Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
In This Issue
Designing Completions
after Predicting Wellbore
Dynamic-Shock Loads during
Perforating
See pages 4-10
Performance of a New
2.35-in. Wireline or Memory
Quad Combo for Through-Bit
or Small-Hole Logging
See pages 37-46
Executive Steering Committee
Eric Carre
A Message from David Topping Senior Vice President, Drilling & Evaluation
David Topping
Vice President, Wireline and Perforating
As the incoming vice president for Wireline and Perforating, it is my Ahmed Kenawi
pleasure to welcome you to the second edition of Reservoir Innovations. Vice President, Sperry Drilling
My hope is that this edition will help demonstrate the depth and
Greg Powers
breadth of our Wireline and Perforating portfolio.
Vice President, Technology
This issue includes two articles about new additions to our solutions
portfolio; “New Slickline Smart-Release Tool Mitigates Wire-Recovery Editorial Advisory Committee
Issues on Extreme Well Conditions” and “Performance of a New Ian R. Hunt
2.35-in. Wireline or Memory Quad Combo for Through-Bit or Small-Hole Ron Cherry
Logging.” We’re also proud to publicize that the paper on page 53, “Using Computer Modeling Daniel Dorffer
to Generate Accurate Pe Equations,” achieved the SPWLA 2011 Symposium “Best Presentation Andrew Kirkwood
Award.” It covers the impact of computer modeling capabilities on tool response accuracy. Dan Quinn
Sriram Srinivasan
So what is Wireline and Perforating?
Soraya Brombacher
“Wireline” is only describing a means of conveyance. However the range of applications
throughout the well lifecycle can be tremendously varied. In the Open Hole environment this can Managing Editor
include conveying on electric line, drill pipe conveyed or pumped down. While in the Cased Hole Soraya Brombacher
environment it can also include slickline, coiled tubing or tractor conveyed. With collaboration
between the Halliburton team and our customers we can develop unique solutions using the Circulation
most applicable conveyance method to provide successful formation and reservoir evaluation and Nancy Kirkland
efficient well interventions. The paper, “Production Logging in Horizontal Wells: Case Histories
from Saudi Arabia Utilizing Different Deployment and Data Acquisition Methodologies in Open Design
Hole and Cased Hole Completions” is one demonstration of this collaboration. Griffin Creative Company
“Perforating” is not merely punching holes in casing. When it can cost many millions of dollars
This magazine is published biannually
to complete a well, one focuses quickly on the fact that where perforating is concerned, you
by Halliburton Wireline and Perforating.
have only one chance to do it right. Success requires the right equipment, the right perforating
For comments and suggestions,
products, and the right organizational capability to deliver the service. In today’s world, however,
please contact:
even that’s not enough. Success also requires job-design simulation capabilities that deliver
WirelineandPerforating@Halliburton.com
optimized connectivity between the cased formation and the wellbore for production, injection
or stimulation. These simulations also provide the assurance that the dynamic shock loads are
understood and managed to prevent damage to the tubular and completion equipment. Our
first paper, “Designing Completions after Predicting Wellbore Dynamic-Shock Loads during
Perforating” includes three case histories on this subject.
As always, I encourage you to collaborate with our Technical Sales and Formation and Reservoir
Solutions representatives to coauthor papers that raise awareness of your technology challenges,
and to highlight solutions that have created value in your reservoir understanding.
We welcome your interest and feedback in our publications, and we sincerely hope you find them
both valuable and enjoyable.
On the Cover
Halliburton uses a downhole detonation event
predictive model that provides pressure and shock-
Thank you, wave predictions to prevent toolstring damage due to
the firing of perforating guns. More advanced modeling
tools, including 3D finite element analysis (FEA)
techniques, are now being integrated in the product.
This modeling process improves gun system design and
job designs, and also helps ensure that health, safety
and environment needs are met.
David Topping
Vice President, Wireline and Perforating © Copyright 2012 Halliburton
All rights reserved.
2
Contents
4 esigning Completions after Predicting Wellbore
D
4
Dynamic-Shock Loads during Perforating
Mitigating Risks of Deepwater Tubing-Conveyed Perforating
11
Expanding the Range of Applications of Traditional Slickline
37
Performance of a New 2.35-in. Wireline or Memory Quad Combo
for Through-Bit or Small-Hole Logging
47
Highest-Quality Measurements with Environmental Corrections
26
37
47
53 3
M i t i g a t i n g R i s k s of De e pwat e r Tubing- Convey ed Perforating
Abstract
Oilwell casing perforation has been used in the industry since 1932 and was pioneered by the Lane-Wells Company who introduced the bullet-gun perforating
technique. Shortly after the introduction of the bullet gun, explosive jet perforators were introduced, which provided a different and more aggressive way to
perforate casing. With the increased demand for oil and gas over the past decades, operators have been forced to explore deeper, hotter reservoirs to find
the most prolific reservoirs. These deepwater opportunities have required constant changes to equipment and services to increase their technical capabilities
for performing in more critical environments. Perforating with higher-shot densities, propellants, and larger perforating guns has been ongoing to meet these
new challenges.
A major problem with these increases, however, is the difficulty in predicting dynamic wellbore behaviors that cause tubulars to collapse and bend and
packers to unset as perforating guns were detonated. Research to understand the pressure behavior during the perforation event, in addition to the solid
loading that is imparted to the tubulars, packers, and other completion hardware in the perforating assembly, was needed to enable the industry to go
forward with a high level of confidence that wells could be completed safely and cost effectively. This paper discusses a shock-wave computer modeling
program that evaluates the mechanical risk factors of well components to ensure that the health, safety, environment, and service quality needs in a design
are addressed. A time-marching, finite-differences technique is applied as the numerical method for both fluids and solids. The software is installed on a
personal computer and typically executes the models within several minutes to several hours, depending on the complexity of the job design.
The physics-based model has been validated (Schatz et al. 1999 and Schatz et al. 2004) with special high-speed recorders that sense pressure, temperature,
and acceleration at a sampling frequency of 115,000 samples per second. This paper provides data from offshore oil and gas wells in the Gulf of Mexico to
demonstrate the success of the design.
and movement of completion equipment in the wellbore. The software Pressure Range 30,000 psi (peak), 15,000 psi (static)
modeling application determines the dynamic pressure behavior during Power Requirements IES Potted AA alkaline batteries
the perforation event as well as the solid loading imparted to the tubulars, Current Drain 500 uA sleeping / 100 mA sampling
packers, and other completion hardware in the bottomhole assembly (BHA). Temperature Range -40°C to 120°C
A physics-based numerical model accounts for fluid dynamics and dynamic
Sensor Frequency Response 0 to 10,000 Hz
failure of solids by accounting for pressures on surface, drag, internal stress
Memory Capacity 1,048,576 data points
waves and reflections, and gravity.
Computer / Communications 750 MHz or greater Pentium III
The time-marching finite differences technique is applied as the numerical Software is included Windows XP is recommended
method for both fluids and solids. The software is compiled on a personal Shock Mitigator1 - #IES-SM-11116 111⁄16” OD x 17” (8 lb), 17-4 SS
computer and typically requires several minutes to several hours, depending Gauge Dimensions 111⁄16” OD x 50” (22 lb), 17-4 SS
on the job design complexity. The numerical solution accounts for the Gauge Options
following failure modes:
#IES-GAUGE-211 111⁄16” OD Gauge (Pressure and RTD)
• Tubing burst/collapse 111⁄16” OD Gauge (Pressure,
#IES-GAUGE-212
• Packer axial load/differential ±10 G’s Accelerometer, and RTD)
Analyze
Shockpro
Results
YES YES
Record Final
Rebuild Model Rebuild Model Was There a NO Was a NO Model Parameters
with Changes & with Changes & Problem on the Job Fast Gauge
Associated with into Shockpro
Analyze Results Analyze Results Run? Database
Shockpro?
NO
• 1–10-ft pup joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing and the points tagged are for illustration only; for each time step, the model
• 3½-in. fill disc assembly checks for dynamic failure at each depth in the completion.
• 1–30-ft joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing
• Shrouded firing head assembly Fig. 6 shows a plot of pressure at various nodes vs. time; the maroon curve
• 43-ft loaded 6½-in., 14 spf RDX Super Hole shows the differential pressure on the packer in the annulus as a function
• Sump packer 10 ft below bottom shot of time. The peak differential pressure at the packer is ±1,700 psi at 26 ms
• PBTD 246 ft below bottom shot into the run. This peak differential is a result of the pressure in the annulus
Stage 2 – Upper Zone below the packer that goes on a vacuum for a short period of time as fluid in
• Workstring to surface the annulus and reservoir flows into the guns, and the hydrostatic pressure
• 95⁄8-in. packer on the backside remains constant. Although pressure is normally applied
• 1–10-ft pup joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing to the backside to protect the packer or keep it in place from a hydraulics
• Below packer safety joint standpoint, the addition of annulus pressure generally serves to increase the
• 1–10-ft pup joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing differential pressure on the packer elements. The peak pressure at the top
• 3½-in. fill disc assembly perforation (green curve) and the bottom perforation (olive) is ±15,400 psi
• 1–30-ft joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing as a result of gun detonation; the pressure decreases exponentially as the
• Shrouded firing head assembly distance from the event increases.
• 30-ft loaded 6½-in., 14-spf RDX Super Hole
• Frac-pack packer 10 ft below bottom shot with packer plug installed
Note: the BHA above the packer is not modeled because the packer
is the anchor.
The graphical output from the simulation, shown in Fig. 5, shows a plot of
motion (left y-axis) and packer load and tension/compression (right y-axis)
as a function of time (0 to 0.5 sec). A point was tagged in the tubing above
the fill disk at 19,720-ft MD; the tubing joint moves up ± 0.16 ft and down Figure 6. Stage 1 pressure at selected nodes.
± 0.08 ft and then oscillates like a spring during gun detonation (red curve).
From motion at the tubing and packer (black line), the corresponding tension Fig. 7 shows a plot of pressure vs. time across the perforated interval; pres-
or compression can be calculated. In this case, the tubing (light blue curve) sures are averaged across the entire perforated interval. The peak pressure
experiences a maximum compressive loading of ± 345 klbf and a tensile is 15,268 psi, and the minimum pressure is 9,983 psi; a dynamic surge is
loading of ± 77 klbf. The packer (navy blue curve) at 19,662-ft MD initially predicted to be greater than the planned perforating state. This dynamic surge
shows a maximum upward force of ± 319 klbf and then a downward force is attributable to the completion and reservoir fluids that rush into the 6½-in.
of ± 176 klbf. The simulation is a finite difference, time-marching model, gun carriers. The gun carriers are at atmospheric pressure internally before
Figure 5. Stage 1 motion, packer load, tubing compression, and tension. Figure 7. Stage 1 average pressure in perforated interval.
6
gun detonation and cause a local vacuum after holes are punched in the gun
scallops. These three plots are typically included in the shock-wave modeling
software report. No issues were predicted in this case. Results were logged
into the modeling software database; the job was implemented as planned
with no damage to downhole equipment.
For the Stage 2 upper completion, the main concerns were damage to the
packer plug and excessive tubing movement because the frac-pack packer
is 10 ft below the bottom shot. With the packer plug installed, it will yield
a clearance of approximately 4 ft from the packer plug running tool. The
graphical output from the simulation, shown in Fig. 8, provides a plot of
motion (left y-axis) and tension/compression (right y-axis) as a function of
time (0 to 0.5 sec). A point was tagged in the tubing above the fill disk at
19,454 ft MD (red curve); the tubing joint moves up ± 0.11 and down ± 0.09 ft.
This peak oscillation is within the 4-ft clearance, which ensures that the Figure 9. Stage 3 Iteration 1 motion, packer load, tubing compression,
packer plug will not be affected by the running tool upon gun detonation. and tension.
No issues were predicted to occur as in the previous stage. The upper zone
was completed with no damage to downhole equipment.
Note: For Iteration 2, the 30-ft joints were replaced with 10-ft pups; total
Figure 8. Stage 2 motion, packer load, tubing compression, and tension. tubing length was left unchanged.
Case History 2 This case history is an oilwell located in Garden Banks with The plots in Fig. 9 and 10 are essentially identical; the difference is that in
a water depth of 2,095 ft. It was originally planned for three stages with changing the rigidity of the tubing increases its threshold to resist bending.
perforations at 21,509–21,589 ft for Stage 1, 21,138–21,218 ft for Stage 2, The model will flag bend if this possibility should occur, but calculations will
and 20,721–20,781 ft for Stage 3. Preliminary models were run on these continue as if the tool string is still intact.
three stages with results showing no issues with the first two stages.
Stage 3 had possible bending in the tubing from 20,590–20595 ft, which can When the actual well was drilled and cased to TD, the lower zone had
be seen in Fig. 9. Fig. 10 shows the results from the second iteration that no indication of hydrocarbons and was, therefore, dropped form the
replaces the 30-ft joints to 10-ft pup, which resolves bending. The BHA for completion plan. Models were then updated with the new intervals
Stage 3 is as follows: (21,132–21,152 ft and 21,044–21,080 ft) and reservoir parameters. Findings
• Workstring to surface from previous models (use of 10-ft pups) were implemented in the updated
• 95⁄8-in. packer models. Final pre-job models showed no indications of failure. Both stages
• 1–30-ft joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing were completed with no damage to downhole equipment.
• Below packer safety joint
• 2–30-ft joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing Case History 3 This case history is also a gas well, and it is located in East
• 3½-in. fill disc assembly Breaks. It has a water depth of 3,382 ft with planned perforations at 7,630
• Shrouded firing head assembly to 7,660 ft MD and anticipated BHP of 4,166 psi. As the first case history
• 60-ft loaded 6½-in., 14-spf RDX Super Hole described, the required information was provided and a preliminary model
• Frac-pack packer 10 ft below bottom shot with packer plug installed was run with no flags. The dynamic load results are displayed in Fig. 11.
7
M i t i g a t i n g R i s k s of De e pwat e r Tubing- Convey ed Perforating
Figure 11. Iteration 1 initial proposed BHA without BPSJ. Figure 12. Iteration 2 with addition of BPSJ and tubing.
This case history was modeled in accordance with the following BHAs:
• Workstring to surface
• 95⁄8-in. packer
• 1–10-ft pup joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing
• 3½-in. fill disc assembly
• 1–30-ft joint 3½-in., 12.95-lb/ft P-110 tubing
• Shrouded firing head assembly
• 30-ft loaded 6½-in., 14-spf RDX Super Hole
• PBTD 10 ft below bottom shot
8
For Case 2, which has fewer guns than Case 1 Stage 1, it is counter- questions requires examining the pressure results and determining how
intuitive that the case with fewer guns had the higher loads. Why would they correspond to the loads. Figs. 14 and 15 show the pressure plots from
it have higher loads? What is causing this to occur? Which parameters Case 2 with elapsed time of 0.25 sec to provide more visual detail of the
are critical to dynamic loading? These are some of the questions (and pressure response. Fig. 14 plots the pressures at selected nodes, and Fig. 15
opportunities) made apparent by this numerical analysis. Addressing these plots the average pressure in the perforated interval.
When comparing the peak pressure of the top and bottom perforations,
Case 3 had a peak of 21,660 psi, as compared to 15,400 psi in Case 1
Stage 1. Regarding the differential pressure across the packer, Case 3 had
a maximum of 3,200 psi resulting from the bottom of the packer pushing
it up. Case 1 Stage 1 had a maximum of 1,700 psi resulting from a surging
effect of a partially loaded gun on top of the gun assembly, which lessens
the effect of the upward force. In both cases, the average pressure in the
perforated interval was similar, but the reservoir pressures were very
different. Case 3 was 5,878 psi, as compared to Case 1 Stage 1 with
9,994 psi. This difference in pressure would affect the containment of
gun gas pressures and the differential across packer, tools, and guns. In
addition, the volume available below the packer must be evaluated; Case 1
Stage 1 had 162 ft more rat hole than Case 3. This difference would enable
more pressure to dissipate and prolong the returning pressure wave from
Figure 14. Case 3 Iteration 2 pressure at selected nodes. PBTD. All of these factors contributed to the higher packer loads and tubing
compressive loads in Case 3.
Conclusions
• As shown in this paper, an experienced user of this software can model
the dynamics of tubing-conveyed perforating operations and eliminate
potential problems before execution.
• The oil and gas industry now has a numerical model to predict dynamic
behavior during perforating events. With this tool, operators can design
well completions ahead of time to mitigate operational challenges and to
minimize the risk of downhole tubular failure during execution.
• When the probability of an operational issue is identified and determined
to be largely unavoidable because of well conditions, contingency
operations to rectify the issue can be developed beforehand to minimize
the economic effect should the worst case arise.
9
M i t i g a t i n g R i s k s of De e pwat e r Tubing- Convey ed Perforating
Authors
Jack Burman is President Martin Schoener-Scott is the Cam was later transferred to Houston Business
of Exploitation Technologies, Business Development Technical Development in 2007 as Technical Advisor for GoM
a Houston, Texas-based Manager for Tubing Conveyed operations. His role as a Product Champion includes
consulting firm that specializes in Perforating. He started his career managing dynamic modeling services. Cam is a member
worldwide deepwater and shelf with Halliburton Energy Services, of YPSPE and SPE.
well completions, production in Victoria, Texas, after graduating
engineering and field implementation. He graduated from Saint Mary’s University San Antonio with a David Suire is the Gulf of Mexico
with a BS in Mining Engineering from Virginia Tech business degree in 1981. He later obtained his MBA in Service Quality Manager for
in 1978 and an MS in Petroleum Engineering from 2004 from Regis University in Denver, Colorado, and Halliburton Testing and Subsea,
the University of Wyoming in 1982, and is a licensed progressed through various operational and managerial responsible for the implementing
professional petroleum engineer. Jack’s career includes positions in well testing, perforating, cement and and continued development of
positions at Chevron, Conoco, Newfield Exploration, stimulation in a diverse range of operating conditions the Quality Management System
and Snyder Oil Corp before forming Exploitation both onshore and offshore. Martin is also a member for GoM TSS Operations. In 2001 he received a BS in
Technologies in 1999. He has experience on three of the SPE and coauthor of several technical papers Mechanical Engineering from the University of Louisiana
world-record water depth deepwater developments: presented at SPE conferences around the globe. at Lafayette. David started his career as a field engineer
Vastar/BP “Horn Mountain” Spar, Anadarko “Marco with Halliburton in 2001 and was later transferred to
Polo” TLP, and Anadarko “Independence Project” Cam Le is the TCP Perforating Houston Business Development in 2005 as a Technical
Subsea, as well as numerous other deepwater and Product Champion for Halliburton Advisor for GoM Operations. In 2006 David became an
shelf projects. Jack has authored 15 SPE papers and Wireline and Perforating, Account Representative for GoM Operations in Tools,
has made numerous industry presentations on various responsible for implementing and Testing, and Tubing Conveyed Perforating. He is a
completion and production engineering topics. Jack is commercializing new technologies, member of SPE and API.
a member of the SPE, and was awarded the SPE Gulf and providing technical support for
Coast North America Drilling and Completion Engineer global operations. He holds a BS (2002) in Chemical
of the Year award in 2007. Engineering from Lamar University, and started his
career as a field engineer with Halliburton in 2004.
Acknowledgements References
The authors would like to thank Halliburton for supporting this effort Canal, A., Miletto, P., Schoener-Scott, M., Medeiros, J., and Barlow, D.
and for permitting the publication of this paper. They would also like to 2010. Predicting Pressure Behavior and Dynamic Shock Loads on
Completion Hardware During Perforating. Paper OTC-21059 presented at
express special gratitude to Halliburton customers and associates who the Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 3-6 May.
supported the development of this technique to improve the probability
Schatz, J.F., Folse, K.C., Fripp, M., and Dupont, R. 2004. High-Speed
that the job was done right. Pressure and Accelerometer Measurements Characterize Dynamic
Behavior During Perforating Events in Deepwater Gulf of Mexico. Paper
Nomenclature SPE 90042 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 26-29 September.
BHA Bottomhole assembly
Schatz, J.F., Haney, B.L., Ager, S.A. 1999. High-Speed Downhole Memory
BHP Bottomhole pressure Recorder and Software Used to Design and Confirm Perforating/Propellant
BH Big hole guns Behavior and Formation Fracturing. Paper SPE 56434 presented at the SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Houston, Texas, 3-6 October.
ID Pipe inner diameter
in. Inches
Lp Perforation length
mD Millidarcy unit
MD Measured depth
OD Pipe outer diameter
OMS Odorless mineral spirits
Perm Permeability
psi Pound square inches (pressure)
SPF, spf Shot per foot
PBTD Plug back total depth
10
Porosity Red uction’s Impa c t on Pulsed Neutron Sa tur a tion
Advancements in Carbon-Oxygen
on-board (POB) constraints. Pulsed neutron tools
in the Mars field are often run continuously in
excess of 40 hours to achieve the objectives of the
Surveillance of the Deepwater Gulf of logging program due to the number and thickness
of reservoirs being surveyed. Since other logs,
11
Po r o s i t y R e d u c t ion’s Impact on P ul se d Ne utr on Saturation
13
Po r o s i t y R e d u c t ion’s Impact on P ul se d Ne utr on Saturation
15
Po r o s i t y R e d u c t ion’s Impact on P ul se d Ne utr on Saturation
Figure 15. Mars A-3 E2 saturation showing Figure 19. Mars A-15 ST01 MarsSat in the M1
seawater replacing oil when analyzed using a sand showing seawater break-through as
porosity of 27 pu. observed in 2010.
Figure 17. Compaction model for the M1/M2 sands
Waterflood Surveillance in Mars M1/M2 representing porosity reduction as a function of A crossplot of C/O oil saturation and Σ in the
Reservoirs reservoir pressure depletion. Mars A-15 ST01 is displayed in Fig. 20. The
Introduction to Mars M1/M2 Reservoirs data for the selected interval, 17,544’-17,515’,
The Mars M1/M2 reservoirs are late Miocene An estimate of porosity reduction from initial trend along the lower boundary indicating the
sandstone deposits with an average porosity production to 2010 for the M1/M2 sand is presence of oil and injected seawater with no
of 28 pu, lower net-to-gross than the E2, and displayed in Fig. 18 below. Scaled porosity formation water.
often consists of many thin layers with shale reduction in pu is displayed in the color-coded
breaks in between. A number of wells in the key on the right border of the display. Well
area have penetrated the M1/M2, and it is the locations are labeled with the value extracted
most frequently surveyed waterflood reservoir from the model. The maximum strain measured in
in the Mars field. Production began in 1997, and wells with formation compaction logging is also
four producing wells, Mars A-12, Mars A-14, displayed. There are two formation compaction
Mars A-15 ST01 and Mars A-14 ST03, produced surveys in A-4 and A-10 ST01 in the M sand that
91.0 MMBO and 87.6 BCFG to date. Current help calibrate the estimate. The surveys measured
production is 7,000 BOPD. In 2004, the A-12 a maximum strain of 5.5% and 6.3%, respectively.
well was converted to an injection well. Current
injection is 12,000 BWPD with a total injection
of 15.4 MMBW to date.
supports the analysis, which indicates seawater is interpretation is well defined. The data from 32 PU & 90% Oil 0.32 0.2520 0.1000 17.95
present in 2010. A-10 ST01 M2.1 sand show a different trend. 32 PU & 25% Sweep 0.32 0.2100 0.2500 20.47
The points fall in the area between the formation
32 PU & 50% Sweep 0.32 0.1400 0.5000 24.67
water and injected seawater boundaries, as
Cases for Porosity Reduction (Compaction)
displayed in Fig. 24.
TPOR Voil SFW ΣTOTAL
Here the logs are responding to a combination of 32 PU & 90% Oil 0.32 0.2520 0.1000 17.95
porosity reduction and a mixture of water types. 30 PU & 90% Oil 0.30 0.2340 0.1000 17.61
Likely the seawater injection front is transitioning 28 PU & 90% Oil 0.28 0.2160 0.1000 17.27
through the original formation water. In this
instance, there is not a clearly defined set of Figure 25. Modeling for formation water sweep
(upper) and porosity reduction (lower) cases. Right
conditions the pulsed neutron responses can column displays the bulk sigma for cases listed in
deliver to separate the porosity reduction from left column. Center columns indicate oil volumes
saturation change. Fig. 25 compares the modeled and formation water saturations for each case.
responses due to water sweep and due to
porosity reduction. There are different sigma (ΣTOTAL) values for both
cases, a reservoir undergoing formation water
The left column indicates fluid-content of a series sweep and a reservoir undergoing compaction.
of cases including original oil-filled reservoir, Fig. 26 demonstrates this by showing the change
water sweep, and porosity reduction conditions. in ΣTOTAL values for each case.
Figure 22. Cross-plot of C/O oil saturation and
sigma in Mars A-4 M1 for the latest surveillance
run in 2010.
17
Po r o s i t y R e d u c t ion’s Impact on P ul se d Ne utr on Saturation
Sigma
5
0
Further complicating the situation, the Mars sands
SIGMA WITH FORMATION
17.95 20.47 24.67
WATER SWEEP
SIGMA WITH FORMATION
are typical of many deepwater GOM sands and are
17.95 17.78 17.61
COMPACTION
highly compressible resulting in porosity reduction
0.0
1.0 Silver So 0.0 with depletion. For a robust interpretation, the best
Figure 26. Modeled sigma (ΣTOTAL) values
Silver
0.0 Sw 1.0
increase for a reservoir undergoing formation estimate of current porosity must be used.
water sweep (blue line) and slightly decrease for Figure 28. Red line represents modeled data
a reservoir undergoing compaction (red line). trend resulting from formation water replacing Measurement uncertainties and limitations of
oil (no injected water) and porosity reduction analysis methods are very important. Invalid
For sigma interpretation, it is difficult to confuse from pressure decline.
interpretations due to uncertainty mask the
porosity reduction and formation water sweep. The
significance of valid interpretations. Additional
measurement is robust even without correcting for From sigma and C/O modeling, a series of
work is ongoing to 1) better understand the
porosity reduction. However, the same is not true curve families can be developed as displayed in
uncertainties and 2) improve the analysis methods
of C/O interpretation as displayed in Fig. 27. Fig. 28. These curve families are consistent with
to deal with these uncertainties.
the observed data trend displayed in Fig. 24.
Oil Sweep Compared to Porosity Reduction The Mars field is a world-class oil field with a
These log responses are being studied further to
0.30 world-class infrastructure. The waterflood is one
0.25 develop a deeper understanding of the data trends.
C/O 0.20 method to improve hydrocarbon recovery and
Presently it is unclear why the data sometimes has
VOLUME 0.15
help maintain reservoir integrity with pressure
OF OIL
0.10
the shape of these curve families, but additional
0.05 maintenance. Surveillance of the waterflood
0.00 work is in progress to understand these responses.
Voil WITH
is critical to determine where the seawater is
WATER SWEEP 32 PU & 90% OIL 32 PU & 25% SWEEP 32 PU & 50% SWEEP
18
Authors
Matt Cuttitta is a Petrophysical Suparman is a Lead Log Analyst Ismar Setiadi is a Log Analyst
Engineer with Shell Exploration for Halliburton in the Formation and for Halliburton in the Formation
& Production Company in New Reservoir Solutions group. He holds and Reservoir Solutions group. He
Orleans, LA. He is a member of a BS in physics from the University has been in the oil industry since
SPWLA and SPE, and he holds BSE of Indonesia. Suparman has more 1973, when he joined ELNUSA in
and MSE degrees in mechanical than 27 years of experience in the Petro-Service group in Jakarta
engineering from the University of Michigan. His current the wireline logging industry, starting with Gearhart Indonesia. He transitioned to log analyst in 1984 with
responsibilities include petrophysical evaluation, as a field engineer. He joined Halliburton in 1987 and Gearhart and later Halliburton. He held assignments in
operations support and reservoir modeling support for entered the evaluation group in 1994. His experience various areas of Indonesia and Thailand before joining
the Mars field. is in various areas, including Indonesia, Australia, and the Gulf of Mexico team in 2007.
most recently in the Gulf of Mexico.
Jeff Weiland is a Senior Staff
Petrophysical Engineer with Phil Fox is a Technical Advisor
Shell Exploration & Production with Halliburton supporting
Company in New Orleans, LA, formation evaluation job design
currently working the Mars field. and interpretation for the Gulf
He joined Shell after earning a BS of Mexico. He holds a BS in
in geological engineering from the South Dakota mechanical engineering from the
School of Mines and Technology in 1985. He later University of Colorado, joining Halliburton in 1981. His
acquired an MBA from Loyola University. Jeff has previous responsibilities include field engineering, log
worked extensively in primary development, mature analysis and technical support in Southeast Asia, South
development, and exploration in the GOM and off the America and the United States.
north coast of Alaska.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the management of Shell, BP and Halliburton for their Eyvazzadeh, R., Nguyen, C., Fox, P., Poernomo, B. 1999. Nuclear Magnetic
support and approval to publish this paper. Resonance and Carbon/Oxygen Logging Improve Determination of Residual
Oil Saturation: A Case Study from the Minas Field. Paper SPE 54338-MS
presented at SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition,
References Jakarta, Indonesia, 20-22 April.
Schutjens, P.M.T.M., Hanssen, T.H., Hettema, M.H.H., Merour,J., de Bree, Fox, P.E., Adnyana, G., Setiadi, I. 1999. Applications of Carbon/Oxygen
P., Coremans, J.W.A., Helliesen, G. 2004. Compaction-Induced Porosity / Logging in Indonesian Reservoirs. Paper SPE 54353-MS presented at SPE
Permeability Reduction in Sandstone Reservoirs: Data and Model for Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition in Jakarta, Indonesia,
Elasticity-Dominated Deformation. SPE Res Eval & Eng 7 (3): 202-216. 20-22 April.
SPE 88441-PA.
de Kock, A. J., Johnson, T. J., Hagiwara, T., Zea, H. A., Santa, F. 1997.
van der Horst, J., Rambow, F., Frisch, G., Quirein, J., Fox, P. 2005. Formation GOM Offshore Subsidence Monitoring Project with a New Formation
Compaction Surveillance in Deepwater Gulf of Mexico: Applications, Compaction Monitoring Tool. Paper OTC-8529 presented at Offshore
Experiences and Best Practices. SPWLA 46th Annual Logging Symposium, Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 5-8 May.
New Orleans, Louisiana.
Simpson, G., Fox, P., Chafai, N., Truax, J. 2001. Introduction Experiences
of a New High Accuracy Through-Tubing Pulsed Neutron Reservoir
Management Solution in Asia-Pacific. Paper SPE 68713-MS presented
at SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference and Exhibition, Jakarta,
Indonesia, 17-19 April.
19
E xpand i n g t h e r ange of appl icat ions of t rad itional s lick line
20
the wire will be capable of successfully performing
additional jobs.
Wire Breakage Figure 1. An example of a data chart prepared with wireline-tension software.
Slickline operations without proper pre-job
of the tubing bore, and thus, gravity-fed wire Smart-Release Tool. The smart-release tool was
planning in challenging wells can increase wire
cutters are prevented from traveling down the designed and developed after several discussions
breakage risks, since wells with high deviations
entire length of wire to the target location. Other with Shell in the Gulf of Mexico. Shell was
often will increase the drag/tension of the wire.
pressure-and-tension-releasable rope sockets are instrumental in helping to assess the needs for a
Operators without pre-job wire-tension modeling
also available, but they require a force or pressure tool that could mitigate the risks associated with
capabilities have only the surface load cell to
applied at the rope socket. The traditions options running slickline into deeper, more deviated wells.
monitor. High deviations and extreme depths may
are discussed below, along with a new option that The goal of the project was to develop a tool that
cause readings at the surface load cell that may
was developed recently to address the difficulties would decrease the risk associated with dropping
confuse inexperienced operators. When the tool
that occur when a tool string becomes stuck. tools to cut the wire.
string becomes stuck, jarring may be applying
abnormal loads and stress at the tool string. If the
Slickline Wire-Cutting Tools. When the slickline The smart-release tool was developed as an
tool string is inadvertently stuck, the best scenario
tools could not be retrieved to the surface, the automatic-release mechanism to release the
is to release the wire at the rope socket on top
traditional option was to cut the wire. One of the slickline at the top of the tool string without
of the tool string and fish the tool string using
cutting tools used for slickline wire cutting is a manual manipulation from the surface. Deepwater
conventional fishing methods. Causes of wire
slotted stem tool with a fishing neck. This tool and deviated wells are considered risky appli-
breakage can usually be grouped into the
can be attached to the slickline via a small strip of cations for conventional gravity-fed/surface-
following classes:
metal pinned in the slot to keep the wireline from dropped wireline cutting tools, and therefore, more
• Excessive Tension – line tension exceeds coming out. When it is dropped from the surface, reliable contingency alternatives were needed.
wire yield point it will slide down the wire until it hits a restriction
• Wire fatigue – wire had bent too many or the top of the rope socket. The tool will cut The smart-release tool is electromechanical and
times in same location the slickline at that point, allowing the slickline is operated by a timer-based release mechanism.
• Chemical-induced failure – well fluid to be retrieved. This tool is battery-powered and is pre-job
attacks wire programmed to release the slickline at the rope
• Weak-point failure – wire has been If the tool cannot reach the rope socket at the top socket after a predetermined time has lapsed.
mechanically damaged at a high-stress point of the tool string, the wire may be cut at another The time allowed depends on the slickline
Any of the above conditions may cause the point, but this will often leave a long length of operation being performed. When the time has
slickline to break during operations. Traditional wire remaining above the rope socket. With the lapsed, the timer powers an electric DC motor that
wire-cutting methods have limitations. Wire challenges facing the operators in the deeper well retracts a ramp that supports the release dogs.
cutters that transverse the wire using gravity scenarios, it became obvious that a new concept
have shown only limited success in wells with that would lessen the current operational risks Various surface timers are available, and the
high deviations. In highly deviated wells, the wire was needed. selection of these timers is based on job-specific
is commonly stretched tightly against the inside parameters. The timers activate after normal
21
E xpand i n g t h e r ange of appl icat ions of t rad itional s lick line
22
Top External Fishneck Smart-Release Tool Lower Internal Fishneck
The complete electronic module, motor, and
battery were tested repeatedly while cycling
between room temperature and maximum
operating temperature to predict battery life.
Figure 4. Illustration of the smart-release tool in a wireline configuration.
Dogs
Battery
5 minutes and then slowly released. The tool
was removed and inspected for leaks as well D. Logic validation test
as to see if the dog mechanism had moved. The basic logic for this tool is that it will turn
No leakage and no release of dog mechanism the motor on after a pre-selected time has
indicated a successful test. lapsed. The prototype PCB has only one time
Timer Module
setting. Changing one resistor on the PCB
B. Tensile pull test to 5,000 pounds creates another time setting. The logic was
Subsea Release (SSR) was mounted in the tested with different resistors to create all
Motor Gearbox
Instron 1332 tension tester (See Fig. 5) that 10 timer settings. Proper function of logic at
is located in the metallurgy lab. Tension was all times was considered successful.
Drive Motor
applied to the SSR mechanism in 1000-pound
increments until 5000 pounds was reached. E. Jar testing
Dogs Tension test is considered as successful if no Creating a jar test that would meet all field
damage occurred in the SSR after being pulled parameters was not possible. This jar test was
5000 pounds. performed to validate that the SSR tool would
operate after being jarred.
C. Temperature test to 300°F [150°C]
Electronic and battery assembly requires During jar testing, the SSR was located above
Figure 4b. Additional drawings depicting the extensive temperature testing to determine the jars. Therefore, the lower section of jars
smart-release tool during a release operation. the battery life and effects of temperature was attached with a vise. A 5-ft weight bar
on the components. Lithium batteries create was placed above the jars, and the SSR was
Testing
a passivation layer when operated at high placed above the weight bar.
The general testing to validate the design of the
temperatures, which is then difficult to
prototype tool is outlined below:
overcome when operated at room temperature. In the test for activating the logic; the stem
A. Pressure tested to 10,000 psi
Even though this assembly will normally is attached, and the SSR is attached above
B. Tensile pull tested to 5,000 lbf
operate at fairly high temperatures, it may be the stem. Then, the 1.5-in.-OD x 5-ft stem
C. Temperature tested to 300°F [150°C]
required to operate at room temperature after is attached. The 1.5-in.-OD x 20-in. jars are
D. Logic validation tested
exposure to high temperature. Therefore, this attached and manually jarred up and down
E. Jar tested
tool will be temperature-cycle tested. 25 times; the function of the tool was checked.
F. Release tested
23
E xpand i n g t h e r ange of appl icat ions of t rad itional s lick line
nonproductive time that could occur if a tool • Rigged up the tool string with a smart-
string becomes stuck. Case History A illustrates release tool. The smart-release tool was
the difficulties that can be experienced when the set for 24 hours.
traditional cutting and fishing methods are used • The lubricator was tested and run into the hole
compared to a job when the preliminary planning with a wire finder to the top of the surface-
includes a smart-release tool in the tool string. controlled subsurface safety valve (SCSSSV) at
5903 feet. Then, pulled out of the hole, bled off
Case History A scale inhibitor (SI).
This is a case history of a high-risk operation • Run in hole to 20,236 feet at 72-degree
where the tools became stuck in spite of the fact deviation. Pulled out of hole.
that great care had been taken in setting up all • Stopped at 3000 feet. Pick-up weight was
pre-job preparations. Below is an outline of well 425 lb. Picked up again and wire stuck.
parameters and the process that was required to 1500-lbf pull was applied, but there was
free the tool string. no movement.
• Determined that tool string was stuck in
This job was performed on a floater rig in the the hydrate.
Gulf of Mexico in 3,500 feet of water. The well • Pumped ethylene glycol (MEG) with cement
had 5,000 shut-in tubing pressure (SITP) and units to free hydrate. Pumped 91 bbls, shut in
bottomhole pressure (BHP) of 11,500 psi. The the well, and waited.
Figure 6. Smart-release tool tension test.
service to be performed was a clean-out of the • Repeated pumping and working wire for
well with slickline. This well was considered a several days.
No damage to SSR after Test E was considered high-risk well due to its history of asphaltenes, • Rigged up the coiled tubing unit.
as a successful test. This test was repeated and suspected gravel-pack failures. • Freed hydrate after 19 days. Rope socket
10 times. and smart-release tool recovered. Wire had
Coiled tubing (CT) washed to the bottom and become wrapped around the coiled tubing
F. Release testing then was pulled out of the hole. The slickline several times.
The purpose of this test was to determine if tool string was prepared. A 1.88-in.-OD conven- • The remaining tool string was fished with a
the SSR would function properly when placed tional slickline tool string that consisted of a pulling tool.
under a tension load. The logic was set for the rope socket, a 5-ft stem, a knuckle joint, a
shortest period of time. The SSR was hung 5-ft stem, spang jars and a 2-in.-OD drive bailer The complete length of wire was recovered
vertically from an overhead crane. A 600-lbm was used. The tool string was run into the hole without breakage, and the tool string below
weight was attached below the SSR. The test to 11,400 feet, and the bailer stuck. the smart-release tool was successfully
was to determine if the logic would activate recovered. Inspection of the tool string showed
and if the SSR would unleash when under The process of fishing the tool string, which that no damage was sustained from using the
tension load. required obtaining a cutter from the shore to pulling tool.
the platform, required 25 hours because of the
If the SSR was released properly, the test was weather conditions. Three drop-bar-type cutters Conclusions
considered as successful. Fig. 6 is a photo of the were used before the wire was finally cut at Shell has run the new tool in its Gulf of Mexico
tension test setup. 10,800 feet. 400 feet of wire remained above operations numerous times as a contingency
the rope socket. A coiled tubing unit (CTU) was method in the event that a tool string should
The prototype of the 1.69-in.-OD smart-release deployed to fish the cutters, wire and tools. The become stuck. As of the writing of this paper,
tool successfully passed all the tests CTU fish job required 23 days. The cost of lost rig only one situation had occurred in which Shell
outlined above. time was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. wanted the smart-release tool to initiate a
disconnect process. This occurred when the tool
After lab testing, the prototype tool was tested in Although the smart-release tool would not have was used to do a soft release of memory BHP
a test well in New Iberia, LA. The tool string was prevented the tool string from getting stuck, had gauges, but the tool failed to release. It was
assembled, and the timer was set on 6 hours. it been used, it would have removed all the wire determined that the cause of the failure was a
The tool string was run to 500 feet and released above the stem, and this would have reduced the dead battery, and the tools are now supplied to
at 6 hours on two separate runs. fishing time by approximately 20 days. the field offices with battery testers. Since the
tool is “fail safe,” any failure in the system will
Case Histories Case History B prevent its releasing. As a worst-case scenario,
While the smart-release tool cannot prevent the This case history concerns a deepwater slickline if this situation occurs, you would be in the same
tool string from becoming stuck, the following job that was run to a depth of 20,236 feet. situation as if you had not run the tool, but since
two case histories show a comparison of Following are the steps followed in performing it is fail safe, there is no concern that the tools
the impact on the job from the economic and this job: can be released early in a failure situation.
24
The auto-disconnect benefits of the tool are The tool has applications in most slickline opera-
particularly advantageous when applied: tions. In 2008, Shell used the tool approximately
1. In deepwater wells where wire fishing 25 times in the GOM. To date, another major
operations could result in expensive rig costs operator also has used the tool in the Gulf of
2. In deviated wells where a dropped cutter might Mexico, but as of this writing, the tool has not
have difficulty reaching the rope socket been required to release a stuck tool string.
3. During services when using .125-in. wire However, both operators feel that the insurance of
diameter and larger, making fishing operations having the tool should a catastrophic occurrence
more difficult take place is well worth the cost of its use.
Authors
Jack Clemens earned a BSME technical papers, Darrell is published in many industry Jerry Foster is the Slickline
from the University of Arkansas periodicals. He is a New Orleans native and earned a Technical Applications Manager
and is a registered Professional degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of for Halliburton Wireline and
Engineer in the state of Texas. Texas at Arlington. Perforating, responsible for the
He is a Technical Advisor in the development of new products and
Halliburton Wireline and Perforating John Schram is a Technical services for the Integrated Cased
Group. Jack has over 25 years with Halliburton and Professional in the Packers product Hole business entity. A 1970 graduate of the University
other oilfield-related jobs prior to joining Halliburton. He line of Halliburton. In this role, John of Texas at Arlington, Jerry has held various well
has 11 patents and has co-authored numerous technical provides customized permanent intervention engineering and management positions
papers. Jack’s areas of interest within Halliburton are packer designs tailored to the since joining Halliburton in 1978.
downhole electromechanical tools that are used in the specific conditions of customer
Wireline and Perforating Group. wells. Since joining Halliburton in 2006, John has also Johnnie Garrett is a Well
worked in the Advanced Slickline Technology and Coiled Interventions Engineering Technical
Darrell Moore has been a Tubing Surface Equipment product service lines. Lead with Shell, having started in
design engineer in the oil and 1984. He later worked in production
gas industry for over 15 years. operations for 13 years and as a
He holds a number of patents and well interventions planner for two
industry awards for his engineering years. Johnnie has authored several articles, and is a
innovations. The author of many member of SPE.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the management of Shell for their input during Goiffon, J.: 1996. Setting Tool Increases Safety and Decreases Setting Time
development of this tool as well as their usage and faith in its capabilities for Packers and Bridge Plugs. WORLD EXPRO 96 (1).
for all their GOM jobs. The authors also want to thank BP for using the tool. Larimore, D.R., Fehrmann, G.Z. 1997. Field Cases of Cost Efficient Slickline
Finally, the authors wish to thank the management of Halliburton for their Well Interventions. Paper OTC 8530 presented at the Offshore Technology
Conference, Houston, Texas, 5-8 May.
encouragement in both tool development and the writing of this paper.
Larimore, D.R., Goiffon, J.J., Bayh, III, R.I. 1996. Low Cost Solutions for
Well Interventions through Advanced Slickline Services. Paper SPE 35236
References presented at the SPE Permian Basin Oil & Gas Recovery Conference,
Bargawi, R.A., Dean, D., Clemens, J., Whitmire, C. 2008. New Electro- 27-29 March.
Mechanical Perforating Technology Reduces Cost and Increases Safety in Larimore, D.R., and Fehrmann, G. Z. 1997. Field Cases of Cost Efficient Well
Workover Operations. Paper SPE 113805 presented at the SPE/ICoTA Coiled Interventions Performed with Advanced Slickline Technology. Paper SPE
Tubing and Well Intervention Conference and Exhibition, The Woodlands, 38097 presented at the SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting, Casper,
Texas, 1-2 April. Wyoming, 18-21 May.
Foster, J., Clemens, J., Moore, D. 2001. Slickline-Deployed Electro- McDaniel, D., Cromb, J., Walton, J., Clemens, J., Moore, D., Huggins, J.
Mechanical Intervention System, a Cost-Effective Alternative to Traditional 2008. Case History: Extended-Stroke Downhole Power Unit Successfully
Cased-Hole Services. Paper SPE 67201 presented at the SPE Production and Pulls Subsea Wellhead Plugs. Paper SPE 113806 presented at the SPE/ICoTA
Operations Symposium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 24-27 March. Coiled Tubing and Well Intervention Conference and Exhibition,
Fripp, M., Kyle, D. Hamid, S., Moore, D., Caja, J. 2008. Development of The Woodlands, Texas, 1-2 April.
a High-Temperature Rechargeable Battery for Downhole Use in the
Petroleum Industry. Paper OTC 19621 presented at the Offshore Technology SI Metric Conversion Factors
Conference, Houston, Texas, 5-8 May. ft x 3.048* E - 01 =m
Gazda, I, and Goiffon, J.J. 1995. A Battery-Operated Electro-Mechanical in. x 2.54* E + 00 = cm lbm x 4.535.924 E - 01 = kg
Setting Tool for Use with Bridge Plugs and Similar Wellbore Tools. Paper psi x 1.589 873 E – 01 = kPa lbf x 4.448 222 E + 00 = N
SPE 29459 presented at the SPE Production Operations Symposium, bbl x 1.589 873 E – 01 = m3 *Conversion factor is exact.
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 2-4 April.
25
N ew - G e n e r a t i o n Array Tool De pl oyme nt Te ch niques
Abstract
The horizontal wells drilled during the last few years are coming to a mature state in different fields
and locations. This has created the requirement to evaluate the performance of the wells and determine
water sources for proper reservoir management.
In horizontal wells tool deployment, multiple sensor data acquisition and the interpretation of these
results is a challenge, particularly when there are long intervals of open hole completions and where Figure 2. Ideal and actual flow profile example.
fractures are often encountered. The horizontal cased completions use multiple downhole valves and
external packers to provide isolation between intervals. for each section or ICD or inter-packer zone is
This paper reviews the two primary deployment techniques of coiled tubing and tractor conveyance and constructed based on shut-in (zero surface pro-
highlights their advantages and limitations for each one. In the paper we propose a general guideline duction) and flow rates at different choke sizes.
for their utilization.
A particular flow profile can explain lateral hetero-
The case histories in the paper evaluate the different sensors utilized and provide recommendations geneities of the formation, different flow units,
particularly for low flow rate conditions. Two interpretation methodologies are evaluated and results open fractures, high-permeability intervals arising
are compared along with the interpretation from other sensors. from dolomitization in carbonates, among others.
The case studies examples in the paper demonstrate the value of integrating all available information The permeability model derived from open hole log
and the value of different data acquisition and evaluation techniques. The conclusions highlight analysis and core data can be confirmed as well.
the operational considerations, the data interpretation and added value in the evaluation of well Flow profiles from multiple wells in a field can be
performance to maintain production and improve reservoir management. used to define reservoir patterns that may provide
useful information for future horizontal in-fill well
placement to avoid intervals of low permeability,
Introduction This is the case of a perfect homogeneous non-
to promote intersecting open fractures and to avoid
Production logging in horizontal wells is primarily damaged reservoir rock with the same vertical
water production zones. In addition, known water
used to determine a flow profile and any water permeability along the entire wellbore.
zones could be isolated between packers, flow
sources. These wells are normally completed
from high-permeability zones can be restricted by
in Saudi Arabia with barefoot open hole in the This theoretical model also assumes there are
ICDs, and many other strategic decisions can be
horizontal section or with a liner, packers and no shale sections, impermeable zones, faults or
made to improve field productivity.
Inflow Control Devices (ICD) (Fig.1). The ICD fractures crossing the wellbore and the horizontal
completion functions to control fluid entry rate wellbore does not cross different formations. In
If the horizontal well is producing some water, it
along the horizontal section or to isolate water addition, this model assumes there is minimum
is important to know the water source. Oil and
producing zones. pressure drop between the heel and toe.
water flow segregation by gravity when flowing
in horizontal sections of the wellbore has been
Horizontal wells are designed to maximize the To achieve the objective of determining a flow
extensively documented. Even if water does not
contact between the borehole and the reservoir profile and to quantify the productivity index
flow to the surface it can remain static within the
permeable zones. Thus, ideally the flow rate of each section of the well, multiple PLT logs
wellbore on the lower side. Stratified flow regime
increases linearly from the toe to the heel (Fig. 2). are acquired at different flow rates. An IPR plot
with the lighter oil flowing on top and heavier
26
water flowing on bottom is the most often Capacitance Array Tools
encountered flow regime at downhole conditions. The current fluid ID array tool type can be
Slugging and bubbling flow regimes are typical capacitance or resistivity. For Saudi Arabia
when the oil flow rate is low and are considered oil reservoirs, the capacitance hold-up array
unstable flow regimes (Fig. 3). tool has been used. In open hole logging a
dielectric tool typically operates at about 1 GHz
A bubble flow regime is characterized by high to properly distinguish between oil and water.
Figure 3. Oil-water flow regime in horizontal section.
fraction of water with oil bubbles flowing along A center sampling capacitance tool operates at
the upper side of the hole. The water fraction frequencies lower than 100 KHz, and they are
may be flowing or can be static (z4 in Fig. 3). If well known to be mostly a qualitative hold-up
the water fraction is not flowing, a mini-spinner measurement for multiphase production logging.
located in the low side of the hole will measure They clearly indicate oil entry in water continuous
zero rps. A mini spinner in the high side of the medium, but the response is not proportional
borehole would behave similar to a vertical to the fraction of oil entering the flow stream.
bubble flow regime. The oil bubbles impinging The response to water entry when oil is the
the small impeller vanes immersed predominantly continuous medium is reliable and when properly
in water will create an impeller response that calibrated can quantify the water-and-oil
would not represent accurately the velocity of the fractions of a water in oil emulsion.
oil bubbles. A distributed fluid ID sensor tool will
respond to only water in the lower sensors and to Despite the center-sample capacitance tool
alternate water and oil in the sensors located in Figure 4. Measurement coverage of circular limitation at high water hold-ups in vertical
the high side of the borehole. A center-sampling distributed array tools. wells, when these sensors are calibrated in
spinner will measure the water velocity and a “segregated” water, oil, and gas within the
center located fluid ID (Capacitance or Density) is not considered reliable. These regimes usually wellbore, they show very good repeatability.
tool will be immersed in water. occur at low to very low oil flow rates and In horizontal wells, where the “segregated
can make these cases the most challenging stratified flow regime” prevails, a circular array
As more oil is added into the wellbore (z3) a to evaluate. of capacitance sensors performs very well and
slugging flow regime would be present. Water with the added advantage of proper response to
in the lower side of the borehole may oscillate Circular Array tools are one type of multi-spinner water-in-oil emulsions as shown in case study #1.
in direction as the oil slugs flow intermittently and multi-fluid ID devices where the sensors Here, there is a water-in-oil emulsion flowing
along the high side of the hole. A mini-spinner are arranged in a circular distribution around the upwards along the high side of the hole with
located along the low side of the borehole will wellbore as depicted in Fig. 4. From left to right, static water at the low side of the hole.
measure an alternating positive and negative a 12-sensor array tool is first shown measuring
angular velocity pattern or simply will not turn the fluid at 7 vertical levels making repeat The mini-sensors response of a capacitance array
at all, depending on the impeller sensitivity and (redundant) measurements in the 5 intermediate device in a stratified flow regime is shown in
threshold velocity. vertical levels. The mini-sensor No. 1 (shown Fig. 5. The upper four mini-sensors are immersed
in red) is located at the high side of the hole, in oil, and the lower eight mini-sensors are
Additional oil influx will result in a stratified and the relative bearing (angular displacement immersed in water. A colour 2D map is used
flow regime (zone z2 and z1 in Fig. 3). If the measured in degrees referenced to the high to present the hold-up measurements, which
water is not flowing or flowing at a low side of the hole) is zero degrees. In the second
velocity, then a water re-circulation pattern sketch, 12 vertical levels are measured, and
will be established in the low side of the hole. this is the most frequent coverage that can be
A mini-spinner in the low side may respond to observed. The last diagram shows another case
this recirculation flow pattern depending on its where the tool position measures at 6 vertical
specific height in the borehole. A mini-spinner levels with full redundancy. A coverage plot
located in the upper portion of the hole will indicating the vertical levels sampled at each
measure the oil phase velocity. tool angular position is also presented. Note that
more often the multi-array tool is sampling 12
Multi-Sensor Array Devices vertical levels except at some particular angles
Multi-spinner devices and fluid identification when redundant measurements are made. Slow
array tools measure the phase velocities and tool rotation provides redundant measurements,
water-oil fraction at all depths within the logging which improves reliability of the measurements,
interval. They work well in stratified flow that particularly when the sensors alternate from one
dominates the cases in horizontal wells; however, fluid to another. The use of swivel joints in the
Figure 5. Capacitance array – borehole tool
in bubble or slug flow regimes their performance tool string slows down the tool rotation. position and hold-up map.
27
N ew - G e n e r a t i o n Array Tool De pl oyme nt Te ch niques
allows better visualization of the layers within required for proper measurements: each mini-
the stratified flow regime. From the 2D map at a spinner needs to be parallel to the tool axis,
particular depth a localised average water height the tool must be well centralized in the wellbore,
is calculated and an associated uncertainty. This, and tool movement should be smooth with a
in turn, is used to compute the water hold-up constant speed.
and uncertainty along the horizontal interval.
While the response of all the mini-sensors is very Deployment Techniques –
similar, a normalization process is used to make General Considerations
all sensors read the same in gas, oil and water. Currently E-Line Coiled Tubing (CT) and tractor
tools are used to deploy the PLT tools in
Since the mini-sensors are located 0.35 inches horizontal wells. Both methods have advantages
from the borehole wall, there is minimum water and disadvantages and several applications Figure 6. Dual mini-spinner array aligned to the
hold-up that can be resolved. It is important to have been documented2. The tractoring force is hold-up tool.
display the average water hold-up and associated applied through a special high-technology design
uncertainty which has some dependency on tool of the wheels; the operation of the tractor has 3. Run and discuss a pre-job deployment modeling
angular orientation (i.e., relative bearing). When been extensively documented2. Regardless of the software that can predict the involved forces
the 2D map shows that all sensors are immersed selected deployment methodology, it is essential and estimate if the CT or tractor can reach
in water, it is possible that there is some oil that every horizontal production-logging job TD. In the case of the well tractor, the cable
flowing along the high side of the borehole, have extensive pre-job planning, which typically weak point needed to come out of the hole
which bypasses the upper sensors. Conversely, requires several pre-job preparation meetings safely should be designed. In the case of CT,
when all sensors show oil, there may be some between the different parties involved. The the weak point must be designed based on the
water bypassing the tool along the low side of service company specialist for horizontal logging tool breaking strength. Plan for maximum tool
the borehole. involved in operations, quality control and data rigid length based on the dogleg and borehole
interpretation should attend these meetings. diameter at the specific depth.
It is well documented6 that very small changes We also recommend the use of the latest 4. Pre-job planning meeting(s) to review
in wellbore inclination, as small as 1° deviation developments in real-time operations and data deployment method, tool to be deployed,
from perfectly horizontal, dramatically change transmission to ensure integrity of the acquired and operation sequence. A risk assessment
the oil and water velocities and hold-ups. data in real time. is important considering the following: open
Therefore, in addition, to have accurate water or cased completion, directional survey with
hold-up measurements, it is essential to have Both deployment techniques have been used and clear definition of doglegs and wellbore
accurate well inclination and well-profile the choice is determined based on economic or diameter, mechanical completion of the well
measurements (ID) to obtain reliable logistical reasons; the following technical items including restrictions and special devices
flow profiles. should be considered: like Y-tool for downhole pumps, the latest
production information, presence of corrosive
Spinner Array Tools 1. If the horizontal section is extended reach and fluids including very saline water, well head
A multi-spinner array tool consists of 6 small CT may lock up prematurely even with the help pressure, and bottom hole temperature.
spinners arranged in a circular pattern similar of other mechanical or chemical means, then 5. Once the operational sequence is completed,
to the capacitance fluid ID array tool. Two the wireline tractor can be used to reach the perform safety and risk analysis defining focal
spinner array tools are stacked and aligned total depth (TD) points personnel.
to the hold-up array tool to provide 12-phase 2. If there is a requirement to nitrogen-lift the
velocity measurements (Fig. 6). In the case well fluids, then only CT can be used
study examples here, every mini-spinner has a 3. On an offshore platform where space and
corresponding mini-capacitance sensor aligned maximum weight are limited, a tractor is Integration of All Logs,
Mechanical, Production
Pre-Job Deployment
Planning Meeting where all
so that the fluid in which every mini-spinner is normally the best alternative and Reservoir Information
to define and achieve
information is reviewed
and a drag and torque
immersed is known at all depths. 4. If corrosive fluids are present, then probably objectives modeling software is used
(1) (2)
CT is the only choice, especially if there are
Since spinners respond differently in different large amounts of H2S
fluids, it is required to perform multiple passes
at different tool speeds in static oil and water to In general, both deployment techniques follow
calibrate the spinners. This is usually done with the same recommended planning process (Fig. 7): Complete and review data
acquisition program with all
the well in shut-in conditions. Once the spinners parties involved and define
Focal Point for proper and
are calibrated, each mini-spinner response can 1. Define the objective of the job effective communication
(3)
be converted to a phase velocity for oil or water, 2. Collect existing well data such as logs,
depending on which fluid the mini-spinner production history, drilling reports, well Figure 7. Horizontal well logging and tool
is immersed in. There are several conditions schematic and survey deployment planning process.
28
The risk of damaging the tool is much smaller
than CT. It is important to avoid running the
tractor above 50% maximum load to minimize
the risk of electric failure.
3. The equipment and personnel required for
using wireline tractor are much less than with
CT. The wireline tractor rig up operation is
as simple as adding a large sinker bar on the
string while rigging up 20 feet more lubricator
in average. The CT operation implies the
mobilization and rig up of special lubricators or
special deployment system (deployment bars),
special large BOP, a special large-capacity
crane, additional pumping truck and fluid
storage tanks without counting the personnel
that can exceed 25 people over maximum
6-8 people for tractor operations. In offshore
operations, the CT equipment load and size
could exceed the limit of the platform, while
tractor operation does not differ too much from
a standard wireline requirement.
4. While CT can run as fast as 60 ft/min, it is
recommended not to exceed 40 ft/min. The
wireline tractor will normally run passes
at line speeds between 20 and 40 ft/min,
Figure 8. Tractor deployment modeling and planning software; well mechanical description and depending on the wellbore conditions. CT
directional survey. allows log down and log up operations, but
it could induce a swabbing effect on the well
The most important input in the planning process the probabilities to retrieve the tool if proper
while going upward, it restricts production
is the CT or tractor deployment simulation procedures are followed are greater when CT
while logging downward. This depends on the
using specialized software. There are different is used because of the larger pulling and
tubing size compared with the CT size. Large
commercial packages available. One of the most maneuver capacity:
flow disturbances have been observed with
important simulation parameters, is the friction
a 2-in. OD CT running inside a 31⁄2-in. tubing
factor to be used, which varies from open hole 1. Both systems apply tension and compression
size. The same CT size created only small
to cased hole and other wellbore conditions. to the tool, but the forces over the tool are
flow disturbances inside 41⁄2-in. production
In the case of CT, the software will indicate the less and easier to control using the wireline
tubing. Tractors have the advantage of
maximum reaching depth before buckling and tractor. While tractor compression is limited to
creating smaller flow disturbance excepting
the typical pulling force considering drag. In the applied current and the grip of the wheels
for the tractor itself. Inside the tubing, the
the case of wireline tractor, the software will to the wall (normally 500 lb compression), the
tractor could act as a downhole choke, but in
indicate the maximum depth that can be reached compression applied with the CT can exceed
the larger-diameter horizontal section, there
with the specific cable used and the maximum several thousand pounds in a few seconds
should be much lower flow disturbance. New
overpull at TD to verify that it is within the safe when running in hole. Most of the compression
technology tractors allow “logging while
range for the cable. An actual planning case forces go into the coil as buckling and friction.
tractoring” or downward logging. This is a
(Fig. 8) shows how the tractor reaches the The larger forces observed at surface could
very important feature, because the tool is
minimum tension towards the TD of the well and mask the smaller forces applied to the more
running against the flow giving larger effective
the pull-out tension approaches the maximum fragile PL tool.
velocity on the spinners. Typically, in upward
permissible tension for the specific cable (50%). 2. CT requires continuous attention from the
passes, there would be some zones where the
operator and engineer to prevent large forces
line speed is similar to the fluid velocity. In
Each technique has advantages and on the tool, in 2-3 seconds up to 10,000 lb
these particular zones, the spinners will not
disadvantages, but most of them need to be compression or tension can be applied on the
respond proportionally to the fluid velocity. The
considered case by case since most of the CT at surface. In the case of wireline tractor,
acquired information then would not be useful
time the well conditions could force one of the it is important to keep constant tension on the
to quantify phase velocities, rendering an
choices with their own limitations and the risk line when running in hole to prevent damage of
incomplete flow profile.
needed to be balanced. Apparently, the tractor the wireline; the operating window is relatively
5. The wireline tractor has some hole size
presents large advantages over the CT, but small and also requires continuous attention.
limitations, depending on the production tubing
29
N ew - G e n e r a t i o n Array Tool De pl oyme nt Te ch niques
restrictions and open hole size. In some cases, internal pressure of the CT slightly higher than interval. The flow profile is generated from the
a 3.125-in. tractor was used to pass through the wellbore pressure. Standard wireline cable downward pass. The upward pass is used for well
3.625-in. restrictions, to log in 6.125-in. and 0.321-in. size has been used in Saudi Arabia stability assessment by observing the pressure
8.5-in. diameter horizontal open hole. tractor operations successfully, but in high- between the up and down passes, Fluid ID maps
Tractoring tools more than 5000 ft of horizontal percentage H2S environment it will be required and temperature repeatability. In addition, a
open hole section have been achieved. to use special steel material H2S 0.222-in. quality check is made for similarity of the spinner
Normally, the tool is gravity deployed until the cable; this cable has lower pulling capacity response in zones when a particular mini-spinner
65° deviation section of the well. The CT size and larger line resistance that limit the is immersed in the same fluid type.
has to be selected according to the tubing size capabilities of the wireline tractor operations.
and the completion restrictions. Larger CT is Larger wireline cables for H2S are not available Log Interpretation
preferred to reach farther, but it could create because they are normally very expensive and The objective of the interpretation is to obtain
large flow disturbances. It is important to plan require special manufacturing. a flow profile in open hole completions and in
the flow rates for a particular CT size, by using cased hole completions to verify ICD performance.
the proper simulators that take into account Data Acquisition Techniques The required input data to determine a flow
tubing size, open hole size, and the created Data acquisition techniques for horizontal wells profile includes water and oil hold ups (Yw, Yo),
flow disturbance. are an adaptation of standard production logging measured with the fluid ID array tool and phase
6. It is always recommended to have swivel and techniques. The typical horizontal PL tool string is velocities (Vw, Vo) measured with the mini-
a knuckle or flex joints in both operations, centralized for the array section and isolated from spinner array tool. The following formulas are
but while the wireline tractor applies limited the deployment tool (CT or wireline tractor) by used to compute the flow rates
compression to the tool, the CT can break the use of a set of flex joints, knuckle joints, and (Qw, Qo) (Eq. 1 & 2):
it in the weakest point, which is normally swivels subs.
the knuckle joints and centralizers. It is not Qo = 1.4ID 2VoYo (1)
recommended to use knuckle joints with CT, Doing multiple passes, which is routine in
excepting for a high-strength flex joint. The standard PL in long horizontal sections, is not as Qw = 1.4ID 2VwYw (2)
use of swivels is very important to isolate the effective as in vertical wells because the mini-
torque and buckling effects with the CT and spinners would not be in the same fluid at the Where:
minimize tool rotation with wireline tractor. same depth in the separate passes due to tool ID = Open hole borehole internal diameter or
The CT cable head has incorporated a swivel rotation. Since the mini-spinners are calibrated pipe ID in inches
joint. Tool tension and especially compression, with multiple up and down passes in segregated Vo = Oil phase velocity in ft/min
is monitored using a downhole tension- oil and water during shut-in conditions, only two Vw = Water phase velocities in ft/min
compression tool. This tool is set above all PL passes, an up and down at low logging speeds, Qo = Oil downhole flow rate in (B/d)
tools and should be monitored continuously for are done for each flow rate test. Typically, the Qw = Water downhole flow rates in (B/d)
excess compression while running in hole. well is flowing with an intermediate choke Yo = Oil hold-up
7. Cable slack management is very important in setting while the tool is conveyed down the Yw = Water hold-up
CT operations; normally around 2% excess production tubing to the heel of the horizontal
is pumped into the CT to minimize the section. Once the well is stabilized, two passes The basic model is shown in Fig. 9.
internal tension of the cable due to curvature are made down and up in a single descent at low
bending when running in hole. If proper slack line speed, typically 30 ft/min. The line speed Methodology
management is not performed, the cable will has to be slow due to the restrictions imposed There are two available methods to perform
be disconnected from the head while running by logging in an open hole completion and CT or flow rate computations. They are depicted in a
in hole, losing communication with the PLT. Tractor limitations. The stationary measurements simplified flowchart in Fig. 10.
This is not a problem with Tractor; instead the are performed during the upward pass to save
wireline tension needs to be controlled from operational time. The tool is then repositioned Both methods start with data preparation, which
the logging truck by slacking cable to allow the at the heel and a full choke test is performed includes file conversion and plotting the raw data
tractor running in hole free. following similar procedures described above.
8. It is important to consider during the design of
the job the H2S gas content and other corrosion The final step is the shut-in log. The well is
fluids that could be present in the wellbore. shut in for a short period to allow the fluid to
Depending on the H2S percentage, it will be segregate and log-down and log-up passes to
required to use either a special H2S cable be made. Then a horizontal section is selected
or corrosion-resistant CT. In the case of CT based on the shut-in log, where oil and water
logging, the cable is protected and corrosion are stagnant, to calibrate the mini-spinners and
affects the CT only. In H2S environments a the regular center spinners in both fluids. This is
corrosion inhibitor is recommended to be achieved by making multiple passes at different
pumped while running in hole, keeping the line speeds (typically 10 to 12) through this short Figure 9. Basic interpretation model.
30
Where:
I = Depth
J = Capacitance sensor number
CO(J) = Frequency of Jth sensor when
immersed in oil
CW(J) = Frequency of Jth sensor when
immersed in water
RACP(I,J) = Frequency of Jth sensor at
depth “I”
NCAP(I,J) = Normalized value of Jth sensor at
depth “I”
31
N ew - G e n e r a t i o n Array Tool De pl oyme nt Te ch niques
Vthphase+ = Threshold velocity for oil/water when the well is shut in and there are static
and for positive angular velocities segregated fluids representing clean water and
(ft/min) clean oil.
Vthphase- = Threshold velocity for oil/water
and for negative angular velocities
(ft/min)
33
N ew - G e n e r a t i o n Array Tool De pl oyme nt Te ch niques
34
Figure 16. Oil and water IPR plots.
This case history confirms the close relationship 3. Logging down is important to acquire proper
between flow profiles and the directional survey, flowing profiles as confirmed in the different
hold up, and fluid velocity previously documented cases studies. Acquiring production profiles
in multiple studies and papers. at different rates is important to have a
better understanding of the well performance
Conclusions through IPR plots and determine the different
1. Horizontal production logging requires inflow zones. It is important to have proper
an integrated approach from planning to selection of the flow rates. It is recommended Figure 17. Composite of logging up at 30 and
final delivery to meet the objectives. It is to acquire a minimum of two flow rates and a 50 ft/min using one choke and pressure
comparison showing the well unstable.
very important to consider the deployment shut-in pass.
methodology as part of the planning process 4. Temperature and pressure response analysis
and use simulators to estimate torque and in horizontal wells should be analyzed profiles in horizontal production loggings. The
forces when deploying the tools. Tool lifting independently of the production profile. ability of selecting sensors based on expected
forces should also be considered, given the Once there is a clear understanding of their downhole conditions using flow regime
large flow rates of several horizontal wells. response, they should integrate with the simulators is a challenge, and it presents
It is also important to use a flow regime flowing profile to have a more complete opportunities for development in the future.
multiphase simulator to assess the reliability understanding of the well behavior. 7. The study of emulsions should be considered
of the interpretation results. 5. The introduction of new sensors, deployment in the future for horizontal wells in addition
2. The introduction of array sensors and the methods, and interpretation techniques has to further studies of water in near-static
complete understanding of their response been positive in the evaluation of horizontal oscillating or recirculating conditions.
have improved the flow profile evaluation of well performance in Saudi Arabia. Different Measuring the net water flow when there is
horizontal wells but still new sensors need to flow patterns ,including stratified flow, recirculation is still a great challenge.
be developed to complement the ones currently confirm the unique performance nature of
used. The sensor distribution in the wellbore each horizontal well.
is important to maximize the investigation 6. The development and studies of flow regimes
of the different phases and velocities along profiles and data acquisition and interpretation
the wellbore, especially at the interface in techniques in horizontal production logging
stratified flow regime, or when fluids are still present challenges. The research and
not fully stratified in slugging and bubbling development of new sensors should continue
flow regimes. along with a better understanding of the flow
35
N ew - G e n e r a t i o n Array Tool De pl oyme nt Te ch niques
Authors
Ali Al-Belowi is the Supervisor Mohammed A. Al-Mudhhi is a Tarek El-Gammal is responsible
of the South Area Petrophysics Petroleum Engineering Specialist in for Halliburton Wireline and
unit in the Reservoir Description the Southern Area Petrophysics Unit Perforating Business Development
and Simulation Department for in the Reservoir Description and (Integrated Cased Hole Operations)
Saudi Aramco. He is responsible Simulation Department in Dhahran, in Saudi Arabia. He graduated from
for ensuring that open hole and Saudi Arabia. He joined Saudi the Higher Technological Institute-
cased hole logging programs are optimized, quality Aramco in 1978, and has 34 years of experience in Egypt in 1995 with a BSC in Mechanical Engineering
log data are acquired, and logs are analyzed on time various disciplines of the petroleum industry, including (Power Section), and has 17 years of experience in
utilizing fit-for-purpose petrophysics methods. He has Production Engineering, Reservoir Management and wireline logging operations and sales. He was awarded
done extensive work on petrophysical analysis in both Reservoir Description. Mohammed holds a BS degree the Halliburton WP Global Top Sales Award in 2010,
exploration and development fields. Ali has 22 years of in Petroleum Engineering from Tulsa University in and also received the UAE, SPE Award for Technical
experience in the industry, and he holds a BS degree in Oklahoma, and is a member of SPE. Support (Rigless Solutions - Adding Extra Barrels)
Petroleum Engineering from the King Saud University in 2011.
in Riyadh. Francisco Arevalo is the
Halliburton Wireline and Perforating
Mohamed Hashem is a Senior Formation Reservoir Solutions
Petroleum Engineering Consultant Manager in Iraq. Soon after
with Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi graduating from the Universidad
Arabia. He began his career in Nacional de Ingenieria (Lima-Peru)
1975 as a Production Engineer for with a degree in Electrical Engineering, he started his
GUPCO-AMOCO in Egypt and left career with Gearhart, which was later acquired by
the company as the head of the Wireline Department Halliburton. With 30 years of experience, Francisco has
to join Saudi Aramco as a Production Engineer in 1981. also worked in Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela and
Mohammed has a BS degree in Petroleum Engineering Iraq. He has authored several papers, and is a member
from Cairo University, and has authored several of SPE and SPWLA.
publications in well stimulation, scale mitigation,
LWD logging, wireline logging, production logging and
logging tools conveyance.
Nomenclature References
Salam, S.P., Al-Mubarak, H.K., Al-Malki, S., Al-Ajmi, A.M. 2003. Impact of
CO(J) Frequency of Jth sensor when immersed in oil Comprehensive Horizontal Well Production Logging and Testing Program in
CW(J) Frequency of Jth sensor when immersed in water Shaybah Field, Saudi Arabia. Saudi Aramco Journal of Technology (4)
I Depth Al-Buali, M.H., Dashash, A., El-Gammal, T., Arevalo, F., Torne, J.P. 2010.
ID Open hole borehole internal diameter or pipe ID in inches Intelligent Sensors for Evaluating Reservoir and Well Profiles in Horizontal
J Capacitance sensor number Wells: Saudi Arabia Case Histories. Paper SPE 137202 presented in
LSPD Line speed (ft/min) CURPEC, 21-23 October.
NCAP(I,J) Normalized value of Jth sensor at depth “I” Wang, J., Chace, D., Georgi, D., Maxit, J. 2000. Interpreting Spinner Response
Qo Oil downhole flow rate in (B/d) in Multiphase Bubble Flow. Paper SPE 63188 presented at the SPE Annual
Qw Water downhole flow rates in (B/d) Technical Conference and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, 1-4 October.
RACP(I,J) Frequency of Jth sensor at depth “I” Pilman, D., Skinner, T., Denton, R., Hansen, M., Torres, D. 2009. Cost
Slopephase- Slope for oil/water and for negative angular velocities Effective Reservoir Characterization, Utilizing Dielectric Logging
(rps/ft/min) Measurements, San Joaquin Basin, California. Paper SPE 124206
presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Slopephase+ Slope for oil/water and for positive angular velocities
Orleans, Louisiana, 4-7 October.
(rps/ft/min)
Vo Oil phase velocity in ft/min Wade, R.T., Cantrell, R.C., Poupon, A., Moulin, J. 1965. Production Logging-
The Key to Optimum Well Performance. Paper SPE 944-PA. Journal of
Vphase Oil or water phase velocity (ft/min)
Petroleum Technology 17 (2): 137-144.
Vthphase- Threshold velocity for oil/water and for negative angular
velocities (ft/min) Theron, B.E. and Unwin, T. 1996. Stratified Flow Model and Interpretation in
Horizontal Wells. Paper SPE 36560 presented at the SPE Annual Technical
Vthphase+ Threshold velocity for oil/water and for positive angular
Conference and Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 6-9 October.
velocities (ft/min)
Vw Water phase velocities in ft/min
36
h igh est-quA lity meA suremeNts with eNViroNmeNtA l c or r ec tioNs
or Memory Quad Combo for Through-Bit or The Natural Gamma Ray Measurement
A sodium iodide scintillation counter in the dual-
be deployed through drill pipe, below the bit. and shock absorber subs are used for latching 1000
Directional
Vertical
Other applications include new or re-entry slim in a special drillstring sub; these assemblies are 800
holes as small as 31⁄8-in. [7.94 cm] and barefoot currently undergoing assembly and testing. 600
completions, common throughout the Mideast 400
and other areas, where the logs can be used to In the past half-dozen years, much experience 200
monitor the reservoir or assess flood progression. has been gained in construction of a new full-size 0
quad combo string of nominal 35⁄8-in. [9.2-cm] Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Six original series tool strings have been deployed, diameter and a hostile environment quad combo 2009 2010 2011 2012
and six production series tool strings are under string at 31⁄8-in. [7.94-cm] diameter. For the new Sources: BHI, Spears
construction. Tools are rated at 14,000 psi 2.35-in. [5.97-cm] string, all this expertise has Figure 1. Spears and Associates, Inc. show the
[103 MPa] and 300°F [149°C]. The four sensor been brought to bear to construct the equipment breakdown of drilling activity by rig type, with
sections are depicted in Fig. 2, along with their and fully characterize the measurements to a most of the increase deriving from rigs outfitted
for horizontal drilling. This trend is expected to
dimensions and measure points. When run as a level equal to that of the other strings. The full
continue in the second half of 2011.
quad combo in a standard wireline configuration,
37
H i g h e s t - Q u a l i t y Me asure me nt s wit h Environmental Corr ec tions
these additives only affect the gamma ray The Neutron Porosity Measurement
response through their contribution to borehole The borehole potassium bias in Equation 2 is
represented by the product of the API units per The thermal neutron porosity measurement is
attenuation of formation gamma rays. However, made with a standard 15Ci Americium-Berylium
if the additives contain potassium, the formation weight percentage of potassium in the mud,
FKmud, and the weight percentage of potassium neutron source and 3He proportional counters
gamma ray signal will be biased by an additional deployed in a dual-detector array. The detectors
signal from the borehole. This borehole signal in the mud, WK.
38
response for water- and oil-based mud systems
is dependent on various parameters. Individual
corrections have been derived for water- and oil-
based mud systems weighted with either barite
or hematite; for oil-based mixtures, corrections
have been derived for diesel, mineral, olefin,
paraffin, and ester-based oil.
TABLE 1
Accuracy and Statistical Precision of Neutron, Density, and Photoelectric Measurements
Listed for Three Formations, Three Logging Speeds, and Two Processing Options
Measurement Bulk Density Pe Neutron
Principle Gamma Attenuation Neutron – Thermal Neutron
Range 1.0 to 3.1 gm/cc 0 to 20 -2 to 100 p.u.
Vertical Resolution (90%) Standard: 18 in. ( 46 cm) Standard: 19 in. (48 cm) 24 in. (standard), 12 in. (enhanced)
Enhanced: 9 in. (34 cm) Enhanced 9 in. (34 cm) 61 cm (standard), 30.5 cm (enhanced)
High Resolution: N/A High Resolution: 6 in. (15 cm)
Depth of Investigation (50%) 1.5 in. (3.81 cm) 0.5 in. (1.27 cm) 6 in. (15.2 cm)
Precision (1 SD) (g/cc) (p.u.)
ρ =2.60 gm/cc, Pe=5.0, φ =3 p.u. Standard* Enhanced # Standard* Enhanced # Standard Enhanced #
At 10 ft/min ± 0.007 ± 0.010 ± 0.08 ± 0.11 ± < 0.1 ± < 0.1
At 30 ft/min ± 0.010 ± 0.016 ± 0.12 ± 0.16 ± < 0.1 ± <0.1
At 60 ft/min ± 0.013 ± 0.021 ± 0.15 ± 0.21 ± < 0.1 ±< 0.1
ρ =2.20 gm/cc, Pe=3.5, φ =20 p.u. ± 0.006 ± 0.008 ± 0.05 ± 0.07 ± 0.3 ± 0.3
At 10 ft/min ± 0.008 ± 0.012 ± 0.07 ± 0.10 ± 0.6 ± 0.6
At 30 ft/min ± 0.010 ± 0.016 ± 0.09 ± 0.12 ± 0.9 ± 0.9
At 60 ft/min
± 0.005 ± 0.006 ± 0.03 ± 0.04 ± 3.0 ± 3.0
ρ =1.69 gm/cc, Pe=1.8, φ =60 p.u. ± 0.006 ± 0.009 ± 0.04 ± 0.05 ± 5.3 ± 5.3
At 10 ft/min ± 0.008 ± 0.011 ± 0.05 ± 0.06 ± 7.5 ± 7.5
At 30 ft/min
At 60 ft/min
Accuracy (with no standoff) ± 0.015 gm/cc +0.010* [Mud density ± 0.1 in light muds with Pe<5.5 ± 5% or ± 1 p.u., whichever is greater
(g/cc) – 1]
Primary Curves RHOB, DRHO, Pe, CORM, CORP, Caliper Neutron Porosity on Limestone (NPHL),
Sandstone (NPHS), and Dolomite (NPHD)
Matrix
Secondary Curves DPe , QLS, QSS, GR, Caliper, Standoff, Pad Extension (PCAL), Arm Extension Near-to-Far Detector Count Rate Ratio,
(ACAL), and Density Porosity (DPHI) Near-and-Far Detector Count Rates
* Measured using the standard 1.75 ft filter, # High axial resolution mode
40
pad housing to let gamma rays pass into the
detectors unimpeded. The collimators are plugged
at the pad’s surface with low-density windows
to prevent borehole fluids from entering the tool.
The window over the near detector is composed
of low-atomic-number materials, which facilitates
the passage of low-energy gamma rays that are
required to make a photoelectric Pe measurement.
41
H i g h e s t - Q u a l i t y Me asure me nt s wit h Environmental Corr ec tions
are used to compute density and Pe. Several [1.2, 1.5, and 1.9 g/cm3], and an 18.3-lbm/gal The Borehole Sonic Array Measurement
corrections are made to the count rates in [2.2-g/cm3] hematite mud. Accuracy of the density The piezoelectric sensor section of the UltraSlimTM
W1-W4 before they are used in computations. measurement for various standoffs is shown in borehole sonic array tool, or SBSAT, consists of
These account for dead time, pulse pile-up, Fig. 12 for marble and fused-silica formations. five receivers between two transmitters. The
background from the stabilization sources, (The fused silica formation is man-made from receivers are 0.5 ft [0.15 m] apart (see Fig. 2) and
streaming from the 1.78 Ci source, and small SiO2 and has a matrix density of 2.2 g/cm3. It are positioned to achieve transmitter-to-receiver
temperature drifts that arise from changes in has some porosity, so its density is similar to spacing from 3 to 5 ft [0.91 to 1.52 m]. The
detector resolutions. a 42-p.u. formation. The borehole is sealed to transmitters fire alternately 40 ms apart, with one
prevent borehole fluids from invading.) The errors pair of firings occurring in every 200-ms frame.
The tool is capable of measuring formation are larger for the marble formation, because the Waveforms are recorded in 4-μs sample intervals
density because the number of gamma rays contrast in density between the formation and with 512 samples per detector. At the standard
detected in windows 3 and 4 depend primarily on borehole fluid is larger than for the fused-silica wireline rate of 4 samples/ft, a logging speed of
the electron density of the formation. However, formation. The errors are minimal out to a quarter 75 ft/min is the fastest logging speed allowable
measured count rates in these windows also of an inch [0.6 cm], but become significant for the to achieve one pair of firings per depth sample.
depend on the photoelectric cross section of the marble formation at half an inch [1.3 cm]. Fortun- For metric depth units, the standard sample rate is
formation, as well as the binding energy of the ately, mudcakes are rarely thicker than 0.25 in. 25% larger at 10 samples/m, so a logging speed
electrons to their atoms and the cross section for
coherent scattering (Moake 2011). In addition,
in the presence of mudcake (or standoff), the
count rates are dependent on the density and Pe
of the mudcake, as well as the thickness of the
mudcake. Thus, the count rates have a strong
dependence on five different variables. Originally,
two-detector density tools were processed with
the spine-and-ribs technique, which is a two-
dimensional solution. That clearly is inadequate,
especially with the wide variety of muds in
use today. Consequently, the four-dimensional
solution developed by Moake (1991) is employed. Figure 12. Errors are shown at various standoffs for the density measurement in marble and fused silica
This works well for small standoffs, where the (similar to 42 p.u. sand) formations.
five variables can be combined into only four
independent variables, one of which is the The borehole correction was studied using of 30 m/min achieves exactly one pair of firings
formation density. Using this technique, windows marble, aluminum, quartzite, and magnesium per depth sample.
W2-W4 from each detector are combined to formations with five different diameters ranging
compute the formation density. An additional from 5.8 to 14 in. [14.7 to 35.6 cm]. The correction For this slim tool, there was a particular
correction to account for the borehole diameter increases with the density contrast between challenge in designing a transmitter that could be
and mud properties is still required, and it is the formation and mud, and it increases as accommodated in the 2.35-in. [5.97 cm] maximum
applied to the density computed with the four- the borehole diameter deviates from the 8-in. tool diameter. After extensive laboratory and
dimensional solution. diameter in which the tool was characterized. modeling work, it boiled down to a choice
The correction was found to correlate with the between two excellent transmitter designs, on
The Pe measurement is made using windows parameter vbh, which is defined as par with transmitters of the larger tools, with
W1 and W4, along with the measured density. center frequencies at 22 kHz and 28 kHz. In a
⎛ 1 1 ⎞
The technique, which is described elsewhere
vbh ≡ ( ρe − ρe _ mud )ρe ⎜ − ⎟ (3) large water tank, transmitter output of each
(Moake 2011), makes extensive use of computer ⎝ dbh 8 ⎠
modeling to derive a response equation that
works for a wide range of materials. In light muds where ρe is the electron density of the formation,
with good borehole contact, the measurement is ρe_mud is the electron density of the mud, and dbh
accurate from 0.1 to 15. is the diameter of the borehole. The correction
is plotted in Fig. 13 for all the muds and
The tool was characterized using six formations formations studied. The correction is less than
that ranged in density from 1.68 to 3.02 g/cm3, 0.02 g/cm3, which is very good, especially
as well as a water tank, which had a density of considering the limited space available for
1.00 g/cm3. The boreholes were filled with five shielding. The accuracy and statistical precision
different fluids: water, barite muds with of the density and Pe measurements are given Figure 13. Borehole correction for the density
weights of 10.0, 12.9, and 16.0 lbm/gal in Table 1. measurement.
42
Figure 14. Frequency distributions for two specimens each of two candidate detectors were determined
using hydrophones at a close spacing in a large water tank.
Figure 15. In the Odessa test well with fast
carbonate formations (left), the 28 kHz transmitter
model was recorded using hydrophones spaced slowness logs in the test wells, shown in Fig. 15,
(red) yields higher peak amplitudes. However, in
1 ft [0.3 m] from the source. This produced the but larger signal amplitudes in the slightly slower the somewhat slower sand-shale sequences in the
frequency distributions shown in Fig. 14. formations and the steady peak frequency seen in Ft. Worth test well (right), the 22 kHz transmitter
the receivers favor the 22 kHz transmitter. The (blue) yields higher peak amplitudes.
To choose the correct transmitter, it was decided 22 kHz transmitter was chosen for use in all tools.
uencies, the slope of the line is unity, which
to construct tool #1 with the 22 kHz transmitter
demonstrates a perfect correspondence between
and tool #2 with the 28 kHz transmitter and The Array Induction Measurement
the two measurements.
record some logs in a pair of Halliburton’s test The Slim Array Induction Tool (SACRt) is the
wells. The Odessa test well has fast carbonate latest member of the array induction family.
Log Examples
formations and the Ft. Worth test well has Its design follows the same methodology as
Fort Worth Test Well. Initial logging tests were
somewhat slower sand-shale sequences. Both previous arrays (standard-size ACRt and hostile
carried out in a test well located at Halliburton’s
transmitters enable the correct compressional environment HACRt) except that it is a thinner
Training Center in Ft. Worth, Texas. The well
tool to be compatible with the UltraSlim family of
was drilled with an 8.75-in. [22.2-cm] bit and
tools. It has the same array coil configuration and
Packets
9.2-lbm/gal [1.1-g/cm3] low-salinity mud. This
spacings, and works at the same frequencies as
4 samples per foot
Time to Depth WLI: T
43
H i g h e s t - Q u a l i t y Me asure me nt s wit h Environmental Corr ec tions
The interval includes a sandstone reservoir and a similarly affected by these minerals whose bulk
shaly carbonate together with neighboring shales. densities are greater than that of quartz.
A non-productive low-porosity shaly carbonate
occurs near the bottom of the interval from Summary and Conclusions
XX236 – XX190. The reservoir between XX146 A new quad combo suite of 2.35-in. [5.97-cm]
and XX080 is a Pennsylvanian Age complex- diameter logging tools and associated peripheral
mineralogy sandstone deposited in a deltaic equipment has been designed, constructed, and
environment that initially produces gas and deployed. The suite is designed to be conveyed
transitions to oil over time. The neutron-density in normal wireline operations or through drill
gas crossover that would normally be observed pipe. The full complement of sensor data can be
in a productive gas zone is suppressed in this telemetered to the surface via wireline or saved
example by the presence of auxiliary minerals in memory downhole. Battery and latching subs to
such as siderite, biotite, glauconite, and varying allow deployment at the BHA without a wireline
amounts of illite clay. The gas crossover is are being assembled and tested.
diminished because all of these minerals have
substantial neutron responses that increase the Tool design, algorithms, and software capabilities
apparent neutron porosity and the density log is are on par with standard-size equipment and a
Figure 18. The three deepest-reading slim tool
responses are comparable to the standard-size
tool responses for all three frequencies. Numbers
on the left refer to the array length.
44
new hostile suite. Each of the sensor sections has
accuracy and precision similar to its larger sibling.
In the case of the compressional slowness
measurement, the transmitter section provides an
improved signature over the full-size equivalent
tool. The full suite of environmental corrections is
available in real time.
Authors
Jerome Truax is the Halliburton patents related to conventional nuclear logging methods in the oil industry. He began his career in 1980 with
Petrophysics Technology Fellow and NMR logging applications. Jim is a member of the Gearhart Industries in Brazil, and has worked as a
and Manager of the Petrophysics Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts and field engineer and a technical manager. David moved
Technology Development group. the Society of Petroleum Engineers. to Texas and has held several positions within the
Jerry has a BS degree in geological organization, including director of training, technical
engineering (1978, University Gordon L. Moake is a Chief assistant to the vice president of operations, and
of Minnesota), an MA degree in oceanography Scientific Advisor for Formation research. He holds several patents and has authored
and limnology (1991, Western Connecticut State Evaluation in the Halliburton various papers in signal and image processing for the
University), and a PhD in petrophysics (1995, Delft Drilling and Evaluation division. logging industry. David holds an EE degree and an MSEE
Technical University), and has been with Halliburton His primary focus is the degree from the University of Madison, Wisconsin.
since 1998. His experience includes field operations, development of wireline and
engineering, research, and log interpretation in both LWD density and neutron-porosity tools, although Ron Cherry is the Halliburton Open
wireline and logging while drilling, mostly specializing he sometimes works on non-nuclear projects. Before Hole Strategic Business Manager.
in pulsed neutron logging technology and other nuclear joining Halliburton in 1984, he worked four years After receiving a BS degree in
applications. Jerry has written or contributed to a dozen at Baker Tubular, developing electromagnetic flaw electrical engineering from the
patents and many technical papers, and is a member of detectors. Gordon obtained BS degrees in math and in University of Tulsa in 1975, Ron
SPWLA and SPE. physics from the University of Wisconsin, and MS and joined Schlumberger Well Services
PhD (1979) degrees in physics from Purdue University. where he held various positions managing operations,
Jim Galford is a Chief Scientific A member of SPWLA and SPE, he holds 18 U.S. patents marketing, and technology. In 1994, he joined NUMAR
Advisor in the LWD and WL Sensor related to the oil and gas industry. and served as the general manager until the company
Physics group at Halliburton. was acquired by Halliburton in 1997. Ron has been
Previously, he worked on nuclear David Torres is the Resistivity responsible for new product developments associated
magnetic resonance (NMR) Global Product Champion for with NMR (MRIL products) for the last several years,
petrophysical applications and Halliburton. In this role, David is and is now responsible for all open hole logging
interpretation. He holds a BS degree in physics from responsible for overseeing the products and services.
West Virginia University. Jim has written several development, testing, and marketing
technical papers on various logging applications for of wireline resistivity logging. For
conventional nuclear and magnetic resonance imaging more than two decades, David has worked in various
logs. In addition, he has contributed to a number of management and research and development positions
45
H i g h e s t - Q u a l i t y Me asure me nt s wit h Environmental Corr ec tions
Authors, cont’d
Batakrishna Mandal is a Chief Arabinda Mishra is a Project Alberto Quintero is the Project
Scientific Advisor in the Sensor Manager in the Wireline and Development Manager at the
Physics group of Halliburton Perforating Technology group, Singapore Technology Center,
Wireline & Perforating. He holds a managing the development projects responsible for the development
BS degree in Physics from Calcutta for UltraSlim tools and the UltraSlim of new technology. He joined
University, India, an MS degree Conveyance and memory mode Halliburton as a Maintenance
in Exploration Geophysics from the Indian Institute of operation. Before starting his current role in April 2010, Engineer in 1984 and worked in several field operations
Technology and a PhD degree in Geophysics from Saint Arabinda held several positions on land and offshore, including Colombia, Ecuador, Sudan, Dubai, Turkey,
Louis University. He was a Postdoctoral Associate starting as a Field Engineer in 1991. He holds a Master’s Oman and Egypt. Alberto moved to Houston to work in
(1987-1989) and Research Scientist (1990-1993) at Degree (1983) in Engineering from the Indian Institute of the Technology Center in 1997 and then to the Electrical
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Since 1994, Technology at Kharagpur, India and has over 25 years of Engineering Development Group in 1998. During this
Bata has been involved with various developments of experience in the oil and gas industry. time, he obtained a patent for the development of the
acoustic and ultrasonic tools. He holds 26 patents, and ADSL Wireline Telemetry, used in the INSITE logging
has published more than 15 papers in referred journals, Luis San Martin is a Senior tools. He was also involved with the development of
and presented over 30 times at international meetings. Technical Professional Leader at several other tools, including, the ACRt, CAST-M and
Halliburton. He joined Halliburton in UltraSlim tools.
1998, after he received his PhD in
physics from the University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign. Luis works in
the Sensor Physics Group, where his main interest is in
electromagnetic instruments, both in modeling
and hardware.
Acknowledgements References
Deployment of the UltraSlim services and construction of this paper Belknap, W.B. et al. 1959. API Calibration Facility for Nuclear Logs. Amer.
owe much to the cadre of technicians working in the Tool Response and Petr. Inst. Drilling and Production Practice. 289-316.
Characterization (TRAC) lab at Halliburton’s facility in Houston. Tim Plasek Briesmeister, J. F., Editor. 2000. MCNP – A General Monte Carlo N-particle
is the manager of the lab, and full-time technicians Aldo Garcia and Shilo Transport Code, Version 4C. LA-13709M.
Black contributed to the work. They also supervised former Texas A&M Gadeken, L. et al. 2000. New Facilities for Characterizing and Validating
engineering students Dustin Durbin and Donald Durbin, who performed Logging Instrument Performance. Paper presented at the 41st Annual
SPWLA Logging Symposium, Dallas, Texas, 4-7 June.
much of the natural gamma ray measurements. The twin brothers were
so enthralled with the oil field that, after their graduation in May 2011, Galford, J.E. et al. 1988. Improved Environmental Corrections for
Compensated Neutron Logs. SPE Formation Evaluation 3 (2): 371-376.
they signed on with Halliburton in Duncan, Oklahoma. Finally, Sperry field
SPE 15540-PA
engineers and true professionals Tiko Davis and Terry Bossier helped us
Galford, J., Truax, J., and Moake, G.L. 2005. Borehole and Formation
out during a slack time in the Gulf of Mexico in late 2010 and early 2011.
Invasion Effects of Formate-Based Mud Systems on Nuclear Logs. Paper
presented at the 46th Annual SPWLA Logging Symposium, New Orleans,
Nomenclature Louisiana, 26-29 June.
GRc Gamma ray borehole absorption correction factor Moake, G.L. 1991. A New Approach to Determining Compensated Density
dbh Borehole diameter, inches and Pe Values with a Spectral-Density Tool. Paper 1991-Z presented at the
32nd Annual SPWLA Logging Symposium, Midland, Texas, 16-19 June.
FKmud Mud potassium gamma ray signal per K concentration unit,
API units/Wt. % K Moake, G.L. 2011. Using Computer Modeling to Generate Accurate Pe
Equations. Paper 2011-MMM presented at the 52nd Annual SPWLA
GRc Corrected gamma ray, API units
Logging Symposium, Colorado Springs, Colorado, 14-18 May.
GRu Uncorrected gamma ray, API units
W K Potassium concentration in the mud, Wt. % Spears and Associates, Inc. 2010. Drilling and Production Outlook 12
x Gamma ray borehole absorption parameter for gamma ray Xiao, J. et al. 2006. A New Asymmetrical Array Induction Logging Tool.
log corrections, g/cm2 Paper SPE 101930-MS presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, 24-27 September.
vbh Borehole parameter for density log correction, g2/(cm6-in.)
Pe Formation photoelectric value, unitless Wahl, J.S. 1983. Gamma Ray Logging. Geophysics 48 (11): 1536–1550.
ρe Formation electron density, g/cm3
ρe_mud Mud electron density, g/cm3
46
Dielec tr ic Logging Energized by “Cell Ph one” Tec h n ology
Evaluation Sensor and Its Applications measurements can be used to compute the
cementation exponent, m, through the use of the
47
D i e l e c t r i c L o g g i ng Ene rgiz e d by “ Ce l l P hone” Tech nology
~
• For frequencies up to approximately 100 KHz, equivalent resistivity R defined by: the desired properties (R, ε’) can be performed by
the imaginary term is 100 times greater than means of look-up tables. The complex dielectric
18 ⎛ 18 ⎞ R
the real part, meaning that the propagation of
= ⎜ + ε dl ⎟, ⇒ R = (4) constant of the formation is a function of these
the EM wave is dominated by the imaginary R ⎝ R
⎠ R two quantities; consequently, measuring the
1+ ε dl
part and the dielectric constants of the material 18 attenuation and phase shift experienced by a
do not play a significant role on its propagation. 1GHz EM wave enables us to determine the
Consequently, the conductivity of the formation Fig. 2 shows the relationship between the complex dielectric constant of a formation ε*for.
is most important at these frequencies. Modern true and equivalent resistivities, described by
and traditional induction and laterolog tools Equation 4, for water with different resistivities. 700
~ R=0.1 εr =90
operate at these frequencies. For low resistivity values R ≈ R and for large 600
R=0.2
R=0.15 εr =60
~ ~ R=0.3 εr =30
Phase (Deg)
400
100000 given by:
300
10000
R 18 200
~
Rmax lim 100
(5)
1000
R R dl 0
1 dl
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Attenuation (dB)
100 18
Figure 3. Relationship between attenuation
10 For example, in the case of fresh water, εdl = 3.7, (x axis) and phase shift (y axis) with respect to the
~
then Rmax= 4.86. material dielectric constant and its resistivity; pink
1 lines indicate lines of constant resistivity, and blue
103 106 109
In summary, Equations 1 and 3 show that an lines indicate the dielectric constant.
Frequency (hz)
EM wave propagating through a material will
Figure 1. Max ε’ (red dashed) for water. The be attenuated and experience a phase shift. Table 1 shows typical values ε’, ε’’ for common
change of the imaginary term of ε* with frequency At 1GHz, the amount of attenuation and phase materials encountered in formation evaluation.
and water of different resistivities. shift are functions of intrinsic properties of The dielectric constant for water is at least 10
the material, including its dielectric constant, times greater than the dielectric constant of any
• In the MHz range, depending upon the conductivity, and dielectric relaxation losses. other material. This means that at 1GHz, water
water resistivity and frequency, both the By measuring the attenuation and phase shift will be the dominant material in the behavior
real and imaginary parts can be important; experienced, it is possible to obtain Resistivity of the EM wave; consequently, the response of
consequently, both the dielectric and the R and the dielectric constant ε’ of the material. a tool working at this frequency will be mostly
conductivity of the material contribute to the At high resistivities, the relaxation dielectric influenced by the water content of the formation.
propagation of an EM wave. losses must be considered to obtain an accurate
• At 1 GHz, the relative importance of the R reading. TABLE 1
Dielectric constant for several materials
real and imaginary parts reverses. Now, the encountered in formation evaluation
dielectric constant of the material ε’ has a The relationship between (attenuation and
Material ε’ ε’’ (1GHz)
stronger influence in the complex dielectric phase shift) and (R and ε’) can be modeled and is
mapped in Fig. 3. These curves can be stored as Water (T, KPPM) fig 4 56 to 80 0.2 to 20
constant. Equation 2 becomes:
tables in a computer, and the mapping from the Air, Gas 1 0.0
* 18
' measured quantities (attenuation and phase) to
i dl (3) Oil 2.0 to 2.2 0.0
R Sandstone 4.65 0.1
48
ε*matrix = parameters whose values are local investigation and the minimum signal that can
εwater(Kppm, ˚F)
90
knowledge (see Table 1). be accurately measured, especially in highly
80
50˚F
100˚F
ε*HC = parameters whose values are local attenuating formations.
knowledge (see Table 1).
Dielectric Constant
70 150˚F
200˚F
60
250˚F
ε*mf = complex dielectric constant of mud
50
40
300˚F filtrate in the zone investigated by the
30 tool; as previously indicated, its value is
20 a function of temperature and salinity as
10 shown in Fig. 4.
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
ϕ = total formation porosity that can be
Water Salinity (Kppm) obtained by density/neutron tools.
Sx0 = water saturation of the flushed zone and Figure 5. Dielectric pad showing the location of
Figure 4. The dielectric constant of water as a can be obtained by solving equation 7: transmitters, receivers and temperature sensor.
function of its salinity and temperature.
Dielectric Constant
15
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth (in)
Resistivity (Ohm-m)
3 R from Sn
R from Sf
2 R from S
R Formation
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth (in)
Data Acquisition and Processing. The 2 tool • EM travel velocity (m/nanosecond) 0.9
consists of 2 transmitters and 3 receivers. The • Dielectric constant
data acquisition and processing is as follows: • Resistivity
ε =10, R=10
• Each time a transmitter is on, the electronics • Water porosity med 10, 10
far 10, 10
measure the in-phase and quadrature • Quality curve ε =25, R=1
med 25, 1
signals at each receiver with respect to 0
far 25, 1
the transmitter excitation. From these Vertical Resolution. Fig. 8 shows the response
0 2 4 6 8 10
measurements, the received amplitude (A) of the tool for a 2-in. thick bed. The dielectric and Radial Depth (in)
and phase (α) are obtained: resistivity obtained by the Sf and Sn signals read
its peak value, whereas the S signal does not. Figure 9. Integrated radial sensitivity response of
⎡ LR MR UR ⎤ ⎡ LR MR UR ⎤
⎢ ALT , ALT , ALT ⎢ α LT , α LT , α LT
Consequently, the vertical resolution of the tool the basic signals (transmitter to receivers).
⎥, ⎥
is more than 2 in.
⎢ AUT
⎣
LR
, AUT
MR
, AUT
UR ⎥
⎦
LR
⎢ αUT
⎣ , αUT
MR
, αUT
UR ⎥
⎦
Where the subscript refers to the transmitter, Fig. 9 shows the percentage of contribution
and the superscript indicates the receiver. to the total signal coming from a radial
distance from the face of the tool. The depth
• For each transmitter, a new set of signals is
of investigation changes drastically with the
obtained by taking the ratio of amplitudes of
formation characteristics; in essence, it changes
two receivers and their difference in phase. In
with the attenuation power of the formation.
this way, the new signals are independent of
For example, for a formation with ε’=10 and
transmitter output power or transmitter phase
R=10, 90% of the signal comes from a distance
(shown as dotted blue, pink, and yellow signals
of 7.5 in. for the Sn signal and from 8.5 in. for Figure 10. Radial depth of investigation of the
in Fig. 7).
the Sf signal. However, for a more attenuating differential signals.
• The signals from the two transmitters are formation (ε’= 25, R= 1) these values change
averaged to obtain the desired final outputs borehole rugosity and mudcake effects. In the
from 2.5 in. to 3 in.
(shown in solid blue, pink, and yellow in worst conditions, the 90% point is approximately
Fig. 7). These signals are compensated for 4 in.; consequently, the tool has a depth of
For the same conditions plotted in Fig. 9,
tool tilt, and will be referred to as Sf, Sn, investigation of more than 4 in.
the differential measurements have a radial
and S. The following outputs are available for behavior, as shown in Fig. 10. In the differential
these signals: Mudcake Effects. Fig. 11 shows that the tool is
measurements, the formation on front of the pad
• Attenuation (db/m) not very sensitive to mudcake up to thicknesses
does not contribute much to the total signal; this
• Phase shift of 0.3 in. Both the measured dielectric constant
creates a measurement that is less affected by
50
Mud Cake Effect (εt=10, Rt=10; εm=25, Rm=1 Ohm-m)
40
ε from Sn
35 ε from Sf
Dielectric Constant
30
ε from S
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Mud Cake Effect (in)
10
0.1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Mud Cake Effect (in)
51
D i e l e c t r i c L o g g i ng Ene rgiz e d by “ Ce l l P hone” Tech nology
Conclusions in the reservoir and compute water saturation depths of investigation with extended dynamic
The microwave formation evaluation tool when the formation water salinity is unknown or range and offers compensation for tool standoff,
measures the formation dielectric constant and has been altered. mudcake effects, and borehole rugosity. The tool
formation conductivity at 1GHz. The dielectric also measures the temperature of the formation,
constant measurement is used to calculate The tool has plurality of transmitters and which is critical for steam injection wells in which
water-filled porosity to differentiate the fluids receivers that enable measurements at varying the thermal gradients have been altered.
Authors
Michael Bittar is the Formation Gary Kainer works as a Program David Torres is the Resistivity
Evaluation Director for Halliburton’s Manager for Halliburton Wireline Global Product Champion for
Drilling and Evaluation Division. and Perforating Services. He joined Halliburton. He is responsible
Michael joined Halliburton through Halliburton in 1988 and worked as a for overseeing the development,
Sperry-Sun Drilling Services in 1990. field engineer before becoming the testing, and marketing of wireline
Throughout his career, Michael has technical operations leader in the resistivity logging. For more than
contributed to the advancement of logging-while-drilling Gulf of Mexico. Since joining the technology group in two decades, David has worked in various management
and wireline sensor technology and interpretation. 2002, he has managed several projects in the resistivity and research and development positions in the oil
Michael received his BS, MS, and PhD degrees in family, including the XRMI (Extended Range Micro industry. He began his career in 1980 with Gearhart
electrical engineering from the University of Houston Imager) and the OMRI (Oil Mud Reservoir Imager). He Industries in Brazil, and has worked as a field engineer
and has more than 70 patents and publications relating received an associate’s degree in electronics from Texas and a technical manager. David moved to Texas and has
to formation evaluation and downhole measurement. State Technical College in 1987. held several positions within the organization, including
Michael is a long-term member of the SPWLA and director of training, technical assistant to the vice
SPE and the recipient of the 2006 SPWLA Technical Ron Cherry is the Halliburton Open president of operations, and research. He holds several
Achievement Award. Hole Strategic Business Manager. patents and has authored various papers in signal and
After receiving a BS degree in image processing for the logging industry.
Jing Li is a Principal Scientist for electrical engineering from the
Halliburton’s Drilling and Evaluation University of Tulsa in 1975, Ron David McCoy is a Senior
Division. Jing joined Halliburton in joined Schlumberger Well Services Petrophysical Advisor for Occidental
2008. Before joining Halliburton, where he held various positions managing operations, Petroleum’s Vintage Production
he worked as a research scientist marketing, and technology. In 1994, he joined NUMAR California where he is responsible
in the well logging lab at the and served as the general manager until the company for formation evaluation in the
University of Houston. He received his BS, MS, and was acquired by Halliburton in 1997. Ron has been San Joaquin Basin. David joined
PhD in Electrical Engineering from Xidian University, responsible for new product developments associated Occidental Petroleum in 2004 as a petrophysicist to
Southwest Jiaotong University, and Xian Jiaotong with NMR (MRIL products) for the last several years, work in the Rocky Mountain Asset Team. In 2007, he
University, China, respectively. and is now responsible for all open hole logging transferred to California, where he worked for OXY Elk
products and services. Hills before coming to Vintage in 2009. Earlier in his
career, David worked for Phillips Petroleum and Amoco
in Houston as a petrophysicist and geologist.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of the Rau, R., Davies, R., Finke, M., Manning, M. 1991. Advances in High
development team and of all who were involved in the field testing. They Frequency Dielectric Logging. Presented at the SPWLA 32nd Annual
Logging Symposium, 16-19 June.
especially acknowledge the support of David Sandoval, who performed
the field testing of the tool. The authors would also like to thank Vintage Bittar, M.S., Rodney, P.F., Mack, S.G., Bartel, R.P. 1993. A Multiple-Depth-
of-Investigation Electromagnetic Wave Resistivity Sensor: Theory,
Production for permission to publish the data. Special thanks to the Experiment, and Field Test Results. SPE Formation Evaluation 8 (3): 171-176.
management of Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. for their full support of
Pilman, D., Skinner, T., Denton, R., Hansen, M., Torres, D. 2009. Cost
this project and for encouragement to publish this work.
Effective Reservoir Characterization, Utilizing Dielectric Logging
Measurements, San Joaquin Basin, California. Paper SPE 124206-MS
References presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New
Archie, G.E. 1952. The Electrical Resistivity Log as an Aid in Determining Orleans, Louisiana 4-7 October.
Some Reservoir Characteristics. In Petroleum Transactions of AIME 146: Hizem, M., Budan, H., Devillé, B., Faivre, O., Mossé, L., Simon, M. 2008.
54-62. Dielectric Dispersion: A New Wireline Petrophysical Measurement. Paper
Meador, R. A. and Cox, P. T. 1975. Dielectric Constant Logging, a Salinity SPE 116130-MS presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Independent Estimation of Formation Water Volume. Paper SPE 5504 Exhibition, Denver, Colorado, 21-24 September.
presented at the Society of Petroleum Engineers Conference, Dallas,
Texas, 28 September - 1 October.
52
Un d er s tand ing th e Pe Meas ur em en t
53
Un d e r s t and i n g t he Pe Me asure me nt
having the largest binding energies. Therefore, sudden decrease in cross sections for 40 keV and per electron. Furthermore, they reasoned that
the nearest electrons have the highest probability 50 keV photons around an atomic number of 60, because Pe is proportional to σp /Z, it, too, should
of absorbing a photon, although the photon as shown in Fig. 2. have those units. Unfortunately, they neglected
energy must be greater than the binding energy to consider that the proportionality constant also
of the electron. The electron is ejected from the had units. In fact, it is quite clear that Eq. 1 is
atom after absorbing the photon. unitless; it depends only on the atomic number of
the atom, which is unitless.
The photon energy also affects the probability
of absorption. The closer the photon energy is Pe for Molecules and Mixtures
to the binding energy, the less residual energy Eq. 1 applies only to elements. To derive the
there is after the absorption. Thus, less energy appropriate equation for molecules and mixtures,
must be transferred to the nucleus, making Bertozzi et al. argued that the ratio of count rates
the transfer easier. Consequently, the closer in a low-energy window to those in a high-energy
the photon energy is to the binding energy, the window should be proportional to the ratio of
Figure 2. Photoelectric absorption cross sections
greater the probability that the photon will be the macroscopic cross section for photoelectric
as a function of energy for 40 keV and
absorbed — as long as the photon energy is 50 keV photons. absorption to that for Compton scattering.
slightly greater than the binding energy. This is They then derived equations for molecules and
why the cross section for photoelectric absorption The Pe Concept mixtures, assuming that Pe is proportional to that
depends strongly on the energy of the photon and The Pe concept described by Bertozzi et al. (1981) ratio. This assumption ignores their definition
increases as the energy decreases, as indicated was intended to provide a measured quantity of Pe given in Eq. 1, and it assumes that Pe is
by Fig. 1. that would differentiate between different measured with a ratio of count rates. It also shifts
lithologies. They realized that different rocks are the definition from being based on atomic number
composed of different mixes of elements and that to being based on cross sections. However, they
photoelectric absorption varies significantly from then used an approximation for photoelectric
element to element. Thus, a measurement based cross sections that is based on atomic number.
on photoelectric absorption can differentiate The following paragraphs provide a more rigorous
between various rocks, such as calcite, quartz, derivation of their equations that clarifies the
and dolomite. required assumptions and does not rely on the
method with which Pe is measured.
Because photoelectric absorption of gamma rays
increases dramatically as their energy decreases, Definition of Pe. To derive the equations provided
the measurement must be made with low-energy by Bertozzi et al. for computing Pe of molecules
Figure 1. Photoelectric absorption cross sections
for silicon (Z=14) and calcium (Z=20). gamma rays. However, even the low-energy and mixtures, Pe must be defined differently
gamma rays are strongly influenced by Compton than in Eq. 1. According to Bertozzi et al., the
Larger atoms have more electrons, which scattering. Bertozzi et al. realized that by dividing photoelectric cross section for an atom in
contributes to an increase in the probability of count rates obtained for low-energy gamma sedimentary rocks is well approximated by
photoelectric absorption with atomic number. rays by those obtained for high-energy ones,
barns
In addition, the binding energies of the inner sensitivity to Compton scattering could be greatly σ p ( E ) ≈ 12.1 E −3.15Z 4.6 −3.15 (2)
electrons increase as the number of protons in reduced, so that the ratio depends primarily on (keV )
the nucleus increases, which also contributes to photoelectric absorption.
an increase in the probability of absorption with where σp (E) is the photoelectric cross section for
atomic number. Consequently, the cross section For simplicity, Bertozzi et al. defined Pe as a the atom and E is the energy of the photon. To
for photoelectric absorption increases rapidly function of the atomic number of the element (Z), honor both Eq. 2 and the desired Pe response of
with atomic number, as shown in Fig. 2. 3.6 Eq. 1, Pe is defined as
(
Pe ≡ Z 10 ) (1) −3.15
σ C (E) (keV ) ( )
Σp E
Electrons with binding energies that are greater Pe ≡ (3)
The value of 10 in the denominator gives the
than the photon energy are unlikely to absorb the
measurement a convenient range. Bertozzi et
12.1×10 3.6
E −3.15
barns ( )
ΣC E
photon because they cannot leave the atom, and
al. observed that the photoelectric absorption
the atom is unlikely to have a vacant orbit with a where ΣP(E) and ΣC(E) are the macroscopic
cross section (σp) for most atoms in formations
binding energy that exactly matches the energy cross sections for photoelectric absorption
is approximately proportional to Z4.6, so Pe as
that the electron would have if it absorbed the and Compton scattering, respectively. σC(E)
defined in Eq. 1 is proportional to σp /Z. Since
photon. That is why the photoelectric absorption is the Compton cross section for an individual
cross sections are often quoted in units of
dependence on atomic number sharply decreases electron. Note that these cross sections depend
barns and there are Z electrons in the atom,
when binding energies begin to exceed the on the energy, E, of the gamma ray. This
they reasoned that σp /Z has units of barns
photon energy. The effect is illustrated by the equation merely states that for a given energy,
54
Pe is proportional to the ratio of the macroscopic NA is Avogadro’s number, vi and ρi are the
photoelectric cross section to the macroscopic volume fraction and bulk density of the ith
Compton cross section. With this definition, Pe is compound, and σi and Ai are the cross section
clearly unitless. and atomic mass of the molecule composing the
ith compound. Using Eq. 9 in Eq. 3 gives
Pe for an Element. For materials composed of a
vi ρiσp, i ( E )
single element, the ratio of macroscopic cross σ C (E)
−3.15 ∑
Pe =
(keV ) i Ai
(10)
sections is the same as the ratio of atomic cross
sections. Using that fact and ZσC for the cross
12.1×103.6 E −3.15 barns
∑
( vi ρi Ziσ C ( E ) )
i Ai
section of the atom, Eq. 3 becomes
−3.15 Using the approximation of Eq. 6, Eq. 10 becomes Figure 3. Percent error in the approximation for
σ C (E) (keV ) σ p (E) the photoelectric absorption cross section given in
Pe = (4) vi ρi Zi Pe,i Eq. 2 as a function of atomic number.
12.1×103.6 E −3.15 barns Zσ C E ( ) ∑ Ai
Pe ≈ i
(11) atomic numbers less than 24 could have errors on
Using Eq. 2 to approximate σp, one obtains vρZ
∑ i Ai i the order of 5%. Materials that contain elements
3.6 i i with atomic numbers greater than 30 could
(
Pe ≈ Z 10 ) (5)
experience very large errors.
where Pe,i represents Pe of the molecules in the ith
which is the same as Eq. 1, except that it is now compound of the mixture.
Measuring Pe
clear that the equation is an approximation for Pe
Ratio Processing. Bertozzi et al. proposed
and not its definition. It is common to define electron density (ρe) as
measuring Pe by measuring energy spectra in a
2Z detector and dividing the spectra into discrete
For convenience in the following derivations, ρe ≡ ρ (12)
A energy windows. One window covered the
Eq. 5 can be inserted into Eq. 2 to yield the
high-energy portion of spectra (called hard), and
approximation Using Eq. 12 in Eq. 11 yields
another covered the low-energy portion (called
barns soft). They proposed computing Pe from the count
σ p ( E ) ≈ 12.1×103.6 E −3.15ZPe −3.15
(6) ∑v ρ P i e,i e,i
(keV ) P ≈ i rates in those windows using
e (13)
∑v ρ i e,i CS A
i = (14)
Pe for a Molecule. For materials composed of a C H 1+ α Pe + β Pe2
single molecule, the ratio of macroscopic cross which is a generalization of the equation Bertozzi
where CS and CH are count rates from the
sections is the same as the ratio of molecular et al. obtained for two compounds, although
soft and hard windows, respectively, and A,
cross sections. For a molecule that has ni atoms it is now clear that this equation is only an
α, and β are constants. In practice, the first
for element i, Eq. 3 becomes approximation.
implementation of the measurement omitted the
σ C (E) (keV )
−3.15
∑n σ ( E) i p,i
The equations obtained for Pe are all independent
second-order term in the denominator (Ellis et al.
Pe = i
(7) 1983). One flaw in this equation is that it lacks a
12.1×103.6 E −3.15 barns ∑n Z σ ( E)
i i C of the energy of the gamma ray. Thus, the
i density term.
concept is valid if the measurement is made using
where σp,i is photoelectric cross section for a range of gamma-ray energies, as long as the
Computing Pe from a ratio has two advantages. It
element i, and Zi is the atomic number of element approximation in Eq. 2 is valid.
reduces sensitivity to Compton scattering, and it
i. Using Eq. 6, this becomes
reduces sensitivity to standoff effects. However,
Limitations of the Pe Concept. Eq. 5, Eq. 8, and
∑n Z P i i e,i
Eq. 13 are the equations used by the industry to
neither dependence is completely canceled.
P ≈ i
(8) Standoff effects can be well compensated in light
e
∑n Z compute Pe. They all hinge upon the validity of
i i
mud, but small amounts of standoff in barite mud
i the approximation given in Eq. 2. Fig. 3 shows the
can overwhelm the measurement. Nor will the
where Pe,i is the Pe of element i. This is the exact accuracy of that approximation; the percent error
ratio completely cancel Compton effects, because
equation given by Bertozzi et al., except that it is in the approximation is plotted vs. the atomic
Compton cross sections for high-energy gamma
now clear that it is only an approximation. number for the photon energies that typically
rays are different from those for low-energy
span a Pe measurement.
gamma rays. Consequently, Pe measurements that
Pe for a Mixture. The macroscopic cross section for
do not account for density effects tend to have
a mixture of compounds, where each compound is Although errors for atomic numbers less than six
significant errors in formations with densities
a collection of identical molecules, is given by are large, they generally have a negligible effect
significantly different from those used to calibrate
on the Pe of most formations or muds. That is
vi ρiσ i because their contributions to Pe are themselves
the measurement.
Σ = N A∑ (9)
i Ai negligible. Materials composed of atoms with
55
Un d e r s t and i n g t he Pe Me asure me nt
Logarithmic Processing. An alternative to ratio Pe, the measurement is limited in its ability to
processing relates the count rate of a given isolate photoelectric effects. That is because
window to the density of the formation and there are other interactions at low energies
a lithology term (L) that is computed from that are comparable in strength to photoelectric
photoelectric and Compton cross sections (Moake absorption and depend on atomic number.
1991). The relationship for any window can be Coherent scattering, in which photons scatter off
approximated by of more than one electron at a time, has larger
cross sections than photoelectric absorption for
lnC = a0 + a1ρ + a2 ρ 2 + a3ρ 3 + a4 L + b1x1 + b2 x2 (15)
light nuclei. Also, incoherent scattering is not
where C is the count rate in the window, really Compton scattering, which assumes that
x1 is related to standoff and the density contrast the electron is free. Because the electrons are
between the formation and mud, and x2 is related actually bound to an atom, the binding energy Figure 4. Ratio of the coherent scattering cross
to standoff and the L contrast between the affects incoherent scattering cross sections. section to the photoelectric cross section and
ratio of binding-energy corrections to incoherent
formation and mud. This approach clearly handles Fig. 4 shows the relative magnitude of these
scattering to the photoelectric cross section
the density dependence of the measurement. effects. Unfortunately, there is no way to plotted vs. atomic number for 60 keV photons.
L can be computed from the equation for the differentiate these effects from photoelectric
low-energy window and then converted to Pe. x1 absorption, so any Pe value computed from tool it is necessary to count over a time span in which
and x2 are computed from the density correction measurements will not agree perfectly with the a trillion or more gamma rays are generated
and known mud parameters. A variation of this Pe value predicted from the equations typically by the source. Unfortunately, even modern
approach combines the logarithms of the hard used in the industry. Some of the error will be computers are not fast enough to track that many
and soft windows to reduce the x1 dependence. calibrated out, but there will always be residual particles in a reasonable amount of time, so
The simple dependence on L in Eq. 15 was error associated with the measurement. mathematical methods have been developed to
determined experimentally with a handful speed up the process. These methods are called
of density standards. Although elegant, the Which detector is best for measuring Pe? In variance reduction, and many different methods
modeling in this study indicates that it is principle, either the near or far detector could of variance reduction are available. Part of the art
not exact. be used to measure Pe. Photoelectric absorption of modeling is choosing the best methods for the
mainly affects low-energy photons. Most of problem at hand.
What is the best way to compute Pe? It seems the gamma rays that eventually reach the
best to combine the count rates from the low- detectors do not reach low enough energies to Two different versions of MCNP were used in
energy and high-energy windows to reduce be significantly affected until they are near the the study. Modeling for the first tool considered
standoff effects as much as possible. Combining detectors. Thus, the depth of investigation of the was performed with MCNP4, which could not
logarithms provides more control in canceling Pe measurement is shallow and approximately generate energy spectra while using variance
standoff effects than a ratio because the two the same for both detectors. The tool reported by reduction. Consequently, the energy and angle
windows can be weighted differently. However, Ellis et al. measured Pe using the detector farthest of incidence of the gamma rays that entered
in practice, the weighting tends to be close to from the source. However, the wide collimation the detector were stored. A separate program,
one-to-one, which is equivalent to using the that is typically used with a far detector makes GAMRES, was then used to estimate an energy
logarithm of the ratio. In principle, an equation the measurement overly sensitive to the borehole, spectrum for the detector from the stored
that accurately relates the ratio to Pe will so the near detector can provide a better information. Modeling for the other tools used
have comparable sensitivity to standoff as an measurement (Moake and Schultz 1987). Also, MCNP5 version 1.51, which could generate
equation that accurately relates the logarithm the near detector usually has a higher counting spectra while using variance reduction.
of the ratio to Pe. Thus, it makes little practical rate, which translates to better statistical
difference which technique is used. Because Pe precision. Thus, the near detector is usually a Calibrating the model. Although the model
is most commonly computed from a ratio, that better choice for the measurement. successfully emulated the tool response, there
combination is used in this study. are unknowns and approximations made in the
Deriving a Response Equation tool geometry that cause small deviations from
Bertozzi et al. used the ratio of low-energy to with Modeling the response of a physical tool. There are also
high-energy count rates to compute Pe, and About the Model. Modeling was performed using variations in physical tools from their nominal
others have used the inverse of that ratio the program MCNP, which was developed at Los design. Thus, it was necessary to calibrate the
(Schultz 1985). The difference is academic. The Alamos specifically for nuclear modeling. The model so that it would give the same results
critical part of the problem is to determine an model emulates nature by tracking each particle as a physical tool. It was calibrated to match
equation that accurately converts the ratio to Pe. that is generated by a source. Each interaction experimental data that was used to develop the
That is accomplished in the next section. is selected randomly in such a manner as to original density and Pe equations for the tool.
reproduce, on average, the cross sections of Thus, equations developed with the modeled data
Limitations of the measurement. In addition to the the elements involved. To obtain statistically can be directly inserted into logging software.
approximations used in the equations to compute significant measurements with a physical tool,
56
The initial study was performed with the LOGIQ® standards. Except for the magnesium point,
version of the Halliburton Spectral Density Log a linear mapping of the modeling does an
Tool (SDLT-IQTM). Fig. 5 shows a typical spectrum excellent job of reproducing the measured
from the near detector. A 662 keV peak at the values. The blue line is a linear fit to the other
far right side of the spectrum comes from a data points. The deviation of the magnesium
small source near the detector that is used to point is probably attributable to the uncertainty
maintain a constant gain in the system. The four in the zinc content of the magnesium alloy that
colored regions of the spectrum signify the energy was used in the model, which has a large effect
windows that are used in computing density and on the photoelectric absorption. The magnesium
Pe. Pe is computed from the ratio of W4 to W1. point is more consistent in the high-energy
window, W4, as shown in Fig. 7. Because Figure 7. Calibration data for the high-energy
As part of the normal tool processing, a variety of photoelectric absorption is much less important window of the near detector of the SDLT-IQ.
modifications are applied to the measured data. for high-energy gamma rays, uncertainty in the
First, they are corrected for dead time and pulse zinc content is less important. The second part of the study determined the
pile-up. Then background from the stabilization relationship between the density-corrected ratios
source is subtracted. The corrected count rates To calibrate the high-energy count rates, a linear and Pe. The formations chosen for this study were
should be equivalent to the modeled data. All of transform was applied to logarithms of the W4 those of most importance to reservoirs: calcite,
the measured data plotted in this paper have had count rates using the solid line shown in Fig. 7. dolomite, and silica. Porosities of 0, 20, and
those corrections applied. Good elemental analysis existed for the marble 40 p.u. were used for each rock. Water was used
and quartzite standards, their impurities were to extend the low-Pe region. Other materials
The tool used NaI detectors, which convert small, the two standards span a large portion were also chosen to study the accuracy of the
gamma rays to light pulses in a non-linear fashion. of the normal Pe range, and they are the most Pe measurement. Table 1 provides the full
Consequently, the energy thresholds of the relevant standards to logging. Consequently, list of materials. The densities used for these
windows shown in Fig. 5 are not exactly where these were the only standards used to calibrate formations were the natural densities.
they appear to be. It was necessary to account the low-energy window. To calibrate W1, a linear
for this non-linearity before comparing to data transform was applied to the logarithm of its Extracting Equations from the Data. Fig. 8
computed with the model. count rates such that the ratio of calibrated W4 to plots Pe against the ratio of high-energy to low-
calibrated W1 was identical to the measured ratio energy count rates for the materials in Table 1.
Fig. 6 illustrates the relationship between the for those standards. All ratios in this paper were This clearly shows that a good Pe value cannot
logarithm of the measured count rates and computed from calibrated count rates. be obtained from the ratio alone, even at low
those of the modeled count rates for various Pe values.
Choosing the Formations to Model. The beauty
of computer modeling is that a wide variety of
formations can be studied, including those that
are not physically possible. To take advantage
of this, the modeling study was divided into two
parts. First, eight materials with a wide range of
Pe were selected, and formations were created
for each material. The materials were calcite,
dolomite, quartz, water, siderite, 40 p.u. calcite
filled with water, 40 p.u. dolomite filled with
Figure 5. Near-detector spectrum from SDLT-IQ. water, and 0.9(CaCO3)•0.1(FeCO3). Computations
for six formations were made for each material Figure 8. Plot of Pe vs. the ratio of high-energy to
using densities of 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, and low-energy count rates for the SDLT-IQ.
5.0 g/cc for the formations. The analysis was
performed in electron density. Because the Fig. 9 shows plots of ratios computed for
difference between electron density and bulk 2.5 g/cc formations vs. the ratios computed for
density is very small for all of the materials except the same materials with a different density.
water, the bulk densities were set at those listed The relationships are all linear. A convenient
above with one exception. The bulk density of way to remove density effects is to choose a
water was selected so that the electron density specific density to be the standard density, and
was equal to the listed values. The resultant then determine the ratio-to-Pe transform for that
modeling data was then used to determine the density. Ratios measured for other densities
Figure 6. Calibration data for the low-energy density dependence of the measurement. must be converted to the ratio that would be
window of the near detector of the SDLT-IQ. obtained at the standard density before Pe can be
57
Un d e r s t and i n g t he Pe Me asure me nt
58
Accuracy of the Measurement experiment or modeling. For example, the Pe
As explained in the “Derivation of Mixing measurement could be used to help quantify
Equations” section, the equations used to the amount of invasion that exists with cesium
compute Pe have errors associated with them. formate mud (Berg et al. 2007), because cesium
In addition, as explained in the “Measuring Pe” has a very large photoelectric cross section.
section, the measurement itself cannot isolate
photoelectric absorption effects from coherent Log Examples
scattering and binding-energy effects. In practice, The following log examples compare the new Pe
the calibration of the tool and the choice of algorithm to the existing one in several different
response equation minimizes these errors for lithologies. The existing algorithm was based on
the most important formations. To understand experimental measurements in density standards.
Figure 11. Plot of Pe vs. the ratio corresponding
to a 2.5 g/cc formation for the materials listed in the magnitude of the residual errors, a wide The standards included relatively pure quartz
Table 1. range of formations were modeled. Fig. 14 and relatively pure calcite, both with very low
shows the results for the normal logging range porosity. A dolomite standard was available,
of 0 to 5.1. Unusual formations are listed in but it was far from pure. Elemental analysis of
order of increasing Pe. Silicon exhibits the the standards was available and used to assign
largest error, 0.17. Pe values to the standards. Nevertheless, the
dolomite standard was only used as a check on
As expected, Pe errors become larger at the algorithm because the accuracy of the Pe
higher Pe values, as shown in Fig. 11. Clearly, value assigned to it was dubious.
Pe measurements will not be very useful for
distinguishing between unknown materials that Fig. 15 is a log from a test well in Fort Worth,
have Pe values greater than 15. Nevertheless, Texas. Density porosity and neutron porosity
it should be possible to use it to determine the are plotted in track 3 on a sandstone matrix.
amount of mixing of two known materials that They do not quite overlay in the sand bed
Figure 12. Plot of Pe vs. the ratio corresponding to have very different Pe values. However, the between 1,460 and 1,480 ft, indicating that the
a 2.5 g/cc formation for select materials.
expected Pe values could not be computed from bed contains some shale. The new Pe curve
atomic numbers; they must be determined from described in this paper is plotted with the
electron out of an inner orbit of the tungsten and previous Pe curve (labeled old) in track 2 on an
another electron falls into the vacancy. They can expanded scale. They agree very well in the sand,
be generated by any gamma ray greater than reading about 2.2, which is reasonable for a shaly
70 keV. Most of the x-rays generated in this sand. The bottom portion of the interval is shale.
fashion will be blocked by the tungsten, but In that interval, the new Pe reads approximately
many of those generated near the collimator can 0.2 less than the previous algorithm.
enter the detector without passing through much
tungsten. The magnitude of this effect will vary Fig. 16 shows a log example in carbonates,
with the collimator design. obtained in a Midland, Texas, test well. In this
case, density and neutron porosity curves are
Muting the Response. The response equation plotted on a limestone matrix in track 3. They
becomes more aggressive at larger ratios to overlay very well at depths below 5,230 ft,
account for the tungsten x-rays just described. Figure 13. Plot showing the effect of muting the Pe indicating a clean limestone. The two Pe curves,
That aggressiveness was not present when the response curve.
which are plotted on an unusual expanded scale,
algorithm was determined solely from Pe values agree very well when they are above 4.5. They
less than 5.1. A side effect is that the new read between 4.8 and 5.0 below 5,230 ft, where
algorithm is more sensitive to barite mudcake the porosity reads between 5 and 8 p.u. The
or standoff in barite muds. (The barium in barite theoretical Pe of clean limestone in that range
has an extremely large photoelectric absorption is 4.9 to 5.0.
cross section.) To minimize this sensitivity, the
Pe measurement is muted for values above 5.1, Fig. 17 shows another log example from the
using the equation Midland test well. The porosity curves are plotted
(
Pe,muted = 5.1+ 0.5 Pe − 5.1 ) (19) on a dolomite matrix in this case. The porosity
curves are very close in the intervals 4,710 to
Fig. 13 shows the effect of the muting. Logging 4,725 ft and 4,765 to 4,795 ft, indicating that
software includes an option to provide the these intervals are primarily dolomite. The
Figure 14. Accuracy of the Pe response curve for
unmuted value when needed. both normal reservoir rock and unusual materials. Pe curves, which are plotted on an expanded
59
Un d e r s t and i n g t he Pe Me asure me nt
Modeling the HDNT. The high-energy to low- Figure 18. Plots of the ratio of high-energy to low-
energy ratio computed for 2.5 g/cc formations is energy count rates for the HDNT. The x-axis is the
plotted against the corresponding ratios computed ratio for the density stated, and the y-axis is the
corresponding ratio in a 2.5 g/cc formation.
for formations with the same material but
different densities in Fig. 18. Formation materials
of water, quartz, dolomite, calcite, siderite, and
0.9(CaCO3)•0.1(FeCO3) were modeled. Unlike the
case for the SDLT-IQ, the mapping is not quite
linear across the entire range of ratios. However, a
good linear mapping can be obtained if the siderite
point is ignored, which is what was done. The solid
lines in Fig. 18 represent the resultant mappings. Figure 19. Plot of the offset values (a0) and slopes
The small errors in the density correction that result (a1) obtained for the transforms plotted in Fig. 18.
Figure 16. Log example illustrating a limestone from this approximations will affect only large Pe
bed. Porosity is plotted on a limestone matrix. values, and most of those errors will be removed
when the ratio-to-Pe transform is determined.
60
and marble. In this case, the experimental ratio was systematically studied. As expected,
water point was used rather than the modeled there is a significant density dependence. The
water point because there was a significant ratio can be corrected for density by mapping
difference between the two. The difference it to the ratio that would be expected if the
may be attributable to imperfect dead-time formation had a density of 2.5 g/cc. Although
and pulse-pile-up corrections, which are large the mapping equation is simple, the parameters
for the water point. The choice of water point of the equation vary with the true density of the
does not significantly affect the mapping of the formation. Consequently, six parameters are
other formations. required to describe the density correction.
61
Un d e r s t and i n g t he Pe Me asure me nt
causes the algorithm to read much larger values it agrees very well with the previous algorithm
when barite mud is present. To present a more in sand and limestone, but reads approximately
normal log, the standard Pe curve is muted above 0.2 lower in dolomite. This is not surprising.
5.1. However, an option exists to provide the The previous algorithm was characterized in
unmuted value. good quartz and calcite formations, but a good
dolomite formation was not available. This result
Log examples showed that the new algorithm underscores the need for modeling in determining
provides reasonable results in sandstone, a Pe algorithm.
dolomite, and limestone. They also showed that
Author
Gordon L. Moake is a Chief
Scientific Advisor for Formation
Evaluation in the Halliburton
Drilling and Evaluation division.
His primary focus is the
development of wireline and
LWD density and neutron-porosity tools, although
he sometimes works on non-nuclear projects. Before
joining Halliburton in 1984, he worked four years
at Baker Tubular, developing electromagnetic flaw
detectors. Gordon obtained BS degrees in math and in
physics from the University of Wisconsin, and MS and
PhD (1979) degrees in physics from Purdue University.
A member of SPWLA and SPE, he holds 18 U.S. patents
related to the oil and gas industry.
References
Berg, P.C., Pedersen, E.S., Lauritsen, A., Behjat, N., Hagerup-Jenssen, S., Moake, G.L. and Schultz, W.E. 1987. Improved Density-Log Lithology
Howard, S., Olsvik, G., Downs, J.D., Harris, M., Turner, J. 2007. Drilling, Identification Using a Borehole-Compensated Photoelectric Factor.
Completion, and Openhole Formation Evaluation of High-Angle Wells in Paper 1987-FF presented at the SPWLA 28th Annual Logging Symposium.
High-Density Cesium Formate Brine: the Kvitebjorn Experience, 2004-2006. Moake, G.L. 1991. A New Approach to Determining Compensated Density
Paper SPE/IADC 105733 presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, and Pe Values with a Spectral-Density Tool. Paper 1991-Z presented at the
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 20-22 February. 32nd Annual SPWLA Logging Symposium, Midland, Texas, 16-19 June.
Bertozzi, W., Ellis, D.V., Wahl, J.S. 1981. The Physical Foundation of Schultz, W.E. et al. 1985. Dual-Detector Lithology Measurements with a
Formation Lithology Logging with Gamma Rays. Geophysics 46 (10): New Spectral Density Log. Paper 1985-DDD presented at the SPWLA 26th
1439-1455. Annual Logging Symposium.
Ellis, D., Flaum, C., Roulet, C., Marienbach, E., Seeman, B. 1983.
The Litho-Density Tool Calibration. Paper SPE 12048 presented at the
58th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibit of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers, San Francisco, California.
62
63
www.halliburton.com/ReservoirInnovations
H09338 07/2012
© 2012 Halliburton. All Rights Reserved.