Standard Interpretation
BP Exploration
INTRODUCTION
Standard interpretation is the process of determining
volumes of hydrocarbons in place from wireline logs. This
process requires four basic steps:
1. Determine the volume of shale. Shale affects the
response of the various logging devices. To interpret
the response for porosity or saturation, the volume of
shale must be determined.
2. Determine the porosity. Porosity is the fraction of the
total rock available for the storage of fluids.
3. Determine the formation water resistivity (Rw). The
resistivity of the water (without hydrocarbons) is used
to interpret the formation resistivity for saturation.
4. Determine the water saturation (Sw). A resistivity
model is interpreted for saturation. This model relates
water saturation, porosity, water resistivity, and
volume shale.
ESTIMATION OF SHALE VOLUME
The volume of shale (Vsh) is best estimated by logging
measurements that respond primarily to shale, in particular,
gamma ray and spontaneous potential (SP). The most
common methods for estimating shale volumes from gamma
ray and SP logs are outlined here. Other measurements can
be used under special conditions to estimate shale volumes,
such as the resistivity in very high resistivity formations, the
compensated neutron in very low porosity formations, or
density versus neutron crossplots in known lithologies.
Shale Volume from Gamma Ray
Application
The gamma ray can be an excellent estimator of shale
volume in areas with little uranium and where radioactive
salts are associated primarily with clay minerals.
Method
The two most frequently used methods of estimating shale
volume from the gamma ray log are the linear and the
nonlinear estimators. Both methods require determining the
gamma ray response (GR) at the depth of interest and
determining the response associated with a clean reservoir
having no shale (GRcl) and a zone of 100% shale (GRgh).
The linear method is the simplest, but it tends to
overestimate shale in the intermediate ranges of shale
volumes. The linear response equation is
y _ GR s h -GR
sh
GR s h -GR c l
280
Mark Alberty
Houston, Texas, U.S.A.
The nonlinear method begins by estimating the shale
volume from the linear equation and then correcting that
estimation using a chart as shown in Figure 1. First, one
marks the horizontal axis (labeled "radioactivity index") with
the linear estimation of shale volume. One then proceeds
vertically to the appropriate rocks and then horizontally to
read the corrected volume of shale.
Advantages
The gamma ray method is very simple, fast, and generally
the most reliable. It can be used with the potassium or
thorium curves and with the uranium corrected total gamma
ray curve from the spectral gamma ray.
Limitations
Gamma ray readings must be corrected for hole size first.
This method does not work well in areas where radioactivity
is not primarily associated with the clays, such as in
feldspathic sands.
Shale Volume from Spontaneous Potential (SP)
Application
The SP can be an fair estimator of shale volume in areas
where mud filtrate and formation water resistivities contrast.
Method
The estimation of volume shale from the SP requires
determining the SP response at the depth of interest and
determining the response associated with a clean reservoir
with no shale (SPcl) and a zone of 100% shale (SPsll). The
response equation is
SP
v _ sh-SP
Advantages
The SP method is very simple and fast.
Limitations
This method does not have good vertical resolution. It
overestimates shale volume in hydrocarbon-bearing zones,
and it is ensitive to the selection of clean reservoir and shale
points. It will not work in zones where J ^ = R^ or in oil-
based muds.
POROSITY ESTIMATION
Any logging device primarily affected by the presence of
porosity can be used to estimate porosity (())). Best results are

0.9-
0.8 -
07 -
Linear Scaling-
Larionov (Older rocks):'
s zone fluid properties in its interpretation. This method is
Clavier et al *.' - L a r i o n o v (Tertiary rochs)
0.5 0.6 0.7
Figure 1. Nonlinear shale volume chart. (From Western Atlas
International, 1985; courtesy of Atlas Wireline Services Division
of Western Atlas International, Inc.)
generally produced by the density, compensated neutron, and
sonic logs. When using a single porosity measuring device
such as the density, neutron, or sonic, assumptions are
normally required to estimate porosity. These assumptions
are the lithology and the fluid properties, which must be
determined from local knowledge. If multiple porosity
measuring devices are recorded, the multiple measurements
can frequently be used together to determine porosity and
lithology. (Determination of lithology is discussed in the
chapter on "Lithology from Logs" in Part 4.)
Porosity from Density
Application
Density is a good method for determining either total or
effective porosity in single or multiple mineral, fluid-filled
reservoirs. It is extremely useful in combination with core
measurements of grain density.
Method
The method of estimating porosity from the density
requires determining the matrix density (pfl), the density log
reading (p^, and the fluid density (pfl at the depth of interest.
The matrix density is determined by the lithology. Normally,
sandstone is 2.65 g/cm 3 , limestone is 2.71 g/cm 3 , and
dolomite is 2.87 g/cm 3 . The fluid density is dependent upon
the salinity of water and the density of hydrocarbon.
Freshwater has a density of 1.0 g / c m 3 and saltwater
approximately 1.1 g/cm 3 . Hydrocarbon density can vary
widely from 0.05 g/cm 3 for gas at low pressures to nearly 1.0
g/cm 3 for certain oils. A typical value for oil is 0.8 g/cm 3 .
The density response equation is
"Pb
<t>D
-Pfl
Standard Interpretation 181
Advantages
This method can be used to determine porosity accurately
when matrix and fluid densities are known. It can be used to
determine either total or effective porosity through the
selection of appropriate matrix density. Matrix density can be
accurately determined from core measurements. Linear
volumetric response allows expansion for multiple mineral
formations.
Limitations
The shallow investigation of the density normally results
in investigating the flushed zone; one must typically use flush
difficult to use accurately in gas reservoirs due to the
difficulty of determining the appropriate fluid density of the
flushed zone. One should use apparent matrix and fluid
densities adjusted to the relationship of the ratio of twice the
atomic number divided by the atomic weight (2Z/A) for
08 09 1
freshwater-filled limestone. This method only investigates
one side of the borehole (typically the low side).
Porosity from Compensated Neutron
Application
The compensated neutron measurement gives a rough
estimate of the total porosity in simple fluid-filled reservoirs.
It is very sensitive to gas, and consequently, it is useful as a
gas indicator in conjunction with the density measurement. It
can also be used with density to determine both lithology and
porosity in non-gas bearing zones. It is sensitive to clay
content.
Method
The compensated neutron measurement is recorded at the
wellsite to provide the correct water-filled porosity in a user-
specified matrix, normally limestone or sandstone. If
recorded on the appropriate matrix, the log values can be
corrected for environmental effects and then used as an
estimate of water-filled porosity. If the zone of interest
contains fluids with lower hydrogen indexes than water, the
porosity will be underestimated.
Advantages
A very strong response to gas is useful in identifying gas
reservoirs (indicates low porosity) when used in conjunction
with density or sonic porosity measurements. A neutron and
density combination is very useful in identifying mineralogy.
The most practical porosity measurement is through the
casing.
Limitations
Since shallow investigation normally results in
investigating the flushed zone, one must typically use flush
zone fluid properties in interpretation. This method
investigates omnidirectionally around the borehole and
typically requires considerable environmental corrections. It
is sensitive to standoff from the borehole wall and needs
effective decentralization for reasonably accurate results.
182 PART 4WIRELINE METHODS
Porosity from Sonic
Application
The compressional sonic log can be used as a moderately
good estimator of porosity in water and, to some degree, oil-
filled rocks.
Method
The two most frequently used methods of estimating
porosity from sonic measurements are the Wyllie time
average method and the Raymer-Hunt-Gardner field
observation method. Both methods require detenriining the
sonic response (At,) at the depth of interest and determining
the response associated with the matrix (Afma). Typical values
for Atma are 55.5 |xsec/ft for sandstone, 47.5 usec/ft for
limestone, and 43.5 usec/ft for dolomite. (A more complete
listing of interval traveltimes for common minerals is given in
the chapter on "Difficult Lithologies" in Part 4.)
The Wyllie time average method requires an estimate of fluid
interval transit time (Atn). Typical values range from 189
usec/ft for saltwater to 204 usec/ft for freshwater. This
method tends to overestimate porosity in uncompacted
sandstones and hydrocarbon-bearing reservoirs. Empirical
corrections to lessen this error can be implemented using the
compaction factor (Cp) and hydrocarbon correction (Hy)
terms. Cp describes the influence of pore pressure on the
sonic porosity equation. It is normally estimated from
comparison of density and apparent sonic porosity or from
the sonic response in nearby shale (Cp = Atsh/100.0). Hy is
approximate and is set equal to 0.9 for oil and 0.7 for gas. The
Wyllie time average equation is
Af,-A; ma Hy
A'fi-Ar ma Cp
The Raymer-Hunt-Gardner equation is an empirical
approach developed from a statistical analysis of a database of
sonic measurements and independently determined porosity.
This equation is
Ah
The value of C can vary between 0.625 and 0.70, depending
upon local conditions. The most widely accepted value is
0.67. A value of 0.60 is recommended for gas reservoirs.
Graphical charts for solving these equations are normally
in service company chartbooks.
Advantages
The sonic method is very fast and can be very accurate
when parameters are tuned to a particular reservoir. For this
reason, the sonic porosity method is commonly used in the
appraisal of field development wells.
Limitations
The interpretation of sonic logs is sensitive to formation
pressure and rock compressibility, particularly in
unconsolidated rocks. Results are variable in hydrocarbon-
bearing zones due to the uncertainty of the appropriate C or
Afn for hydrocarbons. The sonic log may measure the interval
traveltime of the flushed zone or of the unaltered formation
depending upon the depth of invasion and the relative
velocities of the two zones. This can produce some
uncertainty in selection of appropriate interpretation
parameters.
Porosity from Density and Neutron
Uses
Porosity and lithology can both be determined from
simultaneous use of both the density and neutron
measurements. (These methodologies are discussed further
in the chapters on "Lithology from Logs" and "Difficult
Lithologies" in Part 4.) Two primary methods are used.
Method 1
The first method requires determining the lithology that
will cause both the density and neutron response equations to
produce similar porosity values. One of the easiest methods
is to solve these two equations simultaneously in a graphical
manner. Service companies provides their customers with
chartbooks containing density versus neutron crossplots for
their particular tools. An example is shown in Figure 2. First,
one should mark the horizontal axis with the environmentally
corrected neutron reading in limestone porosity units and the
vertical axis with the bulk density. Be sure that the chart and
neutron log are on compatible lithology scales (limestone).
The point where the two meet represents the porosity and
lithology of a clean, water-filled rock. The porosity is
determined by interpolating between equal porosity lines
connecting the common porosity points on the sandstone,
limestone, and dolomite lines. The lithology is determined by
interpolating between the labeled lithologies.
Advantages. The density-neutron generally provides
the best sensitivity to lithology, porosity, hydrocarbons, and
shaliness.
Limitations. Results are degraded in rugose holes
where the density is unable to maintain proper wall contact.
In heterogeneous formations, the density may respond to
formation characteristics occurring on only one side of the
hole while the neutron responds to the formation on all sides.
In additional, the two devices have different depths of
investigation. These conditions may lead to inappropriate
conclusions concerning lithology and/or porosity.
Note. Other crossplot techniques available are the
density-sonic and the density-neutron. The density-sonic is
inappropriate for fractured formations and generally has poor
sensitivity to lithology. The neutron-sonic has reduced
sensitivity to lithology compared to the density-neutron, but
it has increased sensitivity to the presence of gas. Both of
these techniques are subject to the limitations of measuring
porosity with the sonic discussed earlier.
Method 2
An approximation of the crossplot answer for clean
reservoirs can be made using the following equation:

10 20 30
(0CNL>cor NEUTRON POROSITY INDEX, p.u.
(APPARENT LIMESTONE POROSITY)
Figure 2. Density-neutron crossplot chart. (Courtesy of
Schlumberger Well Services, 1979.)
where
<)> = estimated porosity
<>
| N = neutron porosity for the appropriate lithology
<>
| D = density porosity for the appropriate lithology
Advantages. This method provides quick, reasonable
answers even in the presence of gas.
Limitations. This method requires that the porosities be
determined for the appropriate lithology. It is only an
approximate answer (typically within one or two porosity
units). Accuracy decreases with increasing shale content and
gas effects.
DETERMINATION OF WATER SATURATION
Water saturation (Sw) is most often determined from the
logging measurement of resistivity and knowledge of
porosity, water resistivity, and shale volume. The
interpretation procedures can be divided into two separate
proceduresone for shaly and one for clean reservoirs.
Water Saturation in Clean Reservoirs
Application
The Archie equation is the primary method for
interpreting resistivity measurements. Either the induction or
the laterolog wireline measurement can be used for formation
water saturation in areas where the formation water contains
moderate to saturated amounts of dissolved salts and the
reservoir rock contains no shale or clay.
Standard Interpretation 183
Method
The predominant electrical conductor in subsurface
formations is salt water. Most other fluids and minerals
normally encountered in reservoirs are nonconductors. The
analysis of the actual conductivity (or resistivity) of the rock
compared to the conductivity (or resistivity) of the same rock
when fully saturated with water serves as the basis for
determining water saturation from wireline logs. This
fundamental relationship was described by Gus Archie and is
expressed by the following equation:
S" F-Rv
where
S w = water saturation
F = formation resistivity factor
R^ = resistivity of formation waters
R, = true formation resistivity
n = saturation exponent
The formation resistivity factor, F, describes the tortuosity
of the conductivity paths (pore space) in the rock. It can be
determined in the laboratory from cores or it can be estimated
from the following relationship:
F= ^
where is the porosity of the rock and a and m are
determined from local experience. The most common values
for a and m are as follows:
In soft formations: a = 0.81, m = 2.0, or
a = 0.62, m = 2.15
In hard formations: a = 1.0, m = 2.0.
In fractured rocks, m tends toward lower values, and in
vugular rocks, it tends toward higher values.
The value of the resistivity of the formation waters, Rw, can
be determined from the SP in water sands, from the Archie
equation applied to nearby water sands, from water samples,
or from local experience (see the chapter on "Determination of
Water Resistivity" in Part 4). This value of the true resistivity
of the formation, Rt, can be determined from analysis of the
dual induction or dual laterolog measurements (see the
chapter on "Preprocessing of Logging Data" in Part 4).
The saturation exponent, n, describes how the tortuosity of
the conductive paths in the formation increases as the water
saturation decreases. The value of n can be determined in the
laboratory from measurements on cores or from local
experience. The most typically used value for n is 2.0.
Advantages
This method is the simplest for interpreting saturation in
clean sands. It can be calibrated with cores for increased
accuracy.
184 PART4WIRELINE METHODS

Limitations Example Interpretation

It only works for clean reservoirs. The value for m is very
difficult to determine accurately in fractured or vugular
reservoirs.
Water Saturation in Shaly Reservoirs
Application
Many variations on the Archie equation have been
developed over the years to describe the influence of clay or
shale as a conductor in reservoir rocks. These methods
simply have an additional clay or shale term included to the
basic Archie equation to account for the clay conductivity.
Variations of the different equations have arisen to handle the
different distributions that shale or clay may take in the rock.
(For references that provide guidelines for selecting the
appropriate equation for a particular formation, see the
chapter on "Difficult Lithologies" in Part 4.)
The logs in Figures 3 and 4 are used for this example.
Figure 3 is a deep induction log recorded with a shallow
resistivity device and SP, while Figure 4 is a compensated
density-neutron log with a gamma ray. The well is an
unconsolidated sand and shale sequence from the Gulf Coast
area. Interval D is apparently wet because of the low
resistivity. Rw can be determined in this interval from either
the SP or by the Archie method (see the chapter on
"Determination of Water Resistivity" in Part 4). Rw was
determined here by the Archie method to be 0.026 Q-m at
formation temperature. For the purposes of this example, no
environmental corrections were made and were assumed to
be unnecessary.
Point A is above the gas-oil contact, as indicated by the
severe crossover of the density and neutron porosities that
were recorded on a sandstone matrix. The density-porosity
log reads 35% and the neutron log 11%. Thus, we have

Method
N+< lO.ll2 +0.35 2
The Simandoux equation is a good general purpose
equation that accounts for the influence of shale with regard (pA = 0.26, or 26%
to water saturation. The Simandoux equation is
Point B is in a light oil column as indicated by the slight
^u/ crossover of the density and neutron porosities that were
R,SH recorded on a sandstone matrix. The density log reads 30%
and the neutron log 17%. Thus,
where
S w = water saturation 0.17 2 +0.30 2
I0N +0D
F = formation resistivity factor
J^H = resistivity of shale
= 0.24, or 24%
VSH = volume of shale
Rw = resistivity of formation waters
Rt = true formation resistivity Point C is also apparently in a light oil column as indicated
n - saturation exponent by the slight crossover of the density and neutron porosities
that were recorded on a sandstone matrix. The density log
reads 31% and the neutron log 23%. Thus,
The selection of parameters is similar to that described for
clean reservoirs. Note that the equation is quadratic, making
it significantly more difficult to solve manually for saturation. m
0N+0D _ 0.23 2 +0.31 2
Normally, saturations in shaly sands are determined using *-" 2 "\ 2
computers or programmable calculators. ^ c = 0.27, or 27%

Advantages
The formation resistivity factor can be calculated from
This method accounts for shale conductivity in reservoir these porosities using one of the relationships for soft
rocks. Different equations exist for structural, laminated formations:
(interbedded), dispersed, and intermixed distribution clays
and shales.
(|>2 0.262
Limitations
_ 0.81 0.81 n ,
One must understand the shale distribution to select the F B = - ^ = - = 14.1
appropriate equation. The value of m is very difficult to 0.24^
determine accurately in fractured or vugular reservoirs. In 0.81 0.81
z
= 11.1
low salinity reservoirs, these equations overestimate water 0.27
saturation due to a phenomenon called excess clay conductivity;
in these cases, a different model (such as dual water or Saturations can be estimated from the Archie equation
Waxman-Smit) may be more appropriate. since there is little or no volume shale, as indicated by the
 Standard Interpretation 185

Figure 4. Density-neutron log for example interpretation.

Figure 3. Induction log for example interpretation.

gamma ray. Rt should be determined after environmental
corrections, but is assumed here to be equal to the deep
induction resistivity (R,Ld) due to the high porosity and
relatively shallow invasion. In zone A, Rt is 5.0 Q-m, in zone
B, 13 C2-m, and in zone C, 0.55 Q-m.
Assuming n to be 2.0, Archie's equation can be written and
solved for each zone as follows:
This analysis found zone A to be a gas-bearing sand with
26% porosity and 25% water saturation. However, water
saturation is most likely overestimated due to the proximity
of the massive conductive shale bed. Zone B was found to be
a light oil sand with 24% porosity and 17% water saturation.
Zone C was found to be a residual light oil sand with 27%
porosity and 72% water saturation.

(fXw f 12.0-0.026
WA
"1| J?t ~ A' 5.0
= 0.25
114.1 0.026
~\< 13.0
= 0.17
_ 111.1-0.026
Kc
~i RX ~ \ 0.55
= 0.72, or 72%