Porosity Logs

Porosity Logs
• Three types:
– Density p. 32-37; Ch.8 (Bossiouni)
– Neutron p.37-42; Ch.9 (Bossiouni)
– Acoustic (Sonic) Ch. 3; Ch. 10 (Bossiouni)
– Chapter 5 Dewan
• Respond to
porosity, lithology, and gas vs. liquid
• When matrix is known and pore fluid is
liquid
– One measurement may suffice
• Otherwise
– Must cover number of unknowns
with same or larger number of equations
6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 1
Recent Developments
• Common use:
– Compensated Density Compensated tools allow for?
– Compensated Neutron Correction of borehole
– Compensated Acoustic (Sonic) Effects, e.g mudcake
• Newer tools:
– Spectral (Litho) Density Measures Pe, and b
– Dual Energy Neutron

– Long Spaced Acoustic (Sonic)
– Full Waveform (Array) Acoustic
• Newest tools:
– Dipole and Multipole Sonic
– Smaller, lighter, cheaper, and more robust
tools
– Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
Compensated Density and
Spectral (Litho) Density Logs
• Gamma ray source
– Cs137
– 0.66 mev
• Gamma ray detector We actually measure
– Scintillation counter electron density
• Pad (mandrel) type device

e- is proportional to b
(g/cm3)
• Two main interactions:
– Compton scattering (collisions with
electrons)
– Photoelectric absorptionPe (b/atom or b/electron)
(related to atomic
6-Sept-2004
number of UHmaterial
PETR6312
also) Porosity
David Patrick Murphy Slide 3
Regions of Compton Scattering and Photoelectric Absorption as
A Function of Gamma Ray Energy
Zn
Most major
elements in
Earth’s crust
Cs 137 Co 60
Slide 4
The Compensated Density Tool
b (g/cm3)
• Compton scattering effects only
• Watch out for washouts and rugose hole
• Depth of investigation rough
– At mid-densities: 90% at 4 inches
Borehole
– At lower densities: slightly greater
– At higher densities: slightly less effects
• Vertical resolution
– About 3 feet Tool
– Better with enhanced processing
• Borehole corrections Borehole
– Use service company charts
Most sensitive to
Formation
When no mudcake is
formed responses are
identical
Most sensitive to
mudcake and borehole
conditions

With increasing mudcake
No Mudcake thickness, rib (curve) indicates
change in count rate at short
spaced and long spaced
detectors.
Slide 7
Variable formation density in Mudcake density greater
the presence of a mudcake of Than formation density.
given density (1.5 gm/cc)
Slide 8
Validate
density log
when
 > 0.15 g/cm3
Ribs for 5 limestone
densities, with varying
synthetic mudcakes
Enter the graph with the

counts from the 2
detectors
Uncompensated density
from long spaced
detector
Density correction 
using both counts:
b = LS+

How to use a spine & rib plot
Enter the graph with the
counts from the 2
detectors
Uncompensated density
from long spaced
detector
Density correction 
using both counts:
b = LS+
Porosity calculated using

uncompensated measurement:
Assuming a sandstone matrix and
brine pore fluid: =50.3%
Compensated measurement
with same assumptions: =39%
(Note: this is at least reasonable
for a very shallow unconsolidated
6-Sept-2004
sand.) Slide 10
 How
Hole accurate
condition? is this
bulk
density?
How to
change
bulk
density
1 minute into
logging porosity?
time
Note that in gas saturated reservoirs
And for salts the correction is significant.
Correction is negligible over a 40% range in porosity Slide 13

for water saturated “standard” lithologies.
Porosity Derivation from Density
Log
• Relationship between bulk density and

porosity follows a linear volumetric
mixing law
Fluid Component + Rock Component = Bulk

Component
f  1   ma  b
f = fluid ma = matrix or grain

Log
• Rearranging to solve for porosity
ma  b From log


ma  f
From invaded zone
From rock knowledge fluid knowledge
• Where do parameters come from?

• Are they readily available?
• What about propagation of error?

From rock knowledge Log
From invaded zone fluid knowledge
• Matrix densities • Fluid densities
– 2.65 g/cm3 for quartz – 1.0 g/cm3 for fresh mud
(sands, etc.)
– 1.1 g/cm3 for salt mud
– 2.68 g/cm3 for limey
sands or sandy limes
– 1.2 g/cm3 for super-
saturated brine mud
– 2.71 g/cm3 for
limestones – 1.0 + 0.73 N g/cm3 for salt
mud (where N is NaCl
– 2.85 g/cm3 for dolomites concentration in ppm x
10-6)
• Log can be presented
as density porosity – What about the residual
hydrocarbon density?
• Parameters must be
supplied and – What about oil based
annotated muds?
Effect of Gas on Density Logs
• Gas effect looks like increased density porosity
• Fluid in volume of investigation is
residual gas and mud filtrate
f  mf S x0  h 1  S x0 
• Using only a density log in a gas situation is usually

inaccurate, and it is used only as a last resort
• Density log really needs outside help to establish
– Matrix type
– Identify gas
– Simplify porosity determination in gas zones
• Neutron log and Pe curve can help considerably

Use
available
PVT
information

The Spectral (Litho) Density
Log
• Uses photoelectric absorption
information Barns/atom or
– Pe curve related to lithology barns/electron
– Newer generation tool provides not volumetric
better bulk density measurement
Need Barns/cm3
also
• Volumetric photo absorption

  b  0 . 1 8 8 3coefficient

U  Pee U  Pe   P e =(Z/10) 3.6
 1 .0 7 0 4 
• Pe degrades in barite muds  11 ppg

Barns/atom
 change
has minimal
effect on Pe

Limestone
Could be
50/50 Dol/LS
???
Could be
70/30 LS/SS
Sandstone

Gas affects b
but not Pe
So for gas
zones:
porosity is too
high (wrong),
but
lithology is OK

Newest Density Logs
• Schlumberger's Litho-Density Sonde

(LDS)
– Full spectrum analysis to obtain
• Bulk density
• Photoelectric factor
• Schlumberger’s Platform Express

– 3-Detector, high-resolution density log
– Smaller, lighter, more robust
• Other service company equivalents

Compensated Neutron and Dual
Porosity (Energy) Neutron Logs
• AmBe high energy neutron source
• Neutron detectors
– Thermal for CNL
– Thermal and Epithermal for Dual Energy
• Sonde pushed to side of borehole wall
by bow spring
• Two main interactions:
– Elastic collisions when above thermal energy
level
• Above 1/40 ev
• Loses most energy during collision with hydrogen)
– Capture when at thermal energy level
• depends on material in formation and releases a GR
Life of a Neutron Colliding with
hydrogen slows
Tool emits high neutrons most
energy neutron
Epithermal Slowing
Neutron slows down energy down
(loses energy) by level length
bouncing off things (Ls)
Neutron reaches thermal 1/40 ev Diffusion

energy and drifts around length (Ld)
Neutron is captured and

gives off GR of capture Thermal GR
energy
6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 level
David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 28
Neutron
detector

Neutron Tool Evolution
• First generation (GNT, etc.)

– Used in 1950's
– Single detector
– Detector for
• Thermal neutrons
• Capture gamma ray
• Combination
– Scaled in counts
• Can use logarithmic scale to obtain porosity
• Must know lowest and highest porosities
• Interpolate between them logarithmically

• Second generation (SNP, SWN, etc.)

– Used in 1960s
– Single epithermal detector pad device
– Scaled in porosity
– Can be run in air-filled holes

• Third generation (CNL)

– Introduced about 1970
– Pair of thermal neutron detectors
Thermal = more lithology effect
• Fourth generation (CNL-G, etc.)
– Introduced mid 1980s
– Pair of thermal neutron detectors
– Pair of epithermal neutron detectors
Epithermal = less lithology effect

• Newest generation (APS)

– Introduced 1993
– Accelerator neutron source
– Nearly pure hydrogen index measurement
Neutron source is not always

actively emitting neutrons

Compensated Neutron Log
• Ratio of near/far detector counts

is related to porosity
• Calibrated to porosity using test pits
• Each lithology (b and ) has its own

ratio versus porosity relationship
Thermal neutron
• Must know lithology and capture cross
pores must contain liquid section (c.u.)
to obtain porosity when CNL
Probability that it
is only porosity log will capture a
6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy thermal energySlide 37
Porosity
neutron
Depth of Investigation
• For CNL
– Deepest neutron log investigation
– About 90% of response
within 10 inches of borehole wall
• For neutron logs in general

– Depth of investigation
decreases slightly at higher porosities
– Reverse of what happens with density logs

Vertical Resolution and
Statistics
• Vertical resolution of CNL

– About 3 feet after averaging
• Statistical fluctuations:
– About 1 porosity percent at low porosities
– About 3 porosity percent at high porosities
– Opposite of density logs

Log Presentation
• CNL rarely used by itself

(matrix and clay effects)
• Usually run in combination with

– Density log
– Gamma ray log
• A matrix is selected for the log

presentation

Hole Low High
condition?
Anhydrite
Dolomite
LS
Environmental Corrections
• Usually small, ignored for quick look
• Used for final calculations

(especially reserve determination)
• Borehole diameter is largest correction

Gas Effect
Density log sees gas as increased porosity
• Gas has less hydrogen and is less dense than
liquids
• Neutron log sees gas as decreased porosity
• Space taken by gas is not replaced by rock
so apparent porosity effect is even more
pronounced due to density difference
– Originally called excavation effect
– Is now known to be due to lower bulk density of gas
• Can account for this using neutron logs only,

but it is cumbersome
• Use additional information from Density Log
to detect and interpret gas zones
LS
Washout
Gas
effect
LS
Shale
Accelerator Porosity Sonde
(APS)
• Introduced 1993
• 14 Mev accelerator neutron source
• Detectors:
– Near epithermal neutron detector
– Array (pair) of epithermal neutron detectors
– Thermal neutron detector
– Far epithermal neutron detector
• Porosity independent of lithology
– Nearly pure hydrogen index measurement

• Thermal neutron capture cross section
of invaded zone
Combined Density-Neutron
Interpretation
• Porosity can be obtained without

precise knowledge of lithology using
crossplots
• Gas versus liquid can be determined

– But must know lithology
• Pe can provide lithology information

– Pe not gas affected
Porosity-lithology crossplots solve log
response equations, two dimensions at a time
The Dual Porosity (Energy)
Compensated Neutron Log
• A pair of thermal detectors

and a pair of epithermal detectors
• Thermal detectors are equivalent to

CNL
• Epithermal detectors
are less affected by lithology

CNL

Compensated Sonic (Acoustic)
and Long-Spaced Sonic
(Acoustic) Logs
• Measures acoustic velocity of
rock and fluids it contains
(feet per second or meters per second).
• Reciprocal
• Travel time 1,000,000
V
• Transit time t
• Interval transit time
• Delta-t Fast vs. slow
 t
acoustic velocity?
• (s/ft or s/m).
• Why do we want to know this?
Before we drill any well in a basin how do we know what the seismic
reflectors mean?
Well
What units is the

vertical scale
plotted in?
6-Sept-2004 Slide 59
Synthetic seismic modeling
Seismic-well tie
Well
Seismic overlaid with synthetic
P-wave S-wave
Density
velocity velocity

Piezoelectric
transducers –
Typically quartz- a
change size when
subjected to an
electric field b
generating an elastic
wave in the borehole
fluid c
The receiver, excited
by the acoustic wave d
generates a voltage
which is recorded
e
First arrival:
compressional head
wave, vp
Second arrival:
shear head wave, vs
Slide 62
3rd arrival: Pseudo
Rayleigh waves – incident
energy contacts the
a
borehole wall at an angle
less than the critical shear
angle, resulting in total
reflection of the energy at b
the interface and
propagation in the borehole
c
4th arrival: Stonely wave –
a surface wave at the fluid
borehole interface d
If vfluid > vsfm (e.g. e

unconsolidated sands)
shear waves cannot be
critically refracted at
wellbore wall: No shear
wave
Slide 63
Measure time for
Energy to travel
Between two receivers a
T1=(a/vm)+(b/v)+(c/vm)
b
T2=(a/vm)+(b/v)+(d/v)
+(e/vm)
c
This assumes:
Wellbore is in guage and d

tool is in the center of
the wellbore and e
oriented vertically
t = (t2-t1)/Ls
Slide 64
Acoustic Waves Encountered
in Borehole Environment
• Refracted waves via the formation:
– Compressional (easiest to determine)
– Shear Refracted waves: input energy intersects
wellbore wall at the critical angle
• Direct waves:
– Sonde
– Mud
• Surface waves:
– Pseudo-Rayleigh
– Stoneley

Acoustic Log Types
• Uncompensated • Full wave or
acoustic logs array acoustic logs
– Early crude tools – Better shear information
• Borehole
compensated • Dipole and multipole
acoustic logs (BHC) acoustic logs
– Compensate for
washouts and tool tilt – Shear information at
acoustic velocities slower
• Long space than that of drilling mud
acoustic logs
– Solved problems
with large holes and
near-wellbore
alteration
The Uncompensated Acoustic
Log
• Suffered from errors

– Hole washouts or contractions
changed mud travel time
– Tool tilt or eccentering
changed mud travel time
– Both of these gave erroneous results
Spikes and horns

The Borehole Compensated
Acoustic Log
• Available since mid-1960s

• Hardware BHC
• Usual spacing
– 3' T-R1
– 2' R1-R2 Distance between receivers
(plus filtering) defines
acoustic log resolution

Borehole
Compensated
Sonic log: make
measuremetns in
both directions .
This allows for
corrections for
wash outs and
tool tilt.

Vertical Resolution and
Depth of Penetration
• Vertical resolution determined by
spacing between receivers T
– For BHC: 2 feet
• Depth of penetration not well defined

– Dependent upon basic frequency of waveform
– Dependent upon fastest acoustic path R
near borehole
– Depth of penetration is usually very small
(an inch or less) unless drilling mud slows
down formation near borehole and tool
can see beyond damaged formation

slow fast Tool response is
calibrated inside
casing

Pips tma
Integrated
travel time
of 1-msec
or 10-msec
between
pips

Log Presentation
• Usually recorded in s/ft or s/m
across tracks 2 and 3
– Slower to left, faster to right
• Integrated travel time is shown as "pips"

• Acoustic log may be restricted to track 3
if other porosity or resistivity logs are run
• Casing or =0 are good "marker beds"
for log quality control
– Casing has a 57 s/ft travel time
  = 0 has a tma travel time

Noise Spikes and Cycle
Skipping
• Cause erroneous acoustic log readings
• Noise
– Triggers on noise rather than first arrival
• Cycle skipping
– Misses first arrival and triggers on second
arrival
– In early days used as gas detector
– Automatic gain control corrected this
problem

Cycle skipping: due to attenuation associated with gas
Typically see cycle skipping and noise on second detector

Porosity Determination
from Sonic Logs
• Use appropriate petrophysical model

Should be based on local calibration
• What is the appropriate

petrophysical model for acoustic logs?

Acoustic Travel Time Average
Equation (Wyllie)
• Reliable when rock t    tf  1    tma
is
– Under substantial t  tma

pressure tf  tma
– Saturated with brine
– Contains well- Where
cemented grains  t is compressional
wave velocity in ft/s
• Linear volumetric   is porosity,
mixing law fractional
(there is no – f is fluid in the pores
physical reason for (brine)
this to actually – ma is rock fabric
work) or matrix material
Correction for Lack of
Compaction
• A fudge factor for using Wyllie time

average instead of correct
petrophysical model
 = [(t-tma)/(tf-tma)]/Bcp
Where Bcp = tsh/100
Unconsolidated
Sands

Thin section image of a well cemented sample:
Wylie Time average is more appropriate
Thin section image of a well cemented sample:
Wylie Time average is more appropriate
Thin section image of a poorly cemented sample:
Wylie Time average is not appropriate
Acoustics
• Acoustic velocity of rock depends upon

– Mineral composition
Grain size
– Granular nature of rock matrix
Grain sorting
– Cementation Grain shape
– Porosity Grain orientation
– Fluid content Grain Contacts
– Stress regime
Earth stresses
Pore pressure
Orientation

Azimuthal Anisotropy Measured in Thrust Belts
In this vertical well

we see shear
anisotropy in the
sands.
The polarization of
the faster wave is
inferred to be aligned
with the regional
stress field.
Shear splitting
suggests that the
“stress-induced”
anisotropy in the
6-Sept-2004 sands is on the order
Slide 86
of 15%
Azimuthal Anisotropy Measured In Thrust Belts
Max Velocity = 9880 ft/sec
Min Velocity = 8491 ft/sec
Anisotropy based on azimuthal velocities = (9880/8491) –1 = 0.16
Note that this value, measured under isotropic stress conditions, is the same as
that reported from shear splitting on the log data.
The logs may be responding to accumulated strain in the material

S
•Sample image of end trim thin section
(maximum azimuthal anisotropy if
F present) of thrust belt sand (left; blue
arrows indicate grain fractures), CAP
analyzed image (center) and grain
contact image (right).
Normalized grain fracture

Normalized contact length Normalized grain orientation
orientation in end trim thin
in end trim thin section in end trim thin section section
•In this thrust belt setting,

laboratory - measured azimuthal
anisotropy averages 15%.
•Note that grain contact
orientations, and grain long axes,
S tend to be aligned perpendicular
to the fast direction.
F •Normalized fracture long axes
are oriented nearly perpendicular
to the slow direction
•The strain ellipse from Fry
analysis shows significant
6-Sept-2004 shortening parallel to fast Slide 89
direction.
Log Analysis In Shale Reservoirs: The Sonic Log and Geomechanical
Properties
Not All Quartz is Created Equal
Gassmann Equation
  
2 
 K 
Kg 1  m 
1 4  Kg   
Vp 2  K m   m  

 3 K  K g 
1  m   1  
 Kg  Kf  
 
where:
  g 1     f  Almost impossible to obtain
and:
Vp is the compressional wave velocity, cm/s
 is shear or rigidity modulus (ratio of shear stress to
shear strain), dynes/cm2
 is density, g/cm3
 is total porosity, fractional
K is bulk modulus, dynes/cm2 (a measure of a
substance’s resistance to uniform compression)
g is for rock frame solids, i.e., grain material
f is for fluid in pores, i.e., oil, water, gas
m is for empty rock frame, i.e., dry rock Slide 91
Empirical Travel Time Versus
Porosity Relationships  t  C 1

• It is best to use a LOCAL empirical C2
relationship for determination of porosity
– This requires core (with stressed porosity
analysis) and an acoustic log in the same
well(s)
• Raymer-Hunt-Gardner transform
was the first attempt to find the
universal empirical relationship
– Sometimes called
• Schlumberger transform
• Field observation transform
Scatter in  for a given t and mineralogy is due to different
grain sorting, and variations in framework grain mineralogy
and the presence of load bearing and dispersed clay.

Empirical Travel Time Versus
Porosity Relationships
• There are several other attempts
• The most appropriate seems to be
Acoustic Formation Factor
by Raiga-Clemenceau, et al., 1986
1
 tma  x
  1.0   
 t 
where tma and x are defined

empirically for each formation
Gas-Bearing Formations
• Remember that acoustic logs

see very near the borehole
• Gas slows down acoustic velocity
• Gassmann is good method

to predict gas effect

Influence of gas
saturation on
acoustic properties
of sands and
sandstones at
variable depths
(porosities).
Difference
decreases at
high gas
saturations
because velocity
varies inversely
with density. At
low saturation
fluid compress-
ibility dominates.

In presence of secondary porosity (vugs or fractures) the sonic porosity response
is dominated by the intercrystalline or interparticle pores. The difference between
neutron or density porosity and sonic porosity can give an estimate of the volume
of vugs or fractures.
Secondary Porosity
• When vugs and channels are isolated,

acoustic logs do not "see" them
• In these cases it only sees intergranular
Acoustic response is exponential in interparticle/intercyrstalline
or intercrystalline
porosity porosity
in carbonates and linear in vuggy porosity)
• Secondary porosity index may be defined

as
dn  s
SPI 
dn
• Can be used semi-quantitatively

Hole Enlargement and
Formation Alteration Effects
• When hole is large, T-R spacing must be increased
to prevent mud arrival from showing up first
– Usually occurs in surface hole
– Not usually important for formation evaluation
– Usually critical for seismic calibration
• When chemical and stress alterations to shales

occur near borehole, T-R spacing must be
increased to prevent altered region arrival from
showing up first
– Usually occurs in shales
– Not usually important for formation evaluation
– Usually critical for seismic calibration

Shale This is due
acoustic to water
velocity based mud
appears to alteration
get slower of shale
over time

The Long Spacing Sonic Log
• Expands the T-R spacings
• 8' - 10' - 12' are nominal spacings
• BHC by software, not hardware
• Computer processing must be

smart enough not to trigger on noise

X

Shear Travel Time
Measurement
• Used to calibrate shear seismic

• Used for calibration of AVO Amplitude
variation
• Used to estimate with offset
mechanical properties of rock
• Requires acquisition and
computer processing of full waveforms

Mechanical Properties
Estimation
• Uses shear acoustic velocity information
• Poisson's ratio
(ratio of transverse to longitudinal strain)
  = t/l
• Shear modulus: ratio of shear stress to
shear strain (represents resistance to
shearing)
• G = (F/A)/for small strains where, also
called 
  = deformation angle
• Estimation
Bulk modulus: when a body is subjected to
uniform compressive stress, the stress or
pressure is related to volume change by
K = p/(v/v)
• K is the reciprocal of compressibility
• Young's modulus
(represents resistance to linear
compression or elongation)
• E = (F/A)/(L/L)

Estimation
• Ratios and moduli largely estimate
mechanical properties such as
– Sanding threshold
– Fracture pressure
– Rock drillability
• Sanding threshold
– Soft unconsolidated sands will break down and flow during
production if flow rates or drawdown pressures are too high
• Fracture pressure
– Don't want to fracture formation during drilling
– Want to predict fracturability during stimulation
• Problem
– Static (in rock)  dynamic (acoustic log) moduli
– Local calibration is needed

Estimation
Because the strains associated with
acoustic energy are very small, they are
elastic (completely restorable with no
resultant deformation)
Vp = [(K + 4/3)/]1/2
Materials with high E and1/2low 
= {(E/)(1-)}/[(1-2)(1+)]}
Eare=more brittle,
9K/(3K + ) and therefore,
more
Vs “frackable”
= (/) 1/2
= [(E/)/2(1+)]1/2
 = [(E/2) -1]
Vp/Vs = [(4/3)+(K/G)] 1/2
In general, laboratory measurements correspond reasonably
well with log measured velocities.
Log Analysis In Shale Reservoirs: The Sonic Log and
Geomechanical Properties
STRENGTH AND ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES
Shear And Compressional Velocities and Peak Strength in Compression

16000
Laminated Mudrocks
14000 Shale Gas Samples
Calcareous Mudrock y = 2E-06x2.5082 y = 2E-16x4.778
Debris Flow Mudrock
R² = 0.9973
Peak Strength in Compression (psi)
R² = 0.9979
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Shear and Compressional Velocities (ft/sec)
Log Analysis In Shale Reservoirs: The Sonic Log
and Geomechanical Properties
STRENGTH AND ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES
Acoustic Properties and Peak Strength in Extension
6000
Laminated Mudrocks
Shale Gas Samples
Calcareous Mudrock
5000 Debris Flow Mudrock
Peak Strength in Extension (psi)
4000
3000
2000
y = 0.1862x - 299.28 y = 0.1832x - 1212.1
R² = 0.9844 R² = 0.9711
1000
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Shear and Compressional Velocities (ft/sec)
Lithology Identification,
Clay Indication, and Gas Effect
• Lithology from ratio of Lithology ts/tc
shear to compressional
Sandstone 1.58-1.78
travel time
– Not as definitive as Pe Dolomite 1.8
Limestone 1.9
• Clay indication uses ratio of

shear to compressional travel time
– Not as definitive as GR or SP
• Gas effect follows Gassmann equation

Monopole vs.
Dipole Acoustic
Logs
• Monopole (A)
– Everything in this
lecture so far
– Needs Vformation > Vmud
for mode conversion
for shear information
• Dipole and multipole

(B)
– Shear information at
acoustic velocities
slower than that of
drilling mud UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy
6-Sept-2004 Porosity Slide 118
Sonic log graphic courtesy Texas A&M University / ODP

Porosity Logs - Murphy - LAHED6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Porosity Logs - Murphy - LAHED6

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Porosity Logs - Murphy - LAHED6

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

– Dual Energy Neutron

• Pad (mandrel) type device

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 6

Enter the graph with the

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 9

Porosity calculated using

Correction is negligible over a 40% range in porosity Slide 13

• Relationship between bulk density and

Fluid Component + Rock Component = Bulk

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 14

ma  b From log

• Where do parameters come from?

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 15

• Using only a density log in a gas situation is usually

• Neutron log and Pe curve can help considerably

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 19

• Volumetric photo absorption

• Pe degrades in barite muds  11 ppg

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 22

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 24

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 25

• Schlumberger's Litho-Density Sonde

• Schlumberger’s Platform Express

• Other service company equivalents

Neutron reaches thermal 1/40 ev Diffusion

Neutron is captured and

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 29

• First generation (GNT, etc.)

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 30

• Second generation (SNP, SWN, etc.)

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 31

• Third generation (CNL)

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 32

• Newest generation (APS)

Neutron source is not always

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 33

• Ratio of near/far detector counts

• Each lithology (b and ) has its own

• For neutron logs in general

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 40

• Vertical resolution of CNL

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 41

• CNL rarely used by itself

• Usually run in combination with

• A matrix is selected for the log

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 42

• Usually small, ignored for quick look

• Used for final calculations

• Borehole diameter is largest correction

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 45

• Can account for this using neutron logs only,

• Porosity can be obtained without

• Gas versus liquid can be determined

• Pe can provide lithology information

• A pair of thermal detectors

• Thermal detectors are equivalent to

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 54

6-Sept-2004 UH PETR6312 David Patrick Murphy Porosity Slide 55