Tim J.

Bourgeois
Ken Bramlett
Pete Craig
Shell Deepwater Production, Inc.
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
Darrel Cannon
Kyel Hodeneld
John Lovell
Sugar Land, Texas, USA
Ray Harkins
Ian Pigram
ARCO British Limited
Guildford, Surrey, England
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to
Dave Bergt, Schlumberger Oileld Services, Sugar Land,
Texas, USA; Ted Bornemann, Bill Carpenter, Frank Shray
and Rachel Strickland, Anadrill, Sugar Land, Texas;
Joseph Chiaramonte and Darwin Ellis, Schlumberger-Doll
Research, Ridgeeld, Connecticut, USA; Craig Kienitz,
Anadrill, The Hague, The Netherlands; Martin Lling,
Schlumberger Riboud Product Center, Clamart, France;
Dave Maggs, Anadrill, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; and
David Robertson, Forest Oil, Denver, Colorado, USA.
ADN (Azimuthal Density Neutron), ARC5 (Array Resistivity
Compensated), ARC675, CDR (Compensated Dual
Resistivity), ELAN (Elemental Log Analysis), FMI (Fullbore
Formation MicroImager), GeoVISION675, PowerPulse, RAB
(Restivity-at-the-Bit), TLC (Tough Logging Conditions),
VISION475, VISION675, VISION First Look and VISION Telemetry
Protocol are marks of Schlumberger.
Logging-while-drilling (LWD) technology became
available a mere ten years ago. At that time, the
tools fulfilled the primary purpose of their
design, which was to aid in correlation. Within a
couple of years, the industry had found six main
applications for these toolsapplications that
remain key today:
Formation evaluationReal-time correlation
and evaluation allow coring and casing point
selection. Logging before extensive invasion
occurs may reveal hydrocarbon zones that can be
saturated with borehole uid by the time wire-
line logs are run.
Multiple-pass loggingComparison logs
made at different times can help distinguish pay
from water zones, locate uid contacts and iden-
tify true formation resistivity (R
t
). Permeable
zones may be identied from time-lapse ltrate
movement.
Insurance loggingLogs obtained while
drilling provide contingency data in case the well
is lost or when conditions create boreholes that
yield poor-quality wireline logs.
Cost reductionRunning wireline tools in
high-deviation wells requires conveyance by
drillpipe. In some cases, these wells can be
logged with LWD tools, either while or immedi-
ately after drilling, saving rig time offshore or in
wells otherwise needing the TLC Tough Logging
Conditions system.
Enhancing drilling safety and efciency
Measurements while drilling provide real-time
data on drillstring mechanics, uid dynamics and
petrophysics for assessing pore pressure and
wellbore stability and for drilling program and
completion strategies (see Using Downhole
Annular Pressure Measurements to Improve
Drilling Performance, page 40).
GeosteeringBy comparing real-time log
responses to an expected model, the wellbore
trajectory is modied, thereby placing the well in
the most productive portion of a pay zone.
As the real-time nature of LWD information
began to be fully exploited, the early emphasis
on correlation in the late 1980s gave way to dom-
inance by geosteering and well-placement appli-
cations. Availability of LWD data permitted safe
and efcient drilling of exotic trajectories and
extended-reach and multilateral wells that were
unimaginable ten years ago (see Key Issues in
Multilateral Technology, page 14). These wells
frequently make headlines in industry journals
when technological advances contribute to
breaking existing directional drilling records.
1
Pushing the Limits of Formation
Evaluation While Drilling
Through a few case studies this article demonstrates how new
logging-while-drilling measurements are being used to open
frontiers and evaluate formations as soon as they are encountered.
29 Winter 1998
1. Allen F, Tooms P, Conran G, Lesso B and Van de Slijke P:
Extended-Reach Drilling: Breaking the 10-km Barrier,
Oileld Review 9, no. 4 (Winter 1997): 32-47.
Many of the LWD innovations that have
helped directional drillers master the art and sci-
ence of geosteering are also advancing the cause
of assessing reservoir quality while drilling.
Forward modeling routines have been developed
that allow real-time comparison between pre-
dicted and observed logs, helping drillers stay in
the pay.
2
This modeling capability also lets inter-
preters evaluate LWD data for petrophysical and
uid properties and for geologic structure.
Oil company interpreters are becoming more
familiar with while-drilling measurements,
understanding their departure from wireline-
style logs, and trusting them. Operators are also
demanding more measurements for more hole
sizes, and as a result, a broader range of services
is being offered. The more comprehensive reser-
voir assessment that is now possible makes LWD
formation evaluation results valuable not only for
wellsite decisions, but also for longer term reser-
voir planning and developmentas wireline log-
ging results have been all along.
Ten years ago, the available LWD measure-
ments were gamma ray, neutron porosity, litho-
density, photoelectric effect and phase-shift and
attenuation resistivities.
3
In the interim, techno-
logical advancements have vastly improved and
enhanced these basic measurements and even
added new formation evaluation measurements
not previously available in the logging industry.
First came azimuthal or quadrant measurements
such as the quadrant density and photoelectric
factor (Pe) on the ADN Azimuthal Density Neutron
tool and the quadrant gamma ray and real-time
resistivities on the RAB Resistivity-at-the-Bit tool.
Then came quantitative images with multiple-
depth resistivity images from the RAB tool and
density images from the VISION475 system. The
addition of multiple depths of investigation to the
azimuthal data has created new opportunities to
complete the formation evaluation picture.
The comprehensive Schlumberger VISION475
system (the nominal outer diameter of the tool is
4.75 inches) encompasses the enhanced technol-
ogy to provide formation evaluation and drilling
measurements in 5
3
4- to 6
3
4-in. holes. In addition
to direction, inclination and toolface, the
VISION475 tool makes a neutron porosity mea-
surement, azimuthal readings of lithodensity, Pe
and gamma ray, and records 2-MHz phase-shift
and attenuation resistivities at up to ten depths
of investigation.
Deciphering phase-shift measurements with
multiple depths of investigation for resistivity
interpretation has become common practice in
the industry. However, the inclusion of attenua-
tion resistivity measurements with multiple
depths of investigation has brought additional
value to the petrophysicist. Although acquired
with the same transmitter-receiver spacing, the
attenuation measurement has a greater depth of
investigation than the corresponding phase-shift
measurement. These complementary measure-
ments offer an opportunity to understand more
about the uid and resistivity characteristics of
the formation. For example, comparison of atten-
> Possible oil-water contact
on phase-shift resistivity.
The gamma ray (GR) in
track 1 shows sand from
7740 to 8020 ft, and the
phase-shift resistivity in
track 2 indicates the zone
above 7920 has high
resistivitya possible pay
zone above the oil-water
contact. Attenuation
resistivity in track 3 shows
the possible oil layer to be to
a zone of resistive invasion,
and not worth completing.
30 Oileld Review
>
uation and phase-shift resistivities provides a
diagnostic method for differentiating between
borehole uid invasion and formation anisotropy,
a technique discussed later in this article
In one case from a Forest Oil well in the Gulf
of Mexico, the while-drilling gamma ray (GR)
indicated a sand from 7740 to 8020 ft and the
phase-shift resistivities identied a possible oil-
water contact at 7920 ft (previous page). The ve
phase-shift resistivities, each with a different
depth of investigation, have very little separa-
tion, which indicates little to no invasion. A sim-
ple resistivity index calculation yields 38% water
saturation, making the potential oil layer a candi-
date for testing.
However, the attenuation resistivities that are
simultaneously recorded by the VISION475 tool
appear to contain evidence to the contrary. These
deeper reading resistivities show signicant sep-
aration, with the deepest measurementan
approximately 30-in. [75-cm] depth of investiga-
tion from the 34-in. receiver-transmitter spac-
ingrecording the lowest resistivity of about 0.4
ohm-m. This prole indicates resistive invasion,
which might be expected for wells drilled with
oil-base mud, but this was water-base mud with
a resistivity, R
m
, of 0.1 ohm-m. However, forma-
tion water resistivity, R
w
, in this zone is approxi-
mately 0.03 ohm-m, causing the resistive
invasion prole. When formation resistivity is
computed by inversion processing that takes
invasion into account, the zone shows 100%
water saturation. If this zone had been com-
pleted, a signicant investment would have pro-
duced only water. The extra information brought
by the deeper reading attenuation measurements
avoided the cost of an unnecessary completion.
Extracting meaningful information from the
two-receiver, ve-transmitter tool conguration to
probe ve depths of investigation each for phase-
shift and attenuation resistivity requires careful
borehole compensation and borehole correction
of the measurements. Without borehole correc-
tion, washouts together with conductive mud can
masquerade as invaded or anisotropic zones.
Borehole rugosity can cause spikes, or resistivity
horns that may be misinterpreted as laminated
formations (above). Borehole compensation is
necessary because it signicantly reduces the
effects of borehole rugosity and precisely cancels
measurement errors caused by gain and phase-
shift differences in the receivers electronics,
which typically vary with temperature.
>
Borehole compensation for accurate VISION475 multidepth measurements. Without borehole compensation and correction (top), spikes and
separations in the curves of the phase-shift resistivity measurements cannot be interpreted reliably. With correction (bottom), high-resolution
data and curve separations can be identied and interpreted.
31 Winter 1998
2. Bonner S, Burgess T, Clark B, Decker D, Orban J,
Prevedel B, Lling M and White J: Measurements at the
Bit: A New Generation of MWD Tools, Oileld Review 5,
no. 2/3 (April/July 1993): 44-54.
Bonner S, Fredette M, Lovell J, Montaron B, Rosthal R,
Tabanou J, Wu P, Clark B, Mills R and Williams R:
Resistivity While DrillingImages from the String,
Oileld Review 8, no. 1 (Spring 1996): 4-19.
Allen D, Dennis B, Edwards J, Franklin S, Livingson J,
Kirkwood A, White J, Lehtonen L, Lyon B, Prilliman J and
Simms G: Modeling Logs for Horizontal Well Planning
and Evaluation, Oileld Review 7, no. 4 (Winter 1995):
47-63.
3. Bonner S, Clark B, Holenka J, Voisin B, Dusang J,
Hansen R, White J and Walsgrove T: Logging While
Drilling: A Three-Year Perspective, Oileld Review 4,
no. 3 (July 1992): 4-21.
A series of logs from a Shell deep-water pro-
ject in the Gulf of Mexico demonstrates the
impact of adding still more LWD measurements
to the interpretation. In this highly deviated well,
the standard GR, rate of penetration (ROP),
phase-shift resistivity and average density and
neutron data indicate a homogeneous formation
in this potential pay zone (above). The well was
drilled with high-salinity drill-in uid, and phase-
shift curves exhibit a conductive invasion prole
with the deepest spacing at 34-in. measuring the
highest resistivity, about 4 ohm-m. Resistivity
processing to compensate for the invasion
effects would correct R
t
to above 4 ohm-m.
This is the limit of information available from
a conventional triple combo be it LWD or a
wireline system, and it appears to give a
respectable interpretation of the reservoir, but
the VISION475 system provides more information
and sheds new light on the reservoir interval.
If this were truly a conductive invasion prole,
as the phase-shift measurement indicates, the
deepest attenuation curves would show higher
resistivity than the deepest phase-shift curves.
However, all the attenuation outputs read a
lower resistivity than even the shallowest phase-
shift curve. This is an example of resistivity
anisotropya difference in resistivity value
depending on the direction in which the mea-
>
Formation evaluation while drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. In this highly deviated well the GR and ROP in track 1, phase-shift and attenuation resistivities in
tracks 2, 3 and 4, and average density and neutron data in tracks 3 and 5 indicate a homogeneous pay formation. Phase-shift resistivity curve separation
suggests conductive invasion, but this is not conrmed by attenuation resistivities; resistivity anisotropy is responsible. Quadrant displays of density, on top,
bottom, left and right of the borehole, are in tracks 6 and 7.
32 Oileld Review
surement is made (see the rst case study from 7700 to 7740 ft for another
example of anisotropy, page 30).
4
In vertical wells penetrating horizontal layers with no invasion, 2-MHz
tools measure horizontal resistivity, R
h
. This is taken as equivalent to R
t
, the
resistivity input to most formulae derived to predict uid saturation, and so
serves as the reference, or threshold, by which formations are judged to con-
tain pay or not. At other angles, for example, in highly deviated and horizon-
tal wells passing through horizontal layers, 2-MHz tools respond to some
combination of vertical and horizontal resistivities. Vertical resistivity (R
v
), or
resistivity perpendicular to bedding, is always at least as much as, and usu-
ally more than, horizontal resistivitysometimes reaching a 10 to 1 ratio (see
Anisotropy and Invasion, next page).
In the case at hand, the phase-shift curves are each reading a different
combination of horizontal and vertical resistivity, depending on the transmit-
ter-receiver spacing. Formation resistivity, R
t
, is not greater than 4 ohm-m, as
would have been calculated by a radial-invasion resistivity inversion program.
An anisotropy inversion program can be used to calculate R
h
and R
v
, and then
R
h
is used in water saturation calculations to derive S
w
.
Density curves from the VISION475 log also provide more information than
previous-generation LWD density tools, which combine weighted averages of
density from all around the borehole. The density and Pe measurements of
the VISION475 tool are recorded in 16 oriented sectors. These can be displayed
either as an image, or presented as four quadrantstop, bottom, right and
leftas the drillstring rotates (below).
For a rst view, the bottom and average densities can be compared for
consistency (previous page). This log was recorded in a highly deviated well,
so the bottom-quadrant density, in closer contact with the borehole, should
give the best quantitative data. In this interval, not only does the bottom-
quadrant density disagree with the average density, but it also occasionally
measures a lower bulk density. This appears strange because assuming the
bottom of the tool is in contact with the formation also implies that the top
of the tool is not. When that occurs, the mud density, which here is less than
that of the formation, should inuence the top-quadrant reading and as a
result, the average density would tend to be lower.
Taking the next step in evaluating this well, all four quadrant densities are
presented with photoelectric factor and bulk density correction for each quad-
rant (left). The right and left density quadrants agree well throughout the
entire interval. The top and bottom quadrant densities not only disagree, but
cross each other. A threaded borehole, borehole breakout, or a combination
of heavy mud and hole conditions could explain this unusual response. The
response could also be due to a position change of the borehole assembly in
< What quadrant densities mean. Density mea-
surements are gathered into four quadrants
top, bottom, right and leftas the drillstring
rotates. If the VISION475 tool cuts across a layer
boundary with a near full-gauge stabilizer (left),
all quadrant measurements are quantitative.
The view is along the tool axis, which in this
case is also in the plane of the layer boundary.
Quadrant density measurements readily dene
this boundary, providing a distinct bulk density
in each layer. Without a stabilizer (right) the tool
tends to lie on the bottom side of the hole, giving
better borehole contact and so better quality
to the bottom quadrant measurement. The top
quadrant measurement would be qualitative
due to the standoff distance.
33 Winter 1998
4. Anderson B, Bryant I, Lling M, Spies B and Helbig K: Oileld Anisotropy: Its Origins and
Electrical Characteristics, Oileld Review 6, no. 4 (October 1994): 48-56.
Lling MG, Rosthal RA and Shray F: Processing and Modeling 2-MHz Resistivity Tools in
Dipping, Laminated, Anisotropic Formations, Transactions of the SPWLA 35th Annual
Logging Symposium, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, June 19-22, 1994, paper QQ.
>
Many resistivity logs exhibit a combination of
anisotropy, invasion and shoulder (adjacent)
bed effects, and each effect must be taken into
account to deduce true formation resistivity.
Resistivity anisotropy can be caused by layer-
ing, lithology or uid content. It is typically
expressed as the ratio of vertical to horizontal
resistivity, R
v
/R
h
, and its effects on tool response
can be understood by modeling. The standard
response of 2-MHz tools in vertical wells pene-
trating horizontal layers with no invasion is
taken as the reference, and tool response to lay-
ers at other relative angles can be computed
(below left).
In this model the formation consists of a sand
interbedded with an equal amount of shale for
an anisotropy ratio R
v
/R
h
of 6.7. As the relative
angle increases, the apparent resistivity mea-
sured by both phase shift and attenuation
increases. Above 45 degrees, the effect is
greater on the longer spacings; for example, the
phase-shift 34-in. curve measures a higher
apparent resistivity than the phase-shift 28-in.
curve. The curve order resembles a conductive
invasion prole, and therefore may be misinter-
preted. Anisotropy can cause resistivities mea-
sured in high-angle wells to be deceptively high.
Two keys are used to distinguish conductive
invasion from anisotropy. The rst is comparison
of phase-shift to attenuation measurements:
although phase-shift resistivities indicate a con-
ductive invasion prole, corresponding attenua-
tion outputs measure lower resistivity. If
conductive invasion were causing the phase-shift
curve separation, the deeper reading attenuation
outputs would measure a higher apparent resis-
tivity than the phase-shift curves. This is an
important use of attenuation measurements. The
second key is revealed in the modeled exam-
plethe curves are uniformly separated when
viewed on a logarithmic scale. Uniform separa-
tion is less common with invasion.
If anisotropy can be identied in sands, it is
usually an indication of hydrocarbons. However,
in anisotropic formations that are hydrocarbon-
bearing, deep invasion could hide the
anisotropic response if R
mf
and R
w
are similar.
1
To understand the effect of invasion on an
anisotropic formation, a state-of-the-art 3D
nite-difference code was developed that com-
putes phase-shift and attenuation responses
with increasing diameter of invasion.
2
Resistivity responses were modeled for an
anisotropic formaton whose anisotropy changes
with invasion (below right). The virgin forma-
tion anisotropy ratio, R
vt
/R
ht
, is 6.8, but once
invaded, the anisotropy ratio falls to 1.25
nearly isotropic. This change will have different
effects on the phase-shift and attenuation resis-
tivity responses, depending on their depth of
investigation. For invasion diameters less than
15 in., the anisotropy effect dominates.
Anisotropy is recognizable by separated phase-
shift curves reading higher than attenuation
curves. At invasion diameters greater than 50
inches, the effects of invasion rule curve separa-
tion. Measuring phase-shift and attenuation
resistivities before extensive invasion is there-
fore crucial when anisotropy is present.
Anisotropy and Invasion
>
Effects of anisotropy on phase-shift and attenuation resistivities. Anisotropy
becomes evident as the relative angle between bedding and tool axis increases.
The curves resemble those seen in a conductive invasion prole except that with
anisotropy, phase-shift curves read more resistive than attenuation.
>
Effect of invasion on an anisotropic formation. In this formation, which is
anisotropic before invasion, but less so after, modeling shows that for invasion
diameters less than 15 in., the anisotropy is still interpretable from phase-shift
and attenuation resistivity curves. After invasion diameters surpass 50 in., the
effects of invasion mask the anisotropy of the virgin formation.
34 Oileld Review
1. Klein JD, Martin PR and Allen DF: The Petrophysics of
Electrically Anisotropic Reservoirs, Transactions of the
SPWLA 36th Annual Logging Symposium, Paris, France,
June 26-29, 1995, paper HH.
2. Anderson B, Druskin V, Habashy T, Lee P, Lling M,
Barber T, Grove G, Lovell J, Rosthal R, Tabanou J,
Kennedy D and Shen L: New Dimensions in Modeling
Resistivity, Oileld Review 9, no. 1 (Spring 1997): 40-56.
the wellbore caused by changes in wellbore incli-
nation. But no interpretation guesses are neces-
sary because the VISION475 system clearly
provides the answer with density image data.
The density images reveal the detail of reser-
voir congurationa series of thin sands and
shales dipping at varying angles relative to the
borehole (below left). These VISION475 images
provide an easy and efcient means of interpret-
ing complex data. The rst track image is color-
scaled to represent measured quantitative
density variations, while in the second track the
variations have been enhanced by changing the
color scale to bring out detail.
Throughout this interval, the azimuthal density
imaging was the only measurement to ag the
subtle sand-shale layering. The lessons learned
are twofold: rst, the standard suite of GR, resis-
tivity, neutron and average density measurements
may not always be sufcient for complete forma-
tion evaluation. In this case, all the standard mea-
surements pointed to a homogeneous zone.
Clearly the revelation of a laminated sand-shale
sequence can have an impact on the appraisal of
reservoir quality and its subsequent drainage.
Second, techniques that assume maximum den-
sity to be the correct density would greatly under-
estimate porosity and distort the true reservoir
character. This new information is valuable not
only to drillers in real time, but also to well plan-
ners who may need to change future drilling tra-
jectories, to completion engineers for effecting
more efcient completions, to reservoir engineers
for modeling and simulating production and to
geologists for calculating structural dip.
5
Invasion, Dip and Gas
The previous examples show how LWD logs
improve formation evaluation in deviated oil
wells with invaded zones, anisotropic layers and
thin dipping beds. Determining accurate values
of porosity and water saturation in gas wells
under these conditions, however, has been a
special problem that only recently is seeing
some resolution.
In vertical wells, depth of invasion of mud l-
trate into a formation depends on many factors,
including mud properties and lithology, porosity
and absolute and relative permeability of the for-
mation. In the simplest case of a vertical hole in
a homogeneous permeable formation, the inva-
sion prole is radially symmetric. But when
impermeable or dipping layers, or both, are
encountered, the volume invaded by borehole
uid takes on a new shape (below right).
The invasion front becomes even more dis-
torted in a gas zone, because the borehole uid is
so much heavier than the formation gas. Invasion
begins radially, but with time the heavier phase
g/cm
3
ROP
RHOB Image
Gamma Ray
API
Image Orientation
g/cm
3
Image Orientation
U R B L U
degrees 0 90
200 0
ft/hr
1:240 Apparent
Dip
True
Dip
0 90
degrees
U R B L U
0 100
Dynamic RHOB Image
DEVI Deviation
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
2.05 2.45
XX300
XX250
XX200
XX350
>
Density image from the VISION475 system. Measured densities appear in track 1, and
are redisplayed to highlight detail in track 2. Structural dips (green dots in track 3) are
hand picked using the same process as for wireline FMI Fullbore Formation Micro-
Imager data and relative dip to the borehole is calculated (blue dots). These images
are also useful for calculating a sand count or determining the net-to-gross sand ratio.
Filtrate
Impermeable
layer
Impermeable
layer
Slumped
filtrate
Wellbore
W
e
l
l
b
o
r
e
>
Invasion and slumping ltrate. A radial
invasion front becomes distorted in the
presence of a horizontal layer (top) or dipping
impermeable layer (bottom).
35 Winter 1998
5. Bornemann E, Bourgeois T, Bramlett K, Hodeneld K and
Maggs D: The Application and Accuracy of Geological
Information from a Logging-While-Drilling Density Tool,
Transactions of the SPWLA 39th Annual Logging
Symposium, Keystone, Colorado, USA, May 26-29, 1998,
paper L.
slumps in the down-dip direction. The rate of
slumping depends on the vertical permeability of
each zone: the higher the vertical permeability,
the more rapid the slumping. In addition, perme-
ability anisotropy will distort slump geometry. In
formations with permeability on the order of one
darcy, strong azimuthal variations in invasion
have been observed less than an hour after the
bit penetrates the formation.
In gas zones, such variations can make quan-
titative porosity interpretation from nuclear tools
an even greater challenge than usual. Porosity
determination from nuclear tools requires that
the effects of gas be removed. For this, knowl-
edge of the gas volume and both radial and
azimuthal location is needed. Further complicat-
ing the problem, the neutron and density mea-
surements respond differently to the radial and
azimuthal location of gas. The neutron tool reads
deeper and is sensitive to any gas near the bore-
hole, relatively independent of the azimuthal
location of the gas. The density tool reads shal-
lower and is sensitive only to the gas in front of
its detectors.
What is needed is a way to quantify the vol-
ume of gas radially and azimuthally over the
same region of formation that the density and
neutron logs investigate. Then those volumes are
used to apply appropriate gas corrections to the
nuclear tools for nal computation of porosity.
Radial and azimuthal gas quantication is
accomplished by analyzing while-drilling quad-
rant resistivity data acquired as the RAB tool
rotates in the borehole. The RAB tool investi-
gates a region similar to that probed by nuclear
tools, and has ve depths of investigation. By
D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
X050
X100
X150
X200
ohm-m
Porosity
p.u.
RAB Resistivity
RAB
Resistivity
VISION
Density
T
o
p
B
o
t
t
o
m
T
o
p
B
o
t
t
o
m
T
o
p
0.1 100 40 0
Shallow Button Down
Shallow Button Up
Deep Button Up
CDR
Density Up
Density Down
Neutron
>
Images of invasion slump. Density and RAB images show ltrate slumping, but not always down. Track 1 displays resistivities:
three from the RAB tool and attenuation resistivity from the CDR Compensated Dual Resistivity tool. Additional ltrate detected by
the resistivity in the down direction compared to the up direction is shaded. Similarly for the porosity curves in track 2, the left
curves are from the up and down quadrants of the density tool and the right curve is from the neutron tool. Track 3 contains the RAB
image, with white most resistive, and track 4 shows the density image with dark as the most dense, and lighter colors as less dense.
36 Oileld Review
using readings from all around the borehole,
three of those depths of measurement can be
partitioned azimuthally into 56 segments. From
these three measurements, three quantities can
be solved forthe diameter of invasion, DI;
invaded zone resistivity, R
xo
; and true formation
resistivity, R
t
in any or all of the 56 azimuthal
segments. R
xo
and R
t
are assumed to be constant
around the hole; only DI varies. The determina-
tion of R
t
is most robust from the direction with
minimum DI, and R
xo
is most robust from the
direction with maximum DI.
Correcting the LWD density and neutron tools
requires an appropriate radial response function
and appropriate DI; both are different for each
tool. The qualitative response of density and neu-
tron tools has long been understood.
7
The radial
response function of the density tool has been
quantied and is relatively independent of the
uids involved. The neutron radial response func-
tion has been elusive, but Ellis and Chiaramonte
of Schlumberger-Doll Research, Ridgefield,
Connecticut, USA have recently completed a
modeling code to allow the response to be calcu-
lated under all conditions. Their modeling shows
that the neutron responds to the gas closest to
the borehole. Therefore the DI needed to correct
the neutron is the minimum DI computed around
the wellbore. In the typical slumping-filtrate
case, the closest gas usually is at the top of the
hole or possibly on the sides, but denitely not at
the bottom. The DI for the density correction is
the one computed in the direction the density
sensor is pointing.
Finally R
xo
, R
t
, invasion factors for density and
neutron, bulk density, neutron porosity, plus
appropriate parameters are entered in ELAN
Elemental Log Analysis software to solve for
porosity and water saturation.
This method was tested by partners ARCO
and Enterprise on a North Sea gas well deviated
about 40 encountering formations with 70
apparent dip. Images from the ADN and RAB
tools plot the location of the higher density,
lower resistivity mud filtrate, which did not
always slump straight down (previous page). The
diameter of invasion is plotted, and the com-
puted porosity displayed for comparison with
core measurements (above).
in.
30 0
in.
30 0
D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
X050
X100
X150
X200
Porosity
p.u.
0 40
Depth of Invasion
RAB Down
RAB Up
Neutron
Quadrant Corrected Effective Porosity
Density Down
Density Up
Core porosity
>
Porosity computed from corrected neutron- and density-while-drilling data. Track 1 displays the diameter of invasion, DI,
used to calculate corrections. The area between DI calculated from the up- and down-RAB measurements is shaded. Track 2
contains porosities from up- and down-quadrant density measurements, neutron measurements and core (red dots). The
effective porosity computed after corrections (orange curve) compares favorably with core measurements.
7. Sherman H and Locke S: Depth of Investigation of
Neutron and Density Sondes for 35-Percent-Porosity Sand,
Transactions of the SPWLA 16th Annual Logging
Symposium, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 1975, paper Q.
37 Winter 1998
Getting a First Look
High-quality images provide valuable input to the
interpretation process. Geological information,
such as laminations, location of the wellbore
with respect to bed boundaries and the apparent
dip magnitude and direction of bedding planes, is
essential for interpreting log responses in highly
deviated wells. Images quickly reveal whether
the bit is drilling down into or up through bedding
planescritical for geosteering a well and ren-
ing geological interpretations.
The VISION First Look display is a wellsite
answer product that combines images with the
complete VISION dataset to provide a format for
quickly interpreting logs in highly deviated wells
and making drilling decisions. In this real-time
interpretation for the Shell deep-water Ram
Powell eld in the Gulf of Mexico, the horizontal
wellbore is drilled in a clean sand sheet deposit
nearly parallel to bedding. During drilling, several
tight or hard features were encountered unex-
pectedly (above). Rate of penetration dropped
signicantly, and resistivity and bulk density
increased while neutron porosity approached
zero p.u. These tight streaks were a surprise,
because two vertical wells drilled in this area
had not encountered such a feature.
These tight streaks were of concern, as they
might inuence production, perhaps necessitat-
ing a change in wellbore trajectory. They rst
were assumed to be depositional features lying
parallel to bedding. However, careful examina-
tion of the signature of the events on the density
and neutron curves reveals that these are vertical
interfaces. If the hard streaks were parallel to
bedding planes, the tool would encounter the
boundary more gradually and the measurement
transition from reservoir to tight streak would
occur over some distance. These transitions are
quite abrupt, indicating a high-angle boundary.
100
Gamma Ray
API
0
100 0
ft/hr
ROP5
D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
XX500
XX550
XX600
1 100
ohm-m
Density, Bottom
g/cm
3
1.65 2.65
Neutron Porosity
0.6 0
ft
3
/ft
3
22-in. Phase-Shift
Resistivity
Real-time data revealing tight treaks.
While drilling in the Ram Powell eld,
Gulf of Mexico, tight streaks were
encountered unexpectedly. These
events show up as high-density, low-
porosity interfaces in track 3. Rate of
penetration (track 1) dropped signi-
cantly each time, and resistivity
increased (track 2).
38 Oileld Review
>
This interpretation of vertical boundaries
raised new concerns for the operator: Was the
reservoir compartmentalized? Were these
streaks mineralized fault planes? What is the
vertical extent of these features? Should the
wellbore trajectory be changed? The VISION First
Look log, played back with recorded mode data,
was able to answer these questions (above).
The density images displayed on the VISION
First Look log reveal the true nature of the
tight streaks. The boundaries of the features
are not planar, but rather calcite-cemented nod-
ules. The features are not continuous vertical
planar events and will not have a large-scale
impact on production.
The deeper reading attenuation resistivity
measurement conrms this interpretation. The
attenuation measurements are not inuenced by
the high-resistivity hard streaks to the degree
that phase-shift measurements are, and there
are no polarization horns, which indicates that
these events do not extend far from the wellbore.
The Future Vision
The ability to achieve better reservoir quality
assessments in real time has satised some, but
not all, formation evaluation while-drilling needs.
Already operators are asking for these LWD mea-
surements in more hole sizes, and this demand is
being met with the imminent introduction of the
VISION675 and GeoVISION675 systems for 8- to 12-
in. holes. The VISION675 system will encompass
the ARC675 Array Resistivity Compensated mea-
surement, an enhanced PowerPulse MWD tool
with the new VISION Telemetry Protocol system
and a new 6.75-in. VISION675 density-neutron
tool. The VISION675 density-neutron tool extends
the capabilities of the existing 6.75-in. ADN tool
by adding multisector density, Pe and caliper
images for both oil-base and water-base mud. A
related tool for geological imaging while drilling
will appear in the GeoVISION675 system, which
will contain a new-generation laterolog imaging
tool in place of the ARC675 module.
Other measurements are making their way to
the 4.75-in. format, including downhole annular
pressure and bit inclination for precision trajec-
tory control.
To keep pace with the introduction of new
measurements, interpretation experts are devis-
ing new techniques for getting the most from the
new data. Programs for interpreting measure-
ments in layers that are anisotropic, invaded, thin,
dipping, or all of the above, are nding new chal-
lenges when applied to time-lapse LWD data
LWD logs acquired before and after bit changes
or other delays in drilling. Researchers are devel-
oping methods for faster modeling and inversion
of tool responses in more complex geometries
and more realistic formations. These efforts will
enhance our ability to perform formation evalua-
tion while drilling, and also will improve all other
LWD applications. LS
Phase
Shift
TVD
API
Resistivity
Time After Bit
Gamma Ray
R
w
-corrected
Bulk Volumes
Effective Porosity
Matrix
Bound Water
0.02 200
ohm-m
Attenuation Resistivities
Phase Shift-Resistivities
0.2 2000
ohm-m
Bottom Density
Neutron Porosity
Attenuation
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
d

D
e
p
t
h
,

f
t
Clay
XX200
XX250
ft
3
/ft
3
0 60
1.65 2.65
g/cm
3
BHA sliding
Image orientation
U R B L U
0 hours 10
0 0 0.5
0 150
ft ohm-m 100
Azimuth and
Deviation
0 90
34 in.
10 in.
16 in.
22 in.
28 in.
g/cm
3
RHOB Image
2.05 2.45
>
VISION First Look wellsite images. Bulk volume analysis (track 2) and an R
w
curve (track 1) corrected for
clay volume and type are computed and displayed. [Adapted from Cannon D: Shales: An Alternate Source for
Water Resistivities, Transactions of the SPWLA 36th Annual Logging Symposium, June 26-29, 1995, Paris, France,
paper LLL.] Phase-shift and attenuation resistivity curves are displayed in track 3, densities are in track 4.
Density images (track 5) of tight streaks show that these features are clearly not planar.
39 Winter 1998