish these important parameters. Methods
discussed are: S
w
, S
xo
, bulk volume water, Pickett and
Hinglecrossplots, and "quick look" analysis. Also,
determination of log derived permeability (K
e
) shaly sand
analysis will be discussed.
As important as log parameters are, however, they should
not be applied to the exclusion of other data. This statement
is, perhaps obvious to the reader, but nevertheless, it can't
be over-emphasized. A geologist should always consider
every item of relevant data, such as drill stem tests, sample
shows, mud log analysis, nearby production, etc., before
making a decision to "set pipe."
Archie Equation S
w
and S^
Water saturation (S
w
) of a reservoir's uninvaded zone is
calculated by the Archie (1942) formula.
s
- / i L
x
RwY
Where:
J >
w
=
R
w
=
R. =
4 > =
a =
m =
n =
water saturation of the uninvaded zone (Archie
method)
resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
true resistivity of formation (i.e. R^ or R
LLd
corrected for invasion)
porosity
tortuosity factor (Table 1; Chapter I)
cementation exponent (Table 1; Chapter I)
saturation exponent which varies from 1.8 to 2.5,
but is normally equal to 2.0
The uninvaded zone's water saturation (S
w
), determined
by the Archie equation, is the most fundamental parameter
used in log evaluation. But, merely knowing a zone's water
saturation (S
w
) will not provide enough information to
completely evaluate a zone's potential productivity. A
geologist must also know whether: (1) water saturation is
low enough for a water-free completion, (2) hydrocarbons
are moveable, (3) the zone is permeable, and (4) whether
(volumetrically) there are economic, recoverable
hydrocarbon reserves.
Water saturation of a formation's flushed zone (S
xo
) is
also based on the Archie equation, but two variables are
changed:
S
* [#** R
x o
j
Where:
S
xo
= water saturation of the flushed zone
R
mf
= resistivity of the mud filtrate at formation
temperature
R
xo
= shallow resistivity from Laterolog-8*,
Micropherically Focused Log*, or
Microlaterolog*
4> = porosity
a = tortuosity factor (Table 1; Chapter I)
m = cementation exponent (Table 1; Chapter I)
n = saturation exponent which varies from 1.8 to 2.5,
but is normally equal to 2.0
Water saturation of the flushed zone (S
xo
) can be used as
an indicator of hydrocarbon moveability. For example, if
the value of S
xo
is much larger than S
w
, then hydrocarbons
in the flushed zone have probably been moved or flushed
out of the zone nearest the borehole by the invading drilling
fluids (R
mf
).
Ratio Method
The Ratio Method identifies hydrocarbons from the
difference between water saturations in the flushed zone
(S
xo
) and the uninvaded zone (S
w
). When water saturation
of the uninvaded zone (S
w
) is divided by water saturation of
the flushed zone (S
xo
), the following results:
S
w
\
2
_ Rxc/Rt
s
x0/
/ iWRw
Where:
S
w
= water saturation uninvaded zone
S
xo
= water saturation flushed zone
R
xo
= formation's shallow resistivity from Laterolog-8*,
Microspherically Focused Log*, or
Microlaterolog*
R, = formation's true resistivity (R
tLd
or R
LLd
corrected
for invasion)
96
LOG INTERPRETATION
Rn,f= resistivity of the mud filtrate at formation
temperature
R
w
= resistivity of the formation water at formation
temperature
When S
w
is divided by S
xo
, the formation factor
(F = a/0
m
) is cancelled out of the equation because
formation factor is used to calculate both S
w
and S
xo
(Table
2). This can be very helpful in log analysis because, from
the ratio of (R
xo
/R
t
)/(R
mt
/R
w
), the geologist can determine a
value for both the moveable hydrocarbon index (S
w
/S
xo
) and
water saturation by the Ratio Method without knowing
porosity. Therefore, a geologist can still derive useful
formation evaluation log parameters even though porosity
logs are unavailable.
Formulas for calculating the moveable hydrocarbon
index and water saturation by the Ratio Method are:
Where:
S
w
/S
xo
= moveable hydrocarbon index
R
xo
= shallow resistivity from Laterolog-8*,
Microspherically Focused Log*, or
Microlaterolog*
R, = true resistivity ( R^ or R
LLd
corrected for
invasion)
R
m
f = resistivity of mud filtrate at formation
temperature
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
If the ratio S
w
/S
xo
is equal to 1.0 or greater, then
hydrocarbons were not moved during invasion. This is true
regardless of whether or not a formation contains
hydrocarbons. Whenever the ratio of SJS
xo
is less than 0.7
for sandstones or less than 0.6 for carbonates, moveable
hydrocarbons are indicated (Schlumberger, 1972).
lb determine water saturation (S
w
) by the Ratio Method,
you must know the flushed zone's water saturation. In the
flushed zone of formations with moderate invasion and
"average" residual hydrocarbon saturation, the following
relationship is normally true:
S
X0
=(S
w
)i'5
Where:
S
xo
= water saturation of the flushed zone
S
w
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone
However, by substituting the above equation in the
relationship:
j Vj 2
=
R
I0
/R,
The following results:
(Sw" _ <, 8/5 = Rxo'^t
(S
w
)*5
3
* R
mf
/R
w
Therefore:
^/RJRM
r :
s
m
= f ^ M
0 6 2 5
m
\ Rm/ Rw/
Where:
S
wr
= water saturation uninvaded zone, Ratio Method
R
xo
= shallow resistivity from Laterolog-8*,
Microspherically Focused Log*, or
Microlaterolog*
R
t
= true resistivity (R
tLd
or R
LLd
corrected for
invasion)
R
mf
= resistivity of mud filtrate at formation temperature
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
After the geologist has calculated water saturation of the
uninvaded zone by both the Archie and Ratio methods, he
should compare the two values using the following
observations:
1. If S
w
(Archie) = S
w
(Ratio), the assumption of a
step-contact invasion profile is indicated to be correct, and
all values determined (S
w
, R
t
, R
xo
, and d;) are correct.
2. If S
w
(Archie) > S
w
(Ratio) then the value for RJR
t
is too low. R
xo
is too low because invasion is very shallow,
or R, is too high because invasion is very deep. Also, a
transition type invasion profile may be indicated and S
w
(Archie) is considered a good value for S
w
.
3. If S
w
(Archie) < S
w
(Ratio) then the value for R
xo
/R,
is too high. R
xo
is too high because of the effect of adjacent,
high resistivity beds, or R
ILd
(R
t
) is too low because R
xo
is
less than Rj. Also, an annul us type invasion profile may be
indicated and/or S
xo
< S
w
1/5
. In this case a more accurate
value for water saturation can be estimated using the
following equation (from Schlumberger, 1977):
/ S
w a
\ o. 25
(S
w
)cOR
=
Swa
X
( ~ s f /
Where:
(S
W
)COR
=
corrected water saturation of the uninvaded
zone
S
wa
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone
(Archie Method)
S
wr
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone (Ratio
Method)
4. If S
w
(Archie) < S
w
(Ratio), the reservoir may be a
LOG INTERPRETATION
carbonate with moldic (i.e. oomoldic, fossil-moldic, etc.)
porosity and low permeability.
Bulk Volume Water
The product of a formation's water saturation (S
w
) and its
porosity (<f>) is the bulk volume of water (BVW).
BVW = S
w
X tf,
Where:
BVW = bulk volume water
S
w
= water saturation of uninvaded zone (Archie
equation)
<f) = porosity
If values for bulk volume water, calculated at several
depths in a formation, are constant or very close to constant,
they indicate that the zone is homogeneous and at
irreducible water saturation (S
w
,). When a zone is at
irreducible water saturation, water calculated in the
uninvaded zone (S
w
) will not move because it is held on
grains by capillary pressure. Therefore, hydrocarbon
production from a zone at irreducible water saturation
should be water-free (Morris and Biggs, 1967).
A formation not at irreducible water saturation (S
w m
)
will exhibit wide variations in bulk volume water values.
Figure 39 illustrates three crossplots of porosity ($) versus
S
w irr
for three wells from the Ordovician Red River B-zone,
Beaver Creek Field, North Dakota. Note, that with
increasing percentages of produced water, scattering of data
points from a constant value of BVW (hyperbolic lines)
occurs.
Because the amount of water a formation can hold by
capillary pressure increases with decreasing grain size, the
bulk volume water also increases with decreasing grain
size. Table 8 illustrates the relationship of bulk volume
water values to decreasing grain size and lithology.
Quick Look Methods
GeneralQuick look methods are helpful to the
geologist because they provide "flags" which point to
possible hydrocarbon zones requiring further investigation.
The four quick look methods which will be discussed are:
(1) R
xo
/R
t
curve, (2) R
wa
curve, (3) conductivity derived
porosity curve, and (4) R
0
curve.
R
m
/R, curveThe R
xo
/R
t
curve is presented in track #1
as an overlay to the spontaneous potential curve (SP). From
Chapter II, remember that the SP equation is:
SP=-Kxl og(R
mf
yR
w
)
Where:
SP = spontaneous potential
K = 60 + (0.133 x formation temperature)
Tkble 8. Bulk \Wume Water as a Function of Grain Size and
Lithology. A comparative chart.
Grab Size (millimeters) Bulk Volume Water
Coarse 1.0 to 0.5 mm 0.02 to 0.025
Medium 0.5 to 0.25 mm 0.025 to 0.035
Fine 0.25 to 0.125 mm 0.035 to 0.05
Very Fine 0.125 to 0.062 mm 0.05 to 0.07
Silt (<0.0625mm) 0.07 to 0.09
(Modified after: Fertl and Vercellino, 1978)
CARBONATES*
Vuggy 0.005 to 0.015
Vuggy and intercrystalline
(intergranular) 0.015 to 0.025
Intercrystalline
(intergranular) 0.025 to 0.04
Chalky O05
*Carbonate values (for BVW) are to be used as a general guide
to different types of porosity.
R
m
f = resistivity of mud filtrate at formation
temperature
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
In water zones (S
w
= 1.0):
Rxo = FxR
mf
andR
0
= Fx R
w
Where:
Rmf = resistivity of mud filtrate at formation
temperature
R
xo
= shallow resistivity
F = formation factor (i.e. a/$
m
)
R^ = resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
Ro = wet resistivity (i.e. resistivity of a zone 100%
water saturated with water of a certain R
w
. From
Chapter I, R = R, in wet zones).
From the above equations, the SP equation can be
rewritten as:
SP = - K x log (R
xo
/R
0
)
Where:
R
xo
= shallow resistivity from LateroIog-8*,
Microspherically Focused Log* or
Microlaterolog*
Ro = wet resistivity (R^ = R, when S
w
= 100%)
In water-bearing zones, the measured values for R
xo
and
Ro (R
t
for S
w
= 100%; Rn^ or R
LLd
) can be used to calculate
a value for SP. This calculated value for SP should duplicate
98
LOG INTERPRETATION
the measured value of SP from the spontaneous potential
log in a wet zone. The presence of hydrocarbons results in
R
t
values which are greater than R<,. This means that when
SP is calculated from the R
xo
and R
t
values, it will be lower
than the measured value of SP.
On the log, the R
xo
/R
t
curve is plotted as a dashed line.
The dashed line tracks the SP curve in wet zones (see Fig.
6A, Chapter I), but deflects to the right, away from the SP
curve, in hydrocarbon bearing zones (see Fig. 99, Chapter
VIII).
R
wa
CurveThe R
wa
curve is presented in track #1 as an
overlay to the SP curve, similar to the R
xo
/Rt curve. In
water-bearing zones, the Archie equation for the uninvaded
zone can be rewritten as follows:
S
w
= VF x (R
w
/R
t
)
Or:
1.0 = VF X (R
w
/R,)
(where S
w
= 100% or 1.0)
Next, square both sides:
1.0 = F x (R
w
/R
t
)
Now, solve forR
w
:
R
W
a
=
Rc/F
(remember: R
t
= R<, when S
w
= 100%)
Where:
S
w
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
R, = true formation resistivity (R
t
= R<, when S
w
=
100%)
F = formation factor (a/</>
m
)
F = \/<j>
2
carbonates
F = O.81/0
2
consolidated sands
F = O.62/0
2 l5
unconsolidated sands
R
wa
= apparent water resistivity (R
wa
= R
w
in
water-bearing zones)
In water-bearing zones (S
w
= 100%), the calculated R
wa
value is equal to R
w
. However, if hydrocarbons are present,
R, will be greater than RQ , and R
wa
will be greater than R
w
(Fertl, 1978). The R
wa
curve is plotted as a dashed line
along with the SP curve. Low R
wa
values are recorded on
the left-hand side of the log. The R
wa
curve will deflect to
the left in wet zones and to the right in hydrocarbon-bearing
zones (see Fig. 79, Chapter VIII). This deflection is similar
to the behavior of the R
x0
/Rt curve for hydrocarbon or wet
zones. An advantage of an R
wa
curve, rather than an R
xo
/Rt
curve, is that R
wa
values can be converted to a quantitative
value for water saturation (S
w
). The procedure is as follows;
S
w
= VR
W
/R
wa
Where:
S
w
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
R
wa
= apparent formation water resistivity from R
wa
curve
Note: When R
w
= R
wa
then S
w
= 100%
Besides the use of R^ as a quick look method for
hydrocarbon detection, R
wa
can also be applied as a
calculated value for formation water resistivity (R
w
) in
water-bearing zones. R
wa
is a value for R
w
whenever S
w
equals 100%. In hydrocarbon-bearing zones, the value of
R
wa
from a water-bearing zone can be used as R
w
to
calculate water saturation (S
w
) if both zones have a constant
formation water resistivity.
Conductivity Derived Porosity CurveThe conductivity
derived porosity curve is a Dresser Atlas (1975) quick look
curve, plotted in track #1 along with the SP curve. Chapter
III discussed how resistivity (remember that resistivity =
1,000/conductivity) assists in determining porosity. Here,
resistivities of the uninvaded zone (R
t
), rather than flushed
zone (R
x0
) resistivities, are applied to find resistivity
porosity. The formulas are as follows:
Water-bearing zones:
-HIT
S
w
= 100% and R
t
= R,,
Hydrocarbon-bearing zones:
- N* T
S
w
< 1.0 and R, > R
Where:
4> = resistivity (conductivity) derived porosity
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
Ro = formation resistivity when S
w
= 100%
R, = true formation resistivity (RiLd or R
LLd
)
Remember: R, = R,, when S
w
= 100%
S
w
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone
a = constant (Dresser Atlas uses 1.0 for carbonates and
0.62 for sandstones)
m = constant (Dresser Atlas uses 2.0 for carbonates and
2.15 for sandstones)
The calculated resistivity porosity of water-bearing zones
(S
w
= 1.0) is close to true porosity. However, if hydro-
carbons are present, the calculated resistivity porosity will
be less than true porosity. This apparent porosity loss results
because hydrocarbons have greater resistivity than
formation water. The resistivity porosity formula for
99
LOG INTERPRETATION
hydrocarbon-bearing zones corrects for the hydrocarbons in
the pores when water saturation (S
w
) is known.
The Dresser Atlas conductivity derived porosity curves
are calculated by assuming all zones are water-bearing (i.e.
R, = RQ). Therefore, hydrocarbon-bearing zones show up
as a loss of conductivity derived porosity because R, is
greater than R. A scale is constructed with higher porosity
values on the left. Water-bearing zones then show up as a
deflection to the left, and hydrocarbon zones appear as a
deflection to the right, similar to deflections on R
xo
/R, and
R
wa
curves.
Like the R
wa
curve, the conductivity derived porosity
curve can be converted to a quantitative value for water
saturation (S
w
). The Dresser Atlas (1975) formula is:
S
w
= % x 100
0
Where:
S
w
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone
<
w
= conductivity derived or water-filled porosity
4> = true porosity from a porosity log
100 = constant to convert calculated S
w
to percent
R
0
Curvethe RQ curve is probably one of the oldest
quick look curves. But, unlike all other quick look curves,
the R,, curve is plotted as an overlay on the resistivity log in
tracks #2 and #3, and not on the SP curve. R<, (wet
resistivity) is derived by the following formula.
R
0
= F x R
w
Where:
R = wet resistivity or, resistivity the formation should
have when S
w
= 100%
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
F = formation factor (a/0
m
; Table 1)
Because an R curve represents wet resistivity (S
w
=
100%), the difference between the R
0
curve and the deep
resistivity curve (R
ILd
or R
LLd
) indicates the presence of
hydrocarbons (see Fig. 56, Chapter VIII). By using values
of R,, and deep resistivity (R
ILd
or RLUI)>
a
value for water
saturation can be calculated by the formula:
Where:
S
w
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone
R
0
= wet resistivity
R
t
= true resistivity (RILJ) or (R
LLd
)
Note: when R
0
= R
t
then S
w
= 100%
An R,, curve is obtained in three ways: (1) a logging
engineer can plot R
0
as an overlay on the resistivity log, (2)
a geologist can calculate and plot R on the resistivity log,
and (3) some density logs (example Fig. 28) have an F
(formation factor) curve plotted with the bulk density log.
When a formation's R
w
is known, an R,, curve can be
created by overlaying and tracing an F curve on the
resistivity log.
Pickett Crossplot Method
The Pickett crossplot (Pickett, 1972) is one of the
simplest and most effective crossplot methods in use. This
technique not only gives estimates of water saturation, but
can also help determine: (1) formation water resistivity
(R
w
), (2) cementation factor (m), and (3) matrix parameters
for porosity logs (At
a
and p
m
).
The Pickett method is based on the observation that true
resistivity (R,) is a function of porosity (c|>), water saturation
(S J , and cementation factor (m). A Pickett crossplot is
developed by plotting porosity values with deep resistivity
(R
l u
or R
LLll
) values on two-by-three cycle log-log paper
(Fig. 40). On the plot, a zone with constant R, m, and S
w
equal to 100% will have data points plotted along a single,
straight-line-trend (Fig. 40). This straight-line-trend
represents the R (wet resistivity) line. The slope of the R
line is equal to cementation factor (m). Data plotted above
the R line represent water saturation values less than 100%.
The geologist must remember that data points plotted above
the R line only represent water saturation less than 100%
when /? and m are both constant. A value for R, can be
obtained from a Pickett Crossplot (see Figure 40 for the
procedure).
Water saturation (S
w
can be quantified from the Pickett
crossplot method by remembering that S, = (R,,/ R,)
w
. A
porosity value of 10% (0.10) will have a wet resistivity (RJ
value of 5.6 ohms (Fig. 40). The values of various water
saturation lines (Fig. 40), parallel to the R line, are
determined as follows:
Porosity
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.6
5.6
R.
2xR =
4XR
0
=
6x R =
8x R
0
=
14 X R
0
=
20 x R =
11.2
22.4
33.6
44.8
78.4
112.0
S
w
= VflVR.)
71%
50%
41%
35%
27%
22%
After you determine the R line (S
w
= 100%), you can
plot the lower water saturation values (see above listing)
parallel to the R,, line. Your next step is plotting on the
crossplot actual values from the zone you are interested in.
This will give you a "quick look " assessment of a zone's
water saturation.
As an example, given: <f) = 0.21, R = 1.5, R, = 40. By
the formula:
VRJR
t
100
LOG INTERPRETATION
Then a value for S
w
= 19.4% is calculated. This is already
plotted on Figure 40. As other points are added, you will
have a better picture of the range of water saturations for the
well.
In addition to plotting true porosity (4>) versus deep
resistivity (Ri
Ld
or RLU)
o n a
Pickett crossplot, the
following can also be plotted on the vertical (or y) axis:
At - At
ma
Where:
At = interval transit time of formation
At
ma
= interval transit time of matrix
Pma - Pb
Where:
Pma
=
density of matrix
Pb = bulk density of formation
<Asnp Of 0cnl
Where:
^snp
=
sidewall neutron porosity, limestone <f> units
^cni
=
compensated neutron porosity, limestone (j> units
When At At
ma
or p
ma
p
b
are plotted versus R, (R
ILd
or R
L
Ld), a value for formation matrix (At
ma
orp
ma
) must be
used. Pickett (1972) suggests that whenever At or p
ma
,
selected for the log-log crossplot, is incorrect, the RQ line
for At At
ma
or p
ma
p
b
versus R, plot will not plot as a
straight line (Fig. 40), but will curve. A geologist should try
several matrix values (At
ma
or p
ma
) until the R,, line is
straight. By such trial and error, a correct matrix parameter
( A ^
o r
Pma) f
r a
formation is determined. Determining
matrix parameters (At
ma
or p
raa
) is an additional benefit of
the Pickett crossplot technique.
Hingle Crossplot
The oldest of the resistivity versus porosity crossplot
methods, which can be used to determine water saturation
(S
w
), is the Hingle (1959) crossplot. As in other crossplot
techniques, a significant benefit of Hingle's technique is
that, even if matrix properties (p
ma
or At,,,.,) of a reservoir
are unknown, you can still determine a value for water
saturation (S
w
). This is also true if a reservoir's water
resistivity (R
w
) is unknown. The procedure for constructing
a Hingle crossplot to determine water saturation is:
1. Select the correct crossplot graph paper (Fig. 41,
sandstones; Fig. 42, carbonates).
2. Scale the x axis on a linear scale, using values taken
from a porosity log (At, p
b
,
o r
<
N
; example, Table 9). Be
sure to select the scale so that the maximum porosity log
values will plot on the graph paper (Fig. 43).
3. Plot deep resistivity values (R
[Ld
or RLUI example,
Table 9. Density - Resistivity Crossplot
Data, Morrow Sandstones, Cimmarron
County, Oklahoma.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Depth (ft)
4,400
4,402
4,410
4,414
4,426
4,430
4,438
4,536
4,540
4,546
p
b
(gm/cc)
2.38
2.44
2.35
2.42
2.42
2.33
2.30
2.30
2.30
2.30
R,
1.7
2.1
1.3
1.6
1.8
1.0
0.9
40
45
40
Table 9) on the y axis (Fig. 43) versus the porosity log data
(At, p
b
, or <t>
N
). The resistivity scale can be changed, by any
order of magnitude, to fit the log data without changing the
validity of the graph paper.
4. Construct a straight line through the most
northwesterly points (Fig. 43), and extrapolate this line
until it intersects the x axis (Fig. 43; </> = 0; and R
t
= =).
The straight line defines S
w
= 1.0, and is called the R,, line.
5. At the intersection point of the x axis and the R^ line
(where S
w
= 100%; example Fig. 43), determine the matrix
value (p
ma
= 2.70 gm/cc) and scale the x axis in porosity
units (Fig. 43).
6. Calculate a value for R
w
from any corresponding set
of $ and RQ values by the formula R
w
= Rg/F. On Figure 43,
Ro = 6.0, <f> = 10%, and F= 0. 62/ ^i s (F = 87.6),
Therefore:
R
w
- I VF
R
w
= 6.0/87.6
R
w
= 0.068
7. Determine lines of constant S
w
based on the formula:
S
w
= VfRo/R,) for any given </> value. On Figure 43:
<f> R
0
R
t
S
W
=V(R
0
/ R
1
)
.10 6.0 2 x R
0
= 12 71%
.10 6.0 4 XR
0
= 24 50%
.10 6.0 11 x R
0
= 66 30%
.10 6.0 2 5 x R
o
= 1 5 0 20%
Remember that all lines of constant S
w
must be constructed
so that they converge at the matrix point ($ = 0 and R
t
= o;
Fig. 43). The lines of constant S
w
(Fig. 43) are only valid if
the R
w
is constant.
8. Evaluate S
w
values for all the points plotted on the
crossplot; make sure the plotted data points are numbered
(Table 9 and Fig. 43) to avoid confusion. In Figure 43, the
water-bearing Morrow sands from 4,400 to 4,438 ft (points
101
LOG INTERPRETATION
1 to 7) were used to establish the R line (S
w
= 1.0). The
hydrocarbon-bearing Morrow sand from 4,536 to 4,546 ft
(points 8 to 10) plot below the 20% water saturation (S
w
=
0.2) line indicating the sand is productive.
The limitation imposed by evaluating a log from a
crossplot is that a relatively large range of porosity values in
water zones is required to properly define the Rg line (Fig.
43) and determine resistivity of formation water (R
w
). Also,
the lithology and mud filtrate must stay fairly constant in the
interval being evaluated.
Permeability From Logs
Log-derived permeability formulas are only valid for
estimating permeability in formations at irreducible water
saturation (S
w irr
; Schlumberger, 1977). When a geologist
evaluates a formation by using log-derived permeability
formulas, the permeability values, if possible, should be
compared with values of nearby producing wells from the
same formation. You can make productivity estimates based
on log derived permeabilities if the formation evaluated is
compared with both good and poor production histories in
these nearby wells. By using comparisons of log-derived
permeabilities from several wells, a geologist is not using
an absolute value for log derived permeability.
Two methods for calculating log-derived permeability are
discussed here: the Wyllie and Rose (1950) formulas and the
Coates and Dumanoir (1973) formula. Before these
formulas can be applied, a geologist must first determine
whether or not a formation is at irreducible water saturation.
Whether or not a formation is at irreducible water
saturation depends upon bulk volume water (B VW = S
w
x
4>) values. When a formation's bulk volume water values
are constant (Fig. 39), a zone is at irreducible water
saturation. If the values are not constant, a zone is not at
irreducible water saturation (Fig. 39).
The Wyllie and Rose (1950) method for determining
permeability utilizes a chart (Fig. 44), or the following two
formulas:
K"2 = 250 X 0
3
/S
wirr
(medium gravity oils)
K
i/2= 79x<3/S
wilT
(drygas)
Where:
K
1/2
= square root of permeability; therefore: K is
equal to permeability in millidarcies
(/> = porosity
S
w irr
= water saturation (S
w
) of a zone at irreducible
water saturation
A more modern, but also more complex, method for
calculating permeability is the Coates and Dumanoir (1973)
formula. Unlike the Wyllie and Rose (1950) formulas,
hydrocarbon density is put into the equation, instead of
adjusting by constants for the effect hydrocarbon density
has on permeability (Wyllie and Rose, 1950; formulas). The
following data are required to calculate permeability by the
Coates and Dumanoir (1973) formula.
R^, = formation water resistivity at formation
temperature
Rt ;- = true formation resistivity from a formation at
irreducible water saturation
p
h
= hydrocarbon density in gm/cc
0 = porosity
A first step in the Coates and Dumanoir (1973)
permeability formula is calculation of values for two
constants: C and W.
C = 23 + 465p
h
- 188p
h
2
Where:
C = constant in Coates and Dumanoir (1973)
permeability formula
p
h
= hydrocarbon density in gm/cc
W2 = (3.75 - 0) +
[log(R
w
/R
tirr
) + 2.2P
2.0
Where:
W = constant in Coates and Dumanoir (1973)
permeability formula
(f> = porosity
R
w
= formation water resistivity at formation
temperature
R
xin
= deep resistivity from a zone at irreducible water
saturation (S
w
^
Once determined, the constants C and W can be used to
calculate permeability (Coates and Dumanoir, 1973).
Cx 02w
Ki/2 =
W* x (R
w
/R
tilT
)
Where:
Ki'
2
= square root of permeability; therefore: K equals
permeability in millidarcies (md)
C = constant based on hydrocarbon density
W = constant
4> = porosity
Rt in- = deep resistivity from a zone at irreducible water
saturation (S
w m
)
R
w
= formation water resistivity at formation
temperature
Shaly Sand Analysis
The presence of shale (i.e. clay minerals) in a reservoir
can cause erroneous values for water saturation and porosity
derived from logs. These erroneous values are not limited to
102
LOG INTERPRETATION
sandstones, but also occur in limestones and dolomites.
Whenever shale is present in a formation, all the porosity
tools (sonic, density, and neutron) will record too high a
porosity. The only exception to this is the density log. It will
not record too high a porosity if the density of shale is equal
to or greater than the reservoir's matrix density. Also, the
presence of shale in a formation will cause the resistivity log
to record too low a resistivity. Hilchie (1978) notes that the
most significant effect of shale in a formation is to reduce
the resistivity contrast between oil or gas, and water. The
net result is that if enough shale is present in a reservoir, it
may be very difficult, or perhaps impossible, to determine if
a zone is productive. Hilchie (1978) suggests that for shale
to significantly affect log-derived water saturations, shale
content must be greater than 10 to 15%.
Remember that all shaly sandstone formulas reduce the
water saturation value from the value that would be
calculated if shale effect was ignored. However, this
lowering of water saturation can be a problem in log
evaluation, because, if a geologist overestimates shale
content, a water-bearing zone may calculate like a
hydrocarbon zone.
The first step in shaly sand analysis is to determine the
volume of shale from a gamma ray log (see Chapter V).
\folume of shale from a gamma ray log is determined by the
chart (Fig. 38) or by the following formulas (Dresser Atlas,
1979):
Older rocks (consolidated):
V
sh
= 0.33 [2(2XIGR)- i .
0
]
Tertiary rocks (unconsolidated):
V
sh
= 0.083 [2(3-7 x IGR) _ i _o]
Where:
V
sh
= volume of shale
IGR = gamma ray index
W =
Nog'
GRmax ~ GRmir
Where:
GR
max
= gamma ray maximum (shale zone)
(jRmin = gamma ray minimum (clean sand)
GR
log
= gamma ray log (shaly sand)
After the volume of shale (V
sh
) is determined, it can then
be used to correct the porosity log for shale effect. The
formulas for correcting the sonic, density, and Combination
Neutron-Density logs for volume of shale are:
Sonic Log (Dresser Atlas, 1979):
<k
(
=
f At i o g - Au 100
At
f
- A ^ Ay, At f - At
Where:
^sonic
=
sonic log derived porosity corrected for shale
At
log
= interval transit time of formation
A ^ = interval transit time of the formation's matrix
(Table 6)
At
f
= interval transit time of fluid (189 for fresh mud
and 185 for salt mud)
At
sh
= interval transit time of adjacent shale
V
s
h
=
volume of shale
Density Log (Dresser Atlas, 1979):
\Pma J
- v
Pma ~ Psh
Pma - Pi
Where:
V
s
h
=
volume of shale
0rje = density log derived porosity corrected for shale
Pma = matrix density of formation
Pb = bulk density of formation
Pi = fluid density (1.0 for fresh mud and 1.1 for salt
mud)
p
s h
= bulk density of adjacent shale
Combination Neutron-Density Log (Schlumberger, 1975):
$N con
=
4>K X 0.30 x V
tec-, = <t e- [ ( ^g
1 L
) x 0.13
sh
XV,,
$N-D =
corr
2.0
Where:
4>Ncoii
Y*DCOI T
v
s h
0Nclay
= neutron porosity corrected for shale
= density porosity corrected for shale
volume of shale
neutron porosity of adjacent shale
= neutron porosity uncorrected for shale
= density porosity uncorrected for shale
= neutron-density porosity corrected for shale
Next, after the volume of shale has been determined and the
log derived porosity has been corrected for volume of shale,
the water saturation can be calculated. Three of the more
commonly used shaly sand equations are:
(Simandoux, 1963):
Ov y
0.4 x R
(j>2
R,
+
-sh
R
s
i
+
502
R
t
X R
w
(Fertl, 1975; where a = 0.25 Gulf Coast; a = 0.35 Rocky
Mountains):
i*
Rw
R,
a x V
sh
\ 2 a x V,
sh
103
LOG INTERPRETATION
FLOW CHART FOR LOG INTERPRETATION
i
,
n
i
,
,
i
F
,
n = 1.8 to 2.5
MOSTLY = 2.0
CHAPTER I
FORMATIO
i
S
w
= ( F x ^
S x o = ( F x ^ )
n
K
xo
CHAPTER m
, i
,.
R
X0
MICROLATEROLOG
PROXIMITY LOG
MSFL
SFL
CHAPTER m
N FACTOR
F = ^ -
0
m
CHAPTER I
, .
SONIC POROSITY
. At - At mo
0 =
A' f - A' mo
CHAPTER m
DENSITY POROSITY
6 Pmo-Pb
CHAPTJ
NEUTRON
PORC
:R I S
-DENSITY
SITY
2
CHAPTER I S
, .
,.
Rt
, ,
DEEP
INDUCTION LOG
DEEP
LATEROLOG
CHAPTER m
Rw WATER
CATALOG
CHAPTER I
Ro
R
" o
=
F
CHAPTER SI
SSP =
-Klog Rmf / Rw
CHAPTER H
~r
R
w
, ,
,,
Rmf
n
FROM LOG
HEADER
CHAPTER I
104
LOG INTERPRETATION
S = ( Fx ^ )
n
Sxo
:
( F x 5)
"xo
CHAPTER m
MOVEABLE HYDROCARBONS
3 / r\yn / R|
CHAPTER 53
BULK VOLUME WATER
BVW- S
w
x H
CHAPTER 21
PERMEABILITY
K* ( 79x0
3
/ S
W
|
RR
)
2
GAS
K- ( 25Ox0
3
/ S
W
|
R R
)
2
OIL
CHAPTER m
SAMPLE SHOWS
OIL OR GAS?
RESERVES
0
l
L =
7758 x(I . O-Sw)xhx0xR. F. xDRAI NAGE
Boi
GAS 43, 560 x [DEPTH x(0.43/15)] x( 1. 0-S
w
)x hx 0x R F. x DRAINAGE
DECISION
RUN PI PE/ TEST/
DON'T RUN PIPE
105
LOG INTERPRETATION
(Schlumberger, 1975)
V
5h
o w
R,i
+
V.,
R
s
i
&
0.2 x R
w
x ( 1. 0- V
sh
)X R
t
$2
0. 4XR
W
X( 1. 0- V
s h
)
Where:
S
w
= water saturation uninvaded zone corrected for
volume of shale
R
w
= formation water resistivity at formation
temperature
Rt = true formation resistivity
</> = porosity corrected for volume of shale
V
sll
= volume of shale
R
sh
= resistivity of adjacent shale
A major problem encountered in shaly sand analysis is
determining a resistivity value for shale in a formation. The
percentage of shale is not the critical factor, rather, it is
clay's cation exchange capacity (Hilchie, 1978), because
cation exchange capacity greatly affects resistivity of the
clay. Kaolinite and chlorite have extremely low cation
exchanges; illite and montmorillonite have high cation
exchanges. Therefore, montmorillonite and illite lower
resistivity much more than kaolinite and chlorite. In shaly
sand analysis, a geologist must make an assumption that
resistivity of an adjacent shale (R
sh
) is the same as
resistivity of shale in the formation. This assumption is not
always correct.
Most shaly sand interpretation problems occur in
formations with R
w
values which are not too salty (NaCL
20,000 ppm, or R
w
= 0.3 at 80; Hilchie, 1978). Where
formation water is very salty, shale has less effect on the
formation's resistivity. Therefore, calculated water
saturations, without correction for shale, are close to true
formation water saturation.
This chapter discussed several log interpretation
techniques. These techniques are based on many of the
formulas already presented in the text. What the formulas
are, and where they are found is summarized on the log
interpretation flow chart included at the end of this chapter.
Review - Chapter VI
1. The Archie equation is used to calculate a formation's
water saturation in both the invaded (S
xo
) and uninvaded
(S
w
) zones.
2. The Ratio Method for determining water saturation
(S
w
) does not require a value for porosity (</>).
3. The ratio between the water saturations in the invaded
(S
xo
) and uninvaded (S
w
) zones (i.e. S
w
/S
xo
) can be used as
an index for the degree of hydrocarbon moveability.
4. Bulk volume water (BVW) is important because it
indicates when a reservior is at irreducible water saturation
(Nvirr)-
5. Quick look methods are important because they
provide "flags" which indicate zones of potential interest.
6. Hingle and Pickett crossplot techniques are simple
and rapid methods for determining: (1) a formation's
matrix; (2) a formation's water resistivity (R^,); (3) a
formation's water saturation (S
w
); and (4) a formation's
cementation factor (m).
7. Log derived data can be used to estimate permeability
of a formation.
8. The flow chart included in this chapter will help you
review the steps used in log interpretation and will also
provide an index of where different pieces of information
are located.
106
LOG INTERPRETATION
_ .40
- .30-
-.005
.0 5 .10 .15
1
.20 .25 .30 .35 .40
POROSITY , ft
POROSITY , 0
= WATER DBA
0%OIL
POROSITY , fi
Figur e 39. Crossplot of porosity versus water
saturation used to determine bulk volume
water. Because production of water in a well
can affect a prospect's economics, it is
important to know the bulk volume water and
whether the formation is at irreducible water
saturation (S
wiri
).
This crossplot example is taken from the
Ordovician Red River B-zone, Beaver Creek
Field, Golden Valley County, North Dakota
(after Jaafar, 1980).
When values of bulk volume water plot along
hyperbolic lines or, in other words, are
constant or close to constant, the formation is
homogeneous and close to irreducible water
saturation (S
w irr
). Remember, a reservoir at
S
w irr
will not produce water. Note that in
Figure 39A (top diagram) the bulk volume
water values are close to constant (parallel to
the 0.04 hyperbolic line) and the formation
produces 96% oil.
As the amount of formation water increases,
the bulk volume water values become
scattered from the hyperbolic lines and the
formation has more water than it can hold by
capillary pressure. Thus more water is
produced relative to oil. Figure 39B (middle
diagram) shows a well producing 68% oil, and
Figure 39C (lower diagram) shows a well
producing 0% oil (all water). Note the scatter
of crossplot values from the hyperbolic lines
in Figures 39B and 39C.
107
LOG INTERPRETATION
1 l I l l i
.10
0 8
MORROW SANDS
CI MARRON CO. . OKLA.
m = 2 . 0 CEMENTATION FAC
R
w
= 0. 069
J L I I I I J I
PRODUCTIVE ZONE
J I I I I
2 3 4 3 6 7 8 9 1.0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
R
I LD
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0
108
LOG INTERPRETATION
Figur e 4 0 . Example of a resistivity versus porosity (Pickett) crossplot. Example taken from the Morrow sandstone, Cimarron
County, Oklahoma.
Use the chart to find wet resistivity (R
0
) which can be used to compute R
w
.
Giv en: Porosity (0) equals 10%; cementation factor (m) is determined by the slope of the RQ line (see chart) and is equal
to 2; formation factor (F) is equal to 0.81/</>
m
(see Table 1).
Pr o cedur e:
1. Find the porosity value (10%) on the left-hand scale.
2. Follow the value horizontally until it intersects the sloping R line.
3. Follow the value vertically down from the intersection to the Rjm scale at the bottom, and read the value of R.
In this case, R equals 5.6 ohms.
In computing R
w
from R,,, remember that:
R
w
= Rp/F (see text under heading R
wa
Curve)
R
w
= 5.6/81
R
w
= 0.069 at formation temperature
109
LOG INTERPRETATION
19O0-
1800-
1700-
16O0-
1500-
1400-
1 X 0 -
1200-
1100-
10O0-
900-
800-
700-
600-
3O0-
250-
20C:
ISO-
100-
60-
40-
30-
20-
I D-
S'
2-
r
RESISTIVITY/POROSITY CROSSPLOT (RPCP)
CONDUCTIVITY RESISTIVITY
s;
VN ID
s rc
)N IE
s
.6
.7
3
,-v
2
1.2
1.6
" a
2.0
2.5 2 . 5 -
3
4 4 -
5
6
7 7 -
8
9
10 1 0 -
12
15
20 2 0 -
30
40 4 0 -
50
60
100 1 0 0 -
150
200
500
1030
-70
- 60
- 50
- 40
-30
-20
- 10
<t>
fnrF- '??. . 1
rorr
^ MB '
110
LOG INTERPRETATION
Figur e 4 1. Example of a resistivity-versus-porosity (Hingle) crossplot. Note that this crossplot is for use in plotting sandstones. A
similar, but separate crossplot is used for plotting carbonates (Figure 42).
Courtesy, Dresser Industries.
Copyright 1979, Dresser Atlas.
This crossplot example was intentionally left blank so it can be used by the reader to construct a Hingle plot.
I l l
LOG INTERPRETATION
80-
60-
50-
40-
Ca
30-
25-
20-
15-
10
50
40
30
25
20
15
1 0
5
2
RESISTIVITY/POROSITY CROSSPLOT (RPCP)
CONDUCTIVITY RESISTIVITY
CARBONATES
12
15
i - s
2
25
30
40
5C 2 5 -
60
70
80 4
90
100
7
150
200 10
300
400 2 0 -
BOC
600
1000
1500
2000 1 0 0 -
5000
10 000
20.000
- 7 0
- 6 0
- 5 0
40
- 3 0
- 2 0
- 1 0
(tor m 2.0)
112
LOG INTERPRETATION
Figur e 4 2 . Example of a resistivity-versus-porosity (Hingle) crossplot. Note that this crossplot is for use in plotting carbonates. A
similar, but separate crossplot is used for plotting sandstone (Figure 41).
Courtesy, Dresser Industries.
Copyright 1979, Dresser Atlas.
This crossplot example was intentionally left blank so it can be used by the reader to construct a Hingle plot
113
LOG INTERPRETATION
RESISTIVITY/POROSITY CROSSPLOT
CONDUCTIVITY RESISTIVITY
T
10+
6-
i i i_o'
O 2.72
T 1 1 r
T
l = S ^
o I . T - 1 0 0 %
- * 4 - - 5 0
- 4 0
-70
- 6 0
- 30
- 20
IOO 100+10
1200
-15 0 0
10 0 0
2 .6 8 2 .6 4 2 .6 0 2 .5 6 2 .5 2 2 .4 8 2 .4 4 2 . 4 0 2 .36 2 .32 2 .2 8
o- l - o
0 - 0% 10% 20%
( , or F
=rS-
)
P =2.70gm/cc R
w
0.068
114
LOG INTERPRETATION
Figur e 4 3. Example of a resistivity versus porosity (Hingle) crossplot. Morrow sandstone, Cimarron County, Oklahoma.
Before using the Hingle crossplot to determine water saturation (S
w
) for a well-completion decision (see text, steps 1
through 8), you must first calibrate the x-axis scale for porosity ($).
Giv en: Fluid density (p
f
) = 1.0 gm/cc for freshwater mud; matrix density (p
ma
) = 2.7 gm/cc (from Hingle crossplot);
derived porosity is 10% (arbitrary).
Pr o cedur e:
Remember that the density of derived porosity (<]>.) is calculated as follows (see text, under heading: Density
Log; Chapter IV):
<f.
=
Pma ~ Pb
<PDen - _
Pma Pt
Therefore:
2.70 - p
h =
2. 70- p
b
2. 70- 1. 0 1.7
0.17 = 2.70 - p, ,
Pb = 2.53 gm/cc bulk density at 10% porosity when p
ma
= 2.7 gm/cc and p
f
= 1.0 gm/cc
The values p
b
= 2.53 gm/cc and ( = 10% should coincide on the x-axis. In step 2 of the text, you scaled the
x-axis. This exercise (Fig. 43) gives you one point on your x-axis (pb at 2.53; <j) = 10%); steps 4 and 5 in the text
give you the end-point of your scale (p
ma
at 2.70; <j> = 0%).
Scale the x-axis to cover values between 0% and 10% porosity, and continue above 10% to the end of the chart.
115
LOG INTERPRETATION
mmm
n
;
70
5*60
0)
c
o
N
c
50
o
'55
c
o
|i: 40
>
O
XI
<
30
o
=5
B 20
en
0)
I io
en
0
PERMEABILITY: SANDSTONES, SHALY SANDS
. 400
Schlumbergef
10 15 20 25
<, Porosity, p.u.
30 35 40
116
LOG INTERPRETATION
Figur e 44. Chart of porosity ($) versus irreducible water saturation (S
w ta
) for estimating permeability and determining bulk
volume water (C = S
w
x <).
Courtesy, Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1969, Schlumberger.
Giv en: Porosity ($) = 25% and irreducible water saturation (S
wilT
) = 40% for an oil-bearing sandstone.
Pr o cedur e:
1. Find porosity ($ = 25%) on the bottom horizontal scale, and find irreducible water saturation (S
w
^ = 40%)
on the left-hand vertical scale.
2. Follow the two values into the chart to the point where they intersect.
3. The vertically oriented curved line on which this point falls represents permeability. In this case, permeability
(K) equals 100 md for oil (lower scale) and 10 md for gas (top scale).
4. The diagonally oriented, curved, hyperbolic lines (C = S
w
X <>) represent lines of equal value for bulk volume
water. In this example, the bulk volume water equals 0.10 (B VW = 0.10).
No te: It is important to remember that this chart is only valid for estimating permeability (K) in zones at irreducible
water saturation (S
wirr
).
Zones at irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) have bulk volume water values (BVW = $ x S
w
) which are fairly
constant. On the chart, data points from different intervals in a zone at irreducible saturation
(S
wirr
) will plot in a coherent pattern, on or parallel to one of the curved hyperbolic lines.
Data points from zones not at S
w irr
will scatter from this pattern.
117
CHAPTER VII
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
General
Petrophysical logs provide most of the subsurface data
available to an exploration geologist. Besides their
importance in completion decisions, they are also
invaluable tools for mapping and identifying lithologies.
Six techniques are presented here which can assist
geologists with lithologic determination and mapping. They
are: (1) Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log, (2) M-N*
lithology plot, (3) MID* lithology plot, (4) Alpha mapping
from SP log, (5) clean sand or carbonate maps from gamma
ray log, and (6) rock typing and facies mapping. These
techniques are especially important to a geologist when
lithologic data from cores or samples are unavailable.
Combination Gamma Ray Neutron-Density
Log
The gamma ray log (Chapter V) measures the natural
radiation of a formation, and primarily functions as a
lithology log. It helps differentiate shales (high
radioactivity) from sands, carbonates, and anhydrites (low
radioactivity). The neutron log is a porosity device that is
used to measure the amount of hydrogen in a formation
(Chapter IV). The density log is a porosity device that
measures electron density (Chapter IV). When these three
logs are used together (i.e. Combination Gamma Ray
Table 10. Matrix and Fluid Coefficients of Several Minerals and Types of Porosity
(Liquid-filled Boreholes).
Sandstone (1) (V
ma
= 18,000) < > 10%
Sandstone (2) (V
ma
= 19,500) </> < 10%
Limestone
Dolomite (1) (4> = 5.5 to 30%)
Dolomite (2) (<f> = 1.5% to 5.5% & > 30%)
Dolomite (3) (0 = 0.0% to 1.5%)
Anhydrite
Gypsum
Salt
AW
55.5
51.2
47.5
43.5
43.5
43.5
50.0
52.0
67.0
Pma
2.65
2.65
2.71
2.87
2.87
2.87
2.98
2.35
2.03
($SNP*)ma
-0.035t
-0.035t
0.00
0.0351
0.02t
0.005t
-0.005
0.49tt
0.04
(/CLNOma
-0. 05t
-0.005
0.00
0.085t
0.065t
0.04t
-0.002
-0. 01
From Schlumberger Log Interpretation Manual/Principles. Courtesy Schlumberger Well
Services; Copyright 1972, Schlumberger.
t Average values
ttBased on hydrogen-index computation
Neutron-Density Log), lithologies can be determined.
Figure 35 in Chapter IV is a schematic illustration of how
Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log responses are related to
rock type. Figure 45 is a Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log
through the Ordovician Stony Mountain Shale and Red
River Formation in Richland County, Montana. Note in
Figure 45 how the different rock types are related to log
responses. As a quick look metiiod, where there are a
limited number of lithologies, this log works well for basic
lithologic and facies mapping. Whenever lithologies are
more complex, additional logging devices and techniques,
such as the M-N* and MID* plot, must be used. Of course,
after you determine lithology, you can prepare lithology or
facies maps.
M-N* Lithology Plot
The M-N* plot requires a sonic log along with neutron
and density logs. The sonic log is a porosity log (Chapter
IV) that measures interval transit time. Interval transit time
(At) is the reciprocal of the velocity of a compressional
sound wave through one foot of formation. A sonic log,
neutron log, and density log are all necessary to calculate
the lithology dependent variables M* and N*. M* and N*
values are essentially independent of matrix porosity
118
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
(sucrosic and intergranular). A crossplot of these two
variables makes lithology more apparent. M* and N* values
are calculated by the following equations (Schlumberger,
1972):
At
f
- At
M* =
Pb-Pf
x 0.01
At
Pi
Pb
N
* - 4>Nf ~ <N
Pb-Pf
Where:
At
f
= interval transit time of fluid (189 for fresh mud
and 185 for salt mud)
= interval transit time from the log
= density of fluid (1.0 for fresh mud and 1.1 for salt
mud)
= bulk density of formation
$
N
= neutron porosity of the formation from
Compensated Neutron or Sidewall Neutron
Porosity Log
$N
f
= neutron porosity of fluid (use 1.0)
When the matrix parameters (Atn,
a
, p
ma
, 0Nmai Table 10)
are used in the M* and N* equations instead of formation
parameters, M* and N* values can be obtained for the
various minerals (Table 11).
Figure 46 is a M-N* plot of data from the Ordovician Red
River C-zone in the Alpar Resources Federal 1-10,
Richland County, Montana at a depth of 11,870 to 11,900 ft
(Fig. 45). Data from this interval, cluster together in the
M-N* lithology triangle. Lithology is defined by the
end-members: anhydrite, dolomite, and limestone. In this
case, lithology is an anhydride limey dolomite (Fig. 46).
Notice that two of the data points are above the
dolomite-limestone line, indicating secondary porosity from
vugs and/or fractures.
MID* Lithology Plot
The MID* (Matrix Identification) plot, like the M-N* is a
crossplot technique which helps identify lithology and
secondary porosity. Also, like the M-N* plot, the MID*
plot requires data from neutron, density, and sonic logs.
The first step in constructing a MID* plot is to determine
values for the apparent matrix parameters (p
ma
)a and
(AwV These values are determined from neutron ($N),
density (pt,), and sonic (At) data obtained from the log.
Next, these values (i.e. $
N
, pt,, and At) are crossplotted on
appropriate neutron-density and sonic-density charts to
obtain (p
ma
)
a
and (At^);, values. Crossplot charts, along
with instructions on how to use them, can be obtained from
Schlumberger's Log Interpretation Manual/Applications,
\blume II (1974). The method for obtaining apparent
matrix parameters (p
ma
)
a
and (At^,), is also
illustrated in the case studies discussed in Chapter VIII.
Once obtained, apparent matrix parameters
(Pma)a
mA
(^Wa are plotted on the MID* plot (Fig. 47).
Data plotted in Figure 47 arerom the Alpar Resources
Federal 1-10 well, Richland County, Montana (Fig. 45),
and include the same Red River C-zone interval (11,870 to
11,900 ft) illustrated in the M-N* plot (Fig. 46). The data
points form a cluster (Fig. 47) defined by the end-members:
anhydrite, dolomite, and limestone. The lithology is an
anhydritic limey dolomite. The three points that plot above
the dolomite-limestone line indicate secondary porosity.
Alpha Mapping from SP Log
The spontaneous potential (SP) log (Chapter II) can be
used to map clean sands (shale-free) versus shaly sands.
The technique is called Alpha mapping (a; Dresser Atlas,
1974), and is based on the observation that the presence of
Table 11. Values of M* and N* constants, calculated for Common Minerals.
Fresh Mud
(p=1. 0)
M* N*
Salt Mud
( p =l . l )
M* N*
Sandstone (1) V
ma
= 18,000
Sandstone (2) V
ma
= 19,500
Limestone
Dolomite (1)0 = 5. 5- 30%
Dolomite (2) 0 = 1.5-5.5%
Dolomite (3)^ = 0- 1. 5%
Anhydrite p
ma
= 2.98
Gypsum
Salt
.810 .628
.835 .628
.827 .585
.778 .516
.778 .524
.778 .532
.702 .505
1.015 .378
.835
.862
.854
.800
.800
.800
.718
1.064
.669
.669
.621
.544
.554
.561
.532
.408
1.269 1.032
From Schlumberger Log Interpretation Manual/Principles. Courtesy Schlumberger Well Services;
Copyright 1972, Schlumberger.
119
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
shale in a formation decreases the SP response.
The alpha method can be extremely valuable in mapping
because it can allow you to more narrowly define desirable
zones. Alpha values from nearby wells can be used to
construct clean sand (high energy) maps (in effect, you are
mapping iso-alpha values).
To construct an Alpha map, first calculate the static
spontaneous potential (SSP) that a sand would have, if it
was 100% shale-free and unaffected by bed thickness. The
equation for SSP is:
SSP = - K x log(R
mf
/R
w
)
Where:
SSP = static spontaneous potential
K = 60 + (0.133 X formation temperature)
Rmf = resistivity of mud filtrate at formation
temperature
R, = resistivity of formation water at formation
temperature
The SSP must be calculated for the formation in each
well, so that variations in R
mf
and R
w
can be corrected.
Next, determine alpha values by the method shown in
Figure 48. The alpha cutoff (50%, 75%, whatever) is
arbitrary, but should be based on production histories in the
area.
The resulting alpha (a) map delineates clean sand
environments. In the above example (in Fig. 48), the
greater alpha thickness for a given alpha cut-off (i.e. 75%
a, or 50% a) indicates a greater thickness of higher energy,
low-shale sandstones. Also, because the presence of shale
in a sandstone can cause a loss of permeability, an alpha
map is indicative of better reservoir conditions.
The problem with alpha mapping from an SP log is that
SP response is decreased, not only by shale, but also by thin
beds (< 10 feet) and the presence of hydrocarbons (Chapter
II). Bed thickness problems are minimized by making an SP
log bed thickness correction (Chapter II). But, the SP log
can't be corrected for hydrocarbons.
Clean Sand or Carbonate Maps from
Gamma Ray Log
The gamma ray log can be used to map clean (shale-free)
sandstones or carbonates versus shaly sandstones and
carbonates. Because shales are more radioactive than clean
sandstones or carbonates (Chapter V), when the percentage
of shale increases in these rock types, the gamma ray
reading also increases.
Figure 49 is from a Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log
through the Mississippian, upper Mission Canyon
Formation in Roosevelt County, Montana. In this interval of
the Mission Canyon Formation, crinoid-fenestrate bryozoan
bioherms are often developed. Because the bioherm fades
is composed of clean carbonate relative to the non-bioherm
facies, the gamma ray log can be used to map the bioherm
facies. The procedure for obtaining a clean carbonate
cut-off from a gamma ray log is described in Figure 49.
A gamma ray API value of 20 on the gamma ray log (Fig.
49) will represent clean carbonate with a volume of shale
(V
sh
) equal to or less than 5%. By drawing a vertical line on
the gamma ray log equal to 20 API units (Fig. 49), the
geologist can identify and map the clean carbonate (or
sand).
Figure 50 is an isopach map of clean carbonate for the
upper Mission Canyon Formation in Roosevelt County,
Montana. Because the relationship between clean carbonate
and the crinoid-fenestrate bryozoan bioherm facies is
already established, the map (Fig. 50) delineates the
distribution of the bioherm facies. Clean carbonate maps
have also been used to map the Pennsylvanian banks
(bioherms) of north central Texas (Wermund, 1975).
Rock Typing and Facies Mapping
An important contribution to subsurface analysis of
carbonate rocks has been the attempt to establish
relationships between log responses and carbonate facies.
Pickett (1977), Asquith (1979), and Watney (1979; 1980)
used crossplots to identify log response/rock type
relationships. Table 12 is a list of the crossplots applied by
these authors.
Table 12. Types of Carbonate Rock Type
Identification Crossplots (after Pickett, 1977; Asquith,
1979; and Watney, 1979 and 1980).
At (interval transit time) vs. fa (neutron porosity)
p
b
(bulk density) vs. fa (neutron porosity)
Pb (bulk density) vs. At (interval transit time)
R
t
(deep resistivity) vs. fa (neutron porosity)
GR (gamma ray) vs. fa (neutron porosity)t
R
t
(deep resistivity) vs. <fr
s
(sonic porosity)
tWatney (1979 and 1980) also uses neutron log readings
measured in counts/sec.
To date, crossplots have been used to establish log versus
lithology relationships only when petrographic data is
available from cores or cuttings in selected wells.
Petrographic analysis from selected wells is essential to
firmly establish rock type.
When establishing log/lithology relationships, log
responses from control wells (i.e. wells with petrographic
analysis) are crossplotted. Next, areas that delineate
rock-type clusters are outlined (see Fig. 51) on the
crossplot. Finally, log responses from wells without cores or
120
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
cuttings are added to the crossplot. The carbonate rock type
and depositional environment of wells without petrographic
analysis can then be determined by the cluster in which each
occurs on the crossplot chart (see Fig. 51).
In Figure 51, the solid black circles and squares represent
data from wells where petrographic analysis was used to
determine carbonate rock type and depositional
environment. The open circles represent data from a well
without petrographic analysis. The carbonate rock types and
depositional environments were determined by the cluster in
which the open circles were plotted (Fig. 51).
Figure 52 is a crossplot of deep resistivity (R
t
) versus
sonic porosity (</>
s
) for the Lower Permian, Council Grove
B-zone in Ochiltree County, Texas. Clusters for the three
carbonate rock types (oolite grainstone, oolitic wackestone,
and argillaceous bioclastic wackestone) were established by
petrographic analysis of cores and cuttings (open circles).
The solid circles represent data from wells with only log
control. Figure 53 is a facies map of the Council Grove
B-zone based on the percentage distribution of the three
carbonate rock types established by the resistivity/sonic
porosity crossplot (Fig. 52).
The advantage of log crossplot techniques is that they
maximize use of available information. Cores and cuttings
are required from only a few control wells rather than all
wells. This is very important in subsurface facies mapping
because of the difficulty in obtaining cores and cuttings
from every well in an area. Also, because petrographic
analysis of every well is unnecessary, you can save a great
deal of time.
However, it should be emphasized that petrographic
analysis of cores or cuttings from control wells is an
essential first step to firmly establish the rock-type cluster
used in the crossplots.
Review - Chapter VII
1. A Combination Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log
can be used to determine lithology when a limited number
of rock types are present.
2. Where lithology is more complex, a sonic log plus a
Combination Neutron-Density Log are both necessary to
construct M-N* or MID* lithology identification crossplots.
3. The spontaneous potential (SP) and gamma ray logs
can be used to map shaly versus non-shaly carbonates or
sandstones.
4. Crossplotting of multiple log reponses can be used to
establish relationships between log responses and rock
types, provided some petrographic data from cores or
cuttings is available.
121
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
ALPAR RESOURCES INCORPORATED
FED. 1- 10
SW/ SE SEC. 10 2 6 N - 5 5 E
Ri chl and County, Mont ana
STONEY
MOUNT AI N
SHALE
11,700
Calcareous Shale*
RED RIVER
FORMATI ON
11, 100- +
+ +
+
i
GR
a
a
+ +
+
+ +
'GR
log
XL
11, 900-
Jh
T
Gamma Ray
Log
5
r_c
N
1^6
50
_ L _
Ga mma Ray API Units
100 30 20 10
-J
N onPorous Limostono
Poroui Mi crocrystal l i no
Dolomito
NonPoroui l i mostono
Anhydr i t *
Anhydfi ti c Mi crocrystal l i no
Dolomito
N onPorous Limostono
Mi crocrystol l i no Dol omi f
Anhydri l o
Anhydriric Mi crocrystal l i no
Dolomito
Poroui Mi crocrystal l i no
Dol omi f
Nor>Porous Limosiono
Poroui Sucroiic Dolomito
Non- Por ous Limostono
Poroui Limoslono
Non Porous Limostono
Appar ent Limestone Porosity
-10
J
122
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 45. Example of a Combination Gamma Ray Neutron-Density Log showing corresponding lithologies. See Chapters IVand
Vabout log interpretation.
Example taken from the Ordovician Red River Formation, Richland County, Montana. After Asquith (1979).
Note in log tracks #2 and #3 that the neutron log is represented by a dashed line and the density log is represented by a
solid line (see Chapter IV).
The gamma ray log is in track #1 (see Chapter V).
123
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
1.0
0.9
0.8
M*
0.7
0.6
1
GYPSUM
i
0.4
1 i I
~
\ GAS
\ SECONDARY POROSITY /
\ \ f LIMESTONE
\ \ a
/ / ^ \ ^ SANDSTONE
DOLOMITE
t
fe"T
/
/
* ANHYDRITE
APPROXIMATE
SHALE REGION
i i
0.5 0.6 0.7
N*
124
LITHOLOG Y LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 46. Example of an M-N* crossplot of data from the well illustrated in Figure 45; interval 11,870 to 11,900 ft. After
Asquith (1979).
This crossplot helps to determine lithology. Note how data points are clustered within a lithology triangle bounded by three
corners: dolomite, anhydrite, and limestone. In this case, the rock is identified as anhydritic limey dolomite (see text).
Note that two points plot above the limestone-dolomite line, and into the zone of secondary porosity. This indicates
secondary porosity from vugs and/or fractures.
The triangle end-members are plotted from common matrix values for M* and N* found in Table 11.
125
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
2.0
SALT
SNP
SALT
CNL
2.2
2.4
u
u
E
O)
o
E
2.6
LIMESTONE
2.8 -
A
/ \
^ \
D
i
DOLOMITE V> \
\
\
SANDSTONE
\
3.0 -
ANHYDRITE
30 40 50
( At ma) a, JUsec/ft
60
70
126
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 47. Example of a MID* crossplot of data from the log illustrated in Figure 45; interval is 11,870 to 11,900 ft. After
Asquith (1979). The lithologic determination is the same as in Figure 46 M-N* plot.
Note that the data points cluster in a triangle defined by the end-memberslimestone, dolomite, and anhydriteindicating
the lithology is an anhydritic limey dolomite.
127
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
SP Scale 20mv/div.
20mv
I I ' 1*1 I I I 1 '
50%
- 5900
ill
6000
T
50
oC THICKNESSES
*
7 5
= 20 feet
* 5 0
= 3 9
*
e e t
SHALE BASE
LINE
GIVEN'
Rmf=0. 83at 120
Rw=0. 04 at 120*
FORMATION TEMP* 120*
CALCULATE'
SSP=-K log (Rmf/Rw)
SSP=-IOOmv
128
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 48. Determining Alpha (a) from an SP log. Two different cutoffs are demonstrated: 50% alpha (a
50
) and 75% alpha (a
75
)'
The alpha percentage is determined as an inverse function of shaliness (100% alpha is shale-free; 50% alpha is 50% shaly).
Given: You must first determine SSP (see text for formula). R^ = 0.83 at 120F, R
w
= 0.04 at 120F, T
f
= 120F.
Procedure:
1. By formula, we determine that SSP = - lOOmv. Plot a scale of lOOmv on the SP log, using the shale baseline
as the zero point; then use the SP scale to establish the value of your scale increments (in this case, each
increment is 20mv).
2. In this exercise, a thickness and depth will be determined for both a
50
and 075, so draw vertical lines through
your SSP scale approximately halfway (50%) and three-quarters of the way (75%) across, and drop your
vertical lines to intersect the SP curve at the desired depth range.
3. From the intersections, follow the values horizontally to the depth scale on the log. From this log-depth scale
you can count depth-increments to determine alpha thickness, as well as the top and bottom boundaries of the
given alpha zone.
In this example a
75
is the thinner of the two, and measures 20 ft, from approximately 5,935 to
5,955 ft; whereas a
50
is thicker and measures 39 ft, from approximately 5,931 to 5,970 ft.
129
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Thickness
of Clean
Carbonate
Mapped in
Figure 50.
20 API UNITS
o
o _
CO
o
o
T
INTERVAL OF
MISSION CANYON
BIOHERM
DEVELOPMENT
1
100 30 20
GAMMA RAY
API UNITS LIMESTONE POROSITY UNITS
130
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 49. Example gamma ray log depicting a 20 API unit gamma ray cutoff used to determine a clean carbonate interval.
Given: The volume of shale (V
sh
) cutoff is arbitrarily set at 5% (V^ = 0.05). Next, determine the gamma ray index from
the chart in Figure 38; Chapter V (gamma ray index where V
sh
= 5%, is IQR = 0.10).
Procedure:
1. Determine gamma ray cutoff (see log; and Fig. 38).
Remember:
GRmax
_
GRmin
Where:
GRio
g
= gamma ray log
GRmax
=
gamma ray maximum (shale)
GR
m
in = gamma ray minimum (shale-free sandstone or carbonate)
From Log:
CJRmax = 90 (from shale zone on log)
GR
min
= 1 2 (from clean carbonate zone on log)
I
GR
= 0.10 (IGR for V
sh
= 0.05; given)
then:
K3R
Or:
0.10 =
GR
]og
-
GRmax "
_ GR
l o
,
GR
min
-GKin
- 12
9 0 - 12
Therefore:
GR
log
= 19.8 (round off to 20 API units)
20 API represents clean carbonate where the volume of shale is equal to (or less than) 5%.
Draw a vertical line from the scale value of 20 API units and determine the thickness and limits of the clean
carbonate formation (bioherm) much as you determined alpha values in Figure 48.
131
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
132
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 50. Example isopach map of clean carbonates from the Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, Roosevelt County,
Montana, described in the text and in Figure 49.
133
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
10,000
1,000 -
*rm
INTERTIDAL
MICROCRYSTALLINE
ANHYDRITIC DOLOMITE
\
\
100
/
/
. /
10 -
/ SUBTIDAL
FOSSILIFEROUS *
SUCROSIC DOLOMITE
' \
\
\
/
"V
^s
28 24 20 16 12
<
Q
t<
or
</>
S i
S
o
Ol
i V>
o
Z
o
A*
Q2
10
\fco
0>
0N
134
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 51. Example crossplot of formation resistivity (R
t
; in this case deep Laterolog*) versus neutron porosity (<foj). This
comparison of log response to facies helps the geologist develop rock type clusters.
This example is from the Ordovician Red River C and D zones in Richland and Roosevelt counties, Montana. After
Asquith(1979).
Solid squares and circles represent wells with core or cuttings available, in addition to log response. Open circles represent
wells with log control only.
Facies classifications are first confirmed by core/cuttings analysis, but once clusters are established then, only log control is
necessary.
135
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
10,000-
1,000
RT 100
OOLITIC
WACKESTONES
OOLITE
GRAINSTONE
10 -
28 24
ARGILLACEOUS BIOCLASTIC
WACKESTONES
I I I
20 16 12 8
0S
136
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 52. Example crossplot of formation resistivity (R,; in this case from deep induction) with sonic porosity ($
s
). As with
Figure 51, the rock type clusters are developed by core or cuttings analysis, but logging control is all that's necessary once
the relationship is defined.
This example comes from the Lower Permian Council Grove B-zone, Ochiltree County, Texas. After Asquith (1979).
Open circles represent wells with both core/cuttings analysis and log control. Solid black circles represent wells with only
log control.
(In this example, sonic porosity (</>
s
) is based on a limestone matrix, where At^, = 47.6 /xsec/ft.)
137
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
OKLAHOMA
TEXAS
>60%
OOLITIC WACKESTONE
>60%
ARGILLACEOUS
BIOCLASTIC WACKESTONE
CORE +
LOG CONTROL
CUTTINGS +
LOG CONTROL
LOG CONTROL
138
LITHOLOGY LOGGING AND MAPPING TECHNIQUES
Figure 53. Example facies map of the Lower Permian Council Grove B-zone, Ochiltree County, Texas, prepared from the facies
clusters established by crossplotted log data in Figure 52. After Asquith (1979).
The legend defines the position of core, cuttings, and log-only control.
139
CHAPTER VIII
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Introduction
A major hurdle for geologists is learning how the theory
and the many formulas of log interpretation are translated
into practice. The learning process is slow, and only takes
place after a good deal of dreary effort is supported by
actual experience with logs. There are absolutely no
short-cuts. Memorizing log patterns and curve values just
doesn't work, and can, in fact, prove disastrous. However,
to assist the process of changing what's done into how it's
done, case studies can be an invaluable asset. The ones
presented here cover a variety of geographical areas,
geologic ages, lithologies and different log packages. These
are not necessarily a classic representation of any of the
variations. The reader will need to actively engage his or
her intellect in finding appropriate answers for each
problem, and will also need to apply material already
learned from a thorough study of the preceding text.
Although all the case studies are based on actual field
examples, in some studies the amount of log data analyzed
would be superfluous in real-life. A pipe-setting decision
doesn't always require a full-blown log analysis. The
unusual amount of detail is offered here as a learning
experience. Nevertheless, careful study of a log can always
yield information which will further the development of an
expertise.
These case studies are offered as a progressive series of
problems. In the first example the reader is asked to do very
little, but in the final example the reader should be prepared
to proceed most of the way alone. An effort is made to
define variables and terminology appearing in the case
studies, even though they may already have been defined
earlier in the text.
In each of the case studies the moveable hydrocarbon
index (S
w
/S
xo
) is calculated. Sometimes, the water
saturations of the flushed zone (S
x0
) may exceed 100%.
Whenever this happens, a value of 100% is then used to
calculate the moveable hydrocarbon index.
No matter how significant log interpretation is to a
geologist as an exploration tool, it must also be viewed in
the larger context of exploration decision making. That's
why each case study includes a volumetric calculation of
reserves. And, in several studies, the reader is asked to
determine a rate of return on investment. As everyone
intimately connected with petroleum exploration knows,
wells can simultaneously be geologic successes and
economic failures. A successful exploration program will
use petrophysical log interpretation as a way to tip the risk
scale toward economically successful wells.
The list of formulas which follows is an important part of
petroleum exploration. A derivation of variables is included
in this listing, although in most instances, the reader will
not be asked to solve them. Instead, the values will be given
and will need to be "plugged" into their position in the
formulas.
Formulas Used for Calculating
Volumetric Producible Hydrocarbon Reserves
N
r
OIL
7758 X DA X h x <ft x S
h
x RF
BOI
Where:
N
r
= volumetric recoverable oil reserves in stock tank
barrels (STB)
DA = drainage area in acres
h = reservoir thickness in feet
4> = porosity
S
h
= hydrocarbon saturation (1.0 - S
w
)
RF = recovery factor
BOI = oil volume factor or reservoir barrels per stock
tank barrel
BOI= 1.05 + 0.5 X
GQR
100
Where:
GOR (gas oil ratio) =
gas in cubic feet
oil in barrels
GAS
Most geologists use formula I; but an alternative,
Formula II, is offered.
I. G
r
= 43,560 x DAx h x < x S
h
x (j~M x RF
Where:
G
r
= volumetric recoverable gas reserves in standard
cubic feet (SCF)
DA = drainage area in acres
h = reservoir thickness in feet
140
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
4>
s
h
RF
Pf,
Pf
2
= porosity
= hydrocarbon saturation (1.0-
= recovery factor
= surface pressure
= reservoir pressure
Pf
2
_ 0.43t x depth
Pf, 15
- s
w
)
t0.43 is a universal average pressure gradient
which may need to be adjusted for local
conditions.
II. G
r
= 43,560 x DA x h x <$> x S
h
x B
gi
x RF
Where:
G
r
= volumetric recoverable gas reserves in standard
cubic feet (SCF)
DA = drainage area in acres
h = reservoir thickness in feet
4> = porosity
S
h
= hydrocarbon saturation (1.0 S
w
)
RF = recovery factor
B
gj
= gas volume factor in SCF/cu ft
T P
R
s c
Y
B
s
i _
R
r
X
ZxTV
(459.7 + 60)
15
Z x (459.7 + T
f
)
Where:
7
X
= temperature at standard conditions
P
sc
= surface pressure at standard conditions
P = reservoir pressure
Z = gas compressability factor
T
f
= formation temperature (F)
FORMATION PRESSURE ESTIMATION
1. Static mud column pressure = depth x mud weight x
.052
2. Rule of thumb for static bottom hole pressure:
P
ws
= Pwh + 025 x (P
wh
/100) x (depth/100)
Where:
P
ws
= static bottom hole pressure
P
wh
= well head pressure
GEOTHERMAL GRADIENT ESTIMATION
=
(T
f
- T
s
) x 100
g
depth
Where:
g = temperature gradient in F/100 ft
T
f
= formation temperature in F
T
f
= T
s
+ gX (depth/100)
T
s
= mean surface temperature
depth = formation depth in feet
As you begin trying out the various formulas in the case
studies, keep in mind that many values such as water
saturation (S
w
) and porosity (<j>) are given in percent. So,
even though this will be immediately obvious to you,
remember to change percentages to decimals before
entering the numbers into your calculator.
Case Study 1
Pennsylvania!! Atoka Sandstone
Permian Basin
Your company has just finished drilling a 15,900 ft
wildcat well in the Permian basin. The primary target,
Morrowan sandstones, are not sufficiently developed for
commercial production and you are facing a decision of
declaring the well dry and abandoned (D&A) unless you
can find another zone which will produce hydrocarbons.
Sample cuttings from the well indicate that at 14,600 ft
the Atoka Sandstone is predominantly loose, subrounded,
coarse to very coarse, quartz sandstone with minor, tan,
arkosic sandstonemedium-grained to coarse-grained,
unsorted and friable. This information indicates that the
Atoka Sandstone may have permeability because of its
larger pore space developed from the coarse grain size.
Better permeability is also indicated by poor cementation
because the sands are friable.
Other information from the Atoka which you consider
favorable is the emission of a few gas bubbles from sample
cuttings and also gas on the mud logger's chromatograph,
an instrument designed to measure the amount and type of
gas in drilling muds. Total gas background on the
chromatograph increased from 10 units to 40 units of gas
with a trace of C-2 and C-3 hydrocarbons during drilling of
the sandstone's bottom four feet.
Even though you are optimistic about the productive
potential of the Atoka Sandstone because of the nature of
the sample cuttings and the gas shows, you are concerned
about a reverse drilling break which occurred as the Atoka
was penetrated. The drill penetration rate was 8 to 10 min/ft
before, and again after, the Atoka Sandstone. However, the
penetration rate through the Atoka was 15.5 min/ft and
decreased to 20 min/ft through the bottom 10 ft. The slower
drilling times may mean that the sandstone doesn 't have the
porosity and permeability suggested by sample
examination.
141
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
You are now preparing to calculate, and then assess, the
log parameters needed to determine whether the Atoka
Sandstone might produce.
You have the following information: (1) resistivity of
formation water (R
w
) = 0.065 at T
f
from your logging
engineer; (2) resistivity of mud filtrate (Rmf) = 0.65 at Tf
from the log header and corrected to formation temperature
by the Arps equation (see Chapter I); (3) temperature of the
formation (T
f
) = 187F from the estimation of formation
temperature chart (see Chapter I); and (4) the surface
temperature = 75F from an estimation by the well site
geologist.
Complete the following Pennsylvanian Atoka Sandstone
Log Evaluation Table (work Table A). Five depths were
selected for your convenience and are listed in the table.
You may find this list of formulas helpful as you pursue
your calculations:
Neutron Density PorosityValues for neutron (N) and
density (D) porosity read on neutron-density log (Fig. 55).
N-D ~ V
2
+ 4>N
2
4>1
R, MinimumValue for LL-8* from log reading (Fig. 54)
used to correct R
1Ld
* to R, in thin, resistive zones (Chapter
III).
R,
min
= (LL-8* orSFL*) X (R
w
/R
mf
)
Water Saturation ArchieHers, 4> is the value of <j>
N
.
D
from the neutron-density formula. Also, in this example, R,
is equal to either R,
mi
or to R, from the tornado chart in
Appendix 6 (page 212).
\ a
0-81
v
Rw
02 R,
Water Saturation RatioValue for R
M
is from the
shallow Laterolog* (Fig. 54). R, value is the larger value
when R
tmin
formula and tornado chart R
t
are compared.
S
wr
= [(R
TO
/R
t
)/(R
mf
/R
w
)]-
625
Moveable Hydrocarbon Index:
S
w
/S
xo
= [(R
X0
/Rt)/(R
mf
/R
w
)F
2
Water Saturation Corrected:
' S \0-25
Bulk Volume WaterPorosity (0) in this example is
neutron-density porosity (0N-D)-
BVW = 0 x S
wa
Residual Oil SaturationS
xo
is water saturation of
flushed zone calculated by: S
xo
= [0.81/02 x (R
m<
/R
M
)]
1/2
ROS= 1.0 - S
I 0
Moveable Oil Saturation:
MOS = S
xo
- S
w
Irreducible Water SaturationFormation factor (F)
equal to O.81/0
2
in consolidated sands (see Table 1). This
formula calculates an approximate value for irreducible
water saturation. It should be used only in crossplots where
you are trying to determine the relative permeabilities: K
ro
,
K
rg
, andK
m
.
S
wirr
= VF/2000
Volumetric Recoverable Gas ReservesVariables defined
in introduction to case studies.
G
r
= 43,560 x drainage area (DA) x reservior
thickness (h) x porosity (0) x hydrocarbon
saturation (S
h
) x gas volume factor (B
gi
) x
recovery factor (RF)
142
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
:A:
ian Atoka Sandstone Log Evaluation Table
Work Tabic
Pennsylvan
m
J
C
O
D
O
6
C
Q
C
Q
0
a
h
p
e
f
i
e
*
LL8 ILm ILd
I
0
2
0
2
q
0
5
1.00 100
2
c
o
r
H
100 75.9
0
2
0
2
r
N
17.5 1000 220 120 14604
17.5 6.5
r
H
0
2
1150 200 160
24.5
0
5
C
O
r
H
1700 350 270
14608
14612
0
2
10.5
0
5
r
H
450 190 160 14616
22.5 9.5 17.5 350 130
O
0
5
14620
asion by tornado chart (Chapter III) . for inv rrected
o
u
a
t
i
i
1
e
S
4
1
4
3
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
SPONTANEOUS-POTENTIAL
- | * - H + MILLIVOLTS
8AMMA RAY API UNITS
0 125
125 26 0
///
~~_
,
- -
-/-
s
/
J
<r
i
I ,
/ / / / ,
_
a*
s
-(
r
J
*
>'
^
?
J,
?
r
v*
\
-
- -"
*=>_
s
<?
_^
-
a"
^ *
'/
,
'
s
*"
'
.._.
,
/ / / //
"
r3
?
r
/
/
'
3
\
i
/
r
V
\
z j ...
_i
n
3
_L
^
i
^
^
,
zn
1
4-
f-
r
- s
:
-t
r-
\
\
i
/
I
\
)
/
[ -*- sJ^J^V.--- J ^-c^^-^c-^^
RUN 2
( OIL)
146 00
RESISTIVITY OHMS. M' / II
LATEROLOG
0.2 1.0 10 100 I000200C
1 | T
MEDIUM INDUCTION
0.2 1.0 10 IftO IQCQ200I
DEEP INDUCTION
0.2 1.0 10 100 1000 2OO0
'..'.'
DEPTH
BIT SIZE
m
T
4
T
4
~f
J
- I
I
T
T
T
T
I
4
1
"
TYPE FLUID IN HOLE
RM al meaa. tamp.
U
*T
-*3
*
~ir
5 TT1
1596 2
8 - 1/2
FRESH MUD
1.6 7 ot 87 F
-
7 TTT
" " [ "
...
+
.
^f
i
T
T
I
L
1
-
RMF at meas. tmp.
_
r =
r "
^r
ff.S
>,
-"
=
_
1_
.
1.34 at
1
6 7 F
RMC at maaa. tamp. 3. 34 at 8 7 F
MAX . REC. TEMP. 197 T
|
>
Figure 54. Dual Induction Laterolog* with Spontaneous Potential and Gamma Ray Log, Pennsylvanian Atoka Sandstone,
Permian basin. Values from this log are used in work Table A.
At a depth of 14,600 to 14,625 ft, note:
1. High resistivities on resistivity logs in tracks #2 and #3.
2. Hydrocarbon suppression of SP log in track #1 (solid line).
3. Gamma ray log (track # 1 dashed line) has lower gamma ray count in Atoka Sandstone interval because sands
have lower radioactivity than shales.
144
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
CALIPER DIAN. IN INCHES RUN 2 POROSITY MDEX (%) LIME , , ,
l_ _ COMPENSATED FORMATON DENSITY POROSITY
SO 20 10 0 -10
, , ,
GAMMA RAY API UNITS
0 126 COMPENSATED NEUTRON POROSITY
I
Figure 5 5 . Combination Neutron-Density Log with Gamma Ray Log and caliper, Pennsylvanian Atoka Sandstone, Permian
basin. Values from this log are used in work Table A.
From a depth of 14,600 to 14,625 ft, note:
1. Strong gas effect, tracks #2 and #3 (i.e. density log reads much higher porosities than the neutron log) and
high porosity values on neutron-density logs in tracks #2 and #3.
2. Mudcake on caliper log in track #1 (dashed line). Mudcake is indicated because the hole diameter, as shown
on the caliper log, is getting smaller.
145
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Figure 5 6. Computer processed Cyberlook* Log, Pennsylvanian Atoka Sandstone, Permian basin.
From a depth of 14,600 to 14,625 ft, note:
1. Low water saturations (indicated on left side of track #3) and high porosities (indicated by curve on right-hand
side of track #3) calculated by Cyberlook* Log.
2. Shading in track #2 indicates separation between wet resistivity (R(,) and deep resistivity (Rim). The greater
the separation, the greater the hydrocarbon saturation.
146
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 1 Answer
A careful examination of the logs recorded through the
Atoka Sandstone provides the following information. On
the caliper log (Fig. 55), mudcake development is shown by
the decreasing hole size. This mudcake development is
important because it indicates a permeable zone. Mudcake
forms by the accumulation of solid particles from drilling
muds on the borehole walls when a porous and permeable
zone is invaded with drilling fluids. The SP log (Fig. 54)
shows hydrocarbon suppression because the SP reading is
less than SSP. Such suppression suggests the presence of
hydrocarbons; sample shows and the neutron-density log
response (Fig. 55) through the Atoka tell you that in this
case the hydrocarbons will probably be gas. The density log
(Fig. 55) reads a much higher porosity than the neutron log.
When this occurs, it is because of gas effect.
If water saturation Archie (S^) and porosity (0) values
are crossplotted (Fig. 57), a grain size variation of
medium-grained to coarse-grained is shown on the plot.
This supports sample cutting examination which indicates a
medium-grained to coarse-grained sandstone.
Crossplotting irreducible water saturation versus porosity
(see Fig. 58) reveals that the Atoka zone has good
permeability with values ranging from 10 to over 100
millidarcies (md). Another crossplot in Figure 59,
comparing a calculated irreducible water saturation (S
w m
=
VF/2000) with water saturation Archie, shows a high
relative permeability to gas (K,g). The high relative
permeability to gas (K
rg
) means there is a correspondingly
low permeability to water (K
re
). The reservoir, therefore,
should not produce water.
The values derived for both water saturation and bulk
volume water are low. These low values also indicate that
the Atoka Sandstone is a reservoir with a high gas saturation
at irreducible water saturation. Because water saturation
values are low, it follows that the reservoir must have high
gas saturation (remember: 1.0 - S
w
= hydrocarbon
saturation).
Other evidence that the reservoir is at irreducible water
saturation and has high gas saturations can be interpreted
from a crossplot (Fig. 60) of bulk volume water. This
crossplot is created by plotting water saturation Archie
versus porosity ($). The data points cluster along a
hyperbolic line and have, then, approximately equal values
for bulk volume water (BVW). Bulk volume water values
plotted along the hyperbolic line range from 0.015 to 0.027.
Their clustering also supports the conclusion that the
reservoir has high gas saturation at irreducible water
saturation.
Values calculated for residual oil saturation (ROS) are
high. This is anomalous because other evidence supports
the conclusion that the reservoir has high porosity and
permeability. Under these conditions, it could ordinarily be
expected that hydrocarbons would be moved out instead of
left behind in the rock. Furthermore, calculations of
moveable oil saturation (MOS) values are also low. Again,
this is initially puzzling because, in a good reservoir with
high porosity and permeability, these values should be high.
Additional anomalous information comes from the
calculation of the moveable hydrocarbon index. The values
are greater than 0.7, but (usually) favorable moveability
values are less than 0.7. Analyses of ROS, MOS, and the
moveable hydrocarbon index provide negative evidence that
hydrocarbons will move. Indeed, all of these factors suggest
that most of the hydrocarbons will remain in place in the
reservoir.
While information relating to inadequate hydrocarbon
moveability should not be ignored in initial log evaluation,
it can sometimes be explained in the following way. In this
case, what is significant is the high residual gas saturation in
the flushed zone (1.0 S
xo
= residual hydrocarbon
saturation). This high residual gas saturation is the result of
the bypassing of gas by drilling fluids invading a reservoir.
The high residual gas saturation left behind after invasion
can be erroneously read by the logs as unmoved
hydrocarbons (S
xo
< S
w
i; Chapter VI).
Even though you are concerned about negative
information from the drill penetration rate through the
Atoka Sandstone, and about the pessimistic moveability
data, you decide that the other evidence from sample
examination, gas shows, and log interpretation supports a
decision to set pipe. Log interpretation information
especially significant to your decision is: high porosities on
the neutron-density logs, strong gas effect on the
neutron-density logs, low water saturation calculated by the
Archie equation, high log-derived permeabilities from
various permeability crossplots, and the low bulk volume
water values. While you believe the well contains a
gas-filled Atoka Sandstone reservoir, you want to determine
whether or not the well will be a commercial success. To dc
so, you calculate volumetric gas reserves before making
your final pipe setting decision.
An estimation of Atoka Sandstone gas recovery of 11.0
BCF is calculated by using the following parameters:
geothermal gradient = 0.014 x formation depth; pressure
gradient = 0.35 x formation depth; drainage area = 560
acres; reservoir thickness = 15 ft; effective porosity =
15%; water saturation = 13%; gas gravity = 0.65; recovery
factor = 0.85; formation temperature = 205F; initial
bottom hole pressure = 5,117 PSI; Z factor = 0.988.
The Atoka Sandstone was perforated from 14,610 to
14,615 ft. The calculated absolute open flow (CAOF) was
21,900,000 cu ft of gas per day (21,900 mcfgpd) with a
high shut-in tubing pressure (SITP) of 3,758 pounds per
square inch (PSI) and a high initial bottom hole pressure
(IBHP) of 5,556 PSI. The gas gravity was 0.599 at a bottom
hole temperature of 219F. The well's first year cumulative
production was 3,268,129 mcf plus 95,175 barrels of
condensate.
147
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
s
f
S
B
.
2
1
vah
D
C
,
2
e
o
<
c
o
B
9
1
V
}
a
u
,
a
<
<
7
1
s
S
'
s
i
i
t
!
f
c
j <
i
i
w
O
-
<
-
o
S
o
C
O
f
e
^
(
P
f
c
o
J
o
C
Q
>
C
Q
C
Q
c
r
t
C
Q
O
^
5
J
>
-
H
>
&
o
o
1
M
3
M
,
C
+
3
0
.
f
t
t
o
r
-
l
z
s
t
-
*
t
o
0
2
0
5
0
2
q
t
o
r
H
i
H
c
p
t
-
c
-
0
5
H
C
O
r
-
l
1
0
-
*
O
O
c
o
o
0
2
C
O
C
O
O
0
2
O
C
O
^
O
o
C
O
o
Z
S
i
-
i
0
2
O
C
O
*
r
-
t
t
o
1
-
1
c
o
0
0
o
^
i
H
0
!
0
2
q
0
5
o
q
r
-
i
O
O
i
H
^
i
H
C
O
i
H
o
o
0
5
C
O
N
0
2
0
2
2
-
c
o
i
H
o
o
o
o
0
2
0
2
O
0
2
i
-
l
^
o
C
D
t
f
i
-
l
^
H
C
O
o
o
o
C
O
I
-
l
0
2
0
2
q
0
5
o
q
i
-
i
o
o
I
-
l
C
O
I
-
l
C
O
<
*
I
-
H
C
O
o
I
-
l
o
c
o
C
O
o
0
2
C
O
C
O
C
O
0
2
O
C
O
O
O
O
1
0
o
C
O
I
-
l
c
o
o
C
D
^
f
I
-
l
C
O
I
-
l
t
o
o
o
t
o
-
I
-
l
0
0
i
H
q
0
5
2
>
c
p
0
2
0
0
<
*
I
-
l
t
o
r
-
l
C
O
r
-
l
r
H
t
o
2
S
C
O
r
-
l
C
O
c
-
r
-
l
C
O
C
O
r
-
l
0
2
o
C
O
r
-
l
r
-
l
o
o
0
2
o
C
D
r
-
l
0
0
o
C
D
*
r
-
l
i
H
i
-
H
o
0
5
0
2
o
I
-
l
C
O
I
-
l
q
1
0
o
o
.
c
o
N
C
O
o
0
2
o
I
-
l
o
i
H
0
2
1
0
C
D
0
2
t
o
0
5
C
D
i
H
o
o
*
I
-
l
o
0
5
i
-
l
o
I
-
l
0
2
O
r
-
t
C
D
^
-
I
i
-
l
r
-
t
o
0
5
0
2
O
i
-
l
C
O
r
-
t
o
C
D
O
0
5
.
C
D
E
-
0
0
C
O
C
O
i
-
l
o
l
-
l
t
-
l
-
l
0
2
C
O
*
0
2
0
5
C
D
r
-
l
o
o
r
>
r
-
t
o
t
o
t
o
o
t
-
0
2
0
2
i
H
C
O
^
i
-
H
0
2
i
-
H
c
o
0
0
t
o
0
2
i
H
t
o
I
-
l
q
C
O
2
>
2
>
i
-
l
2
>
0
5
N
I
-
I
O
0
2
i
H
t
o
z
s
o
0
2
t
o
0
2
0
2
0
5
C
O
i
H
o
o
0
2
i
-
l
o
0
0
t
o
o
C
O
0
2
^
r
-
t
C
D
^
r
-
t
i
-
H
i
-
l
i
-
l
0
0
0
5
0
5
r
-
t
0
5
i
H
q
r
S
0
2
<
*
>
.
C
O
*
O
-
<
C
O
o
o
H
C
O
^
0
5
f
>
C
0
r
H
*
0
2
1
0
O
r
-
l
0
5
i
-
l
o
t
o
*
o
0
5
r
-
t
o
C
D
i
-
l
C
O
i
-
l
(
0
*
r
-
t
i
-
l
r
-
t
0
2
C
O
C
O
C
O
i
-
l
t
o
0
2
q
0
5
o
^
C
O
C
D
t
o
r
H
o
C
O
r
-
t
o
t
o
I
-
l
t
-
0
5
t
o
t
o
0
2
O
r
-
l
C
O
i
-
l
O
O
t
o
o
t
o
0
2
C
O
t
o
r
-
l
C
O
I
-
l
C
D
^
i
-
l
0
2
i
-
l
-
2
>
o
o
t
o
0
2
C
O
0
2
q
i
H
i
-
H
2
>
.
I
-
I
C
D
C
O
r
H
Z
S
i
-
H
t
o
t
o
C
D
t
-
2
>
C
O
0
2
0
2
C
O
0
5
C
O
Z
S
r
-
t
o
1
0
t
o
o
t
o
i
-
H
o
0
5
o
0
2
C
O
^
i
H
I
-
l
i
-
H
r
H
-
:
O
O
r
-
l
0
5
0
2
r
H
0
2
q
0
5
m
w
r
H
t
o
r
-
t
r
-
t
0
5
r
H
O
O
i
H
o
0
2
r
-
l
C
O
c
o
0
2
0
2
r
H
C
O
2
>
i
H
o
o
o
i
H
C
O
o
i
H
o
0
2
i
H
0
2
0
2
C
O
^
i
H
i
>
(
|
t
1
1
2
.
2
1
a
,
1
B
*
>
7
1
1
,
g
%
a
,
i
1
1
b
-
S
2
8
B
^
o
=
2
%
3
=
.
|
'
U
i
!
-
i
-
-
i
-
!
1
4
8
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Effec t of grain size
SW %
Figure 57. Grain size determination by water saturation (S
w
)
versus porosity (<) crossplot, Pennsylvanian Atoka
Sandstone, Permian basin.
Note:
Remember that water saturation Archie (S
wa
)
is equal to S
wirr
in zones at irreducible water
saturation.
7 8910 15 803030
Swirr %
Figure 5 8. Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus porosity
(<j>) crossplot for determining permeability,
Pennsylvanian Atoka Sandstone, Permian basin.
Note:
Remember that water saturation Archie (S
wa
) is
equal to S
w jrr
in zones at irreducible water
saturation.
149
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
sw %
Figure 5 9. Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
)t versus water
saturation (S
w
)tt crossplot for determining relative
permeability to gas (K
rg
), Pennsylvanian Atoka Sandstone,
Permian basin.
Note:
30 40 SO 6 0 TO 80 90
Swirr%
tS
w irr
= VF/2000 This formula calculates an
approximate, theoretical value for S
wirl
. Values
calculated for S
wirr
by this formula should only be
used in crossplots to determine relative
permeabilities: K
ro
, K
rg
, and K
w
.
tf In this example, S
w
is equal to water saturation
Archie (S
wa
).
%
Figure 60. Bulk volume water crossplot
(< vs. S
w
), Pennsylvanian Atoka Sandstone,
Permian basin.
C stands for bulk volume water.
Note:
Data points cluster along the 0.02
hyperbolic line; the closer they are to
the line, the closer you are to
irreducible water saturation (S
wirr
).
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 2
Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation
Williston Basin
An Ordovician Red River wildcat well is in progress in
the Williston basin. As drilling proceeds, two zonesthe
Mississippian Mission Canyon and Devonian
Duperoware encountered which have hydrocarbon
shows. The well has just penetrated the Devonian Duperow,
the second "show" zone. A decision is made to stop and
drill stem test (DST) the Duperow. Unfortunately, the drill
stem test tool fails and becomes firmly stuck. Several
attempts are made to remove the tool but none succeed.
Meanwhile, wall collapse (caving) begins to develop within
the well bore.
Now you face the choice of either halting drilling with the
hope that the first show zone, the Mississippian Mission
Canyon Formation, might be a productive reservoir or, of
continuing efforts to remove the DST tool. If the fish (the
stuck DST tool) is successfully removed from the hole, the
Duperow can be tested and drilling continued to the Red
River Formation. However, continued attempts to recover
the fish will undoubtedly lead to further deterioration of the
hole, and logging measurements taken when hole
conditions are poor, may be unreliable. Also, it is possible
the DST tool cannot be dislodged.
Because of the exploratory nature of the well, you made a
decision several weeks ago to core the Mission Canyon at a
depth of 9,302 to 9,358 ft. Twenty-five feet of oil-stained,
fractured, microcrystalline dolomite was recovered, and the
remaining core consisted of microcrystalline limestone and
anhydrite. After coring, se eral DST's were tried and when
none were successful, the well was drilled ahead.
You decide the information from coring is favorable
enough to halt drilling, to log to the top of the fish while
hole conditions appear still reasonably good, and then to
assess the potential of the Mission Canyon. Your company
agrees with your suggestion that a very complete log
package be run in the hole, since the well is exploratory and
carbonates can often be harder to evaluate than sandstones.
The following data are available to you: (1) resistivity of
the formation water (R
w
) at T
f
= 0.023; (2) resistivity of the
mud filtrate (R
m
f) at T
f
= 0.017; (3) temperature of the
formation (T
f
) = 207
C
F; (4) At
ma
= 44.4 /^sec/ft, which is
the interval transit time for a dolomite matrix (Table 6); (5)
At
f
= 185 /tsec/ft, which is the interval transit time of fluid
for saltwater mud (Chapter IV); (6) p
ma
= 2.82 gm/cc,
which is the matrix density for dolomite (Table 7); (7) p
f
=
1.1 gm/cc, which is the fluid density for saltwater mud
(Chapter IV); and (8) the surface temperature = 60F.
Preliminary examination of a Cyberlook* Log reveals
higher water saturations in the lower part of the Mission
Canyon Porosity zone (Fig. 66). Consequently, you decide
to begin your evaluation of the Mission Canyon by
developing a Pickett crossplot which will give you a quick
analysis of the distribution of the different water
saturations. Values from the log (Fig. 62) for neutron
porosity (<j)
N
) and from the log (Fig. 61) for deep resistivity
(RLLJ *), when crossplotted on two-by-three cycle log-log
paper, will show these water saturation distributions.
In order to establish an Rg line in the Pickett crossplot,
you use the following information:
R
0
= R
w
x F
Where 10% porosity, F = l/<2 or 100
R
0
= 0.023 x 100
or
R
0
= 2.3 ohm/meters
The slope of the R
0
line equals 2 (average slope for
carbonates).
Choose any five points (depths) in the following Mission
Canyon Log Evaluation Table (work Table B) and calculate
the values for the blank spaces (complete the Table for those
five depths).
After determining values for the different log parameters,
you can use the formula for volumetric calculation of
recoverable oil to evaluate the productive potential of the
Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation. The formula for
volumetric calculation of recoverable oil is:
7758 x DA x h x (/> x S
h
x RF
BOI
Parameters used in your calculations of recoverable oil are:
drainage area (DA) = 150 acres; reservoir thickness (h) =
28 ft; porosity (tf>) = 11%; water saturation (S
w
) = 33.5%;
recovery factor = 20%; and reservoir barrels per stock tank
barrel (BOI) = 1.35. When the equation is solved for N
r
the resulting value for N
r
represents stock tank barrels. A
stock tank barrel is oil recovered at the surface after
shrinkage has occurred as gas separates.
The Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation Log
Evaluation Table (work Table B) has already been partly
completed for you. Fill in the rest of the table as you
proceed with your calculations.
151
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
.
0
g
,
2
+
-
3
W
s
*
J
s
o
0
u
>
e
o
ion Can
K
S
a
-
.
2
s
a
.
5
.
H
"
3
5
1
M
m
C
O
.
o
o
a
O
O
M
>
o
X
C
O
- E
g
C
O
C
Q
Q
S
3
*
*
d
f
O
o
&
9
C
Q
"
9
H
H
i
n
f
l
p
.
O
0
2
0
0
"
c
o
C
O
<
*
l
-
(
"
t
o
r
H
C
O
t
o
0
0
o
t
o
a
>
C
O
c
-
t
o
0
)
*
0
!
r
H
0
2
0
2
N
0
2
O
H
t
o
0
3
o
*
i
o
o
o
o
0
2
i
t
o
;
o
0
2
O
C
D
0
2
-
I
t
o
0
3
c
o
C
O
r
H
0
2
I
D
O
r
-
i
C
O
t
o
0
3
^
r
-
l
C
O
0
!
t
o
0
3
0
2
-
i
-
"
C
O
C
D
r
-
\
0
2
0
2
C
D
C
O
C
O
0
2
C
O
t
o
0
3
t
-
0
2
0
2
0
3
O
0
2
i
-
H
r
-
l
C
O
t
f
C
D
r
H
C
D
C
O
c
o
0
3
^
s
f
0
2
0
3
C
O
C
O
0
2
*
0
2
C
O
0
0
r
H
C
O
C
O
t
o
0
3
0
3
0
2
t
o
C
O
t
-
r
H
0
3
C
D
C
O
C
O
0
2
O
*
C
O
0
3
t
o
C
O
C
D
r
H
0
2
C
O
t
-
;
0
2
*
C
D
#
C
O
0
3
-
C
O
C
O
0
2
r
*
0
2
C
D
r
-
l
0
2
0
2
C
O
0
2
C
O
t
o
0
3
C
D
C
D
C
O
C
O
c
o
0
2
r
H
r
H
C
O
0
2
C
O
*
C
O
c
o
0
3
1
t
-
C
O
C
O
N
2
>
-
-
I
0
3
r
H
0
2
C
O
c
o
*
C
D
2
>
t
o
0
3
s
c
o
*
C
O
c
o
r
H
C
D
r
H
J
-
r
-
i
C
D
c
o
C
D
C
O
c
o
0
3
1
5
2
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
_f
CALIPER < MM. in I n t o !
If
t SAMWA HAY API mi i l a 10 0
10 0 t O O
_ j
^
c
\
^ r
?X
^ f
^ i
?
%
t x
-!
1
i '
< 1
-Xui
i +
- ^ +
-?i
/ \
S
/ V . , 1
/ .
-J-J
~i j
i a
J
' i
1
i T
J
~
3 * ^
IHV
BR
E l l
Mi
= T
300
400
|
L
R E S I S T I V I T Y M M . M %
MI C RO - S F L
0 . 2 1. 0 10 IO O I 0 0 0 10 0 C
SHALLO W L AT ERO L O G - L L >
0. 2 1. 0 10 10 0 I 0 0 0 2 0 0 C
DEEP L A T E R O L O S - L L <
0 . 2 LO 10 10 0 l O O O f O O O
- 3 :
DEPTH
WT
e
^
V "
BIT SI ZE
TYPE FLUID IN HOLE
a i
7t
~
=
r~
r
s
=
,
_
-^
"
m.
- ;
z :
Z I
-
J :
"\
= ;
:
~ T^
V
_ _
^ :
S;
^ 5
, i
z _
T *
M
? .
J -
r p
nti
Tnt
J t u 4
K S
- * r
= ^
P. . J. *
-*-
^
l
5
j L
"
l
"
'-^
* -
r " T
*1
T
5
"
3 M
^
*
,1,22
8 V4
SALT MUD
RM at meas. t emp | 05 6 at 7 4 F
=
a
2
^ 7
-
fe
II
i *
:
IP
-*
^
HZ
r *
-
r
.,
r-"
5 T-
L__
= =
- -
i " - -
I V "a
# M
RMF al m
UA
- X ,
% ' *-
4- .
ea% t emp
C at meas temp.
X HEC. TEMP.
T 1
4 ]
i i I
J LLI
1
f i
1
."5
04 6 ot 7 4 F
- - at - - F
Ther momet er Br oke
Figure 61. Dual Laterolog*MSFL* with gamma ray log and caliper, Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, Williston
basin.
From a depth of 9,308 to 9,408 ft, note:
1. The separation of the three resistivity logs which read the following resistivities:
R
MSFL* (Rxo)low resistivity
RLLS (Ri)intermediate resistivity
Riid (R
t
)high resistivity
2. This type of resistivity profile on a Dual Laterolog*MSFL* indicates the presence of hydrocarbons (see
Chapter I; Fig. 7B).
15 3
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
CALI ( IN)
i< ( AM
100.0
TIM ( Li )
0.0
OPHI ( )
o.sooo
o . io o o
-
_NPHI_(^ t _
LIMESTONE
-0.100
" -"oiob
III!
Figure 62. Combination Neutron-Density Log with gamma ray log and caliper, Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation,
Williston basin.
From a depth of 9,308 to 9,408 ft, note:
1. The high porosities on the neutron and density logs (tracks #2 and #3) .
2. The neutron log reads higher porosity than the density log indicating the lithology is dolomite (tracks # 2 and #3) .
15 4
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
CALI ( IN)
6 . 000 H. 00
R ( UPI)
0. 0
<*'
_J
\
1
s
(
\ V
s
\
_
\
I i
1
t
,'
V
1
,' '1
V i
A
3
,;
,(.
V ^ ' l
kC
>
-fc
r-
!< i
k
V,
1
1
r>
N
i
f,
V
'X
?
\J
"i
r-J
W\
< tn
n
ID
IP
10
1
_
0. 0
- -
L-c
DRHO IS/ C 9) J
- 0. 0S0 0. 4B 001
RO ( O HHM)
1. 000 ! 10000.
SHO I ( 8 / C 5 )
2. 000
^ > ~ i
Ed
<
<
-^
s-
\
<
t
\
^ H
5
-f
1
i
<
/
V
^
.
*-
-.
X
_ L
-*.
^r:
-.
S^
^
" ~ t
"~^
^=
T*"
=
S
=*rJ k?-^
*
1
=
^
1
-
"*"
^
7*
'
--
~
^r j
I^- N! -^-n
.
c r;
*--
-*
,
<
^-v-1
*=
1 .
1
- J .
!
=^
.
^
^
^
*
-*
^
- r j
m
-e*
r
< *
v
^ r = *
_r
S
s-~
u
^
=^
W
~ I
s > - \
JJ*-
^-^
,
U?
t
-*;
?
' c
'
'
n
m
$k
y
==
r ^
I Z
1
.
\
r
,
I
-^=
3
S= " w
^"^
-
0 0
^
_
-
*
0
=
-
,
^
7= ::
,
"
^
Figure 63. Density log with F curve, gamma ray log and caliper, Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
From a depth of 9,308 to 9,354 ft, note:
The increased amount of correction on the bulk density correction curve (A
p
). This increase on the correction curve may
indicate the presence of fractures in the Mission Canyon (tracks #2 and #3).
155
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
CALI ( IN)
( . 000 W.00
* ( ( ATI)
OLC
=i
g
-
-
f
t
e
-x
-<
i
i
4
-
^
H
T-
"*
<
SI
4
r-*
*
1
1
4
t
1
-*
- t -
1
4
l _
|
L-
+:
>
T"
k-
"T"
d
1
-N*
0
!-
*=
IMV
CA
lA
IP
^4^-0< AiH^OvA^J^^4
LM^
10
t. _
0. 0
>
tso o
4 0 0 "
DT ( 1
TINI ( Li)
16 6 00. 0.0
J*/ F)
0. 00 40. 00
PHI ( )
0.1
H
\00t
i 1
ON
)
ILL
:u LU
OMIS
'
tEC 3N0
( \f
- U AVI
LIMESTONE
22
^
u i
s * -
n
u-
-"
:d
^
^
a
c
e
^
^
^
4*
s
^
2
^
k .
^
^_
5
< *
H
p
-
*
F
tr-
"Jjw
Tn
>s
&=
/ -
*
*
>
5^
7 *
1
>-
0.1>0
Figure 64. Sonic log with gamma ray log and caliper, Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
From a depth of 9,308 to 9,408, note:
The numerous porosity zones indicated by the increasing interval transit time (At) on tracks #2 and #3.
156
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
BOREHOLE CORRECTED
AMMA RAT
API
0 100
APPARENT
RAIN DENSITY
f n i M / c e
1. 5 9. 0
mmm
RESISTIVITY o hm. m
APPARENT
%
O l LO 10 100 IOOC
APPARENT
FLUID RESISTIVITY
0. 01 0.1 LO 10 ItX
= " 11
II
- T . . I
i l
:
i i
' I I I
PASS ONE
<t m<
mi
= j i n
f r i l l
III
H I M ap=
mi a i d
mi
IIIIIII H I
. . 1 H V
Hl l l i MI
IIHHI M l
Ml IIII *
l ai i Mi aai
I
IIIIIK17
" UHF^
ffl 1
- lillli,-
i nl l t j
|Mlj l>
" II *
IIIIIIH
*.
' I
-
D
D
1
ffl
v
i nn
POROSITY
2. 71 - L . S.
NDEX
MATRIX
COMPENSATED FORMATION
DENSITY POROSITY
40 -10
4 0
4 0
COMP
NCUTROI
1
APPARE
POR
^
<
-^
'
-
^.
IT'
_^
-~"
" - I
__
~7
* *
!
f
k
'
L_
~
-
"7=
*
i r
C N!
P
NT"
} s n
P*a
*
sm-
' ,
t i
^
e *
_1
v
5-
t
'-..
-
< i
I?
iL
-
, i*i;
r-"i
-J
r -
-4
=rJ
ATED
OROSIT
TO TAL
Y
-."-!
V,
UJ
i i 3
p *
Jr
1
t
.
s*
>
U
52
i i
s
3
gE
s
*
^j
>,'
s
si
*
j
<
i -
T
r
h
e *
1
dk-
^
i *
?
r?
r. -r^
r -
5
^>
Y
-*
^
i
^
^
- r
^_
3
__
*-
z
t {~
JL,
^
1
s-
?
r_
10
r
i
=
__
k .
__
Figure 65. Computer processed Cyberlook* Log (pass-one), Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
Note:
1. The data on this log is used to generate the pass-two Cyberlook* Log (Fig. 66).
2. Pass-one is used as a check of the computer's input of logging parameters before the pass-two log is
generated (Fig. 66).
157
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
MAIN MNMTY
f . t t * / 1.0
g
; s
11 =
:5
-**
=5"
Figure 66. Computer processed Cyberlook* Log (pass-two), Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
From a depth of 9,360 to 9,408 ft, note:
The higher water saturations over this interval, indicating the lower part of the Mission Canyon Formation is
probably water productive (wet).
158
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 2 Answer
The very complete log package run in this well includes
an electric log suite for resistivity measurements, and both a
Combination Neutron-Density Log and a sonic log for
porosity measurements. A Cyberlook* or computer
processed log is also part of the package. It is used for a
quick look examination of the well to identify zones with
low water saturations (i.e. possible productive zones).
Because the borehole has experienced some caving
problems, your assessment begins with a careful check of
the caliper log (Fig. 61). The caliper log shows a relatively
constant hole diameter and no intervals of significant hole
enlargement due to washout. The constancy of the hole
diameter means log measurements should be reliable.
\four next evaluation step includes an examination of the
resistivity logs (Fig. 61). The salt saturated drilling mud
(R
mf
R
w
) in the well has necessitated using a Dual
Laterolog* with a Microspherically Focused Log (MSFL*).
The MSFL* measures the resistivity of the flushed zone
(R
xo
), while the Laterolog* shallow (LLS) and Laterolog*
deep (LLD) measure the resistivities of the invaded (Rj) and
uninvaded (R
t
) zones, respectively.
You begin scrutinizing these resistivity logs to identify
invasion profiles. Invasion profiles help you locate zones
which merit a more detailed analysis.
Between depths of 9,308 and 9,415 ft, the resistivity
logsMSFL*, LLS, and LLDread different values for
R
xo
, Rj, and R
t
; and the curves separate. The curve
separation suggests that invasion has taken place and
hydrocarbons are present in porous and permeable zones
occurring intermittently over the interval.
1
' However, you
note that the lower porosity zones from 9,370 to 9,415 ft
have less separation between the Microspherically Focused
Log* (MSFL* reading R
xo
; see Fig. 61) and the deep
Laterolog* (LLD reading R^ see Fig. 61). The lessening of
separation in the lower zones indicates higher water
saturations (remember: higher water saturations mean lower
hydrocarbon saturations).
Porous and permeable zones, which occur intermittently
over the interval from 9,308 to 9,415 ft, are identified by
analyzing the Combination Neutron-Density Log (Fig. 62),
the density log (Fig. 63), and the sonic log (Fig. 64).
Approximately eleven different porous and permeable
zones can be identified on these logs from a depth of 9,308
to 9,415 ft. On the Combination Neutron-Density Log (Fig.
62), the zones of porosity and permeability are seen by an
increase in both neutron and density porosity. They appear
tOf course, the reverse would be true in a salt saturated mud system if all
three resistivity curvesMSFL*, LLS, and LLDhad essentially the
same values and separation did not occur. You would then conclude either
invasion hadn 't occurred or hydrocarbons weren't present.
on the density log (Fig. 63) as a decrease in bulk density
(p
b
). Finally, they are identified on the sonic log by an
increase in the interval transit time (At).
A check of the Cyberlook* Log (Fig. 66) verifies that the
lower Mission Canyon zones from 9,370 to 9,415 ft have
higher water saturations. You note in track #3 of the
Cyberlook* Log an increase in water saturations with
increasing depth.
Further verification of water problems from a depth of
9,370 to 9,415 ft comes from a Pickett crossplot (Fig. 67).
On the plot, data points with water saturations above 35%
are mostly from lower zones.
As you continue your evaluation of the Mission Canyon,
you decide to compare your observations of the core
lithologies with lithologies derived from log data. Your
study of the core indicates it is microcrystalline dolomite,
limestone and anhydrite, lb compare this information with
log data, you construct a MID* plot, a neutron-density
porosity crossplot, and an M-N* plot. (Ordinarily you
would probably construct only one of these lithology plots
when evaluating a well, but all are presented here as a
learning experience.)
By crossplotting (At
nia
)
a
t
versus (p
ma
)
a
t
on a MID* plot
(Fig. 68), you determine that the interval you are studying
has a matrix which varies from dolomite to dolomitic
limestone. And, because the average (At,,,.,);, is 44.4/xsec/ft
(Fig. 69) and the average (p
ma
)
a
is 2.82 gm/cc (Fig. 70), the
interval has an average lithology of limey dolomite.
The neutron-density crossplot (Fig. 71) shows porosities
varying from 4 to 17%. The clustering of points between
dolomite and limestone supports a judgement that lithology
is a limey dolomite.
An M-N* plot (Fig. 72) suggests the presence of
secondary porosity because many data points are plotted
above the calcite-dolomite lithology tie-line. Once more,
like the MID* and the neutron-density crossplots, the M-N*
plot indicates a lithology varying from dolomite to
dolomitic limestone.
Another crossplot (Fig. 73) is useful for establishing
grain size. A plot of water saturation (S
w
) versus porosity
(4>) shows grain size variations from coarse-grained to
fine-grained. However, data which cluster in the area of
coarse or larger grain sizes probably don't reflect the grain
size of the intercrystalline porosity. Rather, this data
clustering in the larger size areas may, instead, reflect
vuggy porosity. Data which cluster above very fine-grained
tThe value for (M
ma
)
3
is obtained by crossplotting (Fig. 69) interval transit
time (At) with neutron porosity (0N). A crossplot (Fig. 70) of bulk density
(pb) versus neutron porosity ((J>N) provides a value of (p
ma
)
a
- See Chapter
VII, or in the book, Log Interpretation Manual,I Applications,
(Schlumberger, 1974).
159
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
are from lower porosity zones in the Mission Canyon
interval. These data points above very fine-grained are
probably also above irreducible water saturation (S
wirr
) and,
therefore, cannot be used for determining grain size.
At this juncture in your log evaluation of the
Mississippian Mission Canyon from 9,308 to 9,415 ft, you
are optimistic about the productive potential of the well. On
logs, the interval shows invasion, it has intermittent
permeable and porous zones, and its rock typedolomite
is usually a good reservoir rock. But, you are concerned
about whether or not completion should be attempted from
the lower zones of the interval, especially from 9,370 to
9,415 ft. The Cyberlook* Log examination, the diminishing
separation of the resistivity curves with increasing depth,
and the high water saturations on the Pickett crossplot all
strongly support your judgement that production from the
lower porosity zones in the Mission Canyon interval will
not be water-free. You don't know, though, how much
water these zones will produce relative to oil.
Because you are primarily concerned about the water
saturations in the lower Mission Canyon interval, you
continue your log evaluation by comparing the relative
permeability to water (K
w
), relative permeability to oil
(K
ro
), and percent water-cut.
Relative permeabilities to water (K
TO
) of different zones
are shown on a crossplot of S
w irr
f vs. S
w
(Fig. 74). Data
points, clustering on or below the zero permeability to water
line, represent zones from which water-free production can
be expected. Data points above the zero line represent zones
which will produce some water; the amount of water
produced will increase as the points are further away from
the zero K
TO
line.
Relative permeabilities to oil (K
ro
) of different zones are
shown on a crossplot of S
wirr
vs. S
w
(Fig. 75). Data points,
clustering around the 100% (K
ro
= 1.0) line, represent
zones which should produce 100% oil. Data points, with
increasing distance from the 100% line, indicate zones
which will produce increasing amounts of water.
The relative permeability to water (K^,) and oil (K
ro
)
plots illustrate that some of the zones in the Mission Canyon
will produce water. However, neither plot gives information
about the amount of water each zone will produce. To
determine the amount or percent of water which can be
expected from each zone, you construct a water-cut
crossplot.
The water-cut crossplot (Fig. 76) reveals a percent
water-cut variation from 0 to a high of 50%. The percent of
water produced, however, shouldn't exceed 30% and will
generally be less than 15%. Higher water-cut values are
from lower porosity zones; therefore, the lower porosity
zones should not be perforated.
tRemember to use the formula Swirr = VF/2,000 in crossplots of: K
ro
, Krw, K
rg
.
In order to support your decision to avoid perforating the
lower zones, you construct a bulk volume water (BVW)
crossplot (Fig. 77). On the bulk volume water plot, data
points above 0.035 are from lower porosity zones which are
not at irreducible water saturation, and so these zones will
produce some water.
The position of data points on a bulk volume water
crossplot can indicate changes in types of carbonate
porosity. Points which are below 0.035 represent zones with
vuggy porosity, along with intercrystalline porosity (Table
8).
Even though you have examined crossplots of relative
permeabilities which gave you information about the
relationship between fluids in porous zones, you want more
specific information about each zones's permeability. This
information is provided by a permeability plot of S
w
;. vs. </>
(Fig. 78). Most of the data points plot with permeability
values which are considered favorable in your area. Values
range from 0.1 to over 100 millidarcies, but generally
indicate a good reservoir.
One of your last log evaluation procedures is finding
values for the moveable hydrocarbon index (S
w
/S
xo
), for
moveable oil saturation (MOS), and for residual oil
saturation (ROS). The moveable hydrocarbon index value is
less than 0.7, and so the oil is moveable. Oil moveability is
also apparent from the high moveable oil saturation and low
residual oil saturation values.
Your log evaluation of this particular well has been
unusually complete. The extensive evaluation has, in part,
been necessitated by the exploratory nature of the well and
also by the water problems presented in the lower porosity
zones of the Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation.
Furthermore, because of the log package used in the well, a
large amount of data was available for analysis.
It was apparent rather early in the log evaluation process
that the data seemed to support a decision to set pipe.
Nevertheless, it was important to know the correct interval
for perforating so that water production could be kept as low
as possible.
The estimated oil recovery from the Mission Canyon
Formation for a gross interval of 9,308 to 9,357 ft is
353,110 stock tank barrels (STB). This oil recovery figure
is based on the following parameters: drainage area = 150
acres; reservoir thickness = 28 ft; porosity =11%; water
saturation = 33.5%; recovery factor = 20%; and BOI
(estimated) =1. 35.
The Mission Canyon Formation was selectively
perforated from 9,308 to 9,357 ft. After a light acid
clean-up, the well potential was 569 barrels of oil per day
(BOPD), 31 barrels of water a day (BWPD), and 700,000
cubic feet of gas per day (700 mcfgpd) with a gas/oil ratio of
1,230/1. During the first five months, the well produced
56,495 barrels of oil and 5,802 barrels of water.
160
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
"
"
"
!
1
1
Evalua
e
s
s
e
1
*
f
e
.sion Can
Ikble
ppian
sw er
ssissi
t
e
,
f
<
o
f
c
8
6
a
.
a
)
b
i
l
X
C
O
0
0
<
f
<
1
f
e
C
>
0
0
o
r
t
C
D
O
a
>
o
X
C
Q
5
0
9
c
6
o
!
z
i
p
T
p
a
I
I
I
d
d
d
f
l
P
i
I
D
P
O
0
2
0
)
Z
S
0
2
C
O
C
O
*
O
2
-
c
q
t
o
t
o
c
q
o
i-
H
r
H
i
H
t
o
i
-
H
o
C
D
0
2
O
c
o
0
2
0
2
O
O
*
o
*
t
o
t
o
o
C
D
C
O
0
2
O
0
2
i
-
H
i
-
H
0
2
0
0
^
C
O
C
O
i
H
<
J
<
t
o
r
H
C
O
t
o
C
O
o
t
o
0
>
0
2
r
H
C
O
0
0
0
2
t
o
0
2
^
O
S
r
H
t
o
C
D
C
O
0
0
i-
H
0
2
r
H
C
O
r
H
N
C
O
0
2
t
o
C
D
C
O
0
2
O
t
s
0
2
O
C
O
0
5
i-
H
*
t
-
0
2
r
H
"
*
i-
H
o
o
r
H
C
O
-
t
o
0
1
t
0
2
-
H
0
2
0
2
2
-
0
2
O
r
H
t
o
0
5
C
O
r
H
o
0
5
0
2
o
o
r
H
*
o
o
C
D
0
5
o
C
O
Z
S
o
o
2
-
o
2
-
0
2
C
O
C
O
Z
S
r
H
Q
C
O
Z
S
t
o
I
-
H
3
*
0
2
o
-
t
f
0
2
i
-
H
<
*
-
H
o
^
c
o
o
o
w
C
O
r
H
o
0
2
O
C
O
0
2
I
-
H
t
o
0
5
^
t
o
C
O
0
0
0
2
Z
S
*
*
c
o
t
o
c
q
0
2
0
)
Z
s
C
O
C
O
0
2
C
O
2
>
0
2
0
2
C
O
t
o
i
-
H
o
C
O
*
t
o
Z
S
t
q
*
<
C
O
0
5
0
2
O
0
2
C
O
C
O
r
H
C
O
t
o
r
H
*
f
1
o
r
H
*
i
-
H
O
C
O
o
o
r
H
"
*
i
r
H
1
t
o
0
5
0
0
0
2
0
5
z
s
0
2
0
0
^
^
C
D
C
D
C
O
C
O
t
o
C
O
C
O
c
o
0
0
O
O
C
D
0
2
t
o
C
O
C
O
t
o
o
0
2
i
-
H
^
^
<
o
c
q
c
o
t
o
0
2
*
>
*
*
0
0
t
o
0
0
i-
H
0
2
C
O
c
i
r
H
C
O
t
o
0
5
^
r
H
C
O
0
2
t
o
0
5
O
0
2
I
-
H
0
0
0
2
C
O
t
f
Z
S
1
0
C
O
C
O
t
o
C
O
c
o
0
5
i-
H
r
H
t
o
C
D
0
2
0
0
C
O
C
O
^
<
->
0
)
r
H
o
*
I
-
H
c
q
r
H
C
O
c
o
*
r
H
*
r
H
r
H
0
2
r
H
i
-
H
C
O
C
D
r
H
0
2
0
2
C
D
C
O
c
o
0
2
C
O
t
o
0
5
*
r
H
0
2
c
o
0
2
Z
>
-
0
2
<
*
c
o
*
I
D
2
-
C
D
C
O
C
O
0
5
C
O
i
-
H
N
C
O
0
2
C
O
C
O
i
-
H
t
o
o
0
5
i-
H
r
H
C
D
C
O
i
-
H
0
0
0
0
r
H
r
H
0
2
C
O
C
O
i
-
H
Z
S
0
2
0
2
0
5
O
0
2
r
H
r
H
C
O
^
C
D
r
H
C
O
t
o
t
o
0
5
0
2
r
H
C
D
O
O
0
2
t
o
r
H
f
0
2
0
2
c
q
z
>
C
D
C
O
0
0
0
5
C
O
i-
H
Z
S
C
O
0
2
C
O
C
O
i
-
H
t
o
q
t
o
C
O
o
c
o
C
O
s
^
O
O
0
2
z
s
r
H
O
O
i-
H
<
*
<
J
<
0
2
0
5
C
O
t
o
0
2
*
0
2
C
O
0
0
r
H
0
0
t
o
c
o
0
5
0
0
r
H
*
C
O
0
2
o
o
t
o
^
<
C
O
t
o
c
q
0
5
r
H
Q
0
0
0
5
O
i
-
H
C
O
C
O
0
2
o
o
C
O
C
D
0
2
o
C
O
C
D
*
r
H
o
<
9
C
O
t
o
t
o
C
O
r
H
0
2
C
O
0
2
i
-
H
0
5
0
2
t
o
C
O
Z
s
r
-
t
0
5
C
O
C
O
t
o
0
2
O
*
c
o
0
5
0
2
C
O
C
O
C
O
0
2
C
O
t
f
<
*
0
5
*
c
q
C
D
r
H
.
C
O
C
O
C
O
t
o
2
-
0
2
0
2
C
O
C
D
i
-
H
q
0
5
0
2
o
C
O
o
t
o
i-
H
N
0
2
0
2
i-
H
0
2
2
S
C
O
t
o
o
r
H
r
H
'
C
O
d
i
H
z
v
-
f
r
H
o
2
S
0
2
"
t
t
o
0
5
C
O
i
-
H
C
O
0
0
0
2
*
t
o
^
t
o
0
2
C
O
C
O
l-
i
Q
r
H
0
2
r
H
0
2
r
-
f
r
-
l
C
D
0
2
0
2
C
O
C
O
C
D
q
o
C
D
C
D
^
^
.
o
o
r
-
l
C
O
t
o
t
f
<
<
C
O
r
H
t
o
C
O
C
D
r
H
0
2
C
O
2
>
0
2
^
C
D
^
c
o
0
5
C
O
i-
H
0
5
c
o
o
i
r
-
\
c
o
^
t
o
o
c
q
o
0
5
2
V
O
r
H
r
H
r
H
0
5
t
s
C
D
0
2
r
H
C
O
0
5
C
O
q
o
C
O
r
H
t
o
C
O
c
q
o
f
-
0
5
*
0
5
c
o
C
O
r
H
t
-
C
O
C
O
0
2
r
H
0
2
C
O
r
H
0
2
0
2
C
O
0
2
C
O
C
O
0
5
C
O
r
H
0
5
C
O
0
2
C
O
r
H
#
c
o
o
c
q
0
5
0
2
c
q
0
5
O
r
H
0
2
r
H
0
2
C
O
0
2
0
5
C
O
0
5
C
O
q
C
O
0
2
0
5
t
o
t
-
"
=
*
!
^
N
0
5
C
O
C
O
C
O
N
r
H
C
D
C
D
C
D
C
O
C
O
0
2
r
H
r
H
0
0
0
2
C
O
^
C
O
t
o
0
5
C
O
C
V
2
C
O
C
O
0
2
C
D
C
O
*
o
t
o
t
Q
0
0
o
.
C
O
C
D
C
O
"
f
2
S
0
2
C
O
C
O
0
2
0
2
q
r
H
C
D
C
O
r
H
t
o
0
5
C
O
C
D
C
O
C
O
0
2
0
5
*
C
O
*
0
2
t
o
r
H
<
<
r
H
c
o
r
H
C
O
C
O
0
2
C
D
C
O
0
5
C
O
0
2
t
o
C
O
0
2
2
>
^
^
t
o
*
C
O
C
O
o
t
o
.
C
O
C
O
C
O
^
Z
V
0
2
C
O
C
O
r
H
c
o
q
^
t
o
0
-
0
2
0
5
C
O
C
O
C
O
r
H
C
O
0
)
t
o
o
o
0
2
^
0
2
0
2
r
H
r
H
t
o
c
o
c
o
i
-
H
0
5
r
H
C
O
C
D
c
o
0
5
C
O
0
2
c
o
O
O
0
2
0
1
c
o
<
*
c
o
t
f
C
O
C
O
r
H
Q
C
O
c
o
c
o
0
2
t
>
0
2
t
o
t
o
^
t
o
q
^
0
2
C
O
c
o
c
o
c
q
C
O
t
-
C
D
<
*
r
H
^
C
O
C
O
<
*
0
5
r
H
r
H
0
!
r
H
0
2
*
0
5
C
O
i
-
H
0
2
2
-
c
o
0
5
t
-
r
H
r
-
H
C
O
0
2
O
5
2
-
C
O
C
D
C
D
*
C
O
0
5
O
r
H
t
o
i
-
H
0
5
C
O
0
2
0
5
C
O
*
C
O
q
C
D
0
2
C
O
0
2
C
D
0
}
*
Z
y
O
C
D
0
5
<
t
o
^
b
-
C
O
C
O
2
S
2
S
r
H
0
5
r
H
0
2
t
o
C
D
^
C
D
Z
S
t
o
0
5
Z
>
r
H
0
5
z
>
-
0
2
r
H
C
O
^
0
0
C
D
C
O
C
O
t
o
P
O
r
H
r
H
r
H
*
r
H
0
0
C
O
0
2
i
-
H
C
D
Z
S
C
D
q
z
s
r
H
0
2
t
o
0
2
C
D
C
O
O
O
C
O
C
O
r
H
C
O
c
o
r
H
0
2
C
O
0
0
C
D
r
H
C
O
r
H
0
2
s
t
1
0
2
C
O
t
o
a
>
o
0
2
C
D
Z
S
0
2
C
O
C
O
<
t
f
0
0
0
0
C
O
^
t
o
Q
r
H
r
H
0
2
H
<
t
f
r
H
O
O
C
O
0
2
0
2
C
O
r
H
Z
S
q
C
O
r
H
t
o
O
O
<
p
C
O
0
3
0
2
C
O
*
C
O
r
H
r
H
C
O
*
0
0
t
o
r
H
C
O
r
H
2
-
i
-
H
C
O
t
o
C
D
C
O
C
O
0
3
0
2
C
O
C
O
C
O
c
q
a
s
1
6
1
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
100
RT
Figure 67.
Pickett crossplot
ofR
LLd
vs. <j>
N
,
Mississippian
Mission Canyon
Formation, Williston
basin. R
0
= 100%
water saturation
line. See Chapter VI.
MID* PLOT
s
i
o
I
Z. B
2. 7
2.8
2. 9
I D
DOLOMITE
1
CALCITE a
n
#< *> i
o o / o I
o 0 o o /o
o o \
N
\
\
\
ANHYDRITE
1 1
QUARTZ
\
\
\
\
\
1
30 40 5 0
(Atmo ) a , mic ro eec /f 1
60
Figure 68.
MID* lithology plot of Mississippian
Mission Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
The solid circles represent matrix parameters
for anhydrite, calcite, dolomite, and quartz.
Values for (p
ma
)
a
and (At
ma
)
a
are from
Figures 69 and 70. See Chapter VII.
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
I
H
OT
Z
<
H
O
z
o
w
6 0
50
1
(At
1 I
ma) a
O
1 \A
/
/ ^
0
0
oa r
0 go
/ /
' M i l l
to
V
/ i t
o o Z o t
o ? /
/ A
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0
0
1
0
o
1 1
*
&
0
o
0
MID, Chart
CNL- Sonic
1 1 1 1 1 11
10 20
0 CNL NEUTRON POROSITY INDEX , p.u.
30
Figure 69.
Interval transit time (At) versus neutron
porosity (</>N) crossplot for determining
(At),, for the MID* plot (Fig. 68),
Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation,
Williston basin. See Chapter VII.
10 20 30
0 CNL NEUTRON POROSITY INDEX , p.u.
Figure 70.
Bulk density (p
b
) versus neutron
porosity (</>
N
) crossplot for determining
(Pma)a for the MID* plot (Fig. 68).
Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation,
Williston basin. See Chapter VII.
163
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
> f U
' ' I I I I \JC I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
10
>
( 0
o
UJ
z
o
s
u
5
s
z
o Q:
-5
10 20
CNL NEUTRON INDEX (0CNL)c
(APPARENT LIMESTONE POROSITY)
" 5
Figure 71.
Neutron-density crossplot
for lithology and porosity
identification, Mississippian
Mission Canyon Formation,
Williston basin. See Chapter IV.
0. 9
0. 8
0. 7 -
DOLOMITE
M-N PLOT'
FOR MINERAL IDENTIFICATION
Secondary
Porosity
o o
o
CALCJTE / +
0
o o V ^ /
0 0o -^ /
* a /
o T o o /
/
/
A
Gas
o r
Salt
(* ma: 19,900 f t / t i c )
SILICA
< mo = 18, 000 f t / t K)
SALT MUD CHART
( * f = l . l , AtfIB 5)
\ /
\ /
ANHYDRITE
J I I I I I L_l L_| I I I I I I L
Figure 72.
M-N* lithology crossplot
for matrix and secondary
porosity identification,
Mississippian Mission Canyon
Formation, Williston basin.
Solid circles represent matrix
parameters for anhydrite,
dolomite, calcite, and silica
(quartz). See Chapter VII.
M* = ^
k
^ - X 0 . 0 1
N* =
Pb - Pf
4>Nf ~ 4>N
Pb~ Pf
0. 4 0. 8 0.6 0. 7 0. 8
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Effect of grain size
T 8 9K) 15 20305 0
Figure 73.
Grain size determination by water saturation (S
w
)
versus porosity ($) crossplot, Mississippian Mission
Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
Krw
SW %
10 20 30 40 5 0 60 TO
Swirr %
Figure 74.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus water saturation (S
w
)
crossplot for determining relative permeability to water (K^),
Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
S
w irr
= VF/2000 This formula calculates an approximate, theoretical
value for S
w irr
Values calculated for S
w m
by this formula should only be
used in crossplots where you are trying to determine K
ro
, K
rg
, K
w
, or
percentage water-cut,
165
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
oo
Kro
Kro = 0
10 80 30 40 SO 60 70
Swirr %
Figure 75 .
Irreducible water saturation (S
wirr
) versus water saturation (S
w
)
crossplot for determining relative permeability to oil (K
ro
),
Mississippian Mission Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
Swirr %
Figure 76.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus
water saturation (S
w
) crossplot for determining
percent water-cut, Mississippian Mission
Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
166
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
25
20
IS
10
5
0
-
0
0
1
\
\
0
<p
1 1
0 0
0 O
o
o~-cx.
1 1
0
. C*.035
ooo
0
i 1 1
10 20 30 40 SO 60 70 80 90
Figure 77.
Bulk volume water crossplot (<j>
vs. S
w
), Mississippian Mission
Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
C = bulk volume water.
SW %
Swirr % '
K = Permeability, md
Figure 78.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus porosity (<j>)
crossplot for determining permeability, Mississippian Mission
Canyon Formation, Williston basin.
167
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 3
Eocene Wilcox Sandstone
Gulf Coast
You are assigned the log evaluation of a lower Wilcox
sandstone in South Texas. A fairly typical Gulf Coast log
package was used in the well. It consists of an induction
electric log with an SP and a R
wa
quick look curve and a
sonic log. The induction electric log has a deep induction
log used to measure resistivities in the uninvaded zone (R
t
)
and a short normal to measure resistivities in the invaded
zone (Rj). The log package is run on a single combination
tool, and because it requires only one run in the well, it has
saved your company valuable rig time.
Drilling operations, on your company's lower Wilcox
wildcat well, halted at 10,936 ft after penetration of a
sandstone. There was a sudden, large, gas increase in the
drilling mud; gas increased by 3,200 units over background
on the chromatograph. As a response to this, mud weight
had to be increased from 14.8 lbs/gal to 15.4 lbs/gal to
contain the gas within the formation. When drilling
operations were resumed, gas continued to cut the mud with
a weight of 15.4 lbs/gal going into the hole and 15.2 lbs/gal
coming out of the hole. Also, the mud logger's
chromatograph maintained about 100 units of gas, even
when the well was deepened beyond the zone of initial gas
show.
You select five depths (or points) from 10,930 to 10,970
ft within the Wilcox sand interval. Depths are picked on the
basis of an even distribution through the interval being
evaluated. Here, you use a distribution of points every 12 ft
from 10,930 to 10,970 ft.
Because the only porosity tool at your disposal is the
sonic log, you use one of the following equations to help
you find porosity. The perferred equation is HI because of
your experience with its use in the Gulf Coast.
Equation VariablesAt = jusec/ft and is interval transit
time read from the sonic log; At^ = /x,sec/ft and is interval
transit time of shale read on a sonic log from a clean shale
zone up the borehole from the Wilcox sand; At
ma
= /xsec/ft
and is interval transit time of the matrix for sandstone
(known for Wilcox sands in Gulf Coast); and Atf = /usec/ft
and is interval transit time of freshwater-based muds (see
Chapter IV).
Sonic Porosity Equations:
I.
. , , , At-At 100
sonic porosity (</>
s
) = -r- rf
8
- x -
Where:
At
f
= 189
AW= 56.7
II. sonic porosity (<j)
s
)
At - 55
1.4
and
III. sonic porosity (<f>
s
)
5(At - AW)
8 x At
Where:
At
ma
= 55.5 ^Msec/ft for all sandstones.
Because the sonic log is strongly affected by gas, you need
to use the equation for sonic porosity gas correction:
* = </>
s
x 0.7
The recoverable reserves of gas are calculated from the
gas volumetric equation and the following parameters are
needed to complete the equation: drainage area = 240 acres;
reservoir thickness = 15 ft; porosity = 18%; water
saturation = 57%; gas gravity (estimated) = 0.62; recovery
factor = 0.6; temperature (estimated) = 279F; initial
bottom hole pressure (IBHP, estimated) = 8,103 PSI; Z
factor = 1.229;geothermal gradient = 0.0255 x formation
depth; and pressure gradient = 0.74 x formation depth.
Your company has purchased a 25% working interest
(WI) in the well, which has a net revenue interest (NRI) of
82.5%. Net revenue interest is the total interest (total
interest equals 100%) minus any royalties such as an
interest granted to a mineral rights owner.
The estimated cost of the well is 1.8 million dollars. You
use a product price of $ 1.90 per mcf to find out the
projected return your company can expect on its
investment.
You have acquired certain information needed to help
with an evaluation of the logs: R
w
= 0.022 at T
f
; F =
0.62/<^
15
(formation factor for Gulf Coast sands); R
mf
=
0.222 at T
f
; T
f
= 260F; At
sh
= 116; and surface
temperature = 80E
The following Eocene Wilcox Sandstone Log Evaluation
Table (work Table C) is designed to assist you with your
work. The first three depths and their deep induction, short
normal, and interval transit time (At) values have been
determined for you. However, this information for the last
two depths is left for you to complete.
168
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
0 Rwa OS
7 9 II 13 15
( Inc htl)
HOLE SIZE
- H +
10
Millivo lt!
5. P. Caliptr
8
" * 4 >
~
r "T
z_
=
r"T
r t t-
s
-{U
u
f t i -
* ! h
r
r:
-
, ,
-
i
V
~~"^*
-
"<
3
^
i r _
V
7-
f
1
HW
^
" f
J-l -
^ > J ^
i
-
-
i^rz:
_ : -
1
,
r"
31
-
"" ;;;
--
tf
-1 - -H-~
SP
'
UJ
z -ia
3RT It^O"
o
8
nftw-
40 INDUCTION RESISTIVITY
TJ T 10-
W TAO
-
10< W
-
16 NORMAL
RESISTIVITY
Ohmt n^/mn
ISO
J l_
100 50
Micro. So c o nd/ft.
SPECIFIC ACOUSTIC TIME
AC0USTIL06
Figure 79. Induction electric log with SP, R
wa
curve, and sonic log, Eocene Wilcox Sandstone, Gulf Coast.
Note:
1. At top of Wilcox sand (10,935 to 10,958 ft) the deflection of R
wa
quick look curve in track #1 to the right away
from the SP curve. The deflection indicates the presence of hydrocarbons.
2. In track #2, the increase in resistivity in the upper part of the Wilcox sand (10,935 to 10,958 ft). The resistivity
increase also indicates the presence of hydrocarbons.
3. The low resistivities and the deflection of the R
wa
curve to the left at the base of the Wilcox sand (10,958 to
10,982 ft) indicating a probable water zone.
169
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
Work Ikble C:
Eocene Wilcox Sandstone Log Evaluation Ikble
1
MOS
C
O
O
0
3
0
3
S
C
O
j
X
i
(
0
i
e
j
>
-
*
m
e
C
Q
3
Depth
0
)
o
t
o
t
o
t
-
i
10930
i
C
B
t
o
<
9
r
-
i
10942
r
0
)
0
)
r
H
t
o
t
o
r
-
i
10954
1
7
0
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
'
1
l
i ] i 1
10966
j
i
10978
1
1
7
1
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 3 Answer
An evaluation of the logs begins with an assessment of
sand development in the well through the Wilcox interval,
because this interval is where a good gas show appeared. A
porous and permeable sand is read on the SP log (Fig. 79),
from 10,924 to 10,982 ft, by a leftward deflection of the
curve from the shale baseline.
The R
wa
quick look curve (Fig. 79) deflects to the right,
away from the SP curve, in the upper part (10,935 to 10,958
ft) of the Wilcox sandstone. Such a curve deflection is
evidence of the presence of hydrocarbons.
On the deep induction log (Fig. 79), reading R
t
,
resistivities increase in an upper zone covering
approximately 10,924 to 10,958 ft. Increased resistivity
also indicates hydrocarbons.
A fairly rapid decrease of resistivities into the lower zone
and a deflection of the R
wa
curve to the left at 10,958 to
10,982 ft means higher water saturations. These
observations alert you that the lower zone may be water
productive.
In order to establish whether or not the lower Wilcox
zone will produce water, you decide that a rather detailed
log evaluation is necessary. The evaluation will include a
Pickett crossplot for water saturations, Archie equation
calculated water saturations and crossplots for grain size,
relative permeability, permeability, and bulk volume water.
A Pickett crossplot (Fig. 80) of deep induction log
resistivities (R,) versus sonic log interval transit (At) time,
corrected for a sand matrix (At - At
ma
), has water
saturations ranging from 100% to less than 50%. High
water saturations of greater than 71% on the Pickett
crossplot are from the lower Wilcox zone. This supports
your previous suspicions about its water productive nature.
Examination of the sonic log reveals porosities of 14 to
20% after correction for gas effect. These calculated sonic
porosities are used in the Archie water saturation equation
(S
wa
) and in making crossplots.
A determination of Wilcox sandstone grain size as very
fine-grained is made after you review a crossplot (Fig. 81)
of water saturation Archie (S
wa
) versus sonic porosity (</>).
High water saturations of 70 to 80% in the lower zone
(10,958 to 10,982 ft) probably invalidate grain size
determinations, because the reservoir is not at irreducible
water saturation (S
w irr
).
Water saturations of the upper part (10,924 to 10,958 ft)
of the Wilcox range from 43 to 62% (a relatively high
level), and result from the very fine-grained size of the
Wilcox sand. The relationship of grain size and water
saturation is such that fine-grained sands have high
irreducible water saturations (see Chapter VI), and
consequently they also have high values for bulk volume
water.
A crossplot (Fig. 82) of irreducible water saturation (S
w
irr
) versus porosity (<) reveals a permeability range of 10 to
50 md. You conclude, therefore, that the reservoir has good
permeabilities.
Data on a crossplot (Fig. 83) of irreducible water
saturation (S
wirr
) versus water saturation (S
wa
), are plotted
in a range from intermediate to low relative permeabilities
to gas (K
rg
). And, those data points which have low
permeability to gas values (less than 10%) are from the
lower Wilcox zone. As K
rg
values decrease, relative
permeability to water increases and the reservoir will
produce some water. In the case of your company's Wilcox
well, because of the position of the lower zone's data
points, the amount of water produced may be appreciable.
On the crossplot (Fig. 83) data points with values of relative
permeability to gas which are greater than 10% should
produce decreasing amounts of water. These data points are
from the upper zone.
The moveable hydrocarbon index (S
w
/S
xo
) is less than 0.7
from 10,924 to 10,958 ft, indicating hydrocarbons have
moveability. The high moveable oil saturation values
(MOS) also suggest hydrocarbons will move.
The lower bulk volume water values (Fig. 84) and lower
water saturations in the upper Wilcox sandstone, when
compared to the lower, indicate only the upper Wilcox may
be above a gas/water transition zone. The bulk volume
water values which are much greater than 0.1 (Fig. 84) are
from the lower part of the Wilcox from 10,958 to 10,982 ft.
This interval is above irreducible water saturation.
All of the data produced by your evaluation support your
early assessment of a reservoir with gas on top of water. You
were immediately alerted to a potential problem after you
examined the R
wa
quick look curve and saw a deflection to
the left through the lower Wilcox zone, and when you saw
the fairly rapid decrease of resistivities into the lower zone.
An estimate of recoverable reserves by volumetric
calculations of the Wilcox sandstone is 2.3 BCF using the
following parameters: drainage area = 240 acres; reservoir
thickness = 15 ft; porosity = 18%; water saturation = 57%;
gas gravity (estimated) = 0.62; recovery factor = 0.6;
temperature (estimated) = 279F; initial bottom hole
pressure (IBHP, estimated) = 8,103 PSI;Z factor = 1.229;
geothermal gradient = 0.0255 x formation depth; and
pressure gradient = 0.74 x depth.
You estimate the return on investment of the Wilcox
sandstone as follows:
1. Total Well Cost X Working Interest = Working
Interest Well Costs: $1,800,000 x 0.25 = $450,000.
2. Net Revenue Interest (lease) x Working Interest =
Net Revenue Working Interest: 0.825 x 0.25 = 0.20625
(20.6%).
172
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
3. Reserves x Product Price = Gross Revenue:
2,300,000 MCF X $1.90 = $4,370,000.
4. Gross Revenue x Net Revenue Working Interest =
Net Revenue (Working Interest): $4,370,000 x 0.20625 =
$901,312.50.
5. Net Revenue (Working Interest) 4- Working Interest
Well Costs = Return on Investment (before taxes and
operating expenses): $901,312.50 -r- $450,000 = 2:1.
The relatively poor (2 to 1) return on your company's
investment is weighed with your judgement about the
reservoir's high water saturations. You think the reservoir
will be able to produce gas at only fairly low levels so water
production from the lower zone can be kept under control.
However, a decision is made in conjunction with your
company's management, to set pipe, because of a hope of
future increases in gas prices. This pipe setting decision
may be questioned by readers who find that the return rate,
even with projected price increases, doesn't meet their
economic criteria.
The Wilcox sandstone was perforated from 10,962 to
10,963 ft. The interval flowed 11 hours on a 10/64 inch
choke at a rate of 1,584 mcfgpd, 5 barrels of condensate per
day (BCPD) and 1,090 barrels of water per day (BWPD).
The interval (10,962 to 10,963 ft) was squeezed (i.e. closed
off) and an interval from 10,925 to 10,933 ft was then
perforated. The results from this interval were as follows:
Calculated absolute open flow (CAOF) was 7,000 mcfgpd
and7.8BC/mmcf;SITP = 7,130 PSI: IBHP = 8,480PSI:
BHT = 283F; gas gravity = 0.657; liquid gravity = 46.7.
The well produced 350 mmcf during the first ten months.
173
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
Answer Table C:
Eocene Wilcox Sandstone Log Evaluation Table
0
3
X
C
O
M
0
3
0
X
e
"
P
Q
MOS
o
C
O
C
D
I
d
0
3
X
t
-
i
M
e
n
0
3
ILd Dept h
0
2
C
O
i
H
i
H
0
2
2
>
0
2
.106
C
D
c
o
100
t
o
t
o
C
D
i
-
i
<
*
0
2
0
3
0
0
2.7 1.6 10924
0
2
i
n
C
O
r
4
0
2
0
2
O
O
i
-
l
[
0
0
2
6 6 0 ' 0
2
0
3
C
O
100
t
o
0
3
C
O
<
-
l
<
*
0
2
O
0
3
3.2 1.8 10926
0
2
i
-
i
i
-
H
0
2
0
3
i
-
l
0
2
.109
O
O
t
o
0
2
C
D
100
C
O
t
o
0
2
C
D
C
O
i
-
l
C
O
0
2
c
o
0
3
3.0 1.5 10928
i
-
i
i
-
H
o
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
2
i
-
l
t
o
.108
t
o
2
S
1
0
100
t
o
2
>
C
O
0
3
i
-
l
0
0
0
2
0
3
0
3
3.0 1.5 10930
o
i
-
H
o
0
2
0
3
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
C
O
T O T ' O
C
O
i
-
i
C
O
100
t
o
t
o
1
-
1
C
O
o
0
2
0
0
0
2
100 2.9 1.7 10932
i
-
l
i
-
l
0
3
i
-
l
0
2
0
2
O
C
O
9 6 0 ' g
r
-
l
C
O
100
r
-
i
t
o
i
-
l
C
O
0
3
i
-
l
Z
-
0
2
0
3
3.0 1.9 10934
i
H
i
H
0
3
0
2
r
H
0
2
O
t
o
T O T
-
2
S
t
o
C
O
100
C
D
t
o
C
O
C
O
0
3
I
-
l
2
>
0
2
2
>
-
0
3
3.3 1.7 10936
i
-
i
i
H
0
3
i
H
0
2
i
-
H
0
2
O
C
O
.112
i
-
i
0
3
c
p
100
0
)
t
o
0
3
1
0
0
3
i
-
l
0
2
0
3
3.1 1.4 10938
r
H
r
H
0
3
i
-
H
0
2
i
-
l
0
2
O
t
o
.106
^
^
C
D
C
O
O O T 0
3
C
O
C
D
C
O
0
3
i
H
0
2
0
3
3.4 1.6 10942
i
-
i
i
-
i
C
O
C
O
0
2
O
0
2
0
3
0
2
.097
C
D
*
100
C
O
c
o
C
O
0
0
r
-
t
C
O
0
2
C
O
0
3
3.5 1.9 10944
0
2
i
H
C
D
i
-
H
C
O
0
2
0
0
i
-
l
C
D
0
2
.088
0
0
0
2
C
O
100
t
o
t
o
0
2
C
O
i
H
0
2
i
H
0
3
4.0 2.3 10946
o
i
-
l
i
-
l
0
2
O
c
o
0
2
C
O
9 8 0 ' 2
>
C
O
C
O
100
C
O
t
o
C
O
o
0
2
0
3
0
2
102 3.9 2.3 10948
o
i
H
i
-
l
0
2
i
H
w
<
*
0
2
<
*
C
O
.098
i
H
C
O
0
3
100
C
O
t
o
0
3
o
0
2
0
3
0
2
103 3.5 1.8 10950
O
i
-
H
o
0
2
0
3
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
C
O
.112
<
*
C
D
C
O
100
o
C
D
C
O
O
0
2
0
0
0
2
100 3.2 1.4 10952
i
-
H
i
-
l
o
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
2
i
-
l
C
O
.116
0
3
t
o
r
-
i
100
C
D
O
0
2
O
O
0
2
0
3
0
3
3.1 1.3 10954
I
-
I
0
3
i
-
l
2
>
0
2
0
2
0
2
r
-
t
t
o
.116
0
3
t
o
i
H
100
0
2
i
H
C
D
s
Z
-
0
2
O
O
0
3
3.3 1.3 10956
i
H
i
H
2
>
0
2
O
0
2
C
O
0
2
.124
I
-
l
c
o
0
3
<
9
100
0
2
0
3
C
O
O
O
H
C
O
0
2
0
3
2.9 1.2 10958
-
I
i
-
H
i
-
l
0
2
O
0
2
O
O
0
2
.126
o
t
o
O
2
>
100
0
2
O
0
0
i
-
H
C
D
0
2
0
3
2.8 1.1 10962
0
2
r
-
i
i
-
l
0
2
0
3
i
H
0
2
.127
0
0
0
2
t
o
2
S
100
<
*
t
o
0
0
r
-
t
C
O
0
2
C
O
0
3
3.0 1.1 10964
1
7
4
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
-
r
H
i
r
H
r
H
r
H
0
0
:
0
0
1
-
1
r
_
l
C
D
0
2
O
0
2
0
5
0
2
2
>
t
o
r
H
0
2
C
D
100
*
^
C
D
C
O
r
H
C
D
0
2
C
O
0
5
2.6 1.0 10966
C
D
0
2
O
0
2
0
5
0
2
C
O
r
H
o
0
2
r
H
r
H
o
o
r
H
C
O
0
2
o
0
2
0
5
0
2
0
5
r
H
0
0
r
H
r
H
'
(
0
0
0
|
C
O
O
I
O
O
!
O
r
H
i
r
H
<
*
r
H
0
0
C
O
r
H
C
D
0
2
C
D
0
5
C
O
t
o
0
0
0
0
r
H
C
O
0
2
C
O
0
5
C
O
|
C
O
0
2
!
0
2
o
q
o
q
C
O
0
5
o
O
0
5
o
r
H
r
H
r
H
o
o
C
O
0
2
O
0
2
0
5
0
2
0
5
r
-
j
0
0
r
H
t
o
o
o
r
H
0
0
0
0
r
H
C
D
0
2
C
O
0
5
0
2
Q
0
2
C
-
0
5
O
r
H
r
H
r
H
O
O
r
H
C
O
0
2
O
0
2
0
5
0
2
5
r
H
o
0
2
O
O
o
r
H
C
O
o
0
0
0
0
r
H
C
D
0
2
C
O
0
5
.
0
2
r
H
C
O
r
H
t
o
0
2
O
O
r
H
c
o
0
2
o
r
-
j
o
0
2
O
O
o
r
H
#
*
#
o
0
0
0
0
r
H
1
0
0
2
0
2
0
5
)
0
2
j
0
2
0
5
I
0
5
1
1
*
|
C
D
N
I
^
0
5
I
0
5
o
c
r
H
|
r
H
0
2
r
H
C
O
r
H
t
o
0
2
C
O
r
H
C
O
0
2
r
H
r
H
r
H
t
o
r
H
0
5
r
H
C
O
r
H
0
2
0
2
t
o
0
2
r
H
1
-
\
C
O
r
H
r
H
t
o
t
o
.
o
o
r
H
0
2
t
o
0
0
r
H
0
2
r
H
0
5
t
o
0
2
0
5
O
O
2
V
0
5
O
r
H
0
2
8
r
H
0
0
t
o
0
2
0
0
1
0
r
H
0
2
0
2
C
O
0
0
C
O
0
2
0
2
i
-
i
o
0
0
0
5
o
r
H
C
O
r
H
r
H
r
H
C
O
r
H
t
o
r
H
0
5
r
H
<
*
O
r
-
j
C
O
0
2
<
*
O
O
r
H
C
O
t
o
<
*
r
H
O
0
2
r
H
0
0
t
o
i
-
l
0
2
0
0
0
5
O
r
H
i
1
i
i
!
:
i
i 1
i
|
r
i
i
i
1
7
5
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
100
Figure 80.
Pickett crossplot of R
ILd
versus At - At
m
(58), Eocene
Wilcox Sandstone, Gulf Coast.
Atp, (58) is equal to the interval
transit time (i.e. 58 ^isec/ft) for
the Wilcox Sandstone.
Solid dots are created by
overlapping circles.
100
Effec t of grain size
100
SW % so
_
_
-
-
3
i i i
5
o
0
0
\
8
\
\ *
\
1 1 1 1 I I I
10 62030
VFG Figure 81.
P- MG Grain size determination by water saturation (S
w
)
CQ versus porosity ((j>) crossplot, Eocene Wilcox Sandstone,
Gulf Coast.
176
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
90 -
5 0
Swirr %
K
:
Permeability, md
K = O . I36 ( 0
44
/ Swirr
2
)
Timur
J I I I l_
O 20 30 40
fi%
Figure 82.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus porosity (<j>) crossplot for
determining permeability, Eocene Wilcox Sandstone, Gulf Coast.
S W% so
M l
20
0 %
Swirr %
T"
\
\
\
Figure 83.
Irreducible water saturation (S
wirr
) versus water saturation
(S
w
) crossplot for determining relative permeability to gas (K
rg
).
Eocene Wilcox Sandstone, Gulf Coast.
\
\
o \ p o
OVQ 0 0 0 0
O ^0 O o
\ o
> ^
/ ^" 0
Normal *ilc o > Production
Cutoff --
C=0.l
10 5 0 90
Figure 84.
Bulk volume water crossplot (<f> vs.
S
w
), Eocene Wilcox Sandstone, Gulf
Coast.
The bulk volume water values (BVW),
plotted above the 0.1 hyperbolic line, are
values from the lower part of the Wilcox
Sandstone, which is above irreducible
water saturation (S
w irr
).
SW %
177
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 4
Pennsylvanian Upper Morrow Sandstone
Anadarko Basin
An area covering several counties in the Anadarko basin
is assigned to you. It is your responsibility to map and
develop hydrocarbon prospects and oversee all company
activity in these counties.
As you pursue the assignment, you review many logs
from previously drilled wells; some are producing and some
are dry and abandoned. One particular dry and abandoned
well captures your attention, because its induction log has
good resistivities and its sonic log has good porosities. The
well wasn't tested before its abandonment. However, it was
logged with an induction electric log (Fig. 85) to determine
resistivities of the invaded (R,) and uninvaded (R,) zones,
and a sonic log (Fig. 86) to determine sonic porosity.
Before you can calculate water saturations Archie, a
value for R
w
is needed. You decide to find a value for R
w
by
using the SP log and charts (see Fig. 11, Chapter II).
Because water production is a local problem but water
samples are not available, you decide to check the amount
of water the well may produce. To do this, irreducible water
saturation (S
w irr
) values are plotted versus water saturation
Archie (S
wa
) and a water-cut crossplot is constructed (charts
for water-cut percent are in Appendix 4). Irreducible water
saturation values calculated by the formula S
w irr
=
VF/2000 are: at a depth of 7,444 ft = 14; at 7,446 ft = 9;
and at a depth of 7,448 ft = 11.
The sonic porosity formula is:
=
A - Au
*
s
At f - Au
Other important information you use to pursue your
evaluation is: R
mf
= 0.527 at T
f
; R
w
= 0.11 at T
f
; T
f
=
130F; F = 0.81/02; and surface temperature = 70F.
Volumetric recoverable oil reserves are calculated with
the following parameters: drainage area = 160 acres; BOI
= 1.3; recovery factor (RF) = 0.15; porosity = 16%; water
saturation (S
w
) = 57.5%; thickness (h) = 8 ft.
An analysis by the company's engineering department
leads to a judgement that, if it appears the well will be
productive, it can be re-entered. An estimated cost for
re-entry and completion of the well is $275,000. With a
gross product price of $32.00 per barrel and a lease which
has a 3/16th royalty, what do you estimate as a return on
investment?
Use the Pennsylvanian Upper Morrow Sandstone Log
Evaluation Table (work Table D) to complete your
evaluation.
178
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
I
Work Table D:
Pennsylvanian Upper Morrow Sandstone Log Evaluation Ikble
m
MOS 0
X
m
>
J
J
i
d
C
Q
I
n
C
O
ILd Depth
!
i
o
t
o
7444
C
D
t
f
C
O
I
S
j
!
1
7
9
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Figure 85 . Induction electric log with spontaneous potential log, Pennsylvanian upper Morrow Sandstone, Anadarko basin.
Note:
1. The deflection of the SP curve in track #1 to the left away from the shale baseline (7,440 - 7,452 ft), opposite
the porous and permeable upper Morrow Sandstone.
2. The separation of the short normal curve (Rj) from the induction curve (R
t
) in track #2 indicates invasion has
taken place, and that the upper Morrow Sandstone is permeable.
180
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
SPONTANEOUS " PO TENTIAL
millivolts
-|2|.
GAMMA RAY
<\ \ \
N W W W W W
('
N|
/
\
V
/
\
\ \ \ \
o
o
o
o
100
16 0
INTERVAL TRANSIT TIME
microseconds per foot
{ increases
T_3_R| J _ R 2
$
130
40
100
Figure 86. Sonic log with spontaneous potential log Pennsylvanian upper Morrow Sandstone, Anadarko basin.
Note:
The high interval transit time (At = 81 /xsec/ft. at 7,446 ft) which indicates high sonic porosity. See tracks #2 and
#3 between 7,440 and 7,452 ft.
181
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 4 Answer
The upper Morrow sandstone in the well occurs from
7,440 to 7,452 ft and is shown on the SP curve (Fig. 85) by
its leftward deflection from the shale baseline. The
permeable nature of the Morrow is seen by the separation
between the short normal (Rj) and induction (R
t
) resistivity
curves. Separation between these curves indicates invasion
has taken place. Porosity in the sand from 7,440 to 7,452 ft
is apparent by the high (70 to 81 (u.sec/ft) interval transit
time (At) on the sonic log (Fig. 86).
Grain size, determined from a plot (Fig. 87) of water
saturation (S
w
) versus porosity (</>), is very fine-grained.
This means high water saturation and bulk volume water
values. However, because of the very fine grain size, higher
than normal values can be tolerated and the well may still
not produce much water.
As suspected, water saturation (S
wa
) values (work Table
D) are high, ranging from 41 to 62%, and so are bulk
volume water values (Fig. 88). Data points on the bulk
volume water crossplot exhibit only minor scatter from the
hyperbolic line, suggesting the reservoir may be at or near
irreducible water saturation. But, the plot (Fig. 88) has only
three points, not enough to firmly establish whether or not
the well will produce some water.
Permeability (Fig. 89) varies from less than one to
approximately 15 md. These are fairly low permeabilities,
and probably occur here because the upper Morrow is very
fine-grained.
Data points on the relative permeability to water crossplot
(Fig. 90) increase in value from 0.04 to substantially over
0.1. Two of the three points, however, plot under 0.1.
Because permeability relative to water is above zero, some
water will certainly be produced, but probably not in any
great amount.
A percent water-cut plot has two points between 20 and
40% water-cut. The third point plots around 70% and is
from a depth of 7,444 ft at the end of the sand interval. The
70% point may not be reliable. Problems, caused by the
resolution of logging tools along bed boundaries, cast
doubts about the validity of the 70% water-cut data point.
Therefore, you assume a water production amount of
between 20 to 40%.
Finally, your calculations of the moveable hydrocarbon
index (S
w
/S
xo
) and moveable oil saturations have favorable
values.
You have completed your log assessment and are
encouraged by evidence of good porosities on the sonic log
and good indications of permeability on the resistivity log.
Also, you are aware that the low cost of a re-entry well
enhances the economics of the prospect.
However, you weigh the positive aspects of the prospect
against the relatively thin zone and the few data points
which you have used. The lack of points calls into question
the statistical accuracy of the information, and in turn, your
conclusions based on such limited data. Also, fine-grained
reservoirs do not have the permeability of coarser grained
reservoirs. And, you have determined a 20 to 40% water
production from the well.
You estimate recoverable oil as 78,000 stock tank barrels
(STB). An estimated investment return is: stock tank barrels
(STB) x product price x net revenue interest (NRI) + total
cost = investment return (78,000 x $32.00 x 0.8125 +-
$275,000 = 7.4:1 return). This 7.4:1 figure is an excellent
return on investment and your company accepts your
recommendation to re-enter the well.
The upper Morrow sandstone was perforated from 7,443
to 7,451 ft. Initial production flowing (IPF) was 100 barrels
of oil per day (BOPD) and 6 barrels of salt water per day
(BSWPD) with an oil gravity of 38.3. During the first four
months, production averaged 75 BOPD, and after six
months, production stabilized at 50 BOPD. Two years after
completion, an offset well located 1,320 feet away, was
drilled. The new well had an initial production flowing
(IPF) of 336 BOPD and no water. Production came from a
19 foot upper Morrow sandstone reservoir which was,
structurally, 13 feet high to the original well.
182
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
aluation Ikble itone Log Ev Sand< orrow
Answ er Ikble D:
Pennsylvanian Upper IV
C
D
BVW
C
Q
o
o
M
C
O
>
C
O
o
C
D
J
c
3
C
O
4
^
>
<
5
C
O
ILd Depth
.087
C
O
O
0
0
0
2
C
O
o
t
o
r
H
7444
!
0
3
0 6 0 ' r
H
r
-
<
.090
t
o
0
2
0
3
1
0
i
t
o
C
O
i
Z
V
0
3
c
o
r
-
l
0
2
0
2
C
O
0
3
0
2
r
-
l
i
-
f
7446
C
O
C
O
o
C
O
C
O
C
O
2
-
C
O
0
2
r
H
r
H
7448
;
1
8
3
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Ef f ed o f gram size
100
SW % 30-
7 8 9 0 e 20 30SO
Figure 87.
Grain size determination by water saturation (S
w
)
versus porosity ($) crossplot, Pennsylvanian upper Morrow
Sandstone, Anadarko basin.
0 %
X
\
25
20
\
\
\
0 % '5
\
\
No rmal Mo rro w
Pro duc tio n Cuto ff -
\
\
\
_L
C-
c
= . 0 4
Figure 88.
Bulk volume water crossplot ($
vs. S
w
), Pennsylvanian upper Morrow
Sandstone, Anadarko basin.
10 20 30 40 5 0
SW %
60 70 SO 90
184
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
5 0 -
Swirr %
K = prmo bilityt md, dl
0 K( 0 I ) = prmo bi!ity, gat
(C(0
3
/Sw lrr) 3
2
25
0 %
"ft
Figure 89.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus porosity (<)
crossplot for determining permeability, Pennsylvanian upper
Morrow Sandstone, Anadarko basin.
Krw
100
SW% so >
' K) 20 30 40 5 0 60 TO
Swirr %
Figure 90.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w iri
) versus water saturation (S
w
)
crossplot for determining relative permeability to water (K^),
Pennsylvanian upper Morrow Sandstone, Anadarko basin.
185
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
80
70
60
5 0
Swirr %
40
30
20
K)
1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 9 0 6 0 7 0 8 0
SW %
Figure 91.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus water saturation
(S
w
) crossplot for determining percent water-cut,
Pennsylvanian upper Morrow Sandstone, Anadarko basin.
Note:
WC = water-cut
API = oil gravity
186
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 5
Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone
San Juan Basin
A large block of acreage in the San Juan basin, much of it
with gas production, has been purchased by the company
you work for. The company is pursuing an active
development drilling program of in-filling with new
Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone wells on 80 acre units,
rather than on the 160 acre units, previously used.
You are presented with a log from a new in-fill well and
are asked to evaluate it. Depth of the Pictured Cliffs
Sandstone in the well is from 1,920 to 1,964 ft. The log
package includes: an induction log with a Spherically
Focused Log (SFL*) and an SP log (Fig. 92), and a
Combination Neutron-Density log (recorded in sandstone
porosity unitst) with a gamma ray log (Fig. 93).
You already know from previous experience that shale in
a zone can adversely affect logging measurements. Water
saturations calculated by the Archie formula will have
values which are too high (i.e. pessimistic values) if shale is
present (see Chapter VI). Furthermore, shale in the
reservoir will cause permeability problems.
A careful examination of the neutron porosity (</>N),
density porosity ($D)>
ar |
d gamma ray log convinces you
that you are dealing with a shaly Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs
sand (Fig. 93). A shaly sand analysis will be necessary. But,
before following this investigative path, you decide to
check the R
w
value given for the area against a log
calculated R
w
. (See Chapter II, Table 3, for R
w
formulas.
Also see charts with Figures 12, 13, and 14).
R
w
CalculationDetermine R
w
using the following
information: depth = 1,936; BHT = 89F at 2,145 ft;
surface temperature = 65F; R^ = 2.26 at 65F; SSP =
- 57mv; T
f
= 87F; R
mf
at 75 = 1.984; K = 71.526;
i WRwe = 6.255; R
mfc
= 1.687; R
we
= 0.269. Therefore:
R.
at 75F = 0.3026
at T
f
= 0.264
R^atTf = 0.26
To do a shaly sand analysis you use: a formula for
calculating volume of shale, formulas for correcting both
the neutron and density porosity for volume of shale, a
formula for calculating neutron-density porosity, and
finally, a formula which corrects water saturation for the
effect of shale. The procedure is:
Shaly Sand AnalysisShaly Sand Formulas;
Schlumberger(1975):
y _ GR
iog
- GR
min
"sh '
GR
ma x
- GR
4>Ncorr = <fo( ~ [(^Nolay/0-45) X 0. 30 X V
s h
]
<f>Dcorr = <h~ [(^Nclay/0-45) X 0. 13 X V
sh
]
S
w
Wher
J / (^Ncorr)
2
+ (^Dcorr)
2
9N-D ~yj 2
V
sh
/ / V
s h
\ 2 &
R
S
h ' V \RshA ' 0 . 2 x R
w
x ( 1 . 0 -
4>
2
0 . 4 XR
W
X( I . 0 - V
s h
)
e (Formula Variables):
- V
sh
) X R
t
GR
log
= Gamma ray reading from various depths in
Pictured Cliffs Sandstone (for depths picked,
see Log Evaluation Table; work Table E),
GR
m
ax
=
134 API gamma ray units; units are read on
gamma ray log at a depth of 1,838 ft (shale).
GR
m
in = 64 API gamma ray units; units are read on
gamma ray log at a depth of 1,921 ft (clean
sand).
R^ = 4 ohm-meters; resistivity of adjacent shale at a
depth of 1,915 ft.
4>Nciay
=
0.53; neutron porosity of adjacent shale at a
depth of 1,866 ft.
V
sh
= volume of shale
4>xcon
=
neutron porosity corrected for shale
focorr
=
density porosity corrected for shale
4> = porosity corrected for shale
Other information you use to complete your log work is:
R,
mf
= 1.734 at T
f
= 87F
tSee Chapter IV for a discussion of different matrix units used on the
Combination Neutron-Density Log.
Because of the in-fill drilling program, your company is
particularly interested in having you calculate recoverable
reserves based on 80 acre units. Reservoir depletion will not
be a problem, since Pictured Cliffs Sandstone wells
normally don't drain 160 acres. The volumetric recoverable
gas reserves are estimated from the following parameters:
drainage area (DA) = 80 acres; reservoir thickness (h) = 30
ft; effective porosity (<
e
) = 17%; water saturation (S
w
) =
53%; recovery factor (RF) = 0.75; gas gravity (estimated)
= 0.51; temperature (estimated) = 99F; initial bottom hole
pressure (IBHP estimated) = 770 PSI: Z factor = 0.928;
geothermal gradient = 0.051 x depth; and pressure
gradient = 0.395 x depth.
A Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone Log Evaluation
Table (work Table E) assists you with your evaluation.
187
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
-
g
^
m
r
a
o
B
O
^
C
O
o
0
1
0
)
t
s
o
Evaluat Log
s
e
ffs Sandst
M
u
o
t
3
0
1
(
A
Work
Creta
t
.
p
C
O
t
r
t
^
i
4
-
Q
2
-
3
a
C
O
>
o
n
e
s
?
!
5
a
!
>
-
<
a
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
!
f
t
o
^
C
D
C
D
t
o
C
O
0
2
*
r
-
i
t
o
l
-
l
o
1
t
o
0
)
r
H
0
2
1
0
0
0
C
O
2
>
o
o
r
H
0
2
r
H
*
2
S
t
o
C
D
0
2
O
0
2
C
O
i
H
C
O
1
t
o
0
3
0
0
^
C
O
o
o
i
H
r
H
0
2
1
<
t
f
?
S
1
0
r
-
0
2
O
0
2
O
O
r
-
t
0
2
<
*
0
)
*
O
O
i
5
C
O
C
O
0
2
-
r
-
i
C
O
r
H
O
O
^
0
)
"
;
v
.
c
>
i
o
^
X
5
$
y
<
I
f
u
=
<
S
J
g
x
S
?
2
T
-
"
i
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
^
j
u
'
>
>
X
X
d
X
X
r
f
"
t
d
d
f
t
4
1
f
t
4
e
S
f
a
-
o
1
i
I
I
I
I
I
8
*
^
:
:
:
e
!
S
*
s
8
O
o
s
^
I
-
8
+
[
t
t
1
1
i
N
1
1
i
!
i
1
8
8
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
SPONTANEOUS-POTENTIAL
.10,
_ LJ MILLIVOLTS
~t
tz
tz
t
/ 1
>.
1
/
L
\ s
\
7
1
t _ TZ
Z
_
/
fc
V^*~v^N^~>^^^4-^-"
i-
t
1850
to
O
o
195 0
rnNmirTrviTY
BEEP INDUCTION
400 200
RESISTIVITY OHMS MV
DEEP INOUCTION
0 100
0 1000
SPHERICALLY FOCUSED LOG
R
SFL
0 100
0 1000
--
A
-*-
Zt
5
?
_r
:
5
^ 3
=a
-s
OE
! _>
?
fcj
^
t:
r i
i
MIL
J
^} r~<
*v~
TH
BIT SIZE
Tfp Fluid in hol
Rm o l mo t ( imp
a:
z^ " * N
*
*~
(" S
K
^ _
- ^ s-
2I4S
7 7/ 8
FGM
2. 33 o t 5 F
1000
OHMS M< 7
0
-_J
^
/
A
1
Rmf o l mtai tamp.
Rrnc o l mtai tamp
Mo *. Rc Tnp.
2
Zn
_3
^
\
\
\
/
{
\
M
2 26 Jl 6 5 F
o l F
8 9 * F
Figure 92. Induction-SFL* log with spontaneous potential log, Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan basin.
Note:
The increase in SP deflection (track #1) and increase in resistivity (tracks #2 and #3) upward in the Pictured
Cliffs Sandstone (1,970 to 1,924 ft). These increases are the result of decreasing shale content upward in the
Pictured Cliffs Sandstone.
189
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
C ALIPER DI4M NKCHES
6" 16"
T r " i T ' i r r - - f - r
GAMMA RAY API UNITS
0 200
POROSITY INDEX % S. S. MATRIX
COMPENSATED FORMATION DENSITY POROSITY
30 20 10
I I
COMPENSATED NEUTRON POROSITY
30 20 K)
Typt Fluid in ho ll
Rm at meat tamp 2 35 at 6 3 F
P
- p r
,
" 1
t J
' - f ^
f
' i
e
Rmf ot iwai. ttffip
Rme o l miai. ttinp.
Mat. Rc Ttmp.
en:
^ k \ v
^ = r
r~:f
2 26 at 65 " F
Figure 93. Combination Neutron-Density Log with gamma ray log and caliper, Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan
basin.
Note:
1. Decrease in hole diameter (1,926 to 1,958 ft) on caliper log in track # 1 indicating mudcake (permeability).
2. Neutron porosity is higher than density porosity in tracks #2 and #3. But in a gas-bearing sand, the neutron
porosity should be less than density porosity (gas effect). It can be surmized that the reason for the high neutron
porosity values in the Pictured Cliffs Sandstone is the high shale content of this sand. Shale has a high
hydrogen concentration and therefore has high neutron porosity values.
190
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
C ALIPER 0IM IK INCHES
16
T | - T " I I I T T~T-
GAMMA RAY API UNITS
O 200
CORRECTION
Use this scale when correcl i or
curve is presented in Troth 3
BULK DENSITY GRAMS/CC
2 5
Type Fl ui d in hoi *
Pm at mr ai It mp
Figure 94. Density log with gamma ray log and caliper, Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan basin.
Note:
1. Decrease in hole diameter (1,926 to 1,958 ft) on caliper log in track #1 indicating mudcake (permeability).
2. Low bulk densities on the density log in tracks #2 and #3 indicating porosity.
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 5 Answer
The behavior of the Combination Neutron-Density log,
which was run on a sandstone matrix, alerts you to the
presence of shale in the reservoir. You know that if a sand
contains oil or water or both, the two curvesneutron and
densityshould have the same porosity values if the sand is
logged on a sandstone matrix and if it is shale-free.
However, if a sand contains gas (as in the case of the
Pictured Cliffs) and is shale-free, the density log should
have higher porosity values than the neutron log. (See
Chapter IVabout gas effect.) Your examination of the
neutron-density log (Fig. 93) reveals neutron porosity (</>
N
)
is higher than density porosity ($D)- The higher neutron
porosity is recorded because shale has a high hydrogen ion
concentration. The neutron log responds primarily to this
concentration of hydrogen ions.
High values on the gamma ray log (Fig. 93) also alert you
to the presence of shale in the Pictured Cliffs Sandstone.
High gamma ray readings are caused by the greater levels of
radioactivity found in shale.
Because shale can create permeability problems, as you
analyze the well, you decide to pay careful attention to the
various ways permeability can be detected or estimated.
You note a decrease in hole diameter occurring from
1,926 to 1,958 ft on the caliper log (Figs. 93 and 94). The
decrease in hole diameter indicates the presence of
mudcake, which means invasion has taken place.
A calculation of water saturation by the standard Archie
equation gives values ranging from 62 to 83%. These high
water saturation values result from the shale content of the
reservoir, which is 6 to 29%. By using the Schlumberger
(1975), shaly sand equations to correct for the effect of
shale, the water saturations values can be lowered to 48 to
67%. Such a substantial adjustment to the water saturation
values illustrates the importance of shaly sand analysis in
the evaluation of certain reservoirs.
The high water saturations in the Pictured Cliffs
Sandstone, even after using the shaly sand correction, are
the result of the very fine grain size of the sand (Fig. 95).
The reservoir's grain size, along with its shale content, is
the reason for the low relative permeability to gas (Fig. 96)
and the fairly low reservoir permeabilities (Fig. 97). The
moveable hydrocarbon index is less than 0.7 and the
moveable oil saturation is high. These parameters cause you
to be reasonably certain gas will move out of the reservoir.
High bulk volume water values (0.11 to 0.14) also result
from the very fine-grained shaly sand. But, the lack of
data-point scatter from the hyperbolic line (Fig. 98) shows a
reservoir at irreducible water saturation (S
w itI
). And, at
irreducible water saturation, the reservoir will not produce
water, despite high water saturation values.
As you write your report on the Pictured Cliffs Sandstone
in-fill well, you summarize all of the favorable indicators.
First of all, the zone is approximately 30 ft thick and has
permeability as shown by the presence of mudcake,
indicated by the caliper log. Reservoir permeability is also
indicated by the moveable hydrocarbon parameters (S
w
/S
xo
and MOS). Next, good porosities, ranging from 14 to 22%
are determined from the Combination Neutron-Density log.
The bulk volume water plot is of special significance
because it shows a reservoir at irreducible water saturation.
Consequently, water-free production can be expected even
though there are high water saturations, \folumetric
calculations give a production estimate of approximately
0.322 BCF. All of the information you have developed,
along with the shallow depth, low-cost, and very low-risk
of the well, make a completion recommendation inevitable.
The Pictured Cliffs was perforated from 1,926 to 1,954
ft. After an acid treatment and a sand frac, the well initially
produced 350 mcfgpd with no water on a 3/4" choke.
During the first year of production, the well produced
approximately 60 million cubic feet (60,000 mcf) of gas.
192
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
I
;
.
i
1
*
&
a
W
t
i
Evalu Log
P
ndst
a
s
C
/
>
!
t
3
0
4
)
leE:
Pictur
S
i
5
3
2
I
S
C
O
o
S
o
O
X
C
O
&
o
f
n
t
i
g
^
J
p
>
o
J
*
^
l
>
*
c
b
n
A
*
*
0
3
3
o
>
-
i
r
H
0
)
C
O
r
-
l
t
o
C
O
z
s
c
o
o
o
r
H
0
)
C
O
Z
s
C
D
f
r
-
Z
S
C
O
r
-
l
c
o
1
-
t
o
0
2
0
)
o
f
r
-
C
O
*
C
O
0
2
C
D
i
-
t
r
H
r
H
c
o
0
2
0
)
r
-
l
0
5
0
2
C
O
r
H
1
C
D
t
o
O
O
H
C
D
t
o
C
O
t
o
K
)
C
O
H
0
2
i
-
H
0
2
C
O
0
2
0
5
O
f
r
-
O
O
r
H
C
O
f
r
-
0
2
C
O
r
-
l
0
2
r
H
0
0
0
2
0
5
r
-
l
0
5
C
O
0
2
r
-
l
C
O
'
f
f
r
-
C
O
o
o
r
H
0
2
C
O
2
s
t
o
t
-
C
O
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
O
*
c
o
Z
S
i-
l
C
O
C
O
0
2
*
>
>
r
-
l
t
o
l-
l
O
t
o
0
5
I
-
H
r
-
l
r
-
l
t
o
0
2
r
-
l
5
f
r
-
1
0
o
o
r
H
C
O
C
O
2
S
C
O
0
)
C
D
C
O
r
-
l
0
5
r
H
0
2
i-
l
r
-
l
0
2
I
S
z
s
r
-
l
C
O
*
0
2
Z
S
r
-
l
<
t
f
r
H
0
2
t
o
a
>
r
-
l
1
0
2
r
A
0
5
r
H
r
H
1
0
*
t
o
t
o
o
o
i
-
H
C
O
C
O
t
o
t
o
o
t
-
Z
S
l
-
H
C
O
H
0
2
<
*
r
H
<
*
f
r
-
C
D
l-
l
t
o
<
#
0
2
0
5
i
-
H
t
o
l-
l
^
t
o
0
5
r
H
0
2
r
H
0
2
r
H
i
-
H
C
O
^
0
2
C
O
o
o
i
-
H
C
O
C
O
0
2
C
O
c
o
C
D
f
r
-
i
-
t
C
O
r
H
0
2
*
l-
l
*
?
2
S
1
0
C
D
r
H
1
0
0
2
O
0
2
C
O
r
-
l
C
D
t
o
0
5
i
-
H
<
-
l
r
-
l
0
2
r
H
r
-
l
0
5
*
r
H
C
O
O
O
r
H
*
C
O
r
A
C
O
0
2
C
D
0
0
r
-
l
0
5
i-
l
0
2
-
"
r
H
0
2
z
s
z
s
r
H
^
0
2
O
0
2
Z
S
r
-
l
C
O
t
o
0
5
r
-
l
0
2
r
-
l
0
2
r
-
l
r
-
l
C
O
<
*
C
O
C
O
O
O
r
-
l
f
r
-
C
O
1
0
t
o
0
0
C
O
N
r
A
f
r
-
1
0
0
5
r
A
r
-
l
r
H
0
2
f
r
-
C
O
<
t
f
r
-
l
C
O
C
O
0
2
t
o
0
2
z
s
r
H
o
<
*
0
5
r
-
l
0
2
i
-
H
0
5
O
r
H
0
2
C
O
C
O
<
t
f
O
O
i-
l
t
o
C
O
C
O
*
^
C
D
z
-
i
-
t
c
o
r
-
l
0
2
*
r
-
l
*
f
r
-
C
D
f
r
-
l-
l
^
f
0
2
O
0
2
0
0
r
H
0
2
"
*
0
5
r
-
l
0
2
r
H
0
3
r
A
r
-
l
C
O
*
C
O
C
O
o
o
r
H
C
O
C
O
1
0
C
O
o
f
r
-
f
r
-
i
-
H
f
r
-
o
0
2
*
r
H
*
f
r
-
C
O
z
s
r
-
l
C
O
0
2
C
O
r
-
l
C
O
r
H
5
0
5
"
'
<
*
r
-
l
C
O
0
2
r
H
r
-
l
<
*
0
5
t
o
O
O
r
-
l
0
2
t
o
0
3
1
0
t
o
0
0
1
0
i
-
H
Z
s
o
0
2
Z
S
r
H
C
O
f
r
-
C
O
r
-
l
C
O
0
2
C
O
r
H
^
<
r
A
C
O
*
0
5
i
-
H
C
O
r
H
r
o
r
-
l
r
H
r
H
C
O
0
3
^
o
O
r
-
l
i
-
H
C
O
0
3
^
r
H
0
0
^
r
H
c
o
0
2
0
2
0
3
0
2
^
C
O
z
s
i
-
H
C
O
C
O
0
2
2
S
r
H
C
O
l-
l
0
0
^
0
3
i
-
H
r
-
l
r
-
l
0
0
l-
l
r
H
C
O
*
C
O
C
O
O
o
r
-
l
C
O
t
o
C
O
C
O
0
2
C
D
0
3
r
H
0
5
r
H
0
2
0
3
O
f
r
-
C
D
c
o
<
-
!
t
o
0
2
0
0
r
-
l
C
O
l-
l
o
C
O
0
5
r
-
l
r
H
r
-
l
0
2
0
2
r
H
0
3
t
o
r
H
C
O
o
o
r
H
0
5
t
o
i
-
H
C
D
0
0
C
O
0
0
r
-
l
0
5
O
0
2
C
D
0
0
C
D
C
D
r
H
C
O
0
2
O
0
2
<
*
i-
l
0
2
C
O
C
D
r
-
l
1
1
9
3
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Effec t of grain size
SW %
20 3090
Figure 95.
Grain size determination by water saturation (S
w
)
versus porosity (<) crossplot, Cretaceous Pictured
Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan basin.
Krg
SW % 5 0 -
Figure 96.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w
in-) versus water
saturation (S
w
) crossplot for determining relative
permeability to gas (K^), Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs
Sandstone, San Juan basin.
194
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
70
Swlrr %
3 0 -
10 -
~ S g K = prmobllity, md, oil
K(O.I)=DrmaWllty, ga
/ Swl rrf) '
J L.
19 25
%
35
Figure 97.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus porosity (</>)
crossplot for determining permeability, Cretaceous Pictured
Cliffs Sandstone, San Juan basin.
0 % ~
Figure 98.
Bulk volume water crossplot (<j>
vs. S
w
), Cretaceous Pictured Cliffs
Sandstone, San Juan basin.
SW %
195
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 6
Devonian Hunton Formation
Anadarko Basin
Awell owned by your company has just reached final
depth after penetrating its target zonethe Hunton
Formation in the Anadarko basin. The well was drilled
because subsurface mapping indicated an updip fault and a
structurally low well which produced gas and water. As you
correlate logs from the newly completed well, you
determine that it is some 40 ft structurally high to the well
which produced gas and water.
When your company's well encountered the Chimney
Hill Member of the Hunton Formation, a drilling break
occurred. The penetration rate changed from 10 min/ft to 5
min/ft, and the mud logger's chromatograph increased 20
gas units.
By examining samples, you identify Hunton lithology as
dolomite with some minor chert. It is gray to gray-brown,
medium crystalline, and sucrosic with vuggy porosity.
Samples collected through the drilling break do not exhibit
fluorescence or cut.
Your usual procedure before beginning log analysis is a
check of R
w
values, generally known for the area, against a
log-calculated R
w
value. This time, you decide to determine
a log value for R
w
using charts (see Chapter II) and the SP
log. The following information is assembled before you
begin finding an R
w
value:
R
w
Determination Using SP Log and ChartsYou
determine SSP = - 95mv where the SSP value is read from
SP log; T
f
= 221 F; and R
mf
= 0.249 at T
f
.
As you examine the log package on the new Hunton well,
you identify values for: resistivity of the mud filtrate (R
mf
=
0.249 at T
f
), surface temperature (70F) and formation
temperature (22TF).
lb correct neutron porosity for temperature in deeper
wells (generally over 12,000 ft) such as this Hunton well,
you need to add 1.5 porosity units (P.U.) to neutron porosity
(</>N) before you determine neutron-density porosity.
Recoverable volumetric gas reserves are calculated with
these parameters: drainage area (DA) = 540 acres; gas
gravity = 0.63 (estimated); temperature (estimated) =
228F; BHP (estimated) = 7,260 psi; recovery factor (RF)
= 0.75; Z factor = 1.165. In addition, a geothermal
gradient of .014 x formation depth and a pressure gradient
of 0.445 x formation depth are used in reserve calculations.
You need to determine the following parameters: porosity
(<t>), water saturation (S
w
), and reservoir thickness (h).
When the log evaluation is finished, you will make a
completion decision. And, if you decide to set pipe you will
be responsible for selecting perforations. A Devonian
Hunton Log Evaluation Table (work Table F) helps organize
the log data, but you must pick your own depths for
calculation.
196
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
QLAR
Tso'o 'io'oo'
SP(MV]
1600 40.00
i
ILD ( O HMM
0.2000 2000
ILM ( O HMM)
02000 2000
SFL ( O HMM)
0200
-
DEPTH
0
l l _Uky \t
,-|
BIT SIZE
Tf pt Huid in hoi*
Rm at mo* tmp.
1649
" TTTT " " "
- -
. -
--j it
J
111
>fNI
> ' ' . i n
7 *
p *
IT
""tt
---t4
0
,
..__..
--
...
i 4
^7 T
j r L
U _
e - 3/4
Cnamicol
.93 at T4 F
Rm
r f
~" 3
3^E
HT
<T-K-
<
-
":~
-
--
-- -J
* V-"
- r
J -
- - -
al m oi t t mj
Rmc cl mtat t mp
Max. Rtc T mp.
r
^...
- *
-_
^~
j -
5
^
-J-
7 0
2 0
5 , 3
' J
3tH
"FTT
^ T
J 11
5^t* T
" " NT
-144-
Hi
nt
00.
'>
:^*-
-
-
al 7 4F
al _ _ F
2 2 2 F
Figure 99. Dual induction-SFL* with spontaneous potential log and R
xo
/Rt curve, Devonian Hunton Dolomite, Anadarko basin.
Note:
1. From 16,300 to 16,390 ft, the deflection of the R
xo
/R
t
curve to the right away from the SP curve in track #1
which indicates the presence of hydrocarbons (see Chapter VI).
2. From 16,325 to 16,370 ft, see the much lower resistivities in tracks #2 and #3. This is the result of either a
water productive zone or a substantial change in the type of carbonate porosity (see Chapter VI, Table 8).
197
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
;
4
>
3
E
S
c
s
1
a
>
w
e
o
2
a
2
2
E
a
*
s
|
V
X
f
!
I
I
m
\
C
Q
O
a
i
0
H
;
0
3
"
f
o
X
C
Q
g
C
Q
S
I
J
i
-
C
Q
a
f
e
\
&
O
e
s
I
?
P
T
C
Q
6
I
J
i
i
-
t
3
M
A
+
=
P
<
(
D
i
Q
\
i
1
"
!
1
j
i
|
1
;
i
'
j
i
i
1
9
8
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
i i
:
1
-
:
1
^
1
i i |
1
i
i
|
1
1
s (P.U. ity unil 5 poros
+
Z
e
i
i
z
i
1
9
9
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
CALI ( I N)
6 000 16. 00
GR (GftPI)
0. 0 15 0 0
1
^3
Is
- 1
X
S
Tr-
y^T f
.t ~
"t
*~
T
v
z: i
1i
E x
.
,
) r
1
/
r
I
i '
i
l
,
i
i
f
*
i
zz
.
. _
zz
N
,
t =
b;
i
S
s
ta
rfTl
I p *
>
s
< y
h
rt
s.
*-
.
s
t-
h
16300
16400
T ENS( LB)
10000. 0. 0
NPHI ( )
03 000 - 0. 100
DPHI ( )
0 3 000 - 0. 100
f t
J llll JUL
-
EQI
V
DEPTH
B IT SIZE
Tj pt fluid in hola
Rm al naat. lamp.
m
==
>:
\
. ^
1
i
T *
-
:
r ^
16 490
8 - 3 / 4
Chanuc o l
. 93 ot 7 4 F
E
-;
>
- i
_ i -
^ L :
Poi
?
2=
*
^ ^
^
^
.
|S
>^
e
3L^-
r
_ x
"
r
3
5
s
:
r*
-(-
-V-
-J-
^
*
5
.
5:
^
^
- ^ 5
-=n
,
< -
i
r
=
~
"-
i
g
- r -
^
"
s
^'
- ^
zz\
~
1
*
=
=
.
Zz
1[
R< nf at mto i. lamp
Rnvc o l mao*. tamp
Mo Rae Tamp
-*
"2L
^
^ Z|
, ,
?
S
* -
^
s
~
=
=
z:
}
,-
s
. 70 al 74 F
al F
222
F
Figure 100. Combination Neutron-Density log with gamma ray log and caliper, Devonian Hunton Dolomite, Anadarko basin.
Note:
1. From 16,302 to 16,386 ft, the decrease in hole diameter on the caliper log in track #1 because of mud cake
(permeability).
2. From 16,302 to 16,384 ft, see the increase in neutron and density porosity. Also, the neutron and density
porosity values are approximately equal. Because the lithology of the Chimney Hill Member of the Hunton
Formation is dolomite, if the Hunton was wet or an oil-bearing reservoir, the neutron porosity should be greater
than the density porosity (lithology effect; Chapter IV). However, because the Chimney Hill porosity is
gas-bearing, the neutron-density porosities are approximately equal (gas effect).
200
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
GAMMA RAY
CALIPER
HOLE SIZE INCHES
DEPTH
0.4300 0000
NEUTRON POROSITY
T n ~ T T j T i
RH06 ( G/ C3)
DEPTH 1 6 4 9 0
BIT SIZE B-V4
T]^ llutd in hoU d>>micol
i. Hm. .93 at 74 f.
Wmf ol K M, t w .TO at 7 4" f.
Wwie ai moi . i
Mai Wtt.Timp. 122 F.
Figure 101. Density log with neutron porosity, gamma ray log, and caliper, Devonian Hunton Dolomite, Anadarko basin.
Note:
From 16,304 to 16,386 ft, the increase in correction (A
p
) which has been applied to the bulk density log (p
h
). This
increase in correction is the result of the mudcake developed on the porous and permeable Chimney Hill Member
of the Hunton Formation.
201
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Case Study 6 Answer
The log package used in the well includes a Dual
Induction Spherically Focused Log (SFL*) with an SP log
and a R
xo
/R
t
curve (Fig. 99), and a Combination
Neutron-Density log with a gamma ray log and caliper
(Figs. 100 and 101).
On the Dual Induction Log, the R
x
JR
t
quick look curve
has a strong deflection to the right, away from the SP log,
from 16,300 to 16,390 ft (Fig. 99). The rightward
deflection of the R
M
/Rt curve indicates hydrocarbons are
present. Further examination of the Dual Induction Log
shows resistivities decline precipitously at an interval from
16,325 to 16,370 ft (Fig. 99). Such a rapid change to lower
resistivities may be due to the presence of water or perhaps
to a signficant change in lithology.
The SP curve in track # 1 of the Dual Induction Log is
used to find a value for R
w
. The chart in Figure
13 helps you determine R
m
f/R
we
from SSP; the
value located on the chart is 12. Next, calculate a
value for R
we
by the formula: R
we
= R
m
f/(R
m
f/R
W
e)'
The resulting value for R
we
is 0.021. Then, you determine
by the chart (Fig. 14) that R
w
at T
f
is 0.025.
The caliper log on the Combination Neutron-Density Log
alerts you to the occurence of invasion in the Hunton by
mudcake development (Fig. 100). Another item of
significance interpreted from the Combination
Neutron-Density Log is gas effected dolomite (see Chapter
IV).
On neutron-density porosity logs recorded over a non-
gas-bearing dolomite, the neutron log will read a higher
porosity than the density log when the logs are run on a
limestone matrix. However, on this matrix through the
porous Hunton dolomite, both the neutron and the density
logs record essentially the same porosity, with porosity
values ranging from 6 to 10% (Fig. 100). These equivalent
porosity values can be explained by the presence of gas in
the zone, because gas causes the neutron log to record too
low a porosity, and the density log to record too high a
porosity. The coming together of both the neutron and
density curves, as noted in the Hunton dolomite, reflects a
gas effected dolomite (Fig. 100).
The density log (Fig. 101) has a high correction on the A
p
curve from 16,304 to 16,386 ft. This high amount of
correction is the result of correcting the bulk density p|, for
effect of mudcake.
Grain size, determined by a crossplot of water saturation
versus porosity (Fig. 102), over the porous Chimney Hill
Member of the Hunton from 16,306 to 16,384 ft is:
coarse-grained from 16,306 to 16,324 ft; fine-grained to
medium-grained from 16,326 to 16,372 ft; and
coarse-grained from 16,372 to 16,384 ft. The coarser grain
size data points on the crossplot are probably not the result
of coarse, sucrosic dolomite porosity, but rather the
presence of vuggy porosity. You reach this conclusion
because you know that vuggy porosity has very low values
for irreducible water saturation, and therefore, also has very
low values for bulk volume water (see Chapter VI, Table 8).
Conversely, because of higher bulk volume water values
when only intercrystalline porosity is present, you conclude
that the fine to medium grain sizes from 16,326 to 16,372 ft
(Fig. 102) represent a zone in the Chimney Hill Member
with predominantly intercrystalline (i.e. sucrosic) porosity
and only minor vugs.
The low (less than 0.7) moveable hydrocarbon index
(S
W
/S
TO
) together with high moveable oil saturation
percentages suggests hydrocarbons were moved by invasion
of the mud filtrate. Relative permeability to water is low
and varies from 0.06 to 0 (Fig. 103) and relative
permeability to gas (Fig. 104) is high with values ranging
from greater than 20% to 100%. The relative permeability
values for K^, and K
ro
are favorable indicators of
commercial production.
Permeability (Fig. 105) averages 10 to 15 md and reaches
a maximum permeability of 50 md. The bulk volume water
crossplot (Fig. 106) confirms the presence of higher water
saturations due to a finer grain size and a lack of vuggy
porosity, or the higher water saturation values may be
related to water saturation values above irreducible, where
bulk volume water is greater than 0.015. Higher bulk
volume water values are from the zone occurring over an
interval from 16,325 to 16,370 ft. This is the interval which
also happens to have the lower resistivities (Fig. 99). Bulk
volume water values of 0.015 or less (Fig. 106) are from
zones in the Hunton with both vuggy and intercrystalline
porosity (see Chapter VI, Table 8).
The upper zone from approximately 16,300 to 16,322 ft
of the Chimney Hill Member of the Hunton has several
favorable indicators of a productive hydrocarbon zone.
First, good permeability and porosity seem to be present.
The porosity ranges from 6 to 10% and is intercrystalline
and vuggy. There are low water saturations and low bulk
volume water values; these, along with the high relative
permeabilities to gas and the good reservoir permeabilities,
support your decision to set pipe and to perforate the upper
zone. The lower zone from 16,325 to 16,370 ft has higher
water saturations and higher bulk volume water values, and
therefore, it may be water productive. Because subsurface
geology indicates the presence of downdip water, this zone
might be avoided for perforating; however, the higher water
saturation and bulk volume water values over the interval
from 16,325 to 16,370 ft may occur because of changes in
rock type. Evidence for a lithology change is the apparent
loss of vuggy porosity as indicated by the increase in BVW
202
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
from 16,325 to 16,370 ft. If, in fact, a loss of vuggy
porosity has caused the abrupt change to lower resistivities,
then the interval may not represent a zone above irreducible
water saturation (i.e. "wet zone"). Unfortunately, without
having a core to analyze, you can't determine with any
certainty whether or not the 16,325 to 16,370 ft interval will
be water or hydrocarbon productive, and so you decide to
avoid perforating it in this well.
The estimated gas recovery is 2.76 BCF. Parameters used
to arrive at this figure are: drainage area (DA) = 540 acres;
porosity (<) = 7%; water saturation (S
w
) = 11%; reservoir
thickness (h) = 8 ft; gas gravity = 0.63 (estimated);
temperature (estimated) = 228F; BHP (estimated) = 7,260
psi; recovery factor (RF) = 0.75; Z factor = 1.165. A
geothermal gradient of 0.014 x depth and a pressure
gradient of 0.445 x depth.
The Hunton was perforated from 16,306 to 16,314 ft with
27 holes. Completion was natural and the calculated open
flow (CAOF) of the well was 67,023 mcfgpd and the
shut-in tubing pressure was 4,639 psi. During the first six
months of production, the Hunton produced 0.455 BCF
plus 2,030 barrels of condensate.
203
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
o
.
0
s
"
3
>
w
nLog
!
c
IeF:
unto
wer
onia
I
S
1
i
C
O
o
J
t
>
p
q
C
O
3
O
H
m
J
o
C
O
f
c
e
g
C
O
o
S
5
p
O
5
o
P
H
^
1
H
C
O
f
l
)
-
I
3
r
H
3
S
1
t
o
<
*
0
2
r
H
z
s
o
q
r
H
t
o
0
2
t
o
t
o
<
*
<
*
0
2
*
t
o
C
O
0
2
t
o
t
o
^
o
o
1
0
o
o
t
o
o
t
o
t
o
o
o
t
o
C
O
o
t
o
C
O
r
-
1
0
2
t
o
o
o
z
v
o
q
0
5
r
-
i
t
o
t
o
0
5
0
2
2
>
0
2
O
Z
>
1
0
*
t
o
a
>
C
O
o
o
C
O
o
o
C
O
o
o
C
O
o
o
C
O
C
O
o
t
o
C
O
r
H
0
2
t
o
C
O
N
O
q
*
0
2
o
t
o
^
t
o
0
2
0
2
o
r
H
N
K
)
C
O
0
0
t
o
C
O
o
o
C
O
o
C
O
^
o
C
O
*
o
o
C
O
o
r
H
t
o
C
O
r
H
0
2
t
o
0
0
N
o
q
0
2
0
2
0
2
t
o
0
2
t
o
^
0
2
o
r
H
Z
-
t
o
*
t
o
0
0
N
o
o
t
o
o
o
t
o
o
o
t
o
o
o
t
o
0
2
r
H
t
o
C
O
r
H
-
0
0
0
2
0
0
z
v
o
q
^
0
2
0
0
0
2
t
o
t
o
o
0
2
0
)
C
O
C
O
2
S
C
O
0
0
z
v
1
0
t
-
^
C
O
C
D
t
o
C
O
c
o
t
o
C
O
z
v
-
*
^
r
H
t
o
C
D
r
H
C
O
0
2
N
O
)
o
o
0
2
0
2
0
2
t
o
0
2
t
o
^
0
2
o
r
H
a
>
C
O
O
O
2
C
O
C
O
O
o
t
o
o
o
t
o
o
o
C
D
O
O
t
o
C
O
l
-
<
t
o
C
O
r
H
t
o
0
2
0
0
C
O
O
q
z
>
r
H
t
o
t
o
t
o
0
2
2
-
-
0
2
0
)
0
5
C
O
t
o
0
5
C
O
o
o
*
o
0
0
*
t
o
0
2
*
o
o
<
t
f
0
0
r
H
t
o
C
D
r
H
C
O
0
2
C
D
z
v
o
q
C
D
r
H
^
t
o
^
0
2
C
D
0
2
C
O
0
3
C
O
0
)
C
O
C
O
z
y
o
t
o
<
*
t
o
0
2
t
o
o
o
o
r
H
o
C
O
1
<
o
0
2
t
o
C
O
r
H
t
o
t
s
C
O
o
r
H
q
t
o
C
D
C
O
t
o
C
O
0
5
z
s
0
2
t
o
t
o
t
o
C
O
0
2
^
t
o
0
2
o
t
o
0
2
o
o
t
o
o
o
t
o
o
t
o
0
2
0
2
0
2
t
o
C
D
r
H
0
2
t
o
1
^
r
H
q
0
5
t
o
^
t
o
C
O
t
o
C
D
0
2
o
0
2
2
-
t
o
o
0
5
C
O
Z
S
o
t
o
r
H
o
C
O
r
H
o
o
0
2
o
t
o
r
H
*
0
2
t
o
C
D
r
H
z
-
t
o
C
O
r
H
r
H
0
2
q
*
t
o
^
0
5
N
-
t
o
C
O
t
o
C
O
t
o
C
O
C
O
C
D
C
O
t
o
o
r
H
r
H
o
C
D
t
o
C
O
C
O
w
t
o
C
D
r
H
Z
5
-
t
o
C
O
t
o
N
0
2
q
C
O
C
O
^
*
o
o
t
o
t
o
T
f
1
<
C
O
C
D
t
o
C
D
C
O
t
o
t
o
o
C
D
t
o
C
O
t
o
t
o
c
o
0
2
t
o
C
D
r
H
<
*
t
o
1
0
5
0
2
q
C
D
1
0
^
^
o
o
t
o
t
o
<
^
E
-
1
0
C
D
C
O
C
O
C
O
o
t
o
C
O
t
o
r
H
t
o
o
t
o
o
t
o
t
o
C
O
r
H
0
2
t
o
1
r
S
0
2
q
C
O
C
O
o
*
C
D
0
5
r
H
t
o
c
o
t
o
2
-
C
O
C
O
r
S
C
D
C
O
t
o
C
O
C
O
C
O
t
o
C
O
t
o
0
2
t
o
t
o
C
D
r
H
0
2
t
o
1
t
o
0
2
q
o
C
O
0
2
^
t
o
0
0
*
t
o
C
D
t
o
z
v
t
o
C
D
C
O
C
O
C
D
o
^
o
Z
V
r
H
^
o
*
^
t
o
t
o
C
D
r
H
0
2
t
o
1
0
2
0
2
q
>
C
O
C
D
t
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
t
o
z
s
1
0
^
C
O
C
O
N
o
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
*
o
t
o
C
D
t
o
t
o
C
D
r
H
t
o
0
2
C
O
r
H
0
2
*
0
2
q
0
2
r
H
o
N
C
O
t
o
*
C
D
z
>
0
2
0
5
t
o
E
-
-
1
0
0
5
0
0
t
o
^
o
r
H
0
2
o
0
2
r
H
C
O
t
-
0
0
t
o
C
O
C
D
r
A
0
0
0
2
r
>
0
2
^
0
2
q
t
o
t
o
Z
S
<
f
0
2
C
D
0
5
t
o
0
5
0
2
0
0
t
o
-
C
O
C
O
C
D
t
o
*
o
o
f
~
i
o
C
D
t
o
*
o
^
t
o
C
D
r
H
C
O
0
2
1
o
t
o
q
C
O
C
O
o
l
t
o
0
5
0
2
t
o
Z
S
t
o
o
o
t
o
t
o
C
O
0
5
C
O
0
0
0
2
C
O
*
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
2
<
*
t
o
C
D
r
H
2
0
4
L
O
G
I
N
T
E
R
P
R
E
T
A
T
I
O
N
C
A
S
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
i
!
t
o
0
2
1
*
t
o
q
t
o
C
O
t
o
r
-
l
*
o
0
3
t
o
t
o
z
v
t
o
0
3
0
3
0
3
t
o
2
>
0
2
0
2
0
0
t
o
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
*
*
t
o
C
D
r
-
l
1
0
0
2
1
C
D
t
o
O
0
3
<
#
C
O
^
0
3
C
O
N
t
o
O
<
*
0
>
O
)
I
D
O
O
t
-
0
3
r
H
0
)
W
o
0
2
0
3
r
H
C
D
*
t
o
C
O
r
H
O
t
o
1
t
o
t
o
o
t
o
C
D
2
~
-
*
!
o
o
r
-
l
C
O
t
o
2
-
*
t
o
t
o
i
S
I
O
N
C
0
o
0
2
z
>
t
o
o
0
2
o
0
2
o
o
"
*
t
o
C
O
r
H
0
0
0
2
1
0
2
t
o
o
2
3
-
<
*
C
O
*
;
t
o
C
D
O
O
Z
>
t
o
0
3
t
o
O
O
Z
>
t
o
0
0
z
v
t
o
0
2
0
2
C
D
0
0
w
C
O
0
2
O
t
o
t
o
C
D
r
-
i
C
O
^
1
o
t
o
q
0
3
t
o
r
-
l
C
O
o
o
r
-
l
0
3
t
o
r
-
l
C
O
C
O
-
*
C
O
1
0
<
t
f
c
-
0
2
O
C
O
r
-
l
t
o
N
0
2
0
2
C
O
t
o
C
O
r
H
t
-
t
o
1
t
o
t
o
q
r
-
l
*
0
3
I
O
O
O
r
H
r
H
t
o
0
3
t
o
C
D
C
O
t
o
I
D
I
S
C
D
O
0
2
o
t
o
o
0
2
O
0
2
*
t
o
t
o
C
O
r
H
o
o
0
2
1
r
-
i
*
q
0
3
^
r
H
t
o
o
o
r
H
t
o
t
o
r
H
C
O
C
O
^
C
O
o
0
3
C
O
r
H
C
D
0
2
C
O
r
H
C
O
r
H
C
D
C
O
t
o
C
O
r
H
o
o
0
2
I
0
2
^
*
q
t
>
*
t
o
t
o
o
o
r
H
J
>
t
o
t
o
t
o
0
0
C
O
C
D
O
r
H
t
o
0
0
^
r
H
0
0
0
2
0
2
r
H
"
*
r
H
0
0
C
O
t
o
C
O
r
H
a
0
2
1
1
0
<
*
q
t
o
*
t
o
C
O
C
O
*
o
o
r
H
r
H
C
O
C
O
f
o
r
H
C
O
r
H
r
H
t
o
0
3
0
2
r
H
0
0
r
H
r
H
r
H
0
2
r
H
o
C
D
t
o
C
O
r
H
o
0
2
1
S
q
o
C
D
o
^
o
o
r
H
t
-
0
2
O
<
*
r
H
r
H
C
O
C
D
*
r
H
C
O
0
2
r
H
t
o
r
H
C
D
r
H
0
2
r
H
t
o
r
-
i
0
2
C
O
t
o
C
O
r
H
o
c
*
1
t
o
t
o
q
t
o
C
O
C
O
t
o
t
o
0
0
0
0
0
2
o
t
o
r
H
r
H
C
O
0
3
0
2
r
H
C
O
O
r
H
t
o
0
2
O
t
o
o
0
2
t
o
0
2
*
c
o
t
o
C
O
r
H
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
2
0
2
q
t
o
^
C
O
0
3
t
o
r
-
i
t
-
r
H
t
o
0
0
0
2
o
o
C
O
o
d
0
0
C
O
C
D
o
C
O
O
O
N
o
C
O
o
C
O
C
D
C
O
t
o
C
D
r
H
2
>
t
o
1
t
o
0
2
q
C
O
C
O
r
H
^
*
0
3
t
o
t
o
c
o
t
o
C
O
1
0
C
O
N
C
O
!
S
^
f
C
O
Z
v
2
>
^
2
>
*
C
O
C
O
t
o
C
O
r
H
0
2
0
2
t
o
0
2
^
0
2
q
o
*
0
0
t
o
^
f
C
D
o
t
o
^
0
2
O
r
-
i
t
-
0
2
r
H
C
O
O
r
H
0
2
^
O
C
D
C
O
t
o
0
2
<
t
f
o
r
>
t
o
C
O
r
H
1
0
0
2
N
r
H
t
-
r
H
q
t
o
t
o
C
O
t
o
0
2
C
O
0
0
0
2
0
3
r
H
0
3
t
o
t
o
r
-
i
r
-
i
t
o
0
)
o
0
3
C
O
r
H
r
H
O
0
3
o
0
3
0
2
E
>
t
o
C
D
r
H
t
o
0
2
0
2
r
-
H
0
2
r
H
o
t
o
t
o
o
o
0
2
C
O
T
f
r
H
0
2
t
o
r
-
H
0
3
O
O
I
D
O
r
H
0
3
O
o
o
r
H
t
o
r
H
o
1
0
0
2
O
O
O
r
H
*
#
>
t
o
C
D
r
H
0
0
r
-
H
0
0
r
H
r
H
o
t
-
0
2
t
o
0
2
C
O
t
o
o
o
r
-
H
0
3
C
O
0
2
r
H
t
o
r
H
0
2
r
-
i
C
O
O
r
H
o
0
3
r
-
H
o
0
2
r
H
o
0
2
r
H
o
0
3
r
-
H
C
D
f
r
-
t
o
C
D
r
H
0
2
0
2
r
H
r
-
H
0
2
r
H
o
t
o
t
o
r
>
0
2
C
D
*
o
0
2
t
o
r
-
H
o
r
-
i
t
o
t
-
C
O
0
2
r
H
r
H
o
C
O
o
0
2
r
H
O
0
0
r
H
O
C
D
r
H
0
0
2
>
t
o
C
D
r
-
H
0
3
r
H
r
H
r
H
C
O
r
H
O
0
3
0
2
o
t
o
0
2
s
f
<
0
2
0
2
t
o
r
H
0
2
r
-
H
r
H
r
H
t
o
r
-
H
C
O
r
-
i
r
H
o
r
-
H
r
H
o
o
r
-
i
o
o
r
-
H
o
r
-
H
r
H
o
0
0
t
o
C
D
r
H
O
0
2
r
H
t
-
r
H
q
0
3
t
o
0
0
0
2
^
C
O
O
0
2
C
O
r
H
r
-
i
r
H
C
O
0
3
C
O
0
2
r
H
r
-
H
r
H
o
0
3
o
t
-
C
O
C
D
O
0
3
0
2
C
O
t
o
C
D
r
H
s (P.U.
1
1.5 poros
+
z
I
I
o
0
2
t
o
0
3
r
H
<
t
f
r
H
q
o
*
^
w
.
o
C
D
C
O
0
2
r
-
H
0
2
2
>
c
o
0
3
C
O
O
0
2
r
-
i
o
r
H
0
0
0
0
o
0
2
r
H
Q
0
0
t
o
C
D
r
H
2
0
5
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
Effect of grain siz*
100
SW % so -
680 3080
Figure 102.
Grain size determination by water saturation (S
w
)
versus porosity (0) crosspiot, Devonian Hunton Dolomite,
Anadarko basin.
Krw
SW %
10 20 30 40 SO 0
Sw irr %
TO
Figure 103.
Irreducible water saturation (S^
irr
) versus water saturation (S
w
)
crosspiot for determining relative permeability to water (K^,),
Devonian Hunton Dolomite, Anadarko basin.
206
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
D 20 3 0 4 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 8 0 9 0
Swirr %
Figure 104.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w m
) versus water
saturation (S
w
) crossplot for determining relative permeability
to gas (Kfg), Devonian Hunton Dolomite, Anadarko basin.
K * parmMbility , md
Swirr %
Figure 105.
Irreducible water saturation (S
w iri
) versus porosity (<j>)
crossplot for determining permeability, Devonian Hunton
Dolomite, Anadarko basin.
207
LOG INTERPRETATION CASE STUDIES
30
25
20
0 %
IS
10
5
10 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 6 0 9 0
sw %
Figure 106. Bulk volume water (BVW)
crossplot (<j> vs S
w
), Devonian Hunton
Dolomite, Anadarko basin.
208
APPENDICES
PERMEABILITY: SANDSTONES, SHALY SANDS
70
^ 6 0
o
N
c
o
50
w
c
o
z 40
>
O
x>
<
30H
c
o
B
l a )
< />
i _
V
I io
</>
400
Schlumberget-
- . 005
10 15 20 25
<t>, Porosity, p.u.
30 35 40
Appendix 1. Chart of porosity (</>) versus irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) for estimating permeability and determining bulk
volume water (C = S
w
x <).
Courtesy Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1969, Schlumberger.
209
APPENDICES
Appendix 2. Irreducible water saturation (S
w irt
) versus
water saturation (S
w
) crossplot chart for
determining percent water-cut (65 API gravity
oil). Chart after Fertl and Vercellino (1978).
30 40 50 60
Water saturation, S
w
- %
80
Appendix 3. Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus
water saturation (S
w
) crossplot chart for
determining percent water-cut (19 API gravity
oil). Chart after Fertl and Vercellino (1978).
Water saturation, S
w
< %
210
APPENDICES
Appendix 4. Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus
water saturation (S
w
) crossplot chart for
determining percent water-cut (35 API gravity
oil). Chart after Fertl and Vercellino (1978).
30 40 50
Water saturation, S
80
%
Appendix 5. Irreducible water saturation (S
w irr
) versus
water saturation (S
w
) crossplot chart for
determining percent water-cut (27 API gravity
oil). Chart after Fertl and Vercellino (1978).
Water saturation, S,
211
APPENDICES
Appendix 6. Dual Induction-Laterolog-8* chart for correcting R
ILd
to R
t
.
Courtesy of Schlumberger Well Services.
Copyright 1968, Schlumberger.
212
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
Alger, R. P., 1980, Geological use of wireline logs (p.
207-222) in G. D. Hobson, ed., Developments in
petroleum2: London, Applied Science Publishers,
Ltd., 345 p.
Archie, G. E., 1942, The electrical resistivity log as an aid
in determining some reservoir characteristics: Petroleum
Technology, v. 5, p. 54-62.
Asquith, G. B., 1979, Subsurface carbonate depositional
modelsa concise review: Tulsa, PennWell, 121 p.
1980, Log analysis by microcomputer: Tulsa,
PennWell, 105 p.
Bateman, R. M., and C. E. Konen, 1977, The log analyst
and the programmable pocket calculator: The Log
Analyst, v. 18, no. 5, p. 3-11.
Carothers, J. E., 1968, A statistical study of the formation
factor relation to porosity: The Log Analyst, v. 9, p.
38-52.
and C. R. Porter, 1970, Formation factor-porosity
relation from well log data: Soc. Professional Well Log
Analysts, 11th Ann. Logging Symp.,Trans., paperD.
Coates, G., and J. L. Dumanoir, 1973, Anew approach to
improve log-derived permeability: Soc. Professional
Well Log Analysts, 14th Ann. Logging Symp., Trans.,
paperR.
Doll, H. G., 1948, The SP log, theoretical analysis and
principles of interpretation: Trans., AIME, v. 179, p.
146-185,
Dresser Atlas, 1974, Log review1: Houston, Dresser
Industries, Inc.
1975, Log interpretation fundamentals: Houston,
Dresser Industries, Inc.
1979, Log interpretation charts: Houston, Dresser
Industries, Inc., 107 p.
Fertl, W. H., 1975, Shaly sand analysis in development
wells: Soc. Professional Well Log Analysts, 16th Ann.
Logging Symp., Trans., paper A.
1978, R
wa
Methodfast formation evaluation, in
Practical log analysis8: Oil and Gas Jour., (May 15,
1978-Sept. 19, 1979).
and W. C. Vercellino, 1978, Predict water cut from
well logs, in Practical log analysis4: Oil and Gas
Jour., (May 15, 1978-Sept. 19, 1979).
Hilchie, D. W., 1978, Applied openhole log interpretation:
Golden, Colorado, D. W. Hilchie, Inc.
1979, Old electric log interpretation: Golden
Colorado, D. W. Hilchie, Inc., 161 p.
Hingle, A. T., 1959, The use of logs in exploration
problems: Soc. Exploration Geophysicists, 29th Mtg.
(Los Angeles).
Jaafar, I. B., 1980, Depositional and diagenetic history of
the B-zone of the Red River Formation (Ordovician) of
the Beaver Creek Field, Golden Valley County, North
Dakota: M.S. thesis, West Texas State Univ. 68 p.
Johnson, H. M., 1958, The importance of accuracy in basic
measurements for electric log analysis: 3rd Ann. Conf.
on Well Logging Interpretation, McMurray College,
Abilene, Texas.
Kobesh, F. P., and R. B. Blizard, 1959, Geometric factors
in sonic logging: Geophysics, v. 24, p. 64-76.
Morris, R. L., and W. P. Biggs, 1967, Using log-derived
values of water saturation and porosity: Soc.
Professional Well Log Analysts, 8th Ann. Logging
Symp. Trans., paperO.
Pickett, G. R., 1972, Practical formation evaluation:
Golden Colorado, G. R. Pickett, Inc.
1977, Recognition of environments and carbonate
rock type identification: in Formation evaluation manual
unit II, section exploration wells: Tulsa, Oil and Gas
Consultants International, Inc., p. 4-25.
Sethi, D. K., 1979, Some considerations about the
formation resistivity factor-porosity relationships: Soc.
Professional Well Log Analysts, 20th Ann. Logging
Symp. Trans., paper L.
Schlumberger, 1968, Log interpretation/charts: Houston,
Schlumberger Well Services, Inc.
1969, Log interpretation/charts: Houston,
Schlumberger Well Services, Inc.
1972, Log interpretation/charts: Houston,
Schlumberger Well Services, Inc.
-1972, Log interpretation manual/principles, vol. I:
Houston, Schlumberger Well Services, Inc.
1974, Log interpretation manual/applications, vol.
II: Houston, Schlumberger Well Services, Inc.
1975, A guide to well site interpretation of the Gulf
Coast: Houston, Schlumberger Well Services, Inc.
1977, Log interpretation/charts: Houston,
Schlumberger Well Services, Inc.
1979, Log interpretation/charts: Houston,
Schlumberger Well Services, Inc.
Society of Professional Well Log Analysists, 1975,
Glossary of terms and expressions used in well logging:
Houston, Soc. Professional Well Log Analysts, 74 p.
213
REFERENCES
Simandoux, P., 1963, Mesuresdielectriques en milieu
poreux, application a mesure des saturations en eau:
Etude du Comportement des Massifs Argileux, Revue de
l'institut Francais du Petrole, Supplementary Issue.
Suau, J., P. Grimaldi, A. Poupon, andG. Souhaite, 1972,
Dual Laterolog R
xo
tool: Soc. Petroleum Engineers -
AIME, 47th Ann. Meeting (San Antonio), paper
spe-4018.
Timur, A., 1968, An investigation of permeability, porosity,
and residual water saturation relationships for sandstone
reservoirs: The Log Analyst, v. 9, (July - August), p.
8-17.
Tittman, J., and J. S. Wahl, 1965, The physical foundations
of formation density logging (Gamma-Gamma):
Geophysics, v. 30, p. 284-294.
Tixier, M. P., R. P. Alger, W. P. Biggs, and B. N.
Carpenter, 1963, Dual induction-laterologa new tool
for resistivity analysis: Soc. Petroleum Engineers -
AIME, 38th Ann. Meeting (New Orleans), paper no.
spe-713.
Truman, R., R. P. Alger, J. Connell, and R. L. Smith,
1972, Progress report on interpretation of the dual
spacing neutron log (CNL): Soc. of Professional Well
Log Analysts, 13th Ann. Logging Symp. Trans., paper
Watney, W. L., 1979, Gamma ray-Neutron cross-plots as an
aid in sedimentological analysis (p. 81-100), in D. Gill
and D. F. Merriam, eds., Geomathematical and
petrophysical studies in sedimentology: Pergamon Press,
266 p.
1980, Cyclic sedimentation of the Lansing-Kansas
City groups in northwestern Kansas and southwestern
Nebraska: Kansas Geol. Survey Bull. 220, 72 p.
Wermund, E. G., 1975, Upper Pennsylvanian limestone
banks, north central lexas: Univ. Texas, (Austin), Bur.
Econ. Geol. circ. 75-3, 34 p.
Wylie, M. R. J., and W. D. Rose, 1950, Some theoretical
considerations related to the quantitative evaluations of
the physical characteristics of reservoir rock from
electric log data: Jour. Petroleum Technology, v. 189, p.
105-110.
- A. R. Gregory, and G. H. F. Gardner, 1958, An
experimental investigation of the factors affecting elastic
wave velocities in porous media: Geophysics, v. 23, p.
459-493.
214
Explanation of Indexing:
A refere nce is indexed accordi ng to it s important , or key ...
W<lrds .
Three columns are to the left of a keyword entry. The first
column . a ktter entry, re present s the AAPG book series from
whic h the refe re nce originated. In thi s case. R stands for
ntc thods in Geology Series. Every fi ve years. AAPG will
merge all its indexes togethe r. and the letter R will diffe rentiate
thi s re ference from those o f the AAPG Studies in Geology Se-
ries (S). the AAPG Memo ir Series (M). or from the AAPG
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
I!
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
11 '1
4
2
5
96
2
7
]Qj
,
63
111
11'1
6 1
8 1
6'1
"
51
2!
,-,
J
2:
9;
9;
9 ]
9'
9 1
6'1
10'1
101
6<>
29
:! J
21
49
4 1
41
4 1
47
69
10
4'
81
g;
79
li S
119
11 9
11 9
ALPHA \-lAPPING FROM SP LOGS. LITHOLOGY LOGGI G
A NUl.US PROFILE. LOG t. T ERPRETATI ON. INVASI O
ARCHIE. BACKGROUND. LOG INTERPRETATION
ARCHI E. WATER SATURAT I ON FORMULA
ARCH I E EQUATION. LOG I NT ERPRETATION
BOREHOLE ENVI RONMENT. DEFINED
BOREHOLE ENVIRONMENT. SCHEMATIC
BULK VOLUME WATER. LOG I NTERPRETATION
BCLK VOL UME WATER. LOG I TER PRETAT ION
BULK VOLUME WATER EQUAT ION
CALIPER EXAMPLE. SPO T ANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
CARBONATE FROM RAY
CLEM> SAND MAPS FROM GAMMA RAY
COMBI NATION NEUTRON- DENSI TY LOG. POROSI TY LOGS
NEUTRON LOG, LITHOLOGY CORRECTIONS
COMPTON SCATTERING. DDI SITY LOG
CONDUCTIVITY. DEFI NED. LOG I NTERPRE TAT I ON
CO. DUCTIVITY DERIVI' D POROSITY. QUICK LOOK
DI'F.P I NDUCTION CORRECTED TO T RUE RESISTIVI T Y
Dl ' EP LATEROLOG CORRECTED TO T RUE RESIST I VI TY
DI'NSITY FUNCTI ON. RESIDUAL H YDROCARBON SATCRAT I ON
DENSITY LOG. POROSITY LOGS
DENSITY LOG. COMPTON SCATTERING
DENSITY LOG. MATRI X DENSITIES. TABLE
DENSITY LOG. POROSll Y FROM BULK VALUES
DENSI TY. LOG EQUATION. LOG INTERPRETATI ON. POROSITY
Dl!AL INDUCT I ON FOCc' SEO LOG. RESISTI VIT Y LOGS
INDUCTI O FOCUSED LOG. EXPLAI NED. RESIST IVIT Y
I NDUCTION FOCL' SED LOG. HYDROCARBO. -BEARI!' G
DUAL I NDUCTI ON FOCL' SED LOG. WATER-BEAR I. G
Dl ' AL LATEROLOG-MICROSPH ERICALLY FOCUSED LOG
DUAL LATEROLOG-MICROSPHERICALLY FOCUSED LOG
DUA L l.ATEROLOG MICROSPH ERI CALL Y FOCUSED LOG
F.QUIV ALENT R ESI STI VI I'Y. SPONTANEOL!S POTENTI AL L.()(;
FACI ES MAPPI NG. LITHOLOGY LOGGI NG
FLUSHED ZONE. DESCRIBED. LOG
FORMATION FACTOR. COEFFI CI ENTS. LOG
FORMATION FACTOR EQUATI ON. LOG INTERPRETATION
FORMATION T EMPERATURE CALCULATIONS
FORMATION WATER RESI STIVITY E()UATION
FORMATl'ON TEMPERATURE Cll ART. l. OG INTERPRETATION
GAMMA RAY I NDEX. GAMMA RAY LOG
GAMMA RAY LOG. GAMMA RAY I NDEX
GAMMA RAY LOG. SHAL E. VOLGM E CALCl'LATIONS
GAMMA RAY LOG. VOL. l.' M E OF SHALE CORRECTIONS
GAMMA RAY LOGS. LOG I T ERPRETATIONS
GAMMA RAY NEUTRON-DE SITY LOG. LITHOLOGY LOGGING
GAS EFFECT. NEUTROJ'.< LOG
HI NGLE CROSSPLOT. RESI STI VITY VERSUS POROSITY
HING!..E CROSS PLOT Mf.HIOD. LOG INTER.PRETAT IO:O.
HYDROCARBON EFFECT. SONI C LOG
HYDROCARBON SUPPRI:.SSI ON. SPONTANEOUS POTE:"TIAL
HYDROCARBON-BEARING. DUAL LATEROLOG-MICROSPHER
HYDROCA RBO -BEARING. Dl A L " DIJCTION
INilUCl l ON ELF.CTRIC LOG. EXPLAI I'JED
INDUCTION EL ECTRIC LOGS. I N Dl..CTION LOGS. RESISTIVI TY
I NDUCTI ON ELECTRI C l.OGS. SHORT LOGS
l :"DIX T ION LOCS. RESI SrtVITY LOGS. I NDL'CTI ON ELECTRIC
VERSUS LATEROLOG. DETERMI NATION.
I "'TERV .. \1 . TRANSI T T IMES. TABLE. SOI'I C LOG
I NVADfD ZONE. DESCRI BED. LOG INTERPRETATI ON
INV.\ SI ON. ANNIJLI .' S PROFI LE. LOG I NTERPRETATI ON
INV,\SI ON. STEP PROHI.f. LOG INT ERPR ETATI ON
I. VASI ON. TRANSIT ION PROFILE. LOG I NT' RPRETATTON
I NVASI O>.! PROFILES DESCRI BED. l.OG I"TtRPRETATIOJ'
IRREDLCIBLE W.HER SA r L R.H I ON. DEFI NED
LA TEROLOG. RESI ST I VITY L()(;S
LA f EROLOG. FOCt.;SED < ' t.:R RENT. R ESISli \TfY LOGS
LITHOLOGY CORRECTI ONS. NEUTRO'-. J.Qt;
LI T llOl.OGY CORR ECTIONS. N ECTRON-DE'-.SITY LOG
LI T HOI. cx; y CORRECT IONS. NI T TRON POROSII Y
LITHOLOGY LOGGI NG. I OG IYfERPRF.TATI ON
LITHOLOGY LOGGI. G. ALPHA MAPPI NG FRO t SP LO<.;s
LI THOLOGY LOGGI NG. CARBONATE MAPS
LIT HOLOGY LOGGI NG. CL EA:" SAND :Vt APS FROM GA:VIMA
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
](
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
({
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
Bulktin ( B l
The following number is the series number. ln case. 3
represe nts a reference from Methods in Gel)logy Series ND. 3.
The last column entry is the puge number in thi s vDlume
wh.: rc this reference will be found.
1 ute : Thi s index is set up for s ingle- line entry. Where entries
exceed one I inc of type . the I inc is terminated. The reader must
sometimes he ahlc tn real ize keywords, although commonly
take n out 11 f context.
l I ]]
J 1] 9
J
J
) 123
J 121
J 118
.1 118
) 135
) 89
J 9
.1 6
.1
) 5
) 96
J 7
J
J 98
) 10'
J 6
.1
3
J lib
.1 J
J
)
)
J
) 101
J )
4
10
li B
'I
11 8
I
,,
1 ) 1
(I))
b
:!7
) .j ]
J Jill
J
l J I
)
)
)
J ()
} 91
.l '
.l 12 !
J
l h
1
)
.l b
1
1
J 41
) .IJ
.l hJ
) " .l
1 I ' X
.l I :x
J ():
J h'
.l H'
l.llHOUXjY LOGGI G. DISTRIIJI; T IIJN <'l. FAN C .. \I{ IJO'i ATES.
LI THOUx; y l.OG<.<I NG. ES ROCKT Y I' I' Cl.l ! S IT.RS.
LITiiOI.<XiY l.OGGI " G. FACl l S MAPI'l !'(;
LITHOl.<XW LOGGI NG. ( ; A\-i:'vt ,\ KAY N t:\ t ROJ' -Dl NSITY L00
LITHOLOGY LOGGING. l iTHOLO<;Y ON L<>< ; . E'<A.:-..1 1'1 E
LITHOLOGY LOGGI N<;. M AND N CONSTANTS. I ABI.I'.
LITHOi_!')(;y J.CX;GIN(; . MID Lll HOI.O<;Y PI ()I'
L1 n JOL(X;Y LOGGING. M :-1 LII IIOLOI' Y PI Cl r
LITHOI.<X;y LOGGI 'C. RFSI STIVITY CROSS PI OT FOR ROCK T Y Pl '-'G
LITIIOUX;Y LOGGING WIT II (; \.\IM,\ ({,\ Y . . 'iF.l' T RO'< lll' SITY L()(j
LOG flE,\ DI:"<;. FXA:VII' L E. L()(; riON
LOG I "TEKI'Rf.,\ riON. FORM.-\liON WA I' ER KESI Sl lVrJY
UX; I NTERPRETATION. ARCIIII:. BACK<; ROL.ND
LOG I NlTRI'KETATIO:\; . ARCIIII'. WA.li.R SA r URA flO>\;
LOG INTERPRETAflO'i . ARC! il l' E()L.-\rto.'-.
LOG I NTERPRETATION. IIOKUl ll LE FNVI RON vJ E!' I. >< ' 111' .. \ I ATI C
LO(; INTERPRETAI'I ON. llORLHOLF F:\;VIKO ' \-iE:--11 . 0 1'.1' 1:--il'.ll
L OG 1:-.'TERPKET AT IO . Al .' I.K \'OLCM I . W,\ I' I'.R
U J(; l !'TEKPRETAT ION. II I ' L K \ OI.L: Mt . \V,\ l'loR
I.O<; ll'TERPRET.-\ T ION. Ht.:LK W,\ r EK F()l ,\liON
LOG I NTI' RI' RETA l'I ON. l'ONlll CTI VI J'Y lll.l ' INI' I l
LOG I Nl EKI'RFTATION. lll!:\L I NI)t.;( liON HlCl .Sl l l l.< l < .
J.()(; I NT ERPRETATI ON. FLOW< ' HA Rr
l.O<; I NTERPRF.T,\TION. FI.CSHJ'[) ZONI'. I)J:SCRI II U l
LO(; 1'-.TERPRI' TATI ON. H) RM\ liON F\<TOK
LOG l'iTERPRET,\TI ON. FOR!VH T ION f \l ' IOR 1'.()1' .-\TIO:-.
LOl ; 1'-iT ERPRETA fl O'i. FOR \g flO rE\tl'LR,\ I I RE
l.OG l:"TERPRF.T ATION. i OR.\1.-\ ITO.'\; r 1-.:'vtPI.RA rt ' RI. CIJ,\ R I
LOG I NlERI' Rl .l AT ION. II INC! 1: CROSSI' l.O l'
l.O(; I J'' l F. RPRF. TATI ON. ZOI' lc. Dl ' SCRI I<l ' l'
LOG A"! Nl' I.I ' S I'ROI l l l
LOG I NTF.RPR F.TArJON. INV,\SlJN. l'ROIII.l'
I.OG l "iTERPRETATIOI' . INVASI<l l\ I'ROf' ll .E') [)I: SCRl lll I>
l.OG 1:\;TERPRETATI ON. I RRFil l T IBI.E W,\ ILK SA 1'1 ' R.-\ rill.'\;
LOG . LI T HOI O(;y I.Ol ;<.;r:-.<;
LOG I NTERPRETATIO . l.OC; HI ,\IJ I N<; . I'X.-\ MI' U
LOG l "iTERPRETATI ON. 'vi API'I M; IT.CII Nil) l .TS
LOG INTERPRETATI<lt' . DU' INI : ll
LOG Y EQI 'ArJO:-.
LOG i r>T ERPR ETATIO'J .l'LR.\IL\BIIIIY FROM 1.0< ;.')
l :"TERPRETATIOr>. PI CKUT CROSSPI.OI METIIOD
1.01; !'OROSI r Y. DE"iSITY 1.0( ; E<) l .,\ !' ION
LOG I NTlRPRI' TATIO!'<. POROSII Y. :" 1:1 TKON-DLNSI I \ 1.0<;
U)<.; INT lRPRETATION. l'OROSIIY. Si>.'-IC I ()( ; I'.() I_: A 110,'-.
LOG POROSII'Y lll'.l' l El>
LOG l i'TI'. RPRET ATION. POKOSIIy I.Ol; S
LOC I NTERPRE IX fiON. PROCUli ' RLS
L<X; l "'llRPRETArtO'i . ()l!ICK l.OllK .\I J' I'IIOllS
i.OG R .. \ riO M ETIIOD
LOG 1:-ITERI'RET.-\TI O"i . Rl ' l ,\I'I VI' PER:VI LAHII .I'IY. lll- 11'- l l l
LOG I NTERPRF.T\ l'I ON. Rl.SI SII\Tl'Y. DLI'IJ'I. Il
LOG ri O . CORIHCTU l l l ;,'vlf'
L<.X; INTERPRI'TA 1' 10 I. O(;S
L<X; INT ERI'Rl ' TA fiON. SHALY S.-\. D LYSIS
LOG I NTERPRI' T ,\ fiON. :>PON L\NLOl s l'OTE:-IT I AI. 1.0 (;
LO<; I NTERPRETA l'ION. SI'ON r ,\ N EOI JS l'OTr: "i rJ ,\ 1. J.O< ;
LO<; I N l'i' RPRETA l i ON. rE'-il'I. R .. Yn; Rt GR.-\l lll: N r
LO(; I N I'ERPRETATION. t :N t NVADED /.0 "1 1 .. l.lFSCRIBLil
LO<; IN fl'.R l'R ET.-\ fiON. WAIT R SA fl;RATI ON. DESCR lll i :D
LOC 1"-!TI ' RPRE I'A flON. W:\TlR SATlJR.\'IIO"i EOUA J'I O"J
1.0<; I NTI' RPKl'IXfiONS. (;AMM:\ l .<J< ; S
J.()( ; I NTI' RI'Rt' r :\ITON. i"J V,\ SHlN. TR.\ . SITION PROI ll.l '
M :-.'CO 'ST.-\ TS. J,\Rl.l' .. Ill HOI.IJ(;y J.()( ;(;J"i< ;
:\ l APPi N(; Tl'. CHNI()I IES. I.Ol ; I N
\-lATRI X llE"i SI'l ILS. .. DENSITY J.()( ;
M,\ TRi X YEI.OCIT IFS. TABLE. SO"i l< . l.<l(;
R II Y I.Ol ;S
MICROI.OG. Rl' SISIIVITY I.O<;s
M I CROI.OG. CA LI PER EX,\ .'vtPI E. 1'.-\ 'Jl' OL; S P(l'i E.'J.Il!\1.
Mll'ROLOG. POSITI VE Si ' I'ARA li ON
MI D IITIIOI.OGY PI.OT. IIT II OI O(; Y I oc;<; J 1;
\-i .r-; Ll f ii OJ.<X; Y PLOT. i.<l (;(; JN<;
NELTRON I.O< ;. POROSII Y L()(; S
Nfl!TRON LOG. G,\ S EFFECr
NEUTR0:-1-DE"JSITY 1.0 ( ;. Lillllll OGY CURRECTIO:-I S
2 15
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
I{
I{
R
R
R
I{
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
I{
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
I{
R
R
I{
R
I{
R
I{
2 16
X'!
" I
2X
" 101
107
liMI
1117
.19
li
27
l.l:-'
4 I
45
4'
r
41
4 1
4'1
47
4'
4]
4.1
4.1
NEUTRON-DLNSrl Y LOG. Lll HOLOGY LOG(;JNC WITH G.-\\1\1 \ RAY
N[ t, TRON-llLNSII Y LOG EQUATI ON. LOG I'JTLRPRETATIO'J
PFRMEADII. ITY. f>I'FIN[Il. L()(j INT ERPRETXIIO.N
PER\1 EABII.ITY CAITULATI ON. SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG
I'ERMI'ABII.ITY E()l ; ATION. LO(; ITRI'RETATI ON
PI'RML.-\liii.ITY FROM LOGS. LO<O I NTERPRETA rtON
PICK E IT CROSSI'l.Ol. R VERSL S POROSI TY
PI CKEITCROSSPLOT \IHHOO. LOG 1:-ITERPRETATI ON
I'OROSITY. PICKET!' <"ROSSPLOT. RESISTIVITY VERSL' S
POROSITY. DFNSI'I Y LOG E() UATION. LOG 1:-ITERPRETATION
POROSITY. N FI!lRON- IlE:-ISITY LOG EQUATION
POROSI r Y. SONIC L()(; E()IIATION. ux; INTERPRETATION
POROSITY LOC I NTERPRET\ !101'<
POROSI rY DETERMINED FROM SONIC VELOCITY. SON I C LOG
rY FROM UULK DE"'SITY V.\llJES. DENSITY LOG
POROSITY FROM RESISTIVITY. RESISTIVI TY LOGS
POROSITY Fl.; NcriON. RFSIDUAL HYDROCARBON SATL' R.-\ r!0:-1
I'OROSITr LO(;S. LO(; INTERPREJXI'ION
POROSITY LO<jS. COMBINATION NEUTRO'I -Df'NSI TY LOG
POROSITY LOCS. DENSITY LOG
LO<;S, Nl-.l iTRON LO(o
POROSITY LOGS. SON IC LOG
POSITIVE SI'P.\RA 110"1. MICROL<)(;
PROXIMITY LO<i. RI' SISTIVITY Lt)(;S
I'SECDOS'T A TI C SP<lN l'ANf:OL:S PO I'Ei'<TIAL. PSP
PSP. SPONTAN EOUS POTENTIAL LOG. PSEUDOSTA riC
(lUICK LOOK INTEKPRE rATION. RESIS'II VITY RATIOS
QUICK LOOK I NTF.RPRETA r!ONS.I'OROSITY
QUI CK LOOK I NTERPRETATI ONS. WF I K!'SISTI\' ITY CLRVE
()UICK L(XlK .\,IETIIODS. LOC INTERPRErAI ION
RA riO \1LTHOIJ. L<>G I NTERPRETATION
RELA JI VL I'ERMl:.\llii .ITY. DEFI NED. LOG I'ITERPRU .\ riO'i
RESI DI ' AL HYDR<l<.ARBON SA rtO"' . DENSITY
RESII l i JAL IIYDRO<'ARDON SA fl ' RATION. POROSITY FL' .'ICT ION
KESIS"IIVITY. llEEP INDUCTION CORRECTED r o TKCE Rf'SISTI\' ITY
RESISTIVITY. lli' FP LAI'EROLOG CORRECTED TO TRL' E RESIST IVITY
RESISTIVITY. DEFI'<Ell. LO<;
HI' SISTI VITY. DUTRMININC; CORRECJTD RW. CHART
RESISTIVITY CALCI'LA l'ION. POTE'ITIAL LOG
RESISTIVITY CORRFCTED FOR TEMPERATL!RE. CHART. LOG
RES IS riVITY rOR ROCK
R
R
I{
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
RESISliVITY I OCS. LO<; l ''n ERPRETA riO:>- R
RI.' SIS IIVI TY L()(jS. <.'1..-\ SSi r!C\TIO:>- r Alli.L R
RFSIS II VI rY LOGS DL' AL I'JDUCTION FO<'l. SHl LOC R
RLSI SI'I VITY I.OliS. Dl ' AL FO<TSU> LO(; R
RESISTIVI TY LOCS. I'LECTRI( L(l(;S. leoDlTTIO'' LO<iS R
RESISTIVITY LO<;s. l i'<DlT liON ELECTRI C L(X;s SHORI LOGS R
Rf'SI SIIVI ry LOGS. I NDl ' CTI ON lLFCl RIC L(Xo. R
RESISTIVITY LO(oS. l i'<DI ICTION \'ERst s
RESI STIVITY LOGS. 1,\ ITROLOl o
R I' SISTIVII'Y LOCS. LA ITROLO(i. IOCl SED CLR RL'J I
RESISTI VITY LO(oS. \IICROLATER0/. 0(;
RESISTIVI'I Y L()(;S. MICROLO<i
RLSIS n vrrY LOGS. POROSITY RESISTI VI I Y
R
R
R
R
4 ]
45
) 2
)7
98
109
107
J 40
J 91
3 31
J 29
J 102
3 41
J 79
J 6()
3 66
J 69
J 1>9
J 73
J 69
J 6
J 6?
J 28
J 6.1
J 29
J 29
J 28
J 29
J 28
)2
)7
40
)I
35
J 29
3 19
J ) 7
] 19
J 40
3 35
J 29
J 4
J 5
3 4
J )
J 91
3 19
J 95
3 J
J 6
5
19
17
100
RESISTIVITY LOGS. PROXIMITY LOG
RESISTIVITY LOGS. TWO-COI L I'JDLTATION SYSTE\1
RESISTIVITY OF WATER. SPONTANEOL' S POTENTIAL LO<;
RESISTIVI TY RATIO FROM SSP. SPO"TANEOI_s P<JT[.NTI \L
RESISTIVITY RATIOS. QUI CK LOOK I'<TERPRETA r!O.N
RESISTIVITY VERSUS POROSITY. HI'<GLE CROSSI' LOT
RESISTIVITY VERSL!S POROSITY. PICKETT CROSSPLOT
RW FROM SSP. FORMUL\S. SPONTA'JEOUS f'OTE:-ITL\L
SHALE. VOLUME C\LCULATI ONS. GA.\1.\IA R.-\Y LOC;
SHALE BASELINE. LOG INTERPRET.-\TION. SI'ONT \'<EOI ' >
SHALE CALCULATION. SPONTANEOL:S POTE'ITIAL LOG
SHALY SAND ANALYSIS. LOG I.'<TERPRETATION
SHORT NORMAL LOGS. RESISTIVITY LOCS. INDL CTI O.'-
SIDEWALL NEUTRON POROSITY LOf;, LITHOLOGY
SONI C LOG. POROSITY LOGS
SONI C LOG. EFfECT
SONI C LOG. I NTERVAL TRANSIT TI.\IES. rABLE
SONI C L<XO. \>lATRIX VELOCITIES. TABLE
SONIC LOG. POROSITY D ETERMINED FROM VELOCil r
SONI C LOG. SONIC VELOCITIES. T,\BLE
SONIC LOG EQLATION. LOG INTERPRET.-\TION. !'OROSI rY
SONI C VELOCITIES. TABLE. SO"IC LOG
SPONTANEOCS POTEeoTI AL LOG. LOG
SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG. ,\IICROLOG C\ I.I PER
SPONTANEOUS LOG. EQI; I V.AlloNT RFSISTivTI Y
SPONTANEOL: S POTENT!AL LOG. HYDROCARBO'- Sl ' PPRESSION
SPONTANEOUS POTE!'JTIAL LOG. PER.\IEABILITY
SPONTANEOCS POTE'JT IAL LOG. PSEUDOST AT IC l Ol.'S
SPONTANEOL:S POTENTIAL LOG. RESISTIVITY CA LlTL\
SPONT.\NEOUS POTE'ITL\ L LOG. RESISTIVITY OF WA ITR
SPONTANEOCS POlENT I AL LOG. RESISTI VITY RA r io FRO\! SSP
SPONTA.'IEOUS POTENTI A L LOG. RW FR0,\1 SSP. H)R\Il'I..-\S
POl ENT IAL LOG. SH.\LE
SPONTANEOCS POl ENT I ,\L LOG. SSP CORRECT IO'- CII.\KT
SPONTANEOUS POl F.NTIAL LOG. S I' A TIC SI'ONT.-\
SPONTANEOUS POTENTI AL L<X;. VOU !.\IE 01' SII .\LE
SSP. SPONTANEOCS POT ENTIAL LOG. RESISTIVITY RA !10
SSP. SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG. STATI C SPO'-T \.'iEOI.' '
SSP. FORML:LAS. SPONTANEOlS POTENTI.\L LOG R W
SSP CORRECTI ON CHART. SPONTA.NEOL' S PO rEN'' I.\L LOC
ST.\TIC SPONTANEOUS POTENTI AL SSP
STEP PROFILE. LOG I NT ERPRET\TI0'-1. I ."V\SIO".
TEMPERATURE GRADI ENT
TRANSITION PROFILE. LOG I NTERPRET.-\ TION. [',\iASION
UN INVADED ZONE. DESCRIBED. LOG I NTERI'Rf'T
VOLUME CALCULATIONS. GAMMA R.-\ Y l OG. SII ALL
VOLUME OF SHALE CALCL' L\TION. SPO-..TANEOI S POTL> I 1.\ L
VOLUME OF SHALE CORRECTIONS. ID<;
WATER SATL: RATION. DESCRI BED. LOG f .\ I
WATER SATURATION E()l!ATION. I.OG I'HERPRFIATIO.'-
WATER SATURATI ON FORMLJLA. LOG leoTERJ' RETXfiON. ,,RCIIII'
WATER-BE.\RING. DUAL LA fEROLOf;.MICROSJ'I!LRIC -\LLV
WATER-REARING. LOG I NTERPRET.\ TION. Dl AI. I NDl'Cl i<Y\
WET RESISTIVITY CL:RVE. QUI CK LOOK I NTERPRFTATIONS
FLOW CHART FOR LOG INTERPRETATION
n= i . et o 2.5
MOSTLY = 2.0
CHAPTER I
MICROLATEROLOG
PROXIMITY LOG
MSFL
SFL
CHAPTER m
FORMATION FACTOR
F-
o
aim
CHAPTER I
1
SONIC POROSITY
At "At mo
A'f-Atmo
CHAPTER m
DENSITY POROSITY
. Pmo- Pb
P
" Pma-Pf
CHAPTER I I
NEUTRON-DENSITY
POROSITY
CHAPTER I I
DEEP
INDUCTION LOG
DEEP
LATEROLOG
CHAPTER HI
Rw WATER
CATALOG
CHAPTER I
R - ^ -
CHAPTER SI
SSP =
- Kl og Rm f / Rw
CHAPTER D
R
w Rmf
FROM LOG
HEADER
CHAPTER I
Sw = l F
R -
1
-
"w , n
R , 4"
S x o M F x ^ ) "
CHAPTER 21
\ '
MOVEABLE HYDROCARBONS
s
w /
R
x o
/ R
t \ 2
s
xo
R
mf
/ R
w
CHAPTER 21
1
'
BULK VOLUME WATER
BVW S
w
x 0
CHAPTER 21
'
1
PERMEABILITY
K ( 7 9 x / )
3
/ S
w m R
)
2
GAS
K- ( 25Ox0
3
/ S
W
|
RR
)
Z
OI L
CHAPTER m
'
1
SAMPLE SHOWS
OIL OR GAS?
RESERVES
0 I L
. 7758 x(I.O-Sw)xh X0XR.F. x DRAINAGE
Boi
GAS- 43, 560 x [DEPTH x (0.43/15)] x (1.0-S
w
) x h x 0x R.F. x DRAINAGE
t
DECISION
RUN PIPE / TEST/
DON'T RUN PIPE
ISBN: 0-89181-652-6
;.
-:;.