SPE 38736
Applying NMR Total and Effective Porosity to Formation Evaluation
George R. Coates, Stefan Menger, Manfred Prammer, Danny Miller, NUMAR
Copyright 1997, Society of Petroleum Engineers, Inc.
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 1997 SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition held in San Antonio, Texas, 5–8 October 1997.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subject to publication review by Editorial Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300
words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledg-
ment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box
833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
The porosity of a reservoir and its water saturation fraction
have long been at the heart of wireline and MWD log based
formation evaluation. In many formations, however, the com-
plexity of the mineralogy and the properties of the formation’s
conductivity have only permitted qualitative answers. This has
even been true with evaluations based on multi-log data suites.
At the 1996 SPE Conference a new NMR logging process,
the MRIL• C/TP system, was introduced. C/TP provides a
measure of total porosity independent of mineralogy and de-
pendent only on the hydrogen density of the fluids themselves.
This represents a significant advantage over the conven-
tional density, neutron, and acoustic ‘porosity’ logs, which
mostly respond to rock properties. Furthermore, the C/TP am-
plitude can be subdivided into pore size groups associated with
clay mineral bound water, capillary bound water and pores
free to accumulate hydrocarbon (FFI).
Usage of the MRIL has proven the benefit of a borehole-
centralized log, a feature that makes it largely independent of
borehole size and shape. It has also become recognized as the
first porosity log that truly measures the pore system and not
some inference of porosity based on the rock matrix.
Thus the log analyst is provided with a wireline log that is
truly a porosity log which provides a quantitative measure of
total and effective porosity.
To investigate the accuracy and reliability of these methods
and ideas, well bore data are assembled and compared to con-
ventional log and core results. A full description of these com-
parisons and processes are included to show
•
MRIL is a registered trademark of NUMAR Corp.
• the benefit of a true porosity measurement that is insensi-
tive to matrix mineralogy and only depend on pore size
and fluid contents,
•
the advantage of a porosity measurement largely inde-
pendent of borehole condition.
Introduction
Formation porosity is essential information to explore and ex-
ploit hydrocarbon reservoirs successfully. Until today, a com-
bination of well logs (i.e., neutron porosity and density and, in
fewer cases, sonic) is used to obtain porosity information.
However, bad data quality or, logs missing at all, often affect
the accuracy of the porosity results. Another potential source
of inaccuracy is the lithology-dependence of the models used
to interpret the individual logs and their combinations.
Since its commercial introduction in 1991,1,2 NUMAR's
MRIL tool has progressively made in-roads into these issues.
It began by providing the first well log porosity measure inde-
pendent of mineralogy, though limited to measurement of non-
clay pore sizes.3, 4
Also provided by the MRIL was the ability to separate the
porosity associated with capillary bound water from the mov-
able fluid volume, commonly referred to as the FFI pore vol-
ume.2
Later, further improvements in logging system design
opened the possibility to determine fluid volume, fluid type
and, to estimate diffusion properties directly from MRIL data.5
In 1996, the ability to measure the small, clay size, pores
previously missed was added, opening the way to formation
evaluation based on gradient-field NMR.6
To quantify the capability of the MRIL's porosity methods,
and to compare the gradient-field NMR based formation
evaluation with the conventional approach, a series of studies
of core and log data were made.
Conventional Methods to Determine Formation Po-
rosity
The conventional approach to derive formation porosity from
logs combines the results of gamma-gamma density, neutron
porosity and sonic logs. A minimum of two of these logs is
used as input for pre-defined interpretation charts. Those
2 G. R. COATES, S. MENGER, M. PRAMMER, D. MILLER, NUMAR
"litho/porosity crossplots" being derived by semi-empirical
and semi-deterministic methods are strongly lithology de-
pendent. Optimal circumstances (i.e., clean, shale free, forma-
tions saturated with fresh water, good quality logs, good
knowledge of mineral composition) are prerequisites to deduce
accurate formation porosity values.
The following example shows that under certain, never-
theless common circumstances, the conventional approach can
yield an incorrect porosity value. The true formation porosity
shall be calculated by a combination of neutron porosity and
gamma-gamma density log. The density log shows a bulk den-
sity of ρb = 2.32 g/cm3. The log analyst assumes a matrix den-
sity ρma = 2.65 g/cm3 and fluid density ρfl = ρm = 1.00 g/cm3.
In a clean, water saturated formation the neutron log would
read the correct porosity value ΦN = 0.2. Using equation A-3
(refer to Appendix A), an averaged neutron-density porosity
ΦND = (ΦD2 + ΦN2) / 2 (1)
yields ΦND = 0.2. This is the correct porosity for this forma-
tion. In a gas bearing zone however, ΦN will decrease propor-
tional to the hydrogen index and the relative fraction of the
fluids. In the extreme, ΦN could drop close to 0 p.u. due to the
very low proton density in gas, whereas ΦD = 0.309 will read
too high. In this situation the averaged porosity would be de-
termined with ΦND = 0.219, i.e., the porosity is overestimated
about 10%.
Although here the neutron porosity log should only be used
as a qualitative indicator, log analysts regularly have to inter-
pret ΦN quantitatively due to lack of better alternatives.
In shaly formations the situation is more complicated.
Since the log response in shale bearing zones is very difficult
to predict, porosity interpretation in those formations poses a
real challenge. Interpretation in such zones is based, to at least
a certain degree, on assumptions about the clay content of the
formation. This can introduce large uncertainties in the results.
For example, a clay contents of only 5% at a true formation
porosity Φ = 0.10 results in a ΦND estimation error of about
6% for Illite and 9% for Kaolinite.
In addition to those inherent difficulties, conventional po-
rosity analysis methods require a multiplicity of good quality
logs. In sub-optimal hole conditions the neutron-density log,
which is the back-bone of most conventional porosity analysis
methods, is prone to give erroneous results caused by, for ex-
ample, borehole rugosity. Hence, failure of one of the required
logs can jeopardize the entire formation evaluation.
For a review of the physical principles of conventional po-
rosity logging, the reader is referred to Appendix A.
MRIL Total Porosity
The MRIL total porosity simply counts the number of hydro-
gen atoms in the fluid state within the measurement volume.
For details see Appendices A and B.
SPE 38736
Historically, relaxation components with relaxation times
T2 > 3 ms have been considered a measure of effective poros-
ity, i.e., the pore space not associated with clay minerals.6
Thus, in liquid-filled pores, the number of hydrogen atoms
"seen" by MRIL maps directly into porosity, since the hydro-
gen density is very close to that under calibration conditions.2
The newly introduced C/TP technique allows MRIL to
quantify hydrogen with nuclear relaxation times as fast as 0.5
ms and as slow as several seconds.6 The NMR signal inte-
grated over the complete relaxation spectrum is designated as
MSIG (named after the sum-symbol Sigma).
In gas-bearing (non-flushed) formations, MSIG undercalls
true porosity proportional to gas saturation and inversely pro-
portional to gas hydrogen index. Additional processing and
interpretation techniques are required to restore the porosity
reading.1
A New Approach
Recent papers have demonstrated that NMR can be used to
provide lithology-independent total porosity information.6, 7
Hence, in contrast to the conventional approach of
litho/porosity crossplots, using MRIL data leads to an easier
and more reliable approach in estimation of true formation
porosity.
Taking into account the MRIL's proven capability to pro-
vide highly accurate total porosity values regardless of bore-
hole rugosity, pore size, pore contents (i.e., water, oil, gas) or
shaliness, a new approach in porosity analysis is proposed.
NMR data is to be used to provide reliable porosity informa-
tion directly requiring only a single log, which inherently con-
tains all information required to satisfactorily determine for-
mation total porosity.
The following examples are presented to illustrate that
lithology independent MRIL total porosity can provide accu-
rate and more reliable values than conventional porosity logs
in mixed mineral formations even under sub-optimal borehole
conditions.
Examples
South Texas: The first example is taken from a well in South
Texas. The logs show data from a portion of the Wilcox for-
mation which, typically, consists of separate lithofacies, from
sand rich to mudstone shales, potentially deposited in six dif-
ferent depositional systems.8 This well is located in the La
Salle Delta system which Xue and Galloway8 identify as
showing “[…] strong dip-dominated sandstone trends.
Downdip, several local thicks lie at or near the ancient shelf
margin. They reflect shelf-edge delta depositions or shelf
margin slump resedimentation of delta facies or both.” These
marine environment deposits have also been influenced by
wave action and often include shell remnants and resulting
carbonate cementation.
SPE 38736 APPLYING NMR TOTAL AND EFFECTIVE POROSITY TO FORMATION EVALUATION
The permeability of the Wilcox reservoir units is deter-
mined primarily by grain size, varying from sands size to clay
size (Wentworth scale), though other detrital minerals as well
as authigenic changes may also influence the formations flow
qualities.
Log based formation evaluation of the Wilcox depends on
correctly assessing the water content of these units, a particu-
larly difficult task since they tend to have high water content
even when free of water production. The correct assessment
of porosity, needed for formation factor, and the clay mineral
content, needed to account for equivalent water resistivity ef-
fects, are critical to this process.
In track 1 of Fig. 1 is the uranium adjusted gamma ray
CGR, caliper CAL, and the bulk densities from log RHOB and
core analysis CROB that uses the inversion of core porosity
and matrix density. Track 2 shows density porosity PDSS,
neutron porosity PNSS and a neutron-density crossplot based
porosity PND, and core porosity PCOR. Track 3 compares
MRIL total porosity MSIG, with neutron-density porosity
PND and core porosity PCOR.
Generally speaking, the conventionally derived porosity
(e.g., PDSS, PNSS, and PND) exhibit higher values than
MPHI and PCOR. The average difference between PND and
MPHI is about 3-5 p.u.
The high reading of the conventional logs might be caused
by significant clay mineral content in the formation, whereas
the model to derive porosity from neutron and density logs is
based on a clean, in this case sandstone formation (refer to
Appendix A).
In particular the neutron porosity is very sensitive to an in-
crease in clay mineral volume as indicated by increased CGR
values. This behavior is clearly expressed at 10286 – 10290 ft.
There are other zones (e.g. 10264 – 10268 ft, 10307 – 10309
ft, 10317 – 10319 ft) where PNSS appears influenced by in-
creased clay mineral content, although the overestimation of
porosity in these intervals is not as prominent as at 10286 –
10290 ft.
In contrast to the conventional logs, MRIL total porosity
MSIG is in good agreement with core porosity PCOR. How-
ever, there are three zones where MSIG and PCOR exhibit
different characteristics: In zone 10244 – 10251 ft, core po-
rosity shows decreasing values from about 17 p.u. down to
approximately 8 p.u. whereas MSIG slightly increases from 15
to 18 p.u. In the same interval the conventional logs show the
same characteristics as the core data. However, the absolute
value e.g. for PND is still about 6 p.u. too high.
The discrepancy between MRIL data and core porosity can
be explained by the fact that MRIL's vertical resolution is ap-
proximately 3 ft.2 The tool "sees" the high porosity formation
at 10251 ft correctly, but is not able to resolve the low porosity
section (10244 - 10249 ft).
The same applies for depth intervals 10262 – 10277 ft and
10288 – 10290 ft. In all three zones RHOB as well as CROB
show an increase in bulk density suggesting that the formation
is tighter with less pore volume, i.e., porosity.
3
This example clearly demonstrates that conventionally de-
rived porosity can severely suffer from its inherent lithology
dependence. Not being affected by such limitations, the lithol-
ogy independent MRIL total porosity provides more reliable
values than the conventional logs.
South Texas: Fig. 2 provides a detailed look at logs recorded
in another well logged in the Wilcox formation of South
Texas. This well is located in the Zapala Delta of the La Salle
Delta system where the deposition tends to be shelf edge or
slope region facies.8 The mineralogy in this well is similar to
the previous Wilcox example with similar formation evalua-
tion issues.
Shown in track 1 are uranium adjusted gamma ray CGR,
caliper CAL, bulk density RHOB together with core derived
bulk density values CROB from five drilled sidewall samples.
Track 2 presents density porosity PDSS, neutron porosity
PNSS and the neutron-density crossplot based porosity PND;
while track 3 compares MRIL total porosity MSIG and MRIL
effective porosity MPHI, with neutron-density porosity PND.
The caliper log CAL indicates a moderately rugose bore-
hole with enlargements generally less than 1 in. The disagree-
ment between the log measured bulk density RHOB and the
core derived CROB suggests a log error.
The close agreement of MSIG and the over-burden cor-
rected core porosity PCOR in contrast to the disagreement
between PCOR and PND supports the superiority of the NMR
measurement of total porosity. This conclusion is further sup-
ported by comparison of MSIG and MPHI where there differ-
ence indicate a minor fraction of clay pore sizes to be present
in the interval thus reducing the possibility that clay minerals
may have influenced the core derived porosity.
The MSIG-MPHI indication of clay bound water is also
consistent with the 6-9 p.u. spread in neutron-density porosity,
providing the involved clay is smectite, a distinct possibility in
these formations.
The previously stated concern with conventional porosity
determination in mixed mineral formations is seen in this dis-
play. Clearly, mineralogy is affecting the conventional logs
making the benefit of a mineralogy independent total porosity
apparent.
North Sea: The next example (Fig. 3) shows data from an
exploration well in the North Sea. The formations are basically
quartz based shaly sands from estuarine; beach, washover and
tidal delta; upper shore face and beach barrier sand, and,
braided-delta front. The facies variation and the associated
depositional energy changes results in a considerable variance
in reservoir quality due to grain-size and clay mineral content
as well as lithic fragments, commonly associated with micas
and other heavy minerals.
Track 1 presents the gamma ray GR, track 2 shows density
porosity PDSS, neutron porosity PNSS and the neutron-
density crossplot based porosity PND as well as core porosity
4 G. R. COATES, S. MENGER, M. PRAMMER, D. MILLER, NUMAR
PCOR. Track 3 compares MRIL total porosity MSIG, with
neutron-density porosity PND and core porosity PCOR.
Similar to the previous example, the conventionally derived
porosity (e.g., PDSS, PNSS, and PND) exhibit significantly
higher values than MSIG and PCOR. In most parts PND is
about 3 p.u. higher than MSIG.
Again the higher reading of the conventional logs can be
explained by significant clay content. The clay effect is most
prominent in the depth interval 12688 – 12710 ft, where core
data and MRIL porosity show low porosity formation while
the conventional logs, and PNSS in particular, erroneously
suggest higher formation porosity of about 15 p.u.. Other
depth intervals (e.g., 12725 – 12728 ft, and 12752 – 12757 ft)
reveal similar problems if not as prominent.
The only difference is found at 12630 – 12654 ft. Here
neutron-density porosity PND seems to track the core porosity
more accurately while MSIG underestimates PCOR signifi-
cantly. A detailed look at that section reveals, that PND is
again strongly influenced by significant clay volume. Thus
PND suggests higher porosity (approximately 18 p.u.) than
found in the core data (13.5 p.u.). PND misses the 13.5 p.u.
core porosity point at 12646 ft. At this depth MSIG reads the
lowest porosity with about 4 p.u. Higher up, i.e., 12642 –
12638 ft, MSIG recovers. However, it still does not read the
correct porosity of about 18 p.u.
As pointed out above MRIL's vertical resolution of about 3
ft might be the reason for this untypical behavior: The NMR
measurement correctly detects a low porosity zone at about
12464 ft. But, as MRIL vertically integrates over about 2-3 ft.,
it can not recover (i.e., in terms of depth) fast enough to accu-
rately map the high porosity part of the formation.
Since MRIL's results are lithology independent and its
characteristics are well known, it should be possible to develop
methods to account for and to correct such behavior.
North East Utah: The example shown in Fig. 4 comes from
the Douglas Creek member of the Green River formation in
North East Utah. These formations are Eoscene deposits from
Uinta mountain detritals that were deposited in an inland lake
environment. Reservoir salinity fluctuates from fresh to salty
depending upon damming of the lake inlets.
The reservoir sands are dominated by quartzose deposits
with some organic materials present such as plant fragments.
Two depositional types of reservoirs are recognized, a fluvial-
delatic and a lacustrine to offshore bar form. The reservoirs
are stratigraphic traps related to sand quality variations associ-
ated with grain size, and authegenic effects including cement-
ing and clay formation.
Clay minerals are primarily illite or illite-smectite though
some authegenic kaolinite is also found, while cementing ma-
terials are carbonate dominated and often iron rich though
some redeposited quartz cement is also found.
In track 1 gamma ray, caliper and bulk density logs are
shown, GR, CAL and RHOB respectively. Track 2 presents
density porosity PDSS, neutron porosity PNSS and the neu-
SPE 38736
tron-density crossplot based porosity PND. Again, track 3
compares MRIL total porosity MSIG and MRIL effective po-
rosity MPHI, with neutron-density porosity PND.
The caliper log (CAL) indicates a moderately rugose bore-
hole with enlargements up to 1 inch. With the exceptions of
few zones to be discussed below MPHI shows very low values
(0-1 p.u.) over the entire interval (i.e., 5650 – 5760 ft). MSIG
indicates a fairly constant porosity of about 9 p.u. with varia-
tions of ± 3 p.u., while the conventional logs exhibit unsteady
readings between 6 and 27 p.u., i.e., for PND.
There are several zones (5666-5668 ft, 5684 – 5688 ft,
5702 – 5703 ft, 5718 – 5721 ft, 5738– 5739 ft and 5744 –
5748 ft) where MSIG, MPHI and PND closely match. In these
intervals, GR shows low readings relative to the rest of the
gamma ray log.
These observations suggest that MSIG gives the correct
formation porosity. Only in relative clean (i.e., clay-free) zones
marked by the low GR readings, PND seems to indicate cor-
rect formation porosity. In those (clean) intervals, MPHI
(which does not include the clay-bound porosity) approaches
MSIG. This strongly suggests that those intervals contain only
little amount of clay.
Only at 5684 – 5688 ft, the match between all three poros-
ity logs (i.e., MSIG, MPHI and PND) is almost perfect.
Whereas MSIG and PND correspond in all clean intervals,
MPHI exhibits the same characteristic as MSIG, but reads
lower values. An explanation could the 2 – 3 ft vertical resolu-
tion of the MRIL tool already mentioned above. MPHI is not
able to fully resolve thin beds with thickness of 1-2 ft.
The conventional logs, in particular neutron porosity, are
severely distorted (i.e., they read too high) in layers with sig-
nificant clay contents as indicated by high GR and low MPHI
readings. While at places PND overestimates the porosity as
much as 18 p.u., MSIG correctly determines the true formation
porosity.
These observations illustrate that, in contrast to conven-
tional logs, MRIL measurements provide more reliable and
accurate results where
• borehole conditions are sub-optimal (rugosity),
• formation porosity is relatively constant,
• mineral contents of the formation changes significantly.
Conclusions
This study has found
• MRIL total porosity to closely match drilled core plug
porosity,
• MRIL total porosity to be superior to conventionally de-
rived porosity (i.e., density porosity, neutron porosity) in
mixed mineral formations and under sub-optimal borehole
conditions,
• MRIL porosity to be an invaluable log for formation
evaluation.
SPE 38736 APPLYING NMR TOTAL AND EFFECTIVE POROSITY TO FORMATION EVALUATION 5

The Future Acknowledgements

The challenge for service and oil companies alike is a re- The authors wish to express their appreciation to those compa-
assessment of the open-hole logs available today. Porosity nies allowing the use of their logs and to publish their data in
determination by NMR will continue to move towards the this study including Exxon Company, U.S.A., Coastal Oil &
center of formation evaluation based on its relative simplicity, Gas Corporation, and Chevron U.S.A.. The authors would also
accuracy and robustness towards hole conditions and mineral- like to thank Ridvan Akkurt and Dave Marschall for their
ogy. contributions.
With NMR-based porosity at hand, the log analyst will be
able to exploit the mineral-dependent aspects of conventional References
"porosity" logs to better appreciate other reservoir characteris- 1. Prammer, M.G., Mardon, D., Coates, G.R., Miller, M.N.:
tics. "Lithology-Independent Gas Detection by Gradient-NMR Log-
Nomenclature ging", paper SPE 30562 presented at the 70th Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum Engi-
γ gamma radiation neers, Dallas, Oct. 22-25, 1995.
Φ formation porosity 2. Miller, M.N, Paltiel, Z. Gillen, M.E., Granot, J. Bouton, J.C.:
ΦD density porosity "Spin Echo Magnetic Resonance Logging: Porosity and Free
ΦN neutron porosity Fluid Index Determination", paper SPE 20561 presented at the
ΦND averaged neutron-density porosity 65th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society
of Petroleum Engineers, New Orleans, Sept. 23-26, 1990.
ρb bulk density
3. Coates, G.R., Miller, M., Gillen, M., Henderson, G.: “The
ρfl fluid density MRIL in Conoco 33-1, An Investigation Of A New Magnetic
ρm mud density Resonance Imaging Log” , presented at the 32th Annual Logging
ρma matrix density Symposium of the Society of Professional Well Log Analysts,
∆t interval travel time Midland, June 18, 1991.
∆tma interval travel time in the matrix fraction 4. Prammer, M.G. "NMR Pore Size Distributions and Permeability
at the Well Site", paper SPE 28368 presented at the 69th Annual
∆tfl interval travel time in the fluid fraction
Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petro-
A atomic mass number leum Engineers, New Orleans, Sept. 25-28, 1994.
CAL caliper log 5. Mardon, D., Miller, D., Howard, A., Coates, G., Jackson, J.,
CGR uranium adjusted gamma ray log Spaeth, R., Nankervis, J.: "Characterization of Light Hydrocar-
CPMG Carr-Purcell – Meiboom – Gill bon-Bearing Reservoirs by Gradient NMR Well Logging: A
CROB core bulk porosity Gulf of Mexico Case Study", paper SPE 36520 presented at the
GR gamma Ray log 71st Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society
D diffusivity of Petroleum Engineers, Denver, Oct. 6-9, 1996.
FFI free fluid index 6. Prammer, M.G., Drack, E.D., Bouton, J.C., Gardner, J.S.,
Coates, G.R., Chandler, R.N., Miller, M.N.: "Measurements of
M molecular weight
Clay-Bound Water and Total Porosity by Magnetic Resonance
MPHI NMR effective porosity log Logging", paper SPE 36522 presented at the 71st Annual Tech-
MSIG NMR total porosity log nical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Petroleum
NA Avogadro’s number Engineers, Denver, Oct. 6-9, 1996.
Ne number of echoes in a single echo train 7. Freedman, R., Boyd, A., Gubelin, G., McKeon, D., Morris,
NEl number of electrons per unit volume C.E., Flaum, C.: "Measurement of Total NMR Porosity adds
NH number of hydrogen atoms per unit volume New Value to NMR Logging", paper OO presented at the 38th
Nm number of hydrogen atoms per molecule Annual Logging Symposium of the Society of Professional Well
p pressure Log Analysts, Houston, June 15-18, 1997.
8. Xue, L., Galloway, W.E.: High-Resolution Depositional
PCOR core porosity
Framework of the Paleocene Middle Wilcox Strata, Texas
PDSS density porosity log Coastal Plain", AAPG Bulletin Vol. 79, No. 2, 205 – 230, 1985.
PND neutron-density porosity log 9. Wyllie, M.R.J., Gregory, A.R., and Gardner, G.H.F.: "Elastic
PNSS neutron porosity log Wave Velocity in Heterogeneous and Porous Media", Geo-
R gas constant physics Vol. 21, No. 1, 41-70, 1956.
RHOB bulk density log 10. Tixier, M.P., Alger, R.P., and Doll, C.A.: "Sonic Logging", Pet.
T absolute temperature Trans., AIME (1959) 216, 179-187.
T1 magnetic resonance longitudinal relaxation time 11. Geertsma, J.: "Velocity-Log Interpretation: The Effect of Rock
T2 magnetic resonance transversal relaxation time Bulk Compressibility", SPEJ (December 1961) 235-248, Trans.,
AIME, 222.
Te echo-to-echo sampling time
12. Bassiouni, Z.: "Theory, Measurement, and Interpretation of
Tpr partial recovery time Well Logs", SPE Textbook Series (1994).
Tw wait time 13. Akkurt, R. Vinegar, H.J., Tutunjian, P.N., Guillory, A.J.: "NMR
V gas volume, fluid volume Logging of Natural Gas Reservoirs", The Log Analyst Vol. 37,
Z atomic number, number of protons in nucleus No.6, 33 – 42, 1996.
6 G. R. COATES, S. MENGER, M. PRAMMER, D. MILLER, NUMAR
14. Akkurt, R., Moore, M.A., Freeman, J.J.: "Impact of NMR in the
Development of a Deepwater Turbidite Field", paper SS pre-
sented at the 38th Annual Logging Symposium of the Society of
Professional Well Log Analysts, Houston, June 15-18, 1997.
15. Kleinberg, R.L., Vinegar, H.L.: "NMR Properties of Reservoir
Fluids"", The Log Analyst Vol. 37, No.6, 20 – 32, 1996.
Appendix A — Physical Principles of Well Logs to
determine Formation Porosity.
Gamma-Gamma Density Log
Gamma-gamma density logging is based on the attenuation of
gamma rays in the formation. Density tools determine the at-
tenuation of gamma rays originating from a gamma source of
known strength. The attenuation is caused by Compton scat-
tering i.e., interaction between gamma ray photons (0.1 to 10
MeV) and electrons of the outer shell of atoms. The amount of
scattered gamma photons and, in turn, the attenuation is di-
rectly related to the number electrons per volume unit NEl.
This number can be calculated by
NEl = NA (Z/A) ρb (A-1)
with NA: Avogadro’s number,
Z: atomic number, number of protons in nucleus,
A: mass number, sum of the number of protons and
neutrons in nucleus,
ρb: bulk density.
Since the ratio Z/A is almost constant for most materials of
geologic interest except hydrogen, NEl and in turn the gamma
ray attenuation is directly proportional to the bulk density ρb.
Thus ρb can easily be calculated from the measured gamma ray
attenuation.
Knowing or assuming the matrix and fluid densities, ρma
and ρfl respective, the bulk density can be written as
ρb = (1-Φ)ρma + Φ ρfl (A-2)
where φ is the rock porosity. Solving for porosity yields
Φ = (ρma - ρb) / (ρma - ρfl) (A-3)
Since gamma density measurements have only a very shal-
low depth of investigation typically smaller than the region
invaded by the borehole fluid, most of the time it is appropri-
ate to ρfl = ρm with ρm density of the borehole fluid. However,
under certain circumstances e.g. in formations where the inva-
sion zone is very shallow, the derived formation porosity may
be invalid.
Neutron Porosity Log
While gamma-gamma density logging is based on the attenua-
tion of gamma rays, neutron porosity logging exploits the
scattering phenomena of neutrons.
SPE 38736
The formation is irradiated with fast neutrons generated
either by a chemical source or an electrical source (like used in
pulsed neutron tools). On their way from the source to the
detector the neutrons are slowed down by elastic and inelastic
scattering. Neutron tools record either backscattered neutrons
directly or capture gamma radiation (i.e., gamma photons that
are generated when neutrons are captured by nuclei).
Due to the similarity in mass of neutron and hydrogen nu-
cleus, the neutrons interact most effectively with hydrogen.
Hence the neutron porosity log is sensitive to hydrogen in the
formation i.e., free fluid water and chemically bound hydro-
gen.
Neutron tool count rates are calibrated in terms of porosity
for different lithologies (sandstone, dolomite and limestone)
assuming that neutron scattering occurs mainly in the free fluid
in pores while scattering with hydrogen chemically bound in
the formation can be ignored.
Since it is essential that the neutrons experience scattering
in the formation only and not in the borehole fluid (mud), most
modern tools bring both source and detector in close contact
with the formation. However, neutron porosity logs are very
sensitive to borehole irregularities in particular rugosity.
Sonic Log
Sonic tools excite the formation by emitting acoustic waves of
typically several kHz signal frequency and measure the time
the signal needs for a given distance. This interval travel time
∆t or so-called slowness depends on elastic properties of the
rock matrix, the properties of the rock fluid and the rock tex-
ture, i.e. rock porosity. Wyllie et al.9 suggested that in com-
pacted formations ∆t can be expressed as the sum of the travel
time ∆tma in the matrix fraction and the travel time ∆tfl in the
liquid fraction
∆t = (1-Φ)∆tma + Φ ∆tfl (A-4)
Solving this equation for porosity yields
Φ = (∆t - ∆tma) / (∆tfl - ∆tma) (A-5)
Thus it is possible to determine the porosity if the matrix and
fluid slownesses are known.
Equation A-5 yields reliable results only in compacted
formations. For other formations like carbonates or uncom-
pacted formations other models10, 11 have been suggested
which similarly to equation A-5 allow to determine rock po-
rosity from travel time measurements.
Sonic logs can fairly reliably corrected for environmental
effects i.e., mud velocity, borehole diameter. However, since
the depth of investigation proportional to the wavelength of the
acoustic signal, which in turn is dependent on the slowness of
the formation, the depth of investigation can only be assumed.
According to Bassiouni12 typical values vary between 0.75 ft
for soft formations and 3.75 ft for hard formations. Hence the
value of fluid slowness ∆tfl to be used in equation A-5 is sub-
ject of uncertainty.
SPE 38736 APPLYING NMR TOTAL AND EFFECTIVE POROSITY TO FORMATION EVALUATION
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)
NMR tools excite previously aligned hydrogen atom spins in
the fluid or gas contained in the pore space to rotate about a
fixed magnetic field thus inducing an electric current recorded
by the tool.2 The recorded signal amplitude is proportional to
the number of hydrogen atoms within a tool specific measure-
ment volume ("sensitive volume", e.g., about 750 cm3 for the
MRIL tool) and is independent of the rock formation.
In liquids, the number of hydrogen atoms NH per unit vol-
ume (i.e., hydrogen density) is a weak function of pressure p
and temperature T which tend to cancel each other between
surface and reservoir conditions. Hence, for fluids the hydro-
gen density can be easily calculated
NH = (NA Nm) / M (A-6)
with NA: Avogadro’s number,
Nm: Number of hydrogen atoms per molecule,
M: Molecular weight in g/cm3.
Since pressure p, temperature T and volume V of gases are
approximated by p V = R T where R is the gas constant, the
hydrogen index for a an ideal gas is given by
NH = (NA Nm) / V (A-7)
The MRIL tool is calibrated to read 100% porosity in a
tank filled with fresh water at room conditions. For other sub-
stances like salt water, oil or gas and other physical conditions
the MRIL readings have to be corrected with respect to
• ion contents (salinity),
• hydrogen density (i.e., for water, oil, gas),
• pressure, and
• temperature.
Virtually all required information to correct the data is
available at the well side (such as mud salinity and pressure)
or, is information intrinsic to the data set recorded by the
MRIL tool (e.g. temperature, hydrocarbon classification).
Tab. A-1 compares typical MRIL readings for different
substances at 100% porosity. The results show that the signal
amplitude can vary significantly depending on the type and
phase of the pore contents (i.e., water, oil or gas).
The MRIL tool has a typical penetration depth of 4 in
which only depends on the standoff from the borehole wall and
is unaffected by borehole rugosity. Thus, MRIL samples a
measurement volume in the nearly flushed zone next to the
borehole. In consequence MRIL readings are strongly gov-
erned by the chemical composition and physical state (i.e.,
temperature and pressure) of the mud filtrate.
However significant quantities of native gas and oil are
routinely detected by MRIL. As pointed out above the correct
estimation of porosity requires the identification of the hydro-
carbon phase and its separation into oil and gas.
The separation of water, oil and gas phases requires two
data sets acquired simultaneously with largely different wait
7
times applied between measurements.13 The echo-by-echo
difference between these signals highlights the presence of
long spin-lattice relaxation time T1 characteristic for light hy-
drocarbons.
In addition, hydrocarbon gases appear as fast decaying sig-
nals in the echo difference due to their rapid diffusion. Light
oils diffuse much slower and cause a slowly decaying signal.
For this scheme to be quantifiable, the relaxation times of
oil and gas need to be predictable. The required parameters
can be extracted from the MRIL log itself by zone averaging14
and can also be calculated from temperature and pressure of
the gas phase.1
Appendix B — Data Acquisition and Signal
Processing for MRIL Total Porosity Logging.
This appendix reviews the concept and the implementation
options of a total porosity log measurement by MRIL. For an
in-depth discussion, the reader is also referred to Prammer et
al.,1 a paper that introduced hydrogen index corrections for oil
and/or gas-filled porosities; as well as to Prammer et al.,6
which covered the principles of clay-bound water porosity
measurements.
The MRIL logging tool is unique in its ability to simulta-
neously run complicated, interleaved data acquisition se-
quences tailor-made for particular applications and environ-
ments. A total porosity measurement consists, in principle, of
three components:
* a fast-echo, fast-repeat pulse/echo burst that captures
rapidly decaying signal components with very high signal-to-
noise ratio;
* a regular CPMG pulse/echo train with an echo spacing of
around 1ms, which, in a linear magnetic gradient-field, evokes
additional T2 signal decay in the gas phase; and
* a sequence of different wait times Tw between CPMG’s
designed to differentiate the hydrocarbon phase from the water
phase by virtue of T1 contrast. A choice of two wait times 1s
and 8s is a good default.
In combination, these acquisition sequences provide a wide
range of relaxation information:
* T2 relaxation times: Used as relaxation parameter from
less than 0.5ms to over 2s.
* T1 relaxation times: Covers the very slow end of the re-
laxation spectrum above 1s.
* Diffusivity D: The combination of a linear field gradient
and a 1-ms echo spacing enhances the contrast between gase-
ous and liquid fluid phases, which is necessary in order to ap-
ply the correct hydrogen index correction factor(s).
For practical purposes, the acquisition can be broken up
into a fast downlog, which records only the clay-bound poros-
ity and other T2 components <5ms, and an uplog that records
1-ms CPMG echo trains with variable wait times. The mode
switch at the bottom is essentially instantaneous. The tool is
never required to stop anywhere in the hole and maintains its
8 G. R. COATES, S. MENGER, M. PRAMMER, D. MILLER, NUMAR
calibrations under all possible hole conditions regardless of
temperature and magnetic debris.
Another total porosity mode is shown in Fig. B-1. Here, T1
contrast was considered irrelevant and instead of variable wait
times, short and long CPMG sequences are run in adjacent
measurement volumes, interleaved with a partial-recovery,
fast-echo burst sequence. The long and short CPMG’s share
the same echo spacing of 1.2ms and hence can be stacked to
improve the precision in the first few, very crucial echoes.
Typical echo counts are 400 for the long train and 10 for the
short one. As indicated in Fig. B-2, the first 1.2ms echo is dis-
carded because it contains some amount of redundant fast-
decaying signal. After phase and amplitude corrections, the
“standard” 1.2-ms echo train is converted into a T2 distribution
using 10 base components, logarithmically spaced between
8ms and 2048ms.
The fast-echo pulse burst consists of 50 CPMG’s with 10
echoes each. The first two CPMG’s are used to establish a
steady-state dynamic equilibrium condition corresponding to a
wait time of 20ms. The first 20 echoes are not processed. The
remaining 48 CPMG’s form 24 phase-alternated pairs, which
are co-added both in I and Q channels, resulting in 10 complex
numbers. Between pairs, the resonance frequency is varied in a
fashion to ensure an artifact-free first echo, which is crucial for
the accurate determination of very fast T2 components.
SPE 38736
After stacking 24 phase-alternated pairs and the customary
vertical stacking, the fast echoes are virtually noise-free. In
this situation, phase correction is unnecessary and the magni-
tude suffices for further processing. The T2 inversion algo-
rithm employed senses the differences in signal-to-noise ratios
between standard, 1.2ms echoes, and fast echoes and adjusts
its internal stabilization parameter accordingly. A complete
analysis of this algorithm can be found in the paper SPE-
28368 (1994). The T2 inversion uses a base system of 0.5, 1, 2,
4, 8 and infinity (i.e., no decay) ms. In practice, the sensitivity
to fast components trails off at around 0.3ms. The amplitudes
associated with 8ms and infinity are discarded as remnants of
incompletely recovered long-T2 components. The amplitudes
for 0.5, 1, 2 and 4ms form the leftmost end of the T2 spectrum;
from there the standard distribution takes over and extends the
spectrum up to 2048ms.
For the log analyst, these data acquisition and signal proc-
essing issues are mostly transparent. The end product is a sin-
gle T2 spectrum spanning the range from fractions of a milli-
second to several seconds. With proper hydrogen index cor-
rection, the area under this spectrum equals total porosity from
MRIL. The interpretation effort consists, as described in the
main body of the present paper, in partitioning total porosity
into the clay-bound water volume, the effective porosity and
the free fluid volume.
SPE 38736 APPLYING NMR TOTAL AND EFFECTIVE POROSITY TO FORMATION EVALUATION 9

GR PDSS
0 API 150 30 PU 0
CAL PNSS MSIG
6 IN 16 30 PU 0 30 PU 0
RHOB PND PND
DEPTH
2.15 G/C3 2.65 FEET 30 PU 0 30 PU 0
CROB PCOR PCOR
2.15 G/C3 2.65 30 PU 0 30 PU 0

10200

Fig. 1: Logs and core data over a section of the Wilcox formation from a South Texas Well.
10 G. R. COATES, S. MENGER, M. PRAMMER, D. MILLER, NUMAR SPE 38736

MPHI
30 PU 0
GR PDSS MSIG
0 API 150 30 PU 0 30 PU 0
CAL PNSS PND
DEPTH
6 IN 16 FEET 30 PU 0 30 PU 0
RHOB PND PCOR
2.15 G/C3 2.65 30 PU 0 30 PU 0

11150

Fig. 2: Logs and core data from a different South Texas Field. The interval shown is also from the Wilcox formation.
SPE 38736 APPLYING NMR TOTAL AND EFFECTIVE POROSITY TO FORMATION EVALUATION 11

PDSS
30 PU 0
GR PNSS MPHI
0 API 150 30 PU 0 30 PU 0
RHOB DEPTH PND PND
2.15 G/C3 2.65 FEET 30 PU 0 30 PU 0
CROB PCOR PCOR
2.15 G/C3 2.65 30 PU 0 30 PU 0

12700

12800

Fig. 3: Logs and core data from a North sea shaly sand sequence.
12 G. R. COATES, S. MENGER, M. PRAMMER, D. MILLER, NUMAR SPE 38736

GR PDSS MPHI
0 API 150 30 PU 0 30 PU 0
CAL PNSS MSIG
DEPTH
6 IN 16 FEET 30 PU 0 30 PU 0
RHOB PND PND
2.15 G/C3 2.65 30 PU 0 30 PU 0

5700

Fig. 4: Logs from a Green River formation interval in a well in North East Utah.
SPE 38736 APPLYING NMR TOTAL AND EFFECTIVE POROSITY TO FORMATION EVALUATION 13

Substance Rel. Amplitude (%)

Fresh Water 100%
Salt Water (250 kppm) 90%
Oil Based Mud (no solids) typically 100 %
Oil Based Mud (Novaplus) 85%
Crude Oil (gas-free) 70% - 100%15
Methane P=0.1 MPa, T=300K 0.15%
P=65 MPa, T=400K 60%

Tab. A-1—Comparison of MRIL readings for different Substances.

Density Neutron Sonic NMR

Physical principle γ attenuation backscattered neutrons travel times hydrogen excitation in
capture γ − rays pore space
Assumptions Z/A = const. scattering occurs in free
fluid
Information required ρma, ρfl calibration, ∆tma, ∆tfl, P, T,
a priori knowledge a priori knowledge hydrogen index
of formation of formation

Tab. A-2—Comparison of Logs yielding Formation Porosity.

14 G. R. COATES, S. MENGER, M. PRAMMER, D. MILLER, NUMAR SPE 38736

Te=1.2, Ne=400 Te=0.6, Ne=10, x50

vol.1

vol.2

Te=1.2, Ne=10 wait time

processed for processed for

8ms - 2048ms 0.5ms - 4ms

Fig. A-1—Example of total porosity MRIL acquisition sequence in dual-volume mode.

Each box represents a CPMG echo train with echo spacing (Te) and number of echoes (Ne) as indicated. The initial
1.2/10 pulse/echo sequence is used to enhance the signal-to-noise ratio of the 1.2/400 train which immediately follows in a
separate volume. The fast-echo, fast-decay pulse burst consists of 50 short CPMG’s with 10 echoes each. They form 25
phase-alternated pairs, of which the first is only used to establish a steady-state equilibrium. The remaining 48 CPMG’s
sweep through a range of resonance frequencies to eliminate spurious artifacts that could affect the signal quality.

Te=1.2, Ne=400 Te=0.6, Ne=10, x50

ignore
partial stacking stacking

1.2 calibration 0.6 calibration

phase correction magnitude

echo 2-N echo 1-10

8/16/../2048 MAP MAP 0.5/1/2/4/8/inf

T2 Distribution
Fig. A-2—Processing sequence for total porosity.
Data with 1.2ms echo spacing is amplitude and phase corrected and converted into a T2 distribution between 8ms and
2048ms. The first 1.2-ms echo is redundant and is therefore eliminated. The fast-echo data consists of 24 phase-
alternated, frequency-swept pairs which are averaged to yield ten, essentially noise-free echoes. They are transformed into
the (left) fast end of the T2 spectrum consisting of the principal components 0.5ms, 1ms, 2ms and 4ms.