See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301543811

Issues With Cement Bond and Cement Evaluation Logs-Case Studies

Conference Paper · December 2015

DOI: 10.2523/IPTC-18538-MS

CITATIONS READS
2 10,596

2 authors:

Ko Ko Kyi Arthur Goh

36 PUBLICATIONS   16 CITATIONS   
PETRONAS
3 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

APOGCE2017 papers View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ko Ko Kyi on 23 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 All final manuscripts will be sent through an XML markup
process that will alter the LAYOUT. This will NOT alter the
content in any way.

IPTC-18538-MS

Issues With Cement Bond and Cement Evaluation Logs - Case Studies
From Offshore Malaysia
Ko Ko Kyi and Arthur Goh Jin Wang, PETRONAS

Copyright 2015, International Petroleum Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the International Petroleum Technology Conference held in Doha, Qatar, 7–9 December 2015.

This paper was selected for presentation by an IPTC Programme Committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s).
Contents of the paper, as presented, have not been reviewed by the International Petroleum Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s).
The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any position of the International Petroleum Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Papers
presented at IPTC are subject to publication review by Sponsor Society Committees of IPTC. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper
for commercial purposes without the written consent of the International Petroleum Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted
to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the
paper was presented. Write Librarian, IPTC, P.O. Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax +1-972-952-9435

Abstract

Cement Bond Logs (CBL) and/or Cement Evaluation Logs are usually run to evaluate the quality of the
cement bond behind a cemented casing or liner, before a well test or production operation is performed in
the well. These logs may also be run during workover operations to evaluate the integrity of the casing
before sidetracking the well. In many countries, regulatory authorities require that cement bond logs be
run in every well after cementing operations to investigate the presence and quality of the cement bond
behind the casing so as to evaluate the hydraulic and mechanical seal of the cement. There is still a long
ongoing discussion in the industry regarding the validity and reliability of such cement evaluation logs in
determining the quality of the cement bond behind pipe. There is a faction which believes in the cement
evaluation logs and uses them regularly. There is also another faction which does not believe in these logs
and does not use them at all. The Cement Bond Log, which records the amplitude and transit time of a
sonic signal traveling along the casing, has been around for many decades. The measurement principle of
the CBL tool is well known and understood. The new generation cement evaluation tools, such as the
ultrasonic scanner tool, use an ultrasonic transducer to send an ultrasonic signal inside the casing and
estimate the acoustic impedance of the cement behind the pipe. The measurement principle and processing
of such a cement evaluation log is more complicated and can be sometimes difficult to understand.
Furthermore, depending on the input parameters used, such as the impedance of the wellbore fluid, a
cement evaluation log can give contradicting results. For example, a log which has been processed using
a certain mud impedance showing very poor cement quality can be reprocessed with a different mud
impedance and produce another log which indicates better cement quality. Therefore, it is important to
understand how such a log is processed before making a decision to take any remedial action based on the
apparently poor quality of the cement bond indicated by the log. In this paper, ultrasonic cement evaluation
log examples illustrate the complex task of evaluating the quality of the cement bond. Likewise, even the
old Cement Bond Log can be affected by the properties of the borehole fluid. A heavy mud in the well
can attenuate the sonic signal, leading to spuriously low CBL amplitude and hence falsely indicating a
good cement bond. Cases like micro-annulus, if not properly recognized, will be interpreted as poor
cement bond and may lead to unnecessary and unsuccessful attempts to squeeze cement into the annulus.
The presence of a micro- annulus can be determined by rerunning the CBL log with the casing under
pressure. The case histories in this paper illustrate the importance of understanding how the cement bond
2 IPTC- IPTC-18538-MS-MS

and evaluation logs are acquired and processed, so that proper decisions can be made regarding the quality
of the cement bond and hence any remedial action that needs to be taken. Examples are also given
illustrating the instances where total disregard of cement bond and cement evaluation logs, due to distrust
in these logs, can result in undesirable consequences leading to expensive remedial actions later.

This paper presents case histories which will indicate the importance of evaluating cement bond quality
behind pipe. It will highlight that cement bond and cement evaluation logs play an important role in
identifying possible well integrity issues, which can result from poor cementing jobs. It will also
recommend that due diligence and care should be taken in interpreting cement bond and cement evaluation
logs to prevent costly mistakes.

Introduction

Cement Bond Log/Variable Density Log

For many years, wireline logging companies have been trying to develop tools and techniques that can
determine the quality of the cement bond behind casing. The efforts started with the Cement Bond Log,
which tries to establish a relationship between the amplitude of a sonic signal, returning from the casing
to the receiver on the logging tool, with the cement bond between casing and cement. This then progressed
to the VDL (Variable Density Log) which records the sonic wave train received at the far receiver (5 feet
spacing) to establish an indication of the cement bond between cement and the formation. Both of these
logs have been in use to evaluate the quality of the cement bond behind pipe. They are very useful but
have their own pitfalls and limitations in evaluating cement bond quality. There is already abundant
literature in the industry covering the principles and applications of the CBL/VDL logs. However, it is
worth mentioning that these logs cannot determine the hydraulic isolation between different zones in the
formation. The ultimate goal of cement bond evaluation is to determine and quantify the degree of
hydraulic and mechanical seal provided by the cement behind casing. Furthermore, the CBL/VDL logs
are non-directional and can only provide an average reading of the CBL amplitude around the wellbore.

Fig. 1 – Principle of CBL measurement (after David Stiles) Fig. 2 – Presentation of CBL/VDL logs. (after David Stiles)
IPTC-IPTC-18538-MS-MS 3

Segmented Bond Log/Cement Map

In an effort to improve on the shortcomings of the CBL/VDL tools, many later generation cement
evaluation tools have been developed. The Radial Bond Tool (RBT) is an improvement on the CBL tool,
whereby a 360o image of the cement bond is generated. There is also the Segmented Bond log (Baker
Hughes) which has six independently articulated arms with one ultrasonic transmitter and a receiver on
each pad. Similar to the standard CBL tool, this tool measures the amplitude of the ultrasonic wave
returning from the casing and provides a compensated measurement using different combinations of
transmitter and receiver pairs on the adjacent arms. The output from this tool is six attenuation curves,
which are used to create a cement map behind the casing. The main advantage of this tool is that due to
the articulated arms, all the pads are kept in contact with the casing wall, thus alleviating the eccentering
effect which is detrimental to CBL logs. Furthermore, because the pads are maintained in contact with the
casing, the SBT tool can be used in empty or gas-filled wells. There is also no issue with running this tool
in heavy muds, which are of concern to other types of cement evaluation tools.

Fig. 3 – Transmitter-receiver pairs of the SBT Segmented Fig. 4 – Presentation of SBT, six attenuation curves and
Bond Tool (courtesy of Baker Hughes) cement map. (courtesy of Baker Hughes)

Ultrasonic Cement Evaluation Log

Another type of cement evaluation tool, such as the USIT Ultrasonic Imaging Tool (Schlumberger) and
the CAST Circumferential Acoustic Scanning Tool (Halliburton), uses a rotating pulse echo transducer
which scans the inside of the entire wellbore by emitting an ultrasonic signal and produces an acoustic
impedance map. This impedance map is then transformed into a cement map around the outside of the
casing. The map is color coded according to the value of the impedance which is measured in MRayl
units. Cutoff values can then be used to identify poorly bonded intervals and flag them as being either
liquid filled or gas filled. In addition to a cement map this type of tool provides additional measurements
such as casing internal diameter, casing thickness and an indication of casing corrosion. However, it
should be noted that this type tool is sensitive to the weight of the fluid inside the casing and usually there
is maximum mud weight limit for the usage of this tool. The latest generation ultrasonic cement evaluation
tool, namely the IBC Isolation Scanner tool (Schlumberger) provides flexural wave measurement in
addition to the standard cement impedance. Under the right conditions, the flexural wave can detect the
Third Interface Echo and provide information on the bond between cement and the formation.
4 IPTC- IPTC-18538-MS-MS

Fig. 5 – Principle of Ultrasonic Cement Evaluation Log. Fig. 6 – Presentation of Ultrasonic Cement Evaluation log
(after David Stiles) (after David Stiles)

Fig. 7 – Schematic diagram of Schlumberger IBC tool. (after Fig. 8 – Derivation of Solid-Liquid-Gas (SLG) map using the
David Stiles) IBC tool (courtesy of Schlumberger)

Observations on Interpretation of Cement Bond and Cement Evaluation Logs

In spite of the development of new tools and techniques to evaluate the cement bond, none of the tools so
far can actually measure hydraulic isolation, which is the information really required. All of the current
tools can only give an indication of the cement bond quality by inference from other physical parameters,
such as sonic amplitude, attenuation, impedance which can be actually measured by the tools. Like any
other interpretation, cement bond evaluation is subject to the skill and experience of the interpreter. It is
an opinion based on certain assumptions and any subsequent decisions such as remedial cementing jobs,
like squeeze jobs, need to be supported by other evidence. Therefore, one needs to be cautious about taking
critical decisions based on cement evaluation logs, regarding the cement bond quality. However, if the
cement bond evaluation logs are totally ignored, even in cases where they are indicating obviously poor
cement bond, serious consequences can result due to lack of appropriate actions being taken. Usually, the
resistance to perform remedial cementing jobs comes from drilling personnel, with reasons of possible
failure in squeeze cementing, well integrity issues due to punching holes in the casing, additional cost,
etc. Project managers may also be reluctant to do remedial cement jobs because of the cost involved, as
well as additional time required to complete the project. In this paper, case histories from offshore
Malaysia are given to illustrate the various issues encountered with cement bond or cement evaluation
logs.
IPTC-IPTC-18538-MS-MS 5

Case Histories

The following case histories from offshore Malaysia will highlight the importance of Cement Bond and
Cement Evaluation logs in ensuring that proper decisions are taken regarding poor cement bond as
indicated by these logs. Certain cases, where decisions were made not to perform any squeeze cementing
jobs, in spite of clear indication of the lack of zonal isolation, resulted in unwanted fluid production, such
as early gas breakthrough into oil bearing zones. Remedial cementing jobs performed at much later dates,
as a result of these incidents, were more costly because of the need to pull the completion strings out and
to bring back a workover rig. Oftentimes, cement squeeze jobs performed at a much later date have a
lower chance of success. If these squeeze cement jobs had been performed right after the discovery of
poor cement bond or isolation, it would have been less costly and had a better chance of being successful.
In all fairness, there have also been cases where squeeze cementing had been attempted without success
incurring additional rig time and cost.

Case History-1

In this well, USIT/CBL/VDL logs, inside 9 5/8 inch casing, indicate lack of isolation between the upper
gas bearing sand and the lower oil bearing sand. Decision was made to perforate and complete in the oil
bearing sand, without performing a remedial squeeze cementing job to isolate the sand. Gas from the upper
sand broke through within a few days, as shown in the adjacent production test results. Poor cement bond
was probably due to cement recipe, as the surface cement sample did not set properly even after 25 days.

Fig. 10 – Production test profile from the previous well in

Fig.9 - CBL/USIT logs indicate very poor cement bond.
There is no isolation between the gas bearing sand and the oil
bearing sand. The surface cement sample did not set properly
even after 25 days of waiting.
Figure 1. The oil bearing zone was perforated and completed
without squeezing cement into the interval between the two
sand. Gas broke through from the upper reservoir within a
short period of time. The Gas Oil Ratio kept on increasing
even after choking back.
6 IPTC- IPTC-18538-MS-MS

Case History #2

In this well, the CAST/CBL/VDL logs indicate poor or lack of cement bond in the E06 sand which has a
gas cap above the oil bearing interval. The decision was taken to perforate the bottom part of the oil zone,
far away from the Gas Oil Contact, without performing a squeeze job in the E06 sand. Gas broke through
quickly into the perforated interval within a few days.

Fig. 11 – CAST/CBL/VDL logs indicate poor cement bond in the E6 sand, leading to poor isolation between the gas cap and the oil bearing
interval. The well was completed in the oil zone without performing cement squeeze job. Gas broke through quickly, even though the
perforated interval was way below the Gas Oil Contact.

Case History #3

In this well, the first USIT/CBL/VDL logs, run on 10 September 2011, indicated very poor cement bond.
As the rig had to go off location and went to another site, USIT/CBL/VD logs were run again six months
later on 17 March 2012, using a different rig, to see if there was an improvement in the cement bond.
Although there was some noticeable improvement in the cement bond quality, it was decided that a
remedial squeeze cementing job should be performed due to the requirement to have good isolation
between the intended perforating intervals. Several attempts were made at different intervals to squeeze
cement, but of them were not successful. Selective zonal production tests carried out at a later date,
confirmed that all of the perforated zones were isolated from one another, thus indicating that there was
no communication behind the casing, in spite of the poor cement bond indicated by the logs.
IPTC-IPTC-18538-MS-MS 7

Fig. 12 - CBL/VDL logs show very poor cement bond. CBL Fig13 - CBL/VDL logs recorded 6 months later show
scale: 0 – 100 mV. High CBL amplitude seen, indicating improved cement bond. CBL scale: 0 – 50 mV. CBL
possible poor cement bond. amplitude decreased

Fig. 14 - USIT log run on 10 Sept 2011. Poor cement bond Fig. 15 - USIT log run on 17 March 2012 (six months after
quality. Processed with Zmud = 2.8 MRayl the first run). Improved cement bond quality. Processed with
Zmud = 2.68 MRayl
8 IPTC- IPTC-18538-MS-MS

Case History #4

This case history demonstrates the importance of using the correct mud impedance for the USIT log, when
creating cement impedance map. The use of a wrong mud weight (or impedance) can result in a totally
different looking cement impedance map for the same USIT log.

Fig. 16 - USIT cement map processed using mud impedance Fig. 17 - USIT cement map reprocessed using mud
of 2.38 MRayl. The cement map shows very little cement. impedance of 2. 8 MRayl. The cement map shows some
The cement bond log indicates very poor bond. CBL improvement. The cement bond log remains unchanged. CBL
amplitude scale is 0-100 mV. amplitude scale is 0-100 mV.

Case History #5

This case history is similar to the previous one and emphasizes that mud impedance is a very important
input for processing the IBC Solid-Liquid-Gas. Different mud impedances can result in different SLG
maps.

Fig. 18 - IBC log processed on 19/9/2012 using mud Fig. 19 - IBC log reprocessed on 20/9/2012 using mud
impedance of 1.48MRayl. The SLG map shows liquid. impedance of 2.5 MRayl. The SLG map shows solids.
IPTC-IPTC-18538-MS-MS 9

Case History #6

The first run of IBC/CBL/VDL indicated poor cement bond. As micro-annulus was suspected, the logs
were rerun with casing pressurized by 2000 psi. Micro-annulus disappeared eliminating a squeeze job.

Fig. 20 – Comparison of IBC/CBL/VDL logs run before and after pressurizing the casing at 2000 psi.
There is a significant improvement in cement bond and SLG maps in the pressurized run.

Case History #7

The IBC/CBL/VDL logs indicated very poor cement bond across the entire cement interval. However, the
decision was made to go ahead and complete the well, without any remedial cementing job. Excessive
amount of water was produced as water broke through from a high pressured water sand above the
perforated gas bearing zones.

Fig. 21 – IBC/CBL/VDL logs indicate very poor bond across the entire cemented interval. Decision was made to go ahead and
complete the well without remedial cementing job. Water broke through from the water bearing sand above the perforated
intervals.
 10 IPTC- IPTC-18538-MS-MS

Conclusions

Cement Bond Logs and Cement Evaluation Logs play a very important role in hydrocarbon exploitation
and production. In spite of the limitations and uncertainties in interpreting these logs, they should be
recorded in oil and gas wells for proper completion purposes. Evaluation of cement bond logs should not
be undertaken on its own. All available information, including drilling and cementing data, should be
taken into consideration when evaluating cement bond logs, as high impact decisions are based on the
results of these interpretations. All relevant and interested parties, such as surface team members and
drilling personnel should be involved in the decision making process, should there be a possibility of
performing a remedial cementing job, such as squeeze cementing. All possible causes of the apparently
poor quality of the cement bond should be thoroughly investigated before a decision for remedial
cementing job is taken, as they can be very expensive to implement and the chance of success could also
be low. However, if it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the cement bond is indeed poor, all parties
concerned should be willing to take the necessary decision to perform a remedial cementing job. As
illustrated by the previous case histories, failure to take appropriate actions can result in serious and costly
consequences, with severe damage to the well integrity.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the Management of PETRONAS for their permission
to present this paper. They would also like to thank the colleagues in PETRONAS for providing examples
of cement evaluation logs for this paper.

References

1. Challenges with Cement Evaluation What We Know & What We Don’t; David Stiles, 120711 SPE Cement
Evaluation Webinar Presentation.
2. Now You See It, Now You Don’t! The Illusions of Cement Evaluation Logs; Ko Ko Kyi, Presentation at
the Formation Evaluation Society of Malaysia (a chapter of the Society of Petrophysicists and Well Log
Analysts), 17 December 2012.

View publication stats