PROBLEMS IN DIELECTRIC-CONSTANT LOGGING

AND POSSIBLE ROUTES TO THEIR SOLUTION

LIANG C. SHEN
University of Houston
Houston, Texas

ABSTRACT Table 1: Dielectric Permittivity of Reservoir Substances

Dielectric-constant logging is a relatively new technique (E ’ /co)
in formation evaluation. In this paper a brief introduction gas 1
of the principle of dielectric-constant logging is given. Pre- oil 2
sent status of the tool development is reported. A survey
of the technical staffs of nine oil companies has been con- 20 ohm-m water 79
ducted. Their comments on the advantages and limitations 1 ohm-m water 77
of the dielectric-constant tools and suggestions for further 0.1 ohm-m water 59
improvements are given. Some important areas of research
to overcome present problems in dielectric-constant log- sandstone matrix 4.7
ging are recommended. limestone matrix 7.5
APPLICATIONS dolomite matrix 6.9
Development of dielectric-constant tools arises from the Notes: (1) The dielectric permittivity of water is calcu-
need to investigate formations containing fresh water or lated from an empirical formula given in
formations that have been flooded by water, steam, or [Saxton and Lane, 19521.
chemicals. Conventional resistivity tools are not useful in (2) e0 is equal to 8.8542 x 10-12 F/m.
fresh-water formations because the contrast in formation
resistivity between the oil-bearing zone and the water-
bearing zone is greatly reduced. Fresh-water oil fields are some basic principles. The electromagnetic properties of
often of shallow depth and with heavy oil, such as those a material are as follows:
in Kern County, California. They are also found in Canada,
E ’ = dielectric permittivity (Farad/m)
China, Colombia, Indonesia, and U.S.S.R. For water
ed = dielectric loss (Farad/m)
flooded reservoirs, interpretation of resistivity logs is
CJ = conductivity (S/m or mho/m)
hampered by uncertainty in R, values. Many infill wells
fall into this category. p ’ = magnetic permeability (Henry/m)
Dielectric-constant tools are designed to measure the p ” = magnetic loss (Henry/m)
dielectric permittivity of the formation. The dielectric per- The dielectric permittivity is related to the ability of the
mittivity of oil is approximately 2 units, gas is 1 unit, and electric dipoles in the material to form and align themselves
fresh water is 79 units. Table 1 lists the relative dielectric with the alternating electric field. Water molecules have
permittivity of some typical substances found in reservoirs. large electric dipole moments and consequently the dielec-
It is seen that while the contrast in resistivity between oil tric permittivity of water is high. The dielectric loss Ed
and water is lost in formations containing fresh water, water can be attributed to friction between electric dipoles when
and oil have very different dielectric permittivities. Note they are oscillating with the external electric field. For
also that variation of dielectric permittivity of water as a water, this term is negligible at low frequencies but
function of salinity is much smaller than the variation in becomes appreciable at 1 GHz and above.
conductivity. Consequently, dielectric-constantlogs are less The first three quantities listed above form what is known
dependent on R, than resistivity logs are. That is why as the complex dielectric permittivity of the material:
dielectric-constant tools are useful in formations with vari-
able or unknown water salinities.
BASIC PRINCIPLES The last two form the complex magnetic permeability of
How do we measure dielectric permittivity of a forma- the material:
tion? In order to answer this question, we must understand p, = p ‘ - j p,” (2)
14 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER, 1985
 Characteristics of electromagnetic waves of angular fre- Table 2: Complex Dielectric Permittivity of Water ( d e O )
quency w, with e‘O‘time variation, are determined by these
complex quantities. In other words, the relative weighting
- -
of each individual term is given in the above equations.
For example, the conductivity term is weighted by the fre- 20-ohm
quency factor in the denominator in equation (1), causing water
the conductivity to play the dominant role in low-frequency
(e.g., 20 kHz) cases, 1-ohm
Propagation of electromagnetic waves in a medium like water
the earth formation is characterized by the complex wave
number k given below: 0.1-ohm
k = o d F (3) water
Note that k is proportional to the square root of the com-
plex dielectric permittivity. The real part of the complex
wave number k is called the propagation constant:
,f? = Re{ k ] (4)
The imaginary part of the complex wave number k is called
the attenuation constant:
a = Im{k} (5)
Note that the familiar quantity “skin depth” is equal to
the inverse of a ;that is,
d, = skin depth = lla (6)
For a plane electromagnetic wave propating in a medium
for a distance L, the phase of the wave is shifted by 6 L,
and the amplitude is attenuated by exp[ - aL]. In wireline
dielectric-constanttools the electromagneticwave generated
by the transmitter is not planar, thus the phase shift and
the attenuation are also affected by the geometry of the tool.
The phase shift and the attenuation are the quantities
measured by a dielectric-constant tool. From equations
(3-5) we see that the tool measures the complex wave
number k. From measured k, and by assuming that the
formation does not contain any magnetic mineral so that
the magnetic permeability of the formation is equal to that
of the free space, we can then calculate the dielectric per-
mittivity of the formation.
The foregoing discussion can be summarized as follows:
(a) The real part of the complex dielectric permittivity
of the water is relatively insensitive to its salinity while
the imaginary part, which contains the conductivity
term, is very much affected by the salinity.
(b) The measurable quantities are the phase shift PL and
attenuation a L both of which are affected by both the
real and the imaginery parts of the dielectric permittivity.
(c) At low frequencies (e.g., 20 kHz) the imaginary term
is much greater than the real term even for fresh water,
thus the measured phase shift and attenuation are al-
most entirely determined by the conductivity.
(d) In order to calculate the real part of the dielectric per-
mittivity from the measured data, the operating fre-
quency of the tool must be so high that the real and
the imaginary parts of the dielectric permittivity are
of the same order of magnitude.
THE LOG ANALYST 15
20 kHz 30 MHz 1100 MHz
79-j45000 79-j30 79-j5.6
77-j900000 77-j600 77-j21
59-j9000000 59-j6000 594167
Notes: (1) The dielectric permittivity a. water is calcu-
lated from an empirical formula given in
[Saxton and Lane, 19521.
(2) e0 is equal to 8.8542 x 10-12 F/m.
SELECTION OF OPERATING FREQUENCY
Because of its molecular structure, water contributes
greatly to the dielectric permittivity of reservoir rocks.
Table 2 lists the complex dielectric permittivity of saline
solution. From this table, it is seen that in order to satisfy
the condition that the real and the imaginary parts of the
dielectric permittivity be of the same order of magnitude,
the operating frequency of the tool must be several tens
of MHz.
Figure 1 shows measured dielectric permittivity (real
part only) of fluid saturated Berea sandstone in the fre-
quency range 20 to 1300 MHz. When the rock is saturated
with oil, its effective dielectric permittivity is essentially
independent of the frequency in this frequency range. When
the rock is filled with water, the dielectric permittivity is
distinctly different from the oil-filled value, demonstrating
the basic advantage of the dielectric-constant logging. Fig-
ure 1 also shows the dependence of dielectric permittivity
on water salinity. At 20 MHz, the dielectric permittivity
changes about 5 units when the fluid in the Berea sand-
stone is changed from deionized water to 30 kppm water.
At 1100 MHz, the corresponding change is only 1 unit.
Thus salinity effect is reduced when the operating fre-
quency is increased.
Figure 2 shows the skin depth calculated from the
measured data of water-saturated Berea sandstone. The skin
depth is defined in equation (6). It serves as a measure
of depth of penetration into the formation by an elec-
tromagnetic wave, emitted from a logging tool. It is seen
that a 20 MHz wave has a skin depth of approximately
8 inches in this rock, while the skin depth of a 1100 MHz
wave is only about 2 inches in the same rock formation.
Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate the following points. Selec-
tion of operating frequency to be 1100 MHz makes the
dielectric-constant log relatively insensitive to the salin-
ity. However, the formation investigated by the tool will
 I (7)
R =
o + o E d
8 x 0 Measured Data
It is seen that R is always less than 110 because of the
.-2 2 0 - dielectric loss term. Note that the resistivity of the forma-
.->
c
.- tion obtained in a dielectric-constant log is not necessarily
5 equal to that obtained in conventional resistivity logs. This
d 15-
is due to the fact that the borehole and invasion may pro-
.-0 duce different effects on the dielectric-constant tool than
c
L.
0
al on resistivity tools. Another reason is that the mixing law
cu.- 10- (to be examined later in this paper) may be frequency
P
al dependent so that the effective conductivity of the rock
>
.-
c at low frequencies may be different from that at higher
a
cu
a
5 - frequencies.
Schlumberger’s EPT log displays propagation time and

0’
-
10
1

20
I

30
I 1

50
1 I , , I

100
I ,
200 300 500
I I # 0 1 ,

1000
Frequency (MHz)
Figure 1: Real part of dielectric permittivity ( E I E ~ of
) Berea
sandstone, with porosity equal to 19%, at room
temperature, saturated respectively with oil,
deionized water, and 30 kppm water.
normally be the flushed zone because the investigation
depth is only a few inches. Designing the tool to operate
in the 20 to 50 MHz range increases the investigationdepth.
However, the dielectric-constant logs will be more depen-
dent on the salinity of the water than they would be with
the IlOOMHz tool.
DIELECTRIC-CONSTANT TOOLS
At the present, several dielectric-constanttools have been
developed and some have been available for commercial
use. They are listed in Table 3. Dielectric-constant tools
attenuation. The propagation time tPl is related to the phase
by the following equation:
t,,/ = phase shift in radians (seconds/m) (8)
W L
where L is the spacing of the two receivers expressed in
meters.
PRESENT USAGE
Mandrel-type dielectric-constant logging tools have been
used for general formation evaluation in formations that
contain water with low or unknown salinities [Meador and
Cox, 1975; Cox, 19831. They were also used for monitor-
ing progress of water injection [Meador and Cox, 19751
and for water prospecting [Daev, 19741.
The 200-MHz tool developed by Dresser-Atlas is relatively
new compared to the 1100-MHz tool, the Electromagnetic
Berea Sandstone
10 Por. = 0.19

can be classified as mandrel-type and pad-type. The trans- 30 k p p m W a t e r

mitters and receivers of mandrel-type tools are coil (loop) 23 O C

0 @ 0 Calculated from Measured D a t a

antennas, as illustrated in Figure 3 where only a trans- 8
mitting coil and two receiving coils are shown. Those of
pad-type tools are slot antennas, as illustrated in Figure 4*.
During logging operation, the transmitter in the dielec-
tric-constant tool emits into the formation electromagnetic
waves of fixed frequency. There are at least two receivers
in a tool. The wave that reaches the far receiver undergoes
longer phase delay and greater attenuation than the wave
that reaches the near receiver. The difference in phases
and the ratio of the amplitudes of the two received waves
are measured by the tool. Using equations ( 1 - 3 , the com-
0
plex permittivity may be calculated from these measured 10 20 30 50 100 2 0 0 300 5 0 0 1000
data. Some logs display the phase and attenuation data, Frequency (MHz)
some logs show the real part of the permittivity and the
resistivity R. R is related to the imaginary part of the per- Figure 2: Skin depth versus frequency for the Berea sand-
mittivity as follows: stone saturated with 30 kppm water.

*Sometimes these tools are still referred to as mandrel-type because the antenna pad is
rigidly mounted to the tool body.

16 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER, 1985
 Table 3: Dielectric Logging Tools

FREQUENCY COMPANY TRANSMITTER-RECEIVER SPACINGS

(mandrel type)

16 MHz Texaco T-R (44”)

20 MHz Gearhart T-R1(24”), T-Rz(40”)
20 MHz Welex T-R1(24”), T-Rz(38”)
20 MHz Texaco T-Ri(24 ”), T-Rz(40 ”)
25 MHz Schlumberger T-R1R 4 5 0 ”), T-R3R4(95 ”)
30 MHz Gearhart T- R1(32”) , TR2(44 ”)
30 MHz Texaco Ti-R(31.5”), T~-R(40.5”)
47 MHz Dresser-Atlas T-R1(31.5”), T-Rz(39.4”)

200 MHz Dresser-Atlas

1100 MHz Schlumberger

receiving coil # l
Tl
slot Rl
receiving coil 4‘2 antennas
R2

T2

transmitting coil

Figure 4: Pad-type dielectric-constant tool. Transmitting and

receiving antennas are slot antennas located on
Figure 3: Mandrel-typedielectric-constant tool. Transmitting a conducting pad which is pushed against the bore-
and receiving coils are wound over a non-con- hole wall by a powered mechanical arm on the
ducting mandrel. opposite side of the pad.

THE LOG ANALYST 17

Propagation Tool (EFT), developed by Schlamberger. Since was reported [Daev, 19741.
the first technical discussion of the EFT tool was published According to calculations made by Daev, the dielectric-
[Calvert et al., 19771, many papers have reported various constant tools could not function accurately when the for-
applications of the Em. Examples are given as follows. mation resistivity was lower than 5 ohm-m. Also, the
(a) to calculate S, from the EFT log [Neuman, 1983; Shen invasion diameter must be less than 0.6 m and the mud
et al., 1984; Dahlberg and Ference, 19841, resistivity must be greater than 0.8 ohm-m.
(b) to calculate water-filled porosity from the EFT log and Dielectric-Constant Tool in China
cross plot it with total porosity and to use the difference According to a recent paper, China has also developed
of the two porosities as oil indicator [Johnson and a dielectric-constant sonde [Geng et al., 19831. It operates
Evans, 19831, at 60 MHz, with a transmitting coil and two receiving coils.
(c) for thin bed resolution and sand count [Allen, 1984; Spacing between the transmitting coil and the first receiving
Suau et al., 19841, coil is 0.95 m, and the second receiving coil is placed 0.3
(d) for oil movability indicator [Standen and Badry, 1981; m further away from the transmitting coil. Vertical resolu-
Shen et al., 19841, tion was reported to be better than 0.6 m and the depth
(e) for monitoring steam drive Wharton and Delano, 19811, of investigation was 0.4 m.
( f ) for formation evaluation in oil base muds [Boyeldieu The Chinese dielectric-constant tool has been tested in
et al., 19841. more than 100 wells at Daqing, Liaohe, and Fuyu oil fields
In addition, reservoir tomography is another possible in China. The Daqing reservoir has a typical depth of
application of the dielectric-constant tool. It was reported 900 m, with 6 to 8 kppm of salinity in the connate forma-
that by propagating electromagneticwaves between closely tion water. During production, very fresh water (0.5 to
spaced wells (typically 50 to 100 feet apart), the data ob- 0.8 kppm salinity) was injected. As a result, dielectric-
tained by a specially designed dielectric-constant tool might constant tools were needed to evaluate this flooded field.
reveal the status of the reservoir [Kretzschmar, 19821. Use
of electromagnetic power for oil-shales heating and rock INTERPRETATION OF
DIELECTRIC-CONSTANT LOGS
fragmentation was tried in the 19iO’s, and the dielectric-
constant tool must have played an important role in the The task of interpreting the dielectric-constantlogs may
project. Fluid-filled fractures tend to reflect high frequency be separated into two major parts. The first part is referred
electromagnetic waves. It has been observed that hetero- to as the tool theory. The goal of studying the tool theory
geneity of the reservoir rock causes scattering of the elec- is to answer the question: how well does the tool measure
tromagnetic waves at 800 to 1200 MHz range [Shen et al., the true dielectric permittivity of the formation? In that
19851. These facts suggest that dielectric-constant tools study, effects of borehole fluid, mud cake, adjacent
might be developed for fracture detection and heterogeneity shoulder bed, invasion, tool geometry eccentricity, and
indication. borehole rugosity must be considered. These effects must
be corrected to obtain the true dielectric permittivity.
The second part of log interpretation study is referred
Dielectric-Constant Tool in U.S.S.R.
to as the rock property. The goal of that study is to obtain
Development of dielectric-constant tools may have begun
a mixing law that can convert the dielectric permittivity
earlier in the Soviet Union than in the United States. In
data into reservoir parameters such as the oil saturation.
1974, it was reported that at least two versions of dielectric-
The status of the tool theory development and rock property
constant tools had been developed and tested [Daev, 19741.
research is given in the following sections.
The first tool was called Dielectric Inductive Logging
Sonde. It operated at 14.5 or 24 MHz. The sonde had 2 TQOL THEORY
transmitting coils and 1 receiving coil. The coil spacings The basic theory of the 20 to 50 MHz mandrel-type tool
were 0.8 and 1.0 meter, respectively. The second sonde, is the same as that of the induction tool because the trans-
operated at 43 or 60 MHz, was called the Wave Dielectric mitting and the receiving devices on both kinds of tools
Logging Sonde. It had 1 transmitting coil and 2 receiving are coils. Theory developed independently by Duesterhoeft
coils. The spacing between the transmitting and receiving [1961] and Moran and Kunz [1962] is also applicable for
coils is approximately 1 meter. mandrel-type dielectric-constant tools when the mandrel
These dielectric-constant tools were reportedly tested that houses the coils is made of non-conducting material.
at the Romashkinskii oil field which contains both car- Schlumberger’s 25 MHz tool has a metal tubing at the
bonate rocks and sand-shale formations. Fresh water was center of the mandrel. As a result, a more complicated
used in drilling and in recovery. In addition, underlying formulation should be used to account for this metal tub-
fresh-water aquifer rose into the reservoir, making the con- ing [Chew, 19821.
ventional resistivity tool unsuitable for well logging. The The mandrel-type tool typically has a depth of investiga-
depth of the reservoir was approximately 1700 meters. tion of approximately one foot. Consequently this type of
Dielectric-constanttools were also used for hydrogeological tool is usually sensitive to borehole fluid and invasion.
studies. Logging of a water well 250-m deep near Moscow Calculation of borehole and invasion effects in infinitely

18 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER, 1985
 thick beds has been made by Chew [1982] using an analytic
approach. The borehole and invasion effects in thin beds
were obtained by Anderson and Chang [1983] using the
finite element method. A new method developed by Ander-
son and Chew [1984] greatly reduced the computation time
needed to solve the same problem.
The effect of eccentricity of the mandrel-type dielectric-
constant tool in a borehole has not been reported in the
literature. However, the theory needed to study this effect
has been obtained by Gianzero and Lin [1985] who carried
out the study for induction tools.
In a theoretical study [Freedman and Vogiatzis 19791,
the pad-type tool is modelled as consisting of thin line
transmitting and receiving antennas located on an infinitely
large planar perfect conductor. The mud cake is modelled
as a layer of dissipative medium between the conductor
and the formation. In another study [Chew and Gianzero,
19811 the slot antenna on the tool is treated as an infinitely
long magnetic line-source.
According to the work by Chew and Gianzero, the mea-
sured propagation constant for Schlumberger’s EFT sonde
does not need correction if the mud cake is less than 3/8
inch thick. The Freedman and Vogiatzis paper contains
some correction charts for the propagation time with
various mud cake parameters. The correction charts for
the Dresser-Atlas tool have not yet been published.
In summary, several recent publications have indicated
that the borehole, invasion, thin bed, and eccentricity ef-
fects of a mandrel-type dielectric-constant tool can be ob-
tained using computer simulations. The mud-cake effect
of the pad-type tool can also be found similarly. However,
complete sets of correction charts or computer codes to
generate these charts have not been published in the litera-
ture, nor have they been commercialized.
ROCK PROPERTY
Archie’s equations relate the conductivity of a rock ‘to
the water saturation. What is the law that relates the dielec-
tric permittivity of a rock to the water or oil saturation?
Such a law is referred to as the mixing law for dielectric TPO Method
mixtures.
At the present, the mixing laws that are used to interpret
dielectric-constant logs in the 20 to 60 MHz range are as
follows:
Lichtnecker-Rother Formula
where
er = dielectric permittivity of the rock,
4 = porosity,
S, = water saturation,
E,,, = dielectric permittivity of the water in the
rock,
em = dielectric permittivity of the rock matrix,
THE LOG ANALYST 19
eh = dielectric permittivity of the hydrocarbon
in the rock,
c = dielectric cementation factor,
p = polarization factor.
In most of the relevant literature [Meador and Cox, 1975;
Berry et. al., 1979; Cox and Warren, 19831, only the real
parts of the dielectric permittivities are used in equation
(9). The dielectric cementation factor c is usually chosen
to be 0.5 and the polarization factor p is so chosen that
the value will best fit the core data.
where
= dielectric permittivity of substance 1 in the
rock,
e2 = dielectric permittivity of substance 2,
$1 = volume fraction of substance 1,
42 = volume fraction of substance 2.
The above formula is used in the U.S.S.R. [Daev, 19741.
Only the real part of the permittivity is used in equation
(10). Note that the Odelevskii formula is limited to a rock
having either water or oil. If the rock contains both oil
and water, this formula may be used in succession: first
to obtain the effective dielectric permittivity of rock and
oil, and then to calculate the overall effective dielectric
permittivity by treating the rock and oil as substance 1
to mix with water which is substance 2.
No literature has been published to substantiate the
validity of either equation (9) or (10). The major drawback
of these formulas is that only the real part of the dielec-
tric permittivity is present. According to the electromag-
netic theory, the complex permittivity as a whole should
be involved in all measurable physical quantities.
There are three mixing formulas being used for inter-
preting E m logs:
(A) &T = 9 S W G+ 9(1- + (1 - 9 ) d Z (11)
where
E , = dielectric permittivity of distilled water.
The difference in equations (11) and (12) is in the water
dielectric permittivity term. That term in equation (11) is
for the water in the formation and the water permittivity
term in equation (12) is for the distilled water. Again, only
the real part of the permittivity is used in both equations
(11) and (12). These equations are special cases of the
Lichtnecker-Rother equation with c = 0.5 and p = 1. The
TPO formula was first proposed by Wharton et al. [1980].
It has been shown that the TPO formula is valid only when
the water in the rock is very fresh [Dahlberg and Ference
1984; Shen et al., 1985; Sherman. 19851.
Complex Refractive Index Formula
t? 4SW E: + q5(I-Sw) tk + (1-4) 6;
= (13)
Note that this formula is the Lichtnecker-Rother formula
with c =0.5 and p = 1, with complex permittivities for rock
and water. It was proposed by Wharton et al. 119801 and
was referred to as the CRIM or CRI formula.
It has been shown that equation (13) agrees quite well
with experimental data even when the water in the rock
has high salinity [Shen et al., 19851. The CRIM equation
predicts that the dielectric property of a partially saturated
rock is not affected by the condition that the rock is water
wet or oil wet, as long as the total volumes of oil and water
remain the same. If this assertion should be true, then the
CRIM formula should be valid in case of oil base muds.
But laboratory data show that CRIM formula fails to predict
the dielectric property of an oil base mud.
Figure 5 shows the measured data of an oil inverted mud
in the frequency range 800 to 1200 MHz. The mud is made
of oil (64% by volume), 285 kppm water (19%),and solids
(17%). The laboratory system used to measure the oil base
mud is described in [Huang, 19841. From Figure 5, it is
seen that the complex dielectric permittivity of that oil in-
verted mud is approximately 5.3 - j 0.2 near 1100 MHz.
With the following values:
4 = 0.19,
E , = 12.6 - j 466 for 285 kppm water,
E , = 3.0 - j 0 for oil and solids,
s, = 1.0,
the CRIM formula predicts that
t, = 10.7 - j 24.9.
This is very different from the measured value.
Bruggeman-Hanai-Sen Formula
where
e l = dielectric permittivity of the host medium,
t2 = dielectric permittivity of the guest medium,
4 = fractional volume of the guest medium with respect
to the total volume of the whole mixture,
c = depolarization factor.
The host medium is the continuous phase of the substance
in the mixture. Original derivation of the Bruggeman-
Hanai-Sen (BHS) formula is for the static case (where the
frequency is zero) and for perfect insulating substances
so that all permittivities are real numbers [Sen et al., 19811.
For a spherical guest medium, the depolarization factor
c is equal to 1/3.
When the BHS formula is used to fit the laboratory data
20
measured in the 800 to 1200 MHz range, it is found that
the depolarization factor, C, should be a complex number
in order to result in a close fit [Shen et al., 19851. The
physical meaning of a complex depolarization factor is not
entirely clear, but it is believe to be connected with the
fact that the original formula was derived under the as-
sumption of zero frequency and non-conducting substances
and the laboratory data were taken at 1100 MHz with con-
ducting solution in the rock.
For EFT log interpretation, Sherman [1985] suggested
to use complex dielectric permittivities in equation (14)
and to obtain the depolarization factor by measuring the
core data. He found that the standard deviation of the value
c is reasonably small in a given reservoir.
Note that the BHS formula is not symmetrical in terms
of the subscripts 1 and 2, meaning that it predicts different
dielectric permittivity values for water-wet and oil-wet
rocks. As an example, for the oil base mud considered
above, if one treats the water as the continuous phase, then
tl = 12.6 - j 466,
c2 =3.0 - j 0,
4 = 0.81,
and using c = 1/3, one obtains
E, = 5.2 - j 38.7.
On the other hand, if the oil is considered as the continuous
phase, as it should be for the oil inverted mud,
tl = 3.0 - j 0,
t2 = 12.6 - j 466,
4 = 0.19,
and the result is that
E,. = 5.6 - j 0.1.
This last value agrees with the laboratory data quite well.
The BHS formula has been further generalized to cover
cases in which rocks contain both spherical and platy
grains. It is reported that a new formula, called the bimodal
equation, yields more accurate interpretation of EFT logs
[Baker et al., 19851. In another study connected with the
BHS formula, it is reported that for EFT log interpretation
in oomoldic rocks, a formula called the Maxwell-Garnett
equation can be used [Rasmus and Kenyon, 19851. The
Maxwell-Garnett equation is sometimes referred to as the
Lorentz-Lorenz equation or Clausius-Mossotti equation.
This equation is also derived under the assumption of a
static field. In fact, the BHS formula is closely related to
this formula [Sen et al., 19811. However, no laboratory core
data have been published yet to substantiate the claim that
this formula predicts better the dielectric property of
oomoldic rocks at the EPT frequency than the BHS formula
does.
The dielectric property of the rock near 200 MHz has
not been studied in open literature. It remains to be seen
whether or not the mixing formula used for EFT log inter-
NOVEMBER-DECEMBER, 1985
pretation can also be used for the Dresser-Atlas tool.
In summary, the mixing law being used for interpreta- mation, but at the same time they involve more unknowns.
tion of mandrel-type tools operated in the 20 to 50 MHz
range lacks theoretical support. The Lichtnecker-Rother Comments on 20 - 50 MHz Sondes
formula does not agree with laboratory core data unless
an adjusting factor, the polarization factor p, is used. That
factor is obtained from core measurement and is dependent
on the reservoir rock. Its value may vary from well to well.
The dielectric property of rocks at 200 MHz is unclear
at the present time. Compared to other frequency bands,
the mixing law at the 1100 MHz frequency band has made
more advancement. The CRIM formula is recommended
for clean, water-wet rocks. The BHS formula with adjusting
depolarization factor may be used if extensive cores are
available. Of course, one should not overlook the potential
usefulness of the bimodal formula proposed by Baker et
al. [1985]. It should be remarked that none of these formu-
las have been substantiatedby accurate laboratory measure-
ments for shaly formations or for elevated formation
temperatures.
SURVEY OF OIL COMPANIES
A survey of the technical staffs of nine oil companies has
been conducted by the author in order to learn their first-
hand experience in using these newly developed dielectric-
constant tools. Their comments on the advantages and
limitations of these tools, and suggestions for further im-
provements, are given in the following sections. The inter-
views were conducted with the understanding that no
proprietary information would be discussed and names of
the participating persons and their affiliations would re-
main anonymous. It should be noted that all of the 40 or
so persons interviewed were in the research or technical
service branches of their companies, not involved in daily
operation of oil fields. Their personal opinions, not the
official company’s, are summarized below to serve as
a reference for those who are interested in developing
dielectric-constant tools or in improving interpretation of
dielectric-constant logs.
General Comments
Persons who are enthusiastic about dielectric-constant
tools believe that these tools offer new ways for formation
evaluation. The dielectric-constant logs are less sensitive
to water salinity than conventional resistivity logs and con-
sequently are very useful in formations with fresh water
or water with unknown or variable salinities.
Some persons still have reservations about dielectric-
constant tools. The major drawback, they say, is that the
mixing law is more complicated than the corresponding
one in conventional logging. The conductivity of oil and
rock matrix is known to be zero, consequently water is
the only component that contributes to the low-frequency
conductivity of the formation, with exception for shaly
sands. In contrast, oil, rock matrix, and water all contribute
to the dielectric permittivity of the formation at high fre-
THE LOG ANALYST
quencies. In short, dielectric-constantlogs give more infor-
The major advantage of the dielectric-constant tools
operating in the 20 to 50 M H z range is that they are less sensi-
tive to the salinity of the water in the rock than conven-
tional resistivity tools. Also, because of the fact that these
tools use phase detection, or amplitude detection, or both,
the logs generated turn out to be less sensitive to adjacent
beds than the conventional resisitivity logs.
In general, the dielectric-constanttools in this frequency
range are limited to formations with resistivity greater than
10 ohm-m. In formations with lower resistivities, the signal
from the transmitting coil is usually attenuated to such a
low level that accurate measurement of the received signal
is impossible.
One company reported to have conducted an experiment
in which 4 different dielectric-constant tools had been
used to log the same well. The apparent resistivity traces
measured by all tools were very close, but curves repre-
senting the real part of the dielectric permittivity did not
agree fully.
Comments on EPT Sonde
Persons who have used the EFT sonde generally praised
its good reliability. Its excellent thin bed resolution is
recognized by many users. Its ability to provide MSFL-
type logs in oil base mud is highly valued.
Because the EPT sonde is a pad device and the detection
relies on electromagnetic wave propagation between the
transmitting and receiving antennas, it is limited to smooth
boreholes. It is also a shallow measuring device designed
to obtain information in the flushed mne a few inches away
from the borehole. Apparently some people were not aware
of or informed about these limitations as evidenced by the
fact that the EFT had been run, or had been proposed to
be run, in wells that do not meet these limitations.
One researcher experienced a case where the trace of
tpl up-link is different from the trace of tp, down-link in
the EFT log. It was also observed that sometimes the small
caliper on the EFT sonde did not follow the rapid move-
ment of the tpItrace. An experienced log analyst pointed
out another possible area for improvement of the sonde.
That is, at the present the EFT signal becomes too weak
in some water zones so that no calibration can be made
for the log. Although theoretical analysis indicates that the
EPT log is not accurate when the mud cake is thicker than
3/8 inch, the mud cake has not been a major problem for
EFT interpretation, as reported by one active log analyst.
Summary of an unofficial survey
The following results were the impressions gained by
the author after he has interviewed about 40 staff members
in 9 oil companies. The “company” mentioned below
means the consensus of a group of the staff in a particular
company. It may or may not coincide with the official com-
pany view.
21
 10 r
OIL BASE MUD
2QO c
8 JI 8
t
41
2l I
t-
FREQUENCY (MHz)
Figure 5:The complex permittivity of an oil inverted mud measured in the frequency range
800 to 1200 MHz. The mud is NL Baroid Invermul.
5 companies regard EPT as a proven tool and use it on
regular basis in suitable fields,
4 companies still have some reservations about the EPT
sonde and use it only on trial basis.
2 companies have systematic research projects to evaluate
new 20 to 50 MHz dielectric-constant tools,
7 companies test these tools by operation groups and do
not have coordinated evaluation programs.
7 companies pursue in-house research on dielectric prop-
erties of reservoir rocks,
2 companies do not have in-house research project on such
subject.
3 companies are developing new wireline tools that operate
in the 20 to 1200 MHz range,
6 companies do not have in-house project to develop any
new dielectric-constant tool.
FUTURE WORK IN TQOLS
Oil companies are interested in improving dielectric-
constant tools so that more options will be available to them
to investigate the oil reservoir. The service companies are
interested in wider usage of their tools for obvious reasons.
Therefore it should be a common goal for both to overcome
some of the problems facing the dielectric-constant logging
mentioned in the preceding sections.
-41 l o
I
I
-14
E I
I
Both the hardware and the software of the dielectric-
constant tool may be targeted for further improvement. For
the hardware, an obvious need is to boost the output power
of the transmitter so that the limitation of the formation
resistivity may be lessened. Present limitation of about
10 ohm-m in formation resistivity may not be a serious
factor in fresh water formations. However, it may cause
concern when the tool is proposed to be used in some infill
wells where both the fresh water and saline formation water
are present so that the formation resistivity may fall below
the 10 ohm-m mark. Another possible technique of increas-
ing the received signal is to radiate the electromagnetic
power more efficiently in the direction of the receiver.
Whether such directional radiator can be designed for a
borehole environment seems to be worthy of further study.
According to recently published literature, the borehole
effect, the invasion effect, and even the eccentricity effect
of a dielectric-constant tool can be predicted by computer
simulations. However, there are two deficiencies. The first
is that most of the details of the techniques used to calculate
these effects remain proprietary. The second problem is
that dimensions of the tools are not disclosed in the litera-
ture. Consequently it is difficult to verify the theory by
the reader.
To publish a technical work for public scrutiny and yet
not compromise a company's secret is indeed a dilemma. The
22 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER, 1985
 following suggestions may be worthy of some considerations
by future authors working in the industry. If the company
is adamant about not allowing details of a technical work
to be published, it is then suggested that the author urge
the company to commercialize the software. It should be
I
required that the software be written in user-friendly format
so that log analysts without special training in such tech-
nique as finite element method can use the computer pro-
gram for log interpretation. As to the second problem about
the exact tool dimensions, a simple way to overcome it
is to present a case in the publication for a fictitious tool
whose dimensions are close, but not equal, to the actual
tool. If this is done, other workers in the same field may
then compare their own techniques with the proposed one
and check for its accuracy and computer time efficiency.
FUTURE WORK IN ROCK PROPERTY
The immediate objective in the area of rock property
research should be the development of laboratory tech-
niques for core measurements. For the wide range of
parameters associated with reservoir rocks, it may be
necessary to use different sample holders and different
equipment to measure the dielectric property of reservoir
rocks at the 20 to 50 MHz band, at the 200 MHz point,
and at the 1100 MHz point. These measurements are by
no means easy and there is no standard method available.
Furthermore, there are no standard materials which have
substantial dielectric loss and for which standard values
of the complex permittivities have been assigned.
Coaxial-line holders have been used to measure rock
properties in the 800 to 1200 MHz range [Rau and Whar-
ton, 1982; Shen, 19851. However, the method is limited
to consolidated rocks. A new holder has been developed
which might be used for measuring shaly formations at
the E€T frequency [De, 19851. These efforts should be
continued for studying dielectric properties of rocks at
elevated temperatures. So h r no such high-temperaturedata
have appeared in the open literature.
A subject closely related to high temperature problem
is the question of water dielectric permittivity at elevated
temperatures. At the present, the empirical formula ob-
tained by Saxton and Lane [1952] is widely used in EPT
interpretation at reservoir temperatures. These data were
obtained only up to 40" C. Since saline solution is the most
important contributor to the overall dielectric permittivity
of a rock, efforts should be directed to remeasure the dielec- C o r e
tric permittivity of saline solution at temperatures ranging Sample
from 20" C to 90" C.
Poley et al. [1978] used a General Radio sample holder
to measure dielectric property of reservoir rocks in the
20 to 50 MHz range. Mazzagatti et al. [1983] developed
a Texaco holder. Zhao [1982] and Knight and Nur [1984] Figure 6:
used parallel-plate sample holders. All of these holders
are of the parallel-plate capacitor type, as that shown in
Figure 6. This type of holder is suitable for measuring
dielectric permittivities of samples with small loss tangent
THE LOG ANALYST 23
which is defined to be the ratio of the negative of the
imaginary part of the complex dielectric permittivity to
the real part given in equation (1). According to Mazzagatti
et al. [1984], the lower limit of the resistivity of the rock
that the system can accurately measure is approximately
1 ohm-m.
Measurement of rocks is usually hampered by the con-
tact resistance or gaps between the sample and the holder
unless precautions are taken. This problem has been
studied for coaxial line holder [Huang and Shen, 19831
but no similar study has been made for the parallel-plate
holder. Interpretation of the data taken from the parallel-
plate holder assumes that the electromagnetic fields in the
sample are uniform. This is equivalent to the assumption
of static field within the sample. Static field assumption
may not be accurate when the frequency is 50 MHz and
the resistivity of the sample is low. It is urged that future
papers should describe experimental apparatus and verify
the measurement system when laboratory data on dielectric
property of cores are presented.
In summary, future research efforts in the area of rock
property should be in the following directions, covering
the frequency range from 20 to 1100 MHz:
(a) measure the dielectric permittivity of saline solu-
tion at elevated temperatures,
(b) develop and improve core measurement techniques
to obtain data bases for rock properties,
(c) develop mixture theory for reservoir rocks and obtain
a mixing law for clean formations,
(d) develop mixing law for shaly formations,
(e) study the effect of trace elements such as pyrites on
the dielectric property of the rock.
Vdid laboratory core data will provide researchers some
insights that hopefully will lead to a valid mixing law for
dielectric property of reservoir rocks. Empirical formula
based on laboratory data is an objective and it would be
useful for practical interpretation of dielectric-constantlogs.
Obtaining such an empirical formula should not be our
/I
The parallel-plate sample holder is often used in
the measurement of core samples at the 20 to 50
MHz range. Usually the contact resistance between
the rock and the holder is assumed to be negligible
and the electromagnetic fields in the rock are as-
sumed to be uniform. Are these assumptions valid?
final goal. Our goal should be aimed at understanding the
physics of the rock mixture.
NEW Td4QLS
All the dielectric-constant tools have fixed operating fre-
quencies. Changing the operating frequency will change
the influence of the salinity on the overall dielectric per-
mittivity of the rock. The frequency also affects the depth
of investigation. Thus a multi-frequency tool will yield
more information than a tool operated at a single frequency.
The tools developed in the U.S.S.R. seem to have the capa-
bility of switching the operating frequency from one to
another. The tools listed in Table 3 do not have frequency
switching capability, although some of the tools, such as
the Dresser-Atlas 47 and 200 MHz tools, may be run simul-
taneously in a borehole.
To push the idea of multi-frequency dielectric-constant
tool further, one might consider developing a time-domain,
or electromagnetic pulse tool. Sonic tools have adopted
this concept.
The mandrel-type dielectric-constant tool is geometri-
cally compatible with measuring-while-drilling (MWD)
operation. An induction-type MWD tool has been devel-
oped [Rodney, et al, 1983; Coope, 19841 but its operating
frequency of 2 MHz is too low to be classified as a
dielectric-constant tool.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Since the 1970’s dielectric-constant tools have been used
worldwide: in Alberta, Canada; Colombia; Kern County,
California; North Sea; Permian Basin; Rocky Mountain;
and Sumatra, Indonesia. These surveys have been carried
out even though the interpretation of the logs is not com-
pletely satisfactory. This fact testifies to the importance of
dielectric-constant logging.
From 1927 to 1945, basic wireline tools were developed.
During the next 30 years between 1945 and 1974, the indus-
try invented induction, laterolog, nuclear, and sonic logs.
Compared with those established logging techniques,
dielectric-constant logging is still at its young age. It is
believed that this new logging technique has good poten-
tial. Whether or not it can be established as a viable
wireline technique depends critically on the success of
obtaining accurate interpretation methods. It will take time
and effort to accomplish that task. With today’s advanced
science and technology, and with industry management’s
patience and support, the author is hopeful that the dielec-
tric-constant tool will join the rank of other successful tools
in the near future.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The work reported here was supported by the Well Log-
ging Industrial Advisory Committee which consists of 18
oil and service companies. The author also wishes to thank
all 40 or so persons whom he has interviewed in prepara-
tion of this work. They are the anonymous co-authors of
this paper.
24
REFERENCES
Allen, D. F., (1984), “Laminated sand analysis”, SPWLA 25th
Annual Logging Symposium, Paper XX.
Anderson, B., and Chang, S. K., (1983), “Synthetic deep prop-
agation tool response by the finite element method,”
SPWLA 24th Annual Logging Symposium, Paper T.
Anderson, B., and Chew, W. C., (1984), “A new high speed
technique for calculating synthetic induction and DPT logs”,
SPWLA 25th Annual Logging Symposium, Paper HH.
Baker, P L., Kenyon, W. E., and Kester, J. M., (1985), “EPT
interpretation using a textural model”, SPWLA 26th Annual
Logging Symposium, Paper DD.
Berry, W. R. II, Head, M. P., and Mougne, M. L., (1979),
“Dielectric constant logging a progress report”, Australian
Petroleum Exploration Association Journal, Vol. 19, Part I,
pp. 142-159; also appeared in SPWLA 20th Annual Logging
Symposium, Paper VV.
Boyeldieu, C., Coblentz, A., and Pelissier-Combescure,J.,
(1984), “Formation evaluation in oil base mud wells”,
SPWLA 25th Annual Logging Symposium, Paper BB.
Calvert, T. J., Rau, R. N., and Wells, L. E., (1977), “Electro-
magnetic propagation, a new dimension in logging”, SPE
Paper No. 6542.
Chew, W. C., (1982), “Response of the deep propagation tool
in invaded boreholes”, SPE Paper No. 10989.
Chew, W. C., and Gianzero, S. C., (1981), “Theoretical investi-
gation of the electromagneticwave propagationtool”, IEEE
Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Vol.
GE-19, NO. 1, pp. 1-7.
Coope, D., Shen, L. C., and Huang, F. S. C., (1984), “The
theory of 2 MHz resistivity tool and its application to mea-
surement-while-drilling”, The Log Analyst, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp.
36-45.
Cox, P T., and Warren, W. F., (1983), “Development and testing
of the Texaco dielectric log”, SPWLA 24th Annual Logging
Symposium, Paper H.
Daev, D. S., (1974), High Frequency Electromagnetic Tech-
niques of Well Logging, Nedra Publishing House, Moscow.
Dahlberg, K. E., and Ference, M. V., (1984), ‘ R quantitative
test of the electromagneticpropagation (EPT) log for resid-
ual oil determination”, SPWLA 25th Annual Logging Sym-
posium, Paper DDD.
De, B. R., (1985), “Measurement and analysis of broadband
dielectric properties of brine-saturated rocks”, SPWLA 26th
Annual Logging Symposium, Paper YY.
Duesterhoeft,W. C., Jr., (1961), “Propagation effects in induc-
tion logging”, Geophysics, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 192-204.
Freedman, R., and Vogiatzis, J. R, (1979), “Theory of micro-
wave dielectric constant logging using the electromagnetic
wave propagation method”, Geophysics, Vol. 44, No. 5, pp.
969-986.
Geng, X. W., Yong, Y. Z., Lu, D., and Zhao, S. F., (1983),
“Dielectric log - a logging method for determining oil
saturation”, J. Petroleum Technology, Vol. 35, No. 10, pp.
1797-1805.
Gianzero, S., and Lin, Y., (1985), “The effect of standoff on
the response of induction-loggingtools”, SPWLA 26th An-
nual Logging Symposium, Paper FF.
Huang, F. S. C., (1984), “Techniques for measuringthe dielec-
tric properties of samples using coaxial-line and insulated
antenna”, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Houston.
Huang, F. S. C., and Shen, L. C., (1983), “Analysis of error
due to presence of gaps in the measurement of rock sam-
ples in a coaxial line”, Geophysics, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp.
206-212.
NOVEMBER-DECEMBER, 1985
Huchital, G. S., Hutin, R., Thoraval, Y., and Clark, B., (1981), Saxton, J. A., and Lane, J. A., (1952), “Electrical properties
“The deep propagation tool (a new electromagnetic logging of sea water”, Wireless Engineer, October, 269-275.
tool)”, SPE Paper No. 10988. Sen, P. N., Scala, C., and Cohen, M. H., (1981), &‘Aself-similar
Johnson, R., and Evans, C.d., (1983), “Results of recent elec- model for sedimentary rocks with application to the dielec-
tromagnetic propagation time logging in the North Sea”, tric constant of fused glass beads”, Geophysics, Vol. 46,
8th European Formation Evaluation Symposium, Paper Y. NO. 5, pp. 781-795.
Knight, R., and Nur, A., (1984), “The effect of level of water Shen, L. C., (1985), “A laboratory technique for measuring
saturation on the dielectric constant of sandstones”, SPWLA dielectric properties of core samples at ultra high frequen-
25th Annual Logging Symposium, Paper MM. cies”, Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal, to appear.
Kretzschmar, J. L., Kibbe, K. L., and Witterholt, E. J., (1982), Shen, L. C., Manning, M. J., and Price, J. M., (1984), ‘Rppli-
“Tomographic reconstruction techniques for reservoir moni- cation of electromagnetic propagation tool in formation
toring”, SPE Paper No. 10990. evaluation”, SPWLA 25th Annual Logging Symposium,
Maple, L. C., (1985), “A crossplot approach to electromagnetic Paper J.
propagationtool (EPT) interpretation”, SPWLA 26th Annual Shen, L.C., Savre, W. C., Price, J. M., and Athavale, K., (1985),
Logging Symposium, Paper N. “Dielectric properties of reservoir rocks at ultra-high fre-
Mazzagatti, R. P., Dowling, D.J., Sims, J. C., Bussian, A. E., quencies”, Geophysics, Vol. 50, No. 4, pp. 692-704.
and Simpson, R. S., (1983), “Laboratory measurement of Sherman, M. M., (1983), “The determination of cementation
dielectric constant near 20 MHz”, SPE Paper 12097. exponents using high frequency dielectric measurements”,
Meador, R. A., and Cox, I? T., (1975), “Dielectric constant log- SPWLA 24th Annual Logging Symposium, Paper D.
ging, a salinity independent estimation of formation water Sherman, M. M., (1985), “The calculation of porosity from
volume”, SPE Paper No. 5504. dielectric constant measurements: a study using laboratory
Moran, J. H., and Kunz, K. S., (1962), “Basic theory of induc- data”, SPWLA 26th Annual Logging Symposium, Paper HH.
tion logging and application to study of two-coil sondes”, Standen, E. J. W., and Badry, R. A., (1981), ‘a wellsite moved
Geophysics, Vol. 27, No. 6, Part I, pp. 829-858. oil plot using the EPT log”, Canadian Well Logging Society
Neuman, C. H., (1983), “Logging measurement of residual 8th Formation Evaluation Symposium, Paper L.
oil, Rangely Field, CO”, J. Petroleum Technology, Vol. 35,
NO. 10, pp. 1735-1744. Suau, J., Albertelli, L., Cigni, M., and Gragnani, U., (1984),
Poley, J. Ph., Nooteboom, J. J., and de Waal, I? J., (1978), “Use “Interpretation of very thin gas sands in Italy”, SPWLA 25th
of V.H.F. dielectric measurements for borehole formation Annual Logging Symposium, Paper A.
analysis”, The Log Analyst, Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 8-30. Wharton, R. I?, Hazen, G. A., Rau, R. N., and Best, D. L.,
Rasmus, J. C., and Kenyon, W. E., (1985), “An improved (1980), “Electromagnetic propagation logging: advances in
petrophysical evaluation of oomoldic Lansing-Kansas City technique and interpretation”, SPE Paper No. 9267.
formations utilizing conductivityand dielectric log measure- Wharton, R. P., and Delano, J. M. Jr., (1981), ‘ a n EPT inter-
ments”, SPWLA 26th Annual Logging Symposium, Paper V. pretation procedure and application in fresh water, shaly
Rau, R. N., and Wharton, R. I?,(1982), “Measurement of core oil sands”, SPWLA 22nd Annual Logging Symposium,
electrical parameters at ultrahigh and microwave frequen- Paper E.
cies”, J. Petroleum Technology, Vol. 34,No. 11, pp. 2689-2700. Zhao, S. F., (1982), “Study of dielectric property of rocks in
Rodney, P. F., Wisler, M. M., Thompson, L. W., and Meador, a high-frequencyfield”, Acta Petrolei Sinica, July, pp. 63-72
R. A., (1983), “The Electromagnetic Resistivity MWD Tool,”; (in Chinese).
SPE paper 12167.

LIMITED EDITION SPWLA BELT BUCKLE

Handcrafted
Solid jeweler’s quality brass
Custom designed
Individually inspected for quality
Unconditional lifetime guarantee
from the foundry

$1 5.00 including postage.

To order, contact the SPWLA Business Office, 6001 Gulf Freeway, Suite C129, Houston, Texas
77023. Phone: 713-928-8925.

THE LOG ANALYST 25