Effective Pulsed-Neutron Logging in both Tubing and Casing
for Brown Fields
By
M L Sanni, S McFadden, Shell Pet Dev Co Nigeria, S Kimminau Shell International,
P Wanjau, L. Silipigno, Schlumberger Sugar Land, B. Roscoe, Schlumberger Ridgefield.
ABSTRACT
Reliable logging in both tubing and
casing in Niger-Delta oilfields has
allowed bypassed oil to be found and
produced for very low costs, typically
less than 1 dollar per barrel. Fields in the
Niger-Delta often consist of a stack of
many “completable” reservoirs, each
seldom more than a few hundreds of feet
thick, but together stretching over
several thousands of feet vertically. In
most completions many potential
reservoir intervals are behind both
casing or liner and at least one string of
tubing.
Cased-hole logging provides
information on fluid contact movements
and thus reservoir connectivity during
the production life; it has identified
bypassed oil previously thought to have
been developed by existing producers
and, conversely, unperforated sands
being drained via neighboring
reservoirs. Carbon-oxygen logging
through both casing and tubing became
possible in 1991 with the introduction of
a 1 11/16 in. OD tool. However, the tool
was originally intended to be conveyed
through tubing on its way to an interval
with a single casing or liner below the
tubing shoe, and it had not yet been
characterized for logging inside two
steel tubulars.
1
Initial field trials inside two tubulars
concentrated on establishing fluid
contacts on an empirical basis, while a
research program provided both Monte-
Carlo modeling data and a laboratory
characterization database. Laboratory
data have been acquired in 68
conditions, characterizing tubing sizes
of 2 3/8 and 3.5 in. within 8.5 and 12
in. boreholes. A software job planning
tool calculates carbon-oxygen yields and
statistical precision under a variety of
completion conditions, allowing the
optimal data acquisition program to be
planned. Interpolation between different
completion cases is not automated
because of the sparsity of the
measurements and the complexity of the
completion geometry, but a library of
well-characterized cases allows inter-
comparison.
Field results have been encouraging,
with more than 70 percent of cases
clearly indicating fluid contacts that
have subsequently been proven by re-
completion. The new characterizations
and their inclusion in the planning
database are currently under field test.
INTRODUCTION
Pulsed-neutron logging is today the
primary means of identifying unswept
and bypassed hydrocarbons in producing
oilfields all over the world. The theory
of operation of such devices is explained
in detail in standard texts(1). Two basic
elements are critical to the successful
application of this technique in the
Niger-Delta: the availability of a 1-
11/16-in. OD carbon-oxygen log, and
the response characterization for
through-tubing-and-casing conditions.
Pulsed neutron logs fall into two main
categories; pulsed-neutron capture, or
PNC logs, which have been available for
many years in 1 11/16-in. (42mm) OD,
but which suffer from reduced
sensitivity in low or variable water-
salinity environments, and pulsed-
neutron spectrometry, or PNS logs,
which measure the carbon-cxygen (C/O
ratio) and are insensitive to water
salinity, but due to technical reasons
have not historically been available in
diameters smaller than about 3 inches.
In 1991 a new PNS carbon-oxygen tool
became available(2,3) in 1 11/16-in. OD,
making logging through both casing and
tubing possible. However, the tool was
originally intended to be conveyed
through tubing on its way to an interval
with a single casing or liner below the
tubing shoe, and it had not yet been
characterized for logging inside two
steel tubulars.
PNC logs are relatively insensitive to the
steel borehole contents because they
respond mainly to the thermal neutron
capture die-away time in the rock
2
formation surrounding the borehole. The
borehole effects are largely compensated
by a time-based processing system(4).
PNS logs on the other hand record a
spectrum which comes simultaneously
from both the borehole and the
formation, and respond to carbon and
oxygen atoms in both regions.
Effective pulsed-neutron logging
through tubing and casing in the Niger
Delta requires a tool capable of both
PNC and PNS carbon-oxygen
measurements, packaged in 1 11/16-in.
OD, posessing accurate characterization
of the tool response in these special
conditions so that formation carbon
content, and hence oil saturation, can be
determined accurately enough to
unambiguously detect unswept oil, or
conversely to show its absence.
RESERVOIR CONNECTIVITY IN
THE NIGER DELTA
Typical Niger-Delta oilfields consist of a
stack of many “completable” reservoirs,
each seldom more than a few hundreds
of feet thick, but together stretching over
several thousands of feet vertically. In
most completions many potential
reservoir intervals are behind both
casing or liner and at least one string of
tubing. If reservoir connectivity were
reliably known, location of unswept
reserves would be a much easier task,
for example evidence of water
production at an up-dip sand would
provide conclusive evidence that down-
dip sands had already been swept.
Conversely evidence that a down-dip
sand is still oil-bearing leads to the
conclusion that up-dip sands are still
unswept and are targets for re-
completion. Without absolutely reliable
reservoir connectivity data, a very large
uncertainty exists in knowledge of
reservoir drainage patterns.
Cased-hole logging provides
information on fluid contacts in each
well logged. Measurements made over
time reveal movements and thus
reservoir connectivity during the
production life. Accurate and reliable
OWC (Oil-Water Contact) data can
identify bypassed oil previously thought
to have been developed by existing
producers and, conversely, unperforated
sands being drained via neighboring
reservoirs. The Niger-Delta examples
show both cases, allowing recovery of
previously unswept oil, and also
avoidance of water-swept zones. Figure
1 illustrates a case in which a thin shale
separates two sands, but it is continuous
and impermeable enough to prevent
vertical sweep between the two sands.
Figure 2 illustrates another case, in
which the lower sand is in vertical
communication with the upper sand
(which is being produced in another
well), although in this case the shale is
thicker, and might have been thought to
be an effective seal.
SPECIAL CHARACTERISATION
Some log measurements (such as
resistivity) have responses which can be
calculated for many environments by the
use of precise and completely
characterized physical models. Nuclear
logs in general, and PNS logs in
particular, must be characterized for a
given environment, typically through
laboratory measurements. Useful
3
characterization data can also be
obtained through nuclear Monte-Carlo
modeling methods, although some
difficulties remain with the absolute
accuracy of prediction of this technique.
Several factors contribute to
inaccuracies, the most important of
which is the problem of modeling the
fine details of detector response. The
effectiveness of Monte-Carlo can be
greatly improved if “benchmark”
laboratory data is available, that is data
sets which are measured sufficiently
“close” in completion parameter space
to assume an acceptable degree of
similarity across typical porosity
variations encountered in a well.
Why then is the through-tubing-and-
casing situation so difficult to
characterize? One simple reason is the
fact that two borehole fluids, or even
mixtures, are now involved; the
production tubing contents and the
tubing-casing annulus contents. Carbon-
oxygen logs have different sensitivities
to fluids in the different regions.
Another complication is that the tubing
may be centered or eccentered within
the casing. In some cases two tubing
strings are present in the casing.
Benchmark carbon-oxygen
measurements through both casing and
tubing were carried out at the
Schlumberger Environmental Effects
Calibration Facility (EECF), Houston,
Texas.
Two typical completions were identified
and constructed for use with existing
EECF neutron tank formations. Figure 4
shows a side-view schematic of a single
tubing inside the casing in an EECF
neutron tank, with the 1 11/16-in. OD
carbon-oxygen tool inside the tubing.
The tool was eccentered in the tubing
during all measurements. For the single
tubing measurements, the tubing was
positioned both centered and eccentered
in the casing. For the dual tubing
measurements, the tubing axes were
positioned at the 1/3 and 2/3 points of
the inner casing diameter.
Measurements were made in a total of
68 combinations of fluids and tubing
positions. These are summarized in
Table 1, and the computed
carbon/oxygen ratios are plotted in
Figures 5 to 8. The fluid endpoints
represented in the figures are: WW -
water in borehole and water in the
formation, OW - oil in borehole and
water in the formation, WO - water in
the borehole and oil in the formation,
and OO - oil in the borehole and oil in
the formation.
PNS RESPONSE IN BOTH TUBING
AND CASING
Figures 5 and 6 show results obtained in
a single 2 3/8-in. tubing within a 7-in.
casing. The two rhomboids labeled “No
Tubing” are the same in each diagram
and are the same as are published in
standard response charts. They serve as
a reference for the other two cases in
each figure, which show the effect of
centered and eccentered tubing. As one
might expect, the tubing measurements
show a reduced carbon sensitivity in oil-
filled tubing (Figure 6). It is also
interesting to note that the extra tubing
steel around the tool produces a
noticeable offset in the zero-carbon
(water-water) case.
4
Figures 6 and 7 show the corresponding
results for 3 1/2-in. tubing in 9 5/8-in.
casing. Again, the two rhomboids
labeled “No Tubing” are the same in
each diagram and are the same as are
published in standard response charts,
serving as a reference for the other two
cases. As expected, the environmental
effects are much larger than in the case
of smaller tubing and casing. Whilst the
responses seen in Figures 5 and 6 could
be “re-normalized” if sands with known
or inferred saturation are used as a
reference, it can be seen that these
effects in larger diameters imply
significant changes in response.
Response rhomboids such as these have
previously been published in response
charts, (only for the single-casing
situation), but a new software job
planning tool calculates carbon-oxygen
yields and statistical precision under a
variety of completion conditions,
allowing the optimal data acquisition
program to be planned. For the multiple-
tubing completion geometry,
interpolation between different
completion cases is not automated
because of the sparsity of the
measurements and the complexity of the
completion geometry, but a library of
well-characterized cases allows inter-
comparison.
NIGER-DELTA APPLICATION
AND RESULTS
Figure 3 shows analysis of a carbon-
oxygen log in a typical Niger-Delta well
with two sands presented within the
logged interval. These sands were
interpreted from open hole logs to share
a common original OWC close to the
bottom of the lower sand. An RST-A*
log run in both 2 3/8-in. tubing and 7-in.
casing has been interpreted to show that
two different current Oil-Water contacts
are present, and hence that the shale
between the sands is acting as a vertical
flow barrier. Note that although the
characterization is not yet perfect
(mismatches can be seen between the
original saturation in unswept zones), it
is nevertheless quite “fit-for-purpose” to
achieve the objective of locating
unswept oil, especially with regard to re-
perforation.
CONCLUSIONS
Application of pulsed neutron
hydrocarbon-water contact logging in
Niger-Delta reservoirs has been
encouraging, with more than 70 percent
of cases clearly indicating fluid contacts
that have subsequently been proven by
re-completion. Finding and production
costs are very low, typically less than 1
dollar per barrel.
Through tubing and casing carbon-
oxygen log laboratory data have been
acquired in 68 conditions, characterizing
tubing sizes of 2 3/8 and 3.5-in. within
8.5 and 12 in. cased boreholes,
respectively. The new characterizations
and their inclusion in the planning
database are currently under field test.
5
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank Shell
Petroleum Development Company of
Nigeria and Schlumberger Oilfield
services for permission to publish the
log examples and RST* characterization
data. Personal thanks are due to Mr Ton
Loermans of SPDC who initiated and
supported much of the work, and to
professor Max Peeters, formerly of
Shell, and now professor of petrophysics
at Colorado School of Mines.
*Mark of Schlumberger
REFERENCES
1. Well Logging for Earth Scientists, Chapter
13- Pulsed Neutron Devices, pp281-304,
Darwin V Ellis, Elsevier New York 1987.
2. “A New Through-Tubing Oil-Saturation
Measurement System,” B A Roscoe, R A
Adolph, Y Boutemy, J C Cheeseborough, J
S Hall, D C McKeon, D Pittman, B Seeman,
and S R Thomas, paper SPE 21413
presented at the SPE Middle East Oil Show,
Bahrain, 16-19 November 1991.
3. “A New Compensated Through-Tubing
Carbon/Oxygen Tool for use in Flowing
Wells,” H D Scott, C Stoller, B A Roscoe,
R E Plasek, and R A Adolph, paper MM,
presented at the SPWLA 32nd Annual
Logging Symposium, June 16-19, 1991.
4. “Improved Pulsed Neutron Capture Logging
With Slim Carbon-Oxygen Tools:
Methodology,” R E Plasek, R A Adolph, C
Stoller, D J Willis, E E Bordon and M G
Portal, paper SPE 30598 presented at the
SPE Annual Technical Conference and
exhibition, Dallas, USA, 22-25 October
1995.
 Table 1: LABORATORY MEASUREMENT LISTING

Configuation 1 8 ½ in. Borehole / 7 in. Casing / No Tubing (33 p.u. Sandstone Formation)
Configuation 2 8 ½ in. Borehole / 7 in. Casing / Single 2 3/8 in. Tubing (33 p.u. Sandstone Formation)
Configuation 3 8 ½ in. Borehole / 7 in. Casing / Dual 2 3/8 in. Tubing (33 p.u. Sandstone Formation)
Configuation 4 12 in. Borehole / 9 5/8 in. Casing / No Tubing (33 p.u. Sandstone Formation)
Configuation 5 12 in. Borehole / 9 5/8 in. Casing / Single 3 ½ in. Tubing (33 p.u. Sandstone Formation)
The tool is positioned eccentered in tubing 1 throughout
Note: Water* Fresh water, 0 kppm
Config Tubing 1 Tubing 1 Tubing 2 Tubing 2 Borehole Fluids1 Formation
Positions Fluids Position Fluids Fluids
1 Water* Oil Water* Oil

2 CEN2 ECC3 Water* Oil Water* Oil Air Water* Oil

3 1/34 Water* Oil 2/34 Water* Oil Water* Oil Water* Oil

4 Water* Oil Water* Oil

5 CEN2 ECC3 Water* Oil Water* Oil Air Water* Oil

1) When tubings are present, ‘Borehole’ refers to tubing - casing annulus

2) CEN = Centralized
3) ECC = Eccentralized
4) In the dual tubing configurations, each tubing axis is positioned at 1/3 and 2/3 of the inner casing diameter
1 11/16” OD C/O Tool Eccentered in Tubing

Single Tubing Eccentered in Casing

Formation Flush
Formation Material

Casing and Cement Sheath

Formation Drain
Spool

Borehole Fill & Drain

Rathole

Fig. 4 Neutron Laboratory Measurement Formation Schematic

6
 Sand 1

Sand 2

Original OWC

Thin Shale Separates Sands 1 & 2

Sand 1

Sand 2

Different OWCs

Figure 1. Thin shale between sands 1 & 2 does act as a flow barrier,
PNS log in a well shows different OWCs due to production.

Sand I

Sand II
Original OWC

Thick Shale Separates Sands I & II

Sand I

Sand II
Same OWCs

Figure 2. Thick shale between sands I & II surprisingly does not act as a
flow barrier, PNS log shows same new OWCs.

7
 Caliper GR Carbon-Oxygen Analysis

UnSwept

Swept

UnSwept

Swept

6 Caliper 0 NCOR 0.5 Fraction

0 Gamma Ray 150 0 FCOR 0.5

Figure 3. Field example logged in both tubing and casing (2 3/8 inch tubing
in 7 inch casing, 8.5 inch open hole. Note the clear indication of two
different OWCs in the two sands and the remaining oil targets, as well as
the imperfect but fit-for-purpose analysis (based upon normalisation).

8
 Measured Carbon/Oxygen Ratio Response in Single 2 3/8" Waterfilled Tubing.
8 1/2 in. Borehole, 7 in. Casing, 33 p.u. Sandstone Formation
0.7
OO

0.6
OO
OO
0.5
Far Detector Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

OW
0.4

0.3
OW OW

0.2

WO
0.1 No Tubing

Eccentered Tubing
0
WW
Centered Tubing

-0.1
-0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1
Near Detector Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

Fig. 5: Carbon/Oxygen response in single 2 3/8 in. water filled tubing, 7 in. casing, 8 ½ in. hole

Measured Carbon/Oxygen Ratio Response in Single 2 3/8" Oilfilled Tubing.

8 1/2 in. Borehole, 7 in. Casing, 33 p.u. Sandstone Formation
0.7
OO

0.6
OO
OO

0.5
Far Detector Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

OW
0.4

0.3 OW OW

0.2

WO
0.1 No Tubing

Eccentered Tubing
0
WW
Centered Tubing

-0.1
-0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1
Near Detector Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

Fig. 6: Carbon/Oxygen response in single 2 3/8 in. oil filled tubing, 7 in. casing, 8 ½ in. hole

9
 Measured Carbon/Oxygen Ratio Response in Single 3 1/2" Waterfilled Tubing.
12 in. Borehole, 9 5/8 in. Casing, 33 p.u. Sandstone Formation
1.4

OO
1.2

1
Far Detector Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

OW
0.8
OO OO

0.6
OW
OW

0.4

0.2
WO No Tubing

0 Centered Tubing
WW

Eccentered Tubing
-0.2
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2
Near Detector Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

Fig. 7: Carbon/Oxygen response in single 3 1/2 in. water filled tubing, 9 5/8 in. casing, 12 in. hole

Measured Carbon/Oxygen Ratio Response in Single 3 1/2" Oilfilled Tubing.

12 in. Borehole, 9 5/8 in. Casing, 33 p.u. Sandstone Formation
1.4

OO
1.2

OO
1
OO
Far Detector Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

OW
0.8
OW OW

0.6

0.4

WO
0.2
WO No Tubing

WW Centered Tubing
0 WW

Eccentered Tubing
-0.2
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2
Near Detector Carbon/Oxygen Ratio

Fig. 8: Carbon/Oxygen response in single 3 1/2 in. oil filled tubing, 9 5/8 in. casin
g, 12 in. hole

10