## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages, available at www.spec2000.net/00-orders.htm By E. R. (Ross) Crain, P.Eng.

www.spec2000.net Phone: 1-403-845-2527 ross @ spec2000.net Copyright: E. R. Crain, P.Eng. All Rights Reserved Updated Nov 2011 ISBN 0-9734171-1-0

Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal

Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R. Crain, P.Eng.

Page 1 of 54

**SAMPLE REFERENCE MANUAL
**

This document is intended as a sample of the presentation quality and technical content of the Petrophysical Referemce Manuals offered in “Crain’s Petrophysical Series”. The full version of this Manual is more than 190 pages and a few selected pages are shown here to illustrate the style of writing and the quality of the illustrations. There are 9 other manuals in the Series. Orders can be placed at www.spec2000.net/00orders.htm . Compare this sample to course handouts provided elsewhere and decide for yourself which is easier to read and refer to in the future. We offer practical, no-nonsense courseson a variety of petrophysical topics. Each seminar is supported by a full colour Reference Manual and visual presentation with practical exercises. We sell solutions, not logging tools. As a low cost alternative to In-House courses, “Crain's Integrated Petrophysics AV Courses” include narrated PowerPoint slides, exercises, and full colour PDF Reference Manuals, and Excel Spreadsheets. Narration simulates a live, in-house course presentation. A Certificate of Proficiency is awarded upon completion of assignments. These lectures and reference manuals are time-tested in major and independent oil companies, service companies, and government agencies around the world, and are backed by 50 years of worldwide experience. These practical, nononsense, courses are intended for personal study at work or at home. Workload is at 3rd or 4th year University level. No prior knowledge of logs is required, but some facility with basic math is an asset. FREE Sample Lecture (17 MB) You can run the slide shows at your own speed, repeat individual slides, pause to read more in the supplied Reference Manuals, have a coffee, feed the baby, or check your email - you can plan your time to suit your personal situation. The material is also suitable for a structured environment such as In-House Training or Tech School / University settings. Unlimited Worldwide Multi-Student Corporate and Academic Licenses Are Available. Contact us by email for details. Put 50 yrats of continuous practical experience to work for you!

THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages, available at www.spec2000.net/00-orders.htm

Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal

Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R. Crain, P.Eng.

Page 2 of 54

**CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL
**

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Restrictions on reproduction 2 Special Copyright Notice 2 Trademarks 2 Warranty 2 About the Author 4 1.00 Introduction Quantitative Log Analysis 5 1.01 What Is Well Logging? 6 1.02 Organizing Your Work 15 1.03 Calculators and the Math Hierarchy 17 2.00 The Step by Step Procedure 18 2.01 The Analysis Model 19 2.02 The Formation Rock Model with Definitions 20 2.03 The Log Response Equation 24 2.04 Using The Log Response Equation – Seismic Modeling 25 2.05 Integration – Calibrating to Ground Truth 27 3.00 Eyeball Analysis Of Logs - Crain’s Rules 29 3.01 General Rules For Picking Log Data 38 3.02 Selection of Log Interpretation Parameters 38 4.00 Shale Volume 40 5.00 Pore Volume 42 5.01 Porosity From The Sonic Log 43 5.02 Porosity From The Density Log 45 5.03 Porosity From The Neutron Log 47 5.04 Porosity From The Complex Lithology Density Neutron Crossplot 49 5.05 Porosity From The Dual Water Density Neutron Crossplot 54 5.06 Porosity From The Photoelectric Density Neutron Crossplot 55 5.07 Material Balance for Porosity (Maximum Porosity) 56 5.08 Useful Porosity 57 5.09 Porosity From The Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Log 58 5.10 Fracture Porosity 59 5.11 Porosity from Old ES Logs 60 6.00 Lithologic Analysis of Matrix Rock Volume 61 6.01 Two Mineral Lithology From Matrix Density 62 6.02 Lithology From Sonic Density Neutron Data 63 6.03 Lithology From PE Density Neutron Log 64 6.04 Lithology From Spectral Gamma Ray Log 66 6.05 Lithology From Vp/Vs Velocity Ratio 68 6.06 Elastic Constants / Mechanical Properties From Logs 69 7.00 Formation Water Resistivity 71 7.01 Water Resistivity From Catalog or DST 72 7.02 Water Resistivity From Water Zone (Rwa) 74 7.03 Water Resistivity From Spontaneous Potential 75

Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal

Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R. Crain, P.Eng.

Page 3 of 54

**TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued
**

8.00 Water and Hydrocarbon Saturation 76 8.01 Determination of Saturation Parameters A, M, N 77 8.02 Water Saturation from Archie Method 81 8.03 Water Saturation from Simandoux Method 82 8.04 Water Saturation from Dual Water Method 82 8.05 Water Saturation from Buckles Number 83 8.06 Irreducible Water Saturation 85 8.07 Moveable Oil Saturation 86 9.00 Permeability and Productivity 87 9.01 Permeability from the Wyllie-Rose Method 87 9.02 Permeability from Porosity 88 9.03 Permeability from the Coates Method 89 9.04 Fracture Permeability 89 10.00 Summarizing Results 90 10.01 Cumulative and Average Reservoir Properties 91 10.02 Fluid Properties and Reserves 91 10.03 Productivity Index and Water Cut 93 11.00 Beyond Log Analysis 95 11.01 Productivity From Drill Stem Tests 95 11.02 Production Projection and Cash Flow 98 12.00 Case Histories 101 12.01 Cretaceous Glauconitic Sand 101 12.02 Triassic Dolomitic Sand 111 12.03 Devonian Carbonate Reef 118 12.04 Tar Sands 124 13.01 List of Abbreviations 126 Appendix: Fractured Reservoirs 130 Exercjses 145

CONVERSION FACTORS Feet = Meters * 3.281 Meters = Feet = 0.3048 Inches = Millimeters / 25.4 Millimeters = Inches * 25.4 Barrels = Cubic meters / 0.159 Cubic meters = Barrels * 0.159 (100 bbl/d = 15.9 m3/d) (100 m3/d = 629 bbl/d) PSI = KPa / 6.894 KPa = PSI * 6.894 Mcf = Cubic meters * 35.3 Cubic meters = Mcf / 35.3 (1 mmcf/d = 28 262 m3/d)

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: E. R. (Ross) Crain, P.Eng. is a Consulting Petrophysicist and a Professional Engineer with 50 years of experience in reservoir description, petrophysical analysis, and management. He has been a specialist in the integration of well log analysis and petrophysics with geophysical, geological, engineering, and simulation phases of oil and gas exploration and exploitation, with worldwide experience. His textbook, "Crain's Petrophysical Handbook on CD-ROM" is widely used as a reference to practical log analysis. Mr. Crain is an Honourary Member and Past President of the Canadian Well Logging Society (CWLS), a Member of Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log Analysts (SPWLA), and a Registered Professional Engineer with Alberta Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists (APEGGA). THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages, available at www.spec2000.net/00-orders.htm

Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal

Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R. Crain, P.Eng.

Page 4 of 54

**CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL
**

1.00 Introduction To Quantitative Log Analysis

This Handbook is designed to give you a starting point for learning quantitative log analysis methods. It is a condensed version of Chapters 4 through 11 of Crain’s Petrophysical Handbook on CD-ROM, avail able at www.spec2000.net. When log analysis is combined with sample, core, test and production data, it is called Integrated Petrophysics or just plain “petrophysics”. You can use this book as a quick reference to quantitative petrophysical analysis or as a self-directed study guide. If you wish to take the exam at the end of this book to earn a certificate of proficiency, please go to my website at www.spec2000.net. To get maximum benefit from available well data, you must integrate logs, cores, samples, tests, seismic, geological, and engineering concepts into a coherent picture. Log analysis performed in isolation is pointless and can be a career-buster. However, learning log analysis methods can be done in relative isolation, as long as we appreciate the contributions available from other disciplines. It is really important to temper, and sometimes completely revise, the results of your log analysis by comparison to other sources of “ground truth”. Using productivity analysis based on accurate shale, porosity, lithology, saturation, and permeability calculations from log data, you can compare the quality of a zone with known production in your area. From this, you can decide if the well is worth completing or whether to drill more similar wells. You can also highgrade your drilling or completion prospects based on estimated flow capacity as well as the more usual net pay figures. This handbook provides the methods to extend conventional well log analysis to cover productivity and cash flow analysis. The real question you must answer is not "What is the porosity and water saturation?" but "Will the zone produce economically and at what rate?" This goes considerably beyond conventional log analysis. That’s why my petrophysical software is called Meta/Log (Meta = Beyond). There are cases where you cannot get this far, either for lack of corroborative data or narrow-minded job descriptions, but it never hurts to try. The full spectrum techniques described here will help you find oil and gas more effectively from logs, complete discoveries more economically, and work-over wells with more confidence. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal provides quantitative log analysis methods suitable for use by most geologists, engineers, and geophysicists who need to perform quick, complete, and accurate calculations of reservoir properties. The formulas presented are simple but adequate for all but the most detailed work. Usage rules for each method are described, based on the log suite available and the rock/fluid mixture expected. More complex methods are contained in Crain’s Petrophysical Handbook, the “big brother” to the Pocket Pal. Although visual analysis, crossplots, and log overlay techniques have been widely used, this handbook provides a step by step numerical method which has worked reliably in most formations in many parts of the world. This computational approach minimizes the risk of bypassing lower quality zones, and improves your ability to estimate the quality of a zone. Finding zones of interest on a long log does require some form of visual scanning. This topic is covered in Section 3.00, after we review the details of our log analysis model.

Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal

Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R. Crain, P.Eng.

Page 5 of 54

Eng. analysis of log data is required. Well logging is the process of recording various physical. pilots. and the trip is taken into and out of a wellbore. The petrophysical analysis is said to be “calibrated” when the porosity. The use of well logs for evaluating mineral deposits other than oil and gas. Most Chapters apply to both hydrocarbon and mineral exploration. the work is called petrophysics or petrophysical analysis. an oil well log is a record displayed on a graph with the measured physical property of the rock on one axis and depth (distance from the surface) on the other axis. including evaluation of geothermal energy and ground water. such as a ship’s log ot travelog. and lawyers keep logs of their activities. Truckers. and reducing the possible error in the assumptions and in the results based on them. such as core analysis or petrographic data. such as how much oil or gas is in the ground. such as coal.01 What Is Well Logging? A log is a record of measurements or events recorded versus time or distance. an increased number are being run yearly for other purposes. using a number of assumptions which. the ship is a measuring instrument of some kind. More than one property may be displayed on the same graph. if true. Although the vast majority of logs are run to evaluate oil and gas wells. Page 6 of 54 . A large portion of this handbook is aimed at oil and gas. When log analysis is combined with other physical measurements on the rocks. Thus. uranium. doctor. fluid saturation. or how much is being produced. Such important knowledge can only be derived. potash. None of the logs actually measure the physical properties that are of most interest to us.1. and permeability results compare favourably with core analysis data. will give reasonable estimates of hydrocarbon reserves. R. In the case of well logging. electrical. P. but the other topics are not ignored. The art and science of log analysis is mainly directed at reducing a large volume of data to more manageable results. and hard rock sequences has been practiced since the early 1930’s and is widespread today. The results of the analysis are called petrophysical properties or mappable reservoir properties. from the measured properties listed above (and others). chemical. or other properties of the rock/fluid mixtures penetrated by drilling a well into the earth's mantle. Further confirmation of petrophysical properties is obtained by production tests of the reservoir intervals. Crain. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. In its most usual form.

The cable itself is used as the depth measuring device. The cartridge contains the electrical circuitry or computer components needed to control the downhole equipment. so that properties measured by the tools can be related to particular depths in the borehole. the measuring instrument. Surface equipment is mounted in a logging truck. The cable provides power to the downhole equipment. or skid unit from which all logging operations are controlled. Page 7 of 54 . The theory doesn't change . The science is called borehole geophysics instead of petrophysics.Eng. and sometimes the emphasis. P. and to transmit data to and from the surface. so that more than one log can be recorded on a single trip into the wellbore.When logs are used for purposes other than evaluation of oil and gas. and electronic or computer equipment for controlling and recording the downhole measurements. The logging unit contains hoisting equipment for lowering and raising the tools in the hole. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R. or both. The sonde is the portion of the tool which gives off energy. van. To perform a logging operation. Additional wires in the cable carry the recorded measurement back to the surface. receives energy. Combination logging tools consist of more than one sonde and cartridge. often called a probe or sonde. The Well Logging Operation = A logging tool is made up of a sonde and a cartridge. Crain.just the nomenclature. they are often called geophysical logs instead of well logs. This difference is merely a matter of semantics and training. is lowered into the borehole on the end of an insulated electrical cable.

R. as seen below. Crain. Page 8 of 54 . or chart recorder.spec2000. Many instrument control and calibration functions are now handled by the same computer used to record the digital data. with some human control. P. The same data are captured in digital form on magnetic tape or disc for later use in computer aided analysis. available at www. The result is a log.htm Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. analog and digital.Recording the Well Log Measurements are recorded in two forms.Eng. electronic plotter. The analog data may be recorded on photographic film. THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages.net/00-orders.

with a standard 3-track presentation on the left and an image log on the right. Crain.Eng. Curve names and scales in the scale heading help identify which curve is which. Common Logging Scales English Terminology 5" = 100 ft 2" = 100 ft 1" = 100 ft 10" = 100 ft 25" = 100 ft 60" = 100 ft Metric Terminology 1:240 1:600 1:1200 1:120 1:48 1:20 1:200 is also very common 1:500 is also very common 1:1000 is also very common 1:100 is also very common 1:50 is also very common Often Called Detail scale or large scale Correlation scale or small scale Super detail scale * Dipmeter scale 8 pages omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. Logs can be run on a number of vertical (depth) scales and quite a variety of horizontal (curve value) scales. Page 9 of 54 . P.Example of a Well Log. R.

Go: 1. Choose computation method 4. we proceed to the starting line. tools. get Ready. Check for indications of fractures D. but a consistent. step by step procedure will produce more reliable results. Estimate depositional environment 10. Plan your approach to this project 3.00 The Step By Step Procedure Log analysis involves a series of logical steps. Focus on the results required 4. Like an athlete running to win the 100 meter sprint. Critique Your Work: 1. each necessary to proceed to the next step.IS THE ZONE ANY GOOD? 4. and tests 2. Identify coal or salt beds 7. log analysis requires training. Look for signs of permeability 9. Concentrate on the important issues. Crain. Identify the matrix rock from the log response 8. and a few steps might be skipped from time to time. Review local well histories and regional geologic information 2. R. Find clean zones and shale zones 2. Check results against samples. Go.Eng. reduce the noise B. Learn and understand the methods and their limitations 2. Edit the logs C. Get Set: 1. This list looks pretty imposing. Calculate results E. Look for hydrocarbon indications 6. or at least iterative. Pick log values in each layer 3. Write a report.CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL 2. Find porous zones that are fairly clean 4. and Finish. and concentration before the race starts. It tends to remove some of the mystery involved in log Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. At race time. Prepare For The Race: 1. focus. P. Correlate offset logs and pick formation tops 3. Mark all known data on logs or data sheet 4. Could the job be better organized or simplified? 2. present results and conclusions F. Subdivide cleaner zones into horizontal layers 2. Finish: 1. Think to a conclusion . time) to do a better job? Log analysis also may be circular. Set. planning. since the results from each step can often be compared to other sources of data and corrected if differences are found. What else is needed (data. Pick shale base lines on all logs 3. Page 10 of 54 . Rework problem areas 3. if any 5. cores. Then we critique the results – did we win or finish last? CRAIN’S STEP LADDER TO SUCCESS A. Did the results satisfy the end-user? 3. Find obvious water zones. Get Ready: 1.

Both commercial and in-house databases exist and appropriate software is available for most personal computers and workstations. literally thousands of methods exist. As a result. you may have to climb the ladder more than once if log analysis results do not compare to ground truth. The invasion process leaves behind the solid particles of the mud. If the hole is enlarged by erosion beyond the bit size during drilling. that data from a new well may overturn all previous analysis results on older wells.Eng. Invasion is a process whereby drilling mud fluid is forced into the rock due to differential pressure. or test results. The drilling mud is made up of solid particles and ions dissolved in water. high permeability zones which allow quick buildup of mudcake. and mixes with formation water that is not displaced. The Log Analysis Model takes into account two distinct problems: 1. such as core analysis. and reduces effort in the long run. These should be added to the "Hopper of Knowledge". such as mud and hydrocarbon logs. tests. review sample descriptions. On deep. and low permeability zones invade the most or deepest. a number of logs may be recorded while drilling. formation tops. Crain. cores. and possibly structural or isopach maps of the target formations. the mudcake thickness may be impossible to determine. The mudcake thickness by definition. The most universal applications have been assembled in this handbook. The distance to which some displacement and/or mixing occurs is called the invasion diameter. 2. Unfortunately. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. You might consider the procedure to be a "Step Ladder to Success". A data retrieval from a computer data base may reduce the labor in locating much of the needed information. review these as well. Nonpermeable zones are not invaded. Thus.analysis. Mudcake is the sealing agent which slows down invasion. and the zone so disturbed is termed the invaded zone. invade the least.01 The Analysis Model Quantitative log analysis is based on a series of mathematical formulas. Since the mudcake is scraped off each time a drill pipe joint or the bit passes a formation. 2. Only a very few of the equations are original to the author. P. Thus. or offshore wells. The zone nearest the borehole. R.04. is the portion of rock where the maximum amount of displacement and mixing has occurred. resistivity. invasion of shallow zones may be repeated many times with many different fluids. The balance of the invaded zone is named the transition zone. thus making such zones difficult or impossible to analyze. If seismic maps or cross sections are available. some critical assessment of the old data is required in addition to that usually accorded the new data. however. derived from the experience of many analysts. Review the available data before embarking on detailed analysis. sample descriptions. This water displaces the native formation water to some degree. The resulting material is called mudcake. or even gamma ray. The complex mixture of rock types and fluids that comprise the formation. and may be anywhere from 3 inches thick to very thin and difficult to detect. which collect on the borehole wall. or other quantitative log curves. or models. These definitions are illustrated schematically in Figure PP2. Known gas-oil and oil-water contacts must be noted. where the transition between maximum flushing and no invasion occurs. Locate the well history files or well history cards. Page 11 of 54 . remote. and production histories. or flushed zone. look at offset logs. is one half the difference between the bit size and the borehole diameter. Remember. Invasion of the formation by drilling mud filtrate.

Page 12 of 54 . and to correct the log readings for the effects of invasion. corrections should be applied using the appropriate service company "Tornado Chart".8 and 1. gamma ray. knowledge of the invasion profile is necessary in making assumptions about log analysis methods or parameters. If the ratio falls outside this range. density. but special models are needed for gas zones. Sonic. Resistivity logs which measure different depths into the rock can be used to estimate the invasion profile. These charts are ONLY useful in water zones – they do VERY BAD THINGS in hydrocarbon zones. invasion effects are minimal and no correction to the deep resistivity is made. Most mathematical models include terms which account for invasion of mud filtrate into oil or water zones.2. P. Resistivity distribution in a radial direction from the borehole is determined by the invasion profile. For example. These are noted as special cases in subsequent sections of this handbook.Eng. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. and spontaneous potential logs see the invaded zone and are thus influenced by those fluids. neutron.04: The drilling fluid invasion model Since the depth of investigation of logging tools varies. Crain. The resistivity log reading in the formation depends on the response field of the logging tool and varies with the design of each tool. if the ratio of the deep to medium resistivity log values is between 0. R. Results are used to judge the reliability of resistivity data.Figure PP2.

industry accepted model of the reservoir rocks and fluids. dolomite. and anhydrite or . Vrock + PHIe + Vsh = 1.2.limestone. calcite cement. Vmin2.silt (Vsilt) . ….water absorbed chemically into the molecules of the clay minerals Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. P. Crain.quartz. DFN 1: The formation rock/fluid model is comprised of: . Vcl2.the shale content of the matrix rock (Vsh) By definition.05: The Formation Rock/Fluid Model for Log Analysis Here are the definitions that derive from the rock/fluid model shown above.02 The Formation Rock Model All log analysis methods are based on a uniform. …) .Eng.00 DFN 2: The matrix rock component (Vrock) can be subdivided into two or more constituents (Vmin1. such as: . DFN 3: The shale component (Vsh) can be classified further into: . FIGURE PP 2.the pore space (or porosity) within the matrix rock (PHIe) .). and glauconite The mineral mixture can be quite complex and log analysis may not resolve all constituents. Page 13 of 54 .the matrix rock (Vrock) . R.water trapped into the shale matrix due to lack of sufficient permeability to allow the water to escape .one or more clays (Vcl1.water locked onto the surface of the clay minerals .

clay bound water (CBW) .total water volume (BVW + CBW) to .free water.residual hydrocarbon (BVHr) DFN 10: Free fluid index (FFI) is the sum of BVWm. and in micritic.an immobile or irreducible water volume bound to the matrix rock by surface tension (BVI or BVWir) BVI is sometimes called “bound water”. excluding clay bound water (CBW). They are almost invariably filled with immoveable water and do not contribute to useful reservoir volume or energy. however. BVHm. By Definition. CBW varies with shale volume and is zero when Vsh = 0.Eng. CMR. Nonuseful porosity also occurs as tiny pores that do not connect to any other pores. including irreducible water (BVW) . Crain. Vsh = Vcl + Vsilt + CBW DFN 4: Bulk volume water of shale (BVWSH) is the sum of the three water volumes listed above in the definition of shale and is determined in a zone that is considered to be 100% shale. DFN 9: Hydrocarbon volume (BVH) can be classified into: .free water. R. etc).a mobile portion free to flow out of the reservoir (BVWm) .effective porosity (PHIe) Sw = BVW / PHIe Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. vuggy.hydrocarbon (BVH) DFN 7: Effective porosity is the porosity of the reservoir rock. or skeletal carbonates. including irreducible water (BVW) . Such pores occur in silt.mobile hydrocarbon (BVHm) . DFN 8: Free water (BVW) is further subdivided into: . CBW = BVWSH * Vsh DFN 5: Total porosity (PHIt) is the sum of: . DFN 11: Total water saturation (SWt) is the ratio of: . not “bound” to the shale. It is also called moveable fluid (BVM) or useful porosity (PHIuse). PHIuse = BVM = FFI = BVWm + BVHm + BVHr OR PHIuse = PHIe – BVI OR PHIuse = PHIe * (1 – SWir) This definition is needed for the nuclear magnetic log (NMR. By definition. since it cannot see BVWir. so “irreducible water” is a better term. Note that BVWm = BVW – BVI. P.free water volume (BVW) to . but this is confusing (see definition of clay bound water above).total porosity (PHIt) SWt = (BVW + CBW) / PHIt DFN 12: Effective water saturation (Sw) is the ratio of: . Page 14 of 54 . volcanic rock fragments in sandstones.hydrocarbon (BVH) DFN 6: Effective porosity (PHIe) is the sum of: . PHIe = PHIt – CBW PHIe = PHIt – Vsh * BVWSH OR Some of the “free water” is not free to move . and BVHr.it is. The NMR may see some of this non-useful porosity – the jury is still out.The sum of the three water volumes is called clay bound water (CBW).

DFN 21: Relative Permeability (Kro. Kg) is the permeability for a particular fluid. Krw. the water saturation approaches one (by edict. DFN 17: Further constraints that should be remembered are: PHIt >= PHIe >= PHIuse SWt >= Sw >= SWuse. which is assumed to be the same porosity as in the uninvaded zone. we are not normally interested in the total water saturation.This is the standard definition of “water saturation”. DFN 20: Effective Permeability (Ko.Eng. The water saturation in the invaded zone between the flushed and uninvaded zone is seldom used. except as a mathematical by-product. to .effective porosity. usually less than Kair. Since all interpretation methods described here correct for the effects of shale. P.useful porosity (PHIuse) SWuse = (BVW – BVI) / PHIuse DFN 14: Irreducible water saturation (SWir) is the ratio of: .effective porosity (PHIe) Sor = BVHr / PHIe DFN 16: The water saturation in the flushed zone (Sxo) is the ratio . Crain. The amount of free water in the invaded zone is usually higher than in the uninvaded zone. Kw. if not by calculus). Krg) is the ratio of the effective permeability of one fluid compared to the second fluid in a two phase system. In tables or reports. PHIt = PHIe and SWt = Sw when Vsh = 0 All volumes defined above are in fractional units. The usual assumption for a new reservoir is: SWmin = SWinitial = SWir DFN 19: Absolute Permeability (Ka) or Intrinsic Permeability is the ease with which air will flow through the effective porosity. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.effective porosity (PHIe) SWir = BVI / PHIe DFN 15: Residual oil saturation (Sor) is the ratio of: . Thus Sxo >= Sw.free water in the flushed zone. DFN 18: Capillary Pressure (Pc) is the force that pulls water up a thin tube (capillary) above the free water level.immobile oil volume (BVHr) to . R. Older books use this term to define total water saturation. also called Air permeability (Kair) – measured in milliDarcies (mD). As effective porosity approaches zero. DFN 22: Water Cut (WC) is the ratio of water volume produced to the total fluid volume produced at the surface. DFN 13: Useful water saturation (SWuse) is the ratio of: . when oil or gas is present.immobile or irreducible water volume (BVI) to .BVI) to .useful water volume (BVW . Page 15 of 54 . log analysis results are often converted to percentages by multiplying fractional units by 100.

One is to find out what a log would read under a hypothetical set of circumstances. The algorithms in following chapters attempt to resolve as many of the unknowns as possible using these piecewise techniques. By re-arranging terms and further assuming that porosity is small. neutron porosity. as for water and oil in the sonic log equation for porosity. for example. This is what makes it possible. This approach will fail if gas is present because the water and gas contributions are too dissimilar. and present instead the finished product. thorium and potassium). but ALL log analysis methods rely on this approach. It will also work for various derived logs described in later chapters of this handbook. density. we get: The Gamma Ray Response Equation Solved for Shale Volume VSHgr = (GRlog – GRmatrix) / (GRshale – GRmatrix) Here GRlog. Where this is inappropriate.03 The Log Response Equation The response of an individual log to the model described above is defined by the Log Response Equation. P. to calculate the shale volume from the gamma ray response. GRshale. with the final solution being given. This strategy eliminates the need to know water saturation prior to knowing porosity. R. which takes the form: THE LOG RESPONSE EQUATION LOG = PHIe * Sxo * Lw + PHIe * (1 – Sxo) * Lh + Vsh * Lsh + (1 – Vsh – PHIe) * Lma) (water term) (hydrocarbon term) (shale term) (matrix term) WHERE: Lh = log reading in 100% hydrocarbon Lma = log reading in 100% matrix rock LOG = log reading Lsh = log reading in 100% shale Lw = log reading in 100% water PHIe = effective porosity (fractional) Sxo = water saturation in invaded zone (fractional) Vsh = volume of shale (fractional) This response equation will work for sonic travel time. Both the water and hydrocarbon terms go to zero. since neither of these components has any gamma ray contribution. If the reconstructed log doesn’t match the recorded log. sets of two or three simultaneous equations are solved. and is used to generate synthetic logs or to verify log analysis results. the electromagnetic propagation log. The response equations can be used in several ways. It will not always be obvious that simultaneous response equations were used. Page 16 of 54 .2. Some terms in the response equation for certain logs go to zero. and the photoelectric effect (if PE * DENS is used). What we have done here is eliminate the repetitive derivation of the solution. This is called forward modeling of log response. by using a log reading and assuming the other terms to be known or derivable from some other response equations.Eng.uranium. we sometimes lump two terms together. the thermal decay time log. Another way is to calculate one unknown in the equation. ready for inclusion in a calculator or computer program. gamma ray (and the spectrolog curves . Crain. for example porosity or shale volume. then something in the analysis model is wrong and must be fixed. resistivity (if Sxo is replaced by Sw for deep resistivity logs). and GRmatrix are read from appropriate places on the gamma ray log to calculate shale volume. or density porosity. A third approach is to use sets of response equations simultaneously to determine as many unknowns as possible from the available log data. 4 Pages Omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. In other cases.

medium. The common rules are described below with reference to Figures PP3.01. Photo electric effect (PE) is in Track 2 with neutron porosity (PHIN) and density porosity (PHID) spread across Tracks 2 and 3. Crain. Lets start the race. RESM. RESD) on a logarithmic track to the right of the depth track.00 Eyeball Analysis Of Logs – Crain’s Simplified Rules You should know the basic rules for eyeball analysis of log curves to help you climb the “Ladder to Success”. R. and deep resistivity (RESS. and determine their scales. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.06D. The right half of the image shows a density neutron log with gamma ray (GR) and caliper (CAL) in Track 1. Crain’s Rule “Minus 1”: Identify log curves available. FIGURE PP3. Page 17 of 54 .CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL 3.06A through PP3.06A: The left half of this image shows a resistivity log with spontaneous potential (SP) in Track 1 and shallow. A more elaborate set of rules follows in Section 3. P.Eng.

examine the spontaneous potential (SP) response. Very shaly beds are not “Zones of Interest”. R.Eng. Draw clean and shale lines. High GR values. P. and is still a zone of interest at this stage.net/00-orders. THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages. Low values of GR.50) and even obvious water zones. highly negative values of SP.htm Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.06B: To find clean zones versus shale zones. and density neutron separation. it is still a useful source of log analysis information. FIGURE PP3. deflections to the right are shaly. gamma ray (GR) response. are interesting. then interpolate linearly between clean and shale lines to visually estimate Shale Volume (Vsh). Although a zone may be water bearing.Crain’s Rule #0: Gamma ray or SP deflections to the left indicate cleaner sands. Everything else. or density neutron curves falling close to each other usually indicate low shale volume. or large separation on density neutron curves normally indicate high shale volume. no SP deflection. available at www. Page 18 of 54 . Crain. including very shaly sands (Vsh < 0.spec2000.

Crain’s Rule #1: The average of density and neutron porosity in a clean zone (regardless of mineralogy) is a good first estimate for Effective Porosity (PHIe).Eng. or no porosity. density. coal. Crain. Crain’s Rule #2: The density porosity in a shaly sand is a good first estimate for Effective Porosity (PHIe). draw bed boundaries (horizontal lines). If density neutron data is available. Identify zones which show high medium.06C: For zones of interest. and salt beds are no longer “interesting”. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R. All porosity logs deflect to the left for increased porosity. low. In shaly sands. FIGURE PP3. Mark coal and salt beds. Page 19 of 54 . P. high shale content. provided logs are on Sandstone Units. estimate porosity in clean sands by averaging the two log values. Scale the sonic log based on the assumed matrix lithology. and neutron. Low porosity. read the density porosity. Then review the porosity logs: sonic. which appear to have very high apparent porosity. IMPORTANT: This is just an estimate and not a final answer.

R. High porosity (deflections on the Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. Page 20 of 54 .06D: Raw logs showing resistivity porosity overlay. OR Low resistivity with moderate to high porosity usually undicates water or shale. Red shading indicates possible hydrocarbon zones. compare deep resistivity to porosity. Crain’s Rule #4: Crossover of porosity on a resistivity log overlay usually indicates hydrocarbons. Crain. by mentally or physically overlaying the density porosity on top of the resistivity log.Eng. P. FIGURE PP3. To find hydrocarbon indications and obvious water zones. OR High resistivity with moderate to high porosity usually indicates hydrocarbons.Crain’s Rule #3: Tracking of porosity with resistivity on an overlay usually indicates water or shale.

Layer B and Layer A show crossover when the porosity is traced on the resistivity log. 0. This is close to the final answer because there is not much shale in the zone. Water saturation is usually calculated from the Archie equation or a shale corrected version of it.much higher than the truth due to the influence of the shale in the zone. pretty close to the core data. The porosity scale on the log is a function of choices made at the time of logging and have nothing to do with the rocks being logged.06C. Low resistivity and high porosity usually means water. and 0. Low porosity water zones may not be obvious. You must know whether the density neutron log is recorded on Sandstone. and anhydrite is 22 or more. The average of density and neutron porosity in Layers B and C is 24 %. or limestone recorded on a dolomite scale.0100 to 0. log analysts would be out of work! Crossover on the density neutron log usually means gas. as in Layer C. An easier estimate of water saturation can be made in obvious hydrocarbon zones by using a method attributed to Buckles. Layer A on Figure PP3. or Dolomite porosity scales. Known DST.density log to the left) and high resistivity (deflections to the right) usually indicate oil or gas.1200. This is not easy to do with mental arithmetic.0400 as a first try in clean sands. Therefore all our analysis must make use of shale correction methods.0250 in intercrystalline carbonates. sand-shale sequences are logged on Sandstone scales and carbonate sequences on Limestone scales. limestone is about 7 porosity units. Crain’s Rule #6: On Limestone Units logs. Crain’s Rule #5: Approximate Water Saturation (SWa) in an obvious hydrocarbon zone is estimated from: SWa = Constant / PHIe where Constant is in the range from 0. R. In fresher water formations. and it is commonly used by reservoir engineers in a hurry. so these zones remain interesting. Ideally. Visual determination of lithology (in addition to identifying shale as discussed earlier) is done by noting the quantity of density neutron separation and/or by noting absolute values of the photo electric curve. so you could find any porosity scale in any rock sequence. The lack of SP development will often help distinguish fresh water zones.0800 in shaly sands. See cross-hatched area on resistivity track of Figure PP3. separation for sandstone is near zero. particularly in shallow zones. The rules take a little memory work.06 is a shaly sand and has medium porosity. which can also show crossover – not caused by gas. it is often difficult or impossible to spot hydrocarbons visually. The real world is far from ideal.0600 to 0. or mud log indications of oil or gas are helpful indicators. or fresh water. All other layers are shale with no useful porosity. If it was easy. Fresh water may look like hydrocarbons. Crain. Take care! Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. production. P. before you apply Crain’s Rule #5. sandstone recorded on a limestone scale. Watch for rough hole problems. Layers B and C are clean sands and have high porosity. the density neutron separation for limestone is near zero. dolomite is 8 to 12 porosity units. On Sandstone Units logs.Eng. Water zones with high porosity and low resistivity are called “obvious water zones”. Sandstone has up to 7 porosity units crossover. Page 21 of 54 . The average in Layer A is 16 % . The density porosity is about 11%. and anhydrite is 15 or more. Limestone. Use 0. dolomite is 15 or more.

FIGURE PP3.Eng.07: Sand – shale identification from gamma ray and density-neutron separation. Small amounts of density neutron separation with a low gamma ray may indicate some heavy minerals in a sandstone. Page 22 of 54 . R. P. Both pure quartz (no separation) and quartz with heavy minerals (some separation) are seen in Figure PP3. volcanic rock fragments. so any cementing materials. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.07. or mica will cause some separation. Crain. Most minerals are heavier than quartz.

P.08). along with a review of core and sample descriptions. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. (PE is invalid on Figure PP3.Eng. R.08: Lithology identification is accomplished by observation of density neutron separation and the gamma ray response. The photoelectric effect is often a direct mineralogy indicator.FIGURE PP 3. Page 23 of 54 . Crain.

Crain’s Rule #9: If the logs are noisy. Crain’s Rule #10: Check your work and revise your assumptions. Crain. Figure PP3. look for indications of porosity. 3 Pages Omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. To tell radioactive dolomite zones from shale zones. near 3 is dolomite or shale. known production or tested intervals. High thorium values on the gamma ray spectral log indicate the shale.09: Combine N-D separation rules and PE rules (N-D in percent). hashy resistivity curves. The PE value can help differentiate between radioactive dolomite and chlorite shale but not between dolomite and illite rich shale. near 2 is sandstone. since the density neutron log will show separation in both cases. The high density (negative density porosity) of anhydrite will distinguish anhydrite from limestone.5 3. then refine rules for each project area.45 SHLE 20+ 13+ PE 2 5 3 5 4. it is probably permeable. To find signs of permeability. and near 5 is limestone or anhydrite. To check for indications of fractures. High gamma ray will distinguish shale from dolomite. hashy dipmeter curves. are a sign of radioactive sandstone or limestone. mudcake shown by the caliper. Page 24 of 54 .Eng. or caved hole in carbonates. use a gamma ray spectral log. R. look for sonic log skips.37 .Crain’s Rule #7: PE below 1 is coal. density neutron crossover in carbonates. blame it on fractures. and hydrocarbon shows in the mud. ROCK N–D N–D (SS) (LS) SAND 0 -7 LIME 7 0 DOLO 15+ 8+ ANHY 22+ 15+ SALT . P.5 GR LO LO LO LO LO HI High GR log readings coupled with density neutron log readings that are close together. Crain’s Rule #8: If it is porous. separation on the resistivity log curves. sample descriptions.

These can be determined from appropriate cross plots of PE. and potassium logs.00 for English units KD1 = 1000 for Metric units KD2 = 2. *** PLEASE NOTE *** You must choose the appropriate methods for each zone.87 for English units Dolomite scale log KD2 = 2870 for Metric units Dolomite scale log NOTE: The choice for KD2 must match the neutron log units – if neutron is in Limestone units. and sometimes due to uranium. Crain. However. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. but the minimum rule works well in most cases. depth of burial. as shown in Figure 4. provided the usage rules have been honored first. so the methods shown in Sections 5. and burial history. P. thorium. Shale volume estimation is the first calculation step in a log analysis.00 Shale Volume Shale is an imprecise term used to describe a rock composed of clay. Page 25 of 54 .Eng. All other calculations depend on the shale volume being known from this step. and bound water. and 8 in this handbook do not apply to laminated shaly sands.71 for gm/cc or 2710 for Kg/m3 log scale.65 for English units Sandstone scale log KD2 = 2650 for Metric units Sandstone scale log KD2 = 2. Most shales are radioactive due to potassium and thorium.01 above. The bound water volume varies with clay type. The shale volume calculations shown below are insensitive to the shale distribution.CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL 4. Some shales have not lost as much water as others at similar depths and are called overpressured shales. The clay type and silt composition can vary considerably from one place to another.71 for English units Limestone scale log KD2 = 2710 for Metric units Limestone scale log KD2 = 2. porosity and water saturation are strongly affected by laminated shale. silt. 7. KD2 must be 2. R. STEP 1: Convert density log (gm/cc or Kg/m3) tp porosity units if a density porosity log is not available (skip this step if density data is already in porosity units): 1: PHIDSH = (DENSSH – KD2) / (KD1 – KD2) – do this once in an obvious shale zone 2: PHID = (DENS – KD2) / (KD1 – KD2) – do this for every data level Where: KD1 = 1. 6. Shale distribution can vary.

Use Thorium curve from NGT for radioactive sandstone. P.GR0) 4: Vshs = (SP .logRMAX) / (logRSH .STEP 2: Calculate shale volume from the three common methods: 3: Vshg = (GR . The shale in the zone may not have the same properties as nearby shales seen on the log.38 . Average effective porosity calculated from logs is pessimistic in thinly laminated sand shale series. high resistivity zones. Vshs.(Vshg + 0.htm Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. or heavy minerals are present. Page 26 of 54 .Eng. replace the gamma ray method with Thorium method if gamma ray spectral data is available: 7: Vshth = (TH . STEP 3: Adjust gamma ray method for young rocks. if needed: 8: Vshc = 1. add the resistivity method: 6: Vshr = (logRESS . or X-ray diffraction data. Therefore. calculated shale volume may be too high (or vice versa).0 and 1. check the clean and shale parameters. or in carbonates.logRMAX) In radioactive sands. available at www.7 . If too many values fall outside this range. Do not use density neutron crossplot when bad hole.PHIDSH) In tar sands or heavy oil.net/00-orders. Vshr. R. Do not use the nonlinear young rock model unless there is some evidence that it is needed. Vshx.SP0) 5: Vshx = (PHIN .15 to 0. gas. Vshc) Calibration of log analysis shale volume is usually accomplished by comparing it to sample descriptions.PHID) / (PHINSH . Do not calculate methods which fail to pass all usage rules listed below.7) ^ 2) ^ 0.SP0) / (SP100 .TH0) / (TH100 . and uranium corrected GR (CGR) curve for radioactive carbonates. Crain.0.spec2000.06 to +0.(3. salt mud systems. THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages.45 All values must be picked from logs or assumed from previous experience. and unconventional methods should be used to determine porosity and water saturation.5 STEP 4: Take minimum of available methods: 9: Vsh = Min (Vshg. Do not use SP in fresh water formations.GR0) / (GR100 .20 PHINSH = 0. PARAMETERS: GR0 = 8 to 35 GR100 = 75 to 150 SP0 = -20 to -120 SP100 = +20 to -20 PHIDSH = -0. core description. thin section point counts. some adjustments to shale properties might be necessary. USAGE RULES: • • • • • Use uranium corrected gamma ray (CGR) in preference to uncorrected GR Do not use GR in radioactive sandstones or carbonates. If log analysis porosity is too low.TH0) NOTE: Trim Vsh values between 0.

Crain. you may want to try several methods. The META/ESP spreadsheet. does NOT take into account shale or lithology effects. Unfortunately there is no standard logging program. These rules may need to be adjusted to suit local conditions.net. hole is good.use in preference to a single log method except in bad hole where density is no good. The easiest methods are: ** Section 5.01: Porosity From The Sonic Log .CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL 5. Other methods will define the lithology for you. In the classroom or when starting work in a new area.03: Porosity From The Neutron Log . so you may also need to calculate it. P.use in preference to sonic if available.07: Material Balance for Porosity (Maximum Porosity). Some analysis methods NEED total porosity as an intermediate step.06: Porosity From The Photoelectric Density Neutron Crossplot . Logs read total porosity. Each method has its own usage rules. as presented in the field by the service company.04: Porosity From The Complex Lithology Density Neutron Crossplot . handles these models and makes the work relatively painless.spec2000. ** Section 5. Pore volume is the space in a rock filled with oil.use if both sonic and density are not available. All our analysis methods also account for matrix rock (lithology). and is called PHIe. and see which matches core porosity the best. Effective porosity does not include bound water.02: Porosity From The Density Log . Total porosity includes the bound water in the shale and is called PHIt. When there is no shale. R. YOU MUST choose a method that is appropriate for the available data and for the rock type being analyzed. available on the Downloads tab at www. Log analysis MUST ALWAYS be done to find the correct porosity. but YOU may be required to define the rock type for some methods.use in preference to complex lithology ONLY if mineral model end points are well known. PHIe equals PHIt. gas. lithology is well known. ** Section 5. so there is no single foolproof log analysis method. so raw log readings should NEVER be used as answers.Eng. and density neutron combination is not available. Calibration of log analysis porosity is usually accomplished by comparing it to conventional core porosity.use if density neutron combination is not available. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. ** Section 5. so the answers from any method presented below will give effective porosity. the results must be trimmed to prevent too high a porosity in shaly zones and in bad hole by using Section 5. ** Section 5. ** Section 5. or water.00 Pore Volume The second calculation step in a log analysis is to find shale corrected porosity. otherwise use Complex Lithology method. Raw log porosity. In all cases. All our analysis methods correct for shale. or in bad hole when density log is no good. Page 27 of 54 .05: Porosity From The Dual Water Density Neutron Crossplot – use in quartz sands with no heavy minerals.

but it is unlikely that a gas correction will be needed in very shaly sands since invasion should be relatively deep. although this is not clearly stated in the literature. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. STEP 2: Calculate porosity from sonic log (PHIsc) for each layer in the zone: 2: PHIs = (DTC – DTCMA) / (DTCW – DTCMA) 3: PHIsc = PHIs – (Vsh * PHISSH) The sonic porosity (PHIsc). SPECIAL CASES: CASE 1: Correct each layer for lack of compaction. but a poor model for the Lower Cretaceous in Western Canada. If lithology is unknown. Use the gas correction KS only if PHIsc is too high compared to other sources and if gas is known to be present. Use the compaction correction KCP only if DTCSH > 100 usec/ft (for English units) or DTCSH > 328 usec/m (for Metric units). but they are really specific to certain areas. Of the three "one-log" porosity methods. a constant for each zone: 1: PHISSH = (DTCSH – DTCMA) / (DTCW – DTCMA) DTCSH is a constant for the zone. The Wyllie approach. 10: KS = PHItrue / PHIsc • KS is never greater than 1. P. is called the effective porosity. R. NORMAL CASES: STEP 1: Calculate shale porosity (PHISSH). Other porosity methods are presented in following sections. or when density log is affected by bad hole. Page 28 of 54 . the sonic corrected for shale is the preferred one for wells that have no density log. is universally applicable. this is normally required when above 3. The method shown is called the Wyllie time average equation. when calibrated to core. In western North America. For example. Other methods for the sonic have been proposed. • • 8: KCP = DTCSH / 100 (for English units) OR 9: KCP = DTCSH / 328 (for Metric units) • • KCP is never less than 1. after all corrections are applied.000 feet (900 – l. PHIe.0.Eng.000 4. Crain. sonic log corrected for shale is better than density log because the lithology effect on the sonic is smaller. the Hunt-Raymer transform is appropriate for the US Gulf Coast.5.0. The need for this correction is common.200 meters). crossplot methods or the density log corrected for shale are usually better if the log data is available. ONLY IF PHIsc > PHItrue and gas is known or suspected 5: PHIe = PHIsc * KS USAGE RULES: • • Use when density log is unavailable. chosen from the sonic log in a nearby shale. ONLY IF DTCSH > 328 (Metric) or DTCSH > 100 (English) 4: PHIe = PHIsc / KCP CASE 2: Correct each layer for gas effect. However.01 Porosity From The Sonic Log The sonic is a simple method and must be employed if more modern density neutron data is not available.

3 44.3 55.4 47.1.3 45.0 .Raymer equation has been proposed. KS.3 55. and gas compressibility.4 0. DTCSH.0 50.7 .0 DTCSH (choose from log) KCP KS DTCW Fresh drilling mud Salty drilling mud DTCMA Clean Quartz Calcite Dolomite Anhydrite Gypsum Mica Muscovite Biotite Clay Kaolinite Glauconite Illite Chlorite Montmorillonite Barite NaFeld Albite Anorthite K-Feld Orthoclase Iron Siderite Ankerite Pyrite Evaps Fluorite Halite Sylvite Carnalite Coal Anthracite Lignite 200 188 656 616 55.1.5 64.7 39. Appropriate crossplots may assist.7 67.6 45. KCP.0 73. adjust DTCMA. Shale corrected data should be entered to this equation (not mentioned in original paper).5 47.9 44. • • PARAMETERS: * English usec/ft 60 . This value depends on water saturation in the invaded zone. but it seems to work well only in the Gulf Coast of USA.0 .8 47.6 64. pressure.Eng. or Vsh to obtain a better match by trial and error. eg: dolomitic sand. To calibrate to core porosity. P.0 Metric usec/m 190 – 480 1. or prorate the values in proportion to the described mineral assemblage. temperature. representing the travel time of sound in a mixture of gas and water.1. 7 Pages Omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.5 64.0 52. Page 29 of 54 .1. A newer method called the Hunt .7 .6 69. DTCMA = (144 + 182) / 2 = 163 usec/m.150 1.4 0. DTCW.0 105 160 182 155 144 164 172 155 182 211 182 212 212 212 229 155 148 226 144 150 130 150 220 242 256 345 525 For mixtures. Crain.0 45.1 68. Values in the range of 600 usec/ft (1900 usec/m) at shallow depths to 300 usec/ft (950 usec/m) at 6000 feet (2000 meters) are recommended as a starting point.• Another way of making gas corrections is to change DTCW to a higher value. R.6 64. take the average of two pure values as a starting point.8 78.

5 CASE 2: IF gas is known to be present but no crossover occurs after shale corrections. log analysis involves the density neutron crossplot.net/00-orders. this usually means gas in dolomite or in a sandstone with lots of heavy minerals. there is gas crossover 7: THEN PHIxdn = ((PHInc ^ 2 + PHIdc ^ 2) / 2) ^ 0. Crain. STEP 2: Check for gas crossover after shale corrections and calculate porosity for each layer from the correct equation: 3: IF PHInc >= PHIdc. It was found to be a poor model for any sandstone that contained other minerals in addition to quartz. Page 30 of 54 . after all corrections are applied. there is no gas crossover 4: THEN PHIxdn = (PHInc + PHIdc) / 2 The density neutron crossplot porosity. so it is the preferred model today.80 for Sandstone scale log KD3 = 2. R.5.htm Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.04 Porosity From The Complex Lithology Density Neutron Crossplot The best method available for modern.8 – PHInc)) 9: PHIxdn = PHIx + KD3 * (0.8 – 1) / (1 + PHIdc / (0. Shale corrected data must be entered. apply the following gas correction: 8: PHIx = – PHIdc / (PHInc / 0. A crossplot method. is called the effective porosity. apply the following gas correction: 6: IF PHInc < PHIdc.00 for English units KD1 = 1000 for Metric units KD2 = 2.spec2000. PHIxdn.00 for Limestone scale log THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages. NORMAL CASES: STEP 1: Shale correct the density and neutron log data for each layer: 1: PHIdc = PHID – (Vsh * PHIDSH) 2: PHInc = PHIN – (Vsh * PHINSH) PHIDSH and PHINSH are constants for each zone. P.12.Eng. The complex lithology model works equally well in quartz sands as in mixtures. but not all models are recommended. available at www.65 for Sandstone scale log KD2 = 2. Although the name of the method is complicated. SPECIAL CASES: CASE 1: IF gas is known to be present AND gas crossover occurs after shale corrections. Chartbook solutions are provided in Figure PP5. and are picked only once. simple. the mathematics are not. called the shaly sand model was once widely used.30 – PHIx) * (DENSMA / KD1 – KD2) Where: KD1 = 1.71 for Limestone scale log KD3 = 1. Several variations on the theme are common. PHIe.

R. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. DENSMA should reflect the matrix density of the expected lithology.Eng. Density and neutron data cannot be used for this purpose because the gas effect masks the mineral effect. This can be predicted accurately if the PE curve can be used to determine mineral volumes in a two mineral model.12: Density Neutron Complex Lithology Crossplot Do not use Dolomite scale log for this special case. Page 31 of 54 .14 shows the effect of using this gas correction. Notice that computed porosity does not match core porosity unless the correct DENSMA is chosen. P. Figure PP5. Crain.FIGURE PP5.

PHIDSH. Answer porosity is accurate to +/.1% porosity using the simplified rules. Appropriate crossplots may assist.45 (choose from log) See Section 5. P. Use Limestone units log ONLY for these two special cases.0.16)) 11: PHIxdn = (E * PHIdc + 0.02 for matrix density (DENSMA) if needed for gas correction. To calibrate to core porosity. except gas in dolomite and low porosity dolomite. or regression of PHIxdn vs core porosity may be used. Page 32 of 54 .0. PARAMETERS: PHIDSH PHINSH -0. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. calculate secondary porosity: 14: PHIsec = PHIxdn .3 + 10 ^ (-5 * PHInc . even in shaly sands to correct for heavy mineral content.0.06 . Crain. Shale corrected data must be entered.(3. It is slightly more accurate. use Equations 10 and 11 with Limestone units logs instead of simpler rules. but requires a computer or preprogrammed calculator. CASE 3: IF rock is dolomite AND porosity is less than 5%. use the following instead of Equation 4 or 5: 10: E = (4 .15 .Chartbook solutions are provided in Figure PP5. Shale corrections could create apparent gas crossover and this may be real or an artifact of excessive correction. Check against known data from the well if shale correction creates crossover.PHIsc USAGE RULES: • • • • • • • • • Use in preference to most methods if data is available. CASE 4: IF Archie or dual water model is to be used for water saturation. For better accuracy. PHINSH or Vsh to obtain a better match by trial and error.15 (choose from log) 0. R. Do not use when density is affected by bad hole conditions. The matrix density required for the gas correction must be assumed from the sample descriptions or by calculating the lithology from the PE (photoelectric effect) log if it is available. except gas rules must still be applied. Charts and math for sonic density and sonic neutron crossplots are provided in Chapter Seven of Crain’s Petrophysical Handbook. the following is needed: 12: BVWSH = (PHIDSH + PHINSH) / 2 (a constant for the zone) 13: PHIt = (PHID + PHIN) / 2 (one value for each layer) CASE 5: IF zone is vuggy carbonate. adjust DENSMA.754) This option can be used instead of equation 4 as long as there is no gas crossover after shale corrections. No correction for log units (eg Sandstone or Limestone units) is needed for most cases.754 * PHInc) / (E + 0.Eng.13 when gas is present.

spec2000.Eng.FIGURE PP5.net/00-orders. R.htm 2 Pages Omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. available at www. Page 33 of 54 . P.13: Density neutron crossplot for porosity with gas in heavy minerals (eg dolomite) THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages. Crain.

so the hydrocarbon indication is from the invaded zone. However. For modern logs: 1: PHIt = CBW + BVI + BVM 2: PHIe = BVI + BVM 3: PHIuse = BVM Some or all of the sums defined above may be displayed on the delivered log. and mobile fluids (hydrocarbon plus water. are required. Log presentation is far from standard for NMR logs. In some situations. R.Eng. P.5. Crain. by further (experimental) processing of the original signal.09 Porosity from Nuclear Magnetic Log The Log Response Equation for modern nuclear magnetic logs is the same as for all other logs. based on other open hole logs. and sometimes gas can be distinguished from oil. For the same reason. This transform is illustrated in Figure PP5. FIGURE PP5. The difference between the NMR and other porosity logs is that the Log Response Equation is solved by the service company at logging time. the depth of investigation and measurement volume are tiny. irreducible water (capillary bound water. which see much larger volumes of rock. Page 34 of 54 . On older logs.16: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Response to Fluids For older logs: 1: PHIuse = FFI 2: SWir = KBUCKL / PHIuse 3: PHIe = FFI / (1 – SWir) 4: BVWSH = (PHINSH + PHIDSH) / 2 5: PHIt = PHIe + Vsh * BVWSH Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. BVM). mobile water can be separated from hydrocarbon. only free fluids (FFI) is recorded and some subtractions. instead of by the analyst after the logs are delivered. PHIt and PHIe from NMR do not always agree with that derived from density neutron methods.16. also called free fluids or free fluid index (FFI). BVI). An NMR log run today can display clay bound water (CBW). The matrix and dry clay terms of NMR response are zero.

KBUCKL is in the range 0.708 0. available at www.350 6 Pages Omitted THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages.25% (0.584 0. Fracture aperture from cores or thin section may be exaggerated due to stress release. Some “fracture-related” porosity. The simplest is to use the shallow resistivity and assume that the flushed zone water saturation is near 1.75) 3: OTHERWISE PHIml = 0 PARAMETERS Mud Weight lb/gal Kg/m3 8 1000 10 1200 11 1325 12 1440 13 1550 14 1680 16 1920 18 2160 KML frac 1.847 0. so be cautious using this data.100.10 Fracture Porosity There are a number of techniques published for calculating fracture porosity from conventional open hole logs. P. R. 1: PHIxo = (A / ((RXO / RMF@FT) * (SXO ^ N))) ^ (l / M) This is pretty nearly a last resort. Old style neutron logs (Section 5. will be seen by conventional logs. These older methods over-estimate fracture porosity. Page 35 of 54 .htm Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. The microlog can also be used: 1: IF RES2 > RES1 2: THEN PHIml = 0.001 * Wf * Df * KF1 Where: KF1 = number of main fracture directions = 1 for sub-horizontal or sub-vertical = 2 for orthogonal sub-vertical = 3 for chaotic or brecciated PHIfrac = fracture porosity (fractional) Df = fracture frequency (fractures per meter) Wf = fracture aperture (millimeters) Fracture porosity is exceedingly small and seldom is larger than 0.spec2000. with a default of 0.614 ((RMF@FT * KML) ^ 0.61) / (R2 ^ 0. Crain.PHIe and PHIt should be compared to density neutron or other methods defined earlier.000 0.Eng.07) may work better.010 to 0.380 0. which is why some older fracture porosity methods give quite high values for fracture porosity 5. All were developed before the processing of formation micro-scanner data for fracture aperture became common.488 0. 5.03) and the maximum porosity methods (Section 5. such as solution porosity near the fracture face.040.net/00-orders. The only correct method is to use fracture aperture and frequency data from FMI/FMS processed logs: 1: PHIfrac = 0.0025 fractional).412 0. This is well below the noise level of conventional open hole logs.11 Porosity from Old ES Logs There are a number of techniques for handling ancient logs like the old electrical survey (ES).0.

65 for Sandstone scale KD2 = 2. YOU must choose the model which gives the best resolution for the mineral end points you have chosen.71 for Limestone scale NOTE: Density data is needed in English units (gm/cc). where Vrock = 1 . Crain. USAGE RULES: • • If Min1 and Min2 are to be plotted in a volumetric track with Vsh and PHIe. 10 Pages Omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.PHIe – Vsh.00 KD2 = 2. 1 – D – E) + MAX(0. This method provides two different two-mineral and one three-mineral models. NORMAL CASES: STEP 1: Calculate shale density and shale capture cross section (a constant for each zone): 1: DENSSH = PHIDSH * KD1 + (1 – PHIDSH) * KD2 2: USH = PESH * DENSSH STEP 2: Translate density porosity to density units for each layer: 3: DENS = PHID * KD1 + (1 – PHID) * KD2 Where: KD1 = 1. E)) 12: Min2 = MAX(0.01. Use the Uma method any time data is available. Resolution is better when the values for the end points have the largest absolute difference.E) + MAX(0. STEP 3: Calculate matrix capture cross section for each layer: 4: Uma = (PE * DENS – Vsh * USH) / (1 – PHIe – Vsh) STEP 4: Calculate two mineral rock volumes from UMA: 5: Min1 = (Uma – UMA2) / (UMA1 – UMA2) 6: Min2 = 1.0 – Min1 STEP 6: Calculate three mineral rock volumes from Uma and DENSma: 9: D = (Uma * (DENS2 – DENS1) + DENSma * (UMA1 – UMA2) + UMA2 * DENS1 – UMA1 * DENS2) / (UMA1 * (DENS3 – DENS2) + UMA2 * (DENS1 – DENS3) + UMA3 * (DENS2 –DENS1)) 10: E = (D * (DENS3 – DENS1) – DENSma + DENS1) / (DENS1 – DENS2) 11: Min1 = MAX(0. R.6. D) + MAX(0. but not in bad hole conditions or when gas is present. Equations 1 thru 8 are not needed. but DTCma and DENSma must be derived as shown in Section 6. P.03 Lithology From PE Density Neutron Data This is the best method for calculating lithology if the data is available. E) / (MAX(0. E)) 13: Min3 = 1 – Min1 – Min2 SPECIAL CASES: Only the PE 2 mineral model can be used in gas zones.D . Page 36 of 54 . D) + MAX(0. multiply by Vrock before plotting.Eng. replace all Uma terms with DTCma terms in Equations 9 and 10. To use DTCma instead of Uma. 1 . 1 – D – E) / (MAX(0.0 – Min1 STEP 5: Calculate two mineral rock volumes from PE: 7: Min1 = (PE – PE2 – PESH * Vsh) / (PE1 – PE2) 8: Min2 = 1.

Two of the most common are given in Section 8. R.02: Water Saturation from Archie Method . We calculate water saturation from the effective porosity and the resistivity log. Rearrangement of these four equations give the more usual Archie water saturation shown in the next section. M can be as low as 1.5 to 1. M can be as high as 7. However. For shale free rocks with both hydrocarbon and water in the pores. the Formation Factor (F) was a constant defined by: 1: F = R0 / Rw He also found that F varied with porosity: 2: F = A / (PHIt ^ M) For a tank of water. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. but this is not supported by core data in all cases.5 and for M is 1. The normal range for A is 0. Page 37 of 54 .2.0 and M can have any value.6. Shale corrections are applied by adding a shale conductivity term with an associated shale porosity and shale formation factor relationship. in a shale free. Hydrocarbon saturation is 1 (one) minus the water saturation. depending on rock texture. both A and M vary with grain size. Crain.use in clean (non-shaly) zones. leading to numerous potential solutions for water saturation. simpler math than Dual Water Method. Water saturation is the ratio of water volume to pore volume. F is infinite and both A and M can have any value. YOU must choose an appropriate method from one of the following: ** Section 8. ** Section 8. then A must also be 1. R0 = Rw. water filled rock. he also defined the term Formation Resistivity Index ( I ) as: 3: I = Rt / R0 4: Sw = ( 1 / I ) ^ (1 / N) Archie used an N of 2 and the usual range is from 1. P. In fine vuggy rock.0 with a correspondingly low value for A. *** PLEASE NOTE *** Again. sorting. In fractures. Water bound to the shale is not included.1. and rock texture. Note that R0 is also spelled Ro in the literature. It is often taken to equal M. Archie used A = 1 and M = 2.use in shaly zones. All methods rely on work originally done by Gus Archie in 1940-41.7 to about 3. so shale corrections must be performed if shale is present.3 to 2.04. for real rocks.03: Water Saturation from Simandoux Method .Eng. If porosity is zero.00 Water and Hydrocarbon Saturation The fifth step in a log analysis is to find water saturation. Numerous authors have explored this approach.03 and 8. Therefore F = 1.CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL 8. He found from laboratory studies that. Since PHIt = 1.

This is called a Pickett Plot and is often a product of computerized log analysis. in this example A = 0. M = 2. provided they fall within reasonable ranges and the data set is large enough to be valid. This is usually done in carbonates or fractured reservoirs. Page 38 of 54 . M. they should be used.** Section 8. Figure PP8. Water saturation can be calibrated by comparing log analysis results with water saturation from capillary pressure data on core samples.21: Pickett plot showing different slopes (M) for dolomite (red) and limestone (blue) in a single reservoir The M value in fractured rock can be quite low and compensates for the invasion of drilling fluid into the fractures. you will have to calculate water saturation in the invaded zone.Eng. The intercept of the line at PHIe = 1. Data should be grouped by rock type. or mineralogy before the best fit lines are determined. 8. the slope of the best fit line through the formation factor data is the cementation exponent. The slope M may still be valid but the intercept is no longer A * RW. and in some cases from oil base cores. and N Archie initially proposed that A = 1. or for rough approximations.05: Water Saturation from Buckles Number Method . If you want to estimate moveable hydrocarbon. In Figure PP8. using shallow resistivity.01 Determination of Saturation Parameters A. Water cut is derived from the differences between actual water saturation and irreducible water saturation. porosity type. P. as in Figures PP8.22: Pickett plot showing low values of M in fractured reservoir and higher values in un-fractured intervals M can be varied for every depth level by computing it from the position of the data point on the Pickett plot.use when water resistivity is not known. The best fit line can be forced through the origin (a pinned line) which makes the tortuosity factor A = 1.60.0 is A * RW.0. Crain. and is generally meaningless.0 exactly. A cross plot of the deep resistivity versus porosity on a log-log scale made in a clean “obvious” water zone will provide the slope M. Figure PP8.use in shaly zones.0. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. preferred when shale resistivity is very low (less than 2 ohm-m). but of course this is not true. Data is usually presented in tabular as well as graphical form. This “variable M” is then used with the deep resistivity to calculate water saturation.23. and N = 2.0.23 and 8. Shaly zones should be excluded because the shale corrected water saturation equations correct automatically for varying A and M. These plots are also made with shallow resistivity versus porosity. ** Section 8. later it was found that these values varied with rock type.24.04: Water Saturation from Dual Water Method . When electrical properties are available. M. All zones are assumed to be wet due to invasion. The intercept of the best fit (un-pinned) line will give A. as opposed to hydrocarbons in place. R.

Several partial saturations are taken on each core plug and N is determined from the slope of the line through these points. The best fit line on this plot is always pinned at the origin. FIGURE PP8.Eng. There is no equivalent crossplot to find N from log data.0 by definition. N can be varied by defining lithofacies for each core plug and relating this to some log signature. It is a plot of resistivity index ( I ) versus water saturation. R. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.0 when SW = 1. This is especially useful in fractured reservoirs or carbonate reservoirs with varying pore geometry. P.24. since resistivity index must equal 1.23: Formation Factor versus Porosity plot to find saturation parameters A and M The value for the saturation exponent N is usually found in the laboratory as in Figure PP8.In water zones: 1: log(RESD) = – M * log(PHIe) + log(A * RW@FT) 2: M = (log(A * RW@FT) – log(RESD)) / log(PHIe) In hydrocarbon zones we assume the flushed zone is nearly 100% wet: 3: log(RESS) = – M * log(PHIe)+log(A*RMF@FT) 4: M = (log(A*RMF@FT) . Page 39 of 54 .log(RESS)) / log(PHIe) The M value can be varied zone-by-zone or for every data point. Crain.

it varies with pore geometry. or large). or coarse).Figure PP5. as illustrated below: Shell Method Analysts at Shell Oil proposed a formula to vary M in carbonates with porosity. Typical rock types in carbonates are intergranular (clastic texture). vuggy (fine. Crain. Page 40 of 54 . P. microporosity (unconnected pores). medium. and with porosity in some pore types. Rock typing is usually done from sample or core description. medium. oomoldic. Other relationships could be found by fitting non-linear curves to the data used Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. Various authors have proposed specific solutions.24: Resistivity Index versus Water Saturation to determine saturation exponent N VARIABLE "M" METHODS FOR CARBONATES The cementation exponent M is more difficult to assess in carbonates .Eng. R. M can be made to vary by solving equation 1 or 2 for each data point instead of fitting a line through the average of the data set. intercrystalline (fine. and fractured zones (with any other rock type).

20 + 6. in which M increases with porosity. there is no reason to believe M is a constant in a zone because fracture intensity probably varies dramatically from foot to foot within the layer. Both should be shale corrected as described in Chapter Seven. A method proposed by Rasmus.10) 8: M = 1. This can be derived from the results of a two or three mineral model or sample description. Page 41 of 54 .for the Pickett plot or by plotting individual M values versus porosity: 6: M = 1. Nurmi Method In oomoldic porosity.40 + 6. The M value so derived will be the result of BOTH fractures and the rock type in the zone covered by the crossplot. vuggy.29 * PHIe (perm = 1. and fossilmoldic rock types.57 * PHIe (perm = 0. based on secondary porosity concepts. PHIsc must be calculated with a matrix value (DELTMA) that varies with the rock lithology.PHIsc)) / log(PHIe) Mb is the formation factor exponent for the bulk matrix (un-fractured) rock and Md is the value for the combined matrix plus fracture. or a Pickett plot using a shallow resistivity log in the invaded zone.0 . Mb should be determined separately in unfractured zones if possible. A standard Pickett plot in water zones. R.Eng.100) 10: M = 1. intercrystalline.22 + 3.1 .49 * PHIe (perm > 100) WHERE: M = cementation exponent (unitless) PHIe = porosity from any source (fractional Nugent Method An equation proposed by Nugent uses the secondary porosity concept: 11: M >= 2 * log(PHIsc) / log(PHIxnd) PHIsc represents the matrix porosity and PHIxnd represents the effective porosity in the carbonate rock. as shown below: 7: M = 1. Rasmus Method The same techniques used to derive M for various carbonate rock types can also be used to find M in fractured carbonates.PHIsc) 13: PHIma = PHIxnd . Nurmi proposed the following: 12: PHIvug = 2 * (PHIxnd .87 + 1.20 + 12. However. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. PHIsc must be calculated with a matrix value (DELTMA) that varies with the rock lithology. will usually suffice.1.0) 9: M = 1.PHIsc)) * (PHIsc^Mb) + (PHIxnd . Results are too low in oomoldic rock type. Use Nugent's method in intergranular.PHIvug 14: M >= 2 * log(PHIma) / log(PHIxnd) Use Nurmi method in oomoldic rock type. Normally. P.(PHIxnd . M is chosen once for each fractured interval from Pickett plots over well-defined rock type zones or layers. solves this problem: 11: Md = log((1 . This can be derived from the results of a two or three mineral model or sample description with DELTMA = V1 * DELTMA1 + V2 * DELTMA2 + V3 * DELTMA3. porosity.9 * PHIe Focke and Munn l Method The Focke and Munn paper referred to earlier shows a variety of data sets. or double porosity. Crain.76 * PHIe (perm < 0.

If Vsh is high or RSH is low.7 NOTE: A. Hence: 3A: SWa = Sqrt (RW@FT / Rwa) The water saturation from the Archie method (SWa) is called the effective water saturation. M. A quick look version of the Archie formula sets A = 1.02 Water Saturation from Archie Method The most common saturation method was developed by Gus Archie in 1941. the Archie method will be pessimistic in shaly sands. clean sands.htm 5 Pages Omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.5 • • This formula can be calculated by mental arithmetic or on a scratch pad when needed. STEP 1: Calculate water saturation: 1: PHIt = (PHID + PHIN) / 2 2: Rwa = (PHIt ^ M) * RESD / A 3: SWa = (RW@FT / Rwa) ^ (1 / N) The term (1/N) is usually ½ or 0. N.15 N = 2. and is accurate enough for quick look work. Calibrate water saturation to core by preparing a porosity vs SW# graph from capillary pressure data. It is widely used in all parts of the world and is suitable for carbonates. PHIe until a satisfactory match is achieved. and shaly sands where RSH is above 8 ohm-m. P.0. M = 2.00 M = 2. replace RESD with RESS and RW@FT with RMF@FT. Crain.2 to 1.20 and RSH > 8.62 M = 2. which represents the square root. Where shale resistivity is low. PARAMETERS: for sandstone for carbonates for fractured zones A = 0.00 M = 1. R. THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages.Eng.00 N = 2. Sw. M.0.8. Page 42 of 54 . A.0 and N = 2.5. To calculate Sxo. 3: SWa = (RW@FT / (PHIt ^ 2) / RESD) ^ 0.net/00-orders. USAGE RULES: • • The Archie method should only be used when Vsh < 0. then SWa is too high and a shale corrected method should be used. and N should be determined from special core analysis if possible.0. Adjust RW.spec2000. available at www.00 A = 1.

CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL 9. Calibrate to core by adjusting CPERM. or Klinkenberg corrected permeability from core analysis. usually when no core data is available. However. Permeability to liquids is lower than absolute permeability. Perm. These values determine whether a zone is commercially attractive. There are a number of methods for calculating matrix permeability. Although it is not a quantitative measure of permeability. and EPERM.03: Permeability from the Coates Method . ** Section 9.use if core data is available. so Perm will vary also. Sw. Crain. PHIe and Vsh should have been accomplished earlier. R.use if no core data is available. we see that this equation is strictly a function of porosity if KBUCKL is a constant. The log can still be run today as part of a density log survey. the separation between the two microlog curves is an excellent indicator. ** Section 9. Again fractures will cause a difference. Allowance must be made to eliminate fractured samples from the core data set.02: Permeability from Porosity . maximum.use in place of Wyllie-Rose. You should state which type of core analysis you calibrated to. 9.01 Permeability From the Wyllie-Rose Method The general form of this equation has been used by many authors. The permeability from the Wyllie method (PERMw) is called the effective permeability. Not reliable in fractures or heterogeneous reservoirs. USAGE RULES: • • • Use anytime. absolute. Log analysis matrix permeability is calibrated to maximum core permeability (absolute permeability or air permeability).00 Permeability The sixth step in a log analysis is to estimate permeability and productivity. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. P. with various correlations between log and core data.01: Permeability from the Wyllie-Rose Method . Flow capacity from logs (KH) can be compared to pressure buildup analysis. more optimistic in low porosity. Page 43 of 54 . Individual analysts routinely calibrate their core and log data to this equation. KBUCKL varies with shale volume and grain size. The result is in millidarcies. STEP 1: Calculate permeability 1: PERMw = CPERM * (PHIe ^ DPERM) / (SWir ^ EPERM) If we recall that SWir = KBUCKL / PHIe. DPERM. It can be calibrated to air.Eng. *** PLEASE NOTE *** You must choose a method appropriate to the available data: ** Section 9.

0 Values of CPERM as low as 10 000 and as high as 1 000 000 have been used in the Morris . Not reliable in fractures or heterogeneous reservoirs. USAGE RULES: • • • Use anytime that parameters can be calibrated to core. Page 44 of 54 .50 –1.5 2.00 –1.htm Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. STEP 1: Calculate permeability 1: PERMp = 10 ^ (HPERM * PHIe + JPERM) The permeability from the Porosity method (PERMp) is called the effective permeability. 29 Pages Omitted THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages.20 –2. or Klinkenberg corrected permeability from core analysis.00 HPERM 16 18 20 22 24 26 30 The medium grain parameters approximate the Wyllie .spec2000. These parameters should be calibrated to core data whenever possible. Crain. The result is in millidarcies.Rose equation.Biggs equation.0 2. It is also called the Tixier equation.net/00-orders.02 Permeability From Porosity Permeability is often a semi-logarithmic function of porosity.PARAMETERS: RESEARCHER * Morris-Biggs Timur CPERM OIL or WATER GAS 65000 6500 6500 650 DPERM EPERM 6. Core data is usually plotted to determine the equation of the best fit line: it can be calibrated to air. absolute. PARAMETERS: Sandstones Carbonates Very fine grain Chalky Fine grain CryptocrystallineMedium grain Intercrystalline Coarse grain SucrosicConglomerate Fine vuggy Unconsolidated Coarse vuggy Fractured Fractured JPERM –3.50 –2.00 –2. 9.Eng. core porosity is often used to obtain this relationship for a particular zone. maximum. available at www.80 –1.0 4. R. A best fit line of the logarithm of core permeability vs. unfortunately with a fairly large deviation. Perm. P. especially in low porosity.

this interval cannot be completed. This is caused by gas effect canceling the dolomite effect. further restricting the completion interval.01: Induction and sonic logs on dolomite reef. defined by lower resistivity values at 2158. Although visual observation would provide good porosity values in the oil and water zones. The extra high resistivity from 2108 to 2115 meters is a gas cap. Since production rates are severely penalized by government regulations when GOR is too high. Spikes on deep and shallow resistivity and poor quality sonic (shaded red) suggest fractures.03 Case History – Devonian Carbonate Reef This example is more complex than first appearances would indicate. Deep induction sonde error was poorly set and curve pegs at 2000 ohm-m. while the density neutron shows little separation for dolomite in the gas zone at the top. so medium induction should be used instead. Initially. Page 45 of 54 . which probably extends down to 2130 meters. Porosity must be computed from the special "Gas in Heavy Minerals" algorithm over this interval or the results will be far too pessimistic. Beware of underestimating porosity in the “Gas in Dolomite” environment. 2166. Many computer aided log analysis programs cannot do this without some help from you. and workover history on this and adjacent wells paint a different story. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. the resistivity and porosity logs show a 70 meter pay zone. it is completely inadequate in the gas and solvent zones. Water break through has begun in the lower portion. The PE curve indicates clean dolomite. confirmed in the core and production rates. Crain. FIGURE CH3. leaving only a short interval between 2138 and 2174 meters available for production – about half the “net pay” interval. production history. but study of tests. Completing too close to the water contact is also unwise.Eng. R. Sonic log from offset well is shown in red to assist in editing the log.12. and 2173 meters. The raw logs indicate limestone with 8 % porosity when the zone is really dolomite with 10 – 12% porosity. P.

In other levels. Fractures are indicated by skips on the sonic log and spikes on the density log. the porosity from the sonic log would be very optimistic in some levels. minor crossover for 42 API oil. Dolomite scale presentation shows gas crossover at top of reef. as well as confirm the dolomite lithology. Beware of dolomite scales in a limestone rock – the crossover on the density neutron DOES NOT indicate gas in this situation. There is also a small amount of crossover on the dolomite scale log in the oil zone caused by the light gravity crude. Page 46 of 54 . Some of the density spikes caused by hole breakout at fractures still show up on the final results. Limestone scale log (left) shows reduced separation in top 15 – 20 meters. These observations indicate how difficult it is to analyze older carbonate wells where the sonic may be the only porosity log. Some very expensive mistakes have been made by inappropriate use of dolomite scale logs. demonstrating that the dolomite scaling is correct. Notice that there is no crossover in the water zone. Although not shown on any of the depth plots. R. These could have been edited to reflect reservoir conditions instead of borehole effects Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. and no crossover in water zone (so logs are properly calibrated for dolomite). suggesting limy dolomite. and gas on the sonic log.FIGURE CH3. A depth plot of the density neutron log on a dolomite scale helps point this out by creating the gas cross over effect.Eng.02: Density neutron PE log on the dolomite reef. as well as low resistivity spikes on both the deep and shallow resistivity curves.The gas-oil contact is not perfectly clear based on crossover. fractures. Test shows G/O below 2125 and residual oil in core suggests 2127 to -2130. P. so it must be gas. the porosity would be several percent too low due to the sonic's inability to see all vuggy porosity. caused by cycle skipping in fractured rock. Crain. These are also the most likely places for water break through. The lithology crossplots show the effect of vugs. but PE confirms pure dolomite.

00 0 .5 m3 Unknown recovery.0 No Shut In.fractional 0 .7 m3 Unknown recovery.5 – 2111. 0 .0 min FP: 6550.0/23063.0 Production Test No Pressures Gas 9600 m3/d (0.0 kPa High permeability.0/6223. A detailed match to porosity from core is usually not possible due to heterogeneity of the reservoir and the difference in rock volume seen by logs compared to the core.0 kPa SIP: 16410.0/27.1 m Logs: DIL-SP.0 SI: 28.01 1 1 00 1 00 00 H o r i z o n t a l P e r m e a b il it y . No formation damage. Heterogeneity. No Pressures Recovery: 447.Eng.2 m3 clean uncontaminated oil Perf #2 2107.0 kPa HP: 23718. Perf #1 / Acid Squeeze 2138.0 2365.5 10223926W4 Kmax vs Core Porosity 0 .6 m Production Test No Pressures Recovery: 52.0 m Production Test No Pressures “not set” Perf #6 2166. 2178.0 m Production Test No Pressures Recovery: 13.0 6622.0 – 2125.10 0 .8 7561.30 0 .6 m3 clean uncontaminated oil NOTE: Bridge plugs between these tests were not reported.0 – 2130.0 – 2170. FDC-CNL-GR.0/24. Crain.15 0 .6 m VO: 24.3 inches 8.4 from 10-22 Twin Well Analyzed Completion Record 15-22 Size/Depth mm Surface Casing: 219.1 7762. BHCS-GR. Gas 67 600 m3/d (2.8 Core Record 15-22 2150.25 0 . WELL HISTORY Fossil Joffre 15-22-39-26W4 Twin Well in 10-22-39-26W4 KB Elev: 908.7 6752. Page 47 of 54 meters 2012. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. FIGURE CH3.6 m Prod Test 2138.387 mmcf/d) Perf #4 2171.3 6909. GR (COMPL) Log depths in METERS Formation Tops 15-22 Name Calmar Nisku Ireton Leduc Cooking Lake Total Depth Testing Record 15-22 DST #1 2120.1 Production Casing: 139.05 0 . closed chamber.20 0 . A good match to average porosity and total pore volume can be achieved by adjusting the target matrix density in the computer program. 5 .5 2018.05: Well history listing for Carbonate Reef Example.Below are the well history and core data for this well.0 – 2155.5 2366.0 – 2174.0 – 2179.50 feet 1263. 2158.0 m Swab Test Recovery: 5.0 – 2161.0 – 2157. A permeability match may be possible if pore geometry is uniform throughout the interval. P. fractures. and vuggy porosity usually prevent a reasonable permeability from log analysis.m D M a t r ix P e r m = 1 0 ^ ( P H I e * 1 8 .0/2.0 feet 6603.0.5.0 m Inflate Straddle VO: 1.5 2058.0 2304. 2150.0. Blow description: none given.0/16410.0 Not Analyzed 2110. R.2 7760. Perfs Ineffective??? Perf #3 2121.7 Perfs: See Testing Record meters 385.0 2106. Recovery: 188m clean condensate 192m mud.339 mmcf/d) Perf #5 2166.0 – 2186.5 – 2161.5 – 2145.2 .5 – 2176.35 Core Porosity .63 5.

05.4 MM bbl 0.07 MM bbl 5. Black dots show core porosity. Most computer software does not handle gas in dolomite very well and underestimate porosity and over estimate water saturation. Results on the right uses the gas correction given in Section 5. The math is given earlier in this Handbook in Section 5.Eng. but only if you allow gas to be present. Crain. The illustration on the next page show the difference between no gas correction and a reasonable gas correction.9 Bcf 1.5 Bcf Log analysis production predictions in carbonates are difficult.6 MM bbl 1. P.4 Bcf 3.04.CUMMULATIVE PRODUCTION STATISTICS Cum’l Gas Oil Water Inj CO2 10-22 8. as in this case. and may be impossible. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. Some more sophisticated programs can handle this problem. Figure CH3. Results on left underestimate porosity in dolomite with gas due to a conflict between gas crossover and dolomite separation. Page 48 of 54 . R.03: Computed results over gas interval.4 MM bbl 15-22 1.

Black dots are core data.FIGURE CH3.Eng. R.04: Final petrophysical analysis of the dolomite reef. showing heterogeneous nature of the reservoir (and the difficulty in comparing the beer-can-sized core sample to a barrel-sized log reading). P. Crain. Page 49 of 54 . Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E..

070 0.19 0.00 5.12 30.271 0.101 0. suggesting that it would be difficult to obtain a good porosity analysis from the sonic log.50 338.34 0.51 0.116 0.38 2128.071 0.20 0.50 21. A solvent flood was begun after Year 3 to maintain pressure in the twin well.285 0.41 0.338 0.103 0.0 20.080 0.30 0.22 0.64 2122.42 0. Page 50 of 54 .432 0.047 0.70 2126.001 0.153 0.001 0.00 2110.104 2810 2830 2830 2810 2810 2790 2820 2840 2890 2830 2840 2830 2830 2830 2830 2840 2840 2840 2840 2830 2830 2830 2830 2840 2830 2820 2820 2810 2820 2830 2840 2830 2830 2840 2830 2627 2713 2638 2544 2546 2525 2685 2649 2799 2594 2695 2700 2594 2618 2702 2662 2575 2595 2623 2642 2616 2550 2592 2702 2706 2643 2598 2654 2562 2693 2702 2717 2696 2603 2640 0.30 36.94 2132.0 2880.001 0.00 2126.49 55.96 0.0 1670.043 0.90 165.CORE ANALYSIS DATA FOR 10-22-39-26W4 10223926W4 S# 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Top Base Len Kmax K90 Kvert Porosi GrDen BkDen Soil Swtr Lithology meters meters meter mD mD mD frac Kg/m3 Kg/m3 frac frac 2122.44 2125. 24 Pages Omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.90 107.427 0.117 0.76 2130.95 2127.00 130.07 102.074 0.129 0.30 2110.67 0.113 0.048 0.353 0.38 2127. Vuggy porosity is mentioned often.398 0.80 2125. IPR was 2100 bbl/day but declined very steeply and continued to decline on the same trend after the solvent flood was terminated.0 166.086 0.35 1840.86 2123.20 0.44 2125.05 2123.95 2127.072 0.072 0.64 2122.20 2110.20 196.198 0.80 81.000 0.504 0.36 120.27 0.055 0.000 0.60 2131.26 2129.26 2129.001 0.79 2129.10 672.36 113.00 192.26 0.42 2126.63 1700. then production was resumed during Year 6.00 6. We also need the production graph for the twin well to see the overall performance.50 90.90 16.18 2125.30 547.8 28.0 20.16 698.079 0.94 2128.370 0.064 0.412 0.28 0.207 0.19 2127. Crain.79 2129.70 11.28 2122.130 0.28 2122.81 2.21 2126. the data scatter is large due to natural fractures.534 0.108 0.068 0.56 0.67 2124.082 0. R.147 0. The high porosity – low perm data points represent matrix permeability.0 5.00 10000 2. The lower porosity – high perm points indicate the fracture permeability.046 0.75 2126.60 27.00 421.38 2127.212 0.097 0.60 2131.205 0.001 0.0 226.290 0.80 17.0 708.46 0.00 8.129 0.23 92.144 0.27 267.103 0.247 0.00 40.24 0.30 12.81 0.94 2132.105 0.261 0.10 7.00 533.00 16.26 0.075 0. Use the Oil Saturation column (Soil) to pick the gas-oil contact.053 0.05 2123.02 11.130 0.000 0. On the core porosity versus permeability plot.129 0.90 875.43 0.Bbbl/d (mcf/d) 2 00 0 1 50 0 1 00 0 5 00 0 1 4 7 YEAR S 10 Notice the high permeability streaks caused by fractures.118 0.00 11.560 0.077 0.00 6.00 2126.273 0.118 0.19 2127.86 2123.00 11.000 0.94 2128.00 48.Eng.00 15.14 2131.12 1.10 2124.75 2126.19 99.122 0.23 0.44 0.24 0.00 1.30 14.20 3.204 0.0 560.38 2128.70 2127.00 11.062 0.90 5.39 0.88 0.001 0.260 DOL I VUG CARB VFRAC DOL I PPV LV VFRAC DOL I VUG STY VFRAC DOL I PPV SV CARB DOL I VUG CARB STY VFRAC DOL I MV LV CARB VFRAC DOL I VUG CARB VFRAC DOL I VUG DOL I PPV SV ANHY DOL I VUG DOL I VUG STY DOL I VUG STY VFRAC DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I VUG FOSS DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I PPV MV DOL I VUG STY VFRAC DOL I VUG DOL I VUG CARB VFRAC DOL I VUG CARB VFRAC DOL I VUG CARB DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I VUG DOL I PPV LV VFRAC DOL I PPV SV VFRAC Arithmetic Averages FIGURE CH3.21 2126.18 2125.40 16.13 0.00 10000 2.60 82.182 0.29 0.15 2132.32 0.00 95.67 2124.47 0.410 0.60 48.000 0.0 5350.30 1800.53 2124.054 0.21 0.00 8.142 0.133 0.76 5.90 1282.15 2132.43 0.10 2124.70 532.09 2128.191 0.1 50. Lower values show matrix permeability.00 11.075 0.31 0.068 0.06 1.00 2122.92 88.121 0.09 2128.54 2122.70 443.06 0.47 2123.037 0.133 0.00 37.148 0.250 0.106 0.104 0.70 2126.00 2110.0 62.32 2130.53 2124.76 2130.83 2131.19 0.21 0.073 0.80 2125.00 19.83 2131.146 0.05: Core data listing for Carbonate Reef Example – partial listing over gas-oil contact 15-22-39-26W4 Production History 2 50 0 Normalized Rate .001 0.47 2123.097 0.21 0.42 2126.180 0.087 0. P.64 82. Compare to the crossover on the dolomite scale density neutron log.36 0.50 0.80 8.33 0.50 572.001 0.062 0.000 0.14 2131.8 0.075 0.20 2340.104 0.15 0.000 0.62 7.38 0.54 2132.196 0.00 572.0 23.70 5.174 0.32 2130.000 0.21 0.182 0.80 1770.0 32.70 2127.80 25.40 30.

Water resistivity is calculated from the water zone. and psi.0400 / PHIe in clean hydrocarbon bearing zones.CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL EXERCISE #1: Shaly Sand – Thick Beds – Log Depths in Meters Page 1 of 4 Your Name_____________ VISUAL ANALYSIS Draw shale and clean lines on SP and gamma ray logs.net/00-orders. R. This case history is described starting on page 92. P. The standard visual and quantitative rules apply. These are thick beds for porosity analysis but the clean oil and water zones are thin beds as far as the conventional induction log is concerned. which layer is most likely to produce water? ________ Based on the approximation that water saturation (Sw) = 0. barrels. Extending the conventional analysis to include reserves and productivity gives a better understanding of the relative and absolute quality of the two oil zones.0600 / PHIe in shaly hydrocarbon zones. THIS IS A SAMPLE – FOR ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES ONLY The complete manual is 193 pages. Work this exercise in feet. Page 51 of 54 . Estimate approximate shale volume and porosity for these 3 layers by observation of the logs: Shale Volume (Vsh) A: _____ B: _____ C: _____ Effective Porosity (PHIe) A: _____ B: _____ C: _____ Based on the resistivity log.htm Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E.281. 0. available at www. estimate Sw in all zones: Water Saturation (Sw) A: _____ B: _____ C: _____ SHALE PROPERTIES: Gamma Ray clean line (GR0) Gamma Ray shale line (GR100) SP clean line (SP0) SP shale line (SP100) Density shale line (PHIDSH) Neutron shale line (PHINSH) Sonic shale line (DTCSH) Resistivity shale line (RSH) Resistivity of Water Zone (R0) __________ ___________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ___NA___ _________ _________ LOG DATA VALUES FOR LAYERS NOTE: Convert depths to feet by multiplying meters by 3.Eng. A: Sh Sd Layer Top Layer Bottom Deep Resistivity Neutron Porosity Density Porosity Sonic Travel Time Gamma Ray Spontaneous Potential Photo Electric Effect Caliper ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ __NA____ ________ ________ ________ ________ B: Oil ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ __NA__ ______ ______ ______ ______ C: Water _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ __NA___ _______ _______ _______ _______ RESD PHIN PHID DTC GR SP PE CAL COMMENTS: This exercise illustrates a straight forward clean sand with oil over water and a shaly sand with oil.spec2000. Crain.

SP0) / (SP100 .40. EPERM = 2. SWbuckl) Permeability – Assume CPERM = 65 000. Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. N = 2. R.CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL EXERCISE #1: Shaly Sand – Thick Beds – Log Depths in Meters Page 2 of 4 Your Name_____________ A: Sh-Sd Shale Volume B: Oil C: Water 1: Vshg = (GR .62.GR0) 2: Vshs = (SP .0 1: Perm = PERMw = CPERM * (PHIe ^ DPERM) / (SWir ^ EPERM) Reserves – Assume Bo = 1. P. Qo in bbl/day.0.PHID) / (PHINSH . _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____ ____ _____ ____ ____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ______ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _Wtr_ _____ _____ _Wtr_ Show units of measurement for permeability.SP0) 3: Vshx = (PHIN . DPERM = 6. VISO = 2. RF = 0. AREA = 160 acres. Depth in feet. 1: THICK = Layer Base – Layer Top 2: PV = PhiH = PHIe * THICK 3: HPV = HydH = PHIe * (1 – Sw) * THICK 4: Kh = Perm * THICK 5: NetH = THICK 6: Roil = RF * KV3 * HPV * AREA / Bo KV3 = 7758. Sw. Productivity – assume (PF – PS) = 1000 psia. M = 2.00 for Sandstone 1: PHIwtr = (PHID(wtr zone) + PHIN(wtr zone)) / 2 _______ 2: RW@FT = (PHIwtr ^ M) * R0 / A _______ Water Saturation 1: PHIt = (PHID + PHIN) / 2 2: Rwa = (PHIt ^ M) * RESD / A 3: Sw = SWa = (RW@FT / Rwa) ^ (1 / N) Irreducible Water Saturation 1: KBUCKL = PHIe(oil zone) * Sw(oil zone) _________ 2: SWbuckl = KBUCKL / PHIe / (1 – Vsh) 3: SWir = Min (1.0 cp 1: Qo = KV1 * Kh * (PF – PS) / VISO KV1 = 0. reserves.PHIDSH) 4: Vsh = Minimum of above in each zone Porosity 1: PHIdc = PHID – (Vsh * PHIDSH) 2: PHInc = PHIN – (Vsh * PHINSH) 3: PHIe = PHIxdn = (PHInc + PHIdc) / 2 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____ ______ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ Water Resistivity from Water Zone Use A = 0. Page 52 of 54 .GR0) / (GR100 .25.0001.Eng.15. Roil in stock tank barrels. and productivity. Crain.

P. Crain. Page 53 of 54 .CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL EXERCISE #1: Shaly Sand – Thick Beds – Log Depths in Meters Page 3 of 4 Your Name_____________ Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R.Eng.

P. Crain.CRAIN’S PETROPHYSICAL POCKET PAL EXERCISE #1: Shaly Sand – Thick Beds – Log Depths in Meters Page 4 of 4 SANDSTONE SCALE LOG Your Name_____________ 42 Pages Omitted Crain’s Petrophysical Pocket Pal Copyright 1978 – 2012 E. R. Page 54 of 54 .Eng.

- Well Log Interpretation
- B P - Petrophysical Reservoir Evaluation
- Petrophysical Engineering
- Interpretation Log
- Basic Formation Evaluation
- Introduction to Wireline Log Analysis_baker
- Petrophysics
- Intro to Petrophysics
- Guide to Petrophysical Interpretation
- Well Log COURSE
- 136 - Core-Log Integration
- Petrophysical Pocket Pal Lecture 6
- BASIC LOG INTERPRETATION_HLS
- Introduction to Reservoir Petrophysics
- Geoscientists Guide to Petrophysics
- Core Laboratories - Formation Evaluation and Petrophysics
- Peters, E. J. - Petrophysics
- Formation Evaluation MSc Course Notes Paul Glover
- Fundamentals of Petrophysics Ch 1-5
- Petrophysics MSc Course Notes
- Jensen et al. Statistics for Petroleum Engineers and Geoscientists (1997)
- Basic Well Log Analysis, 2nd Edition AAPG
- AAPG Memoir 67 - Seals Traps & Petroleum System
- Basic Log Interpretation
- Applied Petroleum Geoscince Course
- Petrophysics P.glover (1)
- Reservoir Petrophysics Class Notes
- Basic Well Log Interpretation
- Development Geology Reference Manual
- Crain's Petrophysical Handbook

- Stacking Pattren.pptx
- 31591109 Basic Petroleum Geology Log Analysis
- Turner2006.pdf
- Punjab Platform
- AVO
- Imagelog_Interpretatio.pdf
- ndx_ali.pdf
- Cutoffs in Finite Element Modeling
- AVO3
- Deltas 2013.pdf
- Paper2_Haavard_D_Enge.pdf
- Dictionary_of_Petroleum_Industry.pdf
- App Matrix
- SPE_Channel_Sands.pdf
- Morse.pdf
- Scale Factor Info
- 38764270 NMR Prinicples Haliburton
- Montecarlo
- Tectonics of kutch basin
- well_logging
- MApping fractures
- Rw Calculation
- 023logs Analouges.pdf
- AVO_ineversion
- fractures
- Potwar Chemistry
- Geochemistry of Potwar_best
- Punjab Platform
- An experimental evaluation of the curvature

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulClose Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading