| 00:11 | That ferocity log, which this is more than a porosity log though it's |
|
| 00:19 | used for that, right? Uh the acoustic clock where we're actually measuring |
|
| 00:24 | acoustic velocity or a travel time. we know the distance between our |
|
| 00:30 | we can get the velocity. So uh measure the acoustic velocity. It |
|
| 00:38 | has units of feet per second meters second, depending on whether you're in |
|
| 00:44 | US or Canada or somewhere else And it's reported either terminology in terms |
|
| 00:52 | travel time, transit, time transit time, Delta T, |
|
| 00:59 | delta T and microseconds per foot or per meter. So this is why |
|
| 01:06 | this interesting, why are we sitting talking about it today? Because it |
|
| 01:11 | the most complex. You notice we've built up in complexity because it actually |
|
| 01:19 | the one measurement out of the acoustic . In fact, the one measurement |
|
| 01:23 | talked about we're actually dealing with a of the material. So although it's |
|
| 01:29 | very large, uh typical, typical measured in an acoustic log size make |
|
| 01:37 | uh sub micros strains. So pretty displacements. Yeah, but at least |
|
| 01:44 | a displacement and therefore, it's uh , more closely related to things like |
|
| 01:51 | static properties, large strain properties as to small strain rock failure, uh |
|
| 01:58 | those kinds of things. So the idea, obviously a compensated tool that |
|
| 02:08 | tool is the most compensated tool we have uh has more like four receivers |
|
| 02:16 | than two. And so we are in multiple directions of that. But |
|
| 02:21 | simple concept, you have a piso transducer uh and it generates, you |
|
| 02:28 | a, you apply a voltage to . Uh and it actually will ring |
|
| 02:33 | with that voltage. You will uh an acoustic wave uh through the mud |
|
| 02:41 | the borehole wall travels along the borehole reaches multiple receivers. The the various |
|
| 02:48 | and what we've gotten better at include improving the efficiency of getting that energy |
|
| 02:55 | , improving the depth of investigation of tool, which used to be quite |
|
| 03:01 | . The old just borehole compensated the uh dipole tool, multiple tools |
|
| 03:08 | actually get significantly better depths of investigation we'll talk about. And then simply |
|
| 03:14 | tool travels, it gets picked up multiple receivers. You know, the |
|
| 03:18 | between the receivers, you can pick arrival time. And one of the |
|
| 03:23 | things about this method for doing it I can pick as long as I |
|
| 03:28 | the same point on the wave form the uh multiple receivers, I can |
|
| 03:34 | an interval time. And then I the distance between the two detectors. |
|
| 03:39 | know the time difference. So I everything I need to get a |
|
| 03:43 | OK. OK. What time transmitter , et cetera? And then we |
|
| 03:53 | that time between receiving signal at the . This is not the way you |
|
| 03:58 | it in the laboratory. By the , typically you don't measure this. |
|
| 04:02 | know what we'll see is we actually just a, a uh pulsar and |
|
| 04:07 | receiving transmitter on the ends of the . And here we can actually pick |
|
| 04:12 | first arrival. There are some complications picking an arrival, tiny interior to |
|
| 04:18 | coda of the wave form. Geophysicist should know what that is, but |
|
| 04:24 | , there's a first arrival and then is this long signal associated with scattering |
|
| 04:29 | , uh et cetera that goes on the wave form. And then what |
|
| 04:34 | is you penetrate deeper and deeper into coda. You get more and more |
|
| 04:38 | group velocity as opposed to a phase . Usually people want a phase velocity |
|
| 04:46 | could probably help us with kind of what group velocity with bayes velocity is |
|
| 04:52 | the one has to do they do differ because there is a frequency dependence |
|
| 04:57 | the velocity. So that causes basically a wave with multiple frequencies present to |
|
| 05:05 | at a slightly different rate than the single frequency does. The short form |
|
| 05:11 | that. If you want to go that more detail I'd be happy to |
|
| 05:15 | to you about it. OK. Everybody understands the measurement we're making, |
|
| 05:21 | the way, uh let's, let's what we learned about uh the density |
|
| 05:27 | measured. What measures the rock absolutely little bit deeper than that electron |
|
| 05:37 | which you're right, exactly right. density is related to bulk density and |
|
| 05:43 | dominated by the rock. Yeah. the answer there is electron density which |
|
| 05:49 | the key to all the properties. the see absolutely direct logic towards it |
|
| 05:56 | the rock. Yeah, neutron log measuring fluids and the hydrogen density is |
|
| 06:04 | origin of why it's measuring the So almost everything else follows fairly directly |
|
| 06:10 | those assumptions, right? As long you can remember that, right. |
|
| 06:15 | I would strongly recommend you commit that memory, you can pretty much figure |
|
| 06:20 | it a lot of what the rest talked about this is measuring what I |
|
| 06:25 | told you yet. But what do think just about? I'm sorry, |
|
| 06:33 | on. Yeah, good. A little bit deeper. What property |
|
| 06:38 | absolutely is correct. But what property the rock is it? Does it |
|
| 06:48 | ? Remember we had one that measured rock, we had one that measured |
|
| 06:51 | fluids. What's this one measure rock the fluids measuring both very good. |
|
| 06:58 | already we're more complicated. It's some complex average that we'll get to over |
|
| 07:05 | properties of the rock framework and the in the framework. So the physics |
|
| 07:10 | already significantly more complicated, right? even because of that, in |
|
| 07:21 | uh what kind of waves will we ? And we have to make sure |
|
| 07:25 | measuring the right things. There's uh waves in the formation. This is |
|
| 07:30 | we want to get. The congressional is the easiest to determine. Why |
|
| 07:36 | I say that because it's the first , right. So the first thing |
|
| 07:40 | shows up will be that congressional In addition, we have to have |
|
| 07:44 | idea of what a sheer wave is , it may be a little less |
|
| 07:49 | for you. I don't know, this is actually a wave where the |
|
| 07:56 | is perpendicular to the direction of OK. So will you get a |
|
| 08:02 | wave in a liquid? No, is that? Because there is no |
|
| 08:09 | force in a liquid? So we propagate an elastic wave in a |
|
| 08:15 | The good news about an acoustic wave that it is an elastic response. |
|
| 08:21 | Hook's law is valid here, Why is that because the displacements are |
|
| 08:26 | small, right? If you look micro strains, which is what you're |
|
| 08:32 | sub micros strains and you look at much you're actually moving an individual grain |
|
| 08:36 | complying an individual grain, it's quite . OK. So uh that's the |
|
| 08:42 | thing that makes our life easier and us to directly attribute attributes from acoustic |
|
| 08:49 | . So, and why we can to at least gives us a start |
|
| 08:54 | estimating more complex attributes like large straight rocks. So, rock failure, |
|
| 09:01 | all of those things come out of , right? In addition to these |
|
| 09:06 | , right, the compression and shear , we also had to get direct |
|
| 09:11 | either through the sod, which God us. We are not interested |
|
| 09:16 | It's dominated by steel and in it was a huge problem when you |
|
| 09:20 | trying to do this MWD, You've got all the steel in the |
|
| 09:25 | hall. So how do, how you get around that? I'm still |
|
| 09:29 | that, that they can. In , I'm amazed that you can get |
|
| 09:32 | acoustic wave when you're actually busting up rock in the presence of it, |
|
| 09:37 | ? You're generating all kinds of acoustic related to that. So the, |
|
| 09:44 | that's the tool yeah, or directly the mud and the mud can get |
|
| 09:53 | in regards to the shear wave because waves travel more slowly, restoring force |
|
| 09:58 | smaller than a compression wave, which a direct wave, right? And |
|
| 10:03 | you can in having muds confuse a arrival or a direct sheer arrival, |
|
| 10:09 | takes a longer path that is So that sometimes caused confusion and the |
|
| 10:16 | recent tools like I said, the Sonic or multiple sonic help with that |
|
| 10:22 | . You get a lot more sheer into the formation with those and then |
|
| 10:26 | have surface waves. So you have ray waves, which geophysicists in the |
|
| 10:32 | might be uh have called ground It's that thing where they actually have |
|
| 10:37 | interface between a softer material and a material. And you actually get that |
|
| 10:44 | responding to that, right. Uh then a stone wave which uh comes |
|
| 10:49 | every 10 years or so as the to the permeability question, right? |
|
| 10:55 | there you actually OK, it's an wave between the rock and the fluids |
|
| 11:01 | in the rock, in and out the poor space. So every model |
|
| 11:06 | ever made has a permeability in that . How easy is it for the |
|
| 11:12 | to flow? OK. That's related this stony way, the physics of |
|
| 11:17 | . What's the issue with doing this a borehole? This is a little |
|
| 11:26 | esoteric question. But the remember when talked about spurt los building mud |
|
| 11:32 | et cetera, the rate at which will enter or leave the actual rock |
|
| 11:38 | dominated by the mud cake. And really not interested in a mud cake |
|
| 11:44 | . So plus that will vary a from well to well. So uh |
|
| 11:50 | can't just say the mud cake permeability such and such that often the permeability |
|
| 11:56 | the mud cake is significantly lower than permeability of the rock. So people |
|
| 12:02 | about this and yes, you can this in the lab. Yes, |
|
| 12:05 | can build these models. But in four hole or you have a root |
|
| 12:09 | hole with mud cake built on it made this every time it ends |
|
| 12:14 | Gee, what a great idea. just doesn't work. I've seen that |
|
| 12:18 | at least three times in my tenure the oil industry as new generations figure |
|
| 12:24 | stuff out. Don't recognize anybody ever anything before them. Uh, which |
|
| 12:30 | every 10 years or so. People that I haven't heard about it for |
|
| 12:36 | while. So it's gonna come up . So acoustic log types, we |
|
| 12:41 | uncompensated and just like all the other , uncompensated tools doesn't really work, |
|
| 12:49 | ? So it's a single detector and tool really, really needs compensation because |
|
| 12:57 | I saw this thing is centered in borehole, you have a mud travel |
|
| 13:01 | . If this thing's tilted, then gonna have various mud travel times depending |
|
| 13:05 | the tilt. And uh also all these other things, right? Uh |
|
| 13:11 | your borehole, if you have anything borehole size changes significantly, this |
|
| 13:16 | gonna really hurt this tool. So moved on to compensated acoustic logs. |
|
| 13:24 | like I say, that helped with tool tilt. No, although it |
|
| 13:29 | still doesn't work well. If you a bad bal, the long |
|
| 13:35 | the acoustic log helped you with two . Uh Mostly it was built because |
|
| 13:40 | we don't want to make rock It's expensive to get rock. Let's |
|
| 13:45 | a tool that has basically a spacing to a seismic wavelength. How much |
|
| 13:52 | that big? Is a typical seismic ? Big tens of feet, |
|
| 14:00 | So you're averaging over a lot of . This was a huge tool. |
|
| 14:04 | was like 100 ft long or something that, right. And so uh |
|
| 14:09 | , what good did that do? ? And that it's a good |
|
| 14:12 | Gee, we don't have to worry upscaling, which is a big problem |
|
| 14:16 | interpreting sizing. How do we upscale a measurement on a plug this big |
|
| 14:22 | one that's meters in size. But the problem is if you stick the |
|
| 14:27 | every other time you run it because so long, right? Nobody wants |
|
| 14:32 | deal with that. So it quickly favor, right? So it, |
|
| 14:37 | , I haven't heard about shell I know for exactly that reason, |
|
| 14:41 | wanna, don't wanna cut core that'll a lot of money. Then we |
|
| 14:45 | on to full wave or ray acoustic . This was about to actually when |
|
| 14:51 | raids computing power got high enough that could actually save a full wave |
|
| 14:56 | It didn't just have to like save the picks, right? So |
|
| 15:02 | this whole wave form is a lot data than just saving this arrival |
|
| 15:07 | Yeah. So why on earth would want to do that? Because typically |
|
| 15:12 | we generate this acoustic wave, we an arrival and this would, in |
|
| 15:18 | , this wave form would have been compression wave. The sheer arrival may |
|
| 15:22 | something like here buried in the middle my Cota of my wave form. |
|
| 15:28 | wave uh uh this time dependence of velocity after that. So you tell |
|
| 15:34 | where you're gonna pick this. I pick it here. I could pick |
|
| 15:36 | here. I could pick it So you've got uh in fact, |
|
| 15:41 | is the only thing we still have at Shell. I know who do |
|
| 15:46 | work, trying to pick sure, times right on these logs. And |
|
| 15:52 | talk about why we want both sheer congressional information in a second. All |
|
| 15:59 | . And then the latest generation which really was a significant um was |
|
| 16:05 | And this is uh I'll show you picture of it, but it actually |
|
| 16:09 | , but it, it's much more at generating sheer energy. So getting |
|
| 16:15 | to propagate a shear wave in the . That's one good thing it |
|
| 16:20 | The other good thing it did was uh has a much deeper depth of |
|
| 16:25 | than the standard compensated borehole thing. , these are getting run quite a |
|
| 16:31 | nowadays, justifiably. So they give data as, as well as particularly |
|
| 16:38 | di hole has a directionality to So as you go up the bore |
|
| 16:43 | and it will rotate as we talked before you can get g the sheer |
|
| 16:48 | compression velocity as a function of as youth angle around the bore hole. |
|
| 16:54 | according to some, you can translate into stress, an isotropy as mutual |
|
| 17:01 | . And no, again, there's about what that means. We can |
|
| 17:08 | that if you'd like. Oh, not simply related to stresses. It's |
|
| 17:13 | related to basically stress history. The have a memory. Ok. So |
|
| 17:23 | uncompensated tool with really a mess as uncompensated tools are wash hole, |
|
| 17:30 | contractions, uh, change mud travel . Yeah, we go squirrels are |
|
| 17:35 | problem tool, tilt or this thing centered exactly all of those change mud |
|
| 17:41 | time. So this gives you the answer. This is a significant correction |
|
| 17:47 | what your travel time would be. pretty slow compared to rock. So |
|
| 17:52 | though your your travel distance through a may be significantly bigger, right? |
|
| 17:58 | correction you need to make for the if it's changing, could significantly impact |
|
| 18:03 | velocities. Yeah. So what do do now? Is they actually |
|
| 18:09 | They have multiple transmitter receiver spacings, receivers and I will show you |
|
| 18:16 | A world compensated tool and the Uh So maybe this is clear or |
|
| 18:23 | , but the resolution is, but I have a spacing this far, |
|
| 18:27 | obviously averaging over that much rock to from one receiver to the other. |
|
| 18:32 | so the further the spacing, the the resolution is gonna be uh |
|
| 18:38 | if I increase my resolution, what doing, it is I'm, I'm |
|
| 18:45 | gonna degrade my signal, my ability uh measure the velocity. So there's |
|
| 18:50 | tradeoff there, they make it I get principle deeper depth of |
|
| 18:56 | but I lose resolution. There's a between resolution. So again, this |
|
| 19:01 | receiver, this receiver spacing is typically the order of beat in this, |
|
| 19:06 | is comparable to the other tools. do you heck of a lot of |
|
| 19:12 | to get a higher resolution than your logs or other things, right? |
|
| 19:16 | I'm gonna, those are gonna enter my calculation anyways. So that's about |
|
| 19:23 | they settle makes sense. So what you end up with when you're trying |
|
| 19:26 | do this? We actually have we have a transducer, a lower |
|
| 19:31 | , we have an upper transducer, have a couple of receiver pairs. |
|
| 19:35 | so we actually have, we measure , we're combining a measurement from the |
|
| 19:40 | transducer to the receiver pairs, from upper transducer to the receiver pairs. |
|
| 19:46 | what this allows if you do the here of combining those, this allows |
|
| 19:52 | to first order compensate for changes in size or tilts, right? The |
|
| 19:59 | in those much travel times related to I have an additional measurement that allows |
|
| 20:05 | to more directly compensate for four whole changes, you know, and tool |
|
| 20:11 | . So again, we, we look at the multiple receivers and we |
|
| 20:15 | these measurements into something like that, ? Go on that's the good |
|
| 20:23 | So the depth of penetration. So is where I've mentioned this already, |
|
| 20:28 | vertical resolution is determined by the the depth of penetration. I used |
|
| 20:33 | ask this a lot for the and will run into conscious the VHC Boral |
|
| 20:39 | acoustic log still quite a bit. they are running more and more multiple |
|
| 20:45 | Sonics, like I said, and I asked people like the person who |
|
| 20:49 | doing that your way, picking what the depth of penetration of this |
|
| 20:54 | He would tell me, well, you gotta tell me is which |
|
| 20:58 | how hard the rock was, what exactly of the tool was, |
|
| 21:03 | And the answer was usually pretty So uh the density looks deeper than |
|
| 21:12 | thing does. So uh for that , it it really is pretty |
|
| 21:19 | I mean, people got useful information of it. This inch or less |
|
| 21:23 | be a real problem if you have thick mud cake, et cetera. |
|
| 21:27 | you need to beware with how uh you're interpreting this tool. That's the |
|
| 21:33 | compensated hole, right? BHC compensated , right? So if the formation |
|
| 21:40 | damaged, significant mud cake, that can be an issue. And |
|
| 21:48 | it's quite interesting why you can see the formation. You all here, |
|
| 21:53 | first ran into a problem like When I was dealing with high frequency |
|
| 21:57 | , why can submarines communicate with with coast? Right? This is because |
|
| 22:03 | much the same physics, the radio salt does not work very well transmitting |
|
| 22:09 | waves, it's a conductor. So these things communicate with other submarine |
|
| 22:15 | land based things, they get a travels along the surface. And then |
|
| 22:20 | uh actually somebody can measure it another , et cetera. That's the other |
|
| 22:26 | uh I actually went to school in upper peninsula of Michigan that I'm trying |
|
| 22:32 | make this interesting. Uh And, when, when I went to |
|
| 22:36 | there was a huge controversy because they to change, they wanted to actually |
|
| 22:42 | the entire upper peninsula of Michigan into large radio wave receiver. So basically |
|
| 22:49 | whole out there and why did they to do that? Because the lower |
|
| 22:54 | frequency, the better this uh this radio wave will transmit, that's gonna |
|
| 23:01 | into play when we, when we about these logs, maybe I should |
|
| 23:06 | talked about it then. But by way, they turned it down, |
|
| 23:10 | never did it. Everybody was afraid were gonna get brain cancer. That |
|
| 23:15 | before cell phones, by the which in my mind are probably a |
|
| 23:18 | bigger issue than, than this very frequency wave. It's a good reason |
|
| 23:25 | use your speaker phone. And so a look at kind of a typical |
|
| 23:31 | form. So porosity again is made go this way, just like the |
|
| 23:36 | logs we've looked at, they have porosity in this direction. And here |
|
| 23:41 | kind of a typical acoustic wave one measure, you know, so couple |
|
| 23:47 | things about this, right. Uh is a typical maybe this is near |
|
| 23:52 | surface, this is actually casing, they will calibrate the tool in |
|
| 23:58 | Or if you have a region where really think the velocity is zero, |
|
| 24:04 | then you would know the velocity of , right? If I had a |
|
| 24:09 | low porosity limestone or something like I might know what my answer was |
|
| 24:14 | porosity is not gonna affect it. then we move out of this, |
|
| 24:18 | the zone is. Uh And then are getting actually an acoustic of travel |
|
| 24:23 | here. These ticks on the size is quite interested in. Uh one |
|
| 24:30 | the reasons you run this is to size, making developed a velocity model |
|
| 24:36 | your formation. And so what they you have a depth track here and |
|
| 24:41 | you have basically intervals, right of of uh travel time differences, these |
|
| 24:48 | they're integrated travel time. So I a direct calibration for sizing as a |
|
| 24:53 | of depth. That's so it is of the common reasons still. What's |
|
| 24:58 | problem with this calibration physicist ought to able to help the all one of |
|
| 25:06 | . So what's the problem with this that is, is that there's what's |
|
| 25:12 | as frequency dispersion, the velocity changes frequency and the tools measure it |
|
| 25:19 | somewhere between, depending on the 10 and 15 kilohertz mi seismic frequencies |
|
| 25:27 | that one? Surely you can I don't know what your name surely |
|
| 25:31 | typically between maybe 10 and 100 Hertz best. So you have several orders |
|
| 25:37 | magnitude in frequency and the velocity is dependent. Why is it because we |
|
| 25:45 | energy? Yeah, I don't know deeply to go, but whenever you |
|
| 25:51 | energy, you actually will cause a to change. It's called Kramer's chronic |
|
| 26:00 | . Maybe you're familiar with it, ? Where as we absorb, it's |
|
| 26:04 | this whole thing on the spring. if I have they hit a big |
|
| 26:09 | flaw and I know in the amplitude all frequencies, I know I know |
|
| 26:14 | dissipation of energy at all frequencies, a direct relationship. So once you |
|
| 26:20 | how a damned harmonic oscillator things doesn't to tell you too much, |
|
| 26:28 | So the log presentation is it's usually in microseconds per foot. Why do |
|
| 26:34 | do this rather than uh a velocity universe of right, you peak per |
|
| 26:44 | peak for micro second. And I this is probably related historically, how |
|
| 26:50 | was interpreted was the wily time average we actually were averaging these travel times |
|
| 26:57 | arrive at our porosity. Talk about in a sense, right? Uh |
|
| 27:02 | interpretation, by the way, uh can be locally true in a mathematical |
|
| 27:09 | uh but not globally. It's, physics is wrong. So those integrated |
|
| 27:16 | times. Again, I talk about the, the travel time steel is |
|
| 27:22 | microseconds per foot. She's relatively you know, and at, for |
|
| 27:31 | porosity gives us the delta T of matrix which we need for a mile |
|
| 27:36 | time average, you're actually going to figure out how to do that. |
|
| 27:42 | gonna use Archie's equation combination with a in what's known as a uh uh |
|
| 27:49 | we do a quick resistivity measure quick resistivity, which was gonna happen next |
|
| 27:55 | when we do that exercise, So we have a couple of common |
|
| 28:02 | of uh getting bad data. This due to noise, acoustic noise. |
|
| 28:07 | , this is one of the reasons really find it remarkable. They can |
|
| 28:11 | this in a drilling well, uh spikes and cycles get them. So |
|
| 28:16 | actually will cause opposite errors. And we're gonna assume is because our signal |
|
| 28:25 | with distance is that our first And remember we have two receivers, |
|
| 28:29 | gonna assume our first arrival is correct it's second arrival right at the second |
|
| 28:35 | receiver where our problems are caused, ? So what noise does is it |
|
| 28:41 | on noise rather than the first this noise would obviously be earlier than |
|
| 28:48 | . So it's gonna cause our travel to be too low, quite common |
|
| 28:53 | have this occurring versus cycle skipping where signal attenuates at such a rate that |
|
| 29:04 | don't trigger really on the first but a later arrival, now I'll |
|
| 29:09 | you specific pictures of this, And in particular, right, this |
|
| 29:14 | days used as a gas detector because you think the neutron log was gas |
|
| 29:19 | , this thing is really gas right to the point, you cannot |
|
| 29:23 | get a signal out of it. . And then this was helped right |
|
| 29:30 | automatic gain control by a. So an example of signaling on noise. |
|
| 29:38 | we're picking our, we're picking our based here. So we have a |
|
| 29:43 | , you have a positive departure from signal. We have a negative departure |
|
| 29:48 | we're looking for a certain threshold negatively we happen to get a noise spike |
|
| 29:52 | was at that amplitude. So we here instead of here. So |
|
| 29:59 | what's that gonna mean for our travel , this interval versus this interval? |
|
| 30:09 | our travel times much too short, diagnostic of this problem. OK. |
|
| 30:16 | enough. That's as a poem hang . So I can show you that |
|
| 30:21 | , right? Our delta T we is this rather than this. So |
|
| 30:27 | a big issue. It's obviously It's obviously not something that could |
|
| 30:34 | But the problem is you don't get data you want, particularly in the |
|
| 30:38 | old days when all they saved was arrival funds. If you have a |
|
| 30:43 | away form Sonic, you could fix later, it's another reason to get |
|
| 30:47 | pull away form Sonic and then cycle . It's kind of the opposite. |
|
| 30:57 | , we have a nice clean free signal, large signals, but |
|
| 31:01 | attenuating. And so we are supposed trigger here is the idea, we |
|
| 31:06 | that because it didn't reach the So we trigger here whether through the |
|
| 31:12 | , but obviously, this time is long. Thanks. That's called psycho |
|
| 31:21 | . Right. So here's an example this where this happens or what it |
|
| 31:24 | look like you're gonna get this is would be triggering on noise or this |
|
| 31:29 | be triggering on uh basically cycle which is this other than what it |
|
| 31:46 | and what's happening here, right? my time is much too long, |
|
| 31:53 | be in here somewhere. My time much too long and I'm going back |
|
| 31:57 | forth and so maybe it triggered once twice here. A lot of times |
|
| 32:01 | didn't we cycle skip, it got too long. And now that would |
|
| 32:05 | a fair question for you. is this noise triggering or is this |
|
| 32:10 | skipping pretty clear? I hope which is. Yeah. Yeah. So |
|
| 32:18 | do we get porosity from this Uh This is as big a generality |
|
| 32:24 | I think I have in all my , use the right model. Uh |
|
| 32:29 | the appropriate model? Uh people still ? So, uh this has actually |
|
| 32:36 | up again recently. How do we do this interpretation since the advent of |
|
| 32:42 | micro CT. So the micro if you remember, show you that |
|
| 32:47 | actually working again. It's got it like two days ago. Uh $150,000 |
|
| 32:54 | . Uh ouch, it's a $1.2 machine, by the way. So |
|
| 33:01 | worth spending 100 K or so on to get it running again. But |
|
| 33:05 | not that it wasn't paid for spending . That's the cost of a full |
|
| 33:10 | student. Yeah, 44 or five of them. So, uh what |
|
| 33:17 | the appropriate model? Why did it up again? Because now people have |
|
| 33:22 | , a map of the poor And so they should be able to |
|
| 33:26 | this out is the argument. This another one of the silver bullets that |
|
| 33:30 | watched come and go. People were the micro CT, we don't need |
|
| 33:35 | make any measurements anymore. I must heard that from several people obviously because |
|
| 33:40 | kind of a lab of guy, . Uh That kind of rubs me |
|
| 33:44 | wrong way. He told me my career was spent doing the wrong |
|
| 33:48 | Uh Then that tends to affect some at least me. And it's also |
|
| 33:53 | true. Uh One of the poorest to make calculations uh was demonstrated by |
|
| 34:01 | , we actually did a round robin shell where we made measurements in the |
|
| 34:05 | and we actually sent them out to to do calculation and they were horribly |
|
| 34:12 | . They were to the geoscientists in room. They're outside a void bound |
|
| 34:19 | this. So they were way too . Why did they get that |
|
| 34:24 | You might be asking yourselves that, ridiculously stiff. That's the absolute maximum |
|
| 34:30 | could be right. That is you know, if you're familiar with |
|
| 34:36 | bones, right. These are outside bounds include effects that may be related |
|
| 34:41 | anti. Yeah. And so why they do that? Because they completely |
|
| 34:47 | contact modulus, which is gonna be of this, I'll talk about |
|
| 34:51 | which is significantly. So and so we told them, we said, |
|
| 34:57 | , how stupid do you think we , you've calculated something that's literally physically |
|
| 35:03 | and given us to us as a number, they actually recalculated it and |
|
| 35:09 | came inside a voice pound at this , right? But it was still |
|
| 35:13 | way too fast compared to a uh measurements. I actually quite care to |
|
| 35:20 | those velocity measurements correct. So, that is because there's no real good |
|
| 35:26 | to get a contact. That's actually stiff the contact between the grains |
|
| 35:32 | which is kind of the softest determining a velocity. How squishy that |
|
| 35:37 | , how rough the contact is. there clays or anything in between those |
|
| 35:41 | ? Whatever? But you never know that is uh cool. So what |
|
| 35:50 | the acoustics? So uh mineral composition it, is it quartz, is |
|
| 35:56 | clay uh etcetera? So obviously, it prate? Right. So uh |
|
| 36:02 | , they all have different differences, ? They all have a different |
|
| 36:06 | So they all have a different compliance the acoustic way that's gonna matter. |
|
| 36:10 | granular nature. This is where the modulus comes into, into uh plays |
|
| 36:17 | important role particularly in an unconsolidated right? What is that? |
|
| 36:22 | how angular is the grain? How is the contact? How rough is |
|
| 36:27 | surface, et cetera? All of comes into that role. So and |
|
| 36:32 | will, this is why acoustics is fun. There's so many things to |
|
| 36:37 | about cements. For example, if have one or 2% particularly uh cement |
|
| 36:45 | will glue the contacts together if it's uh distributed. If you have |
|
| 36:52 | you have a geologist, I'm allowed say these words, right? If |
|
| 36:55 | have opic cements, the stuff that out into the poor space that |
|
| 37:00 | that's gonna, that's not gonna affect velocity near as much as if I |
|
| 37:05 | the contact, right? And step that contact. So you can see |
|
| 37:09 | huge change in velocity. It's just few percent cement. You ask a |
|
| 37:16 | to point out that lots of Yeah. Uh you do 300 |
|
| 37:23 | You have a just a percent That's good. You're gonna run into |
|
| 37:26 | . Maybe a one or two of coin count, right? Good. |
|
| 37:30 | , right. Getting a statistically significant of those so cementation or even the |
|
| 37:37 | of cement, right? Uh It's matter. That's similar to what happens |
|
| 37:44 | frail and noven ferocity, which is we're after for here. Right. |
|
| 37:49 | this does come into play. But was talked about, you have both |
|
| 37:56 | modulus of the cement, the amounts the granular material, the amount of |
|
| 38:01 | and it's some sort of average over . I'm gonna show you what the |
|
| 38:06 | , our best answer for the average just a second, right? And |
|
| 38:12 | we constructed a matrix for this And again, contact module come into |
|
| 38:17 | there. So there is a hope plays a role, but it may |
|
| 38:23 | even be the dominant effect. So see, we'll see how useful it |
|
| 38:29 | in your exercise. Not too What kind of fluids. So there's |
|
| 38:33 | consortia here in the department here that's for like the last 20 years worrying |
|
| 38:40 | the acoustic properties of the fluids, ? Uh What's, what's uh how |
|
| 38:47 | gas is dissolved in the oil, the, what the actual uh oil |
|
| 38:53 | like the length of the hydrocarbon all of these things matter as well |
|
| 38:57 | the matrix, right? And so a big issue too. A lot |
|
| 39:04 | dry holes have been drilled because you CO2 dissolved in water is gas or |
|
| 39:11 | . And that will mimic a gas in a reservoir. And really can't |
|
| 39:15 | the difference and then stresses how, hard am I pushing the rocks together |
|
| 39:21 | will step in the contact modules? we'll, and so therefore, we'll |
|
| 39:26 | the velocity. And the problem with is even if I have taken a |
|
| 39:31 | and taken it to a fairly high , then I uplift it. It |
|
| 39:35 | remember that high stress. So it's just its current stress, it's the |
|
| 39:42 | high stress, it will also impact . So you're all asking yourself, |
|
| 39:48 | good is this at this point? interesting research topic still. Uh So |
|
| 39:55 | good for me, please. how useful is it an interpretation |
|
| 40:00 | Why is it useful because we actually displacing the rock. We're getting some |
|
| 40:06 | of the stiffness of the rock. even though it's very small strain, |
|
| 40:10 | is the closest measurement we have to mechanical properties. And if our rock |
|
| 40:17 | fairly lithic and comes pretty close to linear elastic model, that string dependence |
|
| 40:24 | not be as important as long as not breaking the rock. So that |
|
| 40:30 | still the primary use that we find the school. There's seismic calibration still |
|
| 40:37 | . And actually calibrating our geom mechanical is the other big reason we want |
|
| 40:43 | really not to get cross it. historically, it would be rock matrix |
|
| 40:53 | shape angularity because it's part of that cetera and earth dresses historical stresses. |
|
| 41:03 | then anisotropy will also matter, Core pressures is the rock anisotropy, |
|
| 41:11 | worry about that all the time. here's how you actually average it. |
|
| 41:18 | could be simpler. Yeah. So is your interpret the best interpretation model |
|
| 41:25 | have it's a gas equation. We have a compression of velocity |
|
| 41:30 | You have the density here, And anyway, this is the we |
|
| 41:35 | the sheer modulus here. So even you have to understand one thing, |
|
| 41:43 | equation is valid for a application of stresses. So we apply a stress |
|
| 41:48 | way and this way. So we sharing the formation when we do |
|
| 41:53 | So the sheer modulus comes into Yeah. And even for a plain |
|
| 41:59 | , the shear modulus comes into right? So you, you want |
|
| 42:04 | know the sheer modules, we also the uh this uh the compressibility of |
|
| 42:10 | grains which is uh reasonably easy to usually dominated by courts, got a |
|
| 42:17 | good idea of what's going on It's use a simple volumetric average for |
|
| 42:21 | fluids. We do that because we they can't support a sheer modulus, |
|
| 42:27 | ? And then the difficult one here that km the entry rock break. |
|
| 42:35 | it that is I don't know about impossible that I published on trying to |
|
| 42:41 | that brain modulus. No. So not impossible. But the problem is |
|
| 42:50 | do we get this in the And again, one of the reasons |
|
| 42:54 | is so difficult to get is that modulus is part of that. This |
|
| 42:59 | literally the strength. How compressible is rock framework. So no fluids are |
|
| 43:06 | yet. I don't have to worry distributing fluid stresses from the, from |
|
| 43:12 | external to my core space here. just working and compressing that brain |
|
| 43:18 | Yeah. So what could be Right. Uh The sad truth is |
|
| 43:25 | is widely accepted, commonly used and validated by quite a few measurements, |
|
| 43:32 | ? This is the world we are . Why is it so complicated? |
|
| 43:37 | rocks, not only when you compress , do they have an ex do |
|
| 43:42 | have? Right, the effect of external stress that you have a core |
|
| 43:46 | ? And so when you change the in the pores that does not change |
|
| 43:51 | rock velocity in the same way as the external stresses. So not only |
|
| 43:57 | we have a problem, this is linear elastic model, right? Uh |
|
| 44:01 | only do we have problems with applying stresses, but how do core pressures |
|
| 44:06 | them? How if I apply an stress thing on the condition, those |
|
| 44:12 | will get transmitted to the core fluids . So we have to deal with |
|
| 44:17 | of that and why all of these parameters come into come into playing, |
|
| 44:24 | ? All right. So and the news, bad news is this thing |
|
| 44:29 | works. So what good is You might be asking yourself geophysics? |
|
| 44:37 | in the room. There's two of are in, how do, how |
|
| 44:40 | you use the ones you're talking about same thing? So, sure, |
|
| 45:05 | both. Right. Well, I'm sure. Let me try to. |
|
| 45:10 | so what, what they do is fluid substitution, which is what you're |
|
| 45:14 | about. So we can measure a under certain conditions, we can measure |
|
| 45:18 | dry, we can measure it saturated a certain fluid that we know the |
|
| 45:22 | . Then we can use this to at the impact of substituting a different |
|
| 45:27 | with a different modulus, right? look at the impact on the velocity |
|
| 45:31 | doing that. Why is that a thing to do? Because when you |
|
| 45:37 | , you're basically using acoustic waves, sure this is aware of, gee |
|
| 45:41 | want to know whether there's gas in poor space or there's fluid or if |
|
| 45:47 | really am getting uh hopeful, can tell oil from water or gas or |
|
| 45:55 | this is? Originally when people really doing this was, was called bright |
|
| 45:59 | technology, right? And so you get a large amplitude change for very |
|
| 46:05 | amounts of gas. So if I these bright spots, I was interpreting |
|
| 46:10 | I probably have an oil reservoir where got burned a few times is when |
|
| 46:15 | had uh carbon dioxide right in in fluids, lowering their modules. |
|
| 46:22 | and that's a lot of the reasons to get that fluid modulus, |
|
| 46:26 | Uh Again, that's what the consortium about to get this number if you |
|
| 46:31 | into gas equation. Yeah. So quite useful problem is getting that brain |
|
| 46:42 | . And so how do we uh that, that uh we don't know |
|
| 46:46 | to calculate the frame module is a matrix in this notation. Uh People |
|
| 46:53 | used the wily time marriage. The problem. What does this look like |
|
| 46:57 | you just run into a equation that just like this this morning interpretation of |
|
| 47:07 | density lag what we did. So does that say? Why did I |
|
| 47:13 | there? What the assumptions were this interacting? Gee it's simple, just |
|
| 47:18 | on the amounts of the materials Hopefully, uh I showed you this |
|
| 47:24 | tell you gee that ain't true right? All of these things interact |
|
| 47:29 | each other causing the velocity to have fairly at best, this fairly complex |
|
| 47:36 | between the different components and the actual . This thing really does not |
|
| 47:43 | However, if we are willing to a over a small range of |
|
| 47:49 | right? Look at how our travel varies as we, we can always |
|
| 47:54 | a straight line to that as long we're allowed to empirically plug numbers particularly |
|
| 48:00 | this guy in here, right? quickly the the lots of changes you |
|
| 48:05 | have to be aware that one gets . And uh uh and that we |
|
| 48:12 | have to locally calibrate it and then might be useful over a limited range |
|
| 48:17 | porosity changes. As long as my didn't change in any quote unquote fundamental |
|
| 48:25 | . For example, with depth in deep water gulf, this really breaks |
|
| 48:30 | when you start to cement the Right. It's a completely different |
|
| 48:35 | So you could use it reasonably well a limited depth interval. And |
|
| 48:41 | if I figure out what this has be empirically to use it, I |
|
| 48:45 | do that. Right. And it isn't reliable anywhere. It needs to |
|
| 48:49 | fairly li to the point and gee better not have any gas. |
|
| 48:55 | So there's no physical reason for this work. In fact, there's lots |
|
| 48:59 | reasons why it shouldn't. Yeah, situation is actually fairly complex compared to |
|
| 49:08 | , but they always do what we get away with. Right. And |
|
| 49:14 | people put factors one question, I like to, I asked what |
|
| 49:21 | what kind of geometric model would fit ? What would my rock have to |
|
| 49:29 | like for this to actually work? can, well, sure, uh |
|
| 49:41 | , to use constant parameters. Absolutely with that. That kind of even |
|
| 49:46 | basic than that. Uh Let me . I'll try writing on the screen |
|
| 49:54 | like it actually planted action when it 10. So here, if I |
|
| 50:09 | my water was here, my rock here. If I'm traveling through here |
|
| 50:17 | this, then my travel times would , right. It would simply be |
|
| 50:21 | to how much water I had versus I had. Right? Is that |
|
| 50:26 | way our rocks look? No? uh clearly this is the wrong business |
|
| 50:32 | the wrong bottle. Again, I fit a straight line to anything. |
|
| 50:36 | long as I'm willing to recognize how it is over what interval it's |
|
| 50:42 | Uh You can do whatever you right? Uh whole premise of calculus |
|
| 50:48 | that any curve looks like a straight , we zoom in close enough, |
|
| 50:53 | differential calculus in a nutshell. And here's a solution. Again, this |
|
| 51:02 | you of the density plot, Uh just how we solve these |
|
| 51:06 | but nobody does that the OS but a look at an acoustic log, |
|
| 51:12 | ? And so we, we have an assumption right about uh travel |
|
| 51:18 | They have neutron porosity here. I I have an acoustic log, my |
|
| 51:23 | formation density here, it just neutron girl that plaque got in there. |
|
| 51:41 | . So uh again, I, guess this is just to look a |
|
| 51:45 | like, right? And again, I don't know how this is |
|
| 51:55 | Uh so just the comparison of my . So ignore that slide. Uh |
|
| 52:01 | have a density porosity here. I my li here, I have my |
|
| 52:07 | porosity to the back of my So it was meant to indicate how |
|
| 52:13 | slide the point of it is to how variable an acoustic porosity might |
|
| 52:19 | Right. So I measure a density porosity of 14% right? And then |
|
| 52:25 | measure the range of sonic porosity I . Right. And then uh what |
|
| 52:31 | sonic porosity is and I get a large variation in what my sonic porosity |
|
| 52:37 | be. Right? Depending on what travel time I'm using and hydride |
|
| 52:44 | we can get significant range. My neutron pod is zero. It's pretty |
|
| 52:50 | in an hid limestone at 16%. sonic porosity may range from 8 to |
|
| 52:58 | density neutron porosity, right. This that so the the the density of |
|
| 53:05 | porosity is 18% ionic porosity over that where we had 18 by range from |
|
| 53:11 | to 18 and and six from density . It could range from the sonic |
|
| 53:17 | 3 to 11, right. So , it's not as good at getting |
|
| 53:24 | is the bottom line is the So how do we do this? |
|
| 53:29 | we can use a local empirical We're determining porosity we calibrate against core |
|
| 53:37 | uh one of the better ways to this. Uh So we can get |
|
| 53:42 | porosity out of those, we have acoustic log. Again, we have |
|
| 53:46 | same problem if, if we have stressed core, well, not |
|
| 53:51 | we have a porosity from the stressed . We have an acoustic log, |
|
| 53:56 | are somehow upscaling our core porosity to log resolution which is one issue to |
|
| 54:03 | here. How do I take one samples, two inch long samples and |
|
| 54:07 | that 2 ft, you know Uh and so always, right. |
|
| 54:15 | reason people do this not as often they used to because the geophysicists now |
|
| 54:21 | they can get everything from 3d seizing , right? So they have enough |
|
| 54:26 | of the sensors, they can build whole velocity model. Uh My experience |
|
| 54:31 | hasn't always worked, right? But made, I will say significant progress |
|
| 54:36 | over the last 10 to 20 years actually doing that a lot of it's |
|
| 54:41 | to 3D seizing having higher resolution So you can get, as you |
|
| 54:46 | at the offsets, you can get module out of that. If you |
|
| 54:50 | at our velocity varies with us that gets more and more important as you |
|
| 54:55 | out, you know. And so is this and there is no empirical |
|
| 55:02 | anywhere. This is basically the wily average, right? We just have |
|
| 55:08 | , we have a coefficient here. have delta T and we have another |
|
| 55:12 | , we're doing a linear fit between and our delta T. This is |
|
| 55:18 | I was saying, I locally However, in all cases, |
|
| 55:22 | this really is nonlinear. Uh There's argument over what the stress dependence is |
|
| 55:29 | sure, but it's it it is . So what you would like would |
|
| 55:34 | to have an equation that actually mimics that curvature between travel time and |
|
| 55:43 | So this relationship is one that's reasonably accepted, right? It is |
|
| 55:49 | I do like the fact that it's Law, right? And we are |
|
| 55:53 | to our matrix travel time. Delta and this power here. But |
|
| 55:58 | it's clearly just a empirical again, ? All of those things. |
|
| 56:06 | And that, what I show you that absolutely the reason people have such |
|
| 56:12 | calculating this. So how does gas this? It's a complicated question, |
|
| 56:19 | think, right, we're replacing the with gas again. So our frame |
|
| 56:29 | right is not gonna change in that Gasman equation. What we will do |
|
| 56:35 | make the modulus of our fluid much , much softer, right? So |
|
| 56:42 | point is and one of the right? So Gasman works, as |
|
| 56:47 | said before, uh we can include fluid modulus uh like I showed you |
|
| 56:52 | equation to do that. But the is to be quantitative with it is |
|
| 56:56 | difficult with very small amounts of gas . The minute I get a gas |
|
| 57:02 | in this thing that poor fluid gets compressible, right? Quite compliant. |
|
| 57:08 | it really doesn't matter how big the bottle is, it's gonna get a |
|
| 57:12 | softer. This is the reason if making measurements and they have a lab |
|
| 57:18 | these measurements for you, you need make sure they keep a finite pore |
|
| 57:23 | on. They use degas Brines, apply pore pressure because you get very |
|
| 57:30 | amounts of gas. I'm gonna show you will get the wrong velocities and |
|
| 57:34 | error in the velocities. You get lot of dispersion coincident with that, |
|
| 57:41 | ? The velocity changes because you attenuate . Why do you attenuate energy? |
|
| 57:46 | the fluid can move around in the space and when I move fluids |
|
| 57:50 | I dissipate energy doing that. So models all basically cover that effect, |
|
| 57:57 | ? So there's scot what are called flow models, which are on a |
|
| 58:00 | scale to be flow models which are a much longer scale. But they |
|
| 58:05 | involve and people get interested in right? Because gee permeability shows up |
|
| 58:10 | , right. I've seen a lot papers that look at the frequency dependence |
|
| 58:15 | velocities G that's related to the permeability with these models is sometimes the permeability |
|
| 58:22 | up in the numerator other times in denominator depending on what model you |
|
| 58:28 | So it's still a lot people aren't sold on how to model that or |
|
| 58:34 | it comes into play, but it's true. But one thing I have |
|
| 58:39 | as long as I'm talking about this most of the dispersion occurs between seismic |
|
| 58:46 | logging tool data, between the logging and laboratory measurements, right? You |
|
| 58:53 | get those nearly the velocity changes is I've seen. Right? Empirically |
|
| 59:00 | I should mention what the frequencies are mentioned that seizing frequencies of 10 to |
|
| 59:06 | Hertz four hole measured frequencies are like to 15 Kiah Hertz. Laboratory measurements |
|
| 59:12 | usually 300 kilohertz to a megahertz, like that. You have a big |
|
| 59:18 | . If you're trying to compare directly laboratory measurement that typically they're made at |
|
| 59:23 | megahertz to even a kilohertz, the range is side make that's like three |
|
| 59:29 | of magnitude frequency. You're, you're to account for most of the models |
|
| 59:36 | most of the data appears that seem indicate that this dispersion is occurring between |
|
| 59:42 | tools and seizing between. Usually, the laboratory measurements are done well, |
|
| 59:49 | would correlate pretty well to your seen that multiple, multiple times. |
|
| 60:01 | who's worried about the transcript again. right. And so Gasman is good |
|
| 60:08 | show this. Now, I'm gonna you given what I've said. Does |
|
| 60:13 | plot make sense? Let me explain it is. We have a saturation |
|
| 60:18 | , either oil or gas. The is gas, oil is this, |
|
| 60:24 | changing saturations from 100% water saturated to percent hydrocarbon. What are the |
|
| 60:31 | You see? What's the effect of versus oil? No gas bubbles already |
|
| 60:40 | that question. Very small volumes of decrease the velocity quite rapidly. So |
|
| 60:47 | you need is a percent or two gas in your brain to cause a |
|
| 60:55 | effect. That was the easy right? What happens in oil? |
|
| 61:01 | don't, you never have that. it's monotonically decreases. Yeah, as |
|
| 61:07 | get more oil, why is Because the modulus of oil is typically |
|
| 61:11 | than brine. So if I put softer oil in, the more I |
|
| 61:14 | , the lower my velocity gets And that will depend in detail on |
|
| 61:20 | my gas oil ratio is. And hydrocarbon in the oil, how quickly |
|
| 61:25 | decreases right. Then they've actually done presumably this is higher porosity, this |
|
| 61:31 | lower porosity. So the change is here. This is all gas calculations |
|
| 61:37 | the way. So what's happening here the gas bubbles? Why is the |
|
| 61:43 | increasing? This is where I have into discussions with geophysicists in the group |
|
| 61:51 | . Why does the velocity increase as add more gas? It decreases quite |
|
| 61:59 | and then it will increase more or pretty linearly actually after that, why |
|
| 62:04 | that happen? What's the velocity determined this? Really? Isn't fair. |
|
| 62:16 | geophysicist that can ask this question, the geologists, right? It's not |
|
| 62:20 | so fair. What determines the If, if you look at the |
|
| 62:24 | equation? What what determines the velocity the wave equation? The square root |
|
| 62:31 | the modulus divided by the density. . OK. So we have both |
|
| 62:37 | modulus and the density and the velocity . So what's gonna change is I |
|
| 62:42 | more gas, the density. So density is actually going down. It's |
|
| 62:49 | modules divided by the density. So velocity will increase. Yeah, nobody's |
|
| 62:56 | to argue with other groups. Tell that that's absolutely wrong that this could |
|
| 63:00 | happen. Example I've given in the right? Water versus steel, |
|
| 63:10 | Yeah. So which is more dense . And if as a kid we |
|
| 63:20 | to put, I used to put mom's dead so she won't care |
|
| 63:25 | Right? We used to go down the train tracks and we could hear |
|
| 63:28 | train coming a long ways away, ? Because we had put our ear |
|
| 63:32 | the rail of the train tracks, . Yeah. And why does that |
|
| 63:37 | ? Why does the, why does get there sooner? The modulus is |
|
| 63:43 | and the density is higher, And so it's a competition between a |
|
| 63:48 | and a density that determines the This comes the wave equation comes straight |
|
| 63:53 | of Newton's laws, right? So I give a given force on something |
|
| 63:58 | is gonna accelerate more the low density the high density be low density, |
|
| 64:05 | ? F equals ma. And so just comes straight out of Newton's life |
|
| 64:11 | density dependence. They get confused because also in things that tend to be |
|
| 64:17 | dense, tend to have a more modulus, higher density is slower. |
|
| 64:29 | group using his has been quite controversial times. Uh but you can look |
|
| 64:36 | up if you don't believe me. this box just because there's a huge |
|
| 64:41 | . It's just a small amount of , right. So you really can't |
|
| 64:45 | quantitative, but there's a big effect to gas and it's really tough to |
|
| 64:49 | quantitative with it. Right? Cool porosity. This is another one that |
|
| 64:58 | published on uh secondary velocity plugs versus porosity when we were looking in classifying |
|
| 65:07 | . Yeah, one of the peak was bugs versus matrix porosity. Why |
|
| 65:13 | that? Why did get so excited bugs versus matrix ferocity? He was |
|
| 65:21 | geologist, by the way, I him. Ok. Well, |
|
| 65:27 | he overlapped the shell for a Yes. Bugs are big. Bugs |
|
| 65:34 | big pores. This is gonna be to us when we interpret reactivity, |
|
| 65:39 | and not too long definition of a is that standard definition is that it |
|
| 65:45 | uh three times a grain size, , whatever metric you want to use |
|
| 65:51 | a grain size. Why does that ? I've talked about this when we |
|
| 65:56 | about the grain size sets the length , right? Fundamental length scale for |
|
| 66:02 | tortuosity. For example, I have go around grains on that length |
|
| 66:07 | A hug is big. And so you look at the path like a |
|
| 66:11 | will flow, it's got to go . All these grains hits a bug |
|
| 66:14 | zips straight across. Yeah, electrical . The same way it's got to |
|
| 66:20 | around all these grains. It's a that zips straight across. So it |
|
| 66:24 | impact your rock properties very differently than porosity. And this is true in |
|
| 66:32 | . All the rock properties, resistive velocities are impacted in a different way |
|
| 66:39 | buggy porosity than matrix porosity. And now know more than I would estimate |
|
| 66:47 | of the carbonate that your physicists know what determines rock properties in carbonate. |
|
| 66:54 | you do not understand your buggy you do not understand your rock and |
|
| 66:59 | determines your rock properties. We're gonna through that in detail with an in |
|
| 67:03 | exercise with resistivity once you get to and hopefully it'll be clear when we |
|
| 67:08 | to that, but it's not All right. And I will tell |
|
| 67:12 | go back to your company, you an experienced petro business one who's looked |
|
| 67:17 | carbonate velocity logs. Everyone I've talked has said you can see buggy |
|
| 67:24 | quote unquote in a carbonate in the lock. So the acoustic log gives |
|
| 67:31 | that information. Whereas a neutron log not, a density log will not |
|
| 67:37 | electric log will, it's complicated by things, you know. All |
|
| 67:42 | So they have the secondary porosity index it's just you've normalized, right? |
|
| 67:48 | that you normalize it, right, secondary porosity, the total porosity minus |
|
| 67:52 | secondary plastic. And you can, would argue you can use this quantitatively |
|
| 67:57 | you know how to do it The other thing you should recognize is |
|
| 68:02 | size will a bug be in a versus in a, uh, |
|
| 68:08 | Versus in something with a much larger size. Bugs can be much smaller |
|
| 68:16 | . The size of a bug depends the size of the grains surrounding |
|
| 68:23 | Right. The matrix it's embedded So you can have millimeter size bugs |
|
| 68:28 | smaller in a chalk because they will much bigger than a grain size than |
|
| 68:33 | would be in an inter particle So it's a local definition depending on |
|
| 68:39 | rock you're looking at. I hope demonstrate that to you, right? |
|
| 68:45 | enlargement formation alteration again, shales, , et cetera washouts. None of |
|
| 68:51 | is good for you. And so think we're building up to the long |
|
| 68:57 | Sonic and where we have problems, ? This is just a time lapse |
|
| 69:02 | , right? And as we, happens is things get slower and slower |
|
| 69:07 | our borehole gets more washed out and goes and get slower over time. |
|
| 69:15 | just because the bore hole alteration. is one of the advantages of the |
|
| 69:20 | logs in general. We will have better borehole, right? Initially than |
|
| 69:25 | will later in time. We're getting to the end of a lecture, |
|
| 69:28 | the way. Yeah. Long Space . So this is about again, |
|
| 69:34 | mentioned this already. You could have ft spacings in this thing, |
|
| 69:38 | And then you have these in two , you're up to tens of |
|
| 69:41 | many tens of feet, right? then you can, oh, that's |
|
| 69:51 | a look at that. And this a look at what you get out |
|
| 69:54 | a long space. Sonic versus a spacing and can see this data looks |
|
| 70:00 | effects, right? Basically are showing in the short space sonic that don't |
|
| 70:05 | up in a long space. The problem was it was you could only |
|
| 70:09 | a single logging run with it that it expensive, it got stuck a |
|
| 70:13 | that made it expensive, right? it really has lost favor. It's |
|
| 70:18 | to find him nowadays. Another, just another example. So we get |
|
| 70:26 | to sheer travel time. Why are interested in this geophysicists in the |
|
| 70:32 | Should know this one for sure. , to do a vo Absolutely. |
|
| 70:48 | that, that, that means the variation with the offset. You're not |
|
| 70:52 | with size. I mean, we a source and then we have multiple |
|
| 70:55 | at varying distance away from that And what happens is to get to |
|
| 71:00 | receivers, we get the shallower and angles, right? And so g |
|
| 71:05 | sheer modulus comes more and more into , the larger my offset is |
|
| 71:11 | But even beyond that, what do care? Besides this, uh we |
|
| 71:16 | start in this industry, in particular a linear elastic model. OK. |
|
| 71:22 | our rocks, what does that I can in an isotropic linear elastic |
|
| 71:29 | , I can completely describe the material two parameters. That's almost a |
|
| 71:35 | right? That any two parameters like bulk modulus and a sheer moles Young's |
|
| 71:41 | and a bulk modulus. Young's modulus a sheer modules all are completely |
|
| 71:46 | I can transform from one set of parameters to another. You can look |
|
| 71:51 | in the table how to do et cetera. So all of those |
|
| 71:55 | straightforward, that's one of the good . I only need to deal with |
|
| 71:59 | parameters. But you have to realize only works for linear elastic isotropic |
|
| 72:07 | right? If I get to something an isotropic, right? No, |
|
| 72:12 | not gonna work for you anymore. is one of the things you think |
|
| 72:15 | can tell any nowadays, right? can get an isotropy out of a |
|
| 72:20 | survey, you know, so you're of an expert at it than I |
|
| 72:25 | , right? And this is what need calibration to a bo also, |
|
| 72:30 | allows me if I can assume my is linear elastic, then I can |
|
| 72:36 | my large scale parameters out of my large strain parameters out of |
|
| 72:41 | right? As long as it's still . So rocks in general don't do |
|
| 72:48 | . Um Particularly if you get to , particularly if you get to things |
|
| 72:52 | ductal materials, they this is not work because there are significant irrecoverable strains |
|
| 72:59 | to form a rock, reduce the . It does not come back to |
|
| 73:03 | I started. I have changed the right by deforming it. I have |
|
| 73:09 | , I have load bearing duct I'll push them into the floor |
|
| 73:12 | I'll break grains, I'll create micro . I'll do all these kind of |
|
| 73:17 | to my rocks, right? So gonna be the same. So a |
|
| 73:22 | of times what you do is you you cut a core, you measure |
|
| 73:26 | large strain properties. I figure these related to my small strain properties and |
|
| 73:31 | build a correlation right between those So pretty common these and other common |
|
| 73:38 | do this. We did this uh we were, we were building geom |
|
| 73:43 | models in the Gulf, we least to do this quite often, |
|
| 73:50 | And then you actually have to get , you have to get, you |
|
| 73:53 | can't do those first arrival picks. , I need more data than |
|
| 73:59 | We're we're almost done. It don't out about, right? But here's |
|
| 74:04 | look at this kind of looks more to seizing people probably than others, |
|
| 74:12 | ? So we have depth here. have our recorded wave form here. |
|
| 74:15 | is my P arrival gonna be somewhere ? Where is my sheer arrival gonna |
|
| 74:21 | somewhere in there? Right. So , you can see though sometimes it |
|
| 74:26 | difficult to make picks, etcetera, ? So again, we have people |
|
| 74:31 | do this still a large percentage of time and shall use this full weight |
|
| 74:36 | data to try to get both sheer compression arrival out of this sort of |
|
| 74:44 | . Then here is the, this a look at the log obviously and |
|
| 74:48 | dealt with the measurements and then we estimating right uh Hassan's ratio, et |
|
| 74:57 | from our sheer and compression of So I need two measurements to get |
|
| 75:02 | parameters. So I can, if linear elastic model holds, I can |
|
| 75:07 | characterize my rock with these two That's a lot, I guess a |
|
| 75:12 | to summarize why we find it. we use the acoustic velocity. Uh |
|
| 75:20 | this allows us again, Quan's ratio modulus bulk modulus, young's modulus, |
|
| 75:27 | are all equivalent ways to characterize a elastic model. Bulk modules is basically |
|
| 75:35 | stresses. How does the volume A sheer modulus is basically if I |
|
| 75:40 | it like this, I have a force and it will return. |
|
| 75:45 | Was ratio is a little bit different can take and measure my uh my |
|
| 75:52 | deformation and my radial deformation, I the ratio of those for a liquid |
|
| 75:57 | conserves volume that would be a right? Because I got two directions |
|
| 76:04 | . And so uh and most rocks somewhere between 0.1 maybe 0.3 0.4. |
|
| 76:11 | you're getting somewhere around 0.5 for you're pretty sure you're yielding the |
|
| 76:17 | right? Because it's basically acting like can't support any sheer stress at that |
|
| 76:22 | . It's acting like a liquid within interpreting young's modulus, it just I |
|
| 76:29 | down on it. I measure my force and I measure my axial |
|
| 76:34 | It's the derivative of the axial strain respect to axial stress. So these |
|
| 76:39 | all basically the same, same, two of these is equivalent to any |
|
| 76:44 | two for a linear elastic model. , I know two of them. |
|
| 76:48 | know all the press I can there are table, you can almost |
|
| 76:52 | text will have a table of that to convert those, right? And |
|
| 76:57 | when I look at these modular et , it helps me predict standing. |
|
| 77:01 | actually are talking to having a graduate work on this problem as we |
|
| 77:08 | Uh When will it fracture? It's related to the stresses. Uh What |
|
| 77:13 | my drilling rates be? It's gonna related to this. Uh Again, |
|
| 77:18 | sanding threshold is uh mostly related to actually is a safety issue. Uh |
|
| 77:26 | drilling uh not drilling anymore, but completing a reservoir. I'm drawing it |
|
| 77:31 | . When will I start to produce ? And how much sand will I |
|
| 77:35 | ? Right. Why do I care I say I'm not gonna get any |
|
| 77:40 | ? I don't design anticipating sand. get sand in all my pumps. |
|
| 77:45 | that a good idea? No, that they blow up on you, |
|
| 77:51 | can be quite a bad idea, ? So uh you care. So |
|
| 77:56 | will I see how much sand will produce and what do I have to |
|
| 78:00 | to remediate for that produced sand? am I gonna fracture? Right. |
|
| 78:04 | this gets got quite important for unconventional etcetera, right. So where should |
|
| 78:11 | produce? Right. Where can I ? When can I produce a significant |
|
| 78:17 | eye zone? A roundup fracture? . And not just a I can |
|
| 78:21 | just make a fracture that when I something, do I shatter it? |
|
| 78:25 | addition. So the more lithic it the more that rubble eye zone uh |
|
| 78:31 | be. And then our problem is get the dynamic module, we're trying |
|
| 78:37 | predict the static module and by this is geophysicists fault. They uh |
|
| 78:44 | uh relating basically an acoustic wave to much lower frequency deformation. That's really |
|
| 78:50 | the problem. The problem is the of the strains. The acoustic wave |
|
| 78:56 | again, like I said, uh to the minus 6, 10 to |
|
| 78:59 | minus seventh strain. Typically a rock break at 1.5 2% strain, |
|
| 79:06 | So many, many orders of magnitude , right? Um We're trying to |
|
| 79:12 | that strain they show. So it straightforward because the acoustic acoustics, remember |
|
| 79:19 | we talked about how difficult it was predict the acoustic properties. You think |
|
| 79:23 | bad, try to predict the static . But now I'm not just deforming |
|
| 79:29 | , I'm actually breaking brains, I'm brains and moving things into the poor |
|
| 79:34 | , et cetera. And I'm not . We're getting, getting pretty |
|
| 79:38 | Um So we have a lithograph right? Uh It can help us |
|
| 79:44 | that, but it's really not very at this for reasons I'd beat to |
|
| 79:48 | , right? Clays are actually quite . Why is that? Actually, |
|
| 79:54 | have a student working on this as speak. Uh Because the distribution of |
|
| 79:59 | will have a huge impact on If the clays are actually dispersed clays |
|
| 80:04 | the poor space, they'll speed up velocity. If they're structural clays, |
|
| 80:08 | replacing grains, we slow down the . If they are clay lamination, |
|
| 80:14 | can do either. So the distribution clay gets quite important and gas is |
|
| 80:21 | true. So you can see what's on here. This is just an |
|
| 80:25 | of my uh delta TC, my time here, first sheer versus |
|
| 80:34 | So you can get different trends, ? And even the slopes can be |
|
| 80:38 | in different materials. So we move to our last topic which is monopole |
|
| 80:43 | diol acoustic logs. And so a basically just expands like that. So |
|
| 80:50 | that's different than inducing, inducing an wave in the formation. We actually |
|
| 80:56 | an impulse and so we get much at at uh actually generating sheer in |
|
| 81:02 | formation doing that. This one has even more popular because it has directionality |
|
| 81:07 | it. And we can do some with actually looking at direct, you |
|
| 81:12 | what what would be my stress in direction versus this direction, depending on |
|
| 81:17 | the tool is oriented. So we know what the orientation of the |
|
| 81:22 | is and we are done. uh next thing we're gonna do, |
|
| 81:27 | can take a break and then we're start an exercise, right. That's |
|
| 81:32 | end our day, which I'm sure ready for. So I need to |
|
| 81:38 | the exercise, which I'll do right the break. It'll take about 10 |
|
| 81:42 | and then we will, uh, on it together. I'll call it |
|
| 81:45 | day. You're free to ask any about anything. I, I will |
|
| 81:52 | my best to answer it. Most sensitive is actually the acoustic log all |
|
| 82:08 | way to where you can't get any from it because you have slowed things |
|
| 82:14 | . You've attenuated things to the Right. And so you just get |
|
| 82:18 | skipping, right. Something like And then next most sensitive would, |
|
| 82:24 | be the neutron log and then the most sensitive would be the density gonna |
|
| 82:41 | , uh, an exercise. uh, this will take, I |
|
| 82:44 | tell you couple of hours. So would encourage you working groups on this |
|
| 82:56 | in particular. It is up to , it along more power to |
|
| 83:01 | But, uh, and the other I will warn you about is you |
|
| 83:05 | your way down the worksheet, which get to, it gets harder. |
|
| 83:10 | , I've never, I've never worried if people want to leave. They're |
|
| 83:13 | to leave. Right. But uh a mistake on this exercise. I |
|
| 83:18 | tell you. So, uh it's conceptually not that hard but things |
|
| 83:23 | a little more difficult. The other I will give you is pay attention |
|
| 83:28 | the gamma ra. OK. Uh not ignore the gaming. In |
|
| 83:33 | it's more diagnostic in this exercise than should be. So I use the |
|
| 83:41 | , that'll mean more to you in second. So what we're gonna do |
|
| 83:44 | solve the log response equations two dimensions a time, you're gonna get several |
|
| 83:49 | plots which I'll show you we'll go an ex fairly easy example problem, |
|
| 83:55 | ? In general, this is just general general statements. Again, uh |
|
| 84:00 | different tools, these cross plots will different from different companies. They'll be |
|
| 84:05 | for different logging tool models. So you're gonna do this in some sense |
|
| 84:09 | real life, which you can make plots in tech log, for |
|
| 84:13 | if you would like, right? they're useful, even if uh they're |
|
| 84:17 | to look at things, they're also . They can help you get depositional |
|
| 84:22 | even and, and look at what's on if you look at mythology changes |
|
| 84:26 | its depth and things like that. these are useful plots to make and |
|
| 84:30 | understand, right? So here's an of a chart we have a limestone |
|
| 84:39 | porosity versus uh a true porosity And I've shown you this before, |
|
| 84:45 | I don't have suspended. So, we have is the apparent limestone ferocity |
|
| 84:52 | food ferocity works in each other, give you a different answer. Not |
|
| 85:01 | big deal. Right. Here's one you're gonna find quite important. All |
|
| 85:06 | . And actually a cross plot that will use and what we have is |
|
| 85:09 | density on one axis. And then have neutron gravity on the other. |
|
| 85:14 | have shown you something like this We've shown you how to interpret |
|
| 85:17 | Remember what the gas correction will look ? Thanks, bottom line is, |
|
| 85:25 | gonna be, you're going to be and square logged, you're gonna be |
|
| 85:30 | to tell what the is for each the domes that you're given. If |
|
| 85:34 | look at that thing that it's like square did do a zone in square |
|
| 85:39 | . I've given you a zone in log. I've also given you mud |
|
| 85:44 | interpretations of what that. So it you gas shows and things like |
|
| 85:48 | Get your clues. What not. , we, we, we've been |
|
| 85:56 | this, we've looked at these So we're all like birds like |
|
| 85:59 | right? Or a gas direction and all looks like this one, |
|
| 86:06 | is a little different if you were plot your log data and you've got |
|
| 86:10 | that looks like this, what would assume is going on to help you |
|
| 86:14 | your geo geology, interpretation. What's again? You don't undo rock, |
|
| 86:29 | ? You dole limestone. So we what direction we're going, right. |
|
| 86:35 | have things we're going from almost a limestone to a pure dolfi. |
|
| 86:41 | What's happening to my ferocity? So I think it's pretty obvious what's |
|
| 86:50 | on with this one, right. We're izing a limestone and what |
|
| 86:54 | Our porosity reduces as that happens. . So I used to call this |
|
| 87:03 | . I can get my cursor back Doma. I was told by |
|
| 87:08 | I'm not allowed to say that it's Doma. There is no such thing |
|
| 87:13 | over Dole. So that's a petro trying to do geology thing. But |
|
| 87:19 | is happening? And this doesn't always is your porosity can, sometimes you're |
|
| 87:24 | the Dolomites can be higher than in limestone that will happen. So you |
|
| 87:29 | be aware of that. It's, not unusual for uh porosity to decrease |
|
| 87:34 | increasing do. So. That's kind fun, right? Because it gave |
|
| 87:40 | a real geologic insight into what's If you were to connect those. |
|
| 87:46 | is kind of another plot that you be using and you're given is the |
|
| 87:50 | put electric curve showed you this thing . What are you gonna get from |
|
| 87:57 | ferocity? No, you're gonna get from that almost independent. What's the |
|
| 88:06 | of what's the gas correction look look like on this? Uh You're |
|
| 88:14 | . So I thought I do So density will change. The lithograph |
|
| 88:18 | not. So you'll move basically close vertical. That's a clue if |
|
| 88:26 | if your porosity is wrong, but mythology is consistent. That's a real |
|
| 88:30 | . You have gas. Yeah. , we've looked at this, |
|
| 88:37 | Gas exists. So, gas process . But the lit, all |
|
| 88:42 | This one is an example of using sonic, which you've already described. |
|
| 88:48 | , the only thing the sonic is for here again, you really aren't |
|
| 88:53 | a lot of uh variation based on Sonic, right? Your Sonic travel |
|
| 89:00 | . What it can tell you is if the thing for the porosity, |
|
| 89:05 | acting too fast is bucks. So quote out of Dean, if any |
|
| 89:12 | you are looking at the text related this is that an acoustic log does |
|
| 89:17 | quote unquote see books, what does mean? That means that the log |
|
| 89:23 | acting like that porosity doesn't exist. so the porosity is too high for |
|
| 89:28 | velocity. The bugs do not impact change in buggy porosity does not impact |
|
| 89:35 | velocity as much as a change in porosity. OK. So what will |
|
| 89:42 | is this rock will look basically too for the porosity based on my other |
|
| 89:49 | . So this can give you a indicator, right? Plotting on |
|
| 89:54 | Do this, you do this primarily will tell you to look for |
|
| 89:58 | The other thing is the blue lines widely time average. The curved lines |
|
| 90:03 | what they call, right? Uh observation. Which one do you want |
|
| 90:08 | use? Not to be wily time because I've discussed the same. So |
|
| 90:16 | would like to use the field not the wily time message, |
|
| 90:20 | Use the orange curves, not the ones. Yeah. So what |
|
| 90:30 | So let me ask you this We'll see if you understand. We |
|
| 90:34 | 2 20% porosity rocks. OK? know the porosity is 20% 1 is |
|
| 90:40 | bugs, 10% matrix, the other 20% matrix. Which one will be |
|
| 90:50 | ? That's why that was a good . It, it will be the |
|
| 90:57 | matrix, 10% bug because right, get fast as our porosity goes |
|
| 91:04 | And so the matrix porosity is more when I add the bugs. |
|
| 91:07 | my velocity doesn't increase as much as I had increased the matrix, quote |
|
| 91:15 | , the 20% ferocity rock that had bugs doesn't see that buggy ferocity. |
|
| 91:21 | acting like a 10% ferocity rock and real. That happened. I've actually |
|
| 91:29 | on that exact problem. Demonstrated it laboratory data to my satisfaction. I |
|
| 91:39 | a I think it was an arm paper if you're interested. All |
|
| 91:49 | So that's what the the point Again, what we have here is |
|
| 91:56 | porosity versus sonic porosity. You're welcome make this cross plot. And |
|
| 92:01 | we should use the orange lines, the blue ones, right? Not |
|
| 92:07 | anywhere in the amounts of the Wily time average would be uh this |
|
| 92:20 | ray chart, right? Which uh , good, good luck with |
|
| 92:25 | So here's an example problem, For what you're gonna do, we |
|
| 92:31 | a 23% uh porosity from the neutron curve. We have a bulk density |
|
| 92:41 | of 2.43 g per centimeter cube. have a travel time of 69 microseconds |
|
| 92:48 | foot and we have a pe value 2.4. So for our example, |
|
| 92:55 | , your problem is more complicated. have three major lipid types, |
|
| 93:00 | dolomite and cords, plastic. And so we have liquid filled |
|
| 93:07 | Don't have to worry about gas which you also will have to worry |
|
| 93:10 | . But you have more data than too. What is the porosity and |
|
| 93:14 | li of this rock? Right? what are we gonna do? Let's |
|
| 93:18 | plotting things it plots right there. are my possibilities? Could be a |
|
| 93:28 | of sandstone and dolomite could be a of calite and dolomite, right? |
|
| 93:35 | if we just put the numbers to , you find it could be |
|
| 93:39 | dolemite 19.5% porosity. And then you estimate what percentage just based on where |
|
| 93:46 | is on the line, right? roughly 50 50. It could be |
|
| 93:51 | mixture of quartz and dolomite and a of 20%. So there's two |
|
| 94:00 | We don't know. And this, catch students on all the time on |
|
| 94:05 | exam. I'll give them a plot here on this plot asking what the |
|
| 94:09 | is. And they tell me it could be a next year, |
|
| 94:16 | ? Of quartz and dolemite, Or it could be PCI. So |
|
| 94:23 | let me catch you. You have for a warrant. There is no |
|
| 94:27 | for making that mistake. But if ask you this question, I guarantee |
|
| 94:32 | one or two of you will, see. But I will be pleasantly |
|
| 94:38 | and quite proud of myself if nobody . Yeah, they will call this |
|
| 94:46 | . I know this is Calci. it plots right on the Calsci |
|
| 94:51 | that's wrong. There is another And then what's disappointing is we spent |
|
| 94:57 | this time went through all these right? They still make that |
|
| 95:01 | So, what were we doing through whole exercise? Yeah. If people |
|
| 95:07 | get it right. And where does , where does it lie here? |
|
| 95:18 | luck. Right. There's just not information in the acoustic log or we |
|
| 95:24 | about multiple times information. What's going ? You might be able if I |
|
| 95:29 | the, you might be able to me something about buggy cross depending on |
|
| 95:35 | it lies well occur here. We're get a reasonable answer plots here. |
|
| 95:40 | are my possibilities? The orange curve be a mixture, right. |
|
| 95:54 | it's in between calite. This is dolemite line. This is the calite |
|
| 96:03 | . This is the quartz line. , this could be a mixture |
|
| 96:07 | this could be a mixture of calci could be a mixture of basically uh |
|
| 96:14 | and dola. OK. I got right. Limestone and dolomite. That's |
|
| 96:20 | 2 21.5% or a mixture of sandstone do like 20.5% right? And then |
|
| 96:29 | , this maybe is the one I have done first. Uh That's up |
|
| 96:35 | you. Where is it flat What could it be? Could |
|
| 96:44 | Sandstone do could be sandstone and psi , dolomite. 20%. Again, |
|
| 96:57 | wouldn't use the porosity. It's pretty or sandstone and limestone, right? |
|
| 97:02 | these two using these two curves and one clearly ain't gonna work is way |
|
| 97:09 | , everything's way off and it's the orth it's not consistent with the other |
|
| 97:15 | . Yeah. So the, the one we got consistent sandstone goal might |
|
| 97:19 | back between all of these. We sandstone, dolomite, 20 a half |
|
| 97:25 | . We got sandstone dola. They believe the cross here. And what |
|
| 97:30 | we get for this one? Ban Dolemite 20% right. So the only |
|
| 97:39 | that was consistent and see what we , we plotted out on the |
|
| 97:44 | all of with none of the data incorrect, right? I haven't done |
|
| 97:49 | to you. Uh You know, classes have accused me of that, |
|
| 97:54 | . So I have not done that data is consistent. You just need |
|
| 97:58 | start thinking out of the box. I will tell you as you go |
|
| 98:00 | the more complicated example, they get , you have clays to deal |
|
| 98:05 | you have gas to deal with. have the three li deal with, |
|
| 98:11 | know, as well as it could hydrate could be salt, it could |
|
| 98:14 | other minerals besides one exit, I and ask you to put together kind |
|
| 98:23 | a everything we talked about today. here's your data. And so you |
|
| 98:29 | a mud log over here, you gas shows here. You have a |
|
| 98:33 | ray right over here. And this is zoned in square or your |
|
| 98:41 | . Easy ask you to zone and a log. That would be a |
|
| 98:45 | , right? Because you all have answers. That depends on what's being |
|
| 98:49 | fairly precisely what give me. So that means something to you at this |
|
| 99:00 | and then you're supposed to fill out chart. But what's the true |
|
| 99:05 | what's the lithic? Right? And much if I have a mixture of |
|
| 99:10 | , what percentage of each do I ? Ok. So I would strongly |
|
| 99:17 | you start from the top and work way down. They get harder as |
|
| 99:20 | go use the information you learn up to help you interpret the information down |
|
| 99:28 | . Yeah, you don't look as as you should. Uh, that |
|
| 99:35 | the side, I really think this a good exercise. I like it |
|
| 99:39 | I in particular, I like it it really integrates the knowledge. Gives |
|
| 99:44 | a chance to discuss gas effects, effects all of this to help |
|
| 99:50 | kind of all the things we've talked . I'm more than happy to help |
|
| 99:54 | if and when you get stuck OK, I'm pretty sure you |
|
| 100:00 | Why are we doing class together? we we have plenty of time to |
|
| 100:04 | it. Uh As far as I'm , if you get in done |
|
| 100:07 | you can sleep. Plus if you , uh you have not taken advantage |
|
| 100:15 | me to the extent you might and don't want to show you. |
|
| 100:35 | OK, it really is dangerous. recommendation on how to work this problem |
|
| 100:54 | make yourself a table, use the plots and then list in this table |
|
| 100:59 | each cross plot gives you as Then look at the data you have |
|
| 101:04 | , use your deductive reasoning skills, ? And then decide what the has |
|
| 101:11 | be based. All all of your , pay attention to the mud |
|
| 101:17 | pay attention to the gas shows, attention to the gamma ray, you're |
|
| 101:23 | need all of it. That was example of the game right? Here's |
|
| 104:46 | data charged in charge you're supposed to . Yeah, doesn't hurt, but |
|
| 104:58 | , this was the example of exercise . This was my explanation of the |
|
| 105:09 | . No, you're not. This explaining what to do. And you're |
|
| 105:16 | , this is the chart you fill and you're using these charts, |
|
| 105:24 | Might be able to give you bigger in this. But you're, you're |
|
| 105:27 | to plot on these charts and this your input data would have been nice |
|
| 105:33 | you plot it this way, had plots. And the problem is you |
|
| 105:39 | use this card, you're gonna use chart data and we're going to use |
|
| 105:46 | charge. So you have multiple You could share a copy, |
|
| 105:54 | And work together. You have to these numbers off of here, |
|
| 106:07 | I actually gave you the numbers, mind. I've given you these numbers |
|
| 106:13 | where their question marks mean you couldn't it. Mm So plot it on |
|
| 106:25 | of those parts, gather the data then discuss, decide uh what mythologies |
|
| 106:34 | be I think. Yeah, if can find the charts in there, |
|
| 106:51 | might be better off. These are small. OK. OK. |
|
| 107:31 | another one where it really helps to in the room. OK. |
|
| 107:41 | How many students are online? Uh been the same as other days. |
|
| 107:52 | you less than us. So welcome. It does. It is |
|
| 108:03 | easier to come in and, and daughter is more than welcome. |
|
| 108:38 | but like other courses, have they all day long, the whole |
|
| 108:42 | the whole period. Oh Sure. Is that that in general you that |
|
| 109:36 | in general you don't use? So one you're not gonna use this one |
|
| 109:41 | not gonna use. This was about example, this is about the example |
|
| 109:48 | is about the example this one you use this one you will use. |
|
| 109:57 | think there's more than three, this you'll use, right? Does make |
|
| 110:14 | a little simpler. Yes. Yeah. So to be honest, |
|
| 110:47 | there's some confusion about that. You're gonna use basically you have the data |
|
| 110:54 | then the charts past it are the you're supposed to use. The ones |
|
| 110:58 | it were just the example pizza they anyways. So if she's asking |
|
| 111:07 | this is just the porosity based on limestone matrix. This is the density |
|
| 111:14 | based on a limestone is the right . It's identical to this side. |
|
| 111:20 | about the API I don't know what talking about. I think she, |
|
| 111:36 | think she's talking about the table. Well, yeah. So on the |
|
| 111:43 | , the the the table is Oh, here that's just standard |
|
| 111:57 | standard units for the gamma. Mhm . Really will help the T A |
|
| 112:12 | you label the point when you graph that plot, label it one sample |
|
| 112:18 | et cetera, right? So that can tell why. Oh Yep. |
|
| 113:39 | . Zero. Yeah. CNLB And they feed people they right and |
|
| 113:52 | . It's ok to me, I hear it. So it's a lot |
|
| 114:06 | salt to me and hydrate 00. , sure. And hydrate as zero |
|
| 114:18 | by almost by definition. But I . Right. Yeah, it's certainly |
|
| 114:29 | with zero ferocity from here. again, you don't have any cross |
|
| 114:35 | for it. Right. And an , you could google an hydrate, |
|
| 114:39 | would find it at very low You have a li right? So |
|
| 114:44 | zero porosity. The first one was . They do get harder though. |
|
| 115:13 | . So my suggestion would be as go down, they're gonna get |
|
| 115:18 | Right? Again, you can you can have gas, you can |
|
| 115:21 | plays, it could be a it could be any of these three |
|
| 115:26 | . It could be an hydrate for . But you're just gonna do your |
|
| 115:31 | this way, I would say plot all the plots, look at all |
|
| 115:34 | possibilities based on those plots and then , find a consistent answer between all |
|
| 115:42 | the plots. And then also remember clays do to the pe cur. |
|
| 115:50 | that basically, if you have clay you have a reason to suspect |
|
| 115:55 | you have to disregard the pe cur that curve will get confused by |
|
| 116:04 | I give you too much of a but clays are associated with high gamma |
|
| 116:11 | . So that would be consistent with . If you throw a data, |
|
| 116:14 | have to have a reason to throw data out. You do it all |
|
| 116:17 | time. Right. Well, at in my lab I did by working |
|
| 116:24 | students. Got you. So this not a value but it, |
|
| 116:36 | you get anhydride zero. Ok? like salt effectively as zero velocity. |
|
| 116:47 | have a little bit of water in , but not very much, |
|
| 116:53 | Can you hear me? What's your exactly? Yeah, you should, |
|
| 117:36 | I were grading it and I were give partial credit, they should give |
|
| 117:41 | cross plots and they should label sample on each. So, you |
|
| 117:46 | did they plot it correctly? Did not plot it correctly, et |
|
| 117:50 | But they don't know how to plot even it's hard to give them much |
|
| 117:53 | credit. Right? So that's up you. How you wanna grade |
|
| 117:58 | grade generously. So what I would is the grade is gonna be based |
|
| 118:03 | the line for the TV. I have, I don't know, I |
|
| 118:10 | go to the detail when I about . So, so I don't know |
|
| 118:21 | we don't kind of stop the, well located, we just integrate it |
|
| 118:30 | with the will do the work. , who would be doing this sort |
|
| 118:41 | work typically wouldn't be a geophysics. if I were one, I would |
|
| 118:47 | at least looking into this, Depends what depends what you were |
|
| 118:52 | right? If you're a seismic right? Can I get a velocity |
|
| 118:57 | . I would like to validate that against if I had logs, I |
|
| 119:01 | be looking at that to what my tell me a little biology, my |
|
| 119:06 | , whatever are you use all the you can and all the circumstances you |
|
| 119:10 | ? Right. So does it hurt to know how to do this? |
|
| 119:13 | would say no, how often will be doing it again? If you're |
|
| 119:19 | likely the petro physicist would be the doing this, right. So, |
|
| 119:23 | then from there, the geologists would heavily engaged with this too. Geologists |
|
| 119:28 | petro physicists, like I talk about all the time, right? So |
|
| 119:32 | would be the ones mostly doing right? Reservoir engineer might sometimes be |
|
| 119:37 | heavily engaged geophysicist. A lot of , you know, it depends on |
|
| 119:43 | aspect are, are there are geophysicists work with Petros all the time. |
|
| 119:51 | there is a certain sub discipline, ? And like she, we had |
|
| 119:56 | some other people who did things like . And then there were other geophysicists |
|
| 120:00 | never looked at a log in their , right? So it, it |
|
| 120:04 | depends on a subspecialty. I think belong in this class clearly because I |
|
| 120:11 | think, I mean, we don't gonna teach you how to use tech |
|
| 120:15 | , for example, here, Whereas in my well liked class for |
|
| 120:19 | petroleum engineer and we actually have weekend to that kind of arrangement. So |
|
| 120:24 | , you could do things in a more depth than this. Is, |
|
| 120:27 | this a knowledge which I think every should have, I would argue that |
|
| 120:33 | would say, but I'm pretty biased . So there's a question about uh |
|
| 120:47 | gas. Great, great. That's pe den density curve. Yeah, |
|
| 121:03 | got pe here and we, we the bulk density here. What's the |
|
| 121:12 | ? So you and hydride on Good luck. I mean Anna does |
|
| 121:24 | should plot down there. What's the value you got that? We was |
|
| 121:31 | about the first point where, where's data in here? Somewhere in a |
|
| 121:44 | ? Yeah, they yeah, right here should on this but |
|
| 122:11 | so you can mm So if you up that pe curve, you do |
|
| 122:25 | , this plot bring that plot up I show him how to plot it |
|
| 123:11 | and need to be able to draw the same range. Good. Thank |
|
| 123:23 | . Oh OK. Um OK. , I mean it's not sure why |
|
| 123:41 | getting this question but you can just that if you look at, we |
|
| 123:57 | even have to do a lot more than it should be. Mhm So |
|
| 124:11 | you hear me? But yeah. . And so you look up, |
|
| 124:20 | what you're gonna look up is the value is 5.1. So you go |
|
| 124:25 | 5.1 on this curve, right? don't know if you can see the |
|
| 124:31 | . Can you, can you see cursor? Yeah. Yeah. |
|
| 124:43 | And then the pe curve, the value is 5.1. So we're at |
|
| 124:50 | right? And this is six, of these is 0.2. So 5.1 |
|
| 124:56 | the pe value stop moving. So there and then the bulk density which |
|
| 125:04 | the other one is 2.97 right, is about right there. So the |
|
| 125:10 | plot right there. But what is ? So it clearly plots and on |
|
| 125:24 | hydrate and the porosity is almost identically in an right. Yeah, you |
|
| 125:41 | have an answer. OK. it's basically within, in the introductory |
|
| 125:51 | . If you go all the way the end there, I didn't, |
|
| 125:54 | didn't show it here. So I it at the end of that is |
|
| 126:02 | answers. A demon plotted right A red or something. He's OK |
|
| 126:51 | not. OK. That's the easiest on the whole sheet. Like a |
|
| 127:09 | physicist needs to know a little bit diving. Go ahead. You're talking |
|
| 127:15 | people all the time. You, doing fine. I've had a lot |
|
| 127:30 | than you. So you're, you're fine. Yeah, I, I |
|
| 127:41 | want you to check that they've handed in and let them come in. |
|
| 128:03 | , yeah, how are we Well? Right. When we were |
|
| 128:10 | at this graph, there was a that landed directly like on the or |
|
| 128:15 | the, yeah. And we talked how that was either or land on |
|
| 128:21 | or, and then just now, , no, no, no, |
|
| 128:23 | never said that or I never meant say that if I did say |
|
| 128:29 | So you're landed here, it has be like, there's no way to |
|
| 128:33 | in something over here and get something here. Right. I can't |
|
| 128:38 | So, I'm on an extreme, two extremes. Right. Yeah, |
|
| 128:43 | has to be that if I'm somewhere between, right, then it could |
|
| 128:50 | a mix. Your only problem with is for example, the gas corrections |
|
| 128:55 | , I could land here if I gas, it could be this because |
|
| 129:00 | may have to make a gas correction a, in a high porosity |
|
| 129:05 | I could maybe even move it even higher, the porosity, the further |
|
| 129:09 | can move. So gas can move right. We plot over here and |
|
| 129:16 | has to be corrected in this And so in all the examples I |
|
| 129:21 | , I didn't give, I, ruled out gas corrections and that's why |
|
| 129:25 | said here or here has to be anywhere in between. If I'm in |
|
| 129:30 | , it can be a mixture of and this or this and this come |
|
| 129:34 | here. It can be a mixture this and this or this and this |
|
| 129:38 | be a mixture of those two because on the wrong side. Right? |
|
| 129:42 | land on the. Perfect for Sure. So then that, of |
|
| 129:58 | the, yeah, it's on the of my house. You need to |
|
| 130:06 | careful with gas corrections here. Are looking at your mud log? |
|
| 130:12 | we, we're gonna get that Well, all right. So you're |
|
| 130:16 | going, you're still going through It sounded like you had decided. |
|
| 130:21 | , no, no, no. right. Sorry. All right, |
|
| 130:26 | . So, if there's a gas , it means there's gas. I'm |
|
| 130:33 | giving you bad data. Every I have somebody accused not every |
|
| 130:43 | but often I get accused of giving bad data. We now and |
|
| 131:09 | You have gas. You always, have gas, you have to make |
|
| 131:12 | gas correction moves the point this way read too far over here. You |
|
| 131:23 | to move the point this way. , yeah, parallel to that. |
|
| 131:30 | , so is there no, just that direction? Right. So if |
|
| 131:39 | point is here and you think there's , you need to move it to |
|
| 131:42 | direction parallel to that arrow as best can don't know. So you could |
|
| 131:52 | me a range in process. For , you could give me a range |
|
| 131:59 | , you could just give me, give me an example. Which, |
|
| 132:03 | one are you working on that you're about? So where does it? |
|
| 132:11 | . So, so far what, could it be? It could be |
|
| 132:14 | site could be a mixture? Of and this, but we're gonna make |
|
| 132:17 | gas cratch. So we don't know far to move it. Right. |
|
| 132:22 | , we have a lot of possibilities . Let's plot somewhere else. |
|
| 132:33 | But that does tell you what what this is, is cycle |
|
| 132:43 | So, let's play on the pe . Yeah, you can. |
|
| 132:50 | What? Yeah, the fee is . Gas is, is relatively unaffected |
|
| 132:56 | gas. It's claves that bother Well, that one's pretty clear that |
|
| 133:14 | says dolemite and we have no reason indicate it's, there's clay. What's |
|
| 133:24 | ? Yeah, Marie, what would expect the gamma ray between limestone and |
|
| 133:30 | to be, which would have the the higher would be so, so |
|
| 133:38 | Dola might look pretty good that Dolemite . Where are we here? So |
|
| 133:51 | is the dolemite line. So if make a gas correction, I would |
|
| 133:55 | moving in this direction and I would up somewhere like there. I just |
|
| 133:59 | to put my ruler here, move to this line and gas, correct |
|
| 134:09 | all. All this is, is gas correction. What happens to my |
|
| 134:14 | density if I have gas reads So I need to move down |
|
| 134:22 | and what happens to my, my porosity? Oh What does, what |
|
| 134:30 | gas do to it? It means reads to. So I need to |
|
| 134:35 | towards a higher neutron porosity. And all this is indicating I wanna move |
|
| 134:39 | a lower density porosity. Higher, . Yeah. And higher neutron. |
|
| 134:49 | what I was saying. So just general direction is this. So you |
|
| 134:53 | move over here pretty close. it's pretty parallel and the P curve |
|
| 135:00 | it's dole, so I'm gonna end there. Uh So I, so |
|
| 135:05 | need to make a gas correction and gas corrected this point. You're doing |
|
| 135:13 | on purpose to confuse you because it's Calite. The pe curse says it's |
|
| 135:19 | . And so I need to correct it. And I end up |
|
| 135:22 | a dolomite with that ferocity that I . But I have a lot of |
|
| 135:30 | . One of the Yeah, then they've given you the reading. |
|
| 135:44 | , I did that in the chart the chart is on the other side |
|
| 135:52 | this page me here. So you're supposed to get that gamma ray |
|
| 136:04 | . So which one do they wanna ? Two? Um Which problem they |
|
| 136:09 | on? I think just the, law, I think just the, |
|
| 136:12 | , this, this line. So gamma ray ranges from 0 to 1 |
|
| 136:20 | . There's actually, I think 15 these, there's 123456789, 10. |
|
| 136:28 | each one is 15 units or two over. That's 30. The gamma |
|
| 136:34 | here is 15, 30 45 I mean, in general, all |
|
| 136:42 | doing is reading this chart. This , the first one's at 30 the |
|
| 136:47 | one's at 60 this next one is 45 one and two, right? |
|
| 136:54 | is 0 15, 30 45. I don't know what to say. |
|
| 137:01 | than that, you're just reading the . So, um can the person |
|
| 137:11 | me or not? I don't know else to say other than you could |
|
| 137:17 | them if you want to show them chart, I could use my cursor |
|
| 137:24 | show them this chart. Ok, . So if they can see the |
|
| 137:46 | . So this is the gamma ray here. It ranges between zero and |
|
| 137:51 | 50. OK. There are there's 123456789, 10 goes to 1 |
|
| 138:03 | . Each of these bars is there 15. So reading here, this |
|
| 138:10 | 15, this first one's reading 30 next one is reading 15, 30 |
|
| 138:17 | 60 just like it says in the . The next one's reading 0 |
|
| 138:24 | 30 45 the next one's reading 0 , 30 45 60. Again, |
|
| 138:34 | just reading, you're just reading off chart like the gaming it 2000. |
|
| 138:48 | . Ok. You OK. To right this we're reading, we have |
|
| 138:57 | caliper over here to the left, have a caliper and e that between |
|
| 139:05 | think she makes, well, there no gamma ray over here. You |
|
| 139:11 | that right now? Ok. So are exactly similar. It's divided |
|
| 139:17 | in all of these. So we a limestone reads between zero and |
|
| 139:22 | So we can count the number of 123456789, 10. So each of |
|
| 139:31 | is 10 units, right? And this is 0 to 60. So |
|
| 139:39 | would be 30. So each of would be three porosity links. This |
|
| 139:44 | zero porosity, right? And then , 12, 15, 18, |
|
| 139:52 | 24 27 30 et cetera, All way up to 60. These numbers |
|
| 139:59 | the minimum this far over here. numbers represent the maximum over here. |
|
| 140:06 | each division you just gotta take, ? Just the 60 units divided by |
|
| 140:10 | units. Each one is three by density ranges between, oh, similarly |
|
| 140:32 | 2nd 4500 and 20 just like you a log, all the, all |
|
| 140:58 | you've been doing so far. That's what you should ask that question a |
|
| 141:09 | time ago is what I would So important that they have now because |
|
| 141:16 | go through the notes and I don't how to read like a bar |
|
| 141:25 | Exactly a bar chart. It's like is a zoned and squared and |
|
| 141:33 | we need it um could have been you know, it wouldn't be people |
|
| 141:40 | wouldn't be exactly the same thickness I , pretty obvious. But they all |
|
| 141:45 | on exact numbers. Right. way too. So somebody decided what |
|
| 141:54 | attitude, the certain pathology should A lot of first of January, |
|
| 142:09 | ? It OK is particularly with the modern looking pretty good value. Then |
|
| 142:32 | have somebody actually checking here. This what the guy to make sure that |
|
| 142:48 | know. So you can sometimes we're not anything, you have sometimes |
|
| 143:54 | than others, right? Like sometimes other designs, a new tool |
|
| 144:08 | you know, pretty good and get lot more energy, a lot of |
|
| 144:23 | . So depending on what was talking it, it's closer to what is |
|
| 144:34 | . The first one is TV, indigo. Yeah, red is the |
|
| 145:01 | . Well, the, the limestone, the bulk density is the |
|
| 145:12 | , assuming the lines don't make So neutron, the black one. |
|
| 145:23 | , is the neutron velocity in the . So you, you have to |
|
| 145:29 | them what matrix, the plot across between the density, I can plot |
|
| 145:35 | bulk density, right? And then I can plot that without a matrix |
|
| 145:43 | . Yeah, the neutron log, are you gonna apply? They can |
|
| 145:46 | that capture cross section that doesn't mean to anybody. So they're gonna ask |
|
| 145:51 | for a li to plot that in then they're gonna have to tell them |
|
| 145:56 | , I need to do something If you would do it different, |
|
| 146:00 | , you would actually res scale that you decided it was something like that |
|
| 146:06 | , you could do that if you to. OK, we are basically |
|
| 147:53 | in all the OK. That's one . OK? Typically I would do |
|
| 148:00 | a sample at a time. Yeah, because you're gonna learn things |
|
| 148:06 | you go down, you can trust , for example, gamma ray values |
|
| 148:10 | be consistent, right? Can trust of other things. This thing works |
|
| 148:15 | than it should in that sense, ? So if I have a certain |
|
| 148:19 | ray, it's gonna give me a clue as to what the lithograph is |
|
| 148:23 | they're not gonna figure out what that ray is till I answer these questions |
|
| 148:27 | the top. That's gonna help me values further down. Yeah, it |
|
| 148:35 | has gas. A lot of So you have to guess correct this |
|
| 148:41 | matter what it is. Oh, again, where did it plot, |
|
| 148:47 | did it plot on here? So have a choice, right? This |
|
| 148:52 | be just based on this plot could a mixture of, of uh limestone |
|
| 148:58 | , and quartz could be pure right? Or it could be |
|
| 149:04 | if we have to make a gas , I have to move this |
|
| 149:09 | So it could be at some a mixture of right, of dolomite |
|
| 149:14 | limestone. Yeah. So I don't yet. That's all I can tell |
|
| 149:18 | that graph. I need to pick data point. I need to plot |
|
| 149:23 | somewhere else. I need more That's all I can tell from |
|
| 149:30 | I know I have gas. So know it's not pure, pure |
|
| 149:34 | Right? I know it's got I correct going this way. So |
|
| 149:39 | gotta have some dolemite in it. question is how much? So I |
|
| 149:47 | try this plot because it's relatively unaffected gas. So where does that plot |
|
| 149:54 | this plot? The number that she's two? I think she's on two |
|
| 150:09 | number two. So where does that some of my kids? Ok. |
|
| 150:19 | gas correction on here there is a correction but it moves it vertically. |
|
| 150:23 | don't know how much, but it's not gonna change the mythology. This |
|
| 150:29 | it's dolemite independent of the amount of I have. It's again, I |
|
| 150:35 | correct the PDE curve, right? pe value stays the same. My |
|
| 150:40 | porosity will vary and I need to towards what direction gas makes the bulk |
|
| 150:49 | read too low. So I'm gonna , it's gonna move that direction. |
|
| 150:55 | . So I know this one tells it's dolemite. So I gotta move |
|
| 150:58 | the way to there parallel to So here's where it would plot if |
|
| 151:03 | had no gas. Yes, you read the porosity. You can't get |
|
| 151:12 | porosity off of this because it's vertical there. There is no way I |
|
| 151:17 | tell what the porosity is. But can tell gas correcting this, you've |
|
| 151:22 | it right? I can move along . I know it's pure dolemite. |
|
| 151:26 | I have to go all the way the dolomite curve. You read the |
|
| 151:39 | right here. The right. So that's what 15% porosity do. |
|
| 151:50 | your answer. 15 present porosity to . Yeah, you have to use |
|
| 152:07 | information off of both graphs. What is your peak or? It's your |
|
| 152:16 | down. Yeah, you already did one. Very cool. You, |
|
| 152:25 | you see the logic on this I really do like this because it |
|
| 152:33 | you to think about all the gas corrections on the logs, et |
|
| 152:37 | . Right. It's a good No one will convince me to get |
|
| 152:51 | . You, by all means, it on there. But you, |
|
| 152:55 | don't have a velocity so you can't that one, huh? Yeah. |
|
| 153:19 | great. So closer to the it's not that which one is |
|
| 153:44 | Mhm. Mhm. Dr. In gammy on seven. Reading what? |
|
| 154:07 | . You had any other ones that 60? Yes. And they've been |
|
| 154:14 | . So you got a lot of that are telling you dolomite? So |
|
| 154:19 | comes out. Hm. So 27 then I was reading, yeah, |
|
| 154:39 | seemed pretty consistent everywhere. I I got dolemite. No gas though |
|
| 156:45 | , yeah. Really? These Oh. Mhm. Oh, |
|
| 163:14 | Ok. Ok. Right. Yeah. Bye. Wow. |
|
| 164:52 | they can't. I, that, . Ok. Yeah. Ok. |
|
| 165:57 | . Bye. Are, yeah. . Exactly. Like I, |
|
| 166:52 | Oh, all the way to, why I, oh, yeah, |
|
| 167:35 | don't want so, yeah, oh, Ok. Yeah like |
|
| 168:50 | Ok. Right. Yeah. Oh . Ok. So. Mhm. |
|
| 170:22 | . Right. Yeah. Ok that . Ok. Yeah. Yeah. |
|
| 172:07 | . Ok. Got it. Thank you. Yeah. Ok. |
|
| 172:57 | I mhm I I don't. Oh . Yeah like hold on. |
|
| 173:31 | Right. Yeah. Ok. Yeah. Care of that. |
|
| 174:00 | Yeah that yeah. Ok. Ok. Yeah. Yeah. |
|
| 174:37 | Yeah that I ok. Right. . That's fine. Ok. Um |
|
| 175:54 | . Yeah the party. Yeah thanks mhm. Yeah. Ok that I |
|
| 176:43 | . Yeah sounds good. Ok and crazy. Ok. Ok. I |
|
| 177:20 | I mhm. Yeah. Yeah. . Yeah. Yeah, I mean |
|
| 178:42 | yeah thanks. Ok, absolutely. . Yeah that yeah. Oh yeah |
|
| 180:17 | so. Ok pretty so. of course that so I have a |
|
| 180:51 | iphone seven. I be very Mhm. Oh so yeah for this |
|
| 181:39 | . Yeah. Ok. Yeah yeah that you five dot com three. |
|
| 183:13 | that ok bye yeah, one ok a sandwich so so everything bye. |
|
| 185:09 | thank you. Yeah. Oh Ok. Oh yeah. Oh there |
|
| 186:03 | . Ok, something lower. See I bye. I yeah, pretty |
|
| 186:59 | thank |
|
