Chapter 5 Resistivity Logs 5.1 Introduction ‘The discussion ofthe nature of electrical resistivity of rocks in Chap. 1 revealed that « relationship exists between rock resistivity and both porosity and water saturation, I also revealed that ifthe for- ‘mation resistivity is measured, the presence of hydrocerbon and its quantity can be deduced, Resistivity measurement was first used in mining exploration, ‘This geophysical exploration method consists of inducing a low- ‘frequency current into the subsurface with metallic electrodes placed atthe surface. The potential difference generated by the induced current is measured at the surface. The quadripole ABMN in Fig. 5.1 Is the most commonly used electrode array in surface explora tion. A and B are the current electrodes, and M and N are the poten tial electrodes. A resistivity value, usualy called apparent or cffectve resistivity, is derived from the induced current and meas- ‘ured potential ata surface station. The measurement aud caleula- tion of apparent resistivity are repeated at several stations covering the area prospected. Resistivity profiles similar to that in Fig. 5.2 ‘and resistivity maps similar to that in Fig. 5.3 are constructed, These profiles and maps are used to obtain quantitative and qualitative information pertzining to type and structure of subsurface forma tions. The depth of investigation ofthis technique is controlled main= ly by the spacing between the electrodes, Electric well logging is a spin-off of geophysical prospecting. In March 1921, Marcel Schlumberger and several colleagues took advantage ofa 2,500-R-leep reconnaissance borehole and conducted downhole resistivity measurements. The purpose of these meas- ‘urements was t0 enhance the interpretation of surface data, The resistivity measurement di reflect the variation in the nature of subsurface formations penetrated by the wellbore. In early 1927, ‘Conrad Schlumberger outlined the principe of @ new exploration methad called electrical coring. The first resistivity log was ob- tained on Sept. 5, 1927, in Pechetbronn, France. ‘The first resistivity log was obtained by lowering three elecrodes, ‘current Electrode A and two potential Electrodes M and N, into the wellbore atthe end of insulated cables (Fig. §.4). The surface casing was used asthe other current Electrode B, The value ofthe current that circulated between Electrodes and B and the voltage that resulted between Electrodes M and N were used to calculate ‘an apparent resistivity value. The measurement was repeated at 3- ft intervals, A plot of resistivity vs, depth resulted in the first, resistivity log, which is shown in Fig. 5.5. This successful logging, ‘operation was followed by the progressive development of the many resistivity tots discussed in this chapter. These tools may be clas~ sified as either conventional electrode, focused current, or induc- tion type, 5.2 Apparont Resistivity ‘The theory for resistivity measurements is complex. Accurate treat- ‘meat calls for involved electromagnetic theory. The true complex geometry ofa borehole that penetrates several formations also has to be considored.? The concept of apparent resistivity, however, can be introduced by using the simplifed case of a DC, point-power electrode in a homogeneous, isotropic, and infinitely extended medium > Consider a DC source located at Point A Isotropic mestium with resi electrode i placed so far from the electrode at Point A that its pres- ‘ence may be neglected during consideration of the current flow around Point A. Because the medium is completely homogeneous, the current density around the source depends only on the distance, 7, from Point A. All points equidistant from the power electrode are then at the same potential. The prevailing flow system is spher- ‘cal with equipotential spheres and radial lines of eurrent flow, ‘The resistance, dp, of te spherical shell between the radii rand r+ér is given by IL p=R— =k 61) ‘The resistance between two measuring points, Points 1 and 2, ated on two equipotential spheres with radii r, and r,, respec” tively, is ‘eB E (LA! oa eo alan 6.2) If Tis the intensity of the current leaving Electrode A and AV’ isthe potential difference between the two spheres, the application fof Ohm's law to the conductor between these spheres gives Pa AV ll cess eceoee ce .3) Combining Eqs. 5.2 and 5.3 results in 6.4)RESISTIVITY LOGS 9 i POWER SOURCE AMPEREMETER Fig, §,1—Current tlowlines and equlpotentials for a typical ABM quadripole. Eq, 5.4, giving the potential difference AV}, between any two points in a homogeneous medium as a result of the flow of a cur- rent /, may be solved for Ras follows: ee see I) where Gp=4xiryralira—r)) 6.6) Gy is a geometric coefficient for this particular electrode artay It depencs only on the spacing between the electrodes on a sonde. A similar expression for R can be obtained for other electrode ar- rangements. Only the geometric coefficient Gr will be different. Example $.1. A constant I-A current flows from the current Elee~ ‘ode A situated in a 100-0+m homogeneous, isotropic medium ‘What is the voltage measured by two electrodes situated at 17 ft, 4 in, and 20 ft, respectively? Note that tis electrode arrangement corresponds 19 the 18 ft, 8 in, lteral tool deseibed later in Sec. 5.3.2. 30 equice of tivity curve and value etivity in ohm 109020903000 en e ‘SCALE Vy wy ARICEST! ~SSN oC osiivtios (ons an? Fig. 5.2—Example of surface resistivity profile illustrated by the frst one obtained In 1920 at May St. André, Normandy | (trom Ret. 1). Solution, With the assumption of spherical low and uniform resistivity about the current electrode, Eq. 5.4 can be used to cal- culate the voltage AP. The distances ry and ra tothe two poten til electrodes are ry=17 f, 4 ia. =208 in. =5.2832 m and 7 =240 in, =6.0960 m, Using Eg. 5.6 gives ‘4x(5.2832)(6.0960) 6.0960~5.2832 Because [=1 A, and R= 100 0-m, 93 m. Gp resistivity map obtained above ‘Ariceati Salt Dome, Rumania, In 1923 (atter Ref. 1). Fig. 5.1—Schematic of the electrodes array used in record- ing the first resitivity 1og {rom Ret. 1).ot THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS a \ equipotentiat surfaces tees ls et gente a tere T "sparse"? | | Fig. 5.2—Schematc o equipotent surtaces around a power 1 | electrode n'a borehole, Meter Generator Fig, 5.5—Reproduction of the first restetivity og recorded in Pechelbronn, France, In 1827 (trom Ret. 1). Equipotential t J Spheres SF Spacing AM mom | | ie >am \ j ~ 7 7 Spe eure Fig, Point power electrode ine homgeneous, oop: ieVanditntay oxonded medium, Fig, 6.4—Baslo arrangement of he normal devon «400 {Up to this point, « homogenous, ante medium bas beea Via =0. v assumed. An actual medium is less homogeneous in several ways. 193 “The existence of hole filed with ling med, the presoree of =200 mV. several formations, and the inevitable nonhomogencities in the for _— nvions affect the configuration of the equipotentil surfaces andRESISTIVITY LOGS the resulting potential differences observed atthe measuring elec trodes, Fig. 8.7 isa schematic ofthe equipotential surfaces around power Electrode A in a borehole near the boundary between two formations of different resistivities, each more resistive than the ‘mud filling the hole Tnan actual drillhole, a voltage AV is still indicated by the meas- uring electrodes. If AV is substituted into Bg. 5.5 withthe proper values of [and Gy, a resistivity value can be calculated and plot- ted vs. depth as a fog. This calculated resistivity is called apparent resistivity, R. The apparent resistivity can be regarded as the resistivity of homogeneous, isotropic, and infinitely extended ‘medium that is electrically equivalent o the true medium surround- ing the tool. ‘This concept of apparent resistivity uses the simplified case of spherical flow of DC and electrode-type devices. It holds true in ‘more complex cases of focused current and induction devices. Ia those cases, the signal recorded by the tool is used to calculate aa apparent resistivity, which is the resistivity of a simplified med tum electromagnetically equivalent to the true medium surround- ing the tool. The simplified medium is usually one where (1) all. the media surrounding the measuring device are assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic, (2) the fluid column filling the hole has the shape of a circular and infinitely long cylinder, and ) the electrical logging tool is located on the drillhole axis. Regardless of the tool type and design and the simplifying a sumptions used, aa apparent modium sesstvity is calculated and rescaied asa resistivity og. When sufficient information is ava able regarding the conditions ofthe measurement, itis often possi- ble to use the og values of apparent resistivity to arrive atthe true formation resistivity by means described in Secs. 5.6 and 5.7. Example 5.2. Three electrodes, A, M, and N, are lowered on a Jogeing sonde into a 3,000-i weilbore drilled through an unknown medium and filled with drilling uid, The distances AM and AN are 17 ft, 4in, and 20 f, respectively. When & 2-A current is cit- ‘ulated between Electrosies A and B (B is situated atthe surface), 2 signal of 10 mY is measured between Electrodes Mand N. Cak- ‘ulate the apparent resistivity of the medium that surrounds the sonde. ‘Solution. Because Blectrode B is so far from Electrode A, Ea, 5.5 can be used Ry=Gy(AVi), 6.7) where Ry isthe apparent resistivity ofthe medium surrounding the tool Eq, 5.6 yields Gy=497.93 m, and because Ry=497.93(0.012 =2.50'm, Note that none of the zones surrounding the tool would neces- sarily have a resistivity of 2.5 +m, Aaand V=0,010 5.3 Conventional Electrode Tools ‘As with the geophysical exploration method, the electrode-type log- ‘ging devices use an array of four electrodes: A, B, M, and IN, Two ‘or threo of these electrodes are mounted on a sonde and lowered jo the borehole. The remaining electrodes are either grounded atthe surface or positioned in the borehole far from the sonde. The ‘electrode arrangements common in well logging are the normal and lateral arrangements. In the normal arrangement, (wo electrodes ‘are mounted on the sonde; inthe lateral arrangement, three elec- trodes are on the logging tool Resistivity logs obvained withthe normal and lateral electrode arrangements are not currently in use because of inherent limita- ns (discussed later). Despite this fact, familiarity with these logs ‘is warranted because of several reasons. Fist, theit concept is the simplest of all developed resistivity tools, and grasping it makes understanding the workings of other devices easy. Second, the nor- ‘mal and lateral devices were used extensively from the late 1930's os to the early 1960's and make up almost 45% of al existing logs. Finally, the new technology of log measurement while driling (MWD) uses @ normal device to measure formation resistivity 5.3.1 Normal Device. Fig. 5.8 shows the basic electrode aerange- ‘ment ofthe normal device. The eveent Electrode A and pote Ectrode M are mounted onthe sonde and lowered into te bore- tole, Electrodes B and N are located atthe surface far from Pee. trodes & and M. In practice, Elecrode Bis also pt inthe borehoe “Te generator induces a low-frequeney, constant cure between Elctrodes A ard B. Because Electrode Nis rmate from the eur rent electrodes is potentials practically negligible. The vatacter tmessures the potential of Electrode M. This poteatal canbe ex. pressed with Bq, 5.8, where, is replaced by AM andr i n- Finite, resulting in AV=IR/4xM. (5.8) “The apparent resistivity calculated from the measured AV and is expressed with equations similar to Eqs. 5.5 through §.7: Ro GulAVID, (5.9) where Gy=42RME. eee (6.10) Gy isthe geometric coefficient of he normal sonde and Ais the sonde specing, The value of R, i pleted atm dep that corre- sponds tothe midpoat between Elecrodes A and M. This poin if wsunly called te inscription poin ‘As demonstrated later, 50% ofthe signal measured by normal device placed in an infin, homogeneous medivm cos fom a spharical volume catered at Electrode A, with a radius equal to twice the spacing AM. Consequently, the normal device ssid to hve a radias of depth of investigation tht is twie ts spacing ‘Mot ofthe electri cols contained t katt normal devices cf two diferent spacings. The most commonly wed normal spac ings ae he 6m, shor normal end the 6, long normal An intermediate 36%. spacing was also available onthe U.S, pull coast? The long normal device, which has a rads of investiga tion of shout 10 f, was tse to overcome borehole and invaded one effi and t provide a representative vale of tve forma tion resistivity, B,. The resolution ofthe long normal, however, is poor in thin bes. The short normal resisuvity logis used for cortlation, forthe leation of bed bounearies, and forthe evaia- tion of thn beds. 5.3.2 Lateral Device. Electrodes A, M, and N are mounted on the lateral soade (Fig, 5.9). The cureat induced between Elec- trodes A and B creates a voltage difference, AV, measured between Electrodes M and N. This voltage snd the apparent resistivity de- sived from it are expressed by Eqs. 5.4 and 5.7. The geometric coelficicnt G ofthe lateral curve is expressed by Eq, 5.6 end can be waitea as 6, =4eAH- ANTI. 61 "The calculated apparent esstvity is transeribedon the log at a depth correspncing othe midpoint, O, of Electrodes Mand N. The dis- tance AO is called the spacing ofthe lateral device. Tha homogeneous, infinite medium, the lateral log measures the resistivity ofthe imaginary spherical shell between potential Elec- trodes M and N. The most common lateral spacings, AO and MIN, aie 18 Bin, and 32 in, respectively. The radius of investigation of this tol is about 19, whieh exceed the 1 radius ofinvest- gation ofthe long normal, The lateral device largely overcomes the etfct ofthe invaded zone and yields a good Ry value. This is true, however, only for beds 0 for more thick. In thinner Beds, the itera loses most ofits vertical resolution, 8.3.3 Response of the Normal and Lateral Devices. Insight into the shape ofthe apparent resistivity curves was gained through both theoretical and experimental work. The theory of electrical images and the principle of superposition®® yield a relatively simple so- ltion for the case ofthe half-space of Fig, §.10. The bal-space is made up of two homogeneous beds of resistivities Ry and Ry ‘where Ry>Ry. The logging device consists of point electrodes96 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS Generator Meter EDU oF orrzowmaL _ RESISTIVITY Re >Re Senet ~heowy oF TP sain, | L Plas our Fig. 5.10—Schomatlc ilustrating the symbols and parame- tors of Eqs. 6.12 through 6.15. twaveling vertically, perpendicular to the boundary that separates the two beds. For the curent Electrode A situated above the potential Blectrode M where both electrodes are situated in Medium 1, the apparent resistivity can be calealated from 2ealle) If only Blectrode M is in Medium 1, then Ry=2RiRyM(Ry +R2), ‘| 6.13) and when both electrodes are in Medium 2, q reat te, vecenvasess lS) Beaikat Where C is usually called the coefficient of reflection defined by C= Ri RVR, +R; 6.19) {q isthe coordinate ofthe current Blectrode A measured from the boundary and L, is the device spacing AM. TABLE 5.1—A, VALUES AS A FUNCTION OF DIMENSIONLESS DEPTH FOR EXAMPLE 5.3 29, 16in, 20, 64a. ‘Short Normal Long Normal Zalls ) te) o 18. 087 267 08 540 133 533 aI 86.0 200 8.00 -2 757 3.33 1333 =3 737 407 1887 m4 32.0 8.00 24.00 =5 535 733 29.33 -8 86.75 11.33 45.33 -10 1s 88 1400 56.00 =20 =205 882 2733 109.33 40 40.5 9.1 5400 216.00 =100 -1005 898 ©1340 536.00 TABLE 5.2—A, VALUES AS A FUNCTION OF DEPTH FOR EXAMPLE 5.3 20, 16 2, BA, Ry Short Normal Long Normal Zplly — Zolly (Gin) CH) fi 0 05 180 067 267 ' 15 127 2.00 8.00, 2 28 ie 333 1333 888 ina 497 19.67 2 48 109 24.00 5 88 107 29.83 0 105 ja 56.00 20 102, 109.83 4 216.00 8 Example 8.3. Plot the apparent resistivity curve obtained by a 16- in, short normal and a 64-in. long normal device in & half-space ‘made of 90- and 10-1-m resistivity beds. ‘Solution. Cy given by Eq. 5.15 i8 =Ra _ R/Ry)~ Cg Ra _ Pua RFR) ORyIR)+1 =0-H16+1) 0.8. Rq, when both electrodes are in the 90-Q-m medium, is given by Ba. 5.12: [ og R,=|1+———— 2eqll) R, values are given in Table 5.3 as a function of dimensioniess depths (¢/L,) and Go). Zo Is the depth of Insription Point O. R,, when both electrodes are in the 10-'m bed, is given by Eq, a {inc Jo gives the value of R, when only Electrode M is situated in Medi- um 1 Fy =[2(90)10)490+ 10)}=18. ‘This oocurs a the sonde straddles the boundary over an interval between zo/L,= 0.3 and zolLy= +0.5, ig. 8.11 sows R, vs depth ofthe Inscription Point © for both the 16-n. short normal and the 6¢-in. long normal. The dfferencs inthe response ofthe two devices shows the eect of tool spacing on responceResistivity Loss 7 RESISTIVITY, obm.m | iz ee nee eee ee) oizsasere 40 naan He Fe =i ehome arene x me 5 20] : | |e ei € \ Fig. 5 12Responee ofthe normal dove ina rlativly thick : \ boi (h>>AK). more resistive than adjacent formation zo merece |_| (F>Ray ator Ret, 8 5 Coon i 8 a \ | ; s | rartor | | 8 | -20 i | ony Re typ nevsinin | nyse) | TES oem SSS Nes Ul nushae' | | | | | | 0 l Fig, 6 10--Reeponce ofthe normal device na relatvely thn bed (n tess ey calculated trom Bg 5.7 wit he nominal Ire Rae aR. When Elciodes Mand N are stuned e- rane pena) bu Electrode Ai ln the upper oad: so eae caren forced upward and ow apparent ‘resistivity is calculated over an interval equal 10, the “delay”8 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS interval, When Electrodes A, M. and N are inthe resisive bed, Ry increases capdly and reaches platen, The resiviy ofthe Pate approximates the fe resistivity. Abed tienes greater than 24 times th spacing AO ie needed fora plateau to develop, Inthis condition, te bed appears es infinite tothe tou situated itsmiddle, When Electrode Ais nar the lower bounay, the cr, rents forced downward toward te lower conic bel ‘Te et ren intensity at Point O is mick higher than it would be in & homogeneous, infinite medium. The calculated apparent reistv ‘y overshoots Ry, The “overshot interval ends When Electrodes M and N ross the lower boundary ofthe resistive bed. Reaching the resistivity Ri delayed over an intcral equal to AO ast ct rent electode and Point O straddle tho boundary, Fig, 5.17 leit the case fa resnve bed of thicknessight ly higher than AO(AO == 246A), The curve shows a depres: sion above the top bourdary, a delay flow both the top and lower boundaries, and an overshot above the lower boundary. A patoad doesnot develop, making the determination of Ry move aifcl. Enpircal relations have been developed to relate 0 RT the bed is 1.3 AO in thickness, then R= Renae 6.16) and if fis about 1.5%R0, thea R,=Rqo+*URedinm—Raok oD where Rao isthe apparent resistivity displayed by the lateral curve ata level situated a distance AO below the top boundary. Eq. 3.17 is known as the two-thirds rule, ‘When h >AM) less resistive than the adjacent formation (Fr 2.5 KO) mare resistive than aojacent formations (9, >A) (atter Ret. 8. Fig. 8.17—Response of lateral device In @ bod more realative than the surrounding (R,>R,) and of thickness. sllghtly higher than spacing et.RESISTIVITY Los, co he es Fig. 5.18—Response of lateral device na relatively thin bed {%). ™ ay ott | ule Fig, 5,19—Response of the latoral device Ina relatively thick ‘bed (>50 ft) leas resistive than the adjacent beds (Ry Ry x1 la, 8 called the “positive separation."* Positive seperation 's& strong qualitsive indication ‘of porosity and permeability. As explained later, R,, can be deter- mined from the Ry int in, ld Ro, values. 3. The vertical resolution ofthe Microlog is excellent. Itcan de- tect extremely thin beds, such as Zones C and D. These beds could certainly remain undetected by tools with poorer vertical resolu tion, such asthe ong normal, the lateral, and even the short normal “The Microlog can be extremely usefal in detecting permeable zones, It also canbe used to derive an Ryy value withthe method discussed in Sec. 5.7 5.4 Focused Curront Devices ‘The conventional electrode-type devices introduced in Sec. 5.3 have two main limitations. CALIPER_,| ‘ARMS, |.__ ELECTRODE PAD Me BACK | Mie DEPTH PAD Rit REFERENCE Fig. §.26—Schematic of the ML. (Irom Ret, 13). 1. In relatively thin bods, the tool response is severely distorted ‘The recorded apparent resistivity is considerably different from the true resistivity, rendering meaningful quantitative and even qualita- tive interpretations difficult 2. Ina saltwater-based mud, the current emitted by the tool is confined within the borehole mind column or within the mudeake layer inthe ease of the Microlog. Recorded apparent resistivity ap- proaches Ry OF Rye and is of litle or no practical value "To overcome these limitations, a family of tols that uses difer- cent current focusing schemes has been developed. 5.41 Laterolog-3. The Laterolog-3 (LL3) tool consists of along. cylinder divided into three isolated electrodes. A middle electrode, Electrode do, usually is 1 long and is called the measuring elec trode. Upper and lower long electrodes, known as guard electrodes, are designated Electrodes Gy and Gy in Fig. $.28. Guard elec- trodes are usually 5 f long. A constant current Jp is induced ‘between Bloctrode Ap and a remote return electrode, An automati- cally adjustable current is induced between the guard end remote ‘electrodes, Because the current emitted by electrode Ap is kept ‘constant, its potential, Yo, with reference to a remote potential ‘elecirole varies with the resistance of the medium offered to the flow of current, An apparent resistivity ofthe medium is ealculat- ed by an equation similar to Eq, 5.7: Re=GrVollo, (5.19) ‘The parameter G is dependent on tool design. Gr is called the calibration coefficiont because it usually is determined ex- perimentally. “The tool vertical cesolution is controlled by focusing the current induced by Electrode Ag. This is done by maintaining Electrodes ‘Ag, Gy, and G atthe ste potential by adjusting the current emit- ted by the guard electrodes. The current of the middle electrodes is thus forced to flow in a plane perpendicular to the axis of the tool. Tho thickness of the eurrent beam is approximately equal tothe length of electrode Ag." The LL3 then has an excel- lent vertical resolution. It detects thin beds and, in certain cases, ‘even those that ate thinner than the focused current beam, ‘5.4.2 Laterolog-7. An inconvenience of the LL3 isthe considera- ble mass of metal in the sonde. Such mass will, for example, dis- turb the flow of naturally emitted currents into the borehole. Such a disturbance affects the quality ofthe SP log unless the electrode102 nesistiyity icnocatires shee Fig, 5.27—ML example, | THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOS: Fig. 5.28—Schematic of a three-electrode focused system (Guard tog, LL3) showing current flowlines {trom Ret. 14). measuring the SP is placed far from the LL3 sonde, usually 25 away. ‘To overcome this inconvenience, the Laterolog-7 (LL) focuses the current by using multiple small electrodes arranged as shown, in Fig. 5.29. The thickness of the current beam emitted by tis tool 's the distance O02 in Fig. 5.29, usually 32 in. The length A,Az Of the sonde is 80 in, Because of the reduced amount of metal in the sonde, an SP curve may be recorded on depth simultaneously with this laterotog. 18 ‘The LL3, LL, and similar devices, such as the Deep Laterolog. (LA) discussed late, overcome the two aforementioned limita: ‘ions ofthe conventional electrode-type devices. For example, Fig, 8.30 shows the responses of the LL7 and conventional logs to & thin bed drilled with saltwater-based mud. As a result ofthe th ness ofthe bed, the short and long normal tool responses are dis- torted and give the characteristic reversed signal discussed in Sec 5.3.3. The lateral tool shows the bed as more resistive than the sr rounding formations. However, the displayed maximum epparent cof 13 Q-m is only a small fraction ofthe 100-9+m true /. Despite the adverse conditions of the thin bed and -based mud, the LL7 clear indicates the resistive bed and displays an average apparent resistivity of the same order of ‘magnitude as the true resistivity Laterologs are usualy used to investigate formations that display ‘wide range of resistivity, Linear scales are not suitable. A logarith mic grid (Fig. $31) usually is used to record laterologs, The scale encompasses four cycles and covers & range of 0.2 10 2000 8m, ‘The linear scale of the left track usually is used to display the gam- ‘ma ray log. Fig. 5.32 shows an LLT recorded on such a grid, The ‘esistvity in the illustrated interval spans a wide range of 5 to 500 +m. The vertical resolution of the device is excelent; it defines zones as thin as 1 f 5.4.3 Laterolog Devices of Intermediate Depth of Lavestigation. ‘To define the resistivity distribution around the wellbore, several apparent resistivity readings of tools of different rai of investiga tion are required. This need prompted the design of the shallow- investigation Laterolog-8 (LL8) device. Subsequently, the spheri- cally focused log (SFL) was developed as an improvement over the LL8. As Fig. 5.33 shows, in these devices, the current-return electrode is located a relatively short distance from Electrode Ap, With tis configuration, the equipotental surfaces assume a spher ical shape. The tool reading i influenced most by the invaded zone, ‘The LL8 and the SFL are usually recorded in conjunction with an LLd or a deep induction log 5.4.4 Dual Laterolog. The Dual Laterolog is the most advanced Laterolog device. The tool provides a simultaneous measurement of an LLd and a shallow Laterolog (Ls). The tool provides two Aifferest current beams of different configurations and froqueacies ‘The current patterns ofthe two ceses are showa ia Fig, 8.34. The Le provides the deepest investigation of all available laterologs. ‘The LLd and Ls have essentially the saune vertical resolution 5.4.5 Focused-Current Microdevices. When the resistivity con- trast between the invaded zone and the mudeake is high Ge. high ReolRye), the current induced by the Microlog tends to escape through the muccake (Fig. $.35), To eliminate this problem, focused-current devices—Microlaterolog™ (MLL). the Proxim: ity Log™ (PL), and the Micrespherically Focused Log™ (MictoSFL)—were developed.REsisTIVITY Loss LATEROLOG A WZ / a ae IRS Fig, §.29—Schematlc of the LL7 (from Ref. 14). ‘The MLL comprises one central electrode (Ag) and three ring clectrodes (My, Mg, and A,). These electrodes are imbedded in pad, as shown in Fig. 5.36. The tool functions identically to the LL7. Because of the focusing effect, the MLL tool response is af= fected more by the invaded-zone resistivity and less by the mud- ‘cake resistivity. When invasion is suficintly deep and mudcake is <¥ in, thick, the MLL displays an apparent resistivity value that approximates Ryy ‘The PL is similar'in principle to the MLL. The pad and elec- trode designs are such that isotropic mudcakes up to % in. have very litde effect on the log measurement. 5 However, a diameter of invasion equal to oF greater than about 40 in, is needed for the PL to provide direct approximation of R,,. Ifthe invasion is shal- low, the reading is influenced by R. Fig, 8.37 is an example PL rin simultaneously with an ML. The PL, Micro-normal, and Micro- inverse log readings for Zone Q are 100, 13, and 8 {-m, respec- tively. These values clealy indicate the dramatic effect of mud- cake on the Microlog readings and demonstrate the advantage of octsed-current devices in obtaining representative resistivity valucs. Moreover, the log illustrates the importance of the Microlog as a permeability and porosity detection to. Porous and permeable Zones are clearly indicated by the positive separation of the Ren, and Ry ip 1 ig, COVES: "The MicroSEL is similar in principle to the SFL desceibed in ‘Sec. 5.4.3, The MicroSFL electrodes are smaller and pad-mounted. Fig, 5.38 shows the electrode arrangement and current distribu- tion ofthe MicroSFL. This design minimizes mudcake effect without Fig. 6.91-—Logarithmic grid used to record the laterologs (after Re Fig, 5.30—Response of LL? and conventional logs opposite ain resatv bed tnvade, wt sa md inthe wel fr 15). requiring deep invasion, as with the PL. The MicroSFL provides ‘0d values of Rp in a wider range of conditions than ether the PLor MLL. Another distinct avantage ofthe MicroSPL isis com patibility with ther logging tools, such asthe Dual Laterolog and the induction SFL. This climinates the need for a separate logging run to obtain Ry data.'§ Fig, $.39 is a schematic of the Dual Laterolog/MicroSFL. combination tool (also known as the Dual Laterolop/R,, tool). Fig, 5.49 shows a log measured with this combination tool, The MicroSFL, LLs, and LLd are traced on the logarithmic scale in solid, doted, and dashed lines, respectively. "The thick formation located inthe depth interval of 5,687 0 5,717 ftis characterized by a seperation ofthe three curves. This sepera- tion indicates thatthe zone is invaded by mud filtrate; hence, it smeable, This interval was drilled with a saltwater-based mud 056 at 68°F) that as a Buy tio water. The resistivity displayed by the logs increases with the tool's radius of investigation because of the salinity contrast be- toveen the mud filtrate and the formetion water. inity exceeding that of forma- 5.5 Induction Devices Flectrode devices, ether conventional or focused current, require the presence of conductive fluid in the borehole. The conductive borehole fluid establishes electrical contact between the electrodes. and the formations. Current cannot be induced without such a con- tact. This contact was not possible in early holes drilled with cable tools, which generally are dry. This contact is also impossibe in holes drilled with nonconductive oil-based mud. To overcome this sudverse condition, conventional electric logging used scratcherelec- ‘roves foreed by springs to make direct contact with the formation. In general, measurements performed with such electrodes were not reliable. 8 ‘Induction tools were introduced in the mid-1940's to log empty boreholes and boreholes Filled with oil-based mud. The induction tool operates on an entirely different principle from electric tools Tedoes not require conductive fluid in the borehole or direct physi cal contact with the formation LOGARITHMIC \ 10. 1090 2000104 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS a+ 2 ft. a Fig. 5.22—Example of LL7 recorded on a logarithmie grid (a- tor Ret. 14). Fig. 5.94—Representative current patterns for the LLd and LLs (from Ret. 16) sarin Fig. 5.98—ML current configuration of a permeable forma- tion more resistive than the mudeake (Irom Ret. 17) > N = . SNS \ SS e WY La Fig. 5.33—Schematlc of current pattern forthe SFL (after Ret. 15). Fig. §.36—MLL pad and current distrioution next to a perme- able formation (after Ret. 17).ResistIvITY Loss: 105 AeSISTINTY ‘aureR Induction tools ate focused to minimize the contribution ofthe borehole, invaded zone, and surrounding formations to the mess trement. Focusing is realized by means ofa system of several rans- ‘milter and receiver coils The principe ofthe tool, however, cat be simplified with the two-coll system in Fig. 8.41. A transmiter coll is excited by an alternating current, 1, of medium frequency. ‘This cuerent induces a primary magnetic field, B, in the forma tion that surrounds the borehole. The magnitude and frequency of B, depends on the transmitter current. The vertical component of this induced magnetic fieté, (B,),y ia tum generates an electric field, E, which curls around the vertical axis, This elecric field causes a current to low in the formation in circles concentric with the borehole. The earrent density, J, is proportional to the electric Fig. 5.37—Examplo of a PLIML (courtesy Marathon). esisTIVTY field, and the formation conductivity, C. The current that flows: jn a formation ring behaves as a transmitter coil and generates its ‘own secondary magnetic field, Bs. Bs, which is proportional to the formation conductivity, induces en electric signal, V, in the receiver col. This signal is easily calibrated in terms of formation ‘conductivity. The conductivity is usually converted 19 resistivity and recorded vs. depth "The induced magnetic field is a component of an electromagnet- ie wave that undergoes attenuation and phase shift a it propagstes through the formation. This propagation effect, also known os skin ‘effect, depends on the transmitter frequency and the formation’s Clectromagnetic properties. Induction logs are automatically cor fected for the skin effect during recording.”108 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL Los vam EE ee ty “| vee |" wanesr| wonton Fig. 36_srocearangunort and aren abana tne mere om Bet ‘ig. .42 ilustrates an example of an induction log recorded in «borehole filled with an oi-besed mud. The gamma ray log, dis ‘cussed in Chap. 7, is recorded on the first track. The SP log usual- ly displayed on this track cannot be recorded in oil-based mud because it requires a conducive drilling fui. The resistivity curve js shown on the second track, It is recorded on a linear seal, 0 to 100-m, increasing from lft o right. The induction conductvi- ty is shown on the third track, Its recorded on a linear scale, 0 ‘0 4000 mO/m, increasing from right to left, The scales are set up in this fashion so thatthe resistivity and conductivity curves move together in the same direction as the curve passes through zones of high and low resistivities ‘Although induction tols were designed for a nonconductive bore hole environment, they were found 1 yield excellent measurements in water-based mud, provided thatthe mud is not too salty, te for: mation is not too resistive, and the borehole diameter is not ‘oo large. Fig. 5.0 shows an induction log recorded in freshwater- ‘based mud. Tn addition tothe induction resistivity and conductv {y curves, an SP and 16-in. short normal are shown. This combi nation is known as the inductionlelectric survey (JES). The short normal is recorded to reflect the near-wellbore resistivity, In recent applications, the SFI. repleced the short normal. Also, a dual induction tool (BIL) was designed. The DIL consists of a regular deep-induction device (ILA) and @ medium device (ILtn), ‘The TL has the same vertical resolution a the ILd but about half the depth of investigation. 3 The DIL curves are usualy recorded ‘with a shallow Laterolog, such asthe LLS or the SFL. Fig. 5.44 shows a DIL/LL8 combination log. Induction logs and Laterologs differ, however, in the invaded- ~zove effect on te tool response, To a first approximation, the in- vaded zone and the true resistivity zone are investigate in parallel by the induction tool and in series by the Laterolog tools. Fig. $5.45 gives the preferred ranges of application of indction logs and Laterologs for R, determination. Recently introduced induction vices include te Phasor Induction Tool?! and the Electromag- netic Propagation Tool (EPT), The Phasor Induction Tool uses 4 DILISEL array to record resistivity at three depths of investiga tion. The tool measures the quadrature signal in addition to sal in-phase induction measurements. is main advantage is that it gives ‘more accurate values in all resistivity ranges, and it has the capa- bility to log in large boreholes The EPT uses a very short-spaced array of transmitters and receivers to record the propagation and attenuation ofa 1.1-GH2 clectromagnetic wave sent through the invaded zone. The magnet- {ic propagation in a medium of relatively low conductivity is re- luted mainly to its dielectric constant. This constant is much larger for water than that of ether formation constituents, incivding hydrocarbons. The measurement, which is predominantly sensi- tive to the water content, can be Used to estimate the mud-filtate saturation in the invaded zone, Sy. 12" Ay k~ AS Rxo PAD Fig. 5.39—Schematic of the dual LaterologiMlcroSFL. (from Ret. 16). 5.6 True Resistivity Determination Several tools of different designs are used to measure the electric resistivity of formations penetrated by s borehole, These inchide conventional electrode, focused-current, ot induction tools. The Fesponse of each ofthese tools, recorded when they are positioned next to a formation of interest, is a Weighted average that reflects the different zones surrounding the tool. These zones are (3) the 4riling fcid and modcake zone, usualy called the borehole 2008; (2) the fist few feet of the formation invaded by the mud filtrate, ‘svally called the invaded or flushed zone; (3) the formation zone ‘beyond the invaded zone, usually known as the uninvaded zone (of primary interest to the log analyst); and (4) the beds adjacent to the formation of interest. ‘The tool response is used to calculate a resistivity parameter ‘known as apparent resistivity. The contribution of each ofthe four zones 10 the calculated valve of the apparent resistivity is deer-RESISTIVITY Los 107 Receiver Coil aaa Ring of Formation Material ‘of Conductivity, Transmitter Coil Fig, 5.41—Schematic of atwo-coll induction system (alter Ref. 19). Fig. §.42—Examplo of an induction log recorded in a bore- hol filled with oll-baed mud (courtesy Amoce). mined by the zone resistivities and geometries and the tool type and design. "The value ofthe apparent resistivity, Ry, generally is different from the formation true resistivity, R, Is usualy a value between R, and the resistivity of the flushed zone, Ryo. For qualitative ia- terpretation, the appazent resistivity Tog values can be used as is. However, their use in Eq. 1.42 for quantitative interpretations could yield inaccurate and even misleading results. The determination of| R, and Ry, from the R, value is of great importance in the quaa- titative interpretation process. 5.6.1 Geometric Factors, The manner in which the various me dia surrounding the electrodes affect the R, value obtained with ‘a given device is sometimes indicated by reference to its radius of, investigation, This characteristic is dependent onthe spacing of the device. When very short spacing is used, the mud in the hole may have a dominaat effect onthe resistivity value obtained. Ifthe spac= ing is increased, the volume of the media appreciably infivencing the measurement inereates, and the effect of adjacent formations becomes dominant. For the determination of true formation resistvi- ties is useful to record curves that have large radi of investiga~ tion. This is particularly true for permeable formations that have ‘been deeply invaded by the mud filtrate “The radius of investigation is commonly defined for simplicity ‘on the basis ofthe potential distribution inthe vicinity ofthe bore~ hole. For example, the radius of investigation of a normal device placed in a homogeneous medium is taken to be equal to twice its ‘spacing. At this distance, the potential has dropped by one-half its ofiginal value, A more precise idea regarding the radius of inves pation of a device under various conditions may be arrived at by the study of geometric factors Fig. 5.46 shows a homogeneous, isotropic, and infinite medium of resistivity R. A current Electrode A and a potential measuring Electrode M ate also shown. The curtent-return Electrode B end the second measuring Electrode N are placed at infinity. The medi-108 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS: reenomzoony || ST Be | Fig. ‘§.43—Example of Induction electrical log (from Ref. 15). shalahh Fig. 5.44—Example of @ dual Induction/LL6 (trom Ref. 15). ‘um is subdivided into concentric spheres. The center ofthese spheres is Electrode A, and their radii are a multiple ofthe spacing, £, ‘The potential difference between the measuring Electrodes M ard 1N, AVjfoe isthe sum ofthe individual potential drops across each spherical shel AVitos AV in FAV 2g FAV 5g. BV gmt (6.20) [Because the current / remain the same, Eq, 5.20 ean be written as Agar =lomen “M12 to23 teas. +O inant +G.21) wher p12, oz, ae th resistances of the individual! sels. ‘aris the total resistance between the measuring Electrodes M. and N. ‘The contribution ofeach ofthese shells tothe total signal is meas- ‘ured by the differential geometric factor, G: a bloctn _bin-ne Me Pe. An integrated geometric factor, G, is also defined, G; isa meas: ‘ure of the contribution tothe total signal of all shells between the first and mth spherical surface: (5.22) 6.23) ‘With Bg, 5.2, the resistances prjees Pans Ad Pex-ty 6a BE Ox pressed as Pata RMLs coveceresseee 624) ae 29 7 aft ipRre i oP TL, alten 626 Replacing pate Pt 4 yyy in Bay. 5.2 ad 5.23 with hee expressions given in Eqs. 3°28 through 5.26 rests in nH 627) (528) “Table 5.3 ives the values of Gand G; forte fst ine shells of Fig. 5.46. Fig. 5.47 shows these values graphically, The sells Close tothe current electrode contribute more than those faraway ‘Now, let the concentric spherical shells making up the medium be of different resistivities Ry, Ry..-R,, respectively. Eqs. 5.21 and 5.25 can sll be used to express & volege Aya indicted by the took Rot may 4nb, 1@) 4x1, 23) 4aL, mint) a 6.29) Considering the definition of G, Eq. 5.29 becomes 1 ign FGI F OAR Ho HGR Dy ooo 30) axl, where G,, Gy...Gy are the differential geometric factors of the consecutive spherical shells. Because R, is calculated by RyadxL 6AM nll), 7 31) Bq, 5.30 simplifies to RAG RAG Rt. AG Ryton 28.32) which can be expressed in the form Rye DG Re ees i v6.33)RESISTIVITY LOGS 109 INDUCTION LOG + PREFERRED \ ‘ABOVE APPROPRIATE i Aw CURVE 2 | Tati Lh @ LATEROLOG & PREFERRED PRE Recor ay | 1 TOS aw 1s eortaseta a Rint / Ry —> Fig, 5.45—Preferred ranges of application of induction logs. ‘and Laterologe (trom Ret. 15). | Fig. &46—A homogeneous, Isotropic, and infinite medium subdivided Into concentric spheres. ‘TABLE 5.3—DIFFERENTIAL AND INTEGRATED GEOMETRIC FACTORS FOR FIG. 5.46 G=tn—1 G0 tn 0 0.500 0.500 0.167 0.887 0.083, 0.750 0.050 0,200 0.083 0.230 0.024 0.287 0.018 0275 014 0.889 oor 10 0.900 Note that 5.34) Example $.5. A normal electrode aray is paced in a medinm com- ‘posed of three homogeneous and isotropic zones centered around Electrode A (Rig. 5.48). The frst zone extends spherically to @ radius of 32 in, and has a resistivity of 20 +m, The second zone ‘extends spherically to a radius of 64 in. and has a resistivity of 5 {Q-m. The third zone extends infinitely beyond the second zone and hes a resistivity of 1.0 +m, ‘a. What voltage is measured between Eleetrode M and a distant Electrode N fora I-A carrent and electrode spacing AM = 16 in.? 'b, What isthe value of the apparent resistivity calculated with the measured voltage? Solution, AVytq and R,, can be calculated with two approaches. 1. Fig, 5.48 i schematic of the measurement environment and shows the equivalent electric circuit. The equivalent circuit is com= posed of three resistances in series, 61, 92, and ps, which repee- Sent the three zones of resistivities, Ry, Rp, and Ry, respectively. Bq, 5.20 can be rewritten in Aig =AV, AV +473, where AV, AV2, and AV, are the potential drops in the three zones, respectively. According to Eq. 5.4, wer 1 16(0.0254) 32(0.0254) - Mop 1 1 AV,=——| ——__ -__ | -0.245 v, 4x (32(0.0254) 64(0.0254) wa ae laos foe v, 4x | ea.02s4) and AF jas =1.958 +0,245+0.049=2.252 V. From Eq. 5.31, 2. Bq, 5.33 can be revitten for this case as Ry=G,R\+GyRy + Oaks. ‘The thickness of the first spherical shell i 16 in., which is equal to the spacing L,. From Table 5.3, G;=0.500. The thickness of ‘Zone 2 is 32 in. and ig two concentric spherical shells, each 16 in, thick, Again, from Table 5.3, Gp =0.167-+0.083=0,250, Be cause G, +2 +Gy=1, Gy=0.250 and R=0.500(20)-+0.250(8)-+0.250(1) =11.5 Oem,110 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS "3 ad 2 os| oeoagi tt era Feae eae ieee eee nea Fig, $.47Diferonal ard ntepraed geome corer norma elecwode devices nm fie nea From Ea $5, Jc dneaons represented te mami ant Sas ofthe guomeri tr at 0.48, 0.259, 0.078007, Ww no 2st v. and 0.157, respectively. {as0.025 i shld berets ean that the geotrca far. Gora The preceding discussion of geomettc factors considers the simple case of spherical flow of DC and conventional electrode devices. The concept also is true for other potential distributions, geome tries, and tools. Derivations of geometric factors ofthese more com- plex cases are available in the literature, Doll® tealed the geometry of induction logging end gave the relationships to caleu- lat the respective influence of different regions ofthe medium sur rounding the coll system. Inthe treatment of induction logging. itis more appropriate to use conductivities than resistivities. The value of the apparent conductivity, C,, can be written a5 Cg=GyC,$GyCQ+ GC oe 635) where Ci, C2...C, ace the conductivities ofthe diferent regions whose gectic fctors are Gy, Gp. .Gy, respectively. Fig. 5.49 isan example ofthe relative values of geometrical factors. Region ‘A corresponds to the uninvaded zone of a permeable bed, Region B corresponds tothe zone of that bed invaded by the mud filtrate, Regions D and F correspond to two very thick beds that constitute the upper and lower strata, and Region M corresponds to the mud zones Fig, 5.48—Measurement environment of Example 5.3, given region ofthe medium indicates the fraction ofthe total sig- nal contibuted by such a region when the conductivity isthe same forthe whole space, Actually, to determine what proportion of the ‘whole signal is contributed by that region, itis necessary to take into account he respective conductivities ofthe different regions, as is evident from Eq. 5.35. A region having only a small geamnet- rie factor can, in fact greatly influence the measurement simply Fig. .49—Example of relative values of geometric factor, two- ‘coll sonde; spacing= 1.25% hole dlameter (after Ret. 18).RESISTIVITY Los souncenr eo fo | outer Fig. 5.50—Schematlc of downhole measurement environment. because it has a proportionally large conductivity. This would be the case, for instance, for Regions D and F in Fig. $.49 if their conductivities are much higher than that of Region A, which the system is supposed to measure, Example 5.6 I the conductivities of Regions A. B, D, F, and M in Fig, 5.49 are 100, 10, 500, $00, and 1,000 mm, respective ly, ealeulate the apparent resistivity indicated by a two-coil sonde whose spacing is 1.25 h, where iis the bed thickness, Solution. Eq, 5.34 can be rewritten for this example as Cy=GxCa+GyCu+GpCp* Gale + GC Using the values of G indicated in Fig. $.49 gives (0.448.100) + (0.239) 10) +2(0.078)(500) +(0.157)(1,000) #282 mim 1,000 _ 1,000 =-35 Om C28, and R= 8.6.2 Parameters Determining Re. Fig. 5.50 shows the measure- ‘ment environment considered in the determination of R, and Rey ‘rom R,. This is a simplified radial model with no transition zone between the flushed and the uninvaded zones and with adjacent beds ‘that extend infinitely, The radial resistivity distibution is hence sim- plified to a tait-step function, as shown in Fig, §.81. These as- ‘umptions substantially simplify the mathematical work and lead to practical results, However, significant errors can result if the tuue resistivity profile differs considerably from the assumed step profile Figs, 5,50 and 5.51 indicate that 10 parameters contribute to the determination of the apparent resistivity value: ‘The true resistivity of the formation, R. Rosistivty of the invaded (flushed) zone, Ry, ‘The diameter of the invaded zone, d; Resistivity of the mud, Rye. Resistivity of the mudéake, Ry ‘The measuring tool vertical resolution Mudeake thickness, hpe Hole diameter, dy, Bed thickness, 10. The resistivity of the adjacent beds, R,. Fortunately, some ofthese fuctors do not play a signiticant role {mall the cases whore resistivity isto be determined. Itis possible, in fact, to setup rather broad limits wherein the log reading may bbe used directly for R, or with only a simple correction, In the 0 Reo Z| « = ImyageD c NE 2 4 Rr g UNINVADED ZONE | RADIUS, Fig, §.51—Simpilied stalnatep ditibution of =m more dificult cases, itis necessary to resort to lengthy computa- tions to make the proper interpretation. ‘The above parameters can be classified into four groups. Each group determines the effect of one of the four istnct zones, shown in Fig, 5.50, on the apparent resistivity. These four zones nd the corresponding parameters are I) the borehole Ryu» Ras dis Fn) {@) surrounding beds (Rh, tol vertical resolution), (3) the vvaded zone (Ryo, d;) and (8) the uninvaded zone or trae resist ty zone (8, di) ‘A relationship similar to Eq, 5.32 can be written fora spec tool of certain vertical resolution: Ry= Guilds hing Rn + GOR, + GE MRyo + Gi (5.36) where Gyr: Gs, Gros and G; are the geometric factors of the bore- hole zone, surrounding beds, invaded zone, and true resistivity zone, respectively, For induction tools, Eq. 5.36 assumes the form CoM Endy, lhncdEn* GAME, Golde) Cay + GAC +63) ‘The calculation ofR, from Bg. 5.36 of 5.37 requires the meas- ured value of Rand Knowledge of the different geometric factors aad Roy Ryy aid Rey Example 5.7, For the particular case represented in Fig, 5.49, cal culate the true conductivity ofthe uninvaded Zone A of the perme able bed if the tool indicates an apparent conductivity of 2,000 smd; the mud conductivity, Ca, i 1,000 m/e; the uninvaded- ‘zone conductivity s 10 times that ofthe invaded zone; and the ad- Jacent bed conductivity, Cy, is $00 mt/m. ‘Solution, Step 1—Borehole effect. Borehole signal Gj,Cy,™0-157(1,000)=157 mB/en, Signal free from borehole effect=2,000—157=1,843 mU/m, Bq. 5.37 reduces to 1813-G,C,+G C+ G,C, Step 2—Surrounding-bed effect. Surrounding-bed effect=G,C,=% Signal free from borehole and surrounding beds effects "781,765 mile. Bq, 5.37 reiduces further to 1,165=GyCo# GC, ‘Step 3—Invasion effect Invasion effect= GioCuy Knowing that C,.%0.1 C,, the invasion effect becomes invasion effest™=(0.239)(0.1)C,=0.0239C,12 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS, Ry /Ren Fig. 5.52—Borohole-offect correction chart for 16-n. short normal (after Ref, 23). Fig. 5.58—-Borehole-ofect correction chart for 64-n, long nor ral (from Ret, 22). Hence, 1,765=0.0239C, +0.448C, and Cy=3,740 mim, ‘The calculation of R, oF C, from Eq, 5.36 oF 5.37 is performed in several steps in « manner similar to that illustrated by Example 5.7, However, the effects of different zones are obtained directly from charts published periodically by well-logging service compa nies, The concept and use of these charts are discussed inthe fol- sections. 5.6.3 Borehole Effect. The borchole contribution to the overall response is determined by Ryys Ries dys an fgg. For resistivity u TIT wap ths TOOL CENTERED, Trex eos 1 tL tt || doy | Ra/Ro | os E i é it 100 = ‘abbr 3000, Rg/Rm Fig. 5.54—Borehole-etfect correction chart LL (after Ret, 29). i i Bo denriae Se ey i ° oa Ro/ Ran THICK BEDS too *0 509 iog9 10.000 Fig, 5.55—1 joreholo-offect correction chart for Ls (after Ref. 23).RESISTIVITY LOGS 010, -007 + 006 STAND-OFF ne inches) S 002 + oo! BOREHOLE GEOMETRICAL FACTOR ° =.001 1 a 6 8 10 12 1 Ie 18 20 HOLE DIAMETER (inches) Fig. §.56—Borehole-efect chart for doop Induction tools (after Ref, 23). tools with a relatively deep radius of investigation, such as focused- ‘current and induction devices, the effect of the mudeake zone (Rye, Jy) is negligible, and the borehole effect is determined by only ddy and Rj. On the other hand, for pad-type tools (microresistivi- ty devices) the effect of dy and Ry, is eliminated because the elec- trodes are pressed against the formation face. Only Rye 04 Ane determine the borehole zone effect. 13 ‘The borehole effect is annulled with correction charts. In gener al, the input tothe chart isthe dimensionless ratio (Ry/Ry). The ‘utp is anther dimensionless ratio, (Rz/Ry) oF REIRG). Riis the value ofthe apparent resistivity corrected forthe orshole ef fect. Ry is called the “borehole-ffet-free” apparent resistivity. Fig. .52 8 the borehole correction chart forthe 6-in. normal resistivity recorded with Schlumberger’s Induction Eletre Log? {6FF40-16°N). Fg. 8.83 is an example ofa borehole correction hart for 64-in, normal readings. For conventional electrode devices, th borehole contribution inereases as borehole diamster increases and mud resistivity decreases. “These chats, like all other correction charts, were based on the- retical and experimental work. Assumptions and simplifications tad to be made to perform the calculations and experiments. The major assumption are that (1) the tol is centered inthe borehole, {2 the bed is thick, and (3) the borehole is a uniform circle, These conditions ate not usally flfled in real applications. The cor- rection given by these chars is then an epproximation. The higher the correction, the higher isthe uncertainty inthe outpat value. “Tae correcton carts, however, canbe very usefbl in determin ing the range of essvty and geometric parameters where the too ‘ll provide an apparent resistivity value with negligible boreole correction. As Figs. 5.52 and 5.53 reflect, for conventional elee- trode tools, the borehole correction is extremely smal (ss than 10%) or nonexistent for reasonable borehole diameters (810 10 in.) ard for Ra/Ry <0. igs. 5.54 and 5.85 ae borehole corecton chats for LLd and LLs readings fora centered onde, Eccentricity has litle effect on the LLA but can be detrimental to the LLs when Ra/Rpy is bigh Fig. 5.54 shows thatthe LLd in the most common measurement environment will read within 10% of the correct valne, but that ‘ale sil nudes surrounding bed an invasion effects. Fig. 5.55, Shows thatthe Ls also wil read within about 10% of its correct “al in holes up wo 11 in in diameter, For Inger holes, te cor rections can be guite important Fig. 5.56 gives the borehole geometric factor forthe deep R,), adjacent bed cffecs will lower the apparent resistivity value. For thin condue- tive beds (.e., Ry20%. Then from Table 5.5, d;<2.Sdy <30 in,, and from Fig. 5.63, G, Eg. 5.37 becomes (Ri), ~OMR ro) “UR, )=Ry= 1.0 Om, Becaase of shallow invasion, (Rg)ow is greatly affected by the uninvaded zone, A reliable Ry value cannot be determined from the furnished data, 5.7 Determination of Ryo From Microresistivity Tool Readings Microresistvity tools can be considered fre from adjaceat-bed cf fect because of their small spacings. They are, however, affected by the madcake and invaded and uninvaded zones: R,=Gyelte Rc Gag Reo GHADR, 6.43) ‘When the first microresstvity tools were introduced, the effect ‘of the uninvaded zone was assumed 0 be negligible. The tool is. then affected only by the madeake zone andthe Dushed zone, whose geometric factors are Gye and Gyo, respectively. BeceUse Ge Guy =1, Bq. 5.43 simplifies to R=Gyellng Buc +1~ Gln) Rey 6.44) “Two equations ofthis form canbe writen forthe Microlog read ings, one with the microinverse reading, (R,),, and the geomet- rie factor Gy, dG Rage HUG Reo (5.45) and another using the micronormal reading, (R,)2, and geometric factor Ga, Rada G2Rge A= GR: + (5.46) gs. 5.45 and 5.46 can be solved simultaneously for the two unknowns Ryy thd yc. Fig. 5.70 is a graphical solution of this system of equations Constructed for the ML tool Example $15. The ML gives microinverse and micronormal read- ings of 2.7 and 3.0 Om, respectively. Ifthe borehole diameier is UO in, andthe miudcate resistivity is 0.81 Q-m at formation tem petstare, determine the Oushed-zone resistivity Solution. (Ry/Rye=2.700.81~3.3 and (R,)y/Rge=3/0.81 3.7, Entering the chart of Fig. 5.70 with these iw tatios gives RyiRge=B ad Figg = in. fom which Ryy=800.81)=6.5 Om. |A microresistivity tool other than the Microlog carries only one clecttde arrangement and displays one resistivity curve. The MLL, PL and MicroSFL readings are first corrected for mudcake effect with the appropriate chart. The resulting Ry’ value is expressed by Eq. 5.37. The determination of Ry, from one microresistiviy read- ing alone is possible only when the effect ofthe uninvaded zone is negligible, Ths effect can be negligible when deep invasion pre- sails, 28 in low-porosity formations. ‘Consider the case of an in. ole and a formation with a porosi- ty <20%. Table 5.5 indicates that dj; will be greater than 20 in. For this value, Fig, 5.65 shows that the geometric factor of microresistivty tools is equal or very close to unity. In fac, for the MLL, G,, reaches a value of unity once dj exceeis a mere 6 in. When optim conditions prevail, the reading of microresistvity, tools is free from the uninvaded-zone effect and R,o=Rj!- Se 5.6.3 showed tha, under optimum conditions of tin, resistive mod- ‘cakes, the borehole effect is negligible and Rj’=R,. In low- to ‘oderate-porosity formations, the apparent resistivity recorded by the mierodevies generally is very close tothe Nushed-zone resistivi- ty value, Ryo can be read directly from the log. For shallow invasion, Ry can be determined only if R, and dy values are available, Eq, 5°37 can thea be solved for Ryo. Gao(4i) values are read from Fig. 5.65.124 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOS: f SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL sueao Commas SSUES th 08 1 sc, 218 feu eos ap ant ator Sa $s, saiacez0n els ett | cour _awernce sare uuu ER Bo ‘20 + Soe Fig. 5.73—Dual Laterolog tor Problem 5.17 (courtesy Marathon Oil Co.). Example 5.16, Fig. §.71 shows a section of an MLL/ML run, De- termine the resistivity of the flushed zone of Interval A, Solution, The following data are obtained for the log, (Redynue =21 +m from the MLL curve, (R,)1 "2-7 Om from the ML curve (R.)2=4.4 O-m from the ML curve Bit size=7% in, Hole size=73 in. from the ealiper curve, Depth interval=5,248 to 5,250 ft ‘Temperature at $,281 =132°R, Rye 1.66 +m at 14°F, Rug 0.83 em at 14°F, Re and Rey at Formation Temperature. The interal of interest is only a few feet above the bottom ofthe borehole. The tempera- tue at this level is very close to the maximum recorded tempera- ture of 132°F. Rye and Ror can be calculated from Eq. 1.11 446.77 13246.77 Ry at 132°F=0.83 0.483 O-m, 446.77 1324677 Rap dd hing from the ML, Rigg t 132°F $1.66. =0.966 +m, Badr Rac 0.966 Entering the chart of Fig, 5.70 withthe above two values, 2.80 and 4.55, yields Ryo/Rpe™40 and Rig 40 (0.986)~38.6 2-m. RglRy is greater than 15, which is the limit above which Fig 570 yields erroneous results. 19 The value oF Rip =38.6 has to Be aisceparded Borehole Correction ofthe MLL Reading. The mudcakethick- ‘645, gc, an be approximated from the caliper reading: Iga = Heit size hole size) = WTI TH) 1 in Entering the chart of Fig. 5.57 with ie std (R,)ytt/Re = 2110.966=21.7 gives (Ri)ypL1/ Rye 22-3, from” whichRESISTIVITY Los. (Ryyng.=21.7 @-m. Because the MLL reading is free from ad- jacen! bed fees, Ree = Ra Order of Magnitude of. he sling Mud ia the borebole freshwater-based mud. “Thorefore, Ryy>Ry and, most likely, Ry>R, ifthe invasion i such thatthe (Ry, vale is fected by the uninvaded zone, then Ry, (Ri yt, F canbe expressed aus Bo Incorporating this value into Eq. 1.16 yields gs 0282, 0.08 Roy _ 0.620489) Fu LT ocse. According to Table 5.5, 4\>5dy > SC) >39 in Rug From the MLL Reading. ‘The geometric facior Gp for d;>39 in is unity. The MLL read- ing is free from the R, zone effect; hence, Ryo™ Ren 21-7 Om. Note that Ryo differs from (R,)yu1 by only 0.7 +m, or about 34%. Thus, when such a measuting environment is encountered, it would be prectical to read Ryy directly off the log. 5.8 Summary Resistivity devices display apparent resistivity values. The appar- cent resistivity, K,, measured ata depth of intrest is affected by the resistivity and’ geometty of four zones thet surround the tool: the borehole, adjacent beds, and the invaded and uninvaded zones, ‘of the bed of interest. The apparent resistivity value should be cor- ‘ected forthe borehole and adjacent-bed (also called bed-thickness), offecs, The corrected value, R;’, bears the influence of the invad- ‘ed and uninvaded zones. Depending on the type and number of resistivity logs available, Ry’ is used to calculate, R,, oF Both Departure eurves (charts) are usually used to perform these cor rections and calculations. ‘Determining R, and Rj» requires three steps. 1. The apparent resistivity, Ry, is frst corrected for borehole effects by use of Ry and d,. Correction of readings of ‘microresistvity devices requires’ Rye and iy. instead. For each resistivity tool, optimum measurement conditions exists in whici, the borehole effect is nil or negligible. 2. The value obtained from Step 1, Rj, is then corrected for bed= thickness effect with te resistivity of the adjacent bed, Ry, and the ‘thickness of the bed in question. No adjacent-bed corrections are necessary wen the bed thickness exceeds certain value. Tis value ‘depends on the tool's vertical resolution and the resistivity contrast Ru, Readings of microresistvity tools are free from this effet. '. “The last step isto use the value R,’ obtained in Step 2 to cal~ calte R, and R,.- The calculation calls on the geometric factors. Departure curves (tomado chars) ora system of equations is used. [Ifthe diameter of invasion is smal, the effect on invasion is negligi- ble and R,=Rj". On the other hand, for microreistvity devices, ‘when invasion is deep, the effect of the uninvaded zone becomes negligible and R,o=R? ‘in certain measbrement environments, the three effects (bore hole, bed thickness, and invasion) are negligible. In these cases, Ry ot Ryo can be read directly from the log. ‘in some instances, the data available lead fo unrealistic results, such a3 negative values, or the data falloff the tornado chart. In, mast instances, such an Occurrence is the result of values improperly read or improperly corrected for borehole or bed-thickness effect. However, in cases of very deep invasion with an invasion profile 125 that cannot be approximated by a step profile, such a ease may re sult27.28 Treatment of other invasion profiles, such as the transi- tion and annulus profiles, requires extensive data; four sesstvity readings ate usually needed, Roviow Questions 1. What is the eesistvty value ealeulted from a resistivity ool response called? How is it defined? 2. What isthe geometric coeicient ofan electrode array? 3. Dos the apparent resistivity recorded by a resistivity tool equal the true formation resistivity? Explain, 4, Describe the spacing and inscription point ofa logging (ol 5. What are the similarities and differences between the normal anc lateral resistivity devices? 6, What isthe relationship between a ool spacing and its depth of investigation? 7. Describe the response ofa normal eurve ina thick, uninvad- 4, resistive bed 8. Describe the response of a norm curve in a thin (4< AM), invaded, resistive bed. 9. Describe the response ofa lateral curve recorded opposite a thick, uninvaded, resistive bed 10. Under what conditions does a blind zone appeer on the response of the lateral device? TI. How thick should resistive bed be to result in plateau response on the lateral curve? 12, What eurves ae usually displayed ona conventional electri cal survey log? What grid an scales are commonly used ia heir recording? 13. Why des the recording of elecrode-type devices require the presence of a conductive drilling fluid inthe borehole? What hap ens tothe quality af the recording asthe diling- uid conduciv ty increases? 14, Why are the ML electrodes placed on a pa pressed against the borebole wall? 15. What are the curves recorded by the ML? 16, What s meant by a positive separation ofthe ML resistivity curves? Why 8 Sicha separation a song indication of formation permeability? 17 Ina porous and permeable formation, what isthe range of resistivities, expressed in terms of mud resistivity, displayed by the ML? 18, How does the focused-curent device overcome the Lmita- tions of corventional clectrode devices? 19, Why ar different focused-curtent ools having different cur- rent coafigurtions needed for optim interpretation? 20, Whats the major advantage ofthe Focused microressivity devices ovee the ML? 21. How does the MLL differ from the PL? 22. What ste major advantage ofthe MicroSPL over the ober ricrodevices? 23. What is the concept of the induction tool? 24, What isthe “skin effect?” 25. Name the different zones of the mediom surrounding & resistivity too! that contribute to the to's response. 726. The conteution of each zone around the tool can be repre- sented by a matherastical product. What is this produc?” 27. What does the geometrical factor G fora given zone inca? 28. How i the borehole usually represented in the mathemat «cal models uted in resistivity calculations? Which position does the tool assume in the borehole? "29. What isthe invasion profile considered in te construction of tornado charts? Why was this profile selected? 30, Can X, of a permesble bed be determined when only one resistivity log is availabe? 31. Can &,, of & permeable bed be determined when only one resistivity logis avalabe? “2. How my resistiviy logs are usually needed for ue resisivi- {y determination in low-porosity formations? Explain, 33, Cam the true resistivity of shale beds, Ryy, be read diretty off the short noemal? Explain,| 126 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS | | SavyA SAY | LatERoLes aSiereegeaina eoeome 130, | a_arig Teece Fin lag aes | pe Fai SACL ae Fig. 5.00—Lateroiog-3 for Problem 5.18 (courtesy Continental Ol Co). Problems 5.1 For r2=1,000 r,, what error is introduced in the calculated value ofthe resistance by neglecting the term Wy in Eq, 5.2? 5.2. Using the reslts of Example 5.3, approximate the response ‘of a 16-in. short normal and a 64-in, long normal in a 90- ‘Q+m, 1,600-n.-thick bed bounded by two 10-2'm, very thick formations. 5.3. Examine the electric log of Fig. 8.72; then: 4a. On the log, circle and label log responses caused by geo metric dstonion ». Mark the upper and lower boundaries of permeable Sands AA through C marked on the log. What i the gross thick- ‘ness of each sand? «. Give the apparent resistivities of Zone A indicated by the short and long normal too. Explain why the two tools ine dicate different values. 4, Explain why the shor and Jong normal tools read the same in Zone D, which is an impermeable shale, What is this reading? €: Give your best evlaton ofthe spparnt esses of Zone B as indicated by the short nema and the lateral Irth ding fl is teshoater axed mod explin why Ragies> Rie 54, Refer the letra og of Fig. 5.73 in providing nfoena Son onthe following. a. The log showy a thick snd, Give your best xine of the formation tices. b. Discs the responses of the Iter curve at Levels A through D marked onthe log. Explain why the lateral an log normal ols Jip the same resistivity reading at Level C The lg headings inceate tat Mud density=9.8 Ibm/¢al. ‘Temperature at 7,100 f= 138°R. Ry, a 138°F=0.85 Om, ‘at 38°F =0.62 O-m, Roe at 138°F 1.07 Om,RESISTIVITY LOGS wer Tse Ris ory © HOLE UME TER mie schuptar 0 ‘00 10900 Fig, 5.81—Borehole-fact correction chart for LL3 (trom Ref. 23). Bed Thies Fst r a Fig, 5.82—Bed-thickness effect correction chart for LLS (rom Fol. 15). 5.5. Give your best estimate of the true resistivity of Sand A in Fig. 5.74. 5.6. Consider a current source located at Point A in certain medi- um, The current-retuen Electrode B is o far from the elec- trode at Point A that its presence may be neglected when considering the current flow around Point A. ‘Suppose that Point A is the center of a zone of resistivity Ry =50 Om, which extends spherically to a radius of 32 in ‘A'secon zone of resistivity Ry=10 0m extends spherical ly beyond the first zone to infinity 4. What voltage is mensured between an Electrode M and a distant Blectrode N for 0.5-A current and electrode spec- ing AM=16 in.? b, Using Eq. 5.5, calculate the apparent resistivity of the medium. c. Using the geometric factors shown by Fig. 5.47, calculate the apparent resistivity of the medium. 4. Repeat Steps a through ¢ for a Gt-in. electrode spacing. €. Da the results of Step d explsin why longer spacing is less affected by the invaded zone? 5.7, A section of an &-in. borchole is filed with saltwster-based ‘mud of 0.1-0-m resistivity. If a maximum of 5% borehole effect can be considered negligible, indicate the range of for imation resistivity within which the readings ofthe LLd and LLLs can be considered free from borehole effet. 5.8, A deep induction log is used to log a section ofa 16-in, bore hhole where the mud resistivity 0.2 Om. Ifa maximum hole signal of 10 mB/m can be tolerated, what minimum standotT ize is recommended? 5.9. A short normal resistivity log has been run in a borehole that, has the following characteristics. Bit size=9% in. ‘Mad density =9.8 Tbm/gal. Ry 47 (om at TF. Bottomhole temperature 156°F. Bottomole depth=10,463 ft. ‘The short normal readings for the 8,048- to 8236-Ntinter- val are listed below. Short normal Interval Reading fo, Lithology @m_ 8,088 to 8079 Shale 2 8,079 10 8,111 Sand 33 8111 to 8,195 Shale 2 8.195 10 8,200 Sand a 8,200 to 8,236 Shale 2 Determine the short normal resistivity value corrected for borehole diameter and behicknes effects. 5.10 Opposites 10-f bed, the LLd reads a center bed value of $0 ‘Or. The adjacent beds havea resistivity of LO Oem, What is the resistivity value corrected for adjacent bed cffect? What is the corected va if the bed is only 5 thick? Assume tegligile borehole effet. 5.11 The R, and R,» values ofa very thick, permeable bed are 10 and 40 O-m, respectively. Assume that the borehole effect can be neglected and that d,=20 in 4, Determine the reading ofthe SFL, the LLs, and the LLd b. Repeat Part a for d,=80 in. 5.12 Ina very thick, permeable zone, d)=30 in., R/=2.0 2m, find Ry =20.0 Om, Ignoring borehole signal, compute the theoretical responses for ILm and TLd inlution cacves 5.13 Consider Zone A ia the composite log of Fig. 5.75 2. Calculate ,, of Zone A, Knowing tit Ry Ry at Ry ae 1.0, 0.76, and 123 frm, respectively, af formation temperature (123°F). b, Using the R,, vue from Part a, estimate the porosity of Zone A. Assume the 20n€ to be 100% water-saturated «Far the sume Zone A, the MLL reads an average valve of 95 rm, Caleulate Ry. 4. Why are the R,, values thi are calculated in Parts a and ¢ different? Give your best estimate of Rg ¢. Why isthe ,, valve obtained above great than the read- ing of the 16'n, short nocmal? 5.4 Fig, 8.76 shows a PL. The zone of interest is from 8,120 0 8,138 8, Give lnc and (Ry), ofthe Zone of intrest. bi. Deternite (Rr, ©. If Ry=30 Om and dj$ in, estimate Ry, 4. R,=30 O-m and dj=15 in, estimate Ry 5.15 The IES of Fig. 5.77 shows « gas Formation B and an oil Formation C. 4. Ifthe change in resistivity witha Formation Cis from a change in lid type, determine the apparent resistivity in the water and ot 2o0es. Is the borehole corestion negligible? What i the resistivity of adjacent shales? ‘What isthe thickness ofthe oll zone? Use Fig, 5.62 to correct the resistivity values obtained in Part for bed-thickness effect128 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS 5.16 a. Using the chart of Fig, 5.66, determine dj, Rip, and Ry cf Zones D and E on the DIL of Fig. §.78. Bocehole and adjacent-ed effects can be considered negligible. b, Sketch the radial resistivity profile for Zones D and B. 5.17 Fig. 8.79 illustrates a Dual Laterolog obtained in a 7%-in. borehole drilled through carbonate formations. «, What ae the apparent resistivities at Level G indicated by the two resistivity curves? b. Determine dj, Ryys and R, at Level G. ©. What are the appareat resistivities at Level F indicated by the LLd and Ls? 4, Explain the difference between the two readings in Pact ©. Show that the borehole and adjacent-bed corrections are so small that they can be neglected. £, Assuming that 5% <9-<10%, estimate Rand R, of Zone F, 2g Assuming that 10% < $< 15%, of Zone F. 5.18 The LL3 in Fig. 5.80 shows a resistive Formation H. a. What is the apparent resistivity of Zone H? . Correct the above value for borehole effect with Fig, §.81, cc. What is the average resistivity of beds adjacent to Forma tion H? 4. Using the chart of Fig. 5.82, determine the Ry" value for Zone H. @. Calculate Ryy for Zone H using the following data: core samples indicated « residual ol saturation of 25%; a porosi= ty of 12% was caleulated from the density log; and the for- ration water resistivity obtained from water samples i 0.05. em at 75°F, £, Estimate the geometric factor of the flushed zone of For- ration H. fg. Determine the true resistivity of Formation H. 1h. Calealate the oil saturation, 1, Caleulate the oil saturation using the uncorrected apparent resistivity valve indicated by the log timate dj, Regs and Ry Nomenelature C= conductivity, mim Gj = borehole-effect-free apparent conductivity, mt}/m Cp = coefficient of reflection , = agjncent-bed conductivity, tim G, = conductivity of uninvaded zone, mi/m ameter, invasion diameter, in ferential geometric factor imegrated geometric [actor ‘geometric coefficient of lateral tool ‘ud-zone geometric factor ‘geometric factor of normal sonde adjacent-bed geometric factor eometric factor of uninvaded zone tool geometric factor geometric factor of flushed zone thickness, ft current, A. device spacing, in rm radius, ft oF m R = resistivity, @-m R, = apparent resistivity, Qn Ri = borehole-effect-free apparent resistivity, Q-m Rj! = bed-thickness-effect-free apparent resistivity, Q°m Rao = epparent resistivity displayed by lateral curve ata level situated a distance AO below top boundary &1:m, mudeake resistivity, Q-m resistivity of adjacent formation, +m lave formation resistivity, Q-m. invaded-zone resistivity, Q°m $= saturation ¥ = voltage, V AV = potential difference, V 24 = Vertical coordinate of current Electrode A 29 = depth of tool Inscription Point O = resistance, 8 = porosity Subscripts ‘a = apparent 1 = borehole i = invasion, invaded zone TL = induction fog tool m= mud max = maximum ‘me = mudeake ‘mf = mad filtate SN = short normal tool 1x0 = flushed zone References 1, Alla, L. and Marin, M:Schtonberger, The History ofa Technique, John Wiley & Sons Inc, Now York City (1977), 2, Dakin, V.N.: "Geophysical Well Logging,” Quarterly ofthe Colora- do Scho! af Mines (April 1962) 57, No. 2, Chap 3. ‘3. “Inerpetation Hand-Book for Resistivity Loge," Schlumberger Woll ‘Surveying Corp., Doewment No, & ly 1930) 4, Frank, R.W.: "Prospecting with Old E-Logs,”" Schlumberger Educ tional Services, Houston (1886) 5. MeCiay, D.C. “An Analysis of Electcat Logging Devices Their Ad- ‘aniages and Limitions,” Perforaing Guns Ailas Corp, publication (i957. 6. Guyer, Hs Gigods Blecriea! Well Logging, Welex, Houston (1944) Par 5, 7. Pinson, $.3. “Factors Affecting Measured Apparent Formation Resistive,” Oi! Gas J. (Nov. 22, 1947) 63-87, 8, Pirsn, 8.1: "The Resistivity Curves,” Oil & GasJ. (Oct 25, 1947) s2-115. 9. Inerprettion Hand Book for Kesisvity Logs, Schlumberger Wel Sue- veying Corp., Heuston July 1950) 10. Log tnerpretation/Application, Schiumberger, Houston (1974). LU, Log Interpretation Chars, Chart 8-, Schlumberger, Houston (1958). 12, Rerisivity Departre Curves, Schlumberger, Houston (1983). 13, Dol, 1.6: "The Micro Leg—A New Electrical Logging Method for Detaled Determination of Permeable Bede,” Tras, AIME (1950) 189, 129-42, Hammack, G.W.: Larolg, technica bulletin, Dresser Als, Howson ast), 15, Log Interpretation Principles, Schlumberger, Houston (1972). 16, Suau, J. etal. “The Dual Laterlog Ry, Tool” peper SPE 4018 resented atthe 1972 SPE Annual Meeting, San Antonio, Oct. 8-11, 17, Doll, HG. "The Microlaterolog," Trans» AIME (1953) 198, 17-32 18, Doll, H.G.: “Introduction to Induction Logging and Application o Log ging of Wells Dried with Oi Base Mud,” Trang, AIME (1949) 186, 1-8, 19, Bis, D.V.: Well Logging for Barth Scientist, Blvevier, New York City (1987), 20. Log Review 1. Dresser Atas, Houston (1971). 21. Phasor Induction Tool, Scombergse, Houston (1986) 22, Bteciromagnete Propagation Tool, Scalomberger, Houston (1984). 2: Log interpretaion Chars, Schlumberger Well Serveying Corp, Houston (1972). 24, Formation Evaluation Data Handbook, Go Wireline Services (1974). 25, Log Inerpretation Chars, Dresee atns, Houston (1983) 26, Jensen, JL, aud Garmer, M.L.: “Tornado Chart Sensitivity Analy= Sis." Trans, SPWLA. (1983) paper N. 27. Doll H.G., Dumanoir,.L., até Martin, M.: “Suggestion for Better Eteirc Log Combinations and Improved Interpretstion,” Geophys- ies (Aug, 1960) 854-82, 28, Tier, MP eral: “Determination of Formation Resistivity and Water Saturation With the Dual Induction-Laterolog--A New Technigoe,” ‘sper SPE 713 presented at the 1953 SPE Anal Mesting, New Orica, On 69,Chapter 6 The Spontaneous Potential Log 6.1 Naturally Occurring Electrical Potentials [Naturally occurring electrical potentials are observed at the earth's surface and in its subsurface. These potentials, asally called spon- tancous potentials, have been used in mineral exploration. They are associated with weathering of mineral bodies, variation of rock properties at geologic contacts, bioelectric activity of orgenic ma- terial, thermal and pressure gradients in underground fluids, and ‘ther phenomena, During. early resistivity measurements al Pechetbconn, France, a potential was observed between Electrodes, MN of Fig. 5.4 when no current was emitted.? The value meas- ured, which i a potential gradient, varied with depth, as shown by the gradient curve in Fig. 6.1. This curve was integrated and resulted in the potential curve, which represents the voltage that, would! have been measured between an electrode in the borehole and a surface electrode. This potential originates from the contact ‘of the ceiling fui filling the borehole and the formation. Although not actually @ naturally occurring potential, itis also called « spon- taneous potential, selfpotential, or simply SP because it originates, without an artificial source of eurrent. Despite the complex geology at Pechelbronn, a bed of conglomet ste generated an SP response distinct from surrounding formations, 1s shown clearly in Fig. 6.1. This early encouraging result prompted the simultaneous recording ofthe SP curve and resistivity logs. Fig, 6.2 isa schematic ofthe circuit used to measure the SP. The main, circuit components are a downhole mobil electrode, a fixed sur face electrode, a voltmeter, and a bucking cirult composed of bat- tecies and a variable resistor. Tho absolute voltage measured between the two electrodes could be several hundred millivolts. This volt- age consists of two components: a major component reflecting the naturally occurring potentials associated with the major geologic subsurface structure around the wellbore, and a minor component reflecting geologic changes inthe immediate wellbore vicinity. The latter is the component of interest in well logging, so the major ‘component is offset withthe bucking circuit, which introduces a voltage of similar magnitude but different polarity. 6.2 The SP Log Fig. 6.3 is a schematio of an SP curve recorded in a shale/sand formation sequence with the cireut of Fig, 6.2. Such a curve, un simultaneously with other logs in almost all boreholes, is traced ‘on the first track on a linear scale. Because & bucking circuit is used, the SP measurement emphasizes the variation of potential rather than its sbsolute value. The sensitivity of the linear sale is, cchosen so thatthe variations remain on the track and can be read easily. The sensitivity is usually 10 or 20 mV per scale division. Correlation ofthe SP log with stratigraphic data indicated that the log response in shale formations fall on 2 straight line called the ‘shale baseline.” Tops and bottoms of the sands are marked by sharp negative deflections of several tens of millivolts. The flection points on these deflections correspond to bed boundaries ‘The SP log can be used to distinguish berween impermeable shales ‘and permeable and porous sands. The boundaries ofeach permeable bed can be defined and its thickness calculated. In thick beds, the deflection reaches a maximum and stabilizes asa platoaa, The sponse in thin beds falls short ofthe plateau and exhibits a round shape, Maximum SP deflection is also affected by shaliness. A shale- content index can be calculated by comparing the deflection in the shaly sand to that of a clean sand. The shape of the SP deflection is also used to correlate between wells and in sedimentological sud Example 6.1. Fig. 64 shows an electric log obusined in the 8,900- to 9,040-M interval of a well drilled through sands and shales 1." Determine the SP deflection displayed by the four sands marked ‘on the log by the letters A through D. 2. The SP deflection indicates permeable and porous beds. Do ‘other data displayed by the log corroborate the SP indication? 3. What is the gross thickness of each bed? ‘4 What isthe net thickness of Bed A? 5. Calculate the shale-content index of Zone D, Solution, The shale baseline is first traced through shale beds. SP Aefletions off this line aro ~98, ~74, ~82, and ~30 mV for Beds A through D, respectively. 2. Yes. The separation between the short normal and deep in- duction displayed by Beds A through C indicates invasion, which {is asgoctated with porons and permeable formations. Note the strong correlation between the separation of the resistivity Iog and the SP deflection, The lack of clear separation in Bed D is the result of shaliness, ‘Although the separation is used in this case to corroborate the presence of porosity and permesbilty its absence does not neces: saeily indicate the opposite. '3, From the inflection points on the SP curve and the separation between the resistivity curves, bed boundaries are traced on the log. Gross thicknesses of Bods A through D are 48, 4, 8, and 6 A, respectively.130 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS ‘SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL POTENTIAL GRADIENT (SP) CURVE, all CURVE sevate Fig, 6,1—-The fiat SP measurement obtained In Pechelbronn, France (after Ref, 2). 4, The gross thickness of Bed A, which corresponds tothe dis- tance between the top and the bottom of the sand unit, was deter ‘mined to be 48 ft. Sands are usualy interbedded with impermeable shale streaks. These streaks are usually indicated by depression in the SP deflection. The total thickness ofthese streaks is subtracted from the gross thickness to obtain the net thickness or the effective thickness of the permeable and porous zone ‘Two depressions ofthe SP deflection appear within Bod A at Lev- els X and ¥. The severity ofthe depression and the disappearance of the separation between the two resistivity curves at Level ¥ in- dicate a shale streak. For opposite reasoning, Interval X i slightly shaly but is invaded, indicating permeability. Only the thickness ‘of Zone Y (3 ft) is subiracted from the gross thickness, The net thickness of Sand A is then 45 5. The SP deflection in Zone D is only ~30 mY, compared with ~98 mY full deflection in clean Sand A. The shale-content index of Sand D is (98~30)/98=0.69 (69%), ‘The SP deflection is partially decreased ag a resut ofthe bed- thickness effect (see Sec. 6.4). The 69% shale-content index is an overestimate 6.3 Origin of the SP ‘The SP observed in boreholes is of electrokinetic and electrochen= {cal origin. Electrochemical potetial, believed 0 he the major con- {cibutor to te SP, consists of two components: the diffusion potential and the membrane potentisl 6.3.1 Diffusion Potential. Diffusion poteatial, also known as liquid junction potential, arises when two elecrolyes of different chemical activites are separated by a clean porous medium. Activity i related ‘to both number and type of ions presen. Fig. 6.5 illustrates a con- figuration that will result in the generation of edifusioa potential, Eq, when concentrated and dilute solutions of sodium chloride are used. In tis case, both postive sodium ions (Na) and negative chloride ions (CI~) will diffuse across the porous medium trom the concentrated tothe dilute electrolyte. The CI~ ions wil diffuse ‘more rapidly than the Na * ions because of their smaller size and lesser affinity for water. The Cl~ ions ar said to have a higher ‘mobility (the speed at which an ion moves under a fixed potential gradient), Because of this diftsion phenomenon, the dilute solution ‘becomes negatively charged. The rate of diffusion slows asthe nega- tive charge repels further migration of negative ions. Whea the cell reaches equilibrium, a steady E, is established. When the two soki- tions are connected by an electric conductor, a current flows from the positively charged concentrated solution, through the conductor 1 the dilute solution, then through the porous medium and back to the concentrated solution. Eq can be expressed by the Nemst equation?.#: Eyam tr MRT q/F MQ, a2) 6D Bucking Circuit Voltmeter Reference Surface Electrode Mobile Electrode Drilling Fluid- filled Borehole Fig, 6.2—Schematic of the clrcult used to measure the SP Log. ‘where £=diffusion potential, V; cy =chlorine anion transference number: fg,=sodium cation transference number; Mant, 8.3145/*C; T, =absolute temperature, °K; F~Paraday con stant, 96,516 C; and ay and az=the activities of the Iwo electrolytes. ‘The transference number is the fraction of current carried by the designated ion. tn a sodium chloride solution, ¢ and ty, ere re- lated to the ion mobilities by ter Val Vert Upy) 62) ad 144= Upal(Ver+ Tyas 63) where Ucj and Uy, are the mobilities of the C1~ and Na+ ions, respectively. By definition of transference numbers, +a and Eg, 6.1 becomes Eg= Qty WRT PYIn(ay a) fee 6) 6.3.2 Membrane Potential. Membrave potential, also known as shale potential, arises when two electrolytes of different concen: tations are separated by a pocous medium where the pore walls carry an electrical double layer. As discussed in Chap, 1, clay mia crals have such a layer, and because shale is rich in clays, it con- stitutes such a membrane. Fig, 6,6 shows « membrane-potential generating cell where two electrolytes of concentrated and dilute NaCI solutions are separated by a shale membrane, In this case, both C1~ ions and Na* ions ty to diffuse from the concentrated solution to the dilute solution. However, the pore walls ofthe shale ‘membrane are negatively charged because ofthe existence of the cleric double layer, so the passage of Cl~ anions is greatly re- stricted. The Na* cations, however, can enter the pores freely Consequently, the concentrated solution will be negatively charged With respect to th dilute solution, and a potential, Eis created ‘across the membrane. When the two solutions are connected by ‘an elecric conductor, a current flows from the positively charged llute solution, through the conductor to the concentrated solution, through the shale, then back to the dilute solution. ‘This membrane potential, Ey, can be expressed by Eg. 6.1. Cer= ‘ain shale membranes can completely block the passage of Cl~‘THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG ions, and charge transport is enttely the result of the Na* ion ‘Such a membrane is called a perfect membrane. The maximum pos- sible shale potential occurs across a perfect membrane because and fy, 1, and according to the Nernst equation, (RTy/FHn(ay/a). vse 6S) When a shale membrane is imperfect, a CI anion leak occurs and the membrane potential decreases. In this case, a correction factor should be introduced into Eq. 6.5, 6.32 Electrochemical Component of the SP. The two stvations illustrated in Figs. 6.5 and 6,6 canbe combined into one cylindrical cel. Fig. 6.7 shows aeylindrical trough that contains two solutions of sodium chloride of activities a, and a. The two solutions are Separated atthe upper part ofthe trough bya perfect shale membrane and atthe lower par ofthe rough by 2 clean porous medium. AS discussed, an electric current will flow across the shale from the concentrated solution to the difute solution, creating the membrane potential, E,, The electric current will flow across the clean porous medi from the dite solution to the concentrated sootion, ‘reating a diffsion potential, This configuration, frst suggest. ‘ed by Mounce and Rust,5 constitutes a closed electric circa in which E, and E, are created electrochemically. These two poten tials ae additive, and their sum is knowin as the electrochercical potential, Ey: Eye gt Ey os oe 66) Using he expresion of Ey and Ey, ven by Eas. 6.4 and 63 yields Epm2tqy BTy fF) Qy 109). oo coee 6D Fig. 6.7 shows thatthe components forming the closed electic circuit are found at the boundary between a shale bed and a saltwator-bearing permeable formation traversed by a boreboe filled with drilling mad. The saltwater-bearing formation plays the roles of both a concentrated NaCl solution of activity a, and a clean ‘porous membrane. The shale i, of cours, the ion-selective mem brane. The drilling mud in the Borehole and the mad filtrate in the pertveable invaded zone constitute the dilate solution of ectivity, Oo ‘Upon substitution of ay and dye for ay and ap, respectively, and conversion ofthe naurllogerim to the logarithm of the base 10, Eq, 6.7 becomes E,=K loel@y/any) 68) where K=2(2.303)tqRT/F = 4.606 fo RTylF. -.-+---(6.9) ‘AL25°C, the corde and sodium mobilities are 7.9110 and 5.19104 cm/s-V, respectively. According to Eq. 6.2, T91x1o~ (19145.19)x10-* ‘The transference numberof the chloride ion, fc, is relatively Independent of concentration and tompesture over the ranges 20 mally experienced in weil-logging applications.* Substtuing 0.604 for yin Bg. 6.9, together with te values of the ess and Faraday constants, resus in K=4,606(0.604) (8.314196 516)7, 0.000247, Expressing Kin mlivols and temperature in degrees Ces gives 2026073247) or K=65.540.247. ..... : ++(6.10) THemporaure, 7, expesied in depos Flr, =61.3-+0.1337. oan 6.3.4 Electrokinetic Component of the SP. Mud filtrate may be forced into the drilled formations asa result of the difference be- ‘ween formation pressure and the hydrostatic pressure of the mud column. This filtration process results in an electrokinetic potential, 11 | SP CURVE STRATIGRAPHY - + | Shole Thick Cleon ‘Sond Shale Thick Shaly shale Content © Sead. ‘eee Shale ‘Thin Clean Sond Shale Inflection son Points and Shole Fig. 63-Schemalt of an SP curve retorded ina haleeand | formation sequence. ‘also known as the streaming potential, Ey. A mudcake is usually formed across permeable formations. The mudcake contains clay Particles that have an electric double layer. Because ofthe difference in ionic concentration between the bound clay water and the free ‘ater, a potential difference exists. This difference between the free Water and the boundary ofthe bound-water layer is known as the zeta potential, £. Ifpressure is applied tothe solution, the solution will flow pas the solid surface, carrying with it charges that have ‘potential &. The movement ofthese charges creates the electroki- netic potential. Wyllic's® experimental investigations ofthe elee- trokinetic potential developed across. a mudeake established a relationship of the form Epa, 6.12) where Ey =electokinetic potemial, p=differentsl pressure, and x ‘and y=constants related to mul composition and resistivity ‘The greater the mud resistivity and the pressure differential are, the greater the electrokinetic potential is. Experimental data for 1,000-pai differential pressure are represented by the upper curve in Fig. 6.8, ‘Shale is similar, in kind and properties, to a well-formed mudcake Gondouin and Scala” experimentally proved the existence of elec- trokinetic potential aross shales. Their data are represented by the lower curve in Fig. 6.8. Because the SP isa relative messurement With respect to shale, the combined contribution of potentials of ‘electrokinetic origin would be the difference between the electroki- netic potential across the shale and that aeross the mudeake. At low ‘mud resistivity and low differential pressure, this difference is gener- ally small, as shown by Fig. 6.8. These differences may vary con siderably in practice, however, depending on the relative electrokinetic properties ofa particular mudeake and shale system.192 ™ {EORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS EOUS POTENT SPONTANEOUS POTETAL |e otal nantore fay = aber r= te aso “ore RESISTIVITY 16° NORMAL, CONDUCTIVITY ‘Ohm win Mites’ INDUCTION conoUETIVTY 07 spacing, 100] TWOUETION RESTIVITY | 8000 40" PACING { Fig. 6.4—Electre log of Example 8.1 (courtasy Atlas Wireline Services Experience indicates that electrokinetic potentials are generally negligible for low mud resistivities and 500-psi or less cifferenial pressure.® Electrokinetic potentials are usually ignored in SP calculations. ‘The fotal naturally occurring electric poteatial, calle the static self- potential, Eesp, is assumed to equal £, and is expressed with Eqs. 6.6 and 6.8) Exggp BE. Ey+Eg=—K OGG!) oo. eee eee (6.13) The negative sign is added because, by convention, a negative SP is messured relative t0 the shale when «> dy 6.4 Theoretical Egep vs. Measured SP ‘The theoretical potential, Essp, expressed by Eq. 6.13 is deter- mined by the formation temperature, which controls the value of , ane the chemical activities, The formation temperature can be determined as discussed in Chap. 4. The mud filtrate is sampled and its properties are measured. Consequently, if Esgp cat be deduced from the measured SP, Eig, 6.13 can be solved for forma- ‘ion water properties. As the equivalent circuit of Fig. 6.9 shows, the curcent, f,ciculating atthe sand/shale boundary is generated by the total potential: Espa ly trap te vets 6.14 where r, ray and rn are the resistances encountered by the elec ‘wie current while flowing through the sand formation, shale for ‘mation, and mud column, respectively. The measured SP is the ‘ohmic potential drop as the electrode passes from shale to sand. Its expressed by Esp=ltm: 6.15) ‘Combining Eqs. 6.14 and 6.15 yields Bos (6.16) tye 4, 6.16 indicates that Esp is greater than Esp. The Esep/Esp ratio depends on the borchole’s resistivities and geomety, a8 Well, 4s the shale and sand formations. Formation resistivity is ically {rater than mud resistivity. However, the current has a much wider «xoss-sectional path inthe formation, resulting in alow resistance ‘compared with that of the restricted path in the borehole. 7p can be expressed as Fn 2 Rll, (6.19 where Rq=mud resistivity, h=bed thickness, and d,—borehole diameter ‘We can soe from Eg. 6.17 that, fr relatively low-resitivity for- tations, freshwater-based md, thick beds, and small boreholes, itis practical to assume that Egp=Eggp because ry (Fy +7). ‘To account forthe difference between Esp and Esgp, an empir- ical correction chart (Fig, 6.10) was constructed from data takenTHE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG. Diffusion Potentat, Eg }—Corcentioted Nec! Selution Solution Porous Medium 133 Membrane Potent Em Fig, 6.5—Schematic ofa dfusion-potontial generating cell. Dilute Nect Solution *% Sezoaane ‘hole Membrone Fig. 6.6—Schomatic of a membrane-potontial generating cel. (on a resistor network analog.’ In this chart, Ris the resistivity of the invaded zone, which can be approximated by the reading of the shallow resistivity tool. The value of the diameter of inva: sion, dj, ean be approximated with data from Table 5.5. The chart shows that, or average Ri/Ry, and d; values, (Esp/Egsp)>0.9 for beds 10 ft thick. Only thin beds warrant a correction, 6.5 Dotermination of Formation Water Resistivity A representative value of formation water resistivity, Ry, is o8- sential to quantitative log calculation of water saturation, Sy. Models relting Essp to R, exist and are frequently used to de- rive an Ry, value. 6.5.1 Relationship Between Essp and Ry for Predominantly NaCl Waters. The use of Eg. 6.13, which'is expressed in terms of ay and dnp; is possible; however, in well-logging interpreta- tion, it is more practical to use the resistivities, Fig, 6.11 shows the relation between activity and resistivity of pure NaCI solutions. ‘To express the relation analytically ina form similar to that of Eq. 6.13, Gondouin et a.!) introduced the concept of “equivalent * of the formation water. By definition, the equivalent resistivity is proportional to the reefprocal ofthe activites: Rodeq@Alty + 6.18) where (Ry)qq the equivalent resistivity of formation water and A=proportioaality factor. Ifthe mad filtrate is essentially a pure sodium chloride solution, thea Raped Reg =2u/nf> 6.19) and the SSP can be expressed by SSP= ~RTOBCR py agRu deg: 6.20) As Fig, 6.11 shows, (R)qg™R for pure NaCl solutions of resistivity larger than 0.1 Q-m at 75°F. This generally is the case ae = for freshwater-based drilling mad. Eq, 6.20 can then be weitten when Ryy>0.1 Om Esse = K 108 Rey l(Rydege « (6.21) Bocause Rs not (Ry)eq isthe parameter needed in well-logging interpcoa; Gon eu used scat rin, poner rere nd erate eso aves to cont Mig 6.12, which Teittes Ry and (Rup Ifthe Esep and fy tales ae kre, (Ba)oy 8 Hit closed from Eq"€.2 andthe coresponding Ry, ‘is obtained graphically from Fig. 6.13. Fig. 4 shows a sore convenion’ chs for SP lg interpre cine This car takes imo aocoant the effect Of temperate and Concentration a the Na transpr: nner, Ry ay Str mined by taking the following sept (ig. 6.13) I: Determine te maritdeof he SP Ey fom the log forthe zone of interest 2, if warrant, correct he SP value fr bed-thickness and in vasion eee, 3 Determine Ry a formation temperature 4. er the ch wth he value of iy The intercept with he appropriate tnperature ine defines theloe Eon eDetermine the valu Ey by sultroctng th vegave Easy vale rom Eqy- Add the posive Eggp vale fo Ey, to delete ‘2 ©. Determine the value of Ry 2 the intercept of Eg with the line representing the formation temperature, Point B 4 3 8 a 3 8 2 STREAMING POTENTIAL 06 08 10 20 40 60 MUD RESISTIVITY AT 75°F Fig. 6.7—Schematie of the current flow caused by the elec- ‘trochomical potential (ator Refs. 4 and 8). Fig. 6.8—Streaming potential across mudcake and shale vs. ‘mud resistivity at 75°F (after Rt. 4).134 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS Reterence Eacroce Fig. )-9—Equlvalent circuit representing SP measurement. Example 6.2. Caleulate the SSP for a clean, predominantly NaCl water-bearing sand drilled with a freshvwater-based mud (also predominantly NaCl. The formation temperature is 180°F, and Rpg and Ry measured at this temperature ate 0.54 and 0.037 Om, respectively, Solution. Because the mud filtrate is essentially a NaCl solution with resistivity greater than 0.1 Q-m at 75°F (Ryy>0.1 B-m at 1B0°F), (Ryphog=Ryy ane EG. 6.21 applies K=61.3+0.133(180)=85.2 mV from Eq. 6.11, Ryqq=0.03 0m from Fig. 1.37, and SSP-=~85 log (0.54/0.03) 107 mv. [Note that a similar value is obtained from Fig, 6.14, Example 6.3. Determine R, and porosity for Zone A of Fig. 6.4, which is 2 Water-bearing stad he wb ie Pawn waa Resistivity Ohm-meters or 23 8700 88 3710 Nay Activity (Gr-ion /liter, tote! Na) ee BED THICKNESS (th) Fig. 6.10—SP correction chart (after Ref. 10). Solution. Because Sand A is relatively thick, Essp=Esp=—98 iV. Using Eq. 1-11 knowing that Ray =0.64 at 78°F yields Ry =0.64(78+6.7D (1806.71) 29 +m at 180°F. From the one-step chart, Fig. 6.14, Ry =0.028 0-m at 180°F. From the conductivity curve, C,=5,200 mB/m, 90 R, = 1,000) 5,200=0.19 Om and F=R,/R,,=0.19/0.028 =6.87. Using Fa. 119 relating F and porosity yields 6=35% RESISTIVITY (2m) 0.002 a.cor Or 02 10 ACTIVITY (gr ion/t) 50 Fig. 6.11—Activty of Na * Jone va, NaC! resistivity (rom Ret. [. Fig. 6.12—Activity vs. resistivity for concentrated NaCl ¢0- lutions at different temperatures (from Rot, 11).THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOS og --800"F (sore ont ib soorr coe (CRylea oF (Rmtleg» Ohm e 8 Ry OF Rent» Ohm.m 135 i hy, He ISS pip Fy Fig. 6.19—Ry V8. (Ryv)aq and formation temperature (from Re 6.5.2 Bssp=Ry Relationship for Water Contaling Salis Other ‘Than NaCl, The presence of divalent ions (like calcium, Ca++, and magnesium, Mg**) in either the mud filtrate or the forma tion water considerably affects the magnitude of Eggp when th sa linity of either Nid is low. Gondouin era." used an empirical approach to find that Essp in such cases can be expressed by lay + Veen Fang) Iw [any VGea ag) Ig where ax, dour ANd Gngy a the activities of the Na+, Cat, and Mg*™ ions, respectively. Fig. 6.16 shows the relation be: tween cation concentration and activity, Essp=—K log (6.22) Example 6.4. A typical relatively freshwater analysis (n ppm) from ‘well in Moffat County, CO, "! with a Ca** concentration about 25% of the Na* concentration is given below. fon Concentration (ppra) Sodium 13s Calcium 310 ‘Magnesium 2 Bicarbonate a7 Chloride 768 Sulfate 2,320 Total 5,192 Measured water resistivity =1.45 +m at 75°F Calculate Esp in 2 sand saturated with the above formation ‘water at 75°F, The borchole is assumed to be drilled with @ pare [NaCI solution whose measured resistivity is 4.66 Om at 75°R. Solution. Because the divalent cation concentration is about 25% ‘of the monovalent sodium cation concentration, the use of Eq. 6.22 is recommended. From Fig, 6.16, (ayy) y=0.05 g-ion!L. Llp) +(ppm igh =310-+52=362 pra, Again, fom Fig. 6.16, (Seca ag v0.06 gion, (a+ agg Fagg y90.0840,06%0.11 gion, From Fig. 6.1, (@yqy=0.015 prion From Eq. 6.10, K=61:340.13305)=713 mv. Sabsuing in Eq. 6.22 yields Esqp= —T1.3 log (0.110.015) -82 mV. ‘This value is equal tothe value actually measured in the boretole. ‘Assuming thatthe water is predominantly NaCl, Bq, 6.20 re- sults in Egsp=—71.3 log(4.6611.45)=—36 mV, which differs considerably from the measured valve.136 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS Fig. 6.14—One-Step SP interpretation chart (trom R Example 64 illustrates how the value of Egsp canbe predicted wen water analysis i known, The real interpretation prober, how- ver, i determining the electicalresisivty of the formation water, ‘Rg. from: the SP log, An empirical relationship between R, and Rey may be developed for 2 geologic environment known for 8 constant ion assemblage. Evers and Iyer!5 applied this principle in Wyoming's Big Horn and Wind River basins. They used published water analyses to Predict the Essp ftom Eg, 6.22, which was then used to cleuate (Bq from Eq, 6.21. Mud flrates were considered NaCl solu- tions: R, values were obtained from published det and plotted vs, deg: Hig. 6.17 presets their results. For water with only NaCl in Solution, the Ry=(Rw)ep relationship is given by the straight lin. Curves of Ry v5. (Rydag of other waters are displaced up- ward so tat, for the same Value of (Ry gq, the Ry Vale is great- cr than forthe pure NaCl water. The Girves of Fig. 6.17 are applicable only to Wyoming's Big Horn and Wind River basins ‘They emphasize the importance of collecting and using local data to develop empirical elatons to be usd in wel-o interpretation so.00 } ET TTT if 1 1 1 1 1 I i 1 1 1 1 i 1 J Fig. 6.15—R,, determination using Fig. 6.14 (trom Ret, 12). aa Fg oF Rays Ob 6.5.3 Esgp-Ry Relationship for Nonideal Shale Membrane, [Bqs. 6.21 and’6.22 assume that shale formations behave as ideal cation selective membranes. Because the clay contents and shale porosities may vary aporeciably, shale membrane potentials also ‘vary. Labocetory measurements made on shale membranes cut from, ‘cores commonly show a potential that is different from that calcu lated for an ideal membrane." Assuming perfect membrane be- ‘havior in such a case will not yield an accurate value of formation ‘water resistivity. Eg. 6.21 tends to overestimate Ry, which in turn results in underestimation of the potential of hydrocarbon, ‘zones. 1617 This fat is evident in Fig. 6.18, which shoves the cor- ‘elation between Ry, values inferred from water samples and those calculated from Eg, 6.21 for 32 selected eases in Grand Isle il LA. Smits!8 developed a theoretical equation that describes the mem- ‘brane potential in shales and shay sands asa function ofthe cation ‘xchange capacity per unit PY of the rock, Qy. Consequently, changes in membrane potentials caused by changes in clay content ean be acoounted for, However, because ofthe difficulty associ ed with obtaining reliable Qy valves, log analysts have been reine- tant to accept this theory, Silva and Bassiouni'6(7 developed an empirical graphical rela- onship between Essp and Ry for nonideal shale membranes. The readily available shale electrial resistivity, Ry, is used to reflect the changes in salinity, clay content, shale poresity, and hence mem brane efficiency. Fig. 6.19 gives the relationship between Esso peri ys Ppa! IE Ter ‘hel (Pett Ft) «Pg Fig, 6.16—-Activity vs. concentration, Na* and Ca”* plus Mg"* (rom Pet. 13).‘THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG. Fig, 6.17—Ry V5. (Ra)ag for roltively fresh waters of Wyom Ing’s Big Horn and Wind River basins (trom Ref. 18) values and Ry, Ry, and Ry Use ofthis chat, which was devel: oped with U-8, gl coast da, i restricted to cases where NaCl constnes more than 95 wt % ofthe tal dissolved solids (TDS). To determine Ry Uke Esgp value, Ryo formation temperature, 2nd average resistivity ofthe purest adjacent shales, Ry, are required ‘To use Fig. 6.19 to estimate Ry, the abscissa is eotered withthe gp valu, The intersection withthe curve ofthe proper Res Rng ratto determines the coresponding Rpyy ratio and, in turn, Ry 137 ie 7 GRAND ISLE FELD, LA. f y 5 i 2 Ba = 8 3 . ¢ r o ny FROM WATER SAMPLES, Ohne ° eo eg | [Figs 10-8, trom SP tg (Eq. 6.21) v0.7, from water eam {Ry lyg AT 29°C, ORM-METERS Blea from Grand lle ald, LA (rom Ref. 17). Fig. 6.20 shows the improvement in R, estimation that results fron the use of Fig. 6.19. Fig, 620 shows te corelation beeen 2, values inferred from chemical analysis and those derived from the chat for the 32 datapoints used in Fig, 6.18 representing Grand Isle field, LA Lau end Bassiousi"? introduced an SP model that incorporates the concept of water-ransport phenomenon and shale-membrane efficieney, map. This term measures the nonideal behavior of a shale membrane. An ideal membrane displays 100% efficiency, ‘The membrane efficiency relates empirically 10 the shale resistvi- 19, Ry, 699 img “0.4740.3Ry (623) ‘The value of meg calculated from Eq. 6.23 should not exceed unity. 2 GRAND ISLE FELO, LA, & | i FETE Tram Esp. fy PROM WATER SAUPLES, Ohm Fig. 6.19-Chart relating the SP log reading to Ray, Ray and @.20-R from SP log (Fig, 6.19) va. Ry trom chemical Re trom Ret. 17) aneiele, Grand Tal ely UA trom Rf. 17)198 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS Eggp. -mV ees Ege seeemtees ? 2 Rw or Rmp, Ohm'm Fig, 6.21—SP chart constructed for membrane ettcioncy value of 1.0 (trom Ret. 21). & TT al Bee BE Ec=Egsp, -mV “Th ‘MEMBRANE EFFICIENCY = 0 a 1 . 0 Ry or Rip, Ohms im Fig. 6.22—SP chart constructed for membrane efficiency value of 0.8 (Irom Ref. 21). Figs. 6.21 through 6,24 illustrate interpretation charts for differ- Essex iV 55 ent membrane efficiencies. Formation temperature, °F 108 Reg a 108°F, Q-m 0.89 Example 6.5. The following data pertain to a Miocene sand inthe Ray at 1O8°F, Oem a8 2,812- to 2,878-M interval ofa St. Charles Parish, LA, well (see Ry from reliable water samples, 0.059 Fig. 6.25), ‘Oem at 108°F‘THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG 10 it Tm = m0 st CAE 4 20 Tak wo aH 1 19 > — » ry aT r ® a » 3 ° i: uw "8 a o © w 0 nat | - been Heencr bos] Fig. 1 TIT a] T st GHAR =] » a on "| > » 5 a & « 8 Ww 6 ” i | ow. 1} + wi » of ‘MEM®I SFFICIENCY = 0.7 7 Pity | n 1 T ° Rw or Rmt, Ohm +m Fig, 6.24—SP chart constructed for membrane efficiency value of 0.7 trom Re. 21). Estimate Ry using diferent approaches. Compare the estima ed values to the value obtained from water samples, ee ree ee on eee Solution, Eq 6.21 assumes that shale behaves asa perfect mem Exon brane, Ii we cls Deviation S., Caleulation Method Ry at 108°F (9%) (%%) =61.3+0.133(108)=75.7 mV Wateranaiysis 0059 = eye oie? ia ee a Fa.6.19 oo "a9 se nt rece Membrene-tfciency 0.067 14 7 ad Raden ag ay MONT rregt140 = ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS ‘Seaixow rocuseD Loa negistiyrry 90 Bes ioiyuas conbucrivity Milita dn Fig. 6.25—Log of Examplo 6.5.THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG. Because (Ryeq>0-1y, RoR y)eg=0-167 Om a 108°F. Fig. 6.19 ttempis to take the nonidel shale-membrane behavior into consideration: Ral Ryp=0.900.89 Rag!R,= 10.8. £y=0.89/10,890.082 fm at 108°F. ‘The concept of the shale-membrane effickency results in smgy=0.47+0.500.9) 0.74 From Figs. 6.23 and 6.24, Ry =0.088 0m for mop: 053 D-m for mag =0.7. By interpolation, Ry =0.067 Om fot mgy=0.74 ‘The R, vals obtained by these different methods ae listed in Table 6.1, together with deviation and possible error in S, detr- mination. “As Table 6.1 shows, the valves obtained when the ‘onideal shale behavior is taken into consideration ae in closer agrecient with that obtained from chemical analysis an result in lower ero in 5, valve On. 6.6 Character and Shape of the SP Deflection In clean formations, the deflection of the SP curve off the shale baseline is expressed by Eg. 6.21. Considering a relatively short interval ofa few hundred feot of » wellbore, the temperature and, subsequently, K and Ray remain practically unchanged. (Rye is directly proportional to’, Therefore, the higher Ris, the [ow- cer the SP deflection is; ie, the higher the formation water salinity is, the higher the SP deflection is. ‘In addition to the absolute value of Ry, the contrast Ruy/Ry OF precisely Ryy/(Ry)qp determines the magnitade of SP deflection. The contrast betsiees mud filtrate and formation water salinity re- sults in one of three typical cases (Fig. 6.26). 1. Ifthe mud is relatively fresher than the formation water, such 8 Ry >Ry, @ negative SP deflection occurs, 2. Ifthe Salinties of the mad filtrate and formation water are about tbe same, such as Ry = (Rye, then litle or no SP deflec- tion occurs because log Rly )eq £0. 3. If formation water is Tesher than the mud filtrate, such as Ray <(Ry) eqs Positive SP deflection occurs. Example 6.6. Determine the formation water salinity for Sands ‘A through C in Fig. 6.27. The log heading lists the following in- formation: Ry =0.30 at 66°F, Ryy =0.23 at 68°F, and T= 148° at 7,665 fi Solution. The geothermal gradient is 86" [(148—70)/7,665]100= 1° F100 ft Formation temperature forall three sands = 70-+1(6,650/100)= Br, ‘Mad filtrate resistivity is Rg =0.23(68 +6.77V(137-+6.77) 0.12 8m, ‘Sand A. Considering maximum deflection of the shale basaline, Esgp = Bop = +33 mV. From Eq. 6.11, K=61.340.133(137)=79.5 mV, Solving Eq. 6.21 for (Ry)ey gives Host ay!(Ry eg Re Esso! gl WOES K Ian +3y—95 031m, Becaise (Ry)ey>01, Ry (Rye Assuming the Slaton i redomisanty NaCI, Fi thatthe forraton water slnty i 11,000 pprn 31 Oem at 137°R, 1.7 indicates 141 Shale Cleon sand Rot < Py tog Petey tye sp Shote ‘lean sana Rat = Rw log Rata, #0 no SP. Shate Clean Sond Rat > Ry log Pints tve ~ve 5? Fig. 6.26—Schomatic of the effect of contrast toh, on SP deflection, tween Rs Fig. 6.28 shows how a similar value of Ry is obiained from Fig, 6.14, Sand B. Because Esp=0, Ry = Ryy 1.7, water salinity i 30,000 ppm. 12.f+m, and from Fig, than e SP. ‘Sand C. Here, ssp =Esp=~10 mV. Using Eq, 6.21 ot Fig. 6.14 results in Ry=0.09 8'm, which in turn indicates a salinity ‘of 38,000 ppm. Example 6.7. Explain why Sands W through Z in Flg. 6.29 di play different Esp values. Sand X is known to be cleen and Ryy=0.25 O-m at formation temperature ‘Solution. The difference in the SP deflection displayed by the Afferent zones can be explained by one or a combination of the following: 2 change in formation water salinity, different bed- thickness and formation-resstvity effects, and the fact that Zones W through Z are shaly sands. The probable reason(s) is deduced by elimination, First, major changes in water salinity are improbable given the closeness of the {our sands, Second, the bed-thickness and formation-resistivity ef- fects ate investigated. Data aiding in the investigation are listed below. Sands eee Thickness, f nator Esp, nV 46 27 394 R, (hort normal reading) @-m 2.2 53 2.3 2 Rip 38 212 92 § Esplisgp (Fig. 6.10) 0.96 “0.84 0.89 0.87 Esse 4832 4h 8142 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS cous © 2000 8 Fig, 6.27—Log of Example 6.6 (courtesy Schlumberger). aq a Ry oF Ray Ode Fig, 6.28—Solution of Example 6.6 with Fig. 6.14.‘THE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LO 143 ronmccus pre alo Schematic cistribution ‘of SP currents ‘Schematic representation of formations ‘and SP log ZZ), Ste nperdous and compsrtvely conde) 3 compost formation very high resatiity ) Permeable (comparatively conductive) Fig. 6.29—Electrie log of Exar berger) (courtesy Schlum- Fig, 6.30—Schomatic of the SP curve In highly resletivefor- mations (trom Ref. 19). Because the effect of salinity changes is considered minor, the Esp value should be the same forall clean zones. However, Fig. 6:10 is empirical, The Essp value is approximate and should be ‘weated only as an order of magnitude. It follows that Send Y is relatively clean, It displayed an SP valueless than that of Sand X., mainly because of the bed-thickness effect. The Esgp values of ‘Zones W and Z ere considerably different from that of clean Zone X because these sands are shaly. Their SP deflection is different nevis aT -Ke i from that of Zone X owing to both bed-thickness and shaliness ef: fects, The shale index, I,y, for these zones can be calculated as aw =(8—32948=0.33 aad pz =(68 289/88 =0.42 ‘The formation resistivity, as discussed in Sec. 6.4, affects the value of the SP deflection. In a highly resistive formation, how- ever, the shape of the SP curve itself is affected. As Fig 6.30 il- strates, the flow of the current next to highly resistive beds is largely confined tothe wellbore because it presents the puth of least resistance. The intensity of the current remains constant, which in aesistinT oe Fig. 6.31—Log showing a constant SP gradient next to ahigh- ly resistive formation {courtesy Amoco Production Co.). Fig. 6.32—Log showing the changes in SP next to a highiy tesltlve bed between two shales (courtesy Marathon Oil Co).14a THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS Probtoms, 6.1 Calculate the relative magnitude ofthe membrane potential com- pared with the diffusion potential for clean sands at 80° 6.22, Botimate ssp, assuming that the shale membrane is per- feet, if formation temperature=200°F, Ryy tt 200°F-=0.5 Q-m, and R,, at 200°F =0.1 9m, ', Taking into consideration the nonidealty ofthe shele mem- brane, estimate Esp if Ryy=2 Om, 6.3 Bstimate Essp for 2 formation with the following character- istics. Formation temperature, ° 30 Formation thickness, ft 100 Regs Om at 90°F 2 Ry Bm at 90°F 25 Assume that the formation water is a pare NaCl solution », Take into account the fact that water is fresh, so the effect of salts other then NaCl has to be considered, 64 The electric log in Fi. 6.31 was obtained ina well drilled with freshwater-based anud where Ryy=0.65 at 85°F, Maxim temperature recorded in the well was 165°F at 8,700 ft. If Zone 1is a clean water-bearing sand and formation watet salinity is practically the same in all sands, determine Ry, and Jy, of| the different permeable zones. 6.5 Determine the formation water salinity of the formations dis cssed in Example 6.7. 16.6 The heading of the electric log in Fig, 6.33 lists the following. information. Total depth, 9,500 ‘Maximum recorded temperature, °F 168, Fig, 6.88—Electic log of Problem 6. Rema tse 036 Mad weight, Ibeagal it ‘um results in constant potential gradient, The SP curve then as- a, Estimate the formation water resistivity and salinity for the umes a siraight-line shape next to highly impermeable formations bottom permeable Zone A. Related erzmaemel eerie, A turd ater set cee ca ce Sangster eee a= ent hyo cr , = electrochemical potential, V tion fe eae E, = diffusion potential, V iia #6 te sauces of aatrly curing ied tT Sarl tel 2, Sic speaking, ithe variation ofthe poten in Bn = membrane potential, V paltcia ce masa orga eer ee = measured selfpotential, mV 3, Explain how and why the SP meesurement i relative rather Fssp * state selpotetialy mV than absolute. F = Faraday constant (96,516 Coulombs) 4, Why docs an SP deflection occur atthe Boundary between 2 -«&@ = geothermal gradient, *F/100 ft shale bed and a permesble formation? hh = bed thickness, ft clectric current, A shale index ‘eraperature-dependent coefficient in SP equation, mV 5, Explain how the diffusion, membrane, and streaming poten- tials are generated, What is the relative magnitude of each? 6. Why is the electrokinetic component ofthe SP usally ignored in SP quantitative interpretation? T. How is the Essp value defined? shale-membrane efficiency 8. Why does the measured SP differ from Esgp? pressure, pein 9. Under what conditions are Esp and Essp close in value? Qy = cation exchange capacity, meg/em? 10. Under what conditions are the resistivities of pure NaC so- Pee lutions inversely proportional to their activities? eal pas coun Ivy (a teeth omation water emia resin, ™ Bs ot i2"How woul you rate Fg oR atvly feshonter Senn formations that contain salts other than NaCl? fe ee ee ee ae 13, In SP quantitative interpretation, shale is usually assumed) fn Sodium cation transference number to bea perfect cationic membrane. How valid is this assumption, Ty, ~ absolute temperature, *K ad what effect willithave onthe calculated Ry and Sy values? = terperatre, F 1, Whatarethe factors affecting the polarity snd order of mag —-U = mobiliy, em/s-V nitude of the SP deflection? 9 = porosityTHE SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL LOG Subscripts Ca = calcium 1 = chlorine eq = equivalent ‘f= sand formation h = borehole i = invaded zone m= mud ‘mf = mud filtrate Mg = magnesium Na = sodium 0 = oil ch = shale formation w = water Reference: 1. Telfond, W.M, eral: Applied Geoplyscr, Cambridge U. Press, Cam bridge, MA (1976) 458-68. 2 Allaud, Land Matin, M.: Schumberger, The History ofa Technique, Jolin Wiley and Sons, New York Ciy (1977) 116-23 3, Pitson, 8.8: Geological Well Log Anabss, Gulf Publishing Co., Houston (1970) 36-58, 4, Lynch, BI: Formaion Evaluation, Harper and Row Publishers, New ‘York City (1962) 99-108 $5. Mounce, W.D. ané Rust, W.M. Jr: "Natrol Potentials a Weil Log- ing.” Trans, AIME (1944) 138, 49-55. 6. Wyllie, MRT. “An Investigation ofthe Blecronetc Component ofthe Seif Potenial Curve," Trans, AIME (1851) 192, 1-18 7. Gondoula, M, and Seal, C’: “Steaming Poel andthe SP Log,” Trans, AIM, (1958) 213, 170 8. Aldaus, V2: "Electokiseds Potentials in South Louisiane Tertiary Sediment.” The Log Analyst (May-July 1967) 29-34 145 9. Segesmnan, F-P: “Now SP Comecion Carts,” Geophysics De. 1962) 27, No, 6, Part I, 815-28, 10. Log tnterprevation Charts, Schlumberger, Heuston (1979) 1H. Gondouin, M., Tier, M-P., and Sinard, G.L.: "An Experimental Study on the Influence ofthe Chemical Composition of Electrolytes ton the SP Curve," Tran. AIME (1957) 210. 12, Siva, PL. and Bassloun, Z: “One Step Chat for $P Log Interpreta tion, paper presented at the Canadian Well Logging Soe. 10th For ‘mation Evaluation Symposium, Sop, 1985, 13. Log hnerpretarion Principles, Schlumberger, Houston (1972) 14, Alger, RP.: “Interpretation of Electric Logs in Water Wells in Un ‘consolidated Formations," Proc, SPWLA, Tulsa (1966) paper CC. 1, Evers, J.P and ler, B.G.: A Siaisical Stay of the SP Log in Fresh ‘Water Formations of Wyoming's Big Horn and Wind River Basins,” Trant, Canadian Well Logging Soe. (1973) 5. 16, Silva, P-L, and Bastouni,Z.:""A New Approach to the Detesmia- ‘ion of Formation Water Resisvg from the SP Log,” Pr,, SPWLA, Mexico City (1981) pape G. 17 Sila, P-L, and Basiouni, Z.: “Applications of New SP Iaterpreta tion Charts to Gulf Coast Lousiana Fels," The Log Anaya (Merch 1983) 28, No, 2, 12-15 18, Smits, LJ.M.: "SP Log lnterprotation in Shaly Sands," SPEV (July 1968) 123-26; Tran, AIME, 23. 19, Lau, M.N. and Bussicusi, Z.: “Development and Field Applications of Shaly Sand Petrophysical Models: Pant ~The Spontaneous Pten- tial Model," paper SPE 20387 available a SPE headquarters, Richa son, TK. 20, Combaria, G.:"By-Passeé Oi Due to Misiatrpretaton of Well Logs, (MS thesis, Lousiana Ste U., Baton Rouge (Dec. 199) 21. Combarza, G., Lau, M.N., and Bassiouni, “Formation Wator Resistivity Determination from SP Log in Cae of imperfect Shale Mem brane,” Proc, [3th European Formation Evaluation Symposiom, Basapest (Oct. 1990) paper E.Chapter 7 Gamma Ray Log 7.1 Introduction ‘The gamma ray log is continuous recording of the intensity of ‘he natural gamma radiations emanating from the formations penetrated by the borehole vs. depth, All rocks have some radio- activity. The most abundant source of natural radioactivity is the aGioactive isotope of potassium, K®, and the radioactive elements ‘of the uranium and thorium series, The radioactive material origi nally occurred in igneous rocks. It was subsequently distributed "unequally throughout sedimentary formations during erosion, tans- port, and deposition, In sedimentary formations, radioactive ele- ments tend to concentrate in clay minerals, which, in turn, ‘concentrate in shales. Table 7.1 gives the average gamma ray ac. tivity of sedimentary rocks, and Fig. 7.1 shows the relative degree of radioactivity ofthe most common sedimentary rocks, Natiral radiosetvity is a function of the type of formation, is age, and the ‘method of deposition. In general, sendstones, limestones, and dolo- mites have very lite radioactive content, Black shales and marine shales exhibit the highest levels of radioactivity, Radioactivity 1s related to lithology, but not directly or rigorously. It can be used to distinguish between shale and nonshale formations and to est ‘mate the shale content of shaly formations. high level of radio~ sotvity is not always associated with the presence of clay minerals ‘Such anomalous cass include potash salts, which have ahigh potas sium content, and sandstones that contain uranium or thorium sls, Use of natural radioactivity in lithology differentiation requites sod knowledge of the local lithology. ‘The gamma ray lg is usually recorded with porosity-ype logs— i.e., density, neutron, and sonic. As Fig. 7.2 illustrates, the gam- ‘ma ray curve is recorded on the first track of the log with a Linear scale. All recordings are positive, with the radioactivity level in- ‘reasing tothe right. Because shales normally display the highest level of natural radionctvity, the gamma ray curve generally ap- ‘ears similar to the self-potental (SP) curve of the electric logs. In empty boreholes or boreholes drilled with oil-based mud, an SSP curve cannot be recorded. The gamma ray curve replaces the SSP curve on the first track of the induction log (see Fig. 5.42), 7.2 Detection and Measurement of Nuclear Radiation Four different detectors—the ionization chamber, the proportional counter, the Geiger-Mueller counter, and the scintillation counter — hhave been used in radiation well logging. The proportional coun- ter curently s used only in neutron logging. The other tee devices hhave been used in both gamma ray and nettron logging. The con- cept ofthe ionization chamber, proportional counter, and Geiges- “Maller counter is based on the ability of gamma rays to cause ioni- ‘zation upon passing through 2 medium, such as ges. The concept of the scintillation detector is based on the ability of gamma rays {o produce tiny flasbes of light as they decay in certain crysals ‘The ionization chamber, shown schematically in Fig. 7.3, con- sists of a metallic housing that encloses «high-pressure (1,000 10 1,500-psia) gas. The steel case functions as an electrode. The sec ‘ond electrode is central thin wire. A. voltage, typically 100 V, is applied across these two electrodes to create an electtc field, ons aad electrons produced by ionization resulting from gamma ‘adition entering the chamber are collecied at these two electrodes, AA flux of gamina rays produces a minute electric current that re. ‘ures considerable amplification before it ean be reeorded.? The log deflection is proportional tothe amount of current, Which, in ‘urn, is measure ofthe intensity of the radiation. The jonization chamber is of simple construction and low voltage. However, it Presents several disadvantages. Ituses a high-pressure gas, and the ‘amplification required could resuc in drift and instability. The ion}. ‘ation chamber also has a poor counting efficiency that ranges from 5% to 10%, depending on gas pressure and chamber length. Use ofthe ionization chamber has been mostly discontinued. > ‘The Geiger-Mueller counter and the proportional counter (Fig. 77.4) are designed like the ionization chamber. The voltage differ. ential between the electrodes, however, is much higher in magn ‘ude than in the ionization chamber. The gas enclosed inthe counter is rarefied rather than pressurized, which causes the chamber {0 act dffeseatly. The introduction of an jonizing particle into the gas starts a chain reaction of multipf ionization, Because ofthe high Potentil difference, the inital ionization products ae accelerated at a high speed toward the electrode of opposite polarity. They col- lide with other atoms and cause ionization, The process is repeat- ced, and the result is an “avalanche” of ions. In the Geiger-Mueller counter, tis avalanche creates a uniform voltage pulse that is independent of the number of ions formed by the inital ionizing event. These pulses are counted, and the log = Tie (gop) > Marks i Fig. 7.2—Gamma ray curve recorded with the compensated-neutronvformation-density log. Bq, 7.4 also can be written as JeO= (MOOS) +I Xe“), as) ‘where J_(t) isthe apparent intensity reflected by the recorder. The meter then provides a running average of the pulse rate. Ths re- sults in the smoothing out of statistical variations. The product re is called the time constant ofthe electric circuit. When ¢=rc, thea (1 =e7H)=0.63. One time constant is then the time necessary forthe equipment to record 634% of the change in counts from the previous level. This constant determines the time over which the STEEL CASE HIGH PRESSURE GAS Fig. 7.8—lontzation chamber (after Ref. 2). Fig. 7.4—Proportional counter, or Geiger-Mueller Counter (f tor Ret. 2)GAMMA RAY LOG 149 a wwrterace ——~ | PHOTO CATHODE Sine fr crn Ke i sree mmoro-wxroen—| UT Fig. 7.5—Schematic of scintillator and photomultiplier tube rom Ret. 4). 24 sve nck LATE ‘WATER, ‘LOW ACTIVITY CONCRETE (20740 ‘OTTAWA SILICA, LOW ACTIVITY ‘CEMENT SELECTED FOR UN FORM: ITY OF acriViTY) RUGATED PIPE LOW ACTIVITY CONCRETE Lo all SelM a i ‘CASING (5 V2'0D, 178 J-88) Fig. 7.6—Gamma ray log callbration pit (trom Rt. 7). radioactive counts are averaged. The time constant of a measuring device can be changed by a slight modification of the circuitry. ‘Statistical variations are more pronounced for lower count rats, soa larger time constant is required for adequate averaging of the variations. In most cases, however, a time constant of 2 seconds is sufficient. 1! To check the appropriazeness of the selected time ‘constant, radioactivity ofa relatively active formation is recorded for several minutes. This testis called a statistical check. For @ Jog of acceptable quality, the residual fuctuations should aot ex- ‘ceed a certain percentage, usually 5% to 15%, of the total change in radioactivity between shales and clean formations. Example 7.1. Fig. 7.8 shows, hypothetically, the fluctuation of pulse rate vs. time. Show the smoothed-out response generated by the ro circuit having a time constant of 1 second. Repeat fora time ‘constant of 2 seconds. Let the pulse rate immediately before these ‘events be 100 counts!sec. Solution, Using Eq. 7-5 forthe first second gives Jq(t)=100+ 10(1~e-"), Values of J, for re=1 and vs. time are listed below. calculated from this expression ' Jay 021 Joy (Geconds) _—(eountsisec) ——_(counts/see) 0 100 100 0.25 102.2 101.2 0.50 103.9 102.2 0.75 105.3 103.1 10 106.3 103.9 Calculations forthe other time intervals are performed similarly For example, Jg(¢) for co 1 is expressed for the following sec- ond a Jof0)=106.3-420{1 et DE], ‘The smoothed-out response (Fig. 7.9) indicates thatthe larger the time constant, the smoother the profile. 7.5 Logging Speed ‘The numberof pulses averaged bythe detector depends en the rai- ation intensity, the counters efficiency, the time constant, and the Jogging speed. An increase in logging sped is equivalent oan ap parent delay of equipment reactions toa change in radiation inton- sity: the higher the speed, the smoother the tool response and vice versa, Fig 7.10 shows the effet of speed on log quality. The same section of« wel is logged at spoods of 720 and 2,700 fr. The quality ofthese log is diferent. Beds are ot defined as well on the 2,700-thr log. But bed resolution also depends on the tne constant; a better resolution calls for a smaller time constant. A g00d-quality log should be run with an optimum combination of logging spoed and time constant. Example 7.2. 1, A 10-ftthick hypothetical bed with an average radionctive in- tensity of 100 counts/sec lies between two infinite beds of zero rai activity. Show the response of a point detector having atime constant of 4 soconds run at a speed of 3,600 ftvhr. Repeat for a speed of 900 fur. c, Ifa logging speed of 1,800 fdr is used, what time constant, if any, reproduces the response calculated in Part 6? Solution. 1. From Eq. 7.5, Je{Q=100(L e028), hero isthe time clapsed since the tool lft the lower bed boundary. Tf is the tool location above the same boundary, then fora speed ‘of 3,600 fr, the following data are obtained.150 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL Logs, m0) rf 189 8 reo] Fg. 7.7—Cieut or averaging statistical variations (rom et. |_| #10 a é 100 ' z Jaf) Z (seconds) (fh) (counts/sec) ot ® 3 © 0 0 t z 3 + 7 9 7 Te, + 2 2 3% : 3 7 Fig, 7.6—Hypothotical pulse rate thactuation, Example 7-1 4 4 8 #E-FEEPEEE CEP eEr EEE Creo cere 5 5 n Tre logsing-speedltime-constant combination resuls in wo s 6 8 effets 2 2 2 I Te og responses at peeve of bed whos thi 7 7 i ses is less than the crtiel thickness, the distance traveled 7 e = by the sonde in onetime constant. : 2. An anomaly is sified in the direction in which he tools moy- For a speed of 900 hr, the values given below result. ing. This lag, a8 wel asthe ciel thickness, isexprsaed by : 2 Jal) ihe tsetse . (seconds) ey (eounts/sec) heme 5 feneeecuae t 7 Fone ‘where h=lag or critical thickness, ft; v=logging speed, ft/seo; 2 ie ae and f,=time constant, seconds. To avoid excessive distortion of 4 1 6 te garama ray curve, van, ae chosen s thatthe lg about 6 Ls 8 1. Most common logging speeds and coresponding opin time 8 2 a constants areas shown below. » 25 2 5 99. x + 2 8 10 ie) (seconds) ‘Fig. 7.1 graphically presents these two cases. The intensity above 3,600 i the top bed boundary forthe 3,600- and 900-fuir cases is calculated 41,800 2 from ine following wo equations, respectively: ‘00 3 Tele) =Me-0281—10) hs and J,(¢)= 100-0284 7 cdi, given by Eq. 7.5 can be expressed as a function of 2: S.P. Gamma Ray JqZ)=J O){1-e- Kel} } (7.6) 3 ‘where » is the logging speed in feet per second. Eq. 7.6 indicates 7 that identical responses ae obtained ve depth for aferent spect, ‘provided that the product ve) remains the same. The profile of Pat b, obtained with sped of S00 fiir and ime constant of 4 seconds, ca be repreion ata logging speed of 1,800 far bat ‘at a time constant of 2 seconds. = ‘atti { 130 1 ae F heo | ° | 122 E nol - = § [ ei t 2 $ 4 se = TIME, & —— Fig. 7.9—Smoothedout fluctuation using re creuk, Example | | Fig. 710—Etect of apood, Log ofthe eame section record ma ed ata peed of 720°and 2,700 thr (rom fat. 8)GAMMA RAY LOG 181 | RADIOACTIVE INTENSITY, eps 3 3 4D @ o 10 360011 Login Sent 9001/4 Lopoing Sed ‘a Tine contest 2, DISTANCE aBove LOWER BED BOUNDRY, 1 i ? Tn Goa fy tasty Fig, 7.11—Etfect of logging opeed on log response, Exam ple ‘The logging speed is usually indicated by tic marks or gaps ia the far left vertical line ofthe first track. These tics are spaced 1 ‘minute apert. For example, the log of Fig. 7.2 shows gaps spaced 35 ft part; this indicates thatthe logging speed was 35 ft/min or 2,100 fe. ‘The theoretical tool responses shown so far assume a point de- teotor, A detector of appreciable length is used in actual logging ‘This result in additional smoothing ofthe curvo, as ilusteated by Fig, 7.12, New equipment uses an averaging technique other thaa the re circuit. One method consists of averaging the reading obtained at ‘one depth with the readings that immediately precede and follow. 7.6 Tool Response ‘The gamma ray tool response, recorded with an optimum speed ‘and time constant with th too! situated opposite a given forma: tion, depends on several factors: specific formation radioactivity, ‘o—ice., gamma rays/see-g; formation bulk density, py; specific ac: tivities of the borehole fluid; density ofthe borehole fuid; bore hhole diameter; characteristics of the detector and the counting system; and position of the detector in the borehole—i.e,, eccen- ticity. In a eased hole, the tool response also depends on the spe cific activites of the casing an¢ cement and on the thicknesses and densities of the casing and cement Year! Yon 3 § TRUE GR INTENSITY it High Logging Speed Low Logging Speed —"— Infinitely Slow Fig. 7.12—Etfect of detector fength on gamma ray curve shape (after Ref. 9). For qualitative interpretation, the borehole-eavironment effect borehole ud, cement, and casing) can be neglected because the interpretation relies on relative variation from one zone to ‘nother and because the borehole conditions affecting the gamma ry remain practically unchanged over long borehole sections. For ‘quantitative interpretation, the effect should be taken into consi eration, especially in large and cased holes. Service company chart books contain charts to correct for bore- hole effect, Fig. 7.13 is an example. This chart, which is based largely on laboratory experiments, gives the ratio of corrected gam- ‘ma Tay, Yeo 10 the gamma ray log response, “gs 88 & function ot hole size and mud weight for centered and eecentered tool. Yue {is defined as he response of a 3%-in tol eccentric to an 8-in, Role filled with 10-Ibm/gal mud. Those are considered normal meas- ‘urement conditions. In most cases, boreholes deviate from the ver- tical and the sonde can be assumed eocentrie, Example 7.3. A gamma ray log was recorded in an empty, open hole drilled with a 77-in. bit. The gamma ray device is 3% in. 7 yy HOLE SIZE, in Fig. 7.18-—Gamma Ray Correction for hole size and mud welght, after Ref. 12 | Fig, 7.14—Inlegrated radial geometric factor of the gamma Fay'tog under the conditions stated in Example 7.6.152 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS: Fig. 7.16—Gamma ray and SP log recorded In high-ealinity, Md, Roy A, (from Ref. 9). Fig. 7.15—SP and gamma ray logs recorded simultaneously In an open hole (from Ref. ). in diameter and curs simultsneously with « Formation Density Com. pensuted (FDCS*) tool. a, Determine the corrected radioactivity, Yq, OF & zone that registered 30 API units on the log. ». One subsequent ran, with the same equipment, the hole has been filled with 10-Ibm/gal mud. What level of radioactivity would ‘now be displayed by the log for the seme zon c. Repeat Part b for « 16-bm/gal mud, 4. Repeat Parts b and ¢ for the case where the gamma ray device is ran simultancously with & Borehole Compensated Sonic (BHC™) tool Solution. «a, From Fig. 7.13, Yeo! Yag 0-79 and Yoq,20.79(30)=23.7 2124 API units, b, Because the FDC is un in an eccentric fashion, the borehole ‘environment closely matches that used to define 9,3 8in, bore hole, 10-lbm/gal_mud,, and tool eccentricity. Therefore, “Vog =Yoor =24 APL units, © For prevailing conditions and 16-Ibnv/gel mud, the chart in Pig. 7.13 gives Yeor! Nog = 1-2 and Yigg=24/1.2=20 APL units. 4. Gamma tay devices are un simultaneously withthe BHC cen tered, This affects the log reading. For a 10-Ibmigal mud, Yeo Vog LL (by interpolation ant og 24/1122 APL nits For the 6bm/gal mud, Yeo! Mog 2146 and ug =24!1 6 APL units. After the borehole-environrent effect i normalized, the corrected! ‘reponse is proportional tothe weight concentration of radioactive ‘materials inthe formation. It can be expressed fora formation con- ing n specific radioactive minerals as! ZY aWiay «-. : 78) 19) where p/=density of the radioactive mineral, Vy=bulk volume fraction of the mineral, a, «proportionality fator that corresponds, ta the radioactivity of the mineral and depends onthe detector used. and the sonde design, and B =p;4;~a constant for each specific radioactive mineral For Schlumberger devices, the relation between the concentra- tion of K, Th, or U and the total gamma ray signal recorded in ‘common sedimentary rocks can be approximated by! Cry P8CY HC ees ee ce teeseeeeeee (7.10) ‘where total gamma ray, APL units; Cx =potassium concentra- tion, wt’, and Cy and Cy=thorium and uranium concentrations, respectively, in ppm. Ifthe effect of formation density needs to be taken into account, the gamma ray log may be normalized by multiplying it by the bulk density value obtained from the density log. ‘The depth of investigation ofthe gamma ray tool (i.e. the volume ‘ofthe formation contributing the major portion of the tcolresponss) is difficult to determine by experimentation. An analytical treat- ment using Monte Carlo simulation shows that, in general, 90% ‘of te signal comes froma shell 6 in, thick. A less sophisticated calculation shows thatthe integrated radial geometric factor, G(r), ‘can be expressed as!5 Giy= tae, aay where is the redial distance measured from the borehole wall and ‘isthe mean free pa, The mean free path, discussed in Sec. 2.7.3, is the average distance traveled by a photon in a medium between‘GAMMA RAY LOG ELECTRICAL LOG im GAMMA RAY [enema woutever (sree eee Fig. 7.17—-Original and workover gamma ray log showing water channeling behind the casing (trom Ret. 15). successive interactions, F depends on photon energy and the medium donsity Example 74, Pot the integrated geometric factor vs, adi for an 8-in. borehole with a formation density of 2.65 g/em?, where the K® radiation is detected by the tool, Solution. From Bas. 2.38 and 232, R= Vay Upty, where ps the medium blk density anda nda are the nar and tas absorption coefficients, respectively. K4 emis gamma Fays of | 46-MeV energy. From Table 25, y=0.05127 em? Then, Fr=t/2.65%0.05127)~7.36 om Bq, 7.11 reduces to Goya, whore isin inches, Fig 7-14 plot ofthis function, Fig. 7.14 indicates tal the firt 7, of the formation generates 90% ofthe signal under the stated conditions 9 in 7.7 Applications of the Gamma Ray Log With ow exceptions, the gamma ray log sorrelates very well with the SP log, a ius in Fig. 7-18 Like the SP lo, the parma ‘ay og can be used to delineate shale beds ano const bexen svells: The gamma ray log subsites forthe SP log when the SP is las areaut of low contrast between Ryy and Ry (Fig. 7.16) and when the SP log cannot be recorded, 3s the cas fo bsed tug empty hoes, and cased hoes ‘When ptssam isthe onl or the major conribtorto stale radi activity, the gamma ray lg response i use to estimate the sale Content A shale index, fy, is cleat from Toy O05 Yeah Yl 7.12) 159 ‘where pg is the log response in the zone analyzed, and yyy and “inn ate the log responses in shales and in zones of rainimut ra ‘activity, respectively. fy i converted to shale content, Vy, with the method detailed in Sec, 15.2.2. Tn mineral exploration, gamma ray logging is sed to detect radio- active minerals, such as potash or uranium, and nonradioactive min eral, such a8 coal ‘The gamma ray fog is particularly useful in cased-hole applica- tions in both completion and production operations. The simul neous recording of a casing-collar locator and the gamma ray is indispensible for accurate positioning of perforating guns and other downhole devices. Openkole information is tied to eased-hole con- ditions by correlation of an openole SP or gamma ray log to the cased-hole gamma ray log, which, in turn, is tied to the casing collar locations. Instead of measured depth, which usually differs from true depth by a few feet, the gun ar any other tool is posi- tioned with respect to the collars. Application of gamma ray logging in production operations abounds. For example, prolonged fluid: migration behind casing or through perforations causes radioactive anomalies that ae easily recognizable on gaznma ray logs. Fig. 7.17 shows operhole elec trical and gamma ray logs recorded in a well completed in the 7,852 to 7,858-f interval, It also shows a workover gamme ray run 2 years later to identify the source of a sudden increase in water pro- ‘duction. Because the workover log showed an abnormally high radiosctiity throughout the interval between the top of the perfe- ration and the base of the next-higher saltwater sand, it was con- ‘cluded that water production was caused by water channeling from, this sand through the cement sheath. With this information, appro priate measures were taken, and the well was restored to wate free production ‘The gamma ray log i also at the heart of radioactive-racer log- sing In this process, the uid pumped into a borehole or a forms tion carries gemma-ray-cmitting isotopes, ether in solution or ia suspension. A gamma-ray log run later will display an increase in radioactivity opposite zones that experienced fluid intake. Radioactive-racer logging is used to determine waterflood injec tion profiles, zone response to fracture treatment, los of circulation, casing leaks, perforated zones, and cement location. 16 Fig, 7.18 shows an example of a gamma ray used to locate cement carrying 2 radioactive tracer. Gamma ray Run 1 is a base log obtained be- fore cementing. Gamma ray Run 2 was made after 125 sacks of adioactive. cement was pumped through perforations located st 3,678 wo 3,692 ft 7.8 Gamma Ray Spectrometry Log ‘The gamma ray log provides a measure of the total natural radio activity ofa formation, regardless of its energy level or energy spec trum. The spectral garama ray log, or gamma ray spectrometry th tlso detects the naturally occurring gamma rays and defines the ener- 8y spectrum of the radiations. Because potassium, thorium, and Uranium are responsible for the energy spectrum observed by the {0ol, their respective elemental concentrations can be calculated. Fig. 2.6 shows the pamma-ray-emission spectrum of the potas- sium, uranium, end thorium serics. The observed spectrum is of continuous rather than a discrete form. This results mainly from 1 detector-type depth of investigation and logging speed. Fig. 7.19 illustrates the continuous spectrum obtained with a sodium iodide ‘rystal scintillation detector. The spectrum shows three di peaks characieristic of the tee sources of natural radioactivity, ‘These peaks are at energy levels of 2.62, 1.76, and 1.46 MeV. “They correspond to gamma ray emissions astociated with the de- cay of thalium (T18) bismuth (Bi2') and potassium (K%), re- spectively. The three peaks are used to distinguish the thorium, ‘uranium, and potassiun because they are sharp and of reletively high magnitude. ‘One method for analyzing the pulse height is to divide the ener- 2y spectrum into several energy ranges known as windows. Fig. 7.19 shows the five window systems Schlumiverger uses. The pulses that correspond to each window are recorded with 2 specific de-154 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS ea ET can aay TE Fig. 7.18—Example of gamma ray logs used to locate radiogctive cement (courtesy Schlum- tector, The element concentrations ae estimated by the matrix & tent? bain me] & |. (9]=(MILW), 7.13) & where [0] is the vector of Th, U, and K concentrations, dow 7 and Element j. Cn. wr-[ cb } Eade ceeeeneees D8) Bim Bry Bix & tage] Pm Bau Bax [Wis the vector of five window count rates, Ry, Bsn, Boy Box as) and [M] is the 35 matrix of estimation coefficients, By, for Win- 7.16)GAMMA FAY LOG eS Be Seer eT ial Ee TOWAL COUNTS FOTASHUM” THORIUM Fig. 7.19—Natural gamma ray energy spectrum determined with sodium lodide crystal detector (teom Ref, 17) Fig. 7.21—Apparent shale response caused by high-uranium streak ina northern California wel (from Rel. 18) STAB PS) —8S__1o} [o_thioem aclo Kt) 19) fo cr arii 20] [=10 v (eon ety Lwin] craps eee eee 1) Fig. 7.20—Typleal presentation of the gamma ray spectrom- aot try tool (trom Ret. 17). ‘The matrix coefticiens B, are deermined for each tol in calibre- tion pits built of formations that contain known quantities of the three elements, Bq. 7.13 is solved for each level of te borehole, and the results are represented in a form similar to that shown in Fig, 7.20. The Jog shows thorium and uranium curves sceled in parts per million and a potassium curve scaled in percent The conventional total gam- ‘ma ray log is also presented. Tis obtained by linear combination of the three elements” individual responses and by use of a rela- tionship similar to that expressed in Eq. 7.10. A “uranium free” gamma ray curve (GRS in Fig. 7.20) obtained by combining only the potassium and thorium can also be presented. The log quality |s indicated by a stabilization curve recorded in some cases. ‘The gamma ray spectrometry log has several potential applica- tions in geological and engineering studies. The amounts and types of elements present in a formation are determined by the way the formation is deposited and what has happened to it since deposi- tion. The concentration curves caleulated show a correlation (0 ‘epostonal environment, diagenetic proceses clay iype, and clay volume. ‘One major application isthe estimation of shale content. On the ‘conventional gamma ray log, high-radioactivity zones were cor sidered tobe shale and were not analyzed; or if they were analyzed, 2 shale correction was applied that could have resulted in a mis leading interpretation. An example (Fig. 7.21) was obtained through 1 sandstone encountered in a northern Oklahoma well. The high API valne appearing on the gamma ray log at $70 to 580 fe could be interpreted asa shale streak. With the benefit ofthe spectrome- try log, it was determined thatthe high radioactivity was actually ‘caused by high uraniom concentration ina sandstone streak, This ‘uranium was deposited from solutions migrating through the perme able steaks of the formation, This zone, in fact, was found to be 4 productive hydrocarbon zone. '¥THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS 8 Th, THORIUM CONCENTRATION (ep) $ + k, POTASSIUM CONCENTRATION (6H) Fig, 7.23—Mineral identification trom natural gamma ray spec- trometry log (from Ret. 12). A shale index, Zam be calculated from the gamma spectrom- etry log information: es) =€Crming (Candin C aa ~(Credaiade «+ (F.1D) Gal =UCaeg (Conia (Cea (Ceeial 7.18) andlor Cl ay =lCYap) ig ae i ry )sh “Craps «+ 7-19) Crys Ck, att yyp are the log responses indicated by the tho= une, potassium-, and uranium-iree curves, respectively. The sub- seripis sh and min geet tothe logs’ responses in shales and in zones. ‘that indicate a minimum level of radioactivity. The Jy, values cal~ culated from Eqs. 7.17 through 7.19 are more representative than those obiained from the gamma ray. This results from the exehi- sion of uranium, wich is associated with radioactive minerals other than those found in shale—i.., organic materials. For example, Zone C in Fig. 7.22 appeats shaly on the gamma ray log. How” ver, it contains almost no thorium or potassium, which indicates, that i is clean ‘Clay minerals can be identified from the erossplot in Fig. 7.23, from potassium and thorium concentrations, Because the compo- sitions of many clay minerals vary somewhst, a mineral location, cn the plot is not a unique point but a general area. Zone B in 7.22 plots as mixed-layer clays Example 7.5 Calculate the uranum-free gamma ray (yy) for Levels A through C of Fig. 7.22. Estimate they of eal one sing the total and uranium fre gamma ray level: Which ofthe ‘wo is the beter estimate? ‘Solution. Log readings al the three levels ae as given below. Coy cy x {opm — (ppm) 0 1250 Bs 17 o 3 ° “toys estimated with Eq. 7.10: -8Cu, vr where yup and 7 are in API units and Cy is in ppm. ‘The shale indices (I), and (ly) are derived from total gamma ‘ay, 7, and wraniun-iree, yy, respoases with Eqs. 7.12 and 7.19: ay) =€4-10)60-10) and (ida Cy 0)/(600).. SAAR AATal Fig. 7.24-IES tog of Problem 7.9 (courtesy Amoco Produe- tion Co). The values of yy (Ly)1, and (yp), ate listed below. ep Gyr Mya Level (API its) ws , A 0 0 0 B Cy 100 100 © 0 28 0 ‘The value of (1,4) derived from the uraniun-free value is more representative. Review Questions 1, What formation property does the gamma ray log reflect? 2. Is the gamma ray response a rigorous lithology indicator? Explain. 3. Why do the SP and gemma ray curves correlate in shale and sand sequences of sediments? 4. Discuss the concepts, advantages, and disadvantages of the different detectors used in radiation logging. ‘5. What is meant by the efficiency of a radiation detector? What determines such efficiency? 6. What isthe standard unit of gamma ray measurement? What prompts the use of this unit? How is it defined? 7. How ate gamma ray logging devices calibrated to this stan- dard unit? 8, Even with the tool stationary in the borehole, the amount of radiation passing through the detector fuctuates with time, What, is this phenomenon called? Describe two methods used to smooth ‘out these fluctuations. 9. What is meant by the ‘time constant” of « gamma ray log ‘ing tool? How does it control measurement quality? 10, How does logging speed affect log quality? How isthe opti- mum speed selected?GAMMA RAY LOG 187 ‘reac roTeTTAL Sa nom Fig. 7.25—Denelty log of Problem 7.3 (courtesy Amoco Pro- duction Co, LL, What parameters determine the gamma ray tool response ‘when itis stationary inthe borehole and opposite a given formation? 12, How is tho borchole-environment effect treated in both qualitative and quantitative interpretations? 13, On average, what is the depth of investigation of the gamma ray tool? What factors control this parameter? 14, Discuss the different applications of the gamma ray log 15. Is the formation shale index derived from the gamma ray log always representative? Explai 16, Discass the concept and application ofthe gamma ray spec- trometry log. Problems 7.1 Using the re smoothing circuit, how long musta tool stay next to a formation to receive 95% of the counts available to it? 7.2 Preparea plot of gamma ray vs. bulk density using the response ‘of zones within the interval shown in Fig. 7.2. Does a correla- tion exist between these two parameters? IF yes, provide an ex- planation. 7.3 Figs. 7.24 and 7.25 show a 200-ft interval on the Induction Electric Survey7™ and density logs run in a southern Loui siana well. Twelve zones were selected for analysis. The zoncs were marked on both the SP and gamma ray curves. Prepare ‘2 gamma ray vs, SP plot ‘a. Mark and label the pattern that represents relatively clean sands. ». Mark and label the pattern that represents shaly sands, ‘GR (crs)_s00 q Fig, 7.26—Gamma ray spectrometry tog of Problem 7.5 (rom Ref. 17). . One ofthe twelve zones considered is abnormal—i.e., it does not fal into either of the wo previous patterns, Which zone is i How does it differ from the other zones? What is the nature of is abnormality? 174 A typical average shale contains 12 ppm, 3.7 ppm, and 2.7% Of thorium, uranium, and potassium, respectively. Calculate its response on a garnma ray log calibrated to APT standards. 7.5 The gamma ray spectrometry log of Fig. 7.26 was recorded opposite a thick, Permian Basin carbonate reservoir. IF thor um is knovin to be the best shale indicator in these sediments, can this log be used to detect permeable zones? If yes, mark these zones on the log. Explain the bess for your interpretation 7.6 Fig. 7.27 isa composite log ofthe openhole SP and microlog and a workover gamme spectrometry log obtained in a sand= stone reservoir made up of several petmeable zones. Cen these data be used to identify the zone(8) responsible for the high produced-water/il ratio? 7.1 Zone A matked in Fig. 7.28 exhibits high levels of radiose- tivity. Explain the source ofthis radioactivity and estimate the shale index. Note that this zone tested et 447 Mef/D, Nomenclature a = specific radiogctivity, counts/see-g © = capacitance, F Cj, = potassium concentration, wt% Cy = thorium concentration, ppm Cy, = uranium concentration, ppm ‘G = integrated radial geometric factor thickness, ft mean free path, cm hg = lag oF critical thickness, f 1 = electric current entering the capacitor, A yy = shale index, fraction “J = pulse rate, counts/s umber of radioactive minerals eleeisio charge, C ragial distance measured from borehole wall, in.168 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS. URANIUM Micro-Normat Jo__ppm__ to THORIUM 2 __ppm _ 20] ‘09] 2001 ig, 7.27—Gamma ray spectromotry log of Problam. Ral. 17). Ry, = formation-water resistivity, om "= time, seconds 1 = time constant, seconds + = logging speed, Var ¥ = potential, V ¥ = volume, fraction Vy = shale coment, fesction ‘= vertical distance, f cx = linear absorption coefficient, em“! iy = mass absorption coefficient, em?/g "Y= gamma rey atvty, APL units p= density, gem? op = formation bulk density, g/em? eee sh = shale Tm U = uranium sf = uraniomree References 1, Rusoall, W.L “The Total Gamma Ray Activity of Sedimentary Rocks 1 Indicated by Geiger Counter Determinations,” Geophyuics (Apri 1944) 1X, No. 2, 180-216. 2, Wakefield, ELH! “Nuclear Radiston—Lis Detection and Moarure- sent," ASTM Bulletin (FP39) (Apel 1953) 33-38, Fig. 7.28-—Gamma spectrometry log of Problem 7.7 (courtesy Atlas Wireline Servic 3. Log Review 1, Dresser Atlas, Houston (1974) Sc. 8. 4, “Seinlaton Spectrometer Well Logging,” McCullough Tool Co., prevented atthe 1955 Joint Moning of Rocky Mounsia Peron Sec- tion/AIME, Denver, May 26-27 5. Youmans, A. and Monaghan, R.* Stablty Requirements for Seiati- Ion Counters Used in Radioactiviy Logging." JPT (March 1964) 319-28; Tran., ATME, 231. 6, Belknap, WB. "Standardization and Calibeation of Nuclear Logs," Pat. Brg, (Dec. 1959) B24-27, 1. RP 33, Recommended Practice for Standard Caltoation and Form for ‘Muclear Logs, API, Dallas (Sept. 1959). 8. Lynch, Bf: Formation Evaluation, Harper & Row Publishers, New York City (1962) 227-67. 9. Kokesh, F.P.: "Gamma Rey Logging," OW & Gas. Guly 26,1951). 10, Hearst, 1.8. and Nelson, P-H.: Well Logging for Physical Properties, ‘McGraw-Hill Book Co, Ine., New York City (1985) 191-278 11. Log inerpretaion Principles, Schlumberger, Houston (1972) 12. Log Interpretation Charts, Schiaaberge, Houston (1979 and 1985). 13. Bll, D.V.: Well Logsing or Bach Scents, Elsevier Scientific Pob- Ushers, Amsterdam (1987) 161-200. 1 Wahl, 1.S.: "Gamma Ray Logging." Geophysics (1983) 48, No. 1 15, Killin, H_W.: "Fluid Migration Behind Casing Revesed by Garara Ray Logs,” The Log Anaiyst (Jan -March 1966) 6, No. 5, 69. 16, Flag, ALH, et al: "Radioactive Traces in Oil Prodcton Problems,” Trans, AIME (1955) 204, 1-6. 17, Sema, 0. etal: "Theory and Practical Application of Naural Garena Ray Spectioscopy,” Trans, 21st SPWLA Symposium, Lafayette (1980) paper Q 18, Kowalskl, 13. and Asekun: "Tt May Not Be Shale," Proc., 20th, SPWLA Symposium, Tulsa (1979) paper .Chapter 8 Gamma Ray Absorpti ion Logs 8.1 Introduction ‘The first commercial tool to use the physical phenomena of gam: ‘ma ray scattering and absorption was introduced in the early 1950's, The tool, known as the gamma-gamma, was developed. initially to measure bulk density in situ as an aid to geophysicists in gravty-meter data interpretation, The tool consisted of a gam- ‘ma ray source and a detector.233 The sources used are cesium 137 and cobalt 60. The cesium, preferred because of its stability, de cays with a half-life of about 30 years, emitting gamma ray of bout 0.66 MeV. The cobalt yields gamma rays of 1.17 and 1.33 MeV and has a half-life of 5.2 years. The gamma rays emitted by the source, held in a skid in contact with the borehole wal, are ditect- ed toward the formation. Some ofthese gamma rays are tbsorbed and some are scattered away from the detector, but others ate scal- {ered ino the detector and counted (Fig. 8.1). Gamma rays detected hhave energies ranging from 0.2 100.6 MeV. As explained in Chap. 2, the energy lost by scattering is dependent on the number of elec- ‘ons in the formation and heace is proportional tothe bulk density ‘of the formation: the higher the density of the formation, the lower the response at the detector, By the early 1960’s, the formation density log provided by this carly tool was accepted as a source of porosity because porosity ccan be related rigorously to bulk density by Eq. 2.50. ‘The response of the density tools used alone to determine porosi- ty when matrix and fluid densities are known, Porosity determing- tion from in-situ density measurement did not become reliable, however, ual a two-detector tool was developed inthe late 1960's. ‘The tool, called the Formation-Density Compensated (DCS) tool corrects for certain borehole effects. ‘The Litho-Density ToolS™ was introduced inthe early 1980's.5 Its designed to measure a photoelectric index, P,, in addition 10 bulk density, pp. Pe is highly dependent on lithology and can be used to determine matrix density, faq» Wick, in ura, is used with the corresponding bulk density to calculate porosity, Actually, Py and op are wse 1 solve for matix density and porosity simula neously 8.2 Single-Detector Formation Density Tool Fig, 2.7 shows that the gamma rays emitted by the cesium 137 or cobalt 60 (energy range of 0.66 to 1.33 MeV) are altenuated predominantly by Compton scattering. Combining Eqs. 2.45, 2.47, ‘and 2.48 shows tha the detector count rate, R, can be expressed by Rade“, occ ccseeeseeteerees ve BD) where c and fare coefficients, depends mainly on the source ‘strength end the fluid in the borehole. # depends mainly on detec torisource spacing. Eq. 8.1 shows thet, ifthe count rate is measured, the tool can ‘be calibrated to obtain directly the ps of the medium traversed by the gamma rays. The early tools were calibrated in test pits con- taining blocks of materials with known bulk densities and boreholes ‘of different diameters filled with muds of different densities. Fig. 8.2 shows an example calibration eurve. ‘Except for aluminurn windows at the source and detector, the tool is insulated by a lead shield. Because the source and detector are kept in contact withthe borebole wall, most of the gamma rays. reaching the detector pass through the formation, In permeable for rations, however, the gamma rays reaching the detector also pass through'a mudcake with a deasity considerably different from that ofthe formation, The detector count rae is affected by the two media and results in a bulk density value between the formation and mud ‘ake densities. The mudcake contribution can be corrected with carts such as that in Fig. 8.3. This correction is not always reli ble because of uncerzintis in mudcake thickness and composition. ‘The interpretation of a single-detector tool was further complicat- ced by the necessity for manual conversion of log counting rates to density.” This shortcoming prompted the development of the dual- {detector formation density tool 8.3 Dual-Detector Density Tool ‘A dual-detecor tool was developed to compensate for mudcake and ‘minor borehole irregalarities automatically.+ A schematic of this tol, called the compensated device, is shown in Fig. 8.4. I is ‘equipped with two detectors situated at different spacings from the source. The long-spaced detector is atthe same spacing as in the single-detector, uncompensated device and yields the same responses. The short-spaced detector, because of its closeness to the radiation source, is particularly sensitive to the mudcake and hole iregularties; thus, it yields a response different from that of the long-spaced detector. The difference in the detectors’ count rates reflects the spacings; the formation bulk density, pp; and the mud- cake density, ger and thickDess, fine. Fig. 8.5 shows the responses of the Wo detectors fora case without madcake, The line of Fig, 8.5, usually called a spine,” reflects the effect of change in formation bulk density and is scaled in p» values. Fig. 86 illustrates the effect of mudcake thickness for forma- tion anid madeake densities of 2.5 and 1.5 g/cm, espectively. The curved lie that leaves the spine, called the “ri,” indicates the effect of increase in hye. AS Age Becomes quite large, both detec=160 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS BOREHOLE FORMATION ELECTRONIC CIRCUITRY DETECTOR ALUMINUM. WINDOW RAY SCATTERED INTO THE DETECTOR RAYS SCATTERED AWAY FROM THE DETECTOR ANO ABSORBED BY THE FORMATION RAY SCATTERED INTO AND. ‘ABSORBED BY THE LEAD SHIELD ALUMINUM WINDOW Y RAY SOURCE TOOL RESPONSE, cps TOOL RESPONSE, cps 3 Fe <3 vem ‘el a ia P. a/em3 Py ave? Fig. 8.2—Example of density tool calibration chart forawater- | | Fig. filed hole and ino mudcaks (trom Ref. 7). 1—Chart showing corrections for mudcakos having # ‘of 4.5 glem? to be applied to Fig. 8.2 (from Ret. 7)GAMMA RAY ABSORPTION LOGS Fig, 8.4 —Schematle of the dual-detector density tool (from Rot. 4). 161 LONG SPACE (LS) DETECTOR COUNTING SPACE | SHORT SPACING (SS) DETECTOR COUNTING RATE Fig, 8.5—Effeot of formation bulk density on long- and ‘9p8ced detector responses in the absence of mude: tor Ret. 4). LONG SPACE (LS) DETECTOR COUNTING SPACE * m3 Pre? ''5.0/e LONG SPACE (LS) DETECTOR COUNTING SPACE SHORT SPACING (SS) DETECTOR COUNTING RATE SHORT SPACING (SS) DETECTOR COUNTING RATE Fig. 8.6—Effect of mudcake thickness on long- and short- spaced detector responses (after Ref. 4). Fig, 8.7—Etfect of mudcake density on short- and long-speed dotector responses (after Ret. 4).162 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS a = 15 gtem |\ P= 1.6 g/em? i LONG SPACE (LS) DETECTOR COUNTING SPACE. SHORT SPACING (SS) DETECTOR COUNTING RATE LONG SPACING DETECTOR COUNTING RATE Fig. 8.8—Etfect of formation density on the shor ‘spaced detector responses in the presence of am ter Ret. 4). ‘and long- ke (a SHORT SPACING DETECTOR COUNTING RATE Fig. 8.8—Spine-anct-ibs plot for the FDG tool (trom Ret. 4). LONG SPACE (LS) DETECTOR COUNTING SPACE SHORT SPACING (SS) DETECTOR COUNTING RATE Fg. @.10—Grephical presentation of the compensaton method. “CAUPER haere wales ‘BULK DENSITY “CANA RAY Fig. 8.11—Examplo of an FDC log (from Ret. 8).GAMMA RAY ABSORPTION LOGS 163 cits (ear Filed ows ze pe Tas be eal oF F— | tppetent ce rena ee, te wards Fs es SS BOREHOLE OIAMETER, CHES Fig. 8.12—FDC borehole correction for gas- and mud-tled ‘boreholes (from Ret. 9). tors are affected only by the mudcake, and the rib rctuns to the spine at a point whet® pp yc=1-5 elem? Fig, 8.7 illustrates the effect of varying mudeake density. When ‘mudcake density excoeds formation density, the rib extends to the left side of the spine because both detectors count less than when rmudeake is absent, Finally, Fig. 8.8 shows the effect of varying formation density in the presence of mudcake. 8.3.1 Tool Compensation Method. Flg. 8.9 shows the actual spine- ‘n-ibs plot obtained experimentally forthe FDC tool. Ribs were developed for five limestone formation density valves and fora va- riety of synthetic mucakes. A single rib that is practically mdepend- ent of midcake thickness, density, or composition corresponds to teach formation density.* These ribs can be scaled in terms of true formation density Conceptually, 2 compensated density value is obtained by enter ing such a graph with the counts of the two detectors. In practice, the two counts are processed by a surface computer. The comput- cer derives a value of uncompensated density using the lorg-spaced detector response. It also computes a density correction, Ap, using both counts and an algorithm base on the spine-and-rib plot. The correction is added tothe uncompensated values to obtain the eom- pensated bulk density, py Foc 22% Porosity 38% Porosity . 2 4 6 8 0 1 INCHES FROM BOREHOLE WALL Fig, 8.13—Integrated geometric factor curves for FDC too! {alter Rot. 10). where pzs isthe long-spaced detector uncompensated density. A relatively light mudeake shows a negative correction; « relatively heavy mudcake shows a postive correction “The compensation method is depicted graphically in Fig. 8.10, ‘The accuracy of tis technique is limited. For an extremely thick. rmuudcake or rugose borehole see Fig. 4.3), both detectors will see ‘mainly mudcake or a mud pocket. The tool interprets this asa for- ‘mation witha balk density very close to the mud or mudake density Fig. 8.11 is an exemple of an FDC log that shows the compen- sated bulk density and the Ap curves, The bulk density curve is shown in Tracks 2 and 3 as a solid line. The tool response is in ‘grams per cubic centimeter. The conventional scale is from 2.0 10 50 glen across both tacks, or 0.05 glem’ per division. The cor- rection curve is traced in Track 3 as a dotted curve. Its normally sealed from —0.25 10 +0.25 glem®. The Ap curve is given for ‘quality control parposes. Bulk density values derived with a cor- pe=o1s+80, (6.2) _festion that exceeds 0.06 gem? shouldbe used oniy qualitatively. —— oat >in Sener tee ]"* ae CORRECTIONS i | avo commecTion (oRDINATE te Bete TOM L TO Phag, To OBTAIN TRUE] 2 ee). bute oeNstry, py, sai $b : wanes CNN pr40% 0 +08" nl “i oom S 4.08 ane —| 08 om pmesgute 038 3 ‘Gn am 1h PORES é 08 jno4 +02] ‘Q | soe © Fzen0 or 40% ae TaRTORTTE veh a 25 Plog + Sem Fig, 6.14—Correction needed to obtain true bulk density from apparent log density (rom Ret. 17).164 ‘THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS. ‘TEMPERATURE, °C ea wl a ” § § a lo Ee 2 a 8 TEMPERATURE,°F Fig. 8.18—Densities of water and NaCl solutions at various temporatures and pressures (trom Ref. 8). In addition tothe compensation for mudcake effect, the density ‘curve is cocrected automatically for borehole size. Fig. 8.12 shows the order of magnitude of this correction. 8.3.2 Depth of Investigation. The integrated geometric factor curves obtained experimentally forthe FDC tool! are shown in, Big. 8.13, These experimental results indicate thatthe tool inves- tigates ony the first few inches of the region next tothe tool. Half ofthe tool response reflects the region within about 2 in, while ‘90% reflects the region within 5 in. of the borehole wall. Conse- ‘quently, the density tool investigates the invaded zone of perme Ble formations. ‘The Compton scattering effect, on which density logging is based, {s proportional to the number of electrons per unit volume, Ve, de fined by Bq. 2.2. N, i, in tara, proportional tothe electron den- sity index, p,.'p, is arbitarly defined by Eqs. 2.45 and 2.46 as = CPrs 3) where C=2(ZiA). : (84) Z and A are the atomic number and weight, respectively For most elements and compounds found in sedimentary rock and ised in Tables 2.6 and 27, the quantity 2(Z/A), to abigh degree ‘of approximation, can be considered equal to unity. To consider the effect of varitions inthe value of Z/A, the tool is calibrated in pts containing 2 sequence of identical formations with very ae- crately known grain densities and variable feshrater-filed poros ties. The tool is calibrated using limestone as the ‘standard’ with freshwater-filed porosities ranging from 0% to 40%. For {reshwater-bearing limestone, the standard formula given by Eq. 2,50 can be written in terms of both the true density and electron ‘density indes: P= (04 —oy)MO-0.) 7 6s and 6=[(01)).—PeMl9pe~ (Ou eb 66 where py =limestone balk density=2.71 glem®, p, freshwater bulk density=1 gem, (p,)_ limestone electron density index, and (py)emfeshwater election density index. Fig. 8.16—Example of a density 1og displaying the density porosity curve. Using Eq. 8.3 and (Z/A) values from Table 2.7 gives (4) 90.9991 24, oD and (04.)¢=1-1101 Dy. Be Eliminating 6 between Eqs. 8.5 and 8.6 and then replacing py, (owe, ahd (0, bY their numerical values results in 2T=py __0.99910.11)~p 2A=1.0 099912.7=1.1101" and finally in py=1.0708 p,~0.1883. 9 Bq. 8.9 is the density tool calibration relationship used to teans- form the measured electron density index to bulk density. ‘The bulk density displayed by the logis rigorously correct only jn freshwater-bearing limestone formations. In an environmentGAMMA RAY ABSORPTION LOGS different from the standard, the fog displays an apparent value png. Fig. 8.14 shows the deviation between the tre and apparent det- sities (2p—Pjng)- We can see {rom Fig. 8.14 that for oilwell- logging applications the difTerence between py and png is negli bic. This difference i significant, however, in formations like gyp- sum and salt and in low-pressure gas-bearing formations. ‘The calibration pits representing the *‘primary" calibration stan- ard cannot be transported. A set of secondary standards is avail able for too calibration at logging company bases. The secondary calibrators consist of blocks of aluminum, magnesium, or sulfur ‘of accurately known densities and geometries. These blocs, weigh- ing about 400 Ibm, also are not easily transportable, 30 a field calibeator containing two small gamma ray sources is used at the welltit to reprdice the same count rates as the secondary calor tion blocks. !2 Example 8.1. Calculate the response of the density tool next 10 a pure sulfur formation with an actual bulk: density of 2.07 glem? ‘Solution. From Table 2.6, sulfur atomic weight, A, is 32.07 and its atomic number, Z, is 16. From Bq. 8.3, be *2(16/32.07)2.07) =2.0655, and from Eq. 8.9, Pog=1.07(2.0655) ~0, 188 2.022 gle? ‘The log response deviates from the true density value by 0.048 ‘plem? because of the Z/A effect 8.5 Porosity From Density Log Response ‘The bulk density isthe overall gross or weight-average density of anit of the formation. It can be expressed by 24 b0¢+(1-B? mae + eves HB10) Solving for porosity yields $=(na 26M Pa Pfby ooo vo GU) where pris the average density ofthe fluids in pore spaces. Com- mon values of Pigg are given below. Matrix Density Rock Type (glem3) Sand oF sandstone 2.65 Limestone an Dolomite 287 Ankyarite 2.98 Because the toel's depth of investigation is shallow, it investigates the invaded zone, and py is expressed by 0p ~ScoP ag *(~S.o)Phs 8.12) where dqy—mud-fltrate density, S,.=mud-fltrate saturation in the invaded zone, and. 24 =invaded-zone hydrocarbon density Tn water-bearing zones where S,,%1, Pf bmg : coe -8.13) ‘Assuming thatthe mud filtrate is predominantly sodium chloride, ‘yy can be obtained from Fig, 8.15 for different salinities, tem: peratures, and pressures In pracice, ayy can be approximated according tothe mud type. A Mud Base wes) on 09 Fresh water 10 Suurated ait water uM ‘These values are aso used to approximate py in oil zones. This approximation is supported by the ow value of residual ol satura- tion, S,,, and the small difference between py and py. These a ‘sumptions usually make small changes t calculated porosities. The case of gus zones is treated in Chap. 16, Example 8.2. The density poresty is usually calculated assuming ‘y= gfem3, Compare this “apparent” porosity, iby tothe true Porosity, ¢,, that corresponds t0 2 bulk density of 2.1 giom? in the following environments: (1) a water-bearing sandstone invade Fig, 6.17—Density log of Example 8.5 (courtesy Amoco Pro- | auction co, co by 2 mud filtrate of 1.05-glem? density, (2) a 0.8glem? oi bearing sandstone characterized by Sq-=30%, and (3) a low- preseure gxs-benring sandstone characterized by 30% residual gas saturation. ‘Solution. The apparent porosity calculated With pay 1 gem? is bg=0.65~2,1)/2,65-1)=0.33 of 338%. For the salty-mud 4,=2.65~2.1)102.65-1.05)=0.34 oF 34% ‘Then, $)~¢0. For the oi-bearing zone, from Eq, 8.12, dap =0-7(1)+0.300.8)=0.94 lem and §,=@2.65-2.1/@2.65-0.94)=0.32 or 32%, Again 6,=6, For the low-pressure gas-bearing zone, assume o from Eq. 8.12, 220.7, 6, (2.65~2.1)12.65-0.7) and $, <9 ‘Thus, except for gas-bearing formations, i i reasonable to as: sume that ayg= 1 urate case, Thea, 28 o 28%, Example 8.3. A water-bearing sandstone displays a 2.1-gfom? bulk density. Calculate the density porosity using a metrx density 62.68 gletm?. Compa this value to that calculated withthe nor- rally assured mat density of 2.65 g/cm? Solution. From Example 8.2, 4733, = Q.68-2.1)/(2.68-1) 90.345 oF 34.5%. ‘This represents a deviation of —1.5 porosity units and a relative ‘error of about 4%166 THEORY, MEASUREMENT, AND INTERPRETATION OF WELL LOGS Fig. 8.18—Example of a Litho-Density log (courtesy Schlumberger). ‘The determination of porosity from the density log response dis- ‘used inthis chapter applies onl relatively simple enviroameats Incomplex environments, sich a shaly sands, ges-bearing forma: tons, and complex lithology, the density logis combined with other Jogs for better evaluation. These caes are treated in later chapters. “The density lg response also canbe displayed in tx of porosity calculated with Eq, 8.11. Matrix and fhid densities are selected and entered into the computer. Fig. 8.165 an example ofthe gener- ‘ed porosity curve. This curve, called the density porosity, dp, ‘splays en apparent porosity vale. The log displays awe poco valu ony if the selected matrix and fu density values correspond to those ofthe formation of interest. Example 8.4. In answering the following questions, refer to the Jog of Fig. 8.16 obtained in 2 borehole drilled with freshwater-aved ‘mud, 4, What are the values of, Ao, mms ray, caliper, and bp in Zones A and B? '. What is the true porosity value of Zones A snd B? Solution. 4. The following values are displayed by the log. Zon A Zone B yy gfe? 2.15 2.45 bos “6 2 ‘Ap, gfem? 0 0 Gamma ray, API 2 13 Caliper, in 8 8 b. The porosity curve of Zone A was calculated with feshwvater- fille sandstone parameters (Se log heading). The log displays @ negative apparent porosity of ~6% noxt to Zone A. Eq. 8.11 in ‘ates that a negative value results from the fact thatthe measured ‘is greater than the assumed p,q. It follows thatthe true matrix ‘density is greater than the trve sandstone density. Icis also greater than the deasty of limestone (p)=2.75>2.71). Knowledge of li- thology is required for accurate determination ofthe true porosity ofthis zone. Although the porosity of Zone B is positive, it ean still be an apparent porosity value because the lithology can be something other than sandstone, The logs indicate (1) thatthe borehole is regular and drilled to gauge (bit size is most cercinly 7% in), (2) that gam- ‘ma ray response is low; 3) that Ap=0, indicstng possibie absence ‘of mudeake, which, in turn, suggests a low-permeability forma- tion; and (4) that lithologies other than sandstone are present— e.g., Zone A. ‘These facts indicate that Zone B is probably not sandstone. Its true porosity can be determined only after accurate lithologic iden- tification, Example 8.5. Fig. 8.17 shows the density tool's response obtained over a sand/shale series 4, Caleulate the average porosity of the clean sand interval by Using a matrix density of 2.65 g/cm?, calculate the average

You might also like

• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  

  From Everand

  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life

  Mark Manson

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (5823)
• The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  

  From Everand

  The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are

  Brené Brown

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1093)
• Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  

  From Everand

  Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It

  Chris Voss

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (852)
• • Magazines
  • Podcasts
  • Sheet music
• Principles: Life and Work

  

  From Everand

  Principles: Life and Work

  Ray Dalio

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (612)
• The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  The Glass Castle: A Memoir

  Jeannette Walls

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1719)
• Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  

  From Everand

  Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance

  Angela Duckworth

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (590)
• Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel

  Jesmyn Ward

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1105)
• Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  

  From Everand

  Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race

  Margot Lee Shetterly

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (898)
• Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  

  From Everand

  Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike

  Phil Knight

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (541)
• The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  

  From Everand

  The Perks of Being a Wallflower

  Stephen Chbosky

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2105)
• The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  

  From Everand

  The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers

  Ben Horowitz

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (349)
• Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  

  From Everand

  Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future

  Ashlee Vance

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (474)
• Bad Feminist: Essays

  

  From Everand

  Bad Feminist: Essays

  Roxane Gay

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1025)
• The Outsider: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Outsider: A Novel

  Stephen King

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1867)
• Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  

  From Everand

  Her Body and Other Parties: Stories

  Carmen Maria Machado

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (823)
• The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  

  From Everand

  The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)

  Viet Thanh Nguyen

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (122)
• The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  

  From Everand

  The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

  Siddhartha Mukherjee

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (271)
• Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  

  From Everand

  Angela's Ashes: A Memoir

  Frank McCourt

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (441)
• Brooklyn: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Brooklyn: A Novel

  Colm Tóibín

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (1948)
• The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  

  From Everand

  The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living

  Meik Wiking

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (403)
• A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  A Man Called Ove: A Novel

  Fredrik Backman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (4771)
• Steve Jobs

  

  From Everand

  Steve Jobs

  Walter Isaacson

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (809)
• The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  

  From Everand

  The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century

  Thomas L. Friedman

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2259)
• The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel

  Garth Stein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (4208)
• The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  

  From Everand

  The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)

  Sarah M. Broom

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (98)
• Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  

  From Everand

  Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America

  Gilbert King

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (266)
• A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  

  From Everand

  A Tree Grows in Brooklyn

  Betty Smith

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (1929)
• Yes Please

  

  From Everand

  Yes Please

  Amy Poehler

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (1903)
• A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  

  From Everand

  A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story

  Dave Eggers

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (231)
• Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  

  From Everand

  Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln

  Doris Kearns Goodwin

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (234)
• The Woman in Cabin 10

  

  From Everand

  The Woman in Cabin 10

  Ruth Ware

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (2523)
• Wolf Hall: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Wolf Hall: A Novel

  Hilary Mantel

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (3973)
• Fear: Trump in the White House

  

  From Everand

  Fear: Trump in the White House

  Bob Woodward

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (738)
• John Adams

  

  From Everand

  John Adams

  David McCullough

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (2409)
• On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  

  From Everand

  On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal

  Naomi Klein

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (74)
• The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Light Between Oceans: A Novel

  M.L. Stedman

  Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

  4.5/5 (789)
• Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  Manhattan Beach: A Novel

  Jennifer Egan

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (880)
• The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  

  From Everand

  The Constant Gardener: A Novel

  John Le Carré

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (104)
• The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  

  From Everand

  The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America

  George Packer

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (45)
• Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  

  From Everand

  Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore

  Jay Sekulow

  Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

  3.5/5 (137)
• Little Women

  

  From Everand

  Little Women

  Louisa May Alcott

  Rating: 4 out of 5 stars

  4/5 (105)
• Dropbox - TOEFL Outlines and Strategies

  

  Document9 pages

  Dropbox - TOEFL Outlines and Strategies

  Pilar Sofia Viloria Ahumada

  No ratings yet
• TOEFL Writing Topics

  

  Document6 pages

  TOEFL Writing Topics

  Pilar Sofia Viloria Ahumada

  No ratings yet
• Global Environmental Change: Arnim Scheidel, Alevgul H. Sorman

  

  Document8 pages

  Global Environmental Change: Arnim Scheidel, Alevgul H. Sorman

  Pilar Sofia Viloria Ahumada

  No ratings yet
• Is It Futile To Measure Relative Permeability For Heavy Oil Reservoirs?

  

  Document7 pages

  Is It Futile To Measure Relative Permeability For Heavy Oil Reservoirs?

  Pilar Sofia Viloria Ahumada

  No ratings yet