Cement Integrity Evaluation

Gehan S. Abdelkader
Well Integrity Product Champion
WLH

1
Outline
• Cementing
• Reasons to have a quality cementing job
• Cementing process
• Factors affecting the Cement Quality
• Cement Quality Evaluation
• Solutions
• Conclusion
• Strategy

2
Cementing
• Wellbore cement that provides complete zonal isolation
protects the environment, enhances drilling safety and
optimizes production. Without high-quality cement filling
the annulus between the casing and the formation,
freshwater aquifers above or below the reservoir might be
contaminated by fluid from other formations. Casing that
is not protected by cement might be prone to corrosion by
formation fluids.

Oilfield Review
Summer 2001

3
Cementing
• Reasons for quality cementing job:
• Support the pipe in place
• Further drilling
• Production
• Protect pipe in place
• Corrosive formation fluids
• Hydraulic isolation
• No communication between different formation fluids
• No migration of formation fluids to surface
• No loss of production to thief zones

4
Cementing Process

Pre-blend
SFM

WELLCLEAN II
CemCADE
CemCAT CBL/VDL
USIT
Sonicalc

5
Cementing Process
• Job design
• Data gathering
• Borehole geometry (bit size, caliper, % excess, depth, etc.)
• Well bore information (pore and frac pressures, lithologies)
• Temperature (gradient, BHST, BHCT)
• Problem zones (lost circulation, washouts, water flow, etc.)
• Casing data (size, type and placement of hardware, previous casing)
• Survey data (TVD, KOP, bearing, deviation, etc.)
• Drilling fluid Data (type, density, rheology)
• Lab verification
• Cement material is suitable for downhole condition
• Cement additives are suitable for downhole condition
• Cement system is reproducible
• Cement job simulation (CemCADE)
• For consistency and optimization of casing centering and mud
removal
6
• Cement placement
Cementing Process – Cont.
• Job execution
• Reproduce the cement system verified by the Lab
• Flow rate for effective well clean and mud removal
• Duration of cement placement (pumpable slurry)
• Enough slurry volume
• Solid Fraction Monitoring for constant density
• Job evaluation
• Hydraulic isolation and cement distribution
• Pipe condition
• Pipe support

7
Factors Affecting Cement Quality
• Borehole Geometry BHST at top of Annular gap
Minimum: 3/4-in.
Cement >BHCT
• It has a great effect on at TD Ideal: 1 1/2-in.

the cement quality, good Properly

cement quality and good conditioned
hole and mud
zonal isolation are Gauge
No sloughing
achievable in good diameter Uniform as possible
( no washouts or restrictions)
holes. In gauge holes
NO LOSSES NO FLOW
allows:
• Cement volume
• Tubular centralization
Casing centered in borehole
• Effective flow rate for
mud removal Thin, impermeable mud filter cake Accurate BHST and BHCT
(not gelled or unconsolidated)

8
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

• Borehole effect on cement / excess volume

calculation
One-arm caliper

Correct volume Wrong volume Wrong volume

Four-arm caliper

Two Equal Diameters Different Diameters Wrong volume

Correct volume Correct volume

9
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

• Tubular centralization
• Effect on flow rate

18
RH
16
FLOW RATE RATIO

14
RC
12
10
W
8
6 % Stand-off =w X 100
RH - RC
4
2
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
API % STAND-OFF

10
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

• Effect of flow rate on flow regimes

V=0
Laminar Flow

Increasing Flow Rate

Velocity Profile V=2 x Vav
(Sliding motion)

Turbulent Flow
Velocity Profile
(Swirling motion)

There are four possibilities

of flow in an Eccentric Annulus
No flow
Laminar
Turbulent
11
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

Wide

Narrow

Wide
Vw
Vn
Narrow

12
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

13
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.
• Example

14
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

15
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

Mud removal is the key to zonal isolation

16
Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

17
 Factors Affecting Cement Quality – Cont.

Solid Fraction Control Density Control

100 10 0 10

90 90 9

80 80 8

70 70 7
Solid Fraction (%)

60 60 6

50 50 5

40 40 4

30 30 3

20 20 2

10 10 1

0 0 0
10:35:02 10:49:26 11:03:50 11:18:14 11:32:38 1 0:3 5:02
11:47:02 10 :49:26
12:01:26 11:0 3:50 11 :18:14
Time

18
Cement Quality Evaluation
• “It is now admitted by the Industry that the primary use of
any Cement Evaluation Tool is not to decide when and
where to perform a cement remedial job but to try and
improve the primary cement job on the next well of the
same kind”

D. Rouillac in
“Cement Evaluation Logging
Handbook, 1994”

19
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Two major types of tools:
• Sonic tools (CBL/VDL)
• The CBL measurement is the
amplitude in millivolts of the No
first arrival E1 at the 3 –foot Cement
receiver. It is a function of
the attenuation due to the
shear coupling of the
cement sheath to the casing.
The attenuation rate
depends on the cement
compressive strength, the
Good
casing diameter, the pipe Bond
thickness, and the
percentage of bonded
circumference

20
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Applications, Benefits & Features :
• Quantitative evaluation of casing to cement bond
• Qualitative evaluation of cement to formation bond
• HPHT Application
• Slim access application
• Microannulus detection (run with pressure)
• Best results when combined with USIT

21
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.

22
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Variable density log
• 5 ft Receiver for VDL Analysis Tx
• Allows easy differentiation
between casing and
formation arrivals
R3
5 ft

R5

23
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Factors affecting CBL Free Pipe Signal
• Good cement – Stretch E1
Good Bond
T0 Threshold Signal

TTTT’

DT

• Good cement – Cycle skipping

E1 E3
T0 Threshold
TT TT’

E2

24
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Basic interpretation
• Free pipe 5

• No cement to casing bond

• No attenuation of the signal

Free Pipe Signal 3

E1
T0 Threshold
2

TT

25
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Free pipe amplitude
E1 Amplitude (MV) SFT 155 in Air
100
90
SFT 155 in Fluid
80
7 in CSG
70
9 5/8 in CSG
60

50

40

30

Casing ID (in)
20
2 4 6 8 10 12 14161820

26
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Good cement to casing
bond 5

• If casing is well bonded,

soundwave will be attenuated.
• The received CBL amplitude will
be low.
3

CBL: Free Pipe

2

CBL: Good Bond

27
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
Good casing to cement to formation bond
X

28
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Irregular Bond
• The more “free” pipe or 5

“contaminated” cement in an
interval, the poorer the bond
• If cement job is not perfect,
CBL amplitude increases. 3

CBL: Poor Bond 2

29
 Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
Poor Bond w/ Casing

X
Medium

Stable <------------------------------CBL Amplitude

Transit Time
Strong

X Casing Arrivals

30
 Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
Poor Bond w/ Formation

No

X
Formation Arrivals
Transit Time
Low
with some
<----------------------------------------CBL Amplitude
Cycle Skipping
No
X

Casing Arrivals

31
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Microannulus
• Gap between Casing and Cement
5
• Caused by contraction of casing after
cement sets if Casing Fluid is changed.
• E1 amplitude resembles a poorer
bond than actual.
• Only a pressure pass can be done to 3
eliminate the micro annulus.

CBL: Poor Bond

T

32
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Tool Eccentering
• Causes for Eccentralization
5
• Improper Equipment selection
Centralizers ] for Casing Size
• Missing or Broken Centralizer(s)
• Weak Centralizers in deviated wells
3
• Tool Damaged and/or bent
• Damaged Casing
• Consequences 2

• Unbalanced sound paths

• Resulting waveform is meaningless
T

33
 Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
Short Path Waveform
Resulting Waveform Normal Waveform
T0 Threshold

TT
Result is a Bad Log not recoverable in Playback
Delayed Waveform
If the tool is eccentered:

There will be destructive interference from different sound paths, waveform

from close tool side to casing, Waveform from far tool side to casing, resulting
waveform has dramatic lower amplitude, resembling a zone of Good Cement
but with shorter Transit Time [≈ 4 ms less]

34
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Fast Formation Arrivals
5
• In cases of good cement
andformation slowness < steel
slowness formation arrival arrives first
3
DT Dolomite = 43.5 msec/ft
DT Limestone = 47.5 msec/ft
DT Anhydrate = 50.0 msec/ft
2

• The transit time and CBL amplitude

will be affected
T

35
 Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Fast Formations
5
• In FF arrivals, CBL evaluation is not possible,
E1 amplitude reflects the formation signal
and not the casing signal. ( 3 & 5 ft Rx)
3
• Only in short spacing Tx-Rx (~ 1 ft) the
casing arrival will arrive earlier than FF
2
arrival.

• Tools able to measure CBL in FF are: CBT,

CMT and SSLT (shortes Tx-Rx about 1 ft T

36
 Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.

High

Transit Time <-------------------------------CBL Amplitude

Shorter than on areas of

Casing arrivals fast formation

<-----------------------------------------arrivals

37
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.

38
 Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
3 BI = 60 %
• CBL Quantitative 0
I 2
Interpretation. n 5
BI = 70 %
• ATTENUATION t 2
0
• Logarithm of E1 amplitude [first peak e
1
of CBL waveform] r 5
v 1 BI = 80 %
a 0
• BOND INDEX l
5

Attenuation in zone of interest [dB/ft] [ft]

BI =
5 6 7 8 9 10
Attenuation in Cemented Section
[dB/ft] Casing O.D. [in]

39
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Interpretation process for cement bond log:
• Log LQC
• Transit times correct for casing size (CBL Parameters)
• Amplitude correct in free pipe & 100% cement as predicted.
• Check for centralization
• Check for fast formation (TT decreasing)
• Conditions
• Cement type
• Borehole fluid
• Cement tops
• Hole size (OH Caliper)
• Well deviation
• Hydraulic isolation determination
• Determine 80% Bond Index
• Determine minimum cemented interval
• Check VDL for cement to formation bond
40
 Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Ultrasonic tools (USIT)
• Theory of measurement is based on
measuring the acoustic impedance (Z) of
the material in the annulus by sending an
ultrasonic pulse and measuring the decay
of the reflections using a single rotating
transducer.
*Z = Density x Velocity
Transducer
Casing Cement Formation
Mud

Echo
Thickness
amplitude
Transit time
(Internal casing Cement Impedance
condition)
Internal radius
41
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.

Z (MRayl)
Ultra Heavy Weight Cement
8.0
Heavy Weight Cement
6.0
Cement 15.8 ppg

4.0 LiteCRETE

Foam Cement
2.0
1.5 Water
0.1 Gas

42
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
8

Standard

Standard
Light

Light
Z – 0 → 8 MRayl

4 Maximum
impedance
Completion fluids

Solid/liquid
+/- 0.5 threshold
Slurry

2
Liquid

Gas/liquid
0 threshold

Raw Interpreted Gas or dry microannulus

image image

43
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Sonicalc
• Stand-alone acoustic log calculator
▪ Supports the user for the QA/QC process
• Cross-segment product
▪ Used by both, Cementing and Wireline engineers
▪ Will contribute to increase the quality of cement evaluation services
as it provides log setup before the job
• Forward simulation tool
▪ Predicts more accurately the expected responses (Z, amplitude) of
different cements
▪ Assures that tools (CBL/VDL & USIT) were operated correctly
▪ Assures that results are presented with the appropriate parameters

▪ SoniCalc is designed to import CemCADE-files or to start from scratch

44
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Input • Outputs
• Well • Scenarios
• Survey, temperature, casing • Only data you need!
• Logging Fluid • CBL/USIT QA/QC (and evaluation)
• p, T  logging fluid & • Log file
transducers
• Slurries
• Defaults
• Surface T, vertical well, water,
G neat
• Import data
• CemCADE

45
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
USIT Theory of Measurement & Processing

Fluid Properties Measurement (FPM)

Z mud V mud Internal

Echo amplitude Rugosity
Time Domain &
Travel time of the echo Internal
Radius
Wave Form T3 processing
Casing
thickness
Frequency Domain Resonant frequency: f0
&
Fractional bandwith:D f/f0 Acoustic
impedance

46
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Standard Presentation

Standard API Header

Dowell Cement Header (if cementing by Dowell)

Client Log

SLB Composite/LQC log

Repeat section (Client log)

ZMUD and FVEL plots

Standard API Tail

47
 Cement Quality Evaluation –
Cont.
QC Casing Cement

Channel

Amplitude Thickness Cement interpreted

Processing flags Internal radius Bond index
Eccentering, CCL, GR Casing cross-section Cement raw

48
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Good Cement Example
Strong formation arrival

CBL flat, low Mean Z 8

MRayl Weak casing arrival

QC CBL USI VDL

49
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Light Cement Top
Example
• Light cement has low
impedance
• 0-4 MRayl scale shows
contrast between light
cement and liquid
• Liquid/solid threshold
set low (2.1) for light
cement
• CBL agrees with USI

0 0-4 MRayl Threshold 2.1 MRayl

100

50
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Channel Example
Weak formation arrival
CBL variable, high
Strong casing arrival

Channel

Low-Z cement

QC CBL USI VDL

51
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Deformed casing can cause lost echoes and tool
eccentering. Even the eccentering curve becomes false.
The log must be repeated with a wider acquisition
window.
Eccentering Lost echoes

QC Casing Cement

52
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Third Interface
• No centralizers, 4.5 in. liner inside 7 in. casing

Galaxy patterns on narrow side of annulus

53
Cement Quality Evaluation –
Cont.
• Microdebonding algorithm
• If all 4 standard deviations are Vertical
higher than set thresholds, the Deviation

current data point is Transducer Diagonal 1

“spot” size
considered to be locally
debonded Horizontal
Diagonal 2
Deviation

Pixel Z AI Thresholds Cement

Liquid
< Thresh
OR
> Thresh
Micro-D
Gas
<Thresh
OR
> Thresh
Micro-D

54
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
Micro-debond Formation
presentation Conventional arrivals

Low
CBL

BI Map BI Map CBL VDL

55
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.

Micro-debond logic example

BI Map CBL VDL

CBL

56
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
• Environmental Challenges
• Heavy Weight Mud
• Signal attenuation – Sonic / Ultrasonic
• Motor stalling – Ultrasonic
• Hydrostatic pressure – Ultrasonic
• Heavy Casing
• Database not available for modeling – Ultrasonic
• Uncalibrated response – Sonic / Ultrasonic

57
 Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.
CEMENT USIT CBL
Standard cement good bond

Accuracy
Standard cement free pipe
Very light cement
Microdebonded
Dry microannulus
Free pipe Well bonded
Liquid microannulus
Channel (gas/liquid)
Good interpretation
Contaminated Ambiguous
Very ambiguous or not detectable

58
Cement Quality Evaluation – Cont.

Insufficient Hydrostatic High Free Water

Fluid Loss
Pressure Free Water Channel

Gas zone

Cement
Cement

Poor Mudcake
Micro annular Cement Integrity
Removal

Mud
Channel

Mud Cake

59
Solutions
• Upon the diagnosis of the
hydraulic isolation problem,
Schlumberger Well Services offer
a wide range of solutions for:
• Cement job enhancements
CemSTONE
• Remedy

DuraSTONE

FlexSTONE

60
Solutions
• CemCRETE
More solids = improved mechanical properties

8 - 28 lbm/gal CemCRETE

15.8 lbm/gal Class G

Extended
12.5 lbm/gal
lightweight

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Solids Fraction

61
 Solutions
CemCRETE WORLDWIDE
2701 Jobs
1200
921
Jobs Count

691 832 Increasing Demand

600 For Low Density Slurries
257
LiteCRETE
0 1469 Jobs
700
1998 1999 2000 2001 547

Jobs Count
460

350 276
CemCRETE is a Proven 186

Technology
0
1998 1999 2000 2001

62
Solutions
• Problem: Weak formation and lost circulation applications
• Solution: LiteCRETE – LiteCRETE UL

Porosity and permeability comparison

LiteCRETE vs Foam Cement

63
Solutions
• Problem:
• Cracking (tension)
• Failure (compression)
Enter well geometry data
Start
and wellbore conditions
Simulate

• Micro Annulus Calculate Required Young Modulus

• Solution: FlexSTONE & SAM
Cement Y From the SAM,
e
cracking s determine % of
? flexible agents
N
o
Casing Y Add expanding
e
debonding? s
agents,
as described in
N
the Engineering
o
Guidelines
Formulation complete

64
Solutions
• Problem: High pore pressure
• Solution: DensCRETE up to 28 ppg

• Problem: Gas migration

• Solution: Gas Block

• Problem: Microannulus (50 microns), Casing leaks, Liner tops,

Channels behind casing, Gravel packs, Water zones
• Solution: SqueezCRETE

• Problem: Sidetrack plugs, problematic casing shoe, high density and

multi zone perforation
• Solution: DuraSTONE

65
Conclusion
• In gauge hole, casing centering and mud removal are the keys for good
cementing job.
• Even if there will not be a remedy consideration, cement evaluation helps in
improving the next cementing job of the same kind
• The USI provides the most detailed view of the distribution of cement in the
annulus available today.
• The USI combination with CBL/VDL is always recommended. Data from both
services complement each other for more accurate interpretation, especially
in the presence of microannulus and nonstandard conditions.
• Acoustic logs have limitations.
• Cement evaluation must combine cement job analysis and acoustic logs
• Schlumberger Solutions = Integrated “Cementing and Evaluation”.

66
 Strategy
Complete cement Qlty/Qty
Accuracy
Zonal Isolation measurement
&
Address extreme environment
Answer product Qlty
- Heavy mud
- LiteCRETE
- Thick casing

Standard environment Extreme environment

67