Company: NPN B.

Well: TVN-01

Prospect: Tiendeveen

Country: Netherlands

Analyst: Rana S. Amin

Logging Date: 22-12-09

Interval: 3517 - 3671 m

Report Date: 12-01-10

RST Sigma Log Interpretation

PRODUCT CODE: RST-SIGMA

1
 TVN-01

TABLE OF CONTENT

1. Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 3
1.1. Introduction................................................................................................................................... 3
1.2. Objectives ..................................................................................................................................... 3
1.3. Main Results ................................................................................................................................. 3

2. Log Quality Control and Processing .................................................................................................. 6

2.1. Data Quality................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2. Data Processing Summary ............................................................................................................... 6

3. Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... 9
3.1 RST Tool Sketch ............................................................................................................................. 9
3.2 Well Sketch ................................................................................................................................. 10
3.3 RST-Sigma .................................................................................................................................. 11

Standard Disclaimer
The use of and reliance upon this recorded-data by the NPN (and any of its affiliates, partners,
representatives, agents, consultants and employees)is subject to the terms and conditions
agreed upon between Schlumberger and the NPN, including: (a) Restrictions on use of the
recorded-data; (b) Disclaimers and waivers of warranties and representations regarding
company's use and reliance upon the recorded-data; and (c)Customer's full and sole
responsibility for any inference drawn or decision made in connection with the use of this
recorded-data.

Page 2
 TVN-01

1. Summary
1.1. Introduction

The RST (Reservoir Saturation Tool) Sigma was run to determine the water saturation in the
nd
deviated (max 42 deg) well TVN-01 on 22 Dec 2009. The logging tool string was run on
wireline and data recorded in real time.
The logged interval which extends from 3517 – 3671 m MDRT is completed with 3.5” liner (3.5”
is 9.2 lb/ft weight, 2.992” inner diameter & L-80 casing grade).
This log was run in lieu of openhole logs as an obstruction at 3555m MDRT prevented the tools
reaching TD. In order to maintain the integrity of the well the decision was taken to run
casedhole logging tool (RST-Sigma), in order to characterise the reservoir objectives drilled in
the 4.125” hole. The logged interval was conducted over the tail of the well which is near
vertical.

1.2. Objectives

The main objectives were:

• Evaluate the Rotliegend and the Hardenberg sandstone water saturation for future well
intervention.

• Evaluate thin sands between the base of the Hardenberg sandstone and TD.

1.3. Main Results

The interpreted profile from the RST-Sigma data is presented in Fig-1. The interpreted
profile indicates that hydrocarbons are present in both Rotliegend and Hardenberg
reservoirs. The Hardenberg appears to be more water saturated compared to the
Rotliegend. The thin sand units between the base of the Hardenberg (3638m MDRT) and
TD also appear to be gas bearing.

Page 3
 TVN-01

Fig: 1- Interpreted profile of from RST-Sigma data. The profile shows that the Rotliegend and
Hardenberg appear to be gas bearing. However, the water saturation in the Hardenberg is
greater than in the Rotliegend.

Page 4
 TVN-01

Fig: 2- RST-Sigma composite profile.

Page 5
 TVN-01

2. Log Quality Control and Processing

2.1. Data Quality

Log quality control was carried out on all logs. The logs were found to be of good quality. The
repeat Sigma pass was in good agreement with the main log. All the borehole & casing
parameters were put in place correctly.

2.2. Data Processing Summary

The volume of shale (Vsh) was calculated from RST-SIGM & RST-GR and calibrated with the
wellsite lithology. Effective porosity was calculated from TPHI (RST Sigma). Before
determining the effective porosity, the data was calibrated with the data from offset well
Geesbrug-1 (GSB-1).
The porosity from the sonic data was compromised by poor compressional arrivals. For more
detail refer to SSLT (Slim Sonic Logging Tool) interpretation report (dated 29 Dec 09).
Due to the low porosity and uncertainty (due to low hydrogen index in gas-bearing zones the
neutron porosity measurements such as RST porosity (TPHI) underestimate formation
porosity) in porosity (Avg. 5%) in the Rotliegend the water saturation accuracy is likely to be
+/- 30%. The water saturation error (+/- 10% -15%) in the Hardenberg is less than the
Rotliegend as it has a greater average porosity (Avg. 10%).
Water saturation from sigma was produced by using a formation water salinity of 200 ppk
which was taken from the offset well GSB-1. Details about RST-Sigma are presented in
Appendix 3.3.
The drilling fluids will only impact RST data if there is invasion. In case of invasion, sigma can
be affected; however it depends upon drilling fluids salinity/type and fluids in invaded zone.
There is no indication of invasion from the logged data. Therefore, it is assumed that if there is
any invasion, it is insignificant.
The other following key parameters used for water saturation calculation (at borehole
temperature 117 deg C & pressure 410 bar) are:

Page 6
 TVN-01

For Rotliegend

Sigma Value c.u. (Capture Units)

Water 96
Shale 54
Gas 11.17
Matrix (Sandstone) 13

The sigma matrix value for the Rotliegend (13 captue units) is higher than the typical sigma
matrix value (4-6 capture units, Appendix 3.3); this could be due to the high salinity of the
formation water and salt plugging the pores.
Sigma (Capture Units)

Porosity (fraction)

Fig: 3 – Cross plot between Sigma (y-axis) & Porosity (x-axis) is indicating that with selected
parameters all the data is in good agreement with each other.

Page 7
 TVN-01

For Hardenberg Sandstone

Sigma Value c.u. (Capture Units)

Water 96
Shale 54
Gas 11.17
Matrix (Sandstone) 7.0
Sigma (Capture Units)

Porosity (fraction)

Fig: 4 – Cross plot between Sigma (y-axis) & Porosity (x-axis) is indicating that with selected
parameters all the data is in good agreement with each other.

Page 8
 TVN-01

3. A ppendices

3.1 RST Tool Sketch

Page 9
 TVN-01

3.2 Well Sketch

Tiendeveen proposed casing/completion scheme 2

Tubular
Hole Casing/TOC/Formation, all depths from RT depth depth
size Crown tubing hanger 11" x 3 1/2" AHRT TVRT
m m

WE-5 TR SC-SSSV OD 5.170", min. ID 2.812" 70 70

17 1/2"
13 3/8"shoe 492 492
TOC 9 5/8" casing (channeled to 400m)
KOP 598 598
12 1/4" 9 5/8" 43.5# Polseal N80 casing
3 1/2" 9.2# L80 tbg, collar OD 3.900", ID 2.992"

TOC 7" 1700 1607

9 5/8" casing shoe 2254 2030

8 1/2"
SPM w. dummy, OD 5.360", drift 2.867"

WX LN max. OD 4.250", min. ID 2.750"

RPBR max. OD 5.750", drift 2.867"
Baker SB-3 prod. packer, min. ID 3.875" 3270 2945
WXN NoGo LN max. OD 4.250", min. ID 2.640"

WEG OD 4.250", min. ID 2.992"

X-over 5" x 3 1/2", TOL 3288mAH 3288 2962
5" coupling OD 5.587", ID 4.276"
5" TOL: 3347 mAH 3347 3021

7 5/8" MUST casing 2772 - 3416mAH

39m 7" 26# VAGT L80 casing, 7" shoe 3455 3129

depth of 8 1/2" hole and 5" shoe 3517 3192

3 1/2" 9.2# 13%CrL80 VamAce liner, ID 2.992"

3 1/2" shoe 3682 3356
Final depth 3683 3357

Page 10
 TVN-01

3.3 RST-
RST-Sigma

Thermal neutron capture creates gamma rays and Sigma (macroscopic thermal neutron
capture cross section) measurement is measuring the rate of this gamma ray population
decay over time (Figure 3.3.1). Sigma mode records thermal neutron decay time distributions
to provide capture cross-section data in a fast logging pass. The RST utilises dual neutron
burst similar to TDT-P (Figure 3.3.2). It produces time decay distribution optimised for the
determination of both borehole and formation sigma with low statistical variations. The count
rate spectrum is recorded in 126 time gates of varying width, covering the entire sequence,
including the burst and the "burst-off" background. Decay rates are corrected for pile-up
losses and background and four apparent sigmas are computed, one for each burst/detector
combination. Most environmental effects on nuclear measurements are too complex to be
derived in practical analytical form. Instead tool response was characterized by acquiring a
database of laboratory measurements in Schlumberger’s Environmental Effects Calibration
Facility (EECF) in Houston. The database was then parameterised in terms of the
environmental variables that influence the measurement, such as:

• Formation porosity
• Lithology
• Borehole size
• Casing size
• Casing weight

The characterisation was subsequently confirmed in the Europa test facility (located at that
time in Aberdeen) for sigma and porosity and in the industry standard API porosity test pits for
porosity alone.
The four apparent sigmas are input to the database along with the environmental parameters
and transformed to formation sigma (SIGM), porosity (TPHI) and borehole salinity (BSAL) by a
dynamic parameterization and a classical weighted multiple linear regression. The output can
be constrained by porosity or borehole salinity or both, but this is not normal practice (Figure
3.3.2).

Page 11
 TVN-01

Because chlorine has a large neutron cross capture section, sigma based saturation
technique provides good results in areas with high formation water salinities. When the
formation water is not sufficiently saline or when salinity is unknown, the sigma technique
breaks down. Table-1 listed the typical sigma values for common formation matrix and fluids.
Formation water saturation can be calculated using the equation illustrated in Figure 3.3.3,
knowing the effective porosity, sigma values for formation matrix including shale/clay, volume
of shale/clay, sigma values of formation fluids and measured sigma. In low formation water
salinity, sigma water and oil are similar, thus it is impossible to distinguish water from oil.
Therefore, saturation calculated from sigma measurement could have large error due to low
contrast between oil sigma and water sigma.

Figure 3.3.1-
3.3.1- Sigma Measurement

Page 12
 TVN-01

Figure 3.3.2-
3.3.2- Dual Neutron Burst and Sigma Measurement flow

The same scenario for unknown water salinity or in mixed salinity due to water injection as
the sigma saturation equation depends on known water sigma value. Carbon/Oxygen
technique would provide better answer in these conditions as it is independent of salinity.

Table-
Table -1. Typical Sigma Values

Page 13
 TVN-01

Figure 3.3.3-
3.3.3- Sigma Interpretation

IRAT Background corrected F/N inelastic ratio

WINR Weighted Inelastic ratio
RSCF Far Detector Capture Count Rate
RSCN Near Detector Capture Count Rate

Page 14