1 Society of PetroleumEngineers I

SPE 24673

Case Histories of MWD as Wireline Replacement: An Evolution of

Formation Evaluation Philosophy
L.A. Cantrell, K.B. Paxson, and B.L. Keyser, Texaco E&P Technology, and Scott Ball,"
Sperry-Sun Drilling Services
*SPE Member

Copyright 1992, Society of Petroleum Engineers Inc.

This paper was prepared for presentation at the 67th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition of the Society of Peiroieum Engineers held in Washington, DC, October 4-7, 1992

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 PetroleumEngineers.Permissionto copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrations may not be copied. The abstract should contain conspicuousacknowledgment
of where and by whom the paper is presented. Write Librarian, SPE, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836 U S A . Telex, 730989 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT (MAD) were recorded for indication of relative

permeability and detection of moveable
Since its introduction in the late 197OYs, hydrocarbons.
measurement while drilling (MWD) technology has
evolved from an auxiliary directional drilling service Comparative evaluations proved conclusively that
to a fully integrated logging package for quantitative MWD could be used as a substitute for correlative
reservoir characterization. Many major and wireline logging suites where borehole size was not
independent oil companies are now re-evaluating a limiting factor. Texaco's recent experience with
traditional formation evaluation methods, commonly MWD has evolved from that of a "last resort"
utilizing MWD technology as a replacement for application toward that of a primary logging suite for
routine wireline logging services. formation evaluation. This philosophical change in
utilizing MWD has resulted in significant savings in
Recent MWD logging case histories are presented rig time and associated costs. Additionally, difficult,
from the Texaco operated Kilauea (Green Canyon well plans were drilled and evaluated with
Blocks 6 and 50) and Tick (Garden Banks Block confidence; geopressure was safely monitored; and
189) Projects from the Gulf of Mexico Flexure tops of conventionally cored intervals were selected.
Trend for the purpose of evaluating their utility for Geological interpretations and quality operational
quantitative reservoir characterization. Single and decisions were made before the wells reached total
multiple depth of investigation resistivity, formation depth, creating a more efficient business process.
density, neutron porosity, and dual gamma ray
MWD responses are compared and contrasted with INTRODUCTION
their correlative wireline counterparts. Petrophysical
evaluations are corroborated by conventional core Accurate formation evaluation is an important
data, borehole images, sidewall core, and production cornerstone of the exploration and production
data. MWD "nearffar" neutron count rate overlays industry. Historicdly, wiretine logs have provided
were employed for qualitative evaluation of the best indirect analyses of the subsurface and
hydrocarbon type. Measurements after drilling continue to be a major source of data for reservoir
 CASE HISTORIES OF MWD AS WIRELINE REPLACEMENT:
AN EVOLUTION OF FORMATION EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY
characterization. A wide ranging host of
stratigraphic and petrophysical properties can be
measured with wireline devices, and log
interpretation techniques are widely known.
Limitations on the wireline measurements are
typically related to invasion, hole conditions,
rugosity, and shoulder bed effects. Acquiring
wireline logs in high angle wells can prove to be
problematic, and pipe-conveyance of the logging
tools is sometimes the only method by which the
wireline data can be obtained. Because pipe-
conveyed logging is extremely time consuming, the
formation measurements can be very strongly
affected by invasion and hole washout which
progress with time. Until the advent of MWD
formation evaluation capability, there was no
alternative for logging highly deviated wells.
The MWD tool was originally developed as a
directional survey device which was placed in the
bottom hole assembly behind the bit. The first
MWD logging tools included gamma ray and simple
resistivity devices for correlation and pore pressure
detection. MWD formation evaluation technology
has advanced rapidly within the past decade, now
providing an accurate alternative to wireline logs.
Because directional survey information is mandatory
for drilling deviated wells, adding formation
evaluation tools to the drill string results in only
incremental cost. Invoices for MWD logs are
usually comparable with their wireline counterparts
but are dependent upon the total number of
drilling/logging days.
MWD formation evaluation services include natural
gamma ray, short-normal resistivity, two megahertz
electromagnetic wave propagation resistivity, four
depths of investigation resistivity (EWR-Phase 4SM),
neutron porosity, density, and ultrasonic caliper
measurements (Figures l a and lb). The sensor
systems developed for MWD formation evaluation
differ from their wireline counterparts, and
therefore, the sensor responses or curves are
subsequently different as well. The fact that they
are different does not imply that one is more correct
than the other. Just as a laterolog and an induction
log run in the same well would not be identical,
SM EWR-Phase 4 is a Service Mark of Sperry-Sun
Drilling Services, Inc.
116
SPE 24673
neither then would an MWD log be an exact replica
of its wireline counterpart. MWD sensor
capabilities for gamma ray, resistivity, and porosity
logging are well documented in the literature1.2.3.4.5.6.
A primary advantage of MWD logging is that its
measurements are sampled within tens of feet behind
the bit, such that responses are recorded from
freshly cut formations. Invasion and hole washout,
common problems encountered when wireline
logging, are dramatically minimized. Shoulder bed
effects are negligible due to the MWD's excellent
vertical resolution, even in very high angle well^^.^.
While drilling is ongoing, MWD tools transmit a
portion of their formation evaluation data through
the mud column to surface computers, providing a
"real-time" log for reconnaissance. High resolution
MWD data is stored downhole in memory until the
tool is brought to the surface and is the source of the
final logs to be used for formation evaluation. It is
this type of detailed information which is more and
more frequently being chosen to replace equivalent
wireline services.
Limitations of MWD logging include variable
penetrationllogging rates, depths measured by drill
pipe alone, and availability of only limited types of
measurements. Although resistivity, gamma ray,
and neutron responses are overall very reliable,
MWD density recordings can be adversely affected
by hole size and angle, sliding as opposed to rotating
while drilling, and other environmental factors.
MWD tool design is dominated by structural
integrity requirements, and aside from a natural
gamma ray device, slim MWD tools have yet to be
developed for hole diameters less than eight inches.
Because the MWD logging environment is constantly
changing, accurate records of pertinent drilling
factors must be kept at the rig site and annotated
onto the logs by the field engineer. These factors
must be taken into consideration when interpreting
the logs.
In years past, Texaco has periodically utilized MWD
formation evaluation data as wireline log
replacement, but only in a "last resort" type of
application. If hole conditions were anticipated to be
extremely poor or hole angles were very high, then
MWD logs were seen as an economic alternative to
risky, time consuming wireline logging via drillpipe.
Because MWD was a new, upcoming technology,

SPE 24673 L.A. CANTRELL, K.B. PAXSON, W.L. KEYSER, S. BALL
there was resistance in using it as a total replacement
for wireline. Many recognized its potential but
wanted better repeatability, durability, and a proven
track record. Within one year, Texaco's attitude
toward MWD evolved tremendously. Case histories
of wells logged by MWD as wireline replacement
exemplify the progressive turnaround in Texaco's
utilization of MWD technology.
BACKGROUND FOR CASE STUDIES
Two recent Texaco-operated projects in the Gulf of
Mexico are the Green Canyon Block 6 Field
(Kilauea Project) and the Garden Banks Block 189
Field (Tick Project). These two platforms are
located 166 nautical miles (267 km.) southwest of
New Orleans, Louisiana and 130 nautical miles (81
km.) south of Lake Charles, Louisiana, respectively
(Figure 2). The Green Canyon Block 6 "A"
Platform, situated in 622 feet (190 m.) of water, was
installed in July, 1989 and finished initial drilling
operations in late December, 1991. A total of 16
wells and ten sidetracks were drilled, yielding 12 oil
completions and two gas completions. The Garden
Banks Block 189 "A" Platform, set in 720 feet (220
m.) of water, was installed in August, 1991, and
exploratory and development drilling is anticipated
to continue through spring of 1994 with 20 wells
planned. As of this writing, six wells have been
drilled, yielding five oil completions.
Despite their geographical separation, Kilauea and
Tick Projects share several common features:
Both fields, located within the Gulf of Mexico
Flexure Trend, are comprised of Pleistocene
pay intervals. Kilauea sands are Illinoian in
age, while Tick sands are Yarmouth in age.
Both fields feature a series of fault traps which
are downthrown to major salt piercements.
Each producing property contains multiple pay
sands. Kilauea has two gas and ten
gas-associated oil reservoirs. Tick has eight oil
reservoirs with associated gas caps.
The fields share a common depth range for
their productive interval. Kilauea is productive
from 3,500' to 8,000' subsea (-1,067 m. to
-2,439 m.). Tick is productive from 4,500' to
9,000' subsea (-1,371 m. to -2,744 m.).
Most wells from both projects utilize
directional drilling. Hole inclinations vary
117
3
between 30" and 70" from the vertical, with
displacements up to 6,600' (2,012 m.).
6). Lastly, both projects have utilized traditional
wireline and MWD logging for formation
evaluation.
MWD LOGGING AT GREEN CANYON
BLOCK 6 FIELD
At the beginning of the drilling program for the
Kilauea Project, all wells were evaluated with
traditional wireline logging suites which included
induction, density, neutron porosity, gamma ray,
and sidewall core services. Sonic logs, dipmeters,
and geochemical logs were run on select wells.
After all of the field's pay sands were discovered
and the structural geology and fluid contacts became
better known, the focus of the project changed to
drilling shallow gas objectives and delineating
isolated oil rims. For the last four wells of the
initial drilling project, MWD was selected as the
primary method of formation evaluation by the
Kilauea lease development team.
The first well at Kilauea to be fully evaluated with
MWD was the #A-4 well. This shallow, high
displacement well was drilled with a maximum hole
angle of 73" and targeted a seismic amplitude in an
untested fault segment. Due to mechanical risks
associated with drilling and drillpipe-conveyed
logging, an MWD logging suite consisting of gamma
ray, resistivity, and neutron porosity was selected
for formation evaluation. Drilling operations
proceeded smoothly with constant monitoring of
geopressure, but the objectives encountered were
wet. Due to rapidly obtained MWD real-time data,
the #A-4 well was immediately plugged and
abandoned, saving substantial rig time and additional
logging costs. MWD was selected again as the
primary formation evaluation method for the next
well - the #A-16.
CASE HISTORY NUMBER ONE - GAS ZONE
DETECTION UTILIZING MWD RESISTIVITY
AND NEUTRON DATA.
The #A-16 well was drilled through the 1-3 Sand
with a maximum hole angle of 66". As an
alternative to pipe-conveyed logging, the well was
evaluated with an MWD logging suite consisting of
gamma ray, resistivity, and neutron porosity
 CASE HISTORIES OF MWD AS WIRELINE REPLACEMENT:
AN EVOLUTION OF FORMATION EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY
measurements (Figure 3). Ideally, a density tool
would have been included in the tool string as well,
but the hole environment was not conducive to good
quality MWD density measurements. For optimum
results, the density tool used at Kilauea required an
8-112" hole size, but since the #A-16 well was
drilled with a 9-718" bit, the density tool was not
incorporated into the MWD assembly.
Accurate hydrocarbon typing was accomplished in
the 1-3 Sand by graphically and numerically
examining the raw measurements from the MWD
neutron porosity device. Hydrocarbon typing with
the "nearlfar" neutron detector count rate ratio
technique, documented in the literatureg, proved to
be extremely reliable at the Kilauea field. Nearlfar
neutron count rates, normalized in a fluid filled
porous sand, showed characteristic curve separation
in gas intervals. The 1-3 Sand was also encountered
in the offset #A-13 well which was evaluated with an
induction/density/neutron/gamma ray (triple-combo)
wireline suite (Figure 4). The indicated tops of the
1-3 Sand in these two wells were laterally 1,100'
(335 m.) apart but were in a common reservoir. The
top portion of the sand was tight in both logs,
grading downward from a highly laminated to a
more clean and massive sand towards the base.
Due to invasion and poorer vertical resolution of the
wireline induction device in the #A-13 well,
formation resistivity values were lower when
compared to the MWD responses in the #A-16 well.
The MWD gamma ray character was comparable to
the wireline gamma ray curve over select sand and
shale intervals. In the #A-13 well, wireline neutron1
density "cross-over" was evident in the thick, well
developed gas bearing lobes and became more subtle
in the more laminated sections. In the #A-16 well,
the MWD near-far neutron count rate overlay
exhibited good gas response in the clean,, thick
portions of the 1-3 Sand, as well as in much of the
highly laminated intervals. In the more shaly sands,
hydrocarbon typing became more problematic.
The MWD logging suite accurately identified the gas
content of the 1-3 Sand. This sand will be an
important future plug-back objective for both the
#A-13 and #A-16 wells.
SPE 24673
CASE HISTORY NUMBER TWO OIL ZONE -
DELINEATION WITH MWD TRIPLE COMBO
LOGS.
Given the success of the MWD logging on the
#A-4 and #A-16 wells, the MWD resistivity/neutron/
densitylgarnma ray (triple-combo) was used for
evaluating the subsequent #A-5 sidetrack 2 (Figure
5). This well was drilled through the TA-2 Sand
with a maximum hole angle of only 38". This sand
was also encountered by the #A-12 well, a nearby
offset evaluated by a triple-combo wireline suite
(Figure 6). The indicated tops of the TA-2 Sand in
these two wells were laterally 1,800' (549 m.) apart
in a common reservoir. The interpreted gasloil
contact for the TA-2 Sand was at 7,568' TVD, and
the oillwater contact was at 7,664' TVD as shown in
both wells. Wireline sidewall cores were taken in
the #A-12 well only.
In the TA-2 Sand, the #A-12 wireline suite identified
the gas cap with good neutronldensity cross-over
effect. The #A-5 sidetrack 2 MWD logging suite
also identified the gas cap, but the neutronldensity
cross-over response was slightly suppressed due to
shaliness in this portion of the sand. The wireline
triple-combo log did not exhibit good cross-over
response either in this same interval, but did so in
the cleaner portions of the sand. The MWD logging
suite exhibited good fluid filled porosity detection in
the oil bearing zone, while the wireline logging suite
did not. Differences in porosity were attributed to
reservoir heterogeneity.
Overall, MWD neutron and density porosities were
very comparable to wireline responses and offset
sidewall core data. Formation resistivities from the
wireline logging suite were significantly lower
relative to its MWD counterpart, due primarily to
shoulder bed effects on the induction log. The
gamma ray responses from the wireline and MWD
tools were comparable. Porosities from sidewall
core data (Figure 6) and computed water saturations
were presented on the log examples (Figures 5 and
6).
The TA-2 Sand in the #A-12 well was perforated
from 7,593' to 7,629' TVD for a single gravel
packed oil completion. After a clean-up period of
five days, this well flowed 789 BOPD, 1.436
MMCFGPD on a 22/64" choke. The TA-2 Sand in

SPE 24673 L.A. CANTRELL, K.B. PAXSON, W.L. KEYSER, S. BALL
the #A-5 sidetrack 2 was bypassed due to a
subsequent sidetrack for a deeper objective.
MWD LOGGING AT GARDEN BANKS BLOCK
Given the positive results from MWD logging at the
Kilauea Project, the Tick lease development team
decided to test the accuracy of MWD as wireline
replacement by running both types of logs in the
same borehole. A conventional core, along with an
acoustic borehole televiewer - the digital
Circumferential Borehole Imaging Log (CBILSM),
were run to compare and contrast hole images with
whole rock properties from the core. Since the Tick
Project was just beginning its field development and
the geologic picture was far from complete, the use
of MWD as total wireline replacement was not seen
as feasible until later in the drilling program.
CASE HISTORY NUMBER THREE-
COMPARISON OF MWD AND WIRELINE
TRIPLE COMBO LOGS
The first well drilled from the Tick Platform was the
#A-4 well which targeted the YA-1 and YC Sands.
This well was an S-shaped hole with a maximum
displacement of 1,362' (415 m.) from the platform
and was near-vertical through its objective interval.
A comprehensive formation evaluation program was
designed for this well. Wireline services included
resistivity, neutron, density, sonic, dipmeter, CBIL,
and sidewall cores. MWD logs included the
standard 2Mhz resistivity, four depth of investigation
resistivity (EWR-Phase 4), neutron porosity, density
porosity and gamma ray curves.
Resistivities from the EWR-Phase 4 device showed
the highly laminated nature of the YA-1 sand, as
well as a detailed early invasion profile across the
interval (Figure 7, track 2). In contrast, the wireline
resistivities showed evidence of averaging between
the individual sand and shale laminae, probably due
to invasion and shoulder bed effects (Figure 7, track
3). Overall resistivities from the wireline tool were
lower than the MWD responses, and did not appear
to have resolved the lower portion of the sand nearly
SM CBIL is a service mark of Western Atlas
International, Inc.
119
5
as well as its MWD counterpart. The gamma ray
curves for the two log types were comparable, with
the MWD AAPI values being relatively lower. This
was caused by spectral biasing due to the drill collar
thickness.
A digital CBIL was also run through the YA-1 Sand
interval, and its images demonstrated the finely
interbedded nature of the reservoir (Figure 8).
Individual sand stringers identified by the CBIL
varied between 6" and 2' (15 cm. to 60 cm.) with
interbedded shales ranging from 1" to 1' (3 cm. to
30 cm.). . These borehole images, along with the
MWD gamma ray and resistivity curves from the
EWR-Phase 4 correlate extremely well for thin bed
evaluation and resolution.
When compared, the neutron curves of the MWD
and wireline tools showed excellent agreement,
especially within the fluid filled portion of the pay
sand (Figure 7, track 4). A gasloil contact was
indicated at 5,754' MD by sidewall core analysis.
This contact was not resolved by either the MWD or
the wireline porosity responses. The highly
laminated nature of the sand and rugosity of the 9-
718" hole may have detrimentally affected the
porosity responses, preventing the typical gas effect
from developing on either of the logs. This contact
was identified, however, by a subtle change in the
invasion profile of the EWR-Phase 4 (Figure 7,
track 2). Within the well developed lobe near the
top of the YA-1 Sand, all four resistivity curves
separate due to gas effect on the invasion profile.
As the sand became more shaly with depth, the
medium and deep resistivity curves separated from
one another in the gas cap, but began to more
closely overlay within the oil-filled part of the sands.
Computed water saturations from both MWD and
wireline logs showed different results (Figure 9).
MWD water saturations were significantly lower due
to the better vertical resolution in the thinly
laminated intervals and less invasion effects on the
MWD resistivities.
The second objective for the #A-4 well was the YC
Sand, and in addition to MWD and wireline
services, a sixty foot section of conventional core
was cut in the upper portion of the sand. By closely
monitoring the real-time MWD curves, the team was
able to precisely pick the appropriate coring point.
Petrophysical examination of this sand showed it to
 CASE HISTORIES OF MWD AS WIRELINE REPLACEMENT:
AN EVOLUTION OF FORMATION EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY
be an extremely well-sorted, fine to medium grained
sandstone with upward fining bedforms that range
from 2" to 15' (5 cm. to 4.6 m.). Average porosities
for the YC Sand were 32 percent, and air
permeabilities ranged from 0.35 darcies to 14.24
darcies. Average air permeabil ities were 4.32
darcies. The CBIL tool was also run across the
cored interval, and correlation with the MWD log
was excellent (Figure 11).
The MWD resistivity in the YC Sand showed a
superior response relative to its wireline counterpart,
exhibiting better vertical resolution and pre-invasion
measurements (Figure 10). The MWD and wireline
neutron porosity curves were quite comparable in the
YC Sand. Both the wireline neutronldensity and the
MWD near-far neutron logs showed crossover and
curve separation, respectively, as indication of gas
effect. (Figure 10, tracks 3 and 4). Both log types
accurately identified the gasloil contact at 6,469'
MD which was verified by sidewall core analysis.
MWD neutronldensity curves, while correctly
indicating hydrocarbon type, could not precisely
identify the gasloil contact due to the MWD density
being adversely affected by the large hole size and
tool precession in the near-vertical portion of the
hole.
Since the YC Sand was gas bearing in the #A-4 well
and a subsequent downdip well would target the YC
Sand oil rim, the YA-1 Sand was perforated from
5,750' to 5,820' MD for a single gravel-packed oil
completion. Initially, the well flowed 270 BOPD
with only .034 MMCFGPD, and the well was
considered to be a candidate for gas lift. After a
clean up period of 10 days, though, the well's rate
increased and now flows at 800 BOPD and 3.5
MMCFGPD. Invasion by mud filtrate and the
laminated nature of the YA-1 Sand may have
contributed to the initially low test rates.
The Tick lease development team was extremely
pleased with the success of the #A-4 well. As the
first well drilled from Texaco's deepest water
platform in the world, expectations were great.
Production rates proved to be very respectable, and
MWD logging gave the team the data they needed.
The #A-4 well was one of the first in the Gulf of
Mexico to be logged by the EWR-Phase 4 tool and
the first in the world to be logged by the digital
CBIL device. Both technologies are now regularly
120
SPE 24673
utilized at the Tick Platform.
CASE HISTORY NUMBER FOUR - GASIOIL
CONTACT DELINEATION - COMPARING
MWD AND WIRELINE LOG DATA
The third well drilled from the Tick Platform was
the #A-5 sidetrack. This well was an S-shaped hole
with a maximum angle of 45" and maximum
displacement of 2,500' (762 m.) from the platform.
The primary target, which was the YC Sand, was
encountered nearly vertical.
MWD logging for the #A-5 sidetrack included
gamma ray, neutron porosity, and EWR-Phase 4
resistivity. Wireline services included density,
neutron porosity, sonic, dipmeter, and sidewall
cores. No wireline induction logs were required
because the EWR-Phase 4 responses were seen as
superior in nature to their wireline counterpart.
Both types of neutron logs were run once again in
this well to verify the MWD neutron responses in a
12-114" wellbore.
As noted earlier, the YC Sand contained an oil
reservoir with an associated gas cap. Wireline
neutronldensity crossover and the MWD nearlfar
neutron count rate technique both identified the gas
content of the sand and the gasloil contact at 7,500'
MD (Figure 12). This contact was confirmed by
sidewall core analysis. Since the bit size for this
portion of the well was 12 1/4", both the wireline
and MWD neutron porosity measurements were
adversely effected. The MWD neutron porosity
response, although influenced more by large hole
size, correctly identified the hydrocarbon type and
gasloil contacts.
In Figure 13, the MWD multiple resistivity curves
were contrasted with a measurement after drilling
(MAD) pass which was run 10 hours later, revealing
two high permeability zones located at 7,458' and
7,502' MD. These high permeability areas,
indicated by curve separation, were confirmed with
sidewall core data. The EWR-Phase 4 MAD run
showed stronger invasion profiles (Figure 12) in the
gas zone delineated by the MWD nearlfar neutron
technique: The difference in the early invasion
profile for the gas and oil zones was probably due to
better hydrocarbon mobility in the gas cap and good
overall permeabilities. The change in profile of the
SPE 24673 L.A. CANTRELL, K.B. PAXSON, W.L. KEYSER, S. BALL
four resistivity curves over time was seen as a
qualitative confirmation of the location of the gadoil
contact.
The #A-5 sidetrack was perforated in the YC sand
between 7,442' and 7,516' MD for a single gravel
packed gas completion. After a clean up period of
14 days, the well flowed at a rate of 247 BOPD and
4.0 MMCFGPD on a 27/64" choke.
CHANGE IN LOGGING PHILOSOPHY
In mid 1991, MWD was used twice as replacement
for pipe-conveyed triple combo wireline services at
the Kilauea platform. The Kilauea lease
development team originally viewed MWD only as
a more economic, albeit less reliable option to time
consuming pipe-conveyed logging. After reviewing
the MWD logs and comparing them to sidewall core
data, the logs were seen to be surprisingly accurate
indicators of hydrocarbon type and gas-oil contacts.
MWD resistivities were less affected by invasion,
and overall vertical resolution was excellent. MWD
porosity measurements were in good agreement with
sidewall core and offset wireline log data. A
comparative cost analysis was conducted by
Texaco's rig operations team for these two wells'
costs versus typical pipe-conveyed. charges for
similar wells. It was calculated that roughly
$300,000 in invoicing and rig time savings were
realized by using MWD in lieu of pipe-conveyed
logging on the #A-4 and #A-16 wells at Kilauea.
Recently, process maps were designed to analyze
activity flow for wireline and MWD logging in other
wells which were not highly deviated and only
required triple-combo services (Figure 14).
Although a time scale was not incorporated into the
maps, it was estimated that one full day of rig time
was saved by using MWD logging instead of
correlative wireline services. Conditioning trips, rig
up time, time for recording down-logs, and actual
logging time were considered as part of the
wireline's overall rig-time duration. Furthermore,
rig operations were additionally delayed while
subsurface data was being evaluated and decisions
were made. By analyzing the real-time MWD data
before the well reached its total depth,
recommendations and operational decision making
were expedited. Consequently, utilizing MWD
logging was seen to have resulted in a more efficient
business process.
Until recently, MWD was a technology which was
not adequately understood by most of Texaco's
geoscience staff. An in-house study was conducted
in order to assess MWD formation evaluation
capability and to gauge competitor utilization of
MWD logging. In-house log examples of MWD
data were examined, and an update on the
availability of MWD services was provided. The
results of the study showed that while Texaco was
now just beginning to replace wireline logging with
MWD, major competitors such as Shell, Amoco,
and Exxon had already been doing so for field
development since as early as 19847,9,10.
Two major benefits were cited by most operators
who used MWD to replace wireline logs: confidence
in the MWD's accuracy and realized dollar savings
in rig time and invoicing. These were the same
factors which initiated the change in Texaco's
offshore formation evaluation philosophy.
CONCLUSION
The shift in Texaco's attitude towards the use of
MWD formation evaluation can be attributed to:
accuracy of the data, increased mechanical
reliability, recent technological advances, a favorable
track record, and realized economic benefits.
Recent experience from both Kilauea and Tick
Projects has helped foster a growing confidence in
MWD logging in the Gulf of Mexico. As of this
writing, every well drilled by Texaco in the Gulf of
Mexico since September, 1991 has utilized MWD to
fully or partially replace equivalent wireline runs
where hole size was not a limiting factor (Figure
15).
This rapid change in formation evaluation
philosophy occurred shortly after self-driven cross
functional teams were created and challenged by
management to maximize field value. These
empowered teams are responsible for project and
reservoir management. Team innovation is
constantly encouraged, recognized, and rewarded.
This new way of doing business at Texaco has
provided a primary catalyst for the use of MWD
logging technology. In today's business
environment, where value and quality of services are
 CASE HISTORIES OF MWD AS WIRELINE REPLACEMENT:
AN EVOLUTION OF FORMATION EVALUATION PHILOSOPHY
paramount, MWD formation evaluation warrants
more serious consideration. The MWD logging
technology, once seen as suspect, is now being
selectively chosen instead of equivalent wireline
logs, providing highly accurate and more economic
subsurface data for field development.
REFERENCES
Coope, D.F., "Gamma Ray Measurement
While Drilling", The Log Analyst, Jan.-Feb.,
1983, pg. 3-9.
Coope, D.F. and Yearsley, E.N., "Formation
Evaluation Using EWR Logs", Paper SPE
14062 presented at the International Meeting on
Petroleum Engineering of SPE, March 17-20,
1987, Beijing, China.
Roesler, R.F., Barnett, W.C., and Paske,
W.C., "Theory and Application of a MWD
Neutron Porosity Sensor," Paper SPE 16057,
1987 SPEIIADC Drilling Conference, New
Orleans, Louisiana.
Paske, W.C., Roesler, R.F., Barnett, W.C.,
and Rodney, P.F., "Formation Density
Logging While Drilling", Paper SPE 16756
presented at the 62nd Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, TX,
September 27-30, 1987.
Koopersmith, C.A., and Barnett, W.C.,
"Environmental Factors Affecting Neutron
Porosity, Gamma Ray and Resistivity
Measurements Made While Drilling", Paper
SPE 16758 presented at the 62nd Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas,
Texas, September 27-30, 1987.
I.M.S. - Eastern Hemisphere Technology
Committee, "Compatibility of Formation
Evaluation MWD Data and Wireline Log Data
(Guidelines to Optimise FEMWD Quality),
Thames Symposium, London, December,
1991.
Greif, M.A. and Koopersmith, C.A.,
"Petrophysical Evaluation of Thinly Bedded
Reservoirs in High Angle/Displacement
Development Wells with the NL Recorded
SPE 24673
Lithology Logging System", presented at the
Canadian Well Logging Society Tenth Formation
Evaluation Symposiumheld in Calgary, Alberta,
September 29 - October 2, 1985.
Bittar, M.S., Rodney, P.F., Mack, S.G., and
Bartel, R.P., "A True Multiple Depth of
Investigation Electromagnetic Wave Resistivity
Sensor: Theory, Experiment and Prototype
Field Test Results", Paper SPE 22705
presented at the 66th Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition held in Dallas,
Texas, October 6-9, 1991.
Simms, G.T. and Koopersmith, C.A.,
"Hydrocarbon Type Identification Using MWD
Neutron Porosity Logging, a Case History",
Paper SPE 19620 presented at the SPE 64th
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
San Antonio, Texas, October, 1989.
Cantrell, L.A., "MWD as Wireline Log
Replacement: Texaco's Changing Attitude in
the Gulf of Mexico", presented at Texaco
Formation Evaluation Conference, Houston,
Texas, April 27-29, 1992.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank the management teams of
Texaco Exploration and Production, Inc. and Union
Oil Company of California for their cooperation in
releasing logs and production data from both Green
Canyon Block 6 and Garden Banks Block 189
Fields. Many special thanks to George Steinberger,
Terri Myatt, and Mike Lynds at Sperry-Sun Drilling
Services, Inc. Their assistance in the preparation of
this publication is greatly appreciated.
Pulser NO PM CIM CN@ SFD EWR DGR

Figure 1A
MWD triple combo sensor configuration.

Figure 1B
EWR-Phase 4.

EAST
UERO
AREA
EUGENE
ISLAND
AREA

EAST BREAKS &RE* GARDEN BANKS AREA

ILANINDS CANYON AREA I I E A W L E V C Y R N AREA WALKER RIDGE AREA

NG 16-4

-100
-
- -
- MILES

160 KM.

Figure 2
Location Map for Green Canyon Block 6 and Garden Banks Block 189 Fields.
 1/
388
FEET
nn
68 P.U. 0

I of TA-2 Sand I

7688
A
N onta
i
ul

;( 29.5' GTY
L 1979FI'F'
'1 789 BOPD

7788

Figure 5 Figure 6
Kilauea Well No. A-5 ST 2, MWD Triple Combo Kilauea Well No. A-12, Wireline Triple Combo data with
data with computed water saturation. sidewall core porosity (x) and computed water saturation.
 DSWL SHfi DSUL RHO
PAPI HE 2 ----L!I!$I-.-. g. .Z OHH-n 20 , 1.65 M/CC Z.56
FRET
CBlL
SU PHIE VCL
18 ' 1 0 tlUD GR
MIPI 1 1 0 . 1 DECIML 0:.5 0.0 DECIML 1
REFLECTANCE (DEG) FEET
VCL UL SU BVU PHlE
0 DECIlL 1 1 DECllL 8 .5
-----------------*----------------, DECllL 0.1 0

Figure 7
Tick Well No. A-4, MWD and Wireline data
Figure 8
Tick Well No. A-4, Acoustic Borehole Televiewer
Figure 9
Tick Well No. A-4, MWD and Wireline Water 1
-P-
comparison with sidewall core porosity. data showing sandlshale laminations. SaturationAnalysis. &
u
u
 WL SHBL EUR NEBR UL C~L
ohnn 2EE . 2 ohm 2EE .21EE counts 51EE -y--_p .u.
WL ILM
ohm -
2EE 425
FBR
counts 1425 68
UL DEW
p.u. E
CBlL
em---------------.,

UL ILD I D EN
o h 288 ....
68 .....
). P.U. E

SUC POR
REFLECTANCE (DEG)
,6E P.U. E
[.I

Figure 10 Figure 11
Tick Well No. A-4, MWD vs. Wireline data comparison with Tick Well No. A-4, Acoustic Borehole
sidewall and whole core porosity data. Televiewer Reflectance Data.
 1/
388
FEET
EUSP EUSP-UP
onnu ZBB .z OM-H ZBB

-
7488

-Gas

7588
Oil

Figure 12 Figure 13
l3ck Well No. A-5 Sidetrack 2- vs. Wmline comparison with l3ck Well No. A-5, ~idetrack2,MWD and MAD ~easurement
MWD neutron neadfar counts utilized for hydrocarbon typing. After Drilling) comparison of EWR-Phase 4 resistivity data.
 Drilling with Conventional Logging Program
plsliminaw
Management Log
Review

................................................~.......~.~mmm......~.~~~ml~m~~m~~~~~m~mmm~~~~m~~~~mmm~mm~m~ ......I ..a I ........... ..................

w
Evaluate Meke Obtain Glve
Recommend-
Technical + Logs a
'FF ' ation t o
Manngment
i
Partner
~pprovd
Orders
T0.g

.............................................................................. .....I........... ........................ ...a. I

+ &yk
Condition Log Well Pmceed w/
Dillling Rig + Drill Out of Surface M n g to TD Hole tor
Logging LCT"zsrsts
+ &
Fax Logs
_) Operations

u
Drilling with MWD Logging Program

u Management ation?

0
Next Activity
W&Acti"ity

r Drilling Rig

Figure 14
Business process maps for conventional wireline and MWD logging programs.
 (Note: Each symbol represents a single well.)

p MWD AS ECONOMIC LAST RESORT

rf. MWD FOLLOWED BY DUPLICATE WlRELlNE

MWD AS WlRELlNE REPLACEMENT ( TOTAL OR PARTlAL )

Figure 15
Frequency Plot of MWD as wireline replacement for
Texaco operated wells in the Gulf of Mexico.