API Calibration Facility for Nuclear Logs
WILLIAMB. BELKNAP,~: JOHNT. DEW AN,^ C. V. KIRKPATRICK,~
WILLIAME. M O T T , A.
~ J. PEARSON,**AND W. R. RABSON***
ABSTRACT
The work of the A P I National Subcommittee on
Revis~onof RP 53 Recom.~ne7~cletl P r c ~ c t ~ f&o r Stccncle~rcl
Cal.lr',rcctzo7~and For?)?.for Nftcleccr Logs IS explained
111 tliis papel Accoinplishnieiits of tliis Subcommittee
~ n c l u d ea revlsed recommended standard nuclear log
lieadilig and form, a defin~tionof standard gamma-ray
and neutlon log units fol m e a s u n n g radiatlon, t h e
tles~gii and coiist~uctloii of a nuclear log calibration
I. INTRODUCTION
Nuclear logglng methods wele introcluced commei-
cially to the petroleum industry about 20 years ago.
Their utilizat~on has steadily increased u n t ~ ltoday a t
least one nuclear log I S run 111 nearly every well d r ~ l l e d .
Table 1 is presented to slio\v the number of nuclear logs
l u n d u l ~ n grecent yeais I n splte of this wide use, those
pelsons usillg nucleai logs have found it a very com-
phcated - lf not a t t ~ m e simposs~ble- task to make
coniparlsons between logs r u n by the v a n o u s logg~iig
companies l~ecauseof the absence of standardrzation.
T h ~ slack of s t a n d a r d ~ z a t ~ o IS
n demonstrated by t h e
numelous dlffereiit u n ~ t sused f o r measuring radiation,
d~fferentprocedures f o r checklng and calibrating logging
~ n s t r u m e n t s ,d~fferentlog headrngs, and d ~ f f e r e n tscales
used by the logging companies. The exlstlng differences
In log nieasureinents have severely l ~ m ~ t et hd e use of
nuclear logs In areal studies and critical correlation
( The lack of standard~zationand need f o r calibration
The response of t h e present-day gamma-ray logs is
calibrated in a u n ~ twhich, so f a r a s t h e petroleum
~ n d u s t r ya s a whole 1s concerned, is ideiit~fiableonly w ~ t h
the l o g g ~ n gcompany making the log A survey of eight
logging companies offerlng nuclear logs showed seven
d~fferentunits b e ~ i i gused f o r measuring gamma radia-
t ~ o n .Some of these u n ~ t shave identical names, b u t a r e
not the same unit of measure since t h e logging com-
panies use d ~ f f e r e n tc a l ~ b r a t l n gtechniques. I n current
usage a r e the following diverse units of gamma-ray
rneasurement. counts/mlnute, connts/second, radiatlon
units, inicrogralns rad-eq./ton, and ni~croloentgens/
*Phllllps Petroleum Company. Bartlesvllle, Okla
iSchlumberger WeU Surveying Corp , Houston. Texas
Un~versltyof Houston, Houston, Texas
iGulf Research and Development Co P~ttsburgh,Pa
**The Atlantlc Refinlng C o , Dallas, Texas
***Pan Geo Atlas Corp , Houston, Texas
f a c ~ h t y ,and a recommended standard procedure f o r
presenting cal~bratlondata. D e t a ~ l e ddes~giiand eiigl-
neering d a t a on t h e calibration f a c ~ l i t ya r e presented.
The development of standard nuclear log units of
measurement and calibiation of-logs in these units is
a s~giiificantforward step in this field. I t \vil1 enable
petroleum engineers and g e o l o ~ s t sto compare dliectly
nuclear logs r u n by different l o g g ~ n gcompanles
hour. completely l a c k ~ n gis a common approach w h ~ c h
can be used by all involved to relate these units t o each
other a s well a s to the phys~calproperties of the for-
mation being measured. There have been attempts by
some of the operating companies to ~ n t e r - r e l a t eunits
through the use of field data, but a s yet a n uil-to-date
set of factors f o r converting gamma-I a y readmgs from
one company's log t o t h a t of another company h a s not
been publ~shed By and large, the work of developing
conversion factors has proved to be time-consum~ng,
expensive, and usually of temporary value
A s i m ~ l a rploblem exists with present-day neutron
logs The suivey showed S I X different units being used
for neutron measurement by seven logglng companles
These ~ n c l u d ethe following counts/second, inches per
standard unit, counts per mmute, environmental u n ~ t s ,
~ n c h e sper 100 standard units, and standard counts per
second
of nuclear logs resulted in t h e Steerlng Comm~tteeon
Product~on Practice of the D ~ v ~ s ~ oofi i Production, '
American Petroleum Institute, a p p o ~ n t i n ga national
subcomm~tteea In June, 1956, to ievle\v RP 35 Rec-
ol,fnlemdetE Prcictfce for Stc~)lclurd Raclior~ct~uityLog
F o r ~ ,( T e i i t a t ~ v e )I' This Subcommittee was ~iistlucted
to accumulate all available suggest~onsf o r revlsion of
R P 55. and to develop a standard practice t h a t would
create unifornnty and allow d ~ r e c tcomparison of radlo-
actlve logs I t w a s selected to provlde representation
from both 011 and logging companies from throughout
the United States
The Subcommittee investrgated t h e e x ~ s t ~ ncoiid~tions g
of s t a n d a r d i z a t ~ o nof log h e a d ~ n g s , forms, u n ~ t sf o r
aSee Appendlx A for membership
bThe first ed~tlonof R P 33 was adopted and publ~shed In November
1948.
290 BELKNAP, DEWAN,KIRKPATRICK,MOTT, P E A R S O N , AND RABSON

Table 1
Total Nuclear Logging Operations'

Total Nuclear
O p e l a t ~ o n sIn Teims of
Wells Drllled Nucleal Logs Run* Wells Dr~lled,Percent
Outs~de Outslde Outslde
Year U S U S. Total U S. U. S. Total U. S. U. S Total

'Reference; are a t the end of the paper

'Comp~led from data supl~liedby the following compames Blrdwell. Inc. Frontler Perforators, Inc . Creat Lakes Petroleum Serv~ces,Inc , Lane-
Wells Company. McCullough Tool Company. Perforating Guns Atlas Corporation. Ram Guns. Inc . Schlumherger Well Surveying Corporat~on.
.
Weles, Inc The Western Conlpany. Worth Well Surveys. Inc

measuling l a c l ~ a t ~ o nand , c a l ~ b i a t ~ oprocedures

n Early
In thls study it \\.as agreed t h a t development of con-
version factors between vailous l o g g ~ n g compan~es'
gamma-ray and neutron logs would not be a s a t ~ s f a c t o l y
s o l u t ~ o nto the problem I t was recognized t h a t f u t u i e
developments would greatly Increase the ~nipoltance
of neutron logglng a n d i n t e n s ~ f ythe need fol a solutlon
to the standardization problem.
111 the original RP :'3, gamma-ray and neutron logs
weie classed a s radloactlv~ty logs The Subcomni~ttee
changed thls tltle to nuclear logs because the term
"nuclear" IS more descrlptlve
Leadlng to the objective of standartl~zlngnuclear logs,
t h e Subcommittee acconlpllshed the follownig
1 Designed a standaid log heading and folm
2. Established a standard A P I Gamma-Ray U n ~ t .
3 Established a standaid A P I Neutron U n ~ t .
4. Des~gnedand promoted construction of a callbra-
t ~ o nfacllity fol nucleai logs
5 Developed a standard c a l ~ b r a t l o npiocedure
These accompl~shmentsresulted in pubhcat~onIn Sep-
tember 1959 of the 2nd ed~tlonof RP 3.3 Recom?laended
Prrictlce for St4~7tda~d Cnl16ri~tz07~ (~71dForm for Nziclecir
Logs The r e v ~ s e d edltlon contalns t h e lecommended
form f o r nuclear logs and d e t a ~ l s of procedures to
be followed f o r callbratlng nuclear l o g g ~ n g tools in
standard A P I unlts
The purpose of thls paper 1s to plesent In detall t h e
technical aspects of planning, constluct~ng,and operat-
Ing the cal~bratlon f a c ~ l l t y2 The factors involved ~n
arrlvlng a t sultable s t a n d a i d ~ z ~ nm g e d ~ af o r nucleal
logs, viz , gamma-ray and neutron c a l ~ b i a t ~ oplts, n are
outhned. Detalls of the s t u d ~ e si e q u ~ r e dto d e t e l m ~ n e
t h e slzes of plts needed and materials used t h e i e ~ na r e
presented Constluct~onof the f a c l l ~ t yIS descr~bedto
~ l l u s t r a t e t h e many problems ~nvolved In selecting,
measuslng, processing, and placlng m a t e i ~ a l s 111 the
plts The various tests, ~ n c l u d ~ ncore g analyses, spectral
analyses, chemlcal analyses, log checks, etc a r e pre-
sented. The operation, financing, callbrat~onprocedure,
conversion from e x l s t ~ n gu n ~ t to s A P I ulnts, and records
n ~ a ~ n t a ~ nbye dt h e U n ~ v e r s l t yof Houston a r e described.
F ~ n a l l y ,poss~blef u t u ~ euses of the faclllty a s well a s
~ t value
s t o the Unlverslty a r e discussed
11. FACTORS INVOLVED IN GAMMA-RAY
STANDARL)IZATION
Gamma-ray L o g g ~ n gPrinciples
The alrn of gamma-ray logglng a s currently practiced
IS to obtaln a measure of the total number of gamma
l a y s emltted per second by a unit welght of f o l m a t ~ o n
lock The gamma l a d ~ a t l o nof natural mateilals 1s due
almost e n t ~ l e l yto the decay products of uranium, the
decay products of tlior~uni,and the rad~oactlve soto ope
of potass~uni Hence,- t h e gamma-lay actlvlty, A , of a
secl~mentalyrock can be cons~dereda h n e a i function of
the amounts of uranluni, t h o l ~ u m , and potasslum
piesent, 1.e .
+
A = AuWu ATILWTILAKWK + (1)
I.l'he~eu~Au, ATJL,and A,- represellt t h e spec~ficactlvl-
tles (gamma r a y s per second o r ~ g l n a t l n ge ~ t h e rd ~ r e c t l y
01 ~ n d l i e c t l yfrom a g r a m of the element) and I,i'u, li'TJ,.
and IYK the corresponding fractional abundances of
uianlum, thonum, and potass~um,respect~vely.F o r all
practical purposes In well logglng, ~t can be assumed
t h a t t h e source mateilals a r e u n ~ f o i n i l y d ~ s t r ~ b u t e d
throughout t h e and the uranluni and t h o l ~ u m
serles (Tables 2 and 3 ) a r e 111 rad~oactlveeclull~br~um
A s defined, A U IS t h e total number of gamma rays
e m ~ t t e dper second by a gram of ulanluni in e q u l l ~ b r ~ u m
wlth ~ t decays ploducts I t s value I S obtalned by sum-
mlng t h e contr~butlonsfrom each of the radlonucl~des
In t h e ulanium serles, t h e presence of t h e membels of
the actlnluni serles belng ~ g n o r e dbecause the parent,
Us" IS only 0 72 pelcent abundant. Uslng the most
recent d a t a available and summlng only photons h a v ~ n g
energles greater than 100 kev,* we find
A U = 2.8 X 104 pl~otonslsec-grwnU .
I11 11ke manner, s u m m a t ~ o nof the gamma r a y s e ~ n ~ t t e d
by t h e elements of the thorlum serles ylelds
A,,, = 1.0 x l o 4 pl~oto?zslsec-gra?~Th
'Phohns of energ! lrss than 100 kev are strongly absorbed by the
formal102 and the p..essure houslng of the l o g g ~ n gtool
 A P I CALIBRATION
FACILITY
FOR NUCLEAR
LOGS 291

Table 2.
The Uranium Series3

Mode o f
Nuclide Disintegration Half L l f e Sequence

238 9
UI a 4.51 x 10 y r
9 2'
gOTh234 p 24.1 d
uX1
234m 1 . 1 8 rnin
uX2 91Pa B , IT,
234
uz 9 lPa B 6.66 h r
2 34 5
UII a 2.48 x 10 yr
9 2'
4
I0 Th230 , a 8.0 x 1 0 yr
90
226
Ra a 1620 y r
88Ra
222 d
Rn a 3.82
86Em
218
Ra A 84" a, a 3 . 0 5 min

R~A' 85AL218 a, p -2 sec

218
RaA" a 1.3 sec
86Em
RaB 82Pb214 p 26.8 min

RaC 83Bi214 a,p 1 9 . 7 min

214 a 1.6 x 1 0 - ~ s e c
R~C' 8 4"
RaCgL 81T1210 B 1 . 3 2 min

RaD 82Pb210 B 19.4 y r

210 5.01 d
RaE 83Bi a, I3
210 a 138.4 d
Ra F 84'O
RaE' 81T1206 I3 4 . 2 min

RaG 82Pb206 Stable --

Natural potassium h a s a much lower speclfic actlvlty,
VIZ , ~n the spectiurn of the former, 60 in t h e latter.*
A , = 3.4 pJz.oto~tslsec-yrrtm K,
than elther uianiunl or thorium but is of approximately
equal importance In its contiibution to the gamma-ray
act~vltiesof most sed~mentaly rocks because ~t is a
much more abundant element.
Some idea of the complex~tyof the emisslon properties
of the U23Rand Th2" familles follows from the f a c t t h a t
to date nearly 80 gamma-ray 11nes have been observed
Although the data on the energles and intensltles of
many of these a r e to some extent uncertain, ~t is
belleved t h a t the aforementioned values of A , and ATh
and the general features of the energy dlstrlbution
curves a s outhned ln Table 5, p 294, a r e sufficiently
accurate f o r present-day logging studies.
'Theergrgles and l n t e n s ~ t ~ eofs the most Intense lines In the spectra
of the naturally occurring rad~onuclldesare l~stedIn Table 4 , p 293
Note that the gamma rays ernltted by K4O are monoenergetlc.
 Table 3
The Thorium Series3
a

Mode o f
Nuclide Disintegration Half L i f e Sequence
--
232
Th
goTh a 1.42 x l0l0yr -
MsThl
228
6.7
a
88Ra B yr AL
228 B
MsTh2 B 6.13 hr
8 gAC
RdTh ~h~~~ a! 1.91 yr -
I3
224
3.64 d
a
ThX a! A-SL
88Ra
220 a
Tn a 51.5 sec AL
86Em
216 a
ThA 84"
a 0.16 sec JL

ThB 82Pb212 B 10.6 hr a

JL

ThC 83Bi212 alp 60.5 min V

64.6%
212 35.4%
ThCr a 0.30 psec
8 4 P ~ a
ThC" 81~1208 B 3 . 1 0 min AL a
.ThD 82Pb208 Stable -- B v

The baslc characteristics of the 3 naturally occurring
source m a t e r ~ a l sa r e summar~zedIn Table 6, 11. 294. The
radium portion of the uranlum series 1s included a s a
separate item f o r reference purposes.
It is impoltant to observe t h a t the response of the
natural gamma-ray log does not necessarily p r o v ~ d ea
d ~ r e c measuie
t of formatlon a c t ~ v i t yI n fact, the nature
of the problem 1s such that, In some condltlons, the
q u a n t ~ t i e srecorded on a log cannot even be qual~tatively
related to gamma-ray emission without the a ~ dof
calibration data and departure curves T h ~ shappens,
of course, because the magnitude of the signal produced
a t the output of the detection system 1s ~nfluencedby
a combination of factors. To elucidate, the response of
a detect01 statlonary In a borehole oppos~tea glven
formation will depend upon:
1. Specific activity of the formatlon (gamma rays/
sec-gm)
2 Speclfic a c t ~ v ~ t i eofs borehole flu~d,caslng, and
cement
3. Character~stlcs of the detector and the counting
system
4. Posltion of the detector ~n the borehole
5 Density of the f l u ~ d111 the borehole
6. Dlanletel of the borehole
7. Thickness and denslty of the caslng and cement
8 Bulk density of the foirnation
and in some cases 011
9. Relative concentrat~onsof the radioactive mate-
rials ( U , Th, and K ) In the formatlon.
The physical pi lnclples nlvolved here can perhaps best
be understood if the contrlbut~onto the response, d I ,
made by the radioactive materlal contamed In a n element
of volunle dl', havlng denslty p , located a t a dlstance r
from the center of the sens~tlbevolume of the detector
1s expressed In the general form (for the case of a
pulse-type detector) :
d l = .4~Pfi)O(r)pdIT (2)
Wl~ere~n:1 . sA the number of gamma rays emitted per
second per gram of rock; O(r), the fraction emltted in
 API CALIBRATION
FACILITY
FOR NUCLEAR
LOGS 233

Table 4
Gamma-ray Lines* in the Spectra of the Important
Naturally Occurring Radionuclides3
--
- -
-- _I___- -- -_..A

greater than 0 05 photons per dls~ntegrat~on

* w ~ t n~ntens~tres and enera~esgreater than 100 kev.

the d ~ r e c t ~ oofn t h e sensitive volume of the detector, Expressed alternat~vely,E 1s the p l o b a b i l ~ t yt h a t a

p(r), a factor to corlect f o r t h e absorption and scat-
terlng of gamma r a y s In the reglon between the element
dV and the detector, and E, t h e effic~encyof the detector
f o r gamma rays, I.e., the f r a c t ~ o nof those incldent on
the detector t h a t actually contributes t o the response.
The factor P accounts f o r the f a c t t h a t the number
of gamma rays w h ~ c hreach t h e detector ( A p f l p d V )
IS strongly ~nfluencedby t h e environment In w h ~ c ht h e
source and the detector a r e s ~ t u a t e d I t s value v a n e s
w ~ t hthe types of mateilals present, the dlstance ,I., and
t h e energy of the gamma r a d ~ a t l o n
gamma r a y ~ n c l d e n t on t h e detector w ~ l l produce a
count The c h a r a c t e r i s t ~ c sof the counting system (e.g ,
the setting of t h e d ~ s c i ~ m l n a t used
o r wlth a sclntlllation
counter) and t h e characteristics of t h e detector deter-
mine ~ t values In a n y glven s l t u a t ~ o nThe three p r ~ n c ~ p a l
classes of gamma-ray detectors currently In use a r e
lon~zatlonchambers, Ge~ger-Mullertubes, and sclntllla-
tlon counters Even w ~ t h n la given class, ~ n d ~ v l d u a l
~ n s t r u m e n t scan have wldely different energy-response
characteristics unless they a r e bullt to exactly t h e same
specifications. T h a t IS, In addltion to b e ~ n gnot equally
294 BELKNAP,DEWAN,KIRKPATKICK,
MOTT,PEARSON,
A N D RABSON

Table 5
Spectral Composition of the Gamma Rays* Emitted by the Uranium Series,
the Thorium Series, and Potassium'
U r a l i ~ u n iS e n e s
Number of
Photons per
I 1 T h o r ~ u n lSeries
Number of
Photons' per
I
-

Energy D ~ s ~ n t e g r a t ~ o n Relative D ~ s i n t e g r a t ~ o n Relatlve Number of Relat~ve

Interval, 111 E q u ~ l l b r ~ u m Intensity, in E q u ~ l ~ b r ~ u mIntensity, Photons per Intensity,
Mev Mixture Percent Mixture Percent Disintegration Percent
0.1 - 0.3
0.3 - 0 5
0 5 - 0.7
0.7 - 0 9
09-11
1 1- 1.3
13-15
1 5 - 1.7
1.7 - 1.9
1.9 - 2.1
2.1 - 2 3
2 3 - 2.5
25-27

'Includ~ng l ~ n e su ~ t henergles greater than 100 kev

Table 6
Characteristics of the Three Naturally Occurring Source Materials'

Number of Number of - Number of

Dls~ntegratonI Sec-Gm Photons/D~s~ntegrat~on Photons1Sec-Gm Mean Photon
Element of Element In E q u ~ l ~ b r l uM
m~xture* of Element* Energy, Mev*
u(+)
Thi+)
1.23 x lo4
4 02 x 103
2.24
2.51
I 28
10
x lo4
x 104
0.80
0 93
-

K 31.3 0 11 1.46
Ra(+) 3.63 X 1010 2.20 80 X loi0 0 81
*Photons w ~ : henergles less than 100 kev not Included
( + )Ser~esIn equ~l~brlum.

s e n s ~ t i v eto gamma r a y s of all energles, the manner In
whlch the efficiency v a n e s with energy can d ~ f f e rfrom
one type of counter t o the next
Thus, In p ~ l n c i p l eP IS affected by v a r ~ a t ~ o nins the
l a s t six items l ~ s t e dpreviously. The last seven Items w ~ l l
affect the energy d ~ s t r ~ b u t i oof n gamma rays w h ~ c h ,
in t u i n , affects the spec~ficvalue of E . The descript~onIS
s ~ m p l ~ f i econsiderably
d however, ~f we assume, In accord-
ance wlth a common practice whlch may or may not be
well-grounded, t h a t under the c o n d ~ t ~ o n normally s
encounterecl In well logging
a. t h e energy spectrum of the gamma r a y s e m ~ t t e d
by the formation does not v a r y much from one
formatlon to another (l.e., w ~ t ht h e r e l a t ~ v econ-
centrations of U, Th, and K ) , and
h. t h e spectrum ~ n c ~ d e on n t the detector is not shifted
s ~ g n ~ f i c a n tby
l y changes In horehole and formation
condit~ons.
p will now v a r y only w ~ t hItems 4 to 8, E, with Item 3
Calibration and Standardization of Gamma-ray Logs
I t IS apparent from the "Introduct~on" t h a t many of
the d ~ f f i c u l t ~ emherent
s in gamma-ray logging would be
e l ~ m ~ n a t eifd a common u n ~ of t measurement defined In
telnls of a standard source of ganima radiation (which
could be used to c a l ~ b r a t eeach type of gamma-ray
logging tool) were adopted by t h e servlce companies
Once the Subcomm~tteeagreed t h a t t111s approach t o
s t a n d a r d i z a t ~ o nwas practicable and would not 11lfr1ng.e
upon t h e r ~ g h t sof ~ n d ~ v ~ dcompanies,
ual t h e h a w pioh-
lems of namlng and defining the standard unit of log
response were attacked E x ~ s t ~ nunits g wele first con-
s ~ d e r e d .Some of these had desirable characteristics b u t
none w a s completely d e s c r ~ p t ~ vofe the ganinla-ray enils-
slon p r o p e r t ~ e sof the formatlon Because of t h ~ and s the
d~fficultyof achlevnlg agreement between the competi-
 FA(:ILITY
APT CALIBR.ATION
tive l o g ~ l n gcompanies on a n e s ~ s t ~ nu gn ~ t a, new t e n n
"API Ganinla-Ray Unit" was apploved by the Sub-
conlln~ttee
As ~ n d ~ c a t eeda l l ~ e r ,In gamma-lay l o g g ~ n gone I S
only co~icernetlw ~ t hthe gamma l a y s eni~ttetlby K40,
U"s, T h " h n d the decay products of the latter t\vo
I t mas reasonable therefore t h a t t h e Subcomm~ttee
defined the A P I u n ~ tm terms of the magnitude of t h e
response produced by a n estended m e d ~ u mc o n t a ~ n ~ nag
m ~ s t u r eof the three naturally occurrmg r a d ~ o a c t ~ v e
source materials F o r one thing, w ~ t hlogs calibrated
111 such units, effects caused by energy-dependent factors
(such a s the d ~ f f e r e n energy-iesponse
t characterist~csof
the various logging systems) w ~ l lbe n ~ ~ n ~ m i z ~f e d in
, E , \\rill be a decleasmg f u n c t ~ o nof the distance from
f a c t they do play a n ~ m p o l t a n tpart.
Although some c o ~ i s i d e r a t ~ o\\,as n glven to the p o s s ~ -
h ~ l ~ tofy u s ~ n ga geolog~cal f o ~ m a t ~ oans a primaly
standard, the unanimous c h o ~ c eof t h e Subconlm~ttee
was a c a l ~ b i a t ~ opit i i because ~t appeared to meet t h e
b a s ~ crequirement of bemg both practical and pelma-
nent The p ~ t(see S e c t ~ o nI V h e r e ~ n ) would he com-
p r ~ s e t lof two zones - one of very low r a d ~ o a c t ~ v ~ t y ,
the othei h a v ~ n gessent~allythe same relative concen-
t r a t ~ o n s of uranium, t h o r ~ u m , and potasslum a s a n
average shale, but a p p r o s ~ n i a t e l ytwice the total a c t ~ v -
~ t y Both
. zones would be used f o r c a h b r a t ~ n gpurposes,
w ~ t hone A P I Gamma-Ray U n ~ defined t a s 11200 of the
d~fference111 t h e lo? deflections produced by the two
levels of radiation.
Espiessed in terms of equation (2), a f t e r ~ n t e -
g r a t ~ n g ,the c a l ~ b r a t ~ opn ~ w
t ~ l lglve:
I , - I2 = A l ~ , X-lA 2 ~ , k 2
= ,000 API Gn?n~nc~-Rny U7tzts (3)
W l l e r e l ? ~k l and k, a r e constants of p r o p o r t ~ o n a l ~ t y
Therefole, if energy-dependent effects a r e ~ g n o r e d ,the
e q u a t ~ o nf o r the iesponse of every c a l ~ h r a t e dtool In a
f o r m a t ~ o nof spec~fica c t i v ~ t y.4 w11l be.
I = [ZOO A k I ( k , A , - li2A2)]
( A P I Gamma-Ray U n ~ t s ) (4)
I t IS e v ~ d e n tt h a t the response I 1s independent of tool
type and other instrumental factors and thus sat~sfies
the cond~tlonsf o r s t a n d a r d ~ z a t ~ o n
111. FACTORS INVOLVED I N NEUTRON LOG
STANDARDIZATION
Neutron L o g g ~ n gPrinciples
Altliougl~ t h ~ spapel 1s not intended a s a nuclear
logging primer, ~t I S necessary to set forth c e r t a ~ n
~ u d ~ m e n t a i py ~ ~ n c ~ p l111
e s order to make clear the
reasoning b e h ~ n dsome of the Subcommittee's d e c ~ s ~ o n s .
Coiisequently, 111 t h ~ ssect~on,only those t o p ~ c sd ~ r e c t l y
related t o the c a l ~ b l a t l o nand s t a n d a i d i z a t ~ o nof neutron
logs w ~ l lbe d~scussed and then a s br~eflya s poss~ble
F o r a comprehens~vetreatment of the phvs~cal prin-
ciples of neutlon l o g g ~ n g ,the readel IS refelred to the
work of T i t t n i a i ~ . ~
I n the sequence of events w h ~ c l i character~zes the
neutlon l o g g ~ n g method, energetic neutrons from a
source 111 the logging sonde enter the f o r m a t ~ o n ,lose
energy (slow down) through elastic and i n e l a s t ~ c
FOR NUCLEAR
LOGS 295
nuclear c o l l ~ s ~ o nusn t ~ lthey a r e in thermal e q u ~ l ~ b i i u i n
w ~ t hthe moderating medluni, and then d ~ f f u s eunt11
they a r e absorbed by t h e f o r m a t ~ o nnucle~.A steadp-
state cond~tron is reached when the total number of
n e u t ~ o n sabsorbed per second equals the number e m ~ t t e d
per second
I n the steady state, neutrons of all energles a r e
d ~ s t r ~ b u t e111
d space about the source F o r a n y glven
set of bolehole and f o l m a t ~ o nc o n d ~ t ~ o n st ,h ~ sclout1
of neutrons will have the follow~nggeneral features:
a The total neutron density ( ~ . e ,t h e n~ilnber of
neutrons per unit volume), a s well a s t h e d e n s ~ t yof
neutlons w h ~ c hhave been slowed down to some energy
the source.
h Neutrons of energy E will be distributed, on the
average, closer to the source than those of some lower
energy E'.
c. The spatial d~stributionof thelmal neutrons will
always be broader t h a n t h a t of ileutrons of energles
just above thermal
As f o r the effect of the i n t r ~ n s i cp r o p e r t ~ e s of a
f o r m a t ~ o non t h e s ~ a t ~ da ~l s t n b u t i o n .we observe t h a t
in slo\ving down to a low energy E , neutrons (on t h e
aveiage) travel f a r t h e r f i o m t h e source when the
hydrogen concentrat~on is low than \vl~en ~t is high
In other wolds, a s t h e hydrogen content of the rock
Increases, the neutrons a r e slowed down more effectively
and the distribut~onis narrowed. To ~ l l u s t r a t et h ~ swe
c o n s ~ d e rtwo formations, one having n, hydrogen atouis
per u n ~ tvolume, the other 1t2, where 7 7 1 > ?L?. If t h e
neutron deiisit~es 111 these f o r m a t ~ o n sa r e q , ( E ) and
q 2 ( E ) , respectively, and all other factors a r e constant,
then, a t t h e source p o s ~ t ~ o qn ,l ( E ) > q 2 ( E ) . However,
upon movmg away from t h e source a p o ~ n tI S reached
(the crossover p o ~ n t where q , = q 2 ) beyond wh~cli
q1(E) < rp(E).
A generalizat~onof the foregoing 1s that, regardless
of the energy of the neutrons under considerat~on,a
d ~ s t a n c e can be found a f t e r whrcli neutron density
always dimin~shesw ~ t hhydrogen content. We need to
remember, however, t h a t the exact m a g n ~ t u d eof the
reduct~on IS a f u n c t ~ o nof neutron energy; I e , a t a
glven d ~ s t a n c efrom t h e source, the thermal and epl-
thermal densities, f o r esample, w ~ l lnot change a t the
same r a t e with hydrogen The detectors of all presently
a v a ~ l a b l e neutron logging devices a r e located In the
reglon where the neutron density decreases a s t h e
hydrogen concentrat~onincreases
Of course, elements other t h a n hydrogen can influence
the manner in w h ~ c hneutrons of a glveil energy a r e
d ~ s t r ~ b u t eabout
d a source. F o r example, a t low hydro-
gen concentrat~ons,where the s l o w ~ n gdown of f a s t
neutrons IS no longer d o m ~ n a t e dby hydrogen, effects
caused by d~fferencesin the nlajor elements present 111
t h e rock matrices become significant. F u r t h e r , t h e
diffusion of thermal neutrons can be a p p r e c ~ a h l yaffected
by small concentrations of elements w h ~ c ha r e strong
neutron absorbers (e.g., chlorine) and, under c e r t a ~ n
cond~tions, by t h e major elenients in the formation.

Reference should also he made to the f a c t t h a t t h e
energy, E,, of t h e source neutrons plays a role In
determlnlng the character~stlcs of the spatial d ~ s t r l -
h u t ~ o n of neutlons All other factors belng equal,
changes In E , can alter t h e relationship hetween neutron
d e n s ~ t yand hydiogen content.
The niechan~sms u n d e r l y ~ n g the neutron l o g g ~ n g
niethod a r e such t h a t the f u n c t ~ o n a l r e l a t ~ o n s h ~ p
hetween hydrogen concentrat~onand log response can
v a r y from one type of logg~rlgsystem to another. I t is
thls c h a r a c t e r ~ s t ~ cmore
, t h a n a n y other, which compll-
cates the s t a n d a r d ~ z a t i o nproblem
The h a s ~ cd~fferencesIn response vs p o r o s ~ t y~ n d e x
of the various logging systems stem from the use of
d~fferent types of detectors, source-detector spacings,
and - probably to a niuch lesser extent - types of
sources. Each of these factors is discussed briefly
following
CL. Detector T y p e . Three generlc types of detector a r e
used In commercially a v a ~ l a b l eneutron loggnlg tools.
F o r our purposes, we w ~ l l refer to these s ~ n i p l ya s
thermal neutron, eplthernial neutron,* and gamma-ray
detectors, ~th e ~ n gunderstood -hut ~ g n o r e d- t h a t not
all thermal-neutron detectors a r e completely insensl-
tive to e p ~ t h e r m a l neutrons a n d l o r gamma rays and
converse1y.
The responses of the first two detectors a r e propor-
tional to the densities of thermal and epithermal
neutrons, respect~vely, In t h e ~ r ~ m m e d ~ a tvei c i n ~ t ~ e s .
Hence, from the dlscuss~onIn the prevlous sectloll, we
see t h a t for a . given set of horehole a d format1011
c o n d ~ t ~ o n sa, neutron-thermal neutron and a neutron-
e p ~ t h e r m a lneutron log can have q u ~ t ed ~ f f e r e nhydrogen
t Sources of t h ~ stype a r e made by mlxlng - o r com-
response curves
A t fiist s ~ g h ~t t appears a s though a sonde c o n t a l n ~ n g
a gamma-ray detector wlll produce a log w ~ t ha response
veiy s ~ m ~ l ator t h a t of the thermal neutron log. The
reasonlng 1s a s follows When thermal neutrons a r e
absorbed by format1011 n u c l e ~ the , excess r e a c t ~ o nenergy
1s promptly released In the form of gamma r a y s
Inasmuch a s t h e number of neutrons absorhed per
u n ~ tvolume a t a n y polnt In the formation IS propor-
t ~ o n a lto t h e thermal neutron d e n s ~ t y a t t h a t polnt,
the g a m m a - r a y - e m ~ t t . ~ nnucl~des
g a r e seen to he d ~ s -
t i ~ h u t e dabout the source (of neutrons) 111 exactly t h e
same manner a s the thei-mal neutrons Up011 assuming.
t h a t few gamma rags c o n t i ~ h u t eto the courit~rigl a t e
unless they a r e produced very near the detector, one
1s led to the conclusion t h a t the response of the gamma-
r a y detector 1s proport~onal to the thermal neutron
d e n s ~ t yIn ~ t v~clnity.
s product nucleus varies wlth the angle hetween the Incl-
Of course, the fallacy 111 tins reasonlng IS t h a t In
the neutron capture process the eneigy ant1 numbei
of t h e gamma r a y s e n i ~ t t e ddepend upon the particular
rlucle~mvolved. T h a t is, f o r the same thermal neutron
density, the number of gamma r a y s e m ~ t t e dper unit
time by a unlt volume of rock can he larger, smaller.
o r the same a s t h a t from some other u n ~ volume t havlng
8.4 neutron w h ~ c hhas not completed the slow~ng-downprocess
, MOTT,PEARSON,A N D RABSON
s l ~ g h t l ydifferent elemental composlt~on Under some
conditions, then, t h e response curves of the neutron-
gamma a n d neutron-thermal neutron logs niay be t h e
same, whereas under others there may he major
d~fferences.
b. Soztrce-detector S p n c ~ n g .The a h l l ~ t yof a neutron
log, regardless of type, to ieflect changes m t h e hydrogen
content of a formatlon IS dlrectly related to the spaclng
between the source a n d the detect01 As the spaclng is
Increased (in t h e reglon above crossover), the fractional
change i n response f o r a u n ~ change t In hydrogen IS also
~ncreased. However - a s was mentioned prev~ously-
neutron density always decreases w ~ t ht h e d ~ s t a n c e
from the source, so t h a t the larger spaclngs a r e char-
acterlzed hy lower c o u n t ~ n grates and greatei s t a t ~ s t l c a l
fluctuat~ons
Each sei-vlce company selects source-detector spaclngs
In accordance w ~ t hits own ideas a s to what constitutes
the best comproni~sebetween hydrogen resolut~onand
c o u n t ~ n gr a t e f o r its 1)artlcular cond~tions The result
1s t h a t even tools of t h e same type ( e . g , neutron-
gamma) a r e operated w ~ t hd ~ f f e r e n tspacings and, a s
a consequence, can have d ~ f f e r e n tresponse cuives.
c. Nezctron Solirces. The neutrons e m ~ t t e d h y the
sources In present-day neutron logglng tools a l e pro-
duced by a nuclear reaction w h ~ c hmay be described
symbolically a s follows:
.,Be9 + .He4 -+,nl + ,C1" 5.71 Mev.
A small p a r t of the r e a c t ~ o nenergy (5 71 Mev) is used
up In the r e c o ~ lof the C 1 h n c l e u s , all o r p a i t of the
remainder may be carrled off by the neution
h l n ~ n gchemically - a n a l p h a - e m ~ t t ~ nr agd ~ o n u c l ~ dsuch
e
a s Raze, Pox0, Ac227, or PuZSY,w ~ t hberyll~um, the
t a ~ g e tmatella1 The neutron y~eltlof a glverl source
prlnclpally depends upon the r e l a t ~ v ep r o p o r t ~ o n sof
alpha en11tte1 and target m a t e r ~ a lused, the manner of
mlxlng or conihln~ng,and on the decay p r o p e r t ~ e sof
the alpha e m ~ t t e r A p p r o x ~ m a t e y ~ e l d s o b t a ~ n a h l e In
p r a c t ~ c efrom some of the commollly used alpha-neutron
sources a r e listed in Tahle 7.
An ( a , ? ~source ) always e x l i ~ h ~ at s wrde spectium of
neutron energles even when the alpha pal-t~clesall have
the same i m t ~ a lenergy. T h ~ IsS hecause: (I., many alpha
p a r t ~ c l e slose p a r t of t h e ~ energ!,
r 11g coll~slonprocesses
hefore they ~ n t e r a c twith a h e r y l l ~ u mnucleus; h , t h e
product nucleus 1s somet~mesleft In a n e s c ~ t e ds t a t e 111
which case the energy of e s c ~ t a t ~ o1s n not a v a ~ l a h l et o
the emitted neutron, and c, t h e recoll energy of t h e
dent alpha p a r t ~ c l eand the o u t g o ~ n gneutron I n general,
detalls 01.1 the neutron energy spectla of (a.7~)sources
must he determined exper~mentally Short of expeil-
merit, one can say wlth c e r t a ~ n t yonly t h a t t h e nlaslmum
energy of t h e neutions w ~ l lhe less t h a n the slim of the
alpha-part~cleenergy and the react1011energy D a t a on
the spectrum of neution energles emitted hv R3-Be,
Po-Be, and Pu-Be sources a r e included In Table 7.
 A P I CALIBRATION
FACILITY
FOR NUCLEAR
.-
Table 7
Pract~cal Yields from Alpha-Neutron Sources
-- Source
Ra:Be
Alpha
Em~tt.ei
Ra"26 plus
Alpha E n e r g ~ e s ,
Mev
decay products 5.49, 5 99, 7.68
Po. Be p0~lo
Ac :Be Ac"" plus 4 94, 5.86,5.97,
decay prodi~cts 6 03,6.62,6 82,
7 36, 7.43, and
Pu :Be pu?:3s 5.15, 5 13,5.10,
It genelally thought t h a t the energy spectra of
IS
((X,7~) so~irces a r e not sufficiently dtfferent t o cause
pronounced effects In neutron loggtng However, a s f a r
a s can be detenntned, there a r e no d a t a a v a ~ l a b l eon t h e
\7anous types of l o g g ~ n gtools In use w111ch can justify
completely thls po111t of mew.
Calibrat~onand Standardtzatton of Neutron Logs
The Subcomnltttee cons~dereda t length the cholce of
a common neutron log u n ~ tNone of t h e eslstlng neutron
l o g g ~ n gunlts renewed In the "Introduction" had out-
s t a n d ~ n gmerit a s a n Industry standard. I11 p r ~ n c ~ p l e
~t would be ]deal to scale neutron logs dlrectly in total
poroslty unlts (free w a t e r plus eclmvalent bound w a t e r ) ,
slnce thls IS a physical u n l t and IS t h e quantlty ultl-
mately deslied from t h e log However, t h ~ sIS not
f e a s ~ b l ebecause the response of a neutron tool IS not
llnearly related to poroslty and because ~t IS so affected
hy borehole variables. The Subcotnm~ttee therefore
adopted a new unlt, d e s ~ g n a t e da s t h e A P I Neutron
Unlt, t o be defined In terms of a p ~ l n i a r ystandard
a v a ~ l a b l eto all servlce c o m p a n ~ e s
The follow~ngposslbllltles were consldered a s p i ~ m a l y
standards f o r neutron tool c a l ~ b r a t ~ o n :
1 An actual well, probably a n abandoned cased hole.
2. A specla1 sleeve or t a n k slmllar to e x ~ s t l n g
calibrators.
3. A test pit wlth predeterm~nedformatlon and bore-
hole condlt~ons.
The first scheme mas rejected on the giouncls t h a t the
well mtght not remain usable ~ n d e f i n ~ t e l yt h, a t char-
a c t e i ~ s t ~ cofs the formatron would not be known pre-
c~sely,depth measu~etnents might be In error, c a s ~ n g
would corrode, etc. The second scheme was also rejected
on the basls t h a t e s ~ s t l n gc a l ~ b r a t l n g sleeves were ,
tallored to particular types of tools, I e , they contamed
a i r spaces, sliding mechanisn~s,neutron absorbers, etc.,
and t h a t it mould be ~ m p o s s ~ h to l e choose o r even des1g.11
a u n ~ v e r s a lsleeve w h ~ c hmould appeal the same t o all
slzes and types of tools I11 other words, a p a r t ~ c u l a r
callbrator, des~gned to glve t h e same response a s a
10-percent porosity format1011w ~ t hone tool, m ~ g h tglve
a 15-percent porostty response to another tool ,and a
5-percent response to a t h ~ r d .
LOGS
297
Yleld,
Neutrons/ Sec-Curte
1 0 - 1.5 x 10'
I Neutron Energy, Mev
Average
38
1 Mas~tnum
12
25 x lo6 4.3 . 10 8
1.7 - 2.0 x lo7 5.0 13
1 4 - 2.0 X lofi 42 10.5
The f o r e g o ~ n gobject~onsdo not apply to a properly
deslgned test plt c o n t a ~ n ~ n"subsurface"
g formations.
Thls w a s therefore adopted a s a standard Because of
the widespread utlhzatlon of neutron logs In Innestone
reservoirs and the a v a ~ l a b ~ l l tof y clean Ilnlestone, the
"standard f o r m a t ~ o n "w a s chosen to be I n d ~ a n aIlme-
stone of 19 percent average l~orosltysaturated w ~ t h
fresh water and drllled wlth a 7%-ln. hole; the hole
would he uncased and full of fresh water The A P I
Neutron U n ~ was t defined a s 1/1,000 of the response of
a tool In t h ~ format~on.*
s By d e f i n ~ t ~ othen,
n all neutron
tools scaled In A P I u n ~ t smust show a deflection of
1,000 A P I unlts ~f t h e tool passes through a clean
l~nlestone bed where poros~ty, s a t u r a t ~ o n , and hole
c o n d ~ t ~ o nasl e ~ d e n t ~ c awl ~ t hthe A P I standaid Wlth
t h ~ ssystem n e u t ~ o n logs wlll show deflect~ons fioni
a few hundred to a few thousand A P I n n ~ t sfol the
usual range of borehole and f o r m a t ~ o ncondttlons
.
In a d d ~ t l o nt o t h e callbratloll formatlon, t h e Suh-
conimlttee consldered ~t advisable t o provlde two add]-
ttonal l~mestonef o r n ~ a t ~ oone ~ ~ sof, lower p o r o s ~ t yand
one of hlghel p o r o s ~ t yt h a n the standard The three
formattons would serve to e s t a b l ~ s hone common depar-
t u r e curve and would p e r n ~ t teach servlce company t o
normalize ~ t laboratory
s departure curves to the A P I
standard. T h ~ sprovision appeared necessary because
there w a s considerable v a r l a t ~ o n~n porosltles asslgned
by servlce companles to the same type of limestone In
thelr lndlv~dual test p ~ t s ,p a r t ~ c u l a r l y a t the lowest
poros~tles. W ~ t h t h e f a c ~ l ~ t ~a et sthetr d~sposal, the
R P 3.9 Subcomm~tteecould determine extremely accu-
rately the poroslt~esof t h e stone installed ln the test
D I and~ these values would be nlutually acceptable to all.
To sumniarlze, ~t was declded to e s t a b l ~ s h- a s a
means f o r standardlzmg neutron logs - a standard for-
m a t ~ o na v a ~ l a b l eto all s e ~ v l c ecompanles. The response
of any tool m t h ~ sstandard f o r m a t ~ o nwould be deslg-
nated 1,000 A P I u n ~ t s Each servlce company woulcl
compaie the response of a tool 1x1 ~ t field s callbrator to
the response In the test formatlon and thereby asslgn
to the field callbrator the a p p r o p r ~ a t enumber of A P I
'Although there are several advantages to a cal~hratronhased on two
standard format~ons,the Subcommittee bel~evedthat the two-po~nt
method would Impose practical drficultles on the servlce companles
In scaling thew logs whrch could lead to numerous scaling errors
u r i ~ t s In a c l d ~ t ~ o neach
, servlce company could Issue
depalture curves In A P I u n ~ t sw ~ t hthese curves nor-
m a l ~ z e dto the response of the tool In the A P I s t a n d a i d
format~ons
IV. DESIGN O F T H E API NUCLEAR LOG
CALIBRATION FACILITY
Facility 1,ocation and F ~ n a n c i n g
As outl~netlin S e c t ~ o n sI1 and 111, t h e Subcomm~ttee
on Revtew of A P I R P $3 dec~dedt h a t the best method
of a c h ~ e v l n gs t a n d a r d ~ z a t ~ oofn gamma-ray and neutron
logs was to construct prlmary standards In t h e form of
c a l ~ b r a t ~ opn~ t s one
, f o r gamma-ray and one f o r neutron
logs These p ~ t swould c o n t a ~ n f o r n ~ a t ~ o nws ~ t hpie-
c ~ s e l yknown plopel ties, s ~ ~ n u l a t ~snu gb s u ~face condl-
t ~ o n sa s closely a s poss~ble. They would be set u p a t
some central locat1011wheie each servlce company could
l u n ~ t logglng
s tools and lelate the response of each
tool In the prlmary standard to the field c a l ~ h r a t o r
normally used.
I n J a n u a r y 1957, a panel' of the Subcomm~tteewas
appointed to d l a w up a d e s ~ g nf o r the neutron and
gamma-ray calihrat~onp ~ t sand to ~ n v e s t ~ g a tposstble e Design of the Garnrna-ray P i t
locat~onsand methods of f i n a n c ~ n g The first f a c ~ l ~ t y
cles~gndlawn up by the panel was plesented to the
Suhcotnm~tteeIn May 1957, and a final r e v ~ s e dd e s ~ g n ,
w ~ t ha firm cost e s t ~ m a t eof $48,000 ( e x c l u d ~ n gl a n d ) ,
was approved In October, 1957
Poss~bles ~ t e sf o r the f a c ~ l ~ t ay s, well a s alterriatlve
methods of financing, were then ~ n v e s t ~ g a t e by d tlie
panel A letter r e q u e s t ~ n ga n ~ n d ~ c a t ~ofo n~ n t e r e s tand
a proposal for c o n s t r u c t ~ n g and operating the call-
bratton f a c ~ l i t y w a s sent t o 14 commerctal research
o r g a m z a t ~ o n s and u n ~ v e r s ~ t ~The e s answers recelved
establ~shedthat ~t would not be f e a s ~ h l ef o r a commerc~al
organlzat~onto constluct the p ~ t sand a m o r t ~ z ethe cost
on a serv~ce-chargeb a s s The p o s s ~ h ~ l ~ oft ythe servlce
compames alone h e a r ~ n gthe major p a r t of the cost
was d~scussedand rejected f o r several reasons, a major
one b e ~ n gt h a t objective and ~ m p a r t ~ acontrol l of the
f a c l l ~ t yhy o p e r a t ~ n gcompanles could not be exerased
under these condit~ons.I t was concluded t h a t t h e only
f e a s ~ b l e f i n a n c ~ n gmethod would he f o r the A P I to
u n d e r w r ~ t ethe construct~oncosts of the f a c ~ l ~ t w y ,~ t h
m a ~ n t e n a n c eand o p e r a t ~ n gcosts t o he covered by selvlce
charges f o r t h e ~ ruse Accord~nglythe A P I undertook
a s o l ~ c ~ t a t ~of o n approx~mately 50 o p e r a t ~ n g and 10
servlce companles, w ~ t hthe suggested c o n t l ~ b u t ~ oof n tration, led to a - c h o ~ c eof 8 f t fol t h e bed thtckness
each company betng loughly proportlonate to the stze
of t h e company By J u n e 1958, tlie necessary $48,000
had been rece~vecl
I t was agreed t h a t the f a c l l ~ t yshould be located In
t h e Houston a r e a hecause of the f a c t t h a t a p p l o x ~ m a t e l y
'7.5 percent of t h e servlce compan~es'general offices and
shops a r e In t h a t a r e a Accordtngly, the U n ~ v e r s ~ tofy
Houston was approached and lece~ved the proposal
favorably. The University agreed to d e d ~ c a t ethe land
Gulf Research and Development Co . J T
*W E Mott. Clrart~~ta:)~.
Dewan. Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp. A S McKay. Texaco
. .
Inc G~lbertS w ~ f t ,Well Survevs Inc R H Wlnn, Welex, Inc
and W B Belknap, e x ofic&o,Phrlllps Petroleum Co.
. fluctuatrons but st111 w t h ~ nllnearrty capabrl~t~es
necessary, to act a s the prlme c o n t ~ a c t o rf o r the A P I
In c o n s t r u c t ~ n gthe f a c ~ l ~ t yand
, to p r o v ~ d e f o r t h e
subsequent supelvlslon, o p e r a t ~ o n and malntenance of
the f a c ~ l i t y ,wlth t h e u n d e r s t a n d ~ n g t h a t ~t could be
used f o r educat~onalpurposes. Constluct~onand opera-
t ~ o nof the faclllty w a s placed undel the ~ u r ~ s d ~ c of t~on
the Petroleum E n g l n e e r ~ n gD e p a ~ t m e n tw ~ t hProfessor
C V. K ~ r k p a t r l c k ,head of the D l v ~ s ~ oofn Chenilcal and
Petroleum E n g ~ n e e r l n g ,d ~ r e c t l yIn charge.
I n F e b r u a r y 1958, a second panel of S I X memhers?
was a p p o ~ n t e dto coord~natet h e construct~onand opera-
t ~ o nof t h e A P I f a c ~ l ~ twy ~ t hProfessor K ~ r k p a t r ~ c k
T h ~ scomm~ttee worked very closely w ~ t h Profess01
Kirkpatrlck d u r ~ n gthe detatled planning and construc-
t ~ o nstages A s the p l a n n ~ n gprogressed, a numher of
changes were made to lower the cost and Increase the
f l e x ~ b ~ l t tof
y the lnstallat~on,particularly In regard to
the b u ~ l d l n gand type of h o ~ s tspec~fied Consequently,
the final d e s ~ g n descr~bed
, follow~ng,embod~esthe work
of hoth of t h e panels, a s well a s some m o d ~ f i c a t ~ o n s
suggested by the Unlverslty of Houston staff supervlslng
the construct~on
S p e c ~ f i c a t ~ o nl as d down f o r the gamma-ray p ~ wele t
threefold. F l r s t , the d ~ m e n s ~ o nofs the p ~ had t to be
large enough t h a t the s y n t h e t ~ cf o r m a t ~ o n sa p p e a r to be
~ n f i n ~ tot e gamma-ray detectors. Second, t h e p ~ had t to
have a rad~oactivezone c o n t a ~ n ~ nt hg e three naturally
occurring r a d ~ o a c t ~ v elements e - uranium, t h o r ~ u n i ,
and potasslum - In apploximately tlie same r e l a t ~ v e
concentrat~onsa s occui In a n average shale, the total
a c t ~ v ~ of t y the zone had to be a p p r o x ~ m a t e l ytwtce the
a c t ~ v ~ tofy t h e shale. T h ~ r d ,the r a d ~ o a c t ~ velements
e
had to be dispersed In a large mass of r e l a t ~ v e l y~ n e r t
m a t e r ~ a l . Inasmuch a s such m a t e r ~ a l w ~ l lhave some
s l ~ g h tr a d ~ o a c t i v ~ t ya , second zone of t h ~ ms a t e r ~ a lhad
to be prov~ded.The d~fferenceIn ~ n t e n s ~ between ty the
two zones IS used to define the A P I Gamma-Ray U n ~ t
C o n s ~ d e r ~ n first
g the slze, tt IS known t h a t t h e
95-percent depth of l n v e s t ~ g a t ~ oof n the gamma-ray log
In a very porous formation IS appl-ox~mately1 5 In.
(from the borehole wall). Consequently, t h e r a d ~ u sof
the test ptt w a s set a t 2 f t . Even w ~ t hthe longest
counter In present-day use, about 3 f t , a good "plateau"
should be o b t a ~ n e dIn t h e center of the zone durlng
logglng T h ~ s ,coniblned w ~ t ha 1 5 - ~ n depth of pene-
D a t a on a n a l y s ~ sof over 200 shales ~ndlcated t h a t
the aveiage shale contained a p p r o x ~ m a t e l y 6 ppm
uranlum, 1 2 ppm t h o r ~ u m ,and 2 percent potasslum
S ~ n c e~t w a s desired to o b t a ~ ntwice the average shale
levelf In the radioact~vezone of t h e p ~ t concentrat~ons ,
f o r t h e l a t t e r were set a t 1 2 ppm uranlum, 21 ppm
thorlum, and 4 percent potassium F r o m the constants
.
.
TW B Belknap, Chazr71rnn. Phlllrps Petroleum Co W E Mott. Gulf
Research and Development Co J. T Dewan, Schlumberger Well
Surveying Corp .W R Rabson. Pan Geo Atlas C o w . A J Pearson.
The Atlantrc Refining C o . and A B W ~ n t e r ,Lane-Wells Company
$This level was chosen as berng h ~ g henough to mrnlmlze statistrcal
tools.
of exrstrng logglng
 A P I CALIBRATION
FACILITY LOGS
FOR NUCLEAR 299

glven ti Table 6 ~t 1s seen t h a t , w ~ t hthe ielatlve con- T h e n i a x l m u m a m o u n t s of r a d ~ o a c t i v em a t e r ~ a l

centratlolls ~ n d ~ c a t e dnranlum
, contributes approxl-
mately 47 percent, thorlum 34 percent and potasslum
19 peicent to the effective gamma-ray a c t ~ v ~ tofy thk
forniat~on.
Although ~t m ~ g h thave been poss~bleto find a shale
wltli the d e s ~ r e dconcentrat~oiiof radloact~veelements,
the prospect of a long search f o r a s u ~ t a b l eshale out-
cropping was riot a t t r a c t ~ v e Consecluently, ~t was con-
sidered t h a t t h e best way of achlev~llg the deslred
a c t l v ~ t ywas to obtain accurately assayed amouilts of
uranlum, thorium, and potasslum i n concentrated form,
mlx these un~fornily In a slurry w ~ t h low-act~vity
cement, pour the s l u i r y Into t h e p ~ t ,and allow ~t t o
set u p In the foim of concrete T h ~ h s a s the advantage
t h a t ~f the r a d ~ o a c t ~ v~en a t e r ~ IS
a l u m f o r n ~ l yd ~ s t r ~ h u t e d
to begln w ~ t h ~t , lenialrls so ~ n d e f i n ~ t e l y
Fig. 1 shows the final d e s ~ g nof the gamma-ray p ~ t
I t contams 3 sepalate concrete zones each 4 f t In
d~anietel and 8 f t deep. The top zone, of low-act~vlty
concrete, 1s prlniallly a cosmlc-ray s h ~ e l d ;the m ~ d d l e
f o r m a t ~ o n - I the
S r a d ~ o a c t ~ vzone
e (see Tables 9 and 10
for final concentrat~onsof r a d ~ o a c t ~ vmaterial) e , and
the bottom format1011 1s the l o w - a c t ~ v ~ t"background" y assumed t o exlst In subsurface f o l m a t ~ o n s , although
zone. A 5%-in 17-lb caslng extends thlough the three
reclu~red f o r a 4-ft clianieter by 8-ft deep racl~oactlve
zone were e s t ~ m a t e dprlor to construct~onto he approxi-
mately 75 g i a m s of uranlum, 150 grams of t h o r ~ u m ,
and 500 Ib of potasslum, although the actual compo-
s ~ t ~ ou lnt ~ m a t e l yd~fferedf l o m these e s t ~ m a t e s .Sources
of these l n a t e ~ ~ a in l s s u ~ t a h l eform f p r n i ~ s i m
~ i tlie
~
slurry were sought This was not a s ~ m p l etask smce
In each case there were certam c o n s ~ d e r a t ~ o nto s be
taken Into account. F o r uranium and t h o r ~ u m ,a knowl-
edge of the rad~oactlvedlslntegrat~onschemes I S iieces-
s a r y ; these a r e shown In Tables 2 and 3 Both elements
decay In a serles of steps, each w ~ t hits characteristic
half-11fe and type of emlsslon (gamma, beta, alpha, o r
comhlnat~onthereof), untll a stable lsotope of lead 1s
reached The Important polnt 1s t h a t when uranlunl or
t h o r ~ u n la r e contamed In a glven volume f o r a suffic~ent
length of t ~ m e ,a condlt~on of e q u ~ l r b r ~ u m 1s reached
whereln the numbers of atoms of each member of the
serles N , , N2. N3. etc. become constant and a l e cliar-
a c t e r ~ z e dby t h e relation N , I T I = N21T, = N,?IT,, etc.,
where TI,T,, T,, etc a r e the correspond~nghalf-l~ves
of each. (Thls condltlon of e q u ~ l ~ b r ~ u1smgenerally
dev~atlonsfrom equ~llbrlumhave been reported, par-

"*,
zones and 15 f t below them. t ~ c u l a r l yf o r outcropplngs or marine s e d ~ m e n t swhere
selective l e a c h ~ n gor d~ssolutionof specific Inemhers of
I' 4 'D l STEEL DECK PLATE the serles has occurred.)
In the case of uranlani, ~t 1s easler to ohtaln a pre-
c ~ s e l yknown quantity of t h e daughter product radlum
than of uranluni Itself I t I S l e g ~ t ~ i n a t ?e use r a d ~ u m
because approxiniatelv 98 pelcent of the gamma l a y s
LOW ACTIVITY CONCRETE
above 100 kev e n i ~ t t e dby uranlum In e q u l l ~ b n u mm ~ t h
~ t sdaughter products come from the products below
r a d ~ u m .The r e q u ~ r e damount of r a d ~ u n iIn equ~llbrlum
w ~ t h75 g r a m s of uranlum I S 25 nilcrograms In order
CORRUGATED P I P E to have some r a d ~ u m available f o r p ~ l o t nllxes, a
cluantity of 40 micrograms of radlum in t h e form of
a n insoluble compound (sulfate) ~ n t ~ m a t e m l y~ x e dw ~ t h
40 I b of 20130 Ottawa s ~ l l c asand w a s obtalned. N a t ~ o n a l
RADIOACTIVE CONCRETE Bureau of Standards cel-t~ficat~on on the amount of
r a d ~ u mw a s prov~ded.
Radlum decays initially to the element radon, whlch
1s a heavy g a s and whlch h a s a 3 8-day half-l~fe. It
was a n t ~ c l p a t e dt h a t some of the ladon, w h ~ c hwould
be 111 equilibrlunl w ~ t hthe r a d ~ u mwhen rece~ved In
LOW ACTIVITY CONCRETE sealed c o n t a ~ n e r s ,would escape to tlie all d u r ~ n gthe
process of mlxlng the cement s l u l r y f o r the test p ~ t .
Thls necessitated waiting sevelal radon half-lives-
about 3 weeks-after pourlng the conclete foi the
activlty of p l o t nllres 01 of the gamma-ray p ~ ltself t
to b u ~ l dup to e q u ~ l ~ b r ~before u n ~ maklng measurements
CASING (5; 0 0.17 : ~ - 5 5 ) One advantage of niaklng the test p ~ concrete t 1s t h a t
~t p o s ~ t ~ v e lInsures
y t h a t radon m ~ l l not escape The
loss In a n unconsol~datedformat1011would, In all proh-
a b l l ~ t ybe
, n e g l ~ g ~ bhut
l e a small element of doubt would
exist.
I n the case of t h o r ~ u m ,a somewliat s ~ m l l a i problem
Fig. I-Gamma-ray Log Calibration Pit of e q u ~ l l b r ~ u marlses The ~ n i n ~ e d ~ adaughter
te of
300 BELKNAP,
L)EWAN, KIRKPATRIC
thorlum is Mesotholiuni I, whlcli has a 6 7-year half-life.
T h ~ snuchde 1s a n lsotope of r a d ~ u m so t h a t when
t h o r ~ u m1s refined and the radlum w h ~ c h1s nornially
present IS lemoved, the Mesothor~umI IS also removed.
A perlod of 20 to 30 yeais IS r e q u ~ l e df o r t h e Meso-
thorlum I to agaln approach equillbnum Attenipts were
therefore made to locate a supply of t h o r ~ u mrefined
20 to 30 years ago; thls proved to be f r u ~ t l e s s I11 l ~ e u
of the refined t h o r ~ u n2~ k ~ l o g r a m s of finely ground
~ n o n a z ~ t ore
e assaying 9 70 percent t h o n u m o x ~ d e
( a p p r o x ~ m a t e l y180 g r a m s of t l i o r ~ u m ) and only 0 37
percent uranlum oxide w a s obtained from t h e New
Brunswlck laboratory of t h e Unlted States Atomic
Energy C o m n ~ ~ s s ~ A o n check by the AEC laboratory
showed t h a t the m o n a z ~ t emas w ~ t h l n 2 percent of
equlllbr~um. An a d d ~ t ~ o n a2l2 k ~ l o g r a m sof monazite
ore assaylng 5 5 to 6.0 pelcent T h o 2 and 0.1 peicent
U,08 eras donated to the project but not used
I n the case of p o t a s s ~ u m ,a d ~ f f e r e n ttype of problem
arose. Here a relatively large amount of the material
is required. However, easily a v a ~ l a b l ep o t a s s ~ u mcom-
pounds, such a s KCL and KISO,, a r e water-soluble
Thls posed a d~fficult problem of assuring u n ~ f o r m
d ~ s t r ~ b u t i oofn the potassium In the cement s l u r r y slnce
a n y excess water would tend to collect on top a s t h e
cement set up The solutlon adopted was to use mlca,
whlch is insoluble, a s a source of potass~um.Potassium
mlca (muscovite) h a s the theoretical formula H2KA13
(S1O4)3 w h ~ c hi n d ~ c a t e sit contains 9 8 percent potas-
sium by weight A quantlty of magcomica assayed 9
percent K, 1 0 8 ppm U and 0 01 ppm Th T h ~ was s used
In t h e test p ~ tHowever, slnce the p ~ recluired t a con-
centratloll of 4 percent K, it was necessary t o fill about
half of the volume of the r a d ~ o a c t ~ vzone e with mlca.
Slnce mlca h a s a i e l a t ~ v e l ylow bulk d e n s ~ t y ,t h ~ sled
to a n overall bulk denslty in t h e r a d ~ o a c t ~ vzone e con-
siderably less than In t h e other two zones and less than
nornially occurs In subsurface forniat~ons.
Details of the rnlslng procedure, pilot checks, labora-
tory analysis, etc f o r the gamma-ray pit a r e glven
m S e c t ~ o nV.
Design of t h e Neutron Pit
In designing the neutron p ~ t ,there w a s conslderahle
expellence to draw upon slnce a number of the members
of the afolenient~oned panels had already constructed
somewhat s ~ m i l a r plts f o r thelr p a r t ~ c u l a roperating
or service companies.
General spec~ficat~ons f o r the neutron p ~ were
t that
~t hat1 to contaln three clean (shale-flee) l~mestone
folmatlons - one of low poros~ty,one of Internledlate
poros~ty, a n d one of h ~ g hporosity. The formations
hat1 to be "infi~nte" in slze, conipletely saturated w ~ t h
fresh water, and have accurately known poroslt~es.The
~ n t e r m e d ~ aporoslty
te zone would be used a s a standard
f o r c a l ~ b r a t ~ o nwhereas
; t h e other two, in conlunction
w ~ t ht h e mtelmediate zone, would he used to e s t a b l ~ s h
a standard departure curve
F o r the t h i e e types of stone there w a s little alterna-
t ~ v ebut to choose those already nl common use, v ~ z ,
Carthage marble, w h ~ c hh a s a p o r o s ~ t y 111 the range
1 to 3 percent, I n d ~ a n alimestone w ~ t ha porosity of
17 to 20 percent, and Austln l~mestonew ~ t ha poroslty
of 25 to 30 percent. These m a t e r ~ a l s wele o b t a ~ n a b l e
in Houston, 111 the form of closely mach~ned blocks.
The slze of the f o r m a t ~ o l l s111 t h e neutron p1t 1s
determined by the depth of i n v e s t ~ g a t ~ oofn the neutron
log T h ~ sI S strongly dependent upon poros~ty, b e ~ n g
greatest In low p o r o s ~ t ~ ewhere
s, t h e 90-percent depth of
p e n e t r a t ~ o nwith radium-beryllium neutrons, IS about
2 f t However, in the f u t u r e t h e use of 14-mev neutrons
(from the H"d,n)He4 reaction) may become w ~ d e -
spread These neutrons should have a somewhat
Increased depth of investigation although the exact
amount IS difficult to assess. Consequently, a r a d ~ u sof
2 % f t was chosen. The depth of the formation w a s set
a t 6 f t , based on the exper~nlentalf a c t t h a t the vertlcal
n ileutron logs is approx~mately
depth of l n v e s t ~ g a t ~ oof
2 f t The 6-ft depth should therefore give a good l o g g ~ n g
"plateau."
Fig. 2 shows a-cross-sect~onalvlew of the neutron pit.
I t I S 24 f t deep overall, with a 15-ft rathole e x t e n d ~ n g
below the bottom zone. The 3 l ~ m e s t o n efolmations a r e
each made up of 6 octagonal blocks, each 1 f t t h ~ c k wlth ,
carefully machined flats. A 7%-ln. hole extends through
the center of the p ~ tThe porosit~es~ n d ~ c a t e011 d Flg. 2
a l e the final values assigned to the formations (see
S e c t ~ o nV I ) On top of the stone IS a 6-ft layer of w a t e r
w h ~ c hserves the dual purpose of provldlng a 100-percent
poroslty reference p o ~ n tand s h ~ e l d ~ nthe g gamma-ray
detector In G R N tools from excessive r a d ~ a t l o nfrom
the neutron source a s the tools log the upper lrnlestone
CARTHAGE LIMESTONE
(POROSITY=I 9V.AVG)
INDIANA LIMESTONE
(IS%AVG POROSITY)
AUSTIN LIMESTONE
( 2 6 % AVG POROSITY)
BLOCK DETAIL
Fig. 2-Neutron Log Calibration Pit
 FACI
A P I CALIBRATION

zone A %-In. thlck luclte pipe extends through t h e and approved by the API. Construction of the faclllty
water zone to guide upper decentralizing dev~ces on was begun In September 1958 on a %-acre slte on the
logglng tools Thls pipe h a s no noticeable effect on t h e University of Houston campus, and completed in J u n e
neutlon response In the w a t e r zone. 1959. Genelal layout of the facillty IS shown In F i g 3
The method of saturating hhe blocks w ~ t hfresh w a t e r The Gamma-ray Plt
and of nieasuiing the amount of w a t e r in them a f t e r
Follow~ngexcavation and placement of the walls and
s a t u l a t ~ o nwas given a g r e a t deal of attention. Industry
centered caslng in the gamma-ray pit, the first low-
experience on smaller blocks indicated t h a t vacuum
activlty zone w a s poured using a neat portland-cement
implegnatlon was absolutely necessary to achieve com-
slur1 y. To insure uniforniity of cement used In all zones,
plete s a t u r a t ~ o n .Furthermore, slnce t h e blocks would
a quantity suffic~entf o r all three zones w a s p u ~ c h a s e d
be too heavy f o r a n accurate measurement of d i y weight
from the same source.
and wet welght, t h e only method of measuring directly
the amount of w a t e r held by each block w a s to com-
pletely desaturate ~t first and then to measure t h e Table 8
amount of water whlch ~t took up on saturation To thls Calculations of Material Quantit~esRequired for
end an elaborate s a t u l a t ~ o nsystem w a s deslgnetl, a s Gamma-ray High-activity Zone
descllbetl In the follow~ngs e c t ~ o n
I T/olicme of Portron of P L to~ be F ~ l l e d
V. CONSTRUCTION O F T H E CALIBRATION Volnme = .rrR" depth
=.rr(2 ft)" 8 f t = 100.5 c u f t
FACILITY 11. Spec~ficGravity and Density of 11Izx
Contracts and General Layout A s deteim~netlfrom small pilot mixes
Spec~ficgravlty = 1.47
Upon ieceiving authorization f l o m the API, t h e Denslty = 91.6 lb pel cu f t
University of Houston, acting a s prime contractor, 111. Totc~lTT7eig1rtof Mix Regutred
sol~cltedtulrlkey blds f o r the major constluct~onItems Weight = density x volume
of the f a c ~ l i t y . All blds were considered too high,
= 91 6 x 100.5 = 9,220 lb
01 4 18 x lo6 g m
w h e ~ e u p o nsubcontracts wele let f o r varlous poltlons IV. Q i u ~ n t i t yof IIf~caReqi~rredf o r 4-percet~tK
of the construction a s follows. ( b y weiglit) Concentrcctzo?~r t ~JItx
1 Fol major, slte wolk i n c l u d ~ n g~nstallatlonof the (Mlca analyzed t o contain 9.0 percent K )
two plts, all concrete slab wolk, g l a d ~ n g , and Q u a n t ~ t ymica = ( K concentlat~ondeslredl
K concentration In m ~ c a )
sliell~ngof adjacent areas. ( w e ~ g h of
t mix)
2 . Fol ~nstallationof a 20-ft x 40-ft ~nsulated,heated, = ( 0 04010.090) (9,220)
a l l - c o n d ~ t ~ o n e dmetal
, b u l l d ~ n g ~ n c l u d ~ n gwork = 4,097 lb mica
benches, a small office, lavoratory, and dark room. V. Qluitzt~tyof Wonaztte Sccnd ( T h o n ) Reqiiirecl fot:
3. Fol installat~onof a specla1 jib-type crane wlth a 24-ppn Tli ( b y w e i g h t ) Co?rce>rtrc~tto)~ In Jflx
40-ft boom and electrlc controls (Sand analyzed to contaln 9.7 percent T h o o and
4. Fol qualrying and fabrication of the limestone 0 37 pelcent U308)
blocks f o r the neutron pit Q u a n t ~ t ysand = [ ( T h ppm desired) ( w e ~ g h tof
5 Foi necessaly carpentry, electrical, and plunlblng mix)] / [ ( T h o 2 concentiatlon 111
work sand) (molecular w e ~ g h t T h /
6 F o r ~ n s t a l l a t ~ oof n a steel fence s u r r o u n d ~ n gt h e molecular w e ~ g h tT h o 2 ) ]
facillty. = [(24) (9,220)]1
All contract work w a s performed 111 accordance wlth [ (0.097) (2321264)l
= 2.6 lb o r 1.177
, -Em sand
speclficatlons furnished by t h e Umversity of Houston
V I. Qtic~ntttyof R a d z z ~ nOttmrucc.
~ Sand Regz~z.redf o r
12-ppm U ( b y w e z g l ~ t )Concentrutzo,t~z 7 ~Mzz

Ii GATE
1 , 7
(Sand analyzed to contain 1 bg R a per Ib)
From (Half llfe Rathalf llfe U )
= [(l.620) (lo3) l(4.51) ( l o 9 ) ]
= (0.359) (10-6)
U = 0.359 ppm R a
GAMMA-RAY LOG
U cleslred .x. R a I U
CALIBRATION P I T = R a necessary per gm mix
( E L E C T R I C CONTROLS I
1 2 x 10-6 X 0 359 X 10-6
= 4 31 x 10-'"1 R a per gm n11x
NEUTRON LOG 4 31 X 10-1- 4 18 X lo6 gm
CALIBRATION P I T
= 18 b g m R a required
= 18 Ib sand requlred
VII. Qziat~tttyof Neclt Portlc~ndCement Required
for M Z X
13 percent a s determined from pilot mlx
lz=='"- 108'-0.
Fig. 3-Plan and Layout of API Nuclear Logging
I
VIII
0 13 X 9,220 Ib = 1,200 lb cement
Qriant~tyof W a t e r R e q l ~ i r e d f o r I l f t z
42.33 percent a s determined from pilot nlix
Calibration Facility 0.423 X 9,220 Ib = 3,903 lb o r 468 gal w a t e r
 F o r the hlgh-act~vltyzones the materials selected f o r
m ~ x t u r e wlth cement were r a d ~ u m - c o n t a ~ n ~ nsand,
g t o t h e bottom s e c t ~ o n ,w a s poured approx~lnatelyone
t l i o r ~ u m - c o n t a ~ a i i ~monazlte
g ole, and potasslum-con-
t a ~ n l n g mica Three major 011-company laboratories
analyzed the cement and mica by gamma-ray spec-
t ~ o s c o p yto d e t e ~ m l n ethe U, Th, and K content. Content
of the Ottawa sand and m o n a z ~ t eo r e w a s certified by
the supphers. From this ~ n f o r m a t l o nthe quantities of
i n a t e ~ l a l sused 111 the n u s were calculated a s shown In
Table 8
Extensrve pilot nlixung w a s then performed t o confirm
adequate nilsmg control and to check the calculations.
The samples wele first mlxed 111 % and 1 cu f t batches,
and finally a test barrel of a p p l o x ~ m a t e l y25 cu f t w a s
p o u ~ e da ~ o u n da plece of 5%-ln. caslng 011-company
l a b o ~ a t o i l e sr a n spectral analysls on each pllot mlx
a f t e r each lnlx was allowed to set f o r 2 t o 3 weeks f o r
e q u ~ l ~ b r a t l oofn the radon g a s I n a d d ~ t ~ othe
n l a r g e test
balrel was "logged" by two servlce compan~es f o r
p ~ a c t l c a l confilmatlon of over-all r a d ~ o a c t ~ v l t y
F ~ o mthls wolk ~t was found t h a t considerable d r y
mlslng was necessaiy to obtain uinform d l s t r ~ b u t i o nof
the ratlloactlve n i a t e l ~ a lthroughout the mlx F o r actual
poullng of the pit the inaterlal was d r y n ~ ~ s eInd a
c o r n m e ~ c ~ mlxel
al for 8 hours, then 2 hours more a f t e r
the a d d ~ t ~ oofn water C o n i p o s ~ t ~ oof
n the mlx wlth
s u ~ n n i a t ~ oof n radloactlve components 1s presented In
Table 9, from mhlch ~t 1s seen t h a t total component
a c t l v ~ t l e sa r e very close to the spec~fiedd e s ~ g nvalues
A s l u ~ r yvolume a p p ~ o x ~ m a t e l15
y percent In excess of
the calculated volume needed was mixed. Durlng t h e
pourlng operation a sample w a s taken a s each foot of
the sect1011w a s poured f o r later laboratory analysis by
gamma-ray spectroscopy
Table 9
Composition of Flnal Mix for H~gh-activityZone, Gamma-ray Pit
1 86 x lo6
R a d ~ u mOttawa Sand1' 1 8,180 18 1 I
Water
3,903 1 1
Total -
Conipos~t~on Actual 4.07 percent K
By Weight
Deslred 4 percent K
-
aAEC cert~ficat~onof 9 7 percent Tho, and 0 37 percent U s 0 8
b18 lb Ra sand = 18 ugm Ra = 50 3 g m U equ~valent
cSame type cement poured neat for lower and upper low-act~v~ty zones Concentration determ~ned by gamma-lay spectroscopy
The upper low-actlvlty sectlon, s l m ~ l a rIn compos~tlon
month a f t e r the h ~ g h - a c t ~ v l tzone
y
The Neutron P i t
A f t e r selection of stone types to be ~nstalledIn t h e
neutron pit, quarrles throughout t h e U n ~ t e dS t a t e s were
contacted, a n d a Houston company w a s selected a s best
ecluipped to furnlsh the stone blocks 111 conformance
with the following approved speclficatlons
Slx octagonal blocks of each type stone (Carthage
marble, Indlana limestone, and A u s t ~ nllniestone)
to measure 5 f t across the flats and 1 f t thlck w ~ t h
a 7%-ln dlameter hole bored through the center
of each, all machlned surfaces to be w ~ t h ~1132-ln.
n
tolelance, each type of block to be cut from a slngle
large piece of stone to provlde nlaxlmunl un1-
formlty of poroslty, n i a t r ~ s character, and geo-
logical environment.
To permlt checking the u n l f o r m ~ t yof poroslty between
stones of a glven type, and fol late1 cornpailson wlth
final saturation values, ~t was agieed t h a t e x t e n s ~ v e
core analysls should be performed on samples of each
block To f a c ~ h t a t ethls, the s u p p l ~ e rfirst m a c h ~ n e dthe
blocks ~ n t o5-ft squares, 1f t t h ~ c kUnder the supel-vlslon
of the student project englneel, the colners were sawed
off, formlng the fin~shed octagon, and then a 4-111.
d ~ a n l e t e rcore was taken from t h e center before lathe
turnliig t o the 774-1n finished d ~ a n ~ e t eEach r removed
corner sectlon a n d center core w a s carefully tagged and
coded to t h e block from whlch ~t w a s taken These
sectlons were then cut ~ n t oS I X pleces (each t a g g e d ) ,
and samples from all sectlons d l v ~ d e dInto S I X sets, each
set t h u s h a v ~ n ga sample from every corner and centei
core removed from every block.
R a d l a t ~ o nComponent
1 . 1 . 5 0 3 1 0111
1 102 49
1( .
0 2256
1 .
54 545
1
I
0 12035
24 4 ppm Th 1 3 1 ppm U
24 ppm Th 12 ppm U
 A P I CALIBRATION
FACILITYFOR NUCLEAR
LOGS 303

I
Arrangements were made with f o u r major oil-company a r e b e ~ n g retamed f o r chem~cal analysls a t a later
laboratories to r u n small core analyslson a complete set date. F o r general information, semi-quant~tative spec-
of these samples The U n i v e l s ~ t yof Houston Petroleum trographlc analysis made by a testlng laboratory In
Engineering Depaitment analyzed the fifth set and the 1951 on samples of slmllar stones I S given In Table 10
slxth set 1s being retamed a t the facihty foi possible F o r processing the blocks, many methods were con-
f u t u r e use Results of this analysis a r e tabulated and s ~ d e r e d and d~scussed with particular regard t o the
discussed In Sectlon V I I Samples of dust obtalned accuracy w ~ t hwhich final saturation could be measured
duling the cuttlng of the blocks were also collected and The method selected prov~dedf o r accomplishment of the
following objectives
Table 10 1 Effective d e h y d r a t ~ o nand satuiation of all blocks
Semi-quantitative Spectrographical Analysis of wlth accurate measuiement of all expelled and
Carthage Marble, Indiana and Austin Limestones absorbed w a t e r
Performed in 1951 2. Means of measuring bulk volumes of the blocks fol
comparison wlth geometi~cally computed values.
(Percent by weight; oxygen omitted)
Carthage Ind~ana Austln Arrangement of t h e e c l u ~ p ~ n e nnecessaiy
t fol the
Marble L~mestone Limestone process selected IS shown in F l g 1. One of the principal
Calc~un~ 37. 35.6 38.07 components 111 t h e system 1s the s a t u r a t ~ o ncham be^
Slllcon 18 0.8 0.39 which w a s leased from a company who had constructed
Ilon 0.1 0.14 0.19 ~t f o r a slmllar purpose I t s dimensions weie sufficient
Magnesium 1.3 24 1.06 to permlt piocesslng three blocks a t a time, and 0 - r l n g
Chl o n ~ ~ u n ~ 0 002 0 0008 0 0001 s e a l ~ n gof the lid piovided foi m a ~ n t a i n m gthe necessaiy
Aluminum 02 0 03 0.03 high vacuum durlng phases of the piocess. To ald in
Copper 0 001 0.0074 0.0034 dehydratlon of the blocks, eight 1,500-watt 220-volt s t r l p
Manganese 0.06 0.0033 0.0016 heaters were Installed withln the chambei uslng spark
T~tan~um 0.009 plugs f o r electrical connect~onsthrough the chamber
Stront~um Trace wall.

3-PIN
TEMPERATURE

SIGHT
GLASS

I VOLUME SOURCE
SATURATION TANK
START CALIBRATION A-A'
CHAMBER 3 ' 30'
~
E N D CALIBRATION 8 - 0 '

Fig. &Flow Schematic for Limestone-block Saturation

304 BELKNAP,
DEWAN,KIRKPATRICK,
MOTT,PEARSON,
A N D RABSON
Connected to t h ~ chamber
s w a s a h~gh-capacityKlnney
Model KS-13 vacuum pump which performed very satis-
factorily In obtaining good vacuum in t h e chamber.
Installed In the llne com~ectingt h e chamber and pump
was a large spherical-type watei t r a p equlpped wlth a
compiessol-diiven r e f r ~ g e r a t i o nu n i t assembled by t h e
project engineers Thls vei y effectively removed w a t e r
vapor befoie r e a c h ~ n gthe pump
Also connected to the s a t u r a t ~ o nchambe] w a s t h e
large-volume tank which w a s fabricated a t the faclllty
fioni a 25-ft section of 3-ft dlameter pipe Henilsphencal
heads were used to cap t h e plpe ends to form t h e tank,
w h ~ c hwas sand-blasted and painted before using. A
slght glass was fitted to the s ~ d eof the tank to permlt
water-level measurements necessary d u r ~ n gthe satura-
t ~ o nprocess
A beam-type scale with a c a p a c ~ t yof 69 5 kilograms,
accurate to 12 5 grams, was purchased to enable accurate
measurement of water q u a n t ~ t l e sadded to the volume
tank fol block s a t u l a t ~ o n M~scellaneous equipment
included a multl-pen recordei and thermocouples f o r
continuous m o n l t o r ~ n gof watel temperatuies 111 the
system, and a DuBrovln ahsolute pressule gage f o r
vacuum measurements.
In practlce tlie s a t u r a t ~ o nprocedure w a s repeated
s e v e ~ a l tlmes c o n f i l n i ~ ~ i gaccuiate placement of all
marks on the glasses I n addltlon, tempeiatures of the
watel In the saturation chamber and volume t a n k were
cont~nuously iecorded t o provlde means f o r volume
corrections due to denslty changes of the w a t e r from
temperatule vai latlons The system y a s then drained
and made leady f o r dehydiatlon of the first group
of blocks.
The 1 8 blocks were d ~ v l d e dinto 6 i r o u p s , 2 each of
similar type, and the geonietrlcal volume of each block
calefully measured and added w ~ t hothers 111 ~ t group s process was begun.
f o ~asslgnnient of each group's bulk volume. I n all cases
this amounted to shghtly over 60 cu f t
The fiist gioup of three stones was sealed Into t h e
saturatlon chamber and, wlth Valve A closed, a vacuum
was pulled on the chamber. A f t e r about 200 hours of
evacuation of the first group, it w a s dec~dedt h a t heaters
should be mstallecl within t h e chamber to accelerate and
Insure better dehydrat~on.T h ~ sw a s done, enabling a
chamber temperature of 200 to 220 F. to be m a l n t a ~ n e d
during evacuation. W ~ t hthls temperatule, e v a c u a t ~ o i ~
time ranged from 175 hours f o r one group of Austlii
blocks to 77 hours f o r one group of Indlana blocks
W a t e r collected 111 the t r a p was measured to deterln~ne
o r ~ g l n a lwater saturatlon of t h e blocks Values v a n e d
s ~ g n ~ f i c a n t leven
y between s ~ m ~ l agroupsr because of
some blocks belng exposed to cons~derabler a m whlle
a w a ~ t l n gprocesslng
Satisfactory dehydration of the blocks was deteimlned
with the a ~ dof a DuBrovin ahsolute pressure mercury
gage Reacllngs of 2 mm H g f o r Carthage, and 6 to 7
mni H g f o r Indlana and A u s t ~ n were found t o be
acceptable.
P r ~ o r to commencing s a t u r a t ~ o n of the limestone
blocks, the e q u ~ p m e n tw a s carefully checked f o r proper
leak-free connections. Through simulated runs, specific
procedural instructions were worked out and hsted t o
avold e r r o r s occurrii~gduring actual processlng. Thls
piocedure is described in Table 11.
Table 11
Procedure for Calibrating
L~mestone-block Saturation System
(Refer to Fig 4 for System Layout)
h1(1,rkA' was aibltrarily etched on the s ~ g h tglass of
the volume t a n k near its top and the tank then filled
with w a t e r to t h ~ slevel, also f i l l ~ n gthe lower line t o
valve or illark A.
Illark B w a s a r h ~ t r a r l l yetched on the s ~ g h tglass
extending above t h e s a t u r a t ~ o nchamber. IJc~lveA w a s
opened allowlng water to flow fioni t h e volume t a n k to
the satuiatlon chamber reachlng Mr~rk B. (No blocks
In chamber )
dlark.B' was etched on the volume chalnbei's glass
a t the level to which water had fallen. (The volume of
the tank between Mc~rksA' and B' represents t h e total
volume of the saturatlon chamber from filwks A to B.)
Using the w e ~ g h i n gscale (installed on t h e supporting
scaffold), and w ~ t hValue A closed, exactly 60 cu f t of
watei weie welghed and added to the volume t a n k and
Illcwk B m etched on the glass a t t h ~ slevel. The volume
of the cliambe~between IlIc~~ks B' and Bq~tis 60 cu f t
whlch represents the nommal bulk volulne of a group of
three blocks. The volume between Il.lo+ks A' and Bnz
~ e p r e s e n t sthe volume of the s a t u r a t ~ o nchamber from
Illark A to B minus tlie nonilnal bulk volume of three
blocks
Wlth a group of dehydrated hlocks i n t h e saturatlon
chamber under full vacuum, the follow~ng s a t u r a t ~ o n
1. Volume tank and line (to valve Illnrk A ) w a s filled
wlth w a t e r to Illark A' on the s~gllt-glass.
2. llc~lve A was opened allowing water from t h e
volume t a n k to be drawn ~ n t ot h e saturatlon
chambef up to nlr~rk B, completely floodlng t h e
blocks The water level In the volume t a n k Imme-
diately clropped t o Mark Bm, representing t h e
volume of the vold space 111 the saturatlon chamber
However, a s the blocks absorb watei t h e level
dropped below dlark Bw1 and Vcthre -4 was a d ~ u s t e d
to m a l i i t a ~ n t h e watei level 111 the saturation
chamber a t I\lark B. P e r l o d ~ cadjustment of Vc~ltre
4 was necessary to m a ~ n t a i i ithe level a t Ilrlr~rkB
untd a b s o ~ p t l o lceased
~ (38 hours f o r Carthage
blocks).
3. Upon l e a c h ~ n gstatlc equlllbr~um,and w ~ t ht h e
water level a t jlln+li B, ( w ~ t hValve A closed), t h e
watel level In the volunie tank was a t some point
below Mark BWL.
4. A volume of water was carefully welghed ~ n t ot h e
volume tank t o brlng the level hack u p to filnrk B?n.
A f t e r necessary temperature correct~ons,t h ~ svol-
ume of w a t e r represented the quantlty absorhed by
the group of three blocks f o r complete saturatlon.
 Table 12
Neutron Pit - Block Processing Data

Block Numbel sa I16,17,18 113,14,15 1 10,11,12 17,8,9 1 2,4,6 1,2,3

Ind~ana Indlana Carthage Carthage
Type L~mestone Liniestone Limestone Llmestone Marble Marble
Austln
Started Process, Date 4-18-59 1;;;:; 1 5-17-59 5-23-59 5-29-59
Placed ~n Pit, Date 5-7-58 5-17-59 6-6-59
Evacuation Tlme, H r :Mln 121.30 102.10
Refrlgerat~onTlme, H r :Min 154.30 174.10 99 0
Water Removed, Cc 153,995
Computed Saturation Before Processing, Percent 33 0
Tlme Heaters On, H r :Mln 1 176:50 121 :30
Saturation Time. H r :Mln 133:45 139.30
S a t u r a t ~ o nTemperature of Volume Tank, Deg F., S t a r t F i n ~ s h 174178 1-182 176178 180185 177186
Total Water from Pump and Sphere durlng Saturation, Cc 1250 6,702
IWe~eht.
- , Grams = Volume. Cc '
/I 445.430 134.195
Total Water W e ~ g h e dIn
IWater Temperature, Deg k. 1 72 1 79'
Bulk Volume Weight, Grams 32,263
Weight In Temperature, Deg F., TankJWater 66/65
Geometr~cBulk Volume, Cu Ft. 61 137 61.394
Porositv Index. Percent 125 55 1 26 37
Deviation Measured from Geometric Bulk Volume, Cc 10 10 I +500 10 1 +6,800h
aBlocks 1, 3. 6. 4, 7 9, a n d 10 a r e harlrne-cracked
bShould have been 7% hours less due to pulling In water vapor overnight
cIlsed d w Ice a n d acetone. ~ce-creamsalt
d v a l i e should be 8.552 due to oulllne In water vaoor o v e r n ~ c h t
ev%& should be ~ ~ 0 d u e h p ; l l ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ ~ k a t e ~ ~ v a p ~ ~ ~ o ~ e m ~ ~ 6 t ~
fExcess bulk volume W a t e r weruhed In after saturation d ~ dnot Include the volume above the 60 cu f t mark on volume tank. o r 1 326 cu f t
EExcess bulk volume W a t e r welghed In a f t e r saturation d ~ dnot ~ n c l u d ethe volume above the 60 cu f t mark on volume tank, o r 1 2 5 2 cu f t
hDue to 1.200 cc celotex volume
 111establishing the bulk volume illark Bm, a nominal
value of 60 cu f t was utilized, whereas actual geomet-
rlcally computed bulk volumes of the groups of three
blocks varied from 61.1 to 61.4 cu ft. Consequently, the
level of Ilfark BWLwas adjusted for each group to
account for thls difference. To check the accuracy of
the geometrically calculated bulk volume of t h e blocks,
the following procedure was used.
1. With the blocks completely saturated, the satura-
tion chamber was drained back to Valve A, and
volume tank filled to Mark A'.
2. Valve A was then opened, b r l n g ~ n gthe water level
to Illark B with the aid of a slight vacuum, and
then closed.
3 The water level in the volume tank should then
have retuined to Il.lmrk B ~ I Any
.. deviation repre-
sented the difference between ge~metricallycalcu-
lated and expe~iineiltallydetern~medbulk volume.
Deviations were found to be qulte small, t h u s con-
firming the accuracy of the computed bulk volumes.
Flnal operation involved transferring the saturated
blocks from the chamber into t h e n ploper positlon in
the neutron p ~ t .Thls w a s accoinplished through use of
a specially constiuctecl sling des~gnedto clamp tightly
around the octagonal periphery of the blocks. Processing
and pit-stacking order f o r the blocks was prearranged
(using porosity values from core a n a l y s ~ s ) ,to provlde
maxlmunl unlfo~nlltyof poros~ty near the mlddle of
each zone.
Principal data accumulated durlng the processlng of
the 6 groups of blocks a r e given in Table 12. Porosity-
index values for each group of blocks were computed
from the measured data a s the ratio of absorbehzuater
volumelblock bz~lkvolzsnae. Of particular ~ n t e r e s tis the
very close agreement of these values between groups of
s l m ~ l a rstone types. These values also compare favor-
ably with those obtalnecl from core a n a l y s ~ s of the
small samples, further confirming the adequacy of
the selected processlng technique ~n fulfill~ngthe com-
mlttee's objectives.
VI. DETERMINATION O F FINAL
STANDARDIZATION VALUES
I11 considering the role of t h e two plts a s industry
standards, i t 1s ~ m p o r t a n tto understand their dual
nature in this capacity. I n one sense the plts a r e
"arbitrary" standards established by A P I assignment
of arbitrarily selected numbers of A P I units to t h e
response of logging instruments exposed to certain zones
in the pits. As "arbltrary" standards, the pits completely
satisfy t h e b a s ~ cobjective sought In p r o v ~ d ~ nmeans
g
of standardizing all log responses 111 common units
related to a standard environment In another sense, the
plts may be consiclered "absolute" standards, provid-
Ing certain basic and useful properties quantitatively
established 111 absolute u ~ u t s Snch knowledge furthe1
enhances the value of the plts to the industry by
accurately interrelating these properties to A P I u n ~ t s
and hence to log response.
The many measurements made durlng construct~onof
the plts provide for deterininat~onof certaln of these
properties 111 absolute units. F o r t h e gamma-ray pit,
concentration of each of the three radioactive compo-
nents (U, Th, and li) may be established, a s may be
porosity-index* values f o r each of the three zones In
the neutron p ~ tA discussion of the cleteimlnation of
these absolute properties from the measured d a t a
follows.
The Gamma-rag Plt
I n the determination of the U, Th, and K concentra-
tions in the high-activity zone of t h e gamma-ray pit,
two sets of measured data were available-one from
the small samples taken during pourlng of the zone
which were laboratory-analyzed b y gamma-ray spec-
troscopy, and the second from measurement of quantities
of these matenals actually introduced into the mlx. The
latter measurements have been presented 111 Table 9
from which i t is seen that d e s ~ g nvalues a r e closely met
f o r each of the three elements. The results of t h e sample
*Poroslty ~ n d e xIS defined as the product of fractional water satura-
tlon tlmes poroslty

Table 13
Spectral Analysis of Gamma-ray Pit Samples as Performed by Three Laboratories

Potassium, Percent Uranium, Ppm

--- - Thorium, Ppm

7 a
%
Q)
M bL
A B C 2 A B C 2 A B -C I
$ : <
Depths, Ft
4.27 4.24
-4
426
-
446
-
59
4
5 18 22.4 29.0 25.7
TOP
1 4.31 3 97 4 00 4 09 7.03 7.5 4.5 6 34 24.5 24 3 25 2 24 7
2 3 97 4.27 4.00 4.08 4.83 4.4 36 4.28 22 1 26 6 24 0 24.2
3 4 06 4.28 3 90 4.08 11.80 12.6 11 1 11 83 21 3 25 7 23 8 23 6
4 4 21 3 91 4 00 4.04 10 30 11.8 12 2 11 43 24.0 25.4 21.4 23.6
5 4 06 3.92 3 90 3 96 11 10 13.6 13.2 12.63 21.4 23 7 20 7 21 9
6 370 3.57 4.10 370 886 14.7 95 11.02 19.0 22.9 22.3 21.4
7 3 99 3 99 3.70 3.89 11.85 12 9 15 1 13 28 22.1 27 4 25.8 25.1
7% 446 4.41 4.00 4.29 5.67 9.5 36 626 21.6 28.4 23.4 245
Bottom 4.47 4.51 4 20 4.39 3 79 60 39 4.56 26 6 29.8 27 6 28 0
 FACILITY
A P I CALIBRATION FOR NUCLEARLOGS 307

I
level) was therefore selected a s the officlal calibration
polnt f o r the zone. Shown a s F i g 6 IS a computed curve
of total radloactivlty obtalned by weighting the U, Th,
and K concentrat~onsaccording to t h e ~ rspeclfic activity
a s determined froin Table 6 . Thls approslmates the
ielatlve response expected to be obtained froin a n aver-
age logglng instrument.
After careful consideration of these data, the Sub-
committee felt justified in assigning the offic~alcall-
bratlon point 111 the zone the following absolute values
of concentratlon of the three elements:
U - 13 ppm; Th - 24 ppm; K- 4 percent.
To confirm the adequacy of the zone In fulfilling the
Fig. 5-U, Th, and K Content of Samples Taken baslc objective, three servlce compames logged t h e
well measuring radlatlon levels with their respective
from the Gamma-ray Pit as Determined by
u n ~ t sa s piesently used The results a r e the following:
Gamma-ray Spectroscopy
Average
Low-activity Hlgh-actlvlty Shale from
analysis p e i f o ~ m e dby three oil-company laboratories Company Zone Zone Field Logs
a r e shown In Table 13. These measurements a l e also
plotted ln Flg. 5 Comparison of these measurements a t
1-ft Intervals with antlclpated average measurements
f o r the whole zone (froin Table 9 ) indicates close
agreement f o r I( and Th with u n ~ f o r nconcentratlon
~
of these elements throughout the depth of the zone. This The activity in the callbrat~onzone IS thus approxi-
IS not true for the U component whlch, from the sample
mately twice t h a t designated by the servlce companies
analys~s,IS found to be substantially lower than d e s ~ r e d to be obtained in a n average shale.
In the upper 2 f t and lower 1 ft. This is not well- Slnce, by A P I definition, the response of a logging
understood, but is belleved to be partially caused by a instrument to the h ~ g h - a c t l v ~ tzone
y mlnus the response
mechanical fallure of the cement-mls~ng equlpnlent In the low-actlvlty zone, is assigned the value of 200
which allowed an undetermined amount of escess water A P I Gamma-Ray Units, ~t may be expected t h a t field
to be added durlng the pourlng of the upper few feet logs w ~ l show
l shales, on a n average, to be about one-half
Some of the Ra was probably washed from the sand thls ~ntenslty,o r 100 A P I Gamma-Ray Units
and removed wlth the excess water. Fortunately, a rela- Thus the gamma-ray pit, by vlrtue of determination of
t ~ v e l yumform a c t l v ~ t yf o r each element is indicated In its baslc radiation properties and assignment of stand-
the center region of the sectlon, and was subsequently a r d unlts to the response of instruments to these prop-
verlfied by "loggmg" checks. Thls region (I e., the 4-ft erties, truly just~fiesits classification a s a n "absolute"
a s well a s "arbitrary" Industry standard.
TOP -
The Neutron P i t
I - I n determination of porosity-index values to be
assigned to the three zones In the neutron pit, two
sets of measurements were available to the Subcom-
w 2 -
Z mittee - one from data acqulred during saturat!on of
2 the large blocks and the other from core analysis of
LL 3 -
0
a
the small samples removed from the comers and centers
0
+ 4 -
of the large blocks It had been previously agreed by
I the Subcoinmlttee that, In case of discrepancy between
0
5 .
the two measurements, the large-block data should be
I considered more applicable. The former have been pre-
+
sented 111 Table 12.
6 .
F o r analysis of the small samples submitted to the
7 . varlous 011-company laboratories, each was requested to:
1 Measure poroslty of each of the 90 samples utiliz~ng
8 their best technique.
I I I I I I I I I I I 2. Measure poroslty Index, using t a p water, on a t
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.1 12 13 least 40 percent of the samples.
PHOTONS/SEC-GM OF M I X ( W I T H ENERGY >IOOKEV
These measurements a r e glven In Table 14. A description
Fig. 6-Radioactivity of Gamma-ray Pit (Calculated of the analysls techniclue used by each laboratory IS
Using Specific Activities Given in Table 6) inclitdcd In Appendlx B, p 317.
- ---
0
A
03
m
w N
*
0
N
N N

a m
w N
0.1

0
N

40.1
*
m

N *
01 0.1

0 rl
5 4
NO.l 01
C U

0 w
2 0
s
N m

*
m
(3
m
0.1
0.1c

0
w *
m
-7
m 0.1 4
u)

--
?<
0 0
0 3 II
N c , \
0 * w 4
t : - 0
N C \ I
I
m
V
'R
t- 0 C(
C- a
N7-4 II
-CO a
4
m
A N E
2 0.1
0

0.10-
t- c
CO

m
mwoq
hlNA
a s
E
O
w
N $
4

N T
V
A O C - 4
mwC- U
0.1N4, 9
Q
r l N
0.1
m

0 C-

-
:: C-

0
C:
0.1

0 Q,
m m
m
2
0
X
rl

."
* EZW

+
22
m
. m
&
2
 Carthage Marble (continued)
Posltlon 1 2 3 4 5
Porosity P.I. Porosity P.I. Poroslty P.I. Poroslty P.I. Poroslty
Block 5
L R l L I R L I R L I R L R l L l R L I R l L R L I R
T 1.67 1.29 1.71 1.60 1.67 120 1.40 1.72 1 69 1 71
Layer 170 150 1.68 2.54 1845 201 250 205 230 181 160 1 80
1 1 1 1.90 150 1 1.69 1.70 1 1 6 2 1.83 1 1415 1 178 I 2 50 1 1 2 74 190 1 180
Averages 154 1 84 185 1.69 153 1.74 2 08 2.28 196 1 80
Block 5 A v e ~ a g e s Poroszty = 1.774 - P.Z. = 1 849
Block 6
T 170 1.40 3.08 1 50 1 52 2 36 150 175 2.30
Layer 190 2 10 163 1.80 150 1.56 1.735 2 21 1965
5
1.61 162 170 1.66 176 2 09 14 8 5 1.50 125 5 20 1.45 1 7 0 1.83 190
E
Averages
1 g 1 ?1: 1 1.66 1 67
1
2.05
1
1 72
1
1 84 160
1
2.58 1.57
1 1
187
1
2.06 m
P
>
Block 6 Averages: Porosaty = 2.013 -P.Z. = 1.712 2
6 C a r t h g e Marble Blocks, Averages: Porosity = 1.884 -P.Z. = 1.829 o
z
Indiana Limestone '4
*
Block 7 2
E
T 198 200 19.9 18 9 19 42 17 5 18.1 19 3 1 8 2 19 1 19 1 19.9 19 6
Layer 1 1 18 6 18 1 1 18.2 19 0 lo 1 0 19.0 19
". 18 2 1 18 3 19.43 1 8 55 18.4
1 1 1 8 75 2z
18 8 18 85 18.6 19 3 19 2 19.0 18 8 18.9 19 2 :'i 184
z
Averages 19.21 18.70 19.30
Block 7 Averages
19 37 18 96
Porosztg = 19.1-7 --
18.20
P.Z. = 18.75
18 93 18.56 19 24
"118 80
5P
m
*
z
Block 8 t'
0
R
T 18.1 19 93 19 2 19.4 18.9 18 6 18 9 18.6 18.9 18 9 18.45 1 8 9 19 15 cn
Layer 1 19.3 27 0 1 , 1 18 56 18 2 1 17 3 21 19 6 19.4 19 5 19 2 1
18.45 :: 1 ::.:1 23.6 :i:i 1 17 17 18.8 17.55
5 19 0
4 bg 1
Block 9
T 18.43 18.65 19 0, 18.1 1 8 9 18 1 18.7 18.8 18.9 18.65 18 0 18.42 18 2 19.0 18 15
18 15 18.5 18 5
1; 2118,7 1184 1 ::!7188 " 5 1 7 :::I188 179118.7 ::::I94 "'189
Averages 19 21 18.78 18 39 18 45 19.07 18.51 1 8 41 18 26 19.15 18 81
Block 9 Averc~ges P o r o s ~ t y= 18.85 - P.I. = 18.55
 Table 14 (continued) 1E
Indiana Limesto~le(continued)
Position I 1 2 I I 4 I 5 I
Poros~ty P.I. Porosity P.I. Poroslty P.I. Porosity P I. Porosity P.I.
ppppp-
Block 10
L R L R L R L R L R L R L R L R L R L R
- - - - --- - --- - - - - - - - - -
T 196 192 19.1 18 0 17 8 19 52 18 6 19.5 20 6 19 9 20 3 19 6 19.6 19.5
- Layer M 18.45 18 1 18 95 19 8 20.0 19 7 18.5 17.75 1 8 2 7 19 1 18.7 .
B 19.8 20 2 19.0 18.0 20.0 19 2 19 9 19.1 18.5 18.6 19 2 18 8 19.45
Averages 19.44 1 8 79 19.27 18.50 19.31 19.28 19.19 19.07 19.30 19.22
E'
Block 10 A v e r a g e s . Poroszty = 19.31 -P.Z. = 18.98 g
Block 11 2
"d

T 192 18 8 19 1 18 25 17.1 19.1 18 9 18 3 18.3 18.3 S

19.8 20 0 17 15 17.8 17.3
1; 1 9 6 7E'1
9",,,!,,,,,,,),,1~1
-8.8:: :ai8.41;;::5
5
Averages 19.67 18.87 19.18 19.16 1 8 24 18.28 18.87 18.70 . 18.85 18.04'
n
Block 11 Awerages. Poroszty = 18.93 -P.Z. = 18.57 X
2
cj
Block 12
T 20 5 19 ti 19.5 l8.6 19.8 18 7 19 0 19 85 19.4 19.4
E
194 5
Layer 18 3 20.1 21.3 19.9 19 2 20.8 19 2 19 57 a
19.1 19 18.7 19'" 19 1 l9 "9.1 1 8 25 17 35 18.1 19.1 19.1 19 4 19.1 19 2
cj
Averages
( 1: 19.36
1 1
19.23 19.33 18.85 19 66
1 1
18.45
::::1
19.29
(
19.28
1
19.63
1
19.39
j
M

Block 12 A v e r a g e s . P o r o s ~ t y= 19.45 -P.I. = 19.0.5 FAl

6 Indiana h m e s t o n e Blocks, Averccges: Porostty = 19.23 -P.Z. = 18.78 v1
0
2
Aust~nLimestone
>
Block 1 3
5
T 23 8 24.3 24 1 26 7 28 2 26 G 27.3 27 6 24.0 27.6 24 0 26 5 27.4 272
21.7 26.7 25 0 24.1 24 9 23 8 23 9 22.1 1 26'0
28.9 . 31.2, 30.9 30.1 29 6 24 9 :if 24.3 24.6 2:7
":'
1 b: 1 1 1 1 1 :I 1 1 1 1 '2
Averages 27.49 25 93 26.68 27.10 26.20 26 38 25 26 24.40 26 58 25 25
Block 13 A v e r a g e s . Porostty = 26.49 - P.I. = 25.81
Block 1 4
T 27 8 26.9 25.6 25 9 28 4 26.8 26.8 28 4 28.3 29.2 26.6 27.9
y e 1: 1 26 2 27 3 31 2 28 29 2- 25.9 1 27 27.7 27 4 1 29 1 27.2 1
34.8 2: 1 29 0
27.3 29 3 1 28 8 30 0
29.4 L11 1 33.2 30 8 32 0 32.3
Averages 29.03 28.90 28 75 27 73 29 40
Block 14 Averages . P o r o s ~ t y= 88.82 - P.Z. = 28.73
28.13 28 8 3
" 29.70 28.08 29.13
API CALIBRATION
FACILITY
FOR NUCLEAR
LOGS 311
 CARTRACE WRlLE AUSTIN
POROSITY - PERCENT -
P W O S 1 T I PERCENT POROSITY-PERCENT
Fig. 7-Porosity Distributions from Analyses of
Small Samples Taken from the Corners and
Centers of Large Blocks
I t I S interesting to note the geneially good agreement
of measured poroslty values a s submitted by the d~ffer-
ent laboratories using varlous techniques, and t h e very
unlform poroslty character~sticsof the I n d ~ a n alime-
stone w h ~ c h was chosen a s the offic~al cahbratlon
environment Close agreement between measured poros-
i t y a n d p o r o s ~ t y - i n d e x v a l u e s indicates n e a r l y
100-percent water s a t u r a t ~ o n of the small samples
I n F i g 7, these porosity data a r e plotted In graphical
form vs. the number of samples f o r determinat~onof
mean poroslty values f o r each stone type.
F o r easy comparison of porosity-index values deter-
mined from the small samples and the large blocks,
Table 16 IS presented Blocks a r e listed in Col. 1, 111
the order 111 which they a r e stacked in the pit. Of
particular importance to the Subcomm~tteeIn assign-
ment of poros~ty-indexvalues to the zones were the
values determined from s a t u r a t ~ o nmeasurements of
the groups of large blocks, a s tabulated following.
Poroslty Index, Percent
Group 1 Gronn 2
Carthage marble 1.829 1881
Indiana l~mestone 19.10 19 07
Austin limestone 26 37 25 55
The very small d~fferencesbetween measurements of t h e
Carthage and I n d ~ a n ablocks, respect~vely,confirms the
adequacy of t h e s a t u r a t ~ o ntechmque used, and further
Indicates good unlfoimity of porosity-~ndex values
between individual blocks of a type The sllghtly h ~ g h e r
d~fferencebetween measurements of the A u s t ~ nblocks
1s believed caused 1)y v a r ~ a t i o n sIn porosity character-
l s t ~ c sof the ~ndividualblocks. T h ~ sis substantlatea by
"sample" measurements of the ~ndlvldual blocks in
which values of porosity lndes vary from 2.5.08 to 28.73.
From these measurements and with cons~deration
to their llmits of accuracy, the three zones mere
ass~gnedthe following values of poroslty Index by the
Subcommittee:
Carthage marble - 1.9 percent
Indlana limestone - 19 percent = 1,000 API
Neutron Units
Austin limestone - 26 percent
LIULSmNE
I t IS ~ n t e r e s t i n gto compare these carefully determined
values f o r the three types of stones with values cur-
rently assigned similar type stones 111 servlce-company
test plts F o r ~nstance,Carthage marble, here deter-
mined to be 1.9 pelcent has carried values from 1
percent to 3.5 percent in such privately owned plts,
wlth s i m ~ l a r differences for the other stone types
Now, through use of logglng ~ n s t r u m e n t scallhrated in
t h e A P I pit, ~t wlll he possible f o r servlce compames
to more accurately establish porosity-nldex values f o r
slmllar zones in their own pits. This w ~ l l serve the
whole industry In providing means f o r clerlv~ngmore
accurate charts relat!ng log response to format1011
5
poroslty index o r porosity.
VII. OPERATION O F T H E FACILITY
Operating Agreement
Operation of the callhrat~onf a c ~ l ~ was t y begun Imme-
dlately following formal opening on J u n e 24, 1950, under
contractual agreement mlth the University of Houston
Under tlils agreement, the U n l v e r s ~ t yprovides personnel
and servlces as necessary to the operation of t h e faclhty.
This Includes techn~cal consultation and d~rectlon, a
quahfied observer to witness and certlfy calihrat~ons,
maintenance to assure full serviceability of f a c ~ l ~ tand g,
secretarlal and account~ngservlces
I n ~ t i a lfees for use of the c a l ~ b r a t ~ ofna c i l ~ t ywere
set at $15 per hour o r major p o r t ~ o nthereof, and $7.50
per minor port1011 The fee is u n ~ f o r ~f no r all callbra-
t ~ o n sbut
, is subject to period~cadlustment by agreement
between the U n i v e ~ s l t yand Institute.
Subject to prior approval 1)y the A P I Suhcomm~ttee,
the University is autl~orlzed to p e r m ~ tusage of t h e
f a c i l ~ t yf o r purposes other than those whlch a r e pur-
suant to APZ RP 35, and to charge such fees a s a r e
agreed upon by the Unlverslty and the Subcommittee.
The University is further authorized to use t h e f a c l l ~ t y
for purposes of ~nstruction, experimentation, o r re-
search. All such usage IS subord~nateto requirements
of ind~vidualso r companies desiring service pursuant
to APZ R P 33.
Llmitatlons a r e placed on usage of the callbration prts
to prevent a n y posslble damage or dev~atlon of t h e
standard calibration No mod~ficat~on of the plts wlll
be allowed t h a t I S not completely and ~mmedlately
, removable
The University I S guaranteed a mlnlnium compensa-
tlon for o p e r a t ~ n gthe cal~hratlon facllltp durlng the
first year of o p e r a t ~ o n The guarantee is $6,780. The
A P I oligmally made the guarant.ee; ~twas subsequentlv
underwritten by the l o g g ~ n gcompanies usmg the call-
h r a t ~ o nfacll~ty.
An A P I Subcommittee of five members and a repre-
s e n t a t ~ v efrom the Univers~tyof Houston was estah-
llshed to admlnlster the operation of the f a c ~ l ~ t The y
contractual agreement w ~ t hthe U n ~ v e r s l t yIS suhlect to
revlew semi-annually or a t any t ~ m eon request of
, either party. P n o r t o each revlew, the U n ~ v e i s l t y I S
required t o submit a financ~alreport to serve a s a hasls
1 for revlslon of c a h b r a t ~ o nfees and alteratioll of such
 FACILITYFOR NUCLEARLOGS
A P l CALIBRATION 313

Table 15
Final Tabulated Data Neutron Pit -
C M = Carthage Marble; IL Indiana Limestone, AL = Austin Limestone
I
Block No., Type, Core A;al y sis, Core Analysis, Final Graphical Mean,
and Relat~ve Numerical Average Numerlcal Average for Saturation Each 6-block Group,
Poslt~onin f o r Each Block, Each 3 Blocks a s Results of Results of 5 Laboratories
Neutron Plt Results of 5 Saturated, Results Large Plt Plotted on D l s t r ~ b u t ~ o n
Surface Down Laboratories of 5 Laboratories Blocks Graph
P.I., P.I., P.I.,
Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent

Average All
6 Bloclts

Average All
6 Blocks
NOTE
1 I 1
P I = poros~tyIndex defined as the product of the water saturation and the poros~ty.
25 96 1 26 196

& = poroelty
Average Graln Density. Carthage Marble (CM) = 2 694 g m per cc:
Indlana Llrnestone (IL) = 2 688 g m per cc; Austrn Llrnestone (AL) = 2 707 g m per cc

other telms, cond~tions, and procedures a s heco111e
necessary
Procedure for Logging Calibration Pits
The purpose of the A P I c a l ~ b r a t ~ o1ns to assign to
a logging company's field calibrator a specific number
of A P I units a s determined by t h e relative responses of
the company's l o g g ~ n gtool in t h a t cahbrator and In the
c a l ~ b r a t ~ oplts
n low-rad~oactivityconcrete, and a final instrument zero.
Before lowering the loggmg tool i n either c a l ~ b r a t ~ o n
p ~ t the
, tool should be cahbrated using the logglng com-
pany's field cahhrator. The c a h b r a t ~ o nw ~ t hthe field
callbrator f o r a gamma-ray tool includes a n i n ~ t i a l
nlstrument zero, gamma-ray background 111 alr, gamma-
r a y callbrator reading, gamma-ray background in a i r
after cahbrator reading, and a final instrument zero.
After calibration on the surface, two decentralized runs
of the gamma-ray logging tool- a r e made 111 the gamma-
r a y callbration pit from the bottom to the top of the
plt. Each r u n ~ncludesa continuous recording of the
instrument zero, log deflect~onfor the low-rad~oactiv~ty
concrete, the radioactive concrete, the upper section of
The logging tool 1s stopped for a readlng oppos~tethe
center of the radioactive-concrete section If deslred, the
reading made while the tool is stopped a t the center of
t h e radioactive-concrete sect~onmay be made a f t e r the
continuous and repeat runs, thus allow~ngthe two logs
of the plt to be continuous Follow~ngthe logging runs
314 BELKNAP,DEWAN,KIRKPATRICK,
MOTT,PEARSON,
, brators have been determined, each callbrator can be
Fig. 8-Typical API Gamma-ray Log Calibration
A N D RABSON
in the plt, the gamma-ray tool response with the field
callbrator is again recorded. Fig. 8 shows a portion of a
typical gamma-ray log callbration.
A P I callbratlon of neutron logging tools includes a
recording of tool response using the logging company's
field calibrator before and after logging. This consists
of initla1 ~ n s t r u m e n tzero, neutron background 111 air,
neutron calibrator deflection, and final ~ n s t r u m e n tzero.
Some calibrators have been designed for two callbration
readings. I n this case, both callbration readlngs may be
recorded instead of the one. Two runs a r e made In the
neutron log calibration pit with the logging tool decen-
tralized. Both runs a r e made from the bottom to top of
the plt and ~ncludea recording of lnstrunlent zero, the
three llmestone zones, the water shield, and a final
instrument zero. The logglng tool is stopped opposlte
the center of the Indiana llmestone f o r the calibration
reading. Thls r e a d ~ n gmay be made a f t e r the logging
runs, thus allowing the callbration runs to be contunuous
Fig. 9 shows a portion of a typlcal neutron log
calibratlon.
Llmitatlons a r e placed on the speed for running tools
in o r out of the neutron pit. It 1s preferred t h a t the
crane be used Instead of loggng-truck wlnches. A
maximum speed of 1 6 f t per min is specified No logging
tool o r other device is allowed in either the gamma-ray
o r neutron callbration p ~ w t h ~ c hwould impair their
usefulness a s a prnnary calibrat~onstandard.
Relating of Field Calibrations t o API Units
The foregoing procedure calibrates both gamma-ray
and neutron field callbrators in A P I unlts f o r speclfic
tool types Experience Indicates t h a t gamma-ray cali-
bratois in present use may readily be converted to A P I
Gamma-Ray Unlts. Conversion f o r neutron callbrators
is also straight-forward Once the values In A P I units
for the respective gamma-ray and neutron field call-
used to calibrate the logging tools directly In A P I
Gamma-Ray o r Neutron Units. I n the changeover period
from existing log units of measure to A P I units, some
l o g g ~ n gcompanies may use conversion factors to convert
their old units to A P I units. However, most companies
have indicated they will swltch directly to calibratlon In
A P I units, because they anticipate fewer errors in
callbration by doing so
No serious problems should be encountered if ~t I S
desired to convert a n old log to A P I unlts, provided
the old log was reliably cal~bratedto some other u n ~ t s
and the equivalent A P I units a r e known.
Maintenance of Calibration Records
R P 33 provides t h a t the U n i v e r s ~ t yof Houston shall
keep records of all callbrations on a prescr~bedfoinm
I n order for a calibration to be considered official, the
form must be complete and t h e calibration log attached.
Logglng companies a r e privileged to withhold record-
ings w h ~ c hthey d e s ~ r eto designate a s unofficial and
confidential.
The University is required to maintaln a file of all
logs designated a s official calibrations. This file is not
 First Six Months of Operation
Durlng the first six months of operation of the call-
bratlon facility - from July 1, 1959 to J a n u a r y 1, 1960
- 10 l o g g ~ n gcoml~aniescompleted and filed official A P I
callbrations of nuclear logglng tools a t the University.
It is anticipated these companies wlll convert thew
nuclear logs to A P I standards by mld-1960.
The financlng of operat1011 of the f a c ~ l l t yh a s worked
out a s est~matedby the Subcommittee. I t appears t h a t
the o p e r a t ~ o nwlll break even f o r the first year a t the
rates estabhshed.
VIII. CONCLUDING REMARKS
The A P I Nuclear Calibrat~onFacihty was des~gned
and b u ~ l tf o r one purpose: To p r o v ~ d et h e petroleum
Industry wlth a means for obtalnlng standardized
gamma-ray and neutron logs.
The first and one of the most Important benefits of
standardization will be the d ~ r e c tcomparison of logs
r u n by various logglng companies. The engineer *or
geologist (working on the well slte) can quantitatively
compare the log on his well with the log on a n offset
well. W ~ t hproper c o n s ~ d e r a t ~ oofn well-bore cond~tions
and tool response, h e will be able to tell from the nuclear
logs if and how formation cond~tionshave changed
between wells.
A standard u n ~ IS t essential before nuclear logging
can truly progress from a qualitative to a quantitative
a r t Its use should promote many s t u d ~ e s t h a t w ~ l l
Increase the.knowledge and quantitative use of nuclear
logs. F o r example, only prehminary work has been done
to determine porosity of a shaly forlnatlon from a
combination of the gamma-ray and neutron curves. A
standard unit wlll provlde a b a s s for such studles
Wlth standardized nuclear logs, research s t u d ~ e s of
depositional changes in a f o ~ m a t l o nover a geoloac
basin may be possible.
One by-product of standard~zationwill be improved
quality in nuclear logs. Because of the varlation in
u n ~ t s logs
, have been compared by appearance - a s a t ~ s -
factory log w a s one' t h a t "looked" all rlght Wlth a
standard unit those logs t h a t have not been properly
cahbrated, scaled, etc wlll be r e a d ~ l yapparent and they
will not be accepted by the well operator I n addition,
standardizat~onwlll p e r m ~ tquantitat~vecomparison of
various types and models of gamma-ray and neutron
Instruments.
Although the Calibrat~onFacllity was not primarily
designed to provide departure curves, the neutron pit
provldes some data for one response curve f o r each
tool calibrated. This curve will provide the logging
companies with a means of v e r ~ f y i n gthe values assigned
to their own test formations. F o r those companies t h a t
Fig. 9-Typical API Neutron Log Calibration do not have test pits, t h e Calibration Facihty will pro-
vide valuable response curves Also, wlth certain restric-
tions, the pits may be used for research and development.
open f o r ~nspection.Requests for callbration data should I n summary, the A P I Nuclear Callbration Facjllty
be made d~rectlyto the logglng company involved, not should lead to better nuclear logs and increased knowl-
to the Unlverslty. The University wlll verify calibration edge of nuclear l o g g ~ n gMost ~rnpol-tant,~tw ~ l provide
l
logs, but will not f u r n ~ s hcoples of logs the basis f o r truly q u a n t i t a t ~ v enuclear logs
 A t present t h e Callbration F a c ~ l i t ydoes not provide
the range of conditions t h a t a r e needed to prepare a
complete set of neutron response curves. F o r example,
~t u~oulcl be desirable to have pits: 1, saturated with
salt water, 2 , with d~fferenthole sizes; 5,t h a t could be
cased; 4, t h a t could be filled with mud of varying
density, etc Many logging companies have already bulk
such p ~ t sThe A P I h a s no present plans t o hulld addl-
t ~ o n a lp ~ t s but
, they could be added to the Facility qulte
econonucally Perhalis, through the cooperation of sev-
eral companles, ~t w ~ l l be poss~ble to work out a n
agreement whereby additional p ~ t scan be built. I t is
not d~fficultto v~suallzea complete set of plts a t the
Facillty a t some f u t u r e date. Complete response curves
based on common test plts w ~ t hcarefully determined
properties would be valuable to all
I11 addttion, t h e Callbratlon Facility may be used 111
the future for calibration of other types of logs The
present pits may be adequate for some aclclit~onaltypes
of logs - In other cases, new test plts may be needed
F o r example, the present neutron p ~ appears t appl~cable
f o r evaluation of acoust~cveloc~tylogs and density logs
The gamma-ray pit can conce~vably be used f o r a
gamma-ray spectroscopy standard
Nuclear logging IS stiil a relatively new sclence. Many
improvements in present logs and many new ,types of
logs a r e anticipated. I t is hoped t h a t the F a c i l ~ t ywlll
a ~ din the developme~ltof such logs.
The Callbratioil Facllity h a s already p1.ovecI its value
to the University of Houston a s a t e a c h ~ n gaid Student
help was used wherever poss~bleIn construction of the
Facllity. Soine phases required research and wlll be the
subject of theses prepared for graduate degrees. Student
work on the Facihty during construct~onand operat~on
has had a n addlttonal benefit. Several students have
been provided the financ~almeans for c o n t m u ~ n gt h e ~ r
eclucat~onand for obtalnlng advanced degrees There
a r e many ~)ossibilit~es for research using the F a c i l ~ t y
APPENDIX A
L ~ s t e d follow~ng IS the membership of the A P I
N a t ~ o n a l Subcommittee on Rev~ew of R P 73 a t the
t ~ m eof puhl~cationof the revls~on.
W. B Belknap, C ~ / L ~ / I ) I I * L ) I ,
Phllllps Petroleum Company
J. M Bird, Seismograph S e r v ~ c eCol p.
J T Dewan, Schlumberger Well S u r v e y ~ n gCol p
T. A. Johnson, Jr , Southern C a l ~ f o r n ~Gas
a Co
A. S McKay, Texaco, Inc.
W E Mott, Gulf Resealch & Development Co.
A J Pearson, The A t l a n t ~ cRefining Co.
A A Pereb~nossoff,Mob11 011Company
W R. Rabson, P a n Geo Atlas Corp
G. T. N. Roberts, Shell 011 Company
The Umverslty has the r ~ g h tto use the pits f o r t h ~ s
purpose when they a r e not in use f o r calibrat~on.Use
of the F a c ~ l i t yf o r Unlvers~tyresearch 1s expected t o be
of value In the coming years.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
So many have contrlbuted to the A P I Nucleai Log
Callbration Facillty t h a t a n y acknowledgment must be
~ncomplete.The men (and t h e ~ r1-espect~vecompanies)
who served on the Subcommittee to R e v ~ e wAPZ R P 33,
the compantes which contr~butedfunds to bulld t h e pits,
plus many others who freely f u r n ~ s h e dexpert a d v ~ c eon
c e r t a ~ n phases of the project have all contributed
~mmeasurably.
Those organizat~onswhich contrlbuted special services
were Gulf 011Corporation, Shell 011 Company, Humble
011 & Refining Company, The Atlantic Refin~ngCom-
pany, Schlumberger Well S u r v e y ~ n gCorporation, P a n
Geo Atlas Corporation, Lane-Wells Company, and The
Univers~tyof Houston
REFERENCES
'Matt, W. E and E d ~ g e rN , M: Nuclear Well Logg~ilg
In Petroleum Exploration and Production, Proc Fifth
World Petroleum Congress, X, 195 (1959).
ZBelknap, W. B: A P I Calibration and Standardizat~oii
of Nuclear Logs, presentecl a t the sprlng meetings of
the Mlcl-Continent and Rocky Mountain Districts, April
22-24, 1959, and May 6-8, 1959, respectively. P e t ~ o l e l ~ , ) ~
E n y z ~ t e w (adaptation, t ~ t l e . New A P I Factlity foi
Standardization and Callbration of Nuclear Logs) 31
[I31 B-24, Dec. (1959).
3Strominger, D ; Hollander, J. M ; and Seaborg, G. T
Table of Isotopes, Rev. mod en^ PILYs., 30, 585 (1958)
Yhttman, J a y : Neutron Logglng, Proc. U n i v e ~ s t t yof
Kunsus Petrolezcm Engzneering Conference, A p r ~ l2-3,
1956.
H E. Schaller, McCullough Tool Co.
J. A Stinson, P a n Amencan Petroleum Corp
G11 Swift, Well Surveys, Inc
Tei r y Walker, Welex, Inc.
W. 0 Winsauer, Humble 011& Refin~ngCo.
A. B. Winters, Lane-Wells Company
The representation from spec~ficcompanles changed
d u l ~ n gthe progress of the Subcommittee's work because
of chahges In indlvldual assignments w ~ t h ~those
n com-
panles Recognition is also made of the contr~butionsof
the following persons to the work of the Subcommittee.
C L Doyle, General Petroleum Corp ; Thomas G11-
martin, P a n American Petroleum Corp.; Ben H Goocle,
Lane-Wells Company; and R H Wlnn, Halliburton 011
Well Cen~entlngCompany.
 FACILITY
A P I CALIBRATION
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY CORE-ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES USED FOR
CORE ANALYSIS OF LIMESTONE BLOCKS IN NELTTRON
PIT AS SUBMITTED BY COMPANY LABORATORIES
COMPANY A
Core plugs (l-ln. long by %-in diameter) were drilled
flom the limestone blocks, with t a p w a t e r used a s
coolant The plugs were oven-drled f o r 24 hours a t
100 deg C. Aftei coollng, grain volumes weie d e t e r m ~ n e d
w1t.11 a pressure-type Boyles' Law a i r poroslmeter Fol-
l o w ~ n ga d r y welglit, the plugs were evacuated a t less
than 1 nlin mercury f o r 30 mln and then saturated with
t a p water The plugs were we~ghedw h ~ l esaturatecl wlth
t a p water and a g a m while suspended in t a p water.
The bulk volume w a s obtained by subtracting the
susl)eiided weight from t h e saturated weight and cllvld-
Ing the difference by the tap-water d e n s ~ t y The. reported
p3ioslty was calculated by subtractlng the grain volume
f ~ o n ibulk volume and d i v ~ d i n gthe diffe~enceby bulk
v o l ~ ~ mThe e volume of water In the coie plug was found
by subtractlrig d r y weight from saturated welght and
g difference by t h e density of t a p w a t e r The
t l ~ v ~ d l nthe
1 atlo of this volume to bulk volume 1s the p o r o s ~ t yindex
A measuremint of porosity index is p a r t of our
nnimal plocedure so t h a t we will know how well t h e
coles a r e saturatecl. We l ~ a v etherefole llsted thls value
f o ~all of the core plugs ~ n s t e a dof only those ~ n d ~ c a t e d
on the list Because of experimental error, the porosity
~ n t l e s1s hlgher than the p o r o s ~ t y in some cases. We
belleve our pore-volume measurements a r e wlthin
k0.02 cc of the t r u e value. The maxlmum e r r o r f o r
either of the reported values i s therefore about 0.2
p o i o s ~ t ypercent f o r core plugs of the size used.
COMPANY B
The large triangular blocks s u p p l ~ e dwere cut into
iectangular blocks, using a tap-water lubr~cated,dia-
mond cutting wheel; the smaller, split cyhndrlcal
samples were used 111 t h e condition furnlslied. P n o r t o
porosity measurement, all specimens were a ~ r - d r l e d
a t 100-105 deg C
The best method of poroslty measurement conslsts of
the use of whole core equipment f o r g r a m - o r solids-
volume determlnatlon, followed by a water-d~splacement
test to ascertain bulk volume A mod~ficatlon of t h e
gas-expansion technique described by Coberly a n d
Stevens was employed to measure g r a m volume. The
m o d ~ f i c a t ~ oconslsts
n p r ~ m a r ~ lofy t h e respectlve use of
d r y a l r and mercury manometers 111 lieu of hydrogen
arid pressure gages. Following solids measurement, t h e
samples were allowed to ~ m b ~ bfully e In t a p w a t e r and
subsequently were immersed while suspended ~ n t oa
counterbalanced, water-filled' vessel resting on a t o r s ~ o n
balance. The volumetric d~splaceinentand bulk volume
of the core w a s then calculated from the resulting
welght changes The t o r s ~ o nbalance used h a s a sensl-
tlvlty of 0 1 gram.
F o r porosity-index pore-volume determinations, speci-
mens were evacuated f o r approximately 6 hours a n d
FOR NUCLEAR
LOGS 317
submerged in de-aerated t a p water a t atmospheric
PleSsure f o r a t least 14 hours. The ~nduced welght
changes also were measured on the torslon balance
All allalysls of the Houston city t a p watel 1s not
available, ho\vever, the specific gravity was 10026
COMPANY C
The porosity Index f o r each of the 90 samples w a s
determined 111 t h e following manner
1. Cyllndrlcal core plugs, 1 in. In diameter and 2 t o 4
In. In length, were clnllecl from the p a r e n t core
samples using t a p water a s the circulating fluid.
2. The core plugs were drled 111 a n oven a t 120 cleg C.
f o r 14 l ~ o u r s This temperature was above the
specified maslmum of 105 deg C. Therefore, t h e
cores were saturated w ~ t ht a p water and then
drled again a t 90 deg C.
3 The dried core plugs weie cooled to room teinpera-
t u r e and the d r y weight of each sample w a s
measured
4. The core plugs were then saturated with t a p w a t e r
by flushing de-aerated t a p water mto the cores and
c o n t i n u ~ n gto maintain a vacuum f o r 1 2 hours
before restoring atmospherlc pressure.
5 The w e ~ g l l tof each sample when water-saturated
was then measured.
G The pore volume f o r each core plug w a s calculated
by d i v i d ~ n g t h e difference between t h e water-
saturated and d r y weights by t h e d e n s ~ t yof the
tap water
7 The bulk volume f o r each core plug w a s calculated
from measurements of the ~. h"v s l c a ldlrnens~onsof
. the samples.
8 The poroslty nldex w a s calculated by dividlng t h e
pore volume by t h e bulk volume
COMPANY D
Three cyhndrlcal core samples were drllled from each
of the 90 large samples whlch were prov~ded The
samples w e i e c111lled with t a p water and dried a t
100 deg C.
The core plugs representing those samples on which
a porosity analysls with t a p w a t e r was requested were
evacuated to 20 microns mercury pressure and saturated
with de-aerated t a p water. The g r a i n volumes were
determined by the buoyant-force method. A mercury-
dlsplacement bulk-volume meter w a s used f o r t h e bulk-
volume deternilnatlons.
These samples were again d n e d a t 100 (leg C. and
included with t h e remaining core plugs f o r grain-
volume determinations uslng toluene a s the s a t u r a t ~ n g
fluid. The same buoyant-force method was used f o r
these determinations.
UNIVERSITY O F HOUSTON
The University of Houston laboratory used the gas-
expansion method uslng the RUSKA mercury pump
f o r poroslty determ~natlons.Bulk-volun~emeasurements
were made by mercury dlsplacement. Checks by g r a m
density were made period~cally.