IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?

t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:1

Well logging provides a way to measure formation properties using instruments that are run into the
borehole at the end of a wireline, the end of a drill string, or the end of coiled tubing. The resulting well log
provides a continuous record of a physical property such as spontaneous potential, resistivity or density,
plotted as a function of depth.

For wireline logging, the data recording equipment is located on the surface, and is connected by steel
armored electrical cable to the logging instrument in the hole.

Logs can also be obtained as the well is being drilled, using instruments embedded into drill collars near the
base of the drill string. Depending on the service used, this technique is referred to as Measurements While
Drilling (MWD), Logging While Drilling (LWD) or Formation Evaluation While Drilling (FEWD).
Communication between the instruments in the drill string and the surface recording equipment is
established by means of pressure pulses in the mud, through a technique known as mud pulse telemetry.
These pulses are generated by a mechanical device near the drill bit, and are transmitted through the mud
before being detected by pressure transducers, which are decoded at the surface.

The Scope of Formation Evaluation

Formation evaluation covers a wide array of measurement and analytical techniques. Although our emphasis
1 of 3 tends to focus on wireline logging techniques and log analysis methods, these are far from the only tools
available to the petrophysicist. In addition to such key parameters as porosity, permeability, and saturation, a

3 of 9 5/31/17, 1:32 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:1

range of other parameters are provided by core, fluid, and log analysis. These parameters are essential for the
other geo-disciplines such as geology and geophysics, as well as production and reservoir engineering.
Examples for wireline logging and some of the uses of wireline logs are shown in the table below.

Table 1: Determination of Reservoir Parameters and Their Uses

Parameter Derived from Used for

Acoustic velocity Sonic logging tool Seismic time to depth conversion

Density, Neutron, Geological interpretation
Lithology
Gamma ray tools Reservoir delineation
Density and sonic Mud weight, fracture strength, and sand production
Rock strength
tools calculations
Cement bond Sonic tool Zonal isolation
Chemical rock
Pulsed neutron tool Lithology characterization and saturations
composition

Well logs are central only in the sense that they are recorded in practically all wellbores, and are directly
relatable to all other parameters available from the associated sciences. For example, a geophysicist needs
borehole measurements to determine a time-depth relationship, and a petrophysicist needs core analysis to
properly define log response. However, a thin section or scanning electron microscope (SEM) photo of a
rock sample are of little direct help to the interpretation of a seismic section, nor is a vertical seismic profile
(VSP) especially helpful in determining relative permeability. All these measurements are, however,
pertinent to the complete task of defining reservoir limits, storage capacity, hydrocarbon content,
productivity and economic value.

It is the task of the Log Analyst to ascertain which type of rock was penetrated, and whether this rock
contains producible hydrocarbons as shown in the table below.

Table 2:Objectives of a Petrophysical Interpretation.

LOCATE: reservoir
fluid content
DETECT:
fluid type : gas / oil / water
lithology
mechanical properties
gross / net reservoir thickness
porosity
permeability
EVALUATE:
capillary properties
salinity of the water original hydrocarbon saturation
residual hydrocarbon saturation
percent oil/gas/water
reservoir pressure

Sources of Information
Obviously, the well data obtained at the surface, solely through cuttings and hydrocarbon shows, cannot
provide information on all parameters listed in the previous table. Additional logging data provided by the
petrophysical measurements are required, as listed below.

Table 3: Petrophysical Evaluation Data Sources.

DIRECT INFORMATION - ROCK FRAGMENTS & FLUIDS

drill cuttings, mud shows sidewall samples, cores or core slices

production tests, formation wireline samplers
drill-stem tests

INDIRECT INFORMATION - WIRELINE LOGS

1 of 3

4 of 9 5/31/17, 1:32 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:1

PHYSICAL PHENOMENON MEASURED PARAMETER

sonic velocities
acoustic - waves
acoustic impedance
electron density
gamma / gamma scattering
photoelectric cross section
thermal neutron density hydrogen density
thermal neutron decay thermal neutron cross section
neutron activation elemental concentrations
natural gamma radiation Curie / Bequerel / API / REM
spontaneous potential membrane potential
electromagnetic waves 35 Hz -20 kHz electric resistivity / conductivity
100 Mhz-2 GHz dielectric permitivity
free hydrogen
nuclear magnetic proton resonance
spin lattice relaxation time

The first group of data gives direct "physical" information by means of rock and reservoir fluid samples. The
second group of data is composed of wireline logging and MWD measurements.

Note that no log measurement listed in the table above provides direct quantitative information of the
parameters that we want to know, such as porosity, permeability, and hydrocarbon saturation. This is both the
beauty and the curse of Petrophysics. Many (petro)physicists have spent long hours searching for universal
relationships between the measured physical quantity and the desired reservoir parameter. A striking
example is the relation between water saturation and the resistivity of a porous shaly sandstone. More than
30 different relationships have been proposed in the last half-century. All have their own limited
applicability, sometimes restricted to only one reservoir, and none can claim universal validity. In most cases
the relationships contain several "constants" that can only be found by measuring the physical properties
accurately under controlled conditions on rock samples in the laboratory. These laboratory analyses provide
the calibration data required for a meaningful interpretation of the wireline logs.

The task of the Petrophysicist is to find within the multitude of measurements and relationships those that
best answer the questions concerning the location of reservoirs, and the volumes of producible fluids. The
petrophysicists often have to devise their own relationships and then combine the responses of several logs
to come up with an adequate answer.

Petrophysicists of course do not work in isolation. If one applies empirical relationships, it is essential to use
as many constraints as possible. Data and interpretations from other disciplines provide these constraints to
ensure that the petrophysical evaluation is meaningful.

The environment of deposition provided by geologists; seismic stratigraphy from geophysicists; fluid types
provided by production engineers; and reservoir distribution data provided by reservoir engineers, should all
be honored by the Petrophysicist to avoid erroneous interpretations. This exchange of data and
interpretations is a cyclic process, and only the synergy of different disciplines can create a comprehensive
"image" of the subsurface that will characterize it with sufficient accuracy to make a reliable and economic
development plan.

Formation Evaluation Objectives

The ultimate goal of formation evaluation is to help determine the size of a reservoir, the quantity of
hydrocarbons in place, and the reservoir's producing capabilities. The initial discovery of a reservoir lies
squarely in the hands of the exploration department, using seismic, gravity and magnetics studies, and other
geologic tools. Formation evaluation presupposes that a reservoir has been located, and is to be defined by
drilling the least number of wells possible. Enough data should be gathered from those wells to extrapolate
reservoir parameters field-wide, and to arrive at realistic figures for both the economic evaluation of the
reservoir and the planning of the optimum recovery method. Formation evaluation offers a way of gathering
the data needed for both economic analysis and production planning.

What, then, are the parameters that the manager, the geologist, the geophysicist, and the reservoir and
production engineers need? Which of these can be provided by seismic, by coring, by mud logging, by
testing, or by conventional wireline logging?

Magnetic and gravity geophysical surveys are generally regarded as reconnaissance tools, delineating
1 of 3 sedimentary basins in which oil and gas reservoirs are found. As a subsequent exploration step, surface
seismic provides the first coarse images of prospective zones, with a resolution of some 100 feet. Despite the

5 of 9 5/31/17, 1:32 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:1

fact that 3-D seismic can presently show "direct hydrocarbon indicators", only a wellbore can
unambiguously prove the presence and productivity of a hydrocarbon reservoir. Moreover, to obtain a
resolution of less than one foot, measurements with instruments run in the borehole, and analysis of rock
samples cut from the borehole are required. These activities are grouped under the heading of log and core
analysis. The broader scope of Formation Evaluation covers the following processes:

Wireline Logging
Mud Logging
Logging While Drilling
Coring
Wireline Testing
Production Testing
Pulse testing
Drill Stem Testing
Cross-Well Electrical and Seismic surveys
Vertical Seismic Profiling
Single Well Seismic

To place the various disciplines in perspective, we will present the overall problem of formation evaluation
in terms of orders of magnitude. If one meter is taken as a unit of measurement, then each formation
evaluation technique can be placed in order, as shown in the table below.

Table 4: Formation evaluation perspective

Order of
Formation Evaluation Purpose
Magnitude
Technique of Data
(meters)

106 Satellite imagery

105 Basin geologic studies Gross Structure

104 Seismic, gravity, magnetics

103 Borehole gravimeter, Ultra-long spacing electric logs Local Structure

102 Drillstem tests Productivity and

101 Wireline formation tests Reserves

100 Full-diameter cores

Local Porosity,
Sidewall cores, Most conventional well logs, Measurements
10-1 Permeability, and
While Drilling
Lithology
10-2 Micro-focused logs, core-plug analysis

Local Hydrocarbon
10-3 Cuttings analysis (mud logging)
Content

10-4 Core analysis Rock Properties

Rock and Clay
10-5 X-ray mineralogy
Typing
10-6 Scanning electron microscope (SEM) Micropore structure

Comparing Scales

Thus, formation evaluation techniques cover at least 12 orders of magnitude. Equally far-ranging are the
physical principles employed to make the basic measurements. Another way of viewing the vast spread is to
consider the frequency employed by the measuring processes available, as described by the table below.

Table 5: Range of Physical Principles Used in Formation Evaluation

Measurement Frequency, Hz Measurement Type

10 E+09 Dielectric (EPT)

1 of 3 10 E+07 Dielectric (DCL)

6 of 9 5/31/17, 1:32 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:1

10 E+04 Induction, Acoustic

10 E+02 Laterolog, Seismic
10 E+10 Old Electric Logs
10 E-04 Step-Rate Well Testing
10 E-08 to E-09 Material Balance

Few other sciences require, or use, such a wide range of measurement techniques over such a wide range of
physical dimensions. These techniques are used to determine the parameters that are essential to calculate
the hydrocarbon volumes originally in place (STOIIP or GIIP), and the quantities that can be produced
(reserves), as illustrated in the table below.

Table 6: Reservoir Quantities Required and Their Corresponding Reservoir Parameters.

QUANTITIES REQUIRED RESERVOIR PARAMETERS RESULT

Storage capacity porosity ( ) Hydrocarbon Volume in Place

Fluid pore-fill saturation (Sw) oil: STOIIP
gross volume gas: GIIP)

Hydraulic Conductivity Permeability (k) Producible Volumes

Affinity between fluids and rock Capillarity (Pc ) (Reserves)

The gross rock volume, porosity, and hydrocarbon saturation are combined to calculate the volumes of oil
(STOIIP) and gas (GIIP) originally in place. These static parameters, together with permeability and
capillarity, govern the volume of hydrocarbons that could be produced. However the volume that is actually
produced is not only dependent on geological and technical parameters but also on oil price and unit
development cost. The prediction of this volume, called oil or gas "reserves" can therefore significantly
change over time.

Log Interpretation Objectives

The objective of log interpretation depends very much on the user. Quantitative analysis of well logs
provides the analyst with values for a variety of primary parameters, such as:

porosity
water saturation, fluid type (oil/gas/water)
lithology
permeability

From these, many corollary parameters can be derived by integration (and other means) to arrive at values
for:

hydrocarbons-in-place
reserves (the recoverable fraction of hydrocarbons in-place)
mapping reservoir parameters

But not all users of wireline logs have quantitative analysis as their objective. Many of them are more
concerned with the geological and geophysical aspects. These users are interested in interpretation for:

well-to-well correlation
facies analysis
synthetic seismograms
regional structural and sedimentary history

In quantitative log analysis, the objective is to define

the type of reservoir (lithology)

1 of 3 its storage capacity (porosity)

7 of 9 5/31/17, 1:32 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:1

its hydrocarbon type and content (saturation)

its producibility (permeability)

Data For All Disciplines

Geophysicists need to know critical time-depth relationships in order to calibrate conventional seismic and
VSP surveys. Geologists need to know the stratigraphy, the structural and sedimentary features, and the
mineralogy of the formations through which the well was drilled. Reservoir engineers need to know the
vertical and lateral extent of the reservoir, its porosity (the nature of the porosity) and permeability, fluid
content, and recoverability. The production engineers need to know the rock properties, potential zones of
overpressure, and need to assess sanding and associated problems, and recognize the need for secondary
recovery efforts or pressure maintenance. Once the well is in production, they also need to know the
dynamic behavior of the well under production conditions and be able to diagnose problems as the well ages.
Engineers also need to know formation injectivity and residual water saturation to plan waterflooding and
monitor waterflood progress when it is operational. The manager needs to know the vital inputs to an
economic study -the original petroleum hydrocarbons in place, recoverability, cost of development and,
based on those factors, the profitability of producing the reservoir.

Log measurements, when properly calibrated, can give the majority of the parameters required by all these
professionals. Specifically, logs can provide either a direct measurement or a good indication of:

porosity, both primary and secondary (fractures and vugs)

permeability
water saturation and hydrocarbon movability
hydrocarbon type (oil, gas, or condensate)
lithology
formation (bed) dip and strike
sedimentary environment
travel times of elastic waves in a formation

From this data, it is possible to obtain good estimates of the reservoir size and the petroleum hydrocarbons in
place.

Logging techniques in cased holes can provide much of the data needed to monitor primary production and
also to gauge the applicability of waterflooding and to monitor its progress when activated.

In producing wells, logging can provide measurements of:

flow rates
fluid type
pressure
residual oil saturation

From these measurements, dynamic well behavior can be better understood, remedial work can be planned,
and secondary or tertiary recovery proposals can be evaluated and monitored.

In summary, when logging is properly applied, it can help to answer a great many questions from a wide
spectrum of special interest groups on topics ranging from basic geology to economics. Of equal importance,
however, is the fact that logging by itself cannot provide answers to all formation evaluation questions.
Coring, core analysis, and formation testing are integral parts of any formation evaluation effort.

Costs

The amount spent on running wireline logs, cutting cores, evaluating the logs, and analyzing the core
samples depends very much on the total cost of the well, the importance of the data (do we get another
chance to collect similar data in another well?) and the risks involved in obtaining the data (can we afford to
loose the well if a logging tool gets stuck?). The evaluation costs usually amount to 6 -12 % of the total well
cost. For an offshore exploration well drilled from a floating rig in deep water, the total well cost can easily
be 20 million dollars. Maximizing the information obtained from this "one time" effort is essential.
Evaluation costs for such ventures can reach several million dollars.

IPIMS
1 of 3

8 of 9 5/31/17, 1:32 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:2

In practice, the order in which formation evaluation methods are used tends to follow the
previously discussed Order-of-Magnitude table, i.e., from macroscopic to microscopic. In
this table, if one meter is taken as a unit of measurement, then each formation evaluation
technique can be placed in order, as shown in the table below:

Table 1: Formation evaluation perspective

Order of
Formation Evaluation Purpose
Magnitude
Technique of Data
(meters)

106 Satellite imagery

105 Basin geologic studies Gross Structure

104 Seismic, gravity, magnetics

103 Borehole gravimeter, Ultra-long spacing electric logs Local Structure

102 Drillstem tests Productivity and

101 Wireline formation tests Reserves

100 Full-diameter cores

Local Porosity,
Sidewall cores, Most conventional well logs,
10-1 Permeability, and
Measurements While Drilling
Lithology
10-2 Micro-focused logs, core-plug analysis
Local
10-3 Cuttings analysis (mud logging) Hydrocarbon
Content
10-4 Core analysis Rock Properties
Rock and Clay
10-5 X-ray mineralogy
Typing
Micropore
10-6 Scanning electron microscope (SEM)
structure

Thus a prospective structure might first be detected by aerial photography, then later defined
by seismic, gravity, and/or magnetics studies. Most wellbores are monitored as they are
being drilled, by mudlogging and/or measurements while drilling (MWD), and sometimes
cores are cut. Once the well has reached a prescribed depth, wireline logs are run and
sidewall core samples are often taken. Subsequent to logging, an initial analysis of mud log
shows, together with initial MWD log analysis, may indicate zones that merit examination
either by the wireline formation tester or by drillstem testing. Should such tests prove the
formation to be productive, more exhaustive analyses will be made of all available data,
including core analysis. The whole process is summarized in the table below.

Table 2: Formation evaluation overview

Phase Activity Formation Evaluation Methods

Exploration Define structure Seismic, gravity, magnetics

Mud logging, coring, penetration, Measurements
Drilling Drill well
While Drilling
Logging Log well Openhole logs
Sidewall cores, vertical seismic profile, wireline
Primary Log analysis and
formation testing,
Evaluation testing
drillstem testing

3 of 6 5/31/17, 1:33 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:2

Analysis Core analysis Laboratory studies, surface gamma ray

Refinement of Log calibration by core analysis results and seismic

Feedback seismic model and calibration
log analysis from log analysis results
Producing
Exploitation Material balance analysis
hydrocarbons
Secondary and Water injection or Production log analysis
Tertiary gas injection and Flood efficiency analysis
Recovery production logging Micro-rock property analysis
Openhole logs
Abandonment Economic decisions Material balance analysis
Production log analysis

(Mechanical) Mud Logging

Mud logging, more precisely referred to as hydrocarbon mud logging, is a process whereby
the circulating mud and cuttings in a well are continuously monitored as the well is being
drilled. This process involves physical examination and description of the cuttings, as well
charting various drilling parameters. A typical mudlogging unit will contain a variety of
sensors, such as:

Flame Ionization Detector (FID) for measuring gas volume (gas samples are drawn out
of the mud above the before it reaches the shale shaker.)
Gas Chromatograph for measuring light and heavy gas components: C1-C2-C3-C4,
etc.
Blue light for detecting fluorescence given off by oil in the cuttings (cuttings samples
are collected at the shale shaker)
Rate of Penetration (ROP) recorder, which plots a drill rate curve that can be
correlated against SP or Gamma Ray curves from offset wells.
Weight on Bit indicator
Mud Pit Level detector -used as a safety precaution to indicate if the well might be
flowing.

The combined analysis of all such measurements provides an indication of the rock type and
its fluid content. The sundry measurements are displayed on a log as curves or notations as a
function of depth.

Not all wells are logged in this manner. Development wells, for example, normally are
drilled and then logged by wireline logging tools only. In contrast, wildcat wells are nearly
always monitored by the mud-logging process, followed by wireline logging. The
advantages of mud logging include the availability on a semi-continuous basis of actual
formation cuttings analysis (which, in turn, gives immediate indications of rock type and
hydrocarbon presence) and the ability to predict drilling problems (such as overpressure)
before they become unmanageable.

Coring
A number of methods can be used to cut cores in a wellbore. Conventional cores are cut
using a special core bit, and are retrieved in a long core barrel. Using this method, the
recovered core sample may undergo physical changes on its journey from the coring depth to
the surface, where it will ultimately be analyzed. More sophisticated coring mechanisms are
able to conserve either the orientation, the pressure, or the original fluid saturations of the
rock sampled. An awareness of these changes and sampling methods is essential for
understanding core analysis results.

Other coring methods have been devised to obtain additional rock samples after the well has
been drilled, but before it has been cased. These methods require wireline tools that cut core

4 of 6 5/31/17, 1:33 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:2

plugs from the sides of the wellbore. It should be realized that many of the parameters
required to correctly interpret openhole wireline logs can only be determined from accurate
core analysis. Thus, the major role that coring plays in field development can not be
overemphasized.

Open-hole Logging
Openhole logging provides the great meeting place for all formation evaluation methods.
Only through openhole logging can a continuous record of formation properties such as
porosity, water saturation, and rock type be obtained. In particular, wireline logs can record
formation self potential, electrical resistivity, conductivity, bulk density, natural and induced
radioactivity, hydrogen content, and elastic properties. Most wells drilled for hydrocarbons
are logged with these types of instruments.

Unfortunately, the full potential of the logs may not always be utilized, or the logs may be
incorrectly analyzed. This is caused either by a lack of training on the part of the analyst or a
lack of understanding of where wireline logs fit in relation to the other formation evaluation
tools.

All too often, logs are seen as an end in themselves and are considered in isolation. This
presentation should encourage the reader to take a broader view of log analysis in the context
of overall formation evaluation, and ultimately, in the context of field development.

Figure 1 Interrelationships between Formation Evaluation Methods illustrates the formation

evaluation picture and the central role of openhole logging and log analysis.

FIGURE 1

Measurements While Drilling (MWD)

Increasingly, formation properties are being measured at nearly the same instant the
formation is drilled by using special drill collars that house measuring devices. These MWD
tools are particularly valuable in deviated offshore wells where wellbore path control is
critical, and where immediate knowledge of formation properties is vital for evaluating
pressure and choosing casing points. Additionally, MWD measurements are less susceptible
to downhole environmental effects such as washout and invasion because the measurements
are made behind the bit soon after the hole is drilled.

Until the 1970's, measurements with instruments that were embedded into drillpipe were
limited to weight on the bit with strain-gauges, and directional data with magnetic devices.

5 of 6 5/31/17, 1:33 PM
IPIMS | Introduction to Formation Evaluation http://www.ipims.asia/scorm/app/?t=29946#/subtopic:29949/subject:2

These two were later augmented with a simple Geiger-Müller gamma-ray counter. The need
to measure resistivity, density and neutron porosity during drilling became acute as highly
deviated and horizontal wells were drilled in larger numbers. In such wells, it has usually
proved to be very difficult (and often impossible) to run wireline tools into the hole, because
the high deviation angle decreases the pull of gravity that would normally move the tool to
TD. Running tools at the end of drillpipe is a costly, time consuming and often risky practice.
For this reason, Measurement While Drilling (MWD) is an attractive alternative.

During the 1980's MWD tools equivalent to the gamma-gamma density; the neutron
scattering porosity; and simple lateral resistivity wireline tools were developed. These
sensors could be inserted in recesses in special drill collars. Moreover, newer tools like the
electromagnetic wave propagation resistivity, and bit resistivity tools were developed, and
have no wireline equivalent. The instruments are either powered by a generator connected to
a mud-motor, or by batteries. The measurements are either stored in a memory downhole or
transmitted via pressure pulses in the mud to the surface. One of the most advanced
instruments uses sensors placed on or immediately behind the bit, and electro-magnetic
(EM) signals are used to bypass the mud motor. The receivers above the mud motor convert
the EM signals to mud pulses, which are then transmitted through the mud to the surface.

Formation Testing
Formation testing serves as the ultimate "proof of the pudding." If the well flows oil or gas
(or both) on a drillstem test (DST), no amount of logging data or core analysis can deny that
a productive zone has been found. However, a drillstem test provides not only proof that
hydrocarbons exist in the formation and will flow, but also supplies vital data about both the
capacity of the reservoir and its ability to produce in the long term. Pressure records from
drillstem tests also play an integral role in the overall formation evaluation task.

Wireline formation testers (RFT) complement drillstem tests by their ability to sample the
fluid across many different horizons in the well, and to gather detailed formation pressure
data that it is almost impossible to obtain from a DST alone. This detailed pressure
information can then be used to calculate fluid contacts, such as the free water level.

IPIMS

IHRDC
Copyright © 1998-2017 International Human Resources Development Corporation. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy. v3.2

Normal
Increase 20%
Increase 40%

Show Tips
Support Center
About IPIMS

6 of 6 5/31/17, 1:33 PM