ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
GeoFrame 4.0
ELANPlus Theory
ELANPlus Theory -7
ToC
Index
© 1999 Schlumberger
Schlumberger Austin Systems Center
8311 North FM 620 Road
Austin, Texas 78726 U.S.A.
All rights reserved. No part of this manual may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or translated in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying and recording, without the prior written
permission of Schlumberger.
Use of this product is governed by the License Agreement. Schlumberger
makes no warranties, express, implied, or statutory, with respect to the
product described herein and disclaims without limitation any warranties of
merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.
Version and Program History

Version Date Comment
4.0 May 2001 Updated for GeoFrame 4.0
3.7 July 1999 Update for GeoFrame 3.7
3.6 April 1999 Update for GeoFrame 3.6
3.5 July 1998 Update for GeoFrame 3.5
3.2 August 1997 Add APS Interpretation
3.1 March 1994 Upgrades for GF1.1 standards
3.0 June 1993 Commercial
2.0 July 1992 Beta
1.0 March 1991 First Version
-6 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
How to Use On-Line Help

The Help menu on the right side of the title bar of major windows offers
options such as Table of Contents, Index, On Context, Version, and Help,
which activate hypertext links to the relevant pages of this document.
If you click on the On Context button, the cursor becomes a question mark.
Move the question mark to the item for which you want help and click the
mouse button. The User Guide will open to the relevant page.
About This Document

This document contains the information you need to know to run this
program. It is designed to be used both as a hardcopy document and to be
accessed online by means of Hypertext. Click on any item in the table of
contents to jump directly to the page on which that topic begins.
Mouse Buttons
These conventions are used to indicate which mouse button to click:
MB1 Left mouse button
MB2 Center mouse button
MB3 Right mouse button
If you are told to click on something, and you are not told which mouse
button, use MB1.
Hypertext Links
In the user’s guide Contents, you can click on any heading to jump to that
page. After you have jumped to a reference—even if you have paged forward
or backward after jumping—you can return to the original jump point by
pressing the GoBack button.
Throughout this user’s guide, there are references to other sections in this
guide and to other GeoFrame documents. These references are also active
Hypertext links. When you click on a phrase that appears in blue, underlined
Italic type, you jump to the section or document represented by that phrase.
To jump to the beginning of the table of contents at any time click on the ToC
button. ToC
ELANPlus Theory -5
iii
ToC
Index
In addition, all items in the table of contents (though they are in black, not Q
blue, type) are hyperlinked. Click on any TOC item to jump directly to the
section of the document it represents.
The Index button is not connected at this time. The Q (Quit) button closes the
User Guide and quits FrameViewer (program used to view the Guide).
Printing This Guide

To print this user’s guide from FrameMaker or FrameViewer on a PostScript-
compatible printer, you must have the proper Adobe PostScript printer drivers
installed for your printer.
1 With the cursor anywhere in the document, press MB3 to display the
MAKER or VIEWER menu, and select the Print option.
The FrameMaker Print Document window appears.
2 Under the Print Page Range heading, verify that the All option is selected.
3 In the Printer Name field, select the name of your printer.
4 Make sure that the Print Only to File button is not selected.
5 Click on the OK button to print the document.
You may want to use the UNIX lpq command to check the printing status.
See your system administrator or on-line man pages for information about
this command.
-4
iv ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Contents
Version and Program History
How to Use On-Line Help
About This Document
Mouse Buttons
Hypertext Links
Printing This Guide
Chapter 1 ELANPlus Program Theory ..............................................................1

The Purpose of the ELANPlus Application ..................................................1
Conventions ...................................................................................................3
Equations and Tools ................................................................................3
Formation Components, Volumes ...........................................................3
Matrices ...................................................................................................4
Mnemonics ..............................................................................................4
Model, Interpretation Model ...................................................................4
Summation Expressions ..........................................................................5
Units ........................................................................................................6
Vectors .....................................................................................................6
xxxx .........................................................................................................6
Assumptions of the ELANPlus Application .................................................6
Borehole Pressure ...................................................................................7
Bound Water.............................................................................................7
Curve Editing—Depth Correction, Depth Matching, Despiking,
Patching....................................................................................................7
Environmental Corrections ......................................................................7
Flushed-Zone and Undisturbed-Zone Relationships................................7
Lateral Continuity ....................................................................................8
Neutron Porosity ......................................................................................8
Qv_effective ............................................................................................8
Summation of Fluids ................................................................................8
Summation of Volumes ............................................................................8
Vertical Continuity ...................................................................................8
ELANPlus Theory -3
v
ToC
Index
Chapter 2 Interpretation Models ..........................................................................9
Formation Components ...............................................................................10 Q
Response Equations ....................................................................................10
A Simple Response Equation Example ................................................11
Invasion Model ......................................................................................11
The Overdetermined Solution ...............................................................13
Parameters ...................................................................................................16
Global and Program Control Parameters ..............................................16
Binding Parameters ...............................................................................18
Response Parameters .............................................................................20
Salinity Parameters ................................................................................24
Temperature Correction of Parameter Values .......................................30
Parameter Calculator .............................................................................31
Constraints ..................................................................................................31
Building an ELANPlus Model ....................................................................34
Step 1 Select Formation Components ...................................................35
Step 2 Select Response Equations ........................................................35
Step 3 Rationalize Formation Components and Response
Equations................................................................................................35
Step 4 Choose Constraints ...................................................................37
Step 5 Label the Model ........................................................................38
Step 6 Choose Model Combination Method ........................................38
Step 7 Create Functions ........................................................................39
Step 8 Set Parameter Values..................................................................39
Step 9 Save Your Work ........................................................................40
Chapter 3 Response Equations ............................................................................41

Wet and Dry Clay ........................................................................................41
Density Response Equation ..................................................................42
General Response Equation ..................................................................44
Gamma Ray (GR) Response Parameters ....................................................45
SP Response Parameters .............................................................................47
Sonic Response Parameters .........................................................................51
Slowness ................................................................................................51
Velocity .................................................................................................52
Neutron Response Parameters .....................................................................56
Linear NPHI ..........................................................................................57
-2
vi ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Nonlinear Neutron Response Parameters ..............................................61
Recommendations for Using Neutron Data in Q
ELANPlus Processing ...........................................................................66
Recommendations for APS Interpretation ............................................67
Constant Tools .............................................................................................69
Parameter Tables .........................................................................................71
Chapter 4 Conductivity Models ...........................................................................75

No Rxo Tool ................................................................................................78
Oil and Gas Model with Rxo ......................................................................79
Oil and Gas Model without Rxo .................................................................80
Water Saturation, Linear Conductivity ........................................................80
Conductivity Input, Hierarchy ....................................................................83
For Global Parameter Clay = Wet .........................................................84
For Global Parameter Clay = Dry ..........................................................84
Beware of CUDC_clai ............................................................................84
Conductivity Equations ...............................................................................85
Waxman-Smits Equation .......................................................................85
Dual-Water Equation .............................................................................89
Linear Conductivity Equation ...............................................................92
Indonesian and Nigerian Conductivity Equations .................................95
Simandoux Conductivity Equation .......................................................96
Chapter 5 Uncertainties ........................................................................................103

The ELANPlus Solution Method ..............................................................103
Balanced Uncertainties .............................................................................104
Conductivity, SP ........................................................................................106
Weight Multipliers ....................................................................................106
Default Uncertainties ................................................................................107
Uncertainty Tables ....................................................................................108
Carbonate-Clay Example ..........................................................................111
Chapter 6 Constraints ...........................................................................................113

Internal Constraints ...................................................................................113
Predefined Inequality Constraints .............................................................114
Maximum Porosity Constraint ............................................................115
Irreducible Water Constraint ...............................................................115
ELANPlus Theory -1
vii
ToC
Index
Sonic Clay Volume Constraint ............................................................116
Conductivity Constraint for Water-Based Mud (Sxo Sw) ..................119 Q
Conductivity Constraint for Oil-Based Mud (Sxo £ Sw) ....................123
Sxo Constraint for Water-Based Mud (Sxo Sw) ................................123
Sxo Constraint for Oil-Based Mud (Sxo £ Sw) ..................................124
User-Defined Constraints ..........................................................................124
Chapter 7 Model Combination ..........................................................................125

Methods for Generating Combined Answer Sets .....................................125
Individual Models .....................................................................................127
Model Probabilities ...................................................................................127
External Probabilities ...........................................................................127
Internal Probabilities ............................................................................128
Bad Hole Probability............................................................................129
Final Model Combination, Using Probabilities ..................................130
Chapter 8 Quality Control ...................................................................................135

Quality Control of the Model ....................................................................135
Examples of Bad Hole Models .................................................................138
Quality Control of the Results ..................................................................139
Reconstructed Logs Can Identify Model Problems ............................140
Poor Reconstruction Means There Is a Problem .................................140
A Good Reconstruction Can Go With a Wrong Answer .....................140
Use Predicted Value to Check for Inconsistencies...............................140
Summary ..............................................................................................141
Appendix-1 ....................................................................................................................142
Simandoux Equation (A historical perspective)...................................142
Glossary .................................................................................................149
0viii ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Chapter 1
ELANPlus Program Theory

This document presents theoretical concepts of the ELANPlus petrophysical
interpretation program. Although the new user may wish to read this docu-
ment in its entirety, it has been designed to be accessed in small, self-con-
tained, single-topic segments, as well.
As much as the ELANPlus User’s Guide. This document often refers to
ELANPlus editors such as the Global Parameter editor and Process Editor
that are part of the human interface. Information on the editors is also found
in the ELANPlus User’s Guide.
You can run the ELANPlus application and produce results—even meaning-
ful results—without the information presented in this document. However,
until you understand the underlying concepts, theory, and assumptions of the
ELANPlus program, it will remain a mysterious black box.
If you do not understand the theory behind it, the ELANPlus program will
sometimes appear to produce inconsistent, irreproducible, illogical results.
Fine-tuning parameter values will remain a frustrating hit-or-miss proposi-
tion. With a firm theoretical understanding, though, you can make educated
choices of model components and parameter values that will quickly con-
verge to a high quality result.
The Purpose of the ELANPlus Application

The ELANPlus computer program is designed for quantitative formation
evaluation of cased and open-hole log level by level. Evaluation is done by
ELANPlus Theory 1
ToC
Index
optimizing simultaneous equations described by one or more interpretation
models. Singe-well ELANPlus can be run anytime after preliminary data Q
editing (such as patching, depth matching, environmental correction) is com-
plete.
Most users think the purpose of the ELANPlus application is solving the so-
called inverse problem, in which log measurements, or tools, and response
parameters are used together in response equations to compute volumetric
results for formation components. In reality, that aspect of the program is only
one side of a three-way relationship among tools, response parameters, and
formation component volumes. The relationship is often presented in a trian-
gular diagram, as in Figure 1.
t v
t = Rv
R
Figure 1 Petrophysical model used by the ELANPlus application.
In Figure 1, the t represents the tool vector—all logging instrument data and
synthetic curves. The v is the volume vector, the volumes of formation com-
ponents. R is the response matrix, containing the parameter values for what
each tool would read, given 100% of each formation component. Given the
data represented by any two corners of the triangle, the ELANPlus program
can determine the third.
In the inverse problem, t and R are used to compute v. As stated before, solu-
tion of the inverse problem is often considered the main job of the ELANPlus
program.
The forward problem, also known as log reconstruction, uses R and v to com-
pute t. A log reconstruction problem is computed for each inverse problem,
or Solve process. The reconstructed logs are compared against input data to
determine the quality of volumetric results from the inverse problem.
Using t and v to compute R is called the calibration problem. Here the ques-
tion is, “What response parameter value(s) should I use to obtain the best fit
between the observed logging instrument readings and some believed forma-
tion component volumes (often core results)?” A method for solving the cal-
2 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
ibration problem has not been implemented in version 2.x of ELANPlus. The
problem will be solvable in Version 3.0. Q
Note that the inverse problem solves for formation component volumes only.
Other traditional log interpretation program results (such as water saturation,
matrix grain density, and so on) are provided by the Function process. That
approach allows the program user to control the definitions of the additional
output types rather than having the definitions hard-coded in the program.
Chapters 2–8 explain ELANPlus interpretation model concepts and tell how
individual models can be combined for wide ranges of formation types, how
the program produces its results, and how to check the quality of results.
Conventions
To fully understand the concepts behind the ELANPlus model, you must be
aware of the conventions used in this document. If reading this section for the
first time, please read it completely. Though some terms may also be in the
glossary, most of the material presented here will not be repeated.
Equations and Tools

Equation and tool will be synonymous in most cases. The more technically
correct term is equations, or better, response equations. The term tool comes
from the fact that most response equations obtain their input data from log-
ging tools and often use the same mnemonic as the tool data. Also, the
response equations and their associated data are used as tools to produce the
desired results. Finally, the term tool has historical roots in the program.
Generally, equation or response equation will be used when the intent is to
focus attention on the structure of the equation. Tool will be used more con-
ceptually in discussing interpretation models.
Formation Components, Volumes

When setting up an interpretation model, you must tell the ELANPlus pro-
gram which minerals, rocks, and fluids are likely to be present in the forma-
tion. These minerals, rocks, and fluids are the formation components.
Often the primary job of the ELANPlus program is to determine the relative
quantities or volumes of the formation components that would most likely
produce the set of measurements recorded by the logging instruments. There-
fore, the terms volumes and formation components, or just components, are
often used interchangeably.
ELANPlus Theory 3
ToC
Index
Usually components will be used in discussing interpretation models, where
the constituent, but not the quantity thereof, is of prime importance. Volumes Q
tends to be used in discussion of equations and output curves, where quantity
carries more importance.
Matrices
Matrices are represented by upper case, bold characters, such as R.
Mnemonics
The mnemonics in this document will be those of the GeoFrame Interpreta-
tion Workstation. They are used (primarily in equations) to show how the the-
oretical concepts are related to the working program. Mnemonics will be
explained when first used.
Model, Interpretation Model

A model is a way to present information to the ELANPlus program to
describe the problem to be solved. A model consists of a set of tools, or equa-
tions, a set of formation components, or volumes, and a set of constraints.
Implicitly there are associated curves, response parameters, and other global
and model-specific parameters.
Abstractly, a model describes program input data and the solution space over
which the ELANPlus optimizer can operate (the allowable results). The equa-
tions describe the logging data and supplementary response equations that are
available. The formation components describe the minerals, rocks, and fluids
likely to be encountered in appreciable quantity and provide the geological
description of the types of formations to which the model applies.
The constraints let you set upper and lower limits on the output volumes.
They are often used to establish a relationship between one formation com-
ponent and another (or others). Constraints are a way of supplying the pro-
gram with local knowledge.
Often the term model is used interchangeably with Solve process, because a
different Solve process is usually set up for each general set of equations, for-
mation components, and constraints.
Often, each model is given a name, such as Sand-Shale model, Carbonate
model, Cotton Valley model, XYZ E&P Reservoir model. The results from
each specific model are combined through the Combine process to produce a
final answer for the entire borehole interval being evaluated.
4 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Summation Expressions
Many concepts are best described mathematically and involve a summation. Q
To avoid defining all summation elements and indices after each equation the
most common ones are described once here.
The summation indices are used in a unique way in this document. Assume a
model which, among other formation components, includes the clays illite,
kaolinite, and chlorite. In the expression
nc
∑ Vi
i=1
even though the summation index, i, is shown to start at 1 and index to nc, the
number of clays in a model (in this example, nc = 3), i does not take on the
values 1, 2, 3. Instead, it takes on the values ILLI, KAOL, and CHLO. Simi-
larly, Vi represents volume of illite, volume of kaolinite, and volume of chlo-
rite in the expanded summation.
nc
The symbol nc represents the number of clays in a model, including all clays
that have specific names (ILLI, MONT, etc.) as well as the generic clays
(CLA1, CLA2).
nf, nuf, nxf
The symbol nf represents the number of fluids in a model and includes all
types of fluids (water, hydrocarbon, irreducible, etc.) in both the flushed and
undisturbed zones. The symbol nuf applies to all fluids, regardless of type, in
the undisturbed zone only. The symbol nxf applies to all fluids, regardless of
type, in the flushed zone only.
nfc
The symbol nfc represents the number of formation components in a model.
Unless otherwise stated, nfc includes all solids—nonclay and clay alike—and
all fluids. However, note that since bound water (XBWA) is solved for as a
dependent variable, nfc does not include it.
ns
The symbol ns represents the number of solid formation components in a
model, including both clays and nonclays unless otherwise stated.
ELANPlus Theory 5
ToC
Index
Vi, Vi, CEC_j, WCLP_i, RHOB_i
The notations Vi, Vi, CEC_j, WCLP_i, RHOB_i, and others are used prima- Q
rily in summation expressions, where the i ( j, k, ...) indicates the ith
( jth, kth, ...) element of the summation. It is also used to refer to any nonspe-
cific member of a volume, parameter, or similar group.
For example, in “The range of any output volume, Vi, is between 0.0 and 1.0
(0 to 100 p.u.),” Vi is used generically to refer to, say, volumes in a nearby
formula. As stated in the Summation Expressions section, the i, j, k, ... is not
replaced with an integer, but with a mnemonic, so that NPHI_i refers to
NPHI_QUAR, NPHI_CALC, or whichever formation components exist in a
model.
Units
Examples are sometimes used to elucidate a concept. Unfortunately, the use
of any specific numerical value at once raises the issue of units. Unless other-
wise stated, porosities and other volumes will be given in v/v (decimal poros-
ity), not p.u. (porosity units). In other situations where the units are not
supplied and are not obvious from context, assume English units.
Vectors
Vectors are represented by a lower case bold letter, such as v.
xxxx
Most equation and formation component mnemonics contain four characters.
The string xxxx is used to indicate that you are to fill in appropriate mnemon-
ics as required by context.
For example, in “Equation uncertainty parameters, xxxx_UNC, should be set
such that ...,” the xxxx should be filled in with RHOB, NPHI, DT, TPL, or
whatever equations are being used in a model. Similarly, in a sentence like
“Cation exchange capacities for the clays are entered using the parameter
CEC_xxxx,” the xxxx should be replaced by the mnemonics for the clays
(ILLI, MONT, etc.) being used in a model.
Assumptions of the ELANPlus Application

Most formation evaluation programs impose some sort of interpretation
model—assumptions about the depositional environment, clay properties,
fluid interactions in pore space, and so on. Although the ELANPlus applica-
tion was designed to be free of such assumptions, it is virtually impossible to
design a working computer program without some sort of assumptions—
6 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
some imposed by physics, some resulting from incomplete knowledge of all
variables that affect the solution sought. Q
The assumptions implicit in the ELANPlus program are related to borehole
pressure, bound water, curve editing, environmental corrections, flushed-zone
and undisturbed-zone relationships, lateral continuity, neutron porosity,
Qv_effective, summation of fluids, summation of volumes, and vertical con-
tinuity.
Borehole Pressure
Borehole pressure is used in the computation of certain salinity-dependent
parameter values. Borehole pressure (in psi) is assumed to be 0.465 times
depth, in feet.
Bound Water
Clays are composed of dry clay mineral and associated (bound) water. The
ratio of bound water to dry clay is constant for each clay.
Curve Editing—Depth Correction, Depth Matching, Despiking, Patching

All input data curves have been properly depth corrected and matched with
each other and have been edited to repair spurious effects such as data spikes
or gaps.
Environmental Corrections
All input data curves are environmentally corrected. That is, they have had the
effects of the borehole contents and geometry removed. One notable excep-
tion is that the salinity correction for the nonlinear neutron should not be
done, because the salinity correction can be done properly only when the vol-
umetric constituents are known, that is, during minimization.
Flushed-Zone and Undisturbed-Zone Relationships

Solid formation components exist in equal number and volume in both
flushed and undisturbed zones.
If a model includes an undisturbed-zone fluid, the same type of fluid exists in
the flushed zone, even though the volume of the fluid might be zero in either
or both zones. For example, if a model includes undisturbed-zone oil (UOIL),
it must also contain flushed-zone oil (XOIL).
The volume of porosity in the flushed and undisturbed zones is the same,
regardless of the types of fluids filling the pore space.
Hydrocarbon density (gas/oil ratio) is the same in both zones.
ELANPlus Theory 7
ToC
Index
Lateral Continuity
All solid formation components extend infinitely from the borehole at zero Q
degrees dip.
Fluid formation components exist in one of two annular zones—the flushed
zone, near the borehole, or the undisturbed zone, farther away from the bore-
hole. That allows for the concept of fluid invasion but uses the simplifying
assumption of a step invasion profile.
All formation components are azimuthally homogeneous, that is, the number
and volume of formation components at one azimuth is the same as at all
other azimuths.
Neutron Porosity
All neutron porosities are given in limestone units.
Qv_effective
Qv_effective (QVSP_N) is internally multiplied by porosity before use. That
this multiplication occurs is particularly important to know in the computa-
tion of the QVSP_UNC (uncertainty) parameter. Default uncertainty is based
on the assumption of a 0.3 (30 p.u.) porosity.
Summation of Fluids
The sum of all fluids in the flushed zone equals the sum of all fluids in the
undisturbed zone. This assumption is explicitly added as an equation along
with the other tools whenever a model includes both flushed and undisturbed-
zone fluids. The only user-settable parameter for the Summation of Fluids
equation is the uncertainty, VOLS_UNC (as in the Summation of Volumes
equation).
Summation of Volumes
The sum of all formation components must equal 1.0. This assumption is
always added along with the other tools in a model. The only user-settable
parameter for the Summation of Volumes equation is the uncertainty,
VOLS_UNC (as in the Summation of Fluids equation).
Vertical Continuity
The solution of one data level is completely independent from the solution at
adjacent data levels. There is no vertical continuity logic in the ELANPlus
program. The nonlinear optimizer does use results from the preceding level
as a starting point when it can, but the solution is still determined only by the
program data at each level.
8 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Chapter 2
Interpretation Models
An ELANPlus interpretation model has four parts: formation components,
response equations, parameters, and constraints.
Formation components are the constituents for which volumetric results are
desired.
Response equations are the equations to be solved and their associated input
data and uncertainties.
Parameters are the global and program control parameters, response parame-
ters, binding parameters, and salinity parameters.
Constraints are the limits that the volumetric results must obey.
Additionally, the ELANPlus application includes methods by which individ-
ual models can be mixed and spliced to provide a combined model for more
complex environments and large borehole extents. Each individual model is
specified in a separate Solve process. The final result is (typically) produced
by mixing the results from individual models (Solve processes) in a Combine
process.
The Combine process will be discussed later in this chapter and also in a sep-
arate chapter. The discussion that follows considers only a single model and
a single Solve process, as all remarks on a single Solve process apply equally
to multiple Solve processes.
ELANPlus Theory 9
ToC
Index
Formation Components
In most cases, the primary answer sought from the ELANPlus application Q
will be the volumes of certain formation components at each data level. For-
mation components exist in three groups: minerals, rocks, and fluids. The user
must specify the components for which the program is to solve, by selecting
them in the Process Editor.
Minerals are solids described by a chemical formula; for example, SiO 2,
CaCO3, or CaSO4. Because of their well-defined structure, it is usually pos-
sible to supply default parameters for minerals.
Rocks are considered to be user-defined combinations of minerals, such as
silt, carbonate, and igneous rock. Rocks do not have default parameter values
other than Absent.
Fluids are pore-space-filling substances, including water, oil, gas, and other
special fluids. It is often possible to provide usable default values for fluids,
though some defaults are better than others. A neutron porosity of 1.0 is pretty
safe for water, but the default 0.8 gm/cc density of flushed-zone oil could vary
appreciably from well to well.
The formation components selected to be in a model should be only those
expected to be present in appreciable quantity. The number of components to
be solved can never exceed the total number of equations in use.
Response Equations
A response equation is a mathematical description of how a given measure-
ment varies with respect to each formation component. The simplest linear
response equations are of the form
nfc
measurement = ∑ Vi × Ri (1)
i=1
where:
Vi = volume of formation component i
Ri = response parameter for formation component i
Although some linear equations include additional terms, and the nonlinear
equations are more complex, the overall concept is the same: the total mea-
surement observed is determined by the volume of each formation component
and how the tool reacts to that formation component.
10 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
A Simple Response Equation Example
The easiest way to discuss response equations is with a simple example. Q
Assume that a formation consists of only calcite and water and that a density
log was recorded through the formation. You can easily solve for the volume
of water by using the density response equation written for a single matrix
component:
measured density = φ × fluid density + ( 1 – φ ) × matrix density (2)
where:
φ = the volume of water-filled porosity.
Assume, also, that at some depth of interest the density log read 2.368 g/cm3.
Using a density of 2.71 g/cm3 for calcite and a density of 1.0 g/cm3 for water,
and substituting those values into Equation (2) yields
2.368 = φ × 1.0 + ( 1 – φ ) × 2.71 (3)
Rearranging and solving for φ yields φ = 0.20 and, consequently, the vol-
ume of calcite (CALC) is 0.80.
Something so obvious that it is frequently not stated is that Equations (2) and
(3) assume that the volume of calcite is given by
CALC = 1 – φ (4)
The significance of Equation (4) is that it points out an assumption implicit in

all ELANPlus models: at every depth level, the sum of the volumes of all
formation components present in a model must be 1.0. Expressed in
ELANPlus terms, that is
nfc
1 = ∑ Vi (5)
i=1
Equation (5) is always added to all the other response equations in a model
before the set of equations is passed to the ELANPlus optimizer.
Invasion Model
Also implicit in the ELANPlus solution method is the assumption of a step
invasion profile consisting of a flushed zone, the X zone, and an undisturbed
ELANPlus Theory 11
ToC
Index
zone, the U zone. All solid formation components and two particular fluid
components, isolated porosity (ISOL) and parallel porosity (PARA), are Q
assumed to exist in equal volume in both X and U zones.
Shallow-reading log measurements are assumed to respond only to volumes
of formation components in the X zone. Hence, their response equations con-
tain terms for only the components that exist in the X zone.
Similarly, deep-reading log measurements are assumed to respond only to
volumes of formation components present in the U zone. Their response
equations contain terms for only the components that exist in the U zone.
Some tools, which have a medium depth of investigation, are assumed to be
influenced by both X and U zones, and their response equations contain terms
for all formation components, regardless of zone, and contain a special factor,
xxxx_IFAC, called the invasion factor, which controls how much influence
comes from the X zone. The remaining influence, 1.0 - xxxx_IFAC, comes
from the U zone.
Table 1 lists all curves currently recognized by the ELANPlus application,
grouped by zone. In Table 1 the modifier, _xxx, represents the different forms
of the nonlinear conductivity equations (such as CXDC_DWA, CUDC_IND,
and others).
Table 1
Logs and the Zones to Which They Respond
L Logs Assumed to
Logs Assumed to Measure ogs Assumed to Measure Parts of
Only Flushed Zone Measure Only Both Zones
Undisturbed Zone
CCA EATT CUDC BMK
CCHL EQHY CUDC_xxx ENPA
CFE EX1-EX10 SDPT ENPU
CGDM GR SDPT_N NPHI
CHY PHIT NPHU
CK QVSP_N RHOB
CSI SIGM
CSUL TPL
12 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Table 1 (Cont.)
Logs and the Zones to Which They Respond
Q
CTI U
CT1 - CT6 VELC
CXDC WWAL
CXDC_xxx WWCA
DT WWFE
DWAL WWGD
DWCA WWK
DWFE WWTI
DWGD WWSI
DWK WWSU
DWMG WWTH
DWSI WWTI
DWSU WWU
DWTH
DWTI
DWU
The Overdetermined Solution

In any simultaneous solution of a system of equations, there must always be
at least as many equations as unknowns. If there are exactly as many indepen-
dent equations as there are unknowns, the system is said to be determined, or
deterministic. In a determined system there is exactly one set of values for the
unknowns that will satisfy the equations.
If there are fewer equations than unknowns, the system is underdetermined
and cannot be solved until the problem is reorganized by adding independent
equations or by reducing the number of unknowns. If there are more indepen-
dent equations than unknowns, the system is overdetermined, and some
means must be employed to settle any disagreements among the equations.
ELANPlus Theory 13
ToC
Index
The ELANPlus program allows specification of determined and overdeter-
mined systems. To envision how the program operates, consider the job of Q
trying to draw a straight line through a collection of points.
There are two unknowns to be solved: the slope and the intercept of the line.
The points are analogous to tools in the ELANPlus program and the line coef-
ficients are analogous to formation component volumes. Figure 2 shows the
solution to the problem when there are two points—a determined system.
Figure 2 Determined system.
It is generally impossible to draw a straight line through the data when more
points are added, though, especially in any system where the measurements
(points) may include some noise. A technique called linear regression is usu-
ally employed to determine a best fit to the data.
Often, the best-fit line is drawn so that the sum of the squares of the distances
from the data points to the line is minimized (Figure 3). The technique of min-
imizing the squares of distances from data points to a line is called least-
squares minimization.
C
B
Figure 3 Overdetermined system.
14 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Normal linear regression treats each point as having the same weight. It is like
assigning equal trust to each point, but often we know that some points are Q
more reliable than others. More sophisticated linear regression programs
allow different weights to be assigned to each point.
Figure 4 shows the same data as Figure 3, but with points A and D assigned
a weight of 1 and points B and C assigned a weight of 100. The equally
weighted fit is also shown for reference.
D
Points B and C
heavily weighted
C
B
A
Equal weighting
Figure 4 Overdetermined system with weights applied
Uncertainty is the inverse of weight, so the results illustrated in Figure 4 could

be generated by assigning points A and D an uncertainty of 1.0 and points B
and C an uncertainty of 0.01. The same results would also be obtained with
the uncertainty of A and D set to 10 and the uncertainty of B and C set to 0.1.
Note that the actual value of the uncertainty is not the most important part; the
key is the relative value of the uncertainty of one point with respect to the rest.
The ELANPlus program assigns an uncertainty to each response equation,
including internal equations such as the Summation of Volumes equation or
the Equal Hydrocarbon Ratio equation. After the program converts uncertain-
ties to weights, it applies a second factor, a weight multiplier, to determine the
final weight to be applied to each equation in the least-squares optimization.
It is up to you to set appropriate uncertainties and weight multipliers for the
problem at hand. All equations have default values for the uncertainties and
weight multipliers. Those values have been determined through both theory
and experience. Schlumberger suggests that you use the default values to start
and modify them only as conditions warrant.
For more information see Chapter 5, Uncertainties.
ELANPlus Theory 15
ToC
Index
Parameters
ELANPlus program parameters give you control over how the program Q
behaves, what results are produced, and which data are used. Although the
program has over 3000 parameters, you will use only a small subset for any
given model. Program parameters fall into four general groups: global and
program control parameters, binding parameters, response parameters, and
salinity parameters.
Global and Program Control Parameters

Global and program control parameters control which direction the program
will take at certain major branches in the logic. You can think of them as
determining in what mode the program will operate.
Because they determine the environment in which the ELANPlus problem is
set, program control parameters usually are global. That is, they take on a sin-
gle value throughout the processing interval. Often they are set and never
changed for an entire job.
This and the following subsections cover (briefly) only the program control
parameters that affect the concept of an ELANPlus model: Clay, Uncertainty
Channel, Special Fluid Attribute, and Weight Percentage Option. There are
other program control parameters in the program, such as Pasteboard Option,
Output Sample Rate, and Processing Mode, that are important but do not
affect the petrophysical model.
For detailed information on other program control parameters, see the
ELANPlus User’s Guide, available on line through the Help menu.
Clay
The Clay parameter can be set to either Wet or Dry, using the Global Param-
eter Editor. By selecting Wet you tell the program that response parameters
associated with clay will have values that represent a clay-water aggregate.
By selecting Dry you tell the program that the clay parameters values repre-
sent only the clay mineral and that values for the clay-associated water will
be entered with separate parameters.
For more information see the Wet and Dry Clay section in Chapter 3, Pre-
sponse Equations.
Uncertainty Channel
Response equation uncertainty values can be supplied to the ELANPlus pro-
gram either through a zoned parameter (xxxx_UNC) or through a data curve.
The uncertainty curve to be used with a given response equation is selected in
16 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
the Binding Editor in the same way a curve is selected for use by a response
equation. Q
Setting the Uncertainty Channel toggle to True in the Global Parameter Editor
tells the program to use any curves bound to the equation uncertainty param-
eter(s). Any uncertainty parameter that does not have a curve bound to it will
use values from its corresponding zoned parameter, regardless of the setting
of Uncertainty Channel.
If Uncertainty Channel is set to False, the zoned values will be used for all
equation uncertainties, whether or not there are curves bound to any uncer-
tainty parameters.
Special Fluids
To be as general as possible, the ELANPlus program allows you to model for-
mation components with user-defined characteristics. You simply give each
solid formation component a generic name like carbonate or evaporite, and
the program treats it like any other formation component.
Fluids are a little more complex. You may wish to model, for example, a cer-
tain portion of the formation water, diesel invasion from oil-based mud, acid,
a borax solution, or maybe carbon dioxide.
Conductivity equations need to know a little bit more about how to treat such
user-defined fluids. The Special Fluids parameter provides the additional
information. The options are Water, Hydrocarbon, Immovable Water, Immov-
able Hydrocarbon, and Other. Water is the default.
You set the Special Fluids parameter in the Global Parameter Editor. The
attribute chosen for a special fluid in any process is applied to all processes in
the session. Do not try to combine special fluids from different processes if
they have different characteristics.
Similarly, the attribute chosen for the special fluid in the flushed zone (XSFL)
and the special fluid in the undisturbed zone (USFL) must be the same. The
flushed zone and undisturbed-zone special fluids may have different densities,
conductivities, or whatever, but if one is, for example, Immovable Hydrocar-
bon, so must the other be.
Weight Percentage Option
After you select a Solve process that uses a dry weight percent curve such as
DWSI or DWCA, set the Weight Percentage Option in the Process Editor. The
value can be set to Linear, to direct the program to use the linear formulation
for dry weight percentage data, or to Relative, to direct the program to use the
relative equation formulation.
ELANPlus Theory 17
ToC
Index
Note that because the Weight Percentage Option is set from the Process Edi-
tor, rather than the Global Parameter Editor, different Weight Percentage Q
Option values can be used for different Solve processes.
Combination Method
Generally the more refined an ELANPlus model becomes, the more specific
it becomes. The key to efficient interpretation of long borehole intervals or
multiple wells in a field is the ability to splice together results from a library
of well-refined models. Controlling the splicing of individual models is the
purpose of the Combination Method.
Unlike the other program control parameters, the Combination Method is
zoned instead of global and is built with the Combine editor. Each entry in the
list tells the ELANPlus program which model combination method to use for
a given depth range. The zonation applied to the Combination Method param-
eter is separate from that of the response parameters.
For more information see Chapter 7, Model Combination.
Binding Parameters
Binding parameters tell the ELANPlus program which data curve to use for
any given purpose. You set them in the Binding Editor.
All response equations used in a session must be bound to a data curve, except
the constant tools CT1–CT6 (each of which uses a zoned parameter), the
Equal Hydrocarbon Ratio tool (EQHY), the Summation of Volumes equation,
and the Summation of Fluids equation.
Response equation uncertainty parameters may or may not be bound to
curves, as described in the section “Uncertainty Channel” on page 16.
Remember that even if equation uncertainties are bound to curves, the curve
data will not be used unless the global parameter Uncertainty Channel is set
to True.
Finally, some special response parameters can also be bound to curves.
Table 2 lists the mnemonic and definition of each parameter that can derive
its value from either a zoned parameter or a curve.
18 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Table 2 Q
Parameters That Can Use Curve Input
GST Parameters
GST_PFAC GST borehole partitioning factor
BCA Borehole calcium
BCHL Borehole chlorine
BFE Borehole iron
BGD Borehole gadolinium
BHY Borehole hydrogen
BK Borehole potassium
BSI Borehole silicon
BSUL Borehole sulphur
BTI Borehole titanium
Saturation Parameters
M Porosity exponent in Indonesia/Nigeria equation
M_DWA Porosity exponent in Dual Water equation
M_WS Porosity exponent in Waxman-Smits equation
N Saturation exponent for nonlinear conductivities
Invasion Factor Parameters

BMK_IFAC Bulk modulus invasion factor
ENPA_IFAC Linear epithermal neutron invasion factor
ENPU_IFAC Nonlinear epithermal neutron invasion factor
NPHI_IFAC Linear thermal neutron invasion factor
NPHU_IFAC Nonlinear thermal neutron invasion factor
RHOB_IFAC Bulk density invasion factor
ELANPlus Theory 19
ToC
Index
If a curve that can be used for any of the parameters in Table 2 is present in
the data base, it will be used whether or not a valid value exists for the corre- Q
sponding zoned parameter. If such a curve is present in your data base, and
you want to force the ELANPlus program to use the zoned parameter value,
you must use the GeoFrame Process Manager DataItem Editor to change the
name of the curve so that the name of the curve will be inappropriate for use
by the parameter.
For more information on using the Binding Editor and DataItem Editor, see
the ELANPlus User’s Guide, available on line from the Help menu.
Response Parameters
Response parameters can be roughly grouped into three main categories:
those that represent pure formation component endpoints for each equation,
auxiliary parameters that are related to certain formation components, and
auxiliary parameters that are related to certain response equations.
All response parameters must contain valid values prior to the beginning of
computation. Any interval in which any response parameter has a value of
Absent will produce results containing only Absent values for all formation
components for that entire interval.
Formation-Component-Endpoint Parameters
Pure-formation-component-endpoint response parameters are the majority of
all response parameters. Each endpoint parameter value is the value that
would be read by a logging instrument if it were surrounded by an infinite
amount of a particular 100% pure mineral, rock, or fluid.
In the case of constant tools, the “logging instrument” is synthetic; you make
up the endpoint values. The actual values are immaterial, as long as you main-
tain consistency within the equation and with the uncertainty of the equation.
See Constant Tools on page 69 for more information about constant tool
parameters.
Pure-formation-component-endpoint response parameters usually have mne-
monics of the form equation mnemonic_formation component mnemonic.
For example, the mnemonic for the density of calcite is RHOB_CALC, the
mnemonic for the dry weight percentage of silicon in illite is DWSI_ILLI.
There are two exceptions to the rule: equation mnemonics containing an
underbar, and GST response equations.
20 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Equation Mnemonics Containing an Underbar
For equation mnemonics containing an underbar, drop the underbar and Q
everything after it before adding the underbar and formation component mne-
monic. For example, for the SP equation and kaolinite component you have
the equation mnemonic QVSP_N and formation component mnemonic
KAOL that combine to produce the response parameter mnemonic
QVSP_KAOL.
For the dual-water flushed-zone equation and flushed-zone water,
CXDC_DWA and XWAT produce CXDC_XWAT. Note that for any given
formation component all conductivity equations for a specific zone (flushed
or undisturbed) share the same response parameter. For undisturbed-zone
water, CUDC, CUDC_DWA, CUDC_IND, CUDC_SIM, and CUDC_WS all
share the CUDC_UWAT response parameter. That is because there can be
only one conductivity equation for each zone per model.
GST Response Equations

GST response equations have mnemonics that begin with C, for capture, and
response parameters that begin with F, for fraction. For example, the GST
capture silicon equation, CSI, uses response parameters FSI_QUAR,
FSI_CALC, FSI_ILLI, and so on.
There are three internal equations—Equal Hydrocarbon Ratio (EQHY), Sum-
mation of Volumes, and Summation of Fluids—that do not have endpoint
response parameters that can be modified. Any values needed by those equa-
tions are set within the program.
Formation-Component-Related Auxiliary Response Parameters
Table 3 lists the mnemonics and definitions for the formation-component-
related response parameters.
ELANPlus Theory 21
ToC
Index
Table 3 Q
Formation-Component-Related Response Parameters
Mnemonic Definition Applies to

ARHOB_xxxx Actual density All formation components
CBWA_xxxx Apparent bound water conductivity Clays only
CDPT_xxxx Conductivity as seen by the Deep Propagation Tool UWAT, UIWA, USFL
CEC_xxxx Cation exchange capacity Clays only
FLSOS_xxxx Fluid/solid switch Clays and XBWA
RSMSM_xxxx Ratio of the skeleton modulus to the shear modulus All formation components
WCLP_xxxx Wet clay porosity Clays only
Equation-Related Auxiliary Response Parameters

Table 4 lists the mnemonics and definitions of equation-related response
parameters. For more information, see Chapter 3, Response Equations,and
Chapter 4, Conductivity Models.
Table 4

A Archie A factor All conductivity equations
BCA Borehole calcium GST equations
BCHL Borehole chlorine GST equations
BFE Borehole iron GST equations
BGD Borehole gadolinium GST equations
BHY Borehole hydrogen GST equations
BK Borehole potassium GST equations
BSI Borehole silicon GST equations
BSUL Borehole sulphur GST equations
BTI Borehole titanium GST equations
22 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Table 4 (Cont.)
Q

C_DWA Dual water clay effect coefficient CUDC_DWA, CXDC_DWA
C_WS Waxman-Smits clay effect coefficient CUDC_WS, CXDC_WS
DPT_DIS_EXP Texture dispersion exponent SDPT_N
DPT_DIS_FAC Texture dispersion coefficient SDPT_N
ERSH Simandoux clay exponent CUDC_SIM
ERSHO Simandoux clay exponent CXDC_SIM
EVCL Indonesian clay exponent CUDC_IND, CXDC_IND
EXC_FAC Excavation effect factor NPHU
EXPXO Flushed-zone saturation exponent CXDC_IND, CXDC_SIM
FLUID_PAR Fluids add in parallel switch BMK
GST_PFAC GST borehole partitioning factor GST equations
M Archie porosity exponent CUDC_IND, CUDC_SIM,
CXDC_IND, CXDC_SIM
M_DWA Dual-water porosity exponent CUDC_DWA, CXDC_DWA
M_WS Waxman-Smits porosity exponent CUDC_WS, CXDC_WS
MC2 Effective porosity exponent CUDC_IND, CUDC_SIM,
CXDC_IND, CXDC_SIM
MVCL Indonesian clay exponent CUDC_IND, CXDC_IND
N Undisturbed-zone saturation exponent CUDC_DWA, CUDC_IND,
CUDC_SIM, CUDC_WS
CXDC_DWA, CXDC_WS
QV_HYD_FAC QVSP hydrocarbon factor QVSP_N
SOLID_PAR Solids add in parallel switch BMK
SONIC_POR_FAC Sonic porosity factor VELC
SWSHE Water saturation shale effect CUDC_SIM, CXDC_SIM
xxxx_IFAC Invasion factor BMK, ENPA, ENPU,
NPHI, NPHU, RHOB
ELANPlus Theory 23
ToC
Index
Table 4 (Cont.)
Q

xxxx_UBW Undisturbed-zone bound-water conductivity Undisturbed-zone
conductivity equations
xxxx_UNC Response equation uncertainty All equations, including
internal equations
xxxx_WM Response equation weight multiplier All equations, including
internal equations
xxxx_XBW Flushed-zone bound-water conductivity Flushed-zone conductivity
equations
Default Response Parameter Values

Every effort has been made to provide reliable default values for response
parameters. The minerals, which are well defined, all have reliable default
values with the exception of the GR_xxxx and SDPT_xxxx parameters.
Fluids are less well defined. Some fluid response parameters have default val-
ues; others contain only the Absent value. The values of fluid parameters that
have default values are usually a good starting point. Use the Parameter Cal-
culator to calculate fluid parameters that contain only the Absent value.
Because rocks are defined by the user, it is impossible to provide default val-
ues for rock parameters. In a future release of the ELANPlus program, how-
ever, the Parameter Calculator will be improved to help compute rock
response parameters.
Salinity Parameters
The values of some fluid response parameters depend on the salinity of the
fluids. They will always have a default value of Absent. The ELANPlus pro-
gram attempts to help you, though, by calculating values for the salinity-
dependent parameters whenever possible.
24 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
The following tables list the salinity-dependent parameters whose values can
be calculated automatically by the program. Table 5 lists all salinity-depen- Q
dent parameters whose values are a strong function of temperature.
Table 5
Parameters That Are a Function of Salinity
And a Strong Function of Temperature
CXDC_XWAT EATT_XWAT TPL_XWAT

CXDC_XIWA EATT_XIWA TPL_XIWA
CXDC_XSFL* EATT_XSFL* TPL_XSFL*
CDPT_UWAT CUDC_UWAT
CDPT_UIWA CUDC_UIWA
CDPT_USFL* CUDC_USFL*
EATT_PARA TPL_PARA
EATT_ISOL TPL_ISOL
* — XSFL and USFL only if Special Fluids is Water or Immovable Water
Table 6 lists salinity-dependent parameters whose values are a weak function

of temperature and pressure.
ELANPlus Theory 25
ToC
Index
Table 6 Q
Parameters That Are a Function of Salinity
And a Weak Function of Temperature and Pressure
FCHL_XWAT RHOB_XWAT SIGM_XWAT U_XWAT

FCHL_XIWA RHOB_XIWA SIGM_XIWA U_XIWA
FCHL_XSFL* RHOB_XSFL* SIGM_XSFL* U_XSFL*
RHOB_UWAT
RHOB_UIWA
RHOB_USFL*
FCHL_PARA RHOB_PARA SIGM_PARA U_PARA
FCHL_ISOL RHOB_ISOL SIGM_ISOL U_ISOL
* — XSFL and USFL only if Special Fluid is Water or Immovable Water
The program will compute a value for any of the parameters in Table 5 and
Table 6 if the parameter value is Absent and the associated salinity value is
known. The main difference between the two groups is that in addition to
being initialized by the program, the parameters in Table 5 have their values
updated periodically as computations progress—as the borehole temperature
changes. The values of the parameters in Table 6 are not updated.
Another difference is that the parameters in Table 6 have a small pressure
dependence. The pressure (in psi) used to compute their values is 0.465 times
the depth in feet.
In the following discussion of the salinity initialization hierarchy, the exam-
ples are (1) trying to compute the EPT attenuation for flushed-zone water,
EATT_XWAT, and (2) trying to compute the density of undisturbed-zone
water, RHOB_UWAT, to show how the rules apply to specific parameter val-
ues. Assume a formation temperature of 125 ˚F. Salinities are expressed in
ppk.
Rules for Initialization of Salinity-Dependent Parameters
The rules for initialization of salinity-dependent parameters are as follows:
26 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Not Computing Parameter Values Other Than Absent
If a parameter has a value other than Absent, its value is not computed. For Q
example,
EATT_XWAT = 1700
RHOB_UWAT = 1.15
Parameter Value of Absent Requires a Valid Salinity Value

A parameter that has a value of Absent will be computed by the program if it
can determine a valid salinity value for the parameter. The salinity for each
parameter is determined by whichever of the following occurs first:
1 Finding a valid value for SALIN.
2 Finding an absent value for SALIN but a valid conductivity value associ-
ated with the parameter.
3 Computing salinity from RMF, RW, and RWT.
4 Leaving the value as Absent.
Valid Value for SALIN_xxxx. If the SALIN_xxxx parameter has a valid
value (not Absent and greater than or equal to zero), it is used as the salinity
value. For example,
SALIN_XWAT = 50
SALIN_UWAT = 200
Absent Value for SALIN_xxxx but Valid Conductivity Value. If the
SALIN_xxxx parameter has an Absent value, but the parameter has an asso-
ciated conductivity parameter that has a valid value, the conductivity param-
eter value and temperature are used to compute salinity. (However, salinities
are not computed from conductivities for parallel porosity (PARA) and iso-
lated porosity (ISOL).) For example,
SALIN_XWAT = Absent; CXDC_XWAT = 12.3
SALIN_UWAT = Absent; CUDC_UWAT = 37.0
Computation of Salinity from RMF, MST, RW, and RWT. If the first two
tries fail, the program makes a final attempt to compute values for the
xxxx_XWAT and xxxx_UWAT parameters. Either (1) resistivity of the mud
filtrate (RMF) and mud sample temperature (MST) or (2) resistivity of the
formation water (RW) and formation water temperature (RWT) can be used
to compute salinity.
ELANPlus Theory 27
ToC
Index
Both RMF and MST must be present to compute SALIN_XWAT, and both
RW and RWT must be present to compute SALIN_UWAT. Though this is
Q
the method of last resort, it is actually the most frequently used method. For
example,
SALIN_XWAT = Absent; CXDC_XWAT = Absent;
RMF = 0.13; MST = 75 ˚F
SALIN_UWAT = Absent; CUDC_UWAT = Absent;
RW = 0.027; RWT = 125 ˚F
Leaving the Parameter Value as Absent. If the program cannot perform at
least one of the three actions (1, 2, or 3), the parameter value is left as Absent.
Borehole Temperature
Temperature plays an important part in salinity computations. The ELANPlus
program must know the borehole temperature to compute proper salinity and
parameter values. Usually a temperature curve already exists in the data base
by the time the program is run. If the curve exists, you simply bind it, using
the Binding Editor. The program automatically attempts to bind a curve
named TEMP to the temperature.
If no temperature curve is bound by the time that the program first needs one,
the program will compute a temperature from parameter values. The param-
eters that it uses are borehole temperature (BHT), surface temperature (ST),
and gradient (GRADI).
If BHT, a zoned parameter, contains valid values, then temperature is linearly
interpolated between the values. The temperature between the shallowest
depth entered in BHT and the surface is interpolated, using the shallowest
BHT value and ST.
If BHT contains only Absent values, ST and GRADI are used together to esti-
mate the temperature.
Salinity Editor
Because the program needs to know salinities before it can perform some
other operations, such as giving the Zoned Parameter Editor proper values,
the ELANPlus program has a special editor, the Salinity Editor, for entering
salinity-related parameter values, including those needed to compute a tem-
perature, if necessary.
Table 7 lists the parameter mnemonics and definitions for the parameters
found in the Salinity Editor.
28 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
. Index
Table 7 Q
Salinity Parameters
SALIN_ISOL Salinity of isolated porosity fluid

SALIN_PARA Salinity of parallel porosity fluid
SALIN_UGAS Salinity of undisturbed-zone gas
SALIN_XGAS Salinity of flushed-zone gas
SALIN_UIWA Salinity of undisturbed-zone irreducible water
SALIN_XIWA Salinity of flushed-zone irreducible water
SALIN_UOIL Salinity of undisturbed-zone oil
SALIN_XOIL Salinity of flushed-zone oil
SALIN_USFL Salinity of undisturbed-zone special fluid
SALIN_XSFL Salinity of flushed-zone special fluid
SALIN_UWAT Salinity of undisturbed-zone water
SALIN_XWAT Salinity of flushed-zone water
RMF Resistivity of the mud filtrate
MST Temperature of mud filtrate (mud sample temperature)
RW Resistivity of formation water
RWT Formation water temperature
BHT Borehole temperature
ST Surface temperature
GRADI Earth temperature gradient
ELANPlus Theory 29
ToC
Index
Temperature Correction of Parameter Values
The value of some parameters changes significantly with temperature. That Q
includes all the parameters listed in Table 5 and Table 9.
Table 8
Fluid Parameters That Are Temperature Corrected
CXDC_XWAT EATT_XWAT TPL_XWAT

CXDC_XIWA EATT_XIWA TPL_XIWA
CXDC_XSFL* EATT_XSFL* TPL_XSFL*
CDPT_UWAT CUDC_UWAT
CDPT_UIWA CUDC_UIWA
CDPT_USFL* CUDC_USFL*
EATT_PARA TPL_PARA
EATT_ISOL TPL_ISOL
* — XSFL and USFL only if Special Fluids is Water or Immovable Water.
Table 9
Clay Parameters That Are Temperature Corrected
CBWA_CLA1 CUDC_CLA1 CXDC_CLA1

CBWA_CLA2 CUDC_CLA2 CXDC_CLA2
CBWA_CHLO CUDC_CHLO CXDC_CHLO
CBWA_GLAU CUDC_GLAU CXDC_GLAU
CBWA_ILLI CUDC_ILLI CXDC_ILLI
CBWA_KAOL CUDC_KAOL CXDC_KAOL
CBWA_MONT CUDC_MONT CXDC_MONT
Because the parameter values change with temperature, the ELANPlus pro-
gram periodically updates the values (does a temperature correction). The
temperature correction is applied only internally, during the computations.
30 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
The parameter values and temperatures that you see in the Zoned Parameter
Editor are never modified by the temperature correction unless you insert or Q
move a zone boundary.
Temperature corrections are made under the following conditions:
At every zone boundary. The reference temperature for the parameter
is the temperature at the bottom (deeper) depth of the zone.
At every 100 foot interval if all response equations in the process are
linear. That is, the temperature corrections are performed whenever the
depth in feet is evenly divisible by 100. If a processing interval bottom
depth were 7615, temperature corrections would be applied at 7600,
7500, and so on, not at 7515, 7415, 7315. To ensure consistency, the
temperature correction interval is based on feet, regardless of the depth
unit used.
At every depth level if any response equation in the process is
nonlinear.
Parameter Calculator
Use the Parameter Calculator! Its use is a key to self-consistent results with
the ELANPlus application. Those who do not use it will find that the conver-
gence to a believable answer takes much longer than if the input data are
obtained from the Parameter Calculator.
The Parameter Calculator can be used to compute
Water parameter values and salinities (if salinity is not entered)
Linear neutron dolomite and quartz endpoint values to approximate
nonlinear effects and excavation correction
Gas density and apparent neutron porosity as well as FHY_XGAS
Hydrocarbon density from chemical formula
Wet clay to dry clay conversions
Most computations are bidirectional. You can supply a conductivity to obtain
a salinity, or a salinity to obtain a conductivity. You can convert wet clay val-
ues to dry clay, or dry clay values to wet clay, and so on.
Results from the Parameter Calculator are easily pasted into the Zoned
Parameter Editor. Use the Parameter Calculator!
Constraints
Constraints let you impose absolute limits on the volumetric results of the
program. They are often used to eliminate physically impossible results.
ELANPlus Theory 31
ToC
Index
Consider a formation modelled as calcite and water. Assuming a calcite den-
sity of 2.71, a water density of 1.0, and a measured density of 2.737, you can Q
easily compute the volumes of calcite and water, using the following system
of equations:
2.737 = 2.71 × CALC + 1.0 × XWAT
sum of volumes = 1.0 = 1.0 × CALC + 1.0 × XWAT (6)
Solving the equations yields CALC = 1.01 and XWAT = -0.01. Both answers
are physically impossible—you cannot have more than 100% of a formation,
and you cannot have negative porosity—but they lie within the uncertainty of
the equations. To avoid such situations, the ELANPlus program imposes non-
negativity constraints on all formation component volumes and a constraint
on the Summation of Volumes.
Constraints are brick walls; there is no uncertainty associated with any con-
straint. When applied to the results of equations (2-6) and (2-7), the
ELANPlus internal constraints would result in CALC = 1.0 and XWAT = 0.0.
The imposition of constraints has an interesting side effect. When the forward
problem is run to build the reconstructed logs for the example problem, the
result is
RHOB_REC = 2.71 × 1.0 + 1.0 × 0.0 = 2.71 (7)
Note that neither the input density, RHOB, nor the reconstructed density,
RHOB_REC, is constrained; it is the formation component volumes that are
constrained. It is the result of the volumes being constrained that causes
RHOB_REC to lie between 1.0 and 2.71. Think of constraints as limiting the
volume space available for an answer.
You can also define constraints. For example, you might constrain the results
to match results known from some other source, such as core analyses. One
such constraint might be an illite-montmorillonite relationship:
ILLI
0.4 ≤ ----------------------------------- ≤ 0.6 (8)
ILLI + MONT
The interaction of the constraint in Equation (8), the nonnegative volume con-
straints, and the Summation of Volumes constraint results in an available
solution space shown as the clear area in Figure 5.
32 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
1.0
Volume of Montmorillonite
0.5
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0
Volume of Illite
Volume of illite greater than or equal to zero
Volume of montmorillonite greater than or equal to zero
Sum of volumes less than or equal to one
ILLI/(ILLI + MONT) less than or equal to 0.6
ILLI/(ILLI + MONT) greater than or equal to 0.4
Figure 5 Solution space subject to constraints.
User-defined constraints can be very useful for adding local knowledge to the
ELANPlus model. However, just because some constraints are good, do not
ELANPlus Theory 33
ToC
Index
assume that lots of constraints are better. If a model requires a lot of con-
straints, chances are that your time would be better spent reviewing your Q
choice of response equations, formation components, and parameter values
rather than writing more constraints.
Also, be wary of your source of local knowledge. A known “pure” limestone
may turn out to have a large amount of microcrystalline quartz, for example.
Modelling only calcite or using a constraint to force zero quartz in that case
will make the result of the computation match the local knowledge. Unfortu-
nately, all of the answers will be skewed, including porosity and hydrocarbon
volumes.
Be especially cautious about core results. Core results are usually measured
by weight; ELANPlus computations are usually in volumes. Valid compari-
sons can be performed only after one set of measurements is converted to be
consistent with the other. Also, core measurements are made on a very small
volume, compared to logging measurements.
That is not to say that one measurement is better than the other, but that they
are simply different. You should not place too much emphasis on a small
number of core results. Look for trends. Remember that there is often a depth
difference between core results and log results.
For more information, including a set of constraints that have already been
written for you, see the User-Defined Constraints section of Chapter 6,
Constraints.
Building an ELANPlus Model

The term model means the way in which you present a problem to the
ELANPlus program; a model is simplified description of reality. Actually, all
formation evaluation problems are vastly underdetermined. It is unlikely that
anyone will ever have enough measurements, with sufficient accuracy and
resolution in all dimensions, to fully describe the near-wellbore environment.
Instead you will settle for a model, a subset of reality.
The following discussion of a methodology for building ELANPlus models
assumes that you do not already have a library of models available. By no
means is this the only way to go about building models, and not every well
will lend itself to it. It is only a suggested method, based on experience.
Before ever sitting down to the computer, take time to think about the well.
Each well has its zones of interest and distinct geological subdivisions, many
of which will be common across a field. These natural subdivisions are the
starting point for model definitions.
34 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Often it is impossible and undesirable to try to describe long wellbore inter-
vals with a single model. The ELANPlus application allows you to create sev- Q
eral Solve processes (models)—each of which describes a distinct
depositional environment, time sequence, or whatever—and then combine
the results of the models to cover the entire interpretation interval. Using the
model-combination capability of the ELANPlus application, you can build
more specific and accurate models that can be saved and reused as you
encounter the same geological conditions in other wells.
Step 1 Select Formation Components

For each model, select the formation components that you think may be
present in significant quantity. Significance may depend on the mineral. The
presence of pyrite, for example, can be important in volumes as low as a few
percent. Solving for a feldspar in a quartz sand formation is probably unnec-
essary unless the volume of feldspar reaches double-digit percentages.
Do not try to trim the list too much at this point. The more general a model,
the wider its applicability. It is usually advisable to include a hydrocarbon in
a model to be used for clean, wet formations. Sometimes nature provides little
surprises. You can always eliminate superfluous components later.
Step 2 Select Response Equations

The available selection of response equations is primarily determined by the
logging suite recorded in the well. Select logs that are sensitive to at least one
of the formation components you have selected.
Do not select response equations that are inappropriate for the model. It does
no good to include the gamma ray equation in a calcite-anhydrite-dolomite
model. Those minerals are not radioactive, and the gamma ray tool has the
same response (or lack thereof) to each of them.
In a bad hole model, it is inappropriate to select any borehole-wall contact
tools, such as bulk density or EPT attenuation. An exception might be made
either if the uncertainty of the tool is being driven by a curve at least partly
determined by hole rugosity, or if you very carefully zone the uncertainty
parameter.
Step 3 Rationalize Formation Components and Response Equations

To produce a unique solution, your model must contain at least as many
response equations as formation components. That is a mathematical fact of
life, but it represents only the minimum requirement. Each response equation
in the model must also be sensitive to at least one of the formation compo-
nents in the model.
ELANPlus Theory 35
ToC
Index
When you count response equations, remember to include the Summation of
Volumes equation, which is always present, and the Summation of Fluids Q
equation, which is present if undisturbed-zone fluids exist in the model. The
Summation of Volumes and Summation of Fluids equations are added auto-
matically by the program. You do not have to select them, but they must be
counted.
Most tools are more sensitive to one formation component, or group of com-
ponents, than others. You can use that fact to help establish good, stable mod-
els. Many log analysts who have experience with the ELANPlus program
write models an the same form as the one in Table 10.
Table 10
Rationalized Formation Components and Response Equations
QUAR CALC ILLI XWAT XOIL

RHOB U NPHI GR CXDC ∑ volumes
There are no hard and fast rules. For example, rather than leaving the NPHI
equation unassigned, you might write the model as in Table 11.
Table 11
An Alternate Method
QUAR CALC ILLI XWAT XOIL

RHOB U GR, NPHI CXDC, NPHI ∑ volumes
The main point is to write the model so that you can see which equation
affects which formation component. In reality, all response equations affect
all formation component volumes, but it is often helpful to think of a particu-
lar tool as “solving for” a particular component.
Look at Table 10 again and consider what would happen if the sand were
arkosic and you wanted to include orthoclase in the model. Where would it
go?
Even though there are enough response equations to solve for the number of
formation components, which tool would be responsible for the orthoclase?
Certainly not the neutron. Orthoclase and quartz may as well be the same as
far as it is concerned.
36 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
The same is true for density and conductivity. The gamma ray tool responds
to orthoclase, but you are already counting on the gamma ray for the illite. Q
The best solution is to provide an additional tool. Perhaps the gamma ray tool
could be replaced with thorium and potassium. If it is known from some other
source that the orthoclase volume is, say, roughly 20%of the quartz volume,
a constant tool could be added.
If you cannot add another equation, you may need to model the quartz-ortho-
clase mixture as a single rock. To do that, assume a ratio of quartz to quartz-
plus-orthoclase; call it K. Replace QUAR with SAND in the model. Then
compute each of the SAND response parameters as
xxxx_SAND = K × xxxx_QUAR + ( 1.0 – K ) × xxxx_ORTH (9)
You could, of course, simply modify the xxxx_QUAR parameter values in the
same manner as Equation (9), but that is not recommended, because it could
be misleading. Quartz is silicon dioxide and nothing else. A quartz-whatever
mixture should be modelled as a rock.
Whenever you include a rock in an ELANPlus model, document its com-
position. The interpretation makes sense only when everyone can understand
what went into it.
Step 4 Choose Constraints

If you wish to restrict the volume space available in the solution, you may
wish to set some constraints. For now, simply remember that constraints are
absolute limits and that they are not substitutes for equations.
For more information see Chapter 6, Constraints.
When you use a constraint, you begin to “draw” the result. Use constraints
with care. It is a good idea to run the computation at least once without any
constraints to see how it looks before you start imposing your idea of what the
solution should be.
For example, some log analysts dislike seeing porosity or hydrocarbon shows
in shales. It would be easy to build constraints to limit porosity and to force
hydrocarbon volumes to zero. But consider that the shale might be a source
rock. Suppressing the hydrocarbon hides important information from a geol-
ogist. Even worse, the minor shows might be a tip-off that a potentially pro-
lific, thinly bedded pay zone is present. Never apply a constraint for the sake
of aesthetic effect.
Whenever you do apply a constraint, document it. Include the name of the
constraint, the depth intervals for which it applies, and the reason for applying
ELANPlus Theory 37
ToC
Index
it. If you have defined the constraint, you should also include the constraint
definition. Rigorous documentation may seem like excess work, but others Q
cannot read our minds, and 6 weeks down the road you may find yourself
spending just as much work trying to decipher your own constraint syntax.
Step 5 Label the Model

The ELANPlus program allows you to provide your own label for processes
in a session. Use that capability to give your model a name that will be mean-
ingful not only to you but to those who follow.
Be as specific as the model. Use words that tell what sets this model apart
from other, maybe similar, ones. Your efforts will be rewarded on subsequent
jobs when you can quickly choose desired models from your stored work.
Step 6 Choose Model Combination Method

Up to now, nearly all remarks have been on individual models that exist as
individual Solve processes. Now it is time to enlarge the scope to that of a ses-
sion.
Good model-building walks a fine line between generality and specificity. If
a model is very general, it can be applied to more wells and larger borehole
intervals, but it often will have to be refined extensively when reapplied. If a
model is very specific, it usually will require little if any refinement when
reapplied, but its reusability suffers. Compromising on specificity can cause
a single well interpretation to require many individual models.
A separate editor, the Combine process editor, is used to specify how the indi-
vidual models will come together to provide the final interpretation for the
entire wellbore interval. The zonation that controls the depth interval over
which a certain combination method will be used is unique. Modifying zone
boundaries in the Combine process editor has no effect on response or other
zoned parameters.
The final combined result may come from
Any one of the individual models exclusively.
A weighted combination of all of the models, based on probabilities
computed from expressions that you supply to the program.
A weighted combination of all of the models, based on probabilities
that were computed externally to the ELANPlus program
If you use internally computed probabilities for any model combination inter-
val, you need to select (or create) probability expressions to be used.
38 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
For more information, see the Final Model Combination, Using Probabilities
section of Chapter 7, Model Combination. Q
Step 7 Create Functions

The ELANPlus program computes results in formation component volumes.
Usually it is desirable to create functions of those component volumes as out-
put data types such as water saturation or grain density.
The ELANPlus application lets you specify any number of Function pro-
cesses, which may be driven by data from other processes and from curves
present in the data base. A Function process uses the data along with function
definitions that you provide to compute additional outputs that may be written
to the database.
See the ELANPlus User’s Guide (available on line through the Help menu in
the single-well section of the ELANPLus program) for details concerning
function definition creation and syntax.
Step 8 Set Parameter Values

Parameters come in four types: global and program control parameters, bind-
ing parameters, response parameters, and salinity parameters. For more infor-
mation, see the Parameters section of Chapter 2, Interpretation Models.
When you set parameter values, you set them for all processes to which they
apply. The lone exception is the Weight Percentage Option, which can be set
model by model.
It is especially important to remember that one parameter value applies to all
processes when you are fine tuning response parameters. Changing a
response parameter value might improve one model but adversely affect
another, which might or might not be important. Remember, too, that those
same response parameter values may affect constraint limits, model probabil-
ities, and function results.
Use the Parameter Calculator to help you set parameter values. The Parameter
Calculator helps ensure consistency among parameter values and generally
results in a quicker convergence to a believable answer.
Use the Zoned Parameter Editor to help you review the values of selected
groups of response parameters. All response parameters can be zoned. When
a zone boundary is created for one response parameter, it will exist for all
response parameters. Since response parameters are used in the evaluation of
some constraints, the zonation of response parameters affects the zonation of
constraints.
ELANPlus Theory 39
ToC
Index
Step 9 Save Your Work
Select Save As from the File menu in the main title bar and give your work a Q
meaningful name. You will be able to call it up later for use. If you have prob-
lems, the saved file, the Session File, is invaluable to those trying to help you.
40 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Chapter 3
Response Equations
The types of response equations discussed in this chapter include Wet and
Dry Clay, Gamma Ray Response Parameters, SP Response Parameters, Sonic
Response Parameters, Neutron Response Parameters.
Wet and Dry Clay

Fundamental in understanding ELANPlus response equations is a knowledge
of how clay is handled and the concept of wet versus dry clay. Many log ana-
lysts treat wet and dry clays as the same, even though they can be quite dif-
ferent.
The most common source of dry clay information is core results. Such results
are often used to judge the log analysis, which normally is in wet units, mak-
ing the comparison less than ideal. The ELANPlus program allows you to
work in either domain. There will be an additional program (GEOPOST) that
converts back and forth between the two domains.
ELANPlus logic makes use of the Dual Water Model formulation for clays,
where wet clays are composed of dry clay and associated (bound) water. The
ratio of bound water to dry clay is assumed to be constant for each clay.
The ELANPlus program lets you enter parameters independently for the clay
and the bound water by setting Clay = Dry in the Global Parameter editor.
Alternatively, by setting Clay = Wet, you can enter parameter values for the
clay-water combination and another parameter, WCLP (wet clay porosity),
which specifies the fraction of bound water in the wet clay. The relationship
ELANPlus Theory 41
ToC
Index
between wet and dry clay values is best shown and understood in the follow-
ing formulations. Q
Volume of dry clay

Volume of wet clay = -------------------------------------------------------- (10)
1.0 – Wet clay porosity
Density of wet clay – Wet clay porosity

Density of dry clay = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (11)
Volume of dry clay × Wet clay porosity (11-1a)

Volume of bound water = -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
= Volume of wet clay × Wet clay porosity (11-1b)
Volume of wet clay = Volume of dry clay + Volume of bound water (12)
Throughout this text, unless otherwise specified, wet clay (Clay = Wet) is the
default for parameters and response equations. Response parameters signify
dry clay values only when Clay = Dry is specifically stated.
Mnemonics that have a subscript of DC also denote dry clay values. When one
or more clays is present in a model (Solve process), the ELANPlus program
automatically creates a bound water output curve (XBWA). The volume of
clay in each output clay curve (ILLI, MONT, etc.) is a dry clay mineral vol-
ume. The bound water from each clay is summed into the XBWA curve.
Occasionally, the subscript WC will be used to emphasize that a particular
parameter or volume is a wet clay value. Keep in mind, though, that referring
to a volume in a response equation signifies wet clay values irrespective of the
value of the Clay switch. Regardless of whether parameters are input as wet
or dry values, the ELANPlus program always works internally with wet clay
values, converting them whenever necessary.
Density Response Equation

The density response equation is the same for clay and nonclay minerals. The
program solves for the volume of wet clay (dry clay plus its water). Then
Equation (11-1b) is used to separate the total volume into volume of dry clay
and volume of bound water.
Note: If Clay = Wet, the program expects the clay response parameter values
to be wet clay values and a WCLP_xxxx value for each clay in the model is
required. If Clay = Dry, the response parameter values must be input as dry
clay values, plus each equation requires a value for the bound-water parame-
ter, xxxx_XBWA.
42 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Assume that Clay = WetT and the volumes of illite, quartz, and water are
being solved; then the linear response equation needs to be formulated in wet Q
clay terms. That is done for the density tool (RHOB) in the following equa-
tion.
RHOB = RHOB_QUAR × QUAR

+ RHOB_XWAT × XWAT (13)
+ RHOB_ILLI × ILLI
where:
RHOB_QUAR = density of quartz
RHOB_XWAT = density of flushed-zone water
RHOB_ILLI = density of illite
QUAR = volume of quartz
XWAT = volume of flushed-zone water
ILLI = volume of illite
When Clay = DRY, Equation (13) is used with the following substitution,
RHOB_ILLI WC = RHOB_ILLI DC × ( 1.0 – WCLP_ILLI )

(14)
+ RHOB_XBWA × WCLP_ILLI
where
WCLP_ILLI = wet clay porosity of illite
RHOB_XBWA = density of bound water
Inserting Equation (14) into Equation (13) for RHOB_ILLIWC yields
RHOB = RHOB_QUAR × QUAR + RHOB_XWAT × XWAT +

( RHOB_ILLI DC × ( 1 – WCLP_ILLI ) + RHOB_XBWA × WCLP_ILLI ) (15)
× ILLI WC
Most users set Clay = WET when running the ELANPlus program. An advan-
tage of setting Clay to Wet is that only one clay response parameter is needed
for each equation. (RHOB_ILLI is all that is needed when Clay = WET, but
RHOB_ILLI and RHOB_XBWA are required when Clay = DRY).
ELANPlus Theory 43
ToC
Index
General Response Equation
The simplest response equation is for linear measurements, such as the U Q
(volumetric photoelectric cross-section) tool. Equation (16) has the same
form as Equation (13). The difference is that it is for the U tool instead of the
RHOB tool and has been generalized to include XOIL and XGAS (flushed-
zone oil and gas) in the porosity analysis, plus all minerals with and without
bound water.
U = U_XWAT × XWAT + U_XGAS × XGAS

ns
∑
(16)
+ U_XOIL × XOIL + U_i × Vi
i=1
where:
ns = number of formation components that are solid
U_i = the response parameter for formation component i (if the
component is a clay, U_i is its wet clay response parameter)
Vi = the volume of component i (if the component is a clay
the Vi is its wet clay volume)
If Clay = WET, Equation (16) is used precisely as displayed. If Clay = DRY,
the general response equation is reformulated to look like Equation (15):
U = U_XWAT × XWAT + U_XGAS × XGAS

ns
+ U_XOIL × XOIL + ∑
U_i × Vi
i=1 (17)
nc
+ ∑ ( U_ j × ( 1 – WCLP_ j ) + U_XBWA × WCLP_ j ) × V j
j=1
where:
ns = number of solid formation components, excluding clay
U_i = the response parameter for component i
Vi = the volume of component i
nc = the number of clays in the formation
44 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
U_j = the dry clay response parameter for clay j
U_XBWA = the response parameter for bound water Q
Vj = the volume of wet clay for clay j
Gamma Ray (GR) Response Parameters

The general form of the linear response equation is used for many tools.
Although straightforward, in practice it can be confusing to those not familiar
with it. An example is the following gamma ray response equation.
nfc
GR = ∑ GR_i × Vi (18)
i=1
where:
GR = the gamma ray tool reading
GR_i = gamma ray response parameter for component i
For a sand-shale sequence, a commonly used equation for volume of clay
from the gamma ray is
GR – GR min
Volume of clay = ------------------------------------------- (19)
GR max – GR min
where GRmin and GRmax are picked from the logs in a clean sand and a good
shale, respectively. Compare this to the ELANPlus equation (assuming a
model that contains only quartz, a clay, flushed-zone water, and flushed-zone
oil):
GR = GR_QUAR × QUAR + GR_CLA1 × CLA1

(20)
+ GR_XWAT × XWAT + GR_XOIL × XOIL
Set GR_XWAT = GR_XOIL = 0, then solve for CLA1:
GR – GR_QUAR
CLA1 = ------------------------------------------ (21)
GR_CLA1
In a clean sand, the volume of quartz is 1.0 minus the effective porosity
(1 – φe) and the volume of clay is zero, thus
ELANPlus Theory 45
ToC
Index
GR – GR_QUAR × ( 1 – φ e )
CLA1 = -------------------------------------------------------------------- (22) Q
GR_CLA1
To get the same result as the conventional GR equation, one would set
GR min
GR_QUAR = ------------------ (22-1a)
1 – φe
and
GR_CLA1 = GR max – GR_QUAR (22-1b)
Note: The preceding equation assumes a similar porosity in the sands and the
shales. As an alternative, one could treat the fluids and clean sands as if they
had the same GR response and set
GR_QUAR = GR_XWAT = GR_XOIL = GRmin (23)
That could work better in areas where there are significant variations in poros-
ity. The fact that GR_XWAT and GR_XOIL are not equal to 0.0 is not intu-
itively obvious. However, that is what is assumed with the traditional pick of
GRmin from a clean sand, where it represents the GR response of a mixture of
quartz and fluids.
Picking consistent endpoints for the gamma ray can be difficult. There are no
default values for the GR tool. That is because the gamma ray signal comes
from many sources, only one of which is clay. Total GR (SGR for the NGS
Natural Gamma Ray Spectrometry tool) comprises a linear combination of
thorium, potassium, and uranium measurements:
SGR = 3.6 WWTH + 18.3 WWK + 9.5 WWU (24)
In contrast to a total GR, there are defaults for thorium and potassium mea-
surements. Uranium, though, is a very mobile, water-soluble trace element
whose presence cannot be predicted. If all radioactive minerals present are
being solved for, the following values can be used. (CGR represents gamma
ray data with uranium signal removed.) See Table 12 for more information.
46 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Table 12 Q
Values to Use when All Radioactive Minerals Present in Formation
Are Included in Model
Thorium Potassium CGR

Quartz 0.0 0.0 0.0
Illite 18.0 4.0 138.0
Kaolinite 27.0 0.0 97.0
Smectite 15.0 0.5 63.0
Potassium Feldspar 5.0 10.0 201.0
If a total GR measurement is being used, the values given will require some
boosting, depending on the amount of uranium and potassium present.
SP Response Parameters
The SP measurement is not directly usable. It must first be transformed into a
Qv_effective by two programs, SPBOUNDARY and SPQV. (QVSP_N is the
ELANPlus input curve name for Qv_effective.)
The SPQV program requires a value for Qv_shale (or Static SP, SSP), the salin-
ity of filtrate and formation waters, and SP data. The SP used by these pro-
grams must have its baseline set to 0.0.
The transform of SP to Qv_effective is an implementation of the work of
L.J.M. Smits. The work describes the SP deflection as a function of the con-
trast between the wellbore and the formation salinities, and as a function of
the contrast between the electrical charges of the sands and the surrounding
shales.
Qv
Q v_effective = ----------- (24-1a)
S xot
Equation (24-1a) has been implemented as
Qv
Q v_effective = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (24-1b)
S xot + QV_HYD_FAC ( 1 – S xot )
ELANPlus Theory 47
ToC
Index
where:
Sxot = total water saturation in the flushed zone Q
QV_HYD_FAC = the hydrocarbon correction factor for Qv

QV_HYD_FAC is added to the original equation to allow you to adjust the
magnitude of hydrocarbon correction. The ELANPlus default is full hydro-
carbon correction: QV_HYD_FAC = 0. For no hydrocarbon correction, set
QV_HYD_FAC = 1.0.
The QVSP_N response equation used is
 nc nxw nxh 
QVSP_N 
 ∑ Vi × WCLP_i + ∑
V j + QV_HYD_FAC Vk
 ∑
i = 1 j=1 k=1 
(25)
nc
= ∑ Vi ( 1 – WCLP_i ) ( CEC_i ) ( ARHOB_i )
i=1
where:
nxw = number of flushed-zone fluids that have a water attribute
Vj = the volume of water component j
nxh = number of flushed-zone fluids that have a hydrocarbon
attribute
Vk = the volume of hydrocarbon component k
CEC_i = cation exchange capacity of clay component i
ARHOB_i = actual density of clay component i
The parameters that control the effect of the SP on the final answer are
Qv_shale (or SSP), QV_HYD_FAC, and QVSP_UNC (SP uncertainty).
Qv_shale and SSP are in the preprocessing programs, and QV_HYD_FAC and
QVSP_UNC are within the program.
The Qv_shale (or SSP) parameter must be set correctly before the ELANPlus
program is run, or you will have to exit the program to make the appropriate
corrections.
Calculating QVSP_UNC requires you to know that the processing of the
ELANPlus program internally multiplies QVSP_N by porosity.
48 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
For more information, see the Conductivity, SP section in Chapter5, Uncer-
tainties.
Q
We recommend that you use the value of Qv_shale, rather than SSP, as the
input into SPQV. It is easier to set the SP baseline to 0.0 and estimate Qv_shale
than it is to estimate SSP, especially when hydrocarbons are present.
One way to estimate the value of Qv_shale is as follows:
1 Use Figure 6 (Qv_shale = 1) and Figure 7 (Qv_shale = 4).
170
Ec (mV) Smits SP Chart
160
150
QvShale = 1
140 (meq/cm3)
130
120
110
100
Qv
90 (meq/cm3)
80
0.0
70
.04
60
SP 0.1
50
0.2
40
0.3
30
0.5
20
0.7
10
0 1.0
0.6 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200
Salinity (ppk)
Figure 6 Chart showing Qv shale = 1
ELANPlus Theory 49
ToC
Index
170
Ec (mV) Smits SP Chart
160
Q
150
QvShale = 4
140 Qv (meq/cm3)
(meq/cm3)
130
120
0.0
110
.04
100 0.1
90
0.2
80 0.3
70
0.5
60
0.7
50
1.0
40
1.5
30
2.0
20
10
4.0
0
0.6 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200
Salinity (ppk)
Figure 7 Chart showing Qv shale = 4
2 Enter the x-axis with the salinity of the mud filtrate and the salinity of con-
nate water.
3 Move each entry up to the line representing Qv_shale = 0,.
4 Move left to the y-axis (as in the example in Figure 6).
5The difference is what the SP (-44 mV on Figure 6) should read in a clean
water zone. The chart that most closely fits the data approximates Qv_shale.
The SPQV program handles Qv_shale values continuously from 0.25 to 10.
A normal range of Qv_shale is from 1 to 4. A value of 1, or even lower, is com-
mon in high-porosity rocks of the Gulf of Mexico. In older, more consolidated
rocks, a value of 4 will be more normal.
Another approach to approximating Qv_shale is the following (Figure 7):
1 Run the ELANPlus program with QVSP_N in a model that is not part of
the final answer. The program will create a reconstructed QVSP_N from
the other tools.
2 Note the average value in shales. Exit the ELANPlus program.
3 Put the reconstructed QVSP_N into and run the SPQV program.
4 Use the QVSP_N output from SPQV in the ELANPlus program.
50 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Either of those techniques may seem overly complex, but it is very important
to have the SP information balanced with the other tools used in the final solu- Q
tion. If it is not balanced, the ELANPlus processing will try to justify the
Qv_effective input by altering one or more of the answer volumes.
An example of that is when the Qv_effective from the SP is much higher than
the Qv indicated by the other tools. If QV_HYD_FAC is anything but 1, the
ELANPlus processing will increase the volume of hydrocarbons in the
flushed zone in an attempt to correct the imbalance between the two sources
of Qv. That will in turn increase the volume of hydrocarbons in the deep zone
(decreased Sw), even when the deep conductivity tool computes 100% water.
Generally, the deep and shallow zones are linked mathematically by a Con-
stant Tool, which amplifies the problem (for example, XOIL = 0.2 UOIL ,
or in deep zone terms, UOIL = 5 XOIL ). Because of that, we recommend
that new users start with QV_HYD_FAC = 1 (no hydrocarbon correction).
Sonic Response Parameters

Because the sonic tool responds not only to the various mineral and fluid vol-
umes but also to the structure and texture of the rock, it less than ideal as a
porosity tool. Some uses for the sonic are
Mineral identification
Clay from dolomite differentiation
Porosity backup in bad hole
Hydrocarbon type identification
The response equations available for the sonic tool deal with either slowness
(Wyllie equation, DT input curve) or velocity (Hunt-Raymer-Gardner equa-
tion, VELC input curve). Neither currently supports the presence of gas,
because there is no industry-accepted way to handle it.
The concept of compaction correction in the Wyllie equation is not directly
supported. It must be entered by altering the fluid endpoint.
Shear velocities or slownesses also are not explicitly handled. Shear data
must be entered into equations used for compressional data, with appropriate
parameter changes.
Slowness
The slowness equation is simply the Wyllie Time Average equation.
ELANPlus Theory 51
ToC
Index
DT – DT matrix
φ sonic = ----------------------------------------------------- (26) Q
DT fluid – DT matrix
For a sand-water mixture this equation can be expressed in the form of a stan-
dard ELANPlus linear equation as
DT = DT_XWAT × XWAT + DT_QUAR × QUAR (27)
or more generally
nfc
DT = ∑ DT_i × Vi (28)
i=1
where:
DT = the compressional slowness measurement
DT_XWAT = the compressional slowness of flushed-zone water
DT_QUAR = the compressional slowness of quartz
DT_i = compressional slowness of component i
To include a compaction correction (CP), replace the fluid term (DT_XWAT)
with DT_XWAT_CP_corrected, as shown for a single mineral in
Equation (29).
DT_XWAT _CP_corrected = DT_XWAT × CP + DT_QUAR ( 1 – CP ) (29)
Velocity
The velocity expression can be derived from the simplified Hunt-Raymer-
Gardner equation for sonic porosity:
52 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
DT – DT matrix
φ sonic = 0.625 ---------------------------------------
 (29-1a)
 DT  Q
1 ⁄ VELC – 1 ⁄ VELC matrix

⇒ 1.6φ = --------------------------------------------------------------------- (29-1b)
1 ⁄ VELC
⇒ 1.6 × VELC matrix × φ = VELC matrix – VELC (29-1c)
⇒ VELC = VELC matrix × ( 1 – φ ) – 0.6VELC matrix × φ (29-1d)
⇒ VELC = VELC matrix × ( 1 – φ ) + SONIC_POR_FAC × φ (29-1e)
When expressed as a general ELANPlus equation, the velocity equation looks

like
VELC = SONIC_POR_FAC × ( XWAT + XGAS + XOIL + XIWA + XSFL )

ns
∑
(30)
+ VELC_i × Vi
i=1
where:
VELC = the compressional velocity measurement
SONIC_POR_FAC = sonic porosity factor
VELC_i = compressional velocity of component i
Note that Equation (30) is different from the standard ELANPlus expression.
The minerals are a simple sum of the volumes times the endpoints. However,
the fluids are multiplied by a coefficient called the sonic porosity factor,
SONIC_POR_FAC.
Figure 8 is a plot of DT versus porosity for dolomite, calcite, and quartz. It
compares the simplified Hunt-Raymer-Gardner sonic transform to the
ELANPlus response equation.The response parameters used to generate the
Figure 8 plot were assigned the following values:
VELC_DOLO = 21,700 ft/sec
VELC_CALC = 19,800 ft/sec
VELC_QUAR = 18,000 ft/sec
ELANPlus Theory 53
ToC
Index
SONIC_POR_FAC = –11.88
Q
30
DOL
CLC
20
QUA
PHIT
10
0
40 60 80 100
DT
ELAN Response Equation
Simplified Hunt-Raymer-Gardner
nm
1000 = VELC = SPORF x ( VXWA + VXGA + VXOI ) + Σ VELCA.i x V. i
DT i =1
Figure 8 DT versus porosity plotted for dolomite, calcite, and quartz.
In Figure 8 the solid curves represent the simplified Hunt-Raymer-Gardner

transform. The dotted curves represent the ELANPlus response equation.
Although the two transforms are similar, a different SONIC_POR_FAC is
needed for each matrix to mimic the Hunt-Raymer-Gardner equation exactly.
In this example, the value of SONIC_POR_FAC was chosen for calcite.
A crossplot of VELC versus total porosity (PHIT) is one technique for deter-
mining a value for the compressional velocity of the matrix and the appropri-
ate SONIC_POR_FAC. Figure 9 is a crossplot of VELC versus PHIT in a
limestone reservoir.
54 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
12
Q
14
16
VELC
18
20
22
0 5 10 15 20 25
PHIT
Figure 9 Crossplot of VELC versus total porosity (PHIT).
A line through the points (PHIT, VELC) = (0.0, 19.54) and (25.0, 13.1) was
selected to represent the best fit of the data. SONIC_POR_FAC was com-
puted as follows:
VELC = SONIC_POR_FAC × φ + VELC_CALC × ( 1 – φ ) (30-1a)
⇒ VELC = ( SONIC_POR_FAC – VELC_CALC ) × φ + VELC_CALC (30-1b)
The curve is of the form y = slope × x + intercept. Evaluating it for the given
data yields
intercept = VELC_CALC = 19.54 (thousand) ft/sec
slope = (SONIC_POR_FAC – VELC_CALC)
∆y 13.17 – 19.54
= ------ = --------------------------------- = – 25.48
∆x 0.25 – 0.0
⇒ SONIC_POR_FAC = slope + VELC_CALC = –5.94

Do not be surprised to find SONIC_POR_FAC for calcite deviating from the
default value of – 11.88 . The default was selected for intergranular porosity.
The formation crossplotted in Figure 9 contained vugular porosity.
VELC_CALC, on the other hand, was found to be quite close to the default
value of 19,800 ft/sec. Observe that perfect agreement between porosity and
velocity is nonexistent because of variations in texture (secondary porosity)
and trace minerals.
ELANPlus Theory 55
ToC
Index
That example was for one mineral. Multiple-mineral, or complex-lithology,
parameter determination using a crossplot is awkward. It is difficult to deter- Q
mine whether changes in velocity should be attributed to porosity or lithol-
ogy. A companion program, CALPAR (not yet released), solves for sonic
parameter values in complex lithology.
Sonic response parameters vary. Those calibrated in one area or zone may not
apply elsewhere. Table 13 shows how sonic velocities observed in the high-
porosity, soft rocks of Gulf of Mexico (GOM) differ from the default com-
pressional velocities, which are based on hard rock data. The shear parame-
ters are included as a starting point for the user; the program does not, at this
time, explicitly recognize a shear velocity as an input.
Table 13
Typical Gulf of Mexico Sonic Velocities
Default
ELANPlus GOM
Parameter Compressional Compressional GOM Shear
SONIC_POR_FAC –11.8 –9 –5.5
VELC_QUAR 18.0 18 7.2
VELC_ILLI 10.0 8 4.3
VELC_KAOL 12.5 10 5.1
VELC_MONT 9.1 7 3.8
Neutron Response Parameters

Unlike the sonic, the nonlinear neutron is fairly well understood, although
complex. Understanding of the neutron response has improved with time.
The traditional neutron response was calibrated to field data and showed a
larger than expected matrix effect in dolomite. That lead to the classic curved
dolomite line shown in Schlumberger chart books from 1972 to 1986. The
response was encoded in the environmental correction programs and is still
output on field logs as the curve named NPHI.
The apparent dolomite effect was later understood to be related to formation
salinity. The neutron was recharacterized, and a new response and environ-
mental corrections were introduced in 1986 in SPE paper 15540, “Improved
Environmental Corrections for Compensated Neutron Logs,” by Gilchrist,
et al.
56 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
The field output is named TNPH (or NPOR if alpha processed). These new
response and environmental corrections also are encoded in the current envi- Q
ronmental correction program although the output is still called NPHI.
Note: The ELANPlus logic expects all neutron input to be in limestone units.
Figure 10 shows the response for the old and new neutron porosity transforms
at a salinity of 50 ppk.
SS
30 SS
30 LS
LS
DOL
DOL
20
20
PHIT
PHIT
10
10
0
0
–5 0 5 10 15 20 25
–5 0 5 10 15 20 25
NPHI.LIM
NPHI.LIM
TNPH Transform ( 50 ppk )
TNPH
NPHI Transform ( 50 ppk )
Transform
NPHI Transform
Figure 10 NPHI and TNPH porosity transforms at 50 ppk
In the ELANPlus processing there are linear and nonlinear response equa-
tions for the neutron. The linear neutron equation is referred to as NPHI in the
Session Editor and uses data from the curve selected for NPHI in the Curve
Editor. That can be either the old or new neutron (NPHI or TNPH) with the
endpoints picked appropriately.
The nonlinear equation is called NPHU and uses data bound to NPHU. It
requires a curve from an environmental correction program, to which all cor-
rections except salinity have been applied. Salinity corrections are part of the
final solution.
Linear NPHI
The ELANPlus linear approximation of the nonlinear neutron response equa-
tion is adequate for most applications. The approximation is accomplished by
adjusting the mineral endpoints NPHI_DOLO and NPHI_QUAR. Such an
approximation is valid only over a specific range of porosities and fluid satu-
rations.
ELANPlus Theory 57
ToC
Index
Computing Linear NPHI Mineral Endpoints
To compute NPHI_DOLO and NPHI_QUAR, use the following steps: Q
1 Observe the average true porosity range.

2 Enter the true porosity on the y-axis of Chart POR-13 of the Schlumberger
chart book.
3 Record the limestone porosity values on the x-axis assuming the matrix is
dolomite and sandstone.
4 Use these values together with the neutron response equation to solve for
NPHI_DOLO and NPHI_QUAR.
For example, assume that the average porosity in a dolomite reservoir is 8 p.u.
The chart book indicates the limestone neutron porosity is 15.6 p.u.
Note: Do not use the difference between the limestone neutron porosity and
the true porosity for NPHI_DOLO.
The calculations needed are
NPHI = NPHI_DOLO × DOLO + NPHI_XWAT × XWAT (30-2a)
⇒ φ N _LS = NPHI_DOLO × ( 1 – φ ) + NPHI_XWAT × φ (30-2b)
φ N _LS – φ
⇒ NPHI_DOLO = ----------------------
- (30-2c)
1.0 – φ
0.156 – 0.08
⇒ NPHI_DOLO = ------------------------------ ≈ 0.083 (30-2d)
1.0 – 0.08
where φ N _LS = neutron porosity, expressed in limestone units.
The previous example is valid only in water and oil zones (NPHI_XWAT
= NPHI_XOIL = 1.00). In gas zones there must be an additional term on the
right-hand side of the equation, NPHI_XGAS. It lumps together the neutron
value for gas and the excavation correction.
For more information see the Nonlinear Neutron Response Parameters sec-
tion in Chapter 3, Response Equations.
You must solve the nonlinear excavation equation to determine a value for
NPHI_XGAS, or use the Parameter Calculator (selected from the Options
menu in the Session Manager), which requires as input the approximate
porosity and water saturation as seen by the neutron.
58 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Figure 11 is a graph of the NPHI_QUAR and NPHI_DOLO as a function of
porosity. The transforms for NPHI and TNPH were used to generate it. Note Q
that except for NPHI_DOLO at low porosities, the response parameters
change slowly as a function of porosity.
Neutron Response Parameter

10
NPHIA.DOL
5
NPHIA.QUA
–5
–10
0 5 10 15 20 25
PHIT
TNPH Transform (PPK = 50)
NPHI Transform
Figure 11 Neutron quartz and dolomite parameters as a function of

porosity.
The neutron matrix value calculation is also encoded in the Parameter Calcu-
lator. Having it there allows appropriate parameters for the neutron to be
determined with either transform.
Crossplot Porosity as Total Porosity
There are two exceptions to not putting the same information into a model
twice in different forms. They are both uses of crossplot porosity as total
porosity (PHIT) in carbonates.
In reservoirs that contain dolomite, the addition of PHIT can be very helpful.
Crossplot porosity (PXND) in dolomite is a nonlinear function of the density-
neutron tools.
Binding PHIT to the PXND curve enables the ELANPlus program to use
PXND as an apparent-PHIT tool and helps the ELANPlus processing over-
come the nonlinearity of the neutron tool by biasing the final answer with a
crossplot approximation of total porosity.
With PXND as an input, expect the Standard Deviation of Reconstruction,
SDR, to increase slightly in dolomites when there are large porosity varia-
ELANPlus Theory 59
ToC
Index
tions. PHIT is also a required input to the Sonic Clay Volume predefined con-
straint, which is designed to assist interpretation in radioactive dolomites. Q
In sand-shale reservoirs PHIT is not recommended, because it adds little to
the solution. If the problem is underdetermined, adding the PHIT equation
will not help.
For sandstones, PHIT is a near-linear combination of density and neutron data
and, especially in higher porosity, NPHI_QUAR varies little. Instead, select
a value for NPHI_QUAR that is representative of the average porosity and
use the linear neutron response equation.
Note: Set the PHIT response parameter for a mineral equal to a value that the
input PHIT data would read in the pure mineral.
Applying that to quartz, calcite, and dolomite yields PHIT_QUAR = 0.0,
PHIT_CALC = 0.0 and PHIT_DOLO = 0.0 when using density/neutron
crossplot porosity.
Be careful with clays and minerals that exhibit false crossplot porosity.
Assume that illite (ILLI) is used in a Solve process, that RHOB_ILLI has a
value of 2.50 g/cm3, and NPHI_ILLI has a value of 36 p.u. Crossplot porosity
for 2.50 g/cm3 and 36 p.u. is 24 p.u., so PHIT_ILLI should be set to 24 p.u.
(assuming Clay = WET).
It is important to realize that PHIT_ILLI has nothing to do with the
WCLP_ILLI parameter. PHIT_ILLI is used solely in the PHIT response
equation. WCLP_ILLI is used to relate the volume of bound water to the vol-
ume of dry clay.
Crossplot porosity and the volume of bound water associated with clay are
totally different entities. One comes from a transform built to give accurate
porosity when the reservoir is composed of quartz, calcite, and dolomite. The
other is related to the ratio of the surface area to the density of the clay.
PXND reads 0 in most minerals. However, there are some minerals where it
has a nonzero value. Salt (26 p.u.) and gypsum (36 p.u.) are common exam-
ples.
Set PHIT_HALI = 0.26 or 26.0 p.u. and PHIT_GYPS = 0.36 or 36.0p.u. when
PXND is used as the input curve for the PHIT equation. The Parameter Cal-
culator provides the capability of computing any required crossplot porosities
when the density and neutron values of a mineral are known.
There is one more thing to watch out for if PXND is used as the PHIT tool:
If the density or neutron log gives an erroneous reading, setting the
60 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
uncertainty for RHOB (RHOB_UNC) or for the neutron (NPHI_UNC)
to a high value is not enough. You must also increase PHIT_UNC. Q
Noninear Neutron Response Parameters

lThe nonlinear neutron tool input curve is NPHU. The ELANPlus program
assumes that all environmental corrections already have been applied to
NPHU except for formation salinity, which is computed during the simulta-
neous solution.
Applying the salinity correction during optimization is more rigorous and
more correct than attempting to apply the salinity correction in an environ-
mental correction program before ELANPlus processing. Without a complete
solution of the volumes of formation water, filtrate, gas, and oil the salinity
correction can only be an approximation.
An even better way to apply the salinity correction is to use a measured sigma,
because sigma is a direct measurement of the salinity and absorber effects that
perturb the neutron. The only problem is that a usable sigma is seldom avail-
able.
The sigma measurement must be made at the same time the neutron log is
recorded. If it is run at a different time, the fluid volumes will have changed
and it will no longer reflect the effects as seen by the neutron log. The sigma
correction is applied before ELANPlus processing.
If the sigma correction is applied, then salinity parameters in the
ELANPlus program must be set to 0 to eliminate a double correction.
The nonlinear neutron response equation is given by the following equation:
φ N = φ N _matrix × V matrix + φ N _ fluid × V fluid + ∆φ N _ex (31)
where:
φ N = the total neutron response
φ N _matrix × V matrix = the matrix response
φ N _ fluid × V fluid = the fluid response
∆φ N _ex = the excavation effect
The matrix response (salinity and porosity dependent) is computed within the
ELANPlus program by the response equations as a function of effective salin-
ELANPlus Theory 61
ToC
Index
ity and fluid volumes. Although the matrix response, fluid response, and
excavation effect will be reviewed in detail in the following sections, a few Q
general comments are in order. The basic assumptions are
1 For quartz, calcite, and dolomite the apparent matrix point, φ N _matrix ,
is not constant, but rather a function of the volume of pore fluids,
V fluid , and apparent fluid salinity, PPKfluid.
2 The response parameter for hydrocarbons can be modeled as a function of

its hydrogen index, HIhc. The hydrogen index of a hydrocarbon can be
computed as a function of the hydrogen density, as discussed in Schlum-
berger Interpretation Principles. For a hydrocarbon with a density of ρhc
and a chemical formula of n(CHX), the hydrogen index is
9X
HI hc = ---------------- ρ hc (32)
12 + X
The hydrogen index value can be computed in the hydrocarbon section of the
Parameter Calculator and should be entered into the appropriate response
parameter (such as NPHU_XGAS or NPHU_UOIL). The response parameter
for all waters should be set to 100 p.u. The reduction in hydrogen index for
water when salinity increases are taken into account by using the matrix term.
Following is a subset of the response parameters required for the nonlinear
neutron equation:
NPHU_QUAR,
NPHU_CALC,
NPHU_DOLO,
NPHU_ANHY,
NPHU_ILLI,
.
.
.
NPHU_XOIL SALIN_XOIL,
NPHU_XWAT SALIN_XWAT,
NPHU_UOIL SALIN_UOIL,
NPHU_UWAT SALIN_UWAT,
NPHU_ISOL SALIN_ISOL,
NPHU_IFAC,
EXC_FAC.
62 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Each mineral volume has an associated response parameter and default value.
In general, you should not modify the response parameter for quartz, calcite, Q
dolomite, or any water.
Also, each fluid term has an associated salinity parameter, SALIN_xxxx (in
units of ppk), that must be entered. The value for SALIN_xxxx can be sup-
plied directly by the user or computed by the program from an associated
parameter.
For example, if the program finds that SALIN_UWAT is Absent, it will
attempt to compute a salinity from CUDC_UWAT. If CUDC_UWAT is also
Absent, the program will try to compute salinity from the formation water
resistivity RW.
For more detail on how the program determines salinity values, see the sec-
tion on Rules for Initialization of Salinity-Dependent Parameters.
The invasion factor, NPHU_IFAC, represents the percentage that the neutron
response is influenced by the flushed zone. It has a range of 0 to 1. A value of
1.0 would indicate that the neutron tool is affected only by the flushed zone.
A value of 0.0 would indicate influence from only the undisturbed zone. If
both flushed and undisturbed fluids are present in a model, a value of 0.4
would be typical.
The parameter EXC_FAC allows you to adjust the magnitude of the theoret-
ical excavation effect. It has a default value of 1.
For more information see The Neutron Excavation Term section, later in this
chapter.
The Neutron Fluid Term
The fluid response is defined by the following equation:
nxf
φ N _ fluid × V fluid = NPHU_IFAC × ∑ NPHU_i × Vi
i=1
nuf (33)
+ ( 1 – NPHU_IFAC ) × ∑
NPHU_ j × V j
j=1
+ NPHU_ISOL × ISOL + NPHU_PARA × PARA
where:
ELANPlus Theory 63
ToC
Index
NPHU_i = nonlinear neutron response parameter for flushed-zone
fluid i Q
Vi = volume of flushed-zone fluid i
NPHU_j = nonlinear neutron response parameter for undisturbed
zone fluid j
Vj = volume of undisturbed-zone fluid j
NPHU_ISOL = nonlinear neutron response parameter for isolated
porosity
ISOL = volume of isolated porosity
NPHU_PARA = nonlinear neutron response parameter for parallel
porosity
PARA = volume of parallel porosity
If the fluid is water, its response parameter should be set to equal 100 p.u. (the
default value). The response parameter for hydrocarbons should simply be set
to the hydrogen index computed in the Parameter Calculator.
The invasion factor, NPHU_IFAC, is used to define the percentage of the
flushed-zone and undisturbed-zone fluids influencing the neutron response.
Because isolated and parallel porosity (ISOL and PARA) are viewed as being
the same in the flushed and undisturbed zones, the invasion factor has no
influence over them.
The Neutron Excavation Term
For a simple mixture of hydrocarbons and water, Schlumberger Log Interpre-
tation Volume I—Principles approximates the excavation effect as
∆φ N _ex = 2K ( HIw V w + HI hc V hc ) [ ( 1 – HI w )V w + ( 1 – HI hc )V hc ] (34)
where:
K = a constant defined by the user
HI w = hydrogen index of water
V w = volume of water
HI hc = hydrogen index of hydrocarbon
V hc = volume of hydrocarbon
64 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
It follows that the general case of fluid mixtures is handled as
Q
nf nf
∆φ N _ex = 2K ∑ HIi Vi × ∑ ( 1 – HIi )Vi (35)
i=1 i=1
where:
nf = number of fluids, both water and hydrocarbon
HI i = hydrogen index of fluid i
V i = volume of fluid i
In the ELANPlus program the excavation effect is implemented as
∆φ N _ex ≡ 2Kφ N _ fluid V fluid ( V fluid – φ N _ fluid V fluid ) (36)
where φ
N _ fluid V fluid is the fluid term discussed earlier and
nxf
V fluid ≡ NPHU_IFAC × ∑ Vi
i=1
(37)
nuf
+ ( 1 – NPHU_IFAC ) × ∑
V j + ISOL + PARA.
j=1
The response parameter for the constant term, K, is called EXC_FAC. It has
a default value of 1.
The Neutron Matrix Term
The matrix response is defined by the following equation:
φ N _matrix V matrix = ∑ φ N _matrix V j

j
j = QUAR, CALC, DOLO
(38)
ns, ns ≠ QUAR, CALC, DOLO
+ ∑ φ N _matrix V i
i
i=1
ELANPlus Theory 65
ToC
In general, φ
Index
N _matrix i values are modeled as constants for all minerals,
and they have the value of the response parameter NPHU_i. However, for Q
quartz, calcite, and dolomite, φ

N _matrix i is a function of porosity and
salinity.
The defining equation for φ

N _matrix i is
 ∆φ  (V , PPK fluid )
 N _matrix j fluid
φ N _matrix ( V fluid, PPK fluid ) = NPHU_ j + ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (39)
j 1 – V fluid
The NPHU_j term is a constant and generally should not be modified by the
user.
The ∆φ
N _matrix j term is a function of porosity and salinity.
It is selected to be consistent with TNPH data and salinity correction.
The matrix response for quartz, calcite, and dolomite is a function of the fluid
volumes and excavation effect; that is why the neutron response equation is
nonlinear.
Recommendations for Using Neutron Data in ELANPlus Processing

TNPH is the preferred transform to use for the neutron equation (either linear
or nonlinear). Using it is no problem with new logs. For older logs, Schlum-
berger recommends converting the traditional NPHI curve as input to TNPH.
The nonlinear neutron (NPHU) is most correct for gas or for carbonates with
salt mud, or in large porosity variations. When using the nonlinear neutron,
keep the following points in mind:
Do not modify the default values for NPHU_QUAR, NPHU_CALC or
NPHU_DOLO (2.05, 0.0, and 0.63 p.u., respectively). The actual matrix
response is computed as porosity, and salinity varies.
All water response parameters should be set to 100.0 p.u. Changes resulting
from salinity are incorporated in the matrix terms.
The oil and gas values for NPHU can be computed in the Parameter Calcula-
tor. They differ from the linear response parameters because the linear param-
eters have the excavation effect built in. The parameter EXC_FAC should
normally be left at 1.0
66 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
If a measured sigma is available, use it to make a formation salinity correction
before ELANPlus processing and bind the resulting NPOR_CRC to the Q
NPHU equation.
Note: With sigma-corrected data, be sure to set all the SALIN_xxxx param-
eters to 0 when running the ELANPlus program.
Recommendations for APS Interpretation

Following are recommendations for APS interpretation.
Channels
The relevant output channels available from both the Maxis and PREAPS are
shown in Table 14.
Table 14
Available Maxis and PREAPS Output Channels
Channel
Description
Low Resolution High Resolution
APLC HALC APS Near/Array Corrected Limestone Porosity

ENPI HNPI APS Near/Array Corrected Limestone Porosity except for
Formation Salinity (Linear)
Do not use APLC or HALC in interpretation. The Near/Array porosity is an

epithermal measurement which responds almost linearly with hydrogen
index. In salt water the hydrogen index is reduced by the volume fraction of
salt resulting in a number less than one. APLC is equal to the measured poros-
ity divided by the hydrogen index of the salt water computed from the logging
engineer’s input parameter of FSAL, formation salinity.
The net result is that in a 20 pu salt saturated limestone formation the mea-
sured porosity reads 18 pu but APLC is boosted to read 20 pu. The problem
with this approach is that in a 18 pu limestone and oil formation APLC will
be boosted to 20 pu when in fact no boosting should occur. In shales, APLC
is also incorrectly boosted.
For this reason one should use either the ENPI or HNPI channel in interpre-
tation. It is identical to APLC/HALC but with no formation salinity boosting.
Response Equation
The response equation is identical to the linear neutron equation, NPHI.
ELANPlus Theory 67
ToC
Index
# Minerals # x fluids
ENPI = ∑ ENPI_m × V m + ENPI_IFAC × ∑ ENPI_x × V x (40) Q
m x
# u fluids
+ ( 1 – ENPI_IFAC ) × ∑ ENPI_u × V u
u
Matrix End Points
Parameters for the clean matrices quartz and dolomite may be computed from
the Neutron Matrix Computation of the ELANPlus Calculator. Simply enter
the porosity and salinity and the matrix end points are computed.
Water End Points
Typically one simply enters the parameters RMF, MST, RW and RWT and the
flushed and undisturbed zone water parameters are computed automatically.
If at any time one wishes to change the estimate of mud filtrate or formation
water salinity, use the X-Water or U-Water Parameters computation of the
ELANPlus Calculator. The corresponding ENPI parameters are computed.
Light Hydrocarbon End Points
In order to determine the correct gas parameters use the Hydrocarbon Param-
eters computation of the ELANPlus Calculator and enter the density and
either the weight percent of hydrogen in the gas or the number of hydrogen
molecules associated with each carbon atom. For example, the gas methane
has a density of 0.1 gm/cc at 150 F and 2000 psi and has 4 atoms of hydrogen
for each carbon atom. This results in a gas parameter value of 22.5 pu.
Mineral End Points
Monte Carlo computations were performed to develop an algorithm which
related the density and chemical composition of compounds to the ENPI
response. The algorithm was used to compute the clay end points.
Table 15 shows the mineral end points for clays and other minerals. Note the
large positive value of 20.0 pu for salt.
68 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Table 15 Q
Mineral End Points
Mineral ENPI Mineral ENPI

HALI 0.200 BIOT 0.086
ANHY 0.020 GLAU 0.245
GYPS 0.600 ILLI 0.254
PYRI 0.165 KAOL 0.430
SIDE 0.028 CHLO 0.410
MUSC 0.112 MONT 0.700
Constant Tools
Constant Tools provide a way to add more information to a model. Unlike
most tools within the ELANPlus application, they do not represent a curve
bound to data. They are a means of adding local knowledge to the model
through equations.
The equation for a Constant Tool is in the standard form for the ELANPlus
program:
nfc
CTn = ∑ CTn_i × Vi (41)
i=1
where:
n = number of the Constant Tool (currently CT1 through CT6)
CTn_i = response parameter for Constant Tool n and formation
component i
As with all other tools the user must supply an uncertainty ( CTn_UNC). The
units used in CTn_xxxx determine the units for CTn_UNC.
Although the units used for constant tools are arbitrary, it is easiest to think
of them as porosity units, especially when setting the uncertainty. If, for
example, the CTn_xxxx parameters have values like 20 and -100, then
ELANPlus Theory 69
ToC
Index
CTn_UNC would have a value like 1.5. Similarly, if CTn_xxxx parameters
had values of 0.20 and -1.00, then CTn_UNC would be on the order of 0.015. Q
Unlike other tools, the value of the Constant Tool is supplied as a parameter
(for example, CT1 = 0), rather than a data-driven curve. Using Constant Tools
is best illustrated by the following examples, where spectral gamma ray data
(from the NGS tool) are available on one well but not on another. The model
used for the well with NGS tool data is summarized in Table 16.
Table 16
Model Using Data from NGS Tool
Model QUAR ORTH ILLI XWAT XOIL

Tools RHOB NPHI WWK WWTH CXDC ∑Volumes
On the well without NGS tool data, the thorium (WWTH) and potassium
(WWK) information must be replaced by external knowledge in order to
solve for both illite and orthoclase. One way of handling the problem is to
replace QUAR and ORTH with SAND to reflect a combination of quartz and
orthoclase (so GR_SAND would be higher for this well than GR_QUAR for
the previous one).
An alternate approach is to use a Constant Tool. Assume that the orthoclase-
to-quartz ratio of the first well is about 20%, and the geology of the two wells
is similar. That knowledge can be entered into the ELANPlus program by
means of a Constant Tool:
If
QUAR/ORTH = 20%
then
QUAR = 0.20 * ORTH
and
0 = QUAR – 0.20 * ORTH
or
0 = 100*QUAR – 20*ORTH
That is of the form
CT1 = CT1_QUAR × QUAR + CT1_ORTH × ORTH (42)
70 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
The new model would be as shown in Table 17.
Q
Table 17
Model Using Constant Tool and GR in Place of NGS
Model QUAR ORTH ILLI XWAT XOIL

Tools RHOB NPHI CT1 GR CXDC ∑Volumes
In this example, potassium was replaced by a Constant Tool, and thorium was
replaced by the total GR. If a fairly constant value of uranium was observed
in the first well through zones of interest, then the GR parameters must be
adjusted accordingly. If the uranium varies significantly in zones of interest,
this model will be in error unless the GR was zoned to reflect the variations.
The following parameters were used: CT1 = 0, CT1_QUAR = 100,
CT1_ORTH = -20, and CT1_UNC = 1.5. The interpretation model could be
made more sophisticated by determining an orthoclase ratio for the sands and
shales and defining different Constant Tools for each model.
Parameter Tables
The response equations previously described require fluid and rock or min-
eral parameters to function. There are no default values for rocks and for
many fluids.
Fluid parameters are dependent on hydrocarbon type and water salinity. The
Parameter Calculator should be used to determine the different fluid parame-
ters.
Rocks (sandstone, shales, carbonates, etc.) are composed of undefined mix-
tures of minerals. The classical interpretation techniques are based on rocks.
The analyst chooses the required parameters from some technique, such as
crossplots.
Minerals, on the other hand, are more well known and generally have defined
values. For example, there is very little debate over the composition of quartz.
Clay minerals, though, are an exception.
Tables 18, 19, and 20 provide most of the parameter values needed to run a
mineral-based interpretation, using the ELANPlus program. These are kept as
default parameter values in the ELANPlus data base.
Some default values in the data base were updated according to work that was
done in Schlumberger-Doll Research center in Ridgefield, Connecticut,
ELANPlus Theory 71
ToC
Index
U.S.A., and documented by M.M. Herron and A. Matteson in their paper,
“Elemental Composition and Nuclear Parameters of Some Common Sedi- Q
mentary Minerals,” Nuclear Geophysics, 1993, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp 383–406.
Two sets of values are listed for chlorite and illite in the following tables. The
second sets are retained from previous version of this document for poorly
ordered chlorite and well-ordered illite.
Table 18 gives the Dry Elemental Weight Percent of various minerals com-
monly found in sedimentary rocks.
Table 18
Common Sedimentary Minerals Dry Elemental Weight Percent
Si Ca Fe S K Al Mg Ti Gd Th U
weight % ppm
Quartz 46.75 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10
Calcite 0.20 39.40 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.00 0.50 0.00 1.40
Dolomite 0.60 21.60 0.30 0.10 0.00 0.10 12.30 0.00 1.30 0.10 0.90
Orthoclase 30.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 10.20 9.90 0.10 0.00 0.30 1.10 0.40
Albite 30.00 2.30 0.10 0.00 0.50 11.80 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00
Anhydrite 0.00 29.44 0.00 23.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50
Gypsum 0.00 23.28 0.00 18.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30
Pyrite 0.00 0.00 46.55 53.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Siderite 0.40 0.28 39.98 0.00 0.00 0.70 3.01 0.00 0.50 0.40 0.50
Muscovite 21.16 0.10 1.30 0.00 7.80 19.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
Biotite 18.20 0.20 13.56 0.00 7.20 6.03 7.72 1.48 0.20 1.50 0.70
Glauconite 23.09 0.49 15.52 0.00 5.94 4.35 2.10 0.09 4.20 3.00 5.40
Kaolinite 20.80 0.10 0.40 0.00 0.10 20.40 0.10 1.10 4.30 19.30 3.20
Chlorite 14.00 0.70 20.80 0.00 0.40 9.60 4.80 1.30 4.80 11.40 3.60
(poorly ordered) 13.30 0.20 16.28 0.00 0.03 9.58 12.10 0.00 - - -
Illite 24.80 0.50 4.80 0.00 4.50 10.50 1.20 0.50 3.70 12.30 4.80
(well-ordered) 24.40 0.36 3.90 0.00 5.50 14.20 1.69 0.30 - - -
Montmorillonite 26.40 1.40 2.00 0.00 0.66 9.10 2.20 0.10 7.80 26.00 7.10
The General Parameters listed in Table 19 are the most frequently used
parameters that are required by the ELANPlus program. Some were derived
from parameters listed in Table 18.
Note: In Table 19, U represents the Volumetric Photoelectric Factor (unlike
Table 18 and Table 20, where the U stands for Uranium).
72 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Except for Wet Clay Porosities WCLP, no default values are provided for
salinity-dependent parameters. Use the appropriate formation water salinity Q
or resistivity to compute those parameters with the Parameter Calculator.
Table 19
General Parameters
ARHOB RHOB WCLP NPHI ENPI U SIGM EATT TPL

g/cm3 g/cm3 p.u. p.u. p.u. c.u. dB/m ns/m
Quartz 2.65 2.65 0.0 -6.0 -8.0 5.0 4.7 0.0 7.2
Calcite 2.71 2.71 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.1 7.4 0.0 9.8
Dolomite 2.85 2.85 0.0 1.8 0.3 9.1 6.92 0.0 8.7
Halite 2.05 2.04 0.0 -3.0 20.0 9.7 750 0.0 8.2
Orthoclase 2.57 2.57 0.0 -1.0 -1.0 8.7 15.3 0.0 7.6
Albite 2.62 2.60 0.0 -1.0 -1.0 5.6 11.4 0.0 7.6
Anhydrite 2.96 2.98 0.0 -2.0 5.6 14.95 11.1 0.0 8.4
Gypsum 2.32 2.35 0.0 54.0 58.0 9.46 20.0 0.0 6.8
Pyrite 5.00 4.99 0.0 0.8 16.5 82.06 90.0 - -
Siderite 3.93 3.88 0.0 18.4 11.1 71.6 54.2 0.0 8.9
Muscovite 2.86 2.85 0.0 24.0 10.7 11.5 95.3 0.0 8.9
Biotite 3.09 3.04 0.0 13.4 8.6 21.6 54.1 0.0 7.8
Glauconite 2.96 2.65 15.6* 41.0 36.0 16.5 90.0 * 12.0
Kaolinite 2.63 2.55 5.8* 50.7 49.0 5.1 21.9 * 11.0
Chlorite 3.01 2.81 10.1* 58.3 71.0 21.7 43.7 * 11.0
(poorly ordered) 2.82 2.63 11.1* 59.6 49.6 14.96 34.0 * 11.0
Illite 2.79 2.61 10.4* 35.2 28.0 9.9 41.0 * 14.0
(well-ordered) 2.78 2.49 15.6* 47.9 37.9 7.55 66.0 † * 14.0
Montmorillonite 2.78 2.02 42.5* 65.0 60.0 4.4 20.0 * 16.0
* → Salinity-dependent parameters
† → Marine source
The ARHOB values in Table 19 are the true dry mineral densities. The RHOB
values are the wet densities as measured by the density tools.
The thermal neutron NPHI values are only approximations because of the
presence of unpredictable neutron absorbers. The values were derived from
the epithermal neutron ENPI data by adding a maximum-thermal-absorber-
effect of 10 p.u. to the clay endpoints. That translates into a 10% to 20% cor-
rection in normal clay and porosity ranges.
ELANPlus Theory 73
ToC
Index
The Wet Elemental Weight Percent values in Table 20 are for spectral tools
(NGT, HNGS, ECS, RST, GST). Q
Table 20
Common Sedimentary Minerals Wet Elemental Weight Percent
Si Ca Fe S K Al Mg Ti Gd Th U
weight % ppm
Quartz 46.75 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10
Calcite 0.20 39.40 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.00 0.50 0.00 1.40
Dolomite 0.60 21.60 0.31 0.07 0.00 0.10 12.30 0.01 1.30 0.10 0.90
Orthoclase 30.00 0.10 1.49 0.00 10.20 9.90 0.10 0.00 0.30 1.10 0.40
Albite 30.00 2.30 1.75 0.00 0.50 11.80 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00
Anhydrite 0.00 29.40 0.00 23.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40
Gypsum 0.00 23.28 0.00 18.62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30
Pyrite 0.00 0.00 46.50 53.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Siderite 0.40 0.30 48.60 0.00 0.00 0.70 3.00 0.00 0.50 0.40 0.50
Muscovite 21.16 0.10 3.97 0.00 7.80 19.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
Biotite 18.20 0.20 14.44 0.00 7.20 6.00 7.70 1.50 0.20 1.50 0.70
Glauconite 21.74 0.47 15.16 0.00 5.55 4.05 1.98 0.09 3.95 2.82 5.08
Kaolinite 20.32 0.10 3.18 0.00 0.10 19.93 0.10 1.07 4.20 18.86 3.13
Chlorite 13.50 0.67 21.35 0.00 0.67 9.25 4.63 1.25 4.63 10.99 3.47
(poorly ordered) 28.60 0.70 22.88 0.00 3.00 10.58 - 0.00 - 15.00 -
Illite 23.81 0.48 6.02 0.00 4.32 10.08 1.15 0.48 3.55 11.81 4.61
(well-ordered) 48.30 1.10 7.08 0.00 5.62 14.51 - 8.40 - 18.00 -
Montmorillonite 20.94 1.11 2.60 0.00 0.48 7.22 1.73 0.10 6.19 20.63 5.63
74 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Chapter 4
Conductivity Models
The ELANPlus program supports the water saturation equations listed in
Table 21.
Table 21
Water Saturation Models
Saturation Model Undisturbed Zone Flushed Zone

Linear conductivity CUDC CXDC
Dual Water CUDC_DWA CXDC_DWA
Indonesia CUDC_IND CXDC_IND
Nigerian CUDC_IND CXDC_IND
Simandoux CUDC_SIM CXDC_SIM
Waxman-Smits CUDC_WS CXDC_WS
These equations represent different models for the correction of the effects of
clay conductivity on the calculation of water saturation. For each ELANPlus
model (Solve process) being used, choose the water saturation model with
which you feel most comfortable. To compare the effects of the different con-
ductivity models of Table 21, create several Solve processes, each of which
differs from the others only in the conductivity equation(s) used.
ELANPlus Theory 75
ToC
Index
The Waxman-Smits and Dual Water models describe the same data base and
therefore have many similarities. There are differences in the saturation expo- Q
nents a and m, though the main difference is the way in which the two models
describe clay conductivity.
The Dual Water model uses clay-water conductivity (CUDC_UBWA) and
clay-water porosity (WCLP). The Waxman-Smits model uses cationic
exchange capacity of clays (CEC_xxxx). Both models, in their basic form,
express clay conductivity in Qv (charge per unit volume).
There is a WCLP parameter in the Waxman-Smits model for partitioning the
wet and dry clay fractions in the final output. This parameter does not affect
the computation of water saturation. Translation of parameters from the Wax-
man-Smits to the Dual Water model and the reverse are supported in the
Parameter Calculator.
The Linear Conductivity model is a simplification of the Dual Water model.
It is special in that it is the only model that allows for the concept of conduc-
tive minerals that are nonclay minerals.
The Indonesian model and Nigerian model are very similar. Only two param-
eter changes are needed to convert one equation to the other.
In ELANPlus processing, water saturation is not explicitly determined.
Instead the ELANPlus program solves for volumes of water and hydrocar-
bon, which can then be converted to conventional water saturation through a
Function process, using the equation
UWAT + UIWA + USFL w

S w = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (43)
UWAT + UIWA + USFL w + UOIL + UGAS + USFL hc
where:
UWAT = volume of “free” water in the undisturbed zone
UIWA = volume of irreducible water in the undisturbed zone
USFLw = volume of special fluid with a water attribute in the
undisturbed zone
UOIL = volume of oil in the undisturbed zone
UGAS = volume of gas in the undisturbed zone
USFLhc = volume of special fluid with a hydrocarbon attribute in the
undisturbed zone
76 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
The relationship between the flushed zone and uninvaded zone can be confus-
ing. With Constant Tools the relationship is loosely fixed. With flushed-zone Q
resistivity (Rxo) and deep resistivity (Rt) measurements there can be strong
disagreements between the two solutions.
In the volumetric display, moved hydrocarbons means that S
w ≤ S xo .
Negative moved hydrocarbons (moved water) means that S
w ≥ S xo .
The flushed zone can have a profound effect on the calculation of water sat-
uration. All log measurements, except deep resistivity and a few other deep
reading devices, are dominated by the flushed zone.
ELANPlus logic assumes that the volume of minerals and associated porosi-
ties are the same in the flushed zone and the uninvaded zone, but it does not
make any assumption about the fluid volume relationships. Computing
hydrocarbon volumes in the uninvaded zone does not mean that hydrocarbons
are present in the flushed zone (as in the case of deep invasion).
Any interpretation system—and the ELANPlus system is no exception—
must know the volume and type of hydrocarbon in the flushed zone in order
to make the proper hydrocarbon corrections (especially gas corrections) to the
porosity measurements. There are two ways for the program to establish the
flushed-zone volume and type of hydrocarbon: (1) measurements such as R xo
and density-neutron that allow for the direct solution and (2) R xo information
supplied by the user.
Warning: The ELANPlus program believes what the user tells it.
Flushed-zone computed values can have a dramatic effect on the uninvaded
zone and vice versa, especially when gas is part of the solution. One example
is a model, solving for gas in a gas zone, that finds no gas effect on the den-
sity-neutron measurements yet has a Constant Tool defining a similar volume
of hydrocarbons in both flushed and uninvaded zones.
Using balanced uncertainties, the ELANPlus program will see two tools (den-
sity and neutron) indicating no gas while the deep conductivity (CUDC) indi-
cates gas. Two against one in an optimized solution will have an answer
weighted towards the two tools that agree (no gas).
This is an example of a case in which the model does not fit the data. The
ELANPlus program will warn you that the tools are inconsistent in this case
by showing a reconstructed conductivity that does not match the measured
conductivity.
For more information see Chapter 8, Quality Control.
ELANPlus Theory 77
ToC
Index
To correct the problem you can either correct the flushed-zone hydrocarbon
model or lower the uncertainty of the deep conductivity (CUDC_UNC). If Q
CUDC_UNC is lowered, the deep saturation will be more correct but the den-
sity-neutron will not reconstruct and their “corrected porosity” values could
be in error.
No Rxo Tool
If no shallow-resistivity device is available, the ELANPlus system still needs
to know the distribution of the flushed-zone fluids to accurately predict poros-
ity. Computation of the flushed-zone fluids can be done by assuming some
relationship between undisturbed-zone and flushed-zone fluids
1⁄
5
One common relationship is the Tixier assumption that S
xo = S w
In ELANPlus processing, an approximation of the Tixier assumption can be

formalized with the use of a Constant Tool (CTn).
Experience dictates that you should assume a hydrocarbon ratio of
flushed-to-undisturbed zone rather than water ratio. For example, assume
that the ratio of XOIL/UOIL is 0.2. That can be rewritten as
XOIL
-------------- = 0.2 (43-1a)
UOIL
⇒ XOIL = 0.2 × UOIL (43-1b)
⇒ 0 = – 1.0 × XOIL + 0.2 × UOIL (43-1c)
⇒ 0 = CT1 = CT1_XOIL × XOIL + CT1_UOIL × UOIL (43-1d)
Table 22 shows the relevant parameter values necessary to establish an

XOIL/UOIL ratio of 0.2 using the constant tool CT1. All other CT1 parame-
ter values would be 0.0.
Table 22
Constant Tool Parameter Values for an
XOIL/UOIL Ratio of 0.2
CT1 CTl_XOIL CT1_UOIL CT1_UNC

0.0 –1.0 0.20 0.015
78 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
The equation is equally valid if the signs are reversed, CT1_XOIL = 1.00 and
CT1_UOIL = –0.20. In addition, the same result is achieved if CT1_XOIL, Q
CT1_UOIL and CT1_UNC are multiplied by a constant such as 100. They
would then become –10.0, 20, and 1.5, respectively.
Oil and Gas Model with Rxo

When both flushed-zone and undisturbed-zone oil and gas are part of the
model, two additional equations are required. One defines the ratio between
oil and gas; the other defines the relationship of the oil and gas ratio in the
flushed and the undisturbed zones.
The neutron log is the conventional measurement used to distinguish between
gas and oil. (Deep conductivity describes the total amount of hydrocarbons.)
However, there is still a need to relate the oil and gas ratio between the
flushed and uninvaded zones.
That need is handled with an internal tool similar to a Constant Tool (no
external data curve used as an input). However, unlike a Constant Tool, this
equation is nonlinear. It is referred to as the Equal Hydrocarbon Tool, EQHY.
It assumes that the hydrocarbon density in the flushed and undisturbed zones
is the same. In other words, the gas-oil ratio (GOR) is the same.
XGAS UGAS
---------------------------------------------------------- = ---------------------------------------------------------- (44)
XGAS + XOIL + XSFL UGAS + UOIL + USFL
To avoid a divide-by-zero problem at zero porosity, the equation is actually

implemented as follows:
0 = XGAS × ( UOIL + USFL ) – UGAS × ( XOIL + XSFL ) (45)
In Equations (44) and (45), special fluids in the flushed-zone (XSFL) and
undisturbed zone (USFL) are included only if they have a hydrocarbon
attribute.
It should be emphasized that solving for gas, oil, and water at the same depth
is a tricky problem even under ideal conditions. The presence of clay in a
shaly sand environment causes the neutron-density to respond in a manner
opposite that of gas. Therefore, some other tool must accurately resolve the
clay volume in order to quantitatively distinguish between gas and oil. Expe-
rience has shown that EQHY should be used only when an Rxo measure-
ment is in the model.
ELANPlus Theory 79
ToC
Index
Oil and Gas Model without Rxo
Previously when oil was in the model and no Rxo device was present, a con- Q
stant equation set the ratio of flushed-zone to undisturbed-zone oil. Likewise,
when both oil and gas are in a model, and there is no Rxo device, Constant
Tools are needed. Specifically, two Constant Tools are needed to replace
CXDC and EQHY, as follows:
CT1 = CT1_XOIL × XOIL + CT1_UOIL × UOIL

or (46)
0 = – 1.0 × XOIL + k × UOIL
and
CT2 = CT2_XGAS × XGAS + CT2_UGAS × UGAS

or (47)
0 = – 1.0 × XGAS + k × UGAS
Note: Use the same ratio of flushed-zone to undisturbed-zone oil as is used

for gas, which is equivalent to the assumption made by the EQHY equation.
Numerical stability is not maintained when the EQHY equation is used with-
out an Rxo device. To stay out of trouble, stick with two constant equations.
For more information, see No Rxo Tool on page 78.
Water Saturation, Linear Conductivity

Following is a very simple example of how water saturation is formulated
into a conductivity equation. For the case of no clay, the linear conductivity
equation can be derived from the classic water saturation equation.
This derivation is written in deep conductivity terms (such as CUDC or
UWAT). To express it in flushed-zone terms, replace the U’s with X’s
(CXDC, XWAT).
n a × Rw
S wt = -------------------- (48)
m
φ × Rt
Assuming a =1 and m = n = 2 yields
80 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
2 Rw
( φ × S w ) = -------- (48-1a)
Q
Rt
Rw
⇒ UWAT = ------------ (48-1b)
Rt
1 1
⇒ ---------- = ------------ × UWAT (48-1c)
Rt Rw
⇒ CUDC = CUDC_UWAT × UWAT (48-1d)
Or in the general ELANPlus program form
nfc
CUDC = ∑ CUDC_i × Vi (49)
i=1
where:
nfc = number of formation components
CUDC_i = conductivity of component i
Vi = volume of component i
The linear conductivity equation is used because the influence of each of the
terms on the volumetric results is more easily observed with this equation.
However, what is shown for the linear conductivity equation applies equally
to the nonlinear conductivity equations.
The complete equation with mineral conductivities included is
nf ns
∑ ∑ Vj ×
CUDC_i
CUDC = Vi × --------------------- + CUDC_ j (50)
a
i=1 j=1
where:
nf = number of undisturbed-zone formation components that are
fluids
ELANPlus Theory 81
ToC
Index
Vi = volume of undisturbed-zone fluid i
CUDC_i = conductivity of undisturbed-zone fluid i Q
a = the Archie fluid factor

ns = number of formation components that are solids
Vj = volume of solid component j
CUDC_j = conductivity of solid component j
Note: Unlike any other saturation equation, linear conductivity allows any
mineral to have conductivity associated with it. An example would be the
conductivity of pyrite (CUDC_PYRI) or the conductivity of illite
(CUDC_ILLI). The conductivity value that was entered for the CUDC_xxxx
parameter represents the total conductivity of the rock and any associated flu-
ids.
Often for a clay it is more convenient to supply a value for wet clay porosity
(WCLP) and apparent bound-water conductivity (CBWA) than it is to com-
pute the conductivity of a clay-water mixture. The ELANPlus application
includes an alternative formulation to allow clay conductivities to be speci-
fied in this manner.
For more information see the Conductivity Input, Hierarchy, section in Chap-
ter 4, Conductivity Models.
Note that the ELANPlus program does not have WCLP parameters for non-
clays.
nf ns
∑ ∑ Vj ×
CUDC_i
CUDC = Vi × --------------------- + CUDC_ j
a
i=1 j=1
(51)
nc
∑ Vk × WCLP_k ×
CBWA_k
+ ------------------------
a
k=1
where:
ns = number of solid formation components, including clays for
which a valid CUDC_xxxx exists
nc = number of clays that have no valid CUDC_xxxx, but have
valid WCLP_xxxx and CBWA_xxxx
82 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Vk = volume of clay k
WCLP_k = wet clay porosity of clay k Q
CBWA_k = apparent bound-water conductivity of clay k

a = the Archie fluid factor
This water saturation equation is good for illustration, but it is only an approx-
imation. Its validity is limited to when the conductivity of formation
water and clay water are similar or when there is no clay.
For more information see the Linear Conductivity Equation section in Chap-
ter 4, Conductivity Models.
In addition to the main saturation equation, the ELANPlus program applies
internal equations. One equation, which is always in effect, forces the sum of
all volumes to 1.0:
nfc
1 = ∑ Vi = QUAR + ILLI + XOIL + XWAT + … (52)
i=1
The other internal equation, applied only when undisturbed-zone fluids are
present, forces the sum of fluid volumes in the flushed zone and undisturbed
zone to be equal:
nxf nuf
0 = ∑ Vi – ∑ V j (53)
i=1 j=1
where:
nfc = number of formation components
nxf = number of fluids in the flushed zone
nuf = number of fluids in the undisturbed zone
Conductivity Input, Hierarchy

There are several ways to enter conductivity of clays into the ELANPlus pro-
gram. They are listed later in this section for each water saturation equation,
in their hierarchical order.
ELANPlus Theory 83
ToC
Index
When there are two possible input types, do not enter both. Those desig-
nated (A) take precedence over those designated (B). Q
To ensure that a parameter is not used, insert the representation of an Absent
value used in the ELANPlus system. (The default is –999.25.) The parameter
modifier, _clai, represents either a generic clay, such as CLA1, or other clays,
such as illite (ILLI).
For Global Parameter Clay = Wet

For global parameter Clay = Wet, there are two groups of models: (1) Wax-
man-Smits, and (2) Dual Water, Linear Conductivity, Indonesian, Nigerian,
and Simandoux.
Waxman-Smits
There is only one possible input type for Waxman-Smits:
(A) CEC_clai
Dual Water, Linear Conductivity, Indonesian, Nigerian, Simandoux
For the Dual Water, Linear Conductivity, Indonesian, Nigerian, and Siman-
doux models, there are three possible input types:
(A) CUDC_UBWA
(B) CUDC_clai
(C) CBWA_clai, WCLP_clai
For Global Parameter Clay = Dry

For global parameter Clay = Dry, there are two models, Dual Water and Lin-
ear Conductivity, with two possible input types:
(A) CUDC_UBWA
(B) CBWA_clai
Beware of CUDC_clai
Beware: CUDC_clai does not equal CBWA_clai because
CUDC_clai is affected by both rock and fluids, similar to Rt.
CBWA_clai is defined by fluids only, like Rw. (Add WCLP_clai and
m, and it becomes CUDC_clai.).
84 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Conductivity Equations
The nonlinear conductivity equations differ mostly in the way they handle Q
clay. The effect that clay has on the conductivity measurement has been the
subject of numerous publications. The effect is summarized in Figure 12.
Non- Linear Zone

linear
Co Zone
X ”L ine
and
eanS
“Cl
Cw
F
Cw
Figure 12 The effect of clay on conductivity.
At high salinities, the effect of clay is seen to shift the conductivity of the rock
to a higher value. The higher salinity range where the shift in conductivity is
essentially constant is called the linear region.
At low salinities the effect becomes highly nonlinear; given very fresh waters,
the effect is to lower the conductivity of the rock.
In the equations in the following subsections the term USFL stands for Undis-
turbed-zone Special FLuid. Although these equations are written in terms of
the undisturbed zone, you merely replace the U with an X (consistently, of
course) to rewrite the equation for the flushed zone, for example,
CUDC_UWAT ⇒ CXDC_XWAT.
Waxman Smits Equation

Equation (54) shows the theoretical form of the Waxman-Smits equation.
ELANPlus Theory 85
ToC
Index
*
1 m n  BQ v
C t = --- φ t S wt  C w + ----------- (54) Q
a  S wt 
If the term involving Qv is dropped, the Equation (54) reduces to the familiar
Archie water saturation equation. See Table 23 for the parameters used in it.
Table 23
Waxman-Smits Conductivity Parameters
Name Unit Default Symbol Description

A — 1.0 a Constant, a in Archie equation
ARHOB_clai g/cm3 † ρdcli Actual density of dry clay i
CEC_clai — † CECdcl Cation exchange capacity of clay i

i
CUDC_UWAT mho/m Absent Cuwa Undisturbed-zone conductivity of forma-
tion water
CUDC_UIWA mho/m Absent Cuiw Undisturbed-zone conductivity of irre-

ducible water
CUDC_USFL mho/m Absent Cusf Undisturbed-zone conductivity of special

fluid
M_WS — 1.8 mws Parameter for m* (Qv) computation
C_WS — 1.0 cws Parameter for m* (Qv) computation
N — 2.0 n Saturation exponent
WCLP_clai p.u. † φ cli Wet clay porosity of clay i
CUDC_UNC mho/m 0.065 σ CUDC Uncertainty of the CUDC curve data
† → See Table 24, Default Values Used for Clay.
Table 23 Notes:
1 All input data are at downhole conditions.
2 Replace any U or u with an X or x for the flushed-zone equation.
Clays are made up of molecular sheets of silica tetrahedrons (silica with four
oxygens and/or hydroxyls, whatever is needed to balance the structure) and
aluminum octahedrons (aluminum with six oxygens and/or hydroxyls).
Within the clay lattice there is substitution of Al+3 for Si+4 in the tetrahedron
86 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
and Mg++ for Al+3 in the octahedron, resulting in a net negative charge imbal-
Index
ance. Q
Additionally, there are broken bonds around the edges (at the end of the hor-
izontal sheets of silica tetrahedrons and aluminum octahedrons) of the clay
particle, contributing to the charge imbalance. The smaller the clay particle,
the greater the number of broken bonds.
Nature requires clays to be electrically neutral. Electrical neutrality is main-
tained by positive ions (cations or counterions) being adsorbed on the exte-
rior of the clay particle. The cations are typically Ca++, Mg++, K+ or Na+.
When submerged in water, these ions are free to float about and exchange
with other positive ions.
The counterion charge per unit pore space is defined as Qv.
 meq ρ dcl V dcl CEC dcl Counterions

Qv  ---------- = --------------------------------------------- = --------------------------------------- (54-1)
 cm 3 φt Total pore space
The unit meq stands for milli-ion equivalent and is a unit of charge. An ion
equivalent is the amount of charge in a mole of protons (6.023 × 1023 protons
times 1.602 × 10-19 coulombs/proton).
The counterions per unit of pore space will depend on the amount of clay and
the type of clay, input to the program via the CEC_xxxx parameter for each
clay. In CEC you can set the units of meq per gram of dry clay.
Table 24 shows the default values for clay parameters used by ELANPlus
logic:
Table 24
Default Values Used for Clay
Parameter Illite Glauconite Kaolinite Chlorite Smectite

ARHOB 2.79 2.96 2.59 2.82 2.78
CEC 0.25 0.23 0.09 0.15 1.00
WCLP 15.6 15.6 5.8 10.1 42.5
As shown in Table 24, CEC is related to the WCLP (Wet Clay Porosity)
parameter. The wet clay porosity is part of the Dual Water model and will be
discussed in the following section.
ELANPlus Theory 87
ToC
Index
The CEC values in Table 24 were determined by taking the average of the lit-
erature values. To give you an idea of the precision of the CEC values, the Q
literature values for illite ranged from 0.1 to 0.4, resulting in an average value
of 0.25.
The product BQV in Equation (54) is the conductivity of the clay counterions.
The B term is known as the equivalent conductivity, which is measured in
units of mho/m per meq/cm3. It is a function of temperature and the salinity
of the water surrounding the clay.
Juhasz, with Shell, developed the following empirical formula to use for the
clay counterion equivalent conductivity. Temperature is expressed in degrees
Celcius.
2
– 1.28 + 0.225 Temp – 4.059 × 10 –4 Temp (55)
B = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.23
1 + R wa ( 0.045 Temp – 0.27 )
The equivalent conductivity is basically a quadratic function of temperature.

For very fresh waters the Rwa term in the denominator becomes very large,
which causes the equivalent conductivity to approach 0.
If you examine Equation (54), it appears that for the same porosity, adding
clay to the system can only increase the conductivity. Actually, that is not the
case, because of the parameter m*, which has been found to increase with the
Qv of the formation.
The cementation factor varies much more strongly with the Qv of the forma-
tion when using the Waxman-Smits model than with the Dual Water model.
An empirical algorithm relating the cementation factor to the Qv and porosity
for the Waxman-Smits model is given by
– 17.3Y
m* = m ws + C ws ( 1.128Y + 0.22 ( 1 – e )) (56)
Qvφ t
Y≡ -------------
- (57)
1 – φt
As an example assume that the water resistivity is 0.04. (Conductivity is

25.0.) For a 20% porosity formation with no clay, the conductivity computes
to be 1.38, using an m* of 1.8.
Assume that the temperature is 60 C. The equivalent conductivity computes
to be 10.75. Retain the same porosity, but change the matrix so that it is 20%
88 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
dry clay. Assume the clay is montmorillonite and has a CEC value of 1.0 and
a density of 2.78. Q
The Qv and Y values are 2.78 and 0.695, respectively. That translates to an m*
value of 2.8. Using the new cementation value of 2.8, the conductivity com-
putes to be 0.36, a much smaller value than the original 1.38.
One more important factor needs to be mentioned about the Waxman-Smits
equation. Rather than using Equation (54) as it is written, the ELANPlus pro-
gram takes the square root of both sides.
Two advantages arise from taking the square roots. First, the square root
makes the variation with water volume closer to linear, resulting in a more
numerically stable and faster equation for the nonlinear solver. Second, the
same uncertainty parameter (CUDC_UNC) can be used for all conductivity
equations. Because of these advantages, the ELANPlus program not only
takes the square root of Equation (54), it takes the square root of all nonlinear
equations.
Dual-Water Equation
The theoretical form of the Dual Water equation is
 S – αV H Qv
βQv
C t = --- φ t S wt  ------------------------------------ C w + -----------
1 m n wt Q
(58)
a  S wt  S wt
 
which can be rewritten in bound-water terms as
1 m n  S wt – S wb S wb
C t = --- φ t S wt  -------------------------- C w + C bw ---------- (59)
a  S wt  S wt
by using these substitutions
β
C bw ≡ ------------- (60)
H
αV Q
XBWA H
S wb ≡ ------------------ = αV Q Qv (61)
φt
ELANPlus Theory 89
ToC
Index
See Table 25 for the parameters used in the equation.
Q
Table 25
Dual Water Conductivity Parameters

ARHOB_clai g/cm3 — ρdcli Actual density of dry clay i
CBWA_clai mho/m Absent Cbwi Bound-water conductivity for clay i
CUDC_clai mho/m Absent Cucli Conductivity of clay i
CUDC_UBWA mho/m Absent Cubw Undisturbed-zone bound-water conductivity
Used only when Clay = DRY
CUDC_UWAT mho/m Absent Cuwa Undisturbed-zone conductivity of formation
water
CUDC_UIWA mho/m Absent Cuiw Undisturbed-zone conductivity of irreducible
water
CUDC_USFL mho/m Absent Cusf Undisturbed-zone conductivity of special
fluid
CUDC_PARA mho/m Absent Cupar Undisturbed-zone conductivity of fluid con-
tributing parallel conductivity
M_DW — 1.8 mdw Parameter for m (Qv) computation
C_DW — 1.0 Cdw Parameter for m (Qv) computation
WCLP_clai p.u. † φcli Pure wet clay porosity of clay i
† → See Table 24, Default Values Used for Clay, on page 87.
Table 25 Notes:
1 All input at downhole conditions.
2 Replace any U or u with an X or x, respectively, for the flushed-zone
equation.
90 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
The relationships between β, V Q , Qv and Cbw, Swb are more familiar to the
H Index
log analyst. The β has the same meaning as the B term of the Waxman-Smits Q
equation, but it uses an algorithm that is a function of temperature only:
Temp ( °C ) + 8.5
β = ---------------------------------------- (62)
22.0 + 8.5
H
V Q is called the clay water volume factor.
It can be thought of as a volume of bound water per counterion charge. It has
a value of 0.28 cm3/meq at room temperature. In the Waxman-Smits equation
B decreased with decreasing salinity.
H
In the Dual Water equation V Q increases with decreasing salinity, causing
the conductivity of bound water to decrease. Both models predict a decreas-
ing clay conductivity at low salinities.
To compute the volume of bound water (XBWA) and the bound-water satu-
ration (Swb), ELANPlus processing uses the wet clay porosity parameter for
each of the clays:
nc
XBWA = ∑ Vi × WCLP_i (63)
i=1
H
αV Q ρ dcl CEC dcl
i i
WCLP_cla i = ------------------------------------------------------------- (64)
H
1 + αV Q ρ dcl CEC dcl
i i
As with Waxman-Smits, the m in the Dual Water equation is dependent on
Qv, although somewhat differently. The mdw has a default value of 1.8. To
use a fixed m = 2, set Cdw = 0 and mdw to 2.0.
– 16.4Y
m = m dw + C dw ( 0.258Y + 0.2 ( 1 – e )) (65)
Qvφ t
Y ≡ -------------- (66)
1 – φt
In ELANPlus terms, this is
ELANPlus Theory 91
ToC
Index
nc
∑ Vi ( 1 – WCLP_i )CEC_i × ARHOB_i Q
i=1
Y ≡ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- (67)
1.0 – ( V hc + V wf + V bw )
where:
Vhc = sum of all fluids that are hydrocarbons
Vwf = sum of all fluids that are nonclay waters, including irreducible
water
Vbw = sum of all clay-bound waters
The Parameter Calculator (selected from the Options menu of the Session
Manager) is a customized program used for computing parameters that are
peculiar to ELANPlus processing. It is capable of computing all of the rele-
vant Dual-Water parameters shown.
Once again, realize that the square root of the conductivity is used internally
by the nonlinear solver to improve numerical stability and speed.
Linear Conductivity Equation

The Linear Conductivity Equation in its theoretical form is
nc
Cw  C bw 
Ct = -------- × V w +
a  a ∑
 ----------- × Vi × WCLP_i

(68)
i=1
which can be rewritten in ELANPlus terms as
nf ns
CUDC = ∑  Vi × CUDC_i

--------------------- +
a  ∑ (V j × CUDC_ j ) (69)
i=1 j=1
In Equation (68) the term Vi × WCLP_i represents the quantity of bound
water associated with the various clay volumes defined in the model.
Equation (69) is the more general form of the equation.
92 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Table 26 shows the parameters used in the linear conductivity equation.
Q
Table 26
Linear Conductivity Parameters

CUDC_i mho/m Absent Cmini Conductivity of nonclay component i
CUDC_UBWA mho/m Absent Cubw Undisturbed-zone bound-water conductivity
Used only when Clay = DRY
CUDC_UWAT mho/m Absent Cuwa Conductivity of undisturbed-zone free water
CUDC_UIWA mho/m Absent Cuiw Conductivity of undisturbed-zone irreducible
water
CUDC_USFL mho/m Absent Cusf Conductivity of undisturbed-zone special fluid
CUDC_PARA mho/m Absent Cupar Conductivity of undisturbed-zone fluid contrib-
uting parallel conductivity
M — 2.0 m Cementation exponent
WCLP_clai p.u. † φ cli Pure wet clay porosity of clay i
Table 26 Notes:
2 Replace any U or u with an X or x, respectively, for the flushed-zone
equation.
The Linear Conductivity equation is an approximation of the Dual Water
equation. The derivation is presented below. Start with the Dual Water equa-
tion and assume that the cementation factor, m, and the saturation exponent,
n, are both 2.0.
ELANPlus Theory 93
ToC
Index
1 m n  S wt – S wb S wb
C t = --- φ t S wt  -------------------------- C w + C bw ---------- (70) Q
a  S wt  S wt
1
⇒ C t = --- ( V w + V bw ) × ( C w × V w + C bw × V bw ) (71)
a
2 2
C w × V w ( C w + C bw ) × V w × V bw C bw × V bw
⇒ C t = ----------------------- + ---------------------------------------------------------------- + ----------------------------- (72)
a a a
The term ( 2 ⁄ a ) × C × C
w bw × V w × V bw is added to and subtracted
from both sides to get
2 2
C w × Vw C w × C bw C bw × V bw
⇒ C t = ----------------------- + 2 ------------------------------ × V w × V bw + -----------------------------
a a a
(73)
C w + C bw – 2 C w × C bw
+ ------------------------------------------------------------------
a
Neglecting the last term results in
1 2
⇒ C t = --- × ( C w × V w + C bw × V bw ) (74)
a
or
Cw C bw
⇒ Ct = -------- × V w + ----------- × V bw (75)
a a
The last equation is the Linear Conductivity equation used in ELANPlus pro-
cessing. It is equivalent to the Dual Water equation, provided the formation
is totally clean or 100% bound water, or if
C w + C bw
C w × C bw ≈ -------------------------- (76)
2
Relation (76) is satisfied when C
w ≈ C bw .
94 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Indonesian and Nigerian Conductivity Equations
The theoretical form of the Indonesian and Nigerian equations is identical. Q
They differ only in the numerical values used for the EVCL and MVCL
parameters. The Indonesian equation, the default, uses EVCL = 1.0 and
MVCL = 0.5. The Nigerian equation uses EVCL = 1.4 and MVCL = 0.0.
n----
( evcl – mvcl V cl ) C uwa 0.5 ( m + ( mc2 ⁄ φ ) ) V uwa 2
e
Ct = C ucl V cl + ------------------- φ e ----------------
φ (77)
a e
Table 27
Indonesian and Nigerian Conductivity Equation Parameters

CUDC_UWAT mho/m Absent Cuwa Conductivity of undisturbed-zone formation
water
water
MC2 — 0.0 mc2 Porosity correction for cementation factor
EVCL — 1.0 evcl Exponent of Vcl in saturation equation
MVCL — 0.5 mvcl Vcl multiplier for exponent of Vcl
ELANPlus Theory 95
ToC
Index
Table 27 Notes:
1 All input data are at downhole conditions. Q
2 Set EVCL = 1.4 for Nigerian equation.

3 Set MVCL = 0.0 for Nigerian equation.
4 Replace any U or u with an X or x, respectively, and N with EXPO for
the flushed-zone equation.
The flushed-zone Indonesian Conductivity equation is the same for an undis-
turbed zone, except that the water saturation exponent parameter is expo
rather than n. In addition, the water and clay parameters require an x rather
than a u; for example, Cxwa, Vxwa rather than Cuwa, Vuwa.
Default values for EVCL and MVCL are 1.0 and 0.5, respectively. To use the
Nigerian equation you must manually change them to 1.4 and 0.0.
Observe that the equation blows up when Vcl is 100%, because water and
effective porosity will be zero, so that the equation contains a zero-divided-
by-zero term. Experience has shown that it is a good idea to write a constraint
to force the volume of water to be greater than about 0.5 p.u. when using the
Indonesian or Nigerian equation.
Simandoux Conductivity Equation

The actual form and derivation of the “Simandoux”equation as quoted and
used in ELAN has a long and tortuous history. Enquiring minds who refer to
the original Simandoux paper of 19631 (and can read French) will find that the
paper is in fact a report on laboratory experiments to measure the complex dia-
lectric constant at 1MHz of material samples that relate the dialectric con-
stants and losses to water saturations; and resistivity to porosity, clay content
and clay resisitivity, but for water filled formations only, by the following
equations:
2 K – C∗
ζε 1 + ε′ = ζε 1 + εδ + ASw + BSw = Kζε 1 -------------------------------------------------2 (EQ 1)
( K – C∗ ) 2 + ( G∗ ⁄ ω )
and
1 2 G∗ ⁄ ω
ε″ = --- ( ASw + BSw ) = Kζε 1 -------------------------------------------------2 (EQ 2)
µ ( K – C∗ ) 2 + ( G∗ ⁄ ω )
and
1 1 p
--- = ------- + -------- (EQ 3)
R R m R sh
96 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
Where:
ε1 = Dialectric constant of apparatus walls Q
ε’ = Real dialectric constant of the sample

ε” = Dialectric losses of the sample
δ = Thickness of the ionic double layer
ζ = Dimensionless coefficient, describing the ratio between the active capacity
of the apparatus walls and that of the sample = (K/ε1)/C0
C0= Active capacity of apparatus cell.
ω = Angular frequency of the current 2πf
µ = Proportionality of the coefficient between ε’and ε”
K= Capacity of the apparatus insulating walls
C*= Apparent capacity of the cell-sample combination
G*= Apparent conductance of the cell-sample combination
A= Constant
B= Constant
p= Clay content of the sample
R= Radius of apparatus external walls in the case of a cylindrical cell
Rm= Resistivity of the equivalent clean formation
Rsh= Clay particle resistance
Sw= Water saturation
It may be seen from the form that the above equation is strictly valid for lam-
inated layers of clean sand and shale only.For this reason many, in fact most,
saturation models that are variations of a laminated model are termed “Siman-
doux”equations.
The actual form of the equation in ELANPlus is based on the same concept as
Simandoux of laminated sand-shale layers but originally derived from an equ-
valent parallel resisitor model. This gives:
m n
φ e Sw
1 Vsh
----- = ( 1 – Vsh ) ----------------------------------m- + --------- (EQ 4)
Rt aRw ( 1 – V ) sh
Rsh
ELANPlus Theory 97
ToC
Index
This equation was first modified for a reduced effect in hydrocarbon bearing Q
formations:
m n
φ e Sw ˙
1 Vsh
----- = ( 1 – Vsh ) ----------------------------------m- + --------- Sw (EQ 5)
Rt aRw ( 1 – V sh ) Rsh
And then for the non-laminar behaviour of real clays:

m n
φ e Sw Vsh
c
1
----- = -------------------------------------------
m–1
- + ----------
- Sw (EQ 6)
Rt c Rsh
aRw ( 1 – V sh )
This equation was first published in the 1972 Schlumberger Log Interpretation
Principles2 book with the assumption of m=n=2. In his 1985 review of satura-
tion equations Paul Worthington3 classifies the original Simandoux equation
as a “Type 1”, which means it has a form of Phi x Sw plus linear Vclay,
whereas the above equation is classified as a “Type 2” where Sw is raised to a
power and Vclay contains an Sw term.He attributes this equation to Schlum-
berger, 1972, with no reference to Simandoux. However, the 1972 Schlum-
berger Log Interpretation Principles book directly references the original
Simandoux paper as the basis of the 1972 equaiton, and also the paper by Pou-
pon et al4 in 1967 as the development of the model.
Considering that Shale is a mixture of clay and silt, the 1972 Log Interpreta-
tion Principles book uses the standard R0=aRw/φm to obtain:
R clay R clay
( V sh = V silt + V cl ) → ( I Silt = V silt ⁄ V Sh ) → R sh = -------------------------x = ------------------------------ (EQ 7)
( 1 – V silt ) ( 1 – V silt ⁄ V sh ) x
where x is empircally found to range between 1.4 and 2.4, depending on clay
distribution type, and Vsilt is the silt index or volume. Combining equations 6
and 7 and using m, n, and a instead of 2,2 and 1 :
m n
φ e Sw V cl
x
1
- + ---------------------------------------------
----- = --------------------------------------------------------------- ( x – c)
- Sw (EQ 8)
Rt c m–1
aRw ( 1 – ( V cl + V silt ) ) R cl ( V cl + V silt )
98 ELANPlus Theory
ToC
Index
‘x’ and ‘c’ were usually taken equal to 2 for practical reasons: it allows reduc-
tion of the equation to a quadratic form that may be solved using a slide rule Q
or simpe calculator.
With the x = ‘ersh’ and the c = ‘swshe+1’in ELANPlus terminology, three fur-
ther assumptions were made :
• 1) The difference between the exponent of (m-1) and 1.0 for shale term
in the first denominator is not significant enough to consider for shaley
sand, and therefore (m-1) is assumed 1.0.
• 2) The Sw in the second term should be to the power of n/2, not unity.
• 3) ‘m’ may vary with porosity as per the Shell formula. The usual value
assumed for mc2 is 0.19.
This produces the form of the equation as implemeted, and with conductivity
replacing resistivity, the Simandoux Conductivity Equation is written:
n
---
ersh  V uma
2 ( m + ( mc2 ⁄ φ e ) )  V uwa n
C ucl V cl  --------------- φe  ---------------
 e  φ C uwa  φe 
C t = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ (78)
( ersh – swshe – 1 ) a ( swshe + 1 )
( V cl + V silt ) 1 – ( V cl + V silt )
Table 28
Simandoux Conductivity Equation Parameters

water
water
ELANPlus Theory 99
ToC
Index
Table 28 (Cont.)
Q

ERSH — 1.0 ersh Exponent to compute Cush from Cucl
SWSHE — 0.5 swshe Simandoux shale effect
Table 28 Notes:
2 Replace any U or u with an X or x, ERSH with ERSHO, and N with
EXPXO for the flushed-zone equation.
The ELANPlus default values for ersh and swshe are 1.0 and 0.5, which cor-
respond to an ‘x’of 1.0 and a ‘c’of 1.5. This essentially assumes that by default
in ELANPlus the silt behaves in the same manner as clay in relation to the con-
ductivity. The expected range for ersh was given above as 1.4=>2.4, and that
of swshe as 0=>1.0. The default value of mc2 is 0.0. In tight formations for
which this was developped (actually very low prosity limestones!), the value
is usually taken as 0.19 .
The reader is refered to the refernces below and other referecnes in the litera-
ture, such as the SPWLA Shaly Sand Reprint, to determine the applicability
of the equation outside the strict model of a laminated shaley sand, and also
the range of industry accepted values for the above exponents beyond those
quoted.
References:
1) Simandoux, P., 1963, Measures diélectriques en milieu poroux. Revue de
l’I.F.P., pp 193-215
2) Schlumberger Log Interpretation Principles/Applications, 1989, pp 8-14,8-
15
100 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
3) Worthington, P. F. , 1985, The evolution of shaly-sand concepts in reservoir
evaluation. The Log Analyst 26(1) 23-40. Q
4) Poupon, A., Strecker, I., and Gartner, J., A review of Log Interpretation
Methods used in the Niger Delta. SPWLA Symposium, 1967.
ELANPlus Theory 101

ToC
Index
102 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Chapter 5
Uncertainties
Uncertainties are a difficult concept for many users, but without some knowl-
edge of uncertainties you will have a difficult time reaching a believable
answer. For a given situation the correct uncertainties often require a subjec-
tive decision by the user. Actually, there may be more than one mathemati-
cally valid answer.
The ELANPlus Solution Method

The ELANPlus program solves the inverse problem by creating the
incoherence function and standard deviation:
1  ( RHOB_REC – RHOB ) × RHOB_UNC_WM 2 

incoherence = ---  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + . . . .  (79)
2 RHOB_UNC × Largest Weight 
standard deviation = sqrt [ 2.0 × incoherence ⁄ ( num of tools ) ] × Largest Weight (80)
where:
RHOB = density input curve (bound to RHOB equation)
NPHI = neutron porosity input curve (bound to NPHI equation)
xxxx_REC = xxxx curve, reconstructed from output formation
components
ELANPlus Theory 103

ToC
Index
xxxx_UNC = uncertainty of the xxxx curve
Q
RHOB_UNC_WM = Weight Multiplier
Largest Weight = Maximum Weight of all weights encountered
For more information on Standard Deviation, see the Quality Control of the
Results section in Chapter 8, Quality Control.
There is one term in the summation for each equation used in the Solve pro-
cess. The program selects as its solution the volumes that minimize
Equation (80).
Uncertainties do not include the volume of the mineral. In other words, the
uncertainty of QUAR is dependent on the response of the various tools to
quartz and to the uncertainties of the various tools, but not to the actual vol-
ume of quartz being computed. Because the volume uncertainties are inde-
pendent of the volumes, the uncertainties can be computed and used for
quality control before the volumes are actually computed.
The fact that the volume uncertainties do not depend on the absolute value of
the volume means that balanced uncertainties can be created.
Balanced Uncertainties
Calculating solution uncertainties is difficult. Theoretically, solution uncer-
tainties are made up of two parts: tool uncertainty, and model uncertainty.
Tool uncertainty can be illustrated with the induction and density tools. The
absolute accuracy of the induction log is excellent (in the proper fresh mud
environment), but the density log is influenced by counting statistics and
rough borehole.
Uncertainties resulting from counting statistics and rough borehole can be
quantified through modelling and laboratory experiments. However, quanti-
fying the uncertainty of a saturation model for induction versus a porosity
model for RHOB is quite difficult. Uncertainties in this discussion relate spe-
cifically to the tool uncertainties.
Either uncertainty parameters or uncertainty data channels (or both) can be
used to put uncertainties into the ELANPlus program. The environmental cor-
rection programs have uncertainty channels as output, but those channels may
not be appropriate for ELANPlus processing without rescaling.
In addition, the user cannot adjust channel input (short of exiting the
ELANPlus program and functioning the channels), aside from a zonable
weight multiplier.
104 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Finally, opening additional data channels increases the program execution
time. Thus, most log analysts use the uncertainty parameters (RHOB_UNC, Q
NPHI_UNC, and so on) and take on the responsibility of choosing the correct
uncertainties for a given situation.
The suggested approach is to start with balanced uncertainties. That means
that each tool in the model affects the resultant volumes equally.
For linear equations, the balanced uncertainty value can be determined easily
by the following steps:
1 Assign an uncertainty value to the Summation of Volumes equation
(VOLS_UNC). Remember that the absolute uncertainty value is not impor-
tant. What is important is its value relative to the others. The volume sum-
mation equation has a range of 0 to 1.0 (100 p.u.); the default uncertainty
is 0.015 (1.5 p.u.).
2 Determine the range for all the other equations from the minimum and
maximum response parameters of the major minerals and fluids in the
model.
For a quartz-calcite-dolomite model, the minimum for the density tool
would be the density of the water in the pore space (RHOB_XWAT),
which is about 1.05. The maximum would be the density of dolomite,
RHOB_DOLO = 2.85. Those values reflect the values from 100%
porosity to 100% dolomite.
If the mineral exists only in trace quantities (for example, a trace
amount of pyrite), do not use it for the maximum or minimum value.
3 The uncertainty value that leads to a mathematically balanced set of equa-
tions can be determined by
MAX tool – MIN tool

Balanced Uncertainty = ------------------------------------------------ × VOLS_UNC (81)
MAX vols – MIN vols
For the preceding density equation and quartz-calcite-dolomite model

(expressing the summation of volumes in p.u.), that would be
2.85 – 1.05
RHOB_UNC = --------------------------- × 1.5 ≈ 0.027 (82)
100.0 – 0.0
Using balanced uncertainties is, in effect, a technique to scale the broad vari-
ety of input data so that they are weighted equally in the final answer.
Balanced uncertainties are useful for two reasons. First, balanced uncertain-
ties result in a model with the minimum resolution number for a given com-
105 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
bination of tools, volumes, and endpoints. Second, all the tools will equally
affect the results when you run the ELANPlus program. Your job is to evalu- Q
ate those results and modify the uncertainties to improve the final result.
Conductivity, SP
The conductivity equation is special. Within the ELANPlus system the square
root of conductivity is used for all water saturation equations. Therefore, the
expression MAXtool – MINtool becomes MAX tool – MIN tool. More specifi-
cally, for the deep conductivity equation (CUDC) would be
CUDC_UWAT – 0.0
CUDC_UNC = ------------------------------------------------------- × 1.5 (83)
100.00 – 0.0
with a similar expression for the flushed-zone equation.

The SP also is special because the input is multiplied by porosity. Therefore,
MAXtool – MINtool becomes (Qv_shale – 0)(φ). The SP measurement is most
useful in areas of high porosity; therefore a value of φ = 0.3 is used in the
default computation.
Weight Multipliers
Before use, ELANPlus uncertainties have incorporated within their computa-
tion an additional term, a multiplier that is based on log analyst experience. A
multiplier value of 1.0 means that the tool will influence the answer as
strongly as the Volume Summation tool. An understanding of how a tool can
affect the results and a knowledge of tool physics is required to select
the multiplier values.
Consider the following scenario, if the borehole was in good shape, and the
log analyst wants the density and neutron tools to determine the porosity.
He gives these tools a multiplier value of 1.0. He gives UCUDC a multiplier
value of 0.75 so that it does not affect the estimation of porosity as much as
the density-neutron. He gives UCXDC a multiplier value of 0.50, because he
has selected the SXO > SW constraint and if a conflict between CUDC and
CXDC arose, the log analyst has more confidence in CUDC. Since the U
tool is formed by multiplying the PEF and RHOB measurements, it has a mul-
tiplier value of 0.50 to account for the increased statistics present when
two tools are multiplied together.
The ELANPlus program uses the following algorithm:
106 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
1 Take the xxxx_UNC value supplied by the user or a default table.
2 Convert to internal representation (units), if necessary. Q
3 Limit the value (to avoid dividing by zero).

4 Invert the uncertainty to produce a weighting factor.
In the process, the program keeps track of the largest weight encountered, and
when all weights have been calculated, the program normalizes the largest
weight to a value of 1.0. Finally, each weight is multiplied by the user-zonable
parameter xxxx_WM to produce the weight actually used by the solver.
1.0 ⁄ xxxx_UNC
Weight = --------------------------------------- × xxxx_WM (84)
Largest Weight
Weight multipliers allow modification of balanced uncertainties in a consis-

tent way without any computations. They are particularly convenient to use
when the input uncertainties are obtained from uncertainty curves.
Also, some users would rather work with laboratory-established values for
tool uncertainties. Weight multipliers allow them to modify the theoretical
uncertainty values to produce balanced results.
Using laboratory-based and theory-based uncertainties is in fact a conceptu-
ally cleaner way to handle uncertainties. To use that method, however, you
must be very familiar with the meaning of the laboratory uncertainties, the
eigenvalues and principle components, and the ELANPlus solution method.
Default Uncertainties
Table 29, Table 30, and Table 31 show the basis for the default uncertainties
used in the ELANPlus program.
Note: the MIN/MAX values used are the full expected range of the measure-
ment, not just what is seen on the log. If a log value is used as a reference
range for one of the tools, then all tools must be rescaled appropriately.
Uncertainty is the inverse of a weighting factor. A small weight multiplier
applied to the balanced uncertainty means that the equation is not being
weighted as heavily as an equation with a larger multiplier. Default weight
multipliers are based on experience in using ELANPlus processing to solve
various problems.
Dividing the multiplier by four is close to having the tool ignored in the
solution. Truthfully, one can never completely turn the tool off with uncer-
ELANPlus Theory 107

ToC
Index
tainties. To be totally out of the solution, the equation must be removed from
the model (Solve process). Q
GR and SDPT values have been added to the table as a guide. The default
within the ELANPlus program is Absent because these logs have such a high
degree of variability. For the gamma ray, if an assumption is made that there
is seldom more than 50% clay in shales, then the MAX value used in the
uncertainty computation should be at least twice the observed log value in
shales.
Uncertainty Tables
Table 29, Linear Uncertainties, contains the default uncertainties and weight
multipliers for the ELANPlus linear equations. It also shows the values used
to derive the uncertainties.
Table 29
Linear Uncertainties
Equation MIN MAX Balanced Weight

Uncertainty Uncertainty Multiplier
CUDC_UNC 0.0 20.0 0.065 0.67
CXDC_UNC 0.0 20.0 0.065 0.5
DT_UNC 43.0 189.0 2.250 0.75
EATT_UNC 0.0 2500.0 37.500 0.5
ENPA_UNC 0.0 1.0 0.015 1.0
GR_UNC* 0.0* 400.0* 6.000* 0.3
NPHI_UNC 0.0 1.0 0.015 1.0
PHIT_UNC 0.0 1.0 0.015 0.5
RHOB_UNC 1.0 2.8 0.027 1.0
SIGM_UNC 10.0 50.0 0.600 1.0
TPL_UNC 7.2 50.0 0.600 0.5
U_UNC 0.4 15.4 0.225 0.5
VELC_UNC –12.0 20.0 0.500 0.7
VOLS_UNC 0.0 100.0 1.500 1.0
108 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
* GR uncertainty has no default value within the ELANPlus program because of
high variability. The values shown are only suggested as a starting point.
Q
Table 30, Nonlinear Uncertainties, contains the default uncertainties and

weight multipliers for the ELANPlus nonlinear equations. It also shows the
values used to derive the uncertainties.
Table 30
Nonlinear Uncertainties
Equation MIN MAX Balanced Weight

BMK_UNC 0.0 10.0 0.15 0.5
CUDC_xxx_UNC 0.0 20.0 0.065 0.67
CXDC_xxx_UNC 0.0 20.0 0.065 0.5
ENPU_UNC 0.0 1.0 0.015 1.0
NPHU_UNC 0.0 1.0 0.015 1.0
QVSP_UNC 0.0 8.0 × 0.3 0.036 0.5
SDPT_UNC* 0.0* 9.0* 0.14* 1.0
EQHY_UNC 0.0 0.1 0.0015 1.0
* SDPT_N uncertainty has no default value within the ELANPlus program because
of high variability. The values shown are suggested only as a starting point.
Unlike the other ELANPlus equations, those used on elemental concentra-

tions do not lend themselves to simple MIN/MAX calculations to determine
the proper balanced uncertainties. Table 31, Geochemical Uncertainties,
ELANPlus Theory 109

ToC
Index
shows the default uncertainties and weight multipliers for the elemental equa-
tions. Q
Table 31
Geochemical Uncertainties
Equation Balanced Weight

DWAL_UNC 0.0028 1.0
DWCA_UNC 0.011 1.0
DWFE_UNC 0.0018 1.0
DWGD_UNC 0.7 1.0
DWK_UNC 0.0026 1.0
DWMG_UNC 0.021 1.0
DWSI_UNC 0.016 1.0
DWSU_UNC 0.0515 1.0
DWTH_UNC 0.5 1.0
DWTI_UNC 0.002 1.0
DWU_UNC Absent 1.0
FCA_UNC 0.031 1.0
FCHL_UNC 0.010 1.0
FFE_UNC 0.020 1.0
FGD_UNC 0.065 1.0
FHY_UNC 0.010 1.0
FK_UNC 0.125 1.0
FSI_UNC 0.028 1.0
FSUL_UNC 0.019 1.0
FTI_UNC 0.05 1.0
WWAL_UNC 0.00256 1.0
WWCA_UNC 0.01 1.0
110 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Table 31 (Cont.)
Geochemical Uncertainties
Q
Equation Balanced Weight

WWFE_UNC 0.0016 1.0
WWGD_UNC 0.64 1.0
WWK_UNC 0.00235 1.0
WWMG_UNC 0.019 1.0
WWSI_UNC 0.0145 1.0
WWSU_UNC 0.047 1.0
WWTH_UNC 0.45 1.0
WWTI_UNC 0.0018 1.0
WWU_UNC Absent 1.0
Carbonate-Clay Example
The following carbonate-clay example illustrates how uncertainties affect the
answer. The user set DT_UNC = 10 (4.4 times normal, turning it off) in the
carbonate section. The job was run without zoning.
Figure 13 shows the result in the clay section where there was bad hole. The
same effect could have been obtained by setting DT_WM = 4.4 and not
changing the DT_UNC default.
ELANPlus Theory 111

ToC
Index
NPHT ROBT DTT

4.0 0 2.0 2.8 120 60
NPHI RHOB DT
4.0 0 2.0 2.8 120 60
UNPHI = 2.0 URHOB = 0.016 UDT = 10.0

Figure 13 Carbonate-Clay Example with DT_UNC = 10
Zoning DT_UNC to 1.0 (0.44 of normal) to overcome the problem of invalid

density-neutron data in the washed-out zone yields the results shown in
Figure 14. The same result would be obtained by setting DT_WM to 0.44 and
not changing the DT_UNC default value.
NPHT ROBT DTT

4.0 0 2.0 2.8 120 60
NPHI RHOB DT
4.0 0 2.0 2.8 120 60
UNPHI = 4.0 URHOB = 0.48 UDT = 1.0

Figure 14 Carbonate-Clay Example with DT_UNC = 1.0
112 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Chapter 6
Constraints
Constraints are absolute minimum and/or maximum limits on ELANPlus for-
mation component volumes. Constraints typically are used for imposing geo-
logical or petrophysical information, limiting anomalous tool response (for
example, bad hole), and constructing minimum clay indicators.
Unlike constant tools, which are weighted by uncertainties, constraints are
absolute limits. Constraints fall into three categories:
1 Internal constraints
2 Predefined constraints
3 User-defined constraints
Internal Constraints
Internal constraints are imposed by the program on the optimized solution
and cannot be changed by the user. They are based on physical limits, such as
a volume not having a negative value, and the sum of all volumes not being
greater than 1.
The positive volume constraint is always used by the program. It is written as
follows:
Vi ≥ 0.0 (85)
ELANPlus Theory 113

ToC
Index
Another constraint always used by the program is the Summation of Volumes
constraint. It is actually implemented as a pair of constraints, one limiting the Q
sum of volumes to be less than or equal to 1.0, the other limiting the sum to
be greater than or equal to 1.0:
nfc
∑ Vi ≤ 1.0 (85-1a)
i=1
nfc
∑ Vi ≥ 1.0 (85-1b)
i=1
where nfc = number of formation components in the model, excluding any
undisturbed-zone fluids. The effect of the constraint pair is that the sum of
volumes must be exactly equal to 1.0.
Finally, two more internal constraints are used whenever a model contains
both undisturbed-zone and flushed-zone fluid volumes. Used together, these
constraints ensure that the sum of the fluid volumes in the flushed zone is
equal to the sum of the fluid volumes in the undisturbed zone.
nxf nuf
∑ Vi – ∑ V j ≤ 0.0 (85-2a)
i=1 j=1
nxf nuf
∑ Vi – ∑ V j ≥ 0.0 (85-2b)
i=1 j=1
As with the sum of volumes constraints, a pair of inequality constraints is

used to establish an equality.
Predefined Inequality Constraints

Predefined constraints are commonly used constraints available in the
ELANPlus program. Note that the predefined constraints are not automatic
but are made available at the user’s discretion. There are seven such con-
straints:
Maximum Porosity Constraint
114 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Irreducible Water Constraint
Sonic Clay Volume Constraint Q
Conductivity Constraint for Water-Based Muds ( S

xo ≥ S w )
Conductivity Constraint for Oil-Based Muds ( S ≤ S )
xo w
Sxo Constraint for Water-Based Muds ( S
xo ≥ S w )
Sxo Constraint for Oil-Based Muds ( S ≤ S )
xo w
Maximum Porosity Constraint
The maximum Porosity Constraint limits the sum of the flushed-zone fluid
volumes to be less than or equal to the zonable parameter PHIMAX.
nxf
∑ Vi ≤ PHIMAX (86)
i=1
The main application of the Maximum Porosity Constraint is to control
excess porosity, which might be caused by bad hole. Set PHIMAX to the
maximum porosity observed in the good hole. Setting PHIMAX to less than
1.0 (0.5, perhaps) also helps the nonlinear solver to be more stable and run
faster.
Irreducible Water Constraint

The Irreducible Water Constraint limits the sum of all waters in the undis-
turbed zone to be greater than or equal to the minimum of either the zonable
parameter BVIRR or the input curve PHIT. The same constraint is applied to
the flushed zone.
UWAT + UIWA + USFL ≥ minimum ( BVIRR, PHIT ) (86-1a)
XWAT + XIWA + XSFL ≥ minimum ( BVIRR, PHIT ) (86-1b)
where:
UWAT = undisturbed-zone water
UIWA = undisturbed-zone irreducible water
USFL = undisturbed-zone special fluid if the global parameter Special
Fluids is set to Water or Immovable Water
XWAT = flushed-zone water
ELANPlus Theory 115

ToC
Index
XIWA = flushed-zone irreducible water
XSFL = flushed-zone special fluid if the global parameter Special Fluids Q
is set to Water or Immovable Water
BVIRR = value of the bulk volume irreducible zoned parameter
PHIT = value of the curve bound to PHIT
The PHIT limit is for very low porosity carbonates and will be active only
when there is an input PHIT curve. The Irreducible Water Constraint is
applied to prevent the computation of unrealistically low water saturations, as
can happen in low porosity or when the resistivity tool is spiking to high val-
ues.
Sonic Clay Volume Constraint

The Sonic Clay Volume Limit Constraint limits the sum of all the clays to less
than or equal to a clay volume that is based on a sonic matrix velocity
(Vmatrix) versus matrix volumetric photoelectric cross-section (Umatrix)
relationship.
nc
∑ VDCi ≤ A × U + B × VELC + C – D × PHIT (87)
i=1
where:
VDCi = volume of dry clay for clay i
U = value of the volumetric photoelectric cross-section curve
VELC = value of the sonic velocity curve
A, B, C, and D = coefficients computed from response parameters
The concept of the Sonic Clay Limit Constraint relies on the fact that, in a car-
bonate, the sonic velocity is sensitive to the amount of clay in the matrix. The
constraint has very useful applications in distinguishing between clay and
radioactive dolomite, especially when a computed gamma ray, CGR, (gamma
ray minus uranium) is unavailable. Observe the crossplot of Vmatrix versus
Umatrix in Figure 15.
116 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
24
Q
22 DOLOMITE
CALCITE
Vmatrix
20
18
16
ILLITE
14
6 8 10 12 14 16
Umatrix
Figure 15 Matrix velocity versus matrix photoelectric cross-section.
The equation of the line connecting the limestone and dolomite points is given
by
0 = a × U matrix + b × V matrix + c (88)
where:
a = 1.0
b = –  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
U_CALC – U_DOLO
 VELC_CALC – VELC_DOLO
U_CALC × VELC_DOLO – U_DOLO × VELC_CALC

c = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VELC_CALC – VELC_DOLO
The fraction of the matrix rock that is illite (F ILLI) is given by the ratio of the
distance from the point (Umatrix, Vmatrix) to the limestone-dolomite line to the
distance from the illite point (U_ILLI, VELC_ILLI) to the limestone-dolo-
mite line.
ILLI a × U matrix + b × V matrix + c

F ILLI = -------------- = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (89)
1 – φt a × U_ILLI + b × VELC_ILLI + c
where:
ELANPlus Theory 117

ToC
Index
ILLI = volume of illite (wet clay)
Q
φt = total porosity
U – φ t × U fluid
Umatrix = ---------------------------------------
1 – φt
VELC – φ t × SPORF
Vmatrix = ---------------------------------------------------
1 – φt
Introduce the following definitions:
DC ≡ a × U_ILLI + b × VELC_ILLI + c (89-1a)
a
A ≡ -------- (89-1b)
DC
b
B ≡ -------- (89-1c)
DC
c
C ≡ -------- (89-1d)
DC
Then Equation (89) can be written
ILLI
-------------- = A × U matrix + B × V matrix + C (90)
1 – φt
Expanding the definitions of Umatrix and Vmatrix yields
ILLI  U – φ t × U fluid  VELC – φ t × SPORF

-------------- = A ×  --------------------------------------- + B  --------------------------------------------------- + C (91)
1 – φt  1 – φt   1 – φt 
Finally, multiply both sides by 1 − φt to get
ILLI = A × U + B × VELC + C – φ t × ( A × U fluid + B × SPORF + C ) (92)
The value computed for ILLI in Equation (92) is the value used as the upper
limit for the sum of all dry clay volumes in the Sonic Clay Volume Constraint.
118 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
In order to evaluate the Sonic Clay Volume Constraint, the program requires
values for all of the parameters and tools in Table 32. Q
Table 32
Parameters and Tools Required by the
Sonic Clay Volume Constraint
Parameters Tools
U_CALC VELC_CALC U
U_DOLO VELC_DOLO VELC
U_ILLI VELC_ILLI PHIT*
U_XBWA PHIT_ILLI
U_XWAT SPORF
WCLP_ILLI
*PHIT is required input!
If the global parameter Clay is set to Wet, the illite wet clay parameters are
converted to matrix values according to Equation (89). The Sonic Clay Vol-
ume Constraint is normally used in carbonates. No harm is done if it is used
in shaly sands, because the limiting value is generally greater than the volume
of clay computed by the ELANPlus program.
Conductivity Constraint for Water-Based Mud (Sxo ≥ Sw)

The Conductivity Constraint for Water-Based Mud (Sxo Sw) can be confus-
ing. It is best explained by reviewing an example of effective porosity, undis-
turbed-zone water, and flushed-zone water in a clean formation (Figure 16).
Notice that flushed-zone water spikes to a value less than that of the undis-
turbed-zone water.
ELANPlus Theory 119

ToC
Index
Undisturbed-zone water volume

0.25 0.0
Flushed-zone water volume
0.25 0.0
Effective porosity
0.25 0.0
Figure 16 Porosity contents in a clean zone with no constraints applied
The Conductivity Constraint for Water-Based Mud is designed to limit the

volume of water computed in the flushed zone by the volume of water com-
puted in the undisturbed zone, assuming that the undisturbed-zone water is
correct.
For water-based muds, the invading fluid is water. Therefore, the water satu-
ration of the flushed zone is expected to be greater than or equal to the undis-
turbed-zone-water saturation.
Use the Conductivity Constraint for Water-Based Mud when (a) the flushed-
zone tools (EPT, MSFL) are considered to be less accurate than the undis-
turbed-zone conductivity (as in rough hole or unusual mudcake conditions)
and (b) you wish to force the Sxo ≥ Sw condition, using only conductivity data.
Otherwise, use the Sxo Constraint for Water-Based Mud.
As indicated by its name, the Conductivity Constraint for Water-Based Mud
relies exclusively on the deep conductivity (CUDC) for the limit. Conceptu-
ally, the constraint can be written as
Xwater ≥ Uwater + PHI_OFFSET (93)
where:
120 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Xwater = the sum of all flushed-zone water volumes
Uwater = the sum of all undisturbed-zone water volumes Q
PHI_OFFSET = a small offset to Uwater

The form in which it is implemented can be derived as follows:
1 Start with the linear deep conductivity response equation.
ns nuf
∑( ∑  ---------------------- × V j
CUDC_ j
CUDC = CUDC_i × Vi ) + (94)
a 
i=1 j=1
where:
ns = number of solid formation components
CUDC = value of the deep conductivity measurement
a = the Archie porosity factor
Assuming that the effect of undisturbed-zone irreducible water and
special fluid is negligible compared to undisturbed-zone water yields
ns
∑(
CUDC_UWAT
CUDC = CUDC_i × Vi ) + ------------------------------------- × UWAT (95)
a
i=1
2 Solve for the undisturbed-zone water.
ns
CUDC – ∑( CUDC_i × Vi )
i=1
UWAT = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (96)
CUDC_UWAT
-------------------------------------
a
3 Substitute the right hand side of Equation (96) for Uwater into the con-
straint, Equation (93), and expand Xwater to a formal summation.
ELANPlus Theory 121

ToC
Index
ns
nxf
CUDC – ∑( CUDC_i × Vi ) Q
∑ Vk ≥ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i=1
CUDC_UWAT
+ PHI_OFFSET (97)
k=1 -------------------------------------
a
4 Finally, rearrange to isolate the conductivity measurement.
 nxf  ns

∑ Vk – PHI_OFFSET × ------------------------------------- + ∑
CUDC_UWAT
( CUDC_i × Vi ) ≥ CUDC (98)
  a
k = 1  i=1
Equation (98) is the form in which the constraint exists in the program. The
conductivity from the solids summation term
ns
∑i = 1 ( CUDC_i × Vi )
usually is exclusively from clays. If other conductive rocks or minerals are

present, they will be included.
Figure 17 allows you to compare the results of applying the Conductivity
Constraint for Water-Based Mud with PHI_OFFSET = -0.02 to the data from
Figure 16.
122 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
undisturbed-zone water volume

0.25 0.0
Flushed-zone water volume
0.25 0.0
Effective porosity
0.25 0.0
UWAT + PHI_OFFSET
0.25 0.0
Figure 17 Porosity contents in a clean zone with the Conductivity Constraint

for Water-Based Mud applied
Conductivity Constraint for Oil-Based Mud (Sxo ≤ Sw)

When oil-based mud is used, the invading fluid is a hydrocarbon. Therefore,
the water saturation of the flushed zone is expected to be less than or equal to
the undisturbed zone. As in the water-based constraint, the limit is based on
deep-reading conductivity.
The derivation of the constraint is the same as for the water-based constraint.
The only difference is that the direction of the inequality is reversed.
Xwater ≤ Uwater + PHI_OFFSET (99)
Sxo Constraint for Water-Based Mud (Sxo ≥ Sw)

The Sxo Constraint for Water-Based Mud is more commonly used than the
Conductivity Constraint for Water-Based Mud, because it better reflects stan-
dard constraints. The Sxo Constraint for Water-Based Mud limits the volume
of water in the flushed zone to greater than or equal to the volume of undis-
turbed water, on the basis of the normal response equations.
ELANPlus Theory 123

ToC
Index
The Sxo Constraint differs from the Conductivity Constraint in that a single
tool does not determine the undisturbed water used to constrain the flushed- Q
zone water. Its application is similar to the Conductivity Constraint but it can
be applied more generally.
Sxo Constraint for Oil-Based Mud (Sxo ≤ Sw)

The Sxo Constraint for Water-Based Mud limits the volume of water in the
flushed zone to less than or equal to the volume of undisturbed water on the
basis of the normal response equations. This constraint differs from the Con-
ductivity Constraint for Oil-Based Mud in that a single tool does not deter-
mine the undisturbed water used to constrain the flushed-zone water. Its
application is similar to the Conductivity Constraint, but it can be applied
more generally.
User-Defined Constraints
User-defined constraints are created by the user to constrain volume solutions
as a function of the input tools, the constants, and a combination of tools and
constants. The constraints are defined in a syntax much like that of the C pro-
gramming language.
The syntax includes the most common arithmetic operators and logical com-
parisons. Any curve available in the current data focus and any user-accessi-
ble variable known to the ELANPlus application can be used.
In addition to program variables, you can create and use as many convenience
and intermediate variables as you desire. User-defined constraints are a very
powerful and flexible means of controlling volumetric results.
For details on syntax and user-defined constraints, see the ELANPlus User’s
Guide, available on line from the Help menu in the Single Well mode of the
ELANPlus program.
124 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Chapter 7
Model Combination
An ELANPlus model can never solve for more formation components than
the number of response equations (including any internal response equations)
in the model. Since the number of logging measurements available from any
given well is often small, it might seem that wells with widely varied geology
cannot be evaluated, but they can.
Previous programs have handled the complex lithology problem with inter-
nally defined geological models. If the data did not match the prebuilt models,
the problem could not be solved.
Only the ELANPlus program can explicitly define and process multiple mod-
els in a single pass, optimizing each model for a particular geology or even a
specific formation. The volumes for each model are solved independently,
each potentially with different formation components, response equations,
parameter values, and constraints.
The results from the individual models can then be combined in a variety of
ways. The models can be combined after individual fine tuning or while the
Solve Processes are being executed.
Methods for Generating Combined Answer Sets

To combine results of different processes (models) you must first create a
Combine process and associated dependencies, using the Session Editor. For
example, if three models, Shaly_Sand, Carbonate, and Bad_Hole, were being
combined, the Session Editor might look like Figure 18.
ELANPlus Theory 125

ToC
Index
Shaly_Sand Carbonate Bad_Hole Q

S1 S2 S3
Combine
C1
Figure 18 Three Solve processes being combined.
Once a Combine process exists, the Combine Editor can be activated. To do

that, click on the Combine process icon; then select the Process option from
the Edit menu.
The Combine Editor is the means by which the order and method of model
combination are controlled. It contains a list of zones (maybe only one zone
at the start) and zone boundaries.
Zone boundaries can be added, deleted, or modified. The zone boundaries in
the Combine Editor are different from the boundaries used by the zoned
parameter editor. For each zone, a combination method is chosen.
Models can be combined by two main methods: individual models and prob-
abilities. Probabilities can be determined from an external source or com-
puted internally.
The results of probability combination depend on whether the probability
maximum or probability average method is used. All together, there are five
possibilities for the combination method:
Individual model
External maximum
External average
Internal maximum
Internal average
126 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Only one method can be chosen for each zone, but any combination of meth-
ods can be used in different zones. Q
Individual Models
When an individual model is selected as the combination method for a zone,
the results are from that model used exclusively for that zone.
For example, for the session depicted in Figure 18, assume that there are five
zones. Using individual models, the models might be combined as Zone 1,
Shaly_Sand; Zone 2, Carbonate; Zone 3, Bad_Hole; Zone 4, Shaly_Sand;
Zone 5, Shaly_Sand. At each zone boundary there is an instantaneous change
from the volumes computed by one model to those computed by the next
model in the list.
The individual model method provides direct control of the appearance of the
combined results. It reflects the fact that, in nature, abrupt facies changes are
common.
Model Probabilities
Sometimes, gradual transitions occur. Sometimes, abruptly alternating envi-
ronments make manually zoning and selecting models impossibly tedious.
Model probabilities are well suited to either problem.
A model probability is a value between 0.0 and 1.0, inclusive, assigned to a
model to indicate its suitability according to volumetric results and/or curve
data. A value of 0.0 indicates that the model does not fit; a value of 1.0 indi-
cates suitability.
The volumetric data can come from any model in the session for which results
are available. The curve data can come from any available database curve.
External Probabilities
The ELANPlus program allows computation of model probabilities by an
external source. The source might be a facies identification program, some
custom or proprietary code, or even a previous run of the ELANPlus program.
Whatever the source of the probabilities, the curves are bound to PRB1 for
probability of model 1, PRB2 for probability of model 2, and so on.
At each data level, the model assigned to be model 1 takes on the probability
value from the curve bound to PRB1. Model 2 takes on the probability value
from the curve bound to PRB2 and others. If the probability value of any
model lies outside the range 0.0 to 1.0, it is clipped. Model combination then
ELANPlus Theory 127

ToC
Index
proceeds as discussed in the Final Model Combination, Using Probabilities
section. Q
RHOB_UNC_WM = Weight Multiplier
Largest Weight = Maximum Weight of all weights encountered
Internal Probabilities
Internal probabilities are computed from probability expressions entered in
the Combination Probability Expression section of the Combine Editor. The
entries can be obtained from an ASCII file or typed in. Good model probabil-
ity expressions are something of an art but are well worth the effort, particu-
larly when the formation is highly laminated.
Suppose that you wanted the Carbonate model of Figure 18 to have zero prob-
ability when the volume of calcite computed by that model is less than or
equal to 40%, and have a probability of 1.0 when the volume of calcite
exceeds 65%. The values required for a probability expression required to
impose those conditions can be computed from the system of equations
0.0 = 0.40x + y
(100)
1.0 = 0.65x + y
from which the values x = 4.0, y = −1.6 result. The probability expression that
you would enter in the Combine Editor would be
prob(SOL.2, 4.0*CALC_VOL.SOL2 - 1.6)
The keyword prob indicates the introduction of a probability expression.
The entry SOL.2 indicates that the probability is to be applied to Solve Pro-
cess number 2.
Note that the Carbonate model in Figure 18 is marked S2, indicating the Solve
Process number.
The 4.0 and -1.6 are the coefficients that were computed from the system
of equations (100). Finally, CALC_VOL.SOL2 indicates that the mineral
volume used is the calcite volume from Solve Process number 2.
When internal probabilities are used, any model that does not have a proba-
bility expression is assigned a probability of 0.0.
Once all probabilities are computed, model combination proceeds.
For more information see the Final Model Combination, Using Probabilities
section in Chapter 7, Model Combination.
128 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Bad Hole Probability
Bad hole data (data corruption by enlarged or rough hole) is a common prob- Q
lem in log analysis. Many techniques have been developed to handle it.
In programs using optimization solvers, like the ELANPlus program, often
the weighting on one tool or another changes as a function of hole size. That
works sometimes, but in reality tools are seldom just a percentage bad. Their
measurements are usually good or bad (unrecoverable).
To allow for the problems caused by bad hole, the ELANPlus application
includes the concept of a bad hole model. In addition to probabilities for indi-
vidual models, there exists a special bad hole probability. It is used to switch
over to a specific model when certain conditions are met. A bad hole model
usually uses a subset of available logging measurements, eliminating tools
that would respond poorly in bad hole, such as RHOB, TPL, and so on.
Since fewer tools are available, bad hole models typically use a limited num-
ber of formation components as well. Because of the way the final model
combination is set up, the bad hole model takes precedence over all others.
For more information see the Final Model Combination, Using Probabilities
section in Chapter 7, Model Combination.
For example, assume a bad hole probability based on the hole rugosity curve,
HRUG_CH, and differential caliper curve, DCAL_CH. The desired result is
to have the bad hole probability high if the hole is washed out (large
DCAL_CH) or if the borehole wall is rough (high HRUG_CH), regardless of
hole size.
Assume that the probability based on differential caliper should be zero when
DCAL_CH reads 1.5 (inches) or less and the probability should be 1.0 when
it reads 2.5 or higher. Probability based on hole rugosity will be set to zero
when HRUG_CH reads 0.2 or less, and the probability will be 1.0 when it
reads 0.3 or higher.
The bad hole probability may then be computed as
PCAL = (DCAL_CH - 1.5)/(2.5 - 1.5)
PRUG = (HRUG_CH - 0.2)/(0.3 - 0.2)
prob (BADHOLE, min(max(PCAL, PRUG, 0.0), 1.0))
where min and max are the minimum and maximum functions provided by
the expressions parser. The parser provides many other useful functions as
well, such as a linear transform that could have been used in place of the
explicit arithmetic in the PCAL and PRUG expressions.
ELANPlus Theory 129

ToC
Index
For details on probability expression syntax, see the ELANPlus User’s Guide
(by selecting from the Help menu from within the single-well part of the
Q
ELANPlus program).
Final Model Combination, Using Probabilities

Once the individual and bad hole probabilities have been computed (whether
externally or internally), the individual model results are combined, using
rules based on these:
1 Combination order
2 Whether Probability Maximum or Probability Average is selected
3 Bad hole probability
Combination Order
Part of the Combine Editor is dedicated to something called Combine Order.
It is an ordered list of the processes feeding into a combine process. Each pro-
cess involved in the model combination is assigned a combination order num-
ber based on its position in the list. The order is used in the final stage of the
internal average and external average combination methods. It is also used for
resolving ties.
In general, the primary geological model should be the last process in the
Combine Order. If a bad hole model exists, it should always be assigned the
first position in the Combine Order.
Probability Maximum
If the chosen combination method is external maximum or internal maxi-
mum, the individual model probabilities are examined, and the model with
the largest probability value is selected as the sole model to be used for the
current data level. If there is a tie between probabilities, the primary geologi-
cal model wins.
Probability Average and the Bad Hole Model
When either the external average or internal average method is selected, the
final probability of a model is based on:
• Its original probability.
• Its position in the Combine Order list.
Let us consider the example shown in the session in Figure 18) . There are
three processes Shaly_Sand (S1), Carbonate (S2) and Bad_Hole (S3) feeding
130 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
into the Combine process. The order in which these models are listed in the
combine order is shown in the figure below. Q
Shaly_Sand(S1) the main geological model is listed at the bottom of the list
and Bad_Hole(S3) the badhole model is on the top. The final probability of
the badhole model (first in the list) is given by
prob ( SOL3 ) = prob ( SOL3 ) 0 + prob ( BAD ) × ( 1 – prob ( SOL3 ) 0 ) (101)
where:
prob(SOL3) = the new probability of model S3
prob(SOL3)0 = the original probability of model S3
prob(BAD) = the bad hole probability
The following relationship between prob(3) and prob(BAD) results from
Equation (101):
prob ( SOL3 ) 0 , if prob ( BAD ) = 0.0

prob ( SOL3 ) =  (102)
 1.0 if prob ( BAD ) = 1.0
Remember that prob(BAD) = 0.0 if no bad hole probability expression exists.

Once the bad hole probability has been applied to the first model, the remain-
ing probabilities are readjusted as follows (again using the example in Figure
18).
ELANPlus Theory 131

ToC
Index
Using the cascading scheme of in Table 33, the higher-numbered models take
precedence over lower-numbered models. Q
Table 33
Probability Cascading Used for
Final Probability Values
prob(SOL3) = (prob(SOL3))
prob(SOL2) = (prob(SOL2)0) × (1.0 – prob(SOL3))
prob(SOL1) = 1.0 × (1.0 – prob(SOL2)) × (1.0 – prob(SOL3))
For example, assume that before final combination prob(1) = 1.0, prob(2) =
1.0, prob(3) = 0.0, and prob(BAD) = 0.0. When the final combination is
applied, model 2 will receive 100% of the final probability, and model 1 will
receive 0%.
No probability expression is required for model 1(the last model in the list).
It gets whatever remains after the models listed above it have removed their
share of the probability.
It may seem backwards that the primary geological model is accorded only
the leftovers of the secondary models. The idea is that in most cases, the mod-
els listed earlier in the list are exceptions. As such, their probabilities are zero
or low most of the time. The primary model gets all or most of the probability
until an exceptional condition occurs. At such point a specialized model takes
over.
If no probability expressions exist, all individual model probabilities are zero.
In that case, the probability cascading method causes all volumetric results to
be obtained from the last model in the list, since its probability will be 1.0 as
a result of the cascade.
The final volumetric results are obtained as
nmod
Vi = ∑ Vi ( j ) × prob ( j ) (103)
j=1
where:
Vi = volume of the ith component in the union of all formation com-
ponents from all models
132 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
nmod = number of models being combined
prob(j) = final, cascaded probability of model j Q
ELANPlus Theory 133

ToC
Index
134 ELANPlus Theory

ToC
Index
Chapter 8
Quality Control
ELANPlus quality control consists of developing appropriate models and
controlling the quality of the results.
Quality Control of the Model

Model development involves taking known information about the geological
area and building appropriate ELANPlus models. Although the ELANPlus
program has no knowledge of how appropriate a model is geologically, two
pieces of information can be computed that provide an indication of the math-
ematical validity of the model: resolution number, and relative volume uncer-
tainties.
Resolution number is the average sensitivity of the results to small changes in
the parameters or tool response. A value of less than 4 indicates good resolu-
tion. A value greater than 6 indicates poor resolution.
A relative volume uncertainty is the uncertainty for an individual volume,
normalized so that the smallest uncertainty has a value of 1.0. When all rela-
tive volume uncertainties are less than 10, the results warrant a high level of
confidence.
The resolution number and relative volume uncertainties are derived from the
response matrix and can be computed only for linear models, but the same
concept can be applied to nonlinear models. Neither the resolution number
nor the relative volume uncertainties are output by the program. They are used
ELANPlus Theory 135

ToC
Index
here to show how changes to a model affect the mathematical stability of
results. Q
A poor resolution number or poor relative volume uncertainties may be the
result of an unbalanced uncertainty matrix, which can result when one tool is
weighted much more heavily than the others. While there are good reasons to
weight a tool more heavily in a particular well (for example, sonic in bad
hole), during model development you should keep the uncertainty matrix bal-
anced. The balanced uncertainty matrix discussed earlier provides the lowest
resolution number for any given model
For more information see the Balanced Uncertainties section of Chapter 5,
Uncertainties.
For a model with balanced uncertainties, the best way to improve the resolu-
tion is to add an additional measurement that responds to a volume being
solved. For example, consider the model in Table 34.
Table 34
An Example Model
Components QUAR ILLI XWAT XOIL

Equations RHOB NPHI GR CXDC ΣVolumes
Resolution Number = 2.86

QUAR = 3.4741
ILLI = 4.3235
XWAT = 1.0000
XOIL = 1.8322
Now extend the model by adding orthoclase feldspar (ORTH), as shown in
Table 35.
Table 35
Model with Orthoclase Added
Components QUAR ORTH ILLI XWAT XOIL

Equations RHOB NPHI GR CXDC ΣVolumes
ELANPlus Theory 136

ToC
Index
QUAR = 210.28
ORTH = 189.95 Q
ILLI = 36.865
XWAT = 1.0000
XOIL = 16.404
Obviously the solution of Table 35 is not very believable. To solve for ortho-
clase requires an additional measurement.
Extend the model by adding the potassium measurement (WWK), as shown
in Table 36..
Table 36
Model with Orthoclase and Potassium Added

Equations RHOB NPHI WWK GR CXDC ΣVolume

QUAR = 2.1606
ORTH = 1.2834
ILLI = 4.0862
XWAT = 1.0000
XOIL = 1.7494
Note that the models of Table 34, Table 35, and Table 36 are all possible. That
is, the number of unknowns is less than or equal to the number of equations.
Table 34 is a quartz-clay model. In Table 35 orthoclase was added. Note that
the resulting resolution number and the relative volume uncertainties are very
poor. That suggests that the tools provided do not have sufficient resolution
for the model, so the results obtained from ELANPlus processing would be
very poor. Adding the potassium measurement in Table 36, however, again
results in a well-defined model.
Neither tools nor volumes can be arbitrarily added or subtracted from a
model. The choice must come from external knowledge in one of three basic
forms:
Adding more individual models and limiting the types of minerals
found by each model.
Adding additional information in the form of constant equations.
ELANPlus Theory 137

ToC
Index
Constraining the results of an individual model to a known solution
space.
Q
Examples of Bad Hole Models

In rough hole conditions, some models lose their validity. Often, bad hole is
limited to a single facies (as perhaps only the shales wash out). Thus, a model
needs to be defined with a more limited number of volumes and tools. A bad
hole model example is shown in Table 37.
Table 37
A Bad Hole Model
Components QUAR ILLI XIWA UIWA XIWA=UIWA

Equations DT GR CUDC ΣVolumes CT1
Note that hydrocarbons are not included in this model! Therefore, the model
is appropriate only when the bad hole is in sections believed to be nonproduc-
tive.
Notice that the model is overdetermined because of the relationship estab-
lished by the constant tool, CT1. Thus, a similar model could be built even
when no DT data are available. (The CUDC equation can be an excellent
rough-hole porosity tool in zones where clearly there are no hydrocarbons.)
In cases where the bad hole is in more than just one facies, consider using the
constant tools. Take, for example, a sand-shale section; the primary model for
the sands is shown in Table 38.
Table 38
Sand-Shale Model

Equations RHOB NPHI WWK WWTH CXDC ΣVolumes
ELANPlus Theory 138

ToC
Index
If there are some sections where hole rugosity causes the RHOB and CXDC
equations to be in error, you can define a second model where those measure- Q
ments are replaced with constant equations, as for example in Table 39.
Table 39
Sand-Shale Model for Rough Hole

Equations CT1 NPHI WWK WWTH CT2 ΣVolumes
CT2 controls an average moved hydrocarbon ratio; CT1 controls an average

porosity for the sands. The actual values for CT1, CT2 and their parameters
are determined in good hole. The basic model and the bad hole model are
combined using ELANPlus model combination logic.
Another way of handling bad hole is through the use of a constraint. An exam-
ple is limiting volumes such that the reconstructed density is greater than
2.15:
constraint(Min_Density,
2.5*ILLI+2.65*QUAR+2.71*CALC+2.85*DOLO+1.0*XWAT
2.15)
If density is less than 2.15, the constraint will affect the answer as if the den-
sity had a value of 2.15.
Quality Control of the Results

The primary quality control mechanism for ELANPlus results is the use of
reconstructed logs. Reconstructed log quality information is available in two
forms: the curve SDR (standard deviation of the reconstruction), and the indi-
vidual reconstructed logs, themselves.
SDR provides an overall indication of how well the logs reconstruct. For a
determined model, SDR could theoretically approach 0. With real data the
value of SDR may be low but will not reach 0.
For an overdetermined model, an SDR greater than 0 theoretically means that
one or more of the logs do not agree with the other logs. To determine which
logs are being affected, the ELANPlus processing provides a set of logs
reconstructed from the volumetric results of each Solve or Combine process
in the session.
ELANPlus Theory 139

ToC
Index
Reconstructed logs are an important tool for quality control of ELANPlus
results. Here are some points to remember about reconstructed logs. Q
Reconstructed Logs Can Identify Model Problems

Reconstructed logs can identify model problems such as data outside the
model or inconsistency within models.
Data Outside the Model
Reconstructed logs can help identify problems caused by data outside the
model. For example, a problem is indicated in a sand-shale model when
RHOB_REC = 2.5, but RHOB = 2.8. The high density must be rationalized.
The most likely cause is the presence of a heavier mineral, perhaps a dolomite
stringer.
After model tuning is complete, the density log should reconstruct (unless
there is bad hole). If it does not, there is a problem.
Inconsistency Within Models
Reconstructed logs can help identify problems caused by inconsistency
within models. For example, oil parameters input for NPHI and gas parame-
ters for RHOB.
Poor Reconstruction Means There Is a Problem

Poor reconstruction means that there is a problem that may lie with the log
that does not reconstruct, another log, a constraint, invalid data (for example,
bad hole data), the selection of one or more parameters (for example, Rw,
hydrocarbon type).
A Good Reconstruction Can Go With a Wrong Answer

A good reconstruction does not necessarily mean that the answer is correct. It
means the data fit the model. An example is an average carbonate model,
which is underdetermined, that will compute a very geologically questionable
50% dolomite and 50% clay in shaly zones. The user must make sure that the
chosen model makes petrophysical sense for the area being interpreted.
Use Predicted Value to Check for Inconsistencies

Using the predicted value for a log (reconstructing a log from a model that
does not use the log directly) is a powerful technique to check for parameter
inconsistencies such as wrong Rw and to check the validity of a particular log.
There are two methods: use the log from one model with the volume from
other models, and set the uncertainty very high.
ELANPlus Theory 140

ToC
Index
Using the Log from One Model and the Volumes from Others
Have the log in one model and use the Combine Editor to choose the volumes Q
from other models to use for reconstruction.
Setting the Uncertainty Very High
Set the uncertainty very high for the log in question (assuming the original
model was overdetermined). Setting the value very high only de-emphasizes
the input; it never completely eliminates the influence of the data in the final
answer. A common way to run the first ELANPlus pass is to have
CUDC_UNC high to see if there is an Rw problem; then balance for the final
computation.
Summary
In summary, the SDR curve will point out areas in which log reconstruction
is poor. It is then up to you to determine the cause of the inconsistency.
Remember that a good SDR does not always mean good results. As a final
check, always ask, “Do the volumetric results make sense?”
ELANPlus Theory 141

ToC
Index
Appendix-1
The Simandoux Conductivity Equation (A historical perspective)
The actual form and derivation of the “Simandoux”equation as quoted and
used in ELAN has a long and tortuous history. Enquiring minds who refer to
the original Simandoux paper of 19631 (and can read French) will find that
the paper is in fact a report on laboratory experiments to measure the complex
dialectric constant at 1MHz of material samples that relate the dialectric con-
stants and losses to water saturations; and resistivity to porosity, clay content
and clay resisitivity, but for water filled formations only, by the following
equations:
2 K – C∗
ζε 1 + ε′ = ζε 1 + εδ + ASw + BSw = Kζε 1 -------------------------------------------------2 (EQ 9)
( K – C ∗ ) 2 + ( G∗ ⁄ ω )
and
1 2 G∗ ⁄ ω
ε″ = --- ( ASw + BSw ) = Kζε 1 -------------------------------------------------2 (EQ 10)
µ ( K – C∗ ) 2 + ( G∗ ⁄ ω )
and
1 1 p
--- = ------- + --------
R R m R sh
ELANPlus Theory 142

ToC
Index
(EQ 11)
Where: Q
ε1 = Dialectric constant of apparatus walls

ε’ = Real dialectric constant of the sample
ε” = Dialectric losses of the sample
δ = Thickness of the ionic double layer
ζ = Dimensionless coefficient, describing the ratio between the active capac-
ity of the apparatus walls and that of the sample = (K/ε1)/C0
C0= Active capacity of apparatus cell.
ω = Angular frequency of the current 2πf
µ = Proportionality of the coefficient between ε’and ε”
K= Capacity of the apparatus insulating walls
C*= Apparent capacity of the cell-sample combination
G*= Apparent conductance of the cell-sample combination
A= Constant
B= Constant
p= Clay content of the sample
R= Radius of apparatus external walls in the case of a cylindrical cell
Rm= Resistivity of the equivalent clean formation
Rsh= Clay particle resistance
Sw= Water saturation
It may be seen from the form that the above equation is strictly valid for lam-
inated layers of clean sand and shale only.For this reason many, in fact most,
saturation models that are variations of a laminated model are termed “Siman-
doux”equations.
The actual form of the equation in ELANPlus is based on the same concept
as Simandoux of laminated sand-shale layers but originally derived from an
equvalent parallel resisitor model. This gives:
m n
φ e Sw
1 Vsh
----- = ( 1 – Vsh ) ----------------------------------m- + ---------
Rt aRw ( 1 – V sh ) Rsh
ELANPlus Theory 143

ToC
Index
(EQ 12)
This equation was first modified for a reduced effect in hydrocarbon bearing
formations:
m n
φ e Sw ˙
1 Vsh
----- = ( 1 – Vsh ) ----------------------------------m- + --------- Sw (EQ 13)
Rt aRw ( 1 – V ) sh
Rsh
And then for the non-laminar behaviour of real clays:
m n
φ e Sw Vsh
c
1 (EQ 14)
----- = -------------------------------------------
m–1
-+ ----------
- Sw
Rt c Rsh
aRw ( 1 – V sh )
This equation was first published in the 1972 Schlumberger Log Interpreta-
tion Principles2 book with the assumption of m=n=2. In his 1985 review of
saturation equations Paul Worthington3 classifies the original Simandoux
equation as a “Type 1”, which means it has a form of Phi x Sw plus linear
Vclay, whereas the above equation is classified as a “Type 2” where Sw is
raised to a power and Vclay contains an Sw term.He attributes this equation
to Schlumberger, 1972, with no reference to Simandoux. However, the 1972
Schlumberger Log Interpretation Principles book directly references the orig-
inal Simandoux paper as the basis of the 1972 equaiton, and also the paper by
Poupon et al4 in 1967 as the development of the model.
Considering that Shale is a mixture of clay and silt, the 1972 Log Interpreta-
tion Principles book uses the standard R0=aRw/φm to obtain:
R clay R clay
( V sh = V silt + V cl ) → ( I Silt = V silt ⁄ V Sh ) → R sh = -------------------------x = ------------------------------
( 1 – V silt ) ( 1 – V silt ⁄ V sh ) x
(EQ 15)
where x is empircally found to range between 1.4 and 2.4, depending on clay
distribution type, and Vsilt is the silt index or volume. Combining equations 6
and 7 and using m, n, and a instead of 2,2 and 1 :
m n
φ e Sw V cl
x
1 (EQ 16)
- + ---------------------------------------------
----- = --------------------------------------------------------------- ( x – c)
- Sw
Rt c m–1
aRw ( 1 – ( V cl + V silt ) ) R cl ( V cl + V silt )
ELANPlus Theory 144

ToC
Index
‘x’ and ‘c’ were usually taken equal to 2 for practical reasons: it allows reduc- Q
tion of the equation to a quadratic form that may be solved using a slide rule
or simpe calculator.
With the x = ‘ersh’ and the c = ‘swshe+1’in ELANPlus terminology, three fur-
ther assumptions were made :
1) The difference between the exponent of (m-1) and 1.0 for shale term in the
first denominator is not significant enough to consider for shaley sand, and
therefore (m-1) is assumed 1.0.
2) The Sw in the second term should be to the power of n/2, not unity.
3) ‘m’ may vary with porosity as per the Shell formula. The usual value
assumed for mc2 is 0.19.
This produces the form of the equation as implemeted, and with conductivity
replacing resistivity, the Simandoux Conductivity Equation is writ-
ten:
n
---
ersh  V uwa
2 ( m + ( mc2 ⁄ φ e ) )  V uwa n
C ucl V cl  --------------- φe  ---------------
φ  φe 
(EQ 17)
 e  C uwa
C t = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
( ersh – swshe – 1 ) a ( swshe + 1 )
( V cl + V silt ) 1 – ( V cl + V silt )
Table 40

water
ELANPlus Theory 145

ToC
Index
Table 40 (Cont.)
Q

water
ERSH — 1.0 ersh Exponent to compute Cush from Cucl
SWSHE — 0.5 swshe Simandoux shale effect
† -> See Table 24, Default Values Used for Clay, on page 87.
Table 28 Notes:
2 Replace any U or u with an X or x, ERSH with ERSHO, and N with
EXPXO for the flushed-zone equation.
3
The ELANPlus default values for ersh and swshe are 1.0 and 0.5, which cor-
respond to an ‘x’of 1.0 and a ‘c’of 1.5. This essentially assumes that by
default in ELANPlus the silt behaves in the same manner as clay in relation
to the conductivity. The expected range for ersh was given above as 1.4=>2.4,
and that of swshe as 0=>1.0. The default value of mc2 is 0.0. In tight forma-
tions for which this was developped (actually very low prosity limestones!),
the value is usually taken as 0.19 .
The reader is refered to the refernces below and other referecnes in the liter-
ature, such as the SPWLA Shaley Sand Reprint, to determine the applicability
of the equation outside the strict model of a laminated shaley sand, and also
the range of industry accepted values for the above exponents beyond those
quoted.
ELANPlus Theory 146

ToC
Index
References: Q
1) Simandoux, P., 1963, Measures diélectriques en milieu poroux. Revue de

l’I.F.P., pp 193-215
2) Schlumberger Log Interpretation Principles/Applications, 1989, pp 8-14,8-
15
3) Worthington, P. F. , 1985, The evolution of shaly-sand concepts in reservoir
evaluation. The Log Analyst 26(1) 23-40.
4) Poupon, A., Strecker, I., and Gartner, J., A review of Log Interpretation
Methods used in the Niger Delta. SPWLA Symposium, 1967.
ELANPlus Theory 147

ToC
Index
ELANPlus Theory 148

ToC
Index
Glossary
alpha processed, alpha processing Alpha processing is a signal processing technique that uses high
frequency information from a short spacing detector on a multi-detector tool
to enhance the vertical resolution of the tool. An alpha-processed curve is a
curve that has undergone alpha processing.
absent A special numerical value, recognized by the ELANPlus program as repre-
senting invalid data. The Absent value has historically been -999.25, a value
that is unlikely to occur in borehole data from logging tools and that produces
a specific, easily recognizable bit pattern on certain computers. If necessary,
Absent cane set to any number.
Note: an Absent curve is not the same as a missing curve. An Absent curve is
a curve in the database that contains only Absent values. A missing curve sim-
ply does not exist in the database.
balanced uncertainties Equation uncertainties chosen so that each equation has approximately the
same relative influence on the volumetric results.
calibration problem In a linear algebra expression of the type Ax = b, the calibration problem is
that of determining A, when b and x are known. Contrast with inverse prob-
lem.
constraint A limit imposed on the volumetric results of the ELANPlus optimizer. A con-
straint can be used to impose an absolute upper or lower limit on an output
volume (for example, volume of flushed-zone water ≥ 0.03) or it may estab-
lish a relationship among volumes (for example, volume of montmorillonite
≤ 0.25 times the volume of illite).
ELANPlus Theory 149

ToC
Index
curve (data curve) A depth-indexed array of real-valued data such as logging data or environ-
mentally corrected data. Q
Combine process A part of the ELANPlus application that provides the capability to combine
the results of several Solve process computations into a single set of answers.
formation component One of a set of minerals, rocks or fluids assumed to be present to some degree
in a borehole interval under study.
forward problem In a linear algebra expression of the type Ax = b, the forward problem is that
of determining b, when A and x are known. Contrast with inverse problem.In
the ELANPlus program, the forward problem is also called log reconstruc-
tion.
Function process The part of the ELANPlus application that takes input and produces output
according to one or more predefined or user-defined functions.
hypertext A system of links between parts of a document or documents that allows the
user to click on a link in one document to display the relevant information in
(and to navigate among) other documents and return to the same place in the
original document.
incoherence function A mathematical expression based upon the deviation of reconstructed tools
from the true tool reading, taking also into consideration the uncertainty of
each tool. It is this function that the optimizer tries to minimize to achieve the
most probable answer.
inverse problem In a linear algebra expression of the type Ax = b, the inverse problem is that
of determining x, when A and b are known. It is named for the fact that the
matrix A must be inverted to obtain the solution.
In the ELANPlus program, the linear response equations can be written in this
form and are usually written t = Rv, where t is the tool, or log data, vector, R
is the matrix of response parameters and v is the formation component vol-
ume vector. The object of the inverse problem is to obtain v, given t and R.
The concept of the inverse problem applies whether the equations are linear
or nonlinear.
local knowledge Information specific to a localized area, usually a well or field, which is taken
as truth. When properly provided to the ELANPlus program, local knowledge
such as “We know that the XYZ sand contains no more than 20% calcite
cementing,” can help produce a more accurate interpretation.
log measurements The data obtained from instruments lowered into a borehole, sometimes
referred to as tools.
ELANPlus Theory 150

ToC
Index
level by level An analysis in which data from input curves are all obtained from the same
depth, with no consideration to the data values at adjacent levels. When com- Q
putations for the current depth level are complete, results are written to a file
(either in memory or on disk) at the same depth as the input data.
model A set of response equations, formation components, constraints, and parame-
ters that define the problem to be solved by the ELANPlus program.
nc The number of clays in a model, including all clays that have specific names
(ILLI, MONT, etc.) as well as the generic clays (CLA1, CLA2).
nf The number of fluids in a model, including all types of fluids (water, hydro-
carbon, irreducible, etc.) in both the flushed and undisturbed zones.
nfc The number of formation components in a model. Unless otherwise stated,
nfc includes all solids—nonclay and clay alike—and all fluids. However, note
that since bound water (XBWA) is solved for as a dependent variable, nfc
does not include it.
nuf The number of fluids in a model, including all types of fluids (water, hydro-
carbon, irreducible, etc.) in both the flushed and undisturbed zones. Applies
to all fluids, regardless of type, in the undisturbed zone only.
nxf The number of fluids in a model, including all types of fluids (water, hydro-
carbon, irreducible, etc.) in both the flushed and undisturbed zones. Applies
to all fluids, regardless of type, in the flushed zone only.
ns The number of solid formation components in a model, including both clays
and nonclays unless otherwise stated.
parameter A numeric or alphanumeric value, that can be set by the user and is used by
the program in the evaluation of expressions, in the selection of inputs and
outputs, or to control program flow.
process A computation component specified by the user for an ELANPlus session. A
process can be of type SOLVE, COMBINE, or FUNCTION, and each type of
process performs a specific type of computation.
p.u. Porosity Unit. Internally, the ELANPlus program always works in decimal
porosity, that is, values ranging between 0.0 and 1.0, inclusive. Porosity units
are 100 times the decimal units, or values between 0.0 and 100.0.
reconstructed logs Output curves that are generated from computed formation components and
from response parameters using ELANPlus response equations. Recon-
structed logs are mathematical reconstructions of measured logs.
ELANPlus Theory 151

ToC
Index
relative volume uncertainty The uncertainty for an individual volume, normalized so that the small-
est uncertainty has a value of 1.0. When all relative volume uncertainties are Q
less than 10, the results warrant a high level of confidence.
resolution number A number that represents the relative degree to which the equations selected
in a model respond to the selected formation components. Strictly speaking,
for any response matrix, the resolution number is the base 10 logarithm of the
ratio of the largest eigenvalue of the response parameter matrix to the smallest
eigenvalue. A value in the range of 3 to 4 generally indicates that the input
logs are sensitive to the selected formation components. A value greater than
about 6 indicates that at least one formation component exists for which the
input logs all react in a similar way.
For a formation composed of calcite and water, using the equations for
gamma ray, thorium, and potassium (alone) would result in a very high reso-
lution number, even though there are more than enough equations, since these
logs are insensitive to any differences between calcite and water. Using den-
sity and conductivity, on the other hand, would produce a low resolution num-
ber.
response equations A mathematical expression whose form is known to the ELANPlus applica-
tion. A response equation relates a set of measured logs such as density,
gamma ray, etc., to a set of formation volumes such as quartz, water, oil.
response parameters A parameter, usually zonable, whose value represents the reading of a tool
when surrounded by 100% pure formation component. There are therefore
(number of tools) times (number of formation components) response param-
eters available in the ELANPlus program. The mnemonic for a response
parameter consists of its tool mnemonic and its formation component mne-
monic, joined by an underbar (for example, RHOB_QUAR, DT_XWAT,
CT1_USFL ...).
Solve process A part of the ELANPlus application that uses input logs to compute the vol-
umes, reconstructed logs, and Standard Deviation of Reconstruction (SDR).
tools Measurements from logging devices, such as bulk density, gamma ray, and
deep conductivity. In addition to log measurements, tools may also be con-
stant or zoned values.
uncertainty The numerical value expressing the level/degree of uncertainty of how a
response equation will contribute to the final solution of an instantiated
ELANPlus model.
volumes Values assigned to formation components such as quartz, illite, oil, and bound
water. These values are calculated from logging measurements and response
ELANPlus Theory 152

ToC
Index
parameters. The term volumes is often used interchangeably with formation
components. Q
zoned parameter A parameter whose value varies with the depth interval in which it is defined.
A zone can be defined by a top depth and a bottom depth or by a top depth
and an interval.
ELANPlus Theory 153

ToC
Index
154 ELANPlus Theory

ELANPlus Theory

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELANPlus Theory

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ToC

Version and Program History

How to Use On-Line Help

About This Document

Printing This Guide

Chapter 1 ELANPlus Program Theory ..............................................................1

Chapter 3 Response Equations ............................................................................41

Chapter 4 Conductivity Models ...........................................................................75

Chapter 5 Uncertainties ........................................................................................103

Chapter 6 Constraints ...........................................................................................113

Chapter 7 Model Combination ..........................................................................125

Chapter 8 Quality Control ...................................................................................135

0viii ELANPlus Theory

ELANPlus Program Theory

The Purpose of the ELANPlus Application

Equations and Tools

Formation Components, Volumes

Model, Interpretation Model

Assumptions of the ELANPlus Application

Curve Editing—Depth Correction, Depth Matching, Despiking, Patching

Flushed-Zone and Undisturbed-Zone Relationships

measured density = φ × fluid density + ( 1 – φ ) × matrix density (2)

2.368 = φ × 1.0 + ( 1 – φ ) × 2.71 (3)

The significance of Equation (4) is that it points out an assumption implicit in

The Overdetermined Solution

Figure 2 Determined system.

Figure 3 Overdetermined system.

Figure 4 Overdetermined system with weights applied

Uncertainty is the inverse of weight, so the results illustrated in Figure 4 could

Global and Program Control Parameters

Invasion Factor Parameters

GST Response Equations

Mnemonic Definition Applies to

Equation-Related Auxiliary Response Parameters

Mnemonic Definition Applies to

Mnemonic Definition Applies to

Mnemonic Definition Applies to

Default Response Parameter Values

CXDC_XWAT EATT_XWAT TPL_XWAT

* — XSFL and USFL only if Special Fluids is Water or Immovable Water

Table 6 lists salinity-dependent parameters whose values are a weak function

FCHL_XWAT RHOB_XWAT SIGM_XWAT U_XWAT

* — XSFL and USFL only if Special Fluid is Water or Immovable Water

Parameter Value of Absent Requires a Valid Salinity Value

SALIN_ISOL Salinity of isolated porosity fluid

CXDC_XWAT EATT_XWAT TPL_XWAT

* — XSFL and USFL only if Special Fluids is Water or Immovable Water.

CBWA_CLA1 CUDC_CLA1 CXDC_CLA1

2.737 = 2.71 × CALC + 1.0 × XWAT

sum of volumes = 1.0 = 1.0 × CALC + 1.0 × XWAT (6)

RHOB_REC = 2.71 × 1.0 + 1.0 × 0.0 = 2.71 (7)

0.0 0.5 1.0

Volume of illite greater than or equal to zero

Volume of montmorillonite greater than or equal to zero

Sum of volumes less than or equal to one

ILLI/(ILLI + MONT) less than or equal to 0.6

ILLI/(ILLI + MONT) greater than or equal to 0.4

Figure 5 Solution space subject to constraints.

Building an ELANPlus Model

Step 1 Select Formation Components

Step 2 Select Response Equations

Step 3 Rationalize Formation Components and Response Equations

QUAR CALC ILLI XWAT XOIL