Hydrocarbon Evaluation

and Interpretation
CONTENTS

SECTION 1 ORIGINS OF GAS 3

1.1 Classification of Gas Sources .................................................................................................. 3

1.2 Liberated Gas .......................................................................................................................... 4

1.3 Produced Gas ........................................................................................................................... 7

1.3.1 ‘Permanent’ Conditions of Underbalance ......................................................................... 7
1.3.2 Temporary Conditions of Underbalance ........................................................................... 7
1.3.3 Produced Gas from Impermeable Formations ................................................................... 8
1.3.4 Similar Mechanisms .......................................................................................................... 9

1.4 Recycled Gas .......................................................................................................................... 11

1.5 Contamination Gas ................................................................................................................ 15

1.5.1 The Addition of Petroleum Products ............................................................................... 16
1.5.2 Oil Based Mud Systems .................................................................................................. 17

SECTION 2 QUANTITY AND COMPOSITION OF RECORDED GAS 22

2.1 Formation Considerations .................................................................................................... 22

2.1.1 Porosity and Gas Saturation ............................................................................................ 22
2.1.2 Effective Porosity and Permeability ................................................................................ 23

2.2 Hole Depth.............................................................................................................................. 26

2.3 Drilling Considerations ......................................................................................................... 28

2.3.1 Rate Of Penetration and Hole Diameter .......................................................................... 28
2.3.2 Bit Type and Resulting Drilled Cuttings ......................................................................... 33
2.3.3 Coring .............................................................................................................................. 34
2.3.4 Flowrate ........................................................................................................................... 35
2.3.5 Differential Pressure ........................................................................................................ 38

2.4 Fluid Invasion and Flushing ................................................................................................. 40

2.4.1 Invasion and Filtration ..................................................................................................... 40
2.4.2 Flushing ........................................................................................................................... 43
2.4.3 Fluid Influxes .................................................................................................................. 48

2.5 Mud Type and Rheology ....................................................................................................... 52

2.5.1 Mud Type ........................................................................................................................ 52
2.5.2 Mud Density .................................................................................................................... 53
2.5.3 Mud Temperature ............................................................................................................ 54
2.5.4 Viscosity and Gel Strength .............................................................................................. 54

2.6 Surface Considerations ......................................................................................................... 55

2.6.1 Design, Efficiency and Location of the Gas Trap ........................................................... 56
2.6.2 The Gas Sample Line ...................................................................................................... 59
2.6.3 Losses of Gas to the Atmosphere .................................................................................... 60

1
SECTION 3 EVALUATION OF LIBERATED AND PRODUCED GAS 65

3.1 Basic Definitions .................................................................................................................... 65

3.2 Background Gas .................................................................................................................... 65

3.2.1 Stationary and Circulating Backgrounds ......................................................................... 66
3.2.2 Formation Background .................................................................................................... 70

3.3 Interpretation of Background Gas ....................................................................................... 72

3.4 Show Evaluation .................................................................................................................... 75

3.5 Gas Normalization ................................................................................................................. 81

3.6 Evaluation of Produced Gas ................................................................................................. 90

3.6.1 ‘Sealed’, Overpressured, Permeable Formations ............................................................. 91
3.6.2 Undercompacted shales with a transitional pressure increase ......................................... 92

3.7 Connection Gas ...................................................................................................................... 95

3.7.1 Causes of Connection Gas ............................................................................................... 95
3.7.2 Zone of increasing formation pressure due to undercompaction. .................................. 100
3.7.3 Underbalanced permeable zones ................................................................................... 100
3.7.4 Shape, duration and timing of connection gas peak ...................................................... 102
3.7.5 Reporting of Connection Gases ..................................................................................... 105

3.8 Trip Gas ............................................................................................................................... 108

3.8.1 The occurrence of Trip Gas ........................................................................................... 108
3.8.2 Interpretation of Trip Gas .............................................................................................. 114

39 Kelly Gas .............................................................................................................................. 120

SECTION 4 CHROMATOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS 126

4.1 Gas Ratio Analysis ............................................................................................................... 126

4.2 Gas Ratio Plot using chromatographic values of methane through pentane ................. 126
4.2.1 Use of the Ratio Plot...................................................................................................... 128
4.2.2 Evaluation of Oil Bearing Zones ................................................................................... 131
4.2.3 Evaluation of Gas Bearing Zones .................................................................................. 133
4.2.4 Prediction of Condensate Bearing Zones ...................................................................... 134
4.2.5 Comparison with Drilled Cuttings ................................................................................. 135

4.3 Wetness, Balance and Character Ratio Analysis .............................................................. 137

4.3.1 Wetness Ratio (Wh) ...................................................................................................... 138
4.3.2 Balance Ratio ................................................................................................................ 140
4.3.3 Using Bh with Wh ......................................................................................................... 141
4.3.4 Character Ratio .............................................................................................................. 144

4.4 Oil Indicator ......................................................................................................................... 147

4.5 Limitations to Gas Ratio Effectiveness .............................................................................. 149

2
 HYDROCARBON EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION

Section 1 ORIGINS OF GAS

1.1 Classification of Gas Sources

With gas being monitored and recorded on a continual basis as the drilling of the well
proceeds, the logging analyst must be able to make informed decisions as to the origin of the
recorded gas in order to make accurate interpretations in terms of formation and reservoir
evaluation.

Gas may ‘originate’ from the formation through a number of different mechanisms. The
logging analyst must be aware of these different mechanisms and be able to distinguish
between, for example, gas that can be directly attributed to the formation; gas that may be
indirectly attributable to the formation or further influenced by drilling operations; and gas
that originates from artificial sources.

To assist in this procedure, four classifications of gas were determined by Richard Mercer
(SPWLA 15th Symposium , June 1974) and this model has been widely adopted, as the
accepted classification, across the industry.

The four categories of gas being: -

1. Liberated Gas

2. Produced Gas

3. Recycled Gas

4. Contamination Gas

3
1.2 Liberated Gas

This is the term given to the gas that is directly attributable to the volume of gas originally
contained within the crushed, cylindrical volume of rock produced as drilling proceeds.

It is defined as the gas that is mechanically liberated, by the action of the bit, into the drilling
fluid as the bit penetrates the formation.

Gas is mechanically and instantaneously liberated as the rock becomes broken up, crushed and
chipped by the drill bit, creating the drilled cuttings and in the process exposing a greater
surface area and void (pore) space (mechanism A).

Any gas that is not liberated during this

initial drilling process, but retained
within the cuttings, may still undergo a
slower release to the drilling fluid as
the cuttings rise in the annulus and
opposing hydrostatic pressure, due to
the weight of the mud column,
decreases (mechanism B). For this B
‘secondary’ release of gas to occur (the
major part of which will occur close to
surface), the formation has to exhibit
some degree of permeability and fluid
mobility in order for the gas to escape
from the cuttings.

These liberated gas mechanisms are

illustrated in Figure 1.1

The sum of the gas released by both

mechanisms goes to make a fair
representation of the total bulk volume A
of free gas present in the given volume
of formation and will closely reflect the
composition of the fluids present in the
rock at the time of drilling.
Figure 1.1 Liberated gas mechanisms

However, the following points have to be remembered: -

4
 • Some gas may be retained within the cuttings, whether trapped as free gas
within the pore spaces of the cuttings or remaining in solution within pore
fluid. This proportion of the gas will go undetected by gas analysis from the
drilling fluid but can be determined with cuttings gas analysis (see Section
2.1.2).

• Some gas, preferentially the lighter hydrocarbons, will be lost to the

atmosphere as the returning mud passes through the surface system i.e. at the
bell nipple, along the flowline etc.

As will be illustrated many times throughout this manual, the total recorded amount is of
lesser importance than the relative changes in quantity and composition. Trend analysis is
therefore foremost in hydrocarbon gas analysis.

The gas liberated by mechanism ‘A’ yields no information about permeability or fluid
mobility, but does give information pertaining to the porosity and/or gas saturation of the
formation. In other words, an increase in porosity, with no change in gas saturation, would
lead to an increase in recorded gas owing to the greater bulk volume of formation fluid.
Similarly, with no increase in porosity but an increase in gas saturation, an increase in gas
would be seen since the bulk volume of gas has increased in proportion to the same bulk
volume of formation fluid. This is illustrated in Figures 2.1 and 2.2.

Mechanism B does give an indication as to formation and fluid characteristics. A simplified

explanation would be that the more gas that is retained by the cuttings (as determined by
blender cuttings gas analysis), then the tighter the formation.

This permeability indicator, however, has to be considered along with other parameters such
as

• Formation fluid type and viscosity

• Hydrocarbon composition and mutual solubility
• Pore throat size
• Mud density

These factors all play a part in determining overall fluid mobility and the ease at which gas
can be liberated from the cuttings to the drilling fluid. This is further detailed in Section 2.1.2

5
As will be seen in more detail in Sections 2 and 3, one of the primary purposes of surface gas
evaluation is the recognition of changes in the quantity of liberated gas that may indicate a
change in a formations porosity, gas saturation or fluid type (Figure 1.2).

However, there are many other factors, other than formation changes, that can effect the
quantity and composition of gas detected at surface and these will be expanded on in more
detail in Section 2.

Chromatographic Gas %
0.001 0.01 0.1 1.0 10.0

Lagged
Depth

1896

1897

INCREASE IN
LIBERATED
1898
GAS VOLUME

1899

Figure 1.2 Liberated gas as seen on a real-time log

6
1.3 Produced Gas

This is defined as the gas that is produced into the drilling fluid, from a specific zone or
formation, as a result of the formation pressure exceeding the opposing hydrostatic pressure
resulting from the drilling fluid in the wellbore.

This pressure differential may occur at the bottom of the hole as drilling is proceeding or exist
in any open or exposed formations in the wellbore at any time.

Providing that some degree of permeability exists in the formation, fluid will flow from zones
of high pressure to low pressure.

In ‘conventional’ drilling, the mud weight is selected so as to produce a hydrostatic pressure

slightly greater than the formation pressure. This is known as overbalance and prevents
formation fluids from freely flowing into the wellbore.

If, however, the formation pressure exceeds the hydrostatic pressure, a condition of
underbalance exists and formation fluids are free to flow into the wellbore. This state of
underbalance may be permanent or temporary resulting from the following circumstances: -

1.3.1 ‘Permanent’ Conditions of Underbalance

• A purposely selected drilling fluid, or mud density, so as to provide an underbalance.

Underbalanced drilling will allow formation fluids to flow and, in effect, can provide
a continual production test as the well is being drilled. Underbalanced drilling also
results in maximum penetration rates, minimum reservoir damage and minimized risk
of lost circulation and differential sticking.

• Insufficient mud weight selected.

• Increased formation pressure that exceeds a presently balancing mud weight.

• A reduction in hydrostatic pressure should mud become gas cut. This gas may
originate from an already underbalanced condition; from excessive penetration rates
through gas bearing formations; from fractures or even from inefficient surface
equipment.

1.3.2 Temporary Conditions of Underbalance

7
 • A reduction in hydrostatic pressure when
circulation is halted. When drilling and
circulating, the pressure in the annulus is
increased as a result of the annular
pressure losses due to the friction of the
moving fluid (circulating pressure due to
the equivalent circulating density).
When there is a halt in circulation, the
pressure in the annulus returns to the
hydrostatic pressure resulting from the
static mud weight. This reduction,
especially when drilling transition zones
of increasing formation pressure, may be
sufficient to result in an underbalance.

• A reduction in hydrostatic pressure due

to swabbing. When the drillstring is
lifted, the mud, as a function of its
viscosity and gel strength, will be
dragged along with the pipe. This results
in frictional pressure losses that cause a
reduction in the hydrostatic pressure.
Again, this could be sufficient to create a
temporary underbalance that will allow
formation fluids to flow into the wellbore
(Figure 1.3 and Plate 1.1).
Figure 1.3 Underbalance due to swabbing

1.3.3 Produced Gas from Impermeable Formations

The conditions of underbalance illustrated above will clearly lead to the influx of formation
fluid, given that the formation is permeable, resulting in produced gas should the formation be
gaseous.

Produced gas can also originate from impermeable formations should a condition of
underbalance, due to any of the situations described above, exist in the wellbore. In this case,
however, the gas is unable to flow freely into the wellbore, but is attributed to the formation
caving or collapsing into the wellbore.
As described above, fluids will always try to flow in the direction of a decreasing pressure
gradient. Cavings may result where higher formation pressure cannot be released from
impermeable lithologies, typically shales or clays. Because the fluid cannot escape, the fluid
pressure may cause formation failure or fracture, with resulting fragments caving or collapsing

8
into the borehole (Figure 1.4). Produced gas will be released as the formation ‘breaks’ apart,
exposing pore volume (much in the same way as liberated gas from the drilling process
breaking up the formation). As the ‘caved cuttings’ rise in the annulus, further gas may be
produced into the drilling mud as a result of further fracturing of the cavings. This results
from the change in pressure differential; the cavings retain the higher pressure from the depth
of origin, but as they rise, the opposing hydrostatic decreases. This decreasing ‘resistance’
will encourage further fracturing and release of gas.

Impermeable

Permeable FP > Phyd

Figure 1.4 Produced gas mechanisms from permeable and

impermeable formations

Produced gas mechanisms and specific shows such as connection and trip gas will be
discussed at length in Sections 3.6 to 3.8.

1.3.4 Similar Mechanisms

Strictly by definition, produced gas results from formations that have a higher pressure than
the opposing hydrostatic pressure, whether due to abnormally high formation pressure,
insufficient mud weight or temporary reductions in the hydrostatic pressure.

9
However, very similar situations in a balanced or overbalanced well can also lead to gas
entering the wellbore. Although not strictly produced gas, this gas does not originate from the
volume of rock liberated by drilling and so cannot be regarded as representative of the bulk
volume of gas present.

Typically, the sources, that will be described, do not lead to significant changes in recorded
gas levels or to distinctive peaks or shows as in the case of ‘legitimate’ produced gas
mechanisms. Indeed, they may be very difficult to recognize or distinguish from normal gas
levels.

From formation sloughing that lead to increased cuttings (and therefore gas if the formation
contains gas) in the wellbore as a result of mechanical effects such as structural or stress
weaknesses; dip of the formation in relation to the wellbore; weak, unconsolidated formations.
Here, as with underbalanced impermeable formations, gas will be released to the drilling fluid
as the formation breaks away into the wellbore. In addition, the formation may be permeable,
allowing a normal release of gas from the cuttings as they rise in the annulus.

10
1.4 Recycled Gas

This is defined as gas that has not been liberated and removed from the drilling fluid while at
surface and has therefore been pumped back into the wellbore to be re-circulated and appear a
second or further time at surface.

The failure to remove gas from the drilling fluid can have the following detrimental effects so
that gas removal is an important function of the surface circulating system.

• Inefficient operation of the pumps leading to erratic circulating pressures.

• Reduction in the mud density and hydrostatic, possibly resulting in an

underbalanced condition and the influx of formation fluids.

• Different hydraulic behaviour of the mud resulting from the change in mud
rheology, particularly the density, viscosity and gel strength.

• Possible misinterpretation of recycled gas shows.

There is a difference in emphasis, in terms of recycled gas, for drilling and geological
personnel.

The priority of drilling engineers is to determine the condition of the mud and it’s effect on
drilling efficiency and well control. There are obviously occasions when quantities of free gas
are recycled, reducing mud hydrostatic pressure and therefore important in terms of well
control. A more continual concern is the amount of gas being held in solution changing the
rheological characteristics of the mud. Dangerous situations can occur, with changes in well
conditions such as temperature, pressure and mud rheology, when dissolved gas may come out
of solution leading to a rapid drop in hydrostatic pressure and blowout potential.

With agitator gas detection systems, this poses a problem since it is exactly the content of
heavier dissolved gases that is not being efficiently extracted and measured. For the purpose of
well control, determination of relative change is obviously important, but a precise
measurement is especially necessary. The application of the GasWizardTM technology will
provide this important information, since the sensor can be installed in the pump suction line
to provide quantitative measurement of gas re-entering the borehole.

For geologists, determination of continual recycled gas content is also important but does not
pose such a problem. The GasWizard technology will again provide a quantitative
measurement of differential gas. Thus, the difference between gas entering the well and gas
leaving the well determines precisely the proportions of recycled and newly liberated

11
formation gas. However, for routine evaluation, when gas responses, or shows, are evaluated
against a background level, the recycled gas content is effectively eliminated since it is an
equal component of both the background level and the actual response.

A more immediate problem for geologists is the recognition of significant gas responses being
recycled, so that subsequent shows are not misinterpreted as newly liberated shows.

There are many conditions and factors that may influence the potential of gas recycling to
occur:

• The efficiency of the surface degassing equipment.

• The volume of entrained gas that has to be removed from the mud.

• Mud type, weight, viscosity and solubility characteristics, all influencing the
ease at which gas can be extracted from the mud.

• Gas composition (light to heavy hydrocarbons) and mutual solubility with

the drilling fluid, determining how readily the mud will retain the gas.

• The temperature of the mud which effects the volatility and solubility of
gases, together with the viscosity and solubility capacity of the mud.

• The volumetric size of the surface system, determining how long the mud
remains at surface before being returned to the wellbore. Obviously, the
longer the mud is at surface, the more gas is able to escape.

• The degree of agitation, facilitating gas escape at surface, provided by the

length and slope of the flowline, mud shakers, mixing and agitation in the
pits etc.

Recycled gas shows are, typically, easily identified and dismissed as originating from the
formations being currently drilled, by comparing them with any associated drilling parameter
or lithology changes.

The recycled gas show will be detected at surface one complete circulation time (surface
circulation time + downtime + lagtime) after the initial gas show. It can therefore be used as a
way of determining total circulation time and thereby determining the time mud takes to pass
through the active pit system and lines. Before the ‘surface time’ is known, we have to be
able to recognize recycled gas shows through composition and duration changes, resulting
from the following factors: -
1. The recycled show will normally be longer in duration since the original
volume of gas cut mud will be mixed with a larger volume of mud at surface

12
 and will be subject to surface agitation and to turbulence as it is pumped back
down the drillpipe. This leads to a diffusion of the gas and significant
lengthening of the show (Figure 1.5).

2. Typically, the composition of the recycled gas will show an increased

proportion of heavier hydrocarbons since the lighter hydrocarbons are more
easily extracted at surface and the heavier hydrocarbons more susceptible to
being retained and recycled (Figure 1.5).

% Total Gas % Chromatographic Gas

0.1 1.0 10 100 0.01 0.1 1.0 10

C2 C1
C3

C4

complete
circulation

Extended proportionally
Recycled more heavy
Gas peak hydrocarbons

Figure 1.5 Typical characteristics of a recycled gas peak

3. When the gas cut mud is returning up the annulus, the effective reduction in
drilling fluid density may facilitate minor diffusion from gas bearing
formations as yet unprotected by filter cake. Since lighter hydrocarbons
diffuse more readily, such diffusion may lead to an increased proportion of
lighter gases. This process would certainly be minor in comparison to the
dominantly heavier composition of the initial recycled gas.

13
A gas show will be concluded as recycled gas if it cannot be attributed to any of the following:
-

• A change in lithology.

• A change in porosity as indicated by penetration rate and/or cuttings analysis.

• An increase in penetration rate through different drilling parameters.

…and if the occurrence of the peak corresponds to one circulation time after a previously
recorded peak, whether a formation gas show, a produced gas peak, a carbide lag test etc.

In reality, recycled gas peaks are not particularly common because the entire surface system,
as well as specific equipment, is a very effective degasser. The most common occurrences
will be from large trip gases and influxes when the entire gas volume cannot be removed from
a ‘single pass’ through the system. Even in these cases, the magnitude of the recycled peak
will be a fraction of the size of the original peak. The recycled trip gas shown in Figure 1.6
illustrates this.

Notice that as the trip gas approaches surface (up to point A), all hydrocarbon gases, C1
through C3, are increasing at the same rate. This gas originates from the drilled cuttings that
were not circulated to surface prior to the trip (i.e. equating to liberated gas) and shows a
steady increase as the mud temperature increases. The increasing temperature reduces the mud
viscosity and increases the gas volatility, both allowing for more effective gas extraction.

ORIGINAL TRIP GAS PEAK RECYCLED RESPONSE

Liberated Gas
14
C3 C2 C1

A
Looking at the recycled gas peak, the two characteristics already described are, firstly, that the
peak is longer in duration, and secondly, that the peak shows a typical increase in the
proportion of heavy gas. Although in this example the heavy gases are small and off scale, the
fact that they have increased proportionally, in comparison to the light hydrocarbons, is
demonstrated by the much lower balance ratio.

1.5 Contamination Gas

This is defined as any gas that has been artificially introduced into the drilling fluid from any
source other than the drilled formations.

15
There are many external contaminants that may result in anomalous gas shows or that may
result in continual background gas measurements that can complicate or confuse formation
gas analysis: -

• Addition of petroleum products to the drilling fluid to provide lubrication in high

drilling torque situations for example.

• Oil-based or invert mud systems.

• Re-used oil based mud that may have retained hydrocarbon fluids from previously
drilled wells.

• As a result of thermal degradation or chemical reaction of mud additives. Often

recognized as foam on the surface of the drilling fluid, this doesn’t actually generate
hydrocarbons, but results in a lighter fluid that increases the efficiency of the gas trap
resulting in more gas being extracted from the mud.

• Resulting from lag checks e.g. the use of calcium carbide used to produce acetylene
in water based muds. Normal gasoline is also commonly used (Plate 1.2).

• Production of hydrogen when drilling through casing shoes and collars, that will
generate a gas response on CC and TCD type total gas detectors.

• Contamination from transporters or mud tanks previously holding crude.

In general, contamination gas does not normally present too much of a problem in formation
and reservoir evaluation. Individual gas responses resulting from small volume additions can
be readily identified as long as communication is good and the mud logger or geologist is
aware of the addition. Continued contamination causing a background gas measurement,
again, does not normally present problems since volume changes in liberated gas can be
evaluated over and above the background measurement. However, there are situations when
ratio analysis and small compositional changes can be adversely effected by background
contamination gas.

There are a number of considerations for wellsite operations: -

The major concerns for formation evaluation come with the use of oil based mud systems and
with the addition of petroleum fluids for lubrication etc.

1.5.1 The Addition of Petroleum Products

16
Refined oils and diesels commonly used do not present a problem in themselves since they do
not contain the light end hydrocarbons (methane through pentane) being analyzed and will
therefore not cause a gas response.

However, gas responses are often recorded, resulting from the following possible situations: -

• The lighter, lower viscosity characteristics of the petroleum product may allow
diffusion of formation gas from formations as yet unprotected by filter cake.

• The different rheological and solubility characteristics of the petroleum may allow
the extraction of more gas at surface. In this situation, the size of the addition
becomes an important factor if it is not removed at surface and is incorporated in the
mud system. Since the petroleum product will become dispersed throughout the
entire system, solubility characteristics are changed throughout. This will alter the
proportions and components of hydrocarbons either retained, or released, by the mud
system, from previously established background levels.

• Certain petroleum products that are used may actually contain the lighter
hydrocarbons that are being analyzed. Again, any response resulting from the
addition can be readily identified as long as communication is good. However, the
size of the addition will determine the significance of further evaluation problems.
Consider the response illustrated in Plate 5.2 resulting from a lag check with one litre
of gasoline. The increase in C4 and C5 components is quite significant. If you now
imagine the response that would result from several barrels or cubic metres of a
similar petroleum liquid used for lubrication, it is clear that any small compositional
changes in formation fluid, occurring at the same time, may be completely masked,
or hidden, by the contamination gas.

• The use of native, or unrefined, crude oil does present an enormous problem for mud
loggers. Obviously, hydrocarbons are being introduced into the mud system resulting
in a gas response when added. Recycled gas responses will also be produced and
have to be identified. As circulation continues, the oil will be dispersed throughout
the mud system resulting in a continual background contamination and totally
changing the solubility and retention characteristics of the drilling fluid. This may
have a continual effect on the gases that are extracted and detected at surface and, in
most cases, it is virtually impossible to determine the extent of the problem.

1.5.2 Oil Based Mud Systems

Similar to the situations described above, oil based muds are typically produced from refined
products that do not normally possess the light end hydrocarbons (methane through pentane)
analyzed in routine wellsite operations. The use of oil based muds does not, therefore,
automatically result in evaluation problems with contamination gas. However, as with the

17
addition of petroleum fluids described above, there are often situations that will result in
hydrocarbon gases being recorded.

• If the oil being used does lead to a background level of contamination gas, the
compositional signature is easily determined and any changes in formation gas,
whether magnitude or composition, can be readily identified and evaluated. The
evaluation of compositional changes using gas ratios can sometimes be a problem
where contamination levels are relatively high and the formation change relatively
small, but in most situations, by just considering the change over and above the
background level, fluid type and changes are still identifiable.

• Over time, of course, the contamination background derived from just the oil-based
system is going to be added to by any retained formation gases. Given the high
solubility capacity of the oil, a proportion of the heavier components, especially, will
be retained and recycled. These will then add to, and in some situations will be the
sole cause of, a contamination background. The same principle, of identifying
formation changes over and above this continually changing background, applies.

• Often of concern is when oil is used to drill in the same region from which it was
produced. Being refined, the same principles apply, in that, typically, the lighter end
hydrocarbons will not be present. However, if the oil-based mud does result in
background gas contamination, then the composition may obviously be very similar
to any formation gas liberated from zones of interest. Volume changes in terms of
increased liberated gas from the zones of interest will be clearly identified, but ratio
analysis is now somewhat of a problem since the mud system itself will produce the
same ratio values. Evaluating oil type is not essential in this case since it is already
known. Of more important consideration is the identification of gas/oil and oil/water
contacts in order to determine the vertical interval of the reservoir. In these cases, the
compositional changes (for example, increased light end content in the gas zone;
increased heavier end components in the water zone showing residual oil) will often
still be identifiable over and above the background contamination.

• Addition of new oil will often result in a gas response that may be mis-interpreted as
a gas show if the mud logger has no knowledge of the addition. Communication
between the mud engineer, derrickman and mud logger is therefore of paramount
importance.

• Diesel is often used as the oil phase in invert mud systems and typically does not
present a problem to chromatographic analysis since, as with refined oil, light
hydrocarbons are not typically present. Heavier hydrocarbons (typically C4 and C5)
may be detectable but, as described above, the signature is easily discernable should
they be detected. Typically, only trace amounts will be detected, if at all, from
additions of new diesel.

18
A phenomena, not fully understood, that has been recognized, is the trapping and build up of
micro-droplets in dryers and filters. This, normally, does not interfere with gas analysis but,
whether due to a saturation point or the warmer temperature in the logging unit, after a period
of time these droplets go into a gas phase leading to a slow increase in the levels of C4 and
C5. The contamination is easily remedied by replacing filters, but the process is one that mud
logging personnel should be aware of. This process complicates the identification of possible
condensing of liberated gas in the gas sample line as described in Section 4.2.1. Both
processes will result in the same type of contamination gas and therefore very difficult to
distinguish.

Problems of contamination are ones, not so much of mis-interpretation, but ones of having a
detrimental effect on evaluation.

• With obvious mutual solubility, diesel and oil-based mud systems may retain
hydrocarbons in solution, so that, if muds are re-used from well to well without proper re-
conditioning, gases from other wells and formations will add to the background of the
mud being used in the present well.

• The dumping of oils into the mud system for purposes of lubrication, for example, may
not only introduce new hydrocarbons to the system but changes the solubility character of
the mud. The change in the gas content of the mud can complicate evaluation and, if
native crude from the same area is used, changes in formation gas level may be difficult to
detect because the mud already contains that composition.

19
 PLATE 1.1 Real-time log illustration of a typical produced gas peak

Lagged
Depth

Duration of
Connection

This typical connection gas response results from a temporary condition of

underbalance, in this case, the reduction in bottom hole pressure when the pumps
are turned off in order to make a connection.

With typical connection procedure, the lowest pressure exists when the drillstring
is set in slips and the well is balanced by the mud hydrostatic pressure. This is the
time that influx will occur (shaded area); the extended peak is a result of normal
gas dispersion.

20
 PLATE 1.2 Gas response resulting from a gasoline lag check

An illustration of a contamination gas source, in this case from a gasoline lag

check producing a response from the heavier end hydrocarbons, butane and
pentane.

Typically, diesel and refined oils used in oil based mud systems do not yield such
light hydrocarbons, but when contamination traces are seen from such systems,
they will similarly be composed of butane and pentane hydrocarbons.

If such a response is generated by a single litre of gasoline, it is easy to

appreciate the problem that can be caused when several cubic metres of similar
fluids are used for lubrication purposes. It is not so much a problem of
misidentifying the response, but a problem of a large contamination response
masking any changes in formation gas over the same interval.

21
 HYDROCARBON EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION

Section 2 QUANTITY AND COMPOSITION OF RECORDED GAS

2.1 Formation Considerations

2.1.1 Porosity and Gas Saturation

The combination of these two formation characteristics determines the actual bulk volume of
gas present in a given rock (Figure 2.1).

Porosity defines the total void space present

within a formation and therefore determines
the maximum possible volume of any fluid
within that space, be it gas, oil or water.
Absolute porosity is reduced if voids contain
cement or clay infil etc.

Gas Saturation defines the proportion of gas,

relative to the other formation fluids, present
within the available pore space.

matrix gas pore fluid gas saturation (%) x pore volume = bulk gas
volume
Figure 2.1 Bulk gas volume

Wireline and core analysis can lead to the accurate determination of these parameters, and
while the well is being drilled, porosity can be estimated from visual inspection of the drilled
cuttings, with relative changes resulting in changes to the penetration rate for example. In
addition, apparent gas porosity can be determined from quantitative gas measurement.

Relative changes, or trends, in gas quantity recorded at surface are just as important as the
actual quantity. This is because there are many conditions that will influence how much of the
actual bulk gas volume from the formation is liberated to the drilling fluid, how much remains
in solution and goes undetected, how much escapes and goes undetected etc.
An independent increase, in either absolute porosity or gas saturation, will lead to an increase
in the actual bulk volume of gas in place, as is illustrated in Figure 2.2. This will have the

22
most immediate effect on the gas that is mechanically liberated by the drilling process. It will
also have an effect on the gas that is available for subsequent release from the cuttings as they
rise in the annulus.

A. Same pore volume B. Increased pore volume

Increased gas saturation Same gas saturation

Figure 2.2 Effect on gas volume due to changes in porosity / gas saturation

2.1.2 Effective Porosity and Permeability

The term effective porosity is used to describe the quantity of inter-connected pores. If a
formation has a low effective porosity, then liberated gas will be largely confined to the
fraction of gas that is released from those pores exposed by the drilling process. Pores within
the intact cuttings will retain the pore fluid, and gas, if the porosity is not effective.

The permeability of a formation is a measurement (milli-Darcy) of the quality of

communication or inter-connection between the individual pore spaces and relates, for
example, to direct lines of communication (tortuosity) and pore throat size. If there is no
connection between the pores, the formation has zero permeability (as well as zero effective
porosity) and natural fluid movement cannot occur.

The formation’s permeability is a principle factor in determining how much of the gas retained
by the cuttings is released to the mud and how much remains trapped within the drilled
cuttings when they reach surface.

If permeability is low or zero, any gas that was not mechanically liberated by the drilling
action will be retained by the cuttings as they rise to the surface. There may be a minor

23
amount of mechanical liberation, should the cuttings be subject to collision or erosion during
transit, but mud hydraulics is usually designed to minimize this and protect the cuttings for
evaluation.

As a simple, general, rule, the greater the permeability, the greater the amount of gas released
to the drilling fluid and this can be confirmed, to some extent, by cuttings gas analysis.

• If permeability is good, we can

expect any gas retained by the
intact cuttings to escape to the Good porosity
drilling fluid during their transit to Low effective porosity
surface, resulting in low or zero No permeability
cuttings gas.

• If permeability is low or zero, gas

will be retained by the cuttings
and the resulting cuttings gas Good porosity
analysis will be relatively higher. Good effective porosity
Low permeability

• If effective porosity is good but

permeability low, we can expect
gas liberation to occur but at a Good porosity
slower rate. Some gas may be Good effective porosity
retained all the way to surface, Good permeability
again resulting in cuttings gas.

In general, these are reasonable

assumptions to make but this is a very
simplified picture. As well as Figure 6.3 Porosity vs Permeability
permeability and effective porosity,
several other factors will have an
influence on the release of gas from
the rising cuttings.
One important consideration is that permeability is relative, depending on the fluids present.

• Free gas will escape more easily, especially during expansion, than gas in solution,
which is subject to overall fluid mobility.

24
• Pore throat size may be such that it can provide good permeability for free gas, but
when this is mixed or dissolved with molecularly larger fluids such as water or oil,
the permeability may not be as effective.

• The composition and viscosity of the formation pore fluid will effect mobility. Here
is a proviso to the cuttings gas rule, where a higher cuttings gas analysis may be a
result of crude oil being retained by the cuttings rather than as a result of low
permeability.

• Pressure and temperature changes also have to be considered. As these decrease with
the shallower depth (relative to the cuttings rising), they will cause other parameters
to change; i.e. changes in hydrocarbon phase, fluid viscosity and solubility, all in turn
having an effect on the relative permeability.

• A further factor affecting the ‘relative’ ease at which gas and fluid is liberated from
the rising cuttings is the formation pressure retained by the cuttings - the greater this
is in comparison to the opposing mud hydrostatic, then the easier it will be for the
fluids to escape. Indeed, if the pressure is great enough, fracture of the cuttings may
occur, exposing further voids.

The use of cuttings gas analysis has been described as an approximate determination of the
degree of permeability in the cuttings. This is certainly true but it has to be recognized,
however, that there are several drawbacks and possible inaccuracies with the procedure.

Cuttings gas analysis is performed by taking a given sample of washed cuttings and
pulverizing them in a standard blender. This, effectively, completes the drilling process so that
any remaining gas is liberated from the cuttings. The gas is drawn off to the detectors where it
is measured and analyzed.

Limitations with the process are as follows: -

• The time that it takes to complete in comparison to the penetration and sampling rate.
The analysis has to be done immediately since gas will be escaping and often, this
labour intensive process is not possible to complete for small depth intervals, owing
to other work requirements.

• The cuttings have to be washed so that gas remaining in the mud is not affecting the
analysis. This adds to the time delay before testing the sample, and may even lead to
fluids being flushed from within the cuttings (especially where permeability is good).

• A typical sample will contain cavings as well as drilled cuttings so that the resulting
reading is not wholly representative of the drilled interval.

25
• The difficulty in determining a constant sample size, whether by weight or by
volume.

• Blending every sample to a consistent chip size.

In addition to these operational requirements and limitations, there are situations where the
rule of thumb (i.e. high cuttings gas means low permeability) does not apply, and this
uncertainty has lead to the use of cuttings gas analysis declining in popularity: -

• Heavier, viscous oil containing soluble gas will lead to high cuttings gas. The oil is
retained as a result of it’s viscosity rather than necessarily being an indication of low
effective porosity or permeability.

• Oil with a low gas oil ratio will lead to a low cuttings gas value, which cannot be
interpreted as an indication of low permeability.

Further effects of permeability will be detailed in Section 6.4, where it’s role in fluid
movement, due to pressure differential, will be covered.

2.2 Hole Depth

The hole depth has a fundamental control on gas analysis and interpretation, some of which
have already been covered in previous sections. The main consideration is to the change in
temperature and pressure, the difference between the conditions at the depth in question to
those present at the surface and the resulting effect that this has on the gases.

• The effect on the actual volume of gas present at surface. With no other changes or
influences, if the same volume of ‘in place’ gas was released from formations at
2000m and also at 4000m, the volume recorded at surface would be much greater in
the second case due to gas expansion. Taking the most basic gas expansion law
(Boyle Law, where pressure x volume is a constant), free gas will double in size for
each ‘halving’ of the depth (and therefore opposing hydrostatic pressure). In the
above case, this would mean that even though the in place volume of gas was initially
the same, the gas recorded once at surface would be double in the second instance.
In practice, it is not quite as simple since temperature is also a factor, so too is the
mud type together with solubility and phase changes that may occur. For example,
with an oil-based system, where a greater proportion of the gas is held in solution, no
expansion occurs until close to surface where the bubble point is reached and the gas
starts to break out of solution.

26
• The solubility capacity of fluids, which increases with pressure and decreases with
temperature.

• The gas volatility, which decreases with pressure and increases with temperature.

• The mud viscosity, which decreases with temperature.

27
2.3 Drilling Considerations

2.3.1 Rate Of Penetration and Hole Diameter

We have already seen how the bulk volume of gas present in a given formation is controlled
by the porosity and gas saturation.

The volume of fluid and gas that is then actually released to the drilling fluid is dependent on
the volume of the cylinder of rock (i.e. the borehole) that is created from the drilling process.

Remembering that gas extraction and detection at surface is against a time base, the final
measurement will reflect the magnitude of gas that is recorded against this time base. This,
then, obviously reflects the volume of the rock ‘cylinder’ produced over a given time.

The volume of the rock cylinder is determined by: -

1. The diameter of the hole (i.e. bit diameter)

For a given hole section, the diameter will obviously be virtually constant (changes may occur
as a result of bits becoming undergauge or due to hole enlargement where formations are
extremely friable), so that cylinder volume is principally dependent on ROP. However, a
significant difference in cylinder volume obviously occurs between holes of different
diameter, so this is an important consideration when comparing different wells.

A significant change in gas volume may occur at the start of new hole sections on a given well
because so many parameters, such as mud type, density and temperature, bit type, drilling
parameters, ROP and flowrate, will all change at the same time (Plate 6.1). All, as this section
will show, have a bearing on recorded gas.

2. The vertical height of the cylinder

Since we are dealing with the rate at which the cylinder is created against a time base, the
height of the cylinder is determined by the rate of penetration.

If a given formation is drilled at a constant rate of penetration, then the volume of rock
penetrated, chipped, crushed and released to the wellbore is constant over a given unit of time.

28
If there is no change in gas volume (i.e. porosity and gas saturation) throughout it’s interval,
then the volume of gas mechanically liberated to the drilling fluid will also be constant over
this given unit of time. This, then, effectively governs the resulting gas saturation of the
drilling fluid, which is reflected in a constant gas reading by the detectors at surface.

If the same formation is drilled at a faster rate of penetration, then, even though the actual bulk
gas content of the formation is the same, a greater volume of rock, and subsequently gas, is
liberated over the same unit of time into the same volume of drilling fluid. The gas saturation
of the mud is therefore increased, which will be reflected by an apparent increase in gas by the
detectors at surface.

A=r2

Gas Volume
ROP

2 min

2 min/m 1m

1 min
1 min/m 1m

Time

Figure 2.4 The effect of ROP on gas level, assuming no other changes

In fact, since hole diameter can be assumed constant over a given interval, while drilling, the
volume of crushed rock is solely dependent on the ROP. Assuming that there are no changes
in the ‘in situ’ gas volume, and that there are no other changes in volume caused by other
parameters, then the relationship between ROP and gas volume is a direct one (as illustrated in
Figure 2.4). I.e. if the ROP doubles, the recorded gas volume will double.
It is clear, therefore, that a change in the penetration rate will have a direct effect on the
resulting gas level recorded for the corresponding depth. Interpreting changes in gas level, or
gas shows, therefore requires a correlation or comparison with the ROP in order to determine
a qualitative estimate of changes in the gas volume and/or saturation.

29
In the example shown in Figure 2.4, if it is assumed that there is no change in the bulk gas
volume in each metre of formation drilled, it can be readily seen that the gas volume is
represented at surface by the area underneath the gas curve. For both metres drilled, the actual
volume of gas released to the drilling fluid is the same, yet, at first sight, the gas would appear
to be more significant for the second metre drilled.

The following question is one that should always be asked: -

Has the ROP increase been as a result of a change in drilling or circulating parameters, or does
it indicate an increase in porosity and gas volume?

Changes in any one of the following parameters can result in a change in ROP. Any resulting
change in the gas level does not, therefore, necessarily indicate a change in bulk gas volume or
saturation.

Positive changes on ROP will occur with: -

increases in.... weight on bit, rotary speed, formation pressure, porosity

decreases in.... mud weight

Changes in ROP will also be caused by changes in: -

lithology, bit selection, bit wear, hydraulics,

Naturally, the drillability of a formation has a major influence on the penetration rate and as
well as parameters such as type, hardness, strength of matrix and cementation, porosity is an
important element in terms of how easily a formation will drill.

An increase in porosity will lead to an increase in ROP, so that ROP is an invaluable tool in
determining formation tops or changes, closely following the sonic log transit times, which
also increase with greater porosity.
In terms of precise gas analysis, however, this does lead to a slight complication. If we know
that none of the above parameters are the reason for an ROP increase, then the increase is
indicative of increased porosity. We have already seen how an increase in porosity will lead
to an increase in gas volume even with no change in gas saturation, purely due to the increased
volume of pore fluid being liberated to the drilling mud. We have also seen how an increase
in ROP will lead to an apparent increase in recorded gas, again as a result of an increased
volume of rock and therefore pore fluid being released to the mud over a given time.

30
Therefore, when an increase in recorded gas is accompanied by an increased ROP, it has to be
a result of either, or a combination of, porosity increase, gas saturation and ROP.

To determine whether the ROP or the porosity/saturation is more responsible for the gas
increase (whether gas volume has increased), a qualitative estimate can be gained by using the
principle already illustrated in Figure 6.4.

If, for a given interval, the ROP doubled due to an increase in porosity and the corresponding
recorded gas also doubled, then it can be reasonably stated that there has been very little
change in the actual gas volume.

If however, for the same interval of formation, the doubling in ROP was accompanied by a
corresponding gas increase of five times the previous level, then it can be reasonably assumed
that there has been a significant increase in gas volume. This is an important basic
consideration when evaluating liberated gas shows (Section 7.4).

A real-time example of a gas increase resulting from a drilling break is shown in Plate 6.2.
The comment made on the real-time log by the mud logger at the time of the increase tells the
story! Here, a quick appraisal of the relative increase in ROP (18 to 5 min/m) to the increase
in gas level (6 to 10%) shows that more than a 3 fold increase in ROP results in less than a 2
fold increase in gas. If the in situ gas volume had remained the same, then the ROP, alone,
would have resulted in a 3 fold increase in gas. Therefore, although we know we have a zone
of increased porosity, as shown by the drilling break, there is, actually, an overall decrease in
formation gas volume. It can reasonably be assumed, therefore, that over the zone in question,
there was an increase in formation porosity but an actual decrease in gas saturation. How
significant this is, in terms of zone or reservoir appraisal, depends largely on the type of fluid
that has been encountered. This will be expanded on in Section 7.4.

Before leaving this section, it is worth pointing out a ‘relationship’ between the bit diameter
and ROP, the two factors that determine the volume of rock produced by drilling.

As already stated, given no other influences, an increasing ROP has a corresponding increase
in recorded gas (i.e. double the ROP, double the gas). An increase in bit diameter will lead to
an increase in gas corresponding to the square of the radius (i.e. the area of the cylinder face is
given by ‘r2’ ).

Now consider the situation arising when starting to drill a new, smaller, hole section in the
well. Firstly, the smaller hole diameter results in a smaller volume of gas as given by the
above relationship. This reduction will be ‘amplified’ by the ROP component of the cylinder,

31
since, typically, smaller bits cannot sustain the weight that can be applied to a larger bit. This
reduction in weight on bit, together with smaller bit, tooth size etc will lead to a ‘naturally’
reduced ROP for the new bit, further reducing the gas recorded at surface.

32
2.3.2 Bit Type and Resulting Drilled Cuttings

The bit type is obviously a main factor in determining the ROP, as described above, so will
have a subsequent effect on the amount of gas released over a given time.

The other important effect on gas analysis is the cutting action, degree of crushing, and size of
the final drilled cuttings. This is controlled, not only by the size of the bit, but by the bit type.

When discussing the processes involved in the occurrence of liberated gas, we have seen how
the drilling action will allow for the mechanical release of gas. This occurs as a result of an
increased amount of surface area and voids becoming exposed as the rock is broken, chipped
and crushed into smaller and smaller cuttings.

The amount of gas mechanically released during this initial process will be dependent on the
size and degree of crushing of the cuttings. The smaller the final cuttings, then the greater the
amount of gas mechanically liberated. If the final cuttings are large, then the greater the
proportion of gas retained by the cuttings. Factors such as permeability, solubility and fluid
mobility then become a factor in determining how much of the gas retained by the cuttings
will be released as the cuttings rise in the annulus and arrive at surface.

Cuttings produced from insert bits and especially diamond bits are much smaller than those
produced by steel toothed bits. With tooth (and insert) bits, the size of the teeth is also very
important in determining the size of the cuttings; the larger the tooth, the larger the cuttings.

Where there are a greater number of smaller cuttings being produced, then a greater surface
area and void space will have been exposed by the drilling process, leading to a greater
liberation of formation fluid and improved gas shows.

In fact, purely for the quality of gas shows and subsequent evaluation, diamond or PDC bits
are the best since they generate the smallest cuttings (often completely pulverizing cuttings
into “rock flour”) with maximum liberation of gas. Unfortunately, other formation evaluation
techniques such as ROP changes with lithology/porosity changes, and cuttings evaluation, are
lost with such bit types!

33
2.3.3 Coring

Coring is a special case that often disheartens inexperienced geologists. After having seen a
good gas response and making the decision to core, the gas levels during the coring operation
are seen to drop to a fraction of what they were beforehand (Plate 6.3). For experienced
geologists or mud loggers, this is to be expected and again occurs as a result of the volume of
rock from which gas can be liberated.

There are four main factors to consider when assessing the drop in gas levels due to the coring
operation: -

• The most important and influential change is that the amount of rock available for
gas liberation is reduced significantly since, obviously, the central core remains intact
inside the core barrel and retains all of the formation fluid contained within that
volume of rock. This obviously leads to a significant reduction in liberated gas from
a given interval of formation.

• Most coring operations will typically result in slower penetration rates than if the
same formation were drilled conventionally, leading to a further apparent reduction
in liberated gas.

These two factors result in the most significant change, a large reduction in liberated and
recorded gas, and far outweigh the following two factors that result in a relative increase: -

• A proportionally greater volume of gas will typically be liberated from the ‘outer’
volume of rock that is ground and crushed by the core bit than the equivalent volume
of rock drilled by a conventional bit. This is purely a result of the action of the
diamond core bit producing much finer cuttings.

This can sometimes be accompanied by an apparent compositional change, as

illustrated by gas ratios. With conventional drilling, any permeability restrictions may
result in cuttings retention, preferentially, of the heavier components. More of these
components will be released when coring, since smaller cuttings are generated and
permeability is less of a factor.

• The flowrate is also typically reduced for coring operations so that any liberated gas
will be concentrated within a smaller volume of mud (see Section 6.3.4).

34
2.3.4 Flowrate

Changes in the flowrate of the circulating fluid have a similar and automatic effect on gas
volume measurement, as we have already seen with the rate of penetration.

For a given flowrate, if the bulk volume of gas that is being liberated to the drilling fluid is
constant over the interval of a formation, ROP and other factors are all constant, the gas
entrained within a given volume of mud will be a constant. As this mud is drawn into the trap
and sampled at the said flowrate, a constant gas recording will result.

If ROP remains constant, then the volume of formation rock being released into the annulus,
over a given period of time, remains constant. An increase in flowrate will lead to a greater
dispersal, or dilution, of the gas within the mud, i.e. the same volume of cuttings, together
with formation gas, are now being liberated into a greater volume of mud, effectively reducing
its gas saturation. When this mud is sampled at surface, a reduction in gas volume will be
recorded.

At first sight, this appears to be a relatively straightforward concept in that a higher flowrate
reduces the gas saturation of the mud, resulting in lower gas levels recorded in surface. This
is, in fact, the over-riding influence, although increasing the flowrate introduces or results in
other changes that have a less significant effect on the recorded gas.

• An increase in flowrate produces greater annular velocities that result in more

pronounced cuttings and gas dispersal. However, the significance of this will vary
throughout different sections of the annulus where annular volumes and relative
velocity increases vary significantly. Dispersal will be greater in the lower sections
of the hole, where annular clearance is smallest, but will be less significant in the
larger upper sections of the hole, and is especially so in the case of offshore marine
risers.

• The increase in flowrate and annular velocity results in a higher equivalent

circulating density due to increased frictional pressure losses. This increase in
opposing pressure, or pressure differential, may have significant effects on gas
release, including effects such as flushing or influxing.

1. Greater opposing pressure that will reduce the amount of gas that is released
from the cuttings as they rise in the annulus. Where permeability is good,
however, this has little bearing, since the gas will be released at surface when the
opposing pressure will be atmospheric.

2. Increased pressure differential at the bottom of the hole that results in: -

35
 • A reduced penetration rate that will result in less volume of rock being
produced, and therefore a reduction in the amount of liberated gas per
unit volume of mud.

• An increased risk of flushing the formation (if permeable) ahead of the

bit. This displacement of formation fluid will lead to a reduced gas
content in the formation when it is drilled. The effect of flushing and
other fluid interactions will be discussed more fully in Section 6.4.

• The increased flowrate will lead to greater agitation of the mud as it passes through
the surface system, therefore leading to the release of more gas to the atmosphere.
This will lead to a preferential bias towards increased heavy hydrocarbons since the
lighter gases are the ones that will escape more easily to the atmosphere.

• The most significant effect is one that the mud logger does have some control on!
The increased flowrate will lead to a rise in the mud level in the shaker box or shaker
box. This will lead to a larger mud sample being sampled by the trap, but a
corresponding decrease in agitator rotation and extraction efficiency. In most
situations, the overall effect will be an increase in the level of recorded gas. This
effect will typically have a more significant influence on the gas level than any of the
others, but will obviously be corrected for by the mud logger resetting the trap to it’s
former height.

All of the possible influences and changes in gas liberation and recorded levels, as a result of a
change in flowrate, are illustrated in Figure 2.5.

36
 higher and preferential losses to the
atmosphere
due to increased turbulence in flow
DECREASE in lighter components

rise in mud level and

gas being sampled >DECREASE
INCREASE

relative increases in annular

velocities, leading to dispersal
of cuttings and gas >>DECREASE

greater pressure opposing

early fluid escape from
cuttings

>>>DECREASE

increased pressure differential due to higher ECD:-

flushing potential due to higher overbalance reduced ROP due to
DECREASE increased differential
DECREASE

Figure 2.5 Schematic showing the possible changes and influences on

recorded gas levels due to an increase in flowrate

37
2.3.5 Differential Pressure

It has been seen, in many instances already in this manual, how fluids will preferentially flow
from high pressure to low pressure, along the path of a negative pressure gradient. This
principle has an enormous influence in many aspects of gas liberation or generation and is a
principle that anyone who is involved in the analysis and interpretation of gas data should be
very familiar with.

The differential pressure is the difference between the hydrostatic pressure of the formation
pore fluid and the hydrostatic pressure exerted in the wellbore by the vertical mud column.

Mud Hydrostatic Pressure = Mud Density x Vertical Depth x gravity/conversion constant

Phyd (psi) = ppg x ft x 0.052 imperial units where psi = pounds per square inch
ppg = pounds per gallon

Phyd (KPa) = kg/m3 x m x 0.00981 metric units KPa = kilopascals

kg/m3 = kilogram/cubic
metre

If formation pressure > hydrostatic pressure the well is underbalanced, and formation
fluids are able to flow, or escape, from the
formation into the wellbore. This is termed
an influx.

If formation pressure = hydrostatic pressure the well is said to be at balance

If formation pressure < hydrostatic pressure
the well is overbalanced and the drilling fluid
is able to flow from the wellbore into
permeable formations. This may be termed
flushing or fluid invasion, depending on the
time of it’s occurrence.

The condition of balance is therefore determined by the relationship between the actual
formation pore fluid pressure and the mud density. The hydrostatic pressure resulting from a
given mud density will be further increased by frictional pressure losses while circulating (to
give an equivalent circulating density or ECD), or by downward pipe movement (surging).
Conversely, hydrostatic pressure may be reduced by frictional pressure losses caused by mud
movement induced by upward pipe movement (swabbing).
Circulating Pressure (due to the ECD) = Hydrostatic Pressure + Annular Pressure Loss

38
In order for fluid flow to occur, whether from the borehole to the formation or vice versa, the
other condition that must exist is permeability. If there is no permeability, then fluid flow
cannot occur (although, as we have seen, produced gas may still result from high-pressured
impermeable formations due to caving).

Before discussing fluid invasion and influxing specifically, let us summarize the effects of
differential pressure on normal gas liberation as detailed previously: -

• Penetration Rate

The greater the overbalance, the slower the ROP. We have already seen how a change in ROP
has a direct effect on the apparent level of gas recorded at surface. A doubling of the ROP
leads to twice as much rock and therefore gas (given the same porosity and saturation) being
liberated to the same volume of mud, resulting in a doubling of the recorded gas at surface.

• Bottom Hole Effect

In an underbalanced situation, the cuttings will be washed clear of the bit more rapidly by a
combination of expanding formation gas and the jetting action from the bit nozzles.
Mechanical liberation from the action of the bit will therefore be reduced.

• Rising Cuttings

Gas retained by the cuttings will still escape, given permeability, as they rise in the annulus
and the ‘fossil’ or ‘residual’ formation pressure retained by the cuttings becomes greater than
the opposing hydrostatic pressure. This process will be reduced or delayed if the hydrostatic
pressure is higher. This liberation may continue at surface and will be seen as gas bleeding
from the cuttings. If the formation is impermeable or if pores are isolated, gas expansion
and/or increasing pressure differential (formation > hydrostatic) may cause the cuttings to
fracture allowing the further release of gas.

39
2.4 Fluid Invasion and Flushing

2.4.1 Invasion and Filtration

Once a permeable formation has been drilled and is then left exposed in the wellbore, a normal
condition will occur, given a state of overbalance, of drilling fluid invading the formation
(Figure 2.6). The severity of this, i.e. how far the mud invades the formation, will be
dependent on how high the pressure differential is, the degree of permeability and effective
porosity, and on the type of mud system being used (invasion is not such a problem with oil-
based mud systems owing to oil-water immiscibility).

MudHYD > FP

Mud invasion into

“clean” Invaded Filter Invaded
permeable formations
formation zone - zone -
– mud solids left on cake
fluids filtrate layers filtrate
borehole wall

Figure 6.6 Invasion of formation before an impermeable filter cake layer is built up

Invasion does not affect gas responses. Gas is liberated normally when the formation is
drilled, so that normal responses occur identifying zones of interest. Invasion occurs after
drilling and can therefore have a detrimental effect on subsequent evaluation by electrical
logs, where filtrate is being detected rather than formation fluids.

Invasion by the drilling fluid is minimized by allowing an impermeable layer of mud solids, or
filter cake, to build up on the borehole wall and prevent continued invasion. This occurs as a
result of filtration. As the drilling mud flows into the formation, given sufficient particle
diameter of the clay solids incorporated within the mud, the solids will filter out from the mud
to be left on the wall, becoming thicker and building up the impermeable filter cake to prevent
further filtration. This process is ‘efficient’ for all except extremely permeable formations
where the clay solids may be carried into the formation along with the drilling fluid (leading to
lost circulation).

40
The time that it takes for the filter cake to become thick enough and sufficiently impermeable
will determine the amount of invasion that may take place. This is an important process,
since, if invasion and filtration is too excessive, the formation properties may be damaged: -

• Deeper invasion obviously means that a larger volume of the rock will be
affected.

• The deeper the invasion, then the further the formation fluids are displaced from
the borehole wall. This may lead to erroneous electric log data. The situation
may be such that initial liberated gas and show analysis give indications of good
reservoir potential, yet the wireline ‘post filtration’ results indicate no potential or
a water-bearing formation.

• Poor sidewall cores may result, containing reduced levels of formation fluid and
large amounts of filtrate.

• The filtrate may damage and reduce the formation’s permeability or porosity.
This may reduce the effectiveness of formation tests such as RFT’s (repeat
formation test) and DST’s (drillstem test) and may even permanently damage the
formation, affecting productivity.

Filtration and filter cake are carefully monitored by the mud engineer with the degree of
filtration measured by the water loss, which should be kept to a minimum. The value should
be clearly reported on the mudlog so that it may help to explain any non-correlation that may
occur between electrical and mud logging analyses, as illustrated in the above example.

A measurement of the filter cake is important to ensure that the impermeable layer is
sufficiently thick and being built quickly enough.

There are certain conditions that may act against the filter cake build up, or dislodge existing
solids.

• The circulating flow of mud, especially if turbulent (in fact, in the section
above the bit and around the collars where filter cake build up is required,
the annular velocity will be the most rapid in the entire borehole). Filter
cake will not build up effectively until the drill collars have passed the zone
and lower annular velocity and pressure is present.

• Slower drilling through permeable formations can therefore result in higher

levels of mud invasion.

41
 • Pipe movement and drag, especially in deviated or horizontal wells and
where full gauge tools scrape against the wellbore wall.

It is also important that the layer of filter cake does not become too thick because this will
obviously reduce the size of the borehole and may lead to problems with sticking pipe. This is
of special consideration when differential sticking is a problem - a thick, spongy filter cake
will only enhance the problem.

42
2.4.2 Flushing

What was previously described as invasion and filtration, can also technically described as
flushing since formation fluids are being flushed or displaced away from the borehole.
However, this happens after gas has already been mechanically liberated by the drilling action
and therefore does not effect the initial gas response from the formation. The term invasion is
used to describe this process once a formation has been drilled and left exposed in the
borehole.

The term flushing, in the scope

of mud logging, is more usefully
used to describe the similar
action of formation fluids being
displaced, but more specifically
referring to the time during, or
prior to, penetration by the bit.
invasion
Here, the displacement of
formation fluid will effect the
amount of gas that will be
consequently liberated from the
volume of rock produced by
drilling and therefore does have
an effect on the initial gas show.

Similar conditions are required;

an overbalance together with a
permeable formation, the degree
of both determining the severity
of the flushing. What may
further enhance the degree of
flushing is a slow penetration
rate (allowing more time for the Displaced, or flushed
flushing to take place) and Formation fluid
excessive horsepower and jet
velocity at the bit (effectively
blasting drilling fluid into the Figure 2.7 Flushing mechanisms
formation).

The zone beneath and surrounding the bit is extremely turbulent and subject to the action of
the bit, preventing the build up of filter cake. This layer will only begin to form once the bit
has passed the formation and a smoother circulating flow is present. The presence of
stabilizers in the bottom hole assembly will also be a factor, since they are full gauge and will
remove any filter cake that has been built up on the wall.

43
Given the suitable conditions of overbalance, formation permeability and jet impact force,
some degree of flushing is then almost certain to occur ahead (i.e. before the formation has
even been drilled) and to the side of the bit (Figure 2.7).

The consequence of this is that formation fluids are displaced and flushed away from the rock
face, down and/or to the side depending on the easiest line of communication provided by the
permeability. Horizontal permeability is typically much more significant than vertical, but
flushing ahead of the bit does require a degree, or combination, of both. Subsequently, when
the formation is penetrated, the volume of rock crushed by the bit will contain fewer
hydrocarbons that can be liberated into the drilling mud. This results in a reduced, or lower,
gas response when parameters such as ROP and cuttings analysis suggest that a better show
might have been expected.

Recognizing that flushing is actually occurring can be very difficult, and not conclusive on the
basis of gas response alone.
Does a low gas response signify
flushing or does it simply mean
that a poor zone has been
penetrated? We will look at
evidence that will lead us to
suspect that flushing may have
occurred, but often, it is not
conclusive until electric logs are
run, identifying flushed zones
or identifying a potential zone
that yielded a poor gas response
when it was drilled.

It is possible, given suitable

formation thickness and
specific conditions of vertical
and horizontal permeability,
that the displaced formation
fluid will be cycled back into
the wellbore into the less
turbulent and lower pressured
zone above the bit (Figure 2.8).
This would result from a
natural movement of the Figure 2.8 Formation recovery leading to a
displaced hydrocarbons towards delayed gas response
areas of lower pressure.
Initially, when equilibrium is disturbed, the area of lower pressure for the displaced fluids is
vertically upwards. Once the bit has passed by, lower pressure exists in the annulus behind the
bit. Thus, formation fluids can cycle back towards the wellbore

44
This ‘formation recovery’ may therefore result in a delayed gas response. In other words,
ROP and visual cuttings analysis may indicate the top of a zone at a given depth, but the
corresponding gas show indicates a depth a metre or two deeper (Figure 2.9 – response A).
This, initially, may well be evaluated as a subsequent change in properties such as fluid type,
porosity, gas saturation or permeability, giving a lower gas response. However, if the
conditions for flushing exist, it has to be recognized that zonal flushing may be occurring and
that resultant hydrocarbon evaluation is subject to error.

ROP Total Gas

A
Partial flushing, delayed gas response

B
Initial response, followed by flushing

Severe flushing, negative response C

Figure 2.9 Indications of possible flushing through gas responses

A delayed response may even be interpreted as an incorrect lag time! It is therefore important
to consider all available data. If there has been no change in ROP from the top of the zone to
the depth of the show, then it is unlikely that there has been any change in porosity that would
result in a similar gas response and flushing has to be suspected.

If a completely impermeable layer overlay the flushed zone, then flushing cannot occur before
the zone is penetrated. An initial gas response would be seen in this case, before giving way to

45
a reduced response, caused by flushing once the zone was penetrated (Figure 6.9 – response
B).

Where the flushing is more severe, or where conditions do not allow, it may not be possible
for the “recycling” of formation fluids as described above. In many instances, this severe
flushing may lead to an overall reduction in gas response, as compared to the previous
background level (Figure 2.9 – response C). The degree of this obviously depends on the
particular situation, the level of background gas and the severity of flushing. Again, it leads to
a problem of immediate evaluation; does it indicate flushing or simply a poor zone? However,
given permeability (which has to exist for flushing to occur in the first instance), it is still
possible for the formation to ‘recover’ over time with formation fluids returning to the flushed
zone. This may occur, for example, over the duration of trips when the wellbore is at the lower
hydrostatic pressure and when swabbing reduces annular pressure further. This can therefore
result in a permeable zone that gives no hydrocarbon indication when drilled, but when tested
with electric logs, gives every indication of being a hydrocarbon bearing zone.

With these types of occurrences, flushing can be suspected and subsequent gas evaluation has
to bear this in mind since it may be erroneous. However, it can never be conclusive unless
wireline data, at a later date, results in different information.

Flushed
Zone
Invaded
Zone

Figure 2.10 Flushing with subsequent Invasion

However, where permeability and pressure allow, or where permeable zones are thin and
bounded by impermeable layers, a condition of total flushing may occur where formation
fluids are completely flushed away from the wellbore area and are unable to return. This will
not only result in no gas being liberated when the formation is drilled, but, with a combination
of total flushing and subsequent invasion (Figure 2.10), may also result in zones going
undetected by electric logs.

46
In this situation, only some form of testing could identify the presence of hydrocarbons. But,
with such severe contamination, permeability may be damaged to such a degree that a test
would not be possible (not forgetting that there would have been no information to suggest
that a zone warrants testing in the first place).

With no initial gas response and no indications from wireline, there is really nothing to go on,
so that flushing can lead to zones going completely undetected.

47
2.4.3 Fluid Influxes

We have seen how mud invasion of the borehole can occur when a positive pressure
differential, i.e. overbalance, exists between the pressures due to the drilling fluid and the
formation pore fluid. When a negative pressure differential exists, i.e. a state of underbalance,
when the pressure due to the formation fluid is greater than the pressure exerted by the mud
column, then fluid flow will occur in the opposite direction; that is, formation fluids will be
able to flow into the borehole.

The same factors that influence the degree of flushing also influence the degree of fluid influx,
namely the degree of underbalance and permeability. A distinction should be made between
permanent and temporary conditions of underbalance and the different influences that they
have on recorded gas levels.

Temporary conditions of underbalance occur when the hydrostatic pressure, due to the weight
of the mud column, is temporarily reduced below the formation pressure by the two
mechanisms described in Section 1.3.2.

• Reduction in hydrostatic pressure when circulation is stopped.

• Reduction in hydrostatic pressure due to swabbing when the drillstring is lifted

(Figure 1.3).

The resulting produced gases such as connection gas are important for evaluation purposes.
They indicate the condition of well balance for well safety and can confirm whether
production may be taking place while actually drilling, to explain changes in gas level.
Connection gas and such evaluation techniques will be discussed separately in Section 3.7.

Permanent conditions of underbalance will exist if the balancing pressure due to the drilling
fluid is less than, and remains less than, the formation pressure. Since we are referring to the
influences on gas responses while drilling, then the balancing pressure is that exerted by the
equivalent circulating density (the increase in hydrostatic pressure due to the frictional
pressure losses of the circulating mud).

This is the desired case in underbalanced drilling when fluids such as air, gas, foam, mist or
aerated fluid or, simply, low density water or oil muds are used specifically to provide an
underbalanced condition. This provides certain advantages in the drilling operation, such as: -

• improved penetration rate

48
 • limiting lost circulation
• eliminating the potential for differential sticking
• minimizing formation damage
• the reduction of drilling costs and improvement of production

Such underbalanced drilling will allow the free flow of formation fluids, from permeable
formations, into the wellbore so that, in essence, the well is in a constant state of production,
or testing, as it is being drilled.

In conventional balanced drilling, the mud weight is selected so as to provide an overbalance

in order to prevent the flow of formation fluid into the wellbore. A condition of permanent
underbalance will only occur if a formation of higher pore pressure (exceeding mud weight) is
drilled into and no changes to the mud weight are made. Similarly, a permanent condition
may result from a reduction in mud weight so that the hydrostatic pressure may fall below the
pore pressure of previously drilled formations. Fluid flow from the formation will then be
possible until the mud weight is increased to a point where it once again exceeds the formation
pressure. The hydrostatic pressure may also be reduced through “normal” situations,
principally from allowing too much gas into the annulus thereby reducing the overall mud
density: -

• fracture generated gas

• excessive penetration rates through gas bearing formations
• inefficient removal of gas at surface

The difference to gas evaluation is, that in such a situation, there are two sources of formation
gas, liberated and produced. As shall be demonstrated in Section 7.4, basic show evaluation
comes down to the determination of gas volume (i.e. porosity and saturation) changes through
changes in liberated gas. This basic technique is lost, to some extent, when production is
occurring since the gas measurement does not simply reflect the volume of gas in a given
volume of rock.

Gas responses that can be expected when drilling into a higher pressured formation, giving a
condition of underbalance, will vary depending on the relative conditions of the underbalance,
permeability and porosity. The formation fluid type is obviously a factor too, but for the
purposes of this discussion, we are assuming the presence of gas.

The worst conditions of influx occur when the pressure differential is high and when porosity
and permeability are good, so that the influx is large enough to cause a substantial kick, or
even worse, become uncontrollable so that a blowout condition results. In continual
monitoring of total gas and other parameters such as mud flow and pit levels, it is one of the
mud loggers’ primary duties to detect such occurrences and inform the driller and company
representative so that appropriate measures can be taken.

49
 Drill into Overpressured Formation Reduce mud weight
High Pressure Lower Pressure to leave exposed
Differential Differential Reduced formation
Good Permeability Good Permeability Permeability underbalanced

Total Gas Total Gas Total Gas Total Gas

0 0 0 0

drilling background
penetrate formation

initial increase
bottoms up due to influx

steady increase as
drilling proceeds

Well flowing/pumps off/ shut in

stop drilling

circulate
NB pressure reduction and increases
in flow and mud level due to bottoms up
expanding gas displacing mud from
the wellbore would normally lead to
the well being shut in before gas
sustained circul-
reaches the surface
ating background

Figure 2.11 Typical gas trends resulting from fluid influxes

If permeability is still good, but the pressure differential is lower, fluid flow still readily occurs
resulting in a kick, but the rate and volume of influx will be lower. This may result in a longer
period of influx occurring before it is detected by surface changes. The gas increase may be
less significant, but the end result will still be an influx that needs to be controlled and then
mud weight increased to prevent further influx.

50
If permeability is restricted, then fluid flow will not be so ‘easy’ and the rate of influx will
vary according to the pressure differential. Rather than a rapid influx occurring, a slower
gradual influx or ‘feed-in’ will result. This will be evident from changes in background gas
rather than a rapid increase in gas levels. As more of the formation is penetrated, a greater area
of the formation is exposed from which fluid flow will emanate. Therefore, as drilling
proceeds, the amount of influx increases so that the drilling background level of gas will show
a continual and steady rise.

If the pressure differential results from a reduction in mud weight, causing a previously drilled
formation to become underbalanced, an initial increase in the drilling background gas will be
seen when the influx begins and this higher background level will be maintained as long as
conditions remain the same.

In both of these cases, if drilling was stopped but circulation maintained until bottoms up was
reached, a higher level of circulating background gas will be observed and maintained as a
result of the continual influx.

These different situations are illustrated in Figure 2.11

N.B. the background level terms introduced above will be explained further in Section 3.2.

51
2.5 Mud Type and Rheology

Many of the effects that the drilling fluid has on gas analysis have already been discussed in
relation to other conditions. Here, they will be summarized: -

2.5.1 Mud Type

We have seen that different drilling fluids have varying degrees of mutual solubility in respect
to different hydrocarbons compounds.

• Oil based muds have a high solubility capacity for all hydrocarbons whereas
water has a much lower capacity. The degree of salinity in water based muds
will reduce this capacity further. This, then, has a bearing on the extraction
and sampling of gas. Oil based muds are more subject to the efficiency of
agitator type traps since the gas is principally in solution. With water based
muds, the light end gas, especially methane, is more prone to being lost to the
atmosphere when the mud is at surface, whereas the heavier ends held in
solution are, again, more subject to the trap efficiency.

• The solubility factor not only determines which hydrocarbons are going to be
held in solution but it is also a major consideration in how easily the
hydrocarbons can break out of solution. A smaller proportion of light end
hydrocarbons will be taken into solution, and, what there is, will be more
readily released. The heavier hydrocarbons, however, being denser with
higher boiling points, critical temperatures and lower vapour pressures, are
less readily extracted from the mud.

• This principle can also be applied to the formation fluid. For example, if the
gas recorded is dominantly methane, then the zone is more likely to be water
bearing.

• Oil based mud systems are more likely to retain and recycle gas, simply as a
result of the higher proportion of gas held in solution. This, generally, is a
more significant factor than their typically low viscosity and gel strength
making it physically easier to break gas out of solution. This relationship will
vary from case to case, depending on the specific composition, rheology and
temperature of the drilling fluid together with the composition of the gas.

52
2.5.2 Mud Density

Mud density determines the hydrostatic pressure present in the borehole and is therefore a
factor in the release of gas from the formation: -

• The pressure differential is a factor on the ease at which fluids will escape
from the rising cuttings. This, potentially, may lead to a separation of gases
(in relation to the lagged depth interval) with lighter gases escaping before
heavier components. However, the significant release of gas will occur with
the gas expansion when the mud is close to, or at, surface. Also, this volume
of gas is, in most cases, much less than the volume of gas initially liberated
by the drilling process, so that the mud density is a fairly minor factor in
overall gas liberation.

• The pressure differential is a main factor, along with formation permeability,

in the flow of fluids between the borehole and the formation and therefore
effects the degree of flushing and the degree of influxes, should they be
occurring. Obviously, the greater the mud density is over the formation
pressure, the more serious flushing becomes. In ‘conventional’ drilling,
however, it should be noted that the actual mud density makes no difference
if it is providing just a marginal overbalance against the formation pressure.

• With conventional agitator systems, the mud density, along with the
viscosity, is a major factor in the extraction of gas at surface, since it will
effect the efficiency of the gas trap. The heavier the mud, the more load
there is acting against the rotation of the agitator and the less efficient it will
be.

In fact, in normal balanced drilling, the mud density has very little ‘ variable’ effect,
downhole, in the liberation of gas. The over-riding factor is the control on gas trap efficiency
as mud density changes and the actual extraction of the gas.

53
2.5.3 Mud Temperature

Mud temperature is often overlooked as a factor in gas measurement, although it has a number
of important various effects: -

• Along with pressure it is a factor in phase changes and solubility and whether
hydrocarbons arrive at surface as a free gas, dissolved gas or as a liquid.

• Temperature effects the volatility of hydrocarbons and the ease at which they
can flow and be liberated. The higher the mud temperature, the more volatile
the gas.

• Temperature effects the viscosity of the mud (Section 2.5.4.) and of

formation fluids and is therefore a factor in fluid flow (i.e. fluids escaping
from cuttings) and the retention of gases. The higher the temperature, the
lower the viscosity and the lower the retention.

In fact, all of these factors act together as mud temperature changes. The hotter the mud
system, then the better the gas measurements, as a result of: -

• The lower the volume of gas that can be held in solution. More gas will be
‘free’ and more readily extracted at surface.

• The lower the viscosity of formation fluid, resulting in a greater volume

being released from the rising cuttings.

• The more volatile, and readily extractable, the gas.

We now have to consider when these temperature considerations are going to have an effect
on gas analysis: -

• Shallow wells with lower mud temperatures

• High temperature – High pressure wells

• Water depth in offshore operations where the mud is cooled to a much larger
degree when passing through the marine riser or conductor.

• Changing effect as hole depth and/or bit run duration increase.

2.5.4 Viscosity and Gel Strength

54
The viscosity and gel strength are very important rheological factors since they are the
‘holding’ or retention parameters of the mud.

• High viscosity mud may limit the release of formation fluids from the rising
cuttings since there is more of an ‘obstacle’ to fluid flow. This effect will be
more evident in water based mud systems since oil based muds are typically
low viscosity and gel strength systems.

• They are also a large consideration in how effectively gas can be sampled
and extracted at surface for analysis. A low viscosity system will lead to a
greater loss of light end gas (free gas) in the surface system, but a more
efficient extraction of the heavier end gases. A high viscosity system will
lead to better retention and measurement of the free gas, but, at the same
time, better retention and reduced trap efficiency will result in poorer
extraction and measurement of the dissolved, heavier gases. An example of
this, dealing with fracture quartzitic sandstone, is illustrated in Section 10.7

• Another important effect of viscosity is the control of gas dispersion in the

drilling fluid and the resulting definition of gas shows that can be related to
specific zones of interest or formation boundaries. Dissolved gas is not so
effected by gas dispersion so that oil based muds generate sharp, clearly
defined gas responses. However, with water based muds, most of the light
end gas is free and subject to dispersion. Low viscosity mud will be more
susceptible to gas dispersing readily, so that a gas show may not be so well
defined, leading to poorer correlation with drill breaks and cuttings analysis
in the determination of formation changes. On occasions, there may be a
degree of separation (i.e. a delay in their arrival and detection at surface)
between light end and heavy end gases since a greater proportion of the
heavy gas is in solution. It is very important that this is taken into
consideration when evaluating the composition of a gas response in order for
gas ratios to be determined accurately.

• Viscosity is also a factor in the amount of gas produced into the wellbore
through swabbing when the drillstring is lifted producing a temporarily
underbalanced condition. The greater the viscosity, the higher the frictional
pressure loss and the greater the resulting influx leading to connection or
similar gas response.

2.6 Surface Considerations

55
Up to this point, we have seen that there are many factors and combinations of factors that can
influence the gas quantity and composition as it travels from the formation to the surface.

However, many of the largest influences occur while the gas is travelling through the surface
system before it finally reaches the gas detectors for analysis.

2.6.1 Design, Efficiency and Location of the Gas Trap

The gas trap is probably one of the least sophisticated pieces of equipment used in a modern
mud logging unit and yet it is undoubtedly one of the most, if not the most, important!
Without a means to efficiently and effectively extract and sample the gas from the drilling
fluid, the heart of the mud logging operation is lost!

Variations in trap type and design may obviously lead to differences in the efficiency of gas
extraction and may make it difficult to make accurate quantitative comparisons between wells
that have been monitored with different equipment. Efficiency considerations were discussed
in detail in Section 3.1.1; here, we shall detail the more operational considerations.

• Trap location is a very important consideration. Typically, agitator type traps can
only be situated in the shaker box where the mud exits the flowline (Figure 6.12).
Ideally, the trap should be located directly over the flowline, in order to sample the
mud as soon as possible and where the flow is greatest and fresh returning mud will
be constantly flowing past the trap. If the trap is located away from this zone,
especially where the shaker box is large (maybe combining several shale shakers),
then not only is the flow reduced, but the mud is more likely to have been in the
shaker box for a period of time before being sampled. This allows more time for
light end gas to escape to the atmosphere, and it will also mean less accurate lagged
correlation and possibly even missed horizons, contacts or formation tops.

• The depth at which the trap is set in the mud determines the volume of mud that is
sampled and therefore the amount of gas that can be extracted, together with the
efficiency of the agitator. The mud logger should ensure that the trap is set at the
correct depth and that this depth is maintained for the duration of the well so that the
amount of mud that is being sampled is a constant. This will require resetting of the
trap at any time that the mud level in the shaker box changes, i.e. when the mud
flowrate is changed or in the event that the shaker/gate arrangement is altered (Figure
6.13). If this is not carried out effectively, not only does the change in the volume of
mud sample effect the amount of gas, but it also changes the load acting against the
agitator, effecting it’s efficiency.

56
 Variations in mud level Proximity to flowline

Figure 2.12 Location of agitator trap

• The mud logger has to ensure that the flow passing the trap is not restricted in any
way by the build up of cuttings around the trap. Mud caking the entrance port, the
agitator or the exhaust port also has to be avoided to ensure as uniform an operation
as possible. Anytime that this ‘passageway’ is blocked or altered, the flow pattern of
the mud through the trap is altered and this effects the efficiency of the agitator.

• The agitator is the most important component of the trap, in terms of gas extraction
from the mud, so should be regularly checked to ensure that it is fully operational.
Damaged or worn blades (erosion from the drilled cuttings in the mud), mud caked
blades, reduced rotation speed due to failing bearings, will all greatly effect the
efficiency of the trap.

Even with the trap and agitator properly maintained and fully operational, variations in gas
extraction due to other factors may still lead to changes in the efficiency of the system.
Changes in mud properties (viscosity, gel strength), mud temperature, and gas composition
may lead to changes in overall or preferential gas extraction as discussed in Section 2.5.

57
 Mud level drops

Check chromatographic
response with test gas

Trap position reset

Figure 2.13 Drop in mud level in the shaker box, requiring the
re-setting of trap height

58
2.6.2 The Gas Sample Line

Once the gas has been extracted from the mud, it still has to be collected and transported to
the gas detectors and here, again, there are several conditions or factors that can affect the
final gas analysis.

It is known that standard polyflow tubing can absorb heavy hydrocarbons until saturated. This
will effect, to a minor degree, the butane and pentane being analyzed. Any gas absorbed can
be subsequently desorbed, should the gas concentration within the sample line decrease.

Gas extracted from the mud is lifted from the trap by air being pumped through the system.
The volume of air in the gas line does contribute to the degree of gas dilution, but this volume
is minor when compared to the internal volume of the gas trap where the significant gas-air
dilution is occurring.

Variations in the flowrate of air through the sample line will only lead to minor changes in the
concentration of gas to air in the mixture being analyzed. The main effect of the sample line
and air flow is in the amount of gas-air sample being lifted from the trap. A reduction in
flowrate will lead to a reduction in sample and in the gas measurement. This will have the
additional effect of ‘extending’ or ‘elongating’ gas responses. The slower the pump rate, the
longer it will take to evacuate a given volume of gas from the trap so that, a given gas
response spans a greater period of time leading to poorer show definition.

A standard flowrate is around 4.0 scfh (standard cubic feet per hour) but variations in actual
flowrate may be caused by: -

• The length of the sample line. The longer the line, the greater the air volume and the
greater the ‘load’ acting against the pump, causing a reduction in the flowrate.
Although this will be a constant for a given well, there may be differences when it
comes to comparing different well data.

• Blockages caused by mud entering the line – this will be immediately rectified by the
mud logger so should not lead to any erroneous data.

• Ambient temperature has a significant effect. Low air temperatures may lead to
extracted gases condensing back into a liquid. This not only reduces the quantity of
free gas that will be carried to the detectors and measured, but also restricts the flow
in the sample line imposing an extra load on the sample pump. The length of the
sample line also comes into play here; the longer the line, then the longer the time
that the gas is subjected to the colder air temperature and the more condensing will
take place.

59
• Air temperature is also important in terms of normal moisture in the sample line. In
areas of cold climate, this may lead to moisture freezing in the sample line, restricting
flow and eventually blocking it completely. Continuous monitoring and maintenance
is required.

• Drying agents and filters are placed in the sample line, not only to keep the flow in
the line unrestricted, but also to prevent any moisture from entering the gas detectors.
These have to be regularly monitored and replaced to prevent them restricting the
sample flow and also to prevent them from becoming contaminated with condensed
hydrocarbons and perhaps giving subsequent erroneous gas readings.

2.6.3 Losses of Gas to the Atmosphere

Unfortunately, in terms of gas analysis, the surface equipment can, and in most cases does, act
as a very efficient degasser before the mud and gas even reaches the gas trap.

As illustrated in Figure 2.14, gas losses to the atmosphere will occur at the bell nipple and
along the flowline, before the mud ever reaches the shaker box for sampling and extracting of
gas. The severity of the gas loss will be influenced by the flowrate and by points of turbulence
in the system.

When installing equipment on a rig, it is important to survey the surface system in order to
determine how serious an effect will be imposed on gas detection.

The following characteristics of the flowline will all introduce turbulence to the returning mud
flow resulting in a higher gas loss: -

• Degree of inclination; obviously, the steeper the flowline the more rapid the
flow and the greater the amount of lost gas.

• Changes in the angle of inclination.

• Abrupt changes in direction.

• Length of the flowline – the longer it is, the greater the amount of lost gas.

• Whether the flowline is open or closed.

• The shape of the flowline and depth of mud. A cylindrical flowline will tend
to have a deeper level of mud, whereas a square, flat bottomed flowline will

60
 generally result in a shallow level of mud so that any effects of turbulence
are only made worse.

• Entry point into the shaker box. On many older systems, the flowline may
end above the shaker box so that the mud simply drops into it (rather than
entering into the body of the shaker box below the mud level), resulting in a
major loss of gas.

Losses at the bell nipple where mud

flow changes from vertical to horizontal

Losses along flowline depending

on length, shape, steepnees,
changes in gradient or direction

Losses if
flowline
terminates above
the shaker box

wellhead shaker box

Figure 2.14 Potential gas losses throughout the surface system

A real example of an appallingly designed rig layout, requiring an exceptionally long flowline,
had many points that made the flowline bad for gas retention. These were as follows: -

• A square flowline with a very large cross sectional area and a flat bottom, resulting in
a mud level of only a few centimetres.
• Sharp changes in slope angle.
• 90 degree turns.
• Completely open to the atmosphere.
• The open end was positioned about ½m above the mud level in the shaker box.
• The only available site for the gas trap was at the end of the shaker box, opposite to
the flowline, where there was virtually no mud flow.

Obviously, in this case, very little consideration had been given to gas analysis since,
everything that could be wrong, was!

61
 PLATE 2.1 Gas decrease with change in hole size

0 min/m 15 0.001 Chrom Gas % 100

Casing Point

The dominant effect at casing points is obviously the reduction in hole size with less liberated
gas. However, many other parameters are changing at the same time such as reduced flowrate,
change in bit type and reduced weight on bit, change in mud system or rheology or, at least, a
significant cooling of the mud, change in hydraulics and flow regimes.

62
 PLATE 2.2 Real-time gas response resulting from a drilling break

Lagged Depth Chromatographic Gases

10 minutes

The 0.2m lagged depth ticks shows a relative increase in ROP from 18 to 5 min/m, with a
corresponding increase in gas level from 6 to 10%. In other words, a 3 ½ fold increase in ROP
results in less than a 2 fold increase in gas. Therefore, if all other possible causes of the drill
break are eliminated so that we know we have a zone of increased porosity, there is, actually,
an overall decrease in formation gas volume. It can reasonably be assumed, therefore, that
over the zone in question, there was an increase in formation porosity but an actual decrease
in gas saturation.

PLATE 2.3 Drop in gas levels as a result of coring

63
 ROP Chromatographic Gas % Gas Ratios

Cored
Interval

An expected decrease in gas levels, when coring, is clear, resulting from the volume of rock
retained within the core barrel and often lower rates of penetration.

What isn’t so fully appreciated is the occasional compositional change in recorded gas and
subsequent gas ratios. This can result from the different sized cuttings being produced when
accompanied by reduced permeability.

When drilling into the zone with a conventional tri-cone bit, the cuttings are typically going to
be larger and, with reduced permeability, they will retain a proportion of the gas, preferentially
the heavier end components. When proceeding with the core bit, cuttings are typically smaller
so that more gas is actually liberated from the volume of rock drilled. In this case,
permeability is less of a factor so that proportionally more heavier end gas may be released
and recorded.

64
 HYDROCARBON EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION

Section 3 EVALUATION OF LIBERATED AND PRODUCED GAS

Having investigated the different sources of gas, and the different factors that may influence
the final quantity and composition of gas recorded at surface, Section 7 looks at how the gas is
monitored and interpreted on a real-time basis, and how this information is presented and
evaluated on depth based logs.

This log will be used in the final evaluation of a well and in future well correlation, so that the
data has to be presented in such a way that it is easily understood, and so that the maximum
possible amount of information can be gained from it.

3.1 Basic Definitions

1. Background Gas A reasonably constant level of gas that is established when drilling
through a consistent lithology interval.

2. Gas Show Any gas response, in either quantity or composition, that increases
above the established background level.

3. Gas Kick Although significant gas shows may be referred to as a gas kick, this
term should be used specifically to describe an influx of formation
fluid into the wellbore that leads to a displacement of drilling fluid
from the annulus and a well control situation. Note that formation
fluids other than gas can result in such a well control situation.

3.2 Background Gas

Gas present in the drilling mud may be as a result of liberation from newly penetrated
lithologies, as a result of being ‘produced’ into the wellbore, as a result of recycling or due to
contamination. The gas measured at any point in time can therefore be a result of all, or a
combination of these causes.

65
The purpose of determining a background level of gas is so that we have what can be a
considered a normal gas value, or control, against which, volume variations can be compared
in order to evaluate possible reservoir potential.

Exactly what should be thought of as the background level and how it should be determined is
open to different interpretations but, as will be demonstrated, there is a clear difference
between theory and what is actually practical or sensible in the field.

The first obvious and essential requirement is that detectors are properly calibrated and
zeroed. This requires Total Gas Sensors to be zeroed against ambient air flowing through the
detector at the same rate that the gas sample will be supplied at. The mud logger must be
careful that this ambient air is sampled from an area where there is no possibility of the
presence of diesel or other vapors, since this would lead to a false zero.

There is no such complication with the micro-chromatograph, since it is calibrated to

determine specific gases (rather that a total response) and will automatically zero itself to the
response caused by the carrier gas, every time that a sample is injected.

Now it comes to the point of sampling the drilling fluid for any gas entrained within it. Mud
loggers are aware that: -

• A proportion of gas will be retained by the mud and detected even if

stationary in the shaker box.

• Different levels of gas are seen when the mud is being circulated or when
drilling is taking place (Figure 3.1).

So, what do these different levels (the stationary background, the circulating background and
the formation background) represent and which provides the best control or background
level?

3.2.1 Stationary and Circulating Backgrounds

Drilling mud, at any time, will contain a certain amount of gas that hasn’t been extracted at
surface. This gas will be as a result of recycled and contaminated sources. Typically, there
will be a bias towards the heavier alkanes that are preferentially retained, in solution, by the
mud.

66
 Calibrated Zero
Total gas sensors calibrated
with ambient air flow

Stationary Background
Recycled and/or contaminated
gas retained by the mud system

Circulating Background
Strictly recycled gas content, but
will initially contain liberated
and produced gas from previous
bit run/trip and requires a period
for mud temperature to stabilize

Formation
Background
Incorporating newly
liberated gas

TIME

Figure 3.1 Background gas terminology, as seen when beginning to

drill a new interval at the start of new bit runs.

This, then, is the quantity of recycled gas being pumped back into the hole. Gas newly
liberated from the formation will be over and above this level. The problem with trying to
establish a background level from this, is that the longer the mud sits at surface, the cooler it
becomes with increasing viscosity due to the gelling action of the mud.

This effects the volatility and ease of extraction of the gas from the mud by the agitation of the
trap and can therefore lead to different recorded values, depending on how long after the
previous drilling/circulating period the measurement is done.

67
The only suitable time is during a trip out of hole, but before the pipe is run back in when
warmer mud containing more volatile gas, together with gas that was produced during the trip
out of the hole, will be displaced from the annulus. For some bit runs that may last 12 hours,
24 hours, or even cover a period of several days, this is not a reliable or acceptable means of
establishing a background level against which all subsequent shows will be evaluated.

A more reasonable time to establish a background level would be during a continued

circulation, but again, there are major operational difficulties to determining this in order to
make it a reliable background reference.

The point of a background level is to provide a value against which gases, liberated or
produced from formations while drilling, can be satisfactorily evaluated. A circulating
background level therefore has to be free of these gases that have been freshly introduced into
the drilling fluid.

At the start of drilling bit runs, this would require a long circulating period, without drilling, to
ensure that all previously liberated gas has been extracted from the mud and to allow
temperature and mud properties (density and viscosity) to become uniform. It would also
require that there be no pipe movement during this period so that produced gas is not being
freshly introduced into the mud.

The initial circulating background then, should only be a measurement of the contamination or
recycled gas present in the drilling fluid before gas is liberated from drilled formations.

Consider the gas that would be recorded following a trip into the hole but before any new
formation is drilled: -

• A steady increase would be observed as gas, liberated from the previous

drilled interval, still in the annulus, reaches the surface (this is assuming that
‘bottoms up’ was not circulated at the end of the previous bit run).

• Added to this would be the gas produced from the formation during the
previous trip out of the hole.

• Even after bottoms up, when these gases will have been circulated out of the
hole, several circulations may be required in order for the temperature and
rheology of the mud to become stable.

Given the cost of operating a drilling rig, this is obviously an unacceptable use of rig time
without any new hole being made!

68
Before the time required to establish a stable circulating background has elapsed, there is extra
gas in the mud that has been liberated from drilling. Most of this gas will be removed at
surface, but some may be retained within the mud increasing the background level.

It is therefore difficult to establish a circulating background level, when there is, effectively,
always a higher level due to the gas liberated from drilling. One way of establishing
circulating background when drilling is proceeding requires the frequent co-operation of the
drilling contractor (and operator, since time and money is a requirement).

At any time, if drilling was to be halted for just a few minutes, but circulation maintained, then
for that period of two minutes, no further gas is being liberated into the drilling mud from
drilled formation. Drilling can then resume immediately. When this ‘operation’ is lagged to
surface, the gas level would drop from that representing the drilled, liberated gas, to the
circulating background level.

For this background level to represent nothing other than the gas retained in the mud, a further
requirement of the operation is that when drilling is halted, the bit must be held stationary. If
it was to be lifted, then gas may be swabbed in from the formation, adding to the background
level.

In order for this to be successful and a circulating background ‘window’ in the mud to still be
evident once it has reached surface, then circulating time and mud properties are important.
The following points, resulting in gas dispersion that would remove the ‘window’, limit the
success and accuracy of background determination: -

• Deep hole or long ‘bottoms up’ time, allowing a greater period for dispersion.
• Connections or pipe working that disturb gas in the mud column.
• Low viscosity and gel strength, resulting in less resistance to dispersion.

Knowing the circulating background is of obvious benefit to the drilling and evaluation of a
well. It is a measurement of the gas volume retained and recycled by the drilling fluid and is
therefore very important to well safety. In addition, any gas above the circulating background
can only have originated from the formation. Where a circulating level can also be beneficial
is in the identification of an underbalanced condition when gas is being continually produced
into the wellbore. This may be due to increased formation pressure and permeability of a
newly penetrated zone and would result in gas levels being sustained while circulating, after
drilling had been stopped and bottoms up reached (Figure 3.2). After this time, the
mechanically liberated gas will have reached surface and been removed from the mud. If no
gas were being produced, the level would drop off after bottoms up and fall to a level that
would be the normal circulating background. A higher and sustained level of gas can only be
due to gas being produced into the wellbore.

69
 Total Gas

Time
Stop drilling and Removal of liberated
circulate bottoms up gas during bottoms up
circulation

FBG
Bottoms up

Circulating
Background
Continued feed-in
of gas after
bottoms up shows
that the well is
A sharp drop in gas level underbalanced and
after bottoms up shows that continuing to
the well is overbalanced produce into the
wellbore

Figure 3.2 Well balance as indicated by circulating gas level

It should also be remembered that stationary and circulating backgrounds, being a

measurement of the recycled , dissolved, gas content, are also subject to the accuracy or
efficiency of the gas extraction equipment.

3.2.2 Formation Background

Owing to the practical difficulties in establishing stationary or circulating background levels, a

more accepted practice is for the background level to be determined from the formations as
drilling proceeds. Obviously, this background reference now includes newly liberated gas as
well as the recycled gas content within the mud and is subject to changes previously
described.

70
However, consider that the production potential of possible reservoir zones is being evaluated.
If drilling through an impermeable, non-producing lithology such as claystone or shale,
maintaining constant penetration rate, flow rate and mud density, the amount of gas liberated
into the drilling fluid from the formation will be constant as long as porosity, formation
pressure and gas saturation remain constant.

% Total Gas

siltstone FBG 1

claystone FBG 2

sandstone

Gas Shows

Figure 3.3 Formation background gas (FBG) vs gas show

This background level can be determined for any lithology. If a potential producing zone is
then penetrated, the resulting gas increase or show can be evaluated against the background
level established for what we know is a non-productive lithology (Figure 3.3). In other
words, the producing potential of the new zone is represented by the change in gas level or,
more simply, the value over and above the non-producing formation background previously
established (Figure 3.4).

The over-riding benefit of the formation background is that any complication from recycled or
contaminated gas within the stationary and circulating backgrounds is eliminated, since they
are a component of both the formation background and the gas show. Only the liberated gas is

71
being evaluated or compared, thus determining how much more gas is liberated from the
potential reservoir zone as compared to the non-producing lithology immediately above it.

Background

Time Show

Show

Figure 3.4 Background versus formation gas show

3.3 Interpretation of Background Gas

The formation background level is subject to the changes already described in Sections 5.2
and 5.3 as applied to liberated and produced gas, namely formation changes such as porosity,
saturation, permeability and formation pressure and ‘outside’ influences such as penetration
rate, flowrate and mud density.

Over a given depth interval, flowrate and mud density are unlikely to change significantly
leading to erroneous evaluations, but have to be born in mind when determining the possible
causes of background changes.

72
• If the flowrate is changed, there will be an immediate and corresponding change in gas
level (Section 3.3.4) so that the correlation is clear, and a new background level
established.

• If the mud weight is being gradually increased or decreased, then a corresponding

decrease or increase in gas level can be expected. Complication may occur if a
formation change occurs during the same time period since gas level changes that are
a result of porosity or saturation changes, may be masked or hidden.

However, a change in gas level due to a formation change will be immediate, whereas the
changing mud density will result in a gradual change, the trend of which would already have
been seen. Once the mud weight is stable, the new formation background can be readily
established. These changes should be clearly reported on the mudlog to avoid any confusion
or misinterpretation at a later stage (Figure 3.5).

If all ‘external’ influences, such as penetration rate, mud density and flowrate, on the
background level remain unchanged, then any change in gas level must correspond to a
change in formation property such as porosity, formation fluid, saturation, or pressure. This
may correspond to a change in a given formation or to a complete change in lithology, where
all or a combination of the above factors may change.

Changes in formation pressure may lead to an immediate or gradual change in gas level
depending on the situation. If the pressure increase corresponds to the penetration of a sealed,
overpressured body (such as a reservoir), then the response will be immediate, resulting in a
gas show or even a kick.

If the pressure increase is due to transitional undercompaction of shale for example, then the
background gas level will increase as the pressure differential increases. In this case, the mud
logger will be looking at other pressure indicators such as produced gas peaks, cuttings (size,
shape, volume), drilling exponent, mud temperature, salinity etc, to confirm the change in
formation pressure.

REAL-TIME CHART

Lagged Mud weight Total Gas

Depth
CORRESPONDING MUDLOG
1000 Lithology Total Gas
1002 Initial BG

1000 73
1004 MW 1020

Increase
Increase MW
MW
1006 Decreasing
 Figure 3.5 Background trend with simultaneous changes in mud density and formation

The change in gas level in these situations may be due to combination of liberated and
produced gas. Changes in pressure as described above will be associated with an increase in
porosity, so that a given volume of rock will contain more formation fluid, leading to an
increase in liberated gas. This increase will be more significant if there is also an increase in
gas saturation.

In addition to the liberated gas, if the pressure increase leads to an underbalanced situation,
then gas will also be produced into the wellbore as drilling proceeds. Connection gases
(Section 3.7) will also occur when the pumps are off and/or when gas is swabbed into the hole
when the drillstring is lifted.

74
3.4 Show Evaluation

Gas evaluation, of increased background or shows, or when a change in porosity leads to a

higher gas volume, is complicated by the fact that there will typically be an accompanied
increase in the penetration rate. This, in itself, results in a higher gas recording as was detailed
in Section 6.3.1 (Figure 6.4 and Plate 6.2). This is simply as a result of the rock becoming
easier to drill due to the increased porosity. In fact, the ROP is used, in addition to cuttings
analysis and gas level, as a reliable indicator of changes in porosity. This is illustrated in Plate
7.1, where the higher ROP’s and increased gas level provide a good indication that that
interval of limestone has higher porosity (shaded intervals).

The problem, then, is that the ROP has to be taken into consideration when evaluating the gas
show. As illustrated in Figure 6.4, a faster penetration rate will result in higher recorded gas
even if there is no change in the actual gas volume in place in the formation. A gas show from
porous sand for example, will result from an increase in porosity and gas volume, but also
from the effect of the increased drilling rate. The significance or comparable importance of the
two influences has to be determined in order to evaluate a show.

0 ROP min/m EMA % 1. 0

10 10

1000
BG

1010 1 0.7 ABG

1020

2 2.1 ABG
1030

Figure 3.6 Gas show vs penetration rate

Consider the two sand bodies illustrated in Figure 3.6, where Sand 2 has resulted in what
appears to be a more significant gas response.

75
STEP 1 Evaluate the change in gas volume in comparison to the previous background
(above background, ABG). This applies whether you are dealing with a
change in formation or a change within a formation. This is done by
comparing the degree of change in ROP and gas and by using the rule of
thumb method detailed in Section 6.3.1.

Background ROP = 9 min/m Background Gas = 0.1%

Sand 1 ROP = 6 min/m, Gas Show = 0.7 % ABG

Here, the increase in ROP is x1½, yet the increase in gas is x7. It can
therefore be deduced that there is certainly an increase in gas volume.

Sand 2 ROP = 2 min/m, Gas Show = 2.1% ABG

The increase in ROP is x4.5, with a gas increase of x21. So, again, the sand
unit certainly shows an increase in in-situ gas volume.

STEP 2 In an example like this, with sand units occurring in the same geological
sequence with the same well conditions, it is quite valid to compare the
individual gas responses against each other, as well as against the background
levels.

Initially, we look to have a much better zone with Sand 2, just on the basis of
the higher gas response (3x greater than Sand 1). However, when looking at
the ROP, it can be seen that Sand 2 drilled three times as fast as Sand 1 and,
as we know, for a similar in situ gas volume, three times the gas should have
been liberated.

It follows then, that the total gas volume in each of the sands is, actually, very
similar. Without the additional information provided by the ROP curve, we
would not be able to deduce this from a depth based mudlog.

This deduction is confirmed by referring to the corresponding real-time chart shown in Figure
3.7. Although Sand 1 only yielded a maximum of 0.7% EMA above background, this level
was maintained for the 36 minutes required to drill the sand unit (sand 6m thick, drilled at a
rate of 6 min/m). Comparing this to the second sand unit drilled at the rate of 2 min/m, 2.1%
EMA was maintained for the 12 minutes required to penetrate the unit. The area underneath
the real-time gas curve approximates to the volume of liberated gas, and, by comparing the
area beneath the two curves, it is reasonably clear that both sands contain similar total
quantities of gas.

76
 Total Gas % EMA
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
10.00

Actual
Time

11.00

SAND 1
12.00

13.00
SAND 2

14.00

Figure 3.7 Real-time evaluation of gas shows, where the area

under the gas curve approximates to gas volume

This is not quite all that has to be considered however. Firstly, the reason for the different
penetration rates has to be considered. Sand 2 may have better porosity (and possibly
permeability) or higher pressure and therefore may well have better production possibilities.
Similarly, Sand 1 may be harder, more consolidated or cemented. Therefore, the gas show has
to be evaluated alongside not only the ROP, but also the drilled cuttings and other indicators.

If changes in drilling parameters and lithological changes (other than porosity) can be
eliminated as a cause of the higher penetration rate, then it is down to increased porosity and
the evaluation procedure can be taken a step further.

77
STEP 3 It has been determined that the bulk volume of each sand unit is equal, yet
Sand 2 has higher porosity.

It can therefore be further deduced that Sand 2 has lower gas saturation.

STEP 4 The significance of step 3 is dependant on the type of reservoir fluid, and for
this, we would need to go to the chromatographic gas ratios and/or
fluorescence indications.

For an oil zone, the gas saturation is lower; it is likely that the oil in Sand 2 is
of lower API.

For a gas zone, the situation is different. With a lower gas saturation, it is
likely that Sand 2 is a poorer zone (even though porosity is better), since we
are considering the gas saturation in water and the zone would almost
certainly produce more water.

Of course, comparison with the real-time gas chart and such ‘area under the curve’ is a valid
evaluation tool when dealing with a continuous total gas curve. However, when dealing with
chromatographic analysis, individual samples are being analyzed.

Many real-time chromatographic curves do not have the same validity as total gas curves,
since the curve is not a continuous measurement, but an updated measurement after each
sample injection. The accuracy or usefulness of the ‘area beneath the curve’ principle is
therefore dependent on how frequently the chromatograph is taking samples.

Many chromatographs may take between 2 and 5 minutes between samples so that the area
beneath the curve has no validity whatsoever. As can be seen in Figure 7.8, a curve generated
by a 5 minute sample time gives no representation of gas volume at all. Not only that, it is
quite possible that no sample will be taken at the time corresponding to the main gas response
or zone of interest, so that, even the compositional analysis is subject to significant error.

The Geolog chromatograph samples and updates for each hydrocarbon (C1 through C5) every
60 seconds so that the curve is very analogous to a continual gas curve, providing good real-
time ‘area’ comparison.

30 second divisions

78
Total Gas Sensor
 Figure 3.8 Real-time chromatograph trends

Most mud loggers and geologists are very familiar with the significance of the effect of ROP
on individual gas shows and are, typically, quite satisfied to visually appraise the gas values
alongside the penetration rate in order to evaluate individual shows. However, attempts have
been made to remove the human error and mathematically correct or normalize gas shows for
different penetration rates. The practice of this will be discussed in Section 7.5.

Regardless, when gas shows are quoted and tabulated in reports, they should always be quoted
with the value of each hydrocarbon compound above formation background (so that relative
changes in composition can also be identified) together with the change in penetration rate, as
shown by Table 3.1

Depth Litho- ROP Total Total C1 C2 C3 C4 C5

logy Change Gas BG Gas BG / Pk BG / Pk BG / Pk BG / Pk BG / Pk
Peak
Min/m % % % % % % %

1200 – Sandston 15 / 2.3 1.250 7.395 1.0500 / 0.0250 / 0.0030 / ------- / ------- /
1203 e 6.5763 0.3654 0.0658 0.0231 0.0195

1275 – Sandston 21 / 1.5 0.950 13.823 0.8750 / 0.0035 / ------- / ------- / ------ /
1279 e 12.2681 1.1050 0.2045 0.1265 0.0873

79
Table 3.1 Typical reporting of gas shows

This allows, during the final well and subsequent evaluations, for immediate comparisons to
be made and for any preferred normalization calculation to be used.

In addition, the ‘ratios’ of increase can be included in the report to allow for direct
comparisons and evaluation. The same gas responses are shown again in Table 7.2.

Depth Litho- ROP Total Total C1 C2 C3 C4 C5

logy Change Gas BG Gas BG / Pk BG / Pk BG / Pk BG / Pk BG / Pk
Peak
Min/m % % % % % % %

1200 – Sandston 15 / 2.3 1.250 7.395 1.0500 / 0.0250 / 0.0030 / ------- / ------- /
1203 e 6.5763 0.3654 0.0658 0.0231 0.0195
Increase X 6.52 6.145% 5.5263% 0.3404% 0.0628% 0.0231% 0.0195%
(abg) x 4.92 x5.26 x13.62 x20.93

1275 – Sandston 21 / 1.5 0.950 13.823 0.8750 / 0.0035 / ------- / ------- / ------ /
1279 e 12.2681 1.1050 0.2045 0.1265 0.0873
Increase X 14 12.873% 11.393% 1.1015% 0.2045% 0.1265% 0.0873%
(abg) x13.55 x13.02 x315

Table 3.2 Gas report including relative increases

Here, we can see that for both sands, the increase in the total gas response is less than the
increase in ROP, indicating that the actual gas volume has decreased. Looking at the
chromatographic breakdowns, this decrease is only reflected by the methane component with
all heavier components showing a volume increase.

The increase in heavier components is much more significant in the second sand, suggesting a
heavier fluid. We can go further if we look at the actual gas ratios (Section 8).

Sand 1 has a C1/C2 ratio (Section 8.2.1) of 16 which, unfortunately, is a borderline case,
indicating a wet gas, a condensate or possibly a light oil. Given the drop in C1 saturation, and
lesser increases in the heavier components (as compared to sand 2), the zone is most likely a
condensate.

Sand 2 has a C1/C2 ratio of 10, indicating a high gravity oil.

80
3.5 Gas Normalization

Section 6 illustrated that, because of the many parameters and conditions (see below) that have
a direct or indirect influence on the quantity of gas recorded at surface, relative changes in gas
trends are more meaningful than the actual value.

• Pressure and temperature

• Porosity
• Gas saturation
• Permeability
• Hole depth
• Rate of penetration
• Hole diameter
• Bit type
• Flowrate
• Differential pressure
• Mud type and rheology
• Trap efficiency

The recorded gas value may be modified further, by such conditions as: -

• Fluid movements in terms of flushing and influxes

• Phase and solubility changes
• Losses of gas to the atmosphere
• Gas retained by cuttings

Gas Normalization is an attempt to quantify a qualitative measurement in order to improve the

data allowing for better: -

• Determination of the significance, or quality, of a given gas show

• Comparison of shows from different zones in the same well
• Correlation of shows from different wells

Obviously, not all of the variables are directly calculable and so, cannot be accurately
normalized. However, some parameters are purely geometrical so that their influence can be
mathematically determined and corrected for.

1. Rate of Penetration

81
Section 6.3.1 illustrated the direct effect that ROP has on the quantity of measured gas, in that
it controls the amount of rock and formation fluid that are liberated into the drilling fluid over
a given time period. An increase in ROP will lead to a direct increase in gas.

2. Hole Diameter

As with ROP, hole diameter also determines the volume of rock liberated to the drilling fluid.

3. Flowrate

A change in flowrate has a direct effect in that it controls the dilution of gas within the drilling
mud. An increase in flowrate will lead to the gas, liberated over a given time, being diluted in
a greater volume of mud and will therefore result in a drop in recorded gas value.

Although this correction, in itself, is a valid one, it does not allow for secondary changes that
can occur when the flowrate is changed (see Section 6.3.4).

Normalization of these parameters is a mathematical correction that is made to eliminate them

as variable factors. In this way, the significance of gas shows can be directly compared against
each other and against normal background levels. However, it has to be remembered that,
although this is certainly an accurate correction for the volume of gas released into the drilling
fluid together with the subsequent dilution, it is not a complete correction. It cannot account
for all the other variables that play a part in the final recorded gas total.

Nevertheless, it will be demonstrated that, purely as a gas volume correction for geometric
variations, normalization of gas curves does work. However, many geologists/engineers find
that a further gas curve on the mud log may only serve to complicate the information
displayed, and that in many instances, although accurate, it provides the same information that
can be determined from the ‘rule of thumb’ techniques already illustrated in this manual.

Gas normalization is not ideally suitable for total gas detector values owing to the variable and
non-linear responses resulting from changes in gas composition and concentration.

What can be effectively normalized is a total gas value taken from the sum of the
chromatographic gas values, since these are an absolute measurement of the concentration of
each hydrocarbon compound.
This Total Chromatographic Gas value can then be normalized to eliminate the effects of
diameter, ROP and flowrate.

82
Many equations have been formulated for gas normalization, varying from the most basic to
extremely complicated procedures. The problem with bringing in too many other variables is
that they can not be geometrically corrected, so that a false perception of normalization may
be given, or worse still, further errors may be introduced.

A case in point is the correction made for different bit types, where, simply, a correction factor
for the bit type plus tooth or insert size, is entered into the normalization. This is a gross over
simplification in allowing for different sized cuttings being generated since no consideration is
given to lithology type and strength.

A normalization equation that purely corrects for the geometric variables is described below: -

 (a  b ) 2


N =
  c
2000
(

d )
100 

 

 

Where N = normalized gas (%)

a = pump output (m3/min)
b = ROP (min/m)
c = hole diameter (mm)
d = total gas (chromat) (%)

Example 1 Comparing shows in the same hole section (Figure 3.9)

In this situation, although accurate, gas normalization may be considered by some to be

superfluous, since the information that it provides is readily apparent.

In other words, while drilling the same hole section and circulating with the same flowrate, the
only ‘external’ variable is the rate of penetration controlling the volume of rock and gas
liberated to the wellbore over a given time.

For gas shows resulting from two potential zones, the rule of thumb method (Section 2.3.1)
can be used as effectively as normalization to compare the two shows or to compare the shows
to the established background level.

ROP min/m Total Chromatograph %

0 5 10 15 0.1 1.0 10 100

83
 Figure 3.9 Comparing shows, Example 1

With a constant background gas of 1% from the shale, drilled at an average ROP of 10 min/m,
it is clear that both sands have production potential in terms of gas volume. If there had been
no change in actual bulk gas volume, the ROP increases would generate 3.3% gas in sand 1
and 10% gas in sand 2.

Sand 1 was drilled at a rate of 3 min/m and resulted in 10% total gas (above background).

With no change in drilling parameters, sand 2 was drilled at a rate of 1 min/m (i.e. 3 times as
fast as sand 1). If the sand units contained similar volumes of in place gas, an equivalent show
would therefore be 30%.

Assuming that hardness, grain size or cementation are not the cause of the different
penetration rates, based on the ROP alone it is reasonable to assume that Sand 2 has better
porosity than Sand 1. This can be confirmed by cuttings inspection and, subsequently, by
wireline information.

With the actual recorded gas for Sand 2, on reaching surface, being less than 30% (assume
20%), it can be deduced that a less than equivalent volume of gas has been liberated from the
formation.

84
Possible reasons for this are: -

• Lower porosity and therefore bulk volume – unlikely in this case since the faster
penetration rate tells us that the porosity is greater in Sand 2.

• Lower gas saturation.

• Reduced permeability, so that more gas has been retained by the drilled cuttings
– this can be confirmed by the relative volumes of cuttings gas.

• Increased permeability – resulting in flushing of the formation so that less

formation fluid was ‘available’ for liberation. This is unlikely in this case since
there is no delay in the timing of the gas show to suggest flushing.

What we have deduced then, is that both sand units have higher gas volumes than the
background control and that, although it possesses better porosity and generated a higher gas
response, sand 2 actually contains less gas volume than sand 1. The particular fluid type would
then tell us how significant this difference is.

A normalization curve, in this context, would tell us the same information, but nothing further
since ROP is the only variable.

Example 2 Comparison of shows in different hole sections or wells (Figure 3.10).

Gas normalization has more relevance to the operator when comparing or correlating wells. A
common question exists: “Why, when we drilled this zone on the last well did we see 10%
gas, yet on this well we are only seeing 1%?”

Normalization will improve this situation, to some extent, by removing the geometrical
variables as a cause.

However, it cannot eliminate any of the other possible causes: -

• Perhaps the mud density is higher resulting in flushing and/or decreased trap efficiency.

• Perhaps the mud viscosity is higher, making it more difficult to break the gas out of the
mud.

• Perhaps a different type of bit is being used, resulting in different cuttings size.

85
• Perhaps a different mud system is being used with different solubility or bubble point.

So, normalization can only go so far in making overall gas data from different wells directly
comparable. However, it will always have the benefit of removing the volumetric variables.

Take the same sand units illustrated in example 1, but now, assume that sand 2 was penetrated
in a different hole section, so that not only ROP, but flowrate and hole diameter would also
now be very different.

Sand 1 still yielded 10% with ROP 3 min/m, flowrate 2 m3/min, 12 ¼” hole.
Background gas from shale 1%, drilled at an average 10 min/m.

Sand 2 yielded 20% with ROP 1 min/m, flowrate 1.4 m3/min, 8 ½” hole.
Background gas from shale 1%, drilled at an average 10 min/m.

Which sand now has the best production potential, in terms of gas volume?

Using the ROP rule of thumb and comparison of each trend with the background resulting
from the unproductive shale: -

Sand 1 drills approximately 3 times as fast as the shale, so a gas show exceeding 3% would be
required to cause excitement. The fact that 10% is recorded points to a good show worth
further evaluation.

In other words, after eliminating the effect of ROP, sand 1 contains around 3 times the gas
volume as the background.

Sand 2 drills 10 times as fast as the shale, so would need to record at least 10% to be worth
further investigation. Liberated gas of 20% indicates some potential, but maybe not as much
as Sand 1.

In other words, sand 2 contains around 2 times the gas volume as the background.

If the varying conditions of different flowrate and hole size are now taken into consideration,
does a normalized gas lead to any different conclusion?

86
Applying the normalization formula to the 2 situations: -

Sand 1 normalized background = 0.84%

normalized show = 24.8%

Sand 2 normalized background = 1.22%

normalized show = 18.0%

After normalization then, the show from Sand 1 is 24% over background whereas Sand 2 is
only 16.8%.

Comparing the relative gas volumes from the two different techniques: -

Rule of Thumb Sand 1 = ~3x above background; Sand 2 = 2x abg ~ ratio 3:2

Normalization Sand 1 = 24% abg; Sand 2 = ~17% abg ~ ratio 3:2

So again, the normalization has mathematically corrected the variables and has the same
conclusion that was derived from the ROP/gas response rule of thumb.

This phenomenon has occurred because the gas shows have been compared to the
background levels, which are obviously affected to the same degree by the changes in flow
rate and hole diameter. The only real variable, due to lithology and porosity change, is the
ROP and this is what was being assessed in the first instance.

87
What the normalized gas curve does add, is an easier appraisal and the elimination of the
simple mathematics (Figure 3.10).

Flowrate m3/min Normalized Gas %

ROP min/m Total Chromatograph %

0 5 10 15 0.1 1.0 10 100
0 3
12 ¼ “

8½“

Figure 3.10 Gas shows with normalized gas curve

So, whereas in the first instance, sand 2 gave the false impression of a larger gas response,
after normalization it is readily apparent that it actually has less gas volume than sand 1.

A situation where a gas normalization process may prove of benefit on individual wells is
when they are being directionally drilled with a downhole motor. The alternate sliding (where
rotation is just due to the downhole motor) and rotation (where rotation is due to both the
motor and surface rotation) can often produce distinct changes in the recorded gas (Plate 3.2).

88
The typical normalization process will account for the relative changes in penetration rate due
to the different drilling methods (with typically faster penetration resulting from the higher
RPM when applying surface rotation) but will not allow for the effect of rotation on the
release of gas from the cuttings.

The extra rotation while applying rotation from the surface will often result in smaller cuttings
being produced, leading to an increase in the initially liberated gas.

Plate 7.2 shows the lower gas levels associated with alternating sliding (shaded) and rotating
of the bit while directionally steering a well.

As can be seen, higher gas levels result when rotating the bit. There are two principal causes:
-

Increased penetration rate due to faster rotation

increased weight on bit

Smaller cuttings resulting from faster rotation.

89
3.6 Evaluation of Produced Gas

In Section 1.3, the various mechanisms by which produced gas may occur were described.
Here, we will examine the precise situations when produced gas shows occur, which
mechanisms are mainly responsible, how the gas appears on real-time charts and how it should
be evaluated and represented on logs and in reports.

Produced gas is defined as gas that is produced into the drilling fluid from a specific zone or
formation as a result of the formation pressure exceeding the opposing hydrostatic pressure.

If such a condition of underbalance exists while drilling, the background gas level will
represent a combined effect of liberated and produced gas. If a well is drilled purposely
underbalanced, then this situation will always be the case. If the well is being drilled
conventionally overbalanced, then this situation will arise if there is an increase in formation
pressure to the point that it exceeds the hydrostatic pressure in the annulus.

There are several points to bear in mind, in terms of hydrocarbon evaluation, if a formation is
producing.

Firstly, the gas that is being extracted and measured is now composed of liberated and
produced gas. With normal show evaluation, the volume of gas liberated from a given volume
of rock is being evaluated, so that changes in volume are readily identified. If a formation is
also producing, then much of the basic show evaluation is lost since we are not, now, dealing
with volume changes. Gas is flowing from the same formation, in addition to the volume
liberated from the drilled bore.

Secondly, depending on the particular fluid type and amount of production that is occurring, a
compositional change can often be identified. When fluids flow, the light end components will
flow more readily, so that gas ratio analysis will determine a lighter composition to the fluid.
A similar process can occur from fracture generated gas.

In addition, if a previously drilled formation continues to produce as drilling proceeds, then

this will add to the background gas level, and where significant, it may be more difficult to
identify changes from the formations actually being drilled.

Whatever the particular mechanism causing an overpressured formation, all have a common
characteristic. That is, the overpressure results from the formation retaining an abnormal
volume of formation fluid, which is then supporting a greater proportion of the overburden.
This is important, since, possessing greater fluid volumes necessarily means that
overpressured formations possess a greater porosity. So, even if an overpressured formation is
actually balanced by the drilling fluid so that flow cannot occur, an increase in gas will still be
seen just as a result of the pore volume increase.

90
Two typical situations of overpressured formations are illustrated: -

3.6.1 ‘Sealed’, Overpressured, Permeable Formations

An obvious example is that of hydrocarbon reservoirs, where the overpressure will lead to a
gas show and potentially a gas kick.

ROP min/m Gas %

Background Gas
FP<ECD liberated

produced

FP>ECD

FP<ECD

Figure 3.11 Produced gas as a result of an overpressure body

With the example shown in Figure 7.11, the formation background level is established in the
impermeable shale overlying the sand body. On penetrating the sand, the initial gas response
is going to be evaluated as a liberated gas response. It is what happens subsequently that
enables you to determine that the formation is also producing: -

• Obviously, if the well is flowing leading to a well control situation, it is clear!

• If the formation is producing while drilling, then connection gases are also definitely
going to be produced.

• A valid assumption can also be made about the background gas level after drilling through
the sand unit. In the situation illustrated it can be assumed, that if the shales are in the
same geological sequence with the same burial and compaction history, the lower shale
unit will result in a similar background level to the upper unit. If, after drilling through the
sand, a higher background level is maintained, it can be reasonably assumed that it is

91
 being produced. Although there are situations when this is not always going to be the case,
it is a common and reasonable assumption to make.

In Figure 3.11, the gas show, on entering the sand, results from: -

• An increase in liberated gas due to increased porosity and gas volume.

• Possible increase in gas saturation.

• The faster penetration rate.

• Produced gas as a result of the pressure differential and permeability.

After drilling through the sand, if there were no produced gas, the background level would
return to the previous background level established in the shale. Here, however, with no
change in mud weight, the sand body will continue to produce into the wellbore leading to a
higher background level. This higher level serves as an indication of how much of the gas
show from the sand was due to liberated and how much due to produced gas.

Even in a situation where a sand body is normally pressured and balanced by the circulating
mud, proper drilling practices should be followed when drilling through thick bodies
containing gas. If such a formation were to be drilled too quickly, then a large amount of gas
would be liberated into the drilling fluid. This gas cut mud may, in itself, be sufficient to
reduce the hydrostatic pressure of the mud column below the formation pressure and allow an
influx to occur.

3.6.2 Undercompacted shales with a transitional pressure increase

As described in Section 5.3.3, an “influx” of formation fluid can still occur even if
permeability does not exist in the formation. In the case of shale and claystone for example, if
the fluid pressure is greater than the hydrostatic of the mud column, the fluid cannot flow into
the wellbore as it would from a permeable formation. The fluid pressure will open up micro-
fractures, causing the rock to fracture and cave into the wellbore. This will be accompanied
by the release of gas as the rock breaks apart (Figure 5.4).

In a typical situation where shale is abnormally pressured due to undercompaction during

burial, the rock will contain a greater amount of formation fluid (and, for the relevance of this
manual, we will assume increased gas content). If drilling the formation with a mud weight
less than the formation pressure, an increase in background gas will be seen as a result of
proportionally more gas being mechanically liberated by the bit, but a sustained influx or kick
is unlikely due to lack of permeability. Once the formation has been penetrated and left

92
exposed in the wellbore, further ‘influx’ may occur as a result of the caving mechanism
described above.

Such caving of the formation does not require an abnormally pressured formation; if the
hydrostatic due to the mud weight is less than a normally pressured formation, the same
mechanism can occur. Similarly, if a formation is weak or unconsolidated, or if structural dip
is such that rock can break away and fall into the wellbore, then such caving can occur under
‘normal conditions’.

In the example of a transitional pressure increase illustrated in Figure 7.12, the formation
background level is again established in the shale prior to entering the transition zone.

As the zone is drilled into and the formation pressure increases (but still below the ECD so
that the well remains overbalanced), the background gas level will increase due to an
increased amount of liberated gas resulting from: -

• Increasing undercompaction is accompanied by an increase in porosity and

therefore gas volume. It is quite typical that through these transitional zones,
the pressure increase and associated porosity increase is uniform, leading to a
constant increase in gas level.

• As undercompaction and porosity increase, the penetration rate will increase.

If the formation pressure continues to increase, to a point where it exceeds the circulating
pressure due to the ECD, a kick is unlikely to occur owing to the lack of permeability, but the
background level will continue to increase, now as a result of: -

• Continued increase in liberated gas as detailed above.

93
• The occurrence of produced gas. A minor amount may be a result of fluid flow due
to the pressure differential, but since shale is essentially impermeable, the produced
gas content is primarily due to the formation caving into the wellbore and releasing
gas.

ROP Pressures Total Gas

ECD BG

liberated
FP

produced
A

Figure 3.12 Produced gas resulting from a transitional overpressured zone

If no change is made to the mudweight to the balance the formation, point A, where the
background increases for the second time, determines the point at which the well becomes
underbalanced. There would have been warning of this beforehand, since connection gases
would have been produced prior to this point.

Even though the shale itself is not going to result in a kick, there are other associated problems
that necessitate the mudweight being increased. The greater the underbalance, the more shale
cavings there are falling into the hole leading to rotation and drilling problems and a strong
possibility of the hole packing off and the pipe becoming stuck. In addition, there may well be
thin sand stringers within the shale, which will be at the same pressure, and these may possess
the permeability to allow the well to kick!

In both of the above situations, we have seen the gas response due to pressure changes while
drilling is proceeding. As mentioned, the mud logger will also be looking for the occurrence
of produced gas peaks to confirm these suspected pressure changes.

94
3.7 Connection Gas

3.7.1 Causes of Connection Gas

Connection gas results from an influx of formation fluid that occurs over the duration of a
connection due to a temporary condition of underbalance. When pumping is stopped, the
hydrostatic pressure in the wellbore will be that exerted by the static vertical column of mud,
i.e. due to the mud weight.

In cases of increasing formation pressure, the increase may be masked by the circulating ECD
when drilling, but when pumping stops, the drop in pressure may create the underbalance
required for a fluid influx. If the producing formation is at the bottom of the hole, the gas peak
will occur at surface when one lagtime has passed after circulation is re-established following
the connection.

There are two mechanisms by which a condition of underbalance may be caused, resulting in
the occurrence of produced connection gas: -

1. Due to the reduction in annular pressure when pumping is stopped.

Typically, any ‘new’ occurrence of connection gas resulting from this pressure drop will
originate from the formation newly penetrated at the bottom of the hole. Formations
previously drilled would have been balanced by the existing mud weight otherwise connection
gas would have occurred before. These formations will obviously remain balanced unless
there has been a subsequent reduction in the mud weight.

As drilling proceeds, this ‘newly drilled’ formation will be left exposed in the well bore and is
still subject to influx when connections are being made. It will only cease if the mud weight is
increased, or, if over a period of time, sufficient filter cake builds up during circulating periods
to prevent further influx. Connection gases corresponding to this formation will now be
arriving at surface before bottoms up, since it is no longer at the bottom of the hole.

At the same time, new formations that are subject to influx, may be penetrated. Now, two
connection gases will be detected; one corresponding to bottoms up and the other arriving
some time before bottoms up (Figure 7.13).

2. Due to swabbing

This occurs when there is a reduction in the annular pressure resulting from frictional pressure
losses caused by movement in the drilling fluid when the drillstring is lifted. These pressure
losses are calculable so that the reduced equivalent mud weight (i.e. the balancing pressure)
when pipe is being lifted can be accurately determined.
With normal connection procedures, the pumps are generally kept running when the pipe is
being lifted, so that it is the ECD that is being reduced by swabbing. Normally, this reduced

95
pressure will still be greater than the mud hydrostatic. Therefore, if influx is occurring as a
result of swabbing, the connection gases will be larger and longer in duration, because the
influx will still continue when pumping is stopped and the connection is being made.

One result of the pipe movement, which is present but not calculable, is the syringe effect
resulting in suction and a temporary ‘void space’ beneath the bit as the pipe is lifted. This is
influenced by how fast the pipe is lifted; by the mud rheology and flow characteristics (how
‘quickly’ the mud can fall to fill the space); and by the nozzle diameter (the smaller the area,
then the harder it is for mud to fall from the pipe to fill the space left beneath the bit).

This process is less significant than the pressure losses described above. Certainly, the suction
effect is only going to result in influx for the short time that it takes to pull tools, such as the
bit and stabilizers, passed permeable formations. The pressure losses, on the other hand, occur
for the whole time taken to lift the pipe and they occur for the entire length of drillstring,
resulting in an accumulated pressure drop at the bottom of the well. Never the less, given
conditions of rapid pipe speed together with viscous mud and small nozzles, the resulting
‘void’ may permit the influx of formation fluids before mud displaces to fill it.

The pressure reduction due to swabbing will occur throughout the open hole section as the
string is being lifted so that influxes can occur at any point in the hole. The degree of pressure
reduction will be a factor of: -

• The speed of pipe movement (the faster the string is pulled, the greater the
pressure loss).

• The annular clearance i.e. the difference between the hole diameter and the
outside diameter of the pipe (the smaller the difference, the greater the
pressure loss).

• Mud rheology (viscosity and density), the greater these are, the higher the
pressure loss.

• The length of drillstring, in other words, the depth of the hole. The more
string there is, the greater the pressure loss.

The effect of swabbing increases with depth since the pressure at any depth is a result of the
mud hydrostatic and the reduction due to the accumulated pressure losses occurring
throughout the wellbore. It is therefore more likely, since the reduction is greater, that
swabbing will result in an underbalanced condition near to the bottom of the hole.
It has to be remembered, however, that an underbalanced condition may be created at any
point in the borehole. This is especially important to recognize when formations of greater
pressure are exposed at a shallower depth.

96
The pressure reduction and swabbing effect will be greatest at the bottom of the hole.

• The annular clearance (borehole diameter versus drill collars and tools) is smallest,
creating the greatest suction effect.

• Here exists the largest pressure drop for a given length of pipe, but also, at the bottom of
the hole, the pressure reduction is a cumulative affect of all of the pressure losses
throughout the entire borehole.

• At the bottom of the hole, also, filter cake would not have had sufficient time to provide a
barrier against fluid movement.

The example in Figure 7.13 shows two connection gases. The second peak of 1033units
corresponds to bottoms up and the formation influx at the bottom of the hole. The first peak of
1253 units arrives before bottoms up and therefore corresponds to a formation further up the
borehole.

The exact depth of the shallower producing formation can be determined by looking at the
time that the gas arrives at surface, the volume of mud pumped and the annular volume at the
bottom of the hole.

In this case, the peak arrives 20 minutes before bottoms up. If the pump rate is delivering
1.5m3 of mud per minute, this equates to a mud volume of 30m3.

If the annular volume at the bottom of the hole (in practice you would have to determine the
annular volumes for the drill collar and heavy weight drillpipe sections) is 0.0436m 3/m (that
for a 311mm hole and 203mm drill collars), then the height of the formation is: -

30/0.0436 = 688m above bottom

In this particular example, the shallower formation is producing more gas than the bottom hole
formation. At the shallower depth, the swab pressure loss is lower and you would also expect
filter cake build up to reduce swabbing, all resulting in a lower connection gas response. The
higher gas level in this case results from higher formation pressure and possibly better
permeability in the shallower formation, leading to a greater influx when the connection is
being made. The response is also longer in duration and slightly asymmetric (Section 3.7.3),
so it is likely that the formation pressure is great enough to bring the well underbalanced when
the pipe is being lifted and the well balanced by the swab reduced ECD. This is illustrated in
Figure 3.14.

97
 Chromatographic Gases Total Gases

Figure 3.13 Double connection gas peaks

It is very important that lagtime and annular volumes are accurately known, so that, with the
occurrence of connection gas, the depth of the producing formation can be properly
determined.

In the example shown in Figure 3.14, there are two abnormally pressured sands, the upper one
being of higher pressure. Neither sand unit is balanced by the existing mud weight, so that
both will influx when a connection is made and the pumps turned off. However, the swabbing
effect when the pipe is being lifted, has reduced the circulating pressure due to the ECD. This
pressure at the bottom of the hole is still greater than the formation pressure, so that there is no
additional influx. However, the reduced ECD at the depth of the upper sand has fallen below
the formation pressure, so that influx will occur when the pipe is being lifted and when the
pumps are off, generating a larger and longer connection gas (similar to that shown in Figure
3.13).

Given that the conditions allow for the occurrence of connection gas, the size of the resulting
peak is dependent on the degree of underbalance, the degree of permeability and the duration
of the underbalanced condition.

98
Even though the influx, or flow of formation fluids, will not be sustained in this situation since
the well will be balanced as soon as circulation begins, a kick may still ultimately result. If
conditions allow for a large volume of gas to enter the wellbore, then once it is rising in the
annulus and approaching surface, the gas will expand and may lead to the displacement of
drilling fluid from the wellbore. In addition, the rapidly expanding gas volume may reduce
the hydrostatic pressure sufficiently to produce a ‘permanent’ state of underbalance downhole,
allowing the formations to begin flowing, even when circulating.

FP HYD ECD
Mud movement
and frictional
pressure loss ECD Pressure reduced
due to swabbing

% Total Gas
- Lagged

BG

CG

CG

Figure 3.14 Connection gas as a result of swabbing

Significant changes in mud weight and/or pipe speed would have to occur for such a situation
to develop from previously drilled formations and are therefore very unlikely in practice.

The occurrence of connection gas is therefore very significant, not only because it is an
immediate indication of permeability, but also, if there has been no change in mud weight or
connection procedure, it is indicative of a pressure change. Its occurrence should therefore be
duly noted, reported and recorded and closely monitored for any change.

99
Connection gas originating from the bottom of the hole should always be closely monitored.
Two typical situations of subsequent connections producing increasing volumes of gas
without any significant change in mud weight, connection speed or duration, signifying
downhole changes, are illustrated.

3.7.2 Zone of increasing formation pressure due to undercompaction.

Typically, such transition zones occur within impermeable shales or clays that are unable to
sustain a continual fluid influx. Background gas shows an increase as the zone is penetrated,
resulting from increased porosity and gas volume, together with increased ROP. This trend
would continue as the well is approaching balance or even becoming underbalanced, with
further produced gas originating from caving shale resulting from the pressure differential.

With no permeability, however, a fluid influx or kick is unlikely unless the gas is not removed
from the mud at surface, reducing the density and hydrostatic of re-circulated mud. The
appearance of connection gas confirms the state of balance of the well and signifies increased
caving of the formation and gas release during the connection when the pressure differential is
greater. Increasing connection gases, at this point, would indicate increasing formation
pressure as the transition zone is further penetrated, and an increased interval of formation
subject to caving during the connection.

However, should some permeability, allowing formation fluids to flow, exist, then there will
obviously be the danger of a kick, since the well is already underbalanced as shown by the
connection gases. This permeability may be by way of some weakness in the shale, or more
significantly, by way of fracture or interbedded sand that may be charged by the overpressured
shale.

Therefore, even though there may be no immediate danger when drilling an underbalanced but
impermeable formation, steps should still be taken to increase the mud weight and bring the
well back on balance to pre-empt the occurrence of permeability allowing fluid flow.

From a drilling point of view, this would be the normal practice in order to avoid excessive
cavings loading the annulus, to avoid tight hole, rotary torque and stuck pipe problems.

37.7.3 Underbalanced permeable zones

If a kick doesn’t occur immediately on entering a permeable formation, then a similar

situation, in terms of gas response, may be observed as described above. i.e. increasing
background gas, this time resulting from increased feed-in as more of the formation is

100
penetrated. Initially, this would be justifiably interpreted as increasing gas due to increased
porosity and/or gas saturation. However, if such an increase is accompanied by the
occurrence of connection gas, then we know that we are dealing with an underbalanced
formation. Increasing connection gases would again be indicative of more formation being
penetrated and exposed to influxing during connections (Figure 7.15).

For any logging engineer, these would be classic warning signs preceding a kick and should
be reported immediately to the drilling supervisor so that appropriate measures can be taken.
If the mud weight isn’t subsequently increased to alleviate the problem, then even though the
formation is ‘feeding rather than kicking’, more and more gas is entering the mud, reducing
the hydrostatic pressure, and at some point the well is going to flow!

BG

pumps off for connection

CG Liberated Gas

Produced Gas
feed-in and
connection
CG

CG

Well flowing

Figure 7.15 Produced gases preceding a kick

Trends in connection gases, and their correlation with changing background level, can
therefore be used to determine exactly what is happening downhole.
Similarly, if mud weight is increased to restore a state of balance to the well, the formation
pressure can be fairly accurately determined by comparing the current mud weight with
background gas reduction and the disappearance of connection gases. We know, at that point,
that the formation pressure lies somewhere between the mud hydrostatic and the equivalent
circulating density.

101
3.7.4 Shape, duration and timing of connection gas peak

As long as the lag time is known exactly, the characteristics of the connection gas peak can be
a very reliable indicator of formation pressure when compared to the precise operation during
the connection.

The important characteristics are firstly, at what point of the connection the influx corresponds
to, and secondly, the symmetry of the connection gas response.

With a normal connection gas,

Lagged
Depth the time of the influx is going
to be when the drill string is
set in slips and the well is
balanced by the mud
dispersion hydrostatic (shaded area in
Figure 3.16).
INFLUX The resulting gas peak will be
‘elongated’ but symmetrical,
through normal gas
dispersion, when it is
circulated to surface.

If the well is also influxing

when balanced by the swab
reduced ECD (ie when lifting
the pipe back into slips), you
Figure 3.16 A normal connection gas
can see that the period of
influx is longer and that the
resulting connection gas peak would also be longer in duration, corresponding to the different
connection operations and balancing pressures.

102
 RESULTING CONNECTION
2
GAS AFTER BEING
LAGGED TO SURFACE

3
1

ECD ECD – Swab HYD ECD

OPERATION AND
BALANCE PRESSURE

Drill to Kelly Down Lift pipe into Pumps off –make Drill ahead
slips while connection
circulating

Figure 3.17 Connection procedure with balancing pressure versus produced gas response

Consider the examples shown in Figure 7.17.

Connection Gas 1 A symmetrical peak of short duration, the period of influx

corresponding only to the time when the pipe is set in slips, the
connection being made and the mud column static.

mud hydrostatic < Formation Pressure < ECD - Swab

Connection Gas 2 This larger symmetrical peak has a longer duration, the influx
corresponding to the period of the complete connection, i.e. when the
pipe is being lifted and when the pipe is set in slips. Influx is now
occurring through swabbing.

ECD – Swab < Formation Pressure < ECD

103
Connection Gas 3 This peak is similar to peak 2, in that, we can determine that influx is
occurring through swabbing when the pipe is being lifted. Here
however, the peak is asymmetrical or extended, indicating continued
production after circulation has recommenced. This longer period,
required for the gas to fall back to a normal background, shows that
the well is approaching balance even when circulating, and that the
formation pressure is approaching the actual ECD.

ECD  Formation Pressure >> ECD – Swab

In practice then, the formation pressure, or changes in formation pressure, can be very
accurately determined by studying the connection gas peaks in relation to the connection
procedure.

As the pressure differential increases, the connection gas will become larger and longer in
duration as swabbing becomes increasingly more important in the production of formation
gas.

Further, if a change in shape is also observed, formation pressure is approaching the actual
ECD as the gas peak becomes increasingly asymmetrical. This is obviously very important to
determine, since the well is approaching a condition of permanent underbalance.

With computerized logging systems, these pressures (ECD, swab reduction) are accurately
calculated on a real-time basis so that connection gases are an extremely reliable means of
determining the formation pressure with a very small margin of error.

In practice, operators and drillers are very aware of the causes and results of swabbing and
typically follow a safe procedure when making a connection. That is, pipe is pulled at a
sensible speed to minimize the pressure loss through swabbing, and mud circulation is not
halted until they are ready to set the string in slips. This procedure ensures that the annular
pressure, balancing the well, over a connection never falls below the mud hydrostatic pressure
(Figure 3.18).

Also, it is worth mentioning that when pipe is being worked over a connection for hole
cleaning and stability, the pipe is also run back to bottom at a safe speed to minimize surge
pressures and the potential of fracturing weaker formations.

OPERATION RESULTING PRESSURE

104
time

Drill to kelly
 Figure 3.18 Pressures resulting from a typical connection

3.7.5 Reporting of Connection Gases

As already stated, the occurrence of connection gas is very significant. It should not only be
reported immediately and monitored at wellsite through the drilling operation, but must also
be clearly represented on the mudlog and in reports.

In order for the significance of a particular gas peak and continuing trend to be determined, the
following information should be recorded: -

Peak value / background value a connection gas of 2.5% is obviously more

Time that the pumps were off
significant if the background level is 0.5% as
opposed to 2.2%.
subsequent increases must be compared to the time
that the influx could be happening. No significant
changes in underbalance would be present if

105
 connection gas doubled but the connection time also
doubled. However, it would be significant if there
had been no change in connection time.

Mud weight / ECD normally recorded separately on the log, enabling

connection gases to be compared to the balancing
pressures.

In a written report, the gas would then typically be reported in the following format: -

peak value / background value / time pumps off

Typically, produced gases that have the same origin such as during a survey, resulting from a
flow check or any kind of shut down, are identified separately as shown in Table 7.3

Further explanation should be provided if the cause/time of the peak can be determined (i.e. as
a result of swabbing reduced or normal hydrostatic pressure), leading to the determination of
the formation pressure, as detailed in Section 7.7.3

Produced Gas Type Depth (m) Peak Value (%) BG Value (%) Time Pumps Off (min)
Connection 1050 4.135 3.500 5
Connection 1060 4.568 3.610 5
Survey 1069 5.993 3.860 15
Connection 1078 5.625 4.250 5
Flow Check 1085 7.475 4.980 10

Table 3.3 Reporting of Produced Gas Shows

Representation of produced gas peaks on the mudlog should be done separately, or rather, in
addition to the recorded gas curves. If the produced gas peaks were left as part of the
formation gas curve, it may easily be confused with a gas show resulting from increased
liberated gas from a formation (Plate 3.3).

Not only this, but the typically increased proportion of lighter hydrocarbons in produced gas
peaks completely distorts the gas ratios. This complicates evaluation but can also make the
ratio curves extremely ‘messy’. In the example shown in Plate 7.3, the liberated gas indicates
a light oil or condensate on the basis of the ratios. All of the peaks are produced gas, with the
gas ratios now indicating a light gas due to the easier movement of light components under
fluid flow.

106
 0.1 (produced gases) 1.0 Total Gas % 10
(Liberated)
1050 CG

1060 CG

SG
1070

CG
1080

FCG

Figure 3.19 Log presentation of produced gas shows

The produced gases detailed in Table 3.3 are illustrated in a typical log format in Figure 3.19.
Note that each produced gas peak is represented by a ‘bar graph’ type line to the value of the
peak above the background level, rather than the actual total value. Each peak is also labeled
as to the particular operation that led to the production.

Another type of log representation is illustrated in Figure 7.20. Here also, the produced peaks
are detailed separately to the normal gas curve in order to avoid confusion of origin but, now,
the peaks are represented numerically in the same format as the tabulated report (i.e. type,
peak value, background value, time pumps off).

107
 Chromatograph and Produced Gas Gas Ratios

Figure3.20 Log presentation of produced gas shows

3.8 Trip Gas

3.8.1 The occurrence of Trip Gas

Trip gas is the term given to a gas show that occurs after one bottoms up circulation has been
completed immediately following a trip back into the hole. Typically, shows that follow a trip
to surface (to change the bit or BHA,
section T.D’s, fishing trips etc) are referred
to as trip gas (TG). Shows following partial
trips out of the hole, for the purpose of hole diffusion
cleaning and stability for example, are
referred to as wiper or dummy trip (WTG)
gases.
settled
cuttings

previously
108
flushed

diffusion
Although the mechanisms described in the production of connection gas are also a major
factor in the duration and size of trip gas peaks, a condition of underbalance is not a
requirement. If gas has been liberated from the formation and recorded while drilling, then a
show following a trip is a normal occurrence, being a result of the conditions illustrated in
Figure 3.21.

Owing to time and money constraints, bottoms up will only be circulated, following a bit run,
under specific situations such as to confirm the bottom hole formation or to remove gas from
the annulus prior to tripping.
Figure 3.21 Normal conditions leading to
the occurrence of trip gas

Ordinarily, therefore, cuttings and liberated gas remain in the annulus during the trip. Gas
already liberated into the drilling fluid will slowly migrate, but there will also be gas that
remains trapped within the drilled cuttings. This comprises one of the ‘normal’ sources of trip
gas, as detailed below.

• The accumulation of cuttings from the most recently drilled formations (as a result of
settling during the duration of the trip) towards and at the bottom of the hole. Gas
not liberated when the formation was drilled will be retained until circulation
recommences and subsequent pressure and temperature changes, as the cuttings rise,
result in phase and solubility changes allowing the normal release of the gas.

• Normal fluid diffusion from permeable formations while the mud column is static
during the trip and before a filter cake layer prevents it.

• Gas that may have been displaced, as a result of flushing, when the formation was
drilled, may re-enter the borehole during the period of the trip and lower annular
pressure.

Just considering these ‘normal’ processes leading to trip gas, a distinct peak will result from
gas that has accumulated at the bottom of the hole (Figure 3.22), even if no other factors come
in to play, since: -

• Drilled cuttings and gas will be present throughout the annulus (unless circulated out
prior to the trip) but will lead to nothing more than a background level of gas when
circulated out. It is the settling of cuttings to the bottom of the hole, leading to an
abnormally high ‘annular’ concentration of cuttings with the subsequent release of
retained gas when they are circulated up the hole after the trip, that will result in a gas
‘show’. The degree of settling that occurs is a function of the duration of the trip, the
relative densities of cuttings and mud, together with mud viscosity and gel strength.

• The effect of fluid diffusion will be greatest at the bottom of the hole where filter
cake has not yet had the time to build a sufficient barrier against such fluid reaction.

109
• Previously flushed gas returning to the borehole will only be a factor from the most
recently drilled permeable formations, again resulting in gas concentrating at the
bottom of the hole.

Background Level
The first process is no more than an
accumulation of drilled cuttings that
subsequently liberates gas. The latter Liberated when
two processes involve fluid movement accumulated cuttings rise
and release gas
from the wellbore and are, therefore,
classed as produced gas which are
subject to differential pressure. Even in
overbalanced conditions, all of these TRIP
processes may lead to a trip gas peak GAS
being recorded, but their importance is
minor when compared to produced gas Produced through swabbing,
mechanisms in a state of permanent or diffusion and return of any
temporarily induced underbalance. flushed gas

Figure 3.22 Trip gas components

A typical trip gas, resulting primarily from these mechanisms is illustrated in Figure 3.23.

Notice that as the trip gas approaches surface (up to point A), all hydrocarbon gases, C1
through C3, are increasing at the same rate. This gas originates from the drilled cuttings that
were not circulated to surface prior to the trip (i.e. equating to liberated gas) and shows a
steady increase as the mud temperature increases. The increase in mud temperature, as
circulation proceeds, results in
decreasing viscosity and
increasing gas volatility. Thus, a
gradual increase in gas is
typically seen at the beginning of
new bit runs as the mud system
Liberated Gas stabilizes.

C3 C2 C1 Now consider the actual trip gas

peak. The peak is short in
A duration and corresponds exactly
Produced Gas to bottoms up. It can, therefore,
Bh be determined as resulting
primarily from the produced
mechanisms previously
described. I.e. fluid movements
due to influx and diffusion, with
A
minimal bottom hole swabbing.
When such fluid movement

110
occurs, the molecularly lighter and smaller hydrocarbons flow more readily.

This results in a preferential increase in light end gases, typical of such produced gas peaks.
This can clearly be seen in the chromatographic gas curves but is also illustrated by the high
balance ratio (Bh, see Section 8.3.2) which increases with the higher proportion of C1 and C2.
Figure 3.23 Typical trip gas response

By far the most important process involved in the production of trip gas is much the same as
that described in the production of connection gas, namely, the reduction to a normal
hydrostatic pressure and the effect of swabbing throughout the duration of the trip. This is a
major influence on the amount of gas produced into the wellbore, making the evaluation of
trip gas an important aspect of well balance and safety monitoring, but one that is often
overlooked.

Naturally, a trip out of the hole will not be proceeded with if the hydrostatic pressure of the
mud does not balance the formation pressure. The worst well control situation is one where
the string is out of the hole! However, the important thing here, and the difference between
connection gas and trip gas, is that when swabbing takes place, it is the hydrostatic that is
being reduced leading to much lower balancing pressure.

Normal drilling practices dictate that the mud density should be such as to provide an
overbalanced condition for the duration of the trip in order to prevent any influxing under
static conditions. However, when the pipe is being lifted, the degree of pressure reduction is
critical in terms of temporary influxes.

The importance of swabbing during trips: -

• It is the mud hydrostatic pressure being reduced, not the equivalent circulating
pressure.

• There is repeated swabbing every time that a stand is pulled, not a one off occurrence
as during a connection.

• Even when the string is half way out of the hole, frictional pressure losses occur for
that length of string, but the accumulated pressure loss at that bit depth is still acting
on the bottom of the hole.

• All permeable zones in the open hole will be subject to swabbing, through the piston
or suction effect of the drillstring, when the BHA and full gauge tools are pulled
passed formations. Over a connection, only the formations at the bottom of the hole
will be effected. The importance of this during a trip will depend on the precise

111
 pressure differential, the degree of permeability and the effectiveness of filter cake
build up in individual zones.

• With the increased likely-hood of swabbing during a trip, there will be more gas in
the annulus reducing the overall hydrostatic. In addition, with the duration of trips,
this gas is subject to migration and expansion, reducing the hydrostatic further. This
can result in increased swabbing and further influx.

Swabbing is therefore a concern throughout the open hole section, for the entire duration of
the trip, but the most significant effect still remains at the bottom of the hole.

The importance of swabbing at the bottom of the hole: -

• This is where the greatest pressure reduction will be.

• Recently drilled formations will have no protection from filter cake.

• It is possible that a higher pressured or more permeable formation was penetrated at

the end of the drilled section, so that there would have been no prior indication while
drilling.
The pressure loss caused by swabbing will increase with: -

• Increased hole depth and string length.

• Smaller annular clearance (difference between hole diameter and pipe outer diameter).

• Higher density and viscosity mud.

• The rate at which the string is lifted.

The danger of swabbing in too much gas during a trip, is that the increased volume of low
density gas will reduce the normal mud hydrostatic pressure. This reduction in differential
pressure will lead to increased feed-in and swabbing, further reducing the hydrostatic and so
on. This may ultimately lead to the well becoming underbalanced in a normal static condition
and allowing the well to flow.

It is, therefore, very important that such influxes are minimized by maintaining a trip margin
over the formation pressure. Thus, if the formation pressure is known, or accurately
estimated, the mudweight can be selected to produce a higher bottom hole pressure, that, even
when reduced by swabbing, maintains a balance over the formation pressure.

112
With the help of software, a graph of pipe running speed against the resulting pressure loss
due to swabbing can be prepared (Figure 3.24). From this, the maximum running speed (X)
that does not exceed the pressure loss (Y) that would reduce the existing hydrostatic pressure
below the formation pressure (i.e. maintaining the trip margin) can be determined.

A further factor when considering formation fluid influxes is the effectiveness of the filter
cake that has built up on the wellbore wall and whether this cake remains in place. If the cake
is insufficient or is being knocked off the wall, then influxes will continue. The following
conditions should therefore be considered: -

• Turbulent or rapid mud flow, while drilling, will prevent effective build up. It
is unlikely that build up will begin until the drill collars have passed the zone
in question and lower annular velocities are present. How quickly filter cake
builds up therefore depends on the ROP and how quickly the collars proceed
passed the zone.

• Movement of the drillstring can knock filter cake off the wall especially if
full gauge tools such as stabilizers are included in the string.

• Repeated working of the pipe or hole cleaning will lead to the removal of
more cake.

• Build up of filter cake will be less efficient in deviated or horizontal wells

since the drillstring will always be dragging along the lower side of the wall,
removing the cake.

Pressure
Reduction

X Pipe Running Speed

Figure 3.24 Determination of running speed to minimize swabbing

113
3.8.2 Interpretation of Trip Gas

Changes in the magnitude of trip gas can be evaluated in a similar fashion to connection gas,
but it is not such a definitive guide to downhole changes.

The first control on trip gas is that of the background gas level, since the main constituents of
trip gas are swabbing at the bottom of the hole and cuttings collecting at the bottom of the
hole. Observed trip gases are then largely dependant on lithology and the volume of gas
present. If minimal gases were observed while drilling, then trip gases can be expected to be
low.

For a given interval, trip gas will normally show an increase with depth for the following
reasons: -

• An increasingly larger open hole section becomes subject to swabbing.

• Pressure reduction through swabbing is greater due to the longer pipe length.
• The longer duration of trips allows for increased diffusion and for more
cuttings to settle to the bottom, increasing the concentration that will result in
a gas show.

If significant deviations from this trend cannot be explained by an observed increase in

background gas, then we have to look at other possible explanations: -

• Has there been an increase in formation pressure leading to increased

swabbing and production?

• Has a more permeable zone been penetrated, leading to increased feed-in

when swabbing is occurring?

• Has the tripping speed increased resulting in increased swabbing (different

floor crews can often be identified by trip gas responses resulting from the
speed at which they pull the pipe!)?

• Has the mud rheology (density, viscosity) changed resulting in reduced

hydrostatic or increased swabbing?

• Has the BHA changed (diameter of drill collars, more full gauge tools)
resulting in increased swabbing?

114
Similarly to connection gases, pertinent downhole information can also be gained by the
arrival time of the trip gas peak and by the shape of the peak (Figure 7.25): -

1. Peak is of short duration and arrives at the calculated lag time.

• The mud weight balances the well and swabbing is minimal.

• The gas originates from accumulated drilled cuttings and minimal swabbing at the
bottom of the hole.

Hydrostatic – Swab > Formation Pressure

115
2. Peak arrives early, before the complete lag time is reached.

• A permeable, producing zone is at a shallower depth in the well.

BG
2. Early peak – shallow zone

1. Gas from bottom of hole, well

balanced, minimal swabbing
2
4. Early onset – extensive
swabbing and/or gas
migration during
Bottoms long period of trip
1 4
Up

5a. Well continues to produce

due to lower hydrostatic as
5a gas cut mud is circulated
out of the hole

5b 5b. Well not balanced by the ECD

and continues to produce
Time

Figure 3.25 Significance of trip gas arrival, duration and shape

3. Multiple peaks

• Gas from more than one zone has been swabbed in, with enough separation for
the influxes to remain distinct. Considering the effects of gas migration and mud
disturbance through pipe movement etc, this is not very commonly observed. Gas
will tend to merge into one extended peak.

4. Extended peak with an early onset.

• This could indicate producing zones over a larger interval, therefore an indication
as to the extent of swabbing occurring throughout the trip.

Formation Pressure > Hydrostatic – Swab

116
 • Or, this could be an indication of gas migration over an extended period out of the
hole, with gas still entering from the bottom-hole producing zone.

Formation Pressure > Hydrostatic of gas cut mud

• Or, it could simply be an indication of mud and gas disturbance due to the lifting
of the pipe, running of the pipe, breaking circulation at regular intervals etc.

• If the peak falls off immediately after bottoms up, the increased circulating
density (even allowing for gas reduced hydrostatic) still balances the well.

ECD of gas cut mud > Formation Pressure

5a. Slow drop off of the peak after bottoms up.

• The hydrostatic pressure reduced by the swabbed gas does not balance the well
even when circulation begins.

ECD of gas cut mud  Formation Pressure

The slow ‘drop off’ occurs as the gas cut mud is circulated out and gradually replaced
by conditioned mud, returning the well to a normal hydrostatic. The well is barely
balanced in this situation.

5b. Should the level not return to the previous background, or show an increase, then the
ECD is no longer balancing the increased formation pressure and continued fluid
feed-in is occurring.

Formation Pressure > ECD

In reality, this should not really be possible, since, if the ECD is not balancing the
well, then indications of a flowing well would have been observed over the duration
of the trip when the balancing pressure was lower. However, the balancing pressure is
subject to decrease as gas is lifted in the annulus and expands.

Such a situation may arise if a trip gas of large magnitude is not efficiently removed at
surface and is recycled down the hole. Not only will this result in a second peak, but
the still gas cut mud may allow further influx as it is being recycled. Such a situation
is shown in Figures 3.26 and 3.27 where a trip gas of over 90%, lasting 60 minutes,
has not completely depleted before it runs into the recycled gas as it reappears at
surface, resulting, in effect, with an extremely long, double trip gas peak.

117
 Chromatographic Gases Total Gas Sensors

10 minutes

Figure 3.26 Significant Trip Gas peak

Trip gas is reported and signified on logs in exactly the same way as connection, or any other
produced gas. That is, the peak should be separated from the actual gas curve and reported as

118
the level over and above the background gas reading at the time of the trip. Pertinent
information such as the mud weight and duration of the trip should also be available.
Chromatographic Gases Total Gas Sensors

Drop in gases caused due to shaker

gate being opened, reducing mud
level, as the increased flow arrives
with the recycled gas

Figure 3.27 Recycled Trip Gas peak

Plate 3.4, with the use of available spreadsheets, illustrates a very useful method of reporting
all produced gases. A bar graph format together with the background gas level creates a clear
visual picture of pressure changes leading to gas increases and produced gases.

119
3.9 Kelly Gas

A further occurrence of gas, that should be mentioned, is that of ‘kelly cut gas’ since it can
lead to ‘false shows’ or misinterpretation of gas cut mud.

It results from the pipe not being completely filled at the end of a trip into the hole, or after a
connection, so that a bubble of air becomes trapped when the kelly is connected and
circulation of drilling mud begins.

The air is pumped down the string,

Air cut mud arrives
becoming compressed in the process Trapped air pumped
at surface
and aerating the surrounding mud. down string

When circulated back up the annulus

to surface, the air bubbles will expand
back to their original volume so that
the mud appears to be gas cut (Figure
3.28). To all intents and purposes, the
mud is gas cut except that the gas is
air rather than hydrocarbons!

The volume of mud that this effects is

relatively small, so that the ‘gas cut’ air compresses,
mud is fairly short lived in terms of aerating mud
time at surface. However, it can lead
to mistaken reaction on the part of
possible
shaker hands, for example, thinking
diffusion
that there is a gas and well control
problem.
lighter, aerated
Another problem is one of anomalous mud returns up
gas shows and this is a phenomenon the annulus
that is not fully understood.

Firstly, why should air result in a Figure 3.28 Occurrence of kelly cut gas
hydrocarbon gas show and, secondly,
why is it only an infrequent
occurrence when there is air in the
kelly every time a connection is
made? There are two likely answers to these questions: -

1. Once in the annulus and returning to surface, the lighter aerated mud may be more
likely subject to fluid diffusion from the permeable formations, especially of the
lighter end hydrocarbons.

120
 Hence, hydrocarbons will only result if there are permeable formations as yet
unprotected by filter cake. The process is not likely to be particularly significant in
any case, since it will only be occurring for the time that the aerated mud is passing
such formations.

2. A more likely cause is a gas response resulting from the effect of the aerated mud on
agitator type gas traps. The mud is aerated and lighter and, as a result, will lead to an
increase in the efficiency of the trap. This increase in efficiency will lead to a higher
proportion of soluble gas actually being extracted from the mud. The response will be
sustained for the time that it takes the aerated mud to pass through the shaker box and
trap. As to why it doesn’t happen all the time is a question of relative changes; the
initial density and viscosity of mud, the degree of aeration and change in trap
efficiency, and the quantity/composition of soluble gas available for extraction.

The important thing is that, whatever the particular mechanism that leads to a kelly gas
response, it is correctly identified and not misreported. The worst thing, because it is recorded
following a connection, is that it is actually reported as connection gas, something that tells a
very different story about the well!

Bottoms Up
(Lag Time) Possible TRIP or CONNECTION GAS

Lag Time +
Downtime KELLY GAS

Time
Figure 3.29 Appearance of gas following a trip or connection

Clearly, identifying the occurrence of kelly gas is by the time that it arrives at surface (Figure
3.29). When circulation begins following a trip or connection, the air is in the kelly at the top
of the drill string. It therefore has to travel around the system, and will be recorded one
downtime and one lagtime after circulation begins. It should never be misreported as
connection gas, which is coming from the bottom of the hole and arriving at surface after one
lagtime!

121
 PLATE 3.1 Porosity effect on penetration rate and gas level

ROP min/m  Chromatograph Gas %

0 25 0.001 100

Higher porosity, as confirmed by cuttings analysis, clearly generates higher penetration rates
when drilling through zones of interest.

Both the higher porosity and the higher ROP will lead to increased measurements of liberated
gas and the relationship is the basis of show evaluation in the determination of gas volume
changes (Section 3.4).

122
 Plate 3.2 The effect of directional drilling on gas responses.

0 min/m 15 0.001 Chrom Gas % 100 Gas Ratios

This example shows how the gas curves can follow a high low pattern depending on whether
the drilling operation is through sliding (bit rotation achieved through downhole motor) or
rotation (the addition of surface rotation through the rotary table or top drive). Note that the
sliding intervals are shaded.

Higher gas levels result when surface rotation is being applied, principally as a result of the
higher penetration rate that typically results. This can be corrected through normalization of
the gas measurement.

In addition, the higher rotation may, in certain situations, result in smaller drilled cuttings, so
that a higher volume of gas is physically liberated from the formation.
Plate 3.3 Poor representation of produced gases on the mud log

123
 0.001 Chrom Gas % 10 1 Ch 3 1 100
Bh Wh

In the example, the gas responses seen all result from temporary influxes and produced gas
responses. It can be appreciated that this deteriorates from the evaluation of liberated gas
responses and the determination of gas volume changes. Liberated and produced gases are
better reported and evaluated separately.

The other complication that can result is the effect on the gas ratios. When influxes result in
produced gas responses, there will typically be an increase in the proportion of light end gases
that will flow preferentially. This will be reflected in the gas ratios and, in this case, actually
causes the wetness and balance ratios to invert every time that there is an influx of gas.

124
 Plate 3.4 Bar graph presentation of background and produced gases

PRODUCED GAS (%)

0.1 1.0 10.0
1900
MD=1100 kg/m3

2050

D MD=1105 kg/m3
E
P
T 2200 Background Gas
H
Connection Gas
Survey Gas
Trip Gas
Wiper Trip Gas

2350

MD=1200 kg/m3

2500

125
 HYDROCARBON EVALUATION AND INTERPRETATION

Section 4 CHROMATOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

4.1 Gas Ratio Analysis

As illustrated in Section 3, basic gas evaluation concentrates on the interpretation of gas trends
and gas responses in the determination of volume changes and formation pressure changes.

More detailed and exact evaluation requires the evaluation of the constituent components. The
analysis of absolute chromatographic gas values has proven to be of great benefit in
diagnosing the quality and composition of potential production zones, and in more specialized
applications such as the geosteering of wells and the identification of miscible flood extents.
In these applications, gas ratio analysis has been shown to provide an accurate and cheaper
alternative to LWD tools.

Changes in composition are undoubtedly apparent from a visual perspective by the normal
chromatographic gas curves, but ratio analysis of compositional changes does provide a
further beneficial interpretative tool, providing more exact information in the determination of
gas shows that may not be so readily apparent from the mudlog.

Because there are so many factors influencing the amount of gas finally detected at surface,
the actual magnitude of a gas show has little importance in terms of predicting the productivity
potential of a reservoir. Rather, it is the comparison of the gas show against the preceding
background gas level and the analysis and comparison of individual hydrocarbon compounds
that enable evaluation of reservoir composition and production potential.

As explained in preceding sections, situations can arise when there may be a question as to the
absolute quantitative accuracy to gas measurement, regarding the amount and composition of
gas actually detected at surface, and this always has to considered when evaluating such
measurements.

No single parameter should be used as conclusive diagnostic evidence, and the ratio evidence
should always be used alongside other real-time evidence such as drilling parameters, cuttings
analysis, fluorescence indications etc and subsequently with wireline evidence to provide an
overall evaluation of potential zones.
4.2 Gas Ratio Plot using chromatographic values of methane through pentane

126
Often referred to as the Pixler ratio plot in the industry (after B.O. Pixler’s initial paper, SPE
2254, 1969), this analysis provides the following information: -

• Type of petroleum fluid, whether gas, oil or condensate.

• Oil gravity and gas wetness.
• Production potential of the reservoir.
• Permeability of the reservoir.
• Presence of formation water.

The ratios were developed by using data from Texas (SPE 2254) and later, by data gathered in
Alberta and British Colombia, Canada (Ferrie, Pixler and Allen, PSCIM 81-32-20, 1981).

A steam still was used to provide the gas sample, so that hydrocarbons (certainly C1 through
C5) present in a given mud sample were more completely extracted and analyzed. Although
not completely efficient, especially for larger gas volumes, the steam still is certainly a more
efficient extraction mechanism than agitator type traps. However, the steam still process
prevents it’s application on a real-time basis at wellsite while the zones are being drilled.

When a ditch line gas sample is used, it has to be remembered that gas traps are not 100%
efficient in removing all gas from the mud and that the sample is then diluted with air.
However, this limitation is obviously present throughout continued sampling, so that the error
is reduced or removed by comparing the relative change in gas values from the gas show to
the background level.

With the Gas Ratio Plot it is this relative change that will provide the information as to
production potential.

Where there may be a certain amount of error is when higher viscosity muds are being used,
reducing the amount of the heavier hydrocarbons that are liberated by the trap from the mud.
This preferential retention of gas by the mud would not be so evident with the lighter
hydrocarbons so that the ratio of light to heavy may be erroneous.

The steam still will therefore reduce the error produced by higher viscosity muds, but it still
has to be recognized that it, too, is only measuring the gas present in the actual mud sample. It
was shown in Sections 5 and 6 that this may not provide a measurement of overall gas content,
owing to the potential of the loss of light end gas to the atmosphere once the mud arrives at
surface and, also, because it doesn’t consider the gas that is retained by the cuttings.

It is generally accepted, that the relative changes in ditch gas values, provides accurate data
without the added use of the labour intensive steam still.

127
4.2.1 Use of the Ratio Plot

The ratio plot compares the quantity of each hydrocarbon (ethane, propane, butanes and
pentanes) compound to the quantity of methane present in the gas sample analyzed. The ratio
of methane to other heavier hydrocarbons has proven to be a reasonable indication of gas, oil
or water production potential, although, there is no doubt that regional ‘calibration’ against
production or test results improves its dependability.

From a series of tested or producing wells, petroleum actually being produced was compared
to the recorded gas data and the ratio of methane to other heavy hydrocarbons determined.
From these ratios, probable limits were determined for productive oil and gas zones and non-
productive zones (Figure 4.1).

Ratios from lagged gas data can be plotted on this graph to give an immediate prediction of
reservoir fluid and production potential. The location of the curve will determine the probable
petroleum product and it has been shown that water bearing zones and permeability can also
be evaluated from this plot. If production data is also available, these values can be determined
or verified regionally. The better the calibration, the more effective the Pixler ratio in reservoir
evaluation.

The obvious advantage of such data is that an appraisal of the zone of interest is available just
one lag time after the zone has been penetrated, i.e. the time it takes for the gas to travel up the
annulus to the gas chromatograph.

From the zones illustrated in Figure 8.1, the C1/C2 ratio is the principle ratio in determining
the petroleum composition of the zone, whether oil or gas, or whether it is non-productive.
The original guidelines are shown below: -

128
 1000

NON-PRODUCTIVE GAS

100

PRODUCTIVE GAS

10

PRODUCTIVE OIL

NON-PRODUCTIVE OR RESIDUALOIL
1

C1/C2 C1/C3 C1/C4 C1/C5

Figure 4.1 The Gas Ratio Plot

C1/C2 ratio Fluid Type and Gravity

<2 non-productive, residual oil

2–4 low gravity oil, API 10 – 15
4–8 medium gravity oil, API 15 – 35
8 – 15 high gravity oil, API > 35
10 – 20 gas condensate
15 – 65 gas
> 65 light gas, non-productive
C1 only salt water

Observations on these guidelines: -

129
• The value of 2, below which, any oil is non-productive or residual, is a little erroneous.
Certainly, residual oil will lead to such values. However, low values can also be generated
by heavy oils that will be productive. This obviously has to be determined by testing, but
certainly, these oils may be productive today whereas they may not have been productive
with the technology available when the ratios were derived. Another situation is shown in
Figure 10.30, case 14, where a 25 API oil simply does not contain a significant quantity of
methane. All the other components increase proportionally against the methane,
generating very low ratio values.

• At the other end of the plot, the value of 65 to determine productive or non-productive gas
has proved reliable. Typically, these values will be produced when methane is by far the
dominant component of a gas. Without the heavier components present (ie ethane present
in such a quantity so as to reduce the ratio below 65, together with the presence of C3-
C5), the gas is typically non-productive because it is not associated with a true
hydrocarbon source. Such situations may arise from bacterially derived gas, methane
generated through deep thermal cracking outside of the oil window, or even gas associated
with abnormal pressures.

As well as it’s function with the gas ratio plot, the C1/C2 ratio can be calculated real-time and
plotted, both on a real-time basis and on mud logs together with other depth based data. This
provides immediate evaluation of fluid changes as zones are being drilled and means that
relative changes in the ratio value are as indicative as the actual precise values (see Figure
8.2).

Further evaluation from the gas ratio plot comes from the character of the curve. The slope of
the curve is an indication of whether the zone possesses water, and also gives an indication as
to the permeability of the formation. The original guidelines, together with some observations
are detailed below: -

• A fully positive slope indicates productive hydrocarbons.

• A negative slope, or negative interval, indicates a water bearing zone.

Typically, water is indicated by a negative slope between the C1/C3 and C1/C4 ratios;
in other words, the total of iC4 and nC4 is greater than C3. Although a reliable
indicator of water, no explanation as to why is given in the original papers; the reason
may lie in the greater water solubility of the heavier hydrocarbons. This characteristic
is often misinterpreted as indicating zones of no interest. The presence of water is can
clearly be an indication of passing through an oil-water contact, but in other situations,
it is indicating that there is some degree of water saturation. Whether the zone is wet
and non-productive or whether it will produce hydrocarbons economically, along with
some water production, requires testing of the zone.

130
 • A gradient similar to the zone lines indicates good permeability.

• The steeper the slope (greater than zone lines) indicates reduced permeability; a very
steep slope may indicate tight formations.

Although it should be recognized that tight formations may lead to poorer quality gas
measurements, the principle of the slope’s gradient refers to the restriction in
movement of hydrocarbons. The tighter the formation, the more gas will be retained
by the drilled cuttings and go undetected. Typically, this restriction will affect the
heavier components to a greater degree, so that they are proportionally lower than
methane. This will result in higher C1/C4 and C1/C5 ratios compared to the C1/C2
and C1/C3 and the steeper slope (left to right) of the curve.

• If C1/C2 is low in oil section and C1/C4 is high in gas section, the zone is probably
non-productive.

0 min/m 20 1 C1/C2 10 RATIO 100

High Ratio –
normal formation
gas, non productive

TOP OF ZONE

Ratio 8 – 10;
Medium to High
gravity oil

Oil Water Contact

Ratio < 2,
Residual Oil

Figure 4.2 Use of the C1/C2 ratio real-time or log-based.

4.2.2 Evaluation of Oil Bearing Zones

Figure 4.3 illustrates 5 gas ratio plots for probable oil zones.

131
 1000

1
NON-PRODUCTIVE

100

GAS

10 3

OIL 4

5
NON-PRODUCTIVE
1

C1/C2 C1/C3 C1/C4 C1/C5

Figure 8.3 Example ratio plots for oil zones

• With a C1/C2 ratio of between 8 and 9, plots 1 and 2 both indicate a medium gravity
oil.

• Plot 1 has a very steep slope, an indication of low permeability.

• Plot 2 shows productive oil with an indication of very good permeability shown by
the slope of the curve being very similar to the zone line.

• With a C1/C2 ratio of between 3 and 4, plots 3 and 4 both indicate a low gravity oil.
• Plot 3 indicates productive oil and fair to good permeability as indicated by the
shallow, positive slope of the curve.

132
• Plot 4 indicates a water bearing formation, as given by the negative slope between
C1/C3 and C1/C4. This zone may therefore be wet and non-productive or it may
produce both oil and water.

• Plot 5, with a C1/C2 ratio of less than 2, indicates a heavy or non-productive oil with
the presence of water shown by the negative slope between C1/C3 and C1/C4. This
will certainly indicate residual oil below an oil water contact if previous plots through
an interval have indicated productive oil. However, if this plot is seen on the entry
straight into a zone of interest, then it is possible that we have either residual oil or
heavy oil with a degree of water saturation.

4.2.3 Evaluation of Gas Bearing Zones

Figure 4.4 illustrates 4 gas ratio plots for potential gas zones.

• Plot 1 clearly shows predominantly methane (which would be evident from the mudlog)
producing a very high C1/C2 ratio. The zone is probably a non-associated and non-
productive gas. The steep slope adds to this non-productive prediction, showing the
formation to be tight.

• Plot 2 shows a productive zone of moderately wet gas, with very good permeability
indicated by the constant positive slope at a gradient similar to the zone line.

• Plot 3 shows a similar moderately wet gas but the very steep slope suggests that the
formation is much poorer permeability and possibly too tight to be commercially
productive.

• Plot 4 shows a lighter, drier gas but the permeability is questionable with different degrees
of slope to the curve. Since the permeability indicator is considering the components more
likely to be retained when permeability is lower, it is reasonable to assume that the
differences exhibited by the C4 and C5 components are a more reliable indicator. In this
case, the slope between C1/C4 and C1/C5 would suggest good permeability. In addition
however, this zone is most likely wet as indicated by the negative slope between C1/C3
and C1/C4.

133
 1000
1 3

NON-PRODUCTIVE
4
2
100

GAS

10

OIL

NON-PRODUCTIVE
1

C1/C2 C1/C3 C1/C4 C1/C5

Figure 4.4 Example ratio plots for gas

4.2.4 Prediction of Condensate Bearing Zones

A greater degree of interpretation is required to predict gas condensate reservoirs, since there
is obviously an overlap with the predictions made by the C1/C2 ratio. In most cases this
distinction is not possible on the basis of gas ratios alone since the fluid types in question are,
compositionally, very similar.

For example, with a C1/C2 ratio of between 15 and 20, the fluid could be a gas condensate or
a wet gas. With a C1/C2 ratio of between 10 and 15, we could again be dealing with a
condensate or, alternatively, a high gravity oil with a probable high gas oil ratio.

Figure 4.5 illustrates gas condensate fluids indicated by particular ratio plots, but typically,
comparison with other data and test results would be required for final determination and
distinction from gas or oil zones that may produce a very similar ratio plot.

134
Typically, there may be less confusion between gas condensate and gas prediction because gas
zones typically yield a higher, more definitive C1/C2 ratio. Confusion or uncertainty is more
likely between gas condensate and light oil predictions since the C1/C2 ratio may be very
similar.

1000

NON-PRODUCTIVE

100

GAS

10

OIL

NON-PRODUCTIVE
1

C1/C2 C1/C3 C1/C4 C1/C5

Figure 4.5 Example ratio plots for gas condensate

However, in reality, it isn’t possible to be any more specific in the determination of the actual
fluid. This information must therefore be compared to other gas ratio data (section 8.3) and
more usefully, to fluids and fluorescence evident in the actual drilled cuttings.

4.2.5 Comparison with Drilled Cuttings

135
Again, it should be emphasized that the ratio plot, like any other logging parameter or
calculation, is just one piece of information. Always, the mud logger will use every piece of
evidence available to him/her before making an informed evaluation. Most importantly, the
most basic of evidence should not be forgotten; that provided by the drilled cuttings
themselves!

• If the ratio plot is suggesting low permeability, then the quantity of

cuttings gas can be used to confirm or deny this prediction.

• If the ratio plot is predicting oil of particular gravity, or if there is

uncertainty as to whether the plot is suggesting condensate or light oil,
then the cuttings should be examined for traces of the liquid. The natural
colour and fluorescence colour under UV light will provide a guide as to
the petroleum product present (see Table 8.1).

For example, if the C1/C2 ratio is 13, indicating either high gravity oil or condensate, either
none or a violet fluorescence would confirm a condensate whereas a blue-white fluorescence
would indicate oil. If a sample exhibited no visible fluorescence, however, it could indicate a
gas zone or a condensate fluid that is fluorescing in the ultra-violet range of the spectrum.

C1/C2 Ratio API Gravity Fluid Type Natural Colour of

Colour Fluorescence

2–4 10 – 15 Low Gravity Oil Dark brown to Red brown to

black orange

4–8 15 – 35 Medium Gravity Light to medium Cream to yellow,

Oil brown gold, green

8 – 15 > 35 High Gravity Clear Bluish white,

Oil blue

10 – 20 > 45 Gas Condensate Clear Violet / none

visible

Table 4.1 Guide to colour and fluorescence of petroleum liquids

In summary, the gas ratio plot has proven to make valid predictions of petroleum type, oil
gravity, production potential, permeability and water content. In effect, it is a form of gas
normalization, since only the difference of the gas show above the background level is used,
so that external influences are minimized or eliminated.

136
However, the plot does have minor inconveniences: -

• The number of plots that can be provided for each potential zone is limited, since
the data available originates from a database. The evaluation is not real-time,
although the C1/C2 ratio can be used effectively in this fashion.

• Plots are offline, separate to the mudlog, so that information not immediately
apparent.

A summary use of the plot is shown in Figure 8.6

1000

Non-productive gas
Non-associated methane

100

Dry gas
Productive gas Gas Condensate
Increasing wetness

Wet gas
Hi gravity 10

Productive oil
Increasing density

Low gravity

Heavy oil, possibly Residual oil

1

C1/C2 C1/C3 C1/C4 C1/C5

Figure 4.6 Summary use of the ratio plot
4.3 Wetness, Balance and Character Ratio Analysis

Unlike the gas ratio plot, these ratios were determined on the basis of gas extracted from the
return ditch line and the ratios derived were then compared to actual production and test data.

137
The ratios were developed in the mid 1980’s from data gathered in the USA and in the North
Sea (Haworth, Sellens and Whittaker, AAPG V69 No8, 1985 and Haworth, Sellens and
Gurvis, SPE 12914, 1984).

By comparing the proportion of light gas to heavy gas recorded at surface, these ratios can be
used to determine the fluid type (whether dry or wet gas, light or heavy oil etc) present in the
reservoir.

Although the ratios use actual gas values (rather than the values above background), a distinct
advantage is that they can be immediately calculated, as drilling is proceeding and the
reservoir being penetrated, and graphically represented on real-time paper or screen plots.
This provides immediate evaluation, enabling different zones and contacts to be identified
while the reservoir is being drilled.

This enables effective trend analysis in addition to the specific values, in identifying fluid
changes and contact points and therefore, not only provides good reservoir analysis but allows
for other applications such as the geosteering of wells (Section 10.1).

Further, the ratios can be plotted on a depth-based mudlog. The trends are easily
understandable and provide final well and future analysis of curves alongside any other
mudlog or wireline parameter, enabling the overall character of a reservoir to be readily
assessed.

4.3.1 Wetness Ratio (Wh)

This ratio shows an increasing trend as gas and oil density increases, i.e. as the amount of
heavy gas increases proportionally against the lighter gases.

 C 2 + C3 + C 4 + C5 
Wh =   100
 C1 + C 2 + C3 + C 4 + C5 

Simply, as the ratio increases, dry gas (principally methane) through to wet gas (higher
concentration of heavy gases) is being indicated, increasing further from light, through
medium and high density oil (high to low API gravity) to, finally, a residual oil deposit.
Wh Fluid Type

< 0.5 non-productive, non-associated dry gas

0.5 – 17.5 gas, increasing in wetness as Wh increases

17.5 – 40 oil, increasing density (decreasing gravity) as Wh increases

138
 > 40 residual oil

The exactness of these values has to be viewed with a degree of caution and will certainly
benefit from regional calibrations.

Residual oil being indicated if the wetness ratio exceeds 40 is a little erroneous in a similar
way to the gas ratio plot. Certainly, heavy oils yielding a ratio of over 40 have been produced,
so really, these situations have to consider relative changes, comparison to other data and
evidence provided by the drilled cuttings in terms of fluids and solids present.

These predictions, based on the wetness ratio, are illustrated in Figure 8.7.

1 10 100

NON-PRODUCTIVE
DRY GAS

Increasing density or wetness

POTENTIAL GAS
PRODUCTION
Increasing density

POTENTIAL OIL PRODUCTION

HEAVY, POSSIBLY RESIDUAL OIL

Figure 4.7 Reservoir fluid based on wetness ratio

139
4.3.2 Balance Ratio

The Balance Ratio (Bh) is a direct comparison of light to heavy hydrocarbons and, for
interpretative purposes, is used together with the wetness ratio as shown in Figure 8.8. This
diagram can be thought of as a reservoir profile, either time-based when drilling, or depth-
based on a mud log.

C1 + C 2
Bh =
C3 + C 4 + C5

0.1 0.5 1.0 10 17.5 40 100

Wh NON-PRODUCTIVE GAS
Bh

POSSIBLE PRODUCTIVE GAS

PRODUCTIVE GAS
Increasing
Wetness

GAS, CONDENSATE or OIL

Decreasing
Gravity PRODUCTIV
E
OIL

HEAVY, POSSIBLY RESIDUAL OIL

Figure 4.8 Fluid type using wetness and balance ratios

140
Bh reacts inversely to Wh so that it decreases as the fluid density increases. It therefore
decreases as the gas wetness increases and further as it passes into the oil phase. It is used to
determine, or confirm, gas production potential. The value will be very high with non-
associated methane for example, then fall rapidly as soon as there is even a trace of the heavy
hydrocarbons.

4.3.3 Using Bh with Wh

A typical representation of the two ratios and how they react inversely to each other is shown
in Figure 8.9. This graph can be thought of as depth based, so it is evident how these ratio
curves can be beneficial in determining the nature of reservoir fluids and contacts against a
vertical section of lithology, or time-based so that fluid changes are identified as zones are
being drilled.

Table 4.2 shows exactly how the two ratios are used, numerically, to determine these zones.

Balance Ratio Wetness Ratio Reservoir Fluid and Production Potential

> 100 Very light, dry gas

Typically non-associated and non-productive such as
the occurrence of high pressured methane, metagenic
cracking out of the oil window, bacterial methane etc
< 100 < 0.5 Possible production of light, dry gas

Wh < Bh < 100 0.5 – 17.5 Productive gas, increasing in wetness as the curves are
closer together
< Wh 0.5 – 17.5 Productive, very wet gas or condensate or high gravity
oil with high GOR (Bh<Wh indicates liquid, but Wh
still indicates gas)
< Wh 17.5 – 40 Productive oil with decreasing gravity as the curve
separation increases
<< Wh 17.5 – 40 Lower production potential of low gravity, low gas
saturation oil
> 40 Very low gravity or residual oil

Table 4.2 Fluid and production predictions from wetness and balance ratios

141
The examples shown in Figures 8.9 and 8.10 shows how these principles and guidelines can
be used to evaluate fluid changes and identify contact points in practice.

1 10 17.5 40 100 1 10 17.5 40 100

Wh Bh Wh Bh

High Bh, Low Wh

Non-associated gas
Normal formation gas Reservoir Top

Gas Zone

Gas-Oil contact
Reservoir Top

Low Gravity Oil

Medium gravity oil

Oil-Water contact Oil-Water contact

Here, the Wh/Bh cross-over is
lithological, as well as fluid based, since
the well enters straight into an oil bearing
reservoir with no true gas-oil contact.
The curve separation through the zone
suggests medium gravity oil and the oil
water contact is determined when there is
a greater degree of separation resulting
from heavier, residual oil.
In this example, the top of the reservoir
is identified when the balance ratio drops
to show a more productive gas. The top
of the reservoir is a gas cap as the curves
gradually come together, indicating an
increasingly heavier gas as the oil zone
is approached. The gas-oil contact is
seen when the two curves finally cross.
With the higher wetness and greater
separation from the balance, a lower
gravity oil is predicted in this example.

Figure 4.9 Using the Wetness and Balance ratios

142
 1 10 17.5 40 100 1 10 17.5 40 100
Wh Bh Wh Bh

Possible Condensate

Productive
Gas Zone High Gravity Oil

Oil Water contact

- more light end gas
is detected in this
case

Productive gas zones are indicated when
the balance ratio falls (below 100) in
relation to the background formation gas
level. At the same time, the wetness ratio
increases and converges on the balance
rato – the closer the curves come
together, the heavier the gas.
When Wh and Bh cross in this example
to indicate the top of the reservoir, they
remain very close together. In this
situation it is very difficult to determine
the fluid type between condensate, gas or
oil, although the character ratio can be
used as an extra indicator.

Typically, any gas-water contact will be
evident from the ratios returning to a
light, normal formation type gas
composition.
With lower Wh, and the curves quite
close together, the main zone is a high
gravity oil.
The oil-water contact acts inversely to
what can normally be expected – in this
case, more light gas is evident from the
water than heavier gas from any residual
oil.

Figure 4.10 Using the Wetness and Balance ratios

143
It is clear from the graph and table, and from the example in Figure 8.10, that when the two
curves are close together near the crossover point, it is very difficult to determine the exact
nature of the fluid, since wet gas, gas condensate and high gravity oil are very similar,
compositionally.

I.e.

• When Wh indicates gas but Bh is only slightly greater than Wh, then the reservoir
could contain wet gas or condensate.

• When Wh indicates gas but Bh is less than Wh, then the reservoir could contain
condensate or light oil with a high gas oil ratio (GOR).

• Even after the crossover when Wh now indicates oil, if the two lines are still close
together it is difficult to predict whether we have a condensate fluid or light oil with a
high GOR.

In this situation, a third ratio known as the Character Ratio (Ch) can be used to help in the
evaluation.

4.3.4 Character Ratio

C 4 + C5
Ch =
C3

By omitting the lighter hydrocarbon compounds (methane and ethane) and just comparing the
heavier compounds, the presence of a dense hydrocarbon fluid can be confirmed and this
should aid in the distinction of a very wet gas from a very high gravity oil.

The significance of comparing these three compounds is that C3 will typically be more
important in a gas reservoir, with only small or trace amounts of C4/C5. All the heavier
components will increase as the fluid density increases, but C4 and C5 will increase
proportionally in the case of light oils.

144
 If Ch < 0.5 With C3 the major component, the presence of a productive gas phase
is confirmed, indicating either wet gas or gas condensate.

If Ch > 0.5, The presence of a productive liquid phase is confirmed, so that the
gas indicated by the wetness ratio is associated with light oil.

Character Wetness Ratio

Ratio Balance Ratio
0 3 1 10 17.5 40 100

Dry Gas

Increasing
Wetness

Gas or Condensate

High Gravity Oil with High GOR

Decreasing
Gravity

Heavy or
Residual Oil

Figure 4.11 Reservoir analysis using Wetness, Balance and

Character ratios

Often, in practice, evaluation of the ratio curves is based initially on the balance and wetness
curves – where they cross over is taken as the gas/oil contact. There is nothing wrong with
this basic premise, however, it may be erroneous if the cross-over occurs while Wh is still less

145
than 17.5 indicating gas. This is where the use of the character ratio can be used to be more
specific, as illustrated in Figure 4.11.

Plates 4.1 to 4.3 show some examples of how the ratios can be plotted and used to determine
the reservoir fluid through a vertical section and remember, that this information is not only
present on the mud log, but these changes are being monitored while the well is being drilled.

Further examples are shown throughout the cases in Section 10.

146
4.4 Oil Indicator

This simple ratio is one that is widely recognized in the industry, but during research for this
manual, it’s origin has not been discovered, nor indeed, has any reference to it in any other
publication been found.

It is therefore a little bit of a mystery, but it is extremely useful as an additional source of ratio
information. It works in a very similar fashion to the balance ratio; in fact the formulae are the
same except for the omission of C2 in the oil indicator. Not knowing the source of the ratio,
the reason for the exclusion of C2 cannot be explained.

O = C3 + C 4 + C5
C1
The oil indicator compares the methane content of returned gas to the heavy hydrocarbon
content, with the resulting trend reflecting the changing density of the hydrocarbon fluid.

The oil indicator will range between 0 and 1, but plotted inversely, the numbers are easier to
deal with and follow a similar trend to the balance ratio.

The Inverse Oil Indicator will therefore range from 0 to 100, increasing as the fluid density
decreases (Figure 4.12).

I = C1
C3 + C 4 + C5

Oil Indicator Evaluation Inverse Oil Indicator

0.01 – 0.07 dry gas – wet gas 100 – 14.3

0.07 – 0.10 condensate – light oil 14.3 – 10

with high GOR

0.10 – 0.40 oil (under-saturated) 10 – 2.5

0.40 – 1.0 residual oil 2.5 – 1

147
 1 10 100

Dry Gas

Wet Gas

Condensate or
Light Oil/Hi GOR

Oil

Residual Oil

Figure 4.12 Use of the inverse oil indicator

148
4.5 Limitations to Gas Ratio Effectiveness

Gas ratio analysis utilizes economical, readily available data and, correctly interpreted,
provides an excellent tool by which to evaluate potential reservoir zones.

Ratios such as the wetness, balance and character, the oil indicator and the C1/C2 ratio allow
fluid changes and contact points to be evaluated immediately as the zone is being drilled. They
are also readily presentable alongside depth-based information for effective vertical profiling
of potential zones.

In addition, the gas ratio plot allows further information relating to the permeability and the
presence of water.

All in all, there is a lot of required and necessary information available from a very economic
source.

However, mud loggers are aware that certain situations can arise, whether from external
influences or resulting from specific fluid types, that lead to inaccuracies in the precise
numerical values.

Hence, it is important to evaluate relative changes in the trends of ratios in addition to the
exact numbers. Trends will still determine contact points and fluid changes even if the
numbers are telling you that you have a light oil rather than a medium gravity oil.

All ratio data should be evaluated together, alongside the basic chromatographic gas curves
and together with information from cuttings; what fluid or fluorescence is actually seen.

Having a good understanding of what can lead ratio data to be less accurate will allow for
better evaluation during those situations, but will also provide confidence in the use of this
information when, for the most part, they are reliable.

• Heavier oils that do not possess the light end hydrocarbons, particularly methane.

If methane is low or non-existent, then any ratios contain C1 will be distorted, either high or
low. All the gas ratio plot values will be low (see Case 14); the wetness ratio will be high and
the balance ratio low (see Plates 4.4 and 4.5 and Case 14); the character ratio will not be
affected since it only considers C3 to C5. As the above examples show, although the ratio
values are distorted to extremes, trend analysis will still effectively determine changes in fluid
gravity together with contact points.

• Oils with low gas saturation (low gas-oil ratio).

149
Ordinarily, low gas responses are no impediment to identify zones. A response, no matter how
small, in the heavier components above background, is enough to ensure that that zone is
evaluated carefully. Although there is a risk of changes being masked, even in situations of
high background or contamination, this principle still applies. However, especially in the case
of high background contamination, the ratio analysis may be affected as a result of the
contamination gas values. For example, if high levels of C4/C5 are being recorded from the
mud, a gas response of a few parts per million may not lead to a significant change in real-
time and depth-based ratio values.

Similarly, when the gas levels are low, then any deficiency in the gas extraction can lead to a
bigger degree of error. In the case of heavy gases, if the concentration is only in terms of low
ppm, then a difference in extraction of a few ppm could lead to a different ratio interpretation.

• Tight formations.

The gas ratio plot can be an accurate indicator of degrees in permeability when a greater
proportion of heavier components are retained by cuttings and not liberated to the drilling
fluid and subsequently detected.

However, it should be appreciated that in the case of extremely tight formations, then we may
see a ‘worsened’ situation of gas being retained by cuttings. The accuracy of the gas ratios will
then depend on just how much gas is liberated to the drilling fluid at the moment of
penetration.

• Large amounts of produced gas.

Ordinarily, seeing a degree of production from a zone is good, because we are seeing the
actual fluid flowing from the formation, enhancing the gas response and indicating pressure
support and permeability.

However, in the case of absolute gas ratio evaluation, there may be a degree of error in the
determination of fluid type. This will depend on the actual permeability, fluid type and
mobility, but can result through production when the light end gases flow preferentially to the
heavier end components. This can lead to lighter fluids being predicted.

• Flushing

If zones are being flushed, then formation fluids are being displaced and we are simply not
seeing a true volume of gas liberated into the drilling fluid and all subsequent evaluation has
to be viewed with a degree of caution (see Case 13).

• Surface losses or poor extraction, leading to erroneous proportions of light or heavy gases.

150
As detailed in previous sections, occasionally situations are such that the mud logger is fairly
certain that we are not seeing a true reflection of the actual composition being liberated from
the formation.

- High viscosity mud leading to poorer extraction of heavy components.

- Low viscosity mud leading to poorer retention of light components (see Case 15).
- Poor surface system leading to larger volumes of lost gas, particularly light end
components.
- Cold ambient temperatures leading to condensation of heavy components.

In practice, these situations are not ‘everyday’ occurrences, and if they are present, they will
be taken into consideration, and their influence assessed, when evaluating zones. For the most
part, the ratios are dependable and together with the actual gas response and other data,
provides invaluable data from which reservoir contacts and production potential can be
reasonably and accurately determined.

This not only provides essential information from which zones that should be further tested
can be pinpointed and confirmed with wireline, but in many instances, has highlighted zones
that have been subsequently undetected by wireline.

151
 Plate 4.1 Vertical profile of fluid changes determined by
the use of chromatographic gas ratios.
Vertical Well

100 3

Residual 2.5
Oil Wh

Wet Condensate/Light Oil

2
Gas
Very Light
Light Gas
Dry Gas High Gravity Oil Balance Rat
10 1.5 Wetness Ra
Character

Ch
1

0.5
Bh

1 0
3000 3025 3050 3075 3100 3125 3150 3175 3200 3225 3250
Depth
DEPTH (m)

152
 Plate 4.2 Ratio determination of a high gravity oil bearing sand

0 min/m 30 0.001 Chrom Gas % 100 0 Ch 3 1 Wh/Bh 100

C3 C2 C1 Total 0 C1/C2 90

High Bh and
C1/C2 shows
C4/C5 normal dry
gas

No change in
Ch relative to
proportions
of C3-C5 in
the We
background t
Gas
Low C1
Hi API
oil

Slow drop off

- produced
gas

Bh/Wh ratios
slowly separate;
C1/C2 increases as
gases return to
background

153
 Plate 4.3 Ratio determination of gas/oil zones and contact

0 min/m 30 ø 0.001 Chrom Gas 100 0 Ch 3 1 Wh/Bh 100

C3 C2 C1 Total 0 C1/C2 90

Dry gas
indicated by Bh,
although wetter
gas shown by
C1/C2

C4/C5

Reservoir Top

Wet Gas

GOC

Medium
API oil

Lo API oil

Plate 4.4 The effect of heavier oil with low light end concentrations

154
0 min/m 12 0.001 Chrom Gas % 100 0 Ch 3 0.1 1000

Wh Bh
C2 C1 TOTAL

C3

Reservoir Top

C1
iC4 C3 nC4

C2
C5’s contact

contac
t

This example illustrates the effect of heavier oils not possessing the light end components.
Note the compositional changes on entering the reservoir at 764m with the relative increase of
heavier components over light; there is no change in C1 over the background, and both C3 and
nC4 increase over the C2. This has the effect of distorting the Wh and Bh ratios, with Wh
values of 70 to 100 certainly indicative of residual oil. However, this zone contains 14 API,
grading through 10 API oil.

Note, even though values are distorted, with a larger scale, the ratios clearly identify the gas-
oil contact on entering the reservoir, together with the contact points of the different API oils.

155
 Plate 4.5 The effect of heavier oil on gas ratios

1000 Bh

Wh
0.01
3 Reservoir Top
Ch
0
100
nC4 C2 C1

Chrom C3
Gas % Total
C1
ic4, C5’s

C2
0.001 C3
Vertical Well Profile

This example is very similar to the one shown in Plate 4.4, in that a 14 API oil possesses a
lower concentration of the light end gases causing distortion of the gas ratios.

When this occurs, it is fairly evident that we are dealing with a heavier oil, so losing the
exactness of the ratios isn’t so important. What is important, and what we still have by
increasing the scales of the ratios, is good evaluation of relative fluid changes and exact
determination of contact points.

156