Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 147

Guide to

Petrophysical Interpretation

Daniel A. Krygowski
Austin Texas USA























This Guide contains references to, and specifically lists, trademarks and service marks
of the following companies, their subsidiaries, and/or their parent companies: Baker
Hughes, Baker Atlas, Baker Hughes INTEQ, Gearhart, Halliburton, PathFinder,
Precision Drilling, Precision Wireline Services (formerly Computalog), Reeves Wireline
(formerly BPB Wireline), Schlumberger Limited, Sperry-Sun Drilling Services, Welex.




































1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski
All rights reserved. No part of this Guide shall be reproduced or transmitted in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any
information or retrieval system (except for the conditions stated in the paragraph below)
without written permission from the Author.




The file which contains this document is protected from printing but is not protected from
copying. Users may copy this file from the original compact disk to the hard drive of the
computers on which they are the primary users. Making copies for purposes beyond
those of personal reference is not permitted.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA





About This Document

This document was developed, updated, and refined over about two decades in
response to the feedback of participants in a number of different petrophysical short
courses, especially the basic well logging course taught by Dr. George Asquith and
myself under the sponsorship of the AAPG. It is meant to be a quick guide or a memory
aid to those needing to interpret well log data (wireline or MWD), and a starting point for
more detailed study when needed.

The document is a summary of each common openhole petrophysical measurement; the
interpretation goals and details, a brief explanation of the physics and operating
constraints, and some of the nomenclature related to each measurement. The
measurements are listed below, and are those that have been traditionally used to
determine formation lithology, porosity, and fluid saturation.

The measurements are arranged by interpretation goal, rather than by tool physics, so
that the user can more readily compare the interpretation methodologies of
measurements that are focused on a common goal, such as the determination of
porosity. In addition, there is a section on openhole log interpretation that is again meant
as a general guide, not as an exhaustive study of all interpretation techniques.

The measurements/topics covered here are:
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential (SP)
Gamma Ray
Caliper
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Density
Neutron
Porosity Measurement Combinations
Resistivity
Induction Logs
Laterologs
Microresistivity (Rxo) Logs
Openhole Log Interpretation

An Annotated Bibliography is included to guide the user to more complete reference
material.





Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA

Correlation/Lithology











Correlation/Lithology

This section contains information about three measurements: Spontaneous Potential
(SP), Gamma Ray, and Caliper.

The measurements are those which are usually displayed to the left of the depth track in
an API standard (three data tracks) display. While the Gamma Ray and Spontaneous
Potential (SP) are often used for correlation, they are also useful for the determination
of gross formation lithology (reservoir vs. non-reservoir). In addition, both can be used to
determine the shaly sand calculation parameter Shale Volume (V
shale
), and the SP can
be used to determine formation water resistivity, R
w
. The Caliper measurement
determines hole size, which can be an indicator of the quality of other logging
measurements, and which is used in some of the corrections made to those
measurements to account for changes in the borehole environment.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 1
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
Interpretation Goals
Correlation of formations from well to well.
Gross lithology (reservoir vs. non-reservoir).
Estimate of formation water resistivity, R
w
.
Estimate of shale (clay) content.
Qualitative indication of permeability.
Identification of depositional environments.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 2
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
Tool Diagram
Halliburton array induction (HRAI)
showing the SP electrode (SP
band).
2000 Halliburton

Physics of the Measurement
The SP is a passive measurement of very small
electrical voltages resulting from electrical currents
in the borehole caused by the differences in the
salinities (resistivities) of the formation connate
water (R
w
) and the drilling mud filtrate (R
mf
), and by
the presence of ion selective shale beds. The
voltage changes are measured by a downhole
electrode relative to a surface ground. Unlike other
logging tools which are displayed on a specific
scale with a specified reference value, the SP has
no specified origin and values used for computation
are referenced to deflection from the nearby shale
baseline established by the interpreter.
The SP is one of the oldest logging measurements
(very old logs may show the curve as "permeability"
or "porosity"). It continues to be one of the least
understood measurements, in terms of basic
physical principles of operation.
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
(feet)
Radius of
Investigation
Precision
(+-)
SP 1/porosity shallow 1mV

Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
cased hole eccentered
In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: The logging speed is constrained by
other measurements in the toolstring.
Comments: Usually run with induction logs and old
electric logs, the SP can also be run with laterologs,
sonics, micrologs, dipmeters, and sidewall cores. There
usually is no separate "SP tool".

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 3
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company
literature, and may no longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
Spontaneous Potential SP
Computalog
Spontaneous Potential SP
Halliburton
Spontaneous Potential SP
Gearhart
Spontaneous Potential, SP
Welex
Spontaneous Potential, SP
Reeves Wireline
Spontaneous Potential SP
Schlumberger
Spontaneous Potential SP
Tucker Wireline
Spontaneous Potential SP
MWD/LWD Mnemonic
There are no MWD/LWD SP measurements

Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
Spontaneous Potential SP mV


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 4
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
Log Example



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 5
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
Interpretation Details
CORRELATION OF FORMATIONS
Curves are scanned for similarities in shape and magnitude.

GROSS LITHOLOGY
Reservoirs are shown as deflections (either positive or negative) from a relatively stable (and
arbitrary) shale baseline. The direction of the deflection is determined by the relative salinities
(resistivities) of the formation water (R
w
) and the mud filtrate (R
mf
), and is not directly related to
formation porosity or permeability.
As a rule of thumb the following relationships are true:
If R
mf
> R
w
, then the SP deflection is negative.
If R
mf
= R
w
, then the SP deflection is zero.
If R
mf
< R
w
, then the SP deflection is positive.

ESTIMATE OF FORMATION WATER RESISTIVITY (R
w
)
SP response equation:

=
we
mfe
R
R
K SP log
SP = Spontaneous Potential (from the log)
K = temperature-dependent factor (K=61+ 0.133*T; T in F).
R
mfe
= equivalent mud filtrate resistivity.
R
we
= equivalent formation water resistivity.

The magnitude of the SP is measured from the shale baseline near the zone of interest. The
baseline is usually assumed to have a value of zero. "Equivalent" resistivities are required to
correct for the non-linear relationship between resistivity and ionic activity which exists at high
NaCl concentrations, and when significant amounts of divalent (non-NaCl) ions are present.
A good estimate of Rw (at formation temperature) can be obtained from the following equation:

( ) ( ) K SP R K
w
mf
R
/ log
10
+
=
where R
mf
is corrected to formation temperature.

See pages SP 9 or SP 10 for detailed flow charts to determine R
w
from the SP.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 6
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
ESTIMATE OF SHALE (CLAY) CONTENT
Shale/clay volume equation:

= =
shale clean
clean
shale clay
SP SP
SP SP
V V
log

V
clay
= V
shale
= Shale or clay volume.
SP
log
= SP in the zone of interest (read from the log).
SP
clean
= maximum SP deflection from a nearby clean wet zone in the same well.
SP
shale
= SP value at the shale baseline (often considered to be zero).

This method assumes a constant R
w
for all zones considered. It also assumes that the response
of the SP to shaliness is linear.
The terms shale and clay are used almost interchangeably in log analysis techniques, even
though the understanding of the difference between shale and clay have matured since the
development of the techniques.

QUALITATIVE INDICATION OF PERMEABILITY
The presence of an SP (positive or negative) opposite a bed indicates permeability. Only a
minimal amount of permeability is required to develop an SP and therefore there is no technique
to determine the magnitude of the permeability from the SP. The permeability may in fact be
only ionic and not hydraulic.

IDENTIFICATION OF DEPOSITIONAL ENVIRONMENTS
Depositional environments can be inferred from the shape of the SP. The method is ambiguous,
and should therefore be used only in support of other data in an area of interest. Depositional
environment interpretation will work best if data from several wells are used to create a three-
dimensional subsurface picture, rather than the use of data from only one well.
Environmental effects which may decrease the magnitude of the SP, such as differences in
values of R
mf
from well to well or the presence of hydrocarbons, can produce the same effects on
the SP as shaliness. The presence of these effects should be considered in the interpretation,
either in a qualitative way, or thorough more rigorous normalization procedures which account for
R
mf
differences.

COMPARISON OF SP BETWEEN WELLS
When comparing the SP curves in a variety of wells, remember that:
The location of the shale baseline on the log grid is set by the logging engineer, and has
no interpretive meaning.
Differences in SP magnitude between wells could be due to:
o A change in the shaliness of the formation,
o A change in mud filtrate resistivity, R
mf
, in different wells.
o The presence of hydrocarbons in one of the wells,
o A change in the formation water resistivity, R
w
.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 7
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Shale: The presence of shale in the formation will cause a smaller deflection (either positive or
negative) from the shale baseline than in an equivalent clean formation. The response is
assumed to be linear.
Hydrocarbons: Oil or gas in the formation will cause a smaller deflection from the shale baseline
than in an equivalent wet formation. There is no equation to quantify this decrease.
Other effects:
Those with corrections: borehole size, bed thickness, depth of invasion.
Those without corrections: poor ground, stray rig currents, magnetized logging cable, electrical
storms, nearby power lines on pumping wells, logging cable rubbing against rig floor,...
Streaming potential: an increase in the magnitude of the SP due to fluid flow between the
formation and the borehole. This phenomenon will appear as excessive SP values beyond that
anticipated from the R
mf
/R
w
contrast. This is a rare phenomenon.
Baseline drift: The gradual change in SP baseline (that is, the value of the SP in shales), either
positive or negative, with depth. Many possible environmental and equipment factors can
contribute to this phenomenon which must be recognized during the interpretation. The causes
of baseline drift are poorly understood (if at all) and have no meaning in interpretation.
Most logging software packages have routines to remove the drift, so that long sections of log can
be easily processed using a constant value for the baseline.

Note: The location of the SP baseline on the log is controlled by the logging engineer, and not by
any physical phenomena. Positioning of the baseline is done for aesthetic reasons (and ease of
reading the curve) rather than as part of calibration to a universal standard.

INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Hydrocarbons and/or shale (clay) in the formation will cause the calculated R
w
to be higher than
the actual formation water resistivity; this will cause the water saturation, S
w
, calculated from
Archie's Equation to also be higher than the actual formation water saturation.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 8
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
The SP should be recorded as noise-free as possible.
SP baseline shifts made by the logging engineer (done for display purposes) should be abrupt,
made in the shale sections (not reservoirs), and noted on the log.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections. SP should repeat very well except under unusual conditions (e.g.,
streaming potential).
Cross-check the curve character with other curves from the same logging run.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 9
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF R
w
FROM THE SP
Taken from the procedure outlined in Schlumberger chartbooks. Use the Log Example in this
section.

1: Identify a zone on the logs which is clean, wet, and permeable.
2: Read the SP value at the depth of maximum deflection.
SP = _______ mV at __________ feet.
3: Calculate formation temperature (FT) at the depth of the SP value. (Use Schlumberger chart
Gen-6 with total depth and maximum temperature from the log heading.)
Total depth (TD) = ______ feet
Formation depth (FD) = ______ feet
Bottom hole temperature (BHT) = ______ F
Formation temperature (FT) = ______ F
Annual Mean Surface Temperature (AMST) = ______F
The following equation can also be used:
AMST FD
TD
AMST BHT
FT +

=
4: Convert R
mf
from surface temperature to formation temperature (use Schlumberger chart Gen-
9 with R
mf
at measured temperature from the log heading).
R
mf
= _______ohm-m @ ________F (measured temperature)
R
mf
= _______ohm-m @ ________F (formation temperature).
The following equation (Arps equation) can also be used:

( )
( ) 77 . 6
77 . 6
+
+
=
FM
Tk
FM
T
Tk R
R
R
FM
= fluid resistivity at formation temperature T
FM
(in F).
R
Tk
= known resistivity at a known temperature, Tk.
Tk = known temperature (in F).
5: Convert R
mf
at formation temperature to R
mfeq
using one of the following:
a: If R
mf
@ 75 F > 0.1 ohm-m, use R
mfeq
= 0.85R
mf
.
b: If R
mf
@ 75 F < 0.1 ohm-m, use Schlumberger chart SP-2.
(a and b are included on Chart SP-1 of the Schlumberger chartbook).
R
mfeq
= ______ohm-m @ ________F (formation temperature).
6: Using SP, formation temperature, and R
mfeq
, enter Schlumberger chart SP-1 to find R
weq
.
R
weq
= _______ohm-m @ _________F (formation temperature).
The following equation can also be used:

( ) ( ) K SP R K
weq
mfsq
R
/ log
10
+
=
7: Convert R
weq
to R
w
using Schlumberger chart SP-2.
Rw = _______ohm-m @ ________F (formation temperature).

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 10
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF R
w
FROM THE SP:
Taken from the procedure outlined in Western Atlas chartbooks. Use the Log Example in this
section.

1: Identify a zone on the logs which is clean, wet, and permeable.
2: Read the SP value at the depth of maximum deflection.
SP = _______ mV at __________ feet.
3: Calculate formation temperature at depth of SP value. (Use Atlas chart 1-1 with total depth
and maximum temperature from the log heading.)
Total depth (TD) = ______ feet
Formation depth (FD) = ______ feet
Bottom hole temperature (BHT) = ______ F
Formation temperature (FT) = ______ F
Annual Mean Surface Temperature (AMST) = ______F
The following equation can also be used:
AMST FD
TD
AMST BHT
FT +

=
4: Convert R
mf
from surface temperature to formation temperature (use Atlas chart 1-5 with R
mf
at
measured temperature from the log heading).
R
mf
= _______ohm-m @ ________F (measured temperature)
R
mf
= _______ohm-m @ ________F (formation temperature).
The following equation (Arps equation) can also be used:

( )
( ) 77 . 6
77 . 6
+
+
=
FM
Tk
FM
T
Tk R
R
R
FM
= fluid resistivity at formation temperature T
FM
(in F).
R
Tk
= known resistivity at a known temperature, Tk.
Tk = known temperature (in F).
5: Using SP, formation temperature, and R
mf
, use Atlas chart 2-2 to find R
weq
.
R
weq
= _______ohm-m @ _________F (formation temperature).
The following equation can also be used:

( ) BHT SP
mfeq weq
R R
+
=
133 . 0 61 /
10
6: Convert R
weq
to R
w
using Atlas chart 2-3.
R
w
= _______ohm-m @ ________F (formation temperature).
The following equation can also be used:

( ) [ ]
( ) [ ] 8 . 50 / log 0426 . 0
0 . 2 9 . 19 / log / 1
10 5 . 0
10 131 . 0
BHT
weq
BHT
weq
w
R
R
R

+
+
=

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SP 11
Correlation/Lithology
Spontaneous Potential
PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINATION OF R
w
FROM THE SP: ANSWER
Taken from the procedure outlined in Schlumberger chartbooks. Use the Log Example in this
section.

1: Identify a zone on the logs which is clean, wet, and permeable.
Large SP, low GR, low resistivity
Possibilities: 10,317 or 10,340
Go with 10,317: closer to pay, lower GR, thicker zone.
2: Read the SP value at the depth of maximum deflection.
SP = __-87__ mV at ___10,317__ feet.
SPshale = +5, SPclean = -82; SP = -87
or, SP baseline = 0 (by definition); SP = -87
3: Calculate formation temperature (FT) at the depth of the SP value using the equation below.

Total depth (TD) = _11,192_ feet
Formation depth (FD) = _10,317_ feet
Bottom hole temperature (BHT) = _175__ F
Formation temperature (FT) = __168__ F
Annual Mean Surface Temperature (AMST) = __80__F
168 80
196 , 11
80 175
= +


= +

= AMST FD
TD
AMST BHT
FT
(Schlumberger chart Gen-6, with total depth and maximum temperature from the log heading, can
be used in place of the above equation.)
4: Convert R
mf
from surface temperature to formation temperature using the Arps equation
below.
R
mf
= __0.58__ohm-m @ ___70___F (measured temperature)
R
mf
= __0.26__ohm-m @ __168___F (formation temperature).

( )
( )
( )
( )
26 . 0
77 . 6 168
77 . 6 70 58 . 0
77 . 6
77 . 6
=
+
+
=
+
+
=
FM
Tk
FM
T
Tk R
R
R
FM
= fluid resistivity at formation temperature T
FM
(in F).
R
Tk
= known resistivity at a known temperature, Tk.
Tk = known temperature (in F).
(Schlumberger chart Gen-9, with R
mf
at measured temperature from the log heading, can be used
in place of the above equation.)
5: Calculate the SP factor, K:
3 . 83 168 133 . 0 61 133 . 0 61 = + = + = FT K
6: Using SP, formation temperature, and R
mf
, calculate R
w
from the equation below.
R
w
= __0.023__ohm-m @ ___168___F (formation temperature).

( ) ( )
( ) ( )
023 . 0 10 10
3 . 83 / ) 87 ( 26 . 0 log 3 . 83
/ log
= = =
+
+ K SP R K
w
mf
R
(Schlumberger chart SP-1 can be used in place of the above equation to find R
w
.)

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
GR 1
Correlation/Lithology
Gamma Ray
Interpretation Goals
Correlation of formations.
Gross lithology.
Estimate of shale (clay) content.
Clay typing.
Fracture identification.
Source rock identification.





Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
GR 2
Correlation/Lithology
Gamma Ray
Tool Diagram
Halliburton spectral gamma ray tool
1999 H
Physics of the Measurement
The number of naturally occurring gamma rays,
from potassium, uranium, thorium, and associated
daughter products, is counted by the detector in
both natural gamma ray and spectral gamma ray
tools.
(CSNG)
alliburton
Spectral tools also measure the energy of each
detected gamma ray. The range, or spectrum, of
energy detected is divided into windows, or limited
energy ranges, which indicate the elemental
gamma ray source (i.e., the specified isotopes of
potassium, uranium, or thorium).
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
90%
Radius of
Investigation-
50%
Precision
(+-)
Gamma Ray
18-36 in.
12in.*
4 in.
11 in.@90%
4 API
units
Spectral
Gamma Ray
18-36 in.
12in.*
4 in.
11 in.@90%
5 API
Units
* with enhanced resolution processing
Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
cased hole eccentered
In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: For standard gamma ray
measurements, the logging speed is constrained by the
other measurements in the toolstring.
For spectral gamma ray , 10 feet/minute.
Comments:

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
GR 3
Correlation/Lithology
Gamma Ray
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company
literature, and may no longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
Gamma Ray GR
Spectralog SL
Computalog
Gamma Ray GR
Spectral Gamma Ray SGR
Halliburton
Gamma Ray GR
Compensated Spectral Natural Gamma Ray CSNG
Natural Gamma Ray Tool NGRT
Gearhart
*Gamma Ray, GR; *Natural Gamma Ray Spectral Log, SGR
Welex
*Gamma Ray, GR; *Compensated Spectral Natural Gamma Ray, CSNG
Reeves Wireline
Compact Gamma Ray MCG, MGS
Spectral Gamma Sonde
Schlumberger
Integrated Porosity Lithology IPL
Platform Express
*Gamma Ray, GR; *Natural Gamma Ray Spectrometry Log, NGS, NGT
Tucker Wireline
Gamma Ray Tool GRT
MWD/LWD Mnemonic
Baker Hughes INTEQ
Directional-Gamma DG
Resistivity-Gamma-Directional RGD
Exlog
*Gamma Ray, DLWD component
Teleco
*Gamma Ray, DG, DDG, RGD, ReGD component
Pathfinder
Directional Gamma Ray HDS1
Resistivity Gamma Ray CWRD
Schlumberger LWD (Anadrill)
Vision 475
*Gamma Ray; *Resistivity at Bit, RAB (focused gamma ray)
Sperry Sun
DGR Sensors DGR
MWD Triple Combo
*Dual Gamma Ray, DGR; *Natural Gamma Probe, NGP
Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
Gamma Ray, Total Gamma Ray GR API Units
Uranium-Free Gamma Ray GRS, SGR, KTH API Units
Potassium POTA, K Percent
Uranium URAN, U ppm
Thorium THOR, TH ppm

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
GR 4
Correlation/Lithology
Gamma Ray
Log Example


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
GR 5
Correlation/Lithology
Gamma Ray
Interpretation Details
CORRELATION OF FORMATIONS
Curves are scanned for similarities in shape and magnitude.

GROSS LITHOLOGY
In general, reservoirs are less radioactive than shales. However, some sandstones and
dolomites can be radioactive.

ESTIMATE OF SHALE (CLAY) CONTENT
The magnitude of the gamma ray in the formation of interest (relative to that of nearby clean and
shale zones) is related to the shale content of the formation. The relationship between gamma
ray magnitude and shale content may be linear or non-linear. The relationships are all empirical.
Gamma Ray Index, I
GR
:
clean shale
clean
GR
GR GR
GR GR
I

=
log

I
GR
describes a linear response to shaliness or clay content.
GR
log
= log reading at the depth of interest
GR
clean
= Gamma Ray value in a nearby clean zone
GR
shale
= Gamma Ray value in a nearby shale

Linear Gamma Ray - clay volume relationship:
V
shale
= I
GR


Non-linear Gamma Ray - clay volume relationships:
Steiber:
GR
GR
shale
I
I
V

=
0 . 2 0 . 3


Clavier:
( ) [ ]
5 . 0
2
7 . 0 38 . 3 7 . 1 + =
GR shale
I V

Larionov (Tertiary rocks):
( ) 1 2 083 . 0
7 . 3
=

GR
I
shale
V

Larionov (older rocks):
( ) [ ] 0 . 1 2 33 . 0
2
=

GR
I
shale
V



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
GR 6
Correlation/Lithology
Gamma Ray

All the above relationships are empirical. The choice of which to use is up to the user, and
depends on other information that may be available. If no other information is known, the linear
relationship is probably the best choice, although it is the most pessimistic (that is, it predicts the
most clay volume for a given Gamma Ray response. All the non-linear relationships predict less
clay volume than the linear response, in varying amounts depending on the Gamma Ray reading
and the clean and shale values.
The terms shale and clay are used almost interchangeably in log analysis techniques, even
though the understanding of the difference between shale and clay have matured since the
development of the techniques.

* CLAY TYPING
The method involves plotting the potassium responses against those of thorium which will give
some indication of the type of clay present in the formation. This technique assumes the
presence of pure clays, which rarely exist in reservoirs. Because of its limitations, this technique
is no longer widely used.
The uranium-free curve is often a better shaliness indicator than the total gamma ray curve,
because it can distinguish between the gamma rays counted from potassium and thorium in clays
and the gamma rays resulting from uranium which are not necessarily associated with clays.

* FRACTURE IDENTIFICATION
Spikes to higher values of uranium may indicate fractures due to the deposition of soluble
uranium compounds in the fractures during reservoir fluid movement. The technique is
ambiguous, and even when working, will not distinguish closed from open fractures.

* SOURCE ROCK IDENTIFICATION
Consistently high uranium readings in shales may indicate high source rock potential due to the
uranium compounds associated with the organic material.

* These interpretations are usually based on spectral gamma ray logs only.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
GR 7
Correlation/Lithology
Gamma Ray
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Hole size: increasing hole size decreases count rates.
Mud weight: increasing mud weight decreases count rates.
Centering: centering the tool decreases count rates.
Mud type: KCl muds increase potassium count rates in spectral tools; barite-weighted muds
affect all count rates.
Logging Speed: In older logs, the logging speed may cause some variation in the response, with
logs acquired at a faster speed having somewhat less definition and activity than those acquired
at slower speeds.

INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Sandstones and dolomites may occasionally be radioactive and respond as shales. A Density-
Sonic crossplot may help to distinguish radioactive ("hot") reservoirs from shales.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
GR 8
Correlation/Lithology
Gamma Ray
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
The gamma ray should agree with other shale indicators except in radioactive beds.
The uranium-free curve should always be less than or equal to the total gamma ray curve.
The uranium curve should never be negative.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections.
Cross-check the curve character with other curves from the same logging run.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
CAL 1
Correlation/Lithology
Caliper
Interpretation Goals
Indication of hole diameter and volume.
Input for environmental corrections for other measurements.
Qualitative indication of permeability.
Correlation.
Log quality control.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
CAL 2
Correlation/Lithology
Caliper
Tool Diagram
Halliburton 4-arm caliper tool (FACT).
1999 Halliburton
Physics of the Measurement
For wireline tools, the physical movement of arms
on the tool is converted to a diameter measurement
through electrical circuitry. The arms are intended
to either keep the tool centered in the borehole, or
to push the tool against the borehole wall.
Some MWD tools generate a caliper curve based
on the differences in the response of the detectors
as the tool rotates. Other tools use ultrasonic
sensors to generate a caliper by measuring the
time taken for an acoustic pulse to travel from the
sensor to the formation wall and back.
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
Depth of
Investigation
Precision
Caliper
Not
defined
None
Not
defined

Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
1

cased hole eccentered
1

In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: The logging speed is constrained by
other measurements in the toolstring.
Comments:
The measurement is usually auxiliary to other
measurements being made.
1
Centering depends on the requirements of the other
tools in the toolstring.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
CAL 3
Correlation/Lithology
Caliper
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company
literature, and may no longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
Caliper CAL
*4-Arm Dual Caliper, *4CAL; *Multi Finger Caliper, MFC
Computalog
Caliper
Dual Axis Calipers DAC
Multi Sensor Caliper MSC
Halliburton
Caliper CL
*Four Arm Caliper Tool, FACT; *Four Independent Arm Caliper, FIAC
Gearhart
*Caliper, CL; *X-Y Caliper
Welex
*Caliper, CL
Reeves Wireline
Two Arm Caliper TAC
Compact Two Arm Caliper MCT
*Caliper, CAL; *Four Arm Caliper, FAC
Schlumberger
Environmental Measurement Sonde EMS
*Caliper, CAL; *Borehole Geometry Tool, BGT
Tucker Wireline
Centralizer Caliper Tool CCT
XY Caliper Tool XYT
MWD/LWD Mnemonic
Baker Hughes INTEQ
Caliper Corrected Neutron CCN
Exlog
(none)
Teleco
(none)
Pathfinder
Density Neutron Caliper DNSC
Density Neutron Standoff Caliper Tool DSNCM
Schlumberger LWD (Anadrill)
*Compensated Density Neutron, CDN (Downhole Sonic Caliper)
Sperry Sun
Acousticaliper MWD tool

Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
Caliper CAL, CALI Inches, cm


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
CAL 4
Correlation/Lithology
Caliper
Log Example



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
CAL 5
Correlation/Lithology
Caliper
Interpretation Details
INDICATION OF HOLE DIAMETER AND VOLUME
Hole diameter is read directly from the log. One- or two-arm calipers (like with the Density,
Dipmeter, or Rxo tools) will tend to read the long diameter of the hole if the hole is elongated,
while three-arm calipers (like with the Sonic) will read an average, somewhere between the
length of the long and short axis. One arm or two arm calipers will tend to be more sensitive than
three-arm calipers. Calipers which show diameter in two orthogonal directions will show holes
which have become elongated.
Hole volume is computed by integrating the hole volume calculated at each depth sample. The
hole is assumed to be circular for a single diameter measurement, and assumed elliptical for a
two dimensional measurement.

INPUT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CORRECTIONS FOR OTHER TOOLS
The hole diameter is used in various charts for Density, Neutron, Laterolog, and Induction, and to
indicate the thickness of mud cake for Rxo tool corrections.

QUALITATIVE INDICATION OF PERMEABILITY
The existence of mudcake (when the borehole diameter is less than the bit size) is an indication
of the infiltration of mud into the formation. Because of differences in mud type, density, and
other parameters, the magnitude of permeability cannot be determined. Mudcake is usually
noted as a comparison to bit size. When the hole is washed out, the presence of mudcake can be
masked by the washout.

CORRELATION
Curves can be scanned for general shape and changes in indicated hole size. Some formations
can consistently wash out in a particular geographic area (regardless of mud program), giving a
general indication of the location of the well in the subsurface.

LOG QUALITY CONTROL
Indications from the Caliper that the hole is rough is a warning that measurements which are from
tools pressed against the borehole wall, such as Density, Neutron, and the microresistivity
curves, may not be reliable.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
CAL 6
Correlation/Lithology
Caliper
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
In highly deviated holes, the caliper mechanism may not be strong enough to support the weight
of the logging tool, and may not indicate the actual diameter of the hole.

INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Occasionally, mud cake indications can be masked by a washed out borehole.






Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
CAL 7
Correlation/Lithology
Caliper
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
Check the caliper value in casing against the casing diameter.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections.
Cross-check the curve character with other curves from the same logging run.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA

Porosity











Porosity

This section contains information about the three common porosity measurements;
Sonic/Acoustic, Density, and Neutron. Although called porosity measurements, none
of the logging tools actually measure porosity directly. It is this indirectness that leads, in
part, to the interpretation of the measurements in pairs or in triads. The Porosity
Combination part of this section details the interpretations that produce better estimates
of porosity, and as a by-product, estimates of formation lithology.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 1
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Interpretation Goals
Porosity (from interval transit time, DT)).
Lithology identification (with the Density and/or Neutron).
Synthetic seismograms (with the Density).
Formation mechanical properties (with the Density).
Detection of abnormal formation pressures.
Permeability identification (from waveforms).
Cement bond quality.
Borehole size (from an attached caliper).



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 2
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Tool Diagram
Halliburton Full Wave Sonic tool
(FWST) in its long-spaced
2000 Hallibu
configuration.
rton


Physics of the Measurement
A high frequency (10s of KHz) acoustic pulse from
a transmitter is detected at two or more receivers.
The time of the first detection of the transmitted
pulse at each receiver is processed to produce an
interval transit time called delta t (!t orDT). The
delta t is the transit time of the wave front over one
foot of formation. If the entire acoustic waveform is
captured, arrival times and attenuations (energy
decrease) of several portions of the waveform can
be measured including: compressional (the
standard delta t), shear, and Stoneley.
Compensated tools use multiple transmitter-
receiver pairs to minimize the effects of borehole
size changes.
Array or similarly named tools usually have 4 or
more receivers, and the data from all receivers is
processed to determine arrival times.
Some tools are designed specifically for shear
wave measurements.
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
90%
Radius of
Investigation-
50%
Precision
(+-)
DT 12 in.* ~6 in. 1 usec/ft
*depends on receiver spacing
Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
1

cased hole eccentered
1

In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: 60 feet/minute.
Array or full wave tools may require slower logging
speeds.
Comments:
1
To minimize signal attenuation, the tool should be run
centered in holes smaller than 16 inches, and
eccentered in holes larger than 16 inches. The tool
should always have some standoff in order to reduce
road noise.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 3
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company
literature, and may no longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
Acoustic Properties Explorert APX
Cross-Multipole Array Acoustic XMAC
Borehole Compensated Acoustilog DAL, AC

*Long Spaced BHC Acoustic, ACL; *Multiple Array Acoustilog, MAC; *Digital Array Acoustilog,
DAC
Computalog
Borehole Compensated Sonic BCS
Digital Acoustic Array DAR
High resolution sonic logs (BCS variants)
Long Spaced Sonic, LSS; Sonic Signature Log, SSL
Halliburton
Full Wave Sonic FWS
Multipole Acoustic Logging Service XACT

*Borehole Compensated Sonic, BCS; *Long Spaced Sonic, LSS; *Low Frequency Dipole Tool,
LFDT
Gearhart
*Borehole Compensated Sonic, BCS; *Long Spaced Sonic, LSS
Welex
*Compensated Acoustic Velocity, CAV; *Full Wave Sonic, FWS; *Acoustic Velocity Log
Reeves Wireline
Compensated Sonic Sonde CSS
Long Spaced Compensated Sonic Sonde LCS
Compact Sonic Sonde MSS
Ultrasonic Gase Detector UGD
*Sonic Waveform, SW
Schlumberger
Dipole Shear Sonic Imager DSI
*Borehole Compensated Sonic Log, BHC; *Long Spaced Sonic, LSS; *Array-Sonic
Tucker Wireline
Compensated Sonic Tool CST
Long Spaced Sonic Tool LST
MWD/LWD Mnemonic
Baker Hughes INTEQ
No information available.
Exlog
*(none)
Teleco
*(none)
Pathfinder
Density Neutron Caliper DNSC
Schlumberger LWD (Anadrill)
IDEAL Sonic-While-Drilling Tool ISONIC
Sperry Sun
Bi-Modal Acoustic Tool BAT
Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
Interval transit time, travel time
(for compressional, shear, and/or Stoneley waves)
DT, !t usec/ft, usec/m

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 4
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
SON 4
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Log Example

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 5
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Waveform display

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 6
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Variable density display


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 7
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Interpretation Details
CHARACTERISTIC VALUES:

Matrix Value
(Wyllie)
DTMa
Matrix Value
(Raymer-Hunt-Gardner))
DTMa
Fluid Value
DTFl
Sandstone 51.3 to 55.6 168 to 182 56 184
Limestone 43.5 to 47.6 143 to 156 49 161
Dolomite 38.5 to 43.5 126 to 143 44 144
Anhydrite 50 164 50 164
Halite 67 220 67 220
Coal >100 >328 >100 >328
Steel 57 187 57 187
Gas 920 3018
Oil 230 755
Water
179 to 208
(189)
587 to 682
(620)
Units usec/ft usec/m usec/ft usec/m usec/ft usec/m


POROSITY
Wyllie Time-Average Equation:
cp ma fl
ma
cp
S
B t t
t t
B DTMa DTFl
DTMa DT
SPHI
1 1
"
! # !
! # !
$ "
#
#
$ $%
SPHI = %
S
= sonic (acoustic) porosity
DT = !t = sonic travel time (from the log)
DTMa = !t
ma
= matrix travel time
DTFl = !t
fl
= fluid travel time
B
cp
= compaction correction, where
0 . 1
100
& $
DTShale
B
cp

The Bcp factor was added to the equation when it was found that the equation gave highly
optimistic porosity values in unconsolidated sands. DTShale is picked from a shale near the zone
of interest. The correction factor is never less than 1.0.

Raymer-Hunt-Gardner Equation (Schlumberger Empirical Relation):
t
t t
DT
DTMa DT
SPHI
ma
S
!
! # !
" $
#
" $ $
8
5
8
5
%
SPHI = %
S
= sonic (acoustic) porosity
DT = !t = sonic travel time (from the log)
DTMa = !t
ma
= matrix travel time

The above equation is an approximation of Schlumberger chart Por-3.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 8
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Like the Wyllie equation, Raymer-Hunt-Gardner is based on empirical data. It is non-linear in
form, resulting in lower porosities than Wyllie for high DT, as in uncompacted sands. No
compaction correction is needed.
The choice of which equation to use depends on the interpreter. If other porosity information is
available, as from cores, choose the equation which best fits the supporting data.
The formation matrix traveltime, DTMa, is the acoustic traveltime of the formation at zero porosity.
Its value depends on the lithology of the formation (see the Characteristic Values, above). Since
the Sonic log "sees" the formation close to the borehole, the fluid is assumed to be the drilling
mud filtrate. The formation fluid traveltime, DTFl, varies somewhat with the salinity of the
formation, but is usually assumed to be 189 usec/ft.

LITHOLOGY IDENTIFICATION
Lithology is determined by comparison of delta t with Neutron and Density data in crossplots, in
Matrix Identification (MID) plots, and in M-N (A-K) plots. The charts may vary by Neutron tool
type, Sonic response equation type, and by service company.
The ratio of shear to compressional DT may also be an indicator of gross lithology.

SYNTHETIC SEISMOGRAMS
Sonic compressional and Density data are used to determine acoustic impedance of the
formations along the borehole, and reflection coefficients at bed boundaries. The synthetic
seismic trace that is derived from that information can be displayed in depth or time to be
compared to the seismic data.
The logs can also be modeled with varying fluid properties (and sometimes also with varying
porosity), and synthetics calculated from the modeled curves, to help determine the response of
the seismic data to the subsurface.

FORMATION MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Compressional and shear sonic data are used with density data to calculate formation properties
such as Poisson's ratio and Young's Modulus, and formation strength.
Formation strength calculations can be used to determine the mud weight range to be used while
drilling to ensure borehole stability. Information on relative formation strengths supports the
design of hydraulic fracturing so that fractures remain in the target formations instead of
extending to adjacent formations. Formation strength can also support predictions of drawdown
pressures so that sand-free production can be maintained when a well is completed and
produced.

DETECTION OF ABNORMAL FORMATION PRESSURES
Sonic traveltime values in shales are plotted against depth. Sharp deviations from a general trend
of decreasing DT with depth indicate the presence of geopressured (overpressured) zones.

PERMEABILITY IDENTIFICATION
Attenuation of some of the later arrivals in the acoustic wavetrain (shear and Stoneley waves)
gives some indication of permeability. The attenuation is, however, affected by other parameters,
such as lithology. This technique is not well defined.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 9
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic

CEMENT BOND QUALITY
Using specialized tools, the quality of the cement bond (cement to pipe and cement to formation)
can be deduced by the attenuation of the acoustic signal. Essentially, the better the bonding, the
more attenuation of the signal.

BOREHOLE SIZE
The hole size is produced by a caliper measurement associated with the centralizing equipment
on the tool. Movement of the centralizer arms as changes in hole size are encountered are
translated to a hole diameter and r

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 10
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Enlarged borehole, formation fractures, gas in the borehole or formation, or improper
centralization can produce signal attenuation resulting in "cycle skipping", or DT spikes to higher
values.
Improper centralization, the lack of standoff, or excessive logging speed can result in "road
noise", or DT spikes to either higher or lower values.

INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Lithology effects are manifested in the necessity to chose a matrix traveltime (DTMa) value in
order to calculate porosity.
Porosity calculations in uncompacted formations will yield porosity values higher than actual
porosity when using the Wyllie equation. This can be accounted for through the use of the
compaction factor, Bcp, in the Wyllie equation, or by use of the Raymer-Hunt-Gardner equation.
Porosity calculated in gas bearing zones will be slightly higher than actual porosity because the
traveltime in gas is higher than in water.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
SON 11
Porosity
Sonic/Acoustic
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
There should be no spikes or interruptions in DT.
Check DT values in anhydrite (50 usec/ft), salt (67 usec/ft), or zones of known zero porosity.
DT = 57 usec/ft in casing.
For waveforms, the arriving signal of interest should not be saturated (truncated at its highest
values) and should be apparent on the display.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections.
Cross-check the curve character with other curves from the same logging run.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
DEN 1
Porosity
Density
Interpretation Goals
Porosity (from bulk density, RHOB).
Lithology identification (from the PEF curve and/or with the Neutron and/or Sonic).
Gas indication (with the Neutron).
Synthetic seismograms (with the Sonic).
Formation mechanical properties (with the Sonic).
Clay content (shaliness) (with the Neutron).
Borehole size (from an attached caliper).




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
DEN 2
Porosity
Density
Tool Diagram
Halliburton spectral density tool (SDL).
2000 Halliburton

Physics of the Measurement
High energy gamma rays are emitted from a
chemical source (usually Cesium 137) and interact
with the electrons of the elements in the formation.
Two detectors in the tool count the number of
returning gamma rays which are related to
formation electron density. For most earth
materials of interest, the electron density is related
to formation bulk density through a constant.
In newer spectral tools, the number of returning
gamma rays at two different energy ranges are
measured. The higher energy gamma rays (from
Compton Scattering) determine bulk density, and
therefore porosity, while the lower energy gamma
rays (due to photoelectric effect) are used to
determine formation lithology. The lower energy
gamma rays are related to the lithology of the
formation and show little dependence on porosity
or fluid type.
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
90%
Depth of
Investigation-
50%
Precision
(+-)
Bulk density
33 in.
5.5 in.*
1.5 in.
0.01
g/cm3
PE
33 in.
2 in.*
0.5 in. 5%
*with enhanced resolution processing
Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
cased hole
1
eccentered
In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: 60 feet/minute. May require slower
speeds for enhanced resolution processing.
Comments:
1
Can be run in cased holes in special conditions.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
DEN 3
Porosity
Density
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company
literature, and may no longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
Advantage Porosity Logging Service APLS
Compensated Z-Density ZDL
Compensated Densilog CDL
Computalog
Spectral Pe Density SPeD
*Spectral Litho Density, SLD; *Compensated Density, CDL
Halliburton
Spectral Density Log SDL
Gearhart
*Spectral Litho-Density, SDL; *Compensated Density Log, CDL
Welex
*Spectral Density, SDL; *Compensated Density Log, DEN
Reeves Wireline
Photo Density Sonde PDS
Compact PhotoDensity MPD
*Compensated Density, CDS
Schlumberger
Integrated Porosity Lithology IPL
*LithoDensity Log, LDT; *Compensated Formation Density Log, FDC
Tucker Wireline
Compensated Density Tool CDT
Lithology Density Tool LDT
MWD/LWD
Baker Hughes INTEQ
Optimized Rotational Density ORD
Modular Density/Lithology MDL
Exlog
*(none)
Teleco
*Modular Density Porosity, MDP
Pathfinder
Density Neutron Standoff Caliper Tool DNSCM
Density Neutron Caliper DNSC
Schlumberger LWD (Anadrill)
Vision475
Sperry Sun
Azimuthal Stabilized Litho Density ASLD
MWD Triple Combo
*Simultaneous Formation Density, SFD
Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
Bulk density RHOB, DEN, ZDEN g/cm3, kg/m3
Density porosity (referenced to a specific lithology) DPHI, PHID, DPOR %, v/v decimal
Density correction DRHO g/cm3, kg/m3
Photoelectric effect (lithology indicator) PE, Pe, PEF b/e
Caliper (hole diameter) CALI, CAL Inches, cm


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
DEN 4
Porosity
Density
DEN 4
Porosity
Density

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Log Example

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
DEN 5
Porosity
Density
Interpretation Details
CHARACTERISTIC VALUES

Matrix Value
RhoMa
Fluid Value
RhoFl
Lithology
PEF
Sandstone 2.65 2650 1.81
Limestone 2.71 2710 5.08
Dolomite 2.87 2870 3.14
Anhydrite 2.98 2980 5.05
Halite 2.04 2040 4.65
Coal ~1.2 ~1200 0.2
Barite 4.09 4090 267.
Gas .2 200 0.95
Oil ~0.85 ~850 0.12
Water 1.0 to 1.2 1000 to 1200 0.36 to 1.1
Units g/cm3 Kg/m3 g/cm3 Kg/m3 b/e


POROSITY
fl ma
b ma
D
RhoFl RhoMa
RHOB RhoMa
DPHI

= =
DPHI =
D
= density porosity
RHOB =
b
= bulk density (from the log)
RhoMa =
ma
= matrix density
RhoFl =
fl
= fluid density (often assumed to be mud filtrate density)

LITHOLOGY IDENTIFICATION
Lithology is determined by comparison of bulk density with Sonic and Neutron data in crossplots,
in Matrix Identification (MID) plots, and in M-N (A-K) plots. The charts may vary by Neutron tool
type, Sonic response equation type, and by service company.
The photoelectric effect (PEF) curve can be used alone to determine a single lithology, or in
combination with bulk density, or bulk density and Neutron curves to determine mixed lithologies.

GAS INDICATION
Gas is indicated when the Density and Neutron "crossover"; that is, when the neutron porosity is
less than the density porosity in a porous and permeable zone. Both curves must be corrected to
the lithology of the zone of interest. Similar crossover may occur as part of a lithology effect, as
when both the Density and Neutron tools are recorded on limestone matrix, and the lithology is
actually a sandstone.

SYNTHETIC SEISMOGRAMS
Sonic compressional and Density data are used to determine acoustic impedance of the
formations along the borehole, and reflection coefficients at bed boundaries. The synthetic
seismic trace that is derived from that information can be displayed in depth or time to be
compared to the seismic data.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
DEN 6
Porosity
Density
FORMATION MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Compressional and shear sonic data are used with density data to calculate formation properties
such as Poisson's ratio and Young's Modulus, and formation strength.
Formation strength calculations can be used to determine the mud weight range to be used while
drilling to ensure borehole stability. Information on relative formation strengths supports the
design of hydraulic fracturing so that fractures remain in the target formations instead of
extending to adjacent formations. Formation strength can also support predictions of drawdown
pressures so that sand-free production can be maintained when a well is completed and
produced.

CLAY CONTENT (SHALINESS)
Density and Neutron data are crossplotted, and a shale point identified on the plot (generally from
associated Gamma Ray data). The distance between the shale point and a clean formation line
is a measure of the clay content of an individual zone, with the shaliness relationship assumed to
be a linear function of that distance.

BOREHOLE SIZE
A mechanical arm opposite the sensors and source hold the density tool against the borehole
wall. Movement of the arm is calibrated to indicate hole diameter. Because of tool design, the
tool will tend to measure the longest diameter of the hole when the hole is elongated.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
DEN 7
Porosity
Density
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Enlarged borehole (>9 inches): RHOB < formation bulk density (DPHI > PHI
actual
).
Rough hole: RHOB < formation bulk density (DPHI > PHI
actual
). This is due to the sensor pad
losing contact with the borehole wall. Other indications of a rough hole will be a highly variable
Caliper curve, and a high-valued density correction (DRHO) curve. There are no environmental
corrections than can be applied to correct for loss of pad contact.
Barite muds: RHOB > formation bulk density (DPHI < PHI
actual
), and PEF > PEF
actual
.

INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Lithology: The porosity calculated from bulk density will be affected by the choice of matrix
density, RhoMa, which varies with lithology. In dense formations, such as anhydrite, the density
porosity will be negative because the assumed matrix density is less than the actual formation
matrix density.
Fluid content: The porosity calculated from bulk density will be affected by the choice of fluid
density, RhoFl, which varies with fluid type and salinity. In routine calculations the zone
investigated by the density tool is assumed to be completely saturated with mud filtrate.
Hydrocarbons: The presence of gas or "light" hydrocarbons in the pore space investigated by the
Density tool causes the calculated value of density porosity to be more than the actual porosity.
This is most noticeable in the presence of gas, causing "crossover" of the Neutron porosity and
Density porosity curves, where the Neutron log values are lower than the Density log values.
In all the cases above, the bulk density value, RHOB, derived from the tool is correct, but the
calculated Density porosity is erroneous because of differences between the assumed matrix
and/or fluid density values and the actual densities in the formation.





Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
DEN 8
Porosity
Density
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
Density porosity should equal Neutron porosity in clean, wet formations, when both are properly
corrected for lithology.
The correction curve, DRHO, should be near zero in smooth holes.
DRHO values deviating by more than 0.05 may be questionable due to loss of pad
contact.
DRHO values deviating by more than 0.10 indicate the density value is not
quantitatively reliable.
The DRHO value will be negative in heavy muds (e.g. barite muds).
Continuously large DRHO values in a smooth borehole may indicate excessive pad
wear (density readings could be questionable), or other problems.
Large DRHO values opposite an apparently smooth borehole wall may indicate
fractures (or other small irregularities at the wall surface).
PE will not be reliable in heavy muds, and will show values well over 5.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections.
Cross-check the curve character with other curves from the same logging run.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 1
Porosity
Neutron
Interpretation Goals
Porosity (displayed directly on the log).
Lithology identification (with the Sonic and/or Density).
Gas indication (with the Density).
Clay content (shaliness) (with the Density).
Correlation; especially in cased holes.





Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 2
Porosity
Neutron
Tool Diagram
Halliburton neutron tool (DSN-II).
1999 Halliburton
Physics of the Measurement
A chemical source (Americium-Beryllium) emits
high energy neutrons which are slowed by
formation nuclei. Two detectors in the tool count
the number of returning capture gamma rays or
neutrons (depending on the type of tool). The
detector count rates are inversely proportional to
the amount of hydrogen in the formation ("hydrogen
index"). By assuming that all the hydrogen resides
in the pore space of the formation (as water or
hydrocarbons), the hydrogen index can be related
to the formation porosity. "Gamma ray-neutron"
tools detect gamma rays and thermal neutrons;
"sidewall" tools detect epithermal neutrons;
"compensated" tools detect thermal neutrons.
Schlumberger offers a neutron tool which uses an
accelerator to generate neutrons, eliminating the
need for a chemical source. This minimizes safety
issues on the rig floor and in the event the tool is
lost in the hole.
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
90%
Radius of
Investigation-
50%
Precision
(+-)
thermal
36 in.
20 in.*
6 in. 0.4 p.u.
epithermal 30-44 in. 6 in. 1 p.u.
Gamma-
neutron
20 in. 8 in. NA
*with enhanced resolution processing
Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
cased hole eccentered
In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: 60 feet/minute. May require slower
speeds for enhanced resolution processing.
Comments:

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 3
Porosity
Neutron
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company
literature, and may no longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
Compensated Neutron Log CN
*Sidewall Epithermal Neutron Log, SWN; Neutron Log, NEU
Computalog
Compensated Neutron Service CNS
*Sidewall Neutron Log, SNL
Halliburton
Dual-Spaced Neutron II DSN II
Dual-Spaced Epithermal Neutron DSEN
Gearhart
*Compensated Neutron Log, CNS; *Sidewall Neutron Log, SNL; *Neutron Log, NL
Welex

Dual Spaced Neutron II, DSN II; Dual Spaced Neutron, DSN; *Sidewall Neutron, SWN;
*Neutron, NEU
Reeves Wireline
Compensated Neutron Sonde CNS
Compact Dual Neutron MDN
Schlumberger
Integrated Porosity Lithology IPL
Platform Express

*Compensated Neutron Log, CNL; *Sidewall Neutron Log, SNP; *Gamma Ray-Neutron Tool,
GNT
Tucker Wireline
Compensated Neutron Tool CNT
MWD/LWD Mnemonic
Baker Hughes INTEQ
Caliper Corrected Neutron CCN
Modular Neutron Porosity MNP
Exlog
*(none)
Teleco
Modular Nuclear Porosity, MNP
Pathfinder
Density Neutron Caliper DNSC
Schlumberger LWD (Anadrill)
Vision475
*Compensated Neutron Density, CDN
Sperry Sun
Compensated Thermal Neutron CTN
MWD Triple Combo
Compensated Neutron Porosity CN

Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
Neutron porosity (referenced to a specific lithology) NPHI, PHIN, NPOR %, v/v decimal
For older (GNT) tools, Counts
Counts/second, API
Neutron units


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 4
Porosity
Neutron
NEU 4
Porosity
Neutron

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Log Example

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 5
Porosity
Neutron
Interpretation Details
CHARACTERISTIC VALUES:
These values are for Schlumberger CNL tools, with NPHI curve mnemonic (not TNPH),
with lithology referenced to LIMESTONE. Values will change with logging company and tool
vintage (type).

Matrix Value Fluid Value
Sandstone -0.02 -2
Limestone 0.00 0
Dolomite 0.01 1
Anhydrite -0.02 -2
Halite -0.03 -3
Coal >0.40 >40
Gas
Oil
Water 1 100
Units v/v decimal % v/v decimal %


POROSITY
Except for the obsolete "Gamma Ray Neutron" tools, Neutron porosity is calculated by the
acquisition software and is displayed directly on the log. This porosity is referenced to a specific
lithology, usually limestone. Corrections to the porosity to account for the lithology actually
present can be done through charts or appropriate algorithms.
NOTE: It is important to use the chart or algorithm for the correct Neutron tool and acquisition
company. Each tool has a unique lithologic response, and use of the wrong algorithm will result
in erroneous porosity estimation.
The older "gamma ray-neutron" tools will show response in counts per second or API Units on a
linear scale. The neutron count rate (or API value) decreases with increasing porosity. In these
displays, increasing porosity is shown by movement of the curve to the left of the scale (just like
for the newer tools which display porosity directly). These values can be converted to porosity
through calibration to core data, or by rules of thumb which approximate the response. The core
calibration and rules of thumb tend to apply only to specific reservoirs or over limited geographic
areas.
All Neutron tools can be run in cased holes to determine formation porosity. Corrections must be
made for the presence of casing and cement.

LITHOLOGY IDENTIFICATION
Lithology is determined by comparison of neutron porosity with Sonic and Density data in
crossplots, in Matrix Identification (MID) plots, and in M-N (A-K) plots. The charts may vary by
Neutron tool type, Sonic response equation type, and by service company.

GAS INDICATION
Gas is indicated when the Density and Neutron "crossover"; that is, when the neutron porosity is
less than the density porosity in a porous and permeable zone. Both curves must be corrected to
the lithology of the zone of interest. Similar crossover may occur as part of a lithology effect, as
when both the Density and Neutron tools are recorded on limestone matrix, and the lithology is
actually a sandstone.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 6
Porosity
Neutron

CLAY CONTENT (SHALINESS)
Density and Neutron data are plotted, and a shale point identified on the plot (generally from
associated Gamma Ray data). The distance between the shale point and a clean formation line
is a measure of the clay content of an individual zone, with the shaliness relationship assumed to
be a linear function of that distance.

CORRELATION
Any of the neutron logs can be used in open or cased holes for correlation.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 7
Porosity
Neutron
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Enlarged borehole: NPHI > PHI
actual

Mudcake: NPHI < PHI
actual

Borehole salinity: NPHI < PHI
actual

Formation salinity: NPHI > PHI
actual

Mud weight: NPHI < PHI
actual

Pressure: NPHI > PHI
actual

Temperature: NPHI < PHI
actual


Temperature and pressure have the greatest effects on the the Neutron log.
The Neutron is not as severely affected by rough borehole as the Density log.


INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Shaliness: NPHI > PHI
actual
in shaly zones. Thermal neutron tools are more affected (read higher
in shales) than are epithermal neutron tools.
Gas: NPHI < PHI
actual
in gassy zones. See also the section on "Gas Indication" on the previous
page.
Lithology: In general, for logs recorded in limestone units, if the actual lithology is sandstone, the
log porosity is less than the true porosity, and if the actual lithology is dolomite, the log porosity is
greater than the actual porosity. See the Neutron porosity equivalence curves in the chartbooks.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 8
Porosity
Neutron
Neutron environmental corrections


































1988 Schlumberger

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
NEU 9
Porosity
Neutron
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
Neutron porosity should equal Density porosity in clean, wet formations, when properly corrected
for lithology.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections.
Cross-check the curve character with other curves from the same logging run.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 1
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Porosity measurement combinations
Remember that porosity tools dont measure porosity directly:
Acoustic logs measure acoustic wave travel time;
Density logs measure formation bulk density;
Neutron logs measure formation hydrogen content.

When using a single porosity measurement,
Lithology must be specified (through the choice of a matrix value) for the correct porosity
to be calculated.

When using two or more porosity measurements,
Lithology can be predicted (along with porosity) [with some ambiguity].

The greater the number of measurements, the greater the complexity of the formation that can be
assumed.

Measurement preferences (in order of choice)
Two measurements:
Neutron and Density
Neutron and Sonic
Spectral Density (bulk density and Pe)
Density and Sonic

Three measurements:
Neutron and Spectral Density
Neutron, Density, and Sonic
MID (Matrix Identification) plots
M-N plots

Interpretive techniques
Quicklook
Graphical techniques, usually comparing measurements in a log plot format (usually for
Neutron and Density).
Crossplots
Graphical x-y plots which predict porosity and lithology on the basis of the location of data
points with respect to pure lithology reference data. The plots may also contain data in
the z-axis.
Algorithmic calculation techniques are derived from these plots.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 2
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Neutron-Density Quicklook method

shale
limestone
limestone
dolomite
shale
sandstone
sandstone
anhydrite
coal
salt
limy dolomite
sandy limestone
dolomitic sand
shale
shale
shale
shale
shale
limestone
limestone
dolomite
shale
sandstone
sandstone
anhydrite
coal
salt
limy dolomite
sandy limestone
dolomitic sand
shale
shale
shale
shale


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 3
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Neutron-Density Quicklook method
Approach:
Compare the positions of the curves with respect to each other, as well as with respect to
the track.
Assumptions:
The Neutron and Density porosities are calculated with respect to limestone.
The Neutron porosity is recorded on a limestone matrix.
The Density porosity is calculated with a matrix density of 2.71 g/cm
3
, or scaled
to approximate the Neutron porosity scale.
The formation fluid is either water or oil, but NOT gas.
Responses
Lithology Porosity Neutron-Density response Pe response
Shale -- Neutron greater than Density by some variable amount
depending on the shale composition and depth.
Variable, but
about 3.
Limestone 0.05 Neutron and Density values overlay. About 5.
Limestone 0.15 Neutron and Density values overlay. About 5.
Dolomite 0.10 Neutron values greater than Density by 12 to 14
porosity units (0.12 to 0.14).
About 3.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.
Sandstone 0.26 Neutron values less than Density (crossover) by 6 to 8
porosity units.
2 or slightly
less.
Sandstone 0.05 Neutron values less than Density (crossover) by 6 to 8
porosity units.
2 or slightly
less.
Anhydrite -- Neutron porosity greater than Density by 14 porosity
units or more. Neutron porosity near zero.
About 5.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.
Salt -- Neutron porosity slightly negative. Density porosity >40
porosity units (bulk density near 2.0). Check the caliper
for bad hole and bad density data.
About 4.7.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.
Coal -- Responses variable depending on coal composition.
High Neutron and Density porosities (low bulk density).
Less than 1.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.
Limy
Dolomite
0.10 Variable response with lithologic mix, but Neutron
generally greater than Density.
3 to 5.
Sandy
LImestone
0.10 Variable response with lithologic mix, but Neutron
generally less than Density.
2 to 3.
Dolomitic
Sand
0.10 Highly variable, with Neutron greater or less than
Density, depending on the lithologic mix.
2 to 5.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 4
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Neutron-Density Quicklook: sandstone
shale
salt
shale
shaly gas sand
shaly oil sand
shaly wet sand
clean wet sand
shale
shale
shale
dolomite
limestone
clean wet sand
shale
salt
shale
shaly gas sand
shaly oil sand
shaly wet sand
clean wet sand
shale
shale
shale
dolomite
limestone
clean wet sand


In this example, the Neutron and Density are displayed with respect to a sandstone matrix (matrix
density = 2.65 g/cm3).
Note the Neutron-Density crossover in the limestone zone.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 5
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Two-Mineral Crossplots
METHODOLOGY
The four crossplots in this section are interpreted in a similar manner. Given two porosity
measurements, the crossplots can be solved for a mineral pair and porosity.
There are three lithology lines displayed on the crossplot: sandstone (quartz), limestone (calcite),
and dolomite. The lithology lines are marked with porosity values, usually in percent. There may
also be additional mineral points on the crossplots; anhydrite and salt are commonly displayed.
The log values for a particular interval or depth are plotted on the crossplot to create a point, and
the location of the point with respect to the lithology lines is an indication of the lithology and
porosity of the point.
If the point falls directly on a lithology line, the lithology of the point corresponds to the lithology of
the line, and the porosity of the point corresponds to the porosity of the line at that location.
If the point falls between two lines, it can be assumed to be a mixture of the lithologies of those
two lines. It contains a greater percentage of the mineral of the line to which it is closest. The
porosity of the point is determined by connecting the porosity points on the lines, and estimating
the porosity of the point by its relationship to those connecting lines. Note that depending on the
location of the plotted point, there may be more than one solution for the lithology, and that the
porosity will vary according to the lithology solution that is chosen.

For example, in the Neutron-Density crossplot on the following page:
Neutron limestone porosity (x-axis) = 15% (0.15)
Bulk density (y-axis) = 2.50 g/cm3

From the location of the point, the lithology is estimated as limy dolomite (the point is
closer to the dolomite line than to the calcite (limestone) line), with a porosity of 15%.
An equally reasonable interpretation is that the point represents a sandy dolomite (the
point is between the quartz and dolomite lines, but much closer to the dolomite line), with
a porosity of 15.5%.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 6
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Neutron-Density crossplot




























1994 Halliburton

Porosity is relatively invariant with lithologic assumptions (quartz-dolomite or calcite-dolomite).
The tools are usually run together, making the data combination relatively common.
Because of the differences in response of Neutron tools, the charts from different service
companies and tool types will vary significantly.

.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 7
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Neutron-Sonic Crossplot


































1994 Halliburton
Porosity is relatively invariant with lithologic assumptions (quartz-dolomite or calcite-dolomite).
Historically the tools are not run in combination.
This may be useful if the hole is rough and the density values are questionable.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 8
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Spectral Density (bulk density-Pe) crossplot



































1998 Schlumberger
Requires only one porosity tool (with two measurements).
Porosity varies significantly with the choice of the mineral pair.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 9
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Density-Sonic crossplot
1994 Halliburton

Porosity and lithology estimates are subject to large errors.
This is a good plot for distinguishing hot, or radioactive, formations from shales. The potentially
productive formations will plot in the area of the lithology lines, while shales will plot generally in
the lower right quadrant of the plot.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 10
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Two-mineral crossplots: Summary
Crossplot Advantages Limitations
Neutron-Density

Given two possible lithology
pair solutions, the porosity will
remain relatively invariant
between solutions.
The combination of neutron and
density measurements is the
most common of all porosity
tool pairs.
In rough holes or in heavy drilling
muds, the density data may be
invalid.
Neutron-Sonic

Given two possible lithology
pair solutions, the porosity will
remain relatively invariant
between solutions.
The sonic is less sensitive to
rough holes than the density.
The combination of sonic and
neutron data (without the density) is
not common.
Density (bulk density-Pe)

Both measurements are made
with the same logging tool; both
will often be available.
The choice of lithology pair will
have a significant effect of the
estimation of porosity.
In rough holes or in heavy drilling
mud, the data may be invalid.
The Pe measurement is relatively
new, and will not be present in wells
logged before about 1978.
Sonic-Density

Best for identifying radioactive
reservoirs, rather than predicting
lithology and porosity:
Potential reservoirs will plot
along the closely spaced
lithology lines while shales will
tend to fall toward the lower
right of the plot. This can
indicate the presence of
radioactive reservoirs which are
intermingled with shales (which
tend to have high radioactivity).
The choice of lithology pair will
have a significant effect of the
estimation of porosity.
The lithology lines are closely
spaced, so any uncertainty in the
measurements will produce large
changes in the lithology and porosity
estimates.





Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 11
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Three-Measurement Crossplots
METHODOLOGY
The three crossplots in this section are interpreted in a similar manner. Given three porosity
measurements, a three-mineral matrix can be determined. Because the techniques are restricted
to a two-dimensional plot, intermediate quantities which collapse the three measurements to two
axes are calculated and plotted.
The older M-N plot used sonic, density, and neutron values to calculate M (a function of sonic and
density) and N (a function of neutron and density).
Newer techniques, and the addition of an additional measurement, photoelectric effect (Pe or
PEF), derive apparent matrix values. Apparent matrix density, Rhomaa (a function of density
and neutron) is plotted against apparent matrix sonic traveltime, DTmaa (a function of sonic and
neutron). Apparent matrix density is also plotted against apparent matrix photoelectric cross
section, Umaa (a function of density, neutron, and photoelectric effect).
In these techniques, any three mineral points are plotted as the vertices of a triangle. The
relationship of a plotted apparent matrix point to the triangle determines the components of the
formation represented by the point.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 12
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
M-N plots




























1998 Schlumberger

01 . 0 !
"
"
#
fluid
fluid
Rho RHOB
DT DT
M
fluid
N Nfluid
Rho RHOB
N
"
"
#
$ $

There is a dependence of the technique on salinity, matrix travel time, and porosity range.
Older Baker Atlas (then Dresser Atlas) literature showed a similar technique called A-K plots.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 13
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Preliminary charts for the Neutron-Density-Sonic MID plot
To use the plot, apparent matrix density and apparent matrix traveltime must first be calculated.





This is a Neutron-Density crossplot, focused
on the lithologic response of the
measurements, and ignoring the porosity
response.
Apparent matrix density is derived from this
plot.







1994 Halliburton






This is a Neutron-Sonic crossplot,
focused on the lithologic response of
the measurements, and ignoring the
porosity response.
Apparent matrix traveltime is derived
from this plot.







1994 Halliburton

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 14
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Neutron-Density-Sonic MID Plot





























1994 Halliburton

A three-mineral matrix model is assumed. Any three minerals that have unique locations on the
plot with respect to the other two minerals can be used. The proximity to the mineral endpoints
indicate increased amounts of that mineral.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 15
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Preliminary chart for the Neutron-Spectral Density MID plot






























1994 Halliburton

The apparent matrix volumetric cross section is determined from the bulk density and PE, and the
total porosity (from the Neutron-Density crossplot.






Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 16
Porosity
Porosity Combinations

Neutron-Spectral Density MID Plot
1994 Halliburton

A three-mineral matrix model is assumed. Any three minerals that have unique locations on the
plot with respect to the other two minerals can be used. The proximity to the mineral endpoints
indicate increased amounts of that mineral.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 17
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Three-mineral crossplots: Summary
Technique Notes Comments
M-N Lithology M = f(DT, RHOB)
N = f($
N
, RHOB)
M and N here are different from, and
should not be confused with, the m and n
exponents in Archies equation.
The location of the mineral points on the
plot depends on mud salinity, matrix
traveltime, and the porosity range.
This is the oldest of the three-mineral
techniques, and is probably the least
desirable to use.
Neutron-Density-Sonic
MID plot
RhoMa
app
=
f(RHOB, $
N
, $
Total
)
DTMa
app
=
f(DT, $
N
, $
Total
)
The mineral triangle for the sandstone-
limestone-dolomite group is narrow.
Neutron-Spectral Density
MID plot
RhoMa
app
=
f(RHOB, $
N
, $
Total
)
UMa
app
=
f(Pe, RHOB, $
Total
)
Requires only Neutron and Spectral Density
tools.
Sensitive to rough hole data problems.
Large mineral triangle for the sandstone-
limestone-dolomite group.














Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Combo 18
Porosity
Porosity Combinations
Beyond three minerals
Solution of a problem with more than three minerals is beyond the scope of graphical solutions.

The technique shown below solves for 4 minerals (in this case, quartz, calcite, dolomite, and
anhydrite) plus shale, and also estimates water saturation.
Solid component volumes
Fluid component volumes
Solid component volumes
Fluid component volumes


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA

Resistivity











Resistivity

This section addresses three categories of resistivity measurements; Induction logs,
Laterologs, and Microresistivity (Rxo) measurements. The induction and laterologs
both attempt to measure the resistivity of the undisturbed part of the formation, laterally
distant from the borehole. The measurements achieve the same goal through different
physics of the measurements.

The microresistivity measurements for the most part use the same physics as the
laterologs, but are designed to measure the resistivity of the formation very close to the
borehole, in the zone that has been flushed by the drilling fluid.

Both measurements (as well as some measurements of intermediate lateral distance)
are useful; their use in concert provides a better estimate of undisturbed (true)
formation resistivity, and also provides a qualitative estimate of formation producibility.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
IL 1
Resistivity
Induction
Interpretation Goals
True (undisturbed) formation resistivity, R
t
.
Fluid saturation, S
w
, via Archie's Equation.
Geopressure (overpressure) detection.
Diameter of invasion.
Correlation.





Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
IND 2
Resistivity
Induction
Tool Diagram
Halliburton array induction log (HRI).
1999 Halliburton

Physics of the Measurement
Transmitter coils induce an alternating current in
the formation. Receiver coils sense the response
of the formation, both in magnitude and phase.
This response is proportional to the formation
conductivity (the inverse of resistivity). Multiple
transmitter and receiver coils are used in an effort
to minimize borehole and invasion effects on the
tool. Newer versions of the tool make better, and
digitally recorded, measurements of the in-phase
and out-of-phase parts of the signal, and operate at
different frequencies, in order to improve the
accuracy of the tool. Accuracy is further enhanced
by environmental corrections done in real time.
Array tools have many receivers, usually at small
spacings, and rely on signal processing to create a
common vertical resolution for all measurements.
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
90% *
Radius of
Investigation
50%
Precision
(+-)
Deep 24 in. 91 in.
0.25
mmho
Medium 24 in. 39 in.
0.25
mmho
Shallow <17 in. 17 in.
0.1
ohm.m
* Some array tools have selectable resolutions of 1,
2, or 4 feet.
Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
cased hole eccentered
In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: 30 to 100 feet/minute depending on
the tool type.
Comments: Most tools can be run eccentered, but
must be kept slightly away from the borehole wall.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
IND 3
Resistivity
Induction
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company literature, and may no
longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
3D Explorer Induction Logging Service 3DEX
High-Definition Induction Log HDIL
*Dual Phase Induction Log, DPIL; *Dual Induction Focused Log, DIFL; *Induction Electrolog, IEL
Computalog
Simultaneous Triple Induction STI400
*Dual Induction Laterolog, DIL; *Induction Electric Log, IEL
Halliburton
High Resolution Induction HRI
High Resolution Array Induction HRAI
*Dual Induction Logging Tool, DIL, DILT
Gearhart
*High Resolution Induction, HRI; *Induction Electrical Log, IEL
Welex
*Dual Induction Log, DIL; *Induction Electric Log, IEL
Reeves Wireline
Array Induction/Shallow FE AIS
Compact Array Induction MAI
Schlumberger
Array Induction Tool AIT
Platform Express
*Dual Induction Tool, DIT; *Induction Resistivity Tool, IRT; *Induction Electrical Survey, IES
Tucker Wireline
Dual Induction Tool DIT
Phased Induction Tool PIT
MWD/LWD Mnemonic
Baker Hughes INTEQ
Multiple Propagation Resistivity MPR
Dual Propagation Resistivity DPR
Exlog
*Electromagnetic Resistivity, EMR; *DLWD component (16-inch normal)
Teleco
*Dual Propagation Resistivity, DPR; *RGD component (16-inch normal)
Pathfinder
Resistivity Gamma Ray CWRD
Slim Resistivity SCWR
Schlumberger LWD (Anadrill)
Compensated Dual Resistivity Tool CDR
Array Resistivity Compensated 5 Tool, ARC5
Sperry Sun
EWR Phase 4 Resistivity EWR
MWD Triple Combo
Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
For Array and/or Imaging tools:
Multiple curves, the names of which imply both vertical
resolution and depth of investigation
e.g., HO60 ohm.m
For Dual Induction tools:
Deep induction resistivity ILD, RILD ohm.m
Medium Induction resistivity ILM, RILM ohm.m
Shallow resistivity LL3, SGRD, SFL ohm.m
For Induction Electric tools:
Induction resistivity IL, RIL, ILD, RILD ohm.m
Induction conductivity COND, CILD mS/m, mmho
Short Normal resistivity RSN, SN, R16 ohm.m
Spontaneous potential SP mV

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
IND 4
Resistivity
Induction
Log Example


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
IND 5
Resistivity
Induction
Interpretation Details
TRUE (UNDISTURBED) FORMATION RESISTIVITY, R
t

The Induction curves can be corrected for changes in borehole size, mud resistivity, and bed
thickness. True formation resistivity, R
t
, can be determined from the Deep Induction curve by
applying the above corrections, and corrections for invasion. The Medium Induction and shallow
curves are needed for the invasion correction, along with the proper algorithms and/or charts.
In the majority of cases, the Deep Induction curve will be sufficiently close to R
t
so that
corrections are not needed.
If the Deep Induction curve is corrected for invasion through the tornado chart, the resulting
value of R
t
will be less than the original Deep Induction value.

FLUID SATURATION, S
w

Archie's Equation:

n
t
m
w
w
R
R a
S
1


S
w
= formation water saturation
R
w
= formation water resistivity
R
t
= "true" formation resistivity (from the induction log)
= porosity
a = cementation factor
m = cementation exponent
n = saturation exponent

Archie's equation assumes that all electrical conductivity occurs in the water saturated portion of
the porosity in a rock, with the rock matrix and any hydrocarbons acting as insulators. The
presence of clays in the formation (a "shaly sand") creates additional formation conductivity (a
lower formation resistivity than an equivalent "clean" sand). In this case, Archie's equation will
predict an S
w
greater than is actually in the formation. Several "shaly sand equations" have been
developed to account for the effects of clays. The most commonly used are Simandoux, Dual
Water, and Waxman-Smits.

DETECTION OF GEOPRESSURES
Deep resistivity values in the shales in a well are plotted on a reduced scale, and a trend with
depth defined. The trend is usually one of increasing resistivity with increasing depth. An abrupt
decrease in shale resistivity with increasing depth usually indicates an increase in formation
pressure.

DIAMETER OF INVASION
Diameter of invasion is determined as a byproduct of the correction of the Deep Induction curve
using a graphical "tornado chart" (or mathematical equivalent). Using the chart, ratios of the
Medium/Deep and Shallow/Deep resistivity measurements are entered on the x and y axes, and
values for invasion diameter (di), R
xo
/R
t
, and R
t
/R
Deep
are read from the three families of curves

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
IND 6
Resistivity
Induction
which comprise the chart. R
t
is derived from the R
t
/R
Deep
ratio, and R
xo
is derived from the R
xo
/R
t

ratio.
Invasion can be determined qualitatively by the separation of the three resistivity curves,
especially if the connate water resistivity (R
w
) and the mud filtrate resistivity (R
mf
) are significantly
different.
Deep Induction ~ Medium Induction > shallow resistivity indicates shallow invasion;
Deep Induction > Medium Induction ~ shallow resistivity indicates deep invasion.

CORRELATION
Curves are scanned for similarities in shape and magnitude. The logs are often displayed at
scales of 1 inch per 100 feet or 2 inches per 100 feet.
Correlation of resistivity is really correlation of fluid volume and fluid salinity.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
IND 7
Resistivity
Induction
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Borehole effects can be large when the formation resistivity is greater than 100 ohm-meters, or if
the borehole is large, or if the mud is very conductive. The effect is greater on the medium
induction than on the deep induction, especially if the proper standoff is not used.
Bed thickness effects are noticeable when bed thickness is less than eight feet, or when adjacent
beds have large resistivity contrasts (e.g., 18 foot thick bed with an apparent resistivity of 30 ohm-
m and 1 ohm-m shoulder (shale) beds).
No invasion corrections are needed when the ratio: RILM/RILD < 1.2.
The induction works in non-conducting muds or in air-filled boreholes.
The induction is most effective in fresh muds and low formation resistivities.
Because the induction actually measures formation conductivity (1/resistivity), the effects of the
tool's precision predominate at high resistivities. The response of the standard induction
measurement becomes suspect in formation resistivities greater than 100 to 125 ohm-meters.

INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Clays in the formation (shaliness) decrease the formation resistivity as compared to equivalent
clay-free zones, because of the conductivity due to the clay and its bound water. Archie's
Equation does not account for this excess conductivity, and will yield water saturations which are
pessimistic; that is, the calculated water saturation will be greater than the actual saturation.
This shaliness effect increases with increasing formation water resistivity (R
w
), because the
conductivity from the presence of the clay will be a larger percentage of the conductivity from the
formation water (as compared to a low R
w
(highly conductive) water).
Various "shaly sand" equations (Waxman-Smits, Dual Water, Simandoux, others) account for the
clay effects. Other conductive minerals (pyrite, others) may cause similar excess conductivity
effects, varying with their manner of distribution in the rock.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
IND 8
Resistivity
Induction
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
All three resistivity curves should stack (have the same value) in impermeable beds once they are
corrected for borehole and bed thickness effects. If the Laterolog 8 (LL8) or Short Normal are
used instead of the SFL, they will read about 0.2 ohm-m higher than the induction curves in the
shales.
Curves should stack at about 2000 ohm-m in impermeable, non-conductive beds (e.g., anhydrite)
greater than 20 feet thick.
The proper invasion profile in water-bearing permeable beds is:
if R
mf
< R
w
, then Shallow < Medium < Deep;
if R
mf
> R
w
, then Shallow > Medium > Deep.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Induction curves should be free of spikes; especially check the high resistivity range.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections.
Cross-check the curve character with other curves from the same logging run.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
LL 1
Resistivity
Laterolog
Interpretation Goals
True (undisturbed) formation resistivity, R
t
.
Fluid saturation, S
w
, via Archie's Equation.
Geopressure (overpressure) detection.
Diameter of invasion.
Correlation.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
LL 2
Resistivity
Laterolog
Tool Diagram
Halliburton dual laterolog tool (DLLT).
2000 Halliburton


Physics of the Measurement
A very low frequency current flows from the tool,
through the borehole, into the formation. Electrode
arrays on either side of the source electrode force
the measurement current into a horizontal disk-
shaped pattern around the borehole. Formation
resistivity is determined by monitoring the amount
of current flowing from the tool.
The tool must make electrical contact with the
formation.
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
90%
Depth of
Investigation
50%
Precision
(+-)
Deep 24 in. 60-84 in.
0.2
ohm.m
Medium 24 in. 24-36 in.
0.2
ohm.m

Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
cased hole eccentered
In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: 100 feet/minute; slower if an Rxo tool
is run in combination.
Comments:

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
LL 3
Resistivity
Laterolog
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company
literature, and may no longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
High Definition Laterolog HDLL
*Thin Bed Resistivity, TBRt; *Laterolog, LL3
Computalog
Dual Laterolog DLL
Halliburton
Dual Laterolog DLL
Gearhart
*Dual Laterolog, DLL
Welex
*Dual Laterolog, DLL; *Dual Guard, DGL; *Guard, GL
Reeves Wireline
Dual Laterolog Sonde DLS
Compact Dual Laterolog MDL
*Short Focused Guard, SFE
Schlumberger
Azimuthal Resistivity Imager ARI

*Dual Laterolog Tool, DLT; *Spherically Focused Log, SFL; *Laterolog 3, LL3; *Laterolog 7, LL7;
*Laterolog 8, LL8
Tucker Wireline
Dual Laterolog Tool DLT
MWD/LWD Mnemonic
Baker Hughes INTEQ
No Laterolog-type tools
Exlog
*Focused Current Resistivity, FCR
Teleco
No Laterolog-type tools
Pathfinder
(unknown)
Schlumberger LWD (Anadrill)
*Resistivity at Bit, RAB; Geosteering Tool, GST
Sperry Sun
No Laterolog-type tools

Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
Deep laterolog resistivity DLL, LLD, RLLD ohm.m
Shallow laterolog resistivity SLL, LLS, RLLS ohm.m
flushed zone resistivity curve Rxo ohm.m


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
LL 4
Resistivity
Laterolog
Log Example



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
LL 5
Resistivity
Laterolog
Interpretation Details
TRUE (UNDISTURBED) FORMATION RESISTIVITY, R
t

The Laterolog curves can be corrected for changes in borehole size, and bed thickness. True
formation resistivity, R
t
, can be determined from the Deep Laterolog curve by applying the above
corrections, and corrections for invasion. The Shallow Laterolog and R
xo
curves are needed for
the invasion correction, along with the proper algorithms and/or charts.
In the majority of cases, the Deep Laterolog curve will be sufficiently close to R
t
so that
corrections are not needed.
If the Deep Induction curve is corrected for invasion through the tornado chart, the resulting
value of R
t
will be less than the original Deep Induction value.

FLUID SATURATION, S
w

Archie's Equation:

n
t
m
w
w
R
R a
S
1


S
w
= formation water saturation
R
w
= formation water resistivity
R
t
= "true" formation resistivity (from the induction log)
= porosity
a = cementation factor
m = cementation exponent
n = saturation exponent

Archie's equation assumes that all electrical conductivity occurs in the water saturated portion of
the porosity in a rock, with the rock matrix and any hydrocarbons acting as insulators. The
presence of clays in the formation (a "shaly sand") creates additional formation conductivity (a
lower formation resistivity than an equivalent "clean" sand). In this case, Archie's equation will
predict an Sw greater than is actually in the formation. Several "shaly sand equations" have been
developed to account for the effects of clays. The most commonly used are Simandoux, Dual
Water, and Waxman-Smits.

DETECTION OF GEOPRESSURES
Deep resistivity values in the shales in a well are plotted on a reduced scale, and a trend with
depth defined. The trend is usually one of increasing resistivity with increasing depth. An abrupt
decrease in shale resistivity with increasing depth usually indicates an increase in formation
pressure.

DIAMETER OF INVASION
Diameter of invasion is determined as a byproduct of the correction of the Deep Laterolog curve
using a graphical "tornado chart" (or mathematical equivalent). Using the chart, ratios of the
Deep/Shallow and Deep/R
xo
resistivity measurements are entered on the x and y axes, and
values for invasion diameter (di), R
t
/R
xo
, and R
t
/R
Deep
are read from the three families of curves

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
LL 6
Resistivity
Laterolog
which comprise the chart. R
t
is derived from the R
t
/R
Deep
ratio, and R
xo
is derived from the R
t
/R
xo

ratio.
Invasion can be determined qualitatively by the separation of the three resistivity curves,
especially if the connate water resistivity (R
w
) and the mud filtrate resistivity (R
mf
) are significantly
different.
Deep Laterolog ~ Shallow Laterolog < R
xo
resistivity indicates shallow invasion;
Deep Laterolog< Shallow Laterolog ~ R
xo
resistivity indicates deep invasion.

CORRELATION
Curves are scanned for similarities in shape and magnitude. The logs are often displayed at
scales of 1 inch per 100 feet or 2 inches per 100 feet.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
LL 7
Resistivity
Laterolog
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Borehole size corrections are usually neglected unless the borehole diameter is greater than 12
inches.
Bed thickness corrections are small for beds greater than 4 feet thick unless the resistivity
contrast is high for the bed resistivity compared to the shoulder bed.
No invasion corrections are needed when the ratio: RLLD/RLLS < 1.05.
The laterolog must have conducting fluid in the borehole; it will not work in air filled holes or oil
based muds.
The laterolog is most effective in salty muds and high formation resistivities.

INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Clays in the formation (shaliness) decrease the formation resistivity as compared to equivalent
clay-free zones, because of the conductivity due to the clay and its bound water. Archie's
Equation does not account for this excess conductivity, and will yield water saturations which are
pessimistic; that is, the calculated water saturation will be greater than the actual saturation.
This shaliness effect increases with increasing formation water resistivity (R
w
), because the
conductivity from the presence of the clay will be a larger percentage of the conductivity from the
formation water (as compared to a low R
w
(highly conductive) water).
Various "shaly sand" equations (Waxman-Smits, Dual Water, Simandoux, others) account for the
clay effects. Other conductive minerals (pyrite, others) may cause similar excess conductivity
effects, varying with their manner of distribution in the rock.





Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
LL 8
Resistivity
Laterolog
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
All three resistivity curves should stack (have the same value) in non-permeable beds once they
are corrected for borehole effects.
The proper invasion profile in permeable beds is:
if R
mf
< R
w
, then R
xo
< Shallow < Deep;
if R
mf
> R
w
, then R
xo
> Shallow > Deep.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections.
Cross-check the character of the curve with other curves from the same logging run.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 1
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
Interpretation Goals
Flushed zone formation resistivity, R
xo
.
Flushed zone water saturation, S
xo
, via Archie's Equation.
Indication of permeability.
Thin bed definition.
Fracture identification.
Invasion corrections to other resistivity measurements.






Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 2
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
Tool Diagram
Halliburton Micro Spherically
1999 Halliburton
Focused Log (MSFL).


Physics of the Measurement
Electrical current is forced into the formation by
closely spaced electrodes mounted on pads
pressed against the borehole wall. Some designs,
like the MicroSpherically Focused Log, use
focusing electrodes similar to the laterolog, while
other (older) designs, like the MicroLog, do not
focus the current.
Volume of Investigation

Vertical
Resolution
90%
Radius of
Investigation
50%
Precision
(+-)
MSFL 3 in. 1-4 in.
0.1
ohm.m
Microlog
microlateral
1.0 in. 1.5 in.
0.1
ohm.m
Microlog
microinverse
1.5 in. 4 in.
0.1
ohm.m

Operational Constraints
The tool can be run:
open hole centered
cased hole eccentered
In a borehole fluid of:
gas or air
water or water-based mud
oil or oil-based mud
Logging speed: 60 feet/minute
Comments:

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 3
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
Measurement Names
Measurement names preceded by an asterisk (*) are not listed in current acquisition company
literature, and may no longer be available, or are obsolete.
WIRELINE Mnemonic
Baker Atlas
Minilog ML
Micro Laterolog MLL
Micro Spherical Laterolog MSL
Proximity Log PROX
Computalog
Micro Resistivity Tool MRT400
Micro Spherically Focused Log MSFL
Micro Electric Log, MEL
Halliburton
Micro Spherically Focused Log MSFL
Microlog ML
*MicroLaterolog, MLL
Gearhart
Micro-Triple Resistivity, MTR; Micro-Electrical Log, MEL; Micro-Laterolog, MLL
Welex
Microlog, ML; Microguard, MGL
Reeves Wireline
Micro Resistivity Sonde MRS
MicroLog Sonde MLS
Mud Resistivity Sonde RMS
Schlumberger
Array Induction Resistivity AIT
Array Laterolog Resistivity HRLA

*Micro Spherically Focused Resistivity Tool, SRT, MSFL; *Microlaterolog, ML; *Microlog
Proximity Tool, MPT; *MicroLog Tool, MLT; *Micro-Cylindrically Focused Logging Device, MCFL
Tucker Wireline
Microspherically Focused Tool MFT
Micro Log Tool MLT
MWD/LWD Mnemonic
There are no MWD/LWD tools specifically defined as Rxo

Curves Displayed
(Curves are listed by generic name, common mnemonics (if any) and measurement units.)
Curve Name Mnemonics Units of Measurement
For Micrologs:
Micronormal resistivity MNOR ohm.m
Microinverse resistivity MINV ohm.m
For other Rxo measurements:
Micro Spherically Focused resistivity MSFL ohm.m
Micro Laterolog MLL ohm.m


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 4
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
Log Example



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 5
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
Rxo 5
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Microlog example

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 6
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
Interpretation Details
FLUSHED ZONE FORMATION RESISTIVITY, R
xo

Flushed zone formation resistivity, R
xo
, can be determined, with minimal environmental
corrections, from any of the microresistivity measurements, except for the Microlog. This value is
used in Archies equation to determine flushed zone water saturation, S
xo
, or to indicate moved
fluids by comparison to the undisturbed formation resistivity, R
t
.
FLUSHED ZONE WATER SATURATION, S
xo

Archie's Equation:

n
xo
m
mf
xo
R
R a
S
1


S
xo
= flushed zone water saturation
R
mf
= mud filtrate resistivity
R
xo
= flushed zone resistivity (from the microresistivity log)
= porosity
a = cementation factor
m = cementation exponent
n = saturation exponent

Archie's equation assumes that all electrical conductivity occurs in the water saturated portion of
the porosity in a rock, with the rock matrix and any hydrocarbons acting as insulators. The
presence of clays in the formation (a "shaly sand") creates additional formation conductivity (a
lower formation resistivity than an equivalent "clean" sand). In this case, Archie's equation will
predict a water saturation greater than is actually in the formation. Several "shaly sand
equations" have been developed to account for the effects of clays. The most commonly used
are Simandoux, Dual Water, and Waxman-Smits.
In the flushed zone form of Archie's equation shown here, Rt is replaced by Rxo, and Rw is
replaced by Rmf, with the assumption that all the original water has been replaced by drilling mud
filtrate. Comparison of Sxo and Sw (using the same form of Archie's equation) gives some
indication of (qualitative) permeability, and the amount of hydrocarbons which will be moved
during production.
Because of the design of MicroLogs, the resistivity from the log may vary significantly from the
actual resistivity of the formation. They should not be used in these calculations.

INDICATION OF PERMEABILITY
For Micrologs: The micronormal resistivity is greater than the microinverse resistivity ("positive
separation"). There should also be mudcake, as shown by a decrease in the caliper reading.
For other Rxo tools: Compare the reading with the resistivity from deeper reading tools. The
relationship between the readings will depend on the contrast between the formation water
resistivity and the mud filtrate resistivity.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 7
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
FRACTURE IDENTIFICATION
Rapid curve movement, or "hashiness", may be an indicator of fractures as the tools see
conductive mud-filled fractures alternating with less conductive beds. Rough hole may cause the
same response. This technique should be used only as one piece of information along with
others in trying to determine the presence of fractures.

THIN BED DEFINITION
These tools will identify very thin beds. The bed definition can be used qualitatively to estimate
the effect on the deeper reading tools. Bed thickness information from these tools can also be
used in software which attempts to make quantitative thin bed (or laminated reservoir) corrections
to other resistivity and porosity tools.

INVASION CORRECTIONS TO OTHER RESISTIVITY MEASUREMENTS
Rxo tools are usually run in combination with two deeper reading tools (e.g. deep and shallow
laterolog, deep and medium induction log). Using the combination of three measurements,
invasion corrections may be made using "tornado charts" or equivalent algorithms.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 8
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
Secondary Effects
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Mudcake corrections may need to be made if the measurements are to be used quantitatively.
Micro Laterologs provide good R
xo
readings for invasion thicknesses of as little as four inches, but
require mudcake corrections for mudcakes larger than 1/4 inch. On the other hand, no mud cake
correction is required for the Proximity log unless mudcake thickness is over 3/4 inch or very high
R
xo
to mudcake resistivity (R
mc
) ratios exist. However, the Proximity log has a much larger depth
of investigation, and unless flushing has proceeded to 40 inches from the wellbore, one cannot be
sure of getting an R
xo
reading not affected by the uninvaded rock resistivity. The MSFL tool is a
compromise to give reasonable R
xo
readings without requiring mudcake correction except for
large mudcakes
Rough hole will cause the pad to lose contact with the borehole wall. No corrections can be made
to the data to correct for the effect.

INTERPRETATION EFFECTS
Clays in the formation have the same effect on these resistivity tools as on the deeper reading
tools. Flushed zone forms of the various shaly sand equations can be written. Where
hydrocarbons have been flushed away from the vicinity of the wellbore, the resistivity effect may
be less severe for the R
xo
device than for the deeper reading tools responding to the uninvaded
(or less severely invaded) rock beyond the "flushed zone". However, S
xo
calculations may still be
affected similarly to S
w
calculations in fresh water mud systems since clay conductivity effects are
more pronounced in less saline environments. Then, with fresh mud systems in saline water
saturated rocks, the resistivity effect will be larger for the R
xo
devices (i.e. clay conductivity
component more significant).






Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Rxo 9
Resistivity
Microresistivity, Rxo
Environmental Corrections
This table indicates the corrections for the borehole and formation conditions that can be made
for each logging measurement. The corrections that are applicable to the measurement are
shown in bold.

CORRECTION COMMENTS
borehole
mud weight
bed thickness
invasion
mud cake
borehole salinity
formation salinity
standoff
pressure
temperature
excavation
propagation time
attenuation
lithology
Not all acquisition companies may have the correction indicated
on this chart, or make corrections for all generations of the tool.
For newer logs, corrections may have been made at the time of
data acquisition. Check the log header for information.
Algorithms which are equivalent to (or often better than) the
chartbooks may be available from the acquisition company, or in
some formation evaluation software packages.

Quality Control
Microresistivity curves should overlay deeper-reading curves in impermeable beds.
Separation with deeper-reading logs should be indicative of invasion or borehole effects.
Curves may not repeat as well as other logs due to variations in pad path and possible resulting
changes in hole conditions or fracturing.
Check caliper for very thick mudcakes requiring quantitative corrections.
Shale values should be similar to those in nearby wells.
Check repeatability; curves should have the same values and character as those from previous
runs or repeat sections.
Cross-check the curve character with other curves from the same logging run.



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA

Interpretation











Openhole Interpretation

This section is intended to give a flavor for openhole interpretation, as a supplement to
the tool sections that precede it. It is not intended to provide a comprehensive
compilation of interpretive techniques. The general scanning techniques, quicklook
techniques, and quantitative analysis flowchart may be of the most use to the reader.

The reader is referred to the Annotated Bibliography, especially (in order) the works of
Asquith and Krygowski (in press), Dewan (1983), Hearst et al (2000), and Bassiouni
(1994).


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 1
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Introduction
The traditional goals of openhole log analysis are porosity and water saturation, and
occasionally, lithology. These goals have driven the techniques to strive for more accurate
predictions of these quantities, to give the most accurate answers with which to determine
formation hydrocarbon volumes and producibility. This approach has also tended to create
specialists which have little interaction with other disciplines, except to gather data from them,
and then deliver the answer to them.
In recent years, a dichotomy in interpretation has developed, where interpreters are increasingly
called on to provide just enough information for an accurate yes/no decision, with details to
follow later (if at all). This approach also requires the interpreter to become an active part of an
asset team, incorporating the work of others in his/her process, and delivering the results of that
process to other team members in a timely manner. In this context, the interpreter is expected to
be an active member of the team, producing results that explicitly account for the information
provided by others. The interpreter is also expected to be aware of, and interested in, the other
team disciplines as a way to improve and integrate his/her interpretations.

Contents of this section
This section looks at the process of openhole interpretation, primarily of well logs. No distinction
is made between the data gathered by wireline tools as contrasted with MWD/LWD tools. In the
interpretive arena, the measurements are essentially identical.
Introduction
Contents
Comments
General scanning technique
General scanning workflows
Neutron-Density quicklook for determining lithology and estimating porosity
Rwa quicklook for identifying potential productive zones
Quantitative analytical techniques
Data sources and output quantities
Analytical workflow
Determination of formation lithology
Calculation of shale volume (in shaly formations)
Calculation of porosity
Estimation of formation water resistivity, R
w

Temperature correction
Mud filtrate resistivity, R
mf

Determination of true formation resistivity, R
t

Calculation of formation water saturations: S
w
and S
xo



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 2
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
General scanning techniques
Clastics: Because the shales surrounding clastic reservoirs tend to have slowly varying resistivity
with depth, the scanning process targets formation resistivity to identify zones of interest.
Carbonates: Because the resistivity of a sequence of carbonate formations may vary over a wide
range, the scanning process targets formation porosity to identify zones of interest.



















Look for clean zones
Hard rocks
(Carbonates)
Soft rocks
(Clastics)
Look for resistivity
Water zone
Use as baseline (wet)
comparison.
Tight.
Unlikely pay.
Check porosity
Zone of interest
Look for porosity
Water zone
Use as baseline (wet)
comparison.
Tight.
Unlikely pay.
Check resistivity
Zone of interest
Begin detailed analysis
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH LOW
1
2
Look for clean zones
Hard rocks
(Carbonates)
Soft rocks
(Clastics)
Look for resistivity
Water zone
Use as baseline (wet)
comparison.
Tight.
Unlikely pay.
Check porosity
Zone of interest
Look for porosity
Water zone
Use as baseline (wet)
comparison.
Tight.
Unlikely pay.
Check resistivity
Zone of interest
Begin detailed analysis
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
HIGH LOW
1
2

1: Zones which appear to be shales may be radioactive productive zones.
2: Shaly zones may produce even when having low resistivity.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 3
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Quicklook Techniques
Quicklook techniques can be the next step after scanning the logs, or can be conducted during
the scanning process. Two of several techniques, Neutron-Density and Apparent Water
Resistivity, are discussed here.

NEUTRON-DENSITY QUICKLOOK

shale
limestone
limestone
dolomite
shale
sandstone
sandstone
anhydrite
coal
salt
limy dolomite
sandy limestone
dolomitic sand
shale
shale
shale
shale
shale
limestone
limestone
dolomite
shale
sandstone
sandstone
anhydrite
coal
salt
limy dolomite
sandy limestone
dolomitic sand
shale
shale
shale
shale

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 4
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

The Neutron-Density quicklook technique is a quick way of determining formation lithology. The
most important aspect of the technique is determining the relative positions of the neutron and
density curves (with respect to each other). While the positions of the curves on the log will vary
with changing porosity, the relative positions of the curves will remain fairly constant with
lithology.
The photoelectric effect curve (Pe) is not required for the technique, but may be useful to resolve
some ambiguities which occur with some lithologic mixtures.

The following conditions must be met for the technique to work well:
! The Neutron porosity curve is recorded on a limestone matrix.
! The Density porosity is calculated with a limestone matrix (matrix density = 2.71 g/cm3 or
2710 Kg/m3). Alternately, the bulk density curve can be used if it is scaled to closely
approximate the scale of the neutron porosity curve (as shown in this example).
! The formations are assumed to be clean (no clays/shales).
! The formation fluids are assumed to be liquid-filled (water or oil only; no gas present).

The porosity of the formation can be estimated by taking the average of the neutron porosity and
density porosity readings. In most cases, this will provide a porosity within one porosity unit of
that derived from neutron-density crossplot porosity techniques.

The descriptions in the table below correspond to the lithologies in the example on the previous
page. The responses listed in the table are general responses for the listed lithology types.

Lithology Porosity Neutron-Density response Pe response
Shale -- Neutron greater than Density by some variable amount
depending on the shale composition and depth.
Variable, but
about 3.
Limestone 0.05 Neutron and Density values overlay. About 5.
Limestone 0.15 Neutron and Density values overlay. About 5.
Dolomite 0.10 Neutron values greater than Density by 12 to 14
porosity units (0.12 to 0.14).
About 3.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.
Sandstone 0.26 Neutron values less than Density (crossover) by 6 to 8
porosity units.
2 or slightly
less.
Sandstone 0.05 Neutron values less than Density (crossover) by 6 to 8
porosity units.
2 or slightly
less.
Anhydrite -- Neutron porosity greater than Density by 14 porosity About 5.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Coal -- Responses variable depending on coal composition.
High Neutron and Density porosities (low bulk density).
Less than 1.
units or more. Neutron porosity near zero.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.
Salt -- Neutron porosity slightly negative. Density porosity >40
porosity units (bulk density near 2.0). Check the caliper
for bad hole and bad density data.
About 4.7.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.
OH 5
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Lithology Porosity Neutron-Density response Pe response
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.
Limy
Dolomite
0.10 Variable response with lithologic mix, but Neutron
generally greater than Density.
3 to 5.
Sandy
LImestone generally less than Density.
0.10 Variable response with lithologic mix, but Neutron 2 to 3.
Dolomitic 0.10 Highly variable, with Neutron greate
Sand
r or less than
Density, depending on the lithologic mix.
2 to 5.
Shale -- As described in the Shale section above. As above.


The
wa
ater resistivity between
inte ls ones, or within the same
zon a st
alue of R
wa
is the closest approximation to the true formation water resistivity, R
w
, and that
values of R greater than the minimum value are indicative of the presence of hydrocarbons. A
alculate an apparent water resistivity, R
wa
, from the porosity and uninvaded zone resistivity
measurements.
s of
R
wa
calculated in the other zones.
If desired, an Archie water saturation can be calculated from the R
wa
values in the compared
The patterns to observe a
ith est ter-bearing, and the
wa

the l val
valu R
wa
ave some
hydrocarbon saturation.
n p
The R
w
values in the zones that are compared are assumed to be the same.
ity (les
actual R
w
value.
The basis for the technique:
from Arc s equa
OH.01
and
APPARENT WATER RESISTIVITY, Rwa, QUICKLOOK
R technique relies on the comparison of calculated values of w
rva in a well. This comparison can be made between different z
e if water-hydrocarbon contact is suspected in that zone. The assumption is that this lowe
v
wa
water saturation can also be calculated from the values of R
wa
.
The technique is:
C
Look for the lowest value of R
wa
in a porous and permeable zone and compare it to the value
zones.

re:
The zone w the low value of R is the most likely to be wa
wa
ue of R
w
in the formation.
value of R
is closest to actua
Zones with es of greater than the minimum observed are likely to h

Interpretatio itfalls:
In low poros zones s than about 10 percent porosity), the R
wa
value will be lower than the

Recall hie tion that


m
OH.02
w o
R F R # $
a
F
%
$

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 6
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

Combining equ ns OH. atio 01 and OH.02, and solving for R
w
yields:

R
o
% #
R OH.03
uation abo From eq OH.03 ve, define apparent water resistivity, R
wa
, as:

R
t
% #
R OH.04
r-bearin ones (S
R
t
= R
o
and R
wa
= R
w

hydrocarbon-bearing zones (S
w
< 1.0):


en
, the following values can be
a = 1.0, m = 2.0. The Deep Induction or Deep Laterolog is used as R
t
, usually
h
ng, the neutron-density crossplot porosity should be used for the best estimate of
SCANNING AND QUICKLOOK TECHNIQUES: SUMMARY
he purpose of scanning and quicklook techniques is to identify potential zones of interest (both
er-bearing) from the bulk of the drilled interval which usually has no
he era of computer-aided data processing, where the difference in
n the zones in the well with the most
In wate g z
w
= 1.0):
a
m
w
$
a
m
wa
$

In
R
t
> R
o
and R
wa
> R
w

By comparing a number of zones (or different depths in the same zone, where a water-
hydrocarbon contact is suspected), and assuming the zone with the lowest value of R
wa
is wet,
that minimum value of R
wa
can be used as an estimate for the value of R
w
in all the zones being
considered. If the zone with the minimum R
wa
value actually contains some hydrocarbons, th
the other zones will be even more hydrocarbon bearing than anticipated.
In practice, especially when calculated and displayed as a curve
used for simplicity:
without any environmental corrections. Porosity is usually derived from the sonic or density, wit
the proper matrix and fluid parameters for the formations to be encountered. If available in real
time during loggi
porosity.

T
hydrocarbon-bearing and wat
production potential. Even in t
time of processing is trivial between the entire well and only interesting zones, these techniques
are useful in helping the interpreter to quickly focus o
potential.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 7
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Quantitative analytical techniques
This diagram shows the output quantities targeted in the analytical techniques, and the data












sources and parameters needed to derive those quantities.


and Parameters Quantities and Parameters Quantities


Resisti ity Resisti ity

(deep-reading) (deep-reading)

Resistivity Resistivity




(shallow-reading)
Density
R
xo
S
xo
(shallow-reading)
Density
R
xo
S
xo





Neutron & (Phi)
Moveable
Neutron & (Phi)
Moveable






Magnetic
Resonance
Spontaneous
V
shale
R
Bulk Volume
Water (BVW)
Magnetic
Resonance
Spontaneous
V
shale
R
Bulk Volume
Water (BVW)
Data Source
Input Data Output
v
Sonic
Potential (SP)
Gamma Ray
Wellsite
Measurements
Laboratory
Measurements
Local
Knowledge
R
t
w
R
mf
a
m
n
S
w
Hydrocarbons
Permeability
Reserves
Data Source
Input Data Output
v
Sonic
Potential (SP)
Gamma Ray
Wellsite
Measurements
Laboratory
Measurements
Local
Knowledge
R
t
w
R
mf
a
m
n
S
w
Hydrocarbons
Permeability
Reserves




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 8
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Analytical workflow
Calculate porosity
Estimate formation water
resistivity, R
w
Determine true
formation resistivity, R
t
Pick Archie parameters:
a, m, n
If needed, pick shaly
sand parameters:
V
shale
, R
shale
,
Calculate formation water saturation, S
w
Estimate mud filtrate
resistivity, R
mf
Determine flushed
zone resistivity, R
xo
Calculate flushed zone water saturation, S
xo
Predict moveable hydrocarbons
If needed,
Calculate shale volume, V
sh
If a microresistivity (Rxo)
measurement is available:
Calculate porosity
Estimate formation water
resistivity, R
w
Determine true
formation resistivity, R
t
Pick Archie parameters:
a, m, n
If needed, pick shaly
sand parameters:
V
shale
, R
shale
,
Calculate formation water saturation, S
w
Estimate mud filtrate
resistivity, R
mf
Determine flushed
zone resistivity, R
xo
Calculate flushed zone water saturation, S
xo
Predict moveable hydrocarbons
If needed,
Calculate shale volume, V
sh
If a microresistivity (Rxo)
measurement is available:
Determine formation lithology Determine formation lithology




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 9
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Determination of formation lithology
SAMPLES: CUTTINGS AND CORES
The best estimate of formation lithology will obviously come from a sample of the formation.
However, even a detailed lithologic description will not guarantee the value of porosity tool matrix
parameters (that is, a clean sandstone may not have a matrix density value of 2.65 g/cc), but
the value will probably be close to the standard value.
Lithologic descriptions will help the evaluation process by narrowing the bounds of many analysis
parameters, and by alerting the analyst to secondary minerals or conditions which may have an
effect on the interpretation.
Specific core measurements (porosity, grain density, permeability, ...) can help fine-tune
analytical techniques. It is important to remember, however, that core measurements have about
the same precision (or alternatively, the same range of uncertainty) as logging measurements.
One should consider an interpretation as the reconciliation of a variety of data types rather than
calibrating the logs.

Remember that the piece of core you have so thoroughly characterized is the only piece of rock
which is no longer part of the reservoir that you are trying to produce.
-Dr. Folkert Brons, The University of Texas, ca.1974

LOCAL KNOWLEDGE
Knowledge of the lithology of a formation in a specific geographic area is often almost as good as
lithologic descriptions from the specific well in question, in terms of predicting analytical
parameters.
Often, the knowledge of local experts will extend beyond just the lithology to other commonly
used analytical parameters.

INDICATIONS OF GROSS LITHOLOGY
The SP and Gamma Ray can provide indications of gross lithology; that is, they can be used to
distinguish reservoir from non-reservoir. Their use should be in conjunction with other logs to
confirm the indication, since both logs are subject to secondary effects which will affect their
reservoir detection capabilities. These effects are:
Gamma Ray
Reservoirs with high gamma radioactivity will look like shales.
SP
Reservoirs with high clay content may look like shales.
If mud filtrate and formation water resistivities are equal, no SP will be
developed.

NEUTRON-DENSITY QUICKLOOK
he Neutron-Density quicklook technique is detailed in the section on general scanning,
eginning on page OH 3.

T
b


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 10
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

RAL TECHNIQUES
Using tw rossplot) tends to minimize some of the
es
n the crossplot. For all the crossplots










point, at (10, 2.50), could have two possible lithologic mixtures:
! The point could be a mixture of calcite and dolomite, since it lies between those lithology
lines. Because it lies closer to the calcite line, it is assumed to have more calcite than
POROSITY CROSSPLOTS: TWO-MINE
o porosity measurements in an x-y plot (c
environmental and porosity effects which impact individual tools, and produces better estimat
of lithology (and porosity) than by using a single porosity measurement.
To use the technique, the interpreter must assume the presence of some two-mineral pair. Any
two minerals may be used as long as they plot uniquely o
listed in the table below, lines for sandstone (quartz), limestone (calcite), and dolomite are shown.
The Neutron-Density crossplot is the most desirable of the four possible crossplots, and is shown
here as an example.




















In the crossplot above, the

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 11
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
dolomite (a dolomitic limestone?). Based on a linear interpolation of the distance
ite and 30 percent
on the distances of the
Crossplot Advantages Limitations
between the lithology lines, it contains approximately 70 percent calc
dolomite.
! The point could also indicate a mixture of quartz and dolomite because it also lies
between the quartz and dolomite lines. Ignoring the calcite line, this sandy dolomite is
approximately 60 percent dolomite and 40 percent quartz, based
point from each of the lines.

The table below summarizes the two-mineral crossplots, and lists them in descending order of
preference of use.

Neutron-Density

Given two possible lithology
pair solutions, the porosity will
remain relatively invariant
between solutions.
The combination of neutron
and density measurements is
the most common of all
porosity tool pairs.
In rough holes or in heavy drilling
muds, the density data may be
invalid.
Neutron-Sonic

Given two possible lithology
pair solutions, the porosity will
remain relatively invariant
between solutions.
The sonic is less sensitive to
rough holes than the density.
The combination of sonic and
neutron data (without the density)
is not common.
Density (bulk density-Pe)

Both measurements are
made with the same logging
tool; both will often be
available.
The choice of lithology pair will
have a significant effect of the
estimation of porosity.
In rough holes or in heavy drilling
mud, the data may be invalid.
The Pe measurement is relatively
new, and will not be present in
wells logged before about 1978.
Sonic-Density

Best for identifying
radioactive reservoirs, rather
than predicting lithology and
porosity:
Potential reservoirs will plot
along the closely spaced
lithology lines while shales
will tend to fall toward the
lower right of the plot. This
can indicate the presence of
radioactive reservoirs which
The choice of lithology pair will
have a significant effect of the
estimation of porosity.
The lithology lines are closely
spaced, so any uncertainty in the
measurements will produce large
changes in the lithology and
porosity estimates.
are intermingled with shales
(which tend to have high
radioactivity).

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 12
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

A n ra he
two-min
although
The Neu is used here as an example.
! Total porosity is determined from the Neutron-Density crossplot.
matrix density determination.



eutron-Density crossplot, focused
he lithologic response of the
surements, and ignoring the porosity
response.

1994 Halliburton

a form o




This is a Neutron-Sonic crossplot, focused
on the li
ure
spons
1994 Halliburton

POROSITY CROSSPLOTS: THREE-MINERAL TECHNIQUES
atu l extension of the two-mineral technique is the three-mineral technique. Similar to t
eral technique, any three minerals that plot distinctly on the crossplot can be used,
calcite-quartz-dolomite and calcite-dolomite-anhydrite triangles are most usually shown.
tron-Density-Sonic technique
! Apparent matrix density is determined from a form of the Neutron-Density crossplot
focused on



This is a N
on t
mea





f the Neutron-Sonic crossplot

thologic response of the
ments, and ignoring the porosity
e.
meas
re





! Apparent matrix traveltime is determined from
focused on matrix traveltime determination.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 13
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

! inst a mineral


















1994 Halliburton

As with the two-mineral techniques, the lithology estimation assumes a linear relationship, and
should be used as a general indicator of lithologic content, rather than of specific lithologic
percentages.


Apparent matrix traveltime and apparent matrix density are plotted aga
triangle. The proximity of the data to the mineral endpoints of the triangle indicate the
mineral composition of each point.






Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 14
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

The b
The M-N e.

Technique Notes Comments
ta le below lists the three-mineral techniques.
Lithology technique is the oldest of the three techniques, and the least desirable to us
M-N Lithology M = f(DT, RHOB)
N = f(%
N
, RHOB)
M and N here are different from, and
should not be confused with, the m and n
exponents in Archies equation.
The location of the mineral points on the
plot depends on mud salinity, matrix
traveltime, and the porosity range.
This is the oldest of the three-mineral
techniques, and is probably the least
desirable to use.
Neutron-Density-Sonic
MID plot
RhoMa
app
=
f(RHOB, %
N
, %
Total
)
DTMa
app
=
f(DT, %
N
, %
Total
)
The mineral triangle for the sandston
limestone-dolomite group is narrow.
e-
Neutron-Spectral Density
MID plot
RhoMa
app
=
f(RHOB, %
N
, %
Total
)
UMa
app
=
f(Pe, RHOB, %
Total
)
Requires only Neutron and Spectral Density
tools.
Sensitive to rough hole data problems.
Large mineral triangle for the sandstone-
limestone-dolomite group.


POROSITY CROSSPLOTS: MULTIMINERAL TECHNIQUES
Multimineral techniques (usually greater than three minerals) are usually based on probabilistic
techniques where the lithology (and often porosity) are estimated from the ideal mineral
responses provided (either by the logging company or the user) for each logging measurement.
In general, the more measurements that have been made, the more complex the lithologic model
that can be assumed.
These techniques have no chartbook format, and can only be used through sophisticated
algorithms and computer programs.

DETERMINATION OF FORMATION LITHOLOGY: SUMMARY
ll available data should be used in determining formation lithology. Cuttings and cores are the
ciling any
ifferences in interpretation.
A
best indicators, and the comparison of the logs to cores and cuttings will help in recon
d

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 15
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Calculation of shale volume
Not long after the work of Archie and others in devising a method to quantify water saturation
fr
c
om logs, it became clear that there were limitations to the method, especially in formations
ontaining shale and/or clay, and commonly referred to as shaly sands. The early literature
fer to the format containing shale, and a number of modifications were made
ation which u amon
effects. As our understandin cesse
and clay were different, an s were s mixed in,
but sands which contained clays; clays which could b he
shales near those sands of interest. Again, the literat se
the terms shale volume and clay volume interchangeably. Most of the shaly sand techniques
developed over the years concern themselves with s
Waxman-Smits and Dual Water methods, seek to us the
formations to predict an accurate water saturation.
This section addressed the calculation of shale volume that is then used to determine porosity
haly
SP, SPONTANEOUS POTENTIAL
tended to re ions as
to Archies equ sed shale volume ( g other parameters) to account for those
s matured, it became understood that shale
usually not just sands with shale
g of geological pro
d that shaly sand
e very different from the clays present in t
ure and our interpretive techniques often u
hale volume, but a few, notably the
e the electrical properties of the clays in
and water saturation in s

sands.

S SP
V
shale
'
$
P

P
OH.05
Where:
V
shale
= volume of shale
PSP = pseudo static spontaneous potential ( rmation).
SSP = static spontaneous potential of a nearby thick clean sand.
SP
shale
= value of SP in a shale (usually assumed to be zero)
maximum SP of the shaly fo
S
SS PSP
shale
'

GAMMA RAY
Gamma Ray Index, I
GR
:
shale
clean
GR
GR GR
GR GR
I
'
'
$
log
OH.06
clean
I
GR
describes a linear response to shaliness or clay content.
GR
log
= log reading at the depth of interest
GR
clean
= Gamma Ray value in a nearby clean zone

shale GR
OH.07


Non-linear Gamma Ray - clay volume relationships:



GR
shale
= Gamma Ray value in a nearby shale

Linear Gamma Ray - clay volume relationship:
V = I

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 16
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Steiber:
GR
shale
I
V
# '
$
0 . 2 0 . 3
OH.08
Clavier:
( ) * +
5 . 0
2
7 . 0 38 . 3 7 . 1 , # # $
GR shale
I V OH.09

Larionov (Tertiary rocks):
( ) 1 2 083 . 0
7 . 3
' # $
#
GR
I
shale
V OH.10

Larionov (older rocks):
( ) * +
2
' # $
#
GR
I
GR
I
0 . 1 2 33 . 0 V OH.11




relationships are more
optimistic than the linear
relationship; that is; for an
equivalent gamma ray
lower
volume than the linear
ponse.





Baker Atlas, 1985


shale
All the non-linear gamma ray
response, they return a
shale
res

NEUTRON-DENSITY

shale
V
% % '
$
DShale NShale
D N
% % '
OH.12
his technique assumes that the neutron and density porosities are corrected to the proper
thology, and that the response relationship of the measurements between shale and the clean


T
li
formation is linear.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 17
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Calculation of porosity, %
This and the following page outline a general interpretation flow which considers the availability of
lithologic and other rock information in the determination of porosity. The more specific calculation
methods which follow can be used within this general context.






























Are two or more porosity Are two or more porosity




iques to determine
logy and porosity.
scription and
se the lithology
arameter.
iques to determine
logy and porosity.
scription and
se the lithology
arameter.

can be in e
as much
can be in e
as much

data.
porosity units.
data.
porosity units.
Is the lithology known?
(Go to the next page.)
Are rock descriptions and/or measurements available?
Are two or more porosity
measurements available?
Is a clay correction needed?
Are the c splot results
and ck data in
agreement?
Use porosity crossplot
techniques to determine
lithology and porosity.
Use the most likely
estimate of
lithology to
calculate porosity.
Apply the clay
correction.
measur ents available?
Use porosity crossplot
techn
litho
Use rock de
data to choo
matrix p
Is a clay correction needed?
Apply the y
correctio
Reconcile
rock and log
Effective porosity, %
e
Depending on the
l
and the actual
formation lithology,
porosity estimates
rror by
as 6
yes no
yes
yes no yes no
yes no
yes no
yes no
Is the lithology known?
(Go to the next page.)
Are rock descriptions and/or measurements available?
Are two or more porosity
measurements available?
Is a clay correction needed?
Are the c splot results
and ck data in
agreement?
Use porosity crossplot
techniques to determine
lithology and porosity.
Use the most likely
estimate of
lithology to
calculate porosity.
Apply the clay
correction.
measur ents available?
Use porosity crossplot
techn
litho
Use rock de
data to choo
matrix p
Is a clay correction needed?
Apply the y
correctio
Reconcile
rock and log
Effective porosity, %
e
Depending on the
l
and the actual
formation lithology,
porosity estimates
rror by
as 6
yes no
yes
yes no yes no
yes no
yes no
yes no
no no
em em
cla
n.
cla
n.
ros ros
ro ro
ithology assumed ithology assumed

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 18
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA






(Go to the previous page.)
yes no
(Go to the previous page.)
yes no
Is the lithology known?
Are rock descriptions and/or measurements available?
Is a clay correction needed?
Apply the clay
correction.
Is a clay correction needed?
Apply the clay
correction.
Reconcile
rock and log
data.
Effective porosity, %
e
yes no
yes no
yes no
Are the porosity curve lithology (matrix)
and fluid settings in agreement with the
known lithology?
Are the porosity curve lithology (matrix)
and fluid settings in agreement with the
known lithology?
Compute the porosity using the
matrix setting for the known
lithology.
Reconcile log, rock, and fluid
data.
Compute porosities.
Is log-derived porosity in
agreement with available rock
measurements?
yes no yes no
yes no
Is the lithology known?
Are rock descriptions and/or measurements available?
Is a clay correction needed?
Apply the clay
correction.
Is a clay correction needed?
Apply the clay
correction.
Reconcile
rock and log
data.
Effective porosity, %
e
yes no
yes no
yes no
Are the porosity curve lithology (matrix)
and fluid settings in agreement with the
known lithology?
Are the porosity curve lithology (matrix)
and fluid settings in agreement with the
known lithology?
Compute the porosity using the
matrix setting for the known
lithology.
Reconcile log, rock, and fluid
data.
Compute porosities.
Is log-derived porosity in
agreement with available rock
measurements?
yes no yes no
yes no
























fluid. transmit to able and cted interconne is hich porosity w of amount The Porosity Effective
rock of volume Total
pores of Volume
Porosity Total
$
$



OH 19
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
POROSITY FROM SINGLE MEASUREMENTS
Density log
fl ma
b ma
D
RhoFl RhoMa
RHOB RhoMa
DPHI
- -
- -
%
'
'
$
'
'
$ $ OH.13
DPHI = %
D
= density porosity
RHOB = -
b
= bulk density (from the log)
RhoMa = -
ma
= matrix density
RhoFl = -
fl
= fluid density (often assumed to be mud filtrate density)

Sonic log
Wyllie Time-Average Equation:
cp ma fl
ma
cp
S
B t t
t t
B DTMa DTFl
DTMa DT
SPHI
1 1
!
. ' .
. ' .
$ !
'
'
$ $% OH.14
SPHI = %
S
= sonic (acoustic) porosity
DT = .t = sonic travel time (from the log)
DTMa = .t
ma
= matrix travel time
DTFl = .t
fl
= fluid travel time
B
cp
= compaction correction, where
0 . 1
100
/ $
DTShale
B
cp

The Bcp factor was added to the equation when it was found that the equation gave
highly optimistic porosity values in unconsolidated sands. DTShale is picked from a
shale near the zone of interest. The correction factor is never less than 1.0.

Gardner-Hunt-Raymer Equation (Schlumberger Empirical Relation):
t
t t
DT
DTMa DT
SPHI
ma
S
.
. ' .
! $
'
! $ $
8
5
8
5
% OH.15
SPHI = %
S
= sonic (acoustic) porosity
DT = .t = sonic travel time (from the log)
DTMa = .t
ma
= matrix travel time

The above equation is an approximation of Schlumberger chart Por-3.

Neutron log
Except for the obsolete "Gamma Ray Neutron" tools, Neutron porosity is calculated by the
acquisition software and is displayed directly on the log. This porosity is referenced to a specific
lithology, usually limestone. Corrections to the porosity to account for the lithology actually
present can be done through charts or appropriate algorithms.
OTE: It is important to use the chart or algorithm for the correct Neutron tool and acquisition
ompany. Each tool has a unique lithologic response, and use of the wrong algorithm will result
in erroneous porosity estimation.
N
c

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 20
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
The old unts per second or API Units. In
s, increasing porosity is shown my movement of the curve to the left of the scale
he newer tools which display porosity directly). These values can be converted to
porosity through calibration to core data, or by rules
The core calibration and rules of thumb tend to apply
geographic areas.
All Neutron tools can be run in cased holes to determine formation porosity. Corrections must be
made for the pre

POROSITY FROM MEASUREMENT COMBINATIONS (CROSSPLOTS)
sing two porosity measurements in an x-y plot (crossplot) tends to minimize some of the
ntal and lithologic effects which impact porosity estimation from individual tools, and
etter estimates of porosity (and lithology) than by using a single porosity
To use the technique, the interpreter must assume the presenc
two minerals may be used as long as they plot uniquely on the c
listed in the table below, lines for sandstone (quartz), limestone (calcite), and dolomite are shown.
The Neutron-De f the four possible crossplots, and is shown
here as an exam














1994 Halliburton
er "gamma ray-neutron" tools will show response in co
these display
(just like for t
of thumb which approximate the response.
only to specific reservoirs or over limited
sence of casing and cement.
U
environme
produces b
measurement.
e of some two-mineral pair. Any
rossplot. For all the crossplots
nsity crossplot is the most desirable o
ple.











Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 21
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation


To estimate the porosity of the point at (10, 2.50), a mineral pair must first be chosen. In this
case, the pair is calcite-dolomite. The porosity is estimated by connecting the porosity values on
each line and readin

g the porosity from the points location (in this case, about 9.5 percent or
termination section) summarizes the crossplot
chniques. In general, the sonic-density crossplot is not recommended for porosity
etermination.
Most of unts of
0.095)
The table below (also shown in the lithology de
te
d
the crossplots have algorithmic equivalents which are easier to use for large amo
data.

Crossplot Advantages Limitations
Neutron-Density

Given two possible lithology
pair solutions, the porosity will
remain relatively invariant
between solutions.
In rough holes or in heavy drilling
muds, the density data may be
invalid.
The combination of neutron and
density measurements is the
most common of all porosity tool
pairs.
Neutron-Sonic

Given two possible lithology
pair solutions, the porosity will
remain relatively invariant
between solutions.
The sonic is less sensitive to
rough holes than the density.
The combination of sonic and
neutron data (without the density) is
not common.
Density (bulk density-Pe)

Both measurements are made
with the same logging tool; both
will often be available.
The choice of lithology pair will
have a significant effect of the
estimation of porosity.
In rough holes or in heavy drilling
mud, the data may be invalid.
The Pe measurement is relatively
new, and will not be present in wells
logged before about 1978.
Sonic-Density

Best for identifying radioactive
reservoirs, rather than predicting
lithology and porosity:
Potential reservoirs will plot
along the closely spaced
lithology lines while shales will
tend to fall toward the lower right
of the plot. This can indicate the
presence of radioactive
reservoirs which are intermingled
with shales (which tend to have
high radioactivity).
The choice of lithology pair will
have a significant effect of the
estimation of porosity.
The lithology lines are closely
spaced, so any uncertainty in the
measurements will produce large
changes in the lithology and porosity
estimates.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 22
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

POROSITY FROM MEASUREMENT COMBINATIONS (QUICKLOOK)
The Neutron and Density can be used in combination to determine porosity without using
crossplot techniques. These are usually used as a quicklook technique, rather than a rigorous
determination of porosity.

If the lithology and formation fluid are unknown:
N
%

2
% $ OH.16
D
% ,
Notes for use:
! The porosities should be recorded on limestone matrix in complex lithologies.
of the method in l yield slightly low porosity values (0 to 0.025)
g on the por .
! Use of the method in lues o ity which are very close to
actual porosities.

If the lithology is known and th

! Use gas zones wil
dependin osity range and the value of S
xo
water or oil zones yields va f poros
e formation fluid is gas:
N D
%
3
, % $
1
OH.17
Notes for use:
! The porosities should be recorded on, or corrected to, the actual formation lithology.

OF
T e general form of the equa ity
CALCULATION EFFECTIVE POROSITY
tion to convert from total poros h to effective porosity is:
% = rosity measurement in a nearb shale
N D
%
% %
3
2
2
2 2
$
,
( )
shale shale e
V # ' $ % % % OH.18
Where:
%
e
= effective porosity
% = porosity calculated from the measurement
shale
value of the po y
V
shale
= shale volume




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 23
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Estimating formation water resistivity, R
parison can be made between different zones, or within the same
one if a water-hydrocarbon contact is suspected in that zone. The assumption is that this lowest
alue of R is the closest approximation to the true formation water resistivity, R
w
, and that
indicative of the presence of hydrocarbons. A
water saturation can also be calculated from the values of R
wa
.
number of zones (or different depths in the same zone, where a water-
hydrocarbon contact is suspected), and assuming the zone with the lowest value of R
a
is wet,
that in es being
con e
If the zo hydrocarbons, then the other
zon w
In practice, especially when calculated and displayed as a curve, the following values can be
used for simplicity: a = 1.0, m = 2.0. The Deep Induction or Deep Laterolog is used as R
t
, usually
lly derived from the sonic or density, with
s to be encountered. If available in real
time during logging, the neutron-density crossplot porosity should be used for the best estimate of
orosity.

M THE SP
From a water-bearing zone near the zone of interest, calculate R
w
by:

w
APPARENT WATER RESISTIVITY, R
wa
, TECHNIQUE
The R
wa
technique relies on the comparison of calculated values of water resistivity between
intervals in a well. This com
z
v
wa
values of R
wa
greater than the minimum value are
The details of the technique are shown in the scanning and quicklook section.
By comparing a
w
m imum value of R
wa
can be used as an estimate for the value of R
w
in all the zon
sid red.
ne with the minimum R
wa
value actually contains some
es ill be even more hydrocarbon bearing than anticipated.
without any environmental corrections. Porosity is usua
the proper matrix and fluid parameters for the formation
p
R FRO
w
( ) * + 2 9 . 19 / log / 1
10 131 . 0
BHT
# ,
'
( ) * + 8 . 50 / log / 0426 . 0 BHT
weq
w
R
R
, # '
$ OH.1
10 5 . 0
weq
R
8
A simplified equation that will yield adequate results is:

( ) ( ) K SP R K
mf
/ log , #
wher
w
R 10 $ T K # , $ 133 . 0 61 e (T in degF) OH.19
The presenc ted from the PS to be too
high. Th
w w
.
Significant amounts of ions other than NaCl will also cause R
w
to be in error.
R
w
FROM A PICKETT PLOT
he Pickett method is a graphical solution of Archies equation in terms of resistivity. Archies
equation is solved for resistivity:

e of shale and/or hydrocarbons will cause the R
w
calcula
is will cause the S calculated from that R to also be too high

T
n
w
m
w
t
S
R a
R
#
#
$
%
OH.20
Taking the logarithm of the equation produces:
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
w w t
S n m R a R log log log log ' ' # $ % OH.21

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 24
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

uation reduces to:

If the zone is water-bearing, S
w
= 1, log(S
w
) = 0, and the eq
( ) ( ) ( ) % log log log m R a R
w t
' # $ OH.22
ic
-
This form of the equation (y = b + mx) indicates that by plotting R
t
on the y-axis (on a logarithm
scale) against porosity (%) on the x-axis (on a logarithmic scale), one can determine the product
(a R
w
) from the intercept of the line (b), and the cementation exponent, m, from the slope of the
line (m). In practice, the resistivity, R
t
, is usually plotted on the x-axis and the porosity, %, on the y
axis.
Using the convention, the equation becomes:
( ) ( ) ( )
w t w
S n R
m
R a log log
1
log ) log( ' ' # $ % OH.23
Plotting a mixture of water-bearing and hydrocarbon-bearing points on a Pickett plot results in the
following attributes (as shown below):
traight line with a slope of (1/m)
and an intercept (at porosity = 1.0) of (aR ). From this line, the cementation exponent,
int from the water-bearing line depends on the water saturation, S
w
, of that point. If the
saturation exponent, n, is known (or can be estimated), the water saturation can be
determined. Lines of constant water saturation lie parallel to the water-bearing line.








Water-bearing points of different porosities plot along a s
w
m, can be determined, and if the tortuosity factor, a, is known (or can be estimated), R
w

can be predicted. This is the water-bearing, or R
o
, line.
Hydrocarbon-bearing points will lie away from the line, moved horizontally to the right
from the water-bearing line by their increased resistivity. The horizontal distance of a
po

1.00 1.00





0.10
r
o
s
i
t
y
,
0.10
r
o
s
i
t
y
,

i
t
y

p
o
i
t
y

p
o





0.10 1.00
0.01
0.10 1.00
0.01

y, Rt y, Rt
10.00 100.00
!
!
!
! !
!
! !
70
50
30
100
True resistivit
D
e
n
s

D
P
H
I
!
Sw
10.00 100.00
!
!
!
! !
!
! !
70
50
30
100
True resistivit
D
e
n
s

D
P
H
I
!
Sw

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 25
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

RW FROM PRODUCTION TESTS:
This is the best value of Rw when available.
NOTE: Sometimes produced water is not formation water (e.g., water of condensation from gas
wells, acid contaminated load water).
ALSO: Be sure to that the reported value of Rw is corrected to formation temperature before
using in in the interpretation.

RW FROM DRILL STEM TESTS (DST):
OTE: Water from drill stem tests is often contaminate
usually obtained from the sample chamber measurement.

These c ional societies (SPWLA, SPE),
and sta
NOTE:
using in

RW FROM LOCAL KNOWLEDGE:
his is usually from the expertise of individuals with experience in a certain area.
OTE: Be sure to that the reported value of Rw is corrected to formation temperature before
sing in in the interpretation.
TEMPERATURE CORRECTIONS
he Rwa, SP, or Pickett plot techniques produce values for Rw that are at formation temperature.
he other sources for Rw will yield values or results which resistivities may not be measured at
rmation temperature. In order for Rw to be used properly in Archies equation, it must be
orrected to formation temperature.
he next section discusses the calculation of formation temperature and the temperature
orrection of fluid resistivities.
N d with mud filtrate. The best value is
Be sure to that the reported value of Rw is corrected to formation temperature before using in in
the interpretation.
RW FROM WATER CATALOGUES:
atalogues are compiled by individual companies, profess
te agencies (geological surveys, water boards).
Be sure to that the reported value of Rw is corrected to formation temperature before
in the interpretation.
T
N
u

T
T
fo
c
T
c

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 26
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

Temp
ollowing equation:
erature corrections
Formation temperature can be found by the f
AM FD
TD
AMST BHT
FT , 0
1
2
3
4
5
#
'
$ ST OH.24
FT = formation temperature

at a desired temperature is:

Where:

BHT = bottom hole temperature
AMST = annual mean surface temperature
TD = total depth
FD = formation depth
Resistivity of a fluid
( ) 77 . 6 ,
$
Tk
Tk R
R
( ) 77 . 6 ,
FM
FM
T
OH.25
F).
re (in F).

Where:
R
FM
= resistivity at formation temperature T
FM
(in
R
Tk
= known resistivity at a known temperature, Tk.
Tk = known temperatu



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 27
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Mud filtrate resistivity, R
mf

e SP, and for the calculation of
t the wellsite at the time of
logging and is reported as a resistivity me
in those calculations.
Mud filtrate resistivity is required for the calculation of Rw from th
S
xo
using Archies equation. Mud filtrate resistivity is measured a
asured at a specific temperature. R
mf
must be corrected
to formation temperature (using the temperature correction equations above) before being used

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 28
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

resistivity, R
In the case of extreme invasion, unusual borehole fluids, or enlarged boreholes, environmental
corrections may be required.

Invasion corrections should be made under the following circumstances:
If ILM/ILD > 1.2, correct ILD for invasion.
IF LLD/LLS >1.05, correct LLD for invasion.
Where:
ILD = deep induction log reading
ILM = medium induction log reading
LLD = deep laterolog reading
LLS = shallow laterolog reading
Environmental corrections, if they are made, need to be made in the following order and
circumstances:
Correction Induction Log Laterolog
Determining true formation
t
In the majority of cases, the deepest-reading measurement from either the induction log or the
laterolog will very closely approximate the true undisturbed formation resistivity, Rt. The deep
induction curve or the deep laterolog curve on older tools, or the deepest reading curve on array
or imaging tools will be satisfactory.
Borehole If hole diameter > 10 in. If hole diameter > 10 in.
For LLS: hole diameter > 10 in. and Rt > 50
ohm.m
Mud
Resistivity
R
m
< 0.5 ohm.m None
Bed
Thickness
If thickness < 4 feet If thickness < 4 feet
Invasion When ILM/ILD > 1.2
(ILD is not corrected by more than
0.75)
When LLD/LLS > 1.05
(LLD is not corrected by more than 1.8)

Note that invasion corrections will yield a value of R
t
less than ILD and a value of R
t
greater than
LLD.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 29
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation
Calculating formation water saturation: S
w
and S
xo

a:
ARCHIES EQUATION
Water saturation (S
w
) of a reservoir's uninvaded zone is calculated by the Archie (1942) formul
n
R a
1
2 5 #
m
t
w
w
R
S
0
0
1
3
3
4
#
$
%
OH.26
Where:
tion temperature
ction or Deep Laterolog corrected for

% = poro
a = tortu
m = cem
n = satu
of a formation's flushed zone (S
xo
) is also based on the Archie equation, but two
e cha rate resistivity, R
mf
, in place of formation water resistivity, R
w
, and
ne res invaded zon

S
w
= water saturation of the uninvaded zone
R
w
= resistivity of formation water at forma
R
t
= true formation resistivity (i.e., Deep Indu
invasion)
sity
osity factor
entation exponent
ration exponent

Water saturation
variables ar nged: mud filt
flushed zo istivity, R
xo
, in place of un e resistivity, R
t
.
xo
R
1
#%
OH.27
S = water saturation of the flushed zone
R
mf
= resistivity of the mud filtrate at formation temperature
R
xo
= shallow resistivity from a very shallow reading device, such as Laterolog-8,
Microsp
% = porosity
a = tortuosity factor
m = cementation exponent
n = saturation exponent

Water saturation of the flushed zone (S
xo
) can be used as an indicator of hydrocarbon
moveability. For example, if the value of S
xo
is much larger than S
w
, then hydrocarbons in the
flushed zone have probably been moved or flushed out of the zone nearest the borehole by the
invading drilling fluids (R
mf
).

APPARENT WATER RESISTIVITY, R
wa

Details of the Rwa technique are in the scanning and quicklook section.
An Archie water saturation can also be calculated from the ratio of the R
wa
values.

Where:
xo
herically Focused Log, or Microlaterolog
n
m
mf
xo
R a
S
1
0
0
2
3
3
4
5 #
$

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 30
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation


zone wa
minimum wa
R
S
w
$
R
OH.28
Where the cementation exponent, n, in the equation above is assumed to be 2.
A shortcut to the saturation calculation, used as a scanning aid, is:
(R
wa
zone/R
wa
min
(R
wa
zone/R
wa
minimum) = 4 yields Sw = 0.50;
R zone/R minimum) = 5 yields Sw = 0.45.


PLOTS
Details of the Pickett plot technique are shown in the Determining water resistivity section.
The water saturation of a point plotting away from the water-bearing line on the Pickett plot can
be determined by the equation:
imum) = 3 yields Sw = 0.58;
(
wa wa
Where a = 1.0 and m = 2.0.
PICKETT

o
w
R
S
0
0
1
3
3
4
$
n
R 2 5
1
t
In practice, this means reading the resistivity of the point (R
t
) and the resistivity of the water-
bearing line (R
o
) at the same porosity value as the point, estimating a v
OH.29
alue for saturation
exponent, n, and making the calculation.

















70
100
70
100


0.10 1.00 10.00
0.01
0.10 1.00 10.00
0.01
100.00
1.00
!
!
! !
50
30
D
e
I
Sw
100.00
1.00
!
!
! !
50
30
D
e
I
Sw
!
!
! !
!
!
!
! !
!
Sw
D
P
H
D
P
H
0.10
y

p
o
r
o
s
i
0.10
y

p
o
r
o
s
i
t
y
,

t
y
,

n
s
i
t
n
s
i
t

True resistivity, Rt True resistivity, Rt

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 31
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation

SHALY SAND ANALYSIS
from logs, it became clear that there were limitations to the method, especially in formations
rly literature
r of modifications were made
ters) to account for those
Not long after the work of Archie and others in devising a method to quantify water saturation
containing shale and/or clay, and commonly referred to as shaly sands. The ea
tended to refer to the formations as containing shale, and a numbe
to Archies equation which used shale volume (among other parame
effects.
Effects of clays and shales on logging measurements.
Measurement Effect
Spontaneous Potential, SP Decrease in magnitude with respect to the shale baseline.
Gamma Ray Increased radioactivity, shown as less movement away from the
nearby shale values than an equivalent clean sand.
Sonic A sonic porosity higher than the actual formation porosity due to
the higher traveltime of the clays/shales.
Neutron A neutron porosity higher than the actual formation porosity due
to the water which is part of the clay structure, and which is
adsorbed on the clay surfaces.
D A density porosity which is higher than the actual formation ensity
porosity due to the generally lower matrix densities of most clay
the
y.
minerals. If the matrix density of the clay is close to that of
formation matrix, there will be little or no effect on porosit
Resistivity A decrease in resistivity when compared to an equivalent clean
formation, due to the conductivity of the clay.
This will produce a calculated water saturation which is greater
than the actual formation water saturation. (Archies equation
assumes that all conductivity is from the formation water, and that
the formation matrix is completely non-conducting.)

After the shale corrected porosity has been determined, the water saturation can be calculated. A
ariety of techniques are briefly introduced below. As with Arc equation, the substitution of
R
mf
for R
w
and R
xo
as R
t
will yield calculations of S
xo
instead of S
w
.
1950s
The automatic compensation technique. It used the resistivity and sonic logs with Archies
quation. Since the presence of shale caused the porosity, %
S
, to read too high and the resistivity,
t
, to read too low, one compensated for the other in the saturation equation:
v hies

e
R
S
t w
w
R R
S
%
/
9 . 0 $ OH.30
960s
ith the advent of the density log, the dispersed clay model gained popularity. In this model, the
density was assumed to respond only to the liquid-filled porosity, while the sonic was affected by
e clays, with the difference, q, being the fraction of the intergranular space filled with clay:

1
W
th


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 32
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation


S
%
and the saturation given by:
q q R
w
6
8
9
;
'
0
2
3
5
,
# 8 . 0
2
D S
q
% % '
$ OH.31
S
t S
w
7 :
$
( ) q
R
'
6 9 1 4 #
1
2 2
2
%
OH.32
70s
A number of V
sh
based methods These
d:
Fertl, 1975:


1960s and 19
became popular, many of which are still being used.
include
6
6
8
#
' 0
1
2
2
2
sh sh
V a
OH.33
7
= 0.35 in the Rocky Mountains.

( )
sh
sh
sh t w
R
V
V R
'
' # # 1
2
2
%
OH.3
9
9
:
;
3
4
5 #
, # $
2
1
t
w
w
V a
R
R
S
%
Where:
a = 0.25 in the Gulf Coast, and a
Schlumberger, 1975:

( )
sh
sh
w
R R
V
S
#
,
0
0
1
2
3
3
4
5
$
2 . 0
2
%
4
sh w
V R ' # # 1 4 . 0
Simandoux, 1963:
6
6
8
9
9
;
'
#
#
,
0
0
1
2
3
3
4
5
#
0
0
1
2
3
3
4
5 #
$
sh
sh
w t sh
sh w
w
R
V
R R R
V R
S
2
2
2
5 4 . 0 %
%
7 :

The Dual Water method is perhaps the most widely used of those techniques w
OH.35
hich go beyond
the shale volume methods. This method is more fully described in Dewan (1983) and Bassiouni
sands, and the apparent water resistivity, R
wa
, in the sand of interest is calculated.
he total (shale corrected) water saturation of the formation is:
(1994). The bound and free water resistivities are determined from nearby shales and clean
T

wa
wt
R
b b S , , $ 7.48
Where:
w
R
2


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
OH 33
Interpretation
Openhole Interpretation


b w
7.49
( ) ( )
2
1
wb
R R S
b
'
$
The effective water saturation of the formation is:

wb
wb wt
we
S
S S
S
'
'
$
1
7.50
nd the volumetric fraction of hydrocarbo

A ns is:
( )
wt t h
S ' $ 1 % % 7.51
here
rosity (from the neutron and density).





W
% = total po
t








Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA

Appendix











Appendix

This section contains three listings: References with comments, an Annotated
Bibliography, and Links of Interest.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA

Appendix
References

The charts illustrated in this document were taken from the following sources. A
copyright citation immediately follows each figure.

Western Atlas Logging Services, 1985, Log Interpretation Charts, Rev. 12/95; Baker
Atlas, Houston, Texas.

Halliburton Energy Services, 1994, Log Interpretation Charts, Third Printing, Houston,
Texas.

Schlumberger, 1998, Log Interpretation Charts; Schlumberger Wireline and Testing,
SMP-7006, Sugar Land, Texas.


The Tool Diagrams in each measurement section were taken from the Halliburton
website in late 1999 and early 2000. They are intended to give the reader a general idea
of the configuration and size of a typical logging tool of the particular measurement
type. At the time that the figures were copied, the website was open to all interested
parties. At present (Fall of 2003), much of the information on the website is open only to
registered users. See www.halliburton.com












Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Biblio 1
Appendix
Annotated Bibliography

Not all the resources listed here are accompanied by comments.
Some resources are identified at the beginning of the citation as follows:
G* General logging tools and techniques.
C* Cased hole tools and techniques.
O* Old (pre-1960s) logging tools and techniques.
M* Magazine with significant formation evaluation content.
Also see Links of Interest for internet websites that were active at the time of publication of this
document.


_____, 1984, Wireline Logging Tool Catalogue: Houston, Gulf Publishing Company.

G*

Asquith, George and Daniel Krygowski, in press, Basic Well Log Analysis: Tulsa, AAPG.
A good introductory text. Provides general interpretive techniques without details of
tool operation or interpretation pitfalls. Problems with solutions give a good
opportunity for practice.

G*

Asquith, George, 1982, Basic Well Log Analysis for Geologists: Tulsa, AAPG.
A good introductory text. Superceded by Asquith and Krygowski (in press).

C* Bateman, Richard M., 1985, Cased Hole Analysis and Reservoir Performance Monitoring:
Boston, IHRDC (most recently available through Prentiss-Hall).

Bateman, Richard M., 1985, Log Quality Control: Boston, IHRDC (most recently available
through Prentiss-Hall).

G* Bateman, Richard M., 1985, Open Hole Log Analysis and Formation Evaluation: Boston,
IHRDC (most recently available through Prentiss-Hall).
A comprehensive book covering mud logging, coring, and MWD, as well as open
hole logging. Detailed in tool operation and interpretation; contains occasional
simple problems with answers.

Bassiouni, Zaki, 1994, Theory, Measurement, and Interpretation of Well Logs: Richardson,
Texas, SPE Textbook Series, Volume 4,.
A comprehensive logging book for those who want to delve into the details of tool
operation and interpretation.

Bigelow, E. L., 1987, Fundamentals of Diplog Analysis: Houston, Atlas Wireline Services (now
part of Baker Hughes).
A good text regarding the interpretation of Atlas Diplogs, and the response of
dipmeters to specific sedimentary environments.

Brock, Jim, 1984, Analyzing Your Logs, Volume I: Tyler, Texas, Petro-Media.

Brock, Jim, 1984, Analyzing Your Logs, Volume II: Tyler, Texas, Petro-Media.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Biblio 2
Appendix
Annotated Bibliography

Crain, E. R., 1986, The Log Analysis Handbook, Volume 1: Quantitative Log Analysis Methods:
Tulsa, PennWell Books.

Desbrandes, Robert, 1985, Encyclopedia of Well Logging: Houston, Gulf Publishing Co.

G* Dewan, John T., 1983, Essentials of Modern Open-Hole Log Interpretation: Tulsa, PennWell
Books.
A very good general coverage of open hole logging. Provides insight to tool
operation and environmental effects without confusing details. Measurements are
grouped on the basis of measurement goals (e.g., porosity) rather than the physical
basis of the measurement.

Doveton, John, 1986, Log Analysis of Subsurface Geology: Somerset, New Jersey, John Wiley &
Sons.
A good treatment of many of the geological aspects of logs. Begins with simple
concepts and expands to relatively complex mathematical treatment of the data.

Dresser Atlas, 1982, Well Logging and Interpretation Techniques, The Course for Home Study,
Second Edition: Houston, Dresser Atlas.
A self-paced course which does a relatively good job in introducing the basics of well
logging. Concepts are reinforced with problems (answers are provided).

Ellis, Darwin V., 1987, Well Logging for Earth Scientists: New York, Elsevier Science Publishing
Co., Inc.
A comprehensive general text with emphasis on the physics of logging
measurements.

G* Etnyre, Lee M., 1989, Finding Oil and Gas From Well Logs: New York, Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
A good general text which first addresses the formation physical properties to be
measured, then the logging measurements. Problems (with answers) help the reader
grasp the concepts presented.

O* Frank, Rollyn W., 1986, Prospecting with Old E-Logs: Houston, Schlumberger Educational
Services,.

Helander, Donald P., 1983, Fundamentals of Formation Evaluation: Tulsa, OGCI Publications.

Hearst, Joseph R., Philip H. Nelson, Frederick L. Paillett, 2000, Well Logging for Physical
Properties, Second Edition: Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Emphasizes the physics behind logging measurements more than the interpretation.
A good text for understanding measurement principals.

O* Hilchie, Douglas W., 1979, Old Electrical Log Interpretation: Douglas Hilchie, Inc., Golden,
CO. Reprinted by AAPG (2003).

Hilchie, Douglas W., 1982, Applied Openhole Log Interpretation: Golden, Colorado, Douglas
Hilchie, Inc. (out of print).

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Biblio 3
Appendix
Annotated Bibliography


Hilchie, Douglas W., 1987, The Geologic Well Log Interpreter: Boulder, Colorado, Douglas
Hilchie, Inc. (out of print)

Hilchie, Douglas W., 1989, Advanced Well Log Interpretation (1989 Edition): Boulder, Colorado,
Douglas s Hilchie, Inc. (out of print)

Hilchie, Douglas W., 1990, WIRELINE, A History of the Well Logging and Perforating Business in
the Oil Fields: Boulder, Colorado, Douglas Hilchie, Inc.
An interesting history drawn from many sources. Somewhat disjointed because of
the company-by-company history approach, but entertaining and informative
nevertheless.

Johnson, David E. and Kathyrne E. Johnson, 1988, Well Logging for the Nontechnical Person:
Tulsa, PennWell Publishing Company.

Jorden, James R., and Frank L. Campbell, 1984, Well Logging I - Rock Properties, Borehole
Environment, Mud and Temperature Logging: SPE Monograph Volume 9: Dallas, Texas, Society
of Petroleum Engineers.

Jorden, James R., and Frank L. Campbell, 1986, Well Logging II - Electric and Acoustic Logging:
SPE Monograph Volume 10: Dallas, Texas, Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Labo, J., 1987, A Practical Introduction to Borehole Geophysics: Tulsa, Society of Exploration
Geophysicists; Geophysical References, Volume 2.

O* Pirson, Silvain J., 1963, Handbook of Well Log Analysis: Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
Prentiss-Hall.
Although not intended as an "old E-log" book, its age makes it so. Has good
information about interpreting the older logs.

Pirson, Silvain J., 1970, Geologic Well Log Analysis: Houston, Gulf Publishing Company.

Ransom, Robert C., 1995, Practical Formation Evaluation: New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Rider, M. H., 1986, The Geological Interpretation of Well Logs: Glasgow, Blackie Halsted Press.

Schlumberger, 1986, Dipmeter Interpretation (Publication SMP-7002): Houston, Schlumberger
Well Services.
Operational details and interpretation examples of Schlumberger dipmeter data and
processing.

C* Schlumberger, 1989, Cased Hole Log Interpretation Principles/Applications (Publication SMP-
7025): Houston, Schlumberger Well Services.
Covers a wide range of cased hole and production logging measurements and their
interpretation.

Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Biblio 4
Appendix
Annotated Bibliography


G* Schlumberger, 1989, Log Interpretation Principles/Applications (Publication SMP-7017):
Houston Schlumberger Well Services.
Openhole log data acquisition and interpretation done the Schlumberger way. A
good basic reference.

Serra, Oberto, 1984, Fundamentals of Well-Log Interpretation; Volume 1, The Acquisition of
Logging Data (Developments in Petroleum Science 15a): Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Elsevier
Publishing Company.
Much detail of measurement theory and tool operation (geared mostly to
Schlumberger tools); almost nothing about interpretation. A very good reference for
those interested in how and why logging tools work.

Serra, Oberto, 1984, Fundamentals of Well-Log Interpretation; Volume 2, The Interpretation of
Logging Data (Developments in Petroleum Science 15b): Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Elsevier
Publishing Company.
Covers many details of geologic interpretation and reservoir evaluation with a
decided Schlumberger flavor.

Serra, Oberto, 1985, Sedimentary Environments from Wireline Logs (Publication SMP-7008):
Houston, Schlumberger Well Services.
A detailed look at common sedimentary environments and the responses of logging
tools (especially dipmeters) to them. Detailed, with many examples.

M* Society of Exploration Geophysicists, monthly magazine, Geophysics: SEG, Tulsa.
Rarely has logging papers; those appearing usually deal with tool theory.

C* Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1985, SPE Reprint Series Number 19, Production Logging:
Dallas, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
A group of reprinted production logging papers.

Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1986, SPE Reprint Series Number 21, Openhole Well Logging:
Richardson, Texas, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
A group of reprinted openhole well logging papers.

M* Society of Petroleum Engineers, monthly magazine, Journal of Petroleum Technology (JPT):
Richardson, Texas, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Occasional well logging and petrophysical papers of a more general nature than
appear in SPE Formation Evaluation.
.
O* Society of Professional Well Log Analysts, Houston Chapter, 1978, The Art of Ancient Log
Analysis: Houston, SPWLA.

Society of Professional Well Log Analysts, 1984, Glossary of Terms & Expressions Used in Well
Logging, Second Edition: Houston, SPWLA,.
A very good guide to sorting through the jargon of well logging; a good desk
reference.


Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Biblio 5
Appendix
Annotated Bibliography



M* Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts, bimonthly magazine, Petrophysics
(formerly The Log Analyst): Houston, SPWLA.
Papers geared to well logging and petrophysics.

Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts, yearly beginning ca. 1963, SPWLA Logging
Symposium Transactions: Houston, SPWLA. (Now available on compact disk.)
Copies of papers presented at the Annual Logging Symposium.

Tittman, Jay, 1986, Geophysical Well Logging: New York, Academic Press, Inc.,.
Although addressing data interpretation briefly, the book's strength lies in its
explanation of the physics of logging tool measurements.




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Links 1
Appendix
Links of Interest

Wireline and MWD Companies
Baker Atlas (a division of Baker Hughes)
http://www.bakerhughes.com/bakeratlas
(More technical information with login to BakerHughesDirect)

Baker Hughes INTEQ (a division of Baker Hughes)
http://www.bakerhughes.com/inteq/index.htm
(More technical information with login to BakerHughesDirect)

Halliburton Logging Services
http://www.halliburton.com/oil_gas/sd0900.jsp
(Technical information available only with login to MyHalliburton.)

PathFinder Energy Services
http://www.pathfinderlwd.com/main.html

Precision Wireline Services (formerly Computalog)
http://www.computalog.com/

Reeves Wireline
http://www.reeves-wireline.com/

Schlumberger
http://www.slb.com/Hub/
(Premium content available with login.)
Schlumberger LWD
http://www.slb.com/Hub/
(Premium content available with login.)

Sperry-Sun (a division of Halliburton)
http://www.halliburton.com/oil_gas/sd1318.jsp
(Technical information available only with login to MyHalliburton.)

Tucker Energy Services
http://www.tuckerenergy.com/



Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA
Links 2
Appendix
Links of Interest


Organizations
Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts (SPWLA)
http://www.spwla.org

Petrotechnical Open Standards Consortium (POSC)
http://www.posc.org




Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
1995, 2000, 2003 Daniel A. Krygowski, Austin Texas USA









END

Guide to Petrophysical Measurements, 2003

Похожие интересы