SPE 146023

In-Situ Viscosity from Acoustic Logging

E. Dyshlyuk, SPE, A. Parshin, SPE, M. Charara, SPE, Schlumberger, A. Nikitin, Lomonosov Moscow State
University and B. Plyushchenkov, Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics, RAS

Copyright 2011, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition held in Denver, Colorado, USA, 30 October2 November 2011.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper have not been
reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its
officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to
reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
This work contributes to a concept proposal for obtaining pore fluid viscosity and formation permeability from thermoacoustic
measurements (i.e., conducting acoustic logging of pore fluid mobility at different temperature conditions in the wellbore).
The acoustic method for mobility estimation from Stoneley wave attenuation and dispersion is widely used in the industry.
Currently, nearly all wireline measurements are performed at static thermodynamic conditions in the wellbore. But what
happens if thermodynamic conditions are changed and logs are run at different temperature conditions at a given depth? In this
case, the measurements of the pore fluid mobility at different temperatures allow obtaining additional information on the pore
fluid viscosity and improve the accuracy of permeability estimation by the acoustic method.
This work includes experimental and modeling verification of the suggested thermoacoustic method. The experiments were
on laboratory core samples; finite-difference poro-visco-elastic code was used for the modeling. The applicability of the
method is shown to be dependent on the temperature difference of the formation, accuracy of the Stoneley wave dispersion
and attenuation measurements, and the in-situ wellbore pore fluid viscosity, temperature, and pore pressure.

Introduction
Formation permeability and pore fluid viscosity are key petrophysical parameters during all stages of oilfield development.
These parameters are crucial for reservoir evaluation, optimal completion, production optimization and drainage pattern
optimization for maximum hydrocarbon recovery. Having a continuous profile of these properties would be of a considerable
benefit. At the same time permeability and viscosity measurements are one of the most difficult measurements to get in a well.
Although viscosity is a property of the pore fluid while permeability is a property of the formation, the measurements of
these parameters and the methods used are strongly interconnected at present. Determination of the permeability implies
determination of two physical quantities: the fluid mobility (the ratio of permeability to fluid viscosity) and fluid viscosity.
Existing direct methods for pore fluid viscosity and formation permeability determination include pore fluid sampling with
subsequent analysis, petrophysical and geochemical analysis of core plugs, pressure buildup, and drawdown tests. All these
methods are time consuming and expensive; moreover, they provide information only for certain tested points along the
borehole or, instead, for the whole reservoir.
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) is the only existing continuous logging method for both pore fluid viscosity and
formation permeability estimation. This method is indirect and relies on empirical correlations between the NMR relaxation
times measurements with the fluid viscosity and formation permeability. Although this method has proved efficient in certain
field conditions for viscosity determination (Seccombe et al. 2005; Zittel et al. 2008) and is also used sometimes for
permeability estimation (Chang et al. 1997; Fleury et al. 2001), as with all indirect methods, it has strong limitations and is far
from being universally implemented.
The only direct continuous logging method for mobility estimation is based on the acoustic logging method (Rosenbaum
1974; Chang et al. 1988; Winkler et al. 1989; Tang et al. 1991; Tang and Cheng 1993a, 1993b, 1996; Tezuka et al. 1994; Liu
and Johnson 1997; Pampuri et al. 1998; Brie et al. 2000). Stoneley wave dispersion and attenuation indicate the mobility of
the fluid in the porous formation. Here we consider this method to be direct because it measures physical parameters that are
directly connected with the fluid mobility (i.e., fluid moves relative to the pore space during the measurement). The acoustic
method measures the mobility of the fluid in the pore space, and one needs further information on the fluid viscosity to
determine permeability. The viscosity on its own account is hard to measure in a well, as was mentioned before. Fluid
viscosity depends on the temperature. Water viscosity changes more than six times at atmospheric pressure in the range of
temperatures 0 to 100C (Fig. 1), while the change of viscosity of oil could reach hundreds of times even in a smaller
2 SPE 146023

temperature range (Cholet 2008). Therefore, even a small temperature variation of the formation leads to considerable
viscosity variation of the pore fluid inside the formation,
while porous formation permeability could be deliberately
thought of as constant at temperature variations less than 100
C (Mitchell and Soga 2005). Therefore, we can use the
acoustic mobility estimation method at different temperatures
to try to get information on the pore fluid viscosity and,
consequently, to make permeability estimation by acoustic
methods more accurate, fast, and robust.

Acoustic Method for Mobility Estimation

The acoustic method for mobility estimation is based on
the investigation of the Stoneley wave dispersion and
attenuation. The Stoneley wave is a guided wave that travels
along the borehole/formation interface. In an elastic
formation, this wave has only geometric dispersion and no
attenuation. When the formation is porous some fluid Fig. 1Temperature effect on viscosity.
movement relative to the formation occurs (Fig. 2). Simply
speaking, this movement causes Stoneley wave attenuation and additional dispersion.
The theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid-
saturated porous solid was introduced by Frenkel (1944) and
developed by Biot (1956a, 1956b, 1962). Biot theory was further
supplemented by Johnson et.al. (1987), who introduced the
dynamic permeability concept in the theory allowing accounting
for frequency dependence of viscous friction losses between the
solid and liquid phases. Biot theory is the basis for the reverse
task solution (i.e., determining the fluid mobility from the
Stoneley wave attenuation and dispersion), although, of course,
there are porous media that exhibit effects that are dominated by
mechanisms outside the Biot theory.
Other mechanisms were proposed to account for
discrepancies between the Biot theory and some experimental
results. The proposed additional mechanisms on the microscale
include, for example, additional friction of rock skeleton in the
points of contact (Stoll and Kan 1981; Turgut and Yamamoto
1990) and squirt flows in the microcracks (Dvorkin and Nur
1993; Dvorkin , Nolen-Hoeksema, and Nur 1994; Dvorkin,
mavko, and Nur 1995). Some other mechanisms should be
accounted for on the macroscale. These processes include, for
exampole, geometric irregularities of the borehole (Tezuka et al. Fig. 2The Stoneley wave is a guided wave that travels
1994), formation interfaces influence, mudcake influence (Liu along the borehole/formation interface (Balossino et al. 2008).
and Johnson 1997), tool presence in the borehole (Tang and
Cheng, 1993a) and so on. All of the above-mentioned mechanisms limit applicability of the method in real wells. The main
technical limitations for the use of the method in sandstone and carbonate reservoires are listed elsewhere (Brie et al. 2000;
Balossino et al. 2008).

Experimental Verification
We used modeling tools to estimate the possibility of determining the viscosity from thermoacoustic logging in this work. The
first step to do this is to evaluate modeling results by the comparison with the experimental ones. To our knowledge, there are
no works available on estimation of mobility from acoustic logging conducted at different temperature conditions. In the work
of Winkler et al. (1989), the authors changed the fluid viscosity by changing the fluid in the sample and obtained a good
correlation between the theoretical and the experimentally measured mobility. In the current work, the same fluid is used in the
core sample, and the sample temperature was changed to change the viscosity.
A water-saturated Idaho sandstone (see Table A-1) cylindrical core sample of 250 mm height and 200 mm outer diameter
with an axial borehole diameter of 20 mm is used in this work for the experiments. The scheme of the experimental setup is
given in Fig. 3 and the photograph of the experimental setup is given in Fig. 4. A metal thermoinsulated tank is equipped with
copper coil pipes to circulate the fluid by means of a thermocirculator and thus to change the investigated media temperature.
The core sample temperature is controlled with a number of thermistors inside the tank allowing accurate control of the
investigated media temperature (< 0.5 C).
SPE 146023 3

Fig. 3Experimental setup scheme. Fig. 4Experimental setup photograph.

Two B&K 8103 hydrophones (sensitivity change with temperature < 0.03 dB/C) are used as a sourcereceiver pair. The
source is placed on the bottom of the core sample plexiglass stage and the receiver is placed on the tip of a plexiglass pipe. The
receiver position along the borehole axis is changed by the positioning device with a high accuracy (0.1 mm). National
Instruments PXI-1044 chassis controlled with a computer and equipped with NI PXI-5922 ADC, PXI-5422 signal generator is
used for signal generation and conditioning. Equipment specifications are as follows:
Signal generation: NI PXI-5422 signal generator (200 MS/s, 1-period sin wave 30 kHz, 5.2 V peak-to-peak) => B&K Power
amplifier 2713 PA (40 dB, reactive load) => B&K 8103 hydrophone.
Data acquisition: B&K 8103 hydrophone => NI PXI-5922 (single ended, AC, 5 Ms/s, 20 bit, 2 V peak-to-peak).
It would be beneficial for our purpose to measure only Stoneley wave parameters, but this is not possible in the real
experiment because a number of other body and surface waves interfere with each other. Different techniques can be used to
extract the Stoneley wave out of the wavefield. The TKO decomposition algorithm (Hua and Sarkar 1991; Ekstrom 1995) is
used in this work to obtain phase velocities and attenuation of the Stoneley and first normal mode waves from experimental
pressure wave trains. TKO decomposition is valid only for guided wavesStoneley wave and normal wavesand can be
considered only as approximate for other types of waves in the wavefield.
If A = A(t, zm), m = 1,,M are the wave trains of the measured quantity A, where M is the number of equidistant receivers
located on a vertical, zm+1 = zm+h are the coordinates of receivers, and h is the distance between them, the TKO algorithm
represents AFa Fourier transform on time from these wave trains in the form of plane waves expansion:
exp ,
where j() is the amplitude of j-th wave (complex-valued function of circular frequency ), and

1 ,

is the z component of the wave vector A, Vj is its phase velocity, 1/Qj is attenuation, p is the number of plane waves. Normally
we used 36 wave trains with a 4 mm distance between the receivers and p = 10 in these experiments.
The experimental results are compared with the modeling results. Modeling is done with a finite-difference (FD) code
developed for the calculation of the wavefield in an elastic or Biot formation for the azimuthally symmetric problems [31, 32].
Only open pore, no mudcake conditions were considered. This code allows accounting for a logging tool presence effect on the
log data. The receiver hydrophone and its mount pipe are represented as a rigid body in the modeling. After the modeling of
the wave field the same TKO procedure is used to obtain Stoneley and first normal wave phase velocity and attenuation.
Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 demonstrate experimental and FD code synthesized wave trains for Idaho sandstone at different
temperatures. Idaho sandstone parameters were measured in the laboratory and used as input parameters for the modeling
code. Tabular values for the water viscosity at different temperatures were used. One can see also P (~ 3200 m/s) and S (~1700
4 SPE 146023

m/s) waves on the wave trains. As it is evident from Fig. 7 which shows one of the wave trains, Stoneley wave velocity
depends on the temperature, while the temperature dependence of P and S waves is far less pronounced.

Fig. 5Experimental wave trains, Idaho sandstone. Blue, Fig. 6Synthesized wave trains, Idaho sandstone. Blue, 5C;
5C; red, 22C. red, 22C.
Figs. 8 and Fig. 9 represent a comparison between the .
experimental and modeling results for the Stoneley and first
normal wave phase velocity for Idaho sandstone at different
temperatures. One should admit that a good correlation
between the FD modeling results and the experiment is
achieved for the Stoneley wave phase velocity although the
frequency range of investigation lies in the part of the
frequencies difficult for interpretationnear the Biot
frequency (Table A-1).
Although Stoneley wave parameters are investigated in
this work, the ability to measure the normal wave in the
experiment allows better fitting of the input parameters for
the model (see Table A-1). Minor discrepancies in the
measured and fit parameters could be attributed to the
measurement accuracy. Although the data on the phase
velocity of the Stoneley and normal wave fits very well, the
experimentally measured attenuation exceeds that of the Fig. 7Experimental wave train, Idaho sandstone. Blue, 5C;
modeling for both types of waves (see Fig. 10 for the magenta, 13C; red, 22C.
Stoneley wave attenuation). The data is fitted by introducing
a complex correction term in the shear modulus equal to 5.5108 N/m2. This term takes into account additional intrinsic
attenuation of shear waves and is analogous to the correction terms used by other authors (Stroll and Kan 1981; Turgut and
Yamamoto 1990) to account e.g. for additional friction of rock skeleton at the points of contact. Normal mode phase velocity
tends to a sound velocity in the borehole fluid (water) at higher frequencies (Kaufman and Levshin 2005) that is clearly seen in
Fig. 11 and allows us to better fit modeling parameters as well. One can see the fit for attenuation of the Stoneley and normal
wave after introducing a compex correction term in the shear modulus in the Figs 12 and 13, accordingly (Fig. 13 is provided
here to give a complete picture).
We have shown in the experiment that it is possible to measure a change in Stoneley wave phase velocity at different
temperatures. A correlation was achieved between the experimental and modeling results after the calibration of the modeling
parameters. The measurement uncertainty is too big or, reverse, the attenuation variation is too small to allow quantitative
interpretation of the variation of attenuation at the frequency range available in these experiments. This should not be the
problem on the real scale experiments. We should also admit here that attenuation measurements are preferred determining
viscosity from thermoacoustic logging. The attenuation dependence on temperature is dominated by the influence of the
viscosity change at different temperatures. It is not so for the velocity dependence, where bulk modulus change with the
temperature has even greater effect on the Stoneley wave phase velocity than the viscosity change with the temperature. Small
variations of fluid density with the temperature can be neglected both for the attenuation and velocity dependences. We have
considered no change in the parameters of the solid part of the media with the temperature.
SPE 146023 5

Fig. 8Stoneley wave phase velocity versus frequency for Idaho Fig. 9Normal wave phase velocity versus frequency for Idaho
sandstone. Solid line, FD modeling results; dots, experimental sandstone. Solid line, FD modeling results; dots, experimental
results. results.

Fig. 11Normal wave phase velocity versus frequency for Idaho

Fig. 10Stoneley wave attenuation versus frequency for Idaho
sandstone. Solid line, FD modeling results; dots, tabular values
sandstone. Solid line, FD modeling results; dots, experimental
for sound speed in water.
results.

Fig. 12Stoneley wave attenuation versus frequency for Idaho Fig. 13Normal wave attenuation versus frequency for Idaho
sandstone. Solid line, FD modeling results (complex shear sandstone. Solid line, FD modeling results (complex shear
modulus term introduced); dots, experimental results. modulus term introduced); dots, experimental results.

Applicability Analysis
Our aim in this section is to define the area of the applicability of the method and its constraints. In this section we discuss the
depth of investigation of the acoustic method, the calculation of the thermal fields, and the applicability of the method.
6 SPE 146023

Acoustic Method Depth of Investigation

The information on the depth of investigation of the acoustic method for mobility estimation from the Stoneley wave is
important here because, amongst other things, it is essential to understand how deep the formation temperature should be
changed to obtain the desired effect on the Stoneley wave. The data on the depth of investigation depend on the Stoneley wave
data frequency range, the formation, and borehole parameters.
Available information on the depth of investigation differs from one source to another: ~ 5 cm (Baker 1984) to 15 to 30 cm
(Pampuri et al. 1998; Brie et al. 2000) and up to six borehole diameters [(Sinha and Asvadurov 2004). Baker (1984) provides
an analytical estimate of the skin depth of attenuation of the Stoneley
wave at 6 kHz; the conclusion of Sinha and Asvadurov (2004) on the depth
of investigation is ambiguous no clear cutoff parameter is present (e.g.,
exponential decrease of the signal) and the authors Pampuri et al. (1998) and
Brie et al. (2000) do not give any explanation or a reference. Due to
ambiguity of these results it is necessary to make a numerical experiment for
an estimate of the depth of investigation of the acoustic method.
The experiment scheme sketch is presented in Fig. 14. A borehole of 20
cm diameter in the Fontainebleau-B (FBB) formation is filled with water
(viscosity 1 cp) while the formation is saturated with viscous oil (viscosity
50 cp). It was decided to take FBB formation parameters (see Table A-2)
both for the sake of generality (more abundant in the real wells than high
permeable Idaho sandstone) and because its parameters are better Fig. 14Experiment scheme for determining the
characterized in the laboratory (Pengra et al. 1999). The idea of the depth of investigation of acoustic mobility
estimation method.
experiment is to vary the length of the invaded zone and to obtain the
dependence of the Stoneley wave phase velocity and attenuation. Only the presence of water in the invaded zone is considered.
High contrast between the water and oil viscosity should allow estimating the depth of investigation of the method. Modeling
experiment results for Stoneley wave phase velocity and attenuation at different depth of the invaded zone are presented in
Figs. 15, 16.

Fig. 15Stoneley wave phase velocity versus frequency at Fig. 15Stoneley wave attenuation versus frequency at different
different lengths of the invaded zone, 1 cp water, 50 cp oil. lengths of the invaded zone, 1 cp water, 50 cp oil.
The depth of investigation of the acoustic method depends on the available frequency range of the Stoneley wave. It is
beneficial to use the low-frequency part of the spectrum for the interpretation where the effect on the Stoneley wave is
maximal. It is difficult to obtain low-frequency waves appropriate for interpretation signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in a real well.
Whereas in 1984, for example, the characteristic maximum for the Stoneley wave was in the range of 6 kHz (Baker1984),
nowadays, with progress in acoustic logging techniques, one can be on the safe side to rely on the high enough SNR in
frequencies near 1 kHz and even lower in some formations with modern sonic tools.
Taking 1 kHz frequency as a reference point for Stoneley wave interpretation, we can deduce from the Figs. 15 and 16 that
the depth of investigation of the Stoneley wave in this case does not exceed 5 cm, and it would be hard to obtain depth of
investigation of 10 cm even if we are in the lower frequency range. Supposing that the contrast of fluid viscosities is less
pronounced (5 cp oil), one can see from the Fig. 17 and Fig. 18 that the depth of investigation would be even smaller.
In some ways, this result with a relatively shallow depth of investigation is discouraging for the acoustic method because it
is always interesting to measure formation parameters farther from the damaged zone of the borehole. From another point of
view, this is an inspiring result for the thermoacoustic method because it is much easier to change the temperature of the part
of the formation very close to the borehole than to heat or cool a bigger part of it.
Let us have a look now at conventional wireline logging. Shallow depth of investigation means that formation parameters
are most likely investigated in the damaged or flushed zone. The depth of the invaded zone is usually 40 to 80 cm, but it can be
as shallow as 5 cm or as deep as several meters depending on the formation and mud properties (Baker 1984).
SPE 146023 7

Fig. 17Stoneley wave phase velocity versus frequency at Fig. 18Stoneley wave attenuation versus frequency at different
different lengths of the invaded zone, 1 cp water, 5 cp oil. lengths of the invaded zone, 1 cp water, 5 cp oil.

If one considers logging while drilling (LWD), it is a very straightforward approach to implement the thermoacoustic
method during underbalanced drilling when the invaded zone does not develop. It is still very probable that information on the
virgin formation could be gained even with conventional overbalanced drilling. The invaded zone length depends in this case
on the drilling rate, formation and mud parameters [e.g., oil-based mud filtrate invasion rate is 20-40% lower than water based
mud filtrate invasion rate (Salazar and Verdin 2009)].
One of the tasks for the drilling engineers is to minimize mud losses and to make the invaded zone smaller; therefore, with
the advances in the technology it is very possible to implement the thermoacoustic method for virgin formation, not only in the
LWD, but for wireline operations, also. It is worth mentioning here that the formation and fluid parameters are of great interest
anyway even in the invaded zone.

Temperature Variation in the Formation

Let us now look at the possible means to change the formation temperature for thermoacoustic logging during LWD and
wireline jobs. It does not matter whether the formation is heated or cooled down; only the temperature difference is important
for this method. A straightforward approach for the thermoacoustic method would be to use a heater to change the formation
temperature. In this case, the measurement should be done twice before the change of the formation temperature and after it
either with two tools and a heater in between or with two passes of a single tool.
A quick estimate of the energy required to heat a cylinder of a formation of 30 cm [formation density 2700 kg/m3,
formation specific heat 1000 J/(Kkg)] with a borehole of 20 cm in diameter filled with water shows that one needs to heat 1 m
length of this cylinder for 30 min with 1 kW power to gain a temperature increase of ~ 10C. This means that for the
continuous logging even at the low logging rate of 600 ft/hr, one would need about 100 kW heaters (conduction, induction,
microwave etc.) to change the formation temperature to 10C. Smaller temperature variations are possible, but these would
result in less accuracy and range of applicability of the method as it will be shown later. This estimate of cause is only in the
order-of-magnitude agreement with a real situation because many
processes should be taken into account (e.g., convection and
conduction effects, etc.), and these would require even higher
power. Nevertheless, this estimate is accurate enough to show that
it is difficult to gain this temperature change in continuous logging
using a heater on the tool, and either only local measurement at a
fixed position should be done or the method of temperature
variation should be changed.
Another option to change the temperature of the formation is to
use the formation temperature perturbation caused by the mud
circulation in the well. It is natural to associate the heater method of
temperature variation with wireline operations and the mud
circulation method with LWD.
A common scheme for heat transfer during the circulation
operation is presented in Fig. 19. Drilling mud at some temperature
on the surface is pumped through the drillpipe to the drill bit. After
passing through the drill bit, mud moves upwards in the borehole
annulus back to the surface. Drilling mud moving upwards is
Fig. 19Common wellbore circulation heat transfer scheme.
heated by the heat flow from the formation and gives some amount
of heat to the mud moving downwards inside the drillpipe. At some point in the well, the temperature of the upward-moving
8 SPE 146023

drilling mud becomes equal and then higher than the formation temperature. After this point, drilling mud transfers the heat
not only to the mud in the drillpipe but also to the formation. One should account also for a heat release from the drill bit while
drilling. For the calculation of the temperature field variation during drilling operation a simulator (Semenova and Pimenov
2006) is used. Simulator allows us to account for: temperature and pressure distribution along the well and temperature
distribution in the formation during drilling, circulation, and shut-in operations; pressure loss due to friction; heat release due
to friction and pipe rotation; Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids; fluid losses to permeable formation.
Although the simulator allows to account for a variety of parameters (e.g., geometries of the borehole, various formation
parameters, and different drilling schedules), we have used a simple set of parameters (see Table A-3) in the simulation for the
sake of simplicity without any deterioration of the generality of the conclusions based on these modeling results.
In Fig. 20 one can see the radial distribution of the temperature immediately after the drilling is finished at the depth of
3000 m. In Fig. 21 one can see axial distribution of the formation temperature at the same moment at the depth of 5 cm inside
the formation. It is clearly seen from this figure that the formation temperature perturbation at 5 cm away from the borehole
exceeds 10C at most depths. Although the perturbation near 1000 meters is smaller, in reality, when the drill bit is at this
depth, the temperature perturbation exceeds 10C here also (Fig. 22).

Fig. 20Radial distribution of the formation Fig. 21Axial distribution of the formation Fig. 22Axial distribution of the formation
temperature inside the formation (depth, temperature (radial position, 5 cm; time, 200 temperature (radial position, 5 cm; time, 73
3000 m; time, 200 hr). hr). hr).

Method Applicability
The range of viscosities that can be estimated with the thermoacoustic method is evaluated below. Let us have a look at the
temperature effect on the viscosity. The temperature effect is stronger for high-viscosity oils. However, high viscosities
decrease fluid mobility and, consequently, the effect on the Stoneley wave. One needs to perform modeling to account for
these opposing effects.
Several other physical effects should be also taken into account. Fluid parameters for the modeling are obtained from the
classical work of Batzle and Wang (1992). Extensive survey of this work allowed the authors to obtain empirical formulas for
correlations of interdependencies of the oil API gravity, viscosity, temperature, sound speed, bulk modulus, and reservoir
pressure. FBB formation parameters were supplemented with the fluid parameters from this work, and several simulations
were done. Neither the invaded zone nor the effects of temperature or pressure on the solid phase are taken into account.
In Fig. 23 and Fig. 24 one can see Stoneley wave phase slowness and attenuation at different temperatures at 25 MPa pore
pressure and 30API oil in the formation. Although the method for mobility estimation from the Stoneley wave includes both
slowness dispersion and attenuation analysis with a dominant effect of viscosity change on the attenuation, measurements of
slowness are more common and robust. The difficulty with the use of attenuation in the following analysis is that we were
unable to evaluate the attenuation measurement accuracy with the real tools while it is common to provide accuracy of the
slowness measurements for a given sonic tool. For this reason, further analysis is conducted for slowness dispersion only. It
should be noted that inclusion of the attenuation in the consideration would increase the method applicability range.
Table A-4 summarizes simulation results obtained for the slowness of the Stoneley wave in FBB formation saturated with
different API grade oil (10 to 50 API) at various formation temperatures (70 to 90C), pore pressure (5 to 35 MPa), and wave
frequency (500 Hz, 1 kHz). The cells are marked with a color indicating the applicability range of the method. Green cells
correspond to cases in wich the difference of the Stoneley slowness exceeds or equals 1 us/ft for 10C temperature difference,
yellow cells correspond to cases in wich the difference in the Stoneley slowness exceed or equal 1 us/ft for 20C temperature
SPE 146023 9

Fig. 23Stoneley wave slowness versus frequency (30 API, 25 Fig. 24Stoneley wave attenuation versus frequency (30 API, 25
MPa). MPa).
difference and red is used for the cells showing cases in wich one needs temperature difference of more than 20C to obtain
slowness difference equal or more than 1 us/ft. As it is seen from the table, the range of the applicability depends both on the
measurements accuracy and frequency and on the other physical parameters included.
From this simulation it can be seen that the range of applicability of the method depends mainly on the slowness estimation
accuracy (no attenuation influence was included). In practice, absolute accuracy for the Stoneley wave is about 1 to 2 us/ft.
Unfortunately, data on the relative accuracy which is of interest here is not available. It is understood that the relative accuracy
should be better than the absolute one. The second parameter influencing the measurements is the available frequency range
for the Stoneley wave interpretation (SNR is high enough for the interpretation). The frequency range depends on many
parameters of the borehole, formation, tool, etc. One would be on the safe side supposing that it is possible to obtain reliable
data at 1 kHz, while good data at 500 Hz is less common in the field. It should be also mentioned here that the real
measurements are done over a certain frequency range (not at a fixed frequency as it was used here for simplicity) thus
increasing the accuracy of the measurements.
The main physical parameter influencing the measurement is oil viscosity (API gravity increase corresponds to the
decrease in the oil viscosity). As Table A-4 shows, although more viscous oil exhibits stronger viscosity dependence on the
temperature the mobility is too small in this case to allow measuring this effect. Formation temperature and pore pressure also
influence the measurement. Viscosity exhibits roughly exponential behaviour with the temperature (stronger variations at
smaller temperatures); that is why it is easier to measure the slowness change at smaller temperatures. Approximately the same
physics is seen with the pore pressure. Increased pore pressure diminishes relative changes in the spatial parameters of the
fluid (changes in the solid phase were not considered in this simulation). Consequently, as a rule, this method is easier to
implement at shallower depth (smaller temperature and pore pressure).
This analysis showed major trends and applicability ranges for the thermoacoustic method. A further step should include
natural-scale lab experiments with a real tool at different temperature of the formation followed by a field experiment.

Conclusions
New application of the known method for the mobility estimation from the acoustic measurements of the Stoneley wave
slowness dispersion and attenuation was considered. A thermoacoustic method was verified by the experiment on the core
sample in the laboratory and by finite-difference code modeling results. Good correlation of the measured and simulated
Stoneley phase velocities was obtained; however, additional term in the shear modulus was included to obtain a correlation for
the attenuation parameter in the high frequency range.
Discussion on the applicability of the method was supported by several simulations. The depth of investigation for mobility
estimation by the Stoneley wave was assessed not to exceed 5 cm in real logging conditions. By a simple estimate it was
shown that in the case of changing the temperature with a heating device during continuous logging, high power is consumed,
which makes this approach less favorable. Mud circulation provides more than 10C temperature perturbation along the
borehole at depths less than 5 cm inside the formation.
Further modeling allowed us to evaluate the range of applicability of the proposed method in real boreholes in terms of the
formation oil API grade, formation temperature, and pore pressure. The relation between measurement accuracy and frequency
range was also taken into account.

Acknowledgments
Authors are thankful to their colleagues from the Schlumberger Moscow Research Center: Clement Kostov, Sergey Safonov,
Vyacheslav Pimenov, Valery Shako and Timur Zharnikov for their interest in this theme and fruitful discussions during the
preparation of the paper.
10 SPE 146023

References
1 Baker L. 1984. The effect of the Invaded Zone on Full Wavetrain Acoustic Logging. Geophysics 49 (6): 796-809.
2 Balossino P., Pampuri F., Bruni C., Ebzhasarova K. 2008. An Integrated Approach to Obtain Reliable Permeability Profiles from Logs
in a Carbonate Reservoir. SPE Reservoir and Evaluation. p. 726.
3 Batzle M., Wang Z. 1992. Seismic Properties of Pore Fluids. Geophysics 57 (11): 1396-1408.
4 Biot M.A. 1956. Theory of Propagation of Elastic Waves in a Fluid-Saturated Porous Solid, I. Low-Frequency Range. J. Acoust.
Soc.Am. 28. 168.
5 Biot M.A. 1956. Theory of Propagation of Elastic Waves in a Fluid-Saturated Porous Solid, II. High-Frequency Range. J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. 28. 179.
6 Biot M. A. 1962. Mechanics of Deformation and Acoustic Propagation in Porous Media. J. App. Phys. 33 (4): 14821498.
7 Brie A., Endo T., Johnson D., Pampuri F. 2000. Quantitative Formation Permeability Evaluation from Stoneley Waves. SPE Reservoir
Evaluation & Engeniering. 3 (2): 109.
8 Chang D., Vinegar H., Morris C., Straley C. 1997. Effective Porosity, Producible Fluid, and Permeability in Carbonates from NMR
Logging. Log Analyst 38 (2): 60-72.
9 Chang S.K., Liu, H.L., and Johnson, D.L. 1988. Low-Frequency Tube Wave in Permeable Rocks. Geophysics 53: 519.
10 Cholet, Henri. 2008. Well Production Practical Handbook (New Edition Expanded). Editions Technip.
11 Dvorkin J., Nur A. 1993. Dynamic Poroelasticity: A Unified Model with the Squirt and the Biot Mechanisms. Geophysics 58 (4): 524
533.
12 Dvorkin J., NolenHoeksema R., Nur A. 1994. The SquirtFlow Mechanism: Macroscopic description. Geophysiscs 59 (3): 428438.
13 Dvorkin J., Mavko G., Nur A. 1995. Squirt Flow in Fully Saturated Rocks. Geophysics 60 (1): 97107.
14 Ekstrom M. 1995. Dispersion Estimation from Borehole Acoustic Arrays Using a Modified Matrix Pencil Algorithm. Presented at 29-
th Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers, Pacific Grove, CA, p.5.
15 Fleury M., Deflandre F., Godefroy S. 2001. Validity of Permeability Prediction from NMR Measurements. Comptes Rendus
delAcademie des Sciences Series IIc: Chemistry 4 (11): 869-872.
16 Frenkel J., 1944. On the theory of seismic and seismoelectric phenomena in moist soil, Journal of Physics 8: 230-241.
17 Hua Y., Sarkar T. 1991. Matrix Pencil Method of Estimating Parameters of Exponentially Damped/Undamped Sinusoids in Noise.
IEEE Transactions on Acoustics. Speech and Signal Processing, 38: 814-824.
18 Johnson D. L., Koplic, J., Dashen, R. 1987. Theory of Dynamic Permeability and Tortuosity in Fluid-Saturated Porous Media. J. Fluid
Mech. 176: 379-400.
19 Kaufman A., Levshin A. 2005. Acoustic and Elastic Wave Fields. Geophysics 3. ISBN 0444-519-55-6. Elsevier.
20 Liu H., Johnson D. 1997. Effects of an Elastic Membrane on Tube Waves in Permeable Formations. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 101, 3322.
21 Mitchell J., Kenichi S. 2005. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior (3rd Edition). ISBN 978-0-471-46302-3.
22 Pampuri F., Rovellini M., Brie A., Fukusima T. 1998. Effective Evaluation of Fluid Mobility from Stoneley Waves Using Full Biot
Model Inversion: Two Case Histories. SPE paper 49132 presented at SPE Annual Technical Conference, Louisiana, New Orleana,
USA, 27-30 September.
23 Pengra D., Xi Li S., Wong P. 1999. Determination of Rock Properties by Low-Frequency AC Electrokinetics. J. of Geophys. Research
104 (B12): 2948529508.
24 Plyushchenkov B., Turchaninov V. 2002. Optimum Approximation of Convolution of Arbitrary Grid Function with the Power Kernel.
Poromechanics II, (Auriault et al. (eds.)), 753756. Swets&Zeitlinger, Lisse, ISBN 90 5809 394 8.
25 Plyushchenkov B., Turchaninov V. 2002. Construction Principles of the Efficient Finite Difference Scheme for the Refined Biot's
Equations. Poromechanics II, (Auriault et al. (eds.)), 757764. Swets&Zeitlinger, Lisse, ISBN 90 5809 394 8.
26 Rosenbaum J. 1974. Synthetic Microseismograms: Logging in Porous Formations. Geophysics 39, 14-32.
27 Salazar J., Verdin C. 2009. Quantitative Comparison of Processes of Oil- and Water-Based Mud-Filtrate Invasion and Corresponding
Effects on Borehole Resistivity Measurements. Geophysics 74 (1): E57-E73.
28 Seccombe J., Bonnie R., Smith M., Akkurt R. 2005. Ranking Oil Viscosity in Heavy Oil Reservoirs. SPE/PC-CIM/CHOA 97935.
29 Semenova A., Pimenov V. 2006. Computational Modeling of Thermal Processes in Drilling Frozen Rocks. (in Russian). Geology and
Exploration 1 (2): 42-44.
30 Sinha B., Asvadurov B. 2004. Dispersion and Radial Depth of Investigation of Borehole Modes. Geophysical Prospecting 52: 271-286.
31 Stoll R., Kan T. 1921. Reflection of Acoustic Waves at WaterSediment Interface. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 70. 1. P. 149156.
32 Tang X. M., Cheng, C. H., and Toksoz, M. N. 1991. Dynamic Permeability and Borehole Stoneley Waves: A Simplified Biot-
Rosenbaum Model. J. Acoustic. Soc. Am. 90, 1632-1646.
33 Tang X.M, and Cheng, C.H. 1993. Borehole Stoneley Wave Propagation across Permeable Structures. Geophysical prospecting 41:
165-187.
34 Tang X. M., and Cheng, C.H. 1993. The Effects of a Logging Tool on the Stoneley Wave Propagation in Elastic and Porous
Formations. The Log Analyst 34: 46-56.
35 Tang X. M., and Cheng, C. H. 1996. Fast Inversion of Formation Permeability from Borehole Stoneley Wave Logs, Geophysics 61:
639-645.
36 Tezuka K., Cheng, C. H., and Tang, X. M. 1994. Modeling of Low Frequency Stoneley Wave Propagation in an Irregular Borehole,
Expand. Abstracts 64th SEG Ann. Mtg., Los Angles, California, 24-27.
37 Turgut A., Yamamoto T. 1990. Measurements of Acoustic Wave Velocities and Attenuation in Marine Sediments. J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
87 (6): 23762383.
38 Winkler K.W., Liu, H.-L., and Johnson, D.L. 1989. Permeability and Borehole Stoneley Waves: Comparison between Experiment and
Theory, Geophysics 54, 66.
39 Zittel R., Beliveau, D., O'Sullivan, T., Mohanty, R., Miles, J. 2006. Reservoir Crude-Oil Viscosity Estimation from Wireline NMR
Measurements. SPE Paper 101689 presented at the SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio, Texas, USA,
2427 September.
SPE 146023 11

Appendix

Table A-1Experimental Parameters for Idaho Sandstone

Fluid parameters (water)
Temperature 5 C 22 C 35 C
3
Fluid density, kg/m 1000 998 994
2 9 9 9
Fluid bulk module, N/m 2.0410 2.2110 2.3110
Fluid viscosity, cp 1.52 0.96 0.72
Core sample parameters (measured)
Core sample diameter, m 0.2
Core sample height, m 0.25
Borehole diameter, m 0.02
Mass (dry), kg 14.400
Mass (water saturated), kg 16.600
Vp (dry)*, m/s 2880
Vs (dry)*, m/s 1900
Vp (water saturated, 22 deg C)*, m/s 3180
Vs (water saturated, 22 deg C)*, m/s 1700
Vp (water saturated, 22 deg C)**, m/s 3100
Vs (water saturated, 22 deg C)**, m/s 1650
Core sample parameters (deduced from the measurements)
Porosity 0.28/0.20 measured/used for simulation
Permeability, Darcy 1.4***/1.0 measured/used for simulation
3
Material density, kg/m 2575
2 10
Material bulk modulus, ks, N/m 3.910
Bulk cementation factor, 0.14
2
Bulk modulus of dry skeleton, N/m K= ks
2 10
Material shear modulus, N/m 4.510
2 9
Shear modulus of dry skeleton, N/m 6.210
Tortuosity **** 3.5
Geometric factor **** 1.0
Temperature 5 C 22 C 35 C
Biots frequency, kHz 13.6 8.7 6.5
* measurements on the 1-inch core sample.(at 500 kHz)
** from the travel time curves
*** measured by air flow
**** guess values (no measurements were done on these parameters)

Table A-2Input Parameters for Simulation with FBB Formation

2 10
Material bulk modulus, ks, N/m 3.910
Bulk cementation factor, 0.28
2
bulk modulus of dry skeleton, N/m K= ks
2 10
Shear modulus of dry skeleton, N/m 1.2610
3
Material density, kg/m 2640
Porosity, 0.167
Permeability, Darcy 0.5
Tortuosity, 3.33
Mb 1.0
Other parameters of flushed zone
2 9
Fluid bulk modulus, N/m 2.2510
3
Fluid density, kg/m 1000
2
Fluid viscosity, Ns/m 0.001
Invaded zone length, cm 0, 20 50, 10,
Other parameters of FB-B reservoir
2 9
Fluid bulk modulus, N/m 1.4410
3
Fluid density, kg/m 850
2
Fluid viscosity, Ns/m 0.005, 0.05
12 SPE 146023

Table A-3Input Parameters for Simulation

Geometry
Onshore drilling
Tubing outer diameter, m 0.1
Tubing thickness, m 0.01
Tubing thermal conductivity, W/mK 52
Roof, m 0
Sole, m 3000
Well diameter, m 0.2
Environment
Formation temperature at surface, C 25
Formation temperature gradient C /m 0.03
Min. horizontal stress, Bar (surface) 100
Min. horizontal stress, Bar (sole) 600
Formation thermal conductivity, W/mK 2.5
3
Formation density, kg/m 2700
Formation specific heat, J/Kkg 2220
Young modulus, GPa 18
Poisson ration 0.22
Failure stress for compression, Bar 300
Failure stress for tension, Bar 100
Mud properties
Viscosity, Pas 0.001
Thermal conductivity, W/mK 0.58
Specific heat capacity, J/Kkg 4200
3
Density, kg/m 1000
Drilling schedule
Drilling rate, m/s 15
Reservoir mud temperature at the beginning, C 25
Reservoir mud temperature at the end, C 30

Table A-1Applicability Analysis

Stoneley wave slowness (at 500 Hz)
P, MPa T, C API 10 API 20 API 30 API 40 API 50
5 70 218.2 220.0 222.7 226.3 231.1
5 80 218.6 220.7 223.7 227.6 232.8
5 90 218.9 221.3 224.6 228.9 234.5
15 70 218.0 219.6 222.1 225.3 229.5
15 80 218.4 220.3 223.0 226.6 231.1
15 90 218.7 220.7 223.7 227.6 232.5
25 70 217.7 219.3 221.6 224.6 228.2
25 80 218.2 219.9 222.4 225.6 229.7
25 90 218.5 220.4 223.1 226.5 230.8
35 70 217.8 219.2 221.2 223.8 227.3
35 80 218.1 219.7 221.9 224.8 228.5
35 90 218.3 220.1 222.5 225.7 229.5
Stoneley wave slowness (at 1000 Hz)
5 70 217.4 218.7 220.4 222.9 226.1
5 80 217.7 219.2 221.2 223.8 227.2
5 90 217.8 219.4 221.7 224.6 228.3
15 70 217.2 218.3 220.0 222.3 225.0
15 80 217.5 218.8 220.7 223.0 226.1
15 90 217.7 219.1 221.1 223.8 227.0
25 70 217.2 218.2 219.7 221.7 224.2
25 80 217.4 218.5 220.2 222.4 225.2
25 90 217.5 218.8 220.7 223.0 225.9
35 70 217.1 218.0 219.3 221.2 223.5
35 80 217.3 218.3 219.9 221.8 224.4
35 90 217.4 218.6 220.3 222.4 225.0