Quad Neutron Measurement and Interpretation Guide Revision 4

QUAD NEUTRON MEASUREMENT AND
INTERPRETATION GUIDE
Technologies Ltd.
“Powered by Quad Neutron”
Revised: 02 March 2016
This document is proprietary and confidential. No part of this document may be disclosed
in any manner to a third party without the prior written consent of Roke Technologies Ltd.
Quad Neutron Measurement and Interpretation Guide
This page intentionally left blank
This document is proprietary and confidential. No part of this document may be disclosed 1
Contents
Document Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 3
Foreword ......................................................................................................................................... 3
What and How We Measure........................................................................................................... 3
Terminology ................................................................................................................................ 5
Field ......................................................................................................................................... 5
Shale / Clay.............................................................................................................................. 5
Singles ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Neutron Porosity Measurements ............................................................................................... 5
Fluid Sensitivity ......................................................................................................................... 11
Quad Total Porosity, QTP .......................................................................................................... 13
Shale Volume Correction .......................................................................................................... 14
Quad Liquid, QL ......................................................................................................................... 20
Quad Density ............................................................................................................................. 24
Quad Neutron Saturation Equation .......................................................................................... 26
How We Process - Understanding the Overlay Technique and QLgain........................................ 26
Depth of Investigation .............................................................................................................. 29
Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 36
Document Purpose
The purpose of this document is to provide information about the Quad Neutron measurement
and how to interpret the results of those measurements. It is assumed that the reader does have
basic measurement understanding related to downhole measurements such as depth delayed
offsets, data filtering, depth of investigation and vertical resolution.
Foreword
Quad Neutron technology is the first though pipe technology that truly combines two
compensated physics in a balanced configuration to achieve reservoir and formation
measurements independent of open hole log data information. Although open hole data inputs
are not required, it is Roke’s firm belief that any and all measurements provide useful information
when trying to gain an understanding of the reservoir. We do advocate that open hole data be
acquired whenever feasibly possible, the same as we advocate that Quad Neutron data be
acquired whenever feasibly possible. The ability to relate measurements and the changes
identified between open hole and cased hole can provide information that can be utilized to
optimize drilling, completion and production.
As with all measurements, there is an interpretation required to gain the benefit of the
measurement. The interpretation is made stronger when local and experience knowledge is used
for inputs. This would be the same as getting your doctor to perform some health measurements
on you. If your doctor understands your family health history and your personal health history,
his interpretation and diagnosis will be stronger than having a new doctor do the interpretation.
The end goal we all should be aiming for is a positive benefit to the company we are all working
for.
What and How We Measure

Quad Neutron is a neutron based measuring device that not only measures thermal neutrons,
but also measures the highly informative and diagnostic gamma rays associated with neutron
activation. Measurement and incorporation of Neutron activation Gamma Rays is one of two
critically unique aspects of what we do. The other aspect is embodied in the iterative overlay
techniques used in processing the Quad measurement data. Both of these aspects will be
described and discussed in this Guide.
Quad Neutron data can be acquired real time via wireline to a Warrior acquisition system or in
memory using a downhole memory section and a surface memory module. The tool consists of
a quad neutron detector array that is balanced across a chemical neutron source. There are two
neutron thermal neutron detectors, SNN and LNN that measure thermal neutrons and two
neutron gamma detectors, SNG and LNG that measure gamma rays entering the detector. The
term neutron thermal neutron and neutron gamma follow the naming convention “source type
detection type”. Neutron Gamma would then be interpreted as neutron source and gamma
detection. In addition to the primary neutron measurements, the Quad Neutron has borehole
fluid resistivity monitors, UBRM and BBRM, temperature sensors, UHT and BHT, casing collar
locator sensor, CCL, one natural gamma ray detector, GR, and one high energy filtered gamma
detector, FGR. A tool sensor configuration is shown in figure 1.
UHT
UBRM
FGR
GR
CCL
LNG
SNG
AmBe
SNN
LNN
BHT
BBRM
Figure 1: Quad Neutron Sensor Configuration
Terminology
Before proceeding with how the Quad Neutron measurements were derived and used, we need
to cover some terminology used throughout the document.
Field
Neutron measurements can be viewed from a multiple of physics perspectives. Neutron Neutron
measurements can be viewed on the basis of particle physics. This intuitively makes sense since
the neutron is a particle which interacts with other particles. Another perspective is to view all of
the particles as part of a neutron cloud or energy field with flux equivalent to the number of
particles existing equidistant from the neutron source. In this document, the term field is used to
represent the cloud or field size for both neutrons and gamma rays.
Shale / Clay
The term shale and clay are commonly interchanged in the industry and yet can have different
meanings for different groups. From a petrophysics definition, clay is a mineral, while shale is a
fine-grained, clastic sedimentary rock that contains clay minerals. From a geologist’s definition,
clay is a particle size, while shale is a fine-grained sedimentary rock that forms from the
compaction of silt and clay-size mineral particles. In this document, the term shale and clay will
follow the petrophysics definition.
Singles
The term singles is used in this document to refer to the collection of single neutron neutron and
neutron gamma detectors, more specifically SNN (short neutron neutron), LNN (long neutron
neutron), SNG (short neutron gamma) and LNG (long neutron gamma).
Neutron Porosity Measurements

Before going into neutron porosity measurements, we need to think about the parameters that
we want to measure to fully characterize the formation. These parameters include:
1. Effective porosity (amount of pore-space without clay bound water),

2. Saturation,
3. Permeability.
Now let’s look at the Quad Neutron technology to see if we can use it to provide these
parameters.
The Quad Neutron tool utilizes an Am241Be chemical source that emits fast neutrons into the
formation. As the fast neutrons collide with other atoms, they slow down. This slowing down
process is called thermalization. Once the neutrons are thermalized, there is a high probability
that they will be captured by another atom. This capture process is called thermal neutron
capture. During thermalization the neutron interactions are creating high energy gamma
radiation by colliding with the nucleus of other atoms. The thermal neutron capture can also
produce high energy gamma radiation. The gamma radiation created by the neutron is measured
on two neutron gamma detectors, SNG and LNG. The Quad Neutron tool measures thermal
energy neutrons (drifting at 2000m/s) on two neutron detectors, SNN and LNN. If the neutron
enters the detectors at higher energy than thermal, it will not be counted.
The best element to slow down fast neutrons is Hydrogen. Hydrogen has the same mass as a
neutron and therefore has high energy transfer efficiency. We can look at an analogy using Ping
Pong balls as neutrons and billiard balls as the nucleus of a larger atom. If a Ping Pong ball collides
with a billiard ball, not much energy is lost and the ping pong ball bounces off the billiard ball. If
the Ping Pong ball collides with another Ping Pong ball, it will transfer energy to it dependent on
the angle of collision. If the Ping Pong ball hits the other Ping Pong ball head on, the energy
transfer can be as high as 50%.
Another aspect that dictates neutron counts is the distance between the Neutron Source and the
detectors. Consider the figure below.
Figure 2: Thermal Neutron Porosity Relationship vs Detector Source Spacing
We send fast neutrons into the formation and measure thermal neutrons. If the detector is too
close to the source and there is no Hydrogen between the source and detector, the neutrons are
not going to be thermalized and subsequently they are not going to be counted in the detectors.
The more hydrogen we have, the more thermal neutrons we have and the higher counts we are
going to measure. Since Hydrogen dominates the thermalization process, the counts on the
detectors are proportional to the amount of hydrogen in the measured volume. If we assume
that all of the hydrogen came from the fluids in the formation pore space, then we can assume
that porosity is directly proportional to the amount of hydrogen. When the detectors are spaced
such that they measure in the region where thermalization is occurring, the detectors are
considered to be in the near zone and counts are directly proportional to the amount of hydrogen
and directly proportional to porosity. This area is shown as region (a) in figure 2.
Now let’s move the detector far from the source. If we have a lot of hydrogen between the source
and the detector, all neutrons are going to be thermalized before reaching the detector, which
increases the probability of the thermalized neutrons being captured by atoms in the medium,
which in turn reduces the number of neutrons being counted on the detector. The result is that
we are going to see low counts on the detector. If we do not have much hydrogen, then we are
going to see high counts on the detector. When the detectors are spaced such that they measure
in the region where thermal neutron capture can influence the count rates, the detectors are
considered to be in the far zone and neutron counts are inversely proportional to the amount of
hydrogen and inversely proportional to porosity. This area is shown as region (b) in figure 2. The
Quad Neutron is designed to operate in the far zone.
If we know the number of counts on the detector, we can calculate the amount of hydrogen and
if we know the hydrogen concentration per unit volume, we can then compute the volume of
space that the hydrogen occupies. This space we interpret to be porosity. There are however, a
number of issues with this approach.
The first issue is with hydrogen in the

matrix. If we look closer at the
formation we see that hydrogen can
exist in the pore space due to the fluids
and due to clay particles (AL2O3*nH2O)
in the pore space. Clay particles can
also exist in the matrix along with
microporous capillary bound water
common in shales. The water
contained in shales can contribute a
significant hydrogen concentration
which needs to be accounted for. To
Figure 3: Hydrogen in Pore Space and Matrix
calculate the amount of hydrogen in the pore space we need to know how much hydrogen is
associated with the matrix.
The second issue is that we do not know the hydrogen concentration in the pore space and
therefore the relationship between counts and porosity is going to be fluid dependent. Neutron
tools are calibrated to measure true porosity based on the hydrogen content of fresh water in
the pore space. But what happens when the fluid in the pore space is not filled with fresh water?
For example, if we fill the same volume with oil, the amount of Hydrogen will be different due to
the different chemical composition and bulk density of oil as compared to fresh water. As such,
because the neutron porosity measurement exhibits sensitivity to fluid changes, it will naturally
deviate from true fresh water calibrated porosity.
A third issue is that we do not know if the capture rate of thermal neutrons in the measured fluid
is the same as in fresh water. We need to consider this issue since we are operating in the far
zone, where thermal neutron capture can influence the number of neutrons being detected.
The following table shows some of the nuclear properties for common fluid elements. Sigma is
the thermal neutron capture cross section area for the element. The larger the number, the
higher the probability that this element will capture a thermal neutron, if a thermal neutron
collides with it.
Table 1: Nuclear Properties of Common Downhole Fluid Elements
Element Symbol Z Mass Sigma Therm*

Hydrogen H 1 1.008 0.3326 19
Carbon C 6 12.01 0.0035 124
Oxygen O 8 16 0.0002 162
Sodium Na 11 22.99 0.53 228
Chlorine Cl 17 35.45 33.5 347
*Therm represents the average number of collisions with this element to
thermalize a fast neutron emitted from an Am241Be chemical neutron source.
From the chart, we can see that Chlorine has the highest Sigma value and therefore the highest
probability to capture thermal neutrons. So what is going to happen if we add chlorine in the
water? More thermal neutrons will be captured relative to fresh water and therefore fewer
neutrons will be available to be detected. In the case where it is not known that salinity has
changed, the decrease in neutron counts could be improperly related to both, an increase in
hydrogen concentration and, as a consequence, lower porosity.
Before we summarize the issues related to neutron porosity, we need to define hydrogen
concentration in terms of Hydrogen Index. Hydrogen Index is defined as the amount of hydrogen
in a measured volume relative to the amount of hydrogen in the same volume of fresh water at
standard temperature and pressure. The equation for Hydrogen Index, HI, is given as:
𝐴𝑚𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒

𝐻𝐼 = 𝐴𝑚𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
𝑚𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝐻/𝑐𝑚3
𝐻𝐼 = 0.111
𝜌𝑚 𝑁𝐻 /𝑀
𝐻𝐼 = (Eq. 1)
0.111
Where ρm is the mass density of the fluid in g/cm3, NH is the number of hydrogen atoms in the
molecule, and M is the molecular weight of the fluid.
If we now summarize the issues related to neutron porosity we realize that neutron porosity is a
function of the hydrogen index and salinity of the fluid in the pore space and the hydrogen
associated with the matrix. If we define effective porosity as the amount of pore space without
clay, we can define the following function for Neutron porosity, ϕN, as follows:
∅𝑁 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙) ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 2)
Where
HI represents the hydrogen index of the fluid in the pore space

Sal represents the salinity of the fluid in the pore space
ϕeff is the effective porosity or amount of pore space without clay
Vsh is the volume of shale in the matrix and
HIsh is the Hydrogen Index of the shale.
To resolve effective porosity, we need to know the fluid properties in the pore space, the volume
of shale and the Hydrogen Index of the shale.
To solve for the volume of shale, a number of methods have been developed using standard open
hole log measurements including GR/SP and/or Density/Neutron relationships. Unfortunately
there are problems with the shale volume calculations.
For GR, the measurement responds to radioactivity which does not necessarily correlate to shale
volumes if the rock matrix contains radioactive particles outside of the shale. For example, sands
containing K-feldspars can have high gamma readings due to the potassium which has nothing to
do with the radioactivity from the shale particles. Another problem with GR Vshale is that the
measurement is statistical and the volume of investigation is not matched to the Neutron volume
of investigation.
Density/Neutron methods can give relatively good matrix clay volumes if the matrix bulk density
is known, which it typically is not. Changes in mineralogy can also cause separation between the
neutron and density curves which will change the computed shale volume.
Another problem for shale volume estimation occurs when clay particles invade the pore space.
This can happen during drilling with mud invasion or during production, whereby the produced
fluids carry and deposit clay particles near the wellbore. So how do we measure the amount of
clay in the pore space? GR is not able to provide accurate information because most of the GR
signal is coming from the matrix and not from the pore space. The density measurement may be
used if the matrix bulk density, porosity and fluid type is known. There may be a possibility to use
the separation on resistivity curves with different depths of investigation to detect invasion but
to date there is no proven method on how to convert this to clay volume in the pore space.
Another method is to include the clay in the pore space as part of the matrix shale volume in the
neutron measurement which is already done in Equation 2 by using the effective porosity
definition as the amount of pore space without clay.
One other aspect to consider is that the shale volume methods presented assumed that the
measurements could be made in an open hole environment. If we now attempt to make
measurements though pipe and want to determine shale volume we increase the difficulty of the
aforementioned methods. The pipe adds physical measurement restrictions, i.e. no SP and
resistivity and increased statistical error on the density measurement. Another problem can
occur in older wells with NORM contamination that will render the GR method useless.
Regardless of the measurement environment, a shale volume needs to be determined to solve
for porosity.
To summarize our key points around neutron porosity we see that:
1. Neutron porosity depends on the hydrogen index and salinity of the fluid in the pore space
and
2. Neutron porosity includes hydrogen from water in the shales, which has to be corrected in
order to determine effective porosity.
Assuming that the shale volume is known, the neutron measurement depends on two
parameters - porosity and fluid in the pore space. This gives us hope that if one parameter is
known the other should be solvable.
One approach used in OH to resolve fluid uncertainty is to assume that all measurements were
taken from the flushed zone and that all fluids in the pore-space are related to the drilling mud.
If we know the fluid in the pore-space, we can then apply corrections to our neutron porosity to
resolve effective porosity.
Roke invented a completely different approach to determine porosity and to determine what
fluids are in the pore space. The method is based on exploiting the sensitivity of the neutron
porosity measurements to fluid types.
Fluid Sensitivity
When we looked at Neutron porosity we saw that there was porosity sensitivity to fluid type in
the pore space relative to fresh water. With standard open hole tools, we can see this effect on
Neutron Neutron and Gamma Gamma (Density) porosity. A good example is in gas filled sands,
where the two porosities cross each other. This indicates that the porosity measurement
sensitivity to fluid, for the two physics, is opposite to each other. A similar relationship exists
between the Quad’s neutron neutron (NN) and neutron gamma (NG) physics. For most fluids in
the pore space, NN porosity sensitivity is opposite to NG porosity sensitivity. Porosity response
vs fluid in the pore space on both NN and NG porosities is presented in the figure below.
Increasing Porosity
Increasing Water Salinity Increasing Oil API
Figure 4: Neutron Neutron and Neutron Gamma Porosity Fluid Sensitivity
If we calibrate both NN and NG devices in fresh water, and we measure across an unknown
porosity filled with fresh water, the NN porosity will be equal to the NG porosity.
What is going to happen if we increase the water salinity by adding chlorine in the water? Since
Chlorine has a high thermal neutron capture cross-section, it will effectively capture thermal
neutrons and the NN counts on detectors will be lower and porosity will be higher relative to the
fresh water, same as before. But what happened to the NG porosity? We can see from figure 4
that NG porosity decreases for increasing water salinity, but why?
Gamma rays are created as a fast neutron thermalizes and eventually becomes captured. When
a high energy Neutron (above several MeV) collides with a nucleus of another atom, it is possible
for the neutron to transfer sufficient energy to the nucleus creating an excited nuclear state. This
excited nucleus will emit secondary radiation to return to its ground state. The secondary
radiation can include gamma radiation. The phenomenon is called Inelastic Neutron Scattering.
When a neutron is absorbed by another nucleus it is called neutron capture. The absorbing
nucleus will be altered to an excited nuclear state, which again will result in secondary radiation
to be emitted to return to a stable nuclear state. If the capture of neutrons is followed by
emission of gamma rays, the capture is called Radiative Capture. Aluminum and Chlorine are
radiative capture elements.
Table 2: Common Thermal Neutron Radiative Capture Nuclides
Counts per second

Parent Abundance Daughter
per gram after 2
Nuclide (percent) Nuclide
min irradiation1
27Al 28Al
100 27000
37Cl 38Cl
24.5 810
41K 42K
6.88 190
26Mg 27Mg
11.2 310
55Mn 56Mn
100 12000
23Na 24Na
100 210
30Si 31Si
3.09 6
1 Based on 10 percent counting efficiency, a flux of 108 n/cm2 sec, and a
normal abundance of nuclides.
(After Senftle and Hoyt (1966), with additional data from Goldman and Stehn (1961))
Based on these nuclear interaction properties, we would expect that neutron gamma counts
increase as thermal neutrons decrease due to capture by chlorine. If we now have a porosity
relationship that is inversely proportional to the neutron gamma count rate, a decrease in count
rates results in an increase in porosity. When we look at figure 4, we see that increasing the
salinity decreases the porosity. Another interesting observation is that the NN and NG porosities
invert their relationship in hydrocarbon.
We can write the Neutron porosity equations for NN and NG physics as follows:
∅𝑁𝑁 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 3)

∅𝑁𝐺 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 4)
Quad Total Porosity, QTP

Since the sensitivity to fluid type in the porosity is opposite for the two physics, we can combine
the two porosities to minimize the fluid sensitivity. We can represent this graphically as shown
in the figure 5.
Figure 5: Neutron Neutron and Neutron Gamma Fluid Insensitive Porosity
The equation that minimizes porosity fluid sensitivity is called Quad Total Porosity, QTP and can
be written as follows:
∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁−𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 5)
Where f(HI,Sal)NN-NG is a function that incorporates both the NN and NG porosities to build a
composite porosity with minimized sensitivity to fluid type.
We can see from the equation that we still have a shale component in our porosity but we have
minimized sensitivity to fluid type in the pore space. We can now say that QTP porosity is
independent of fluid type. Using this approach we are resolving the porosity uncertainty due to
fluids in the pore-space. Please note, the term fluid embodies both liquids and gases. Gas will
cause the QTP curve to measure pessimistic and as such a gas correction needs to be applied to
QTP in these cases.
Shale Volume Correction

Although we have now minimized the sensitivity to fluid type in the pore space, we still have to
correct our QTP for clay bound water in the shales.
Figure 6: Vshale Methods from Gamma Ray
We can use standard OH approach of using Gr as follows:
1. Calculate ΔGr, based on shale/sand line

2. Use established relationship between Vsh and ΔGR to calculate Vsh.
3. Take QTP reading thru 100% shale zone to give us HI of shale, HIsh
4. Calculate effective porosity using QTP, Vsh and HIsh as an inputs.
This algorithm is implemented in the Quad Neutron processing software.
The following is an example of using Gr to compute Vsh and ultimately to determine effective
porosity. Using the method previously described, a Grsand and GRshale value was chosen to
compute Vsh. The HIsh value was adjusted until the Vsh*HIsh value (PclayGR) equalled QTP in a
100% shale interval, 7220. The resulting effective porosity will be the difference between QTP
and PclayGR as seen in figure 7.
Figure 7: Vshale & Effective Porosity from Gamma Ray Vsh
Unfortunately this algorithm does not address issues identified earlier related to measuring
volume, statistics, and difficult environments which can affect the results in some cases. For
example, if there is mud invasion in the formation then GR will not see this invasion but the
neutron measurement will be sensitive to the invasion and hence an insitu effective porosity will
be computed that requires correction. Another example where the GR method can result in
incorrect Vsh results will be in wells with radioactive NORM contamination. The contamination
will cause the GR readings to be high, which again will translate to an effective porosity
calculation that deviates from the true condition.
To address these issues, Roke created the Quad Clay curve, QC, which is based on Aluminum
radiative neutron capture. Since Al is part of clay (Al2O3*nH2O), we have a direct measurement
of the clay amount. QC is computed using the following relationship:
𝑆𝑁𝐺
𝑆𝑁𝑁
𝑄𝐶 = 𝐴𝐿𝑁𝐺 + 𝐵 ∗ 𝐿𝑁𝑁 + 𝐶 = 𝑓(𝑉𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑦 ) (Eq. 6)
Where A, B and C are determined empirically.
In this regard, Quad Clay represents the total volume of clay in the measurement volume.
𝑄𝐶 = 𝑓(𝑉𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑦 ) (Eq. 7)
Although we have a direct relationship to the amount of clay, we do not know the hydrogen index
for the clay or the relative amount of Aluminum present in the Clay. Based on our observations
with feldspars and clays, there is a direct relationship between the radiative capture rate and the
relationship between the Aluminum content and hydrogen index of the clays. If we let a
represent the Aluminum/Hydrogen Index factor we can rewrite Quad Clay porosity as:
𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 = 𝑎 ∗ 𝑓(𝑉𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑦 ) (Eq. 8)
If we allow a to include the hydrogen index of the microporous capillary bound waters in the
shale matrix with the hydrogen index for the clays in the shale matrix, we can write the following
equation
𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 = 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 9)
Rewriting our QTP equation using the previous relationship gives us:
∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁−𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 (Eq. 10)
One method to determine a, is to use core data inputs. Another method is to use a similar
approach to computing Vsh from GR as follows:
1. From the QC curve, set QCsand and QCshale values based on assumptions that clean sand
will have little or no clay and that shale will have high clay.
2. Between QCsand and QCshale, set a QCcollector value such that all QC above this line will
represent bound fluids due to clay and hence no effective porosity.
3. Find the QTP value where QCcollector = QC.
4. Compute a = QTP / QC
5. Calculate effective porosity using QTP – a * QC.
The value a * QC is represented in the Quad Neutron processing software as Pclay. As mentioned
the method is very similar to using GR and HIsh, but instead of using GR that is a separate
measurement with different vertical resolution/depth of investigation/measuring volume, etc.,
we use the 4 single neutron detector measurements. The same 4 singles are used for QTP and QL
calculations which in turn are used for Sw calculations.
An advantage of using this method over the GR method is that the QC is going to be sensitive to
clay in the pore space due to the strong influence of the radiative capture on the measurement.
This can help identify mud invaded zones and productive intervals that have become plugged
with clay particles. An additional advantage in older cased wells is that the measurement is not
affected by NORM contamination.
The following log example shows how the Clay curve is used to represent lithology and the
difference between QC and Pclay (shaded as Clay Bound in the lithology track). The difference
between QTP and Pclay is Effective Porosity which is used in the Fluids track for BV fluids. It is
interesting to note that the Clay lithology follows closely to the GR and yet the method did not
use GR as an input.
Regardless of the method used to determine lithology, it is highly recommended that more than
one method be used to be able to identify differences between the methods. The differences can
provide insight to missed pay zones, clay plugged production zones and zones with high NORM
contamination.
To sum up to this section, we have a method which gives us the ability to calculate total neutron
porosity, independent of fluid in the pore space and we have a method to determine effective
porosity based on a clay measurement that has a matched volume of investigation in both depth
of investigation and vertical resolution as the total neutron porosity determination. All we need
now is an ability to measure fluid saturation.
Figure 8: Vshale & Effective Porosity from Quad Clay
Dry Lithology Model

Simultaneously with the wet clay lithology model, curves for the dry clay lithology model are
being calculated. Two Vsh curves are calculated: Vsh based on GR – same as in the wet model
and Vsh based on QC, using sand and shale cut offs. Shale and silt content are calculated based
on these two inputs. Four effective porosities are also being calculated:
1. Øeff= QTP-Vsh*Hish
2. Øeff= QTP-(Vsh+Vsilt)*Hish
3. Øeff= QTP*(1-Vsh)
4. Øeff= QTP*Vsand
Figure 8.1: Vshale & Effective Porosity from Quad Clay and GR
Quad Liquid, QL
As shown earlier in our discussion of QTP, a Neutron porosity measurement is sensitive to two
parameters, the true porosity itself, and fluid type in the pore-space. Because the e, fluid
sensitivity on the neutron neutron porosity will be opposite to fluid sensitivity on neutron gamma
porosity, one begins to see the simple elegance of using these effects to determine accurate
porosity and fluid type with the Quad.
Increasing Porosity
Figure 9: Neutron Neutron and Inverted Neutron Gamma Porosities
Instead of using the opposing sensitivities of the NN and NG porosities to fluid in the pore space
to compensate and nullify the effect as with the QTP, for a fluid type determination we want to
use these fluid type sensitivities in an additive way. To do this, we invert the NG porosity and
calculate the additive fluid sensitivity of the two porosities as shown in figure 9. Starting with our
NN and NG porosity equations
∅𝑁𝑁 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 11)
∅𝑁𝐺 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 12)
We can combine these equations for maximum fluid type sensitivity. The computed curve is
called Quad Liquid, QL and can be written as:
∅𝑄𝐿 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁+𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 13)

or,
∅𝑄𝐿 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁+𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 (Eq. 14)
Where f(HI,Sal)NN+NG represents the function relationship of the fluids for NN and NG porosity
for maximum fluid sensitivity.
We can represent this graphically as shown in figure 10.
Figure 10: Neutron Neutron and Neutron Gamma Fluid Sensitive Porosity
Here is one of the biggest differences between QUAD technology and pulse neutron technologies
currently on the market. All cased hole pulse technologies are based on either NG or NN physics.
None of them have both physics combined.
The measurement process though has similarities in that porosity is required as an input. For
Quad, it is QTP. For pulsed technologies, porosity is based on open hole data or from the ratio
curve from the pulsed tool itself. A potential problem with open hole data is that it was not done
at the time of the pulsed measurements and differences may exist due to sand production or
from cementation, and in the case of the ratio curve, the computed porosity will be fluid and
porosity dependent similar to any single physics neutron measurement.
Moving on for our quest for saturation, if we compare equations between QTP and QL:
∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁−𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 (Eq. 15)
∅𝑄𝐿 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁+𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 (Eq. 16)
We see that QTP and QL are going to be equal when effective porosity is zero as in shales and
when 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁−𝑁𝐺 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁+𝑁𝐺 as in formations filled with certain salinity water
where QTP and QL overlay each other. This last statement may seem confusing without
understanding that the QL curve is overlaid with the QTP curve in a water filled interval as part
of the processing method. When a formation is filled with saltier water than the one where QTP
and QL were overlaid, QL will read higher than QTP and vice versa with fresher water. If a
formation filled with hydrocarbon is encountered, QL will read lower than QTP and the
separation between QTP and QL will be proportional to amount of hydrocarbon in the pore space
relative to the overlaid water salinity.
𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑓(∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 − ∅𝑄𝐿 ) (Eq. 17)
Now we need to determine the function to be able to compute Soil. If we look at the graphical
representation between QL and QTP as shown in the figure below, we see that the two curves
overlay in fresh water. This would be expected because the Quad Neutron is calibrated in fresh
water.
Increasing Porosity
Figure 11: QTP vs QL Porosity Tied for Fresh Water
If we now overlay QL to match QTP for higher salinity water, A, we in essence move the QL curve
down to overlay QTP at A salinity as shown in figure 12. If we want to determine the porosity
change created by now filling an interval with an API oil of B, we can simply look at the difference
between QTP and QL at point B, which is represented by the length X. In other words the
maximum porosity change, MaxPor, between 100% water filled and 100% oil filled represents
the water salinity porosity correction, ϕwater, minus the oil API porosity correction, ϕoil. This can
be written as:
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑃𝑜𝑟 = ∅𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 − ∅𝑜𝑖𝑙 (Eq. 18)

Where,
∅𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = 𝑄𝐿𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 − 𝑄𝑇𝑃𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (Eq. 19)

And
∅𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑄𝐿𝑜𝑖𝑙 − 𝑄𝑇𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑙 (Eq. 20)
for a water of a fixed salinity and oil of a fixed API.
Increasing Porosity
Figure 12: QTP vs QL Porosity Tied For Water Salinity A
The relationship between QTP and QL responses for different salinities and oil API were measured
in the Roke test facility. Two charts were created. One was for water salinity porosity corrections
and the other for oil API porosity corrections. Both charts can be found in the appendices.
The response charts were created under ideal lab conditions with parameters specific to the test
environment. To use the charts for different measurement environments, the Quad Neutron
Liquid span coefficient, k, was added to the saturation equation. The Quad Neutron Liquid span
coefficient, k, is computed as follows:
32.5∗65
𝑘= (Eq. 21)
𝑄𝐿𝐴∗𝑄𝑇𝑃𝐴∗(∅𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 − ∅𝑂𝑖𝑙 )
Where,
𝑄𝐿𝐴 = “A” value for Quad Liquid, which can be found on the log zone listings
𝑄𝑇𝑃𝐴 = “A” value for Quad Total porosity from log zone listings
∅𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = water salinity porosity correction from the chart
∅𝑂𝑖𝑙 = oil API porosity correction from the chart
We now know the maximum porosity sensitivity for the given measurement environment. If we
now look at a ratio of the measured porosity sensitivity versus the maximum possible porosity
sensitivity, we have a percentage representation of the two liquids, saturation. This
representation can be written as
𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑘 ∗ (∅𝑄𝑇𝑝 − ∅𝑄𝐿 ) (Eq. 22)
We now have a quantifiable relationship for saturation based on porosity sensitivity to fluid type,
uncorrected for environment effects, lithology and independent of QTP and QL gains.
Environmental effects are corrected based on overlay processing techniques. When we look at
environmental influences on QTP and QL, we see that QTP is a function of CSG, Cement,
Formation, fluid in the pore space of the formation with fluid effects minimized, while QL is a
function of CSG, Cement, Formation, fluid in the pore space of the formation with fluid effects
maximized. When we overlay them, we are getting rid of similarities.
Quad Density
There is a natural relationship between gamma counts and density. The higher the density the
lower the gamma counts. Density measurements typically use a gamma source of a known
energy and based on the number of counts measured on the detector, the relative density in the
volume of investigation can be computed. For Quad Neutron, we use the balanced relationship
between NN and NG. We normalize the response of the singles curves too porosity. If we assume
that the density variability between liquids is negligible compared to the matrix, our density
relationship should follow porosity. If we see the NG counts drop relative to NN counts we can
assume that a high density material was encountered in the measured volume. If we see the NG
counts go up relative to the NN counts, then we can assume that a light density material was
encountered.
The change in NG due to density shows up in our QL curve because of how the computation was
done to enhance fluid sensitivity. We therefore need to apply a density correction to the QL
curve. The resulting curve is called the Quad Liquid Saturation curve and can be computed as
follows:
𝑄𝐿𝑆𝑊 = 𝑄𝐿 − 𝐶𝐸 ∗ 𝑒 𝑏 (Eq. 23)
Where b is the density correction factor and CE is the density computed by subtracting the LNG
porosity normalized response from the LNN porosity normalized response. The CE density curve
is then converted to a density porosity curve, CEP by overlaying with QTP and cross-checked with
QC lithology/effective porosity – we should see shale separation between CEP and QTP thru the
same intervals where we see shale on clay. Clean water filled zones should have QTP overlaying
CEP the same as open hole neutron and density porosity. If an additional tie point is made
available, the CEP curve can be quantified in bulk density if the density matrix input is made
available.
A similar technique for determining a neutron gamma density was present at the SPWLA 53rd
Annual Logging Symposium, June 16-20, 2012, titled “Neutron-Gamma Density (NGD): Principles,
Field Test Results and Log Quality Control of a Radioisotope-free Bulk Density Measurement.”.
This paper presents some basic physics around the concept of doing density measurements
without a density source. There are a number of differences between ours and their approach,
as follows:
1. Quad Neutron is using a constant neutron source emitting lower mean energies of fast
neutrons, resulting in less fast neutron activation gamma effects that may alter the
gamma/neutron relationship
2. Quad Neutron is only using thermal neutron field (NN measurements) to correct for
thermal neutron effects.
3. Quad Neutron is using a balanced compensated measurement technique for both physics
to correct for borehole effects, which cannot be physically done in the discussed method
due to the physical design of the pulsed neutron generators
The Quad Neutron density processing method can be summarized as follows:
1. Create Relative Density curve from gamma/neutron field relationship. We do this by

normalizing the single detector responses of the two physics (neutron and gamma) to
porosity and then simply subtract the long neutron gamma porosity from the long
neutron porosity.
2. Create Density Porosity curve by normalizing relative density curve to our Quad Total
Porosity curve.
The Quad Neutron density curve is used to correct QL for saturation calculations, for gas flagging
and to qualitative check shale intervals.
Quad Neutron Saturation Equation

The majority of the environmental factors have been accounted for due to the overlay process
between QL and QTP, the manner in which the equations were derived and with the density
correction applied to QL. The last aspect to account for is the formation factor, which takes into
account the formation field effect differences between the NN and NG fields. If we let F represent
the Quad Neutron Formation factor, the Soil equation can be now written as
F
𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑄𝑇𝑃 ∗ k ∗ (∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 − ∅𝑄𝐿𝑆𝑊 ) (Eq. 24)
Assuming liquid saturation only, we can solve for water saturation, S w, as

F
𝑆𝑤 = 1 − 𝑄𝑇𝑃 ∗ k ∗ (∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 − ∅𝑄𝐿𝑆𝑊 ) (Eq. 25)
Where
𝐹 = Quad Neutron formation factor

𝑘 = Quad Neutron liquid span coefficient
∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 = Quad Neutron total porosity
∅𝑄𝐿𝑆𝑊 = Density corrected Quad Neutron liquid porosity
QTP = QUAD Total Porosity
Quad Neutron liquid span coefficient, k, is computed as:
32.5∗65
𝑘= (Eq. 26)
𝑄𝐿𝐴∗𝑄𝑇𝑃𝐴∗(∅𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 − ∅𝑂𝑖𝑙 )
Where,
𝑄𝐿𝐴 = “A” value for Quad Liquid, which can be found on the log zone listings
𝑄𝑇𝑃𝐴 = “A” value for Quad Total porosity from log zone listings
∅𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = water salinity porosity correction from the chart
∅𝑂𝑖𝑙 = oil API porosity correction from the chart
The following is an example of how to compute saturation using the Quad Neutron saturation
equation. Given water salinity of 60 kppm, oil API of 15, Quad Liquid A of 22.6, Quad Total
Porosity A of 65, ∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 of 22.5, ∅𝑄𝐿𝑠𝑤 of 20 and F of 20, determine 𝑆𝑤 .
𝑄𝑇𝑃 = 22.5
𝐹 = 20
𝑄𝑇𝑃𝐴 = 65
𝑄𝐿𝐴 = 22.6
First step is to compute the Quad Neutron Liquid span coefficient, k. To do this, use the Water
Salinity Porosity Correction chart and look up the porosity correction value for 60kppm water,
which will be 94%.
Next use the Oil API Porosity Correction chart and look up the porosity correction value for 15
API oil, which will be 73%.
∅𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = 94
∅𝑂𝑖𝑙 = 73
Compute the Quad Neutron Liquid span coefficient using the given Quad Liquid A value, the Quad
Total Porosity gain value and the porosity corrections from above.
32.5 ∗ 65
𝑘= = 0.0685
22.6 ∗ 65 ∗ (94 − 73)
Compute Sw using the given formation factor, ∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 and ∅𝑄𝐿𝑠𝑤 and k.
𝑆𝑤 = 1 − 20/22.5 ∗ 0.0685 ∗ (22.5 − 20) = 0.85
Please note that filters are applied at the end of the Sw calculation. The filter length used on the
original processing will also be listed in the zone parameters. The filter length units will be in the
depth units used for the log. For example, if the filter is listed as 2 and the log was done in feet,
the filter is a 2 foot triangle filter.
Gas Saturation
To calculate Sgas we are using similar approach as with open hole by utilizing Density/Neutron
overlay. For Quad Neutron we utilize three overlays: QTP / Normalized Density porosity, QTP /
DDN and QTP / QL. For QTP / NDPOR, QTP reads lower than NDPOR in gas filled intervals.
For QTP / DDN, DDN is going to be more affected by presence of gas than QTP and therefore we
should see DDN reading lower than QTP in gas filled intervals. For QTP / QL we see QL reading
higher than QTP in dry gas filled intervals, and if light oil is presented in a mix with the gas, QL
will be lower than QTP.
The Roke Sgas algorithm is as follows:
We calculate Soil based on QTP and QL separation. Everything that is not oil is either gas or
water. To calculate Sgas we are using weighted function on overlays QTP/DDN and
NDPOR/QTP. Our typical weighting is 25% QTP/DDN and 75% NDPOR/QTP. The absolute
difference between the curves is normalized to max difference in 100% gas saturated interval.
Re-writing these statements as a function:
𝑄𝑇𝑃−𝑁𝐷𝑃𝑂𝑅 𝑄𝑇𝑃−𝐷𝐷𝑁
S𝑔𝑎𝑠 = 𝑎 ∗ ( ) + (1 − 𝑎 ) ∗ ( ) (Eq. 27)
𝑐 𝑑
Where,
𝑎 = weight function for each overlay

c = QTP – NDPOR normalization
d = QTP – DDN normalization
Some cased hole gas saturation methods utilize SNN/LNN overlays but the method is very
subjective, and requires reference data to compare the overlay quality.
How We Process - Understanding the Overlay Technique and QLgain

The entire Quad Neutron measurement approach is based on measurement overlay techniques,
which are commonly used in the analysis of log data. For example, we commonly overlay neutron
with density, or neutron with acoustic to determine information about the formation. For Quad
Neutron we overlay our Quad Liquid to Quad Total Porosity and Dual Detector Neutron to Quad
Total Porosity. Quad Liquid and Quad Total Porosity are especially powerful in that they built to
exploit the relationships between NN porosity and NG porosity.
QTP is a function of the measuring environment i.e. fluid in the CSG, CSG, cement, formation, etc.
QL is going to be affected by the same environment factors in a similar way as QTP. The biggest
difference between these two curves is in how they react to fluid in the pore-space. QTP is liquid
independent while QL is liquid dependent and that dependency is gained by using two
measurement physics, NN and NG.
Another parameter which is going to affect QL more significantly than QTP is the bulk density. In
higher density zones, QL reads lower than QTP, creating an artificial oil response. This is not an
issue if the zone is thick as the interval would be zoned to renormalize the overlay between QTP
and QL and the singles which will reset the relative bulk density to zero and as such QLSW = QL -
b * 0 = QL. In smaller zones that have higher relative bulk density than the zone, we simply apply
the relative bulk density correction to QL to compute QLSW.
In the end, when we use the difference between QTP-QLSW (QLSW is corrected for the bulk
density), we cancel out environment effects common for both curves.
Let’s say QTP is set and we are working to overlay QL with QTP. There are two parameters we
can adjust to overlay QTP and QL. We can either shift QL and/or we can gain QL. Adjusting QL
gain is related to water salinity in the measured volume and by including QL gain into the
saturation equation (in the Quad Neutron Liquid span coefficient) we are setting the reference
point for water salinity. By using our charts and fluid sensitivity, we can estimate the water
salinity based on the same QL and QTP gain.
Why is this important? We need to have a salinity reference point to compute saturation and
sometimes we do not know water salinity in the zone of interest. Sometimes we believe we know
the water salinity but it is wrong. Even water salinity from the produced water does not represent
the water salinity in the zone. For example, if several intervals are perforated each with different
salinities, the produced water salinity will be a salinity based on the volume and salinity of the
water contributed from each zone.
Another example of when water salinity should agree but does not is in mature water flood fields.
The produced water salinity will typically be similar to the injected waters and not necessarily the
same salinity as where the oil is seen. Why? The injected water will flow through the best
permeable intervals which are already swept by the flood and the less permeable intervals will
still contain the oil and original formation water. To compute saturation, which is a percentage
of one fluid against another, the two fluids need to be correctly identified.
Water properties can also change over time as the flushed zone cleans up through production.
For example, it is not uncommon to see drilling mud after perforating, which is going to be
substituted with water and later with the oil. So any water sample acquired months after
producing will not represent the salinity measured insitu during the logging operations.
OH and other cased hole measurements are going to be affected by uncertain water salinity. The
biggest difference between the measurements will be on how robust the processing algorithm is
to handle the different uncertainties.
Figure 13: Quad Neutron – Quad Proc Processing Flowchart
Processing Methodology
The Quad Neutron measurement and the methodology to determine porosity and saturation are
a first in the industry. Being first does have its challenges. One of the challenges is the lack of
petro-physical software that can be used to efficiently process Quad Neutron data. As such, Roke
developed Quad Neutron processing software. The software package is called Quad Proc. In
addition to handling Quad Neutron data, Quad Proc can handle many different input data formats
and types including open hole, core, formation tops, well schematics etc. Output options have
also been developed to efficiently create single log outputs, LAS data and multi-log posters. This
section will not discuss the details of all the software features. Instead this section will cover the
methodology and process overview to create an interpretable output starting with raw data.
A Quad Neutron processing flow chart is shown on the previous page. Starting from the top, Quad
Neutron raw input data and any available auxiliary data are loaded into a Quad Proc project. If
the data was acquired in memory, the memory time data is merged with a depth time file. The
merged file is then split into up and down logging passes. Calibrations are applied and all passes
are put on depth.
A wellbore diagram is created next to assist in verifying reasons for environmental changes.
Passes are checked for repeatability and to identify any moving borehole fluids. The input curves
to be processed are then mapped to a processing product along with any additional auxiliary data
the log processor may want to see, i.e well path or OH gamma ray etc.
Once the curves are mapped the program generates a single zone processing panel and displays
the default QTP, QL, DDN, Quad Clay and singles curves on the screen. The processor typically
will start at the bottom zone and will work their way up hole. The notes written here assume this
process. The remainder of the process is to set the input values for the computed curves. The
generic process for all inputs is as follows:
1. Use previously established values if available, or

2. Set values to agree with previously established auxiliary inputs, such as core or production
water salinity, or
3. Set values from local knowledge, geological, geophysical and/or petro-physical, or
4. Set values from charts, or
5. Set values based on experience with similar formation and wellbore conditions.
These five steps will not be reiterated for each node along the process.
The first curve that needs to be set is QTP, as it will be the primary reference curve. To do this,
QTP gain and shift inputs are entered based on casing and bit size as is the lithology correction
based on high or low compacted formation (limestone vs sandstone). These parameters are set
for the different casing bit size changes by creating zones at the change point and adjusting the
QTP gain and shift for each zone as required.
The process now splits into two paths, singles and QL/DDN. Both are used to identify
environmental changes within the wellbore. Once the change is identified, a zone is created and
the environmental correction is applied for the zone. The recommended process is to follow
down the singles path.
The singles are normalized to QTP by adjusting each single to match QTP. The singles are now in
porosity units. A tie point is selected in a high clay or shale interval based on either the Quad Clay
curve or the Gamma curve. Once the tie point is selected, the overlay of the singles is critiqued
for alignment and overlay quality. If the singles do not align for the entire zone, the point at
where they become misaligned is investigated to determine why. The well schematic is reviewed
for potential reasons as are any other sources of information such as drilling or completion
reports. Once the reason for the environmental change has been identified, the reason is
documented in the zone comments section and a new zone is created. The processor can then
opt to continue working with the singles to establish all required environmental zone corrections
or they may opt to finish processing zone by zone. We will follow down the path to finish
processing the zone.
Once the singles are aligned, the CE curve will be created. The CE density curve is then converted
to a density porosity curve, CEP, by overlaying with QTP and cross-checked with QC
lithology/effective porosity – we should see shale separation between CEP and QTP thru the
same intervals where we see shale on clay. Clean water filled zones should have QTP overlaying
CEP the same as open hole neutron and density porosity. If not the singles may need to be retied
and the process repeated. Quad Clay and lithology are now worked on.
Quad Clay gain and shift values are set based on the generic process. Next Lithology is created
Quad Clay by setting shale, silt and sand cutoffs on the Quad clay curve based on the generic
process. Once the Quad Clay Lithology is created it is compared against GR. If there are significant
differences, GR lithology will be created and compared to Quad Clay lithology. The differences
will be investigated and resolved and then based on the findings, the PClay method will be chosen
and PClay will be set by the generic process.
We have now established CE, Quad Clay and PClay curves in preparation to compute saturation
but we need to finish the other side of the process, which is to establish the overlays for QL and
DDN.
QL and DDN overlays are an iterative process with many checks and balances. The generic process
is followed throughout. If parameters have been established based on an offset well with
matching environmental conditions, the same values can be used straight through to saturation.
If this is the case, it is still recommended to go thru the QL/DDN process loop for quality control.
To begin, the QL curve gain is set match input water salinity. QL is then shifted to overlay QTP in
a 100% water zone of the matching water salinity. The overlay is then analyzed. QL should not be
reading higher than QTP through any potential production intervals in the zone. If it does, it
indicates higher water salinity in the interval. The processor needs to decide to leave the shift as
is and continue processing or they can readjust the salinity by changing QL gain or create a zone
specific for the new salinity. Another overlay check is to confirm that QL is reading lower than
QTP in tight or high density areas within the zone.
Assuming an acceptable QL/QTP overlay or to proceed with a shift on QL relative to QTP, DDN is
gained and shifted to overlay with QTP. The overlay is then analyzed. In shales DDN should read
the same or slightly higher than QTP and in tight intervals, DDN should read lower than QTP. If it
is not possible to overlay QTP in the zone, the processor can opt to create a zone.
Once the DDN/QTP overlay is accepted, the next step is to confirm the overlay against the QL/QTP
overlay. To do this the processor is now interpreting the result and looking for contradictions
between the overlays and known log responses. For example, if QL/QTP identified a salty water
interval, DDN should be lower than QTP through this interval. If DDN/QTP is indicating gas then
QL should be reading higher than QTP, etc.
If the overlays do not agree with each other, the processor can readjust the QL gain or go back
to the DDN/QTP overlay to readjust the input parameters on DDN or create a zone if the overlay
is correct in some intervals and not in others.
With all curves overlaid the processor can now look to saturation. The formation factor, F, needs
to be input based on the generic process. The other parameter that needs to be set is the relative
bulk density correction factor, b. The relative bulk density correction factor is usually set to 0, i.e.
no correction required. If QL is starting to read lower than QTP in tight calcified stringers, the
correction will need to be applied. Once F and b are set, the saturation result is checked for
quality control.
Quality control checks at this stage include the following:
1. Ensure that oil saturation does not exceed 100%. If this is the case the processor needs to
review F or b input values or QL fluid inputs and resulting gain.
2. There should be no oil saturation in shales that are not organic. If oil saturation is seen in
the shale, then the processor needs to review the QL overlay and/or the b input and/or
the lithology inputs.
3. There is oil in sands that do not have oil in them. Caution is advised when using this check
as we have had examples of seeing oil in historical water sands that were subsequently
perforated and are now producing oil. Nonetheless, to explore the quality of the
processing and to assume there is no oil in the sand would mean that QL overlay and or
gain is incorrect for the sand in question.
If the saturation result has passed all quality control checks available to the processor, it is
finalized and sent to the customer for review. If there are issues related to the final results that
cannot be resolved with the current information, a draft output can be made and taken for
review to see if the customer has any additional inputs or information that would explain the
identified issues. The additional information can then be input into the process to confirm
assumptions and then if correct, the result is finalized with hard copy outputs.
Appendices
Water Salinity Porosity Correction ............................................................................................... 37
Oil API Porosity Correction ........................................................................................................... 38
Revision History ............................................................................................................................ 39
Water Salinity Porosity Correction

Water Salinity Porosity Correction
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
Salinity (kppm)
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115
Water Porosity (%)
Oil API Porosity Correction

Oil API Porosity Correction
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
Oil (API)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
0
70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85
Oil Porosity (%)
Revision History
10 May 2018: Sw equation updated by A.Kalistratov.
09 Jul 2017: Document updated and reformatted by H.Kramer
02 Mar 2016: Document updated by A.Kalistratov and formatted by H.Kramer
16 Feb 2015: Original document created by H.Kramer from material provided by A.Kalistratov

Quad Neutron Measurement and Interpretation Guide Revision 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Quad Neutron Measurement and Interpretation Guide Revision 4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Quad Neutron Measurement and Interpretation Guide Revision 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

QUAD NEUTRON MEASUREMENT AND

Revised: 02 March 2016

This page intentionally left blank

What and How We Measure

Figure 1: Quad Neutron Sensor Configuration

Neutron Porosity Measurements

1. Effective porosity (amount of pore-space without clay bound water),

Figure 2: Thermal Neutron Porosity Relationship vs Detector Source Spacing

The first issue is with hydrogen in the

Figure 3: Hydrogen in Pore Space and Matrix

Table 1: Nuclear Properties of Common Downhole Fluid Elements

Element Symbol Z Mass Sigma Therm*

𝐴𝑚𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑛 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒

∅𝑁 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙) ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 2)

HI represents the hydrogen index of the fluid in the pore space

To summarize our key points around neutron porosity we see that:

Increasing Water Salinity Increasing Oil API

Figure 4: Neutron Neutron and Neutron Gamma Porosity Fluid Sensitivity

Table 2: Common Thermal Neutron Radiative Capture Nuclides

Counts per second

∅𝑁𝑁 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 3)

∅𝑁𝐺 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 4)

Quad Total Porosity, QTP

Figure 5: Neutron Neutron and Neutron Gamma Fluid Insensitive Porosity

∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁−𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 5)

Shale Volume Correction

Figure 6: Vshale Methods from Gamma Ray

We can use standard OH approach of using Gr as follows:

1. Calculate ΔGr, based on shale/sand line

This algorithm is implemented in the Quad Neutron processing software.

Figure 7: Vshale & Effective Porosity from Gamma Ray Vsh

Where A, B and C are determined empirically.

𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 = 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 9)

∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁−𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 (Eq. 10)

5. Calculate effective porosity using QTP – a * QC.

Figure 8: Vshale & Effective Porosity from Quad Clay

Dry Lithology Model

Increasing Water Salinity Increasing Oil API

Figure 9: Neutron Neutron and Inverted Neutron Gamma Porosities

∅𝑁𝑁 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 11)

∅𝑁𝐺 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 12)

∅𝑄𝐿 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁+𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑉𝑠ℎ ∗ 𝐻𝐼𝑠ℎ (Eq. 13)

∅𝑄𝐿 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁+𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 (Eq. 14)

We can represent this graphically as shown in figure 10.

∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁−𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 (Eq. 15)

∅𝑄𝐿 = 𝑓(𝐻𝐼, 𝑆𝑎𝑙)𝑁𝑁+𝑁𝐺 ∗ ∅𝑒𝑓𝑓 + 𝑎 ∗ 𝑄𝐶 (Eq. 16)

𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑓(∅𝑄𝑇𝑃 − ∅𝑄𝐿 ) (Eq. 17)

Increasing Water Salinity Increasing Oil API

Figure 11: QTP vs QL Porosity Tied for Fresh Water

𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑃𝑜𝑟 = ∅𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 − ∅𝑜𝑖𝑙 (Eq. 18)

∅𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = 𝑄𝐿𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 − 𝑄𝑇𝑃𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (Eq. 19)

∅𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑄𝐿𝑜𝑖𝑙 − 𝑄𝑇𝑃𝑜𝑖𝑙 (Eq. 20)

for a water of a fixed salinity and oil of a fixed API.

Increasing Water Salinity Increasing Oil API

Figure 12: QTP vs QL Porosity Tied For Water Salinity A

𝑆𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 𝑘 ∗ (∅𝑄𝑇𝑝 − ∅𝑄𝐿 ) (Eq. 22)

𝑄𝐿𝑆𝑊 = 𝑄𝐿 − 𝐶𝐸 ∗ 𝑒 𝑏 (Eq. 23)

The Quad Neutron density processing method can be summarized as follows: