FORMATION EVALUATION

Logging While Drilling:

A Three-Year Perspective

Stephen Bonner
Brian Clark
Jacques Holenka
Bernard Voisin
Sugar Land, Texas, USA

Jim Dusang
Randy Hansen
Jim White
Aberdeen, Scotland

Tom Walsgrove
Amoco (UK) Exploration Company
London, England

Logging while drilling (LWD) has been in commercial service since the late 1980s. Since then, the basic measurements
in hardware, processing and interpretationsome incremental, some monumentalhas furthered understanding of the

Since the introduction of logging while

drilling (LWD) in 1989, jobs in more than
400 wells worldwide have propelled the
technology through the first stage of maturation. Tools have improved, interpretation
methods can address more complex problems, and challenges presented by highly
deviated and horizontal wells are being
overcome. Since 1989, worldwide expenditures for all measurement-while-drilling
(MWD) services has more than doubled,
from about $250 million in 1989 to a projected $520 million in 1992.1
This article summarizes advances in
Schlumbergers LWD technology and applications over the past three years (right ).
Highlighted are tool technology, evolving
LWD applications and advances in data
processing and interpretation.
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Dave
Best, Keith Moriarty and Richard Rosthal, Schlumberger
Logging While Drilling, Sugar Land, Texas, USA; Trevor
Burgess, Jean-Michel Hache, Marc Lesage, Bernard Montaron and Alan Starkey, Anadrill, Sugar Land, Texas,
USA; Charles Flaum and Mike Gibbs, Etudes et Productions Schlumberger, Montrouge, France; Ken Henry,
Schlumberger International Coordination, Houston,
Texas, USA; Martin Lling, Schlumberger-Doll Research,
Ridgefield, Connecticut, USA; Rod Nelson and Frank
Shray, Schlumberger Well Services, Houston, Texas, USA.

MWD services

Real-time telemetry & recorded data

LWD
Compensated
Dual Resistivity
Compensated
Density Neutron

Drilling
mechanics

Direction
&
Inclination

Short-normal
resistivity
Gamma ray

nThe relationship between MWD and LWD measurements.

In this article, LWD is used to denote wireline-quality petrophysical measurements made while drillingresistivity, gamma ray,
density and neutron porosities, calipers and photoelectric factor
( Pe). LWD is a subset of MWD services, which also include sensors for drilling-related measurements, such as direction and
inclination and equipment for data recording and telemetry.
Tool Technology
Basic LWD measurementsresistivity, neutron and density porosities and photoelectric factorhave not changed since their
introduction (next page, below), but tool
technology has undergone several refinements. These include a range of engineering
improvementsfrom more robust sensor
design, to more secure mounting of connectors and integrated circuits. These improvements have led to increased tool durability.
Because the tools are contained in drill
collars, hardware takes up space inside the
collar, reducing the cross-sectional area
available for mud flow. This reduction in
area, and erosion of tool components by

sand and lost circulation material, mean

mud flow rates are lower than in plain collars. However, demand for LWD measurements has increased in wells that require
higher flow rates for effective hole cleaning.
In response, the maximum mud flow rate for
the 61/2-in. tools was recently increased
from 450 to 600 gallons per minute [from
28 liters/sec to 38 liters/sec]. This upgrade
makes the tools practical in wells where
mud rate requirements might have precluded them in the past. The upgrade was
accomplished by redesigning internal tool
parts to allocate more cross-sectional area

Oilfield Review

nThe team that built the 8-inch CDN tool

in Sugar Land, Texas, USA with (below)
the 6 1/2-inch tool and its red, slide-on stabilizer, and (above) the 8-inch tool. The
black plugs cover windows for the density
source and gamma ray detectors. The 8inch tool, because of its larger diameter,
has the source and detector in the blade
rather than in the tool body, which moves
them closer to the formation.

have remained the same, but evolution

best ways to use the measurements.

to mud flow, and by increasing the tool

diameter. In 1991, the outside diameter of
the CDR (Compensated Dual Resistivity)
tool was increased from 61/2 and 8 in. to
63/4 and 81/4 in., respectively. The 61/2-in.
CDN (Compensated Density Neutron) tool
will be replaced in the near future by a 63/4in. version. The 63/4-in. tools permit a maximum mud flow rate of 800 gal/min [50
liters/sec]; the 81/4-in. tool is rated to 1200
gal/min [76 liters/sec].
The most fundamental change in the
nuclear tool is detector design. The first generation used a combination of 3helium (He)
detectors, also used in wireline tools, and
Geiger-Mueller detectors. Compared to
Geiger-Mueller detectors, 3He detectors,
have a broader dynamic range, do not need
correction for spurious activation, are less
affected by borehole salinity and have better
statistics, permitting a higher rate of penetration (ROP). But they were not thought to be
as rugged as Geiger-Mueller detectors. Field
experience proved otherwise, and since
1990 the CDN tool uses 3He detectors only.
Older tools are being retrofitted.
The CDN tool has a 7.5-curie 241americium-beryllium neutron source and a 1.7curie 137cesium density source, both connected to a source retrieval assembly. In the
first version of the tool, the sources and
retrieval head were connected with a flexible steel cable. This has been replaced with
a flexible titanium rod, giving more reliable
retrieval and more accurate placement of

LWD Tools
CDR Tool
Parameter

Measurement/Computation

Tool OD/Mud rate

nMeasurements
and formation
parameters from
CDR and CDN tools.

in./gal/min

Correlation

Dual resistivities (Rps and Rad)

Gamma ray (total API)

Rt
Rxo
Thin beds
Invasion
Shale volume

Dual Resistivities

Porosity

Compensated neutron porosity

Compensated spectral
gamma-gamma density

Lithology

Density-neutron crossplot
Pe

Rugosity,
detection of
free gas

Ultrasonic caliper1

6 1/2 / 600
6 3/4 / 800
8 / 850
8 1/4 / 1200
9 1/2 / 1400

Natural gamma ray scintillation

spectroscopy (Th, U, K)
Computed gamma ray

CDN Tool
6 1/2 / 600
6 3/4 / 800
(under development)

/ 850

1. For 63/4- and 8-in. CDN.

the sources. Also improved is the density

detector shielding, which eliminates sensitivity to spurious signals from the mud.
The CDN tool uses a full-gauge stabilizer
with windows cut in the blades in front of
the density source and gamma ray detectors
(top). When the hole is in gauge, the blades

In this article, DWOB (Downhole Weight-on-Bit), M3

(Measurement-while-drilling telemetry system), TLC
(Tough Logging Conditions system), CDR (Compensated
Dual Resistivity), CDN (Compensated Density Neutron)
and EPT (Electromagnetic Propagation Tool) are marks of
Schlumberger.
1. Modified from Hall GT: Measurement While Drilling
Update, First Boston Equity Research, July 31, 1991.
In this report, MWD services include direction and
inclination, porosity, resistivity and gamma ray measurements and charges for real-time data transmission.

wipe away mud from in front of the sensors,

thereby minimizing borehole effects. A
locking mechanism is being retrofitted on
the stabilizer to increase its resistance to
slippage under high torque and jarring. New
stabilizers with an integrated lock are under
design and scheduled for release next year.
A range of stabilizers, including undergauge
sizes, has been added for use in horizontal
and deviated holes.
Superposition
of Calipers

A significant development in nuclear

technology was the introduction in 1991 of
the 8-in. CDN tool, and, in the near future,
of a 6 3/4-in. version. Other than being able
to operate in holes up to 12 3/4-in., the 8-in.
tool has several features that distinguish it
from the 61/2-in. tool. In the 8-in. tool, neutron and density detectors are both in stabilizer blades rather than in the tool body, as
in the smaller tools. This design is preferred

MWD Ultrasonic
Caliper
While Drilling

in the larger tool because locating the detectors in the tool body would have placed
them too far from the formation and thereby
degraded the measurement. The 8-inch tool
also includes an ultrasonic caliper (see
Unocal, Indonesia, page 21).2 The 63/4-in.
version will have new electronics to
increase the number of measurements per
foot by a factor of four and will also have an
ultrasonic caliper.

Wireline Four-Arm
Caliper 5 Days
After Drilling

LWD Ultrasonic
Caliper
While Drilling
ROP

Small Axis

Small Axis-Wireline
12

Small Axis

22
150

Large Axis-Ultrasonic
Large Axis

in

17

Depth, ft

Large Axis-Wireline
12

in

ft/hr

Measured depth, ft

Small Axis-Ultrasonic

Large Axis
8

in

in

22

Gas Indicator

Flow In
0

gal/min

750 0

units

25

Baselineno gas

Large Axis
22 12

18

X300

Bit enters
gasproducing
fracture
zone
X400

Sensors
pass
below gasproducing
zone

X300
X500

Gasproducing
fracture
zones
X600

X400
X700

nComparison of LWD ultrasonic caliper made while drilling and

wireline caliper, made five days after drilling. At zone A, the
borehole has become larger with time due to sloughing shales.
At zone B, the discrepancy between LWD and wireline measurements is due to mudcake buildup in front of the permeable zone.
6

nA gas detection log made while drilling in underbalance conditions, using the ultrasonic caliper (above), and caliper schematics (next page). The ultrasonic sensor is mounted in stabilizer
blades of LWD tools. It transmits a pulse that passes through a
rubber window of similar acoustic impedance to that of mud.

Oilfield Review

aa
Two ultrasonic sensors are mounted 180
apart on stabilizer blades. The sensors function in a pulse-echo mode that allows the
direct measurement of standoff, from which
short and long axes of the borehole diameter are computed. The vertical resolution is
1 in. [25 mm] and accuracy of the diameter
measurement is 0.1 in. [2.5 mm]. The
caliper is used to correct the density and
neutron porosity measurements for borehole
effects and can be used as a borehole stability indicator (previous page, left ). It can also
be used for downhole detection of free
gasgas bubbles, not dissolved gas
through a combination of formation and
faceplate echo signals (below and previous page, right ). The faceplate echo is measured at the surface of the tool, at the
mud/window interface. It is affected by gas
content in mud, with echo amplitude
increasing with gas content. The smallest
amount of detectable gas is less than 3%
volume of free gas. Real-time transmission
of this information can shorten the time
needed to detect gas influxes while drilling.
This can simplify kill operations.
Memory of the CDN and CDR tools was
doubled to 1 megabyte in 1991, and with
the introduction of Anadrills second-genera-

tion MWD/telemetry system in 1991, downlink to the tools can be established while
they are in the hole. Previously, tool operationsuch as data sampling ratehad to be
preset at the surface and was not adjustable
once the tool was downhole. The downlink
capability permits, for example, the operator
to use one CDR sample rate during drilling
and switch to a higher rate while tripping
out, or to turn sampling off in front of casing,
thereby saving memory. The current generation mud telemetry system permits transmission of data at up to 3 bits/sec.
Another advance is the introduction of a
downhole shock measurement transmitted
to surface. This measurement enhances
selection of the bottomhole assembly (BHA)
and drilling parameters, and may increase
survival of MWD/LWD tools. Many failures
of MWD/LWD tools result from high shock
and vibration produced during drilling. Lateral vibration contains the most energy and
does the most damage to downhole tools,
the drillstring and drill bits. Traditionally,
engineers predicted a rough running drilling
environment from surface torque measurement and modeling of drillstring dynamics.
But this is not a direct shock measurement
and therefore does not properly account for

all causes of vibration and for frictional loss

between the surface and BHA. Now the
driller can see the downhole environment in
real time and adjust rotary speed, weighton-bit and flow rate to eliminate or reduce
shocks. The drilling engineer can also use
this information to design BHAs less prone
to vibration.
Anadrills downhole measurement of
shock is made by an accelerometer near the
telemetry electronics, 20 to 50 ft [6 to 15 m]
above the bit.3 At a given time interval, typically 60 seconds, the cumulative number of
shocks exceeding 25g 4 is reported to the
surface (next page ). This 25-g value is considered the optimal limit for alerting the
driller to possible mechanical failure.
2. Orban JJ, Dennison MS, Jorion BM and Mayes JC:
New Ultrasonic Caliper for MWD Operations,
paper SPE/IADC 21947, presented at the SPE/IADC
Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
March 11-14, 1991.
3. Rewcastle SC and Burgess TM: Downhole Shock
Measurements Increase Drilling Efficiency and
Improve MWD Reliability, paper IADC/SPE 23890,
presented at the IADC/SPE Drilling Conference, New
Orleans, Louisiana, USA, February 18-21, 1992.
4. A g, for gravity, is a unit of force equal to the force of
gravity exerted on a body at rest. It is used to indicate
the force to which a body is subjected when accelerated. For example, 25g is 25 times the force exerted
on the body as when it is at rest.

a
Mud/window
interface

Window echo

MWD

Mud/formation
interface

Mud

Formation
Firing
pulse

LWD tool
with ultrasonic sensor
in stabilizer

Amplitude

Ultrasonic
sensor

Firing
pulse

Formation
echo

Window

Formation
echo

Mud
interface
echo

Time after firing

Clean mud, no gas

Mud with gas

When gas bubbles are present in the mud, the acoustic impedance of the window is
less than that of the mud. Much of the pulse amplitude is therefore lost on the echo at
the mud/window interface. When no gas bubbles are present, the pulse passes
through the window with no reflection, and a stronger pulse reaches the formation,
generating a formation echo of higher amplitude than the faceplate echo.

July 1992

m/hr

Depth, m

75

SWOB
20

1000 kg

LWD/Wireline Comparisons

Surface Torque

ROP

Minimum

RPM
150

50

Maximum
Downhole Shock

Average
0

kNm

20 0

sec-1

150

200

Run #1

Start of
171/2-in.
hole

300

340

Run #2

95 RPM
120 RPM
368

400

nRelationship between shock levels measured downhole, and rotary speed in a North
Sea well. Shock increases with increasing rotary speed and as stabilizers pass changes
in borehole diameter. In run #2, a pendulum assemblywith stablilizers only high in
the BHA in order to drop hole anglewas run with low weight-on-bit to control hole
angle. This resulted in greater vibration of the BHA and failure of the MWD transmission. High shocks below 340 meters corresponded to the stabilizers passing from the 24in. rathole to the 17 1/2-in. hole. At this point, surface torque also increased, indicating
increased drag from the stabilizers. Rotary speed was reduced at about 347 m in
response to the shock levels, and 95 rpm maintained minimum shock. At 368 m, the
driller, constrained to maintain verticality, increased rotary speed to 120 rpm and
shocks rose to 120 sec -1.
5. Allen D, Auzerais F, Dussan E, Goode P, Ramakrishnan TS, Schwartz L, Wilkinson D, Fordham E, Hammond P, Williams R: Invasion Revisited, Oilfield
Review 3, no. 3 (July 1991): 10-23.
6. Shray F: LWD Detects Changes in Formation Parameters Over Time, Petroleum Engineer International
64, 4 (April 1992): 24-32.

7. The intergovernment treaty organization that governs

dumping in the North Sea, the Paris Commission, is
expected to pass a ruling that 1% to 2% oil on cuttings is not a significant environmental hazard. This
will then be ratified by the Commission ministers and
come into force in January 1994. This would represent
the minimum standard to be enforced by signatory
countries.

In the three years since LWD technology

became available, the industry has found
five main applications for these tools:
Insurance logging, in case the well is lost,
cant be logged with wireline tools or will
yield poor-quality wireline logs.
Logging before invasion, which may
reveal hydrocarbon zones that might be
missed by wireline time.5 In some highpermeability formations, borehole fluid
displaces hydrocarbon from the nearwellbore rock, making the well look like a
dry hole by the time of wireline logging.
This effect may be more common in horizontal than vertical wells because the
drainhole is exposed to full hydrostatic
mud pressure for the long period required
to drill the lateral section.
Geosteering and enhancement of drilling
efficiency (discussed below).
Savings in rig time in settings requiring the
TLC (Tough Logging Conditions) system
and offshore.
Multiple pass logging. Comparison logs
made at different times can help distinguish pay from water zones, locate fluid
contacts and identify true formation resistivity and density.6
Tom Walsgrove of Amoco UK, who is
responsible for introducing new technology
to the companys North Sea operations, has
done a cost-benefit analysis of LWD vs.
wireline logging that has wide application.
He finds that LWD has a clear cost advantage when well deviation is 60 or more. At
this deviation, triple combo wireline tools
require conveyance by drillpipe with the
TLC system. But LWD can be beneficial in
other settings that are not so easily identified. It is for this gray area that Walsgrove
has developed general criteria to help
choose between wireline and LWD for
basic formation evaluation.
He has found LWD cost-effective when:
Rig cost is high. Rig cost high enough to
make LWD attractive exists almost entirely
offshore and where time-consuming TLC
logging would be required. Most of the
additional expense of a TLC operation is in
rig costs, which run about $5000/hour in
the North Sea. Amoco is looking to
MWD/LWD as a means to cut this cost.
Use of LWD may also accelerate selection
of coring and casing points and perforation intervals, which can contribute to savings in rig time.
Water-base muds are used. These typically
yield poorer borehole conditions by wireline time than oil-base mud (OBM). Wireline tools may therefore be difficult to get

Oilfield Review

0.5

CDN
Density

30

ohm-m

500

CDR Resistivity, shallow

GAPI

Gamma Ray

200

a
Horizontal distance, ft

100

800

down the hole, may get stuck or yield

poor logs. In the UK sector of the North
Sea, as OBM use continues declining for
environmental reasons, Amoco expects
LWD use to increase. Use of OBM is
banned in exploration wells in Norway
and the Netherlands. The UK is expected
to enact other restrictions by 1994.7
The well is in an area known for operational difficultiesswelling shales or,
most commonly in the North Sea, overpressured zones. Under these conditions,
LWD offers the advantage of insurance
logging. But more importantly, real-time
data can accelerate decisions about well
control and how the well should be
drilled and completed. Amoco finds that
real-time data provide an effective means
of minimizing risk and reducing excessive
operating costs in exploration wells.
Most of this savings is related to savings in
rig time. To illustrate this point, Walsgrove
cites an instance in which LWD reduced
operating costs by allowing more accurate location of coring points within a
sand/shale sequence.
From our work on other wells in this
area, Walsgrove said, I knew it was
highly probable that the first core would
be mostly shale with only minor sand
stringers. But with MWD/LWD we were
able to pick the coring point at the top of
a thick sand unit. We saved ourselves the
cost of cutting that wasted core, which
typically takes a dayabout $120,000.
In another instance, the company spent
several days drilling a rathole in basement, including cutting a terminal core
that would confirm that the well was in
basement before logging. If real-time
gamma ray and resistivity logs had been
used, the data would have indicated basement quickly, saving days of drilling.
When real-time access to pore pressure
analysis (in undercompacted formations)
and petrophysical data are needed for
drilling decisions and planning a wireline
logging program and completion strategy.
Real-time access to petrophysical data
has led to a new application, called
geosteeringusing real-time measurement of geologic and reservoir parameters
to help steer the bit along highly deviated
and horizontal trajectories. These parameters are added to conventional steering
datadirection and inclinationand data
about the shape and extent of geologic
structures, mainly from seismic profiles.
The usual goal is to keep the well within a
particular bed or maintain an appropriate
distance from a bed boundary or fluid
interface (right, above and top ).

July 1992

True vertical depth, ft

X50

X75

Poor sand

Thin shale

Main
reservoir

nWhat can happen when CDR resistivity is not transmitted in real time. CDR data were
acquired in memory mode only, since the data stream to the surface was confined to
drilling optimization information. In this case, the memory logs (gamma ray, resistivity
and density) showed the well trajectory went into the top of the pay zone at point A,
only to go back out through the top of the pay zone at point B. The pay zone here was
more than 10 feet [3 m] thick but the drill bit crossed only the top 10 feet. (Adapted from

30

g/cm3

2.7

Density

N
p.u.

Standard Density

White, and Hansen and White, reference 9.)

2.2

Horiz. distance, ft

X700

Normalized
Short-Spacing
Variance

X800

X900

X1000

X1100

X1200

nDetails of CDN logs for the same well as above. The normalized short-spacing variance is not a regular product but used here to compute the rotational density output.

When geosteering was introduced, the

CDR resistivity log was used for detecting
hydrocarbons and the gamma ray log for
finding marker beds and kick off points.
Because the CDR measurement has higher
resolution and precision than the typical
MWD short-normal resistivity measurement,
thin beds can be more easily identified. It is
also more sensitive to boundaries between
beds of contrasting resistivityindicated in
a deviated well by the characteristic peak
on the log curve, called a hornand has a
greater depth of investigation (see Why a
Horn? below).
Although resistivity remains the main
headlight, a handful of operators have
recently examined CDN density logs to see
if they can contribute to geosteering (previous page, below). However, the CDN tool is
always farther from the bit than the resistivity measurement so its contribution to steering may be as a confirmation of gamma ray
and resistivity logs.
The measurement suite for geosteering
may be the same as for formation evaluation
(see MWD/LWD Data Frames, next page).
The suite typically includes resistivity,
gamma ray, short- and long-spacing density
and neutron porosity, downhole torque and
downhole weight-on-bit to determine formation properties at the bitwith the addition of tool face, or direction and inclination
(D&I). This tells the driller the orientation of
the bent housing.8 Tool face is needed at a
high update ratetypically, every 10 seconds but as fast as every few seconds is
desirable for accurate steering with polycrystalline diamond compact bits. With
these bits, more reactive torque is generated
at the motor, making them go off course
sooner than conventional bits. If a high
update rate for tool face is used, the update
rate on other data drops. The lower rate
reduces resolution of petrophysical data, but
not usually to a significant degree.

Walsgroves analysis indicates that wireline measurements are advantageous when:

Equity decisions are a concern. Because
wireline measurements remain the
accepted standard, both from technical
and legal standpoints, partners may shy
away from relying only on LWD measurements when there is a possible equity
debate. Some operators view LWD as less
desirable in equity decisions because of
the need to depth match it with wireline.
Depth matching LWD to wireline is often
straightforward, but may be complicated
when invasion or borehole conditions
cause large differences between LWD and
wireline logs, or when drillers depth
varies nonsystematically with wireline
depth. This can happen because of pipe
stretch, compression or yo-yoing, or miscounted pipe stands. Absolute depth correction of LWD logs is sometimes done
using a gamma ray from the cement bond
log when casing is setusually one to
three days after LWD logging. This delay
in absolute depth correction does not stall
drilling-related decisions based on LWD
information. The relative depths of features on the LWD log are used to reference formation tester sample, core and
casing points.
High temperatures (greater than 320F
[160C]) are encountered. Wireline tools
typically have a higher temperature rating
than LWD tools, which are limited mainly
by their use of batteries.
Hole size is very large. The current maximum hole size for the CDN tool is 133/4
in. [35 centimeters (cm)], and for the
CDR tool is 171/2 in. [44 cm]; or 26 in.
[66 cm] if mud is made with freshwater
(1.5 ohm-m).
Other variables may complicate the choice
between wireline and LWD. Amoco did a
cost analysis for two wells in which both
wireline and LWD services were run. In one

well, discounting rig time, LWD cost 241%

more than wireline. In this instance, the
large difference was due to LWD tools sitting on the rig unused for 21 days because
of unanticipated problems setting casing. If
LWD had been run promptly, its cost would
have been 100% more than wireline.
In the second well, LWD logs were made
promptly. Although the LWD cost was
slightly higher than wireline, when rig cost
was added, LWD afforded a net saving. The
LWD service was less expensive than in the
first case because the operator needed only
three days to mobilize and demobilize the
tools, which were on a nearby rig.
Taking cost analysis one step further,
Amoco modeled typical North Sea wells to
determine the most cost-effective triple
combo logging program. Wireline was
marginally less expensive in the first example, which had:
straight hole
casing set at 8000 ft [2440 m] and average
ROP of 30 ft/hour [10 m/hr] to reach total
depth (TD) at 10,000 ft [3050 m]
two days each to mobilize and demobilize
the tools
total rig operating cost of $120,000/day.
The second model was identical, except the
well was deviated to 45 at 4000 ft [1220
m]. Although TD and the casing point were
the same true vertical depth (TVD) as
before, the openhole footage and total measured depth increased. Again, wireline
offered a marginal savings. But when well
deviation reached 70, rig time associated
with wireline cost exceeded LWD cost
because TLC hardware would be needed to
convey wireline tools. Financial analysis by
another major oil company shows that lostin-hole cost is always more expensive with
LWD than with TLC methods, but that risk
of losing the tools is lower with LWD than
with the TLC system.

Why a Horn?
A polarization horn on a CDR log in a horizontal

interfaces between formations of contrasting

well indicates the tool is crossing a bed bound-

resistivities and no secondary field is generated.

ary. This horn occurs because of charge buildup

But in a horizontal well, as the tool moves along

at bed boundaries. Because this charge is caused

the bed boundary, the current loops pass from

by the signal from the logging tool, it therefore

one formation into another, generating a substan-

oscillates at the same frequency, acting like a

tial secondary field. At each bed boundary, the

secondary, weak transmitter along the bed

received signal increases, producing the charac-

boundary. This effect doesnt occur in a vertical

teristic polarization horns. The magnitude of this

well, where bed boundaries are horizontal and

polarization increases with the relative dip angle

parallel to the current loops generated by the

and the resistivity contrast between the beds.

tool. In this setting, the current loops do not cross

10

Oilfield Review

MWD/LWD Data Frames

Data Transmission: Real Time or

Recorded?

Combined improvements in MWD telemetry and LWD technology now permit realtime transmission of any LWD data. But not
all data can be sent at once, so a major
decision is what data to send in real time
and what to store downhole for retrieval
when the BHA reaches the surface (see A
Second-Generation MWD/Telemetry System, page 13 ). In the future, throughdrillpipe wireline systems will be available
to unload tool memory downhole.
The selection of real-time or downhole
memory mode depends on the application,
and may change from section to section,
even in a single well. While real-time data
help with drilling decisions, the more data
sent uphole, the slower the update rate of
each measurement, so the lower the resolution. The proper balance between real-time
and recorded modes involves determining
not only what data are needed when, but
what data quality is needed. The goal is to
get the right data at the right time.
The recorded-only mode is commonly
used in formation evaluation for reservoir
characterization in development wells. Realtime data are used mainly in formation evaluation for well management decisions, such
as whether to run wireline logs and, if so,
which ones; where to core and set casing;
and when to plug the well, to adjust hole trajectory or mud weight, drill deeper or stop
drilling. A typical real-time suite consists of
directional surveys, resistivity measurements
(resistivity from attenuationdeep, Rad and
resistivity from phase shiftshallow, Rps ),
gamma ray, short- and long-spacing density, neutron porosity, downhole torque and
downhole weight-on-bit ( right ). Most of
these data are updated every 26.5 seconds,
equivalent to a 6-in. [15-cm] sample rate at
an ROP of 70 ft/hour [21 m/hr]. In practice,
twice the ROP140 ft/hour [43 m/hr]
gives 12-in. [30-cm] sampling, sufficient for
most real-time formation evaluation.
Amoco UK bases its selection of recorded
vs. real-time data on comparison of data
cost and quality. In exploration wells, the
company usually transmits the CDR log in
real time to improve drilling efficiency. In
development wells, the company usually
acquires LWD logs only in recorded mode.
This reduces logging cost as a result of not
having to run an MWD tool for direction
and inclination data.

Typical Formation Evaluation Setup

Downhole
Measurement

Transmitted
Data

MWD sync

Rps

Rps
Rad

Update frequency
(sec)

Equivalent ROP at
two data points/ft

26.5

68

Rad

26.5

68

LWD GR

26.5

68

LWD GR

SS density

26.5

68

SS density

LS density

26.5

68

LS density

TN porosity

26.5

68

TN porosity

DTRQ

53

34

DTRQ

DWOB

53

34

DWOB

VALT

53

34

Rps
Rad
LWD GR
SS density
LS density
TN porosity
VALT
Typical Geosteering Setup
Downhole
Measurement

Transmitted
Data

Update frequency
(sec)

Equivalent ROP at
two data points/ft

T/F sync

Gravity T/F

10.6

170

GY [T/F]

Rps

53

34

Rps

Rad

53

34

Rad

LWD GR

53

34

GZ [T/F]

SS density

53

34

SS density

LS density

53

34

LS density

TN porosity

53

34

GY [T/F]

DTRQ

53

34

TN porosity

DWOB

53

34

LWD GR

VALT

53

34

GZ [T/F]
DTRQ
DWOB
GY [T/F]
VALT
GZ [T/F]
DTRQ: downhole torque; VALT: MWD turbine voltage output, which is proportional to mud flow, so VALT acts as a downhole flow
meter; T/F sync: a number identifying the sequence of measurement to be transmitted; GY and GZ (T/F) are values of the
accelerometer measurements along the Y and Z axes; the tool is the X axis. GY and GZ are used to compute the orientation of
the bent sub with reference to the high side of the hole. The DWOB measurement is downhole weight-on-bit. Many downhole
measurements appear more than once in the left column, indicating that they are sent more than once per data frame.

nSample data frames from the North Sea, used for formation evaluation and geosteering.

8. There are two tool face measurements. Magnetic tool

face is in reference to magnetic north. Gravity tool
face is in reference to the high side of the hole.

July 1992

11

a
a

aa

The application of LWD in North Sea

development wells is unique, having to do
with how they are drilled. Many operators
use MWD directional and gamma ray information to position the 9 5/8-in. [25-cm] casing just above the target. Some also use the
CDR resistivity for this task. Casing is set
and the hole drilled out with a locked
BHA, in which stabilizers are arranged to
minimize drift of the borehole. From this
point, MWD is not used because the driller
has to drill a straight hole a short distance
and cant miss the target. Once in the target,
LWD measurements are used in memory
mode to log the reservoir.

nFour possible
interpretations for
a deep resistivity
response in a horizontal well. More
log data are
needed to constrain the geologic
model. There are
no horns because
the deep resistivity
measurement
tends not to show
horns and because
the resistivity contrast between beds
is small. (From

Gamma
Ray

GAPI

Rt Input for
Computer
Model
Simulated
Phase
Resistivity

ohm-m

100

x100

White, reference 9.)

Logged
Phase
Resistivity

Depth, m

ohm-m

2000 2

2000

Poor
sand

Thin
shale

x200

x300

x400

Main
reservoir

x500

Deep
resistivity

ohm-m

10

Main reservoir
Poor sand

Measured depth, ft

Shale

100

200

300

12

nResistivity modeling of the uppermost

resistivity horn shown on page 9, top.
Here, formation dip, bed boundaries and
resistivities were estimated from the geologic model and used to develop a model
of R t and a synthetic resistivity log. The
model is confirmed because the synthetic
log nearly matches the measured log.
This modeling was done because of a disparity between nuclear and resistivity
logs. On page 9 (top figure), the density
and gamma ray logs show that the zone
between the two peaks appears to be a
shale. But the resistivity log does not show
the low value normally associated with
shales in this area. Because the shale is
thin (about 2 ft [60 cm] ), it is possible that
the large volume of rock investigated by
the CDR tool prevented it from seeing the
shale. This presented an ideal opportunity
to run a resistivity simulation across this
zone. The square log of R t successfully
simulated the measured log, reinforcing
the model of the formation as a shale
with significant lateral extent. (Adapted
from Hansen and White, reference 9.)

Oilfield Review

400

Data Processing Advances

Most data processing routines for logs were

designed for low-angle holes, typically less
than 40. Assumptions in the vertical
wellazimuthal symmetry of formations
and invasion around the borehole, no lateral variation in formation properties, and
formations becoming older and deeper with
measured depthbreak down for directional and horizontal wells.9 The increasing
use of LWD in horizontal and highly deviated holes has stimulated progress in the
processing of LWD log data.
In directional and horizontal wells, data
processing and interpretation is a two-step
process. The first step, while the well is
drilled, is to determine whether, when and
where the well trajectory enters the geologic
target and whether it stays there. This is
done by monitoring formation evaluation
informationcores, cuttings, MWD and
LWD dataas the well is drilled, and then,
modifying the well path as needed. The second step, which takes place after the well is
drilled, is detailed appraisal of formation
parameters for reservoir evaluation, well
completion and field development. To meet
these needs, and interpretation needs in
conventional wells, several new data processing methods for LWD have been developed. These include:
Prediction of CDR resistivity in high-angle
and horizontal holes with varying relative
dip between the borehole and beds, using
the RangDB program (rang dee bee, for
relative angles data base)
Real-time phase-resistivity caliper and
borehole correction to phase and attenuation measurements
Correction of the CDR measurements for
the effect of resistivity anisotropy10
Correction of the density measurement to
account for elliptical holes.
Prediction of CDR resistivity in high-angle
holes with varying relative dip. An objective
of interpreting CDR logs in high-angle wells
is to build up a model of the formation surrounding the borehole. This interpretation
must be made with care because there may
be insufficient data to develop a unique geologic scenario (previous page, left). Simulation of CDR logs may help clarify this process (see Electromagnetic Tool Modeling,
page 22 ). Often, CDR response in a horizontal well can be predicted before drilling. This
may be critical for identifying log signatures
that show when a drill bit is entering or leaving a target. This prediction of CDR response
in a well with constant, unchanging relative

July 1992

A Second-Generation MWD/Telemetry System

In 1991, Anadrill introduced a second-generation

Data compression. The data transmission rate

MWD telemetry system, which is used to convey

of the M3 system is 3 bits/sec. However, the

MWD and LWD measurements. The new system,

downhole microprocessor makes it possible to

called the M3 MWD Telemetry tool (M for MWD; 3

minimize the number of bits in the data stream,

for 3 bits/second), includes several notable

which increases the update rate while keeping

departures from the first-generation system. Here

sufficient resolution. This minimization yields

are some highlights.

an effective transmission 30% faster than the

A mud pulse modulator that resists jamming.

first-generation system.

At the heart of mud pulse telemetry is a down-

Reprogramming while downhole. MWD tools no

hole modulator that generates pressure pulses

longer have to be reprogrammed on the sur-

in the mud. It is placed in the path of the mud

face only. Using surface-to-downhole commu-

flow and opens and closes to generate pres-

nication, achieved by varying mud flow rate,

sure pulses. The first-generation modulator

the engineer can reprogram data transmission

was occasionally jammed by debris and lost

speed, vary in real time which data are

circulation material. The new modulator has

recorded, alter the sample rate and vary the

better resistance to jamming because it is self-

rate at which data are sent uphole in real time.

cleaning and has lower drag. It performs suc-

New electronics packaging. The hand-wired

cessfully in muds having up to 40 lb/barrel of

electronics of the first-generation system has

loss circulation material.

been redesigned using proven LWD technology.

Reduction in transmission data error rate by an

order of magnitude. This was accomplished

This has resulted in significant improvement in

reliability.

two ways. The new modulator permits a higher

signal-to-noise ratio, and introduction of a
downhole microprocessor allows finding and
correcting errors in the data stream. After error
correction, the received data contain less than
1 bit error per 1000 bitsan error rate of 0.1%.

dip is achieved by using the CDRDIP module in the electromagnetic modeling package, ELMOD11 (previous page, right ). But
what about the typical high-angle well,
where the well inclination changes continuously?
For this, a second-generation modeling
program has been developed, RangDB. This
prediction has several steps. The first step, as
with any simulation, uses local knowledge
and offset well data to provide a simple, lay-

ered model of the geology. This model is

verified using ELMOD data to simulate the
resistivity curve from the offset well.
The second step uses this model as input
to several runs of CDRDIP at different
angles (next page, left ). The angles are chosen to represent the range of dips likely to
be encountered along the trajectory.
RangDB then computes values of phase shift
and attenuation resistivities versus TVD
interpolated at 1 deviation steps between

9. White J: Recent North Sea Experience in Formation

Evaluation of Horizontal Wells, paper SPE 23114,
presented at the SPE Offshore Europe Conference,
Aberdeen, Scotland, September 3-6, 1991.
Hansen RR and White J: Features of Logging-WhileDrilling (LWD) in Horizontal Wells, paper SPE 21989,
presented at the SPE/IADC Drilling Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, March 11-14, 1991.
10. Leake J and Shray F: Logging While Drilling Keeps
Horizontal Well on Small Target, Oil & Gas Journal
89, no. 38 (September 23, 1991): 53-59. The same
physics, but for induction logging is detailed in Klein
JD: Induction Log Anisotropy Corrections, Transactions of the SPWLA 32nd Annual Logging Symposium, June 16-19, 1991, Midland, Texas, USA,
paper T.
Formation Anisotropy: Reckoning with its Effects,
Oilfield Review 2, no. 1 (January 1990): 16-23.

11. CDRDIP is now a module in ELMOD. For background:

Anderson B, Bonner S, Lling MG and Rosthal R:
Response of 2-MHz LWD Resistivity and Wireline
Induction Tools in Dipping Beds and Laminated Formations, Transactions of the SPWLA 31st Annual
Logging Symposium, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, June
24-27, 1990, paper A.
Anderson B, Barber TD, Singer J, and Broussard T:
ELMODPutting Electromagnetic Modeling to
Work to Improve Resistivity Log Interpretation,
Transactions of the SPWLA 30th Annual Logging
Symposium, Denver, Colorado, USA, June 11-14,
1989, paper M.
Data Services Catalog. Houston, Texas, USA:
Schlumberger Educational Services, 1990: 105-106.

13

nResistivity logs for

beds dipping 0 to
85, showing
development of
horns as a bed
boundary is crossed
at increasingly
shallow angles.
The 0 example is
a modeled CDR
log, based on an
induction log in a
vertical well. The
others are modeled
CDR logs using the
CDRDIP program.
These logs show
that variation in
dip angle, even
when adjusting for
true bed thickness,
gives logs of different character.
Comparing curves
at the 4-ohm-m reference line shows
that resistivity
creeps upward
with increasing
dip angle.

1000

100

Relative
Dip

10

Ohm-m

85

75

45

Rps
Rad

6350

6390

6430

6470

6510

True bed thickness, ft

the chosen dips. These resistivity values are

entered in a data base, which allows fast prediction of resistivity log response for changes
in well deviation or formation dip at any
point in the well. In the near future, the program will then take the computed resistivity
values and, in conjunction with real-time
well directional data, produce a provisional,
simulated CDR log along the actual trajectory. During drilling, these models can be
compared with the real-time CDR resistivity
log to determine, for example, if the bit is
approaching a calcite streak or a bed boundary. In particular, the log predictions give the
directional driller enough information to correct the course of the drill bit.
The RangDB program encourages crossdisciplinary communication by requiring
cooperation from the geologist/petrophysicist and directional driller when planning a
directional well (next page, left ). Because
the program integrates the well plan from
the drilling department with formation tops
and dips from the geology department, it
tests whether the two are synchronized.
The program also runs at the wellsite,
using the actual well trajectory to help modify the trajectory in real time. This is done
by determining whether a difference
between the modeled and measured CDR
log is due to the trajectory not going as
planned, or the formation depth or dip
diverging from the model.

26

LWD phase caliper

Four-arm wireline caliper

Borehole diameter, in.

22

18

14

12 1/4 in.-bit size

10
50

100

150

200

250

Depth, ft

300

350

400

450

nComparison of
phase and wireline
calipers. At a few
places140 to 170
feet, 240 and 430
feetthe caliper
while drilling
reports a larger
value than the
wireline reading,
perhaps due to
swelling shales.
The phase caliper
at 60 ft reads
between the two
wireline values
because it reports
an average borehole size. Limitations of the phase
calipers vertical
resolution cause it
to miss some of the
thinner sands. Note
that the shales are
almost uniformly
washed out to 17
in. [43 cm].
(From Rosthal et al,
reference 12.)

14

Oilfield Review

Resistivity caliper and borehole correction.

The phase caliper is computed from the raw
phases of a 2-MHz electromagnetic wave
measured at two receivers and from the
phase shift between the receivers.12 The raw
phase is strongly dependent on mud resistivity and borehole size, whereas the phase
shift is only slightly affected. Since mud conductivity is known, the measurement can be
used to calculate large changes in borehole
diameter from bit size in conductive muds
(previous page, bottom ). This caliper can be
used to monitor borehole stability during
drilling or tripping. Calculation of the phase
caliper does not require special equipment
and does not compromise the tools standard
measurements. Mud, however, must be at
least 1 siemens/m (S/m) [1 mho/m] more

Anticipated
Geologic Model

conductive than the formation. Accuracy of

the borehole diameter measurement is 1/2
in. [1.3 cm], the vertical resolution is about
36 in. [91 cm], and it will work in borehole
diameters up to 24 in. Because the phase
caliper works best for large variations in
borehole diameter, it complements the ultrasonic caliper, which works best where borehole variation is no larger than about 6 in.
The calculated borehole diameter can be
used to apply a borehole correction to the
two resistivity measurements. This correction
is needed most in large boreholes filled with
very conductive muds.
Resistivity anisotropy code. Resistivity
anisotropydifferent resistivity values in
horizontal and vertical directionsmay produce markedly different resistivity logs of the

Planned
Wellbore Trajectory

TVD, ft

Depth, ft

-40
0
40

Well
Well
trajectory
trajectory
#1 #1

6000

6500
7000
0

80

400

800

1200

Horizontal offset, ft
Resistivity, ohm-m

ELMOD
(CDRDIP)

Well trajectory #2
Well trajectory #3

Modeling of
CDR logs at various
deviations from
0 to 90

Formation
dip and
horizon
TVD

12. Rosthal RA, Best DL and Clark B: Borehole Caliper

While Drilling From a 2-MHz Propagation Tool and
Borehole Effects Correction, paper SPE 22707, presented at the 68th SPE Annual Technical Conference
and Exhibition, Dallas, Texas, USA, October 6-9, 1991.

nCoping with resistivity anisotropy.

Measurement of
resistivity in a vertical well is always
of the horizontal
value, whereas in
a horizontal well, it
is some combination of vertical and
horizontal values.
In the horizontal
well, where adjacent shales distort
the current, the
value of horizontal
resistivity is needed
to compare log
values with those
of offset vertical
wells. The resistivity anisotropy code
provides this,
using CDR tool
measurements
and relative dip
angle between the
horizontal well
and formations.

5500
-80

same bed measured in a vertical well and

measured in a well deviated more than 70
(below ). Resistivity anisotropy is typically
seen in formations with laminations less than
about 3 in. [8 cm] thick, with alternating
high and low resistivities. Induction and
CDR resistivity measurements in such a formation will read lower in a vertical well than
in a horizontal well. The opposite is true for
a laterolog resistivity measurement. A code
to handle this problem, and correct the resistivity measured in the deviated well, was

Well trajectory #4

RangDB data base:

TVD
Relative dip between
borehole and beds
Electromagnetic phase
shift
Electromagnetic
attenuation

(From Leake and

Shray, reference 10.)

Shale

CDR modeling for curved trajectories

Modeled
log #1

Modeled
log #2

Modeled
log #3

Sand

Modeled
log #4

nInputs for CDR resistivity modeling of various well trajectories

come from both the drilling and geology departments.

July 1992

15

Vertical Well

Horiz. Well

0 apparent dip

89 apparent dip

Sand
Shale
0

ohm-m
Rt

Rad

ohm-m
Rt

50

Rad

20

Rps

Rps

Measured depth, ft

30

100

200

300

400

500

600

GAPI

120

Gamma Ray

ft

True Vertical
Depth

Top of target

Rps

Rad

ohm-m

20

nResistivity modeling showing that resistivity anisotropy explained why pay zone resistivity in a horizontal well was higher than expected. The model demonstrates that
inequality between horizontal and vertical resistivities could reproduce the measured
log results. The right inset shows that anisotropy is represented by a series of thin beds
of alternating high- and low- resistivity streaks. The two models, one vertical (0) and
the other horizontal (89), successfully reproduced the measured log responses4-ohmm in the vertical well and 9 to 10 ohm-m in the horizontal well.
(From Leake and Shray, reference 10.)

Resistivity, ohm-m

1000

100

Rad
Estimated
dielectric value
10

Rps
1

X450

X470

X490

X510

Depth, ft

16

developed to address resistivity anisotropy in

a US Gulf Coast well. It has subsequently
been used in wells elsewhere in the US Gulf
Coast, Alaska and the North Sea.10
Jack Leake of Oxy and Frank Shray and
Richard Rosthal of Schlumberger, compared
the resistivity of a pay zone measured by the
CDR tool in a horizontal well with that
measured by the wireline induction tool in a
nearby vertical well. A 4-ohm-m pay zone
on the induction log from the vertical well
appeared in a horizontal well as a 9-ohm-m
zone on the Rad and 15 ohm-m on the Rps
measurements. At first glance, the separation of the deep and shallow measurements
could have been due to invasion, but closer
examination showed this was not likely.
Invasion was unlikely because the well was
logged while drilling, the hole was thought
to be in gauge and the sensors were only 30
minutes behind the bit. Although invasion
has been observed under these conditions,
the amount of separation seemed too great
for that explanation. The discrepancy
between vertical and horizontal logs could
have been caused by neighboring beds
within 2 vertical feet of the LWD sensor, but
there was no corroborating evidence that
they were present. This left anisotropy as the
prime suspect.
Evidence for anisotropy came from the
ELMOD resistivity modeling program that
was able to simulate both the wireline (vertical) and LWD (horizontal) logs. The model
configured the top 3 ft [1 m] of pay as a
series of high- and low-resistivity streaks,
which represents the effects of formation
anisotropy. CDR logs were simulated in this
setting in a vertical well and a horizontal
well. Although these logs do not represent a
unique solution, they reproduced the field
results (above, left ).
Existing CDR software was modified to
output a continuous log of horizontal and
vertical resistivities. Inputs are Rad, Rps and
the angle between the hole and the bed in
question. The vertical resistivity component
is used only for the calculation, not for true
resistivity. The horizontal component correlated closely with that measured by the
induction log in the vertical well.

X530

X550

nA pronounced dielectric effect causing

an anomalously high, deep attenuation
measurement. This example is from a volcanic rock in a North Sea well. The
expected dielectric constant for this formation was about 50, whereas the actual
value was over 500. The same effect, but
not as dramatic, has been observed in
shales in the US Gulf Coast, Alaska and
the Far East.

Oilfield Review

Another advance concerns correcting

CDR measurements in conventional wells
(deviated less than 40) for dielectric effects.
In formations with a high dielectric
constant13typically highly resistive rock
and some shalesthe Rad value is anomalously high. Significant elevation of R ad
occurs in most shales and some volcanic
rocks. The problem is evident in thick
shales, where there is no invasion and no
borehole effect, yet Rad exceeds Rps (previous page, bottom ). A log processing routine
has been developed that uses Rad and Rps to
solve for the dielectric constant and correct
resistivity for dielectric effects.
The routine uses information about dielectric constants collected from analysis of 300
rock samples worldwide, performed at

Schlumberger-Doll Research, Ridgefield,

Connecticut, USA. A data base was then
compiled, relating dielectric constant to
conductivity as a function of frequency.
The data base provides an estimate of the
dielectric constant as a function of conductivity at the 2-MHz frequency of the CDR
tool. 14 An anomalously high R ad value
results when the actual dielectric constant is
larger than the estimated value. The dielectric processing program for the CDR tool
computes from the two recorded CDR resistivities an apparent dielectric constant and
its corresponding, dielectrically corrected
resistivity, Reps, for epsilon, the symbol for
dielectric constant. The program does this
automatically, but a chartbook-type version
of this correction is shown (below ).

inch CDR logs. The red curve, just below

the top of the fan, is the estimated dielectric value versus resistivity, derived from
lab studies. This curve predicts, for example, that a phase shift of 5 will produce
an R ps of 11 ohm-m and an attenuation of
5.2 dB will produce an Rad of 19 ohm-m.
These correspond to estimated dielectric
values of about ps=45 and ad=40,
respectively. The intercept of these two
resistivity values, however, gives the
dielectrically corrected resistivity, which
is 12.5 ohm-m. The line on which the
intercept falls indicates an apparent
dielectric constant of 180, four to five
times greater than the predicted dielectric constant. The dielectrically corrected
resistivity always falls between the other
two resistivities, Rad and Rps, making it a
robust computation.

5
5.6

ps =45

Rps =11

ad =40

5.4

10

Rad =19

10

Attenuation, dB

Resistivity Rad, ohm-m

Many advances in LWD pertain to log interpretation in horizontal wells, a setting in

which LWD commonly has economic
advantage over basic wireline measurements. One interpretation consideration
being given more attention, with the growing number of horizontal wells, is gravity
segregation of fluids in the invaded zone
(next page, top).
An example of this was seen in a North
Sea deviated gas well logged with LWD
while tripping three days after drilling. There
were two CDN density outputs: bulk density
and the rotationally corrected density. A
greater rotational density than bulk density
suggested an oval hole.15 Amoco thought
the greater rotational density value was not

nCorrection for dielectric effect on 61/2-

5.8

20

Interpretation Advances

15
20
5.2

30
50
100

50

Dielectrically corrected
resistivity=12.5

5.0

Apparent dielectric
constant=180
150
4.8

=300
4.6
0

Phase shift, deg

100

50

30

20

15

10

Resistivity Rps, ohm-m

13. A dielectric constant is a measure of the ability of a
material to store electric charge for a given applied
field strength. A dielectric is a material having a low
electrical conductivity compared to that of metal.
Fresh water, for example, has a dielectric constant of
about 80; quartz is 4.65. The shale dielectric constant varies strongly with frequency of the electromagnetic field and with mineral content. It typically

July 1992

has a dielectric constant of up to 10,000 at induction log frequency (10 to 40 kHz), 100 to 200 at
CDR log frequency (2 MHz) and 5 to 25 at the frequency of the EPT (Electromagnetic Propagation
Tool) (1.2 GHz). Measurement of the dielectric constant, in the case of the EPT tool, is used to distinguish two fluids that have the same resistivity: fresh
water vs. a mixture of saltwater and oil.
14. Clark B, Lling MG, Jundt J, Ross M and Best D:
A Dual Depth Resistivity Measurement for FEWD,
Transactions of the SPWLA 29th Annual Logging
Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, USA, June 5-8,
1988, paper A.

15. For a discussion of rotational density:

Best D, Wraight P and Holenka J: An Innovative
Approach to Correct Density Measurements While
Drilling for Hole Size Effect, Transactions of the
SPWLA 31st Annual Logging Symposium, Lafayette,
Louisiana, USA, June 24-27, 1990, paper G.
Betts P, Blount C, Broman B, Clark B, Hibbard L,
Louis A and Oosthoek P: Acquiring and Interpreting Logs in Horizontal Wells, Oilfield Review 2,
no. 3 (July 1990): 34-51.

17

due to ovalization but because invaded

fluid, after three days, lay on the low side of
the hole. Since the introduction of LWD,
failure to account for density variation associated with invasion in gas-bearing reservoirs could lead to an erroneous interpretation, Walsgrove said. Now I mentally
model whats going on in the formation
before I begin log analysis.16
Amoco has progressed in its interpretation
of LWD logs in deviated holes. A case in
point is a highly deviated well that penetrated a known oil zone, but that LWD logs
indicated anomalously high water saturations as determined from the deep resistivity
( R ad ) log. The zone in question was a
sand/shale sequence. Close examination
showed that the deep resistivity was being
suppressed so much by the overlying shales
that the sands looked wet (see Amoco,
North Sea, page 20 ). This suppression
effect was proved by modeling the formation and using tool response functions to
predict log response.
Advances have also been made in interpretation of nuclear logs. Since the introduction of LWD, differences have sometimes been noted between wireline and
LWD nuclear logs in the same well. Recent
work has shed light on two mechanisms for
this disagreement: differences in how the
tools make their measurements and changes
in wellbore conditions in the time between
logging with LWD and wirelinenamely,
displacement of reservoir fluid by invading
mud filtrate of a different density, chemical
alteration of shales by drilling mud and
increased rugosity. 17 How these effects
influence the preference for wireline or
CDN logs is summarized (right ).
For density measurements, the main difference in response to wellbore conditions
is due to the different mechanical arrangement of the tools. Wireline density tools use
pad-mounted sources and detectors that are
held against the formation, minimizing perturbation of the signal by mud. The CDN
tool makes its measurement through a fullgauge stabilizer (the same as bit size). As
long as the hole remains in gauge, the stabilizer removes virtually all mud from in front
of the sensor, yielding a reliable measurement. The rotational density algorithm can
correct for a small degree of standoff1 to
2 in. [3 to 5 cm], depending on mud weight

18

Filtrate heavier than

formation fluid
Limit of
filtrate
invasion

Pad tool
Volume seen
by pad tool
Filtrate lighter than
formation fluid

nRadial asymmetry of the invasion profile in a horizontal well

through a homogeneous, permeable formation. A sufficient difference in the densities of the filtrate and formation fluids will
cause filtrate to form a teardrop oriented either up or down. Pad
and mandrel tools facing the low side of the well will see a different invasion than those facing the upper side. These asymmetric effects are time dependent as the invasion profile develops. (From White, reference 9.)
nComparison of
how wellbore conditions affect CDN
and wireline density measurements.

CDN Hole
Condition

Wireline
Hole Condition
Smooth and
in-gauge
Smooth,
in-gauge
with mudcake
Smooth and
enlarged
Smooth,
enlarged
with mudcake
Smooth
and altered
formation
density

(From Allen et al,

reference 17.)

Excellent
agreement
Rotational
processing
required

Time-lapse density
interpretation possible

Enlarged
and rugose
Enlarged,
rugose
and altered
formation
density

CDN density preferred

and mud chemistry. Greater standoff

exceeds the algorithms ability to furnish a
usable correction.
For neutron measurements, different
designs of wireline and LWD tools also
cause differences in how the tools respond
to wellbore conditions ( next page ). The
wireline neutron measurement is made from
a mandrel pressed against the borehole

Sonic porosity
preferred

wall, whereas the CDN measurement is

made from a tool centered in the borehole.
The borehole effect for the wireline tool is
not important compared to the mudcake
effect. On the contrary, the borehole size
effect on the CDN tool is large because the
tool is centered in the hole. The wireline
tool standoff effect is comparable to the
CDN borehole effect in amplitude.

Oilfield Review

Wireline
-0.9

0
0.1

150

0.1

60

Depth, ft

CDN
-0.9

150

Wireline N
CDN Rotational DCAL

0
10

CDN D

MWD Gamma Ray

0

10

Wireline D

Wireline Gamma Ray

0

Wireline DCAL

60

CDN N

x700

x800

nComparison of wireline and CDN density and neutron porosity logs in a vertical south

Texas well drilled with fresh mud. Above and below the bar, the hole was smooth and
in gauge during CDN logging. The zone marked by the bar was logged with the CDN
tool during a bit trip after being open several hours. Here, the CDN is high, consistent with a 9 pounds per gallon [lbm/gal] mud weight, and DCAL is close to zero. This
combination of readings indicates the hole was enlarged enough to prevent the CDN
tool from maintaining contact with the formation. The combination of a well-stabilized
BHA and lack of hole deviation produced this standoff. By wireline time, the caliper
indicates mudcake had formed. Arrows mark rugose intervals where wireline density
reads too high. In these intervals, the CDN measurement would be preferred, while in
the zone by the bar, wireline density would be preferred. (From Allen et al, reference 17.)

July 1992

Charles Flaum of Schlumberger in Montrouge, France, studied CDN density logs

and helped solve a key problem in horizontal drilling: knowing whether a formation
boundary is crossed from above or below.
Flaum examined the rotational density
output in a horizontal well that both entered
and exited the top of a pay sand (page 9,
top). The rotational correction makes use of
the statistical variance of the near-detector
count rate as the tool turns in the hole. In
this computation, a normalized statistical
variance of 1 indicates an in-gauge hole,
assuming no radial variation in density.
When the hole is in gauge, further excursions of the variance are not caused by
changes in standoff but by the tool crossing
a density boundary at a low angle. These
deflections may be used to determine
whether the well is approaching a density
contrast boundary from above or below.
Flaum found that in a smooth hole drilled
with undergauge stabilizers, the variance
will have a positive shift in the absence of a
density contrast boundary. If a denser formation approaches from below, the variance
will increase until the boundary is passed. If
a denser formation approaches from above,
variance will decrease. The opposite effects
will be observed if the approaching formation is of lower density. The density horns
may also help identify boundaries between
beds that have insufficient resistivity contrast
to produce horns on the resistivity log.
These advances in LWD technology and
technique are some of the innovations being
combined in new ways with drilling-related
measurements that are more quantitative.
This synergy of LWD and drilling measurements may take geosteering, now a new
technique, into the realm of the commonplace. This will lead to the next step, which
might be called geodrillingreal-time
merging of petrophysical and drilling data to
find more efficient and safe ways not only to
position the bit, but also to drill the well.
JMK
16. Others have noted the special case of invasion in a
horizontal well. See Woodhouse R, Opstad EA and
Cunningham AB: Vertical Migration of Invaded Fluids in Horizontal Wells, Transactions of the SPWLA
32nd Annual Logging Symposium, Midland, Texas,
USA, June 16-19, 1991, paper A.
17. Allen DF, Best DL, Evans M and Holenka J: The
Effect of Wellbore Condition on Wireline and MWD
Neutron Density Logs, paper SPE 20563, presented
at the 65th SPE Annual Technical Conference and
Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September 23-26, 1990.

19

LWD Case Studies

Amoco, North Sea

Amoco UK first decided to use LWD when a 60

Wireline

Wireline Caliper

development well had reached TD and the opera-

Wireline Density

tor could not get wireline tools downhole. The

6

drilling degradation of the borehole. A triple

in

16

Wireline Pe

combo LWD suite made a single trip in the well.

The logs appeared valid, except for a density discrepancy0.03

g/cm3

too high.

Depth, ft

cause of difficulty was suspected to be post-

CDN

CDN Caliper
-0.8

0.2

Wireline N
CDN Density
CDN N

CDN Pe
-3

g/cm3

2.10

In a subsequent well, drilled with oil-base

g/cm3

2.60 36

p.u.

x000

mud, Amoco determined that a comparison was

required between LWD and wireline measurements. The LWD-wireline comparison showed
excellent agreement. The b from LWD and wire-

nClose agreement
between wireline
and LWD density
logs in a North Sea
well. Divergence of
neutron porosities is
probably due to
differences in the
physics of wireline
and CDN measurementswireline
density is a purely
thermal measurement, whereas the
CDN density measures a combination of thermal and
epithermal neutrons.

line almost match (right). The LWD neutron

porosity, however, was lower than wireline particularly in shales because the LWD measurement,

x050

unlike the wireline measurement, accounts for a

combination of thermal and epithermal neutrons
and here was significantly affected by epithermal
neutrons.
Examination of the LWD logs shows that the
higher vertical resolution of the CDR tool in this
conductive environment (less than 2 ohm-m),

x100

compared to the wireline medium induction

resistivity log, improved calculation of water satlower water saturation, increasing the deterLWD
Gamma Ray

mined oil in place.

0

GAPI

100

Depth, ft

Wireline
Gamma Ray

uration in thin sands (right). This resulted in a

Wireline,
Medium Induction

Wireline,
Deep Induction

LWD, Rps

LWD, Rad

0.2

ohm-m

20 0.2

ohm-m

nHigher thin-bed
resolution on the
CDR log, compared to that of the
medium induction.
20

x700

x750

20

Oilfield Review

Unocal, Indonesia

Porosities
Wireline Caliper

Deep
induction
6

in

LWD Density

Depth, ft

Wireline Resistivity
Depth, ft

Shale Indicators

16

Wireline Density
1.7

g/cm 3

2.7

7100

Medium
induction

x700

LWD
gamma
ray

Wireline
density
7150

Diff.
caliper

Wireline
gamma
ray

CDN
neutron

7200

Wireline
neutron

x800

7250

nCorrugation of the wellbore wall from turbodrilling, evidenced

by oscillation of the wireline caliper. In the gas sands, LWD density is higher than the wireline value because the CDN tool
made better contact with the formation.
nGas sands in Southeast Asia less affected by excavation
effecta decrease in apparent neutron porosityat LWD time
compared to wireline time. Farther up the well, borehole conditions deteriorated by wireline time, preventing good pad contact
of the nuclear tool, which masked other gas sands.
Unocal has drilled a series of wells with MWD/

Use of OBM complicated evaluation with wire-

in good condition at this time, with no washouts

LWD tools in offshore Kalimantan, Indonesia. A

line logs because the mud masked many pay zones

greater than 1/2 in. But at wireline logging, five

notable gas discovery was made in the second

on mud logs. The real-time CDR log, however,

days later, washouts went off the scalerecorded

exploration well in the Serang field. LWD was

identified pay zones in what turned out to be a sig-

subsequently at 16 in. [40 cm].

planned over a long

section.1

The objectives were

nificant gas discovery. Downloading of CDN data

In the lower gas sand, above 7200 ft, the wire-

to evaluate the CDN measurements, obtain real-

confirmed the top of the gas sand had been pene-

line caliper shows a slight oscillation associated

time CDR measurements for comparison with

trated (above, left). These gas sands were later

with a regular corrugated effect on the borehole

wireline logs in a nearby well and provide early

verified by formation tester sampling. These zones

from turbodrilling (above). In this interval, the

detection and evaluation of pay zones.

could have been mistaken for oil zones because

maximum density from the CDN tool is higher due

of deep invasion at the time of wireline logging.

to better contact with the formation than that of

1. Norby P and Henry K: Logging While Drilling (LWD)

Results in Indonesia, paper OTC 6862, presented at the
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, USA,
May 4-7, 1992.

The CDR log was 60 minutes or less behind the

the wireline tool.

bit and the CDN log was less than 3 hours behind
the bit. The CDN differential caliper, between

July 1992

tracks two and three, indicates the hole was still

21

WELL LOGGING

Modeling Electromagnetic
Tool Response
Barbara Anderson
Gerald Minerbo
Michael Oristaglio
Schlumberger-Doll Research
Ridgefield, Connecticut, USA
Tom Barber
Bob Freedman
Frank Shray
Schlumberger Well Services
Houston, Texas, USA

Resistivity modeling was used as far back as

1927, when Conrad Schlumberger first reasoned how current from an electrode
spreads out into the formations around a
borehole. But he would have called it theorizing. Characteristics were assigned to
the formation (the formation model) and the
laws of physics, usually in idealized form,
were used to predict analytically the
response made by some electrode configuration (the sonde, or tool, model) to the
modeled formation. Both theoretical and
experimental modeling have passed through
many stages since then.
Early experimental modeling used small
electrodes in infinite saltwater baths.

the role of modeling during the last decade.

Computerized modeling has reduced from
weeks to minutes the time required to calculate many effects of tool design changes.
One can now systematically explore the
effects of environmental conditions such as
borehole rugosity and caves, mudcake,
invasion, dip, shoulder beds, and formation
anisotropy on resistivity tool responses.
The latest stage in this evolution is aimed
at providing rapid, low-cost log interpretation through the use of fast computers with
large, high-speed memories and efficient
programs. Recently, even massively parallel
processing has been introduced to serve
these goals. Some log interpretation by

Resistivity modeling is shortening the learning curve in gaining understanding of the reservoir.
Although almost as old as logging itself, resistivity modeling is an integral part of the latest developments,
from steering horizontal wells to investigating the effects of anisotropy.
Later, tool responses were studied using
mock-up sondes in more realistic environments created by using thin impermeable
membranes to separate waters of different
salinity. For a number of years, a resistor
network was used at the Schlumberger-Doll
Research laboratory in Ridgefield, Connecticut USA. This network, consisting of tens of
thousands of electrical resistors, simulated
resistivities in borehole, invaded zone and
virgin formation. In addition, theoretical calculations of sonde responses to layered and
invaded formations generated books of
departure curves. This theoretical approach
was especially important for tools that had
large depths of investigation or were not
readily adaptable to laboratory experiments.
Large improvements in computing capability have introduced qualitative changes in

22

interactive modeling is possible even on

personal computers.1 Program packages for
simple one-dimensional (1D) modeling are
commonplace; two-dimensional (2D) and
three-dimensional (3D) modeling are practical in many special cases, although they
generally require the use of mainframes or
supercomputers. Two-dimensional modeling
permits examination of axially symmetric
radial variationsfor example, treating
zero-dip layering and coaxial invasion
simultaneously. Three-dimensional modeling also handles azimuthal variations such
as circumferentially irregular caves or invasion, sonde eccentering and dipping beds.

Oilfield Review

The distinction between modelingfrequently forward modelingand inversion

is sometimes muddied. The latter typically
attempts to back out true resistivity, Rt ,
directly from the log with a minimum of
assumptions. The best known example of
this approach is vertical deconvolution
through the use of inverse filters. In its
purest form, this method requires only that
the vertical response function (VRF) of the
tool be known accurately.2 In practice, VRFs
are usually formation dependent, so approximations must be used. Nevertheless,
deconvolution has been employed successfully, running in real time on logging unit
computers. Artifacts may appear, however, if
inverse filters overreach in trying to achieve
fine vertical resolution or if the 2D assumptions implicit in the filter are violated.
In modeling, on the other hand, the analyst suggests an environmental model. This
trial model includes a description of the
borehole and formation geometry and
parameter valuesnumbers assigned to
variables such as borehole diameter and
bedding dip, thickness and resistivity. Then,
the tool physics a model in its own
rightis used to compute an expected log,
which is compared with the field log. If the
match isnt good enough, the initial trial
model is altered and the calculation
repeated. This process is iterated until the
two logs match satisfactorily. Several criteria
for the quality of match are used, from simple eyeballing to the more sophisticated
least-squares and maximum entropy methods described later. The models geometry
or parameter changes are executed interactively, using the analysts intuition and experience, or automatically, if computers and
programs of sufficient power are available.
Modeling intrinsically yields consistency
with the field log, even though the solution
isnt unique. This nonuniqueness is seldom

July 1992

Model Rt Profile
Computed Deep
Induction
0.2

ohm-m

Depth, ft

Modeling Versus Inversion

Model Rt Profile
Computed Deep
Induction
0.2

2000

ohm-m

2000

1800

1810

1820

1830

1840

nThe lack of uniqueness in forward modeling. Different formation models can

lead to nearly identical induction logs.
The ambiguity is resolved, however, by
addition of nearly any log with high vertical resolution.
a serious problem, however, because the
range of possible formation models can be
severely constrained by local knowledge
from cores and logs. An extreme example of
this condition shows two grossly different
models that predict the same deep induction log (above ). But in practice, almost any
additional log with vertical resolution of
about 1 foot [30 cm] or less (gamma ray,
EPT Electromagnetic Propagation Tool, dipmeter or photoelectric factor, Pe) would
resolve this ambiguity.

For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Charles

Flaum, Services Techniques Schlumberger, Montrouge,
France; Stan Gianzero, Austin, Texas, USA; Martin
Lling, Schlumberger-Doll Research, Ridgefield, Connecticut, USA; Bill MacGregor, Schlumberger Austin Systems Center, Austin, Texas, USA; Richard Rosthal,
Schlumberger Well Services, Houston, Texas, USA; Liang
C. Shen, Well Logging Laboratory, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA; Julian Singer, Schlumberger,
New Delhi, India.
In this article, AIT (Array-Induction Imager tool), CDR
(Compensated Dual Resistivity), EPT (Electromagnetic
Propagation Tool), Phasor and MicroSFL are marks of
Schlumberger. Cray is a mark of Cray Research, Inc.
Connection Machine is a mark of Thinking Machines
Corp. VAX is a mark of Digital Equipment Corp.
1. Georgi DT, Phillips C, Hardman R: Applications of
Digital Core Image Analysis to Thin Bed Evaluation,
Society of Core Analysts Transactions, paper 9206,
June 14-17, 1992, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA,
(in press).
2.Vertical Resolution of Well Logs: Recent Developments, Oilfield Review 3, no. 3 (July 1991): 24-28.
The vertical response function describes the characteristic response of the tool as it passes, perpendicularly,
an infinitely thin bed.

23

Model Two

Rt

Rt

Computed Deep Induction

Computed Deep Induction

Measured Deep Induction

2

ohm-m

Rt
True vertical
depth, ft

Measured depth, ft

Model One

Measured Deep Induction

200 2

ohm-m

Computed Deep Induction

Measured Deep Induction
2

200
0

A
B
C
D
E

ohm-m

200

nThe importance of
modeling. For a
well inclined 56,
an initial trial
model and its computed deep induction log are compared with the field
log (model one).
Modification of the
model leads to better agreement
between computed
and field logs, but
some discrepancies
remain (model
two). The final
model (right) produces nearly perfect agreement.
Depths in models
one and two are on
a log-measured
scale, while the
final results are presented on a true
vertical depth scale.
The two scales are
different because
the well is slanted.

50

25

Examples of Formation Evaluation

The economic importance of modeling is

illustrated by a North Sea reserves calculation based on induction log interpretation
carried out with a Schlumberger program
called Induction Sonde in Multilayered
Media (ISMLM).3,4 This is a 1D induction
modeling code for layered media that
neglects borehole and invasion effects. It
handles up to 150 parallel dipping layers.
Invasion was considered negligible because
the well was drilled with oil-base mud.
The measured deep induction log, initial
trial formation model and computed log are
shown in the first model (above, left ). Highresolution details of the trial model were
provided by an EPT log. The effects of the
first model revision are based on the analysts experience. The analyst changes the
thicknesses of conductive beds, adds layers
to the sands, and improves the depth match

24

between the induction and EPT curves.

Since visible discrepancies between the
field log and the modeled log remained, further model revisions were needed to
achieve the final results (above, right ). The
final model reduced the wells estimated
average water saturation from 9.7% to
7.2%. Because the hole is deviated 56, the
log-measured depths (MD) are greater than
the true vertical depths (TVD), and bed
thicknesses are similarly magnified. This
MD expansion of scale, obvious in highly
deviated wells, will be observed again in a
later example.
Subsequent to this work, the ISMLM code
was made part of the Electromagnetic Modeling package, called the ELMOD program.
The program consists of 1D and 2D codes
that compute the responses of electric logging tools to models of downhole environment. The programs can be run at any
Schlumberger Data Services Center or on a
Schlumberger VAX workstation. Configura-

tions include induction and laterologs in

multiple horizontal beds with borehole and
invasion, and induction and CDR Compensated Dual Resistivity logs in multiple dipping beds without borehole or invasion.
Other tool environments and fast induction
codes are being evaluated for addition to
the package. Other codes in this program
can be used for dipping bed interpretation.
In the dipping bed interpretation using the
ELMOD program, bed boundaries were provided by the Phasor deep induction log, and
an apparent dip of 38 by the dipmeter log.5
Discrepancy between the field induction log
and initial computed log led to revision of
the trial model and a recomputed log (next
page, top). This improved the fit, but one
more iterationfine-tuning the shapes of
some beds and adjusting for overcompensationyielded an excellent visual match
(ELMOD Simulation Three). Although the
final model is not a unique representation of

Oilfield Review

ELMOD Simulation One

ELMOD Simulation Two

Resistivity
1000

Resistivity

ohm-m

0.2

ELMOD Simulation Three

2000

ohm-m

0.2

Resistivity
2000

ohm-m

0.2

2000

Depth, ft

1050

1100

Measured deep
Phasor induction
Modeled deep
Phasor induction
Rt
1150

nModeling simulation using the ELMOD program for interpretation of a deep induction Phasor log in a North Sea well with
apparent dip of 38. The initial trial model was refined in two steps, left to right, until agreement was reached between the
model-computed and field logs. Simulation Three was consistent with the log analysts knowledge of the field.
Summary of Induction Modeling Programs
Source

Program

University of
Houston

NLAYER

Unlimited

MLIND

Well Logging
Laboratory1

DIPEX

WLAP

NDIP

IND9110

15 layers

ISMLM2
(ELMOD)

150 layers

TRIKHZ3
(ELMOD)

3 layers

No

Schlumberger

Radial Annuli

Horizontal Layering

Accounts for Dip?

CPU Time

No

10 sec4

Transmission

30 feet [9 m]

No

11 sec4

Perturbation

3 layers

Yes

40 sec4

Analytical

10, max 66 ft [20m]

No

12 min4

Propagation

100 layers

Yes

NA

Analytical

No

NA

Eigenmode

Yes

20 min5

Analytical

3 min5

Hybrid

1. Well Logging Technical Report, No. 7. Houston, Texas, USA: University of Houston Well Logging Laboratory, October 30, 1986. These programs are available to supporters of the laboratory, a consortium including most of the major oil companies.

3. Anderson B and Chew WC, reference 4.

Anderson B and Chang SK, reference 13.

2. Anderson B and Gianzero S, reference 4.

Anderson B, Safinya KA and Habashy T, reference 4.

5. VAX 11/780

true resistivity, it was consistent with the

analysts knowledge of the field, and the
predicted water saturations were accorded a
high degree of confidence.
Many more computer programs for a variety of electrical logging measurements have
been developed by service companies, oil
companies and universities. Some are available for commercial use, others only for
research purposes (see Summary of Induction Modeling Programs, above ).

July 1992

Method

4. IBM 3090

3. Fylling A and Spurlin J: Induction Simulation, The

Log Analysts Perspective, Transactions of the SPWLA
11th European Formation Evaluation Symposium,
Oslo, Norway, September 14-16, 1988, paper T.
4. Details of the ISMLM program:
Anderson B and Gianzero S: Induction Sonde
Response in Stratified Media, The Log Analyst 24,
no.1 (1983): 25-31.
Anderson B, Safinya KA and Habashy T: Effects of
Dipping Beds on the Response of Induction Tools,
paper SPE 15488, presented at the 61st SPE Annual
Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans,
Louisiana, USA, October 5-8, 1986.
Anderson B and Chew WC: A New High Speed
Technique for Calculating Synthetic Induction and
DPT Logs, Transactions of the SPWLA 25th Annual
Well Logging Symposium, New Orleans, Louisiana,
USA, June 10-13, 1984, paper HH.

5. Anderson B, Barber TD, Singer J, and Broussard T:

ELMODPutting Electromagnetic Modeling to Work
to Improve Resistivity Log Interpretation, Transactions
of the SPWLA 30th Annual Logging Symposium, Denver, Colorado, USA, June 11-14, 1989, paper M.

25

Modeling for Bit Guidance in

Horizontal Drilling

6. Gianzero S, Chemali R and Su S-M: Induction, Resistivity, and MWD Tools in Horizontal Wells, Transactions of the SPWLA 30th Annual Logging Symposium,
Denver, Colorado, USA, June 11-14, 1989, paper N;
also in The Log Analyst 31 (May-June, 1990): 158-170.
Burgess T and Voisin B: Advances in MWD Technology Improve Real Time Data, Oil & Gas Journal 90,
no. 7 (February 17, 1992): 51-61.
7. Chemali R, Gianzero S and Su SM: The Dual Laterolog in Common Complex Situations, Transactions
of the SPWLA 29th Annual Logging Symposium, San
Antonio, Texas, USA, June 5-8, 1988, paper N.

26

Distance from boundary, ft

Forward modeling is serving needs other

than conventional log interpretation, such
as guiding the bit while drilling deviated or
horizontal wells and evaluating the influence of adjacent (shoulder) beds on horizontal well logs.
Recent modeling studies in horizontal
wells make clear that conventional rules-ofthumb dont apply. Predictions have been
made of responses of induction and focused
electrode tools to shoulder beds,6 an important subject when logging thin beds or in
horizontal wells exhibiting vertical drift.
Because the induction tool is relatively
unaffected by the borehole, its calculations
were carried out analytically. For the
focused electrode tools, however, the borehole is an essential part of the problem, so
forward modeling was carried out with a 3D
finite-element method (FEM) computation, a
much larger enterprise. This investigation
concluded that the electrode devices are
more sensitive to conductive than resistive
shoulder beds, indications of which had
appeared earlier,7 and that the opposite is
true for induction tools. This behavior is the
reverse of that observed in vertical wells. In
the calculated responses of these tools to
the boundary between two beds of 1 ohmm and 10 ohm-m, the characteristic polarization horn is clearly visible on the
induction curve (above, right). This horn
appears when surrounding beds have high
resistivity contrast and the bed boundary
dips more than about 45.8 It is created by
oscillating polarization charges induced at
the bed boundary.
Another modeling study explored the
effects of dipping beds and laminated formations on induction and CDR tool
responses.9 Since the CDR model assumes

-2

Medium induction
Shallow laterolog

Deep induction
Deep laterolog
-4

10

100

Resistivity, ohm-m

10

100

Resistivity, ohm-m

nShoulder-bed effects on induction logs and laterologs in horizontal wells, calculated

by modeling. These curves show how traditional heuristic thinking does not apply: in
horizontal wells, laterolog tools are more sensitive to conductive than to resistive shoulder beds, while the opposite is true for induction tools.
point dipoles, the code was first qualified by
comparison with exact FEM calculations for
horizontal multiple beds and with test tank
experiments covering dips of 0 to 90. This
study predicted that both dip and shoulders
can cause shallow resistivity, Rps , and deep
resistivity, Rad , to separate, with Rps reading
closer to R t . Prominent polarization horns
appear at high-dip bed boundaries when
resistivity contrast is large, and the CDR tool
makes resistivity anisotropy apparent (Rps >
Rad ), the effect increasing with dip angle.
Oxy USA used forward modeling extensively while drilling horizontally into the
Cruse sand in La Salle Parish, Louisiana,
USA.10 To avoid the problem of water coning they had observed in vertical wells, Oxy
engineers planned to penetrate horizontally
into the top 10 feet [3 m] of the 40-foot [12m] thick Cruse. Resistivity models of marker
beds and of the pay sand itself were created

from induction logs in two nearby vertical

wells. Then, logs expected in the horizontal
well were computed for the CDR tool used
in Logging While Drilling (LWD). This 2MHz resistivity tool provides two outputs:
Rps from a phase-shift measurement, and
Rad from attenuation.11 No one knew accurately in advance what the logs would look
like as the well curved through the markers
and into the Cruse. In addition, actual borehole inclination is often not exactly as
planned. Therefore, prior to drilling,
ELMODs dipping-bed code was used to
compute CDR logs expected at several
apparent dips.9 Thus, the right modeled log
would be available immediately for comparison with the field log when the actual
relative dip became known while drilling.
Since the two CDR resistivity measurements have different depths of investigation,
the curves are predicted to separate just

8. Anderson B, Barber TD and Lling MG: The Role of

Computer Modeling in Log Interpretation, Transactions of the SPWLA 13th European Formation Evaluation Symposium, Budapest, Hungary, October 2325,1990, paper L.
9. Anderson B, Bonner S, Lling MG, and Rosthal R:
Response of 2-MHz LWD Resistivity and Wireline
Induction Tools in Dipping Beds and Laminated Formations, Transactions of the SPWLA 31st Annual
Logging Symposium, Lafayette, Louisiana, USA, June
24-27, 1990, paper A.
10. Leake J and Shray F: Logging While Drilling Keeps
Horizontal Well on Small Target, Oil & Gas Journal
89 (September 23, 1991): 53-59.

11. Clark B, Lling MG, Jundt J, Ross M and Best D:

A Dual Depth Resistivity Measurement for FEWD,
Transactions of the SPWLA 29th Annual Logging
Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, USA, June 5-8,
1988, paper A.
12. Formation Anisotropy: Reckoning With its Effects,
Oilfield Review 2, no. 1 (January 1990): 16-23.
Anderson et al, reference 8.

Oilfield Review

before the highly inclined tool leaves the cap

shale and enters the sand. Also, at the sands
upper boundary, the Rps curve predicts the
characteristic polarization horn.8 This horn is
expected to be somewhat broader on the
field log than on the computed log because
modeling calculations ignore the borehole
and the finite size of the tools transmitter
and receiver dipoles. These features are visible on logs modeled for the planned inclination of the borehole (85) at the top of the
target sand, and on actual field logs (below ).
The boundary of the Cruse is located precisely, confirming that the bit entered the
sand at the desired depth.

Measured depth, ft

Modeled CDR Resistivity

at 85
Rps
Rad
ohm-m

2000

Modeling played a role in interpreting an

unexpected logging observation within the
target zone. Differences between shallow
and deep CDR readings seemed too large to
explain by invasion because CDR measurements are made shortly after a section is
drilled. Furthermore, the vertical-well induction logs measured only 4 ohm-m, while in
the nearly horizontal well, the CDR deep
attenuation measurement approaches 10
ohm-m. In the vertical well, core analysis
from the upper part of the Cruse suggested
modeling it as a series of high- and lowresistivity streaks. Logs calculated on this
model agreed with both the vertical deep
induction log and horizontal Rad measurements, confirming that the formation resistivity is anisotropic. 12 This study led to
development of a CDR software package
that provides continuous logs of calculated
horizontal and vertical resistivities, using
measured apparent resistivity and relative
dip angle as inputs.

x700

Measured depth, ft

Rps

Rad
ohm-m

2000

How Modeling Calculations Are

Carried Out

Prior to starting the modeling process, many

analysts apply chartbook corrections to the
field log. These corrections make the field
log more accuratecloser to R t , for exampleand allow the use of simpler models
and faster computer programs for modeling.
Then, the corrected field log and all other
constraining information are used in setting
up the initial trial formation model. Less frequently, the uncorrected field log is used,
and the burden of accounting for features
like borehole, invasion, shoulder and skin
effect is borne by the formation model, tool
model and computing code. In this case,
the environmental corrections are
accounted for simultaneously, as preferred,
rather than sequentially, as when applying
chartbook corrections. Unfortunately, this
approach requires large programs and long
computer times.
Although further advances in computing
power will likely change the picture in the
future, current practice usually requires the
log analyst to construct an initial trial model
and propose changes at each iteration.
Feel or intuition are frequently the basis
for doing this, often acquired from field
experience or published studies of tool
responses to specific environmental features. In the last five years there has been a
surge of such studies that, themselves, were

nModeled (left) and measured CDR resis-

x750

x750

Polarization
horn, top of Cruse

Polarization
horn, top of Cruse

tivity logs as the tool curves into a pay

sand in a horizontal well. The measured
Rps and Rad curves (right) show a characteristic crossover as the tool crosses from
the cap shale into the sand. Just below
the boundary, Rps exhibits a polarization
horn created by induced oscillating
charges at the interface. The logs computed from a model assuming an 85
inclination show the same characteristics.
This inclination expands the MD scale by
a factor of 11.47 relative to the TVD scale.
(At 85, 1 foot of TVD equals 11.47 feet of
MD [30 cm of TVD = 344 cm of MD].)

x800

x800

July 1992

27

Purely analytical methods, using exact

mathematical solutions, employ codes that
run rapidly and require only modest computer memories. This makes them well
suited to the small computers readily available to most log analysts, but they are intrinsically limited to simple geometries such as
invasion with no layering or layering with
no invasion.
From this standpoint, numerical methods
are ideal. They break intractable mathematical problems into smaller, more manageable
pieces. Numerical methods, such as 2Dand 3D-FEM codes, can solve differential
equations in almost any geometry. The FEM
is widely used in research and engineering,
from the design of automobile bodies to the
study of diffusion over corrugated surfaces.
A typical logging application is the
numerical solution of Maxwells equations
for induction tools. This problem eventually

Tool Responses to Environmental Features

Tool

Environmental Conditions

Reference

Induction
(standard, Phasor)

Dip, shoulders, thin beds,

anistropy, laminations, R xo << R t

1, 2, 3, 4

Array Induction
Imager Tool

Borehole, caves, shoulders,

radial resistivity variation

5, 6

Laterolog

Shoulder, high dip, caves,

anisotropy, very high R t

2, 7

High-resolution
induction

Magnetic mud and formation

minerals, conductive caves

EPT

Mudcake, standoff, invasion,

depth of investigation, laminates

CDR

Dip, shoulder radial resistivity

variation

4, 10

1. Anderson B: The Analysis of Some Unresolved Induction Interpretation Problems Using

Computer Modeling, The Log Analyst 27 (September-October 1986): 60-73.
2. Chemali R, Gianzero S and Su SM: The Effect of Shale Anisotropy on Focused Resistivity
Devices, Transactions of the SPWLA 28th Annual Logging Symposium, London, England,
June 29-July 2, 1987, paper H.
3. Anderson B and Barber T: Strange Induction LogsA Catalog of Environmental Effects,
The Log Analyst 29 (July-August 1988): 229-243.
4. Reference 9, main text.
5. Grove GP and Minerbo GN: An Adaptive Borehole Correction Scheme for Array Induction
Tools, Transactions of the SPWLA 32nd Annual Logging Symposium, Midland, Texas, USA,
June 16-19, 1991, paper P.
6. Hunka JF, Barber TD, Rosthal R, Minerbo GN, Head EA, Howard AQ Jr, Hazen GA and
Chandler RN: A New Resistivity Measurement System for Deep Formation Imaging and
High-Resolution Formation Evaluation, paper SPE 20559, presented at the 65th SPE
Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, September 2326, 1990.
7. Reference 7, main text.
8. Strickland R, Chemali R, Su SM, Gianzero S, Walker M, Klein J and Sakurai S: New Developments in the High Resolution Induction Log, Transactions of the SPWLA 32nd Annual
Logging Symposium, Midland, Texas, USA, June 16-19, 1991, paper ZZ.
9. Anderson B, Liu Q-H, Taherian R, Singer J, Chew WC, Freedman B and Habashy T: Interpreting the Response of the Electromagnetic Propagation Tool in Complex Borehole Environments, Transactions of the SPWLA 32nd Annual Logging Symposium, Midland, Texas,
USA, June 16-19, 1991, paper XX.
10. Habashy T and Anderson B: Reconciling Differences in Depth of Investigation Between 2MHz Phase Shift and Attenuation Resistivity Measurements, Transactions of the SPWLA
32nd Annual Logging Symposium, Midland, Texas, USA, June 16-19, 1991, paper E.

28

50
40
30
20
10

z, in.

carried out by modeling (see Tool Responses

to Environmental Features, below ).
Even when forward modeling strives only
for formation description, most of the burden is on codes that implement the tool
modela representation of hardware and
physics for calculating how the tool
responds to its environment. This model
may be approximate because it idealizes
tool hardwaretreating finite-size coils or
electrodes as points, for example. Or it may
simplify the physicsas by using the geometric factor approach rather than
Maxwells equations in calculating induction tool responses. Alternatively, the hardware or the physics, or both, may be treated
exactly. The decision is a trade-off between
accuracy and computing efficiency. In
either case, some particular computation
algorithm becomes the vehicle for arriving
at the goal.

0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
0

10

20

30

40

, in.

50

60

70

nA small section of a simple grid used in

axially symmetric finite-element modeling calculations of induction logs. In the
calculation, the electromagnetic field is
determined at each node, or intersection,
on the grid. In some cases the complete
grid must extend hundreds of feet radially
and vertically.
reduces to solving a (usually) large number
of simultaneous linear equations by matrix
methods.13 The immediate objective is to
find the electromagnetic fields vector potential at the nodes, or intersections, of a 3D
grid, in the most general case. Simpler grids
(above) can be used in solving axially symmetric (2D) problems. The complete grid
may extend hundreds of feet vertically and
radially to adequately cover the electromagnetic field. In one modeling exercise, the
grid was terminated where the vector potential had fallen 15 orders of magnitudeto
zero for practical purposesfrom the starting point near the transmitter. Grid size
increases with distance from the transmitter
in regions where both vector potential and
generalized geometric factor are falling
slowly. This increases computational efficiency, with negligible loss in accuracy. In
1982, a CDC CYBER 750 computer typically
took five hours to compute 25 feet [7.6 m] of
induction log.14 Today, the whole log takes
only 15 minutes on a Cray supercomputer.
Most pure FEM codes need a fast vector processor or a Cray unit to run with reasonable
turnaround times. Unfortunately, this means
interfacing from a remote site, a capability
with only limited availability at present.
Hybrid techniques that retain the advantages of both purely analytic and purely
numerical methods have been developed.
They typically break the problem into two

Oilfield Review

nComparison of
hybrid and finiteelement modeling
calculations for
deep and shallow
laterologs. The two
methods yield
nearly identical
logs, but the
hybrid calculation
uses only oneeighth as much
computer time

100

Resistivity, ohm-m

10

(2 1/2 minutes on an
IBM 3081) as the

complete finite-element calculation.

Hybrid method
Finite-element method
Rt

0.1
100

Resistivity, ohm-m

10

Hybrid method
Finite-element method
Rt
0.1
-120

-90

-60

-30

30

60

90

120

Depth, in.

nHybrid modeling
calculation of deep
and shallow laterologs in 25 beds.
Calculating time
increased to 12
minutes (compare
with figures above),
but most of the
additional time
was used in segmenting the log
and recombining
the pieces, rather
than in the computation itself.

1000

Resistivity, ohm-m

100

10

Deep laterolog
Shallow laterolog

Rt

parts, one of which is attacked analytically

and the other numerically. This leads to
codes that can quickly solve, even on existing workstations, some problems in fairly
complicated geometries. The axially symmetric problem of the laterolog in a borehole through horizontal, layered formations
provides a simple example of a hybrid
approach. The 2D Laplaces equation that
governs the potential distribution around the
tool is reduced to two 1D problems in radial
(r ) and vertical (z) planes, respectively, by
the customary separation-of-variables technique. Then, the vertical distribution of the
potential can be treated numericallyby
the FEM, for exampleand the radial distribution treated analyticallyby modal analysisor vice versa.14 Compare the dual laterolog results of this method with a
complete FEM calculation in a 5-foot [1.5m] thick noninvaded bed (left). The logs are
essentially identical, but the hybrid calculation uses only one-eighth as much computer
time as the complete FEM calculation. If the
hybrid calculation is extended to 25 beds
(below, left), the hybrid time is increased
from 2.5 minutes to 12 minutes on an IBM
3081. Most of the additional time, however,
was used in segmenting the log into manageable portions and then recombining
them, rather than in the computation itself.
Earlier studies of hybrid techniques
describe other methods for modeling induction tool responses.15 Numerous codes and
13. Anderson B and Chang SK: Synthetic Induction
Logs by the Finite Element Method, Transactions of
the SPWLA 23rd Annual Logging Symposium, Corpus Christi, Texas, USA, July 6-9, 1982, paper M;
The Log Analyst 23 (November-December 1982):
17-26. Also published with more mathematical
detail as Simulation of Induction Logging by the
Finite Element Method, Geophysics 49 (November
1984): 1943-1958.
14. Gianzero S, Lin YY and Su SM: A New High-Speed
Hybrid Technique for Simulation and Inversion of
Resistivity Logs, SPE Formation Evaluation 3 (March
1988): 55-61.
15. Kaufman AA: Theory of Induction Logging,
Siberian Dept. of Nauka Press, Novosibirsk, 1965.
Anderson and Chew, reference 4.

0.1
-600

-400

-200

200

400

600

Depth, in.

July 1992

29

Analytical

Hybrid

Geometrical factor theory:

1 min VAX (Doll H, 1949) 1

Hybrid with/without skin effect:

2 min VAX (Kaufman AA, reference 15)

Bed
boundaries

Invasion
front

Unlimited cylindrical boundaries:

1-2 min VAX (Gianzero S and
Anderson B, 1984)2

Fast, semianalytic: 3 min VAX

(Anderson B and Chew WC, reference 4)

computer times exist for various types of

modeling (next page). Dashed boundaries
indicate problems solved with geometric
factor theory; solid boundaries indicate
solutions developed using exact electromagnetic theory. The times shown are all for 50foot [15-m] sections of log, where bed
boundaries exist, and for a single-point calculation in the two cases where one
infinitely thick bed is indicated (in this case
the log is constant as the tool moves vertically). These codes may be used for studying tool responses to specific environmental
perturbations, as well as in modeling for formation evaluation.
Least-Squares and Maximum Entropy
Matching Criteria

Dip with borehole and invasion:

15 min VAX (in progress)

Unlimited bed boundaries:

1-2 min VAX (Anderson B and
Gianzero S, 1983, reference 4)

Axis of
symmetry

Numerical

Eccentricity: 5 min VAX

(Gianzero S, 1978)3

2D finite elements: 20 min Cray

(Anderson B and Chang SK, ref. 13)

Unlimited dipping beds:

2-3 min VAX (Anderson B, Safinya
KA and Habashy T, reference 4)

nA sampling of codes and computer times

used in modeling induction tool responses.
Dashed boundaries indicate cases for
which geometric factor theory was used;
solid boundaries indicate use of Maxwells
equations. Times shown are for 50-foot
sections of log, where boundaries exist,
and for a single-point calculation where
one infinitely thick bed is indicated.

3D finite elements:
< 2 hrs Cray (in progress)
Nonuniform
invasion
front

Axis of
symmetry

Subjective eyeballing can usually evaluate

the fit between the field log and the modeled log. But two other matching criteria,
least squares and maximum entropy (MEM),
have received attention. They are of interest,
however, more because they use algorithms
that converge automatically to their respective best-fitting models than because of their
inherent objectivity. No human intervention
is needed to alter the model at each iteration. In application, these criteria lead to
computational methods that are different
from one another and from the manual
interactive approach.
One application of the least-squares criterion picks the set of formation parameters
that minimizes the sum of the squares of differences (SSD) between the field log and the
log derived from the assumed formation
model.16 In the language of statistics, the
mean square deviation, or variance,
between the two logs is minimized. For
example, with initial trial values of thickness
and resistivity assigned to each bed in the
model, the program computes the predicted
log and finds the SSD between it and the

1. Doll HG: Introduction to Induction Logging and Application to Logging of Wells Drilled with Oil-Base Mud,
Transactions, AIME 186 (1949): 148-162.
2. Gianzero S and Anderson B: Mathematical Theory for
the Fields Due to a Finite H.C. Coil in an Infinitely Thick
Bed with an Arbitrary Number of Co-Axial Layers, The
Log Analyst 25, no. 2 (March-April 1984): 25-32.

Known boundaries

30

Approximated boundaries

3. Gianzero SC: Effect of Sonde Eccentricity on Responses

of Conventional Induction-Logging Tools, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience Electronics GE-16, no. 4 (October
1978): 332-339.

Oilfield Review

16. Lin Y-Y, Gianzero S and Strickland R: Inversion of

Induction Logging Data Using the Least Squares
Technique, Transactions of the SPWLA 25th
Annual Logging Symposium, New Orleans,
Louisiana, USA, June 10-13, 1984, paper AA.
17. Dyos CJ: Inversion of Induction Log Data By the
Method of Maximum Entropy, Transactions of the
SPWLA 28th Annual Logging Symposium, London,
England, June 29-July 2, 1987, paper T.
Freedman R and Minerbo GN: Maximum Entropy
Inversion of Induction Log Data, paper SPE 19608,
presented at the 64th SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA,
October 8-11, 1989. Also published with minor
changes in SPE Formation Evaluation 6 (June 1991):
259-268.

July 1992

24 in.
200 ohm-m

25
ohm-m

Borehole

40 in.

200
ohm-m

50 ohm-m

nForward modeling by applying

the least-squares
method to a set of
simulated logs.
Synthetic induction
logs and a laterolog (lower left)
were computed for
the formation
model shown.
Then, using the
dotted-line parameter values (estimated by a standard interpretation)

1
ohm-m

as the initial guess,

the least-squares
method converged
to the solid-line
final iteration
model (lower right).

32 in.
15 ohm-m

5 ohm-m

8 in.

30

0.2

ohm-m

Computed
Invasion Diameter

Computed Rt

Simulated Resistivity

Depth, ft

field log. Then, the models bed thicknesses

and resistivities are automatically changed
to reduce the SSD. This procedure repeats
until the SSD converges to a minimum.
Computing time depends, as in other iterative schemes, on how close the initial
model log is to the field log. To keep this
time short, the user frequently minimizes
the number of parameters to be optimized
since computing time increases with this
number. Also, if some parameters interfere
with one anotherproduce similar effects
on the logtheir precision is adversely
affected even though they are optimally
determined in the least-squares sense.
Consider an application of the leastsquares method to a set of simulated logs
(right ). The initial trial model used parameter values estimated by a standard interpretation. Because flushed zone resistivity, Rxo,
values were assumed known from the
MicroSFL resistivity tool, the modeling program was called upon to determine the pay
zone thickness in addition to Rt and invasion diameter in each of the three beds. This
early-1980s calculation took 20 minutes on
an IBM 360, using FEM. Today it can be
done on a workstation in under 60 seconds.
The maximum entropy criterion comes
from Shannons information theory and has
been used for reconstruction of blurred
satellite photographs and for extracting signals from noisy data. It leads to a different
method of calculation 17 although the
method bears some similarity to the leastsquares approachdifferences between
field log and modeled log are used in calculation of 2, a quantity related to the SSD.
With respect to the use of 2, the maximum
entropy method can be considered an
extension of the least-squares approach. The
actual algorithms employed reduce 2 iteratively, while maintaining entropy close to its
maximum at each iteration. This procedure

2000

0.2

ohm-m

2000

in.

100

Laterolog
Deep
Induction
Medium
Induction

Initial guess
Final iteration

selects the unique least-squares solution

having maximum entropy.
There is an important difference between
the MEM and least-squares methods. The
final model selected by the MEM is the
smoothest possible profile rather than the
one that yields a minimum SSD. Of all possible models, it is the one that has minimum
information content (in the information-theory sense) consistent with the field log. Consequently, this criterion inhibits the appearance of artifacts that sometimes show up
when using the least-squares method.
Unfortunately, the MEM is computationally
expensive. The cost is reduced if a priori
knowledge of bed boundaries is included in
the initial model, as with other methods, but
cost remains the main impediment to wider
MEM use at present.

31

Oklahoma Formation

nForward model-

ing of an induction
log by the maximum entropy
method (MEM)
(left) and using
information from
the medium induction log to remove
oscillations
(below). Geometric
factor theory was
used to calculate
the synthetic deep
induction log from
the assumed Rt profile. An advanced
version of the maximum entropy
method, assuming
no bedding structure in the initial
trial model, then
converged to the
final R t profile.
Oscillations in the
thicker beds result
from the Fourier
spectrum of the
deep induction
tools vertical resolution function,
and are unrelated
to use of the maximum entropy modeling approach.

1000

Resistivity, ohm-m

100

10

MEM without beds input

Raw Doll ID signal
Rt

Resistivity, ohm-m

1000

100

10

MEM without beds input

Medium induction
Synthetic deep induction
Rt

-1000

-500

500

1000

Vertical position, in.

17

15
100
13
10

MEM computed raw deep

induction signal
Measured raw deep
induction signal
Caliper

11

0.1

Caliper, in.

Conductivity, milliSiemens/m

1000

nA deep induction
field example comparing the log
computed by the
maximum entropy
method with the
measured log. The
predicted finalmodel profile is
also shown.

Nevertheless, the MEM can provide a formation model from an induction log, without assuming knowledge of bed boundaries
(left ). The synthetic field log was calculated by applying geometric factor theory
(for simplicity) to the Rt distribution shown,
and geometric factor theory was thus used
in representing tool response in the forward
modeling. Oscillations visible in the thicker
beds are not a consequence of the MEM,
but result from so-called blind frequencies
in the Fourier spectrum of the deep inductions VRF. These oscillations are readily
suppressed by adding information from the
medium induction. Addition of the medium
induction contributes a smoothing effect. An
actual example shows how well an MEMpredicted log matches its corresponding
field-measured induction (below, left ).
The Future

Further developments in modeling are

already in the pipeline. Generally, these
take two forms, depending on the computation size envisioned. One effort is aimed at
providing a computed log in about one
minute, using interfaces that are suitable for
workstations. These should make the process more analyst-friendly, through features
like entry of parameters in graphical format
and windows that display the field log, the
computed log and the model, including its
parameters, dips and boundaries.
The other development arena involves
extending the capabilities of large computers. Primarily intended for use in tool
design, these studies are deep into the 3D
domain, using the FEM for modeling computations that take hours even on a supercomputer. Still more exploratory are investigations of advanced algorithms and
automatic code generation for speeding up
complex calculations. Some algorithms are
being applied in commercial seismic processing using parallel computers like the
CM-2 Connection Machine.
JT

7
8200

8250

8300

8350

Vertical position, ft

32

Oilfield Review

Mixed-Terrain 3D Seismics in
The Netherlands
3D seismics is an exploration technique that improves the success ratio of wildcat wells. Cost-efficient at
sea and on land, it has also proved its worth in mixed terrains. This article describes the planning, acquisition and processing of perhaps the most difficult 3D mixed-terrain survey ever made.

nAerial view of the Europort near Rotterdam, with 3D seismic survey grid superposeddistance between lines is 400 m. The grid
indicates the ideal shooting and receiving positions. In practice, equipment has to circumvent obstacles. Additionally, the survey
has to cope with the ever-changing terrain, from water to land and back again. The 15-km by 25-km survey took 6 months.
Carsten Petersen
Assen, The Netherlands
Horst Brakensiek
Markos Papaterpos
Hannover, Germany
1. Bukovics C and Nooteboom JJ: Combining Techniques in Integrated 3D Land, Shallow Water and
Deep Channel Seismic Acquisition, First Break 8
(October 1990): 375-382.

July 1992

Since the late 1970s, the exploration and

production company Nederlandse Aardolie
Maatschappij b.v. (NAM), jointly owned by
Shell and Exxon, has been systematically
acquiring three-dimensional (3D) seismic
coverage of its Dutch concessions. Most of
these surveys have been for exploration, a
pioneering trend when the surveys were
begun3D seismic technology was initially
heralded as a tool for improving reservoir
characterization. But the financial risks have

paid off. In 1988, 12 of NAMs 15 exploration wells struck pay, an astonishingly

high proportion.1
The terrain has not been easy. The people
of the Netherlands not only have harnessed
every square meter of their land for urban,
agricultural or industrial use, but through
dyke building have steadily claimed vast
areas of subsea land called polder. The

33

nLocation of
NAMs 3D surveys
near The Hague
and Rotterdam.
This article
describes the 1990
Monster survey, so
called because of
its complexity and
the fact that the
town of Monster
lies in the survey
area. The adjoining marine survey
was performed at
about the same
time. The survey
covered farmland,
urban development, extensive
greenhouse cultivation and the
worlds busiest oil
port and refinery
complex. At any
given moment, the
team would be
deployed over an

Amsterdam

Den Haag
1985-6
Monster
1990
Beijerland
Dordrecht
1987
1988
Biesbosch
1986
3

Urban
Farmland
2
Greenhouses
Wildlife reserve
Industrial/Refineries
1
4

area shown by the

green rectangle in
block 4. Complexity of the survey is
demonstrated in the
detail of the port,
which also shows
the 400-m by 400m survey grid.

countryside is crisscrossed with canals, large

and small. Densely populated, the complex
terrain provides endless challenge to the
versatility of seismic crews as they coordinate complex shooting configurations.
NAMs progress has been steady. Thousands of square kilometers of land and nearshore coast have been surveyed using 3D
techniques. The work has concentrated in
two main areas, in the northeast of the country including the giant Groningen gas field,
and in the southwest, in and around the
cities of Rotterdam and The Hague (left ).
The southwestern area is particularly challenging for both acquisition and processing.
Some of the surveys have to contend with a
mix of near-shore marine areas, harbors,
urban sprawl, sections of land covered in
greenhouses, and farmland. Typically, three
different sources are usedairguns, dynamite and vibratorsand two types of
receiversgeophones and hydrophones.
The several combinations of source and
receiver produce seismic traces that require
careful phase correction during processing.
In addition, the processing must contend
with very difficult statics. Statics describes
the time correction that must be applied to
each individual trace to neutralize the effect
of the unconsolidated weathering layer. In
the Rotterdam area, the weathering layer
varies dramatically in both thickness and
acoustic velocitytwo key controlling
parametersfrom one geophone station to
the next.
Despite these problems, 3D surveys here
have yielded valuable results. NAM reports
identifying potential pay and then drilling a
discovery well beneath the Shell refinery in
the Europort, Rotterdam. 2 This article
describes the seismic acquisition of one of
the last pieces of the puzzle for this southwest survey area by PRAKLA in 1990/91
and accompanying processing challenges.3
Planning

2. Company Profile: Shell, First Break 9 (December

1991): 566-567.
3. PRAKLA together with GECO now forms part of the
Schlumberger seismic company, GECO-PRAKLA.

34

The survey area measures about 15 by 25

kilometers [9 by 15 miles] and is composed
of five types of terrain. The southwestern
section comprises mainly farmland. This is
bordered to the north by the Europort with
its web of canals through which about 200
large boats, for example oil tankers, and
numerous smaller vessels ply daily, and the
largest conglomeration of refineries in
Europe. The eastern section covers suburbs
of Rotterdam. To the northwest is again
farmland, and then an area of land, 9 by 9
km [6 by 6 miles], entirely covered in
greenhouses. Northwest of the greenhouses
is beach, protected as a wildlife sanctuary. If
that were not already daunting enough, the

Oilfield Review

survey also had to move out to sea and provide overlapping coverage with a marine
survey previously commissioned by NAM
and completed by GECO.3
The first planning step was to decide
where to start and the order in which to survey these areas, each having its own special
access restrictions and safety aspects. The
survey was planned to begin in June 1990,
and the following restrictions applied. Work
in water areas was ruled out during winter
because of the rapid onset of death in the
event of anyone falling overboard. Work on
the beaches was ruled out in spring during
the bird breeding season and was also not
desirable during summer because of tourists
and sunbathers. Work in farmland is best
during winter when cattle are confined to
sheds, but tolerable during any season.
Once you have figured how to do it, seismic
surveying in greenhouses is possible anytime during the year.
The overall planning therefore took shape
as follows: The survey party would begin in
easy territory in the farmland in Block 1.
They would then move up to the harbor
area at the top of Block 1, gaining wider
experience with an increasingly large array
of equipment. Flexibility was to prove the
key to accomplishing the difficult stages to
schedule, and this early training period
proved essential for party members to gain
familiarity with all types of equipment.
During the summer, the survey would
then move to Block 2 and survey the mouth
of the port and its beach area. Toward
autumn, the party would split, with a
smaller group surveying the beach and
adjoining offshore area in Block 3 and the
majority of the crew deployed in Blocks 4
and 5, the remaining harbor area and the
Rotterdam suburbs. As winter approached,
the crews would recombine to survey the
farming area of Block 6 and then finish with
the greenhouses in Block 7 (above, right).
Once the overall sequence was established, detailed arrangements could begin.
Consistent with earlier surveys, the 3D survey was to map the subsurface with an areal
resolution of 20 mthat is, the survey area
was subdivided into a mosaic of bins, each
measuring 20 m by 20 m (see Conversion
Glossary, right ). This coverage is obtained
by arranging source rows and receiver lines
on a much coarser grid measuring 400 m by
400 m. A grid this size was therefore superposed on the map.
The coarse grid provides the ideal positioning of sources and receivers arranged
along the vertical and horizontal lines of the
grid respectively. In reality, of course, obstacles of all kinds stand in the way. The grid

July 1992

nGreenhouses covering several

square kilometers
of the survey. The
PRAKLA crew
negotiated this
sensitive area
using explosive for
a sourceno glass
was shattered!

Conversion Glossary
Land Acquisition
Bin size

20m 66 ft

Reciever/shot spacing

40m 131 ft

Grid spacing

400m 1312 ft

Reciever array

4.8 km by 1.2 km 3 miles by 0.75 mile

Rectangle of coverage

2.4 km by 0.8 km 1.5 miles by 0.5 mile

Swath width

0.8 km 0.5 mile

Marine Acquisition

Airgun pontoon draft

75 cm 30 inches

S.V. Solea draft

2 m 6.6 ft

Streamer length

1800 m 5906 ft

Group spacing

25 m 82 ft

must be bent and squeezed to get around

them, but the new grid must also satisfy the
environmental and safety concerns of
municipalities, private companies, landowners and the public. Three months before the
survey begins in a particular area, NAM
contacts the various state authorities to
obtain permission to conduct the survey and
discuss these matters. Simultaneously, a representative of the survey contractor, called a
permit man, contacts the private companiesthere were over 50 major companies
in the refinery area alone.

The last group to be approached, perhaps

one month before the survey reaches their
land, is the farmers. To defuse tension that
may arise when geophysicists deploy equipment and explosives on valuable farmland,
NAM and the Dutch farmers union have
agreed to a third party performing farm permitting. Farmers are an important group to
maintain good relations withNAM surveys
touch up to 20,000 farmers every year. A

35

Vibrator
Explosive
Airgun
Offset shooting
Receiver line

36

nActual shooting locations compared with the ideal 400-m

by 400-m grid. If an obstacle prevents shooting on the grid,
the location is shifted orthogonal to the shooting line. Vibrator locations (blue) follow roads, and explosive locations
(rpink) have to avoid the middle of cultivated fields. The airguns (orange) follow the grid best.

farmers working life is constantly being

adjusted to accommodate the weather, and
as a result seismic crews have to do likewise.
A string of geophones laid across a field one
day may have to be relocated to the edge of
the field the next because the weather
changes and potatoes have to get planted.
Throughout the planning and even during
the survey, all participants from the individual farmer to the major corporation require
constant liaison. Videos are shown to harbor
officials explaining how seismic surveys
work, demonstrating the need for their participation to ensure contractor boats do not
tangle with supertankers; mayors must be
reassured that vibrating trucks will leave
street surfaces as they found them.
Slowly, deviations from the ideal grid are
agreed upon by all parties and a realistic
survey plan takes shape. Generally speaking, sources are more of a problem than
receivers. Unless an obstacle is truly insurmountable, organizations and landowners
tolerate placement of hand-sized geophones
where the grid stipulates. Sources on the
other hand require relatively large equipment and usually cannot be constrained to
the grid (left ). An exception is in the water,
where airguns carried on pontoons can get
to any location once shipping has been
accounted for. A team of four vibrator
trucks, used in urban areas at night, has to
stick to roads. And explosives, used in the
fields andyes, in greenhousessuffer their
own special restrictions.
All the while, surveyors must keep track
of every relocation of a source or receiver.
Moving source locations from their ideal
position raises the issue of how one ensures
an even coverage in each 20-m by 20-m
bin. But this begs the more basic question of
how sources and receivers arranged on an
ideal 400-m by 400-m grid provide the
required 20-m by 20-m coverage. Let us
answer the last question first.
Three-dimensional land seismics are usually performed with receivers laid along several widely spaced parallel lines and shooting points distributed along a line orthogonal
to the receivers (next page, top ). In the Rotterdam survey, 480 receiver groups were
distributed along four lines, 120 groups per
line, each group comprising several geophones or hydrophones connected in series
to boost signal at the expense of noise.
Shots were fired sequentially at ten equally
spaced stations between the two middle
receiver lines.
This configuration provides 4800 seismic
records, whose reflection midpoints define
the rectangle of coverage. To get the requisite coverage, that is putting a midpoint in

Oilfield Review

1.2 km

4.8 km

nStandard 3D land shooting configuration. 480 receiver groups are spread

along 4 lines, 120 per line, with a 40-m
spacing between groups. Shooting is performed at ten equally spaced locations
along an orthogonal line between the two
inner lines. This provides rectangular coverage of an area equal to one-half the
surface deployment area.
Twelvefold coverage is obtained by
stepping the shooting position in the
direction of the receiver lines, providing a
swath of coverage comprising overlapping rectangles. More overlap is obtained
as the survey moves back creating an
adjacent swath.

Source
Receiver

each 20-m by 20-m bin, the spacing

between successive receiver and source
positions has to be twice 20 m, or 40 m.
This means that the distance between
receiver lines, equal to ten source points,
has to be 400 m and each receiver line is
4.8 km long. At any moment, the survey
team is therefore deployed over a 4.8-km by
1.2-km area, shooting ten positions between
the two middle lines (below ). The rectangle
of coverage measures 2.4 km long by 0.8
km wide.
Once the ten shots are complete, the survey then steps either right or left, and the
entire process is repeated. This provides a
similarly sized rectangle of coverage overlapping the previous one and creating a
swath of coverage 0.8 km wide. The logistics of stepping are relatively simple
because most of the receivers can remain in

place. Just a few groups must be added to

the advancing end of the four receiver lines,
while those on the receding end are picked
up and transported ahead for future use.
When the survey reaches the edge of the
survey area, the entire top or bottom
receiver line is picked up, and relaid the
other side of the remaining three lines.
Shooting then recommences in the middle
of the new configuration and the survey
progressively steps in the opposite direction.
This provides another swath of overlapping
coverage that overlaps the previous swath.
Every point on the ground gets covered by
just two swaths.
NAM stipulated a fold of 12, so every
point on the ground had to be covered by
six overlapping rectangles in a given swath.
Since each rectangle measures 2.4 km long,
the stepping distance therefore had to be

2400/6 = 400 m. This explains the coarse

400-m by 400-m survey grid. Now for the
original question: How does the survey
team allow for shot point deviations from
the ideal grid?
The solution follows the principle that
when a source is moved left or right from its
proper position, reflection points remain
unchanged if receivers are moved an equal
distance in the opposite direction (below ).
In practice, receivers are not moved at all.
The source is moved in 40-m increments
orthogonal to the shooting line or parallel
to the receiver lines. The receivers can then
be reconnected at the recording truck to
simulate physical relocation by the requisite number of 40-m steps. Each of these
manipulations is worked out in advance
from the detailed planning and performed
without interrupting the days schedule.

nThe survey team

inserting geophones in a street
in the Rotterdam
suburbs.

nEnsuring coverage when obstacles

require relocation of the source. The solution is first to move the source, then to
move the receivers an equal distance but
in the opposite direction. In the field,
receivers do not have to be moved, but
simply reconnected to simulate movement.

July 1992

37

nUndershooting
used when
extremely large
obstacles prevent
shooting anywhere
near the required
grid position.

Personnel

A variation of this technique, called

undershooting, solves the problem of being
unable to shoot in extensive areas that
vibrators cannot access or where dynamite
is prohibited (left ). In these cases, source
positions are shifted to an adjacent 400-m
block in the direction of the source line and
shooting takes place during the previous or
following swath when the receiver lines are
also effectively shifted by one 400-m block.
Undershooting ensures full coverage in the
most complex areas.

Vehicles and Vessels

Seismic Equipment
Recording units 2

Recording trucks 2
Explosive trucks 2

Party chief 1

Power units
316

Seismologists 3

Field station units

1700

Supervisors 13
Liaison vehicles 6
Mobile
workshop

nSeismic equip-

ment worth $20

million, 137 personnel, 88 vehicles
and over a dozen
vessels were needed
to conduct NAMs
3D mixed-terrain
survey. The 6month operation
was completed
without accident.

Light trucks
(4WD) 4

Recording team 17
Light trucks 55
Cable crew 19

Drill rigs 4

Spread cables
1700

Drilling team 20
Holders 8

Ram hammers 7

Cable support 16
Chase boats 2 Bay cables 66
Dynamite crews 4

Vibrators 6

Administration 1

Pontoon

Maintenance 7

Geophones
20,400

Sara Maatje
Survey vessel Solea
Auxiliary boats 5
Motorship Karin Cat

Additional helpers 24

38

Oilfield Review

nA pontoon carrying airguns used in

the shipping channels and shallowmarine areas. Its
specially designed
airguns can operate in water as
shallow as 75 cm.

Execution

The physical reality of recording swaths of

12-fold coverage across harbor, urban environment and farmland amounts to a platoon
of men and equipment, trained for peak efficiency (previous page, below). One hundred and thirty-seven men headed by a
party chief included seismologists, recording teams, shooters, drilling teams, dynamite crews, cable support groups, maintenance and administration. But the crew
could not be constrained by labels. Everyone worked at several jobs to maintain the
flexibility the mixed terrain demanded.
To get around on land, the crew logged
400,000 hours driving 2 recording trucks, 2
explosive trucks, 59 light trucks, 6 liaison
vehicles, a mobile workshop, 6 vibrators
and 12 small drill rigs. Specifying a parking
space at PRAKLAs base for each vehicle
represents a trivial yet significant example of
the organization required to keep track of
the vehicle population and ensure its efficient use.
At sea and in the harbor, there was a shallow-water survey vessel, the S.V. Solea, two
very shallow-draft airgun poppersthe Sara
Maatje and a specially constructed pontoon
that could turn on its axisand a small
flotilla of chase and supply boats. The shallow-draft poppers can operate in only 75

nBay cables
weighted hydrophone cables
awaiting deployment across a busy
shipping channel
of Rotterdams Europort. Bay cables
posed many problems for the survey
team. Although
designed to lie
across the channel
bottom, they were
displaced by currents and large-vessel movement and
frequently cut by
anchors. Their position was determined
using transponders.
The yellow instrument on the tripod
was used to fix the
location of the pontoon equipped with
airguns.

July 1992

centimeters of water, eliminating the use of

explosive, a boon to the local fish population ( above ). Explosives can kill fish
because the high-frequency content of the
explosion excites natural oscillations in their
air bladders destroying their buoyancy control. Airguns, on the other hand, have been
shown not to harm fish.
To record the survey, the party deployed
equipment worth $20 million: 1700 field
station unitscompact, weatherproof boxes
of electronics that digitize the seismic signal
from a group of receivers and on command
transmit the data to the recording

truck316 miscellaneous electronics packages such as power units and repeater units,
1700 spread cables used to connect the
field station units to the recording truck, 66
bay cablesweighted hydrophone streamers for laying across the bottom of waterways crisscrossing the survey areaand
20,400 geophones.
Essential to the survey was simultaneous
deployment of marine and on-land equipmentthe shooting area of 4.8 km by 1.2
km frequently covered both shipping lanes
and the bordering land. Activity in the water
had to be coordinated with the harbor
authorities and police, to avoid shipping.
Often both airgun poppers were deployed
to save the time just one would have taken
to negotiate the maze of shipping docks.
Bay cables, however, were the worst
problem (left ). Easily shifted from their original locations by tides or the hefty wake of a
supertanker, they were also cut by boats setting anchor to aid maneuvering in tight
spaces. Practically none of the 66 bay
cables was serviceable at the end of the survey. Because of bay cables being cut and
also because of the generally complex terrain, two recording trucks linked to different
segments of the receiver lines and operating
in synchronization offered a recording versatility and speed that would have been
impossible using the usual one.
Despite the extreme complexity of the
survey, no accident marred the 174-day
operation. Both NAM and PRAKLA certainly
did not stint on attention to safety procedures. In the refinery area, for example, the
survey team had to learn and adhere to

39

each refining companys separate in-house

safety code. Equally, the survey team had to
maintain safety standards of subcontractors for example, pilots hired to help lay
bay cables. Safety would always be on the
agenda of the daily morning briefing sessions when plans for the next 24 hours
would be firmed up.
Environmental concerns were also ever
present, particularly in the farmland and
greenhouses where the crew used explosive
as seismic source. Being reclaimed land,
most of this area averages an elevation a
few meters below sea level, and shot holes
drilled conventionally for explosive would
have flowed water and possibly contaminated the surrounding land.

The solution was to create holes without

water circulation, by pushing or hammering
drillpipe to a depth between 12 and 20 m
and using a disposable aluminum point
attached to the bottom of the drillpipe to
facilitate penetration into the earth (below ).
The explosive charge was then inserted
down the drillpipe, followed by cardboard
tubes filled with bentonite clay. As the
drillpipe was pulled out of the ground, the
cardboard tubes remained in the hole gradually filling with ground water. This swelled
the bentonite, sealing the hole from the
environment and as a bonus providing perfect tamping for detonation.
Further precautions were required to protect the sterile growing environment of the

Drill hammer

Clay/
peat

Sand

Make hole

Place explosive

Insert bentonite
tubes

Pull out casing

Hole sealed

nMethod of drilling shot holes to avoid water contamination. The hole is created by
hammering drillpipe into the earth rather than by conventional drilling with water circulation. As soon as the explosive is inserted, the hole is filled with cardboard tubes
containing bentonite clay. After the drillpipe is removed, the tubes fill with ground
water, swelling the bentonite and sealing the hole.
nClad in clean
boots and coats to
avoid introducing
bacteria and
microbes into the
clean environment
of the greenhouses,
three members of
the PRAKLA survey
team insert tubes
of bentonite into a
shot hole.

40

greenhouses. To avoid tramping in unwanted

microbes and bacteria, the crew were
obliged to don white surgical coats and
clean boots (below ).
A critical part of the operation was providing overlapping coverage with GECOs
marine survey. This was carried out in stages
that covered progressively shallower water
(next page, top ). First came GECOs survey
using deep-sea vessels that could approach
the shoreline to almost 10-m water depth.
Then, PRAKLA deployed the S.V. Solea, a
shallow-water survey boat with a draft of
only 1.3 m. Towing a 1800-m streamer
equipped with 72 hydrophone groups
spaced every 25 m, the S.V. Solea continued
coverage to around a 2-m [7-ft] water depth
and also in an area of sea near a long breakwater that GECOs larger boats with longer
streamers could not negotiate.
Finally, the shallowest water up to the
beach was surveyed by laying geophone
cables along the beach and using the pontoon to air-pop along orthogonal shooting
lines in the water. This provided coverage
up to the conventional land survey. As
much as possible, the crew limited activity
to high tide so the pontoon could get as
close as possible to the beach area.
Coverage and data quality are the key
ingredients of a successful survey. The even
coverage of the PRAKLA survey, both at sea
and on mixed terrain, attests to thorough
planning and execution ( next page, bottom ). Thereafter, it is up to data processors
to create order in the millions of records and
through exquisite manipulations of deconvolution, stacking and migration form an accurate, focused picture of the subsurface.

Land survey

10 m
Pontoon popping
S.V. Solea

nEnsuring coverage in the nearshore area where

GECOs deep
marine survey
abutted PRAKLAs
mixed-terrain survey. The transition
zone was surveyed
in four stages moving from sea to land.
First the deep sea
survey, then a shallow water survey
using the shallowdraft S.V. Solea,
then very shallow
water coverage
using an airgun
popper in the surf
and geophone
lines spread on the
beach, and finally
the land survey.

GECO survey

Above 12
12fold
Below 12

18 fold
912
1320

July 1992

nBinning maps
showing abutting
coverage in the
two main surveyed
areasthe 15-km
by 25-km mixedterrain area and a
shallow-marine
area in the northwest that links with
a deep-marine 3D
survey conducted
by GECO.

41

Processing

This survey posed two special challenges for

processors: correctly assessing the effect of
the weathering layer, in a series of processes
called statics correction, and accounting for
the different source signatures of airguns,
dynamite and vibrators. It was decided that
differences between geophone and hydrophone responses were too small to have a
noticeable effect and were ignored.
The goal of statics correction is to timeshift every trace so the entire survey looks as
though it was made from a depth datum situated in consolidated rock somewhat below
the weathered layer. 4 This removes the
effect of surface topography and travel time
in the weathered layer which often varies
greatly on land. Without statics corrections,
land seismic sections often have a choppy
appearance, with reflectors showing poor or
no continuity. Applying the time-shifts
restores continuity.
The essentially flat topography of the Rotterdam area poses no problems, but the
weathered layer is complex (below ). Near
the shore, at least two layers must be considered, dunes of dry sand with low velocity
lying on top of wet sand with high velocity.
Farmland often sits on peat that has very
low velocity and varies unpredictably in
Sea

Dunes

nLocations of refraction surveys conducted to evaluate the weathering layer and perform the statics correction. Each short line represents a 100-m spread used to make a
refraction survey, essentially a small-scale survey designed to estimate the depth and
acoustic velocity of the weathering layer only.
Refinery

Rubble

Channel

Farmland

Peat

nProfile of weathering layer showing difficulties in the near-shore environment with

low-velocity, dry sand dunes, in the refinery area with high-velocity rubble, in the shipping channels with no weathering layer at water depths greater than 10 m, and in the
farmland with low-velocity peat varying unpredictably in thickness.

42

thickness, up to 10 m [33 ft] thick. The shipping channels appear to have eroded all
trace of the weathering layer where water
depth exceeds 10 m. In the refinery area
built on reclaimed land using rubble from
World War II bombing, the surface layer is
fast, but there may be underlying weathering material of much lower velocity.
How does the crew go about measuring
the weathering layers velocity and thickness? Several approaches must be used
together. One is the refraction survey, a
miniature seismic survey designed to catch
only energy that is reflected from the base of
the weathering layer or refracted along it.
Suitably plotted, this information can yield
the required velocity and thickness. In the
countryside, a small explosive charge set in
a hole 2 to 3 m deep provides the energy,
and a geophone array comprising 24 geophones spread over about 100 m [328 ft]
picks up the signal. The entire operation is
conducted by a specialized crew of four
who manage perhaps four or five surveys a
day, about two for every square kilometer of
the main survey (above ). In urban areas,
explosive is ruled out so PRAKLA devised a
small truck-conveyed hammer drop as an
alternative source, essentially a large weight

Oilfield Review

dropped from a height of 2 m onto a base

plate placed on the ground. In water, refraction surveys are ruled out.
Weathering information is also obtained
at every shot point in the main survey that
uses explosive. Shot holes are usually
drilled to just below the weathering layer, so
placing a geophone near the top of the hole
automatically measures the travel time
through the layer. Additional data come
from picking first breaks on every recorded
trace in the main survey, a Herculean task
that is simplified by semiautomatic picking
programs functioning on workstations. A
first break indicates the first reflecting interface, presumed to be the bottom of the
weathering layer.
Initially, NAM hoped to interpolate
weathering zone thickness and velocity
across the survey area from information
derived from refraction surveys. But this
Stack with Field Statics

Stack with Field and Residual Statics

July 1992

failed to adequately describe the weathering

zones extreme variability, and the resulting
statics corrections failed to pull reflectors
into line. The first-break picking method
was then employed to fill in detail.
Two steps in the processing chain are
actually required to complete the statics
correction. The first, called field statics, uses
all the available data on the weathering
layer described above to perform an initial
normalization of the traces to a datum. This
improves reflector continuity. But because
of inherent uncertainty about the weathering layer, choppiness in reflector continuity
often remains. This must be eliminated in a
second step called residual statics, in which
adjacent traces in a gather are cross-correlated and then shifted to improve continuity
for reflectors judged to represent continuous
interfaces in the subsurface. Statics correction is the single most important step in pro-

cessing the data from the Rotterdam area, as

these results demonstrate (below, left ).
The second processing challenge was
matching data recorded using three different
types of sources. This is necessary because
each source type has a distinct signature. An
explosive source provides the sharpest pulse
of acoustic energy. The airguns signature
may contain small reverberations due to the
bubble oscillating as it rises to the surface.
In practice, several airguns are used together
and tuned to eliminate the bubble effect.
Vibrators sweep through the seismic frequency spectrum and produce records that
must be convolved with the sweep to pro4. For a review of statics correction, see
Dobrin MB and Savit CH: Introduction to Geophysical Prospecting, 4th ed. New York, New York, USA:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1988.
Yilmaz O: Seismic Data Processing. Tulsa, Oklahoma,
USA: Society of Exploration Geophysicists, 1987.

nStatics correction
on a section from a
neighboring survey
in the Rotterdam
area. The field statics that uses refraction survey information and firstbreak picks on the
main survey pulls
reflectors somewhat into line, but
nevertheless leaves
a choppy appearance. The second
step, residual statics, creates an
interpretable
image. Statics correction is a crucial
step in this mixedterrain area of The
Netherlands.

43

duce a usable trace. The vibrators effective

source signature differs from the other two
in that it is zero-phase, meaning that it is
symmetrical about time zero, the effective
time of shooting. The other two are minimum phasenothing before time zero but
then as much energy as possible immediately afterward (below ).
Matching sources amounts to converting
the minimum-phase traces produced by
explosive and airgun to the zero phase of
traces produced by vibrators, the approach
favored by NAM, or conversely converting

the vibrator traces to minimum phase. In

each case, the match has to account for the
detailed differences in source signature,
even between dynamite and airgun, and
also the filtering effect of the recording
instrumentation. If the processing proceeds
in minimum phase, the results are generally
transformed to zero phase right at the end.
This maximizes the resolution of the seismic
image. Comparing the difference between
results obtained from a section surveyed in
the southeast corner of the survey area and
processed with and without matching

sources attests to the importance of source

matching (below).
Achieving successful acquisition and processing in this difficult terrain did not happen overnight. The Dutch PRAKLA crew
progressively gained experienced in complex environments over several years, and
NAM has been forthright in its help, advice
and encouragement. In the future, acquisition will ease with the introduction of
adaptable telemetry systems that permit the
elimination of cabling where needed, simplifying logistics on the ground.
HE

Without Source Matching

Zero phase

Minimum phase

Time

nZero-phase and minimum-phase

With Source Matching

wavelets. The vibrator technique results

in a zero-phase wavelet, while explosive
and airgun produce minimum-phase
wavelets that have additional small differences. During processing, seismic traces
produced by different sources must be
matched to simulate what would have
resulted from using only one type of source.

Airgun

Vibrator

Dynamite

nA section from a neighboring survey in the Rotterdam area before and after source
matching, showing superposed reflectors obtained from processing data obtained with
three different sourcesdynamite, airgun and vibrators. Before matching, reflectors
superpose poorly. After matching, reflectors superpose well, as evidenced by the
increased black in the section.

44

Oilfield Review

An Early Look at Coiled-Tubing Drilling

nA coiled-tubing
unit with diagrams
of the injector
head (left) and
blowout preventers (center).

Mick Ackers
Denis Doremus
Sugar Land, Texas, USA

Ken Newman
Montrouge, France

Interest in drilling slimhole wells with coiled tubing is high. So far, only a few experimental wells have been
drilled and many technological issues remain unresolved. But if these challenges are met, coiled-tubing
drilling could become the medium that finally delivers slimhole wells across the industry.

In this article, FSTS (Formation Selective Treatment

System), SideKick and CoilLIFE are marks of Dowell
Schlumberger. SLIM1 is a mark of Anadrill.
For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Bruce
Adam, Dowell Schlumberger, Rosharon, Texas, USA.
1. For details of coiled-tubing hardware and its applications to workover and logging:
Ackert D, Beardsel M, Corrigan M and Newman K:
The Coiled Tubing Revolution, Oilfield Review 1,
no. 3 (October 1989): 4-16.
2. Littleton J: Coiled Tubing Springs into Horizontal
Drilling, Petroleum Engineer International 2 (February 1992): 20-22.

In recent years, workover and logging using

coiled tubing has become increasingly
widespread ( above ). 1 During workover
operations, coiled tubing has been used
successfully to drill out cement plugs and
remove scalein most cases harder to drill
than formation. Now attention is focused on
coiled-tubing drilling as a technique to
deliver cost-effective slimhole wells for both
exploration and production.2

Slimhole wells are normally defined as

having at least 90% of their diameter less
than 7 in. They are drilled using rotary rigs
that are much smaller than normal
rigsabout 20% of their weight, requiring
about a quarter of the drillsite area. Over
half of drilling costs depend on factors
other than drilling time, such as construct-

45

ing the drill pad and access roads, moving

the rig, and the cost of casing and consumables like mud.3 A coiled-tubing unit (CTU)
is even smaller than a slimhole rig, is easier
to mobilize and requires less equipment
and personnel. Its smaller site requirement
leads to lower civil engineering costs. The
smaller, quieter CTUs have a reduced environmental impact.
There are also particular benefits offered
by use of continuous tubing. It avoids the
need for connections, speeding up trip times
and increasing safetymany drill floor accidents and blowout/stuck-pipe incidents
occur when drilling is stopped to make a
connection. CTUs have pressure control
equipment designed to allow the tubing to
be safely run in and out of live wells. The
stripper above the blowout preventers
(BOPs) seals the annulus during drilling and
tripping. This offers increased safety during
drillingsimilar to having a conventional
rigs annular preventer closed all the time.
This safety feature also facilitates underbalanced drilling, in which drilling is carried
out while the well is flowing.
A range of different uses has been proposed for slim holes drilled by a CTU
(right ). So far, lateral production and vertical
re-entry wells have been drilled. These
experimental wells were designed to prove
that the technique can effectively meet
design specifications.
Three re-entry horizontal production wells
have been drilled in the Austin chalk, Texas,
USA, using 2-in. directionally-controlled
coiled tubing with 37/8-in. bits. In an effort
to prove the efficacy of coiled-tubing
drilling for exploration, a vertical well was
deepened in the Paris basin, France, using
11/2-in. coiled tubing with 37/8-in. bits. This
was also a re-entry, but a new vertical well
is also planned.
This article reviews one of the Austin
chalk wells and the Paris basin well. Then it
will look at the technological challenges
arising from these experiences.

Lateral Re-Entry for Production

Last year, Oryx Energy Company re-entered

a vertical well in the Pearson field, Texas,
USA, completed in Austin chalk. Horizontal
drilling in Austin chalk using mud commonly encounters almost total lost circulation. To reduce mud losses, formation damage and costs, water is often used as drilling
fluid. This decreases bottomhole hydrostatic
pressure to less than formation
pressureunderbalanced drilling. To combat annular pressure from formation flow
during drilling, conventional rigs use a rotating stripping head or rotating BOPs to seal
the annulus. The wells are killed each time
a trip is made.
By using a CTU, which has its annulus
sealed throughout drilling by the stripper,
Oryx was able to run in and out of hole
without killing the well. This improved safety

New wells
Straight
holes

Disposable
exploration wells

Re-entry

nPotential applications for coiled-tubing drilling.

Well deepening into

new producing zone

Lateral
holes

Horizontal extension
into producing zone
Multiple radial
drainholes

Original

New

Deviated
development
wells

3. Randolph S, Bosio J and Boyington B: Slimhole

Drilling: The Story So Far... Oilfield Review 3, no. 3
(July 1991): 46-54.
4. Ramos AB, Fahel RA, Chaffin M and Pulis KH: Horizontal Slim-Hole Drilling With Coiled Tubing: An
Operators Experience, paper IADC/SPE 23875, presented at the 1992 IADC/SPE Annual Drilling Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, February 18-21,
1992.
Wesson HR: New Horizontal Drilling Techniques
Using Coiled Tubing, paper SPE 23951, presented at
the 1992 Permian Basin Oil and Gas Conference,
Midland, Texas, USA, March 18-20, 1992.

46

and avoided the expense and potential damaging effects to the formation of pumping
brines to kill the well prior to tripping.
To prepare the well, Oryx used a conventional service rig to remove the existing
completion hardware, set a whipstock and
sidetrack out of 41/2-in. casing at a true vertical depth of 5300 ft [1615 m]. Drilling was
then continued using 2-in. coiled tubing,
downhole mud motors, wireline steering
tools, a mechanical downhole orienting tool
and 3 7/8-in. bits. An average buildup rate of
15/100 ft [15/30 m] was achieved and a
horizontal section drilled for 1458 ft [444
m].4 The main bottomhole assembly (BHA)
components were:
DrillstringOryx employed a reel comprising 10,050 ft [3060 m] of 2-in. outside
diameter coiled tubing with 5/16-in. monoconductor cable installed inside the tubing.

5. Traonmilin E, Courteille JM, Bergerot JL, Reysset JL

and Laffiche J: First Field Trial of a Coiled Tubing for
Exploration Drilling, paper IADC/SPE 23876, presented at the IADC/SPE Annual Drilling Conference,
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, February 18-21,1992.
Traonmilin E and Newman K: Coiled Tubing Used for
Slim Hole Re-entry, Oil & Gas Journal 90 (February
17, 1992): 45-51.
6. Ackert et al, reference 1.

Oilfield Review

Tubing injector

Vertical Exploration Well

Tubing reel

Power supply

5100

Coiled tubing and final

well trajectory

True vertical depth, ft

5300

Wireline connector
Downhole
orienting sub

5500

Bent sub
Fixed cutter bit

5700

50 ft
Directional survey tool
Whipstock

5900

Check valve
6100

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Positive
displacement
mud motor

1600

1800

Displacement, ft

nFinal analysis of the Oryx well in Austin chalk, Texas, USA. With a steerable bottomhole assembly, the horizontal section was drilled within its 50-ft vertical window.
Orientation toolBecause coiled tubing
cannot be rotated from surface to alter
drilling direction, a downhole method of
changing tool face orientation is needed. To
achieve this, Oryx deployed a mechanical
tool that converts tubing reciprocation into
rotationcompression rotated the tool face
to the right, extension to the left. Once
adjusted, the tool face was locked in place
using a minimum 250-psi differential pressure across the tool.
Directional survey toolThe survey tool
inside a nonmagnetic collar relayed directional information to surface via the wireline.
Directional BHATwo assemblies were
used, depending on the build rates
requireda double-bend assembly consisting of a conventional 27/8-in. bent housing
mud motor coupled to a single bent sub, or
a steerable assembly comprising a singlebend motor.
BitThermally stable diamond bits were
used to drill the curve and build sections
and polycrystalline diamond compact
(PDC) bits to drill the lateral section.
Oryxs motive for drilling this well was to
prove that coiled tubing could be used to
drill a lateral well in a controlled manner.
This was achievedthe final wellbore trajectory came within a 50-ft [15-m] vertical
window along the horizontal section (above).
Because this well was the first of its kind,
new techniques had to be developed, and
much of the drilling equipment had to be
adapted from existing conventional hard-

July 1992

ware. Orienting the tool face was not difficult, but maintaining it was hard because of
the unpredictable reaction of the coiled tubing to the torque generated by the drilling
motors rotation. Drilling was also slowed
by failure of BHA components, particularly
the orienting and directional survey tools.
These difficulties affected the final cost
analysis. Total cost was estimated by Oryx
at twice that of using a conventional
rignondrilling time was responsible for
nearly 40% of this (below ). However, as
purpose-designed equipment becomes
available and drilling procedures are
refined, coiled tubing should deliver more
cost-effective, slimhole, lateral wells.

Normal drilling
60.9%

Waiting/repairs
20.5%

Directional
7.1%
Fishing
11.5%

Last year, Elf Aquitaine embarked on a series

of trials to determine whether coiled tubing
could be used to drill slimhole wells, cutting
exploration drilling costs. The goal of the
first well was to demonstrate that a CTU can
drill a vertical well sufficiently fast, cut cores
and test formations. Elf envisions initially
drilling these slimhole wells with a single
openhole sectionavoiding the need for
casingwith the surface casings set using
low-cost, water well rigs.
This first trial involved the re-entry of well
Saint Firmin 13 in the Paris basin.5 The plan
was to use the CTU to set cement plugs
across the existing perforations at 2120 ft
[646 m] and then drill a 2105-ft [642-m]
vertical section of 37/8-in. diameter. Directional measurements using a coiled-tubingconveyed survey were to be taken every
500 ft [150 m]. Then a 50-ft interval was to
be cored and logged. Finally, a zone was to
be flow tested by measuring pressure
between two straddle packers.6
The trial was carried out by Dowell
Schlumberger using a trailer-mounted CTU
with a reel of about 6000 ft [1830 m] of
11/2-in. tubing. To avoid the need for costly
modifications, standard surface hardware,
like injector head with stripper and BOP
stack, were used. A workover rig substructure was installed over the existing wellhead
to act as a work platform.
The operation encountered difficulties at
the outsetnot with the drilling but with the
integrity of the wells 30-year-old casing.
After cement plugs were set, the well would
not hold the 360 psi above hydrostatic pressure required to withstand the anticipated
formation pressures. Because of this, drilling
depth was limited to 2955 ft [901 m] which
allowed limestone coring but did not extend
to a high-pressure aquifer.
The drilling BHAs employed a highspeed, low-torque motor with PDC bits. For
coring, a high-torque motor was used. The
drilling and coring assemblies were made to
hang vertically by incorporating heavy drill
collars into the BHA, creating a pendulum
assembly. At the start, the deviation at the
casing shoe was 2 and, as expected, the
BHA did not build angleat 2362 ft and
2795 ft [720 m and 852 m], the deviation
angles were 23/4 and 21/4 respectively.
During drilling, the rates were comparable
to those drilled by conventional rigs at work
in the area. This showed that a CTU can
drill vertical wells at commercial rates. Two
cores were cut and retrieved with good
recoverymeeting the second objective of
the trial.

nCost breakdown for the first Oryx well.

47

Looking to the Future

FSTS setting tool

Packer

Formation to
be tested

In addition to proving that coiled tubing can

be used to drill wells, the trial pointed out
how procedures could be changed and
where future hardware development is
required. For example, rate of drilling could
be increased by incorporation of measurement-while-drilling tools to make directional surveys, improving surface handling
and weight-on-bit (WOB) control techniques and better optimization of the BHA.
To address these issues, Dowell Schlumberger has assembled a multidisciplinary
task force with Sedco Forex and Anadrill. Its
wide-ranging agenda covers equipment
needs, operational and safety procedures,
tubing limits and personnel requirements.
Equipment needsThe Elf job utilized a
workover rig substructure. In the future, a
purpose-built substructure will be employed.
Standing 10 ft [3 m] off the ground and over
the wellhead, this substructure will act as
the drill floor to make or break the BHA and
also to support the injector head.

The BOPs will be mounted below the

injector head directly on top of the wellhead, casing or christmas tree. If the hole
diameter is less than 4 in. [10 cm], 4 1/16-in.,
10,000 psi coiled-tubing BOPs will be used.
If the hole is larger, a standard set of 71/16in., 5000 psi drilling BOPs will be used
instead. In both cases an annular preventer
will also be incorporated into the stack
(below and next page, left ).
In the directional wells drilled so far using
coiled tubing, BHA direction has been
altered using reciprocation of an orienting
tool. This technique has the dual disadvantages of interrupting drilling and requiring
manipulation with pressure in the tubing,
which has a severe fatiguing effect. The task
force has therefore designed BHAs that
incorporate an orienting tool controlled by
using mud flow rate.
Directional information can be sent to
surface either using wireline or mud-pulse
telemetry. Wireline offers real-time transmission of high volumes of information. How-

Injector head

Packer

Stripper

nBlowout preven-

ter configuration
for a well drilled
with a hole size
less than 4-in.
diameter.

nThe FSTS Formation Selective Treatment

System. The coiled-tubing conveyed FSTS

straddle packers were set across the formation to allow reservoir fluids to flow,
proving that drillstem tests can be carried
out using coiled tubing.

Because the program had to be revised to

avoid high-pressure zones, no oil-bearing
formation could be tested. To prove the testing technology and meet the third objective,
a drawdown test was carried out on a zone
between 2221 ft and 2231 ft [677 m and
680 m]. The FSTS Formation Selective Treatment System was deployed with its two
packers straddling this zone. The formation
was successfully isolated and, if it had been
a reservoir, would have produced into the
coiled tubing (above).

Drill floor
Mud returns
Annular preventer
BOP stack 41/16 in. 10,000 psi

Blind rams

Shear rams

Slip rams

Pipe rams

Kill line

Choke line

Wellhead, casing
or christmas tree
Ground

48

Oilfield Review

ever, having wireline in the tubing requires

a high level of maintenance and cuts down
pumping optionslike acidization treatments. To avoid the need for a cable link,
the task force has adapted Anadrills SLIM1
measurement-while-drilling systemwhich
uses mud pulse telemetryso that it fits
inside a 31/16-in. diameter nonmagnetic drill
collar (right ).
The chemistry of muds used when drilling
with a CTU is not expected to be significantly different from muds used in conventional wells. However, the technique does
have some special rheological requirements. In a re-entry well, the coiled tubing /casing annulus may be relatively
largeperhaps 2 in. inside 7 in.slowing
the annular velocity of the fluid and possibly compromising the cuttings-carrying
capacity of the mud. Further, because the
fluid is pumped through small-diameter tubing, friction must be kept to a minimum by
using low solids muds with low viscosities
and yield points. To mix and treat drilling

nStraight hole and buildup/horizontal

bottomhole assemblies (BHAs). In both,
fullbore check valves prevent backflow to
surface. The pressure disconnect sub
allows recovery of the coiled-tubing string
if the BHA gets stuck. A ball is dropped
and pumped through the tubing until it
seats in the disconnect sub. Internal tubing pressure is then applied that shears
pins in the sub and releases the string.
The straight hole BHA includes drill collars, so that the string acts as a pendulum
and tends to the vertical. Buildup and
horizontal BHAs include an adjustable
bent housing to facilitate deviated
drilling. The housing angle is fixed at surface before the BHA is run, and its effect
on the drilling angle is controlled by
using the orienting tool to rotate the tool
face. Progress is monitored by the SLIM1
MWD tool, which relays the information to
surface via mud pulses.
A CTU employs a low WOB, 2000 lb
[900 kg] compared to 4000 to 6000 lb
[1800 to 2700 kg] for conventional slimhole drilling. So high-speed700 rpm
low-torque drilling motors are expected to
be most effective. Polycrystalline diamond
compact or thermally stable bits are used.

BHA
straight hole

BHA for
buildup and
horizontal sections

Coiled tubing

Connector
Check valve
assembly

Pressure
disconnect

Injector head

Stripper

Drill floor

Mud returns
Annular preventer

Drill collars

nBlowout preven-

ter configuration
for a well drilled
with a hole size
greater than 4-in.
diameter.

Orienting tool

SLIM1 MWD
in nonmagnetic
drill collar

Blind rams
Mud motor

BOP Stack 71/16 in. 5000 psi

Mud motor

Shear rams

Kill

Choke

Adjustable
bent housing

Wellhead, casing
or christmas tree
Ground

July 1992

49

Casing shoe pressure, psi

1000

Coiled tubing
Conventional drilling

800

600

25

Pit gain, bbl

fluid, a trailer-mounted pumping and treatment unit has been constructed.

In a vertical hole, the setdown weight
read at surface is equivalent to the WOB.
However at high angles, the tubing compresses inside the wellbore. If too much
weight is set down, the tubing may lock
against the walls of the well, failing to transfer any further weight to the bit.7
Experience from the Paris basin well
showed that while manual control of setdown weight was possible, it was tedious
and required absolute concentration from
the operator. To improve drilling efficiency,
the CTU has been fitted with a system that
automatically maintains a setdown weight.
With this autodrilling system, the operator
can monitor progress without having to
make continual minute weight changes.
The task force is reviewing three other
areas of equipment development under
review. All involve handling tubulars:
removing the existing production tubing in
re-entry wells, deploying the BHA into a
live well, and running casing.
Operational and safety procedures
Procedures for controlling a slimhole well
when drilling with a CTU differ from those
needed when drilling with a conventional
slimhole rig. At the heart of this is the difference in annuli. Conventional slimhole
wells have a narrow annulus and the mud
traveling up it creates a back pressure,
called the equivalent circulating density
(ECD). The ECD increases with pump rate
and raises bottomhole hydrostatic pressure.
This provides the option of dynamic
killincreasing the rate to increase the
pressurebut also a potential disadvantage
of losing mud due to ECD exceeding the
formation fracture gradient.

15

5
0

40

80

110

130

Time, min

nComparison of gas kicks in 5000-ft wells

drilled using coiled-tubing and conventional methods with 3 1/ 8-in. and 61/ 2-in.
BHAs, respectively. SideKick software was
used to compare the effects of influxes
that gave similar annular heights. In both
cases, the drillers method was used to circulate out the kick, during which casing
shoe pressures were about the same.
Because of its smaller annular volume,
the well being drilled by CTU experienced much smaller pit gains.
When drilled with a CTU, the annulus is
largerparticularly in re-entry wellsECD
is not a factor and dynamic kill cannot be
applied. To evaluate other well-kill strategies, the task force used SideKick software
to model gas influxes in a full size well
being drilled conventionally and a slimhole
well being drilled by a CTU.8
The SideKick model was used to assess
the significance of the volume of influx.
First, it modeled influxes that gave comparable heights of gas in conventional and
coiled-tubing annuli (about 7.5 and 3 barrels, respectively). The shut-in casing pressure (SICP) at surface and the casing shoe
pressure (CSP) were broadly similar in both

wells (left ). But in modeling an influx of 7.5

barrels in the slim and conventional annuli,
the SICP and CSP in the coiled-tubing well
were much higherdouble or more.
Therefore, early detection of gas influxes
during coiled-tubing drilling is vital. The
CTUs stripper seals the annulus and ensures
that the mud return line is full, improving
the reliability of delta flow measurements
the difference between mud flow rate in and
out of the well. Delta flow is measurable
down to 10 gal/min [0.8 liter/sec], permitting rapid detection of kicks after allowing
for the volume increase due to cuttings. In
the mud pits, resolution of conventional
level sensors is improved by having mud
tanks with a smaller base area than is normal.
All drilling operations are subject to safety
regulations limiting operational equipment
to zonesin Europe, Zone I allows only the
most stringent explosion-proof equipment,
Zone II the next most, and so on. Ironically,
the compactness of a CTU complicates
compliance with these regulations.
In the Paris basin well, the Zone II classification was specially reduced by the authorities from a 100-ft to a 50-ft radius from the
wellhead. If the radius had been any larger,
it would have extended the zones requirements to the cars on the edge of the lease
(next page ). Changes in local regulations
and in equipment classification may be
required in the future.
Tubing limitsCoiled tubing had a slow
start as a workover service because of unreliability and propensity for unpredicted failure. To combat this, Dowell Schlumberger
has developed a better understanding of the
factors governing tubing fatigue; this is now
being applied to drilling operations. 9
Repeated use of coiled tubing has three
types of limitation:

7. Ackert et al, reference 1.

8. White D and Lowe C: Advances in Well Control
Training and Practice, paper, presented at the Third
Annual IADC European Well Control Conference,
Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands, June 2-4, 1992.
9. Newman KR: Coiled-Tubing Pressure and Tension
Limits, paper SPE 23131, presented at the Offshore
Europe Conference, Aberdeen, Scotland, September
3-6, 1991.
10. Newman KR and Newburn DA: Coiled-Tubing-Life
Modeling, paper SPE 22820, presented at the 66th
SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition,
Dallas, Texas, USA, October 6-9, 1991.
Newman K: Determining the Working Life of a
Coiled Tubing String, Offshore 51 (December
1991): 31-32, 34-36.

50

Oilfield Review

tubing fatigue that is more sophisticated than

simply counting cyclesthe CoilLIFE
model.10 During jobs, all tubing movement
and pressures are monitored and recorded.
The CoilLIFE software then calculates the
amount of life remaining in the string. It
takes into account the relative severity of
each cycle, the nature of the fluids that have
been pumped and the sequence in which
the cycle occurredwhich affects the accumulated damage.
Personnel requirementsThe number of
personnel required for coiled-tubing drilling
is likely to be about 50% of that needed for
conventional operations. Not only are dayto-day operational requirements lower, but
the number of service personnel can also be
reduced. For example, when running casing, the mud system could be employed to
mix and pump cementeliminating the
need for a cementing engineer. All the
drilling information, along with basic mud
logging data and general surface data, will
be centralized in a computerized information system, eliminating the need for a fulltime mud logger.
CF

Pressure and tension limitsthe burst and

collapse pressures and the maximum tension and compression at various pressures. These are analogous to the limits
experienced by drillpipe and can be calculated through tests and carefully
avoided during operations.
Diameter and ovality limitsthe degree
to which the pipe is collapsed, ballooned
or mechanically damaged. This also has
an analogy in drillpipe where damaged
pipe and couplings have to be detected.
With coiled tubing, the physical shape of
the tubing can be continuously monitored
during the job to detect damage.
Life limitsprimarily due to bending in
the pipe at the gooseneck and on the reel
as it is spooled on and off, often with the
tubing pressured. Anticipating life limits of
tubing has proved difficult, but is vital to
avoid catastrophic failure. At its crudest,
the fatigue of a reel of tubing can be
equated to the number of times it is run
into and out of the welltermed cycles.
After extensive research, Dowell Schlumberger has developed a way of assessing coiled-

Portakabin

Mud products
storage area

Portakabin
Cra

Access road

ne

truc

nLayout of Elfs
coiled-tubing
drilling site in the
Paris basin,
France.

nit
rac u
Catf pump
p
u
back
Generator

Tool rack

Fuel tank

Substructure

CT unit

Choke
manifold

Mud treatment/
pumping unit
Water tank

Bin

Bin

Bin

50 ft safety perimeter

July 1992

51

F O

Taking Advantage of Shear Waves

he introduction of the DSI Dipole Shear Sonic

pressional and shear waves travel through a fluid-filled

Imager tool, which measures shear waves in

porous medium such as oil-saturated rock:

all types of formations, has stimulated

c Vp2 = K p + K b + 4N
3

development of new applications for measurements of

shear wave speed, Vs , and its reciprocal slowness.

and

Slowness measurementsshear, compressional and

c Vs2 = N .

Stoneleycan help improve identification of rock

In these equations, the composite density c is made

lithology and fluid content, and assist borehole and

up of density contributions from water, hydrocarbon

surface seismic interpretation. In addition, shear wave

and rock. N is the rock frame shear modulusshear

slowness provides the critical link in calculating rock

modulus describes how a body deforms under a shear

shear stiffness and bulk compressibility, two quantities

stress. K b and K p are the bulk moduli of the rock frame

invaluable for planning fracturing operations and con-

and pore space, respectivelybulk modulus measures

trolling production to avoid sanding. A new log of the

a bodys resistance to a change in volume under pres-

pore-fluid bulk modulus K f , based on DSI measure-

sure. The Biot-Gassmann theory also shows that K p

ments, shows promise as an indicator of hydrocarbons

and Kb are related via pore-fluid bulk modulus K f , the

in sandstone formations.

bulk modulus of the rock grains K m , and porosity f :

Before the development of shear wave logging tools,

Kp =

shear waves created by traditional tools using

Km

monopole sources were measurable only in fast, or

hard, formations. Consequently, geophysicists based
their interpretation schemes largely on measurements
of the more accessible compressional speed, Vp . To

2
- +

Kf

where

= 1- K b
Km

begin extending interpretation of both Vp and Vs mea-

Readily available shear wave measurements from the

surements, researchers at Schlumberger-Doll

DSI tool combined with the Biot-Gassmann relations

Research in Ridgefield, Connecticut, USA drew from

gave researchers a handle on N, but they still needed

three sources: Biot-Gassmann theory, laboratory mea-

to know more about K m , K b and K p for evaluating K f .

surements of gas-saturated, quartz sandstones and

Laboratory dataultrasonic measurements of shear

contact theory.

and compressional velocities plus porosity measure-

The theoretical groundwork for the K f log lies in the

Biot-Gassmann equations, which describe how com-

ments on gas saturated, pure quartz sandstones

yielded the necessary information on these elastic
properties. Plots of K b and N, calculated from the data,

52

Oilfield Review

Kb and N as a
function of porosity
for pure quartz sandstones.

Bulk Modulus Kb, GPa

50
40
30

grain contact area, and thus the force transmitted

increases as porosity decreases. Mathematical expressions describing the theory confirm experimental

20

results that K b and N are nearly linear functions of

porosity and that the ratio of moduli for the dry rock,

10

K b /N, is independent of porosity and equals 0.9 for

quartz sandstones.

50

Shear Modulus N, GPa

depend in part on the porosity of the rock because the

With all parameters in the Biot-Gassmann equations

40

either known or derived from log measurements, inter30

pretation in shaly sands proves fairly straightforward.

20

First, the shear frame modulus N, calculated from

10

measurements of Vs (measured N ), is compared to N

calculated from the porosity-dependent equation based

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

on lab data (predicted N ). Porosity for the latter equa-

Porosity, p.u.

tion comes from independent measurements, such as

the neutron-density log. If the measured N matches the
Laboratory data
show that Kb /N is a
constant 0.9, independent of porosity.

Kb /N

predicted N, the formation is interpreted as a clean

sand; if it doesnt match, the formation is considered a
shale. Next, setting K b = 0.9N in the Biot-Gassmann
equations allows one to first solve for K p , then for K f .
A K f log from the Gulf of Mexico shows the correlation between K f value and the presence of hydrocar-

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

Porosity, p.u.

bons (next page). A K f value of 0 corresponds to gas,

and water has a higher K f value than oil. The log indicates gas from 2343 to 2350 meters; oil from 2350 to

versus porosity reveal a nearly linear porosity depen-

2365 meters and from 2368 to 2373 meters; and water

dence (top). In addition, the data establish that the

throughout other intervals.

ratio K b /N is a constant 0.9, independent of porosity

Side-by-side comparisons of logs from the Gulf of

(middle). Finally, the lab data show that K m for quartz

Mexico well demonstrate the consistency of the K f log

equals 36 Gigapascals (GPa).

with neutron-density, resistivity and gamma ray logs.

The laboratory findings on K b and N were consistent

Shales were detected at the depths marked using two

with Hertz-Mindlin contact theory, which models

techniques. First, the measured (Vp / Vs )2 is greater than

unconsolidated rock as a random packing of spherical,

the predicted value. Second, the measured N is signifi-

elastic grains. According to contact theory, any force

cantly below the predicted N for water-saturated sands.

applied to the rock is transmitted at the grain contacts,

Tracks seven through nine compare the measured Vp

where one grain touches another. The grain contacts

with theoretical predictions assuming the formation is

consequently govern the rocks bulk and shear moduli,

filled with water, oil and gas, respectively. The match

and hence its compressional and shear velocities.

between measured and predicted Vp for gas reveals a

Each grain contact can be thought of as two coil springs

partial gas saturation from 2344 to 2350 meters. This

that move in directions tangential and normal to the

agrees with the K f log, which has values of less than 1

contact surface. The stiffnesses of these contacts

at the same depth intervals. According to the veloci-

July 1992

53

F O

Taking Advantage of Shear Waves

he introduction of the DSI Dipole Shear Sonic

pressional and shear waves travel through a fluid-filled

Imager tool, which measures shear waves in

porous medium such as oil-saturated rock:

all types of formations, has stimulated

c Vp2 = K p + K b + 4N
3

development of new applications for measurements of

shear wave speed, Vs , and its reciprocal slowness.

and

Slowness measurementsshear, compressional and

c Vs2 = N .

Stoneleycan help improve identification of rock

In these equations, the composite density c is made

lithology and fluid content, and assist borehole and

up of density contributions from water, hydrocarbon

surface seismic interpretation. In addition, shear wave

and rock. N is the rock frame shear modulusshear

slowness provides the critical link in calculating rock

modulus describes how a body deforms under a shear

shear stiffness and bulk compressibility, two quantities

stress. K b and K p are the bulk moduli of the rock frame

invaluable for planning fracturing operations and con-

and pore space, respectivelybulk modulus measures

trolling production to avoid sanding. A new log of the

a bodys resistance to a change in volume under pres-

pore-fluid bulk modulus K f , based on DSI measure-

sure. The Biot-Gassmann theory also shows that K p

ments, shows promise as an indicator of hydrocarbons

and Kb are related via pore-fluid bulk modulus K f , the

in sandstone formations.

bulk modulus of the rock grains K m , and porosity f :

Before the development of shear wave logging tools,

Kp =

shear waves created by traditional tools using

Km

monopole sources were measurable only in fast, or

hard, formations. Consequently, geophysicists based
their interpretation schemes largely on measurements
of the more accessible compressional speed, Vp . To

2
- +

Kf

where

= 1- K b
Km

begin extending interpretation of both Vp and Vs mea-

Readily available shear wave measurements from the

surements, researchers at Schlumberger-Doll

DSI tool combined with the Biot-Gassmann relations

Research in Ridgefield, Connecticut, USA drew from

gave researchers a handle on N, but they still needed

three sources: Biot-Gassmann theory, laboratory mea-

to know more about K m , K b and K p for evaluating K f .

surements of gas-saturated, quartz sandstones and

Laboratory dataultrasonic measurements of shear

contact theory.

and compressional velocities plus porosity measure-

The theoretical groundwork for the K f log lies in the

Biot-Gassmann equations, which describe how com-

ments on gas saturated, pure quartz sandstones

yielded the necessary information on these elastic
properties. Plots of K b and N, calculated from the data,

52

Oilfield Review

Kb and N as a
function of porosity
for pure quartz sandstones.

Bulk Modulus Kb, GPa

50
40
30

grain contact area, and thus the force transmitted

increases as porosity decreases. Mathematical expressions describing the theory confirm experimental

20

results that K b and N are nearly linear functions of

porosity and that the ratio of moduli for the dry rock,

10

K b /N, is independent of porosity and equals 0.9 for

quartz sandstones.

50

Shear Modulus N, GPa

depend in part on the porosity of the rock because the

With all parameters in the Biot-Gassmann equations

40

either known or derived from log measurements, inter30

pretation in shaly sands proves fairly straightforward.

20

First, the shear frame modulus N, calculated from

10

measurements of Vs (measured N ), is compared to N

calculated from the porosity-dependent equation based

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

on lab data (predicted N ). Porosity for the latter equa-

Porosity, p.u.

tion comes from independent measurements, such as

the neutron-density log. If the measured N matches the
Laboratory data
show that Kb /N is a
constant 0.9, independent of porosity.

Kb /N

predicted N, the formation is interpreted as a clean

sand; if it doesnt match, the formation is considered a
shale. Next, setting K b = 0.9N in the Biot-Gassmann
equations allows one to first solve for K p , then for K f .
A K f log from the Gulf of Mexico shows the correlation between K f value and the presence of hydrocar-

0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

Porosity, p.u.

bons (next page). A K f value of 0 corresponds to gas,

and water has a higher K f value than oil. The log indicates gas from 2343 to 2350 meters; oil from 2350 to

versus porosity reveal a nearly linear porosity depen-

2365 meters and from 2368 to 2373 meters; and water

dence (top). In addition, the data establish that the

throughout other intervals.

ratio K b /N is a constant 0.9, independent of porosity

Side-by-side comparisons of logs from the Gulf of

(middle). Finally, the lab data show that K m for quartz

Mexico well demonstrate the consistency of the K f log

equals 36 Gigapascals (GPa).

with neutron-density, resistivity and gamma ray logs.

The laboratory findings on K b and N were consistent

Shales were detected at the depths marked using two

with Hertz-Mindlin contact theory, which models

techniques. First, the measured (Vp / Vs )2 is greater than

unconsolidated rock as a random packing of spherical,

the predicted value. Second, the measured N is signifi-

elastic grains. According to contact theory, any force

cantly below the predicted N for water-saturated sands.

applied to the rock is transmitted at the grain contacts,

Tracks seven through nine compare the measured Vp

where one grain touches another. The grain contacts

with theoretical predictions assuming the formation is

consequently govern the rocks bulk and shear moduli,

filled with water, oil and gas, respectively. The match

and hence its compressional and shear velocities.

between measured and predicted Vp for gas reveals a

Each grain contact can be thought of as two coil springs

partial gas saturation from 2344 to 2350 meters. This

that move in directions tangential and normal to the

agrees with the K f log, which has values of less than 1

contact surface. The stiffnesses of these contacts

at the same depth intervals. According to the veloci-

July 1992

53

Gamma
Ray

Depth, m

GAPI
120

60

Comp.
Slowness

Density
Porosity

Caliper

Neutron
Porosity

in

p.u.

18 0

Deep
Induction

Medium
Induction

60 1

Shear
Slowness

s/ft
ohm-m
200 0
20,000 100

Vp

Vp

GPa

km/sec

Water

Oil

Gas

Predicted

Predicted

Predicted

Predicted

Theory
Water

km/sec

km/sec

Measured

10 1

Measured

30 0

Measured

4 0

10

GPa

Measured

4 0

Kf

Theory
Gas

Kf
GPa

Vp

4 0

10

Kp
10

Oil

(Vp/ Vs)2

Water

Gas

2340

2350

2360

2370

2380

2390

Shales

ties, oil occurs in the sands from 2350 to 2352 meters

and 2354 to 2368 meters. The K f log also indicates oil.
Finally, agreement between measured and predicted
velocities shows water in the sands from 2372 to 2379

Consistency of interpretation from conventional and sonic

logs taken in a Gulf of
Mexico well.

AVO, the change in seismic reflection amplitude as a

function of incident angle or offset, is used to distinguish hydrocarbon prospects from lithologic effects.
The K f log will allow researchers to isolate the effects

meters. The K f log shows salt water at those depths. In

of formation fluid on the seismic response while logs

all cases, these findings mirror an interpretation of the

of the frame moduli, K b and N, will isolate the effects

gamma ray, neutron-density and resistivity logs.

caused by lithology. The next chapter in K f log research

The new information offered by the K f log has

involves characterizing K f behavior in other formations.

spawned several potential applications. The K f log

TAL

may help identify low resistivity pay in unconsolidated

sands where resistivity contrast is small. Because the
acoustic signals and responses of the DSI tool are relatively unaffected by steel, the log may identify hydrocarbon type behind casing. Most importantly, the K f
log represents a key component in integrating wellbore
DSI interpretation with near-well seismic measurements such as amplitude variation with offset (AVO).

54

Acknowledgements and Further Reading

For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Andy Reischer, Larry

Schwartz and Bill Murphy, Schlumberger-Doll Research, Ridgefield,
Connecticut, USA.
In this focus, the DSI (Dipole Sonic Imager) tool is a mark of
Schlumberger.
Murphy WF, Reischer A and Hsu K: Modulus decomposition of compressional and shear velocities in sand bodies, Geophysics (in press).
Hornby BE, Murphy WF III, Liu H-L and Hsu K: Reservoir sonics: A
North Sea case study, Geophysics 57 (January 1992): 146-160.

Oilfield Review

Gamma
Ray

Depth, m

GAPI
120

60

Comp.
Slowness

Density
Porosity

Caliper

Neutron
Porosity

in

p.u.

18 0

Deep
Induction

Medium
Induction

60 1

Shear
Slowness

s/ft
ohm-m
200 0
20,000 100

Vp

Vp

GPa

km/sec

Water

Oil

Gas

Predicted

Predicted

Predicted

Predicted

Theory
Water

km/sec

km/sec

Measured

10 1

Measured

30 0

Measured

4 0

10

GPa

Measured

4 0

Kf

Theory
Gas

Kf
GPa

Vp

4 0

10

Kp
10

Oil

(Vp/ Vs)2

Water

Gas

2340

2350

2360

2370

2380

2390

Shales

ties, oil occurs in the sands from 2350 to 2352 meters

and 2354 to 2368 meters. The K f log also indicates oil.
Finally, agreement between measured and predicted
velocities shows water in the sands from 2372 to 2379

Consistency of interpretation from conventional and sonic

logs taken in a Gulf of
Mexico well.

AVO, the change in seismic reflection amplitude as a

function of incident angle or offset, is used to distinguish hydrocarbon prospects from lithologic effects.
The K f log will allow researchers to isolate the effects

meters. The K f log shows salt water at those depths. In

of formation fluid on the seismic response while logs

all cases, these findings mirror an interpretation of the

of the frame moduli, K b and N, will isolate the effects

gamma ray, neutron-density and resistivity logs.

caused by lithology. The next chapter in K f log research

The new information offered by the K f log has

involves characterizing K f behavior in other formations.

spawned several potential applications. The K f log

TAL

may help identify low resistivity pay in unconsolidated

sands where resistivity contrast is small. Because the
acoustic signals and responses of the DSI tool are relatively unaffected by steel, the log may identify hydrocarbon type behind casing. Most importantly, the K f
log represents a key component in integrating wellbore
DSI interpretation with near-well seismic measurements such as amplitude variation with offset (AVO).

54

Acknowledgements and Further Reading

For help in preparation of this article, thanks to Andy Reischer, Larry

Schwartz and Bill Murphy, Schlumberger-Doll Research, Ridgefield,
Connecticut, USA.
In this focus, the DSI (Dipole Sonic Imager) tool is a mark of
Schlumberger.
Murphy WF, Reischer A and Hsu K: Modulus decomposition of compressional and shear velocities in sand bodies, Geophysics (in press).
Hornby BE, Murphy WF III, Liu H-L and Hsu K: Reservoir sonics: A
North Sea case study, Geophysics 57 (January 1992): 146-160.

Oilfield Review