See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281874916

What's new in well logging and formation evaluation

Article  in  World Oil · April 2015

CITATIONS READS

2 2,100

1 author:

Stephen Prensky

22 PUBLICATIONS   230 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Stephen Prensky on 23 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


What’s new in well logging and formation evaluation
PART 2: In this second of
two installments, the latest
developments in reservoir
monitoring, coring and
laboratory analysis are
assessed. Developments in
borehole reservoir monitoring
include borehole-to-surface
electromagnetic surveys, and
permanent and wireline fiber-
optic sensing. Advances in
coring and core evaluation
include sidewall “pressure”
coring. Developments in
laboratory analysis include
advances in digital rock
physics, and the use of
cuttings for petrophysical
evaluation.
 STEPHEN PRENSKY, Consultant, Silver
Spring, Md.
The purpose of this article, which is
based solely on published technical papers
and publicly available literature, is to inform
readers of new and potential technologies
in well logging and formation evaluation.
This article does not endorse or promote
any particular technologies or service pro-
viders. Some of the technologies described
in this article may be currently available as
commercial services, while others may still
be in the development or test phases.
BOREHOLE RESERVOIR
MONITORING
Borehole-to-surface electromagnetic
(BSEM) surveys. Borehole electromag-
netic (EM) geophysical methods use the
presence of strong resistivity contrasts
between formation fluids, such as oil and
water, to map the resistivity distribution in
the subsurface. This information, in turn,
allows geophysical imaging of hydrocarbon
FORMATION EVALUATION
reservoirs and mapping fluid distribution,
and fluid saturation in a target reservoir lay-
er. Time-lapse surveys, conducted over the
life of a field, are used in reservoir monitor-
ing to study the movement of these fluids
during production or a waterflood. For ex-
ample, cross-well EM techniques (see the
2009 article) are used to image and char-
acterize the interwell region between two
wells. BSEM is another EM technique that
uses time- and frequency-domain EM data,
acquired in a single surveyed well, to map
fluid distribution of a target reservoir layer
around a well. The scale of the method is
partially a function of well depth, and rang-
es from hundreds to thousands of meters
away from the transmitter wellbore. In con-
trast, cross-well methods require two or
more wells to create cross-sectional images,
over an inter-well distance of up to 1 km.
Deployment of both of these methods can
be expensive and logistically challenging.
In BSEM, the transmitting electrode is
in a wellbore, and the receiver arrays, com-
prising a grid of electrodes, are buried a few
feet under the ground at the surface. The
transmitting dipole consists of an ‘A’ (injec-
tion) electrode that is lowered in the well
on wireline, and a ‘B’ electrode, a surface
grounding point, buried close to the well-
head, Fig. 1. The ‘A’ electrode is placed at
different depths, typically at the top and
the bottom of the reservoir layer under
investigation. Part of the electric current
flows from the downhole electrode to the
counter electrode through the casing, and
Fig. 2. Resistivity (left) and induced polarization (right) maps, relative to the A1-A2
reservoir layer. Blue/green corresponds to water and yellow/red to oil.2
the rest flows within the earth, generating
surface EM fields that are characteristic of
the electrical properties of the subsurface
around the well. At the surface, a large re-
ceiver array (up to 1,000 receivers), posi-
tioned in a grid around the survey well that
can extend up to 4 km from the transmit-
ting well, measures amplitude and phase
of the electric field radial component, ori-
ented from each receiver station toward
the surveyed transmitter well. After data
processing, which includes data inversion,
the resulting maps are used to identify oil-
and water-bearing zones in the investigated
reservoir layers, Fig. 2.
Saudi Aramco recently conducted suc-
cessful pilot studies of BSEM in Saudi Ara-
Fig. 1. Schematic of a BSEM survey layout
showing the relative positions of the ‘A’
and ‘B’ electrodes of the transmitting ‘AB’
dipole and the surface receiver line.1
Synchronization
by satellite
Receivers line
A1
Upper reservoir
A2
Transmitter A3
Lower reservoir
A4
Transmitter
Transmitter well
World Oil®/APRIL 2015123
FORMATION EVALUATION
Fig. 3. Chart showing the potential applications of permanently installed DAS sensors,
beyond initial and time-lapse VSP measurements, throughout the life of the reservoir and
reservoir imaging.10
Vertical seismic Baseline VSP while
profile VSP fracing
Flow
Flowback
assurance
Hydraulic fracture Microseismic
characterization monitoring
Hydraulic fracture Frac
monitoring monitoring
Wellbore integrity Cement job
monitoring assessment
Construction Completion
bia that resulted in resistivity and IP images
of oil-water contacts at reservoir depth and
estimates of fluid distribution that were
consistent with those obtained from logs,
production data and reservoir models. In
addition to BSEM’s exploration potential,
these maps demonstrated the potential
of the method in reservoir surveillance,
namely, mapping flood fronts, monitoring
fluid displacement and sweep efficiency.1,2
Two new advances have the potential to
reduce survey costs and to simplify deploy-
ment. The first is the development of a ro-
bust, broadband, high-impedance, capaci-
tatively coupled sensor that provides fast
data acquisition and is easily deployed (the
sensor does not require burial).3 The sec-
ond advance is using the in-situ well casing
as a current injection electrode (source)
in place of a wireline electrode. EM trans-
mission through the earth is achieved by
connecting an electrode at the wellhead
and a counter electrode that is placed at
the surface, several kilometers away. Two
methods have been tested, one with in-well
electrodes, where the current flows down
the casing (deep-casing source), and the
other using only surface electrodes, where
the current flows up the casing (top-cas-
ing source). Both methods extended the
depth of EM investigation to the depth of
typical hydrocarbon reservoirs, provided
a larger injected current than conventional
BSEM, and proved capable of detecting
fluid movement at depth. However, the
top-casing source has the advantage of
being very easy to configure and not re-
quiring any downhole equipment, thus
124APRIL 2015/WorldOil.com
Repeat Repeat MMV
VSP VSP VSP
Flow
Valve/pump monitoring
Subsidence
monitoring
Production Abandonment
Time
avoiding the need for a potentially costly
well intervention. This method could also
be used to provide permanent real-time
monitoring in producing fields.4 Modeling
indicates that the enhanced current flow
at depth provided by using the casing as a
source results in measurable signal changes
for targets traditionally considered outside
the capability of EM, e.g., CO2 plumes,
steamfloods, water, bypassed oil, and, po-
tentially, even hydraulic fractures.5
Fiber-optic sensing. Significant ad-
vances continue to be made in fiber-optic
technology and data interpretation, and
the range of applications of these sensors
(see World Oil, July 2014, p. 81).6,7 As
discussed in previous articles (see World
Oil, June 2011, p. 85; July 2012, p. 107;
and July 2014, p. 81), fiber-optic sensing
can provide low-cost, on-demand, repeat-
able quantitative measurements of reser-
voir properties. The mode of fiber-optic
conveyance may differ in exploration and
production wells: Wireline conveyance
might be preferred in an exploration well;
while production wells would benefit from
the permanent installation of fiber optics
behind the casing or clamped on to the
production string.8 The combined instal-
lation of distributed temperature sensors
(DTS) and distributed acoustic (vibra-
tion) sensors (DAS) can provide seismic
data/imaging and production logging data
throughout the life of a well or reservoir
(summarized in Fig. 3), at a relatively small
incremental cost and without requiring
expensive periodic well interventions to
acquire data.9
Fiber-optic interferometers are sensi-
tive to the orientation of the sensor.7,11 A
three-component (3C) fiber-optic sensor
array, in which the optic fibers are arranged
to provide interferometers along the three
orthogonal axes, similar to 3C geophones
or accelerometers, has been developed
and field-tested.12 The 3C sensor arrays
are manufactured at predetermined dis-
tances (i.e., receiver levels) along the fiber.
By eliminating downhole electronics, the
fiber-optic sensors enable active-source
seismic monitoring (e.g., VSP) and passive
monitoring (e.g., microseismic monitoring
of hydraulic fracturing and injection) in
HPHT boreholes and in wells that are not
accessible to geophones.
Ziebel, a Norwegian company, has
developed two fiber-optic conveyance
systems that provide temperature and
acoustic profiles: 1) a composite-carbon-
rod (Z-System) designed for use in long
horizontal wells; and 2) a wireline gravity-
deployed system (Z-Line). The 15-mm-
diameter, semi-stiff carbon-rod includes a
sensing tool, which consists of six optical
fibers embedded in the 15-mm-diameter
rod, and a bottomhole assembly (BHA).
Two multi-mode fibers are dedicated to
DTS, one single-mode fiber to DAS, and
three single-mode fibers are dedicated to
point pressure, point temperature and vi-
bration measurements.13,14 The sensors
for the pressure and temperature point
measurements are in the BHA. The car-
bon rod comes coiled in drums of 20,000-
ft lengths, and the fiber-optic sensors are
rated to 10,000 psi and 302°F. The hori-
zontal reach of the carbon-rod system is
determined by the pipe’s internal diam-
eter; the condition and roughness of the
pipe’s internal surface; and the amount of
debris in the hole. The gravity-deployed
system, which can be run in vertical or
highly deviated producing or injecting
wells, employs a 4.8-mm-diameter, com-
posite carbon line that may contain the
same six optic fibers as the carbon-rod
system, or fewer.
Because different companies are pro-
viding different implementations of fiber-
optic systems there is a need for stan-
dardization. Energistics, a Houston-based
organization and the successor to POSC,
is serving as an umbrella organization for
establishing a standardization code, i.e.,
PRODML, to enable transfer of produc-
tion-related data acquired with different
distributed fiber-optic systems, e.g., DTS
and DAS.6

CORING AND CORE ANALYSIS
Sidewall “pressure” coring.
Halliburton introduced a new core service
(CoreVault), which uses pressure-tight
containers to ensure the recovery of all
the fluids contained in the core samples
recovered by their new-generation, rotary
sidewall-coring tool, Fig. 4. Preventing
the loss of pore fluids, during core recov-
ery and transport, ensures more accurate
volumetric determinations of the in-place
reservoir hydrocarbons. The coring system
can capture up to 10 1.5- x 2.4-in. samples
per trip, in a sealed container. A specialized
overpack has been designed to allow safe
handling and transport of the sealed, pres-
surized sample container. The coring sys-
tem is rated to 400°F and 25,000 psi, and it
can operate in borehole sizes between 6.75
in. and 12.25 in.15
Conventional-coring workflow. A
recent paper presented at the Society of
Core Analysts annual symposium pres-
ents a generic workflow for the acquisi-
tion of high-quality conventional cores
to meet core-evaluation objectives. The
workflow covers planning and opera-
tional aspects that must be considered,
e.g., equipment, core preservation, trans-
portation and storage. Two scenarios are
presented: 1) unconsolidated sand for
special core analysis (SCAL) tests; and
2) carbonate for routine core analysis
(RCA).16 A second paper, presented at
the same meeting, reviews current wax
core-preservation techniques and prac-
tices, and offers recommendations for
improving the preservation of whole-core
and core-plug pore fluids, to help assure
the reliability and representativeness of
fluid-saturation measurements.17
Quality control of core measure-
ments. Ensuring the quality of core-anal-
ysis measurements is an ongoing effort
(see World Oil, July 2013, p. 71). Two
recent papers discuss quality-control is-
sues related to different laboratory mea-
surements and offer recommendations
for improving the accuracy and reliability
of these measurements. The focus of the
first paper is on using laboratory mea-
surements of elemental concentrations to
validate “geochemical” (elemental spec-
troscopy) log interpretation. This paper
discusses the importance of understand-
ing and validating core chemistry and
mineralogy, typically obtained via X-ray
fluorescence (XRF), inductively coupled
plasma (ICP), X-ray diffraction (XRD)
and Fourier-transform infrared spectros-
FORMATION EVALUATION
copy (FTIR), before using them to recon-
cile disagreements between core and log Fig. 4. Halliburton HRSCT tool with the
data, and presents an in-house QC mea- sidewall “pressure” coring system.15
sure for assessing the quality of mineral
analysis, once the quality of the elemental
concentrations is established.18
The second paper discusses the mea-
surement of porosity and fluid saturation
on hydrocarbon source rocks. A compar-
ison of three independent techniques re-
sulted in discrepancies of up to 20%. The
paper reviews possible reasons for these
discrepancies, e.g., equipment-related or
procedural, and proposes different tech-
nical solutions. In addition, the authors
present guidelines and recommenda-
tions to improve the accuracy of total po-
rosity, grain density and water saturation
measurements.19
LABORATORY ANALYSIS
Digital rock physics. Traditional core
analysis, both RCA and SCAL, can be ex-
pensive and time-consuming, particularly
for relative permeability and pore-pres-
sure measurements. DRP delivers a rapid
and cost-effective solution for estimating
macroscopic rock properties (e.g., poros-
ity) and pore-scale properties (e.g., per-
meability and fluid transport dynamics) age analysis and 3D visualization software
in rock samples, at scales ranging from (see World Oil, July 2012, p. 107; and July
whole-core and core plugs down to the 2014, p. 81). These imaging techniques
subpore (nanometer) scale. This capabil- provide textural information, such as
ity can result in an improved understand- grain and pore size, and specific surface
ing of reservoir petrophysical and flow area, which allows for the estimation of
properties, in terms of rock type, pore porosity and permeability, and informa-
structure, texture, and interconnectivity tion about the mineralogy and chemical
that can lead to improved predictions of composition of core-plug and cuttings
reservoir performance and, ultimately, to samples, at different resolutions in a rela-
greater hydrocarbon recovery. tively short period of time.
DRP combines core-imaging tech- Digital imaging includes multi-scale
niques, e.g., scanning electron microscopy computed tomography (CT) and micro-
(SEM) and 3D X-ray computed tomogra- CT, and provides 3D images of the spatial
phy (CT), with advanced, multiphase, 3D distribution of grains, pores, and pore flu-
flow modeling and simulation capability. ids of the whole core and core plugs. Sim-
The DRP workflow involves digital imag- ilar to the microscopy techniques, these
ing to resolve pore-scale features, process- images can be used for estimating rock
ing the images to separate the pore phases properties, such as porosity, permeabil-
from the mineral matrix, and simulating ity, pore-size distribution, effective elastic
physical process within the 3D model to moduli, and electrical conductivity, but
determine effective static and dynamic rock at a higher resolution. Integrating imag-
properties, e.g., permeability (absolute and ing data acquired at different resolutions
relative), electrical resistivity, and the elas- (scales) helps to improve the reliability
tic moduli, in the microstructural model.20 of the results. Advanced, multiphase, 3D
The SEM methods, typically, include flow modeling and simulation capability
high-resolution backscattered electron allow 3D characterization of the miner-
imaging (BSE), low-resolution energy- alogy, pore structure and flow processes
dispersive spectroscopy imaging (EDS), of conventional and complex reservoir
and high-resolution focused ion-beam rocks, ranging from the centimeter to the
(FIB) imaging, along with associated im- nanometer scale.
World Oil®/APRIL 2015125
FORMATION EVALUATION
Fig. 5. Permeability vs. irreducible water saturation (Swirr) for the BSE images and core
plugs from a Norwegian Continental Shelf reservoir.29
1.0
0.8
0.6
Swirr, frac
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.1 1 10
Permeability, mD
The advantages and value of DRP were
discussed in a recent paper by BP geoscien-
tists.21 The company conducted extensive
field trials, involving static rock-property
measurements (e.g., porosity, permeabil-
ity, formation factor, cementation export,
saturation exponent, resistivity index and
capillary pressure) and measurements
obtained using DRP technology. These
results were compared with the results ob-
tained using traditional laboratory meth-
ods. The project involved conventional
reservoirs (permeability ≥1 mD). The au-
thors concluded that DRP technology can
improve evaluation of reservoir quality and
quantification of hydrocarbons-in-place,
while reducing the cycle time for appraisal
and reducing uncertainty in subsurface de-
scription. However, the technology must
be fully proven and validated—the ability
to use an existing in-house database of sim-
ilar measurements obtained using the tra-
ditional methods is “essential for enabling a
methodical and thorough validation of this
new technology.”21
In general, DRP-derived trends and re-
lationships, such as porosity versus perme-
ability, and acoustic-wave velocity versus
porosity, are in very good agreement with
laboratory results at larger scales.20 How-
ever, operating companies have had differ-
ent experiences with DRP. Several recently
published studies have advised caution
in using DRP as an alternative for labora-
tory measurements. DRP is still an evolving
technology, and the prediction of effective
properties can be affected by a number
of factors, including sample bias and the
choice of modeling and simulation param-
eters.22,23 Due to differences in scale (i.e.,
representative volumes) between DRP
126APRIL 2015/WorldOil.com
Image analysis
Experimental data
Log (image analysis)
Log (experimental data)
100 1,000
techniques and laboratory measurements,
current imaging techniques may not fully
characterize the microstructural details of
a rock sample, especially heterogeneous
rocks, such as carbonates, and this can result
in discrepancies (i.e., mismatches) between
numerical estimates of mechanical proper-
ties, based on micro-CT images and labora-
tory-derived data.20,23 One recent study of a
Middle East carbonate reservoir found sig-
nificant scatter in DRP predictions that did
not exist in the SCAL data, and that could
not be attributed to sample heterogeneity;
a second study found that, regardless of the
approach used, all of the numerical predic-
tions overestimated the bulk modulus mea-
sured in the laboratory.24,25
In contrast, another study involving car-
bonate reservoirs in a giant Middle Eastern
field achieved excellent agreement in DRP-
predicted and laboratory-derived dynamic
rock properties.26 DRP capillary-pressure
and relative-permeability measurements
were made at full reservoir conditions on
whole-core subsamples (core plugs). The
DRP results were upscaled as whole-core
composites, to enable comparison with
laboratory SCAL results obtained previ-
ously on core plugs from the same reser-
voir. The SCAL measurements required
six years, while the DRP measurements
were completed in six months. DRP also
allowed the investigation of various wetta-
bility scenarios and their impact on the rel-
ative permeability results, in a timely man-
ner, i.e., within months rather than years.
Within the past few years, the emerg-
ing technology of digital rock physics has
moved out of academic and operating
company research labs (see 2006 article),
and become a viable commercial service
provided by specialized companies and
major oilfield service companies. Some
companies may only provide the digital
imaging and core/pore-network visual-
ization that enables predictions of static
rock properties, while others also provide
modeling of dynamic rock properties
(fluid transport).
Schlumberger recently introduced its
digital rock and fluid analytics service
(CoreFlow). This new service combines
physical core analysis, and digital analysis
of rock and fluid properties, with a new di-
rect, hydrodynamics (DHD), multiphase,
compositional pore-scale flow simulator
in a single integrated workflow that en-
10,000 compasses rock and fluid characterization,
simulation and validation. Both the physi-
cal laboratory and digital techniques are
applied in the same facility, on the same
rock samples. The characterization phase
includes measurements of basic fluid, rock
and fluid-rock properties, including PVT
data, rheology, fluid-fluid and rock-fluid in-
teraction data, and rock morphology. The
simulation phase, which combines digital
rock models, digital fluid models, 3D wet-
tability distribution, and setup of boundary
conditions, measures capillary pressure,
relative permeability, recovery efficiency,
and flow heterogeneity, by stimulating flu-
id flow through porous media, i.e., investi-
gating rock-fluid and fluid-fluid interaction
dynamics. The simulator, which has been
benchmarked against physical models and
real rocks, accurately simulates the flow
of complex multiphase, multicomponent
fluid flow through digital rock models
while honoring real pore geometries, even
at very fine scales. This enables evaluation
of the effect of mixed wettability, complex
rheologies of fluid phases, and changes in
saturation during the production cycles, as
water drives production. In the validation
phase, predicted digital core properties
are compared and validated by laboratory
measurements on the same core plugs.27
SEM-based imaging techniques. The
presence of matrix-dispersed microcrystal-
line quartz (chert) cement in mudrocks
can have a significant impact on rock brit-
tleness, a mechanical rock property used in
the design of fracturing jobs. To estimate
the amount of chert cement, it’s necessary
to distinguish it from authigenic or detrital
quartz that also may be present; however,
bulk chemical and mineralogical analyses
may not readily provide this information.
Cathodoluminescence imaging is sensitive
to subtle contrasts in trace-element com-
 FORMATION EVALUATION

position and crystal defects, and this in- able. The proposed methodology requires construction of Pickett plots without pre-
formation can be used to discriminate the good-quality cuttings, between 1 and 2 vious availability of well logs, and estima-
different types of quartz that are present.28 mm in size, and employs a combination of tions of geomechanical properties, such as
In this SEM-based technique, a focused laboratory analyses (porosity and perme- Poisson’s ratio, Young’s modulus and brit-
beam of electrons impinges on a polished, ability), and empirical correlations with tleness index. The method has been tested
thin-section sample and induces it to emit petrophysical properties and parameters. in Western Canada tight sandstone, and it
light that is collected by an optical system. The method allows quantitative evaluation provided good results.32,33
The sample is scanned with the beam, of water saturation, pore-throat aperture,
REFERENCES
and the light emitted at each point is mea- capillary pressure, flow units, porosity (or 1. Marsala et al., “Fluid distribution inter-well mapping in multiple
sured to create a map of the optical activity. cementation) exponent m, true formation reservoirs by innovative borehole to surface electromagnetic:
survey design and field acquisition,” IPTC paper 17045, pre-
Variations in cathodoluminescence color resistivity, and distance to a water table (if sented at the International Petroleum Technology Conference,
and intensity indicate contrasts in crystal present). In addition, the method allows Beijing, China, March 26−28, 2013.
defects and trace elemental composition.
This information is used in conjunction
with information on crystal size, crystal Visit
shapes, and fabric, to identify different us at
quartz types in mudrocks. OTC
Estimates of irreducible water satura- Booth#
tion (Swirr) obtained from analysis of BSE- 4527-14
SEM images of reservoir rock thin sections,
give a good match with results obtained
using laboratory porous-plate capillary-
pressure methods, Fig. 5.29 The basis for
this approach is that Swirr is linked closely
to the smallest pores (typically related to
authigenic clays) in the reservoir rock and
the amount of these pores can be estimated
from the BSE images. The technique offers
a fast, cost-efficient and reliable way to es-
timate Swirr of siliciclastic reservoir rocks.
Applications of 3D printers in core
evaluation. Complimenting the develop-
ment of DRP imaging techniques is a nov-
el application of the emerging 3D-printer
technology. These printers are being used
to create physical models from virtual CT-
image-based models of rock cores and pore
networks, i.e., to replicate textural and pet-
rophysical properties of porous rocks to
aid in visualization and to improve under- ...and take advantage of surface artificial
standing of the factors that affect fluid flow lift and pressure boosting technology.
Leistritz Multiphase Gathering and Wellhead
at different scales. The resolution of the
Systems reliably boost production without
pore networks that can actually be printed
separation and lower wellhead pressure
is limited by the capability of current 3D without intervention.
printers. One long-term objective is to sub-
ject these 3D-printed physical models to
laboratory-based physical measurements,
to help validate the DRP-based porosity MULTIPHASE PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
and pore-connectivity predictions of real Multiphase Wellhead & Gathering Systems
and artificial rocks.30,31 Multiphase Blow Down Units
Drill-cuttings evaluation. A meth- Multiphase Annulus Gas Units
odology has been developed that allows a
complete petrophysical evaluation of wells
in low-permeability formations based sole-
ly on drill cuttings. The objective of this
approach is to complement conventional Leistritz Advanced Technologies Corp.
well-log and core-based petrophysical (201) 934-8262swww.leistritzcorp.com/pumps
analysis, and to offer an alternative meth-
od for petrophysical evaluation in wells
where well logs and core data are unavail-
World Oil®/APRIL 2015127
FORMATION EVALUATION
2. Marsala et al., “First borehole to surface electromagnetic survey
in KSA: Reservoir mapping and monitoring at a new scale,” SPE
paper 146348, presented at the SPE Annual Technical Confer-
ence and Exhibition, Denver, Colo. Oct. 30−Nov. 2, 2011.
3. Hibbs et al., “New electromagnetic sensors for magnetotelluric and
induced polarization geophysical surveys,” Paper MG 1.8, SEG An-
nual Meeting Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 1−5, 2012.
4. Marsala et al., “Borehole casing sources for electromagnetic
imaging of deep formations,” SPE paper 170845, presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam,
The Netherlands, Oct. 27−29, 2014.
5. Hibbs et al., “Advances in electromagnetic survey instrumenta-
tion and the use of a cased borehole for imaging a deep forma-
tions,” Paper WS9-C05, presented at the EAGE 76th Conference
and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 16−19, 2014.
6. Jacobs, T., “Downhole fiber-optic monitoring: An evolving tech-
nology,” Journal of Petroleum Technology, 66(8), pp. 44−53, 2014.
7. Mateeva et al., “Distributed acoustic sensing for reservoir moni-
toring with vertical seismic profiling,” Geophysical Prospecting,
RUD’s best lifting solutions for the
Oil & Gas Industry
®
® 23. Andra, et al., “Digital rock physics benchmarks—Part II:
+ pp. 33−43, 2013.
www.rud.com
128APRIL 2015/WorldOil.com
View publication stats
62(4), pp. 679−692, 2014.
8. Frignet, B.G., and A.H. Hartog, “Optical vertical seismic profile
on wireline cable,” Paper FFFF, Transactions, SPWLA 55th An-
nual Logging Symposium, Abu Dhabi, UAE, May 18−22, 2014.
9. Zett, et al., “A case study of optical sensing applicability in reser-
voir surveillance—the non-unique solution dilemma,” Paper P,
Transactions, SPWLA 55th Annual Logging Symposium, Abu
Dhabi, UAE, May 18−22, 2014.
10. Hill, D.J., “Distributed acoustic sensing for permanent downhole
monitoring,” Paper Th-01-05, presented at the 2nd EAGE
workshop on permanent reservoir monitoring 2013—Current
and future trends, Stavanger, Norway, July 2−5, 2013.
11. Papp et al., “Fundamentals of vibration sensing with distributed
fibre optic sensors though downscaled experiments,” paper
Th-ELI2-09, presented at the 76th EAGE Conference and
Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 16−19, 2014.
12. Karrenbach, et al., “Field testing a three-component, fiber-optic
borehole seismic array,” paper VSP 1.3, SEG Annual Meeting
Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp. 5019−5023, 2014.
13. Hensen, et al., “Successful deployments of a new well-interven-
tion methodology in horizontal wellbores,” SPE paper 121459,
presented at the 2009 SPE/ICoTA Coiled Tubing and Well
Intervention Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, Texas,
March 31−April 1, 2009.
14. Danardu, et al., “Data acquisition and processing of carbon rod-
conveyed DTS and DAS in very long horizontal wells: First trial
in North Sea Danish sector,” SPE paper 170663, presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam,
The Netherlands, Oct. 27−29, 2014.
15. Halliburton, “CoreVault fluid and rock sampling service,” Sales
Brochure H011158, 2014.
16. Gay, M., “A coring matrix for success,” paper SCA2014-086, pre-
sented at the Society of Core Analysts International Symposium,
Avignon, France, Sept. 8−11, 2014.
17. Roussell, M., J.-V. Garcia and M. Gay, “Wax core preservation—
extended review of existing methodologies,” paper SCA2014-
097, presented at the Society of Core Analysts International
Symposium, Avignon, France, Sept. 8−11, 2014.
18. Herron, et al., “Application and quality control of core data for
the development and validation of elemental spectroscopy log
interpretation,” paper LLL, Transactions, SPWLA 55th Annual
Logging Symposium, Abu Dhabi, UAE, May 18−22, 2014.
19. Le Bihan, et al., “Quality control of porosity and saturation
measurements on source rocks,” paper MMMM, Transactions,
SPWLA 55th Annual Logging Symposium, Abu Dhabi, UAE,
May 18−22, 2014.
20. Dvorkin, et al., “Relevance of computational rock physics,”
Geophysics, 76(3), E141−E153, 2014.
21. Fredrich, et al., “Digital rocks: Developing an emerging technol-
ogy through to a proven capability deployed in the business,”
paper SPE-170752, presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Conference and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
October 27−29, 2014.
22. Mishra et al., “Effectiveness of digital rock physical laboratories
in characterization of heterogeneous and complex carbonates—
A synthesis,” paper IPTC-14500, presented at the International
Petroleum Technology Conference, Bangkok, Thailand, Feb.
7−9, 2012.
Computing effective properties,” Computers & Geosciences, 50,
24. Guice, et al., “An evaluation of digital rock physics technology
for the prediction of relative permeability and capillary pressure
for a Middle Eastern carbonate reservoir,” paper IPTC-17288,
presented at the International Petroleum Technology Confer-
ence, Doha, Qatar, Jan. 20−22, 2014.
25. Saenger, et al., “Digital carbonate rock physics,” paper RP E-P1.1,
SEG Annual Meeting Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, pp.
2915−2919, 2014.
26. Koronol, et al., “Capillary pressure and relative permeability
assessment on whole core samples from a giant Middle Eastern
carbonate reservoir, utilizing digital rock physics,” SPE paper
171851, presented at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum
Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE, Nov. 10-13, 2014.
27. Nadeev, A., and D. Klemin, “Inside the rock,” GeoExpro, 11(5),
pp. 32−35, 2014.
28. Milliken, K. L., “SEM-based cathodoluminescence imaging for
discriminating quartz types in mudrocks,” SPE paper 168851,
presented at the Unconventional Resources Technology Confer-
ence, Denver, Colo., Aug. 12−14, 2013.
29. Lopez, et al., “Thin section image analysis for estimation of initial
water saturation in siliciclastic reservoir rocks,” paper SCA2013-
070, presented at the Society of Core Analysts International
Symposium, Napa Valley, Calif., Sept. 16-19, 2013.
30. Ishutov, S., and F. Hasiuk, “3-D printing artificial reservoir rocks
to test their petrophysical properties,” AAPG Search & Discovery,
Article No. 41427, 2014. http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/
documents/2014/41427ishutov/ndx_ishutov.pdf. Accessed
March 16, 2015.
31. Maslin, E., “The third (3D) industrial revolution?” Offshore
Engineer, 39(10), pp. 44−49, 2014.
32. Ortega, C., and R. Aguilera, “Potential impact of drill cuttings
on the design of multi-stage hydraulic fracturing jobs in tight
gas formations,” paper XXX, Transactions, SPWLA 53rd Annual
Logging Symposium, Cartagena, Colombia, June 16−20, 2012.
33. Ortega, C., and R. Aguilera, “A complete petrophysical evalua-
tion method for tight formations from drill cuttings, only in the
absence of well logs,” SPE paper 161875, SPE Journal, 19(4), pp.
1−12, 2013.
STEPHEN PRENSKY is a
consultant to logging service
companies, with over 40 years
of working experience in
petroleum geology and
petrophysics. He has served as
the SPWLA V.P. of technology
and as editor of SPWLA’s Petrophysics
publication. Mr. Prensky is also a 35-year
member of both AAPG and SPE.